o said and I don't know what the fake doctor — not trusting is getting the vax. Getting the vax is trusting. Is it? So you would trust the COVID because remember it's not just trusting people it's also trusting a virus. So you would have to trust your own understanding of the long-term impact of the virus. I don't trust that. Why would you trust your own opinion of the long-term impact of long COVID? Why would you trust yourself because you're a good track record? I don't know how you trust anybody.

All right. Oh and here's the other thing. There's one of the studies showed that — so here here's the one that McCullough was talking about. He said that myocarditis or pericarditis from primary COVID infections occurred at a rate as well basically the virus was six — no I'm sorry. So here's the problem. I tried to write down what McCullough said and then I just Googled some other things that said the opposite and then my own notes are confused because they literally say the sky is blue and then my very next note says the sky is red and I've actually lost which one McCullough is talking about. So I don't know why his is the good one and the others are the bad ones because I can't tell. Can't tell.

Do I have COVID antibodies? I have COVID. I assume I do.

Oh and then somebody pointed me at a really, really good blog post in which somebody explained 18 reasons for not getting vaccinated. And I read the 18 reasons and the first seven — well actually all the 18, all 18 reasons were solid. Did you expect to hear that? So it was a list of 18 reasons to not get vaccinated and they were all good. Does that surprise you? Do you hear me say that there were all good reasons? Do you know what the 18th reason was? I had to read all of the reasons and I got to the 18th reason and the 18th reason said he had already had COVID. That's right. He already had natural immunity. So now rethink the first 17 good reasons. The first 17 reasons were just rationalizations. When I read them they look like good reasons but when he got to the end he only had one reason that mattered, right? If you've already been infected and you probably didn't trust the government that didn't mean anything. That's all he needed. One good reason. And the other 17 were intellectually solid. I didn't disagree with any of them. The other reasons were you know they didn't show us sufficient information. It wasn't tested long enough. And I agree with all that. I agreed at the time with every one of those reasons but I also knew that I didn't know what the other risk was either.

The seven trees unique from each other? Pretty unique. Yeah there was a really well done blog post. I should have tweeted I guess but Ben Garrison. Now Ben Garrison believes that if you saw those 18 reasons that you're done. So Ben Garrison is a binary. The binaries don't understand that there could be risks and benefits to a decision. They only believe that there's a yes and a no. So never be a Ben Garrison. Yeah if you're calling his name in support of your opinion that's good entertainment if you're a Club Bird because the Club Birds don't try to be serious. The Club Birds are pretty anti-science. So Club Birds you can — you're all Ben Garrisons. But if for regular people with functional minds and stuff you wouldn't want to make an appeal to Ben Garrison. He's an idiot cartoonist, terrible cartoonist who's even worse at science. So that's pretty much what I want to say.

Is there a story I'm missing? Any story I'm missing?

Here's a question for you. Did you notice that before Andrew Tate was picked up by the Romanian police he was everywhere on social media and the everywhere wasn't coming from him it was coming from other people promoting his clips? Have you noticed it all stopped? At first it went down to a trickle but I don't believe I've seen it in a few days and it used to be all over my feed because if you look at a couple of them you know you're doomed to be. Do you think the algorithm changed or do you think that there are fewer people creating clips because the people creating the original clips I think were pretty dedicated followers? I don't know that they've stopped following him. You think it's the algorithm? I feel like he's been — I feel like there's a human decision to erase him from the internet and that the platforms all made the same decision. It doesn't look like they stopped being active. The people who are boosting him I doubt they just stopped.

Now the other possibility is that the people who are supporting him got embarrassed because they knew if they kept supporting him they would be dragged into the accusations themselves. Could be that. But generally people — here's why I think it's less of that. When was the last time anybody ever changed their opinion about anything? The people who were pro Andrew Tate probably still are 80 percent of them. So there should have been almost as much activity after he went to jail if not more. Yeah there could have been more because that would create more anxiousness among his followers. But the fact that it just disappeared that tells you it's all manipulated, right? Yeah I don't believe that a computer is the algorithm. I don't believe the algorithm already existed in a way that would erase him from the internet in two weeks. In two weeks it just erases him from the internet.

Oh somebody says he was released. Or are you thinking the first time he was picked up? The first time he was released but my understanding is they say he's detained but I'll tell you again everything you hear about that situation is not credible. I don't even believe he's detained. I mean that's the news. The news and it's coming from Romanian sources but the Romanians are saying that he's detained but they don't describe where he's detained if you catch my meaning. I have a feeling he's probably at home and maybe he paid extra to have an off-duty policeman guard his house maybe for his protection but also to guarantee he stays home. Maybe he has an ankle bracelet on. I don't know but I don't think you know anything about the situation.

The other possibility that I wouldn't rule out is that he was never suspected for any crime and they may be having him under some kind of protection because somebody was trying to get at him because he did say things that would make the actual mafia in Romania — assuming one exists — would have made them pretty anxious. I think he said some things that they would not want him to keep saying. So he could have an internal enemy that has nothing to do with the legal system. And if it's true that as he said if it's true he owned the local police they might actually be protecting him. That might be all this is because everything about this doesn't sound right, right?

So let me make this prediction. I'm not going to make a specific prediction about where it goes. I'm going to make a general prediction that whatever you think about the situation is going to be really different later. I don't know in which way. Don't know in which way. The Romanian mafia does exist we have a confirmation. Okay yeah he couldn't run his business without paying the mafia. I believe that's probably true. Yeah because he was in sketchy businesses and you have to imagine that the mafia wants — oh you know what else it could be? It could be a mafia takeover of his business. Yeah if the mafia wanted to take over his business because he was making a lot of money suppose they said you know you got to give us 50 and suppose he said no. What would they do? If they wanted the business intact they wouldn't go in and kill everybody. They would make his business unviable and then they would find out who the women are and they would just move them over to their operation. I'd be curious if that hasn't already happened.

Yeah so I'm not saying that that's likely to be what's happening. I'm just saying that I don't believe anything that the police in Romania are saying. Nothing. And if you believe it well maybe you're right. Maybe you think it'll be a more mundane — yeah it might be right. Money laundering behind the scenes but pimping was a front. Well I've seen no evidence of that. No evidence has been presented by anybody. No description of what that supposed money laundering might be. It's kind of weird to have an accusation like that with no details that would you know — well usually when you hear money laundering there's a description of how. As in he was taking money from this source and he laundered it this way. Without that I'm not sure that that's a real charge.

Laughing at the focus of Tate and no Epstein stuff. Well the Epstein substance older story. Yeah I reject the framing that talking about something is ignoring something else. Now when the media does it that might be what's happening. When I do it it's just what I'm talking about. What's in the headlines today. That's all that's happening. You know like I'm not forgetting that the Epstein thing happened. And by the way if you don't know the real story of the Epstein stuff which we don't, don't you have to assume the worst? Don't you have to assume the worst? Somebody says Tate has several passports. Don't you think they confiscated all of those by now? I don't know. Maybe he has a hidden one that they didn't get.

So the Templar scaffold commander — the scaffold commander being you mean that January 6. That's just more stuff we don't know anything about. My take on January 6 and everything else is that the worst case assumption is most likely to be true. The worst case assumption is most likely to be true for anything that the government is hiding from you. And I think the Epstein stuff is the government hiding from us. So I guess I'm comfortable with the assumption that there is in fact there was at least a blackmail ring for sure. I don't think there's any chance there was no blackmail ring.

UFOs. All believe UFOs when somebody gets a good picture. One. So let me put this out for you fo