Mike Baker and Joe Rogan swap stories about a fossilized walrus bacula, then pivot to election transparency, where Baker highlights Pennsylvania’s disputed military absentee ballots and observer restrictions while Rogan questions why fraud claims target only Biden-winning states. They critique both sides’ performative outrage—progressives spitting on police, conservatives overreacting to policies—and agree crises get weaponized for political gain, with Rogan blaming liberal governors for shutdowns over livelihoods. Baker defends Soros’s philanthropy but dismisses villain narratives, while Rogan rejects the lone gunman theory in JFK’s assassination, citing ballistics and past conspiracies like Operation Northwoods. Debating UFOs, Rogan cites David Fravor’s claims and multiverse theories as evidence of intelligent life beyond Earth, but Baker doubts governments could hide such secrets long-term, ending with a nod to Georgia’s Senate races and Rogan’s quirky mask-law flu theory. [Automatically generated summary]
Remember, they didn't actually concede, I think, or whatever you want to call it, get sort of the final count until 12 or 13 December.
So Al Gore and his lawyers, the DNC, they carried that in 2000. They carried that process out.
And they were entitled to, just like in the current time, if the current president of Trump wants to pursue remedies for what they perceive to be irregularities, then that, by law, you're entitled to do that.
Now, you don't want to get in the game of making spurious accusations and just throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks, so it has to be based in something.
But this is not unprecedented, and so I think people need to keep that in mind.
If you've spent the past four years Denying the results of the 2016 election or chasing the Russian collusion bullshit or if you were in the media and you've been just throwing that crap around about the Russian collusion and happily doing it for the past four years,
then you really don't have the moral high ground now to say that the other side can't investigate, can't cry foul, can't say they've got concerns and that we should just all, as Nancy Pelosi says, we just have to unify now.
Is that what she said?
Yeah, she came out today and it's like, oh, the good thing is we just need to unify.
Under the president-elect, as she referred to him, or soon to be Joe Biden.
But I see what you're saying.
Look, I'm far more concerned, because I like a divided government, right?
I wouldn't want to see one party, regardless of which party it is, have control of everything.
I always think that's when shit happens or things go wrong.
So I'd be fine, right?
The Republic's going to survive just fine if, for instance, the Senate remains in control of the Republicans.
The House, you know, it's going to be tighter now.
Look, I mean, the House, you know, Pelosi lost...
You know, conservatively, you know, right now they're saying five seats, but there's ten other seats leaning towards the Republicans in a heavy way.
So she could have a, you know, a 15-seat turnaround, 16-seat turnaround.
It's going to be a very thin majority that she's going to have.
But that's fine.
So they've got the House, the GOP has the Senate, Biden, Harris, you know, they win if they win.
Okay, we're gonna be just fine, right?
My concern is the Senate.
If that tips over and the deciding vote is cast by Kamala Harris because it's 50-50, then we got a problem.
And I think the most fascinating thing about all of this, which is getting lost in the wash because naturally we're all distracted with what's going on between Trump and Biden right now, Is those two Senate races in Georgia, right?
It's 48-48.
Likely, we're getting Alaska and North Carolina wrapped up for the Republican side.
They're going to end up at 50. You got two seats left, right?
And those are both in Georgia.
Those are both going to be runoffs, basically, in January sometime.
Because unless one of them hits the 50% threshold, if, what's his name, Purdue gets the 50% plus one vote, okay, then now it's 51 to the Republicans, and they have control of the Senate still.
Otherwise, I think we got problems if the Dems end up with the White House, the Senate, and Congress.
It's a lack of self-awareness on both sides that I always find fascinating.
My favorite tweet so far since Tuesday, since the election day, was after, I think it came out on Wednesday, some progressive tweeted, I think I'm almost getting it word for word, Republicans are such sore fucking losers.
And I read it and I thought, well, this has got to be like a parody, right?
They got to be kidding around.
And so then you have to dig in there and investigate and read everything else they've been reading or writing.
And you look and you realize, no, they're serious.
And then you read the thread after that and all the response is like, oh, that's so true.
That fuckers, they can't take a loss.
And you're thinking there is no fucking self-awareness on that side.
I have no respect for people that mass generalize entire political parties like that.
It's so stupid.
Republicans are such this.
Like, come on.
Just stop.
I know what you do.
You're just spitting out nonsense.
It's one thing if you want to say that.
I guess that is what you're saying on Twitter, though.
The problem is it's written down, right?
So you take it more seriously.
But if you're just having coffee with your friend and you're like, Republicans are such fucking sore losers.
And you're like, yeah, right?
Like they would say, they are, right?
But when you're saying it to the whole world, it's like you're allowing the whole world to listen in on a conversation you're having at Starbucks.
You've got to be a little bit better at being self-aware and also recognizing that you spent, if you're a hardcore Democrat, you spent the last four years saying Russia got Trump into power.
And even after the evidence comes out that that's not true, you're in denial of that and have never taken it back.
I mean, if you look at it, you don't see a lot of avenues for success on this one.
I mean, look, Pennsylvania, they're still saying, rightly so, it's too close to call...
They've got 8,000-some-odd military absentee ballots still to count.
The assumption would be— Those would be Trump.
Those would be for Trump, just like they assume a lot of the mail-in ballots in the Philadelphia area or Allegheny will be for Biden.
But they have to go through that process.
Now, Pennsylvania is an interesting one, right?
I mean, again, there's a lot of people that are getting very pissy about Trump's attitude towards this whole thing.
And could he be more eloquent?
Could he just shut the fuck up and let the system work, right?
Let his legal teams do what they're supposed to do and what they're entitled to do and just say, you know, we just have to work through the process?
Well, yeah, of course he could, but he's not going to.
But Pennsylvania is interesting because the problem up there, and maybe there's no fucking You have to—it's like an investigation, right?
When you do an investigation, you have to base it on—right from the very beginning—you have to base it on facts, on something concrete, right?
If you don't, you're building an entire investigation, potentially, on very shaky ground.
The whole thing comes tumbling down, and it's a house of shit.
You know, it's like an operation, an Intel operation.
Everybody remembers, maybe not, the WMD, you know, fiasco, you know, from Iraq.
The idea that, oh my God, we got to get in there because they got WMD. Well, a lot of that, you know, was based on one source reporting, right?
Which got into the reporting chain and then got reinvented in another report and then got, you know, self-corroborated in another reporting.
And before you know it, you're confirming...
All the same information from originally that one source, right?
Very shaky.
So you're not building an invasion of a country on solid information.
So with Pennsylvania, if people are looking at that and going, oh, there's all sorts of shit going on and it's fraud, well, you got to step back and you got to say, okay, where are the problems?
Now, there's a handful of issues that I think are legitimate in Pennsylvania, one of them being This idea that the state Supreme Court circumvented what the legislative branch in Pennsylvania said about ballots and when you can count the ballots up until what time, the postmarking on the ballots.
And so that's a legitimate issue that probably or could end up in a higher court.
Did the state Supreme Court in Pennsylvania have that right, according to the Constitution?
