News in 2024 Is Just Plain Bad

Once again, we bring back the Chaos Monkey that is mister Josh Brewer and his lovely sidekick, Donna. mister Johnson? I don't know. I was trying to think of the name for you. Donna. Donna Johnson. 

Donna Johnson is here. No, it's just it's mister Aaron Johnson. that's what he's going to name Kid number one If it's a girl. Donna. No, it's not. Oh, it's Diane. Diane. Diane. No, it's Karen. I want a dirty Diana in my house. 

What? What? What? 

The song. I always think of that song when you hear Diana. I don't I don't know that song. it's a Michael Jackson song. I think. OK Dirty Diana or something like that. don't know it off the top of my head. Sniff your powder. OK Wow. That could sound bad in the wrong house, regardless of the fact. But like I said, we have Chaos Monkey here for number two Yay Chaos Monkey in full gear. 

And this one I am sure the Chaos Monkey will have much to say on because oh boy, I know he will have much to say on. When I wrote up the notes for it, I really This is why I wrote. I said media on both sides just sucks. 

And the reason I say that primarily media now is not, it seems it's not so much for handing out facts. it's more for how can I get the most views, how can I get the most clicks, and how can I generate the most outrage. it's sensationalized, as Aaron I think was trying to say there. 

The thing that brought this to mind, to memory, to the forefront for me was recently Aaron Rodgers, actually. Oh, interesting. what's going on with him now? This was a little while ago. This is where when we're going to record earlier in January. OK still wow, O what happened in earlier January this year? The Epstein client flight list. Oh, is he on it? No. Oh, Dang it. OK so right before the Epstein flight logs were released on the Pat McAfee show, oh gosh, he, you know, kind of insinuated joke, whatever, that Jimmy Kimmel won't be happy about the fight logs being released. You know, kind of insinuating that Kimmel might be on it. Kimmel got upset, blah blah blah, responded back the next day. You know, Kim, McAfee said. Oh, Rodgers isn't going to be on the show anymore. So people on one side of the aisle were like, Oh yes, Rodgers got what he deserved, he's got kicked off, blah, blah, blah. 

And then, you know, everyone on the, you know, that was being a people on the leftness, you know, to be obvious, people on the right were going, I can't believe this, this is a travesty. We need to fight back, blah, blah, blah. But you know they're going, this is evil, it's censorship, it's all these things. And then they forget about one simple thing, though. 

Aaron Rodgers has been on this show for many years. What does he do every time his team is no longer playing football? he's off the show. 

So he wasn't kicked off the show because of the comments he made. He was kicked off. He wasn't kicked necessarily. He just left the show because his team was done. His team wasn't proceeding further on. But on both sides you had people writing articles, news articles saying this is what happened, this is the and people making videos about it going, Oh my goodness, we have to fight back against the censorship because Aaron can't speak his mind on a radio show. But a little realizing that most of aaron 's I guess I could say Otter comments if you want to put it, categorize it that way. But it'd be about the vaccinations or whatever have been on the Pat McAfee show and they had to kick them off before this. So why would this be the thing that tilt. Yeah, yeah. And so that was the thing that kind of start started bringing that to my brain and just kind of looking and be like man, that just sucks. And The thing is it's not one side or the other, it's both sides of the aisle that are over sensationalizing the news. 

And as I was kind of digging deeper on some stuff, I came across an article actually by and it's on the Harvard Business Review of all places. And it was an article that they obviously they they're going to publish a a variety of things. It does not necessarily be that they published it that that means it's how do you say it's an endorsement of what that is. But they wrote an article basically saying the the headline is why the news is not the truth. 

This is written back in ninety five that long ago. And so they cite some stuff. News and the culture of lying, how journalism really works. Who stole the news? Why can't Why? Why We can't keep up with what happens in the world tainted truth and manipulation of facts in America. And this was ninety five before the news got even more polarized and political than it already is. And this first paragraph I think sums UA lot of my thoughts on this and I agree with this. And here's the article. The US press, like the US government, is a corrupt and troubled institution. Corrupt not so much in the sense that accepts bribes, but in a systemic sense. It fails to do what it claims to what it should do and what society expects it to do. 

Yeah, that's probably true right there. And then of course keep going on with that and you see other things like The New Yorker from twenty twenty three talking about after the Vietnam and Watergate you know back, this is back in like seventy six right? seventy two percent of the public said they trusted the news media. Today the figure this is February twenty three is down to thirty four percent Now they did emphasize among Republicans it's down to fourteen percent Wow. 

Which, to be honest, there's robably valid reasons. On on some things, i'm not saying all things. And they point out that journalism is no longer a public service. it's a business. you're doing stuff to get views, clicks. you're trying to get all these things right. And I was like, yeah, that's probably true. And we're seeing multiple examples of even beyond the Aaron Rodgers thing. 

I, for example, and this is one, you know, me and you, Josh, have messaged a couple times back and forth on that article article, the video I sent you that Crowder released recently. Oh yeah, that one. I don't know if you're familiar with that Aaron or not. Which one? The about The Who is hero one three one at mail dot com Oh, I started, I hadn't finished it, but I started to look into that but didn't get far. But yeah, just even watching that, you know, not concrete, you know, things published, you know? As much as I could. But even then, all of a sudden people on both sides of the aisle going off and making tons of assumptions, tons of arguments either for or against and not letting the facts just be facts. 

And I look at this, i'm like, we are in trouble with news. And it really has gotten to the point where media and the news just kind of sucks. Yeah, because either things are admitted for reasons to make whatever position you want better, or over exaggerated to make whatever you want better, or if it makes if it's a bad story. When I say bad story, bad for a political position or something like that, it's not even published anywhere. Mainstream, I should say. Where it's going to get widespread play, widespread appeal, widespread viewership, and attention to how important it really is. 

it's kind of funny how, I mean, that's like the one thing that I would think would give people hope, how quickly stuff can get shared around. But when you're a little guy competing that's not growing up, this little dude is right and what he's finding or whatever, I mean with I suppose like censorship and all that other the algorithm type crap that apparently is going on. I mean, there's no way to compete with any of these big guys that are out there. Granted, it's all Malav, it's probably just a ton of junk anyways. But yeah, and part of it is also our own results of this kind of social media influencer culture that we have. Where? Yeah, social media jars so to speak, if you can calm that are making their entire livings off. 

Youtubers are making their entire living off of it. I think of like, you know, for example, there's a guy locally to here to southeast Wisconsin. He makes his entire living online on YouTube. Yeah, guess what, He was one of those guys that when the, you know, Pat McAfee show thing kind of came around, he at least had a kind of a sensible take on it because he he follows the show. So he's like, what you guys don't realize, you know? And he said this like the day before Mccafee came out and said, hey, he wasn't kicked off for anything about this. You know, in the day before that he goes, Rogers is done when his team is done. that's when Rogers is done with the show. Yeah, you know, So you know, he kind of had that more balanced approach on that. But everyone else outside that was having that whole losing their mind sort of thing. Yeah, You know, like for example, this one here. 

