All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 24, 2023 - Viva & Barnes
02:04:57
Steven Crowder on Tim Pool; Jeremy MacKenzie; Trudeau Gaslighting AND MORE! Taco Tuesday with Viva!
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I've been crystal clear on this for many, many years.
I do not think any provinces should be proactively, preemptively using the notwithstanding clause.
What they're doing is suspending fundamental rights and freedoms and preventing the courts from even being able to weigh in on that.
As a government, we will always stand up for people's fundamental rights and freedoms.
We've committed that we are going to engage at the Supreme Court in the current case on Bill 21, and we're going to continue to look at the best ways to make sure that right across the country, every Canadian has their fundamental rights and freedoms protected.
I want to play that again.
But I know that there's going to be some serious audio contrast issues between my mic, and I hope I'm on the right mic, and that.
That is pathological psychopathy.
I'm not a psychiatrist.
I'm a doctor.
I'm not a doctor.
I'm a lawyer.
That is pathological psychopathy, narcissism, borderline person, whatever you want to call it.
It's clinical.
It's clinical and it's the type of gaslighting.
I'm trying to find an analogy because I can't think of any analogy more egregious than having someone come up to you, slap you in the face, and as you recoil and put your hand on your red cheek and you say, what the hell did you just do?
They sit there and say, I didn't do anything.
What are you talking about?
Your cheek was like that when I got here.
I have to break this down and I'll probably have to say what he's saying a little louder because this is pathological gaslighting.
This is doing exactly what you are accusing others of doing.
Condemning others for doing exactly what you have done.
Exactly.
And you either rely on the victim.
You either rely on the victim.
To be so baffled by the sheer audacity of the gaslighting, or you rely on ignorant spectators who didn't just see you walk up to the person and slap them in the face, and so when everyone starts screaming, everyone's like, what just happened?
I didn't see it.
And one person says he slapped me, and he says, I just got here.
What do you say?
You want to say hi?
You're annoying.
I don't know why you started so early.
We're going to start this again after I put this thing down.
I'll say what he's saying just in case you can't hear it.
I've been crystal clear on this for many, many years.
I've been crystal clear on this for many, many years.
What does Viva say when someone says, let me be clear?
What's going to come out of their mouth, more often than not, is dishonest misinformation rubbish.
What comes out of Justin Trudeau's mouth after this?
Disinformation rubbish.
I do not think any provinces should be...
The notwithstanding clause, Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, provides that provinces, to protect themselves from the overarching authority of the Supreme Court of Canada, can specifically enact legislation that specifically violates certain provisions of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Not all.
There are some rights that cannot be...
I'm trying to think of other ones.
It could be ordered to work or go back to work.
Certain provisions of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, those guaranteed God-given rights, can be violated if they're specifically violated by a specific provision of law that the government says we are specifically violating Or we're enacting legislation notwithstanding certain provisions.
There are certain requirements that can't last longer than five years, the idea being that there will be a new election, and if a government invokes this clause abusively, they'll get voted out of office.
That's Section 33. What we're doing is suspending fundamental rights and freedoms and preventing the courts from even being able to weigh in on that.
What they are doing...
Is they are suspending certain fundamental rights and freedoms.
What did he say here?
And preventing the courts from being able to weigh in on that?
Even being able to weigh in on that.
This is beyond offensive.
And it's beyond shocking.
And it's beyond nauseating.
This is, it's not Alinsky's rules of radicals, accuse others of what you are doing to create confusion.
It was actually attributed to Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda minister.
Accuse your enemy of doing what you are doing so as to create confusion.
I don't think it's one of Alinsky's rules for radicals.
In fact, I'm certain it's not, and people oftentimes mistake it for that.
Justin Trudeau is accusing the provinces of usurping fundamental rights and freedoms and then preventing the courts from adjudicating on that.
What did Justin Trudeau just do?
The notwithstanding clause is akin, it's analogous to the Emergencies Act because you're invoking legislation that violates or usurps fundamental rights and liberties.
What did Justin Trudeau do when he invoked the Emergencies Act?
He violated fundamental rights and liberties.
What did Justin Trudeau do when he enacted the mandate?
That unvaccinated Canadians can't board planes and trains to travel across a country that's nearly 4,500 kilometers across?
He violated fundamental rights and liberties.
He basically said to Canadians 13 years and older, you're second-class trash citizens.
You don't get on planes and trains with us.
You're not going to put at risk our kids.
You want to go cross-country for a funeral?
Drive.
Suck it up.
You...
Racist, misogynist, anti-vaxxer, anti-science, suck it up and drive.
Oh, don't have a car?
Too bad, you're going to miss that funeral.
You're going to miss that wedding.
You're going to miss that graduation.
He violated fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians with that particular provision, the ban on unvaccinated children from boarding planes and trains.
And what did he do?
When Brian Peckford challenged that and took it to the federal court, what did he do in the interim?
Rescinded.
That unconstitutional, unconscionable, inhumane provision.
And then said, no controversy anymore.
They didn't even rescind it, by the way.
They suspended it.
We're suspending that violation of human rights.
And now you have no court case.
And what did they do?
They moved the court for a motion to dismiss for mootness.
And what did the court do?
Granted it.
What did Justin Trudeau do?
That pathological...
Narcissistic, gaslighting psychopath.
He violated fundamental rights and freedoms.
And then he basically and effectively deprived the citizens of their ability to even challenge those provisions in courts because he suspended the provision and then moved to dismiss and the court dismissed the lawsuit.
And now he's lecturing provinces.
Oh my gosh, I'm sorry.
And now he has the audacity to lecture and criticize provinces for doing exactly...
Exactly what he actually did.
I'm just going to see if I just got a text to make sure my dad's not texting me to tell me to calm down.
And the government declared it moot.
Oh, what's that?
Hey, if he does it again, come back to court.
Oh, what's that?
You've been in court for nine months?
You've racked up $150,000 in legal fees, Peckford?
Oh, too bad, Buttercup.
That's democracy.
That's Canadian democracy for you.
I don't feel better.
I actually am still quite frustrated with this.
All right, let me go see that we are live on Rumble.
We are.
Let me see if I see WEF chanting in the chat here.
I see liar, liar.
I see traitor.
I see Joe Biden says, no joke.
Yeah, Joe Biden says, here's the deal.
Here's the deal.
Bullcrap coming out of his mouth next.
Okay.
Was unable to find the Give, Send, Go from McKenzie.
If you're spelling McKenzie that way, that's going to be the reason why.
It's givesendgo.com slash McKenzie.
M-A-C-K-E-N-Z-I-E.
What I'm going to do now before I forget, I'm going to put the link to the Rumble because we're going to go to Rumble after I finish ranting a little bit more about some Canadian stuff.
I'm getting a Candace Owens ad on my...
On the YouTube video.
Oh, all that shilling for the Daily Wire has paid off.
I'm getting Candace Owen advertising on my YouTube channel.
That's a joke, and we're going to talk about that in a second also.
Link to Rumble.
Here we go.
Okay, the link to Rumble's there.
We're going to go to Rumble after we talk about some Canadian stuff.
Let me go here because I see...
Okay, standard disclaimers.
Thank you for the Super Chats.
Thank you for the Rumble Rants, the support.
Just so you know, YouTube takes 30% of a Super Chat.
If you don't like that and you want to support the channel, we are simultaneously streaming on Rumble, where Rumble has Rumble Rants.
Rumble takes 20% of their cut of Rumble Rants, so better for the platform, better for the creator.
It's a free speech platform that genuinely respects free speech.
Flip side, other way to support, you can get some merch, vivafry.com, or you can support us at locals, vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
I'm not reading that.
Sorry, I didn't even read that one.
I've got some comments that I flagged because I want to talk about them afterwards.
Jonah Ryan, Viva, look into the plan for movement of people and goods.
It advises stakeholders before government agencies when they close the border from 2022.
Okay, I'll keep that.
Screen grab that.
Ginger Ninja, I love you, Viva.
Really, I'm just surprised that you're level on the DW situation.
Beyond SC's tactics, did you watch the whole...
Pool show or just clips.
I watched the whole pool show.
I was the one making the clips.
I'll get to it, Ginger Ninja.
And it's an amazing thing.
This pool, this Daily Crowder, Daily Wire, Steven Crowder debate has now, look, it's become the litmus test.
It's become the, if you don't agree with me, you have to be compromised.
It's like we are now adopting tactics akin to what we've seen on The other side, in terms of demonizing anybody who disagrees with you on one issue, level discourse.
It's disheartening, and we're going to get to it.
Fourth name change.
What do you have against the francophones?
Hostie.
Hostie Chris is the French-Canadian way of...
Oh, okay.
So we're going to get into Jeremy McKenzie, the madness in Canada, and then when we go to Rumble, we're going to talk about Daily Wire, Stephen Crowder.
But before we get there, people...
Because I have sponsors.
And because there comes obligation with freedom, but there also becomes a source of pride with being able to do business with products that you like and use.
By the way, products that you like and use, let's start with the first sponsor of the channel, Birch Gold.
Now, there is no one out there.
Gold is a form of idolatry.
Worshipping statues, it goes back to biblical times.
Worshipping idols and worshiping statues is a form of idolatry.
That being said, when it comes to a form of investment, it's a good investment.
Gold is gold.
It stood the test of time for 5,000 years for good, I should say precious metals, because birch gold is not only about gold, it's about precious metals.
When the government is out there spending and spending and spending, and how do you...
How do you protect the money that you've worked hard to make?
You can go plop it into a stock market, and as far as I'm concerned, it's legalized gambling, which I partake in from time to time, but it's legalized gambling.
You can go into crypto and take your chances there.
Or you can just put the money that you've worked hard to earn in a bank, let it sit there, and let it lose value just by virtue of sitting there when you see inflation going through the roof because of incompetent or corrupt government policy.
In the States, it might come from the endless trillions of...
Printing cash, shipping money overseas, whatever.
In Canada, it might be something similar.
Gold is...
It's been around for thousands of years because it's a pretty easy way to make sure that you preserve the money that you've worked hard to earn.
You can take a chance on the market.
God bless.
I plopped a little money in Tesla.
Or you can just roll over some of your 401k into precious metals.
It doesn't 10x overnight, but it doesn't 10x down overnight.
And there's a reason why it stood the test of time.
At the end of the day, also, when it comes to these services, you're buying a service and not better gold through Birch Gold.
The gold is 99 point whatever mint gold.
You're buying a service.
You're buying a responsive service.
You're buying a company that's going to reach out to you, listen to you, get back to you.
Birch Gold has A, what do they call them?
A-plus ratings with the Bureau of Bird of Business.
Thousands of happy customers.
Countless five-star reviews.
Secure your future with gold.
I wouldn't mind, you know.
Having a few gold coins and just sitting there like golem looking at them.
But it's a good way to protect the money that you've made.
Birchgold.com forward slash Viva.
You get a free info kit.
And if you have the money to invest in gold, you know, it's a tough thing.
You got to make the money.
You got to save the money.
You got to preserve the money.
And then you got to invest the money in a way that will hedge inflation, will hedge market volatility.
And gold has been one of the time-tested true ways of doing it.
Birchgold.com.
Promo code Viva.
Link is in the pinned comment.
And that, thank you.
For a good sponsor and the luxury and the privilege of being able to work with sponsors that I actually trust.
Okay.
I love francophones despite just it.
He's not a francophone, by the way.
He's more anglophone than francophone.
His father was francophone.
His mother was not, I think.
Okay.
Birchgold, ad reads, Candice Owen adverts, you signed the contract, didn't you?
No, what I love is I get Jordan Peterson ads over my YouTube videos.
I get Epoch Times ads over my videos.
I've reached out to Epoch Times.
They should probably just do direct advertising.
Okay, people, we're going to talk about the Crowder thing later when we go over to YouTube.
And I've flagged some comments that I want to talk about.
But we're going to start with the Canadian stuff.
For those of you who don't know, Canada seems to be in a slow, steady, and rapid decline into absolute, absolute China-level...
What is it called?
It's ESG.
I always forget.
It's like Social Credit System.
What is the acronym in the chat?
I have two questions in the chat.
What is that acronym for the Social Credit System?
Because we're moving there, not just quickly.
I was having a discussion with someone who's older, smarter than me, and who basically says, we're already there.
Deal with it.
And I'm like, I know we're already there, and this is how I'm going to deal with it, by screaming into the abyss, by shaking my fist like Abe Simpson at the sky, at the madness.
If you don't know what's going on with Jeremy McKenzie, chat.
I've talked about what's going on with Jeremy McKenzie, but did I do it since?
We talked about it Sunday very briefly and we've got developments.
There's developments in the Jeremy McKenzie case.
Jeremy McKenzie, Diagalon founder, the extremist.
