Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 9, 2020 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:20:31

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #9

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen.
	Welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Seaters for Friday the 20th of November 2020.
	I'm joined today by Callum and Hugo, and we have an awful lot to go through.
	I think we'll just begin with an update on what's going on with the US elections.
	So, Biden has apparently won a Georgia recount, which was due today, and...
	I'm sure that this is the case, that after counting the ballots, that the totals are as they are being reported.
	Brad Raffensperger has come under remarkable pressure from both sides.
	He's a Republican, but he seems to be at least maintaining a position of neutrality on this.
	He claims to have been pressured by Lindsey Graham.
	He's obviously been pressured by the Democrats.
	But the results have come in.
	Trump was...
	1,400 votes closer to Biden by the end of this, after several batches of votes were discovered, but this wasn't enough to put him over.
	However, this is still contentious, but we'll get into why in a minute.
	But...
	Sorry, was this the audit?
	This is the audit.
	Right.
	Because they're calling it the recount in the headline.
	Yeah.
	I'm honestly not sure what they are actually doing at this point, because I'm seeing words recount and audit being used interchangeably, but they're not the same thing.
	And Giuliani, in his press conference, seemed to think that it was just a recount rather than an audit as well.
	But we'll get into that in a minute.
	But Raffensperger said, And so it seems, from the official figures there, that Trump will have lost Georgia.
	But I suppose it's worth going on to the Giuliani press conference.
	And the press conference itself, in my opinion, was pretty good.
	Rudy Giuliani laid out a lot of good evidence.
	The problem I think that he is having with these press conferences is that he's from a different era dealing with the public and the media.
	Things have changed in the Trump era.
	The press have become a partisan activist organization against Trump.
	And we know because there have been studies that show that something like 90% of all press coverage of Trump is negative.
	And Giuliani being on Trump's side fails to understand that the media are now, I think we can, in a kind of malicious compliance mode where they will just seize on anything.
	No longer can Rudy Giuliani expect any kind of charitable treatment from the media.
	And he has a habit of being a human being when he's giving these conferences.
	Now, what I mean by that is what he really should do when dealing with the media is just come out and give the numbers.
	Here's the statistics.
	He shouldn't intersperse his own opinion into it because the media can take this out of context, try and paint him to look crazy like he's a conspiracy theorist, like there's absolutely nothing here, and use his effervescences in his delivery to make him look ridiculous to the public and various other things that we'll get into shortly.
	But I suppose we can just go for the first clip, because this is Giuliani laying out...
	I've taken the liberty of excerpting certain just factual statements that he's making when reading from the affidavits that he has, and he says that he's got nearly a thousand of these with hundreds in each of the contested battleground states.
	And so this is serious evidence, but we'll let him lay it out.
	This is a consistent pattern of allegations that are being made by the people who've sworn these statements.
	and And The way that Giuliani has, I think, made mistakes here is that he has been putting moral invective in the delivery of it, which makes it easier for the media to, I don't know, essentially obscure what he's actually saying.
	But we'll get to the media reaction shortly.
	But, I mean, some of the allegations are staggering.
	Reading from one of the affidavits, just one of the allegations from a woman who allowed her name to be made public because this, and Giuliani points this out in the press conference, this is a dangerous thing to do because as we saw with Michigan, with the two Republicans who rescinded their certification of the election results...
	And who had been harassed, doxed, threatened, and was like smeared as racists for all time with a stain on their soul.
	Thankfully, they had the wherewithal to say, actually, this is wrong and we're not going to certify this.
	We've seen plenty of this happening.
	There has been a lot of aggression.
	And Giuliani calls all of this out.
	But he intersperses it with all of the facts, and so it becomes quite difficult, I think.
	I mean, it was difficult for me, going through his previous press conferences, to really extract the sort of solid meat, the solid points he'd been making.
	But we'll let him...
	I've taken these clips out, so we'll let him do that now.
	So apparently there wasn't sound on the video when it was first played, so can we replay it for the audience?
	Oh, yeah, sure. sure.
	That's the first one.
	Yeah, that was the first one.
	So we'll go on to him reading just from one woman's affidavit.
	So we'll go on to him reading just from one woman's affidavit.
	So we'll go on to him reading just from one woman's affidavit.
	So we'll go on to him reading just from one woman's affidavit.
	So we'll go on to him reading just from one woman's affidavit.
	So, I mean, each one of those is a crime that's being alleged happened at the ballot count.
	I think this was the Michigan one.
	I can't remember whichever one this was.
	This, if done by the Trump campaign and alleged by the Democrats, would be front page news on every newspaper all around the world and everyone would think that Trump had stolen the election.
	I mean, what he said first, if that's true, what the woman alleges, that the supervisor instructed everyone on the site to just do that, if that was true, they would point to something really big being done because everyone would have had to have been on it, right?
	Yeah.
	It's not just something that two people in secret talk about.
	It's just something that's done in the open at the polling station or something.
	And that's exactly what Giuliani says.
	He says this is a coordinated effort across these four districts that all did the same thing.
	Put Republicans in separate rooms or something like this.
	All these kind of things.
	It naturally suggests that there is a larger conspiracy at play here.
	And, while, you know, Giuliani is right to point that out, I wish he had presented it slightly differently.
	But, like I said, all I've done is taken out this sort of, like, you know, direct input from where he's reading out, and suddenly, it seems very clearly and level-headedly, And you can see by the way he's reading it out, he's just like, how am I saying these things and getting no response from the press?
	You know, this is a scandal that this happened at one place, let alone at like four places.
	And he's got hundreds of sworn statements all to the same effect that all say the same thing.
	So it's like, Christ, you know, there's something really rotten here.
	And the media is treating Giuliani like he's a lunatic.
	Yeah, I mean, you said before that it's a shame that he's presenting it like this to the media and at press conferences, but that would be more or less okay if he presented it differently in court.
	But what we talked about yesterday suggests that he talks this way in court as well, which is kind of weird.
	Well, again, he's a 70-something-year-old man, so, you know...
	But the fact is, it does seem there's plenty of evidence to suggest a huge amount of malfeasance.
	But you read through one of the affidavits, didn't you?
	Yeah, so I got the affidavit for Michigan.
	Stop doing the American thing of D-ing the T's.
	Don't D the T's, man.
	That's what growing up on YouTube will do to you.
	I know, it's terrible, isn't it?
	I put it in the chat just in case anyone wants to read it on here.
	We'll put it in the links for the clips so you can read the whole thing in your own time.
	But they list, I think it's like maybe 13 different accounts of things going wrong and then 20-odd affidavits to the specific claims.
	And the claims are wild, like he's saying.
	So one guy was getting annoyed because absentee ballots were coming in and they seemed to be putting random names on them instead of the names of the people they were meant to be.
	So we're just giving people who didn't vote a vote just because most of them seem to vote for Biden.
	So he wanted to go over and observe what was going on at the polling desk where people are working to make sure that they're putting it next to the books and everything's being done right.
	And when he did this, they started complaining that because of COVID he was too close to the desk and he's like, well I can't see if I stand six feet back so I've got to stand here and view it.
	And then they went and got a supervisor and then kicked him out and then refused to let him back in to observe stuff.
	And he's alleging during that time there must have been at least tens of thousands of ballots going through and our guys couldn't look at them because you kicked us out.
	I mean, it doesn't seem unreasonable to suggest that that's not right.
	You shouldn't be able to do that to a poll watcher.
	And then you've got other complaints.
	Well, again, the poll watchers have to be able to watch the counting of the poll or it's not counting the ballots or it's not legitimate.
	It's a legal requirement, as I understand it.
	And as Giuliani promotes it, and I'm sure that he's right.
	He's a lawyer.
	I'm sure that he's got a legal team.
	I'm sure that he's correct.
	And there are a bunch of different laws in different states as well, because obviously they do vary.
	And again, we're not going to go through the entire press conference, but he explains these laws and says, this is just legal.
	This is illegal.
	This is illegal.
	There's loads of it.
	And in this case, in this election, it's kind of made easier for anyone who would want to exclude these people to do so because of the COVID restrictions, like six feet apart and things like that.
	So it provides another angle to use if you want to do that.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, but there's loads of allegations on here, and it's getting to what we said about, you know, you're going after a few thousand or a few hundred votes, that doesn't really matter.
	So in Michigan, Biden's up by 150,000 was the last reported figure from RealClearPolitics.
	And in this, they go into accusations of tens of thousands in different allegations.
	So you add that up, it would end up being in 100,000, 100,000 plus.
	Oh, yeah.
	So this is him actually going after what he needs to go after.
	I mean, he said, you know, there's something like 300,000 in one state that can be identified to be at least suspect, you know, very highly questionable.
	And then you've got the arrival of the ballots at 4am, where something like 130 something thousand turn up and you get the giant spike in the graph that Trump tweeted out.