Like, I pulled up one tweet from someone right, about this thing, right? Disappointed by McAfee 's approach disney slash ESPN one aaron Rodgers suspended from the pat mcafee show after his comments to jim on jimmy kimmel mcafee said he was happy rodgers won't be back on the show because of the drama it caused. I was like, is that another person had McAfee had Aaron Rodgers on show today. He showed AESPN who runs the show. 

Again two sides, both incorrect on the same thing but yet guess what? That person who was like Disney. ESPN One. You want to guess how many views they got on Twitter? 

And they're verified. So that means they're eligible to get a part of ad revenue on Twitter based on number of views. So you want to guess how many tweet views that tweet got? 

Some millions. Give me a number seven seven mil? Sure, Josh. 

what's your number seven million? This is ESPN we're talking about. No, this is just a random guy. Just a random Twitter user on on Twitter but since three point fives you're close two point four million. But since he's verified he's eligible for AD revenue from people viewing that tweet. So he picked an outrage thing to get views right. Yep sounds right. 

So that's why i'm like, and yeah, I don't know what sort of news culture we're going into, especially with an election cycle coming up here where this is going to be every day. And as we kind of talked about in the last in the previous episode, you know, even looking in, this is where I know i'm going to unleash a rabid beast here called Brewer. Called the Chaos Monkey. 

You know look at stuff like January sixth twenty twenty one and on both sides in that look at stuff like I don't know if you both remember it or not. The IT was maybe or maybe two years ago it was a Vox article where the person was talking about like a shootout somewhere and they showed the picture of the whole bullet sitting in the side of the wall and so that was shot from a gun and left there like that. I don't remember if either of you two remember that. I remember that I think it was CNN just came out to it may have not been CNN It was a more of a remember what we're going to call a left based mainstream media right big name. 

And it it came out like January fifth they're like we've had more mass shootings in the United States and we've had days in the new year and then you start looking into what they're actually talking about. I think two of the three shootings, there was shots fired and I think the only person that died was. One of the suspects that became at large and then I think there was one or two other people that got hurt but but it was they weren't even mass shootings. 

The the the thing that stood out to me is when you looked into it, right, you're looking at this and you're like, they think we're that dumb, that we're going to go off of the title of the article, read five lines into it and not investigate it for ourselves. I mean, it was a blatant lie because. And for those of you who don't know this, there's not actually technically a true definition of a mass shooting. it's subjected to police departments and what they feel is worthy of putting out, right. I mean, there's shootings that happen all the time. You know, if a gang member does a drive by and he's got two oozes or two MPS or whatever, and he sits and he lights up and he kills seven people, well. To most state standards, I think it's anything over four with the intention of continuation and killing. it's considered a mass shooting and you don't hear about that from Chicago because that's a normal thing. 

it's nothing that's going to grab anybody 's attention greater than what we have right now. But the fact that this mainstream media put out something and two to the three were something of some form of weight and three out of the five were nothing greater than, oh, this guy had a gun and he walked into a place he shouldn't have. Turns out that he was a prior convicted felon and he should not have carried the firearm, but because he had a firearm, he was going to kill a bunch of people, right? So they're trying to paint this, this skewed reality when you do look into it. But when you absolutely look into it, the whole narrative and the narrative is always going to be something that it's an idea that you want to take away from a situation and it's going to multiply. that's a narrative. 

Going going back to the idea that it is sensationalized for clicks, it is sensationalized for spreading. And it's a revenue generating event. Yeah, and and to your point, there isn't a definition of a mass shooting. Some some places it's based on deaths, some places it's based on people who get injured. 

And then some places exclude gang violence, armed robberies, familiar sides. Terrorism. Aaron, do you know what a familiar side is? Family. Good job. i'm impressed, actually. Good job. 

So yeah, that I yeah, there's no definition on it. And it just, yeah, that that's one example of things that drive me nuts just with that, that we people will massage things let's say to make things how they want and and and the other thing I think is. I agree, and this is a little side tangent, but this is going off with the whole thing. 

I don't agree with people you know, getting shot. You know, kids shouldn't have to be afraid of going to school, right? Right. They should be able to go to school. They should be able to have public education and be armed with information that allows them to question authority, right? Which that doesn't happen. But maybe i'm going down that route. that's a different route. At the end of the day, a kid should be able to go to school, achieve what they need to to arm themselves to be able to excel in life. Because that is one thing America does have, regardless of what people say right is if you have good education and you apply yourself with that education, the different adventures in life or obstacles you will achieve and you will prosper. 

The definition of achieving and prosper is different, but at the end of the day, kids should go to school and come home to school, come home. They should not have to. They. There should be no shooter trolls. There should be no drills at all. That we shouldn't even need cops posted to deal with gang violence in schools, right? That is a thing I agree on. 

But when you have people going into schools, shooting up schools, and then everybody is painted that a certain type of weapon is the deadliest on the planet and it's not, you have some military leaders saying that that's not they want something more deadly. They don't train their troops to shoot three times to kill something. They know that they can hit at once and it drops dead, Right. If we're going to get to specifics of carnage here, OK so we know that. The gun that. Media, all media is painting as the bad gun is not actually the best gun to use in a situation like that. But what they're doing is they're creating a martyr out of a firearm. So they're not only are telling you that it's something that it's not, now they're they're they're they're patronizing this firearm. So now that other people that want to do the same thing bite into that same cycle, right. So hey, I want to go do a lot of damage and i'm going to do a place without security and i'm just going to buy this firearm and i'm going to go do the duty. 

But then on the flip side, the answer is, OK we have a problem, let's do something with guns. let's do something with law abiding citizens and making it harder or punishing people, you know, this and that. But at the same time, too, a quick answer would be, let's post security at the school, let's let's give the bad guy a force to be reckoned with, right. You know, and this is, i'm going to tie this all together, OK America says they don't negotiate with terrorists, right? If you're willing to shoot up a school, I would consider you a domestic terrorist. You are willing to find innocent people that have no life threatening intentions to yourself and you're willing to take their life. You should be deemed a domestic terrorist. So we have all these domestic terrorists running around and nobody 's stopping them, and we have the easiest way of preventing or putting a front up to them. 

But then you're also telling people that this is how you should perceive this item in our world as the bad guy. This is actually the bad guy, not the guy doing it, and not the people who are refusing to have an immediate answer for it, but this object, right, this thing that is made by humans. So the message that we see is we see something that is constantly mail informed. 

