Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 6, 2022 - Viva & Barnes

02:36:15

TGI Viva Frei-Day! Meanwhile in Canada (NO JOHNNY DEPP! ;) Viva Frei Live

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
	I'm sure all of us in this house are used to vigorous debate, certainly during question period, but there is a line that should be not crossed, especially when it comes to using unparliamentary language.
	The Prime Minister used an obscenity, and it was not fuddle-duddle, in describing the official opposition.
	I would ask the Prime Minister to stand and apologize for that language.
	I want to make sure I heard the voice.
	Point of order.
	Four foothills.
	Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
	I'm sure all of us in this else are used to vigorous debates.
	I don't know why they played it twice, but listen at the end.
	There is a line that should be not crossed, especially when it comes to using unparliamentary language.
	The Prime Minister used an obscenity, and it was not fuddle-duddle in describing the official opposition.
	I would ask the Prime Minister to stand and apologize for that language.
	I think you can hear something in the background when they replay this.
	Okay.
	Look, people, I know that...
	Hold on.
	Hold on.
	Let me just add myself back to the stream.
	I know that some of you don't want this trial stuff, and we're not going to talk about the trial stuff, but I promise you there's going to be so much Trudeau stuff that you're going to wish that we would be talking about the trial.
	There was someone in the chat early on who said, who accused me and said, I'm going to be unable to avoid discussing the trial.
	To which I said, will you apologize when you're wrong unless making a joke about how I'm not going to discuss the trial qualifies as discussing the trial?
	Which I think it wouldn't because that would be contrary to the very essence of the idea.
	No trial stuff today, people.
	None whatsoever.
	Viva Friday.
	The old lady from Iowa turning 63. Ugh.
	People, it's Viva Friday.
	And we've got...
	I mean, I think they're always good shows.
	I think it's always good content.
	Insightful, meaningful, important.
	But it's going to be especially good today.
	Why?
	There will be no Johnny Depp, Amber Heard discussion whatsoever.
	We're going to have a lot of good Canadian discussion.
	And then we're going to maybe touch on the Dave Chappelle incident, which is secondary in my mind.
	There's some legal-ish stuff to it, but...
	Secondary to what we're going to talk about today, Canada, I mean, the world is going nuts.
	The world is, it seems to be falling apart or being torn apart at the seams.
	There are people saying, Viva, do you seriously see a non-violent way out of this?
	And what's my solution?
	To which I say, yes, we will win.
	Demonetized already.
	Makes total sense.
	It makes total sense.
	Let me just go request review.
	I know why it's getting demonetized, people.
	It's not to do with content.
	I think that's the sign that one has made it on the interwebs.
	People flagging.
	Before I'd even had a chance to say anything offensive.
	They've been getting systematically remonetized afterwards, but I guess thank you for the attention.
	People have asked, and they're serious.
	Do you see everyone's predicting conflict?
	People are predicting...
	Falling into the abyss of the worst type of social divide.
	I don't blame Tim Pool for fearing it.
	People say, Viva, I only see one solution to this.
	How do you see a nonviolent solution to this?
	We're seeing it in real time.
	We are seeing the social pushback, the political pushback, and the outright mockery of the absurdity.
	The dishonesty, the hypocrisy.
	We're seeing it in real time, and that's how you do it.
	You can influence people a lot more through humor than through aggression.
	You convince someone with a joke.
	You convince someone by shamelessly mocking the stupidity of the political elite, those who consider themselves to be the elite that they look up to.
	And eventually, at some point, the absurdity becomes undeniable, and it becomes...
	Popular to laugh at.
	And that is how you win hearts and minds.
	I mean, it's an interesting theory as to why in this existential or cultural war, if we can call it that, between, let's just say between the West, between America and between Russia, why American culture has prevailed.
	It's prevailed because the culture wins a war in a nonviolent, influential manner.
	And that is how you win a lasting conflict, an ideological conflict.
	How do I see this being won by the right minds?
	Not the right minds, but the right minds.
	Which way do I mean that?
	Not the right minds, but the right minds.
	It's going to be through relentless, shameless mockery of the idiocy, relentless, shameless exposure of the hypocrisy and the corruption.
	And that's what we're going to do today.
	But before we even get there...
	Let's read a few superchats.
	My content for Trudeau has reached levels I never thought was possible.
	Pre-FC Fidel Castro.
	I just wanted the mandates gone.
	Now he's made it...
	Well, what is the FC?
	Is that Fidel Castro or is that F Corona?
	Wait until you hear the latest of Trudeau's scandalous behavior.
	Salty Army reporting.
	Dude, come on.
	We...
	I don't adopt Salty's tactics or rhetoric, although I do watch Salty.
	I was watching his bit this morning on apparently some blue checkmark journalists calling for aggression, to use the mild word, against SCOTUS justices who apparently would overturn Roe v.
	Wade and punt the decision back to the States, calling for wrongful acts against them.
	I need to find that Anna Kasparian meltdown on the Young Turks.
	I'm almost reluctant to give them any more attention than they deserve, which is none.
	I think they've been relegated to the crackpot side of the YouTubes, where they're not taken seriously anymore, and rightfully so.
	Not only are they not taken seriously, but they are rightly admonished, ignored, demonized, and mocked.
	Come on.
	Stop it, people.
	Stop.
	Okay.
	My brother is coming on.
	Dan the Lion Freiheit is coming on in a bit.
	Just had a third job offer pulled by the federal government because of my medical status.
	No end in sight.
	He ruined my life intentionally.
	I'll qualify that.
	He's ruined lives of those who've made decisions intentionally.
	To me, there's no question about that.
	I don't think he targeted you in particular, Fringe Canadian.
	He targeted You're kind.
	He targeted people who had the audacity to say, my body, my choice doesn't just apply when you want to end the life of a living being inside a woman's stomach.
	My body, my choice is not just a question of reproductive rights.
	It's a question of my body, my choice for medical decisions at large.
	Trudeau does not own your body in one respect and then claim that you own it in another.
	That's not how things work.
	And there's no question.
	There is no question.
	That he has deliberately implemented draconian, unconstitutional, and remorseless policy to punish those who would dare exercise their rights to control their own bodies, as relates to the Fauci juice.
	There's no question.
	I mean, one day I'll be more at liberty to discuss it.
	But the travel requirements, they are purely punitive.
	They are wholly unscientific.
	They are wholly unconstitutional.
	It amounts to nothing more than child abuse.
	State-sanctioned child abuse.
	Do you see a situation with U.S., NATO, and the deep state being resolved without WW3 or that?
	Yeah, I don't see it getting to there because I think, well, first of all, it's a ridiculous thing, right?
	You know, like, you had COVID madness.
	And then Russia comes in.
	The Russian war in Ukraine, the Russian invasion of Ukraine comes in.
	COVID solved.
	The Russia invasion of Ukraine solved the COVID crisis.
	No more COVID.
	As of the time Russia invaded Ukraine, no more COVID.
	Nothing.
	It magically solved it.
	Humanitarian crisis?
	Refugee crisis?
	It's automatically COVID is over.
	There's no more...
	I don't think there were...
	Certain requirements, medical requirements for refugees, but the Russian war in Ukraine magically disappeared COVID.
	The Russian war in Ukraine magically disappeared the outrageous unconstitutional invocation of the Emergencies Act to violently suppress a peaceful protest in Canada.
	And now, lo and behold...
	The SCOTUS leak has magically cured the Russia-Ukraine invasion.
	What do you hear about in the news now?
	It's so shamelessly obviously opportunistic.
	It's so shamelessly one rage clickbait after another from the media to generate the clicks, the revenue, the outrage that they need to exist.
	It went from COVID madness to Russia madness, and now it's SCOTUS leak SCOTUS leak madness.
	And just like that, everyone's forgotten about...
	Russia and Ukraine, at least for now.
	They'll come back to it when they have time.
	So I see that resolving itself through attrition.
	The politicians, the machine, would love to fight day in and day out, but people get fatigued of it.
	And when public interest fatigues, and now they've moved on to something else, lo and behold, you don't have your rage machine to support your war machine.
	When people move on to a different subject, So too do political and media interests.
	And we're seeing it in real time.
	And I think that the two of those nations are going to punch each other into fatigue.
	And after thousands of innocent Ukrainian civilians die, whether you think it's from Russian aggression or Ukrainian playing chess with pawns, allowing, you know, not looking for any sort of negotiated resolution, just a military one.
	Seeking the support of the rest of the international community, relying on it, sacrificing their own citizens in the hopes that they'll get it.
	When those two nations are done aggressing, you know, when they're done warring, they'll get fatigued, and then they will find a solution that they probably could have, should have, and ought to have found months ago.
	So...
	Does this count?
	Does this count?
	I forget who said it at the beginning.
	But, no, it's like, COVID?
	Russia, SCOTUS, and it's going to be something else in a week or two because people are easy to manipulate, especially when they're living in fear and living in hatred and living in constant divide.
	But you guys want to puke in your mouths a little bit.
	I mean, we're going to do it.
	It's the most beautiful of all...
	It's a tapestry of corruption and lack of ethics and immorality and...
	It's a tapestry.
	It weaves together so well into the tapestry that is Canadian politics.
	We started off with the no respect.
	Trudeau has no respect for Parliament.
	The story of the week, at least in Canada, is Trudeau allegedly drops an F-bomb in Parliament.
	It's curious because they do have recordings of parliamentary debate.
	I would have liked to have heard what this F-bomb was, but this is the news from NARCity, which take the news outlet for what it's worth, but I took this one for a reason.
	But it's been reported everywhere.
	Let me just make sure that we're seeing the same thing to satisfy my own neuroses.
	Yes, people, I know.
	The scandal of the week is that Trudeau dropped an F-bomb in Parliament, and he had the sassiest response.
	Oh, yes.
	He had a quip for reporters when he was asked about what happened.
	Now, this is the thing.
	I don't know what the F word was.
	Typically, there's one F word, but they specify it's the six-letter F word.
	So, did Justin Trudeau swear in Parliament?
	That's the question on a lot of people's lips after the Prime Minister was accused of dropping an F-bomb during a heated exchange on Wednesday.
	According to some Conservative Party members, so take it for a grain of salt, it might be Conservative members making it up whole cloth because we don't have video evidence of it.
	Trudeau used...
	A six-letter F word during a heated exchange in the House of Commons on May 4. Now, let's be creative.
	Typically, the F word is F asterisk CK.
	It could be a six-letter F word if it's F asterisk CKED.
	I happen to think that the six-letter F word that he might have used is the F asterisk GG asterisk T to refer to...
	Other members of Parliament.
	Conservative House Leader John Broussard described the alleged expletive as an unparliamentary term and said it wasn't fuddle-duddle.
	And this is where we're going to go on a little learning curve, peeps.
	He said that everybody who was in two rows across from Trudeau heard him use the word.
	Broussard said that the PM was being asked about military aircraft flying over Ottawa during the Freedom Convoy when he used the F-bomb.
	Trudeau responded that the question was dangerously close to misinformation designed to gin up fears and conspiracy theories.
	It's delusional.
	I'm going to bring this one down because it's purely delusional.
	So first of all, the idea is that he might have used the word to describe opposition, in which case it might have been F-U-C-K-E-R.
	Or it might have been F-A-G-G-O-T.
	I don't know which six-letter F word he used to describe them as F-ers or F-ers.
	He's referring to the idea that they might have flown military aircraft as dangerously close to misinformation.
	And we know what he wants to do with misinformation in the country.
	Dangerously close to misinformation that they flew military, that they allegedly...
	He was merely asked the question.
	That's dangerously...
	The question itself, how dare you ask me that question?
	That's dangerously close to misinformation.
	But the fact that we came in with a highly militarized police force, not just the OPP, the Ontario Provincial Police, not just, I think, OPS, Ottawa Police Services, not just Durham Police, not just Surte de Québec, which they brought over from the province of Quebec, not just the RCMP.
	It's dangerously close to misinformation to suggest that this corrupt, unethical prime minister flew military aircraft over Ottawa during the protest after he...
	Unleashed a highly militarized police force which deployed tear gas, physical abuse, what do they call them?
	Riot gear against peaceful protesters.
	That question is dangerously close to misinformation and we know what Justin Trudeau wants to do with those who, in his view, mention disinformation.
	Hold on.
	But the throwing it out there, disinformation, where is it?
	Oh, I didn't bring up...
	Oh, I need to bring this tweet.
	Hold on.
	We're going to get...
	I'm going to share here.
	It's like Justin Trudeau throws out the allegations of misinformation the way Oprah Winfrey ends out cars during her show.
	Is it going to be worth it?
	Is it going to be worth it going all the way down?
	There we go.
	There we go.
	Your misinformation...
	Everyone's misinformation.
	Seize their bank accounts.
	Prevent them from running for office.
	Go after the opposition who dare provide misinformation.
	Censor their social media accounts.
	Everyone's misinformation to Justin Trudeau.
	Ask him a question.
	Ask him a question.
	This is what Trudeau said.
	that Canada's special forces were operating surveillance aircraft, I'm sure they were just in training, over Ottawa during the February truckers'protests.
	This contradicts everything the government has said to date.
	Liberals didn't put soldiers on our streets, but they did put them in the air, Mr. Oh, I would disagree with the first half of that.
	The right Honorable Prime Minister.
	Y'all wish you were watching Amber Heard now.
	Canadians, pay very careful attention to this exchange.
	What the member opposite just engaged in is dangerously close to misinformation and disinformation designed...
	To gin up fears and conspiracy theories around what happened a number of months ago.
	It is entirely irresponsible for members of Her Majesty's loyal opposition to stray so close to misinformation and disinformation.
	I would ask them to be more responsible.
	Yeah, so that's nice, JT.
	Can we have an answer?
	Can you answer the question?
	I didn't deploy military personnel over the skies.
	I just had drones in the sky, which we saw in real time.
	Those weren't military drones, though.
	Those were police drones.
	I didn't deploy the military.
	We just used the military to test propaganda techniques on Canadians during COVID.
	But not now.
	Not now.
	And how dare you ask me that question, given everything I've done in the past?
	It's irresponsible.
	Disinformation.
	Misinformation.
	Conspiracy theorists.
	You should be kicked out of Parliament.
	We should freeze your bank accounts too, McKenna.
	No, not McKenna.
	I see my brother in the background.
	Do I do this?
	Dan, give me two minutes.
	Okay.
	Because we're on the topic.
	So he allegedly, purportedly dropped the F-bomb.
	I don't know if he referred to opposition as the F with two Gs or the Fs with CKs.
	I don't know.
	Not that it really makes much of a difference.
	And, you know, he got called out for it, and he had...
	One of the reporters said, did you use the fuddle-duddle?
	Did you use the fuddle-duddle?
	One reporter asked him, what did you say?
	Here, you gotta see this.
	It's...
	Ezra Levant says it's sociopathic.
	I'm just not sure if it's psychopathic, sociopathic, or narcissistic.
	I think it's just all three.
	It's JT.
	Don't know if you're a psychopath, sociopath, or narcissist.
	You might just be all three.
	You might just be JT.
	Did you say fuddle-duddle?
	That's what the reporter's asking because apparently he used...
	He takes his mask off because science.
	What is the nature of your thoughts, gentlemen, when you say you move your lips in a particular way?
	In what world is there an age in gentlemen?
	This is like...
	What is the nature of your thoughts, gentlemen, when you say you move your lips in a particular way?
	So it's deranged, it's incomprehensible, until you go and try to understand what it means.
