Today, Dan and Jordan take a little breaky from the present to go back and experience some Alex Jones of the past. In this installment, Alex interviews the parent of a high school whiz kid, and a guy who claims to be a former assassin for Interpol. Citations
Well, that now supersedes my Bright Spot for being my Bright Spot, so mine is immediately no longer a Bright Spot, but what I had before was, I am excited.
What's fun about that is it could be no relation to Edward Snowden, or it could be no relation to Alex Jones, because people are sometimes related by first name.
So, we're going to be dealing with this 2003 episode, and I actually think right off the jump, we kind of have something that relates to the present day, and that is an insistence that there's false flags coming.
Former Defense Secretary says that nukes will go off in U.S. cities.
It's going to happen.
Of course, he's CFR.
And, hey, they'll love it.
A nuke goes off in a city, they'll have even more of an excuse to tell you the government's your boss.
They're going to take all your rights for your safety.
And, of course, it won't be North Korea detonating that nuke, folks.
It will be the shadow government.
And out of that, all of their training, all of their takeover systems will be activated.
And things are going to go downhill very, very quickly.
Or we could speak out and get involved and blow the whistle inside and outside of government and stand up against the military-industrial complex and save America.
But the yuppies and the bureaucrats and all of you are in for a rude awakening.
You can't go on being part of an evil system forever and not have it turn on you.
And you're all about to find out.
You've all been finding out individually over time, but you're going to find out on a mass scale what your masters think of you and will do to you.
So we're entering the ninth circle of hell, ladies and gentlemen.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, coming up in about 12 minutes, we're going to be joined by Angela Lipsman's father.
Headline, Port K.O.'s college whiz kid.
A 15-year-old Manhattan girl whose parents sent her to college instead of high school has been told by a judge that she can't get her associate's degree even though she's got enough credits as city officials launch an educational neglect probe against her dad.
No, no, the other thing that the Spelling Bee is great for is it was all of the best episodes of Cheap Seats starring the Sklar brothers, and she had just a fantastic episode.
She was great on the show, she was great, it was amazing.
After her, George Thampy and Sean Connolly both won as homeschoolers in 2000 to 2001.
Then six years later in 2007, Evan O'Dourney won, bringing the total to four homeschooled winners in 82 years.
If Alex wants to talk about who are really dominating the Spelling Bee game, he should talk about students from India.
They are far and away the most consistent winners in modern time or in recent years of the Scripps Bee.
The fact that homeschooled children are beating kids who go to public school in all these scholastic competitions isn't true.
It's just a centerpiece of homeschool propaganda.
And to be clear, I don't think there's something inherently wrong with making the decision to homeschool your child, but I do think it's unhealthy if it's motivated from the sort of place that Alex is coming from, where it's like, the schools are evil and indoctrinating your kids into globalism and multiculturalism.
The news is incredible, but I do have a death threat email.
I get these about every week, and basically it says that I'm with Al-Qaeda because I believe in freedom, and that the guy says he's in Texas, and that if I ever come to Texas, I'm in deep trouble.
So Alex is lying about the situation with Angela and her diploma, but also all that other stuff was nonsense that he was getting into with these documents and UNESCO.
Angela had been taking college courses through the borough of Manhattan Community College for the past three years at this point, since she was 11, and she's now 14. And she'd earned enough credits to get an associate's degree.
Apparently there had been some interest from Vassar to have her come continue her education there, but she can't because the community college can't give her her associate's degree.
This is because you can't get a higher-level degree without some form of primary degree.
You can graduate high school and get a diploma, or you can get an equivalence like a GED, and that works.
But most states have rules in place that you can't get a GED until the age you would be when you would graduate high school.
And in Angela's case, in New York, you have to be 17. This rule is in place for a number of reasons, but it's primarily because socially a 14 or 15 year old isn't ready to be in a college setting, generally, and even if you're intellectually able to handle the classroom material, it can be dicey.
The bare minimum for this is generally 16 years old for GED issuing in states.
And that's the minimum age in most states that you can drop out of high school, period.
You can be allowed to do that.
It's generally seen as a preferred path for a student to skip a grade if they're overachieving because the alternatives don't really seem to be super healthy for a child, broadly speaking.
Plus, when children overachieve this aggressively, it's often a sign that they might be experiencing some unhealthy influence from parents, like the equivalent of an academic stage parent.
And that's something that you don't necessarily want to facilitate as a society.
