Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 18, 2022 - Viva & Barnes

01:33:17

Taco Tuesday - From Trudeau to Danchenko to Climate Change - Viva Frei Live!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Dr. Fauci said that if hospitals get any more overcrowded, they're going to have to make some very tough choices about who gets an ICU bed.
	That choice doesn't seem so tough to me.
	Vaccinated person having a heart attack?
	Yes, come right on in.
	We'll take care of you.
	Unvaccinated guy who gobbled horse goo?
	Rest in peace, Wheezy.
	We've still got a lot of...
	Let's listen to this a couple of times.
	We're going to have to make some very tough choices about who gets an ICU.
	But that choice doesn't seem so tough to me.
	Vaccinated person having a heart attack?
	Yes, come right on in.
	We'll take care of you.
	Unvaccinated guy who gobbled horse goo?
	Rest in peace, Wheezy.
	You're...
	That's...
	I'm going to stop it there.
	The only thing I want to highlight.
	Is the individual who tweeted this.
	Five times August.
	Has been on the show.
	Will be on the show again.
	The musician of our time, for the times that we're living through, tweeted this.
	And he's got a new album coming out on vinyl, for anybody who's into vinyl.
	He's got his album coming out.
	The most beautiful music you've ever heard.
	Like Bob Dylan meets COVID.
	Meets the pandemic.
	Can we just appreciate one thing here?
	Two things.
	Maybe three things.
	Dr. Fauci said that at hospitals...
	Dr. Fauci said, like Dr. Fauci said, it's like a little brother saying, but mom said, you know, Dr. Fauci said that I'm entitled to act like an inhumane buffoon, so I'm going to go ahead and do it.
	That's number one.
	Dr. Fauci said that at hospitals...
	I was just following orders.
	...get any more overcrowded.
	They're going to have to make some very tough choices about who gets an ICU.
	That choice doesn't seem so tough to me.
	Hey, let's do overweight people, Jimmy.
	I mean, you're looking good now, but let's do overweight people while you're at it.
	Vaccinated person having a heart attack?
	Yes, come right on in.
	We'll take care of you.
	Unvaccinated guy who gobbled horse goo?
	Rest in peace, Wheezy.
	The fake news about the horse goo.
	Now, I can't remember if it was ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine.
	It was ivermectin.
	Repeating the rubbish about the horse goo.
	What I love also is that...
	He doesn't even make it clear that he's refusing entry to the hospital.
	In his ideal view of the world, the unvaccinated, it's not clear if the person in his hypothetical, inhumane, you know, maniacal version of the world was even going to the hospital for COVID.
	Sounds like he was comparing two heart attack issues.
	If one wants to read it that way.
	Oh, heart attack?
	Okay, come on in.
	Heart attack, but unvaccinated, goo-eating thing?
	Okay, no.
	Let's just even assume he was saying, all right, someone who didn't get vaxxed comes to the hospital and needs treatment.
	And there's someone with a heart attack there.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	What if the person's heart attack was from eating McDonald's three times a day for the last 20 years?
	That guy gets priority over someone who wanted some form of medical autonomy, even if you happen to disagree with it?
	Heron Kimmel?
	Everything about this is wrong.
	And the way the crowd cheers like a bunch of buffoon...
	Clapping seals.
	We still got a lot of Pan Dimwits out there.
	How did that pan out Pan Dimwits?
	Oh yeah, that's right.
	Was that back in the day when Dr. Fauci was still saying it would prevent transmission?
	Was that back in the day when Fauci was saying you don't need to wear a face mask because they're useless before he said you need to wear a face mask?
	Was that back before Fauci denied funding?
	Through third-party NGOs, gain-of-function research in a lab in Wuhan, China.
	Was it before then, Jimmy?
	Oh, but Fauci said, Fauci said, I get to treat other humans like animals, so I'm going to do it.
	Mengele said things also.
	Other historical doctors who have committed atrocities said things, and people, I can see how it happened in real time.
	Oh, well, the doctor said so.
	Doctor said it's okay to do it.
	Doctor said it's okay to...
	Let someone die because they didn't do something I thought they should have done.
	The doctor said it.
	Oh, and by the way, the man's in there for a heart attack because he weighs 350 pounds, hasn't exercised a day in his life, ate deep-fried Twinkies and whatever.
	Oh, no, no.
	I'm not going to judge him.
	Or am I, Jimmy?
	In your next era of eugenics, do you then say people who are in the hospital for heart attacks because they're overweight?
	Sorry, if there's someone who's healthy, if there's someone who's genetically...
	Worthy of treatment.
	They get priority treatment.
	Never let anybody forget about the atrocities that not just people, but the people with the greatest powers and the greatest responsibilities owed to their fellow humans.
	Never let Jimmy Kim...
	Oh, he cried about a lion that got shot in...
	What was the dog's name?
	Not the dog.
	The lion's name.
	He cried about a lion while he...
	Cheers on the death of fellow humans with whom he has medical disagreements.
	Never let him forget.
	It's up to you whether or not you want to forgive.
	I think forgiveness is a useful thing.
	Not so much for the person forgiven, but for the person who forgives.
	So they can, with any luck, try to cleanse some of that anger out of their heart.
	Now, I'm going to go to the chat here and put the link to rumble.
	Link to rumble.
	Here.
	Booyah.
	And we're going to pin this.
	Jimmy Kimmel.
	Yeah, that's it.
	I wholeheartedly condone medical discrimination and then let them die, Wheezy.
	Yeah, Viva Rock and the Sideshow Fro.
	Well, I washed my hair and brushed it yesterday, so the curls are sort of out.
	Then anyone who watched the local stream earlier knows that I then applied argon oil to my hair.
	So it's not quite the soul glow curls.
	It looks like a cotton ball went through the dryer.
	But it smells good, it feels good, and I could go another week without washing my hair.
	The sky is falling.
	Good afternoon, Viva and friends.
	Deep-fried Twinkies are fantastic, though.
	There's a lot of things that are fantastic.
	And I guess a deep-fried Twinkie every now and again is not an issue.
	The idea...
	That you would predicate medical treatment for emergency medical treatment based on your moral judgment at the time.
	I mean, Jimmy must have forgotten when he wasn't necessarily the healthiest physiques of humans.
	As far as I'm concerned, if we're going to make medical judgments about people based on their life choices in terms of deciding whether or not they get treatment, why stop it?
	Hey, do smoking.
	Do drinking.
	Do people who don't...
	Follow the recommended intake of meat.
	Let's just have our very own discriminatory triage at hospitals.
	Oh, and by the way, Jimmy, above and beyond your Karl Malone impression from a while back, do you know who you would statistically be targeting with your inhumane...
	Would it qualify as...
	Eugenics policy?
	Whether or not it's eugenics.
	Do you know who you'd be targeting disproportionately?
	Jimmy Kimmel through that policy?
	Black Americans.
	You would be targeting disparately minority Americans who are reluctant to get the jab because of the historical abuse from their very government.
	So congratulations, progressive Jimmy.
	Very progressive of you.
	You may as well have said, I am prepared to proportionately and disparately exclude...
	Black Americans from the healthcare system who are statistically under-vaccinated for very good reasons, historically speaking, you are promoting racial discrimination, medical discrimination, and just outright inhumane policy, and your clapping seal of an audience loves it.
	No problem.
	No problem whatsoever.
	Oh, I thought his name was Turdow.
	Oh, we're going to get there.
	Jimmy Howe says, I look fabulous.
	You look fabulous, darling.
	Thank you very much.
	So we're going to have a fun show today because it's a show.
	I have come to grips with the fact that it's a show.
	I've got to be done by 1.45.
	I've got things that need to be done in the afternoon.
	But at 1 o 'clock, if it's not earlier, John Hogley, who you may remember from such prior streams as when he was on a stream...
	I'm going to put this here.
	To charge my phone.
	John Hogley is covering the Danchenko trial.
	And the Danchenko trial is the alleged source of the Steele dossier information to the FBI for spying on Trump.
	And he's been going to trial now because under Durham's investigation, he's another one who lied to the FBI.
	And that trial is over.
	It's in deliberation.
	Hogley was watching the trial.
	We're going to get his rundown on it.
	And it's like, we'll see.
	You watch these trials and you can just predict who's going to get acquitted and who's going to get convicted based on political affiliation.
	I'm just watching the Danchenko part of it, this Danchenko trial, and I'm like, I have difficulty predicting which way this is going to go because I don't know which side Danchenko is on, politically speaking.
	So, Hogley's going to come on at 1 o 'clock.
	And until then, we're going to go over a...
	Fake news story from the New York Times.
	Now, by the way, science is so decided not only on climate change.
	Individual events right now can be definitively pinpointed as being the result of climate change.
	Man-made climate change.
	Even when buried in the lead of the article, it says something somewhat different.
	And we're going to go over the inquiry.
	The Emergencies Act inquiry.
	Because...
