Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 12, 2022 - Viva & Barnes

01:56:23

Jagmeet HECKLED; Crenshaw Has LOST IT; More Laws & Slow Litigation! Viva Frei Live!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I remember.
	I just remember.
	And I remember.
	I remember.
	I remember...
	I just remember.
	I just remember.
	I remember.
	And I just remember.
	I remember, I remember, I remember, I remember, I remember, I remember, I remember, I remember, that's what I remember.
	I, I, I, like, I remember.
	I just remember.
	I remember.
	Remember.
	I remember.
	I distinctly remember.
	And I remember.
	I remember.
	I remember, I remember, I remember, I remember, I remember, I just remember, I remember, I just remember, I remember.
	or...
	Sorry, guys.
	I didn't realize that that went on for two minutes and 15 seconds.
	I was like, when's this going to end?
	When is this going to end?
	Because if I had not the time, but the talent, because if I had the talent, I would make the time.
	If I had the talent to turn that into an awesome trance, Hip-hop techno remix.
	Oh my goodness.
	I would.
	Now, I brought that up for a couple of reasons.
	First of all, I wanted to start this stream off with the video of Jagmeet Singh getting heckled as he got into his car at an event in Peterborough.
	My mustache is getting in my mouth.
	I wanted to start off with that video, but apparently YouTube has determined that that video is worthy of demonetization.
	On my second channel, Viva Clips, I posted that unedited.
	I think it was on someone's Instagram feed or whatever.
	I posted that unedited.
	I asked, you know, does this cross the line for some of you out there?
	We're going to talk about it.
	But I posted that on my second channel, Viva Clips, or the third channel.
	And it was demonetized before I was able to hit go public and confirmed on manual review.
	If I agree, there's swear words in it.
	To me, that should not be enough for demonetization, but maybe it's the beginning of Canadian government monitoring the internet for information, for videos that they don't want to get organically promoted via the full monetization so that YouTube will show it to people and have a financial interest to do it.
	So I was going to start off with that, but I don't want this stream to get demonetized, although it probably will.
	Anyhow, we'll see.
	So I wanted to start with this.
	Chase Hughes from the behavior panel.
	You got Scott Rouse, Chase Hughes, Mark Rousey.
	Oh, I'm going to forget their names.
	And yeah, they're amazing.
	And they're doing some breakdowns of this.
	So it's definitely worth a watch and worth a follow.
	And to give you the heads up for next week, Barnes and I, at the very least, for the continued examination in chief and cross-examination of Amber Heard, We're going to be covering that in real time, and I think we're going to do something of a different format than what's being done currently out there.
	I think what we might think of doing is actually pause commentary so that we can comment the way we want to comment without talking over, and then we'll catch up during break time because the cross-examination should be dynamite.
	And if the, you know, they're going to have had a week and a half, they're going to have had a week and a half to prep for this, to scour the internet, to collect the aggregate knowledge of the interwebs, comparative photos, comparative testimony.
	Nate Brody, I did a live stream with him Saturday night, comparing her answers in her deposition in the UK defamation case against the Sun to her answers on the stand in principle, not even in cross.
	Let's just say some of the answers don't necessarily match up entirely with past sworn testimony.
	So we're going to do that.
	It's going to be fantastic.
	And we do have a very good guest.
	I haven't confirmed the exact time yet.
	Trying to get this individual on for the sidebar.
	But if we can't do it in the evening, we'll do it during the day.
	So stay tuned.
	Cross is going to be fire.
	And, you know, I've been going out of my way this week to cover other stuff.
	Because I think there's enough people covering this 24-7.
	The trial itself has turned into something of a Johnny Depp Amber Heard industry.
	But I'm trying to cover other stuff to actually get away from it, as we're going to do today.
	But that's as much of the Johnny Depp Amber Heard trials we're going to talk about today.
	But stay tuned next week.
	Barnes and I are going to be live streaming commentary of the deposition as they occur.
	And I think we'll do it a little differently.
	And if anybody wants the standard commentary, you got Alita LegalBytes, who has been crushing it.
	Emily D. Baker, also crushing it.
	Reketa, always crushing it.
	Joe Nierman, good logic is out there.
	Nate Brody, Nate the lawyer.
	Oh, there's Hoag Law.
	There's another lawyer out there now in the YouTube Legalverse.
	Law and Lumber.
	Law and Lumber.
	And he just actually put out a pretty interesting video on one aspect of the testimony, which was the broken bed frame, which Amber Heard testified occurred as a result of Johnny's boot in one of the events that she described.
	That she remembered.
	Law and lumber did a breakdown because apparently this lawyer has an interest in woodworking and it's obvious from his setup and everything.
	He did a great breakdown as to why her testimony couldn't explain how the wood splintered in the manner it did.
	So, interesting stuff.
	Let's see here.
	And the lawyer you know is also new to the circuit.
	Oh, the lawyer you know.
	Okay, good.
	Everyone in the chat, the law verse has...
	It's its own ecosystem now, and it's beautiful.
	There's a lot of players.
	There's a lot of synergy.
	There's a lot of collaborations.
	It's a beautiful thing.
	So tune in next week.
	But for today, moving on from Johnny Depp, Amber Heard, although you should go watch Behavior Panel's analysis, standard disclaimers.
	Emotionally exhausted.
	The last thing Canadian democracy saw before it died was Jagmeet's face.
	He deserves every bit of that.
	We're going to get there.
	First of all, thank you for the super chat.
	Standard disclaimers, no legal advice, no medical advice, no election fortification advice.
	YouTube takes 30% of Super Chats.
	If you don't like that, I know that we are...
	Oh, my back.
	Still hurts from the trampoline house.
	We are simultaneously streaming on the Rumbles.
	And I'll just make sure that we're good there.
	Where are we?
	Are we streaming live on the Rumbles?
	We are.
	We are live on the Rumbles.
	Booyah.
	Okay, good.
	We're live on Rumbles.
	Rumble has these things called Rumble Rants.
	They take 20%.
	Better for the creator, better to support a platform you like.
	Best place to support me or me and Robert Barnes is Locals.
	VivaBarnesLaw.Locals.com There's a ton of content for non-paying followers, so it's not all behind a paywall.
	There are some special goodies and some exclusives that are behind the paywall for supporters.
	So VivaBarnesLaw.Locals.com What do we start with?
	Do we want to start with Crenshaw is a young global leader graduate?
	I had to look it up.
	Or do we want to start with Jagmeet?
	Let's start with Jagmeet.
	I know people don't like this about me.
	And I won't apologize for anything that I do on purpose that I meant to do and that I don't think was wrong when I did it and that I don't feel bad about having done.
	I don't do this...
	I don't do this to try to stay in YouTube's good graces, period.
	I don't do this to try to kiss up to any politicians for the purposes of an interview.
	Jagmeet Singh probably hates me more than he hates any of those hecklers that followed him to his car, shouting obscenities with their middle fingers up.
	I say this because I genuinely believe it, and I think it's the only way to go forward.
	Heckling versus a certain type of heckling versus a certain type of what is outright verbal abuse.
	Not illegal.
	Shouldn't be illegal.
	You have the right to say F you to anybody you want.
	Will it be productive?
	Will it achieve the goals that you want it to achieve?
	And more importantly, will it reflect properly on the people that you are representing while you're doing it?
	It was either yesterday or the day before.
	Jagmeet Singh, and his name is pronounced Jagmeet.
	I have been pronouncing it improperly Jagmeet.
	It is Jagmeet by his own pronunciation, so I'm not making fun of anybody's name.
	Jagmeet was doing a stop somewhere in Peterborough, and he got thoroughly, thoroughly heckled.
	And people think, like, I don't like seeing it.
	People think, like, I don't like seeing it.
	I don't like Jagmeet.
	I do think he is something of a traitor.
	I do think he is the most divisive, deceitful, dishonest, power-hungry, corrupt politician in Canadian politics, tied right up there with Justin Trudeau.
	I think all of this.
	I will call him this.
	I will call him a liar.
	I will call him...
	I don't think I've called him treasonous because I think that word is used improperly.
	I, politically speaking, loathe Jagmeet Singh.
	I don't think he can be any nicer of a person on a personal level, but I don't know him as a person.
	I just know him as a politician.
	He's divisive.
	He's a dishonest, awful, awful politician.
	And for anybody who might have had any lingering...
	I mean, for anybody who might not know, Jagmeet is the most divisive, dishonest, and I'll say discriminatory politician out there.
	He is, like Justin Trudeau, exactly what he warns others about.
	Way back in the day, people, when I was running for federal office and Jagmeet Singh at one point was giving a press conference.
	I wish I could find the video.
	I'll try to find the video.
	But he gave a press conference in which he sat up there and said that there's a correlation between right-wing extremism and anti-maskers, people who don't want to wear the mask.
	They tend to be selfish.
	They tend not to care about community.
	They tend to be right...
	It was the most inane minute and a half of verbal diarrhea.
	Hold on.
	I may have to get it.
	Let me see if I can't find it.
	Give me 30 seconds.
	And I'm just going to talk about the verbal diarrhea that it was.
	It was the most inane verbal diarrhea.
	Jagmeet Singh right-wing extremism mask.
	Let's just see if I can.
	I'll remember it when I see it.
	He gets up on stage and says over and over again in like multiple forms, there's a connection between right-wing extremism, right-wing mask, and being selfish.
	They don't care about community.
	Oh, you know what?
	Oh, here it is.
	Is this it?
	Here we go.
	Oh, yeah.
	I got it.
	I was looking for my post so that I could avoid any claims of copyright.
	This is from the Canadian Press.
	So, hold on.
	I don't know if people know about this.
	I take for granted that everyone knows the things that I've come across in the day-to-day of this.
	Listen to this.
	I do think that there is a connection with people who aren't wearing a mask or who aren't following public health guidance and the extreme right and the idea that folks in the extreme right don't care about people around them.
	Sorry, in the chat, by the way.
	One, have you seen this?
	Yes or no?
	Real quick, have you seen this already?
	Wait for the punchline.
	Have you seen this yes?
	No.
	I want to see how many people in the chat are already familiar with this.
	This was May 11th, 2021.
	Oh my gosh.
	The fact that I just saw three people say no, we're starting again.
	Do you think that there is a connection with people who aren't wearing a mask or who aren't following public health guidance and the extreme right and the idea that folks in the extreme right don't care about people around them?
	Aren't concerned about the safety and well-being of people generally, their neighbors, and an extreme right, that kind of ideology is connected with not really caring about the people around you.
	It's a selfishness where personal interest takes over from a community.
	Personal interest takes over from a community.
	And we're seeing...
	That is a trend with extreme right.
	Not caring about people around you, not wanting to invest in social programs, not wanting to invest in things that support all of us as a community.
	And the idea of not following public health guidelines and not wanting to do their part to stop the spread of an infection is very much in line with this extreme right.
	Not wanting to do their part.
	Not caring about people, not supporting the people around you.
	And it is dangerous and it's hurtful.
	It is dangerous and it's hurtful.
	It's selfish.
	People not caring about community.
	People not wanting to do what is necessary to prevent the spread of a virus.
	And it's dangerous.
	And it's hurtful.
	I can't believe...
	I can't...
	This is how much I take for granted.
	I've been doing this stuff for years now.
	I just take for granted everybody knows this.
	To me, it's inconceivable that people don't know that Jagmeet Singh said this out of his own...
	Oh my goodness!
	Oh, it was a year to the day yesterday.
	Well, we're celebrating the one-year anniversary, Jagmeet, of the most idiotic thing.
	Just remember what he said, people, before we get to the punchline of this disgusting joke.
	Selfish.
	Not concerned about community.
	Don't want to do what's necessary to stop the spread of a virus.