	Apparently his daddy, Pierre Trudeau, had similarly used offensive rhetoric, rhetoric, rhetoric, because there's more of an H in rhetoric than in gentleman.
	Apparently his father also used the fuddle-duddle in Parliament and had the same, or had the response that Justin Trudeau was channeling from his dad.
	It's very cool.
	I mean, it's very cool when you read these things.
	Where's the article?
	Son of a bee sting.
	Oh, come on, Viva.
	Get your stuff in order.
	Oh, it was a tweet.
	It was a tweet.
	I'll get to it in a second.
	But then, I mean, this is where I'm going to end on this.
	Then Catherine McKenna.
	Comes in and says, this is creating an unhealthy work environment.
	It's creating a toxic, it's creating an unpleasant work environment in Parliament.
	This is Catherine McKenna.
	I'm going to end on this because it's just going to go.
	It has to be said that the atmosphere in the House of Commons, especially during question period, is too often appalling.
	I don't know who she's talking about.
	Is she talking about Trudeau deflecting from a legitimate question and calling people the F-words or the F-words?
	Shouting, mocking, bullying, cheap tactics.
	How about deflecting?
	Refusing to answer?
	Maybe you got name-calling in there, so maybe that's it.
	It's a dysfunctional workplace.
	I agree.
	And embarrassing for kids to watch.
	I agree.
	It needs to be fixed if we want good people to run.
	Or, Catherine...
	You were there.
	Maybe you don't want it to be fixed so that bad people like Justin Trudeau and yourself can run.
	And by the way, I've talked about it before.
	For anybody who doesn't know who Catherine McKenna is, and I'm bringing this up because it's of interest.
	Catherine McKenna has an interesting history.
	We've brought it up a number of times.
	There's some behavior that from childhood is somewhat less relevant to modern-day politics, like the Cawthorn video of Cawthorn being naked and doing something What's the word?
	Crass, on a bed.
	I mean, that displays youthful stupidity and not, as far as I'm concerned, corrupt or immoral judgment.
	Catherine McKenna, for those of you who don't know, once upon a time, bribed her way into an illegal cockfight.
	She consumed dog meat, and then when that was brought up later on in life to show that maybe her morals and her ethics are somewhat questionable, turned it as a conservative attack on her.
	You've got to see this.
	This is Catherine McKenna's actual tweet.
	Do I have a...
	I thought I commented on this.
	Conservatives seem to think a 25-year-old...
	It's a documentary, so everything's...
	You know, go ahead and eat human brains like Raza...
	Was it Reza Aslan?
	Whoever that was, one of the guys from CNN, ate human brains.
	It was a documentary, so nothing immoral about it.
	Good for a documentary, you know.
	A 24-year-old documentary that ran on Discovery's travel channel for years is a gotcha moment.
	So here it is.
	Watch for yourself, then back to this century so we can keep helping people through COVID-19 and build a better Canada.
	By the way, we'll get to the build back.
	Video footage of Catherine McKenna eating dog at an Indonesian cockfight into which she bribed her way.
	An illegal Indonesian cockfight.
	So you watch roosters viciously attack each other while consuming the flesh of an animal that is arguably of a higher order, if you believe in, if you're not an outright vegetarian.
	But she thinks it's a conservative attack.
	I love how Catherine McKenna seriously claims that thinking it's grossly immoral and objectionable to eat dog after bribing your way into an illegal Indonesian cockfight is somehow a conservative thing.
	These are the people, and now she's talking about wanting to bring good people into politics.
	And by the way, I went through the exercise.
	The exercise, I see my brother now holding his head.
	I think he's trying to process this.
	I just did it for the sake of it.
	Catherine McKenna, World Economic Forum, Google search.
	It's a pure coincidence.
	Build a better Canada.
	Build back better.
	Catherine McKenna, immoral.
	Bribing her way into watching an illegal combat where animals viciously attack each other to the death and then consuming the flesh of a dog.
	Talking about bringing in good people into politics, building a better Canada, and look at this!
	Chair, UN high-level expert group on the net zero emissions commitments of non-state entities.
	The Honourable Catherine McKenna was elected.
	I mean, look at the length of this freaking bio.
	You can go watch this stuff.
	Yep, yep.
	You can go read this stuff.
	I'm going to click it in there.
	It's becoming a meme.
	Did I just lose my screen?
	No, I didn't.
	It's becoming a meme.
	It's becoming a meme in real time when people say Canada and Canadian government has been infiltrated by WEF foreign world...
	What do they call them?
	Global interests?
	Every time I look into a politician now, just Google it.
	Here you go.
	Catherine McKenna, Jagmeet Singh, Justin Trudeau.
	Who are the other ones?
	Who are the other ones there?
	Oh, I forgot all their names now.
	It doesn't matter.
	It's just endless.
	It's just endless.
	All right, with that said, that was a meandering.
	But let me see something here.
	I believe I saw some Super Chats.
	I'll get the Super Chats later.
	I figured out now how to star them so I can come back to them.
	I don't want my brother to wait longer than he has to.
	Dan, I didn't flag the links.
	I didn't pull up the links, so maybe you can pull them up and we'll share them.
	Because my brother now is going to talk about the Fauci juice.
	Well, hold on.
	Before you do that, I wanted to talk.
	I didn't realize that incident in Parliament with Trudeau, man.
	That's actually disturbing.
	He reflexively channels his father's...
	Like, he knew that his father said that, because back in 2015, he said, my dad didn't say fuddle-duddle.
	He either called people F-A-G-G-O-T or F-U-C-K-E-R.
	I mean, I don't know which, but I don't know which...
	And he's trying to shut down the opposition, calling even the thought, the misinformation you're mentioning there?
	Don't you dare ask questions.
	I mean, we've seen it.
	I'm not going to pull it up again.
	The Canadian military saw the pandemic as a good opportunity to test propaganda on Canadian citizens.
	But don't you dare ask Justin Trudeau, who just unleashed a militarized police force on peaceful protesters, if he flew military in the sky.
	I mean, he had drones in the sky.
	We saw it.
	That's crazy.
	I'll tell you what gives me comfort, though, Viva.
	It's an island off our coast.
	It's St. Pierre and Michelin.
	We can always get out of here by dinghy and get to France.
	Dude, okay.
	So I went from, you know, vote with your feet, vote with your dollar.
	I would not vote with a dinghy across winking water.
	Only 5 or 10 kilometers, Dave.
	It's not Viva.
	There's an island, right?
	I'm telling you.
	Off Newfoundland.
	Off Newfoundland.
	Yeah, we were there.
	In fact, when we drove to Newfoundland, we were going to do that, but it was international.
	We couldn't cross.
	You need it right.
	You need your passport.
	No, Viva is my new name.
	My middle name is Andrew.
	David Andrew Fryhead.
	My brother's name is Dan.
	Can I share it?
	So, dude, what's the good word?
	The good word is, well, okay, so we wanted to chat the Vaccine Your Support Program.
	We love talking about this program, right?
	Let me go pull up some of the links you sent me.
	What's the latest while I pull this up?
	The latest is, I think it's a lose-lose for the federal government.
	Well, explain what it is for anyone who's now tuning in for the first time.
	What is the vaccine?
	Anybody who doesn't know about this, you've got to have a long, hard look at your government.
	This thing was a program pitched in December 2020 to take care of the Canadians, the one in a million Canadians that get injured from vaccines.
	That's the way Trudeau pitched it.
	It was a program set up to protect Canadians that got injured from taking a jab.
	Dan?
	Yep, talk to me.
	Sorry about that.
	I was playing a video that I didn't...
	I was playing you.
	Sorry.
	Yeah, sorry.
	Carry on.
	So they said it's called the Vaccine Injury Support Program.
	You can just Google it.
	It'll come right up.
	I'll bring it up right now.
	It's not very well known, but it's there and it's managed privately.
	This is the kind of the black hole type operation of it.
	It's managed privately by a private company.
	There it is.
	Good job.
	We'll see if this gets in trouble.
	If you believe you are experiencing a health issue as a result of a vaccine, please contact your local public health unit or your health care provider.
	If this is a medical emergency...
	Yeah, I'm Googling in case it's a medical emergency.
	Anyone who goes to this website for a medical emergency needs their head examined.
	The purpose of the ISP, the Vaccine Injury Supplement...
	Support program.
	It's to ensure that all people in Canada who have experienced a serious or permanent injury as a result of receiving a healthcare-authorized vaccine.
	Health Canada, yep.
	Authorized vaccine.
	Okay.
	All right.
	Does that include emergency use?
	It does.
	It would.
	This was specifically why it was set up.
	And again, so, right, it was set up around the same time as they signed contracts with all the big pharma companies.
	The theory is that they all require vaccine injury support programs in the countries that they're delivering medication to.
	So that's why these programs are set up.
	And like I say, other countries have these programs, and they're used, and there's a lot of applications, and some of them are small, like they're $2,000, $4,000, $5,000.
	So they're not necessarily large or significant entries, but they're there, and they're important that people know about them and use it.
	And that's why our Prime Minister, our Honorable Prime Minister Trudeau, set it up.
	And so the question is...
	If people aren't using it, why is it difficult to get applications in?
	What's holding people back?
	For the $150 million in COVID ads that they've been spending in Quebec and for the $80 million, I mean, it's more than that nationally.
	Has there been any that you're aware of marketing program to publicize this supplemental program that they've initiated?
	Personal injury lawyers, I'm not, you know, so normally you would see it as the personal injury would mark, it would raise awareness of the program.
	So the government itself doesn't want to raise awareness.
	So it's not advertised as such for a few reasons.
	One is that it would scare people from getting vaccinated if you advertise it too much.
	And, you know, even talking about it makes people anxious and it would reduce uptake of the vaccines.
	But that really, my view is, you know, full information.
	It's better than information that gets leaked out over time and that confuses people.
	So it's not, to your point, it's not very well advertised to the point where I've spoken to some senior doctors.
	I mean, specialists that didn't even know it existed.
	And probably they do now because it's getting more discussion.
	But that, yeah, it's...
	It's interesting.
	The double-edged sword.
	Advertise it too much.
	You scare people.
	Don't advertise it enough.
	Nobody knows it's there.
	Right.
	So, but in other countries, for some reason, and I don't know the answer to this question, like Singapore, Thailand, a few other countries, it's very well used and very well funded, and they've paid out a lot of money.
	And so I just, you know, I don't know the reason for that.
	And I'd be curious if the internet sleuths have an explanation.
	I'd be curious to getting data across all jurisdictions, how well these programs are marketed and used by the public, because that's really what they're there for.
	And that's really what our Honorable Prime Minister set it up for, is to help.
	I have to double check if the WEF we have in the chat is satire or if Klaus Schwab is watching us.
	We discussed the program in greater detail previously.
	What's been the latest of your learnings?
	Can you pull up the website again?
	You want me to pull up the program website?
	The program, yeah.
	For me, I do more of the corporate.
	I'm a corporate commercial lawyer, like I say, so I work in association with personal injury lawyers as well as the employment group.
	Okay, you see this here?
	Yes, so if you scroll down to the bottom.
	Okay, look at that.
	So this program is funded by Public Health Agency of Canada, okay?
	Oh my god, Dan, you're going to make me angry.
	This is like the WE Charity administering the student loans program, I presume.
	Public Canada Health Agency of Canada and administered by RCGT Consulting Inc., which is Raymond Chabot Grand Thornton.
	I thought they did bankruptcy, but...
	Well, they do...
	So there was an application to be able to qualify.
	They bid on this, so they won the bidding.
	We don't know the details of that, but you can...
	Well, we could find out.
	But just as a technical point, this company, this entity, RCGT Consulting Inc., doesn't actually exist.
	It's not a legal entity correctly identified.
	It would be the full name of the company.
	So it's actually...
	If I were to Google or look up under the business registry, RCGT Consulting Inc., it wouldn't yield anything or would it yield another business name?
	What I use for this is a corporate...
	It's free.
	It's Corporations Search Canada.
	And you could just...
	Let me see what I find.
	This is the Quebec.
	Yeah, it could be a Quebec entity, but I don't think it is.
	I think it's federal.
	You find an enterprise.
	This is people, if you want...
	This is legal information, so if people can...
	This is publicly available information.
	Lawyers recommend you use lawyers, right?
	This is only good for Quebec.
	RCGT Consulting Inc.
	But I don't see...
	Wait, we don't see your...
	You don't see your search here.
	Oh, hold on one second, because I've done this.
	I'm going to close this, and I'm going to go here.
	Do you see this now?
	I see.
	Yeah, there you go.
	So I'm going to put it in.
	What is this?
	R-C-G-T.
	I guarantee you it's going to be another name for J 'ai lu et compris.
	Yeah, fine.
	Yeah, nothing.
	How about R-C-G-T?
	It should be spelled out in full, so just if you Google it.
	Yeah, no, well, now you're going to get it.
	Now if you do Raymond, even if I did Raymond Chabot.
	Okay.
	So that's a small detail, but it's important.
	Like, lawyers get dinged with this when they file statements of claim, right?
	And they don't have the right legal entity properly named.
	So you've got to know exactly the name of who's involved, right?
	So if you just Google RCGT, you'll see it spells it out.
	Okay.
	So let's go to their website.
	I'm going to close this, bring you back up, and we're going to go to Raymond Chabot, Grand Thornton.
	I thought they only did bankruptcy because we always dealt with as trustees in my practice.
	We hope this program won't go bankrupt.
	We want this program to be well-funded.
	Raymond Chabot Consulting.
	Okay, here we go.
	Your public sector needs one solution.
	Scroll up.
	That's Ottawa.
	That's the Rideau Canal.
	That's the hotel where the individual carrying the Yahtzee flag was found.
	In all her splendor.
	Where do I go?
	Okay, go up to the top.
	There you go.
	What's this?
	Look at the top.
	Vaccine validation solution.
	Let's go learn more.
	So people have to understand this.
	There you go.
	Vaccine validation made simple.
	This is going to blow your mind.
	Blew my mind that this kind of product is up there.
	No, don't contact.
	Go scroll down.
	Learn more about the program.
	What do they do here?
	First of all, this is very pleasing that the arrow becomes sharper the more you go down, but never mind.
	Okay.
	Real-time results.
	Our program helps you stay in the know with real-time dashboards and reports to track vaccine status for all employees and actionable insights to ensure workplace safety.
	And now, I think I asked you this question privately, but which employees are they referring to?
	Are they referring to their own or all employees?
	Good question.
	Good question.
	I think they work with companies, big companies with lots of people.
	I'm going to guess federal...
	Federal company, like federal crown corporations.
	Anybody who would be subject to a vaccine mandate, for example.
	Right, right, exactly.
	Federal company, where you've got 200,000 employees that need to get the jab.
	Good to have a little dashboard so I can track all these.
	Like, this is insane.
	So scroll, flexibility, privacy support.
	But so real-time results, where's the hyperlink that's going to show me what they're talking about?
	A solution that meets security standards.
	Single sign-on, vaccination status validation, real-time dashboard.
	Are we going to need so many vaccines that we need real-time updates on every single...
	But what is that?
	I mean, because you have to create, I presume, an account in order to do this.
	Contact them.
	Do we know what that real-time dashboard looks like?
	I haven't contacted them to roll this out.
	I don't have a personal need for it, and I hope, you know, I would recommend...
	Hold on a second.
	Let's just see what we're doing.
	RCGT vaccine.
	COVID-19 tracker.
	I mean, must include RCGT.
	No, that's not it.
	Okay, so it's just...
	We don't know who's using it.