What had happened was I had finished all of those, and so I had a huge chunk of my schedule that was empty, so I had convinced them to let me go to the community college and take courses there.
But I hated those, so I found out that you could test out of those classes and get credit for them.
Yeah, I just kept taking all these tests and getting good grades in these classes, but I never went.
So eventually they found out that I was spending half of my day outside of school doing fuck all, and they got real mad at me, so I wasn't allowed to keep doing that.
And then he starts talking, and I got some problems.
unidentified
It had everything to do with an arbitrary and capricious age requirement for a high school diploma that was totally irrelevant to the academic achievement of the diploma.
So when I look at the totality of evidence I have in front of me and all the information I've been able to find, I don't care much for this Daniel Lipsman character.
It's one thing to support your very intelligent child's pursuit of appropriate education, but it's another thing entirely to do what he seems to be involved in.
For one thing, the whole studying at college at age 11 thing, it appears to have been Daniel's idea.
In a 2011 profile on Angela in the Borough of Manhattan Community College's website, Angela describes how she got started.
Quote, my dad had met Makia McDonald, who was then assistant to the vice president for student affairs and broached the idea of enrolling me in summer courses.
This was just after she graduated fifth grade.
And I don't know how that story doesn't include.
I told my dad I really wanted to go to college over the summer.
So he contacted Miss McDonald.
The way it's phrased makes it really seem like this was something that he was motivated Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Yeah, it does sound like my dad went behind my back, talked to this muckety-muck, broached the idea, and then the next thing I knew, he said, I've enrolled you in summer courses at the community college!
It sounds like if you were asking me that question about swimming lessons, I'd be like, well, my parents saw an ad in the paper, and then the next thing I knew, I was at swimming lessons.
So when you read this profile, you get a sense that she's an amazingly capable and driven person, but also the level of stress and responsibility that was being put on her at that age, I think is wildly inappropriate.
From the profile, quote, "I went to school every day like everyone else," she says, "but two evenings a week I took the subway downtown to Chambers Street to attend classes at BM MCC.
unidentified
When she got home, she'd first tackle her sixth grade homework.
That was the most challenging part, she admits, but somehow I was able to get enough sleep and wake up refreshed the next day, ready to do it all over again.
So this would make me a bit weary, but the reality is that this isn't even the first time that Daniel Lipsman has used his child to try to bring legal action against the schools.
In 1999, Lipsman sued the New York City Board of Education because he felt that their uniform policy, quote, violates their rights to free speech, equal protection, privacy, and liberty under the First, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
The judge found his case to have no merit, so Lipsman, acting as the lawyer for himself in the case...
But he waived all the claims, and the judge gave the school board summary judgment and informed Lipsman that if he didn't get an actual lawyer for the case, it would be dismissed.
He felt like he should be able to represent his daughter pro se, but it's established law that you can't appear pro se for someone else.
So Lipsman didn't get a lawyer and then decided to appeal the case, arguing that, quote, the district court's dismissal of Angela's claims on the ground that she lacked an attorney deprived her of her right to a day in court.
This appeal would be rejected, and the prior dismissal affirmed.
This is right around the time that Angela was graduating fifth grade and starting college courses.
Taken together, I can't help but get a little bit of a picture of someone not acting from a place of trying to do what's best for his child, but actually more of someone who's acting out and using their child as a prop.
Otherwise, it's hard to understand how he wouldn't get a lawyer to try the case about uniforms if that was actually what this was about, like these underlying claims, as opposed to getting a chance to grandstand in front of a court.
I was able to find a New York Times article from 1993 about how New York schools were delaying in opening that school year because there was a fear about asbestos.
So they were doing a thorough investigation before letting kids in.
Angela was about to begin kindergarten.
And according to this article, Daniel had taken the school board to court to try to force them to open the schools on September 9th, ultimately losing that case.
You could look at this as him having previously been really into schools and then a few years later going 180 degrees, but I actually think that this behavior tracks perfectly with his later actions.
He seems to like to sue people, particularly the school board, and I would guess he has a fairly libertarian-leaning set of politics, so I guess he would probably be...
Super opposed to spending money to inspect schools for asbestos.
Yeah, I imagine this is a guy who has a card ready and waiting at a security checkpoint, just like, you don't have the right to search my car, sir, thank you very much.
Right, this fight that he's having over the diploma issue is not the first time that he's tried to tangle with the school board on his, presumably on his daughter's behalf.
The one that's unclear is that I think he wrote a book in 1972 titled The Jewish Connection.