	They're self-interested.
	Extreme right.
	Oh, oh, I'm sorry.
	What was that?
	What was it?
	This tweet was from Huen.
	No, this was May 27th.
	May 27th.
	Two weeks.
	What's my problem?
	May 11th, 21st.
	Two weeks after Jagmeet Singh spills out these beans of intellectual gold, he gets caught breaking the rules.
	I hope they...
	Yeah, okay.
	This one, they blocked out the license plate of the car.
	This is from...
	I believe it was from Global News.
	No one should forget that Jagmeet Singh, after calling anti-maskers selfish extremists, was caught not wearing a mask, breaking his own COVID rules.
	The convoy is dangerous, Jagmeet.
	A hypocrite and a liar in a position of power is the definition of dangerous.
	And yes, I called him a hypocrite, and I called him a liar.
	In my view, that's not quite the same thing as saying F you and running up to his window with your middle finger up, but maybe I'm just making excuses for myself.
	I can appreciate that accusation.
	This dude, two weeks after that verbal diarrhea of divisiveness.
	Oh, that's dangerous.
	They don't care about anybody.
	They're right-wing extremists.
	This guy is with his buddy who's driving a Beamer.
	Life is good in the government.
	NDP leader Jagmeet Singh apologizes after video shows him breaking COVID-19 rules.
	What did he say?
	Oh yeah, that was in response to one of his tweets.
	I understand people are frustrated that we're still in this pandemic.
	We've sacrificed so much.
	When I hold my daughter, I think about getting through this safely so that kids can have normalcy again.
	And I'm concerned by the dangerous rhetoric we've seen from the convoy.
	This dude, two weeks after calling anybody who opposes mask mandates...
	Right-wing extremist, selfish, anti-maskers, dangerous and hurtful, is busted himself, not wearing a mask, hugging his buddy-buddy in their own...
	So, I don't like Jagmeet Singh, politically speaking.
	I don't know him personally, but it's impossible that someone could be a better human privately when they're this bad publicly.
	It's impossible.
	So...
	Everyone should appreciate that.
	It's in the context of this backdrop that even still, I say, when you approach Jagmeet Singh the way the people were approaching him, you know, part of what they were saying is totally legitimate.
	I have children, you're not touching them.
	Absolutely.
	Traitor, I believe that Jagmeet Singh is not representing the interests of the people who elected him to represent their interests.
	And I hope that they start to realize that now.
	To go from there to F you approaching his car vehicle with your middle finger up, I don't think it should be illegal unless it violates certain laws like threats, causing someone to fear for their well-being, which that could reasonably do.
	We're Canada.
	Not everybody's as armed as in the United States, but the people who want to do bad things, you never know if they're carrying a weapon, a firearm.
	So approaching a politician's window of his car with your middle finger up screaming F you, that could cause some reasonable apprehension, but you presume that there's good security there.
	But let's just assume it's all legal.
	It doesn't mean it's the right thing to do or that doing it is going to serve the interest that you want to serve.
	Because my personal view is once you do things like that, you discredit the group, you allow others to discredit the group whom you are either directly or inadvertently representing.
	And so let me just pull up my take, which I appreciate people are not going to necessarily agree with.
	Here, I'm not playing the video, but you can go to my Twitter feed to see it.
	And it spawned some interesting discussion in the Twitter responses, and one of which was, I think, the best burn I've ever had in my Twitter life.
	I have children, and you won't touch them, but that's what one person said.
	Another person was screaming traitor, another person was screaming FU.
	I don't approve of this, and I probably should have clarified.
	The woman speaking of her children, that is legitimate, substantive protest.
	Traitor, I think it's there.
	The FU is where I start having a problem, and the approaching the vehicle of a politician who is detested, I think is...
	If it's not illegal, it's not going to reflect well on the group, because this is...
	Affiliated with, seemingly, directly or indirectly, the convoy, the outdoor protest, that entity.
	It will be used to stifle, suppress legitimate critique.
	But if citizens disapprove of you, they need to be free to express it, and you need to listen.
	And this is the bottom line.
	It may be counterproductive in my mind to say, F you, F you, and raise your middle finger.
	That doesn't mean that he gets to disregard it and not listen to it.
	Jagmeet Singh.
	If his citizens that he's supposed to represent are that angry with him, he has to listen to them.
	That's his job.
	As he does in the video, he just waves it off when they're laughing like it's funny.
	Oh, he's so thick-skinned that he just waves it off.
	You don't get to do that when you represent those people.
	It doesn't matter that they're saying F you.
	Maybe they should phrase it better.
	Maybe they should phrase it in a manner that you find less offensive.
	It doesn't matter.
	You are elected to represent also not just the people who voted for you, but the people who didn't vote for you.
	And if they're saying F you and calling you a traitor, you don't just get to disregard that and go to listen to the people who tell you what you want to hear.
	You have to listen to them.
	Okay, I'm going to get to, I'll get to the part two of this in a second.
	Let's just get to some super chats because I don't want to fall too far behind.
	Chef Nick Nero says, love your gusto, Viva.
	Did you know I'm exactly seven days older than you, sir?
	May 16, 1979.
	Yep, I'm turning 43 next year, next week.
	Also started a cooking channel after watching all of you.
	Check.
	A cooking channel I can wholeheartedly endorse.
	Cooking is my second passion that I'm terrible at.
	Chef Nick Nero, thank you very much for the super chats.
	And good luck with the channel.
	Cooking channels are a saturated market, but I'm good friends with Not Another Cooking Show.
	We grew at the same time together.
	It was amazing.
	We did a couple of collabs.
	We drove down to New York.
	It was great.
	It's a saturated market, but the cream, to use a cooking expression, rises to the top.
	I live with my four-time, who is immunocompromised, and we are...
	No medical advice, no legal advice.
	Fringe Canadian, thank you very much.
	Water jabbers.
	He is saying the quiet part out loud.
	He's saying that value, individual liberties over the collective good are extremists.
	He's just a hypocrite.
	He's a hypocrite and he's a liar.
	And if he hadn't gotten busted, breaking his own rules two weeks after admonishing anybody who did exactly what he did two weeks later, he never would have apologized for it.
	In his mind, he would have deserved it.
	He works hard.
	Life's tough.
	It's hard to be a politician.
	Canada appears to be the last country on Earth, apart from China, that is still clinging onto the COVID nonsense.
	Even Australia has let it go.
	Well, it's a good distraction from not addressing the government corruption that is the Trudeau regime.
	I don't know why people are so up in arms about Jagmeet.
	I personally love it.
	Okay, come on, man.
	You see, sometimes I don't read them in time.
	Let me get this out.
	Okay, I'm not even bringing it up.
	Okay, so that's the way I feel about it.
	And I appreciate people are going to disagree with it.
	People are going to call me a coward.
	They're going to say, Viva, the time for civility, the time for diplomacy is over.
	And I'm going to tell you, good luck with that.
	You're not going to win.
	An actual confrontation with this government, period.
	All you're going to do is give them exactly what they want.
	You're not going to sway the minds of people who are not yet there, who are on the verge of being there by doing that.
	You're not going to convince anybody who's not yet there with F you and approaching the window with your middle finger up.
	You might approach it with traitor.
	You might get them on board, sobbing, telling the story of your 13-year-old kid who couldn't play soccer because he or she wasn't vaccinated.
	You might get them on board with that.
	And this only will be a political solution, that you have to start by making it uncool, politically speaking, to be the hypocrite that Jagmeet is.
	Now, public heckling, I don't have a problem with it.
	To the extent it remains within civility.
	Calling someone, traitor, traitor, shame, shame, yeah, F you, you mother F it.
	No, you can be a little smarter, you can be a little more eloquent in the insults, and a little more, not tactful.
	Persuasive.
	Because screaming FU doesn't persuade anybody.
	But some of the bad takes, some of the bad takes, and objectively bad takes.
	Oh, this was fantastic.
	I did not know who this individual was before.
	Because people are trying to analogize this.
	Everyone's looking for hypocrisy.
	And people who don't like me or want to find hypocrisy so they can try to discredit me.
	They're saying, oh, Viva, you say, you know, Jagmeet on the street has to listen to hecklers, but the Supreme Court justices don't?
	So Brian Espinosa, who I knew the name, he follows me, I guess, I'm not sure if he's going to follow me anymore, but he says, and I love the tweets, imagine, like, this is starting off with shame.
	How stupid can one human being be?
	Imagine the idiocy, the folly of some dumb Canadian lecturing that he needs to receive more criticism in public, while also saying that protesters on public land aren't allowed to if it's directed at a Supreme Court justice.
	Because, you know, it would make me a hypocrite if I said you can picket or you can protest, you can heckle politicians, but not judges.
	Yeah, you know, unless there's an actual law on the books that specifically prohibits protesting or picketing.
	On the residences of judges or in their places of business for the purposes of influencing them as they render a decision.
	So I just had to go to the individual's feed.
	Very bad wow player.
	I don't know what that means.
	Writer, script editor, producer of Rogue Rocket, and Philip DeFranco.
	I don't know how that escaped my view.
	I think I got blinded by the fact that he's followed by Legal Eagle.
	And so I had a fun...
	Look, some comebacks write themselves.
	I think this remains within the realm of Twitter civility.
	And I wrote, I'm going to say, put a little smiley face because that is a little tongue-in-cheek jab because we do know there's political disagreement.
	Or at the very least, some might say bias that not only...
	That infiltrates reasoning.
	So I was happy with that.
	But then I was happy with that joke.
	It's kind of funny.
	But there's a specific law that prohibits picketing or parading in front of a judge's residence or building for the purposes of interfering with a decision, with their job.
	It's not the same thing as protesting a politician whose job it is to reflect the will of their citizens.
	Justices and judges are supposed to be detached from public influence.
	They're supposed to apply the letter of the law in the absence of public influence, politics, not the word, persuasion is not the word, pressure, public pressure.
	That's what they're supposed to do.
	That's why in Canada, judges are appointed for life.
	So that they are not subject to political, financial, or social pressure in the rendering of their decisions in the administration of the law.
	That's the essential difference between being a judge and being a politician.
	You represent your constituents.
	If your constituents are unhappy, they let you know so that you make decisions to govern yourself accordingly going forward if you want to get re-elected.
	So, fundamental difference.
	Also, there's a law that specifically prohibits this.
	I read it yesterday because, you know, I was kind of flabbergasted that Chuck Schumer is out there specifically encouraging people to break the law.
	Here's another one who tries to find some gotcha.
	So people you don't like have to listen, but people you do like should be shielded from criticism.
	Got it.
	Yeah.
	Except that's what we call a straw man and absolutely not the discussion.
	And also, you know, there's a law.
	Now, some people...
	Do I want to find the law?
	I should probably find the law.
	Hold on a second.
	Just so nobody...
	If we go here...
	I know someone posted it in response to show more replies.
	It's parading and picketing.
	Here we go.
	18 U.S.C., 1507, picketing or parading.
	Whomever with the intent of interfering with obstructing or impeding the administration of justice.
	Or with the intent of influencing any judge, and then we go on pickets or parades near a building, housing them, or with the intent of influencing.
	That is exactly what's going on by the picketing and parading in front of Alito's house.
	They want to put pressure on him so that he changes his decision in the midst of rendering a decision.
	There's a specific provision of law making such conduct illegal.
	There is no such similar provision prohibiting heckling or picketing outside of I don't think it would be any better outside of a politician's office, but I don't know that there's a specific provision of law that governs that.
	So, fundamentally different for anybody who wants to actually apply the comparison analogously.
	Some people said, let me see if I can pull up this tweet, some people said the law is unconstitutional.
	In America, you've got your First Amendment and that law, that provision of law which...
