The Joe Rogan Experience - Joe Rogan Experience #2101 - Bret Weinstein

00:00:01.000 Joe Rogan Podcast, check it out!

00:00:04.000 The Joe Rogan Experience.

00:00:06.000 Train by day, Joe Rogan Podcast by night, all day.

00:00:12.000 A very funny text you said in the other day.

00:00:15.000 He said, I hope we have something to talk about.

00:00:18.000 Well, you know, the fact is the world's gotten kind of calm, so I was hoping, I looked out the window of the hotel this morning thinking the weather might help us.

00:00:28.000 Nope, boring as can be.

00:00:29.000 It's beautiful, birds chirping, while who knows what lies on the horizon.

00:00:34.000 I did not watch the Super Bowl, but I got a ton of messages from people that watched it. 0.99

00:00:38.000 They're like, what the fuck is going on? 0.98

00:00:40.000 Like the Super Bowl was a gigantic propaganda campaign and there's Pfizer ads and weird woke commercials. 0.98

00:00:48.000 It was bizarre.

00:00:51.000 I did watch it.

00:00:52.000 I had nothing else to do and I probably wouldn't have watched it otherwise.

00:00:55.000 But But I did watch it, and it was like some running inside joke.

00:01:01.000 You had to know who these people were in order to even just be with the flow.

00:01:06.000 I mean, obviously the game is what it is, but all of the stuff surrounding it was like you're either embedded in this culture or it's kind of a head-scratcher.

00:01:15.000 I did not see any of it, so I wasn't watching the Super Bowl last night.

00:01:19.000 I was busy.

00:01:20.000 So I don't know what happened.

00:01:22.000 Well, let's put it this way.

00:01:24.000 I'm not a football aficionado by any stretch, but it was a pretty exciting game.

00:01:28.000 I mean, it came down to the last seconds of overtime, and it was a hell of a comeback.

00:01:36.000 There are a ton of conspiracies.

00:01:39.000 About the way it was officiated and that the fix was in with Travis Kelsey being sponsored by Pfizer and Taylor Swift and Taylor Swift's music catalog being owned by some mega corporation that has shady ties.

00:01:54.000 Well, I have to say, I was watching it and I, you know, I didn't have a dog in the fight.

00:01:59.000 I wasn't really rooting for either team.

00:02:01.000 I was just trying to get the sense of, you know, what the game was like.

00:02:05.000 But I did find myself in the end rooting against Taylor Swift.

00:02:10.000 This is the Biden thing that they posted?

00:02:14.000 After his bedtime.

00:02:15.000 Just like we drew it up, and it's Biden with these red robot eyes.

00:02:21.000 Why would they do that?

00:02:22.000 Why would they make that?

00:02:24.000 Just that alone?

00:02:26.000 What are you saying?

00:02:27.000 What are you doing?

00:02:28.000 Imagine that's the President of the United States.

00:02:30.000 I want you to imagine Ronald Reagan, if social media was alive, posting a photograph like that.

00:02:37.000 Or Bill Clinton.

00:02:38.000 Well, I mean, I do know what they're doing, right?

00:02:41.000 They have a very weak meme game, but they do have moments when they show some kind of spark in this regard.

00:02:52.000 And I detest it.

00:02:54.000 I think they have an obligation to be above this stuff and to not troll.

00:02:58.000 But...

00:02:59.000 You know, in a world where Trump is a political force, they're trying to, you know, they're trying to build a game in the same arena and they're going to get crushed.

00:03:10.000 But that's why they did it.

00:03:12.000 You know, and obviously it's the machine that did it.

00:03:14.000 It's kind of amazing that the left can't meme.

00:03:20.000 Because they're really bad at it.

00:03:21.000 Because they're denying so many truths.

00:03:25.000 Like, in order to adhere to the ideology, you have to be so rigid in what you accept as truth.

00:03:32.000 And there's so many things that just don't jive with that, that you can't really meme well When you're doing that, like what memes are is pointing things out and exaggerating them in a way where people kind of know that this is the case and then you make a preposterous image and everybody laughs.

00:03:50.000 But the left can't really do that because a lot of those memes are very offensive and funny.

00:03:57.000 Well, I think it's actually a window into not really the left.

00:04:04.000 I mean, as you know, I feel myself of the left, but I don't relate to these people at all.

00:04:11.000 Nor do I. Something weird happened and we got kicked out.

00:04:14.000 Yeah, it got taken over by something diabolical.

00:04:17.000 And, you know, what you're pointing to, it's the same thing.

00:04:20.000 It has no sense of humor, right?

00:04:23.000 Right.

00:04:23.000 They laugh.

00:04:25.000 But they have no sense of humor.

00:04:26.000 They have no ability to juxtapose things so that you suddenly see something in the way a funny joke works.

00:04:36.000 They can't meme because they're not really...

00:04:40.000 You know, this is some corrupt cabal behind the scenes that arranges a set of, you know, policies that aren't coherent together because they're about something that's never been discussed with us.

00:04:53.000 And so it's not a natural for, you know, you can't really build a culture around it because it's incoherent to begin with.

00:04:59.000 So they just, they have no, they're bad at humor.

00:05:03.000 Memes is a special kind of humor that has...

00:05:08.000 I think?

00:05:21.000 The difference between a tweet and, you know, what I've seen you do in your club, right?

00:05:30.000 Where in your club, you can actually structure a joke that isn't funny until four lines in because your audience isn't going anywhere.

00:05:41.000 On Twitter, you need to keep them on board with the tweet so they don't scroll to the next one, right?

00:05:47.000 So there has to be some juice in the beginning.

00:05:49.000 In order to get to the punchline.

00:05:51.000 But, you know, anyway, I'd be curious what you think about what the different rules are for humor in the different contexts.

00:05:57.000 But even just the structural differences is profound online.

00:06:01.000 Well, one of the best examples of how the tide has changed is the Babylon Bee out onions the onion.

00:06:07.000 The onion is essentially dormant.

00:06:10.000 The onion was like the dominant force of satire forever.

00:06:15.000 And they were so good.

00:06:17.000 They were so good.

00:06:18.000 And then something happened where there's places they can't go.

00:06:23.000 It's like a runner being limited to a certain amount of miles per hour when the speed that you're limited to cannot compete with the best runners.

00:06:35.000 I think it's actually a manifestation of a larger pattern that you can see very clearly when it's about humor and satire, and you don't see it as clearly elsewhere.

00:06:44.000 But when The Onion was funny, it was a political force.

00:06:49.000 And so it had to be targeted by things that it would have opposed, right?

00:06:54.000 By things that it would have mocked and revealed.

00:06:56.000 And so the fact that it's been neutered makes perfect sense if you imagine whoever it is that was galled by being revealed by the onion.

00:07:06.000 It doesn't make sense if you imagine that the onion is in some competitive environment where it's trying to win market share by being hilarious.

00:07:16.000 Right?

00:07:16.000 Why would you take a hot property like The Onion and ruin it?

00:07:20.000 Well, the question is, are you trying to accomplish something political by getting rid of a powerful force, a force of ridicule?

00:07:28.000 Or are you trying to compete economically?

00:07:31.000 And we see this in lots of places.

00:07:33.000 Why would social media platforms embrace censorship?

00:07:39.000 Right?

00:07:40.000 Everybody wants to be in a social media environment that's lively.

00:07:45.000 It doesn't want one that's heavily constrained.

00:07:48.000 And yet, these would-be competitors are behaving, they're colluding effectively to shut out messages that lots of people want to hear.

00:07:56.000 Do you think that that's because they're worried about government intervention and some sort of repercussions for not adhering to whatever guidelines the government wants you to do?

00:08:05.000 I mean this clearly seems to be the case when you look at like the Twitter files.

00:08:11.000 The Twitter files, which has gotten almost no press in the mainstream media, or I should say the corporate-controlled media, but has been extensively covered by independent journalists because it's so shocking.

00:08:23.000 Because you're seeing the government actively campaign to get factual information removed from Twitter because it's inconvenient.

00:08:35.000 And most of the social media campaigns, most of the social media programs, whether it's the companies, whether it's Facebook or Instagram, or most of them have complied to a certain extent, you know, at least limited the reach of certain things.

00:08:51.000 Like there was one that Tucker did famously on COVID. Whatever government organization that was contacting them, I think it was the FBI, was trying to get them to take it down.

00:09:03.000 And they wouldn't take it down, but they limited the reach substantially by like 50%.

00:09:08.000 But they had ruled that they cannot take it down because it's factual.

00:09:13.000 And so there's no, it's not like this was misinformation.

00:09:17.000 So then it falls into this weird category that we've just recently heard, recently entered the zeitgeist, which is malinformation.

00:09:26.000 Malinformation is factual information that could be used in a damaging way.

00:09:32.000 I know.

00:09:33.000 Heather and I have been screaming about this one since the day that memo emerged.

00:09:38.000 It's wild.

00:09:38.000 Like, what the hell?

00:09:39.000 You're actually going to put that on paper? 0.78

00:09:41.000 Yeah, it's wild.

00:09:42.000 But I think the answer to your question is we in the public...

00:09:49.000 Are under the misapprehension that the game is about money.

00:09:54.000 And the reason that we're under that misapprehension is that traditionally money has been a pretty good proxy for power.

00:10:01.000 And what's happened is the game is still very much about power and control, but money doesn't mean what we thought it did.

00:10:08.000 In what way?

00:10:09.000 Well, A, I think we're being set up that, you know, your ability to store wealth in money...

00:10:19.000 Is dependent on rational policy, right?

00:10:23.000 If somebody is going to print money in order to get themself out of a crisis, then they're robbing you without ever gaining access to your bank account.

00:10:31.000 So the value of what you've stored is under somebody else's control.

00:10:36.000 Now, if you imagine that the power players understand this game, that they know that – the way I would put it is this.

00:10:45.000 Money has two values.

00:10:48.000 One is as a means of exchange.

00:10:50.000 Can you buy stuff with it?

00:10:52.000 And money still works the way it always did from that perspective.

00:10:55.000 The other is can you store your wealth there?

00:10:57.000 And at least with respect to dollars, it used to be the case that you could store your wealth in dollars.

00:11:04.000 But the power players are aware that dollars aren't going to continue to mean what they have traditionally meant.

00:11:16.000 And presumably they have other strategies for storing wealth in ways that they're going to be able to recover it after whatever happens.

00:11:24.000 I would recommend people...

00:11:27.000 I hope I have the title right.

00:11:29.000 There's a book called The Great Taking, written by an elite Wall Street insider who reveals certain changes that have...

00:11:42.000 It's been introduced into the law that most of us are unaware of.

00:11:47.000 For example, there's a change in which you think you own a stock in the way that people used to own stocks, but stocks used to actually have a physical manifestation.

00:11:57.000 You had a sheet of paper that you would put in your safe.

00:12:00.000 And what has happened is you now own a stock and you can cash out anytime you like the way you always could.

00:12:08.000 But if the entity, the underlying entity, goes bankrupt, then you don't actually own the stock.

00:12:15.000 You actually own an IOU, which can be valueless.

00:12:19.000 And we don't know this.

00:12:20.000 In the public, we think we're trading stocks the way we always did.

00:12:23.000 But what has happened is Something that had a physical manifestation in which you could have a battle in a court about who owns this piece of paper is now not about a piece of paper.

00:12:34.000 It's about a right, and that right has an arcane structure that most of us are unaware of.

00:12:40.000 So the question is, at some point...

00:12:43.000 Do things that you think you own, do rules get revealed to you that tells you that you don't actually own those things anymore and that your financial position is therefore not the one that you thought you were in?

00:13:01.000 So what do you think this strategy is about?

00:13:05.000 What do you think?

00:13:06.000 Power and control.

00:13:08.000 But do you think that this is the devaluation of money?

00:13:13.000 What's the end purpose of the devaluation of money?

00:13:18.000 Is it central bank digital currency?

00:13:21.000 That is a mechanism for the ultimate purpose, which is power and control.

00:13:27.000 And I should point out that in the way I think about things, I take that as an assumption.

00:13:35.000 I'm not arguing that as a conclusion, although I do think you can discover that that is the pattern by looking at all of the evidence about what the rent-seeking elites care about and don't care about.

00:13:47.000 But I would say it is a comparatively safe assumption that it is about control and power because it's always been about that.

00:13:58.000 Evolutionarily, that's really why creatures look the way they do, right?

00:14:03.000 Even, you know, if you take a human being, for example, you're composed of something like 30 trillion cells of 200 different kinds.

00:14:11.000 All of those cells contain the same information, but they all agree to act differently because it's in their interest to not go rogue, right?

00:14:21.000 They could all independently try to reproduce like single-celled organisms.

00:14:25.000 But if they agree to collaborate, they surrender a lot of capability to reproduce.

00:14:31.000 You know, 30 trillion cells can produce a lot of offspring cells.

00:14:34.000 What they get is an increased amount of control over their environment.

00:14:39.000 So that's what evolution is doing by organizing things in the way it is.

00:14:43.000 It's purpose is to put your genes as far into the future as it can lodge them.

00:14:49.000 But power and control is the game, the evolutionary game that is being played.

00:14:54.000 And humans play it differently.

00:14:57.000 And, you know, we go from being a highly adaptable, somewhat technological creature.

00:15:05.000 You know, our Stone Age ancestors were technological in the sense that they could flintnap a weapon or a tool.

00:15:13.000 I think we're good to go.

00:15:21.000 I think we're good to go.

00:15:33.000 And to arrange to protect it into a future which they see as increasingly chaotic and dangerous.

00:15:42.000 As the people of Earth become aware that they have no plan for the future, that most of us have nothing meaningful to do with our lives, that even the systems that feed us and sustain us energetically are built on rickety premises,

00:15:58.000 they know that there's a reckoning coming, and so they're preparing for it.

00:16:03.000 And, you know, what you saw at the Super Bowl or didn't see but might have is the distraction, right? 0.98

00:16:10.000 The stuff that we are fed so that we'll think about things that other than our long-term prospects in light of elites who, frankly, don't give a shit about us. 0.98

00:16:21.000 Have you seen what happened in Europe with the farmers? 0.98

00:16:24.000 I've been watching that, yes.

00:16:26.000 Yeah.

00:16:26.000 It seems like they at least temporarily have won.

00:16:30.000 They have won, but...

00:16:33.000 Let's explain what we're talking about.

00:16:48.000 Angry and organized about regulations that make farming increasingly difficult, unproductive, and unprofitable.

00:16:58.000 If I was a conspiratorially minded person, what I would say is what they're trying to do is take over these farms.

00:17:07.000 And the best way to do that is to enact legislation and rules that limit their profitable...

00:17:15.000 Well, first of all, farms are always very difficult to run.

00:17:19.000 They're very difficult to maintain profitability.

00:17:22.000 They struggle.

00:17:24.000 And it's a terrible shame that the people that provide us the thing that we need to survive, ultimately, food, That we've done something to these people to make it more difficult for them to do it while it's already insanely difficult.

00:17:39.000 It requires incredible hours Incredibly difficult, highly stressful.

00:17:45.000 There's so many moving pieces just to provide food for all these people.

00:17:51.000 And they started enacting legislation to limit the amount of fertilizer they're allowed to use, to limit the amount of animals they have.

00:17:59.000 I know in Ireland they proposed something where they want to kill A certain amount of the cows because they're saying that the cows produce methane. 0.98

00:18:08.000 It's fucking insane. 0.99

00:18:10.000 It's not scientific. 0.99

00:18:11.000 It's not something voted on.

00:18:12.000 It's not something agreed upon by scientists, biologists, certainly not It's debated when you're talking about regenerative farming practices, like people that have provided significant options for farming, whatever the issues that they have,

00:18:29.000 where they can actually sequester carbon in the soil and make these farms carbon neutral.

00:18:34.000 It's been demonstrated.

00:18:36.000 It's not theory.

00:18:37.000 It's been done in America. 0.97

00:18:39.000 Polyphase farms, White Oaks pastures are two great examples of that, but there's many regenerative farms.

00:18:45.000 It can be done.

00:18:46.000 And for whatever reason, they have decided to enact these harsh limitations on these farmers' abilities to provide food for people.

00:18:58.000 Cynically, when I look at something like that, I'm like, I think what they would do is do that, cripple the farmers' ability to make money, the farms go under, they take over, they control the food supply.

00:19:10.000 Right.

00:19:10.000 And I hear you working overtime not to see what's in front of you.

00:19:18.000 And I agree.

00:19:19.000 Well, I'm just being fair.

00:19:21.000 I'm just making it as...

00:19:23.000 I'm trying to steel man it as much as possible.

00:19:27.000 Right.

00:19:28.000 But if you take the objective of the game as profit, it's not exactly clear what the endgame is.

00:19:36.000 If you take the objective of the game as power and control, then it's pretty clear.

00:19:42.000 That's the best way to control the food supply. 0.95

00:19:45.000 You just put the farmers out of business.

00:19:47.000 Who's going to challenge you if their ability to eat requires them to embrace whatever nonsense you're feeding them?

00:19:54.000 And all you would have to do is start some sort of famine and just make it very difficult for people to get food and people panic.

00:19:54.000 Yes.

00:20:02.000 Right.

00:20:02.000 And when people panic, especially people with limited resources and limited financial ability, they concede.

00:20:09.000 They do.

00:20:10.000 And that's what we saw during the pandemic.

00:20:12.000 I mean, it was a great...

00:20:14.000 Test run to see how much control you can really have over people as soon as you have some sort of major issue that everyone globally has to deal with.

00:20:25.000 Right.

00:20:26.000 Of course, simultaneously they make it difficult for those of us who recognize What is unfolding to make ourselves self-sufficient?

00:20:37.000 So you see weird regulations against ancient things like unpasteurized dairy as if that was some major threat to people or something that you should override their ability to judge for themselves.

00:20:52.000 But the pattern of seeking power and control, if you imagine an antagonist, rent seeking elites for lack of a better term, and you imagine that they are, however they get there,

00:21:09.000 Completely amoral with respect to us normies.

00:21:14.000 I don't know that they hate us, but they don't care if we live or die.

00:21:18.000 If you imagine that, then you begin to see that major patterns point in the same direction, right?

00:21:27.000 This attempt to control agriculture, which suggests some later chapter in which hunger is going to be used to keep people in line, Is consistent with vaccine mandates that were issued in the military,

00:21:43.000 which drove out all of the people who would naturally resist immoral orders, creating a more compliant force.

00:21:53.000 Now, you could imagine that that was an accident.

00:21:55.000 You could imagine that public health officials let their fears get away from them, and they mandated these things Out of a misunderstanding of the protection of that force.

00:22:11.000 But I think the most parsimonious explanation is that actually a force built of people who take whatever orders you give them is desired for some scenario we have yet to see.

00:22:26.000 So what happened in Europe was these farmers started fighting back.

00:22:29.000 They started dumping manure everywhere and they started blockading and doing all these things to protest and apparently At least temporarily, they've won.

00:22:41.000 Now, what kind of repercussions they're going to face because of this is what's going to get really weird, and that'll be very telling to see what they do to attack these farmers.

00:22:51.000 But it seems like part of the problem was the public was unanimously in favor of the farmers.

00:22:58.000 No one thought any of this stuff made sense.

00:23:00.000 No one thought that killing all these cows made any sense.

00:23:03.000 No one thought that limiting the amount of fertilizer these guys could use or the way these guys can produce food made any sense.

00:23:11.000 And I think most people fundamentally recognize that farming is not just difficult, but it's fragile.

00:23:22.000 They don't have a lot of wiggle room.

00:23:25.000 And so for these people to rise up the way they did, that's very courageous.

00:23:31.000 It's very courageous and it reveals that we are in territory that was just simply not anticipated by the US founders, by any of the important founders of the Western nations.

00:23:47.000 Nobody envisioned some sort of an attack from within in which the ability to generate enough food for the population would be targeted.

00:23:58.000 That seems an insane thing that one doesn't need to create rules against because it would be, you know, if we view through a A couple-century-old lens, it would be a suicidal move.

00:24:12.000 But that's not the case anymore.

00:24:14.000 You're dealing with a global elite, and that global elite has options that were unthinkable in the 18th century.

00:24:24.000 So that said, I don't think these people, whoever they are and whatever it is they are doing, I do not believe that they understand the world nearly as well as they think they do.

00:24:39.000 Do you think that's just because they're removed?

00:24:41.000 I mean if you're one of the billionaires that's involved in the World Economic Forum, how much contact do you have with regular people?

00:24:48.000 What are your perceptions of regular human beings?

00:24:52.000 And if you've been living like that for a long time, I liken it to like celebrities who just have no concept of how other people think or behave or feel because they've been famous and wealthy for so long and adored for so long.

00:25:05.000 They don't understand the plight of the average human being.

00:25:08.000 They don't understand and they don't care because they don't see themselves as headed back that direction.

00:25:13.000 It's a rare elite that even if they came from humble beginnings, it's a rare elite that maintains that mindset in any significant way because it becomes an obstacle.

00:25:25.000 It becomes a limiter of what strategies you can deploy.

00:25:29.000 Yeah, and encourages empathy, which is bad for business.

00:25:32.000 Very well said, Joe.

00:25:34.000 But the problem is they also...

00:25:38.000 The elites, especially ones who have, to some degree or other, arranged their assent, right?

00:25:47.000 They've done something that makes them feel like they must be very well informed, they must be very clever, right?

00:25:53.000 There's some component of their power that is the result of some moment of cleverness in their past, or maybe more than one.

00:26:00.000 But it makes it...

00:26:04.000 Difficult for them to remember how much of what they accomplished actually had nothing to do with them.

00:26:10.000 It had to do with systems built by other people that they know nothing about.

00:26:16.000 And the tendency for them to see the part of the puzzle that they're comfortable with, right?

00:26:22.000 Maybe it's the strategy of power and control, but to not appreciate the parts of the puzzle that nobody's expert at.

00:26:29.000 Right?

00:26:30.000 They're dealing with complex systems layered upon each other.

00:26:35.000 The ability to disrupt that stuff in a way that it stops functioning such that even the elites who make this happen are not going to like the world that they're going to create.

00:26:46.000 They may not even be able to live in it.

00:26:48.000 Right?

00:26:48.000 That's the biggest concern I have.

00:26:51.000 Right?

00:26:52.000 That they were diabolical but knew what they were doing.

00:26:56.000 Then my sense is, well, all right, we're in for a bad hundred years and that's terrible, but that's not extinction, right?

00:27:03.000 I think we're actually headed for extinction because I think these people have no idea what they're playing with.

00:27:09.000 They do not understand what needs to be preserved in order to keep the world functional enough for them to live in.

00:27:15.000 How is that conversation not taking place?

00:27:18.000 That's what doesn't make sense to me.

00:27:20.000 Is it coming from a place where they never feel like they're ever going to go back to poverty or to any sort of chaotic world that we could envision if everything falls apart?

00:27:31.000 They think they'll be protected ultimately because of resources, influence, power.

00:27:36.000 Think about it this way.

00:27:38.000 Let's say that you're really good at the game of power and control, and you manage to take what would ordinarily be a profit-making entity, a social media platform, and you get it to sign up for rules of censorship that are bad for business but good for keeping dangerous ideas from spreading.

00:28:00.000 Well, then you're also likely to utilize that mechanism to shut down the very discussions that you need to hear.

00:28:11.000 So if you think about the question, you know, and I don't know how accurate it is that monarchs had court jesters.

