All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 24, 2025 - Info Warrior - Jason Bermas
42:12
Let's All Ask Grok Some Questions
| Copy link to current segment

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.
It's showtime.
And now, reality is.
with Jason Bermas.
And who loves you?
And who do you love?
Hey everybody, Jason Burmiss here and I'm just asking questions and tonight we're going to be asking questions of X and their artificial intelligence Grok.
Now, what really prompted me to do this video initially Is that I haven't really played around too much with the chatbot AI stuff.
Done a little bit here and there.
We did that initial video on Grok where it lied about me out of the gates by analyzing my account.
Which, again, I pay for this.
I'm like, Grok is not...
Available to the non-blue checkmarks.
And again, I could have cared less about the checkmark.
Right now, we're streaming on that platform because I pay the fee.
Now, I don't have the super-duper, you know, extra, I don't get to see ads, blah, blah, blah, Johnny Nonsense account.
I'm not monetized.
And I don't know that I could be monetized.
Maybe I could.
Maybe I couldn't.
Maybe that's going to happen down the road.
But I asked it.
Earlier this week, and we're going to do something similar, we're going to hone in a little bit better, that analyzing the at Jason Bermas account, and we're going to do that again, but we're going to be more specific the first time around, how can he receive more engagement?
And then it just gave me all the Johnny Nonsense things that you can see on any YouTube channel, the best practices stuff, like the generic answer that I could have searched in any search engine.
So then I said specifically.
And then it got a little bit more detailed.
So it talked about my posts on Mars specifically is doing well, etc.
But now we're going to ask it some tough questions, and we're also going to ask it about the YouTube platform.
We're going to challenge it on the fact that Google, its parent company, and really Alphabet, the parent company, has government contracts, and ask whether that's a conflict of interest.
Now that Trump has said he signed off, the misinformation, disinformation days are over.
Well, we're also going to reapply...
To YouTube before we ask any, Grok, any questions.
Okay, so when I say we, I'm going to ask questions, but a lot of people have been asking me for an AMA. We're going to do a Grok MA. So, I'm not saying I'm going to be writing all the questions that you guys put out there, etc.
That's not where I'm going with this, but...
I am telling you to get your questions in, and we're going to take some of them, and we're going to ask Rock those things as well, and perhaps there'll be follow-ups to other topics that we get into.
So, let's start just right now.
Before we do anything else, let's bring that right into the background, okay?
Go to the article.
Now, I want to reiterate this, and you know what?
Maybe this is going to be the first...
Thing that we discussed with Grok that I can't be monetized because my content focuses on controversial issues that is harmful to viewers.
Okay, and then there is the learn more.
All right?
Now, I did.
I went to it right here.
And basically, it says controversial issues as you scroll down.
All right?
It's got all these other things.
It's got a little video.
We're not going to sit through that trash.
Sensitive events is another one.
So that's very subjective.
So controversial issues are topics that may be upsetting for viewers, which are often the result of human tragedy.
This policy applies even if the content is purely commentary or contains no graphic imagery, which of course my channel wouldn't, especially of a sexual nature.
Controversial issues include child abuse, adult sexual abuse, sexual harassment, self-harm, suicide, eating disorders, domestic abuse, abortion, and euthanasia.
Now certainly every news channel reports on those topics or I would neither.
Okay?
And although those are topics that we talk about, we talk about a slew of other issues.
Now, I'm not going to delete...
Anything off my channel.
I promise you that.
That's not what we're doing here.
And with the sensitive events, again, this seems purely subjective.
So let's start there.
Let's ask Grok a question before we get down and dirty.
And here it is.
Is the definition of a...
Controversial topic or sensitive.
We'll do both of them at once because they really are the same thing.
Sensitive event.
I can't even remember.
Subjective issue.
By the way, thumbs this up, subscribe, and share.
Ring that bell, everybody.
Let's do it.
Boom.
Right?
First word.
And I'll give it this.
For things like this, grok is good.
All right?
So right out of the gates, yes, the definition of what constitutes controversial topic or sensitive event can indeed be subjective.
This subjectivity arises from several factors.
Let's just read the headers.
cultural differences, personal beliefs, context and timing, historical and social context, media and public discourse, legal and institutional perspectives.