By the way, he started a fictitious land on the interwebs known as Diagalon after noticing that...
The states and provinces that were fighting harder against these COVID mandates seemed to follow a diagonal line across continental North America from Alaska to Florida.
So they called it diagonal.
Then, because they were being called some sort of extremist organization, they humorously posed with their hunting rifles and firearms.
Legally procured, from what I understand, and took a picture of this radical terrorist group, Diagalon.
And the government of Canada bought the meme.
Like Kekistan, the government of Canada thought Diagalon is a true extremist organization.
And they relied on Diagalon in the debates leading up to the invocation of the Declaration of the Emergencies Act to violently suppress the most peaceful protest the world has ever seen.
Jeremy subsequently was arrested on gun-related charges, and I think it had something to do with the photograph, and I don't know what the other portions of the charges are.
Got arrested on, I'll say like rather tardy, but let's just call them allegations of assault.
Arrested, detained for two months, much of it in solitary confinement because he refused to submit to the COVID test.
And they had to, you know...
Safety people.
They have to put him in solitary because if he refuses to do the PCR test that takes a piece of your brain out, I'm joking, it doesn't do that, but it goes very far up.
He refused to submit to that test and they had to keep him in solitary because of science and safety people.
He testified during the Public Order Emergencies Commission hearing.
And he's a political dissident.
There's no question about it.
Two months in jail, denied bail, solitary confinement, flown from Nova Scotia to Saskatchewan on a nationwide warrant.
Well, after they let him out of jail, the persecution didn't stop there.
Friday afternoon last, Jeremy McKenzie gets a call.
You know what?
I should probably play that.
Gets a call from Scotiabank, a rep at the Scotiabank.
And the call basically says, Hi, Jeremy.
Sorry about the inconvenience.
We're going to have to debank you.
Shut your bank accounts down.
Pull your shit out and go home.
Oh, sorry.
That's right.
You're home?
Well, we're going to probably have to take your home sooner than later because get out.
No more banking with you.
30 days to close up.
Find an alternative.
And good luck.
Oh, and by the way, we'll still take your mortgage payments.
Can you imagine this?
Scotiabank apparently...
He has his mortgage with them.
Scotiabank says, we're going to cancel your bank account, get your stuff and leave, but continue paying us for the mortgage that we've granted you.
Here, hold on a second.
Present, share.
Here we go.
I'll play some of the audio.
It's just the side of its risk appetite.
So typically we don't call customers in these situations, but I recognize you've been a long time client of the bank.
So I want to call to give you the courtesy of the heads up.
Which part of it is too risky for the bank?
Is that my military pension?
I'm afraid I don't have any other details.
Just to recap, I'm being debanked.
I'm banned from the bank.
There is no reasons given.
There is no one to contact.
And that's it.
Is that about right?
So just on the contact field, again, there will be some contact information on that letter that you can use.
Okay, hold on.
I want to get to the part.
I'll have to talk to somebody else about it.
Well, I don't think we need to listen to the whole thing, but you can go find it on my Twitter feed.
Hold on.
Actually, we just got to the part right there.
He says, I understand your frustration.
I understand your frustration, Jeremy.
Listen to this.
Yeah, you don't, though.
It's not frustration.
This is catastrophically ruinous to most people.
I can't imagine this is something typically people deal with, so I don't appreciate people saying you understand, because you certainly don't.
Have you ever been debanked before and had your mortgage cut?
I mean, my children live there, so what, are they just homeless now?
These are things I have to deal with now, so please don't condescend to me and say that you understand my frustration.
Far beyond frustration, sir.
Calmer than I'd be under those circumstances.
We understand your frustration.
So that's what happened to Jeremy McKenzie.
Now, I will get to Jeremy McKenzie, bad man, in a bit.
I started, first of all, no one in Canadian media, with the exception as far as I know now, I was on Richard Surratt Talk Saga yesterday.
I'm looking at Pudge.
She's jiggling her legs and I'm looking to see if that's because she's pooping.
I was on with Richard Surrett yesterday.
He covered this.
I've been talking about it.
There have been some independent alternative media talking about it.
No one in mainstream media is talking about it.
Nobody.
Radio silence.
And I'll give them credit.
It's actually impressive.
It's actually impressive how they've understood.
No media coverage because even if it's to demonize Jeremy, even if it's to demonize Jeremy and say this radical extremist who made jokes about assaulting Pierre Poilier's wife, even if they say he got what he deserved, it would be bad publicity because any publicity for this would be bad publicity.
You may recall, did I bring this up?
During the convoy, Scotiabank was one of the first, I think, one of the first, if not the only bank.
To apologize for freezing the bank accounts of some of the protesters, the participants in the convoy.
Some of them.
Once upon a time, by the way, look at this.
This is from March 11, 2022.
Once upon a time, they apologized when it was politically expedient to do so.
They apologized when what they did was so radically unpopular with what the government did.
And when what the banks did was so radically unpopular, it caused something of a run on the banks, causing problems for the banks.
Then they apologized.
They're like, whoa, whoa, whoa, people.
We're sorry.
It was a mistake.
We shouldn't have done this.
We won't do it again.
Don't pull all your money out because we don't have the money in the coffers in the back.
We're sorry.
They did it then, only to discreetly, when nobody's paying attention, do the exact same thing again to Jeremy McKenzie.
But this is an article written by Rex Murphy in the National Post.
National Post, as far as any of the Canadian publications go, has been The best insofar as it's not the trash that the Toronto Star is.
The vile, vitriolic, hate-filled trash that is the Toronto Star.
They're better.
This is Rex Murphy.
Good question, Rex.
Good question.
I have a question for you.
Why aren't you asking this very same question right now?
Why aren't you talking about this?
Rex Murphy, National Post.
Now, I tweeted this out and tagged Rex Murphy and the National Post.
In credit to Rex Murphy, he didn't block me yet, so I guess that's good.
Let's see here.
Just pulling a relevant part of the article.
The banks have huge questions to answer and like...
The we affair, they are being forgotten in the present moment.
The main one is, why did the banks bend so quickly and so cravingly to the Trudeau government?
Have they no courage at all?
And while I'm at it, answer this.
Would the big banks have the stomach to freeze the accounts of Black Lives Matter protesters or environmental activists or anyone who advocates for the woke cause of the moment?
I doubt it.
We have not heard a single bank president, not one, pose a question, make a comment, or say a word about the perfectly compliant acceptance of Trudeau's unprecedented edict.
They should be ashamed of themselves.
But being bank presidents, one must assume shame is a foreign emotion.
Psychopaths.
And courage is something that comes into play only when protecting their bloated emoluments.
This is despicable.
National Post.
Rex!
Rex!
You talk a big game.
You talk a big game.
Why haven't you said a damn word about Scotiabank debanking Jeremy McKenzie?
You know why?
Because I'm sure Rex Murphy says, well, he said anti-Semitic things, Jeremy McKenzie.
Jeremy McKenzie made a joke about a very bad thing with Pierre Paulier's wife.
Yes.
Oh, okay.
Setting aside the fact that you may not find it funny, and I don't.
And I think it's a stupid...
And I said it at the time, it makes it very difficult for people who publicly support the cause at large to support Jeremy in particular when he goes out and says things which he might think is funny, you know, to say at a two o 'clock in the morning live stream when you might have, you know, and I'm not saying this to be demeaning, you know, you get drunk, you have fun, and you say things which your crowd understands what you mean when you say them, other people will not.
And even if other people might understand what you're saying, they're going to pretend that they don't because they want to demonize you and you gave them a damn good reason and you made it very hard for people who support you to continue doing it publicly.
He hasn't been convicted of a crime.
He hasn't had his time in court yet.
They don't debank actual rapists.
Like, I don't know that Carla Homolka had a bank account, but I think she did in Canada.
They don't debank murderers.
They don't debank the people who are actually convicted of heinous crimes.
And for the progressive crowd out there, the liberals, the progressives who believe in criminal justice reform, criminal reform, and now you're going to say, okay, I'm going to turn a blind eye when they're debanking someone who hasn't even been convicted of a crime and the crime that he might get convicted of, potentially assault, potentially gun-related charges, and you turn a blind eye to that?
Because he's such a detestable character.
You know, the joke that he made about Pierre Poilievre's wife as offensive and inappropriate as it was.
There was a time, for anybody who follows on our Locals community, I posted an old SNL skit with Will Ferrell.
Who in the chat is going to remember this one?
When Will Ferrell was playing Turkmenian, a boss who was interviewing Pierce Brosnan for an interview.
Pierce Brosnan was being interviewed for a job, and Will Ferrell comes out.
He's soft-spoken.
He's calm.
He's polite.
He looks like the best boss on Earth.
And then Sherry O'Terry comes in to interrupt and says, and he says, yeah, I wouldn't have done that.
And then she says, done what?
He's like, you do not interrupt me!
I do not put up with this bullcrap!
And then, you know, then he calls her a B-I-T-C-H.
Or he refers to Pierce Brosnan.
I'm sorry you had to see that.
She could be a real B-I-T-C-H.
Then Chris Kattan comes in.
And Chris Kattan comes in to talk to the boss and says, hey boss, I've got this document, look it over.
And then Will Ferrell says, you know, I wouldn't have done that.
And he goes, done what?
And then he slaps it and then yells at him and says, this is crap.
It looks like someone took a crap on the photocopier or whatever.
It's a printer.
And then he points to Chris Kattan and he says, I am this close to R-A-P-I-N-G-ing you.
That was mainstream humor.
Humor in its insane, over-the-top, egregious awfulness.
What made it humor, what made it comedy, Was the contrast between the appropriate and the inappropriate.
That's what made it humor at the time.
That's what made it mainstream SNL humor at the time.
I am this close to blanking you.
That was Will Ferrell.
And I shared that on our local screen.
I said, look, I happened to find this skit to be one of the funnier ones SNL has ever done.
It was over the top.
It was in your face.
It was so bad, you're looking at it and think, oh my God, they're actually doing this.
And it was comedy.
I actually jokingly said I can't believe they didn't come to cancel Will Ferrell.
That's pretty much along the same lines as Jeremy's joke.
And now it's, can we press criminal charges?
Can we debank?
And even if Jeremy is found guilty, this is not something that we can tolerate in a free and democratic society, because if we tolerate it, it's no longer a free and democratic society.
So So blackout in the media.
And in the meantime, so by the way, I set this give, send, go up for Jeremy in one of my rages, which is still pretty polite rage, Saturday night.
And it just broke $20,000.
And, you know, I spoke to Jeremy.
I made sure that everything was, in as much as I can verify that this was a true story, you know, okay.
And then people are like...
He didn't lose any money.
We don't even know if this is true.
He could be lying.
I'm like, okay, well, if he's lying, that's a seven and a half minutes of Oscar-worthy acting from whomever's on the other end of the line.
And I asked Jeremy, I said, when you get the letter from the bank so I can pacify the people who have doubts, could you send me the letter and can I share it?
And he said, yes.
And then he sent me the letter.
I redacted it, and this is a portion of the letter, but this is basically it.
The Bank of Nova Scotia, the Bank of Nova Scotia, has decided to terminate one or more aspects of our banking relationship with you, as noted below.
We recommend that you take immediate steps to make alternative banking arrangements with another financial institution.
Oh yeah, that's just, that's going to be, that's going to be very easy.
All of the stuff, mortgage, all of the stuff, yada, yada, yada.
And it's not just that they debanked him unilaterally in the dead of night and with media silence.
Jeremy has been restricted from going on Nova Scotia premises.
Take notice that you are not to enter onto the premises of the bank, including any of its lands, buildings, other structures, or any other Scotia branches or locations from this date forward, without first obtaining the written permission of management, and that you may be arrested automatically I guess this is like a notice not to trespass.
This is Canada, people.
Some of you might say it's possible that Jeremy fabricated these documents.
This is all a big scam.
Jeremy's getting rich off all this.
Okay.
It's over the top.
A little over the top.
And then we got Keith in the house who seems convinced I'm a grifter.
That's what's going on in Canada.
That's what's going on with Jeremy McKenzie.
It's an outrage.
And this is like the Alex Jones treatment.
It starts with a character that you either hate or the media has convinced you to hate.
And then you say to yourself, well, I'm against debanking, but Jeremy said some things.
He called Schindler's List a work of fiction, and he made some jokes that I think are anti-Semitic, and he made this terrible comment about Pierre Polier's wife, so I'm going to let it slide this time.
Oh, like I said on Richard Serret's show last night, let's just assume that Jeremy went full-out Holocaust.
He didn't, but let's just assume he did.
All right.
Debanking for Holocaust deniers.
All right, what's next?
Let's debank for election deniers.
Oh, let's debank for publicly criticizing the government.
This is not a slippery slope.
This is the cliff.
How is Viva?
We're going to get to this also with Carter.
