Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 12, 2022 - Stay Free - Russel Brand

01:04:01

The Truth About Twitter Files, With Matt Taibbi - #044 - Stay Free with Russell Brand

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I'm going to go ahead and get my phone out of the way. Let's see what's going on. I'm
	going to go ahead and get my phone out of the way.
	I'm going to go ahead and get my phone out of the way.
	Pfizer In this video, you're going to see the student circle.
	Thanks for joining me on Stay Free with Russell Brown.
	If you're watching this on YouTube, you can stay here for 10 minutes, but the minute stuff starts getting deep and a little bit uncensored, you're going to have to come over and join us on Rumble because there's certain things we simply can't say on a censored platform like YouTube, much as I love it, and kind and wonderful home, though it has been to us, In today's show, we're asking, is all news propaganda now?
	Is there any truth in it?
	Now we are moving to rumble to cultivate a new space where we can speak freely in order to bring people together from
	across the political spectrum.
	If you want to join our membership community, there's a link in the chat to show you how you can do that to get
	even more stuff.
	I mean, there's a point where the intimacy will become unbearable.
	In today's show, we're asking, is all news propaganda now?
	Is there any truth in it?
	Let me know in the chat, in the comments, what you think.
	The reason that I'm asking you that question is because when you look at the reporting on Vladimir Putin and the
	sort of the gleeful ongoing reports of his health crises, you feel like these are the kind of propagandist techniques
	that belong to yesteryear.
	He's got a swollen foot, he's only got one ball, he fell down the stairs the other day, his hands are shaking, he's trembling.
	Yet, in his evident ongoing senility, perhaps not the right word because that's a medical word, but in his, let's call it, trembling inefficiency, Joe Biden appears to be a modern-day equivalent of King George III, a living Freudian slip that unwittingly reveals the power abyss at the core of American democratic politics, which has of course been replaced by corporatism.
	So how can we trust anything We are reading in the news.
	Can we even trust the Twitter files?
	We're going to be talking to Matt Taibbi, one of the journalists who, along with Barry Weiss, broke those Elon Musk stories.
	We're going to talk to him and ask what's really going on at Twitter.
	Is Musk using this for his own end?
	I mean, of course he is.
	It's not an entirely altruistic project, I suppose.
	But we want to know, what was it like?
	What was it like when Elon Musk first approached you?
	What other revelations are there going to be?
	What are the real big stories?
	Is the Hunter Biden laptop kicking Donald Trump off?
	Are they the main things?
	Yeah, the kind of repressing of more right-wing journalists.
	Shallow banning.
	Hit Rumble if you're watching us on Rumble, and if you're watching us on YouTube, join us over on Rumble now.
	We've got some fantastic guests coming up over the course of the week.
	Let's focus on today's show, and in particular, the reporting on Putin's health.
	Putin is red-faced and swaying and slurring.
	He's got a claw-like grip while he's holding onto a champagne glass.
	Look at that.
	It sounds like a sort of a monstrous spectacle, the sort of thing that if you were witnessing it with your own eyes, you'd struggle to stifle the vomit.
	But let's look at what actually What's the claw bit?
	for a lovely grip.
	He's got the fingers of a pianist, hasn't he?
	Look at the way he's holding them.
	Not like Prince Charles's great big sausage fists clutching onto a glass.
	What's the claw bit?
	Does it look like a claw?
	I mean, do all hands look like a claw?
	That's more of a modality rather than an essence.
	I think what the implication is, is that he's involuntarily clutching at that champagne flute like a man possessed.
	Really, it looks relatively composed, and I suppose that the reason we're asking the question about is all news relayed in a propagandist way is because you find yourself suddenly at odds with an entire culture, not because you support Russia, because obviously Russian actions in Ukraine are egregious, the suffering of Ukrainian people is appalling, but because you're invited to blindly forget events of just months ago.
	We know that because of the pandemic and the way that's been reported on and what's been learned since then.
	And the way that we're told, the way that the story of the Ukraine-Russia conflict is told.
	So it's mostly the media's role we're focusing on and the way that they extract any possible NATO action or American military or resource-based interests.
	For me, for the news to make sense and for me to feel sort of at ease and like I could trust the source, they would just say, listen, we know that NATO has reneged on some of the pacts that were made with Gorbachev in 1990.
	It's clear that there was electoral meddling in 2014.
	And the American pro-democratic think tanks were operating in Ukraine to meddle in democracy.
	None of this means that Russia are great or that Putin's a fantastic sort of Russian Father Christmas character.
	It just means that if you do not gain access to the necessary nuance, it invites you to contemplate what the agenda is.
	Why are you not being trusted with complexity?
	Why is that?
	Let's have a look, we've got some other, what is it?
	He's cancelled a press conference, is it?
	He's pooed himself, he's fallen downstairs and pooed himself.
	What else is there about Putin?
	Is there any more information?
	He's running scared, he's battling cancer.
	Actually, normally when people are reported on that are overcoming those sort of health difficulties, they're lauded as heroes, aren't they?
	It's weird, isn't it?
	allow the war to continue in a way because if you just keep portraying this
	as Putin he's gonna die pretty soon this will be over you don't have to say why
	are we still doing this and spending all this money on weapons I also think it's
	a more vivid image to constantly focus your attention on a demonic tyrant who's
	sick and ill of body whose own biochemistry is telling you of the
	malady at his core you don't have to think about the complexity of the
	funding of the war the profits that are being made by Lockheed Martin and
	Raytheon the reductivism in the reporting and I suppose that's sort of
	what I mostly resent is being sort of spoken to like we're idiots I mean Joe
	Biden's meeting up with Macron and like look you can't on one hand I suppose
	Lord Putin which I would you know obviously never do and then needlessly
	demonize Joe Biden just that How is it that we have moved to the point where only avowed right-wing outlets will point out the plain absurdity of a moment like this?
	Have a look.
	That first bit, what's that he's doing?
	He's checking what's going on, isn't he?
	Like, who the hell are you?
	What is that?
	I hope that... I don't watch late night talk shows anymore, not because I don't like those people that do them, because I know some of those people and they're very nice, but like...
	I feel like when Trump was doing his off-key weird stuff, they were all over it night after night.
	In fact, they're still talking about his tax affairs and all of those things, which, if true, are significant in some way.
	But why would you not equally spread your ire on any figure who is powerful that's come up through the CIA, that's clearly a representative of economic interests?
	Why are we pretending that there's this incredible distinction, that this is anything other than an absurd spectacle akin This is what I'm offering you.
