Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 3, 2023 - Viva & Barnes

01:58:31

SBF / FTX Democrat Launderers? More Fake News! Idaho Accused Killer Arrested & MORE!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I think in all my communications, in the frustration that Canadians were feeling, not just around that, but around the pandemic in general, there was a sense that Canadians really stepped up for each other.
	People went out and got vaccinated to a higher degree than just about any other country.
	And because of that, we actually had a...
	Better and safer pandemic than most people.
	Yes, we lost far too many people.
	Far too many.
	Heartbreaking.
	Heartbreaking.
	Better than most of the other countries that we can compare to.
	Let's stop there.
	Substantiate that, please.
	The two provinces with the highest vaccination.
	I won't even get into asking him to substantiate that.
	Substantiate that claim.
	But...
	Look, if you haven't eaten breakfast yet, you might be better off than those who did.
	But let's continue with this.
	The fact that there were some people out there who were actively spreading harmful disinformation and misinformation, harmful lies that made people scared that the vaccine was more dangerous than the virus, and families sitting around the bedside of a loved one who was dying from COVID.
	Saying, oh my God, I wish he'd just taken the vaccine.
	I wish he hadn't listened to all those YouTube channels.
	Like, this is real.
	There were real tragedies and there were people trying to gin that up and to expand the divisions and the fear and sense of conspiracies that were out there.
	We had, as a government, always and will always be extremely patient with people who are hesitant about getting a vaccine or whatever.
	But those people who were actively...
	Putting people's lives in danger by spreading falsehoods around science that will help and heal and save people and save our economy and save lives and save our institutions.
	Those people, and they were a small minority within...
	A small fringe minority holding unacceptable views.
	...who were really vocal.
	Don't, and I won't apologize for calling out people who were harming their fellow Canadians.
	So tinfoil hats comment you don't regret?
	Well, when someone believes that your government is trying to inject a vaccine in you to control your mind and track you and there's a microchip in it, that's almost the definition of a government conspiracy theory that you wear a tinfoil hat to protect your brain from brainwaves.
	How about we not take that?
	Conspiracy theory, Justin Trudeau.
	And we just go with the stated fact from your own health officers.
	One in 5,000 risk of myocarditis in young men per dose.
	How about we just stay with that one?
	Don't describe what most people would think, not as conspiracy theories, but just delusional thoughts.
	Let's set aside the delusional thoughts and just stick with the actual science.
	Are the people who say, who repeat the statement from Chief Medical Health Officer Kieran Moore from Ontario, one in 5,000 per dose for young men for myocarditis, is that disinformation?
	By the way, the projection in this two minutes and 18 seconds of verbal diarrhea is stunning.
	It's stunning.
	And I want to walk through it a little bit.
	And by the way, I had this lined up as today's intro before.
	The news broke of Damar Hamlin.
	And we'll talk about that later.
	That's not why I brought this up.
	This was my intro before I heard about that.
	Before that even occurred, I set this up yesterday.
	I was intending to try to go live.
	Listen to the projection of this pathological gaslighting.
	...in just about any other country.
	And because of that...
	There was a sense that Canadians really stepped up.
	Stepped up.
	Stepped up.
	Just do the montage of step up.
	Canadians stepped up.
	I've got my think tank catchphrase.
	Stepped up.
	Got your back.
	People went out and got vaccinated to a higher degree than just about any other country.
	And because of that, we actually had a better and safer pandemic than most people.
	Yes, we lost far too many people and it was heartbreaking.
	Can you imagine?
	Yes, we lost far too many people and it was heartbreaking.
	Yes, yes, yes.
	But we did far better than other countries that we can compare to.
	Compare yourself to Florida.
	Compare yourself to Texas.
	How much better did you do if you did it all in the moment?
	And how much better are you doing now for the incidentals that arise from your draconian and unscientific response?
	We lost far too many people.
	It's heartbreaking.
	Why did we lose those many people?
	Oh, because...
	The long-term healthcare facilities didn't have sufficient personal protection equipment.
	Why?
	Because we donated it to China back in February 2020.
	Oh, yes, but we lost far too many.
	It was very tragic.
	But we did better without any more specifics.
	We did better than others.
	By the way, you're going to hear noise because there's construction going on all day and there's nothing I can do about it.
	But we did better than most of the other countries that we can do.
	Better than most.
	So not better than some.
	Okay.
	That statement means nothing.
	The fact that there were some people out there who were actively spreading harmful disinformation and misinformation, harmful lies that made people scared that the...
	Let's actually stop it there.
	The fact that there were people out there spreading harmful lies.
	Oh, I don't know, like Joe Biden.
	If you get the jibby jab, you can't transmit it.
	It acts like a block.
	Rachel Maddow.
	MSNBC saying if you get the jibby jab, you can't spread it.
	I could go on forever.
	The fact that there were people out there spreading disinformation and misinformation and this pathological gaslighter was one of them.
	Oh, but now he's disinformation that could deter people from running out and jabbing their children.
	The vaccine was more dangerous than the virus.
	That the vaccine was more dangerous than the virus.
	What demographic are you talking about, Justin Trudeau?
	Because that will not be true of a certain demographic, and it will be true of another demographic.
	Because 1 in 5,000 myocarditis for young men, I believe, based on what I've read and understand from the science, 1 in 5,000 risk of myocarditis from a jab for young men is far greater than the risk of any serious effect.
	From the Rona itself in that same demographic.
	80-year-old, double comorbidity, obese, diabetic.
	That's a different set.
	Are you saying that this is not true of any demographic?
	Because that sounds like disinformation and misinformation, Trudy.
	And families sitting around the bedside of a loved one who was dying from COVID saying, oh my God, I wish he'd just taken the vaccine.
	I wish he hadn't listened to all those YouTube channels.
	But just so everybody appreciates, I don't...
	React to this as though I think he's even talking about me.
	I've always been pretty strict in the rule of not providing medical information and certainly not providing disinformation, like we've seen in other movies of, you know, clips taken out of context, anecdotes which are, in fact, factually incorrect.
	Is Justin Trudeau now going to the deathbed confession of someone dying in the family saying, I just wish they took the vax?
	When we now know that the vaccine wouldn't have prevented contracting it in the first place and at best might have reduced the severity of certain symptoms, not knowing anything else, by the way, because back in the day, Kieran Moore, Hoshel, who are the other ones, come out and say, we haven't been distinguishing between hospitalized with COVID versus hospitalized from COVID.
	And now Trudy is coming out here and saying, talking about disinformation and misinformation.
	Those families lamenting, had they just gotten the vax, none of this would have happened.
	That's totally scientific.
	This is real.
	There were real tragedies and there were people trying to gin that up and to expand the divisions and the fear and sense of...
	Can you imagine Justin Trudeau seriously with a straight face talking about ginning up fear and division?
	Can you imagine it?
	The lack of insight.
	And we're going to get to so much lack of insight in the context of this stream.
	Let's just finish this up.
	Conspiracy that we're out there.
	We had, as a government, always and will always be extremely patient with people who are hesitant about getting a vaccine or whatever.
	We'll be patient with people who are hesitant.
	We won't be patient with others.
	Listen to what that suggests.
	We will always be patient with people who we think are good people of pristine intentions.
	People who are legitimately scared.
	We'll always be patient with them.
	Others?
	We won't be so patient with.
	People who were actively putting people's lives in danger by spreading falsehoods around science that will help and heal.
	Oh, you mean like safe and effective, except for that small risk, according to Kieran Moore, one in 5,000 per dose.
	Safe and effective, although doesn't prevent contracting, cowering, or transmitting the virus.
	Safe.
	Even though they are only now, Pfizer and Moderna, conducting trials as to the incident rate of myocarditis.
	And this guy is accusing other people of spreading disinformation, misinformation that might harm people.
	And save people, and save our economy, and save lives.
	Save our economy.
	Save our economy.
	Getting vaccinated will save our economy.
	It's very scientific.
	Our institutions, those people...
	And there were a small minority within the larger anti-movements who were really vocal.
	I don't and I won't apologize.
	Don't and I won't apologize.
	Tyrants never do because tyrants are never wrong.
	They're never wrong in the science, even when they are.
	They were just trusting the science at the time.
	They were never wrong for compelling people to do things against their will with their own bodies that might have had very serious impacts.
	Potentially.
	Just, you know, one in 5,000.
	Minor.
	Mild myocarditis.
	It goes away.
	You're going to hear noise.
	So let's just...
	That's the intro.
	Sorry, people.
	It's disgusting.
	And that's a drill, I think.
	We're going to have to deal with this noise all day.
	All stream.
	But it was that or no stream.
	Because I have yet to build out the studio.
	It's going to happen.
	It's going to happen this year.
	Because that was one of my New Year's resolutions.
	Happy New Year, everybody.
	This is the first stream of 2023, unless you follow Robert and myself in Locals, in which case you saw a live airport stream and other stuff.
	Happy New Year.
	Nothing but health and happiness in the new year and noise.
	Health, happiness, and noise.
	Standard disclaimers.
	I'm going to bring up this super chat to...
	To say this, Dragon Slayer says, not a lack of insight as so much as their evil chip-them-all plan Yeshua warned us.
	I don't subscribe to the chip theory.
	Never have.
	I don't subscribe to the turning your body into an antenna theory.
	Never have.
	For obvious reasons, they don't need to do it that way when they can do it this way.
	And we're going to get into that in terms of anybody thinking you can get away with a crime these days.
	It's not going to be possible.
	The only question is going to be whether or not the state of technology and constant surveillance is going to reduce crime overall, or crime itself, generally speaking, is a momentary act of compulsion, not thinking things through, and then suffering the consequences for the rest of your life.
	Who's drilling?
	Windows.
	Windows.
	You need a haircut, bro, Marion?
	Never.
	I don't say never.
	We'll see.
	On the menu today, the Idaho Killer.
	I keep not saying Iowa.
	I'm saying Iowa or Idaho.
	I forget which.
	It's the one that I keep making the mistake on.
	I think it's Iowa.
	I keep getting mixed up between the two.
	The Iowa Killer, the latest.
	I mean, just the latest.
	I was on Megyn Kelly yesterday, which is why I couldn't get a stream going.
	The day ran out of hours.
	The latest on the...
	I want to see in the chat if anyone's going to tell me.
	Is it Idaho or is it Iowa?
	Oh, wait a minute.
	It's Ohio.
	No, it's not Ohio.
	It's Idaho.
	Holy crap.
	Idaho, Ohio, Iowa.
	All very similar.
	Idaho.
	We're going to get into that.
	We're going to talk about tomorrow.
	Not to hypothesize, not to theorize, just to highlight the disingenuous nature of public discourse.
	And what else?
	SBF.
	You know, we're going to start with SBS.
	SBF.
	How bad is the noise, people?
	I can hear it even through my headphones, but maybe the mic, if I position the mic away from the window.
	We're going to start with...
	You might have noticed, people.
	New year, new sponsor.
	Which one do we start with?
	We're going to start with...
	We're going to start with gold.
	By the way, before we even get into that, those on our locals community have now seen this.
	This, by the way, if everyone can see it, is a legit, authentic tetradrachma.
	I bought this...
	I've had a fetish for coins my entire life.
	I love coin collections, and I have a pretty crappy coin collection back home.
	And when I went home, I was looking through it, and I remembered I had one coin that was my pride of my collection.
	A real tetradrachma that I bought about 12 years ago when I was a lawyer at Borden Ladner Gervais.
	Oh, the noise.
	Okay, the noise is fine and not too loud.
	Good.
	I bought that tetradrachma.
	For 400 Canadian dollars, it was the most expensive coin I ever bought.
	And it has only depreciated in value, but not because of the value of the silver.
	It's an actual 99% silver coin from over 2,000 years ago.
