PsyOps examines how movements like January 6th supporters, Canada’s Trucker Convoy, and anti-vaxxers dismiss opposing evidence as "psyops"—a tactic echoing Orwell’s doublethink and Trump’s cult-like framing. David Bloomberg critiques inconsistencies in false flag claims (e.g., unchanging actor hairstyles) while linking mass shootings to gun control resistance. The episode reveals how conspiracy theories weaponize deception, reshaping reality to avoid cognitive dissonance, with Twitter as the battleground for this ideological war. [Automatically generated summary]
The podcast would have a better name if they weren't all taken.
I'm Spencer, your host, and I'm back again today with David Bloomberg.
How you doing, David?
Good.
How are you?
Very good.
Are you?
Well, maybe I'm just showing you that I am so that I'll get the response I need from you.
Or maybe I was just telling you that because whenever somebody says, how are you?
Everyone always responds without thinking.
Or do they?
Well, maybe they respond that way just so that they get the response they're looking for because if they didn't give that response, they would stand out and they don't want to stand out.
We'll never know.
But we will talk about what we're circling here, which is today's topic, which is about psyops.
Psyops.
Those are those big giants with one eye, right?
Those are cyclops.
Oh, you're not prepared for this episode, are you?
No, I'm going to have to change all my notes now.
That's okay.
That's okay.
I prepared notes.
We're good.
Okay.
So it's not Cyclops from Greek legend.
It's psyops.
Psyops is a shortened form of the phrase psychological operations.
This has been as a phrase that's become more and more commonplace in our everyday speech.
Oddly, the fact that it is more and more common in our everyday speech is a sign that conspiracism is kind of creeping into a lot of places that didn't make it before.
That's the only way I can call it.
So I need to describe this, how it looks in my brain, I think.
So I'll just kind of take the lead here.
So very early on in our collaboration, David, we did a few other episodes.
We did one on deception.
Well, actually, we did one on dishonesty.
And then we did one on meta thinking.
So granted that all meta-thinking is like something like dishonesty.
And that's kind of why I put, you know, shortly close together with you, those same set of episodes.
When you take a person who's meta-thinking, what you have is a person that is in their mind, thinks they know what the other person will react with when they do a certain thing.
It's a form of like goal-oriented decision-making.
So you have a goal that you want and you're acting in an inauthentic way to try to get to achieve your goal that you need the other person to make a certain decision in order to achieve your goal.
And that's really what meta-thinking is in a very brief recap.
So when you take this and you expand it past a single person who's making decisions and attempting to affect a single other person, you expand it to like an organization, a large organization that's trying to affect perhaps single individuals or perhaps an entire other organization to make a certain move.
This is where we get psyops, psychological operations.
The idea here is that you're attempting to affect their psychology.
You're attempting to affect their decisions and their decision-making process so as you get the outcome that you're looking for.
Okay.
So could this be as simple as, for example?
Sure.
I worked in state government.
Yeah.
And not that I would have ever done this, of course, but sometimes politicians want, they have to write something up.
They have to write up a summary of something that has happened or something that will happen or whatever.
And there are often ways you can do it.
There are often two or more sides to any topic, but depending on how you write something up, you can write it up to sound one way or another way.
And if you write it to sound one way, which sounds more favorable towards the way you want to do it, is that a psyop?
Well, only in the sense that all marketing campaigns are also potentially psyops.
Nike attempting to put a commercial to get you to buy more shoes of their brand specifically, not just shoes in general.
Well, I guess if you're really stretching this, but it's more like you're trying to get people to make the opposite decision.
Oftentimes, it's more like you're trying to get people to make the opposite decision of the one they would ordinarily make.
So a salesperson who is able to get someone to buy shoes when they weren't looking to buy shoes at all, you know, that's sort of like psyop behavior.
But usually this is viewed through the conspiracist lens.
Usually when it comes up in conversation, it's viewed through a conspiracist lens.
It's viewed through the idea that you're trying to get someone to hate a certain thing, to hate a politician or to hate a political movement or something like that.
And so something is being done deliberately to put in place to trick you into hating it or conversely trick you into liking a certain thing when you ordinarily wouldn't have done so.
So maybe we should get right into some of the examples and this will make a lot more sense.
Okay.
So I came up with three examples and this is a very short list of things that people have actually claimed are psyops.
Now, these are real events that occurred in the world, first of all.
