Scott Adams – False Memories, Brett Kavanaugh, Peacocks, Lie Detectors, and the Simulation

This entry was posted in Government, News, Politics, The Culture, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Scott Adams – False Memories, Brett Kavanaugh, Peacocks, Lie Detectors, and the Simulation

  1. czarowniczy says:

    What ‘false memories’, how about outright lies? This has prog screenwriter fingerprints all over it. If this were being presented as an episode on Fox its ratings would 3 thumbs down, viewers would be asking: “How stupid do you think I am?”.
    As for lie detectors the lie is in the name itself. Many branches of the government put selected members on a poly regularly but still they have bad guys who beat them- then there’s the ALLEGED instance (some years back) of the CIA having its and MI6’s Latin/South American operations compromised as a bunch of the Cubans it hired were actually members of the Cuban intelligence who were trained to fool the box and we don’t even have a CV on the polygrapher.
    The coup continues…

    Liked by 1 person

    • lovely says:

      Out right malicious lies with the intent to derail the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh.


      Lie detector? Hand picked polygrapher could give a pass to Hillary.

      The Left’s hate and fear of reaping the consequences of their actions has turned them into rabid delusional lunatics.


    • lovely says:

      Adams is a Lefty, he can’t reconcile his Leftist brain with the fact that some people are just evil malicious liars, he always on both sides of the aisle goes with the most benign reason as being the true reason for someones actions.

      Low information voters LOL you’re 20 years late Adams.

      Not that I don’t like Adams, I do and he is often spot on, but everything he says has to be squeezed through the lens of reality and what we know of certain people and their agendas. Adams refuses to accept that people are defined by their repeated behavior regardless of how much we want them not to be evil pieces of garbage.

      False memories 🙄.

      Read creating Monsters Adams.

      As I said I like Scott and I enjoy his persuasive talks, and that is exactly what he is doing every time he does one of these things, he is trying to imbue his thought process into other people’s brains as fact.

      I have a guess about him and my guess is that he is not really taking a sip of anything from his cup. I don’t know if anyone has ever asked him but I think it is part of the game he plays.

      I do believe that he is good intentioned and has done tremendous good for President Trump.

      I just think that he is a little too fascinated by himself and the whole Lefty thing does skew his option in everything. Waiting for him and Dershowitz to come over to the Light Side.


  2. stella says:

    Editorial from the Wall Street Journal:

    The #MeToo Kavanaugh Ambush
    A story this old and unprovable can’t be allowed to delay a Supreme Court confirmation vote.

    Alternate link (no pay wall):

    The woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of a drunken assault when both were teenagers has now come forward publicly, but that should not deter Republicans from proceeding with their current confirmation-vote schedule. There is no way to confirm her story after 35 years, and to let it stop Mr. Kavanaugh’s confirmation would ratify what has all the earmarks of a calculated political ambush.

    This is not to say Christine Blasey Ford isn’t sincere in what she remembers. In an interview published in the Washington Post on Sunday, Ms. Ford offered a few more details of the story she told anonymously starting in July. She says she was 15 when Mr. Kavanaugh, who would have been 17, and a male friend pushed her into a bedroom at a drinking party, held her down, and pawed her until the male friend jumped on them both and she escaped to a bathroom until the two boys left the room.

    Mr. Kavanaugh denies all this “categorically and unequivocally,” and there is simply no way to prove it. The only witness to the event is Mr. Kavanaugh’s high school male friend, Mark Judge, who also says he recalls no such event. Ms. Ford concedes she told no one about it—not even a high school girl friend or family member—until 2012 when she told the story as part of couples therapy with her husband.

    The vagaries of memory are well known, all the more so when they emerge in the cauldron of a therapy session to rescue a marriage. Experts know that human beings can come to believe firmly over the years that something happened when it never did or is based on partial truth. The Post reports that the therapist’s notes from 2012 say there were four male assailants, but Ms. Ford says that was a mistake. Ms. Ford also can’t recall in whose home the alleged assault took place, how she got there, or how she got home that evening.

    This is simply too distant and uncorroborated a story to warrant a new hearing or to delay a vote. We’ve heard from all three principals, and there are no other witnesses to call. The only purpose of another public hearing would be a political spectacle in which Democrats could wax indignant for the cameras while Mr. Kavanaugh repeated his denials.

    The timing and details of how Ms. Ford came forward, and how her name was coaxed into public view, should also raise red flags about the partisan motives at play. The Post says Ms. Ford contacted the paper via a tip line in July but wanted to remain anonymous. She then brought her story to a Democratic official while still hoping to stay anonymous.