	And the poll watchers, the people there, apparently thought that this was food arriving at 4am.
	So they went out to check and it was just in rubbish bags and in boxes, just all these ballots.
	And again, people say when they, you know, the poll watchers who have sworn these testimonies say, well, we only saw ballots for Biden.
	They just all seem to be for Biden.
	It's like, this is so unbelievably suspicious.
	It's just ridiculous.
	Ridiculous!
	Do you mind if I read the quote from the afternoon?
	Yeah, no, please, please.
	Right, so this is a guy under the penalty of perjury.
	He said that this is true.
	The defendants systematically preceded and counted ballots from voters whose names failed to appear on the qualified voting file.
	And then, get down, at 4am on November 4th, tens of thousands of ballots suddenly appeared in the counting room through the back door.
	These new ballots were brought through to the counting center by vehicles with out-of-state number plates and it was observed that these new ballots were cast for Joe Biden.
	So I'm assuming by that he's either saying entirely or majoritively.
	So that's a 4 a.m.
	And then we have a graph from Trump that he tweeted out accusing them of fraud here.
	At 6.30 there's a huge count suddenly for Biden.
	It was 96% of the votes counted for that chunk went to Biden.
	So I'm assuming that's the connection between those two allegations.
	Whether or not they're true is a different matter.
	Well, it's for the courts to decide.
	It depends how many witnesses they have, whatever other investigations they do.
	Yeah, we've got witness testimony under penalty of perjury that this is what happened.
	Well, you've got to investigate it then.
	That's not that there's no evidence, it's that there's no proof yet.
	Yeah, it's not concrete proof, but it's certainly evidence.
	At the same time, it's under the penalty of perjury, but with these things, you can say that, yes, I believed this to be true, and it turned out not to be true, but I wasn't aware of this, and I said it honestly, and I thought this to be true.
	And so, with these things, you will never have anyone actually convicted for perjury just because something turned out not to be true that they had said was.
	Oh, you can.
	I mean, if it seems it's a deliberate lie.
	Yeah, yeah, sure.
	But that's very hard to prove, and usually it doesn't happen.
	I know, but in these cases, I mean, he's making specific claims about ballots being turned up in vehicles.
	And it's not just one guy.
	It's, you know, dozens and dozens of people at each location saying the same thing.
	The Russia investigation, people being done for perjury because they lied to the FBI. So I imagine it can happen, but you're right.
	It will be quite by par.
	It probably doesn't often happen.
	But the point is, you know, when you've got so many people all alleging basically the same thing, all saying, yeah, we saw all of this dodgy stuff happening on the poll day, Giuliani, you know, is well within his right to be just flame-throwing the media, going, you know, you can say that she's lying if you want, but you can't say this isn't evidence because people are convicted on this evidence all the time.
	Like, this is a direct witness statement.
	This is a direct knowledge that the witness has of the event.
	You can't.
	You can't get better evidence of this, you know?
	What better evidence are you expecting?
	I mean, you could find the guy doing it.
	Well, yeah, I guess a confession, a signed confession from the guy who did it would be nice.
	Full HD video.
	Yeah, exactly, of him, you know, with a GoPro on his head recording it.
	That would be wonderful.
	But, like, this is perfectly good evidence.
	And so it's really insufferable watching the gaslighting that's going on around this.
	And it seems to be going on everywhere, doesn't it?
	Like, but before we go on to the media, is there anything else about this that you think is noteworthy?
	Like, any other...
	About the affidavits?
	Yeah, anything else interesting in there?
	I did put a few down, just because, you know, the most important ones.
	Because there will be a handful of cases where people are alleging, oh, I wasn't able to see this, or this guy filled in a few.
	But if it's just a few hundred or whatever, like we've mentioned before, and Ben Shapiro's mentioned, voter fraud is part of elections.
	It always happens.
	But is it significant enough?
	So...
	The allegations around tens of thousands of ballots are the ones that are significant.
	So one guy says here, "After election officials announced the last absentee ballots had been received, another batch of unsealed ballots arrived without envelopes, arriving in trays to the polling center.
	There were tens of thousands of these absentee ballots, and apparently every ballot that was counted was attributed only to Democratic candidates." I mean, that reminds me a lot of the Birmingham case we were talking about where they turned up with mail-in ballots.
	After a factory was producing them.
	Yeah, and they said, oh, we found more ballots, we need to count them.
	They counted them overwhelmingly for Labour, and it was just accepted at the time.
	So, is that suspicious?
	Yeah.
	Is it proof that it's definitely fraud?
	No.
	But you investigate it, you find out what happened there.
	I mean, there have been accounts that the ballots are all, you know, freshly pressed and look different to the other ballots, that they've only got the vote for Biden on, they don't have any down-ballot votes, again, all of this being...
	Like, unusual, considering that most people vote with the down ballot as well, and Biden having like 34% or whatever it was, that don't is really weird.
	Just really unusual.
	But yeah, sorry, go on.
	Yeah, so it's just, you know, a handful of these kind of accusations, trucks turning up with tens of thousands, the guy being kicked out so he couldn't observe tens of thousands, and then this guy claiming that tens of thousands of absentees turn up.
	Well, you know, you add these up, you do get to the ballpark numbers that we were talking about.
	Totally.
	Is an investigation unwarranted?
	No, not at all.
	And it casts doubt on all of the other ballots that have been cast.
	You know, if you're a resident of the States, you would surely demand that the ballots be checked properly, because they might be stealing your votes.
	Every fraudulent ballot cancels out a true ballot.
	So I would be furious.
	I'd be furious about any of these allegations, to be honest.
	But all of them at once, I think, is tremendous.
	It's...
	I mean, I don't know whether this is the Kraken or not, but I mean, these are staggering allegations.
	Certainly looks like a couple of tentacles.
	It certainly does.
	It certainly does.
	Even though, I don't know if the Kraken was actually meant to be an octopus or something.
	I think it's actually like a big fish monster.
	It's like a squid, right?
	Well, in modern sort of view it is, but originally I don't think it was.
	You'd be the one to know.
	Yeah, well that's the thing, that's what I'm saying.
	But anyway, if we can play Rudy's last clip, because this is a good one.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	And there's also a huge amount of fake news going around as well, just to add this onto the end of this part, because Giuliani said that they've only got three lawsuits.
	They've filed three lawsuits.
	The Trump campaign has filed three lawsuits.
	They have withdrawn zero of these lawsuits.
	So what is the press talking about when they say, oh, there have been like 33 been thrown out of courts and things like that.
	These are from other actors.
	These are from other agents.
	These are private citizens or local people charging their local state for fraud and stuff like this.
	And a bunch of them have been thrown out.
	I think a few of them haven't.
	But they're not from the Trump campaign.
	But the media is not reporting that.
	The media is giving everyone the impression that literally everything Trump has filed has just been thrown out, which is just not true.
	Yeah.
	I mean, take the one I'm talking about.
	That's Constantine versus City of Detroit.
	That's a private citizen with a bunch of other private citizens suing the city of Detroit for fraudulent practices and not following procedure.
	It's got nothing to do with the Trump campaign.
	He speaks about it in that conference where he's like, we haven't coached her.
	We haven't spoken to her.
	She's done this on her own and we think she's credible.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	So yeah, let's get to the media response to Rudy Giuliani's press conferences and Trump's legal campaign in general has been a giant gaslighting disgrace.
	And I really understand why Rudy Giuliani has difficulty separating his emotional and moral arguments from the factual arguments from the affidavits.
	Because...
	I think it might be worth taking a step back and saying, well, who is Rudy Giuliani?
	Because I think a lot of people don't know how much Rudy Giuliani has done in his life.
	So he comes from a working class Italian-American New York family.
	He studied to become a lawyer and he became a lawyer.
	And one of the first things he did is ending up smashing the New York Crown families.
	So back in the 80s, New York was dominated by five major Italian mob families.
	And these people, they killed people in the streets, they ran racketeering and all various other drug smuggling, whatever it is.
	And Rudy Giuliani ended up sending the head of these families, all five of them, to jail.
	He ended up sending like 11 really important players in this network to jail.
	He ended up destroying it.
	By the end of it, he had an $800,000 hit out on his head for what he had done.
	But he succeeded.
	He did a good job.
	He reduced crime.
	And then in 1994, he becomes mayor of New York until 2001, and he halves crime in certain very high crime districts.
	There's a graph on the Wikipedia.
	I don't know where we can get it up.
	But it literally, it's staggering how much he has affected things.
	And it's things like stop and search, you know, Targeting likely offenders, things like this.
	But it actually had a major effect.
	And then, come 2001, he was heavily involved.
	There's the graph, in fact.
	You can see, just look at that blue one.
	That's from Newark.
	Look how much he has reduced the crime there.
	Staggering.
	And so, like, an obviously good thing for the citizens of New York, if you're a law-abiding citizen.