And there are also things that people have said were psyops.
So the first on the top of the list is that January 6th, of course, we all know was an event named for a date on which it occurred in which people were surrounding the Capitol building and in some views were just peacefully protesting.
And in other views, they were an angry mob that was committing violence.
No, they were just tourists.
Right.
So the idea that this has two separate narratives is part of the heart of this beast.
So whenever anyone who believes that the crowd outside the Capitol on January 6th was peacefully protesting is confronted with evidence that there was violence occurring and that windows were being broken so that the people could get inside,
they have what's kind of what could be called a catch-all explanation for why they're seeing that, which is they get to say that that violence, those few incidents of violence, those isolated incidents of violence are actually either Antifa or the FBI, who are just trying to make it look like it was an insurrection when really it was a peaceful protest.
And that the insurrection definitely never happened and that no one intended to change anything or unduly affect anything.
They just wanted to show their support for their cause.
That's what people really say.
And I'm sure that you have experienced people saying that as well.
Yeah.
That idea that you can form that, that's at the nexus point in your mind of cognitive dissonance.
And not your mind, David.
I mean, in the mind of a person who comes up with that, that's cognitive dissonance.
And that's a thing that eases cognitive dissonance.
That's cognitive dissonance is like a stress inside your mind when the thing you believe is confronted with a thing that refutes that belief.
And then you get this uneasy feeling like, oh, maybe nothing that I think is true is really true.
This narrative will ease that, will make it okay to continue believing the thing you believe.
Oh, you can dismiss all those.
You can put them in a box and label it bad stuff and put that box on a shelf and say, well, everything is still fine with the world.
All the people I am allied with are still good people.
And we're all looking to get the right thing done.
And anyone who was doing the wrong thing is Antifa or the FBI.
So first thoughts.
Yeah, I'm sure you're going to get to this, but this is a good place, I think, to link.
PSYOPs are often associated with conspiracies or claims of conspiracies, I should say.
And so the point, of course, of any good conspiracy claim is that it can't ever really be falsified because of things like claims of psyops and false flag operations and things like that.
Because if you point to evidence against the claim, well, then obviously that evidence, that so-called evidence, is a psyop.
And specifically, the reason I'm bringing it up for this example is that this is perfect in this regard.
It doesn't matter that it's clear to anybody with half a brain that these were Trumpers storming the Capitol.
But immediately, like in real time, I saw it happening on social media.
Their allies started spreading the lie that they saw Antifa dressed up in MAGA gear and equipping themselves with Trump and Confederate and Jesus flags and things like that.
And then, you know, fast forward a little bit, there were videos, arrests of people who were clearly Trumpers, not Antifa.
And they were on video doing the things that they, you know, were actually doing.
And of course, the woman who was unfortunately shot dead, she was not Antifa, but there she was breaking through a window.
Yeah.
Then the stories had to change.
And so then it became, well, the Antifa people or the FBI, like you said, or whoever, had riled up the otherwise peaceful crowd and incited them to riot.
But then they stepped back so they wouldn't themselves get caught.
Well, okay, where's the evidence of that?
Well, there isn't, but that's because they were so good at it.
Oh, yeah, they're so good.
They're so organized on every level, except for the levels that we actually see them doing anything at which point they're incredibly disorganized.
Right.
The idea that people were already saying, like on the day that it occurred, were already saying that Antifa was dressing up as mega people to discredit people tells me that either the people who were making that claim were prepared to create this psyop situation to tell this untruth so that they could already plant the seed for this,
or that they're so already programmed to make this determination in this way, this, you know, flick this switch in their mind this way, that they can on the fly undo the observations that they're making in real time, which is incredible.
I think it's, yeah, I think it's the latter.
I think they are just the conspiracy believers.
That's just the way they think.
Like literally, anytime something happens, and as soon as it happens, I go to Twitter and I'm about to make a joke about like, oh, we'll see how long it takes for the conspiracists to say this.
About half the time they beat me.
Like they have already been on social media saying that as a belief of their own before I can even make a joke about how they're probably going to say it.
Yeah.
And the idea that it's the latter of those two options immediately brings to mind, I've mentioned it on this podcast before, but it's prominent in our world.
It's one of the great pieces of fiction of all time, in my opinion.
1984.
The idea of double think.
The direct quote from the book of George Orwell's 1984 is the party, in his case, the one political party that was running his world, the party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears.