	Must include...
	No, must include vaccine.
	There might not be searches if I just had one.
	Okay, so I'm going to go back.
	The point is, we've got this company called Raymond...
	What's it called?
	Raymond Chabot.
	Raymond Chabot.
	They are managing a vaccine injury support program, meaning they have to hire...
	I don't know if they hire doctors.
	They have doctors on staff handling...
	I don't know how many...
	Let's say claims for it.
	They've also got this on this other arm, rolling out this vaccine validation passport thing for massive...
	So they know who's getting injured, if there are any injuries, if people are using it.
	And they know, on the other hand, who they're trying to track to get vaccinated.
	I mean, look, you could...
	I have a question.
	I would invite any one of those folks from Raymond on the board of directors to come, you know.
	Come on.
	Get counsel or whatever.
	Come on to your show.
	Explain what's going on.
	Canadian public deserve to know.
	Right?
	Well, for anyone who might be a little slow like me, the idea that the conflict of interest would be they're doling out compensation for purported injuries while simultaneously implementing policy to, if not compel, because it's a federal mandate, at the very least to survey and presumably not to deter.
	The implementation of the very federal mandate.
	They have two federal mandates, which might have contrary interests.
	One is to compensate people who are injured while also making it easier for people to go get it.
	Although maybe some people are going to say that's not mutually incompatible.
	It's just two sides of the same coin.
	Right.
	If it's part of an umbrella kind of management issue, but then, right, that would be an argument you could make.
	It's interesting.
	Okay.
	First of all, I'd be more curious.
	I'm sure it can be done through a FOIA equivalent request.
	I'd love to see how they got the contract or how much it's worth.
	Yeah, well, and I have done that.
	I've done that in my citizen's capacity.
	I want to see a copy of that, why that private company won that contract and what the contract looks like.
	I think it's everyone has the right to know.
	So in terms of if people have asked me, Because I've been contacted about how do you apply for the program and do you really need a lawyer to do it?
	Like, look, law firms have...
	Actually, that's a legit question.
	Considering Justin Trudeau said it's going to be incredibly difficult to invoke a religious exception, and I presume that means for the big three or the big four.
	I don't think he's going to recognize Satanists or atheists or people with strong moral convictions.
	Well, he's not the arbiter.
	At the end of the day, you have to make that argument.
	It's a good faith.
	What is a good faith?
	Literally, right?
	What's the good faith exemption for religious?
	He literally said they're going to make it difficult.
	Exceedingly difficult.
	Right.
	What were we talking about?
	Oh, yeah.
	So for whether people are asking me, do they need the lawyer to apply for the vaccine?
	And the answer is it's mostly administrative work that needs the assistance of their GP or their specialist to submit a claim to the vaccine injury program.
	Some people just don't have the time, so they want the administrative help.
	And so, you know, the fees really range on how much, how complicated it is to get.
	But, you know, and a lot of lawyers, it's a new kind of program.
	The fees require a bit of discussion, but the idea is that most people can just get the initial application into the vaccine injury support, and then as they get responses, that's where a lawyer might be of more value.
	Let me bring it up just because I found it easy enough.
	Here, hold on a second.
	Hold on.
	Listen to this freaking guy.
	Listen to this freaking guy.
	Someone who's immunocompromised or someone who for religious or deep convictions decides that no, they're not going to get a vaccine.
	We're not a country that makes vaccination mandatory, for example.
	We're not a country that makes vaccination mandatory.
	We're not a country that makes vaccination mandatory.
	Oh, this one, I didn't have the loop where it went to his campaign ad that says...
	I believe vaccinations should be mandatory for air and training.
	Yeah.
	Once upon a time, he believed in that which he no longer believes in.
	I'm not sure.
	And so I'm not sure of the rationales because the recent strains, I thought they were...
	Don't get medical, you lawyer.
	Stay in your lane.
	Stay in my lane.
	Okay, so do you have any information?
	Like how many people have filed?
	How many claims have been approved?
	I know off the record, I've heard from the Quebec program.
	You can check the Quebec history, right?
	Because Quebec's been doing this for 30 years.
	And did they release their new numbers?
	They haven't, which is starting to raise some questions.
	I've spoken off the record with some folks that program.
	It sounds like they are just processing a lot.
	And so my concern is that one way or the other, like I said, I think the government's going to...
	Look bad on this because if there's not a lot of applications, it means they're making it too difficult because we know what the standards are in other countries.
	And if there are a flood of applications, then people are going to be like, oh, why are there so many applications for compensation?
	If you told us, you know, we understood one thing and now we see, right?
	Yeah, I'm trying to find it because I want to find the link because a few weeks ago I said, you know, follow these numbers.
	Yeah, if you just Google Quebec Injury Support Program.
	A big vaccine injury support program.
	And then the first one that popped up, at least for me.
	Injury support program.
	Here we go.
	Okay, boom.
	And it should, the numbers are right there.
	And this is like, this is a great, you know, kudos to Quebec, despite those shortcomings.
	They were supposed to update this, though.
	Here, it's this, correct?
	Right.
	Wait, sorry, I'm actually on my screen.
	Hold on.
	Filing compensation.
	This is the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
	Where would be the statistics?
	Here we go.
	Oh, here we go.
	Okay.
	So, program stats since its introduction.
	Number of claims since 1988, 287.
	And then they were supposed to release numbers for 2021, or 2022.
	And I said, keep an eye on it, and they haven't released them.
	But where did it say?
	No, they couldn't release them for 2022 because we're not done yet.
	No, but they released them at the end of, close to the end of March.
	But again, I think, look, if you go back to look at the Asian in 2010, you'll see that they also had a rush or like relative.
	So here we got since March 31, 2021, which is a year ago.
	So we don't have them for now.
	And when do they update?
	Last updated January.
	So we're definitely not there.
	2022.
	Okay, so I forget where it's said.
	We have to look for this.
	But they're supposed to update it or release the number sooner than later.
	And the question is going to be, what are they going to show?
	What are they going to show?
	That's right.
	Okay.
	There we go.
	Got you back.
	Okay.
	So that's that.
	I think, right.
	Like I said, I think the main thing is to just get your applications in.
	And, you know, the significant ones, the easiest ones are where you have kept good records of anyone who's had to go to the emergency room shortly after a vaccine.
	And you have those records.
	The other thing, yeah, I don't know.
	Do you have time?
	I thought those other websites were interesting.
	Let's see.
	Hold on.
	Which one did you give me?
	The Parent Homework?
	The Parent Homework.
	Have you done your Parent Homework?
	What is Parent Homework then?
	This goes to another thing that was interesting to me is that these claims...
	Everywhere that the vaccines are safe and effective, which is, you know...
	It's a medical claim of assurance, and you're not in a position to deny it, Daniel.
	You're a lawyer and not a doctor, man.
	But what did you do in terms of, like, querying?
	My query was, well, just on my personal, like my, you know, on my parent advocate side, you know, when I see it, when a school says that those vaccines are safe and effective, I just ask them, I'm like, well...
	Where are you getting that statement from?
	And if they say, oh, it's Toronto Public Health, then at least I can figure out who's saying what to who.
	Because then I go to Toronto Public Health, I'm like, where did you get that from?
	And they said, oh, Public Health says it.
	And then you can track where, if there was a gap in the communication, you could figure out where that gap occurred.
	And where I find there's a bit of a gap in communication is between the independent advisory group, NACI, N-A-C-I.
	There's a gap when that...
	What is Nazi again?
	National Advisory Committee on Immunization, I think.
	So it's an independent group that is supposed to be advising the federal government or public health on policy.
	But I think, I don't know, but my concern is that Trudeau is too cozy-cozy with them and putting a bit too much pressure on them to wag the dog, so to speak.
	He's announced the implementation of Moderna.
	Facility in Canada that's going to produce 100 million mRNA vaccines a year.
	That would be a bad investment if it were not based in science.
	I wasn't aware of what he said on that.
	Oh, dude.
	Hold on.
	Let's get...
	He just announced this.
	This is Moderna.
	Man, you really stay up to speed on the...
	100.
	Listen to this.
	I mean, I'll just get the word.
	This is a problem.
	At some point...
	Moderna facility, and we have to get Trudeau's tweet on it.
	Moderna, you can see this?
	Montreal factory will make Canada an mRNA leader, says Trudeau.
	Oh, gracious.
	Can I scroll down?
	A. Come on, you stupid computer.
	The news leaked a day early, but Canadian leaders and biotech company Moderna officially announced Friday that a new vaccine production facility will be created in Montreal because Francois Legault was touting this as Quebec's back on the map.
	Helping ensure a long-term supply of made-in-Canada vaccines.
	And here's the problem.
	People can call me a hypocrite and I can appreciate the criticism.
	Back in 2020, I said, it's incomprehensible.
	That Canada is dependent on India, China, and foreign countries, some of whom are adversarial in nature for medical supplies, medications, etc.
	Because I quickly found out where a lot of the medicines that people take in Canada are manufactured, and it's not in Canada.
	Now, some people are going to say, Viva, you're sucking and blowing, because now that they're making the vaccines here, you can't complain that it's a bad thing.
	Ordinarily, I would have said, yeah, when I had a little more faith in the government, and if it were just standard stuff, and not what is.
	New stuff.
	Like, you know, become independent for long proven safety, you know, known stuff.
	That's one thing.
	PPE, that's one thing.
	This is a little bit different in my view, but it's also I just don't trust them anymore as far as I can throw them.
	Our government promised to strengthen our capacity for production, for producing vaccines here in Canada.
	McGill University.
	Well, yeah, the concern is, yeah, they're really big investing in this.
	It's new technology specifically for vaccination.
	That's not a medical opinion.
	That's just a matter of fact.
	The facility, expected to be operational as soon as 2024, will employ 200 to 300 people.
	Wow, that solves all of the unemployment problems.
	And will be able to produce up to 100 million COVID-19 vaccine doses.
	This is where I have a problem with it.
	This is not for any form of health independence.
	This is not for medical independence from medicines made in China and India.
	This is myopic.
	Well, no.
	I think that's consistent with being a global...
	To be a global supplier is consistent with the objective of satisfying global demand.
	If it's global, then the 100 million per year makes a little more sense.
	If the expectation is that Canadians have to take three or four vaccines a year, what is 100 million divided by 38 million people?
	It's only every four months then.
	I mean, that's...
	My arm's getting sore, man.
	I can't.
	My legs are getting antsy, if you know what I mean.
	Voting with my feet is what I mean, people.
	It will also have a significant, whatever.
	So that's it.
	That was the news, Dan.
	So if you hadn't heard that, you know, more sense.
	Back to parent homework.
	Yeah.
	Oh, hold on.
	I just shut that screen down for a second.
	Well, because what people, what I like to know is who's owning up, who's owning, who owns the information.
	So if you look on these websites, it's important to understand this concept.
	Information is generally owned, you know, like the copywriter, you know.
	And this website is very interestingly articulated in terms of who's saying what on this website.
	And when you try to wrap your head around it, who's making these statements, it's a bit tricky.
	It looks like doctors are saying it, but it's like made with input, like the way the language is crafted.
	It's like the children, so about us.
	Parent homework was created by the Children's Health Coalition.
	With the goal of providing families with trusted information about COVID-19 vaccination for children.
	The Children's Health Coalition is a collective of children's health organizations, including...
	So there could be more.
	We don't know who, you know.
	But a collective...
	Up and down now?
	Yeah, go to the bottom.
	Okay.
	Because then you'll see something interesting, which is about us.
	So look at the copyright.
	This is what I couldn't figure out.
	The copyright, it says all the information, all rights reserved by this company called CHC Inc.
	Okay?
	You know?
	Corporate lawyer, I'd like to know who I'm dealing with.
	I only found two companies called CHC Inc.
	And I don't know if it's inadvertently confused with Children's Health Coalition Inc.
	But from what I saw...
	CHC Inc.
	is a kind of like a consulting, health consulting company that has been dissolved, that was dissolved in September of 2021, I think.
	Do you know who the principals were?
	It's an individual in Ottawa who does consulting work for big institutions.
	I'm assuming that is the entity.
	So, I mean, I guess my question is, why did that company dissolve?
	Is this information not updated regularly?
	And if that company is taking ownership for all the statements made on this website, including all the interesting language about how this coalition has come together and who's actually taking ownership for the statements.
	Because when you say that a vaccine is safe and effective, in the mind of the listener, that's different depending on who you say that to.
	For me, when someone says the vaccine is safe and effective, what I understand is safe means it's as safe as other MMR.
	You know, rubella, the ones, all the childhood vaccines that everyone's gotten.
	And when it's effective, you know, I understand that to mean I'm not going to get infected.
	Like, you know, prevents it.
	But most, you know, that's not what they mean.
	Like, you dig deeper, you find out that what safe and effective means really depends on who's saying it and how they're saying it.
	And that's what I found on that website and another website that I'm going to go through on my advocacy channel at one point.
	I'm just Googling the photographer name.
	Oh, you like the photo?
	Well, I just wanted to see who the photographer was.
	Let me just see.
	It looks like...
	Look, they say it's a coalition, right?
	Coalition is not a partnership.
	Or it could be a partnership, depending on how the coalition has come together.
	But you call yourself a coalition.
	It's kind of like weasel language.
	Well, who's involved in this coalition?
	Who's the authority?
	You're right?
	When they went after the Ottawa coalition of the convoy, they just lumped everybody, everyone responsible for everybody else.
	So you can be careful when you form a coalition, where does the buck stop?
	Trotsy says, these two sound like guests on Alex Jones' show.
	I can read that as an insult, or I can read that as the truth is actually as bizarre as people think Alex Jones is.
	Somebody has to explain that.
	What do you mean, Paul?
	Explain that one to me.
	Is it because the reality of Canada is...
	As bizarre as one might expect from an analyst.
	Or is it because you think we both sound crazy despite the fact that we're literally reading from government documents and trying to understand how these things work?
	Because you could read that as a jab or as truth is stranger than fiction.
	I think it was intended as a compliment.
	And by the way, all of these politicians, WEF, young global leaders.
	It's just totally coincidental.
	Look, I find these interesting, but it depends on your...
	It is.
	It's a grossly incestuous relationship between big pharma, big media, big government, and what else is there in that evil?
	It goes to this intimidation factor.
	When you have all this coalition coming at you with this information, or you have a coalition of whatever it is, officers, or even like...
	You know, government coming at you and you don't really, it's like the mere fact of the coalition is itself intimidation.
	And so you have to know, you know, you just have to have a bit of a semblance of the law and the truth.
	And, you know, something as simple as who is CHC Inc.?
	Step forward.
	Come on, you're claiming ownership for this website.
	Where are the cops?
	It's the idea that you get, this is not to be Alex Jonesy, you get your government appointed experts.
	To make recommendations that the government then has to adhere to.
	Then you get the government to negotiate with the big pharma to guarantee a certain supply of these things.
	And then in order to produce the supply that you guaranteed, you promise them tax dollars, subsidies to build the pharma plants here to meet the demand that they created based on their own recommendations from their own medical experts, all of which gets ratified by the government-appointed court system.
	There's a very simple recommendation I have to anyone who accuses you of being a conspirator or me or whoever.
	Come on a YouTube channel and have a chat publicly.
	You're going to get a lot of people saying, he offered a debate and then he didn't debate me.
	I don't know.
	You have more experience with that.
	I would think anyone from government, come on your channel.
	No?
	No, because the problem is the people you're discussing with, on the one hand, everybody wants to debate.
	And then if you say, he didn't debate me, he's a coward.
