Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 26, 2023 - Info Warrior - Jason Bermas

01:57:36

The Big Apple Has A Big Fix For Donny T | Reality Rants with Jason Bermas

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in.
	Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want.
	We think too much and feel too little.
	More than machinery, we need humanity.
	We know the air is unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat.
	As if that's the way it's supposed to be.
	We know things are bad, worse than bad.
	They're crazy. Silence!
	The great and powerful Oz knows why you have come.
	You've got to say, I'm a human being! God damn it! My life has value!
	You have meddled with the primal forces of nature!
	Don't give yourselves to brutes.
	Men who despise you, enslave you, who regiment your lives, tell you what to do, what to think, or what to feel.
	Who drill you, diet you, treat you like cattle, use you as cannon fodder.
	Don't give yourselves to these unnatural men! Machine men with machine minds and machine hearts!
	Yeah, thank you! You're beautiful! I love you! Yes! You're beautiful! Thank you! Ha ha!
	It's... SHOWTIME!
	And now, reality with Jason Hermes.
	And who loves you?
	And who do you love?
	Good morning, good morning, good morning.
	It is Reality Rants. I am Jason Bermas.
	This is redvoicemedia.com.
	And let's start the day off with some Donnie T. Again, I really, unfortunately...
	I hate to talk this way, but I think it is a foregone conclusion that they intend and will at least achieve on some level with one of these criminal cases to put Donald Trump in prison.
	It has become extremely apparent to me.
	I mean, for me, it's very difficult to understand how more and more people...
	I understand there's like...
	The people that are kind of in the blind cult who just think the guy is totally invincible.
	And then you got the super delusional cult that's been grifted upon that somehow think he's still in charge of everything despite everything, again, that's going on in the public arena.
	Okay? But then you have these guys and gals that I interview almost on a daily basis from...
	To ex-military, to political analysts, to political allies, to pundits, to authors, to media personalities, etc.
	And I put them on the spot about what happens when, or in their case, if...
	I'm like, you and me don't think it's going to happen if...
	They put Donald Trump in actual jail because the arrests have already happened.
	The indictments have already happened.
	The trials are now happening.
	I thought the Georgia case was going to be the weakest one and it was their last card to play and then it becomes this RICO case which is the most dangerous because it's the ultimate fishing expedition of any kind of Moral evil that they can try to seize upon as a criminal act.
	Just want to point that out also.
	Okay? So, yesterday, you had another ruling in this civil case that Donald Trump is attending.
	Okay? And it's absurd.
	The judge gagged Trump on this.
	He said he violated the gag order.
	He fined him another $10,000, gave him another warning.
	Okay? Gonna be a lot more next time.
	You can't even speak on your own behalf.
	And as we illustrated yesterday, and we showed you yesterday, his former lawyer had to get up there and start apologizing in tears for what she had done.
	What? What?
	Forget about just attorney-client privilege outside of the executive.
	Outside of the executive.
	But let's talk about just the executive itself and executive sessions.
	I mean, they got Navarro in prison as well right now.
	Like, let me make sure that's true.
	Because I believe Navarro's still in jail.
	Peter Navarro, jail.
	Let's see what we got.
	He's found guilty.
	Facing prison. Contempt of Congress.
	Convicted. So he's convicted and 30 days at a maximum of one year.
	I'm not sure he's even sentenced.
	Let's see. Let's go to sentenced.
	We do it live here. And we got some other fun live stuff for you, let me tell you.
	For sure. They gave him four months.
	Is it four months or is that Bannon?
	Found guilty last year, defying a subpoena.
	That's Bannon. Bannon four months in prison.
	And look, Donald Trump and this response right here should be everywhere.
	It should be huge.
	This is the former president of the United States.
	Has the largest political visible base I've ever seen in my lifetime.
	Again, you can love them.
	You can hate them.
	You can try to deny that.
	That's the reality.
	Okay? A huge political base.
	And these trials are overtly fraudulent on so many levels.
	Now, killing it in the polls...
	Where is he in any kind of actual search engine?
	Let me just, again, we're going to show you this.
	So I typed in Trump response.
	Trump response. Now, the top one, I went to videos.
	Okay, now, admittedly, the top one is C-SPAN. C-SPAN is like the last bastion of Will Aaron.
	That's it. And it was the last bastion when they cut him off after the 20...
	Cut the president off from the media...
	After the 2020 election.
	That's what happened. First of all, it should be down the line.
	This is today's news.
	August. July.
	June. August.
	June. June.
	June. See that?
	See how that works? I mean, you have to come all the way down here.
	Okay, to 19 years ago.
	19 is the same exact video.
	Or it might be a clip of it from C-SPAN. So C-SPAN's it.
	Now we're going to do a little test in real time here to see what Twitter gives us.
	And maybe we get two minutes of that speech on Twitter.
	Maybe we get the full one.
	I haven't done it yet, so we'll see.
	First of all, this for you garbage is total garbage.
	We never want for you. We always want to be on following.
	Secondly, let's do it.
	Let's just type in Trump responds.
	Same thing. Okay.
	Not Trump.
	14 minute video from whoever Robert Govea Esquire is.
	Okay. And then some kind of MSNBC, Kenneth Chessborough thing.
	So not Trump.
	Not Trump. October 17th.
	Not. Does anybody get it?
	Like, had this happened, like, you know, on a platform that was actually free speech, right, Elon?
	I mean, it's total trash and garbage.
	That thing would be the trending thing, the first thing you find on any type of real news site.
	Any type of one.
	Let's try media. Trump responds.
	Let's see if we can find it. Again, where's Donald Trump?
	Where is Donald Trump?
	In a search, Trump responds.
	Here it is, with Megyn Kelly from September 14th.
	Okay, so now let's try it again.
	Let's just type in Trump.
	Let's see if we can even find the video.
	Okay, so media, at least, hey, I get a Gateway Pundit article.
	The Jenna Ellis Show...
	Okay, so this is the woman that had the tears.
	Third one down, Charlie Kirk, the statement.
	Third one down.
	I had to wait to get to the third one.
	Is it littered with it?
	Nope. Nope.
	So, clearly, anyone who's telling you that Twitter is a free speech platform, and any better...
	Then Facebook... Like, it's a facade of better.
	It's not even really...
	It's like, oh, we're going to bring back some people with band!
	Meanwhile, Schroyer's in jail.
	Couldn't get his original Twitter account back.
	And there are reports apparently he was already put in solitary confinement.
	Because, you know, that's what we should be doing to people...
	Who are non-violent, non-criminals.
	But we'll let criminals do their thing.
	Do their thing.
	And then we'll just censor everybody.
	So it's on like Donkey Kong, everybody.
	Ain't nobody getting out of this one.
	And you can say, ain't nobody got time for that.
	Everybody, whether they realize it or not...
	Are 100% and totally, totally, myself included, manipulated by the screens we stare at all day.
	If you are looking at a screen, there is a level of manipulation no matter what.
	I don't think you can go 30 seconds at this point without something.
	Especially if you're on one of these goddamn things.
	My God. So we're going to play the Donnie T. response, but this is a civil case.
	Okay. They got four criminal ones coming for you.
	And it's funny, I interviewed Joel Gilbert.
	Joel Gilbert's done some really interesting stuff.
	Joel Gilbert has done Dreams of My Real Father, the Frank Marshall Davis-Obama story.
	So it's a great documentary.
	I've shown you Frank Marshall Davis here.
	I think that he makes a wonderful case, a very, very convincing case, that Frank Marshall Davis is indeed Barack Obama's real father, Barry Sotero's real father.
	And this is a guy that did on the ground investigative journalism.
	I always liked that. I always like it when people go out there and actually talk to people.
	Go get old yearbooks, which we're going to talk about, and old photographs.
	So he also did a film called Trump, The Art of the Insult.
	Another very fun movie.
	Very smart. Very on the ground.
	So Gilbert's done some good stuff.
	Didn't realize in 2022, he'd already put a book slash film out called Michelle Obama 2024.
	And he still believes, just like Roger Stone, it will be Michelle Obama who comes in and sweeps up The Democratic nomination.
	He thinks that Michelle Obama is going to announce in November.
	Sometime within the next month.
	We'll see. Joel Gilbert. We're putting it down to Chinatown.
	Gilbert's another one, however, that I'm sitting there and I'm talking to.
	He doesn't seem to think it matters.
	If Trump goes to jail, he's going to be the nominee.
	Now he does not think we're necessarily going to have legitimate elections.
	Well, that's a problem. That's a big problem.
	But he also says, you know, that's one of the reasons that you go with Michelle Obama.
	It's because if these people plan to steal it, you want something more plausible than Joe Biden.
	Because let's be honest, Joe Biden wasn't very plausible the first time around, other than this illusion that the media is setting of how many people had severe TDS. Right?
	I mean, that's how they got away with it.
	Is the severe TDS narrative.
	Well, again, take a good look at the narrative control here.
	We're getting, we did it!
	That's what I'm getting.
	We did it, Joe! I mean, again, I typed in Trump.
	This is what you get for media and Trump on Twitter, the free speech platform.
	This thing, honestly, should be littered down the line.
	It's littered down the line.
	And this should be, I mean, not necessarily Charlie Kirk's, but out of all the searches, why wouldn't that be the top one?
	And I get it.
	There are large echo chambers on other platforms, whether it be Getter or Truth Social, which is like the Trump fanboying.
	What are we doing here, guys?
	If that's all you get, that's completely marginalized.
	And now, the media, along with the government, are legitimizing, criminalizing not only your speech, but your political affiliations.
	DVEs. Domestic violent extremists.
	And now this is with the agave, anti-government.