	It depreciates in value because every time they find another batch of these tetradrachmas, the existing coins in circulation go down in value.
	This is amazing.
	You're holding a piece of history.
	This changed hands in Roman times.
	Who knows what this bought?
	Who knows who held this coin?
	And they call them coins that are fun to touch because they're already tarnished and scratched and whatever.
	You can handle these coins without reducing their value.
	It's beautiful.
	Okay.
	That's the segue into today's sponsor, which is Birch Gold, by the way.
	Because it's not a joke.
	Let me make sure I don't screw up on the talking points.
	I'm going to read it.
	I have my own pitch.
	The theory is this, people.
	Biden's administration knew your goals of tax and spend and turn a blind eye to inflation.
	Are they at odds with your goals of securing your savings?
	Everybody has to appreciate this.
	I'm going to add my own observations into the script of the ad.
	People make money.
	The hardest thing is not actually making money.
	It's making sure you don't lose your money.
	You can make money and hopefully you don't...
	Have someone clip your car when it's parked on the sideway and you have to replace the side view mirror.
	You make money.
	You hope that the government doesn't come and tax you.
	You get a ticket or whatever.
	You make the money and you try to keep your money at the very least to retain value.
	People don't understand.
	You just sit that money in a bank account.
	Inflation being what it is, you've already lost 8% on that money.
	It's crazy.
	And so what do you do?
	You buy stocks, take a chance there, lose however much if you bought Tesla a year ago.
	I picked up a little Tesla the other day.
	How do you retain money?
	How do you at least make sure that you don't lose the money you have?
	Historically, gold has been one of the best things.
	It doesn't go bankrupt.
	You invest in GM, Nortel, as I did.
	They go belly up, even though they're blue chip companies.
	You lose everything.
	At the very least, you buy gold.
	Hard, cold gold.
	It doesn't lose value like a stock that goes belly up overnight does.
	And typically, it appreciates in value over time.
	This coin will always be worth something because it's made out of silver.
	And so the coin itself might not have additional value, but the silver itself will always have value.
	Birch gold.
	For 5,000 years, gold has withstood inflation, geopolitical turmoil, and market crashes.
	And, as we learned from Pulp Fiction, if you hide it in your butt, it can also survive times of war.
	That's the best way to do it.
	Gold.
	Not financial advice.
	This is just buy an ounce coin thingy of gold.
	It can only go down so much, and by and large, it will go up over time.
	It's got to be turned back into fiat currency at some point in time, or bartered, but whatever.
	If you go to birchgold.com slash viva, that is my promo code if you go there.
	AAA rating with the Better Business Bureau, thousands of happy customers, countless five-star reviews, secure your future with gold.
	Start today with a free info kit.
	There's zero obligation to make this request.
	Just visit birchgold.com forward slash.
	Viva.
	And I brought up the screen so you can all see what it looks like.
	Hold on.
	Hold on.
	Here we go.
	Birch gold.
	Boom shakalaka.
	It's not glamorous.
	It won't go up 10,000% overnight like Dogecoin, but it also won't go down 10,000% overnight like FTX and Sam Bankman-Fried, which is the first story of the day.
	Thank you to my sponsor.
	Okay.
	Well, I've heard this before.
	And incidentally, like, some hard assets just go up in value.
	Gold just seems to be the time-tested and true one.
	It won't go up 10,000% overnight like Dogecoin.
	It won't go down 10,000% overnight like FTX.
	The scandal that just keeps on giving.
	What is the latest?
	Like, we haven't talked about SBF, Sandbankman-Fried.
	FTX, his girlfriend Carly Ellison, who has now turned snitch, struck a deal and sending her boyfriend to the gallows, the proverbial gallows.
	I don't think they have the death penalty for what Sam Bankman-Fried is accused of.
	I said it before.
	This FTX is a Democrat money laundering scheme.
	I said it.
	I believe it.
	I think the evidence is already there to support this theory, but I believe...
	If they dig deep enough, more evidence will come out to substantiate it even more.
	But what's the latest?
	If it is a Democrat money laundering scheme, $70 million, no less, went to Democrat candidates in the midterms.
	Sam Bankman-Fried's mother runs this thing called Mind the Gap.
	It's a get out and vote.
	They actually called it a grift.
	I mean, people who are not me called it a grift.
	I think it was Vox that called it a grift.
	Someone called it a grift, and it wasn't me, because I try not to use that word too often, but scam, sham, whatever.
	Sam Bankman's mother runs this get out the vote, mind the gap, and they raised $140 million.
	I think that's up from $20 million in 2020.
	How?
	Who knows?
	Who knows?
	But I said that this is a Democrat money laundering mechanism.
	Elon Musk says it could be in the order of a billion dollars to Democrat political...
	Who knows, but when something becomes potentially, allegedly, possibly a Democrat money laundering scheme, well then you know that you're seeing some circumstantial evidence of it when the Washington Post comes out and starts acting as PR for the alleged conspirators or defendants.
	Listen to this article.
	It's outrageous.
	The framing of Sam Bankman-Fried, Ellison, his co-conspirator, FTX.
	You remember back in the day when this all started breaking, Washington Post, New York Times ran an article framing Sam Bankman-Fried as a failed philanthropist.
	All he wanted to do was help the world, prevent the next pandemic.
	He just wanted to do good.
	And he might have gotten a little too fast and easy with the company managing billions of dollars of client assets.
	Listen to how the Washington Post is framing this now that Ellison, Carly Ellison, the girlfriend, has basically turned, what's the word?
	Cooperative with the feds.
	Caroline Ellison wanted to make a difference.
	Now she's facing prison.
	Can you imagine if they framed Bernie Madoff this way?
	It's like, commit all the fraud in the world, so long as you donate to some philanthropic entities, political entities.
	All you wanted to do was make a difference, even if it was by laundering off money that you had no business getting and then pacifying political interests or bribing political interests through massive donations.
	All she wanted to do was make a difference.
	A close colleague of Crypto King, Sam Bankman-Fried, Ellison, is now pleading guilty, saying she knew that what she did was illegal.
	I'm not going to go through the whole thing because it will make you vomit the degree to which the Washington Post The New York Times, they are not news outlets.
	They are PR firms, mouthpieces, lapdogs of political interests.
	For four years, Caroline Ellison and Sam Bankman-Fried worked together to build a crypto empire.
	Ellison ran the hedge fund connected to FTX, the crypto exchange founded in 2019.
	Beyond work, the pair had a lot in common.
	Both were children of accomplished academics, studied math at prestigious universities, and touted the importance of giving money away.
	To make the world a better place.
	Here's a spoiler alert, Washington Post.
	If you're giving away stolen money and only some of it while you buy lavish apartments in the Bahamas and property for your own personal interests, it's criminal.
	You're not a good person.
	You're not making the world a better place.
	You're just concealing the fact that you are a criminal stealing other people's money while giving the veneer of a philanthropist to yourselves.
	Oh, I'm going to skip down here.
	Where was it?
	Where was the part?
	The math whiz.
	Ellison's ascent to become one of the most important figures in the crypto world was quick.
	In a July 2020 interview on FTX internal podcast, she described her childhood education and quick tour through Wall Street before landing in Alameda Research.
	The hedge fund owned by Bankman Freed was closely integrated with FTX.
	Listen to how the Washington Post is describing Fraud.
	FTX was in fact owned by Bankman-Fried, but not knowingly to everybody.
	It was in fact concealed its interconnectedness to Sam Bankman-Fried.
	It wasn't closely integrated with FTX.
	It was fraudulently acquiring through fraud the investor monies, client investor monies that clients were giving to FTX.
	To invest in crypto that were being siphoned off to Alameda so they could then be used for all sorts of purposes.
	Lavish apartments, political donations, philanthropic research.
	It was closely integrated with FTX.
	It was part of the fraudulent scheme.
	FTX was running a crypto exchange, was collecting client funds, was either directing them to Alameda or directing clients to...
	Wire their investment monies directly to Alameda.
	Alameda was using client funds for non-client purposes such that FTX did not have the liquidity to reimburse clients for their own money when that call came.
	Oh, no.
	She was close with Alameda, a hedge fund owned by Bankman, closely integrated with FTX.
	Bankman-Fried's parents are Stanford law professors.
	Ellison's mother, Ellison's mother and father are economic professors at MIT.
	Holy shiat.
	Oh, she did two internships at Jane Street Capital, a major quantitative trading firm.
	They are giving a resume of fraudster and criminals.
	She's pleaded guilty.
	She admitted now that what she did was illegal.
	She knew it was illegal at the time, and she nonetheless did it.
	If authoritarian governments are a serious threat to civilization, which seems not totally insane, it could end up being important.
	She talked about crypto.
	Listen to this, though.
	At FTX, though, Ellison's job was less about dodging authoritarian governments and more about making money from the explosion of interest and investment in cryptocurrencies.
	FTX grew rapidly.
	Listen to this.
	In interviews, Ellison spoke about the challenges and excitement of the job.
	There are a lot of people who are very smart but aren't good at necessarily the very messy world of trading, especially crypto.
	You never have...
	All of the information, yep.
	And some people have less of the information than others.
	So you kind of just have to make your best guess based on what you can see.
	This is not just a fluff piece.
	I forgot where the best part of this was.
	Hold on.
	Let me see where the best part of it was.
	Clearly, I made a lot of mistakes.
	There are things I would give anything to be able to do over again.
	I did not ever try to commit fraud on anyone, he said.
	That's Sam Bankman for you.
	This is the Washington Post describing possibly the biggest fraud ever.
	Something that makes Bernie Madoff look like child's play.
	Conveniently glossing over all of the political incestuous corruption in this, the donations in the tens of millions, hundreds of millions, and maybe even the billions to political entities, Democrat political entities.
	And the Washington Post and the New York Times, the absolute fake news that they are, running hardcover, and they're just misunderstood philanthropists.
	It's failed philanthropy.
	Hold on, this is pointing way too much to that side.
	And it gets better.
	It gets better.
	Because I will steel man both sides.
	There are people saying, rightly, Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX, they donated to Republican entities as well.
	Oh yeah, okay.
	It's almost like they donated 10% to Republicans and 90% to Democrats so they could then say afterwards, well, we donated to both parties so both are equally guilty.
	But they're not.
	They're not.
	Because even by Bankman-Fried's own admissions and by all evidence out there, if it's not 90%, it's more, went to Democrats.
	Democrat causes, Democrat PACs, Democrat candidates.
	Okay, yeah, they donated 5,800 to some Republican congressional candidates.
	They donated the max to some Republican candidates.
	That does not make it equal.
	In fact, it almost makes it more suspicious that 90% of Democrats, and why 10% to Republicans?
	Some people will hypothesize that they basically went to the most Democrat-Republican candidates imaginable.
	It went to rhinos, Republicans in name only.
	Some might hypothesize that.
	Others might hypothesize it's purely a front to say at the end of the day, so the media has their talking point, well, they gave to both parties.
	Others are saying, look at this.
	I got an article yesterday from...
	I won't call the individual a troll.
	I mean, they may or may not have the Ukrainian flag in their bio and consistently put up the most idiotic tweet responses.
	You know, attention-grabbing attempts to shift the discussion.
	But occasionally they'll put up something very interesting that I'll have to read because I want to know both sides and I'll steal men.
	This was the article that...
	One of those Twitter handles who follows me only to call me all sorts of names and suggests that I'm dumb and don't know what I'm talking about.
	Viva!
	Sam Bankman-Fried says he was the third biggest donor to the Republicans.
	Oh, okay.
	Interesting.
	I'd like to see that.
	From Business Insider.
	I'm not going to go after the source and say Business Insider is schlock journalism of the highest order, which it is.
	I'll read it.
	With a critical eye and an open mind.
	Oh, Sam Bankman Freed says he's the Republicans' third biggest donor, but used dark money to avoid media criticism.
