Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 15, 2022 - Viva & Barnes

02:00:27

Viva Mondays! Immigration Lawyer Explaining Options (and the Usual Corruption / Fake News)

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	We're starting with something politically neutral because we have a guest and I don't.
	I want to stay politically neutral for the informational side of this stream.
	Then we'll get into other stuff.
	Check this out, people.
	Something I discovered yesterday while jogging.
	Are you recording?
	Yeah, the bugs are on the screen.
	Don't spoil the surprise yet.
	I just went jogging in midday Florida.
	I swear to you, I think something about the heat above the sidewalk.
	It's like walking through a gauntlet of these bugs.
	Look at my face.
	Get on my face.
	It's crazy.
	You're in your hair.
	You're not going to get these out.
	Look at this.
	Look at my arm.
	They hit my sweat.
	Look at my shirt.
	Can't see them on my shirt.
	Look at this.
	They hit my body and stick.
	Are they on my face?
	Dave, are they on your face?
	Your face is covered in black spots.
	Do I go in there?
	Have you seen yourself?
	No, I haven't seen myself.
	Are you joking?
	No.
	You have to see yourself.
	Do I look good?
	No.
	Okay.
	I don't know what they are.
	So someone said no-see-ums, but they don't bite.
	Or at least they couldn't bite me through my armor of disgusting man sweat.
	They didn't bite.
	And it's just clouds.
	And I'm jogging and they're going in my eyes, in my nose.
	I'm like, what's his name?
	Ford.
	Just chomping down on bugs as I go.
	It's good.
	I got a little extra protein.
	And I liked it.
	I would be eating some bugs and I like it.
	Okay.
	People.
	Oh, so here, be honest, Viva.
	Did you review every word on the new bed?
	I was ready to smash the frame of the bed and order another one.
	We had to rotate some of those bars five times to get them into the right spot.
	I'm going to do after this stream a locals exclusive called Venting with Viva.
	We're going to talk, see what people are interested in hearing about.
	I wanted to do it before this stream leading into it, but I had to put a bed together with my wife because apparently a mattress on the floor and clothes on the floor can't live like that forever.
	Okay, people, this is at the request of many people who have questions, might be looking at their futures in their respective countries.
	Dorothy McCann.
	is our guest for the first portion of this live stream.
	She is the immigration lawyer that I used for my visa application.
	Now, many caveats, as always.
	No medical advice, no election fornification advice, no legal advice.
	I am not discussing my specific file with Dorothy for the obvious reason that I'm not renouncing solicitor-client privilege and I'm not getting into my specific case because my specific case is mildly irrelevant.
	It's the generalities of how people can go about this, the options out there for Canadians, others looking to potentially temporarily displace to the United States of America, or who knows, maybe for some Americans who think it's better in Canada.
	So we're just going to go over some general questions with Dorothy McCann from Bloomin' McCann.
	And if anybody has any further questions or wants to consult Dorothy or her partner at Bloomin' McCann...
	I'll provide the website, but it's Bloomin' McCann.
	You'll get it if you look it up.
	Those look like midges.
	I'm going to look up what a midge is.
	So, starting off today, Dorothy McCann, we're going to talk in general about the immigration process, visas, options, etc., etc.
	Then we're going to get into the stuff.
	Albert Bourla, testing positive for COVID.
	Because...
	Despite, it's like, we'll get into all of it.
	W-E-F-A-D-L, debunking, okay, whatever.
	But for the time being, we don't want to sully up the discourse for Dorothy, who probably has no interest in that stuff.
	That I know of.
	It doesn't even matter.
	No idea.
	We're going to talk immigration law.
	Dorothy, getting ready to bring you in?
	Five, four.
	Here we go.
	Dorothy.
	Hi.
	How are you doing?
	Great.
	First, before I get into immigration, I'm going to say I think they're love bugs.
	They were introduced into Florida.
	They're not indigenous to Florida, but they were introduced to combat mosquitoes because they eat mosquitoes.
	But it kind of backfired because then the love bugs took over.
	And they have like a short season and they'll get stuck all over your car and they mess up the paint.
	They got stuck over my face in my eyes.
	And the thing is, I think they're attracted to the radiating heat because they were strictly over the path and not on the grass.
	So I started jogging on the grass, but too late.
	Lovebugs, I'm going to go look that up.
	Dorothy, thank you for doing this because people have questions that I can't answer, even though I'm a lawyer.
	Dorothy.
	30,000 foot overview.
	I'm not going to get into your childhood like I do with guests on the channel typically, but what kind of law do you practice?
	Where do you practice out of and how long you've been doing it for?
	I practice primarily business immigration law, meaning usually we work for people who are seeking employment-based visas, whether they're non-immigrant or immigrant.
	Sometimes that does lead into family law, like typically someone will come here.
	On a work-based visa and, you know, fall in love and then they get married and then all of a sudden it switches from an employment-based visa to a family-based visa.
	Our offices are in Manhattan, although now, post-COVID, I work kind of any place I can plug my laptop in, but we are based in Midtown.
	And let's see.
	I've been doing this for, I'm going to really age and date myself here, but like 25 years.
	That was practically before I was born.
	It's not before I was born.
	My math isn't that good.
	Maybe I didn't calculate that right.
	It was when I was in law school, but time goes fast.
	Now, I've realized that I've been a lawyer for, it's over 15 years now.
	It goes quickly.
	Okay, so Dorothy, I'm from Canada.
	A lot of people from Canada are wondering how to come down to the States, what the options are, and how they go about it.
	If I may ask also, typically, do you deal with international clients or primarily North America?
	International.
	We have clients from every corner of the world.
	A lot of our clients are advertising agencies.
	So for a while, it was a lot of French and UK.
	You know, what's hot in industries, like the Swedes were really hot in advertising for a while, and everybody wanted to get their hand on a creative Swede.
	So we, you know, we're not, that's the one good thing about immigrant, well, there's a lot of good things about immigration law, but you're not so confined the way, you know, if you're a real estate lawyer, you do.
	Real estate closings typically in a very narrow area because that's where you have to practice.
	But immigration laws everywhere.
	Okay.
	And now let's get more specific.
	People who want to come to the United States, have you seen an uptick?
	Have you seen an uptick in people looking to come to the States from specific countries?
	Well, I have seen an uptick in Canadians recently.
	You know, COVID changed a lot of the way business is working.
	So even, you know, just me in Midtown, all of a sudden people were able to work remotely.
	So some companies, you know, don't necessarily need their person sitting at a desk in Manhattan.
	They can do their job from Sweden.
	But people themselves still seem to want to be coming to the U.S. The pendulum keeps kind of switching.
	These last five years have been a very volatile one for immigration.
	Not to be political, but during the Trump administration, there was a real...
	Impact on immigration.
	And non-immigrants were really...
	It was becoming increasingly difficult to get anything approved.
	It was like every single application was...
	Things that used to be just kind of part of the course, taken for granted, all of a sudden was just like pulling your teeth.
	But then the flip side was a lot of people wanted to become citizens because they wanted to be able to vote.
	So people who were here...
	In the States for, say, 25 years under a green card and never really felt the impetus to become citizens, then all of a sudden they're like, well, I want to vote in this next election.
	So it kind of just keeps changing.
	So, okay, well, I guess now I'm going to start with some more specific but broader questions.
	The H1, was it H1B1 or H1?
	It wasn't H1N1.
	H1B.
	H1B.
	What was that visa and is it still commonly available?
	The H1B visa is a non-immigrant visa.
	It's considered for professionals in a specialty occupation.
	So it typically requires someone who possesses at least a bachelor's degree or the equivalent.
	The equivalent being either 12 years of experience or a combination.
	There's a formula, some education and some experience.
	It was used very heavily by the IT.
	A lot of computer people, that's the visa they came over on.
	It almost became a victim of its own popularity because it was more of a catch-all visa.
	And it became so popular that it became oversubscribed.
	So now, every year, we have to go through a lottery.
	So they're still available, but there are many more people that want them.
	Then there are visas.
	So every year in April, we go through a lottery, and there's not a guarantee that you're going to get one.
	And then they become available on the fiscal year, October 1st.
	So the timing of it is difficult.
	The scheduling of it is difficult.
	It's rather expensive.
	There's more government fees associated with it.
	While it still exists, it's problematic.
	And you prefaced it by saying it's a non-immigrant visa?
	Yes.
	What does that mean?
	It's not a green card.
	It's temporary.
	So initially it's granted for three years and then you can extend it for another three years.
	But after six years is your max out unless you filed for a green card within that six years.
	And it hasn't been adjudicated yet, and then you can keep extending it.
	All right, interesting.
	But the hardest part is just winning the lottery, honestly.
	I was going to get there in a second, but before then, so just the two broad divisions of visas, you're going to have your non-immigrant and your immigrant visa.
	One is to come here and stay for permanent residence, and the other is temporary residence?
	Yes.
	So that means the non-immigrant visas are tied to an employer.
	So if you come on your H-1B visa and you're working for XYZ Corp and either you decide you don't like working for them or they end up terminating you, then that's the end of your visa.
	You have to leave unless you find a new employer.
	Unlike a green card or permanent residence, you can work for anybody or choose not to work at all.
	Okay.
	All right.
	So H-1B, immigrant visa, temporary, tied to an employer, the lottery.
	Because I think the lottery comes up also in green cards as well, which we might get to.
	That lottery is a different kind of lottery.
	Okay.
	So what does the lottery look like for the H-1B?
	How many people are in it?
	How many names do they draw?
	There was over...
	I think it was over 200,000 this year.
	There's also...
	It's a little complicated.
	There's two caps.
	One is for people with master's degrees, and one is for people...
	Oh, it has to be a U.S. master's degree.
	They get a separate little carve-out of 20,000 numbers, and if you don't get chosen in that lottery, then it pours over into the other lottery for people with just bachelor's degrees.
	But it doesn't have to be a U.S. bachelor's degree.
	It can just be a regular bachelor's degree.
	But, you know, your odds aren't that great.
	It's looking like a one-in-four shot, which is better than Powerball, but not great if you have an employer that is planning on having you start and you don't have another option.
	Okay.
	H1B, then what are the other options that are available?
	Let's just take Canadians at large.
	Well, I guess there'll be some that are specific to Canadians, or Canadians, Mexicans, and some that are going to be international.
	What are some of the other options?
	Well, I'll stick with the ones that are for everybody.
	Because there's some for Australians and there's some for Singaporeans.
	The L1 is another non-immigrant visa.
	That's considered an intercompany transferee.
	So that means, say you work for your company in Canada.
	They want to send you to their affiliate office in New York.
	That is a visa that's available as long as you've worked for the foreign company for one year.
	And the job itself is either managerial or it's something called specialized knowledge, meaning it's not something readily available in the U.S. workforce.
	So that can be a great visa depending on the circumstances.
	Company decides like, hey, we really need you in New York.
	That can work quite nicely.
	That's also the initial employment period is for three years.
	Except if it's a new company.
	Sorry, there's so many caveats in immigration.