And misdirected because they don't want to actually put out a solution. They don't want to actually. And you see this with everything else too. The idea is to keep us in the cycle of is there an answer. This is the answer because if they point to the answer and we the people push for the answer, then they know that they can't utilize that scenario again to get more again, clicks, likes and views. it's it's a really, it's really nasty thing and politicians play into it as well because they know that if we are divided, they can guarantee that's the thing. If they can't if they can't quantify us as people, as voters, then they can't create their projections. They can't figure out which politician 's going to have a more likely chance of of running the country this next time around. i'm going to let you interject. No, I got nothing to interject right now. I was just pulling up actually data off while you were talking because yeah, I agree. 

it's just that continuous cycle there, right back and forth, back and forth on things. They need something that's the new outrage. And of course, being a political year, we got enough outrage because they're pulling back up, up outrage, back all the way back from. 

Like, you know that that date, you dare not speak of January sixth twenty twenty one right? So this year is going to be full of outrage from there on various things. And it's interesting watching as people are finally starting to be able to see some of the footage released from that day and some people starting to go, wait, what? that's what we're all upset about. that's what we're all mad about, you know, You know some of these things, you know, and like, for example, what, what, what do they call him? The the shaman that stole the podium. You know, he actually went Kewan Shaman. Kewan Shaman. You know, he actually went in places in May. He shouldn't have gone in. OK fine, whatever. But we can all kind of agree that the confused little old lady Price shouldn't be treated the same way as someone who maybe was intentionally breaking into offices, whether whether you know because they're treating them all the same way so. And i'm just kind of like, here's my, here's my big issue with the whole January sixth thing. 

Wait, wait. Before you get there, Aaron, did you have anything you want to interject at this point? OK I I I asked this because the fact that, like, when he was talking about when he said the word should be no gun, you know, gun safety drills and that you kind of gave like a weird look. that's why I asked that, you know, I mean in a perfect world because, well, i'm not. And that's the point. Like, we will never have the, the reality that we could live in. It would be cool. It would be nice, right? But at the same time too, and and ask anybody listening, ask yourself this what other country has a constitution and a Bill of Rights? And in there it says that we should allow it to be armed. No, we shouldn't Or should we should be allowed to. 

Exactly my point. Anyone. How many other countries have turned to do quote, unquote democracy, Which is not a reality. We are not a democracy. We are a constitutional Republic that takes on some of the ideas of a democracy. What What are you doing over there, Aaron? Per year? Switzerland. 

What about Switzerland, Switzerland or oh, some S country? Or were they actually like the government, like issues guns for the people to have? Yeah, I think everybody has a mandatory to your service, just like South Korea. 

I could be wrong. I could be wrong. I know that used to be the case. i'm not sure if that's still the same case for Switzerland. I don't know if it's actually written into law that they have the right to bear arms. 

I don't know if it was the right to bear arms per southeast but I should have specified that, yes, How many countries, I guess you could say how many countries that have had American political influence, right, and have come from a different form of governing. they've turned around and said, you know what, we need to make sure that our people have the right to bear arms. I don't know any countries. 

i've never heard one. I, I, I, you hear countries quote, unquote fighting for democracy. But at the end of the day, you don't ever really hear. And if anything, countries that do allow citizens to own firearms, they tend to pull that right back. 

Yeah. So just reference, Switzerland does not have any laws pertaining to owning guns, but about the acquisition of guns and they are a shell issue country on the permit to buy and purchase a gun. So you need a permit to purchase a gun. But they are shell issue on the permit maybe. I don't know. Yeah, I don't know. I just remember seeing some video about some country that where the government. Yeah, gives or or like has gives people. 

Guns or whatever. So he's comparing it to the, like, American stuff, but it's not the same. Oh, I know everybody you're talking about. I can't remember. Colleen Oyer, are we watching an outlet? Yep, Yep, Yep. All right. So I have some data here. Yep. 

So this is based on the population back from twenty seventeen that's the latest they have this data for. OK Switzerland, i'm going to give you the population there, eight million four hundred and fifty four thousand people. How many guns do you think are in circulation there? three point five three point five what? Mil. Mil. 

Aaron, got an idea? i'll go with the same two point three mil. So so twenty seven point six percent of the population. You know, essentially if you if it was a one to one ratio would be gun owners. that's not the worst in the world, definitely not close to what America has, I will say. But they are probably, besides America, except for one other country, the two other countries, one of the highest places, Yemen is at fifty two point eight percent You know, gun, you know, gun to people with fourteen point eight million guns in circulation for a population of twenty eight million. 

The next kind of closest on the list there was Uruguay, one point one million guns for a population of three point four million. And of course, in the United States, we have them all beat three hundred and ninety three point three million guns for a population of three hundred and twenty six million people. Sounds right. that's over one gun per person. Heck yeah. 

So yeah, but yes, what's considering, considering what one two stun name off how many guns. i have in this household yeah don't don't don't give away the secret but yeah so switzerland it though it does say has one of the most liberal gun laws in the world a who what switzerland switzerland oh but it's not a citizen right right it's not a it's not a right but it but it is a shout issue issue ah i cannot issue issue permit E issue issue and you only need special permits for things like fully automatic guns other than that you don't need anything besides that shell. Permit. 

Actually, the weapon law does recognize the qualified right to acquire, possess and carry. I take the back, they do. But yeah, Switzerland will never come up there because they can't They can't possibly. Yeah. And they've kept their neutrality for over two hundred years. So. 

But yeah, And as you continue looking through various things like, OK the US you know, news, right. let's talk about mass shootings. Going back to mass shooting thing, right. Oh, absolutely. 

According to. i'm using one of their own news sources here. I love when this happens. 

According to Mother Jones, how many mass shootings were there last year in twenty twenty three twenty twenty three Yeah. I think i've seen a number like three hundred and fifty seven or or three hundred and sixty I think somebody said that there was or three ninety It was like more mass shootings than there were days. Well, according to Mother Jones, very left leaning organization, website, News source, they maintained a database of mass mass shootings throughout the year. According to their database, which is publicly available on their website, there were twelve Huh. 

Your brain looks like it's malfunctioning. What were they? What were they? Yeah. 

All right, one second Here, one So for First off there. Because again, there's no definition, as we talked about, right? Yeah, mass shootings, their definition is four or more. people that are injured or killed more injured at a given point in time yep four or more OK so the shootings were The UNLV shooting. in las vegas that was near the end of early part of december of twenty three the main bowling alley and bar. shooting. 

jacksonville dollar general store orange county bike biker bar philadelphia neighborhood new mexico neighborhood texas outlet mall louisville bank shooting nashville christian school shooting Still unanswered. Miss Michigan State University, Half Moon Bay Spa and the LA Dance Studio. Those are the twelve according to Mother Jones. Again because their definition is states such that four or more. So again, which which is it? Are we having more mass shootings than days in a year or do we have twelve Which is it? And and this is part of me going back to the whole half truth is, yeah, you can. You can tell the truth. Yeah. There are people dying. There are twelve scenarios where there are four than more than four people being shot and injured. 