	I said it on Twitter.
	I'll say, if this does not sink Justin Trudeau, it will only be because he keeps his head above water by standing on the back of the wreckage of Canada.
	The Emergencies Act inquiry is going on day in and day out.
	Jim Watson, the mayor of Ottawa, was testifying today.
	And it's just mind-blowing what has been revealed in this In this inquiry, which is scheduled to last six weeks, which by design or by accident is going to bore most people out of watching it.
	It's going to allow mainstream media, the fully subsidized Canadian mainstream media, to pick and choose what they want because in six weeks of trial, you can ignore a lot of damning evidence and nitpick a lot of convenient evidence.
	And you're not lying because you're not saying something that's wrong.
	You're just misleading through omission.
	When do we get the tacos?
	There will be no tacos at this Taco Tuesday.
	That being said, what there will be is, you may notice it says paid promotion.
	This video contains a paid promotion.
	Two sponsors we've got today, and I'm going to thank my sponsors sincerely and wholeheartedly because it takes a little bit of courage, cojones, intellectual honesty, and defiance of a mob to say, I'm going to sponsor Viva Fry's content.
	And they're also easy products to sponsor because I use both of them.
	Starting off, the number one, anybody who owns their house.
	In America, your house is, generally speaking, the biggest asset of most people's portfolios.
	It's also, from what I have discovered, having moved down to the States, only temporarily, but we'll see what happens.
	It's a source of a lot of fraud in that people will borrow money against a deed of your home.
	They won't change the deed and say, I hitherto own your house, but they will forge your signature and borrow money against your house.
	I double-checked this with my insurance guy who said it's a real problem and this is a real solution.
	Home title lock, I use it.
	They have the courage to sponsor my channel, but I use it more importantly than anything.
	And what it does is, if someone pulls your deed for the purposes of whatever, you'll get notified and they will freeze the ability to borrow against that deed.
	So you'll get notified if someone goes to wherever to pull your deed of sale out so they will not be able to borrow against your house, so that you will not get stuck with a $50,000 debt that someone got by forging your signature and borrowing against the equity of your house.
	$20 a month.
	And if you go and use the forward slash Viva, hometitlelock.com forward slash Viva, you'll get a $100 free assessment to make sure the title is securely in your name, after which point you can make a decision whether or not you want to spend the $20 a month to protect what is the biggest asset for most people.
	HomeTitleLock.com forward slash Viva.
	Thank you all.
	I'll put the links in the pinned comment and the description after the video.
	And that's it.
	A product I actually use myself.
	Helps me sleep better at night.
	Okay.
	We're gonna get to Field of Greens afterwards.
	But for now, for now, let's go to the...
	Let's just start off with the fake news.
	Let's just start off with the fake news.
	There's gonna be an update in the Harvey Weinstein trial, which I'm not following thoroughly.
	But I'm following some developments.
	The fake news coming out of none other than the New York Times.
	Climate change, people, is now the boogeyman for everything and anything.
	It's gone from COVID to Trump to climate change.
	Anything that happens, by the way.
	There was a non-peer-reviewed study that came out three days after Hurricane Ian that said Hurricane Ian rainfall was 10% harder Because of climate change.
	I mean, just imagine the absolute audacity it takes for anybody to make such a stupid statement.
	I'm not a scientist.
	Oh, and by the way, hashtag no medical advice, no legal advice, no election fornication advice.
	I'm not a doctor.
	I'm not a scientist.
	I am but a lawyer with a semi-functioning brain.
	Huffington Post wrote an article back in 2011 or 2012 that a small nuclear war could solve climate change.
	I'm not joking.
	They're a death cult.
	I'm not your buddy guy.
	We don't need to trust you.
	Although I do because I've seen you around and I know that you're good.
	Trust but verify.
	Let's just go pull up that article because I know exactly what you're talking about.
	Google.
	A small nuclear war.
	HuffPost.
	People are going to think it's...
	Here it is, right here.
	Could a small nuclear war reverse global warming?
	Come on, get your ads out there.
	Nobody wants to see...
	I'm joking, people.
	Well, whatever.
	We might not get past the ads.
	Nuclear war is a bad thing, right?
	I mean, the signs were all there beforehand that the world was going downhill.
	Huffington Post News.
	Nuclear war is a bad thing, right?
	Yeah, yeah.
	You know what?
	If you have to ask the question, you're an idiot.
	Scientists from NASA and a number of other institutions have recently been modeling the effects of a war involving 100 Hiroshima-level bombs, a 0.3% of the world's current nuclear arsenal.
	Oh, why would you measure this in relation to the world's arsenal and not the amount of people?
	Who were killed at Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
	Why would you go that way, HuffPo?
	Oh, it only killed, what, 80,000 people?
	Oh, but it only represents 0.03 of the world's arsenal.
	According to National Geographic, the research suggested 5 million metric tons of black carbon would be swept up into the lowest portion of the atmosphere.
	The result, according to NASA models, could actually be global cooling.
	Oh, you mean the global cooling that environmental alarmists were warning us about in the 70s?
	By the way, you know what else it would do?
	It would block out the sun and, you know, just maybe, just maybe cause humans to go the way of the dinosaur.
	This is news from Huffington Post.
	A small nuclear war could actually reverse global warming.
	Yeah.
	And also just, you know, just kill three, four hundred thousand people.
	Maybe more.
	Probably more.
	And by the way, some people do hypothesize.
	You know what else?
	It reverses global warming.
	Massive volcanic eruptions that emit dust into the atmosphere that deflect the sun and also cause a similar cooling, which tends to happen.
	It's sort of like that thing about the environment being constantly in flux.
	But no, it's not.
	It's not.
	It's not constantly in flux.
	It's always getting worse.
	And it's always, at this point in history, because of man-made climate change.
	This is an article out of the New York Times.
	And the original article is going to be behind their paywall, which I'm not paying, and I didn't archive it, although I'm sure someone did.
	But I clipped it.
	I got it at one point.
	Nigeria is suffering the worst flooding in a decade, largely because of heavy rains caused by climate change.
	600 people have died.
	It's very serious.
	It is the worst flooding they've had in a decade.
	It's almost like once-in-a-decade flooding.
	But let's just parse this out.
	Nigeria is suffering its worst flooding in a decade, which means that a decade ago, it suffered a worse flood or an equally bad flood.
	Largely because of heavy rains caused by climate change.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	Here's the fact, heavy rains, and here's the opinion caused by climate change.
	By the way, and don't trust me, trust the article.
	Why?
	Well, first things first, if it's the worst flooding in a decade, does that not mean that climate change was worse a decade ago or just as bad a decade ago and we had a decade where climate change wasn't a thing?
	From the article.
	Just, you know, burying the lead.
	New York Times, they don't mislead.
	They're not propagandists.
	They're not narrative-driven entities.
	It's news.
	Also this.
	The rain is not the only factor.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	I thought you said not only was the rain the factor, the rain was the result of climate change.
	Every year, neighboring Cameroon, which runs along the length of Nigeria's eastern border, releases water from a dam in northern Cameroon, causing flooding downstream in Nigeria.
	At the time of the dam's construction in the 1980s, the two countries agreed that a twin dam would be built on the Nigerian side to contain the overflow.
	But the second one was never realized.
	And the truth shall set you free.
	I mean, I feel like Jim Carrey out of Liar Liar.
	Oh yeah, it's that rainfall caused by climate change.
	Oh yeah, and that small thing, that dam that they built in neighboring Cameroon where they occasionally release the water and flood Nigeria.
	Oh, and that small thing that Nigeria was supposed to build its own dam so that they don't get flooded when Cameroon releases the water from the dam and floods Nigeria.
	You actually have to read the article to get past this bogus headline.
	Nigeria is suffering the worst flooding in a decade, largely because of heavy rains caused by climate change.
	First of all, I might just go out on a limb and say that it's largely because every year...
	The neighboring country Cameroon releases water from a dam, causing flooding downstream in Nigeria.
	I might put the blame there.
	I guess that is man-made climate change, except it's very local, and it's almost like it's man-made incidents of negligence or whatever.
	Yeah, but no, don't worry.
	It's rain, heavy rain, caused by human, humans, climate change, and you can't question it.
	You can't, you can't.
	Offer any other narrative.
	And you still have to be relatively honest in your misleading reporting.
	So bury the lead into the article.
	For anyone who gets past it, who gets into the actual article, who clicks, clicks, clicks, and reads and understands, that pesky little thing of that dam in Cameroon, which gathers water, and when there's heavy water, they release it and flood downstream Nigeria.
	The death of one man is a tragedy.
	The death of a million is a statistic.
	Joe Stalin.
	I don't know if that's a joke.
	Wait a minute.
	What was Stalin's first name?
	It was Joe Stalin.
	Okay, I get the joke now.
	Joseph Stalin and Joe Biden.
	I think there's a double entendre in there.
