TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @realchasegeiser
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe the upcoming FBI video will show Epstein's body being removed from his cell, suggesting he is in witness protection. This could explain the absence of footage of his alleged suicide and the FBI's claim of new video evidence. It also sheds light on Kash and Bongino's confusing perspectives on Epstein since joining the FBI, as well as the delays in releasing related files. Be sure to bookmark this post.
@realchasegeiser - Chase Geiser
I have reason to believe that the new Epstein video about to be released by the FBI is 'Epstein's' body being removed from his cell. It seems Kash and Bongino were made aware that Jeffrey Epstein is in witness protection. This explains why the video of him killing himself doesn't exist, and why the FBI is now claiming new video will be released. This explains why Kash and Bongino have had such a troubling and perplexing take on Epstein since taking their positions at the FBI. This explains why it's taking so long to release the files. Bookmark this post.
@realchasegeiser - Chase Geiser
Here’s a video of my neighbor, who is a close friend, telling the cops I work for InfoWars after I was swatted today. You can hear the cop respond, “NICE!” https://t.co/ra6izhqVvb
reSee.it AI Summary
I was swatted again just before 2 AM, with 6 to 8 police officers using a PA system to call me out by name. I was handcuffed in the street, likely at gunpoint, though I couldn't see due to the bright light. They took me inside to wake my wife and inform us that someone had called, pretending to be me and making threats against my family. This was the second time in 12 hours, and I shared a video of the incident. Long live InfoWars.
@realchasegeiser - Chase Geiser
I was just swatted again moments ago, just before 2AM. 6 to 8 police officers used a PA system to call me by name and order me to walk out of my house. I was handcuffed in the middle of the street, presumably at gunpoint though I couldn’t tell because of the light being shined on my face. I was then led into the house where my wife was woken up and we were informed that they received a call from someone pretending to be me and threatening to kill my family.
@realchasegeiser - Chase Geiser
Swatted for a second time in 12 hours. Here’s the video. Long live InfoWars. https://t.co/H0nIt8NjcC
Video Transcript AI Summary
Chase, are you in there? Respond, or come out with your hands raised. Okay, turn away from me.
(Sound of footsteps)
Keep moving. Keep moving. Stop. Face me.
That's it.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Chase, are you inside? Can you acknowledge? Or, Chase, can you step out with your hands up? No. My back to you.
Sheriff's County Sheriff's walking. Walking. Keep Keep walking. Stop. Turn around.
Stop. That's it.
@realchasegeiser - Chase Geiser
@realchasegeiser - Chase Geiser
We can argue all day about barbed wire, but what the InfoWars crew and I discovered today proves it’s going to take much more to stop the border invasion. https://t.co/K5WqEiSDrs
Video Transcript AI Summary
Reporting from Eagle Pass, Texas, the speaker shows the border wall separating the US and Mexico. They mention that the design allows birds to pass through but not people. While the wall appears intact, they point out that gates are often left open without guards. They discover various supplies, including medicine, toothbrushes, and jeans, seemingly dropped by individuals crossing the border. The speaker concludes that the wall is not sufficient to prevent people from entering the US. They suggest that the focus on Eagle Pass is a distraction used for political purposes, with both Republicans and Democrats exaggerating their positions on border security. The speaker plans to continue identifying security issues along the border.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This is Chase Geiser reporting for InfoWars from Eagle Pass, Texas. We are here at the border. Mexico is right behind me on the other side of the Rio Grande, and you can see here that this is the border wall. Now my understanding is the reason the wall is designed this way is so things like birds can get through without people getting through. Now we drove all along this wall, and you can see that it extends for miles that direction, and fairly consistently the wall seems to be intact.
However, it is not uncommon for us to pass by a gate that is just left wide open with nobody guarding it, with no police officers inside. Now, obviously, there's law enforcement all over the area, there are different Border Patrol agents and different entities of that nature. But it does seem ultimately fairly unguarded. Now as we keep walking, the interesting thing is we were able to pull off the side of the road here. Over the wall, almost as if somebody had thrown this stuff over, though you see that they didn't have to throw it over in a minute, we can see all sorts of supplies like to there's looks like medicine or anti histamines, toothbrushes, toothpaste, denim jeans here turned inside out, combs, other toiletries here.
This is not stuff that was just littered out of a vehicle. The road is several yards that way, many, many yards that way. This is stuff that was dropped here, apparently, by someone or some group of people who came across the border, I mean, there's a bra there, there's a phone case, socks. If you go over here, there's shoes it's laying here, backpack. I haven't looked inside any of this stuff, and frankly, I'm a little bit freaked out to do it because who knows what's in some of this stuff, but and then you can see that the wall just abruptly ends.
So right now, I'm on the United States side of the wall. Now I'm on the side that faces Mexico. It's very obvious here that this this wall, these defenses at our border are not sophisticated enough to stop this from happening. So, yes, we can talk all day about the barbed wire that's at Shelby Park. We can talk all day about whether or not the state has the right to defend the border or it's the responsibility of the federal government.
We can argue about jurisdictions and do this sort of political grandstanding, this tit for tat, but when push comes to shove, this wall is not nearly extensive enough to block people from coming into the United States from Mexico. Just have to hop over the Rio Grande that way, and you can pretty much walk right in the United States. I don't see any law enforcement around, and it's as easy as that, folks. It's as easy as that. So what we're gonna be doing over the next several days is identifying more holes in the security, more issues with this defense.
It seems to me that this Eagle Pass argument is actually a distraction. It's something that governor Abbott seems to be using for sort of political grandstanding. I think that the Republican Party is really trying to leverage this Eagle Pass controversy, this issue, in order to make it a topic of conversation for this presidential election that's coming up in the fall. It seems like Republicans are exaggerating the extent to which they're fighting on behalf of protecting our interests and that the Democrats are simply wanting to let everyone in as much as possible because they seem to have adopted a policy of just open borders altogether. They want to basically make the entire world this sort of globalist new world order.
They believe in one world government, not national sovereignty, not our nation is not sovereign individuals, but it's just amazing to me. I would never have known this had we not come here, had the Infowars crew not come here. I would never have known how much of a distraction the Eagle Pass argument really is because it is obvious that Shelby Park is not this sort of single issue between the federal government and the state of Texas. It's obvious that there are many other avenues within just a few miles of one another where any sort of migrant who can get across the river can get into the United States of America. Infowars is covering the border invasion all week this week.
Make sure you tune in at banned.video. Also, follow me on x at realchase geyser. That's realchase GEISER. Follow Alex Jones as well on x at realalexjones and infowars@infowarsonx, and tune in at infowars.comforward flash show.
reSee.it AI Summary
The first post suggests that Democrats are trying to remove Trump from ballots for the same reason Lincoln was removed in 1860 - to protect slavery. The second post acknowledges Lincoln's flaws but argues that the Civil War was primarily about slavery, supported by the original declarations of seceding states mentioning slavery extensively. State rights were a contributing factor, but slavery was the central issue.
@realchasegeiser - Chase Geiser
Democrats are trying to take Trump off ballots for the same reason they took Lincoln off ballots in 1860. To protect slavery. https://t.co/jCVqMHfLDL
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Colorado Supreme Court has disqualified former President Donald Trump from the 2024 primary ballot, claiming his alleged involvement in the January 6th events violated the 14th Amendment's insurrectionist ban. This decision reflects the left's hypocrisy and their willingness to suppress dissenting voices. It draws parallels to Abraham Lincoln's exclusion from southern state ballots in 1860 due to his anti-slavery stance. Both Lincoln and Trump faced political exclusion, revealing the left's duplicity. The selective application of the law and unequal treatment raise concerns about political bias. These events highlight the erosion of democratic principles and the need to uphold fairness and justice in our electoral process. The disqualification of Trump is a threat to our republic and a reminder of the battle for the integrity of our democracy.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In a strikingly blatant display of double standards reminiscent of the political tactics from the era of Abraham Lincoln, we are now witnessing the Colorado Supreme Court's disqualification of former president Donald Trump from the 2024 primary ballot. This decision cloaked in the guise of the 14th Amendment's insurrectionist ban exposes the Left's duplicity and the relentless crusade to undercut democracy democracy they claim to protect. Let's take a step back to 18/60 when Lincoln was barred from southern state ballots. It was a clear politically charged maneuver against his anti slavery stance. Now fast forward to 2023 and the disqualification of Trump over alleged involvement in the January 6th events mirrors this historical precedent showcasing the left's hypocrisy.
They preach inclusivity at practice exclusion and silence for those who oppose them. Its modern day political witch hunt, a deliberate move to eliminate perceived threats under the banner of protecting democracy. Both Lincoln and Trump, as separated by centuries, face political exclusion. Yet the constant here is the less hypocrisy. They champion democracy, but only when it serves their agenda, conveniently disregarding it to suppress dissenting voices.