00:28:20.000 I don't know how regular that was, whether it was an exception. 0.98

00:28:22.000 But if you think about the position of a monarch who needs to know what's actually going on, but nobody around them is going to tell them because it's too dangerous to tell the king that the people think he's an asshole. 0.99

00:28:36.000 Right. 0.99

00:28:37.000 So you empower a jester. 0.98

00:28:38.000 Maybe you put a ridiculous hat on him and he speaks in a weird way so that anything he says is dismissible. 0.62

00:28:45.000 But the point is that guy is actually in a position to tell you what you need to know, right? 0.93

00:28:49.000 He can make jokes that are funny in the street that you're not going to hear because you're the king.

00:28:52.000 Yeah.

00:28:53.000 Right?

00:28:53.000 So these new power elites, they don't have a mechanism that overcomes the control that keeps people from telling them exactly what they need to know.

00:29:05.000 Look, if you're one of these people, you're going to screw up the world that you cannot escape.

00:29:13.000 And nobody can tell you that because you've managed to create a very pleasant world of people who tell you what you want to hear.

00:29:20.000 So that's the danger you're putting us in.

00:29:22.000 And we're mad about it for two reasons.

00:29:24.000 We're mad about it because you're plotting against our ability to guide our own ship.

00:29:30.000 That's natural and you expect that part.

00:29:32.000 But we're also mad at you because you're screwing up the world and it's not yours to destroy.

00:29:39.000 You're not going to leave a planet for my children.

00:29:41.000 You're okay with that.

00:29:42.000 I get it.

00:29:43.000 But you're not going to leave a planet for your children either. 0.99

00:29:45.000 So wake the fuck up. 0.99

00:29:46.000 I think they think their children will be protected. 0.99

00:29:51.000 It's the old phrase, rules for thee but not for me.

00:29:57.000 We see that with the World Economic Forum serving beef short rib.

00:30:02.000 It's like, what do you really believe and why are you saying what you're saying?

00:30:07.000 And do you think that because you're so protected now, because you go from limousine to private jet to major hotels surrounded by armed security, back and forth, your interaction with a person who's trying to deal with their bills, 0.98

00:30:23.000 trying to deal with their bullshit, trying to deal with mortgage payments and whether or not they Can afford to pay their taxes and that kind of shit. 0.94

00:30:33.000 You're completely removed from any financial strife. 1.00

00:30:37.000 Once you get into that category, I'm nowhere near those people.

00:30:42.000 And I don't worry about it, so they must not worry about it.

00:30:46.000 They can't.

00:30:47.000 They can't ever think that it's going to be an issue because it's not an issue.

00:30:52.000 It's just like human beings have this inability to recognize anything that they don't immediately interact with.

00:30:59.000 Everything else becomes abstract, like even the whole climate emergency.

00:31:03.000 It's a great thing to talk about.

00:31:04.000 It's a great talking point for people that need something to wave a flag for and scream and protest and block the highway for.

00:31:11.000 It's a great mechanism in that regard.

00:31:13.000 But are you really worried about it every day?

00:31:15.000 I'm not worried about it every day.

00:31:16.000 Every day I wake up, I'm like, it's pretty much just like yesterday.

00:31:19.000 It's not that much different.

00:31:21.000 No, I'm worried about it less and less, in fact.

00:31:23.000 I'm worried about it less and less as well.

00:31:24.000 And also because the way China's... 0.70

00:31:36.000 What was it, Jamie?

00:31:39.000 I think it was like close to 200. They're not, and they're the number one, them and India. 1.00

00:31:45.000 They're the people that are dumping shit into the air. 1.00

00:31:48.000 Killing cows isn't gonna put one half of 1% of a fucking dent in the amount of greenhouse gases that get emitted. 1.00

00:31:57.000 It's not a lot. 0.99

00:31:59.000 No, let's put it this way.

00:32:01.000 I think we have to have one caution, which is just because they're using it to manipulate us doesn't mean that there's not some underlying truth there.

00:32:08.000 But if I look at where the waterline was when I was a kid versus now, it hasn't budged.

00:32:19.000 That alerts me to something.

00:32:21.000 I do think I've seen a little bit of glacial retreat in places that I knew, but it's not a lot.

00:32:28.000 Well, also, isn't that—regardless of whether or not people are polluting the world, and I think they 100 percent are, and I'm 100 percent on board.

00:32:36.000 Look, if you go to Los Angeles from the 1960s and 1970s and look at the air— And then you look at the emission standards that were enacted, catalytic converters, the way they changed how cars work, it is much better now.

00:32:50.000 Substantially better.

00:32:50.000 So much better.

00:32:52.000 Clear indication that these regulations that were smart and intentional, they worked.

00:32:59.000 They did something good.

00:33:00.000 It's better. 0.99

00:33:01.000 It still sucks. 0.96

00:33:02.000 But if you go to Mexico City, you realize there's a giant difference. 0.87

00:33:06.000 I took photos when I flew into Mexico City for the UFC, and it looks like there's a fire.

00:33:11.000 It's like there's a fire on the ground.

00:33:13.000 Like there's so much smoke and it's just an everyday part of their life.

00:33:17.000 If they had the same regulations that they enacted in Los Angeles, that would lead to cleaner air and better health outcomes for pretty much all of their citizens.

00:33:26.000 We both agree to that.

00:33:28.000 I mean, in fact, when I travel to places like this and I think, oh, wouldn't it be cool to live here?

00:33:28.000 100%.

00:33:33.000 I always think, yep.

00:33:34.000 And, you know, how much does your life expectancy go down because of the amount of pollutant you're breathing every day?

00:33:39.000 So yeah, good regulations are...

00:33:42.000 Critical.

00:33:43.000 Critical.

00:33:44.000 And in fact, we just moved recently from...

00:33:47.000 Don't tell anybody where you live.

00:33:49.000 I'm not going to tell them where I live, but I did move from Oregon to Washington, and Oregon and Washington deal very differently.

00:33:55.000 You moved from the frying pan right into the fire, sir.

00:33:57.000 You're a glutton for punishment.

00:33:59.000 What's wrong with you? 1.00

00:34:00.000 We need to get you a gun. 0.93

00:34:02.000 Bring it out to here, to God's country.

00:34:04.000 Get yourself a ranch.

00:34:05.000 We've got guns.

00:34:07.000 Yeah, a well, some guns, some solar.

00:34:07.000 Get yourself a well.

00:34:10.000 Get yourself some longhorns that you can slaughter once a year.

00:34:13.000 Yeah.

00:34:14.000 But the point is, Oregon actually has regulations that you can't register your car if it puts out significant pollution.

00:34:23.000 And Washington doesn't.

00:34:25.000 Otherwise, they're almost identical states.

00:34:28.000 Politically.

00:34:28.000 The difference between driving in Oregon where you're not behind the truck that belches out that huge bunch of smoke and you're struggling to find the thing to turn off the vent, right?

00:34:39.000 In Oregon, it was a night and day difference even between those two states.

00:34:43.000 Because of those rules.

00:34:44.000 Because of the regulations.

00:34:45.000 I'm a big fan of elegant, light-touch regulation that creates a big benefit for a small cost.

00:34:53.000 Also, we realize there's, listen, I am a car enthusiast.

00:34:58.000 I love automobiles.

00:35:00.000 The automobiles today that have the best emissions output are by far faster, handle better, safer.

00:35:10.000 Everything they do outperforms the stinky ones that were ruining the world.

00:35:16.000 The benefit in terms of the air has no negative net effect on the ability to make awesome cars.

00:35:26.000 It just doesn't.

00:35:27.000 The cars are absolutely rad.

00:35:27.000 Right.

00:35:30.000 The electric ones.

00:35:31.000 Not just electric ones.

00:35:33.000 The electric one's problematic.

00:35:34.000 Here's why the electric one's problematic. 0.91

00:35:36.000 At the fucking heart of every electronic device that uses batteries, you've got conflict minerals. 0.76

00:35:43.000 And if you've ever seen my podcast with Siddharth Kara, and you've read his book, and you've seen the investigative journalism that that guy did, where he risked his life to go into the Congo and show how these artesian mines that make cobalt, or that mine cobalt,

00:35:59.000 how it's actually being extracted from the ground, your cell phone is likely Conflict minerals that have come from the poorest of poor people on planet Earth, literally farming with no protection, like hammering this stuff out,

00:36:14.000 mining with babies on their back. 0.96

00:36:17.000 Young girls who have infants on their back are mining this toxic shit that we need for our phones so we can tweet about global warming. 1.00

00:36:26.000 That is wild! 0.99

00:36:29.000 And as of right now, these things don't exist.

00:36:32.000 In terms of the way our batteries work, they don't exist without those kind of minerals.

00:36:36.000 And whether or not they can be harvested ethically, seems like we can probably do it.

00:36:41.000 It doesn't seem like it would be impossible, but China's not interested in it at all.

00:36:46.000 And the people that run those mines are not interested in it at all. 0.99

00:36:49.000 They want to make the most amount of money right now, and the best way is to keep people poor as fuck. 0.98

00:36:55.000 So that those people have to do that because there are no options. 0.99

00:36:58.000 You get that from them.

00:36:59.000 You extract enormous profits.

00:37:01.000 The people that risk their lives and have terrible outcomes have no benefit from it.

00:37:07.000 And you continue business as usual because you've been allowed to.

00:37:11.000 Now, if that was in Ohio, if we found out that that was going down in Ohio, people would freak the fuck out.

00:37:17.000 They would boycott those companies.

00:37:19.000 They'd figure out how to buy things that didn't rely on that.

00:37:23.000 And we would have to change.

00:37:24.000 Politically, it would be so untenable, politically, to support slave labor and to support people living in the most abject poverty you can imagine, the worst poverty on Earth, but yet are extracting some of the most valuable resources the Earth has.

00:37:41.000 That's insane.

00:37:42.000 Yeah, it's crazy.

00:38:12.000 Arguably out of existence.

00:38:14.000 Not just that, but trying to control discourse.

00:38:18.000 Because discourse is what starts the European farmers getting together and overturning these regulations.

00:38:25.000 Discourse is what starts people recognizing how unfair the structure of some of these systems are, and who's profiting, and why, and whether or not we want to support that, or whether or not this is a Normal pattern of behavior for human beings when they have ultimate power.

00:38:44.000 It has existed forever.

00:38:46.000 Every king, every emperor, every person who ran giant groups of people did so ruthlessly with no regard for the people.

00:38:54.000 Ultimately.

00:38:55.000 No one ever said, like, I've got so much money and I'm the king, I'm gonna make sure that my money is distributed to everybody.

00:39:02.000 There's no hungry people.

00:39:04.000 Everybody has food.

00:39:05.000 Everybody has a place to sleep.

00:39:08.000 No one's ever done that.

00:39:09.000 They all do the exact same thing.

00:39:11.000 When they have power, the ultimate power, they develop this idea that they deserve it, and that it's theirs, and then they ruthlessly wield it, and they keep the people down.

00:39:21.000 Because if the people are down just enough, you don't want them down to the point where they're going to fight back and kill everybody.

00:39:26.000 You want just under coup levels.

00:39:30.000 Well, I mean, I think there's a little more richness to that story.

00:39:33.000 I agree that almost without exception, leaders rule in their own enlightened self-interest, but there's a question about how enlightened they are.

00:39:43.000 You can have a monarch who understands that long-term, their ability to rule is better served by protecting the people's interests more than some other leader who realizes, you know, I mean...

00:39:56.000 But isn't that rare to have a leader like that?

00:39:58.000 I think it is.

00:39:58.000 Can you name any of them?

00:40:00.000 It would have a hard time...

00:40:02.000 Are these utopian leaders?

00:40:03.000 No, I think there's a spectrum.

00:40:05.000 You have people on the other end of the spectrum, like Pol Pot, right? 0.93

00:40:10.000 And the idea is you only need one tool, and the tool is if I don't like you, you're dead.

00:40:17.000 Yeah.

00:40:17.000 Right?

00:40:18.000 So that's one way to do it, but it's not really a long-term strategy.

00:40:21.000 And then we have everybody...

00:40:24.000 But isn't it a long-term strategy in some places?

00:40:26.000 Like Kim Jong-un seems to be doing a pretty good job with that.

00:40:31.000 I don't see any relinquishing of that power.

00:40:35.000 No, I don't see it either.

00:40:36.000 It's not like they have massive resources.

00:40:38.000 It's not like they're doing great.

00:40:39.000 I agree with you.

00:40:41.000 I have to say it is a more effective strategy than I would like to imagine.

00:40:46.000 But it doesn't look like a strategy that is going to effectively spread over time.

00:40:53.000 Whereas if you look at our system, and really our system As much as you can say one monarch is better than another, really the point is the West has the alternative that is the best plan going and probably the best plan possible,

00:41:10.000 the consent of the governed.

00:41:12.000 In which we put aside our lineage level differences and we collaborate with other people irrespective of what they look like because they're good collaborators, that system is like wildfire with respect to creating, I hate to use the term growth,

00:41:28.000 but growth is a good proxy for what it creates.

00:41:30.000 It creates capacity, right?

00:41:33.000 And the reason that so much of the world looked at the American experiment and decided that it wanted a piece of it was because Yeah.

00:42:04.000 So, and I believe that what's going on with these rent-seeking elites is that they have not really understood that story and they have decided that they, you know, they're gonna kill the goose that lays the golden eggs and they're not gonna be happy with the world that follows.

00:42:24.000 But isn't that what the founding fathers were trying to prevent by structuring our government in the way that they did?

00:42:32.000 Yeah, my sense is they accidentally solved the most important puzzle because they needed to do it in order to get the colonies to agree to confederate.

00:42:43.000 And so by taking a bunch of different mini-nation-like things and saying, well, what are the rules that will allow these people to trust a confederation is not going to leave them with a short straw?

00:42:56.000 We're good to go.

00:43:22.000 Right?

00:43:22.000 That's magic.

00:43:24.000 If you're limited to your own racial group in order to make wealth, then the amount of wealth you can make is a lot tinier. 0.58

00:43:30.000 So this is just simply a better way of existing.

00:43:35.000 And as you well know, we were nowhere.

00:43:39.000 It was not perfected.

00:43:41.000 It was really just a prototype 10 years ago, 20 years ago.

00:43:45.000 But what we've started to do is wreck it in favor of utopian notions that'll never work or a retreat to some kind of cryptic oligarchic power.

00:43:54.000 And none of these things are in a position to compete with that system from the point of view of discovering what's possible and bringing the value of it to the population of planet Earth.

00:44:05.000 And art, innovation, everything, technology, everything.

00:44:08.000 Everything good that we should be trying to achieve is achieved better with that mechanism.

00:44:12.000 But what's fascinating is that they're using this is like you're saying to kill the goose that lays the golden egg.

00:44:19.000 They're using all of these utopian social ideas and using them in this very weird authoritarian way.

00:44:30.000 And the people that are most promoting it.

00:44:34.000 These are the people that are in control of all these systems.

00:44:38.000 These are the people that are in control of the military industrial complex, the people in control of the pharmaceutical companies.

00:44:43.000 They're the ones that they want this struggle to be going on between people.

00:44:48.000 They want this false sense that white supremacy is the number one problem that we face in America right now. 0.88

00:44:55.000 In a country where we elected a black man twice. 0.98

00:44:57.000 Well, it's just nonsense. 0.96

00:44:59.000 And I think it promotes racism because it makes people that are on the fence racist, angry, and they go the other way.

00:44:59.000 Yeah.

00:45:07.000 They go hard.

00:45:08.000 And there's a bunch of people that feel like...

00:45:10.000 They have to be racist because they're being discriminated against and no one cares.

00:45:14.000 And for people that aren't thoughtful and people that don't spend a lot of time and really consider their position on things, I think they tend to react in a way that is...

00:45:28.000 You're reacting in an impulsive way because you feel threatened and it's not logical.

00:45:34.000 It doesn't reflect your actual real values of how you really would think about people if everybody was just treated everybody as normal.

00:45:42.000 Everybody is the same thing, you know?

00:45:45.000 And that the idea that even the goal of that itself to aspire to a colorblind society is somehow racist.

00:45:55.000 That doesn't make any sense.

00:45:57.000 I think it's a pretty good...

00:46:00.000 This is exactly why I'm concerned that these people just don't know what they're doing.

00:46:04.000 They tried to create racial strife to distract from their bankruptcy, their moral bankruptcy. 0.70

00:46:15.000 They were staving off the French Revolution by getting us to turn on each other. 0.75

00:46:19.000 Well, that worked a little bit for a while, but it also created a lot of interest in talking about what they were up to, and it created an entire alternative media space in which people who didn't want any part of that nonsense Actually gained credibility in the public's eyes,

00:46:41.000 people who might never have been heard of in wider circles if not for this.

00:46:47.000 So they didn't anticipate that they were going to create an alternative to the media that they controlled.

00:46:52.000 That's how little they understand.

00:46:54.000 They didn't realize that at some point, if they tried to push the idea that fat is beautiful, that you're somehow morally defective if you're not attracted to trans people, by pushing that nonsense, 0.64

00:47:10.000 they created a rebellion.

00:47:12.000 They forced people to actually consider these things, which made a lot of us reject them.

00:47:18.000 And by rejecting them, there's now a Very influential, if not powerful, group of people across a wide spectrum discussing what those elites are up to,

00:47:34.000 right?

00:47:35.000 We even, I think, have elites of our own.

00:47:38.000 I can't be certain, but Musk doesn't look like he's on their team to me.

00:47:47.000 He's not on their team.

00:47:48.000 That's what I think. 0.99

00:47:49.000 Well, he's insanely wealthy and independent and an actual legitimate genius in a world of fools. 0.99

00:47:58.000 Right, and I think... 0.99

00:47:59.000 Not flawless!

00:48:00.000 Not flawless.

00:48:01.000 He gets out of line every now and then.

00:48:03.000 He gets a little wacky.

00:48:04.000 He does.

00:48:05.000 He's restless.

00:48:05.000 But he's fun.

00:48:06.000 He's a fun guy to have at the helm.

00:48:08.000 And I think he looks at what is being plotted against us and sees it as a fun challenge to confront it.

00:48:19.000 And he has the resources to do it, unlike most people.

00:48:22.000 And has the courage to do something like completely overpay for Twitter. 1.00

00:48:28.000 And then have the advertisers lock him out and literally in a discussion with the guy from the New York Times, he goes, go fuck yourself. 1.00

00:48:36.000 Go fuck. 1.00

00:48:37.000 Let me be clear. 1.00

00:48:38.000 Go fuck yourself. 1.00

00:48:40.000 I don't care. 1.00

00:48:40.000 Yep. 1.00

00:48:41.000 You're trying to blackmail me with money? 1.00

00:48:42.000 Go fuck yourself. 1.00

00:48:43.000 Right. 1.00

00:48:44.000 And...

00:48:44.000 Nobody does that.

00:48:45.000 Well, I... On the one hand, nobody does it.

00:48:49.000 On the other hand, I wonder why more people don't, because the fact is he's demonstrating that not only does it work, short term it has costs, but long term he's not exactly losing, right?

00:49:00.000 No, but he's also, he's a child of the internet in the sense that He makes memes.

00:49:07.000 He posts memes.

00:49:08.000 When you post that meme of Bill Gates next to the emoji of a pregnant man and said, when you want to lose a boner real quick, that's wild. 1.00

00:49:21.000 Because you can't even say, oh, fuck that guy, he's a dumbass. 1.00

00:49:23.000 It's literally one of the smartest human beings alive and the wealthiest man alive. 1.00

00:49:27.000 And he's dunking on you on a platform that he owns now.

00:49:27.000 Right.

00:49:31.000 Right.

00:49:33.000 There's that.

00:49:34.000 I also, as much as it's juvenile...

00:49:37.000 I love it.

00:49:38.000 I am juvenile.

00:49:40.000 No, it's the one where he was asked for comment by one of these legacy media outlets.

00:49:46.000 I don't know if it was the New York Times, but it might as well have been.

00:49:49.000 And he sent back a poop emoji.

00:49:52.000 And it's like, look, that's a wise move because the rules of the game say, you know, he refused to comment.

00:50:00.000 But you can't say that if he did comment and it was a poop emoji.

00:50:00.000 Right.

00:50:03.000 You have to report that.

00:50:07.000 Yeah.

00:50:08.000 Listen, regardless of how nonsensical some of the stuff that they print is, I still have faith in journalists.

00:50:18.000 I think we're going through a very weird trend right now where...

00:50:23.000 They're not behaving like journalists.

00:50:25.000 They're behaving like propagandists.

00:50:27.000 And I think that the business is imploding because of that.

00:50:31.000 And the rise of independent journalists.

00:50:34.000 And I know there was an attempt at a correction at CNN. There was an attempt at it.

00:50:38.000 But they had so many fucking holes in that ship that just try to patch them up a little. 0.98

00:50:43.000 You're not going to get people's trust in that way. 0.99

00:50:45.000 I think that...

00:51:00.000 Ultimately, they're going to have to either adjust or die.

00:51:03.000 Either one of them is okay, because if they die, then you have independent journalists that do have the respect and the admiration of people, because they've put their neck out there, and they've said things that are controversial and difficult, and they've made these points from a well-articulated place of an actual understanding of the issues and not ideological.

00:51:24.000 So when you're seeing something like the New York Times post things, That are clearly ideological.

00:51:30.000 Rolling Stones lost the plot.

00:51:31.000 I mean, just what are they doing?

00:51:33.000 They're propaganda nonsense. 0.99

00:51:36.000 That shit that they did during the pandemic about the people dying from ivermectin while gunshot wounds. 1.00

00:51:43.000 How many people are getting shot? 1.00

00:51:45.000 The fuck are you talking about? 1.00

00:51:46.000 You've got a line of gunshot wounds? 1.00

00:51:49.000 Is that what you're showing me?

00:51:50.000 And then you're showing me a photograph, which is a stock photo, of a completely different time of the year, where people are wearing winter jackets. 1.00

00:51:57.000 You fuckheads. 1.00

00:51:59.000 This is crazy. 1.00

00:52:00.000 You're talking about, what is it, Oklahoma that we're saying?

00:52:02.000 Oklahoma in the summer, and people were wearing parkas? 1.00

00:52:05.000 Like, fuck you! 1.00

00:52:07.000 How are you real? 1.00

00:52:08.000 How are you real?

00:52:09.000 How are you real while the Dark Horse podcast exists?

00:52:13.000 How are you real? 0.69

00:52:14.000 It's because people, they're not quite ready to jump ship yet, but they're fucking close. 0.96

00:52:20.000 And so you've seen the New York Times and the LA Times just fired a shitload of people, Sports Illustrated, there's all these organizations that are just fucked now because the media, corporate media, you don't want to call it mainstream anymore because it's not as big. 0.94

00:52:36.000 It's really not.

00:52:37.000 The real mainstream is online. 0.98

00:52:39.000 And corporate media is fucking imploding.

00:52:42.000 But the people that want those jobs, the people that go to school, the people that really grow up respecting and appreciating and admiring actual journalists, the people that uncovered Watergate, the people that report about the pipeline being blown up and who's actually doing it, 0.77

00:53:03.000 You know, when you get real, like kids that are growing up right now that are listening to this, people that are in college right now that recognize the true value of journalism, they're gonna get out into the world, and some of them are gonna make it, and they're gonna show the way,

00:53:19.000 and it's the only way for those businesses to survive.

00:53:22.000 You can't survive as a propagandist while X exists.

00:53:26.000 You cannot, because you're gonna be exposed.

00:53:29.000 You might work for the boomers, but guess what? 1.00

00:53:31.000 They're gonna die. 1.00

00:53:33.000 They don't have much time left, especially if they take your fucking medical advice. 1.00

00:53:38.000 Exactly. 0.98

00:53:39.000 So let me introduce a concept here that we talk about on Dark Horse regularly, which is zero is a special number.