	I'm always like, oh, yeah, it's this, it's that.
	Well, L1 is unique because the company has to be an international company.
	You have to have been employed for a period of time beforehand.
	So that's not one that disgruntled citizens can say, I want to pick up and leave.
	No, because if they don't, you know, right.
	There's another visa called an O1 visa.
	And that's for an individual with extraordinary ability.
	Which sounds kind of daunting, like, oh, you know, but you just have to demonstrate extraordinary ability in your field.
	And there's a list of 10 criteria that shows that some of those criteria fit better with certain jobs than others, like awards.
	I work a lot with advertising agencies, so that works well for them because creative directors, copywriters, art directors, they get a lot of awards.
	We can usually almost always demonstrate that.
	You need to document press.
	So for some people, that works better than others.
	High salary compared to the field.
	So that doesn't necessarily mean you have to be making Bill Gates kind of money.
	In your field, the prevailing wage is $150,000 and you're making $175,000.
	Then that would serve to document high salary.
	O-1 is a non-immigrant visa as well?
	Yes.
	It's also a non-immigrant visa.
	One interesting thing about the O-1, you need to have a sponsor, but it doesn't necessarily have to be a straight-up employer because there is the option to have an agent act as your petitioner.
	I say agent, everyone thinks like Hollywood agent.
	It doesn't have to be that kind of an agent.
	It really just has to be a U.S. entity or individual with either a federal tax ID number or social security number who is willing to act as the agent.
	There's a lot of...
	It's kind of a gray area there.
	So it applies more for artists.
	Graphic designers.
	So a lot of graphic designers, when they come here, they're not working 9 to 5, 40 hours a week for the same employer.
	They get a job for this company, and they get a project for this company, and a project for that company.
	And they pretty much work on each design, not as a full-time job.
	So they are often sponsored by an agent.
	In the O1 context.
	I am just going to specify, I think this is a joke, but no, I am not illegal in the US.
	Obviously, and for obvious reasons.
	Okay, so I guess I should, I'll ask this after we go over all of them and you'll price them out respectively, give or take.
	O1, people typically know of the O1 for celebrities or influencers, I guess, is the way they're most commonly known, actors, whatever.
	But that's sort of a misnomer, Dorothy?
	Yeah, I mean, it...
	As long as you can demonstrate the criteria to a reasonable satisfaction, like I've done them for tennis pros before, a lot of advertising people, even business people who speak at a lot of events or are influential, write articles, PR people.
	Probably one of...
	The most bizarre...
	I've done it for a UFO specialist.
	A diaper specialist.
	I can become a specialist in both of those fields.
	I'm not saying they're aliens, but they're aliens.
	So yeah, if you really have some credentials in your field, you have to show at least 3 out of 10. And if you can do that convincingly, then you have a shot at an O1.
	Now, if you really, you know, if the person who's going to say that you're extraordinary is your mom and your first grade teacher, then it's probably not going to work.
	The question was this also.
	Has the O1 become the new H1B in terms of popularity of application?
	I would say it definitely is.
	It has become more popular because of the lack of availability of Hs.
	Traditionally, the people who got H1s were often students here in the U.S. on an F1.
	They got their first job and they had employment authorization for the first year out of school.
	If the company liked them, then the traditional path was then to move on to the H1.
	So it's become more difficult for them because they're really not at the level of an O1 because they're young.
	They don't really have...
	Some of them have, actually.
	And some of them have been able to get O1s in lieu of Hs, particularly in the more artistic fields because they have portfolios.
	And they have shows and stuff, so it works a little bit better for that.
	But for people who are software engineers, one year out of school, the O is probably not going to work for them.
	All right, so we've got H1B, L1, Link to Employment, O1, Extraordinary Abilities.
	Someone's making a joke, but I think this is going to lead us into the next one.
	If you're rich, that helps too.
	You can buy your way in.
	What are some of the other ones, one of which I know is you can buy a business or operate a business?
	Well, there's the non-immigrant version of that.
	It's an investor visa.
	It's an E2.
	It's only with countries that have particular treaties with the U.S. And there's a long list.
	Canada is one of those countries.
	France, the U.K. I don't have the...
	But a lot of countries.
	And either you or the employer invests money in either an existing business or a new startup business.
	It has to be real money.
	It has to be at risk.
	You can't just put money into a shell entity and let it...
	It has to be a real business that's going to start operating or is operating.
	And that visa is a non-immigrant visa.
	There's another visa I think probably your person is referring to where you invest a million dollars and that's a green card visa.
	So they're not wrong?
	They're not.
	No, they're not wrong.
	But it is complicated.
	And it's not...
	Easiest of things to go through, but it does exist, yes.
	And just to back up to the other one, the non-immigrant, meaning if you invest this money, you get to stay, what, as a permanent resident?
	No, it's a non-immigrant visa.
	It's an E2.
	You can continue to extend it indefinitely.
	The other good thing about that visa, your spouse also gets employment authorization.
	And it doesn't have to work for the entity.
	It can work for any place.
	Which I forgot to point out.
	That's the same also for the L1.
	Okay.
	And what is the quantum again for the E1 that you have to invest?
	There isn't a bright line test of money for the E2.
	In our experience, it's typically around $100,000.
	Obviously, it can be more.
	Less.
	The issue is raised, is this enough to fund a business?
	Is it substantial enough to become operable?
	So just give or take $100,000.
	And again, the individual himself doesn't necessarily have to be the investor.
	So if you have Canadian Company X, Canadian Company X wants to set up a U.S. office.
	U.S. company.
	And then if you're a Canadian employee, you can get this E2 visa as an employee.
	But you have to be of the same nationality.
	Okay.
	And this is, I guess, just because the question came up, do you need a vaccine to immigrate at this time?
	Did the Biden administration undo that non-resident restriction or requirement for...
	For people coming to the States?
	Do you mean...
	You do need a COVID vaccine for the green card.
	But you don't need it for the non-immigrant visa.
	Okay.
	They just added it on.
	For a while, you didn't.
	Depending on where you are in the process, you might or might not need it.
	It's very timing specific.
	I'm going to get to the green card questions after this because I've got a bunch of those.
	Okay, so you've got L1, E2, H1B, O1.
	What other visas are available for people looking to come?
	Okay, so now we can start talking about the country-specific ones.
	The TN under NAFTA, that's specifically for Canadians and Mexican nationals.
	They're also...
	Temporary.
	They're also employer dependent.
	So that's not a visa that you can just get on your own.
	You need to have an employer willing to sponsor you.
	There are specific job categories too for that visa.
	Management consultant is probably the most popular because you can document your qualifications if you have five years of experience.
	Or a bachelor's degree.
	Some of the other categories, like lawyer, require a degree.
	There's a computer systems analyst, graphic designer.
	Those are some of the more popular ones.
	Technical writer.
	There's a whole big long list.
	Bottom line, if you're Canadian or Mexican.
	There's a specific...
	There's a potential option, yes.
	If you're in that kind of a field and you have a U.S. employer.
	You always have to have a U.S. employer.
	Okay.
	Any other options?
	There is an E3 visa.
	It's very similar to the H1 in that it's for a professional possessing a bachelor's degree, but it's only for Australians.
	So a lot of...
	You know, most Australians, that's what they're here on, if they're here on a non-immigrant visa, because it's simpler.
	You can process it at the embassy.
	Pretty much, again, you need a U.S. employer, and you need to either have a bachelor's degree or the foreign equivalent.
	Oh, sorry.
	No, go ahead, please.
	I was just going to ask that.
	Oh, no, I was going to move on to a different visa category.
	Okay, do it, because the question I have relates to all of the ones we're going to have gone over.
	Okay.
	There's also something called an H1B1 for Singaporeans.
	It's only for Singaporeans.
	Similar to an H1, and it operates the way an E3 moves.
	And there's also one for Nationals of Chile.
	And that's...
	Just because there are specific treaties with those countries.
	Okay.
	And the respective, give or take rough estimates, standard pricing for these things, the rough costs of H1, E3, L1, O1.
	It's really, it's hard to do rough costs because it's, you know, I could give you the filing fees, but it is case specific.
	So it's hard to...
	You know, H1s, there are a lot more filing fees that are slapped on there.
	So Hs are probably the most expensive because the government just has a lot of filing fees attached to them.
	I think USCIS is trying to almost discourage employers from using them because it's just expensive.
	One thing that they have improved...
	Under this new system, used to be the lottery, you had to do a whole application and file it.
	Now you can do an online entry into the lottery.
	So if you don't get chosen, you don't have to pay for the whole application.
	And when you say a lot, like if people are seeing online some people charging $30,000, $35,000, You know, is that getting towards the high end of what people can anticipate or expect for this?
	You know, again, it's really, you know, it's case by case basis.
	If, you know, some people charge flat fees, some people charge hourly, you know, some cases are going to be demanding.
	It's hard for me to, you know, comment on other attorneys' fees.
	Fair enough, fair enough.
	And now, so we've seen the non-immigrant visas.
	What are the options for immigrant?
	You want to come here, you want to stay.
	How do you go about doing it?
	Well, there's always the tried and true, fall in love and get married.
	But that has to be to an American.
	That does have to be to an American for this to work.
	But the employment-based permanent visas, there are similar categories.
	There is something called an EB1.
	Which is similar to the O1 in that it's for individuals of extraordinary ability, but it's probably a little higher of a bar.
	So, whereas you might be able to get the O1 if you're in kind of a, let's not say marginal, but you're not super, super.
	The EB1, because it's a green card, it is tougher.
	But that's not to say that it isn't available.
	You need to really build a very compelling case and you need to try to hit as many of those 10 points of evidence as you possibly can.
	I've had clients that actually go out and start authoring stuff to help bolster their applications.
	There are even PR agencies, and I haven't tried this, but I have gotten advertisements from them that they will Put out press out there about your client to help bolster their case.
	So that's one option.
	Like the L1 visa, there is the green card version of that, where you would be an intercompany executive managerial transferee, but on a permanent basis.
	But again, like the L1, you need the foreign company.
	And you need the U.S. company to act as the sponsor and the position has to be managerial.
	And those are, you know, they're tough too.
	They really want to see that you manage people.
	They ask for organizational charts.
	They want to see the bachelor's degrees of the people that you manage because they're supposed to be professional.
	But in the right circumstance, it's definitely a viable option.
	You have the foreign company and the US company.
	And the more readily available routes would be through what's called PERM.
	And it's filing an alien labor certification.
	Basically, again, you need an employer.
	The employer is essentially saying, we're offering you...
	A full-time permanent position.
	We can't find any U.S. workers for this position.
	And in order to demonstrate that, we have to run recruitment advertising in Sunday papers.
	There's a whole list of places we have to do this recruitment advertising to demonstrate, test the labor market, that there aren't people that are qualified for these positions.
	Then you file this application with the Labor Department online.
	Right now it's taking about seven months for them to get adjudicated.
	It used to be faster when this system first came out.
	It was only taking like a week.