	Let me know what you think about this historical analysis.
	Like when King George III, who was, of course, a de facto tyrant and king of the colonies, and therefore that's the very king that you guys overthrew, in my view, mistakenly.
	When he went senile, people tried to keep it down and repress it.
	But his erosion, his mental decline, symbolized the arrival of the great democracies,
	and perhaps democracy in its modern form, altogether.
	I.e., the French Revolution happened, the American Revolution happened,
	and from then, there was a different kind of democracy.
	Now, some of you will argue that deep state power was around even then, that there tendrils of true authority
	lay in wait, continually controlling power.
	But for me, I wonder if this is comparable.
	I wonder if he might be regarded, as I said before, as a kind of human Freudian slip, letting us know what the true state of American democratic power really is.
	One of erosion.
	He's falling apart and new systems will have to be born.
	Perhaps we can snatch something from the ashes, but first... One thing is clear, that none of these leaders know what to do with their hands.
	I mean, whether it's Putin, Biden or Macron, no one's understood how to do a proper hand.
	What you should be doing Hands, what do you do with your hands?
	It's very, that's a good acting skill.
	You can do something like that.
	That's good.
	Now, standing up hands is always a challenge.
	Like, you know, once you start standing, yeah, your hands are under a whole lot more pressure.
	They're under more pressure now.
	Look at it.
	I just, like, you can just let your hands loose.
	Let them swing low.
	Let them swing lower.
	Like, if I was doing, like, if I'm Macron, this is, or Biden.
	Yeah.
	Well, like, Macron's being too serious.
	That's too, he's too taut.
	And Biden's looking like he wants a lollipop from Macron, isn't he?
	Yeah.
	Do my hands have a problem right now?
	No, they're all right.
	But now I'm focusing on them.
	Maybe his hands are weird.
	They're saucy little things, aren't they?
	They're your little sidekicks, those guys.
	Macron is strange.
	He's focused too much on how his hands look.
	He's being too serious.
	He's trying to pinch them into little lobster paws.
	And yeah, Biden, he's knackering up nicely.
	But, um, let's see how this sort of unfolds ultimately.
	That's not normal interactions!
	Alex Overton in the chat said that he's got Playmobil hands.
	Like those toys that are like that.
	That's really good, Alex.
	OK, listen, if you're watching this on YouTube, we're going to cut the stream now and we'll only be on Rumble.
	Remember, Matt Taibbi is coming up in a minute.
	We're going to ask him proper questions.
	What's your relationship with Elon Musk?
	Like, are you concerned that you're pursuing Elon Musk's agenda?
	What kind of criticism and attacks have you received since making these revelations?
	And our video, Here's the News Now, Here's the Effing News, is a brilliant look at Elon Musk and what his agenda might be with Twitter and beyond Twitter, and whether or not he ought to be regarded as different from any other oligarch.
	We're going to cut the stream now, jump right over to Rumble, where we can speak in an uncensored way.
	I'm going to start swearing.
	You want to see what I'm going to be doing with my hands in a few seconds.
	Yeah, that's not how normal human beings behave, is it Gary?
	No, it isn't, no.
	Although I do know about feeling more self-conscious when suddenly when you're on camera.
	I mean, right now, for example.
	What, do you feel like you might twitch or something?
	Yeah, absolutely.
	I do sometimes.
	Do something unusual with your mouth.
	Yeah.
	Or do a big unusual swallow.
	The main thing that, one of the reasons we wanted to look at propaganda is because Netflix have made a show where the great David Letterman is interviewing the broadly viewed as heroic Vladimir Zelensky.
	Now, I couldn't be more enthused by the rise of a comedian to leadership of a country.
	The more I think about it, the more I think it would be a lot of pressure to run a country.
	And I actually find it quite hard to just look after my own cats.
	I struggle with Vladimir Zelensky's old job of being a comedian.
	But when you look at the trailer that Netflix have released for the interview with Lehman, it makes you wonder if they have lost the art of critical thinking.
	And I suppose not every single conversation can cover every single topic.
	But when you're talking about something as potentially devastating as a proxy war between the United States and Russia, although of course people stringently deny that's what it is in spite of the billions of pounds of funding, the direct advice, the meddling in the diplomacy, It feels like that you need a little nuance.
	You need to know what the history of that conflict is.
	You need to know what sort of interests are benefiting.
	You need to know the truth.
	You certainly don't want it reduced to a sort of simple puff piece.
	And note the fact that the interview itself takes place in a subterranean space, I think in a train station in Ukraine, with the obvious implication that it's not safe to do it above ground.
	But do you imagine for a moment that Dave Letterman's Sleeping under the ground?
	Do you imagine that Zelensky is living under the ground?
	I mean, he might be in a bunker, I don't know.
	But for me, I would argue that it's a propagandist move to present the show in the manner that they have done.
	Unless, of course, they do ask what happened in the 2014 elections?
	What is the nature of the funding that you're getting?
	What are the energy interests?
	What's the nature of some of the forces within the Ukrainian army and their affiliations with ideologies that are not celebrated elsewhere.
	I'm talking in particular of fascism and Nazism.
	I'm not saying that Zelensky is anything other than a hero.
	I'm just saying that there ought be an obligation to present reporting that is not dipped in saccharine and reductive and overly simplified.
	I think the way that it is presented sort of suggests that they think we're idiots and that we're being sort of corralled into sort of neurological paddocks fit only for goons and children.
	Yeah, it reduces the war to, like, heroes.
	The American heroes, Ukrainian heroes, of which we're not denying that they are, and an evil dictator with claw hands.
	Look at him, the claw-handed bastard.
	That's not even his real head.
	Although, actually thinking about it, Putin does look a bit like Darth Vader when he takes his mask off.
	In fact, I'd like to see a side-by-side comparison of that after this video.
	Let's have a little look at the Netflix trailer, why not?
	When we were planning this trip, I wasn't sure what to expect.
	It had been months since Russian troops were driven out of the city, but just a week ago, Russia launched missiles and drones into Ukraine, including several that hit Kiev.
	Welcome to Ukraine.
	Thank you.
	A conversation is taking place in the safest part of the city, 300 feet below ground, on an active subway platform.
	Ladies and gentlemen, your president, Vladimir Zelensky.
	Yeah, what?
	We're talking, are we?
	Yeah, yeah, what do you think?
	What did you want to say?
	I see you, I sort of watched something come across your face there, a flicker.