While Lincoln's exclusion was a product of his era's contentious political climate Trump's situation reflects a more disturbing trend the weaponization of legal systems for partisan gain Trump's exclusion from Colorado's ballot is a glaring example of the less duplicity and their alarming propensity to trample democracy for their own ends. As they pontificate about the fragility of democracy. They unabashedly erode its very foundations by stifling opposition. This isn't just unprecedented. It's a dire warning about the less readiness to sacrifice democratic principles to advance their agenda.
Let's take a closer look at Abraham Lincoln's 18/60 election and the forgotten tale of state ballot exclusions. The history books are filled with tales of Abraham Lincoln's monumental victory in the 18/60 presidential election, a victory that would ultimately set the stage for the American Civil War and the abolition of slavery. However, there's a crucial aspect of this historic election that often goes overlooked. The fact that Lincoln was not on the ballot in every state. And the shadow of the great Lincoln, the exclusion of his name from certain state ballots is a story that deserves our attention.
The story of political maneuvering a regional tensions and the complexities of American democracy. As the United States hurtled towards the 18/60 presidential election, the nation was in turmoil. The issue of slavery had divided the country into 2 distinct camps, the northern states which were increasingly opposed to the institution of slavery and the Southern states which were fiercely protective of their peculiar institution Abraham Lincoln a relatively obscure Illinois lawyer had emerged as the Republican Party's nominee for president. The Republican Party formed just a few years earlier was staunchly every and the Lincoln's nomination was a reflection of the party's commitment to preventing the spread of slavery into new territories while Lincoln's nomination energized the Republican base in the North it posed a significant challenge when it came to ballot access in the Southern states. Many Southern states had laws and regulations in place that effectively excluded Republican candidates from their ballots.
In several Southern states, including Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas, Abraham Lincoln's name did not appear on the ballot. The reasons for this exclusion varied, but they were largely rooted in the South's deep commitment to preserving slavery. Some states required presidential electors to pledge their support for the protection of slavery, effectively disqualifying Lincoln's Republican electors. Others simply refused to print Republican ballots. In some cases, the decision to exclude Lincoln was driven by fear fear that his election would spell the end of slavery in the South.
The exclusion of Lincoln from southern state ballots had a profound impact on the election's outcome. Without his name on the ballot in these states, Lincoln's chances of winning the electoral college in a four way race were greatly diminished. From our vantage point in the 21st century, it's easy to overlook the these at this moment in history. The exclusion of Lincoln from certain state balance was not just a footnote in the 18/60 election. It was a reflection of the deep divisions that would ultimately lead to the Civil War and alarmingly foreshadow the potential for another one today.
Fast forward from 18/60 to today and we see that in a shocking turn of events, the Colorado Supreme Court has made a controversial decision to disqualify former president Donald Trump from the state's 2024 primary ballot This move has sent shock waves through the political landscape and raises serious concerns about the integrity of our democratic process the decision to remove Trump from the ballot comes under the dubious manner of the 14th Amendment's insurrectionist ban. While it's crucial to uphold the law and protect the principles of democracy, the timing and reasoning behind the move are deeply suspect. The 10th amendments. Insurrectionist ban was designed to prevent those who had actively participated in an insurrection or rebellion against the United States from holding public office. The Colorado Supreme Court's Interpretation of Trump's alleged involvement in the events of January 6th as an insurrection raises important questions were these events truly an insurrection, or were they a politically charged protest that got out of hand?
Labeling them as an insurrection without a fair and thorough examination of the facts sets a dangerous precedent for silencing political opposition. This decision by the Colorado Supreme Court is not an isolated incident. It is part of a larger pattern of behavior by the left to undermine and erase those who hold opposing views. For years, MAGA Republicans have been vilified as threats to receipt while the left has actively worked to exclude them from the electoral process. The most troubling aspect of this disqualification is the selective application of the law.
While Trump is being scrutinized and disqualified for his alleged involvement in the January 6th events, it's essential to remember that not all individuals who were present on that day have faced the same consequences. This raises concerns about the political bias and unequal treatment under the law. This situation draws an eerie parallel to the exclusion of Abraham Lincoln from southern state ballots in 18/60. Both Lincoln and Trump face exclusion due to political reasons, highlighting the less enduring hypocrisy. They preach inclusivity and democracy while ruthlessly silencing voices they perceive as threats.
The disqualification of Trump from Colorado's ballot is not just a political maneuver. It's a threat to our republic itself. It's emblematic of the less alarming willingness to sacrifice democratic principles to advance their own agenda. As Americans We should be deeply concerned about the erosion of our democratic norms and the use of legal systems to silence political opponents the Colorado Supreme Court's decision sets a dangerous precedent, and it's a stark reminder that the battle for the integrity of our democratic process is far from over. We must remain vigilant and committed to upholding the principles of fairness, quality, and justice in our constitutional republic regardless of our political affiliations.
The exclusion of Lincoln from southern interstate ballots in 18/60 and Trump's disqualification from Colorado's ballot in 2024 both serve as stark reminders of freedom's fragility. They highlight the willingness of those in power to use legal systems to exclude political opponents. These events should compel us to reflect on the importance of fair and transparent electoral processes and the dangers of political bias in our nation. As we stand at the precipice of another pivotal moment in American history, it's crucial to draw inspiration from our nation's past. Now in the run of to 18 60 presidential election, a grassroots movement known as the White Awakes emerged.
Their passion, vigilance, and unwavering commitment to a cause they believed in serve as a shining example for those who seek to propel the great awakening in the months leading to the 2024 election. The white oaks of the 18 sixties were ardent supporters of Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party's antislavery platform. They were not merely passive observers but active participants in the political process. Their name, quote, wide awake, reflected their readiness and vigilance in supporting their cause. The wide awakes were known for their distinctive uniforms and torchlight parades.
They took to the streets, rallied in public squares, and passionately spread their message. Their commitment to their cause was a testament to the power of grassroots movements in shaping the course of a nation. Today, as we navigate the complexities of our own time, we find ourselves at a crossroads. The 2024 election looms on the Verizon, and the need for an awakening is more apparent than ever. It's a call to action for info warriors and all who believe in the principles that make America great.
The Great Awakening is not about passive participation. It's about active engagement. It's about being informed vigilant and ready to defend the values we hold dear. It's about taking to the digital streets using the tools at our disposal to spread truth and rallying behind the leaders who champion our cause.
Speaker 1: While other networks lie to you about what's happening now, Infowars tells you the truth about what's happening next. Any botanist died this information. You can see here the Great Awakening orbiting the Great Reset. Although the depopulation systems of the great reset are not yet fully operational, the great reset does have a strong conspiracy network. It is protected by a satanic shield which can be disabled by the great awakening.
The great reset must be deactivated If any victory for humanity is to be accomplished, once the Great Awakening deactivates the shield, info wars.comforward/show will cover the truth, while info warriors fly into the superstructure and attempt to Knock out the great reset. Alex Jones has volunteered to lead the fighter attack. Get a signed copy of The Great Awakening today@infowarsstore.com.
@realchasegeiser - Chase Geiser
For those of you who I expected would light up the replies with claims the Civil War wasn't about slavery, the original Declaration of Causes of Seceding States mention slavery nearly 80 times. Often in the first sentence of the original declarations. I agree that Lincoln was a tyrant and I am well aware that he was explicitly racist himself, but to say that the Civil War was ONLY about state rights or taxes is incorrect. While state rights were a contributing factor, no doubt, slavery was the central issue.
reSee.it AI Summary
The posts discuss the alleged connections between the Bidens and gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. They claim that EcoHealth Alliance and Metabiota concealed the true nature of their research, potentially downplaying risks to DARPA. Hunter Biden's firm, Rosemont Seneca, invested in Metabiota, raising questions about financial interests in controversial Wuhan lab research. The posts highlight the importance of uncovering the truth behind the origins of COVID-19 and criticize the Bidens' alleged involvement.
