 Today we're going to talk about Boris Johnson. He's the British prime minister. And what happens is he had a birthday party and it went against all the rules that the British government has set up that said you can't have more than two people in one spot, you can't have specific things happening, but apparently he's been questioned about having broken a lot of the rules in that as well. Now the guy who's tattling on him or getting after him for it is this guy Dominic Cummins and we did an episode on him a little while back. And we found him to be, I think, fairly honest. Isn't that why we came up with you? Yeah, yeah, we found him to be fairly honest. So it's going to be kind of questionable in here. It's going to be a little bit tough. Greg, why don't you tell us about the videos we're going to see today? Just a few other points. You don't need a whole lot more. It's not just one time. There are many times that this has come up, at least two and maybe a third that they're poking on him about. The interviewer is pretty direct. Did you are you calling this person a liar? So you'll enjoy that. The biggest part of this is we, someone asked many someones from the UK asked by direct message, by email, by lots of things. Could you look at this video? So it's one of those places we want to look at a politician. And as we say, we look at murderers, politicians and other liars. Just to be clear, then, you're saying that Dominic Cummins is lying and his version of events is not true. Well, I'm I just repeat. I deeply sorry for mistakes that were made. Are you saying that he's lying and his version of events? It's very important. Viewers will want to know the public will want to know. And he's will want to know, of course, of course, he is on the record, saying under oath, you are lying that you were warned about this event and you went ahead anyway, that you knew that it was, it was. Categorically, categorically, that nobody told me and nobody, nobody said that this was something that was against the rules. It was a breach of the of the covid rules, what we were doing, something that wasn't a work event, because, frankly, I don't think I can't imagine why on earth it would have gone ahead or why it would have been allowed to go ahead. My memory of this event, as I said, is going out into the garden for about 25 minutes. What I implicitly thought was a work event and talking to staff, thanking staff. I can't remember exactly how many, but for about 25 minutes, I was there. I then went back to my my office and continued my work. You know, I do humbly apologize to people for. Misjudgments that were made, but that is the very, very best of my recollection about this event. That's what I've I've said to to the inquiry. We'll have to see what they what they say. Greg, what do you got? Yeah, when he starts off, he's saying, first of all, he starts to say, well, I'm she says, are you saying and he's not saying much. He starts to stammer and stutter because his brain goes out of gear. One of the things we always say is stress like that, that immediately shot to the brow or to that immediate shot. So you're going to have to make a declaration that Dominic Cummings is lying makes him go and take a step back. So that shot across the bow makes his brain go into stammer, stutter. He moves back. He doesn't say much. And then when he does, he does an emotional eye accessing Q, as he says, categorically, interestingly, because most of the rest of the time, he's got glued eye contact. He does that taffy pull because he's making a lot of eye contact to see how he's being perceived. He does that romance for the entire time. His head will move around his eyes or not. And then his lips appear, you can't tell because the mask, which is a great reason to do this video. His lips appear to purse at you were lying. You see something push up and it's hard to control your face in a way that causes that to happen. Otherwise, he's got his hands behind his back. Someone's coached him to keep his hands down and not move them because then you're leaking information. But I think this is a really good one. And you can see that when she's saying, you know, how people feel, there's a little bit of recognition. He does a little recognition with his head. And my favorite of the entire thing is as he's moving into this, he then starts the beginning of his message. I got to get back to work and he's doing what Bill Clinton did at the end of his denial of Monica Lewinsky. Now, I got work to do for American people. I got to get back to work. So he's talking that. Mark, what do you got? Yeah, OK, so let's let's join in with Operation Save Big Dog. In fact, the dogs are barking around me right now. You maybe can can hear them. So the big dog here is doing something that Peach, my dog, often does, which is to roll the ball along, just nudge it along a little bit. Now, my dog Peach does it because she wants you to join in. She's going, do you want to play? Are you joining in with me? The big dog here is doing it because he wants to roll the message along. He's going, can we move on? Can we move on? He does this, I think, certainly twice and to try to try and knock the idea into the long grass, as it were. Make it disappear. And he's going to knock this into the long grass many, many times. So this this problem disappears. Now, when pressed by Beth Rigby, who's doing the interviewing here, who is strong, really strong and really pins him down when pressed, he juts forward with this idea of work event. So we start to get an idea early on that this is going to be his his out, that it's a work event and and that is implicit in all of this and that that has some different rules than some kind of social event. So he wants to push the idea of work event rather than social event. That's his argument about a dozen times, I would say, we get a single shoulder shrug out of him. Now, he has been coached most likely to lock himself down like this. Two good reasons for that. You the public can't see his hands moving, so he's going to leak less information. Also, this is a stress position as well, and he can create some of his own stress around that. And so when he's under stress, at least part of his brain is going, well, you're you're kind of responsible for a lot of this anyway. He can feel in command in his own agency of some of the stress. But even so, it's not enough that we can't see a bunch of single shrugs there, which would suggest that he's not quite certain of what he's saying. And I'll let you decide what you think somebody might be doing if they're not quite certain of the facts that they're giving. But Chase, what do you got on this one? Yeah, I agree with you. I think there's there's a part of this hands behind back that harkens back to me and watching my friends in elementary school get lectured or yelled at by a teacher. And that's the position we would take as little boys getting in trouble. So getting dressed down, so to speak. So I think that's pretty interesting. And I think you should be extremely suspicious when anybody is unable or unwilling to call someone else a liar. If they've said something that isn't true about them. Again, here in this video, there's an eye flutter where the eyes are are shuttering rapidly for a very short brief time, which we don't factor into a high blink rate. That would be a kind of a different thing. But this eye flutter and avoidance during these critical points of denials throughout this. There's one major one you'll be able to spot it when the video comes back up. But then there's mistakes that were made. There's no ownership. He's not taking actual ownership of anything going on here. And he's saying no one told me details or change. And I think he was warned. But I think he's being honest that no one told him specifically what he said, because those precise words were not used. So all he's denying is they didn't tell me this specific piece of information. That's probably honest, but they did tell him about it. I would say based on the behavior here. So when when somebody's argument kind of defaults to memory of an event or I would I would remember if that was told to me, you've got a problem. So think of your own memory just for a second. You're just going to say what happened. So if I ask what you did yesterday, you're not going to say, well, according to my memory or as I recall or anything like that, you're just going to say I went to the mall or I went outside or I mowed the yard because memories implied unless it's being forced into the conversation, which is happening here. So we don't need to say according to memory because everything that you will ever say about your life is according to memory. So I think we're starting to see his theme here, which is misjudgment. And so everybody who's guilty will start revealing their psychological themes that are in their head for why they're innocent very early on. And if you're an interrogator, once this gets revealed, you use this to basically trap