to the basis of the search at this time. There are, however, certain points I want you to know. First, I personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant in this matter. Second, the department does not take such a decision lightly. Where possible, it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search and to narrowly scope any search that is undertaken. Third, let me address recent unfounded attacks on the professionalism of the FBI and Justice Department agents and prosecutors. I will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked. The men and women in the FBI and Justice Department are dedicated patriotic public servants.  They do so at great personal sacrifice and risk to themselves. I am honored to work alongside them. This is all I can say right now. More information will be made available in the appropriate way and at the appropriate time. Thank you.   Unreal. Not even gonna take freaking questions. Hold on guys. That's all. It was like two minutes long, literally. What in the world? All right, well, how are you all doing? I was planning on sitting through this and talking about it, but it's over, I guess. All right, well, so he basically just got up there and said, let me see if I can replay it. No, I can't replay it. There wasn't... there's not really much to replay. All he said was that, oh, we take this very seriously and we wouldn't have done it unless it was very serious.  Literally right now, there is a whistleblower out there alleging that the FBI is actively covering up Hunter Biden's crimes, which by extension is covering up Joe Biden's crimes, because he is involved in those crimes. We know that, that they're actively covering it up to protect him. That is out there right now. Here. FBI whistleblower. I mean, does anybody think that if there was an FBI whistleblower during the Trump years, wouldn't that be like the biggest thing out there right now in the news? Of course. But instead, there's like nothing. There's crickets. Director Ray, allegations are troubling about the FBI covering for Hunter Biden. I mean, that's huge. Like, oh, I need a haircut. I can't seem to get one scheduled. That's huge. I mean, that's just the latest. That's just like the latest FBI thing.  But I mean, even just recently, we were told by James Comey, the FBI director, that Hillary Clinton did nothing wrong. She didn't know she was breaking the law. She didn't know, man, I didn't know I couldn't do that. You know, she had top secret and classified materials on her private server. And then we know that she covered up evidence by physically destroying devices with a hammer. That is a fact that is undeniable. And yet there were no FBI raids of Hillary Clinton. You know, so this equal application thing is just bull. I mean, and we can just deal with Director Ray. OK, Director Ray, after a Democrat attacked the GOP baseball game practice, he attacked it, shot a bunch of different Republican senators while screaming, this is for health care. He's sitting there shooting at Republican senators. This is for health care. OK, Director Ray takes that, almost kills several senators. Director Ray takes that and says that all it was just suicide by cop guys. No, but, you know, just a regular, everyday old crime, suicide by cop. Of course, that's that's absurd, because we even knew early on that the guy had like a list of Republicans that he went up and asked somebody, is that Republicans over there? So we know that it was like a domestic terrorist attack. But, you know, two years later or more, finally, let's say, Ray admits domestic terror. Then suddenly, see, you've got to be very specific to even find this story. Excuse me. FBI quietly admits that 2017 GOP baseball game shooting was a domestic was domestic terrorism. So it's like 18, 19, 20, four years later, they finally admit that after the election, of course, like, what's up with that? What? Like, why would he actively cover that up to protect Democrats? It's obvious because if that if he comes right out and that's domestic terrorism becomes a national news story, of course, it wouldn't. Fox would have it, you know, right?  And people would ask, huh, why was he screaming? This is for health care. Who? Who inside is? Who radicalized this guy? Well, it was the Democrats. It was the Democrat media who insisted that Republicans want you to die when they were opposing Obamacare, right? So and then there are just so many different examples of this. So, I mean, that's another good reason why people should be very suspicious of this FBI. One second, man, my hand hurts. I don't know what's going on. I'm like falling apart, people.  Yeah, I had a list. I had a running list of all the FBI stuff. You know, they talk so much about they just they actively avoid covering anything that involves Democrats. I mean, Democrats went out there, they they claim. And with along with the media, they claim that there was a widespread mass conspiracy by police officers to hunt down and murder black Americans. That incited riots, death and destruction. It was also not true. And if you look, most Democrats, man, I'm typing horribly, this survey here found that. What's going on, of course. This comes from skeptic.com. And if you look at this graph here, it shows that how many unarmed black men were killed by police in 2019? Very conservative, conservative and moderate people believe. Well, actually, everybody, pretty much conservative and mostly serve people have it about right. They said about 10, which is pretty close. It's, I think, around 20 or less than that, maybe even. But if you look at moderate or liberal and very liberal, they believe literally thousands, thousands, more than 10,000, some of them believe. So you have Democrats believing some really crazy stuff that led in just fight riots and murder and death and destruction. Where's the FBI on that? I mean, it's just like clearly the FBI is not interested in. Consistent, nonpartisan application of the law.  No, Eric Holder ignored congressional subpoenas was never punished. He got off. And in fact, the media applauded it when Democrats walked out of the vote to hold him accountable for that. So, you know, it's just like that's not necessarily the FBI. I mean, it sort of is because that was all related to the ghost guns scandal, which they were involved in, the gun running scandal. So yeah, sorry, guys, it's supposed to be A.G. Garland. It was really, really quick. He was just on there for like a minute. And it's really interesting that. What you're going to start hearing now from the media is that, oh, my God, they're the right, they're they're going after the FBI and attacking the FBI. That's what Garland was saying. He again, Garland, who is a Democrat, matching Democrat rhetoric from the media and that rhetoric I can show you right now. Our friend Tom Elliott put together a supercut here, which I will show you all. And this is basically what we're hearing from the media right now that the right is danger. It's always Republicans, conservatives, dangerous because now they're attacking the FBI. Listen to this. The FBI is a conservative, meaning law enforcement organization. And we sort of like lost lost the thread on that in the past six years. What's the evidence of that? Against the FBI, these attacks against the most important federal law enforcement agency in America, 24 hours after a peaceful search that they gave them a heads up on. It's all peaceful search. All awful. It's not a raid. They didn't see not a raid to see their redefining words again. They're doing it again. They just it's like it's so Orwellian what we're living through, folks. This is straight out of the book. It's straight out of 1984. If you have not read that book, go back and read it. I'm telling you, you must go read it because this is all in there. You know, they're not there improperly or unlawfully. The Justice Department is returning to. So and this is another thing. OK, so we got the FBI lying about the other things already listed. FBI lying to get FISA warrants so they can spy on Democrat political opponents, right? FBI lies and disseminates Russian disinformation in an attempt to overturn the 2016 election against a Republican. So it just seems like it's always being used in service of the Democrat Party. And yet here we have the Democrat media who are just lockstep. They did nothing wrong. The FBI, everything was on the up. They have no idea. They don't know if everything's on the up and up. They're just saying that. It's so crazy, like the we we are really on a slide into authoritarianism. But it ain't because of Trump or Republicans. It's because of these people do its historical position as a law enforcement agency above politics, trying to do the right thing. I don't think there was any politics to be a nonpartisan process. Because anybody on this set had done the same thing. The exact same result would have occurred. But it didn't. It didn't. Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, both took presidential documents and kept them. OK, both of them did that. Trump, they knew that he had them. The FBI was in contact with him or I'm sorry, the presidential library or I'm sorry. You guys know what I'm saying, the the National Presidential Document Society or whatever the hell they're called, they were already in contact with Trump's lawyers, they wanted these documents to be better secured. OK, they knew he had them. They weren't after him for any reason other than for him to secure them better, OK, which they did. We know that Hillary Clinton literally had top secret documents on her server was never rated by the FBI. So when Michael Steele says, oh, it would have happened to any one of us. Bullshit, it didn't happen to any of those Democrats. So please a judge would not sign off on that if there were not evidence. Oh, really? But a judge signed off on those FISA warrants when there was no evidence. The FBI simply lied. They simply lied and they got a judge to sign off on it. And the judge that signed off on this search. Have you guys seen this guy?   He all the typical symptoms that you would expect from these people. Let's finish this real quick. Dorses tell me that, you know, there's a reason they wouldn't go in there if it wasn't really significant. They weren't really concerned about the nature of the classified information that Trump had, what he might be doing with it, who he might be showing it to. Right. But they were not interested. The same people mocked the idea that there was any scandal involving Hillary Clinton. They and we know that because it's still to this day, they're still saying but her emails. You see that everywhere. Hillary Clinton is selling merch right now that says but her emails. Now he's saying, oh, well, no, now it's totally it's totally cool. I mean, all right, it's totally makes sense that the FBI would raid his house. They didn't raid Hillary Clinton. These are real national security concerns. And the fact that a federal judge approved it shows that, hey, they've got something there. We just don't know what it is.  These are the walls are closing in people literally from 2017. The day Trump took office to the day he left, the walls are closing in. They said that over and over and over and they're literally doing it all over again. Tax on the FBI claiming without any evidence that the investigation is politically motivated. They're claiming without any evidence that it isn't politically motivated. Like they have. I am really like I don't understand. Like, do they really not have the self-awareness to see that they're guilty of everything they're accusing the other side of? Or is it that they know that? But it's like, so there's three things. Do they know it? But they're telling themselves that, oh, yeah, I'm lying. I'm misleading. Yes, I'm doing the same thing. But for me, it's different because I'm doing it for the right reasons and the right reasons being to keep the Republican Party, who we've demonized as inhuman domestic enemies, we got to keep them out of power, right? And keep the Democrats in power permanently. And this all makes sense in their work, the mental mind, because it's all based on conspiracy theories they've been pushing for years now.  They're trying to normalize it. They literally want Democrats to be in power permanently.  And I know people are like outlawed. How you're not going to be able to outlaw a political watch. Watch they've done it. They did it in Ukraine, right? There and the people here love Ukraine. What did they say over there? They said, oh, because they're pro-Putin media. So we had to we had to get rid of the other political parties or I'm sorry. Pro and I think they got rid of media that they claimed was pro-Putin. They do the same thing here.  What do they do? They justify all this by just simply claiming that we're fascist Nazis. Joe Scarborough. I'll show you another clip. Joe Scarborough was on today saying that the FBI should be let loose on conservatives. He said conspiracy theorists, freaks, the Republicans. Even he even said that the FBI should go out after and lock up TV news anchors, who he says are inciting violence and pushing conspiracy theories. It's like that's literally what Joe Scarborough does on a daily basis. But they don't for whatever reason. I don't know. It just makes me very afraid for this country in the future, because this can't end well. These attacks on the FBI are just very sort of out there and outlandish. Every person out there. Oh, the attacks on the FBI are out there and outlandish, but multiple years, like four or five years worth of propaganda from the media saying that there's a massive conspiracy by police officers throughout the country, racist police officers.  They said that for years. They continue to say it. Not as much now that Byneson office, you see that stuff pretty much when he got in, even though it's got to be still happening, right? They spread that. That was perfectly fine. It's totally different when they do it. But if we attack the FBI, I mean, which is completely legitimate, given what we've just gone over, lying to FISA courts whistleblower out here saying that they are actively covering up for Hunter Biden to keep Joe Biden out of trouble. Like we know these things. We know that, like they had agents who were fiercely partisan. Peter Strock and what's her face? They we have text messages where they're talking about an insurance policy if Trump gets elected. That was an actual coup attempt, folks. That was the actual insurrection. But that's how they cover themselves, right? They do something and then they there's this massive, like propaganda effort to accuse the other side of those same things, right? And so then they cover themselves because what do we do immediately when they start accusing us? Well, we are like, well, wait a minute, you guys did that. And so then it ends up looking like to people who may not know better. They're like, oh, they're just they're just accusing the other side so to deflect from the fact that they're being accused of it. It's insane, folks. It's 1984. Shit, this is essentially attacking non politicized and independent law enforcement, Republican, non politicized and independent.  Where like, what are they basing that on? These people, let me tell you, you know, I'm not sure if I'm right about everything or right about some things, but there's some things I am 100 percent certain of. And one of those things is that the media is your enemy.  You think like it's crazy now. It's going to get more crazy. Attacks on the Department of Justice and the FBI intensify Proposal fears rhetoric could turn to violence. Growing concerns over the reaction from possible. Not their rhetoric, their rhetoric is totally fine. They're fomenting that violence right now. The CCP has rhetoric that is being fomented because of this, because of how Trump talks about a raid on his own. No, man, it was no raid on your home. They are basically saying that the law. We redefined raid, man. We already rechanged the definition. Well, the fact of the matter is it's not. There's no reason to believe that and no reason to believe that. We have law enforcement to actually bring fascists to justice. There you go. That's what I was talking about. Great Grubion media, by the way, this this montage. Yeah, I want to show you that Joe Scarborough stuff. It's insane. I got to show you that clip real quick. Hold on. Here we go. Check this out. Peezing the public. You're talking about appeasing conspiracy theorists, insurrectionists, weirdos. I'm just going to throw out labels and freaks fascists. I said that twice three times. Talking about violence against the federal judge.  Hypocrite, these people were just covering for an assassination attempt on Kavana that day that day incited a scotus judge as a pre-encored justice. Keep it together, Ryan, keep it together. We're going to win with this group, but, you know, you look at the people that are squawking the loudest. They're the people.  Someone who's guilty and no justice is about to come down on them. Right, right. That's how you expect them to squawk. So I really I think there's way too much chatter about the concern about these right wing extremists and bad just making threats. OK, communists, OK, groomer communists. I think what you do is, you know, you go after them with the law. Go after them with the law. But there's also outlaw people. The political opposition cable news channels that get rid of the journalists. Inspired violence leading up to January the 6th. Oh, OK. Oh, so you get that only inspired violence on January the 6th. That's all I care. Did we inspire violence for something? Just move on from that. Shocked on January the 6th by the violence. It took place. And then after January 6th, pretended like they weren't shocked by the violence. It took place on January 6th and they're doing it again. Well, you know, they're they're legal channels for that, too. When people legal channels, they get hurt. There's I mean, these are the people for years were saying that Trump was a threat to democracy because he criticized journalists. Now, the same people, the very same people think that journalists should be locked up by the FBI or should be looked into or should be set upon by the FBI because they say things that Joe Scarborough disagrees with and arbitrarily applies labels like fascist, right wing extremists, conspiracy theory. That's why they have these labels. They just blah, blah, blah. We got just mass these out there so that anybody who, you know, may not, you know, maybe a Democrat, maybe on the fence, you know, a moderate or whatever and they maybe, you know, they're not really into stuff. They're just going to hear that and it will turn them off. It's like a shield against any kind of anything else getting in there, except for what he's saying, you know what I mean? It's unbelievable. Like I said, these guys at Miss NBC, Joe Scarborough, CNN, they helped perpetrate myths and lies and disinformation that did the various things that they're accusing, you know, Fox News of and stuff, or I assume that they're blaming.  And I love looking at that are the walls closing in on Trump. This isn't this isn't 2017 to 2019 video clip. This is right now and you know what? I'll go. Excuse me. I just had lunch a little bit ago. I'm a little let me show you another clip. Let's get another clip here. The wall are the walls closing in on Trump. But everybody here has seen that montage, right? The walls are closing in. Let me see if I can find it real quick. Let's see if I can find it. It's on I'm I know it's on YouTube. But let me see if I can just find it quickly on here. Probably. Oh, wait, is that it? Oh, yeah, this is that right here. Here we go. I guess if you haven't seen this, you're going to love it. All right, this starts in February 2017, right when right after Trump was inaugurated. Let's go breaking news. A bombshell today is a turning point. Today was historically bad for President Trump. Today was a turning point. Turning point. We're turning point here. The beginning of the end for the Trump presidency. The beginning of the end and breaking news. We have another bombshell. Mike Pence. Democrats have been in charge of the country for two years now. The call for impeachment. And the cover just fell like this. The impeachment. Breaking news. Another bomb fell out of the White House. I believe this is the beginning of the end. I do. It's really the beginning of the end. The beginning of the end. He may be feeling the walls closing in on him. All the walls closing in on him. The walls closing in on him. Breaking news, a new bombshell. One astrologer says this means the beginning of the end for President Donald Trump. The beginning of the end of the Trump presidency. Trump will resign. Trump is going to resign. Is this the tipping point? I know we've said it over and over. You think this is a tipping point? And over and over. This is a tipping point. And over and over. Breaking news, President Trump off the rails. It was the beginning of the end today. The beginning of the end. It reminds me a lot of the last days of Nixon. Breaking news tonight, new bombshells. This is the beginning of the end. The beginning of the end. The walls are closing in. The walls closing in. The walls closing in. Breaking over nine bombshells. Do you hear Joe Scarborough just said that? Three or four years ago. Do you think this is a tipping point? This is unbelievable. This is remarkable. Have you ever seen anything like this? His presidency is crippled. We're still in 2017. This is the day that everything changed. We begin with the bombshell. The beginning of the end. The beginning of the end. The beginning of the end. The beginning of the end. The beginning of the end. The beginning of the end. In fact, if this were a football game, we're in the third quarter. May even be the beginning of the end. We begin tonight with the bombshell. Donald Trump is in a lot of trouble. The president will resign. Another hour, another bombshell. This is a tipping point. Trump's going down. This president could be impeached. I do not think the president will serve out his term. Resignation. Resignation. I don't think this president is gonna serve out his term. Mr. Trump will not serve out his term. He will not serve out his term. No way, no how. Breaking news. Absolute bombshell. I think Donald Trump is in trouble. Donald Trump is not, and he's done. And it's over. It's over. The wall is closing in. It's over. This is going to be the Achilles' Hill. Breaking news tonight. I expect Trump to depart. This week will be the watershed week. Trump is in big trouble. Trump's in a lot of trouble. Oh, that's a shorter version. There's a longer version of that that keeps going. Old man, who feels like he changed everything. Maybe at a tipping point. It's the beginning. Yeah, there's another version of that. Anywho, I'm gonna read some comments. I've kind of been ignoring you guys. Let's see who's all in here. Hey, 354 people, what's up? Hey, let me see if I can get the garland thing again. And I'll show you guys again. Okay, here we go. Good afternoon. He was really only on there for a minute. Since I became Attorney General, I have made clear that the Department of Justice will speak through its court filings and its work. Just now, the Justice Department has filed a motion in the Southern District of Florida to unseal a search warrant and property receipt relating to a court-approved search that the FBI conducted earlier this week. That search was of premises located in Florida belonging to the former president. The department did not make any public statements on the day of the search. The former president publicly confirmed the search that evening as is his right. Copies of both the warrant and the FBI property receipt were provided on the day of the search to the former president's counsel who was on site during the search. I could have sworn we were told that they were not allowed on site. Let me look at that real quick. Trump freed lawyers not allowed in... Yeah, okay. So Trump is saying, and I don't know if that's true, but his lawyers are saying that they were not allowed in. It says that FBI and other federal government officials wouldn't let anyone from his staff, including his attorneys, anywhere near the areas that were being examined. So Garland, who's lying here? Is Garland lying? Are Trump's lawyers? I doubt Trump's lawyers are lying. The search warrant was authorized by a federal court upon the required finding of probable cause. Okay, and I just wanna point out again, the FBI is, we know that they've lied before to get warrants, okay? We know that for a fact. Let's just bring that up real quick. Lied, defy is a warrants. And dealing with the same guy, right? So here we go from the United States Department of Justice, FBI attorney admits altering email used for FISA application during crossfire hurricane investigation. So they lied. They altered the forms, put lies into them so they could get warrants. So the media should be the ones pointing that out and casting doubt on all of this, but they're not. They're just, it's just like, as always, from the White House to the Democrat state media mouths. Same with this. The property receipt is a document that federal law requires law enforcement agents to leave. Real quick, I'm sorry to stop it again, but this is Garland. This is a guy that Trump and Republicans kept from getting a chance to be a Supreme Court justice. So like, why isn't that bring brought up? Like, we're talking about enemies of Donald Trump. This guy is an enemy of Donald Trump. Like, it seems like there's a conflict of interest there. Maybe I'm crazy, I don't know. With the property owner. The department filed the motion to make public the warrant and receipt in light of the former president's public confirmation of the search, the surrounding circumstances and the substantial public interest in this matter. Faithful adherence to the rule of law is the bedrock principle of the justice department and of our democracy. Upholding the rule of law means applying the law evenly without fear or favor. But it's not being applied evenly. Precisely what the justice department is doing. But none of that, they keep saying that. It's being equally applied. But I've just given you all these examples where that's not the case. I mean, they, so let's just go down because I keep thinking of things. So we know that the current FBI director, or well we know the last FBI director let Hillary Clinton off the hook for much more egregious things than what they're accusing Trump of here who didn't, he didn't wrongly have these documents. They just claimed they were improperly stored. And then he supposedly, like they supposedly fixed it and then the FBI showed up anyway, okay? Then we have director Ray cover up a Democrat domestic terrorist attack on Republican senators. He covered it up as suicide by cop. And then later, much later, years later, quietly admits that yeah, that was domestic terrorism. Why did he do that? Why isn't anybody asking why he did that? Well, obviously because the people who would ask him would be the subjects of who radicalized that guy, right? They would be the subjects of who incited him. So that gets covered up. You got the FBI rating, like all the supporters and people around Trump rating them. And nothing came of it. Like they did this Don Raid on what's his face? Can't think of his name. You guys knew what I'm talking about. The weird guy, the little weird guy. They did a raid on him, had him out in his underwear. Nothing ever came of that. It was nothing. It's just, and then we have the Russian thing. They lied to get FISA warrants. They spread Russian disinformation and an attempt to undo the election results. Peter Strock and what's her page, Lisa page. They had an insurance policy to if Trump got elected. What is that? It is what we witnessed. It was the actual coup attempt to try and get him out using actual Russian disinformation. Then what did we see? Then we saw, before another election, the same people, and I will bring the FBI into this, covering up the Hunter Biden laptop story. You got big tech censoring it. You had the media calling it Russian disinformation. And they were justifying that by pointing to intelligence experts, which included the FBI, who claimed it was Russian disinformation, okay? Influencing another election. Oh, and thanks for the... Oh, thanks, Jim. Yeah, it's just, I don't usually have time, but I just happened to... Ozzie Berry said, this reeks of desperation I can see from Australia that they are scared of Trump retaking. Of course, yes. So you just have this long line of FBI corruption that always falls on one direction. Always falls against Republicans, never against Democrats. And I'll point out this happens with the media as well. Like, can anyone, can any of you remember the last big Democrat scandal that the media were all in on? Like, I can, maybe the Clinton years, but even then they were defending them. That's right when I got into politics, right during the Clinton years. And I remember that. That's one of the things that got me realizing that the media was corrupt way back then. Cause I'm like, wow, that's weird that they're covering for them and yet they're constantly going off against Republicans. So, what? Okay. Oh, yes. And then, thank you, wild tangent reminded me. I was getting to that. Another thing, the FBI raids, no, I wasn't thinking of James O'Keeffe, Roger Stone is who I was thinking of. But, yes, the FBI also raided a journalist, James O'Keeffe. Why? To get, as far as I know, to get this diary they supposedly had of Ashley Biden, Joe Biden's daughter. Excuse me. Think about that. The FBI raided a journalist to protect Joe Biden because supposedly in that diary, there's talking there about Ashley Biden actually showering with Joe Biden. Kind of weird that that story just went away, right? But here again, it's another one that falls on a journalist who's against Biden. So, yeah, why would, you know, and I was talking about how this always falls along one side. Well, with the media too. Every one of these stories that they supposedly get wrong, like Smollett or the Covington kids or a written house or any of these things, it always falls along those lines.  That never happens. It doesn't happen. Look at the archetype in the media of a conservative, conservative in the media. They're all anti-conservative. They're all anti-Republican, like Michael Steele in those clips. He's supposedly a Republican. Yet that's all he does is rip on Republicans. Like, at some point, and I want to say it was Kathleen Parker. She's a journalist who worked for years and years and years, never got anywhere. Then she started ripping on her own side and won a Pulitzer Prize. Yeah. So at some point, these people realize, hey, if we want to make it in the media, we just got to go again. We got to at least say we're a conservative or say we're a Republican. And then that's what we do. We just rip on their side. Which, hey, I am totally fine with scrutiny, criticism of the highest order of Republicans. I am not like some, oh, I love Republicans. I'm gonna go to the Republican National Convention and that's not me, okay? Republicans do not particularly inspire me at all. So that's not it. It's that these standards that are put against them, Democrats have been charged this country for two years now and yet you turn on the news, it's gonna be like something about bad about Republican, something bad about Trump, anything to keep attention off the failure of the Democrats. And just to wrap this all up, because I'm probably gonna go ahead and end this because my wife's gotta take my kid to a doctor's appointment and the other two are up there. I'm gonna have to go watch them. But, and I've talked, I know I'm a broken record on this, but go read 1984. I know it's kind of cringy.  It is happening, there's no doubt. Like, I swear at some point these people decide, they were like, hmm, this book's really good. That's a really good idea. Like, if we could do what they do in that book, we could save the planet. Because capitalism's killing the planet and all this stuff.  The only way I can do that is if we take total control of all the information. I'm not saying it's like, exactly what's happening in the story is in the story, you've got, you know, a major war and then all the, you've got, I think, two major powers, or maybe three, and they're always fighting over this one area and there's a single part, which that's not, well, I mean, you could say that's going on, but the main thing is that there is a party. It's one party and it's the only party in power, Incsog, and they control the flow of information. They control what people know. They revise history to benefit the party. They revise definitions. And they so gas-eyed people and so manipulate reality that people don't even know, like, what is real and what isn't anymore? Does that seem familiar? But yeah, go read that. Oh, yeah. Jonah Duelas says the 87,000 armed IRS. I know it. That's another thing we can talk about. I guess I do have to go here in just a minute. But yeah, I do want to show that. If I can find it here. Oh yeah, here. I want to talk about one thing here. It's kind of unrelated. Here. A couple of weeks since we lost. Just another example of how the media is just basically PR, a Democrat party PR. They're all going apeshit over this video. Beto, just watch. 19 kids and their two teachers shot to death with a weapon originally designed for use in combat. Legally purchased by 18 year old who did not try to obtain one when he was 16 or 17, but followed the law that's on the books, ladies and gentlemen. That said, if you buy another one, you could buy two or more if you want to. AR-15s, hundreds of rounds of ammunition and take that weapon that was originally designed for use on the battlefields in Vietnam to penetrate an enemy soldier's helmet at 500 feet and knock him down dead. Up against kids at five feet. It may be funny to you, but it's not funny for me, okay? Okay, so the media is loving this, all right?  Like for one, no, the AR-15 was never designed for combat. The AR-15 is literally a civilian designed rifle. It was, that's what it was designed for, for civilian use. They took an M16, which was made for the battlefield, which was made for combat, which has a fire selector on it for single shot, three round burst, or fully automatic. That's a gun, that's a weapon of war.  Of course, they use shotgun, pump shotguns, semi-automatic shotguns, handguns, revolver guns in war. Are those weapons of war? No, they just say things, they say things to get the most impact out of the word. But that's a lie. The AR-15 was not, is not designed for the battlefield. It's not used by any military. So that's all lies. But instead of fact checking, the media is just, they're just, they're all just promoting it. All the major news networks, news networks, they're all promoting it. No fact checks. But I mean, I guess that's just what we've all come to expect. Wow, this stream is actually going pretty good. I hate to stop it. I do appreciate you all showing up. I did change my upload schedule to daily at 7.30. I didn't have one today because I got stuck doing, I was busy as hell last night and I didn't get a chance to work on it. But it will be up tomorrow morning. That's why, another reason I wanted to do this live stream. But yeah, start checking in the morning for those. There was another, oh yeah. That's great. Twitter's great. Well, I hate Twitter, but I mean, you can get, let's see here. Quarters, that they had no knowledge that the attorney phones said it was a criminal investigation and they weren't going to comment. Well, now senior White House officials are telling reporters that they had no knowledge that the attorney general was going to make remarks today and they have not been briefed on the content of those remarks. So the White House is clearly, if that is true, trying to separate itself where the DOJ and the attorney general are trying to do that. Right. There's a lot of people obviously in Washington who have a hard time believing at this level with the four. Right, that's absurd. Of course they knew. Do you want to know why? I'm sure you all know why that Biden and the media now is going to try and the DOJ and the FBI are going to purposely try to separate Biden from this because that's what they do, first of all, in any situation when a Democrat's in charge and the White House or whatever, however it may be, the media will always separate them from whatever's going on. So during a Republican administration, you got kids in cages. Every article is Trump, kids in cages, Trump, kids in cages, Republicans, kids in cages. But when Obama was president and there was kids in cages and you could find some articles on it, although there's sparse, you can't find them. But when you find them, you're not going to ever see Obama's name in there. I did a video forever ago where I found this NPR article where the journalist did a whole thing about the kids in cages but never once mentioned Barack Obama. And this was during the Obama administration. I tweeted her, she actually tweeted me back and I would show you that but that's on an account banned forever ago. She said something to the effect of the lawsuit didn't, the lawsuit that was lodged against the facilities that were supposedly keeping kids in cages in bad conditions did not name Barack Obama but rather named the immigration department. And so, or DHS or something. And I came back like, but he's the president, he's in control of it. Like we would not see that now. Like they would never, she never respond after that. I'm like, well, that doesn't make sense. I mean, he's the president. It's his immigration policy. And if you remember Barack Obama back then, he did an interview, which I could find where he says that asylum seekers go home. Don't come here because asylum seeker you're not necessarily going to be able to get in here just because you're poor or you're living in bad conditions or even if it's dangerous. That's not the purpose of asylum. Asylum is specifically for people who are being persecuted in their country for some intrinsic quality. Kind of like in America where if you're white you're forced to have this guilt and to somehow take upon you the sins of people that died hundreds of years ago, that kind of thing. But so it's not surprising now to see that they're gonna try and separate Biden from this. Why? Because then, so if you remember, Ducey asked KJP the other day, does Joe Biden consider Trump his political foe? And she wouldn't answer the question. She wouldn't because that's looking pretty orwellian. That's looking pretty authoritarian third world-ish when the president, the current ruling president is sickening the government on his greatest political rival before elections. Like, I mean that obviously looks bad and so it is bad. And so now this is what you're gonna see. You're gonna see this major effort by the press, by the Democrats, by the DOJ and the FBI to separate Biden from, even though that's absurd of course he knows about this. Like if he doesn't know about this what does that say about Joe Biden? Like, the president doesn't know what his department of justice is doing as it concerns the former president, really? I think not. So that's absurd and this is why you're gonna, that is exactly why you're gonna start seeing this now. You're gonna start, because it's so right and there's so nothing wrong with it, right? It's totally on the up and up, totally cool. But Joe Biden had nothing to do with it, got nothing to do with it. Don't worry about that. Just like, you know, Joe Biden has nothing to do with the gas prices. He can't control them. It's the Putin price hike. Then they barely go, oh thanks, Biden, you did it. You got it to go down a couple cents. People will save 85 cents a month. Oh, hail, Biden. Unfreaking real. Did you guys see that clip the other day? Last thing, did you guys, last, I really gotta go. But did you guys see that clip the other day of Joe Biden shaking, he shakes hands with Schumer. Here, I'll show you in my video from yesterday. Those of you who have not seen my video from yesterday, which is doing really crappy for some reason. That's weird. Notes made me $43. It's like it's being, it's like doing way under what my videos would normally do. Oh yeah, check this out. Cameras without any attention from the former for the state. Watch this. Shakes his hand. Forgets that he shook his hand and extends his hand out for another shake. Look at the look on his face. Let me know it changed the second place today. What in the world? I did this. Hold on, look at this. Change that can either. Mm-hmm. Watch this. We let semiconductor manufacturing go overseas. We barely produced 10% of the semiconductor. Confident in both hands, right? Excuse me. Not in his shoulder like you should do. I'll see you later in chip design as well as driving up costs for a family. And everyone not just tiered around the world. Appeals. Now look at this. Like if Trump did this shit, it would be everywhere. All right, folks. I hope you enjoyed the live stream. Those of you who are just getting in and didn't happen to see the actual Garland part, I played it a couple of times so you can go back and look at it. Thanks a lot everybody for watching. If you want to support this channel, as usual, I got the pay, all those links are in the description and will be in the pinned comment, but I have got it all. I got the PayPal, I got the Patreon, I got the Subscribestar, whatever you want. I appreciate it. I also have preparewithdronetech.com and I think that's it. Oh, and also, if you guys want to hang out with us, I do have a Gilded server, my Discord server as you may or may not know got shut down for misinformation. Just out of the blue. Just shut down. Me banned server gone. I messaged them, they just say you're spreading misinformation. Whatever that message, who knows what it is. I didn't even get a chance to see what it was or get rid of it. Who knows? So, Kurt, just kick back a little bit. You'll see it. It's literally like not even two minutes. But if you want to come to my Gilded server, let me see here. Let me get the little invite link for you all. There you go. But anyway guys, thanks for watching. Check back tomorrow or tonight for a short and a new video tomorrow and I will see you then. Thanks a lot. See you all later. As soon as I get this and we are.


August marks the Army's seventh annual Anti-Terrorism Awareness Month. To prevent and respond to terrorist activities, we must produce vigilance and awareness through our individual and collective action. Army leaders should encourage all community members to sustain vigilance, report suspicious activity, understand the indicators of radicalization and violent extremism, and be prepared to respond to an active shooter.  By working together, we can present a united defense for the strength of our nation. Assist, protect, defend, Army strong.


Thank you very much. I wanted to start by thanking the organizers for the opportunity to speak here today. And I'll still be looking at optoelectronic properties of materials like the previous few talks in this session, but the angle I'll take is looking at the effects of the lattice on the optical properties. And hopefully the examples I'll give you will convince you that this is sometimes important to take into account. So we can use a very simple toy model, such as a diatomic molecule, to understand why including the effects of the lattice is technically more challenging than not including them. And in order to understand that, we just look at a diatomic molecule which has some equilibrium bond length L0. And what we usually do is we fix the ions at that equilibrium bond length and then we solve for the electrons with whichever method we want. And that electron solution is represented by the cloud here. And then we calculate the properties we're interested in. And a relevant property in this context might be the dipole matrix elements. Now, when we want to include the effects of ionic motion or temperature, then we need to take into account the fact that the ions are no longer stationary at their equilibrium positions, but they move about. So for most of the talk, I will assume the adiabatic principle, which means that when we look at different configurations that the atoms also explore, such as shorter bond lengths or longer bond lengths for the molecule, then the electrons instantaneously relax to this new configuration in which they sit. And if we now fix the ions in this new configuration we solve for the electrons, we calculate the property of interest again. In general, we'll find a different value for that property. So the question is, what is the actual value of the property when you take into account this lattice dynamics? And the adiabatic answer is very simple. It's just the average over all configurations of the system. And this average needs to be weighted by the appropriate probability of finding any given configuration in the system. So this very simple model immediately tells us why it is more challenging to include the effects of lattice dynamics or dynamics in general. And that's because we're not having to do a single calculation at the equilibrium bond length. We have to do multiple calculations to understand how the property of interest varies as the atoms move around. So if we write this in a somewhat more formal manner, I consider some general electronic observable O. And I'm interested in calculating that some finite temperature T. And what we're doing then in the adiabatic picture is to calculate the expectation value of that observable with respect to a vibrational wave function, which I represent by this chi here. And this could be something like a product of a Gaussian function to assume the harmonic approximation in our system. And then we have the standard Boltzmann factor partition function. And I explicitly write the use here. The use are the configurations of the atoms, which usually we'll describe, say, in a phonon basis if we assume the harmonic approximation. So the challenge is, how do we evaluate this type of quantity? And there are various ways, but perhaps the ideal wave would be using something like molecular dynamics or path integral molecular dynamics to generate the configurations which the system explores and then average the quantity of interest over such a path. And we heard this morning how machine learning techniques can help accelerate this type of calculations. But if we're really only interested in equilibrium properties of systems rather than maybe dynamical properties, then one could just use other methods which are somewhat computationally simpler. And one of them is just realizing that this is, after all, a high-dimensional integral. And the best way to evaluate high-dimensional integrals is using stochastic methods. So what one could do is one could use Monte Carlo integration, for example. And in the particular case where we assume the harmonic approximation for the lattice dynamics, then it's actually very simple because these objects are just Gaussian functions and you can directly sample stochastically Gaussian functions and then you just average over all configurations that you're generating that way. Now, an even simpler method or family of methods which I label here as quadratic methods is one in which you expand to some low order the property of interest. So if we look at this electronic observable at some general configuration of your system U where U equals zero is the equilibrium configuration, then I can write down an expansion in terms of say phonon modes if I have a harmonic picture. And this expansion in principle has terms at all orders, but then I decide to truncate this expansion at some order, say second order. And the expression that result from this are relatively simple. For example, if again I work within the harmonic approximation, then this nuclear density is actually an even function. So when I overlap that even function with this expansion all the odd terms in the expansion will integrate to zero. And that means that to third order the expression is relatively simple. You just get that the value of your observable of interest at some finite temperature it's equal to the static lattice value. And then it has a quantum zero point contribution, a thermal contribution which essentially both I sign occupation factor and then this is the phonon frequency and this is the coupling constant essentially which is the curvature of the property with respect to a displacement of the atoms. So the argument I made at the beginning about the computational expense of including lattice dynamics is here exemplified by this sum here where you need to add all this, you need to sum over all the degrees of freedom in your system. In molecular systems you just have the different phonon modes. In solids you also have the cube vector which is the momentum of the phonons that you need to sum over. So these are the type of expressions that we want to use when we want to incorporate lattice dynamics into our calculations. And the approach I want to describe or we want to use actually is based on finite differences. So there expressions like these are also amenable to linear response methods which have many advantages such as the ability to use a single primitive cell to the calculations. But finite difference methods also have some advantages and this will prove essential for some of the applications I'll show and in particular the advantages are that you can use them very easily with any sort of electronic structure method that you want to use because you calculate the coupling explicitly distorting the atoms in your system and then you can use GW bits help it to whatever you want in that context. But finite displacement methods are computationally expensive so we've been working a little bit on trying to make them somewhat cheaper and I just want to give you an example of some of the ideas that we have and this particular one is relatively simple. So that concerns this problem of having to sample many points in configuration space. So the idea comes from very basic mathematics, the so-called mean value theorem for integrals and you have to imagine the following. So you have a function of effects in red that we're trying to integrate from A to B and if we want to evaluate that integral numerically what we would usually do is we would evaluate the function at many points between A and B and then take some sort of average of those points and that's exactly equivalent to sampling the configurations in your system and calculating the property of interest and averaging over that. Now there's something called the mean value theorem for integrals which tells you that for any such function there's always at least one point C somewhere in the integration interval for which the value of the function at that point is actually equal to the value of the integral you're trying to calculate. So another way of putting that is that the area under the red curve here is equal to the area under the flat blue line there. Now this sounds very, very nice because if we knew what that point C is then all we have to do is calculate the function at that point and then we've solved the integral. Of course the challenge is that in general we don't know what that point C is before we do the integral. But nonetheless this actually motivated us to try and find very good approximations to such a point and this actually turns out to be relatively quite possible in the electron phonon problem and here I'm writing one such approximation which is the approximation when you make the assumptions that your system is harmonic and the electron phonon interaction is to lowest order when you make these two assumptions perhaps unsurprisingly what this solution tells you is that if for each phonon mode of the system you give an amplitude equal to the square root of the mean displacement then the value of the property at that particular configuration will be equal to the thermal average over all configurations and in this way you replace potentially thousands of calculations over different configurations with a single calculation on this particular configuration. So this is the solution for the harmonic low order case. We actually now have extensions to this to both relax the harmonic condition on the lattice dynamics and the low order in the electron phonon interaction and in those cases we cannot actually find solutions with a single point but we can find solutions with just a very few points of the order of 10 say. So this is an example of the sort of tricks that we use to reduce the computational cost to these calculations. We also very carefully choose which sort of supercells we use in order to capture the relevant vibrations of the lattice but I won't go into more detail about this. Today what I want to do for the rest of the talk is to just give you a few examples of how we can use this to do some physics. So the first example is perhaps very simple. So the quantity we're interested in here is just the pure single particle electronic energy in our system and the example is actually from a collaboration that we did with the group of Aaron Walsh and we were looking at, this comes from the photovoltaics context, a class of materials called kesterite. So these are quaternary materials which are essentially the next layer evolution from the so-called six with the representative example being copper zinc tins sulfur and the advantage of these materials for solar applications is that both all these elements are earth abundant and non-toxic. So it would be very nice to be able to make solar cells out of these readily available materials. And the idea behind this sort of family of solar cells is that they're just a derivation from six which are about 20% efficient so this type of material looks promising. However, their efficiencies are not as good as all materials and there are quite a few competing theories as to why that might be the case. And one possible explanation is the band alignment between the absorbing layer and the transport layer and this is the sort of thing we wanted to look at here. And what we looked at specifically was the temperature dependence of the band alignments between this type of material. So here the example is cesium, CZTS, and cadmium sulfite. So what we do is we just calculate the temperature dependence of the energy levels of this material and here I just dissect what it looks like for CZTS. So this is the correction to the band gap of the material at any given temperature. So we have a correction even at zero temperature arising from quantum zero point motion and then we have a further thermal correction. And the red line corresponds to the correction arising from electron phonon coupling which we calculate using the methods I've just been describing. We of course also have a contribution from thermal expansion and that we simply calculated with standard quasi harmonic approximation and then the overall correction is a combination of both. But the interesting thing is that it actually does make a big difference in band alignment. So in this particular case if we ignore temperature altogether we get a band difference of about 0.10 EV for the conduction band minimum. And at room temperature which is perhaps more relevant for social applications we get about a 70% change in the band alignment. So these are effects that could be important in this type of materials. The second example is moving away from individual electronic energy levels and looking at dipole matrix elements. So the connection between them and the first example is single particle optical absorption. And the example that I want to look at is indium oxide. So indium oxide is a material that's being used for transparent conducting applications. So this is the primitive cell the cubic primitive cell with about 40 atoms in it so it looks rather complex. And this is the band structure and it's very easy to see why it's very useful for transparent conducting applications. So this is the valence band. There is a big band gap here. And then it turns out that it's very easy to dope this material to move the Fermi level here. And then these electrons here can provide the conduction. But also there is also then a big band gap between here and here. And therefore while they conduct they also retain some transparency which makes it a good material for transparent conduct applications. So this material has been well known for has been used for a very long time in this context. But the reason why we're interested in this and this is what we did with Andrew Morris is that if you look a bit more closely at the band gap which is around the gamma point you realize the following. So indium oxide has inversion symmetry is one of the symmetry operations of the material and that means that you can classify the states at the gamma point according to their parity. Now it turns out that the parity of the conduction band minimum and the valence band maximum is the same in this material. And if we look at the dipole matrix element if dipole operator is an auto operator and therefore if it connects two states of the same parity then this matrix element vanishes. That means that in reality absorption should only start from lower lying bands that have opposite parity to the conduction band minimum. So if we do the calculation of the absorption coefficient of this material at the static lattice level we get this dashed black lines and that's the experimental result. And so a few things here. So this line here is the so-called optical gap and that's the point from which there is a strong absorption observed experimentally and also theoretically and that corresponds to the lower lying band that has the opposite parity to the conduction band minimum. But then theoretically we do actually get some absorption all the way to the valence band, to the actual valence maximum and that's because although the state at the gamma point can be definitely classified to consider parity as soon as you move a little bit away from the gamma point then parity is no longer a quantum number and therefore you get some contribution from the other parity and although the states are still largely aligned to the parity of the gamma point you still have some transitions and that's what this represents. But then the conundrum here really is that although we do get some absorption there it's actually multipliers of magnitude weaker than what's observed experimentally. So this is again where phonons come in and phonons can mediate this transition and if we include phonons at various temperatures then this is the absorption spectrum that we get and it does increase the absorption compared to the static lattice result by multipliers of magnitude and also it moves closer to the experimental results. The other important thing to know is that we also capture a redshift essentially in the absorption onset of this material that is appearing due to increasing temperature. So let me go to the third example. So the third example is really to do with phonon-assistant luminescence and this is more an advertisement of the work of two other people really. So this is the work of Elena Canuxia and Claudio Tacalita and Elena had actually a poster on this last night and she's still around in the conference so please don't speak to her about this, but so they were interested in looking at hexagonal boron nitrite and luminescence in this material and this is what the band structure of, so this is bulk hexagonal boron nitrite and that's what the band structure looks like. You have the top of the conduction band, the top of the valence band near the K point and the bottom of the conduction band near the N point, so it's the indirect band cap semiconductor, but there's actually luminescence across this indirect gap, so they were interested in trying to capture that theoretically and they just wrote to me about using finite differences in this context and I gave them very little advice and they very nicely included me in their work. But so what we ended up doing here was, in order to describe luminescence, you need to solve the out-of-equilibrium beta-salpeter equation and that's a rather hefty computational task, so unlike the other examples where we actually included all the phonon mode in the system to look at the temperature dependence, in this particular case, we actually limited ourselves to looking only at the specific phonon mode that has the correct momentum to exactly bridge the momentum difference between the conduction band minimum at the N point and the valence band minimum at the K point and that happens to be this phonon mode here, if we look at the phonon dispersion of this material. So this is actually the only phonon mode that we included in the calculations, well all the phonon modes at this wave vector and these are the results, so in this particular case, we actually went beyond the adiabatic approximation and using time dependent perturbation theory just in the same way as Holberdin and Bladdit in the 1950s to describe phonon-assisted optical absorption, but in this case in the excitonic basis, then you can derive the expression for the photoluminescence intensity and this is the exciton dipole matrix element essentially and what we're doing is we essentially were displacing the relevant phonon in the system and looking at the change in that and then these are just the occupation factors, energy conservation terms and crucially, we have the phonon contributions in the energy conserving terms and these again are the Bose-Einstein factors and these are the results, so the material has a, so this is the exciton is actually two excitons divided by about 0.01 EV I think and these are dark in the calculations if you don't include phonons experimentally, you do see a little bit of signal which probably comes from some defects in the material, but then if you do calculate the intensity using this equation, then we get the blue curve here which very nicely reproduces the experimental curve and we have all the resonances each of these corresponding to each of the various phonon modes at this wave vector and we reproduce relatively well both the position and the relative intensities of the spectrum, so I'm actually done, so that's really all I wanted to say, I hope I convinced you that it can be important when looking at the optoelectronic properties of materials to include the effects of temperature as they can have important consequences in what we observe, thank you.


This video I'd like to talk about how persuasion is used in social campaigns and movements as well as political campaigns and movements and product campaigns and movements. So all different kinds of campaigns and movements, how they develop and some of the major persuasive strategies behind those. It's important to recognize that persuasion does play an important role in social movements and other types of campaigns because it's really the only tool that those organizations and those movements have at their disposal. If they had large amounts of weaponry or different things that would be, you know, not a social campaign, it would be a coup or something like that. It's more of a violent takeover, but social campaigns and movements, political campaigns and movements and product campaigns and movements really rely on persuasion to achieve their goals. So let's talk first of all about what makes a campaign. What are we talking about when we say campaign? Let's identify specifics here. First of all, campaigns systematically create positions. They don't just have one single thing about it, but they're very selective about what they represent and how they position themselves with the public and with the powers that be. So they systematically create these positions. They also intentionally design to develop over time. They are intentionally designed to develop over time. They're not an overnight thing. It's not a overnight success. These are things that unfold over the course of weeks and months and years oftentimes. When we look at things like the civil rights movement, it really is hard to pinpoint a specific start date and end date really, but we know that it wasn't all at once. It took place over the course of years. So they're designed to do that. They're designed to take time. They're designed to take hold over time. Social campaigns and movements will dramatize the artifact, inviting audience participation. By artifact, we mean whatever it is that that campaign is based around, whether it's a politician as a person, whether it's a an ideological movement, whether it's a product, whatever that artifact is, it's being dramatized in a way that that will bring people in. They will draw an audience in and invite them to participate and invite them to become a part of that movement. And finally, social campaigns are more sophisticated than other persuasive efforts. It's not the same as advertising, for example, where you just have the same idea, the same commercial, the same product shoved in your face over and over and over and over again. This is more sophisticated. This is more subtle. This is more intentionally designed to, again, to take time and to involve people in different ways. So it's more sophisticated than just the repetition of a sales campaign, for example. So there are really three different types of campaign and I've alluded to these already, so we'll just quickly talk about each of them. One is a product campaign. You can do product. Now, again, we're not talking about the same as a sales pitch where something is just hammered over and over again. We're talking about developing a campaign, really an idea around a product. So we think about, for example, some luxury automakers. You rarely hear them advertising a specific product, you know, a specific model of car or everything like that. It's really about the product itself, the brand itself, right? You know that it's good. It doesn't matter what one you get. They're all awesome, right? They're all luxury.  It's not so much about which one you have. It's about the fact that you have one at all and that says it all, right? So they have these campaigns around these different products, for example, without really specifically providing a sales pitch for any one specific product. You also have political campaigns, obviously. I mean, we call them campaigns. It's not hard to see them as campaigns and they do hold all the attributes of a campaign itself or a movement itself, right? And then ideological campaigns are the third type of campaign. And these are not surprisingly organized around an idea. So you have the Black Lives Matter movement. You have Occupy Wall Street. You have the Civil Rights Movement, the Women's Rights Movement, the ERA, right? So we have all kinds of different movements that are based around these ideological premises. So and those are the most, probably what we would most commonly identify as social movements and social campaigns are around those ideological premises. So the components of a campaign are pretty straightforward. They have goals. They have strategies and they have tactics and they are kind of arranged in a hierarchical situation. You start with the goals, the organization starts with the goals. What are our broader goals here? What are we trying to achieve? And then you develop strategies based around how we're going to achieve those, how we're going to get to those goals, right? The strategies will lead us to those goals. The tactics then are how we're going to accomplish those strategies. So we use the specific tactics to accomplish strategies and to enact these strategies and then that will lead us to our goals. So really straightforward components of campaigns. There are a variety of ways that campaigns are developed and the way that they unfold. And we just want to highlight a few of the major developmental stages of campaigns are the major models that really illustrate these developmental stop, that really illustrate these developmental stages of campaigns. So we're going to take a look at these, the Yale Five Stage Development Model, Positioning Model, Communicative Functions Model, Social Movements Model, and Diffusion of Innovation. So the Yale Five Stage Model, not a surprise, has five stages. We start with identification, identification of a need, identification of a misjustice or identification of a particular product or candidate that we want to promote because it can be used for really all of those three different types of campaigns. Then we focus on legitimacy, getting people to take it seriously, getting people to recognize the legitimacy of this effort. Then we get participation. We start to, it can draw people in, dramatize that, right? Campaigns dramatize the artifact so that they can pull people in and we start to get more and more participation. We start to grow in that sense. Then penetration really involves reaching that critical mass of where we penetrate the social psyche and the social awareness in a broader sense, right? So we can think about Black Lives Matter, for example, has been around for several years. It's not a new effort, right? This is a social movement that has offices and organizations in a number of different cities and was growing and had moved through those first few stages of identification and legitimacy and participation, but really achieved penetration in the summer of 2020 following the George Floyd murder, right? So then it exploded. Then it became a serious moment. Then you started seeing, you know, the Black Lives Matter identified on streets, painted on streets and streets named after it and things like that. So then we get into the distribution. Once you achieve that penetration, then you get into the distribution of this idea, distribution of this product, distribution of this of this candidate, so to speak, on a broader level, right? And on a more broader scope or with a larger part of the audience, so to speak, or, you know, if you want to call it the audience or the public. So the Yale five-stage model, you know, pretty straightforward in identifying these five different stages. And if you look at most social movements, you can identify these, these stages or you can identify where it kind of fizzled out, which of these stages it kind of fizzled out. But successful social campaigns will move through all five of these models. For products, a lot of time, you have what we call the positioning model. This is again, most appropriate with a product campaign, but you have the positioning model and there are a variety of different positions that an organization can take, right, in terms of trying to position themselves with the public. First is being first. You can be the first to do something.  Organizations like Apple try and be the first to do something or to offer something, you know, and they're very successful at it a lot of times. So that's really kind of their position. They're the first. They're on the edge. They're the innovators. Being the best. You know, maybe I'm not the first, but I do this better than anybody else, you know, or as an organization, we do this as better than anybody else if you're thinking about, you know, cell phones, for example. Samsung isn't necessarily the first, but they're considered among the best. You know, they're the most popular anyway. If you want to go with the bandwagon effect and they're the best in that regard, to have some of the best sales, you know, compete with non-Apple phones and non-i-phones and those services and so you can be the best. You can try and position yourself in that way. You can be the least expensive. This is where Walmart has made their money, right? By being the least expensive. Those everyday low values, everyday low prices and so that they make their money on or their position on being the least expensive. You can go the other way and be the most expensive. You know, sometimes people say, well, I don't want the cheapest because that makes me seem cheap. I want the most expensive whatever regardless of whether it's any good or not. I want the most expensive so you can position yourself as the most expensive. You can position yourself as what we're not. We're not one of those organizations that does this. We're not these people. We're not, you know, sales people are not doing this. We're not, you know, over here. So, or you could be, you could be we're not Walmart. We're not Starbucks. We're not Amazon. We're not these things and position yourself as what you're not and in doing so identify with people who don't really care for those types of organizations or those types of positions so you could play the what we're not card. You can position by gender. You can appeal to men or women, right? To people of you can appeal to male or female. You can really try and focus in on one gender or the other. You can position by age. You know, position by age. You can you can say we're going to really shoot for this market and we're for, you know, senior citizens or we're for young people or we're for middle-aged people or whatever we can position by age and focus on people in that certain bracket. So, for products you can use this positioning model and one of these positions to really kind of identify yourself and persuade people through those positions. The communicative functions model here's more about politics. This is something you see a lot in politics and you'll see a lot of these terms, right? You're probably familiar with primaries, nomination, election, and we're not just talking about national level politics here though. For every political race, whether it's your local town council, whether it's president of the United States, whether whatever, you're going to see them move through these different communicative functions and communicative stages, right? The first is surfacing or winnowing, right? Where we're just trying to be known. We're trying to get on the stage, so to speak. Trying to have people recognize who we are and have people take us seriously as we talked about a little bit ago in that sense. So, we're just trying to get some name recognition and get on the main stage. Then we get into the primaries and so we're trying to eliminate some of our competition, some of our more similar competition, right? Some of our people who may be of the same political ideology as we are, maybe in the same party as we are, maybe have the same sort of ideas that we do. We're trying to eliminate some of our near competitors. Then we work, after we win the nomination, we become that name brand. We've worked to win that nomination. Once we earn it, then we have that power behind us of being the nominee. And then finally, in the election, we're going usually against somebody of different ideological stripes than us, right? And so, we have a different strategy that plays out there and different methodologies for reaching the community and the voting public, right? So, again, this is the communicative functions model. It really relates more to the political campaigns or movements. Finally, we have the social movements model, which not surprisingly is more connected with the ideological campaigns. And again, what we see in the social movements model is that social movements have organized groups. It's not just a random bunch of people walking down the street at the same time, even if they're shouting the same things. Social movements have organized groups. Again, Black Lives Matter didn't just pop up out of nowhere in 2020, didn't just have a bunch of people drawn to it. There were organizers that were working on this effort for years. They have organized offices, they have organized plans, they have organized name recognition, all of these things because they have organized groups around their movement. These groups are not institutionalized or recognized by those in power, so they're not part of the government. They're not part of whatever system it is they're trying to work against or not work against necessarily, but change and get to recognize their particular issues. So, they are not institutionalized or recognized really by those in power. Social movements attract large numbers of people and are large in scope. So again, they reach that critical mass. Eventually, social movements do, to be defined as a social movement, they reach that critical mass where they're starting to pull people in and starting to attract large numbers of people, larger than they would have before. So again, we see that in Black Lives Matter movement, for example, in the summer of 2020. They'd had success in the past. They'd had people marching with them, protesting with them and things, but never to the scope and the scale that they did in 2020. So they're really shot off and it took off and shot up in numbers in 2020. So they were reaching that viable social movement stage in doing so. They either promote or oppose social change, depending on what they're working for, but they're trying to either achieve social change or keep social change from happening. You see that on the two sides again in the summer of 2020. You have Black Lives Matter, but you also had another group that was opposing that kind of change. I don't know if they have a name that eventually ended up as the insurrectionists. Anyway, it's either in promotion of or opposed to social change. And they're moralistic. Social movements are moralistic. They're feeling about good and evil, right or wrong, good or bad. So there's some sort of moralistic attitude at play in social movements in some regard. The encounter opposition from those in power certainly do. Change is hard. People prefer the status quo, especially those who are in power. They want to keep power. They want the status quo to remain. So they encounter opposition. Social movements encounter opposition from those in power. And finally, they see persuasion as the ultimate tool to achieve their goals. They see persuasion as the ultimate tool to achieve their goals. So again, they're not relying on weaponry or machinery or different things like that. They're relying on persuasion more than anything as a tool to achieve those goals. So again, social movements model has really more to do with ideological movements than the other types of movements. And this last one, diffusion of innovation could cross all of these as well, cross all three of these in some way. So there's a couple stages in the diffusion of innovation. The first is information or knowledge. We need to be aware. We need to make people aware of the situation of the product or the politician. We need to make them aware and get them knowledge of that to bring it to their attention. Then we engage in persuasion, trying to persuade them as to why our view of things and our side of things is correct. Next is the decision adoption and trial stage, which is just what it sounds like. People are making decisions. They're adopting our persuasive efforts. They're trying things out, seeing if it holds up, seeing if it fits for them. And then finally, confirmation and evaluation where people get locked in then to the certain product or certain idea. So you see this lot with new products, for example, new phones that come out, smartphone comes out, the new one comes out, the new Galaxy phone comes out, the new S whatever comes out. And so people are, first of all, gathering information. They want to know what's the battery life? What's the camera power on it? What's all these types of things? What's the speed of the processors? And so we're gathering information. And at the same time then, Samsung is providing persuasion and salespeople are providing persuasion because they want us to buy this thing. So then you'll have some people try it out. People will take a test run with this thing. They'll make a decision. They'll either adopt it and have a trial run. And then eventually, if they find the product to be worthwhile, then they will confirm and evaluate it. They'll confirm that they are indeed pleased with that product and will become a user of that product. And they evaluate it and let people know what they thought about it. So there's just some models of the communication, of the social movement process and how it can work in different situations. But there are a couple other communication characteristics of social media, not social movements that I really want to share with you. The first is what we call symbolic convergence theory. And these are things that cross over all these different types of campaigns. But symbolic convergence theory tells us a lot of think about why people are attracted to certain campaigns and why they follow certain things. So symbolic convergence theory tells us that reality is socially based and socially constructed. Reality is, in fact, dependent on the person, in a sense. And we all kind of construct our own reality and are influenced heavily by our social surroundings. It also tells us symbolic convergence tells us that the shared inputs and interpretations are believed even over those of a respected authority. So we rely more on the people with whom we're socially involved. And we kind of follow along with them to construct that reality. And we depend on that and believe that, find that more believable and trustworthy even than that of a respected authority. So another example from 2020 is the idea of coronavirus. At the coronavirus thing, there were groups of people and pockets of people who had determined first of all that it was a hoax in general. And they certainly weren't going to buy into that. Despite the fact that doctors were telling them, this is real. This is serious. This is causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. They still felt like, nope, this is hoax. And even if they bought into the idea that coronavirus was real, they had trouble believing authorities and saying, when they said, wear a mask. People said, I don't have to wear a mask. It's my individual rights or it's this or that or whatever. And that filtered into their social group as well. When you have a group of people that are together, then one person says, oh, I see you feel strongly about that. So I'm going to follow along with that because our reality is socially based and socially constructed. And as a result, those relationships, those shared interpretations become so strong that they outweigh even the opinion of respected authorities. Finally, some symbolic convergence theory tells us that the resulting shared beliefs result in what's called a symbolic convergence of meaning, meaning everybody's on the same page, that we end up all on the same page. So believing the same things and for the same reasons and able to spout off those reasons and so forth. So there's another theory then that I want to throw at you called Hoffer's model, Hoffer's model. Hoffer's model then says that movements form around men and women of words. So men and women who are particularly effective with their words can form these moments of movements around them sort of a cult of personality. These people, the men and women of words, they rely on a few unifying devices to solidify status and gather people to their cause when we can identify the major unifying devices that these people use. They go back to them over and over again and sometimes in combination, but to use these particular types of unifying rhetoric and ideological bases. So a one is hatred.  They figure out how to tap into people's hatred and they use that. They use imitation pretending to be someone else pretending to be something else. So they imitate some other group. So then they have persuasion and coercion. These people will use persuasion and coercion quite heavily. They'll identify leadership and identify themselves as leaders in particular. They're the best kind of leadership. They will promote suspicion and make people wonder. We saw this a lot in the 2020 campaign and the quote unquote big lie after the campaign about the election being stolen and so forth. Sowing the seeds of doubt through suspicion. And then finally action. They use that as a tactic as well as a technique and tactic to get people onto their side. We saw a lot of this and there's really no getting around the fact that this is really what happened with Trump supporters especially after the election that people, he used a lot of these methods. He raised suspicion. He used hatred in a lot of ways. He identified himself as a leader. It's the only one who could lead and protect us during this time and so forth. He used a lot of these that were identified in Hoffer's model. In general, we know kind of how these things form and what shape they take and what can come next that can be tracked. So it's up to us to then be aware of these things as persuaders and understand that the process works a particular way and so that we can be better informed about what group is in what stage and what they may be trying to get us to do and whether or not we want to go along with that then, but anyway, persuasion is the main tool of these social movements though. It is the primary tool through which they can accomplish their goals or not accomplish their goals. If you have any questions about persuasion in general, about persuasion and social movements or anything else related to persuasion, feel free to email me. I'm always happy to respond to emails. In the meantime, you don't be aware of social movements. Be aware of the power that they have. Be aware of the way that they use persuasion and just be, again, critical consumers of what we're getting from these groups. Lots of them have really good intentions and really good things going on and some of them are otherwise. So we need to pay attention and be aware of what these groups represent and what they mean to us in particular.


Win your share of 5 million rand. Get a home loan and get one entry. Open a netbank account, move your salary and you'll get another 10 entries. Simply dial star 120 star 762 hash to enter. Make things happen. Netbank. So most of us will stay in our current homes for a number of years before thinking of selling and looking for something new. In the time we spend in our home, we're looking for ways to increase the value so that when time comes to sell, we get the most out of the transaction. We're joined again by Tim Akinusi, Head of Sales and Client Management at Netbank Home Loans. Welcome back to the love, Tim. Thank you, Wani. So, Tim, what changes or upgrades can home owners make to their homes to benefit the resale value? Wani, there are quite a few changes that one can make and I'll start off by saying that when they think about home improvements and enhancements, think about it from an investment standpoint and rather than it being a cost. Because when you upgrade your place, you should be looking at what sort of return you can get into the future. So that starts with things like as basic as when something is about to break or isn't working well, rather repair it because the cost of replacing the entire item is actually a lot higher. And then secondly, start looking at the functional areas of your house and look at how you are maintaining it and look at how effective it is in terms of its operation. And when you start to engage with anything to do with your house, always look at future trends. So you can rely on things like upgrading your geyser to a solar. You can rely on things like improving your energy efficient light. And just those basic things will help improve the value of the house in the long term. Is there a systemic way of working through it because perhaps the temptation is to just do it all at once? Absolutely, but the reality is that things do take time and things are costly. So you really do want to do it in phases and as and when you see it going wrong or as and when you feel like something needs to be upgraded, rather do it and not let things pile up. Because like anything in life, if you let it pile up, it gets a lot more complex and certainly a lot more expensive. Yeah, and some other particular changes or upgrades people can make that eventually actually compromise the value of the home. It's a good question, Bonnie, because sometimes it's often not what you do, it's what you don't do. So when you don't invest in functional areas such as your bathroom, upgrades or your kitchen, then you will be compromising on the value of your house. But to your question specifically, if you take something like a spare bedroom and you turn it into a single purpose area that cannot be converted in the future, then you limit its multi-purpose nature. So you need to make sure that you keep things as classic and as standard as possible and in that way you end up with a house that can transform and can continue to enhance its value in future. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Thank you so much. So make sure that your home is in tip-top shape when planning to sell in order for you to get the most out of the sale. Make the things that really matter happen with NetBank. For more information visit www.netbank.co.ca forward slash home loans.