	But I guess it was not...
	I guess it was not a compliment.
	The science is solid.
	Please look into TWIV this week in virology.
	I don't know.
	Paul's humor, man.
	I can't figure out Paul's humor here.
	It could be satire.
	It's science is solid.
	Hold on.
	Hold on.
	I'm not even getting...
	Dan?
	Do a search before you take it on.
	I'm just going to do this.
	I just want to do this.
	Because when people were saying, Here we go.
	This is from June 2021.
	The science is solid.
	Hold on.
	Science on.
	The experimental vaccine.
	They called it what it was.
	This is the National Institute of Health.
	This is one year ago.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	No, it's less than one year ago.
	What was...
	And I think it's still referred to as an experimental vaccine on NIH itself.
	Science cannot be proven on that which is experimental.
	I'm not making any other statement other than saying to claim that it is settled science after less than a year and a half is fundamentally unscientific.
	Even the NIH still has a term for it that might get non-NIH people in trouble for using.
	Wait, wait.
	Oh, so that article when it said experimental vaccine, I guess that's what it is.
	No, but they still refer to it as that.
	I mean, last I checked, it was on the NIH.
	They still refer to it as the experimental mRNA vaccine.
	It's their words that get other people in trouble sometimes.
	All right, man.
	I got Babers coming on in a few minutes.
	Okay, yeah.
	Go get ready.
	Dan, thank you.
	Good to see you as always.
	Maybe...
	What's going on in my face here?
	Call me.
	Yeah.
	I'll have your parents call my parents.
	All right, man.
	Go.
	Have a good weekend.
	Good seeing you.
	All right, let's get to the super chats.
	No, get that out of here.
	Let's get to the super chats that I've been missing.
	For a good sport, Salty Army loves you.
	For being a good sport, Salty Army loves you.
	I have watched the lip sync cannonball about 50 times.
	Yeah, Salty just messaged me the link.
	I'm going to have to bring it up so that people can see this.
	Like father, like son.
	Fuddle-duddle.
	Oh, he wasn't fuddle-duddle, but the thing is this, chat.
	Did he use the FGG word or did he use the FCK word?
	That's what I want to know.
	Because one would just be abusive, inappropriate, and the other would be bigoted.
	I want to know which one he used, and I don't want to presume which one he used, but I thought typically, even if it was the F word, the F-U-C-K, they would not say a six-letter F word.
	The six-letter F word, to me, refers to an F word with two Gs in it.
	In Australia, every word spoken in the parliament is transcribed and available on the Hansard for public view.
	Does Canada not have a similar setup?
	I don't think so, but I know that it's recorded.
	I mean, they have the recordings.
	The only problem is they shut off one side to record the other, so maybe it didn't pick it up.
	But I would imagine someone picked it up.
	But the debates are broadcast.
	They're live.
	You can see them.
	But they cut the mics, as we've seen with certain speakers.
	I'd be interested in checking that out.
	Fidel Castro in the Canadian Parliament.
	We've got Barb Hoffman.
	I hope there was not intended to be a message there.
	Thank you.
	Super sticker, Fox Fox.
	Thank you.
	What do we have here?
	Dangerously close equals true.
	That is, the question is dangerously close to disinformation, misinformation.
	So I'm not even going to answer it.
	I wouldn't even dignify that question with an answer.
	Just here for the main of magnificence.
	I like that.
	If you dye it red, you could go as Mr. Heatmiser for Halloween.
	I'm going to have to Google who Mr. Heatmiser is.
	Quebec ending mandatory masking as of May 14th, but it seems most people aren't even aware of that.
	VISP probably even less.
	Oh, there's no question.
	I was at...
	Where did I go?
	Oh, I went for nothing serious, people.
	I went to an ultrasound.
	No, I'm not pregnant.
	Ultrasound, nothing.
	All good.
	But I went for an ultrasound, and I asked the technician.
	I was like, oh, I heard that the masks are coming off soon.
	And they didn't even know.
	Yeah.
	May 14, the science changes, by the way.
	What's the date right now?
	May 6. The science shall remain in place until May 13, 1159.
	Then the science changes.
	Trust the science.
	Trudeau isn't immoral so much as he is amoral.
	He is the existential prime minister living with complete sincerity in the fleeting moment.
	It's very beautiful, actually.
	And a type 1 diabetic with a young family being denied a kidney?
	That's not possible.
	It's not possible, Kayleigh.
	I know that there have been stories of this.
	Denied a kidney for no jab because they believe denying a kidney to a type 1 diabetic...
	Sorry, let me rephrase.
	How do I say this?
	That is less dangerous than not getting the vax.
	A negative test.
	For people who trust the science, a negative test is not enough.
	Please see Give, Send, Go Help, the Harper's Beat stage 5 kidney disease.
	He has to seek alternate therapies because Trudeau the tyrant.
	Anyone who can put that link in the chat, please do.
	And after I'm done with Roman...
	I'm going to bring up some Pat King news because I see Roman in the backstage.
	And this is a good segue.
	Absolute, absolute immoral abuse.
	This is abuse.
	I don't care.
	There's nothing science about this.
	It's abuse.
	It's inhumane.
	And I would dare say, in my humble opinion, hashtag not a legal opinion, it's a crime.
	It's against humanity.
	And I think it's a crime.
	Okay, you guys can look it up.
	Oh, no.
	Now, with that said, people, Roman Baber, in the House, Member of Provincial Parliament.
	I cannot hide my previous support for Roman, nor would I want to.
	Roman was one of the few brave MPPs in Ontario.
	Not just consistently and vocally against the mandates and against the tyranny from early on as well.
	And put his money where his mouth is, quite literally, but I'll let Roman explain.
	Roman, come on in.
	How you doing, sir?
	Good to be with you, David.
	It's good to see you.
	I mean, we've never met in person, eh?
	Not yet.
	So are you on the road by the looks of it?
	I am on the road.
	We just left the North Strong and Free conference in Ottawa, where last night we had the first Conservative Party leadership debate, which I hear I did pretty well in.
	And just for the benefit of your viewers, my name is Roman Babber, and they may have heard about a year and a half ago, I have opposed Doug Ford and the lockdown.
	In Ontario, which was deemed to be one of the longest and harshest lockdowns in the world, I was asked to leave the Conservative Caucus, and I did.
	And since then, as I always have, I've been trying to stand up for Canadians against overreaching public health restrictions, against lockdowns that imposed a much greater collateral harm on Canadians than they did any good, and fighting against mandates and passports.
	And now I've decided to throw my hat into the ring, and I'm running for leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, not just to shake up the Conservative Party, but also try and get Canada out of the very difficult situation that I think that we're in.
	Someone in the chat said, you look Roman, but I happen to know you're not Roman.
	Where are you from?
	I mean, I know it, but tell the crowd, for those who don't know who you are, what your history is to get you to where you are now.
	Thank you.
	So I was born in the former Soviet Union.
	And we didn't leave the Soviet Union until I was nine in 1989, which is why I have a very unique perspective on Canada and Canada's democracy.
	Our democracy is precious.
	Without democracy, we don't have anything.
	And I lived in Israel for a short time and then came to Canada when I was 15 to the very district that later elected me about 22 years later.
	I'm Exhibit A for Canadian Opportunity.
	I practiced law for 12 years before I was elected.
	And I had every blessing that our country had to offer.
	I think this is the best country in the world because all you have to do to succeed in Canada is work hard and be nice to people.
	And we get to do that and keep our cultural and religious values and we get to be ourselves.
	Except for the last couple of years, that is not the case anymore.
	We clearly understand that Canada's democracy is eroding.
	And Canada's opportunity is also eroding.
	And for me, David, you know, like people ask for comparisons with the Soviet Union, and I have a number of comparisons that I'd like to bring.
	But the most recent one is, you know, you could not fly freely between the republics and you could not leave beyond communist walls.
	And so to know that three and a half million Canadians are unable to board a plane or a train is something that should upset 35 million Canadians.
	Charter rights, mobility rights are not just charter rights, they're human rights.
	And anyways, I'll let you throw in.
	We have a lot to talk about.
	You know, I'm clipping this particular section.
	I love it.
	The three and a half million Canadians should have any of their rights violated, should upset.
	35 million Canadians and people need to appreciate that.
	Absolutely.
	You know, look, same with the mandates.
	I think some of your viewers must know that I brought the only legislation to my knowledge in the country that sought to protect workers against workplace mandates.
	I think that it's inhumane to make someone choose between their ability to put food on the table and their personal health care choice.
	And we all agree that it's still a choice.
	And so, unfortunately, the Doug Ford government voted down my Jobs and Jobs Act.
	But we have to be very clear.
	We can't just stomp our chest and yell freedom.
	There are a lot of Canadians that aren't sure about what's happening in our country, and a lot of them are hearing a lot of information, and they're not sure exactly who to trust.
	We should be able to articulate a couple of clear propositions.
	Number one, it's a choice.
	We have to respect those that made the other choice as well.
	Number one, and we have to build a bridge to unite this country and move past this.
	And second of all, we can argue clearly on the science.
	According to every medical officer in the country, according to the manufacturer, two shots offer minimal protection against infection.
	And that means that any suggestion that anyone's risk of transmission is higher because the risk of infection is higher is now completely off the table.
	No one is putting anyone at risk.
	No one's putting anyone at risk.
	It's a hateful proposition that we have to dispel very clearly.
	I'm saying in the chat, I start a question because I'm going to get to it afterwards.
	Kov had a question for you, which I'll get to in due time.
	And before we even get here, first of all, I need to know how you rose to even get into provincial politics.
	You said you studied law.
	How long did you practice for?
	12 years.
	You've practiced law for 12 years.
	I have.
	So I started my first law job was with the Legal Aid Clinic in my law school at Western.
	And that's where I gained a lot of compassion.
	Because, you know, at Legal Aid, you deal with folks from all walks of life.
	And that's also where I developed a lot of my passion for addictions and mental health.
	Clients that I saw early in my career that got in trouble with the law were not criminals.
	They just had a mental health or an addiction issue.
	And that's where I started appreciating that people are people.
	And that also applies to their choices.
	I then started and had a brief stint on Bay Street working litigation in the financial services industry.
	And then I started on my own.
	I rented a little office in North York and started my own practice.
	And a couple of years later, ported it and joined with another firm.
	And we grew a small business from three or four people to 35 or 40 people maybe at the max.
	And have been very, very blessed with this Canadian opportunity practicing commercial and civil litigation.
	I then got into politics by actually helping out a little bit in elections law, a leadership campaign.
	Got the bug and decided that I will seek my own nomination.
	I sought nomination for the last provincial election against Joe Oliver, the former finance minister, and I won.
	I just worked for a year and a half, and now it worked Joe.
	I got elected under Doug Ford, served as chair of Parliament's Justice Committee until I was removed from caucus by Doug Ford for writing a letter in which I said, "Look, Lockdowns are potentially killing more people than they're saving because we refuse to factor in the toll, the collateral harm of lockdowns in our public health response.
	And unfortunately, the evidence bears my position in that we had, in Ontario at least, we had more than 350,000 surgeries delayed.
	The Canadian Medical Association is already saying, already said about six months ago, that there's more than 4,000 Canadians that passed away from delayed surgeries.
	We have millions of cancer screenings missed.
	We have a mental health pandemic, especially when it comes to our children.
	We have a rate of overdose essentially doubling year over year throughout most provinces.
	We have a human catastrophe that was perpetuated by public health against Canadians in the name of trying to contain a very transmissible virus.
	That generally, generally, is dangerous to select populations.
	But instead of protecting congregate settings, instead of protecting long-term care homes, we refuse to acknowledge the evidence, we refuse to acknowledge the mistake, for a variety of reasons continuing in this exercise, locked down 35 million Canadians and thereby made them sick.
	Okay, now hold on.
	So you write this letter, and I remember at the time...
	Even suggesting that the lockdowns could cause more damage, but incidentally or longer term, it was heresy.
	It was how dare you if you're not a doctor, if you're not an epidemiologist, if you're not a modeling PhD, you get kicked out.
	What does that mean, getting kicked out of caucus by Doug Ford?
	What does that look like in practice?
	So in practice, I still remained a member of parliament, but I wasn't able to sit with the conservatives anymore.
	And so I became independent.
	And look, it was difficult because a lot of people that I've considered friends for many years moved on.
	And frankly, I've been shunned quite a bit by my own community.
	But that's okay.
	I've heard from hundreds of thousands of Canadians, David, who appreciated the fact that someone...
	Was able to articulate this proposition.
	This is January 2021.
	There was no discussion on this allowed whatsoever.
	And all I wanted is to tell people that, you know, we should have a conversation about this.
	Maybe I'm wrong and I have the right to be wrong.
	But people couldn't even tell their friend that their kid is depressed because somehow that would be heresy.
	And by the way, people can't even tell the fact that they might have had Adverse reactions to certain things because they get shunned also.
	They get blacklisted.
	They get made fun of and they get called a theorist.
	People can't even divulge that without running into problems.
	Sorry, didn't mean to cut you off.
	No, it's...
	And look, it's really the product of what I believe is transpiring today for...
	There's this radical, I think it is left-wing cancel culture that is so determined on forcing...
	This collectivism that refuses to allow for any semblance of disagreement.
	And that is not just bad for our democracy.
	It's also very, very bad for our public policy.
	And so after I got kicked out, I went on to continue and fight for Canadians against these public health measures.
	And I've suggested, look, I'm not saying that we shouldn't do anything.
	What we should do is we should focus on congregate homes, on long-term care homes.
	According to Statistics Canada, more than 80% of those that passed away from the virus were in long-term care homes.
	We need more staffing for proper infection control, not to mention nutrition and hygiene, which was completely abandoned.
	And we need to build healthcare capacity.
	Denying loved ones an ability to access loved ones instead of denying kids much-needed socialization at schools.
	Our kids have regressed.
	Instead of figuring out how to reorder society, prevent loved ones from seeing each other, prevent athletes from exercising, preventing adults from working or opening their business.
	Or having funerals, mourning their loved ones.
	I had a constituent, a very, very dear constituent, her initial M. She passed away, a wonderful person, and the funeral home would only allow three family members, and one of the siblings was not able to come to his sister's cremation.
	This is the cruelty, the cruelty, David.
	That's been perpetuated against Canadians.
	And I'm very, very sad and very, very offended.
	But I don't see another path in that we have to overcome this.
	And the only way I see that we're going to overcome this is politically.
	I hope that from the strategy that I described, that we try and draw strength and...
	Do what we need to do to end this.
	Look, I'm going to rag on you a little later because you get booted from one conservative party, one corrupt, incompetent conservative party, and now I would argue you're running for the leadership of yet another corrupt, incompetent conservative party.
	But setting that aside, and you know the way I feel about this, conservatives are not getting my vote next federal election regardless, even if I like you as a candidate, I think you're going to probably end up getting screwed by the same, just a different corrupt conservative party than the one you already got screwed by, and then you might...
	You know, you might look at the PPC differently afterwards.
	We'll see.
	Or maybe you'll win and you'll turn Canada around.
	But you did do something, which it not only deserves credit, it deserves to be known.
	I don't know what it's called.
	You filed a bill.
	You made a motion that all members of provincial parliament should have their salaries either reduced or, what was it?
	Reduced, I think, a certain amount.
	Yeah.
	While all these lockdowns were going on.
	And then, you know, the punchline is the punchline, but tell the story so people can know.
	I brought a bill to cut pay for members of the legislature to the amount of CERB, to $2,000 a month, until all the emergency orders are lifted.
