For being truthful, four conditions must be met:

1) One's speech should not hurt anyone.
2) The facts must be correct.
3) The speech should be pleasant or affectionate.
4) The speech must have a benevolent purpose.

If any of these factors is missing, then it is better to remain silent.

http://damayanti.store/blogs/news/mastering-the-power-of-true-speech

Socrates' speech is believed to meet all four.
Was the other guy's speech meeting the same?

Claiming that even more people ought to be in prison, that in the country with already nearly the highest rate of incarceration, fulfils neither of the above four:
http://moneywise.com/news/top-stories/charlie-kirk-says-putting-more-americans-in-jail-will-solve-the-housing-crisis-whats-behind-his-theory

---

Dear Dan,

I believe that John Daysh is a true person, not AI.
I do believe, however, that he has a team of humans behind to support him, because it is difficult to reason that one person can have so much knowledge in so many divergent areas.

Yuyutsu,

With sound information and media literacy skills, you don't need a team. We now have faster access to more information than we've ever had.

When you can sort through the information with speed and accuracy to pick out what's reliable, the sky's the limit - no team required.

Strangely, people are still encouraged by truth.
Sorrowfully, their basic understanding of the world around them is flawed.
Their understanding of truth is not purely factual.
It includes far too much instinctive behaviour.

As an example: no person has any natural 'right' to anything.
Instead, we have needs.
When those needs are enshrined in law, and enforced, they become 'rights'.
However, without enforcement, there are no 'rights'.
If your way of thinking includes the existence of natural 'rights', your thinking is flawed.
And reason based on that must also be flawed?
I notice, oh so often, that when people express opinions, that is the case.
I just wish we could all be taught truth from an early age.
It took a long time for me to work it out.

Dear Ipso Fatso,

I agree that rights are not natural - freedom is.

The way I like to describe it is that, say our freedom is a $100 note, then states take away our freedom and return us a change of some copper coins as "rights".

Yet predators are also a natural phenomenon, where even whole stars are swallowed up by black holes, so we should consider ourselves lucky that we are still alive: others for example were taken by states to Siberia and never returned.