	But again, a victim of its popularity.
	It's now taking seven months.
	Then you go to the next agent, file the...
	Permanent visa application.
	And that you have an option of either, this gets a little complicated, filing in the U.S. If you're in the U.S., you can do something called an adjustment of status, which is basically converting your non-immigrant status to permanent status.
	If you're not in the U.S. or there are certain...
	Reasons that people don't want to do the adjustment of status, you can file at consular processing, meaning you'll get your green card at the U.S. Embassy in your country.
	Okay.
	Are there any other ones?
	I guess another question.
	Going from permanent to temporary non-immigrant.
	Is this just overlapping the options or reapplying for a permanent option once you're on a temporary option?
	Well, I'm sorry.
	I'm not following.
	Say you're here on L1 or L2 and you want to turn it permanent green card.
	So what's the process you'd look at doing from that point?
	Oh, I mean, it is a whole new process.
	It's just that it's similar.
	I mean, it's a totally different process, but it's the same type of qualifications.
	So, you need to demonstrate that it's a managerial position.
	You need to demonstrate that you had one year of experience at the foreign company.
	You still need the offer from the U.S. company, but this offer would be for a permanent position.
	You still need to document that you qualify as a manager.
	You need to show that both the U.S. and the foreign companies are continuing to operate.
	Okay.
	Now this is the question people are asking.
	Asylum.
	How does asylum work, Dorothy?
	And what are the criteria for getting asylum?
	Asylum is not my area of expertise.
	I am focused on business immigration, so I'm not really comfortable answering asylum questions.
	It's just not my area of expertise.
	Okay, let me see if I've got any questions here.
	I'll get to some of the chats which are not relevant afterwards.
	Let's see here.
	My wife is from the Philippines and has been here for years.
	On her green card, we want to bring her sister or mother over to help with childcare.
	What is our best, fastest option?
	Can I simply hire...
	I'll say anyone who has legal questions.
	You're not giving the answers away for free.
	Anybody who wants to contact you afterwards, I'll put your link to the website.
	So people know, People even know where to look, what to ask for if they go to someone.
	Dorothy, have we forgotten anything as far as the generalities would go for visas to the U.S. or anything people should know when getting involved in the process?
	Those are the main ones.
	There are some other ones.
	There's student visas.
	There's training visas.
	I think I saw somebody mention a fiancé visa.
	They're less common, and this is all very, I'm sure, for the layperson, already incredibly confusing because there's a lot of details.
	So those are the main ones that you're going to see people using, relying on, needing, and there's tourist visas, there's other things, but I think these are the meat and potatoes.
	Okay, and here John says, what would you recommend for a self-published writer?
	I would say watch the stream, and then if you have questions, call in contact afterwards.
	For specific, because you can't give specific advice.
	It's negligible.
	No, and because immigration is really so fact-driven, it would be just irresponsible of me to try to spout off an answer without having...
	It's very specific facts because the specific facts make all the difference.
	All right.
	Dorothy, chat.
	This was the primer.
	Now you have a rough understanding of what's out there.
	You know at least one potential lawyer whom you can contact.
	Dorothy, I'm not going to end.
	Ordinarily, I'd end and we'd talk and I'd say thank you for coming.
	I'll call you later.
	Okay.
	I know you've got your bugs to deal with.
	I've got bugs to deal with and I've got...
	The human bugs and the bug bugs.
	But we've got to go talk about some stuff that occurred in the news.
	Oh, sorry.
	Someone just says, actually, can you elaborate more on a tourist visa?
	I mean, that's six months, can't work, and you have to go back.
	Pretty much, yeah.
	There's also something called the visa waiver that's only 90 days.
	And you don't always have to go back.
	Yeah, you can get extensions.
	And so everybody knows there are more questions to ask depending on your visa, what the work restrictions on your spouse and kids would be.
	This is just the primer so that people, Canadians, who I think might have had some questions, can look into knowing.
	Because even when I started this process, didn't know about any of it.
	H1B, O1, E2, L1, TN.
	And then they're specific for countries.
	So people out there, there are options.
	Google them.
	Watch this.
	Share it away.
	And if you have any questions, contact Dorothy McCann of Blue and McCann.
	I'll put the website link in the pinned comment.
	Dorothy, thank you very much.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	Have a good day.
	Okay.
	You too.
	All right.
	Bye.
	Now we can start talking WEF, people.
	All right.
	Hold on one second.
	I did see a chat that I wanted to get to.
	Oh, look.
	It's the person on Twitter called a dangerous unhinged man.
	Me.
	Moi.
	Careful, don't mention freedom.
	That's extreme!
	I was having this discussion with someone just today where someone says, if you cause people to distrust the government, FBI in particular, what was the other thing they said?
	And you get angry about it.
	Well, bad people might do bad things.
	And they're like, first of all, If you trust untrustworthy and corrupt institutions, there's a problem there.
	And normal people should be politically angry.
	They should be spiritually angry that the pillars of Western society are corrupted to the core, to the point.
	I was just having the discussion.
	I just said to someone, do you recognize?
	Do we agree?
	It's yes or no, but you can make it an elaborate Kamala Harris-esque answer.
	Is the FBI corrupt?
	The person answered, no more corrupt than they've ever been.
	And I was like, yeah, that's a yes, because the FBI was effectively created or weaponized by J. Edgar Hoover to go after ideological and political enemies, to spy on them, to persecute them for political purposes.
	So if we agree it's always been what it has always been, then we agree.
	And then the only question is, well, do you tolerate it now because the ideological enemies of the time are your own ideological enemies of the time?
	But the idea that informing people such that they will reasonably come to the conclusion of distrusting these institutions which have now been corrupted to the core if they were not always corrupted to the core, is itself problematic?
	It's like telling the victim not to complain about the abuse that the abuser is inflicting on the victim because it might, It might make other people angry at the abuser.
	Preposterous, I say.
	And I'm unhinged.
	Unhinged people.
	People called me unhinged when I caught the bass on the drone.
	Don't confuse a love of life.
	Hyperactivity.
	Some might say ADHD activity.
	Don't confuse that with unhinged.
	If anyone thinks I'm unhinged, well, I must have said something unhinged.
	And I challenge you.
	No one responded to my challenge.
	Find me one clip of something that I said that was wrong that I didn't correct.
	Not only did nobody respond in any meaningful sense to that, there were some good jokes.
	Live long enough, life can teach you a lot.
	Do you also take MasterCard or Discovery?
	Nobody takes American Express anymore.
	I've never seen anybody with a Discover card, but that might just be because I'm Canadian.
	Why did the farmer file an O-1 for the Scarecrow?
	He was outstanding.
	In his field.
	Jenny's getting inky with it.
	Okay, that's good.
	And then we got...
	Now, I think this was a joke, which is why I didn't ask it.
	What if born in Canada?
	Then parents pass away.
	No, joke is in...
	Okay.
	See, I thought this was humorous in the sense that too much detail for anyone to answer on the interwebs.
	What if...
	Born in Canada, parents passed away at 13 years old and you moved with your aunt and uncle to Texas and went to high school there but came back to Canada and now poor and in the early 30s.
	Any options?
	You're going to have to, if that is in fact a correct, true and correct fact pattern, you're going to have to call a lawyer.
	Notice she said it's expensive but never actually quoted the fees.
	That's because the fees aren't inspected.
	Lawyers like her charge exorbitant amounts to file paperwork.
	People here can file themselves.
	For just the fee cost.
	I'll tell you one thing, Tin Man.
	She's not exorbitantly expensive.
	At least it wasn't for me.
	Maybe my case was more straightforward.
	I got some quotes which were exorbitantly red flag raisingly preposterous.
	But you could Google.
	It's true.
	There are filing fees.
	It's true, Tin Man.
	Lawyers are going to charge for their time and their expertise and the decades that they put into the practice in order for...
	Someone like Dorothy to reflexively be able to answer all those questions.
	Know what questions to ask you so that you don't go file an application and someone said, oh, you're from North America.
	Did you not hear of this?
	Oh, didn't know.
	Didn't know the question to ask.
	So sometimes you get what you pay for.
	There are plenty of pro se litigants out there who can represent themselves better than most lawyers could represent them in court.
	As a rule, however, there's an expression about the client who has the...
	The client who has themselves for their own attorney.
	Okay, what the heck did I just bring up there?
	Thank you.
	So, yeah, you could do it yourself.
	And you can do your own research.
	The problem is some people don't even know the question to research because they don't know the questions exist.
	And I can tell you, you could do it yourself.
	And if you miss one thing, it can be denied.
	Then you lose your filing fees.
	Oh, I should have just spent the $5,000 on a lawyer.
	Just 5,000.
	Anyways, it's your choice.
	No, but I'll tell you what.
	A mattress, apparently, without a bed frame.
	That's a no-go.
	Okay, people.
	Let me see what's going on on the rumbles.
	The refresh.
	Okay.
	The news, people.
	I wanted to start with this video clip, but I wanted to be fair to Dorothy, who might not want to be interluded.
	What's the word for something?
	Interlude, I believe, is the word.
	Who may not have wanted this as an interlude.
	So Dorothy got my disgusting, sweaty, bug-face-covered face.
	This is what I would otherwise have begun the stream with.
	Unhinged.
	Unhinged Viva.
	Let's just see what it was here.
	That's the ACLU.
	Listen to this, people.
	What's going on here?
	I'll find it when my computer decides it wants to refresh in the background.
	Is this the one?
	Is this the one?
	Nope.
	That's not the one.
	Damn it.
	Let's stop screen.
	Video clips that you think it's parody.
	And it's not parody.
	Well, let's start with this one.
	This is the CEO of Moderna, I believe, this time.
	Lamenting the fact that nobody wants to take their jab.
	They have to literally throw out 30 million doses in his own words.
	Let's hear it.
	It's sad to say.
	I'm in the process of...
	It's sad to say.
	It's sad to say.
	I'm in the process of throwing 30 million doses into the garbage because nobody wants them.
	We have a big demand problem.
	We right now have governments.
	We try to contact, not only is Seth doing great work with his team trying to get demand into the countries, but also we contacted through the embassies in Washington, every country, and nobody wants to take them.
	It's sad to say.
	I'm in the process of throwing 30 million doses into the garbage because...
	Let me just stop right there.
	I hate it.
	When people who are speaking on behalf of companies of which they are a part say, I. It's my own thing.
	I hate it.
	We.
	We are in the process.
	We as in the entity that is Moderna.
	It's not I like...
	He's the CEO.
	Maybe he thinks it's all his.
	Typically, there's no I in team.
	And this guy might think that there's no team.
	He only has people serving him.
	In his company.
	I'm in the process of throwing out...
	It's sad.
	It's almost like there's a demand problem.
	Pourquoi est-ce qu 'il y a un problème de demande?
	Why would there be a demand problem?
	Maybe because you're putting out a product that nobody wants even though you're giving it away for free.
	Maybe the problem is the product.
	No, no, no.
	The problem is the people.
	They don't know what's good for them.
	We have a big demand problem.
