Yes, that is a presentation worth watching [0] and a follow-up [1]. Even as someone who is pro law enforcement, I have to keep in mind that their job does not always align with protecting you.

In other words, if they pull you over for speeding, the relationship isn't the same as the case where you might be asking a cop for directions or if you are engaging with them because you were a victim of a crime. In the first case they will use their training and knowledge against you to the extent necessary given the circumstances, the the other two cases they will be helpful and supportive.

I do not vilify police officers --the individuals-- for this. It is their job. This is what they do. They would not be doing the very difficult work they do every day if they did not, for example, gather evidence and use what suspects say as evidence, etc.

My problem is with asymmetry of the law as it pertains to lying. When a politician gets on TV and lies, and lies and lies --for years!--, suffering no consequences whatsoever, well, I just don't think that's right.

Thinking of this as an evolutionary process, if the fitness function responds positively to lies, the net result will be evolving towards a condition where lies are a normal part of how one gets ahead or survives. And this is precisely what we have.

Some might say: Well, politicians would not be able to say much on so many subjects if the absolute veracity of their statement was a requirement.

That's fine. I'd rather they shut the fuck up than lie to us with impunity. Or, more accurately, they would be forced to say things like "What I am about to say might not be accurate at all, I don't have first-hand information or supporting evidence for this", or something like that. Then they can go off and spew out their fabrications. Or, if they know they need to lie, they get a court order that allows them to do so on a very narrow basis.

Government works for us. We can't do well if they are lying to us with impunity.

I'll give you an example. We are about to spend an insane amount of money on roads, bridges, government buildings and who knows what else. One of the stories we hear is that we need this in order to be competitive. This is an absolute lie.

Why?

Name ten companies, in the last 50 years that opted not to locate their operations in the US due to the condition of our roads and bridges.

Can anyone produce this list?

No?

How about one? Just one?

No?

Roads and bridges are not the problem then. We need to invest in whatever is required to inshore some portion (because we can't do 100%) of the industrial based lost over the last 50. Semiconductors is a good example of this. Instead of burning cash we don't have on redoing perfectly good roads, we need to have a national objective to bring back semiconductor manufacturing, even if that means subsidizing it for ten years. This is just one example. There are dozens, hundreds, of sectors that need the same treatment. And yet politicians are lying to us every day with bullshit urgency about roads that we don't need fixed. Just a block away from our home about a quarter of a mile of a perfectly good avenue got ripped-up and repaved. I have lived here for more than twenty years. This avenue has been fine that entire time, no issues at all. Nothing. I asked neighbors. Nothing. Well, we just spent a non trivial amount of money "fixing" it, for no good reason at all.

Anyhow, the point is the asymmetry in this regard provides government and law enforcement with a great deal of power over us, whether that be to manipulate with impunity or incarcerate without consequence. This is wrong.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FENubmZGj8