It was their final most essential command.
So the idea that you could on the fly just begin rejecting the things that will break you from your unreality, it's remarkable.
It's just yeah, now the party is, I mean, there's two major parties and only one of them is supporting, you know, the guy who tried to overthrow.
Yeah.
So, and I'll just call it out.
You know, Trump is telling his supporters right now, ignore the evidence.
Ignore the evidence.
You know, I mean, he's been indicted multiple times for multiple different things, and he is telling people, ignore the evidence.
Don't believe that, believe me.
Right.
The Kansas City Star ran an editorial that said, basically, Republicans, please read the latest indictment.
See what it is he's being charged with.
See what it is.
See what the evidence is that's laid out.
See what the actual charges are.
And the thing is, even with that, most won't.
You know, from the first sets of indictments, a lot of even elected Republicans were like, no, I haven't read it yet, but I'm going to tell you that they're wrong.
And it's like, well, how can you say that without even looking at it?
And he's out there giving all his speeches.
He's got his supporters out there saying, oh, they're going after him for, you know, for free speech.
And it's like, literally in the indictment, it says he has the free speech to say it was fraught.
What he doesn't have is the right to do these criminal acts that are associated with that.
But they ignore that because they know that the supporters will ignore the evidence that is in front of them.
Yeah, there's so much there.
I mean, really, his campaign is one big psyop when you think about it.
Well, yeah.
Yeah.
In a lot of ways, it is.
And I've hinted at it when I did two episodes about cults with Stephen Mather.
And he was generous enough to give enough of his time that it was two episodes worth of material.
And I thank him again because both, in my opinion, were very good.
A lot of information.
And I hinted at a lot of things.
I didn't say it outright, but I hinted at a lot of points during both those episodes that individual generic things that were happening in the Trumpist world are things that you see in other cult behaviors all over the place.
There's a reason why we call it a cult.
It's not just because it's a thing that we don't like.
It's because it has an unreasonable control over the people who follow it.
They literally deny evidence right in front of them real time.
That's no one should have that much control.
Yeah.
You know, well-known cult expert, Stephen Hassan.
Yeah.
He wrote a book called The Cult of Trump.
Yeah.
Now, full disclosure, after just talking about how some people don't read things, I haven't read this yet.
I've read a lot of his other writings.
I've listened to his podcast.
I have not read this.
But my point, we were talking about it being a cult.
There's at least one book out there that's literally called that.
So in true Canadian fashion, after January 6th occurred, Canadians eventually got around the next year to having their own version of this event, which centered around a thing that was known informally as the Trucker Convoy.
Ah, yes.
The now infamous trucker convoy that turned into a, I think it was roughly three-week rally in downtown Ottawa, just down the street from the parliament buildings.
And a lot of things happened.
There was so, I mean, this was the Canadian version of a media storm.
It was probably more of a just a little poof compared to the American media storms.
But in Canada, this was on all the media all the time, the entire time it was happening.
And people did all kinds of things during this, especially at the very beginning.
When people first got there on the first like two days was when the worst stuff really was going on.
I suspect that, and this is a deep hope inside my chest that this happened this way, is that the people who were there sort of ran the baddies out of the protest.
I don't know for sure if that happened.
I don't have any evidence to suggest it.
I would like to think that Canadians wouldn't just let that stuff happen.
It's maybe a little too hopeful.
Some of them probably cheered it.
It's hard to say.
I think it's more likely that when the call it the main, the more organized people got there, they set their PR people up and were like, no, we can't have.
Now, you haven't described what it is, but I know, you know, go ahead and describe it.
Well, there were a couple of people seen holding and waving Confederate flags, which is, if it's a weird thing to see sometimes in the U.S., it's a super weird thing to see in Canada.
Yeah.
Like Canada, what's probably not known to people in the U.S. is that Canada works very hard to not just be little United States.
And there's a lot of little things that go into that.
And so when we see things that are just obvious adoptions of ideas from the United States that don't have any reference to any Canadian event, they feel really off in a way.
The Uncanny Valley effect takes, you know, full swing there.
And it's like, what are you, what are you doing?
You're such this confused mixture of history and metaphor.
And like nothing of what you're doing makes sense here.
Like go across the border.
It makes a lot more sense there.
It doesn't make any sense here.
We didn't have a civil war.
We didn't have a Confederate flag.
