Latest / Honey Badger Radio / E Jean Carroll Proves the Woman Card Always Wins, Taylor Swift Is Victimized by AI | HBR News 441

Transcript

E Jean Carroll Proves the Woman Card Always Wins, Taylor Swift Is Victimized by AI | HBR News 441 · Honey Badger Radio

• 0:03
  This is HBr News number four forty one. Egene Carol wins or proves the
• 0:08
  woman card always wins. Taylor Swift is victimized by AI. Where we discuss
• 0:13
  the news of the week and give it the Badger treatment. Hello everybody,
• 0:24
  and welcome to Honey Badger Radio. I hope you guys are doing well this
• 0:26
  week and that you're laughing in all of this episode of DC so that you
• 0:32
  are not consumed by it. Just fill in the middle somewhere, don't worry
• 0:35
  about it. I am joined by doctor Ryder mccam and Hannah Wallin, and
• 0:41
  we're going to be talking about the news of the week. It's going to
• 0:44
  be a good show, so please stick around and let us know what your
• 0:48
  thinking about what we discuss on today's show in the comments section. Today we're
• 0:53
  going to be talking about Oh no, I didn't change the oh crap.
• 0:57
  Okay, that's okay. I can do this. I can do this.
• 0:59
  Today we're going to be talking about the recent victory the defamation lawsuit against Donald
• 1:06
  Trump that e Gene Carroll has won. We're gonna be talking about a California
• 1:11
  woman who stabbed her boyfriend over one hundred times and that the fact that she
• 1:15
  is not facing any jail time, and also a fellow men's rights advocate that's
• 1:21
  been like involved for a long time, David matters Head, is now facing
• 1:27
  a well or well he was, he's facing a restraining order and some things
• 1:33
  about Taylor Swift that I think would well be things that I would normally not
• 1:38
  give a shit about, but here I am having to give a shit about
• 1:41
  it. So please stick around because it's gonna be a good time, and
• 1:45
  be sure to join us afterwards for the Patron Only show. So, speaking
• 1:49
  of Taylor Swift, the si op that she is, I got this article
• 1:53
  from our friend Arwa Madowie, who is at this point, I'm pretty sure
• 1:59
  she is an artificial intelligence that just writes articles every week, and she has
• 2:02
  an article in the week in Patriarchy entitled if anyone can get the US government
• 2:08
  to take deep fake porn seriously, it's Swifties. Their collective anger over AI
• 2:14
  generated sexually explicit images of Taylor Swift may help spur changes to federal law when
• 2:19
  it comes to deep fake porn. Apparently, that's that's that's the battle of
• 2:23
  our time, not the border, not Israel and Gaza, not you know,
• 2:29
  Taiwan, not Ukraine, Taylor Swift, deep fake AI porn. So
• 2:36
  if you convinced there's more AI on the Internet than they rock human based,
• 2:39
  I think everything might be an AI. I think the world really did end
• 2:45
  in twenty twelve and there are no humans left. We're all just AI generated.
• 2:49
  I'm AI generated? How do I know? I'm not? How do
• 2:52
  I know that you didn't come into exist as two seconds ago with our memories
• 2:53
  already like those? Fairly I saw Dark City for irowin Arwin Madawi. To
• 3:00
  be AI, doesn't she have to be at least a little intelligent? A
• 3:07
  little I no, just very She's definitely artificial. I don't know about the
• 3:13
  intelligence part. I'm not sure I can say that I've read her work.
• 3:19
  I just don't think I could say that. Well, if you are,
• 3:24
  if you want to know whether or not we are all artificial intelligences arguing with
• 3:30
  each other in our when we're actually just like brains and brain stems inside of
• 3:36
  jars on in a satellite that's circling the sun somewhere. Go do you have
• 3:42
  to join us in the Patron show? So to become a patron, Go
• 3:45
  to Feedbadgel dot com and set up a monthly subscription. Five bucks a month
• 3:47
  will get you into our discord will you'll be able to enjoy all of the
• 3:51
  additional content that we have, as well as lots of special community style events.
• 3:58
  There's you know, game nights, movie nights, lots of debates,
• 4:01
  discussions, and people trying to like, you know, support each other through
• 4:06
  these crazy times. I don't know how else to describe it. And we
• 4:12
  are still doing our monthly fundraiser. I really really am a little concerned about
• 4:16
  meeting the goal. I think we're gonna make it, but I don't know
• 4:19
  if you guys know. But on Sunday I was hosting a fundraiser and someone
• 4:26
  I don't know who got into my credit card or my bank account info and
• 4:30
  my wife's info somehow, and they ordered themselves a bunch of door dash like
• 4:35
  Red Lobster and Popeye's Chicken and McDonald's. So I'm glad they didn't spend everything
• 4:41
  we had, but we had to cancel our cards and now we can't actually
• 4:46
  access our money until we get new cards, which are going to come till
• 4:48
  next week. So I'm kind of hoping that we make this so that I
• 4:51
  can get it into my PayPal and use it get us things like food,
• 4:56
  water. So if you can help us get there, that would be great.
• 5:00
  I'd appreciate it. Go to feedbagel dot com forward slash support to help
• 5:04
  us out so we can keep bringing you this content and also like eat and
• 5:10
  sleep and have a shelter. So with all that out of the way,
• 5:14
  I think that that's Oh yeah, there's one more thing. If you don't
• 5:16
  want to wake up one morning to find that we've been needed from the mainstream
• 5:19
  Internet, mainstream Internet, please go to badgerfeed dot com as badgerfeed dot com
• 5:26
  that is where all of our content lives. All right, With all of
• 5:29
  that out of the way, we are now going to get into our story.
• 5:33
  So we're gonna this. I gotta share this with you guys. You
• 5:39
  can see it. So first we got a follow up and in case you
• 5:45
  don't know, Egen Carol, who is an author, artist and weirdo,
• 5:51
  won her case. So the jury in New York trial ordered former President Donald
• 5:57
  Trump to pay eighty three point three million dollars to eg and Carol for damaging
• 6:01
  her credibility when he called her a liar after she accused him of sexual assault.
• 6:08
  The jury awarded Carrol sixty five million dollars in punitive damages, eleven million
• 6:13
  dollars for the damage to her reputation, and an additional seven point three million
• 6:16
  dollars because why not cherry on top. This verdict comes after a judge rule
• 6:23
  that Trump had defamed Carol. By the way, by defame, it means
• 6:27
  that when he was asked whether or not he did he assaulted her, he
• 6:31
  said he didn't and wouldn't. So it's basically car like remember when Sargon like
• 6:39
  said I wouldn't even rape you to suggests Phillips, And this is that.
• 6:44
  This is that, except that she's actually accusing, right, And it's worse
• 6:47
  when you deny it. Apparently Sargon was lucky enough to when what's her face
• 6:53
  took him to court Phillips, No, oh, oh, I know who
• 6:59
  you're talking about. I don't remember her name though. Yeah. And she
• 7:01
  sucked up her case by going online and saying I'm going to ruin him,
• 7:05
  I'm going to take everything he has basically admitted in public that her motives were
• 7:11
  malicious, Yes, and that's why she lost her case. Well, that's
• 7:16
  what you get. And it was revealed at some point. I think during
• 7:23
  the trial that the motive behind this is to strip Donald Trump of as much
• 7:28
  money as possible to her. Oh yeah, of getting elected, which which
• 7:31
  should be at least grounds for a mistrial. But no, there's where I
• 7:36
  are. Well, we'll get to that. I have a few things to
• 7:41
  show regarding this this story. So, okay, Trump is expected to appeal.
• 7:47
  This is the second time he has been ordered to pay Carol. Last
• 7:50
  year, he was mandated to pay five million dollars for a separate instance of
• 7:54
  defamation. The Trump twenty twenty four campaign labeled the trial as a political weapon,
• 7:59
  said and Trump plans to appeal, stating he disagrees with both verdicts.
• 8:03
  This decision comes as Trump is facing multiple legal challenges, including a civil trial
• 8:07
  in New York that could result in him paying at least two hundred and fifty
• 8:11
  million dollars for fraudulent business practices. And I just want to okay, so
• 8:16
  Politico has their spin. I have this here. This is I'm gonna share
• 8:22
  this with you guys because we're going to add some more some more info here.
• 8:28
  So, Trump lawyer Alina Alina Haba demands details from judge on troubling allegations.
• 8:33
  He mentored Ejen Carroll's attorney, and let me play this clip. It's
• 8:39
  very it's very short, forty five seconds. Appeal. We will set aside
• 8:43
  that ridiculous jury. And I just want to remind you all of one thing.
• 8:46
  I will continue with President Trump's a fight for everybody's First Amendment right to
• 8:50
  speak. Everybody's a right to defend themselves when they are wrongfully accused and to
• 8:56
  be able to say I didn't do it, double and triple and quadruple down
• 9:01
  and say this is wrong, this is wrong. But we're in the state
• 9:05
  of New York. We're in a New York jury, and that is why
• 9:07
  we are seeing these witch hunts, these hoaxes as he calls them, And
• 9:11
  this is another one of them, be brought in New York in states where
• 9:16
  they know they will get juries like this. It will not deter us.
• 9:20
  We will keep fighting. And I assure you we didn't win today, but
• 9:24
  we will win, all right. And then I got one other thing I
• 9:28
  want to share. So Eging Carroll was on the It's at MSNBC. Oh
• 9:33
  god, yeah, this was I think this is just too good not to
• 9:37
  share, Okay, And they're talking about her victory or at least like,
• 9:41
  you know what the courts awarded now in case I should reiterate, like because
• 9:48
  some people might not have all the contexts eging. Carroll's allegations are decades old.
• 9:52
  There is zero evidence of any of it. And she as a human
• 10:00
  like actual human trash fire walking around on two legs, is constantly saying really
• 10:07
  stupid things and putting her foot in her mouth. And there's also conflict of
• 10:11
  interest with the judge, so there's like all kinds of brazen like in inaccuracies,
• 10:18
  and yet the judge is just like just ruled in her favor, right,
• 10:22
  So she they're they're celebrating a victory over here on MSNBC, and the
• 10:26
  mask slips again. I will play this clip for you guys. Are you
• 10:31
  guys sharing this? Am I sharing this video with you guys right now?
• 10:33
  Yes? Okay, all right, anyway, yeah, I know you've seen
• 10:37
  it. I figured you did, But okay, here we go. We
• 10:39
  would like to be a part of turning our eyes to the future and taking
• 10:46
  back our rights. She's talking about women, so she's making this about women.
• 10:52
  This is why I picked this story. It's one of the reasons.
• 10:56
  But this is like a like this, this is for women's rights. This
• 10:58
  is what Carol is saying. Okay, these are all women on the panel
• 11:03
  here. You've talked about using some of Trump's mind, well except for me,
• 11:07
  baby, Rachel, to help shore up women's rights. Do you know
• 11:11
  what that might be, what that might look less? Rachel? Yes,
• 11:16
  tell me I had such such great ideas for all the good I'm going to
• 11:22
  do with this money. First thing, Rachel, you and I aren go
• 11:26
  shopping to get completely new wardrobes, new shoes, motorcycle for crawling, new
• 11:31
  fishing rod for Robbie. Rachel, what do you want? Penthouse? Rachel?
• 11:37
  Penhouse? And France? You want France? You want to go in
• 11:41
  France? No, she's a dip shit, all right, that's a joke.
• 11:48
  That's not a joke. No, no, no, no, okay.
• 11:56
  So so that that's basically I just wanted to summarize this so you can
• 12:03
  see this is like the level of corruption we're dealing with. And yes,
• 12:07
  it's political, but but I think that there's a good case to be made
• 12:13
  as to why something like this works. And it's not just because Orange man.
• 12:18
  Okay, But anyway, I leave it to you. What are your
• 12:20
  thoughts on this story. It's yet another black pill prediction comes to fruition.
• 12:28
  Folks. We keep warning you that things are gonna get worse and worse,
• 12:31
  and lo and behold, things keep getting worse and worse. The rule of
• 12:35
  law is over. It's not just on its last legs. It's it's a
• 12:39
  distant memory of the past. In Britain and in Canada and in the USA,
• 12:43
  those who toe the line of the Uniparty can get away with anything.
