Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 22, 2023 - Viva & Barnes

01:48:30

Trump Grand Jury CANCELED? "Conversion Therapy" BANNED but "Transition Therapy" PROTECTED?

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Before the pandemic, getting really fascinated by flat earthers and trying to understand sort of the thinking behind them of people who decided actively to create an identity for themselves that was to just clearly reject what science, you know, settled thousands of years ago with the ancient Greeks.
	And that there's no real contrast to it.
	It's more of an identity thing rather than a reasoning.
	Rather.
	Fascinating.
	What it was all about.
	And then of course, you know, we went on to understand the phenomenon of anti-vaxxers.
	Right from flat earth to anti-vaxxers.
	Anti-vaxxers.
	Real consequences.
	There are people in Canada who died surrounded by their families because they truly and genuinely believed that the vaccine was more dangerous than the virus.
	And it killed them.
	Can you believe that he's actually saying this as a matter of fact?
	As an incontrovertible matter of fact?
	So dramatic.
	Dramatic pause.
	Obama would be proud of you, Justin.
	And, you know, my responsibility as Prime Minister is to try and keep everyone in this country as safe as I possibly can.
	But I can't protect everyone from every bit of disinformation on the internet.
	So we have to have reflections of how we move forward, how we responsabilize the companies that are controlling.
	So much private companies that are controlling so much of the public square you now live in that doesn't have police paid by your taxes to keep you safe, that doesn't have rules around businesses to regulate you so you don't get scammed by the corner store.
	He's literally talking about policing.
	This is the new world we're in that we're going to have to try and adjust to.
	And I can tell you...
	I'm worried about the direction we're going.
	Oh, I agree with you there.
	Can you believe this?
	You're listening to an actual tyrant thinking out loud.
	I'm going to leave that up, and we might come back to this in a bit.
	Let me just make sure that I'm not too bright.
	I am too bright.
	Hold on.
	That's because I forgot.
	Now I'm too dark here.
	Ah, yeah.
	Oh, that's a little better.
	Okay.
	That's much better.
	Can you believe the way he's talking?
	We have to responsibilize.
	First of all, is that even a word?
	I know it's a word in French.
	Responsabilize.
	It means to, like, sensitize, sort of.
	Is response...
	Responsibilize...
	Word.
	Responsibilize.
	Wiktionary.
	I don't think it's a real word.
	Doesn't matter.
	Justin Trudeau is talking about policing private enterprise to control disinformation that he deems to be disinformation by citing disinformation.
	People actually died surrounded by family.
	First of all, Trudy, in your Canada, people didn't die surrounded by family.
	They actually died alone in hospitals because you didn't let family go in.
	They actually died alone because the unvaccinated following the science were not allowed into hospitals for a little bit.
	People in Canada had to get vaccinated.
	I'm not sure about that.
	I was going to say they had to get vaccinated in order to get euthanized, but I'm not sure about that.
	I think I remember hearing a story about that.
	We have to responsibilize private enterprise.
	So that people can't talk about things that I don't like them talking about.
	That's what I was going to pull up.
	Oh, yes.
	People actually believe that the jab is more dangerous than COVID.
	Well, here's a spoiler alert for you.
	And don't trust me.
	Trust your own doctors, Trudy.
	For the age bracket, you know, that pesky little age bracket of, I don't know, men aged 13 to 40. Guess what is more...
	Objectively?
	Objectively, that's not a word.
	Objectively more dangerous than the Rona?
	For that age bracket, guess what it is?
	Myocarditis age 13 to 39 risk.
	Let's just pull up one specific.
	What was it?
	It was, yeah, it was like 15 per 10,000.
	Just, yeah, but I, That's it.
	But Justin Trudeau, he loves the basic dictatorship of China and is prepared basically to turn Canada into China through all means necessary.
	And we're going to see this.
	How many of you in the chat watching now have heard of Bill C4 out of Canada?
	We're going to talk about it in a second.
	We have a little special guest intro.
	He only has 10 minutes.
	My brother, who looks like a wise old man.
	Dan, I'm bringing you in.
	Everybody, this is my actual brother from our shared mother.
	Dan Freyheit.
	We have the same last name.
	Dan!
	Yeah, what's going on?
	Look at that.
	Look at that.
	You look a little cross-eyed.
	What's going on?
	Okay, I'm all messed up here.
	Dude, you look so much like our other brother, it's getting scary.
	Right?
	Right?
	Okay.
	So everybody watching, this is my brother Dan from Canada.
	This is my brother.
	He's living through the madness right now.
	And he can give us probably the first...
	The most direct, first-hand bit of information as to the updates as to what's going on in Canada under Justin Trudeau's basic dictatorship that he wants to turn Canada into.
	Dan?
	I don't know, bro.
	I don't know what to tell you.
	Okay, so credentials for anybody who doesn't know, you're a practicing lawyer out of Ontario.
	You're two and a half years older than me.
	Two and a half, that's right.
	Okay, yeah.
	So what's going on in Canada, Dan?
	What's going on in...
	Hey, Pep, where do you want to start, man?
	Where do you want to start?
	Take your mic and move it off your jacket or closer to your mouth.
	Yeah, yeah, sorry.
	No, now you're not even using the mic to your phone.
	What is it?
	How's the audio now?
	Is it good?
	It's decent.
	Tell us what's going on.
	Dan, sensitize America to what's going on in Canada.
	There are still federal mask mandates in federal court, correct?
	Federal court is out of control.
	Federal court is out of control.
	I don't know what's going on there.
	I don't know where they're getting there, who's making the decisions.
	There's so many things, I don't even know where to start.
	Federal court, I believe, has mass requirements to get into court.
	I don't think they're checking vaccination status, which is somewhat comforting, but why not?
	Small miracles.
	So who makes that decision?
	I don't know.
	And does that skew the case that comes out of there?
	I don't know.
	But it's disconcerting because there's no requirement, no recommendation from public health.
	Right?
	For mathematics at this point.
	So I don't know where that's coming from.
	I don't know where that's coming from.
	Yeah, your audio is terrible.
	People are going to live with it.
	But tell us what's going on in Canada.
	I don't think you're plugged in then.
	Oh, now it just got better.
	Now you can hear me better?
	Is the chat going to say that we've got two boomer brothers here?
	If somebody wants to buy me a...
	Oh, maybe it's my old...
	Oh, this is my old...
	Okay, I got the wrong mic.
	Anyhow, I don't have to tell you.
	So that's going on with the federal court.
	What else do you want to know?
	Well, what's the latest?
	What are you working on these days?
	On the advocacy side, well, look, we're dealing with the wrongful terminations, okay?
	So that's good.
	I've got a couple of those in the pipes.
	And, you know, whether it's considered misconduct generally to refuse to get jabbed, right?
	Where'd I go?
	Did I bore you already?
	You got the neon signs, man.
	Times are good when you got neon signs.
	And I don't know, man.
	There's lots to repair, I think, at this point.
	We're dealing with a lot of ongoing mandates, man.
	Ongoing mandates, vaccine requirements to get jobs.
	Crazy in the healthcare sector.
	And I don't know if it's like this in the States.
	I'd be very curious.
	Do you need to be vaccinated in American hospitals?
	Are your people global?
	What's going on in the global community?
	Do healthcare workers need to get vaccinated, jabbed, whatever you want to call it, in order to get a job in a healthcare space?
	I would have to double check what the status is now, but I think the states are a little bit also insane with the back stuff.
	I think the United States is the last country out there that is now requiring vaccination among...
	Non-citizens, non-residents.
	Right to get in.
	I know.
	What is going on with that?
	And the idiotic thing is, you can get in infected with COVID, but you can't get in if you're vaccinated, but you can't get in if you're not vaccinated.
	The science is going to change in May.
	I think they're officially rescinding that.
	So, and I just put up a, what do you call it?
	An ATIP, access to information request, okay?
	Just trying to explain why do these policies change?
	Like, so what's the decision?