Right. And you can categorize that as a mass shooting if you so choose because there's not an actual definition for it. Right. 

What are those? Someone intentionally going in and just shooting people up for no reason because they're angry about something? Or is there another motive? there's a gang violence. Is it relationship, right? 

what's what's the motive? I think the other thing too that people look at is it's so easy to compile numbers that you can rely on, right? Right. Because obviously there's the FBI statistics that get published every year, every other year they get updated or what not. And you can take, like for example, I can sit there and go. 

I can, I can look at this and I can go. You know what? You know who the worst people on our streets are? it's white people. 

You know that six million white people get arrested every year. There is no other race in the US that gets arrested as much as white people. They are absolutely the worst because they obviously are on the back of a squad car. I mean, anybody can take that number, sit there, splat it and paint it, right. I wasn't sure what that was going at first. Well, no, I i'm just, i'm just saying like you can take the number, but then, yeah, you can make this blanket statement that has truth to it. Yes. They. There is no other race in the US that it's arrested as much as white people, right. you're not wrong. But to say that because they're the most arrested, that they're also the most violent, the most dangerous, the worst to have on the street. 

there's no backing to it because you're not actually talking about the evidence you're bringing forth. So at that point, a half truth is a lie yeah they're using one data, point to make a bunch of assumptions and this is where we can see some groups they'll sit there and they'll pull shooting data to where one or two people maybe get shot compile it together and say oh yeah we've had more mass shootings than we've had days in the US what what's going on yeah and i have to give i can't believe i'm saying i'll say these next few words here i have to give mother jones a little bit of credit here back in twenty no no no no no but here's why i i want you to hear why why i'm saying this first OK back in twenty fifteen twenty fifteen they wrote this article no there has not been a mass shooting every day this this year in twenty fifteen you know they try to pass this thing that there were three hundred and like fifty five mass shootings that year right they go no no no no if you actually look at the data bah bah bah bah they go there were four. Things go, or if you count using three or more instead of four or more, then they go, OK then there were six. 

I was like, wait a minute, they're actually saying the quiet part out loud? Yeah. And then on the flip side, too. And this is another thing, right? 

Again, a narrative is a picture they want to paint to get you to respond a certain way, right. How many potential mass shootings, right, where somebody 's running in, right. We had one with the mall. There was one earlier in the year. There was a mall to where a kid ran back into the mall with his firearm and shot the suspect, right. Killed him. So he probably hit a few people if I remember correctly. I think he maybe killed one or two and he, I think he shot a few more and actually, you know, wounded him pretty good, but the kid ran back in and shot him. But that's that's that's not the intention. 

We want you to be afraid. We don't want you to feel safe, and we want you to respond a certain way to a message that we're presenting to you. We don't want you to to feel comfortable that there are people you don't know that are willing to put their lives on the line for you. Because I know it's good, right? The message is negative. At the end of the day, if you read something and you end up having a sour taste in your mouth, you probably should look more into the data than what you're being told about. And you should probably look at that same story from multiple angles. Exactly one of the things I don't know what what what process you run your news through. Josh, are you independent? Yeah. But So what I do is like any news story that comes in, I don't care if it's independent or not. OK because independent can have bias too. Oh yeah, let's be honest. And that's where you wait to see if another independent news, how their take on the story is. So I O i've run everything through a couple things. First, i've run through Newsguard. Newsguard, though has been having a little more problems the AST year. 

OK but I also run everything through Groundnews. Are you familiar with that service? Nope. So what I like about that is they're honest upfront for the most part, where they like they'll be like, for example, I have Mother Jones pulled up on my screen. They say, hey, according to our thing that says Mother Jones is left, leaning left, you know And they get this from a couple different places that kind of give the news site rating where they're left center right but then the other reason is i can pull up an article. in here so i find an article in headline whatever and it will say here's an article from a left wing site a little less left center right more right etcetera so it'll give it from that same article from multiple perspectives so i can quickly tab through and be like and then you can easily see how your political bias that you have can help you you know where it gives you that little blind side sight to certain things and it'll even like if there's articles that only pop up with only like let's say left side or only right side news sources they'll say hey they'll put like a little warning be like hey there might be some bias going on on this article But that's it. 

It won't stop you from reading it. You can pull it up and then OK boom, boom, boom. And then I could tap right through all of them, see them all and kind of get a little more of a rounded view of what's going on. Yep. 

I think one of the things I have noticed is story swapping it it appears right. Again, this is my opinion. What i've seen is i've seen story swapping as i'm calling it. And what you're what you see is you see that a, a a certain news hits the media and it swaps to something else almost overnight. Like obviously you go through the course of three weeks, you look back and you go, oh wait, that happened three weeks ago. Like, obviously our our, our ability to comprehend time is, you know, as I put it, the amount of technology we have to make our time in life more leisurable. Yeah, we still don't have enough time. 

So this is where I jump to this phrase. The convenience of technology is actually inconvenient, yeah, and it makes it real easy to continue your blind spots, correct? The reason being, once the algorithm kind of gets you into a particular flow, particular frame of things, he goes, hey, guess what, you're engaging with this. So i'm going to continue showing you things on this. i'm going to continue feeding you this. And guess what that does? That feeds A perpetual rage machine in your own, not only you, but in everyone else as well. Again, for clicks. Yeah, you know it. It knows Aaron Johnson over here loves ABR So what's going to do is it's going to start showing, oh, please don't do that. he's too white for that. he's too white for his hat to the side. they're going to OK that's fine. 

they're going to show him some stuff about ABR he's going to click it, and then he's going to click more. And then it's going to say, hey, maybe suggest this on ABR maybe suggest this. I use YouTube to watch the song, the music video of the song we're reviewing for this month, right? Guess what? Now is populating my stupid feed? Because I watched that stupid music video more than twenty times. 

More and more electrical boys. it's like, oh, you interacted with this twenty times or so. That means you must like this. 

we're going to give you more. we're going to give you more. we're going to give you more. And guess what? It keeps feeding you down that path that you're going. 

