Knowledge Fight dissects Alex Jones’ June 24, 2021 episode, exposing his misreporting of John McAfee’s death—wrongly claiming Madrid custody and a "dead man’s switch" (debunked by an Instagram post)—while framing it as a "globalist hit squad" targeting patriots. Jones also falsely ties Biden’s gun comments to nukes and vaccines, predicting 20M deaths despite past failed doomsday claims like the "summer of rage." His conspiracy-laden rants on 50-cali rifles (used in crimes like Heemeyer’s 2004 rampage) and critical race theory as a white supremacist boogeyman reveal his pattern of distortion, prioritizing emotional chaos over facts. The hosts mock his unprofessional tactics, including studio interference excuses and shifting to unrelated topics like COVID labs and "gay choirs," while debunking his claims with evidence—like NIH’s routine data removal—proving Jones’ narratives rely on cherry-picked lies. [Automatically generated summary]
And the other thing that I didn't realize watching back is that there was this guy, Michael, who fell into the fire and ended up getting evacuated, got airlifted.
It's so funny just because I remember reading this huge oral history of a kid nation or whatever that MTV reality show was where they put a town 30.
Yeah, they put a town of kids and they're all like 30 kids and they're all like 12 years old.
And the oral history behind it was they built a functioning society and the producers were like, we can't, we were going for Lord of the Flies, but in real life.
So they were the ones fucking everything up for these kids.
The kids are constantly like, we've got garbage pickup.
Why are you guys throwing garbage around?
We have a system, you know?
And yeah, it's so funny to me that they can build like a, we're rationing appropriately, and then adults do it on a reality show, and they're like, I want all the food.
My aunt, before she died, watched every season of Survivor.
She loved it so much.
She watched Survivor and Big Brother.
Those were the two for her.
And I just remember watching like, I think it was like season 23 with her and just going like, how do you not want these people shot into the surface of the sun?
Look, we've talked about this too much already, but the last point I want to make is that the experience that I had watching season one is that I liked both of the tribes.
And in watching season two, I was like, I don't like either of these tribes.
Well, we've got the red emergency radar scan background up.
And that means one thing: Patriots are being assassinated.
It was just 10 days ago or so that we talked about the very famous Emmy Award-winning Grammy Award-winning for TV News individual who had exposed the Tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton and then Attorney General Loretta Lynch.
They said they were death-threatening him and trying to kill him, and that he would never commit suicide.
That he would never commit suicide.
And then he was found shot in the head inside his home alone, a happily married man with two children.
We'll be revisiting that here in a moment.
Well, now we have John McAfee, who I knew very well.
I've been on the show 20 times.
We haven't talked to the last few years because he was in a Madrid jail awaiting extradition in the U.S. That's the only reason?
He said last week, I'm getting threats from the U.S. government that they will suicide myself.
On our last episode, when we discussed the immediate coverage of McAfee's death, I was trying to stress how important it is to understand this story in the context of Alex's coverage of the death of Christopher Sein.
Because Alex had laid the groundwork for a narrative arc about political assassinations when he talked about Sein, he was prepared to tell this exact story no matter who ended up dying and regardless of how suspicious the circumstances of their death really were.
If Alex lucked out and a high-profile person who he's sort of associated with died not too long after Sein's coverage, we would be seeing the outcome that we're seeing now.
If no high-profile deaths fit the bill, Alex could easily, you know, just get away with pretending he never made a big deal out of Sein's death and, you know, pretending that it was a professional hit.
You can really tell how dishonest Alex's coverage is because of the intentional misreporting he's doing surrounding these two cases.
For instance, Christopher Sein, as far as I can tell, never said that he wouldn't kill himself.
And the comment that he was getting threats, that came from a Fox interview from February 2020.
And he was specifically talking about threats that had come, quote, shortly after breaking this story, which is to say back in 2016.