People don't use words properly anymore.
We've gotten into the...
We've gotten into, I'll say, the leftist mentality.
Grifter, racist, just slap the label so you can try to discredit the substance of what everyone says.
Do I have anything more for Mackenzie?
I don't think so.
The link is in my tweet.
It's givesendgo.com.
The media will cover this.
They will cover this.
Because it was atrocious when they did it with the protesters.
It's atrocious when they're doing it now.
It's not because you might even legitimately hate somebody that you can do this.
This is the first step towards China-level compelled compliance.
Government-enforced.
These are federally chartered entities.
These entities are not allowed discriminating.
They are bound by the charter.
And we just...
It's...
Okay.
That's it.
Now, before we go over to Rumble, because we're going to go over to Rumble, right after, I thank the second sponsor of today's show.
Yeah, Keith, let's not confuse grift with graft.
Let's not confuse grift with hard work.
Hard work and being healthy and staying healthy.
I eat, I was going to say a buttload of vegetables because I do, and there's a joke in there.
It's a little-known fact that people have to eat about five to seven servings of raw fruits and vegetables a day, and it's a well-known fact that people don't.
That's not healthy.
Not only do people not eat healthy, they don't exercise as much as they should, they don't get their fruits and vegetables.
If you're one of those people and you're looking for a healthy alternative, it's an alternative.
To getting those fruits and vegetables.
But nothing's better than the raw thing.
Just sit there and chew them like a cow, like I do.
If you can't do it, or you don't do it, or you need a healthy alternative to the soft drink that you pop down in the afternoon, fieldofgreens.com.
It's the powdered greens.
It's not a supplement, and it's not an extract.
It is basically pulverized fruits and vegetables.
You get...
Let me just see this here.
I can't see you too good.
Full serving of fruits and vegetables per spoon.
All of the antioxidants.
The super nutrients that you get from vegetables.
Boosted immunity.
It's made in America, which I like.
And it's USDA organic approved.
And it tastes good.
It looks like swamp water, but that's because swamp water has all the nutrients of life.
It tastes good.
It's a healthy alternative to bad habits.
And it's outright just healthy.
If you don't get your fruits and vegetables, one spoon twice a day.
And then cram in some fruits and vegetables because you still have to.
And exercise, people.
Fieldofgreens.com, promo code VIVA.
And you'll get 15% off your first order and 10% off a subscription if you do it.
And it's good.
It is good.
Boom shakalaka.
And I spent a half an hour on the phone with the doctor behind this company making sure that not only is this good for me, but that this is good in general and I'm happy.
Powdered vegetables are healthy.
My understanding is that when you're not...
Creating an extract.
First of all, you can't really OD on it.
And you're not concentrating it and you're not changing the nature.
It's like dehydrated, pulverized beef jerky, basically.
When you eat dehydrated beef jerky, you get the proteins, you get the energy.
And you also get a little preservatives with meat.
But this is basically like dried, pulverized, and then you mix it in water and you drink it.
And it's better than an extract and it's better than a constant supplement.
It's food.
It's basically food, which is why it's USDA organic approved.
Okay, that is good now.
Now, let us mosey on over.
We're going to do some more Canadian stuff and some other stuff.
It's not all going to be Crowder from here on in.
But let's talk Crowder.
Let's talk tribalism, people.
It's not something that only exists on one side of the aisle.
Errors in reasoning.
And not just that.
Personalizing disagreement.
Okay.
I'm stopping it there.
Let us all go to Rumble right now.
Let's piss off.
Let's do it the way I've been doing it.
And by the way, just so everybody knows, for the YouTube overlords, I'm not going on to Rumble to do anything that I don't do on YouTube.
I put all the stuff on Rumble with one or two exceptions when I interviewed Dr. Francis Christian.
There's no point in even just trying.
I put all the stuff on YouTube afterwards.
What we will do is we will vote with our feet.
We will vote with our dollar.
We're going to use the big platform to maintain the voice.
And we're going to use that and capitalize it and leverage it into building off-platform sustainable platforms.
Off-platform sustainable...
You know what I'm saying.
Okay.
I agree, but you are quite smug.
About the subject.
You're imputing intentions, people, is never a good way to argue.
I agree.
But I'm smug.
I get called lots of things in life.
Smug is not one of them.
Okay.
People.
Fieldofgreens.com.
Promo code Viva.
Birchgold.com.
Promo code Viva.
Gold and vegetables.
The cornerstone of every healthy living.
Okay.
We're ending on YouTube right now, going over to Rumble in 3, 2, 1. There's 1,860 people who were left on YouTube, and we'll see if they're coming here.
Now, did I miss anything in here?
In the Rumble chat, I'm scrolling up.
There's a Rumble rant, people.
R.M. Oh, sorry, that's R. McIntyre 49. In the Harry Potter books, there is a place called Diagon, or Diagon Alley.
May have been named because it runs diagonally to muggle life in London.
Does anybody see any similarity to Diagon?
Cue the Napoleon Dynamite.
I don't understand a word you just said.
I have not read or seen any of the Harry Potters.
So I have no idea what that means.
But thank you very much for the Rumble rant.
Thank you for the support.
Cilantro FTW.
Where did I see that?
Everyone is corrupt.
Cilantro.
Forget the world.
Cilantro is the magic vegetable.
It's so damn good.
I love cilantro.
And I have a theory.
What was it?
I made a video about it.
Parsley on everything.
Parsley is amazing.
Okay.
Jeff Tindall says, V is pretty modest guy.
Smug.
How can I be smug?
I'm an idiot.
I call myself an idiot with smugness.
All right.
Let's talk.
See, what's the strategy here?
Barnes says, Alex Jones strategy.
You've got to save something good for the end, otherwise people leave.
The Viva strategy is more like a Jerry Seinfeld.
What if I never get to the end of the book?
We're going to do the good stuff now.
All right.
We don't need to go over the 30,000-foot overview of the Steven Crowder Daily Wire debate.
Chicane, comme on dit en français, the public, the very public fight.
If you haven't, I've seen like...
I haven't seen everyone's take, but I've seen a lot.
Cernovich had an interesting one.
If I'm going to be critical of Cernovich, too much name-calling, but he has a number of good points about the freemium and the value of staying on a platform even if you're demonetized, which we all understand, we all appreciate, as we saw last night during the Tim Pool interview with Steven Crowder.
Cernovich had an interesting take.
Lauren Chen, as far as I'm concerned, had the best take.
The best as in, I hate that term, the most nuanced, understanding take, I think I agree with her and I think I like her take because I agree with it mostly.
Barnes had and has an amazing take.
And I agree with Barnes on a lot of this.
Because Barnes, to say he's intelligent and insightful is an understatement.
It's like calling the sun bright.
Barnes is a brain.
He's a different type of brain.
And he sees things from a variety of angles.
I don't go as far as Barnes goes with the controlled opposition aspect of the Daily Wire.
But he is right on that this is a perfect example of bad negotiations.
And he's right.
And I never said anything different from the beginning.
I wouldn't have signed that Daily Wire contract.
I wouldn't have been insulted to the point where I go and flip the table.
On the one hand, because I say I'm not a baby.
I'm the youngest of five kids.
I've been a lawyer.
I practiced law for 13 years.
You learn quickly to set aside your emotions because something we seem to have forgotten On this side of the debate, you're not right because you're insulted.
And if you're insulted, it doesn't mean you're right.
You can be offended, and that doesn't mean a damn thing.
And more often than not, being offended is absolutely useless.
You're not going to get points because you say, I'm insulted.
How dare you make this contract better?
I don't take things personally like that.
I think that might be...
It might be an attribute and it might be a flaw because I look at others and say, you should not take this personally either.
Not that it's just business in the sense that bend over and let me give it to you because it's business, but getting offended will do nothing.
And this is the advice that I used to give clients.
Like, oh, they're of bad faith.
How dare they make that offer to me?
It's an insult.
I think, okay, it is an insult.
Where do we go from there?
It's not going to change anything.
What do you want to do now?
Barnes has an awesome take.
I've seen Rakeda.
Not all of Rakeda's because he's talked about it quite a bit.
I've seen Rakeda.
Who else?
It doesn't matter.
I've seen a lot.
And I've said from the beginning, neither party is right and both parties are wrong.
The question is, what are they wrong on?
Barnes is right when he says this is a masterclass in how not to conduct negotiations.
Correct.
The issue here is not that...
It's a masterclass on how to do negotiations badly.
That's not how the dispute was blown up publicly.
Crowder didn't come out and say, look at this exploitive contract, the Daily Wire.
They're not negotiating in good faith.
They're trying to exploit me and others.
Crowder came out and immediately impugned intentions by saying they are deliberately trying to stifle the voice of conservative creators, which is far different than saying this contract is shite.
This contract is...
We've got you by the balls.
Sure, we've offered you what looks like a lot of money, but ultimately it's not that much money.
It's a lot of money, but it's not a lot of money net.
So if Crowder had come out and said, look how unfair this contract is, people would have said, well, that's why you get a lawyer, and that's why companies live with the reputations that they've established in the industry.
Which, if you've watched Lauren Chen, Daily Wire has that reputation.
In the practice of law...
Everybody knows certain law firms have certain reputations for their lawyers, for the manner in which they conduct files, for the manner in which they conduct hires.
Everybody knows it.
Reputations are built because people talk behind closed doors.
People talk openly.
Had Crowder come out and said, this is an exploitive contract.
Look how little they want to pay me at the end of the day.
It would have been a far different discussion than what he did do, which is come out and say, stop Big Con.
These conservative outlets, or I'm not naming it, but everybody knew.
And people who say they didn't know, everybody in the industry knew who they were talking about.
He didn't come out and say they're unfair.
He said they're acting against your interests.
They're trying to stifle conservative speech.
And this is a David and Goliath good versus evil battle as opposed to a business disagreement between people who systematically want the most out of their contracts, the most freedom, the most money with the least obligation and the least risk.
Here.
Sincat says, Viva, you are just wrong on this.
First time I've ever disagreed with you, but you are wrong to the point.
It's insulting.
Oh.
You need to step back and stop this grift game.
Look what Sincat's doing right here.
Attacking intentions, dropping the grift accusation.
This is what actually drives me nuts about the discussion, is it shuts off people's brains.
And certain aspects of it.
If it's the first time you've ever disagreed with this thing, Kat, you might want to look inwards because I've disagreed with me more often than that.
It was a business contract that was agreed, exploitive.
And we're going to get to the slave wage part because anybody who's worked as a young lawyer, you know, young lawyers often refer to themselves as or regard themselves as slave wages.
But there's, or slave wage, you know.
Working for slave wage, they got you by the golden handcuffs is the other way that they talk about it when you become partner.
They get you.
And they've got you by the golden handcuffs because you're getting paid a lot, but you have no freedom in life.
And so you're talking about slave wages for people who are probably getting paid $80,000 to $100,000 a year.
Sure, they've given up a lot of ownership and whatever.
They have a job, they have benefits, and they get paid well.
The slave wage concept...
Is a figure of speech.
But to seriously look at anybody who might be working for the Daily Wire, getting paid a decent salary with benefits, has a job in this day and age, and say that that's slave wage and it's somehow shameful?
Well, I think that, if anyone wants to say that's insulting, that might be insulting.
Viva is using emotion to push his argument as well.
No, I'm not.
So the bottom line is this.
Crowder came out and said this is good versus evil.
Daily Wire, Without naming them, but naming them, is not just exploitive in their business contracts, they're deceitful, and they are acting contrary to the interests of conservative voices out there.
That's what the original discussion was, and that's where, even though I look at that contract and I say, I guess good for you for trying in a cynical sense, like, you know, this is why you need a lawyer to negotiate contracts.
Good.
50 million, it's a big number.
Over four years, $12.5 million a year, Crowder's got a team of 25 people.
He incurs production costs.
I don't know how much you think Crowder deserves to make at the end of the year, but he's worth more than that.
$50 million is a big number, but it's not $50 million net to Crowder.
It never was.
So, you know, they tried.
And people say it's an insult.
This contract, if I had signed it, would have tied Crowder's hands for years.
Boilerplate, here, let's throw in the essential terms, let's talk about it, is not a contract.
It's an LOI, it's an initial offer, and normal people would come back and discuss it.
Crowder says, it was never about the money.
After that, I said, take me out of this.
This is about future creators.
Are you doing this to other creators?
Stop it.
Tell me you'll stop doing it, and I'll walk away.
Crowder telling Daily Wire how to run his business, failing which he's going to blow this up wide open.
But at the end of the day, you have Daily Wire.
I'm getting distracted.
Oh, here we go.
Wolo says, Viva Fry, I'm disgusting.
I'm disgusting.
You disgrace with me.
You have to support the Jews.
Oh, okay.
There you go.