that person a little bit later in the interrogation. That's all I got on this one. Mark. Oh, Scott, I'm sorry, man. Okay. That's cool. I was waiting. I was waiting for you to call somebody else. They were going to eat you alive. All right. I agree with Chase. I'll focus more or more seeing body language wise. However, one of the things he does go back to is that his prepared statement. I think he's ready for this. That's why he goes back to that every time that head goes down as eyes go down and he regulates by that's his form of regulation by saying, hang on just a minute. He looks down and starts talking and tries to talk over her when she starts asking him more questions. So I think that's a regulator at that point. But he's got that message prepared. He knows the points he wants to hit. And he says it's the same ones almost every video that we go through here. Now his head shakes. A lot of times people will say, oh, when somebody's shaking their head, it always means no. Even when they're saying yes. There are also head shakes that are confirmation shakes. Like when you say, oh, she's the sweetest thing in the whole wide world. I love her. Damn, my wife is the sweetest thing. So when you say that or that's a cute little dog of everything. Those are confirmation shakes. You get the confirmation nods as well. Some people will be saying, no, they're saying, no, I didn't do it. Instead of saying, no, I didn't do it, which would be a smaller head shake and it wouldn't be as pronounced. So you can a lot of times make a mistake by thinking the no means no when they're actually trying to confirm something. They'll head tilt and the eyes up, that's or the eyebrows up. That's he shows he's listening and he's agreeing and his head is nodding. So he's showing he's listening and agreeing and when he says mistakes were made and misjudgments, that could be an embedded confession there because he's pretty much saying, yeah, I messed up. I did. I was wrong in what I did. So we'll run down the slide and seeing him try to balance across that tight wire, tight rope as he gets questioned on this. We see a lot of conflicting things as well because we're seeing this agreement as we're seeing him just disagree with what she's saying. I agree with Chase. I think somebody said, don't do it. They didn't use those words. They didn't tell him those words. So it was probably Cummins because who knows. But then he ducks that head again and it goes right back into redirecting the question and what he thinks is a beautiful job of redirect here later on. Chaff redirect, but it's hilarious. But the whole thing, this whole thing is right. It's based on the certain points he hits and he hits them as he's jutting his head, going back to what Mark was talking about. Get those head juts as his illustrators. All right, that's what I got. Just to be clear then, you're saying that Dominic Cummins is lying and his version of events is not true. Well, I'm just repeat. I deeply sorry for mistakes that were made. Are you saying that he's lying and his version of events? It's very important. Viewers will want to know. The public will want to know. And he's will want to know. Of course. He is on the record saying under oath, you are lying, that you were warned about this event and you went ahead anyway, that you knew that it was dodgy. I can tell you categorically that nobody told me and nobody said that this was something that was against the rules. It was a breach of the COVID rules. Or we were doing something that wasn't a work event because frankly, I don't think I can't imagine why on earth it would have gone ahead or why it would have been allowed to go ahead. My memory of this event, as I said, is going out into the garden for about 25 minutes for what I implicitly thought was a work event and talking to staff, thanking staff. I can't remember exactly how many, but for about 25 minutes I was there. I then went back to my office and continued my work. I do humbly apologise to people for misjudgments that were made, but that is the very, very best of my recollection about this event. That's what I've said to the inquiry. We'll have to see what they say. Very good. Yeah. Let's move. Dominic Lawson wrote in The Sunday Times that as well you had been told by two officials it was a party and should be cancelled. You were dismissive. He writes, you said they were overreacting, said Martin Reynolds was your loyal Labrador. Is that also untrue? I've told you, and I repeat, I'm deeply sorry for misjudgments that were made. Your misjudgments? Because ultimately... Because it seems like you're trying to pass the buck and blame other people. No, I carry full responsibility for what took place, but nobody told me. I'm absolutely categorical about this. Nobody said to me this is an event that is against the rules, that is in breach of what we're asking everybody else to do. I should not go ahead. What I remember is going out into that garden for a short time and for 25 minutes or so, thanking staff who'd worked on COVID, who were continuing to work on COVID, and then going back to my office. Yeah, so first of all, let me comment on the dress, just that there might be some people going, why is his tie like that? Is that some strange kind of Oxford knot or club idea? Anyway, it's only because he's at a hospital. So he's tucked it in there because one of the things we know is when people wear ties in hospitals, the ties drag on all kinds of stuff, and they actually carry a whole bunch of disease and bugs around people. So that's why he's tucked his tie in. Anyway, statement analysis. He says absolutely categorically, nobody told me it was a breach, which doesn't mean they didn't tell him something else. They just didn't tell him it was a breach. And again, we'll hear elements of this later on where he's kind of bargaining around that. Anyway, then what I would think is he hides time, essentially. And he says, what I remember is going into that garden. So there's some element there where we don't hear what happened between nobody telling him a breach and then him remembering going into the garden. What happened in between? What did Cummings tell him other than this is a breach? I have some ideas that we can talk about later on. Again, invoking the idea of memory as Chase says there, and then that garden, that seems to me to be distancing. It's the gardens at number 10. It's his garden. It's the Prime Minister's garden. So it's not that garden. So that's all I got. Oh, and then 25 minutes or so. Well, how long? Exactly, how long? You're Prime Minister. You can probably have a good judgment of time. You look after a country. How long? How long was it? So there's some issues there. Chase, what have you got on this one? Yeah, I'm sitting in that office right now at that house. So it sounds funny. Sounds really funny. And it implies a lack of ownership, which I think internally to him, probably at a subconscious level, there's a lack of responsibility. And so when those two things go together, the words that people use change. And I completely agree with that. There's a lack of denial. And this is a bad sign in any interview at all. And it's not owning this misjudgment. And I think he's defaulting to not knowing the rules, but I think the Prime Minister is kind of like the President here, where you should damn well know that kind of stuff. But I'm no expert. But there's some very bad signs of deception here. I think he's honest again when he's discussing that he didn't hear those precise words again. And so one thing you're going to pick up on here, if you're going to pick up on something small about this behavior, is that during this one clip, if you take a look, and the one that you just watched before this, his eye home, the place where his eyes usually travel to recall information is about seven o'clock. Whether or not we know if that's a truthful eye home or not yet is to be determined. But keep that in mind that that normal location that we've so far seen in two videos is about seven o'clock. And you might see something different in the future. Greg? I think that seven o'clock may have to do with how he's feeling when he's talking about it, because it could be emotional. Hey, I better be careful. This is a minefield, Ann. We're back to the same message. It was work. It was work. When they quote a source and say at the Sunday Times, his blank rate goes through the roof, because now he's going to be asked to call another personal liar. That never works very well when you're going to get multiple people who can corroborate whether they're telling the truth or not. I also agree, what I call telling the truth without being honest, he does very clearly. He says, hey, nobody ever told me that exactly. At misjudgments were made, he's in passive voice, which means it wasn't me. The more interesting thing here, Mark, that I think he's masterful at is when you show shame, you admit guilt. That's human nature. And we're going to see that later. We're