But before we do that, how about a little simultaneous up anybody anybody after the simultaneous up? Yes, of course you are- and all you need- is a cover up under a glass at anchor Giles inside the canteen geography. Last a vessel netteke I'd feel it with favour lip, and I like coffee and joy free now for the unparalleled pleasure. It's called the dopamine hinder the day. Everybody say it, it's all about the simultaneous up. Undiscovered happened right now,. John John, is willing to pay me to watch the Doktor Malone Interview Pay me to watch the whole three. Our interview. Can we get a few seconds on that?

start a year ago, funding, although it would be interesting? Wouldn't it my god, I think we ve invented something here. I think you invented something an unjust repeating what you invented. How much would you like a go fund me to force public people consume the opposite opinion or out and then talk about it actually put a show on Let's talk about ideologues Zack I like the different idea, the so good it makes you get goosebumps. I just got goosebumps. That is such a good idea. Isn't isn't there a whole bunch of problem going on that you're sure somebody didn't see the other side. There's a reason: your begging me not begging, I'm sorry, that's a jerk off, The reason you are asking me and even willing

Money in some cases to watch that three our interview, as you say, that. Combining those two things would cause something good for the world right, or at least good, for your entertainment, which is good for the world too. That's really good, because I actually do think that, if you induced it is. I read a book I would really. I will actually go for that now. Each person's can have a different level of inducement. Maybe I'd need that money to go to charity or something something something to make it more fitting for people. My situation, but I would be, I would be absolutely influenced by them if you, You're wondering if I personally would change my behaviour of somebody's gotta. Go fuck me just to get me to consume some information. They think I need that would then therefore be useful for the public. I would do that or totally did a great idea

I think we invented something today. I'm gonna build on that idea, little bit as we go, but first Have you seen the video of China, publicly humiliating their citizens who violated cove and restrictions. I swear to God. It looks like a scene from game of thrones. You know what walk or shame for many of you have seen it all goes. sales, but apparently they make they do a big public event with lots of military people and then the the violators of their covered restrictions we're all white outfits and looks like they make them put a sign around their neck with a big photo on it and I don't know a photo. Is a picture of them or is it a picture of somebody like there would change the more than their own picture? I don't know exactly. I can tell from the

is it is their face because I think their actual faces covered with some kind of a mask. Each situation right guessing so they need to be able to. Therefore, faced with a mask, I guess that's why they do and How would you like that process and for I was- I listened to it, a better or worse than what Canada does cannon. We'll find you a thousand six thousand dollars according to visa? If you violate covert restrictions, which one would you prefer, would you rather pay Ellis taken average, you would you parent rather pay three or four thousand dollars? fine, oh it's! Rather whereas site around your neck, with your picture on they marched round by the chinese leaders, both pretty bad, I think I'd pay the money back.

your mileage might very aright we're talk about doctrine, reload and Joe Rogan. This will not be comfortable. I promise you will not be comfortable, ready and I'm gonna. Do it in the context of a lesson on cognitive dissonance have spotted. so you can see it in the wild but then also how to maybe defend against it. now I would say first, I do not have anything, call solid evidence that anybody can defend against cognitive dissonance. I don't think I can do it But I think maybe there are some tools you can use at least have a chance. but I don't know how you would measure such a thing to know if it was working- and I know the problem cognitive dissonance as if you're the one who's

sperience, yet you're, the only one who can tell you're the one who can tell that's the point, anytime, I am experiencing it by definition there is a good chance that you could see it in me, but I will argue like a wounded weasel that I'm not doing that all that's what it would look like. So if you want to know if I'm in cognitive dissonance, you look for look for the trigger first, but also ll, explain the trigger usually just means that I've done something you, The public, in my case, that would be at odds with who I think I have said I think I am as a person who is reasonable and rational, but if I were to be called out in public for doing something, the opposite very irrational, We're getting something really wrong, presumably myself. Image would now be unaware with what I actually did and then I would help,