And it's amazing. What i'll do is once in a while, i'll go into YouTube, i'll go Incognito mode so it doesn't show me what it thinks i'm going to like. I get a completely different YouTube. Oh, yeah. Oh yeah. And and going off of that whole, you know, convenience of technology is inconvenient. And the whole algorithm aspect, what I felt like I was seeing is when a story stopped being so attractive right to the population, they'd throw something else in the way. Or if a story started to get too much traction, they swap it out with something else. Because one or two things, there's either a a political tie to the story, or they're trying to preserve something, or they don't want all the answers to come out right away. So they swap to something else. They bring the answers later. it's kind of like a card in their back pocket to keep you hooked. And then when you have the whole algorithm aspect as well, now they're trying to keep you divided. 

And that's ultimately, I think the biggest thing I fear of with AI is the ability to figure out your sensitive spot for, say, as a person and exploit that to keep you with a certain type of perception. So are you awake, mister Johnson? OK Have you, you know, based on that, have you ever looked either one of you? Have you ever looked what? Because if you don't have a Facebook account, you, you still have a Facebook profile. Did you know that? 

OK you knew that, Josh. What? Did you know that? No, I didn't know that. Yeah. If you do not have a Facebook account, you still have a Facebook profile essentially where they have all this data on you, mister Brewer about who you are, what you like, what you think. 

Even if you don't have an account, OK there is a way to go. If obviously if you have an account, you can go into the Facebook to see all this data and it'll say like based on all this we know about you. they'll go like we think you're single, we think you're straight, we think you're this, we think you're that. And they'll make all these assumptions based on things that you have viewed and interacted with on the web and that's where you have an account or not. 

Well, I know about that. I didn't then. I didn't Yeah, I knew. I knew that. You know, obviously Google has all this information about you, and obviously YouTube will have this information about you. But how does Facebook have the information unless they buy it illegally or here's the other thing I don't agree with. 

They have it through ads, information harvesting. Yeah, to me personally, should be its own box. It legally should not be built into the terms of service. that's why you have that nine page thing. You have to. Well, that's also why you have stuff like the European Union with the GDPR in that they're a lot more strict on data collection and management than we are in the US we're a lot more lenient on things, a lot more personal information can be siphoned off. Also doesn't help that we have a bunch of companies that have this data that we hand over for whatever reasons and then they're broken into. 

Have you do either of you use stuff like have I been pwned? No. But I know there's stuff out there where like, you can put your e-mail in and see how many websites. Well, so like, it's flagged. And so, like, Have I been Pwned is a great website. You put your e-mail in, right? And it'll and any other information you want. So you don't have to put anything in, but you can put whatever you want into and then it'll show. If you pop up in any data breaches and it'll say, hey, like, hey Josh, you showed up in this data breach, They got your Social Security number. They got your phone number, they got your address. 

I got one of those recently. Or a site that I did legitimate business with was breached and they got like all my info short of my Social Security number. Oh, you don't even need the Social Security number to do damage anymore. I know that you can buy online, you just need a credit card and you can reverse all that. Yep. So. 

And then going back to your statement about AI you know, and how that will be all I remember what was it? Yeah, New York Post twenty Oh, this is longer than I even thought. twenty twenty two was talking about Biden administration working it with social media to censor statements they deemed as misinformation. So that was the government itself censoring speech online that they deemed as misinformation. Right now it's was just the COVID. But what else will be misinformation in the future? Well, one of the things also. 

The feds. But just recently, something came out. The feds said something out to banks, talking about recording anything that aligns with with Trump through its supporters. 

Yeah. Did you see all the items that were on the list? I have nots. Do you want to guess what some of them are? The Bible 's one of them. yes did you know about that. aaron are you tired aaron no are you hungry you're not hungry i'm hungry yes the bible is one of them but at the same time too i think it was it's going back i think two years ago now the DHS worked with the university and this university it was i think a sociology department or something like that anyways this this part of the university was tracked with establishing. 

Domestic terror tears, threats, right. You know, like the KKK is in there and the Proud Boys are in there. Tier five Catholics, Christians, Jews. 

And so they were, they were hiring them on. Now some claim it was just an experiment right. But they were hiring them on right as a you know thing so they they could create and compile this data. Apparently just recently there was something else released. I I don't think it was the DHSI think it may have been the FBI but it was talking about no it wasn't that it was it was something another three letter abbreviation branch and they compiled a bunch of this is YouTube this is podcast stuff. They compiled a bunch of names that they felt the content that they were publishing was. Obviously Trump leaning far, right wing and some of these podcasts on there are liberal standing that have conservative commentators come on. And some of these guys are like, i'm getting thrown in this ringer and all I have is somebody voicing their opinion and i'm now on a blackmail list. 

Essentially this this, this, this kind of thing is it's not this is not like when it's a document that comes from a three letter abbreviated agency. This is legit stuff they're using to create laws to to enforce laws. This is, this is stuff that cannot be. 

what's the word i'm looking for like the ATF The ATF at any given point in time, can choose how to interpret a law. Yeah, they can. They can change what they want the the amount of time, the amount of months it'll take before the Supreme Court can get their hands on it, make a ruling on it and it goes into effect. That is a violation of our rights. it's like half a year or more. 

So these agencies can use these stuff that they create. They rely on outside sources to interpret for them to enforce things. I mean look at, look at the whole thing. I know some people will realize, but look at the whole thing with Trump and the Russia collusion, the the fake dossier, the law firm that got traced back to Hillary Clinton and the money, money channeling of that. 

It was a fake dossier, right? It was done by. It was investigated by the Intelligence Committee. A fake dossier. There was a legit money trail that linked back to Hillary Clinton. O this is candidate persecution, right? This is wrong. This is illegal. But then the FBI was corrupt enough. They didn't check their data. Nobody down in the chain of command questioned this. They used it to wiretap. They used it to investigate personal information and activities. They And at the end of the day, they found nothing, right? As much as people say, oh, Trump was in bed at the end of the day, if you stand before the court of law and you have blank evidence, no evidence or lack of evidence to convince a jury, then you're not found guilty. So you know what's funny? I was reading an article. there's actually a case up to the Supreme Court where the Supreme Court potentially has as part of this case the ability to redefine how three letter agencies are able to function, function and and basically extrapolate laws from other things. 

Yeah, it should be. So the the. I get the and and and again Cisco to a lot of other stuff. Right, right. You know, everything kind of kind of start out with a good intent and then it gets sour over time because it's long past due is its expiration date. Right. 

And this comes from somebody think I deal with the FAA and the FAA Federal Aviation administration 's job is to, on behalf of Congress to ensure that our Airways stay safe. here's a disadvantage. There is so much work and we are changing technologically so quick the FAA can't keep up, which is preventing technology from hitting our Airways. 