going to see some shame, but he doesn't show any shame whatsoever. No chin down, no eye breaking. When he does break his eyes down, it's to come up with information. And he is shaking his head and eye blocking a little bit when he's called out on that Times thing. Often, I think, Scott, you talked about earlier the confirming nod. I think sometimes it can be, how did I get here? That's what the head shake can be. How did I end up in this situation? And then finally, he says the words, nobody said to me and he stops. Nobody said those words. I think that leaves something. Look at his pupils. He's got pretty good pupil dilation going on here. And then he's doing what I call holy ground. I'm taking holy ground. I must be okay because I was doing work for the people I worked. And then I went back to the office to deal with COVID issues. These were people who had worked on COVID. He's taking holy ground. He's taking higher ground and he's not showing any shame. So it's an interesting use of all these terms and his hands are behind his back and he is not giving up a lot of information. Scott, what do you got? Yeah, I totally agree. Well, the heavy breathing is due to probably that mask and he's getting into, he's not in panic mode yet, but man, he's on his way. His fight or flight is on. Yeah, here it goes, man. So every time he goes back to that, you're right. Every time he goes back to that, his prepared statements that head goes down, the eyes go down and he breaks eye contact and starts talking again. And just like in the first video. And again, he's regulating with those head juts, those illustrators and regulators at the same time. More illustrators, I'm going to say the regulation was more when he was looking away. And we get a lot of categorically. So in the last video he was saying as well, so what I'm going to do is I'm going to start using categorically more often, starting today. And what'll happen with words like that is you'll be, you'll hang around with somebody and you'll pick up a word like that, almost like a word virus, which is something I learned from Greg. And if somebody says dude all the time, then you'll start saying dude, if you hang out in that group of people that start saying it. So they kind of flip you a little word virus and you'll start using it too. And other people hear you do it and it's an odd change to your thing, but they get used to it and they may start using it as well. So I'm going to start using categorically here. So if we're ready, categorically, we'll move right on. Paul Nick Lawson wrote in The Sunday Times that as well you had been told by two officials it was a party and should be cancelled. You were dismissive, he writes, you said they were overreacting, said Martin Reynolds was your loyal Labrador. Is that also untrue? I've told you and I repeat, I'm deeply sorry for misjudgments that were made. Your misjudgments? And yes, because ultimately... Because it seems like you're trying to pass the buck and blame other people. No, I carry full responsibility for what took place. But nobody told me, I'm absolutely categorical about it. Nobody said to me, this is an event that is against the rules, that is in breach of what we're asking everybody else to do, I should not go ahead. What I remember is going out into that garden for a short time and 25 minutes or so thanking staff who'd worked on a Covid, who were continuing to work on Covid and then going back to my office. Is that good? Yeah. Categorically. Your comments was your closest advisement. He said he verbally warned you about this. Is he lying? I can't believe that we would have gone ahead with an event that people were saying was against the rules or against the... You're not saying he didn't warn you? You're then not saying he didn't warn you? Nobody warned me that it was against the rules. I'm absolutely categorical about it because I would remember that. All right, Chase, what do you got? This interviewer does an awesome job of raising the stakes. And raising the stakes before a question is answered or during the entire process, raising the stakes is great to do in anything. You're interviewing a babysitter that's going to watch your kids, you're talking to somebody who's going to join your company. Raising the stakes means you're going to open the valve on nonverbal behaviors of deception all the way. So stakes are very important. If there's no stakes and you just have to convince a stranger that you own an Android instead of an iPhone, you won't care and there won't be signs of deception. The stakes matter a lot when it comes to behavior. And this interviewer does a great job doing that. He's using tons of team pronouns, we, us, they, people, all kinds of pronouns, just distancing like crazy from himself. There's big teams, you'll see him shift to self pronouns most of the time when it's talking about something he's accomplished or something that he's working on. But he retreats into this minutiae, this tiny little details that are not important at all. But if this happens to you, my recommendation is to go down into the depths with them. If they go down into the minutiae, then dive down into the details with them. And one pro tip, I haven't said that in a few videos now. Let's do a pro tip. When somebody displays nonverbals like this, this is the reverse of what you're learning here on our channel. We're teaching you how to see something on the outside that's going on on the inside, but the opposite's also true. If we can manipulate the outside, then we can control parts of the inside so the body can control the mind in many ways. So it's kind of the opposite. You don't want closed off positions for too long. And this is kind of a closed off position. The brachial arteries are very protected. The hands are behind the back. So you don't want people, if you're in sales or anything else, you don't want them doing this. So hand them something, get them to grab it, show them something where they have to lean forward and let go of their arms behind their back. Or get them to narrate with their body through questioning and get them to illustrate or demonstrate something. So you want to change that behavior before you start getting to more important parts of the conversation. That went a little long. Apologize. Mark, what do you got? Yeah, so I agree. He's locked off and it's allowing him to become a little pedantic. And it's easy to go down that pedantic root of the detail that he wants to get into. And I'll give you away in a second to kind of get out of that. But here's how he's being pedantic against the rules or against the... And then he takes a big in-breath because he's about to say something that could get him into trouble or get closer to the truth. But he takes that in-breath in order to have... In order to be inspired. Okay, he literally takes in breath. He inspires in order to get more oxygen to the brain so we can get the right message out. And he says what we were asking people to do. Now, it's not very clever what he says there, but it's better than what he was about to say. I'm not entirely sure what he was about to say. But I can have a little bit of a guess in that the pedanticness here is about the rules. I didn't do anything against the rules. Well, the big question here is, I understand that you possibly didn't break the rules. But did you break the spirit of the rules? Now, that's a different thing because the spirit of it suggests that you were doing something potentially not morally right with the society. I mean, if we're going to find out later on, maybe not even being really, truly patriotic in this moment, maybe not being in it all together with the rest of the country, essentially. And so the idea of when you've got somebody who's being pedantic and saying, well, you know, it wasn't really the rule or that's not what's written down. You can go to the idea, you know, but is it really in keeping with the idea that we had? That we... I know we wrote that as a rule, but really is it in keeping with the idea or the spirit of the law or the spirit of the idea that we had? That's where I would like the interviewer to potentially go here, though, she's doing a magnificent job here. So I don't think he was maybe told that it was against the law what he was doing, but I think Cummings potentially said, you know what, this could look bad. Optically, it's not going to look right. I don't think it's the right thing to do, but maybe didn't ever say, hey, I think it'll break the law. I just don't think it's... I think it's against the rules. So I think that's the... So essentially, it's a judgment error. There's an error of judgment, and he was probably advised on that error of judgment. Scott, what have you got on this one? All right. The thing that bugs me about this is he never uses Cummings' name. This is the shot where he should say, wait a minute, hang on a second, if this guy's lying, he's a liar. This isn't true. We never see that. I know Chase brought it up earlier. He