	The entire thing was redacted, meaning they got a legal opinion or they got a medical opinion saying drop the mandates, and they won't say why.
	And I had this issue with University of Western Ontario.
	Why did you change your policy?
	Like, let me hear your thinking.
	Be transparent about it, right?
	Won't tell you.
	We will not tell you.
	It's incriminating?
	Okay, fine.
	Okay, then tell us that.
	But it's...
	Well, maybe don't tell us that.
	I don't know what to tell you.
	It's a lot of weird stuff.
	And, you know, the lawyers have got to start speaking out about this because it's getting to a point where there's too much that we're trying to sweep under the rug and it ain't going to fly.
	We've got to release the, you know what I mean?
	We've got to slowly release all these issues so that we can talk about them.
	Ongoing mandates, what else to tell you about?
	Vaccine, I mean, look, the Vaccine Injury Support Program, you know I've been in that system for a bit of time now trying to...
	Figure out how that thing's operating, man.
	That thing is, like, is supposed to be easy to understand for people to get relief, right?
	Trudeau made all these representations.
	Your chance of getting injured from the jab, one in a million.
	We got you covered.
	We got your six.
	Oh, boy.
	And, you know, people, I think, in the Army may have known that sometimes you're not covered the way you think you are for some of these things, for injuries, right?
	Veterans, people dealing with insurance are, you know, unfortunately have...
	We have to go through this experience of not understanding how to get your forms in order.
	But the vaccine program is intentionally opaque and they're not being clear about or they're making stuff up.
	One guy posted about 60 days to appeal or something.
	A tragic decision.
	60 days to appeal or the file is closed.
	And people are getting these weird...
	You know, indications from the program, like, making up rules on the fly.
	Like, there's nothing about that in my AATIP, in my access to information request, about how that program is run, setting out, you know, these arbitrary cutoffs.
	And it just adds stress to people that are already, like, in a bad spot.
	So, you know, there's that.
	I mean, it's all, you know, there's just, there's so much.
	And it's, but, yeah.
	And the latest, Sean Hartman's dad.
	Yeah, that was the one.
	Everybody knows, Sean Hartman's dad, I forget his first name now.
	His name was Dan Hartman, I think.
	Sean Hartman, 18-year-old kid, died 23 days, 33 days after his first Pfizer.
	Healthy kid, was hospitalized shortly after the jab and then woke up dead.
	I didn't mean to say it like that.
	Died in his sleep 30-some-odd days later.
	The father...
	Didn't know his kid was hospitalized shortly after the jab.
	Found out that the kid was hospitalized after the jab.
	They didn't run D-dimer tests.
	They didn't run troponin tests.
	And then his son died 30 some odd days after the first Pfizer jab.
	His claim for the vaccine injury program was denied.
	You can appeal it.
	Yeah, that's the one he posted.
	And there were some arbitrary timelines imposed there.
	And it was like...
	I just remember looking at the Vaccine Injury Support Program contract.
	There's nothing about any of those kind of timelines.
	Or if there was, it was all redacted.
	And speaking of which, they're supposed to get back to me.
	I've requested they unredact that document and they're supposed to get back to me by the 24th.
	But there was nothing in there about you've got 60 days.
	And it's tough.
	These programs, you've got to kind of make it up on the fly.
	It's like you're dealing with a public health emergency, this, that, and the other.
	You can't be making up these rules like this and making people feel like their rights are going to be extinguished if they don't take certain actions.
	And then people actually believe that their rights have been extinguished when legally they haven't been.
	So my point is, I mean, yeah, you've got to educate yourself.
	And I'll try to share more on my Twitter feed so that people are aware of this stuff.
	But you have these rights and you've got to really push for them and really kind of advocate for yourself, you know.
	So that's it on the Vaccine Injury Support Program.
	What else?
	I mean, look, my real beef was just vaccine mandates for getting out to planes.
	That was my main beef and for participating in social life.
	And I think that's more or less resolved.
	We've still got some work to do on that.
	And people are sharing their work on Twitter about success with the council.
	So it's good.
	We're getting there, but it's just a lot of work.
	Yeah, and you only had 10 minutes because you didn't have enough time.
	Yeah, I got a blitz.
	But okay, good to be on the show again.
	I love picking up followers after I'm on your show.
	Some of them are actually real cute.
	I like hearing from, you know, firsthand what's going on in Canada.
	I see it from down here.
	And my goodness, when you're out of the asylum, it looks outrageous.
	It looks outrageous.
	Except then I say like, oh, look at that.
	You know, they're asking for people to show their vaccination status coming into the States now, non-citizens.
	It's backwards everywhere.
	It's power that they just don't want to give it up.
	I'll give it up.
	I'll give it back to you.
	In two months, you get your rights back.
	Two months.
	Trust the science.
	I've got to take off.
	Good time, bro.
	See you soon.
	Okay, bye.
	Bye.
	Now, I want to bring up a couple of articles.
	So, for those of you who didn't know the news, and we'll do this on both YouTube and Rumble before we go to Rumble because FTW, I'm not scared of anything on YouTube anymore.
	And I think even YouTube is coming around to the science of things.
	The Vaccine Injury Program in Canada.
	Sean Hartman's dad, Dan Hartman, was on the channel.
	We had an interview.
	We had some audio issues during that interview, but just a horrendous story.
	His son died.
	It was 33 days, 23 days.
	I mean, you all know the story.
	His father has now been on a mission, and understandably so.
	It's impossible to understand the devastation.
	And his father has now been on a mission to...
	There is no justice that can be had at this point.
	There is no justice.
	What there can be is punishment for those who are responsible, judicial, political punishment.
	There can be compensation of sorts.
	And then there can be preventing a similar tragedy from befalling...
	Another child, another parent, another family, another human.
	So this is it.
	From the Western Standard.
	Don't expect CBC to be jumping on this story.
	Actually, I'm going to go check right after to see if they've even covered it.
	Ontario man whose son died after COVID vaccine denied compensation.
	Some of you might say, that headline is editorializing.
	No!
	Sean Hartman died.
	A month after getting his first shot.
	Whether or not you think the two are correlated, I'll tell you one thing.
	When a young person dies suddenly, you look for things that they have done out of their ordinary routine, and then you go and you presumptively, I will dare say, presumptively attribute faults, presumptively attribute causality until another form of causality can be shown to have interrupted.
	18-year-old kids don't just die.
	And if they do, and you can't determine what the definitive cause was, you look and you see, well, what did they do differently within the proximity of their death?
	Oh, look at that.
	He got a jab 30-some-odd days before.
	New Tecumseh, Ontario resident Dan Hartman was denied money.
	Dan Hartman is the father, Sean Hartman is his son.
	Was denied money from the Vaccine Injury Support Program on March 7, despite his son, Sean.
	My son died 33 days after his first Pfizer vaccine and he was a perfectly healthy boy with no underlying conditions, he said in an interview.
	And he shows the proof.
	It's enough to make you enraged.
	Sean, 17, took a COVID-19 vaccine to be allowed to play hockey.
	Dan said he took Sean to the emergency room for...
	Dan said he took Sean to the emergency room four days after his first dose because he had brown circles around his eyes, a rash on his face, and pain in his right shoulder.
	I think this reporting is somewhat inaccurate or may have confused something.
	My understanding from my interview with Dan is that his mother had taken him to the hospital and Dan did not know that his kid had been hospitalized shortly after the first jab.
	Details, maybe Western Standard got it right and I got it wrong, whatever.
	The bottom line is, shortly after, days after the first jab, Sean went to the hospital.
	And apparently, the doctors did not conduct what are pretty much standard operating procedure for those types of medical emergencies.
	D-dimer tests, I don't know what it is, but I know what it is now.
	Tropin tests.
	I know what it is now.
	I didn't know what it was at the time.
	What are they looking for?
	Dissolved clots.
	Evidence of myocarditis.
	These are standard tests which should have been done.
	My understanding is Dan went after the doctors and nothing came of that either.