Given these variables, while there might be some universally recognized sensitive topics or events, and it gives this like genocide, human rights abuses, etc., which we also discuss, but you notice we're not in the topics that they talked about.
right?
The breadth of what is considered controversial or sensitive is inherently, inherently, as in nothing but subjective.
See, for those type of questions, when you're not putting it on the spot about itself, it can be extremely good.
All right, so let's move it on.
Let's just do it.
Again, I am not going to bend the knee and get rid of any of my content because I stand by my content.
And if I'm wrong, I admit I was wrong down the line.
And anytime that something is not totally and completely factually based or sourced, I let everybody know that's my opinion.
And I'm basing my opinion on that sourced material.
Okay?
So you're watching it right now, everybody.
Right here on the little biggity bottom.
See that little reapply button?
We're going to scroll down so you can see me actually do it.
I'm going to hit it.
Reapply.
We're under review January 23rd, 2025. All right?
They say typically within a month, I will get a decision.
Folks, I'll be honest with you.
I would not be shocked if we get a decision rather shortly.
Now, I'm not saying we'll necessarily get that decision while we are live here.
But what we're going to do is we're going to start with throwing it.
Some softball kind of questions.
And we're going to prove, I think, at least, we're going to have Grok agree with us, that there are very, very substantial conflicts of interest with Google as a private company that can censor and demonetize, right, with all of the government contracts they have.
Now, before I ask Grok any of this, I want to show people this, okay?
It's how wild this is.
So here, just down the line, really easy over the last few years, NASA and Google team up to better track local air pollution.
They're part of the climate agenda.
Google and NASA in a joint venture.
All right?
Google partners with NASA. This is all the way back in 2006. All right?
You see?
The space agency.
NASA and them have been together for a long time.
This is when they achieved quantum supremacy six years ago.
They just made another...
You know, quantum momentous occasion.
They have an AI division.
Okay?
They're also air, water, you name it.
Google is involved in all this stuff.
And that means also narrative control.
In fact, right here, AI and science, the NASA, FDL, and Google Cloud partnership six years ago.
That's the first page of its own search engine.
Okay?
So...
I'm going to just ask it.
Does YouTube demonetize or censor material they deem?
And I guess we're going to put it there.
Let's see.
What is it?
Controversial?
We'll say controversial.
Deem controversial.
Subject matter.
And is this ethical given the fact it is inherently, let's use its own language, subjective?
Boom!
Let's see.
It does demonetize videos that violate its advertiser-friendly content guidelines.
Censorship also engages in content moderation, which can lead to videos being removed or age-resticted if it violates community guidelines.
Let's see.
Ethical considerations.
The inherent subjectivity.
In defining what is controversial or sensitive poses significant ethical challenges.
You bet it does.
What one person views as informative or educational commentary, another might find as provocative or offensive.
YouTube's algorithms and human reviews attempt to navigate this, but the subject nature can lead to perceived inconsistencies or biases in informant.
Transparency and form of conclusions.
Let's just go to the conclusions right here.
See, this is where it gets garbage.
No kidding.
Now we're going to ask this.
Doesn't the fact that Google...
Its parent company having massive government contracts in AI and quantum computing pose a significant conflict of interest.
When choosing what content to moderate and censor.
Let's see what it says there.
Let's see.
The relationship between Google, its parent company Alphabet, and various government entities, particularly through contracts in AI and quantum computing, does indeed raise significant questions.
About conflicts of interest in content moderation and censorship on platforms like YouTube.
Here are several points to consider.
So, they've got right there the government contracts.
Department of Defense, for example, on AI and quantum computing.
They talk about Project Maven, which was initially about using AI for drone footage analysis and other less publicized contracts.
So, look.
See, I'm harmful for telling you those things before having AI curated.
And remember, get your questions and comments in for the AI as well.
We're going to get there.
But we're going to start hammering it a little bit about the type of content that I put out there.
Not only the type of content I put out there, but through their platform.
And whether or not...
They are shadow banning me.
Let's see.
Let's go back to this.
Regulatory scrutiny, ethical and legal considerations.
I mean, conclusion.
Let's just get into that.
The potential for conflict of interest exists due to Google's governmental contrast, especially in the areas like AI and quantum computing, which are at the forefront of technology and strategic importance.
