portant stuff? Suppose you just said, "All right, all right, I see how that could take 75 years but how about you just give us all of the data results with maybe some underlying data." Don't you think they have that in a packaged form? Are you telling me that these randomized controlled trials weren't packaged up already? No, nobody thought to put all the data in one place? Maybe put it on a spreadsheet? Of course they did. So how long does it take you to get all the data that's already packaged up? It shouldn't take too long. Now suppose you wanted more than that and you wanted all the emails about it. Well that would just be the emails since the pandemic started, right? And you would just do a search for keywords, do a search and say give me every coronavirus, COVID or related term and you just send them over. If you had all of their digital communication internally and all of their trial data, how much extra are you going to get from all the other 74 years? Probably not a lot, right? There's got to be some kind of 80/20 rule here but I feel like it's more like a 99/1. Like the one percent of the data is really 99 percent of what you need. Feels like. I don't know. I could be wrong about that very easily. Very easily could be wrong about that. But that's what we know about it. If you thought the 75-year thing was some indication that Pfizer had knowledge that there were problems with the data, I believe that is thoroughly debunked at this point. I think it's really an FDA problem.

Scott's grasping at straws. Tyrone, you're an goodbye. Do you know what you could say? Could say what I got wrong. You could add context.

All right so Russia — I'm going to talk about Dr. McCullough on Joe Rogan after I do this next segment. Are you ready for that? How many of you want to know my full opinion on Dr. McCullough and what he said on Joe Rogan? Oh I know you're going to stay for that. But first let's talk about Russia, who has offered a clean sheet deal framework with the West. Huh. Almost as if Russia finds it in their interest to be our almost ally because in my opinion the arc of history is unmistakably bending in that direction, meaning that in the long run Russia will be our ally. We should just get over it and make it happen. It's going to happen because it has to because we're going to need each other in space basically and with China's rise. So if you know what's going to happen and I think Russia does and I think we do, I find Russia's offer productive. Now I don't think we're going to make a deal based on these terms but let me read the terms and then you tell me how far off this is from something that we might be able to do. Now I think we would have to add more to it. So this is their offer. It's not something that's needs to be evaluated as an actual deal. It's just their first offer. But this is a pretty strong first offer. There is one part of it that's an instant deal killer but they know that and I would say that maybe we could work with it.

All right here it is. So here's what Russia wants relative to Ukraine and the situation over there. They want to rule out further NATO expansion in general around their border and Ukraine's any path to it. So they don't want Ukraine to be part of NATO. Reasonable or unreasonable? Reasonable or unreasonable? Now we would like to treat that as unreasonable because that would be the proper negotiating stance. Nope, nope, no way. Because if you have to give that up at some point in any form you want to get something really big in return, right? Here's what I would ask for in return: no cyber attacks on each other. Now is that something we could actually get or determine that we had gotten? Would we even know who's attacking us? I don't know. Is there a cyber security expert on here who could tell me could we ever make a cyber deal that we could verify was holding? Can anybody tell? Is that even possible? I might. My assumption is probably not. But we keep acting like we know when Russia has hacked us, right, with Hillary's email and such. So part of this, you know, maybe if we tried to make a no cyber hacking deal we probably couldn't get that deal, could we?

Dr. Robert Johnson says I'm shocked Scott fell for the 75 years excuse. Sad, such a sheep. Well we'll block you today. All right I feel if we could, if there was any way to make a cyber attack truce, I think you'd have to throw that in there. I would say that blocking NATO's expansion without that is a non-starter. What do you think? I think any discussion of limiting NATO anywhere can't go forward as long as Russia is cyber attacking us on the regular. Who would agree with that? So the first thing is don't assume that their list is list you negotiate from. We can add our own stuff and it could be that we get more benefit from hacking them than they get from hacking us. So maybe we don't even want to offer it. It's possible we don't want to offer that. I think you'd have to be pretty deep into that world to know if that makes sense. How much do we learn from Russia hacks? Good question. Wrong. Scott doesn't understand that Russia ought to be our la — I'm just saying Russia ought to be our ally. What are you talking about? Yeah cyber attacks are status quo but I feel like we should be at least trying to negotiate some way out of that. I don't know.

Then they're asking not to deploy additional troops outside any country which they were in before some date, blah blah, before any Eastern European countries joined the alliance, blah blah blah. So they don't want extra troops that would threaten them. They want to abandon NATO military activities in Ukraine. So don't do any military training there. Don't put intermediate and short-range missiles there. Not to conduct any exercises with more than one military brigade. That's in the agenda. I'll tell you this one is the one that signals they're serious. If Russia gave us a list of things that you just looked at and you said no this is all crap then it would mean that they don't really even mean to have any kind of a deal. But this one, this one really signals some seriousness. Not to conduct exercises with more than one military brigade. The fact that they would allow that there could be military exercises but they should be small enough that they don't look like an attack. That actually feels kind of reasonable doesn't it? I mean if it were part of the larger deal. Not if it's on its own.

Here's the next one. This is what Russia is asking: to confirm that the parties do not consider each other as adversaries and agree to resolve all disputes peacefully and refrain from the use of force. What would be another way to phrase that? To confirm that parties do not consider themselves — to confirm that you're not the opposite of an ally. Let's see if I confirm that I'm not the opposite of an ally what am I? This is it. What have I been telling you for actually years now? I've been telling you this: Russia needs to be an ally with us. It's totally in