December 17, 2013: Knowledge Fight dissects Alex Jones’s 2013 broadcast, replayed in 2020, where he misrepresented GM’s $10B stock buy as a bailout, peddled COVID-19 bioweapon theories (later reversed), and cherry-picked soil nutrient studies—claiming 98% loss despite actual declines of 27–37%. He tied iodine deficiencies to sea salt trends while selling supplements, ignored Breonna Taylor’s case in 2020 despite anti-cop rhetoric, and framed himself as a non-radical truth-teller, yet leaned on John Birch Society propaganda. The episode reveals Jones’s pattern of sensationalism over facts, exploiting fears for profit while dismissing real-world geopolitics. [Automatically generated summary]
Yeah, and if you did really well in the drug education section of the curriculum or whatever, they'd let you take it home for the evening and then you had to bring it back.
However, this gentleman, Robert, reached out to me and wanted to create a time capsule of the day that his daughter was born for when she's old enough to listen to the show so she could hear what Alex was doing on the day she was born.
I got this email and I thought it was one of the sweeter, more uplifting things that I've heard in a while, although twisted and obscured through the lens of our show, which is never sweet.
I don't know why because we're already talking about this and this is an episode.
But like, the way I conceived in my mind is that we would play that drop and then we would enter it as if, you know, like that's the beginning of the episode.
Like, I assume that everyone, like, down the road, 10 years from now or whatever, they'll be listening to this part where we're doing this rambling introduction.
Naturally, as you can see, which is why I threw in the raptor princess.
I don't think that this is a bad or uninteresting episode, but I will say that there is very little geopolitical importance on this episode of his show.
Ladies and gentlemen, coming up later in the broadcast, this live Tuesday, the 17th of December 2013 edition, Larry Clayman, the legendary constitutional lawyer that's waged war on tyrants everywhere.
And I'll open the phones up again today, but I think it's going to be on specific topics because I really want to get your take on some of these issues.
You know, Alex does have the, like, there's so many stories to get to that is very similar, but in this case, he does at least start talking about a headband.
So for what it's worth, in July 2019, GM finally finished paying back to the United States government all the money that it owed as part of the bailout.
That was later than it was supposed to have paid it all back, but all $6.7 billion that was considered a loan was repaid.
The government, and by extension, the taxpayers, did still lose out here, though, because part of the bailout plan was to not saddle the company with an impossible amount of debt.
So some of the bailout was in the form of the U.S. government buying stock in General Motors.
According to a 2014 article in CNN Business, quote, although GM has been very profitable since 2009, its stock price never rose to the level that let Treasury recoup that investment.
Of course.
On December 16th, back in 2013, there was an article in the Detroit Free Press with the headline, quote, Should GM repay 10 billion rescue cost?
This article is about whether or not the CEO of GM felt they should pay off the government for all the stock that it bought in GM, which technically is not their responsibility and wasn't part of the bailout plan.
Naturally, the CEO said no, and that, quote, treasury officials took the same risk assumed by anyone who purchases stock.
Also, Alex fails to mention that in this article, they explicitly discuss GM's plan to invest $1.2 billion in five U.S. plants, which brings their total for the past four years at that point up to $10 billion investments in United States plants.
Sure.
Alex is saying that they're moving to Brazil and China, but there are only three GM factories in Brazil, and all of them were opened before the bailout, two of them prior to 1960.
As for the reality of Chinese GM factories, they've been built because of the expanding demand for cars in China.
A 2019 article in CNN Business estimates that approximately 1% of U.S. GM sales are from cars imported from Chinese factories and, quote, do not have any impact on U.S. factories.
There are car plants in China because people in China need cars.
And it's way more profitable to not have to transport big-ass cars across the world just to sell them.
There are definitely things that you should and can take issue with about the GM bailout.
But from everything I can tell, Alex just read this headline about the CEO saying he wasn't going to pay back money that wasn't a loan, and he's making stuff up about the rest.
Sure, sure.
He's just getting wrong.
He's getting mad about stuff that doesn't make sense when there's other things to get mad at.
Part of the arrangement in advance was that they would buy back the stock for the amount that it was sold for or whatever, and they would pay back everything, then yeah, I would think it was a dick move.
unidentified
But per the terms, oh, no, no, no, totally, right?
Well, ladies and gentlemen, even mainstream media is calling it the rise of Google's robot army.
