All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 3, 2022 - Viva & Barnes
14:09
Election Day in Quebec! Jan. 6 Trial Begins! Trudeau Bad Man AND MORE! Viva Monday!
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
But that's why they're censoring us.
The Internet's saying nobody knows who first coined it is.
If the situation was hopeless, the propaganda would not be necessary.
So as negative as things are, we got Bolsonaro.
We got Giorgio Moroni in Italy.
We've got the new Canadian leader set to beat Trudeau, who's totally anti-New World Order.
I mean, you look all over the world.
We are rising right now.
But that concerns me because the deep state globalists are going to throw out...
Everything they've got.
They're going to pull out all the stops.
What are you concerned about?
What do you see happening?
But that's why they're censoring us.
You've got to notice something.
Just notice the fact that Alex Jones never mentions the Canadian leader by name.
Presumably he's referring to Pierre Poilièvre.
I'd be shocked if he was referring to Maxime Bernier.
Never mentions it by name.
Nobody knows who first coined it is.
By the way, I do like the expression.
If anybody needs a little bit of a white, pale, silver lining.
If it were hopeless, they wouldn't be fighting so hard.
When you fight corruption, corruption fights back.
And the more desperate the fight, the more desperate the fight back.
If the situation was hopeless, the propaganda would not be necessary.
So as negative as things are, we got Bolsonaro.
We got Giorgio Moroni in Italy.
We've got the new Canadian leader set to beat Trudeau.
I don't know who said he's set to beat Trudeau.
I think he's talking about Pierre Poilier.
By all accounts, he is because...
He's totally anti-New World Order.
I mean, you look all over the world.
We are rising right now, but that concerns me because the deep state globalists are going to throw out everything they've got.
They're going to pull out all the stuff.
Hold on, hold on.
I wanted to show you the tweet because this tweet, that was the video going along with this man's tweet.
Mark Gerritsen.
Let me just make sure the audio is good here.
People, the echo should be better today.
If you've seen what I've done to my home office, there are my kids' gym mats perpendicular to the floor, balancing to block the echo until we can get...
This is going to be Jablinski gaming all over.
I'm going to soundproof this room one day.
One day it's going to happen.
But let's go to Mark Garretson's tweet.
Mark Garretson, for those of you who don't know, liberal MP for Kingston.
And the islands, parliamentary secretary to the government, House leader, Senate, pushing for progress.
I'm going to get to his Ukrainian flag in his bio as a member of parliament in a second.
It's hard not to think Pierre Poiliev is an alt-right populist when you stumble upon something like this.
Oh, all of a sudden, by the way, let's just even assume, let's just grant Mark Gerritsen, the deep thinker, philosophizer that he is.
That Alex Jones is arguably one of the most alt-right commentators out there.
I would disagree with that.
Doesn't matter.
Let's grant him that.
Alex Jones is an alt-right commentator.
One of the most alt-right commentators, whatever the heck that means.
All of a sudden, Pierre Poilievre is now guilty because a third party spoke his name.
Is that how it works now, Mark Gerritsen?
Is that how it works?
We are not only guilty of the sins of others, we are guilty by association when third parties speak our name without our knowledge and also without even mentioning our name.
They're so tight.
They're so alt-right populist types, the two of them, that Alex Jones didn't even refer to Pierre Poilievre by name.
But let's just set that aside to the substance of what Alex Jones was saying.
The globalist elites are going to do everything they can.
Globalist now has taken on a term where anybody who uses it is going to be pigeonholed.
It used to be New World Order, NWO, which was a band from the 80s, if I'm not mistaken.
Alex Jones, in this clip, is talking about how the globalist elites are going to throw everything they can to try to stop the populist uprising that we see Brazil, Italy, hopefully in Quebec today.
We'll see.
We'll see.
Pardon, parcel of what we're going to discuss today.
They're going to throw everything they can at it.
And what does Mark Gerritsen do?
He starts throwing stuff at it by implying guilt by association of Poilier.
As if, by the way, there's something wrong with being a populist.
As if there's something wrong with listening to the people.
Obviously, to the elitist...
I was going to swear.
I'm not going to start the week by swearing.
Obviously to the political elite who think themselves superior to the lowly hoi polloi, to the people.
They don't listen to the people.
They tell the people what to think.
Obviously to the political elite, being a populist is a problem.
Some might say that it's not a problem, that it's actually probably better government when you listen to the people than when you dictate to the people.
I might be one of those people.
But let's just explore Mark Garrison for a moment.
Hold on.
I haven't done this.
I haven't done this.
Let's see what happens.
Mark, what was his name?
Mark Gerritsen?
Mark Gerritsen, member.
Okay, that's it.
So Mark Gerritsen.
Let's see, people.
Let's see.
Well, he doesn't have a landing page, unless did I spell it wrong?
He doesn't seem to have...
Well, I don't know.
Who's Isabel Gerritsen?
Oh, that would be funny if it's his wife.
Freelance journalist at Thomson Reuters.
Okay, hold on.
We'll do this very quickly, people.
Mark Gerritsen.
I was spelling it wrong.
Let's see what he has to say on Twitter.
WEF conspiracy?
Check.
UN conspiracy?
Um, maybe.
Oh, and he calls him PP.
Because he's funny.
Yes.
How are you doing?
Thanks for coming.
And we'll do a shot here.
I have one question.
Fire away.
Yes.
Yes.
I haven't read it.
I don't know what it is.
That's interesting.
Do you want to do a shot?
Sure.
All right.
Very good.
Thank you.
All right.
I'll have to look at it.
I have a simple rule.
If I haven't read it, I don't comment on it.
It's not a bad rule.
Thank you for the good recommendation.
I'll have a look at it.
Thanks a lot, guys.