	Fewer people were killed by the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nukes than were killed in the firebombing of Tokyo.
	That may be true, and I've heard that in multiple places.
	That doesn't change the fact that...
	Hold on.
	Let's just go double check.
	I think the number was 80,000.
	Chrome tab, Taco Tuesday.
	Well, they're going to get an extra look.
	Hometidelock.com forward slash diva.
	Google, how many people died in Hiroshima?
	I think it was 80,000.
	Was it not 80,000?
	Counting the dead Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 70,000.
	Now, the question, though, is that...
	Is that immediately or in the aftermath, including the radiation that the New York Times...
	I believe the New York Times was actually claiming was not occurring after Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
	How many people died as a result of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
	There is one thing that everyone who has tackled the question has agreed on.
	The answer is probably fundamentally unknowable.
	Okay, well, let's just get the early estimates.
	We saw the number 70. The Hiroshima Red Cross Hospital estimated 70,000 dead and another 50,000 to 60,000 dead within the next two months.
	Total 120.
	The British estimate, based on their own population estimates, that 70,000 to 90,000 people died at Hiroshima and an additional 100,000 were injured at Nagasaki.
	They initially estimated 40,000 killed.
	A lot.
	A lot, by the way.
	And for anybody who hasn't read The Grey Lady Winks, a good book to read.
	I believe the New York Times was also denying the fallout after the bombing of Japan because the military was telling them, don't let the world know how horrific this is.
	It denies fallout Japan-Hiroshima.
	I'm fairly certain.
	I mean, I know it is.
	It was the New York Times who were, you know, being the mouthpiece of the government that they are, were downplaying the fallout of the bombing in Japan because they, you know, I guess the military had visions of continuing to do tests of nuclear bombs elsewhere and they didn't want, you know, they didn't want the world to know that the initial blast itself was devastating.
	And the fallout was equally devastating, horrific, and we know what happened now.
	But the New York Times at the time, being the propagandists that they have been, continue to be, and probably will always be, were spewing misinformation back then as well.
	Thank you.
	Reading some of the chat.
	Well, okay, I'm not going to be able to follow the EMP.
	So...
	When you read the news, A, you have to read it, and then you have to understand it.
	And the reality is that most people tweeting, retweeting, read the tweet, read the headline, don't read past it, carry on with this narrative that climate change, man-made climate change, is not only undeniable, It is definitively attributable to every natural event that has occurred throughout the course of humanity.
	And the science is so accurate, they can actually attribute percentages to the increased severity as a result of man-made climate change.
	All right.
	Viva, EMP is just one of the effects of the nuclear holocaust.
	I know the limitations of my knowledge, and I don't want to bring up a factually incorrect statement that I am not able to assess in real time.
	I know the aftermath, whether it's nuclear poisoning, the aftermath where people were reporting that people were sick, dying after the initial blast.
	New York Times comes there, mouthpiece of the government, nothing to see here, move on, folks.
	And it's only decades later, or years later, decades later, that it becomes known.
	But the New York Times has done this throughout its history.
	And if anybody had any doubts...
	Just read the Grey Lady Wings.
	They did it with Stalin.
	They did it with the Homolador.
	They did it with the Nazis.
	They did it with the Holocaust.
	They did it with Japan.
	They did it with the Second Intifada or the First Intifada.
	They did it with...
	I'm forgetting a big one in there.
	Testing nuclear weapons, I think, on the islands.
	They've done it time and time again, and yet somehow they still managed to maintain the reputation of the old Grey Lady.
	The standard in fake news.
	All right.
	From one fake news to the next.
	I'd say from New York Times to Fox News, but at least Fox News has a bit of a better track record.
	Harvey Weinstein's trial is going on.
	There's a few law troopers covering it.
	I am not.
	For no reasons of aversion.
	There's not enough time in the day.
	And at this point in time...
	Even though it's not the most popular thing on the webs, the inquiry going on in Canada, which we're going to get to in a few minutes, is what's interesting to me these days.
	For those of you who don't know, it's Gavin Newsom's wife has accused Harvey Weinstein of assault of a very sexual nature.
	In the context of the accusation, allegedly, The alleged victim, two years after the alleged incident, was seeking advice from the person that she alleges sexually assaulted her.
	And Weinstein, I presume...
	Weinstein's defense team wants to use this to undermine the accusations to say, if this had been the case, why would anyone who had been sexually assaulted approach their assaulter two years later asking for advice?
	And Harvey Weinstein is going to get to ask on this email that comes two years later.
	There's probably a number of...
	Reasonable, plausible explanations, but it's interesting law, and for anybody who wants to do these types of trials, you may think that Harvey Weinstein is guilty as sin and deserves all the punishment that this world and the next can bring to him.
	You still have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
	You don't get to cut corners, and you don't get to pull the Alex Jones standard.
	Weinstein, loathsome, despicable person that he is and may be, is entitled to the fullest defense under the law, as his attorneys are entitled to make it within the bounds of ethics and legality.
	you Harvey Weinstein's defense team secures a win, can use email from California Governor Newsom's wife in trial.
	Five women, including Jennifer Siebel Newsom, will testify against Harvey Weinstein in his trial.
	Disgraced Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein was secured a partial victory in court today.
	It's a partial victory.
	It's a procedural one.
	Will it have any meaning?
	Whatever.
	We'll see how it plays out.
	A judge said she would allow Weinstein's defense the opportunity to question the wife of Governor Newsom, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, about an email she sent to Weinstein two years after she was allegedly raped by the now 70-year-old man.
	It doesn't say man.
	By the now 70-year-old.
	Los Angeles judge Lisa Lynch ruled that the defense could ask about an email Siebel Newsom sent seeking media advice from Weinstein, but could not say it was about revelations of an affair that Gavin Newsom had with an aide when he was mayor of San Francisco.
	Do we just all appreciate the sordid, disgusting details of life in politics and life in Hollywood?
	I mean, just appreciate what we just read there, the different levels of this Tiramisu of degeneracy.
	You believe all victims?
	Let the process play out.
	But I'll grant for the purposes of this thought experiment, we know enough about Harvey Weinstein to say that more likely than not, someone was up to some serious no-goodness.
	Let's just flesh this out.
	Newsom's wife, who alleges Harvey Weinstein, this Hollywood producer, Who she alleges raped her.
	She's asking for media advice from him, but could not say that it was about revelations of an affair that her husband had with an aide when he was mayor of San Francisco.
	This is Hollywood and this is politics for you.
	And I could even envision circumstances where...
	Siebel's allegations or Newsom's allegations are true against Weinstein, but she would nonetheless have to do this because politics trumps morality.
	It's just like keep your schmeckle in your pants and live like your parents are always watching.
	How hard is that?
	I guess it's hard.
	I didn't mean any dirty pun with that.
	That was just It's just...
	It's like levels of repulsive immorality all put together in one...
	No honor among scoundrels.
	This woman, to the extent we believe that the allegations, is now compelled to contact this guy for media advice as to, at the time, how to deal with the fact that her husband had an affair with an aide.
	Am I good God?
	Is it hard to be good?
	Okay, it doesn't matter.
	That's...
	Forget the moral opinings.
	Weinstein's attorney, Mark Worksman, argued it was imperative to include the details, stating all...
	Hold on a second.
	Arguing, of all things you think a woman that is raped by Harvey Weinstein wouldn't do, it's ask him how to deal with a sex scandal.
	Well, you know what the double-edged sword of that argument is, Mark?
	No.
	I mean, this is...
	It's immoral, it's disgusting, and there's no but, and nobody should have to say it.
	I think it's the exact opposite, Mark.
	Mark Workman?
	Workman, of all the people that you're going to want to ask for advice, how they got away with it for so long, how they pressured women into silence, how they got away with their wrongful conduct for decades, despite it being, as Seth MacFarlane put it, the best-known secret to Hollywood.
	If there's one person who can give you that advice, it's going to be the guy who got away with it for so long.
	Tell us how to ruin the reputation of your accusers.
	Tell us how to threaten them and intimidate them into silence.
	Tell us how to do it.
	Who would know better than Weinstein?
	I wouldn't.
	Don't come to me for advice on how to hide a sex scandal, how to deal with it.
	I don't get into them.
	You know, the person who you'd want to ask?
	The person who's gotten into it, that everybody knows has gotten into it, and yet somehow evades any form of justice for decades.
	That's exactly the person you'd want to ask for advice on how to conceal immorality.
	The judge disagreed with Worsman, suggesting he was overstating the case by saying Weinstein's due process was at stake.
	Siebel Newsom is one of five women Weinstein has been charged with raping and sexually assaulting.
	This particular assault allegedly happened between 2004 and 2005 in a Beverly Hills hotel.
	It was reported that Weinstein's team will argue the relationship was consensual.
	Siebel Newsom is an actress.
	I didn't know if she was an actress or what she's in.
	Throughout the course of their marriage, Siebel Newsom has been outspoken on sexual assault and gender equality.