	So not only did they block my bill and vote it down, the Conservative government House leader, Paul Calandra, brought a motion to cut my pay instead, right?
	That's what they thought.
	About what was happening.
	It's incredible how insensitive it is.
	I speak to business owners.
	And by the way, my letter to the Premier was mostly about health and mental health.
	Who dares to talk about business these days?
	Who dares to talk about the fact that people that have followed the law and worked hard and always meant well and paid a ton of tax and employed people We're all of a sudden deemed non-essential and told that, you know...
	So they brought a motion to cut my pay.
	The Speaker ruled it out of order.
	But it goes to show how tone-deaf the political class is to everything that transpired.
	And they have cover by virtue of the public health exercise where no other opinion is permissible, where no other course of action would even be considered.
	And so that's what happened.
	I litigated against the Attorney General.
	I brought a lawsuit against the Attorney General in my personal capacity and through my advocacy group, seeking my ability to protest in front of my own legislature outdoors and to pray in my synagogue outdoors.
	And the court said that I don't have standing.
	They would not hear my case.
	They said that essentially I'm...
	Trying to just bring a public interest litigation, and they didn't consider my standing in my personal capacity.
	The Court of Appeal two weeks ago agreed with me, but unfortunately dismissed my case because the particular emergency order that I'm challenging is not in place right now.
	It's moot.
	I'm considering the case moot.
	Bullshit.
	I brought a case.
	I asked to hold a protest at Queen's Park and I wanted to go outdoors.
	I wanted to squeak and get any type of wind for our side because we know that there's not a single instance of outbreak outdoors.
	The virus doesn't transmit in open air.
	I'll correct you on two things.
	There was one case, but it involved intimate contact from what I was able to read.
	And when you said 80% of long-term, I think it's like...
	It's 75 to 82 are the estimates, so that no one wants to hold anything against you.
	I figured this is a family show, so I didn't want to talk about the fact that there was one...
	As far as I can tell, one documented case of outdoor transmission which involved intimate contact.
	So I wanted to bring this because I said, look, you don't have a demonstrably justifiable reason to deny my charter recourse in letting me assemble in front of the legislature that I sit in.
	And the court would not hear my case.
	And this goes to what I think is a complete failure of all systems that we've built to prevent something like this from happening.
	Everything failed.
	Obviously, media failed.
	And they're not going to own up to it because, you know, they've, I think, are largely responsible for much of what transpired.
	Our expression is under assault on social media.
	We can't freely express ourselves.
	The court system, unfortunately, is disjointed, whether it's by cancel culture or for whatever reason.
	We're banned from the public square during the gatherings.
	We are being kicked out of our own governments, out of our own caucuses.
	Our parliamentary democracy is gone.
	We're in trouble here.
	We're in trouble, which is why I'm saying that as long as we have a democratic process, if we're going to get another shot at a fair election, then we have no choice.
	We have to.
	We have to change.
	Governance at the top.
	We have to get rid of Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland making a principled stand.
	David, I appreciate your position.
	I appreciate how disillusioned you are with the Conservatives.
	If I lead the Conservative Party, I will apologize to you.
	I will apologize.
	To all of your viewers, and I say this openly, I say this to the Conservatives at their own gatherings, we will apologize to Canadians for not standing up for them, for not standing up for them against lockdowns, against passports and the mandates before the truck convoy rolled into town.
	But we have no other choice.
	We have to unite and beat Justin Trudeau because otherwise we're not going to end this nightmare.
	Well, look, I'm biased, but I've shared my bias and now I can still ask the questions because you are running for the leadership of the party.
	But hold on.
	Sorry, sorry.
	Before there.
	The bill to reduce your salary alone as a reprisal for your audacity to say maybe you guys should suffer some of the same economic limitations you're imposing on others, it only was struck down because it was deemed to be out of order?
	Correct.
	It was a motion in response to my bill, but to reduce someone's pay, you need a bill.
	And so for procedural grounds, it was struck out.
	They still paid me my public service salary.
	Okay, let me ask the one question before because it's sort of on topic now.
	I promised I would.
	COVID-1984.
	Ask Baber if you will denounce UN Agenda 2030.
	The Conservative signed us onto it.
	No Conservative will denounce the goals of sustainable development.
	It's the evil that's destroying Canada.
	If the UN Agenda 2030, is that the WEF thingy that we're hearing about?
	Owning nothing and being happy?
	I'm not sure what it is, so I don't know if you are.
	David, there's a variation of this.
	But it's not 2030.
	It started in the 1800s.
	And I like to people ask me whether I'm a member of the WF.
	And I say, no, I'm not a member of the WF and I never had any contact with the WF.
	But that doesn't get us far enough.
	Let me go Google it, Roman.
	The problem is not the organization per se.
	The problem is the hateful, left-wing, radical ideology that it espouses.
	Right?
	Klaus Schwab did not say you're going to own nothing and you're going to be happy.
	Karl Marx said that 150 years ago.
	Right?
	And this is an erosion of the sovereign state because the sovereign state stands in the way of this pie-in-the-sky utopian redistribution that they want to affect.
	And the state stands in their way.
	Or ownership of resources publicly instead of private ownership.
	It's an evil ideology because the only way you can affect it, redistribution, is by force.
	Or by government dicta that says you've got to close your restaurant or you've got to close your church and you can't even meet up anymore.
	Right?
	So, David, and this is not just unique to the...
	WF or the UN.
	It's in the World Bank.
	It's in the IMF.
	But it's not just global in nature.
	Left-wing radical ideology, this communist ideology, has seeped its way into local governments, to municipal governments, to even your school boards, right?
	The school boards that are right now, that are teaching kids division instead of long division, teaching them critical race theory where a kid needs to apologize for something that happened 100 years ago.
	Or is told that they don't have a chance at success because of who they are, which is the worst thing you can say to a kid.
	That teacher is not a member of the WF, but he or she espouses the same ideology.
	And I'm sorry I'm being lengthy on this answer.
	I'd like to complete it because I know it's very, very important for many of your viewers.
	David, here's what I say in response to this.
	They've been on the move for 30, 40 years through our academia, through our institutions.
	This off-the-charts political correctness, and we need to fight back against it by shining a light on it, explaining for what it is, and convincing Canadians, because I think the Canadians would reject that.
	They don't want this collectivism.
	They don't want government to tell us what to do and how to live, or tell each other what to do and how to live.
	We want to work.
	We want to love our families.
	We want to do what we do for entertainment.
	We want government to leave us alone.
	Government to leave us alone.
	It's such a simple proposition.
	And the best thing we can do to push back against this agenda, against the WEF radical left-wing ideology, is to get rid of Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland.
	Politically speaking, people.
	And I did Google.
	Roman, you're not on the WEF website, which is a good start.
	Hold on now.
	In that conversation...
	Oh, yes.
	I also like...
	You got a good catch line in there.
	They should be teaching them long division, not division.
	Or they're teaching them division where they should be teaching long division.
	That's good.
	How has it been going so far, the run for office?
	You know, political campaigns are not easy.
	Especially when you come from the worldview that I'm now representing.
	But I'm fighting...
	We have to fight for the soul of our country and my party, the conservative party, and we can't turn it around without some straight talk.
	And you see now that most of them, almost every single contender, has come around to our view, right?
	The leading contenders, Pierre Polyev, Lesley Lewis, are now also trumping the freedom card.
	But you can't just...
	You know, thump your chest and yell freedom.
	You have to articulate and convince a lot of hearts and minds in the middle that are not sure about all of this.
	But look, I'm glad they came around.
	I'm glad the party has come around.
	They're now opposing mandates.
	They're now opposing passports.
	It's too bad that that didn't happen a year ago, a year and a half ago.
	How's the run going?
	Good.
	First of all, they've let me run.
	They approved my application.
	After that, they thought, Roman's not going to get on the ballot because I had to raise $300,000.
	I raised it, and they told me that the administrative fee applies on that as well.
	So we gave them $360,000 in all the signatures, and now I'm officially on the ballot with Lesley Lewis, Pierre Polyev, Scott Atchison, Patrick Brown, and Jean Charest, six of us.
	And last night, we had our first debate at the former Manning Conference, North Strong and Free, and a lot of people think that I won.
	And I'm a tough campaign, but I've got to win this, David.
	I've got to win this because we have to get out of this nightmare.
	Someone had messaged me, or I think it might have been in the chat, that said yesterday's debate was a red flag, and I don't know what they meant by that or who they meant that to.
	Between all the candidates, I don't know three of them.
	I know Poilievre.
	He's been pretty decent, but I think he's a lot of talk.
	I think he's done some good stuff.
	As far as concrete action goes, you definitely get two notches for what you've done.
	And Jean Charest, I trust him about as far as I can throw him.
	He seems like Aaron O'Toole 2.0, and Aaron O'Toole was Justin Trudeau 2.0.
	So we'll see.
	You had to raise $300,000 to get on the ballot?
	The entry fee, the initial deposit is $50,000, and the entry fee is another $250,000.
	So yes.
	Where can people go?
	I'm going to put a link right now.
	Where can they go to support you?
	We are asking for support.
	It's joinroman.ca slash donate.
	Joinroman.ca slash donate.
	Yeah, we could definitely use the help.
	Where's the Jordan?
	Is it J-O-R-D-A-N?
	Join Roman.
	J-O-I-N.
	Oh, join Roman.
	I thought your name was something else.
	Joinroman.ca forward slash donate.
	Chat, let me know if this link works.
	Okay.
	Let me see here.
	This is warning all.
	May 22, a big vote to give WHO's Director General to declare health emergencies in any nation and to do so unilaterally and against the opposition of the target nation provincial agenda, item 16.2.
	You know anything about that, Roman?
	I know that they're pushing uniform pandemic response and there's all sorts of provisions that the countries that subscribe to would be penalized by if they don't follow the protocol.
	It's same old, same old.
	When we talk about some of these international institutions, what, if any, credibility do they have left?
	How can you have Saudi Arabia being the chair of the Commission on the Status of Women or Syria being the Commission on Human Rights or Iran or one or the other?
	I forget which one.
	The international community has lost credibility.
	It lost credibility on Because most institutions that we're dealing with are not populated, are not formed with democratic countries.
	More than 75-80% of countries that are actually subscribed to the UN are not truly democratic.
	But now we have to worry about our own country, Canada, that's not being democratic.
	And that is the message of my campaign.
	This is a good time to talk about this.
	I'm the democracy candidate.
	Of course, we're running on economic prosperity.
	I want to turn Canada into a natural resources superpower.
	We need to think about housing.
	I'm going to double the deduction, sorry, the exemption for RRSP to buy your first home, release federal land to increase supply.
	I want to talk about autism.
	We're going to talk about privacy.
	We have a lot of things to fix.
	But without democracy, you don't have anything.
	And we're seeing unprecedented erosion of our democracy, whether it's the censorship.
	Right?
	That has been prevalent.
	20% of Canadians, close to 20% are being treated still like Class B citizens, either unable to travel or fearing for losing their job or already lost their job.
	And the emergency orders, you know, confiscating personal property, whether it's your account or lawfully held Recreational arms.
	I'm just...
	I'm very concerned.
	I'm just going to put up a quick poll.
	I don't think I get six options.
	You've got Baber.
	You're running Poilievre, Charest.
	Who's the other one?
	Brown?
	Who are the top?
	Patrick Brown, Scott Hutchinson, and Lesley Lewis.
	I'm going to have to skip the last two, okay?
	I'll just go with Baber, Poilievre, Charest, Brown.
	It only fits four.
	Let's just see.
	You've got to do Lesley.
	Okay.
	Who is the...
	I call it the favorite right now.
	Well, Pierre definitely has a large advantage.
	He's got high profile.
	He was a finance critic.
	And look, he's got style that works very, very well for the opposition.
	He attacks the prime minister.
	And so there's no question he's articulated and intelligent.
	When I try to differentiate myself with other candidates in the race, I try to say, look, I opposed...
	I'm only alone.
	And I opposed mandates and passports before it became popular.
	And so that's what people can expect of me, even if they disagree with me sometimes.
	I will do what I think is right and say what I believe, even when it's unpopular.
	And that, I think, distinguishes me from the rest of the crowd.
	Well, I mean, you mentioned it actually just two seconds ago, but firearm, what's your position on federal firearm laws?
	Rolling back?
	Making more?
	I mean, do you even contemplate rolling them back, or is that too politically toxic to even discuss during an election?
	David, I will not shy away from a single topic, if asked, because people need to know where I stand.
	I come from a North Toronto writing, North Toronto Electoral District, with one of the highest gun crimes in the country.
	But gun crimes are not committed by law-abiding gun owners.
	They're committed by criminals with illegal guns.
	What we have is we have a major problem at the border.
	We have a mess at the Canada Border Agency and a huge flow of illegal guns from the United States.
	That's what we need to fix.
	The flow of illegal guns with staffing, with a culture change because they're too worried about sensitivity training.
	Then they're worried about guns coming in from the United States.
	But in terms of the government passing a law and taking someone's property, that is such a slippery slope.
	Because the next day they'll say that another item is going to be caught.
	And the next day it's going to be another item.
	We cannot pass laws that confiscate Canadians' property.
	You know, especially now that, you know, some of the new firearms included in the, I don't know, revised order in council target 12-gauge Remington's used for duck hunting, which...
	This is the question, though.
	Above and beyond no more laws, and I think you're right on point, is that not only is the gun violence committed with illegal guns, it's committed with small arms and not with the long arms that the government is going after, you know, left, right, and center.
	But the question is this.
	Do you repeal?
	If you make it in, conservatives come to power.
	Do you make it a political campaign platform to repeal the latest executive order and maybe pull back some of the gun laws?
	I will repeal Justin Trudeau's most recent order, yes.
	And I would also say that we need to start thinking about dealing with sentencing reform again.
	I would like to get tougher on gun crimes.
	At the same time, I'm not sure that our sentencing regime, as it pertains to addiction, makes sense.
	You know, I'm not going to hide what I feel about a lot of things.
	I'm not sure that Canadians, that there's any benefit to criminalizing a Canadian and ruining their life potentially because they may have an addictions issue for simple possession.
	Mark Sidloy says, Shabbat Shalom David, and Roman as well.
	If some of us don't have rights, then none of us have rights.
	We only have privileges granted by benevolence of government.
	And I think we all agree on that.
	He's correct.
	If I may, on that point very quickly, David, the point the gentleman just made is that we have a reworking of a framework here.
	Government It does not own our rights so it would give us back our rights as a condition of certain behavior.
	Those rights are enshrined with us fundamentally and not granted to us by the grace of the Fuhrer.
	So please, we need to insist on the fact that we own our rights, our own indivisible rights, and government cannot usurp them.
	It might suggest that they're not absolute.
	The burden on them is to prove it in a court of law, but not unilaterally deny us.
	And the most precious right of them all is our freedom of speech, because through speech, we preserve all other rights.
	Well, I mean, good segue to the next question, which I know people are asking.
	Has it become cool within the Conservative Party to jump back on the defund the CBC wagon again?
	Is that a common sense to all the candidates?
	Yeah, and I think many of them are making that pledge, and I'm certainly going to defund the CBC and sell them off.
	But I'll go a step further.
	So we have to end the media bailouts and the media subsidies.
	Gotta go.
	Because you don't have free and independent media when the government signs its paycheck.
	It's one of the most key pillars in democracy, is free and independent media.
	But how can you have free and independent media when it's dependent on government?
	And then there's more.