Nathan. I didn't actually do anything like that. We hear about your interpretive that wrong So you can see the knee does. I would be paddling hard to convince. You happily, but I'll do the only one who can say it. It would be invisible to me. here are some suggested ways to get out of cognitive dissonance, at least maybe maybe that's the best I can give you on this topic is: maybe it will reduce the risk of being and cognitive. so I will and then I'm gonna die this to Doctor Malone Interview, Doktor blown off Joe Rogan Rogan. It's all good come together in ways that will make you very uncomfortable, so Here is the best I can offer you for a defence for yourself against cognitive dissonance number one do

do some would only take fifty minutes of your entire life Do some googling and learning what cognitive dissonance confirmation by us are now, argue that five years ago, a lot of you would know what those words meant. Am I right, but in the last five years. Almost all of us know what that means. It's a big deal now. I think that some of you have known what they meant forever. I understand that, but I'd safer. Maybe you love a solid third, the Publican, maybe half, maybe more there were learning about these things for the first time, usually under the Trump scenario? so. First of all know what they are. That's necessary for, if you don't know what they are you're, never going to defend against number two.

Practice being embarrassed in front of other people is probably the best advice I can give If I were wrong in front of you about something really big, could I survive it yeah, no problem, no problem because I've practiced for decades. Being criticized been wrong public having to deal with a big barest, I've given entire speeches would like broccoli at my teeth. I mean you name it if it's embarrassing. Oh I've done it. there's an embarrassing story that I desperately want to say tell in public and in Sunday will is something this more embarrassing than anything you any of you have ever been involved in Something happened to be personally Sunday. I'll tell you, though, story and I have to say,

I laughed all the way through it. It was the funniest day of my life. For most of you, it would have been the most embarrassing thing that has ever happened to Sunday. I'll tell you that but the only thing I'm offering is a practice in anything- makes you better on it. So if you can practise being embarrassed, In other words, put yourself in the situation where you're not good at something. Do something you're, not good at in front of other people. Do it alot watch what happens you just get used to it? you really do get used to the fact that other people's opinions are really just a cab reaction and the skull of a stranger once he has has a chemical reactions in their skull. While why should that bother me does that's all. It is my my sense of embarrassment. Shame is a reaction to some chemical reaction. Somebody's,

all. I don't even know them half the time so dont, let embarrassment body that would give you a defence against cognitive dissonance, create a track record of India. Mistakes. You dont want to be the person that they say you. ever say, you're wrong. I am one of those people, unfortunately, that one of the most common criticisms I get is people say you won't admit, you're wrong. Well, that's true when I'm, I dont have I'm wrong when I write- maybe I do admit it when I'm wrong, I wouldn't know: let's get rid of run for being an asshole goodbye wrong, Now, since I have created a track record in fact, wrote a whole book about all my mistake If I were to add another mistake in public, it would be. All percentage of all the mistakes I've admitted to in public.

little bit and vulnerable, and it's a little bit of protection not completely agree, getting triggered by. I have to defend my rightness. I don't feel As strongly as I used to it,. Ask me when I was sixteen years old. Do you think you can in that? You are wrong. Nope there's no way that's gonna happen, but at my current age, could I admit to you that I was wrong on something really big jacket I could get past, so I'm I'm a little bit of protection next route well get money This last think in terms of the odds, so never in terms of somebody is always true or always false. As soon as you, do that you're setting yourself up to be wrong, the answer is any those nuanced answers, so don't put yourself in the position where,

