coup attempt.

But if somebody who is a Democrat writes it, they're going to say that Russia tried to interfere with the election and there's still some suggestion that the Trump administration talked to the Russians too much and we're not clear what they did or something like that. Right?

So this is an honest question. How do you write the history if you see Biden out there saying that the president called service people suckers and losers, which as far as we know did not happen? So what do the history books say? Do the history books say he did say that? Or the history books say he didn't say that and it was claimed that he said that?

How about the fine people hoax? Do the history books write that as a hoax? Or do they write that like the hoax actually happened?

How about the Hunter Biden laptop story? Will the history write it that that was a real thing that got ignored by the media? Or will history just ignore it the same as the media?

These are pretty big questions. And let me ask you this. I don't remember if I talked about this before so tell me in the comments if I already talked about this. You've heard of the Gell-Mann amnesia effect where if you're an expert on a topic and you read a news report about that topic you can tell all the factual errors in it because you just happen to be an expert on that topic. But you read any other topic in which you are not an expert and you kind of uncritically accept that it's probably kind of true. It's only when you read things you know the truth that you can see how bad the news is.

You have to assume this applies to history as well. We know the winners write history. Right? But the things you think are just facts might not be because our history is pretty subjective it turns out.

Now let me give you an example and stop me if I already told you this. So Wall Street Journal had an article about Jack Dorsey and they mentioned me in the article. Now there were two facts in this little mention of me in the Wall Street Journal. Now the Wall Street Journal is a pretty reliable publication, wouldn't you say? If you were to rank credibility of publications, the Wall Street Journal would be very near the top, one of the very best in credibility.

Two things that were said about me in there. One, I was labeled a conservative. I'm left of Bernie. So my label was dead wrong, complete opposite. I support President Trump but it has more to do with Trump's special skills than some alignment in philosophy.

All right, the second thing they said was they paired me with DeRay Mckesson, I think, as people who Jack interacts with. Now I've interacted with Jack several times, most of them about Twitter itself and Twitter censorship. And once on a book he recommended. But fairly ordinary, trivial stuff. I've only been in the room with him once in my life for about 20 minutes on a charity-related thing and that's it.

And the Wall Street Journal puts me in the article with DeRay, who is one of the activists for Black Lives Matter, as if we are somehow key people in Jack's life. I would not be in the top 5,000 of key people that are important to Jack Dorsey. I'm just somebody who's talked to him a few times. I like him but that's it.

Now if you read that article you would think that we're hanging out all the time and that somehow my association with him has some importance as much as DeRay's, who had a long-time relationship with him. I understand. So the only two things about me were very misleading. Did you know that if you had read that article? Would you know that those two things were misleading? Probably not. Probably not. But if it were about you, you'd know it.

So you don't trust your history. Don't trust your media. The only people you can trust are the people here on this live stream. That's it. You're the only people we can trust.

By the way, there's another thing that Trump does that's really good persuasion. And I laugh every time I hear it because it's so ham-handed and yet it completely works. He tells his supporters that they're smarter than the experts. Now I know that this works because the secret to the Dilbert cartoon strip was when I started telling my readers that they were smarter than their boss. Everybody loves to hear that they're smarter than the experts and they're smarter than their boss. Are they? Well I suppose sometimes. Sometimes you're smarter than your boss. Sometimes you are smarter than the experts. But as a persuasion thing it's really super good