	Unless, of course, you're the sort of person who's perpetrating violent crime, then you might be like, well, Rudy Giuliani's bad mayor.
	But then, after 2001 and the 9-11 attacks, Giuliani was heavily involved in all the legal process there, and he got lots of honours, including an honorary knighthood from the Queen for his work.
	And most recently, he was behind urging Ukraine's president, the new president, I think he's the comedian one, to investigate Hunter Biden's activities with Burisma because he believed there was corruption there.
	And once again, Rudy Giuliani, the anti-corruption hero, is going after corruption in the American elections.
	And yet, the media is treating him like he is a clown.
	They are treating him like he is just a circus.
	Like there is obviously no truth to any of this and there can't be any truth.
	And so, instead of focusing on all of these incredibly weighty allegations and testimonies from people who say they have directly witnessed all of these crimes, instead Sky News, for example, focused on the fact that towards the end of the press conference, and I'm sure it is hot under the lights, Rudy Giuliani's hair dye started melting down his face, and it looked bad.
	I think it's his sweat, because you can see at the top of his head, and it filters through and goes down.
	Yeah, and you can see him mopping his brow when he's doing it, and it's such a silly thing, but that's it.
	Now that's the lead story from the paper, or at least the trending topic on Twitter that all the journos are familiar with, and that gets filtered down through everyone else.
	Or the fact that he referenced a mafia film, Now, I haven't seen it, right?
	So I don't follow Mafia films.
	I don't actually know anything about it, but I had a look into it, right?
	In the Mafia film, there's a courtroom scene where he can't see how many fingers are being held up, like, too far away, and Rudy is using that To show that, look, the poll watchers being kept six feet away, they can't watch the polls.
	That's illegitimate.
	And they mock him for using this.
	And there were memes of him comparing him to the person on the trial, on the stand, being tried by the lawyer.
	But the film is a representation of what Giuliani did in New York.
	Giuliani is the lawyer examining the witness.
	And so it's like, well, why wouldn't he refer to the film if it was useful?
	It's about him busting corruption.
	And yet, they'd say, oh, look at this crazy old man.
	And so this next one is just...
	Jonathan Karl is a journalist for ABC News.
	When Sidney Powell, at this press conference, says there appears to be communist money behind this election through Venezuela, through the Dominion voting systems, which, again, they seem to have allegations and evidence that suggest that that is the case, this guy's like, well, this is next-level crazy.
	What do you mean next-level crazy?
	Like, communists have never put money into foreign endeavours or something.
	This is totally, totally what communists do.
	We've got lots of evidence from the communists themselves doing this.
	So it's like, right, okay, so we're not, we just don't, Rudy Giuliani is now not this corruption exciser.
	He's now just some clown, right?
	He's now just some guy who we don't listen to.
	And this mentality has infected the media to the point where this is a Fox News presenter.
	Let's just see what she has to say.
	Let's just see what she has to say.
	Let's just see what she has to say.
	I can't believe that this 25-year-old face is going to sit here and say that all of these testimonies are baseless.
	This has all been thrown out.
	None of that was true.
	Have you noticed how her hair was moving?
	That means that she's not credible.
	Go to Media and Giuliani.
	Okay, well there we go.
	But yeah, the fact that she's saying that all of this has been thrown out, it has not been thrown out, that these things aren't true, no one has disproven any of these things, they haven't been examined yet to be investigated.
	So the fact that, and then she's like, well, on this one specific claim, it's like, yeah, but there does seem to be evidence that suggests a coordinated activity.
	And Joe Biden did say he'd built the most inclusive voter fraud organization in the United States.
	So I say we take the man at his word.
	But the point is that even Fox News are just like, well, there's no evidence of this.
	And you saw the same thing on what was it, LBC? Yeah, we were driving back from work listening to LBC and they were literally, I don't know if you call it live streaming on the radio, but they were live streaming the press conference from Giuliani.
	It must have been 20 minutes or something.
	So the entire country got to hear Giuliani, go through his reasoning, here's how many affidavits I got, here's what they're saying.
	Here's the evidence.
	And he continually kept saying, and you guys keep saying there's no evidence when I'm giving you the evidence.
	And then it cut through because the presenter at LBC needed to move on.
	He says, right, well, that's Giuliani, waffle, waffle, waffle, presenting no evidence of voter fraud.
	It's like, we literally just heard him accuse you, you know, the media, saying there's no evidence when he's giving the evidence.
	And then we listen to the evidence, and then your response is, well, there's no evidence, is there?
	I just can't get over it.
	As if sworn testimony of eyewitnesses is no longer evidence.
	I mean...
	If a rape victim comes in and says I was raped, well, I can't take a word for it.
	That's the thing.
	Look what they did to Kavanaugh, right?
	Oh, this woman 36 years ago claims that you did something, therefore we believe women.
	And it's like, okay, but that's really weak evidence.
	34 years ago, something happened that I never mentioned since.
	Yeah, and everyone just got behind it going, yep, that must be true.
	So this BBC broadcast, we won't play it, but what it is, is the BBC, in fact, we can play the first like 30 seconds or something so you can get a feel for the tone of it.
	Okay, that's enough because you can see the way that it's being reported.
	This is not being treated as if it's ridiculous.
	This is being treated as a sombre affair, because this appears to be swan allegations of people saying, yes, we saw that Australian soldiers shot people and then put guns next to them, and things like this.
	The strength of that evidence is no greater whatsoever than the strength of what Giuliani has presented, and yet that's treated as if it's credible.
	Giuliani is being treated like a clown.
	It's disgraceful.
	The media was not always like this as well.
	And this is what I think Giuliani is just learning very, very quickly.
	Because I can imagine that back in the 80s, when he was busting mobsters, the media was probably very in favour of this.
	Oh, great, well done.
	You know, this is cleaning up the city and things like this.
	Now, when he's trying to clean up the election process, where they have chosen a side, now it's like Giuliani's a maniac who's with conspiracy theories and died dripping down his face.
	Don't listen to a word he says.
	And there's a part of me that's annoyed where it's like, oh, God, man, you know, You can't allow these silly mistakes to happen.
	You know, they're very silly things.
	But at the end of the day, the young lady, who is also part of the legal team, came out and excoriated the press, saying, look, this is the court of public opinion, and we don't answer to you.
	This is going to go through the courts.
	You're going to see it go through, and it's not going to end up the way you think.
	You're a disgrace.
	And it's like, good.
	At least someone's pushing back.
	So, basically, I know I've been rabbiting a lot and not giving you guys much...
	To get into here.
	But like, basically, at least it seems that Trump's team has a strong case.
	If you ignore the media gaslighting, it looks to the layman like me, like Trump has a strong case.
	And I just want to be clear, these journalists don't know shit about the law.
	They are not experts.
	And for the most part, they're probably not even very bright.
	So, you know, don't trust their word over Giuliani and the legal team.
	That's what I would say.
	Yeah, I wanted to comment on what you said, that the media hasn't always been this bad.
	Because when you were talking about the 80s, something like that, when Giuliani had his lawyer career, when he was doing all these things in New York, and...
	This wasn't a very political position, right?
	It was a legal position.
	It's not very partisan.
	Exactly.
	But at the same time, you had Reagan in the White House and the Arab basically was famous for the media going against Reagan in similar ways that they are doing now with Trump and they have been doing this with Trump.
	And so I would say that at that time, Juliana might have been away from that, but this was still going on, but just in different circles, at the top, the same way that it's going on at the top now, and some lawyer in New York is not going to be smeared like this today either.
	But I think that even then, though, you know, I mean, I can remember watching the news of my parents when I was a kid and stuff like this, and It was just not this bad.
	Like, you wouldn't get the news presenter playing you the clip of the guy saying, look, we've got this evidence, and they say, well, there's no evidence, I guess there's nothing here.
	Like, this is wild.
	But a lot of people take this as credible, and you didn't have any other sources back then either.
	Well, that's true.
	That's true.
	But what I mean is at least they wouldn't show me the evidence and then tell me they hadn't shown me any evidence.
	Like, there was at least that.
	But that's what I was kind of pointing out.
	And I think that many people who might have been listening to the LBC, who support that point of view, they would have said, yeah, of course, he didn't show any evidence.
	They were right to say that he didn't because he didn't.
	And I think many people would say this and would be honest about it like that and would be sincere.
	Well, maybe, but he did.
	Yeah, but not everyone sees it like that.
	It's like a different reality that different people see.
	Yeah, but that's why I'm calling it gaslighting, because I think it is.
	I mean, if you just look at the evidence of your own eyes, there appears to be lots of evidence, and then the media is just like, don't believe that.
	Believe us.
	I agree with you.
	Yeah, I know, but it's just wild.
	I just...
	I just think that this might have been happening for a long time, and it's part and parcel of the media culture and media...
	I agree to an extent it has, but it's just become so open and so embarrassingly transparent.