	Limits your First Amendment rights because it's basically saying you can't say...
	Congress shall enact no law.
	They've enacted a law that limits your free speech by saying you cannot say certain things on the front lawn of a judge for the purposes of hindering the administration of justice.
	Some people say that that law is unconstitutional in their view.
	Very legitimate argument.
	I don't know if that provision has been tested.
	But for people to say, well, it's unconstitutional because it violates the First Amendment, so are laws against criminal harassment, then.
	So are laws against uttering death threats.
	So are laws about doxing, releasing private information.
	I mean, you have to appreciate freedom of speech, First Amendment or freedom of speech rights in Canada, they're not limitless.
	And they have...
	Codified limitations.
	Defamation.
	It's not a criminal.
	It's not a criminal sanction, but it's nonetheless a limitation imposed by a law on freedom of speech.
	You can't make up lies about people.
	But I want to say what I want to say.
	No.
	And you can't complain that you don't have the freedom of speech to make up lies about an individual to damage their reputation.
	My First Amendment, I want to have the freedom of speech to threaten people.
	You don't.
	And that's a limitation that is deemed reasonable.
	Whether or not you think this limitation under 18 U.S.C.
	1507 is a reasonable limitation, to say that it's unconstitutional because it limits freedom of speech is itself specious reasoning.
	Because there are laws out there which specifically limit freedom of speech, death threats, harassment, criminal harassment, public disclosure of a private fact, defamation.
	So that's it.
	Fundamentally different, but I was happy with that burn.
	Because if you're going to try to make someone look like a hypocrite, you'd better make sure you have an understanding of the law.
	If you disagree with the law, good.
	That's an argument for another day.
	So on the Jagmeet Singh, I think people need to do it strategically.
	You need to do it in a manner, on the one hand, that's not going to authorize the government to now say, Jagmeet Singh felt threatened, therefore there's going to be a perimeter everywhere he goes now.
	You're not even going to be able to get close enough for him to hear your heckling.
	And don't think they won't do it.
	In Quebec, they just passed a law where you can't protest outside of hospitals.
	I happen to disagree with the practice of protesting outside of hospitals, but I don't think you needed to legislate a specific provision of law to prohibit it.
	Because, by the way, just conveniently speaking, hold on, let's pull this up just so that people don't believe that I'm making this up.
	Quebec and protest hospital.
	CBC.
	They've passed this law.
	Two and a half years into a pandemic, the government can't pass a law for any emergency orders.
	The government can't pass a law for vaccine passport diktats, edicts.
	But they can find a time to pass a law overnight prohibiting protests outside of schools and hospitals and vaccination sites.
	Quebec passes law to make...
	Get out of there, whatever that thing is.
	Oh, you read that live.
	New law will apply for a 30-day period that can be renewed.
	Has this been renewed?
	Hmm.
	Let's go see if it's been renewed.
	The Quebec government, Supreme Leader Francois Legault, has made it illegal to protest within 50 meters of schools, daycares, hospitals, medical clinics, mobile clinics, COVID-19 vaccination sites, and testing centers.
	The law, 105, tabled Thursday morning and adopted that same evening.
	My goodness, can they work fast when they want to?
	Can the government ever work fast when they know that they're going to have the support to pass a law or they want to avoid public debate?
	They can find ways to do things quickly when they want to.
	Let's just see if I have to get to the exception because the exception on this was it was only illegal to protest COVID measures.
	Nurses, if you want to protest your employment conditions, you can still protest.
	Why might that be the case?
	Why did they carve that exception out?
	Well, maybe the unions.
	Are an important consideration when passing unconstitutional laws.
	You don't want to piss off the unions who tend to support the CAC, Coalition Avenir Le Québec.
	Let's see if the exception...
	No.
	COVID might have been...
	Word.
	Whatever.
	There was an exception.
	It only applied to COVID restrictions.
	And get this, by the way.
	Teachers want to protest outside of a school?
	You know, honk if...
	Do you think teachers deserve more salary?
	That they can do.
	Parents who want to protest outside of a school because the air quality in the school is a risk to their children can't do that because it's related to COVID.
	No joke.
	So, these laws...
	Now I actually kind of forgot what I was talking about.
	In Quebec, they find time to pass this law.
	But protest in a manner that upsets...
	Or that makes government officials feel threatened, feel intimidated.
	They'll just pass a law.
	Okay, fine.
	Now you can't protest within 50 meters of a politician.
	You can still do it.
	You still have that freedom of speech.
	But because of conduct in the past, now the government that has the power.
	And bear in mind, Jagmeet coalesced with Trudeau.
	You know, if they want to pass some pretty ridiculous laws like Bill C-11, they now have the majority to do it.
	You know, do it in a manner that gives them the justification because they have the power and then they'll just do what they did in Quebec.
	Find a way to further limit your right to protest.
	How is this channel still up?
	Because it speaks nothing but substantiated facts from legit news outlets.
	This is CBC.
	I just follow the news.
	Some people say follow the money.
	I follow the news.
	And it's a...
	It's a ridiculous thing just to follow it and to know it exists and other people just don't know that this happened.
	I don't know if that law was renewed like all of their other emergency orders, you know, 30 days, 30 days, 30 days, two and a half years later.
	They outlawed protesting, but only for COVID measures, outside of hospitals, etc., etc.
	And the biggest kick in the teeth in this, in my humble view, they already had the criminal remedies to sanction any protest that caused mischief.
	That impeded with the functioning of a business.
	They already had laws on the books to deal with it, but they wanted a specific one.
	More laws, less justice.
	And I keep forgetting if it's Marco Cicero or Tilius.
	Say what you will about Australia, but at the recent federal election debate, the PM and opposition leader were asked to define a woman, both said adult female, based Australia.
	Eh, problem with Australia is it's going to have to work a lot harder to recoup.
	Recoup the freedom that it gave away.
	This is assuming that saying, you won't touch my kids, won't be considered a threat.
	How dare you tell what the government can touch?
	There's that.
	It's only a matter of time before any form of ridicule, mocking of politicians is hate speech.
	Trudeau started off with banning overt hate speech, which we all agree with.
	Let me rephrase.
	We all agree that hate speech is bad.
	So when you go and pass a law that bans hate speech and you ban calling people the six-letter F-word or the N-word or the K-word, depending on whatever ethnicity.
	Some people say that's hate.
	Others are going to say that still should not be illegal.
	I know where I am on that spectrum of thought.
	But when they pass a law, they always go for the most extreme examples to get the most public support and say, we're only going to use it under the extreme examples.
	Yeah.
	Until it becomes hateful to misgender an individual, and then you have the human rights tribunals of British Columbia, at the very least in one case, sanctioning a restaurant.
	It was called...
	I won't remember.
	Sanctioning a restaurant because they believe that they deliberately misgendered a trans employee.
	There was another case out of British Columbia, a bad case because there were definitely other factors going on where...
	The police force was sanctioned for misgendering someone that they arrested.
	There were other issues there that made it a very unique case, but it sets a bad precedent, at the very least, nonetheless.
	So when they pass these laws that limit your freedoms, they always give you the clearest cut-and-dry example, and then it invariably gets watered down and ends up applying to cases that even those who supported it in the first place could never have envisioned it encompassing.
	And that is the give an inch, They take a mile, and once they've taken an inch, you've got to work real hard to ever get that back.
	Now, let me see if there was any other thing on the notes for jug meat.
	No, we already got that one.
	No, that's it for jug meat.
	What do we go into now?
	Hold on one second.
	Let me just see this.
	Let me just see this.
	Only soft-handed men think saying F.U. is bad in any way.
	Abana Viper, you're entitled to your opinion.
	But run around screaming F.U. We'll see how persuasive that is if the goal is actually to affect change as opposed to just let out one's own rage.
	Because it's not like I don't have rage that I would like to express.
	But I want to express it in a way that's not going to discredit me and that it might actually persuade other people to understand how bad things are.
	And running around with your middle finger up in the air screaming F you.
	It worked for Eminem for a little while, but it's not how you change minds politically speaking.
	But I appreciate, I don't think anyone should be prohibited from doing it.
	Marcus Tilius Cicero, my great-great-grandson, not really.
	All right.
	What do we move on to now?
	Because I know what I've got in the backdrop on the notes.
	Hate speech should be allowed so their arguments can be successfully dismantled by smart people.
	Banning it only ticks off those small groups of ignorance.
	Well, I also think hate speech has to be allowed because the sliding scale, the Overton window of what is hate speech, it will eventually get to the point where calling a politician a fascist, a psychopath, a liar, Treasonous.
	That one day will become hate speech.
	It will be deemed to be hate speech by the policymakers who put it in there because, lo and behold, it will shield them from criticism.
	So you didn't need to outlaw hate speech when you already had laws against criminal harassment, threats, doxing, defamation, and private disclosure.
	You didn't need hate speech laws.
	And the only thing that invariably happens is the Overton window moves.
	The ever-expanding, you know, spectrum of what is deemed to be hate speech at that particular point in time expands, and eventually, things which no one ever contemplated would ever in any realm of the universe be considered hate speech become hate speech, and then lo and behold, political critique becomes outlawed.
	Thanks for what you do.
	Check out my above my pay grade for unprofessional financial insights.
	End the Fed.
	Above my pay grade.
	Thank you for the super chat.
	Not an endorsement.
	I am...
	I don't give legal advice, medical advice, or election fortification advice, and I certainly do not give financial investment advice because my track record is very, very, very bad.
	Name a Supreme Court nominee that can define a woman all the way.
	Well, it's certainly not Contenji Brown Jackson.
	Certainly not her.
	She's not a biologist, which, oddly enough, presupposes that the answer is a biological one, which should have gotten her cancelled by the Democrats.
	Don't pay attention to the haters.
	They can suck it.
	True.
	That being said, sometimes the hater comments that affect you the most are the ones in which you ultimately do recognize you see a little bit of truth.
	And also, you have to respond to the haters.
	I don't get to duck into my car like Jagmeet Singh and just wave off the haters.
	Someone coming to me and saying, don't touch my kid.
	If they're saying F you, I would actually, I mean, I'd love to think that I would stop and say, okay, fine.
	What is your grievance?
	I know that I would say that.
	To the extent that I didn't feel immediately threatened for my physical well-being, I would say, stop.
	What is your specific grievance?
	And let's talk about it.
	I would do that.
	You put your opinions out there.
	You put yourself out there.
	You don't then get to slink off into a car like a coward, think you're all coy and sly for the manner in which you disregard addressing rude criticism and legitimate criticism.
	I like to think that I would sit down.
	And talk to people.
	And understand, even if I dislike the manner in which they do it, and I think I still do that to some extent.
	You don't get to ignore the trolls just because you don't like what they're saying.
	And I don't think that saying something you don't like is a troll.
	I think the definition of a troll, in my view, is someone who's just looking to fight.
	You'll never win the discussion.
	You'll never even agree on disagreeing because the goal is always to move the goalposts, to engage for the purposes of exhausting.
	But even then, you can use You can use the input of a troll to speak or respond, not to the troll, but to the general public at large.
	So there is some utility, nonetheless, even in responding to overt, bona fide trolls who are only there to cause divide, be pains in the neck, to the extent that you might be talking to other people, but using that troll comment as the pretext to do so.
	Anything that's not a good-faith argument and just trolling or being cruel for its own sake has a foundation for being banned.
	But the problem is, who decides?
	The government.
	We all know how that goes.
	I don't think it deserves to be banned.
	You can ignore.
	Banning is done to prove a point to the individual, although I appreciate the argument that banning trolls sometimes also prevents the discussion from degenerating.
	But typically speaking, people ban to prove a point to the individual banned.
	I don't think they need to be banned.
	One can choose to ignore.