never uses his name. They ever said, hey man, hang on a second, this guy's lying. Go get him. I'll tell you right in front of him. Let's do this. Well, let's get him in here. Let's talk about this. Never. And this is his shot right there. It's the first time you can lean into it hard and say, no. Again, when he tries to get back to his specific points and uses his illustrators on those specific points, looks down to the right and comes back up and starts talking and comes back up. Now, his eye fluttering, this is fascinating because it looks just like our dog, Hattie, when we give her a bath. And Hattie doesn't want water or soap in her eyes, so she blinks the whole time, she's moving around doing that. That's what that reminded me of here. And he tries to regain control again by looking away, start to talk, and using that as his regulator, then looking back up and shooting his points out, one by one, as he adjusts his head forward as illustrators. And of course, we're here categorically again. It's really short and small, but it's still in there. So that's all right. Categorically, Greg, what do you have? Well, categorically. So a couple of things. You brought up a great one. When you take prisoners, if you leave their hands tied behind their back for long periods of time, and Chase, I'm sure you've dealt with this too, you end up with respiration problems with those guys because your body is not designed to breathe through your hands tied behind your back. In fact, in my days of like cuffing you between your legs, it caused even more respiratory distress if you left them there very long. Even if you're doing it to yourself, you're creating an artificial restriction on your rib cage and your diaphragm. So you'll notice it even more. If you watch his respiration rate, it's up. His head goes down and his chin protects his throat. You can't miss it. He breaks eye contact. Then he uses words like disbelief. He says, I can't believe that that would have gone ahead. He eye blocks it. I would have remembered. Well, come on. Well, what he's doing here is creating this sense of, well, that can't be true. But we always say clusters matter more than anything. So let's take into account what he says. The clusters are passive voice. The clusters are team pronouns. The clusters are eye blocking. The clusters are disbelief. Not no, I didn't. This didn't happen. Nobody told me that this did not happen. None of that. So it's not a strong positive denial. None of those things that we typically look for when a person's being honest. And the respiration up, yeah, part of it's because his arms are behind his back. But the other parts, because there's some fight or flight rising up in him now. And we always talk about chaff and redirect. He's starting to chaff. But the problem is he's throwing out minutiae that is so easy to wade through that she just walks right into him and she gives him even more reason to get fight or flight in the next one. It's a great one. Great interview. Comments was your closest advisement. He said he verbally warned you about this. Is he like it? I can't believe that we would have gone ahead with an event that people were saying was against the rules or against the... You're not saying he didn't warn you. You're then not saying he didn't warn you. And nobody warned me that it was against the rules. I'm absolutely categorical about that. Because I would remember that. Right. I propose we do this. From now on, when Greg does this, let's all three do that too. Let's start without saying nothing and just do that too. Okay. So if Sue Gray uncovers a different version of events and it merges you did mislead Parliament, will you resign? We'll have to see what she says. And I think that she should be given the space to get on and conclude her inquiry. And I would urge everybody who has knowledge of this and understand, you know, memories of this to tell her what they know. So you'd like her to interview Dominic Cummins? You know, it's not for me to decide who she's got to interview. But I think everybody who has memories of these events should tell her what they know. I think I'll go first on this one. Um, the headline when she says Sue Gray, that's, I think that he's kind of shocked that he heard that name. And so he's getting ready for what's going to happen. It's kind of more fodder for his fighter flight. So he's getting into panic mode. And she hits a hot spot here because his voice starts speeding up a little bit. His cadence increases a little bit. His voice gets a little bit louder. And, uh, and you can, you can see, you can just feel it in there. You can feel in the room after all these building up on him. Illustrating still heavily with those, with those head juts as he, as he gets at specific points across. We see shoulder shrugs and key spots where he should just be speaking normally and look if his arms are behind his back like that, he should be telling you what's happening and with his chin up and giving it to you straight. But at this point, he's having doubts about what he's saying. Maybe not doubts about what he's saying, but doubts if he should be saying it or not. Because the little shoulder shrugs really quick. A shoulder shrug should last about a second. But what you see is little pops like that are just one. That indicates that person's not sure about what they're saying or it can be if there are other clusters around it seen as part of a cluster of deceptive gestures, I guess. So his blink rate is steady, but about halfway through it speeds up some because he's really, he's really starting to feel the heat here. So this is when we feel, we start seeing the panic start to turn on a little bit. It was at one or two earlier, I think we've had about a three, three and a half at this point. So, and also when she said, should she interview Dominic Cummins? He should have said, yeah, man. Yeah, get him in here. She should talk to him. You bet you she should talk to him right now. Call her up. I'll call her up. I got her number. I'm the PM. Are you kidding me? Yeah, call her up. Let's do that. Tell her to do that. If I don't get her, you tell her. And talk to him about it. I want to be there. I want to be there and look at it. And when he's saying that, none of that at all. Never says his name. Never brings his name up at all. So overall, his head's down. He's swinging for dear life like a fighter at this point. He's starting to, he's starting to get in that panic mode where not only is he, he's not going to come on glued, but because he's looked pretty professional. But at this point, we're starting to see the little leaks in his body language that show he's, he's being beat up by this interview. All right, Chase, what do you got? I agree with you. There's a lot of visual words here. And if you are a subscriber, you should have picked up on that by now, or you probably picked up on that. There's a whole lot of visual words for you to talk about seeing and looking at stuff. And there's a non-answer statement in here, which is another piece of a cluster, which the visual words are not. But the strongest single shoulder shrug, like Scott was talking about several of them in here, the strongest one that I was able to measure was right when he's being here, he's saying that Sue should be given all the space that she needs. And there's a big one right there. There's a lot of mention here about memory. And he's going back to this theme of memory is the problem, this whole thing. And this should be feeding the interviewer's style of phrasing and word choices going forward. It doesn't. I wish we could, we should do a course for interviewers. That would be awesome. But his strategy is now on the table. So we have memory, rules, and specifics. So those are the things that she should be targeting and dwindling into or like drilling down into or helping to explain it away so that more information comes out in the end. That's all I got for that one. Greg. Yeah, he starts off by his eyes widening when she says the word resign. And then you see his eyes widen. That's kind of some contained shock when she says Sue. But his fight or flight is up. You can't miss it. You're starting to see his respiration increase. And then he uses a little bit of a chaff and redirect by simply saying, let's not try to do her job for her. He's giving her the authority. He's making everything. He's Mark, your dog pushing the ball. He's kicking the can down the road is all he's doing. He's buying time because if he can push it down the road of ways, he can deal with that later. And I'll leave it at that. I won't put a lot more. You can see his respiration up. You can see that fight or flight is real for him now and that he is starting to lose that forward thinking brain. So we'll see how that changes in a couple of clips. Mark, what do you got? Yeah, absolutely correct. The deflection to an inquiry is kind of a stock in trade of this kind of situation is you simply go, look, there's an inquiry in process. It