	Ooh, you're anti-government.
	I'm certainly not anti-government.
	I'm not ridiculous.
	I realize we have to have a government, but one of a system of checks and balances.
	How dare you say that, Jason?
	Accountability, checks and balances.
	Sounds very undemocratic to me, bro.
	Sounds very undemocratic to me.
	Like, how hard is it to figure it out that just because you're criticizing corruption within a government, you're not an anti-government extremist.
	And also, you don't happen to be a domestic violent extremist, alright, if you like a certain candidate.
	Who is the President of the United States.
	Who they constantly...
	Misrepresented and framed up and tried to make the public believe like he was some kind of Russian Putin lapdog where there was basically no conflict with those people violently.
	Maybe some proxy stuff going on, but nothing crazy.
	No escalation.
	In the Middle East of significance.
	Although, again, I'll always say it.
	Syria didn't do the right thing, Donnie.
	Iran didn't do the right thing, Donnie.
	Israel, Jerusalem didn't do the right thing, Donnie.
	So the stage was set then.
	And in fact, I'm going to show you a clip a little later on.
	Outside of Trump.
	That the U.S. and Israel are doing some pretty massive war gaming together.
	Surprise, surprise.
	In January of this year.
	Now they do this all the time.
	But it's worth noting that this one was definitely gearing up for some type of an escalation and extremely large scale.
	So we'll play that in a little bit.
	We're going to go to break.
	We're going to come back. Thumbs it up.
	Subscribe. And share.
	It is Reality Rants with Jason Bermas, and we will be back after this.
	Attention Americans, breaking news.
	Biden's dangerous plan for a digital dollar is underway.
	Don't be fooled.
	It won't benefit you.
	Take action now.
	The Federal Reserve phased deployment of FedNow began on July 1st, 2023.
	Be prepared. This may catch many off guard.
	Your hard-earned assets are in jeopardy.
	But there's a simple legal tax loophole to opt out of the digital dollar.
	Reach out to American Alternative Assets for a free wealth protection guide and discover how to safeguard your wealth with gold and silver IRAs against a failing dollar in volatile markets.
	Visit ProtectFromBiden.com.
	This invaluable guide provides precise steps to transfer your IRA or 401k into precious metals without any tax consequences.
	Be smart. Don't let Biden force you into using the government's new digital dollar.
	Visit ProtectFromBiden.com to get your free guide and get started.
	Again, that's ProtectFromBiden.com.
	And we are back.
	And you know, the big question still to me remains, what happens once they put this guy in jail?
	Because I honestly don't know.
	I don't know. And look, I'd be one of the happiest individuals ever if indeed they don't put him in prison.
	If indeed he can actually beat all of these cases.
	And the one in D.C., how does that happen?
	I've already seen the precedent set that the political enemies, not just of the Democrats and the left...
	Of any authoritative narrative, and when I say authoritative, I mean authoritarian narrative, they don't get a fair shake in bacon.
	No. They get what?
	They get prison time.
	Hardcore prison time.
	They get solitary confinement.
	They get their entire being stripped of them, And then a narrative projected on them by the media that is obscene and absurd.
	That's what they get. I mean, Assange being one of the biggest cases out there.
	100%. 100%.
	And you know what? We briefly talked about it, but Craig Murray, another journalist, also jail.
	Overseas. Jail.
	Jail time, jail time, jail time for journalists.
	I mean, just what I'm trying to show you here in the obscene.
	Like, let's go to YouTube. It'll be interesting what you get for Trump and YouTube.
	You'll probably get, when I type in Trump or Trump Responds, You'll probably get the authoritative sources and their tyke on it.
	You'll get Fox News maybe in there.
	Right? Maybe we'll get some Fox stuff.
	But MSNBC, CNN, maybe some Forbes.
	Maybe. Bueller.
	Bueller. So we're doing it live.
	Okay? You get to see an insight into my YouTube homepage without me signed in.
	And let's do it. Let's say Trump responds.
	Okay. Four months ago.
	Four months ago.
	Six months ago.
	Two weeks ago.
	Two months ago. All right.
	Okay. So let's say Trump responds.
	Let's filter it. Let's just do this week.
	Okay. There we go.
	So there's the speaker.
	So, oh, you know what?
	That's probably what I have first.
	Okay. Okay?
	This is actually his commentary on the Speaker election.
	That's why there was two here.
	Okay? Okay?
	I mean, that's how hard it is to find these things.
	Okay, so there's the New York Civil one after.
	Oh, wow. So we've got two.
	We'll do the Speaker one as well, but I wanted to talk about Mike Johnson.
	And look, I'll tell you what.
	I don't know much about Mike Johnson.
	But I do know that he was at least one of the people that called out the 2020 election.
	That should be like bare minimum.
	If you're trying to elect a legitimate leader in the House.
	Especially if you're supposedly on that side.
	Bare minimum to say, hey, how about a free and fair election?
	Maybe some audits. Maybe not mail-in ballots.
	Maybe we should not have what audits.
	Machines with proprietary software that we're unable to even know what the software is.
	It's proprietary insanity.
	Insanity. So, let's do it.
	We're 20 minutes deep, Reality Rant style.
	Let's do the New York civil case right here.
	Again, C-SPAN is it.
	So what just happened, as you know, as the witness was fully impeached.
	He admitted that he lied.
	That was a Perry Mason moment.
	I hope you caught it. I don't know if you did.
	A lot of times, the press doesn't like to report what happened, but the credibility of the press is very important.
	So, he just admitted that he lied.
	That was a big one.
	Any other questions? Yes?
	Mr. Trump, I would call it he is a liar.
	That was clear today. The question is, if he was lying in the past in service to you, while he was loyal to you, doesn't that undercover defense actually bolster him?
	Working for me at the time that he lied, you know, when he was doing that testimony.
	That was before Congress.
	A very heavily sworn testimony.
	He was not even working for me.
	He had already left.
	So he lied and he admitted that he lied.
	I'm not sure he really had a choice but to admit it because we caught him.
	He's been totally impeached, as he was, in theory, before he even made that statement.
	But that was very much a Perry Mason moment.
	What is happening with Congress?
	Go ahead. What did they say?
	What was the say to you? Go ahead.
	Go ahead. What should happen now, after the impeachment, Mr.
	President? What should happen now? Well, this should happen in terms of this particular trial.
	I think it should be dropped.
	It should have never been started.
	I don't have a jury.
	Should have never been started.
	I mean, he doesn't have a jury.
	I mean, think about it.
	In the civil case, they didn't give the ex-president who requested a jury a jury.
	And you don't think they're planning on putting him in jail?
	The judge is a Democrat, but I do respect the judge.
	I do respect the judge, and it's very unfair.
	She worked the trial so that it comes under a certain statute where you don't get a jury.
	That's very unfair.
	On Congress, Mr.
	President, you said you may go to the Capitol to see it in person and meet with House members.
	What would you say to the House members if you did go in person?
	Well, you saw my statements over the last few days about Mike Johnson.
	I don't know where that stands right now because I've been sitting in court all day.
	So I'll find out soon, but he's very respectful.
	What's happening inside the courtroom right now?
	What? What's happening inside the courtroom right now?
	You mean the conversation?
	Yes. That I can't tell you.
	Did you violate the ad word, Mr.
	President? No, not at all.
	Were you referring to the court?
	With respect to what?
	The disparaging comments.
	No, not at all. Who were you speaking to?
	Man, they really want him to get fined again, some of these.
	The disparaging comments!
	Were you referring to the court?
	What's going on in the court?
	To the person sitting beside the judge.
	Any other questions?
	Any other questions?
	Well, they're offering a deal, and they're taking deals, but from what I understand, they're saying nothing bad about me at all, but they're taking deals.
	A lot of people, they've been under investigation, After the people that rigged the election and stole the election, they go after people that have been trying to find out who rigged it and who stole it.
	And a lot of people know that answer.
	And if you look at the polls and the public, the public believes very strongly that the election was rigged and stolen.
	But when somebody's gone after for years, any one of a number of people, for years and years and years, and they eventually say, look, let's try and make a deal and get out of this because it's ruined their lives.
	And yet the people that rigged it, nothing happens to them.
	It's very sad. Very bad for our country.
	Now, again, I'm in full agreement with him.
	But since they've been able to pull that off, Donnie T, why?
	Why? And it looks like they gave the guy a civil trial with no...
	The ex-president. A civil trial with no jury.
	And Letitia James just like...
	He dramatically stormed out of court to audible gasps and was later fined $10,000 in a day of legal fireworks.
	Let's hear what... There are mountains of evidence.
	This person...
	But this is what we're up against.
	I want people to understand that these are just people and they're very unimpressive people, by the way.
	I mean, this is what modern-day authoritarianism looks like.
	Alright? This is it.
	Take a good look, everybody.
	It doesn't wear a funny hat all the time.
	It doesn't have a funny accent.
	Okay? It doesn't necessarily have a uniform.
	Alright? And this is it.
	Good evening everyone. This has been a four year investigation and there is mountains of evidence which basically corroborate the testimony of a number of witnesses.
	It's also important to know that Michael Cohen is not the main witness.
	His evidence has been corroborated by the mountains of evidence.
	Enough evidence to fill the courtroom.
	Enough evidence to fill the- I mean this is an unimpressive person also.
	Letitia James has never been impressive on a microphone.
	But I mean, come on. This is like a 90-second soundbite and you can't even get through it?
	Michael Cohen's not even the main witness.
	There are mountains of evidence and mountains of evidence to fill the courtroom.
	So I look forward again to this trial continuing and of course I always look forward to justice.
	Thank you very much. And let me also remind you that the judge has already made a decision with respect to the summary judgment.