	I don't doubt that the media has always been rubbish, but I can see how it's gotten worse.
	I mean, it's gotten worse in the last four years.
	And it's not just this either.
	It's other things in which they're just...
	I mean, they're lying about the court case being thrown out.
	They're lying about the evidence not being presented.
	They're lying about almost everything.
	They're lying about Biden being the president-elect.
	They're lying about everything.
	It's just a total fiction at this point.
	The office of the president-elect thing was bizarre.
	Yeah, and he's standing there under this banner of an office that doesn't exist.
	The Congress came out and said, that doesn't exist, Joe.
	He's still doing it.
	And the media's still going along with it.
	And when you watch Biden in interviews, he's given the most softball questions.
	And Biden's constantly stumbling and, you know, mincing his words.
	And he's just stood by this fake office, jabbering nonsense, being given the most softball questions.
	And I'm just looking at this thinking, man, there are real problems.
	I just wanted to pick up what you said about, you know, don't trust the journalists because they don't know shit about...
	Yeah.
	They don't.
	I mean, but I'm not a lawyer either or all the rest of it, but we're reading what, you know, Giuliani's guys are giving, and I'm also reading the statements given by the City of Detroit in response, and just present it.
	It's not even that hard.
	Like, are there affidavits?
	Well, the media, you know, these journalists will just say, well, there's no evidence that we're not even going to talk about it.
	Yeah.
	No, there are the affidavits.
	The statement, there hasn't been much from the city of Detroit in that, but I feel like I should include it, not to be like them.
	So their response is essentially that it was all conspiracy theories.
	It's very vague wording they use.
	I'll put it in the links when we put the clips up.
	The Trump supporters are wasting everyone's time, and they're trying to explain away the trucks that turned up.
	They're alleging that it's a photographer delivering photography equipment, which...
	Well, that's one story.
	And then we have 200 stories saying that no, it's boxes and bags of ballots for Biden.
	Yeah.
	The bank robber says that nobody robbed a bank, and the people who got robbed are all saying he robbed the bank.
	Which one do we believe?
	I don't know, man.
	There's a hundred people on this side, and one guy on this side, and he's the one under accusation.
	I find it hard to believe that there isn't CCTV at these places, so surely you could just get the video, and I'm sure it'll be brought out in the court case of what it was, and then people will know.
	But to turn around and say, well, these guys are alleging this, the city's saying that no, it's something else, therefore there's nothing to see here.
	Yeah.
	I'm sorry, you're the ones under accusation.
	We're accusing that you were part of a conspiracy to steal the election because you knew Biden was going to get absolutely trashed in this election.
	And in every other metric, Biden did get trashed.
	Every other metric.
	It's a catastrophic loss for the Democrats.
	Except when it came to the presidency when Biden was record levels of popular.
	That is the thing, personally, I find most strange, is the down-ballot casting, the fact that there were so many that just went, no, I love Joe Biden, but I don't care about the rest of the Democratic Party.
	Oh, Saint Biden.
	Like, who's doing that?
	It's nonsense.
	It's nonsense.
	But anyway, should we go on to the lockdown tyranny?
	Because it seems that everyone is currently being tyrannised by COVID-19, or at least our government's reactions to it.
	Am I going through all of these?
	I think so, yeah.
	You don't want to make the note today.
	Okay, sorry.
	So, let's begin in Germany, where recently they were having anti-lockdown protests and they were met by water cannons, which is something we're not allowed to use in the UK, isn't it?
	I believe we are in Northern Ireland, but for the rest of the country, it's a very high standard to bring them out.
	Because Boris wanted them, didn't he?
	And we weren't allowed them.
	I'm not sure of the details, but I remember there was a lot of questions with the Black Lives Matter protests that got very violent.
	People were like, where are the water cannons?
	They're like, well, they're not in England.
	They're in Northern Ireland.
	But apparently, the way that it was reported by...
	I can't remember who was reporting it.
	Independent, I think it was.
	Scores of protesters gathered to oppose them.
	Just scores.
	But the government just opened up with water cannons to try and force them away.
	Yeah.
	Basically, the government's coronavirus restrictions in Germany, they have a bill that's going through the parliament to provide a legal underpinning for the government to issue social distancing rules, require masks in publics, and close stores and other venues.
	So I love this.
	The government is just going to grant themselves the power to expand the power of the government.
	No, but if I can comment on this, I read something about that.
	And I think that in Germany, there have been lockdowns and these corona measures.
	But on the federal level, it hasn't been clear whether it's constitutional or not.
	And so this is a bill that's supposed to provide this kind of legal backing to what the government has already been doing.
	So something like that.
	But that's really bad.
	Yeah, I'm not saying it's awful.
	I mean, that's just horrific.
	The government has been violating the constitution.
	Well, that's okay.
	We've got a bill to make it legal, retroactively.
	No, that's not how law and order is supposed to work.
	This is German law and order.
	Yes, but it's not just this German law and order.
	This is the way that the German parliament is thinking about this.
	The German government thinks about this.
	And naturally, this is being closely connected to Hitler's Enabling Act.
	Of 1933, which granted the minority government in a coalition of the Nazis the power to essentially adopt all sort of constitutional measures themselves and be able to legislate without requiring other interventions.
	And Heiko Maas, the German foreign minister, is very disapproving of you comparing the German government to Nazis.
	Obviously, how could you do that?
	He says, everyone naturally has the right to criticise the measures.
	Our democracy thrives through the exchange of different opinions.
	But whoever relativises or trivialises the Holocaust has learned nothing from our history.
	Hang on a second, we're not trivialising anything.
	We're suggesting that this is actually as bad as what the Nazis were doing, because it seems that you're retroactively justifying yourselves breaking the law in order to tyrannise the government.
	I mean, the protesters, like, one of the signs was just, we want our lives back.
	Put banks under surveillance, not citizens.
	Like, why are you doing this?
	But the Germans didn't stop there, obviously.
	They then banned anti-lockdown protests at the German parliament because they were worried that there would be security concerns of people who are really angry about being tyrannized by the government would come to the government and try and do something.
	So now you're not even allowed to protest there.
	And they've got the same rule there as we do here.
	If you want to protest outside parliament and complain at the government, you've got to ask them for permission.
	Better get a license to voice your rights.
	And so the Interior Ministry just rejected 12 requests to hold rallies.
	They were just like, no, we're just not going to let you do it.
	And we're going to ban you doing it as well.
	But going back to what Heiko Maas said about, oh, everyone's got the right to their opinion on it.
	Well, not a particular German doctor who was apparently live streaming him complaining about the coronavirus lockdown when the German authorities kicked down his door and did some sort of raid on his house.
	And the question is, like, what the hell were they thinking they were going to find?
	A man speaking.
	Yeah.
	Like, you know, he's not hiding...
	I don't know.
	I mean, what other reason would you have to do that other than to intimidate him into silence?
	To stop the live stream.
	Exactly.
	But you can contact social media to do that.
	I mean, it didn't violate any of the social media rules.
	Have there been any official comments on this?
	I mean, this looks like a big thing, so if the police had said anything...
	Not that I've seen, anyway.
	There was also, I wanted to mention, we got sent footage of that protest where some AFD politicians were...
	Joining in with them because they agree with them.
	And there was one guy, he has a condition that means he had an exemption not to wear a mask.
	And the police just grabbed him and arrested him.
	But he's an AFD MP. So they were sending us pictures of the parliament voting on stuff.
	There's just loads of AFD MPs just not there.
	Because they've all been restricted from going in or getting arrested like that guy.
	That's unreal.
	I mean, it's just...
	It's not a good look.
	It's terrible, and I can totally understand why people are comparing it to the Enabling Act.
	It looks like they're centralizing power in an authoritarian regime that is actually going to tyrannize the population.
	I mean, Germany's a weird place.
	I mean, the hate speech regulations there are bad enough, but also you can't even burn the EU flag on German soil, which...
	Well, no, of course.
	And people complain about Trump saying, oh, it should be illegal to burn the US flag.
	Well, it's illegal in Germany.
	Go criticise them.
	But sorry, what were you going to say?
	Yeah, I wanted to say something about the Enabling Act and this bill because...
	The people from the government saying that it's too much criticism, they're probably kind of right, but not exactly.
	Because this bill apparently only allows the government to impose the restrictions that have been part and parcel of a lot of countries over this year, right?
	And so it's not like a blanket permission to do anything without Parliament as the enabling one.
	I appreciate it's not going as far.
	What I wanted to say is that a similar thing was passed in April in Hungary, and that actually was like that.
	Really?
	Yeah.
	So the Prime Minister, Orbán, he basically pushed through the parliament the bill for himself to be able to legislate without parliament during the crisis.
	And he defines when the crisis has ended.
	So...
	And that's actually without any major restrictions on what he can actually legislate and whatnot.