• 12:48
  You can rig elections and start endless wars, you can genetically poison a billion
• 12:52
  people, and you'll be nothing but congratulated. But if you stand in the
• 12:56
  way of the Uniparty and its agenda, they will accuse you of a crime
• 13:01
  with no evidence, and then sue you for proclaiming your innocence and pay off
• 13:05
  the judge select a partisan jury. They still don't let you proclaim your innocence
• 13:11
  in the court, and then they charge you blatantly excessive fines in flagrant violation
• 13:16
  of the Eighth Amendment. By the way, any fine at all would be
• 13:20
  excessive in this case. In what way has Egen Carol had her reputation damaged
• 13:26
  at any point in these procedures. She was nothing before this happened, and
• 13:30
  she's a celebrity now being invited onto TV shows where she brags about how she's
• 13:35
  going to advance women's rise by buying racial meadow of fucking penthouse, and everyone
• 13:39
  just laughs about it isn't fraud hilarious? And then other shitheels in the MSM
• 13:50
  and even other shithill politicians like Romney will claim that a jury found you guilty
• 13:54
  of rape, which clearly didn't happen. A jury found Trump liar the defamation
• 14:01
  because he claimed he was innocent of a crime for which he has not been
• 14:03
  charged. But they'll call you a rapist anyway, and used can you sue
• 14:09
  them for saying that? Of course not, certainly, not New York.
• 14:13
  They'll just find another corrupt judge and another corrupt jury, and they'll charge you
• 14:16
  another eighty three million dollars for punitive damages against the people who actually defamed you.
• 14:24
  So yeah, I'm not saying all is lost. I'm not saying you
• 14:26
  should dene thow yourself from a high balcony. I'm just continually warning you not
• 14:33
  to delude yourself into thinking we're so back, we're so winning we're not.
• 14:37
  Everything has gone to shit and it keeps sinking further into the ship. And
• 14:43
  maybe I'm not necessarily helping by making all these accurate predictions. And I know
• 14:48
  for sure that all the false white pills are not They're not just not helping.
• 14:54
  They are actively detrimental because they give people false hope, which only results
• 15:00
  in true disappointment in the truth. Next time it looks like a bad thing
• 15:05
  might happen, right, prepare people for the bad thing happening. It's this
• 15:11
  false sense of security that gets people sideswiped and bitten in the ass by what
• 15:16
  can otherwise easily be predicted by this ongoing downward trend. Really, I would
• 15:22
  like white pillars and black pillars to live together in harmony, like ebony and
• 15:28
  ivory, if you will. I never ever hear white pillars repenting for all
• 15:35
  the false predictions they make. You let alone apologizing, never mind making amends.
• 15:41
  And I'm not saying you should just have some fucking humility. This is
• 15:46
  why the right wing keeps losing, and that's why the left wing keeps winning,
• 15:48
  because the right likes to make believe that they're winning no matter how much
• 15:52
  they lose, and the left likes to make believe that they're losing no matter
• 15:56
  how much they win. Mm hm, much like men and women respectively.
• 16:03
  As per Warren Farrell's famous quote, men's greatest weakness is their facade of strength,
• 16:08
  and women's greatest strength is their facade of weakness. And I don't expect
• 16:14
  women to snap out of this dynamic anytime soon, and I don't expect the
• 16:17
  left to snap out of it either. Why would they. It's the reason
• 16:21
  they keep winning, because it keeps them overcompensating for losses that never even happen.
• 16:26
  But please, men and right wingers, for the love of God,
• 16:30
  stop pretending you're winning. It's why you keep losing. Bite the fucking willet
• 16:37
  and at least entertain the notion that you are not invulnerable. On the contrary,
• 16:42
  you are far more vulnerable than the all powerful tyrants you insist on calling
• 16:48
  weak and pathetic. So that is you being weak and pathetic. I know
• 16:52
  you don't like the sound of it. It makes you feel bad, but
• 16:56
  fuck your feelings and the fuck up. So the clear and obvious truth.
• 17:00
  Please. I know you like to act as you don't like to act as
• 17:06
  though you're losing, but you have to because you are losing, so so
• 17:11
  am I. By the way, I'm not so are we? We a
• 17:14
  Honeybadger Radio have been on the business end of this void in the rule of
• 17:18
  law ever since twenty fifteen. And yeah, but it gives nobody gives a
• 17:22
  shit. Trust me, you don't want to be in the position where the
• 17:25
  courts will fuck you over and hang you out to dry and no one even
• 17:27
  gives a shit. But it's it's coming. It's coming right for you if
• 17:33
  you don't buck up your ideas. Buco oh y, that's all they go.
• 17:37
  Yeah, there are definitely some things that need to change in the way
• 17:42
  our legal system is run in the United States. And it's not just the
• 17:48
  things that we've talked about the issue of gendered do process rights, which is
• 17:53
  a big one, that's one of our huge issues that we talk about all
• 17:57
  the time, but we do also have an issue with judges being sort of
• 18:08
  unaccountable in general. Like it's very hard to hold a judge accountable for misconduct,
• 18:15
  and it's very hard to hold a prosecutor accountable for misconduct. You can
• 18:22
  embarrass them in public, but only if they're not sociopaths. If the judge
• 18:29
  or the prosecutor is a sociopath, or the lawyer for the other side is
• 18:33
  a sociopath. They don't care. If everybody knows that they did something completely
• 18:44
  unethical, they don't know, or they don't care. If everybody knows that
• 18:48
  they violated your rights, they don't care. If everybody knows that they broke
• 18:52
  the law, as long as they won, as long as they got what
• 18:56
  they wanted out of it. And in fact, if you know that they
• 19:02
  did all those things, if you know that they did something unethical, if
• 19:04
  you know that they broke the law, if they know you know that they
• 19:07
  violated your rights and got what they wanted and they don't face any repercussions for
• 19:14
  it, that's good for them in their their minds, because that shows how
• 19:18
  much power they have and makes you afraid of them. And that's that's basically
• 19:25
  the way the lower parts of our legal system are run. Every judge is
• 19:30
  a little dictator in the courtroom. And if the judge isn't dedicated, strongly
• 19:36
  dedicated to fairness and law and constitutional rights and you know, civil rights,
• 19:45
  human rights, all all of the things that should be first and foremost in
• 19:51
  a judge's mind. When hearing a case. Uh, then that's that's what
• 19:56
  happens. That's what ends up happening. That you get unfair ruling based on
• 20:00
  the judge's personal opinions and personal interests. And the only way to fix it
• 20:06
  is that people actually do have to start standing up in filing complaints, uh
• 20:11
  and taking the legal avenues that they have. Some judges are appointed and instead
• 20:19
  of elected, and some judges are elected, and there's problems with both ends
• 20:23
  of it. Judges who are are appointed often get appointed for life, and
• 20:32
  once they're appointed, difficult is hell to get rid of them. Judges who
• 20:37
  are elected, they're they're beholden to the public opinion. So if you can
• 20:44
  turn the public against a defendant, the judge is then pressured to to discriminate
• 20:52
  against that defendant, even if there's evidence that the defendant is innocent. So
• 20:56
  you have pressures on on both ends of it. And so the only way
• 21:03
  for us to get an actual means of getting judges to treat the public fairly
• 21:11
  is to give defendants to give people who have been in the courtroom, who
• 21:17
  have worked in the courtroom, people who have been part of the case.
• 21:22
  If you're mistreated in the context of the court case in the course of the
• 21:27
  hearing, and your civil rights are violated, you should not have a difficult
• 21:33
  path to accuse a judge of misconduct. It should be every bit as easy
• 21:42
  to accuse a judge of misconduct as it is to accuse your next door neighbor
• 21:48
  of violating the law. And the only the only fail safe against that that
• 21:55
  is necessary is the same laws that protect your abor against being falsely accused,
• 22:03
  which should be enforced. So if you lie, that should that should result
• 22:08
  in criminal charges. But that and judges aren't going to want to do that.
• 22:15
  Politicians aren't going to want to do that because if they corrupt a judge
• 22:19
  and then the judge gets removed because they were corrupt, then the politician looks
• 22:25
  bad. Right, So the only people that are going to be able to
• 22:27
  enforce this are you. You know, the public is going to have to
• 22:34
  campaign for changes, and this is going to have to be a catalyst.
• 22:41
  The other thing is, you know, men who are falsely accused of sexual
• 22:45
  misconduct from now on are going to have to not defend themselves publicly, but
• 22:52
  instead turn around and file defamation lawsuits against their accusers, like because it does
• 22:59
  just destroy your reputation. And if this is any precedent, just saying something
• 23:07
  bad about someone who uh you know, can turn around and say that their
• 23:12
  reputation was damaged is enough to qualify for defamation even if what you say is
• 23:21
  true. So obviously if it's if it's not true, that should that should
• 23:27
  make it h valid fodder for a lawsuit. So, you know, if
• 23:33
  you get if you'd accused of something that you didn't do and and your accuser
• 23:38
  takes it to police and takes it to court, sue, sue, do
• 23:44
  the ship out of her, you know, do do like Egen Carroll,
• 23:51
  try to destroy your accuser financially, and uh, if you get, if
• 23:56
  you get punished for that saying I'm just following the advice of Eging Carroll.
• 23:59
  Somebody says something bad about me and it's not true, I'm gonna sue.
• 24:03
  It's defamation. And in fact, you know, I mean Trump ought to
• 24:10
  turn around and sue her for for defamation. You know, he hasn't been
• 24:14
  found guilty of any crime, and she's running around telling everybody that he's he's
• 24:21
  a sexual harassmer or a rapist. You just know, like, yeah,
• 24:23
  she's she's she's she's far worse. Yeah, it's a it's a it's basically
• 24:29
  a great accusation. I mean obviously it doesn't have a leg to stand on.
• 24:33
  She literally like she like ripped her story out of an episode of Law
• 24:37
  and Order. Like it's like word for word, like it's uh, you
• 24:41
  know, everyone but the but the damage is done. So the low information
• 24:48
  nor me is going to see what the news tells them and they're just gonna
• 24:51
  believe it. And this is the problem. This is like each and Carroll
• 24:56
  is not even a high value woman, Like she is like old way passer
• 25:02
  prime, a little crazy drunk and like you know, a degenerate basically,
• 25:07
  And she makes allegations half baked. She needs like a whole supporting cast of
• 25:15
  people to reinforce it. And yet normal people will watch it and say,
• 25:18
  yes, this is what Trump is because the media won't give them another thing.
• 25:22
  They don't believe her, They don't believe what they are telling you.
• 25:26
  When you run into people who say Trump is a rapist, they don't say
• 25:30
  it because they think Trump is a rapist. They say it because they are
• 25:33
  on team Democrat and that is the only thing they have they know, or
• 25:40
  just anti Trump you don't even have to be on team Demi. There are
• 25:42
  people that are just anti Trump, but they know that that's not true.
• 25:47
  They know when these allegations are bullshit. They know they are spouting bullshit.
• 25:52
  Right. They knew with every single false accuser that has come against him,
• 25:57
  They knew with the false secure users that went against Kavanaugh. Right. They
• 26:03
  know that they are lying. They just don't have anything else. Yeah,
• 26:11
  No, I know that's for some people. That's true. I think there's
• 26:15
  a nucleus, as with all these things, there's a nucleus of people who
• 26:19
  know they're lying, but they're surrounded by by this impenetrable cell matter of people,
• 26:26
  of people who actually believe the lie. Even if it's even if it
• 26:29
  started with the lie, they make themselves believe it. It's it's even the
• 26:33
  nucleus. It's the nature of a pathological lie is more often than not,
• 26:37
  they make themselves believe it. Yeah, there were, there were. They
• 26:41
  know it's not true, Yeah, but there was. I know, I
• 26:45
  understand what you're saying, but I think that people do. They will say,
• 26:48
  you know, maybe it didn't happen, but it probably could have happened.
• 26:52
  Therefore it happened like they. I've heard feminists make this argument many times.
• 26:57
  You know, we'll make the arguments. There's a there's a difference between
• 27:00
  making an argument and knowing something it is true. And this is something that
• 27:03
  I've seen in American politics in particular. I don't know that it so much
• 27:10
  happens in other countries. It probably does, Oh yeah, I'm sure it
• 27:14
  does. It doesn't. The truth doesn't matter to people who feel like they
• 27:22
  they are supporting the greater good. It's the truth doesn't matter to the people
• 27:29
  who will beat you to death for your own good. Right. The truth
• 27:32
  doesn't matter to people who will drown you for your own good, who will
• 27:37
  break your legs so that you can't get outside and hurt yourself. Right,
• 27:41
  those are the people that we're dealing with. They don't care what he actually
• 27:47
  did or did not do. They don't care if it's true or not.
• 27:49
  They don't care if there's a thousand lies that they have to tell. They
• 27:56
  all know they're lying. Not just the media. I'm talking about the everyday
• 28:02
  average, like your neighbor, your family member, your friends that do this.