Because the state houses in each state set the laws about this very thing.
And you've got a problem, though, in Pennsylvania because the state house is run by Republicans.
Now, this bullshit about how long it's taking to count the votes could have been sorted out if a year ago, or not even that, if six months ago, when we knew this pandemic was a problem, when we knew we were going to get unprecedented levels of mail-in votes...
If the Republican State House had said, okay, here's when we can start counting those mail-in votes, as soon as we start receiving them, how about that?
So they could have been well ahead.
Both sides have fucked this up, right?
It's not one side or the other.
Both sides, once again, The truth is always—we talked about this before—is always somewhere in the center, and that's true here.
But anyway, Pennsylvania, close to call.
This idea that they're preventing observers from coming in or standing close enough, because they allowed them in, but then were they able to stand close enough to observe anything of any value?
Because counties run these elections and so some counties do it by the book and others apparently have decided they can do things a little bit differently.
So, some, they were not able to get in, as far as access goes, as, you know, once the voting started.
Some, they weren't able to go in for the pre-vote counting, or the pre-voting day counting of these ballots.
And others, they were able to go in, and they were kept maybe 25 feet back, instead of what apparently was like a six-feet distance that had been, I think, I'm not, don't quote me on this, but maybe a responsibly...
Some places had them watching on monitors, which again is useless.
The problem there is that should never happen.
You should be able to always agree, both sides, that you need campaign observers in there, and they have that right to observe the counting of these things.
And it all comes down to the same issue, whether it's that or whether it's counting ballots or discarding ballots because the person's died previous to the election.
It all comes down to the perception of fraud.
There may not be anything going on in this election in terms of fraud, fraudulent activity, when all is said and done and all the investigations are done.
But the damage is already done because people perceive it as possible.
A lot of people perceive it as likely or as happening.
And if you don't have a transparent system set up that is easy to see, you've got to be able to look at it and not be told by politicians, not be told by election officials or the media that it's a good, credible system.
The voter has to be able to look at the process and say, yeah, that's fair and transparent.
It's like cover for action.
If I'm doing surveillance on some target, and I'm out in the middle of some, whether it's a shithole or whether it's an urban center in a developed country, I have to have cover for action.
I have to have a reason that is plainly obvious by passerbys or by local authorities or police that patrol the area.
Oh, I get it.
That's why he's there, right?
We did an op one time where...
It was overseas.
We were waiting for a target to show up, and it was a port, right?
And busy, a lot of people coming and going, tourists, workers, commercial workers, everybody coming and going from this busy port.
And, you know, what you didn't have is you didn't have a lot of people just hanging out, right?
There weren't a lot of opportunities just to hang out.
So you had to have a reason, right?
So what do you do?
You set somebody down there with a couple of pieces of luggage and a baby stroller and a baby.
And it worked like a charm because they could sit there for hours, right, waiting theoretically for a boat, but obviously pulling surveillance from an observation post.
And people walking by were like, yeah, there's some lady with a baby, you know, suitcases to cover for action.
They whacked an industrialist in Germany one time where the hit team...
It was very elaborate.
But they did what they always do.
They surveil.
They figure out the guy's routes.
And as is usual, your choke points, that's what they're looking for.
You get in a vehicle and you drive, you're going to have choke points.
Usually it's at the place of work or it's at your home.
But it may be somewhere In between, maybe there's an avenue that's always, you know, blocked up.
Maybe there's a turn that they have to come to a complete stop.
You're looking for that choke point where you can lay out the attack, where you control the environment, right?
There was a place in the Philippines that still exists.
We used to call it Ambush Alley, right?
Because you'd start at one end, you'd go to the other, and it was a cut-through.
There weren't that very many of them, and sometimes it was the only one to get from one part of the city to another.
And once you got in there, you know, you just hit the gas because you were a host.
If you got caught up in there and there was an insurgency going on, and so, you know, roadblocks and local hit teams, they call them sparrow units, were always a concern.
And so that was a choke point.
Ambush Alley was a choke point.
Anyway, long story short, they whacked this industrialist, but the hit team, after they'd done their surveillance and they decided where that point was for the attack...
They showed up one day in construction gear and construction uniforms and started digging a trench as a construction team, right?
You can look that.
You drive by and go, oh, they're building something or they're digging a trench, right?
It's cover for action.
And so it's the same.
I don't know how I'm making this analogy, but it's the same with the election.
Voters got to be able to look at it and go, it's transparent.
Well, what I'm saying is the system has to be clearly transparent and honest and credible.
Just from the voters' perspective.
You can't do shit like adjust the rules just because we say, ah, pandemic, now we've got to change the rules, and these states are going to change them, and these states won't, and this state has this.
Yeah, you can change your vote up until the deadline of the election day.
There are some places where you can go in, you have to request it, and then you can change your vote.
Which, if you think about it, is not bad, because if on election day you wake up and you find out that the candidate you voted for has committed murder, then you think, okay, I'd like to change my vote.
Somebody sent me a video, I went down a QAnon rabbit hole last night, of how Trump has set up all the Dems, and this is a sting operation, and that there's, gotta forget what they were saying, that this is all, all of the ballots have been blockchained, and...
But the conversation that these two guys were having about it was like people that are really into comic books talking about their favorite characters.
It's so weird because it's clearly and this is not to disparage people that think there's something illegitimate about this election.
This is not what I'm talking about.
When I'm talking about people that are into certain conspiracy theories and QAnon is one of them Where it becomes a thing they're into.
Whether it's real or not, it's a thing they're into.
You bring your friends in, and then you're a little bit higher up the chain in QAnon, and so you know a little bit more, and you've got more friends within it.
Well, there are some guys that claim to be Republicans, conservatives, and oh my God, we're horrified at the state of the Republican Party, and so we've set our line in the sand, and And never Trumpers, basically.
And so we're going to raise a lot of money, and we're going to fight this thing, and we're going to make sure that we fight for all the Democratic candidates, and we're going to get Trump out of there.
And yeah, of course, we're conservatives and Republicans, and we're going to do this because, hey, look, they didn't get jobs in the administration, right?
And so I have a feeling that part of this started when they didn't get enough hugs, right?
They didn't get what they wanted out of this.
Part of it maybe is they're actually legitimately upset with the administration over certain things, but I can't help but think that they just raised a lot of money.
I'd love to see how you do with charities.
You look and see what their spend is, how much of it goes to administration for the project, and how much of it actually goes and is used for things like actual ads.
I'd love to see how much money ended up in their pockets, because I guarantee you once this is over, if Biden wins, they'll somehow morph into something that now makes money by fighting some of the policies that the Biden White House wants to push out there.
But there's a lot of groups like that that have come out.
A lot of people spouting their self-righteousness over the idea that Trump's a terrible person.
I don't think he's a great person, right?
But we've talked about this before.
I don't think you need to actually like your president.
You need to like your policies and the operations that we're doing overseas and the things that we do.
Would I prefer a kinder, gentler, more eloquent—I don't know.
It's all touchy-feely, but I like the policies.