You said something that can't be estimated, as percent likely to happen. If it can't be estimated postmodern. Then, if you wrong, you like well, I thought it was a sixty percent. Chance would happen, but forty percent chance it doesn't happen, is pretty big. So it's not like I have to explore. So if I say there's a eighty percent chance suddenly happening in that it doesn't happen. Do I get cognitive dissonance, maybe but there's a less of a chance, because I said: there's a twenty percent chance. It'll go the other way and that's pretty bank. I recognise the triggers. This is most important one, and this will dovetail into the conversation about Doktor Malone on European. One of the best ways you can trigger. Somebody is by adding nuance into a conversation where people are taking only two sides: If the people imagine there to size and only two sides- and you know these people- I call them the binaries

The care really see anything but the two sides, and if you anything, that's a nuance or anything that doesnt conform to exactly one of the sides. The person whose binary will say well you're on the other side, because you didn't agreed. Everything I say so if you see a situation where the somebody's of binary truth is violated, they will be triggered into cognitive dissonance, that's what happened with both Doktor Malone, who was on the Joe Rogan Show, and with a tweet that I made now Joe Rogan now in the case of Doktor Malone Duck alone is a nuanced situation, because he's being an anti vex her that's what his critic say. At the same time, he is vaccinated. He is actually and he is an expert who worked to make vaccinations or other

He is the most lesson money guarantee absolute and that sentence it would be very difficult to make. An argument has actually anti of acts when he's vaccinated, his work to make vaccinations what he is. Someone who has a nuance. He is someone who says vaccination good in some situations. Perhaps we Be more reserved and other situations, that's a new US, it's not prove acts or anti vex, so that triggers people into cognitive dissonance. In this case it would be the people who are pro facts. So the pro facts people would be triggered by the fact that Doctor Malone is,

nuanced opinion everybody agree so far. You're always be so far. This is easy stuff, I'm going to get to the more challenging stuff in a minute. Okay, I'm seeing a no pain there, but only one so don't know what that's about. right now. I tweeted this morning something about Joe Rogan, which I was quite sure would trigger cognitive dissonance. Why because Joe Rogan is the ultimate. by very situation and you're gonna wreck as soon as I say it, you either. think Joe Rogan is a national treasure, and I do by the way I think he's a national treasure You think, he's right wing, arrow purveyor of misinformation,. seems to me that those two oppressions but I tweeted a nuance in which you can

Love Joe Rogan to the maximum amount and appreciate his talent stack, which is extraordinary one of the best talent stacks, meaning an assembly of talents. They work together. Well, Show me a better example. Best example of work ethic talons stack careers and then execution just about Eve Embassy, So I cannot say enough good things about Joe Rogan Anti Shell, which is wise, a gigantic phenomena. But let me give you some new ones. I'll. Give you an example of a kitten. Let's say at a kitten, tiny little cabin- and you say offices so and then the lookin, because it's just I clause you a little bit but does

We heard this is like little kitten clause ages of kittens take that take. That can often be leaving like a little there aren't. You don't feel it, but it's so cute. So cute you don't even mind. That's like it's getting males and stuff. You don't mind just inconvenient, so cute. Now. Imagine that you're kitten, was the size of a dinosaur, is still a kitten. But the size of a dinosaur, and now it can kill you does your opinion change, yes, And the only point is that the size of something completely changes one. It is obviously right. There is a difference between a raindrop. Hurry, you being stranded in the middle of the ocean, which probably tell you now, let's get to you, broken when Joe Rogan was a smaller show,

add. Some misinformation on there was a gas says, something that wasn't true. Does it matter not really because what is the smallest show? Its for entertainment is not changed in the world and anyway, it's just fun? People say Is it true? Some to talk about is not its again. This is the kid then. The Joe Rogan show turns into the biggest phenomenon in the world. Suddenly is the kinda turned into a dinosaur. Is everything the same now? If some misinformation, hypothetically there on the jargon show would you say doesn't matter since cute like a little, can take that little cabin boy in my hand, now Joe Rogan has now surpassed at least four people will lead right. I think