• 28:10
  They know that they're lying to you, They know that they're lying to
• 28:14
  themselves. They see the information that contradicts their narrative, and they deliberately you
• 28:19
  can watch them scramble in fear for a way to reframe it to win the
• 28:26
  argument. And it's not about being right, and it's not about the truth.
• 28:30
  It's about winning the argument. It's and it's not. This is why
• 28:37
  they're always angry right, because they know that they are backing a lie and
• 28:45
  they know they are promoting lise. And when you have that cognitive dissonance where
• 28:51
  you know that everything you stand for is false, and everything that you're promoting
• 28:56
  is false, everything that you're you're standing on is wrong, you can't be
• 29:03
  happy. It's true misery. I have family members that do this. You
• 29:08
  probably do too. Listening does I guarantee you, And they know in their
• 29:15
  hearts, they know, in the depths of their minds it's not that far
• 29:18
  off from the surface. And they will get angry with you when you give
• 29:22
  them information that they cannot tear down or they cannot break off, they cannot
• 29:30
  undo right. They'll get angry with you for that. And it is actually
• 29:37
  going to take psychological injury from change is taking place, Like people are going
• 29:48
  to have to have an actual crisis of conscious in them in themselves to change
• 29:55
  this. And I've seen that happen in my family too, and it's a
• 29:59
  it's an unusual person who doesn't take the hard road that to that where they
• 30:06
  have to have so much in their face that it strips them down to nothing.
• 30:11
  And that little tiny person inside who's been going this is a lie.
• 30:15
  Why am I saying this? Why do I believe this? Why am I
• 30:18
  so angry all the time? Is all that's left that It takes a very
• 30:23
  unusual person that to not get to that point. And I watched my parents
• 30:30
  go through a much less dramatic version of that between nineteen eighty and nineteen eighty
• 30:38
  four. I was a little kid, so I didn't understand a lot of
• 30:41
  it, but they were terrified when Ronald Reagan got elected the first time.
• 30:48
  It was the end of the world. We were going to have a nuclear
• 30:49
  war. We didn't have a bomb shelter. They were figuring out, you
• 30:55
  know, what are we gonna do. I were going to prepare the basement.
• 30:56
  We have a dark room. We had a dark room in the house.
• 31:00
  And you know they were they stocked up food to a degree like preppers
• 31:07
  for almost the rest of their lives after that, but as a habit because
• 31:11
  they had started doing it then, and within a couple of years they were
• 31:18
  going everything we thought was going to happen, the opposite happened. Everything that
• 31:23
  you know. Obviously they didn't have the opposite of nuclear warrior, like it
• 31:30
  took a while before the Soviet Union crumbled. But every prediction that was made
• 31:40
  that they were afraid of just turned out to be catastrophically wrong in terms of
• 31:48
  their political beliefs, and by nineteen eighty four they were Republicans. Like now,
• 31:56
  they went from one side of the uniparty to the other. But they
• 31:59
  figured things out, and so I know that it can happen. It didn't
• 32:05
  didn't work on my grandpa, Like he was angry and he was he never
• 32:08
  stopped being angry about politics. He was angry about politics when he was ninety
• 32:14
  five years old and passed away at ninety five. Like, so some people
• 32:21
  don't some people never figure it out. Yeah, but it is. It
• 32:27
  takes a crisis of conscience where you have to first you confront that everything you
• 32:32
  were expecting to happen turned out to be wrong, and then you have to
• 32:38
  confront that you've been voting based on false information for your whole life. And
• 32:44
  it's tough, and you you have to you have to be able to you
• 32:52
  have to be able to be tough. And there's a lot of people that
• 32:55
  have done it with Trump. There's a lot of people that did it with
• 32:58
  Reagan. And I think that if he gets the second term, if Trump
• 33:01
  gets a second term, there will be more people that this will happen with.
• 33:09
  So well, I want to give my chance to say something, and
• 33:14
  then I want to give my final thoughts on this, But go ahead,
• 33:15
  Mike. Yeah. On the on the subject of deliberate lying, who's talking
• 33:20
  about a similar thing went on, and I guess still goes on. On
• 33:23
  the subject of giving children a certain jab. The initial argument is, all
• 33:31
  right, the children don't get sick from the disease, but they can transmit
• 33:37
  the disease, so we need to give them the job anyway. And because
• 33:42
  they're not used to talking to someone who doesn't go along with the lies,
• 33:45
  you then say, right, but the job doesn't prevent transmission. And then
• 33:52
  and then you watch their faces go blank, as the cogs in their mind
• 33:54
  go and they go, what, No, I guess, I guess it
• 34:00
  doesn't prevent transmission, but they still need it because they can get sick from
• 34:04
  it. But you just just said that they don't. So they just flip
• 34:09
  from one lie to another because they weren't prepared for a conversation with them.
• 34:15
  He doesn't go along with the lies, and it's angered and anger doesn't come
• 34:20
  into it. That they're just confused, that they're just trying to make sure
• 34:25
  everyone gets this job, and they don't. I don't think they even know
• 34:30
  they're lying. They obviously are lying. They're deliberately saying things that they that
• 34:37
  they know are not true, but they don't see it as lying. They
• 34:43
  see it as the ends justify the means, the greater good. Yeah,
• 34:46
  yeah, lying. And that's why I say, when they think they're supporting
• 34:50
  the greater, greater good, they will lie about anything, and they will
• 34:53
  they will not admit. They will think that lie is part of a larger
• 34:59
  truth. But I I okay, And a person that will not that will
• 35:04
  not get into a loop of self contradiction and think that that winds you the
• 35:07
  argument, Yeah, well, you need you need to like let your ego
• 35:10
  die and embrace some humility. So the one thing I will say about this
• 35:15
  is that this is. This is psychological torture. This is not just about
• 35:20
  trying to keep Trump occupied. It's not just about destroying his reputation. It's
• 35:25
  not just about trying to drain him of money so that he can't campaign.
• 35:30
  All of those things are true, but it's it is also about damaging his
• 35:36
  psyche when a man. This is something that people need to understand. There
• 35:38
  is no man on earth that is not affected by false accusations. And even
• 35:45
  if there they know for a fact that they didn't do it, it affects
• 35:50
  the way everyone acts around them. Unless Trump is surrounded by the most committed
• 35:55
  people there's there, it's going to eat away to him in the same way
• 36:00
  that it did to Kavanaugh, in the same way it did to Johnny Depp,
• 36:02
  and in the same way that it does to any man, any normal
• 36:06
  man who faces that. Mark Pearson didn't even touch that woman and it was
• 36:12
  torture for him. So this is something that we have to also understand.
• 36:16
  Okay, I know that some people don't like Trump. I don't give a
• 36:21
  fuck what you think about him. This is a person that has been falsely
• 36:23
  accused and the people are are jeering and smiling and laughing and joking about it.
• 36:30
  They are happy about it. This is the kind of shit women can
• 36:34
  do to men. They can do this. It doesn't matter how powerful you
• 36:37
  are. It doesn't matter if you're Johnny Depp. It doesn't matter if you're
• 36:40
  Donald Trump. It doesn't matter if you're Brett Kavanaugh. It doesn't matter.
• 36:44
  They can do this to you. And there will be people that are willing
• 36:46
  to come out of the woodwork to support them doing this to you. So
• 36:51
  and I don't think the illegal system can even help because the judges, like
• 36:55
  the judge in this case, she had a close like there was a conflict
• 37:00
  of interest between her and Egen Carroll, which is why she because this wasn't
• 37:06
  like a case with a jury, This was a judge, and the judge
• 37:07
  voted in favor or she ruled in favor of Egen Carrol. Because there is
• 37:12
  a conflict of interest there, and they don't care. They're doing it brazenly
• 37:15
  in the open. And I think that this is a point that can't be
• 37:21
  driven home hard enough. In a way, you could argue that this is
• 37:24
  what happens when you put women in positions of power over people without any recognition
• 37:32
  of their agency, of the fact that they could use it for corrupt purposes,
• 37:37
  and they're doing that. And the other thing I want to say about
• 37:42
  this is that I would suggest, or I would say that the only way
• 37:47
  to fight against this is to not be overly optimistic, but vigilant, vigilant,
• 37:54
  vigilant, vigilant, and make sure that people know and support anyone one
• 38:00
  who is facing this stuff, even if you disagree with them politically. So
• 38:04
  I'm sorry, but I am done dealing with people who have problems with Trump.
• 38:07
  I don't even want to hear anybody say I'm not a big fan.
• 38:10
  I don't want to hear that shit. This guy is getting dragged through the
• 38:14
  mud in every possible He might even end up being assassinated. Not kidding,
• 38:20
  I don't want to hear that. All I want is this is unjust.
• 38:22
  Something has to be done. That's it. That's my position. No more
• 38:27
  of this pussy footing around, No more of this. If I like that
• 38:30
  guy, somebody might know fuck that this is wrong. This shouldn't happen.
• 38:35
  Egen Carroll should be in prison. She should be in prison, and he
• 38:38
  is gonna fight and he can, he can go after her for money or
• 38:43
  whatever. I understand that there was a I saw just as a little bit
• 38:46
  of a of a silver lining. I watched a clip from another podcast where
• 38:52
  there are these like financial experts, like they're like, you know, big
• 38:55
  Wall Street guys. They know about investing, they know about legal stuff,
• 39:00
  and they're talking about this Eging Carroll thing, and one guy said that Trump
• 39:05
  is going to file for appeal eging Carroll is not going to be able to
• 39:08
  afford. He's basically going to be able to spend more money on on fees
• 39:16
  than she can, and he's not going to give her a cent of that
• 39:20
  money. And so it's it's in a way, this could be just another
• 39:23
  headline, like they're doing this for the headline. Oh look Trump lost this
• 39:28
  suit. Oh look Trump is broke. Oh look right, this guy,
• 39:30
  he's no longer viable. This is all part of that big it's a big
• 39:35
  gas lighting thing. So that you you because this is the main point of
• 39:38
  this is to demoralize regular Americans that are are you know, would support anything
• 39:45
  other than what we have now. They want regular gas prices, they don't
• 39:49
  want foreign wars being fought all over the globe. They want the border clothes.
• 39:52
  These are not right wing things. This is common sense, shit common
• 39:57
  sense, And the only part that's proposing that as this guy and they want
• 40:01
  to stop him. What does that tell you about these people? So yeah,
• 40:06
  let's stop, let's just stop and support the guy because what's happening is
• 40:09
  on just period, full stop, point blank. That's it. That's all
• 40:14
  I got, all right, thank you, No one thing. Yeah,
• 40:19
  if you are a human rights activist of any type, men's rights, women's
• 40:23
  rights, you know, racial issues, poverty issues, anything, then the
• 40:31
  fact that you like or don't like someone cannot be a factor. And whether
• 40:37
  you care about an injustice happening to them or how you judge that injustice,
• 40:43
  right, a cult of personality, a negative cult personality. If you judge
• 40:50
  a situation based on how you like someone, and it's it's a human rights
• 40:57
  situation or a civil rights situation, do process, fair treatment in court,
• 41:02
  discrimination and employment, anything along those lines. Being able to vote when when
• 41:09
  you have the right to vote, and so on. And you say,
• 41:13
  well, I don't like this person or this group of people, and therefore
• 41:19
  you know that that takes that alone, takes away my consideration for their rights,
• 41:27
  then you are one of the bad guys, right, You're one of
• 41:30
  the people who would have supported the the halobindor you're one of the people that
• 41:37
  would have supported the Holocaust, you or at least stood by whipped and didn't
• 41:42
  say anything, would have supported Right, if you can be okay with human
• 41:50
  rights violations and civil rights violations because you don't like someone, you are one
• 41:55
  of the people who would have supported every atrocity throughout history that has been committed
• 42:01
  by totalitarian governments. This is the thing that allows them to happen. Yeah,
• 42:09
  the public deciding that, well it's okay to do bad things, to
• 42:15
  do cruel things, to do human rights violating things to this person or this
• 42:22
  group of people because we don't like them. Yep, Okay, I'm want
• 42:30
  to read some super childs. That was kind of the main story, although
• 42:32
  I do want to talk about Taylor Swift later. But let's look at the
• 42:37
  superchilds and then move on to the next one. But thank you for your
• 42:40
  thoughts and I look forward to you guys's comments. Richard Bierre gets us five
• 42:45
  bucks and says was wondering just quickly she's would wind up broke after such a
• 42:50
  windfall. Well, she's not going to get the money though, So like
• 42:52
  when you're awarded money. It's not like there's a check waiting outside the court
• 42:57
  house. Did I just say, don't fucking wipe people? No? No,
• 43:00
  I'm just saying, like, I think that he can. I think
• 43:04
  that he can make her spend money faster than she gets it. But we
• 43:07
  will see. I'm not I'm not pushing the white pill, but I'm asking
• 43:13
  people to be to be vigilant. That could just steal eighty three million dollars
• 43:16
  from his account. Yeah, or George Soros can sign a check, I
• 43:20
  know, but say there is some evidence, Yeah, they can get financiers
• 43:23
  and shit's involved. I know there is some evidence to her lawsuit is already
• 43:28
  being funded by probably political pundit. I mean, I don't think she has
• 43:32
  the wherewithal to know what the hell day it is. Okay, So,
• 43:37
  anyway, have you heard about that woman who stole a hundred million dollars from
• 43:40
  the US Army? By any chance, apparently even a criminal conviction wouldn't disqualify
• 43:45
  her from receiving her government employee pension. But the Facebook thief has been upstaged
• 43:51
  though. I remember reading about that a little bit, but it didn't it
• 43:54
  didn't stay in my psyche because I have other things on my mind. And
• 43:58
  then Richard gives another five. Huh, it kind of disappeared from the news
• 44:02
  cycle. Really cool. Yeah, I remember it briefly, popping like fish.