	No, I just, you were talking earlier about the kind of complexities that are not revealed by this kind of, I guess what you could call propaganda.
	know we talked about 2008 this is when we had Jeffrey Sachs on he was talking
	about this that this goes back this doesn't go back to a few months ago that
	this war goes back to say 2008 when you know Bush talked about wanting to expand
	NATO into Ukraine and Georgia and at that point like Putin was like don't do
	that or I'll annex Crimea and that's what he did and this was like what
	kicked this all off according to Jeffrey Sachs also lots of you know other people
	have spoken about the same thing There was this, we were talking about it earlier, this was in FAIR that they reported about the backdrop to the 2014 coup and the annexation that apparently cannot be understood without looking at the US strategy to open Ukrainian markets to foreign investors and give control of its economy to giant multinational corporations.
	And I suppose what feels eerily true about those kind of statements is it lines up pretty neatly with United States actions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea, the famous and notorious meddling in Latin American politics, the coups that have been staged.
	And why can't you have a conversation like this without automatically being dubbed a kind of, I don't know, Pro-Putin.
	Apologies, I'm not pro-Putin person.
	Like, when I've seen the list of celebrities that have been out to Ukraine, firstly I was jealous because I've not been invited.
	No, like first I thought, oh no, does that mean that I'm sort of at odds With those people who I sort of like and kind of respect and admire, that if you ask these kind of questions, you're excluded from the mainstream.
	And then I recall that during the pandemic, that if you were like, hey, this science that we're meant to be following, are all the results in?
	Are we sure that they're conducting the correct clinical trials?
	Have they even ever tested for transmission at a clinical level?
	No, they haven't.
	And we never said we did.
	Bloody hell, what was all that?
	Stop the spread.
	It's irresponsible to go and see old people.
	Once you're aware that narratives shift, there's an obligation to remain alert and awake.
	And if that in itself becomes an act for which you are condemned, I think that's a big problem.
	Don't you, Gareth?
	The critical thinking is being outlawed.
	They want you to sort of submit.
	I'm not suggesting that we're actually right.
	That's why I want to talk to people like Matt Taibbi, journalists who I can trust, and we talked to Chris Hedges and we bring people on here to educate and illuminate like proper investigative journalists, academics, experts.
	Jeffrey Sachs to me when we spoke to him and he gave us an alternative narrative that began with NATO impingement after the dissolving of the Warsaw Pact and Gorbachev's willingness to end the Cold War as long as NATO did not impede
	by one inch on Russian territory.
	Like that when you hear that stuff you know what I mean? Oh Jeffrey Sachs is just saying this he's
	probably got a deal with some Ukrainian energy company.
	Hunter Biden's got a deal with Ukrainian energy companies. Oh Jesus! But listen before we go even
	one iota deeper let's have a look at Putin next to Darth Vader. Ah. And decide for yourself who's
	truly evil.
	I will say, when you first mentioned it, I thought, no.
	But it's true, isn't it?
	It's pretty good.
	It's actually fair enough.
	I didn't like it when they took his mask off.
	They shouldn't have done that to him.
	It was embarrassing.
	I think there'll be a matter of days before they say, Putin unable to breathe without oral device.
	Putin has taken to wearing a mask.
	Putin claims.
	Putin's taken up the harmonica.
	We must wear it at all times, he says.
	In his dying days.
	I'm a one-man band.
	Vows to learn tunes.
	Back in the USSR.
	That's my opener.
	I'm rocking the Kremlin.
	Because the idea that you have to strap the harmonica to your head.
	Yeah.
	That's an incredible obligation that the one-man band has taken on.
	Yeah, it looks a little silly, doesn't it?
	I wouldn't buy that.
	I don't even like those braces that go outside your head.
	No, not at all.
	People wear those anymore.
	I think they're trying to stamp him out.
	Now look, even outside of the conditions that led to the Ukraine-Russia conflict regarding NATO involvement, outside of that, here's a few little stats that would be good if they were included in that Netflix show.
	America recently gave Ukraine the green light to launch drone strikes deep inside Russia.
	The Biden administration plans to sell Ukraine four MQ-1C Grey Eagle drones that can be armed with Hellfire missiles for battlefield use against Russia.
	Now, that sort of sounds a little like a proxy war.
	The US has approved more than $54 billion of economic and military aid to Ukraine since February.
	Of course, that's very public and often lauded as support for Ukraine, which, you know, when you consider this situation from the perspective of suffering people in Kiev, it's a Seems like a good move, of course, but like where's that money ending up?
	Some of the largest weapons companies in the world, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, openly tell their investors that tensions between the countries are good for business.
	It's something that they can use in their projections for the next quarter.
	The CBS News report suggests that only around 30% of the weapons sent by the West actually make it to the front lines.
	So again, we're not saying that there is a A counterposition to the mainstream vanilla narrative that is necessarily 100% correct.
	What we're inviting you to consider is a degree of complexity in stories such as this, and perhaps even, tell me in the chat, tell me in the comments, is it irresponsible to report and make hagiographic shows like Netflix, eulogizing about the greatness and bravery, no doubt bravery of Zelensky, without Including the complexity and advantages afforded to corporate interests as a result of this conflict.
	Those are just a few of the things I'd like you to consider.
	But, before we get to Matt Taibbi, we have taken our own deeper dive into the Twitter files we've had.
	I mean, you know me, I'm one of the best investigative journalists that there are.
	Probably, if not the best, but it's one of the things we'll be asking.
	Don't embarrass Matt later, will you?
	I will embarrass him.
	I'll say, check your facts, Matt.
	He'll be in front of that drum kit that he's always in front of, won't he?
	Yeah, he will.
	Matt Tybee from his drum kit.
	He'll be there.
	But before we get into that, let's have a look at the revelations of Twitter files and in particular what Elon Musk's agenda might be.
	Here's the news.
	Oh, here's the effing news.
	Thank you for abusing Foxy.
	Here's the news.
	No, here's the fucking news!
	The Twitter files are- Are these the unprecedented revelations of a true enemy of the state?
	Or is Twitter the plaything of another billionaire with deep ties to the corporate world and the state itself?
	Or, perhaps even more startling than that, could he be the new Klaus Schwab?
	Oh, I do not like to pry.
	Aren't you confused about Elon Musk?
	Doesn't he sometimes seem like a brilliant maverick, orator, novel thinker, innovator, strange enemy of the state interest, free speech advocate?
	But then you find out that Tesla, of course, have massive contracts with the government and SpaceX have big contracts with the government.