He never specified who the threats were coming from, and it could have easily been from mentally disturbed, pro-Clinton or anti-Trump individuals completely disconnected from the two politicians.
There's no reason to jump to the conclusion that it was fucking Hillary making the threats.
Alex has distorted this to fit his narratives because in Infowars World, anytime anyone dies by a suspected suicide who he wants to paint as the victim of a murder, the same script is followed.
Alex has to fudge the details of this case so it neatly fits the archetype that he's already established with past cases.
Also, Sein had three children, and many of the details of his life that Alex is getting wrong are just things that Alex is assuming and making up.
The same dynamic exists in the coverage of McAfee's death.
Some of the details that are just completely wrong include that McAfee hasn't been in jail for years, and he wasn't in jail in Madrid.
The jail he was in was in Barcelona.
More importantly, though, is Alex is lying about the timeline of McAfee's statements.
The tweet that Alex is referencing, where McAfee said he was, quote, getting subtle messages from U.S. officials, was posted on November 30th, 2019.
The tweet where he said he wasn't going to kill himself was from eight months ago.
Alex needs to take these tweets and make them a lot more current than they are, because in reality, there are completely rational explanations for them that have nothing to do with the notion that McAfee was the target of a globalist hit squad.
By combining these sentiments that McAfee has shared in the course of the last few years and pretending he said them just before he died, Alex is trying to create a persuasive fiction to sell his audience on.
And that fiction is exactly how Alex has started the show.
The point and the message is that the globalists are entering the part of their endgame where they're going to stage high-level political assassinations of their patriot enemies.
This mentality is so dangerous for Alex to be playing around with, since it's one of the things in the past he said is a sign that the cold civil war is going hot and that it would be very easy for his listeners to take this as a sign that it's killing time.
There's metadata on the picture, but from everything I've seen about the situation, it's not a crypto key.
As is so often the case, Alex is just taking bullshit he or his staff read on a conspiracy blog or message board, pretending that he got it from some kind of investigative process or imaginary high-level source, and he's trying to pass off a sanitized version of it to his audience.
This is essentially Alex's role at this point.
He finds dumb shit on the internet and tries to launder it to the point where it can pass as a story he can pretend to report.
Inevitably, this dead man switch will fail to materialize, and Alex will probably say that the globalists somehow recouped it or something.
Then there's going to be this great MacGuffin out there.
We could totally prove all of our conspiracies are true if only McAfee's dead man switch hadn't been re-seized by the globalists or whatever.
See, this is the problem with the internet's conspiracy theories.
They don't know how to have fun with it.
Here's what you do: you don't have any evidence that this isn't the case.
Say that they found trace evidence of John McAfee's dick in his own stomach.
Then everybody's like, God damn it, like when they're like when they pull a human leg out of a shark's stomach and everybody's like, well, I guess he actually followed through with it.
Dub tells with Smoking Gun yesterday that Fauci, one month before the COVID outbreak, told them to prepare to activate their COVID vaccine, COVID-19 vaccine program with those exact sequences.
Understand?
Total premeditation.
Total, complete, open and shut case.
Everyone involved is lucky if they end up in a Supermax prison for the rest of their lives.
At this point, I guess that a month before the pandemic started, Fauci directed someone to begin working on a vaccine that's mysteriously a perfect fit for COVID-19.
A good friend of mine, a really smart individual, a true American rebel, John McAfee, died in his jail cell in Barcelona, Spain at 75 years of age, in good health.
After he had just warned the world a few days before that they're threatening to kill me, the U.S. government is inclined with suicide.
He said, I will not commit suicide.
And I believe him.
We've seen a lot of suicides lately of people that challenge the Clintons and others.
Looks hearing from the grave a few years ago talking about the political process on this planet.
unidentified
The deep state is a conspiracy theory.
It's defined as the people within the U.S. government and military who are in secret control of government policy.
Secret?
Please, people.
The deep state is those people within the U.S. government that are career employees that cannot be fired by people that we elect by the Congress or the President.