• 44:07
  Yeah. And Richard Beer gives another five and says, isn't this similar
• 44:12
  to the evidentiary standards of the Salem witch trials? I bet that those actually
• 44:15
  had much higher standards. I bet I bet they did pinpricks and stuff that
• 44:23
  you know, at least there was something injury. This other person must have
• 44:28
  caused it. With defamation, you just have to say, and especially with
• 44:34
  harassment, you just have to say you were injured. You just have to
• 44:37
  say that you were in fear. This person's got to watch law and order.
• 44:42
  Yeah. Richard beerre gives us another five and says, do you remember,
• 44:47
  oh shit, do you remember doing the exercise where you were supposed to
• 44:52
  choose who you were going to allow into the bomb shelter because of miscalculation resulted
• 44:57
  in the shelter being able to support half of the protective population, and you
• 45:00
  to choose who would be allowed in and who would be rejected for entry.
• 45:04
  No, I'm I'm not aware of this hypothetical. Not do that at my
• 45:08
  school. I remember hearing about that. It's one of those things that a
• 45:14
  lot of parents got very upset that students were asked that, And really it's
• 45:20
  not something that you should inflict on kids anyway. But you know, it's
• 45:24
  one of those things that as adults, you know, you think about stuff
• 45:28
  like that because you just do. But it's like the trolley problem. Yeah,
• 45:34
  you don't. You don't ask kids to decide life or death questions like
• 45:38
  that. It's just not something. It's abusive to ask kids to to to
• 45:44
  make decisions like that. You give them nightmares for the rest of their lives.
• 45:50
  Yep, Okay, I got one last super chat a super child and
• 45:54
  this is a big one. Tell them. Nar gives us one hundred I
• 45:58
  think, is that? Is that to the fundraiser because that's massive, So
• 46:01
  thank you so so much, Osh, and he says for that, Hello
• 46:10
  to the good doctor. I am sending this message to compliment you on your
• 46:14
  work as an artist. And I do mean work. I have some idea
• 46:16
  of how much you know, I have a PayPal of my own you could
• 46:20
  have sent Yeah, you could just send it to Mike directly. I want
• 46:23
  the HPO fundraiser to do well. I need these people. But if you
• 46:30
  like Mike, you should help him. I have some idea of how much
• 46:35
  effort it takes to create the sorts of things you do. I am also
• 46:37
  glad to see that you are becoming more confident on streams rather from a cautious
• 46:42
  beginning. For anyone who is not familiar with his work, I recommend Gender
• 46:45
  Gender Gender. On his YouTube channel. It is six years old, but
• 46:49
  still very topical. Actually, all those songs are still great. I did
• 46:52
  a thing on I try and create work that's as timeless as possible despite being
• 46:58
  Yeah, of its time, and we don't how long this this is timely,
• 47:04
  No, these things, these things have aged. It's all aged very
• 47:07
  well. I did a stream on the gaming channel It's Honey Badger Arcade,
• 47:12
  where I watched this Gamergate documentary because Gamergate will be ten years old this year,
• 47:17
  and I opened it up with Mike's song his video Progress, which is
• 47:22
  one of my favorite songs. I don't know why, but that's just a
• 47:25
  good one. So you can't go wrong with Paca Bell's count. Yeah,
• 47:30
  yeah, it's a good one anyway. So let me see. It is
• 47:36
  six years old, but still very topical. We are in the era of
• 47:38
  the never ending current year. After all, the psychological pain Hannah is referring
• 47:43
  to here is effectively getting red piled by another name. In spite of what
• 47:47
  the very cynical Mangaka ninety two said in the chat, there is a bit
• 47:52
  of an increase in the general society of people figuring out that things are not
• 47:55
  what they seem. If enough people get there and start influencing those IMpower or
• 48:00
  better yet, becoming those in power, there might be some improvement. See
• 48:04
  Millia or the anti feminists in South Korea. Well, those guys have been
• 48:07
  fighting in South Korea for a long time. I don't know how well that's
• 48:12
  working out, though. I'm still like trying to get in touch with a
• 48:15
  guy who lives in South Korea to give me like a clue. But you,
• 48:19
  as you can imagine, the time the time gap is a problem.
• 48:22
  So oh, and I originally wrote progress instead of improvement before I reread it
• 48:29
  and decided to use a less loaded term. All right, thank you,
• 48:31
  tell him nar so much for that very thoughtful message. And I think that's
• 48:38
  it, So we'll move on to the next story. Let us know what
• 48:42
  you guys thinking about this one in the comments. All right, so let
• 48:46
  me just put it on the screen here. Whoop. Brynn Speicher, a
• 48:52
  California woman who fatally stabbed her boyfriend Chad o Milia over one hundred times during
• 49:00
  a cannabis induced psychosis what has been sentenced to two years on approbation. The
• 49:09
  incident occurred in twenty eighteen, and Speicher was convicted of involuntary manslaughter. The
• 49:15
  defense argued that she had an averse reaction to marijuana, leading to a cannabis
• 49:21
  induced psychotic disorder. The sentencing decision drew sobs of relief from Spiker or Spicher
• 49:27
  I'm not sure how you say it, and her family, but faced criticism
• 49:30
  from the victim's father, who claimed it's set a dangerous president. The judge,
• 49:36
  David Warley defended the decision, stating it was the right and courageous thing
• 49:40
  to do. Very hard. Remember that name, and I mean David Walley,
• 49:45
  by the way, not Spiker, which is the fucking ironic name for
• 49:49
  someone who had too much drugs. And yeah, I do wonder how many
• 49:54
  people have reacted to this story by going, well, that's why cannabis should
• 49:59
  be legal. I don't fuck I think I've never heard of anybody flipping out
• 50:06
  on cannabis. That there had to be some other substance involved. And I
• 50:09
  have to go, well, heye, does alcohol ever make people go violently
• 50:14
  crazy? I'm not changing the subject anyway. I mean, I mean,
• 50:19
  I would put it to you that stabbing someone a hundred fucking times is what
• 50:22
  should be illegal. But hey, I guess I'm some kind of massagyistue is,
• 50:29
  no man would ever be acquitted of a violent crime, or any crime
• 50:32
  on the grounds that he was drunk at the time, or stoned at the
• 50:37
  time, or on magic mushrooms at the time. I'm sure a lot of
• 50:42
  you remember that one feminist man, that one skeptic feminist man who still remain
• 50:47
  otherwise unnamed, who went to prison for murdering his girlfriend in the first degree
• 50:53
  by shooting her once I think it was maybe twice, and and a lot
• 50:59
  of people tried to excuse it by claiming it was because he was under the
• 51:01
  influence of psilocybin mushrooms. But that changed nothing with with regard to his sentencing.
• 51:08
  For all we know, it was a lie and he was actually stone
• 51:12
  cold sober when he did it, we don't know. The point is when
• 51:15
  it's a woman or a male feminist, that that person is high enough in
• 51:22
  the progressive stack for the uniparty to reach for any explanation other than the usual,
• 51:29
  you know, identity politics. If we can call a murderer an MRA,
• 51:36
  such as a certain supreme gentleman, we'll call him an MRA, even
• 51:38
  if he's never heard of such a thing as an MRA existing. But if
• 51:44
  he's a feminist, an explicit feminist who is explicitly anti MRA, well we
• 51:51
  can't use identity politics against it. And that's where drugs come in handy as
• 51:54
  a convenient scapegoat, whether they're legal drugs or not, and fined, they
• 52:00
  are the kinds of drugs of which any given person does not approve. Caffeine,
• 52:06
  by the way, the world's most popular and least controlled mind altering substance,
• 52:12
  does nothing but cause anxiety and general skittishness. But you'll never hear caffeine
• 52:19
  blamed for someone's paranoid, delusional, violent crimes. Ah, unless it's a
• 52:24
  woman or a feminist. But consider this another one of my blackpill predictions.
• 52:30
  At some point, a female feminist registered Democrat BLM supporting Antifa thug is going
• 52:37
  to kill a man by slowly severing his head with an ice pick and then
• 52:44
  eating it, and a jury will find her not guilty because she's a coffee
• 52:47
  drinker. And the our good friends the World Economic Forum and their cronies are
• 52:54
  going to be right on board with it, given their recently announced agenda to
• 52:59
  crack on coffee because it's a form of ecoside of whatever. And all the
• 53:06
  people who's been cheering on for the prohibition of all the drugs they don't like
• 53:10
  will suddenly do a one at double take when it's their drug of choice being
• 53:15
  targeted by the smear merchants. In case you didn't know, caffeine is a
• 53:20
  deadly drug. It can indeed kill people. There was a there was one
• 53:25
  guy who mistook his pure caffeine powder for his protein shake powder. He dumped
• 53:34
  out half an ounce of the stuff into a receptacle and he necked it,
• 53:37
  and he died in what I can only imagine was a level of fear and
• 53:43
  panic that no one would wish on their worst enemy. You think a caine
• 53:47
  bear was bad, but I don't think caffeine should be illegal. I think
• 53:54
  people should be trusted not to be stupid enough to do that. Meanwhile,
• 54:00
  cannabis and its two active ingredients THHC and CPD do not kill people. Ever,
• 54:08
  no one has ever discovered an LD fifty that would even kill a mouse.
• 54:13
  Now, that doesn't mean it's harmless, and it can indeed result in
• 54:17
  a psychotic episode if taken in large enough doses by someone who already has schizophrenic
• 54:27
  proclivities, it can exacerbate those symptoms, but it generally only happens with prolonged
• 54:34
  use, or, like I said, in unfeasibly large doses in someone with
• 54:38
  schizophrenic proclivities. Even if that does explain this woman's actions, which I don't
• 54:45
  for a second believe it does. I think this is just a violent murderer
• 54:49
  and a corrupt piece of shit simp of a judge looking for any excuse to
• 54:54
  let a woman literally get away with murder. But even if this is one
• 54:58
  of those rare cases of a sleeper cells schizophrenic being snapped by a psychedelic,
• 55:06
  at the very least she belongs in a mental institution. That's typically what we
• 55:10
  do with violent schizophrenics, even if they're not responsible for their own actions,
• 55:17
  they're still effectively just as dangerous as someone who is. If weed is all
• 55:22
  it takes for you to accelerate from zero to one hundred brutal stabbings, then
• 55:30
  you belong in a strait jacket like even if it's PCP, that's still no
• 55:36
  excuse. Most people when they take PCP just stay at home, dancing their
• 55:40
  asses off and going nuts by themselves. If it causes you to go running
• 55:45
  through the streets clubbing police officers to death with a chair leg, that's on
• 55:51
  you, and if you're a man, it is on you legally every fucking
• 55:55
  time, no exception in any court in any land. I know this random
• 56:00
  mine has been mostly about drugs, but anyone in their right mind can see
• 56:05
  this story is about a guynocentric, two tiered justice system that will always throw
• 56:10
  anyone and anything under the bus except women. They will make anything illegal except
• 56:20
  a woman committing a crime, especially a crime against a man. Meanwhile,
• 56:25
  there are people out here who are just living a better life through chemistry,
• 56:31
  minding our own business with our coffee and our weed, which I would never
• 56:36
  do because I don't do illegal things. How dare you? And we're doing
• 56:38
  no harm to anyone, leave us the fuck alone. We didn't do this.
• 56:45
  Your fucked up justice system did this by letting women get away with anything.