There's a listing for that book being written by Daniel Jean Lipsman in the Library of Congress' catalog of copyright entries, but I can't find the actual book, and I can't 100% confirm that this is the same person.
That is definitely his middle name, though, so it seems like the odds are pretty good, and in my experience, if you title the book The Jewish Connection, my eyebrows go up.
Which means that he beat Keith Sweat, and he tied with TV's Jon Stewart.
Ooh, so close!
Point is, I get the sense that this guy's not really acting above board, and there's a part of me that feels bad for Angela.
No one under 18 should have literally any exposure to Infowars, particularly not being interviewed on it and being used to create anti-public school propaganda the way this is being done.
I can't imagine how Alex couldn't realize that giving out the contact information for a 14-year-old on his show might be a super inappropriate thing for him to do.
But not to be outdone by Alex's completely insane action, Daniel pops in and says this that blew my fucking mind.
So this whole thing got resolved when Angela turned 16 and went to New Jersey, where she could get a GED at 16 as opposed to waiting until she was 17 in New York.
She got her degrees and ended up pursuing a path in law.
And as far as I can tell, she's a practicing attorney now.
Coming up, eight minutes into the next hour, we have Dr. David Race Bannon coming on.
Race Against Evil, the secret missions of the Interpol agent who tracked the world's most sinister criminals.
I don't really know what to say about this whole story because of what I think of Interpol and what I know about the UN and who's involved in a lot of the crimes listed in this book.
To discover that most of the time when Alex is easily dismantled by a woman, a group of men get around him to gather and say that he's so great and he won.
He's the best.
There's no way a woman would ever defeat any of us.
Let me just read some of the excerpts now, or the description of Race Against Evil, the secret mission of the Interpol agent who tracked the world's most sinister criminals.
And this electric narrative of suspense and intrigue delivers a first-hand account of heinous criminals and...
Stern justice from the insider's view of David Race Bannon.
At the age of 19, the American youth is recruited by Interpol after he is caught in a deadly riot in South Korea.
Over the next 15 years, Bannon is trained to work in the darkest regions of humanity, deny society's inhibitors against killing, and embrace the agency's role as deliverer of grim justice to evildoers.
Beyond the Reach of the Law, his assignments take him from the slave houses of Thailand and the disappearance of London's most notorious child pornographer to investigating the KAL-858 bombing and tracking terrorists and criminals in the United States.
However, certainly the subdirectorate of Interpol for which I worked, Archangel, our job was to identify those who buy and sell children across international lines.
Having said that, you've mentioned previously a couple of times, very good point.
For most listeners, it's difficult to wrap our brains around this type of crime.
So what I'm saying is, every time I track it back, it's the UN, it's major corporations, and then there are federal agencies and other agencies that are trying to stop it, but they always get pulled off of it when they get too high up the chain.
My years with Interpol, when we were assigned to track these individuals, many times we would find within a network of these slavery rings, there were individuals highly placed, either religious or political leaders or people of old money, and very seldom were those individuals our targets.
Instead, we would target people lower down the chain.
And then it really becomes an overarching system, an intelligence system, so the elite knows how close other agencies are getting to what they're doing.
And he has experienced that Interpol is essentially just a cover-up operation protecting these really rich and powerful people while taking out lower-level folks.
I do believe that there are a lot of people in Interpol who wanted this.
Terrible traffic to stop and were doing everything they could to stop it.
But I also know that frequently we were not assigned the cases where it was very clear an individual of significant influence was either buying and selling child pornography or actually involved in purchasing the services of child prostitutes.
Well, I started as a Mormon missionary in South Korea, of all things, and got involved in a riot in South Korea at the time.
It was a very war-torn country.
Some 2,500 students were killed during that riot, and I was required to use lethal force to defend myself.
My actions came to the attention of an Interpol recruiter, and it was...
Just convenient for him to have somebody who had Korean language training and was malleable to their propaganda techniques, as many fundamentalist Christians are.
Oh, man, that whole thing about marrying fundamentalist service to God with a form of patriotism and how you can get people to do just about anything can't help but feel like that has heavy resonance with Alex's present-day career.
We were then given a dossier on this individual and assigned either as a team or singly to track this individual and extract as much information as possible from them, either through undercover work or sometimes through torture and then ultimately eliminate them.
The head of Archangel, Commissioner Jacques Deferre, with Interpol, told me that of the some 250 Archangel cleaners, or assassins, most of them were responsible for into three digits.