	It's not just the bailouts and the handouts.
	It's also advertising.
	In the last couple of years, we have seen unprecedented amount of advertising by government on media, on all platforms.
	TV, radio, internet, benches, highway ads, elevator ads.
	And this is now...
	It has become such a huge industry.
	And there's a rule in advertising.
	He or she who pays for the ad gets their message across.
	And this is done with taxpayer dollars too.
	This is done with our own money.
	So we need to end.
	We need to end the way that government advertises on the news media.
	Some people say, more politicians saying what they need to say to get elected.
	You, I don't doubt it for a second when you say it because you've lived the life and you've actually suffered the consequences for the last two years.
	Still not voting Conservative.
	David, if I'm leader of the party, will you give me your vote?
	I understand you're not going to sign up because, folks, in order to vote for me in the leadership, you can't just vote.
	It's not a general election.
	You've got to register with the Conservatives and give them 15 bucks.
	You do it at joinroman.ca slash now.
	Just go to joinroman.ca.
	I pinned the link.
	And I should tell everybody this.
	You can sign up, get whatever card you need and pay the 15 bucks and vote for your candidacy and still vote PPC or not vote Liberal next election.
	So, two separate things.
	But I've got a question for you.
	And I'm sorry to put you on the spot.
	No, you won't.
	I got my answer.
	David, even though we haven't met in person, we've spoken enough to understand one another, and we have enough of understanding who's sitting in front of us.
	If I become leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, will you give me your vote?
	I'll tell you this.
	I would think about it, but I would be very reluctant to give my vote to an individual who may be the leader of what I consider to be a corrupt, hypocritical, broken party.
	And so, you have to, in my mind...
	First of all, you have to get there.
	And my prediction is you're going to get screwed by this corrupt party that you're running for.
	And then you might realize it's a good run.
	It'll give you great exposure and it'll create the principles that are going to make you a principled person.
	But one person, I do not think, can change the broken machine.
	And I don't think the conservatives from within have done enough to even give anybody the semblance that they are anything other than what they were under O'Toole.
	But if you as an individual, I would contemplate it, but probably still wait for you to turn the party around and produce results and not promises.
	Anyone else?
	Charest is au tour.
	Pierre Poilièvre, I think your party is broken.
	I think your party is infiltrated by the very woke politics that you as an individual take issue with, and I think your party won't even let you get to where you need to go, even if you could get there.
	But I think your party is broken.
	When you say they're infiltrated by the woke culture, I think they did not have courage to stand against the woke culture.
	Yeah, that's a nice way of saying the same thing.
	You got some conservatives apologizing for their whiteness while purporting to be victims of their womanness.
	You got others silent in front of you.
	You have a few courageous candidates, but by and large, I think the party's broken.
	I don't disagree with you that there's a long way to go.
	There are some institutional challenges, to put that mildly.
	But I also think that this change can start from the top, where you insist on a different culture.
	And the first thing you have to do with them is you have to give the good people among them some cover.
	And I know that there are a lot of good MPs.
	There are a lot of people that want to do what's right by people.
	And we need to protect them and we need to empower them and say, look, I know you're on the right side of this and I know it's going to be tough for you.
	Don't hesitate.
	Do what's right by people.
	Do what's right by your constituents.
	I'm going to have your back.
	And at the same time, to those that just want to play the game, because we have a whole class of politicians that just want to...
	Play the game.
	You've got to tell them, if that's the case, you've just got to go do something else with your life.
	But I understand your position, and I'm going to just say this one more time.
	Let's talk about our options.
	I understand why people went and voted for another party.
	I know you ran for another party, and I respect that, and I understand what prompted you to go there.
	What I'm saying is, we're not, and I know that the same argument was made in the last election.
	That if you vote PPC, then Justin Trudeau will win.
	So don't vote PPC.
	But you didn't have an alternative.
	The conservatives have to earn your vote.
	So you can't just have an Aaron O'Toole and you don't know where that guy stands and didn't have the courage to stand up against passports and mandates, even though when he created a little bit of daylight between him and Justin, that's when he did the best at the polls.
	So you didn't know where the guy stood.
	I don't blame you for going PPC.
	But if we have a clear alternative that will...
	Pledge to preserve democracy with a good track record, then splitting this vote will not get us out of the situation that we're in.
	I'm not even sure if we've got two or three years to go.
	I just think that there's enough of democracy in the DNA of Canadians to survive a couple of years, and hopefully I think the Elections Canada is still a fair organization.
	There's a lot of friction in our election by the media and others, but I still think we're going to get a fair shot in two to three years from now.
	We've got to take it.
	I'm going to address this.
	I've always said every fear hides a wish.
	I fear that you're going to get shafted by the same corrupt, broken political system that I think the Conservative Party is.
	I fear that you're going to get screwed by the media.
	And I'll tell you honestly, there's a part of me that actually wishes...
	That that happens because it will reveal it.
	I've heard this vote-splitting argument before, Roman.
	I heard it last election.
	And ultimately, even with the vote-splitting, Trudeau was re-elected with the most minority of minority governments.
	And the only reason it's amounted to anything is because his vote-splitting has unified.
	So split the vote.
	I think the PPC will get a lot of...
	I think they're going to get a lot of NDP votes now because they've seen what that part is actually about.
	It's a question of voting with your principles.
	You don't split your vote.
	And I say, I have a fear that you're going to become a victim of the corruption of what I think is your party and Canadian media.
	We'll see.
	But if you happen to get elected, and if your voice resonates, which I think it should, your voice should resonate with PPCers who might sign on to support you for the Conservative, but I wouldn't be surprised if they wouldn't vote for you for the party next election.
	I wish you the best.
	I fear for the worst, partially because I think it's all effing broken.
	I don't disagree that it's very, very challenging.
	And we do everything we can, which is why I invite folks, if they want to donate, we could really use a little bit of help at joinroman.ca.
	But look, first of all, let's not wish for a better option.
	I've been doing a lot of mainstream media.
	And thankfully, thus far, I've been surviving the mainstream media by being moderate and sensible and not...
	This is a very difficult situation that we're in.
	You can't just punch through the wall here.
	We're digging ourselves out inch by inch.
	And I've been trying to do that for the last year and a half.
	The other question to you is, if we've acknowledged that everything else has failed, then what is the exit strategy out of the situation that we're in?
	You're saying vote your principles.
	Okay, you're going to vote your principle, even though you can vote your principle for a conservative leader, assuming they're the conservative leader, and if they share your principles, you're still voting your principles.
	But if you don't, you vote your principle because the conservatives shunned you and have refused to stand up for us in the last couple of elections, then what are we accomplishing?
	And the question to you is, how do we regain?
	How do we restore Canada's democracy?
	Because speeches on Main Street are not doing it.
	Our podcasts are not doing it.
	Well, but they're not doing it yet.
	I mean, these problems are new.
	They're oldish, but they're also radically new.
	And I'll bring this up because I don't mind being called names.
	For anyone thinking Viva is rational, he thought he would win during a campaign and got 6% of the vote.
	Mischaracterization.
	I thought I could win.
	And there was an irrational part of me, which I recognized was irrational, that actually thought I would win.
	Vote Baber, he's all you got.
	Actually, there was one thing.
	The PPC got 6% of the vote in its second federal election in existence.
	Not the NDP, sorry, the Green Party, which has been around for 30 years, has now been surpassed by a party that's been in existence for two election cycles, which is, that's like a split second in the history of political life.
	So, how does change happen?
	Unfortunately, I don't think change happens at one election.
	You know, the Donald Trump phenomenon was an absolute anomaly.
	But the type of change, Roman, that we think needs to happen in Canada, it doesn't happen in one election any more than the destruction happens in one election.
	But the ship has to start getting righted.
	And I will recognize you seem to be someone who's riding the sinking political ship that is the Conservative Party.
	But how are you going to oppose CRT when, what's her name, Michelle Wemple within the Conservative Party promulgates it publicly?
	How do you contradicts it?
	This is why we have a leadership election.
	To determine the direction of the party.
	And, of course, your voice has been very helpful and influential.
	And thank God we still get to do this and put it out.
	For now.
	Wait until Bill C-11 comes into play.
	So what I'm saying is we continue down the erosion and you may not have the luxury to accomplish electorally what you think you might accomplish electorally with a couple of elections from now.
	You might not have that possibility.
	You know, I thought one of the worst days of all of this was February 18th when I saw Canadian riot police arrest and mishandle Peaceful protesters on the hill.
	I could not believe my eyes.
	I thought that we're never going to get there.
	I did not think we're going to see anything close to Australia.
	Thankfully, we have not.
	We still have...
	I think the police generally are siding with Canadians.
	We saw that in Ontario when Doug Ford wanted to...
	When Doug Ford wanted to card us just by being on the street.
	And the police said no, thankfully.
	And this is important for February 18th.
	Everything they said, everything that Justin Trudeau said about the protesters and fed the media about them was false.
	There was very little foreign money, like less than 12%.
	There was no foreign collusion.
	The arson was not connected.
	And there were no guns after a search, nowhere near the site.
	But what we did see on February 18th, that no one resisted.
	There was no kicking or assault against police.
	They either went home or were taken safely into custody.
	There was some assault on the protesters.
	I'm saying not against the police.
	This was a truly peaceful movement.
	But back to my point, to watch what we saw with the Emergencies Act.
	Which was passed after the event was over, which was unlawfully passed because you could deal with it by other legislation, highway traffic or municipal bylaws or even the criminal code if you needed to.
	The censorship bill that's coming in, the fact that we're still seeing Canadians lose their jobs over their personal medical choice, we're just going down the rabbit hole of...
	No democracy.
	And I think we have a very short time spent to change the wheel back.
	Someone had asked, did Bill C-11 get passed?
	I think it's in the final stages of approval.
	I'm not exactly sure where it is, but it's going to happen.
	It's going to happen fairly soon.
	And then what worries me, it's not just going to be censorship that we're going to see, but we're going to see censorship of political opponents, potentially.
	Because we're seeing, we saw this with the truckers.
	If you can freeze an account of political opposition effectively, then nothing stops you from banning their YouTube channel.
	So I'm very, very concerned.
	I'm going to bring up a bunch of chats that I've missed because some of them had questions for you.
	I get it, Viva, and I did vote PPC.
	In fact, I would have voted for you if I was in Montreal, but we need change right now.
	I am a political prisoner, brother.
	This isn't long-term planning right now.
	By the way, I'm not trying to deter anybody.
	I didn't even tell people to vote for me during the PPC.
	You vote for who you want to vote for.
	That's like telling someone what religion to practice.
	It's their personal decision.
	This one I want to bring up because I want to...
	I don't typically cry, and I won't, but this makes me so angry that I could.
	I didn't have a funeral for my dad.
	I re-planned my wedding three times.
	We lost two family dogs, two jobs, and now my wife is on administrative leave, yet the liberals' claims to be compassionate.
	Hashtag no more.
	No more trust.
	It's...
	Then another story, another last year, they said I was asymptomatic, canceled my surgery, I went to three different labs, paid for the tests, all three came back negative, not allowed to say my truth, and they still isolated me, called every day.
	For people saying I'm getting too cynical, I'll share stories one day to illustrate that.
	I'm undermining the level of cynicism that a rational person would have come to in my shoes.
	But saw PP speak, wasn't convinced, will not vote CPC, but will donate to your campaign.
	If you lose, will you consider PPC?
	Where are you on BTC and CBDC?
	So BTC is Bitcoin.
	Oh, versus what's CBDC?
	I don't know.
	Skip that part.
	If you lose, will you consider joining the PPC?
	I don't think so, David.
	Because I'm determined to turn this country around.
	And I have to have faith that if...
	I don't even want to say it.
	I don't know what I'm...
	What are we going to do if we don't win the next election?
	You think that there's enough democracy left in this country for us to go for another election?
	Well, my fear is...
	I have a loved one that's telling me that they're getting an application.
	For a visa to the United States.
	What another election?
	But Roman, look, this is where I'm not too cynical.
	Some people in the chat are saying, we're not even going to get to another election.
	Bill C-11 is going to pass.
	The next election we get to, you're going to have your bank account frozen.
	You're going to be off social media because you dared question lockdowns.
	It'll be misinformation, the same misinformation Trudeau just accused...
	A lot of bad things can happen.
	And brother, I didn't mean to put you on the spot because I understand the level of anger and cynicism out there by folks.
	They don't even want to talk to you because you're in politics to begin with.
	I'm even lucky I get bread.
	But what I'm saying to you is I'd like to speak practicality because we all continue to say how dire things are.
	So the best thing we can do is to think practically.
	And like I said, I don't see another way out other than political.
	No, no, for sure.
	The time is short.
	Yeah, well, I agree.
	And by the way, just how everybody knows, I'm not black-pilled cynic.
	I think this requires, in the meantime, massive political pressure, like I said at the beginning of the stream, to relentlessly mock the idiocy, the hypocrisy, and the lack of ethics and corruption.
	Relentless.
	Until it's criminalized.
	And then people have to decide.
	Where they vote with their dollar, where they vote with their feet.
	I, too, am an immigrant.
	Came here from Hungary in 1968.
	As a child, he understands the tyranny of Trudeau, and I feel he can bring back sanity.
	Can I address that for a moment?
	Please.
	First of all, address the avatar.
	That is one.
	That kind of looks like me.
	Okay, sorry.
	Go ahead.
	If you're for...
	I mean...
	David, I don't know where your family is from, but if you're Eastern European, then your senses have been tingling for the last couple of years.
	Because we intuitively feel that something isn't right.
	And I felt that in May 2020.
	And defund the state media as the answer to, Frank, and end advertising.
	No, I brought it up because you had already answered it.
	Sorry, sorry.
	The comparisons are very simple.
	First of all, the lineups to the liquor store, that's classic communism.
	And that was, of course, happening during COVID.
	Because people should wait outside in the cold, in the snow, or in the rain.
	Because that's not going to get them sick.
	Going inside will potentially, and be warm and dry, that will get them sick.
	So that was just insanity.
	But the greatest hallmark...
	of a communist or generally a totalitarian regime is when it's engaging in remarkable things and terrible things that are predicated on a false narrative when they're not true.
	And that happened with vis-a-vis our public health response starting May 2020 when we realized where the risk is.
	That almost the entire risk is with a very vulnerable or in long-term care homes.
	When we realized just how transmissible the virus was, that was a very important moment for me.
	We started understanding, based on all sorts of serological data, that there's a lot more people that actually have COVID than we thought.
	Some of them said maybe 1 to 20. For everyone that got tested, you have another 1 to 20 with COVID.
	Princeton even had a study that said close to potentially 50 in the United States.
	And that was a great thing because that told us that the virus is so transmissible that means that the metrics that we're worried about, the hospitalizations and deaths, are actually significantly smaller.
	We just weren't testing enough.
	And so, which we should have stopped after the spring, 2020.
	So, we understand that the virus is not as bad as we thought, thankfully.
	We know who it attacks, but instead of...
	Readjusting our public health response, we continue the alarmism, the excessive fear-mongering.
	People's reputations, they don't want to take a hit.
	Doug Ford and Francois Legault, they think that they're going to be in bad shape if someone says that the first lockdown was wrong.
	And they continue.
	They continue.
	They also had a big political windfall.
	And you know, I'm going to say another thing.
	Now I'm sure a lot of you are...
	So that's it.
	We continued in the last two years on the basis of this false narrative.
	This is typical for left-wing radical or communist regimes.
	Here's another thing that's typical, and that's specifically to Quebec.