• 56:51
  If the other one should be held accountable, it's this woman and this
• 56:54
  fucking judge. Yeah, bandits all you all right, I'm gonna I'm going
• 57:00
  to go drink more coffee while I still can. You know, I remember
• 57:06
  a news story not too long ago, not too many years ago, at
• 57:09
  least not from the perspective of someone who's been watching news stories like this since
• 57:16
  the eighties. Uh, where a guy committed a crime under the law.
• 57:23
  It was it was you know, the crime was was being too drunk to
• 57:29
  recognize when the person who had consented to sex with him was too drunk to
• 57:35
  consent. Right, that was that was his crime. But if he'd been
• 57:42
  female, he'd also have been too drunk to consent. Right was convicted,
• 57:49
  and then a judge who agreed with his testimony gave him six months in jail.
• 57:55
  He wasn't convicted of rape. He was convicted of sexual assaul and feminists
• 58:02
  got so mad about the short sentence that he didn't get longer time in jail.
• 58:09
  He was given six months. He served three months, and then he
• 58:13
  went home, and that they actually got the judge removed from his position,
• 58:22
  and then they came here to Ohio when he came home and patrolled a neighborhood
• 58:31
  full of completely innocent people that had nothing to do with the case, right
• 58:38
  while carrying the types of guns that people on their side of the political fence
• 58:45
  have argued for years should be illegal because citizens apparently should have the right to
• 58:51
  arm themselves, wandered around a residential neighborhood full of other people that had nothing
• 59:00
  to do with this guy in his case, with those guns being a threat
• 59:05
  in that neighborhood. Because three months isn't long enough for somebody to serve for
• 59:13
  a crime like that, despite having been too drunk to consent himself, too
• 59:19
  drunk to appraise his actions when the crime was committed. None of them are
• 59:27
  speaking up about this case, not one word. They don't care because it
• 59:37
  was a woman who got away with being too high to appraise her actions when
• 59:45
  she committed a violent crime that caused a person's traumatic death. Feminists don't care
• 59:55
  about equality. They don't care about ability for sure, if it's if it's
• 1:00:01
  a woman's accountability. They just care about hating men and taking away men's civil
• 1:00:07
  rights, taking away men's human rights, the right to fair treatment in court
• 1:00:14
  and equal consideration under the law. Can you guys still hear me? Yeah,
• 1:00:19
  it was just for some reason. I don't know if it was my
• 1:00:22
  machine, but I heard it. Oh, and I thought, oh crap,
• 1:00:25
  they can't hear me. But no, they don't care about anything of
• 1:00:30
  that. They only care about hurting men. And that's that's all that you'll
• 1:00:36
  get out of this from feminists that if you bring this up to feminists,
• 1:00:39
  they will tell you that it's a fluke. They'll come up with any excuse
• 1:00:44
  they can to not pay attention to it. They'll make excuses for her,
• 1:00:49
  but they won't admit that it's just as as bad. When women gets away
• 1:00:57
  with a crime that you know, well, it's it's because she was she
• 1:01:02
  was too high or too drunk. Right. When a woman gets away with
• 1:01:06
  it something terrible like this and does has has no real recourse, you know,
• 1:01:12
  against her, Like society has no recourse against her. The victim's family
• 1:01:15
  has no recourse. The victim just basically got spit on by the court.
• 1:01:21
  You don't matter what happened to you, doesn't matter. You're you're you're just
• 1:01:24
  a man. And uh, this is a woman who was she had an
• 1:01:30
  excuse, Like, it doesn't matter what it was. A woman with an
• 1:01:32
  excuse is a woman with an excuse, right, yep. And and they
• 1:01:37
  don't care. Feminists do not care. Again, they know they're lying,
• 1:01:44
  they know this is bullshit, they know that they are being hypocritical in regard
• 1:01:51
  to these cases. They don't care because they actually hate men. Their religion
• 1:02:00
  is about hating men. They are malevolent. They support this kind of thing,
• 1:02:08
  and they will tell any lie they need to in order to maintain it.
• 1:02:15
  Yep. By the way, I just remembered a couple of months ago,
• 1:02:24
  I happened to be on a train and I picked up a copy of
• 1:02:28
  the Metro and there was an article in my page. It was a few
• 1:02:32
  pages in and the headline was Matthew Perry found to have died from the acute
• 1:02:39
  effect of ketamin. And I read this thinking, whoa that, WHOA,
• 1:02:43
  that's crazy, because that's never happened before. Ketamin is another one of those
• 1:02:47
  jokes that has no known LD fifty no one's ever died just from the acute
• 1:02:54
  effects of ketamin by itself. And I read down this article, and by
• 1:03:00
  the third paragraph, sure enough, there's this sentence with drowning as a contributing
• 1:03:07
  factor, drowning. He just drowned a little bit, but it was he
• 1:03:17
  fucking drowned. That's you don't just drown a little bit. But journalists do
• 1:03:22
  this all the time. It's been the same ever since the days of the
• 1:03:25
  fucking reef of madness. They just can't help themselves if they if they could
• 1:03:30
  blame a drug for something, they'll blame a drug. Yeah, what clearly
• 1:03:36
  happened. He I mean, he died indirectly because because an enormous amount of
• 1:03:40
  ketamin was found in his system when they did the autopsy or whatever, and
• 1:03:46
  so he so he took a stupid amount of ketamin and then then then then
• 1:03:52
  went in his hot tub. And yeah, ketamin can make you lose consciousness
• 1:03:55
  and lose motor functions. So yeah, he died indirect because of And that
• 1:04:01
  does happen, just like it happens with alcohol. You can drink so much
• 1:04:06
  that you get into an accident, but alcohol can also also kill you just
• 1:04:11
  by its own acute effects. Everyone sure, but yeah, again, I'm
• 1:04:15
  not saying ketmin is without its dangers. It can make you lose motor functions
• 1:04:19
  so much that you're very likely to get into an accident. I've I've never
• 1:04:25
  taken because it's illegal. But yeah, but yeah, it's like I say,
• 1:04:30
  journalists can't help themselves. They would rather blame a drug than than the
• 1:04:38
  woman. Yeah, it's it's it's remarkably difficult to explain the effect that camin
• 1:04:47
  has. Not that I would know because I would never do it as illegal,
• 1:04:50
  but yeah, it's it's related to PCP. Actually that's great. Well
• 1:04:56
  you know actually that that's not so. You know those lightocane gels that you
• 1:05:05
  can get for sunburn and stuff at at this store, like the blue the
• 1:05:12
  blue aloe that you get for putting on after sunburn. And now the patches,
• 1:05:16
  the lightocane patches, five or four percent are over the counter and five
• 1:05:21
  percent of prescription are there those are legal as well. Comes from the same
• 1:05:28
  plant that cocaine is made out of. Uh So, like there's it.
• 1:05:34
  Drugs can have profoundly different effects on a on an individual, and and so
• 1:05:41
  that's not it doesn't say a lot that it's related. But uh, yeah,
• 1:05:45
  tranquilizers, if I remember right, that's a tranquilizer used by veterinarians on
• 1:05:53
  animals, which doesn't necessarily mean that it can't be used on people. There's
• 1:05:59
  actually a lot of drug that are used on both people and animals. Penicillin
• 1:06:01
  is one of them, and penicillin can be very dangerous to people if you
• 1:06:05
  have an allergy to it. Yeah. So yeah, drugs, depending on
• 1:06:13
  the individual and depending on how they're used, can have different effects as well.
• 1:06:17
  But you're right, the media will it's the same thing as COVID.
• 1:06:24
  Like when my dad passed away, and well, when my mom passed away,
• 1:06:30
  my dad and I were in talking to the funeral director and one of
• 1:06:39
  the things that he was dealing with was death certificates that cited COVID as the
• 1:06:45
  cause of death for causes of death that were obviously not. Like there was
• 1:06:51
  a guy that was decapitated in a motorcycle accident who had tested positive for COVID,
• 1:06:58
  and so the COVID was it is his cause of death, and he
• 1:07:01
  had to send the certificate back. He's like, when you're decapitated, that's
• 1:07:04
  the cause of death that's there. It's not because you had a cold,
• 1:07:09
  it's not because you had an illness, Right, so it's there were incidents,
• 1:07:15
  and we don't know how many. I'm not saying it was prevalent or
• 1:07:20
  or anything like that, because I heard about that one incident from from the
• 1:07:26
  funeral director when we were talking about that, because my mom died with COVID
• 1:07:30
  pneumonia and so we were we were talking about, you know what, what
• 1:07:36
  is going to be the cause of death on her her death certificate because she
• 1:07:43
  also had sepsis and she'd had a massive surgery before death. Well, this
• 1:07:51
  with the media and uh, deaths that occur while a person is you using
• 1:08:00
  drugs, or crimes that occur while a person is using drugs, they just
• 1:08:04
  ignore everything else, every other factor that you know, if the person had
• 1:08:10
  a mental illness, if the person had committed other crimes before, if the
• 1:08:14
  person was known to be violent, you know, or so on. Well,
• 1:08:17
  none of that stuff is relevant because pot right, none of that stuff
• 1:08:21
  is relevant because other drug and frankly, gen xers should be immune to this.
• 1:08:31
  We should be tired of it because we watched it our whole lives.
• 1:08:35
  We grew up with this kind of lie being told to us over and over
• 1:08:40
  and over again, and we know it's all bullshit. We've known it's all
• 1:08:46
  bullshit for probably, you know, thirty or forty years, depending on how
• 1:08:53
  old you are, And so this this shouldn't be surprising, like, oh,
• 1:08:58
  we're going to blame the drug, not the one women, but yeah,
• 1:09:01
  that's ultimate. A woman makes it more likely, righten, women getting
• 1:09:05
  away with things exactly, And she did because she's not going to see any
• 1:09:13
  jail time. So I got some superchows. I'm gonna read those really quick.
• 1:09:18
  Richard Bierre gives us five bucks and says, straight out of the propaganda
• 1:09:21
  movie Reefer Madness, thank you for that. And uh, Meredith g the
• 1:09:28
  top g gives us five dollars and says, HBr News number four forty one.
• 1:09:31
  Does anyone realize how exhausting it would be to stab someone one hundred times?
• 1:09:35
  How the f does anyone come to the conclusion that this was a drug
• 1:09:39
  induced violence? Maybe twenty times, but not one hundred and not on pot.
• 1:09:44
  Well, Meredith knows something about how tiring it is to stab someone a
• 1:09:47
  hundred times. Taking notes, I mean, if you've ever if you've ever
• 1:09:51
  had to cut up raw meat before, yeah, yeah you kind of know.
• 1:09:58
  Yeah, we're made of raw meat. Technically when it comes, and
• 1:10:02
  then Richer Bierre again gives us five bucks and says there is a company that
• 1:10:06
  advertises a ketamine protocol for depression. Seeing their ads on YouTube, they refer
• 1:10:12
  to it as psychedelic therapy. Am actually becoming a thing They're They're also talking
• 1:10:18
  about using using the main ingredient, the substance in shrooms that is psychedelic for
• 1:10:28
  for people with depression. I've been watching this stuff because I mean, I
• 1:10:34
  think I've talked about it before. You know, I one of my diagnoses
• 1:10:41
  historically has been depression, and I've always kind of poopooed it. And then
• 1:10:44
  I found out there's a gene for it, and I have the gene,
• 1:10:48
  but and I've always kind of poopooed it. But at the same time I
• 1:10:51
  was I was suicidal for about twenty years, so you know, obviously they're
• 1:11:00
  there. There's a contradiction. There's I'm not depressed, but I am suicidal
• 1:11:04
  but I'm not now, So don't anybody get all scared. I came to
• 1:11:10
  terms with that for years ago. I can't be I can't. Too many
• 1:11:15
  people in my life depend on me for things that would it would be disastrous
• 1:11:20
  if I just disappeared. Yeah, yeah, I love too many people too.
• 1:11:28
  That's the thing about for for a lot of people, it may not
• 1:11:35
  work for everybody because not everybody's reason is is the same. But I would
• 1:11:44
  say my cure was loving other people now, being loved by other people,
• 1:11:49
  being needed by people that I love right Uh. With With a lot of
• 1:11:56
  people in terms of depression, it is actually chemical. Uh. Their their
• 1:12:01
  brain doesn't doesn't produce enough of this or that, or the way selective serotonin
• 1:12:10
  reaptakers and hibbitters are supposed to work is they think that your brain cleans up
• 1:12:15
  your serotonin. This is really a simplistic explanation. So you know, don't
• 1:12:21
  shoot me if you're in the in the business. But they think your brain
• 1:12:27
  cleans up your serotonin before it gets a chance to detect and use it to
• 1:12:31
  actually change your mood. And so those slow that process down and uh,
• 1:12:38
  and it keeps you from developing this undercurrent of anxiety that causes depression. But
• 1:12:45
  if you don't need them, it really fucks you up. But yeah,
• 1:12:48
  all of this with these drugs. Again, they want to demonize this stuff,
• 1:12:55
  but in fact, there are actually good uses for a lot of these
• 1:13:00
  and this kind of thing might hinder putting to use. Cannabis has tons of
• 1:13:08
  valid uses that we haven't been able to use it for for like most of
• 1:13:15
  gen X's life, because it's been illegal and it's been demonized and it's been
• 1:13:20
  exaggerated how it affects people. So yeah, all right, well, let
• 1:13:29
  us know what you guys think about this one in the comments. We really
• 1:13:30
  got to move on. We got two more stories to get to, so
• 1:13:33
  let us know what you guys think in the comments. We're going to move
• 1:13:36
  on to the next story. So one of our own is in the news.