We didn't have Canada never had institutional slavery.
We have had other racism, just not institutional slavery.
We had other terrible things that we have to account for, just not that specific, terrible thing.
We're not better than other nations.
We're just different than other nations.
So aside from the Confederate flags, there were a couple of monuments that were, in my opinion, desecrated.
Some people pull back on that and say they weren't desecrated.
They were mistreated with some other descriptor.
In my opinion, that's where that line sits.
There was some people who, whether they peed on or they kicked at the grave of the unknown soldier, that's bad.
You don't do that.
Yeah.
And they put a bunch of the banners on the statue of Terry Fox.
That's bad.
You don't do that.
Terry Fox was not political.
He didn't have a political opinion.
He didn't age enough to get a political opinion.
And he fought cancer.
And so you don't get to claim him for your side.
And neither do I get to claim him for my side.
He's just inert.
He fought cancer and we all should fight cancer.
Like if there's one thing we should all be on the same side of, it's fighting cancer, right?
But you don't get to claim him for your side.
You don't get to rah-rah, put, you know, banners around him to show that, you know, it's so great.
That's not right.
And those things really happened.
But the people that I talk to in my everyday life who are cheering about what happened in the trucker convoy, they try to say that that was, I've heard people even say that that was Antifa.
Of course it was.
Because they are the catch-all PSYOP explainer for this.
Because in the same way that the Confederate flag gets adopted by people who want to establish racist ideas in Canada, Antifa gets adopted by those same people who want to explain it away.
We don't have Antifa.
We don't need it.
We don't, it's never been a thing here.
Nobody has Antifa to the level that people think people ascribe.
I mean, people act like Antifa is the damn Illuminati, you know, and I guess in some ways it is because that doesn't exist either.
But, you know, I mean, they, they put them on the same level as like some well-organized, you know, that they can do anything, you know, and it's just part of the same ridiculousness as always when, you know, there's also, you know, probably also part of the woke mob.
Yeah.
The idea that Antifa is as big as it appears in the minds of some people is intricately and there's no way to unwind it, I think, wrapped in this psyop concept because they are, as I said, the ultimate psyop explainer.
They're invisible.
In actuality, they were sort of there for a couple of events and then they just kind of disappeared because they weren't that organized.
They got on some message boards, saw that some fascist people were going to go to some rallies in around, I believe it was in Virginia, wasn't it?
Where the Tiki Torches were?
I don't know.
Where was that one, David?
I do not remember.
I'm sorry.
It's okay.
I'll edit this part out later if it doesn't make sense.
But they went to that one.
There was maybe a couple more around that time where there was some clashes about statues, I think was the thing that people were supposed to be enraged about at the time.
And then they just sort of disappeared.
But ever since, they've given people who want to explain away bad behavior of their supposed allies a name to do that with.
Yeah, along with George Soros, which is code for the Jews.
Right.
George Soros is also part of the PSYOP manufacturing machine.
Yes.
So a funny thing that occurs when some people talk about this convoy rally as it occurred in Ottawa and some of the terrible things that happened there was that some people actually claim that it was the RCMP in disguise who were doing the terrible things to make the protesters look bad.
And there's just in the same way that the FBI were in disguise to make the protesters look bad or to make the protesters to ramp up the crowd in January 6th implies that these agencies that are meant to prevent and work to prosecute crimes know so much about what's going to happen that they could be that prepared on the day that they could be in disguise,
believable as part of the crowd, all of that, have their pictures taken doing so, and then never be found as members of the FBI or the RCMP or anything afterward.
But then like just be that organized, just know that they would be there and that they could do this thing in this way.
And then somehow melt in the background and never having any evidence of it happen ever again.
And not only be that organized, but be that organized to know that in law enforcement bodies, which let's face it, are not typically very liberal, they could pick out the officers or agents who were liberal and therefore would willingly participate in this and hide it from the conservative ones who might leak the information.
Yeah.
Because none of it's been, you know, leaked with any evidence.
So clearly they had to partition according to belief all these different psyops and other conspiracy activities.
Yeah.
I think sometimes that people who come up with these or just believe them when they hear them, these ideas, tend to think of law enforcement agencies, especially as not only like hive mind organizations where everyone inside them universally believes everything that every other one of them believes, but almost more like a cult.
I mean, they go with what they know.
Well, you know, the way their own lives work.