	So let's have a look at these Twitter file revelations which doubtlessly demonstrate the degree of corruption to which Twitter and presumably other social media outfits were willing to support, in this case, Democratic party narratives with the over obvious suppression of the Hunter Biden story which, you know, is now spoken about on mainstream media.
	But at the time, if you mentioned that, you know, people openly called Glenn Greenwald a right-wing fascist.
	Glenn Greenwald, the guy who broke the Snowden story, he was married to a man, right-wing fascist!
	Now, it's just on normal news.
	So whatever they're saying about what we're saying now, in 80 months' time, that will be normal news.
	When it's too late, when the election's been won by their preferred candidate, when their objectives have been met, when their agenda's been pursued, let's see how the mainstream media reports these Twitterphile revelations, and we're going to take this deep.
	We're going to cover the complexity of Elon Musk's connections without needlessly condemning him or fawning over him and celebrating him.
	In the run-up to the 2020 election, the New York Post ran a story accusing Hunter Biden of using his father's position for his own business dealings.
	It also documented the explosive and sexually explicit contents of Hunter Biden's laptop.
	They were not thought to have been the result of hacking.
	They had to find a way to repress the story, because ultimately there are affiliations within Twitter, or there were at that time, that were aligned with it.
	I hope you know that we are not a pro-Republican organisation, that we wouldn't call ourselves right-wing.
	In fact, I think our raison d'etre is to get beyond those categories, because I don't think there's a future for ordinary people.
	With that level of divisiveness.
	But you cannot support that level of censorship and still claim to be in support of democracy and freedom.
	That time is over.
	So on that basis, Elon Musk is doing a good thing at Twitter.
	But is it that unique?
	And is it that distinct?
	Is his objective the support of free speech, as he claims?
	Can we take him at his word?
	Or does the recent banning of Kanye show, whether you think that was right or wrong, that nothing that dramatic has really changed?
	Twitter banned Kanye before for antisemitism, Twitter banned Kanye now for antisemitism.
	My personal stance on antisemitism is you shouldn't be racist.
	It's something the company's founder now accepts was an error.
	We recognize it as a mistake that we made.
	If Twitter is doing one team's bidding before an election, shutting down dissenting voices on a pivotal election, that is the very definition of election interference.
	On this point, I'd have to say that I 100% agree with Elon Musk, as we stated at the time of the Hunter Biden revelations, when we were at some risk for reporting on it.
	So with regard to this issue, we agree with Elon Musk.
	Frankly, Twitter was acting like an arm of the Democratic National Committee.
	The world's richest man also started to release internal Twitter files, something the White House said was not healthy.
	We see this as an interesting or a coincidence, if I may, that he would so haphazardly, Twitter would so haphazardly push this distraction that is full of old news.
	We know that they tinkered with, prohibited, controlled that information because they knew it would affect the outcome of an election.
	We know that there are other things like that that it's still not safe to talk about.
	We don't have a credible government.
	We know that Joe Biden made numerous pledges throughout his election campaign, whether it's around Saudi Arabia, supporting the rights of workers, not exacerbating a nuclear conflict, that he's reneged on.
	Because there is so little trust in public life, a figure like Elon Musk, even as the world's richest man, is a breath of fresh air.
	When the Hunter Biden stories, outlandish and lurid as they were, emerged just weeks ahead of the 2020 poll, social networks decided they were probably false or the result of hacking, and so took decisive action.
	on Twitter have meaningful ramifications for ordinary people.
	We also have to be open-minded about other allegations.
	The nature of Hunter Biden's relationship with Ukrainian energy companies, Chinese energy companies, Joe Biden's impact on those relationships, the degree of his influence and involvement.
	We can't just dismiss it as hacking and conspiracy theory, can we?
	This time, do we always do that?
	It's hacking and conspiracy theory till it's irrelevant, then you can put it on the mainstream news as all, oh well, never mind, everyone was trying their best.
	The second installment of the much-hyped Twitterphiles debuted on Thursday night with conservative writer Barry Weiss outlining in a Twitter thread what she described as the shadow banning of prominent conservatives including Charlie Kirk, Dan Bognino and Libs of TikTok.
	The founder of Twitter, Jack Dorsey, argued that the public would be better served by a more
	transparent approach that cuts out the middlemen.
	If the goal is transparency to build trust, asked Musk on Twitter yesterday,
	why not just release everything without filter and let people judge for themselves?
	Presumably because Elon Musk is, if nothing else, a brilliant entrepreneur and media manipulator,
	and as CEO of Twitter, he does have an obligation to make Twitter relevant again.
	Let's make Twitter relevant again.
	So him making this story play out over time using a very credible journalist like Matt Taibbi and Barry Weiss,
	people who get attacked and criticized a lot, who have been guests on our show before,
	who I happen to think are brilliant investigative journalists, is comparable to what he did at SpaceX.
	You want to make a rocket ship company?
	Go find the best rocket engineers.
	I mean, it's not rocket science.
	Actually, it was rocket science, but this time it's not.
	Critics of Tabi included MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan who wrote, But of course the left have to deal with similar accusations when defending the repression of the Hunter Biden laptop story and numerous other narratives that ultimately play into the hands of establishment liberals like the current Democrat party who Ultimately operate at the behest of corporate interests and are not serving the people that they were elected to vote and not fulfilling the promises and pledges they were elected on.
	Tybee, now labeled a former voice of the left, came to prominence right in about the 2008 crash.
	He was skeptical of claims of collusion between Russia and Trump but literally wrote a book about Trump called Insane Clown President.
	So he was not a pro-Trump figure, he's just interested in investigative journalism.
	It's got to the point now where the narrative has shifted.
	The imposition of censorship has become so rigid and immersive that if you're just investigative and open-minded and not blinkered and blind you are a de facto right-wing conspiracy theorist.
	Although in 18 months you'll just have been telling the truth but you'll be talking about something else then and that will be right-wing conspiracy.
	So you can't really ever get out of it unless you're willing to wear an outrageous coat.
	So is Elon Musk right about government censorship and collusion?
	The FBI warned Twitter during weekly meetings before the 2020 election to expect hack and leak operations by state actors involving Hunter Biden.
	So they started to prime them and let them know, hey, when you hear about this, that's the old hack and leak.
	You sure it's not that Hunter Biden's got all sorts of shady business deals?
	Do you not remember seeing him on the news going, I don't need to tell you about my business deals.
	I don't need to open up my kimono.
	I'll show you what's going on downstairs.