	We have a big demand problem because nobody wants it.
	And it can't be that nobody wants it because even if you've gotten it four of them or five of them, it's not clear that it's doing that which it was sold to do.
	It's not because the product itself is problematic.
	It's because the lowly plebs are problematic.
	They don't understand.
	They don't understand they need it.
	We right now have governments.
	We try to contact...
	By the way, this woman in the back looks like it's the biggest tragedy that this woman could have ever experienced in her life.
	The people don't know what's good for them.
	We need to go straight to the governments to get the governments to compel the people to submit to it because they just don't know.
	They have a big demand problem.
	Seth was doing great work with his team trying to get demand into the countries.
	Trying to get demand into the countries.
	Do you know what that's called?
	That's called coercion.
	That's called government.
	When you don't want something and the government is making you or getting you to need it, that's called coercion.
	That's not called consent.
	That's not called demand.
	That's called imposition.
	Like through the embassies in Washington, every country, and nobody wants to take them.
	Nobody wants to take them.
	Maybe...
	Maybe that's a sign of a problem of the product and not of the people.
	Just maybe.
	But if you had any lingering doubts, let's just go to the news of the day.
	This is not a case of schadenfreude, people.
	I say it's not a case of schadenfreude because here's the news.
	Let's just click on it right here.
	Albert Bourla, the CEO of Pfizer, posted, what did he say?
	August 15?
	I believe he posted it today.
	Albert Bourla, CEO of Pfizer.
	Not a doctor, actually.
	I believe he has experience in veterinary treatment.
	CEO of Pfizer, I would like to let you know that I have tested positive for COVID-19.
	Thoughts and prayers.
	You'll get through this, Pula.
	I am thankful to have received four doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, and I'm feeling well while experiencing very mild symptoms.
	I am isolating, and I started a course of Paxlovid.
	Everyone know what Paxlovid is?
	What's that you don't?
	Who do you think makes Paxlovid?
	Oh, Pfizer prescription.
	What's this?
	What is Paxilovit, actually?
	New oral antiviral treatment.
	What an awesome thing to turn your illness into an ad for your company.
	The first product that we made, by the way, don't take my word for it.
	Take Boola's word for it.
	The first product that we made that we told you was going to be eh.
	That we told you.
	We were so proud.
	It was a marvelous breakthrough.
	The first product that we, Pfizer, made.
	Which we told you.
	What was this from?
	April 1st?
	I didn't realize it was April 1st.
	Is that April 1st or January 4th?
	It has to be...
	Yeah, it's April 1st.
	It wasn't an April Fool's joke, people.
	Albert Bourla, CEO of Pfizer.
	Excited to share that updated analysis from our Phase 3 study with BioNTech.
	Let me just make sure of that.
	Oh, yeah, same one, same one.
	Also showed that our COVID-19 vaccine...
	Was 100% effective in preventing COVID-19.
	100% effective.
	My goodness, what a difference a year and four months.
	What difference a year and four months makes.
	So their first product, excited to share, 100% effective in preventing COVID-19 cases.
	That's 100% effective, unless I'm misreading something at preventing transmission.
	It went from there to...
	I've had four doses, people, and I still got it.
	But don't worry, I'm taking Paxilvid, our other product, which is designed to do something which, if it's as effective as the original thing, is not going to be effective at all.
	Turning his illness into an ad for the company to further advertise products when the first advertisement of the first product as sold was false.
	I won't say it was a lie.
	I'm not sure what the Phase 3 study showed.
	Such that it could allow one to come to the conclusion and allow one to make the statement, this was a lie.
	I don't know what phase three studies said.
	I think it might have been a lie.
	I think maybe the phase three studies could not have allowed any reasonable medical professional to come to this conclusion, but he said it publicly on April 1st.
	100% effective in preventing it.
	Oops.
	A year and a half later, I've had four shots.
	I still got it.
	But trust me, it would have been worse had I not had my four shots.
	Go take Paxilvid.
	But it doesn't stop there, people.
	It doesn't stop there.
	Hold on.
	It doesn't stop there.
	Because he's not the only one advertising Paxilvid.
	Hashtag brought to you by Pfizer.
	Oh, sorry, I forgot to mention.
	Yeah, I said whittily.
	Apparently, it only becomes 100% effective in preventing COVID-19.
	His words, not mine.
	YouTube overlords, Twitter overlords.
	Apparently it only becomes 100% effective after the fifth dose.
	Right, Albert Bourla?
	Hashtag.
	No response.
	But don't worry, he's not the only one taking his illness resulting from a product that they were selling not working as advertised in order to sell another product that they're also selling to...
	Counter the fact that their initial product doesn't work as advertised.
	He's not the only one doing that.
	And for those of you who might be thinking, my goodness, that sounds...
	It's like we're in the matrix and we just had a glitch.
	It's like, I've had my fourth dose.
	I'd like to tell you I've recently contracted COVID and I've had my fourth dose, but I'd like to thank the efficiency of the virus for making it better than it would have been, even though I can no longer verify and cannot verify what would have been had I not done what I did.
	But what I did didn't work to not prevent what happened.
	Now, if it sounds slightly familiar...
	Viva's talking too fast.
	He's unhinged.
	He's crazy, people.
	If it sounds familiar, if it sounds almost like a religious prayer, and I say this with utmost of respect to religion, because there's nothing wrong with religious prayer, it's good to focus.
	But if this, let me rephrase, if this sounds like a cultish mantra, let's just go that way.
	The nighttime is the right time.
	The nighttime...
	Anybody who gets that reference, the nighttime is the right time.
	If it sounds like a cultish mantra, it might be because it is.
	Look at this.
	I went, go to Google, go to...
	You don't go to Google.
	Google will be better.
	Put in, I've tested positive, I'd like to thank the vaccine, and then just put in politicians' names afterwards.
	And when I said, you know, don't worry, Burla is not the only one selling Paxlovid as a counter to the fact that the original product Pfizer was selling didn't work to do what they said it was going to do.
	Don't worry, you got Gavin Newsom also.
	Just look at this.
	People, I had to stop because if I kept going, I was going to go crazy.
	I felt like I'm taking crazy pills.
	I'm living in crazy town.
	I had to stop because if I put any more in, nobody would be able to read the text when they expanded this.
	They're endless.
	But let's just go through them.
	Gavin Newsom.
	Selling Paxilovit.
	I'd like to know.
	I'd like to know.
	I don't know.
	Interwebs?
	Does Gavin Newsom own any stock in Pfizer?
	Or any of its subsidiaries?
	Gavin Newsom.
	May 28th, 2022.
	This a.m.
	I tested positive for COVID-19.
	And I'm currently experiencing mild symptoms.
	Grateful to be vaccinated.
	And for treatments like Paxilvid, I'm following health guidelines and will be isolating while I work remotely.
	Wishing everyone a safe and healthy Memorial Day weekend.
	He's vaccinated.
	Then we got Barack Obama.
	This one was from February, earlier this year.
	I just tested positive for COVID.
	I've had a scratchy throat for a couple of days, but I'm feeling fine otherwise.
	Michelle and I are grateful to be vaccinated and boosted, and she has tested negative.
	It's a reminder to get vaccinated if you haven't already.
	Even as cases go down.
	Oh, is it a reminder?
	I'm no math or statistician here.
	I did study logic as a specific class when I got my honors degree in philosophy.
	And there are whole equations for this.
	If A, then B. And they have, like, you know, their little mathematics.
	I've been double-vaxxed and boosted.
	And I still got the Rona.
	It's a reminder to get vaccinated if you haven't already.
	That's an interesting conclusion to draw from that set of facts.
	At least he's not selling packs of it.
	Lori Lightfoot, mayor of Chicago.
	This is from, oh, January.
	Earlier today, I tested positive for COVID-19.
	I'm experiencing cold-like symptoms, also known as COVID-19, but otherwise feel fine, which I credit to being vaccinated and boosted.
	A world in which One cannot say what a woman is because they're not a biologist.
	All of a sudden, they can pretend to be doctors when they are failed mayors of crime-ridden cities.
	I feel fine.
	I credit the fact that I've got the Rona to the fact that I'm vaccinated and boosted.
	Oh, she's vaccinated and boosted.
	I will continue to work from home while following.
	Are we noticing a trend in these tweets, in the drafting, in the phraseology, in the structure?
	Count the times we see grateful.
	Obama's grateful.
	Wait.
	Is Obama grateful or is Obama grateful?
	He's grateful.
	Right there.
	Newsom's grateful.
	Mayor Lightfoot's not grateful.
	She's just...
	She attributes her success of living to the boosts.
	Elizabeth Warren is grateful.
	I regularly test for COVID.
	And while I tested negative earlier this week, today I tested...
	Positive.
	With a breakthrough case.
	My goodness, when every blue checkmark politician has a breakthrough case, it's no longer a breakthrough.
	It's a new rule, people.
	Breakthroughs are exceptional, not standard.
	I love it, though.
	Why don't you just say I tested?
	What the heck is this preamble?
	I regularly test for COVID.
	And while I tested negative earlier this week, yeah, because you didn't have COVID earlier this week, and now you got COVID.
	A breakthrough case, though.
	When is this one from?
	Oh, this one's from December.
	Maybe in December they were considered breakthrough cases because they hadn't happened to everyone who was vaccinated already.
	I think we can all put aside now, we can retire the word breakthrough for COVID cases in the double-vax, triple-vax, quadruple, and quintuple-vax.
	We can retire that term now.
	It's no longer breakthrough.
	It's just the rule.
	Thankfully, I am experiencing mild symptoms and am grateful for the protection provided against serious illness that comes from being vaccinated and boosted.
	Albert Bourla, we already got him.
	Did he say grateful?
	Ingrate.
	Oh, he's thankful.
	Good enough.
	Amina J. Muhammad, I actually don't know who this is, but it's a blue check mark.
	Just pulling up the, you know.
	I have tested positive for COVID-19.
	Grateful to be one of the privileged to have been vaccinated.
	Wow, just throw them all out there.
	As I think of the millions still without protection, they're doing fine, Amina.
	There's a lot of countries where the vaccination rates are not that high.
	They're doing fine.
	I'll let the statisticians determine whether or not they're even doing better.
	Let us continue to push for vaccines, leaving no one behind.
	Peter Welch.
	This evening I tested positive for COVID.
	This is in March.
	When was Amina?
	Oh, June.
	This evening, I tested positive for COVID.
	Thankfully, my symptoms, which started this morning, are mild.
	I'm grateful for the protection I have for my vaccine and booster, if you're eligible.
	Hey, dude, insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
	I will be isolating.
	John Tory, this morning I tested positive for COVID-19.
	I'm thankful that I've been fully vaccinated and have the best protection possible against COVID-19.
	I know this also gives you the best chance at a quick recovery so I can be back to a busy in-person schedule.
	And then we've got Hillary Clinton.
	When was this one from?
	March.
	I just need to make sure this is real.
	Okay, that's a real account.
	Well, I've tested positive for COVID.