	It's not just about the coronavirus-related legislation.
	But the thing I guess I would push back with is what difference does it make?
	Because the German government has just admitted that they've been carrying out all these unconstitutional lockdowns and they'll just legalize it in retrospect.
	So even if now they go on and do whatever it is that is wrong, they'll just pass another bill, you'll be banned from protesting about it, and they'll break up the water cannons if you've got a problem.
	I mean, there are always two layers on which we can talk about stuff, like what's actually happening on the streets and how things are actually being conducted and enforced, and then the official layer on which what's being admitted and what's being officially recognized as legit.
	I just think this is terrible.
	And things aren't exactly getting better in France when it comes to Macron going after the Islamists either, but we haven't got anything prepared for that.
	But the point is, there seems to be a lot of tyranny on the continent.
	But people who are in the Anglosphere who might be thinking, oh, well, that's just them, isn't it?
	That's what they're like.
	Well, it's also what we're like, actually.
	So in Australia, yesterday, a woman tweeted at a South Australia police account and said, Hi there, can I take my dog for a walk?
	And they said, No, you cannot take your dog for a walk.
	Her response was thank you, by the way.
	Yeah, because she was like, My husband is arguing with me that he wants to go out with the dog, so please tell him that he can't.
	And they were like, No, he can't.
	And she was like, Thank you.
	Yeah, it seems that the South Australia lockdown is actually as tyrannical as it can be expected to be.
	The only reason you can go anywhere is one family member per household each day can leave for essential reasons such as buying groceries.
	Everything else is shut.
	Everything else.
	You can't go out any other way.
	And South Australian Premier Stephen Marshall said,''We need this circuit breaker, this community pause.
	We are going hard and we are going early.
	Time is of the essence.
	We must act swiftly and decisively.'' Now, I don't know what the Australian constitutional situation is, but I would be amazed if it includes provisions for the government to simply pause society.
	I mean, this is just the most horrific tyranny to me.
	I can't think of a reason why the government should have this ability, even if it's the Black Plague.
	I don't care if it's a 50% casualty rate.
	There's nothing that you can do about a virus spreading through society unless you have a vaccine.
	And the lockdowns didn't work!
	Well, we should ask Helen Dale because she's, you know, we spoke to her about this before.
	She says that Australia has a long history of authoritarianism.
	Yes.
	Like it very nearly went a certain way during, I think it was like the 50s or 40s or something.
	But ignoring all that for a second, let's just talk about is this justified?
	So is it proportionate to lock down all of society in response to COVID? Well, you know, maybe if it was rampaging through society and, you know, you were looking at 100,000 dead or something like this in the next few weeks, you could maybe make an argument for it.
	I know you're not even happy if it's the Black Death.
	Not even slightly.
	I'm an extremist here.
	But that's not what's going on.
	Just Google Australia COVID cases.
	You want to guess what it was yesterday?
	Oh, let's...
	I mean, let's...
	Okay, so if you were going to justify a lockdown so harsh, you can't even walk your dog, I would be expecting thousands of deaths per day.
	Seven cases yesterday.
	Is that deaths or cases?
	That's cases.
	How many deaths?
	I think it's either going to be one or zero.
	Right, so nobody's died.
	In Australia?
	It's zero.
	Zero.
	Zero people died against seven cases.
	Yeah, this is all of Australia, so not even that.
	In all of Australia?
	Yeah.
	Right, that's interesting.
	Is that justified?
	Is that a proportionate response?
	Not even slightly, but do you know how it started?
	Was it Victoria?
	No, no.
	It started in South Australia because of a lie.
	A pizza guy had lied about going into a pizzeria and said...
	lied about having COVID in this pizzeria.
	He got caught having it, and so the government implemented this ultra-strict lockdown.
	And this is...
	After it came out, it turned out this guy's lying, that they know that, you know, there's not a massive outbreak of COVID because it was the fact that he was literally in the pizzeria for like a few minutes or whatever.
	They thought, oh, God, this is hyper contagious.
	So we've got to have this hyper lockdown.
	And after it turned out this isn't true, they just come out and say, well, we're absolutely livid with the actions of this individual.
	And we'll be looking very carefully at the consequences of what they're going to be.
	You know, there apparently won't be police action for this because there's no penalty associated with taking lies.
	But we were operating on the premise that this person had simply gone into a pizza shop with very short exposure and walked away with having contracted the virus.
	We now know they are a very close contact of another person who had been confirmed as being positive with COVID. And this changed the dynamics substantially.
	Had this person been truthful to the contact tracing teams, we would not have gone into a six-day lockdown.
	So, okay, why are you still in lockdown?
	So they openly admit, this guy lied to us.
	We did a six-day lockdown.
	The very question is, why are you still in office?
	Yes, yes.
	But the point is, why did you think that on the statement of this one guy, for one case, that you had the authority to just tell everyone, right, you're all confined to your homes now, you can't even walk your dogs?
	Like, they don't have that kind of authority.
	They shouldn't.
	What they have is power.
	They have the power to do it, and a compliant population...
	They don't have justification for it.
	They don't have the right to do it.
	And it's just because we're allowing it to happen.
	So we're just like, okay, well, I mean, I guess we'll have to go along with it.
	But this is not justified.
	Like, say, not one death, seven cases.
	End all of society.
	End all of society.
	You know, no one died of the flu yesterday, therefore we must lock down the country.
	Yeah.
	Like, I appreciate COVID's more infectious than the flu, but it's the point of, like, if there is no outbreak, what are you doing?
	Yeah, but at the end of the day, like, we can't just ruin society because some bureaucrats sat in an office are afraid of the numbers changing.
	It's like, sorry, people have got lives to live, mate.
	But a similar thing happened in Canada.
	Manitoba province in Canada, which is the second most populous province apparently, banned the in-store sale of non-essential items and visitors to homes and things like this.
	So essentially copying the Welsh model where you'll barricade off parts of the supermarket that you can go into so you can't buy the forbidden products.
	But also, you can't have anyone inside your home who doesn't live there, etc., etc.
	This is following on from previous orders.
	And listen to the rationale, though, right?
	Chief Provincial Public Health Officer Dr.
	Brent Rusin and others pleaded with Manitobans to stay at home and only go out for a few essential items.
	Despite that, he says, we saw people gathering at rallies.
	We saw crowded parking lots at big box stores.
	We saw people go out for non-essential items.
	So we're left with no choice but to announce further measures to protect Manitobans to limit the spread of this virus.
	I don't know what the outbreak is like there.
	I don't know how bad it is.
	And they're not giving me any indication that there is actually a bad outbreak there.
	But it's just that they are not obeying the rules and that we saw you congregating, therefore banned.
	Everyone banned.
	We'll protect you whether you want it or not.
	Exactly.
	It's literally the joke.
	Not even the joke.
	The aphorism.
	You are nowhere safer than you are locked alone in a prison cell.
	You've got everything provided for you.
	You're protected from danger.
	But what kind of life is that?
	That's usually a punishment.
	Life comes with risk.
	It's not wrong to enjoy risk and to have risk in your life.
	In fact, if life didn't have risk, life would be really, really boring.
	In fact, it's so boring, we punish people with that.
	That's the punishment when you have done something wrong, is to remove all the risk from your life and just force you to stay in this one place where you're not allowed to go anywhere.
	And this is everywhere.
	Can we talk about the non-essential items?
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	In Wales, for example, non-essential items included clothing as we approached winter.
	And this was also, I saw pictures of...
	In Australia, it's summer.
	Okay, but you're talking about Canada, right?
	Oh, is this the Canada one?
	Yeah.
	So it's even colder.
	Oh yeah, it's even worse.
	Yeah, Jesus.
	So, I mean, I saw in Wales they were also closing off areas where you could buy blankets and towels and things.
	Baby clothes.
	It's like, yeah, I can't even clothe my baby or get blankets for the winter.
	It's insane.
	How is this not essential?
	If you were building a colony, these are some of the most essential things you'd need.
	But just for clarity, in Canada they are experiencing a second wave.
	Right, okay.
	How many?
	4,000 yesterday?
	How many deaths?
	The number of cases isn't actually very important.
	I think the number of people who actually die is...
	79.
	79 deaths.
	Not a huge amount, but even then, the non-essential items thing, I don't even understand.
	Like, if you're going to keep the shops open, because you believe, okay, we can keep the shops open, why on earth would you block people from buying certain things?
	Well, it's the same in Wales.
	You can't buy Christmas cards.
	Because, what, they contribute to the spread of COVID? Shut up!
	At one point, some woman complained to Tesco's, which is a superstore in the UK, because she couldn't buy period pads.
	And Tesco responded on Twitter saying, sorry, those are luxury items, we can't sell them.
	And just a quick diversion, they are counted for tax reasons as luxury items, which I think is ridiculous.
	It's the one thing, one of those things that the feminists are absolutely right on.