• 1:13:43
  Men's rights activist David Marter's head I hope I'm not butchering that and I
• 1:13:47
  apologize or motor shed. One of those has been given a five year restrating
• 1:13:53
  order after being cleared by a jury of harassing barrister and women's rights campaigner feminist
• 1:13:59
  doctor Charlotte proud Men on Twitter maters head or Monoshad was convicted of having a
• 1:14:06
  lock knife when questioned by police and received a suspended twenty week prison term.
• 1:14:12
  The prosecution claimed that he targeted doctor Proudman with threatening language and images, causing
• 1:14:16
  her to fear violence. The defense argued that matters Head did not direct the
• 1:14:20
  messages at the lawyer, and he claimed not to have intended to threaten her.
• 1:14:25
  The judge imposed the restraining order to protect Charlotte Proudman. Do you guys
• 1:14:31
  know matters Head. I mean, he's like my friend on social media.
• 1:14:36
  I'm pretty sure at least. I just want to point out for people outside
• 1:14:42
  of the UK, that's a pocket knife that he was convicted of having.
• 1:14:47
  A pocket knife. Can't have those in the UK unless you convert to the
• 1:14:53
  Nation of Islamic. They're all going up a pocket knife, like seriously,
• 1:14:59
  a pocket knife. Yes, so he was convicted of having and it wasn't
• 1:15:02
  related to anything. Like lots of people carry around a pocket knife, especially
• 1:15:08
  if you have one of those Swiss army knives with little tools in it.
• 1:15:13
  A lot of guys carry that. I have a pocket knife actually, Like
• 1:15:17
  I actually have a little keychain pocket knife that I carry because every so often
• 1:15:28
  you get something and you're out in public and you have you want to open
• 1:15:32
  it, and you have you need a blade or something to cut through plastic
• 1:15:38
  or to cut through one of those little zip ties. So this is to
• 1:15:45
  be convicted of having a pocket knife to an American. That sounds insane,
• 1:15:49
  just absolutely insane. Right, But as soon as you're accused of something,
• 1:15:56
  even though pocket knives are tools that are completely innocent and are not intended to
• 1:16:00
  be used as weapons that you you know, you carry it around because you
• 1:16:04
  have malicious intent. No, they're just a thing that you carry around so
• 1:16:10
  that you have something you can use if you need to get into something that
• 1:16:14
  you have a right to get into, like an item that you just bought.
• 1:16:17
  Right, But as soon as you get accused of something, now it's
• 1:16:25
  dangerous. And I just want to point out here he was told, you're
• 1:16:30
  innocent, you did nothing wrong, you did nothing illegal, but we're gonna
• 1:16:36
  punish you anyway, because woman. So the last story was a woman who
• 1:16:41
  can get away with fatally stabbing someone, and not just stabbing someone, but
• 1:16:46
  stabbing someone over and over again to the degree that it would have been exhausting
• 1:16:50
  and painful for both parties. Like he had to be dead long before the
• 1:16:57
  stabbing was over, just from shop. And she got probation and that was
• 1:17:03
  it. She was let off basically. And here we have a guy who
• 1:17:11
  is not guilty of harassment, did nothing directly to the individual who accused him,
• 1:17:17
  is not guilty of any crime and has done nothing wrong, but he's
• 1:17:25
  facing a restraining order. Doctor Charlotte proud Man is doctor Charlotte proud Men.
• 1:17:35
  In case you don't know, she's a feminist physician. No, she's a
• 1:17:44
  sociology She is associates the doctor of Sociology. Bring up her Twitter and I
• 1:17:49
  will share it. I'm just I'm just going to point out, like it's
• 1:17:55
  an honorary, honoraryum that title. When you're talking about someone with doctor anything
• 1:18:00
  seems phony as fuck nowadays, but when when a PhD is in something like
• 1:18:06
  sociology, it's it's even more fake. Right if you if you were a
• 1:18:10
  PhD chemist, that'd be a different story. If you're a PhD in uh,
• 1:18:15
  criminal justice, if that's I'm sure that exists, or in public education,
• 1:18:21
  you know, or anything like that, that that might be a little
• 1:18:25
  respectable. But I just don't a PhD in sociology and a feminist who is
• 1:18:32
  like, it's obvious that she probably went went through and most of her classes
• 1:18:39
  were women's studies and she doesn't actually know any facts. It's all, yeah,
• 1:18:43
  she's kind of she's kind of known. I know, I've seen her
• 1:18:46
  on like Panels and stuff, doctor Charlotte Proudman. Her Twitter page says the
• 1:18:51
  Advocate of the Year or anything. Yeah, Women in Law Awards, Family
• 1:18:57
  Law Cambridge Academic Founder of Right to Equality, which is another page, I
• 1:19:02
  guess. And then there's a quote on her page I guess by her.
• 1:19:08
  She quotes herself. Women in the public eye who challenge male violence often suffer
• 1:19:14
  the very same abuse. So she's kind of a kind of person that you
• 1:19:15
  probably end up debating as an mra. Yeah, I think if I remember,
• 1:19:24
  she's one of the feminists that has me blocked. She can't do anything
• 1:19:28
  to me because I'm not from her country. Yeah, so yeah, but
• 1:19:34
  no, she's seas a moron in my opinion, I've seen I've seen people
• 1:19:41
  post screenshots of her tweets and everything, and this is an instance where I
• 1:19:46
  can understand why she she cried harassment because she doesn't have anything else. She
• 1:19:54
  doesn't have any valid arguments. She can't counter anything the individual says that she
• 1:20:00
  targeting right. She can't prove him wrong because he's not wrong, and he
• 1:20:05
  can prove her wrong, and that just that just can't stand. So as
• 1:20:11
  as a feminist, she is going to do the next best thing and call
• 1:20:15
  proving her wrong harassment because that's what they do, and and so of course
• 1:20:21
  it's expected that a feminist would behave this way. It's just remarkable in terms
• 1:20:30
  of this, this needs to be discussed. Remarkable, not in terms of
• 1:20:34
  you know, big surprise. Remarkable that the justice system would would turn around
• 1:20:43
  and impose a penalty on someone who was found innocent of the allegation. Oh,
• 1:20:50
  you're you know, we we know you didn't do what you're accused of
• 1:20:54
  doing, but you know, a restraining order is in order. Anyway,
• 1:20:58
  we're going to put a restraining order on you. And it's it'd be different
• 1:21:01
  if a restraining order was just the court saying leave this person alone and don't
• 1:21:08
  bother them, and there were no other repercussions involved, right where there's nothing
• 1:21:15
  like your employer can find out there's a restraining order and use that against you
• 1:21:20
  when it comes to you know, your pay or promotions or some Well,
• 1:21:25
  this is a guy that has a you know, criminal history. Look,
• 1:21:28
  there's a restraining order, but they can it's public information that there's a restraining
• 1:21:33
  order, especially if it's been reported in the media. That means now that
• 1:21:40
  you have a reputation for having had to have a restraining order against you to
• 1:21:44
  keep you away from this woman and to keep you from from talking to her.
• 1:21:50
  And I don't know how much she can enforce this, but if she's
• 1:21:55
  offended by something he says, now, even if it's not directed her,
• 1:21:59
  can she treat that like harassment? Because if she can, then it's a
• 1:22:03
  restraining order that's effectively used to set to silence a human rights advocate. But
• 1:22:10
  on top of that, a restraining order can be used to prevent you from
• 1:22:17
  moving around in various areas. If you go to a public place or a
• 1:22:24
  public event and the individual that you're restrained from being around is there, you
• 1:22:29
  have to leave. And if you show up there and that person can prove
• 1:22:33
  that you showed up while they were there, even if you do the right
• 1:22:38
  thing and leave, they can accuse you of following them there, even if
• 1:22:42
  there's no evidence that you knew they were there and went there because they were
• 1:22:45
  there. You can still get in trouble for being there. You can still
• 1:22:49
  get locked up for being there. And the only exceptions to that are if
• 1:22:55
  they come to your house or if they come to your workplace during your scheduled
• 1:23:00
  time at work. So you're basically screwed in terms of freedom of movement,
• 1:23:08
  you're basically screwed in terms of freedom of speech, and you may also have
• 1:23:14
  other repercussions. I don't know, you know. I mean in the UK,
• 1:23:17
  people aren't allowed to have, you know, spoons practically, so it's
• 1:23:21
  not like you can lose the right to your weapons. But in the US,
• 1:23:26
  if somebody has a restraining order on them and they're an individual that owns
• 1:23:31
  guns, those guns will be confiscated or they have to put those guns into
• 1:23:35
  a trust. Same thing with any other weapon that is strictly a weapon,
• 1:23:45
  Like you might not have to give up your kitchen knives. But if you
• 1:23:47
  happen to be a collector of say historical swords or things like bayonets or anything
• 1:23:57
  else of interesting decorative significance or interesting historical significance, that that's a weapon.
• 1:24:03
  You know, judge may turn around and said, well, you can't have
• 1:24:05
  those because there's a restraining order and you're considered a threat. You're dangerous,
• 1:24:11
  right, A restraining order can cause you to lose certain types of jobs because
• 1:24:16
  you've now had to strike against you and you're considered a threat, a dangerous
• 1:24:21
  person. I don't think you can even be a massage therapist in the United
• 1:24:26
  States if you have a restraining order, like there's actually you have to have
• 1:24:32
  a very clean slate to be a massage therapist, so it can interfere with
• 1:24:38
  that. If you're a cop, it can't interfere with your ability to be
• 1:24:41
  a cop because you can't carry your weapons. So this isn't just a slap
• 1:24:48
  on the wrist. This is a punishment and a proclamation to the public that
• 1:24:56
  you are a threat, that you are dangerous, that you are guilty of
• 1:25:00
  something, even if it's not that crime. Yeah, so it is a
• 1:25:04
  like people are like, well, it's just a restraining there's no just a
• 1:25:08
  restraining order. No, no, it is. It is state defamation of
• 1:25:15
  character. It is imitations on your freedom of movement, your freedom of speech
• 1:25:20
  and your choice in employment, right, your ability to defend yourself. It
• 1:25:27
  is egregious that this happened, and I hope it is a criminal record.
• 1:25:32
  I hope that there's an opportunity to appeal that and get it removed, because
• 1:25:39
  this is shameful that this was done. A restraining order imposed on somebody who
• 1:25:44
  is found to have not done anything wrong. That is crimes, yeah,
• 1:25:50
  social media crimes and misdemeanors. Anyway, let us know what you guys think
• 1:25:56
  about that one in the comments, you know David Motors. Motors said,
• 1:26:00
  I'm sorry, David, I know, I know you. I probably met
• 1:26:03
  you at ICMI anyway where you know. Probably this isn't going to be too
• 1:26:10
  serious. Let us know what you guys think about this in the comments.
• 1:26:13
  We're going to move on to the final story. Weird. I never thought
• 1:26:16
  I'd be talking about it, but Taylor Swift is in the news. So
• 1:26:20
  fans of Taylor Swift are outraged. There's actually a two part thing. There's
• 1:26:25
  two things that I want to say with Taylor Swift. Fans of Taylor Swift
• 1:26:28
  are outrage out there. Being the last ones to discover that online perverts had
• 1:26:31
  been using AI text to image models to generate lude images of their goddess queen,
• 1:26:38
  the Swifties as they are called, were quick to try and protect the
• 1:26:41
  honor of their chosen deity by starting awareness campaigns on Twitter and slash x,
• 1:26:46
  reporting all lude images found attempting to clog up the search results that they would
• 1:26:50
  come back as non pornographic and even contacted the police. The police, However,
• 1:26:59
  many fans are absolutely shocked to discover that there exists no such federal law
• 1:27:03
  within the US barring the creation of smut via AI. The swifties have found
• 1:27:08
  an unlikely ally that wants to change that. Joseph D. Morell, a
• 1:27:14
  US representative for the state of New York, is pushing a bill probably who
• 1:27:18
  isn't going to go through. We'll see that he hopes will change that,
• 1:27:21
  Morell said in a statement concerning his quote preventing deep fakes of intimate images act
• 1:27:29
  end quote. Imagine writing that and keeping a straight face. It says,
• 1:27:32
  quote, We're certainly hopeful that Taylor's swift news will help spark momentum and grow
• 1:27:39
  support for our bill, which, as you know, would address her exact
• 1:27:42
  situation with both criminal and civil penalties end quote. Biden administration is also taking
• 1:27:47
  the matter very seriously, with White House Press Secretary Kareein John Pierre stating quote,
• 1:27:53
  we are alarmed by the reports of the circulation of images that you just
• 1:27:58
  laid out. A false image is to be more exact, and it is
• 1:28:01
  alarming. While social media companies make their own independent decisions about content management.
