Andrew Clavin skewers the Clinton Foundation’s alleged pay-for-play schemes, citing FBI field agents’ resistance to Loretta Lynch and Obama’s downplaying of investigations into Hillary Clinton’s influence peddling, while mocking Trump’s evasive campaign tactics. Dr. Jordan Peterson warns Bill C-16’s mandatory pronoun laws stifle free speech, facing university threats after criticizing Canada’s gender identity policies, with U.S. cities like NYC enforcing similar fines—exposing a creeping ideological control over language that risks silencing dissent. The episode frames 2016’s political chaos as a clash between unchecked power and the fight for intellectual freedom. [Automatically generated summary]
Today we'd like to welcome a new sponsor to the Andrew Clavin Show, the Clinton Foundation.
When you look around at the troubles of the world, do you ever wish you could do something to relieve the suffering of the poor, bring an end to violent conflicts, and ensure important food and medicines get to those who are in need?
Well, get over it and instead give your money to the Clinton Foundation where you can increase the Clintons' personal wealth in return for government favors.
With just a small tax-deductible donation of $1 million, you'll receive an attractive Clinton Foundation tote bag, plus an invasion of any island nation of your choice.
Is there some offshore tax shelter where a gang of freedom-loving rebels is threatening to cut you off from your hard-earned savings?
Well, the next time you carry that attractive bag to Zabar's to buy your artisanal bread, all your friends will know that you had the patriotism to support our armed forces as they risk their lives to keep that island's financial institutions free to serve people like yourself.
For a tax-deductible donation of $2 million, you get the tote bag, an original cast recording of Hamilton, plus Hillary Clinton will stand in the rubble of an impoverished nation wracked by earthquakes and famine and shake her head sympathetically while pocketing your money to further her search for power.
What a feeling of satisfaction you'll have as you look at the starving children of a place like Haiti and know that your dollars are hard at work helping Hillary satisfy her maddeningly compulsive lust for high office.
Next time your heartstrings are touched by the story of a woman who endured the humiliation of her husband's infidelity only to endure the humiliation of being defeated in a presidential primary by an unqualified upstart only to endure the humiliation of struggling to keep a lead over an outrageous candidate like Donald Trump, you'll be able to say yes, the children of Haiti are still starving, but at least Hillary feels better about herself.
And isn't that what really matters?
So you may say, well, that's great, but what do I get for $3 million?
I'm glad you asked.
For $3 million, you get the tote bag, the original cast recording of Hamilton, plus two tickets to the Kennedy Center's annual celebration of American artists who've given money to Democrats.
Not only that, but you'll also get to hear Hillary Clinton deliver a speech about helping the little guy, even while she passes regulations that make it almost impossible for the little guy to challenge your entrenched corporate interests.
Why pay your corporate attorneys for nothing when you can pay them to cut the red tape that you lobbied to have put in place in order to destroy any competition who can't afford your lawyers?
Finally, for a donation of $5 million, you get the tote bag, the album, the Kennedy Center tickets, and we'll kill the guy who's sleeping with your wife.
The Clinton Foundation, where your money makes government work for you.
FBI Investigations Unveiled00:14:25
Trigger warning, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky-dunky.
Life is tickety-boom.
Birds are ringing, also singing, hunky-dunkity.
Ship-shaped hipsy-topsy, the world is a bitty zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray!
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hurrah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hurrah.
Wow, this week flew by.
I think it was because of Halloween and everything.
It just like went right by.
We're going into the last Clavinless weekend before the election.
Anything, anything can happen.
I got to say, we have an amazing interview, what I hope will be an amazing interview, with a really fascinating guy who is going to tell you a story you have not heard here in America, but it is a story about a warning about what could be happening here.
So you want to stay tuned for that, but you've got to be at the Daily Wire if you're looking on, if you're watching on Facebook or on YouTube.
We're going to cut you off ruthlessly at the 15-minute mark, and the interview will come on after that.
