From some bump income will look back pay there. We are like technologies, working sort of sort of Canada, everybody money it's time. It's time for coffee was got items yeah, it's the best time of the day every single time- and I met a secret location- I'll- tell you about that in a moment, but if you'd like to enjoy this episode of coffee was got atoms which remind me is the best part of the day. This right is

Thus part of the day and all you need to maximize it is a couple mugger glass, a tanker jealously they can t juggler flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your liquid. I like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dope and we do. The damn thing makes everything better than simultaneous happens now. Go. That's good! Well, let me tell you what's going on here, I Christine. I decided that. And I've been working hard been doing two or three jobs here every day since the pandemic locked up- and I thought damn it- I've got to get something like a little vacation baby at three days out of town and

so what we decided to do was we would go to the snow country decided to go to Kuba, specifically Park City now park City is a pretty cool place in the winter, is just beautiful, place restaurants and you can walk round, we found a place. We found a resort. There was in port city, perfect location for the winter, and we decided that the things we like would be a nice nice of you, you don't big Vista view, In the summer sweet I dont have a lot of luxury once in my life, but

once or twice a year I like to go to a place this way more expensive and nice than I would normally want to go to just because I, like the view, maybe if it's at Winterplace, I like the fireplace the snow, the walking great idea right. So the things didn't go exactly exactly, and so we got here yesterday and there's not much snow, so it says no destination without all the snow. But that's okay.

As I still like sitting by the fireplace with Christina looking at the view, and we also one of the main things: look: forests, twenty four hour room service, because I I might start work at four, a M Christine laxity dinner. Sometimes at midnight get a snack so as one of our main things twenty four hour, so we found the places in port city, they told us they have twenty four hour room service. We got in writing, so we we know and here's what happened. Let me show you. Let me show you my view so remember this is a very expensive luxury sweet. So I'm not going to tell you the name of the resort, because I don't think it's important

But here's my view: can you see that level is yet that's the view at night, because there are no lights or any kind of illumination outside the window, so from four p m to just about twenty minutes ago? That was the entire view, a little a little black window. Now you saved yourself. Oh course, everybody. You know if it

I am, of course, is not going to be of you. So I'll show you the view that I pay the enormous amount of money for here this severe. Can you see it is the side of a hell escape winter mountain with nothing else, but like dead brush, there's my view, so we didn't get the snow we wanted, but you know I can. I can put up with some inconveniences right. If we didn't get the view we wanted.

And really the main reason I would go to a place like this is for the view, but at least we get you know the fireplace well, when I say we got a fireplace, I don't mean an actual thing that had fire inside a building. It was more like a ornamental decoration in the side of a wall that, if you saw the photos of me on the website, it look like a fireplace, but it doesn't produce any fire rising like that is just the sort of decoration. So instead of watching the b, of course, no I'm my wonderful vista, while sitting by the fireplace I'm looking at a postage stamp of a health gape while sitting next to a thing that looks like a fireplace leave a photo, but isn't that's? Ok, because I'm not the kind of guy who complains because

slaughters we ve got each other and twenty four hour room service will make, will make something right. But they don't have twenty four hour room Service- turns out. They have room service Adams at nine thirty at night, which is approximately two hours before Christina, gets hungry, not ideal so we didn't get the food we wanted the view we wanted the fireplace and there's no much in the way of snow and snow country, but at least we're in park city and if you know about city

It's a pretty cool place. Now, when I say we're in park city, I mean that the website, where we found this resort- and this is very famous high end resort- said it's in park city, so we went there and what they meant. I guess we should have asked more questions when they say it's in park city. What they mean technically is nineteen MI from park City In a town I've never heard of so my idea of walking outside and walking through the beautiful parks, any its harder than it would be because I'd have to walk ninety miles to begin my walk in port city,

So who were rejected out in a few hours, so my three they vacation, probably the only double Uganda town in maybe six months or nine months. We basically my vacation is flying gear wearing a mask all day, not being able to breathe getting here. Looking at a postage stamp of a dark window, and then back home. So that's my vacation, but on the good side, it's also really expensive. So you got that enough about me. That's not why you came here. I just wanted you to feel the pain of being me for a moment. Really. I shouldn't complain. I mean the fact that I can get out of my house.