	Jagmeet doesn't care about anything other than live streaming on Twitch with AOC.
	Does he do that?
	He doesn't do that.
	Does he do that?
	Okay, well, anyhow, enough about Jagmeet.
	Let me see something here.
	I've got to make sure I can't.
	I don't want to bring up any comment that could be misconstrued.
	Yes, he does.
	Okay.
	All right, that's where my phone is.
	Check out Rumbles before we move on.
	We got a Rumble rant.
	Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding.
	Holy crap, Vivo.
	Is that a New Hampshire license plate on your mantle?
	More than just myself watching from there.
	It was a gift.
	Some gifts are so cool.
	It's not a real New Hampshire license plate, but someone sent it to me in the mail.
	And it says Viva Fry on it, and it's totally cool.
	And it's funny because when I initially came up with the name for the channel, Viva Fry, I was going to call it Viva Fry Live Free or Die.
	And then a family member said, you don't need to be negative and mention dying.
	You can just be positive and say live free.
	So Viva Fry, that's how it became what it is.
	Someone sent that to me.
	It's beautiful.
	Whoever it was, thank you very much.
	What do we move on to now?
	Let's move on to...
	Dan Crenshaw.
	And we're going to start, this starts with the baby formula shortage in the United States of America.
	And it's going to start with a story time.
	A story time about my wife's breasts.
	I don't think anybody saw this going there.
	So we have three kids.
	And when we had our first child...
	Nobody knows what they're doing with their first child.
	And I'll say this.
	I don't think anybody knows what they're doing with their third child, but at least you've gotten comfortable with the idea that you don't know what you're doing and you've given up.
	You've abandoned any hope of knowing what you're doing.
	With our first child, you don't know what the hell you're doing.
	They tell you the poop's going to be black for the first week and a half.
	You don't truly appreciate what it looks like.
	It's not the poop is black.
	You picture dark nuggets of poop.
	The baby is initially pooping out stuff that he or she has consumed within the womb.
	It's not just blackish green.
	It's like a tarish substance.
	And not like slime.
	Not like mucus.
	It's like a diluted tar that you can't actually wipe off the baby's butt like you would imagine you could do with slime or something.
	It's like Isles paste, sort of, but a little more diluted.
	Blackish green.
	You have no idea what you're doing.
	You learn as you go.
	The first thing you learn is that baby's born at a certain weight, and typically they say it'll lose 10% of its body weight within, I think it was like the first week, week and a half, and that's supposed to be put back on.
	So what was it?
	It was like, the baby loses roughly 10% of its body weight shortly after being born, and you're supposed to put that weight back on by your first follow-up visit with the doctor, which I think is two weeks later.
	And you're in the hospital, you give birth, the baby latches onto the boob, the breast, the nipple.
	As we say in French, le mamelon.
	You know, before they discharge you from the hospital, they make sure everything's fine.
	They make sure the baby, you know how to get the baby to latch onto the boobie.
	And that's it.
	You go home and you're on your own.
	And hopefully you just have family and friends who can help you through this process because nobody's sleeping.
	You're not in your right mind.
	The mom is healing from stuff that, you know, anybody who goes through it, you'll know what happens down there.
	Amazing.
	Anyhow, amazing scientifically.
	So our first child was having trouble latching when we got home and not having trouble, like, you know, chomping.
	Baby was chomping, just not latching, just not getting milk out.
	So what ended up happening is that the entire nipple...
	I hope Marion's not watching this.
	She'll find out soon.
	Marion's nipple basically got, like, shredded.
	And it...
	I mean, shredded as in, like, it got...
	It's soggy, wet.
	The baby's, like, gnawing on it with...
	With, you know, the gummy teeth trying to latch.
	And, you know, it starts, you're trying to do it so often that it starts like peeling.
	It's like being in water indefinitely.
	And it makes it even harder for the baby to get milk out.
	And we didn't know that our baby didn't put back on the weight that she was supposed to put back on because we didn't know that she wasn't getting enough breast milk.
	And baby's crying.
	You don't know what's going on.
	Baby's crying.
	You're out of your mind trying to make the baby just not cry and sleep.
	And then we found out that baby was having problems latching and we had to go to a bottle.
	We had to go.
	Marion would squeeze and we'd go get formula to supplement because the baby had to supplement for what she was not able to get because she wasn't latching properly.
	And this happens to a lot of women.
	And so that's a reality.
	That when you're out of your mind, you've just given birth, you haven't slept in weeks, and now in the United States, there's an actual shortage of baby formula, and that mothers, in addition to everything else that they're going through, and I say mothers and fathers, families, mothers and mothers, fathers and fathers, and whoever has a newborn, that they have to bottle feed or supplement with formula, apparently there's a shortage.
	I didn't know this.
	I saw it on the news that apparently 80% of the formula production in the United States is made by two companies.
	I don't know which companies those are offhand.
	But...
	Viva bringing back all the horror memories of parents everywhere.
	Oh, man.
	I remember...
	Okay.
	One time, because her nipples were so mangled from the baby not latching properly, we go outside in the sun just to try to get some sunlight to dry the...
	And I just remember, they sprung a leak.
	It was literally like a faucet.
	Because, you know, the milk comes out of these little glands.
	The glands just sprung a leak.
	And we're sitting there.
	She's topless.
	And there's like a little water pistol of milk.
	Just squirted.
	Consistent.
	Not like a drop.
	It was like a broken hose.
	Because there was so much in there that couldn't get out through the baby.
	It just sprung its own leak.
	That was when I had my first taste of breast milk as well, but okay, story time for another day.
	So, okay, fine.
	Yeah, moving on, moving on.
	So apparently 80% of formula in the United States is made by two companies, one of which has been shut down for months.
	Nobody knows why yet.
	And now there's a shortage of, I think there's four states in which the shortage is less than 50% of stock and in all other states, a problem.
	Okay.
	There's a big...
	As far as I'm concerned, baby formula, once you appreciate this, it's not food.
	It's not snacks.
	It's not chips.
	It's not even sugar.
	It's not honey.
	This is an essential item.
	This is an essential item because you're also dealing with babies at a certain time where brain development is critical.
	Getting the proper...
	It's not just electrolytes, vitamins.
	It's critical.
	It's critical for early development.
	So this is not like having a potato shortage.
	It's not like not being able to find cooking oil.
	This is critical infrastructure.
	I don't want to call it national security.
	This is a matter of the safety of a nation, to be able to feed their newborns.
	And for whatever reason, I'm not going to immediately point my finger to Joe Biden because I don't know what this plant was shut down for, how long the problems have persisted, what the problems are.
	I just know where my brain is going in terms of who the buck stops with, according to Joe Biden himself.
	It's not just negligence.
	I believe that this is borderline criminal.
	And I believe it's borderline criminal because you have this problem.
	It's critical infrastructure for all the politicians who talk about reproductive rights.
	Is essential.
	Feeding a newborn is essential.
	And it's not like everybody can go out there and breastfeed.
	This is negligence at best and criminal at worst.
	And while this is going on, by the way, while this is going on, people just find, you know, the government finds $40 billion.
	$40 billion.
	To fund a foreign conflict.
	I mean, it's inconceivable.
	And this is not partisan.
	Once upon a time, people, you knew that I was friendly for?
	That I thought I liked Dan Crenshaw.
	I talked about him favorably a number of times, and I remember the chat saying, Viva, you're wrong.
	He's bad on Second Amendment because he wants certain restrictions, which, you know, red flag laws and other stuff, which people, everyone has their own.
	Their own political issues, which are, you know, critical to them.
	I thought he sent decent.
	He sent principled.
	Dan Crenshaw, in going after Marjorie Taylor Greene, this is not the right one.
	Hold on.
	Where was the original...
	Oh, son of a beasting.
	Did I respond to the wrong one?
	Oh.
	Okay, hold on.
	I got to go to Crenshaw, where...
	Did he delete the tweet?
	Is it conceivable that he deleted the tweet?
	Dan Crenshaw decided to go after Marjorie Taylor Greene.
	He decided to go after Marjorie Taylor Greene for some reason.
	Here we go.
	It's here.
	I don't know which...
	Marjorie Taylor Greene.
	I'm going to withhold my opinion of her.
	It's irrelevant.
	You could think she's the worst person on her.
	You could think everything they accuse her of is true.
	She tweets...
	So you think we are funding a proxy war with Russia?
	She's responding to Dan Crenshaw.
	So you think we're funding a proxy war with Russia?
	You speak as if Ukrainian lines should be thrown away as if they have no value.
	Just used and thrown away for your proxy war.
	How does that help Americans?
	How does any of this help?
	Do we want to go down to the...
	Yeah, because investing in the destruction of our adversary's military without losing a single American troop strikes me as a good idea.
	You should feel free to do the same.
	When it comes to $40 billion in force...
	So the backdrop is irrelevant.
	Yeah, it's a great idea to fight...
	This is the literal definition of fighting a proxy war.
	Using another country to fight it.
	Using another country's civilians to suffer the consequences of your proxy war.
	If anybody had any doubts that the American support...
	For the Ukraine forces against Russia was a proxy war that, man, people will die, but that's a risk they're willing to take.
	But at least, you know, they can do it without losing one American life.
	Just however many Ukrainian lives it's going to take, that's a risk Dan Crenshaw's willing to take.
	She writes back, so you think we're funding a proxy war?
	That's effectively and exactly what he just said.
	And I agree with Marjorie Taylor Greene's tweet here.
	To which...
	Dan Crenshaw says, still going after that slot on Russia Today, huh?
	Now let me tell you, this is, when you talk about trolling and disingenuous discourse, this is right up there.
	When you talk about loser think argument, loser think mentality, to borrow Scott Adams' term, still going after that slot on Russia Today, huh?
	So, Who wants to guess as to which tactics, which loser-think tactics Dan Crenshaw is using right here in his response to Marjorie Taylor Greene?
	Let's, before we get into it, before I say what I think, let's see who can take some guesses.
	What loser-think tactics is Dan Crenshaw employing right here?
	Let me see.
	We're going to get to this.
	We're going to get to this.
	Loser-think tactics.
	Which one?
	There's more than one.
	Chat's taking too long.
	Yeah, strawman.
	Here we go.
	That's number one.
	Strawman.
	Strawman as in grotesquely misrepresenting the position so that it's easier to then disregard.
	That's the obvious one.
	The other one is, oh, son of a beasting.
	Well, ad hominem.
	Ad hominem and going after intentions.
	Don't address the argument.
	Just address what he strawmans as being Marjorie Taylor Greene's underlying intentions.
	She could be right.
	She could, in fact, let me rephrase, she could be going after a Russia television spot.
	I doubt she is because, you know, she talked about what's good for Americans and not what's good for Russians.
	She could be going after the RT spot.
	Does that make her argument wrong?
	When you go after the intentions of the person, you can bypass the substance of what they're saying.
	Bottom line, every single one of the loser think tactics.
	You got ad hominem, straw man, going after intentions.
	And this is Dan Crenshaw.
	A man who says, yeah, I'm willing to fight a proxy war against Russia because American soldiers, civilians don't have to die.
	But, you know, too bad for those innocent Ukrainians who are caught in the crossfire of your proxy war.
	Maybe you should work on a proxy-negotiated settlement.
	How about that?
	No, but that's...
	Hey, why would America need to...
	What's the word?
	When you...
	Organize a settlement?
	Broker.
	Why would America need to broker a settlement when they can fight a proxy war that doesn't cost them an American life, from which they and their brethren will make a fair bit of...
	They have a vested interest, let's just put it mildly.
	Whether or not it's through the government contractors, the military that gets to expand and use its resources.
	Justifying their own existence as politicians.
	If there's no problems to manage, government has to, you know, shrink a little bit.