	He was sent home from the emergency room soon after he was found dead on his bedroom floor one month later.
	An autopsy was performed and a coroner determined that the death was unascertained.
	Oh.
	All the medical examiner could find was an enlarged heart.
	Oh!
	I mean, this is...
	It's tragedy.
	It's absurd, upside-down world, clown world tragedy.
	The application process involved Dan gathering medical, hospital, and family records.
	He sent all of the records to VISP and waited a while.
	The father called his reaction to the rejection pure rage and a lot of sadness.
	He said they cannot prove the COVID-19 vaccine did not kill him.
	You know what the problem is?
	The fact that so many people have heard Sean's story is, I hate to think so bloody cynically, is why they could not possibly approve it.
	If they possibly approved Sean Hartman's death as a vaccine injury, it would unravel.
	It would undermine, contradict the narrative that they have been pitching, not just on adults, but on kids.
	It would undermine everything that they have done to Canadian citizens since the vaccine rollout.
	They could not possibly approve that vaccine injury because it would devastate their story.
	It would devastate the treatment that Sean got.
	It would devastate the prospects of pushing this jab on children.
	But no, trust Justin Trudeau when he sits there with his sleeves rolled up and a hand in his pocket like he's too cool for school, talking about all those people that died surrounded by family and friends because they were actually convinced the jab was more dangerous than the Rona.
	Yep, so they have to continue to lie.
	There's absolutely no choice.
	Let me bring up the article to see if there's anything I didn't...
	Didn't get in this.
	Hold on.
	Sorry, let me pull it back up here on my side.
	They didn't find anything, just an enlarged heart in a young man.
	Just an enlarged heart, 33 days after his first Pfizer shot, which we now know carries a no less than 1 in 5,000 risk of myocarditis for young men, according to Dr. Kieran Moore of Ontario.
	One in 5,000 per dose.
	But if we go to the NCIB or NCBI and we look up the adverse reactions of special interest, we see that it's actually one in 800 per dose.
	Sean's death cannot be confirmed except by staining slides and searching for spike protein.
	There is no pathologist in Canada who can do that right now.
	Dan reached out to American pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole, who was one of the two trained in staining slides.
	To obtain assistance, Dan said he expects the test to prove the COVID-19 vaccine killed Sean.
	He said the toughest part since losing his son has been waking up every day.
	Can you imagine this?
	It's enough to make you actually...
	The toughest thing is just waking up every day.
	And there was back story to the story as to how his son...
	Got the jab.
	And the regret that Dan is going to...
	Dan created a give-send-go to try to take a leave of absence from work.
	He took three weeks off when Sean died, which he said was not enough.
	Every employee has seen him cry at work.
	For the death of a child, he said, every parent needs at least one year of paid leave.
	Let's see what they said here.
	He plans on using some of the money to hire a lawyer to sue.
	Some of the organizations involved in his death, his first target will be the hockey league that required Sean to be vaccinated.
	I'm not optimistic about any of those lawsuits.
	He concluded by saying he wants answers to try and live in peace again, knowing the truth.
	It has totally destroyed my life, he said.
	I've cried so much more than I ever have in my life.
	Canadian government records published in July showed a total of eight COVID-19 vaccine death and injury claims were paid to date.
	Eight.
	With almost 700.
	Awaiting completion of medical reviews.
	The eight anonymous claims were the first to be paid under the $75 million vaccination compensation program launched in 2021.
	Managers of VISP said of the 774 claims received fewer than one-tenth, 71 were rejected due to incomplete information or ineligibility.
	Eight claims were paid and another 654 were under review as investigators retrieved medical records.
	Good luck.
	Good luck trying to prove causality.
	in something which can be difficult under the best of circumstances to prove causality.
	You don't get over that.
	I've shared anecdotally a family within my family, not immediate family, but parents lost a child at a young age.
	They never get over that.
	The family never gets over that.
	And imagine, in this circumstance, the family has been victimized by government extortion, government coercion, which trickled down all the way to hockey leagues.
	All you have is an 18-year-old kid who just wants to play hockey.
	Oh, just, hey, what are you so scared about?
	Just roll up your sleeves and take a jab in the arm, you know, for the greater good.
	And succumbs to the pressure.
	And then the...
	Victimized by policy, victimized by this arrogant, pompous, awful human being, Justin Trudeau, parading around, talking about keeping people safe, trusting the science, equating those who are hesitant to this jab to people who deny that the earth is round or spherical, because it might be slightly obvious.
	Equating those who don't want this jab to flat earthers.
	As if the science is settled on...
	The spherical nature of Earth and all planetary celestial bodies except for very anomalous celestial bodies and meteorites.
	And the safety and efficacy of an experimental jab using technology that had never before been used on humans, let alone at a mass global scale, that has, according to his own doctors, Trudeau's own provincial doctors, Actually, you know what?
	Before we head over to Rumble, let me just pull this up.
	Just in case anybody hasn't seen it.
	I'm just going to go to this.
	It's called Adverse Effects Special Interest.
	Just so that YouTube can understand.
	It's not some lawyer who is veering too far from his lane of expertise.
	This lawyer can read basic English.
	This is from NL...
	What is it called?
	PubMed, NCBI.
	Serious adverse events of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in randomized trials in adults.
	The data is not going to get much better than this.
	Results.
	Just the way they say it, listen to this.
	Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1.
	and 15.1 per 10,000.
	15.1 per 10,000.
	I can do math.
	That's like 1 in 1,000 or 1 in 800.
	Combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000.
	Let me just go ahead.
	Sorry, people.
	You're going to think I'm a total idiot because I am.
	That would be 10,000.
	No, it would be 12.5.
	Divided by 10,000.
	I know it's like 1 in 800.
	What's my problem?
	12.5 divided by 10,000.
	That's not the way to do it.
	Thank you.
	Holy cows, guys.
	Talk about a boomer.
	Divided by 12.5.
	Yeah, it's 1 in 800, but it was like 1 in 827.
	Moderna had a slightly high.
	This is not me.
	This is not a lawyer talking out of his ass.
	Trust Justin Trudeau, however, because what was the COVID risk for young men?
	The risk was so non-existent for that age bracket.
	You had Dina Henshaw out of Alberta literally manufacturing fake cases of COVID deaths.
	So they could then say, look, a 14-year-old boy just died from COVID.
	That's how dangerous it is.
	Everyone go get your jibby jab for your 1 in 800 chances of adverse events of special interest.
	Oh, what's that?
	The kid had stage 4 brain cancer and was in a tumor and we tested him just because he was on death's door and found out that he was COVID positive but dying of stage 4 brain cancer in a coma.
	And we attributed his death to COVID.
	And if they've done it once, they've done it many more than once times.
	You get a father whose life, there's no coming back from that.
	It's a nightmare from which you never awake.
	And when he says the hardest thing of his life is just waking up every day.
	And you get victimized by your government, not once, endlessly.
	And now he's been victimized yet again because his claim has been refused.
	As if a few hundred thousand dollars, because I think the max is like $245,000, as if that could possibly compensate for what he suffered through.
	But why not?
	Just do it.
	Kick him in the teeth one more time, because if you were to dare acknowledge his son's death, attributed it to the jab, something tells me, the father said, give me no money, just vindicate me, acknowledge me, recognize my tragedy, recognize my sorrow, and acknowledge that you are the source of it.
	There's no way they could do that.
	They would sooner probably pay him $10 million to shut up.
	I mean, they've given $10 million to...
	Proven terrorists.
	Okay, well, now I'm angry.
	I didn't want to start this angry.
	I actually didn't want to start like this at all.
	Let's go to Rumble.
	We're 2,000 people watching here.
	Sorry, everybody.
	Well, it'll get better on Rumble because then we're going to talk about the new laws in Canada, which some of you might not have heard about.
	We're going to talk.
	There's not really much to talk about with Trump because, hey.
	Maybe public pressure and public outcry has actually changed a few minds, hearts, and souls.
	Let's move on over to Rumble.