The rise of the machines.
Google search and destroy rise of the robot animals as they've now bought four in the last week and now four more.
So eight robot companies in the last week as Google makes the executive decision to literally buy up almost all serious humanoid or animal-type combat capable in the future robot systems.
So once again, this is easily traceable to a headline from December 16th.
One of the things I thought was really interesting is going through this and hearing the stories that he's covering, it's painfully easy to just go and find the exact article he's talking about.
Like with the last one, the GM article, that was really easy to find.
Like, oh, here's what he's talking about.
And the same thing with this.
It's just, this is a CBS news article with the headline: quote, Google buys eight robotics companies in six months.
Why?
This article is primarily about Google buying a company called Boston Dynamics, which grew out of a project at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
A lot of these investments could easily be understood as Google trying to get in the early stages of technologies that could be used for an almost mind-boggling array of purposes, mostly in the field of automation.
If you look at it from that angle, there's nothing even close to strange about Google buying up these businesses.
The robotics section of Google was being handled by a guy named Andy Rubin, who left Google in 2014.
According to sources who spoke with Vox in 2017, this quote left a number of the companies without much direction about what their role at Google would be.
So it should probably be no huge surprise that in 2017, Google sold Boston Dynamics, as well as their other large robotics interest, Shaft, to a Japanese company called Softbank.
The robotics companies were part of Google X, which is their developmental wing.
They saw large potential in these companies, but after the guy who was running them left, things got a little rudderless and they started to realize that the innovations that were being worked on were too far away from being profitable.
So the sense that I get from reading up on Google's foray into the field of robotics is that it was kind of a mixed experience.
On the one hand, some people accuse Google of holding the field back by spending big bucks to hire some of the brightest minds in robotics into their research divisions where they weren't being used to their full potential.
And therefore, like innovations were held back that could have been maybe done outside of the restrictive purview of Google.
And then others point out the fact that because Google showed such a huge interest in robotics back in 2013, it led to other firms viewing robotics as a field worth investing in.
So in 2020, as we sit, we are in the midst of the coronavirus, the COVID-19 situation, which Alex believes is a bioweapon that the globalists have released in order to precipitate martial law.
Now, here's what's interesting.
Alex was talking about bioweapon stuff back in 2013.
Although the timeline and the order of events is a little bit different.
And listen, you could grow up and be an adult and get ready for what's happening, but you won't do it.
You stay in a childlike arrested development three-year-old level.
I'm talking to new listeners saying this isn't happening.
Oh, it's happening while you're busy watching the NFL, while you're busy into your favorite music star, while you're busy watching your favorite sitcom, we're under total siege because the globalists are taking the planet over towards their goal to then bring in planetary rule to then drop the hammer.
They can't do it till planetary rule's in because a nuclear war might happen.
If they release these bioweapons, they've done the war games.
They know it's going to result in a nuclear war, and they all probably want that.
Probably got to get the police state in place first and a global standardization before they do this.
And the minute they get a real world government in, they're going to up the taxes, bankrupt everybody, 10 times worse, and then they're going to drop the hammer.
So you can see here in 2013, Alex's conception is they need to get the martial law in place first, then they use the bioweapons to remove a bunch of people.
Now it's completely flipped.
The bioweapon is released in order to get the martial law in place.
Although in 2013, he was saying they wouldn't release the bioweapon first because they've done - I mean, he usually would say actuaries, but this time he's a war games.
And they figured out that that would cause a nuclear war.
Everything's changed.
It's the same pieces, but they're organized very differently.
I don't think anything Alex says in any era is meant with any kind of actual predictive ability.
However, I've now decided that we are comparing 2020 Alex's predictions to 2013 Alex's predictions, and both of them or either of them will always be correct.
Every day I see where police go to the wrong house and shoot someone and don't even get in trouble.
I've got two reports today in the stack of that.
And Anthony Gucciarti last night woke up to tanks, armored vehicles, you name it, at the wrong house and big giant fat goblin commander cop with a SWAT team, literally dragging some woman out who was innocent.
It was a wrong house in a fake drug war where they ship all the drugs in to begin with.
Anthony Gucciarti is this guy who ran like an alternative health blog, and he got brought in to Inforz around the same time that Alex was like pushing his supplement line.
And he's no longer there.
I think he hates Alex now.