There are the FCC, the CIA, the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The CIA is headed by the director, who is nominated by the president, who we elect, and is confirmed by the Senate, who are elected.
The CIA director reports directly to the director of national intelligence, who is nominated by the president, who is elected, and then confirmed by the Senate, who are elected.
If the president, who is elected so chooses, they can replace either the CIA director or the director of national intelligence.
I guess it would probably be improper for the president to fire an individual CIA employee, but through the chain of command, if there was a specific legitimate direction, the president wanted to take the organization, they could do that by picking a new director.
The SEC, the Securities Exchange Commission, is run by a board of commissioners who are appointed by the president, who's elected, and confirmed by the Senate, who are elected.
They're put in for five-year terms.
When he was running for office, John McCain threatened to fire the SEC chair, which sparked a conversation about whether or not he actually could.
It seems a bit unclear whether a president could fire them without congressional approval, but it would be a really big deal to try to remove one of these people.
The SEC is supposed to remain very independent, seeing as they're tasked with dealing with market manipulations, so it would be best not to allow people like a president to be in the position where they could fire them without a really good reason.
Imagine if you were a senator with early information that a pandemic was coming and you sold all of this stock before everything happened when it was still at a higher value.
That's something that the SEC would investigate and take care of if they were an independent organization, as we all know they are.
The FCC is run by a board that is appointed by the president who's elected and confirmed by the Senate who are elected.
This is also an agency that's meant to be independent, so it's widely understood that a president could not just randomly fire an FCC commissioner.
But an interesting article from 2014 in Politico brought up a way that a president could still work to shape FCC policy.
While it's accepted that Obama could not fire the FCC chair if he disagreed on policy, Zephyr Teachout made an argument that he could still remove the chair from that position and replace them with one of the other commissioners.
This would keep the same board intact, but still shake up the power dynamics.
So while there's good reason that a president should not have the sole authority to mold independent agencies to their will, there's still things that can be done to affect change.
The IRS is run by a commissioner who's also appointed by the president who's elected and confirmed by the Senate who are elected.
I've seen some arguments that suggest that a president can actually fire the IRS commissioner, and a lot of conservatives are really pissed off that Trump didn't do just that during his term when John Koshkin was in that position.
Similarly, there are now calls for Biden to fire Charles Redig, who's the most recent person to fill the role, being appointed by Trump in 2018.
Neither commissioner was or has been fired, and the reason, again, is probably that doing something like that requires a really strong justification, or else it'll just look like severe corruption.
The idea that the government is secretly run by these unelected people is a popular refrain among folks like McAfee, but it fails to take into account that each of them serves at the pleasure of people who are elected.
And the choices that are made in elections can have a drastic implication on any one of these organizations.
One of the big failings of our government is that Trump appointed an incredibly corrupt person to run the IRS, and then it would look like corruption if you just fired them.
Yeah, if you're being like, oh, they're unelected deep state people, we should reform it.
But your actual plan is like, hey, we should just burn down the IRS forever and the building is gone and the government's gone and just get rid of all of it.
Yeah, I mean, like, and the point that you're making about like corruption still existing within even organizations that are intended to be independent is very fair.
Unless the aliens are the ones who have negotiated the treaty with the aliens, in which case, I guess they're kind of a co-equal branch of universal government.
The reason I'm going to be covering things the way I am here today, because I am Polaxed, trying to really cut to the heart of the matter.
So let me just put this out now.
There comes a moment when the tyranny really launches its full attack that all the window dressing falls away.
And you learn more in a day than you learned the previous year.
And we're in that zeitgeist, that quickening, that acceleration, that revelation, that apocalypse, meaning apocalypse of old ideas dying, new ideas coming forward.
And we're really seeing the death rows of the old world order that calls itself the new world order, wanting to control the future of humanity.
I just grow weary of listening to this over so many different time periods and Alex constantly saying you learn more in a day than you did in a year at so many different times.