So you're telling me that these people are important enough to be assassinated, but not important enough for anybody to notice that thousands of them are going missing all the time.
I'm getting close to what is going to be my favorite part of the story, which is the part where they have to explain why their evil organization that has directed them to murder thousands of people will absolutely not harm them whatsoever after leaving and revealing all of those secrets.
That is unspoken, but I found this in looking into him, into why Interpol won't say that he actually was an agent, and that's because, of course they wouldn't.
So, look, one of the big things that Alex wants to really nail down in terms of this interview is that they're ignoring the upper-level people, like the globalists.
We then were encouraged to infiltrate the network, just basically doing standard undercover work.
We would develop a complete legend or cover story and get as much information as possible before we ultimately eliminated our targets, sometimes using torture if necessary.
While we were doing this, we often would uncover many names within the network that were not known to us, just low-level producers, again, all across the world, and occasionally a name would pop up that was immediately recognizable, or upon further research we could see was highly placed within a government, within a religious organization, or some major global corporation.
And just talking around the warehouse where we trained at Archangel, talking with some of our supervisors, etc., we do know that there were occasionally times when these individuals were blackmailed with the information that we had uncovered to suit the current agenda of Interpol.
The throbbing horror of taking another person's life and of using torture techniques to extract information, of course, plays heavily on one's soul and is very difficult to deal with.
Frequently, these individuals, we would either catch them with child or we would catch them surrounded by video or photographic images of this individual abusing children.
Seeing those images, it was not too difficult then to use the methods in which I was trained to extract the information.
Like, where are you at in your own brain that you can hear somebody in such a banal way just be like, I executed hundreds of people and tortured with no legal justification beyond what it was we saw.
In 2006, Bannon, whose previous name was David Dilley, but he had actually legally changed his name to Bannon to sound cooler, he was arrested in Colorado on a number of charges.
He was charged with criminal impersonation, computer crime, and attempted theft.
We'll get into the details on this, but the short version is that he just made up this entire story about working for Interpol.
U.S. authorities were essentially fine with letting it go, but it became a huge problem when they realized he was using these fake credentials to, quote, solicit fees in excess of $3,000 for a two-day training course on human trafficking.
At that point, he was actively profiting off of his criminal impersonation, so they decided it was time to step in.
Bannon would go on to take a plea deal where he admitted to the criminal impersonation, and the other computer crime and theft charges were dropped.
There's a chance that he actually could have done prison time for this, but the prosecution specifically decided not to pursue it, and the fact that he had to undergo mental health and substance abuse treatment leads me to believe that there was something relevant to that that made it so, like, we think that he's...
So the bottom line here is that this guy is a complete fraud, and the stories he's telling based on personal experience that he's had are all lies.
All the stuff about how he knew that Interpol was ignoring some reports of powerful people involved in child trafficking are just something he made up.
The stuff about torturing and killing child pornographers, that was from his imagination.
The stuff about...
The Charlotte Observer has a really good article about this where they rely on statements from Interpol itself as well as an interview with Bannon's ex-wife to make pretty clear how much of a fraud he is.
She explains that during the period of time he claims he was out there killing human traffickers, he was actually, quote, teaching computer classes at a community college in Raleigh.
Hilariously, one of the sources that did some of the really good work deconstructing his fraudulent backstory is a website called Bushido.net, which has a forum that's dedicated to exposing people who lie about their martial arts background.
So they poked around and figured out that he was pretty much clearly lying about that belt, and that led to pulling some threads.
Their post that originally started on how he was lying about his martial arts skills ended up expanding into a savage takedown of his book, and if their description of the plot is accurate at all, this is one of the most ambitious lies I've seen on this show.
They show that based on the year he claimed it happened, that South Korean riot he says he was in could not have actually even happened at all.
They had somebody in France go to investigate whether or not a French secret servant member that he claimed to be engaged to but died in the line of duty was a real person or not.
Spoiler alert, she wasn't.
It was all made up.
They even contacted the Korean school he claims to have a PhD from, and they have no records of him getting a degree at all.
I think that this entire interview with Alex really highlights two problems with his show that existed in 2003, and he's done zero work to remedy.
The first is that he's the most gullible Mark who's ever hosted a show of this size.
Just about anyone can come in and tell him made-up stories about something he wants to believe, and Alex will buy it wholesale and pass it on to the audience's truth.
People like this guy or Steve Buchanek say the stuff that Alex wants to hear and things that make his narratives easier, but they also create a perception that geopolitically significant, presumably heroic people, they think that Alex's show is an important place to make an appearance.