	I've got some mild cold symptoms, but I'm feeling fine.
	I'm more grateful than ever for the protection vaccines can provide against serious illness.
	Please get vaccinated and boosted.
	If you haven't already.
	Because it worked for us.
	Oh, so I had to stop with the montage because I ran out of space.
	And I felt like I was taking crazy pills.
	I should go back to the chat.
	Let's take some comments in the chat.
	Did I miss a super chat from Etienne de Gaulle?
	Oh, here we go.
	Here it is.
	Right here.
	So fortunate to be Veed.
	I was worried about not having enough for retirement in a few decades.
	But my new case of...
	Okay.
	No medical advice.
	Yeah.
	And then...
	Viva, did you have your new bug butter on your toast today?
	We are going to make it through this period.
	We're going to look back at this period.
	And I want history to mock relentlessly everyone we just saw in that montage.
	And I do hope history does not judge all of the players in this madness kindly.
	They need to be remembered for what they are.
	It is cultish propaganda.
	And my question is, who drafted, who crafted, who syndicated all of those responses?
	Is it an accident that they all look the same?
	They are all structured the same.
	They all use the same terminology.
	People want us to believe that Bilderberg doesn't exist and it's whatever.
	I'm listening to John Ronson's book.
	I haven't finished it yet.
	I haven't come to a conclusion yet.
	But whether or not people meet in a room and there's one person pulling the strings, I mean, I'm not saying that...
	All of these people meet in a room at the WEF convention in Davos where they discuss all of these things and draft and craft their responses and policies.
	I'm not saying that that actually happens, even though it actually happens and we all know it and we all see it and I'm going to get to it in a second.
	The difference between conspiracy theory and reality is framing.
	Who do you think they are?
	You think there's this one evil person sitting in a room and they meet around a table in the dark?
	No!
	They have conferences in Davos and they invite people.
	And when people are paying attention to what happens, people get outraged.
	People start realizing, hmm, maybe this thing called the Great Reset, which we were told didn't exist, maybe now that we know it actually exists because we saw the freaking PowerPoint presentation at a convention where they invited political leaders from across the country to discuss how they were going to exploit the COVID pandemic to enact change for equity.
	Maybe now that we know it actually happens.
	Stop calling it a dark room with certain players and just recognize it for what it is.
	It's in your face and it's real.
	But that's unhinged.
	It's unhinged to recognize that what they call conspiracy theory simply because they describe it in a peculiar fashion is reality in real time going on right now.
	I saw someone inquiring.
	I think they were inquiring into my vaccination status, which...
	I'll tell you one thing.
	Nobody's vaccination status is anybody's business.
	Nobody's vaccination status is anybody's business.
	And I would never have the audacity or the intrusive nature to think it's any of my business, what you've done with your body.
	Okay.
	Let's see here.
	Let's go through the chat.
	I want to see if it's, I'm also having difficulty determining satire from seriousness and other.
	Let's see what we got here.
	Okay, it doesn't matter.
	I'll scroll down to the chat.
	So, yeah, what they describe as conspiracy theory in order to describe people as unhinged is they frame it in a way that is an actual sort of like...
	Caricaturization of what is actually going on.
	But don't take my word for it.
	Trust the ADL.
	The Anti-Defamation League.
	Do you remember once upon a time before...
	I don't remember when the Great Reset was confirmed.
	I do remember at one point in time people said there's no such thing as the Great Reset.
	As a term and a concept.
	They said the Great Reset...
	Doesn't exist.
	Nobody's talking about that.
	And you're crazy for thinking it.
	It was, I'll say, marginalized.
	It was demonetized on YouTube.
	You use the words.
	People would demonize you and say, that's crazy.
	It doesn't exist.
	Then it became known.
	It actually existed.
	Black and white ink on paper or digital print on digital paper.
	And then it became spin.
	And it's always the same, right?
	I described it with the...
	The protest in Ottawa.
	The convoy.
	It doesn't exist.
	Then you have to acknowledge it exists, so you try to distract and confuse.
	Oh, it's not a big convoy.
	It's another one related to something else.
	Oh, then you have to admit that it exists, but you downplay it, and then you demonize it.
	Great Reset doesn't exist.
	You're crazy.
	This W-E-F.
	Great.
	Nobody.
	You're crazy.
	It doesn't exist.
	Oh, what's that?
	There's an actual PowerPoint presentation called The Great Reset.
	Well, now we've got to shift, divert.
	Let's go to the article in the ADL before we go to...
	No, let's just go to this.
	In 2020, the ADL tried to dismiss the Great Reset.
	I know because I was there.
	I know because when I heard the term the Great Reset and people talking about it, I remember my initial reflex.
	It sounds a little fishy.
	I'm not going to say it sounds Alex Jones-ish, because I think even by that time, I knew, by and large, Alex Jones was hyperbolic, but still pretty well researched.
	It sounded more like, not National Geographic, National Enquirer.
	That's what it sounded like, like Bat Boy Escapes.
	That's what was my original reaction.
	Then I realized it existed.
	And then you see this.
	In 2020, the ADL, the Anti-Defamation League, tried to dismiss the Great Reset.
	As a baseless conspiracy theory.
	In their own article, they confirmed its existence, its origin, and its objective, while nonetheless claiming it is a baseless conspiracy theory.
	Now, you have to appreciate this.
	You have to appreciate this, bearing in mind that most people don't read beyond the headlines.
	And I'm not quoting a Lazy Boy song.
	I'm, gosh darn it, what's my problem?
	I'm speaking reality.
	The headline, The Great Reset Conspiracy Flourishes Amid Continued Pandemic.
	Bearing in mind, most people are not going to read past that.
	Oh, Great Reset, it's a conspiracy?
	Okay, thank you.
	I feel reassured now.
	I don't have to worry about someone telling me I'm going to have to eat bugs.
	Even if I, Viva Fry, happen to have eaten bugs, I take pleasure out of exploring culinary delights.
	Oh, hold on.
	Let's just actually see.
	Are we demonetized?
	We're still agreeing.
	Look at that.
	Okay, good.
	I'm not going to lose this.
	Where was my window with the article?
	All right, good.
	Great reset.
	Conspiracy.
	Phew!
	For a second, I was nervous that people were actually trying to exploit the COVID pandemic to fundamentally reshape society for the plebs while changing absolutely nothing of their own lifestyles and, in fact, while continuing to enhance and increase their own opulence.
	Um, lifestyles.
	December 29, let's read the article because there's this thing called burying the lead, which is stick it so far down in the nether regions of the article, few people get to it.
	And then even those that do are going to have a great deal of difficulty trying to make other people who read that article because they read the headline.
	They might've read the first paragraph.
	You're going to have to try to convince them.
	They read that article.
	They came away from it saying it's a conspiracy theory, no evidence for it.
	And you've got to go try to convince them.
	That their memory of what they confirmed on their own as fact is in fact factually incorrect.
	And not just that, but actually totally the opposite of reality.
	December 29, 2020.
	December?
	And when did Rona hit?
	The Rona hit in March, officially.
	Since first emerging in the spring of 2020.
	Quote, the Great Reset conspiracy has gained traction with the ongoing spread of COVID-19 in both mainstream and fringe circles alike.
	Fringe.
	Do elaborate on your terms, please.
	In its most common form, listen to how they describe the conspiracy.
	Adherence to the conspiracy warn that global elites, also known as politicians and people we've never even elected but who considered themselves global elites, Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab.
	Who else can I think of offhand?
	I don't know.
	And by the way, I'm not saying global elites because I consider them to be elites.
	At all.
	It's what they consider themselves to be.
	You had that Australian woman literally talking about how the global elites are in uniform, they're in agreement on what needs to be done.
	But listen to how they describe the conspiracy theory.
	In its most basic form, it being the conspiracy theory.
	Adherence.
	Two, the conspiracy theory warned that, quote, global elites will use the pandemic to advance their interests and push forward a globalist plot to destroy American sovereignty and prosperity.
	However, there are more outlandish and pernicious strains of the conspiracy, and the adoption of this term, the Great Reset, particularly by mainstream figures with large audience, creates dangerous opportunities for ordinary Americans to be drawn deeper into the world.
	Of conspiracies.
	Anyone stops reading there, what do you think?
	Oh, it's dangerous.
	It's not just a conspiracy theory.
	It's not that it just doesn't exist.
	It's dangerous to even talk about it.
	References to the Great Reset Conspiracy can be found on a range of social media platforms, from mainstream platforms like Twitter, YouTube, to newer platforms like Parler, not anymore, maybe, to more extremist-friendly platforms like Gab and Telegram.
	Several prominent conservative pundits have also discussed the conspiracy on their television and radio shows.
	Now it's a politically weaponized conspiracy.
	It's not just dangerous and fringe.
	What did I just do here?
	It's conservative.
	Let's get to the background.
	The conspiracy surfaced in earnest in June 2020 after the World Economic Forum.
	The conspiracy.
	Do we need to go back and refresh everybody's memory as to what the conspiracy is?
	Global elites trying to exploit the pandemic to further their agenda?
	When did it start?
	The background, according to the ADL itself, the conspiracy first surfaced in earnest in June 2020 after the World Economic Forum, a global entity that seeks to impose or govern policy internationally.
	The prominent international non-governmental organization behind the annual Davos Conference introduced the Great Reset Initiative.
	an effort to reduce inequality and advance environmental initiatives in the wake of the devastation of the coronavirus.
	Can you understand what we just read?
	Sorry, I'm getting angry again.
	Some have told me I need to be more like Neil Oliver.
	Slower cadence, a nice accent.
	That way people cannot accuse me of being unhinged because I'll be so polite and so charismatic as I do it.
	Can you appreciate what we just read?
	Let me just go to the bottom of the chat and see if the chat appreciates what we just read.
	James Corbett, Canadian living in Japan.
	He has the best, greatest documentary.
	You should have him on your show.
	YouTube just banned him.
	I will have a look into it.
	Does everyone appreciate what we just read?
	It's a conspiracy theory about a group of global elites.
	Who wants to exploit the COVID pandemic.
	It's a conspiracy theory about how global elites will use the pandemic to advance their interests.
	Global elites will use this pandemic to push forward a globalist plot to destroy American sovereignty and prosperity.
	The background is...
	It's the World Economic Forum, an international non-governmental organization, also known as Elites.
	Also known as...
	Trying to usurp American independence and all national independence.
	In an effort to reduce global inequality, push global initiatives in the devastation of, in the wake of the devastation of the coronavirus.
	To exploit coronavirus to push forward their global policies at the detriment of national interests by a group of unelected global elites.
	And it goes on.
	And I'll just link this to you.
	So you can all go and read it yourselves.
	The conspiracy theory, but it pretty much exists exactly as the conspiracy theory is described by the ADL itself.
	Hinged minority.
	I like that.
	Screenshot.
	Merch shirt.
	Coming shortly.
	Hinged minority.
	It's...
	As pathological as 2 plus 2 equals 5. It's as pathological as...
