p 10 but he's one of the most persuasive human beings on the planet right? It's just a fact. And how does he lose a jury trial? Because he also has the brains and the strategy. He's a chess player. I mean he's got the whole thing. How does he lose? Now there are two possibilities. One he really is as persuasive as the Romanians claim. If that's true then he'll persuade himself out of jail. Two he's not very persuasive at all in which case how did he persuade 75 women to move to Romania and do webcams or TikToks or whatever? How do you do that if you're not persuasive? So there's sort of a logical problem here. If the charges are true he'll go free. If the charges are false he's innocent. And there's only two possibilities. It's true or false and they both get him out of jail. Is that weird? That he has two paths and both of them are getting out of jail unless it's rigged which is a very good possibility. Unless it's rigged.

So his suggestion was that maybe Great Britain was trying to suppress him because his message wasn't good for the youth of Great Britain. I think there might be something to that. There definitely might be some political a little pressure on Romania to tamp him down a little bit. Maybe seems reasonable but we'll see how that turns out. It's probably the most interesting contest in the world because he genuinely is more persuasive than any prosecutor is going to be. Like I don't know what kind of evidence they have but if that evidence isn't just super airtight with witnesses with witnesses who admit they are victims I just don't see how he can be convicted. He's just too good at this specifically this. We'll see.

That ladies and gentlemen concludes my amazing live stream. The very best thing that's ever happened to any of you. Is there any topic I missed today that I should have spoke about? He does not speak Romanian but that shouldn't change the result because whatever persuasion he possesses he can just run through his lawyer. He basically just tells the lawyer how to handle things and it should work out fine. You assume a trial? No when I say trial I mean a judge will decide. Are you making a distinction there? My understanding is that in Romania it's you talk to judges not a jury of your peers or at least for this case. I don't know if it's different for others but I still call that a trial and the rules of persuasion would still apply. He would have an easier deal. Well let me say it this way. There isn't the slightest chance a jury of his peers would convict him. Let me say that flat out. Flat out. If the trial, and I think it won't be, it'll be a judge or judges but if it were a jury of his peers there isn't the slightest chance there would be a unanimous 12 people conviction. None. Literally a zero chance. It couldn't happen because his powers are just too big. He could persuade himself to IKEA. He could take out a few jurors just easily.

The NXIVM cult leader was very persuasive but still received a hundred year sentence. Now good point that's a good point but do you think he was as persuasive? I think there's a level of difference here because I never even heard of NXIVM until they got in trouble but the entire planet heard of Tate. So I would say the NXIVM guy has skills but he was still a B-plus compared to what you're seeing from Tate. You know Tate's at the A-plus plus level of persuasion. Yeah by the way I don't like him personally. I just want to make sure you know that. Don't like him personally. Nothing but I've promised I'm going to call balls and strikes as they say. God I hate saying that. Calling balls and strikes. Let's retire that. It's such an NPC thing to say but I told you I'd say when people had good persuasion when they don't and you could probably learn. Watch his technique and you could probably learn.

All right the NXIVM guy was too ugly to be persuasive. Well is that, huh? Who's your favorite puppet? Please discuss the Sound of Freedom. No plans to watch it. I recommend you don't watch it either. Not because it isn't great and not because it isn't important. It's like I'm not going to watch things that are going to bring me down. I get the topic right? If you understand the topic I feel like that's enough. All right I'm in the zeitgeist. Cool. Pool vacuums. I don't I wish I did. That's the worst suggestion I've ever heard you make. What would be the counter argument? Give me the counter argument. What's the argument for watching it? If you're aware of the situation let's say you read about let's say you read a review or you read an article what would be the point of suffering through two and a half hours of the worst thing I could imagine? What do you get from that? You need to be talking about it now? I'm out. I'm out. I'm tapping out. I'm not going to do every topic and I'm not going to turn this live stream into that. All right there are plenty of people working on that and doing a great job. The fact that you're begging me to talk about it tells me you already know about it. You don't need me right? Whatever is happening in that domain looks like it's happening exactly the way it should meaning that somebody made a movie it's very persuasive and it's getting tons of attention. You don't need me for this. You would need me if it were getting no attention and then I'd probably actually have a different opinion but at the moment I'm not additive. I would be just one more person to make me think about bad things and you have enough people m