would be wrong for me to talk about this. They need to talk to whoever they need to talk about. I should not get involved in this. In fact, I'm just not going to comment on it. And it's a great way of, again, kicking the can down the road, hitting the ball into the long grass, and getting back onto message. And he will get there eventually. I think we see a little kind of optimistic bounce in him by the end. So though I absolutely agree, there's panic there. There's fight and flight. I think he actually thinks this bit goes a little better for him because he's managed to deflect into a classic piece of spin, which he'll have done time and time again. It's not the first time he or another prime minister has said, hey, we need to see the results of the inquiry. So this is classic. What I think is very clever about what he does is, again, he goes, everybody that has memories should tell her what they know. Well, he's already decided. I mean, really, you should look. Look, anybody who has evidence should tell her what they know. There is no such thing as evidence in this situation. There's only memories. And he's socializing this idea of any evidence that's given forward is actually just a memory. And like we all know, we all forget and our memories get corrupted. And people remember this different. And Greg's truth is not my truth. There's all kinds of elements in there like that. So he socializes the idea of memories rather than facts. And then we get a little bounce on him. And I think he's actually quite pleased by that one because it's not a bad move that could work for him further down the line and actually watch out for that one. See whether he does that in a few days time, whether he puts forward the idea that some people's memories are probably better than others and they're not real fact or evidence of this. OK, so if Sue Gray uncovers a different version of events and it merges you did mislead Parliament, will you resign? We'll have to see what she says. And I think that she should be given the space to get on and conclude her inquiry. And I would urge everybody who has knowledge of this and understand, you know, memories of this to tell her what they know. So you'd like her to interview Dominic Cummins. You know, it's not for me to decide who she's got to interview. But I think everybody who has memories of these events should tell her what they know. Mark, you don't get the $1,500 for permission of truth. Oh, we're going to do it. Nobody gets the $1,500. I don't know. You have to clasp your hands. You have to clasp your hands and sell it, man. And the next thing you know, you'll have to think you'll be given your new condition. I didn't see the contract, but I think I followed the spirit of the contract. And so I think in good. Nobody told me I had to hold my hands in good faith. You should pay me the money. You need to call Vivo. You need to call. I'll take Barnes and we'll find out. All right. For $1,500. I'll see you. I'll see you in court. You're not ruling out that you will have to resign if you've missed a parliament. Well, I mean, what I'm saying is that we need to... You've asked me what I'm focused on, what I want to do, what I want to do. No, I asked you if it's found that Sue Gray finds you've missed a parliament. Will you resign? That's what I'm asking you and not answer it. Well, what I'm saying to you with the deepest respect Beth is that we've got to wait for the outcome of the report. But in the meantime, I'm focused on delivering here this fantastic community diagnostics hub run by people from the Royal Free, offering an amazing service. What I'm focused on, number one, is clearing the COVID backlogs and delivering on all our priorities for the British people. We've still got a problem with COVID. We've still got 16,000 people in beds. And since I've got the, you know, I'm in front of the cameras, I must remind people that it's a great thing to do to get a boost. And I've got a couple of... And we've still got a lot of people who could get protected. OK, let me just try one more time. Do you accept on principle that a Prime Minister, if he's found to have missed a parliament, has to stand down from office? Well, I'm telling you, Beth, and I'll repeat this, is that I think that you're slightly anticipating things I will come back to Parliament with a full account and when the inquiry reports, but it would be quite wrong of me to anticipate or prejudge whatever the inquiry making. Just Mark, what do you got? Yeah, I mean, that's brilliant. That's brilliant. There's so much in that. Let me cover a little bit of it that most appeals to me. He almost answers the question. So at the start, he almost answers the question and then he inspires again and he remembers the spin. And it's a beautiful piece of spin. And if this weren't such an important issue, we'd probably let him do it. And probably Rigby would let him do it, but this is too important an issue. And so he says, what you've asked me is what I'm focused on. And of course, she didn't ask him that. She didn't ask him that. And Rigby is a demon here. And she heads straight in there and she does not let him do that piece of spin, which is a wonderful piece of spin of he's just going to go, he's just going to reframe the question completely and get on message. She doesn't let him do it. He then takes the question, but then does deflect again to the inquiry and then brings it again, brilliant piece of spin, deflects to the inquiry and then brings it to the present state. What we're delivering here, so now he's like back in the room, something else happening here. It's a great manoeuvre and it is executed, I think, by him quite well and he'd get away with it if Rigby wasn't there and being a total demon at this and doing the public a great service by hanging on to this one and keeping on hitting him around that. So brilliantly done there. By the end, as she hammers him and hammers his, and will not let it go, we see him stamp both feet. He's angry now and what I want you to do is keep that in mind because in our next video, I think he's going to try and convince you that he has other feelings and I want you to hang on to that idea of anger because he's angry right now, very definitely. Scott, what have you got on this one? All right, this is where he's got his head down like a fighter but he's being clobbered, man. It's like those old Muhammad Ali films where you watch those where he's just standing there letting somebody wail on him but this guy's just getting wailed on him. It's just happening. So you know who this interviewer is, Mark? Yeah, Beth Rigby, Cambridge, as opposed to him, who's Oxford. So it is an Oxford and Cambridge battle going on here. One is a hapless toff and the other is from East Anglia. So there is a little bit of potential kind of class warfare going on. Okay, because I didn't know who it was. Of course, not from there, so I don't know who she was. But anyway, like you were saying, he tries not only to rephrase the question but he just changes it and she's not having it at all. Not even a little bit. She goes on even stronger. She stops him and she asks him the question again, tells him what it was. Then he left hooks her with that Dale Carnegie style using her first name and then saying with greatest respect and it works on her. She shuts it down for a minute and I think she was his big left hook and she regains her head and comes back at him. But it works for a couple of seconds there and then he goes into another redirect and of course it's just a show from there on. But overall, I think at this point he's fighting for his life as a prime minister to see if he can keep that going. That's where I think his biggest thing is. Greg, what do you got? Yeah, if you're playing bingo, now is the time because he starts off with a matador. He tries to dodge that question but quickly, quickly goes into chained elephant and starts dancing around and then turns into a worm on a griddle and a squirrel in the road. He realizes it and he's in real trouble. His breathing goes through the roof. You can't miss it. You can watch his body rise. Here's a great one. Go back and look at video one and then look at this video and look at his eyelids. His lower lids have drooped. He's under high pressure right now. When that lower lid droops, it's a good indicator that you're under high pressure. He's stammering because his brain is out of gear. He's not sure what to say. He can't even really... This guy is pretty clearly spoken when he reads all of his letters. Respect doesn't come out as respect. It comes out as respect and it doesn't have the T at the end. You can't miss it. Then he leans in and he starts to do exactly what Mark, you're saying. He's trying to redirect this conversation in his way. Wait. Meantime. Here. Focused. That's a great and beautiful redirection because what he's done now is allow himself to get back onto the COVID issue that we saw, again, Bill Clinton do in the Monica Lewinsky