@realchasegeiser - Chase Geiser
The Bidens were invested in the gain of function research at Wujan, and now a recent report shows EcoHealth lied about the research to DARPA. When the Bidens lie, people die. US scientists linked to Biden investments misled Pentagon on research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology EcoHealth Alliance, under Peter Daszak, allegedly concealed the true nature of their risky coronavirus research in Wuhan, potentially downplaying risks to DARPA. The Wuhan lab leak theory relates to gain-of-function research on coronaviruses, possibly connected to the COVID-19 pandemic, with involvement from EcoHealth and Metabiota. Hunter Biden’s firm, Rosemont Seneca, invested in Metabiota, linking financial interests to the controversial Wuhan lab research. The partnership of EcoHealth and Metabiota in the PREDICT project raises questions about their roles in viral surveillance and the origins of COVID-19. The Wuhan Lab Deception That Made The Biden Crime Family Millions EcoHealth Alliance, under the direction of Peter Daszak, concealed the real intentions behind high-risk coronavirus research in Wuhan, as per documents that have recently surfaced. Save 40% on DNA Force Plus NOW! Try it today and see why so many listeners have made it an essential part of their daily routine! 2018’s Project DEFUSE emerges as the centerpiece of this drama. It’s not just any research proposal – it’s a story of engineering viruses, eerily akin to the notorious SARS-CoV-2. This isn’t science fiction; it’s the cold, hard potential reality behind COVID-19’s origins, a plot twist that could rival any spy thriller. But the plot thickens: The DEFUSE grant proposal plays a cunning game of misdirection, masking the extent of Wuhan’s involvement. The aim? To make DARPA comfortable while planning to shift significant portions of this risky endeavor to Wuhan, under less stringent safety measures. Cost-saving or safety-compromising? Apparently, both. Enter the duo of Peter Daszak and Ralph S. Baric, the scientists who may have been behind the gain-of-function research at The Wuhan Institute of Virology, set to the backdrop of BSL-2 standards, far from the recommended safety for such high-stakes work. What we have here isn’t just a scientific oversight; it’s a narrative of calculated risks and hidden truths. This saga goes beyond mere viral research; it touches the very essence of global health security and the ethics of scientific exploration. As this story unravels, the world watches, waits, and wonders: Does anything else lie beneath the surface of the Wuhan lab saga? As a matter of fact, it gets much worse. Wuhan Gain-of-Function Research and the Biden Connection The plot thickens with the Bidens’ financial ties. Hunter Biden’s investment firm, Rosemont Seneca Technology Partners, poured half a million into Metabiota, a key player connected to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. This isn’t a distant financial footnote; it’s a direct line to one of the most significant global health crises of our time. The connections are too significant to ignore. The Bidens, gain-of-function research, and the potential lab leak – these aren’t just pieces of a puzzle; they’re chapters of a story that might hold the key to understanding the origins of a pandemic that brought the world to its knees. EcoHealth Alliance and Metabiota happen to have been partners in the USAID’s PREDICT project. This wasn’t just a collaboration; it was a fusion of interests and objectives in the realm of viral surveillance, where every move matters. But here’s where the intrigue lies – EcoHealth’s ties with the Wuhan Institute of Virology and Metabiota’s consequential involvement. What was initially a surveillance venture now appears as a potential gateway to understanding the COVID-19 pandemic’s murky origins. Hunter Biden’s financial dealings with Metabiota, a pathogen research company, raise questions that demand answers. With Rosemont Seneca Technology Partners, co-founded by Hunter, funneling $500,000 into Metabiota, the plot thickens as the company secures a DoD contract to build a bioterrorism surveillance lab in Ukraine– a contract to the tune of $24 million. This all transpires under the watch of then-Vice President Joe Biden. What’s more alarming is Metabiota’s collaboration with the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s research on infectious diseases in bats that was being conducted. See what we’re getting at here? Is it a mere coincidence that the Biden family’s financial ties intersect with a lab central to COVID-19 speculations? Please. It seems like every time we peel back a layer of the Biden Crime Family’s legacy of corruption, another layer of crime surfaces, more complex and controversial than the last. From EcoHealth’s covert operations in Wuhan to Hunter Biden’s not-so-distant financial dance with Metabiota, and the shadowy intertwining of these entities with the origins of a global health crisis, the story reads like a cautionary tale of how a political class will risk anything and anyone for the sake of its own interests. One thing is clear: The world deserves the truth, however inconvenient it might be. And as for the Bidens? Well, let’s just say that in the court of public opinion, even an approval rating of 37% appears far more than is deserved.
Video Transcript AI Summary
US scientists linked to Biden investments allegedly misled the Pentagon about their research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Documents reveal that EcoHealth Alliance, led by Peter Daszak, concealed the true intentions of their high-risk coronavirus research in Wuhan. The project, called Diffuse, aimed to shift parts of the research to Wuhan under less stringent safety measures. The involvement of Daszak and Ralph S Barrick in gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab raises concerns about safety and ethics. Additionally, Hunter Biden's investment firm invested in Metabiota, a company connected to the Wuhan lab, raising questions about financial ties and the origins of the pandemic.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: US scientists linked to Biden investments misled the Pentagon on research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. EcoHealth Alliance under the direction of Peter Daszak concealed the real intentions behind high risk coronavirus research in Wuhan as per documents that have recently surfaced. 2000 eighteen's project Diffuse emerges as the centerpiece of this drama. It's not just any research proposal, it's a story of engineering viruses eerily akin to the notorious SARS Co V2. This is science fiction.
It's the cold hard potential reality behind COVID nineteen's origins. A plot twist that could rival any spy thriller. But the plot thickens. The diffuse Grant proposal plays a cunning game of misdirection max masking the extent of Wuhan's involvement. The aim?
To make DARPA comfortable while planning to shift significant portions of the risky endeavor to Wuhan under less stringent safety measures. Cost saving or safety compromising? Well, apparently, it was both. Enter the duo of Peter Daszak and Ralph S Barrick, the scientists too, may have been behind the gain of function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Set to the backdrop of BSL two standards, far from the recommended safety for such high stakes work.
What we have here isn't just a scientific oversight, it's a narrative of calculated risks and Hidden Truths. This saga goes beyond mere viral research and touches the very essence of global health security and the ethics of scientific exploration. As the story unravels, the world watches, waits, and wonders, does anything else lie beneath the surface of the Wuhan lab saga? Well, as a matter of fact, it gets much worse. Wuhan gain of function research and the Biden connection.
The plot thickens with the Biden's financial ties. Hunter Biden's investment firm, Rosemont Seneca Technology Partners, poured half $1,000,000 into Metabiota, a key player connected to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. This isn't a distant financial footnote. It's a direct line to one of the most significant global health crises of our time. The connections are too significant to ignore.
The Biden's gain of function research, and the potential lab leak, these aren't just pieces of a puzzle. They're chapters of the story that might hold the key to understanding the origins of the pandemic that brought the world to its knees. EcoHealth Alliance and Metabiota happened to have been partners in the USAID's PREDICT project. This wasn't just a collaboration. It was a fusion of interests and objectives in the realm of viral surveillance where every move matters.
But here's where the intrigue lies. Ecohealth's ties with the Wuhan Institute of Virology and Metabiota's consequential involvement as well. What was initially a surveillance venture now appears as a potential gateway to understanding the COVID nineteen pandemic's murky origins. Hunter Biden's financial dealings with Metabiota, a pathogen research company, raise questions that demand answers. With Rosemont Seneca Technology Partners cofounded by Hunter filing $500,000 into Metobiota.
The plot thickens as the company secures a DOD contract to build a bioterrorism surveillance lab in Ukraine, contract to the tune of $24,000,000. This all transpires under the watch of then vice president Joe Biden. What's more alarming is Metabiotas collaboration with Zoovirology's research on infectious diseases in bats that was being conducted. See what we're getting at here? Is it a mere coincidence that the Biden family's financial ties intersect with a lab central to COVID nineteen speculations?
Please. It seems like every time we peel back a layer of the Biden crime family's legacy of corruption, another layer of prime surfaces, more complex and controversial than the last. From EcoHealth's covert operations in Wuhan to Hunter Biden's not so distant financial dance with MetaBioData, the shadowy intertwining of these entities was the origins of a global health crisis. The story reads like a cautionary tale of how a political class will risk anything and anyone for the sake of its own interests. One thing is clear.
The world deserves the truth, however inconvenient it might be. And as for the Bidens, well, let's just say that in the court of public opinion, even an approval rating of 37% appears far more than is deserved. While other networks lie to you about what's happening now, Infowars tells you the truth about what's happening
Speaker 1: When I say this, I mean it from the very bottom of my heart. I wanna say thank you to all the viewers and listeners for supporting the broadcast over the years. We together have changed the world At an incredible level. And I wanna salute the crew as well and all of our sponsors and supporters. Ladies and gentlemen, wow.
The fight has really been joined with the globalist. And As we go into 2024, the most important election in world history, it is now more important than ever to get around the sensors and override the globalist. So keep spreading the word about the broadcast. Keep Sharing articles and videos. Keep praying for the broadcast and our reporters and the crew, and shop at infowarsstore.com, where for Christmas, we have the biggest sales of the year, double Patriot Points, storewide free shipping, up to 60% off on products like Brain Force Plus, Brain Force Ultra.
TurboForce is Back in stock. X2 is back in stock. Vazobeach is back in stock. Body's Ultimate Tumeric Formula, it's all there. My new book, The Great Awakening.