Some of the nation complaining Artless Ipod Georgia, the votes against the votes heavenly in Georgia? Here's my prediction: if it's true that the presidential race was stolen- and I would say, that's not proven- certainly not proven, But lots of delegations if the national election was stolen, then certainly the Senate elections will be stone. So if you see that Democrats win boss, it's I feel like. I have a lot of questions, so I don't think you can make a prediction about the air the way you normally would or you'd say? Who do, I think, gets the most votes? Does I don't think this one is about votes? If we ve learned anything, the will of the people has almost nothing

the new with an election. The things that matter what rule changes happened. What lawyers did what which courts said? What who got out the vote? Whose advertisement was the most cleverly misleading, so it's basically all bunch of tricks and legal stuff and lying and manipulation and fake news and collectively all of that mischief is who determines is present and who determines who senator. So. The idea that so we set has the coffee here Not good wishes consistent, and how would I know I haven't been able to order it. Seven using little will espresso thing in the room. Anyway, so we'll see what happens in Georgia, if it's true Democrats,

when I got questions did you did you hear about the Big Healthcare consortium that was? It was a concern where there are trying to figure out how to make health care costs lower, and it was Amazon and Berkshire. Hathaway J P Morgan got together. Will they just disbanded it so that whole

The whole thing that I thought I had great potential is likewise: if, if these three entities- Amazon, Berkshire J, P Morgan, if the three of those companies can figure out how to penetrate this health care costs problem and make us a better system, I mean, if they can do it, I don't think it can be done. So they disbanded turns out. We can't be done turns out. It can't be done at the reason that they gave is that, although they created a consortium in the in the most perfect Dilber world They decided not to work together after they created the consortium. So all three of them just went off and did their own thing and then they compare- and I said well we're doing this- we're doing that.

Really maroon same things, and so they just said: why are we a consortium we're not even like coordinating, so they just ass good? Now, here's the funny part about it. What is the single biggest? with fixing healthcare or you might say to yourself it's U money in bad Congress in all that, but I would say that the basic problem is complicated. that's the biggest problem as soon as you start digging into it? It just is just turtles. All the way down your endless complication so no matter how well meaning you are, and no matter how qualified you are, it's just impenetrable is just too big to complicated. So even if you could figure out what to do, how did you ever come?

the kid it imagine you're the smartest person in the world and you did figured out how to fix healthcare. Could you explain it anybody now, because a bit too complicated nobody would be able to understand much less vote out. It was less fix it. So, in order to fix this thing, which had a base problem of complexity, I should have seen this coming there. The solution to all this complexity was decree entity of three big corporations which little complicated, individual on top of having to work together, which is a little complex. on top of a complication, to solve a complicated situation. Can you imagine the meetings, the meetings, to be eight hours long just to get to the first

item on the list because of all the all the background context. Here's what you need to know who is doing what it's just impenetrable. So I'm not surprised that using complexity to try to simplify something, didn't work could be the Dilber cotton combat that maybe there will, there might be Fires, the most interesting question of a binding potential presidency. Why, I ask this before, but is endlessly fascinating to me, because there are some things you can predict and some things that justify prediction. So, what's going to happen with a Biden presidency which has as its one of its most whore basic components, one of the strongest part of we are one abide in view of the world is, is letting immigrants in and not putting Jensen gauges and.

You're being s open country, as we can to immigration. Now I think, People agree with the general concept that immigration is good. If you do it the right way, and nothing is good, if you do it the wrong way, are we all in the same page with that? If you do it, if you do immigration, good way, it's God, if you do it all wrong, not so good. is not. Immigration is good or bad. As you say, you do, and so what's gonna happen when the caravans who naturally will see weakness in Biden and they'll, say he's gonna, let us in weapons would all the caravan show up now. It's already started right, you're, seeing lots of them bunching at the border and border border security is doing what it can, but still a presidency of Trump. So today is still trumps people doing Trump stuff to keep the boy

to secure the weapons on day, one of violence. What is day one look like wooden every care of them in the world say. Well, I don't think we'll ever have a better time, so we should see massive caravans coming over as soon as the weather and then the inauguration of happened. He owes the weather's be good enough. I guess I would imagine the winters in a good time to do it. So maybe it's a perfect time to do. I don't know, but How do you see this going? Big limitless either two possibilities that I can see why. immigration grows and grows and grows and expands because nothing stopping it and it just gets out of control in one year and millions of people walk across the border less one way it could go, and that will be at least consistent with what Biden and the Democrats have been saying that you can't keep people