And that validating of Alex's narcissism is just something he can't resist taking part in, regardless of how clear a liar he's having to vouch for in order to get his fix.
The second problem is actually a bit more serious.
And that's because of how irresponsibly Alex handles this stuff.
He's actively disrespecting the very issues he's pretending to take seriously.
Uncritically interviewing this Dr. Race Bannon isn't a front to people who take the fight against human trafficking seriously.
Instead of dealing with the issue soberly as it exists in the real world, Alex retreats into his own fantasies and in the process helps this guy promote and profit off of creating a fake life story that treats the exploitation of children as an intriguing plot.
essentially it's a prop to his story.
Yep.
unidentified
Alex should be really ashamed of his participation in this, but obviously race Bannon should get to the lion's ship.
The notion that he created this entirely fake career in Interpol and was using it to run seminars on human trafficking is terrifying.
It's unknown all the organizations that he sold these seminars to, but when he was arrested, it came about in the aftermath of one of his speaking engagements on a college campus in Colorado.
After he took that gig, the Colorado police caught wind of him and contacted him to see if he would do a training session for the police.
He quoted his price, and that was plenty to fill out the warrant.
The point is, he was willing to lie to students about the reality of this very serious issue of human trafficking, and he was willing to lie to police in a training setting, and he probably had in the past.
He's a person who made his living disrespecting victims of human trafficking, and it's just amazing that Alex can't or will not see through this very clear fantasy story of murders and spy novel tropes just because it works to help him demonize the people that he wants to demonize.
as like obviously this guy is the real problem his appearance and the way alex was engaging with it really does have a connective line to the present day yeah his show sucked in similar ways back then and he never learned he never he never fixed these holes in the boat Or whatever.
It amazes me that the things that we seem to worry about and obsess over, and yet here are literally thousands of innocent children.
And I've been in Thailand on a number of assignments, and we saw parents with children as young as two years old walking up to brothels to sell them into slavery.
I'm not denying that child exploitation and human trafficking does exist at all, but these dudes are having a fraudulent conversation here surrounding a fake lived experience that this guy is describing.
That's being used to call for geopolitical things like invading Thailand, starting a war.
I thought Alex was an anti-intervention guy, really against war.
Yeah, I don't know the extent to which Interpol is going around with assassination squads.
But leaving that aside...
It's embarrassing the way that Alex has now accepted this story and is reporting it as opposed to being like, I'm talking to somebody who claims that he was.
That would maybe be a responsible way to interview this guy with a little bit of pushback.
And, like, let him air the claims but make it clear that you, as the person the audience trusts, have some misgivings about the story.
Like, the fact that the audience had requested Alex interview, Ben, it means that he had every opportunity to do some vetting before having him on, or preparing for the interview in any way, so he wouldn't just get duped by a con man into making a mockery of child exploitation.
The act of not preparing for this interview, I want to be very clear about this, Is a choice.
And I suspect it's one that Alex routinely makes, because if he prepared, he wouldn't be able to justify interviewing these really ambitious liars who help him create profitable narratives and validate his own inflated sense of self.
Real guests wouldn't do that for him, and if he treated the conmen he interviews like they deserve to be treated...
They wouldn't provide him with what he needs.
It's kind of like an unspoken, mutually beneficial arrangement between liars.
And then in 2021, they decided to close up shop, and in a post announcing the end of operations of New Horizon, they discussed the history of the publishing company, and they don't mention Penguin at all, which is another bad sign.
Or at least thanks to Penguin for being a partner throughout.
Totally.
I don't believe that, but Alex is using that part of his lie in order to establish that they would have done fact-checking, so therefore this guy's story must be true.
Yeah, I think that you can get the sense, too, that one of the ways that this guy really is able to get people like Alex to go along with this stuff is he's very soft-spoken, he seems nice, and then also he clearly has some just...
I was involved in a joint operation with Interpol and the counter-terrorist French DST agency where we approached a...
During that confrontation, my fiancée, Sude Rimbaud, who was an officer with the DST, was killed protecting the lives of others by a North Korean terrorist.
And that's what ultimately led to my willingly embracing the role that we played of eliminating these individuals.
Did you, at the moment of her passing, then lower your head and then dramatically raise it upward and scream, no, at God himself as the rain poured down upon your face?