	So instead of brokering a peace deal between, instead of sitting these countries down to spare civilian lives, well, Dan Crenshaw says, hey man, we can fight a proxy war.
	It's good for everyone.
	We don't have to lose any American soldiers and, you know, we can take out who we believe to be an enemy and we don't even have to fight it and we don't even have to die for it.
	That's other people who are going to do that.
	Isn't it great?
	I now know what a warmonger war hawk sounds like and looks like.
	Anyways, all that said and that aside, this man is now justifying a war in a foreign country and financing it to the tune of $40 billion while his own constituents are very likely having difficulty finding baby formula.
	This is the worst.
	This is what people hate in politicians.
	They're detached.
	They're elitist.
	They just don't care once they get elected.
	And their interests and what they think is number one on their to-do list is detached from the reality of the constituents that they're supposed to represent.
	Didn't you just approve a $40 billion in foreign military aid while your own constituents, the ones you were elected to represent, are suffering through a shortage of baby formula?
	It's...
	Anyhow, another tweet I said, you know, it takes a lifetime to build a reputation and literally one tweet to destroy it.
	And Dan Crenshaw, you know, it's never too late for either redemption or, what's the other word?
	I keep mistaken with that.
	Repentance.
	But you've done so much damage to your reputation, it's going to take time to build back that trust that you've just destroyed by prioritizing a foreign conflict over the interests of Mothers and newborns in your own country.
	Take that $40 billion.
	I bet it can buy a lot of baby formula.
	I bet.
	No, but hey.
	Why do that when we can use it to fund a proxy war against an adversary and we don't have to risk anything on our own?
	It's phenomenal.
	We're going to get to the WEF business in a second.
	Hold on.
	Hey, Viva.
	Have you done any cover of Bill 100 passing in Ontario?
	I haven't.
	The door has basically been opened to civil asset forfeiture in Ontario.
	No.
	Remind me, though, and I will ask my brother, who's a lawyer in Ontario, the next time he comes on, that would be a good subject for discussion.
	Dan, if you're watching.
	Dan Freiheit, not Dan Crenshaw.
	Dan Crenshaw, if you're watching, shame on you.
	And yes, I resorted to shame people.
	Hyperbolic for the performance aspect of, you know, the political side of things.
	Sent to the border to feed their babies.
	Prove me wrong.
	Border Patrol sitting on pallets.
	Oh, I did hear about this as well, that baby formula was being sent to the border for people crossing unlawfully into the United States.
	I did read that.
	I'll have to vet that information.
	It came from a big news outlet.
	SCOTUS has upheld that U.S. code, but it's in their cell phone.
	Yeah, so funny thing.
	Is the Supreme Court justice, Going to say, no, that's an unconstitutional law.
	Come pick it on my front lawn.
	How would you even have a judge adjudicate on that without being in a fundamental conflict of interest?
	There's no question.
	They have something of a conflict of interest in that law in that it seeks to protect them.
	But whatever.
	The system will never be perfect.
	It seems like it could be a reasonable limitation on freedom of speech.
	Go protest in the public square, not on the front lawns of judges while they're in the midst of rendering decisions.
	Politicians used to kiss babies.
	Now they deprive them of food.
	Shame on Democrats.
	No, really.
	But shame on Republicans.
	Shame on Republicans.
	That vote did not split along party lines.
	The $40 billion...
	A lot of Republicans supported.
	So shame on all of them.
	I knew Ed Hominum once, but like all Eds, he was a jerk.
	Oh, I get it, Tails.
	Good one.
	Dan Crenshaw is the AOC of the right.
	He's a Twitter politician, and worse than her, he's super establishment and a hardcore corporatist.
	See, I don't know enough about that.
	I just, you know, he spoke well.
	He made some sense in the beginning.
	But that position, to go after Marjorie Taylor Greene with...
	What is nothing shy of a CNN talking point?
	Call me radical.
	RT is no more state government propaganda than CNN, than CBC, than Radio Canada, than Global News and CTV.
	I'll agree.
	In some form, it is government-subsidized government propaganda media.
	It's state media.
	So you take it with that grain of salt when you watch it.
	RT is no more government propaganda than CNN, MSNBC, what's the other one?
	What's the other one?
	NBC, and in Canada, CBC, Radio Canada, Global News, National Post.
	It's no more state propaganda than any of those other outlets, especially in Canada, when they are overtly funded directly through annual subsidies of a billion dollars for Radio Canada and CBC, or 600 million in bailout plus COVID ads and all the other...
	methods of influencing the media.
	They are the propaganda arm of the government in Canada.
	And so if we're going to ban RT for that reason, my goodness, please go ahead and ban CNN and ban CBC.
	And I still don't even say do it, leave it out there so we can call them out every day of the week on their bias.
	USA not responsible to protect Ukrainian lives.
	They represent Americans.
	This Well, here's the deal.
	They're not there to...
	I agree.
	They are not responsible to protect Ukrainian lives, but they are certainly not within their rights to act in a way that actually, deliberately, directly causes Ukrainian lives to be in danger and lost.
	And that's what they're doing.
	It's one thing to say they're not there to protect Ukrainian lives.
	They're certainly not there to use Ukrainian lives as pawns in their proxy war against Russia.
	So you don't have to represent them.
	Just don't put them in harm's way and use them as sacrificial pawns in your...
	You know, global politics game.
	True, they're not there to represent them.
	They have no business representing them.
	If you have the resources to do so after you've taken care of your own population, more power to you.
	They don't have any duty to protect them, but they have a duty not to deliberately act in a way to put them in danger, and that's what they're doing.
	Using them as pawns, like Crenshaw effectively acknowledged in their proxy war against Russia.
	Tout des croceurs is French, for they are all a bunch of liars and scoundrels.
	Depends on how you want to do crosseur as a screwer.
	Someone who screws you out of something.
	Here we go.
	Thank you for bringing me back to the...
	Bildung Bremstrow says, Crenshaw is a young global leader of the WF.
	Look it up.
	There's no need to look it up.
	Because I have.
	It's from Wikipedia, people, but it doesn't matter because you can find the source elsewhere.
	Oh, let me crack my back.
	Oh, God.
	Young global leaders.
	Young Global Leaders.
	The Forum of Young Global Leaders, or Young Global Leaders, YGL, was created by Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum.
	The YGL, a non-profit organization managed from Geneva, Switzerland.
	Red flags, red flags coming off, is under the supervision of the Swiss government.
	History.
	The program was founded by Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum in 1993 under the name Global Leaders for Tomorrow.
	By the way, I was once nominated for an award in Quebec called Lideurs de Demain, Leaders of Tomorrow, and that was an award offered by the Young Bar Association.
	I was nominated three times as one of the Leaders of Tomorrow for Young Litigators of under 10 years practice.
	Didn't win, but I was nominated three times.
	All that to say...
	If you Google my name and you see leaders de demain or leaders of tomorrow, Young Bar Association of Quebec, not the young global leaders of Klaus Schwab's WEF.
	Schwab created the group with $1 million won from the Dan David Prize and the inaugural 2005 class comprised of 237 young leaders.
	Bear in mind this description when we get to Dan Crenshaw.
	People recognized as young global leaders are allowed to attend one meeting of the World Economic Forum for free.
	Wow.
	My goodness, can I not think of anything less interesting or more nauseating than that?
	Okay, here we go.
	Controversy.
	Because it's not just Dan Crenshaw, people.
	Michelle Rempel, a Canadian conservative politician, says she found out she had been selected as a young global leader in 2016 with an email that she thought was a spam and described a 2017 meeting as, quote, no different in feel.
	From an academic conference, if a bit more global in nature, with more high-profile politicians and CEOs in attendance.
	Now, bear in mind, before we get to Dan Crenshaw, this is something that I have pontificated on previously on Dexter.
	What do they do?
	The World Economic Forum looks like a Ponzi scheme.
	It looks like one of those stupid spam emails you get.
	Oh, you've been nominated, and I get them all the time, for an award.
	For Best Lawyer of the Year, all you have to do is buy a membership or whatever and we'll put you in our book or we'll give you this award.
	You get these all the time.
	I think the problem is at this point in time, the world knows what the World Economic Forum is and the world knows what young global leaders are.
	So if you get that email, you know what the institution is.
	Certainly now, maybe not so much in 2016, 2017.
	So I was always wondering, do they just take people and put them on their website to make the WEF look like it's more Well-established and legitimate?
	Or do the parties know?
	And they say, yeah, I don't mind.
	Of course, put me up on your website.
	That'd be great.
	Be honored.
	So I don't know which way it goes.
	From what Rempel is describing, it looks like the spam type thing.
	From what Crenshaw says, it looks like the spam type thing.
	Here we go.
	Daniel Crenshaw, a Republican Texas congressman, was selected as a young global leader in 2019.
	I think 2019, people were starting to know what it was.
	I wasn't there yet, but I think a lot of people were.
	According to podcaster Tim Poole, Crenshaw explained that the Young Global Leader list is an editorial list of prominent young people and that there is no communication or agreement before being put on their website.
	So that's interesting.
	And that was the only way I could imagine this making any sense is if they just put you up there to highlight your awesomeness.
	And I wonder if sometimes people don't even know that they're on the website.
	I'm not sure that that...
	See, I believe you would be correct, Aviva, just adding names.
	Now, that being said, you may not know that they put you on that website if they don't tell you or they send you some spam.
	I'm not surveying the internet to see where my name is put up on websites.
	But 2019, I think the world was knowing it.
	And certainly today, anybody who sees their name on that young global leader's Whatever.
	Or on the WEF website.
	They should ask for it to be taken down.
	And if they don't, if they know about it and do not, I think that's a very, very big problem.
	That's a red flag for me.
	And just to be totally fair, people, we've got to be totally fair.
	In 2017 interview, Klaus Schwab said that Russian President Vladimir Putin had been recognized as a young global leader and also mentioned Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
	I'm going to read it in a German accent.
	I can do that.
	I have to say, when I mention now names like Mrs. Angela Merkel and even Vladimir Putin and so on, they all have been young global leaders of the World Economic Forum.
	But that we are very proud of now is the young generation like Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
	We penetrate the cabinet.
	We penetrate the cabinet.
	So yesterday I was at a reception for Prime Minister Trudeau and I know that half of his cabinet or even more than half of his cabinet are actually young global leaders.
	That's what I want in a Canadian government.
	That's what I want in a Canadian government.
	Half of a cabinet that are members of the young global leaders.
	Klaus has mentioned Putin a second time as shown in a documentary Das Forum.
	Okay, whatever.
	So, that's it.
	It's one thing Crenshaw says, look, they put me on the list and I didn't know it.
	And when you Google his name now, it doesn't come up on the list.
	But that's what I want to hear.
	I want to hear some globalist man, who is by definition globalist.
	I'm not using it in any sense.
	A man who is the founder of the World Economic Forum that talks about the Great Reset and owning nothing and being happy.
	I love to hear him brag about how he's...
	What did he say?
	He's penetrated the Canadian government.
	And half of Justin Trudeau's cabinet are young global leaders or World Economic Forum people.
	That's what I want to hear in Canadian politics.
	It might explain what could arguably be construed as confused priorities from Justin Trudeau.
	Who likes my German accent?
	Add in how many reps have dual citizenship.
	We've gone global.
	I've heard that argument before.
	I think in politics, you should temporarily suspend or renounce your dual citizenship if you have been elected to represent one country.
	I don't think it's possible to have dual citizenship, thereby have dual loyalties to two separate countries when you were elected to represent one of them.
	I'm open to reassessing this position, but that's where my thinking is right now.
	Dan Crenshaw is like a retired adult film actor, knowing the harm Adult films wreck on women funding an adult film company in another country so that women of this country aren't harmed.