just because you ll be a meme. Is they have a reason to want to be here? That's good enough young exaggerating a little bit, but that would be the the Democrat compared to the republican system. This difference in possibility so what happens? Abided goes. The other way, Hey I'm no super progressive. We ve got ass a border security as he said things like that. What happens if he tries to stop it? How can I stop it without force or without building a border wall. What in the world is going to happen, because one of the things could happen is the complete destruction of the democratic Party. How many we put it into a formula is: is it not true? Wouldn't you say this is true. There is a number of immigrants who might come come across the border in a binding

administration some number would be ok, meaning that Biden would still be able to explain it away, even if it was big people than like. If there are complaining that still be, somebody can handle right and people are unhappy Well, it's lots of things, but there is a theoretical number of immigrants that makes the Democratic party disappear. Now, not in the sense that the people companies was wooden vote Democrat. But what would be the point of the party if they just open the borders? Could they ever get elected to get? So let me put it down to this. There is some number of immigrants with it is not up to us, if we're not tightly controlled, the border is up to the immigrants have many come. There is some number there will make voting Democrat ridiculous because, as some number destroys country, as some small

number it helps the country. Does everybody agrees that by the way is anybody would argue with the the general statement that there's I'm a man of immigration done right. That's absolutely good! For the country, I would say essential is beyond good. Immigration is essential. There's! No! I don't think you work around that if you want a good country, but there's something that would be too much. Does anybody disagree with that that there's some number that would be too much? Are we going to hit it the too much, and then why happens we'll find out?

there's a big story, that's just sort of the fun story about come. Let Us- and the story goes, that she allegedly plagiarized story that Martin Luther King told in Playboy interview in the sixties and the the version that I guess, Martin Luther King told was about some toddler. Candy kid be asked why I think was a she was marching in freedom thing It's just a little kid who doesn't know what they're doing the little kid said, something like freedom without knowing even had a pronounced. The word. The story was that she knew she needed it. The freedom is so basic that even the child knows they need it before they can even pronounced the word pretty good story, and then I guess come heiresses version. Is this

who was the girl and she was in a barge and she was asked why you're there and she said not feed them but freedom and that she completed the story. The same way. She couldn't say the word, but she already knew. Was essential now would you say that was plagiarism? Maybe here's my best guess since will never Exactly will never know if she read it. So the ethical does just use that here's. My guess. My guess is she read it once and then formed a false memory in which actually believe she's at it. So there maybe three different explorations one is she knew it was plagiarize.

Just like, I don't think us very likely actually, because who have just that wouldn't be enough benefit for the story. If you knew you stole it, just wouldn't be enough benefit, cost ratios there'd be a dumpling to do, and it could isn't. It was true that can you rule out the possibility that actually happened? Now you actually care rule out that possibly but it sounds a little too I'm an hour's right could happen. So I'd go with false memory. and one of the things that people don't realize the general public is what percentage of your memories are false. Let me ask you this: how any of your memories from let's say age I'll give in age from age, twenty and younger, So, however old you are now, if you're over twenty think about

Remember you heard from age twenty two, your first memory, what percentage of those would use air actual relatively accurate memories and what percentage of them, or some kind of weird mash up of fake memories? What you guess would you say, ten percent, fake memories and ninety percent? True, I don't love anybody. Nosey answer that my personal view, is informed by my hypnosis background. It, which is that is closer to more than fifty percent I say that more than fifty percent are false memories. I don't mean that you didn't that birthday and you didn't get their pony? You know some of those things so that the basics might be right but a whole bunch of the stuff about the context and the timing

who is actually there and what you said or who said what to all that's fake. So some Like ninety percent of your memories are artificial things that literally didn't happen that you remember as if they did happen that, like us at the big stuffed it Yeah, you re really had a. U really had a little brother, you really had a family, no less. So that's why they probably false memory. Not much of a story of freedom is a funny word. It makes a good me I'm seeing a lot of backwards. Thinking in the news. Here's what backwards thinking is forward. Thinking goes Thus I've got some data. I use my sense of reason to interpret the data and I come to a conclusion. That's forward thinking backwards. Thinking, as you start with a conclusion,