Did I dislike Trump enough to vote for the potential policies that are coming down the pike with a Biden White House?
And a Senate possibly controlled by the Democrats?
No, but then again, I voted for Kanye, so what do I know?
Because a figurehead could be polarizing, they could be someone that people love no matter what they do, and they could be someone that people hate no matter what they do.
And that's where it gets strange, where policies and the direction of a government It's attached to an individual personality.
I mean, he came out last night, this press conference, which a lot of people were horrified by, and then a lot of people got on the right and kind of cheered.
I think his first sentence out of the gate in the midst of all this sort of concern and chaos and the angst from everybody was, look, if you just count the legal votes, I have won easily.
We're concerned about some potential irregularities, but don't just start throwing shit at the wall because it demeans the whole process.
And so anyway, and that's where it all falls apart.
People start losing that credibility or that belief in the system.
But then again...
If you've spent four years attacking the credibility of the system by saying it was the Russians that put him in there, and then talking about all this other shit about, oh, he may never leave, and they were accusing him over the past couple of years.
I'll bet he's going to try to steal the election.
And so now when the other side's like, ah, we're kind of concerned about some of the things we're seeing, they're like, oh, for fuck's sake.
Or, you know, it's, oh my god, there's something hinkies going on in Mississippi, right?
So that doesn't happen, but I think, look, the polls got it all wrong.
The only time the pundits were right, I think, is when they were citing that, look, it's going to come down to a handful of important states, and they usually would cite Pennsylvania and Georgia.
But, again, whether there is or isn't, if you've got legitimate grievance, if you've got potential evidence, and you can look at a place like Nevada, Nevada, Nevada, if you've got a few thousand Ballots that are in question because it appears that either they weren't residents of the state or perhaps they died some time ago.
And it's not going to happen in Philadelphia if you say, okay, we're going to toss out these 700 ballots or whatever.
But I think it is important, again, going back to this idea that you've got to maintain faith in the system by showing people that it's credible.
So if there are irregularities, just like the Dems did in 2000, and just like in other elections, it's not uncommon at all to have a contested election result in this country.
The law accounts for it.
And so, go after that, explain what you're doing, be transparent what you're doing, and then for fuck's sake, learn from it for the next one around, right?
Make these changes.
And maybe this was an anomaly because of the pandemic and we're never ever going to see this many mail-in ballots again.
I just find it hilarious whenever I say that people should be able to vote online because you could bank online.
Like, no, there's too much room for fraud.
As opposed to what?
Stacks of paper that people can count?
What the fuck are you talking about?
It seems like you can get a code that is unique to you, like a QR code or some biometric code that's based on your FaceTime or your fingerprint if you have an Android phone.
And it will 100% prove that it's you, and you can fucking vote off your phone.
We should be able to come up with a better system, and you're right.
The problem with this was, again, it wasn't explained well enough.
And so you have the perception, whether it's existing, whether it's happening or not, you have this perception of fraud.
And social media just pumps the shit out of this and causes this problem in a major way.
You've got these videos now that are floating around Twitter and elsewhere of ballot workers working at polling stations filling out ballots.
And so they'll just like lock in.
They'll take 10 seconds of somebody taking an empty ballot, stamping it, filling it out, and then putting it in the box and taking another one, stamping it, filling it out.
And people will go, oh my god, they're falsifying ballots.
They're just creating ballots out of whole cloth.
And then that'll blast around.
And before you know it, you got like 100,000 people retweeting this bullshit without investigating it, going back to what I said before.
You can't build your argument on shit.
Now, if that's a problem, fine, investigate it.
But you also have to look at what are the other scenarios.
Well, maybe these are all ballots that wouldn't fit through the scanner or that got kicked out.
And so now what do they got to do?
They got to put them onto a new ballot, run it through, or whatever.
So I guess my point is, whether it's that or this, you can't just assume that the shit that you see—how do we not know this, right?
By now, the shit that you see on social media, you should probably question it and at least do your own research and find out whether it's true before you then kick it back out or talk about it like it's gospel.
Here's what I'm ready to talk about like it's gospel, even though I have no evidence whatsoever, because people keep saying it to me over and over again.
In Wisconsin, 100,000 votes came in for Biden overnight, and they were 100% for Biden.
The issue is, you know, like, I was talking to someone who understands these things very well, and they were describing it to me, that when the 2000 election came along with Bush and Gore, that Bush had fantastic lawyers, like the cream of the crop.
And that is not the case right now with this scenario where they're dealing with legal fraud or the potential for fraud.
As of this writing, it appears that the Democratic Party machines in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania are trying to steal the election.
As reporters and commentators went to bed early Tuesday morning, all three states were too close to call.
But President Trump led former Vice President Joe Biden by comfortable margins.
Far beyond what had been predicted in the polls.
None of the networks called these states because enough mail-in ballots remained uncounted that it could swing either way.
But Trump's position looked good.
But here's what's wrong with that, and this is what Kyle Kalinsky explained to us, that mail-in ballots were overwhelmingly Democrat because Democrats tend to be pussies who are scared to go there in person because they don't want to get coughs.
Because some of these states, and again, some of them with Republican statehouses, that was the regulation or the law that they put in place, was that you can't count those votes early, the mail-ins, I mean.
You can't vote them early.
So yeah, part of the problem was people went to bed.
Yeah, I gotta tell you, look, I think it's a simple thing, put on a mask, but you're right, there are people who wear it proudly, like the early days of adopting and driving a Prius, right?
Or there's someone in other rooms nowhere near you and you're wearing a mask.
It's a political statement.
It's a thing.
You're showing that you are a responsible person.
It's a way of flying your flag of virtue.
I am wearing a mask.
I'm not one of those...
Like, if you see those people that get in fights at Walmart because they don't want to wear...
You're infringing on my It's always the worst fucking human beings.
The people that represent not wearing a mask are never exemplary, like scholarly, brilliant people who are like, well, the reality is about virus particles and the size of these particles.
I was worried, though, that we were going to have to shut...
That was true.
It is hot as shit.
I was worried that we were going to have to shut the show down, but the doctor informed me that Since I never was really close to him, we made him sit in the corner like a dunce.
And after we found out that he had the cooties, and we tested him again, he failed the second test.
I was thinking about that yesterday, walking around the airport, looking around.
Yeah, quick.
And people all...
And it used to be, right, that if you saw, this is going to sound wrong, but if you saw someone wearing a mask, it was probably somebody from Japan or Korea or somewhere, right?
I mean, it was like that, because it's a little more common over there.
But I've seen people up there running, and it's not like you're running downtown New York City where you're passing people constantly, and like you said, you're breathing heavy.
It's just- And, you know, or you're on an obvious, on a long, you know, 20 mile bike ride because you got your spandex on.
You're going for a big pedal and you got your mask on.
I'm thinking, it's probably, A, it's probably not necessary and B, it's probably not that healthy.
One thing this whole process has taught me is that I find the most annoying people I think exist out there are really, really self-righteous, progressive white people.
Young kids like that who've never been held up at gunpoint, who've never been robbed.