I don't know if he's being facetious.
PP's dilemma.
Because a member of parliament thinks it appropriate to refer to another individual as PP.
When is this from?
August 11, 2022.
So Mark Gerritsen was old enough to know better.
Peepee's dilemma, once you sign on for one conspiracy theory, everyone assumes you are all in.
The game this man is playing is dangerous.
What's the WEF conspiracy, Mark?
Hold on, I've just got to see something here.
What's the WEF conspiracy?
So he doesn't have a landing page that we can know.
Certainly seems sympathetic, but hold on, Mark Gerritsen, let me just see this, wife.
Okay, so it's not...
Okay, whatever.
The sleuths of the internet can put this together.
But Mark Gerritsen is now writing off Pierre Poilievre as a WEF conspiracy theorist.
PP Poilievre, because it's so cute.
Speaking of globalists, and let me just get this off my chest, I think it's highly inappropriate for members of parliament, for members of government of one country, to have...
Barring an excuse that I can think reasonable, maybe citizenship, maybe...
Barring a reasonable explanation and not a politically opportunistic one, I think it's very questionable for a member of government to have another country's flag in their official bio.
Liberal MP for Kingston.
I don't know if this would be qualified as official.
I think it's inappropriate.
For a member of parliament to be flying the flag of another country in their bio wherein they do government business.
And I would argue, even in their personal bio, to the extent that it's still members of government.
This is not to be mean.
This is not to be intolerant.
This is to say, this man is supposed to represent Canadians.
We know that he has disdain for the populists.
We know that he has disdain for Pippi Poiliev because he's so original, such a mature member of parliament.
They should not be flying other countries' flags in their bio when they are supposed to be representing the citizens of their own country.
That's not to say that other people...
You can show your loyalty.
You can show your allegiance.
But when you are a representative of the people in government, your allegiance should be to your people.
I would say only to your people, but at the very least, primarily.
With an emphasis for your people.
And when you fly the flag of another country, especially when it's done in a willy-nilly virtue-signaling manner, it can cause people to question your loyalties.
Mark Gerritsen, I've asked you this on Twitter twice, who do you represent first, Canadians or Ukrainians?
You may believe thoroughly in the Ukrainian cause, and that's your right.
But who do you represent?
And when Canadians see the federal government sending billions of dollars to finance, fund, and arm...
A foreign conflict when the east coast of Canada itself has just been destroyed and now needs to be rebuilt.
People can question your loyalty and rightfully so.
That, and I don't know what's going on, but I can make a predictive assessment that if I take a Twitter handle of an individual who has a Ukrainian flag in their bio, I'm going to see some very questionable takes on subject matter.
I could predict how they're going to align.
Or what positions they're going to take on.
For example, Trump.
By and large, not as a hard, fast rule.
January 6th.
By and large, not a hard, fast rule.
COVID.
By and large, not a hard and fast rule.
I can, more likely than not, if I were to bet money on it, I would make money.
Predicting that the people who have changed their profiles to add a Ukrainian flag are going to have bad takes.
Ill-informed takes, and highly judgmental takes on a great number of things.
I don't know why.
I don't know how.
I was reluctant to come to this conclusion, but my goodness, the world has rubbed my face in it.
Mark Gerritsen, Canadian Member of Parliament, criticizing Alex Jones for talking about globalism, has the Ukrainian flag in his bio.
while the federal government of Canada ships billions of dollars to finance foreign conflict to the detriment of Canadian citizens.
Mark, you may have proved a point, and it may not be the one you intended to prove when you woke up this morning.
With that said, people, good afternoon.
I'm having my...
This only has 99 milligrams of caffeine in it, so I can actually have two of these in a day and be fine.
Remove COVID circuit, insert I stand with Ukraine circuit.
It's a logical conclusion.
Janie Cavender, thank you very much.
What was I going to say here?
Good afternoon.
It's election day in Quebec.
We're going to do the whole election day in Quebec segment on both Rumble and YouTube, and then we're going to bring it over to Rumble.
Why?
Because this is important, and I don't want the segment.
I'm calling it segments now.
Not only do I have to come to grips with the fact that I have a show, I now have to come to grips with segments within the show.
We're going to do this because it's a big story.
It may not be of interest to anybody, but I don't want to break it up into two pieces.
I should have, however, verified that we are live on the Rumbles.
Give me one second to find where it is.
Viva Fra on Twitter.
People are on Twitter, StreamYard, SEC, Quebec, Oath Keepers, New Income.
Where the heck is...
Okay, hold on, people.
I'm just going to go right here.
Rumble.
Make sure we're live, and then we're going to continue, because it's Election Day in Canada.
In Quebec, I'm sorry.
In Quebec.
Uh-oh.
Are we live?
Yeah, we are live.
Good.
Let me take that chat down.
It's duty, baby.
It's Election Day in Quebec.
And I think everybody should know what's at stake, although it's probably too late.
It's already written.
We just now have to live through the day, live through the results, and see.
Are we going to have something of a similar surprise?
Are the pollsters going to have been off?
Are they going to have been wrong?
Are we going to see a populist uprising in the political sense in Quebec, the way we saw in Italy, the way we saw that the pollsters were off?
In Brazil.
I hope I'm not screwing up.
It's Brazil.
Bolsonaro.
We're going to see.
Are we going to have something along those lines today in Quebec?
Provincial elections.
The CAQ.
And I'm not saying that to be funny.
That's what they're called.
CAQ.
CAQ.
It's either a bad word or a poop.
It's CAQ.
La Coalition Avenir du Quebec.
That is the current political party that is in power.
And we're having provincial elections.
To see, you got Coalition Avenir de Québec, you got the Liberals, you got, not the Bloc, but Parti Québécois.
▲
Export Selection