	There is sufficient evidence to prove that in fact Mr.
	Trump, the Trump Organization and the other defendants committed widespread fraud.
	So I'm not going to take questions.
	I stutter and stammer because, again, I was put into this position to do this.
	Part of the game.
	I'm a puppet.
	That's part of it.
	Alright? And then, the other thing that James slipped in is, we've already found him guilty without a jury.
	We've already found him guilty without a jury.
	The judge has already made a summary judgment in this case.
	He's already been found guilty without a jury.
	That's the America I want to live in.
	Somebody at the supposed apex of power in this country, the commander-in-chief, can't get a jury trial in New York, New York City, where he did business for decades.
	Decades. Can't get a jury trial.
	That guy. If he can't get a jury trial, what do you think happens to you if you ever step up to the plate?
	And that's the message here.
	That's part of the PSYOP and the psychological operation.
	And then they have somebody like Letitia James do it to you.
	Yeah, no, she's not poopy pants Joe Biden.
	No, she's conscious.
	But just unimpressive.
	It's like Millie. Unimpressive person after unimpressive person.
	So you sit there and you're like, man, you are one pathetic loser.
	But the beat goes on.
	That's it. I mean, it just...
	Forward. Boom.
	Boom. Boom. Boom.
	Boom. Boom.
	Boom. Boom. In fact, we talked about that via...
	Uh, Truthstream Media yesterday.
	It's like, no matter who's in power, it seems like this agenda, you know, trudges forward.
	Talking to David Icke, you know, a couple times over the past couple months.
	You know, I asked him about how he talked about if Biden had gotten in, it would be worse than Trump.
	And he's like, well, yeah, and it has been.
	I mean, all these things have now been fast-tracked.
	Fast-tracked. It's not wrong.
	We're about to go to break. Thumbs it up.
	Thumbs it up. Thumbs it up.
	Subscribe and share. Let's get over 100 thumbs on every platform.
	It'd be great if we get up to 200 thumbs on platforms like YouTube and platforms like Rumble.
	Try to grow the channels.
	I mean, YouTube is just the slow decline.
	Slow decline. And again, no real traction over on Twitter either because they're narrative management operations.
	They're Trojan horse civilian systems that are part of this whole problem we're talking about today.
	All of it. So we're going to go to break.
	We're going to come back. We're going to talk Donnie T, the Speaker of the House, Mike Jackson, Matt Gaetz, and more.
	Second Hour Lives over at rvmrumble.com.
	back after this word from our sponsor.
	When I invented my pillow, my passion was to help each and every one of you.
	And 20 years later, all of your support is what keeps us going.
	Because of you, we've been able to create thousands of USA jobs and help millions get the best sleep ever.
	To thank you, my employees and I are bringing you a limited edition MyPillow.
	The Giza Elegance MyPillow is made with my patented adjustable fill, the most amazing cotton, and a two-inch pipe cusset.
	It has four custom loft levels, machine washable and drivable, and you get my 60-day money-back guarantee and 10-year warranty.
	Go to MyPillow.com or call the number on your screen.
	Use your promo code to get your limited edition 20th anniversary MyPillow queen size.
	Retails for $69.98, now only $19.98.
	That's right. Get a queen-size MyPillow for only $19.98.
	From all of us here at MyPillow, please America!
	You know, I've got this open-air re-education camp YouTube thing that Danny Polishchuk, who does the boys cast with Ryan Long, he does the low-value male podcast that I've been on.
	He's a really great follow on Twitter.
	Very funny guy. I happen to like comedians, by the way.
	Even if I don't agree with their politics, if you're funny, thank you.
	If you made me laugh, thank you.
	I do happen to like people like Polish Chuck and Ryan Long maybe a little bit more because they are people that are making relevant political commentary.
	Okay. And somebody like JP Awakens.
	He's another one. They actually did a great collab together where Danny Polishchuk plays a pilot and he starts talking about a little something he can't be talking about on the YouTube.
	And they do a good job of satirizing that, right?
	We need more and more of that.
	But we're going to have to wait for that little piece of censorship.
	Because basically, just like Jenna Ellis has to get up there now and read down the line and cry and say, I'm sorry.
	I'm sorry. I wouldn't be involved.
	I didn't do my...
	I'm sorry.
	Just like that. Now, if you want your channel back and to get a strike removed, you've got a little re-education camp quiz.
	Are you going to answer this correctly?
	Can't wait to show you what that quiz is.
	But first...
	Let's get into Donnie T. Okay?
	This is it. This is his comments on the Speaker election.
	Okay? And Mark Meadows' immunity report.
	Now, Mark Meadows... Is yet another one of these people entrenched in this RICO case and has now been given immunity.
	And nobody knows what he's going to say, what he's going to do.
	But just like I said, this is a huge fishing expedition to see what they can do to get people to flip and clip.
	Alright? Or plead guilty to whatever.
	Like you said, a lot of people are taking plea deals.
	Alright? Why?
	Because... That's how they go after this guy from every single angle.
	That's how. I think Mike Johnson is doing very well.
	He's a tremendous congressman, respected by everybody.
	I hear it looks like he's really good.
	I haven't had one negative comment about him.
	Everybody likes him. He's respected by all of them.
	That's something we need. And it looks like that's going to happen.
	So that'll be a wonderful thing.
	I put out a truth today on him.
	We could get somebody that's going to be really spectacular, and maybe for many years to come, he'll be very good.
	So we're very happy about that.
	On the trial here, it's going very well.
	This is a Biden witch hunt deal.
	It all comes out of the DOJ. It's to interfere with the election.
	Our company has turned out to be much stronger than anyone even thought.
	The financial statements are much lower than the actual numbers.
	The actual numbers are much higher.
	We're in the process of proving that.
	We already have proved it.
	They had Mar-a-Lago value.
	They had $18 million, the Attorney General, with the judge.
	We're working in coordination with the judge, and it's worth approximately 50 to 100 times that amount.
	This is a witch hunt. It's just a bad trial, a very unfair trial.
	The only time the statute's ever been used for this is this.
	This is a statute that doesn't give you a jury, doesn't give you anything.
	It's a pure political witch hunt.
	But we have the facts on our side, so the company is much stronger than they anticipated, much stronger than anyone really understood.
	It was a private company, so nobody understood it.
	The assets have very little debt.
	We have a lot of cash. It's a great company, and we're happy with the way it's going.
	But it's a witch hunt.
	There's no question about it.
	Getting back to Congress, we think Mike Johnson's going to do really well.
	He's popular. He's smart.
	He's sharp. He's going to be fantastic.
	I think he's going to be a fantastic speaker.
	I believe that will happen.
	We'll see what. You'll let me know when I come out.
	I'll be out in a couple of hours.
	I don't believe that, because I've spoken to Mark Benos many, many times over the years, and he strongly believed the election was rigged.
	Now, of course, you know, deranged Jack Smith and the prosecutors, they go after somebody for years, and they say, look, here's the story.
	We'll give you nothing.
	We'll erect a statue to you, or you're going to go to jail for 10 years for having done nothing wrong.
	So, you know, a lot of people have to make that decision.
	Some people would never make that decision.
	Other people would. But Mark Meadows always felt it was rigged.
	His whole thing was rigged.
	It was rigged, and it was stolen.
	And because it was rigged and stolen, our country's gone to hell.
	You take a look at the border, you take a look at Israel, that would have never happened.
	You take a look at Ukraine, that would have never happened.
	Our country's going to hell.
	You just look at energy.
	Energy independent, we were.
	And now we're not energy independent.
	We're not even close. We're buying energy from Venezuela and lots of other places.
	And we have more liquid gold under our feet.
	We're a crime-ridden nation.
	We're a nation in decline.
	All because of a rigged and stolen election.
	Thank you very much. What about Giuliani?
	Do you think he'll take a deal? What about Giuliani?
	Will he cut a deal? Who's cutting deals?
	Everyone's cutting deals.
	Deal cutting. So, I believe we've got to find Gates right here.
	Here's Gates. So, Mike Johnson, he's in.
	Again, don't know much about him.
	I would have rather had this guy.
	I love that Thomas Massey did this.
	Ron Paul for speaker?
	Huh? Huh?
	Huh? Massey and Paul?
	A couple of Kentucky winners right there.
	That's what I like to see. People who are winning in Kentucky.
	So, here we go.
	Here is Matt Gaetz on MSNBC on the mainstream media in response.
	Kevin McCarthy celebrating a victory that almost didn't happen.
	Gates, one of the leaders of the rebellion.
	Somebody's holding somebody back.
	Look at that. Oh, somebody just held somebody back.
	Kevin McCarthy going head to head with Congressman Matt Gates after the House Speaker worked with Democrats to avert a government shutdown.
	Matt Gates. Promising he will move this week to remove House Speaker Kevin McCarthy It is astonishing to hear any colleague give Speaker McCarthy credit Kevin McCarthy was ousted from his role as Speaker of the House by fellow Republicans Buckle up for a fight He said it, he did it, and he's here. Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, my live guest in studio in Washington.
	I know it was a busy day on the floor.
	Thanks for being here. Welcome to you to Washington.
	We're glad to have you here. Here I am.
	Let's get right to it. What does today's speaker vote mean?
	And did you cut any side deals this time like we heard about last time?
	No side deals. This speaker election means that the House Republican Conference is united, really, for the first time this Congress.
	We are united behind a man of deep faith who obeys Almighty God and the Constitution before all else.
	And I was...
	Now let me stop it here.
	Let me stop it here.
	I could do without the Almighty God thing in the beginning.
	Call me kooky! I could just do without it.
	I could just do without that type of rhetoric.
