y I'm going to live forever. I found this out by Dr. Mark Hyman. Now that's also something that a poorly endowed man does to a virgin. You'll mark her hymen but you won't otherwise destroy it. So Mark Hyman MD. Sorry Mark you have to go through high school with the last name of Hyman and that's not on me nor is it my fault that your parents named you Mark thus creating a pun that was irresistible on this day December 22nd 2023.

Mark let me just put it this way. Your parents put into motion this joke by the time it got to me. Cause and effect. No free will. What choice did I have? I had to do what I did and I'm happy about it really. But Mark Hyman is very useful and he said in the post that there are four things you can do to vastly reduce your chances of dying too soon and they are don't smoke, exercise three and a half hours a week, eat healthy and maintain a healthy weight.

Now you knew all those things already so that's not the useful part. The useful part is the statistics. Listen to this. If you do those four behaviors which are reasonably easy to do — I mean they're accessible to everybody. I wouldn't say they're easy they're accessible to everybody. If you did those four things — no smoke, exercise, eat right, have a good weight — you have a 93% less chance of diabetes. 93% less chance. You have an 81% less chance of heart attacks. 81% less for doing four things that are accessible to everybody. 81%. 50% reduction in strokes. 50%. And 36% reduction in all cancer cases.

That's not worth it to you? You wouldn't do those four things to get those health statistical likely benefits? Well maybe knowing the odds helps you a little bit.

All right moving on. The strange case of Julian Assange. And you know there's always a movement to try to get him out but as Glenn Greenwald points out it's weirdly bipartisan. Might be the most bipartisan thing I've ever seen in my life in America. Listen to the people who want to get Assange freed. Co-sponsors include Thomas Massie, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Ilhan Omar, AOC. Well they're not co-sponsors but they support it. AOC, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley and Rand Paul. Wow. Wow.

So let me ask you why is Assange in jail with that much bipartisan support? And we're not talking about normal bipartisan support. We're talking about the extremes, right? The extremes of the two parties. Now I'm going to call Rand Paul and Massie extremes but not in terms of right wing kind of extreme. In terms of not always on exactly the same side as their own party which I respect.

So why do you think he's still in jail? Can you think of any legitimate reason? It's obviously something that we're not being told. Don't you think? It's either something he knows or something we're not being told. So clearly it involves corruption if you get to the point where nobody will tell you why it makes sense that he's still in prison. I mean I know the argument blah blah blah but it doesn't hold up in a free speech journalist context. It just doesn't hold up.

So it's got to be exactly what you think it is. There are some corrupt players somewhere. They have enough power to keep him in jail even if both sides have strong bipartisan support. Now what I don't know is how many mainstream middle of the road Democrats and Republicans want him to stay in jail and do they really even know the whole story? Does anybody even really know the whole story? I don't. I feel I don't know the whole story and therefore what do I say when there's some uncertainty and it involves the government? I say the government is guilty until they can prove they're innocent.

So if they can't make a compelling case to the public that can't convince Thomas Massie and Rand Paul and Marjorie Taylor Greene and it also can't convince AOC, Rashida Tlaib, what argument is that? Can you tell me any argument that wouldn't satisfy either one set of those people? But how could there be no argument that will even satisfy either of them, either groups? The only thing I can imagine is there's something we don't know about the public that is really bad. Like really bad. Yeah because there's some people who want him dead obviously. So it's probably the worst thing you could think of is true.

So there's more suspicion that the immigration is really about packing the so-called battleground states with people who would vote Democrat. And Bill Malone's reporting for Fox that he talked to somebody from the African country of Guinea and he said that he was being told to go to Philadelphia. He didn't know why. So he had free passage to Philadelphia. Philadelphia is a very counting suspicious part of the electoral process. So coincidence.

Now I saw a headline somewhere but I didn't read the article. I just saw a headline that the immigrants roughly speaking the immigrants were as pro-Trump as they were pro-Biden. Did anybody see a story like that? That if you talk to them they're about evenly split. So I'm not completely convinced that the immigration thing is super focused on the swing states but I do love the fact that the southern states like Texas if they're smart they would send them to the bluest secure states.

So if you send them where no Republican will ever win because it's just blue as hell then they don't. So having Texas get rid of their immigrants who might change their electoral situation and send them somewhere where they can't hurt anybody because it's already deep blue is also very politically clever. You can separately argue the humanity of it all. It's a good conversation but politically kind of an interesting chess game we're watching.

Well we have some information about how Prigozhin was killed. Apparently one of Putin's top guys they put some explosives under a wing and when it took off they detonated and blew up. So somehow we know that. I don't know how we know that but if it's true. But I would like to remind you again that not only was I the only person I know who predicted the economy would not go into recession but I'm the only person who said fairly early in the Ukraine war that the Wagner group was getting too big and Putin would have to kill him and that Prigozhin might make a play on taking over.

Now you remember nobody else in the world was talking about that way before Wagner actually moved on Russia. It was obvious to me that no dictator can allow somebody to have an army and also that much power. It's sort of a Caesar problem. You know if you're Rome it's okay to have a good general like Caesar but when he gets too good and he has an army well then you're in trouble because he's going to come back and take over which he did.

Now so Putin recognized as I did that Prigozhin was basically becoming Caesar and he could come back and take over the country. So sure enough he did try to take over the country and sure enough Putin ki