	The prosecution also secured a win on Monday, with the judge permitting the prosecution to play jurors a secret recording that another witness made of Weinstein in conjunction with New York police in 2015.
	In that recording, Weinstein apologizes for his behavior.
	And she said he had, after she said he had grabbed her breasts and touched her thigh.
	That's Hollywood for you and that's politics for you.
	Stay away from both.
	I guess is the moral.
	Yeah.
	Nasty people.
	This is from Darth Tater.
	Nasty people let him use them for fame.
	They are all evil lizard goblins.
	Which I assume is not a statement of fact, but rather an assessment.
	An opinion.
	So anyways, that's it.
	Those are the two non-Canadian stuff stories which are interesting.
	And, you know, volunteerist girl, I recall that avatar.
	How you doing?
	Agree.
	There's going to be some...
	The question is going to be, from a legal moral perspective, when begrudgingly allowing that man to do things to you to further your career...
	When it's a quid pro quo, or when it's intimidation of a man saying, whether or not it's coercion.
	All that to say, stay the hell out of Hollywood.
	Stay the hell out of politics.
	Hollywood is a cesspool just like D.C., Mark.
	Mark, Mark.
	Well, you know what?
	Before we move on to Rumble, because we are going to go to Rumble exclusively, and speaking of cesspools, let me see here.
	And I'm only thinking of Swamp Water.
	Now, I'm thinking of Swamp Water.
	And another sponsor with courage, Audacity, and I think deserves credit for it.
	It's another product that I genuinely use.
	I have it right here next to my desk.
	Field of Greens.
	Field of Greens, by the way, if you use the promo code, you'll get 15% off your first order, 10% off recurring orders.
	Field of Greens.
	Powdered Green Industry is a big industry right now.
	They're not all equal.
	Powdered greens, well, field of greens, is not a supplement and it's not an extract.
	It is desiccated, pulverized, actual vegetables and fruits, antioxidants, all the good stuff.
	Pulverized, desiccated, dried into a powder.
	It's a food, which means that it's USDA organic.
	Well, it doesn't mean that, but it's USDA organic approved, which only applies to foods and not extracts and not supplements.
	It's a food.
	One spoonful is one serving of vegetable.
	It may not look appetizing because it looks like swamp water, but it's good.
	It is good.
	And it's good.
	Distraction in the afternoon.
	Get an extra glass of water.
	Get a serving of fruits and vegetables.
	Fieldofgreens.com.
	Promo code VIVAFRY.
	I have to make sure it's VIVAFRY or VIVA.
	Damn it.
	For...
	Hold on.
	Let me just make sure what the promo code is.
	I'm not a total idiot.
	I'm getting there.
	Field of Greens.
	Let me just make sure what the promo code is.
	Viva.
	Not Viva Fry.
	Viva.
	15% off your first order.
	10% off all recurring orders.
	And it is not like drinking Metamucil.
	Back in the day when I was having stomach stuff, I was told to drink Metamucil.
	That stuff is hard to get down.
	Field of Greens.
	It actually tastes good.
	One spoonful, one serving of fruits and vegetables, and you do it twice a day, and it's good for you.
	And it tastes great.
	End of story.
	All right.
	Let us now...
	Mosey on over to the Rumbles.
	Here, link to Rumble, and we're going to go over some of the clips, the highlights of this inquiry of Canadian politics.
	It's highlighting the fact, I'll just give a little teaser here on YouTube before everyone goes over it.
	Canada is plagued by incompetence, corruption, arrogance, pomposity, elitism at the political, municipal, federal, And we're going to get to it.
	There's been some highlights which, if the media were independent, they would be bombshells.
	They are bombshells, but they would be bombshells that the media would be amplifying.
	I just think it's fortunate that I think I actually have a reach that if it's not...
	Almost as big as some of these MSM Canadian outlets.
	It's big enough.
	So I can put it on blast.
	Move on over to Rumble, people.
	I'm going to end it on YouTube in 3, 2, 1. Remove.
	I think we're alone now.
	Are we alone?
	Let's see what we got on the Rumbles.
	Taco Tuesday.
	Let's see here.
	Trudeau must go.
	Bye-bye, Trudeau.
	Harding.
	RoadTrekGirl says, more watching here than on YouTube.
	Booyah, booyah, booyah.
	Okay, let's go.
	We're here.
	Let's do it.
	Oh, wait until you see these highlights.
	So do I get...
	I'm not going to give the rundown every single time.
	Justin Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act to, in my view, violently suppress the most peaceful protest Canada has ever seen.
	After three and a half weeks of occupation in downtown Ottawa.
	It was a siege.
	The convoy was there to overthrow the government.
	It was a siege, an occupation.
	It was Canada's January 6th.
	They were pissing on war monuments.
	They were desecrating the Terry Fox Memorial.
	They were dancing on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.
	There were Nazi flags.
	There were Confederate flags.
	It was mayhem.
	Lies, lies, damn lies.
	It was three and a half weeks of the most peaceful protest you could imagine until Justin Trudeau declared the Emergencies Act.
	Brought in a highly militarized police and violently suppressed this protest.
	Once he do that, Trudeau invokes the Emergencies Act.
	He issues his declaration of what the provisions of this declaration are going to be.
	It goes through the House of Commons debate voted on.
	It was ratified by the House of Commons.
	Then it's got to go to the Senate.
	The sober afterthought of Canadian Parliament, while it was being debated before the Senate, Justin Trudeau, I think fearing that it was going to be struck down by the Senate, from what I understand, was getting phone calls from banks saying there's been a run on the money in the banks because you,
	you absolute tyrannical buffoon, also invoked the Emergency Act to freeze people's bank accounts who were involved with the protest, and that caused a ripple effect where people, and I know this, Anecdotally, from emails that I've gotten, people were withdrawing as much as they could from the banks because they were all afraid they were going to get their bank accounts frozen.
	I donated to the convoy.
	I donated to GoFundMe.
	Before GoFundMe, unilaterally froze their fundraiser, then said they were going to keep the money and give it to a charity of their choice, and then ultimately, because of public pressure, reimbursed the money to all of the donors.
	I then took my contribution and multiplied it by a factor of 10. And donated it through Give, Send, Go.
	Yeah, I might have been a little afraid that they were going to freeze my bank account because I donated a thousand bucks to the convoy.
	But people were making a run on the banks.
	And so I have no doubt, and I've heard plausible, credible stories that Trudeau was getting phone calls from the banks saying, what the hell are you doing?
	We don't have this money in the reserves.
	We can't give these people all the money that they want to pull out of their bank accounts.
	Big amounts.
	I heard, I got emails, people who said, I'm being told I can only take out a thousand bucks a day.
	So that's what happened.
	After Justin Trudeau invokes the Emergencies Act, he rescinded it.
	But nonetheless, there's a provision of the Act that says you have to conduct an inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the invocation of the Act.
	Barbisa Ariane says $1,000.
	I gave $1,000.
	I gave like $50 through Give, Send, Go.
	Then I gave $1,000.
	And then people think they were doxing me because I was on the list that got released.
	I was like, you're not doxing me.
	I already told the world I gave $1,000.
	Live transparently.
	You have nothing to fear.
	But yeah, I gave $1,000.
	And I was a little concerned.
	I mean, Justin Trudeau said, don't worry, we're not going to violate your civil rights.
	We're not invoking the Emergencies Act to suspend constitutional rights.
	We're unilaterally authorizing banks to freeze the bank accounts of people who participated in the convoy, organizing the convoy.
	And they did.
	And Keith Wilson, one of the lawyers for the convoy, gave a press conference where he explained how they were using it to freeze the bank accounts, cancel insurance, liquidate assets, Liquidate stockholdings, call-in loans, freeze credit cards, cause people to default on their mortgage payments.
	Oh, but they were bad people who participated in an unlawful occupation.
	Well, you know what the biggest revelation?
	I'll stop next.
	I think I'm going on for too long.
	But you know what the biggest revelation of this was?
	We had heard that they were near a breakthrough in negotiations with Ottawa.
	The protesters after three weeks.
	We had heard that.
	It was rumors that there was near breakthrough in negotiation discussions between OPP, the convoy, the representatives, but Justin Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act.
	Rumors no more.
	There were rumors that the mayor of Ottawa, Jim Watson, met with GoFundMe to pressure GoFundMe On the basis that Jim Watson thought they were financing illegal activity, pressured them to freeze the, what's the word I'm looking for?
	Campaign.
	And they did.
	And Jim Watson praised them for it.
	This is now confirmed facts.
	So we're just going to go through some of the highlights.
	It's boring as hell.
	It's tedious.
	You're listening for an hour, two hours, so you can get the gem pieces of information.
	I'm trying to.
	I have some people on the inside who are also giving me the good spots because it's very, very difficult to do.
	Let's just share some of these, shall we?
	I need to go to my Twitter feed right here.