	I like the Constitution.
	I like the Bill of Rights.
	I like accountability.
	That's great stuff.
	And look, Gates has grown on me.
	A lot. I think there's some issues there.
	But he doesn't seem to be the frothing-at-the-mouth warmonger that so many of these other people are.
	I'm proud to support him. He's not someone who comes from any particular faction of the Republican Conference.
	I don't know about that. Well, he has strong relationships from our most moderate members to our most conservative members.
	And you know what? Everyone feels listened to with Mike Johnson.
	He has a great tone, a great leadership skill stack, and I'm going to do everything I can to make him successful.
	One of the things that you and several Republicans got changed at the beginning of the year was you made it easier to remove a speaker in real time.
	Then you exercised that authority.
	So people are seeing a Congress, a set of news cycles here because of what you guys did.
	We're told that that continues.
	So will you be as eager to use that rule to topple this speaker as McCarthy?
	Or this was kind of one and done for you?
	Well, we have Republicans and Democrats who are interested in raising the threshold for the motion to vacate beyond just one member.
	And just this morning, I met with Speaker Johnson about that and about those desires, and here's what I've offered.
	Ro Khanna of California, a Democrat, and I have worked on some bipartisan anti-corruption
	rule changes for the House that wouldn't allow members of Congress to become lobbyists or
	registered foreign agents, that wouldn't allow members of Congress to accept donations from
	lobbyists and political action committees, and that would stop members of Congress from
	trading individual stocks.
	You know, I'd like to see lobbyists out all together.
	Just, that's done.
	That's done on Unzo.
	I mean, lobbying used to be, for factions of the citizenry, That wanted their voice heard.
	And now it's all corporate interests.
	It's all military industrial complex interests.
	Period. That's it.
	By the way, can we get a hundred thumbs up on all the platforms over here?
	Let's get back to Gates. So if we could approach that Kana-Gates anti-corruption agenda with great vigor, then I might be willing to consider an increase in the threshold on the motion to vacate.
	So you could raise a threshold, which makes it harder to toss somebody.
	Do you have any idea whether Mike Johnson is worried that you guys will do this again?
	I mean, I said one and done because, yes, you could technically do it, but if you keep doing this, right, that's going to complicate a lot of your party's governing agenda.
	I do not want your viewers to get the impression that I want to govern by motion to vacate.
	This was something that we had to do because Kevin McCarthy had lied to us.
	The one thing that... So it was a McCarthy thing for you.
	Listen, when you sit there, And you say one thing and you do another and it's to the detriment of not only the American people but the global populace.
	When you're allowing us to drift into a possible World War III scenario.
	When you're allowing the imprisonment and overt authoritarian over-punishment of Of American citizens for January 6th and not releasing all the videos like you promised.
	Yeah, out. Get them out of there.
	Goodbye. Later.
	See ya. Well, undeniably, if Kevin McCarthy had maintained his commitments to pursue single-subject spending bills, if he had released the January 6th tapes, if he had called for the votes on a balanced budget amendment and term limits as he had promised, then he would likely still be Speaker today.
	It wasn't about the man so much as his unwillingness to adhere to the agreement that he had made.
	Well, you know, we keep it real around here, and I appreciate you coming on.
	It seems sometimes somewhat about the men, because you seem to have beef with him and him with you.
	It did seem at times to get quite tense.
	Let me ask you about that. Oh, come on now, Ari.
	Although I will admit this is not quite the hatchet job it could have been from the very beginning.
	But he's trying to make it about machismo.
	No, everything Gates just said there is correct.
	That's not true, though. I want to push back on that because I can cite specific things that Kevin McCarthy agreed to do.
	And the reason I brought this motion to vacate is when I went home to my constituents, they looked at me and said, Matt, you promised us a term limit vote.
	You promised us a balanced budget vote.
	He's not doing these things.
	And you said there was a one-person motion to vacate.
	So it was really accountability for policy and procedure failures more than was any beef.
	Accountability. Man, there's a word.
	It's just... Rolls off my tongue.
	Accountability. Self-accountability.
	Accountability for those in power.
	Accountability for those in the media, those in government.
	Accountability. Hell, that's what the media was supposed to be there for.
	Was some type of accountability.
	The fourth estate. Investigative journalism.
	We have informed viewers, and they've lived through it and watched it all, so they can adjust and assess what you're saying based on what they saw, because we saw that.
	But I do want to get you, while I have you, on one of the things that you all said was bad.
	One of you things you said was buy-up.
	Alright, so here comes Ari. We've got to take a break.
	Final segment of the first hour over here at Reality Rants.
	Second hour lives over at rvmrumble.com and we will be back after this word from our sponsor.
	We interrupt today's programming to bring unfortunate news.
	Biden's dangerous plan for a digital dollar is underway.
	Don't be fooled. It won't benefit you.
	So take action now.
	The Federal Reserve's phased deployment of FedNow began on July 1, 2023.
	Be prepared. This may catch many off guard and put your hard-earned assets in jeopardy.
	But here's the good news.
	There's a simple legal tax loophole to opt out of the digital dollar.
	Speak to someone. At American Alternative Assets for a free wealth protection guide and discover how to safeguard your wealth with gold and silver IRAs against a failing dollar in volatile markets.
	Dial 833, the number 2 USA Gold.
	Yes, call now. 833-287-2465.
	This invaluable guide provides precise steps to transfer your IRA or 401k into precious metals without any tax consequences.
	Don't let Biden force you into using the government's new digital dollar.
	Call 833, the number two USA Gold.
	Yes, call now.
	833-287-2465.
	Act swiftly. 833-287-2465.
	Final segment of the first hour.
	Let's get back to it.
	Here comes Melber trying to be slick.
	Huh? We got informed viewers.
	We're going to let them decide whether you were just a macho, macho man with Kevin McCarthy or you actually had some substance behind why you got rid of him.
	They could make that decision.
	But we got this right here.
	I'm going to Melber you right now.
	Let's Melber.
	Was that you said Kevin McCarthy was working with Democrats or doing so in the wrong way.
	Let me show you. Take a look. Working with the Democrats is a yellow brick road that has been paved by Speaker McCarthy.
	The Speaker fought through 15 votes.
	In January to become Speaker, but was only willing to fight through one failed CR before surrendering to the Democrats.
	The only time that we lost the conservative agenda was when Kevin McCarthy went behind the Republican conference and was able to retain a majority of Democrat votes.
	You and others said that.
	And yet, this is the question I've been dying to ask you.
	I haven't seen you in person since this all went down.
	Look at this chart. Congressman Gates.
	You were in the minority.
	You partnered with over 200 Democrats to oust Kevin McCarthy.
	And so the question to you, and this is not a left or right question, as you know, there are conservatives and Republicans who've raised this issue with you in this recent time.
	Why is it bad when Kevin McCarthy partners with Democrats to keep the government open, but it's okay when you do it, to actually shut down basically a functioning house for a few weeks?
	Because that functioning house, what?
	Was... Basically cutting arms deals behind closed doors to escalate wars that really put us all in danger.
	And the opposite is true with what these people did to get him out so he could no longer work with those entities behind closed doors.
	This idea of a functioning government.
	Listen... The government's going to function whether it gets shut down or not, stripped or not.
	We already need a huge overhaul of the outward bureaucracies we all live under right now.
	Right now. Well, we shut down for 22 days.
	Keep in mind, every year, Congress takes a six-week vacation.
	So we took about half the time of the normal vacation, and I actually think it was some of our more productive time.
	And you couldn't have done it without those 200 Democrats.
	You couldn't have done it without working with Democrats, right?
	Yeah, and by the way, I work with Democrats regularly, whether it's on privacy rights, on FISA issues, whether it's on criminal justice reform.
	But I just showed you saying that was a yellow brick road paved by McCarthy.
	You say that was wrong. That was a tight clip.
	There it is. And I'll give you the mic back.
	Sure. Our viewers, they don't always hear directly from you.
	They see, you know, coverage of you.
	Explain to us in logical English why it's bad when he does it and okay when you do it.
	I had to work with Democrats to remove McCarthy because he worked with Democrats to violate the agreements he had made with us.
	Had McCarthy not worked with Democrats on the debt limit deal in violation of the guardrails we had set up, certainly I wouldn't have worked with Democrats to remove him.
	But I think we're being a bit reductive here.
	It's okay to work with Democrats in divided government.
	It's actually necessary and required if you want to do the essential functions of government.
	What's not okay is for Kevin McCarthy to blow through the guardrails we set, for example.
	We told him that he was authorized to negotiate a debt limit deal that was to a certain date or a certain dollar amount, whichever came first.
	He then blew through those guardrails to just suspend the debt limit entirely until January of 2025.
	And doing that, again, that's another 13, 14, 15 months at that time, right?
	In doing that, you've already seen trillion-dollar jumps in the debt, from $32 to $33 trillion in a month's time.
	Now, what do you think that's eventually going to do for stationary inflation?
	Because we've seen some prices come back down.
	But we've also seen the escalation of fuel.
	Winter is coming, everybody.
	November, right around the corner.
	Happy Halloween to everybody coming up.
	I hope everybody's partying it up.
	I'm a very busy guy. I won't be able to do that.
	I hope everybody's having a little fun skiing hutch though.
	Definitely hoping for that.
	But after that, what is it going to be like around Thanksgiving?
	Christmas time? You know, there's some indicators that may be not so great.
	Maybe not so great.
	And there is a tipping point, right?
	There is a tipping point in every society that As to when you can only inflate the currency to so much.
	So without spending limits, etc., that is going to be exacerbated, escalated, and possibly fast-tracked.
	And how many average Americans can really afford that right now?