If you subscribe, you know, you could watch the whole thing of the Daily Wire.
Don't let me steal.
You're lousy eight bucks.
Speaking of lousy amounts of money, my memoir, The Great Good Thing, A Secular Jew Comes to Faith in Christ, is on e-book sale for $2.99.
And people are really reacting strongly to the book.
You can see the reviews on Amazon, but it's only $2.99 for a limited time only.
Great World Series.
Great postseason altogether.
Austin, we have to congratulate Austin Stevens, our engineer.
He's got the cub hat and the guy.
He's an actual Chicago person, so we allow him to wear his cub t-shirt to work today.
That it was amazing.
And I have to say, I'm a Yankees fan from way back.
And what happens to me is when I'm out in California, I can't really watch the Yankees games because they're on odd time.
So I kind of lose interest.
I lose track of baseball a little bit.
So I wasn't really rooting for anybody, but I have to say, I was sitting there.
I was rooting for Ernie Banks.
Ernie Banks, I think, is, I can't think of anybody who even comes close to being the greatest player who never played in a World Series.
And he only died like last year, I think, Ernie Banks.
He was Mr. Cubb, one of the great players, one of the great personalities.
So I'm sure he was watching.
And I'm not sure heaven can get better, but I think it would have been a nice day.
And he caused the rain delays.
That is going to go down in baseball history, that rain delay.
Anyway, it's all 2016, folks, and 2016 is just getting 2016 here every single day.
The latest news, this is incredible.
The FBI, I think, is now in open revolt.
I think these field agents, these are tough G men, you know, and like a lot of times we talk about all the corruption in government and all the bad guys who are at the top of government, but there are a lot of good people in government.
And what I think is happening now is they have just had it.
I think these guys, these Humphrey Bogart guys who are on the street level, are looking up at this corrupt justice department and saying, hey, you know, we investigate corruption for a living.
You can't stop us.
So Fox News breaks the story.
I'm going to let them tell it because it's their exclusive story.
Brett Baer had this to say.
This is his opening.
Yeah.
Breaking news tonight.
Two separate sources with intimate knowledge of the FBI investigations into the Clinton emails and the Clinton Foundation tell Fox the following.
The investigation into the Clinton Foundation, looking into possible pay-for-play interaction between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Foundation, has been going on for more than a year, led by the White Collar Crime Division, public corruption branch of the Criminal Investigative Division of the FBI.
The Clinton Foundation investigation is a, quote, very high priority.
Agents have interviewed and re-interviewed multiple people about the Foundation case.
And even before the WikiLeaks dumps, these sources said agents had collected a great deal of evidence.
Pressed on that, one source said, quote, a lot of it.
And there is an avalanche of new information coming in every day.
Some of it from WikiLeaks, some from new emails.
The agents are actively and aggressively pursuing this case.
And they will be going back and interviewing the same people again, some for the third time.
As a result of the limited immunity deals to a number of top aides, including Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, the Justice Department had tentatively agreed that the FBI would destroy those laptops after a narrow review.
We are told definitively that has not happened.
And those devices are currently in the FBI field office here in Washington, D.C., and are being exploited.
So those of you who have been listening to the show knew this was coming, right?
Because this show is like listening to the future.
It's like that thing, what is it, frequency?
That movie frequency where you call up and you're hearing the past or you're hearing the future.
We have been telling you for probably a year that the real story here is not the classified documents because accidentally exposing the classified documents, which would get you and me put in jail, is not enough to put somebody as powerful and entrenched as Hillary Clinton in jail.
James Comey was basically telling the truth when he said we can't nail her on this.
I think that was right.
Yes, we all looked at that and said, wait, she broke the law.
We can read what the law says and she broke it.
But you just can't get somebody that powerful on something that obscure because she didn't go to the Russians and say, here's our nuclear secrets.
Pay me for them.
But influence peddling, taking money, taking donations, and then doing favors for people, that's different.