	Boomshakalaka.
	Oh, wait.
	Sorry.
	That's not the story.
	We'll get to that one afterwards.
	That's funny.
	Politics ruins everything, especially science.
	Hold on.
	Let me just open up a new window for my Twitter.
	Yesterday's witnesses were a city manager for Ottawa, and Jim Watson was today.
	Here, let's just share this.
	Actually, hold on.
	Let me go to Rumble and just catch up on some of the Rumble chat.
	Okay, CBFixesAll says, looks like they are getting ready to...
	Fat man or little boy Mark Mendocino in the inquiry.
	I don't know what that means.
	Mendocino?
	Minister of...
	I forget what he's a minister of.
	Liar.
	People who menstruate.
	Yeah, we'll get there.
	We'll get there afterwards.
	Okay, so you know what?
	Let's just get to these highlights before John Hoggley comes in.
	Okay.
	Twitter, Twitter, the Viva Free.
	So I think you know the context.
	You can follow me.
	There's a bunch of other people following this.
	Here's the biggest bombshell.
	This would be a bombshell for anyone other than state propagandists at CBC News, Global News.
	Screwed up the tag for Toronto Star.
	This is the moment.
	I forget who this witness is, damn it.
	Oh, crap.
	Anyway, this is the moment where the witness confirms Justin Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act, not despite a potential breakthrough in negotiations.
	For a settlement?
	Probably specifically to avoid the settlement.
	Justin Trudeau wanted a January 6th.
	He wanted an incident.
	He wanted it for three weeks.
	When it didn't happen, he wanted it in response to his violent crushing of this protest.
	And that didn't happen either.
	But listen to this.
	Right.
	And I also understand then that the mayor's vision...
	Sorry, actually, a little context.
	This is the attorney for the convoy.
	This is his cross-examination.
	His cross-examination of this witness lasted three minutes.
	Three minutes and five seconds.
	I posted the whole video on YouTube.
	The whole three minutes of his cross.
	Because there was nothing to get out of this witness after this.
	Listen to this.
	Right.
	And I also understand then that the mayor's vision for how this would work out as well and some of the protesters and truckers was that all trucks, other than the ones on Wellington, would be moved out of town.
	The protesters would just shuttle in in buses from their camps outside of town on a go forward.
	We were told that that was an option, and we don't know if we have no insight into whether or not the organizers were able to pull that off.
	Right.
	And you agree, and from your statement, that it was the police that prevented the deal from being executed in the end, correct?
	My opinion is that it is a broader context of circumstances and that the invocation of the Act created a new legal framework around Parliament Hill in that red zone and that the authorities decided to take a step back and see what was the impact of the invocation of the Act.
	Right.
	But it's fair to say that Mr. Wilson, your dealings with him, he never indicated to you that the protesters and truckers ever intended to renege on the deal.
	That is correct.
	Thank you.
	Those are my only questions, and have a good evening, sir.
	Thank you.
	Slam.
	Slam dunk.
	Does everyone appreciate what we just witnessed right there?
	I just forgot.
	I forgot the name of the witness.
	It doesn't matter.
	That witness...
	Confirmed.
	There was a settlement.
	It's not even discussions.
	There was an agreement in principle pursuant to which the protesters agreed to remove some of their trucks to put them elsewhere and to shuttle in their bodies to Ottawa to continue the protest.
	That's what they had agreed to between convoy and police.
	And then Justin Trudeau invokes the Emergencies Act.
	And once he does that, this witness, like, I don't want to say like a weasel, because I think this guy looks a little bit uncomfortable with the reality of it.
	He says, well, after Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act, we had to take a step back and see what was going to be the impact of having invoked, it's the War Measures Act replacement, after having dropped the nuclear weapon of legislative remedy.
	Well, we just had to sit back and see what was going to happen.
	I mean, we weren't on the verge.
	We had an agreement in principle by the sounds of it.
	The truckers were going to take some of the trucks out.
	I don't know how many, if it was all or a lot.
	They were going to move their trucks, park them elsewhere outside of the downtown core of Ottawa, and shuttle in their human bodies for protest.
	The police said yes.
	The convoy said yes.
	And then Trudeau, who was, from what I understand, Well aware of all of this.
	You can't say he wasn't aware of it.
	He was in talks with Jim Watson.
	He was in talks with them.
	They knew what was going on.
	Knowing this, the coward who said he had COVID and couldn't talk to the protesters, who then fled to British Columbia, who fled the Capitol to avoid any form of discourse with the protesters after they reached this tentative agreement with the city, with the police, pursuant to which they would take the trucks out of there voluntarily and then shuttle in.
	Trudeau invokes the Emergencies Act.
	And let me bring it back up for one second because there was another part of that.
	And just remind me not to shut this down because this is going to be the one we're going to use for a while here.
	Listen.
	You know, a new legal framework around Parliament Hill in that red zone and that the authorities decided to take a step back and see.
	Take a step back.
	Take a step back.
	That glitch was internet connection.
	Right.
	But it's fair to say that Mr. Wilson...
	Mr. Wilson is Keith Wilson, the attorney who's negotiating for on behalf of the convoy.
	...dealings with him.
	He never indicated to you that the protesters and truckers ever intended to renege on the deal.
	That is correct.
	Thank you.
	Those are my only questions.
	Have a good evening, sir.
	I like this lawyer.
	I like him...
	Probably very biased.
	I like his delivery.
	I liked it when he was interviewing Mathieu Fleury, who after a couple of hours of testifying in English, a city councillor, all of a sudden pretends he doesn't understand English.
	And Miller over here says, je m 'appelle Brandon, for good comedic value.
	So that's a revelation.
	No, no, no, get out of Google.
	That's a revelation that should be a bombshell for any independent media to amplify As much as it could be amplified.
	Three weeks in, give or take, they had a tentative agreement that would have preserved rights, that would have preserved democracy, and that would have preserved the physical integrity, bodily integrity, of the protesters who were violently arrested, assaulted, stomped by horses.
	And Trudeau says, no, I'm a fascist tyrant.
	I don't negotiate with the rabble.
	This has been an embarrassment to me at an international level.
	People are laughing at me across the country, across the globe.
	I don't care that there's a tentative agreement to allow this to go on.
	This has been an embarrassment.
	Bring in the militarized police.
	And, oh, I'm sure he just was certain there would be a violent reaction.
	Because, by the way, throughout this entire charade of a hearing...
	One thing they're always saying is, oh, we didn't know if the truckers had bombs.
	We didn't know if the truckers had explosives in their trucks.
	We didn't know if there was going to be violence.
	It's so dangerous that they come in with a highly militarized police, snipers, armored vehicles, batons, RCMP, Sudbury police, Ontario police, Surté du Québec.
	They come in with that to violently suppress this protest, thinking that there could have been explosives.
	They wanted something terrible to happen.
	So that their violent response could be justified.
	And it didn't happen.
	And it's going to be the last play of this.
	I was depressed after the protest because it was violently suppressed and I thought it was done for.
	The fact that the protesters remained peaceful and maintained their dignity throughout this abuse, it will be the last laugh.
	Because the bombshell that people should take away, Trudeau knew that there was a settlement to be had.
	And instead of allowing it to go through, brought in the police.
	Busted heads, pepper sprayed, journalists.
	But maybe you'll hear CBC get on that.
	So that's one highlight.
	Listen to this.
	When I say that these politicians are living in their ivory tower...
	The most privileged people on earth.
	You know, Justin Trudeau, who talks about white privilege and who talks about all sorts of privilege.
	These people, being the politicians, are the most privileged people on earth.
	And they're privileged, and they're arrogant, and they're pompous about it.
	They think they're entitled to it.
	And here you have Mayor Jim Watson.
	Listen to this beautiful soundbite.
	The Prime Minister wanted to get a sense of what was going on on the ground.
	and how this was affecting our city in particular our residential community and the small business community because as you know we just got out of the lockout from COVID and restaurants and businesses could start opening and then all of a sudden we have another lockdown imposed really by the occupiers who came here to disrupt our quality of life.
	These occupiers here Who came to disrupt our quality of life.
	These filthy rabble.
	When Robert Barnes and I were talking about the judges in the January 6th hearings, you flew across the country to come to D.C.?
	Yeah!
	It's my capital.
	It's not your capital.
	It's my capital.
	I flew across the country to come to my capital.
	And you want to hold that against me?
	You think that I'm not entitled to come to my capital?
	That it's your own princedom?
	It's your own little kingdom?
	The rabble have come to...
	What did he say?
	I'm imposed, really, by the occupiers who came here to disrupt our quality of life.
	Our quality of life.
	These filthy, lowly Canadians.
	These unvaxxed rabble come to disrupt our quality of life.
	The nerve.
	They came to Canada's capital to disrupt our quality of life.
	Oh, and by the way, just bear in mind what he's saying here, because you have to understand this.
	They had just gotten out of these measures that the government had imposed to...