Do your Christmas We're shopping there, get great products, and fund the InfoWar. Thank you.
reSee.it AI Summary
Title: Impending Terrorist Attack in the United States: Unfolding Consequences
In the near future, the United States faces an imminent terrorist attack allegedly orchestrated by Iran-backed militants who illegally crossed the border. This event is anticipated to serve multiple purposes for the deep state. Firstly, it aims to remove Biden from office and halt his campaign. Additionally, it will be exploited to escalate US involvement in the Middle East, ensuring the dollar's global reserve currency status and benefiting the political elite. Furthermore, this incident is expected to interfere with the 2024 election, leading to the persecution of law-abiding political dissidents and an expansion of government power. Stay informed.
@realchasegeiser - Chase Geiser
Be ready for a terrorist attack in the United States very soon. It will be said to have been done by Iran-backed terrorists who crossed the border illegally. It will be used by the deep state to remove Biden from office and end his campaign. It will be used to escalate US involvement in the Middle East, ensure the dollar remains the global reserve currency, and enrich the political class. It will be used to interfere with the 2024 election, persecute law abiding political dissidents, and expand government.
@realchasegeiser - Chase Geiser
Scott Adams knows how to start a cult
Video Transcript AI Summary
In this video, the speaker discusses the power of reframing and how it can change our perspectives and behaviors. They talk about the role of hypnosis in reframing and how it can be used to create new thought patterns. The speaker also touches on the concept of ego and how it can hinder personal growth. They emphasize the importance of challenging our own beliefs and being open to change. The speaker concludes by addressing societal issues and the media's role in shaping our perceptions. They encourage viewers to question the narratives presented to them and to focus on personal growth and helping others.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So I obviously am familiar with your work because of Dilbert, but I didn't really know who you were until I saw your interview with Nicky Cline a couple of years ago. I, watched it because I was gonna have Nicky Cline on my podcast and I did, but I was wanting to watch other interviews with her. Sort of bearing in a sense. And I thought that was an absolutely fascinating conversation. In particular, One very specific moment where you asked her about whether or not Keith had had any background in hypnotism because you perceived that he'd done some things that Seemed to correlate with your knowledge of hypnotism.
And I always wanted to ask you what it was that you saw or perceived See you that that gave you that impression. And so I've been spending the last 18 months or so trying to build up a large amount of Twitter following to, you know, be a justifiable use of your time for an hour or so.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So that's a question. Well, you know, I, I believe that his, partner was a trained. And, and so there would be a lot of, you know, cross pollination of skills. So I think, I think he's probably at a base of skills.
And the weird thing is I think even their biggest critics Don't argue with the fact that his method was helping people and they enjoyed it. So that's the weird that, but basically he was reframing and persuading, Yeah. Changing people out how people saw their situation. And it was more about the effectiveness of it. That made me think he had some formal training because he was too good.
I mean, he built, built up too much of an organization around, You know, what, what you could imagine was a thin amount of content, but maybe it wasn't, maybe it was actually deeper than I knew, but, just the fact that they were so effective in getting people to Change in a whole variety of ways. It seemed like it was like a little bit beyond a cult and maybe a little closer to just Super persuasive leader.
Speaker 0: And not to say that Nexium was a cult that one way or the other in this conversation necessarily. We can get it out if you want, but how does one actually start a cult.
Speaker 1: I don't know. Like a bonafide cult.
Speaker 0: You you ever thought about it? Well,
Speaker 1: I I like the way you asked it as how does somebody start work because it's so hard to avoid that question And not act like you haven't been thinking about starting gold. Did did he buy my first answer? How would I know? Yeah, no, I didn't, I have a minute. Was there any credibility to that at all?
Speaker 0: I mean, I would have bought it if I didn't have any context as to who you are and your knowledge and Skills. But I just can't imagine that somebody who's interested in things like reframing and psychology and persuasion hasn't considered, you know, how they can wrangle and influence people to do sort of their bidding.
Speaker 1: Well, first of all, I would define a cult as something that's better for the leader than it is for the people. That that would so like the United States government. Hey. Don't bring us there yet. So I I would say it's not a cult Yes.
The leader is transparent about, let's say you selling a book or, you know, being, doing live streams that are monetized. And if the, if the main benefit looks like it's to the people who are receiving the content, that seems like whatever is the opposite of a cult. I mean, I mostly teach the people who follow me on social media, how to determine what is BS and what is real. So theoretically they would be applying these same rules to me. I hope because I think I passed most of them.
And, so if you're transparently helping people and they say you're helping me, that's probably not a cult. If if you have to, You burn your clothes and wear a robe and, you know, pledge all of your money to the cult leader. That's probably a cult. And if they, if they prevent you from talking to other people, that's definitely a cult. In my case, I actively encourage people to follow as many different sources as possible to actually expose themselves to the outside as much as possible.
So I'm, I'm close to the opposite of the Colts in by the by that definition. But to answer your question, I would use article. I I hate avoiding questions.
Speaker 0: You don't have the answer
Speaker 1: to you don't answer uncomfortable, so I'm not gonna avoid it. I'm just guessing, but I'm not I imagine the way it happens is this way. There's probably some charismatic person who has several friends that he talks to who really get excited about this person's vision. And then they say, Hey, my other friend, you should join me. We're going to talk to this guy.
And next thing, the room is full. And then everybody says, oh, this is so good. You know, they get their friends. And I imagine they started organic. Now maybe there's some exception to that, but, it feels like it's probably just an organic thing because people feel like they're getting some value out of it.
Do You think
Speaker 0: that in most cases, cult leaders intend to start a cult or they just realize that it's hap like, it's happening. You know?
Speaker 1: Well, I'm only guessing, but my guess is that Nexium started as an actual business. And in my opinion, they stayed a business, but there was a little cult of personality around the leader. So next year, it wasn't a cult. I would, I would say, I would say they were a business with Some unusual characteristics, but, you know, they weren't taking everybody's clothes and money and, you know, it wasn't quite like that for sure.
Speaker 0: Have you ever been in a cult?
Speaker 1: Oh, here's a good question. That again that would be def initial, but I would say no.
Speaker 0: Yeah. It's hard to know because if you, when people think of cults, they think of like the big ones, right? They think of Scientology as an example, regardless whether you think Scientology is a cult, that's something that comes to mind, Jim Jones, but there are really like 1,000, right? And I think it's more common Then people think that they're involved in some sort of coal like organization at some point in their life, whether it's their church or some group that they're in. I I think the organizations can take I call like characters this character Yeah.
Speaker 1: The that's the definition thing. I didn't wanna do the obvious It's like, well, you know, I went to church when I was a kid or something like that. Sure. Sure. You know, because they let me keep my clothes and my money, And I could still talk to other people.
So I've never been in any organization that told me not to talk to other people. Yeah.
Speaker 0: I'm just curious because I had an experience where I joined a denomination to Christianity that probably doesn't fit the category of a cult, but it's about as Clawsest you could get to 1 without being a cult. The reason that I say that it wasn't a cult was because there was no sort of individual single leader. It was just Like a lay ministry type thing, but the, the, the doctrine and the dogma, was so intense that it behaved Somewhat like a cult sometimes in terms of alienating people or shaming or guilting people. But at the same time, there was like An unreasonable amount of joy and ecstasy at certain moments, whether you were going on like a retreat or a camp type thing where you're going to do bible studies. Like there were moments where you felt like You were, like, god was on either side of the dry drywall.
And if you, you know, if you listen, you could hear him yelling at you. Right?
Speaker 1: Well, that's a, that's a good experience. I mean, obviously humans are built for that experience because people get it From so many different realms. Some some get it from nature. Some get it from any variety of religious beliefs. So we're we're wired we're wired for that experience.
Speaker 0: Do you think that people on average are more inclined to subscribe to someone else's vision or Always sort of prefer their own.
Speaker 1: Well, you know, the hypnotist take on this is that, are most of our opinions are assigned. Right? You know, if you, if you're born in a deeply Islamic country, You're probably gonna be Islamic and you're probably gonna think that you would have chosen that even if you hadn't been born there. You know, we, we talk ourselves into, well, You know, obviously I made up my own mind at some point, but I think everybody's, basically they're open to different kinds of persuasion, but we're all being persuaded. So while you might not be easily persuaded to change religions, we're all pretty easily persuaded to do things that or personality is compatible with, and especially if it helps out, it helps our pocketbooks.
So, yeah, I think mostly people are sign their opinions, but they accept the ones that feel right and work for.
Speaker 0: If that's the case, Can you really hold anybody accountable for the things that they do on behalf or or as an outcome of what their beliefs are or their opinions are?
Speaker 1: Yes, absurdly. Yes, you can do it absurdly. So, which is the way all life is we pretend that we have free will Because if you didn't pretend we had free will, you couldn't have a justice and this in the many sense. So we pretend that somebody could have acted differently, Even if their brain was exactly what it was and all the situations and causes were the same, but they could have chosen differently. There's no scientific.
Even a hypothesis that would support that. But if we lose that illusion, Then you can't punish people. You can't say you can't condemn them. Society would fall apart. So I take the absurd, but functional belief that I'm going to act as though as if I have a choice, but I'm going to act as though it's a real thing and that people can choose Just so society stays together, but intellectually I noticed nonsense.