And that's the story that the FBI on the ground level has been trying to investigate.
And the Wall Street Journal today has also broken a story because what's happening now is these guys have had it and they're talking to journalists behind the scenes.
The Wall Street Journal broke a story on their front page today, basically saying that the field agents have been fighting the smothering influence of our blandly sinister Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who basically keeps trying to shut this down, but can't quite come out.
You know, they can't quite come out and say shut the investigation down.
And so the article ends with one of the field agents saying to the Justice Department, are you telling me to shut this down?
And they're saying, no.
I can't tell you that.
So they're investigating this influence peddling, even though the Justice Department keeps saying there's no there there.
Later on on Fox, Brett Baer, when talked to Britt Yume, Brett and Britt, the two last TV journalists in America, it's like watching, it's like watching the island of lost TV journalists.
This is what he said.
This is stunning.
Two sources say it has not been easy.
It has not been a smooth process.
They believe that they are moving forward effectively now.
But there has been some angst about Attorney General Loretta Lynch and what she has done or not done.
She obviously did not impanel or go to a grand jury at the beginning.
They also have a problem, these sources do with what President Obama said today and back in October of 2015.
Yeah, we're going to get to that later on in that he downplayed it.
And today he said something that suggests that he's changed his tune a bit about Director Comey.
This does not sound like something that's going to be completed anytime soon, which suggests that if Hillary Clinton is elected, she will take office with not one but two serious investigations of her past conduct hanging over her.
Definitely.
And I pressed again and again on this very issue.
And these sources said, yes, the investigations will continue.
There's a lot of evidence.
And barring some obstruction in some way, they believe they'll continue to likely an indictment.
Wow.
Wow, it's right.
Likely, this is like we're going to get a pre-impeached president.
This guy is going to come pre-impeached.
And, you know, it's going to be a real issue because the House likely stays with the Republicans, and that's where the impeachment process starts.
You get tried.
The impeachment is just like an indictment.
You get tried in the Senate, and there's no way they're going to have, it takes two-thirds of the Senate to convict.
So there's just no way that's going to happen.
They're not even sure the Republicans will keep the Senate.
On the other hand, on the other hand, it is possible that the evidence piles up to the point where these guys have to go back to their state, and they can't go back to their state, you know, and say, we're just so corrupt, we're going to keep the press in blaze.
You know, it does happen.
I mean, that's what happened to Nixon.
Now, of course, the Republicans have integrity.
You know, it's not a lot, but we have some integrity.
I mean, as we see from the fact, as we see from the fact that we are disturbed by Donald Trump, you know, and all the things that he's done that don't fit in with what we think a president should be like, we are disturbed by them.
Democrats, so help me, they look at Hillary Clinton and it's like, eh, you know, she's another Democrat.
She is.
And she's just another Democrat.
These guys, machine politics, corruption is the Democratic way.
So they were talking about, you heard Brett and Britt.
I just love watching them really is like, oh, there's the island of lost TV journalists.
It's like these two guys.
And they have the same name.
It's like very strange.
Can that be mere coincidence?
I don't think so.
But they were talking about Obama now throwing Comey under the bus.
Let's just go back in time for a day and see what Josh Ernest, the president's spokesman, said about Comey a couple of days ago.
The president's assessment of his integrity and his character has not changed.
For example, the president doesn't believe that Director Comey is intentionally trying to influence the outcome of an election.
The president doesn't believe that he's secretly strategizing to benefit one candidate or one political party.
He's in a tough spot.
That was then, like 48 hours ago.
That was then.
This is now.
Now Obama is suddenly, you know, Obama says outright that he has tried to make sure not to give the appearance.
You always have to listen to what Obama says because he's very, he really speaks very precisely in some ways.
He says he's tried not to give the appearance of getting in the way of the investigation.
He didn't say he tried not to get in the way of the investigation.
He just said he tried not to give the appearance.
But now he changes his tune a little bit.