	Five, we've already accrued two additional trillion dollars in debt as a consequence of that.
	Look, people can assess that, like I said, for themselves.
	You're saying that that was the enforcement against deals you'd already made.
	I'm running out on time here, but finally, big picture, take it all together.
	Did Matt Gaetz and the Rebels win because you got the speaker you wanted and now you don't have to vacate or play those strategies anymore?
	Or are Matt Gaetz and the so-called Rebels still out here and Johnson should be just as worried over his shoulder as McCarthy?
	It's the former. We are here to make Mike Johnson as successful a speaker as he can possibly be.
	He has sat next to me for seven years on the House Judiciary Committee.
	We served together on House Armed Services.
	We have very aligned perspectives on a vast majority of issues.
	So this is our guy.
	This isn't a guy that we're going to chase around with a motion to vacate.
	This is a guy we're going to do everything we can to pour into and make successful.
	I gave you time. I want to mention for viewers It's your guy, which is different from how we started the interview, which you said he's everybody's guy, he's across the board, but now he's your side.
	Well, look, look, he can be our guy and he can be the guy for other folks.
	Everybody voted for him, but I think people can be enthusiastic about Mike Johnson for different reasons.
	I'm very enthusiastic about him being an honest man, a true conservative.
	I think others that might not hold his perspective on some of those policy questions really like his leadership style.
	Well, I thank you for coming in. When it comes to the speaker news, you have been a big part of it and been in the news.
	I appreciate you coming on the beat. All right.
	Well, you know what? Ari, not as vicious as I thought he may have been.
	I'm not saying he was super fair, but at the same time, certainly not as vicious.
	Now, we're going to be going over to the second hour in about six or seven minutes.
	I got a wide range of stories down the line.
	I just want to briefly mention a story that I'm not really covering today.
	And that is the story in Maine.
	And I realize so many people are going to be covering it and so many people are going to be analyzing it.
	I'm rather, you know, I'm not saying I'm happy about when it happened.
	I'm happy today is Thursday.
	And this is the last day that I broadcast in the week.
	We do it Monday through Thursday.
	Live, 9 to 11 a.m.
	over here at redvoicemedia.com.
	Also a third hour Burmese afterwards.
	Old premium stuff, which I again still think holds up.
	I hope a lot of you guys are enjoying these archived interviews.
	That go in depth about a lot of stuff that, you know, I don't talk about as much today, but it's still relevant.
	Epstein case, etc. with Richie Allen yesterday.
	But you look at the vast array of what's happening in the world.
	And so many people are quick to jump on, especially when a tragedy like that happens and have an analysis.
	I like to take a step back.
	When something like that happens, where you've got a bunch of dead people and they're reporting 22 dead out there, that doesn't have to be the first thing I talk about.
	Uh-uh. Not at all.
	Not at all. In fact, let me see what I can find about it as it develops over the weekend and into Monday, and maybe we'll cover it then, depending.
	Now, Is it going to be a huge story in the mainstream media?
	Oh my god, of course it is. Without question, right?
	I think we all realize, without question, that's what's going to be happening.
	So, I'm going to back off of that one for now.
	It's just like there wasn't just like an immediate response, full throttle on what is happening in Israel and Palestine and Gaza.
	And by the way, see if I can find that story.
	Yeah, here it is right here.
	So I just want people to understand.
	Again, I'm not for disco kids and rave kids getting killed.
	Okay? I'm not.
	I'm not for them getting terrorized.
	I'm not for paratrooping.
	I'm not for hostages.
	Etc. Just want everybody to understand that I'm not for that.
	This is the Palestinian city of Abed Hunan.
	Okay? Prior to what recently happened.
	And as we slide it...
	Okay?
	Okay? This is what it looks like now.
	Let's just keep sliding this.
	Okay? I want everybody to take a really good look at all those homes that have been leveled and destroyed.
	And can you imagine the death and the destruction?
	I'm sorry, that's not all.
	Hamas didn't own all of that.
	I mean, we're doing it.
	We do it live here.
	And cutting off the power and the food supply and bombing campaigns like this one And then, you find out that the United States is doing high-level war games with Israel in January.
	Over the past week, I've observed our CENTCOM troops participating in Juniper Oak 23 TAC-2 alongside our Israel Defense Forces.
	Combined, joint, multi-domain operation to the fight.
	Operating together on land, in the air, and on sea.
	This is from St. Tom's on page, by the way.
	you This is the Destroyer Squadron Commodore.
	I mean, take a good look, everybody.
	I mean, this is what they sell you on.
	See, there goes the bomby bomb.
	But the reality is...
	These are the training exercises.
	You just saw what the city's looking like, right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Yeah.
	I just don't get hyped up.
	But it's easy to look at that and be like, yeah, America!
	I'm just glad it's not here right now.
	Jones had this Russian journalist on yesterday.
	And it was just a really interesting conversation.
	At the perspective of somebody who's inside of Russia.
	We're going to take a break. We're going to come back.
	We're going to tell you where to find that second hour, rvmrumble.com.
	Thumbs it up, thumbs it up anywhere you're watching.
	Subscribe and share and we'll be back after this word from our sponsor.
	If you're like me and you want to be prepared for the unexpected.
	That's where the wellness company's emergency medical kit comes in.
	Over 40% of Americans say that they would avoid a doctor or a hospital unless it was a catastrophic situation.
	Medical emergency kits with The kit contains eight potentially life-saving medications for you to keep on hand in the event of natural disasters, supply chain shortages, medical emergencies, or like an apocalyptic situation.
	These are the actual medications that you would need in the event of certain situations.
	So they've got emergency antibiotics, antivirals, antiparacidics, TWC.Health.RVM.RVM.RVM.RVM. Folks, you know the deal.
	You've got to come over to RVMRumble.com for that second hour.
	It is free of charge.
	You do want to support the broadcast at redvoicemedia.com slash uncensored.
	I wanted to read this.
	Kim Iverson is in that ad.
	And I think it's going to be a great segue into this new thing that YouTube has.
	And again, we are in now an open-air global re-education camp.
	That's not an over-exaggeration.
	I'm going to show you in the second hour how clear that is right now.
	I always wondered how anyone during their era could have defended slavery or segregation or the Holocaust or Japanese internment.
	But between the pandemic and now, I'm getting it.
	Fear. Fear of harm.
	Fear of others.
	Fear of harm. Fear of being harmed by others.
	If we mix with them, they will hurt us.
	We must keep them away to keep us safe.
	YouTube, we're about to do things we can't do on your platform because this is actually an example.
	I'm not going to read it.
	We're going to talk about it in a minute.
	Of what happens when you get a strike now.
	You get a quiz for re-education.
	So YouTube, we're going to educate, not re-educate the masses off of your platform right now.
	So this is not a joke from funny man Danny Polish Chuck, but we are going to read it.
	So this is the real deal, and my answer to this is I think this is an example of the open-air digital re-education camp we all live in now.
	So the obvious answer is to expose and resist Orwellian nightmares.
	So let's click on this.
	All right, and this is a thread.
	See, here's the rest.
	All the questions are so on the nose, it's unbelievable.
	He goes, I wish I screenshotted.
	It was your appearance on episode three of Low Value Mail that I had to do this for.
	So it was the Alex Stein Low Value Mail podcast.
	Alright, so here it is.
	Are we ready? He has to take this quiz.
	Let's get out of the way.
	Jing is a nurse who makes educational health content.
	In her latest video, she shares that since getting the COVID-19 vaccine last year, she has had three miscarriages.
	She says that the COVID-19 vaccine made her infertile.
	Uh-oh. Rump, bro, George!
	So select the correct answers.
	This video doesn't violate the policy because Jing is a medical professional.
	This video doesn't violate the policy because Jing is not spreading medical misinformation.
	It's probably two, if I had to guess.
	Yes, and it is.
	Correct answer, according to them, is two.
	Okay? So only because it happened to them.
	Now let's go to the Alex Stein ones right here.
	So this is policy training.
	You understand? I'm not making these things up when I say this is an open-air digital re-education camp on how you must present information.
	In a recorded debate, two medical practitioners discuss COVID-19.
	Dr. Smith claims that much of the global concern was exaggerated and people don't have to worry about COVID-19 because it's almost impossible to get it.
	Dr. Patel disagrees with Dr.
	Smith and stresses that COVID-19 presents a serious risk of transmission.
	Okay, so select all the correct answers.
	Let's see what we got. This video violates the policy because Dr.
	Smith spreads misinformation about the transmission of how transmissible COVID-19 is.
	It's probably one, I would assume.
	This video doesn't violate the policy because the two doctors just share their medical opinion and their views are equal to that of any health authority.
	That can't be correct.
	Okay, then this is in the prevention, treatment, and disease denial misinformation.
	This video doesn't violate the policy because Dr.
	Patel contradicts Dr.
	Smith and provides accurate information.
	That could be, yes, that is correct.
	Because the person is corrected, we will allow it.
	We will allow it!
	Once we say no!
	No! No!
	And by the way, guys, just so everybody understands, I mean, children who get COVID shot are infectious for the same amount of time as non-vaccinated study finds.
	Yeah, but get your booster!
	Six months and up!
	Get your booster!
	I mean, again, no difference.
	But get it! Get your booster!
	Both groups of kids aged 7 to 18 were infectious for three days on average.
	Whether you took the bivalent COVID booster or not, no kidding.
	Made no difference in the time that they shed the virus after testing positive.
	I mean, and they tell you right here that they're shedding it.
	Right here.
	You understand how that works?
	Like, all the symptoms of what they told you was COVID came along with the shots.
	I pointed this out. It'll be no...