00:53:46.000 And this is about a little piece of game theory that the rent-seeking elites did not understand.

00:53:54.000 The idea is...

00:53:57.000 If you have control, if you have censorship control over all of the social media platforms, Then the world looks a particular way because certain stories that should be discussed can't be discussed.

00:54:08.000 If a single platform escapes that control, then it becomes the platform that everybody wants to be on because nobody wants to be treated like a child.

00:54:17.000 We all want to be in the places where we can discuss whatever needs to be discussed.

00:54:21.000 So by buying Twitter and keeping it afloat through the initial attacks, Musk created an environment That's my point.

00:54:49.000 But do they?

00:54:50.000 They are.

00:54:51.000 They are and they will.

00:54:53.000 I mean, it's possible that they will find some way to defang X. There's still a lot of bad architecture inside of X. But if X remains freer, then it forces the hand of everybody else who wishes to compete because nobody wants to be playing mini golf when there's real golf.

00:55:14.000 Can you expand on the structure of it, the architecture that you think is...

00:55:19.000 Well, let's just say, I will use in my defense, I met with Elon, and he talked to me about something that I think he's also talked to, he's talked publicly about, which is the fact that before he owned X, he could detect that the behavior with respect to his own account was not organic,

00:55:38.000 that there was lots of structure inside that decided what to elevate and what to suppress.

00:55:46.000 I feel this in my account.

00:55:47.000 I've in fact seen very strange stuff up until last week.

00:55:53.000 It's very hard to convey that to anybody because they don't know how good you are at sorting actual shenanigans from just feeling like a tweet should have done better than it did.

00:56:04.000 Right.

00:56:05.000 And, you know, it was just luck of the draw.

00:56:07.000 But I think it is possible to demonstrate...

00:56:12.000 Let me just tell you about one example.

00:56:14.000 Okay.

00:56:15.000 I was tweeting about what even...

00:56:19.000 Oh, it was about...

00:56:22.000 After my interview, I had two recent interviews with Tucker Carlson.

00:56:25.000 The second one was about the border crisis and it contains some really explosive stuff and It was not trending, which is weird for a Tucker interview, especially one that got as many views as it did.

00:56:42.000 And there has been some...

00:56:44.000 I used to be able to do something I would call climbing a trend.

00:56:49.000 If there was a trend on Twitter, I could very often tweet about it, and then my tweet would climb up the trend.

00:56:56.000 And that became impossible.

00:56:58.000 It was like forbidden somehow in the architecture of Twitter.

00:57:03.000 In the aftermath of this Tucker interview, I expected to see that interview and my participation in it trend because so many people saw it.

00:57:15.000 It was like six million views in two days.

00:57:18.000 So it was obviously something that was being seen and discussed.

00:57:22.000 And it didn't start trending.

00:57:24.000 And then a weird thing happened.

00:57:26.000 My name trended.

00:57:28.000 But it was only my first name.

00:57:30.000 And it trended under the category sports.

00:57:34.000 And if you went to the tweets in the trend, they were actually about the Tucker interview.

00:57:39.000 So the Brett...

00:57:39.000 Whoa!

00:57:40.000 Right.

00:57:41.000 So what it turned out, somebody posted underneath.

00:57:43.000 They said, oh, it's Brett Favre.

00:57:45.000 That's why it says Brett...

00:57:46.000 Favre.

00:57:47.000 Communist.

00:57:48.000 What's wrong with me?

00:57:49.000 Whew! 0.99

00:57:49.000 Wow, I'm not going to live that down, am I? Favre. 0.99

00:57:54.000 He's a legend.

00:57:55.000 You've got to get his name right.

00:57:56.000 I am going to from now on.

00:57:58.000 What did you say, Jamie?

00:57:59.000 That's going to be a meme.

00:58:02.000 All right.

00:58:03.000 Well, I'll take my lumps on that.

00:58:05.000 But nonetheless...

00:58:06.000 It's an odd spelling in your defense if you don't, you know...

00:58:09.000 Well, yeah.

00:58:10.000 So here's what happened.

00:58:11.000 B-R-E-T trended. 0.99

00:58:13.000 The category was sports.

00:58:16.000 It wasn't Brett Weinstein trending.

00:58:18.000 And when you went to the tweets, they weren't about sports or Brett Favre.

00:58:22.000 Okay?

00:58:23.000 They were actually about me.

00:58:24.000 So you were prevented from trending in some way.

00:58:24.000 Right.

00:58:26.000 I think that what happened, to put it in the proper computer science language, is that the intersection of Brett Weinstein and Brett Favre is B-R-E-T. He spells his name with two T's and obviously we have different last names.

00:58:43.000 I think?

00:59:00.000 None of it was about him.

00:59:01.000 It was all about me as far as I could tell.

00:59:03.000 That's wild.

00:59:04.000 So anyway, I think that implies the structure that I've been detecting but haven't been able to establish.

00:59:10.000 And anyway, that stuff is still inside Twitter.

00:59:14.000 Do I think Musk has put a block on me trending?

00:59:17.000 No, I don't think so at all.

00:59:19.000 But I think there's something in there that he doesn't know about.

00:59:22.000 Well, you got to think who's working there.

00:59:26.000 First of all, Twitter's in San Francisco.

00:59:28.000 The idea that you're gonna get 4,000 rebels Or, you know, international dark web members that are working in Twitter is nonsense.

00:59:41.000 You're going to get those kids that are subject to the same social pressures that all the other kids that are getting out of universities and they're moving into social media space are getting.

00:59:50.000 Those are the people.

00:59:51.000 Now, they might have mandates that they're told to use, but these are computer geniuses. 0.98

00:59:56.000 These are people that know how to fuck with things. 0.67

00:59:58.000 These are people that are coders. 0.99

00:59:59.000 And if they can get away with it, especially if your boss is busy running SpaceX and Tesla. 0.98

01:00:06.000 I mean, how the fuck can that guy do? 0.99

01:00:09.000 Oh, and the boring company, sorry. 0.99

01:00:11.000 You know, and having 150 kids.

01:00:13.000 How?

01:00:14.000 How does that guy have time? 1.00

01:00:16.000 I have three kids, and I can't fucking pay attention to half the shit that's going on in the world. 0.99

01:00:16.000 Yeah. 0.99

01:00:21.000 I have issues sometimes at my club where I have to put out social fires, and I'm like, what is actually happening?

01:00:29.000 I have to kind of forensically analyze each and every conflict.

01:00:37.000 Measure personalities like was this person susceptible doing something and maybe they don't seem to be honest like something's going on here What's the actual truth do I get these two people together and? 0.98

01:00:47.000 Fuck man, and that's a simple thing like a comedy club with a hundred employees It's not that big a deal. 0.99

01:00:53.000 You know this motherfucker is running Twitter SpaceX Tesla and the boring company And he's providing Starlink satellites to Ukraine and all other parts of the world, and you could put one on your fucking camper and get 5G in the middle of the desert. 1.00

01:01:10.000 Like, what? 1.00

01:01:11.000 Right, at the same time that he's, like, memeing people into submission.

01:01:15.000 How?

01:01:15.000 Every time I text him, I'm like, how are you responding to me?

01:01:18.000 How do you have the fucking time? 0.98

01:01:19.000 How do you do that? 1.00

01:01:20.000 I can't keep up.

01:01:21.000 I have, like, 89 text messages that I have to get to at the end of this podcast.

01:01:27.000 Yeah, it's amazing what he's able to do.

01:01:31.000 It's insane!

01:01:32.000 And he has a taste for it.

01:01:33.000 So how could he possibly be paying attention to how people are trending and what's allowed and what's not allowed?

01:01:38.000 Oh, I don't think he can be.

01:01:40.000 All he can do is put people in charge and he can give them marching orders and say, I don't want this thing to have its thumb on the scales.

01:01:40.000 He can't.

01:01:51.000 Is he aware of this dilemma?

01:01:53.000 You should alert him to this.

01:01:55.000 Here's the problem.

01:01:57.000 And I don't know what this means.

01:01:57.000 Okay.

01:02:00.000 I was not going to mention this.

01:02:02.000 But this is the very thing.

01:02:05.000 So I went to see Musk, as I mentioned.

01:02:08.000 We had a very good discussion.

01:02:09.000 I spent about a half an hour with him.

01:02:11.000 At the end of it, he said that he thought it was a good discussion and he wanted to meet again.

01:02:15.000 And I said, anytime, of course.

01:02:18.000 On my trip back home, literally from that meeting, my Twitter account got hijacked for the first time ever.

01:02:26.000 I've never had an account hijacked, but my Twitter account got hijacked and it started putting out some crazy spam stuff.

01:02:33.000 And I was concerned about it because not only is it alarming to have your account captured, But I had been DMing with Musk, including encrypted DMs.

01:02:45.000 Now, there wasn't anything sensitive in there, but you can imagine in my shoes, the last thing you want is somebody captures your account and they start exposing communications with Musk that maybe he doesn't want public.

01:02:58.000 So I contacted him.

01:02:59.000 Right?

01:03:00.000 In alarm.

01:03:01.000 And I said, my account's been captured.

01:03:03.000 Not sure what to do about it.

01:03:05.000 We were in a discussion.

01:03:07.000 And we were talking about the fact that the account itself has weird behavior on Twitter, which I didn't know if that was relevant or not.

01:03:18.000 And he asked me for more information.

01:03:21.000 And I started to tell him about this trend stuff.

01:03:25.000 He blocked me.

01:03:27.000 Now, I don't know what that means.

01:03:29.000 I don't think he's on the other team.

01:03:32.000 He blocked you?

01:03:33.000 He blocked me and I'm blocked to this day, which seems strange.

01:03:33.000 Yes.

01:03:39.000 It could be that he's forgotten that he's done it, but I don't think so.

01:03:42.000 Why would he block you?

01:03:44.000 I have no idea.

01:03:45.000 It makes no sense.

01:03:47.000 Now, it's possible that he, you know, he's very busy.

01:03:51.000 It's possible that he took what I was telling him about the behavior of my account as if I thought it was his obligation to pay attention to me personally, which I never thought.

01:04:01.000 But maybe he interpreted it that way.

01:04:03.000 The last thing he said was, stop spamming me, which was very strange for a guy who said he wanted to have another meeting.

01:04:09.000 Right?

01:04:10.000 How many messages were you sending him?

01:04:12.000 Three or four.

01:04:15.000 Stop spamming me.

01:04:17.000 It was very strange.

01:04:18.000 But look, I don't hold it against him.

01:04:21.000 The guy is obviously...

01:04:24.000 I think it's obvious that he is trying to save the world and he's one of very few people who has the kind of power and insight to actually make an important difference in that.

01:04:33.000 So I'm very much a supporter of what he's doing even if I found that whole chapter strange.

01:04:39.000 But...

01:04:41.000 Nonetheless, it happened.

01:04:42.000 I don't know what it means, and it is interesting that it happened as I was trying to explain to him the weirdness in my account, which was a mirror for what he told me he had experienced with his account before he bought Twitter.

01:04:55.000 Yeah.

01:04:56.000 Yeah.

01:04:58.000 If you wanted to be charitable, you could chalk that up to a guy that's just fucking insanely stressed out and busy and dealing with a thousand fires. 0.66

01:05:06.000 Let's put it this way.

01:05:07.000 I'm already there.

01:05:09.000 My feeling is I'm still a supporter of his.

01:05:11.000 I don't like that he blocked me, but the guy's got more important stuff to do, and I'm supportive of what he's doing.

01:05:17.000 Well, hopefully he'll hear this and unblock you.

01:05:20.000 That would be lovely.

01:05:21.000 Stop spamming him, bro.

01:05:23.000 Well, let's put it this way.

01:05:24.000 If that was the issue, all he needed to say is, hey, Brett.

01:05:29.000 Yeah, I'm very busy.

01:05:30.000 I'm very busy.

01:05:31.000 Yeah, which it clearly is.

01:05:32.000 Yeah, you can't fake that.

01:05:32.000 Yep.

01:05:35.000 I don't know how he does it in the first place.

01:05:37.000 So even responding by, stop spamming me.

01:05:40.000 Right?

01:05:41.000 Even that.

01:05:42.000 How expensive was that?

01:05:44.000 He actually typed that out.

01:05:46.000 I'm just thankful that there is a guy like him that's doing what he's doing.

01:05:49.000 Because if it wasn't for him, I think we were moving in a very wild direction.

01:05:54.000 A really crazy direction of adherence and compliance.

01:05:59.000 Regardless of whether or not it's logical and things are moving more and more into this crazy ideological place that seems very much like a cult.

01:06:09.000 And it was in control of all of our mass means of communication other than, you know, whether it's rumble or gab or... 0.86

01:06:18.000 These sites that are committed to free speech and some of them have been kind of fucked and take home and I think that that's something that people need to take into consideration too when you you hear about a right-wing platform that gets infiltrated by racists and Nazis and I'm sure that's true too.

01:06:34.000 I'm sure there are some but I would imagine and I would like you to consider that we know that government interference in social media discourse, whether it is our government or whether it's foreign governments that want us to stay at each other's throats,

01:06:54.000 is a real thing.

01:06:57.000 And one of the ways they would do that is to make any sort of, any kind of, any time there's a discussion, have the most problematic take on it elevated and have massive amounts of people that are saying egregious,

01:07:13.000 horrible things over and over again.

01:07:15.000 And to me, my reaction when I see that is I stopped using that platform.

01:07:19.000 And that's me.

01:07:20.000 That's someone who's really aware of this game and knows how it's going.

01:07:23.000 I don't go to these other platforms. 0.95

01:07:25.000 I just freak the fuck out of here. 0.97

01:07:26.000 It's too nuts, some of them. 0.97

01:07:28.000 And then some of them I go, okay, like on X, like when some hot take comes out, I love to go into the accounts and see what the most ridiculous people, like what they're saying, and then go to their page.

01:07:44.000 And it's usually like a name with a bunch of numbers. 0.98

01:07:48.000 and they have like 43 followers and then you look at their tweets and it's all either responding to these social issues in this very egregious way or retweeting preposterous things and retweeting gaslighting things you know retweeting things that just like you just go who the fuck thinks like this well it's they're not real people man These are agents of chaos, 0.97

01:08:12.000 and they're injected into social media. 0.98

01:08:15.000 If you have beer, and it's a really good beer, and you inject 20% piss into that beer, people are going to drink that beer and go, what the fuck is wrong with this beer?

01:08:24.000 It's not the beer.

01:08:25.000 It's what's being injected into the beer.

01:08:27.000 You're not allowing the real citizens to have an honest take on how everybody else thinks.

01:08:33.000 Because the way we figure out what's right...

01:08:36.000 No one exactly knows that their take is...

01:08:38.000 100% the only way to look at things.

01:08:41.000 You've got to be able to interact with people.

01:08:43.000 That's why discourse is so important, and that's the most fascinating aspect about the free internet, is to be able to see the actual opinions of real people that think very differently than you.

01:08:52.000 And some of them you might think are ridiculous, and some of them might change your mind.

01:08:56.000 You might listen to what their take is on something and go, I never considered that. 0.68

01:09:00.000 Maybe I am looking at things ideologically.

01:09:02.000 Maybe I do have a Preconceived notion of what's right and what's wrong.

01:09:06.000 It's not based on facts.

01:09:08.000 I'm not being objective.

01:09:09.000 And that's the only way to find that out. 0.96

01:09:11.000 But when you're dealing with swarms of people, whether it's Russian troll farms or Chinese or American, and they're jumping into the fray and fucking up all the conversations, you're like, Whew, what's really going on here? 0.97

01:09:27.000 What is really going on? 0.96

01:09:28.000 And I think most people don't know what's really going on.

01:09:31.000 The reason why I got to this recently, there was some article, I forget what the article was about, but it was some social take.

01:09:38.000 But then I saw that they were posting tweets.

01:09:41.000 It's in the article, which is a new thing that lazy journalists will do.

01:09:44.000 And this was the take online of this.

01:09:46.000 And so I go, okay, that's the take online.

01:09:48.000 Let me go to that person, see if it's a real person.

01:09:50.000 Nope, not a real person.

01:09:51.000 Let me go to this other tweet.

01:09:52.000 Nope, not a real person. 1.00

01:09:54.000 I mean, it might be a real person, but my instincts are that the fucking name and three numbers behind it and the way they're tweeting about stuff, bullshit. 0.99

01:10:04.000 So did they do that? 1.00

01:10:04.000 Bullshit. 1.00

01:10:06.000 How did they not do that before they posted those tweets? 1.00

01:10:09.000 They don't give a fuck. 0.99

01:10:10.000 They're just getting clicks. 0.98

01:10:11.000 They just want to see that people are arguing about things.

01:10:13.000 And they want to see the support for whatever preposterous notion they're trying to push out.

01:10:18.000 Whether it's trans athletes or, you know... 0.99

01:10:21.000 People being able to use women's rooms with penises. 0.99

01:10:24.000 All that stuff, when you see the takes on it and you go like, how much of this is real humans? 0.86

01:10:30.000 And how much of it is actually affecting real humans to their whole barometer, their idea of like what's okay and what's not okay, shifts.

01:10:39.000 And the way I've described it, and I heard someone talk about this in terms of, I think it was Tony Robbins actually, talk about it in terms of beneficial behavior.

01:10:48.000 That if you are on a certain path, there's two boats on a certain path, and one of them deviates slightly in a better direction over time, The distance is great from where you would be to where you are now because you've done the right things.

01:11:04.000 Well, that's also true if you, like, get people to believe nonsense, and you get people to believe, like, weird social things, and you get people to believe that if you are not willing to have sex with a biological male who identifies as a woman, somehow or another you're a Nazi.

01:11:18.000 And that gets further and further.

01:11:21.000 Then we find ourselves in these, like, how did I get here?

01:11:24.000 Like, how are we here?

01:11:26.000 Well, a lot of it is just discourse.

01:11:28.000 And if you can control discourse and if you can manipulate discourse, which is clearly being done, you could change what's acceptable.

01:11:38.000 Well, on the one hand, I think it's even worse than you're portraying it.

01:11:44.000 And on the other hand, I find a kind of hope in this.

01:11:48.000 And the way it's worse is if you think about who we're up against and what properties they control.

01:11:56.000 They presumably have the intelligence services on their side.

01:12:00.000 They've banked all of our communications.

01:12:03.000 And, I mean, if you give me their cards, I know how to win, right?

01:12:09.000 You know who suspects whom of what.

01:12:11.000 You know who resents whom.

01:12:15.000 You know how to seed anger and disrespect.

01:12:21.000 It's not hard to take a group of people and get them to tangle themselves if you have that kind of information.

01:12:27.000 And they just simply do.

01:12:28.000 And they don't even have to collect it in real time.

01:12:31.000 They just have to bank it so that they can go back and figure out what the map of these things is and they can tangle us.

01:12:38.000 And I think they're doing it.

01:12:39.000 And I think we are seeing...

01:12:40.000 I know that in the COVID dissident community, there's all kinds of infighting that's going on that...

01:12:48.000 About what?

01:12:50.000 Well, there's a faction that has emerged, for example, that is convinced that there was no novel pathogen circulating during the COVID pandemic.

01:13:03.000 Now, do you think those people are real?

01:13:06.000 Some of them are.

01:13:06.000 I know some of them.

01:13:07.000 Right. 0.99

01:13:08.000 So these people think that it was just all bullshit and that all those people getting sick was what, the flu? 0.98

01:13:15.000 Well, there's a second faction that says it wasn't SARS-CoV-2, it was flu. 0.99

01:13:21.000 Right?

01:13:22.000 Okay.

01:13:24.000 Let's just say, I think the people who say that there was no novel pathogen, they actually have a point that they're failing to make, which they should be making.

01:13:33.000 The point is, the propaganda was so effective, it was so industrial strength, that a pathogen was not required.

01:13:43.000 Right?

01:13:44.000 Much of this could have been accomplished with no pathogen.

01:13:47.000 Right.

01:13:48.000 Now, that doesn't mean there wasn't a pathogen, and I think there was, because I think I've had it, right?

01:13:53.000 And my sense that I have had that pathogen is based on observations of the pattern with my family.

01:14:03.000 So let's just take the question of, well, was this flu, and are you leaping to the conclusion that flu was something special because people had put the idea of SARS-CoV-2 in your mind?

01:14:12.000 I don't think so.

01:14:13.000 And here's why I don't think so.

01:14:15.000 I've had flu maybe three or four times in my life.

01:14:19.000 I've had something three times in the last four years.

01:14:24.000 Something severe and flu-like.

01:14:26.000 I had it...

01:14:27.000 It's still severe?

01:14:29.000 Well...

01:14:29.000 The most recent versions have been severe for you?

01:14:32.000 Let's put it this way.

01:14:32.000 Severe as in debilitating.

01:14:35.000 Really?

01:14:35.000 I treated it aggressively.

01:14:37.000 I got over it quickly.

01:14:39.000 But, yeah...

01:14:39.000 But the results, the impact initially...

01:14:42.000 The impact was profound, right?

01:14:44.000 It was flu or worse severity.

01:14:47.000 Now, am I saying that was SARS-CoV-2?

01:14:50.000 How would I know?

01:14:51.000 How would I know?

01:14:52.000 You didn't get tested the last two times?

01:14:54.000 The last time I got tested, it did not test positive for COVID, but it was out of season.

01:15:00.000 So the basic pattern is this.

01:15:03.000 I believe that pathogens exist.

01:15:05.000 I believe that I have contracted a pathogen three times in four years.

01:15:10.000 Does it have to be one pathogen?

01:15:12.000 No, I'm open to the possibility it was a couple different things.

01:15:14.000 But mostly we're talking about not in the traditional season for flu.

01:15:20.000 Did you get tested for RSV? I didn't, but I did talk to Pierre Corey about it and there was no reason to think it was going to be RSV. So anyway, my point is, I don't believe there was no pathogen because I believe that something that followed the pattern of a pathogen is in the world.

01:15:41.000 Also, the pathogen is clearly documented.

01:15:43.000 Well, I agree with you it's clearly documented, but it's not that the people who are arguing there's no pathogen don't have responses.

01:15:51.000 And so, you know, we saw a lot of shenanigans with cycle thresholds on PCR. So there are ways to create the impression of a pandemic that did not require there to be an actual pathogen.

01:16:04.000 Well, it was also one of the rare times where being asymptomatic didn't...

01:16:09.000 you were still considered sick.

01:16:13.000 Yeah, and that was likely nonsense or largely nonsense. 0.70

01:16:16.000 Well, it was like some wild number.

01:16:19.000 Like 65% of the people who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 were asymptomatic.

01:16:25.000 And this was also during the PCR cycle days of 40 cycles.

01:16:28.000 Right.

01:16:29.000 So the point is, all right, we know that there are various tricks you can play and that we know that they were played, that people who died of things that had nothing to do with any infectious disease were categorized as dying with COVID or of COVID. And that they were financially incentivized to do so.

01:16:45.000 We know all of those games were played.

01:16:47.000 And so from my perspective, I believe that most of what happened could have been arranged without a pathogen.

01:16:55.000 That said, I believe there was one.

01:16:57.000 But the larger point, you asked me what is the infighting in the COVID community.

01:17:03.000 The fact is those who believe that there was a pathogen are viewed as shills or limited hangouts by those who believe that there wasn't one.

01:17:14.000 Can I ask you this?

01:17:15.000 There's this thing that they say that the conspiracy theorists, never biologists say, is that COVID has never been isolated.