I do think that there is a norm that when there are investigations, we don't operate on innuendo.
We don't operate on incomplete information.
We don't operate on leaks.
We operate based on concrete decisions that are made.
When this was investigated thoroughly the last time, the conclusion of the FBI, the conclusion of the Justice Department, the conclusion of repeated congressional investigations was that she had made some mistakes, but that there wasn't anything there that was prosecutable.
So he's not quite throwing Comey under the bus, but when he's talking about innuendo, I mean, this is not innuendo.
Just to give the president his due here, these leaks are disturbing in the sense that you don't want the FBI leaking incomplete investigations, leaking information about incomplete investigations, unless it's the only way they can get it out.
And I'm sure that's what's happening.
Why is it suddenly, you know, Baer and Fox and Wall Street Journal weren't getting these stories before?
They were not getting this kind of inside information before.
Even Catherine Herridge, who's one of the better, best, I shouldn't leave her out of the great reporters who are still on TV.
You know, they didn't have the sources up till now to say these things.
These guys have had it.
They have had it.
And so when, you know, when Obama says, well, we don't want to have leaks in innuendo, yeah, sure, unless that's the only way they can get the information out.
And just, I think we're going to go to the break for a minute, but before we do, I just want to show Donald Trump, who obviously knows he's fallen into hog heaven here, how he's reacting to this, because he's staying very much on message.
Just listen to this.
In six days, we are going to win the great state of Florida.
And we are going to win the White House.
Gonna win it.
It's feeling like it already, isn't it?
Just we've got to be nice and cool, nice and cool.
Right, stay on point, Donald.
Stay on point.
No sidetracks, Donald.
Nice and easy.
Nice.
Because I've been watching Hillary the last few days.
She's totally on a hinge.
We don't want any of that.
I love it.
He's talking to himself.
Donald is talking to him.
Don't mention the beauty queen, Donald.
Don't talk about that.
Don't talk about, you know, Ted Cruz killing Kennedy.
You know, just stay on.
He has to tell himself.
All right, we got to say goodbye to our friends on Facebook and YouTube.
But come on over to the Daily Wire and hear the rest.
We're trying to hook up this interview.
And when we do, we will get right to that.
So meanwhile, this dump of corruption information after corruption information is coming down on Hillary, raining down on Hillary.
And Trump is talking to himself and saying, don't, you know, don't go to this, just stay on point.
Don't ruin it.
Don't ruin it.
You know, don't it's like, don't shoot yourself in the foot while your enemies are killing each other.
Hillary, meanwhile, see, I don't watch a lot of commercial TV.
Like, I record almost everything and then zip through the commercials.
But yesterday, the World Series, I'm watching it in real time, and so I got to see the commercials.
And the ads she is running are unbelievable.
Here is one.
I'll have to describe it.
Leave the mic on and I'll just describe it for people who can't see.
I love the old days.
You know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this?
They'd be carried out on a stretcher, folks.
And you can tell them to go themselves.
I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, okay?
Just like incredible.
When Mexico sends its people, they're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists.
You know, you could see there was blood coming out of her eyes.
Blood coming out of her wherever.
University of Toronto Mandates00:13:17
If you got to see this guy, oh, I don't know what I said.
Oh, I don't remember.
He's going to like, I don't remember.
Our children are watching.
That's the line.
So that's what Hillary Clinton is selling.
You know, forget your taxes, forget war, forget, you know, Obamacare is a mess, forget Islamic terrorism, but our children will be hurt by Donald Trump.
And you know what?
This is, as both I and Shapiro have said numerous times, this is an election where no matter what these two people sling at one another, they're telling the truth.
But if that's the comparison, if that's the comparison, give me Trump and let my children, you know, get this horrible president instead of this corrupt woman with her hands on the lever of power.
All right, yesterday, so we have the doctor great.
Yesterday, you saw me humiliate myself by cracking up doing an opening routine about genderless pronouns.