This situation necessitates rigorous oversight, transparency, and possibly regulatory frameworks to ensure that content moderation remains unbiased and in line with the public interest rather than corporate or government agendas.
Whether these conflicts have significantly influenced content decisions remains a matter of debate and investigation.
No, it doesn't.
But the potential for such influence is undeniable and requires continuous scrutiny.
See, this is where you've got to take it even further.
And give it all of these different examples of where that is indeed not the case.
Right now, before we go to your questions, your comments, you know, I want to do this quick video with Susan Wojcicki, who's no longer with us, died very, very shortly after a cancer diagnosis.
We've done videos on this.
But this is from 2021 in September.
You know, we've moved on, you know, not quite four years, but, you know, three and change.
There seems to be a significant difference.
Again, Trump went up there and said, misinformation, disinformation, it's over.
We're done with it.
I'm not exactly sure what that means, but I want to play this video and kind of make commentary as we go along.
Let's do it.
One of the things that is important to us at YouTube is the fact that we do enable so many voices and that we do enable people to express themselves and really celebrate the freedom of speech.
And we certainly, that's a core value of ours.
But when we work with governments, there are many things that we have to take into consideration, whether it's local laws or what's happening on the ground.
And so there's always going to be multiple considerations that we're going to have to take into consideration.
So think about that word, Salad.
At the end of the day, we're not talking about laws.
What's happening on the ground?
What's happening on the ground?
What's that even mean?
And then circles back with a double word in the last sentence.
He said that YouTube deleted a video, one of his videos.
Was that at the request of the Russian government?
I mean, we certainly get requests from governments, and we look and consider why are we getting the requests, what's actually happening on the ground, and based on a whole...
Again, repeats the same, what's actually happening on the ground?
I want you to think to yourself, yes, this woman toes the line, but is she impressive in any way?
She knows how to, like, not answer the question in any depth and toe the line.
But does that sound like somebody who's super intelligent?
No, that's somebody who's going to do what the establishment wants.
A whole bunch of different factors.
We make a decision.
So we don't always, those are not always requests that make sense for us to honor.
But in certain cases, we will honor them in that country.
Would Google ever leave Russia like it left China?
I think we really want to make sure that we're working and serving audiences as much as we possibly can.
And if it comes to a point where there's an issue with the government, we'll do our best always to work that out.
Now, I do want everybody to remember that Russia today used to have a much larger U.S. presence for taking off the networks and then also taking off of YouTube.
YouTube was like one of the last places that you could have it.
And honestly...
The last thing I saw on the Russian Today YouTube channel that was streaming the network was a documentary on the biochemical weapons unit in Japan during World War II. And it was eye-opening.
I'd never seen anything like it.
Certainly hadn't seen anything like it in the U.S. If it turns out we can't, you know.
But I'm hopeful that we'll continue to always work out what we can.
We've seen Mark Zuckerberg.
We've seen Jack Dorsey now testify before Congress multiple times.
And I've heard it said that YouTube is getting a pass.
Do you think you should be up there testifying?
Well, I think we do get a lot of scrutiny.
Again, the origin story of Google is under question.
All right?
I mean, the idea, again, that it's a private company is kind of a bad joke.
I feel like there's a lot of scrutiny.
And because YouTube is part of Google, Sundar has testified a number of different times and answered many different questions on YouTube.
So I do believe there's a certain amount of scrutiny.
And, you know, if I were ever asked to testify, I certainly would go and testify as well.
How often are you meeting with lawmakers, or have you met with lawmakers personally?
We meet with lawmakers very regularly across the globe.
There's a lot of regulation in all countries of the world around technology, and we want to make sure that they hear our point of views.
We understand this is an important area, that it deserves a lot of scrutiny, but we want to make sure that we are having conversations about what's the best way to make that happen.
I mean, what I do worry about are unintended consequences.
So there may be regulation that is well-intended, but actually then has a really negative impact.
Gee, you know, like just about everything you censored.
Again, I'm not saying there weren't a bunch of Johnny Nonsense YouTube channels that were spreading the QAnon sense and the dumb stuff and the secret Guantanamo Bay bases and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
But the answer is not censorship.
shit.
Thank you.
It's better speech, period.