And then you figure out what your rationalization was to get there and then you cherry pick. The data to figure rationalization says backwards. Thinking the average person cannot tell the difference between forward thinking of course, thinking that's why you learn when you learn hypnosis first thing you learn, basically, is that the average person doesn't know when they're thinking forwards or backwards think about how big a problem that is recent kettle, looking articles that others are George, will article criticising TED crews and Republicans for challenging the election. Now the people are doing this and I will pick on George

will in particular, but anybody who sang that TED Cruz is violating his oath of office to serve the people or that he is assaulting the constitution by challenging this etc. Keep in mind, the only thing he asked for is a ten day audit, which is quite reasonable to ask for no matter what they find you, three that we'd like to be more confident the outcome, so TED crews. As asking this completely reasonable thing, can you look at the data and then look the data and use the reasoning and come to a conclusion. George will and others write articles and criticism with backwards. Thinking now what TED cruises doings forward thinking? He says we don't have enough data we'd like you to do not, then what data that will assign reason and then we'll have conclusions.

Critics say we already know it was a fair elections. They start with. The conclusion we note was fair. so therefore you must be crazy, that's the rationalization or you must be attacking the constitution or you must be some kind of a cold number for the president or your dumb. Those are the rationalizations thinking backwards and then you go back to the cherry pick data the cherry pick. Data is if there are less day twelve different accusations of election fraud. You pick six of them that boy were not real and you just talk about them. So that's backwards, thinking the complete cycle and you can see the difference right

now how many people would read an article by George will and realise that it was literally backwards. Thinking started with the conclusion and work backwards through the rationalization all the way to the cherry pick data, not many people. I would bet more than five out of a hundred would know that they had seen backwards thinking They would imagine they saw forward thinking, they will know the difference and thus scary, if you think about speaking that will get more about it. Sir, the Wall Street Journal says that the New York Stock Exchange decided, after deciding to DE lists, a number of chinese telecom companies because or two associated with. the Chinese Communist Party, you, therefore the military and because the telecom equipment can be used for spying

other reasons they want to be less than, but the real reason for realistic is that they don't follow the same reporting requirements is other companies, so that decision has been reversed according to the Wall Street Journal and that now they're not going to be listed after they got to get we talked about it now. I will say the Wall Street Journal, maybe not reporting the looms exactly the way that the facts would suggest. because what I read the actual article it didn't sound to me like the way to describe it, was that they had that how they say it basically reverse their decision. It sounds like what they're doing is still thinking about. And they just delay the decision. So I think that we don't know what the decision will be looked like they just said: wait a minute. We talk to some people. We have to hold off until we know, a little bit more so

another was reversed, might be just thinking about it because I think they probably want to do it. I hears everything is wrong with the news, and this applies to every topic in the news in politics anyway, probably science as well. It goes like this The New York Times as a story about a top election official in Georgia, who systematically debunked this. That's their own phrase. So from the New York Times they say that Gabriel Sterling Atop of election official in Georgia systematically debunked president charms. False claims of voter fraud in a news conference. So present drop on that call the got the audio that many of you heard, he was talking to the the officials at Georgia and he was telling them all of the allegations that he was aware of really some of them of election fraud.

And they listened some specifics now, they are time says that this official from Georgia held the noose conference and systematically debunk what the present. An alleged so or downright is there anything else to say the president made some planes. the official who is closest to the data news conference and one by one, he debunked the claims according to the New York Times, so so that's the news and now you're informed right. well there's one thing that the New York Times did not include the response to the DE bunks. Because do you think that when the debunking happened that the De Bunker listed everything

the president Said- or do you think maybe he debunked the ones that are easy to debunk and just maybe didn't mention the others. Do you think that could have happened? Did the? What did the New York Times report that when he debunked them, he debunked everything that the president said? I dont believe that they set everything. I believe that a list of the things they debunked, but wouldn't you want the story to say, and that is everything that the present an alleged. because I don't know if it was a few like they might have Jerry baked see the pattern yet start with a conclusion. good work backwards to the rationalization and then the last step of backwards. Thinking. You cherry pick the data, so you pick the ones you can debunk. Now I told you before this that I heard the president's allegations and even I knew that

the ones I heard were either mostly or all already falsified. oh, I didn't think there were necessarily real, but I also think that there are some strong claims still out there, and this is where I think the president is under served by his advisers feel like people are just afraid to tell him the truth. So, if here listening, Mr President, would you just insist they advisers tell you what these allegations yeah tell you that they ve been debunked. Or at least tell you that they ve been addressed, so you know what the other argument is. That doesn't mean debunked now. Actually, my next point what do you know in any topic is the following: things happened. Somebody makes a claim, and somebody else says this is my debunk of your claim and that's it.