	Destroy our quality of life.
	The government just relinquished, just suspended these lockdown measures that ruined our quality of life.
	And now these occupiers come in and they want to cause a second lockdown and interfere with our quality of life?
	Oh, I didn't realize that you had the sole power to interfere with other people's quality of life, Mayor Watson, Justin Trudeau.
	Implicit in that statement is that Mayor Watson, he knows they ruined our quality of life for two and a half years.
	And what do they have to show for it?
	I don't know.
	High suicide rates, high overdose rates, social economic destruction, excess deaths, unexplained deaths.
	They can interfere with our quality of life.
	But when the rabble want to protest and cause an inconvenience in their capital, those occupiers come in.
	Interfere with our quality of life?
	The nerve?
	You should shut up and deal with it.
	Come in here.
	I want to have my coffee.
	I want to have my coffee on Parliament Hill, and I don't want to have to hear honking.
	That's not a revelation.
	That's not a bombshell.
	That's just arrogant pomposity, entitlement privilege of the highest order.
	Where it becomes something of a bombshell.
	Hey, Global News!
	W5, CBC, Radio Canada, National Post, Toronto Star.
	Maybe you want to talk about this.
	...point in that time frame.
	And so I was approached at some point in that time frame from the consulting firm that represented GoFundMe in Canada to see if I'd be amenable to having a meeting with senior GoFundMe people to discuss.
	And to let them know that the funds they were collecting were very much harming our city and, in my opinion, engaged in illegal activities.
	In my opinion.
	Judge, jury, and executioner.
	We had a number of people on the call.
	They'd also spoken, I believe, earlier in the day or after my call with, I think it was Chief Bell.
	So he gave them a more detailed...
	Situational report as to what was happening in our city and why we felt that these funds should be frozen and ultimately sent back to the individuals because those dollars were keeping the convoy going.
	And what happened after that?
	What happened after that, Mayor Watson?
	Well, during the meeting, I think they underestimated how big an issue this was.
	So I had to remind them this was certainly hurting their reputational.
	Jim Watson's looking out for the reputation of GoFundMe.
	It's hurting your reputation to continue funding things like this.
	Their reputation, because they were funding a group that was very much involved in activities that were harmful to our city and our country.
	Harmful.
	And I can't recall the exact time, but a few days later, I believe, there was a decision by GoFundMe to freeze the funds, and I lauded them for doing that.
	I lauded them for doing that.
	I lauded them for doing that.
	Hold on, people.
	For those of you who don't know, I knew what it meant.
	I lauded them.
	I highly praised or admired GoFundMe for caving to my political pressure to freeze the campaign that had been set up for the truckers.
	And by the way, Jim Watson is a liar.
	My opinion?
	But it's substantiated.
	Do you know why he's a liar?
	Because he pretends that GoFundMe gave the money back?
	GoFundMe.
	Ottawa.
	He pretends that GoFundMe gave the money back to the donors?
	Oh no, Jim.
	No, no, no.
	At first, at first GoFundMe said they were keeping the money.
	I can find the article.
	Look at this.
	They got their propaganda entities on it.
	GoFundMe ends payments to convoy protests citing reports of violence and harassment.
	Oh, yeah.
	Didn't happen.
	But the good lackeys of the government said it.
	They had raised $10 million.
	I'll find the article later.
	I see John is in the background, so I'm going to not have him wait for too long.
	Jim Watson is a liar because GoFundMe did not give the money back right away.
	GoFundMe said, we're freezing the account and we're keeping the money and we're giving it to a charity of our choice.
	And then everyone was up in arms saying, holy sweet, merciful crap, what the hell do you think you guys are doing?
	And then there was a whole campaign of people suggesting they file contestations with the credit cards.
	And then after the backlash and the pressure and maybe the financial exposure of lawsuit and other, GoFundMe said, Oh, we're going to donate.
	We're going to give it back to those who request it.
	And then whatever balance is left out, we're going to give to a charity of our choice.
	And then people still went nuts and they said, forget it.
	Too complicated.
	Just take all your money back.
	Jim Watson is a liar because GoFundMe did not say they were going to give the money back as the default mechanism.
	They said they were going to keep it and give it to a charity of their choice.
	And when there was public outrage, they backtracked a little bit and then they backtracked all the way.
	Those are the three big highlights.
	Now, Jim is in the backdrop.
	John is in the backdrop at the Danchenko trial.
	This is so cool.
	Technology is amazing, people.
	I'm going to bring him in.
	John, get ready.
	Three, two, one.
	How goes the battle?
	Well, as you can see, I'm out here in front of the courthouse in Alexandria waiting for a verdict.
	The jury has recessed for lunch and they won't be back until at least 1.30.
	Everybody, you know, I don't know if you can get a...
	I guess everybody has gone off to lunch because, you know, now we know we, you know, aren't going to be yanked as we, when they come up with the verdict.
	So, you know, just loitering suspiciously in the greater downtown Alexandria area.
	Talking to a camera, nothing crazy about it at all, John.
	Okay, before we get into this, I got some questions about the trial, but 30,000 foot overview for those who did not see our first stream.
	Who are you?
	What are you doing?
	I'm a national news writer for the Epoch Times.
	Okay, fantastic.
	You've been covering this.
	Okay, so let's get into the trial.
	How long?
	It's a short trial, right?
	A few days?
	Well, it started Tuesday and ended Monday approximately about 1.10 p.m.
	So it was four and a half days, roughly.
	Some of those days were quite long.
	The first couple of days went into almost like past six, or two-six nearly.
	So there was six witnesses.
	The first one, Brian Orton, an FBI analyst, was a day and a half.
	It was two days.
	And it's been one of those, yet again, cases where there's a lot of email messages and text messages, phone records, very tweaky, and they would bounce back and forth.
	And one of the things about covering a trial at this place is there's no electronics allowed.
	So everybody's with pad and pen, and it's just like right out of the old 50s movies where, you know, you get a break and you see everybody running to their cars parked around the area or at the hotel across the street to try to get word out because, you know, it's like going into a void in there.
	There's no, you know, in other words, you can't communicate.
	Unlike the D.C. courthouse where they have a media room and people like me can live tweet.
	The whole thing.
	And when I'm done for the day, my writers back in New York and elsewhere pick up the story from all the content that I've developed via Twitter.
	And my day is done, but not these days.
	I mean, I got like three hours sleep in a 66-hour span.
	That's inhumane, John.
	I don't know.
	That's not sustainable.
	On Friday, I couldn't even remember.
	I couldn't spell Danchenko.
	I just couldn't spell the name anymore.
	Anyway, so...
	I guess the first question is this.
	What's the impact or the importance of this particular trial and Danchenko as an individual?
	Well, apparently he was a major source in providing...
	He himself said 80% of the information in the Steele dossier.
	What we're learning is that he gathered material from people like Chuck Dolan, who then said he lied.
	He lied to Danchenko.
	Danchenko then lied about meeting with a young man, a Russian entrepreneur called Sergei Milan, who allegedly provided all sorts of dirt and details.
	President Trump's, before he was president, trips to Moscow.
	I'm sure people have heard all the salacious details involved with that.
	And he had claimed to Steele that he was meeting with, he had met with Neon in South Carolina, in New York, and that's where he had gotten this material.
	And then Steele further embellished it into all sorts of crazy stuff.
	And from other material, I guess, that they still don't know exactly where it came from.
	And as a result, we got the Steele dossier, which was total bunk the first time I read it.
	I mean, I kind of like, this is crazy.
	So he's the generator of the impetus, the generator of the material.
	And he actually worked for Orbis, which is the Steele's agency in London, a business intelligence agency.
	And he was working for them and us all being a classified human source for the FBI.
	So it was kind of a lot of double dealing and nobody knows anything who's telling the truth because even, you know, I mean, nobody knows.
	Everybody's lying in this case.
	It's not unusual.
	So let's oversimplify this this way.
	Durham is going after Danchenko.
	Because Danchenko allegedly lied to the FBI about the source for the Steele dossier, about the Steele dossier itself.
	He lied about, allegedly lied about, you know, an anonymous phone call that he had received, then about a mystery meeting that he was going to have.
	But, you know, Danchenko ultimately always said that he wasn't sure if it was me on this and that.
	I mean, in other words, there's all sorts of vagaries that could be...
	Manipulated, you know, it's reasonable doubt, of course.
	So, yeah, it's one thing to get another one of these things where you kind of can see the big picture, but putting your finger on the individual events as they occur can be kind of tweaky if you want to get a conviction.
	So, they dismissed one of the charges, or the judge dismissed one of the charges.
	And so there's four charges that the jury is deliberating.
	Each four are different statements that he made on different dates to an FBI agent, mostly Kevin Helson, who was his handler.
	And, you know, we would listen to all the recordings and everything.
	It was a very, you know, it was hard to stay awake, you know, sometimes.
	But it was a very exhausting testimony.