01:17:26.000 Yeah, I don't think this is true.

01:17:27.000 I think what you want is somebody who is skilled in the molecular side of this story to talk you through what is and isn't correct.

01:17:38.000 Can you just expand on that?

01:17:40.000 This idea that keeps getting propagated that COVID has never been isolated.

01:17:48.000 So, I can't really explore that evidence because I'm not well-versed in it.

01:17:55.000 I can tell you who I trust on this topic.

01:17:59.000 And I would say, talk to Kevin McKernan.

01:18:03.000 He can tell you what's been seen and what hasn't.

01:18:06.000 The problem is, I mean, you read Bobby Kennedy's book about Fauci, right?

01:18:14.000 And you remember in that book that there is an exploration of what happened with HIV. Mm-hmm.

01:18:21.000 Now, the portrayal in that book, which I must say is, I think, shockingly compelling, is that HIV exists, but it is not explanatory of acquired immune deficiency syndrome as we think it is.

01:18:37.000 And this is Peter Duisburg's assertion, too, who was demonized heavily during the AIDS crisis.

01:18:44.000 Right.

01:18:44.000 He's a professor of biology, University of California, Berkeley.

01:18:48.000 So we're dealing with a question...

01:18:51.000 There are those who believe that pathogens don't exist, that viruses don't exist. 0.99

01:18:54.000 I think these people are completely nuts, okay? 0.94

01:18:57.000 We know viruses exist. 0.99

01:18:58.000 For one thing, you know, there are certain viruses you can see, right?

01:19:02.000 Like a bacteriophage is something that you can actually see with an electron microscope.

01:19:06.000 So viruses definitely exist.

01:19:09.000 Whether they are responsible for this, that, or the other syndrome is something that we can get wrong.

01:19:17.000 Can I stop you there?

01:19:17.000 Sure.

01:19:18.000 So if you could see viruses in an electron microscope, you cannot see COVID in an electron microscope?

01:19:23.000 You can see something, right?

01:19:26.000 You can see a particle with structure.

01:19:32.000 So, again, we're in an area that is not my area of expertise.

01:19:36.000 You've got a couple different kinds of electron micrographs.

01:19:40.000 You've got scanning and transmission.

01:19:42.000 And then you have various tricks to increase the ability of them to see into ranges that are actually beyond the ability of electrons to reveal them directly.

01:19:53.000 Anyway, it is a highly technical realm and it's not something I can explain.

01:20:00.000 But we can see something.

01:20:02.000 But the fact, you know, if you say this person has a syndrome, right?

01:20:06.000 And then you go looking for a particle and that particle is present reliably.

01:20:13.000 You have to then figure out if that particle is absent from people who don't have the symptoms, and if it's not absent, which it sometimes won't be, you have to figure out what it means.

01:20:23.000 So there's a postulate about establishing the connection between a virus and a disease that is seemingly logical.

01:20:34.000 In other words, people who have the particle present ought to show symptoms of the disease, and people who have symptoms of the disease ought to have the particle, and those So that postulate, Cox postulate, does not actually work.

01:20:50.000 And the reason it doesn't work is because you have – let's take the case of AIDS, for example.

01:21:00.000 AIDS involves an inability of people to fend off various pathogens that they would otherwise be able to fend off.

01:21:11.000 You can say, well, that's the result of HIV. The problem is that the inability to fend off some set of pathogens may be the result of the disruption of a subclass of cells, CD4 cells, let's say.

01:21:25.000 So if CD4 cells are attacked by HIV and that disrupts the ability of a patient to fend off a particular disease, then anything that disrupts the formation of CD4 cells will produce the same pathology.

01:21:39.000 So according to this postulate, which is too narrow, you can falsify the idea that HIV is causing AIDS because there are patients who have AIDS who don't have HIV. So that's the problem.

01:21:54.000 You need a richer toolkit in order to be able to establish a causal relationship.

01:22:03.000 And in the case of HIV... What the argument is that it is effectively a minor fellow traveler, right?

01:22:15.000 That whatever it is that is causing AIDS actually does, is accompanied by HIV, but that HIV isn't actually inducing that syndrome, right?

01:22:25.000 So AIDS is a syndrome, which just means a collection of symptoms that occur together.

01:22:33.000 But the nature of biology is that you have pathways.

01:22:37.000 Anything that disrupts a particular pathway will create all the same symptoms downstream.

01:22:43.000 And so, in any case, that complexity makes it very difficult to establish with certainty that X particle creates Y disease.

01:22:56.000 It's also ignoring a very important factor in AIDS, which is party drugs. 0.80

01:23:01.000 That is the competing hypothesis, and for those who think that this is a preposterous allegation, you should look at this evidence.

01:23:11.000 The evidence is surprisingly compelling, and if your mind resists that, realize that Luc Montagnier, who got a Nobel Prize for the discovery of HIV, Later in life, became convinced that the thing for which he got the Nobel Prize was not nearly as important as he had imagined.

01:23:31.000 He believed that HIV was not the causal element.

01:23:35.000 So, to me, that's very powerful.

01:23:38.000 Somebody as smart as Luc Montagnier looked at the evidence and said he had gotten it wrong where that actually decreased his own historical importance.

01:23:48.000 And then we have to take into consideration the initial treatment, which was AZT. Right.

01:23:54.000 AZT. Now AZT kills people dead. 1.00

01:23:57.000 And they stopped using it as chemotherapy medication because it was killing people quicker than cancer.

01:24:02.000 And chemotherapy medication has never been prescribed to people that you constantly stay on it.

01:24:10.000 That's just not something they do.

01:24:11.000 You go on it for very short periods of time because it's very damaging, but it kills the cancer, and then your body recovers and survives.

01:24:18.000 With AZT, with AIDS, it was killing people.

01:24:22.000 So now you have people dying from AIDS. And you have this medication which Fauci in the 1980s was famously quoted as saying, is the only reason why we use only one medication is because the only medication that's been proven to be both safe and effective.

01:24:37.000 Where have you heard that before?

01:24:37.000 Right.

01:24:38.000 Right.

01:24:39.000 It was a total...

01:24:40.000 COVID was a rerun of the AIDS chapter with AZT. But the AIDS chapter seems even more terrifying because if the initial treatment was AZT and we know AZT kills people, you're taking someone who has a compromised immune system and your response to that was give them something that's going to kill them quicker and then say there's a giant crisis.

01:24:59.000 And this is what Dewsburg was demonized for.

01:25:02.000 Yeah, I agree.

01:25:04.000 And, you know, for many years, I resisted the interpretation.

01:25:10.000 I was more familiar with Carey Mullis' objections.

01:25:15.000 Carey Mullis was the inventor of PCR technology who died tragically and some would say strangely at the very beginning of the COVID crisis.

01:25:27.000 Why strangely?

01:25:29.000 Just because of the timing?

01:25:30.000 Have you ever seen this piece of video where he talks about Anthony Fauci?

01:25:35.000 Yeah.

01:25:37.000 Let's put it this way.

01:25:38.000 Carey Mullis was a outspoken, vigorous, highly intelligent person who was not corralled by fashion.

01:25:50.000 And in fact, his objection to the idea that HIV was causing AIDS was An early testament to his maverick nature.

01:26:01.000 For people who haven't heard it, let's find that.

01:26:03.000 Find that clip of Kerry Mullis talking about Anthony Fauci.

01:26:08.000 He's essentially just saying he's a bureaucrat and he doesn't know what he's talking about and that his technology should never be used.

01:26:16.000 Yeah, the second one there.

01:26:18.000 The second one, that one, yeah.

01:26:21.000 What is it about humanity that wants to go to all the details and stuff and listen?

01:26:28.000 You know, these guys like Fauci get up there and start talking.

01:26:30.000 You know, he doesn't know anything, really, about anything.

01:26:32.000 And I'd say that to his face.

01:26:34.000 Nothing.

01:26:35.000 The man thinks you can take a blood sample and stick it in an electron microscope, and if it's got a virus in there, you'll know it.

01:26:42.000 He doesn't understand electron microscopy.

01:26:44.000 He doesn't understand medicine.

01:26:46.000 He should not be in a position like he's in.

01:26:49.000 Most of those guys up there on the top are just total administrative people and they don't know anything about what's going on at the bottom.

01:26:56.000 Those guys have got an agenda, which is not what we would like them to have, being that we pay for them to take care of our health in some way.

01:27:05.000 They've got a personal kind of agenda.

01:27:08.000 They make up their own rules as they go, they change them when they want to, and they smugly, like Tony Fauci, does not mind going on television in front of the people who pay his salary and lie directly into the camera.

01:27:19.000 You can't expect the sheep to really respect the best and the brightest.

01:27:23.000 They don't know the difference, really.

01:27:26.000 I mean, I like humans, don't get me wrong, but basically there is a vast majority of them do not possess the ability to judge who is and who isn't a really good scientist.

01:27:42.000 I mean, that's the problem, that's the main problem actually with science, I'd say, in this century because The science is being judged by people.

01:27:50.000 Funding is being done by people who don't understand it, okay?

01:27:53.000 Who do we trust?

01:27:54.000 Fauci doesn't know enough to, you know, if Fauci wants to get on television with somebody who knows a little bit about this stuff and debate him, he could easily do it because he's been asked.

01:27:54.000 Fauci?

01:28:04.000 I mean, I've had a lot of people, President of the University of South Carolina, ask Fauci if he'd come down there and debate me on the stage in front of the student body because I wanted somebody Who was from the other side to come down there and balance mine. 0.97

01:28:18.000 Because I felt like, well, these guys can listen to me, but I need to have somebody else down here that's going to tell them the other side.

01:28:24.000 But he didn't want to do it.

01:28:30.000 Yeah, so that's a pretty wild piece.

01:28:33.000 And how did he die?

01:28:35.000 I've forgotten what the pathology was, but some spontaneous thing.

01:28:39.000 But the thing is, he was a, you know, people die, but he was a healthy, healthy guy.

01:28:48.000 That was from 2000, what, that video?

01:28:52.000 Jamie, do you know?

01:28:53.000 Well, I'll say it's like 16?

01:28:57.000 18?

01:29:01.000 See if you can find it, just so we know.

01:29:03.000 So we can judge based on what he looked like there.

01:29:05.000 He looked pretty healthy, but obviously people have things that come up even when they look healthy.

01:29:10.000 Sure, and that's the problem with all of these things.

01:29:16.000 People do die spontaneously.

01:29:18.000 But if you're looking for someone who would be a brilliant, well-respected scientist that would be at the head of the resistance to something like this and would be vocal about it, that's your huckleberry.

01:29:30.000 Yeah, you would have had him on your podcast and he would have said this cycle threshold stuff is nonsense.

01:29:36.000 And frankly, it would have been...

01:29:38.000 A mirror of what happened with Robert Malone, right?

01:29:43.000 The whole COVID crisis unfolded differently because the inventor of the mRNA technology at the heart of those so-called vaccines didn't think this made any sense, had been injured himself by getting one of these inoculations.

01:29:55.000 That changed the dynamic of the argument to have the inventor of PCR technology saying you're using that in a way that is unforgivably wrong.

01:30:05.000 That would have changed the whole dynamic as well, and yet he was gone.

01:30:05.000 Right?

01:30:09.000 So, probably natural causes.

01:30:11.000 What was his cause of death?

01:30:13.000 I'm looking both things up at the same time.

01:30:15.000 Okay.

01:30:16.000 We'll find out both things shortly.

01:30:18.000 I should point out, Luc Montagnier also died late in the COVID crisis.

01:30:23.000 Now, he was as old as the Hills, so one has to imagine that that was probably just bad luck.

01:30:30.000 I've never even heard of him before.

01:30:32.000 You've never heard of him?

01:30:32.000 No.

01:30:34.000 What does it say?

01:30:35.000 Heart respiratory failure.

01:30:37.000 Brought on by pneumonia.

01:30:41.000 Hmm.

01:30:43.000 2019?

01:30:44.000 Yeah, August of 2019. Look at that.

01:30:47.000 Right before it popped up.

01:30:48.000 Boy, that's convenient.

01:30:50.000 Here's 74. But 74 is, you know, around the time when people do die.

01:30:54.000 That video was from, did we know what year?

01:30:56.000 I was trying to do too many things at once.

01:30:58.000 No worries.

01:30:59.000 I found multiple issues or uploads of that video, but I'm trying to figure out how to find out.

01:31:05.000 When the discussion was?

01:31:06.000 Right.

01:31:07.000 Okay.

01:31:08.000 So anyway, the reason I raised him was that the first place I became aware that anybody significant doubted the story about HIV leading to AIDS, it was Carey Mullis.

01:31:19.000 And my sense at the time, which I now regard as wrong, was this is a chemist, he's a brilliant guy, but he doesn't understand The biology and he's overusing the postulate and he's not understanding why a virus that does cause a disease wouldn't match the postulate.

01:31:39.000 96. So that was when that conversation was, wow, that's crazy.

01:31:42.000 Yeah.

01:31:43.000 96. But what I came to understand later after I looked at what Luc Montagnier had said and I read Bobby Kennedy's book on Fauci was that actually the argument against HIV being causal was a lot higher quality than I had understood.

01:32:04.000 That it being a real virus, a fellow traveler of a disease that was chemically triggered, that is at least a highly plausible hypothesis.

01:32:16.000 And with Anthony Fauci playing his role, that was inconvenient for what he was trying to accomplish.

01:32:25.000 And we have to really take into consideration the time in which we're talking about.

01:32:30.000 We're talking about the 1980s and the media was completely controlled and it was very small.

01:32:37.000 There wasn't a lot of outlets.

01:32:40.000 There was no independent journalism.

01:32:41.000 It didn't exist.

01:32:43.000 There was no people that were standing – no rebels that were standing outside the fray saying that that's not true.

01:32:49.000 This is what's actually going on.

01:32:51.000 Right.

01:32:51.000 And actually, this brings me back to an earlier point.

01:32:54.000 So you were saying that journalism would survive.

01:32:59.000 Yeah.

01:33:00.000 And the story here is an interesting one.

01:33:04.000 I don't trust almost any journalist who's still in the mainstream system, right?

01:33:11.000 There's maybe a couple of holdouts.

01:33:13.000 Cy Hirsch still puts out important stuff every now and again.

01:33:16.000 But the interesting thing that's happened is whatever force it is that has made it essentially impossible to do good journalism inside the official system, Has driven out and surfaced really good people, right?

01:33:31.000 We've got Matt Taibbi, we've got Schellenberger, we've got Greenwald.

01:33:35.000 We have, of all things, Tucker Carlson is now, you know, he's gone from being an anchor person, albeit a very articulate and insightful one, but an anchor person.

01:33:47.000 He's now traveling around the world and doing a job that looks like Yeah.

01:34:11.000 Yeah.

01:34:20.000 And part of it is what we're doing here right now, right?

01:34:25.000 The inability of the system to tolerate open discussion of important topics has produced the phenomenon that you so heavily innovated Yeah.

01:34:43.000 Yeah.

01:34:56.000 So, anyway, that's a very hopeful thing, and the degree to which that is also riding on, you know, the purchase of Twitter and...

01:35:09.000 And people like Tucker.

01:35:11.000 Right. 0.98

01:35:11.000 And also Fox fucking up and removing him. 0.98

01:35:15.000 Well, but think about it. 0.98

01:35:16.000 All of these things are the same, right?

01:35:18.000 You've got...

01:35:23.000 Social media platforms that refuse to provide people a venue in which they can talk about whatever they want. 0.99

01:35:29.000 That's business-wise stupid, but in terms of maintaining power and control, very important, right? 0.93

01:35:36.000 You've got Fox firing its most important asset and thereby accidentally freeing him to basically dwarf their influence. 0.98

01:35:50.000 So all of these things represent something that should...

01:35:54.000 And the onion, right?

01:35:56.000 The onion was funny, right?

01:35:58.000 Funny is a moneymaker. 0.84

01:36:00.000 So why do all of these properties make dumb decisions that sabotage, that cannibalize their own business?

01:36:09.000 Well, it's all pointing in the same direction.

01:36:11.000 All of these things are involved in some battle over control that confuses us because we think of them as normal businesses.

01:36:19.000 Well, it's clearly pressured by advertisers.

01:36:21.000 It has to be.

01:36:22.000 And it also has to be pressured by some intelligence agencies.

01:36:27.000 If you've got a guy like Tucker saying the CIA killed JFK, the FBI had 200 people at least on the Capitol on the lawn that were instigating.

01:36:37.000 Like he's saying this on Fox.

01:36:40.000 And if you have a corporation like Fox, which is this long-standing conservative news organization that has deep ties to the military and to conservative groups and then certainly to beholden to advertisers,

01:36:56.000 you've got a real problem on your hands.

01:36:57.000 Like, how much is this guy worth?

01:36:59.000 How many views does he get?

01:37:01.000 What does Jesse Waters get?

01:37:03.000 Right.

01:37:03.000 Is it close?

01:37:05.000 What about Sean Hannity?

01:37:07.000 Is it close? 0.98

01:37:08.000 Can we fucking just move him in and take a small hit but not have any propaganda hit? 0.99

01:37:14.000 It's not. 0.98

01:37:14.000 And so, I mean, I think that actually describes the game, right? 0.98

01:37:19.000 We've got to stop looking at businesses in simple terms, right?

01:37:23.000 Victoria's Secret does not embrace fat because it thinks anybody actually is persuaded by this stuff, right?

01:37:31.000 It does it because there's some higher order principle being deployed in which it has to play its role.

01:37:38.000 That is driving the fact that there is some influence, a pernicious influence causing everything that should behave normally to behave weirdly and against the public's interest is driving everything that insists on continuing to function out.

01:37:54.000 And if we were all driven out, but we had no mechanism to reach an audience, then it would be game over.

01:38:01.000 But the fact is, there is a mechanism.

01:38:04.000 The internet provides it.

01:38:05.000 So then the question is, well, what are the bottlenecks, right?

01:38:08.000 And now we're going to fight over the bottlenecks.

01:38:10.000 And social media platforms all marching in lockstep, that was a bottleneck, okay?

01:38:16.000 One of them gets broken out by Musk.

01:38:18.000 Now, the whole sector can't behave in the same way because there is a place you can go if you don't want to exist under that control.

01:38:18.000 Right?

01:38:26.000 And when Musk buys it out, Tucker goes to X. Right.

01:38:31.000 Which is a double wild.

01:38:32.000 It gives Tucker a place to go.

01:38:34.000 Yeah.

01:38:34.000 And so the point is he doesn't miss a beat.

01:38:36.000 Not only that, it gets bigger.

01:38:38.000 Far bigger.

01:38:39.000 Far bigger and more powerful.

01:38:40.000 And, you know, it's interesting to see how you can infer the control that Fox had, even over Tucker, by the difference in the way he is playing the game outside of that structure.

01:38:54.000 And it's to our benefit.

01:38:56.000 So I would say as a committed patriot and somebody who thinks the West is in great jeopardy, the way we should look at the chessboard is the most important thing is maintaining that ability for us to discuss what needs to be talked about in a place where it can be found by people who want to hear it.

01:39:21.000 Absolutely.

01:39:22.000 Well said.

01:39:23.000 It's the only way we get through this.

01:39:29.000 I always bring this up, that throughout all human interactions, throughout all history, there's been good and evil.

01:39:38.000 There's been pro and con.

01:39:39.000 There's been negative and positive.

01:39:41.000 And they battle.

01:39:42.000 And it's one of the reasons why positive influences and great things rise, because they're in competition with evil.

01:39:52.000 They have to innovate.

01:39:53.000 They have to grow stronger.

01:39:54.000 They have to expand.

01:39:55.000 Because that's the only way to survive.

01:39:57.000 And when people do have this moral imperative and do have these ethical considerations that don't allow them to give in and sell out, they can push this thing and get through and we all benefit from it.

01:40:10.000 And if this battle didn't exist, maybe we wouldn't get as far as we're going to get.

01:40:17.000 Maybe this is just a natural part of the way Humans interact in the way ideas battle it out to find out what's the good one and what's the bad one.

01:40:29.000 And even these people that are these fake accounts that are on Twitter, they're participating in it whether they realize it or not because they're allowing people to understand like, oh, there are factors at play that are not actual human beings in the sense of like individuals with objective ideas.

01:40:46.000 They're a part of a group that's trying to push a narrative in a very specific direction.

01:40:51.000 And now because I'm aware of that, now I see things a little bit more clearly.

01:40:55.000 I'm a little bit...

01:40:56.000 I stand outside a little bit more and analyze things with less emotion and try to figure out what is really going on here and how complex is it?

01:41:04.000 And also, how much time am I going to have to invest in this before I really understand what's going on? 0.97

01:41:10.000 Because most people don't have any fucking time. 0.98

01:41:13.000 They don't. 0.99

01:41:14.000 Most people's lives are filled with things that they have to do.

01:41:17.000 Obligations, family, finances, all sorts of stuff that they have to pay attention to where they don't have enough rabbit hole time to really dive into this kind of stuff and figure out what the fuck is going on and why are things moving?

01:41:31.000 What is DEI? Why are things moving in this direction?

01:41:34.000 Are people being paid to do this?

01:41:35.000 Who's paying them?

01:41:36.000 Why is there a financial incentive to push this kind of bizarre behavior and thinking?

01:41:36.000 Why?

01:41:41.000 Like, what is it?

01:41:42.000 What is it?

01:41:44.000 Yeah, I think you're pointing to exactly the right thing, and I have the same, you know.

01:41:51.000 Unfortunately, you told me many years ago, don't read the comment.

01:41:57.000 Now, I was a comment reader, and I still do to an extent, but I think what's happened is Whatever, you know, as the number of people who pay attention to me has gone up, the certainty with which I'm going to have to embrace your approach to this grows as well.

01:42:17.000 And the reason is because it doesn't take very much seeding of bad behavior to create a wave even amongst the real people.

01:42:31.000 So when I talk about the COVID dissidents and the infighting, Some of these people are real.

01:42:36.000 I know it because I've met them and I've spent time talking to them.

01:42:40.000 What is inspiring them to do that can well be sock puppets or bots that are loaded with information that is surprisingly good about where their blind spots are or what their suspicions are.

01:42:53.000 And so they can be induced to play this role and to accuse them of not being real is incorrect.

01:42:59.000 But the amount of influence it has over The public discussion is huge.

01:43:06.000 And actually, I would deploy...

01:43:10.000 It's just a hypothesis.

01:43:12.000 But I think one of the reasons that programs like yours are playing the role that they are, and my show is an outgrowth of yours.

01:43:25.000 You literally told me to start one, and I did.

01:43:29.000 The reason that that makes a difference to people is because the ability to mislead is really dependent on the ability to know exactly where the audience is going to be seated so that you can construct something in front of them that looks a particular way and leads them to a particular conclusion.

01:43:53.000 Conversations like this can't do that, right?

01:43:55.000 The point is too many topics.

01:43:57.000 We don't know ahead of time what we're going to talk about.

01:43:59.000 So the point is you really do get a sense for how comfortable a person is with their perspective, whether it requires them to stay exactly on message because as soon as they're off message, it's not going to work.

01:44:12.000 So if you were looking for authenticity, the way you would find it is in You know, a conversation, the confines of which were not spelled out in advance.

01:44:22.000 There was no script.

01:44:24.000 There was no, we're going to spend four minutes here, then there's going to be a commercial, all of that.

01:44:27.000 So I wonder if that's part of what's driving people into podcast world is just the simple fact that it can't really be faked.

01:44:37.000 Yeah.