	Myself and my lady, we went to Quebec in the summer.
	I think in summer 2020, because there was no place to go.
	I couldn't travel.
	And we went into the government alcohol store, the SAQ.
	And I saw a poster of Francois Legault pointing the finger, and I don't even want to do this on camera, pointing the finger at you in a poster saying you've got to wear a mask.
	And irrespective of the public health exercise and whether it makes sense for an airborne virus to wear a cloth mask, to see the leader of your province or a political leader On the front of a store with a poster that points the finger at you and says, you got to do something?
	That's classic communism.
	I'm trying to see if I can find the image real quick.
	You know what I'm talking about?
	I think I know what you're talking about, but I'm not going to be able to find it because it's an ad.
	It's not going to come up in images.
	But yeah, it's like, I mean, look, it's Uncle Sam wants you to join the army, except, you know, some might say that's a noble cause.
	Or the other one is, if you see your neighbor breaking the COVID rules, Tell on them.
	I mean, that's exactly what the CBC said.
	There's another difference with Uncle Sam.
	Uncle Sam is encouraging you to join and do something voluntarily.
	Francois Legault is pointing the finger at you and says, you must do something for the benefit of the collective.
	I'll just bring a few more because I have the ring.
	Will you protect the children in schools from critical race theory and indoctrination of far-left views?
	How will you keep children safe?
	And I guess on that note, you've seen the law that just passed in Quebec, which is removing parental supremacy as the overriding principle of the Youth Protection Act.
	We've seen what's happening in British Columbia.
	Thus far, it's only in the context of divorcing parents who are fighting, but administering certain treatments to children.
	At the request of one parent, at the objection of another, how do you deal with those thorny issues?
	I can't believe that we politicize a family like that.
	And it all starts with the fact that we have given government an unprecedented access into our personal health matters.
	This is unprecedented and in the relationship that we have with our own doctor.
	And that, of course, and then the next step is parental rights.
	One of the greatest evils of this pandemic, and I got to be respectful of the court, I always will be, is when family courts started reordering custody on the basis of not just vaccination,
	but people's political persuasion, people's political ideological approach to this public health exercise would mean that A parent might not be able to see a child or see them less or see them supervised?
	I'm not even sure what to describe, but with respect to the critical race theory, which unfortunately forms part of the curriculum in the provinces, I'll say the following.
	This is another example of us politicizing the classroom.
	And indoctrination that I think has led, in large part, to this very aggressive move by the radical left that has brought us here now, where this ideology is so prevalent in every school board and in every government.
	And like I said, we should be focusing on teaching kids math and science and not teach them hate, because that's essentially what it is.
	We're teaching kids...
	That they are at fault for something that happened generations ago.
	We should learn from history.
	We should appreciate history so we don't make mistakes.
	But we should not be faulting innocent children and potentially scaring them.
	And the other thing is, and this upsets me most, is that it teaches kids of visible minorities or otherwise that they don't have the same chance at success in life.
	Because of who they are inherently.
	To say that to a child, that you don't have the same chance to succeed in life because of who you are, is a terrible thing to say to a child.
	You know, it's the soft bigotry of low expectations or just bigotry, and it's the ultimate irony that the government, the very government implementing these policies saying that.
	If you're Black, if you're a woman, you have less chance of succeeding in life.
	At the same time, implement vaccine policies, vaccine passport restrictions that disparately impact Blacks, Latinos, Indigenous, and women.
	And it's the hypocrisy of the Liberal government promoting body autonomy for pregnant women, but not body autonomy for all Canadians.
	It's astounding.
	It's the same government that says, your body, your choice, but not with vaccines.
	We're not racist.
	And if you're black, you're at a disadvantage because of institutionalized racism.
	And lo and behold, you are now going to have a desperately more difficult time traveling unless you, who we know better than your own decisions, are compelled to do what we're telling you to do with your body, which you have the full choice of.
	I mean, it's madness, but Roman, someone asked, who do you file if you get elected?
	I'll ask that question, but also, where do you start?
	What do you do to ensure that no government ever is able to get away with doing what the current governments...
	I'd say governments have done for the last two and a half years.
	I'll take that as one of our two concluding questions.
	Look, first of all, I'd like to get accountability very much, but you're not going to get accountability until you vote them out.
	You're not going to be able to access records.
	You're not going to have subpoena power in order to move.
	Past this to get to where we end this and we start getting some accountability, it begins with them leaving Parliament Hill.
	That's first.
	And how do you prevent this from ever happening again?
	You're not going to like my answer, David, but that's how it's always going to be with me.
	People will know where I stand.
	It's very hard to do because we've seen many regimes throughout history.
	There were very advanced regimes.
	But when the rule of law is out the window, the rule of law is out the window.
	It doesn't matter how sophisticated you or I are going to conceive it to be.
	And so, right?
	I mean, we're supposed to have checks and balances.
	And they're all failed.
	And the courts have not come to our rescue either, which is the ultimate check and balance against what's transpiring.
	And so...
	I can conceive a legal reform.
	You're not going to reform the charter.
	You're not going to reform the fundamental British parliamentary democracy.
	You can come up with maybe some sort of mousetrap that reigns in public health.
	Okay, but you're not...
	If the desire is there to erode our democracy by state, it's very hard to stop.
	And so this is why...
	We desperately need this change in leadership.
	And so I'm asking your viewers, as I depart from you today, I'd like to win this race.
	I think I can win it.
	And I don't even like politics, to be honest with you.
	And it's not a good life.
	But I do not wish to sit back and watch the erosion of our democracy.
	This is a wonderful country.
	I've had every blessing this country has to offer.
	I think we've got to give it a good shot.
	I'm asking for your vote in the leadership, but you can't vote for me in the Conservative leadership unless you register with the Conservatives.
	Please go into joinroman.ca where you'll have an option to register now.
	Pay them $15 and give me your vote.
	The link is pinned and I will put up all your social media.
	I'm just going to read two last ones.
	Fringe Canadian says Roman.
	I will help you with your bid for the CPC leadership.
	Then you have to earn my vote back from the PPC.
	I think that's fair.
	Fair.
	Roman would agree with that.
	And Wendy's, I think you're going to have to go back to get the answer to this question because it's been the last hour.
	Just came in, Mr. Baber.
	Who are you and what do you have that you feel can win the leadership race against Paul Lievre?
	I'm not being rude.
	Just have never heard of you until now.
	Until Viva mentioned.
	Go back and watch it, Wendy, because look...
	I know who you are.
	And first of all, it's also funny.
	I practiced for 13 years before doing the YouTube thing, but also before running for federal.
	I didn't appreciate you were a lawyer for 12 years of practice.
	Started your own thing as well, which is interesting.
	Running for office.
	So there's some parallels.
	I've been following you for long enough to know that you're not a bag of hot air, that you've actually walked more of the walk than even others have talked to talk.
	And you did great things that I was following during the lockdown.
	So, Godspeed.
	I know what I believe.
	I know what I fear.
	And then we'll see where it goes from there.
	In the meantime, Roman, I will continue to relentlessly raise awareness of the absurdity that's going on in Canadian politics.
	And one of the ways of doing that is by...
	I have a limited platform, but people can now hear you speak.
	You can clip whatever you want from this.
	Use it to send your message to people.
	And I'm going to clip this one-hour interview, post it to my second channel so people can watch it without the one hour before and the one hour after.
	Roman, we will be in touch.
	What's your next leg of the tour?
	We're going to be in Toronto for two days.
	I'm just on my way back from Ottawa.
	And we're going back to Alberta for the first official CPC leadership debate.
	And after that, most likely back to British Columbia.
	All right, and I'm going to say this.
	I tweeted it out, so I'm not going to hide away from the fact that I said it.
	The vaccine passport system that Trudeau has not rescinded, despite the rest of the world moving forward and Canada moving backwards, I said it has some convenient disadvantages in that it quite clearly will impede certain parties or certain political party members from campaigning effectively.
	I'm not asking you any invasive questions that I have no business asking.
	Just saying that's a legitimate criticism, a legitimate concern.
	Trudeau's not...
	Retracting, revoking this idiotic vaccine passport for air and train travel.
	And it happens to be a conservative leadership race which requires travel.
	So with that, Roman, I'm going to stick around and cover Pat King after this and some more Canadian nonsense.
	But Roman, Godspeed.
	We'll be in touch and we'll meet up one of these days.
	I hope so, David.
	Thank you for welcoming me.
	Thank you for coming on.
	Have a good weekend.
	All right, people.
	I like that.
	I like Roman, but call me stubborn, call me irrational, call me counterintuitive.
	My answer is my answer.
	The party's got to earn the vote on action, not on promises.
	Maybe some action would be actually electing or appointing to the leadership of the party someone who's good.
	That is action, I guess.
	But we'll see.
	All that to say...
	Roman deserves as much.
	He is as deserving of a platform to speak his position as anyone else.
	I would have Pierre Poilievre on.
	I'd have Jean Charest on.
	I don't think Jean Charest would ever come on this channel.
	I'm not sure about Pierre Poilievre.
	I think he would.
	I think Pierre would.
	I would have Jagmeet Singh on.
	I'd love to have Jagmeet Singh on this channel.
	Explain.
	You know what the amazing thing is?
	And this is how you can determine honesty from dishonesty, transparency from hiding your awfulness.
	Anyone who will not sit down for long format interview cannot be trusted.
	Period.
	And anyone who will only sit down for long format with someone that they like cannot be trusted.
	I don't even think Jagmeet Singh or Justin Trudeau could get through a long format interview with CBC without looking like buffoon idiots.
	I don't even think they are capable of keeping their veneer.
	They don't even have veneer.
	I don't think they are capable of sustaining coherency.
	Coherence.
	Coherency.
	Whatever that, you know what I'm saying.
	They would not remain coherent for a long format interview with their allies of all allies.
	sigh
	I noticed it the other day.
	It's like, because it's starting to, it's like, it's going up and then it's just falling under its own weight.
	Jogging has become a pain in the butt, but I'm not cutting it.
	When I start jogging, it starts getting sweaty and then it's like...
	My horns.
	They're coming out, my horns.
	Okay, come on.
	Stop it.
	Stop it.
	Get down there.
	Yeah, if a politician will not sit down for a long-format interview, they can't be trusted.
	Roman Baber has done it now.
	Maxime Bernier has done it.
	Maxime Bernier did it with me before I even decided to run for the party.
	And Eric Duhaime did it two days ago, and I just posted that highlight on Viva Clips.
	Thank you very much.
	You're not the boss of me.
	Well, Justin Trudeau would disagree, man.
	Thank you very much.
	But yeah, that's it.
	I'm getting to a headband.
	Or, I mean, the headphones are looking good.
	If I just did this, this would be cool.
	I'm hip.
	I'm with it.
	Taka, taka, taka, taka.
	Okay.
	Oh, I would have Michelle Rample on.
	I would absolutely have Michelle Rample.
	She'll never come on.
	And I'm not saying like as a...
	I'm not saying that as a challenge.
	Let me just get this for anyone who doesn't know.
	I'm giving Michelle Rempel a hard time.
	Because sometimes you say things.
	Roman Baber is not on the WEF website.
	I think I clarified that.
	Michelle Rempel.
	Twitter.
	Tweet.
	Let me just see this here.
	You gotta get the...
	Oh, that's a YouTube page.
	Michelle Rempel, Twitter.
	Apology.
	You've got to see it.
	You've got to see it.
	Oh, I can't find it.
	Come on, man.
	Maybe it's under tweet.
	Michelle Rempel apologizes for her whiteness and then claims to be a victim of being a woman in today's patriarchal world.
	She's working on it.
	It's the woke politics within the Conservative Party.
	We'll see if Roman can have a run within the...
	Within the Conservative Party.
	I'm getting to Pat King soon.
	Search Rockefeller Foundation.
	Yeah, or you could read The Real Anthony Fauci.
	Thank you for the chat.
	I saw you posting this before, but I don't...
	Thank you for the chat.
	Everyone should read The Real Anthony Fauci.
	Here is The Price of Freedom.
	Your every drop of courage, ounce of pain, and pint of blood paid in advance.
	I'm not sure how I am.
	She is WEF plain and simple.
	Yeah, I think she's...
	Oh, yeah, she is.
	She is.
	Okay, hold on.
	Hold on, guys.
	Give me...
	You know what?
	I'll do...
	I'll bring up Pat King first.
	Pat King is still in jail, people.
	How about asking Poilievre to come on?
	Freedom for Canada.
	How about asking Poilievre to come on so we conservatives can have a good choice educated?
	I'll tweet it out.
	Everybody, if you're all watching, tweet out to Poilievre to come on Viva Frye.
	It doesn't have to be a sidebar.
	It doesn't have to be a sidebar.
	Just a lunchtime interview.
	We can do Viva Friday Canada stuff, whatever.
	Tweet out to Pierre Poiliev to come on, and we'll have a discussion.
	I don't have anything against Pierre Poiliev.
	I think he's been pretty decent, relatively speaking.
	Forget...
	Charest is...
	Charest is O'Toole 2.0.
	Pat King is still in jail.
	Some people don't even know who Pat King is.
	This is how it works.
	The collective memory is short, and so it requires constant reminders.
	Pat King is still in jail.
	Pat King was one of the individuals purported to be one of the organizers of the convoy, when in fact he never was.
	He might have co-opted the movement a little bit.
	He might have injected himself within the movement, but was by no means What's the word?
	An organizer of the convoy.
	Pat King has said outrageous things.
	He has said offensive things.
	He might not be, you know, he may not like him.
	But Pat King is an individual who was arrested on mischief charges, obstructing police, counseling people to disobey a court order, which was basically telling people to remain and protest, or maybe even just saying things like, Tow the line.
	Not tow the line, sorry.
	Hold the line.
	He was arrested on February 18th with Tamara Lich, Chris Barber.
	There were a few other ones.
	Tamara Lich was detained for two and a half weeks, initially had bail denied.
	She was also arrested on mischief charges.
	She was finally let free under terms and conditions that...
	Bail terms of release are always infringements on your rights because they limit your rights, but...
	She was let out on terms of release that were so onerous, criminal lawyers said they've never even seen such terms for actual criminals.
	I see I want to flag a question.
	She was let out of jail on bail terms.
	Ridiculous.
	Can't post to social media.
	Can't attend protests.
	Can't make public statements against...
	I think mandates.
	Can't make public statements supporting protests, encouraging protests.
	Limited speech.
	She had her freedom of speech limited.
	She had her mobility rights limited.
	She's had her social media.
	I think she's cut off from social media entirely, but she's free.
	Pat King isn't even fortunate enough to be freed with those types of restrictions.
	Pat King, arrested on similar charges, has been in jail for February to March, April, May.
	It'll be three months in two weeks.
	It's two and a half months.
	May 18th.
	It'll be three months that Pat King is in jail, not on a conviction, not after a hearing on the merits, not after a trial by jury.
	He is in pretrial detention on the basis that his liberty cannot be, his temporary liberty pending his trial, his day in court, cannot be granted to him because he poses such a risk of recidative behavior that if you let him out, he's going to go mischief again.
	He's still in jail.
	People have forgotten all about it.
	So I tweeted, Pat King's still in jail.
	People are like, literally who?
	Initially, it was for counseling to commit mischief.
	Now he's been charged with perjury and obstruction, I believe.
	Someone responded to that tweet.
	Oh, sorry.
	There's a member sign that's been up here.
	Oh, she's out now.
	Maybe there is faith for the party.
	We'll see.
	Or hope for the party, I should say.