I'm not entirely sure because that falls under the heading of like, I've seen some videos of people talking shit about Alex, and I think Anthony Gucciarti is one of them, but that's stuff that just doesn't stick with me because it's like, yeah, this feels like gossip.
But if I understand correctly, I think he hates Alex now.
He hasn't been seen in quite a while on Inforz, but he was a pretty big mainstay around this time in terms of like being another health ranger kind of guy.
to keep you free and clean living on the road my friend was gonna keep you free and clean And now you wear your skin like our and your breath is hard as kerosene.
If you go on and do research, you learn that the FDA has continued to lower the minimum daily allowance of what they say you need of vitamin C, vitamin D, vitamin E, vitamin K. I'm going to get Dr. Mercola on about this.
They have lowered the level of vitamin C down to near scurvy-inducing levels where you just start having rot holes in your skin and your skin basically falls apart and you prematurely age.
How many people do you see who you talk to?
A 50-year-old woman looks like they're 100.
You go, let me guess, do you ever eat fruits and vegetables?
So, firstly, I don't think that this hypothetical person that Alex is impersonating who only eats McDonald's would have their behavior affected too greatly by an altered FDA recommendation.
I'm pretty sure that no one would say, I only eat McDonald's because the FDA said that was a good idea.
I follow their advice.
unidentified
I used to eat all the fruits and vegetables, but then they lowered the vitamin C limit.
So I'm like, I'll just eat at McDonald's forever now.
Obviously, if your diet doesn't include anything that has vitamin C in it, you could end up in bad health.
But for most people, you get what you need without supplementation.
An article in the Journal of the College of Family Physicians of Canada explored a slight re-emergence of scurvy cases in 2008.
From the article, quote, in a retrospective chart review conducted at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, New York, in Scottsdale, Arizona from 1976 to 2002, 10 of 12 scurvy cases were related to alcohol abuse, illicit drug use, and psychiatric disorders.
There are a ton of foods that people eat regularly, even things you can buy at McDonald's that have vitamin C in them.
If you're having a specific problem that might be caused by a vitamin deficiency, it might be a good idea to speak to a dietician and see if there's something you're missing.
What is not a great angle is to imagine that you have a problem, and the reason must be that you're not taking enough of something, so you need supplements.
That's the fear that Alex is exploiting here in order to try and create feelings of deficiency in his audience's mind that he can then come in and solve when for most people, there's no deficiency to begin with.
It's like, yes, there are dietary deficiencies that are, you know, not as rampant as Alex wants people to think, but some people do have nutritional deficits.
And to the extent that that is real for some people, sometimes supplementation can help.
Sometimes dietary changes can be enough to get you into better health.
But what he's doing here is exploitative and predatory.
And not least of which is, once again, putting the blame upon a depressed economic sector as being like, well, why don't you guys eat all your fruits and vegetables?
You guys are just eating at McDonald's all the time, discounting the fact that so many places are fucking calorie poor that there's really not much option.
There are some people who it could be helpful to, but largely speaking, there are some supplements that have things that if you take too much of them, it can hurt you.
Totally.
And most people, through a proper diet, don't need them.
I mean, I think it's pretty obvious what he's misrepresenting.
And it's so transparent that as he goes through the episode, he has to cop to the fact that what they're saying is if you have a proper diet, you don't need supplements.
They've lowered the daily allowance of what you need, the government says, of things like vitamin C and things like oil of oregano down to a level that literally starvation, according to the medical doctors we've interviewed here.
It says this salt does not supply iodine a necessary nutrient.
Says it right.
And why is that?
Because the feds pressured him in the 20s.
Iodine in the salt because of literally millions of people being born mentally retarded from not having iodine in the womb, which is on record will cause all sorts of problems and lower IQs after birth.
And goiter, that's people that look like their job of the hut with just huge things hanging under their necks, where you look like a human worm.
Africa's devastated by this.
China's devastated by it.
China, in many areas, puts iodine in the water so this doesn't happen because it's just a plague of diseases and degenerative problems.
Now, that's a fact.
The feds by the 70s basically said, remove it or we'll come after you.
But also, the Chinese are putting iodine in their water to keep this from happening, which is good, but they put fluoride in their water, which is bad.
But here's the thing: the reason that that salt that Alex has from McCormick's, you know, he's rambling about this.