I don't know if she's ever been robbed.
Maybe she has.
Maybe she's just really hardcore.
She's been robbed, and she's like, I prefer the fucking thieves to the police.
But it's just this thing where you're supposed to hate the cops because of George Floyd or because of a number of other incidents that have nothing to do with that guy.
It's like you can't hate any group of people because of someone that is not...
Right.
They're not the same human.
They didn't do that horrendous crime that everybody saw that makes you angry.
It's not an epidemic, but there's enough so that if you Google it, you'll find many, many, many cases where people lost their license to practice, got sued, went to jail.
But you don't look at every doctor and go, you piece of shit.
I got molested by a doctor.
You fucking asshole.
And no one's under more pressure for fear of their life in a civilian society than a cop.
I mean, if you're a state trooper and you pull somebody over on the highway and you're walking up there, you have no idea what the fuck's about to happen.
A big part of it is also what you're talking about with people being self-righteous.
They're self-righteous all day long on Twitter and they're arguing with people about it and they're finding people that agree with them and everybody's competing for likes.
Social media has ruined discourse but it's also enhanced it.
I'm just saying that there is a downside that we don't seem to be dealing with very well.
Look, I mean, right after this happened, right?
So once it became clear that there was not going to be a blue wave and that Biden wasn't going to ride in on it and that the House wasn't going to flip a bunch of Republican seats and they weren't going to take the Senate, right away...
If you kind of canvassed what was going on in social media, people were like, well, this just cements it then.
This is clear that it wasn't just an anomaly in 2016. This just cements that half of America is a bunch of shitheads, right?
I mean, that was the general tone from some folks out in social media just saying, well, clearly they're either stupid or they're bad people or they're both because they don't agree with me.
There's a lot of things that people are voting for.
They're not just voting one guy bad, one guy good.
That's not what's going on.
There's a lot of economic policies.
They're dealing with support for the military.
That's a giant factor with a lot of people.
Look, for a lot of my friends who are veterans who are either in the military or have been in the military, that is the number one reason why they voted for Trump.
And, you know, for Tim Kennedy, that's why he re-enlisted.
He re-enlisted because he knew that the military was getting more support and that the funding for the military was going to increase substantially and they were going to get to take care of things that were stagnant for a long time.
And he came on the podcast and talked about it, how they basically squashed ISIS in under a year.
And it was going on forever before that.
And they were spreading to Boko Haram and all throughout Africa.
And it was getting scary.
And funding increased substantially.
Support increased substantially.
They got what they needed and they got the job done.
That for a lot of guys, they're not assholes.
They just support the military.
And they know that there was one candidate that was making a big push to support the military.
And another one...
That was a part of the whole Benghazi bullshit.
I mean, that was 2016. They didn't trust her because of that.
They didn't trust her because she's a part of the machine.
They're the part of the whole machine that got them into Iraq in the first place under false pretenses.
And after the summer of what they were witnessing, they thought, you know what?
I think probably looking at that and then saying I'm for defunding the police or whatever the term they use sometimes, reimagining policing as a community effort.
I mean, his answer for a couple of things, like with the pandemic.
Well, what are you going to do?
I'm going to get a commission of the leading scientists, and we're going to look at how do we deliver these things on time, and how do I... I think, well, hold on a second, pal.
Look, I mean, I don't doubt that he's a good person.
I'm sure he is a good person.
But you can't tell me that suddenly you're magically going to develop this level of efficiency that wasn't displayed in the previous eight years of the Obama administration or prior to that when you were as a senator for all this time, admittedly working within a system that sometimes is hard to move.
But I think his answer to that commission, his answer to court packing, are you in favor He wouldn't answer that question.
So he said, I'm in a form of a commission to look at it because I think the Supreme Court's out of whack.
He's so ridiculous, it's hard to write stuff that's more ridiculous.
One of the things you do with comedy is you make things more ridiculous than they actually are, but with a grain of truth to it, when you're mocking a person.
If you stifle their humor, or you don't let them understand the complexity of humor, or how it can be layered, and part of that is sort of the, you know, it's like the nine-year-old will sit with his older brothers, and they'll plow through a couple episodes of South Park, and you know, I'm thinking, okay, I've caught the nine-year-old watching Borat, the second Borat movie.
And so, like, I don't have a problem, you know, and if one of them's acting like a douche, then I'll say, hey, look, stop acting like an asshole or don't be a douchebag or whatever.
But I look at agencies as being something that's completely separate from what the president is.
And that they advise the president and fill in the president in on all the shit that's going on in the world that you don't know about if you're a civilian.
Right.
But you don't directly – it's not – you're not a part of this administration.
I mean, the director sometimes can be, and that's why I say it changes sometimes.
You get people that may come in and have more of a political bent, which I think is always wrong.
Ideally, the agency, NSA, other members of the intel community should always be...
Ideally apolitical.
Now, everybody's human, right?
They've got their own beliefs, etc., obviously.
But I think it works best when these...
And we've seen from other countries overseas, you see this shit, right?
You see when you get a change in government and they just wholesale clean out the intelligence organization or the police organization and they bring in all their people.
But, you know, I think Comey has the same problem in a sense that, you know, like over on the CIA side that John Brennan had.
I think they just...
They got too deep into the game in terms of politics and the association.
And at that point, one side or the other, depending on where you are on the fence, is going to find it that offensive or questionable or maybe lacking in credibility.
So when you say too deep in politics, meaning they did things that weren't necessarily the correct things to do, but they were very good for them politically?
Well, politically, I think he's on the opposite side of the fence there.
Yeah.
I mean, I think if somebody who was more politically aligned with Comey had said that, he would have gone, well, of course I am.
I mean, not loyal, but just saying, sir, you can always count on my loyalty.
It wouldn't have been an issue.
It wouldn't have leaked out.
It wouldn't have been a story.
But, yeah, coming back around, I think the smartest thing they could do, assuming that Vice President Biden becomes President-elect Biden if the numbers continue to go the way they are— With the agency, he should definitely keep Gina Haspel on that job.
I mean, people generally at that level, don't quote me, but generally they submit their resignations, you know.
So if Trump were to have won or were to win, then they would still submit their resignations and he would have the opportunity to either offer them that position again or find someone new.
When there's a change in administration, that's what you do.
You hand in your resignation.
I mean, my daughter works in DC, and she's in a political position.
So she's been out there quietly looking in the event that the administration changes.
Because her assumption is she will not have a job after January, you know, middle of January.
So it's a standard procedure out there.
But when you find a real quality person who can provide you with extremely good advice and insight, you should probably hold on to that person, you know.
Well, and I think that's—what people should watch also is—look, these two—I can't emphasize this enough—unless Purdue gets that 50% plus one vote and outright wins that Senate seat in Georgia, you've got these two Senate seats, right?
And this is the balance of the U.S. Senate.
This is why this is important.
This is actually more important now than the focus that the world's got on Biden-Trump, right?
I think that train's left the station probably, but— Regardless, that Senate control is critically important in terms of, again, a sort of a balance of power arrangement, keeping government in check.