01:44:38.000 I think people definitely have a real hunger for authenticity, and that's a part of it.

01:44:45.000 Like, the least produced, the less there's some involvement, the less you feel like there's an agenda and a script, the more you're willing to listen.

01:44:56.000 Yeah, and I hate to use the term low production values because that sounds like an insult, but at some level it's the low production values, which, you know, that part you can fake.

01:45:04.000 You can make something look like it was put together in a garage.

01:45:07.000 Yeah, but people smell it. 1.00

01:45:09.000 They smell the bullshit. 1.00

01:45:09.000 Right. 1.00

01:45:11.000 Like, this really is a low production value show.

01:45:14.000 Yeah.

01:45:14.000 I mean, it really is.

01:45:16.000 But it's on purpose.

01:45:17.000 And it's because I think that's the only way to do it.

01:45:17.000 Right.

01:45:20.000 And it's also with a skeleton crew, which I also think is the only way to do it.

01:45:23.000 I have friends that have podcasts that have enormous staffs of people running around doing the job of one young Jamie.

01:45:30.000 I don't think that's the way to do it.

01:45:33.000 Nope.

01:45:33.000 And it's amazing.

01:45:36.000 There are a lot of strikes against us in this battle.

01:45:39.000 But one of the things that's working very much for us is the fact that in terms of the equipment, you need to do it.

01:45:47.000 And as long as they don't bar you from accessing the internet, the ability to distribute it is available to pretty much anybody.

01:45:55.000 So the question is, can you load something into that that's actually worth people's time enough that they're going to tune in?

01:46:00.000 Right.

01:46:00.000 Well, that's when it gets real sketchy, right?

01:46:02.000 Because they are taking steps.

01:46:04.000 And one of the things that has been discussed recently was Google's new guidelines in terms of what they're going to do in the future if there's any sort of large event.

01:46:16.000 And they use this really blanket description of what this event would be, anything of social consequence, anything involving a pandemic.

01:46:25.000 And so they're essentially...

01:46:29.000 Expanding their ability to censor.

01:46:31.000 Now, you could imagine where you could justify that if they weren't horribly wrong just a couple of years ago.

01:46:41.000 If just a couple of years ago, if you had discussed things on your podcast that are undeniably true and now accepted as fact, you would be banned.

01:46:54.000 You would be kicked off.

01:46:56.000 That's a fact.

01:46:57.000 We know that to be a fact.

01:46:58.000 And we know that there was pressure, at least on Twitter, documented pressure By these groups that have a vested interest in pushing a very specific narrative to deny people access to the truth, and the best way to do that in their eyes was ban people,

01:47:14.000 suppress information, kick people off the platform, demonetize them so you incentivize them to self-censor.

01:47:21.000 There was all these tactics being put in place.

01:47:25.000 In Google, they're openly stating that they'd like to do more of this after they were horribly unsuccessful and incorrect doing this during the first pandemic.

01:47:35.000 Well, that is a perfect mirror for what's going on in the World Health Organization as well, where I don't know how much you've been following it, but there is a Pandemic preparedness treaty modification and international health regulations that are hurtling towards approval in May of this year.

01:47:58.000 And what they are is...

01:48:03.000 The exact rules that would have allowed the CDC and the WHO and all of those over in Fauci land to win during COVID if they had been in place.

01:48:17.000 So it looks to me like...

01:48:20.000 The World Health Organization is setting us up for a rematch in which we cannot do what we succeeded in doing, which is upend their narrative and get higher quality information into discussion.

01:48:34.000 And they're doing this at every level.

01:48:36.000 And how do they want to do it?

01:48:37.000 What's their plan?

01:48:37.000 Well, so first of all, the plan keeps morphing.

01:48:41.000 Our ability to even see it is not maintained.

01:48:45.000 They keep changing its name so it's hard to search on.

01:48:48.000 But the overarching picture is the World Health Organization would like the ability to declare a pandemic for any reason whatsoever, including climate change.

01:49:02.000 That in the event of such a pandemic, they want the ability to mandate behavior, including lockdowns.

01:49:10.000 They specifically call out the ability to mandate vaccines.

01:49:14.000 They specifically call out the ability to mandate gene therapy, which is frightening.

01:49:21.000 And what's more, they want the ability to censor in order to make the campaign work in addition to being able to redistribute medications.

01:49:31.000 So for example, let's say that they decided that people like you and me were out of hand with ivermectin and they wanted to just mandate that it be sent to some far-flung corner of the globe so it would be a completely academic issue.

01:49:45.000 All of these things are spelled out in detail in this document.

01:49:49.000 And it is written in such a way that you...

01:49:53.000 You know, it's just boring.

01:49:57.000 All of the member nations of the UN. Or of the WHO. So this is a...

01:49:57.000 Who's voting on this?

01:50:08.000 Absolutely diabolical plan that, I mean, if you sat down and you said, well, what rules would have allowed them to win during COVID rather than be embarrassed by podcasters?

01:50:19.000 This is the set of rules.

01:50:21.000 And it is a complete surrender of national sovereignty.

01:50:25.000 Tedros, in addressing that concern, which tells us that we are beginning to make headway raising people's concern about this, what he said is it's not a compromise of sovereignty.

01:50:35.000 And then his explanation for why it's not is that effectively this is going to be voted on by your elected governments.

01:50:42.000 So his point is you've elected governments that should block this if it's a breach of your sovereignty and they're not going to do it.

01:50:52.000 So your sovereignty is intact, but that does mean that he's going to have the ability To declare an emergency and then implement all of these draconian measures.

01:51:01.000 It's absolutely terrifying.

01:51:03.000 Have they suffered any worldwide decrease in respect or whether or not people value their opinion or whether or not people value their competency? 0.97

01:51:17.000 Am I in a bubble where I hear the World Health Organization and go, these people are out of their fucking minds, but does the rest of the world think like that? 0.94

01:51:25.000 What is the general perception? 0.99

01:51:27.000 What's the temperature in the world when it comes to these things?

01:51:30.000 I think there are a great many...

01:51:33.000 Oh, why the world's first pandemic treaty may never happen, and this is in Politico.

01:51:39.000 With less than six months to go, countries are still not really negotiating, say diplomats.

01:51:45.000 Well, that's good if that's the case.

01:51:47.000 A huge global effort to draw up rules around who does what in the event of another pandemic is floundering as members of COVID-19 fade.

01:51:56.000 Raising memories, excuse me, of COVID-19 fade, raising a real possibility that talks will break down and leave the world as unprepared as it was in 2020. Oh, great.

01:52:05.000 So they're saying it's a bad thing that you don't give up sovereignty. 0.99

01:52:08.000 The pandemic treaty politically fucks.

01:52:10.000 The pandemic treaty currently being negotiated through the World Health Organization aims to prepare for the next global health emergency and prevent a repeat of what South Africa called vaccine apartheid, where countries had vastly unequal access to COVID vaccines.

01:52:24.000 Wow.

01:52:26.000 But wasn't the problem also in Africa that people weren't dying because they weren't getting vaccinated and it wasn't having the same effects?

01:52:33.000 And also the way they report things is very different than us because they don't have a financial incentive to label everything as a COVID death.

01:52:40.000 And also, you have less people that have all of our comorbidities, which is really ironic considering they're much poorer than us.

01:52:47.000 But when you don't have a lot of food, you don't get obesity.

01:52:51.000 And obesity seems to be one of the major causes of Of people's health declining to the point where something like COVID is fatal.

01:52:58.000 Yeah, you have all kinds of differences.

01:52:59.000 You have regular use of ivermectin as an anti-parasitic.

01:53:04.000 You have a differential exposure to the sun and the ability to create vitamin D. There are all kinds of reasons that Africa was in a different boat. 0.94

01:53:14.000 And yes, it did fare very differently, much better than most of the world.

01:53:17.000 How confident are you that ivermectin was effective?

01:53:24.000 I will say highly confident that it was effective and there are multiple different routes into that.

01:53:33.000 For one thing, the evidence that it was not effective was drawn from randomized controlled trials that were designed to fail and yet did not.

01:53:43.000 Can you explain how they were designed to fail?

01:53:46.000 Yeah, there are a bunch of different ways you can design a study to fail.

01:53:49.000 You can underdose.

01:53:51.000 You can dose late.

01:53:53.000 You can administer the study in a place where ivermectin was already in use, so the control group is actually cryptically on ivermectin at some higher level.

01:54:04.000 There are numerous different routes to do it.

01:54:07.000 And the irony of those studies, if you dig deeply enough, is that actually although the studies claimed that there was no effect, that actually the effect is in the data.

01:54:20.000 It's just not reported.

01:54:22.000 How so?

01:54:26.000 If you look at an analysis, if you look at what they wrote about what they discovered, it doesn't work.

01:54:33.000 If you look at what they actually found, if you read past their abstract and you look at what they actually found, there is an effect even though the studies were designed to fail.

01:54:43.000 So what that tells you is that the effect is powerful enough that even with the choosing of arbitrarily high end conditions, with all of these effects, you can still see that it was functioning in the treatment group.

01:55:01.000 So even the studies that say it didn't work show that it does.

01:55:05.000 And then there's a huge range of other evidence that did not come from these massive randomized controlled trials or supposedly randomized, supposedly controlled trials is what we should call them, that suggests it works in addition to the clinical experience of numerous doctors who discovered that it worked,

01:55:24.000 in addition to the fact that it was already known to work with SARS- SARS-1, along with a bunch of other RNA viruses.

01:55:32.000 So there was reason to expect that it would work.

01:55:34.000 There was lots of clinical evidence that it worked.

01:55:36.000 And even the randomized controlled trials that supposedly suggested it didn't work show that it does work if you know how to read them.

01:55:42.000 And that it halts viral replication in vitro.

01:55:45.000 Yes.

01:55:45.000 We know that.

01:55:47.000 Yes.

01:55:47.000 And it was not even its only mechanism of action.

01:55:50.000 It also apparently binds spike protein.

01:55:52.000 It is an inflammation reducer in addition to being among the safest drugs that have ever been discovered.

01:56:01.000 And the most important part about this, for people that are unaware, is that it's generic.

01:56:07.000 Cheap as can be, right?

01:56:10.000 It had been administered billions of times.

01:56:12.000 So we knew a lot about its safety profile, its interactions with other drugs.

01:56:18.000 So there'd be no reason, if you were acting in the greater interest of mankind, no reason to not encourage its use.

01:56:26.000 And definitely no reason to demonize it the way it was done and to call it horse dewormer on CNN. It was obscene.

01:56:35.000 This was...

01:56:35.000 Right?

01:56:37.000 Let's put it this way.

01:56:39.000 The...

01:56:43.000 COVID was not a major emergency or it would not have been if medicine had been allowed to function normally so that doctors could discover that things like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine were highly effective and they could be used early to treat people who were actually in jeopardy because they had comorbidities.

01:57:04.000 Now, I still think this COVID was a major tragedy for the world, assuming that what we understand from the evidence is correct, that there was the release of SARS-CoV-2 from the Wuhan lab where it had been engineered to increase its ability to infect human beings. 0.92

01:57:26.000 If that is true, it adds a pathogen to the list of things that afflict human beings, and we will never be rid of it now.

01:57:32.000 So that is a major cost to humans.

01:57:34.000 But in terms of the threat of an individual case of COVID, it's minor if you allow doctors to treat it as doctors would quickly have discovered was readily possible, even in cases where people are full of comorbidity.

01:57:47.000 And we should also explain that not only is it because it's generic and cheap, but because of the emergency use authorization.

01:57:58.000 If you're going to have an emergency use authorization of a medication, there has to be no available treatments that are effective.

01:58:08.000 So not only is it cheap, but it could potentially cost them untold billions of dollars if they don't achieve emergency use authorization.

01:58:17.000 So without the kind of long-term testing That we've become accustomed to when they do approve certain medications.

01:58:25.000 Now, that is true, and I used to think that was the reason that they demonized ivermectin.

01:58:31.000 I have changed my sense of why they did it, because there's something about that explanation that, you know, and I learned about that from Heather, who found it in the regulations and described it on our podcast.

01:58:47.000 And for a long time, I thought that was the explanation, that had ivermectin been understood to be an effective treatment and preventative for SARS-CoV-2, that they could not have gotten the emergency use authorization for the so-called vaccines.

01:59:00.000 The problem is, these people have so much power over the regulatory apparatus, and that explanation requires that they would not have been able to overcome that obstacle, which I think they could have.

01:59:13.000 Yeah, but you're definitely squashing dissent because you're not allowing its distribution and the ability to demonstrate its effectiveness.

01:59:22.000 So if people just can't get it, you know, there's a doctor that I know and this doctor had to go to court over this because they were prescribing ivermectin early and they were in jeopardy of losing their license.

01:59:37.000 Yeah, in fact, there is a mind-blowing section of Pierre Corey's book, The War on Ivermectin, in which he describes an accidental experiment in which a lawyer goes into the job of confronting places where hospitals forbid the use of ivermectin.

02:00:00.000 And the I don't want to misdescribe it, but there is something, I think, if I'm recalling correctly, it was something like there were 12 cases, and he lost something like half of them and won the others, and the people on whose behalf he won,

02:00:18.000 who were administered ivermectin, survived, and the ones where he lost and the Hospital didn't administer it, died.

02:00:26.000 Maybe I'm describing that slightly cleaner than it was, but it's very close.

02:00:30.000 And to think that this drug is powerful enough that your fate in a court, whether the court mandates that you be given it or not, tells you whether you're going to live or get a death sentence.

02:00:44.000 Which we've never experienced before.

02:00:47.000 It's unreal.

02:00:48.000 I mean, that's the thing about this drug is it was a very powerful treatment for this disease, enough that even a study designed to hide that fact didn't effectively hide it.

02:01:00.000 And where, you know, a court case, I mean, and think about how much time it takes to get a court to mandate this stuff.

02:01:05.000 That means that if you win your case, you're getting it late.

02:01:08.000 And yet it's still the difference between life and death.

02:01:11.000 So that's amazing.

02:01:12.000 But what I've come to understand about the Bizarre campaign against ivermectin.

02:01:21.000 What I've come to think is the most likely explanation is not that it really would have blocked the emergency use authorization, though technically it should have.

02:01:29.000 The real problem was if ivermectin was available widely, It rendered SARS-CoV-2 a minor fact, right?

02:01:41.000 It was not something that induced fear if people had access to the proper drugs.

02:01:46.000 So from the point of view of the public and its acceptance of the mRNA shots, most of us in the public would have said, no, you know, given how highly novel that shot is and the fact that there are drugs in the pharmacy that apparently mean that this disease is not something I have to worry about,

02:02:03.000 why would I take that risk?

02:02:05.000 Right.

02:02:06.000 That's what I think was driving.

02:02:36.000 As I may have described here before, I don't remember what we talked about the last time, but the mRNA platform has a number of different design defects that are, in my opinion, insurmountable with respect to its safety.

02:02:54.000 It can't be rendered safe.

02:02:55.000 And I would describe the most important of these as the fact that the lipid nanoparticle, which gets the mRNA into your cells, It has no targeting mechanism that would lead it to be taken up by certain cells but not other cells.

02:03:11.000 It will literally be taken up haphazardly around the body.

02:03:15.000 And what it does, according to the manufacturer, is the mRNA gets into your cells.

02:03:22.000 It is translated into protein by ribosomes.

02:03:26.000 And those proteins then are displayed on the surfaces of cells.

02:03:31.000 Your immune system Automatically because of hundreds of millions of years of evolution.

02:03:40.000 Your immune system regards a cell that produces your own proteins and proteins it's never seen before as virally infected, and it kills those cells.

02:03:51.000 That's what it does.

02:03:52.000 That's its automatic response, because once a cell is infected with a virus, there's no curing it.

02:03:57.000 So the immune system is better off to kill it, even though it's a cell of yours and it's potentially useful.

02:04:01.000 An infected cell is better off removed.

02:04:05.000 If that happens in your heart, it creates a wound and a vulnerability.

02:04:10.000 So these shots were going to cause that effect wherever these lipid nanoparticles introduced the mRNA into cells of yours. 0.76

02:04:20.000 That was inevitable.

02:04:21.000 If that was somehow limited to your deltoid, it wasn't going to be a big deal from the point of view of your longevity.

02:04:27.000 If it's in your heart, it's a disaster.

02:04:29.000 What is the difference in the people that did have heart issues and the people that experienced nothing adverse?

02:04:38.000 First of all, first thing to know is that there are actually a small number of studies in which the question has been looked at, do people with no obvious heart pathology actually have damage?

02:04:53.000 And the answer is yes.

02:04:54.000 There are many people who have subclinical damage.

02:04:56.000 They never had a symptom.

02:04:57.000 But if we look at their hearts directly, we discover that actually they were badly impacted.

02:05:02.000 But there are a couple of factors that impact whether or not a particular person is going to have this effect.

02:05:11.000 One of them is that the manufacturer of the vaccines was...

02:05:19.000 Highly variable. 1.00

02:05:20.000 The quality control was crap. 0.94

02:05:23.000 So the amount of the active ingredient, these mRNAs coated in lipid nanoparticle, that a particular shot contained varied tremendously. 0.98

02:05:34.000 So that's one thing.

02:05:36.000 People who had no effect may have gotten something like a blank.

02:05:40.000 Second thing is you will remember during the pandemic that there was a battle over the aspiration of the syringes that were used to administer this stuff.

02:05:52.000 And the official line was they did not want the people giving the shots to aspirate the needle.

02:06:00.000 That means pull back on the plunger when the needle is in your arm.

02:06:04.000 And the reason that you should do that is It's because it is possible to land the needle just by accident in a vein.

02:06:11.000 And if you do that and you inject it, then the stuff goes into your circulation directly, which is bad.

02:06:17.000 It's not supposed to circulate around the body.

02:06:20.000 Now, what the officials said is don't do that.

02:06:22.000 Don't pull back on the plunger.

02:06:24.000 The idea is if you pull back on the plunger and you see blood, you've got to push the needle in farther, right, so that you can get out of that vein.

02:06:30.000 They said don't do that, and the reason that they said don't do that is because the amount of time that the needle is in your arm and the amount of pain that the person experiences were thought to be a risk.

02:06:43.000 I don't even think they thought it was a risk.

02:06:45.000 They argued that it was a risk and that they didn't want to create vaccine hesitancy, so the idea was inject you as quick as possible.

02:06:53.000 Well, that is insane because what it means is that a small fraction of people for each dose, a small fraction of people got a bolus that circulated immediately because it went into a circulatory vessel.

02:07:06.000 It's not supposed to go into a circulatory vessel and they could have eliminated that.

02:07:12.000 Got hurt because they had an accidental intravenous injection and a big glob of this stuff is circulating around them and lands in their heart and they get a big wound.

02:07:21.000 That's one of the factors.

02:07:23.000 There could be genetic distinctions.

02:07:26.000 I think that's actually pretty unlikely.

02:07:29.000 But between the variation between the doses, the variation in the intravenous versus the interstitial injections, And the fact of just simple dumb luck,

02:07:44.000 right?

02:07:45.000 There's a question about where the material goes and which cells it bumps into.

02:07:52.000 So that's just luck of the draw.

02:07:53.000 Although I will point out that as the vaccine campaign was in full swing, Heather and I wondered about these issues, and the myocarditis consequence was being discussed.

02:08:06.000 And our point was, look, has this ever been studied?

02:08:10.000 Given that this is a risk, has anybody ever looked at whether or not you're better off having it injected in your left arm or your right arm?

02:08:17.000 Or your butt cheek?

02:08:19.000 You know, which of these things produces this effect least often? 0.99

02:08:22.000 And as far as I know, it was never studied, which is also crazy, because it's possible, even if you were going to inject this stupid stuff into people, that you could have done it in a way that was less harmful. 0.71

02:08:32.000 You could have aspirated the needle. 0.96

02:08:34.000 You could have injected it wherever it was least likely to damage the heart.

02:08:38.000 You could have stopped giving it to young people who didn't need it in the first place.

02:08:41.000 There were lots of ways to make it safer, and they did none of them.

02:08:45.000 Because any discouraging would have limited the amount of use that people have.

02:08:52.000 Well, you know...

02:08:53.000 I mean, if there's anything like that, it would have, in some way...

02:08:53.000 Right?

02:08:57.000 I mean, if you've got people that are on the fence, and then they start hearing this kind of talk, oh, they have to aspirate.

02:09:03.000 If they don't aspirate, it could be a real problem.

02:09:06.000 It could get to your heart.

02:09:07.000 What, what, what, what?

02:09:08.000 It can get to my heart.

02:09:09.000 And if it damages your heart, it's permanent.

02:09:10.000 What?

02:09:11.000 Hold on a second.

02:09:11.000 Why am I taking this chance?

02:09:13.000 Well, that's what people should have done, and you're right that if we give them the benefit of the doubt, if we imagine that we had a bunch of I don't know, health morons who are well-intended but clumsy beyond any natural level, 0.84

02:09:33.000 then yeah, maybe they were doing everything in their power to get the maximum number of people to take the shots because they thought those shots were actually going to control the disease. 0.68

02:09:43.000 But, you know, as I think I've said to you before... 1.00

02:09:48.000 There's a limit to how bad advice can get as a result of stupidity. 0.99

02:09:55.000 And what happened during COVID exceeds that limit because virtually everything you were told was the inverse of what you should have done. 0.99

02:10:03.000 Isn't there also a possibility, though, that they have this initial statement, this initial protocol, and they do not want to course correct because then they have to admit that they fucked up in the beginning?

02:10:16.000 Many things are possible.

02:10:18.000 To me, the degree to which they told you the inverse of what you should do.

02:10:24.000 And, you know, let's take your argument and play it through.

02:10:31.000 Wouldn't they at this point be at least taking their foot off the gas with respect to the COVID mRNA shots?

02:10:43.000 But the profitability of it has been so incredible.

02:10:48.000 Well, okay.

02:10:50.000 The profitability is incredible.

02:10:52.000 It is a tiny fraction of what I think was actually in play.

02:10:56.000 And I have come to think that the story of COVID... Let's assume that COVID starts accidentally, right?

02:11:07.000 A virus escapes as a result of inadequate security measures in Wuhan, begins to circulate.

02:11:16.000 It is then utilized as an emergency.

02:11:20.000 It is turned into an emergency.

02:11:22.000 In order to normalize the mRNA platform, to get people to accept that platform without proper safety testing, to get them to allow it into their systems, and to get used to the idea that it is perfectly normal to inject you with a genetic message in mRNA form wrapped in lipid nanoparticle.

02:11:45.000 Right.

02:11:46.000 The public has now accepted that, which it never should have.

02:11:49.000 And the profit that they saw over the course of COVID is a tiny fraction of the profit that will ultimately be realized from that platform if we allow it to continue.

02:12:02.000 Hold that thought because I have to pee so bad.

02:12:04.000 All right.

02:12:05.000 But we'll be right back because there's so many things I want to talk to you about.

02:12:07.000 We'll be right back.

02:12:08.000 All right.

02:12:09.000 We're back.

02:12:10.000 Here we go.

02:12:12.000 So, we were at this idea of using this mRNA platform in the future.

02:12:19.000 Yeah.

02:12:20.000 And that they want to be able to use this in the future.

02:12:22.000 Now, here's my question.

02:12:23.000 If so many people got it, so many people got the shot, and there's 330-whatever million people in this country, and it's estimated that somewhere between 70-something to 80-something percent of the people got at least one shot, Why are there not more people with all these problems?

02:12:42.000 How come so many people I know got it and didn't have really any issues?

02:12:48.000 Do you think that a lot of those people have underlying issues that they're not yet aware of because of it?