	One thing that I don't have to do is sit here and open my kimono.
	It's clear now that those revelations were true and there's probably more information in them that's relevant to their credibility of Joe Biden as a president and the lack of transparency around his business dealings and his connection to his family and these various energy companies.
	Former Twitter legal policy and trust and safety lead Vijaya Gad played a key role in censoring the Hunter Biden story in October 2020.
	After Biden became president, his administration appointed her to an advisory role on a committee that helped shape the Department of Homeland Security's misinformation and disinformation work that same year.
	The revolving door keeps spinning, these connections are still evident, and the idea that we are spoon-fed this stuff and don't question what's going into our mouth becomes increasingly ridiculous.
	Alan McLeod revealed that Twitter hired a host of former FBI agents to work in the fields of security, trust, safety, and content.
	So, deep state agencies had people in social media that were working in areas that meant they would explicitly be directing censorship, controlling content output, and having an influence on how we perceive reality.
	While talking about this and celebrating Elon Musk's work for the freedom of speech, let's have a look at some of his other relationships to give us just some context for how we can look at him as a cultural figure more broadly.
	Tesla and SpaceX have received more than $7 billion in government contracts alone, and billions more in tax breaks, loans, and other subsidies in recent years.
	Tesla has sold at least $6 billion worth of government-backed electric vehicle credits.
	These sales of twice in recent years made the difference between the company posting a profit instead of a loss.
	So ultimately Tesla and SpaceX need their relationships with the government.
	Now that doesn't necessarily mean that Elon Musk is in the pocket of the government.
	It just means that perhaps business operations at that level require a degree of compliance
	around taxation issues and funding issues.
	SpaceX has a $300 million contract with the US Air Force and a $5 billion deal with NASA.
	Emmanuel Macron asked Musk to sign up for Children Online Protection Laboratory, an
	initiative aiming to shield minors from harmful content on the internet, a wide-reaching legal
	tool of state power and censorship.
	Macron tweeted, Will the bird protect our children?
	The billionaire responded in affirmative to Macron's question by writing,
	Absolument, which I believe is French.
	Last week, Musk thanked Apple CEO Tim Cook for taking him around Apple's headquarters
	and revealed that Apple will not be removing Twitter from its Apple Store.
	So ultimately, there are relationships at the top level of commerce and government which
	perhaps are required to operate in the space that Elon Musk does.
	that he is not a valid opponent of establishment narratives, but it means that he has to operate, I suppose, in those
	spaces.
	Let me know in the chat, let me know in the comments whether you think that's a conflict of interest
	or prevents him being the maverick that many people see him as.
	Let me know what you think.
	In addition to that, there are Elon Musk's views around technological utopianism and transhumanism, e.g.
	Elon Musk said on Wednesday that he expects a brain chip developed by his health tech company Neuralink to begin human trials in the next six months.
	In addition to forecasting clinical trials, Musk said he plans to get one of the chips himself.
	This, as the company is under federal investigation after it was reported around 1,500 animals died in the last four years during Now, of course, many people say that Neuralink and much of this technology is used to help people that are paralyzed or blind, ultimately impeded in some way.
	Whether or not you think it's a good thing or whether you're concerned about the sort of cyborg dimension being so rapidly approached, let me tell you there's an unusual ally for Elon Musk in this world.
	It's our old friend, Klaus Schwab.
	Can you imagine that in ten years when we are sitting here we have an implant in our brains and I can immediately feel because you all will have implants.
	You'll have them and you'll be happy.
	And we measure your brain waves.
	What you're doing is your brain waves.
	You will have implants and you'll be happy.
	And I can immediately tell you how the people react, or I can feel how the people react to your answers.
	Is it imaginable?
	So while Elon Musk is a radical opponent of certain Democratic National Party interests, elsewhere his interests seem to be in alignment with globalist goals like the one just cited there.
	That doesn't Let me know what you think in the comments, let me know what you think in the chat.
	person, it just shows that within that space there is alignment financially and
	ideologically in ways that might be surprising and these are certainly the
	things we would love to discuss with Elon Musk. Is Elon Musk a radical maverick
	or is he part of the establishment? Possibly he is both.
	Perhaps it's necessary to be both to operate in the spheres he operates
	in. Let me know what you think in the comments, let me know what you think in
	the chat, see you in a moment. Hey have you noticed that big tech companies are
	now masquerading as privacy companies.
	Just fix your privacy settings, turn off app tracking and you're all good.
	Are we supposed to suddenly believe that the big bad tech wolf has now turned into a sweet grandma?
	Oh no, I wouldn't try.
	Big Tech feeds on your information.
	They can't stop themselves looking at what you do online.
	Oh, you dirty... When you use the ExpressVPN app on your computer or phone, Hide your IP address so websites can't use it to find out your real location or track what you do online.
	It takes just one click.
	How hard is that?
	Just one click to protect up to five devices.
	Visit expressvpn.com forward slash brand to get an extra three months on a one-year package.
	That's expressvpn.com forward slash brand.
	That is how I keep the big bad tech wolf from my door, you saucy bastard.
	I'm gonna put one of those on my phone right now.
	I think it makes us look good if you do it using our codes, you know, it'll be good for us.
	So, yeah, thanks.
	I'm doing my VPN promotion.
	You do it if you can.
	I don't know, I look brown there.
	Very brown.
	Very brown, very brown.
	But let's not spend all our time talking about our brown.
	No, no, more about the colours.
	But what shade was it?
	Was it beige?
	Was it caramel?
	Listen, we're talking about the nature of propaganda and the nature of truth and I suppose that leads us to real investigative journalism and as sure as day follows night.
	You can't mention investigative journalism without perhaps uttering the names that rhyme with baby and maybe.
	Yes, it's Matt Taby.
	Matt, thanks for joining us.
	It's so lovely to see you.
	Thanks for having me on, Russell.
	We're angry with you.
	We're angry and we're jealous that you've been making all these revelations and you've been carrying on.
	Can you tell me firstly how it unfolded, your relationship with Elon Musk and how he told you that he wanted you to release these files?
	Well, that part of it's complicated because I agreed from the start to a general attribution, which is sources at Twitter.
	So the kind of the story of how I got the story, I gotta just leave it at that.
	But I can tell you about interactions with Elon Musk.
	You know, he's, it's funny, I've had a lot of, I've probably done Tens of thousands of interviews.
	I mean thousands, at least, of interviews in my life.
	And there's always this uncomfortable moment when you ask to turn on the tape recorder or the recorder because the person's always afraid that you're gonna, you know, catch them.