	Here's the link.
	But no, I'm sorry.
	It's unimaginable.
	And I can close my eyes and feel the sorrow.
	And I can close my eyes and feel the rage.
	And it's just insult to injury.
	It's an act of provocation at this point.
	What the Trudeau government is doing to Canadians is doing to the victims of Trudeau policy.
	It's not just insult to injury.
	It's provocation.
	Dan Hartman, for all of his tragedies, has probably put out a few tweets that a day later he says, maybe I shouldn't have said that.
	Maybe I shouldn't have put that video out.
	This is a man who is suffering inconsolable grief.
	And is getting needled and is getting provoked by the government.
	Yeah, sorry.
	Oh, yeah.
	Thanks for your documentation.
	Cause of death undetermined.
	I know it happened.
	I know he was hospitalized four days after getting the jab and then died 33 days later.
	But who knows?
	Undetermined.
	Rumble is not down.
	Don't make me nervous, people.
	I didn't do the standard intro.
	Alright, standard intro.
	Disclaimers before we head on over to Rumble.
	Seize the day.
	Novak's not allowed to visit people in hospitals still.
	Un-fucking-believable.
	It's provocation.
	It's provocation.
	They want someone to lash out and do something stupid so they can then say, look at these people.
	Look at these flat earthers.
	They can't even control.
	They don't understand that these rules are to protect them.
	Novak's?
	Can't get into the States if you're not a citizen, a resident.
	No vax?
	Can't get into a hospital.
	Oh, yeah, what's that?
	You have COVID?
	Sure.
	Just tell me what your quarantine plan is.
	Standard disclaimers, Rumble Rants.
	YouTube takes 30% of Super Chats if you want to support the channel.
	Better to do it on Rumble.
	We're simultaneously streaming there.
	We're going to go over there.
	They have Rumble Rants.
	Rumble takes 20%, so better to support a platform that supports free speech.
	Better for the creator.
	All things better.
	You see the way Crowder is...
	I don't want to say killing it.
	I want to say owning it.
	Crowder...
	Rumble is...
	And he made a very good point.
	I was listening to Crowder as we were driving back from the Florida Keys today.
	It's a very interesting distinction between social media and media.
	People go to YouTube not to hang around in social milieus and social media.
	They go there because they want to absorb, consume content.
	Rumble is turning into a network.
	It's turning into an unaffiliated network of content creators that are drawing in people.
	Away from YouTube, towards Rumble.
	En masse.
	By the hundreds of thousands, literally.
	I remain optimistic.
	There's a lot of sheep, as the term grows, there's a lot of people who reflexively just say, hey, what's recommended?
	And I'll know what the news is.
	And they hang around.
	They're getting exposed to Rumble.
	Rumble's in the news.
	Rumble is making the news.
	Rumble has, I'm going to say, an unaffiliated network of free-thinking content creators who are more honest, who are more genuine, who are more reliable than everything you find on network cable news.
	Everything.
	Maybe with the exception of Tucker Carlson, because I do like Tucker Carlson.
	Everything.
	And it is becoming.
	A network to which people are flocking in the same way they used to flock to network television.
	And it's an amazing thing to watch.
	And we're going to go contribute to that.
	So have it over to Rumble.
	There's 1818.
	It's a lucky number.
	1818 on YouTube now.
	Let's see.
	Zero on YouTube and an additional 1,818 people going over to Rumble.
	And then we're going to have the after party on Locals.
	VivaBarnesLaw.Locals.com I'm ending on YouTube.
	And then we're going to talk a bunch of stuff.
	I want to end, remove, and remove.
	Okay, 3, 2, 1. See you on Rumble, people.
	I hope I wasn't too angry with this first half hour, but I am.
	Sorry.
	Sorry.
	Okay, we are now...
	Looks like we're exclusive on Rumble and Locals.
	And now I can actually show you how this works.
	Let's go address a couple of the Rumble rants.
	I haven't read them, so if they're naughty...
	Apologies in advance.
	Chet Chisholm, I know it's not going to be naughty.
	Chet, I had on the channel a little while ago.
	The first three days of the National Citizens' Inquiry went fantastically well.
	Testimonies are now on the Rumble channel and on the website.
	Dan Hartman will be testifying in Toronto next week.
	Chet, thank you very much.
	Chet was an EMT.
	Check out the interview that we had on my channel here.
	It was amazing.
	And, Chad, I don't know if I'm allowed to...
	I might try and testify at the National Citizens' Inquiry as well.
	Whether or not it's in person or digitally, we'll see.
	$5 rumble rent from G.L. Seisich, $5 for Paris fund.
	I don't know what...
	I'm not going to Paris anytime soon.
	Okay, people.
	What do we want to do?
	Do we want to do the Trump or do we want to...
	There's really not much to talk about Trump.
	There's a battle between DeSantis and Trump right now that's going on and people are saying, why are they fighting among each other?
	People are not taking the piss out of me or getting mad at me.
	Or Barnes.
	I posted a highlight of Barnes saying how DeSantis, in his response to the rumorings of Trump going to be indicted and cuffed for alleged hush fund payment, an indictable offense.
	A hush fund, a hush fund, a hush payment to porn star Stormy Daniels is going to lead to Trump's indictment.
	And some people recognize that Barnes is making a phenomenal point, even if they don't like it, because a lot of people like both Trump and DeSantis, me being one of them.
	DeSantis is doing amazing work as a governor.
	I would rather, from a very selfish, self-centered perspective, I would rather see DeSantis stay.
	As governor of Florida, then go up and, you know, potentially get chewed up and spit out by the federal machine in D.C. I happen to like both of them.
	And so when I listen to or retweet or clip critique of DeSantis, some people might view that as taking pot shots at DeSantis.
	Others who see critique, constructive critique for what it's worth, would say, this is constructive criticism.
	Maybe DeSantis should think, you know, about strategy.
	In the same way, when I take shots or criticize Pierre Poiliev, it's not just gratuitous insults.
	It's, hey, I may not support you, but you might still stand to gain by listening to the critique because, you know, not all critique is destructive critique.
	Some of it is legit, constructive critique.
	So for those of you who have been living under a rock for the last little while, Trump is rumored.
	To be on the cusp of getting indicted by a very proactive Soros-funded DA named Alvin Bragg out of New York.
	I will say that the individual, Alvin Bragg, is bona fide.
	It's been reported by Fox, by the New York Post, and it has not been contradicted even by left-leaning media sites like heavy.com.
	Which don't want to confirm it, so all that they do in fact-checking the statement is cite other sources without saying that the sources are wrong.
	By all accounts, it looks like it's confirmed factual information that the DA, Alvin Bragg, was funded by a political action committee, I think it was called Color for Change, that was...
	Funded by George Soros to the tune of a million dollars.
	So Soros doesn't directly say, here Alvin Bragg, here's a million bucks.
	He goes and gives it to a political action committee that then goes and uses it to help Alvin Bragg get elected.
	Alvin Bragg, rumoring to be on the cusp of indicting Trump, by testing out, according to Jonathan Turley, a novel legal theory which would involve Trump allegedly Falsifying business records to conceal a hush payment to porn star Stormy Daniels.
	Porn actress.
	I don't know what it takes to be a star in the porno world anymore, but she's definitely a porn actress.
	All right.
	Very interesting discussion that Robert Barnes and I had Monday night during our Sunday night stream on Monday is why the talk of indictment makes absolutely no sense.
	Michael Cohen.
	Trump's former lawyer who's now in jail or serving time, has served time, whatever, he might have gotten up.
	He pled guilty to campaign finance violations which consisted of him making a contribution in kind to Trump's campaign in an amount that exceeded the limits by making the hush payment to Stormy Daniels.
	So the argument was that Michael Cohen exceeded campaign donations by making this hush payment of $130,000 to Stormy Daniels, but it was actually a contribution in kind to the Trump campaign.
	Therefore, Michael Cohen broke the law and pleaded guilty and went to jail.
	Okay.