	So you know what the first thing I notice here is?
	Business Insider, because they're fake news, but they're, you know, they know the rules.
	They can't make the statements.
	This doesn't say Sam Bankman is the Republicans' third biggest donor, because that might make Business Insider the liars to repeat.
	What's basically, if it's not a lie, it's totally unsubstantiated.
	It might make them liars.
	So how do dishonest media entities spread disinformation without themselves becoming the liars?
	I'm not saying it.
	I'm just quoting Sam Bankman-Fried.
	And then we're going to see the verifications and the diligence that they carried out to verify what Sam Bankman-Fried says.
	But by the way, it's not Business Insider saying it in the headline.
	It's Business Insider saying what Sam Bankman-Fried said in the headline.
	As if anybody's going to really appreciate that distinction when they read the headline, Sam Bankman-Fried, third biggest donor for Republicans.
	Sam Bankman-Fried confirmed pathological liar.
	Sorry, I added that, because he is.
	Sam Bankman-Fried, the liar, says he's the Republican third biggest donor.
	Oh, okay, well, we should definitely believe him.
	What's the evidence?
	Oh, you won't get the evidence, because he used dark money to avoid media criticism.
	Yeah, sounds interesting.
	Let's just hear the thoroughness of the investigative journalism that is Business Insider repeating a lie from a confirmed liar as though it's a fact.
	Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of FTX, says he's the Republicans' third biggest donor, but used dark money to avoid criticism.
	He revealed the information.
	Oh, no.
	He didn't allege it.
	He revealed it.
	It's not an unsubstantiated allegation from a liar.
	It's a revelation of fact.
	From Sam Bankman-Fried.
	In a YouTube interview with journalist Tiffany Fong amid reports that he donated $40 million to the Democrats.
	Can you believe what pathological liar's business insider is?
	He revealed this unsubstantiated allegation coming from the mouth of a liar amid reports that he donated.
	It's not reports that he donated $40 million.
	That's a demonstrable fact.
	And I think it's him.
	He alone that donated $40 million.
	He was at $37.8 million.
	Two of his executives in FTX donated a total of $30 million.
	That's $70 million.
	That we know of off the bat.
	Oh, no, no.
	He revealed an unsubstantiated allegation amid reports.
	They're rumors.
	We don't know them to be true.
	That he donated $40 million to Democrats.
	Bankman Freed.
	That made Bankman Freed the party's number two donor behind only George Soros.
	$128 million per open seat.
	Bankman Freed did not specify which Republican causes he pumped dark money into.
	Oh, he didn't specify and we didn't push.
	He didn't specify which, when, how much, show receipts, which pack did it go to indirectly.
	Dark money, by the way, just so everybody appreciates, it's not like briefcases of cash.
	It's just subterfuges to conceal.
	Where the money comes from.
	So it's not that the dark money leaves no trails.
	He could very easily show where FTX donated to an entity that itself then remitted, siphoned the funds to Republicans.
	He didn't.
	He didn't specify which Republican causes.
	He pumped dark money into them.
	We didn't ask.
	But the former CEO of the failed crypto exchange has now explained how he donated about the same amount to both parties.
	How did he do it?
	How did he do it?
	I've been the third largest Republican donor.
	Liar.
	I don't care what you have to say, you liar, if you don't show the evidence to back up your statements.
	You're a liar.
	Nothing you will ever say again in the future will not be reflexively deemed or suspected to be a lie.
	If you don't have concrete evidence, what you have is basically a lie floated in the ether, and you've got Business Insider repeating it as though it's some sort of substantiated fact.
	And by the way, what do liars do?
	They don't provide evidence.
	They provide confusion.
	Listen to this.
	He also referred to the 2010 decision, Citizens United, in the Supreme Court that led corporations and outside groups to make unlimited political donations.
	I think we can all appreciate the problems with that decision now.
	So he says, I did it.
	And remember that decision.
	Just look over there because I don't have the evidence to support what I just said.
	This created financing loopholes because the groups did not have to disclose their donors, giving rise to dark money.
	That are called disturbingly common.
	Okay, you haven't provided one iota of evidence to substantiate Bankman-Fried's statements.
	He said he did so to avoid media criticism.
	Good.
	Reporters freak the f*** out if you donate to Republicans, he said.
	And I'm going to do it in his voice.
	Reporters freak the f*** out if you donate to Republicans, he said.
	They're all secretly liberal?
	Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Reporters are secretly liberal, you moron.
	Oh.
	Guys, reporters are secretly liberal.
	And I didn't want to have that fight, so I made all the Republican ones dark.
	Oh, yeah.
	How?
	Despite Citizens United being literally the highest-profile Supreme Court case of the decade.
	Is this him?
	For some reason, in practice, no one can possibly fathom the idea that...
	Someone actually gave dark.
	Oh, okay.
	Bankman Freed has been under the spotlight since the biggest fraud in the history of America.
	Once valued at $32 billion, the exchange is now facing lawsuits for fraud.
	50 credits, yada, yada, yada.
	Financial Times reported how employees enjoyed luxury benefits such as $200 a day food delivery and a private plane to fly Amazon packages from Miami to the Bahamas.
	One of the richest person under 30 with a net of $26 billion, Bankman Freed, told Axis on Monday that he's now down to his last $100,000.
	I'm not going to say that Business Insider is schlock journalism of the highest order.
	I'm going to think it, and I'm going to say it.
	Do you notice what was acutely missing from that article?
	One shred of evidence to substantiate Bankman Freed's story.
	One shred of evidence.
	One document showing a million dollars to a Republican PAC.
	To an organization that then subsequently...
	Not one shred of evidence in that entire verbal diarrhea of a Business Insider article.
	Congratulations, Business Insider.
	They should call it Bowel Movements Insider.
	B-I should be Bowel Insider.
	Because that's what that journalism is.
	Rubbish.
	Fecal rubbish.
	I'm trying not to swear.
	My New Year's resolution was to not swear.
	It wasn't, actually, at all.
	But there's no harm in not swearing.
	Although I will.
	Sooner than later.
	So that's it.
	Not one shred of evidence, but they wrote a story that will allow Ukrainian flag in their bio trolls on Twitter to say, Viva, you're such an idiot.
	He's the third largest donor to the Republicans.
	I just don't have any evidence to substantiate it.
	But Business Insider told me what to say, so now I'm going to say it because now that's the thing.
	Fecal rubbish.
	I like it.
	Oh, okay.
	Speaking of fecal rubbish, or the bowel movements, or being healthy, another sponsor for today's stream, before we head over to Rumble exclusively, and it's one that I work with and have worked with for an extensive period of time, Field of Greens.
	Most people are going to have a New Year's resolution to lose the weight that they put on over New Year's.
	I don't know what weight I put on over New Year's, if any.
	I do know that since having moved to Florida in July, I lost, at the very least, based on a scale that I used to weigh myself for the last 10 years, I lost 4 pounds, and my body fat percentage is still slightly under 9%.
	I don't know if it was a good day if I took a massive movement and it allowed me to lose 4 pounds, but at the very least, I haven't put on weight since coming to Florida.
	I think I've added a few extra kilometers to my daily walk, which probably accounts for that.
	I don't know what I put on over New Year's.
	I did manage to exercise pretty much every day, even when I came down with a cold.
	I actually had a theory that, you know, the only way to get over a cold is with the cold, and I went for an outdoor jog.
	In Banff winter boots on a highway, my quads were killing me for like a week afterwards.
	But I don't know if I put on weight over the holidays, but people do, because all you end up doing is sitting around eating, drinking, and being merry with friends or family.
	And so one resolution of people.
	And it's always the good one, but it puts a lot of pressure on people, is to lose the weight going into the new year.
	There are ways to lose weight, but at the end of the day, it's healthy eating, calories in, calories out.
	But losing the weight aside, healthy eating.
	Most people don't know this.
	You're supposed to have five servings of vegetables a day.
	Most people know this.
	Most people don't have five servings of vegetables every day.
	What's the best alternative to five servings of raw vegetables a day?
	It's something called desiccated greens, powdered greens.
	Not to be confused with...
	What's the word?
	Not concentrates, but...
	Oh, jeez.
	I'm going to lose the word.
	Not to be confused with supplements or what is the word I'm looking for?
	Chad, help me out.
	When you synthesize something down into liquid form.
	Not a supplement.
	Extract.
	Not an extract.
	One serving, someone asks, how many grams in a serving?
	It's a spoonful.
	One spoonful of desiccated greens.
	Not defecated, but desiccated.
	Powdered greens.
	It's got all the nutrients of super fruits and vegetables.
	One serving per spoonful, twice a day, stir it in water, drink it.
	It's a healthy habit.
	It's a healthy substitute for those who don't get their vegetables.
	And it will, at the very least, help you get on track to a healthier lifestyle.
	Where you do something healthy instead of something unhealthy like my bad obsession with Red Bulls.
	It'll get you the antioxidants, the nutrients from fruits and vegetables for those who don't sit down and chew five servings of raw fruits and vegetables a day.
	Made in America.
	USDA approved.
	Oh, I actually have it right here.
	Boom shakalaka.
	Field of Greens.
	It doesn't taste bad.
	People are going to look at it and say, how the heck am I going to drink this?
	It's like one of those raw egg competitions from the internet.
	It tastes good, objectively.
	It looks like swamp water.
	Green, nice, thick, rich water.
	But everybody knows that the greens, the wetlands, carry the nutrients.
	They sustain the life for all other water areas out there.
	And I like to think of it in an analogy like that.
	Fieldofgreens.com.
	Fieldofgreens.com forward slash Viva will get you 10% off, 50% off your first order, 10% off a subscription, and it's good.
	It's good and it's a good habit.
	So that's it.
	I spent a half an hour on the phone at one point with the chief doctor from the company to make sure it was good, that I felt comfortable not just sponsoring it, using it myself.
	I do, I have, and it's good.
	Fieldofgreens.com slash Viva.
	Thank you very much.
	Birch Gold and Field of Greens for having the audacity and the courage to sponsor the hinged, fringed minority holding unacceptable views.
	Grof Von Tirol says, I live here in Moscow.
	The killer went to school eight...
	The alleged killer...
	We're going to talk about this in a second.
	The alleged killer went to school eight miles away from here.
	And from what I hear, the WSU Criminology Department plays host to some rather interesting people even before now.
	Let's get into this.
	And by the way, I'm not saying alleged killer to be...
	What's the word?
	Contrarian and play devil's advocate.
	The entire situation is very interesting.
	Now, with that said, by the way, let's move on over to Rumble.
	What have I missed on Rumble?
	Oh, I missed.
	Chisholm has a chat.
	I'm going to grab this.
	Commodio Cordes is a...
	We're going to get to that in a second.
	I'm going to screen grab that.
	I'm going to see what's going on in the chat at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	I haven't joined the chat.
	I set up a live chat.
	On vivabarneslaw.locals.com, where I am going to be much more active this year, consistently active.
	Bill Brown's in the house.
	Lord Jestocost is in the house.
	Mr. Burns, although it is MBNS, is in the house.
	Sophia Agap is in the house.
	And Jungle Boogie's in the house.
	And a bunch of other people.
	I'm going to see if there's any questions here that I miss.
	I don't think I've missed anything.
	There's a heated discussion going on in the chat at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	The best place to support me and Robert if you are so inclined.
	Okay, so what am I doing right now?
	Right now we're going to Rumble exclusively.
	I'm going to put the link in.
	Link here, everybody.
	We are currently 1,366 on YouTube and how many on Rumble?
	Almost 5,000 on Rumble.
	Booyah.
	All right, let's end it here.
	We're going to talk about the...
	Iowa killer?
	Jeez, I keep forgetting.
	I keep forgetting.
	We're going to talk about the Iowa killer and we're going to talk about a bunch of other stuff.
	Hypocrisy.