jargon- has surpassed the credibility of the major news organisations, true or false, true or false, Geronium is not only gigantic in terms of audience but has surpassed So far, the credibility of the major media publications. True I'm saying, altruism, locals you to be a little delay here. Would you agree that, therefore, the right people lean and most my audience does before us right, there's general river, that that is is far and away. More credible and one of the reasons is more credible and again, I'm gonna ask for a check on this. would you say that he's more credible because he has not intending to misleading, and we can read his mind,

but we see no evidence, I mean not that there is any intention, does anything but positive right hundred percent agreement. The percentage, I'm sick, that there is no sense, the money could buy him right. do you think money could buy Joe Rogan? Why do you think of Pharma Company cuz? They look. I know you're doing well, but I'll give you a half billion dollars to say our drugs are good. When you know they're, not you think Joe Rogan would take it. What do you think half a billion dollars to lie to you? You think you know we don't know right, yeah, that's it is the realm of anything is possible, but now. Now, you would not believe that for a second, because she's doing well, and why would he suddenly turned from a force of unambiguously good too, like the darkest evil that

what happened, but what would the newest do? That would any your news platforms or even social media. Would you trust them? Do not take a billion dollars to say something that wasn't exactly true or maybe, or maybe the emphasize something which ends up to say. Do you think the major platforms would turn out a billion dollars to say something? It wasn't exactly the best thing for the world. I don't know, but I wouldn't say, is the same standard like I I feel, really confident offer them. The would not take a giant bribed lie. I would not be confident even a little bit that a corporation wouldn't take money to shade the truth. So we have the situation where Joe, Rogan is to a large segment of the world, the most credible personally in the game or among the top.

So far, you with everybody so far. I guess this is set up for the cognitive dissonance I'm about to present to you. If all of US true- and you believe if I were to say something that violated everything that we both agree. It is true what would happen you would be triggered into cognitive, dissonance. So this is set up and I'll see if right now, because I'm going to read you a bunch of tells for cognitive dissonance and a little bit. but you're going to see them go by the screen to all right here. So I'm going to drop the trigger on, you some of you saw this already and where we all agree. Where seems like it? Basically commas, seems like it. The jargon is problem the most useful source of information we actually have in the United States.

We all agree that now here's the trigger. Joe Robins programme is ripping the country apart is one of the most destructive things I've ever seen in my life, and now I'm going to back it up is one of the most destructive things. I've ever seen as completely accidental as nothing to do Joe Rogan doing anything wrong. What happened was the show got big but stay the same There is the potential now that, if an you deal with me that this is hypothetical, so what work Next is not a criticism is hypothetical. What if Joe Rogan with all its credibility. Here's the person I can tell this is a joke.

The market traders coming in with the first tell he says, cognitive dissonance again: scatters jumped the shark, actually less indifferent common, but you see the guy cognitive dissonance So here is my argument. If we're why european is ripping the country apart, I remember now We in the binaries there's a binary that he's a force for good, that's just great and then, An area is spreading this information, I just one right in the middle I said he's one of the best things we have in the country complete respect, but he's also ripping the country apart accidentally. Here's a problem when you guess somebody with that level of credibility and they put one expert on. One of the experts say something goes wrong? What what's the outcome of that work

But an expert on a low credibility show and they said simply wrong. Maybe no big deal happens, if you put somebody into a three hour interview- and I pathetically we're not talking about any individual person by pathetically- what if that person says on them that was harmful to your health. how big problems, or one of you said, something the expert That was, would divide the country, the sky, having a Molly knew moment, nor them it so, Here's why Joe Rogan is destroying the country while at the same time being one of the best things we have in the country, and it goes like this. when you bought one rogue expert road, meaning doesn't agree with the main stream of anything

some topic anyway, if you put one Rogan, you are only misleading the public. That's the only thing that can come out of that, because You need the other side. Well, let me softened that if the experts had only things are true and good, that would be the best thing in the world. Can we agree on that issue Furthermore, an expert on who only said things that were true and good and useful, and you put it on the gigantic platform of Joe Rogan boost by the credibility that his platform has now been. So you the world right. But what, if and again this is hypothetical we're not yet talking about an individual. What people on somebody who says something really dangerous was the check and balance against that, while one check as you could go, do your own research right to see. If that expert was right,