	That indictment, that charge, that plea is predicated on the idea that Michael Cohen made the payment himself to Stormy Daniels, that it was a contribution in kind that exceeded contribution limits.
	Which should mean, logically, in theory, Trump can never be indicted for the same hushed money payment because if it were a contribution to his own campaign, it wouldn't be illegal.
	Okay.
	So by virtue of the fact that Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to violating campaign finance laws, Trump could not be indicted for this.
	Apparently, the novel theory that they're testing, setting aside statute of limitations, which by all accounts seem to have expired, Falsifying business records to disguise this payment as not being what it was.
	Okay.
	Jonathan Turley, by my standards, by my knowledge, seems to be a very, very fine legal mind.
	I know people on the left no longer like that ever since he came to Trump's defense in the impeachment process.
	Says it's a very weak legal theory and probably best not testing novel legal theories.
	When indicting a former president of the United States and frontrunner to the next presidential election for the Republican Party.
	Probably best not to do if you want to avoid being called a banana republic district attorney.
	If you want to avoid being called an absolutely corrupt district attorney financed by progressive George Soros to politically persecute the frontrunner for the Republican Party.
	Probably not the best thing to do if you want to say, America is not like Russia.
	We are better.
	We go after our political foes with novel theories to try to demonize them to make sure they can't run for office again.
	Trump put out that he expects to be arrested, indicted, cuffed, all the rest of it.
	It hasn't happened yet.
	It hasn't happened yet because maybe, maybe there's been such massive outcry that even a grand jury, which as they say, although I think they only say it of the grand juries in Chicago, but maybe they say it of grand juries in general, could indict a ham sandwich.
	They haven't done it yet.
	And apparently the grand jury meeting or whatever, you know, that was convened for today has been postponed because apparently there's, according to Fox News, take it for what it's worth, there's massive dissent.
	Or major dissension, I think is the quote, yes, in the DA's office.
	Okay, okay, okay, okay, okay.
	Okay, everyone knows that from Leo Getz.
	Whatever you want, Leo Getz.
	That's Lethal Weapon 2, if I'm not mistaken.
	Doesn't matter.
	So apparently Trump hasn't been indicted yet.
	He hasn't been cuffed yet.
	As far as I know, let me just make sure that it hasn't happened.
	Hasn't happened yet.
	Okay, stuck on standby.
	So let's just go here.
	Make sure that we have the most up-to-date article.
	Okay.
	What the hell is going on with...
	Okay, here we go.
	Trump hushed money grand jury proceedings.
	Canceled for Wednesday, sources say.
	I am always skeptical of unnamed sources.
	One thing's for certain.
	It's 545.
	I've been truthful and consistent since today's fire.
	Sorry.
	It's 5.45.
	As far as I know, they haven't had the grand jury convening, so this looks like it's checked out.
	Grand jury proceedings canceled amid major dissension in DA's office, sources tell Fox News.
	Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office has canceled, quote, the grand jury meeting that was scheduled to take place Wednesday as part of the investigation into former President Donald Trump amid speculation of a possible indictment to sources familiar.
	I take these sources with as much of a grain of sand, grain of salt.
	As if they were anonymous sources for CNN.
	Grand jury was slated to meet Wednesday and was expected to hear from at least one additional witness, but Fox News learned that Bragg's office cancelled the proceedings.
	Grand jury was notified Wednesday morning and was placed on standby.
	Standby!
	Now I just had an envision of that guy in Ukraine.
	We can't confirm or comment on grand jury matters, Bragg's office told Fox News.
	Two sources familiar.
	Could it be the most amazing thing ever if Bragg is ultimately humiliated?
	I don't know how he can get forced out of office, but if ultimately the backlash from the, let me rephrase, the response to the amazing backlash that this story has garnered actually deters the DA from following through with this absolutely idiotic political persecution, it would be amazing.
	And it would be, I mean, it would be a white pill.
	I guess it would be something of a white pill.
	But by the way, I don't get these white pills anymore.
	It's going to happen anyhow.
	Do I want to make the unlikely bet that it's not going to happen?
	I don't know.
	I can't do that.
	Despite rumors of a potential imminent indictment, sources familiar with yada yada yada, he told Fox News that Trump had not been formally notified about whether Bragg actually plans to bring charges against him.
	Sources told Fox News, though, that there remains a real chance that Bragg does not choose to indict the former president.
	By the way, here, I'm thinking out loud.
	You know what's going to happen now?
	Bragg is not going to indict Trump.
	And then they're going to accuse him of having put out misinformation, disinformation.
	They were never going to indict him.
	Trump was lying, riling up his base, trying to incite people to violence.
	They were never going to indict him.
	I don't think they can say that now anyhow if there have in fact been grand jury meetings or if a grand jury has been convened.
	Convene a grand jury if your intent is not to indict or not to see if they want to indict.
	Bragg, when he took over as District Attorney General, Prosecutors Mark Pomerantz and Carrie Dunn, who had been leading the investigation under DA Cyrus Vance, submitted their resignations after Bragg began raising doubts about pursuing a case against Trump.
	The possible charges stem from the $130,000 hush money payment that then-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen made to adult film stars.
	Oh, they don't call them porn stars.
	My apologies.
	Adult film stars.
	Stormy Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, in the weeks leading up to the 2016 presidential election.
	Daniels is not one of the last witnesses that Bragg planned to call.
	Her lawyer tells Fox News that, as we stand, Daniels has been asked to speak before the grand jury.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Okay.
	Cohen has said that Trump directed the payments.
	Cohen paid Daniels $130,000 through his own company and was later reimbursed by Trump's company, which lauded the payments as legal expenses.
	Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model who allegedly had a relationship with Trump, received a $150,000 payment through the publisher of the supermarket tabloid National Enquirer.
	Okay, do we care about the rest of this?
	The Manhattan DA's investigation into Trump began in 2019 by then-district attorney Cyrus Vance.
	The probe was focused on possible bank, insurance, and tax law.
	Can you believe, for all the crime that's going on in New York right now, this is what they're dedicating their resources to?
	The case initially involved financial dealings of Trump and Manhattan's properties, yadda yadda.
	Okay, whatever.
	So thus far, everybody, good news, maybe something of a white pill.
	Trump has not yet been indicted and cuffed.
	Maybe they've gotten...
	Wiser.
	Maybe they're just biding their time.
	Maybe they're going to spin it as Trump having made it all up and it was never going to happen in the first place.
	But we're on standby.
	So we'll see what happens.
	Oh, what a time to be alive in a very, very cynical sense.
	Wait until you hear...
	We're going to do a fun one involving Tim Pool right now.
	Right after I read these.
	Okay, here we go.
	On to M. So we're going to do some rumble rants.
	We're going to do a fun short story.
	And I'm going to go through the legal proceedings, much like I used to do out of the car.
	I was going to do a car vlog for this one.
	But no.
	Involving Tim Pool, Tim Cast, being sued for copyright violation by what I might think is copyright trolls seizing on an error in order to try to make an easy payday.
	On to M. Absolutely.
	Barnes is right.
	Barnes is right.
	He might have been a little over the top.
	It might have been a little hyperbolic when he said his political career is over.
	His political career is not over.
	His presidential run might not be over either, but it definitely took a hit.
	And Barnes is right.
	He's right, and I'm complimenting myself here a little bit as well.
	Because DeSantis, first of all, you know what DeSantis could have done to court Trump supporters?
	Defended Trump.
	Vigorously defended Trump.
	If he wanted to cynically siphon off some of Trump's supporters.
	Vigorously defend Trump.
	I see from a self-preservation perspective, DeSantis made a mistake.
	Because by defending Trump, he's not defending Trump, he's defending himself.
	If he thinks this is going to be weaponized prosecution, persecution only for porn star payments, well, wait until they find a way to prosecute DeSantis for, I don't know, they'll find criminal finance, human trafficking laws about the ploy that he did by shipping illegal aliens to Martha's Vineyard.
	They'll find something.