	What did the torturer in 1984 coerce Winston into saying?
	It was 2 plus 2 equals 5. I'm an idiot.
	It's not a theory when proven correct, says XSFDLT.
	So you got to point it out.
	But then, you know, if you point it out...
	You also get called a whatever, ist, ite, phobe, because whenever you point it out, the people who want to call you all these isms always highlight the ethnicities and the races of the individuals who are involved in that which you are calling out, so as to paint it as though you're calling out these people not because they're doing bad things with bad policy while trying to hide it from you and demonize anybody who calls them out, but only because of...
	Their race, religion, ethnicity, creed, gender, whatever.
	Par for the course, people.
	Par for the course.
	Okay.
	So this one I've already discussed, so I'm going to take that down.
	Um.
	you Thank you.
	Oh, yeah.
	Listen to this.
	I'm going to go to my Twitter feed because there were so many today.
	If you don't get shocked and outraged, But respond logically, politically, and peacefully above all else.
	If you don't find these things horridly shocking, then at least we know we agree to disagree on humanity and morality.
	I saw this video on Libs of TikTok, and because I trust nothing.
	I trust nothing.
	I don't even trust myself, which is why I double-check myself quite often.
	I saw this video from libs of TikTok.
	I just want to make sure we're looking at the same thing.
	Libs of TikTok, who's accused of being all sorts of the isms, the phobes, et cetera, et cetera.
	Oh, son of a gun.
	I've just done something with my computer.
	They've been accused of being all of the isms, phobes, ites that you can imagine because they call out the libs of TikTok.
	Sometimes I do say that to pull out an exceedingly rare example and then try to depict it as the rule, you know, you can go on the internet and you can find whatever you want pretty much all the time.
	Whether or not there's one unhinged individual who says crazy things and then you pull that out and you say, look, this represents some sort of new rule.
	That I can appreciate as being misrepresentative of public discourse, of public policy, etc.
	You can find any number of wackos on the interwebs saying wacko things, and if you pull it out and say it represents a rule, yeah, I can appreciate that's sort of disingenuous, sort of dishonest, although still interesting to know what even the furthest of the fringe of the extremes are saying.
	Libs of TikTok is accused of doing that.
	Oh, you pull out one daycare teacher who's putting up one stupid video on TikTok or one channel that's outrageous.
	It's not representative of the overall discussion.
	Fine.
	The Boston Children's Hospital, can we then say that maybe this is reflective of the overall discourse?
	And when what you see coming out of the Boston Children's Hospital confirms, corroborates...
	What had hitherto been described as just a couple of wackos with weird accounts on TikTok, when it confirms it, can we then appreciate that this is actually perhaps what the public discourse is?
	I saw this video, and I believed it was doctored.
	It isn't.
	Spoiler alert.
	I thought it was.
	I thought it was parody that looks so good, it's believable, and that's the testament to the level of the quality of the parody.
	Listen to this.
	My child will often know that they are transgender from the moment that...
	Sorry, hold on.
	A child will often know that they are transgender from the moment that they have any ability to express themselves.
	The doctor, for those of you who can't hear, it starts quickly.
	A child will, and then it carries on.
	A child will often know that they are transgender from the moment that they have any ability to express themselves.
	And parents will often tell us this.
	We have parents who tell us that their kids, they knew from the minute they were born, practically.
	And actions like refusing to get a haircut or...
	I thought the zoom-in was to highlight the absurdity of what she was saying, not to emphasize the insight of what she's saying.
	I thought this edit was post by the people who wanted to make fun of this video.
	Standing to urinate, trying to stand to urinate, actions like refusing to get a haircut is evidence of transgenderism in children who think they can grow up to be dinosaurs or bats.
	Trying to stand to urinate or refusing.
	By the way, I wanted a mullet when I was a kid.
	I always wanted a mullet.
	I didn't know it was called a mullet.
	I asked the barber at Jean Jean on Sherbrooke in Montreal, since passed away, leave the ponytail.
	He never left it.
	Because he knew that, by and large, I say this with great respect for children, they're idiots.
	They want one thing one day and the exact opposite the next.
	They want to live off candy.
	Children need adults because they have idiotic, childish thoughts.
	That's what makes them children.
	What makes a child a child is what makes an adult an idiot.
	Adults who behave like children generally behave like children in the bad sense, not the immature, like, laughing at duty joke sense.
	Adults who behave like children are idiots.
	Children who behave like children...
	Our children.
	What makes a child a child is that their brain's not developed.
	They need to learn.
	It needs to develop.
	They need to process the world through that developing brain, which is why you don't give in to the whims of children.
	Don't want to cut your hair?
	You must be transgender.
	Oh, you want a piece sitting down?
	Transgender.
	Fusing to stand to urinate.
	Trying on siblings' clothing.
	Playing with the, quote, opposite gender toys.
	I thought they put this text in.
	To highlight the insanity of what this doctor was saying.
	I thought this text was overlaid to emphasize the stupidity of what she said.
	The same people who argue that gender is a social construct now say playing with toys of the opposite gender, a totally fabricated social construct, is indicative of something?
	It gets worse.
	It gets worse.
	Things like that.
	There is more and more a group of adolescents that we are seeing that really are coming to the realization that they might be trans or gender diverse a little bit later on in their life.
	So what we're seeing from them is that they always sort of knew something was maybe off and didn't have the understanding to know that they might be trans or have a different gender identity than the one they had been assigned.
	So that is a growing population that we are seeing and that's being recognized as being trans and able to be treated.
	Music Able to be...
	Able to be treated.
	By the way, I want to...
	Emphasize something.
	Everyone deserves respect for their own personal respect.
	Everyone's decisions deserve to be their own decisions.
	People can disagree with other people's decisions to the extent that it affects only them.
	It's nobody else's business.
	None of my business.
	I don't have to agree with your decision.
	None of my business.
	But let me just highlight this.
	So that looked like an edited, it looked like it was tinkered with to highlight the absurdity of it.
	And before I commented, I'm going to try to find the original.
	Got to try to find the original.
	Make sure that I'm not saying something that's inaccurate.
	That's the actual video, people.
	Now, by the way, I haven't looked since this morning.
	Have they disabled the comments?
	There are no comments.
	It's from the Boston Children's Hospital website.
	Know that they are transgender from the moment that they have any ability to express themselves.
	And parents will often tell us this.
	We have parents who tell us that their kids, they knew from the minute they were born practically.
	I want to show you that the edits are the same.
	And actions like refusing to get a haircut or standing to urinate, trying to stand to urinate, refusing to stand to urinate, trying on siblings' clothing, playing with the quote opposite gender toys, things like that.
	It was in the original.
	This is a doctor for the Boston Children's Hospital.
	When she talks about treatment, people should appreciate as well.
	It's not my term.
	It's not my diagnoses.
	It's the experts.
	This is from psychiatry.org.
	It's in the DSM-5, which is the...
	Diagnostic something manual.
	What does the DSM stand for?
	Diagnostic standard manual.
	It's called gender dysphoria.
	And in certain cases, above and beyond what I suspect is probably true for the vast majority of the cases, it being a developmental phase, which everybody goes through, there are diagnostic cases where it fits a criteria.
	Of a medical issue.
	What is gender dysphoria?
	This is from American Psychiatric Association, people.
	This is not my opinion.
	What is gender dysphoria?
	The term transgender refers to a person whose sex assigned at birth, usually based on external genitalia, I would say probably 99.99999% of the time, does not align with their gender identity.
	Some people who are transgender will experience gender dysphoria, which refers to a psychological distress that results from an incongruence between one's sex assigned at birth and one's gender identity.
	Though gender dysphoria often begins in childhood, some people may not experience it until after puberty or much later.
	There's a clinical term That is recognized by psychiatry called gender dysphoria in cases where it causes people significant distress.
	And there should be treatment available for that on a case-by-case basis.
	When did this become mainstream?
	That this medical condition, known as gender dysphoria, recognized by the American Psychiatric Association, defined?
	It's in the DSM-5.
	Let me just see what DSM-5 abbreviation for the diagnostic.
	Something manual.
	Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders.
	When did it become mainstream?
	And when they talk about the treatment, what types of treatments are they talking about?
	Because this is going to be the part that's going to blow your mind.
	What sort of treatments?
	Well, considering there's a lot of people out there who want to ban Conversion therapy, which is trying to make straight people, gay humans, not gay.
	There was therapy for people experiencing gender dysphoria, which is cope with it, see if you get through it, try every other mean above and beyond permanently modifying your body, because even then there are statistics as to whether or not there is nonetheless...
	This miraculous elation satisfaction with the irreparable modification to one's body that one thought would resolve the gender dysphoria in the first place.
	There's a lot of statistics on that.
	But there's a lot of treatments which are non-invasive, not permanent, which I think most people who condemn conversion therapy might nonetheless qualify as conversion therapy and might therefore say, no, don't try to therapy them out of it.
	Transform them into it.
	And wait until you hear the framing of one of the treatments known as puberty blockers, which is one of the ways some people want to promote treating gender dysphoria in developing children by blocking puberty development so that they do not develop in a manner that does not align with their Sex assigned at birth,
	also known as their genetic chromosome level, to better align with their psychological assessment of how they feel, which has nothing to do with sex but gender orientation.
	Puberty blockers.
	Listen to this.
	This is not just propaganda.
	This is not just...
	And I'm going to tell you, it's misinformation by definition.
	I'm not a doctor.
	I do happen to have read a little bit.
	What they refer to as puberty blockers, and some people say temporary and reversible, is neither temporary nor reversible in full.
	It leads to lifelong issues, bone density issues, fertility issues.
	It is neither temporary nor easily or fully reversible.
	That's why it's called puberty blockers.
	Listen to what this doctor had to say about treatment and how to describe this treatment.
	You guys are not hearing it.
	Hold on.
	Pause it, pause it, pause it.
	Now we're looking at the same thing, and now you're hearing what I'm hearing.
	This will be much more productive, people.
	When you can actually hear the video to which I'm referring.
	Here, listen.
	Hi, my name is Priya Dar.
	I'm one of the doctors at the Center for Adolescent and Young Adult Health here at the Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh.
	I wanted to talk to you guys today a little bit about puberty blockers.
	Puberty blockers are basically a medication that says, "Hey, let's just put a pause on puberty." And that can be really beneficial for younger kids who have already started the puberty process who either might go through a lot of psychological distress as they go through puberty if they're struggling with gender dysphoria.
	Or for somebody who's saying, hey, I'm not really sure if I feel comfortable in my body or what gender I truly identify with.
	Hi, my name is Preetay, a little bit about blockers.
	Puberty blockers are basically a medication that says, hey, let's just put a pause on puberty.
	Hey, let's just put a pause on puberty.
	Let's just do that little thing.
	Puberty blockers, contrary to their name.
	Or something that say, hey, let's just put a pause on puberty.
	Puberty.
	There's no alcohol in that cold brew that I'm drinking.
	Let's just see what the definition of puberty is.
	We are looking at it.
	Puberty is the time in a life.