	This is the first time that I looked in somebody's eyes and I could tell they legitimately just did not give a fuck at all.
	Whether or not I was recording, like what I was gonna write.
	And I was explicitly told I could write anything I wanted, and we haven't seen anything.
	or run into anything that suggests otherwise.
	So.
	He's a pretty unique individual with obviously like all comparable outlets spent a lot of time
	considering Elon Musk contemplating his unique cultural space.
	The fact that he's part Donald Trump, part Willy Wonka, part Richard Branson, part Steve Jobs, part Disruptor.
	And I know that part of the, oh gosh, I'm gonna gratify them by using the word backlash,
	but you have, subsequent to making these revelations, you've been accused of being something of a kind of,
	I don't know, left-wing apostate.
	What, like— The idea is that Elon Musk is the sort of representative of a new sort of right-wing type of rhetoric and political perspective, and that you haven't made any revelations about a sort of shadow banning of left-wing figures.
	Why is that, Matt?
	Because we haven't seen it yet.
	We're looking for it.
	And I think one of the misperceptions that people have is that we're sitting in front of a terminal that has global access to everything.
	And if that were the case, we'd be searching for all kinds of names.
	But the data sets that we have, we've looked for Evidence in the other direction of, let's just say, requests from the Trump White House to get this person or that person banned.
	I was told that by human sources, so I felt obligated to put that in one of the threads.
	But we're not seeing that in the documents, so I can't write about it.
	And I think everybody would say the same thing.
	Which is, like, I don't care.
	Like, if it's interesting, I'll put it out there.
	But what we're seeing so far in these documents is not suggesting a whole lot of that.
	Let's put it that way.
	The most interesting revelations, or the most scintillating at least, appear to be the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story, Twitter having a secret blacklist, and the removal of Donald Trump and trying to create a unique case for the removal of a political figure.
	But you believe that the most important thing is the relationship between law enforcement, government, and social media.
	Is that right, Matt?
	Yeah, and that was the thing that I was really most interested in headed into this project was, I think a lot of people have questions.
	How involved is the government in monitoring and censoring the speech of ordinary people?
	What we've seen so far already, and we have definite conclusive proof of, is that there are lots and lots of reports where we see Twitter executives saying things like, DHS flag this, the FBI flag this.
	And then there's a whole thread where they decide what to do about it.
	Do we remove it?
	Do we put a label on it?
	So there's tons of that stuff where they're clearly getting communications from the FBI.
	We also know that they have meetings.
	Not just with the FBI and the DHS, but also a surprise was the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
	I hadn't heard that before.
	That was a new one.
	And then we're learning a lot about The kind of scraping of raw intelligence and fire hosing it to the government, all kinds of government agencies on the back end.
	So the government is harvesting tons of information from these companies and then turning around and spitting it back to companies like Twitter in the form of requests for, you know, maybe bannings, maybe shadow bans, maybe deletions or labels and that sort of thing.
	It's fascinating.
	It is fascinating because I suppose back in the utopian early days of online spaces, I
	think what all of us understood is that a new territory had emerged and like any territory
	it could become democratised, it could become a tool of connection, a revolutionary tool,
	something that would finally usurp the monopolised media spaces and their ongoing support of
	an elitist agenda for want of a better phrase. But what has happened is that expertly the
	social media spaces themselves have been corporatised and corralled and what you have demonstrated
	through these revelations, through your revelations, is just examples of that in practice, that
	these spaces are no longer free spaces, they are managed and controlled spaces, they are
	not organic and the idea that social media could be used to create insurrections, even
	if they are ideological insurrections rather than actual social revolutions, is being quite
	strongly prohibited.
	I think the thing that we were shocked by was the degree of idiosyncratic control over
	the visibility of every single user account, hashtag, they have a whole...
	universe of stuff that they can do to any single account.
	They can dial it all the way down to you cannot be searched.
	And then they, from there, there are like countless gradations of things that they can do all the way up to your account
	will not trend.
	Only people who follow you can see you.
	Even people who follow you won't see you unless they search.
	Like there's a whole list of stuff.
	So they have absolute control over the visibility of basically everything.
	And we haven't learned a lot about amplification of accounts yet because that appears
	to be another side of the company.
	But in terms of cutting it down, dialing it down, we're learning a lot about that.
	So presumably, much of the angst about Elon Musk's acquisition
	was that he was visibly and palpably not a compliant figure like Zuckerberg or other oligarchs
	It isn't on board ideologically with the project.
	We know that Zuckerberg wrote to Fauci and they're just sort of like, how can I be of any assistance that way?
	So if this is happening at Twitter, obviously the assumption is that similar programs are operating throughout the social media world.
	and another space that we are sort of taught to regard as neutral.
	It is in fact a highly managed space that's curated and potentially, as you say, amplified when necessary.
	We would assume it's true at Facebook, we'd assume it's true elsewhere.
	Yeah, and we've seen evidence of the conversations within Twitter
	about what they do at other platforms.
	So you're right about that.
	I think it's a safe assumption that every single one of the major platforms has basically the same arrangement with the government.
	We can't say definitely exactly how it works yet, but I'm assuming, I think it's a safe supposition, that there's probably something similar to what's going on on Twitter at the other platforms as well.
	Twitter is a different animal than the other platforms.
	Like, for instance, one of the things we were told is that you can't get sort of a viral outbreak of
	Political activity as quickly say on YouTube because people have to physically sit down and watch the video
	On Twitter it can happen in in seconds in microseconds Which is one of the reasons why they pay such close
	attention to every single thing that happens on the platform
	What will Elon Musk's actual ability to?
	To deny this kind of access to those sorts of agencies be and
	And this is speculative, and I certainly wouldn't expect you to put your relationship in jeopardy, but how distinct... So firstly, how much is Elon Musk likely to oppose the previous regime's relationship?
	And how different is Elon Musk's agenda likely to be given that many of his economic relationships are going to be sort of comparable?
	You know, we don't know that yet.
	And he explicitly, again, he told me we're not just interested in looking at bad stuff from the past.
	If there's bad stuff in the future, we want you to look at that too.
	So as we learn about all these things, we can look at it.
	But I will say, As a journalist, I think all of us, we all feel the same way, which is that we don't know how long this opportunity to look at this material is going to exist.
	And so I feel like we have a responsibility to try to dive into it as quickly as we can and as comprehensibly as we can before something happens.
	Let's say there's a federal investigation or congressional investigation and the whole thing gets shut down.