02:12:54.000 Or do you think that some people's bodies were able to process it?

02:12:58.000 Or do you think it's a combination of that and duds?

02:13:00.000 And we do know that there's been some studies that have been done that show that a disproportionate amount of adverse effects occurred with specific batches.

02:13:11.000 So there was batches that were tainted or batches that had some sort of a problem.

02:13:17.000 Yeah, the batches varied tremendously.

02:13:20.000 The quality control was really quite lousy.

02:13:26.000 So, A... We're not going to know what the full consequence was unless we actually get serious about tracking people's longevity and we figure out who didn't get it,

02:13:41.000 who did get it, and we properly study that question, which at the moment, it's not looking like we will.

02:13:47.000 I think there was a lot of There was a lot of variability.

02:13:51.000 People presumably got damage to organs that will not limit their lifespan, right?

02:13:56.000 If you got the damage in your liver and not your heart, that probably does not have an implication for how long you're going to live because most of us don't die from the failure of our livers.

02:14:05.000 Failure of the heart is special, which is why we saw that effect.

02:14:09.000 Can you explain that to people, why that's the case?

02:14:11.000 Sure.

02:14:12.000 Let me explain why it is the case and then why I think there's an explanation beyond that.

02:14:19.000 Your liver has a tremendous capacity to replace damaged tissue.

02:14:26.000 In fact, you can transplant a small fraction of a liver into someone and it can grow into a fully capable liver in the recipient.

02:14:37.000 In like six to eight weeks.

02:14:38.000 Yeah, it's amazing.

02:14:40.000 So my guess, evolutionarily, is that that's true because our ancestors did not have such an excellent ability to keep toxins out of their diet.

02:14:52.000 And so you have excess capacity in your liver because your ancestors needed it.

02:14:56.000 And we don't need it, right?

02:15:00.000 So we have livers that unless you're a super heavy drinker, you probably go a whole lifetime super heavy drinker or a very uncareful eater of mushrooms.

02:15:10.000 You probably go your whole life and your liver remains with excess capacity even as you die.

02:15:18.000 The heart, you damage it.

02:15:20.000 Obviously, if you damage it critically, it'll take you out.

02:15:25.000 And if you damage it in some way that it scars over, it will actually limit your athletic capacity for the rest of your life.

02:15:32.000 It will put you at greater risk of heart failure.

02:15:36.000 But anyway, it's much more central to your functioning.

02:15:43.000 Anyway, I think a lot of people who have not had an important pathology have something subclinical.

02:15:52.000 A lot of others got away with it because the shots they got were duds or close to it.

02:16:00.000 Many people did not have intravenous injection, and so they might have gotten a small amount of damage, but not a large enough amount of damage to limit their lifespans.

02:16:10.000 There's also a problem with people being reluctant to talk about injuries they've gotten from the vaccine, particularly if they're of a particular political persuasion.

02:16:21.000 There's a lot of people that don't want to discuss it.

02:16:26.000 They don't want to admit that this is what happened.

02:16:29.000 I get it completely.

02:16:31.000 You don't want the blowback.

02:16:33.000 Well, there's the blowback, but there's also the terror.

02:16:37.000 Yeah, that's it, right.

02:16:40.000 You and I are not built this way, I think.

02:16:43.000 We'd be talking about it like Robert Malone took the shot, got injured, and is talking about it.

02:16:49.000 Or Elon Musk, similarly.

02:16:51.000 Yeah.

02:16:52.000 But for a lot of people, the way they manage the fear that they were induced to do something that could have implications for their long-term health and lifespan is to lie to themselves.

02:17:05.000 And I would point out to those people...

02:17:09.000 As sympathetic as I am, I know how strong that coercion was and how many people who were smart and under other circumstances would have avoided this, succumbed to it.

02:17:23.000 But if you lie to yourself about What happened?

02:17:28.000 Your ability to protect yourself from further harm is greatly reduced.

02:17:37.000 We have to understand what we did to ourselves in order to fend this off.

02:17:42.000 But here's the other part of that question.

02:17:44.000 The people that were promoting the vaccine, did they take it?

02:17:49.000 I don't think so.

02:17:50.000 You don't think any of them did?

02:17:51.000 Well, the people who were promoting it.

02:17:52.000 Lots of people who were promoting it took it.

02:17:54.000 Of course, clearly.

02:17:55.000 But I mean, I'm talking about the people at the front of the line, the people at the wheel.

02:18:01.000 Wasn't there an instance where Albert Borla couldn't go to Israel because he didn't have the right booster?

02:18:09.000 There was something.

02:18:12.000 He wasn't up to date?

02:18:14.000 Let's put it this way.

02:18:15.000 I'm hesitant to say anything conclusive here, not because I don't know what I think ultimately happened, but the way in which the people who knew the actual stakes understood what the safety profile was here.

02:18:52.000 Which one's the DNA shots?

02:18:55.000 The Johnson and Johnson.

02:18:56.000 But the Johnson and Johnson, they pulled. 0.65

02:18:58.000 Right.

02:18:58.000 For clotting.

02:18:59.000 Sure.

02:19:00.000 Because it was a spike protein, right?

02:19:02.000 You say because as if we know why they do anything.

02:19:05.000 But that was the explanation.

02:19:07.000 Right.

02:19:07.000 Yeah.

02:19:08.000 The explanation was that somehow or another the spike protein was causing clotting.

02:19:12.000 They pulled it, but then they reinstated it, but then they slowly discontinued it, right?

02:19:15.000 Right.

02:19:16.000 So the short answer to your question is...

02:19:20.000 I don't think that these people screwed up and injected the world with dangerous shots and they themselves got the same stuff.

02:19:29.000 I think the evidence is they understood far better than we knew what they were doing and that it was going to be dangerous and that you can read...

02:19:44.000 Their shamelessness in the fact that they are still pushing these things on young people who never stood the slightest chance of getting a benefit from them.

02:19:51.000 Especially now.

02:19:52.000 I know you're saying that you have had, like, real bad reactions to the most recent infections that you've gotten.

02:19:59.000 I had COVID once.

02:20:01.000 It wasn't that bad.

02:20:03.000 Got over it in a few days.

02:20:05.000 But then I had it again, and it was nothing.

02:20:07.000 It was like I had a runny nose.

02:20:09.000 And I was joking.

02:20:09.000 This was back in the day we were testing every day here.

02:20:12.000 And I was joking, like, maybe it's COVID. And then our nurse was like, it's actually COVID. I was like, this is crazy.

02:20:19.000 Like, I have to cancel a show for this?

02:20:21.000 I'm like, am I gonna get worse?

02:20:23.000 This is it?

02:20:24.000 No, not only was it not worse, I had it for a day.

02:20:28.000 The two days afterwards when I tested I was negative.

02:20:31.000 Well, I will tell you, you know, the pattern It's weird talking about this because you just know that people are going to spiral off and have all sorts of reactions to it.

02:20:43.000 Just stop reading the comments.

02:20:44.000 Well, that's a thought.

02:20:46.000 Just have this conversation.

02:20:47.000 It's just you and me at dinner.

02:20:49.000 It's just you and me wearing headphones at dinner.

02:20:52.000 So I was here in Austin.

02:20:56.000 I was here to debate Alex Berenson on the subject of ivermectin's effectiveness.

02:21:02.000 Right.

02:21:03.000 And the night before I was going to debate him right here, I started coughing, and it got really bad, and I was flat on my back.

02:21:16.000 Yeah, I remember talking to you.

02:21:17.000 You sounded terrible.

02:21:18.000 I was really, really bad off.

02:21:20.000 Yeah.

02:21:21.000 So Alex wound up coming on by himself.

02:21:23.000 He won by forfeit.

02:21:25.000 But luckily for him, it benefited because it was actually very critical to talk about his situation as well, which is he is involved in a lawsuit with the Biden administration because they were actively trying to suppress him for posting factual information on Twitter.

02:21:40.000 And so he's involved in that lawsuit right now.

02:21:42.000 I agree.

02:21:43.000 And I find Alex to be a total mystery.

02:21:46.000 I don't understand.

02:21:47.000 He's been pretty good on the vaccines, and then he's backpedaled like he's trying to get back into the club or something.

02:21:56.000 He's been terrible on ivermectin, and I don't know why.

02:22:00.000 Maybe he needs a good debate.

02:22:01.000 I thought so.

02:22:03.000 We could do it again.

02:22:05.000 Maybe we should.

02:22:07.000 Yeah, certainly.

02:22:08.000 I mean, after he hears this, I'm sure he'll want to.

02:22:10.000 And also to highlight his particular case, which is still ongoing.

02:22:15.000 But anyway, from the point of view of your question about how bad off I was, you were very kind and you sent your nurse to give me an intravenous injection of vitamins and stuff.

02:22:15.000 Right.

02:22:28.000 And I took ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, which I had with me, of course.

02:22:34.000 And two days later, I was better, but for a cough that hung on for a month.

02:22:38.000 So the cough hung on for a month.

02:22:40.000 But in terms of my general well-being, it was two days and done. 1.00

02:22:47.000 Two days feeling like shit. 0.99

02:22:48.000 Like really, really bad, you know. 0.99

02:22:53.000 I could get to the bathroom from the bed, but that was about the limit of how much energy I had.

02:23:01.000 So it was bad.

02:23:02.000 But here's the other part of that.

02:23:05.000 I was tested for COVID and it came up negative.

02:23:09.000 And so the assumption that it was COVID was based on the symptomatic match So your nurse thought that it looked like COVID and Pierre thought that it sounded like COVID. But I think all of this raises the question about how many different pathogens were actually involved in the emergency that we call COVID. Because testing negative was a fairly common phenomenon even when you were sick.

02:23:39.000 So I don't know what that was.

02:23:41.000 Well, there's also the issue with flu basically going away.

02:23:45.000 The number of people that were diagnosed with the flu during the pandemic was the most radical decrease, which doesn't make sense during a time where people's immune systems are compromised.

02:23:57.000 Because one of the things, if you get hit with any cold or anything, sometimes other things will grab ahold of you during the same time period when you're compromised.

02:24:07.000 Yep.

02:24:08.000 And that didn't really happen for whatever reason.

02:24:11.000 Now, did it not really happen or was it just not reported and not diagnosed?

02:24:16.000 That's more likely.

02:24:17.000 To have a radical decrease in flu.

02:24:20.000 And then they attributed it to the fact that people weren't socializing and that they were...

02:24:25.000 Yeah, but then how did COVID spread?

02:24:27.000 Is COVID that much more contagious than the flu, that you don't still have the flu as well?

02:24:33.000 And if all these people have COVID, now you're dealing with very compromised people.

02:24:38.000 Why didn't the flu get them?

02:24:40.000 Right.

02:24:41.000 Now, I want to be cautious about all of the complexity here because I'm not saying that I believe that the flu necessarily disappeared.

02:24:51.000 And we know for certain that they were hell-bent on categorizing everything as COVID. So it makes sense that they would categorize whatever flu was present as COVID because they were trying to amp up fear of COVID. On the other hand, Flu is adapted to normal human patterns,

02:25:12.000 and the COVID pandemic disrupted normal human patterns through all of the authoritarian nonsense, the lockdowns, etc.

02:25:19.000 So is it possible that the way we behaved during COVID actually did interrupt a normal transmission of flu?

02:25:25.000 That's possible.

02:25:26.000 I don't know that I believe that that's what happened, but at least I want to be open to that possibility.

02:25:31.000 It's definitely a possibility.

02:25:32.000 It's a possibility.

02:25:33.000 It definitely disrupted a lot of the interactions that people had.

02:25:37.000 It changed so much about the way people interact with each other and still do.

02:25:40.000 It changed a lot of stuff. 0.84

02:25:41.000 And frankly, I take a lot of crap from the people who are hell-bent on infighting over my initial belief that masks were a good idea. 0.53

02:25:50.000 In fact, I wore one here. 0.95

02:25:54.000 The fact, though, is that masks have a potential range of utility.

02:25:59.000 I don't think they ended up being useful for COVID nearly at all, right?

02:26:03.000 But from the point of view of a disease that is spread by fomite transmission, that is on surfaces, Can a mask catch the droplets that you would cough out that would land on the surface that somebody else would get on their hand and then rub into their eye?

02:26:17.000 That's plausible.

02:26:19.000 So we did a lot of things that disrupted normalcy that could have had an effect on flu.

02:26:24.000 I'm not saying they did, but I'm just saying if you were going to try to figure out what happened during COVID, you would want all these hypotheses on the table and then you would want to test them and you would want to see which ones actually match the patterns that we saw.

02:26:39.000 I don't want to lose the question of the mRNA profits because I really do think the hypothesis that I at the moment believe is most likely as to what happened during COVID is that the emergency, whatever its nature was, even to the extent that its nature was that they were able to amp up fear over a pathogen that didn't warrant it,

02:26:59.000 But that that allowed them to normalize the idea of mRNA-based gene therapy, that people accepted that because they were terrified of the pandemic or because they wanted to get back to life or whatever it was, and that having done so, what they did is they opened the door to a...

02:27:20.000 An incredibly lucrative set of opportunities using the mRNA platform that didn't exist before and couldn't be made to exist because there's no way that these things could have gotten through normal safety testing.

02:27:33.000 They were too dangerous.

02:27:34.000 And the thing that people who aren't following the biology probably won't intuit is that the very nature of the mRNA platform Is that it allows you to take a genetic message that encodes anything at all and to put it into a shot that isn't any different than the ones you've deployed before.

02:27:53.000 This is completely simplified from the normal process of creating something like a vaccine, right?

02:27:58.000 This is inexpensive.

02:28:00.000 All you need is the sequence that you want in the shot and then you can literally just start manufacturing it.

02:28:06.000 And so To my way of thinking, that opens the door to reformulating every vaccine that already exists.

02:28:13.000 They can create a new one on the mRNA platform.

02:28:16.000 They can patent it anew.

02:28:17.000 They can make a wide range of new vaccines that didn't exist before.

02:28:23.000 And that all of these things would be highly profitable, both because they would be patented and because they would be inexpensive to go through all of that, to basically speed past all of that R&D. What's more, they could probably argue that they didn't need very much safety testing because the only distinction between this shot and that shot was the actual content of the message,

02:28:45.000 right?

02:28:46.000 And so one of the tricks that pharma has played Is that they have, you know, tested things against what looks like a placebo but isn't.

02:28:53.000 It's really just something else in which only one piece has been varied.

02:28:57.000 And that game could be played here endlessly.

02:29:00.000 So I don't know how much money is represented in the potential to use the mRNA platform.

02:29:07.000 But what I see is you got people in pharma.

02:29:12.000 Their job is not to make people healthy.

02:29:14.000 Their job is to sell stuff that's profitable.

02:29:18.000 The mRNA platform allows a whole new kind of medicine to be delivered in a very efficient way that eliminates the big cost in doing pharma properly and that they couldn't get it to market because of the hazard.

02:29:35.000 The emergency of COVID allowed them to bypass the safety testing that would have stopped them, and it now means that the mRNA platform is something that people have accepted in their minds.

02:29:45.000 So that door is now open.

02:29:47.000 I think that's where the real profit is, not in the shots that people were given for COVID itself.

02:29:52.000 Well, that makes sense, but also the shots that people were given for COVID itself.

02:29:56.000 Well, yes.

02:29:57.000 The shots that people were given for COVID were obviously hugely profitable, but they are a tiny fraction of the profit that ultimately might be made with the platform.

02:30:05.000 Which is terrifying if what you're saying about the platform itself is correct.

02:30:09.000 Yeah, that's the other part is they've played this game with us where they have misled us into over-focusing on the spike protein.

02:30:16.000 Now, the spike protein was a bad choice because it's bioactive in its own right. 0.53

02:30:21.000 It is cytotoxic, which I stupidly... 0.98

02:30:24.000 I was fact-checked by stupid people who claimed that that was not true, but it is true. 0.99

02:30:31.000 So it was a poor choice of protein for a so-called vaccine. 0.99

02:30:36.000 But by over-focusing on the problem of injecting people with something that creates spike protein...

02:30:47.000 We're good to go.

02:31:08.000 I've heard cancer.

02:31:22.000 I've been saying it's not a vaccine, and one of the reasons it's not a vaccine is that it turns your cells into a vaccine factory.

02:31:30.000 That's what it does.

02:31:32.000 And I've now seen them use that phraseology.

02:31:36.000 But how can you use the same terminology as a different thing?

02:31:42.000 It's a therapy, right?

02:31:43.000 It's a type of therapy.

02:31:45.000 Let's not even debate whether it works.

02:31:49.000 Let's not debate whether it works, but let's just say what it is.

02:31:53.000 So we've had a definition of what a vaccine is that has been pretty standard for a long time.

02:31:59.000 Yep.

02:32:00.000 And then all of a sudden this hijacks that.

02:32:04.000 Totally doesn't.

02:32:05.000 It fits right into a blind spot that we all have.

02:32:07.000 Right.

02:32:08.000 Where we're pro-vaccine and to be anti-vaccine is to not accept the fact that vaccines have done so much great for humanity.

02:32:15.000 Totally.

02:32:15.000 Young Jamie's little buddy over there.

02:32:18.000 Oh, Carl, he just got vaccinated for the rabies.

02:32:21.000 It works. 1.00

02:32:22.000 That shit works. 1.00

02:32:23.000 You don't want rabies, baby. 1.00

02:32:25.000 I'm vaccinated for rabies.

02:32:26.000 You should be.

02:32:27.000 That's a scary one.

02:32:29.000 It's not a disease you want to die of. 0.96

02:32:31.000 That one scares the shit out of you. 0.92

02:32:33.000 That's an ancient disease. 0.93

02:32:34.000 Worst way to go.

02:32:36.000 Yeah, and it kills everybody.

02:32:37.000 Well, actually, there is one case where somebody survived it.

02:32:40.000 They put them in a coma.

02:32:40.000 We talked about it the other day.

02:32:41.000 They put them in a medically induced coma.

02:32:44.000 Who was it that explained it to us, how it worked?

02:32:46.000 Jamie?

02:32:51.000 Like three or four podcasts ago, our cup overfloweth with inflammation.

02:32:57.000 There's no way to keep track of all of it.

02:32:59.000 But the idea was that putting someone in this sustained coma, this medically induced coma, it allowed the body to have more resources to attack the virus and stop it in its tracks, whereas normally under normal circumstances it doesn't.

02:33:13.000 The virus moves faster.

02:33:14.000 Yeah, it's great.

02:33:38.000 That was intended to put this in our blind spot so that we would accept a gene therapy as a vaccine because most people weren't in a position to know the difference.

02:33:47.000 But once you understand that the mRNA platform is a mechanism for turning your cells into factories of protein, then the question is, well, what protein, you know, what fraction of drugs can be produced this way?

02:34:05.000 Right?

02:34:05.000 A large fraction.

02:34:08.000 So, or how many diseases can be treated in such a way?

02:34:12.000 In principle, a huge number of diseases because proteins are the mechanism by which the biology of the body functions and so getting your cells to produce proteins is a pathway into many of these conditions.

02:34:26.000 So, I don't know, to my way of thinking, I'm sure it's cartoonish, but I can imagine how galling it must have been to have this platform ready to produce huge amounts of profit but unable to deliver it because the safety testing was going to block it and then an emergency allowed it to happen.

02:34:45.000 That's terrifying.

02:34:49.000 That's terrifying because it's plausible.

02:34:52.000 You know, plausible is a category that we are having to expand, given how diabolical these people actually turn out to be.

02:35:02.000 I think of the world so much differently than I did four years ago.

02:35:06.000 It's shocking.

02:35:07.000 Yep.

02:35:09.000 It's shocking.

02:35:10.000 Like, I had all these ideas in my head that we're gonna be fine. 0.95

02:35:16.000 And now I'm like, oh my god, you gotta figure out how to fucking stockpile food. 0.60

02:35:21.000 Like, this could get really wild. 0.83

02:35:23.000 Yeah, and the problem though is, okay, all of us people who are at least somewhat awake, and I work from the principle that none of us are more than half awake.

02:35:36.000 I don't know if that's fair.

02:35:37.000 I don't know how you could be.

02:35:38.000 We're kind of like hearing people talk inside a building behind a large gate.

02:35:44.000 We don't really have access to the actual conversations.

02:35:47.000 What we see is what they're so bold to discuss in Davos in front of everybody. 0.97

02:35:53.000 And you're like, how the fuck are you guys just saying in front of everybody you don't got to vote anymore? 0.98

02:35:57.000 Because they can figure it out in advance. 0.92

02:35:59.000 Everything will not be necessary because our accurate models of prediction.

02:36:06.000 What are you saying?

02:36:07.000 And how is that dude from Google just going along with that? 0.57

02:36:10.000 Why is he not freaking the fuck out going, wait a minute, what are you saying?

02:36:14.000 You won't have to vote because you're going to be able to predict results? 0.58

02:36:17.000 And who's going to be in charge of the software that predicts it?

02:36:20.000 Who's going to be the guy that reads the data and tells the world what they want? 0.99

02:36:26.000 That's fucking bananas. 0.98

02:36:28.000 There's no way voting is in any way bad. 0.99

02:36:32.000 The idea that you won't need to vote, there's no way that's in any way good.

02:36:38.000 There's no way that that vulnerability, that giving away that much power to whoever counts the vote, isn't that a famous quote?

02:36:46.000 I forget who said it, but it's not the votes that count, it's who counts the votes.

02:36:51.000 Who said that?

02:36:53.000 Some famous person.

02:36:55.000 It's a great quote, because it's absolutely true. 0.99

02:36:57.000 And if you've got a fucking computer that you run, and you're in charge of the AI that determines what the people want, and then the people in the neighborhood get together and go, hey man, did you fucking want this? 0.98

02:37:07.000 I didn't want this. 0.99

02:37:08.000 Who are they talking to?

02:37:09.000 They're not talking to anybody.

02:37:10.000 Joseph Stalin.

02:37:12.000 Wow.

02:37:12.000 The people who cast the votes don't decide an election.

02:37:14.000 The people who count the votes do.

02:37:16.000 Wow.

02:37:17.000 That's chilling.

02:37:18.000 And that's a terrifying human being.

02:37:20.000 A terrifying human being that said that.

02:37:23.000 Because he used that.

02:37:24.000 He used that to his advantage.

02:37:26.000 And millions of people died because of him.

02:37:29.000 But that's what's real.

02:37:31.000 And so when someone's coming along telling you in any way, shape or form that voting is not necessary, that's bananas.

02:37:36.000 Of course it's necessary.

02:37:38.000 Look, it's the only way we figure out even just what is voting if it's not organized decision-making and discussion.

02:37:45.000 It's like a consensus that becomes relevant because of all the organized discussion.

02:37:52.000 Because of all the discussion, because of all the people online, because of all the people sharing accurate data, when they come to a conclusion that makes sense and enough people charismatically push that out into the world and say, I should represent you because I have an understanding of these things and I am on your side and this is what I believe.

02:38:11.000 You're going to just decide that with AI? That's crazy talk.

02:38:15.000 And the fact that they're just saying that out loud. 0.99

02:38:17.000 What the fuck are you saying when no one's around? 0.99

02:38:20.000 There's no camera pointed at you because it's got to be wild. 1.00

02:38:24.000 If you're coming to these conclusions, if you've normalized the idea of speaking publicly, that voting won't be necessary, holy shit, man. 0.99

02:38:32.000 What do you say in private? 0.98

02:38:34.000 If you've normalized publicly the idea that overpopulation is a major issue, you've organized that, you've said that publicly, and you said that one way to reduce the population would be vaccines.