	COVID shots won't... Again, I got in trouble for sharing these mainstream articles.
	Didn't matter. They still took me off. COVID shots.
	No walk in the park.
	Oh. Oh.
	No walk in the park. See, this is the CNN article.
	It's not even the one I wanted. This is it right here.
	Should warn them of the side effects.
	Won't be a walk in the park.
	That article's almost three years old now.
	Almost three years old.
	And if you paid attention, members like Sandra Fryhofer right here, both Pfizer and Moderna's COVID-19 vaccines require two doses at least.
	Better come back for that second one.
	Causes all sorts of terrible.
	Causes maybe even worse than what the virus would have done to you.
	They tell you that here.
	Boy, we gotta make sure that they get back in here for number two.
	But we gotta be honest with them about how bad it's gonna be.
	Soreness and fatigue, body aches, maybe even a fever.
	Huh. What do you think you're shedding after you get those shots?
	Can't say that. Geez, Jason, you want to get in trouble for medical misinformation?
	But don't worry, the good person, the good person told us and contradicted.
	That is correct. That is correct.
	In a recorded debate, oh wait, sorry, that was the same thing with the check.
	Let's see. Let's see.
	I like to see the medical.
	It must be right here.
	This one here. Let's open that in a new tab so we can zoom in.
	We're zooming on in.
	In an interview, a doctor says she does not prescribe ivermectin to her patients who have COVID-19, but has seen some reports that it works.
	She says she would like to see the medical community conduct more faster clinical trials on the drug.
	What are the correct answers?
	The video violates the policy because the doctor says ivermectin treats COVID-19.
	She didn't say that. The video does not violate the policy because the doctor never recommends ivermectin to treat COVID-19.
	Is a medical professional?
	I would say it's two.
	If I had to guess, it would be two.
	Let's see what we get. Let's see what the answer is here.
	Well, any answers here?
	So there it is. Yep, two.
	That is correct. That is correct.
	That is correct.
	But that's not really true. Because...
	I had plenty of videos taken down just saying, hey, I'm not the doctor.
	This doctor's saying that.
	I'm not advising you take it.
	This doctor is. Still no good.
	No bueno. So it's all selective enforcement anyway.
	It's a literal re-education program.
	There's no other way to describe it, right?
	I mean, seriously. I mean, come on.
	It's insane. Oh, let's go down the line.
	Is Jada Pinkett Smith's shocking tell-out memoir a flop?
	Book revealing seven-year separation from Will Smith fails to crack top ten on bestseller charts.
	And wait till you see the cover of this thing.
	Look at that. Like the old-school Photoshop filter with all those photographs that make up your face.
	It's a, you know...
	It's interesting. All these always felt like an overlay to me.
	I never thought that they actually did a really bang-up job with that filter.
	Worthy Jada Pinkett Smith.
	Looks like an Egyptian-type alien hybrid side profile.
	Don't get me wrong, Jada.
	Not saying that you're not an attractive lady, but just like this profile.
	Look at that thing. Looks very Photoshop-y and unnatural.
	And even the neck arch.
	It's got that like...
	Almost like binded head vibe.
	And why do I bring up this?
	Jason, you're buying into the celebrity culture.
	What are you even doing? Actually, I'm going to expose how worthless the celebrity culture is.
	And how Hollyweird is losing its grip on the narrative.
	In so many respects and regards.
	So... You probably couldn't have gotten more press as an actress or entertainer, talk show host, whatever Jada Pinkett Smith is at this point, podcaster, than her over the last several years.
	Whether it be the smack heard around the world, which we didn't cover when it happened because it was so ridiculous.
	Or the recent revelations of Will Smith and her being divorced or the controversies with their children and their sexual identities and her affairs and all the things that we're told are super important to care about on the TV and on the social media.
	Couldn't have more press.
	Nobody cares.
	Nobody cares. You didn't even break the top ten with your book.
	Nobody cares. We're over it.
	We're done. It's not even water cooler talk.
	It's... Okay.
	So what? Whatever. We're almost in World War III. Now, the inverse of that is somebody like Alex Jones.
	He's now putting out The Great Awakening.
	And put out the Great Reset and the War for the World.
	Those, by all standards, are number one New York Times bestsellers that are not on the New York Times bestseller list.
	And on the opposite, the only press that Jones gets is super negative.
	Jones, to pay out $1.1 billion, judge rules again.
	Just $1 billion.
	Man, have they just tried to make it semi-legitimate?
	And I'm not saying any of it was necessarily legitimate.
	I think defamation is a thing.
	I think he made some wrongful statements.
	I think in reality, we were talking about damages that honestly would have been ludicrous even in the hundreds of thousands of dollars range for any individual.
	Right? Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me.
	And look, there is repercussions for misreporting, etc.
	But the FBI agent that sued...
	Jones never said his name.
	I was unaware of who he even was.
	$90 million. $90 million!
	I'm sure it's not political.
	$90 million. Meanwhile...
	90 million for Jones.
	No accountability, criminally.
	People that cause criminal harm to others for the big pharma companies that we focused on this week.
	Just saying. Just come on.
	Like, again, what planet are we living on?
	Fortunately, we're living on the only planet we got, baby, Earth.
	Um, let's, let's move on here.
	Let's hit, let's hit a couple more stories.
	We got, we got plenty of stories to hit here.
	Uh, and by the way, I do have, I don't know how much time we're going to have or whether we're going to do it.
	I'm a dork. Okay.
	And I think a lot of you guys know that you realize that I watch presentations on cybernetics, cyborgs, automation, uh, And I was watching one earlier this morning.
	And I was like, man, this is a pretty in-depth breakdown of cybernetics, ethics, philosophy, the technology, where it's going.
	Coming from, it seems like an Americanized Asian perspective.
	I don't really know much about the institute or the individual that's given the presentation.
	But I found it enthralling.
	Pretty baseline and dull and boring, maybe.
	But there's a possibility...
	I mean, it's like 55 minutes, so obviously if we start to finish and I didn't talk over it, which we all know I will, we wouldn't be able to get through much of it.
	At the same time, there's a chance...
	There's a chance, especially with the next story that I'm going over right now, that maybe we'll hit 15, 20 minutes of it and you guys can be bored along with me.
	But cybernetics...
	It's really that pioneering, all-encompassing science of nature and mathematics and electromagnetics, you name it, back in the day, that merged together and now are very much a part of not only the transhumanist movement, but The automation movement that's coming into fruition on the road to that transhumanist move.
	Okay? And with technologies changing, Motorola unveils foldable phone concept that straps around your wrist like a bangle bracelet and changes colors to match your outfit.
	You ready? There it is.
	Whoa, let's watch the trailer.
	Oh, I shouldn't have done that.
	Ha ha ha ha ha!
	My old rocker.
	He's a Satanist.
	My bad with the Abathoman.
	What do we got here? So we got reducing wrinkles and shadows.
	Oh, look at that.
	Not nice. Oh, so they're talking about scanning stuff.
	So like receipts for your taxes, bank statements, all that.
	The real thing is, that reminds me, it's like everything old or new is old or old is new again.
	Remember those little slap bracelets?
	We bring them back jam pants now too?
	Or maybe the phone will interact with your pants.
	That's what we're talking about.
	That's what we're talking about.
	So here's a story that I think is interesting for a number of reasons and we'll break down why.
	But ex-NBA star Dwight Howard denies sexually assaulting a man at his Georgia home in 2021 as his attorney responds to civil lawsuit by claiming that the encounter was consensual.
	I think Dwight Howard has like five kids.
	Now, Howard is not denying sexually being with this guy.
	So I don't think Dwight Howard was out.
	I don't know if there was rumors about him, etc.
	I think that that is possibly why this allegation is being made.
	Who knows? Maybe he did sexually assault the guy after they had some kind of a relationship.
	There's already direct messages that are being shared and text messages that are being shared between the two that kind of show that There's definitely some kind of a sexual relationship there.
	So I don't know whether this is a shakedown or not, but whether it is or not now, this is in the public arena.
	And it just shows you that somebody's public persona can be much different than what they're doing in private.
	That's one.
	That's one aspect of this.
	Now the other aspect of this is that people can be extremely opportunistic let's just say that So let's just read some of this.
	What was a private consensual encounter was made public for profit and Mr.
	Howard looks forward to bringing the truth to light in a court of law.
	Howard's attorney Justin Bailey told ESPN. Howard, who now plays in Taiwan, is being sued by his home state of Georgia by a man named Stephen Harper who claims that he was sexually assaulted by the former NBA All-Star in July of 2021.
	The two allegedly began talking over Instagram direct messages two months earlier, which led to meet him in person according to a lawsuit filed by Harper's attorney and provided to male sport.
	In his complaint, Harper contends that he was made to participate in a threesome against his will, being pinned down and forced to remain in place by the 6'10", 265-pound Howard.
	Harper's lawsuit also contains allegations of international infliction of emotional distress and false imprisonment.
	I mean, that's a big dude.
	So, here's one of those communications.
	You make of it what you will.
	I'm not going to judge either way.
	I'm just showing you that public versus private, who knows, Opportunism?
	Excuse me. Maybe.
	I shouldn't be yawning like that.
	I've been up for a long time now.
	Oh, we're working the kinks.
	I tried to get to bed early last night, guys.
	Literally. And for me, early is like 10.30.
	Even before 10.30. Got right into the bed.
	And thought, you know what?
	Now it's bedtime. Eyes didn't probably actually go under into any kind of REM sleep.
	One-ish, two-ish a.m.
	I don't know, it's tough. And then you wake up several times.
	I need to really, really fix that.
	I need to Dana White myself.
	You know, it's not that my blood work, at least the last time I did it, was bad.