It always seems to be like everything is intensifying now.
Alex is the voice of the person who's like, This is the most important time in history ever.
This story about the Clintons on the Bill Clinton on the tarmac meeting with Loretta Lynch is so damaging to the globalists that they have to kill this guy five years later after he reports it.
But it's also supposed to be a story that would win an Emmy.
The reality is that Christopher Sign won an Emmy in 2014, two years before the Clinton story, for his coverage of the shooting of two police officers in Phoenix.
He also won an Edward Murrow Award for some of his reporting on serial killers in Phoenix.
Alex just read a headline that he won an Emmy, and he's assuming that it must be for the Clinton story, even though that makes no sense when combined with other narratives that he's trying to push.
And I said, if more deaths pop up in the near future of other prominent anti-establishment individuals, it's a message to everyone ahead of massive killing.
So if we start seeing more deaths the next few days, the next few weeks, it's a message to threaten everybody to shut up, or there might be 20 deaths by tomorrow.
I'm not sure what's going on with the control room today.
So if we start seeing more deaths the next few days, the next few weeks, it's a message to threaten everybody to shut up, or there might be 20 deaths by tomorrow.
Oh, I understand.
I sent you guys a full clip and somehow you didn't download them.
Well, there's that, but I think that there's a secondary thing, and that is that he's recognizing that the people he's delegated these tasks to aren't doing their job, except they are.
Yeah, he needs a time machine to go back and tell himself to say what is going to be best for his narrative because unfortunately he was talking out of his ass then and he's talking out of his ass now.
He's throwing a little fit because the clip didn't say how he set it up.
He set it up too extremely.
The clip didn't match those expectations.
And now, instead of dealing with that and being like, well, you know, maybe I misset that up or something, he's throwing a fit and everyone's going to die.
So like if you're on stage and you're in the middle of, let's say, a bit or a story and something happens in the audience that you need to respond to, you can change what you're doing in order to respond to that.
And I think that people who don't have experience doing stand-up or aren't in, like, don't know that don't get how it's even possible that someone could do that.
And I think with Alex, he has that skill, but in this world, in this realm, and that is covering up the appearance of, oh, that doesn't make sense with an emotional outburst that's really severe and seems real to people who are tricked into thinking he's sincere about anything.
I mean, what's great about it is that part of you, if you are a listener, like if I'm part of the InfoWars listeners living through this clip, I am assuming.
Yeah, and part of conveying that to the audience is the distraction of the little petulant meltdown, which totally, totally has nothing to do with the clip.
No, Alex does a different move than he usually does.
Pay attention to this because he makes sort of an argument at the beginning, plays the clip, and then responds to a completely different argument at the end.
As if you'd use a nuclear weapon on a rebellion and blow up Israel full of your own people.
The cities are 60% Democrat slave or more.
It's not even theoretical to use nuclear weapons to, quote, dominate the American people, unless you meant nuke our major power production sites, which they're already turning off via carbon taxes, so that's not needed.
They're already turning off our pipelines, destroying our borders, bringing in dependent populations they control.
They're already doing that.
So to say, hey, don't worry, you don't need those guns anyways.
I'd add the Second Amendment from the day it was passed limited the type of people who could own a gun and what type of weapon you could own.
You couldn't buy cannon.
Those who say the blood of patriots, you know, senile race.
About how we're going to have to move against the government.
Well, the Tree of Liberty is not watering the blood of patriots.
What's happened is that there never been, if you wanted to think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons.
The point is that there's always been the ability to limit, rationally limit the type of weapon that can be owned and who can own it.
So, yeah, you see a completely different point being made after the video because it had nothing to do with the story that Alex is telling about, like, oh, he says he's going to act militarily on the people.
This is sort of a side point that Biden was making to the larger point, which is that there's always been limitations to what sorts of weaponry people can own for safety reasons.