02:38:51.000 What are you saying?

02:38:54.000 That sounds bananas!

02:38:56.000 Wait a minute, have you done this before?

02:38:59.000 It turns out they have.

02:39:00.000 Turns out they have used vaccines to try to limit populations.

02:39:03.000 They've done it unknowingly.

02:39:05.000 These people had no idea they were being experimented on.

02:39:07.000 And they did it in Africa. 0.80

02:39:09.000 They gave women sterilizing vaccines and they hid it. 0.76

02:39:12.000 They hid it under the guise of a vaccine to prevent against diseases and they were giving them HCG. And they were giving them at a dose and in a time period that was going to limit their ability to reproduce or eliminate.

02:39:25.000 They've done that! 0.99

02:39:27.000 I think starting from the premise that these people suck is just, it's good baseline, you know? 0.99

02:39:35.000 Your point, I mean, democracy has its problems, right? 0.99

02:39:38.000 Voting does not inevitably produce good outcomes.

02:39:41.000 But I think if we take your point from earlier, you can see, is it Churchill who said that democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others?

02:39:50.000 Yes.

02:39:52.000 That the point is democracy as noisy and flawed as it is has a tendency over time to move in the right direction and your point about if you are slightly pointed off you end up in outer space if you're slightly pointed in a better direction you actually get there over time.

02:40:10.000 It's wonderful to increase the rate at which you get in the right direction, but just simply moving in a better direction versus a worse direction is good enough, right?

02:40:19.000 It actually does function.

02:40:21.000 And the antipathy that these rent-seeking elites have for the consent of the governed is appalling, right?

02:40:34.000 If you put yourself in their mindset...

02:40:38.000 The threat that democracy poses to your elite plans must be frightening to them.

02:40:51.000 So they conspire against it, not realizing that they are actually depending on that same force to keep the world stable and improving and to give them a landscape in which to compete economically.

02:41:05.000 But they envision a world where they have complete and total control over the population, and you will own nothing, and you'll be happy.

02:41:12.000 Yeah, they said the quiet part out loud.

02:41:14.000 Which is wild!

02:41:15.000 It is.

02:41:15.000 They said it in a way where they had a smiling guy, and you look at all these unhappy people that don't have anything already, and you go, maybe that's the thing.

02:41:25.000 Maybe everybody owns nothing, and then you'll be happy.

02:41:28.000 So if they take it away from all the people that have it, and I don't have it, maybe it'll be better.

02:41:32.000 You know?

02:41:32.000 All these rich people.

02:41:33.000 I couldn't help but notice that they said, you will own nothing.

02:41:38.000 They didn't say, we will own nothing.

02:41:39.000 Yes.

02:41:40.000 Exactly.

02:41:40.000 That's not we.

02:41:41.000 You will own nothing.

02:41:42.000 You will own nothing.

02:41:42.000 Oh, well, thanks for telling me.

02:41:44.000 And then they denied saying that.

02:41:44.000 But people had to go to the Wayback Machine and pull it up.

02:41:47.000 They denied saying that.

02:41:48.000 And that's the thing.

02:41:49.000 They will lie directly to you.

02:41:50.000 Yeah.

02:41:50.000 Right?

02:41:50.000 They will just simply say that they didn't say it.

02:41:53.000 Well, there's enough gaslighting out there now where you can say wild shit. 1.00

02:41:58.000 Absolutely wild shit. 1.00

02:42:00.000 Have you seen Gavin Newsom discussing how great Biden is? 1.00

02:42:05.000 No, but that's got to be something.

02:42:06.000 It's wild.

02:42:08.000 It's absolutely wild.

02:42:10.000 He, first of all, discusses how he would never run against such a great man.

02:42:16.000 And the way he says it is like, He went to ten, and you didn't have to go to ten.

02:42:22.000 You should have been at five or six.

02:42:24.000 Should have been calm and discerning.

02:42:28.000 Like, the way you're saying something like that, when you're talking about a great person, this is like a guy in a movie. 0.98

02:42:35.000 This is like Stephen King's movie where the fucking dude, like, what was that movie where he sees the future and this guy's gonna kill everybody? 0.98

02:42:44.000 I don't know that one. 0.99

02:42:44.000 Remember that movie? 0.99

02:42:45.000 What was the movie where Stephen King, Christopher Walken played... 0.99

02:42:49.000 God damn it. 0.99

02:42:51.000 Forget. 1.00

02:42:51.000 It was a great fucking movie. 1.00

02:42:52.000 Dead Zone? 1.00

02:42:53.000 Great...

02:42:53.000 Dead Zone.

02:42:54.000 Yeah.

02:42:55.000 Where you shake hands with the politician and he could see the future and see that this guy's gonna nuke us all.

02:42:59.000 And so he winds up shooting him. 1.00

02:43:02.000 Crazy fucking movie. 1.00

02:43:03.000 Really good book. 1.00

02:43:05.000 But that's what the kind of vibes this guy's giving off.

02:43:09.000 You need to see this.

02:43:10.000 Play it, JB. I'm trying to figure out which one you want.

02:43:15.000 No, no, no.

02:43:16.000 He was talking to some woman.

02:43:17.000 He was praising Biden, saying he would never run against him.

02:43:22.000 And it's in the middle of all this...

02:43:26.000 When you're seeing Biden on the news, he's literally doing the grumpy man face.

02:43:33.000 It's almost like old white dudes, they get to a certain age, they can't help but walking around like this. 1.00

02:43:39.000 It's like he's got this thing going on, like an exaggerated frown, where he's walking around with this, with this terrible posture and this hunch.

02:43:51.000 For people just looking at that, imagine if that was Trump.

02:43:55.000 Imagine if Trump was rocking around with the grumpy face and then the crazy way he talks where he forgets what he's talking about.

02:44:06.000 He's not held accountable.

02:44:06.000 No one's talking about it on the left.

02:44:08.000 Everyone's so terrified of Trump being president.

02:44:10.000 They're like, blah, blah, blah.

02:44:12.000 I don't hear anything.

02:44:13.000 I don't see anything.

02:44:15.000 They can't say anything.

02:44:16.000 It's nuts!

02:44:18.000 And there's too many people that see it.

02:44:20.000 There's too many people that aren't doing well that see this gaslighting.

02:44:24.000 And like, if you're gaslighting me about something that is so in my face, how can I trust you about what's going on in Ukraine?

02:44:32.000 How can I trust you about Yemen and Syria? 1.00

02:44:35.000 How can I trust you about Gaza? 1.00

02:44:37.000 How can I trust you about the Nord Stream pipeline?

02:44:40.000 How can I trust you?

02:44:42.000 If you won't tell me that you think something's up right here, this thing that's right in front of our face, nothing, everything's fine, it's his superpower.

02:44:51.000 Did you hear that?

02:44:52.000 His age is his superpower.

02:44:53.000 This is another thing that was like a New York Times article.

02:44:56.000 Was it New York Times or was it Medium?

02:44:58.000 Some article.

02:44:59.000 Where they were saying his age is his superpower.

02:45:02.000 Hey! 0.99

02:45:02.000 No, I saw that. 0.99

02:45:03.000 I'm right here! 1.00

02:45:04.000 Fuck off! 1.00

02:45:05.000 Fuck off with this! 1.00

02:45:07.000 You're talking crazy! 1.00

02:45:09.000 You're talking crazy and you're talking also to two liberals. 0.98

02:45:12.000 Regardless of how you and I get aligned with the far right and all the craziness. 0.65

02:45:18.000 Opinion.

02:45:18.000 Age matters, which is why Biden's age is his superpower.

02:45:22.000 It was the LA Times, which is, yeah, they're going under.

02:45:27.000 That's the reason!

02:45:28.000 But did you find the Gavin McGinnis...

02:45:30.000 I don't know if this is it, because I just went through real quick on the...

02:45:34.000 Yeah, this is it.

02:45:35.000 This is it.

02:45:36.000 I don't think I saw the part you want, though.

02:45:39.000 This is four months ago?

02:45:41.000 I know.

02:45:42.000 That's why I'm not seeing...

02:45:42.000 No, it's not from four months ago.

02:45:43.000 It's from pretty recently.

02:45:44.000 I know what we're looking for here, and I'm not seeing it.

02:45:46.000 Google Gavin Newsom gaslights about Biden.

02:45:51.000 See if that's it.

02:45:55.000 Where is it?

02:45:56.000 Everything else now is like recent, and there's not interviews with a woman.

02:45:59.000 Oh, is it hard to find?

02:46:01.000 Goddammit, YouTube, don't tell me you pulled this.

02:46:03.000 See, you can find it on the Twitter, because that X platform, they tend to be a little more loose.

02:46:08.000 They say a few things. 1.00

02:46:10.000 Boy, the YouTube platform, these motherfuckers, they want to hide shit. 1.00

02:46:15.000 That was Google. 1.00

02:46:16.000 Right there.

02:46:17.000 Bam.

02:46:17.000 The one we're talking to that guy.

02:46:18.000 Bam.

02:46:19.000 That's it.

02:46:20.000 I'm sorry.

02:46:20.000 He did talk to a girl as well.

02:46:21.000 Here's the Biden-Harris administration.

02:46:23.000 And then we drive contrast.

02:46:24.000 It's not even a complicated campaign.

02:46:26.000 We have the receipts.

02:46:27.000 We have the best three-year record of any modern American presidency.

02:46:32.000 Period.

02:46:32.000 Full stop.

02:46:33.000 And we need to lift up the issues.

02:46:34.000 That's only one of them.

02:46:36.000 The one where he was talking to the woman, he was talking about how much the Democrats are killing it.

02:46:40.000 He's gone on this campaign.

02:46:42.000 But then when he talked about Biden, I mean, he sounded like a guy who wants to be president.

02:46:47.000 In my opinion, he sounded like a guy who knows he's already got the call.

02:46:51.000 So that woman that you just saw in the corner, there's one of them. 0.78

02:46:54.000 That's it.

02:46:55.000 That's what the woman saw.

02:46:56.000 Yeah, that's okay.

02:46:57.000 Just give me a click on that.

02:46:58.000 That's it.

02:46:58.000 That's what it is.

02:46:59.000 Who in their mind would want to run when you have someone of such esteem as our incumbent president of the United States with a record of accomplishments and a man of character, a man of decency.

02:47:13.000 I'm old school.

02:47:14.000 Talk about loyalty.

02:47:15.000 I'll go to ends of the earth for this guy.

02:47:16.000 I really would. 0.99

02:47:17.000 I wouldn't hire him for one of them fucking cop shows. 0.99

02:47:21.000 One of them goofy TV cop shows. 0.99

02:47:23.000 I'd be like, bro, you can't. 0.64

02:47:24.000 You're too over the top.

02:47:26.000 No one thinks a politician talks like that.

02:47:28.000 It's crazy.

02:47:30.000 It's so phony.

02:47:32.000 And the thing is, in his case...

02:47:37.000 This is what I would say.

02:47:38.000 He just looks like he's lying.

02:47:40.000 This is what I would say.

02:47:41.000 If I am the vice president of a company, and I know the president is stepping down, and then they have, do you want to take over the position?

02:47:48.000 I'm like, let me tell you how great that guy is.

02:47:50.000 He is the best ever.

02:47:52.000 He's the best ever.

02:47:53.000 I could not fill his shoes.

02:47:54.000 I know I'm filling his shoes.

02:47:56.000 Right.

02:47:56.000 That's what I'm saying.

02:47:57.000 I'm throwing that guy a bone.

02:47:58.000 I'm being nice because I'm not in competition with that guy.

02:48:01.000 Whereas any other time...

02:48:04.000 A politician would be at least angling for the position that they are the superior choice.

02:48:08.000 They'd be saying, although I fully support the Biden administration, we disagree on, I think, my vision is that we move forward in this direction, and this is why I think that's going to be beneficial.

02:48:19.000 I would love to convince them that I'm correct, but I'm positioning myself as a superior choice to what's Obviously, the guy wants to be president!

02:48:28.000 Look at him!

02:48:29.000 He looks like a president!

02:48:31.000 He wants to be president.

02:48:32.000 But, bro.

02:48:35.000 Talk to some regular people.

02:48:37.000 That's not how you could say it.

02:48:38.000 You could say all the things you just said.

02:48:41.000 I think he's a man of decency, and I think he's a man of character.

02:48:44.000 You can say it like that!

02:48:45.000 Right.

02:48:46.000 I'm out of decency.

02:48:47.000 I'm out of care.

02:48:48.000 I'm old school.

02:48:50.000 You are old school.

02:48:51.000 You're acting like you're in a 1950s movie. 1.00

02:48:54.000 You're in a fucking James Cagney movie. 1.00

02:48:55.000 This is crazy. 1.00

02:48:56.000 He even alludes to his loyalty, which is obviously...

02:49:00.000 I mean, I wouldn't call it loyalty, but...

02:49:03.000 Bro, you got to clean up California first, sir.

02:49:06.000 You got work to do.

02:49:07.000 You got to do something about California.

02:49:08.000 You can't just let LA be the way it is.

02:49:11.000 I know you're limited in what you can do and what you can't do. 0.99

02:49:14.000 God damn, you got to move forward and fix that. 0.97

02:49:17.000 Fix that and then maybe we'll talk. 0.99

02:49:19.000 All right.

02:49:20.000 Well, he's clearly lying.

02:49:22.000 And you're right.

02:49:24.000 We know why he's lying.

02:49:25.000 There's some sort of behind the scenes thing.

02:49:28.000 A hundred percent.

02:49:29.000 That's your guy.

02:49:30.000 Right.

02:49:30.000 That's your guy.

02:49:31.000 He's your guy.

02:49:32.000 But what do we do with all of the people who appear, you know, the normal folks who can't see Biden's cognitive decline?

02:49:44.000 That's not real.

02:49:46.000 I don't think that's real.

02:49:47.000 I don't think there's anybody out there.

02:49:48.000 I think they just don't want to talk about it because they feel terrible about the idea that Trump becomes president, which seems to be inevitable. 0.98

02:49:54.000 And then you see Kamala Harris serving up word salad like it's a fucking buffet at the Golden Corral. 1.00

02:50:02.000 I've seen these headlines today. 0.99

02:50:04.000 Kamala Harris says she's ready to serve amid Biden memory concerns. 0.99

02:50:08.000 Yo, they're going to put her on a fucking convertible, take her through Dallas. 1.00

02:50:12.000 This is... 1.00

02:50:15.000 Nobody wants that.

02:50:16.000 I don't think they want that.

02:50:18.000 Nobody wants that.

02:50:21.000 I actually think we have to.

02:50:26.000 Boy, it got quiet in here.

02:50:29.000 Here's the problem.

02:50:31.000 Our Constitution anticipates terrible people like Kamala Harris. 1.00

02:50:36.000 Right.

02:50:38.000 It does not anticipate a hidden cabal acting through a senile figurehead.

02:50:45.000 Right.

02:50:46.000 So from my perspective, we have been in a consistent constitutional crisis for the entire Biden administration.

02:50:55.000 His decrepitude was obvious before he was elected.

02:50:58.000 Right?

02:51:00.000 So something else is in control, and that is completely unacceptable in terms of the constitutionality of our system.

02:51:09.000 So the right thing to do is to remove the incompetent person.

02:51:14.000 Either he steps down or he's removed by the 25th Amendment.

02:51:17.000 Kamala Harris has to take office and I hope she has no power to do anything because I don't trust her. 1.00

02:51:23.000 But the point is at least that is a step back in the direction of normalcy, of checks and balances.

02:51:30.000 And then if that is the case, that actually would open the door to Newsom because then Newsom would be competing against Kamala Harris, who he doesn't have the same respect for, at least openly.

02:51:41.000 He's not talking about her.

02:51:43.000 But if he steps down and Newsom says, it's my obligation.

02:51:48.000 I know the right way to this country.

02:51:49.000 Right.

02:51:50.000 The problem is as a patriot, I'm not even sure I can worry about that because any day that Joe Biden is in that office and the call might come over the phone, you know, somebody's launched to something.

02:52:06.000 What are you going to do, Mr. President?

02:52:08.000 Right.

02:52:08.000 We can't have that.

02:52:10.000 You have to have an actual person who's capable of responding to a crisis in that office.

02:52:15.000 It's offensive to the population that we would have had this circus, you know, with an obviously incompetent guy at its head.

02:52:53.000 In the office.

02:52:53.000 If somebody chooses impeachment insurance, they're telling you they should not ascend to the office.

02:53:00.000 Right.

02:53:00.000 We dodged those bullets.

02:53:01.000 We dodged it with Dan Quayle.

02:53:03.000 We dodged it with Mike Pence. 1.00

02:53:04.000 We dodged it with Joe Biden for eight fucking years. 1.00

02:53:08.000 Right. 1.00

02:53:09.000 We did.

02:53:10.000 And that was eight years when he could talk.

02:53:12.000 The olden days.

02:53:14.000 Then the answer is Kamala has to take the office. 1.00

02:53:17.000 The Congress has to step up and make sure that Kamala does not have the power to do anything that is not reasonable.

02:53:26.000 And we need to understand that the Democratic Party has announced that they are not interested in the consent of the governed, that they are interested in putting on a show and kowtowing to people's sensitivities, but they're not interested in actually governing the country in the interest of the citizens.

02:53:45.000 And they're also not interested in pushing anyone who's not going along with the plan.

02:53:52.000 Whether it's Tulsi Gabbard, whether it's Robert F. Kennedy Jr., anybody that is very popular Could you imagine a primary, like a debate between Biden and RFK? Let RFK go.

02:54:06.000 Let him go on TV. Imagine.

02:54:10.000 RFK telling the truth about certain issues.

02:54:13.000 RFK explaining how these systems work.

02:54:16.000 RFK saying things where people accuse him.

02:54:19.000 People have accused you of this.

02:54:21.000 What is your answer?

02:54:22.000 Let him say that on national television and people go, oh.

02:54:26.000 Wait a minute.

02:54:27.000 What is he saying?

02:54:28.000 What's going on here?

02:54:29.000 And then like, I like that guy better.

02:54:31.000 And he's a Kennedy.

02:54:32.000 And he's a Democrat, lifelong Democrat.

02:54:34.000 And he's like a reasonable sort of centrist character.

02:54:38.000 Hold on.

02:54:39.000 That's our guy.

02:54:40.000 That's our guy. 0.99

02:54:41.000 And people would fucking vote for him and they didn't want it. 0.99

02:54:44.000 Of course they would. 0.99

02:54:45.000 And the fact that they're not begging him to run as a Democrat is proof that they would rather lose to Trump.

02:54:52.000 Well, there's enough boomers who think he's a loon, that it becomes a problem.

02:54:56.000 You'd have to re-educate people.

02:54:57.000 But that's where the debate would come into play.

02:54:59.000 At least some reasonable people on the fence and definitely some never-Trumpers.

02:55:03.000 The never-Trumpers would go in that direction.

02:55:05.000 They would go, look, this guy can win a debate against Trump.

02:55:09.000 Whereas I don't think Joe Biden's even capable of having a debate at this point.

02:55:14.000 He can't keep track of what he's talking about.

02:55:17.000 He's talking about people that have been dead for years and mistaking names.

02:55:21.000 He fumbles in the middle of sentences and forgets what he's talking about and says he's being told to wrap it up.

02:55:28.000 It's embarrassing.

02:55:29.000 And it's elder abuse also. 0.99

02:55:32.000 If that was my dad and they were forcing my dad to do that, I'd be like, Leave him the fuck alone. 0.99

02:55:37.000 He's 80 years old. 0.99

02:55:38.000 The guy should be chilling somewhere. 0.99

02:55:40.000 He should be relaxing in a zero-stress position where he's catching bluegills on a pond or going golfing, whatever the fuck he likes to do. 0.98

02:55:48.000 He shouldn't be in that position that's aging an already-aged man. 0.97

02:55:52.000 We know it hyper-ages people. 1.00

02:55:55.000 That fucking stress is brutal to everybody but Trump. 1.00

02:55:58.000 That dude was like water off a duck's back. 1.00

02:56:02.000 He didn't seem to age at all. 1.00

02:56:05.000 He seems like the fucking same guy. 0.99

02:56:07.000 Like he's remarkably durable. 1.00

02:56:10.000 But for Biden, it's been horrible.

02:56:13.000 But I think it opens the door for Newsom because I think Newsom is like I think the whole Democratic Party will embrace him.

02:56:22.000 And, you know, if he could just come closer to the center, I think he's got a real shot.

02:56:26.000 Well, I hope not. 0.95

02:56:29.000 I mean, the guy is utterly despicable.

02:56:32.000 And obviously, California tells you that he's perfectly capable of engaging in terrible governance, you know, to the great detriment of the people under his leadership. 0.84

02:56:46.000 It's a disaster.

02:56:47.000 And if you haven't been there...

02:56:50.000 When I go back, every time I go back, I'm like, oh my god, not only am I not exaggerating, I'm underplaying it. 0.96

02:56:57.000 The amount of tense now that you see is fucking nuts. 0.91

02:57:02.000 It's out of control. 0.96

02:57:04.000 It's not getting better, and they're spending so much money on it.

02:57:08.000 Yeah, I don't know what they're doing.

02:57:10.000 I can't imagine why they would.

02:57:13.000 It's like they're not interested in saving the state because they have some other priority. 0.97

02:57:20.000 I don't know what the fuck is going on, but I do know that one of the parts of the problem is the blue no matter who mentality of the people that live in that state. 0.97

02:57:30.000 It's like they are convinced That there is only one way to vote. 0.99

02:57:36.000 But the problem with that is you don't have any real competition of ideas then.

02:57:40.000 You're just going to get to choose who's going to be the representative of this party that you already know has been controlled.

02:57:45.000 And they're going to do the same thing.

02:57:47.000 Yeah, but Blue No Matter Who is a holdover.

02:57:55.000 It's like when somebody buys a brand that has, you know, that builds a quality product and then they decide to use the credibility, they decide to liquidate the credibility into a brief pursuit of high profits,

02:58:11.000 right?

02:58:13.000 The idea that there are a lot of people, we used to call them Yellow Dog Democrats, right? 1.00

02:58:18.000 These are people who Would vote for a yellow dog if it was running under the right banner.

02:58:25.000 That's the same thing as blue no matter who.

02:58:28.000 They are...

02:58:30.000 Allowing something that has captured the Democratic Party to run the blue states into the ground and obviously their influence over national politics is obscene.

02:58:42.000 I mean what's going on in our southern border makes no sense from the point of view of trying to govern in the interest of average Americans.

02:58:49.000 I want to get into that because I know you've gone down there and you've actually gone to experience this caravan or some groups of...

02:58:59.000 Yeah, I saw the migration in the Darien of Panama, which we'll come back to in a second.

02:59:07.000 But just let me say that the problem is the folks who have been loyal Democrats who will vote blue no matter who need to wake up.

02:59:17.000 That party has been captured by something that is not interested in the well-being of the country, of the West, of the citizens.

02:59:27.000 It is time for them to go.

02:59:29.000 They have to leave.

02:59:31.000 The idea that Newsom is going to be swapped in, and because he's not senile, he stands a chance of winning, couldn't be more troubling.

02:59:42.000 Now, personally, I think RFK Jr. is the solution to this problem.

02:59:48.000 I don't know that anybody can solve the problem of the capture.

02:59:51.000 Can he win?

02:59:52.000 Yeah.

02:59:53.000 Is there a pathway that he could become the president?

02:59:54.000 Yep.

02:59:55.000 There are multiple pathways.

02:59:57.000 That said, do I expect it to go that way?