And I don't mean to crack up.
I really don't.
I try very hard not to, but I'm not a performer.
I'm a writer.
And when I write something that's funny, it makes me laugh.
So I sometimes lose it, which I'm really sorry about.
I always worried what would happen when we went live, because in the old days, we just cut it out and go back and tape it.
But there it was.
However, however, like just about everything I joke about, there is a genuinely serious side to this gender pronouns stuff.
And there is a story going on in Canada that we are not reporting on at all.
It is not getting reported on at all there.
And I am told that the headlines on this were as big as Donald Trump's, you know, talking about sex tape, you know, that thing where he started, made all that line about grabbing women and all this stuff.
This is a story about a psychologist named Dr. Jordan Peterson.
He is a psychologist who teaches at the University of Toronto.
And he's also kind of a cool guy.
When you go on his website, he says he's been a dishwasher, gas jockey, bartender, short-order cook, barkeeper, oil derrick, bit retipper, plywood mill laborer, and railway line worker.
He was raised and toughened in the frigid wastelands of northern Alberta, has flown a hammerhead role in a carbon fiber stunt plane.
That's very impressive.
Piloted a mahogany racing sailboat around Alcatraz Island, explored an Arizona meteorite crater with a group of astronauts, and built a Native American longhouse on the upper floor of his Toronto home.
That must have thrilled his wife.
Anyway, he has also helped create a really fascinating and very simple system of helping people achieve their goals by writing them down.
That is one thing that I had read about before this story.
Do we have Dr. Peterson here?
There he is.
How are you doing, Doc?
Good.
How are you doing?
I'm doing.
It's nice to meet you, too.
And you sound like a cool guy, but you were never as cool as when you actually defied the social justice warriors at the University of Toronto.
Now, I have to tell you, people here have no idea this is going on, so you're going to have to explain it from the beginning.
What exactly happened to started this off?
Well, about a month ago on September 27th, I made three videos criticizing some recent legislation that was proposed at the federal level in Canada and also objecting to the University of Toronto Human Resources Department and Human Resource and Equity Department decision to make anti-racism and anti-bias training, so-called, mandatory for their staff.
And so this bill, the federal bill is called Bill C-16, and it adds gender identity and gender expression to the list of groups or identities, yes, that are protected by the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Canadian Criminal Code.
And it makes discrimination on the basis of those, that's gender identity and gender expression, not only illegal but tantamount to a hate crime.
And so this law hasn't passed yet or it has?
Well, it's already law in a number of Canadian provinces, including the province that I live in, Ontario.
And so I went on the Ontario Human Rights Commission website to look at the policies that were associated with the law so that I could understand it better.
And I found out, among other things, that I'm required now as a citizen of Ontario to address anyone by any pronoun that they prefer, that I'm not allowed to criticize their gender expression, which basically, as far as I can tell, is nothing but their fashion choice.
And I'm not being smart, Alec, about that.
I really looked at the policies, and as far as I can tell, what's defined as gender expression, they say it's your hair, your makeup, your manner of dress.
And so, and not only that, that if I do fail to use a pronoun that someone requests, then that's tantamount to a hate crime.
And also, that my employer is just as responsible for my act as I am.
Okay.
So that's a universality.
Yeah, yeah.
So I made a video.
I was trying to articulate my thoughts about this, you know.
And I made a video describing legislation.
And I said during the video that there's no way that I'm using those made-up pronouns.
And the reason for that at the time, there were two reasons.
One was I regard the government's attempt to legislate the content of my speech as unacceptable, absolutely unacceptable incursion into the domain of free speech.
And second, remember, I'm not being told what I can't say.
So it's not a limit on expression.
It's a demand that I express myself in a certain way.
And there's something even uglier underneath it because the way the legislation has been laid out, it instantiates what's known as a social constructionist view of identity into Canadian law.
This is coming to the U.S., by the way.
It's already the case in many campuses.