Now i'm going to say skies. But at the same time too, they are tasked with determining the legal terms, operations, interactions. that's their job on behalf of Congress. So from a, from a an original standpoint, having people specialize in a certain sector, right of the US to do that bidding on behalf of the of Congress and the Senate right, the legislative branch, that makes sense. But pure point, when they have the ability to reinterpret the very laws that they write or the very laws that their brothers in the little slaves are branch, right. Well, that's wrong. Especially there's a thing called you may know what it's called, I have to have a description first. Civil. it's like a civil service, Civil service protection, OK it's where because you're a part of one of these branches, you are you're deemed a civil service. 

You can't just get fired. It was the long lines of that. I can't remember exactly how, how how it worked. But at the end of the day the the president of the country just couldn't come in and you're fired. they're protected. they're protected under a certain law and it has to go through the proper channels. No, it doesn't surprise me. It it, it doesn't all the unions and all that to get and to get into exactly same thing. But yeah, O back to. 

Are you OK Aaron? I know we're yo yoing a little bit here, but i'm like looking up information as you're doing your thing, you know, back to the thing about them looking, monitoring your bank accounts. You know, we talked Bibles, religious texts, right? You want to guess what other stuff we're kind of it is kind of in there that it can be looked at for extremism. 

And i'm saving this buying an American flag. i'm going to save this news article. So that way I can make sure that I include it in the links, going to certain stores, just going and purchasing anything at those stores. 

Want to guess what type of stores? Well, they're big name stores. dick's Sporting Goods. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. cabela's Yeah, yeah. Pro Shops OK anything that has more of a right wing or quote UN quote gun leaning stance right. So the other things that they said and they they literally said, hey, banks go search in like Zell search for Trump or Baga. 

They also said, hey, you know, we should also look for indicators like transportation charges, bus tickets, rental cars, plane tickets for travel areas with no purpose or the purchase of books including religious texts and subscriptions to other media containing extremist views. Here was the thing that was interesting in this article and it's in this article. I haven't had time time time to just like research it over and over to see. 

But part of the person they interviewed it says this the effort by FIN CEN to work with law enforcement to assist with their post January six efforts began under the previous administration. Huh. That Say it again effort. This is the direct quote that they have in the article that they quoted this person as saying. 

The effort by FinCEN to work with law enforcement to assist with their post January sixth effort began under the previous administration. So what does that mean? don't know. But that also means have to look that up more, right? Yeah. And this was also after what bank voluntarily without warrant gave purchase data on their cards to the FBI without warrant? Yep, they gave purchase date on anyone who purchased anything in Washington DC between January fifth and January seventh twenty twenty one on both their credit and debit card network, Bank of America. 

So if you were anywhere in, you know, in DC area between January fifth and seventh you purchase anything the FBI got. A copy of your all your transaction history without a warrant, they voluntarily gave that data to them. It wasn't just like the transaction data, it was the list of individuals with their transactions as well. 

So as of this recording, we're recording on one twenty eight at this point, right. They there are certain people who have until one thirty one to respond back to Congress so they can do a formal hearing on this on what is going on with this. So maybe by the time this comes out, you know that hearing will have occurred. But who knows? This goes back to your original thing. 

The I had a conversation with somebody recently and his response was. Traditional, traditional, traditional. How how is this response? Well, you'll get to it. Go on pertaining to January sixth Traditional response. OK Going back to this whole news thing. Right. 

OK people sit there and they go, oh, well, there's no, there's no true collusion. there's no true information sharing. there's no true like. there's not this true motive, right. there's not this. You can't draw a line. You can't make a connection. 

TNI. I encourage you all to look up TNI for yourself. Trusted News Initiative, OK it's a part of the BBC OK And there is. 

it's a channeling aspect. So somebody, somebody made a compilation of it and people will quickly jump oh, that was AI Or, oh, this was that. At the end of the day, there's only one video that i'm aware of and somebody took news castings of people talking about the vaccine. Are you familiar with that? I think, I think I know what Go on, describe it. I think I know what you're talking about. And it's an overlay. And it starts in, you hear like, they start talking about something related to COVID. And then the next one shows and sounds like saying the same thing, but it sounds like they're slightly behind. And it keeps going and it keeps going and before you know it, the entire screen is filled with all these news organizations saying almost the exact same thing. 

I can't attest if that's real or not, that there could be a level of manipulation involved in that. But OK that's not the one I saw. OK the one I saw, it was very similar. And I played this and Aaron, Remember this. Aaron where if they were talking about on the local news channels and they started like same thing start with one and then just added layer after layer after layer. But they're talking about how disinformation is a problem and we need to trust the news and that, you know just literally and it I OK And it was the basically the same thing. it's the same message and and to some they would say that that stems from the trusted news initiative. 

And ideally what it is, it's it's there's a centralized channelized because all these news organizations are owned by a select few people right. Once you once you find out who's paying the paychecks it's it comes all this there's I don't know it was like no it was like maybe three or four corporations own all news all Maine big big time news in the United States right. But how do I put it all right now here's a good idea right. i'm trying to think how to work this without taking too long. 

Why? Why you think that? i'm going to play what what i'm talking about here? Hi, i'm Fox, San antonio 's Jessica Headley. And i'm Ryan Wolf. Our greatest responsibility is to serve our Treasure Valley communities, the El Paso, Las Cruces communities, Eastern Iowa communities, Mid Michigan communities. We are extremely proud of the quality, balanced journalism that CBS four News produces. But plaguing our country, the sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media moral law. Some media outlets publish the same fake stories without checking facts first. 

The sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media, and this is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. 

This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. 

This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. In that main chorus, you know when it was like all the voices at once. 

W I S N twelve from Wisconsin was in there. It was like the third or fourth square that joined in the chorus, a surprise face. I know, Surprise, surprise, shock. Pikachu. Yeah, right. The, you know, think about this. If you played sports and you're on a team right, you may not be as good as you know, basketball, baseball, volleyball, softball, whatever, kickball, whatever it is, right, may not be the best player on the team. But at the end of the day you have one goal, well that's the win and ultimately you're only facing one opponent and that's your opponent that must lose. When we think about, you know, the algorithms, political landscapes, the skewed information that we see, the misinformation from those that claim that misaffremation is happening, it's all stems back to a level of division, right? 

Right. An if you only have two options. And if you only have one or two things that one of those options really speaks to you on, you're forced to vote for that person. 

I just lost my train of thought. Oh, that's still happening. Wow. OK yeah, that's still happening. 

So, yeah, you know, it kind of going back to that trust and news initiative and all this art stuff, right? It reminds me, Aaron, i'm sure you remember this. When we talked about this, the the news organizations that came said they came together in a shadow campaign to save the twenty twenty election by fortifying it. Do you remember reading anything about that, Josh? No, I don't Oh, that was all like twenty twenty one early on. 

it's called There Was a a piece out there called The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign that Saved the twenty twenty election. It was a story published after the author gained access to the inside story, The conspiracy to save the twenty twenty election based on access to the group 's inner workings, never before seen documents and interviews with dozens of those involved from across the political spectrum. If you have not read it, I would recommend going to see it. it's out on time dot com i'll include a link in this article or in this podcast as well when the show notes for it. But yes, it it it literally is. it's on time dot com and it's called The Secret History of the Shadow campaign that saved the twenty twenty election. 