	Maybe I should do an update on that.
	But... A lot to be done in this life.
	Not so much time, but a lot to be done.
	Let's see. No, that wouldn't be it.
	Okay, and that one's through there.
	Good. Okay, so we...
	You know what? We've hit the vast majority, if not all of the stories that I did want to hit today.
	So I guess what we will do is we will do this cybernetics watch-along.
	Um... Over the next 30 minutes or so.
	That's what we're going to do. Cybernetics for the 21st century.
	Here we go. So I guess it's just a guy.
	Mateu Talcott. Actually, let's go back just a little bit.
	I know that was boring, but I always want to see where this stuff comes out of.
	Let's see. So, it's out of France.
	Okay, University of Technology in France.
	For this lecture, my proposal is to start from two expressions that were present in the invitation text that you sent me, and these are two formulations that I found intriguing.
	The first one gives its title to this series of conferences, and it's cybernetics for the 21st century.
	The expression is intriguing in that one might wonder how can we put cybernetics and 21st century together?
	Because the term cybernetics not only refers to the distant post-World War II era of the 20th century, but it is also a term That seems largely out of fashion.
	So, you know, I was only listening in the background when I first kicked this off and didn't see this little small blurb.
	So maybe this guy isn't Asian, maybe he's just French.
	I could have been wrong.
	See, I get things wrong. And as your text indicates, we will be hard-pressed to find the word cybernetics in our university's curriculum.
	I teach in an engineering school, and I think that the only one who still talks about cybernetics is the philosopher.
	Both the prefix cyber, with the exception of the phrase cyber security, and the known cybernetics seems to be outdated terms.
	You see that? He says they seem to be outdated terms.
	Then you look at the rise of cybernetics, right?
	Like cyber on the huge rise of that term.
	But talking about cybernetics, that goes down.
	Like 1970s was its peak.
	And then we start getting into bio, nanotech, etc.
	But the term cybernetics, which is the basis for it, it just levels off.
	Referring to obsolete future.
	But on the other hand, it is clear that the concepts and technologies that were promoted by cybernetics have become more widespread than ever.
	And if we take the Ngram viewer tool from Google that you see right now, we can see that the diffusion of the terms feedbacks And information is absolutely monumental, and that is uncorrelated with the decline that affects the word cybernetics.
	So what he's saying is that the real-world use of the technology, and on the very bottom, look, cybernetics, cybernetics, and then cyber at the top, and he's showing that.
	And obviously, it's a tough one to see, especially if you're on your phone.
	But you're looking at what?
	Between 1990 and 2000, when cybernetic and cyber are starting to hit their peaks.
	But again, leveling out right there as well.
	In other words, we are dealing with what could be called a cybernetics without cybernetics, meaning a diffusion of its concepts and artifacts, but without ever pronouncing the name.
	So everyone knows that there was a first cybernetics, that of Wiener, McCulloch, Voynoman, and so on, a second cybernetics, that of Voynforster and Varela, but we are perhaps leaving In a third cybernetics, for which we should no longer mention names of personalities, but names of firms, Google, Amazon, Facebook, and so on.
	So this is really the important thing that I was taking away from watching the lecture.
	He was outwardly talking about how this whole cybernetics future is basically a system of techno-fascism.
	Like right there he's talking about individuals and their ideas and the science behind their theories and their projects and now corporate.
	The third wave of cybernetics is corporate.
	And this is what would be our 21st century cybernetics, a third wave of cybernetics that does not say its name.
	Beyond the progressive diffusion of the vocabulary of information and feedback, the most striking fact is the new social roles played by artifacts anticipated by cybernetics.
	And the artifacts of cybernetics are now entering society on a large scale.
	The first significant technical fact is what has been called the machine learning tsunami.
	Machine learning.
	Now, when we're talking about that, AI becoming bigger.
	Large language models.
	And actually, there's a tweet by Joe Allen that I think I retweeted this morning when I was looking at this subject matter where it starts talking about interactive artificial intelligence and how we can get rid of the quote-unquote fallibilities of human beings.
	Oh. The fallibilities of human beings.
	...on the neuroconnectionist models of cybermeticians in artificial intelligence.
	But there is also the prospect of an industrial revolution based on the coupling between digital technologies and traditional industries.
	And now this...
	And that is the fourth industrial revolution, which is written about by Klaus Nutschwab, And also coined by him.
	Industrial Revolution was precisely what one of the great announcement of the good old cybernetics.
	I'm thinking here of Wiener's description of the automated factory as a kind of complete animal.
	The all-over system would correspond to the complete animal with sensor guns, effectors and proprioceptors, etc.
	So we've played it here.
	I mean, maybe not everybody's seen it, but we showed you the latest NVIDIA technology with their artificial intelligence and the ability to create a virtual twin of any factory before it's actually built in real time and test it out for the quote-unquote complete animal.
	It says from isolated brain to the complete animal.
	So in real time, when it's actually...
	They also have the AI model that in real time they can control the actual factory in.
	And again, the less humans, the better because humans are fallible.
	They make mistakes.
	And the description in Venus of this shift from the computer as a simple isolated brain to the complete animal evokes concrete figures nowadays.
	Those of Amazon robotic warehouses or the autonomous vehicle.
	So here's the fact.
	It's only now, after a 70-year time lag, that cybernetic artifacts are really imposing themselves on us with the kind of autonomy and agentivity that the first cybernetician lent them.
	Hence, the interest of returning to this first cybernetics, which discussed in depth the implication of this technology.
	And this leads me to the second phrase that I took from your text, the duty to inherit cybernetics, and even if it means going beyond it, in order to, I quote, understand and reorient our digital Earth.
	Understand and reorient our digital earth.
	Huh. How's that been working out?
	Talked about a open-air digital re-education camp.
	That's for certain.
	And I gave you a great example of it in real time.
	He mentioned Google as one of those companies.
	Obviously, Google, the parent company of YouTube.
	And we start talking about digital earth.
	Well, we also have to start talking about the fact that these transhumanists talk about a not only post-human future, but a post-carbon future.
	Non-carbon-based life forms.
	Why return to cybernetics to think about our present?
	What can we expect from the first cybernetics to understand and reorient our digital earth?
	I think there are four reasons that justify the interest of this return to the first cybernetics.
	The first reason is that cybernetics has produced in real time a critical discourse on these technologies.
	And one of the specificities of cybernetics is that it presents itself as a multidisciplinary enterprise, which is open to philosophical thinking.
	And we know Heidegger's formula that makes cybernetics the metaphysics of the 20th century.
	Cybernetics is the metaphysics of the 21st century.
	And you know, this is another...
	I mean, first of all, look at the graphic behind me.
	You know, the cybernetics graphic.
	Looks a little new agey.
	It's got the moon, a couple...
	It's got the crescent moon around the moon.
	Right? Negative feedback, positive feedback.
	It's a little less scientific than you might think.
	Okay? Okay.
	So you look at all this stuff and you're like, this is so odd.
	This is the metaphysics of the 21st century.
	Well, that's because it's the Wheel of Fortune.
	Just like Dennis Bushnell tells you, he goes, we don't necessarily have to know how biomimetics or wet computing, which he says that we are, works.
	It just has to work.
	And... Talks about, again, nanosectioning the human cortex and replicating it in silicon.
	So, in other words, they'll experiment on whatever, and this is kind of like the new, it's almost like a religion in many aspects, right?
	Unfortunately. Even though it's a science, right?
	And this is a critical formula in Heidegger's.
	But this formula obscures the fact that within cybernetics itself, there is a philosophical production and claimed as such.
	So the first reason for this return to cybernetics, or duty to inherit cybernetics, I think is the importance of this philosophical production endogenous to the technical environment or the technical media.
	The second reason that justifies this return to cybernetics is that we find within this reflection an original position regarding the nature of information.
	And this was my old PhD.
	The nature of information.
	And you could even...
	I mean, when you talk about the quote-unquote nature of information, information is only conveyed...
	Two, conscious individuals.
	And conscious individuals, and I only want to say human beings, because obviously I believe that there's some consciousness to animals.
	Consciousness is what they can't figure out.
	And so when they're talking about the nature of information, they're also talking about The nature of consciousness.
	Because when we also talk about cybernetics and transferring information, obviously we're able to do so on a wide scale right now wirelessly around the globe through a bevy of technologies.
	Some of it hardline, some of it not.
	The fiber that I use right now is an incredible technology.
	Absolutely, I'm in awe and wonder of it every single day.
	But then, even more than that, realizing high-speed data with the magic device or anything else from the air, also impressive.
	And an extension of...
	Even what I grew up with, with TV stations, etc.
	Radio stations. Okay, I did my PhD about the notion of information in cybernetics, and I defended the idea that cyberneticians Promoted a non-symbolic, physicalist conception of information, and I called it information signal as opposed to information code or symbol.
	And this distinction between signal and code, or signal or symbol, seems to be of considerable importance, insofar as the notion of information is a key term of our present.
	Inextricably conceptual and technical.
	Information is a new kind of universal equivalent applicable to everything and which answers the reduction of everything to computational devices.
	Did you hear that?
	Information takes the reduction of everything to computational devices.
	Everything.
	That coincides with when I talk about Bushnell and these other madmen out there, when they talk about directed evolution.
	The reduction of essentially all information, which is everything, to computational data.
	You might as well call it zeros and ones.
	You might as well call it a version of the metaverse.
	Can we draw on this alternative conception of information to reorient our digital Earth?
	That's the question.
	The third reason for returning to cybernetics is that we find in it not only a controversy about the nature of information, but we also find in Wiener's work A discourse that links this ontology of information with politics.
	Of course it does. We see what's happening right...