	We feel like we've got to look at that first.
	And there are other questions, obviously, about what's going on at Twitter now.
	If people have questions about Elon Musk, I mean, those are things that we can try to answer.
	But I feel like right now, the priority is the documents that are in front of us.
	Yeah, I completely appreciate that.
	And they seem to be significant revelations.
	You're only being attacked then, would you say, from the sort of establishment, the liberal establishment?
	That's the only place their attacks are coming from.
	There are no sort of folks on the right saying, oh, this is unconscionable.
	Are all your attacks coming from that space?
	I don't know where they're all coming from.
	I mean, it's been pretty weird.
	I've gotten threats and, you know, there's been harassment and all that stuff, but that comes with the territory.
	I'm not going to complain about it.
	But certainly the press backlash has been all I mean, it's been remarkable to see how they're all using the same language and everything.
	It's almost like they got a memo from somewhere, which is incredible.
	I don't know how they think this isn't a story to see.
	screenshots of you know where it says the FBI has asked you to look at this and this and this
	um that's not a story I I don't know any journalist who would look at that and not think that a real
	journalist would look at that and not think well that's cool that's interesting we gotta
	we gotta learn more about that. Yeah because I like Mehdi Hussain.
	I've known him for a little while and he sort of was one of the most vociferously condemnatory saying like, oh, you're doing the bidding of a billionaire.
	But I figured maybe he's on MSNBC and stuff.
	I mean, it's such a it's so unfortunate that the very type of journalistic integrity that seems more vital now than ever seems to be In total decline, that people are, it seems, absolutely willing to uncritically absorb information and, as you say, reproduce almost a template of criticism, in the case of this story at least.
	Yeah, and again, I don't know what journalist wouldn't be totally turned on by the opportunity to look through these kinds of documents.
	I mean, for years, everybody who's used Twitter has had these questions like, do they do shadow banning?
	Or is my follower count being suppressed?
	Do they actually have that?
	What can they look at?
	When they look at my account.
	And so when you see something like a screenshot of an account that has a big thing on it that says Trends Blacklist, it's incredible.
	I mean, what journalist wouldn't be interested in that?
	I find that just absolutely amazing.
	And this idea that, oh, because, you know, a source is whatever, we can't be interested in the documents.
	That's never the case.
	Look at, for instance, WikiLeaks.
	You're talking about stuff that was stolen.
	We're not supposed to care about that.
	We're supposed to care about what's true, and it's our job to figure out whether these documents are real or not, and understand what's happening in it.
	But the provenance of it isn't supposed to be really that much of a factor.
	Obviously, Elon Musk is a part of this story, and we've got to address it at some point.
	But much more important is the stuff that we're looking at.
	Yeah, in particular, I suppose, the idea that it's ongoing and that while there is this sense that we live in a time of great censorship, where powerful interests are able to absolutely manipulate narratives and remain unaccountable, it seems that, yeah, I feel like you're totally right.
	And in this instance, I suppose, like, you know, I've, you know, I think I've mentioned it to you and I've certainly mentioned it on the show enough, God knows, but like, you know, I had a brief conversation with Elon Musk once and I thought, He's sort of operating in a trans-moral space anyway.
	He's almost so intelligent and curious that I felt like, you know, that what he's doing here is likely legitimate, even if there is some entrepreneurial flair being shown in sort of bringing Twitter into the forefront in a kind of an interesting and elegant piece of rebranding.
	He was pretty curious, he thought he might get killed as well.
	That was pretty interesting.
	Yeah, I had a similar reaction to meeting him.
	I'm usually pretty good at reading people.
	I had a really tough time reading him.
	Are we still on the air?
	I'm listening.
	I'm listening.
	Okay.
	And, um, Yeah, I mean, I think some of the things that he did that were suggestions, like, I was very skeptical initially of the idea of putting all this out on Twitter first.
	And, you know, I'm a long form reporter, I like to explain everything, you know, and all that.
	But there, there's a kind of brilliance in using Twitter to flay Twitter.
	And it's kind of also a burn on the regular media who tightly controlled Twitter for so long.
	There's a little bit of genius in that that I didn't recognize at first.
	He's an interesting person and difficult to categorize, but I think that's a long term job
	rather than trying to do the spade work of digging into these docs and figuring out what they mean.
	Absolutely, I think you're right, because the revelations are in themselves,
	so weighty that to add to that, what is the...
	Presumed teleology or intention of Elon Musk who is a fascinating figure and anyone that powerful and that wealthy who happens to be pretty idiosyncratic also and isn't just towing the line is it's difficult not to reflect on what his agenda might be and where this might be going because I know he's Deeply into sort of off planetary solutions and transhumanism.
	He's got a lot of interesting sort of like ideas But thank you Matt.
	That's really helpful, but we were talking earlier about the Ukraine war I suppose in light of David Letterman talking to Zelensky and just their presentation of this product is pretty sanitary or hagiographic even because I What I feel is that with the way that Putin is reported on continually is that sort of a malodorous and sick filthy old Parkinson ridden self-defecating filth bag.
	It feels like there's an inability to think critically in the nuanced way about a complex situation.
	When Jeffrey Sachs came on the show he gave us a sort of a rundown on events between NATO and Russia from the 90s.
	So you know he just gave us a sort of a Whistle-stop tour between, well, they said NATO wouldn't impinge, NATO impinged.
	They said they wouldn't meddle in elections, they meddled in elections.
	And all the way through to sort of military-industrial complex stuff.
	Do you think we're at a point, Matt, where all news is propaganda, or at least the majority of mainstream news is propaganda?
	I think we're pretty close to that.
	I mean, I know for a fact that there are certain stories out there that would not have a home in traditional corporate media.
	And that is new, right?
	Once upon a time, A news organization was most interested in whether or not they had a big story.
	They didn't think about other considerations.
	Very rarely you would see something like the New York Times reaching out to the CIA or having conversations with them about whether or not they should print something.
	But now I think that's routine across the entire business.
	I think maybe not the contact, but there's a presumption that we only print things that we think are going to help whatever the cause is.
	And so there's, you know, you combine that with the social media censorship and manipulation, which is just so sophisticated.
	Now, I don't know how you would cover something like the Ukraine war.
	You know, and have an impact, right?
	Because you'd be drowned out if you had a counter-narrative fact by so much other stuff.
	It would be difficult to report on.
	I mean, we're looking at the way that they're, like, suppressing or deciding whether or not to suppress hashtags that involve this war.
	We just started doing that.