	Goodness is its own reward.
	The goodness in vigorously defending Trump, it would have been a selfish...
	Vigorously defending Trump, because it would be preemptively defending himself.
	Because even if he gets to the past, you know, the primaries, and he's the Republican candidate, expect him to weaponize the full force of federal criminal law against DeSantis as well.
	Piotr says, just subbed on Rumble, screw YouTube, booyaka shasser.
	We're up to like, what are we up to, 333,000 subs on Rumble?
	Beautiful, beautiful.
	It's idolatry.
	I know it's idolatry.
	Let me be a child.
	And it's a beautiful statue.
	And then we got Human Flourishing.
	He says, Viva, in 2005, I made one of YouTube's first viral videos featuring Bas Rutten.
	Oh, I remember him.
	And guess what?
	No pauses.
	Now see it on Rumble.
	Everyone, go.
	You know what?
	If I may, can I end?
	I'm going to end the show with this.
	Bas Rutten.
	One of the best UFC fighters.
	One of the best fighters of all time.
	I'm not making a mistake.
	I get mixed up between Bas Rutten.
	Anyhow.
	Great.
	Those are the rants.
	Okay.
	Shall we do a little...
	Shall we do a little...
	Let's do a little Tim Pool lawsuit so everybody can learn from the mistakes of others.
	Where is it?
	I had the lawsuit pulled up here somewhere.
	You can't be careful when you just go and pull something from the internet, people.
	Here we go.
	Check this out.
	So TimCast is being sued because apparently in an article that was published on TimCast, they pulled an image from the original publication of a story and it was somebody's copyrighted work.
	And they're now being sued under the full power of the law.
	Oh, I love these things.
	Look at this.
	Demand for jury trial introduction.
	This action seeks to recover damages for copyright infringement.
	Plaintiff herein creates photographic images and owns the rights to these images, which plaintiff licenses for various uses, including online and print publications.
	Defendant runs the...
	Yeah, we all know them.
	Plaintiff Christopher Sadowski is an individual who is a citizen of the state of New Jersey and maintains a principal place of...
	Okay, whatever.
	He's got a place of business.
	I'm sure he's a good photographer.
	I'm going to show you what the picture looks like in a second.
	No, you know what?
	I'm not going to because I don't want to get in trouble.
	And so what ends up happening, to simplify this, is Tim Kast, someone at Tim Kast pulls this image, runs a story.
	It was about Ghislaine Maxwell.
	It's a picture of the front of the courthouse with somebody walking up the steps.
	And apparently they didn't license the image.
	Okay, the website is a popular and lucrative commercial enterprise.
	The website is monetized in that it contains paid advertisements and upon information and belief defended profits from these activities.
	The website is monetized, yada, yada, yada.
	The photograph was displayed.
	Oh, here we go.
	Is it going to be up still?
	Was displayed at the TimCast URL.
	Okay, so I guess we don't have that anymore.
	All right, the photograph was stored at...
	Let's see.
	Do we see?
	Okay, well, that's it right there.
	This is newsworthy commentary.
	So that's pretty, you know, it's a good photograph.
	Timcast used it, didn't license it, and is now being sued.
	The guy registered his copyright, which is a good thing to do.
	Makes it easier to prove in court.
	And that's it.
	Upon information of belief, the infringement was not posted at the direction of a user.
	Oh, so they're suing under Section 17 U.S.C.
	512, which provides for statutory minimums and statutory maximums in terms of copyright infringement.
	You can sue for the profits generated from it if there were any profits whatsoever, or you can get a statutory minimum and a statutory maximum if the violation is egregious.
	Upon information and belief, a large number of people have viewed the unlawful copies of the photograph on the website.
	Upon information and belief, defendant...
	At all times had the ability to stop the reproduction and display of plaintiff's copyright material.
	Defendant's use of the photograph, if widespread, would harm plaintiff's potential market through the photograph.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	First count, without permission, reproduction.
	This is all a warning tale to not make silly mistakes, but also a warning that I suspect what goes on with a lot of these cases is people wait and see if someone with a, you know...
	Big dollar figures makes a stupid mistake and then potentially see it as a big payday.
	And then instead of doing what normal, responsible, mature adults do, which is, okay, you used it.
	Well, you know, it's too late to license it now.
	So how about you pay me like, I don't know, four or five times what a license would have been for that very same photograph and we can all go our separate ways.
	Sometimes, you know, vigorous, energetic lawyers might see it as an opportunity for a bigger payday.
	Copyright holders might say, $750?
	Statutory minimum?
	No thank you.
	I'll go for the full $30,000 and I'm not settling for a penny less.
	I don't think the courts are going to like what they might perceive to be vigorous, stubborn, copyright trolling, looking for a big payday because of an accidental use or what might have actually just been arguably fair use in the first place.
	But it's always fun to learn.
	I say you learn from other people's mistakes, but you learn from your own mistakes faster.
	We could all learn from the mistakes.
	It's not just because, you know, something's online that you can use it with impunity risk-free.
	That being said, there might be very, very legitimate fair use defenses if it's a newsworthy item or a newsworthy story.
	And even if not, the courts typically don't like the perception of glutton, greed, and opportunism in wasting court resources trying to...
	Judicially extort a massive payday for what should be resolved amicably and reasonably among mature adults.
	That was a nice photo.
	Pay the man.
	I say...
	Okay, I just saw...
	I'm not reading some of these chats because they're crazy.
	Pay the man.
	Who was it?
	It was the reaction channel that got a number of the...
	Copyright violations from a number of their reaction videos.
	I can't remember the name of the licensing agency.
	It wasn't Storyful.
	It wasn't Newsflare.
	Chat, help me.
	You remember that.
	It was a reaction channel.
	A guy and a girl.
	The girl started crying and it got all of her fans very, very angry at this video licensing agency who went after them for, you know, tons of money because they had just basically replayed an entire licensed video, reacted to it, but never licensed it.
	Oh, Chad, help me out.
	Come on.
	What was it?
	What was it?
	It wasn't Getty.
	It wasn't Getty.
	I won't remember anyhow.
	But yeah, you know, there's typically penalty provisions.
	Like, okay, if we catch you having used it afterwards, licensing it is no harm, no foul.
	That's not exactly how it works.
	MXR.
	It was MXR Plays.
	And who was the licensing agency that was getting juking?
	There we go.
	Jukin Media.
	You know, they have penalty provisions, which if we catch you using it without having licensed it, just paying the license fee will not teach you a lesson and it will not compensate us for what we had to go through to get paid for legitimate not fair use.
	So yeah, whatever.
	And we'll see where it goes because Lord knows courts don't like people...
	Using the judicial process as an extortive mechanism to get more than what is reasonable, what is fair, and what could be resolved without wasting judicial resources.
	Okay.
	Parentheses closed.
	I hate court.
	I never want to see the inside of a courtroom again.
	I never want to deal with lawyers on a professional basis again.
	I never want to...
	You get served a lawsuit.
	It's endless headache.
	As a defendant...
	And even as a lawyer, it's endless headache because good, all parties, unless the plaintiff's lawyer is working on commission, which they might very well be doing, which was why they might not want to settle for a reasonable amount.
	They want a big payday.
	But as a defense lawyer, like, okay, it's going to cost you to fight it.
	Are you going to be happy paying me more than you might actually have to pay them?
	Yeah, that's it.
	I'll pay you before I pay them is what every client says before they have to pay both.
	So, all right, that's it.
	Now, let's get to the ugliness of Canada.
	The autofocus is wobbly, someone says.
	Let me see here.
	Oh, I'm an idiot.
	I got the new camera today, and I forgot to set it up for the stream.
	I got a good new camera, a good new plug-in.
	Eric Hunley, America's Hunt, told stories.
	Highly recommended it.
	So I'll get that in there.
	All right, now enough with the inconsequential lawsuit.
	Inconsequential at the broader scheme, except learning a lesson from other people.
	Let's pull up this story, because it's just...