• 1:28:08
  We believe they have an important role to play in enforcing their own rules to
• 1:28:11
  prevent the spread of misinformation and non consensual intimate imagery of real people. End
• 1:28:16
  quote. And in completely unrelated news, the Biden administration is reportedly desperately seeking
• 1:28:23
  an endorsement from Taylor Swift. California governor and staunch Biden supporter Gavin Newsom stated,
• 1:28:30
  quote, Taylor Swift stands tall and unique. What she was able to
• 1:28:32
  accomplish just in getting young people activated to consider that they have a voice and
• 1:28:38
  that they should have a voice in the next election, I think is profoundly
• 1:28:42
  powerful. End quote. This endorsement seeking arrives on the heels of a poll
• 1:28:45
  conducted by Redfield and Wilton Strategies. The poll discovered that nearly one in five
• 1:28:51
  voters say they would be more likely to vote for a candidate that was endorsed
• 1:28:56
  by Taylor Swift. And yet in other news, and then yet other news,
• 1:29:00
  there is a rumor that Swift could toss out an endorsement of Biden during
• 1:29:04
  Super Bowl. What is that? Nine six forty three forty three. I'm
• 1:29:12
  like Norman, numerals are hard. And there was one other thing too,
• 1:29:15
  Ellie Han l is fifty v l. Oh, it's an L. It's
• 1:29:19
  an L. Okay, yeah, so fifty fifty eight fifty eight Okay,
• 1:29:25
  sorry, Holy crap, it's been that many Super Bowls. I had no
• 1:29:29
  idea. I had no idea. So one other thing I was going to
• 1:29:32
  add to this too, is that here's something very interesting. So this is
• 1:29:36
  a clip from NATO and they're talking about using celebrities as to essentially like influence
• 1:29:47
  people, I know, shocking like it never happens. And this is a
• 1:29:51
  clip from this This is like a Fox News spot on it. But I
• 1:29:55
  just wanted to play the clip. You came in here and wanted to understand
• 1:29:58
  how you just go out there and counter information operator. Oh, I should
• 1:30:00
  share this with you guys. You guys can see it's not showing in our
• 1:30:03
  Yeah. Yeah, I'm not sharing the screen. Hold on, I'm sharing
• 1:30:06
  it now. Ok here we go. Listen. You came in here and
• 1:30:10
  wanting to understand how you just go out there and counter information operation. With
• 1:30:13
  the idea is that social influence can help UH can help encourage or promote behavior
• 1:30:20
  chain so potentially as like a peaceful information operation. I include Taylor Swift in
• 1:30:26
  here because she's you know, she's a fairly influential online person. I don't
• 1:30:30
  know if you've heard of her. Yeah, that's real swift covert operation.
• 1:30:36
  So now, okay, this You might say this sounds ridiculous, but I
• 1:30:42
  don't think it is. It's really not that hard. And they've been doing
• 1:30:45
  this with TikTok influence influence. Yeah, they've been doing this with small ones.
• 1:30:50
  Yeah, the undisclosed amounts to to shill for the Biden administration. Yes,
• 1:30:56
  they do it with larger influences. And that's what she is at this
• 1:31:00
  point. I know that she likes to think of herself as a pop star,
• 1:31:02
  but she's just an influencer at this point. That's what happens when you're
• 1:31:05
  in the pocket of the fucking Democrats. Yeah. Well, the thing with
• 1:31:10
  Swift too is that I'll say this, I don't think I think that she's
• 1:31:15
  an unknowing participant in this, like if you can get Okay, So here's
• 1:31:20
  the thing about this poll. I think that there's some validity to it.
• 1:31:25
  I don't think it's one fifth of the population, but I do think that
• 1:31:30
  it's more than zero that would follow this endorsement. I think that people like
• 1:31:36
  well not just the Democrats, but most of the Democrats have been using celebrities
• 1:31:42
  to influence young people's votes for decades and decades, and I think that Taylor
• 1:31:48
  Swift it could be made into an influential true believer. And you know,
• 1:31:54
  I saw somebody else talking about this and they were saying, like, you
• 1:31:57
  know, they were using words to describe her support as like, you know,
• 1:32:00
  voters and potential voters, and I'm like, you mean women, because
• 1:32:04
  let's be real, okay, most of Taylor Swift's swifties are women and and
• 1:32:11
  that and that they're women that relate to her because, like her, they
• 1:32:15
  have made terrible life choices. I mean, she's still rich, I mean,
• 1:32:19
  you know, and all that. I think she actually is not like
• 1:32:21
  a girl from the South. Apparently she actually was. You know, she's
• 1:32:26
  rich, but she doesn't seem happy. Have you seen yes, Well,
• 1:32:30
  because whenever they cut to a clip of her being at the Super Bowl or
• 1:32:33
  at the Oscars or whatever award ceremony, that guy, I forget his name,
• 1:32:42
  he was hosting this award ceremony and he did this joke about about how
• 1:32:45
  in sports events they're always they're always flipping over to a reaction shot of Taylor
• 1:32:53
  Swift. Sure, at that very moment they flipped to the reaction shot of
• 1:32:57
  Taylor Swift, and she's just sat there fucking face. She really doesn't like
• 1:33:03
  any joke being made at her expense, even if it's not her expense,
• 1:33:06
  even if even if it's at the expense of people who keep looking at her
• 1:33:13
  like And there's this one clip of of of a clip throwing over to her
• 1:33:18
  and you can see her looking for a couple of seconds before she notices she's
• 1:33:23
  on the big screen, and you can see her mouthing the words go away,
• 1:33:27
  please. That sense of humor has has been lost to whatever hysteria is
• 1:33:33
  going on here, and I in that sense, I kind of feel for
• 1:33:36
  her. But at the same time, and if if you've got if your
• 1:33:43
  sense of humor has been eroded to the point where you can't laugh at yourself,
• 1:33:46
  then I feel sorry for you. But at the same time I can't
• 1:33:51
  relate to you. I soul has been destroyed. Yeah, yeah, it
• 1:33:59
  looks the three. This isn't really about Taylor Swift. This is about I
• 1:34:02
  think the thing that's fascinating to me about it is that so many Let's just
• 1:34:08
  be real, women can be influenced by a popular women into making like decisions
• 1:34:16
  that affect the entire country, if not the world, because so and so
• 1:34:21
  said so. I mean it blows my mind, like that, is this
• 1:34:26
  what we would call a cult of personality? And also considering her taste in
• 1:34:30
  men, why would they listen to her when if she endorses Joe Biden?
• 1:34:34
  I mean what, I just it's sad because this is the point I think
• 1:34:43
  that we're at now where if you want to win elections, it's not about
• 1:34:46
  policy. It's not about like your whether or not you have a track record,
• 1:34:51
  whether or not there's like something that you can demonstrate your confidence. All
• 1:34:57
  it matters is, well, who's the famous woman? Like you know that?
• 1:35:01
  I like that. I'm that I idolize what does she think? And
• 1:35:05
  then that woman could be anybody. I don't think Taylor Swift is, like
• 1:35:10
  you know, has any idea about things like political science or geopolitics or anything.
• 1:35:15
  She sings country songs about dudes that she can't seem to get along with,
• 1:35:21
  and other women just love her unconditionally. And I think a lot of
• 1:35:26
  that too is also artificially propped up, because another way you can propagandize people
• 1:35:30
  into following someone is to tell people that that someone is someone everyone wants to
• 1:35:36
  follow, even if there is no real evidence. It's like they're telling you,
• 1:35:40
  oh, yeah, so and so everybody loves this person. And they
• 1:35:43
  just tell you over and over and after a while you're like, oh,
• 1:35:45
  I guess everybody loves that person, so I guess it's real. It's like,
• 1:35:47
  literally, how Harvey Weinstein made women famous. He wouldn't, they wouldn't
• 1:35:51
  get famous based on talent. He would say I'm gonna make you a star,
• 1:35:56
  and then he would make them a star, and he would use every
• 1:36:00
  resource at his disposal and put that person in your face. And you know,
• 1:36:03
  I spoke to Lisa Brighton about that. She said that people in the
• 1:36:09
  entertainment business are not there because they're talented. They're there because they're all they're
• 1:36:14
  they're looking to be exposed. If they get exposed enough, people see them
• 1:36:17
  and they say so and so is famous, and then they just start loving
• 1:36:21
  them. And I mean, like not everybody, but a lot of people.
• 1:36:25
  And I think that women are a bit more prone to this kind of
• 1:36:29
  idolization. And it doesn't matter if if she's talented, it doesn't matter if
• 1:36:33
  her music is good, it doesn't matter if her opinions or sound. And
• 1:36:38
  they know that that's why they did it. I remember when Obama. I
• 1:36:41
  was talking to my wife about this just we were driving home and I was
• 1:36:44
  talking about how in two thousand and eight, when Obama was running, it
• 1:36:47
  was around or just before that, the movie Harold and Kumar Go to White
• 1:36:53
  Castle was out, and these two guys were pretty famous there. They were
• 1:36:57
  like on top of the world for a bit because the movie was very popular.
• 1:37:00
  Everybody watched it. I enjoyed it, right, It's a good like
• 1:37:02
  Stoner film or whatever. Money and so the two stars, especially cal Penn,
• 1:37:10
  they were pushing, pushing, pushing for Obama to win the election.
• 1:37:13
  It was like everywhere. And at the time, because I was younger,
• 1:37:15
  I was like, Wow, he's a young guy that's in a movie I
• 1:37:18
  like, and he's telling me I should vote for so and so. I'm
• 1:37:20
  gonna take that opinion seriously. I'm not gonna look at I'm not gonna look
• 1:37:24
  at anything. I'm not gonna look at his policies. I'm not gonna look
• 1:37:27
  at what he's running on I don't know. All I know is that the
• 1:37:30
  brown guy likes him and he's black, so I'm gonna vote for him,
• 1:37:32
  just like Brendan Johnson, who is currently in the hospital for panic attacks because
• 1:37:36
  he couldn't handle one percent less than one percent of the migrants being in Chicago.
• 1:37:42
  He couldn't handle it. But he got in there because he's black.
• 1:37:45
  He didn't get in there for any other reason because people said, you have
• 1:37:47
  to vote for this guy. And this is what like people who don't who
• 1:37:51
  who can't get out of this herd thinking someone like Taylor Swift or whoever it
• 1:37:56
  needs to be. It could it could easily be you know, Jenna Ortiz,
• 1:38:00
  Rachel Ziegler or Breed Larson if they were at all like tolerable. But
• 1:38:04
  they choose someone and it's usually a woman, and they say, this is
• 1:38:08
  the it girl. And all the other women see the it girl and they're
• 1:38:11
  all like, I want to be like her, and then they follow them
• 1:38:13
  and they and then that girl says you should believe these things, and then
• 1:38:15
  those women will believe those things. And that's how this works. This is
• 1:38:18
  mass like mass psychology in action. And uh, that's the main thing that
• 1:38:25
  I'm sort of taking away from this, So, yeah, I don't care
• 1:38:29
  about the AI porn. I think it's stupid. I'm going to point out,
• 1:38:31
  so the AI porn is a complete non issue, and and there is
• 1:38:35
  there doesn't need to be a law addressing it because there already is one.