thing. Now, I've got work to do for the American people. But she don't let him go and she goes after him again. And when she goes after him that time, his skin gets pink. So he's blushing. He's showing that she's got him. This guy's not got anywhere to go from here. And this one is really, really showing a lot of stress. Chase, what do you got? Yeah, I agree with you all. It's incredible that he just invents a question. I know you all said that. It's amazing. Amazing. So if you are honest and innocent of something, it would not be wrong at all to prejudge what an inquiry would conclude about you or what an investigation would conclude about you. This is the reason why bait questions work. And a bait question is, is there any reason blank and blank would happen asking somebody to prejudge something or guess something? So he uses her name twice during this one clip here. And I think it might be an attempt to take back some control. I think it would be more effective if he was not standing there with his hands behind his back like a kid and actually did take control. And he's redirecting back to COVID and didn't even ask about this. So if you're the interviewer and this happens, you just mentioned briefly what they're talking about and they said something like, yeah, here at the hospital, there's a lot going on. And then it's just a quick statement that says, I just heard what you said and then right back to the statement. That's very effective. So he talks about problems with we and he talks about solving them with I all throughout this clip here. There's a double shoulder shrug, a double shrug at the word deepest respect. And you can take a look at this. You can see the apologetic nature of this behavior when somebody says, oh, I don't know. Like, have you seen my car keys and your spouse might go, I'm not sure. That's almost an apologetic movement of our bodies. And I think there's a chance that Mark and I may disagree here, which I think is always fun. I don't think any of us have an ego about this. I kind of do when people disagree with me, but I know Mark doesn't. I think he's going to go forward toward her. He's using her name. And I think it's, there is some territory there. And I think that that was made possible because he was back on his heels. Metaphorically and figuratively throughout this. So she did put him back on his heels. I think that was his like coming down. But I do think there was some, some kind of a little dominance attempt there with the stop there. So, yeah, that's all I got. So, Mark, you gonna take that shit off him or what? No, I agree. Yeah, I mean, you don't see... Right, because you don't see his preparation for that stomp. So, he has to be already on his heels. And I think... But I would still stand... So, I agree. And I would stand by... You hear them come down. So, there has to be extra force in that. He has to import extra musculature into that to create that sound. And I think I agree it's territorial, because he makes the sound to go, get out of my territory to hear that loud noise. I'm big dog, get out of the way. You're not ruling out that you will have to resign if you've missed a parliament? Well, I mean, what I'm saying is that we need to... You've asked me what I'm focused on, what I want to do, what I want to do is... No, I asked you if it's found that Sue Gray finds you missed a parliament, will you resign? That's what I'm asking you, not answering. What I'm saying to you with deepest respect, Beth, is that we've got to wait for the outcome of the report. But in the meantime, I'm focused on delivering here this fantastic community diagnostics hub run by people from the Royal Free, offering an amazing service. What I'm focused on, number one, is clearing the COVID backlogs and delivering on all our priorities for the British people. We've still got a problem with COVID, we've still got 16,000 people in beds, and since I've got the... I'm in front of the cameras, I must remind people that it's a great thing to do, to get a boost. And we've still got a lot of people who could get protected... OK, let me just try one more time. Do you accept on principle that a Prime Minister, if he's found to have missed a parliament, has to stand down from office? What I'm telling you, Beth, and I'll repeat this, is that I think that you're slightly anticipating things. I will come back to Parliament with a full account and when the inquiry reports, but it would be quite wrong of me to anticipate or prejudge whatever the inquiry making is. It's funny how we disagree with each other, and then we figure out that we're talking about the same s***. That's the way I can spin these things. I'll see you in the backyard later. OK, I've got one final thing on this before we move to Covid. This is important. This is the first time we've seen you since reports emerged. In the Daily Telegraph, not denied by Down Street, about two boozy parties held in the garden in the buildings of number 10 the night before Prince Philip's funeral when the country was in national mourning, was having to apologise to the Queen about those parties. The night before she put her husband of over 70 years, she laid him to rest, was that a moment of shame for you? I deeply and bitterly regret that that happened, and I can only renew my apologies both to Her Majesty and to the country for misjudgments that were made and for which I take full responsibility. All right, Greg, what do you got? Yeah, this, I said earlier, Mark, that he could have shown some shame, but to show shame means that you're also accepting that you've done something wrong. So he's been masterful through all the rest of this at not showing shame. Here he's showing shame. And this is classic shame we associated, breaking eye contact, putting your chin down. We can't see his chin to see any emotion in his chin, blocking his eyes, shaking his head. That's what we associate with shame, and he should be ashamed in this case. I actually had written on my notes, this is his Andrew here hold my beer moment, doing something this foolish in, to your point, Mark, you're going to talk about patriotism, not being a Brit, not being someone who lives in that country. I've always been told she is the personification of the country, not just a person. So that's a big deal. It's a much bigger deal than it is to Americans who we think our politicians are all nuts and kind of whatever. So it's a big deal. But he's got the exasperation and explosive breath. I can only imagine him having to talk to the queen and they're going, what? What were you doing? What were you thinking? And that's probably why we're seeing some real shame here. He does emotional eye accessing, his shoulders rise, his volume drops, which is the first time we've heard that, his volume drops, his brains out of gear, and this is what the rest of his stuff should have looked like, which is why I give him credit mark for being very smart about not showing shame in those other videos. Because if he did, we would know exactly what it looks like in the space line. Chase, what do you got? Yeah, I agree. This rocking back and forth is making him look off balance because it's literally doing that. And it's a little strain. If you listen to this again and just close your eyes when the clip plays again in a few seconds for just a few seconds, the only regret is that it happened. The only regret is that it happened. Not that he did it, not that there was a part in it. Imagine someone accidentally steps on your foot or runs over your foot with their suitcase in an airport, and they say, oh, I regret that that happened. Instead of, I'm sorry, I did that. It's a big difference. But there's lots of misjudgment and there's no mistakes. There's zero mistakes, a lot of misjudgment. And there's a single shrug at one of the misjudgments here in this clip, which indicates somebody lacks confidence in that statement or what they're saying at that time. And his breathing is increasing. You can watch it speed up from the beginning toward the end of this clip. You can watch the breathing speed up. And there's two things that we look for when it comes to breathing. We look for location, which is chest or abdomen. Abdomen being comfortable, relaxed, and safe. And chest being stressful. Then we look for duration or frequency. So how often a person's breathing. We're seeing a shift into upper chest and an increase in respiratory rate there. Mostly because this activation of our adrenal glands produce a temporary spike in the body's demand for oxygen. And that's exactly what we're seeing here. Just like Greg's been saying this whole time, there is some serious adrenal function going on here because there's fight or flight responses. And he's really getting pushed up against the ropes by this amazing interviewer. Who's really hammering him pretty hard. Mark, what do you got? Yeah. So that's swinging backwards and forwards. Definitely. He's close to faint, I would say, within the fight and flight situation there. Partly