And the reason I say that is The rules of physics don't stop at the outside of your skull, whatever it is that's happening in your brain is physics. Yeah. Chemistry is chemistry. Electricity is electricity. There there's no part of you that nobody has found This floating around you, this your free will that can make your brain do something different because the thing that's not physical made the physical thing different.
So there's no evidence for anything like that. And indeed all the evidence is the opposite. In fact, w the part of your brain that makes decisions doesn't even activate until after decisions made. And that's been tested for years. Something that happened to just learn on day 1, that people are not rational.
They are rationalizers. There are people who imagine that they came up with an opinion And they imagine they have reasons for it, but that's purely imaginary. Not to say that the reasons are always bad, but they would have reasons whether they were good or bad. So there's gonna be reasons. What first sparked your interest in hypnotism?
When I was a kid, my mother got hypnotized to deliver, my younger sister. And she reported that she felt no pain And she was essentially awake. You know, she remembers the whole thing, but didn't feel. Now my family doctor was also at an assist and he was just, he was there to deliver the baby. So honestly, as an adult, I don't know how much of that was true.
You know? Did she forget? Maybe she had an epidural and just forgot. I don't know. Yeah.
I think it's possible, but I was so impressed by that, that when I was in my early twenties, I thought, you know, we'll sign up for a hypnosis school. There was 1 in San Francisco and it was just a little thing with 1 instructor and we would meet a couple of times a week for a number of months. And I learned hypnosis since the, I think the one, the 1st or second most valuable thing I've learned, You know, outside of reading and writing and the basics. You know, there was a Dale Carnegie course that teaches you how to deal with people. But once you, once you learn hypnosis, almost everything you see that would be ridiculous and absurd and confusing.
It all makes sense. It basically is the thing that explains everything because if you imagine that people are rational, then you can't really figure out why they're doing what they're doing. Right. But if you assume that the rationalizers and somebody assigned their opinion, well, it makes perfect sense. You know, on Twitter, for example, I just saw the most absurd looking opinions, several of them today, which is brutal.
And I used the ball looking
Speaker 0: at my feed before this podcast.
Speaker 1: No names. That's okay. But when you look at them, you just say, okay, this couldn't be a product of free will or the thinking or anything like that. These are obviously assigned opinions and the way they describe the opinions is so, you know, it was so classic to be the, like the, the main, let's say narrative on one side. So you can pretty much identify that People on both sides.
It's not something that's one side of the political spectrum, but, we're rationalizers. Once you realize that Every single starts making sense. And that's all you do, didn't it?
Speaker 0: Well, yeah, it's, it's, it's fascinating. And I don't just, I don't disagree at all. I just had never thought of it like that. So you reframe my perspective on the, on the matter. That's very interesting.
So is there a way to transcend? Well, I guess my first question I wanted to ask is, would you say that everyone is operating in some state of hypnosis?
Speaker 1: No. I wouldn't I wouldn't put it into those terms because that sort of stretches the definition too far so it would have helped. I consider him. This is just part of the big persuasion package. So advertising from marketing, advertising, just being nice to the people you're talking to.
They're all forms of persuasion. So we're persuading all the time. Even if we kid ourselves or we lie and say, no, we're being genuine. Nobody's being genuine. We're all modifying our presentation to, for some of the fact.
Right? So we're, we're trying to persuade, Even if the thing you're trying to persuade is that you don't modify your opinion for other people. That's just another form of persuasion. Right? So we'd be kidding ourselves to say, we're not always trying to persuade anybody who's around us.
We just don't think of it in those terms, but you're always doing it all the time. So to imagine that something is a state of hypnosis and something is somebody practicing hypnosis Yeah. It's sort of the it's more like the canvas of where we are all the time. So I think if it moves us where for example. In my new book, reframe your rate.
I use hypnosis technique to Pick reframes that exists. You know, the good ones and other good ones, but also to create a few that didn't exist, that I can use hypnosis Technically, to make sure that it's powerful.
Speaker 0: Tell me a little bit more about that as as someone who's a layman and not intimately familiar with with hypnosis. And I'm a little bit familiar with what you mean by reframe because I did read some of the book or listen to it and I did read the description of the book, so I understand the idea of There's no such thing as bad press, for example, as being a reframe, right? How does hypnosis operate on a technical level To actually go in and do the right reframes in order to achieve the desired outcome and how do you do it without fucking somebody?
Speaker 1: Well, the risks from hypnosis is basically zero There's people don't do things they don't want to do. So the, the perfect use for hypnosis would be, let's say somebody wanted to Lose their fear of flying. That could work because they don't want to be afraid of flying. There there's no counter in, force. You If somebody gives us a says, can you use hypnosis on me to quit smoking or to quit eating?
I would say, well, I could try. You'll have about a 30% success rate and it'll be about the same success rate as every other thing you could have tried. Like there's no advantage. And the reason that the success rates are very similar with the exception of chemical interventions, but, the behavioral stuff Only depends on, and this is a reframe actually, whether you want to quit or you've decided to quit. That's actually one of the reframes in my book.
When you want to go at, you're sort of looking for something to help you make the decision. Basically when you decide to quit, you're never going to pick up a cigarette. That will be the last day that you spoke because the decision comes with it, whatever, whatever happens, like, you know, however much air arts, However much I wanted, I've decided if you say I want to quit, the evidence can't help you. So basically the same 30% or so, I'm just making up Number this in the ballpark, about 30% of the people have decided when they go, they have business. And then they're just looking for some help.
If they decide it, Any kind of help will get them over the top. If they just want it, it's almost like what they need is for you to Fix their decision, which is a little different thing. And they kind of have to do that themselves. Sort of like a alcoholic hitting bottom. If you're familiar with that world, the the alcoholic who knows they're having issues as an alcoholic, They want to quit, but not as much as they want the Drake.
And it's not to lay a bottom where they're wanting to quit far exceeds, you know, the, the attraction of the drink. So you can only, you can only help people who have dual forces, You know, once they've decided, but I think I did answer the actual question. Was it, can you remind me what the question was? I think it went too far.
Speaker 0: I can't remember. I was listening intently and I don't I I will try to.
Speaker 1: The the limit let me let me give you the, the big mind blowing answer. Right. The coincidence of the fact that the large language model AI. We gave him the sensation. At the same time I was writing a book on reframes It was everything.
Let me, let me tie the 2 of them together. Were you surprised that you can create something called artificial intelligence? Just looking at the patterns of words that people have written already, and nothing else. I was not surprised I was not surprised by that fact, but I was surprised that we were there already. Okay.
So he and Lucas were not surprised because we know that people are not rational and we can observe that they seem to be using words as a substitute for thinking. In other words, the sentence makes sense. People will think that the thought makes sense and they're just different things. So once you really I just never thought it just makes sense. Yeah.
But once you realize that something can be formed out of the combination and pattern of words that we would recognize as some form of intelligence, artificial intelligence, but it looks intelligent in terms of how it acts. What you, you're only one short leap From realizing that's how humans are built as well. That, that thing that we think is intelligence is really just word patterns and combinations, which is why it's so easy for the news to assign you opinion. Does the news puts it in words? The words go into your head And words are actually your, what forms your thoughts, and then their thoughts form your actions.
So once you know that you'd understand how a, A reframe works. So a reframe takes some words that were around the topics that weren't working for whatever reason, you weren't getting a result you wanted. And it gives you a new set of
Speaker 0: words that global warming. Well, let's take some change. Climate change. Right?
Speaker 1: Let me use a better one. That's also in the book. When nuclear energy was considered dirty and risky people. A lot of people said, no, no, I don't want that dirty, risky, unclear energy. As soon as smart people reframed it.
And then I was part of this project. As soon as smart people said, no, this is the greenest of all the green things, because not only is it green, by the way, the version, the, the 3rd generation of nuclear is the only one you would build today and they've never had it melt them. Now people don't know that They
Speaker 0: they know that the older generations have had problems. RBMK reactors can't have meltdowns.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So the so the gen really just to have it that the general generation 4 almost can't have them. Right? And so so it's wasting for them to use to be and they keep the waste on-site now which is a big improvement, etcetera. So the, the argument for nuclear is a little bit more than the average person.
Again, the way you handle, you know, so a little more complicated than people want to spend time to. But if you say nuclear energy is green, Then 10% of the people here will look into it and say, yeah, you know, I see what you're saying. 90% will just hear nuclear is green. Then that becomes their thought process. So repetition and having the right, you know, tight little sentence.
All you have to do is repeat it. So reframe can change your entire life by reading it once, as long as it's fiction you have. I'll give you an example. The most successful reframe by far was, I I didn't even know the fact of other people. I said that alcohol is poison.