And the two people never talker interact, there's a claim and then there's the debunking claim. What have you learned exactly? Nothing, no information. You have there, because if all you have as the claim in the counterclaim, you don't have anything you really have literally nothing, but your brain doesn't think so your brains as well. That's a lot Because you know your brain, does your brain says if you like the claim, the debunking is crazy. If you didn't like the claim that debunking sounds pretty pretty solid, doesn't it? So when you hear somebody debunk and then that's it, there's no there's no interplay, checking on people's assumptions and making sure you're talking about the same European fake news, so when the New York Times your paper of record tells you that the claims of

quote their actual language systematically debunked. That is not news. here's what news would have look like systematically addressed systematically responded to. right now, wouldn't you say that would be news, its news that the president may claim and here the claims and it will be new, who's that somebody who is close to the data addressed some of them? I dont know if those Oliver. Was it all. I don't think so some of the more addressed by just saying that didn't happen? Would you call that a debunk? Let me debunk the claim that, the Joe Biden was elected President watch me. Do it

with the same journalistic integrity as the New York Times and the same authority as the officials in Georgia. Here's my debunk didn't happen, didn't happen or we could now do happen. No, that's not new is that But he just says something didn't happen. would be, I made a claim. Somebody said it didn't happen. The person who made the claim Does here is wise and it happened and they talk about the evidence, its gooders bad. You talk about the context you make sure you're on the same page. I really talking about the same thing. Will then that would be news now, like the year that but here's a claim and here's the debunk that's propaganda. Let me say that again,

Any time you see the news and doesn't matter if us left, Lady NEWS or rightly news. If you see it's just a claim and debunk less propaganda every time just propaganda news would be more of a conversation. so here is on some of the debunks they offered and the ones that all agree with your number, the famous video of the worker in George, forget which county and the videos to show that there were sending people away, and then they took out the that the secret hidden ballots from under the table. There were in regular suitcases, pretty sketchy, regular suitcases. Why would you put a ballot and irregular suitcase course nothing like that happened. So when I watched when I wash The video and Sicily video you all watched. We

much the same. Video most of you said there. It is is right. There there's the front you, can see it with your own eyes and I it's the same, video and said nope, I don't see any of it, absolutely none of it. I see nothing there that even makes me a little sister Here was the explanation, the official explanation that the war I decided to quit counting for the night and they all decided to quit. I have but one it came down to the state that they were gonna quit counting state said you can't quit counting go back to work, because these need to be counted. Dont go home, so the people who thought they were acquitted, Accounting had already sent home the people who didn't need to do anything while the rest of them were cleaning up and then everybody else was gone. The news comes in or you gotta keep counting There were no observers, I'm telling you

There were no observers that all of the people thought that they were going to or go home. But before they all went home, the call came in to keep counting so Observers have gone home. The rest said all crap. We thought we were going home, but now we're gonna have to take. Those ballots that we had stored safely in official ballot boxes with the tape over it. So you know whether it's been opened and they put them under the tables. So probably part of the and they book of them out, and they were not regular suitcases. They were official Bela things I just happened to be. Unwilling is for that very thing, that's it you're lying. So he says you claimed. You said that initial story, you believed, was at the shredder left and the media followed the shutters laughed and the media fall outside the same thing. I'm sorry that a whole bunch of people left because they thought that

role there was done is different. the people were told to leave, and then they did that news people that they were done so they left. I think that's the same as what I said so accusing me lie there was think about a bus and pipe that was just maybe a toilet overflowed. That really happened, but it didn't have much of an impact on the counting wages delayed for a little while so here's the thing, stay state as an explanation, and they say that they reviewed the tape from beginning to end and there wasn't anything on their there wasn't exactly what they know is legitimate, except that by and when they thought they were all gonna go home, the observers in the press laughed and they didn't call them back then already gone on. So should those votes be counted if they were not observed, I think you'd make that you can make that argument. I think that would be a straw