The reason it doesn't have iodine in it is because it's sea salt.
You'll find the same warnings on containers of Morton sea salts, as well as just about any sea salt that you're going to find on the market.
The reason for this is that sea salt and table salt are produced differently.
And because of how the sea salt market operates, it's a product that generally is subject to as little processing as possible.
The salt comes from evaporating water, which leaves flakes of salt, which retain some of the minerals and characteristics of the source that they come from.
Table salt, conversely, is generally the product of mining salt deposits.
And it's a much less niche product.
So it can have iodine added easily in the processing stages, and it generally still does.
If you go buy any table salt, it'll almost always be iodized salt.
But sea salt generally isn't.
I agree with Alex in as much as maybe there should be better messaging to the world that sea salt doesn't contain iodine.
But I'm not sure I can go along with his imagining that this confusion is leading to any kind of large-scale iodine deficiency in the United States because it's just not.
The reality is also salt, that's not the only thing that provides iodine.
You can eat seafood, milk, yogurt, eggs, even some breads, and get all the iodine that you need to maintain proper health.
There are definitely serious problems that can occur from iodine deficiency, and it's a problem that's important in the developing world, particularly.
But this is not an issue the way Alex makes it out to be, particularly not for his audience.
Again, this is an example of Alex working to try and convince his audience that there's something wrong with them that they didn't even realize, which he can provide the solution to.
Because I know that his business model relies heavily on selling iodine supplements.
It's hard not to see this as an intentionally predatory act.
Like he's going through all this stuff about health things, and so much of it is just convincing his audience that there's an underlying problem they didn't know they had that he could provide a placebo solution for.
This is the Scientific American because you get some good studies out there.
Dirt poor.
Have fruits and vegetables become less nutritious?
And they go on to break down major studies going back in the last hundred years from the University of Texas at Austin Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition and Agriculture Nutritional Data from 1950 to 1999 with 43 different fruits and vegetables.
And then looking at studies before that and what is in them metrically by numbers, real studies, they are debilitated in some cases by 98% vitamins, minerals.
I have no idea where Alex is getting those numbers from because they aren't in that Scientific American article.
This is an article that's part of their column Earth Talk, where readers can send in questions, which their writers will then answer.
This question had to do with whether or not fruits and vegetables were more nutritious 50 years ago.
And as it turns out, the answer is yes, but probably not to the extent Alex is reporting.
The article cites an analysis by the Cushy Institute, which found that there was a 27% drop in calcium levels in 12 fresh vegetables they studied, as well as a 37% drop in iron, 21% drop in vitamin A, and 30% drop in vitamin C.
Experts believed that this was a result of focusing on agricultural practices that are meant to expand yield and crop size while ignoring processes that could be done that would enrich soils.
The article discusses ways to push back against this, like alternating fields between growing seasons and embracing organic growing methods in order to rehabilitate soils.
Scientific American actually revisited this topic in 2018 to discuss new findings in the research.
As it turns out, a new paper had been published in the journal Scientific Advances, which found that, quote, concentrations of essential nutrients decreased in 18 strains of rice after being exposed to increased carbon dioxide levels in the experiment.
From the Scientific American article, quote, Agricultural scientists have known for some time that our food has been getting less nutritious, but they thought it was only due to a byproduct of modern farming methods, soil overuse, which leads to mineral depletion, or breeders favoring high-yield varieties, which sacrifices nutrition for size.
Meanwhile, plant researchers working over the last couple of decades were finding something surprising, that elevated carbon dioxide also contributes to lowering mineral content in plants.
The plant and agricultural scientists each had pieces of the puzzle, but no one put two and two together to fully explain the nutrient depletion phenomenon until recently.
There's some evidence emerging that a large factor in nutrient decline in soils and plants has to do with excess CO2.
The plants need CO2 to grow in the same way we need calories, but if we have too many calories, we become less healthy.
There are some who are suggesting that the same is true for plants and CO2.
There are real issues here, and there are issues that are particularly important, again, for people in the developing world.
But Alex doesn't care about any of the real-world aspects of this.
This is like an hour of his show is spent with this weird, like, I'm going to tell you all about the soil, which is all a prelude to getting into talking with Anthony Gucciarti, which is all just an infomercial for his supplement line.
So I'm not even going to play any clips of Gucci already in there because it's basically what you'd expect.