does that work now I was rail against that. We think we can do our own. We think we can Our own resource boy and I'm just going down the trail of confirmation vice. If you do research you'll find out there. You are right all along and if I have the opposite opinion, I do my own research. What am I get it? you did your own researchers have that you are right all along. I did with you, and I do my own research. Is there any chance The on going to see the same thing you saw and then agree with you now both can do our own research and come to different conclusions. That's why do your own researchers is actually a joke for most of us. I was still say: do it right? Yo is better than not do. But you gotta mislead yourself a lot of times so be careful about that What do you do your own research? So Let me give you this proposition.

How many of you would say the hearing? One side of the argument is better than hearing two sides. Nobody right, nobody would say there right, there's nobody, nobody, not even. I think this is one thing you could say as an absolute they you can get away with. There would be no reasonable person. Who is it is better to your one side of an argument then too, who would ever say that nobody But the european model again didn't matter when it was a small show, but now really important when he shows one point of view, a lot of the country think there's a mistake. There like a big one, they could matter to people's health. That's a problem that is a big big problem and that's where we are right now and let's talk about doctors, and what you may have got right, what he may have got it wrong.

One of the things I hear from his supporters in the centres is that he is an expert, has lots of expertise and showed we should mention. So I was I did listen to the first arab forty, five minutes or an hour of the Euro can show I watched the rest of it. You don't have to pay me as I do plan to finish it, but I have enough now that I can. I can make my point. The doktor was asked, and I looked. I love this technique by the way, instead of Joe Rogan, introducing somebody I used the same technique. I s to introduce themselves gazelle. Tell you the things you need to know for the topic. So I'm doctor blown is asked for his expertise. Have you heard the list of Expertise has pretty damn oppressive right.

I mean just goes on and on about the trials he's run in the different degrees, his gun and the things is worked out and all my god, it's really impressive. So we can all agree on that right. That is that does all impressive? But what are the two things that he is? He is most being talked about. I would say the two things that have come out of the interview and since I have watched the three hours and how much is buried there, But in terms of the things that emerged out of it as the clips or the highlights, I would say two categories of emerge. One is: why did he get kicked off of twitter, so we got booted off it

and when they asked which tweet Joe of course, as the the smart question which tweet or tweets got you kicked off twitter. Do you not doktor Malone set said he didn't know. You didn't know now think that could be true, because I think twitter doesn't tell you specifically but Other people, no other people, believe that he got kicked off the twitter, not for something that happened within his expertise, but when he left his expertise and data analysis, because Madame analyzing, something that was within his expertise. Data analysis, I dont believe was part of his stated expertise So when he left his expertise to say The study is a good one or a bad one.

people that I rely on to tell me if a study is good or bad said no less about study, so you have the floor. Or actual experts, knowing whether a study looks legitimate just by even what they tell you about it. people were actually experts, and I don't have an indication that Doctor Malone is an expert on data analysis, but if it- but if you let me know, I would change my opinion if this but the people like say say: Andres back our use. You said my example lot when he looks at some of the things that command of some of the rope doctors. He may have a different opinion, so Twitter, presumably, and they get it. We need to learn. more about Twitter, presumably band him, because he he mentioned a study or a fact that other people say you're reading it wrong. Ok, so that the whole time

got kicked off, is something outside of his expertise. Who do who disagree with that. is the good doctor also an expert beyond beyond being an expert on the topic, so I'm a great his expert on the topic. Only data analysis as a field? I'm saying he didn't claim expertise right and Andrew s back ass could be wrong this well, that's great. So we're getting to the point where, if you have it, if you don't have to experts, you don't have much of anything The second thing you talked about this getting a lot of attention. Trending on twitter is best Formation psychosis- and he quotes echoed some experts on that now did doctor