	Shameless hypocrisy.
	If it weren't for double standards, some people would have no standards whatsoever.
	Okay, link over here, people.
	Ending it on YouTube in 5, 4, 3. Oh, and by the way, all of the links to the sponsors are in the description and they will be in the pinned comment once we're there.
	Ending on YouTube.
	Moving to Rumble.
	Exclusively now.
	Booyah.
	Now it's been...
	Close that.
	Close that.
	And are we still good?
	Let's see.
	We're good.
	We're good.
	And I forgot to change my shirt.
	I was going to wear my Salty Army merch shirt.
	And instead I ended up with Style Boys.
	If anybody knows what that is.
	You get extra credit points.
	Idaho, Idaho, Idaho.
	Okay, so how do I...
	I'm gonna have to remember potatoes.
	Idaho potatoes.
	Or is it Iowa potatoes?
	Or is it Ohio potatoes?
	I've lost the Chisholm Super Chat, but I screen grabbed it so I can get it afterwards.
	All right, let's start with the Idaho killer.
	Alleged killer.
	It was on Megyn Kelly yesterday.
	We talked about the latest.
	It's fascinating from a forensic perspective of...
	Crime detection.
	How anybody thinks you can get away with crime these days, I was thinking about it.
	The only way you can really get away with crime is not in areas where it's so remote that it doesn't happen.
	It's in areas where it's so frequent that it happens so often it's impossible to pinpoint down.
	That's my operating theory.
	But listening to this, people have been obsessing over these stories.
	I don't like these types of stories in general because there are...
	Humans behind the story.
	Four young adults with the rest of their lives ahead of them.
	Truly horrific.
	It's the stuff of horror movies.
	Like, you know, you watch Hellraiser or you watch, I don't know, The Shining.
	Those are two bad examples, actually, because those might be the horrors that humans actually do.
	But you watch supernatural movies like horror movies, and then you realize that the true horror, the most horrific of horror...
	Is what man does to man, humans to humans.
	Whether it's genocide, war, the atrocities of conflict, or the individual evil things that people whose brains are not developed properly do.
	I hate these stories.
	I've been following it, but not daily commentating on it.
	What I found...
	Interesting about this, I was just thinking back to serial killers of the past.
	We live in an era now where everyone has a social media footprint, and if they don't, that itself is a telling thing.
	We're going to get back to that as it relates to this alleged killer.
	But back in the day, people don't remember this story.
	Where's my phone that I just heard beep?
	Back in the day, there was the dating game killer.
	A serial killer, so narcissistic in his...
	Desire for fame, recognition, adulation, the degree to which he would thumb his nose at authorities, the serial killer, I forget his name and it doesn't really matter, who was a serial killer who went on the dating game as a contestant and was selected by the woman in the show who subsequently turned down the date because she thought the guy was very creepy and didn't want to go out with him, called the producers of the show and said, do you mind if I don't go out on the date with this guy because he's giving me the heebie-jeebies?
	And he turned out to be a serial killer.
	Back in the day, reading how a serial killer could ever have gotten onto the show, because he still did have a criminal record, he had no...
	The show didn't do background checks.
	This information was not readily available.
	And so you could get away with it in that sense.
	Dred Spears says, Fauci was on a game show?
	No.
	So, Rodney Alcala, Nature Lover Freedom, has got the name.
	Rodney Alcala.
	So, you know, back in the day, you can understand how people could get away with these things for a longer period of time.
	In fact, back in the day, I wonder how people even got caught in the first place.
	Bearing in mind, you know, you got to get caught, you got to get proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
	Before DNA, before geolocation, before tracking your every movement, how did they catch...
	I mean, they never caught Jack the Ripper.
	I guess maybe it was easier back in the day, but whatever.
	This case, which shook a small town, shook the nation because of the...
	Horror of the incident and the fact that seven weeks went by and nothing.
	No leads, no nothing, you know, that we knew of.
	Now we know they've arrested an individual.
	28-year-old male.
	A criminology student, apparently a PhD in criminology or something along those lines.
	I mean, it's got also very much a vibe of Dexter in real life.
	Criminology students, 28 years old.
	Has been arrested.
	Now, you have to presume, we haven't seen, that I know of at least as of yesterday, and I don't think it came out today, the statements of probable cause, or the affidavit of probable cause.
	We don't know what evidence the FBI has, the authorities have, to have made the arrest, but you presume they've got to have pretty decent evidence to have made the arrest because it requires pretty decent evidence to substantiate the warrant for the arrest.
	What you can imagine they have, first of all, is geolocation.
	It was the white car that set everything off.
	There was this white car that they saw in the area.
	They had questions for the owner.
	Person of interest, they had to ask questions, and lo and behold, this individual owns a white car.
	I think it's a Nissan Elantra or something.
	They got a warrant to basically spy on, follow the individual for several days.
	FBI was following this individual publicly.
	Some of the evidence that we know has come out now is that the individual, the accused, was allegedly wearing gloves in public following the incident.
	Some are hypothesizing that that might have been to reduce the likelihood of him dropping DNA in public, although others are probably hypothesizing that the authorities probably already procured DNA evidence because there were defensive wounds at the site, so you could probably get DNA from under fingernails, etc.
	Following the guy, he was wearing gloves afterwards.
	I don't know if he was wearing gloves before.
	He took a cross-country road trip with his father shortly after the incident.
	The murders occurred eight days before his birthday, which some criminologists mind-reading people think is a relevant fact.
	But there's been an arrest, and we'll see what the evidence is after it's disclosed publicly.
	There's the issue of extraditing him from...
	The Poconos where he was arrested to Idaho.
	Okay.
	Those are the facts.
	Everybody's watching it.
	It's 24-7 coverage regardless.
	And I was watching it on Fox News and listening to those talking heads fill the air with the most inane conjecture, pontification, the most idiotic questions.
	At one point, they asked one of their experts, do you think that this arrest is the result of...
	Long, thorough research and investigation or a break that just occurred?
	And the guy's like, well, it has to be one or the other.
	The coverage is insane and inane and filling the air endlessly because that's what cable news has to do.
	Watching this, you say to yourself one thing.
	You got a phone.
	It pings locations everywhere.
	There's video surveillance pretty much everywhere.
	Social media footprint.
	They're going back to a question, a poll that this accused killer ran when he was in criminology.
	What motivates people to commit crimes?
	How anybody thinks they can get away with a crime in today's day and age is mind-blowing, but most people probably don't go through that thought process when committing heinous crimes.
	When I'm thinking about this to myself, what I'm thinking about is I'll refer to this guy as an alleged killer, an accused, and he will benefit from the presumptions of innocence.
	Until and if convicted in a court of law.
	Although I might have my own opinions even if not convicted in a court of law as I do with O.J. Simpson.
	But presumption of innocence, like I tweeted out the day before New Year's, it's not for people you like.
	No more than the freedom of speech is for speech that you like.
	It's for speech that you don't like.
	Presumption of innocence is for people that you don't like.
	Who you think might be guilty.
	But what this highlights is how it's possible.
	You have the Chicago Five.
	How it's possible when there's an act of violence so shocking, so over the top, so stunning and fear-inducing for a general population, you can understand how any arrest could be a desired arrest insofar as it will quell public fear, public panic.
	You can understand how people can say, I don't care who you find, find someone so that we look like we are ensuring public safety, so that people stop freaking out, so that people think that they can go back to...
	A life of safety, without the uncertainty of whether or not a quadruple murderer is running around with them, studying with them, living among them, you can understand how times of panic can push authorities to arrest and convict people who might actually not have been responsible for the crime, if only to pacify the general public.
	I'm thinking of Pete, what's his name?
	The guy who allegedly was convicted of killing his wife, who Robert Barnes thinks might be innocent as well.
	Peterson?
	Scott Peterson?
	And I'm not saying it's the case.
	I'm not even raising this defense.
	I'm just saying now that you live through it, you can understand how there are some crimes so heinous.
	Find anybody to arrest to pacify the public panic.
	Okay.
	With that said, the pinging of the phone are going to be great ways to determine location.
	DNA evidence.
	What's amazing about this particular case is that there might be Not circumstantial, but incidental DNA evidence coming from family members who did those DNA genealogy things.
	That is now becoming a very conclusive way of identifying the DNA or the DNA by exclusion.
	Like, you can narrow down not just the DNA of people who have submitted for these tests, but the people who haven't through family DNA.
	And that seems to be one of the ways that they might have actually...
	Pinpointed this individual based on DNA coming from family members that went to these genealogy sites and did DNA tests that allowed them to narrow down the window to certain people and then geolocate the people where they live.
	It's fascinating from a criminology perspective how they can actually definitively, potentially definitively pinpoint who this person was.
	So that was one thing.
	Presumption of innocence is not for people you like and it's not for people you think are innocent.
	You can see how pressure can push people to arrest anybody, convict anybody, just to make people feel safe.
	But in this case...
	Something.
	Oh, a little baby.
	He knocked down a picture that was leaning against the wall, and I think it scared him out of his slumber.
	I got my dogs back.
	And look how clean he is.
	They gave him a bath at the kennel.
	Okay, get out of here.
	So that is the latest of the information.
	I don't think there's anything more that we need to say about that.
	Anything says all DNA tests are just global data gathering.
	I mean, I tend to agree.
	The good thing is, you know, in theory, it should allow for easier exoneration.
	But if one is thinking conspiratorially...
	Where in the O.J. Simpson case where they took blood out of a vial and manually added it to a sock to fabricate evidence, having a DNA harvesting website as a business, I don't know, it could be used for nefarious purposes if one wanted to.
	Like straight up planting DNA evidence, oh, it wouldn't happen.
	No one's ever done that before.
	Pudge is alive as well, people.
	And she's looking better and better.
	And she only woke me up at 5 o 'clock this morning for a feeding.
	But I'm not going to bring her.
	Maybe I'll bring her in afterwards to show proof of life.
	But the last time I did that, she actually took a dump on me.
	But if anyone followed us on Locals, vivabarneslaw.locals.com, you got your proof of life video when I picked them up from the kennel.
	Who's on Fist says, oh, could they plant your DNA?
	That's one question.
	Yeah, Bill Brett.
	It says, DNA tests prove the R word.
	The R word rhyming with nation.
	So that's it with the Idaho killer.
	I mean, I don't like those stories.
	It's a tragic, tragic story, and there's no justice that can be had in any of this.
	It's just fascinating from a crime perspective to actually the methodology that they used to find this individual, how anybody thinks you can ever get away with a crime these days.
	And also, the frenzy of unsolved, heinous crimes can drive people to arrest anybody and convict anybody to pacify the crowd.
	Okay.
	Did I have anything in the window on this story that I wanted to bring up?
	You should all go check out...
	I was on with Harmeet Dillon on Megyn Kelly yesterday, and it was a great discussion.
	Oh, I had an article from the New York Times.
	The Idaho murder suspect had been a student of the criminal mind.
	Oh, yes.
	So I don't think there's anything new in there.
	I'll give you guys the archive link.
	I don't like, you know...
	It goes from fear and terror and demonizing the accused to then glamorizing the accused.
	And soon, you know, there'll be a miniseries on Netflix like there was for Dahmer.
	It goes from fear...
	Trauma and demonizing to, at some point in the near future, some form of idolizing.
	Or what's the word I'm looking for?
	Glamorizing.
	We got Privacy Please 23. Happy New Year's, Viva.
	What's your take on John Carpe's arrest?
	Shut the front door.
	John Carpe is the president.
	Or was the president of the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms?
	Shut the front door.
	Detour, people.
	A detour for today's content.
	John Carpe is the president, founder of Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms.
	I did not know this is from, let me just make sure that we are, January 3rd.
	Alberta lawyer charged for having Manitoba judge followed during COVID-19 restriction case involving churches.