argument actual, but that was the explanation given and what I saw on the video didn't look like anything except people. Just working Here's what also said there was no trouble counting by the reprocessing. If there had been, they would have picked it up in the the recount. And no problem with these so called pristine balance. The ballots are usually folded when their mailed but early or somebody cited a lot of balance that didn't have any folded which would suggest they were fake. But apparently, There are legitimate reasons why there are unfolded ballots. You don't need to know the details, but the effect. people say now there are both folded ones and unfolded ones the unfolded ones or because military,

a global was wrong size. They have to transfer it onto something else, does about the details, but there are unfolded balance that are normal. How about this renders so there's report that ballots were being sure but that was just not true. There was shredding, but it was the I guess, just the envelopes or something that does matter so that what they claim that wasn't falls. claims about lots of people using the same address why's that problem another issue where there is a problem that the implication is that lots of people at the same address is smoking gun for fake vote.

but apparently most of them are, let's say, there's a big apartment building, and so they just have the same, addresses justly apartments or other cases where I think homeless, people would use some homeless facility or some kind of place as a common address, because their homeless. Now I don't have a problem with a homeless person using a fake address, For their address, even if the law says they can't in my opinion, that would be one thing I wouldn't want the court either look at. Why can't a homeless person to vote? What? Why do you need an address like why I was a fair to homeless person. They should be able to just use any address. Involve these loans? Are real people real citizens, one? So here's my so. They are not saying that the explanations I'm giving you are accurate.

I'm saying that we have a situation or claims, there are counterclaims. I dont know if they addressed all the claims of the problem, but we can't which one is true. I would say in these cases the the debunks were alleged debunks sound stronger but there are some strong claims out there. The statistical claims are very strong, so the statistics claims essay. The US so there are happening or so remote that fraud had to have happened. But the problem is if you're the state and you are in charge of the election- and somebody comes to you with a statistical argument. What do you do about it? You are in charge of the election and somebody As these statistics show that there was a mischief where you can do a Rico. But what if the retail matches the original count, because I think that actually happened right, the least recounting

places. So if a badges and you're charge of the election, what the hell, are you gonna do so? I think the problem with these statistical arguments are then might be very persuasive to you in my purse, be persuasive to be but walk in phone chargers, elections do about that really throw out the election, because a statistic statisticians said it looked unlikely. Then you have the claim from bad Jovan, Hoddan Pulitzer he's the the technical guy that I talked about, and then people couldn't find the link to it. So I tweeted him again today, you ll find it in my twitter feed. If you want to find the technical PETE person who says that you can get into the voting systems, there are a number of different devices for

for I guess the accounting voting and stuff and southern there is now like there's one machine. It's like a connected machines, and he said that he can get into them and the wifi is open. The official, state responses. That is not so what are you now? So what is the news says claimed by a technical person that you can get into them and that he did? Then he did and he actually showed your screen print I can show you know the address the wife I was at the. I don't know what you call it, though the Wi Fi long code that shows he had access to it. I mean I'm, not I'm not technical enough I would note that proved anything, but certainly has something is willing to show everybody none of its secret. So so he's made a claim and he says I can show you that you can get into those systems and change votes. Here's my question with that

when a Rico, I guess I have a general question, which is how many claims of fraud of the various flavors of claims how many of them would be detected by recount. Verses, would they just be counting Bela's? They were legitimate and just counting at a second time, doesn't recount capture only some kinds of fraud, or does it capture everything that could be captured I would think it wouldn't capture all of them. Would it because. because if you read the new is it's almost as if when have a recount we're supposed to leave. The all fraud has been eliminated as a possibility. Does that not feel like what the news is telling you. That, if a recount that there is good the matches or close enough to the original vote, they say we did reach out. So very

but a recount is not exactly an audit. Isn't I'm saying that the comments right, on. It would be more comprehensive. I would think it ought. It would go, get all the way into the code of the voting machines and how their network and all that stuff. but, let's say here's ears about. I got this black hole of lack of knowledge. Suppose somebody hacked into the voting machines and changed the vote. Would it would a recount discover that because does and here's my question when you vote on the voting machine, Does it create a paper ballots or does it just go digitally all the way to the the final database, because if it goes digitally to the final database, then what good is counting ballots? That's just the the Mets. Right so so I feel like when