	It's going to segue perfectly into where we're going in Canada.
	From the New York Post.
	Minnesota's first transgender lawmaker named one of USA Today's Women of the Year.
	And the top comment is, this is an insult to every woman.
	Okay.
	I'll just...
	This is not a cover-my-ass parentheses.
	Every full-grown adult who chooses to do whatever they want to do to themselves, with themselves, in full awareness of fact and law, is free to do whatever they want to themselves, in full awareness of fact and law.
	Where there's a big problem is when...
	It starts encroaching, and I dare say desecrating, on the rights of others.
	Imagine being a woman in today's day and age, and I'm saying a biological woman, because it doesn't matter how you feel.
	I mean, I guess I should say that.
	How you feel matters to you.
	How you feel does not matter to basic biology.
	There are biological males, biological females, period.
	Imagine being now a biological female who had to fight hard for the right to vote.
	Actually, let's just back this up.
	Imagine we were at where we are today, 100 years ago, and you had biological men who identified as women saying, there's no problem here.
	I get to vote.
	I'm a woman, so I get to vote.
	No problem.
	It wouldn't have flown then any more than it would fly now in terms of what is being done to women's rights.
	Biological women's rights which have a biological essence, a biological root to them.
	It has a historical root to them as well.
	When you celebrate the first woman to have accomplished something where historically biological women were excluded from participation because they were biologically women.
	When you detract from that recognition or dilute that recognition or, I'll dare say, trump that recognition with a recognition that is now being given to biological males because they identify as being women, whatever that means in biology, you are undoing women's rights.
	Period.
	Full stop.
	It becomes even more apparent when you get into the realm of sports where biology, more so than history, plays a determinant.
	Where you have anybody just denying basic biology, trust the science, my ass, but where you have like the Leah Thompsons of the world, biological males who have gone through puberty, who have had all the benefits of testosterone, bone mass, muscle mass, arm span, later on in life after having had all these benefits, identifying as something which they are biologically not.
	And then competing in a sport which was designated, given the biological differences between biological males and biological females, it's an injustice that cannot be overstated, but one that is not necessarily rooted as much in history as in biology.
	Women of the Year was intended to recognize success of women who had been historically, I presume, either discouraged, disincentivized, or outright And then we get to the...
	And then we get to the...
	I'm a Minnesota honoree.
	I have no judgment for anybody who chooses to live the way they choose to live.
	The biological fiction in which we are being browbeaten into living is becoming a little suffocating.
	Lee Fink.
	I don't know what stage of the transition, if you can call it that, Fink is going through.
	I don't know if Fink is intact biologically.
	I'll get there in a second.
	She never planned to be a politician.
	Now she's the first transgender legislator in the state's House of Representatives fighting to build a better future for trans youth.
	I haven't read the more, actually.
	Have I read the more here?
	Our movement for justice...
	Well, let me see.
	We're not looking at the same thing here.
	Let's just look at this.
	Remind me, Chad, in case I forget.
	The argument, well, if a woman has her uterus removed, is she still a woman?
	Well, what makes a woman?
	She has uterus and breasts.
	Well, if she has her breasts removed, is she still a woman?
	What makes a biological man or male a male?
	Male genitalia.
	Well, if you remove those male genitalia, are they not still a biological man?
	Even by the own argument that people use to show that having your uterus removed does not make you less of a woman?
	Don't ask for consistency.
	But this is the argument that is raised, where someone says, define what a woman is.
	And then most people say, okay, well, they have a uterus.
	Oh, so a woman who had a hysterectomy is no longer a woman?
	That's a stupid definition.
	Okay, let me follow your logic then.
	What's a biological man?
	Someone born with male genitalia.
	Typically, there might be some astronomical anomaly where someone is actually biologically male but born without genitalia for whatever the reason.
	But...
	That would be it.
	Oh, so you're saying if they remove their genitalia, they won't be a biological myth?
	Well, following your argument for what doesn't make a woman a woman, that is exactly true.
	Let's just read this.
	Our movement for justice are lifelong.
	Meet Minnesota's first transgender legislator.
	Lee Fink is one of USA Today's Women of the Year.
	A recognition of women who have made a significant impact in their communities and across the country.
	They are asking us to add two and two together and say that it equals five.
	Lee, I know some people take issue with the term transgender because the argument is you can't trans from something you're not.
	You can't transition from something that you are to something that you're not.
	You just can't do it.
	I know the argument.
	You can cosmetically make yourself look like, but you're not transitioning from anything to anything.
	You will always be biologically male, despite cosmetically superficially looking female.
	Okay.
	I think we understand as a colloquial term, transgender means, or transitioning means, means just doing that.
	The non-biological cosmetic alteration, however radical they might be.
	But we are being told to refer to a biological male.
	As what we implicitly recognize that they are not, and called bigots if we say simply, I'll call Lee by Lee's first name, but don't tell me to call Lee by something that denies the biology of who Lee is as a biological being.
	But now, USA Today, not only must you recognize Lee as something that Lee is biologically not, we are going to take the place Of a biological woman and recognize Lee as a woman, not a trans woman.
	And one would think the newsworthiness, the political attention, the media attention that this issue is getting, that you'd have a very large depth of field of a trans category in sports, in politics, in recognition for whatever.
	Make a trans person of the year.
	And then award trans individuals, whatever you understand that to be, with these awards.
	But we're being told to deny basic biology.
	And we're being told to deny our own thoughts and our own, they're not even beliefs, our own scientific matters of fact.
	I'm being told that, oh, someone born a man can change to a woman?
	No, he can cosmetically do a number of things to make himself look like a woman, and if that makes him happy in life, none of my business.
	Really, none of my business.
	Are we going to read this whole thing?
	What is your definition of courage?
	Courage is just doing the right thing.
	Knowing what the right thing is is not courage, but doing it in the face of hardship is.
	That, to me, seems like what it means to be courageous.
	That's a very, very poignant definition of courage.
	A lot of people who are saying, don't tell me to call a biological man a she, don't call me a bigot, and if I'm going to do that and take the heat, that might be courage by Lee's own definition.
	Lee is free to be as Lee wants, but Lee is not free to tell me what to think and to tell me to deny basic biology.
	And good for Fink, for...
	For the accomplishment.
	I wonder if Lee is proud knowing that there is a biological female for whom this category was created that has been bumped off that pedestal for whatever it's worth.
	But I think it's worth nothing because it's USA Today and it's pure rubbish.
	Pure rubbish.
	But speaking, and we're going to get to the Canadian insanity now.
	Let me just go to the chat.
	And see if anybody has heard of Bill C-4.
	Bill C-4, people.
	Who's heard of it?
	Yes, I've heard of it.
	No, I have not.
	Somebody who's watching me says they never stop pushing and they're after the kids in the end.
	We're all seeing that now.
	They're not hiding it anymore.
	They're so not hiding it, they're legislating it in Canada.
	Courage is doing the right thing regardless of the hardships you face.
	Well, you know what that might entail?
	That might entail telling a 10-year-old confused kid that they might feel like a boy today, whatever the hell that means.
	But as an adult, as a mature adult, I'm not going to let a child with an undeveloped brain, with a confused sense of identity, permanently alter their body.
	For the rest of their lives to cater to that irrational, undeveloped whim of a child.
	Oh, and I'm the bigot.
	Not only am I the bigot, in Canada, one might be the criminal.
	If they tell their own kid, I know you feel like a boy today, Tommy, whatever that means.
	Hey, here's an idea.
	Maybe you're just gay.
	Is that radical?
	Hey, I'm a boy, I'm attracted to other boys, or I'm a girl and I'm attracted to other girls.
	I must be a girl.
	Let's take one sex just so that I'm consistent.
	I'm a boy that's attracted to a boy.
	Oh, if I talk to a trans activist, they're going to say, that's because you're a girl.
	Whatever happened to just being gay?
	I'm a boy that's attracted to a boy.
	Okay.
	The irony of the trans movement.