Alex is trying to define a 50-caliber as a cannon, even though he even refers to it as a rifle.
I think he knows that this is a dishonest argument.
Also, in terms of crimes being committed with 50-caliber rifles, I was actually able to find a House of Representatives report from 1999 specifically about crimes committed with 50-caliber rifles.
This report does tend to track with Alex's narrative, but part of the reason for that is that 50-caliber rifles are very inconvenient in terms of committing most crimes.
Most of them are so large that you need to have them propped up on a stand for shooting purposes, which is why most of the instances of crimes associated with 50-caliber rifles in this government report are related to disrupted criminal plots.
There's the case of a West Virginia Mountaineer militia member who was plotting to bomb an FBI office who had a 50-caliber rifle in his home when it was searched, for example.
The majority of people mentioned in this report had the 50-cal at home, but would use smaller, more convenient weapons for away games.
That officer had been part of an interagency group that had uncovered a marijuana grow site in Arizona, where they also found a ton of guns and pipe bombs.
An ATV was seen speeding away from their location, and this officer followed it to what turned out to be the Niedermeyer's home.
As soon as he exited his vehicle, they started shooting at him.
In 2004, a guy named Marvin Heemeyer, he created an armored bulldozer with a .50 caliber mounted on it.
He was mad about zoning issues and city code, so he went off and, quote, plowed the armor-plated bulldozer into the town hall, a former mayor's home, and at least five other buildings.
He shot himself rather than get arrested, and the 50-caliber wasn't actually used specifically in the crime, but it was mounted on his armored bulldozer, so I think that counts.
It is fairly true that 50-caliber rifles are rarely used in explicit violent acts because other weapons are just as effective and easier to wield.
However, they are very often found as part of the home collections of criminals, and they are sometimes used in crimes themselves.
What Alex is saying is just an old NRA talking point that he's internalized as truth because he's an idiot and a zealot, just as brainwashed as everyone he claims on the left are.
I get so tired of the same argument being convincing enough for these types of people.
Like, here's the thing: if somebody gave me an argument that I knew was the exact same argument from the 60s that they tried and that didn't work, I would say, we don't care about that idea anymore.
We tried and it didn't work.
And these people are just like, I know it didn't work last year, but maybe it'll work now and next year and the year after that.
I mean, you, and it's, again, it's just that macro all over again.
You know, you switch the Black Panther fatigues for a BLM shirt and you're just, you're still like, ah, they're communist infiltrators that the Democrats are bringing in from other countries to replace us.
Because there's value in understanding all kinds of people's perspectives.
Yes, he said education is important, and the conservatives went so Alex has some real problems with General Milley and some of the other brass anybody who doesn't say white people are the best and everybody else should die.
Yep.
Apparently they're putting a bunch of black generals in charge because they're going to take the guns and then you're racist if you resist it.
You're not going to, oh, if you attack the black generals leading gun confiscation across the country, they've already briefed.
They're already ready.
They're preparing the cadres to train for total gun confiscation to be led by the Secretary of Defense and the National Sherman 2.0 is to be General Honoré on record declaring war on white people and gun owners.
And it won't matter what color you are when they're taking the guns and killing you.
You'll be a white supremacist.
You don't turn them over.
That's how they were always going to come for the guns.
It's just so funny how obvious this is just because the moment people started talking about critical race theory, the conservatives reveal exactly why it's important by reacting in such a white nationalist way.
Like their immediate response is, you're trying to kill white people.
And you're like, do you get why we need the theory?
This country in its 250 years history has never had traitors as bad as Honoré and Millie and Austin.
These men, once they've been politically, culturally, economically, and using the criminal justice system defeated, will be known as the new definition of Benedict Arnold.
They are the plague.
They are a curse.
And they are planning, in my view, false flag terror attacks here in America to submit their rollout against us.
They're spoiling for a war.
They're spoiling for a coup.
They're spoiling to overthrow.
And they're getting ready to carry out terror attacks.