Well, I've also heard them called like a, like used metaphorically as though they're gangs of thugs.
And I'm not here to stump for law enforcement agencies.
There's been plenty of thuggish behavior from law enforcement agencies in the past, not just on this continent either, in history.
It's a problem.
It's ongoing.
Which makes it even less likely that it would be this situation.
I mean, the whole Trump is a lot more likely to be.
They're much more likely to deal with it with violence.
Yes.
Walk forward with their clubs and their shields and drive you.
There were law enforcement personnel, either retired or off duty or whatever, in those who stormed the building on January 6th.
Look at it from that perspective.
And so, yeah, we're going far afield here, obviously, as we often do.
Yeah.
I should rename this podcast to Far Afield.
Yeah.
There you go.
Yeah.
But just the idea that it was a psyop by these organizations that also involve members of the organization that goes directly against what the evidence shows those members are usually, or at least often, like.
Yeah.
You know, but that's also the same thing.
You could turn that around and see, again, from Trump and his allies, you know, they're calling for literally, some of them are going so far as to call for the disbanding the Justice Department because it's obviously an organization just targeting Trump.
Yeah.
Right.
You know, and it's like removal of their opposition.
Yeah.
Well, but I mean, it's like, as someone said when Trump complained about the venue of the latest indictments being in Washington, D.C.
Well, if you don't want to be tried in Washington, D.C., don't commit your crimes in Washington, D.C. You know, if you don't want to be targeted by the Justice Department, don't commit a bunch of crimes.
And I know, I don't want to say, you know, there's no presumption of guilt, but come on, man.
We've been looking at this for years now.
Yeah.
So I really want to get to the third example of this because it's the most hilarious.
When I talk to people in my everyday life about things that occur in sort of flat earth speech, people just shake their heads.
I have only met in real life, not on the internet, but in person, one person who is a flat earther.
But most everyone else has never admitted to me, at least, that they have any thoughts on this that lean that way.
It's possible that I intimidate them into not speaking up.
For that, I am genuinely sorry.
I would want them to speak up because we should talk about it.
We really should.
I'm not going to mock you.
If you're listening to this and you'd like to have talked about it, it's seriously, I don't mock anyone, even the people online.
But this is his.
That's true.
You do have way more patience.
That's true.
But this is a real thing that I've seen people say about the flat earth movement.
There's people who have said that the entire flat earth movement is a giant psyop that is meant to discredit quote-unquote legitimate conspiracy thinkers.
And I almost want it to be true.
I mean, in some ways, it's more true than many things because if you and I had been having this discussion, I don't know, I lose track of time, 10, 15 years ago.
Yeah.
At that point, the majority of flat earth discussion, flat eartherism in general, was people mocking others.
Yeah.
It was a joke.
And then suddenly a bunch of people started believing it.
I mean, there was always a core that truly believed it, but I would say the majority was a joke.
And then people started believing it.
You know, and it's just like, what is going on here?
So at least, you know, that one has, you know, maybe more to it than other things because some of these people may have actually read some of the BS stuff and started to listen to it or something.
But there are other groups where they truly make these accusations too.
I have seen some anti-vaxxers say they'll, they'll see that another anti-vaxxer is too crazy even for them, which is hard to believe.
I know.
But and then they'll even accuse them of being false flags or plants to make them look crazy as if they aren't doing a fine job of that all by themselves.
Yeah.
You know, and it's, I mean, it does happen.
It's, you know, you can see it on Twitter.
Like, well, this person is, you know, I mean, of course, you know, vaccines do this, but this, what this person said is crazy.
And it's like, well, it's no more crazy than what you're saying.
Yeah, that's, that's too far.
That's the thing that's making the rest of us look bad.
So obviously it's, it's not real.
So I don't want to let this end without a recognition that psychological operations are a real thing that real military organizations and institutions have done in the past.
Probably the most famous or infamous of these that we've confirmed historically happened, mind you, not just accusations of them, baseless mostly.
The most well-known of these was performed by none other than the Nazis, who got a bunch of their own soldiers dressed up in Polish uniforms and they attacked.
They had those soldiers attack, I believe it was a German outpost or maybe it was a series of farms.
I can't exactly remember the details, but they were in Polish uniforms and they crossed the border into Germany from Poland and they committed some violence of some kind, left evidence that it was them who had done it or some survivors who saw the event and reported it in.