And I said that I'd use that as my own reframe to avoid drinking. Now I've never had an alcohol problem. I just, you know, wasn't, wasn't helping me really, to have a few drinks on the weekend. So just by saying alcohol is poison. Those words, you know, poison It was a negative word.
I'm pairing it with something. If you repeat an association of a negative thing with the thing you wanna stop, that's actually enough. And the, to yourself. Yeah. And the, yeah.
To yourself and the, which is a form of hypnosis. So instead of the hypnotist, putting it into your ad. You just put it in yourself by reading the sentence. Now, could anything go terribly wrong? Because you read a reframe that didn't work.
I've never seen it. I don't think it's, I don't think that's really a risk, but I'll tell you that the reframes that hit you And you go, oh my, as soon as you read them, you'll repeat them in your end forever. There's an impact on you. Then effectively you're creating, You're changing the physical structure of your brain, which is what all thoughts and memories do. And you're, you're actually modifying it with a sentence.
Now take that back to AI. If you know AI is intelligence formed by the right combination of words and that's all it is, Then you can see your own brain is similar to that because it is. And if you put it in the right combination of words, even if they don't make sense, and this is a key part of reframes, They don't even have to be logical. They can be right. Like everything Yoda said.
Yeah. Well, I'll give you a here's one that you know is it's Well, he referenced in the book as an old one. The customer is always right. No, that's absurd. We customers not
Speaker 0: trust me. I know I'm
Speaker 1: a small business owner and they're mostly wrong. Right. Yeah. And I I use the example of, I heard a story from a McDonald's employee. There was a senior citizen at the the drive up who, was told that McDonald's has an app, and he was kinda worked up about it.
He says, why does McDonald's have an app? Are you planning on building an airport? Now that doesn't exactly make sense. I guess he knew there were apps for airports, but If you argued with the person, you get a bad result because they're not really complaining about anything. They're they're just having an interaction.
If you say that the, If you say the customer is always right, you serve them their hamburgers and you say, oh, that's weird. You know, I don't know. You just sort of agree with them And everybody goes away happy. So the customer's always right. It's like a classic reframe.
That's very, very effective for fixing your business Because
Speaker 0: in the race, you want to go there, but it doesn't make sense. Now that's the nature of reframes. They don't have to make sense. It's better if they do, but they don't have to. I don't know if this is a perfect example or not, but as you're talking about this and explaining this, I was sort of running through my head of maybe instances in my life where I've unintentionally, not unintentionally necessarily, but been unaware that I was doing reframes on myself.
So for example, I started a small advertising business in 2016 And I'd been 2 years into my 1st job out of college and it was like a dead end job. Like there no no upward mobility. And I quit my job before my business was off the ground because I knew if I didn't quit, I would never do my business. And I remember during that period of time, I kept telling myself Internally, there's nothing more dangerous than assuming no risk.
Speaker 1: You know, like, like, if
Speaker 0: I don't take this risk, Then the outcome is way more dangerous where I'm seeing those, just making $45,000 a year until I'm in my forties or 50, you know? And so that was maybe an example of how I sort of dealt with or reframe my perspective on, you know, whether my, my job.
Speaker 1: I've actually had a few reframes in that domain. One of them is that, risky things are safe and safe. Things are risky. Now that's not true. And sometimes risky things are
Speaker 0: well, technically it's not, but right. Right.
Speaker 1: Well, but if you keep it in your mind, the, the key to this is that we're not good at assessing risk. So don't do anything that might physically kill you or bankrupt you. Right. But, but your example was your risk was probably, you know, a little setback in money, A lot of time, maybe your ego, you know, those things were at risk. Those are the things you want to risk.
So those things feel the scariest. But, as you said, if you don't do those things, you're in worse shape than if you do. And now that one thing you do might not be the key. That might not be the silver bullet. But if you take that attitude to several projects, you know, and you do 10 different things, which I try to do, I try to do about 10 different new things a year.
Most of them don't work and they, they almost, you know, have a crib death. They don't, they don't last very long at all, but sometimes things have a take on a life of their own And live streaming is like that for me. I started live streaming just as it was this new thing called Periscope on Twitter years ago. And I just turned it on and Somebody showed up. I think there were 6 people on the first side.
And then I thought, oh, that's fun. Then I did it again. So that was a case where, you know, something just started small and grew, but you cannot predict where things are going or what will work Your best kit and your best scenario is just try a bunch of things that won't kill you and will bankrupt you if they don't work. But if they do work, they'll pick up their own energy. So here's another reframe.
One way to approach something is to know exactly what you would have to do from beginning to end, but that's kind of rare in the complicated world. Usually you just know a direction and you might know the first step And then you look for energy, like a video game, you know, the video games where you have to find some energy before you can continue, They get windshield or get more ammo or something. So a lot of projects are like that. You don't know how you're going to do it. I'll give you an example of the writing of my book.
So the writing of my book started as if you started thinking about the whole process, you would be overwhelmed because writing a book is really hard and unpleasant. Like you're not going to enjoy the year that you write a book, but here's how it happened. I thought of the title and then it would be about reframes And I wrote it on my whiteboard and I just left it there for a while. And then I talked to somebody I knew and said, what do you think of this idea? And they said, oh, that's a good idea.
And then I got a little energy. There's somebody liked it. Then they took it to my agents, book agent who was canceled me, but back when they had one. And they said, what do you think of this idea? And he said, I think that'd be good.
You should write some of it up. And so I wrote some of it up and then took it to a publisher. The publisher said, yeah, that's a good idea. Now I'm all excited because I've had like a reader or an agent and the publisher say, yeah, that's a good thing. So I write a page and then I look at it and I go, ah, that's not bad.
You know, I can fix this to make it even better. So I'm looking for a fuel, which is a dopamine hit, basically. You know? Because by the way, this is interesting. Did you know that you can't move without dopamine?
This is one
Speaker 0: of the biggest But it makes sense.
Speaker 1: I didn't know that. Yeah. So dopamine is associated not only with how you feel.
Speaker 0: L Doba, like the movie, The Awakenings. Right? You guys are going to go fit.
Speaker 1: You you literally can't get off the couch unless there's some dopamine telling you that you're gonna be rewarded or at least it won't hurt. So, yeah, the, the whole, the whole process of writing the book is I take, you know, 2 steps forward. And if I can find some dopamine, I can go further. And if I can't, I doubt because I've had projects where, you know, I get to that 1st step and then nothing's happening. Nobody's telling me it's good and I'm not feeling as good anymore.
And then I bail out because there's no dopamine. So one of the best reframes is to see everything you do as a dopamine acquisition process. So even, even anything like going to the gym and getting a workout, No matter how painful the workout is, you're going to get a dope. I mean, hit when you're done, you know, that you feel good and you know, I mean, your body feels better. So The dopamine reframe is the ultimate for getting you off the couch, getting you moving, getting you do that to do the
Speaker 0: thing. You mentioned how people make decisions emotionally and then rationalize later. And I wanted to ask you a little bit about The psychology, I guess, for lack of a better term of how people have major shifts in Any sort of ideal, right? So something that for every emotional reason you want to hold on to, but you may abandon because the fact of the matter becomes so obvious. Some boys though, a classic example, not to bring up something controversial for the sake of it, but You have all these Germans, they love Hitler.
Supposedly they don't know that the death camps are occurring after the war. They're showing pictures of all the brutality of the Holocaust. And then it's like the narrative, at least whether it's true or not today is that they were so ashamed that none of them are anti Semitic anymore. Right? That was the narrative anyway when I was brought up.
Like as soon as I realized that one right. And I'm not saying that's necessarily true, but this is, this was kind of a piss poor example, but how is it that people actually make a tremendous shift in an ideal or their ideals or their philosophy or religion or politics or whatever despite the fact that it's so emotionally difficult to do that.
Speaker 1: Well, that's a really big question. The, the, the glib answers that people don't, Generally speaking, you can't change somebody from a major opinion. This is kind of rare and that's why politics is so weird. They're they're fighting for the 3 people who could change their mind potentially. Now, in order to be able to change your mind, you have to, free yourself from the risk of cognitive dissonance.
Now cognitive distance is the thing that, makes you feel stupid when you're shown that you've been wrong about something for a long time. And since you don't like to feel stupid and you're sure you're not. Instead of saying, oh my goodness, you just proven that I've been stupid all of my life, That this basic thing that you understand and I don't, how much smarter you must be than me. I'm a dope. People don't like to do that.
That's the extensive, you know, in terms of your psychology. Instead they will imagine there's something that didn't happen. Such as, oh, you've got that information from the worst source or, or you're forgetting this other fact. And then be something that's not even real. So it's essentially a hallucination.
So people will hallucinate if you challenge their ego and who they think they are. That's the risk. They don't want to lose their self impression. But if you wanted to be a person who did not, experience that The things that I recommend, rather you embarrass yourself as much as possible, intentionally like doing things, you know, you're not good at, try some social things that, you know, are gonna go poorly hurricanes. Yeah.