And it is terrifying, I think is a word to say, reading how these different news organizations and other political leaders essentially came together to say this is what we want for our election. Yet all we heard about from the news is, oh, this is the most secure. This was the most. Oh, and absolutely it was not the most secure. Yeah. And I mean, there was a. They just did a major poll and they found i'm i'm going to knock the number down. Like what was it about forty percent of people voted ballot drop off a minimum of ten percent based on the polls done. I think it was rasmussen 's or something like that ten percent The votes are disqualified, but it was all done anonymously, so you can't actually know who voted illegally or not. 

Most people said that they would fill in the boxes on behalf of somebody else or the biggest offender was is voting in states that you no longer resided in. So you were voting twice. So yeah, but it was the safest. It was absolutely the safest. And the real, the real number of violations approaches more of once you include all the different violations, I think you're about forty percent So about half of the ballot drop off and and some people didn't even realize what they were doing was illegal. And that's the problem, right? it's not whether or not they did the illegal thing, it's whether or not they knew they were doing an illegal thing. Which means they can easily be convinced to do something else that is just as illegal. If they don't actually know what they're doing, it's illegal or not. So you can easily say hey everybody bring your ballots, you know here and we'll all sign them together or something. And that right. You just don't it's Yeah yeah. 

But yeah. If you haven't read that article because they talk in there how this group, this little cabal, they're the ones who went to Congress to steer COVID and relief money to election administration. How they met weekly for two and a half hours to basically figure out ads to promote to get people to vote the way they wanted. how they could do these various things And how they could whatever whatever they needed to do so it's a very interesting article where they kind of go through everything and say yeah this is how we we made the twenty twenty election happen the way we wanted and the ironic thing is and this is this is where I talk about it. 

If somebody mentions January sixth and you roll your eyes, you're a part of the problem because you've allowed that level of persuasion to automatically impact you before the evidence. Most, most of the time, if something happens politically, we won't know the truth about it until four years later. that's just a reality. Once you look talk about investigations and then you have to deal with the press and then you have to deal with if things are classified, you have to wait for them to become unclassified. But whatever it may be, the minimum is about four years before you actually know the truth, or most of the truth, right to the point to where the the question of whether or not it was right or wrong stands out, or who was right and who was wrong stands out enough that it's enough evidence. 

there's plenty of people. Anyway, it was going back to the guy that I was talking about. I had mentioned January sixth and he kind of rolled his eyes and he says, well, I understand people voting for him the first time and I understand for people voting for him the second time. But the third time around, I don't see why people have the right to vote to the way that i'm looking at it, right? If he truly did something illegal, right, they can pin him on it, right? If there's actual evidence that he has done something illegal, they can pin him for it. You you know what's kind of funny that they try to pin him on, on Trump, you know, 'cause he kind of said like the stand down, not at the January sixth stuff, but another times where he's like stand down but stand by sort of deal. Yeah. Again, go back and read this article. They tell they had organized protesters ready to go at the drop of a hat. And they said stand down, but stand by they use that same phrasing. 

With their protesters. And they're like, they're like, yeah, this is what they said. And then pull this up right here. We want to be mindful when was the right time to call for moving masses of people into the street. As much as they were eager to mount a show of strength. Mobilizing immediately could backfire and put people at risk. 

But so none of those protests after the election, at least you know from the left side, were organic. They were called for, organized and controlled by this lovely little cabal. The one of the things I think, I think the American people should be more afraid at, how the initial perception was created. Because if you can do this with one political candidate, you can do this with any political candidate you can persecute without trial. You know, when people sit there, and they and you always hear this, our democracy is at risk. Our democracy, our democracy. You want real democracy, actual unfiltered democracy as they painted. You will regret it. It is mob rule, right? Back in the day when the Kings would leave it up to the mob, the mob chose the punishment the mob chose. 

If you lived or died because of your crime and if you were painted as somebody that they should hate, they would hate you. No question. They didn't They didn't care about having true information. You know, if you're told that you, you know, killed kids, raped women, pillaged other people 's homes, i'm off with his head, off with his head, Hang them, drown them. Whatever it is, mob rule is not what you want. 

But the fact that the initial release of information was the only footage that they could have that shows any form of violence, that was the initial release of footage. The claim that the police officer died out there. And he didn't He died at the hospital, right. Right. 

That the fact that they did that should tell you that they don't care about the truth. They want you to have a certain perception. The fact that three hundred some odd hours of tape footage got released later and shows more peace, more conversations, more interactions with the state police officers, Capitol police officers, who's not to say that there were a few people that were hand picked that were given the opportunity, yet these people. So so for example, this is, it's just me spit bone on this part right here but it's called the, it's called the Wolfpack mentality. Wolfpack mentality is a common thing. Police are aware of it. Police use it to their advantage to try to knock down protests. If it's a eaceful protest, they just keep an eye on it. But as soon as the rotest starts to get a little bit more into a fracas, stuff starts going, stuff starts getting damaged. 

Things look unclean, They target. The alpha. The alpha is somebody that just simply is out there that quickly gets everybody else riled up. they're just an irrational leader in a protest. 

If you put enough of those guys in one spot, you will have violence. You will. And if you can orchestrate that, Oh yeah, you can easily. I can totally see. And maybe being select guys knew each other and collaborated themselves. And maybe that's the reason why we saw one spot of the entire capital surrounding be so violent, right? But nobody knows. Nobody 's allowed to know nobody knows exactly how these hearings are proceeding we just know that people have been and some people have been in jail for years without an actual fair trial yet right so how do we know said it wasn't started and actually there was stuff released by the FBI and there's been stuff leaked by police departments to where when a protest happens they specifically put stuff into play. 

To antagonize and to rile up the protesters, to be able to make arrests. Yeah, that's been heavily claimed from a lot of from a lot of people, from Tim Poole to many others. Like even Wow, what was it? The. 

I forget the name of the group, but like, it was like some Patriot first group or something like that name. Like, they were all caught and This is why they're like, Oh yeah, why are they They were all on like on the New York subway wearing like ski masks and bandanas over face, like just completely hiding their face. Right. he's like why are protesters who are would be proud to be Americans. didn't all this be covering up their face and basically came down to, Oh yeah, that's a lot of interesting that they're may be associated with the government. And then there were other protests that the same group performed at, and they were caught on video. Loading into pickup trucks with government license plates. 