	He is a very brave man fighting a war with other people's soldiers and civilians.
	I was allured by his military experience.
	I tend to think people who have sacrificed deserve automatic respect so long as they don't lose it.
	Crenshaw, I think, now has lost it, at least for me.
	Two things Dan Crenshaw loves, red flag laws and war.
	He's friends with BRCC.
	BRCC, BRCC.
	The big red Charlie...
	No, BRCC.
	Someone's going to have to help me with the BRCC is.
	I'm not even going to be able to guess it.
	That's too much for...
	You get one free conference.
	I couldn't think of anything less interesting than going to one of those conferences.
	And I am of the persuasion that I would not want to be a member of a club that would have me as a member, as a general rule.
	I don't like clubs, which is kind of the reason why I'm sort of...
	Oh, Black Rifle Coffee.
	Okay, thank you.
	I would have never gotten that one.
	Hold on a second.
	Oh, yeah.
	Let's do this.
	Mm-mm-mm.
	Oh, yeah.
	Black Rifle Coffee, yeah.
	Another one that has fallen from the good graces.
	Okay, so anyways, that's it.
	That's what's up with Crenshaw.
	But there was more to that.
	Crenshaw's a hypocrite, fighting a proxy war with Russia, proud to do it using other people's soldiers and civilians, while simultaneously neglecting urgent fundamental issues back at home, affecting his own constituents.
	Very bad.
	Very bad.
	Okay.
	Oh, there was one.
	We'll get to it.
	No, you know what the funny thing is?
	Someone had said, just get back to Jagmeet Singh for one second.
	People had said, you know, he was denied.
	He's not allowed into India.
	And I had to Google that because I found that curious.
	Not being allowed into India.
	Not being allowed into a foreign country.
	It's very interesting.
	What did I just bring up there?
	Okay.
	Hold on a second.
	The article from the Globe and Mail.
	Jagmeet Singh denied visa to visit India.
	This is from 2014.
	So I don't know if he's permanently banned, but he was denied a visa back in 2014.
	And it was just glorious to read the comment from the Indian government as to why he was refused.
	Listen to this.
	NDP MPP, Member of Provincial Parliament, Jagmeet Singh, has been denied a visa by the Indian government.
	Quote.
	The government of India, like any other government, has a sovereign right to grant or refuse a visa to any foreign individual, and it is not obliged to give any justification or explanation for exercising this prerogative, end quote.
	Indian Consul General Akilesh Mishra says about the denial of the visa last December.
	But then they go on to describe it anyhow.
	The consulate doesn't have to explain its decision to anyone, he said in an email to the Globe and Mail, but they go on to explain a little more.
	People, quote, who seek to undermine, end quote, Indian democratic institutions, quote, and foment contempt for this country.
	Its constitution and its judiciary are only misusing the pretext of human rights to pursue their insidious agenda of disturbing the social fabric of India and undermine the peace, harmony, and global integrity of India, he wrote.
	My goodness.
	I'll take...
	Things I bet 90% of Canadians don't know about for 800, Alex, or whoever is hosting the show right now.
	In case anybody wants to read that article.
	Blistering.
	And blistering.
	And what was true in 2014 was equally as true in 2016, 2020.
	I think it was in 2020 when Jagmeet came out and said he hopes Donald Trump doesn't get re-elected.
	Because it's Jagmeet Singh's position as a Canadian politician.
	To interfere with foreign elections?
	Yes.
	The more things change, the more things stay the same.
	Circumstances have changed.
	Jagmeet has remained the exact same person as described in that blistering refusal of a visa by the Indian government.
	Based.
	Yeah.
	Okay, Sam Short, I see your chat.
	I'm going to screenshot it.
	I just don't want to bring it up because I don't know what you mean in your comment, and I don't want anyone misconstruing that.
	So I've seen it.
	No need to continue to repost it, as in spam.
	I'm letting you know I saw it.
	Okay, so that's Jagmeet.
	I think I'm going to clip that section because I don't think enough people know.
	It's not like he's been permanently banned into India that I know of, but they...
	Welcome to the member.
	Welcome to the channel, Jonathan.
	They refused him, but how?
	And even though they didn't have to justify their decision to anybody, they went on to justify their decision.
	Why can I not share the screen?
	Share screen.
	Okay, there we go.
	Sorry.
	They went on to discuss...
	Oh!
	Speaking of the worst takes you can possibly imagine.
	On the baby shortage formula.
	Another individual who I don't know what the heck is going on with people.
	People who are otherwise reasonable.
	People who are otherwise reasonable come up with a take that is so unhinged.
	My initial reaction is to say this is parody.
	This is satire.
	This is commentary on people who are actually unhinged enough to actually believe this.
	Mark Levin.
	Maybe it's satire?
	Chat?
	Is this satire?
	Is Mark Levin being satirical here?
	Yes or no?
	Because it's so bad.
	There's no other way to understand it.
	For the Putin ass-kissers out there who say, why don't we focus on the baby formula crisis rather than Ukraine?
	Legitimate question.
	It makes you a Putin ass-kisser?
	To say, why don't we worry about American babies before fighting a proxy war in Europe?
	It makes you a Putin ass kisser who wants to go with Scott Adams, loser think, Putin ass kisser, going after intentions, ad hominem, straw manning, all in one.
	To call people who take this position, Putin ass kisses.
	You know what, Mark Levin?
	If that's what you think, I want to know whose ass you're kissing.
	Because this is a lot of confession through projection.
	To think that someone who says, why are we fighting a foreign war when babies in our own country need formula, that makes you a Putin ass kisser?
	That is a little guilt of confession through projection that bespeaks to the underlying motivations of your actions.
	Let's move on, though.
	For the Putin ass kissers out there who say, why don't we focus on the baby formula crisis rather than Ukraine?
	Good question.
	Let's hear the answer.
	The baby formula problem predates the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
	Okay.
	So it's an old item on our to-do list.
	Forget about it.
	Forget about it.
	It predates Ukraine.
	That was then.
	This is now.
	I mean, this is idiotic.
	I don't like calling people names.
	There's no way to describe this deficiency in reasoning.
	In prioritizing, other than idiotic or motivated by something else.
	And the way he's going after Putin ass-kissers, I can only imagine whose ass he's kissing that caused him to have this absolutely idiotic position.
	It predates the invasion of Ukraine.
	Okay.
	Oh, sorry.
	Here's another good part.
	And it's not about federal funding, but government incompetence.
	Damn fools.
	This is Jagmeet Singh level stupidity right here.
	He is basically saying, it predates the war in Ukraine, so somehow that makes it less pressing.
	It somehow makes it less of a national interest.
	It somehow makes it less of a priority.
	Not just that.
	It's not about federal funding, but it's about government incompetence, you damn fools.
	It's about government incompetence, so let's go ahead and empower that incompetent government to...
	Blow away $40 billion.
	Holy, sweet, merciful hell is this serious Mark Levin show.
	The problem predates $40 billion to Ukraine, and that's a justification.
	And it results from government incompetence.
	The same incompetent government they just gave $40 billion to fund a foreign war.
	Are you an idiot?
	The thing is this.
	Yeah, I got angry, and I'm worried that I misunderstood something in that tweet.
	Have I misunderstood something in that tweet, people?
	Please.
	Have I misunderstood something in that tweet?
	And I'm serious.
	It is...
	You're all wrong.
	He's not a warmonger or a neocon.
	Learn to read, Viva.
	Hold on.
	Now I don't know if you're playing with me.
	It's not incompetence.
	Okay, hold on.
	I don't know if Debbie Johnson is pulling...
	Neocon?
	I don't know.
	Okay, I'm not misreading it.
	Fine.
	I read it like five times.
	It's not possible.
	I must be misunderstanding this.
	For all the Putin ass-kissers saying, why don't we worry about our newborn babies in America?
	That problem predates the war in Ukraine.
	So you're a Putin ass kisser for still being concerned about a problem that we have not yet resolved.
	And by the way, it doesn't have to do with government funding.
	It has to do with government incompetence.
	So let's go empower that incompetent government to fight a proxy war in Europe using $40 billion of taxpayer funds.
	That's exactly how you reward an incompetent government.
	I mean, it's almost as idiotic as Jagmeet Singh when debating the issue about the invocation of the Emergencies Act, who called Justin Trudeau's response incompetent, dangerous.
	His response?
	Jagmeet Singh said Justin Trudeau screwed up the response to the protest from day one.
	It was incompetent, a blown response.
	So what does he do?
	He gives the power to that blown, incompetent government.
	He gives them the nuclear arm of legislation in Canada.
	That's how you reward incompetence.
	You are spot on with Levine.
	He loves money over all other...
	I don't know what his intentions are, but I'm just...
	Thank you very much, by the way.
	Yeah, okay.
	Dude, that's a good avatar.
	What is going on in there?
	Okay, I thought it was a snake.
	It's not a snake.
	Good avatar, man.
	I don't know what his intentions are, but I'm suspicious that he now has some underlying agenda based on his reflexive act of presuming a Putin ass-kissing agenda for people who are concerned about...
	Babies needing formula.
	Outrageous.
	Outrageous.
	Okay, so let me bring...
	Let's just...
	What was this?
	Okay, well, I think that ends the bad takes on the bit.
	It's really...
	It's disheartening.
	You just wonder what on earth...
	They don't have to answer to people anymore.
	The political elite live in a world of their own.
	What they determined to be their own interests of that day have nothing to do with the interests, the needs, the demands, and the aspirations of the people they were elected to represent.
	10%.
	Why can't you trust your own judgment?
	Why are you second-guessing yourself?
	It's distracting.
	Barbara, I'll tell you why I second-guess myself.
	It's actually a form of insecurity that comes with certain behavioral traits, certain patterns of behavior.
	Sometimes I think I've absolutely misunderstood what someone meant, and I'll obsess.
	First of all, when it does happen, I'll obsess over it for a very long period of time.
	It will drive me crazy that I misunderstood and that I made a mistake.
	And on the other hand, it's a flaw, but it's also a bug and it's also a feature.
	Because when you don't trust yourself and you constantly seek to reassure or re-verify, sometimes it makes it harder to get things done, but it makes it so that when you get them done, you're less likely to have made a mistake.
	But it is, in fact, a characteristic of a certain pattern of behaviors which people can look up.
	To be honest, I wish our politicians looked, sounded more like Putin, even if it is all show.
	At least he's acting like a leader who supposedly cares about his country.
	It is an interesting thing how the attribution of intent that the global community has to give to Putin is that it's not nationalist.
	It's Hitlerian in global domination.
	It's interesting.
	It's an interesting projection or it's an interesting accusation for others to make because it could be another example of confession through projection.
	The people accusing Putin of having globalist agendas, you know, conquering the world a la Adolf themselves might be the ones who have a very global agenda.
	But, I mean, bottom line is I'm not.
	I wouldn't trust the Putin government any more than I trust the Canadian government.
	I'm not moving to Russia anytime soon.
	I'm not sure which government he was calling incompetent, the US or Ukraine.
	Either way, he's supporting extreme power to both neocons.
	No, I think he was calling...
	He was saying it wasn't about federal funding, it was about incompetence, talking about it's an incompetent...
	Because he thinks he's got a gotcha against Biden.
	He's like, oh, it's government incompetence, not federal funding.
	As if he thinks, okay, well, now I'll get to exploit this crisis and politically leverage it against Joe Biden.
	Sure, I don't care that there's actual...
	American babies at issue.
	I get to use it against Joe Biden.
	So he's saying it wasn't a federal funding issue, it's just government incompetence.
	Either way, he just empowered that incompetent government to the tune of $40 billion in foreign aid, but I'm sure he has his reasons.
	Viva, no conservatives are talking about this important story.