And so, you know, the Democrats are, you know, they are going to pump a shit ton of cash into those races, two of them, even if there's just one.
Well, no, if there's one, then forget about it, because, you know, they've lost the majority possibility.
If both of those go to runoff in January, I think that may...
And Biden is the president-elect, and it's decided, and they have the concession speech from Trump, and so we go through this period of mid-December through January.
Then I think you will see some change.
I don't think they'll wait until after Biden is officially president in terms of the coverage, because they're going to want to impact those elections in Georgia, right?
You're going to want to show, oh my god, look, we're really doing this, and it's, ah, things are turning around now.
And the media will be completely complicit in that, obviously.
And by the way, I've been accused of that because of that.
And having a fucking biologist on the show explain why, Brett Weinstein, explain why he believed it came from the lab.
Explain why, because if you examine the virus...
There's so many things that point to the fact this virus has been manipulated, that this virus is far too contagious, that it spreads far too quickly, it's gone through this whole evolutionary process that seems to have happened way too quickly for it not to have been manipulated.
He explained this in scientific terms without saying ever that he believes it absolutely came from the lab.
He's like, all indications point.
To the possibility that this had come from the lab.
And I've read all these things where, like, Joe Rogan's show is spreading dangerous conspiracy theories about the virus.
I read something where it says sneezing in your mask is the new shit in your pants.
Yeah, look, I think there's every likelihood that this was picked up or identified in the wet market or through sort of, okay, this is a naturally occurring, and we know that this has happened before.
So that's not hard to imagine.
The likelihood that that then made its way into the lab is they were looking at it, manipulating it.
I do believe there was fuckery going on in terms of just trying to understand what it was or trying to see where it was going to go.
I think the real wacky conspiracy theory is that they did it on purpose and I don't subscribe to that.
I think that seems highly illogical that they would subject their own people to that and then they would shut down essentially most of the world.
That doesn't benefit anybody.
It doesn't seem like that would...
I don't see a logical reason why anybody would release that on purpose.
It's the same kind of people that wear their fucking masks in their Twitter profile pictures are the ones that hate anybody discussing the possibility that that virus escaped from a lab.
And again, you had this thing, crisis management planning, right?
Every company, every corporation will have a set of protocols, and they go through this and say, okay, we've got to look at all the potential threats and risks facing our company, and then we have to create a crisis management plan in case of this happens, that happens, whatever.
Like you said, have a backup plan or have a scenario that you can go to, and then you exercise that, right?
And so it's not...
Hard to imagine that if you have a pandemic playbook that says, okay, these are the various scenarios, we've identified now that this virus has come from over here, that we're going to temporarily halt travel from that location where we've identified this is the origination of that virus.
What the hell?
How is that tough?
But yet in this environment, because it's immediately politically charged.
Oh, the conspiracy theories that they knew about it in 2019. But it's not fair when they take advantage of something that clearly no one was prepared for and blame it all on him.
Now, if you want to criticize him for saying, it's like the flu, it's going to go away, it's going to be magic, it's going to disappear...
It's gonna go like this.
Yeah, I think you're allowed to criticize him on that.
That's a preposterous way of discussing it.
It's stupid.
And to say it's gonna be like magic?
No, it's not.
And then when he got it himself, I think that was a real wake-up call.
It's not a random question that maybe insight from him would be into, like, I've seen a lot of stuff online about a Melania body double that, like, one version of her doesn't even like to hold his hand, but this other version will hug and kiss him.
My wife has worked with Melania in the past on some overseas concerns and trips, and she's got nothing but excellent things to say about Melania in terms of...
She says she's a very private person, right?
She doesn't really like sort of the press concerns of the job of First Lady.
Her staff, my wife says, absolutely adores her, loves her, because she is a...
You know, a kind individual, a decent person.
So I've heard nothing but good things about her.
I will admit, I've never heard this body double story before.
Because you think about it, sometimes a guy like me may not blend everywhere in the world, and so the ability to operate on the streets or out in the open, yeah, so we've got a shit-hot disguise unit.
Did you see there's some study today that came out, I put it on my Instagram page, that psilocybin is four times more effective for antidepressants than medication.
Well, and then you look at this, and you think, okay, Pelosi, during her speech today, or she came out and gave a little presser.
I don't know if she took any questions, but it was like, Part of it was also this implication that now we're going to get to work on the next stimulus bill.
And I'm thinking, what the fuck have you been doing?
Obviously, clearly we're waiting for this election to go so that nobody gets credit except for you.
Again, you know me, I'm not a conspiracy guy, but I have no doubt that they weaponized this whole pandemic issue for political purposes, and they played it very, very well.
Look, this is going to sound wrong, but it's a horrific thing.
It's terrible.
You never wish it on anybody, but there's no doubt.
That this played into the DNC's or the Democratic Party's hands, and they took advantage in certain cases of it, right?
Because they'd been throwing shit at Trump for four years, and most of it didn't stick, no matter what they tried.
And this was the thing that worked for them, and they saw it pretty early on, right?
And they saw what the economy was doing, and that was his big ticket, right?
Yeah, just like the Dems right now, if it was flipped, they would be crying foul, as we've seen in the past, and they would be saying, we're going to investigate, and we're not giving a concession speech, we're going to take this to court.
Or you just have to accept the fact that not everybody thinks the same, right?
And going back to what I mentioned earlier, where it was like after the election, after it was clear it was going to be very, very close...
And some folks on the left came out and started talking about, well, you just can't save these 48 or 49%, meaning people that don't think like they or didn't vote for Biden.
You can't save them because they're hopeless, they're useless, they're stupid or bad.
That's a hell of a way to think, right?
And then I saw that guy that turned out to be anonymous, right?
But he came out and he wrote this bullshit article or op-ed that basically said, well, you know, I thought it's not Washington that's broken, it's the American people.
Again, referencing anybody who didn't vote for Biden, right?
I mean, it's a disparaging book about the Trump administration.
I don't even want to give it any time because I don't think it's deserving.
But not that there's things you couldn't talk about, but I have this thing about people who walk out of an administration, regardless of which one, Or walk out of an agency or wherever and write a fucking book.
And, you know, like as an example, the agency has what they call a publications review board.
So if you're going to finish up with the outfit and you get out and you think, oh, my God, I want to write a book.
And I know a handful of folks who did, and they were very good books, but they don't talk about...
You know, it's not a tell-all.
It's not a...
And they're not disclosing sources and methods.
But the point being is they've got the PRB, and so you have to submit your transcript, and they go through it, and sometimes they'll edit things out, and sometimes they won't.
But the idea that you come out and you had an unsatisfactory experience and you want to complain about shit...
The George Soros thing just keeps coming up over and over and over again where people that I know that are very intelligent and some that are very connected say that he's funding a lot of these Antifa rallies and protests and chaos and that they're funding the political campaigns of people that are opposed to putting people in jail and that are promoting air quotes social justice and all of these.