Malone say that he is an expert in this field, the mass formation psychosis. I don't believe you, may they claim right. Can you actually? I don't think, there's a clean like that, so You have the good doctor who, within his area of expertise,. As far as I know, I don't have anything to disagree with him about designing, We have an example, because you ve seen more of it, but I'm not familiar. Everything anything. He said within his expertise that I disagree with. As you may see, the example that, if you know my opinion, says he is, I don't think we disagree now here made some speculation about why you got kicked off the twitter,

and although it doesnt have a specific SIRI about why it happened, he speculates that it might not be about just the accuracy of this information could be, maybe political. What do you think? Do you think that its political, why he's being taken on so good argued, right? I think you can argue that it looks political now, whether or not it's right or wrong can be separate argument from whether the reason is being taken off his political. I think we agree on that right. those who say- and I enjoy Rogan them? Doktor Malone would agree that free speech has do trump accuracy. Would you agree their free speech as a standard, is gotta be more important than accuracy, because we all get stuff wrong.

You want you want. You want a situation where free speech fixes the inaccuracy is right. She afraid to say something's wrong. Other people are free to correct you self protection system. So can we all agree that free speech as a standard these to be higher and more important than accuracy? I think I can get on it. so the agreement now how many of you would agree. There are limits to free speech now used, Example unto winner of yelling fire in a theater, and I guess her some history of that, makes it a bad example, but.

Can you say things that are clearly untrue? There would get the public damaged. For example, do you have the do? You have the freedom of speech to say you can cure your covered by drinking poison? The other freedom of speech. I shall I don't know, that's not even a rhetorical question. Do I do the frivolous page assailant expert to make it worse right. The Sailorman expert- and I say you now you should, this code, drink poison, does that allow courier covered, but you'll still be alive, of course, which is not true, do have the freedom of speech to do that. The bleach thing never happen.

A gala, complicated right. The most people were answered with the US and I would say yes, I do have a duet freedom, but Should the social media companies. Who are not exactly bound by the freedom of speech, second amendment that applies to the government not to private companies? Does a private corporation have an obligation to use them? s judgment, to get rid of something that so dangerous that lots of people would die from it. Does the social media platform have that obligation? They certainly have the power. and they certainly have the right degree of that right there, the power, because they do it And they have the right because they're, not a government organization, both the power and the right to do it should say so suppose, let's make it a little tougher for you,

so you could argue whether somebody's specific information was good or bad for the public. But let me let me make it harder for you. suppose you knew for sure that information would kill people and there would be no upside what if he knew for sure. What would you do that The year twitter, you see some information and comes from a top experts unless this is a hypothetical cause, nobody could know for sure. I think we can agree right. Nobody censure, but let's say hypothetically, you did know for sure it would kill people a lot of what do you do? What would you do? Let me ask you hear that c of Twitter and there's some information you can block or you could allow if you allow it you're sure, because this is a hypothetical you're sure a million people die. What do you do you see of twitter logo?

kill the million or save the million. You don't get to not answer. This question are really quiet on that question. Did you yes Now you killed the people already. Let him go lot. Some would say, save someone kill them. So I appreciate that there are free speech, absolutist. say they would let a million people. Innocent people die to preserve free speech now I agree that are designated that, but that's at least a credible opinion right. There's plenty rubbed disagree, but that is a fair opinions. because I always appreciate anybody who can say here's my cos. Here's the benefits and I chose. I chose ones