	U.S. DOT is pushing, Department of Treasury is pushing once again for speed limiters on 70s.
	Oh, Department of Transport.
	Slowing trucks down will not help supply shortages.
	Last time this came was under Obama.
	I don't know, 11 Bravo Crunchy.
	I mean, one could make the argument that if you, you know, trucks go the limit, if you slow them down so they don't speed and get into accidents or whatever, then it might facilitate.
	I don't know.
	It probably, I suspect, it might have to be in response to that recent accident for which the individual was sentenced to 100 years.
	I don't know.
	I mean, keeping trucks within the speed limit.
	Might not be that much of a problem.
	I don't know if it would slow things down.
	Some could even make the argument if it avoids accidents, speeding tickets, and other issues, break issues, maybe it'll speed things up.
	I don't know.
	Definitely not something that I know enough about to even talk.
	Putin is the most articulate and intelligent leader in the world today.
	Just watch Oliver Stone's The Putin Interviews.
	Yeah, he gave an interview in Ukraine on Fire.
	He speaks poetic.
	I mean, he's certainly more eloquent than Justin Trudeau or Joe Biden.
	There's no question about that.
	I'm not sure that he's more eloquent than some of the European leaders, but certainly more eloquent.
	I'm Justin Trudeau.
	And then forget about Joe Biden.
	Forget about that.
	I think Levin was showing a false dichotomy.
	That's another classic strawmanning.
	He used to own CRTV, sold it to make money, and left the content creators in limbo, i.e.
	Crowder, Michelle, Malkin, and a few others.
	This is Levin, I suppose.
	Yeah.
	Let me just go down here.
	We got a few more stories to cover before we wind up and go get some fresh air.
	Imagine that.
	The organizations that took the intellectuals after World War II are a boy type.
	I won't read it, but thank you for the super chat.
	Who would have guessed?
	Elites are hoarding baby alformia on their private islands for the next planet.
	I'm not sure about this, Robby.
	I mean, I would...
	No, I haven't heard about that.
	But anyhow, thank you for the super chat as well.
	Okay, let me see what's going on here.
	Let's go down to the chat and get some non-super chat questions.
	The best pew interview with Austrian News.
	Duran has that interview.
	Oh, I hope everyone saw Barnes on Duran on Monday.
	From the response of Alex and Alex of the Duran, I think it was their best episode ever.
	It's watching unbridled discourse with amazing information.
	It's like watching people dance with their brains.
	It's amazing.
	What did mothers do before conventional baby formula?
	Is this a trick question or is this a question that I should know?
	I think baby formula has been around for a long time.
	Maybe they used mothers who milked, like milkers.
	Okay, next story.
	This one's going to come back to Canada.
	Maxine Bernier and Brian Peckford, their trial is coming to...
	Their challenge of the...
	What I believe is unconstitutional.
	It hasn't yet been declared so.
	Their challenge to the vaccine passport for plane and train travel within Canada for 12 years old and up is coming to trial in September.
	This is from Maxime Bernier's Twitter feed, and it's nothing more than basically a notice of trial.
	I covered Maxime's affidavit in support of his injunction, but bottom line...
	Hold on, I want to flag this one and come back to it in a bit.
	The basis of the lawsuit, Peckford's lawsuit, Maxime Bernier's lawsuit, is that it's a charter violation to impose a vaccine requirement on a Canadian citizen to travel by plane and train within their own country.
	There's a clear charter right.
	It's the interprovincial travel being infringed upon for medical allegedly discriminatory reasons in the absence of any scientific justification for doing so.
	And I think Maxime Bernier filed his suit, give or take February.
	They've been scheduled for trial for five days in September.
	And I've got to tell people who think that this is a long delay, it's February, March, April, May, June, July, August, seven months.
	That's pretty fast by Canadian standards.
	It's pretty fast.
	You've got the Nabil Ben Nahum, Procureur General.
	Between Maxime Bernier, this is federal court.
	And, okay, so you got the other one.
	The Honorable A. Brian Peckford and a bunch of other plaintiffs.
	They're hearing all the cases together because they ask the same questions of law, by and large, going to use the same evidence.
	It is ordered that the hearing of this matter takes place before this court by Zoom video conference.
	I wonder if it's because they can't travel all that easily to actually get to court for an in-person.
	Or I wonder if the court wouldn't let them in because they're not vaccinated.
	That's not true.
	I think the court would let them in, but I suspect it's to facilitate travel because as far as I understand, the individuals, the plaintiffs can't travel.
	Peckford's out in Victoria, Vancouver Island, British Columbia, federal courts in Ottawa.
	Scheduled for the 19th day of September for a duration of five days.
	So bear in mind, people, that this trial now will have taken seven months to get to trial.
	That's seven months during which there has arguably been a constitutional violation of a very high order.
	Five days for the trial, and you know that it's going to take a little bit of time for the judge to render their decision.
	I don't know what the rules are in federal court.
	Provincial in Quebec, I think judges have six months to render their final decision.
	Could be a year, if things even go according to this schedule.
	Before there's a lower court level, a lower court level decision on this alleged charter violation.
	That's what this process entails in Canada.
	I mean, and everywhere.
	It's hurry up and wait in May, June, July, August.
	In four months, you'll get your five-day trial and you'll probably have to wait a few months for a well-drafted decision.
	In that time, 12 years old and over in Canada, who are not vaccinated and don't have an exemption, cannot travel by plane or train.
	This is the Canada that Justin Trudeau has ushered in.
	And this is the Canada that Jagmeet Singh is now a part of, responsible for having ushered in.
	So, you may not like it, but you might understand, at the very least, when Canadians run up to you with the middle finger telling you to go F yourself.
	I don't think they should be doing it, but you should be listening and maybe reflecting on what you have transformed Canada into.
	And, you know, in other news of, you know, some laws that just slipped right in through the door when nobody's looking.
	This is from Rebel News, but my brother, you know, also notified me of this.
	Another order in council further restricting firearm rights of long arms in Canada.
	You'll recall I did a video on this breaking down Justin Trudeau's order in council.
	Passed in the dead of the night, exploiting of the lockdowns of a pandemic.
	Just very quietly.
	Add thousands of long arms to the restricted firearms, just like that, through order and counsel.
	No legislative process, no debate, because the regulation or the legislation itself allows for the Prime Minister, through order and counsel, to enact further regulations, further restrictions, by order and counsel.
	The law allows for it, and Justin Trudeau is exploiting of the full power of his order and counsel capabilities Add yet more gun laws in Canada.
	Rebel News.
	Liberals quietly impose new firearms laws, including backdoor gun registry, takes effect in 10 days.
	The new laws coming into force on May 18, 2020, were introduced outside of Parliament through two separate orders in Council.
	And it's going to affect...
	In Quebec, we already have a registry, so I don't know what impact practically this is going to have on Quebec.
	Long arm owners, but for the rest of Canada, where they abolished the long arm registry, it looks like it's coming right back.
	Justin Trudeau's government has quietly imposed new firearms laws, including a backdoor gun registry, which will take effect in 10 days.
	It comes into effect on May 18, 2020.
	Okay, yada, yada.
	The changes stemming from...
	Oh, I like that it's highlighted in red on Rebel News.
	That's a nice touch, guys.
	The changes stemming from the Liberals' Bill C-71 will force lawfully licensed owners of non-registered firearms to ask permission from the RCMP's chief registrar of firearms before transferring ownership of firearms.
	A new requirement for the collection of personal information of buyers is being forced on firearms retailers and sporting goods stores.
	Link it, people.
	Any firearm owners in Canada might be worth noting.
	Yet more regulations on law-abiding firearm owners coming via orders in council outside of the legislative process because the law allows for it.
	You may find interesting the 2020 Pillars of Russia's Disinformation and Propaganda Ecosystem, also propagated by Michael Trimble on NIH.gov.
	Interesting.
	Have a look at that.
	Screenshot.
	Rule of Acquisition 261.
	A wealthy man can afford everything except a conscience.
	I like that.
	Bro, if you enjoyed Biden's handling of Afghanistan, inflation, children, women, words, you'll love his handling of war.
	F-11, that knee as hat.
	I believe he's as a hat.
	I've wanted to ask Barnes if we could sue the feds to remove their emergency powers.
	Also, has anyone considered using the Mules movie to keep Abrams off the ballot in Georgia?
	How do I unflag?
	And then we'll go down here.
	Viva, why don't you...
	I don't know who this is.
	Screenshot.
	Oh, here we go.
	Runkle covers the new gun registry.
	Okay, awesome.
	Ian Runkle.
	Another lawyer in the YouTube Lawverse, also a practicing attorney who has a specialty in firearms, Canadian firearms.
	Ian Runkle, R-U-N-K-L-E, Runkle of the Bailey, is his channel.
	Be sure to check him out.
	All right, a couple more stories here.
	A couple more stories.
	Stop screen, share screen.
	While we're on the topic of unconstitutional, unscientific, undemocratic stuff, I got a notification in my LinkedIn that CBC is looking to hire.
	I don't know if it was for lawyers.
	It was just an at-large looking for...
	I got an email because for whatever reason, I still get notifications for job options, job opportunities.
	Oh, that might make sense.
	Producer, content creator, CBC Kids News.
	Maybe I'll apply.
	Listen to their requirements.
	This is in their application.
	a big, long description on LinkedIn.
	All employees of CBC Radio Canada, state-funded to the tune of $1 billion annually, are required to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 as of December 1st, 2021, unless exempted based on a medical religious ground.
	As per this requirement, employees must attest to their vaccinations.
	They must attest to their vaccination status.
	But wait.
	There's more.
	There's so much more that this is another one of those things where I had to ask three people, am I understanding this properly?
	I didn't ask three people.
	I asked one person.
	The requirement for employees to be fully vaccinated applies whether they are teleworking, working remotely, or working on site.
	It requires them to be fully vaccinated even if they are teleworking or working remotely.
	Let that sink in.
	We're now dealing with...
	Wholly unconstitutional, discriminatory business hiring practices that are above and beyond discriminatory and unscientific.
	Oh, I just got to the punchline.
	Above and beyond being unconstitutional and discriminatory are entirely...
	I mean, this is not even science fiction.
	I mean, this is superstition.
	And when I say that they are discriminatory, I've said it before, I'll say it again because it's worth repeating.
	We know the demographics on who is reluctant to get vaccinated, who is statistically, what demographics are statistically under-vaccinated as compared to other demographics.
	Whites and Asians tend to be quite heavily vaccinated.
	Black Canadians, Indigenous, Latino, tend to be underrepresented in terms of full vaccination, and for obvious reasons, historical and government reasons.
	So when the CBC actually implements this, I would argue that the CBC is implementing racist and discriminatory hiring practices, because they know damn well who this is having a disparate impact on.
	They may as well say, you can apply, but we're less interested in Black Canadians, Hispanic Canadians, and Indigenous Canadians, because by and large, those groups, those demographics, will be less vaccinated than Caucasians and Asians.
	Of course, they make up for it with other equally discriminatory hiring practices, but...
	That's the policy.
	It's a discriminatory and unconstitutional policy that our state-funded CBC is implementing in their hiring.
	I pay for this.
	Canadians are literally paying taxes to this organization to be discriminated against.
	And it's not just that it's discrimination for working on site, teleworking, and working remotely.
	Hey, CBC!
	We all know you trust the science.
	Would you care to explain why your discriminatory COVID vaccination requirements applies regardless of whether or not someone is teleworking or working remotely?
	To my knowledge, I have not gotten a response from the CDC.
	This is the absolute state of Canada, people.
	And it's not a good one.
	All right, let me see what's on Rumble just before we go any further.
	Is there anything on Rumble?
	Okay, some Rumble discussion.