That is their handlers are to be blamed on those of us that are loyal Americans.
And they're on channels saying we need to get members of Congress using the military.
And then General Millie and General Austin and General Honoré get up there and click their heels and say, we want to slug out with the American people.
And every white person that doesn't salute us is a white supremac enemy.
You know, I might even argue that Alex is making a compelling defense for my point, which is that if you don't read or engage with critical theory, race theory, you're probably a white supremacist.
They're going to call all of us white supremacists only because we immediately react in a way that would suggest we believe in the supremacy of white people.
You know, I didn't play a lot of it because I already watched it yesterday.
I figure most of you have already seen it.
Welcome back to the Australian show here.
Of General Millie and General Austin and all the rest of these guys up there with just such demonic looks on their faces, hateful towards Congress.
When they brought up critical race theory that is a Marxist-Leninist globalist liberation theology to bring down the country on record that America is a colonialist country shouldn't exist.
This is pure poison.
And then to say all our white members of the military have to be asked whether they're good people or not, that is so racist, so evil, so abversive.
And to see the enjoyment of Millie and the enjoyment of Austin knowing this is their takeover plan and they're in on the takeover of America and they're these big conquerors to see them abuse their position, betray us like this, it's just, it's blood curdling.
Oh, you mean a million people showed up to protest the frauds in an election, our right to do it?
And then your provocateurs helped trick maybe 500, 600 inside that walked through the velvet ropes and maybe 20 fought police and the police stood down.
So you can now say, all of them are white supremacist, and then all of America is, and you're the big, the big U.S. military going to teach us, because Biden said, you got the nukes and the F-15s to show the gun owners.
I'm supposed to sit here and be like, the people who work for the government are starting a coup, but me and the person who commits coups, whoa, we're trying to stop it this time.
Because you're the woke person with all the corporations and the Pentagon and all the universities and the whole system in Hollywood behind you to mess with our kids and screw with their brains.
With big tech censoring everybody and the rest of it.
Oh, yeah, that's the other part of understanding white rage is ultimately when you get down to the bottom of it, you just have to remember it's a bunch of people whining that white people aren't running everything and everything isn't easy for them.
Same thing with John McAfee, who I knew well, who personally told me the last time we talked on the phone, a couple years ago, before he was thrown in that Madrid prison for no reason, waiting extradition by Julian Assange, the U.S., that he would never commit suicide.
So as soon as I heard yesterday afternoon, right after I went off air, that John McAfee was dead, I was in my office taking like a 30-minute nap to reset my brain.
Little trick to trick your mind that you haven't been working since 5 a.m.
Alex is screwing up the details of the conspiracy theory.
The story was that Breitbart was killed because he had a video that would take down Barack Obama, presumably evidence that he was a radical communist extremist.
As far as McAfee's lawyer goes, this is another classic case of Alex reading a headline and pretending that he's read the article.
There was a Reuters article with the headline, quote, lawyer saw no sign that software mogul McAfee would kill himself.
And Alex is assuming that the body of the article must be about how the lawyer is saying that it wasn't suicide.
In reality, his lawyer, Javier Villalba, was the person who made the initial statement to Reuters.
Quote, McAfee's lawyer, Javier Villalba, said that the antivirus software pioneer died by hanging as his nine months in prison brought him to despair.
This article is just Villalba commenting that he didn't see any signs that this would come to pass.
Villalba and McAfee's widow are pursuing an investigation into the circumstances of his death.
But according to an ABC News article about the case, quote, although Villalba said that he had no evidence of any foul play, he blamed the death on, quote, the cruelty of the system for keeping a 75-year-old behind bars for economic and not blood-related crimes after judges refused to release him on bail.
So it seems to be that's the approach that he's going with in terms of re-examining the death.
And fine.
I mean, in terms of incarceration, let's take a look at things.
Yeah, I mean, I not for McAfee's sake, but for the sake of the larger the larger issue.