	This is from...
	Medline Plus.
	Puberty is a time in the life of a boy when a boy or a girl becomes sexually mature.
	It is a process that usually happens between 10 and 14 for girls and 12 and 16 for boys.
	It causes physical changes and affects boys and girls' difference.
	This is almost preposterous that we need to look up the definition of puberty.
	I think we all understand.
	The point about puberty is that it's a process of Development that occurs at a specific point in time of a child's life.
	It's not something you can just say, hey, puberty, let's just go ahead and put you on pause there.
	And we'll get back to you when we're ready.
	And they're called puberty blockers, not puberty pausers.
	So this doctor says, oh yeah, that's a lesson in young adult health here at the Children's Hospital.
	That thing that's called puberty blockers, they just put puberty on pause.
	Don't worry about it.
	We'll get back to puberty when you're 16. If you're a boy and you don't develop your testosterone levels, your bone density, your muscle mass, we'll just get back to that at 16. And don't worry.
	It'll happen the same way it would have happened if it happened when it was supposed to happen during the only period of a child's life when it does happen.
	It's just a pot.
	Look at the hand gesture.
	A little bit about puberty blockers.
	Puberty blockers are basically a medication that says, hey, let's just put a pause on puberty.
	Hey, let's just put a pause on all your natural body development that only occurs at a specific point in your life and then tell you that it's temporary and reversible.
	It's shocking.
	It's shocking because if that were...
	Produced to be an ad, as a parody, to make proponents of that procedure as a rule and not the utmost of exceptions, if it were designed to make them look absurd, that's what it would be looking like.
	That's how it would be drafted, worded, edited.
	You'd even have the kitschy, corny music in the background.
	What do people who went through it say?
	We have a lot of testimonials from them.
	You know what?
	Actually, it's a good point.
	Let me just bring...
	Let me just bring one up.
	I've recently started following her on Twitter because she had an incident with the Twitterverse where it looked like Twitter was blocking people from following her.
	And it might have just been a glitch and not specific to her.
	It's Chloe.
	Chloe.
	There it is.
	Come here.
	Chloe.
	Chloe Cole.
	Just pull it up here.
	We'll flip through her timeline.
	There have been a number of people who went through the temporary and reversible procedure, which sometimes includes a double mastectomy of a developing child, because the child says, I'm 13, let's do something irreparable because of how I feel now, as though I didn't feel certain ways at 13, that I say to my parents, thank God you didn't let me do what I wanted to do when I was 13, as an adult.
	Okay, I'm having a problem getting to my stream here.
	Hold on.
	Chloe Cole.
	Share screen.
	I would love to have Chloe come on and discuss her experience.
	Female, former trans kid, started T blockers, T plus blockers, at 13, double mastectomy at 15, detransed at 16. I...
	I can't imagine.
	You have to be careful in terms of judging the parents.
	It's very, very easy.
	It's easy to do it, and it's easy just to do it harshly and remorselessly.
	You don't know what was going on, how bad the situation was, the pressure, etc.
	And I'm not sure I can follow that up with a but.
	For parents, To have allowed this or done it because parents are the guardian of the children.
	It's beyond words.
	So, interesting story with her.
	By all accounts, a lot of people become spokespersons against these temporary reversible procedures after the fact.
	And they seem to run into problems with the actual Proponents of these procedures.
	You know, I say that.
	I would have to be thoroughly convinced there are some absolutely exceptional circumstances that could not make that child abuse.
	I'm sorry.
	A double mastectomy of a 15-year-old kid?
	And I will...
	I was saying that in that video, the first one.
	Any parent...
	Who knows that their kid is transgender before the kid can express themselves?
	Sorry, you're looking at a Warshak test and all you're seeing is transgender kids.
	The problem, more often than not, lies with the parents.
	Who then say, oh, you don't want to cut your hair?
	You must be trans.
	Or you don't want to cut your hair, you're a kid and you want to try new things out.
	You plant the seed, you sit there, you pick it at that scab, and then lo and behold, kid's 11 years old and you've planted these seeds in its head.
	His or her head.
	Because of your own issues.
	Or you even have one of those exceedingly rare cases of bonafide DSM-5 gender dysphoria where you have not a question of preference, you want to change the way you feel from one day to the next, but genuine to your core distress because you don't feel like what you look like.
	Then the question is, how do you treat that?
	Short of a double mastectomy and T-plus blockers.
	I mean, it's...
	Over the top.
	Over the top.
	And I say it will change.
	This tide will change when the children become adults and start suing their parents and start suing their caregivers and start suing the doctors for having allowed this to happen in the first place.
	Money tends to change.
	Money corrupts, but money also tends to make people a little bit more cautious about what they're doing.
	Right now, everyone's getting paid and virtue signaling social media points.
	When they start getting sued into oblivion, because doctors are promoting this on kids who want tattoos all over their bodies.
	And you grow up to be an adult and you still want to do it?
	Do it.
	A kid?
	Why can't a kid get a tattoo?
	Because they might regret the decision when they reach adulthood.
	No, can't get a tattoo.
	But they can permanently transform their body.
	In the sad, socially conditioned idea that if you just let me do this, then I will feel good about myself.
	Then I won't have this distress in my mind.
	You know what might be even worse than the distress of not feeling like the way you look?
	Having done something to your body and never being able to go back to the way you looked.
	Chances are, one is either a phase or an exceedingly rare condition.
	In the other case, the chances are that you've permanently altered your body for what...
	Probably or more likely than not would have been a transitionary phase out of which you would have grown.
	You might have learned how to deal with it in ways that did not involve a double mastectomy and T-blockers at the age of 15. Etienne de Gaulle says, I used to play with my mom's perfume bottles.
	In the 70s, that was a little weird, but then I got a football for Christmas.
	I used to rub my mother's antiperspirant on my sheets when I went to camp.
	Secret.
	Secret, it had that little ball on the top.
	The blue bottle.
	Ovular, a little roll-top bottle, antiperspirant.
	I used to rub it on my sheets so that I could smell it.
	I used to wear my mother's antiperspirant.
	I used to wear Secret until I was 16. The reason why I stopped wearing Secret and all antiperspirants is because of that chemical in it, aluminum something or other.
	I don't think it's good for you.
	I noticed on all of my white shirts, when I wore antiperspirant, they would have yellow stains under the armpits.
	And then I since moved to...
	I since moved to deodorant.
	No longer have the problem.
	I want to bring this one.
	Nicholas Deshane.
	Is circumcision child abuse?
	In my view, and you feel free to disagree with me, no.
	Because it does not permanently impact the proper functioning of the entity.
	I know people are going to make the argument.
	I'm circumcised.
	Couldn't care less.
	When circumcision goes bad, it's a big problem.
	Is circumcision child abuse?
	In my view, no.
	It does not damage the way the thing is supposed to function properly.
	It arguably, I won't say improves functionality.
	It arguably avoids certain problems that some people have which are exceedingly rare, which is strangulation of the head of the wee-wee when you get a boner, an erection.
	People say it's cleaner.
	I have no basis for comparison.
	I've just heard stories.
	But no.
	I don't think so.
	Because for it to be child abuse, I think it has to alter the proper functioning of an otherwise functional organ entity.
	Piercing a child's ears?
	Child abuse?
	No.
	Ears can heal.
	You can't reattach the removed skin from the penis.
	I know all the arguments.
	I think, technically, it's probably possible to reattach skin to the penis to make it look like it's uncircumcised.
	So, no.
	That's where I draw my...
	I appreciate that other people feel differently.
	As opposed to FGM, which damages the proper functioning of an otherwise functional organ.
	Viva, was it more important society having morals with limited laws or government having laws without morals?
	I would be a proponent of having a society with limited laws in general.
	More laws, less justice, people.
	I was going to pull up a chat that I'm not going to pull up.
	Doctors are paid to circumcision.
	I know the arguments with circumcision.
	I've heard them all.
	I know where I align myself on that.
	In my view, Absolutely should be illegal.
	There's tradition, and I appreciate it.
	Metzitzah Bepeh, by the way, is the circumcision where the mohel, the rabbi who cuts it off, doesn't believe in using procedures to extract the blood and does it with the mouth.
	They don't necessarily touch the...
	They suck the blood with their mouths.
	Sometimes they use a device in between where it makes fodder for people who want to criticize Judaism as though...
	Metzizi Bepeh is the rule and not a radical exception that even most mainstream Jewish people don't tolerate or don't like.
	I don't know how insignificant the practice it is, but it's insignificant.
	But it makes the news because every now and again, a rabbi actually gives an STD to the newborn by doing this procedure where they actually suck the blood with their mouth.
	Yeah.
	No.
	I find it.
	Call me whatever you want.
	Unacceptable procedure.
	And I will...
	One of those cases where you can have laws limiting religious freedoms, because I don't believe that that is something that can be tolerated in modern society.
	Unless I am mistaken on what the actual procedure for mtsitsi bepeh is.
	But it's circumcision.
	Bepeh, the mouth is peh in Hebrew, bepeh.
	So you use your mouth to extract the blood.
	No, not for me.
	And not something that I would ever support.
	And something I would support being not permitted.
	Sporting that mullet and smelling of secret.
	Young Viva could have been such a heartbreaker.
	Yeah, don't know the M. If anybody hasn't heard about that business, Google it.
	It's exceedingly rare, but those articles always make the news in certain circles to demonize as though that type of circumcision is the mainstream circumcision in Judaism.
	Mainstream circumcision in Judaism, it's done by a moil.
	Not at the hospital, not with anesthetics.
	They put a little dab of alcohol-soaked cotton in the baby's mouth to get it a little tipsy.
	To avoid issues, potential snipping more than you should, they pull the foreskin, they put a little clamp so they make sure the head of the wee-wee is underneath and they have a razor blade and they take it off.
	It's like no bigger than half a piece of chewing gum.
	Unless you have...
	Utter incompetence.
	The only issue is my circumcision was so painful it took me a year to walk afterwards.
	That's an old one in the business, peeps.
	Okay.
	Did I miss anything here?
	Common side effect is relapse.
	That's what Biden took.
	Now, I've had that one on flag for a while, so I don't actually know what that is.
	Okay.
	Um.
	Um.
	Thank you.
	Drug the infant, then clip the weeby.
	It's wine on a cotton swab.
	Calling it drug the infant, it's like, okay, aspirin for a baby is drugging an infant as well.
	Okay, what else?
	Have I forgotten anything else?
	Let's just go back to the Twitterverse, because I think those are the big stories that we want to get to today.
	But we'll go back to home.
	Go back to this, and what were the other...
	I couldn't believe those videos.
	I mean, I just couldn't believe them.
	Because they look like parody.
	And they're coming out of medical institutions.
	And it's over the top.
	Oh, here.
	And the shocking...
	I could have told you this.
	In fact, I did tell you this two years ago.
	Hopelessness and despair.
	Two years of COVID isolation has, quote, detrimental effect on American kids.
	Oh, spoiler alert, Fox.
	It also has detrimental effects.