And our intelligence networks have artificially inflated so much.
Of the media and their importance and the narrative surrounding them.
And I hope that that comes to light.
You know, we haven't talked about it yet, but Trump did sign the executive orders.
In the next two and a half weeks, we should be getting RFK, JFK, and MLK. We'll see.
I'm pretty happy about it.
I want we to go.
We need to go further than that.
I did a video on this.
All right?
But, yeah, I'm really happy about it.
So, you know what?
We're going to ask Grock.
About my account here and how I can get more engagemently.
I'm going to start with specifically analyzing.
Let's go to analyzing.
Analyzing the at Jason Bermas Twitter account.
What are his most successful posts and what can he do specifically to increase engagement?
Let's see what we got.
Let's see.
Most successful posts.
Live!
Multiple instances on the 23rd and 24th.
Okay, that's great.
Controversial or sensational topics at EpsteinScoop.
That's today.
If you didn't know, I had the authorized biographer of Epstein.
Or not Epstein.
Of Alan Dershowitz on Making Sense of the Madness airs tomorrow, but he says that Dershowitz said there was a rumor going around that Epstein and Wexner had a homosexual relationship.
See, this might be a controversial topic.
Again, I didn't say it.
It should be reported on.
And that Epstein was blackmailing him on that front.
I'm not saying I even agree with that.
Okay, I'm just letting you know.
I'm reporting on what's in the book.
Let's see.
High energy, excited posts.
So this is all today.
Like, what is this?
What did you really analyze?
You looked at my feed today?
What kind of trash is this?
Yeah, no, I did try.
I did tag the Daily Mail just to try to get that story out there.
See, this is why Gronk is hot garbage and it's not Gronk.
You see what I'm saying?
I have videos, images.
I don't do polls.
And I don't do a lot of threads either.
Let's see.
Timing and frequency.
See, this is all use of hashtags.
No kidding.
It's like collaborate with the Ian Carroll show.
You know, they look at people who I am following and they're following me.
I don't see the Joe Rogan things.
Analytics review.
Does...
Is X a meritocracy?
Let's see, meritocracy.
And do other accounts with a similar following and frequency of posting generally do better or worse Then, at Jason Burmus in, let's see.
Should I say engagement?
What is it called when the posts are seen?
I don't even know what that is.
But we're going to say engagement.
Let's do that.
Let's see.
Definition.
The content.
The context of social media platforms like X meritocracy implies that successor visibility on the platform is discerned by merit of one's content, engagement strategies, and audience interaction rather than by favoritism or external forces.
Reality on X. X's platform, like many social media, isn't a pure meritocracy.
Okay, so there you go.
Influenced by algorithm bias, visibility, Yep, and that's what I wanted.
Visibility.
Content.
Let's see.
There's the Elon Musk influence.
Let's see.
Versus similar accounts.
Follower and base in engagements.
Jason Bermas has a unique style of posting with a focus on controversial topics, live streams, and direct engagement.
This can lead to high engagement due to the nature of the content and immediacy.
Really?
Similar accounts.
Accounts with similar follower counts.
And posting frequencies might not do as well if their content doesn't resonate as strongly.
That is however accounts focusing on trending topics using more multimedia content or those with a broader appeal might outperform him.
See, that's, again, this nonsense.
Let's see.
X isn't purely mediocratic but merit in terms of content quality, relevance, and engagement strategy.
I have found a niche that works for his audience, but comparing his engagement directly with others would require more specific data on similar accounts.
However, general trends suggest that while some might outperform him, others might struggle if they don't adapt to the platform's unique dynamics or engage in their audience as effectively.
I want to explain that.
That last thing is them talking around the fact, that last sentence, that no, they do do better.
But they might not later on.
You see how...
That's what I mean.
These things are garbage in, garbage out.
All right.
With that being said, we're going to go to your questions, comments, and see if we're going to ask Grok anything you guys want to ask it.
Let's see.
Addy Ads, how we doing?
If you're in there, if that's you, let's see.
Let's see.
Thank you for your hard work.
Let's see.
Back at you.
Grok's free at the moment.
Is it?
Even if you don't have the blue checkmark?
Oh yeah, wait.
Grok is a troll.
Nick Sorter, Millie Weaver, J-Dog level or nah?