Reforms and all of these political movements that seem to be deteriorating the trust in law enforcement and that there's some sort of organized campaign by him to do something to destroy the fabric of our democracy.
The Open Society Foundation support individuals and organizations across the globe fighting for freedom of expression, accountable government, and societies that promote justice and equality.
You know, the theory being, oh, no, we're trying to promote...
If you wrap yourself in the cloak of promoting equality and justice, most people aren't going to push back because they don't want to look like a dick, right?
So do you think it's just that it's an easy target for someone who's looking for, like, one person who's the puppet master, who's pulling all the strings?
But my point, my overall point, should I have one, is that with Soros, I mean, people like, you know, that's why conspiracy theories and other things exist, right, and continue to exist, is because it's a fascinating concept, it's a fascinating story.
You can look at Soros and go, yes, you're running from a secret lair somewhere under a volcano, an effort to take down America, right?
I do find it always interesting because I'm still fascinated by the Martin Luther King thing because it's It's a rare day when I look at something and go, yeah, that really is horseshit there.
Yeah, he's just a petty criminal and not a good one, right?
Always caught.
Always, always caught.
And, you know, then suddenly he manages to reinvent himself, goes on the road, disappears, lays low, comes out, you know, looks like a professor when he ends up in Europe after the shooting, you know, buys a Mustang, you know, for cash, you know, more cash than the kid probably or the guy I probably ever saw.
It's just, there's too many things here that just make it look like that.
So I'm not a, again, I'm not a conspiracy guy, but I look at that one and I go, you know, over all these years, and we weren't able to kind of get to the bottom of it, you know, speaks to sort of the, I don't know, the sinister nature of it, I think.
I... I would never say I'm not a conspiracy guy because I love conspiracies.
I think they're awesome.
They're so much fun.
But I don't buy all of them.
I think there's a lot of them that are bullshit.
But a lot of them are real.
That's the problem with the term conspiracy theorist.
People don't ever want to be called a conspiracy theorist because it makes you look like a fool.
Fortunately for me, everyone knows I'm a fool.
So I can say that I enjoy conspiracies.
But I also can say, if I'm being honest...
I know that for sure people have conspired to do things.
In particular, when you're talking about in the 1960s, there's evidence, there's a tremendous amount of evidence that people conspired to do a lot of different things.
I mean, there's so much evidence that, you know, there's like, first of all, the Gulf of Tonkin incident.
That got us into the Vietnam War.
That's a conspiracy.
That's a proven conspiracy.
They lied about attacks on America so that they could get us into the Vietnam War.
That's a conspiracy.
How about Operation Northwoods?
That's a conspiracy signed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
They were going to fake attacks on American civilians.
They were going to blow up a drone jetliner, blame it on Cuba.
They were going to arm Cuban friendlies and attack Guantanamo Bay.
So serious people, which fortunately for me, I'm not one of those, serious people that want to be taken seriously, they tend to shy away from conspiracies.
But if he's the one who said it, then yeah, it doesn't come from the government.
You know, the ATIP, which is that Advanced Aeronautical Threat Identification Program, I mean, I think the most interesting thing that the government has come out and said is that, yes, we did have a...
We did have an operation within the Pentagon, an office within the Pentagon that was there to identify unidentified threats, right?
So we get something up in the air and we can't identify it.
David Fravor, for anybody who's interested in this, please listen to him on the Lex Friedman podcast.
Because I had him on, but I had him on with Jeremy Corbell, who's the documentarian behind that Bob Lazar movie.
And by himself, Fravor and Lex, they get deep into the technical specifications of their aircraft and why he believes that no known aircraft could have ever operated the way it is.
And also how it was blocking their tracking devices, which is technically it's an act of war.
And isn't it—it's an interesting conversation, too, because for people that don't like secrecy, and they don't think we should have secrecy— For national security and for the development of things like the stealth bomber or like a lot of other things that show that we have military superiority over our enemies, it's important to have secrecy.
Now I'm deep into the show and I'm just now bashing China for their theft of economic intelligence.
But you look at the effort that they make in terms of stealing our intellectual property and research and development, right?
I mean, the idea that you don't protect your most critical information, whether it's operationally important or whether it's just, again, R&D for development of materials, and that speaks to the strength of your economy.
So yes, certain things have to be kept secret.
But again, you can overclassify things, which tends to happen, right?
You tend to just—because you're trying to protect everything, right?
So I'm just going to overclassify, and that also creates a problem then.
So trying to strike a balance, it's a humor in endeavor, so you never really get it right, I don't think, but— Well, this is where people feel like the line, when it comes to alien spacecrafts and if the government knows and is aware of alien spacecrafts and alien technology, this is where the line of secrecy and being sworn to oath, where it crosses over into a need to know for the general public.
Bob Lazar's story.
The story about him working for S4. He was a physicist for Los Alamos Labs.
That's been proven.
He was on the employee list there.
He also was listed in a newspaper article when he put a jet engine in a Honda that he was a physicist at Los Alamos Labs and he was a propulsion expert.
Says he worked for Area S4 and says he was hired to back engineer UFOs and says they never could figure out how these things worked and that they were never going to because they really couldn't because they were trying to keep everything secret.
They couldn't share all this information with the general scientific community.
And he's like, science doesn't work in these containment bubbles.
You can't compartmentalize science and have only a few small propulsion experts sit around and try to figure this thing out and then they fire and bring new guys in and No one ever gets it.
I mean, if I'm trying to pull information out of another nation, right, if I'm targeting intelligence from, you know, and they're developing some new ballistic missile system or whatever it is, propulsion system, then yes, I'm going to play off of that desire on the part of engineers and scientists to have a collaborative community, right?
And that's And the Chinese do that very well, right?
Particularly when they target Chinese Americans working here in the US in potentially sensitive positions.
This idea that we're all working together and this is just what we should be doing.
My company has done work trying to protect information for companies, pharmaceutical companies is a good example.
Where the scientists, the engineers, the doctors need that free flow in their mind.
They've got to have this free flow and this collaborating and this sharing of information.
And meanwhile, you've got the other side, you know, where the bean counters and security personnel and all that, and they're going like, no, this is the lifeblood of our company.
We can't risk losing this information, so we've got to lock it down to the degree we can.
Those two things don't necessarily coexist all that well together, but you've got to try to find some medium.
So, yeah, I think...
You know, there's—the fact that the government came out and talked about ATIP, I thought was a big step, right?
That's a big deal for them, right?
I mean, that they would discuss that.
Do I think that they're hiding—you know, again, I wouldn't take anything off the table, frankly, because I don't know.
So it would be stupid of me to say, no, they definitely aren't holding on to some— Propulsion system that, you know, isn't of this world, or whatever.
If I don't know it, I can't say absolutely not, but...
It's because they go on for, I think it's three and a half hours.
It's really good.
And they talk about all kinds of things, about flying and pilots and...
And the fact that you always have the same two pilots working together, the pilot and the co-pilot, and they, you know, in the military, it's very different than civilian airliners that these guys work together, they understand each other, and they develop sort of the way Lex described it as sort of a mind meld between the two.