	No, these aren't necessary.
	It's actually, my understanding is it's responsibility to the EU that their class has luxury items and tampons are non-luxury.
	Well, that's what you get for voting against Brexit, feminists.
	Okay, so I actually googled it, because you said 79 deaths, but there was the whole of Canada.
	This is talking about Manitoba, which has, this is an article from Wednesday, and apparently there was 11 deaths.
	I don't know if that's the day, or it just says 11 deaths, but it says currently, on Wednesday currently, 40 people in intensive care.
	How big is your hospital?
	Well, they've got 1.3 million people in that province.
	249 people are hospitalized and 40 in intensive care.
	And I bet they don't tell you the average age of those people who are in intensive care, do they?
	No, but they're going to be octogenarians.
	They're going to be octogenarians.
	You see Paul Joseph Watson tweeted out the statistics for age deaths for Scotland.
	No, I didn't see it.
	If you were between the ages of zero, and I think it was like 31, it was like one person that died.
	And they're in like tier 4 lockdown.
	Okay, I actually got it.
	So Wednesday lists of deaths include a woman in her 50s, a man in her 60s, a man in his 70s, a man in his 70s, a man in his 80s, a man in his 80s, a man in his 80s, a woman in her 80s, a man in his 90s, and a woman in her 90s.
	There we go.
	Lock down all of society because old people are vulnerable to disease.
	So I don't want to sound heartless, but this isn't something you can change.
	It's not something you can fix.
	You can shield the old as well.
	It's not like there's nothing you can do.
	Yeah, exactly.
	They don't have to be, you know, going to the populous places where they're likely catching it, but you...
	Just can't shut down all the society.
	You can also just subsidise them.
	Like, we're furloughing a lot of the country to not go to work at the moment.
	But if you're furloughing people, the risk is fairly minimal.
	I don't understand it, but surely you could just furlough.
	Okay, anyone over the age of 50 or 60, you're furloughed.
	You're going to be paid for.
	Just please stay home.
	I guess, yeah, you could.
	You know, these are options that would be more sensible than what appears to be a deliberate attempt by governments all around the world to simply expand the power of government.
	Because, like, if we don't object to this, then our kids aren't going to think that this is wrong.
	Our kids are just going to be like, well, that's what the government does.
	The government is an all-powerful entity that can do literally anything it wants to me at any time, depending on the whims of the governor.
	Why would they think that's wrong?
	I think this is the last nail in the coffin for this argument about, oh, is a British-style constitution better than American-style?
	Clearly not.
	The American one is you have a written constitution and the government cannot go outside of that.
	They can try and change it with a supermajority.
	You've got all legal avenues to challenge it.
	And they often do go out of that, but there's huge arguments about that every time.
	But in the British one, you know, Parliament is sovereign and can technically do whatever it wants.
	There are some norms.
	But in an instance like this, they can just argue, well, we need it, and therefore they get it.
	And this just doesn't work.
	This doesn't preserve freedom.
	No.
	It turns out that it becomes a convincing argument for tyranny.
	Because if you look at the YouGov results, and if the YouGov results are anything to judge by, something like 70% of this country is in favour of these kind of tyrannies.
	And I just want, for anyone who's wondering, we're not out of the woods either.
	So a Metropolitan counter-terror police chief called Neil Basu has called for action against coronavirus anti-vaxxers.
	Now, I'm not a scientist or anything like that, but I'm aware that there are side effects from taking any kind of drug.
	And the longer period of time that the drug has been used for, the more well-known the side effects are, and the more reliable you can be in predicting those.
	And so when someone rushes through a drug, say, right, we've got a dangerous disease, but we've got a vaccine, and it's 95% effective, I believe that it will, as you know, they've got various testing measures, be effective against the virus that they're trying to vaccinate against.
	But they don't know what the long-term consequences are because they've literally just rushed it out.
	And I personally don't feel like being a test subject for that.
	You know, I'm personally not very afraid of the coronavirus because I'm not over 80 years old, despite what everyone might think by looking at me.
	Um...
	And so I'm personally not actually concerned about it, and so I don't really need to talk about the coronavirus or the vaccine.
	It's not something that bothers me.
	But Neil Bassow has just said, oh, we need a nationwide debate on the introduction of new laws to punish people who spread anti-vaccination conspiracy theories.
	Now, of what I just said...
	Does it count?
	I think you're a terrorist now, mate.
	Exactly.
	You know, stuff the vaccine.
	Let's just say it's 100% effective, there's no side effects, all the rest of it.
	The government doesn't have a right to tell what you can and can't put in your body by force.
	Well, this is the next part.
	Essentially, what we're getting to is that there are going to be people who advocate for the mandatory vaccination of everyone, and no way.
	You don't get to mandatorily vaccinate me.
	You don't get to do anything to me.
	Yeah, my body, my choice.
	Exactly.
	Yeah.
	I mean, how does...
	This is going to sound crude, but I mean, if you ask this guy, you know, well, not this guy, because he's talking about propaganda, but someone who was saying, you know, mandatory vaccines, why is rape wrong?
	I mean, what would be their defense?
	I mean, they can't say to you, well, you know, it's your body, you're allowed to, you know...
	You get to decide what people put into it.
	No, no, no.
	You know, if this guy's going to get more pleasure out of it, then therefore is it better because it's utilitarian and produces more good?
	This is why I'm not a utilitarian at all.
	Yeah, this is a nonsense argument.
	It doesn't lead to anything.
	Well, the worst thing is it's entirely consequentialist, which means the ends justify the means.
	If the end appears on the spreadsheet that the bureaucrats are using to tally everything up into an acceptable series of columns, then fine.
	But the virtue of how you got from point A to point C is what we concern ourselves with in virtue ethics.
	That's point B. It's how you do any of the procedure.
	And, yeah, I still don't know.
	And this is a genuine moral concern that we are just ignoring on the assumption that everything will just work out okay.
	And I don't think it will.
	I think what we're doing is normalizing tyranny.
	But, yeah, we won't get on to the next one because I know I've been talking a lot here, but this is all really bothering me.
	Like, this is all really bad.
	And I wish I had better news for a Friday afternoon, you know?
	I'm going to leave you on the weekend and say, oh, God, everything's terrible.
	It's like, well...
	Well, there are lessons to be learned, at least.
	Like, what I'm getting out of the stories...
	Yeah, 1776 will commence again!
	Yeah, well, you know, start the British way of doing a constitution.
	It just doesn't work.
	I don't think there's been a crisis larger than this for freedom.
	It relies on the idea of good faith, right?
	It relies on the idea that there's good faith between all parties who are involved in society.
	And I don't think that we're seeing good faith from the governments.
	I think what we're seeing is a kind of blind scientism coming from the governments.
	Oh, we're going to follow the science.
	We're going to do exactly what the scientists say.
	Scientists aren't moral.
	They're not moral actors.
	They tell you about empirical reality.
	They don't tell you about the moral choices we should make.
	That's where you'd want a philosopher.
	And I don't think many philosophers would say, yeah, well, what the government should have the power to do is actually shut down all of society because they're afraid of something.
	At least not a liberal one.
	Yeah, at least not a liberal one, you know.
	And I guess that's the position I'm going to die on, the hill I'm going to die on these days.
	Sorry, and again, I know I've been talking way too much on this one, so I'm going to show up.
	No, it's your show.
	It's our show, isn't it?
	Conrad.
	Yeah, it is Conrad, yeah.
	Welcome to Navarro Media.
	And we're just as salty as when Corbyn got kicked out of labour.
	Any thoughts before we go then?
	Not really.
	There are lessons to be learned.
	That's all I've got out of this.
	The British constitution doesn't work.
	We need written constitutions to preserve freedom.
	This can't happen again.
	But also from the voting stuff, the least I can learn from that is that electronic voting needs to die.
	That's the worst idea on history.
	What else can we learn from all this stuff?
	That's the only good thing we can get out of this.
	Otherwise it's all doom and gloom.
	I guess so.
	I mean, Pottery Shard gang rise up, you know?
	Pottery Shards.
	Yeah, well, they work.
	Someone said we should do Pottery Shard merch.
	Look, we can audit Athenian elections better than we can audit Joe Biden's elections.
	That's probably true.
	Just saying.
	We've got more evidence of the votes that accounted for the Athenians.
	But anyway, any thoughts before we go?
	I think we might go to the Super Chats.
	Yeah, that's a good idea.
	Saw someone saying, I wouldn't even vaccine you.
	I wouldn't even vaccine you.
	Well, I would if you asked.
	I would if you wanted vaccinations.
	I'll let you guys read them because my throat's killing me now.
	I'm angry.
	Do you want to start?
	You're a better reader than me.
	Do you want to go from the bottom up?
	Yeah, if we can go to the bottom.
	Is that where we left off?
	No, it's still the 20th.
	What day is today?
	Keep going.