	So for those of you who don't know, he was involved, Carpe was involved in a number of COVID restriction cases of pastors getting charged.
	I think it was the pastors getting charged for conducting church services during COVID restrictions.
	In the context of one of those lawsuits, Carpe...
	Took responsibility for doing something incredibly stupid.
	I respect John Carpe.
	He's doing amazing work on a constitutional level.
	I respect him as a lawyer.
	I respect him and like him as a human.
	That does not mean that I can't say it was an incredibly stupid thing.
	Even the best of us have done incredibly stupid things when we get caught up in the moment and get blinded by rage, get lulled into thinking anything is Justifiable.
	The ends justify the means.
	Or the right strategy just implemented wrongly.
	John Carpe admitted to having the judge in one of the cases followed by investigators to see if the judge was breaking any COVID-19 restrictions.
	And I understand the rationale.
	It's just not something I ever would have done or recommend that anybody should do.
	I think it's a tremendous mistake.
	John Carpe apologized for it, owned up to it.
	And what more does anyone need to do?
	I will continue to respect John Carpe and the work that he's doing while acknowledging this was a terrible mistake that he took responsibility for.
	I did not know that he got charged.
	An Alberta lawyer is facing criminal charges for hiring a private investigator to follow a Manitoba judge during a high-profile pandemic restrictions case.
	Carpe, head of the JCCF, has been charged with intimidation of a justice system participant.
	And obstruction of justice.
	Interesting.
	Here, let me give my initial reflex on the charge.
	Intimidation of a justice system participant.
	I'd be curious as to how secret surveillance could be intimidation.
	The FBI agent was doing this without the knowledge of the judge, so I'm curious as to how that could amount to intimidation.
	Obstruction of justice.
	I don't know what that relates to, but interesting charge.
	Hiring a secret private eye to follow someone unbeknownst to them could intimidate them?
	Okay, interesting.
	The police issued the warrant.
	All charges have yet to be proven in court.
	With the assistance from the Calgary police, a suspect was placed under arrest on the strength of a Canada-wide warrant.
	Oh, they got the Canada-wide warrant again.
	With charges authorized by Manitoba Justice.
	Okay.
	In June, he admitted to hiring a private investigator to try and catch Justice Glenn Joyle breaking COVID restrictions.
	Okay.
	JCCS said in a statement they were aware of the warrant on December 30, and Carpe immediately turned himself in to police.
	This charge is unexpected and without explanation, read the statement.
	The Justice Center is deeply disappointed by the decision of Winnipeg police to lay a criminal charge for events that took place more than 18 months ago and that are already being dealt with appropriately.
	That's interesting also.
	You know, speedy trial.
	One of the constitutional defenses that...
	It also is not only for people that you like.
	18 months to press charges for intimidation and obstruction.
	All right, we'll see.
	I wouldn't bet on a conviction in that case.
	But as we have seen time and time again, the punishment is the process.
	The process is the punishment.
	They get the headline, as they did with Randy Hillier, as they did with other defendants.
	Get the headline for an arrest for charges.
	Run the headline.
	Defame, besmirch.
	Degrade the individual in real time.
	And then a year and a half later, drop the charges like they never existed.
	And no harm, no foul, except for the entire process of discrediting everything a human has ever done based on charges that are going to make headlines for the next month.
	It's actually unbelievable.
	I didn't know that.
	But thank you very much for the rumble rant and thank you very much for the information.
	Oh, and before we get on to the next subject, let's go see what's going on.
	Steve Britton is in the house.
	And there's a discussion among people in the chat that I'm not going to get into.
	Okay, good.
	All right, people, what else do we have right now?
	Let me see what else we have here.
	This will be the segue.
	We're not going to go back over Justin Trudeau.
	Do you guys know Dr. Peter Hotez?
	Dr. Peter Hotez, I've taken not a liking to following.
	It's sort of like a rubbernecking following.
	Peter Hotez, a doctor who was recently complaining about the harassment that he gets online, who is a proponent of lockdowns, vaccine mandates, calling people names if they ask questions.
	Dr. Peter Hotez, MD, PhD, vaccine scientist author, combat anti-science.
	Professor Pediatrics, Molecular Virology, yada, yada, yada, yada, yada.
	Okay.
	Let's just take a couple of his most recent tweets and see if there's anything out there.
	All right.
	Dr. Peter Hotez.
	One contestant of our anti-vaccine friends.
	They love hyperbole when they have zero evidence.
	No, my friend, I take zero dollars from Big Pharma.
	Our vaccines are supported by NIH or philanthropies.
	And I'm not paid by the cable news network podcasters, yet my salary comes from the college.
	So Dr. Peter Hotez has been the news for his staunch opposition to the gain-of-function lab leak theory of the Rona.
	Has been calling people names who...
	We want to look into it.
	Who call it, you know, conspiracy theorists.
	It's a distraction.
	The gain-of-function debate, yada, yada, yada.
	I came across an interesting article.
	It's not new, but it was news to me when I was sent the article.
	Critic of congressional probe into gain-of-function research helped fund Wuhan gain-of-function study.
	This is from US Right to Know, pursuing truth and transparency for public officials.
	One might...
	Write this off as partisan.
	The framing is one thing.
	The evidence is another.
	Go back to the Business Insider framing of Sam Bankman Freed as a philanthropist, failed philanthropist who donated just as much to Republicans without a lick of evidence.
	Well, you might think that this is a politically oriented partisan framing, but they at least have the evidence because I've read through this already.
	A prominent scientist who has denounced a congressional investigation into gain of function research helped fund Wuhan Institute of Virology gain of function work flagged by congressional investigators.
	Peter Hotez, dean of the Baylor College of Medicine National School of Tropical Medicine, has been a fierce critic of potential hearings next year into a possible lab origin of COVID-19 and whether the NIH prematurely discredited the hypothesis.
	We now know that they did, in fact, prematurely discredit the hypothesis.
	Anthony Fauci and that other person, Collins, hell-bent on discrediting anybody who would suggest the theory.
	Only later to, I guess, other outlets, including the Lancet, later admitted it's a perfectly viable theory, the lab leak.
	NIH subsequently having to admit, via Anthony Fauci, indirect funding of gain-of-function research in Wuhan through NGOs.
	At the beginning, though...
	You were a conspiracy theorist, like Alex Jones, for suggesting that this was a man-made virus that leaked from a lab in China.
	Man tinkered with.
	Gain of function means tinkering with natural viruses to make them more transmissible to humans or transmissible from animals to humans, among other things.
	Hotez decried the hearings as nothing less than, quote, a plan to undermine the fabric of science in America in a viral tweet thread last week.
	Hotez also dismissed as an, quote, outlandish conspiracy the possibility that a lab accident sparked the COVID-19 pandemic.
	How does one respond to this?
	I mean, I'll bring up the tweet afterwards.
	You have a man, a doctor, denying what we all now know is a possibility, if not the case.
	Doctors out there who now firmly believe it is the case.
	This was the product of a leak from a lab in China where gain-of-function was being researched.
	Outlandish conspiracy.
	Really?
	So he's defying the Lancet, which says it's a perfectly viable theory.
	We'll get to that in a second, too.
	However, HOTES'own 2012 to 2017 National Institute of Health grant for the development of a SARS vaccine had the stated aim of responding to any, quote, accidental release from a laboratory, in addition to possible zoonomers.
	So that's it.
	The $6.1 million grant from the NIH.
	He's not beholden to Big Pharma, just to the individual that controls the billions of dollars behind the NIH, Anthony Fauci.
	The $6.1 million grant raises the possibility of, quote, deliberate spreading of the virus by a bioterrorist attack.
	SARS outbreak brings a serious concern, yada, yada, yada.
	It's not clear why HOTES has dismissed a possible lab release of SARS as preposterous after having conducted research for years to prepare for a possible accidental or deliberate release.
	Not, didn't reply for comments, obviously not.
	HOTES helped fund research of controversial chimeric...
	Chimeric coronavirus.
	While casting concerns about Wuhan's labs as fringe, HOTES has not mentioned his own connection to a project involving a laboratory-generated chimeric SARS-related coronavirus that has come under Congress's microscope.
	How far down does this thing go?
	HOTES serves as the...
	You know what?
	We're not going to go...
	HOTES serves as the...
	Lancet COVID-19 Commission, a panel of experts working to scrutinize the origins of the virus.
	All right.
	Whenever I discuss the possibility that SARS was a laboratory release, Hotez strongly rejected that possibility, but never explained to me or the Lancet Commission that he actually had a grant that was based on the very kind of risk.
	He should certainly have been clear on that, said Sachs.
	Sachs said the 2017 paper generated questions about whether a potential conflict of interest should have been disclosed to the Commission.
	Here, everybody, go read that.
	It's on my Twitter feed.
	It's in our locals community as well.
	But let me just bring up the tweets.
	That's not the tweet.
	This was the tweet thread here.
	No.
	Delete.
	Here we go.
	Peter Hotev's tweet thread.
	This is a big threat to American biomedical science and should be regarded as such.
	Can you imagine the idea that a doctor, a scientist, is saying that asking questions to a perfectly plausible theory, one that some people believe has been proven, it's a threat.
	It's a threat to science.
	And it's a threat to science itself.
	He's even, like, echoing Fauci sentiment.
	If you question that, you question me and science.
	Speaking of receipts, here is the actual description of the application here.
	This is the document from the NIH.
	Let me see here.
	Well, let's just see.
	Where's Hotez?
	It says Hotez is the author.
	Oh, yeah, it's right up here.
	Here we go.
	Peter Hotez, project leader.
	God, I don't know why he keeps doing that.
	The 2002-2003 pandemic.
	...posed an enormous threat to global public health and the social and economic stability.
	Its causative pathogen, the SARS-CoV virus, has been classified by NIAID as a...
	SARS outbreaks remain a serious concern mainly due to the possible zoonic reintroduction of SARS-CoV into humans, accidental release from a laboratory, or deliberately spreading of the virus.
	By a bioterrorist attack.
	Now, I'll steal, man, what Hotez's response might be.
	The accidental release from a laboratory might just be natural SARS-CoV.
	It's not necessarily gain-of-function research.
	It's just we might have the natural virus in the lab and it might leak.
	Okay.
	Why anyone would have the virus in a lab and what happens to it once it goes into a lab?
	Does it then become...
	Who knows what's being done to it there?
	So that'll be one thing.
	Or the deliberate spread of the virus by a bioterrorist attack.
	Oh, I'll steel man it for Hotez again.
	The bioterrorist attack would not be the release of gain-of-function research of the Rona.
	It would just be a bioterrorist attack of the natural virus that might be in a lab.
	That'll be the steel man.
	Couple that with the fact that Fauci...
	Was basically forced to admit that they're doing gain-of-function research, but he now says what we're doing by tinkering with it and making it more communicable, etc., is not gain-of-function.
	And I've got a study signed by 12 of my colleagues saying it's not gain-of-function.
	Well, there's that.
	And then funding it through third-party NGOs.
	Well, we know that as well.
	So put it all together and decide who you think is more credible in all of this.
	In his application for funding, the fear of a bioterrorist attack, was that only with the natural pathogen that they might have in a lab?
	Once you have the natural pathogen in a lab, why would you have it in a lab if not to test on it?
	And were they not just outright doing gain-of-function research on this as many people believe has been definitively proven?
	So that was Peter Hotez.
	Just so everybody understands that that's there and that this individual who's now clamoring against This individual doesn't want to look into the origins of the virus because understanding the origins of a virus surely is a useless piece
	of information in combating a pandemic.
	Surely it is.
	I'm no doctor, but...
	But I know that.
	All right.
	I'm going to have to go to my Twitter feed for this one.
	So that's Peter Hotez.
	And now the ugly and sad news of the day.
	What can you do?
	You can't shut people's eyes.