So it's like I mean it it stands true and and a lot of people would say that this is just hearsay and this is this is this is lies and stuff because we're there's there's two types of people, right. there's somebody who is fed kind of and everybody leans one way or the other. At the end of the day, everybody does. Nobody is truly neutral, right. Right. it's it's in, it's in US right? As Christians, we know that we have this calling to be a part of something greater than ourselves. Why do you guys, for those of you don't realize, why do you think sports teams exist back to the Roman Colosseum days? Exactly. Back to the Roman Colosseum, when the emperor was doing something that pissed off the people and didn't please the people, where something was going on in society and the people who were unhappy. he'd throw em games, he'd entertain the people, he'd distract the people. 

We just found a way to privatize that and make a lot of poo COO box off of it, but it keeps everybody occupied, you know, four months out of the year, depending on what sport you're into. But at the end of the day, you know, we're we're we're single sided usually, right. Right. If if you made everything black and white, I want to learn more right than I will. Left, right. that's just me. there's nothing wrong with that, right? And there's nothing wrong if somebody leans more left. Based on your experiences and this and that, you're going to have a little bit more of a priority over some things and topics and things that you see and hear and how you interact with things. that's just how it is. 

But yeah, I mean, it's it's crazy how many people get riled up at just the mention of certain things they know nothing about. They just get, you know, they just. So and So what? How, how dare you say that here. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But it's again, if you're if you're not a single sided person, you're that other kind of person who doesn't want to admit that there's actually negativity in this world. I knew several people like that. They think that oh you know, America would never be like that. there's we would never vote. People like that end up into office. We would, we would. And I get it. i'd love to imagine that too. But that's not the case. We somebody said this once, I can't remember what it was. It was a podcast I was listening to. 

And he goes, think about it this way. Are you you guys are aware of the American war machine, right? Oh, yes, Johnson, the American war machine. That sounds familiar. The American war machine is a thought, right? it's a thought followed by actions. OK the American war machine. 

The backbone of the American war machine, Yep, is research and development. To get research and development, you have to have funding from the government. Private companies need funding from the government to make weapons of mass destruction. Check this out. If there's no wars, there's no need for funding. 

If there's no wars that you need new destructible weapons for, there's no need for research and development. Therefore, there's no weapons being made, companies at play. At the end of the day, as long as there's a conflict and there's a war and America is involved in it, Congress will subject funding for weapons, Private companies will profit. 

And we paint it as this big we're being patriots, we're helping a world, we're spreading democracy, we're keeping peace. At the end of the day, it's just this circle that keeps going, right, Omebody said. Now take that and think about that with police force, Think about that with the FBI Think about that with the CIA Imagine if you eliminate a crime. you'd have no reason for police. you'd have no reason for an investigative Bureau. 

The Central Intelligence Committee obviously would be dwindled down, because now you don't have to worry about domestic terrorism. But you don't want that. You need to keep funding for your police departments. You need to keep. So this is more of a even even, not just, even I, I don't know necessarily a hundred percent police awareness but the War. 

machine i mean Yeah. there's a lot in there there there is there is and it's it's not something that you can easily explain or answer and could you ever not have it probably not yeah it's it's it's i'm not going to say it's a necessary evil but it's an unfortunate evil that exists and and that's been like kind of you know criticize all the way even back through like art mediums and that i'll say like TV shows and that all the way even back to vietnam war yeah Korean War. That, and that's why I think shows like MASH resonated with people so much as they were sick of war. But we haven't stopped. People don't want war. we're on the verge of World War three Leaders want war. Yeah, I was going to say there's one one other thing I wanted to mention too. 

The just lost it. You just lost it. Oh well, one of the things that I think should be illegal. 

what's that? Right. Obviously it doesn't matter because it'll probably get violated anyways going into that whole topic, right? Yep. 

You can get pulled over for suspicion without without doubt, right? The cop sees you swerving or not. He can pull you over and and and say, well, I thought it I I had reason to believe that you could be drunk because you were swerving, right? You could be intoxicated, you could be under the influence, right? And then he can push to see if that is true, right? Whether or not you actually swerved. Right. That obviously will be something that'll be channeled because at the end of the day, that is something that will be overlooked if you actually are under the influence. 

Yeah, but first they got to do something to prove that you are. Exactly. However, that is, if it's the little walk of shame, if it's a breathalyzer, if it's hey, you're not being cooperative. I don't feel like you can properly communicate with me. I need to take you downtown. I need to do a blood sample. I have a reason to believe that you might be on crack or cocaine. However they do it, i've never been subjected to that, so hopefully I don't ever have to be. Well, of course you haven't been. you're white. I know both of you are white. I can wear crack and nobody will know more. So, Aaron, he seems a little more wider pale than you. Yes, but I think, and this is going to it, right, if there's no violence, if there's no crime being committed, then you don't really need a Police Department, right? Yeah, we're never getting there. But what? here's my point. I don't believe police officers should be able to do drug deals, and they do. 

I can sit down in your car. I can have communications with him, right? I have no actual concrete evidence that he's going to sell me any drugs. But I can sit down in the car. I can give him the opportunity to commit a crime. And in the process of committing that crime, that's my that's that's i'm now the witness. And I can call on the guys and they're arrested. 

I don't know what all the limitations and rules around that are. So I I would like to know what that is. it's on. it's just pretty much an undercover agent setting themselves. Yeah. But i'm sure, i'm sure there's there's limitations there's processes that they have to go through to do that. I what that is, I don't know. But regardless. 

All right. Aaron. You have been exceedingly quiet on this episode. Is that because the chaos monkeys here? 

You can speak, Sir? Oh yeah. i'd say the only way that camera software 's going to go back to you is if you speak and make sound. Exactly. 

All right. Do you have anything to say on any of this that the chaos monkey has brought her way? A lot of chaos. 

Yeah. there's a lot of chaos there. All right, Josh, i'm i'm going to regret this. Any final closing statements? Nope. Negative. Oh, my goodness. Wow. I wasn't expecting that to be. 

So. Yeah, that was. I don't know how many episodes I must put that into. It might be two episodes. So it might be episodes two and three here, where we're rejoined by the Chaos Monkey. But join us for the next one where we get to hear about aaron 's I guess one of his favorite bands. No, no, no. I just enjoy. I get to hear about the style music that they say that they like. 

I like the don't give, don't give too much away. i'm not going to give that simple. I enjoy. And the Chaos Monkey joins us on that one. By the way, Yes. 

I enjoy the change from pop to metal. I enjoy that dynamic. OK I don't Yeah. 

OK OK No, that's fine. that's fine. OK I got nothing else. 

This won't be interesting to see how AI summarizes it, so talk to you all later. See you next week. Have a good one.