It's a really good interview, and he goes into depth about also the criticisms by these debunkers that don't understand the equipment.
They don't understand what they're saying.
When they're trying to debunk it, they're debunking it in a preposterous way.
They really don't understand what happened.
That thing that they followed went from 60,000 feet down to one feet above sea level in less than a second.
Still unexplained, and when Fravor talked about it, when he first saw it, he was communicating with the other people that were on the other end of the radio, and they were saying, we are in contact with these things all the time.
But do I think that there's aliens that they come periodically visit and just observe and go, oh, fuck this, and then leave?
It does raise the question as to why we, if they've actually visited and they've been here, are they just for observation and then they get fed up with the way we act?
Because if we're looking at that and we say, okay, say the Tic Tac was from some other world, then them looking at us, they're not going to look at us and go, well, that's an advanced civilization.
Right, and so why wouldn't they observe us the way we observe bugs?
People spend their whole life tracking sloths.
They really do.
There's a lot of people that spend their whole life studying plants.
The idea that we, if we found an advanced life form, say if we went to another planet and we found some early Neanderthal types that were just starting to use flint tools, we would study them hard.
We would be fascinated.
Even if they were like, oh my god, they're like 300,000 years behind where we are right now.
Well, with them, I think there's a lot of inbreeding because there's such a small genetic sample.
So it's a small genetic group to draw from.
But I think that if aliens came here from another planet, first of all, they would know for sure that we already split the atom.
They would know that we have the power of nuclear weapons and that we have enough nuclear weapons aimed at each other to decimate all life on Earth multiple times over.
I think they would think that's pretty fucking advanced.
They would know that we can send video through the sky.
They would know that we can capture time in the form of pictures and film.
I think they would be aware that we are on the cusp of some pretty wild shit.
We're sending Teslas into space that are currently zooming around Mars or whatever the fuck they are.
I took my truck to the car wash the other day in Boise and There was a Tesla that was sitting over on the side and the lady was giving the manager hell because she'd taken her Tesla through the car wash and it knocked off the side view mirror and it was clearly a new car for her.
And she couldn't even take it to the car wash without it losing a piece or a part.
And I thought it wasn't a good ad for Tesla, frankly, but you know.
Because they're beautiful, they're kind of cool, they like to hang around people, but they will kill your fucking cat, they will kill your chickens, they'll kill a lot of things.
Well, but it's also—it's the continuing—look, it's interesting if you think about what the fuck is wrong with people, and then you see the rate of movement of citizens out of California and to other locations.
And then you think about, okay, like Georgia's a good example in this election, right?
Georgia's turning, right?
So Georgia may well end up having become a blue state.
Why?
Well, people coming from out of state.
We get that happening in Idaho.
People coming in from out of state.
And you'd like to think, again, going back to the very first thing we talked about, self-awareness, you'd like to think to say, I'm leaving this place.
It's got some problems.
I'm going to go somewhere else.
You know what, though?
I'm not connecting the dots.
I'm going to just say that it has nothing to do with the way that I voted in the past.
I'm sure things will be fine here if I continue that.
And he's like, don't make this state what you fled.
And he makes some very good points, and a lot of other people do, too.
Economic freedom, the freedom to be an entrepreneur, the freedom to start businesses and not be over-regulated, all of those are real problems in California.
They're giant problems.
They impede business.
California businesses succeed in spite of all the regulation, not because of all the regulation.
If you take away incentives, if you take away just the idea that, you know what, maybe...
You know, I got a great job, but I also got an idea.
Maybe I want to pursue that idea and see whether I can turn it into a business.
If you get rid of that either by regulations or just by disincentivizing people from starting a business or from creating something, it could be just a flash of an idea that they've got.
You know, I'm going to sound like I've got rose-colored glasses on, but that was part of the thing that makes this country so special, right?
And, you know, I do look at California, and I look at the movement of people out of there, and Idaho, again, being one of those places where a lot of folks end up, and you could see that happening.
You could see suddenly, you know, a business-friendly state starting to turn, and that's I don't know.
So yeah, if you don't like where you are and you're moving, maybe look in the mirror and think about, maybe I want something different.
Well, one of the things that Governor Abbott was telling me is that, fortunately, there are a lot of people that are coming from California that are self-aware and are voting differently than they voted in the past.
Because they're realizing what they fled.
And they're actually voting for traditional Texas politics, like the way it's always been here.
Hey, speaking of entrepreneurs, this is where I bring in a second promo.
It'll only take me a second.
A buddy of mine did a great thing during the pandemic.
While he's locked down, I think everybody in the lockdown thought, I'm going to get myself in shape, or I'm going to read the Constitution finally, or I'm going to learn a new language or whatever.
Well, Bird Dog Investigations, it's a platform that works in a couple of different ways, but one way is the world of private investigators out there, right?
Because that's sort of the guy's business in a way.
But it helps them in their operations.
If you're a private investigator out in the field, you're out there and you're taking notes, the typical picture of a guy drinking coffee and trying to snap a couple of pictures of whatever it is, insurance fraud or whatever it may be, and he's compiling all this information.
Maybe he's writing some of it on a cocktail napkin in his car, and then he's like, he's got all this shit.
He's got to put it together.
So the thing that's missing is the ability to punch it into an app, right?
Compile all that.
It takes all the photos.
It formats it all into a preset format that the receiver, whether it's a law firm or a company, if the guy's working for a company, it just sets it all in there.
Look at that!
My God!
But it's also useful for large companies.
Like you think about a company out there, a transportation business like FedEx or UPS or one of those, and their drivers are constantly...
What's happening?
There's fraud out there where they get sideswiped purposely, right?
Or they set up fake accidents, and then people are suing a company like UPS or FedEx or DHL or whomever.
And it costs a lot of money.
It costs them a lot of money to get out of these accidents.
It's a real problem, because it involves the perpetrators, right?
They tend to be the same.
It involves law firms.
It involves pain specialists and doctors.
They're in on this thing, right?
So certain jurisdictions around the country have more of a problem than others.
Big urban centers, as you can imagine.
So anyway, the idea was this guy came up and said, you know what, if the drivers of these vehicles have something where they can, you know, take photos of the situation, punch in all the details, it goes straight into a report that looks good, it goes to the company, great.
Now you're not, it's there instantaneously, they can assess the situation, they can react quicker, they can identify the frauds.
So anyway, my whole point was, it's just good to see, you know, Someone doing something good with their time.
Yeah, with their time.
And again, that entrepreneurial spirit that I just banged on about.
And just randomly, so I answered this ad, and it turned out that he lost his license from a DUI. Fucking hilarious guy.
And then never drank again.
Never went to AA or anything.
Just got himself off the wagon.
He's like, all right, I got to stop doing this.
He crashed his car trying to run away from the cops and was like, fuck this.
But really, really funny guy.
Like, hilarious.
And his cousin, this is random, right?
I'm just answering this ad.
His cousin was one of the owners of one of the comedy clubs in town.
So his cousin was this guy, Bill Downs, who was one of the owners, along with Paul Barkley, of the Comedy Connection, which was one of the main comedy clubs in Boston.