	I don't think we're going to be able to get through all of these chats, so we'll really appreciate the support.
	I think we did Axis.
	Oh, but this is weird because it's 18 and then the 20th, so the 19th is probably going to be...
	So Axis says, Hello all, do YouTube Super Chat store work?
	They do for now.
	No, no, that's yesterday's ones, but for some reason they're listed as the 20th.
	Oh, damn.
	Okay, that's confusing.
	I remember Goat, I remember Honey Badger, I remember Mr.
	Flam.
	Yeah, still keep going.
	Seneth?
	Mr.
	Anderson?
	Yeah, I remember that one.
	Bueno?
	I remember that one.
	Yeah, still keep going.
	It starts with Richard Normus, I think.
	Not saying that how you want him to say it.
	Instead of going on a diet, Sargon should go for the Alex Jones aesthetic.
	It's too late.
	I've already done the diet.
	Could you go up a little bit, John?
	Well, I mean, that's true if you want the Overton window to be that wide, but I would actually like to restrict the Overton window to exclude the communists.
	Well, socialists.
	Yeah.
	Socialists by different names.
	Same difference, yeah.
	The Pinkos.
	We should start calling them Pinkos.
	What's Pinkos?
	Communist sympathizer.
	It's a term that is from America in the 50s.
	But it's the Pinko liberals.
	Communist sympathizing liberals.
	And there are a lot of them.
	Because they're not exactly red, but they're getting there.
	You have Pinko Republicans as well?
	Yeah, you know, the sort of liberals are like, oh yeah, John Lennon's Imagine would be wonderful.
	Shut up, Pinko.
	Yeah, but I'm thinking you've got the Republicans who are super authoritarian who want to, you know, I've got a plan for society.
	Would they be pinker Republicans?
	No, because it's about communists and sympathies.
	It's sympathies with the USSR. Yeah, but I consider the unironic far-right to basically be the same camp.
	I mean, the neocons came from the Trotskyites.
	Yeah.
	Keir Starmer was part of the Communist Youth League or something, wasn't he?
	No, that was the leader of the Law Society.
	No, Keir Starmer was a...
	No way.
	He absolutely was.
	Almost all of them, Tony Blair was.
	They all come out of these radical left-wing circles and realise that this doesn't work in electoral politics and so moderate.
	There was a speech of Tony Blair essentially arguing with the leftist radicals in the Labour Party...
	in the 90s.
	And I watched his speech and it was amazing because he was like, look, we all want these things, but if we get 0% because we asked for 100%, it would be better for us to get 30% of the way rather than getting 0%.
	And round of applause, stirring applause, it's like, okay, but I don't want 30% of communism.
	Like I don't want 30% of whatever globalist agenda I don't want that.
	Sorry, Karen.
	Yeah.
	Okay, so President-elect Swatnik.
	It doesn't matter what the media thinks, it's up to the courts.
	Yes.
	I mean, I think we agree on that.
	We probably said that as well on the stream.
	That's...
	Yeah, all that we have talked about is evidence, it's indications of what might have been happening and substitute courts to decide that, but it's a good enough indication that something should be investigated and that these things should be figured out.
	Bullmoose.
	The Greeks never voted with Pottery Shard.
	They voted with Pfeffos, black and white pebbles.
	White was in favor, black was against.
	Get it right, pal.
	Oh god, my keyboard's not working.
	That's not true.
	They were called Ostrarka.
	They did vote with Pottery Shards.
	I don't doubt that there were also voting with Black and White Pebbles.
	In fact, I recall reading something about it myself.
	But it wasn't...
	I guess maybe it was just the votes for ostracism that were done on Pottery Shards, but I don't think it's one or the other.
	I think it was a mix of both.
	But Pottery Shards is just a catchier meme, isn't it?
	They definitely did use Ostrarka.
	Apparently Starmer used to write for Socialist Alternatives.
	Told you.
	He used to write essays on self-managing socialism, which, nah, it's not going to work.
	I don't even need to read it.
	I just know that that's going to be...
	Yeah, I mean...
	This is from liberalcommunist.org, so they have no incentive to lie and be like...
	Liberal communist?
	Yeah, libcom.org.
	What does that mean?
	I've just googled Ostarkon.
	It's a piece of pottery usually broken off from a vase or other earthenware vessel that has small pieces of writing scratched onto them and in the case of elections they would be on elections.
	But I do recall hearing about being black and white as well so I don't think that we're both right or wrong on that one.
	I think it probably is both.
	But it's the meme.
	Sorry Karen.
	Okay, so Thumblegadget.
	Are you guys going to get a science correspondent to cover technical stuff?
	Often court experts are wrong about stuff like COVID and climate and just make the argument from authority and get away with it.
	I mean, I would love to, but we don't have a website.
	And we've actually got a new chap starting today called Josh.
	And you better hope we get a website up soon, guys.
	I mean, it would be lovely to, but not immediately.
	But it would certainly be lovely to have a science correspondent.
	Will says, is there anyone denying these claims?
	Is there anyone saying, no, I was there, and the supervisors did say that, or the equivalent?
	I've heard absolutely no one even addressing the allegations that Giuliani is presenting.
	I've got the testimony from the city of Detroit's lawyers saying that it didn't go down like that and they're all conspiracy theorists, but not directly saying that this supervisor didn't say this.
	The only thing they say is, oh, this is an evidence of widespread voter fraud.
	This is conspiracy theorists' nonsense.
	And it doesn't have to be widespread.
	It's actually directly, specifically targeted in four key states.
	So, Stuart Lee Archer, we missed that one, I think.
	Do you think there will be a lot of individual prosecutions in the long term?
	Will the Dems use it as a badge of honor?
	Well, you've got to have a prosecution for fraud to go higher up in the party.
	You've showed your colours.
	Well, you stuck it to the white supremacist capitalist patriarchy, didn't you?
	Voting is a tool of the white man.
	That's how they think about it, yeah.
	From the perspective of the white fragility, critical race theorist perspective, you have to see voting that way.
	I mean, I don't think that there will be a lot of individual prosecutions in the long term, because these things tend to be resolved somehow, or not, but if they are resolved somehow, someone clearly becomes president, then it dies down, people get shuffled aside, and that's it.
	I don't think many people will go to jail or get prosecuted because of that.
	It could be that you just don't hear about the thing because the media doesn't report it, because it's not a juicy story.
	There are, I mean, there have been, we've been covering, people who have been convicted of vote fraud in Texas and California, and there was another one, I can't remember where it was.
	So it isn't that they're not prosecuted.
	I think people are prosecuted.
	Birmingham, the guys who got done, the guys who are saying about backdating ballots, the supervisors in the postal system, I reckon they'll probably go after them and they'll probably get some convictions there.
	Right.
	That's just openly breaking the law.
	Yeah, but if Giuliani's allegations are true, then they're just openly breaking the law and no one cares.
	Nathaniel says Pottery Shards 2020.
	Yep.
	Based.
	How do you say that one above him?
	With the Z? Xeon Reborn.
	Detroit Leaks showed a video of a six-foot rule that was not in play when it came to checking the mail-in ballots.
	Yep.
	Well done for using the letter Z as well, Callum.
	Breaking the conditioning.
	Wait, I did?
	Yeah.
	Oh, my accent's being fixed.
	Good job.
	Taking his time.
	Mr.
	Flange?
	Yep.
	On the Obama clip the other day, I would like to see the comparison to that and people who were against the printing press.
	He's not wrong.
	I mean, every time I hear someone railing against the internet, it's like, right, so what is the internet?
	It's just a faster exchange of information.
	Yep.
	That's what the printing press is.
	I made a video about this.
	We can't use it because of copyright nonsense.
	But all of the responses to the printing press and the restrictions that were placed on it by the Catholic Church and various state governments...
	Socialist governments, yeah.
	No, the Parliament.
	The Parliament in the UK under Oliver Cromwell tried to restrict the printing press.
	You had to get a license to print a book.
	Tyrannies, they will call them.
	But all of the responses are the exact same responses we are seeing from various governments and institutions in response to the internet.
	It's the same story.
	So you're absolutely right to say...
	No doubt.
	And you can see, by the way, that all of the regimes of the 20th century treated the media.
	It's no surprise that they would treat the internet exactly the same.
	No surprise they want complete control over the information flow.
	Because it provides a kind of unifying narrative where everyone agrees.
	Because that's all it is.
	It's just information exchange.
	There's nothing unique about the internet.
	Yeah, the democratization of information has been bad for the powers that be.
	Well, shame for the powers that be.
	So, Zerg says, can we get an episode on how based Sky News Australia is?
	Oh, we should do an interview with them.
	We should call them up and be like, no, we want to interview you.
	We will see if we can, because they are shockingly good compared to Sky News Britain.
	I'd love to speak to a British and be like, right, do you ever talk to the British guys?
	Do they hate you?