	And this is a lecture from about 10 months ago.
	So, you know, January of 2023, this gets put out.
	Right now, the AI and the algorithms are clearly setting narratives.
	I mean, we illustrated that earlier today with Donny T. And your supposed free speech platform on Twitter.
	Supposed. Absolutely ridiculous and ludicrous to think that that is a free speech platform of any kind.
	And this nexus of ontology and politics of information seems to me to be particularly interesting to reexamine today.
	This brings me to my fourth and last reason.
	In favor of this return to cybernetics, we cannot pretend that the arguments of the first cyberneticians are still applicable as they are to the present.
	And one of the interests of this return to cybernetics lies in the time gap, in particular because the mode of production of science and technology has profoundly changed.
	The mode of science has vastly changed.
	Interesting. Cyberneticians were working at a turning point in the history of science and technology at the time of the Cold War, with science being nationalized by the state and enlisted in the war effort after the Second World War.
	You know, I constantly talk about that.
	How science really went underground, large scale, in a way it never had before, post-World War II, post the Manhattan Project, post-Borne Classified, post-Black Sites.
	And cyberneticians, especially Wiener, took a stand against this transformation of the ethics, I'd say, of science or this way of doing science.
	But today, We live in a different regime of production of science and technology in which the market has taken on an increasingly important role since the 80s.
	But that market, when we talk about science, etc., It's largely deployed via technology that was pioneered by that, what, national security state apparatus.
	But now the markets are driven via Samsung and Apple, etc.
	And, you know, let me make this point too.
	It's a symbiotic relationship.
	I often go to that 2016 Transformers video with NASA because, you know, NASA had had certain types of technologies, especially when we talk about nanosats, etc., for a very, very long time.
	Now, one of the reasons that they couldn't mass deploy them is because they couldn't create chips small enough and cheap enough to do so.
	But then, once you deploy smartphones and that technology begins to be perfected in the consumer arena, well, there are all sorts of little chippy-chips that get made and mass-produced at a massive level in a commercial market.
	Then you can utilize that technology to deploy something you already had at a scalable level.
	Throwing that out there.
	Therefore, cybernetics seems interesting to me because of this gap between the post-war world of the first cybernetics and the contemporary world.
	And going back to Wiener's arguments in particular allows us to assess this gap.
	So I have defined the objective of the very broad objective of this presentation.
	I intend to revisit the debates on the nature of information, and in particular, the nexus.
	By the way, take a look at this.
	I mean, how could I not? I get it.
	The guy is tough to understand.
	How could I not watch this?
	There's the Musker Do right there in the corner.
	Your little self-driving car.
	Green mobile. There's the father of cybernetics up in the right-hand corner.
	And then you got kind of like this all-seeing eye supercomputer Navy thing.
	Probably the least interesting of his slides that made me, oh, but I think you get it.
	Between ontology and politics, which is found in Wiener, and to confront it with the contemporary moment.
	I will proceed in three steps.
	First, I will, as briefly as possible, return to the story of cybernetics to contextualize the movement.
	Then I will propose a dive into what seems to me to be a key document for understanding the cybernetic conception of information.
	Of course, a U.S. military document.
	And this document is the debate that takes place during the 7th Macy Conference on the meaning of the terms digital and analog.
	And finally, I will present a small sample, only samples, of precepts for an information politics, as they can be extracted from Wiener's writings.
	And I will discuss them in relation to the contemporary situation.
	Here's the objective, here's the goal.
	Then, let's go with the first part.
	For my first part...
	Cybernetics, what is it?
	How are we going to define it?
	By the way, this is only 11 minutes into, like I said, an hour-long lecture.
	We got about 10 minutes in the broadcast.
	So look, you're into this stuff dork-style like me.
	Please, please, please, please, please check it out.
	I want to emphasize free messages.
	The first one is that cybernetics is an object that can be very difficult to pin down.
	Indeed, there have been many cybernetics and sometimes absolutely incompatible with each other.
	You know, Joe Allen will also Make this point about transhumanism because he says, look man, there are a lot of transhumanists out there that want to take this technology and they want to exacerbate nature in a manner where they want to make men more masculine and women more feminine, etc. And basically build upon What seems to be nature's plan.
	But then there's another sect that, and this is the sect that I believe is really driving the argument, that don't want to do that, that want to blur the lines between genders and identity and merge with machines in the dystopian manner in which I warn about.
	The term cybernetics functions as a floating signifier, meaning it can be reappropriated in very diverse contexts.
	For example, there have been several different cybernetics in the United States.
	There have been several cybernetics in the United Kingdom.
	There was a cybernetics in the Soviet Union, studied by Slava Gerovich.
	There are the experiments, the cybernetics experiments of Stafford Beer in Chile with Salvador Allende.
	There is an appropriation of cybernetics by the structuralist social sciences in France with Lévi-Strauss and Lacan.
	And perhaps, I don't know, there was also a Chinese cybernetics.
	Who knows? Maybe you know that.
	And there is another history of cybernetics to write.
	So, this uncontrolled diffusion of cybernetics can be explained, in my opinion, by a key phenomenon, the failure of cybernetics to become a science or a discipline in due form, and that could still be taught in our universities today.
	And it is odd how cybernetics was something that was kind of like an openly discussed thing, 70s and 80s, and then cyber stuck around, but not so much the science surrounding it.
	I would say that even the transhumanist movement and those that are aware of it, Most of us always go, that's like a TV show or that's like a movie, because that's where it was really, really, really pushed down our throats psychologically, whether we understand it or not.
	So in this kind of like totally and completely unscientific arena.
	And this was the goal of the cybernetician.
	Instead of having cybernetics departments in our universities, in universities at the time, there were only the Macy conferences.
	And this is a huge tragedy because cybernetics, the first cybernetics, fell apart in a moment that combined interpersonal difficulties And the questioning of its scientific agenda, especially with the emergence of the symbolic artificial intelligence program.
	So the word cybernetics works a bit like the word psychoanalysis in the first half of the 20th century.
	It says psychoanalysis, by the way.
	Cyberneticians failed to regulate its use.
	So the term cybernetic circulates.
	It is reappropriated in many contexts and sometimes quite contradictory.
	For example, I remember one striking example of this floating signifier diffusion of cybernetic is a letter from an artist called Nicolas Chauffeur.
	Who was building a cybernetic light tower, organizing cybernetic ballets with dancers, dancing with robots?
	So basically, again, human dancers dancing with robots.
	Cybernetics very much a part of transhumanism.
	One can't exist really without the other.
	And Schoffer wrote to Wiener to secure an appointment when he was in New York, I think.
	And we have the very dry answer of Wiener to this invitation from Schoffer.
	And it's a short letter.
	Wiener says, I don't understand what you do.
	This is not cybernetics.
	Sorry. So this is an example of this broad circulation of cybernetics.
	And again, because obviously something like that kind of interaction would be almost like you interacting with the Chuck E. Cheese robots, right?
	That's more in the realm, if you will.
	The element to keep in mind when approaching the first cybernetics is the originality of its way of doing science.
	Cybernities, okay, this is well known.
	It's a scientific movement that is marked by multidisciplinarity with bringing together mathematicians, engineers, members of the life sciences, social sciences, psychology, and so on.
	But this original style of science is also open to philosophy.
	Philosophy. So right there, you got psychology and philosophy.
	And that really shows you how this is bent more than just, you know, this very cold, hardline reality.
	And again, we're seeing it more and more with the AI, the algorithms, the narrative control.
	And for example, the 1943 paper by Wiener, Rosenbluth and Bislow on feedback and the application of this model to understand living organisms, This paper was published in a philosophy journal, in philosophy of science journal.
	So we have an article co-offered by a physiologist, an engineer, a mathematician, and published in a philosophy journal.
	And this is not the exception.
	So in other words, he's saying most of these things are philosophical questions.
	And really, when you look at the work Of what Kurzweil's put down with the age of spiritual machines.
	It is the philosophical question of what is consciousness?
	What is information?
	And again, Kurzweil, I think, was a little more honest back in the day and simply said, hey, these things that we create, these beings, if you will, these spiritual machines, may not actually be conscious, but they will be so persuasive That we will grant them and believe that they are indeed conscious.
	So then if that belief is there and we're the predominant species, at least at the time, on the planet, we project that reality, does it indeed then become reality?
	Does that then indeed become quote-unquote whatever consciousness was?
	Those are the questions that they're constantly asking in this type of science, hence why what?
	It was in the philosophical arena.
	We have other similar papers.
	So we have a style of science that is open to interdisciplinarity and philosophical inquiry.
	And from this point of view, I think that cybernetics, the first cybernetics of Wiener van der Manester, is in the continuity of the physics of the 30s, which was open to philosophical reflection.
	Well, I think the physics of the 30s then and of the upcoming 30s now has a lot of philosophical reflection.
	I mean, you look at quantum physics, you look at the 30s into the 40s and really what the physics of creating the nuclear weapon, nuclear power.
	Just saying. There's some religious undertones and overtones when we're talking about that technology and we're talking about rocket technology and beyond.
	Folks! Another week has gone by here at Red Voice Media on Reality Rants.
	I want you to thumbs it up, subscribe, and share at the...
	At the end of this broadcast, remember, there's another hour of Burmus, and then there's a whole lineup that goes until 8.30 p.m., almost a full 12-hour lineup here at RedVoiceMedia.com.
	Next week, I'm going to be joining Drew Berquist on his show.
	You're not going to want to miss that.
	Wayne Dupree, Ray Dietrich, so many other greats here on the network.
	Remember, it's not about left or right to me.
	It's always going to be about right and wrong.
	I love you guys.

▲