	I'll even venture to say it has a detrimental effect on all kids, which is why when people were doing it two years ago, some of us were calling them out and saying, are we weighing the cost benefit?
	Are we weighing the pros and the cons here?
	And now we're learning, coming out of Canada, that no, the government that trusts the science was not measuring any pros and cons.
	They actually had no science to justify anything that they were doing, but they did it anyhow.
	Because when it comes to the government, You're better off doing something tremendously stupid, absolutely devastating, than nothing at all.
	Because at the least, if you screw things up worse than it would have ever been had you done nothing at all, you've given yourself work for the next generation.
	You've just given yourself an excuse to expand your reach.
	Because you've created another problem that you think you're going to be able to solve the same way you screwed up the first problem.
	Okay.
	Oh, yeah.
	And then...
	Okay.
	Jake Tapper.
	House Republicans issued a scathing report criticizing Biden's Afghanistan withdrawal.
	Framing is everything, people.
	We live in a world where you frame the news so that the problem is not the problem.
	The problem is people reacting to the problem.
	It's the same thing with...
	Now with the FBI, which is why I'm telling everybody out there, don't do stupid things because they're going to take those stupid things that people do so they can then say, look, you can't criticize the FBI anymore because unhinged individuals are going to do unhinged things when they hear people criticizing the FBI.
	So because one unhinged person does something unhinged, you can't criticize the FBI anymore.
	And now you turn the FBI into the victims.
	And they run with it.
	And they know it.
	And it also makes you wonder whether or not people just do it or people say it's being done.
	So they can then say, don't talk about our corruption because it gets people angry.
	Don't get angry at Biden's incompetent withdrawal from Afghanistan.
	Borderline negligent.
	Pulling out your military before you pull out your people that you need the military to protect.
	Forget that.
	It's not Biden's withdrawal.
	That was incompetent, borderline criminally negligent, borderline arguably impeachable.
	The Republicans issue a scathing report about his perfect withdrawal.
	Now I'm exaggerating.
	They issue a scathing report about Biden's withdrawal.
	It's like Trump stokes anger against the FBI because of their raid, as opposed to FBI stokes anger by raiding a president's house.
	Where are those nuclear documents, peeps?
	Still waiting for them.
	Someone just said, so you just stopped protesting the tyranny because they may come down on you.
	This goes back to the disingenuous argument I had with the reporter from USA Today who said, Viva, I asked you for video evidence of you telling people not to go down to Mar-a-Lago.
	You didn't provide it.
	And I said, liar, here it is.
	Then he comes back and says, well, you didn't tell people not to protest.
	First of all, me telling people not to go to Mar-a-Lago is advice.
	I'm not in a position to tell people not to exercise their constitutional rights, which are peaceful assembly and protest.
	Yes, peaceful protest.
	Who the hell does anybody think I am to tell them not to exercise their constitutional rights?
	The question is, exercise your constitutional rights, which are predicated on exercising them peacefully and constitutionally.
	Taking a nail gun.
	To the FBI with a firearm in the hopes of breaching bulletproof glass to do whatever.
	That's not exercising your right to peaceful assembly.
	So one can say, yeah, don't break the law when you're exercising your peaceful right to protest.
	And what I decide to do on my own, because I might be more or less fearful than others, that's my own decisions.
	People are going to tell me to fault me for not telling people not to protest.
	All right, you want me to tell people also not to speak?
	Sorry.
	No, no.
	I'm telling you not to exercise your First Amendment right.
	I'm telling you that you should not exercise your constitutional rights.
	That being said, exercising your constitutional rights constitutionally is predicated on peaceful, nonviolent protests.
	Viva, because they're trying to normalize the concept of creators leading blind masses.
	They're trying to rob people of their agency and put blame on media.
	There's no question.
	Terminal insanity, they want to use it as a tool to suppress public discourse, to suppress public scrutiny, and to suppress people who have amassed a following based on the quality of their insight from dissecting and critiquing their behavior.
	I had someone say, well, you reach so many people, you have to be careful.
	First of all, I'm always careful.
	I'm always careful for a reason.
	Not just because I'm afraid, but because I have my own standards of decency and my own morality that I like to live up to.
	I would not want to be the more hyperbolic people who say things that people might take literally.
	I also have my own moral standards where I'm not going to tell people to do things that I wouldn't do myself.
	But I had this discussion with someone.
	They say, well, you reach a large audience.
	You have to watch what you say.
	First of all, yeah, I know that.
	But what you're saying right now is not watch what I say.
	It's don't say it.
	Because when you reach millions of people a month, people don't appreciate this.
	There are criminals in the world.
	There are bad people in the world.
	When you reach millions of people, when you realize, by the way, that violent crime is something like 15, let's say 20 per 100,000.
	Is that right?
	Yeah.
	Let's just say something like that.
	That means that if you reach a million people, you're probably reaching at least 200 criminals.
	At least.
	So the idea that you reach a lot of people, so shut up.
	Okay, so I can only go and express myself peacefully, legally, lawfully to a small group of Facebook friends and family.
	No.
	And by the way, let's just apply that standard consistently if that's the new standard.
	And these are the examples I give.
	First of all, PewDiePie.
	Had his name mentioned by someone who committed one of the worst atrocities ever.
	You better watch your meme reviews, PewDiePie.
	The dude who shot up the congressional baseball game posted Rachel Maddow and Bernie Sanders.
	No, because Bernie Sanders...
	No, no, that's fine.
	That's fine.
	It's weaponized outrage and it's weaponized causation versus...
	Accident.
	When something bad happens and it's an ally, it's an accident.
	When something bad happens and it's an adversary, it's causation.
	It's motivated reasoning, arguing from conclusions and not towards them, and just having two sets of standards.
	Rachel Manna?
	No.
	Bernie Sanders?
	No.
	And by the way, I say no too.
	Depending on the level of the rhetoric, Maxine Waters harassed them, get in their faces, that's too much.
	That is actively inciting people to do bad things, reasonably predictable from the nature of the discourse.
	Who was the other one?
	I forget who the other one was.
	Protest peacefully, like Trump said?
	Much more arguable.
	All hell is going to break loose tomorrow?
	I'll say much more arguable, but I can understand that people are going to maybe equate that more so with Maxine Waters-level stuff than others.
	But no.
	When someone who does something terrible has a Facebook timeline filled with Maddow and Bernie Sanders posts, it's an accident.
	There's no correlation there.
	When it's on the other side and you want to, it's causation.
	Clear-cut causation.
	We need to censor free speech.
	We need to tell our ideological adversaries how they have to deliver their message and their critique.
	Mm-hmm.
	Mm-hmm.
	I'll tell you what.
	Trying to find some chats here.
	Here, get smart.
	Viva, do you think YouTube would stop John Hinckley from promoting...
	I used the Catcher in the Rye example, actually, with someone as well.
	The dude who shot John Lennon had a copy of Catcher in the Rye in his hands.
	Oh my goodness.
	We should ban Catcher in the Rye.
	Clearly, clearly, it causes people to do bad things.
	Clearly, it's a negative influence on people.
	Let's see here in the chat.
	Let's see here in the chat.
	Crowder can't have live chat on YouTube.
	Oh, YouTube.
	They ban immediately, so it's pointless.
	And then, by the way, when you implement that type of philosophy, that type of modus operandi, what do you think it does?
	Well, it certainly motivates what is typically called a false flag.
	An individual who knows What's going to happen if they come in and start posting overtly threatening, violent messages?
	They know what's going to happen.
	So what does it incentivize?
	This is the problem with attempting to hold people responsible for the words of others.
	It incentivizes the double fakie.
	Come into a Steven Crowder and post the nastiest, most egregious, over-the-top comments in the comment section as though it's one of Crowder fans knowing that, look at this, we have to shut it down now.
	It is...
	I mean, it's Saul Alinsky rules for radicals type conduct.
	I love conspiracy theory.
	Mel Gibson and Julia Roberts.
	So that's it.
	That's it.
	I forgot where I was going.
	And, and the, I don't know about that.
	I'll have to look into it.
	The level of stories of things that you thought were fiction, what you would qualify as the most over-the-top conspiracy theory, turns out to be true.
	And the only problem then is you start looking for it everywhere, even in places where it might not exist, which is why you have to be very careful that your reflex to look for it It does not become conditioning to find it even where it doesn't exist.
	All right, peeps.
	Let's see.
	Any questions?
	I'm going to end this now, and then I'm going to go schedule a venting with Viva, although I don't know what's going to be left.
	Exclusive with locals, and we'll have a discussion over there.
	Maybe I'll go fishing with Viva.
	What time is it?
	Two o 'clock!
	People, people, people.
	Okay, first of all, listen to me.
	I say this to my subs and to my followers.
	If you respect me and my channel, You don't leave those types of comments in the chat because you know what people try to do with them.
	And I will operate on the basis that anybody leaving comments in the chat that they know that would make me embarrassed if people said, look at Viva Subs say these things.
	If you're doing it, you're doing it to sabotage me.
	And that's bad.
	So don't do that.
	That being said, even if you have the urge, I've said this for years.
	Hate is a consuming force.
	It's a black hole, and you focus on the hate.
	It absorbs you, and it causes you to do bad things.
	Don't let that happen.
	Do not stare into the abyss for too long.
	Do not look at that ring for too long.
	Hate is a consuming force.
	You can be angry, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with being angry at absolute unconstitutional laws, absolute corruption within Institutions that are supposed to be the pillars of a free society.
	But that anger has to be directed towards productive means of resolving it, which means informing.
	As improbable as it is, trying to sway other people who don't see a problem with it.
	People who say, yeah, the FBI is not corrupt.
	It's the way it's always been.
	They're halfway there.
	You just have to make them understand.
	The way it's always been was created for political corruption to persecute.
	And unlawfully interfere with, spy on, and damage ideological adversaries.
	Then you can say, okay, fine.
	There's a problem.
	How do we resolve it?
	There's a problem, but I'm not only accepting that problem now because it's directed at someone I actually hate.
	You cannot tolerate an injustice against someone you hate thinking it will not come back and bite you in the ass because it will.
	Okay.
	Florida, maybe we'll do that exclusive on locals.
	I gotta start doing...
	Some exclusive stuff to locals, and then I can actually swear on locals.
	No, and that's not even true.
	I will not swear on platforms where I can even swear just because I can because it doesn't make me feel good.
	All right, people.
	It's early in the day, unless you're overseas, in which case you're done.
	If you have an exercise, do it tomorrow.
	Get out.
	Sunlight.
	Sunshine.
	Talk to people in real life.
	It's actually quite fun.
	Stay vigilant.
	Stay civil.
	And I forgot the third one.
	Go.
	Have a good day.
	I'll talk to you all soon.
	Oh, I'll see you tomorrow.
	Roman Baber and Jim Carajalio.
	So we're going to have some Canadian content tomorrow.
	Wednesday, we've got a great sidebar.
	So I'll see y 'all tomorrow.
	Get out there.
	Have a good day.

▲