	Do you have hate emails between work colleagues?
	What's going on?
	So Michy says, the media and social media having an iron curtain on information was a perfect assessment from Giuliani.
	They think that God's agreed.
	That is exactly right.
	Giuliani did use that phrase in the press conference.
	And one of the things he said was just like, look, the public have a right to know this.
	They have a right to know this and you don't have a right to keep it from them.
	And yet the media has realised they can just operate as a class.
	And if they all just close ranks and all say the same thing, then the public doesn't know any different.
	And it's quite terrifying.
	The media class have become wide awake and have a will of their own.
	Which is what the fascists wanted.
	I mean, I'm literally quoting the fascists when they say that, but that's kind of how they're thinking, as a class with an ethic and an intention, and that's not what we're supposed to have.
	So, Thunderstorm says, Politburo Society, yes.
	Nathan says, look up Durante, the media always have been this bad.
	Just sometimes they were on your side.
	Only social media makes their life so obvious.
	I tend to agree, and look up Durante, that's worth it.
	Brian Aleman, my cousin Vinny isn't a mafia movie, it's a fish-out-of-water comedy about a slick-talking New York lawyer defending his cousin in a murder trial in Alabama.
	I haven't seen it.
	Great comedy.
	Really funny.
	So, good recommendation.
	Kyle Pascoe.
	The same media claiming there isn't any evidence also asked Giuliani where to find the affidavits and publicly available info pertaining to the cases.
	I found it in like two minutes of Googling.
	What's wrong with that?
	It's not a secret.
	It's not a secret.
	None of this is a secret.
	So, Shake Silver.
	Interesting metrics.
	Biden supposedly won with a record low of 16% of counties.
	The counties account for 70% of GDP. Hey leftists, there's your 1%.
	Wow, that's a really good point.
	Novobranek.
	Is calling you Sargon dead naming?
	Yes.
	Please invite Anna Khashian of Red Sky Podcast.
	To hear you two talk would be interesting.
	Also talk to Eric Weinstein.
	Well, it all depends on the lockdowns.
	Let me put down my name.
	Stinking ape.
	Whichever side you are on, pro-anti-lockdown, huge economic damage has already been done.
	Why is no one talking about blaming China anymore?
	It looks like Western governments have just been given the carte blanche they wanted to become tyrannical and build back better.
	And I can agree that the less people talk about China and Chinese involvement in this and the cause of this, the more it indicates the Western government's kind of comfortableness with the situation.
	Yeah, but the problem that I have is that the Western governments just are not acting in the interest of their own countries and their own people.
	I know they're like, oh, it's going to save people from COVID. It's like, well, A... We're good to go.
	Like, children being murdered in the home by their parents is, you know, dramatically up.
	Suicide's dramatically up.
	COVID isn't even in the top ten of the most serious...
	the top killers in the UK at the moment.
	It's not as bad as they're making it out.
	And I'm not saying they're being nefarious, either.
	I think they're trapped in a world of numbers and advisors who are telling them all these things, and they just don't know.
	You know, they just...
	I mean, Boris's life every single day will be a coronavirus update.
	Yeah, every day.
	They're being told like it's the most important thing.
	Anyway, I know we're supposed to be hurrying up.
	And Anywhere Somewhere says, World Economics Forum next scare tactic.
	Cyber COVID attacking infrastructure and national grids.
	No, I'm not making this up.
	I don't know anything about that, but Google it.
	see what we find out uh dukus says hit the gym everyone yes do uh reverend norse will the sign contain such content like your the politics of x series those were some amazing videos i hope we The reason I haven't done anything significant, like edited videos recently, is because we've been setting everything up.
	At the moment, we don't have stable revenue, income revenue.
	So I can't sort of relax and say, right, okay, I can dedicate a day or two working on this particular thing because we've got to produce content, frankly.
	And until the website's done, I don't think I'll be able to do things like that.
	But I have got a few videos like that planned where I've got some good dives to go into.
	Just waiting for the website, really.
	So Noel Wayne says, Jeffrey Epstein was suicided and voter fraud now in front of us in the US. The USA gets what it deserves.
	Someone's saying that CCTV footage I was talking about.
	It's going to be Jeffrey Epstein.
	Yeah, that was...
	Oh, it just wasn't working that day.
	Lars Petter Simonsen.
	Is it legal to burn Nazi flags in Germany?
	I wouldn't say so.
	I mean, technically, I think it probably has to.
	No, it is legal.
	Oh, is it?
	It's illegal to, I think, own them.
	But if you were to burn them, that wouldn't be a crime, because the law was if it's a nation's flag, so a current nation that exists, in which they included the EU, so they're saying the EU is a country.
	So ISIS have finally done something wrong by burning the American flag.
	I'm trying to remember.
	I think they did make some Islamist flags illegal to burn as well, but I'll have to Google it.
	oh yeah so what action can individuals or even groups take to counter slash protest lockdown measures is there an is there an effective group to counter the threats of fines is there depends on which Well, talk about our country, particularly.
	Yeah, I mean, with our country...
	Like an insurance or something, right?
	The fines, to understand, have been given out were for the organisers who set up the protests.
	So, like, Jeremy Corbyn's brother, Piers Corbyn, was fined £10,000 for setting up a protest.
	The only way to counter that is probably just crowdfunding.
	Like, if you're going to come, throw in a quid, because we're going to...
	I mean, what are the free speech society doing?
	I don't know if they have anything to say about...
	Brendan O'Neill must be going off his nut about all of this.
	Toby Young must be going off his nut about all this.
	Toby Young is massively against lockdown.
	Yeah, he's been running lockdown sceptics since the start.
	So, good man.
	Don't get me wrong.
	Sorry, go on.
	So, go on.
	You want to go on, Cullen?
	Someone else read.
	I'm bad at reading.
	Antre says, Denmark, the government, ordered the killing of all our mink in order that turns out to be illegal, and she knew for over nine days while the police and military force to have their way.
	That's one of three.
	The people they hired to kill the mink were so incompetent that all mink were dead when they were burned or buried in mass graves.
	The conversation to farmers seems to be illegal.
	Can we scroll up a bit, John, because we need to find...
	There we go.
	No, it's still up.
	A bit further up?
	Yeah, according to the EU. Yeah, according to the EU, this has ruined the farmers' lives and a lot have tried to kill themselves.
	Yeah, I mean, this is exactly the kind of executive decisions that would be taken by, like, Mao that would then ruin entire segments of the economy, destroy thousands and thousands of lives.
	And it was all just because of a bureaucrat's pen flick on a paper.
	It's terrifying.
	We should not be allowing the governments to have the power to do this.
	And in Denmark, as you say, it was unconstitutional anyway, but people did it, which just shows it is actually just a piece of paper, and that everyone is actually prepared to go along with orders.
	So it turns out that when we're at the Nuremberg trial saying, oh, you can't just say you were just following orders.
	Well, all of these people can.
	All of these people can say they were just following orders.
	It's unreal.
	Can you go back down to where it said one?
	Stop.
	So, Lars says...
	No, we're not reading out spicy jokes, but thank you very much for the Super Chat, Lars.
	You know what YouTube's like, don't blame me!
	I don't even get the joke.
	Don't worry, I'll explain it afterwards.
	But I think we're 20 minutes past the hour now, so I think we'll go for a couple more and then we'll have to say sorry for missing the ones that we didn't get to.
	Socrates' execution was a hoax as Pedro.
	Was it?
	Well, not in Socrates' opinion.
	So what do you think of the complex situation in Northern Ireland?
	That's probably complex.
	I don't think we've got time to go into it, but I don't know anything about it, to be honest.
	It amazes me how people are just willing to surrender their freedom, have a friend who says government is incompetent, yet follows all their orders.
	It's wild, isn't it?
	Weird, isn't it?
	And we've seen plenty of examples of being competent, and yet everything's still locked down.
	So Luke says, if government equals health insurer, you have no agency over your behavior slash risk.
	You can do whatever you want and outsource the consequences.
	That's true.
	Don't go up.
	Scroll back down.
	She skips on.
	It wasn't the lockdowns that destroyed my hope for the future.
	It was seeing the public support for them that did it.
	Yeah.
	And then Xerox says, I don't consider Nick Fuentes to be far right.
	I consider sovereign citizens to be far right.
	Stefan Molyneux is very close to that.
	Well, as long as we're bifurcating the concept of far-right and Nazis and fascists, that's fine.
	Because far-right means kind of like libertarian anarchists, you know.
	But that's the opposite of a Nazi.
	So it's not a very useful term, generally.
	But I think we'll probably leave it there because...
	Time is ticking on, but thank you everyone for joining us.
	Sorry, again, it wasn't more good news on a Friday afternoon, but this is all happening, and, you know, I think we should be informed.
	But anyway, we'll be back on Monday at 1pm UK time for the end of the podcast.

▲