Oh, we've got a $20 rumble rant.
Hale Diot says, zero Fs given for big-earing millionaires.
You want your integrity, give value, and get value directly from your audience.
If you advertise, you compromise.
Nothing along with compromise, but admit it.
Okay, I think we can agree with that.
Thank you for the chat.
Chronologic says, you created intention from G. Morgan Jr. leaving out context.
You created intention from G. Morgan Jr. leaving out context.
That's from chronologic $1.
I don't know what you mean by that.
Pepe Pan says, still like your content, one.
Two, not every creator can afford a lawyer.
True.
Three, it was copy and paste contract with just big numbers.
Didn't take into account crowd as persona.
Agreed.
Four, ended friendship.
We agree.
Bad negotiations, bad contracts, exploitive contracts.
But this is what other people should understand as well.
And I've said this before a long time ago.
So the good thing about being honest and having a bad memory is I don't have to worry about contradicting myself.
Because I have a bad memory.
So I'm not going to be a good liar.
And I know that I've said these things in the past.
When I was a young lawyer, I graduated law school, went to work as a student, stagiaire, and young lawyer for what was one of the biggest law firms in the country, Borden Ladner-Gervais.
2007, I was sworn in.
2006, 2007, I did my internship, and I was offered a job afterwards.
The internship, this is way back in the day, and I think I'm allowed to discuss my own remuneration, was $54,000 for the internship for six months.
I remember the starting salary was $80,000 to $82,000 Canadian.
That's a lot of money.
That's a lot of money, and yet everyone knew, and everyone made the joke and made the comment, we were slave wages.
We're getting paid damn good money.
We get benefits.
We had insurance.
We had a bunch of stuff.
We got Friday afternoon sank assets, five to sevens.
We had a good job.
We had good pay.
But everybody said, yeah, we're wage slaves.
We sit there working.
It was 1,800 hours a year that we had to bill.
So we're getting paid $80,000 a year.
It's great.
It's fantastic.
Anybody who complains about that should be fortunate that they have that problem to complain about.
But by the...
Colloquial term wage slave, we were wage slaves.
We were wage slaves.
I never used the term because I said, damn lucky that we have a job.
Only 1% of graduating law students get a job at a big firm if that's what they want.
The alternative, you can go to a small firm and get paid $40,000 a year.
Don't get the same training.
Don't get the same education.
Don't get the same supervision, guidance, mentorship.
We had to bill.
We had to bill.
Bill as in could be collected.
1,800 billable hours a year.
They were billing us, I don't know, give or take whatever the math was, 250 bucks an hour in the day.
So we were making about a half a million dollars for the law firm, and they were paying us $80,000 a year.
That's exploitation!
They expected us to work, bill 1,800 hours a year, which means we had to work a lot more than 1,800 hours.
That's wage slave.
And we're making a butt-ton of money for the law firm, and it's exploitive.
That's right.
They're making money off our back.
The partners were taking their share of it.
And it's not like they said we're doing evil.
We're lawyers.
We're fighting for good here.
We're changing the world for the better.
We fight for justice.
Partners get their cut.
50 cents on every dollar goes to overhead.
You bill, young lawyer, and if you don't make your target, you certainly won't get a bonus and you're not long for the firm.
It is exploitive.
But I do have a philosophy that there is, in a way, A manner in which it's mutually exploitive.
It was but for that training that I was able to go out on my own.
So they were exploiting me for money and I was exploiting them for knowledge, for training, for education, for guidance.
And when I got that training, when I exploited them for that work experience, I then went out on my own.
Started my own law firm, which we ran up into a boutique litigation firm.
And despite what people think, like I make jokes and I don't talk about it for much, it was a very, very successful, respected boutique litigation firm.
I don't like talking about these things.
I went from solo in 2010 to we had at 1.5 lawyers, including my father when he left Steichman Elliott.
To a beautiful office and a beautiful boutique litigation firm.
You know what the only problem was?
I never loved any day of it any more than the day before, even when I went out on my own.
But it is mutually exploitive.
And Daily Wire has these onerous contracts, exploitive contracts.
They're going to live with the reputation that they develop in the industry.
But creators can go and use the Daily Wire as well and exploit them as well.
Create their brand.
Get networks.
Get knowledge.
Know-how.
Talent, skill, everything.
And then if it doesn't work out at the end of a little while and parties say, well, we can't afford each other, you go out on your own and you succeed based on having acquired a network, skills, et cetera, knowledge from the firm, from the company.
BC 5. BC4060 says, with a $10 rumble rant, Crowder countered.
To offer, but DW never gave new offer.
And to add insult to injury, they then tried to poach staff.
If that's how they treat fans...
Poach staff?
I mean, if everybody...
If you guys...
If people think that this is somehow revelatory of industry, you guys...
You're in for a rude awakening.
Law firms poach.
Everyone's trying to poach talent.
And it's dirty.
And that's why some firms have certain reputations.
You know what I never tried to do?
Poach, you know what I never tried to do?
Lowball employees, lowball staff, you know what I never tried to do?
Tell the staff that, well, I'm not getting paid this year, so neither are you.
Wrong.
But this is a business dispute.
And had it come out as a business dispute, people would have been saying, well, go fight quietly and don't sour the well for everybody here.
But the way, you know, for whatever wrong Daily Wire did in their negotiations and their exploitive business practices, Crowder comes out.
And says it's their evil intent and that they are effectively frauds.
I mean, a con is a fraud.
They're frauds, they're acting against your interests, and they have a nefarious purpose of silencing conservative creators.
That's war.
That's war above and beyond, I'm not happy with this contract and I'm not happy with that business.
Sleeves End, $10 rum brand, says, Viva, what exactly does a Daily Wire do?
Not an insult, but please explain.
Why you need Daily Wire, Blaze, etc.
Also, when are you bringing the kids to St. Augustine?
What does Daily Wire do?
What does being a solo lawyer do?
You go to court.
You're a solo.
Nobody knows who you are, who you're affiliated with.
And for wrong, not for right or for wrong, you could be the most talented lawyer on earth.
No one looks at you the same way.
If you're an independent journalist showing up with a mic...
Bugger off.
Oh, I'm with the National Post.
Oh, I'm with Rebel News.
What does Daily Wire do?
Branding.
Promotion.
Credibility to some extent.
Networking.
You're at the Daily Wire.
You're networking with Peterson and his network.
You're networking with if you want to.
Not everybody wants to.
You're networking with Candace Owens.
You get studios, production value, editors.
You get all the stuff that people complain that I don't have.
Viva, get a producer.
You know what happens when you get a producer?
You incur an expense that then you then have to maintain.
Get a producer for $100,000.
I wouldn't hire someone to exploit them.
So you get a producer for $100,000.
That's a hundred and some odd thousand more that you need to make.
What do you have to do to make it?
Sell ads.
Oh, you're selling ads.
You've sold your soul.
So what does the Daily Wire bring?
They bring infrastructure.
They bring networking.
They bring a lot of stuff.
And then if you don't like it, by the way, build the name, establish the network, go solo.
People do it all the time.
It's populist versus establishment tribalism from DeLeo $5.
As a populist, I guess you can't handle exploitive contracts.
That's where unicorns came from in the past.
We disagree, though.
As a populist, you can't handle it.
Well, all contracts are going to be exploitive to some extent.
When Barnes...
You know, when we talked about it Sunday and he said, you know, the masterclass, how not to negotiate.
I don't come in.
I never negotiated with coming with a lowball offer in the hopes of getting to the middle ground.
I don't like doing that.
The problem is that strategy doesn't work well when other people do do that.
And then you get a client that says, why aren't you lowballing them?
They're just going to wiggle it.
I said, I don't do it like that.
I say, here's my, here's my, I don't come in with a lowball to say, let's get to the middle ground.
I say, here is.
The essence.
If we can't do this, period, and then people still try to chisel away.
It's not the way I do it.
But it's the way other people do do it.
And then they develop a reputation where people know, if you're negotiating with The Daily Wire, get a lawyer.
Oh, I don't want to incur the cost of a lawyer?
Well, I mean, what are we saying here now?
That you want a well-drafted contract, you want someone representing your interests, but you don't want to incur the cost of doing that?
Not everybody has the money for a lawyer?
True.
And that's why some people who don't invest in themselves get exploited.
But the idea that it costs money to have a lawyer.
So you want the party who's trying to make money off of you negotiating for and on your behalf against themselves?
MostEvil1 says, Viva, you were wrong with the vaccine rollout and you're wrong here again and using the same logic as with the vaccine.
$10 rumble rant, I'll thank you for the rant and I'll say, what the hell are you talking about?
Wrong with the vaccine rollout?
What do you think I said about the vaccine rollout, MostEvil?
You know what I said about the vaccine rollout?
Nobody should be compelled to do it.
Nobody should be fired for not doing it.
And nobody should be asked whether or not they're vaccinated.
Oh, I'm sorry.
You think you're going to judge me because I got the vaccine and I might now regret it because if I knew then what I knew now, I wouldn't have done it for myself.
I never told anyone to take it.
I never defended anyone.
I have been absolutely consistent on the injustice of vaccine mandates from the beginning.
I have been absolutely supportive of people who didn't want to take the vaccine because they didn't think it was safe or they didn't have enough data to feel comfortable doing it.
I was absolutely, consistently...
Opposed to forcing children to get vaccinated so they could get their freaking vaccine passports to get into a coffee shop.
Sorry, I'm getting angry.
Jenkin says $10 rumble rent.
So Canadian banks freezing closing accounts due to people practicing free speech is completely fine because it's just business.
Got it.
Well, that's an interesting point.
Let me make sure I understand what you're trying to say.
On the one hand, that argument fails because they are federal chartered entities.
Okay, so let's, Jenkin, if you think you're making a point, I'm going to tell you why you're not.
They are federally regulated entities, which makes them bound by certain laws as to discriminatory treatment.
A. B. As far as I understand, there might have been a law up until 2022 that declared banks a utility.
A bank is a utility.
A bank account is a utility.
Daily Wire and your right to create content on your own terms is not.
That is how I would distinguish the point that you think you're making from the point that you're not actually making.
But I thank you for the rumble rant and thank you for the point because it's an interesting point.
Banks are private enterprises.
They can do what they want.
No.
A, they're federally regulated in Canada.
And B, certain things are utilities.
The right to a contract that you love to create content is not a utility.
Rob A says, I will produce for 50,000 plus room and board.
No, thank you very much.
That's a $5 rumble.
Dankis the Great said, isn't 1,800 hours a year, just about 40 hours a week with cushion for non-billed work?
That just sounds like a good job for DW or other lawyer.
No, Ford, I have to do the math on that, but you have to bill about 20. I think my recollection was that you actually had to bill about 2,500 hours because the partner would cut your time down.
Or you would self-censor your time because you don't want the partner thinking you're useless.
And so no, I think you're wrong on the math there.
And what else?
That doesn't include cocktails, which some people like.
I never liked the cocktails.
I wanted to go home at the end of the day.
But it's not a bad argument.
It's not a decent argument.
1,800 hours.
I want to do the math.
That doesn't matter.
No, you had to bill about 2,200 to 2,500 hours to hope to end up at 1,800 hours.
And then the other thing is people wanted bonuses at the end of the year.
This is the bottom line crux of all of this.
Crowder came out and said, this is good versus evil.
Stop big cons.
They're cons.
They're frauds.
They're acting against your interests because they're caving to big tech censorship.
And that was when watching last night, where I can't get the damn clip out here, watching last night, where it became clear to me that, you know, they're all playing the same game.
Crowder is playing the same game as Daily Wire.
To a different extent.
Crowder's saying, look, I'm already demonetized on YouTube, but I comply with YouTube to stay on the platform.
Because while there's value in being monetized on the platform, there's also value in being on the platform even if you're demonetized.
And so Crowder says to Daily Wire, you're bending over to the censorship and passing the buck to the creators, or at least a portion of the buck to the creators.
I'm not doing that.
But I am self-censoring to stay on the platform because there's value in the platform.
And I'll play you the clip, which I think shows that point.
Here.
We've talked about this.
You built your career on YouTube is the argument that people use.
Last three years, unmonetized.
It's like, yes, we're trying to speak the most truth to the greatest number of people possible.
We can't just all have behind-the-paywall honest conversations because then you don't affect people at the biggest possible tech company out there.
By the way...
Does everybody not appreciate this is the Daily Wire's argument?
This is the Daily Wire's argument.
The only business issue is whether or not it's fair of the Daily Wire to say to a creator, if we get the ding, if we get the ding despite trying to speak to the biggest possible audience, how do we mitigate that risk?
How do we contract that risk of getting demonetized?
Because Daily Wire and Crowder are saying the exact same thing.
We've talked about this.
You built your career on YouTube is the argument that people use.
Last three years, unmonetized.