	On what basis did the judge dismiss one of the charges before it got to jury?
	That was about the definition of talk.
	You know, when he, when apparently when Danchenko was being interviewed at various junctures, when they asked if he had talked with this person or talked with that person, Danchenko allegedly, or whatever, you know, We'd say no, because in his idea of what talking was, it was a face-to-face encounter.
	So, you know, and the judge basically, because the FBI, Helson and Orton and a few other FBI analysts, Brian Orton, did not specifically say, you know, in other words, did you talk with the, you know, their questions were vague, and he replied, literally.
	Did he speak with Dolan?
	Did he speak with Steele?
	In other words, did he speak with these sources?
	And ultimately, he said, because of the vagaries in the way questions were asked, somebody could misinterpret it to say, you know, I didn't have a face-to-face conversation.
	I got a text message or an email.
	You know, in other words, and the judge had hinted, well, he hadn't hinted, he had explained earlier that unless the, unless, you know, Durham's team could really flesh that out and get, that he was likely to dismiss the charge, and he did so.
	And I guess there's still, he could still dismiss the whole case, I guess, regardless of the verdict, that's something that's still out there.
	Once again, because there's some vagaries in how the FBI handled the case.
	I read a tweet, let me just see if I can find it here, from Hans Mank.
	Who is he?
	Hans Mank.
	Okay, it seems to be following the case, but he pulled a footnote from one of the filings that basically said, the footnote is to the effect that the FBI knew Danchenko was full of shit.
	They knew it was full of shit.
	Apparently, they had emails from Danchenko that proved that the Steele dossier was bogus to begin with.
	Did you get that part of the trial?
	Apparently, Danchenko himself said it was bogus.
	He said that he was shocked and upset that when he read the Steele dossier...
	After BuzzFeed published it January 10th, 2017, that things that he had told Steele that were unverified, were unsubstantiated, that he couldn't ascertain whether it was real or not, but passing along this information suddenly appeared as fact,
	and that Steele allegedly embellished and did a lot of, in other words, he was upset that that was taken as fact Just saying, this is what this person says, and that's what that person says, which is business intelligence.
	It's basically business intelligence, which is what Orbis does.
	Collects just stray information about people to give to, let's say, a business organization that wants to do business someplace.
	And they're saying, this is what's being said.
	This is a rumor, but it isn't necessarily true.
	He was thinking that, and Steele ran with it, and according to Danchenko, embellished and made it sound like it was factually supported stuff when Danchenko was saying it was just speculation and rumor.
	And the big thing is, despite that, despite their primary source telling him That he couldn't verify this information.
	It still ended up in at least two of the four FISA applications used against Carter Page.
	So the FBI should never have used that material, or at least should have amended their application, but never did.
	And that may have influenced whether these FISA warrants would have been issued.
	No, no, you finish.
	I have another question.
	Sorry about that.
	I was just saying that's part of the discussion here is just like with Sussman, is when you told the FBI this, this is then what the FBI did, using the information you gave them.
	So it's part of the impact, like how this information affected Crossfire Hurricane and then eventually Mueller.
	And, you know, and how the FBI proceeded using this information, even though it was already, even from the primary source, at question.
	Questionable at best.
	Now, this is what I'm wondering is, Danchenko seems to be like enemies.
	Is he an enemy to both sides?
	He allegedly lied, you know, provided these unsubstantiated rumorings about Trump.
	But then they end up in the steel dossier, which authorities, you know, FBI likes.
	He then says, no, that shouldn't be in there.
	Now the FBI doesn't like him.
	So, like, politically speaking, where does Danchenko fit on the spectrum of enemy and friend?
	Well, I think the FBI wants him to be considered a friend, even though, because they say, I mean, matter of fact, virtually, well, the two primary...
	I was going to say, Orton and Helson both had nothing but praise for him in terms of his contributions as a confidential human source.
	There's a whole 40 investigations, 25...
	I can't remember the exact number, but that information that came from him were key in dozens of investigations, dozens of...
	You know, monitoring programs, surveillance, and, you know, names, so that they're aware of all sorts of networks and all sorts of activities, simply because he knew this person, he knows that person.
	Apparently, he's a very gregarious guy.
	He's holding court in the lobby the other day.
	In other words, you can see he's kind of a salesman, in a way.
	They want him to be, you know, they say he loves America, he's a patriot, and so on and so forth.
	But there's issues with his immigration and everything else.
	I don't know.
	Well, so if we're reading the tea leaves through the political spectrum, he's going to get acquitted.
	The judge drops one of the charges already.
	Is your sentiment he's going to get acquitted?
	My sense, and you know, what do we know?
	There's four charges, and they're being deliberated now.
	I guess that would be three and a half hours yesterday, probably another three.
	So it's been going on seven hours.
	And our feeling, or the feeling generally consensus amongst the loiterers in the lobby over here, because we're all wandering around, nothing to do, is that he'd probably get convicted in at least one of the charges.
	Now, that's, you know, who knows?
	Who knows what that means?
	You know, one hand, you got, I mean, even though, like, both attorney teams are hanging out, like, right with each other, at times.
	And, you know, some people are saying, well, the longer it goes, the better it is for the prosecution, or the longer it goes, the better it is for the defense.
	And jury, how many jury members?
	Well, there's 12. There were 16, nine men, seven women.
	And then they shucked off three.
	Two even got informed, you know, like, you're out right at the last day.
	I can't remember who they were.
	So, yes, there's 12 jury members.
	There's three alternates because one of the alternates got sick or something.
	Got sick of the trial, probably.
	I'm not going!
	This is probably one of the drier of the political cases to be involved in.
	Demographic of the jury?
	Makeup?
	Old, young, men, women?
	There's a couple of young women and mostly some middle-aged men.
	I can't remember the racial bracket.
	I said there was nine men, seven women.
	There's a couple of African-American men, one African-American woman, I can't remember.
	Yeah, they say the juries here in the Virginia side of the river are a little bit more amenable than the juries in D.C. to these cases.
	You compare it to the Sussman acquittal after a couple of hours of deliberations where someone should have been dead to rights.
	Right.
	Okay, fantastic.
	Looking at it, in other words, there must be some interesting debates in there, I guess.
	I mean, I think most of us think some of the evidence seems pretty clear.
	A reasonable doubt thing is always...
	Well, it depends on the jury.
	The evidence in Sussman was pretty damn clear.
	Got an acquittal nonetheless.
	All right.
	Fantastic.
	Phenomenal.
	Thank you.
	Totally off-topic, although it's on-topic because it relates to being a journalist.
	Is this fun what you're doing for any young people out there who are aspiring?
	You've been sitting there now for a week.
	You've been in Virginia for a week, day in, day out, following the trial, taking notes.
	You go back, you do your summaries.
	Are you still loving this?
	No, this is horrible.
	I like the D.C. courthouse because they have a media room and we can watch proceedings.
	By the way, behind me was the two...
	Honorato and Sears, the two.
	But anyway, they have a media room where you can watch the proceedings on a remote closed-circuit TV, and people like me can live-tweet, which I like doing that.
	Here, you know, you've got to go in there.
	It's one block off Eisenhower Avenue and firmly in the Eisenhower era, where it's notepad and pen only.
	The brakes are just short enough to accomplish nothing.
	So, you've got to run to your car.
	It's like right out of the 1950s.
	I mean, all the reporters running to their cars parked in these parking areas.
	And, you know, trying to get...
	Because that's where you have to keep your electronics, your phone, everything else.
	So, it's been a bear.
	It's been a bear covering.
	And then, you know, I'm like with me, you know, try to file a nooner or something like that on my lunch break.
	And then...
	Get back in here, and sometimes you're not out to five or six, or like, well, you're almost six, and get back to the hotel room, and then, you know, transcribe 30, 40 pages.
	And then write the story.
	So it's been brutal.
	It's been brutal compared to some of the other things.
	And because of the January 6th trials going on, which is far more sexy than this, you know, I've been kind of spare in the, in other words, I mean, I got yanked off the election team to do this, and so it's been hard.
	It's been harder than covering most trials, but yeah, it's exciting seeing characters you see on the news and stuff, and I walk up to you and tell you that they're taking Dutch lessons.
	I mean, it's kind of weird, but yeah, St. Diego's taking Dutch lessons.
	How does that mean?
	Well, your handle on Twitter.
	At John Hoggy.
	There's a number at the end of it.
	At 58. J.F. Hoggy 58. I'll be following you there to see what happens with this trial.
	John Hoggy 58. I'm actually, if we don't get a verdict by 3-3-30 or so, I gotta go.
	It's J.F. Hoggy.
	J.F. H-A-U-G-H-E-Y 58. At Twitter.
	I'm hanging out until about 3.30 or so, and then I've got to go because I've got to catch a plane and prepare for, like I said, I'm on the election team.
	I'm going to be in Las Vegas November 8th, so I've got to go out to Vegas.