Ask somebody on a date and they're probably not gonna say yes. No, just, just Shower yourself with embarrassment until it doesn't hurt anymore because you can get used to anything. Yeah. I'm a perfect example of being embarrassed until I don't even feel anymore. So by the time I got canceled worldwide, people were feeling bad for me.
And to me, it was a Tuesday. It's just, I just didn't feel it. I thought you
Speaker 0: did it on purpose because you were so concerned cavalier about it. Like, oh, fuck it. Oh, it would be only more socket. No.
Speaker 1: You know, at age 65, you know, I was looking for desperate looking for a retirement plan. I wasn't thinking this would be it, but it worked. And when I say retirement, I mean only doing work that I like to do. Right. That's right.
All retirement. So that's, that's where I'm at now. I'm doing only comics that I like, which you can still see by subscription on Twitter and the accent and, on the locals platform, just subscription Because it's subscription. I can go wild and, you know, do it. They worked anyway.
So the quick answer to your question, I digress Is it don't put your yourself in a position where you have to protect your ego. So one of the things I do is whenever I'm Showing wrong. Let's say I got a in my live stream. I make sure that I just throw myself, you know, onto the mercy of the court. Totally wrong.
A 100% wrong. Everybody have fun mocking me. And then I just make it part of the show. So if I can make my wrongness part of the show and also add content. Here's why I was wrong.
I don't know if you were wrong too, but don't make this mistake. That's the nature of the show, teaching people how to think through this stuff. So because of that, I've removed the trigger for cognitive distance. I have new ego to protect because I don't have anything wrapped up and been right about anything. In fact, I'm thrilled when I find out that they're wrong about something all my life because I feel like I learned something.
And let me, let me interrupt you right there. When was the last time that happened? Last time that happened about being completely wrong about something, that
Speaker 0: you believed for a long period of time.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, this morning I apologized for believing, the science of something that Doctor. Jordan Peterson that retweet that tweet it. So I saw this tweet. It was something about the meat eaters that Amazing health, benefits.
Yes. They were just doing the meat diet. Mhmm. And you said for granted? Well, because it came from him.
So, right. So, oh, the source looks good. And I just assumed he looked at the source and I didn't because I wouldn't know what I was looking at. He could look at the study and know what's wrong with it in a, in a way I couldn't. So I basically delegated my, fiduciary responsibility and was immediately bitten when I found out it wasn't so much a randomized controlled trial as it might've been a Facebook thing.
Right. It was some people answering. So immediately upon finding that actually took a few days until I remember, but I said, oh, I was completely wrong. I'm an idiot. Shouldn't looked Here.
Here's why I got it wrong, as I just explained. And if you can do that over and over again, then people will, oh, here's another one. And I I'm not sure I'm wrong about this yet, but I might be. There's some evidence that the placebo effect isn't real. Well, I believe it is.
It's it's more likely to be real. No. No. That's what we always believed. Right.
So So here's the argument against it. I don't know if I believe the argument against it, but it's blowing my mind. Right? The argument is that the way the placebo effect was created, or at least discovered is that you, let's say you have a new bill. And then I studied, told them the people that the fake bill, and then you see what they do.
The person who was a real poll, real bill, recovers. Maybe not all the way and maybe not everybody, but she got a big effect. The people with the fake bill. They also got like a third is much effect. And you say, wow, if you can get a third of the effect with a fake bill, There must be this psychological thing going on.
Now for years years, everybody believed that. Right? You know what's wrong with this study? It's not ours.
Speaker 0: The people that took the pill and got better didn't know that they had the real pills so they they could have gotten worse.
Speaker 1: No, but when I tell you, you're going to be mad that nobody ever said this before. Most people Those say the same when it comes to health, they might get worse, might get worse. Most people get better. So So what they should have tested that they've never tested and maybe nobody's ever tested. They have never tested the group that didn't know they were being studied for the condition Unless you're unless you're talking about MK Ultra, but those results have all been hidden.
But but if you looked at the people who didn't even know you were studying them And maybe somehow you asked the same questions, but you couched it as like, it was a, maybe part of a bigger thing. So they couldn't really figure out why you were testing. A third of them would just get better because people get better. And so if you compare the people who got better, who didn't even know they were being studied So the people who took the placebo, the placebo, people have the additional information that they're part of the study. But what if the result was the same?
That would mean that the placebo effect has never been real. And every study that, that just did the fake pill to the real pill was misleading you because of course some people just get better on the room. So how
Speaker 0: does this tie into the, That is mind blowing and fascinating. I'm curious to know, how does this tie into the The belief that the, the trans phenomenon going on right now, especially among kids, is merely like a, I don't want to use the word placebo, but maybe that is actually what they're trying to say. Like these kids think that they're trans because they're told that they've been trans or they're influenced to think they've been trans Allegedly. Okay. I'm just not, I'm not saying that for sure, but like how would that tie in to this new approach to whether or not placebo is even real?
I mean, One could argue that a lot of this trans stuff happening among the youth is like a placebo thing because of well, I wouldn't or whatever. Right?
Speaker 1: Yeah. I wouldn't use the CBOW analogy, I would just say that it'd be more I think more akin to mass murders. Yes. If the news has a big mass murderer, you can guarantee there will be a copycat. And if they do the new one, you can guarantee there'll be another one.
That's like, keep doing it. You can guarantee See, you know, if nobody had ever done a mass murder and showed up on TV, there'd probably still be some, but not many As you know, so action has to follow the thought. And if the thought is never there, you just never get the action. So same thing with, you know, let's say TikTok is my favorite, you know, whipping app. If TikTok is showing you a bunch of people who said, well, I wasn't sure about my gender, but then I made this decision and I'm all happy about it.
There's only 1 thing that could happen because children, especially are super susceptible to persuasion because they haven't been fooled enough times yet To to know that the real world is mostly fraud. I hate to say that, but it's true. And, they can be easily convinced. So I don't think there's a mystery to it. If you can make up anything, you've seen in other countries, for example, There'll be some weird rumor that, I don't know, there's a lie in the stealing people's souls.
You know, you, you know, these stories, I'm making that one up, but then the whole village will report while I know somebody whose soul was stolen, you know, they'll say I saw it myself. I knew there's no doubt about this person that a soul wide, walked by soul was stolen. Yeah. So people will believe anything if they've been exposed to the idea. And this is why, This is why the best manipulating persuade persuaders are good.
Yes. They give you a frame. You'll start seeing things to attach to it because it's just the first thing you saw. So if you say, this candidate is known for this bad behavior. You're going to see that behavior at every suggestion of everything they've ever done to their whole life because, because you've been exposed to it.
If nobody ever mentioned it, Well, I wouldn't even notice, you know, you just say, oh, that person did a lot of different things. You wouldn't see a pattern of any way. So people can influence you to see patterns simply by mentioning
Speaker 0: you. Even when the pattern isn't really there,
Speaker 1: even when the pattern is there. So like a Confirmation bias is what fits them the better. Right? That's fascinating. So We were talking a little bit about,
Speaker 0: I guess self esteem, but protection of the ego, right? And how people don't want to be humiliated or convinced that they're a moron, especially relative to other people. One of the reasons that when I was a young man in high school, I was so attracted to Ayn Rand was because Howard Roark in the Fountainhead was this character who had no regard for what anyone else thought of him. And that's an incredibly empowering Philosophy, especially for somebody who's coming of age who struggles with self esteem. Because if you don't have as much regard for what other people think, then You're less vulnerable or susceptible to the feelings of guilt or shame that could be associated with humiliation or embarrassment.
So on the one hand you mentioned Exposing yourself to much as much humiliation or embarrassment as possible in order to sort of develop a catalyst to it. Right. Is there an inverse to that where Right. It's not necessarily about exposing yourself to humiliation, but reframing Your regard for what other people think at all?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, my favorite reframe for this, I couldn't use the actual words in the book. Do you mind some, go ahead. I'm nursing. Are we okay with nursing?
Speaker 0: Go ahead. I already dropped the f bomb.
Speaker 1: All right. So, I had a college friend who introduced me to a philosophy. He learned from a fireman That fireman he knew and it was called the fuck you philosophy. And it goes like this, Scott, I don't like what you're doing for x, y, or z. And then in my mind, but not out loud, I say, no.
Well, fuck you. Now you said you that's our Now you say yourself, how in the world does that help? Like, like, what am I advertising myself by that stupid, simple thought? And the answer is yes. That's exactly why you're you're hypnotizing yourself.
You're using an f bomb on yourself. Don't say it out loud And you're saying, why do I care? Fuck you. Yeah. This is a perfect reframe of a reframe example where the logic It was just missing.
There's no there's no logic to it. You you're simply It's an attitude. It's just an attitude. Well, it but it's words. See the words or program, you know, attitude is enough.