Last three years, unmonetized, but still on the platform and having tens of thousands of eyeballs for marketing, for freemium, for getting people to go to your behind the wall.
But listen to what I'm saying.
Yes, you're still on the platform, Crowder.
Why?
We're trying to speak the most truth to the greatest number of people possible.
Why is Daily Wire not doing the same thing?
Where does Crowder get involved here to say, We're trying to use the platform to speak the greatest truth under their rules to the greatest number of people under their rules, but the Daily Wire is a con job and they're trying to silence people?
This is where we're looking at the same thing and seeing it from two different angles.
Crowder is saying, look, I'm just staying on the platform because I want the biggest platform.
I'll play by their rules.
I need to reach the biggest people.
But Daily Wire, they're silencing conservative speech.
We can't just all have behind-the-paywall honest conversations because then you don't affect people at the biggest possible tech company out there.
So do that, but don't go so far as to play by this additional set of rules.
It really restricts what you're able to say.
Don't go by this additional rule.
That's the one where if something gets demonetized, there's a penalty.
So you can do it to this extent, but not to that extent.
So appreciate they agree.
They agree and they abide by the same principles.
It's just that Crowder didn't like that one provision of if you get demonetized or you get banned, well, then there has to be some offsetting because if you get banned, we're all losing the benefit that you just described here.
We've talked about this.
So that's one point.
And now I'm going to go to the chat because I want to see what people have to say about that.
Barnes, where are you?
Viva is delusional.
That's coming from Anna12061.
Wanted to help you.
I agree with you.
I've been catching fire for it like crazy in the comments.
That's a $20 rumble rant from WGHua64.
By the way, this is one thing.
You don't have to agree with me.
I'm showing you my homework, and you can come to a different conclusion.
I don't get pissed off.
I read the comments that I mute on Twitter, even though I know I shouldn't.
Viva, you're blinded here, Viva.
You are wrong.
SYNCAT, thank you for another substantive responding to my evidence reply.
That's not a rebuttal.
That's shaming.
That belongs somewhere else.
That belongs in another crowd.
You're wrong.
You're blinded.
Maybe I'm controlled opposition, SYNCAT.
Maybe I'm trying to get a job with The Daily Wire.
Maybe that's all I've ever wanted is to be bound in an office and have to go in and fraternize with people and get involved in that big office setting that I left as a lawyer.
Maybe that's exactly what I'm trying to reverse my course in life by going right back to what I loathed in law.
I can't stand office politics.
It's not that I'm selfish and it's not that I'm hard to work with.
I'm actually surprisingly easy to work with and hot empathy is what I suffer from.
But I cannot stand office politics.
I can't stand having to shake hands with the right people, have to kiss butt if you want a bonus, or if you want a good mandate from another...
Oh, you've got to go...
I can't do that.
I can't do that.
I'm not looking for that.
Nor am I looking for affirmation from anybody, because I think we spent a fair bit of time on this channel kind of poking fun at Ben Shapiro.
But it's funny.
Forget all that.
You do not agree that Daily Wire is evil and...
Crowder is a saint.
Therefore, you must be a shill for Ben Shapiro.
Because I'm Jewish.
Let's see here.
There was another one.
There was another one.
I think it was this one.
If it wasn't this one, I'll get it afterwards.
Let me see this.
Here we go.
Kristen Baker says, Will Crowder's company pay his creators guaranteed big money regardless of the revenues they bring in while they let their freak flag fly?
Time out.
Time out.
He doesn't agree with the premise.
Listen to that question.
Are you going to guarantee remuneration even if they get demonetized for letting their freak flag fly?
I don't agree with the premise.
Nobody said it was regardless of revenues you bring in.
It just said it could not be tied to big tech monetization and being on these platforms.
If you're bringing in...
And five subscribers versus 500,000, that's a much different thing.
Yeah.
And sponsors versus no sponsors, that's a much different thing.
Nobody said sponsors versus no sponsors, a much different thing.
But if you get deplatformed or you get demonetized where you would otherwise have sponsors, well, that's a thing there.
That's terrible.
Yes, I agree with you.
Just not for that one little thing.
We'll do the same thing.
Just not for that one little thing.
If you don't bring in enough subs, well, then, of course, we're not going to pay you the same amount.
If you don't bring in enough advertising revenue, then of course we won't pay the same amount.
But we just have an issue with that one element that we framed this entire discussion on Daily Wire being frauds and cons.
Deliberately censoring conservative speech.
They're acting against your interests, is what the original video was.
Although he didn't name the Daily Wire, but everybody knew.
That they couldn't make money, and nobody said Stephen had to be given a guaranteed production contract no matter what money he brought in.
Well, I would have asked for that.
I would have asked for that if I'm Crowder's lawyer.
I don't want...
You know what?
You're getting a lot from me.
I don't want to have to worry about it, and I don't care about it.
And if it doesn't work out for you, cancel it after two years.
I want a guaranteed $50 million, and I don't want any of these penalty provisions.
And if you don't like it, I'm sorry, we go.
Oh, no, but it's a question of principle for Kraut.
He doesn't want this being imposed on anybody else, except by the sounds of it, they'll impose similar provisions, just not on that one specific item.
They were completely and conveniently leaving that off of the table and saying, This is a lot of money, and if you lose anything, that's not going to happen.
Do a rev split with upside.
Again, this is what happens in the entertainment industry.
Whether it's a band at a venue, you do a minimum guarantee, which is going to be lower, which mitigates your risk, or you get the gate, you do a rev split with upside.
You see any upside there?
Is there any portion there that says, by the way...
Crowd is not wrong.
I don't think there's enough upside there.
I'm not sure what upside there is that can compensate for that.
This is a negotiation dispute.
It was turned into good versus evil, which is where the problem lies.
This should have been negotiated and fought behind closed doors, not turned into something that is causing strife among people who, in theory, are ideologically aligned.
If you actually do have the 300, which is well over 300,000 people who said we're going to be in Mug Club, if you actually do hit that, you, okay, get to share in this.
Is there an upside there?
There's zero.
It's 100% ownership.
And by the way, they're the only ones who demand 100% of merch revenue.
That's not even standard.
So 100% of merch, hey, you can do the math right now.
You just saw the sponsors.
Sorry, you just saw the live numbers.
That's what sponsors know about.
How much can you guess can be generated from a single sponsor?
Oh, now they're talking sponsors.
All right, there was one more.
There was one more.
Let me go back to the chat and see what people have to say in general.
Have I missed any crumble?
Oh, I have.
Holy cows.
Grab apples.
Hold on.
I don't know.
Okay, I'm all the way at the bottom now.
Someone says I'd rather send my money to Ukraine.
I think that was a joke.
Delta Ross says Crowder literally got banned on YouTube because Gerald quoted the CDC and because Carrie Lake questioned the election.
Anybody who hires Crowder understands the risk.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
But what's the issue here?
That it was a bad contract and that Crowder felt like he was being exploited?
That's not the issue!
The issue is whether or not the Daily Wire...
The Daily Wire.
It is the Daily Wire.
Whether or not the Daily Wire is, as Crowder initially said, deliberately acting to deliberately suppress conservative independent voices.
That's the question.
Right now, this has all been fought out.
Yeah, the Daily Wire looks like a greedy bastard of a corporate entity.
And Crowder looks like someone who's complaining that he didn't get what he wanted in the contract, but it was initially framed as something very different, which is where I took issue with it, which is why this should have just been done behind closed doors.
MostEvil1 says your were against the mandates, but not the vaccine injuries with heart attacks until it was accepted info.
What the hell?
MostEvil, you're making up history.
So find me anything where I was okay with...
The mandates.
Find me anything where I said I was okay with vaccine mandates.
Most evil.
And you know what?
If you do, I'll send you $100.
You find me anything, anywhere in my social media history, in my life, where I said I tolerated these vaccine mandates, I'll send you $100.
and I'll donate $1,000 to a charity.
Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh.
M. Delson says, penalizing up to $110.
First of all, that...
If a provision of a contract doesn't make sense, it has to be interpreted in a manner that it makes sense.
That was clear.
Part of it was a mistake.
And I think Jeremy even said it, you know, the 25% penalty for demonetization on YouTube obviously made no sense because he wasn't monetized on YouTube.
The rest of them were not cumulative but were alternative.
And so you're not getting a demonetization ban.
You're not getting a demonetization penalty if you've gotten the ban penalty.
So I think people are reading that provision wrong.
But the other bottom line is if a contract It makes no sense.
A provision makes no sense.
A, it's got to be interpreted in a manner that allows it to make sense.
And B, that's why you have a lawyer say this doesn't make sense.
That's what you have a lawyer for.
But yeah, those provisions were not cumulative.
It doesn't make sense to say we're going to penalize you for being demonetized and penalize you for being banned because if you're banned, you're necessarily demonetized.
And so one would be alternative, not cumulative.
Viva is a glowy globalist clown.
Okay, I think that's a joke.
What do we got here?
Alex Joggle says, Crowder drew attention to the pecuniary aspects of the contract that, in my opinion, I think he misrepresented somewhat.
Where he is absolutely correct, however, is Daily Wire's ownership of social media in perpetuity.
Yes, Alex Joggle, and that's a good point.
Social media in perpetuity only of accounts that are created under the term of the agreement.
So not accounts that existed before, nor accounts that would be created afterwards, although I imagine there might be some restrictions on what social media could be created afterwards that might represent what was done during the contract.
Yeah, when you're an employee, you don't own your work product.
Period.
So when you're an employee, you can write the best memo, the best essay, whatever.
It belongs to your employer.
When you're an employee, the product that you produce belongs to your employer, unless you somehow negotiate that in or out.
That was crazy.
I won't get into my agreement with Rumble in any detail, except to say there's a hands-off, do your thing, and I would not have ever accepted that...
Anything be conditional on not getting demonetized on YouTube because that's the exact reason why I partnered with Rumble in the first place.
So it would be totally counterintuitive for me to accept that, say, look, I'm coming to the free speech platform, but they're going to penalize me if I get penalized on the platform that I'm trying to work away from, trying to create an alternative to.
That's why you have a lawyer.
But that's not good versus evil.
That's just aggressive negotiation that some people will think is very exploitive.
Versus get a lawyer and negotiate that out because it doesn't make sense, especially for someone like Crowder.
For other people, it could actually make sense, especially if they are sort of green around the edges and don't have that risk.
Rockahora says, Viva, it's not the same thing at all.
Why is the term sheet all penalties?
No, it didn't say we all lose it.
It says Crowder loses.
Inherently, there would be a dramatic increase in subs if banned.
Yeah, what are we disagreeing with here?
The penalties were asking for everything to get to the middle ground.
I don't like that type of negotiation.
I don't do it.
I never did it.
Occupant 42, $20 rumble and says, if Barnes came to you with a contract offer like that, would you be offended?
Would you be concerned about other people he has contracts with?
No.
Call me naive or just call me callous.
If Barnes came to me with that, I might think that he probably pulled something.
From the internet.
Or he has a draft template that he just, you know, I would focus on the essential.
And might I think that Barnes might lack professionalism if he included a provision that makes absolutely no sense?
Maybe.
This is the initial LOI.
I'm not sensitive like that.
I wouldn't take it personally.
I might think, you know, I might think certain things, but what about, okay, hey, you know what?
And if I think that bad about Barnes?
Thank you.
Have a nice day.
I'll go find someone else.
Which is how this probably could have or should have ended.
Random act?
I am wrong.
Okay.
The contract makes them cuck to big tech, says Deslod.
Thank you for reminding me of the third point that I wanted to get to.
Cucking to big tech.
Because despite all of the drama, despite all the positioning, they are all cucking to big tech to some extent.
And here was another...
By the way...
These are not clips that I retweeted.
I watched the interview.
These are clips that I thought were relevant.
Patsies for the higher-ups.
But when you get coming back to you time and time again, you know, if you did with company X, if you did what company, meaning big conservative companies who have meetings with them, if you did that, we might be able to get you remonetized or at least not suspended.
And that's what, I mean, this is the thing.
What did he just say there?
If you do that, you might be able to get re-monetized or at least not suspended.
Examples you could give us about key issues, specifically about that?
Yeah, anything relating, you know, back in the day on trans issues.
You know, for example, we had a character like we did for a long time.
A long time ago, Trenny Bane was a character that we did.
It was the Bane Dark Knight series, and the whole idea was an uprising, Arkham Asylum against YouTube.
They said, you can't do that anymore.
There was one where they said, you can't sell off-site the socialism shirt that we had, which wasn't even on YouTube.
Oh, yeah.
The socialism is for fig shirt.
You want to know the funny story about that?
I've never seen John laugh so hard.
We started selling on the website, because socialism is for figs.
It's a play on words.
You may not like it, but people also need to know, Che Guevara executed gays, right?