	I'm way behind on election coverage.
	Well, it's phenomenal.
	Thank you for what you're doing.
	Let's be in touch.
	I'll follow you.
	I'll know when there's a verdict, and I'll tweet it out.
	I might not know.
	Yeah, you're going to spend a week there and you're going to miss the culmination of the week's worth of work.
	I don't always stick around for the verdict because that's, I mean, we don't always do that.
	But, you know, if it's taking time.
	But besides, you know, I mean, I got the Yankees.
	The Yankees play today.
	So I got to somehow get in front of that in the hotel, in the airport, I guess.
	Awesome.
	Well, enjoy it, John.
	Thank you very much.
	And we'll be in touch.
	We'll follow up when the election comes around.
	That should be an interesting time for America.
	All right.
	Anyway, thank you.
	Thank you.
	Have a good one.
	Bye-bye now.
	Bye-bye.
	Very cool.
	When he described it, yeah, it feels like 1950s journalism where, like, they're in there, they're writing it down, they all have to run out, get to their computers, be the first ones to publish the story.
	Very cool.
	And so now that I've heard him talk, I'm going to go with an acquittal.
	I'm thinking that I'll be wrong on this.
	I'll be wrong on my predictions if I had to bet I'll lose the money.
	I'm predicting an acquittal.
	Now that I understand the nuance of that trial.
	I've got a few minutes left before we go.
	By the way, John Hoggy, let me get his Twitter handle so everybody can follow him.
	It's good stuff.
	And the election, obviously, is going to be...
	John?
	Oh, it was J.F. Hoggy.
	Here it is.
	Okay.
	Boom shakalaka.
	And I will put this in the chat on Rumble so you can all read it.
	Yeah, this is probably not as juicy of a trial as Daryl Brooks.
	Oh, that's the nature of the beast.
	All right.
	Let's go back to the...
	We're going to get to a few more of the highlights before I have to call it a day.
	GoFundMe?
	We're on the GoFundMe?
	Okay, that's it.
	Back to the inquiry, the GoFundMe.
	And Jim Watson being a liar because it was only because of massive social media pushback that GoFundMe said, yeah, we're reimbursing everybody.
	Let me see if it's in here.
	By the way, I saw some chats.
	Nobody should use GoFundMe anymore.
	They made it clear that it's a political institution when they denied fundraising for certain defenses and then allowed for other defenses.
	Give, send, go.
	Not in a hashtag ad disguised sponsorship.
	I like Jacob Wells.
	He's been on the channel.
	I asked Jacob, would they even allow...
	It's a religious-based organization.
	Give, send, go.
	They will allow people to fundraise for that which they find religiously impermissible and hope that they find salvation, which is the way to do it.
	So give, send, go.
	Do not use GoFundMe.
	It's GoF me for a reason.
	But let's get back to Twitter.
	Let's get back to Twitter.
	So Jim Watson, just discreetly talking about how he met with GoFundMe, pressured them to freeze the accounts, and they did.
	And he he lauded them for that.
	Let's see what else we got.
	Were there other...
	Where were the other highlights for the...
	I watched Idiocracy yesterday.
	Oh, that might be...
	That might be it.
	That might be for the highlights for today.
	I've got a few more on the docket.
	All right.
	We're going to have to see what's going on in the chat on Rumble.
	Oh, man.
	And the threats of lawsuits, heartland denizen.
	Yeah, I think it was more, there was this issue about people saying, contest the charge, and then there's a sort of, or ask for a reimbursement of the charge, and then there's like a $25 charge on GoFundMe's end, and if everyone did it, it would have been a massive financial loss for them.
	But yeah, that's it.
	Everybody, Daryl Brooks is being streamed right now.
	Rakeda's covering Daryl Brooks.
	Uncivil Law is covering Daryl Brooks as well, I believe.
	Uncivil is covering Daryl Brooks.
	Barnes is on the Duran.
	There's too much to do in a day.
	My wife, she comes back on the day after tomorrow, so I should have a respite from the 24-7 that is life these days.
	But that's it for today.
	Read the Rumble Rants.
	Oh yes, Rob A. I did see Juan Rumble Rant, which I didn't get to.
	Oh, I read the Rumble Rants this morning on Locals.
	But Rob A, Rumble Rant for $5.
	It says, hit that plus button, arrow to the left, support Viva, join VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com.
	It's a good place to be.
	I was there this...
	What's going on here?
	I can't...
	My screen is frozen.
	Escape?
	What did I just do here?
	I've done something that I can't undo.
	VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com.
	A great place to be.
	Field of Greens.
	VivaFry.com.
	Promo code Viva.
	15% off your first order.
	10% off recording orders.
	If you own a property.
	HomeTitleLock.com forward slash Viva.
	You get a $100 free assessment to make sure your title is solid.
	And then it's $20 a month to have the monthly protection, notification, and avoidance.
	Avoision of people borrowing against your house.
	Merch if anybody wants to support.
	VivaFry.com.
	You can get some good merch such as this.
	Can't see the sweat.
	And I'm sweating.
	Everybody, stay tuned.
	We're going to have an interview tomorrow.
	It'll be a sidebar either at night or during the day.
	I'm just reaching out to people to see who we can get going.
	But one way or another, there will be a stream.
	All the links will be in the descriptions on both Rumble and YouTube.
	So thank you all for spending the morning to afternoon with me.
	Why can't I get back to...
	I cannot bring up...
	I want to see the Rumble to see if there's any more discussions in there.
	Okay, I did.
	I found a way to do it.
	I want to thank you all for being here.
	Don't lose faith, but don't keep faith in a blind.
	Things will happen if I just give up and let things happen.
	God helps those who help themselves, but do it in a way that would make your parents, your children, and your pets proud, and you can do no wrong.
	Viva, lower your thermostat a degree or two.
	Robbie, do you know how much that translates to at the end of the month?
	Our energy bills have been ridiculous.
	Ridiculous.
	Joey Meatball says, you and Darren Beattie ought to do a hairstyling special.
	Stace on the case says, you need the roughage also, though, so choose some veggies too.
	Absolutely.
	Even the powdered stuff, Field of Greens, it's not a substitute for vegetables, but if you can't, and most people can't and don't, it's a good way to do it.
	And I'm telling you, it does not taste bad.
	It's desiccated actual vegetable.
	Not an extract, not a supplement.
	It's a food, USDA organic, and made in America.
	There.
	Let's see what else we got.
	Dirty Harry, 75. 7585 says, Adios, amigos.
	Thank you, Viva, from Lady on the Right.
	Barbarissa Ariane says, Own nothing and will be happy.
	Now, materiality is not a source of pleasure, but no one's going to tell me what I can own.
	And no one's going to tell me what's going to make me happy.
	And if a government thinks they're going to do that, vote them out of office.
	And I might have to change that thumbnail because Justin Trudeau is no longer a petty tyrant.
	He's a massive tyrant.
	And this inquiry is revealing the level of tyranny, the level of in-your-face hypocrisy, the level of incompetence, and the level of elitism, privileged attitude of these political elites who think they can ruin your life and you can't protest it.
	All right.
	That is it, everyone.
	Oh no, hold on.
	I've got to have a proper...
	I've got to have a short video to play us out.
	Because Rumble...
	Leave a family fish.
	Rumble has the...
	What's the word I'm looking for?
	Rumble has the thing where it gets cut off.
	So you need a video so it doesn't cut off the audio.
	So...
	Something that's going to make everybody a little happy.
	Because, as they say, even a bad day of fishing is better than a good day at work.
	Share screen.
	I've got the video to play us out.
	Fishing.
	Okay, so you got a big worm on this.
	Enjoy the afternoon, everyone.
	Peace out.
	See you tomorrow.
	Good cast.
	How much do you like fishing on a scale of 1 to 10?
	Did you say love it or 11?
	Love it!
	Okay, that's really not on a scale of one to 10, but we'll let that slide.
	There we go.
	You got one.
	You got one.
	Does it feel big?
	Nope.
	It feels fine.
	Oh, dude.
	And we might want to explain why we're using an ice fishing rod, but it doesn't matter.
	Look at that.
	Beautiful.
	Perch.
	Oh, this one's just, just hooked on the lip.
	Okay?
	Unhooked.
	Pull that hook back.
	Fine.
	Okay, so you flip it backwards and then pull it out.
	Wait.
	Yeah.
	Eat me.
	Hey, can you eat me?
	Okay, hold up.
	Why do you have to do this?
	Fine.
	Didn't go in the water.
	Didn't go in the water.
	We're all good.
	Hold on.
	I'm putting it in.
	Put the rod down.
	Put the rod down.
	Hands out flat.
	Under the belly.
	There you go.
	Lower it in the water.
	And it's off.
	And...
	Again.
	Okay.
	Daddy needs coffee, though.
	Don't leave your daddy hanging.
	Daddy's hanging.
	Now you have fish slime on your hand.

▲