It's just, you know, how like when we went back to 2015, we were looking at it, and Dr. Group would come in for like an hour and they'd talk about it's the same thing.
Alex is complaining about people being dumb, so he plays that clip of the contestant from the Miss Teen USA pageant who gave that unfortunately incoherent answer to a question she was posed on stage.
I have a number of problems with this.
The first is that this woman was 18 years old and on a huge stage, being asked a question that she clearly didn't understand and she had to respond to quick.
Sure, it was a bad meandering answer, but it's really cruel to judge someone so harshly for it, considering all the variables.
Any of us on a bad day under a certain amount of stress could end up finding ourselves saying something equally embarrassing.
It's kind of mean to define someone by that embarrassing moment, particularly when it's a person that's so young.
The mockery and shaming about this moment was really severe for this woman.
She said, quote, I definitely went through a period where I was very, very depressed, but I never let anybody see that stuff except people I could trust.
I had some very dark moments where I thought about committing suicide.
Second, this was from the 2007 Miss Teen USA pageant, and this episode of Alex's show is from 2013.
It seems like he's digging pretty far back just to take an unnecessary swing at this woman.
Also, just because it's fun, after this contestant who is South Carolina's Caitlin Upton went viral with this unfortunate answer, and the video of her at the pageant got 15 million views on YouTube, she was signed to a contract with a modeling agency worth up to $30,000 a day.
That modeling agency was owned by Donald Trump, who also owned the pageant at that time.
I don't understand how many 40-year-old white dudes with a giant platform that they can talk to millions of people want to shit on an 18-year-old girl at a teen pageant.
I think his station is actually one of the it might be literally the only station I could find in the country that plays Owen Schroyer and David Knight's shows.
That wasn't the highest attendance for the season, but it's higher than the first three games of the season, the first two of which were at home games in Chicago.
His number of attendance is right about average for the past 12 years, at least.
There's nothing discernible that's out of the ordinary about the turnout for that football game.
I kind of think maybe one of Matt's friends just didn't want to go with him, and this is how he's processing it.
We drive around the country, the great United States of America.
And the last two years, we did a loop-to-loop.
We went through Ohio and we went down to Nashville.
And this last summer, we went to New Jersey and back.
And as we drove through, I saw firsthand the America that most of us don't see.
Most of the people in Austin don't see it.
We live in very privileged areas.
The rest of the country looks like a bomb fell on it.
The rest of the country looks like it's third world.
The rest of the country is decapitated.
It's completely destroyed.
You got billboards where companies just stopped advertising on them because nobody's driving down that highway.
The paper's blowing in the wind.
And I'm driving through there and I'm thinking to myself, my gosh, boy, when my grandparents took my father and his brothers and sisters around the country to the Grand Canyon and stuff, there was the majesty and the wonderment of traveling down Route 66 and seeing these great little shops and these great little restaurants and these great diners.
So my first point that I want to make is that this dude's purely talking about the aesthetic view that he's captured from driving along interstate highways.
Sure, things look pretty bleak if all you're seeing are old billboards and like out-of-date gas stations, but that isn't the full picture of the other America.
There's a whole lot that's just a little ways off those highways that's vibrant, which you totally miss if you're only seeing what's right next to the road.
Maybe the fact that those billboards are empty, maybe that's not a sign that no one uses those roads anymore.
Maybe it's a sign that they never should have been built in the first place.
Maybe the fact that there are all these rundown gas stations around is a reflection of how much better our cars are than when those highways were first built.
Maybe you don't need those.
Maybe no one stops at them because we get much better gas mileage.
And I don't care about taking seriously the opinion of somebody who is only on this show because he does, he allows Alex to syndicate on his station and makes Alex a bunch of money.
Now, let me tell you who William F. Jasper is as he joins us.
He's a graduate of the University of Idaho and joined the staff of the John Birch Society in 1976 as a researcher and current senior editor of the New American.
The first time I heard about William F. Jasper is when my dad was abusing me with his book, and I decided to start reading it immediately following that.
If I told you all the crazy stuff about Nero, I'd sound crazy, but I'm not Nero.
I'm telling you what Nero did.
Marrying his horse, everything else.
These power mad nuts must be stopped.
If you order by the 19th, we can guarantee products at InfoWarsLife.com, the Chiapas high-quality coffee, totally organic, my favorite blend now brought to you, and the old free market way to funder operation, the Infowars high-def dash cams, the lowest price you'll find anywhere on the same dash cam.