Now, the social constructionists insist that biology has no causal force in determining people's identity.
So that gender identity, for example, is completely independent of biological sex.
It's only a matter of subjective choice.
So it unmoves human identity from its objective and biological underpinnings.
And the social constructionists insist on that, and they oppose the biologists, roughly speaking.
So the biologists are next on the social justice warrior warpath.
Okay, so you made videos, point out there's two issues here.
There's a free speech issue, the issue of the government forcing you, as you put out, they're not telling you you can't curse on the air.
They're telling you you must say certain things.
That's one thing.
And then the other is.
Well, the other thing is like these words, these made up pronouns like G and G and the plethora of other pronouns that have been identified.
I've studied totalitarianism and authoritarianism for a long time.
And I'm not a fan of ideologues, not on the left or on the right.
I don't like people oversimplifying things and then forcing their categorical judgments on other people.
I think it's unbelievably dangerous.
And I know what I'm talking about because I've done the relevant homework.
And so I regard these words like G and Jur as linguistic fabrications of the radical left.
And I see them as part of the vanguard of their movement into our society at every level and part of their attempt to control not only what people say, but what they think and even their unconscious minds.
So for example, the University of Toronto Human Resources Department and now our own federal government is the University of Toronto Human Resources Department is requiring its employees to take mandatory anti-racism and anti-bias training aimed at restructuring their unconscious minds.
And the federal government in Canada has now made that mandatory for the committees that are going to select our judiciary.
That's amazing.
It is unbelievable.
It's absolutely unbelievable.
What happened when you made these videos?
And you also, did you in fact refuse to take one of these classes?
No, I don't.
Faculty don't have to yet, but the group that one of the groups that the University of Toronto Human Resources Department is working with is called the Black Liberation Collective.
And it's run by a pair of, well, I wouldn't call them savory characters precisely.
And one of their demands was that everyone be required to take these courses, you know, professors and students alike.
So it's only a matter of time.
This is like a trial run, you know.
If we can get the HR staff to do it, then maybe we can get the rest of the university to do it too.
So what happened to you when you made these videos?
Oh, it's been absolutely insane.
I mean, this is headline stuff in Canada, right?
I mean, this is.
It's been the top news in Canada for five weeks.
This is amazing.
And we're not hearing about it at all.
We're not hearing about it at all.
Nobody who's listening to you now has heard this story before.
I can almost guarantee it.
So what in fact happened?
Well, there were two demonstrations on campus, one specifically targeted at me, and then a free speech rally that was organized by a number of students.
And at the free speech rally, counter-social justice warrior counter-protesters used professional protester types, you know.
They used right noise to drown out the students and the other speakers and chanting loud chants of shame.
And they ran off with the microphone.
And then it culminated in the assault on a Canadian journalist named Lauren Southern, who works for an organization called Rebel Media, which has become quite popular.
It's kind of a right-leaning organization, journalist organization.
And one of the social justice warrior types attacked Southern, and then another immediately came forward to lie to the police about it.
And that's actually gone viral.
I would say 3 million people have probably watched that on YouTube now.
And this is a massive story on YouTube.
I mean, I don't know how many.
And then there's been a Canadian public television show debate about it last week.
And I don't know, a dozen editorials and columns in national newspapers in Canada.
The post-media group in Canada, which represents about 100 newspapers, came out in support of my stance on Friday.
And the university also sent me two warning letters.
The first, so see, my claim was that a discussion like the one that I was having that I put on YouTube was already illegal.
And that if I made it, the university would get tangled up in it by legal necessity.
And then a couple of lawyers, social justice type lawyers, wrote a call and saying, you know, Dr. Peterson, he's just scaremongering.
No one's going to go to jail for failing to use the proper pronouns.
But what happened was immediately, within a week after I made the videos, the university sent me the first of two letters.
The first one warned me that my conduct was in violation of the university policies, although not the policy on free speech, I might add, and that I was likely violating the Ontario Human Rights Act.