done it to himself. He can't breathe properly with his hands behind his back in that kind of situation. So look, just so people understand the severity of this, the queen represents the idea of being a mother, a grandmother, a loyal partner to somebody. She represents that as a country, the idea of a country being like that. For any Americans watching, it's rather like if Uncle Sam were a real person who wasn't elected, they just lived forever. And you could go and talk to Uncle Sam and go, hey, Uncle Sam, what does the country say about this? What are you, the embodiment of the country say about this? That's the idea behind the queen. And so she embodies the idea of motherhood, of being a great female warrior as well. Somebody will get you if you anger her as well. And so if you don't join in with her grief, you're being unpatriotic. And more importantly, you're not respecting other mothers and grandmothers and wives or partners. Now, so Boris shows some elements of shame here. I absolutely agree. I'm unsure whether it's shame for what we think it should be shame for, though. No, is it shame around Britain? I shouldn't have done that to Britain and the people. Or is it shame around Team Boris? Where like, I've really messed up here. Like I made a big, I got caught. I made a big mistake around that. Look, I don't know, but here's what I want you to pay attention to. Look at his breathing and I understand he's messed up his own breathing, but understand I would suggest he's already angry. I think we're seeing angry. I do see some indicators of shame, but I see with that not the breathing of shame. His breathing doesn't change to shame. His breathing stays with anger. I think he's upset with himself that he's got caught with this. And this is the shame of the person who's been caught out and has upset Team Boris, not necessarily Team UK and the nation. Though some of that is speculation, but check out the breathing on that one. Yeah, and we can't tell why he's showing those symptoms. Just tell the symptoms are there, right? Yeah, that's for sure. We're not mind readers to Scott's friend's point. Yeah, yeah. Scott, what do you got on this one? All right, I think the whole thing's a show. I don't think he feels bad about any of it. I don't think we're seeing shame at all. Granted his head goes down. Granted we get all those things that look like it. But once when he comes to his breathing, if you're ashamed of something, you're not going to sit there and breathe heavy for a while. No, you're going to do big heavy, heavy deep breaths. If you're ashamed of something, it's not going to be a bunch of like he's doing. No, it's these big heavy deep breaths. That's when you see shame. So he's making a good show of it. He's trying as hard as he can. The mask makes it hard to see his facial expression, which would be, you know, he's trying to look sad and shameful or ashamed. But that's another reason it's so big at that point. He talks more about mistakes and misjudgments. You're right, Chase. He's on top of that. But I think he does say, I can't remember. Does he say mistakes or not? Or is this misjudgments? I think it's misjudgment. Okay. Because most of us say mistakes and misjudgments. Anyway, overall, I think this whole thing was for a show. I don't think he feels bad about it at all. I think he's worried about himself. And he may be ashamed that he's in that position, but I don't see any cues of real shame, especially around his eyes. I'm not seeing anything that shows that there. I would say categorically. This is fake. Okay. I've got one final thing on this before we move to COVID. Because this is important. This is the first time we've seen you since reports emerged in the Daily Telegraph, not denied by Down Street, about two boozy parties held in the garden, in the buildings of number 10, the night before Prince Philip's funeral when the country was in national mourning, was having to apologize to the Queen about those parties. The night before she put her husband of over 70 years, she laid him to rest. Was that a moment of shame for you? I deeply and bitterly regret that that happened. And I can only renew my apologies both to Her Majesty and to the country for misjudgments that were made, and for which I take full responsibility. A question for you. Are these guys not that you would do it, but do you think it's coaching not to say mistake versus misjudgment? For the British audience, I'm wondering. Yeah. So Prime Ministers can have, can make misjudgments, but mistakes are tougher. Because, because, yeah, yeah. Because you can have, people could be unconfident with you if you make mistakes, whereas misjudgments, you recognize that. And just finally, do you think you'll be Prime Minister by the end of the year? I'm focused, if I may say so, Beth, I know you want to take it back to, to, to me in my career and all that, but I'm focused completely on delivering for the people of this, of this country, getting us through COVID. We've had the fastest booster of any European country. We've got the most open economy. That's because of the hard work of everybody in government. Amazing work of the NHS. All the doctors and nurses up and down the country. And that's, that's who I'm here to support and to thank. And what we're also doing is rolling out to boost, to bust the backlogs. What we're doing is rolling out the community diagnostics hubs. And this is an amazing example. You've got patients who can come in, get screened, get scanned, get tested fast. And you cut out a huge amount of delay. 80% of the, of the backlog delays is caused by people who can't get to see a consultant or can't get the scan that they need in time. We're, we're trying to fix that by making scan, scanning and screening more accessible and faster to speed up the process. Thank you very much. Thank you. Wow. Alright, Chase, what do you got? I'm just excited we finally get to see his hands. Finally, the hands come out, but when they do, there's no palm exposure. They're rapid, they have jerky movement and they immediately retreat back behind the back. One thing that I found interesting here is that the right arm before we saw his hands was tighter than normal. So it was kind of raised up a little bit. So when people's hands are behind their back, clasping them behind the back doesn't always mean that much. But when the person starts reaching up and grabbing onto the opposite arm, and I think this is from the first book on body language was written by a guy named Julius Fast. And this indicates a person being restraint, self-restraint of grabbing the arm behind the back. I was wondering, can't see it. I'm wondering if that might be what we were seeing here in this, in this video. I love how he acknowledges the question and then just answers his own made up one. I think that's fabulous. And this is the first time that we also see him being expressive. He's using his eyebrows for the first time for real here. So his eyebrows are moving more than anything. His voice tone is fluctuating more than anything. And he knows, I think that he knows, the Sabertooth Tiger interviewer is about to leave the area and he's about to be safe. So he's more comfortable and more relaxed in this environment. That's why we see it. And he's finally getting to a point where the rehearsed COVID message of what this building is finally coming out. So he's more confident with that message than anything else. And that's, I think, what we're seeing right here. Scott, what do you think? All right. I think this is his closer and he knows it. So yeah, I agree with you 100%. He sees it coming. And so what happens is his blink rate drops, man. It's like 23 times in that first minute there. That's what she asks the questions. I think I counted 23 times. His voice tone is not only strong here, man. He starts getting loud because it's just like if you go to those little karaoke things at the end of the song, somebody's standing there singing, borderline. Or they get the end of it, man. They're like all into it. And they start screaming borderline real loud. And they start doing all their stuff because it's, here comes the end. You know, it's almost over. So his volume is way up. His cadence speeds up and he's leaning into it almost like at a marching cadence because you're right. This is where he's selling his prepared statement. All he's got is the Prime Minister hears all the things he's doing and he's sounding like a leader at this point. The first time, the whole time he's been doing this, where he's actually selling like he's in control, because he knows nothing's coming after this. You know, so he's leaning into it real hard, illustrating really hard with that head still. Just like bang, bang, bang with all his words. And then he chaps and redirects and gets into all the stuff that we're, you know, here's what we're doing. It's amazing. Is it amazing? All this stuff, everybody else is doing that too. It's amazing. We're amazed. So I think this is his