I'm in the hospital, and the nurse can't figure out what to do with my computer, so I'm trying to figure out how to do something about it. Also, the nurse doesn't understand what I'm saying.
00:01:26.600There are a couple of noisy devices running that I can't get turned off because my current nurse doesn't understand anything I say.
00:01:37.020So I'm having this misery kind of situation where for another half hour, the nurse on duty is a man who hears the opposite of everything I say.
00:01:51.320I don't know why, but if I say, could you bring me an apple, he will say, well, I would never ask for an apple.
00:02:02.000But if I did, he would say, okay, I won't bring you an apple.
00:02:11.100And then I would say, no, no, please bring me an apple.
00:02:15.300And then he would say, oh, oh, okay, no apple.
00:12:20.960How about the, I don't want to talk about this, but I just have to.
00:12:29.220Would you agree that the COVID shot was probably the biggest crime against citizens that we've ever seen?
00:12:39.080And that the people who were behind it had to know, long before we knew, that it wasn't just risky, it was a bad idea.
00:12:52.180So, I'm moving that from, well, maybe they didn't know, or maybe they got caught up in it, or I would say they definitely knew.
00:13:02.720Not everyone, I'm not talking about regular doctors, but the only thing that I thought was still in dispute was whether it reduced the illness for people over 65 or had some bad problem.
00:13:24.040But even they, at least should have been informed.
00:13:32.360So, there was definitely no accurate information.
00:13:36.340So, I'm moving the pandemic thing from, maybe it was a bunch of people who fucked up, to, yeah, it was a crime, and people should be executed for it.
00:13:47.120Because it's hard to imagine a bigger crime.
00:13:50.320So, let's move that to the fact, no doubt about it, I'm not going to have a complaint if somebody says that was fact.
00:14:03.920Well, we do know for sure that it did not stop transmission.
00:14:09.300I think there are still some open questions, because if you didn't believe the data that it worked, why would you believe the data that it didn't work?
00:14:22.960Because they're both non-credible data sets, in my opinion.
00:14:26.980I heard, on Joe Rogan, I heard somebody say, oh, I guess it was Brett Weinstein.
00:14:40.900But he was talking about how there was a natural experiment with ivermectin.
00:14:46.240So, some people took it, and some people didn't, and they were in separate places.
00:14:53.100And you can see that the people who took it had a high survival rate, and the people who didn't take it had a low survival rate, even if they did the other stuff.
00:15:02.720Now, the way that was explained is that the odds of those two different outcomes being so stark is like a gazillion, trillion to one.
00:15:42.820It's not just that that was a non-controlled experiment, because it was a natural experiment.
00:15:50.880Now, they controlled, you know, placebo type of experiment.
00:15:58.380If it were true that the events happened as reported, then I would agree that the odds were a trillion, trillion to one that it was an accident, and that that would be quite definitive that ivermectin was a good solution.
00:16:16.580However, when it's not a controlled experiment, even if it is, because a lot of controlled experiments turn out to be fraudulent, it's possible that it was simply reported wrong.
00:16:30.520Meaning that the people who said, oh, in my hospital, we got this result, could be lying.
00:16:40.120They could have made up the whole thing.
00:16:41.600Or if it were only known because the press looked into it, somebody could be lying.
00:16:52.060So, you can't rule out the fact that if it were a natural experiment, and you got all the data correct, that would be very definitive.
00:17:03.240But, if it was a natural experiment, and that's the very reason that you can't know for sure if somebody made up the data, or lied to you, or just came up with a story, you can never really know.
00:17:18.680And that actually is the reason that a lot of the scientific studies are debunked eventually, is because if the data were true, it would tell you something.
00:17:29.600But, you can't be sure it's true, but you can't be sure it's true.
00:17:33.780So, I would say the ivermectin story, highly likely that it made a difference in a positive way.
00:20:09.680Would you agree that getting some of the Epstein files, but heavily redacted, that it made it worse?
00:20:21.800It almost confirms that there is something that we should know that we don't know.
00:20:27.720So I would say, I don't know who is the guilty party, but obviously the Thomas Massey and Ro Khanna bill had a big loophole in it, which allowed somebody we don't trust to block out stuff, to redact stuff.
00:20:53.340Yeah, but would you agree that the bill ultimately made things worse?
00:21:01.160Because if it allowed any redactions, you will never trust the redactions.
00:21:08.980You will never trust the redactions because you don't know who made them.
00:21:14.280And even if they told you why, you wouldn't believe them, would you?
00:21:17.880So Massey and Khanna, trying to do the right thing, genuinely trying to do the right thing, and also both of them, I would say, very capable and very bipartisan, but they made it worse.
00:21:35.920They did not mean to do that, but they made it worse.
00:21:38.320Now, here's the most surprising thing, and don't get mad at me, all right?
00:21:44.280If you're going to get mad at somebody, get mad at Alan Dershowitz.
00:21:50.500So I saw his reaction to the partial release, and as usual, Dershowitz had the most interesting arguments that I'd never heard.
00:22:04.060So he argued that there should be no redactions, including the victims.
00:22:11.520And his argument was that if you showed the people who were accused, but you didn't give the names of the people who were accusing them, that was not a fair situation.
00:22:23.820And I thought to myself, wait a minute.
00:22:31.920It doesn't mean I agree with him, but his argument is solid, that it would be a crime to show the people accused, but keep hidden the people who accused them.
00:22:47.700Imagine if Trump had been accused by E. Jean Carroll of some sex crime, and she was allowed to be anonymous forever, but he was not allowed to be anonymous.
00:23:04.000In our system, you get to know who is accusing you.
00:23:09.260And ultimately, if it goes to trial or something, you would know who the accuser is.
00:23:14.620Then, somebody got mad at me online, because they said, you animal, are you saying that you should throw the victims under the bus a second time?
00:23:31.180To which I say, what is the alternative?
00:23:34.500Keep in mind that everyone who is an underage victim is now in their probably 30s, so none of them would be children.
00:23:47.740There would be no children involved, even if they were children when the crime happened.
00:23:55.800This would be adults being outed or not.
00:24:00.080Now, some of them might not care, some of them might, but apparently Massey knows the names of 20 or so accused famous people.
00:24:13.340But I think as soon as he said, we'll out everybody accused, but we won't out the people who accused them, we can redact that.
00:24:27.740There was no chance I think this would work out.
00:24:30.180So I believe, unfortunately, as smart as Thomas Massey is, he created a system with Ro Khanna that guarantees that we will never see the stuff that you think is important.
00:24:47.140So, unfortunately, yesterday I predicted that the bad people would resist, even at the risk of going to jail, even at the risk of jail, that we would not see the full stuff, because it's just too easy to redact it.
00:25:09.520But I saw somebody ask online, why doesn't Thomas Massey release, if he knows the names, why doesn't he tell us?
00:25:23.700Apparently, there are a number of people who know the names.
00:25:26.800However, you also don't know if there's some other reason they're not telling you stuff.
00:25:35.480Because imagine if, what would happen if the CIA came in and said, all right, this is not protecting the guilty, but there's a whole bunch of stuff that you cannot know.
00:25:49.740Because it would be a national security problem.
00:25:57.080Let's say, and I don't believe this is true, but let's say Epstein was at least partially a CIA asset, and he had done some things that we don't want our adversaries to know, or even the domestic audience to know.