And they use this as a pretense for starting World War II, invading Poland.
So that is a real event that happened.
And this exact plan has been used by the conspiracist fringe to say that many, many other things have been false flag attacks.
This is a type of SIAP called very specifically a false flag attack.
The German soldiers were, they weren't really waving a flag, but they were essentially representing like they were under a different flag than Germany and performing inactions so that to cause angst between, in that case, between them and another nation.
It's possible that the CIA has been accused of doing false flag maneuvers to get two different nations to fight between each other.
It's in most cases unclear whether that really happened because more recently they were nations that were at their throats to begin with.
It could have easily just been malcontents in those nations, right?
Right.
And more recently, Russia has been accused of some false flag attacks, like the drone attack on the Kremlin.
Yeah.
And I don't know whatever came of it, but the initial thought was, well, that sure, sure seems like a false flag because there's no way those drones would get that close.
You know, there's just a long way from Ukraine to the Kremlin.
Yeah.
Really long way.
I'll work it out later how long it is, but it's not close.
Yeah.
And so, you know, some of, and that wasn't the only one, but things that he wanted to, you know, rile up the public, as if Putin can't rile up the public anyway.
But, you know, when you can control literally all the news and the courts and the armed forces and the police, you know, basically Trump's dream.
But right, but he does need to explain some of the things they can see with their eyes.
Right.
Still, like he doesn't have enough control to get them to just say that drone didn't occur.
It was never there.
You know, the presence of the drone still needs to be explained, which means he doesn't have complete and utter control over everything they believe.
Right.
Right.
Yeah.
Which is interesting.
But yeah.
Yeah.
So, you know, have false flag attacks occurred?
Yes.
But that doesn't mean that every single thing that happens is one.
You know, and so I mean, you can find those a lot in all the different shootings, the mass shootings, the school shootings, immediately.
You know, it's like I said, by the time I can get to social media, someone's already done what I was going to make a bad joke about them doing.
So whenever there's a school shooting, you can bet someone's out there claiming it was a false flag so they can ban the guns.
Yeah.
Because that's worked so well so far.
Yeah.
Right.
And I mean, to the point where Alex Jones lost a lawsuit and is supposed to pay a billion dollars, you know, for his repeated BS claims that the Sandy Hook shootings were a false flag.
Yeah.
And then the evidence that these people, evidence in big air quotes, that these people were gathering, you know, they'll like for a while they were pulling together photos of people who looked similar crying at different events and claiming they're crisis actors.
Or they would just use the same photo while claiming it was in a different place.
I actually know someone, I don't know them well, but I know them a little, who was unfortunately labeled as one of these so-called crisis actors because she was photographed while crying at one terrible situation and then brought up time and time again when others occurred.
And it was a very stressful situation for her.
I think she eventually did an interview about it, you know, in a major media outlet because of how bad it was.
But, you know, that's what they'll do.
They'll find any way to try to claim that.
Like, really, this conspiracy is going to be so vast and so smart, but as part of their psyop, they're going to use the same actors over and over again.
Yeah.
It doesn't even make sense.
But I mean, that's the same type of thinking that, hi, I run a YouTube channel and I'm going to tell you why I'm the only one who has discovered the truth that they are trying to hide from you without any critical thinking that if they really wanted to hide it, you wouldn't be hosting this little YouTube show.
Yeah.
The notion of having the same actor in multiple scenarios is attempting to counter one of the hardest things to counter about the false flag and that the actor narrative.
And that is that if they were actors, why don't we see them in anything else?
Like, yeah, a lot of actors in the world, the ones who aren't very good don't make it into television.
So what makes you think they would be any good at ad-libbing their grief well enough to convince you that they just went through something that traumatic?
So obviously they must be trained.
Well, where did they act before?
Where did what other things did they do?
And if they want to act so badly, what makes them agree to never act again once they hear in one of these scenarios?
If they're in Sandy Hook and they're so good at this that they could act this way, then why wouldn't they want to continue acting?
They've trained to get their acting to this level.
Why wouldn't they want to be in other can't be in TV or movies?
So maybe you got to be in what?
Other false flag scenarios.
And so this is a counter to a counter is what it is.
And yet they're still, they're so dumb that the person crying with the bright red hair, they let them keep their bright red hair, which stands out a mile away.
Yeah.
You know, so they don't have them change their hairstyle.
They don't have them dye it.
They don't have them put on a wig.