    Yet she also then retained a lawyer, Debra Katz, who has a history of Democratic activism and spoke in public defense of Bill Clinton against the accusations by Paula Jones. Ms. Katz urged Ms. Ford to take a polygraph test. The Post says she passed the polygraph, though a polygraph merely shows that she believes the story she is telling.

    The more relevant question is why go to such lengths if Ms. Ford really wanted her name to stay a secret? Even this weekend she could have chosen to remain anonymous. These are the actions of someone who was prepared to go public from the beginning if she had to.

    The role of Senator Dianne Feinstein is also highly irregular and transparently political. The ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee knew about Ms. Ford’s accusations in late July or early August yet kept quiet. If she took it seriously, she had multiple opportunities to ask Judge Kavanaugh or have committee staff interview the principals. But in that event, the details would have been vetted and Senators would have had time to assess their credibility.

    Instead Ms. Feinstein waited until the day before a committee markup on the nomination to release a statement that she had “information” about the accusation and had sent it to the FBI. Her statement was a political stunt.

    She was seeking to insulate herself from liberal charges that she sat on the letter. Or—and this seems increasingly likely given the course of events—Senator Feinstein was holding the story to spring at the last minute in the hope that events would play out as they have. Surely she knew that once word of the accusation was public, the press would pursue the story and Ms. Ford would be identified by name one way or another.

    Democrats waited until Ms. Ford went public to make public statements. But clearly some were feeding the names of Ms. Ford and her lawyer to the press, and now they are piling on what they hope will be an election-eve #MeToo conflagration.

    “Senator [and Judiciary Chairman] Grassley must postpone the vote until, at a very minimum, these serious and credible allegations are thoroughly investigated,” declared Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Sunday. “For too long, when women have made serious allegations of abuse, they have been ignored. That cannot happen in this case.”

    His obvious political goal is to delay the confirmation vote past the election, fan the #MeToo political furies until then, and hope that at least two GOP Senators wilt under political pressure. Already Senators Jeff Flake andBob Corker are playing into Mr. Schumer’s hands by calling for a delay.

    GOP Senators should understand that the political cost of defeating Mr. Kavanaugh will likely include the loss of the Senate. Democrats are already motivated to vote against Donald Trump, and if Republicans panic now their own voters will rightly be furious. They would be letting Democrats get away with the same dirty trick they tried and failed to pull off against Clarence Thomas.

    It would also be a serious injustice to a man who has by all accounts other than Ms. Ford’s led a life of respect for women and the law. Every #MeToo miscreant is a repeat offender. The accusation against Mr. Kavanaugh is behavior manifested nowhere else in his life.

    No one, including Donald Trump, needs to attack Ms. Ford. She believes what she believes. This is not he said-she said. This is a case of an alleged teenage encounter, partially recalled 30 years later without corroboration, and brought forward to ruin Mr. Kavanaugh’s reputation for partisan purposes.

    Letting an accusation that is this old, this unsubstantiated and this procedurally irregular defeat Mr. Kavanaugh would also mean weaponizing every sexual assault allegation no matter the evidence. It will tarnish the #MeToo cause with the smear of partisanship, and it will unleash even greater polarizing furies.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. hocuspocus13 says:

    I believe her story that she was a loose and drunk 15 year old girl going to a house party looking for trouble I just don’t believe that the boy was Kavanaugh

    and PS…15 year old girls don’t go out alone especially back in those days they are always out with their girlfriends…

    Liked by 2 people

  4. jeans2nd says:

    Well lookie here. Jeffrey Toobin, who recently wrote a scathing article on Judge Kavanaugh in the New Yorker
    wrote another scathing article on Judge Kavanaugh previously.

    Late March, 2012, Romney was doing well in the polls against Obama, Toobin singled out Judge Kavanaugh as THE reason to not vote Republican. “If a Republican, any Republican, wins in November, his most likely first nominee to the Supreme Court will be Brett Kavanaugh.”

    Nothing to see here…

    Scott Adams’ voice is often the voice of reason, which is much needed with id10ts such as this wymyn running loose.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Lucille says:

    Having finished watching the entire vid less than an hour ago, I can remember so little of it that I’m proof that Adams’ theory of people not remembering even recent incidents thoroughly is correct.

    The only thing we can do is hope and pray that the vote goes Judge Kavanaugh’s way. Recovered memories dredged up from the unconscious can, as Adams indicates, be false. Unless unassailable proof is offered, in my book Kavanaugh’s accuser is simply a biased, SJW democrat liar that wants to derail a fine and upstanding gentleman who on any given day does more for REAL social justice than all the American left combined.

    The democrats have gone insane and almost to a person aren’t to be believed. I’m sick of them and their delusions.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.