03:00:01.000 I think we all need to start thinking differently.

03:00:05.000 I think we need to recognize that the capture of our system is such a profound threat to the well-being of the country, to the future of our kids and grandkids, that whatever needs to happen for us to come together and usher those people out in favor of something that is at least just not part of that plan Has to happen,

03:00:30.000 right?

03:00:31.000 So as far as I'm concerned, the best shot we've got is Bobby Kennedy.

03:00:36.000 Bobby Kennedy is highly intelligent.

03:00:42.000 I think he is deeply patriotic.

03:00:45.000 And I know from interacting with him and watching what he said that he's also courageous, right?

03:00:53.000 I don't want to overemphasize this, but he is...

03:00:58.000 Literally willing to die to take a shot at saving the country.

03:01:04.000 And I think we need to get behind that.

03:01:07.000 And if anybody has real thought that they might be killed, it's a guy whose father and uncle were killed.

03:01:15.000 Right.

03:01:15.000 Because of doing the exact same thing.

03:01:17.000 Well, I was in the audience at Freedom Fest, which is a libertarian festival.

03:01:24.000 It was in Memphis.

03:01:26.000 And I'm no libertarian, but I felt very welcome there.

03:01:31.000 I gave a talk.

03:01:32.000 Bobby Kennedy also showed up and gave a talk.

03:01:36.000 And it was attended by pretty much everybody.

03:01:39.000 And the talk was very well received, even though Bobby Kennedy is also no libertarian.

03:01:45.000 But the last thing he said in that talk was that everybody there knows that there are fates far worse than death.

03:01:56.000 And I believe that he was speaking absolutely from his heart.

03:01:59.000 And he was telling you that he knew he was taking this risk, but that somebody had to take it on our behalf.

03:02:05.000 And he was stepping up.

03:02:07.000 So, to my way of thinking, that's the best shot we've got.

03:02:11.000 And I really feel like the story, his origin story, makes this like Odysseus returning to the manor, right?

03:02:21.000 Stringing the bow.

03:02:22.000 That this is that iconic moment.

03:02:24.000 And I wish I was certain that once in office Bobby Kennedy...

03:02:29.000 Had the power and the insight to get rid of the people who have captured our system, but I'm not sure anybody does.

03:02:35.000 I think he's the best chance, but it may be that the control is too elaborate.

03:02:41.000 Isn't it wild that you would have never thought this four years ago? 0.98

03:02:45.000 You would have never thought the system was this fucked? 0.99

03:02:48.000 You know, the funny thing is I do think it's way more screwed up than I knew four years ago. 0.99

03:02:52.000 But even four years ago, I knew it was bad enough that it was an emergency.

03:02:57.000 I was suspicious, but I wasn't convinced. 0.82

03:03:00.000 I thought they're mostly good people and they get fucked over by this weird system and you become part of it and you have to play ball.

03:03:07.000 I didn't think it went as deep as it does. 0.94

03:03:09.000 I mean, I keep seeing that it goes deeper.

03:03:11.000 But four years ago, even 10 years ago, I knew that we were dealing with out of control capture and that this was it was anti-democratic in the most fundamental way.

03:03:27.000 But anyway, the final point I want to make is I think Bobby Kennedy is the right way to solve this.

03:03:31.000 He's got a few positions that throw people who would otherwise be on board with him, and I totally get their concerns.

03:03:37.000 I really do.

03:03:38.000 I hope that Kennedy will think about that and address them so that people are aware of what he is and isn't about.

03:03:49.000 But if Kennedy can't make it, I still think we have to line up behind some solution that ushers these people out of office because the capture is it's a fatal pathology if we don't address it.

03:04:05.000 Who can do it?

03:04:06.000 Do you think Donald Trump can have any impact on that?

03:04:09.000 Yeah.

03:04:09.000 Or do you think he can?

03:04:11.000 Well, let's put it this way.

03:04:12.000 He has demonstrated that he has the capability to win.

03:04:16.000 I'm very compelled that he is not part of whatever that cabal is.

03:04:22.000 The cabal really doesn't like him.

03:04:24.000 Clearly.

03:04:25.000 Could be no more evidence.

03:04:26.000 Right.

03:04:27.000 What I don't think, the reasons that I think it's Kennedy and not Trump, in terms of our best shot, is that Kennedy is...

03:04:39.000 He is a brilliant thinker and he is encyclopedic in his knowledge and to whatever extent that this is a difficult problem, he's the guy who understands how you address difficult problems and he will gather the right people and he will figure out what the best approach is.

03:04:56.000 Whether there's any approach that's plausible, I don't know, but I'm convinced that he will address it seriously.

03:05:02.000 Trump A, he only has four years to accomplish the job.

03:05:09.000 Kennedy might have eight to accomplish the job.

03:05:13.000 He doesn't have the temperament.

03:05:17.000 I think that this is maybe the most critical problem with Trump is that Trump has the temperament to win the office.

03:05:25.000 But he doesn't have the temperament to address the nuances of the problems.

03:05:31.000 You know, he got played during COVID and he still doesn't see it.

03:05:34.000 Right?

03:05:35.000 That's a problem.

03:05:36.000 That has to do with him being ego-driven and unable to admit that How was he not going to get played?

03:05:43.000 He's not an expert and he had lots of experts conspiring to lead him to believe things that weren't true.

03:05:48.000 I think it would be...everybody would understand.

03:05:52.000 Also, politically, the people that support the vaccine are clearly on the left.

03:05:56.000 When he comes out and says the vaccine is great, I got the vaccine, we got that vaccine out.

03:06:02.000 He's taking credit for something that these people on the left have already unanimously agreed was a net positive thing.

03:06:10.000 And I've had some wild conversations with really brilliant, intelligent people where I know they're saying nonsense about the effectiveness of the vaccine and the dangers of the vaccine.

03:06:22.000 And I'm going, this is a crazy conversation I'm having with you.

03:06:25.000 Like, you're not even willing to consider it because it's an ideological thing.

03:06:28.000 You got locked into it.

03:06:29.000 So he's playing on that by supporting the vaccine as well. 0.87

03:06:34.000 You have to think, like, if you're looking at a guy who's trying to gather points and armor in a game of fucking, you know, World of Warcraft or something, like, you'd pick that armor up. 0.94

03:06:42.000 Like, hey, this is my vaccine. 0.99

03:06:44.000 I fucking made that vaccine. 0.99

03:06:45.000 Right. 1.00

03:06:46.000 Yeah.

03:06:46.000 It's the wrong temperament for the job.

03:06:48.000 But it's the right temperament to get into office, right?

03:06:51.000 Right.

03:06:51.000 I mean, politically, the man is brilliant.

03:06:53.000 And also, like, he is so polarizing that even though so many people support him and he can win, the people that hate him hate him so much that it's like, God damn, do we really want that sentiment in our society? 0.93

03:07:07.000 Do we want more division? 0.83

03:07:09.000 And would that encourage—or is it possible that he could— Have some sort of come-to-Jesus moment in front of the country, and it would unite people in a way that would realize, you're already seeing a lot of people in the black community that have turned towards Trump because they're seeing what's going on with this immigration and how it's affecting them,

03:07:26.000 and the fact that these people that are coming in that are illegal immigrants are getting so much aid that they're not getting. 0.99

03:07:32.000 And they're like, this is fucking crazy. 0.71

03:07:33.000 This is our community, and you're having these people come in, you're giving them food and money and shelter, and you won't do it for us, and we've been here forever, and we're Americans. 0.99

03:07:42.000 This is crazy. 0.99

03:07:43.000 And then there's a lot of people that, like even Michael Rappaport, because of the way things are going in the world, is saying that – and he fucking hates Trump. 1.00

03:07:52.000 He talks wild shit about Trump. 0.99

03:07:53.000 Even he's saying that that – first of all, that that's not off the table and that now that's the only solution. 0.99

03:08:00.000 Well, I don't think we're there yet, but I don't think on the basis of the time he would have his temperament or his ability to build a team.

03:08:10.000 You know, Trump is kind of a one-man show and his team-building ability I don't think is enough to solve the problem either.

03:08:18.000 But the punchline of that is if Kennedy can't do it for whatever reason, if politics gets in the way, We still have to get whatever that cabal is out of power immediately.

03:08:33.000 This could not be more of an emergency.

03:08:35.000 We've seen through COVID how dangerous these people are, how little they care about our well-being.

03:08:41.000 And we have to rally around whatever it is that addresses this problem.

03:08:49.000 You know, as much as I'm not a believer that Trump on his own can do the job, I would far prefer him to another standard bearer of that cabal.

03:09:00.000 The cabal is too dangerous.

03:09:01.000 And I say this, as you know, I'm a lifelong Democrat, right?

03:09:04.000 This is my party that I'm telling you cannot be trusted with governance.

03:09:08.000 But that's where we are.

03:09:11.000 The border crisis.

03:09:13.000 So you went and saw the migration.

03:09:16.000 You saw the groups of people that are making their way up through.

03:09:19.000 Yeah.

03:09:20.000 I was invited.

03:09:21.000 Actually, my son and I, my son Zach and I went to Panama, where I have some history.

03:09:27.000 I did my bat work on Barrow, Colorado Island in Gatun Lake, the Panama Canal.

03:09:33.000 So Panama is a place I'm familiar with, but Michael Jan invited us down to go look at the migration in the Darien province of Panama, which is the province bordering Colombia.

03:09:47.000 As you probably know, there's a gap in the Pan-American Highway about 60 miles that were never built in this highway that otherwise stretches from Prudhoe Bay, Alaska to the southern tip of South America.

03:09:57.000 And what's there is a tremendously significant and very difficult jungle in the Darien Gap.

03:10:07.000 So there's a national park there.

03:10:08.000 And ordinarily, people do not cross the Darien Gap.

03:10:13.000 It is a famously difficult obstacle.

03:10:17.000 And what we see there is that the international community is encouraging a massive migration of people from South America into Central America and that almost all of those people are ending up crossing our southern border and entering the U.S. The ones who are questioned are claiming political asylum,

03:10:38.000 which is...

03:10:41.000 Not accurate.

03:10:42.000 So we talked to many, many migrants, and the universal story amongst the migrants who would talk to us is that they were fleeing bad economic conditions in the direction of what looks like greater opportunity.

03:10:57.000 They've been told by the international community that they should come across the Darien Gap, where many of them are not surviving the trek.

03:11:04.000 It's extremely dangerous.

03:11:06.000 And they're migrating north.

03:11:09.000 Now, the really troubling thing though is that that migration is familiar in one way.

03:11:15.000 It looks a little bit like the migrations of Central Americans that migrated north when we were kids.

03:11:24.000 But there is another migration.

03:11:26.000 There is a migration of Chinese immigrants that looks different, feels different, and is being housed in a totally separate way in Darien for reasons that are not in any way obvious.

03:11:40.000 Now, I don't know exactly what to make of that.

03:11:42.000 I have hypotheses.

03:11:44.000 There are no more than that.

03:11:47.000 The Chinese migration is not forthcoming about why it is migrating.

03:11:55.000 It is composed mostly of young military-age men.

03:12:00.000 There are some women present, but it's not 50-50 by far.

03:12:05.000 And the international community has arranged separate encampments.

03:12:11.000 The Chinese are in many cases traveling a separate way across the Darien Gap.

03:12:16.000 They're skipping some of the worst parts of it, traveling by boat.

03:12:23.000 As I think I mentioned, they are, when asked where they're from, where they're going, why they're going, they are uninterested in talking.

03:12:33.000 There's a hostility to it that I found shocking because, for one thing, if you If I imagined folks from almost anywhere in the world were heading to the US because they didn't like the way things were in China,

03:12:48.000 they feared their government, they thought that there was economic opportunity, they would be curious about Americans.

03:12:54.000 These are soon to be their countrymen.

03:12:57.000 They would tend to be interested in talking.

03:13:00.000 And even if they, for some reason, because they had lived under a totalitarian regime, felt that they couldn't talk, they wouldn't be broadcasting hostility.

03:13:10.000 They would be ambivalent or something.

03:13:12.000 And that is not the impression that they leave when interacting with them.

03:13:16.000 So I found that utterly alarming, and I came to wonder if the migration of people coming up from South America, many of whom, by the way, are not South American.

03:13:27.000 There are people coming from the Middle East.

03:13:29.000 We met Afghans.

03:13:30.000 There are people from Iran, Yemen.

03:13:33.000 All over the world, they land in Ecuador, which has no visa requirement, and then they migrate through Colombia into Central America and straight up to the U.S. But in any case, that massive migration seems to provide a cloak for this other migration from China,

03:13:54.000 which is nothing if not mysterious.

03:13:58.000 Whew! 0.99

03:14:01.000 Why are they letting it happen?

03:14:03.000 Why do you think the government is allowing the border to be so porous?

03:14:08.000 And why are they resisting when Texas tries to do something about it?

03:14:13.000 Well, I always worry when we're trying to understand what's happening and the information is not being shared with us.

03:14:24.000 You have to ask yourself the question of how many separate things are in play.

03:14:31.000 Before I went to Panama, I thought there was a migration of people.

03:14:38.000 Now I think there are two.

03:14:41.000 One of them is clearly a migration and the other one could well be an invasion.

03:14:47.000 So if I know that there are two things, then I can put them in two categories and I can ask myself the question, why is this being allowed and why is that being allowed?

03:14:57.000 The consensus, maybe consensus is too strong, but the belief amongst many who have been on the story of the migration for years now, is that this is a ploy to create voters,

03:15:16.000 Democratic voters.

03:15:17.000 And I don't think that's impossible.

03:15:19.000 I think that's probably playing a role.

03:15:22.000 I don't know how realistic it is.

03:15:24.000 I don't know whether or not it is clear that migrants necessarily carry the likelihood of voting blue that the blue team imagines.

03:15:39.000 But anyway, I think that that's a plausible explanation in part, but I don't think it really covers it.

03:15:46.000 There are other hypotheses that are darker.

03:15:49.000 There is talk about the possibility of trading citizenship for military service.

03:15:58.000 I think that's a very frightening prospect, but I didn't invent the idea.

03:16:03.000 It has been discussed, and the problem is that to the extent that we saw things like the vaccine mandate drive out the skeptics from the military, This process would also bring in a lot of people into military service who would have more reason to follow immoral orders than a citizen soldier who had been American their whole life.

03:16:30.000 In other words, if the power structure is granting you citizenship which you want in exchange for your obedience, then what is it that would cause you to say no?

03:16:47.000 If acting on behalf of tyranny against Americans, then a force that doesn't have a deep history with the rights of being an American, that doesn't have a longstanding allegiance to people within the country, that force would be potentially more compliant.

03:17:04.000 And that worries me.

03:17:05.000 That should worry you.

03:17:06.000 I really didn't consider that until you just said that.

03:17:09.000 But my thought about this idea of the military turning on the citizens was always, but the military is citizens.

03:17:17.000 And many of them are deeply patriotic and unlikely to do something like that.

03:17:22.000 But if they did swap out immigrants And they did do that. 1.00

03:17:27.000 Holy shit. 0.99

03:17:28.000 Then you have a real coup. 1.00

03:17:30.000 This is what spooks me.

03:17:32.000 In thinking about the various scenarios five years ago, even three years ago, I would have said, I fear that somebody is going to issue immoral orders to the military, but I'm convinced that the military will divide over them.

03:17:48.000 That there are those who will carry out immoral orders and there are others who won't.

03:17:53.000 And at the same time, there's a senator, I think, from Massachusetts that introduced a bill to ban what they call paramilitary training, which is just training with firearms, like, to get better at them.

03:18:08.000 Right.

03:18:08.000 So the idea is you have a right to keep and bear arms, but you can't be good at them because you can't practice.

03:18:14.000 So if you imagine in my naive state a few years ago, the idea was, well, you have a very well-armed populace.

03:18:22.000 You have a military that's likely to be divided about immoral orders.

03:18:26.000 I don't like the sound of that, but I don't think that it's a slammer.

03:18:30.000 That the tyrants win because the part of the military that's not going to follow immoral orders and the citizenry that will fight to defend the Republic, that's a pretty powerful force.

03:18:41.000 But then you have vaccine mandates, which force out most of the people who are independent minded from the military.

03:18:47.000 And then you have the idea that migrants might be granted citizenship in exchange for military service.

03:18:54.000 Has that been introduced anywhere?

03:18:56.000 Is this just a complete hypothesis?

03:18:58.000 No, it's not.

03:18:58.000 It's not a hypothesis.

03:19:00.000 Actually, maybe, Jamie, you could look it up.

03:19:02.000 I don't want to slander anybody.

03:19:04.000 But yes, I believe it has been raised by at least one senator.

03:19:08.000 Jesus Christ.

03:19:11.000 Is that the paramilitary thing?

03:19:13.000 No, no, no, no.

03:19:14.000 The other thing, the thing about granting citizenship to illegal immigrants in exchange for military service. 0.65

03:19:22.000 So, in any case, I did not It took a lot of thinking about different pieces of the puzzle to begin to wonder about something like this.

03:19:35.000 But having wondered about it, it doesn't disappear from my mind as, oh, that's just simply crazy.

03:19:40.000 Actually, given the number of things that don't add up, this begins to explain them in a reasonably parsimonious way.

03:19:49.000 And it has me worried.

03:19:51.000 But that is not inherently, in fact, it is probably not the same thing.

03:19:57.000 As what would explain the concentration of Chinese migrants, right? 0.99

03:20:05.000 The Chinese migrants presumably have left China with the knowledge of their government.

03:20:10.000 The bias of that group in favor of males is something we can talk about if you want to, but it has an obvious interpretation.

03:20:20.000 And that ought to frighten us as well, right?

03:20:24.000 So at the same- How many are we talking about?

03:20:27.000 Is there an estimate of how many military aged Chinese men have gotten into the country?

03:20:31.000 I'm always hesitant at this point in the conversation because what I saw is what one person looks at through their eyes.

03:20:38.000 So I'm in no position to estimate that.

03:20:40.000 But I believe we are talking about tens of thousands.

03:20:44.000 Certainly, when we're talking about the entire migration, we are talking about millions.

03:20:49.000 And the number that is flowing through Central America, you know, the flow-through rate in a given day is many thousands.

03:20:58.000 So...

03:21:01.000 It's hard to know, and I would want somebody who was in a position to look at an estimate, not just a spot check.

03:21:08.000 So if the tyrannical government is playing some long game of chess, these are the pieces that would be moving.

03:21:14.000 The closest I could find on a number.

03:21:16.000 Chinese immigrants who entered the U.S. without authorization.

03:21:18.000 In 2023, it's over 30,000.

03:21:20.000 Look at how low it was in 2021 and how high it is in 2023. What's the source on this?

03:21:28.000 This says U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

03:21:31.000 Oh my god.

03:21:32.000 And that's probably a low estimate.

03:21:34.000 You know, it's probably like VAERS. When I was looking up the other thing about the military, I think you have to have a green card first.

03:21:40.000 Oh, then you give them a green card.

03:21:42.000 This also was talking about the numbers are down for the Air Force, the Army.

03:21:48.000 Yeah, for everybody.

03:21:49.000 They're actually asking people who are retired to come back.

03:21:53.000 Yeah, they are.

03:21:54.000 And in fact, they've gone a large distance towards forgiving people who resisted the mRNA vaccines.

03:22:02.000 But anyway, the larger picture, I don't know.

03:22:05.000 There's a lot of pieces in play that could turn out terribly for us.

03:22:08.000 That's basically what we're saying.

03:22:09.000 We're saying when we look at the long term...

03:22:12.000 If you look at Google's commitment to censorship, the World Health Organization's idea of taking over, the fact that they want to continue to push these mRNA vaccines, the fact that the border is wide open, and they're not only giving people money,

03:22:28.000 they're putting them in housing, they're directing them to getting on buses, they're dropping them off in places.

03:22:35.000 Transporting them into the interior.

03:22:36.000 Yeah.

03:22:37.000 It's happening 100%.

03:22:39.000 It's happening.

03:22:40.000 What happened in New York City when those guys beat the cop up and then they let him right out?

03:22:43.000 And then they're giving the Tupac to the camera? 0.99

03:22:46.000 Like, holy shit. 1.00

03:22:47.000 Like, do you know what kind of a terrible message that sends to bad people all over the world that you could beat up a cop and they're so stupid with their laws they just let you right back out? 1.00

03:22:58.000 It's lawlessness. 0.99

03:23:00.000 I think the overarching message is something deeply unpatriotic has taken over the governance of our country.

03:23:10.000 And that in part, in the same way that we all were misled or most of us were misled by the use of the term vaccine, so we didn't spot the horror of the mRNA shots early enough.

03:23:25.000 We have this reflex of imagining that, you know, there are intense divisions amongst the political class about in which direction the country should be governed.

03:23:35.000 And once you free yourself from that mindset and you imagine, I mean, here's the way I think of it, we have a very corrupt and very corruptible governance structure.

03:23:50.000 I do not know what force it is that is supposed to prevent our enemies from buying influence in the same way that corporations do and did.

03:24:02.000 So I don't assume that what is taking place is the result of misguided patriots.

03:24:10.000 I assume it is the result of corruption.

03:24:13.000 Whether that corruption is actually hostile to the US, I'm completely open to that possibility.

03:24:19.000 And it means that when you're looking at the people in power and you're saying, oh, they couldn't possibly be doing that, could they?

03:24:29.000 The answer is you're really asking the wrong question, right?

03:24:33.000 People just following orders is a well-understood problem, right?

03:24:38.000 Politicians whose reason for being has become corruption, right?

03:24:45.000 They are in effect just following orders, right?

03:24:47.000 The orders of whoever paid to influence them.

03:24:50.000 They don't necessarily know why policies are desired.

03:24:54.000 And if they do know, they don't necessarily care, right?

03:24:58.000 They've gotten used to not caring.

03:24:59.000 That's how they got ahead.

03:25:00.000 So I know how this sounds, but I also know that the only way to make the pieces that we can see fit together is to open our minds to possibilities that sound incredible on first hearing,

03:25:16.000 but actually are a pretty good match for the evidence.

03:25:22.000 I was hoping you were going to wrap it up in a nice rosy way.

03:25:26.000 Nice rose-colored glasses.

03:25:28.000 I'm only kidding.

03:25:31.000 Well, listen.

03:25:34.000 I really appreciate you coming on.

03:25:36.000 I really appreciate your voice because you're one of the few people that can put this together in a digestible way that really understands what we're talking about here.

03:25:47.000 It's terrifying, but it's critical that it gets discussed, and I think you're a really important part of that.

03:25:53.000 And I think if you weren't out there, a lot of these ideas wouldn't be as digestible.

03:26:00.000 So, thank you.

03:26:01.000 I really, really appreciate that, Joe.

03:26:04.000 And, I mean, as you know, the good you have done for humanity by opening this platform and being the guy you are, discussing all of these difficult issues with all the people you bring on,

03:26:21.000 it's really...

03:26:22.000 I'm proud to be your friend.

03:26:25.000 I'm proud to be yours as well.

03:26:26.000 Thank you.

03:26:27.000 Thank you.

03:26:27.000 All right.

03:26:28.000 Dark Horse podcast available everywhere until they pull it.

03:26:33.000 Sign up on Rumble and Locals.

03:26:36.000 Those are the least likely places for us to be remembered.

03:26:38.000 Beautiful.

03:26:39.000 All right.

03:26:39.000 Thank you.

03:26:40.000 Bye, everybody.

The Joe Rogan Experience - February 13, 2024

Joe Rogan Experience #2101 - Bret Weinstein

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript