Hey Leute, dieser Typ Patel braucht ein Hintergrund graben. Wenn Sie zur Episode zurückkehren und zur Zeitstempel 00:46:27 gehen, beschreibt er seinen Hintergrund als Staatsanwalt.
Ist dies der Grund, warum Trump ihn überhaupt angestellt hat? 🤨
Von Dope1up209
3 Kommentare
This comment perfectly summarizes the issues I have surrounding Joe Rogan. He hosts a variety of guests, experts in various fields. Some presenting very fascinating ideas. But how am I, a non expert in a certain field, supposed to know if I’m being given the wrong idea from someone who is an expert in a field? I can do my own „research“, but what exactly does that mean? I heard on interview with an oncologist on the radio who made a comment about something and just researching that comment alone has led me to read 2 books on the subject and instead of feeling more informed I feel like I know even less. Also I don’t have any of the lab equipment allowing me to repeat most of the experiments so my „research“ is less research and more just reading other people’s research. This isn’t to say that I think I’m being lied to, history is filled with scientist who advocated ideas that they believed were correct that were later disproven such as Darwin’s idea of gemmules. What’s stopping me from following the same errors that those smarter and more educated than I have?
As much as I am skeptical of this administration, I am also skeptical of the insinuation that Kash Patel was hired because he defended such horrible people. I’m not a lawyer but from my understanding, if we are to even come close to a fair justice system (I don’t want to talk about the flaws because you can spend your entire professional life doing so and only cover a fraction of the faults) we HAVE to defend horrible people. The way I see it, a trial is a legal experiment. A hypothesis is presented, the accusation, it is supported by evidence, and it is tested, the defense. If the evidence supporting the accusation can weather the defense, the accusation stands and a verdict is reached. It’s not because ethics that we are giving people the benefit of the doubt by the assumption of innocence until proven guilty, it’s that it’s a logical for a claim to be supported. If we have any respect for the process, we have to weigh the evidence and as horrible as it is, it means defending people who we find out are horrible people.
I’m still wondering who tf wrote all his books for him. Every single one of these alt personalities has 10-25 books about how shitty America is available on every platform
Yooo such a clear example of how power launders itself.