You need to actually put it in a word and then the forms, actual structures in your head. Emotion will get you a little ways, but you need the words. So that, yeah, that's a clean example in the book. I say, go, you trudge. That was as close as I could get With the same idea.
Yeah. So Lord of that point, another reframe is that the ego, your ego is not who you are. We like to think, oh, the thing that makes me not want to be embarrassed, that's me. I'm the person who doesn't want to be embarrassed. That's sort of a lie.
It's just this little part of you that's your ego that doesn't want to be embarrassed, your hands and your arms and your legs don't care. And most of your brain is busy doing something else. There's this one little piece of your brain. This job is to keep you safe. And so it tells you you're special.
Let me give you the reframe. If somebody said, Hey, you do me a favor and carry this priceless piece of art, across the street to the museum. And you'd be like, okay, is it gonna be wrapped in anything? And now it's just across the street. It's a priceless feat piece of art.
Just put it in your hands, Walking across the street. Well, you'd probably be panicked. Like, you know, something could happen and a bird could grab under. And what if I said, can you take this potato across the street. You say why?
Well, it doesn't matter. Just take this potato. You wouldn't care if you dropped it. You wouldn't care if a bird graft on it because it's just a potato. If you go learn to think of yourself more like the potato than the priceless art, then you can move your ego out of the way.
And I'm already worthless. Just just say on the potato. Well, even people who have low opinion of themselves Have a huge ego defenses. So it's just always that you have, you have to treat your ego as your enemy, not your identity. Right?
Yeah. If, if the thing that's screaming, protect yourself, you know, say you're right. Even if you're not, if you're listening to that thing, you're not listening to a friend, A friend would say, you know, it'd be easier just to say you
Speaker 0: got that wrong, and then he would do it. You would find that work. Are some of the accomplishments that like, the most The most impressive accomplishments of just humankind throughout history manifest from narcissism and ego.
Speaker 1: Well, I don't know if it's, I'll use different words to agree with you that people like me, I consciously say to myself, if I can do things that are good for other people, that will feel good for me. So is feeling good the same as ego? Cause I know I would have this deep sense of satisfaction. Whenever somebody says, you know, you said a thing that helped me in some way. I just feel really good.
Is that ego? And what do you want that to go away? I would argue that there are 2 kinds of narcissists when people get things confused. There's a, there's a grandiose form And I consider myself one of those. So my let's say my nourishment and always has been, is that I can do something that other people would say, yes, that was a good thing.
You made me happier so that that's a positive form of narcissism. And then they say it and I feel good. The bad part is where you're just trying to destroy people. That's the bad guy. So, yeah, the, the, the words that we use for things, you can see in this conversation, the words you use determine your actions.
So I'm saying, I don't know if that's ego. It's just something that feels good. So I pursue a thing that feels good. If you said, no, that's just for your ego and say, well, I don't want to be with the organization. Right?
Why would I do one of those ego chasing people? So instead J chase the feeling, Chase, the feeling you get when you're a benefit to other people, there's no better feeling except sex And in which if you do it right, you're also a benefit to at least 1 other person.
Speaker 0: That's right. So let's scale this macro before we wrap up. How we've been talking a lot about the individual and how the individual operates. How does this scale on a societal level over time. And one of the things that I've been personally struggling with is Just constant sort of subtle humming thread that all society is doomed to entropy and Corruption can't be turned around.
It just gets worse until it collapses and something else is born like a Phoenix type thing. Right? So Given the nature of our psychology and how we operate as human beings, what is the inevitable outcome of Any sort of civilization that we put together.
Speaker 1: Well, and here's the reframe that might help you, feel better. Okay. I've been around longer than you have. You know, I grew up in the sixties seventies, and this isn't my first, like crisis. America just goes through 1 crisis after another.
And in, in the current, you know, news media landscape, Their business is to make you bad. They can only give money if you're clicking things because you're afraid or angry that somebody else is going to ruin something that'll hurt you. So, fear and anger are the, the currency of media. So if you're feeling afraid and you're feeling angry, It's probably not real. It's literally an illusion.
I've had that feeling that, let's say I started with, there's going to be a nuclear attack. So we, we built a bomb shelter in my house. Didn't happen.
Speaker 0: When was that? Like I didn't leave
Speaker 1: it before That there's a Vietnam war and then all the protests. And I remember all the adults said all these hippies will never turn into good citizens. The, the future is dead because, all the kids are useless drug addicts now and their long hair and their rock and roll. Nothing like that happened. It turned out to be one of the most productive generations of all time.
We're now, they raised the millennials. Yeah. Well, We're we're now talking about right. New generations as being the worthless ones.
Speaker 0: It's like, wow, the Plato did that.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Right. All those other times, All those other times we were wrong, but we got this one. Right. So it is the same thing with the crises, climate change to Corruption in the government.
Do you think there's more corruption in the government than there was now than there was an Abe Lincoln's time? No, no, no, no, no, Abel.
Speaker 0: I think, but I think the government's more powerful now than it was that. And that's why corruption is more dangerous. What was more powerful than you? The government, I think the government is more powerful today
Speaker 1: than it was a 100 years. So wherever you, wherever you have a big complicated thing where money's involved in lots of people and lots of time. Corruption is guaranteed. You just went, went, went, and who was just guaranteed. So, so the first thing is to know that the media is scaring you unnecessarily as they have for every year of my life.
And they will just, they'll just cycle it from 1, you know, the ozone, the, you know, the Chinese. I remember that Japan was going to eat our economy. Do you remember when our economy disappeared in Japan? Tuck it. And I'll bet you every single thing you're worried about today Won't won't happen in terms of the worst case scenario.
Everyone that we've been against, you know, I even have a name for it. I called the Adam's law of slow moving disasters. The ones you have to worry about are like the pandemic because you're sitting here one day and all of a sudden there's something on TV about people falling over in China, which never was real, which is weird. It was suddenly, you know, the world is on fire cause they weren't prepared, you know, in some ways, little ways. Yes.
But not really. So with that, we're not good at that, but we're really good at hey. Population is growing so fast. We'll definitely run out of food and there's just nothing you can do about it. And then we figured out how to make more food.
We're we're definitely gonna run run out of the oil in the seventies and there's nothing you can do about it. So finding that amount, I'm sorry. You could try to argue it, but to hold it, you know, keep your argument to yourself because we're just out of oil and then we learned to track And then we build a solar power and deal, other forms. So there's almost nothing that you can see years in advance. Like that take the two thousand, the year 2000 problem.
Yeah. Computers were all going to break, but we knew, you know, 1 or 2 years in advance. And even like 6 months before that, it looked like it was dire. And I kept saying in public, don't worry Because they know it's coming. They know what to do.
And then showed off in those last few months, the people were good at stuff, figured out how to automatically find and change the days, which was the hard part because they were, the days were embedded in too many words of code, but they just automated the search and replace, which I thought was kind of obvious in the 1st place, but I guess it was hard. And it was no problem. It was just a big dud. So just keep in mind, everything you're worrying about today is one of those, is one of those things that the media made a big thing usually because somebody could make money selling the solution to it. That's that's your climate change situation.
Somebody makes money selling the solution, so you're gonna be scared to death about that forever. So given that the media and journalists are incessantly lying to us to scare us and Pitting us against each other and dividing us, should we
Speaker 0: just kill all of them?
Speaker 1: I I'm gonna say no.
Speaker 0: Okay. Okay.
Speaker 1: And by the way, the, this is teasing by the way. Yeah, I know that this is a media lesson for the rest of you. There was no way to answer that question right unless I said no first. Like, you don't hold the no. Yeah.
I saw the vague, well,
Speaker 0: if we did that, like, oh, he's considering it. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I saw it as a vague, made, made this mistake the other day, which is rare. He doesn't make mistakes, but he left his no. A little too long and then
Speaker 0: it made us sound like a yes. I forget what the topic was, but you say 911 thing. It was a 911 was an inside Job thing on CNN. Is that
Speaker 1: what you're thinking of? Oh, I think it was. Yes. Yeah. I mean, you eventually said it in direct words, whatever it is that you do say, but You say it first.
If you say it first, you're in the clear every time. If you wait, you're dead.
Speaker 0: So where can people find you, follow you, and engage with you? Where where do you want people to interact with you?
Speaker 1: Well, because these days you want to buy my new book, reframe your brain, which literally is changing people's lives. So if you look at the reviews, you're just crazy, Crazy. Good. And you can find me on Twitter at Scott Adams says, and on Lowe's, which is subscription service as My other comics that you don't get to see anywhere else and live streams and lots of other political content as well.
Speaker 0: Thanks, man. I really enjoyed it, and I appreciate your time. I know it's valuable and you got a lot of things to do and this was awesome.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. I I appreciate it. I loved your questions. You're good
Speaker 0: at this. Thank you. I'm trying my best, man.