We bought them in bulk and offer it at the lowest listed retail price anywhere to document what's happening with the police, bureaucrats, wildlife, you name it.
Which is interesting because that's not certainly a concern that he has in the present day, trying to get his audience to wear dash cams in order to protect themselves from police.
Also, I love the idea that it's like, you know, we've got to keep up on wildlife.
I could be completely wrong, but I think it's an interpretation.
I think it's just interesting that he would specifically bring up talking about how evil and insane Nero was being crazy when his favorite book is talking about how evil and insane Nero was.
And then Tragedy and Hope, that's, I don't know, 1,100 pages or so that I see on William F. Jasper's bookshelf on Skype.
You're watching us on TV, where the Georgetown political science professor, Bill Clinton's mentor, who he thanked in the State of the Union, admits they control liberalism, fake conservatism, fascism, and the trilateral commission and all of it is meant to bring in world corporate government.
And that it's only meant to look like there's the illusion of choice in politics.
I'm paraphrasing quotes.
This book, and I've actually read almost the whole thing.
When I say that, I probably read 800 pages of it over the years.
Because, let me not skip over some of the more little factoid inside baseball stuff.
I think my favorite, the way I view about most of those books is Andy Daly is L. Ron Hubbard, whenever he's like, and you're going to read something from your book.
And he's like, I tried to read it and I could not make height nor hair of it.
There's no way if you're giving this, like, facade that you're supposed to be given, if you're Alex, that you don't say, I've read every word of that book.
Why would you – the only reason to say I've read 800 pages of it is because everyone knows you don't read shit.
So Klayman had just won this lawsuit titled Klayman versus Obama, which resulted in a judge ruling that NSA bulk surveillance was unconstitutional.
Nothing was done, however, because any kind of injunction was stayed on the assumption that the government would almost certainly appeal.
When this reached the circuit court, the decision was vacated because Klayman couldn't prove that his records were collected, which meant he didn't have standing to bring the complaint.
And in June 2020, he had his license to practice law suspended for 90 days, which unfortunately, Jordan, could get in the way of his $20 trillion lawsuit against China.
I love the idea that Larry is like, hey, I'm not comparing myself to Jesus Christ, but and then Alex is like, no, I'm holding you up as an example of someone who Alex is pushing back on Larry, not comparing himself to Jesus.
So I don't care about Larry's appearance much because it's just him being like, yeah, I'm pretty great.
I'm pretty great.
And we're very excited to keep going and we're going to take Obama out.
Whatever.
It all didn't work out in hindsight.
But there's one last clip, and that's just to really bring home the fun of Alex just loving Larry Clayman and knowing in the present day, Larry is trying to destroy Alex and Infowars.
You know, like, well, maybe not actually, but the topics do.
Like, we are living in a time that is our lives are touched and affected by things like the Black Lives Matter protests.
The conversation that's happening around those is really relevant and it matters.
The COVID-19 situation and whether or not people take things seriously and adhere to some limited measures.
That's important.
It's relevant.
It touches our lives.
And it becomes really difficult to have a show that's as lighthearted and fun as I want it to be a lot of the time because it's like, hey, tomorrow, any number of people who listen to this show, someone might get hurt indirectly by something that we're talking about.
Like someone could get COVID-19 or someone could have a loved one who could get sick and maybe unfortunately have a difficult case.
And it's really hard to not have that in your mind when we're hearing him lie about those sorts of topics.
And so it can be kind of nice to look back on this time that has a little bit less stakes to it.
As far as the time capsule goes, it is both nice now to have the time capsule of look at us in the present, looking back at 2013 and being like, oh, that's right.
And then, oh, yeah, the other thing I would say is: sorry, that like, I think part of the idea that Robert had was that, you know, get a sense of what was going on on the world on Fee's birthday.
No matter what era of Alex we're looking at, you're going to learn a lot more about an alternate present than you are about anything that has to do with your life.
So anyway, if you're listening in the present, we'll be back.
Makes no sense to do plugs because by the time this episode is used for its proper purposes, we'll have taken over Google's robots and we'll be commanding.
You have to assume Facebook and Twitter are going to be gone by then.
Sure, sure.
So anyway, we'll see you next time here on the podcast.