So the people say yeah I'd, let a million people die to preserve free speech. I I respect open, I disagree, but Affect the opinion, because you showed your work good, for you a new you stood behind it good for you. I don't believe you by the way I don't think a single one of you would make that choice if you are actually ceo, but for our- because today is a perfectly reasonable thing to say I just disagree I think. If any of us were in their position, we would save the million people. I think you say you wouldn't, and I totally respect why you say that totally respect them, but I don't believe it no way to know, but I don't believe so. Here's

this situation. I believe that doctor alone has presented information which is obviously misleading and dangerous. That's what Twitter would say when he kicked them off now. You could argue that, but do you? you that Twitter has the right and the responsibility and there aren't you glad you Didn'T- have to make the decision a lot of people are saved me, Scott. You are you defending Google and twitter. Now, that's cognitive dissonance, I'm just walking through it. You make your own decision was good or bad. I'm not even sure. I have an opinion what's good or bad, but you gotta do least look at it right. So there have been claims made a thorough, specific tweets from doktor below that are dangerously misleading,

there. That's why Twitter abandoned when Joe Rogan asked him what those were. He said he wasn't sure. Do you believe it do? You believe the doctor Malone doesn't know which of his tweets got him banned from twitter? Do you believe it? now, I'm say mostly asses locals about you. You too, believe me doesn't literally, doesn't know which ones where the problems, because remember. He got Lhasa replies, so he knows which ones had the factual problem right. So I'm gonna call bullshit and that I was either when doktor blows, as he doesn't know, which ones did it that might be technically true Billy. He doesn't have a confirmation, but he knows I would know

you and now do you think that you wouldn't know which one year tweets got you kicked off even now, though, I carried his wife, Right you, whoever said you're my dream, absolutely right, that's a good covered carried his mind, but you don't think he's aware of which factual data he got the push back from at exactly the time that twitter abandoned. I dont think too will be anything he would have heard of more than which of those tweets you get banned, for he knows now it is, I think, I'm gonna. I'm not gonna call me a liar because when you as he doesn't now? I think that's technically true. You know what I'm saying if Twitter hasn't confirmed that show he doesn't know. Buddy knows.

He knows anybody in this situation would now you could not know. How can you not know? Oh here's one year ago, boom boom so years, I'm gonna be calling on all the tell for cognitive dissonance. Here's one I've been waiting for, keep digging a whole for you. So that one and accept the EL, those cognitive dissonance, and nothing to do with a Greg or disagree with me. It's just the discomfort that I've I've shown you that it's not a binary if people are just floating around trying to figure out what to do now that they're confused I have no idea what Information Doctrine Malone put out there. That was the problem. I have seen things he put out there that were debunked in a way that I thought were just really obviously debunked.

But I could be wrong about the Devon. So here's the question and that and I guess they request it was a request to Joe Rogan in his current model, which is the evolved from the kitten to the the dinosaur his current model is damaging to the country is seriously damaging very damaging that the interview with Doktor Mccullough, I think, was pure damage to the country, pure damn I think the Doktor loan interview is pure damage pure damage because it lacks the counterpoint. Now, as I told you that Kyoto is darkest darkest before the dawn, and we can tell the difference between the Good NEWS and bad Joe Rogan? Is this close Ali do as I have a second person. Ideally, third and fourth person,

who were silent? Members did just fact check things. Yeah maybe give a note to the person as their going. So Maybe a couple of silent fact, checkers but George There is one invitation, meaning. The person on the other side, the open one. Indeed, asian away. From ruling the whole fucking world Joe. If you listen to this or anybody describes it to her so close Take it that there has been golden ring. This dangling right in front of you and maybe you have so many golden rings already that you can see this one, but the public is begging, you Eugene or begging you please, please, bring on the other side, because what is listening to anybody else? We don't trust anybody. We don't you the news on the left. We don't trust, Those on the right, sometimes if it does not agree with us without trust,

she'll media, but we do trust Joe Rogan. Am I wrong so close? just invite the other side? Oh my god,. I don't know how to understand. Well, I do you can overstate this, Organ is so close to them. I'm always saves the whole fuckin world and is killing me that that then it doesn't know there How close? So he is not only, in my opinion, a national treasure. But he is on,