And so, like, I get to hang out with this guy, and I'm telling you, out of all the people that I've ever met in my life, he's in the top three funniest people of all time.
So I'd be the one that would talk to ladies and ask them questions.
He had these little scams he would do.
One of them would be, he would know someone's license plate and then he would make a couple license plates that were similar to that license plate.
If your license plate was like XYZ, he would make XYW, XYO, and he would say, my girlfriend was in a car accident and there was a witness to the accident and the cop spilt his coffee On the paper, and they didn't get the license number, and I'm hoping that you were one of the witnesses.
And, oh, no, I'm sorry.
What happened?
It was like, I have someone at the DMV, and they gave me these addresses for all these licenses.
They know most of the numbers except for the last one, but I was hoping it was you.
No, it wasn't.
What was the injury?
Was she okay?
And he would say, well, you know, she had the L5 herniated disc.
I would say, in the realm of what's possible in this entire world and universe that we don't know anything about, I'd say yes.
Yeah, I'd say yeah, because there's just so much we don't know.
And so I think it would be, you know, again, that's sort of the, that's kind of like the operational investigative pragmatic side, which says you can't rule out anything that you don't know 100%.
I think there's something there that we couldn't explain, and there's a difference there, right?
So there's a difference that says there's something there that we can't explain, at least with the tools that we've got currently and the technology that we've got currently.
That's not the same thing as saying the government knows what it is and is hiding it.
Right.
So, you know, I'm not taking that jump yet.
Right.
And because, in part because, look, I worked long enough for the government to know that they can't keep a secret.
I mean, over a period of time.
It's just very, very tough.
I mean, and so do I think that everybody involved could keep their yap shut after all these years?
No.
So that's the one thing that rules out the idea, in my mind, to some degree.
Again, not ruling it out entirely that it didn't happen.
I think that there's something there that we can't explain, and that definitely bears further investigation.
Do I think we're investigating it?
Yeah, sure.
Do I think there's some element out there within the military that is investigating the Tic Tac, as an example, what Fravor saw?
Absolutely.
I mean, we'd be silly not to, right?
Because, you know, that's a national security issue at that point.
Well, I think what would be really terrifying to the government is if it wasn't aliens.
Like, if there was a craft that could go from 60,000 feet above sea level to one feet above, and it was a human-created thing, that means that some, unless it's us, some other civilization somewhere on this planet has some kind of technology that's beyond the realm of our current imagination or understanding of physics.
Absolutely, which is why, again, that was really the reason for creating ATIP anyway within the Pentagon was because, again, it's a national security issue, right?
Do the Chinese, have they developed some propulsion system?
We don't know about it.
Have the Russians done that?
I mean, there's only so many options there in terms of the countries that have the resources and the ability.
Yeah, so we should be investigating these things.
We should be looking at this.
Do I think everything needs to be out on the table?
Again, going back to what you were talking about before, is there a need for secrets?
Well, sure, yeah, there are some needs for secrecy here.
I could see where you could argue, if we have anything that we know about alien life or technology or around any of this issue, that we should just come out, put it on the table.
My concern would be, from a national security perspective, if I... Obviously, I don't know much about national security, but if I did, I would say, I don't know if people could handle it.
I don't know if they would be the best thing for these fucking dummies out here that I don't even know if they should be voting.
If those knuckleheads found out that they were aliens...
How bad would they freak out?
And also, what if there are, and what if they very rarely come here, but now that we have proven that they are here, how badly would other people, nefarious interests in the United States and elsewhere, manipulate that information and fuck with people over it?
That's another real concern.
If it is proven that there is alien life, and that we do occasionally get visited by aliens, Do you know how many fucking cult members would be created?
How many people would manipulate that information?
How many people would pretend to have secret insight?
Yeah, I mean, you could argue the other way and say, well, if it had happened, or if, and again, I'm not saying that's the case, but if the government was aware of visits from other worlds, you know, Maybe it helps people put things in perspective.
He's speaking in front of the United Nations in the early 80s, and he said, imagine if we were visited, if we received a threat from another planet, how quickly we would put aside our differences.
There's hundreds of billions of stars in this galaxy alone.
There are hundreds of billions of galaxies in the known universe.
Not only that, some physicists believe that inside every galaxy there's a supermassive black hole and that inside that black hole may be another universe with also hundreds of billions of galaxies, each with hundreds of billions of stars.
And even if it's not infinite, the sheer size of it is beyond our ability to comprehend.
When you hear the numbers, oh, it's 14 billion years old.
What does that even mean?
Does that even register?
That's so big it doesn't register.
And that's just as far as we can see back to the Big Bang.
And it's entirely possible that they think...
It's possible that the Big Bang is part of a series of events and that there's a Big Bang and then an expansion and then ultimately a contraction and a compression leading to another Big Bang.
And it's this cycle that goes on and on and on and on and it's always existed.
I think the key there is, A, we don't know what we don't know, and just the sheer size and scope, and the idea that you'd have to be pretty fucking cocksure to think that we're the only intelligent life in this entire setup, spinning around out here on our own.
But I think, not to take it back full circle, but Yeah, it's that idea that if, you know, don't discount ideas.
Don't, you know, don't rule things out unless you've got the evidence to do so, right?
I also think that if there was some alien force, some species that's so far beyond our current understanding of propulsion and technology, they can travel here instantaneously from anywhere in the universe.
We don't visit an ant colony and go, take me to the queen.
I will not speak to you peasants.
They don't give a shit.
I think they'd be so far advanced that they would just be studying us with no regard to letting us know about their presence and They'd be cataloging us with all the other life forms that they've found and saying, okay, this is how these guys behave in a social environment.
And there's also the possibility that there's many different steps along this pathway, right, where there's insanely advanced and then there's marginally advanced, like something that's only a few thousand years more advanced than us, that visits us, that's much more recognizable.
And then things that are so far beyond our comprehension and so different from such a different environment and different ecosystem that we can't even understand what they are.
But even if he has 270, it doesn't mean that they stop the legal procedures in certain locations.
And so I think that, yes, it's likely to go on, much like it did in 2000, it's likely to go on until December 12th or 13th, but there is an ending to it.
So all these people who think, oh my God, he's never going to leave and he's going to lock himself in, that's not the way this works.
He doesn't get to make that decision.
It's a legal process.
It's a process that...
On the 20th of January, his term ends, and we get a new president.
Hopefully, or Civil War, because he hires his own security firm, and they lock everything down, and they won't let that criminal Biden in, and then the QAnon people become his consultants.
If neither of those races hits 50%, plus one vote, then they both go to runoffs in January.
And that's where they're going to open up the spigot, and hundreds of millions of dollars are going to flow into Georgia for those races, from both sides, I'm sure, because they know what this means, right?
And we are going to have an interesting episode on, not necessarily on aliens, but on the program surrounding the government's investigation of unidentified objects and things.
So we're going to dive a lot deeper into it.
Hopefully I'll come back and I'll have answers, specific answers for your question.