And so Alex, much like he did with the interview and the whole conversation about Angela Lipsman and her whiz kidness, he wants to use this to attack CPS because he hates the Child Protective Service.
Also, I would add to this that on the wider scale, Dealing with this corruption, that most people in the government are not involved in this, but that statistically, the number one group, when I read the newspaper, Dr. Bennington, say if I'm right or wrong, that it's the child counselor, it's the CPS worker, it's the truancy officer.
I know they busted a lot of them here in Austin.
Don't these predators try to get into positions of power over children or the...
An excellent question, and one I've been asked repeatedly.
If I may say this, and I'm entirely selfish in this account, but that is part of the large amount of documentation that I keep secret as an insurance policy for myself and my family.
If he was going to release that, he had better release it to 100 sources before he announced it, because if he was going to release that, they would kill him in a minute.
Like, he can't produce a list of names because that's his insurance policy to stay alive, as opposed to it not existing.
Yeah.
It's using the absence of proof as proof itself, which generally speaking is the mark of someone you shouldn't take seriously.
However, more interestingly, the way Alex engages here is fascinating.
Bannon is saying that he isn't releasing these names because it's his insurance policy to stay alive, and Alex is saying he's gotta do that, and if he wants to release the info, he needs to release it all in a hundred places in advance, but then Alex remembers that his normal talking point is not that, and he completely contradicts himself.
Consistently, it's Alex's position that you're in danger only if you sit on information, and the only way to actually be safe is to live wide out in the open.
What Alex should be doing, if he was serious, is he should insist that Bannon release all the information that he has immediately because to not do so, according to all the things Alex usually says, That's a threat to his life, to not release all of it.
I suspect Alex doesn't do this because on some level he knows Bannon is making this up and there is no list, so it's best not to press the issue.
The only way, really, through this interview is playing along, even if you have to contradict long-held positions that you have.
So you're willing to kill in the triple digits, but if any possible harm comes to you, oh my god, yeah, I gotta protect these...
Billionaires and millionaires who are financing the ongoing human trafficking that's still happening that I'm not doing anything about.
So what you're saying now is that you're willing to invalidate everything you've ever done, meaning that every murder you've committed is 100% worthless and on your black fucking soul.
If you guys want to play your masculine I've killed so many people bullshit, if you want to talk about courage, kill zero people and die to get that information out.
Tell you what, Dr. Bannon, do five more minutes with us on the other side so we can let Larry finish up and then go to Pam, and that's it for calls, because I've got to cover World War III stuff.
Just as serious, if that's actually possible, but it is.
It depended on the individual, and I can say that there are many occasions where, thank God I was with the team, because some of these scumbags were very tough.
We'd like to think of them all being cowards, but they weren't.
I was very surprised because, like I said, this stretch in 2003 that I've been listening to has been really boring and not worth even discussing, really.
And then I get sucked in by this story of a genius high schooler.
Otherwise, they're talking to somebody who is literally running interference for all of the most powerful people in the world so they can continue child exploitation.
Just a bunch of other news here that we didn't get to.
You've got to visit Infowars.com.
The troops are going to put on the streets of America unarmed ground vehicles that zap you and microwave you or shoot you, and the police, of course, will be getting them, too, and, of course, they'll need to use them on you.
It's all part of freedom, ladies and gentlemen.
Before I end this show, I do want to talk about how Black Bear mauled a few people the other day, so I say ban Black Bears.
They want to ban guns.
An old man out in California drove over and killed six to eight people.
They're not sure yet.
Yesterday, I say ban old folks from driving.
I don't really mean that, but that's the answer to everything in this world now.
So I think listening back to these old episodes, I understand how the strategy of never getting to the actual stories developed.
Back then, and in 2003 in particular, around this time, it was super important for Alex to get people who were listening to go to his website, because that was where they had a better chance of getting integrated into the revenue stream.
The best way to get people to go to the website was to hype up huge bombshell news that never actually gets covered on the show, but is totally proven and documented on the website.
That's where you've got to go to find it.
In that understanding, you can kind of see how his show might evolve to essentially be a promotional tool for the website.
Where Alex's insinuations about the news stories, it should be really seen as a sales tactic to get people to take action to go to the website.
Understood in that light, it's absolutely not in Alex's best interest to discuss the stories on air, because if he did so, that would give the audience the impression that they've covered the relevant topics, and there's no real need for them to go to the site to see that coverage repeated.
I have a suspicion that this was an intentional strategy that also conveniently made it so Alex didn't have to do any work, and that's just continued to the present day.