bow to like, thank you very much. This is great. Good night everybody. We'll see you. Thanks Cleveland. We'll see you next time. That's what I think we're looking at. Greg, what do you got? Yeah, I love the, when she asked the hard question, will you be Prime Minister in the year? Some explosive, that exasperation blows his hair up by the way. It's funnier than hell. You just see that mask push away and all that. He could just say, no, no, I don't think so at this rate. And it would have sent about the same message. Then he goes into changing to your point. He chaps and chaps and chaps and chaps and chaps. And then he takes on holy ground. This is all about serving the people. This is classic politician. I got my redirect. Now I'm going to go in the message and I'm going to use my hands and do everything I'm supposed to do and talk. That's what I see. Mark, what do you have? Yeah. So his initial response to that, that question. I think we, I think we probably see a vomit response from him actually. I think we saw the, the, the, it come forward and the, and the lips come forward. I don't know. Check out underneath that mask. I think we see vomit response there. It was throws up in his own mask and then expels there to to rebalance himself to rebalance the levels of oxygen and carbon dioxide because he's, he's, he's in recovery right now. That was, that was quite sure. All of that that happened before has traumatized the guy and, and he's now in a recovery state. But look, he gets back to where he is literally born and trained to be, which is in rhetoric. Understand he went to Eaton. Eaton is the only school to my understanding in the UK that has rhetoric on the syllabus. It's produced 20 prime ministers. He then went to Oxford, which has produced I think 28 prime ministers. He was head of the, of the Oxford Union, which has produced, which is the debating society is produced to prime ministers. I believe. So if not, if not more. So he's already eaten. It's, it's assembly hall is to my understanding a reproduction of the houses of parliament. Imagine if you're a kid and what happens is every time you walk into school assembly, you're already being got ready to rule a country quite extraordinary. So he gets on to his rhetoric and it's, he's very good at it as you'd expect. He's got rules of three there, you know, get back to testing. You know, I don't know what he says, having a pizza, you know, watching great TV and fast, like the rule of three and then fast afterwards. Like great stuff. This is the guy that came up with the idea of Brexit being oven ready, like great metaphor that the departure of, of, of Britain from the union, from the union of, of Europe could be oven ready. Could be as simple as popping a turkey in, you know, so he's, he is brilliant at rhetoric. He's on form here. That's why he is formidable and he's been trained to be formidable and he relaxes very, very quickly from this initial trauma here. Great display, but, but Rigby there, what an adversary, what an adversary. And just finally, do you think you'll be Prime Minister by the end of the year? I'm, because if I may say so, I know you want to take it back to, to, to me in my career and all the rest of it. I am focused completely on delivering for the people of this, of this country, getting us through COVID. We've had the fastest booster of any European country. We've got the most open economy. That's because of the hard work of everybody in government. Amazing work of the NHS. All the doctors and nurses up and down the country. And that's, that's who I'm here to support and to thank. And what we're also doing is rolling out to boost, to bust the backlogs. What we're doing is rolling out the community diagnostics hubs. And this is an amazing example. You've got patients who can come in, get screen, get scan, get tested fast and you cut out a huge amount of delay. 80% of the backlog delays is caused by people who can't get to see a consultant or can't get the scan that they need in time. So we're trying to fix that by making scanning and screening more accessible and faster to speed up the process. Thank you very much. Thank you. We'll start around the room and we'll talk about what our take on the whole thing. We'll go Mark, Chase, Greg, then I'll wrap it up. Mark, where do you go? Yeah, I've never seen him grilled like that before. That's probably as bad as it's going to get for him. So let's see what happens out of this formidable competition. Absolutely, as Chase said, literally on his heels, up against the ropes being hit and hit and hit. There is a recovery at the end, but that's because Rigby's leaving at that point. Chase, what do you think? I think let me just go from a behavioral psychology standpoint. I think the hospital is the perfect place to do this. Every human being is automatically wired to respond to authority and to respond to commands more in a hospital because of doctors. In behavioral psychology, we call this white coat syndrome. And I think it was key, maybe it wasn't planned, but I think it was key. And if the interviewer was wearing maybe a dress that resembled a lab coat or something like that, I didn't see what she looked like. I think that would be brilliant. And I would love to see that. But I think the hospital played a part. I think the hospital was an active participant in the results of what happened in these videos that you just watched with us. And there's a whole lot going on where we see almost a behavioral regression being caused here. So we're seeing regression into language and behavior and all kinds of things that more resemble children than adults and are way off of his baseline of being in charge and confident in exactly what he's saying all the time. Greg? Yeah, a couple of things. This weekend, I went and watched a bunch of bull riders. These are guys who ride 1,200 pound animals and are not afraid of anything except standing in front of people. They would move to try to get comfortable. We see that here. We see here's a guy who's usually in charge and is not going to take a whole lot. But this woman's not giving him a break. She comes right out the gate with this guy called you a liar. Is he a liar? Well, that's back on your heels pretty quickly. He made some mistakes probably by holding his hands. It seems like a great idea until it starts to affect respiration. But through this, we could see his fight or flight rise. We could see him trying to avoid the question, trying to dance away. And then she finally got down to a point where she had called him a liar or many other people have called him a liar and she's using team pronouns. We are calling a liar, not me. So now he's got to defend himself against people that are his confidants and then finally she gets this point where I think he shows shame and where the shame is about self, about the fact he's busted or Scott, a way to deflect. At least he was smart enough not to stand with his chin up and say, yeah, I did that because that to your point, Mark would be defying a holy thing almost in the country. So he walks out of that and then she gives him a break as all that happens. She gives him a break and lets him go because she could have shut him down very quickly after she said, will you be prime minister in the year if he says, yeah, she could have said, and what makes you think that? But she doesn't. She lets him have the ball so he can run back down the place so maybe he'll interview with her again. That's what I see. I think there's a lot of deception and a lot of discomfort. Scott, what do you got? All right, I think this is a great example of someone trying to control what we see. Obviously he's got a mask on so we can't really see what's going on in his face. The arms behind his back, I call that royalty arms because you see that when someone is in control of large groups of people, you'll see generals do it, you'll see sergeants do it, you'll see members of the royal family do it when they're walking around looking at soldiers or if they're in a museum somewhere, their arms behind their back, that makes them look royal and the royals really do that quite often if you'll notice that. So I call that royalty arms and I think that's why he's using it is to give himself that little more thing of looking like he's important and so to kind of solidify his place right there and the importance of what's supposed to be happening. But I think this is a great example of watching somebody go from just being on guard to a little bit more fight-or-flight kicking in, a little bit more panic, a little bit more panic, a little bit more panic and then like you were just saying, Greg, giving them the go, okay man now you can go and just letting them end the way you wanted to so it doesn't end up all messy at the end so he will talk to you again. I think it's a great example of just seeing something just blow up and then actually letting him run with it. Alright, I think this is good fellas and we'll see you next time. See you.