	You can say you're an idiot for having that thought.
	You're a conspiracy theorist.
	You're a callous bastard for...
	Politicizing someone's tragedy.
	You can say that those are all legitimate points.
	Those might be legitimate points, but at the end of the day, when you have excess deaths increasing, it's confirmed.
	The cause, we don't know.
	Not being able to identify a cause is different than having to shut your eyes to the problem.
	When you have insurance companies saying that death rates among working class individuals, you know, 18 to 40 or whatever, 18 to 45, are up 40%, and I think it might be more now.
	When you have insurance companies whose existence is predicated on payouts, stats, underwriting risk, when you have these observations coming from them, when you have deaths from unknown causes, now leading causes of death in Alberta.
	I don't know if it's the leading cause of death in New Brunswick.
	I just know that unexpected deaths were up more than they've ever been.
	You cannot demonize people for asking questions when they see young people suffering incidents, which it's like Cernovich says, maybe I'm noticing it more.
	Maybe it's happening more because I'm noticing it.
	Maybe it's happening more because I'm looking for it.
	As if to say, it's not happening more, but when you're looking for it, you'll notice it everywhere.
	Justin Bieber.
	Justin Bieber's wife.
	The Julie author.
	Lawyers during convoy protests.
	Politicians.
	Young politicians' children.
	Tennis players.
	When it's happening and you're seeing it, and then you're told that you're a conspiracy theorist for asking reflexive questions, The latest...
	Hold on just one second.
	Let me get this here.
	The latest is football player DeMar Hamlin suffering cardiac arrest on the field, having to have CPR administered to him on the field in critical condition.
	And everybody is...
	Anybody with a heart and a soul is and should be praying for his well-being.
	And praying for him as much as you should be praying for people who are going through hardships.
	Life plods along.
	Until it no longer plods along.
	Something unexpected happens and your life is upended.
	I want to highlight a certain hypocrisy in this.
	You have a young male athlete suffering a severe cardiac incident.
	We're going to get to some of the explanations.
	It's early.
	Nobody knows.
	And to some extent, no one will ever know because pinpointing the cause of a cardiac incident, all you can do is hypothesize.
	Barring some immediate proximate evidence, you might know of a congenital problem, you might know of an acute problem that you can somehow pinpoint, but by and large, there's going to be some conjecture hypothesizing looking for an explanation.
	What I find utterly shocking is the hypocrisy from some people.
	Yes, people are going to reflexively have certain thoughts.
	When you know that the jab causes myocarditis in no less than 1 in 5,000 young men per dose, and Lord knows how many doses people are onto right now, you know people are going to have thoughts.
	They're going to have reflexive questions.
	They might even have reflexive theories, even though they don't have sufficient evidence to come to those conclusions.
	It's going to happen.
	Massive tragedy yields massive questions.
	For people to say, how dare you?
	There's no evidence to suggest anything.
	You're exploiting someone's tragedy for political purposes.
	Well, A, the evidence is already out there.
	It's just a question of whether or not people want to look for it.
	The evidence of certain trends and certain phenomena and the exploiting of tragedy for political profit might be a little bit projection, to say the least.
	I came across a number of people.
	Adam Kinziger seems to have a fetish for retweeting Ron Filipowski.
	Ron Filipowski last night tweets, the MAGA, talk about political exploitation for political profit, the MAGA anti-vax ghouls.
	Ghouls.
	They're MAGA, they're anti-vax, and they're ghouls.
	To even have the thought that, hmm, there's a certain procedure being administered to young men out there, and it results in 1 in 5,000 cardiac issues.
	A young male suffers a massive cardiac issue.
	Not the first.
	And quite, you know, one of too many.
	I have a question.
	Oh, you're an anti?
	You're a MAGA anti-vax ghoul wasting no time.
	And he picks on Charlie Kirk.
	This is tragic and all too familiar sight right now.
	Athletes dropping suddenly.
	And there are stats to show that this is happening more and more.
	but you'll just disregard Peter McCullough as a quack doctor anyhow, if that's your line of reasoning.
	Who's this from?
	Joey Gilbert.
	I don't know who Joey Gilbert is.
	There have been too many recent died suddenly cases to deny it anymore.
	This is not normal.
	Laura Witzke, breaking Bill's safety, DeMar Hamlin was taken off the field in an ambulance after And then we got a fourth.
	Stu Peters.
	Stu Peters, I have my issues with Stu Peters now.
	Once a fool, shame on you.
	Twice a fool, shame on me.
	And three times a fool, I should have learned the second time.
	Buffalo Bills safety, DeMar Hamlin, collapses on field after making tackle live on Monday Night Football National Broadcast.
	It appears Hamlin may have died suddenly.
	He was 24. I will explain my issues with Stu Peters.
	On three occasions, he has been determined to have been putting out information which is less than accurate.
	The first was Pat King.
	Which I talked about at the time and which I took flack for at the time.
	From people who said Pat King is doing the Lord's work in Viva.
	People need inspiration.
	And I say to those people, people need accuracy.
	People need truth.
	Not inspiration based on disinformation.
	Pat King who said he found a way to end COVID restrictions.
	He defeated his ticket.
	He ended COVID.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	He didn't defeat his ticket.
	He didn't end any COVID restrictions.
	And that was that.
	And I quickly deciphered his situation.
	His subpoena that he thought ended everything was quashed.
	He ended up having to pay his COVID restriction ticket.
	And the restrictions in April, whatever it was, summer of 2021, never went anywhere.
	That was number one.
	Number two was the snake venom in the vaccine.
	And number three was the montage in the documentary that Stu Peters just produced, where there was a montage of people collapsing.
	And one of them, the most prominent of which, predated the Jibby Jab.
	So you want to do work that allows people to discredit what might otherwise be a legitimate point?
	That's the way to do it.
	And using this as a pretext to push hashtag died suddenly, the documentary that he produced, people can take issue with that, and rightly so, I think.
	But what does Ron Filipowski, the MAGA anti-vax ghouls, waste no time?
	The internet is forever, Ron.
	I just, you know, it's amazing.
	If you're saying to yourself, what would make someone who took this position be a hypocrite?
	Someone calling people who want to, who not want to, but who are asking whether or not this is linked to the Jimmy Jab to call them anti-vax MAGA ghouls.
	What would make a person like that a hypocrite if they relished in the death of anti-vaxxers?
	So I just went to the Twitterverse and the Googleverse and this is what I found.
	And I stopped, by the way, because I can only fit so many on a screen image before you lose legibility of the text.
	Ron Filipowski.
	January 11, 2021.
	Anti-vaccine activist Kelly Cannon just died of COVID shortly after attending the latest, quote, Reawaken America COVID Conspiracy QAnon conference.
	Ron Filipowski.
	Trooper Robert LeMay, who resigned in protest over the vaccine mandate, just died of COVID.
	His last sign-off as trooper...
	Jay Inslee can kiss my ass.
	Ron Filipowski, deputy sheriff who posted this video mocking people for getting the COVID vaccine just died of COVID.
	Filipowski, anti-vaccine activist Veronica Wolski films herself mocking and harassing Staples employees about their mask policy.
	She then got COVID and died.
	Oh, God punished her is what that is suggesting.
	There's more.
	Hold on.
	Let me make sure we're looking at the same thing.
	Yeah, here we go.
	Anti-vaccine televangelist Marcus Lamb, who hosted RFK Jr., the anti-vaxxer, Michael Flynn, the crazy QAnon, and others on Daystar Television Network and referred to mandates as a sin against God, just died of COVID.
	Well, God, God, hey, what's the underlying implication suggestion here?
	Ron Filipowski, Steve Walsh, press secretary to U.S. Senate candidate Rep.
	Vicki Hartzler, and husband of anti-vax Missouri state rep and congressional candidate Sarah Walsh, has just died of COVID.
	Mark Bernier just died.
	Prominent anti-vaccine, long-time right-wing Daytona radio talk show host Mark Bernier is now in the hospital with COVID.
	Anti-vax ghouls.
	They waste no time.
	From the guy who literally wasted no time looking to attribute...
	It's one of two things.
	I had people in the responses to that saying, Viva, it's totally different.
	Making, you know...
	Citing the fact that someone died of COVID when they had mocked public health restrictions and the vaccine is not the same thing.
	Let me clarify something for everybody out there who lacks critical thinking skills.
	When you compare two things, they are necessarily, by definition, not the same things, because if they were the same things, there would be unity, there would be singularity.
	You wouldn't compare things that are identical because they would be the same thing.
	When you are comparing, it's necessarily, by definition, because they are not the same, but they are similar in essential respects.
	What is Filipowski accusing the MAGA anti-vax ghouls of doing?
	Of hypothesizing, for political purposes, something that cannot be or is not, in fact, connected?
	Okay.
	They say, people dropping suddenly, I think it's because of the vax.
	Filipowski's point is you have no evidence to say that.
	You're just saying it for political purposes, partisan purposes, not because, you know, there's actual some science to question whether or not this is in fact happening more frequently, whatever.
	You are connecting things that are not connected.
	Okay.
	Whereas Ron Filipowski is not connecting anything.
	He's just saying someone who criticized the measures died of COVID.
	So he's not connecting anything.
	He's just relishing in someone's death as if to say there's some cosmic justice.
	They got what they deserved.
	Had they taken it more seriously, they might have survived.
	It actually goes even one step further than that, because it's either pure, malicious schadenfreude, the people who said something I didn't like, got their comeuppance, they got their karma.
	It's either that, at the very least, disgusting, or what it is is exactly the same to say these people, had they shown deference to mandates, had they shown respect to the vax, had they gotten the vax, this wouldn't have happened to them.
	That's what it is in fact saying.
	The anti-vaxxer died of COVID.
	Had they gotten the vax, they wouldn't have died of COVID.
	That is perfectly analogous to saying, here's another young male dropping with a cardiac issue.
	It might be related.
	It's exactly the same thing.
	In principle, in theory, mutatus mutandus.
	But the guy who comes out and reflexively says, anti-vax, MAGA, ghouls, they waste no time exploiting tragedy.
	Literally, on so many occasions I had to stop looking, reflexively, immediately weaponized tragedy for political gain to demonize the person who died.
	It is, in fact, even worse.
	Because when you say they died of COVID and they were anti-vax, you say that they deserved it to some extent.
	Whereas in these cases, When you have Justin Bieber getting facial paralysis, his wife suffering a stroke, lawyers dropping during hearings.
	I mean, there's too many to count.
	You're not saying they got what they deserved, although there are people saying that, and I don't like it.
	What people are saying is, what the hell is going on here?
	This is a tragedy, and do we need to start asking questions and taking measures to ensure that this tragedy does not befall anybody else?
	That's it.
	Let me see what the chat is saying here.
	I've been going for so long, I don't even know what's going on.
	Where's Tiffany Dover, says Darrow33.
	And it doesn't end with Filipowski.
	I mean, Kinzinger, for whatever the reason, what did I just do here?
	Kinzinger, Adam Kinzinger, his Twitter feed seems to have turned into a retweet fest of Ron Filipowski.
	Oh, sorry, hold on.
	Let me get this, and then we're going to get something which is even more interesting.
	You want to talk about what people need to tell themselves to quell their own concerns.
	This is what Adam Kinziger's Twitter feed looks like.
	Adam Kinziger.
	Every picture out of Mar-a-Lago is creepy and desperate.
	Retweeting Ron Filipowski.
	Adam Kinziger.
	Retweeting Ron Filipowski.
	Wannabes.
	Making fun of Crawthorn more often than I think a person should.
	Adam Kinzinger retweeting Ron Filipowski, MAGA Mar-a-Lago is all the weird people who wanted to be famous but couldn't.
	Hold on, I'm going to cough.
	But this is the amazing phenomenon.
	It's not a Twitter fight.