	And so, yeah, it's kind of an artificial landscape.
	Have they?
	Have you seen the repression of hashtags relating to this war?
	Yeah, I have.
	I've seen them also decide not to do it.
	There was one One case where there was like a hashtag, I stand with Putin, where I was very surprised to see that they discussed it, but then they ended up leaving it up because they couldn't find any coordinated inauthentic activity behind it.
	But there's other stuff that they took down and there's other things that are interesting.
	But we're only just starting to look in that direction.
	I think sometimes it was arbitrary and just as a result of people's sort of personal political alliances.
	The reason that it sort of, broadly speaking, has been favourable to the establishment liberal class was just because that's the general affiliation of the people that were on the team.
	Yeah, that's one of the things that's amazing about this, the stuff that we've already put out even is you can see in these threads, somebody will say, oh, this got escalated by whatever the ops team, what do you think?
	And then like two minutes later, you'll get a decision from some very senior executive who will say, nah, you know, that's fine.
	Because The executive clearly either thinks it's true based on whatever or did a Google search and found an NPR article that they liked.
	I mean, it's that unsophisticated on that level.
	It's like they'll get a request about something and then they'll do like a two-second Google search and that will be the basis for whether or not they censor it.
	It's just really weird.
	Yeah, I suppose that's why the Hunter Biden laptop story is so significant, because there was obviously an assumption that that would have a negative impact on the election, so they repressed it, and now 18 months later, mainstream media in our country, like the BBC, it's just, oh yeah, that was true, that got repressed.
	And then what do you think about, sort of, I suppose in the realm of celebrity, Kanye West was sort of like, he was banned before, now he's banned again.
	It seems like there's, you know, I guess there has to be a line around hate speech or racism in whatever form, so I guess that's, in a way, that's relatively uniform.
	But then the figures like James Woods or whatever, who seem like they're just like old-school conservatives, like they're not like even that Particularly political.
	They're just like your uncle, who's a bit different from you.
	Right.
	The ubiquity of James Woods is kind of hilarious.
	You would think he was the most important person on earth.
	I mean, he's kind of like the spiritual opposite of Susan Sarandon.
	Like, he's responsible for everything.
	He keeps popping up in these discussions.
	They keep having long discussions about what to do with him.
	And we found this amazing one where they're like, well, He's not guilty this time, but we're going to hit him hard next vio.
	Which proves that the institution has muscle memory, right?
	It isn't just looking individually at each case, it's remembering.
	And that's one of the things that happened with Trump too.
	Yeah, I guess that's another way of saying there is a bias and a clear bias.
	I wonder at times, Matt, when we have these conversations, if the sort of culture war more broadly keeps us kind of throbbing in a space that's relatively convenient for Power that transcends those kind of bounds.
	You know, when you consider like the judicial structures that prevent corporations, profits being impeded in foreign countries.
	When you consider the sort of the advancing power of unelected bodies like the WEF and the sort of established power of groups like the IMF.
	When we're sort of fretting about James Woods, his political perspectives, perhaps we have, you know, somewhat taken our eye off the ball.
	Yeah, I think that's a big part of this whole story, which is you can kind of maybe justify there being some kind of involvement in suppressing this or that.
	I guess there's an argument for that, but they're doing it at a level that's so micro and so And so ridiculously thorough that it can't possibly be anything but a dystopian project.
	I mean, they want to absolutely control or at least have some impact on basically every communication that happens on their platform, which is Which seems crazy to me, but I don't know about you, but that seems more in the realm of Orwell to me.
	Yeah, I suppose so, because I think that none of us, I don't mean none of us, obviously some of us do, but we're pretty anti all forms of racism and obviously anti-Semitism, but I feel that elsewhere in social media, literal far-right groups, because of convenient affiliations even within the current conflict, are sort of promoted, celebrated, supported, given medals at Disneyland.
	You know, there's an unwillingness to kind of allow yourself to fully inhabit the complexity of the world we find ourselves in.
	Just the continual nomination of plain villains and overt baddies and a kind of reductionism that can't lead to solutions because it doesn't take in anything like the necessary scale of the truth.
	Yeah, you have to have gradations of things in order to understand the world and they're not really allowing that to happen.
	So, um, in any case, Russell, I apologize.
	I've got, I've got a, I just got pinged about something.
	I've got to go.
	Um, but this has been great, great to talk to you and thank, thanks so much.
	I hope it's not an execution order and we appreciate you coming on Matt, but particularly at the last minute, it's lovely to chat to you and we'll see you soon.
	Thanks so much.
	Thanks, you both.
	All right, take care.
	Bye-bye, mate.
	Take care.
	Nice hat work from Matt Taibbi there, as well, to tip your hat.
	So cool.
	He's a lovely person.
	OK, listen, we're going to wrap up our show on Rumble today, but let me back ammo that stuff for Matt Taibbi.
	Come back to that, if you wouldn't mind.
	I'm not a teleprompter.
	Thanks.
	Matt wrote the book, Why Me?
	Today's media makes us despise one another.
	You can subscribe to Matt Substack on TK News and follow Matt on Twitter.
	If you're not doing that already.
	On the show tomorrow is Silky Carlo.
	She's going to be talking to us more about surveillance, entrenchment surveillance.
	Glenn Greenwald, the OG of investigative journalism, is coming on the show.
	He's also a sort of a fascist.
	He's a fascist.
	We've got a fascist coming.
	What are we going to call him?
	Rumble Pundit?
	Rumble Anchor?
	A member of the Rumble family?
	I'm going to work on the language around that.
	The new show looks good.
	Looks really cool.
	Glenn's new show.
	Does it?
	Have you watched it?
	Watch some stuff this morning.
	I've got to watch some stuff.
	It'll come up in the course of my investigations obviously.
	Steve-O's coming on as well on Thursday, the great Steve-O, a man who pursues valour in outrageous places through outrageous acts and also Tim Robbins is coming on the show.
	We're going to talk to him about the pandemic and probably liberalisms and the limitations of that sort of philosophy and perhaps the disingenuity.
	At its heart.
	That though, you can see first by joining us at 8am ET, 5am PT and 1pm GMT because we're recording the interview first on Locals.
	If you want to join us on Locals, that's our membership community, StayFreeAF, then there's a link in the description.
	You can join us now.
	Otherwise, we will see you in a couple of minutes over on Locals to answer your questions.
	So think about questions from today's show or about anything.
	Otherwise, stay free.
	See you tomorrow.
	Thanks for joining us.

▲