And I mean, I think that America certainly has some issues with that.
This was in Spain.
I'm not entirely sure how the Spanish prison system is.
Yeah, I mean, and in this situation, it's so unique just because, yes, I know I don't agree that a 75-year-old should be in a prison for financial crimes.
And at the same time, it's John McAfee.
If you let him out of prison, he's not going to be in your country anymore.
If John McAfee had gotten out of this Spanish prison because they didn't want to extradite him to the United States and he ended up back on his boat, I don't know if I would think that was the worst thing ever.
Now, if the conversation that the lawyer is bringing up about, you know, how financial crimes are dealt with, particularly in the case of somebody who's 75 years old, and maybe there's a conversation to have there.
So this tweet is really the keystone of Alex's argument.
And I find it dishonest that Alex doesn't strive to put this statement in its proper context.
For instance, if Alex were an honest actor just trying to present the truth, he should point out that this tweet, you know, he does say that it's from last October, but he doesn't point out that on April 25th of this year, McAfee also tweeted, quote, I've been imprisoned in Catalonia nearly seven months.
I speak no Catalan and little Spanish, so human contact is limited.
There are no entertainments, no escape from loneliness, from emptiness from myself.
That tweet alone presents a departure from the mental state he was in when he posted that tweet in October.
Alex would never bring up this other tweet because it calls into question the certainty of his predetermined conclusion.
And selling that conclusion is impossible if the certainty is ever questioned.
It wouldn't survive any kind of scrutiny unless you enter into the act of scrutinizing already decided of the conclusion and the fact.
Just want to go to his Twitter in a moment and go to a thing eight days ago.
No, no, I want to read that.
I want to read what you had on screen.
But I want to go back eight days ago where the most important one is about they may be planning to kill me because that's the last known communication from him is that, and then he's cut off.
I've collected files on corruption in government for the first time.
I'm naming names and specifics.
I'll begin with the corrupt CIA agent and two bohemian officials coming today.
If I'm arrested or disappear, 31-plus terabytes of incriminating data will be released to the press.
And it doesn't say that McAfee wouldn't commit suicide.
He was just saying that the U.S. thinks he has hidden cryptocurrency, not because they want to kill him for it, but because he was wanted in the United States for financial crimes related to fraud and cryptocurrencies.
Yeah, I mean, you can't have a conversation with somebody who's willing to just be like, ah, these keys were jangling, so I'm going to let whatever information that I was going to talk about go.
And I think that a lot of the times the people who fall for stuff like this and fall into these traps and are distracted by these jangling keys are capable of thinking their way out of it and rationalizing and being and recognizing, oh, this is what he's doing.
I think it is possible, but generally the stimulus that's required to get them to activate those critical thinking tools are, they just aren't ever engaged.
And my best evidence for your point is that if it weren't possible, they wouldn't spend billions upon billions of dollars making sure these people never engage with that.
Is that I think that when you try to jangle other keys, the only thing that ends up happening is you end up just choosing a different lane of bullshit.
As a listener of his show, going in with the information that's provided to me by Alex, I don't know what the proof is that Fauci created this pandemic.
If Alex read any of the stories about this, he would know that it's the policy of the NIH database to consider data to be the property of the scientist who submitted it.
They hold the right to withdraw their data if they want to, and that's what happened in this case.
Also, that data is still available online, and the removal of it from the NIH database will probably have zero impact on any investigation into the virus.
This is just like a catchy headline, I guess, that doesn't really, it sounds like it's a bigger deal than it is, but I don't, from what I've been able to tell, this is not necessarily a huge deal.
Okay, so like most of this episode, obviously, is McAfee nonsense.
And in terms of evidence that's presented, still just all those tweets and then a mysterious conversation that Alex apparently had on the phone with McAfee.
And it's so fun to me to be like living in 2003 on his show as well because you get the technical snafus that happened then and he's just like, hey, who cares?