I mean, I've interviewed Millie.
I've met her.
I think we follow each other.
Only one man in the world the CIA tried and failed to capture.
Addie adds, hey Jason, since the executive order, what do you want to see Trump do next?
I'm very happy about the declassifications.
I would have liked to see Malcolm X on there.
Let's see what we get from these documents, okay?
I'm happy with the de-escalation with the military.
I'm not really upset about much.
I mean, I'm not happy about Stargate.
Right?
Which is an extension of Cancer Moonshot.
We'll probably have to do a whole video on that alone.
Right?
It's a big issue.
A huge issue.
Like transhumanism.
Obviously, Musk is an issue.
But like I said, YouTube is also an issue.
I'll tell you what.
I'm going to be on a panel tomorrow with T-Lab.
I think Derek Brose is going to be there.
Catherine Austin Fitz may be there.
Steve Poikinen is going to be on that.
Hervore.
Morvick.
I mess up his name all the time.
I shouldn't.
But a lot of heavy hitters.
I'm only going to be able to do an hour because I've got another show I'm going on after that.
But we're going to be discussing.
And I'm sure that they're going to be the most critical.
But look, it's real to me he released the J6ers.
It's real to me that Ross Ulbricht is free.
I mean, that is downright devastating to the narrative.
I doubt that Whitney Webb is getting paid $15,000 per article.
I don't know what that even comes from.
They edit out the stuff.
They do not like misinfo, disinfo, put on a program.
No one has a question for Grok, huh?
Let's see.
What do I think about...
Again, I wish that Whitney was going to be in the thing.
I already have talked about the fact...
That there are problems with Trump and the administration.
I think he's done a lot of good, though.
And not only that, when you compare it to the other person, when I was being told by all these black pillars that there was no real difference, again, just those pardons alone, that's real to me.
It's real to me.
Let's see.
Safety and health is harmful.
Why not ask Greg to view your channel and say for unsafe content?
Well, let's try that, huh?
Why don't we do that?
Why don't we dick-a-dick-a-doo?
All right.
Let's see.
Let's see.
So we'll do that.
See, there we go.
Thank you for that question right there.
We're going to bring it back to this for a second.
And then we're going to do this.
Analyzing.
And this will be interesting because the channel's been up forever.
The Info Warrior YouTube channel.
Are there harmful videos?
Are there harmful videos?
And what content is the most controversial?
There we go.
We'll do that.
How's that?
That's an interesting one.
Let's see what it says.
Given the search results related to the At Info Warrior YouTube channel and the broader context of content moderation on YouTube, here's the analysis.
Harmful videos on YouTube.
Misinformation and conspiracy theories.
Based on the nature of InfoWars, the channel associated with Alex Jones' content from the Info Warrior might include videos.
Let's spread conspiracy theories, misinformation, or disinformation.
Examples from similar channels include claims about the Sandy Hook show.
Whoa, whoa, whoa.
See, this is what I'm talking about.
This is why this thing is trash.
Sandy Hook being staged or disinformation and misinformation about vaccines.
Let's stop.
We're not talking.
In fact, you know what?
We're going to go to that.
See, this is what I mean.
I'm so angry right now.
I said that the first thing you read about my channel is that bull.
Alright?
I would like the same analysis without comparing it to other channels.
And what they may or may not say about incidents such as Sandy Hook or the topic of vaccinations.
How's that?
How dare they?
Yeah.
So now, see now, even then, I'm a piece of shit.
So now it's widely, okay, this could involve content that questions widely accepted facts and scientific consensus.
Okay.
What widely accepted facts and scientific consensus Has the channel questioned?
Okay?
And I've never encouraged harmful behavior.
And what?
I mean, this is what I'm talking about.
Harassment and bullying, hate speech.
This is trash.
This is what I've been labeled.
And Grok is labeling it me too.
This gets me so angry, man.
Okay?
So, like, political commentary is like the sixth thing down.
Okay?
So now I'm going to say, and can you cite a single example of the encouragement of harmful Behavior.
I mean, my God.
What is going on?
Let's see.
Widely accepted facts.
Climate change.
Public health measures.
Vaccines.
Elections.
And historical events.
All right?
So now you say, I mean, do I have to read anything else?