anybody says that things have been debunked. I dont know that everyone even looked into it. So the first trick of the fake news is: if there are twelve claims, the claimants of NATO. Gigantic mistake, because if you know you know if they make twelve claims. You're gonna have at least six that aren't true. So what are the p? on the other side, gonna say well, they're not going to address the six strong claims. They don't have to because they get to say what they say and then walk away. It's a press conference, there's no other expert at the press conference. They just get to say what they say and walk away: debunk six out of twelve and we're done so if you come with twelve claims Six of them are weak. You ve done a really bad job, the president, done a really bad job of persuasion really bad on the election fraud stuff, because

he's going with a laundry list filled with known pretty much debunk stuff. Even then, I would say, is a reasonably certainly debunked now does it matter how many things and lister debunked? Would that tell you that the twelve thing is not true? Nope, no correlation there could be a hundred things. Debunked doesn't mean hundred one is also not true. There's no correlation, I suppose it could be, but I pathetically there. So yeah. Recount is not a lot it so,

fake news, I believe, is creating a situation in which the under informed consumer, which is most consumers, will believe that the vote was audited. Slash recounted, which I dont believe, would be a true statement. There have been some recounts in some places, certainly not worded in there. All of the claims of fraud have been debunk, and that's just not true here. Here's a specific. From this Jovan Hutton, Pulitzer and Ivan see Lady debunk of added value, the the jury, guy who talked about it? You didn't, I didn't mention it, so President Trump was saying on his recorded phone call that he wasn't even talking about the dominion and software stuff cuz. He thought the ballot stuff was strong enough, but maybe not so we'll see all right.

there's a here's, a micro lesson. so I'm going to start a micro lesson and I'll probably ask my assistant to cut this piece out and put it on the locals platform. So if you like to see my micro lessons on everything from persuasion to improving your life, to understanding reality better and all that that's locals dot com subscription platform so sometimes when I do a longer periscope, but there's a lesson embedded in others, pick out the lesson so that you can just see, though, separately on locals. Here's a micro lesson on hypnosis, not haven't you hypnosis, put a specific question that people been asking me and the question is this Can you use hypnosis to get somebody to do something that they don't want to do? When I interviewed Nicky Klein, who was involved with the next year,

organization which the news, Gaza Cults, but that's an opinion, nata Nada, objective statement? When I was talking to her, I said during the interview that, in my opinion, you can't have it. You cannot hypnotized people to do things that they don't wanna do, meaning that are deeply against third Rio, ethical or, moreover, self interest and a lot of people disagreed induce a gentle, Eric hardly issue and L E. Why? If you wanna google him he's gotta, you too shell in which he meant he brings up. This point may talks about the different opinions from a couple of other professional card hypnotists. we say the opposite, that they say Oh you know, under the right circumstances, you can hypnotized people to do Pretty much everyone now why

But then I say you can't and two other professional hypnotists even more qualified than make because they do a private. Why would they say you can? But I say you get well the difference. As is more to do with definitions, then, with disagree about the facts. If you dog into each of the individual facts that the other two hypnotist claimed to be true, I will also agree their true, but whirling wearily differing on definition and here's. The problem, when you tell me, can you make somebody do something they don't want to do with hypnosis. I have limited my definition of hypnosis to a subject. a hypnotist who are trying to do the same thing. In other words, the subject once do less a conqueror of fear and the hypnotist wants to help them. Do that? That's your normal subject,

not just the situation now under this situation, by definition, the hypnotist is only doing things that the person wants. They want to get over the fear. So when I call it, hypnosis in a willing, a situation in which the subject- and they have noticed or going for the same objective. So it's more of a definition thing now. Could the hypnotist plant unwanted suggestions, guess somebody to do something that they didn't want to do yes, they could could. Could somebody was not a hypnotist uses, tools of persuasion, somebody to do something that they really didn't want to do? And the answer is yes,. in fact you see that happen every single day. That would be Because I must say, persuasion like you,

crime somebody and then they think they made up their own minds, but they don't know there were primed. That's the thing: it's a book, pre suasion about that of the written by. chill daily chill. Davy also wrote influence before he wrote. Pre suasion influence is exactly a book about how people are in and don't know that they didn't make up their own mind. So you can show that people think they're making up their own mind, but they're actually just influenced. So is that somebody make you somebody to do something they did. What to do about advertising about propaganda, about the fake news about selling about marketing of a negotiating every one of those things get you to do something you didn't want to do. Sir, if you ask me, can you makes but they do something you that they didn't want to do with hypnosis.