This is a guy, when you wear a Che Guevara shirt, you're wearing a Hitler who was He's less successful in being charismatic and duping people.
Not saying Hitler was successful.
I'm saying he was a genocidal maniac.
So, of course, we're mocking him.
YouTube says, well, you can't do that.
That shirt is hate speech.
It's off the platform.
So what we ended up selling at the Crowder shop was a mystery box.
So YouTube is already telling Crowder what he can and cannot do in order to stay on the platform, and he does it.
And then someone's going to tell me if I've misunderstood the second part of this.
He does one thing.
You can't do that on YouTube.
Okay, YouTube, I want to stay on the platform.
I don't want to get suspended.
I don't want to get booted.
So I'm going to do it off-platform.
And tell me if I've misunderstood this.
And I get a call from one of the most senior executives at YouTube.
And I go, what the...
We know what's in the box.
That's when I was like, I'm thinking someone in Silicon Valley is opening it like, and so we stopped selling, but that's something that's completely off the platform.
But the point is, right, you need to be, there needs to be someone standing up to these giant organizations.
Patsy's for the higher-ups.
So I'm, I'll need to defer to the chat here.
So we stopped selling, is what he said.
Mystery box.
And I get a call from one of the most senior executives at YouTube.
And I go, what?
We know what's in the box.
I was like, I'm thinking someone in Silicon Valley is opening it like, and so we stopped telling.
But that's something that's completely off the platform.
But the point is, right, you need to be, there needs to be someone standing up to these giant organizations.
Someone can tell me if I've misunderstood that.
So they...
Off the platform, still going after them.
And he said, and so we stopped selling it.
Did he not say, so we stopped selling it?
So they stopped selling it on the platform.
He gets a call from YouTube exec and they say, it's a really, really funny story.
We know what's in the box.
And so we stopped selling it.
My understanding is that he stopped selling it off the platform because he got a call that says, we know it's in the box, stop doing it, or we're going to kick you off the platform.
Because, by the way, I don't like this rule, but it seems to be one of the rules.
You can't go and direct people to a website that does something that you can't do on the website.
Someone, someone.
Calamity Sue.
I'm an idiot.
Calamity Sue says it was off YouTube's platform.
They had no right to strike him.
I agree with you.
The point here is to illustrate that Crowder is basically asking other people to do specifically what he himself has not been doing.
Someone has to stand up to them.
But they told us not to sell this on the platform, and we stopped because we want to be on the platform.
Because monetized or not, being on the platform has Massive monetary value.
Someone has to stand up to them, but we stopped selling it.
And that's it.
Fruity Buns Buns says, Viva, you're totally doing this.
You bowing to YouTube to make the most of it.
This is wholly different from Rumble forcing you to.
We're just not understanding that that's the way the contract was drafted.
It was a bad contract, and it's terms that I would never tell anybody to accept.
The issue is whether or not Crowder does the exact same thing, because everybody understands that demonetized is bad.
But people who are not in the industry probably might not appreciate or do appreciate.
AdSense revenue is one type of revenue.
Selling paid sponsors.
And like Lauren Chen assessed, Crowder could probably sell for $20,000 a sponsor per episode.
There's the difference between it being an exploitive contract and Daily Wire being deliberately trying to suppress conservative voices.
And that's it.
That's where it all came down.
Rykar1Engage says $2 run.
Barnes and Ricada both said it was cumulative penalties.
Crowder said it added up to 100%.
If he got deplatformed, Crowder self-regulating is not equivalent to 45% penalty.
Bottom line.
There's a problem if a contract is being interpreted differently by people who have experience interpreting contracts.
If it's cumulative, nobody would accept it in a million years.
Is it so insulting to have potentially received this poorly drafted provision?
You can get offended by it.
You can start a political World War III about it, and look what's happening now.
Daily Wire's fighting with Crowder.
Their respective crowds, like everybody said, it's like watching two parents fight.
Their respective crowds are fighting among each other.
Everybody's accusing the other one of being a shill.
I don't know.
I'm trying to think of other words.
A shill.
Everyone's impugning the attention of people who, other than this dispute, are probably ideologically aligned in what is being referred to as the culture war.
So this fight helps nobody.
Maybe it helps Crowder in some sense.
Doesn't help Daily Wire.
Doesn't help the community.
And it doesn't...
You know who it helps?
I take that back.
It helps the left.
They're loving this.
Marty Smith fan, Viva, question, how does Rumble make money?
I never see ads like on YouTube.
They run ads before.
There's ads before videos and there's ads after.
And some of their ask is that creators do paid spots, do sponsored videos.
It's actually, some people call it a sellout.
Other people call it a cash-in, and other people are going to call it an honor and a privilege.
You have an audience.
You're trusted.
And to the extent you get to pick your sponsors or reject your sponsors, because this was one issue that Crowder had issue with, and it's very, very close to my heart, if you don't get to veto some of your sponsors or you're compelled to endorse products that your crowd knows you don't endorse...
That's brand compromising.
So sponsors, it's a privilege.
It's an honor to the extent it's done properly.
And if I'm advising anybody and I talk to people, I say, if you're getting into a contract, make sure you can refuse sponsors without getting penalized.
Can you imagine?
I'm trying to think of something that I would sponsor.
You'd say, he's an idiot.
He's been pooping on this for the last...
I'm trying to think of one.
I know that I've been pooping on something.
I can't name anything in particular.
So, yeah.
Marty Smith fan.
Rumble runs ads.
And...
BC4060 says, you are correct.
$10 rumble because you're looking at it as a lawyer.
LW...
Loud with Crowder fans are looking at it emotionally.
Absolutely.
That's why, like, people...
I always say people need to practice law for long enough to build character but not long enough to destroy it.
It's like sort of the...
Analogous to living in New York.
Live in New York long enough to build...
Well, that's exactly it.
To build character, but not long enough to crush your soul.
Taking things personally doesn't give you an advantage in an argument.
It doesn't mean that you're right.
It actually typically means that you've just stopped arguing logically.
And by the way, I get offended.
I get insulted.
I get upset reading some comments, and I can't help myself.
It's like I'm a glutton for the punishment.
I get offended.
I get insulted.
And then you have to say, okay, why am I getting offended?
Am I getting offended because I see some truth in this?
Am I getting offended because it's just an insult of something that I can't change?
Am I getting upset because it's a distraction, a wasted distraction, and if I had the discipline, I would just avoid it and not think about it, but I can't because I have a brain that doesn't shut up?
Okay, being insulted does not make you right, and oftentimes it means you should take a step back and say, why is it that I'm insulted?
Why is it that I'm offended?
And am I protesting too much?
Why am I impugning Crowder's intentions?
You're calling us lefties while doing exactly what you're projecting.
I am not impugning Crowder's intentions.
What I'm saying is exactly what Crowder did.
Crowder impugned the intentions of the Daily Wire.
He didn't say this was an exploitive business contract.
He said they're up to no good.
They're frauds.
They're cons.
I'm not impugning Crowder's intentions here.
I have no doubt that Crowder believes he's a righteous fighter here.
No doubt.
Period.
So I'm not doing that.
Thank you for the rumble rant.
BC4060, you are correct.
Okay, I got that one.
Anyway, so that's it.
I don't think...
RJ Dizzle says, So Fry, if you're not a lawyer, you can't form an argument or an opinion.
Who said that?
Who said such straw man things?
I think being a lawyer will help you not take things personally and it will show you the utility of not responding personally.
Do you want to know why?
Because I used to do this as a young lawyer.
I would get angry.
I would shoot off an email to opposing counsel that would be aggressive.
It would be not productive.
It would make me feel better in the moment until it ends up in front of the eyes of a judge and the guy's like, I don't like seeing this type of shit among colleagues.
And I had to learn hard.
Who did I have to learn hard from?
I'm not sure if the lawyer's still alive.
He was an old guy.
He showed me the sneakiest, dirtiest way of always being nice and always smiling when you're bending someone over and screwing them.
Just pretend to be a nice old man and nobody can accuse you of being a bastard, a cold-hearted, heartless bastard.
He was in the best way possible, in the psychopathic lawyer way possible.
Okay, I think that's going to be a good segue.
We're done with this and I appreciate people don't agree with me.
Good.
If you hang around with people who you agree with all the time, you're not going to evolve in life.
Okay, Lou S-K-U-N-T, 79. They are both shills.
Crowder isn't funny.
Daily Wire is disingenuous.
Nobody wins.
I agree with nobody wins, for sure.
RoboJu says, you are misrepresenting Crowder's position.
Him choosing to stay on the platform is not the same as Daily Wire punishing their creators on behalf of big tech.
I didn't say it's the same.
It's a variation of the same principle where Crowder is saying they're bending to big tech censorship.
Well, so is Crowder.
By deliberately doing things off-platform, by deliberately not saying things that he knows will get him kicked off of the platform, he's...
Bending to big tech censorship.
He's dealing with it in a different way, but what he's accusing Daily Wire of is doing it to suppress conservative voices where Crowder says, well, we're not going to be able to maximize our reach if we cut off our nose to spite our face and break our biggest bullhorn to prove a point.
And that's where I just fundamentally disagree with anybody who says, get off YouTube entirely.
Good.
You build something that has reach and then burn it down just out of principle.
Go ahead and do it.
It's the dumbest thing you can possibly do.
You want to talk with no limits.
First of all, I self-censor on a daily basis.
It's called being polite.
It's called not calling people names when you want to call them names.
But the idea of I'm going to thumb my nose at YouTube and piss off, shut it all down, burn it down, deliberately get myself kicked off.
Oh, that'll be great.
So I'll be in a park.
Guys, I'll meet in a park and I'll just be totally uncensored.
Unfortunately, no one's going to be listening.
So I found a way of doing what I think is a funny way of skirting the restrictions and sometimes just dealing with it.
I've had plenty of stuff get demonetized.
I have a whole playlist called YouTube Chicanery.
Okay.
Thank you.
I see.
Viva, note, you are also not in agreement with Barnes' view of Crowder exposing the predatory contract.
I know.
You know what the funny thing is?
Barnes makes a very compelling argument in all respects.
I disagree with an aspect of his conclusion, but not the premises.
And you know what's amazing?
I think Barnes might be smarter than me.
That's an understatement.
You know what's amazing, though?
I think I'm smart enough to understand where I can disagree with someone who I think is smarter than me.
I don't have to defer to Barnes' conclusions on everything.
I've listened to his premises.
I've listened to his observations with amazing insight.
His description of what controlled opposition entities look like, how they are formed, it's fascinating.
I just disagree with his conclusion.
But I agree with...
Barnes and I are more in agreement on a bunch of this than most people give us credit for.
It's just like, social media is not the place for nuance.
You're either all in, all out, enemy, hero.
Agree on everything or disagree on everything and there's no room for nuance.
Okay.
Barnes is smarter than me, Viva.
N-T-D-R-K.
You know what?
It is true.
But you know what might make me even smarter than Barnes?
Knowing that I need to hang around and pick the brains of people who are smarter than me.
Okay.
Move on.
Talk about fresh milk.
No.
What we're going to move on about is talking about madness.
In Canada.
Fresh milk.
Hold on.
We've been going for an hour and a half already.
My goodness.
Did I, chat, did I already talk about the doctor who talked about stroke season?
I feel like I've talked about it, but I am getting confused between the exclusive stuff on Locals and chat.
Okay, so Ninth Citizen says, no, let me just read some super chats.
BasedApe says, do you think Crowder has shot himself in the foot here?
He has burned all of his bridges, alienated himself, and nobody who watched what he just did will even risk doing business with him.
BasedApe?
Yes.
Categorically.
I take for granted everybody's recording my conversation when I talk with them, but when I know they are, I just avoid talking with them.
So, this is the other thing.
Crowder could have done this in an entirely different way that would have allowed him to preserve the goodwill that I think he's lost with some people.
Whether or not you agree with Crowder, he's lost goodwill.
He has shot himself in the foot because people in the industry are going to say, I'm not dealing with this guy.
He'll just do this with me.
I mean, I make the joke, like even contractors, if he feels like he's getting exploited by contractors, he's going to do something similar.
That's the biggest issue in all of this.
He might be 100% right.
The way he went about it was wrong, and it's going to hurt him in the long run because people are not soon going to forget this.
People in the industry are not soon going to forget this.
Rykar1Engage says Crowder has been banned four times in one year.
DW hasn't been banned once.
Saying he's bending the knee is just disingenuous.
Okay, I disagree with you because he admits to self-censoring on the platform to stay on it.
He just does it to a different degree.
Yes, he's much edgier than the Daily Wire.
Also, look, there's some reality to the fact that Daily Wire might be in YouTube's good graces because they spend a lot of money advertising.
I'm getting Daily Wire ads on my videos.