• 1:38:39
  So the claim that people are getting away with using AI porn to intimidate or
• 1:38:46
  harass anybody is bulowney. It's absolute bullshit. And and there isn't actually a
• 1:38:54
  reason to create a new law to address this in the United States, because
• 1:38:59
  the United States already has in the Violent Violence Against Women Act, a definition
• 1:39:05
  of stalking that would apply to this. The definition of stalking that would apply
• 1:39:12
  to this says that anyone who is is within or traveling within, So even
• 1:39:18
  if you're from another country, any part of the United States, or anything
• 1:39:24
  that the United States has jurisdiction over, that if you would intent to harass
• 1:39:31
  or intimidate another person or kill or injured. But I mean, if anybody
• 1:39:35
  that gets killed or injured by a I porn has some other things to worry
• 1:39:41
  about, uh, But with intent to harass or intimidate another person engages in
• 1:39:47
  a just a course of conduct online that would be reasonably expected to cause substantial
• 1:39:59
  emotion old distress to a person that that they're targeting, or to their family
• 1:40:08
  or or uh, you know, to to their let's see it. It
• 1:40:14
  says three different groups of people, So to an immediate family member or to
• 1:40:19
  their spouse is guilty of stalking and is subject to the penalties for stalking under
• 1:40:30
  the Violence Against Women Act. And that's that's pretty broad. That would cover
• 1:40:36
  using AI porn to target somebody for harassment or to stalk somebody, and uh,
• 1:40:45
  anything else that it's being used for. If if somebody creates it to
• 1:40:50
  keep for themselves, that's their problem. If they want to look at a
• 1:40:54
  fake version of of you with your face on it and fantasize about it.
• 1:40:59
  The only difference between that and what people do in their heads, where they
• 1:41:04
  have fantasies about people that involve their own personal ideas and storylines and wishes and
• 1:41:12
  whatever, is that they have something to look at and they're not sharing it
• 1:41:15
  with the world. It's theirs. And I would imagine that a lot of
• 1:41:19
  that type of deep fake fake porn is going to be pretty fucking cringe.
• 1:41:26
  Oh yeah. People won't want other people to know they made it right,
• 1:41:30
  so honestly, they don't need a new law. And what they have done,
• 1:41:33
  Like I'm looking right now at the bill for this, and it actually
• 1:41:41
  would cover the creation of parody images of people. It looks to me like
• 1:41:46
  this is yeah, basically you can't you can't use it to make fun of
• 1:41:49
  people in any way. I mean, it's like getting it being this is
• 1:41:53
  being used, this is being exploited to create a new way to criminalize political
• 1:42:01
  speech. Has absolutely nothing to do with the image or the the issue of
• 1:42:09
  harassment or in particular sexual harassment, stalking, none of that. It is
• 1:42:15
  about crippling your ability to criticize and make fun of politicians and other public figures.
• 1:42:23
  Yeah, that is what that is is for. It's basically the fappening
• 1:42:30
  two point oh yeah, you're you're the most one point oh is already the
• 1:42:36
  stuff of nostalgia. They're all game agate? What even? Way? Yeah?
• 1:42:41
  What what even is that? It's and the most effective way to like
• 1:42:45
  get a bill like this even considered is to claim a woman is a victim
• 1:42:49
  of it. And not only will it will you will you get people looking
• 1:42:53
  at it for that reason, but you'll get women in general because they all
• 1:42:57
  tend to think in the collectivist manner, Oh this is this could affect me,
• 1:43:00
  and then they all want to get on board. So I mean,
• 1:43:03
  they're not going to do this to a man like does I mean I understand
• 1:43:06
  that there is some political cartoons of Trump out there, Yeah, that are
• 1:43:13
  pretty disparaging, but he's not complaining. What this says is anybody in same
• 1:43:18
  stipulations in regard to where you are. So you have to be under the
• 1:43:23
  jurisdiction of the United States for this to apply. But anybody who with the
• 1:43:27
  intent to harass, annoy, threaten, alarm, or cause substantial harm to
• 1:43:32
  the finances or reputation of the depicted individual, or with actual knowledge that or
• 1:43:39
  restless, reckless disregard for whether such disclosed or threatened disclosure will cause physical,
• 1:43:45
  emotional, reputational, or economic harm to the individual. That's so all of
• 1:43:53
  that basically is saying that if you upset someone by creating an image of them,
• 1:43:59
  yeah, and it doesn't it's it doesn't specify like that it has to
• 1:44:08
  to be uh, something that you can't tell is fake without being told.
• 1:44:15
  And it does specify that disclosure is not a defense. So even if you
• 1:44:23
  put a put a disclosure up, uh, you know, a statement up
• 1:44:29
  that that lets the individual know this is this is AI, it's intended for
• 1:44:34
  parity purposes or or this is satire or anything. It still won't defend you
• 1:44:40
  against this law. So it is it is a uh, it's it's not
• 1:44:45
  about preventing AI porn. It's about preventing depictions of an individual that might upset
• 1:44:55
  them. Right, make fun of harming someone's reputation can be interpreted very broadly
• 1:45:00
  as well. Redeculing someone publicly for a political move that is that is bad,
• 1:45:09
  you know, that is that is evil, or that is you know,
• 1:45:13
  against the constitution, that is cruel to the public and in some way
• 1:45:16
  or anything like ridiculing an individual for that would be would fall under that.
• 1:45:21
  So yeah, now it does it does, uh specify intimate digital depiction.
• 1:45:30
  But there's a lot of digitally created images that get thrown at you if by
• 1:45:36
  by Trump opponents, if you are a Trump supporter, where they've digitally it's
• 1:45:41
  obviously digitally created cartoon art that it exaggerates Trump's perceived flaws and like stuff that
• 1:45:54
  you know, but it's but it's nude. They'll they'll put a because when
• 1:45:58
  you when you portray someone nude, it makes them vulnerable in the image,
• 1:46:04
  right, it's a portrayal of vulnerability. And so they gave a portrayal of
• 1:46:11
  ugly vulnerability of Trump. But nobody's going to complain about that, where they
• 1:46:15
  will complain about Swift. And this could be used to target any kind of
• 1:46:24
  any kind of imagery of an individual. It's not going to end up being
• 1:46:30
  limited to portrayals of nude images. And then you know, as soon as
• 1:46:36
  soon as they get one foot in the door, it'll be all about political
• 1:46:42
  speech. Yeah, and it doesn't do anything that the existing laws basically already
• 1:46:50
  cover. Yeah. Yeah, Like you said, it's not just that it's
• 1:46:58
  only an issue worth addressing when it happens to women. It's specifically a list
• 1:47:03
  celebrity women. Like every other law proposed under such a gynocentric government, it
• 1:47:10
  will only be enforced when the victim is as close as can be to an
• 1:47:15
  a list celebrity. Well, let's face it, it will only be enforced
• 1:47:19
  when the perpetrator is not part of the uniparty agenda. Not just a man,
• 1:47:26
  but not part of the uniparty. George Soros and his crime family allegedly
• 1:47:32
  already bought the rights to Taylor Swift's music. Sooner or later they'll buy the
• 1:47:40
  rights to her image, and then she might go ahead and die a mysteriously
• 1:47:45
  and untimely death, and you will continue to make albums and music videos.
• 1:47:49
  Yeah, it looks weirdly generated, but you can't only tell her or but
• 1:47:58
  if you generate a Taylor Swift image, they will know about it because they
• 1:48:03
  know she's dead. They know anything they didn't generate. Some people think this
• 1:48:13
  has already happened to Britney Spears and that's why you only ever see these weird
• 1:48:17
  shots for dancing around with knives And yeah, I mean, I'm not sure
• 1:48:23
  I believe it, but stranger things have happened. We're rapidly, un rapidly
• 1:48:28
  heading into a future where the Party can use AI to fabricate entire news stories
• 1:48:34
  out of whole cloth and get away with it, while everyone else will be
• 1:48:39
  banned from using AI for anything. In fact, even if non party people
• 1:48:45
  provide real photographs or real footage, they'll they'll still be arrested for using AI
• 1:48:50
  generated images because someone accused them of it, Because, after all, who
• 1:48:55
  can tell the difference The uniparty. That's who they'll just what is real and
• 1:49:00
  what's not. They pretty much already do. This is a woman because we
• 1:49:06
  say so. This is a transphobe because we say so. This is fascism
• 1:49:12
  because we say so. This is democracy because we say so. Yes once
• 1:49:15
  again, yes this is a black pill. But this is immigration because we
• 1:49:18
  say don't. Don't shoot the messages just because you're deluding yourselves into thinking it
• 1:49:24
  won't happen. If it's going to happen, then it's going to happen because
• 1:49:27
  you are unprepared for the event the eventuality of it happening. And before you
• 1:49:32
  ask, I don't know how to fix it. Fucking My job is ranting
• 1:49:40
  and making music, So I rant and make music on the topic of this
• 1:49:45
  ship happening. If your job is politics, then please do politics along the
• 1:49:50
  lines of the fact that this ship is happening. If you're a lawyer,
• 1:49:56
  then then please lawyer a lot bearing in mind that this ship is happening.
• 1:50:01
  What is whatever skill you've developed in life, it's it's it's up to you
• 1:50:08
  to to focus whatever you can on the fact that this ship is happening,
• 1:50:13
  or don't. You don't have to it's fine, just you know, do
• 1:50:16
  whatever works for you, do whatever makes you happy. Yeah, this is
• 1:50:20
  probably going to have to be challenged under an freedom of speech law. It's
• 1:50:27
  it's somebody is going to have to end up getting getting arrested for this.
• 1:50:31
  And it does actually do one thing that that doesn't do. It increases the
• 1:50:38
  the penalties in in specifically in regard to intimate digital depictions, which are our
• 1:50:47
  nudes ludes basically, so in terms of that, somebody is gonna have to
• 1:50:56
  come along and say, this individual wasn't harmed, no money was taken from
• 1:51:00
  this individual, you know, And and and that's a civil matter anyway.
• 1:51:08
  If you engage in uh stalking her and harassment and it causes financial harm to
• 1:51:15
  somebody, you know, that's that's that's a matter for a lawsuit. But
• 1:51:21
  yeah, deep fakes, they're gonna end up having to address this in terms
• 1:51:28
  of whether or not your right to freedom of speech includes a right to publicly
• 1:51:35
  imagine what somebody might look like naked. Yeah, and and create depictions of
• 1:51:43
  it. And it's not. What's really funny about this is imagery like that
• 1:51:50
  that wasn't created by AI, but has been created by human efforts has existed
• 1:51:59
  for decades, like not it's existed before things like photoshop. It's existed prior
• 1:52:08
  to the availability of computer assisted creation of art, video editing, drawing,
• 1:52:18
  and so on, like people have been drawing pictures, photo realistic pictures of
• 1:52:26
  other people what they might look like nude. People have used various means to
• 1:52:33
  create this. And of course there's been like rule thirty four of everything,
• 1:52:41
  because that's what it is, right if it exists, there's porn of it.
• 1:52:45
  That's been a thing since before any of these abilities to assist have existed.
• 1:52:55
  And yet now people are upset about it. You should be suspicious when
• 1:53:00
  something exists for a long time, but suddenly now that somebody wants to impose
• 1:53:09
  a new limitation on your ability to use depictions of somebody in a particular way
• 1:53:18
  to criticize government figures and so on, that now they want they want you
• 1:53:27
  to be upset about it. Why shouldn't you be upset about it? Twenty
• 1:53:32
  thirty forty years ago. Yeah, all right, well, let us know
• 1:53:40
  you guys think about this one in the comments. It's time that we wrap
• 1:53:44
  the show up. So we're gonna go into the Patron Show and we're gonna
• 1:53:45
  be looking at this article from Arwa Madwi. If anyone can get the US
• 1:53:51
  government to take deep fake porn seriously, its swifties and that's true. So
• 1:53:57
  she might be right about something. You'll have to join us to find out
• 1:54:01
  how right she is. So do that. Go to feedbadger dot com.
• 1:54:05
  Set up a monthly subscription five bucks a month. We'll get you into our
• 1:54:08
  discord and you'll be able to watch all the additional content if you'll just want
• 1:54:12
  to check the discord out. Go to Badgernation dot online and help us achieve
• 1:54:16
  our fundraising goal so that I can continue to do what I'm doing as producer,
• 1:54:21
  animating these little cartoons and like getting the stories together and getting hurting the
• 1:54:27
  cats and all of that. So you know that'd be great. I'd like
• 1:54:30
  to continue to live on this planet and see where it all goes. So
• 1:54:36
  feed thebadgeer dot com to support us, and we're gonna go into the patment
• 1:54:43
  show now. So if you guys like this video, please smash like subscribe.
• 1:54:46
  If you're not already subscribe, hit the belf notification. Leave us to
• 1:54:48
  comment. Let us know what you guys think about what we discussed on the
• 1:54:50
  show today. Links are in the description to all of the stories, and
• 1:54:55
  please please please share this video because sharing is caring. Thanks so much for
• 1:54:59
  coming on today's episode of HPR News, and we'll talk to you all in
• 1:55:01
  the next video.