	Nate Brody is my friend and I respect him.
	Period.
	I'm having a disagreement with Nate on Twitter because Nate said, look, you know...
	The idiots wanted to spin this for anti-vax propaganda.
	Nobody knows anything.
	And there's a perfectly plausible explanation for it.
	And this is it.
	To which I say, on the one hand, we have enough prima facie statistics.
	Evidence.
	It's not hypothesis.
	We have enough prima facie evidence to say, I got questions.
	People are rightly pointing out.
	It's premature to say anything here.
	In this case with DeMar Hamlin, there was a proximate event, that of a tackle.
	And some people are saying that's most likely what caused it.
	I think this guy's a doctor.
	I haven't seen the full clip.
	But listen to this, and then I'm going to illustrate my point with this.
	This is almost certainly something called commotio cortis.
	This is a doctor, by the way.
	I think it's a doctor.
	Let's presume it's a doctor.
	Who, 12 hours later, 24 hours later, is saying what it almost certainly is.
	It's an interesting theory, and let's hear what he has to say.
	This is almost certainly something called commotio cortis, an extremely, extremely rare condition that's one of those things that we typically only think we're going to read about in textbooks.
	Essentially what can happen is if you have a blood trauma to the chip.
	Just understand what he just said also.
	Extremely rare condition, extremely rare, that is so rare actually that it's something that this doctor thinks ultimately assesses is something you only read about in textbooks.
	Let's put a figure of rarity on that.
	I don't even know what it would be, but we'll get back to that.
	...that occurs at exactly the right time in the cardiac electrical cycle.
	Your heart can be sent into cardiac arrest.
	Extremely rare.
	You expect to only read about it in textbooks.
	It has to happen at the, and we'll get to it, at the exact millisecond in order to trigger this trauma.
	Listen to this.
	As Hamlin comes in here, we can see this square hit.
	To the front of his chest, we see him get back up momentarily before ultimately collapsing back down to the ground and requiring CPR on the field.
	This is a tracing of our heart's electrical activity.
	Basically, this is one cycle of the heart squeezing.
	It starts off with this P wave, which is the electrical activity of the atrium at the top of the heart squeezing.
	Then the QRS complex, which is going to be the ventricles acting.
	But then the last phase is this T wave where the ventricle basically depolarizes and kind of resets to get ready for the next cycle.
	For commotial cordis to happen, you have to suffer this blunt trauma to the chest at exactly the right moment.
	So bear in mind what he's saying right here.
	It has to be blunt trauma sufficient in the first place to cause this.
	Was that tackle that we saw, if that tackle was in fact the sufficient blunt trauma?
	Compared to all the other tackles that we've seen in the history of football.
	Was it sufficient?
	This doctor says yes.
	It was sufficient.
	It occurred at the exact millisecond required in order to trigger commodio carditis.
	Specifically on this upstroke of the T-wave in order for the heart to then be sent into this arrhythmia and subsequent cardiac arrest.
	This is one of those things that not only do you have to have a high enough force, but it has to happen within milliseconds.
	Within milliseconds.
	Of a time window, because if that impact comes at any other time in this electrical cycle, you're fine.
	You don't go into this.
	But when it happens at just this right time, during this upstroke of the T-wave, and if it's high enough, then you can have this thing called commotio cordis.
	Commotio cordis.
	It has to be sufficiently strong of a blunt force trauma.
	At the exact millisecond, I can't even pretend to understand, I know what he's talking about.
	At the exact millisecond, within whatever time frame this occurs in, on the uptick of the T-wave, at that exact millisecond, in order to interfere with the heart, like, if we're saying the rarity, if we're going to assess the rarity of that, what would it be?
	One in a million?
	Something that you expect to only read about in textbooks, commodio carditis.
	That requires a series of events to occur at the right millisecond.
	Would you say that that's more than one in 5,000?
	Would you say that that's one in a million?
	And the amazing thing is people saying that the people suggesting that it might be jibby-jab related.
	They're the conspiracy theorists.
	When you're dealing with stats that we know are no less than one in 5,000 cardiac issues per dose.
	To subscribe to that is the conspiracy theory, but to say that it's the one in a million blunt force trauma directly to the chest at the exact uptick in the T-wave of the millisecond required in order to trigger comodial carditis, that's not conspiracy theory.
	That's totally the explanation, without a doubt, despite probability.
	Well, I mean, I'm not saying who's the conspiracy theory here.
	What's a more plausible, more likely explanation?
	Purely statistically, we saw him take a hit.
	This doctor comes out and says, it has to be the right blunt force trauma of a sufficient power at the exact millisecond where the T-wave is upticking so that it causes arrhythmia.
	All right, that's definitely a possibility.
	So rare you expect to read about it only in textbooks.
	Compare that to what we know.
	And then my other question to this doctor would be, it would be, Would a body that has suffered any form of trauma in the past from whatever, a heart that has suffered trauma or obtained scarring from whatever, would it be more susceptible to this type of trauma?
	Because there's a question that people don't really think about.
	It was with the hockey player, I forget his name now, who suffered a stroke because he had a heart condition, a hole in his heart from before.
	People say, well, they had pre-existing conditions.
	Or it's...
	One in a million trauma.
	The question is this.
	Conjunction.
	In conjunction with some form of heart issue that left scarring, would it make these types of imminently rare textbook trauma potentially more likely?
	Would it make underlying conditions more likely to recur?
	That's the question I would have.
	And there's no hypothesizing.
	I'm not saying definitively one thing or another.
	We're allowed asking questions, and certainly when we are noticing phenomena, Supporting the observations.
	XSSFDIT.
	So that's XSSFDIT from Rumble.
	$2 RumbleRand says, Viva, I personally have responded to a baseball game with a child being hit by a bounced baseball and being in cardiac arrest.
	It does happen.
	Absolutely!
	Nobody's saying it doesn't happen.
	Nobody's saying it doesn't happen.
	I mean, period.
	So you have seen the other one in a million where this occurred.
	Of all the cases we're seeing now that we covered the story of the tennis player suffering a massive cardiac arrest requiring CPR, I mean, of all of the infinitely, infinitesimally unlikely scenarios that led to it, why would it be conspiracy theory, ghoulish, MAGA, anti-vaxxer, whatever, to say, I'm gonna...
	I'm going to go with the theory that says it's one in 5,000 versus the theory that says it's one in a million.
	Why is that unreasonable?
	It's not to say it doesn't happen.
	It's just to say, first of all, did it happen this time?
	And are people forever precluded from even asking the questions anymore?
	Because those who say that it's being politically weaponized are politically weaponizing the mere act of questioning.
	And now I'm going back to Chet Chisholm, who had a $2 rumble and says, Commodio carditis is a very valid explanation for what happened to Hamlin as he took a big hit to the center of the chest.
	This happens in car accidents too when they hit the steering wheel.
	Again, absolutely.
	And again, there's a reason.
	I didn't tweet about this story.
	I know people are covering it.
	I know people are tweeting about it.
	My tweeting on the incident is not to draw any connections.
	I might know what I think.
	And I might also understand that I don't have the evidence to even substantiate what I might think, and I too will wait for more information.
	But the idea that you will come out and say you're an anti-vax MAGA ghoul for asking the obvious question that people are rightly asking, and the ultimate irony that the people trying to demonize these people for being opportunist ghouls...
	Relishing in the misery of others, as if that's what they're doing, because I didn't even get that from any of the tweets, even Stu Peters.
	I didn't get the impression that they were relishing in the misfortune and tragedy of DeMar.
	I didn't get that impression.
	I can understand why Filipowski got that impression, because when I read his tweets about the anti-vaxxer dying of COVID, I get that impression.
	I get the impression of, it's a middle finger from the cosmos, you anti-vaxxer.
	Had you gotten the vaccine, you wouldn't have died.
	As if that's not superstition.
	Rawr!
	Wah!
	Thank you.
	Let me see what we got here.
	Oh, so hold on.
	I actually wanted to bring up...
	Oh, I don't know if I have the...
	Peter McCullough.
	Peter McCullough, apparently there was an article where he was noting that it's happening more and more to...
	Peter McCullough.
	Am I not following him?
	I have to be following him.
	Peter McCullough.
	It's happening more and more to athletes.
	Let me see if I can find...
	Yeah, I am following Peter.
	Why am I not getting any of his...
	So where is it?
	Is it recent?
	Here we go.
	Again, I'm more reluctant to retweet these types of things because the retweet will be deemed as affirmation and I don't consider myself to be in a position to validate or to say, oh, I agree with...
	This is what Dr. Peter McCullough says, you know, once upon a time was a very credible, very serious doctor until people decided that he was saying things that they disagreed with and they had to discredit him as a human.
	This recent paper from Dr. Pauly Kretis and myself gets the sharp rise in athletes' deaths into PubMed.
	Since vaccination, quote, 1,598 athletes suffered cardiac arrest, 1,101 of which with deadly outcome.
	A prior 38 years, 1,101 athletes aged 35 or older died.
	Now, I...
	So knowing what I know about statistics, I would like to hear what critics of this study would have to say.
	How are they measuring professional athletes?
	If you're going by number...
	The number might be up, but so too might the number of athletes.
	Again, I haven't read the study.
	I'm going to read it after we end the stream, but these are questions I would ask.
	Cynically as well, cynical of Dr. McCullough.
	Raw number gives you nothing unless you know the number to which it's being compared.
	Are there more athletes?
	I know the other explanation that some people are going to go for.
	Well, are athletes training harder now than they were over the last 38 years?
	Are they pushing themselves?
	More.
	Is global warming to cause fear?
	That I'm joking about.
	Since they are actually blaming an alleged increase in heart attacks on alleged global warming.
	I mean, the scientists have turned into religious demagogues.
	But those are the questions I would ask.
	How are they defining athlete?
	How are they defining the deadly outcome is going to be easy?
	Is it because there are more athletes?
	Is it because they're training harder?
	Is it for a slew of other reasons which might have nothing to do with the jab, or is the jab making it worse?
	Let me share this with everybody, actually, so you can go all...
	There you go.
	Wait a minute.
	Did I put it in there?
	Yeah, I did.
	Okay, sorry.
	So that's it.
	Are we still...
	Have I not been sharing the screen the entire time?
	Well, I'm an idiot.
	Here it is.
	Sorry.
	This recent paper from Dr. Paul, here it is.
	This is the study, okay?
	And then we got...
	It's age 18 to 24. We got...
	What we've learned is the highest risk group is age 18 to 24. This is for myocarditis, presumably.
	In men, 90% of these cases are young men, as shown by Scharf and colleagues in the preprint server system.
	And then a report by...
	Oh, sorry.
	And then another thing would be, is it a peer-reviewed study?
	You know, stats can be...
	I won't say exploited, weaponized, misrepresented, but they can be played with on both ends, in good faith and in bad faith.
	But is it a peer-reviewed study?
	What do other people have to say about the study?
	I'd like to know.
	From Connecticut, Connecticut coroners, backed up by analyses from the University of Michigan and the University of Wisconsin Pathology, published in one of the best pathology journals, Archives of Pathology.
	Two young boys, 16 and 17, they take Pfizer and they die on days three and four after the Pfizer shot.
	They're found dead at home.
	And the parents are horrified, and they call for an autopsy.
	And the autopsy show, indeed, the kids died of vaccine-induced myocarditis.
	But the interesting finding is the histopathology looked like there was an overlay of what's called catecholamine toxicity.
	There must have been a surge of adrenaline.
	Now, this may have been...
	From antecedent athletic activity, we don't know.
	Or it could just be in the throes of dying, the struggle of these boys.
	They died at home.
	Their parents weren't there, struggling for the last breaths of life before they died of the vaccine.
	That could have been the surge of catecholamines.
	But lead investigator, Dr. Flavio Catagiani from Brasilia, Brazil, I just interviewed him on the McCullough Report.