	Someone said...
	I want to share it because it's like sort of the...
	Someone said...
	Oh, I don't have it.
	Either way, someone said, he's a good guy.
	I don't understand how this can happen.
	And I just responded and said, he doesn't have to be a good guy.
	He could be a bad guy.
	He said...
	Pat King, over the summer, was the guy who gave the interview on Stu Peters, who purported to have ended COVID.
	I think he might have been a little bit egged on by Stu Peters in the interview, but he was the guy who purported to have...
	Ended the COVID restrictions in Alberta.
	He subpoenaed Dina Hinshaw.
	She refused to comply with the subpoena.
	Now they've admitted a bunch of stuff which I'm not repeating.
	He took credit for ending the COVID restrictions based on his legal strategy in the case and the fact that they allegedly dropped the charges against him.
	He's not a good guy.
	You know what?
	TS?
	It doesn't matter.
	You may not like him, and he might not be a good guy.
	He might have said things which are wrong, offensive.
	He might have done things which are wrong or offensive.
	You don't maintain in pretrial detention people because they're not good guys.
	He is legally innocent of the charges that have been brought against him, which are mischief-based and now perjury-based because apparently they've now brought new charges after two and a half months in jail on the basis that he lied to the court.
	Under one of the hearings for his bail, I don't care.
	You know what?
	He's not a good guy.
	You're right, TS.
	If you want to live in a country where people that you think are not good guys get held in pretrial detention before conviction, before trial, before evidence is adduced on non-violent, mischief-related charges, when they're not a flight risk, when there's no real risk of recidiviveness because the protest is over, if that's the candidate you want to live in, well, you can either go to North Korea or you can bring North Korea here.
	So...
	Pat King's still in jail.
	I don't know if there's a statute of limitations, and everyone's entitled to a speedy trial, you know, sometimes.
	But the funny thing is, three months in jail, mischief is a hybrid crime.
	It could be summary conviction or indictable offense.
	One is less serious than the other.
	His conviction might carry less time than three months in jail.
	Still in jail because this is Canada and it's 2022.
	Here.
	Pat King, this is from a few weeks ago because there's no news on it.
	Nobody's covering it because detaining a legally innocent individual who has not been convicted on nonviolent mischief, even if it's perjury, I'll take for granted he will be convicted on perjury.
	Let him go until he has his trial.
	Until he has his day in court.
	No thanks.
	Ottawa Convoy Organizer.
	Pat King charged with perjury, obstruction of justice.
	Pay attention, it's from April 19. Ottawa Convoy protester Pat King is now facing perjury and obstruction of justice charges related to testimony he gave at his bail review here.
	Obstruction of justice charges related to testimony.
	They're going to allege the charges they've now found.
	After further investigation, we've exonerated ourselves and found more incriminating evidence.
	He obstructed justice through his words.
	He lied about assets.
	He lied about his social media accounts.
	I don't even know what it is.
	But he was arrested on February 18th, still in jail.
	He's had his hearing postponed time and time again, changing lawyers.
	Lawyer says his computer was hacked.
	They found new charges the last time, so they have to postpone.
	The details on the testimony that led to the allegations are protected by a publication ban.
	What freaking country do we live in anymore?
	I don't know if it's the defense that asked for the publication ban, but they've now said the testimony he gave during his hearing has given rise to perjury and obstruction of justice charges, but there's a publication ban on the testimony in virtue of which new charges were brought and are being used as the excuse to maintain pretrial detention of an individual accused of a non-violent mischief charge.
	And other obstruction charges.
	This is...
	Justin Trudeau hires half of his cabinet as women and others because it's 2020, and then he imprisons political prisoners just because they might be unsavory characters because it's 2022.
	And then you got Randy Hillier, who was released from jail under terms and conditions that can only be described as exceedingly onerous and exceedingly unconstitutional.
	His very prosecution is political prosecution.
	In real time.
	Randy Hillier, his charges of assault was because he allegedly moved a barrier away from a police officer to open it up so that pedestrians can go up on Parliament Hill and protest.
	And the police officer, one month later, felt it to be intimidating and aggressive.
	And therefore, charges of assault on a police officer because of a video showing Randy Hillier, a sitting member of provincial parliament, Lifting and removing a barricade.
	Not moving it into the officer.
	Moving it away from an officer standing on the staircase.
	Took a month to come up with that.
	Is there a statute of limitations on these charges?
	Oh yeah, sorry.
	I got that question already.
	So that's what's up with Pat King.
	Let me see what else was on my notes for the day and then I'll get to some super chats.
	Okay, no, that was not it.
	Michelle Rumpel, we did that.
	TGI Friday.
	Change is coming.
	That is Roman Baber's website.
	Okay, Rebel News.
	Let's just, let's just, I had this on my list.
	Let's just, I was going to start with this because it might have been more optimistic.
	Mr. Bevers, Lincoln J with Rebel News.
	So Canada's thrown out millions of vaccine doses yet, still has 55 million on order for the rest of 2022 at the expense of the taxpayer.
	How would you approach these kind of contracts with pharmaceutical companies in the future?
	I would have to review the contract, but I'm going to urge what I've been urging since the beginning of the pandemic.
	And that means that we have to entrust Canadians with their own healthcare choices.
	And that means that we also shouldn't be interfering in the doctor-patient relationship.
	I think that it's important that people get good information, that they self-inform themselves.
	But under no circumstances should government force Canadians do anything against their will.
	And that means that when you cost someone their job potentially, that is not aligned with their will.
	Or when you force someone as a condition of sitting down for a bowl of soup at importance, I'm not sure that that really means choice.
	So I propose that we need to restore our ability to make our own healthcare decisions.
	And beyond that, I'll examine what our options are once I form government.
	Thanks for your time.
	Thank you.
	I love the optimism.
	Once I form government, and by the way, I'm going to go see what the latest is on Bill C-11 because if Bill C-11 passes, the platforms giving Baber the platform, the media, the social media sites, the YouTube channels, the alternative media giving Roman Baber a platform so his voice can be heard.
	Wait till you see what they start doing that, to that.
	Wait until you start seeing what they do under Bill C-11.
	It will be the end of free media.
	I don't want to exaggerate.
	And I don't think I'm exaggerating, but I don't want people calling me too cynical.
	And you can thank Jagmeet Singh, the man of the people, joining forces with the man of the people.
	Let's see what this says here.
	I've already become a CP, we're going to say Conservative Party, just so no one misunderstands what that means.
	Member and a membership previously.
	30-year vet that has lost faith.
	Ask all those you interview, how will restore faith in constitution and charter that has been so ignored and abused?
	No question about it.
	Caleb?
	Okay, Caleb, I'm going to look, but I'm not going to court, and I get a lot of email, and I can't respond to all of it.
	I'll check, but no promises and don't expect...
	No promises.
	I'll see what I can find, but don't expect anything from me.
	I don't practice law anymore and I'm only certified in Quebec, but I don't practice law anymore.
	You've refused to respond to all my emails.
	All I need was a reference to investigative journal.
	Jared, I get a lot of emails.
	You should appreciate this.
	I'm not a journalist and I'm certainly not an investigative journalist.
	It's not refused to respond to my emails because I would presume I got it, read it, made an active decision that I'm not responding to it.
	I would suggest you contact Rebel News.
	I believe I have an automated message.
	I'm not a journalist and I'm not an investigative journalist.
	So anybody watching, don't send me documents and think I'm going to break a story.
	I'm not a journalist.
	Rebel News would be a good place.
	True North would be a good place.
	But thank you for the super chat.
	And don't take it personally if I don't respond.
	Please.
	So that's it.
	Let me see what else I had on the menu.
	I got that.
	All right, people.
	We're going to have...
	I'll probably go live tomorrow.
	We'll see what happens in the news between now and then.
	Yeah, I heard YouTube Girl got full sense, as someone said.
	But was YouTube Girl the one that was posting unedited clips of other people's channels?
	Because she might have had other or unedited entire...
	Hold on.
	Who was YouTube Grove?
	Was it the Canadian one who had the great sense of humor?
	Or was it another channel that was posting clips from Ottawa?
	Because there might have been other problems there.
	Let's see what we got here.
	New Blue in Ontario.
	Poilievre nationally.
	You're all entitled.
	It's a personal decision.
	That is nobody else's business.
	YouTube might get full censored by the end.
	It's over the top.
	I am top dog.
	Hey, thank you very much.
	But hold on.
	Hold on.
	Where was the YouTube girl?
	Someone...
	Canadian girl channel.
	Okay, so I think she was funny.
	Let me just go see if that was the one I was thinking about.
	She had a good accent, good delivery, recently got married, I think, if I'm not mistaken, or had a baby.
	Canadian girl.
	Let me see.
	I put in Canadian Girl in the first...
	Oh yeah, okay, there we go.
	Canadian Girl.
	But she...
	I think this is the channel, people, that...
	Canadian Girl 7. 10 days ago.
	This might not be the same one, but I think Canadian Girl was the channel that was posting clips and not the satirical, funny Canadian person.
	Okay, she disappears.
	She's on Rumble.
	Okay, I'll have to go check.
	Sorry, people.
	Didn't mean to crack my knuckles like that.
	She got wiped.
	Okay.
	All right.
	If anybody has any questions, let's see if there's any questions before we wind up for the day.
	She's on Rumble as well.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	Power is no evidence for the truth.
	Well, it is not, but it certainly is a method of retaining power.
	Bill C-11 is serious.
	I'm going to go check that right now.
	Actually, we're here.
	We may as well just do this in real time.
	Boom shakalaka.
	We got the Bill C-11 news.
	We got the Bill C-11 news.
	Bill C11.
	Let's just go to news.
	Okay, it does not look like...
	This is from True North.
	YouTube warns Bill C11 lets Feds censor everyday content.
	It does not look like Bill C11 has been...
	I mean, it hasn't been passed.
	It doesn't look like it's received...
	It's gone through the final process.
	So the latest news on Bill C-11, you can Google it.
	From one day ago on CTV, Ottawa.
	Let me share this just so we can actually have the news together in real time.
	It does not look like there's been much news, just more of the same warnings that we've been reading about.
	Here we go.
	CTV News breaking.
	May 4th.
	So that's the day before yesterday.
	YouTube has warned that cooking videos made in people's kitchens and other home videos could be regulated by an online streaming law, despite assurances from the heritage ministers that this will not happen.
	They also assured that Bill C-10 wouldn't apply to individual social media accounts, then lied about it, and then admitted that it would.
	Speaking publicly for the first time, Jeanette Patel, head of government affairs at YouTube Canada, said the draft law's wording gives the broadcast regulator scope to oversee everyday videos posted for other users to watch.
	So it's still in its draft format.
	It has not received royal assenture.
	She told the National Culture Summit in Ottawa, the bill's text appears to contradict Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez's public assurances.
	That it does not cover amateur content.
	Oh my God, is this outrageous.
	At first, people, you'll recall, under Bill C-10, when it was the Minister of Heritage of Guilbault, what was his first name?
	Stéphane Guilbault?
	He said, it's not going to apply to individual social media accounts.
	And then he was grilled on the question by that reporter, and I forget his name now.
	He says, if it's not going to apply to individual social media accounts, why did you remove the exclusion provided for in the law that said it wouldn't?
	And then he's hemming and hawing.
	It's not going to.
	It's not our objective.
	Then why did you remove the specific exclusion?
	You'll see.
	Lo and behold, they removed the specific exclusion which said it would not cover individual social media accounts and then later admitted it would if the social media accounts behaved like a broadcaster.
	And what are we seeing right now?
	Just a little bit of history repeating.
	Now they're saying...
	I guess now they're admitting it's going to apply to social media accounts, but not to amateur content.
	I guess I'd better stay in the basement.
	I guess I'd better stay on an $80 VTAD plug-in.
	That'll be amateur.
	How are they going to define amateur content if it's monetized?
	He ministered the new minister of heritage, who I'm sure is more trustworthy than the last one.
	It will not cover amateur content such as cat videos.
	What?
	The issue of whether the bill covers user-generated videos is likely to be closely discussed by the MPs when the proposed legislation, which is passing through the Parliament, goes to committee for closer scrutiny.
	The online streaming bill, known as Bill C-11, contains a clause excluding from regulation videos uploaded by a user for other users to watch.
	What the hell does that mean?
	It is followed by qualifying clauses saying the Canadian radio, the CRTC, can make regulations relating to programs which YouTube claims would give the regulator the discretion and scope to oversee a wide variety of content, including home video.
	I'm sure they would qualify this as programs.
	If I do it every day, I guess it's a program, even though it's very amateur.
	But they're not after the cat videos, people.
	Unless those cat videos contain subliminal messages as to who you should vote for.
	Alright.
	I'll clip the link.
	You can go read the rest of it.
	The vastness of the platform makes it virtually impossible to have a presence in Canada.
	A presence with Canadian stories.
	He said the marketplace will not service Canadians because Canadians are not a big enough piece of the market.
	They're not after cat videos, people.
	I think we all agree.
	They're not after cat videos.
	They're after the Rebel Newses.
	They're after the True North.
	They're probably after me.
	They're after anything that has an independent voice that runs contrary to the state-funded...
	I didn't realize that chat was up for the longest time.
	They're after anybody that has a voice that runs contrary to anything that might question, undermine, or confront their power, their corruption, and their lack of ethics.
	This is the sad state of thing.
	Last week I got an accident.
	My face crushed.
	I have facial reconstruction next week.
	Then in the ER, they were almost more concerned with my vax state than my condition.
	Humans are not the smartest species on the earth.
	They're the most prone to looking for rules by which to live.
	Because I think humans think setting rules and abiding by rules makes for intelligence.
	We're not the smartest animal.
	But we are certainly the one that is most prone to following rules because we have now established the ability to make rules and meticulously follow rules must be a sign of intelligence.
	Okay.
	People, we're going to end it.
	I have a beverage in the fridge.
	It is a yerba mate today.
	I'm not doing the Red Bull.
	I think...
	Oh, we got the sex boss back.
	Hold on.
	Hold on.
	I would block you.
	Oh, I missed it.
	I missed it.
	It's moving too fast.
	Block the sex...
	Did I do it?
	I think I got it.
	Yeah, it's like whack-a-mole.
	It's like whack-a-mole for the sexbot channels.
	Let's see this.
	No, Viva, you would not be qualified.
	They need a bribe first before you can get to the web.
	Give them enough, you become...
	No, there's no question.
	They know exactly what they're doing with that law.
	The law has not passed, so no rumors.
	It's going to make its way through.
	I guess there's like first reading, second reading, then there's like third reading, royal assent.
	It's got to make its way through, I think, the House and the Senate.
	I think.
	I hope that's not wrong.
	But it's got multiple readings and then it's got to get approved, which it has not been.
	Viva.
	Meticulously following asinine rules is the first...
	It's a question of perspective.
	It might be the first sign of humanity.
	It might be the first sign of your intelligence.
	My goodness.
	Where was it?
	It was...
	I'll get into it one day.
	Okay, all that to say, Bill C-11 has not yet passed.
	Pat King is still in jail.
	Roman Baber's running for the head of the Conservative Party leadership.
	Check him out.
	Follow the numbers, follow the news, and follow, I guess, the channel.
	I'm going to go post that Roman Baber highlight on the second channel, Viva Clips.
	Sunday night, obviously with Barnes, it's going to be awesome.
	Go get some exercise.
	There's some time left in the day, some sunlight.
	You know what to do, people.
	Thank you for coming.
	Thank you for all the support.

▲