I say about just get rid of the word hypnosis: can you get people to do things they didn't want to do by talking to them or exposing them to stand. Patient the answer is tat. All of these things do advertising. Does it marketing negotiating Oliver? Let me make it even simpler. Let's say you planned to get some work done today and you're gonna work ardent day. gonna be a real good work day and your best friend calls you and says: hey is great Dave, you wanna Gulf and now I had today you play was gonna, be work. I knock Gulf gonna work and then your friend is like it's not gonna. Be this good every day. you could you could work tomorrow and that work will still be there and by the way you promised me that you're golf with me the next time it was a good day Finally, you say: let's just go Gulf, so

Is that an example of you been hypnotized to go gulf instead of work, and the answer is yes. Yes, it is, that is an example of you been hypnotized by you, wouldn't call it that use we use the tool, if hypnosis, which is directly asking for something, maybe you're, comparing it to something else. Using the the concept of shortage like I won't be. great days reciprocity. I did this favor fee. Why don't you go with me? Are you Imagine a whole bunch of techniques of hypnosis, but they're just conversation. you and your friend talking would ever say that your friend forced you to do something you didn't want to do, or would you

now I did what I want to do. I simply changed my mind about what it was. I wanted to do. That's probably how you would filter it. You'd say I just I did what I want to do. I just changed my mind about what I wanted to do, or did you because you wouldn't Change your mind: without their friend saying, and doing the right things that friend hypnotized you against your will. Because you're will was not to go golfing and you did so. This opens up an interesting question about free Well. I would say that as a person who does not believe that free will is a real thing is just an imaginary concept, We are, we are all just subject of physics and whatever inputs are happening in the chemistry of my brain,

It's only gonna go one way because physics doesn't have options. I mean in the sense that matters to this conversation so if my brain is gonna, do what my brain does and it gets one set of inputs to change. What I want. Would you say, I've done what I didn't want, or You just say I change what I wanted so when, looks as if I am disagreeing with those other cartoon. Sorry, other hypnotists, not really, and here's one difference. If you ask me. Could you get people to do something that they don't want to do? I might shade my answer so that you don't thank you and a little that is being ethical.

because I don't want to tell you what you really could do cause you might go, do it and it might not be for the better and better until the world, so I am not sure that it would be healthy for the world for hypnotists to say I can get people to do things. They don't want to do it's true, but you don't need any hidden hypnosis to do that. You just need persuasion that doesn't require a transfer. You know you're getting sleepier any that so there's my answer. If you don't believe in free will, the question is is useless anyway and if you believe that all forms of Paris, visions that can get people to change their mind about what they want. Some Dennis asked this question. So you're, ok with lying, did something like that.

Come out of my mouth was ok with live. I dont believe us at that. So there's your micro lesson hypnosis, Yes, somebody say in the commons re here TIM says: have I've been hypnotized? Listen. every morning? And the answer is yes unambiguously, yes,. and the simultaneous up is over And I think this is completely transparent, To tell you I'm doing it, I do it because it makes you addicted Gives you a visual and sensory trigger? So you remember You, like the last time, prime. She would like it this time if you like the beverage, I'm making you pair a beverage you like with some content the brands of a

emerge. So am I hypnotizing you to enjoy the simultaneous up? Yes, yes, but do you feel manipulated Or do you feel as if I make you do something you don't want to do, because if change your mind and then you do want to do it. What is that? Well, since I don't believe in free? Well, it's just what it is. It just is a thing that happened. That's all it is. All right, I believe I didn't have anything else to say we're gonna hear and thank you for listening, and I will talk to you tomorrow, periscopes off, just you and me here on, you for a moment we constantly reevaluated or decisions. That's right! So what happens? If you just change your mind,

How do you know why. Important thing that you ve seen in the last four years is to treat journalists as politicians as right, yeah there's it there's. No, there's not much real journalism anymore, Glenn Green! Does it, but I love you that load people doing the real stuff. Is body language the same as mind, reading, not not if as a scientific basis, and I think it does. comment in the crossfire about Lauren Southern Ireland watch that yet. all right. That's all I got for now I'll talk to you tomorrow. I got to travel, see you later.