And I told them I knew.
So is your job in danger?
Well, the second letter came out on October 18th, and they told me to stop talking about it.
And?
Obviously, you haven't.
Well, so then the next thing that happened was I talked to my family about this and tried to figure out when I went to meet with the dean who wrote the letter.
It was the dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
And I proposed that since this had caused such a tremendous amount of noise in Canada, it's unparalleled, I would say, for a story of this type, that the university should host a debate about it and we could air these issues properly.
And the university agreed to do that.
We've hit a few snags about the precise details of how that might move forward.
But I believe at the moment the probability is quite high that it will move forward.
Yes, they told me outright that, and I talked to them again today, because I suggested what they do is, see, they're trying to distance themselves from me legally so they don't get tangled up in the Ontario Human Rights Act, and maybe even in the hate speech laws.
That's what the two letters were for.
And they were basically crafted by lawyers.
And I suggested instead that they drop that and support my right to free speech and, if necessary, fight it all the way to the Supreme Court.
But they've indicated that they won't do that.
And I also told them that their teaching of biology itself might be endangered by this legislation.
Of course, yeah.
Now, is there any chance that you'll get into this kind of Mark Stein situation where you get called before one of these?
It's highly called, I would say.
I can't see how the Human Rights Tribunal, which is a kangaroo court of Soviet proportions, I can't see how they can avoid calling me in front of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal.
This is insane.
I already decided what I'm going to do about that.
What are you going to do?
I'm not going to defend myself.
You're just going to go and say you did it.
Yeah, and I'll tell them I think they're a kangaroo court.
I know how to deal with kangaroo courts.
I know a lot about the Soviet system.
And one thing you don't do with a Kangaroo court is pretend that it's a court.
Right.
Because all it does, well, all it does is validate, it's like a dramatic validation of the existence of the court.
It's like, well, you're judges, and if you're judges, then I need a lawyer and we have to go through this in a legal manner.
It's like, no, I'm not doing that.
I'm not doing that.
And so they can take me in front of the Human Rights Tribunal.
And if they find me, I won't pay the fine.
And I said on TV the other day when this came up in debate, if they jail me because I won't pay the fine, then I'll go on hunger strike.
But I'm not saying these evidence.
Wow, this is wild.
Kangaroo Courts and Free Speech00:01:57
Well, look, I'm out of time.
I just have one other question.
Has anybody, is like Fox News or anybody here had you on?
Have you been on TV?
No, but a lot of, I've been speaking with a lot of different podcast people.
And of course, the podcast people are becoming quite influential, as you well know.
Because the other thing I've learned, and this has been very interesting, is that all of the relevant political debate has shifted to YouTube.
Right, of course.
Especially for younger people.
That's why YouTube is censoring.
It's a market for free speech.
It's really interesting to see that happening.
Dr. Peterson, thank you for coming on.
I really admire what you're doing, and we'll be definitely following the story.
And I hope it gets out because you're right, it is coming to America.
Oh, definitely.
It's already law in New York City.
You know this.
If you misgender someone in New York City, it's a $250,000 fine.
And New York City protects 31 different gender identities.
Yep, no question about it.
Thank you very much.
I hope to talk to you again.
All right.
Good to meet you.
Nice talking to you.
Thanks.
Bye-bye.
Wow.
I mean, wow.
That is something else.
The guy's going to be taken in front of a tribunal probably because he won't use the stuff, the gender pronouns that we're laughing about.
You know, we're in stitches here.
All right, the Clavin week is over, and we are entering the Clavinless weekend, the last one before the election.
Keep your powder dry.
Stay sane.
Remember, it is, you know, we laugh about these things here because we know, we not only know what people are, we know what they could be if they only tried.
And that's what makes us funny.
It's the difference between what we were made to be by our Creator and the way we are.
That's what makes the joke.
So if we live a little bit more into what we can be, we may not be as funny, but it'll be a better world.