	The Rumble discussion is just as civil as the YouTube discussion.
	It goes to show you that, by and large, people can be trusted to engage in civil discourse, and adults can be trusted to disregard discourse that they don't like without seeking to ban people.
	All right, what else was there?
	We have Crenshaw.
	Okay, I think that...
	Oh, and yeah, that was it, by the way.
	Here.
	Pat King.
	People are asking.
	What's up with Pat King?
	Radio silence is what's up with Pat King.
	Pat King, the individual who was arrested February 18, following the Ottawa protest, has been detained since on...
	Look, his bail hearing has been put off, I don't know, four times now, five times?
	It's now...
	It's going to be February, March, April.
	It's going to be three months next week.
	Yep, three months next week that Pat King will have been detained on mischief charges.
	His last bail hearing was postponed because they found additional charges for perjury during his first bail hearing, so he's still in jail.
	But it's like, it's radio science.
	You look up Pat King, bail hearing, and...
	You go into Google, you don't have an entry.
	There's no news on this.
	Nobody's talking about this since April 14 now.
	You go into news, just so that you make sure we're not doing anything wrong here, three weeks.
	And it's CTV News saying he's been charged with additional charges.
	Three weeks, one month, one month, one month, one month, one month.
	So, yep, news of political prisoners in Canada detained for months on mischief charges.
	It's not really worthy news.
	It's not worthwhile news.
	Vaccination policy will make it hard when they offer a position to only...
	Well, no, they'll find the demographics who are in fact vaccinated, but it's just like...
	The world has gone topsy-turvy.
	The US funding of the war in Ukraine is creeping up towards $55 billion after 10 weeks.
	A year of war in Afghanistan was $46 billion.
	Should be enraging to everybody.
	As an Australian firearms owner, my advice to Canadians is fight like hell while you can.
	We lost all the fun stuff here, politically speaking.
	You know, fight like hell, when Trump says it, peacefully protest, is an impeachable offense.
	A call to arms and fight to victory when Lori Lightfoot says it, that's just good politics, people.
	All right, let me see here.
	Just got some good news.
	Okay.
	People, let's get some chats that are of the non-super chat.
	Did I get...
	Did I miss Jugmeet getting heckled?
	Should I rewind?
	You could rewind for the bit.
	I did not play the video because that video confirmed demonetized after manual review on my second channel, Viva Clips, which I don't care.
	I can even kind of understand it.
	You hear the F word in it.
	So, okay.
	I don't know.
	Although, you know, WAP was fully monetized.
	What was that other one with...
	That guy and the lollipops.
	Fefe.
	Fefe.
	Fully monetized.
	But, you know, Jagmeet Singh getting heckled.
	Not monetizable.
	So anyway, I didn't play the video.
	But the bit was in the beginning.
	Rule of acquisition.
	Now I think you're making up the numbers of the rules, but I like them.
	War is good for business.
	Well, war is good for politicians.
	And war is good for the war machine business.
	Oh, yeah.
	Yep.
	So that's it.
	What else?
	Hold on.
	Let me see if there was not anything else.
	What's happening?
	It's Thursday.
	Friday's tomorrow.
	I don't know what else is going on for the week, but let me see.
	I got my notes.
	I got my notes.
	The Liberals quietly encoded.
	So that's on Rebel News.
	You have the link.
	What was this tweet?
	Oh, this is...
	So, by the way, and Western barbarian, I'm not trying to put anyone on blast.
	This is another argument where people try to acquit.
	You know, Viva, you need to stop calling Canadian politicians like Trudeau fascists on Twitter.
	It's counterproductive.
	It will be used to suppress...
	First of all, there's a real risk of that at some point in time.
	But there is a difference between calling a politician a fascist and fascist being a tyrannical form of government versus screaming F you.
	But I do recognize, by the way, calling them a fascist or psychopathic liars, I appreciate that that's going to rub people the wrong way.
	And it may not be...
	The best tactic for persuasion of those who might be in the middle ground.
	I had a buddy, best friend.
	He still is my best friend.
	He said, you know, you come off a little unhinged when you call politicians psychopathic liars.
	I appreciate that.
	I can even understand that.
	I can even see it.
	But when they come out with psychopathic lies, I'm going to call them psychopathic liars.
	When Justin Trudeau...
	In an interview, he says, we're not the type of country that makes vaccination mandatory.
	What about people with strong religious beliefs, people with medical conditions, people with deep convictions who choose not to get vaccinated?
	We're not the type of country that makes vaccination mandatory.
	When he says things like that, and then election season comes around six months later, and his ad literally says, I believe vaccinations should be mandatory for air travel and train travel, I am going to call them psychopathic liars, even if I might look.
	A little eccentric.
	Peace is good for business.
	Well, dude, now...
	If this one was 35, the other one was 36, which one is better for...
	Oh, no.
	War is good for business was 34. The bigger question is this.
	Which one's better for business?
	If there's no crisis to manage, government doesn't have a reason to exist.
	Yeah, pathological.
	They are remorse.
	They're sociopathic liars because pathological liars I agree with.
	They are sociopathic in that they are remorse.
	They're shameless.
	They have no conscience when it comes to the manner in which they lie.
	They have no conscience when it comes to the sheer brazenness of their lies.
	It's like they think we're stupid.
	And by and large, it's not that we're stupid.
	We have lies.
	We're busy.
	We don't know.
	We don't know that Trudeau gave an interview where he literally said, we're not the type of country that makes vaccinations mandatory.
	They don't know it.
	Let me see something here.
	Let me see if I can find it real quick.
	Viva Clip Trudeau.
	I can't find it.
	Yeah, something tells me.
	I can put in Viva Clip.
	will live youtube when it's in incognito will literally not even not even bring up any of my clips you Thank you.
	Here, let's just see it.
	Maybe it's in here.
	Hold on one second.
	This might be the one.
	Here we go.
	Let's just, let's just, yeah.
	I know many of you are in virtual school again.
	Many of you have made more sacrifices over Christmas, over the holidays, not seeing your friends, Addressing children directly.
	as your parents are working virtually.
	I know it sucks.
	This is not easy.
	And I know almost half of kids across this country have gotten their vaccine.
	seen from ages 5 to 12. Talking directly to my kids.
	We need to get more.
	So please ask your parents if you can get vaccinated.
	Getting vaccinated protects yourself.
	Protects your family, protects your grandparents, protects vulnerable people, but it also supports our frontline workers who are working incredibly hard.
	...mental health, and let's listen.
	They are putting at risk their own kids, and they're putting at risk our kids as well.
	Those people are putting us all at risk.
	So today and every day, let's talk to each other about our mental health and let's listen to each other.
	Not only are Canadians tired of this pandemic.
	Can't do it.
	But if you want five minutes of Justin Trudeau being Justin Trudeau.
	Oh my goodness.
	Okay, people.
	That is it on the menu for today.
	We'll be going live tomorrow.
	Should be some fun stuff.
	Next week, if you're not interested in the Johnny Depp trial, don't tune in during the day.
	I still say it's going to be very interesting.
	Amber Heard's cross-examination is going to be...
	It's going to be epic.
	It's going to be the stuff of legal lore.
	Someone says, take it off.
	Where was it?
	Where was it?
	Take it off.
	Oh, God, it burns.
	Yeah, that's good clips.
	No, no, go, go, go.
	Check it out.
	Share it around.
	It's like, it does not have the one where he says, we're not a country that makes vaccination mandatory.
	That was a separate highlight.
	And by the way, and I'll tell you this thing, K.K. Westbury, yeah, that's a beautiful horse.
	That's fantastic.
	God, watching that, the Kentucky Derby.
	People sent me the original Seabiscuit and Secretariat clips, which they think were on par with that.
	But that's my go-to for inspiration.
	But the question is this, and it's a real question, is how to not get black-pilled, jaded, cynical.
	The stress and the absurdity of it all can be somewhat overwhelming, and it can be somewhat enraging.
	You end up getting angry at the...
	Getting angry at the world is like, that can be taken out of context.
	It's upsetting.
	Let's say that.
	The world situation is upsetting.
	These hypocrite, dishonest, corrupt politicians squandering our taxpayer dollars, causing international conflict, exacerbating international conflict, suppressing and usurping our constitutional rights.
	It can be so enraging.
	That you want to get up there and go tell Jagmeet Singh or Justin Trudeau to go F themselves and stick your middle finger in their face.
	That will make you feel better temporarily.
	Maybe.
	If that.
	Or it might make you feel bad about yourself that you've succumbed to these urges.
	These urges that are inspired or motivated by anger.
	Which one should never really act on.
	If it makes you feel temporarily better, you might regret it afterwards.
	It's not the way.
	How do you do it?
	We're not going to joke our way out of this.
	True.
	You need to channel the energy to make it something useful and not something destructive.
	And you've got to take a deep breath and then get out there and exercise away the nervous energy and smile.
	Because even if you don't want to smile, when you smile and you force it, it will change your chemistry.
	It's science, people.
	I didn't make it up.
	It's science.
	You're a good man, Viva.
	I would be happy for your representation in my criminal endeavors.
	That is if I had any.
	I don't take it the wrong way, Mr. Wonderful.
	I never want to see the inside of a courtroom ever again.
	Following these lawsuits reminds me of the soul-crushing, hurry up and wait.
	When you win, you lose.
	When you lose, you lose aspect of commercial litigation or litigation at large.
	Stay out of the system if you can.
	And it brought me...
	It brought me no good stress to be part of that system to the point where I think I'd be more useful elsewhere.
	But that's it.
	Smile.
	Make it, force it, and do it.
	And when you do, you will be able to deal with bad drivers on the street.
	You'll be able to shrug.
	This too shall pass.
	And yes, the pendulum will swing back at some point in time.
	And it takes slow, convincing.
	Of the people who don't know that there's a problem or who are unwilling to admit that there's a problem or are too heavily invested in their own decisions to recognize that there is a problem.
	It takes time and it happens.
	So, you know, if you bend wood too quickly, it snaps.
	But if you bend it slowly enough and you water it and you oil it, you can get it to take forms that it would not have been able to take had you just gone in there and tried to do it in 30 seconds.
	With that said, there was one other thing.
	Viva clips.
	Viva family.
	And, oh, stick around for this weekend.
	There will be a fishing video this weekend.
	It's my wife's birthday this weekend.
	It's my birthday next weekend.
	All three kids, July birthdays, plus Mother's Day, Father's Day.
	So May to June is a time for celebration.
	Point curation.
	The world is terrifying, but you helped make it digestible.
	Thanks for what you do, and thanks for the positive attitude.
	Point curation, thank you, and thank you for everything.
	And it's good to see you again.
	There will be a fishing video this weekend.
	So stay tuned for that.
	I'm going to use some of the tackle that Heart Tackle sent me yesterday.
	Love you, people.
	Viva Purple Hearts, the sign of the PPC.
	Have a fantastic day.
	I don't know if the Purple Heart had anything to do with the PPC or Emily Baker is into the Purple Heart.
	Thank you, Candice Magnus.
	Thumbs up.
	Let me see here.
	I'm just reading some of the chats.
	The best part of True Dope...
	Oh, come on.
	I didn't mean to bring that one up.
	Do you work for the government with the bending of the wood?
	I don't know.
	I don't know.
	Well, yes, my wife's birthday gift is me out of the house.
	I'm joking.
	Yes, just joking.
	Okay, people, go.
	Have a good day.
	Have a great day.
	Get exercise, sunlight, and talk to people in real time.
	It feels particularly good.
	See you tomorrow.
	Wait, one more.
	Just one more on Rumble.
	Make sure I haven't missed anything.
	People on Rumble, nice to see you.
	All right, go.
	Talk soon.

▲