I watched the entire Rogan interview with the Means. Not overly impressed, but a lot to like about Casey. I DO think they're doing a lot of good because so much of the public has so much waking up to do, that if they move in the Means' direction that would be great. Calley said he didn't speak to Casey for a year when she quit her surgeo…
I watched the entire Rogan interview with the Means. Not overly impressed, but a lot to like about Casey. I DO think they're doing a lot of good because so much of the public has so much waking up to do, that if they move in the Means' direction that would be great. Calley said he didn't speak to Casey for a year when she quit her surgeon job. Huh? That was a heroic thing do to, if only more had such principles. Calley is hopelessly naive. He thinks the politicians have no idea about how they are screwing us - it's all just ignorance. Just because they SEEM to be listening to him, and considering what he says, and then SAY "I didn't know that". Jeez, these are politicians, they're expert at placating when it's expedient. Casey is much better IMO.
...How can you tell when a politician is lying? ...Their lips are moving. ...Naive? Or something else? To wit,
In the siblings' interview with Tucker, Calley also invoked the diversion, "state of emergency." In his opinion we need to declare a state of emergency about Americans' health. --- Really? I wonder what the stripping of rights will entail there when the emergency legislation gets passed?
The currency of lawyers (thus Calley Means) is words. The smart ones know precisely what they are doing. I took a step back after hearing the state of emergency angle. Would/will Calley slide into an executive branch position in accommodating circumstances? Or serve in an advisory position? With the advantage of already being somewhat of a public figure who has apparently come off quite well with his crafted message? I don't know much. Which is why I question most everything.
Already considered. I should have said he "seems" naive. I'm suspicious too. He also claimed all the people working at corporations in fields that are lying to us and profit from f'ing us up are convinced they're helping. Just remembering his words swayed me to the "not naive" side.
Didn't see them on Tucker, thanks for that. What he said there reminds me of an Aseem Malhotra interview on Rogan where he did a good job of describing how corrupt "science" is and same with most all studies, which facilitate harmful government policies. THEN he said we should use government to encourage the foods and treatments HE likes, that have been proven better (by studies and "science"). Really, really dumb? Or something else?
I watched the entire Rogan interview with the Means. Not overly impressed, but a lot to like about Casey. I DO think they're doing a lot of good because so much of the public has so much waking up to do, that if they move in the Means' direction that would be great. Calley said he didn't speak to Casey for a year when she quit her surgeon job. Huh? That was a heroic thing do to, if only more had such principles. Calley is hopelessly naive. He thinks the politicians have no idea about how they are screwing us - it's all just ignorance. Just because they SEEM to be listening to him, and considering what he says, and then SAY "I didn't know that". Jeez, these are politicians, they're expert at placating when it's expedient. Casey is much better IMO.
...How can you tell when a politician is lying? ...Their lips are moving. ...Naive? Or something else? To wit,
In the siblings' interview with Tucker, Calley also invoked the diversion, "state of emergency." In his opinion we need to declare a state of emergency about Americans' health. --- Really? I wonder what the stripping of rights will entail there when the emergency legislation gets passed?
The currency of lawyers (thus Calley Means) is words. The smart ones know precisely what they are doing. I took a step back after hearing the state of emergency angle. Would/will Calley slide into an executive branch position in accommodating circumstances? Or serve in an advisory position? With the advantage of already being somewhat of a public figure who has apparently come off quite well with his crafted message? I don't know much. Which is why I question most everything.
For your consideration.
Already considered. I should have said he "seems" naive. I'm suspicious too. He also claimed all the people working at corporations in fields that are lying to us and profit from f'ing us up are convinced they're helping. Just remembering his words swayed me to the "not naive" side.
Didn't see them on Tucker, thanks for that. What he said there reminds me of an Aseem Malhotra interview on Rogan where he did a good job of describing how corrupt "science" is and same with most all studies, which facilitate harmful government policies. THEN he said we should use government to encourage the foods and treatments HE likes, that have been proven better (by studies and "science"). Really, really dumb? Or something else?