They're spending money.
These are all businesses at the end of the day.
I don't know what Crowder spends for advertising revenue on YouTube, but it's not disingenuous.
It's just difference of degrees.
Rokahora says, the way I see it, there were an infinite number of ways they could have made a boatload of money, but only a few ways to ensure an adverse reaction, and they went with the latter for control.
Maybe, but that's reading too much intentions.
I agree with Lauren Chen.
Anybody who knew anything would have known.
This is like punch-drunk love.
It's like expecting Adam Sandler.
To be able to do business with Philip Seymour Hoffman and Punchdruck Love.
You're dealing with two entities, two personalities, which are mutually incompatible.
Most Evil One says, Viva, I am a sub to you and Barnes, so do be offended at my perspective.
Yes, you were against mandates, but didn't believe the vaccine was harmful until over a year.
So Most Evil, now you just changed it.
So I was against the mandates and didn't believe the vaccine was harmful.
No.
What I said was I didn't appreciate the degree to which a small amount of fluid could be harmful.
So thank you for acknowledging that I was against the mandates because previously you said that I wasn't.
So details, you know, kind of like important details.
And I did say, yes, I did not appreciate the degree to which this vaccine could be harmful because back in the day, I don't think, I mean, some people were making predictions.
And if I had known it, how the degree to which it would become harmful.
If I had known the degree to which it could be harmful, why would I have stuck it in my body twice?
So I was wrong on that.
Yeah, that's a decision that affected me.
I was right on the mandates because that's a decision that other people were imposing on others.
And what I took issue with was you suggesting that I was actually somehow in support of the mandates.
I ran for federal office to fight this crap.
Okay, done.
Done and done.
And I mean done.
Now, the chat says I haven't talked about this.
So speaking of which.
Speaking of which.
I self-centered people.
I didn't say holy shit.
I said holy shit.
Oh, no, I just ruined my censorship.
I said shit instead of shit.
Check this out, people.
First of all, let me just see.
Have we seen this video yet?
Viva is on tilt.
No, no, don't...
I don't mind being accused of things I've done.
Okay, so let me see this here.
Okay.
Has everyone seen this?
Have we seen this?
So what is this link between influenza, infection, and stroke?
Yeah, I didn't know about this either until last year, but it turns out that after flu season, about three or four weeks later, there is a stroke.
And like you said, most of Canada is getting down off of a big hump of flu.
So now we're starting to see more strokes.
And a friend of one of my colleagues actually mentioned that at work the other day.
He said, have you noticed how many strokes we're seeing?
It's a lot more than usual, it feels like.
So anecdotally, we're starting to see that.
So what is the slang, everybody, before I unleash the fury, Mitch?
Has everyone seen that before?
Okay, based on the reaction.
So I have not played this clip yet because I genuinely can't remember.
Let me screen grab that.
Okay, CCAT, I think I'm done with that.
Okay, so based on the chat, nobody...
I'm going to play this one more time.
I'm going to play this one more time because it's...
First of all, I had a teacher...
In high school, Mr. Bardwaj.
I don't think I'm ever going to find out if they're related because this guy blocked me on Twitter.
Yeah, Mr. Bardwaj.
I had a teacher named Mr. Bardwaj and he was an older gentleman.
This guy could be his kid.
I don't know.
Listen to this, people!
Oh my...
By the way, by the way, he said the quiet part out loud.
I'm going to break it down.
So what is this link between influenza, infection, and stroke?
Yeah, I didn't know about this either until last year, but...
Guys?
I didn't know about this either until last year.
Spoiler alert.
He's an urgent care physician.
Which I presume means he works in the emergency room or in urgent care.
Yeah, I didn't know about this either until last year.
I didn't know about this either until last year.
I didn't know about this either.
I'm a trained medical professional working in urgent care, and I didn't know about this either until last year, stroke season.
It turns out that after flu season, about three or four weeks later, there is a stroke season.
If it turns out that three or four weeks later, after flu season, there's a stroke season, and you only learned about this last year, it didn't exist before last year.
I mean, I...
And my colleagues are noticing a lot of people having strokes.
They wouldn't be noticing a lot of people having strokes if it were indeed something that occurred seasonally.
They'd just be used to it.
And like you said, most of Canada is getting down off of a big hump of flu.
So now we're starting to see more strokes.
And a friend of one of my colleagues actually mentioned that at work the other day.
He said, have you noticed how many strokes we're seeing?
It's a lot more than usual, it feels like.
So, anecdotally, we're starting to see that.
Do you know what's funny?
I've been commenting that we're seeing a lot of strokes.
And I've been getting called a conspiracy theorist for noticing that.
I noticed a lot of people having strokes.
Everybody's been talking about it.
There are people saying, there's a lot more strokes happening.
And then other people saying...
No, there's not.
You're a conspiracy theorist, anti-vaxxer, and now it's coming out of the doctor's mouth.
It's almost like he knew that he said something bad.
We're talking.
Have you noticed that there's been a lot more strokes lately?
No, it's because I just learned that last year there's this thing called stroke season, and it comes after flu season, except it's the first time I've ever heard about it, and we're now noticing more people having strokes for something that's supposed to be seasonal, having existed for decades.
Oh my goodness, that makes a lot of sense.
So I asked the doctor to come on the channel for a live stream.
And I was blocked within 30 seconds.
I was blocked.
He protected his Twitter account, which is still protected, which bothers me a lot because I wish people would just...
I don't know if he got harassed in a true sense.
And I sometimes think people don't and they just don't like being questioned and they don't like having...
People get a little outraged.
Just a little outraged at the idea that we're led to believe now, after we've been told we're conspiracy theorist anti-vaxxers for saying, what's up with all the strokes?
Now they're saying, oh, no, no, you're right, there are, but it's stroke season, Dave.
Shut your mouth.
Stroke season, people.
It's beginning to look a lot like stroke season, and I just learned about this last year.
What are the chances?
What are the chances, people?
You'd have to be crazy.
To say, well, it's funny, what an odd time to learn about that last year.
You know, one year into rolling out mandatory jibby-jabs that can potentially cause strokes.
Ischemic strokes in the elderly.
Blood clots in young women.
Myocarditis in young men.
It's a coincidence.
Absolute coincidence.
By the way, I know we might have talked about this.
I brought it up Sunday.
I just, I have to, I have to, I have to, what's the word?
Memorialize?
Is that the word?
I think the word is memorialize.
We have to memorialize this in my tweets.
I'm going to read this quickly and then get back to the chat.
I'm going to show something else.
But for the fact that I memorialized it in a video clip afterwards, I wouldn't have been able to find it because, my goodness, some of the tweets that I've tweeted, some of the videos that I've found are very difficult to find these days.
I'm going to show you right after this one.
May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December, January.
Eight months ago.
MRN...
From Helio.
I don't know if this is a reputable website, but before you go, do you know that we offer CME books and...
Continued medical education books and journals?
Learn more.
No.
MRNA technology may have potential to repair, regenerate cardiac tissue.
Tissue regeneration has been achieved in certain parts of the body, but not the heart.
Some people are hypothesizing there's damn good reason why the heart doesn't regenerate.
I don't know what that is, but chat...
You're smarter than me, so figure it out.
I think maybe it could have to do with, like, if the heart regenerated, then it could potentially cause cancers elsewhere.
I don't know what the theory would be there.
The heart is apparently the only muscle in the body that does not regenerate from damage.
Hence, no mild case of myocarditis, despite what doctors will have you believe.
Subclinical, yes, as Brett Weinstein noted.
Not mild.
That could change if a novel therapeutic derived from messenger RNA succeeds.
Who's making this magic medicine to cure heart damage?
Oh, the one that's potentially causing heart damage!
Now, AstraZeneca and Moderna are developing AZD8601, a locally administered messenger RNA mRNA therapy that encodes for vascular endothelial...
vascular endothelial...
no, vascular endothelial Growth factor A. I don't know what the hell I'm reading.
In preclinical and phase one studies, it demonstrates the potential for regenerative anti-angiogenesis.
It is now being evaluated for its ability to generate new cardiomyocytes, which is what people say are damaged with myocarditis that do not regenerate, hence the permanent heart damage, and improved parameters in patients with conditions like CVD and HM.
I don't know what that is.
Okay, it goes on.
We don't need to do the whole thing.
But what are the irony and what are the chances?
That the company that is arguably responsible for a product that might maybe potentially cause heart damage, they've got the cure for the problem that they've caused.
There was something else that I was going to talk about after that, but I forgot.
I'm going to read Peckerwood.
Hey, Viva, we can disagree and still remain friends.
Both sides have valid points with feelings in the mix.
I'm winning my poll.
Daily Wire, 32%.
Steven, 69%.
I love you, XO.
Peckerwood, first of all.
I will agree to disagree.
And I'm not going to call anybody who thinks Steven Crowder is right a bastard, shill, moron.
This is a case where I think both sides have arguments because I think both sides are wrong.
So, there's that.
If a big corporation claiming to be your friend sent you...
Not as a lawyer.
A contract that could be interpreted as six years of servitude.
Would you call it out?
Would you be offended?
I would absolutely not make the fight public.
Full stop.
I still haven't made my fight with Verizon public yet.
But if I don't have the reimbursement in my bank account, that's going to go public.
Be the most expensive $1,500 they ever took from somebody.
Would I be offended?
No.
I would probably look to find the explanation that would be...
Forgiving on the individual, and not one that would leave me feeling angry.
Maybe I'm too Canadian, maybe I'm too naive, and maybe I'm too stupid, and yada yada.
Deal with it.
If that's the worst of it, I'll live with that.
Rob A says, And stroke medication, okay?
That was a $1 rumble rant.
Ray Notes said $2 rumble rant.
Tim Pool reported last night, confirmed that indeed there has been a stroke season and was reported on well prior to COVID.
He's a Canadian doctor, so what can you do?
Tim Pool reported last night, confirmed that indeed there...
Oh, so I guess he was...
Did I miss that part?
Was that in the questions at the end?
I missed that if he quoted my tweet and was reported on well prior to COVID.
He's a Canadian doctor, so what can you do?
There is the statistic that there are more heart attacks in winter than in summer.
And some people say that's because of constricting blood vessels, people shoveling outdoors, people who are not in shape doing exerting exercises.
That's much different than the stroke season.
And it also doesn't make sense anymore since they're blaming strokes and heart attacks on hot weather as well.
It's just strokes here, strokes there.
Oh, stroke season?
Flu.
Oh, stroke season in summer?
Hot.
Stroke season in spring?
Season will change.
Dr. Fi says, in effect, did Crowder just undermine DW ability to deal with big tech?
I assume Daily Wire contracts weren't privy to anyone outside of...
I bet you everybody in the industry knew of their contracts.
The issue here is some people are saying this contract was actually not even a boilerplate.
It was unique to Crowder.
In which case, that sort of undermines Crowder's position, but whatever.
We don't need to get back into this again.
Okay, we're done.
We're done with Crowder.
Done.
Done, done, done.
Yeah.
Okay.
Let's get back to another phone here.
Okay.
Yeah, no, no.
It's a stroke season that follows the flu season.
Stroke season that comes in the summer from global warming.
Stroke season that comes from playing video games for kids.
Stroke season that comes from overexerting an exercise.
Stroke season that comes from seasonal depression.
Stroke season that comes from loneliness.
Holy crap, apples.
But the doctors, among themselves, and this guy admitted it out loud.
My colleague said, I'm noticing a lot of strokes.
Oh, that's right.
I forgot it's stroke season.
All of this anger is enough to give someone a stroke, and I say that tongue-in-cheek.
All right.
What else did I have in the backdrop here?
Oh, my God.
Guys, whoever made it to the...
How many are we here, by the way?
Nice.
8,300.
Whoever made it this long.
Let's put the cherry on the crazy Canadian Sunday, boys.
Hey, check this out.
It's going to blow your mind.
Or maybe it won't.
Probably won't.
Oh, wait.
Is this out of Canada?
Hold on.
Hold on.
This might not be out of Canada.
All right, guys.
National Arts Center.
This is out of Canada.
Centre National des Arts.
Do we do it?
Should we do it in French, people?
Let's do it.
Are they going to translate the title?
Is God is?
They did not.
Et Dieu est.
Okay, we're going to go back to English.
So this is Canada, people.
The absolute state of Canada.
IsGodIs introduces the first NAC Blackout Night.
That's the National Arts Centre.
Sorry, the NAC.
NAC English Theatre is excited to begin the 2023 with a Dorama...
Okay, fine.
No, I'll read it.
NAC English Theatre is excited to begin 2023 with the Dora Mavor Moore award-winning presentation of Alicia Harris' Is God Is, running February 9-18.
As one of the milestones in a series of offerings over Black History Month, this genre-smashing production will introduce the first of two blackout nights that will be at the NAC this year.