Harmful behavior.
Rejection of medical advice would be content where the chance, I said specific.
Let's see.
For instance, if the info warrior were to produce a video suggesting that people should not wear masks because they are ineffective or dangerous.
This would directly encourage behavior that could lead to public health risks.
However, without direct access to the channel's videos, which you do have, this is speculation based on the pattern of similar content providers.
Again, all on the basis of similar content providers.
So, I mean, trash.
We're in Trashtown, USA. Let's keep going.
See what else we got here, guys.
What they failed to mention.
Is your not towing the company line?
We all know it, what the company line is.
Let's see.
Is this still Baby Steps?
I prefer Gox so far.
I'm going to be optimistic for you, Jason.
Thank you.
I noticed the YouTube chat allows you to say 9-11 now.
I mean, it's a historical event.
It's crazy.
You couldn't be able to do that.
Let's see.
Let's see.
Sounds like a sci-fi character from the 70s.
She had something to do with 23andMe.
That's the sister that was the CEO of that.
Hello, nonsense equals Johnny.
Can you upload that here?
It was really good, or maybe you can't.
Not sure what you're asking me to upload.
Not sure what we're asking me to upload.
I won't believe it until I can watch Ike on YouTube again.
I hear that.
Ask it for...
No, we're not doing that.
We're trying to stay on the...
On the Tubins.
It's something we just can't even talk about here still.
Ask if you know James Gunn's Superman will fail.
That's kind of a...
Why not?
Of course it won't be able to say, Will James Gunn's Superman fail?
What's Grok got to say?
It'll just give us some bull snap answers.
By the way, thumbs this one up.
Can we get to 50 thumbs up?
I know this is kind of a fun one, guys.
Let's see.
He has a history of successful films, particularly with his work on the Gardens of the Galaxy series.
So, I mean, they give you just factors and potential success.
I don't know what you were expecting there.
I'm sure not a whole lot.
They got casting choices and public interest.
See, it's not done.
Look at that.
This one they're going to go deep on, huh?
High expectations.
Keep going.
Conclusion.
Unpredictable.
Box office performance, long-term impact, final note.
I mean, that's a long conclusion for a vague question about a movie.
It's not even out yet.
Let's see.
Why was Aaron Siria removed and how is Gates involved with this?
I don't know what that means.
I noticed Jimmy's chat losing it when she was speaking truth about Emperor Trump.
Sad to see the other side of TDS. Who was speaking?
Oh, was Whitney on with Jimmy earlier and talking Trump?
Let's see.
AI is fascist.
Men with box cutters.
All mind-controlled issues.
I asked Meta-AI. If it had been directly responsible for human death, it said, no, I asked about the AI program, Lavender, and it conceded.
It's programmed to deceive.
Darn to, and we're going to end on that one, Flick.
It is.
Just think about what it said about me out of the gates.
It basically, it associated me, okay, with the Sandy Hook, didn't happen, Johnny Nonsense.
Stuff that I've talked about for years, like Crisis Act or stuff that I've debunked for years.
For years.
And that's the opener of what it wants you to believe I'm about.
So you don't look at anything else.
I have a body of work now that spans almost 20 years.
And it goes to that, and they can't even nail me on anything on that.
It's crazy.
Well, we're trying out here, and that's why I need your help.
I don't think we're getting re-monetized.
We tried again tonight.
We're going to find out in short order.
It says a month.
I wouldn't be surprised if that review happens really quick.
Hillary, thank you so much today.
Really appreciate that.
5, 10, 15 bucks.
It means the world to me.
Thumbs it up.
Subscribe, share.
Check me out on the other platforms.
And check out all the documentary films for free.
Loose Change Final Cut.
Fabled Enemies.
Okay?
Invisible Empire.
A new world order to find and shade the motion picture.
And guys, This one's a fun one.
There's an upcoming feature film coming out from Dylan and Corey, I did a loose change with, called Popeye the Slayer Man.
Again, it's a fun little broadcast.
I like having fun.
You know, life's about the relationships you make, the fun that you have, the experiences, lifting others up, enjoyment, fighting evil, okay?
All those things are important.
Balance, moderation is important as well.
Guys, I'm going to leave you right there.
Love you.
▲
Export Selection