They don't have them put on a false mustache if they're a guy.
Nothing.
They just make them look exactly the same.
Right.
You know, and again, it's this whole contradictory things that don't make sense.
If you're running a psyop that is so good and so well planned, you're not going to screw up on something like that.
Yeah.
Now, I will say, if you're running a vast conspiracy, there will be screw-ups.
It's like, where was I?
I was listening to, I don't remember who I was listening to, but, you know, it's like they couldn't hide a president getting a blowjob from an intern.
Yeah.
And only a couple people knew about that.
And yet you think that the whole government is in a conspiracy to do all these other things and no one is going to mention it.
Yeah, because it would be in a bunch of people's, a bunch of people would get some level of gain from flipping on that in the same way that a bunch of people either got or imagined that they would get some level of gain by flipping on Clinton in that scenario.
Right.
And just to end this where it sits, none of them were Monica Lewinsky.
Yeah.
She didn't gain anything.
No.
She lost a bunch of time and dignity and privacy and everything else from the event.
She gained nothing from any of that.
Just leave the woman alone already.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So I think we should wrap this up here on Monica Lewinsky.
But you didn't think that was the way this is going to be.
I never know which exact direction it's going to go.
I never know.
But I have a little blurb here that I prepared as kind of a wrap-up of false flags at the very least.
Nearly every mass shooting in the U.S. in the past 15 to 20-ish years has been called a false flag attack.
In fact, not just the mass shootings.
9-11 itself was also called and is still called by many a false flag attack by the conspiracist fringe.
The reality is that the existence of so many mass shootings is a legitimate problem for the continuation of the belief that guns should be freely available to the extent they currently are in the U.S.
And being able to call that into question, being able to call into question the very reality of these shootings more easily allows gun enthusiasts to oppose gun control measures.
But this means that the very fact that some of them need to call these shootings psyops means that somewhere inside them, they know that these shootings are a political problem for them.
This gives it away.
This is creeping up on one of my favorite topics, the explicit paradox, David.
So before we get distracted with that, I'll finish this up.
These people prefer to have guns available.
Let's just call it what it is.
And they don't want to give them up.
Let's just.
Yeah.
No one disagrees with that.
Therefore, they direct their beliefs towards the ideas that would allow them to build a world in their minds that they prefer over the rubble of the objective reality that conspiracy beliefs have demolished in their minds.
And that's pretty much all I have to say about gun control at this time.
Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
So in wrapping up, where can we find you, David?
You're busy these days.
I'm surprised you even took the time for this, actually.
I'm glad you did all the same.
I will always do my best to make time for you.
I am, as usual, reachable on like almost every legitimate social media that's out there.
You're not going to find me on Truth Social, but I am on the text-based ones like Twitter and Blue Sky and Mastodon as David.Bloomberg.
I'm sorry, as David Bloomberg at David Bloomberg.
And see, I confuse myself sometimes.
And the video-based like TikTok and Instagram and YouTube as at David Bloomberg TV.
Now, Threads is the lone exception for text-based because they spun off of Instagram.
So I'm David Bloomberg TV there too.
Now, if people don't know who I am, you may wonder why they added TV there and what are you doing on TikTok.
And that is for mostly reality television related videos.
I also do a couple of podcasts.
They're based off of things I've been covering on reality TV.
And so that is the Why Blank Lost podcast for both Brig Brother and coming in September, once again, Survivor.
And that's on the Rob Has a Podcast Network.
Very different types of podcasting than you and I usually do.
Although there's been a few overlaps.
There's been content that definitely referenced.
There's not a lot of false flags or psyops happening in the Big Brother house.
There might be some psyops happening in the Big Brother house.
I mean, you know.
And there's certainly a lot of conspiracies in the Big Brother house, and most of them turn out not to be true.
Right.
So if anyone has any comments, questions, concerns, things they want to add, subtract, multiply, divide, anything you want to talk about related to this episode, you can send that email to truthunrestricted at gmail.com.
And I'm Spencer G. Watson on Twitter on threads.
I think I was forced to take something like Spencer Watson39 or something because I've never used Instagram and I'm late to the game and they just told me that's what I had to be.
So whatever.
But if you can find me there, I post all the episodes there and I also I try to talk more on threads now.
It's slowly ramping up, but I still do a lot of rhetoric on Twitter because to me, that's where the disinformation front line of this war is.