There's something I truly love about inventing. Inventing leads to unity. Think about it, inventors create to help everyone. They see a problem and they ask themselves, how can I fix this or make it better to make people's lives easier? When Thomas Edison invented the light bulb, he lit up the lives of millions of Americans. And when the Wright brothers invented the airplane, they created a faster and more convenient way for anyone traveling long distances. And Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone. He opened up the lines of communication for family and friends to connect across the world. Inventing benefits everyone.


I'm about to step into a realm that I really don't want to step into. I'm really really really scared of park on 2k Dude I talk about sweaters in games I don't think in any video game ever there are bigger sweaters than the people who play park on 2k I tried to flake 30 minutes on the stream. It was it was hard time. Everyone told me to grind my career I've been told me to get the badges.  I don't care if I build a trash. Okay. This game is about over. I don't care about the right badges on I just don't care so don't go in the comments and micromanage my 2k build I should even show you this you're all gonna talk about okay. I played like 14 Season games. It was horrible. It's not fun, but I have gold contact finisher, and I have fast break finisher now I don't know a fast break finisher even works in park at all I'm silver quick draw, and I have bronze range extender, and I have downhill. Oh, also.  This is my build I'm an 87 overall offensive threat number 69 for the Dallas Mavericks I have a zero percent chance to grab any rebound So I hope I have a center to carry me my goal is just to get in the park and have someone carry me now Honestly, I could probably just send out a tweet and have some like Super high ref guy carry me or something, but I don't want to do that. It's neighborhood, right? I'm going to the neighborhood, right? That's what you say I'm gonna run some three on three, and I don't expect it to go well at all So I really hope you guys enjoy it Additionally want to give a huge thank you to Roman for sponsoring today's video if you guys watched my channel for a while You know that I had really bad acne for a while, and I'm really proud to say I'm pretty much clean right now Point being this is a pretty big deal to me So if you're like me and you've dealt with acne dark spots red spots Roman has got you covered You can literally just take your phone and complete a free online consultation I'll ask you some questions about stress the issues you're dealing with etc And you'll hear from an actual doctor within 24 hours We'll actually prescribe you a custom treatment and it's gonna arrive to your doorstep within two days Really really cool service. I wish I had known about this when I was in high school Plus I've got an offer for you as always go to get roman.com forward slash MMG and your first skin care treatment is just five dollars link is in the top of the description Literally free to chat with a doctor. It is just five dollars. That's get roman.com forward slash MMG Roman Thanks for sponsoring guys enjoy the rest of the video. Just twos. I don't think I want to run twos I have no idea what I'm doing dude did all I really want Honestly is the Naruto run and I have no idea how to get it. Oh, is this a game of threes? Let me out of the spot. I'm out man. Oh, I hopped on the spot He hopped off. Does he think I'm shitty cuz I am I feel like this is an inefficient matchmaking system Dude, can I just get in a game, please? Yo, Brody is a God sent me a party invite I don't want to party up with you.  I gotta ask somebody I'm not gonna send out a tweet, but I might know somebody will play with me Brody I swear to God if you don't get away from me Dude, he's chasing me. Can I run any faster dude?  I'm leaving.  I got to go get her in. It's probably a horrible idea Cuz I'm gonna get super sweats gold against me, but I'm about to play park I'm about to play park Dude, I've been AFK for 10 minutes. This dude Brody is still standing right next to me I've been AFK for 10 minutes. I moved for three seconds as Brody dude is here All right, this guy's a 97 overall. I should be good. So where did the dude that's in my squad go? Dude, I could have swear I accepted that. I don't know how this game works. All right We have a squad apparently I don't know where they are though. I might actually get a game shout out Jared paper Adam Lots of people are trying to invite me right now We're getting a game baby. Let's go give me a boy.  Also, there's a 70 overall center. It's only my third day out here But that's my show off That's horrible. Oh, they're gonna toss the ball up for me.  Oh I didn't even know you could follow. I'm not it. Oh, oh butter. See ya. See ya. Oh, okay. Good board Okay, this guy's a beast. That's like a six foot six point guard right there. Oh, he's shooting that I Won't be honest. I won't be able to get a single rebound. So oh splash. Oh, just kidding. Got him Good D. Good D run it Good D Oh It's probably a little bit easier one day the other team has a 70 overall center though. I'm sure that's impacting this a bit. Oh Green giant, I got him thinking right now. What a ball.  I straight up might make 2k videos all year next year if it's gonna be this fun Maybe I'll go once week.  Oh wait You can use your takeover in this All right, that's center is absolutely God awful. He's literally in the pain. Oh, come here I will D you up so hard mate. Yeah. Good luck bud. Good luck.  Yeah, let the 70 overall center shoot it, please. Oh good box out fundamental basketball. Oh, it's a slam That's a slam Yes, he's got a good rebound and that's it dude. That was actually sick. Yo teammates I appreciate you boys. Look at the boys. All the boys are here to watch. What's that? There is a lot of people here Shit dude, let's go. I really hope they have like a 70 overall center or something. Oh, dude, we're fine It's a bunch of bombs. I'm throwing the oop.  Oh, oh, I jumped though Bucket easy. Oh box out. Oh Wow, they're triple teaming me. They know they know what we're doing here. Shit.  I guess no bucket. Oh, that's a bucket Sheesh, I'm so scared of this.  Oh, oh god. I'm got him with the pump.  Okay Easy easy three, dude, you got to get him out cova. He just airballed. Does he have no shooting badges?  This dude is just running to the paint.  Yes Let's go. They keep double teaming me. They know I'm recording a video So they're double teaming me and I'm mad about it and it's effective.  I'm taking this.  Oh Oh, yeah, I should have passed it Good Good pass it up. Pass it up. Yes, sir. And they'll be pretty missed the ooh. Oh Shit, I got to put a shot up, huh? I'll hit a leaner. Oh Oh No, no, please please Not this motherfucker. Oh My god. Yeah, you let me strap.  Oh, he's waving at me. That's so painful, bro I need a new squad after that one. Oh gentlemen. Yeah, so I'm with a jump. Yeah I'm with a jump TV the giant mascot.  I have too many of my squad squad size too big How do I kick him?  He's over there. Oh my god. Come on. Mr. Nachos Mr. Nachos 101 dude.  What is that thing under him? Is that saying that he has a really high rep that like logo?  Lob city passer L. L.  Oh Strap. Oh damn. Oh, that might be a bucket damn Good screen Good good good good.    Okay, please bro, please You're garbage. You're so bad. Good. And it's his dude under the rim scoring every time Don't shoot bro. Don't shoot. Okay. You know what he made one Yeah, no one really guarded that guy. Oh Perfect pass. He's gonna break it. Oh This is a this is a slam There's my gold 17 to 16 he's gonna try and do the same thing. No, no, that's my man game ain't over baby Game ain't over. We need a really clutch three ball and a really clutch stop here. Oh God oh God Yes, wait, I'm open Shit did not realize that way so they can hit a three and ended here.   Oh, that was clutch Hi, I'm an 87 overall point guard getting carried. Oh, I'm just gonna cut to the rack Three buckets. It's too easy. Oh, I got a pass in yeah. Oh, that might be a strap Dude, stop.  Oh good right back to me. Wait, I got the board though. Don't eat it. There's no board Shit Sorry, I was checking.  Give me the free bucket. Dude.  He doesn't want me to have a free bucket. Oh Good good. Papa Meeg's elite elite mind Dude, there's a guy doing a worm on the court and he played defense on me I'm so sad right now. Okay MTV Snags with the MTV Snags defense. I'm shooting it. I don't care.   He knows you just do this to me up here, and I'm gonna get bullied Shit, that's not good All right, we had a hot start.  What am I supposed to do?  I Knew that was gonna happen. Oh wait, I have a bucket here. Yes, sir Me on my coma. Yes Foul. Oh, I still got the ball.  Oh my god.  I had seven points. I attributed exactly as much as my team needed me to that's gonna conclude my first Ever 2k park video. I know this is different, but I hope you guys enjoyed probably won't post anything more from um NBA 2k 20 But when 2k 21 comes out, I'll probably play some stuff. Thanks you guys. It's always boys. See you next one. Peace