What's a blackout night, you might ask?
On February 17, the evening's performance of Is God Is will welcome an all-black identifying audience to experience and enjoy a performance in the Babs Asper Theater.
Tickets for the performance are now available.
Did we all read that?
An all-black identifying.
Not all-black.
Not all-black because, I mean, I...
Remember when segregation used to be bad?
I remember when segregation used to be bad.
Pepperidge Farm remembers when segregation used to be bad.
Now it's reinstitutionalized.
Thanks, progressives.
An all-black, they couldn't say all-black because I guess, I don't know, what if someone is mixed race?
They're not all-black.
Oh, no, sorry, that would be an all-black.
Only black.
If someone's mixed race, would they be black for the purposes of admission?
I presume so.
If they're one quarter, if they're maternal grandmother?
We're going to adopt blackness like it's Judaism.
If it's the maternal grandmother, the maternal grandkid is Jewish.
And if the maternal grandmother is black, the maternal grandkid is sufficiently black to join this crowd.
But no.
All black identified.
So what's her name?
Dolezal?
Dolezal, I think, can come.
And then...
How much longer?
Let's just see if it's...
All black identifying can come.
No whites.
No, I...
I don't even know if technically I have any black blood in me or African blood.
Maybe I should do a test and see if I have a sufficient percentage to say I don't identify as being black, but my genes say otherwise, so let me in.
Inspired by the event created by the fall 2020, yada, yada, yada.
Toronto Theatre Company.
Ugh, whatever.
Experiencing the power of these evenings, NAC and Black Theatre Workshop welcome the opportunity to schedule blackout performances for both curated shows this season.
A blackout is an open invitation to black audiences to come and experience performances with their community.
Do you not understand, like, the myopic, race-baiting perspective that this is?
You look at a black person, their community is the black community?
How about if they happen to be conservative?
Can you appreciate that there's a community that this black person might be a part of in their own minds that's not predicated on their race?
How about if they're Jewish?
That's not your community.
I tell you, your community is limited to the color of your skin.
And here's your night.
The evenings will provide dedicated space for black theater goaders to witness the show that reflects the vivid kaleidoscope that is the black experience.
Hold on, who wrote this?
Oh my goodness.
This individual, it's for black people so they can experience the black experience.
Written by Sean Fitzpatrick, whom if I had to guess, if I had to take a guess, maybe he is black, so maybe I shouldn't say that.
Sean Fitzpatrick, NAC?
Nope.
He's not black.
Black community, your night has hither been saved to you.
It's been saved for you by a white man who says, enjoy your segregated events.
Fitzpatrick sounds like a black man?
Nope.
Fitzpatrick typically is Irish, if I had to guess.
We're living through absolute insanity.
And the idea...
You look at...
Sean Fitzpatrick looks at a black person and says the only community or their defining community is the color of their skin.
You know what that's called?
In any other world, that would be called racism.
Okay.
So there's that.
Get that out of the stream.
And I think...
Let me see here.
Sean Fitzpatrick?
No, no.
We've done it, people.
We've done it.
We got through another day of absolute insanity.
I'll tell you this.
I like our community.
I love our community.
I love what we've built here.
People have to fight the urge to resort to what Scott Adams calls wrong think.
It's a very, very...
Hey, look.
Whatever I think about what Scott has done recently, he made good points in wrong think.
Getting emotional, saying I'm insulted, saying it's insulting.
Doesn't progress things.
Looking at someone who disagrees with you and saying the reason why they disagree with me is because they're liars, scumbags, whatever.
You need to have more evidence than just one disagreement to try to explain away, interpret away someone's opinion that you disagree with.
What I hate about all of this is that it has revealed something of a tribalist, reflexive mechanism.
That people have in social discourse.
Now, the problem is social media is just prone for this type of thing.
I think it was Jordan Peterson with, I think it was Jimmy Dore or Jordan Peterson.
I mean, I've listened to three Joe Rogan podcasts in the last week.
It was one of them where he said social media is bad conditioning because you don't know context.
You don't understand intonation.
You don't get to see a smiling face when he says, you know, you could say the exact same, the exact same thing verbatim on Twitter.
In a written word on social media, and you can say it in a loving way, and you can say it in a hating way.
Like, get out.
Shut up.
Don't be silly.
And social media primes us to react badly to other people's diverging opinions.
It primes us to reduce people to caricatures.
It primes us to reduce diverging opinions to good versus bad, us versus them.
I hate it.
And so I can't avoid reading muted comments, even though I put people on mute because they just distract me.
I can't avoid it, but I hate it.
And this is another reason why I try to stay away from fighting among individuals.
There are certain stories that I just...
Other people will talk about them.
Other people will do well talking about it.
I don't like certain stories that are fundamentally individualistic and serve...
Sometimes no other purpose than tearing individuals down.
So, there's that.
I'm just reading some of the chat here.
Oh my goodness.
Blackout.
Sean Fitzpatrick has made it so that when...
You know, when Sean Fitzpatrick, these people at the NAC, when they look at someone who's black, what do they see?
A black person.
That's it.
Hey.
Do you want a night out where you guys are all on your own?
It's crazy.
Yeah, nature lover freedom.
Well, neuroses goes with OCD.
So there's OCD with insight, which generally also includes generalized anxiety.
And what do they call it?
Oh, jeez.
There's a word for it, like disastrous ideations.
You feel like lightning is going to strike you at any point in time.
Okay, so that said, that's it.
I hope we're done with this.
It was an interesting discussion yesterday on Tim Pool.
The world is going crazy.
What the hell are we going to do about it?
We're not going to make any difference by doing this.
People are entitled to work.
They're entitled to get paid for their work.
They're entitled not to get exploited.
And people have to appreciate there is something of a mutual exploitation in business agreements.
If you don't want to be your own boss, milk it.
The world needs all sorts of people.
If you do want to be your own boss, like Gary Vaynerchuk said, find a mentor, work for them for free so you can learn the skills to go out on your own.
I think I've become thoroughly unemployable because I wouldn't be able to put up with a boss.
And so in that sense...
Get the skills.
And at some point in time, also, cross your fingers and hope the stars align.
Because people don't always get what they want.
They don't always get what they deserve.
They don't always get what they need.
And sometimes those who don't deserve it get it.
And sometimes those who do deserve it don't.
Stop reading the DSM on the toilet, Viva.
Drackmore.
Oh, no, I'm done with the DSM.
My mother used to have the Merck manual.
So this was before...
The DSM is for psychology and the Merck manual was for physiology.
But yeah, it's too late.
I've damaged myself.
So now it's just a question of dealing with it, knowing the foibles, knowing my weaknesses, and knowing what is a destructive distraction versus a constructive distraction.
Okay, let's do it.
What else?
Oh, hold on.
We should have a video to play us out.
Hold on.
Hold on.
I can't do that video.
No, I don't think I posted that one yet.
I haven't.
Oh, hold on.
I can do this.
Okay.
No, no, no, no.
I was going to show some footage from yesterday when I took the kayak to the beach.
I'm going to wait for that edited video.
Let's just be happy and watch an old Viva fishing video.
Viva family fishing.
The sunfish when I caught sunfish with...
A lamprey on it.
If I can find that one.
Am I going to be able to find that one?
Got to find something quickly before people lose their patience.
Viva Family Fishing Lamprey.
Here we go.
Good.
If you've seen it already, people.
Whatever.
I remember, I think this one's been seen before and people were not faulting me.
People were claiming that the lamprey that I...
Thought was the invasive sea lamprey was actually not an invasive sea lamprey, and I dispatched of a non-invasive lamprey.
Everybody, before we go, thank you for being here.
Thank you for being part of this community.
I know the hate and the trolling and the negative stuff is infinitely outweighed by the good and the constructive.
It's just the nature of the bad is it's oftentimes more destructive and more powerful a force than the good, and that's something that I have to work on.
Superchats.
Oh, sorry.
Hold on.
Someone said Superchats.
Did I have any in here that I forgot to get to?
Who said Superchats?
Peckerwood.
Thank you.
Let me see.
Do I have Superchats here?
Can you see these as I bring them up?
Chat, let me...
Do you see a Superchat right now that I've starred on YouTube?
Superchats?
Yes or no?
Do you see them?
Nature Lover Freedom.
Thank you, Veeves.
It was fun to watch you, Rand.
True Viva, have a good day.
Yeah, we see it.
Okay, so let me just do a few of them so I don't lose these.
JD took Joff Edelstein in 2019 after Deutsch.
Okay.
Recall the joke Al Franken told about Leslie Stahl.
I remember the joke that got him in trouble, grabbing for the boobies of a sleeping soldier.
The Daily Wire is part of the Big Tech Small Hat Mafia.
Okay.
Thank you for the super chat.
I emailed Scotiabank over this.
I recommend everyone divulge themselves of all Scotiabank assets.
Steve Britton.
I agree.
It's definitely not about demonizing.
I'm just surprised.
Just reading body language, I find one party more honest than the other.
Maybe watch some of it with body language analysis, loser-think analysis.
And Ginger, I'm wondering which party you think is more honest.
At the end of the day, I don't even care about the body language.
Okay, it doesn't matter.
Thank you for the super chats.
And now, everybody, with that said...
Thank you for being here.
Thank you for being part of this magnificent community.
If we all agreed all the time, it would be an echo chamber.
It would be nothing that makes any of us any bigger.
Carry on the good fight, the righteous fight, but don't do it.
Don't lash out in a way that will allow those who want you to lash out To use your lashing out against you.
I'm convinced Justin Trudeau is such an in-your-face gaslighter because he wants people to lash out so that he can then use that lashing out against them for more censorship, more harsh measures, more government intervention.
I'm convinced.
Call me a conspiracy theorist.
There is no way Justin Trudeau can get up there, talk about fundamental rights and freedoms and frustrating the court's ability to adjudicate on them without begging someone to lash out in a way that he can weaponize.
Don't do it.
Continue to fight the fight in a way that will make your parents, your children, and your pets happy.
And you can do no wrong.
Have faith but not blind faith.
Lord loves a working man.
Yada, yada, yada.
You know what to do.
And now we're going to end the day on a good fishing video.
Everybody, what day is it today?
Tuesday.
Alex Jones, tomorrow night, 7 o 'clock.
Jimmy Dore, Thursday, 3 o 'clock Friday.
There will be something.
Packed week.
Thank you for being here.
See you all tomorrow.
And enjoy.
Enjoy my butt, because I'm fishing.
Booyah.
What the heck am I doing here?
The video quality better get better.
Enjoy.
See you all tomorrow.
Peace.
Oh my gosh.
Are you still rolling?
Are you still rolling?
What?
Dude, what?
I just got this thing.
This thing has a lamprey stuck to its side.
This...
Oh my god.
No, no.
It's not going back.
It's not going back.
And I'm killing this lamprey like we should have done last time.
Look at that.
Look at this!
You disgusting parasite.
I'm going to kill it.
I'm killing it.
Sorry.
Sorry.
I just...
Look away, beautiful sunset.
Sunset.
Sunset.
Okay, first of all, I'm putting the fish back.
Let me see the fish.
Let me see the fish.
Beautiful.
What is it, a sunfish?
Yeah, it's a sunfish.
Oh my gosh.
It's off.
And this thing, this happened once before.
This, we caught one of these before and I didn't realize you're supposed to kill them because they're past.
Look at the teeth.
We just saved a fish's life.
From a disgusting, filthy parasite.
Are we swimming in this water?
No.
Ew.
Look at the mouth, by the way.
Look at the mouth.
Ew.
Truly, truly horrifying.
This sucks blood.
The last lamp we caught off a pipe, by the way, that I threw back in the water because we were in the canoe with the kids was...
Like a snake compared to this.
It was like this thick.
Gross.
Wow.
GoPro's still running.
We captured all that.
That's...
What are the flipping chances?
That's a big lamprey that would have killed that fish.
Goodness.
Do I throw it back in the water?
Throw to the shore.
Send it to hell.
Okay.
Okay.
Done.
It's like...
It's like sandpaper.
It's right.
Do we eat it?
Good cooking.
I'm not even gonna respond to that.
I'm gonna go show the kids.
Great.
Success.
Who wants to see something gross?
I caught a sunfish with a lamprey stuck to it.
It's dead.
Guys!
It's a lamprey.
Look at its mouth.
It sucks onto the side of fish with those rows of teeth.
Daddy, why didn't you shoot it?
Because it's a parasite and it would kill this fish and every other fish that it attached itself to.
Ew!
Look at this.
Oh, it's a blood sucker.
It's called a lamprey.
It's beyond a blood sucker.
It sucks your blood.
It sucks the fish's blood.
Anyways, that fish is going to be very happy tonight.
It would suck your blood if it got on you, for sure.
▲
Export Selection