	He believes it's perfectly consistent.
	With the hypothesis that the vaccine sets up the heart inflammation, which can be very subtle.
	In fact, some that can have no symptoms whatsoever.
	And that is the surge of adrenaline during a soccer game or during a basketball game, during sports, that's triggering these deaths.
	And boy, that theory fits.
	And he has a paper out in the preprint server system, outlining how that really happens.
	And now, today, it's on my Twitter feed.
	There's a school, school physician office that said that no child will play until they have blood tests to see if they have heart inflammation.
	is creating extra medical procedures, even for clearance before athletics.
	And now three countries, certainly in Canada, Hospital for Sick Children, the UK, as well as Australia, the governmental authorities have issued guidelines for doctors, largely cardiologists like myself to follow for screening detection and management.
	D-dimer tests.
	Vaccine-induced myocarditis.
	It's as if this heart damage currently, the vaccines is now becoming a normal part of medical life for cardiologists.
	Absolutely.
	Absolutely shocking.
	And people will just try to discredit Dr. McCullough, however they're going to go do it.
	Absolutely shocking.
	And that's all I have to say about that.
	Demar Hamlin's serious issue, that it's political exploitation.
	I think everybody doing it, for the most part, is doing it not just of good faith, but is doing it of concern, not only for Demar Hamlin, but for other people.
	At some point in time, not asking the questions and being shamed into silence is doing an injustice to other people who might suffer.
	Similar fates in the future, if indeed it does have something of a common cause.
	Now, that's it.
	Thoughts and prayers, and I don't say that, I'm not a religious person, but we have had a friend in the legal community that has had a stroke and has been in the hospital.
	Thoughts and prayers, and for Damar Hamlin, everybody is wishing him the absolute best.
	Life, plods along!
	With all the plans that we have until it plods along no more, something just unexpected screws up all of your plans.
	Now, with that said, let me just make sure I'm going to go to my Twitter feed, my diary of the world's descent into madness.
	I don't expect Twitter...
	Well, I don't know where Twitter's going to be in 20 years, but...
	It will be, if I write a book and it's called The COVID Diaries or, you know, Viva's Descent.
	Viva's Descent into Politics.
	I guess that would be the name of the book.
	My Twitter feed is going to be the diary.
	The moment the world went off the rails.
	Started slowly and then it happened all at once.
	Oh my goodness, how I could have almost forgotten.
	How I could have almost forgotten about Kinzinger's absolute Disinformation campaign.
	Let me find this tweet.
	Did Trudeau?
	I'm not going to pick on share.
	Where is that tweet?
	Listen to this, people.
	Are we...
	Yeah, we are watching the same thing.
	Okay.
	This is Eric Matheny.
	I don't know who Eric Matheny is.
	Let me see here.
	Bob and Eric...
	Do I know who Eric Matheny is?
	Attorney, podcaster, social commentator, co-host of Bob and Eric Save America.
	I think I like...
	I'm approaching 666 followers.
	Not followers, I'm following.
	Who's going to be the 666 number?
	Okay.
	That's who Eric Mathen is.
	Looks interesting.
	In terms of culpability, this is what Ray Mathen...
	I don't know the full context.
	I just know the facts here.
	In terms of culpability, this is back to January 6th.
	Ray Epps is on video encouraging a crowd to riot and admitted such in a sworn statement.
	I also orchestrated it, which he did say.
	House GOP has an obligation to find out his role, who he was communicating with, and who in power helped set up the events of January 6th.
	That's what Eric Matheny has to say.
	Does anyone identify any problems in this?
	If I'm going to be a steel man and say, what could I take issue with if I were a disingenuous political hack?
	In terms of culpability, Ray...
	Epps is on video encouraging a crowd to riot.
	Okay, that's where maybe I would take the issue.
	He's on video encouraging a crowd, but he doesn't say riot.
	He just says to go into the Capitol.
	We'll get there.
	And admitted as such in a statement, I orchestrated.
	That's factually correct.
	House GOP has an obligation to find out his role, who he was communicating with, and who in power helped set up the events of January 6th.
	That's an accusation.
	Okay.
	Well, that presupposes someone in power helped set up the events of January 6th.
	We didn't help set it up.
	We just did nothing to thwart it.
	FBI had infiltrated the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys and knew that they had plans for insurrection.
	Sorry, seditious conspiracy.
	But we didn't do anything.
	We didn't call for extra backup.
	We didn't call in the National Guard.
	We didn't beef up security, despite having infiltrated two terrorist organizations, militias, with the intent of overthrowing the government.
	We did nothing.
	We were caught off guard after having infiltrated the groups.
	Bullcrap.
	But what does Adam Kinzinger, political hack, have to say about this?
	Adam Kinzinger, Republican.
	Adam Kinzinger, one of the two bipartisan members of the January 6th kangaroo court sham of a committee, tweets, literally, completely untrue.
	In terms of culpability, Ray Epps is on video encouraging a crowd to riot and admitted as such in a statement.
	Literally, completely untrue.
	Oh, he's not on camera?
	House G has the obligation to find out his role.
	That's literally untrue.
	That's a matter of opinion.
	1,800 retweets, 900 quote tweets.
	Yes.
	Yes, that's the ratio.
	Yes.
	To which I said, he was literally caught on camera, literally saying it.
	You liar.
	This is it.
	Tomorrow, we need to go into the Capitol.
	Into the Capitol.
	Oh, no!
	Peace, boys!
	Peacefully!
	By the way, he didn't say go and riot.
	He just said we need to go into the Capitol.
	And it's only when the crowd says, hell no, Fed, that he says peacefully.
	Because when Ray Epps says peacefully after saying go into the Capitol and commit a crime, that's fine.
	When Donald Trump says protest peacefully because it's your God-given constitutional right to protest, that's insurrection.
	Peacefully when Ray Epps says it, encouraging people to break the law.
	Explicitly go into the Capitol is an instruction to break the law.
	Trump never said go into the Capitol.
	He said protest peacefully at the Capitol, which is your constitutional right.
	When Ray Epps says peacefully, he means peacefully.
	When Donald Trump says peacefully, he means insurrection.
	That's how it works, people.
	That's language.
	Look at his face.
	Look at his face.
	Peacefully.
	Oh, peacefully.
	Dead, dead, dead, dead, dead, dead, dead.
	Peacefully.
	Oh, peacefully.
	Okay.
	By the way, that was the day before.
	This is the day of.
	And by the way, and there was more.
	That's all I could find on such short notice.
	And there was more.
	Because...
	Was it the Intercept?
	Oh, jeez.
	It was Darren Beattie.
	Revolver.
	Revolver did possibly the greatest breakdown of the only two...
	Unindicted conspirators.
	There is him, Ray Epps, and Scaffold Man.
	Two people intricately and intimately involved with the events of that day.
	For some reason, the only two did not face charges.
	Ray Epps was on the FBI's most wanted list in the week or the wake of the events.
	Magically removed.
	Never faced a charge.
	Scaffolding guy, I don't know if they've identified who that guy is.
	Never faced a charge.
	Okay, we're back in here.
	Let me just see if there's anything else that we want to get to before.
	Okay, get out of here.
	I got it.
	Okay, let's see here.
	Little Adams is a serial liar.
	All right.
	That was Adam Kinzinger.
	And then just some, you know, amazing stories.
	Science is amazing, people.
	Transgender man gives birth to non-binary partner's baby with female sperm donor.
	I just made the joke.
	I'll bet you $100,000 the transgender man who gave birth to the baby is a biological woman.
	I guarantee you.
	I'll bet you.
	$100,000, people.
	And then that's it.
	I watched Total Recall on New Year's, and these were my resolutions for New Year's.
	All right.
	People, 2023 is going to be an interesting year.
	There is a shift in the zeitgeist.
	I can feel it.
	I can see it.
	And it's becoming apparent to everyone.
	That being said, hold on, Winston.
	Wish everyone a Happy New Year.
	Happy New Year.
	I love you.
	That smelly face.
	That being said, the road to truth...
	Oh, God.
	Got a hair on my face.
	The road to truth is a long and arduous road.
	And let me go back to VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com and see what's going on here.
	Hey, Viva, what's up?
	Happy New Year from Mr. Mike.
	I am back.
	Hopefully I was well insulted after having to leave, says Lord, just the cost.
	Dude, what's going on in the chat in Locals?
	It's gonna be a very interesting year.
	Some say make or break year.
	It's gonna be a make year.
	People are, I hate the expression waking up.
	People are getting wise to what's going on.
	People have had enough with what's going on.
	People have had enough, I think, of deferring their autonomy, their freedoms, their constitutional rights to the whims of...
	Of teapot dictators.
	Is that the expression?
	Of teacup dictators.
	Three things cannot long be hidden.
	The sun, the moon, and the truth, Buddha.
	And we are entering the phase of this rollercoaster now where the truth is going to come out.
	You can't hide it forever.
	You can't spin it forever.
	And you can't shame people into silence forever.
	And I think it's going to be a good year.
	That being said, Nietzsche, or Kierkegaard, I forget which, Be careful when battling monsters because when you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares right back at you.
	And you do not want to become one of those monsters, one of those ghouls that actually laments in the suffering of others to say that they somehow deserve it.
	You don't want to become those people.
	And there's a reason why those people see that in other people because it's true of themselves.
	It's how they view the world.
	You don't want to become a monster.
	You don't want to give the people that you are battling.
	The powers that you are battling, the pretext, the excuse that they need to do what they want to do.
	January 6th anniversary is coming up.
	Matt Christensen, who I follow on Twitter, I think he was asking whether or not he should go down and protest.
	Having seen what they did to people in the past.
	Show me the man, I'll show you the crime.
	You're taking your own chances by doing that.
	But whatever you do.
	Don't give them the pretext, the excuse that you know they are looking for to do more of what you know they want to do to you.
	You give them the pretext, you give them the justification, you lose and everybody loses.
	Like I always say now, it's my thing.
	Conduct yourself in a manner that would make your parents, your children, and your pets proud and you can do no wrong.
	Now, what time is it and what day is it?
	It's noon on a Tuesday.
	I'm going to go get some sunlight.
	Some exercise.
	Some food.
	I haven't eaten breakfast yet.
	Thank you all for being here.
	It's great to see everybody again.
	Happy New Year.
	Resolutions are arbitrary, silly things, but they have some meaning.
	Pick something good.
	Be realistic and don't set yourself up for failure.
	Do good in the new year and keep on keeping on.
	I'm going to end this stream because I'm going to play it out with what?
	Cooking, fishing, GoPro.
	Let me see what I can get here.
	All right.
	We'll just do a fun seagull steals my GoPro.
	I think that's a good one.
	Or do I do...
	Hold on.
	We'll do the seagull stealing a GoPro.
	It's fun.
	I'm going to actually go out now and use my GoPro and hopefully capture.
	A winning image for this year's GoPro Challenge.
	2023, people.
	Not an ad.
	GoPro Million Dollar Challenge.
	If you get the new GoPro and you shoot a clip that they use in their two-minute promotional video, I'm going to win.
	I'm going to win again.
	I need it.
	I don't deserve it.
	But I'm going to do it again.
	With that said, everybody, enjoy the day.
	Enjoy this video of a bird with my GoPro.
	Peace out.
	see you tomorrow.
	Oh, oh, oh.
	Get off my camera!
	No, no, no!
	Give me the camera back here!
	Give me the cover back.
	I got it!
	Here!
	For your work!
	come on Well, that was amazing!
	That's gonna be on YouTube!
	Okay guys, that is going to be internet history.
	What do you have to say?
	That's what you get for doing monkey bars.
	I did it first.
	I did it first.
	Thank you.
	So you want to know where to invest $1,000 right now?
	Well, forget about stocks, real estate, or cryptocurrency.

▲