	As we are seeing it metastasized today, is that it's fundamentally misogynist, and it's inherently homophobic.
	It's inherently homophobic.
	And by the way, the victims of all of this are going to be gays, young gays, young lesbians, and impressionable children.
	And for that, I don't know how it happened, they've got the eye of the legislator.
	Let me see something here.
	Let me pull up the law, Bill C-4.
	Look, wait until...
	I'm not pulling up the actual law.
	I'm going to pull up just the...
	Bill C-4, people.
	An act to amend the criminal code.
	This is law now, by the way, in Canada.
	It passed in January 2022, or it was received...
	I'll look at it to see when it received royal assent.
	An act to amend the criminal code.
	The criminal code...
	What the hell is my problem?
	An act to amend the criminal code.
	Conversion therapy.
	Hey, spoiler alert, people.
	Conversion therapy, one way, is criminalized.
	Conversion therapy, another way right now, not so much.
	And just wait until you...
	This is coming from the justice point, qc.ca, justice.governmentofcanada.ca.
	Explanatory note.
	Section 4.2 of the Department of Justice Act requires the Minister of Justice to prepare a charter statement for every government bill to help inform public and parliamentary debate on government bills.
	One of the Ministers of Justice's most important responsibility...
	Charter considerations.
	The Minister of Justice has examined Bill C-4, an act to amend the criminal code conversion therapy, for any inconsistency with the charter pursuant to his obligation under Section His.
	Under Section 4.1 of the Department of Justice Act, this review involved consideration of the objectives and features of the bill.
	What follows is a non-exhaustive discussion of the ways in which Bill C-4 potentially engages the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Charter.
	It is presented to assist in informing the public and parliamentary debate on the bill.
	Listen to this.
	So this is old, but whatever.
	Overview.
	Listen to this.
	Bill C-4 would amend the criminal code to prohibit certain activities that relates to conversion therapy.
	Well, that's funny, because when you hear it, you might think that it's actually going to outlaw converting boys to girls, transitioning girls to boys, double mastectomies, bottom surgeries, lopping off functional genitalia to convert literally, or to attempt to convert literally.
	One sex to the other.
	You'd be wrong if you thought that.
	Conversion therapy, which is defined as a practice, treatment, or service designed to wait until you see how unidirectional this is and deliberately so.
	It's in your face.
	Conversion therapy is defined as a practice, treatment, or service designed to change a person's sexual orientation to heterosexual.
	You can change them to gay.
	You can change them to trans, but you can't change their sexual orientation to heterosexual.
	Change a person's gender identity to cisgender.
	What the heck does cisgender mean again?
	Look up cisgender.
	A cisgender person is someone who has a gender identity that matches their sex assigned at birth.
	Conversion therapy, that would be outlawed, is changing a person's practice.
	Treatment service designed to change a person's gender identity to cisgender, but you can change it to trans.
	Change a person's gender expression so that it conforms to the sex assigned to the person at birth, but you can change them to a sex that they weren't assigned at birth.
	Repress or reduce non-heterosexual attraction or sexual behavior.
	Repress a person's non...
	Can you imagine our legislators are using...
	Our government is using this terminology.
	Repress a person's non-cisgender identity or repress or reduce a person's gender expression that does not conform to the sex assigned to that person at birth.
	Conversion therapy is basically anything that would involve trying to veer someone back to...
	Heterosexuality to accepting their gender identity as assigned at birth, whatever the hell that is.
	Do you know what this basically does?
	This criminalizes treatment of gender dysphoria.
	Some of you may not know what gender dysphoria is.
	Because once upon a time, everything that we're discussing now is trans ideology.
	Is known as gender dysphoria.
	It's in the...
	Just so nobody thinks I'm making this up, they're going to call me a bigot for, you know, being all medical.
	It's only a matter of time before they try to abridge or amend the DSM-5 or 6 or 7, whatever, just to take gender dysphoria out of there.
	It's no longer going to be an issue.
	I mean, OCD is going to be an issue.
	Feeling anxiety, stress, if you don't do certain things compulsively, that'll still be recognized as a mental issue, a mental illness under the DSF.
	They're going to take out gender dysphoria.
	The extreme unease of feeling that you're not the sex that you were born into, that'll be taken out.
	Gender dysphoria is a term that describes a sense of unease that a person may have because of a mismatch between their biological sex and their gender identity.
	The sense of unease or dissatisfaction may be so intense that it can lead to depression, anxiety.
	uh This is from NHS.
	Let's just go to DSM-5.
	We're going to go back to that provision of criminal law now.
	You can't try to talk someone out of their gender dysphoria.
	You can only affirm it.
	And Jordan Peterson had an amazing segment on the idea that a psychiatrist or a therapist or a cognitive behavioral therapist or a psychologist's role in treating a patient is to affirm.
	Their mental issues.
	Like, that's what they're for.
	Psychiatrists there are now no longer there to advise, assess, and provide medical expertise.
	They're there simply to affirm the dysphoria of their patients.
	Gender dysphoria, a concept designated in the DSM-5 TR as clinically significant distress or impairment related to gender incongruous, which may include desire to change primary and or secondary sex characteristics.
	Not all transgender or gender diverse People experience gender dysphoria.
	American Psychiatric Association.
	Don't blame me, people.
	I didn't make this up.
	The bill would prohibit certain activities related to conversion therapy, which is defined as treatment service designed to change a person's sexual orientation to heterosexual, change a person's gender identity to cisgender.
	Well, that's it!
	Our government...
	Has just handcuffed and crippled and criminalized the subcategory of psychiatry related to the treatment of gender dysphoria.
	Because if anybody now says to someone suffering from gender dysphoria, maybe wait this out.
	Here are some things you can do to treat the anxiety, to possibly come to grips with, to realign with your sex assigned at birth.
	It's going to be potentially criminal right now.
	Prohibition causing another person to under...
	What this was intended to...
	I presume...
	I'm not even sure that I can presume that anymore.
	I imagine what this was intended to target was kidnapping young gay kids by ultra-religious individuals, parents, whatever, who want to exercise the gay out of them.
	I can only think of something that would involve criminality and not just words.
	Like a religious parent who I respect the beliefs.
	I understand the way they might feel about homosexuality.
	I can safely say I do not share those beliefs.
	What I imagine this was intended to outlaw was kidnapping, psychological abuse.
	I can imagine a parent waking their gay kid up every two...
	In a horror movie, I can imagine this.
	I don't think this is the way the religious people work at all.
	So I'm not trying to stereotype.
	The type of abuse of waking a gay kid up every two hours and saying, you're going to go to hell if you don't get straight.
	I can imagine that, but you know what?
	Criminal laws already exist to prohibit that type of conduct.
	Criminal harassment, psychological abuse, parental abuse, like waking up, kidnapping, it's already there.
	This now basically criminalizes a concerned, potentially religious and not necessarily even religious parent saying, you'll grow out of this phase.
	Maybe it's just a phase.
	Maybe, you know, calm down, live life.
	And you'll grow out of it.
	Telling a kid they might grow out of a phase right now, potentially criminal.
	Who the hell knows because it's so bloody ambiguous.
	That's what it was intended to cover, outright abuse in terms of conversion therapies.
	What's quite clear from this is that it bans pretty much one unidirectional.
	If you're telling someone that they're not, you can't tell someone they're straight.
	You can't tell someone that they're male if they were born male.
	But you sure as hell can convert them.
	The other way.
	You sure as hell can.
	It almost seems like it's implicitly protected under this drafting.
	Hold on.
	Here we go.
	Where was it?
	Here.
	Check this out.
	Canada Bill C4 banning conversion therapy comes into force January 7, 2022.
	Bill C-4, a federal bill that amends Canada's criminal by creating new criminal offenses.
	Nothing's better than creating new criminal offenses where you already had provisions of law to deal with those very same conceptual acts of potential criminality.
	Related to conversion therapy came into effect.
	The new offenses include knowingly causing another person to undergo conversion therapy, promoting or advertising conversion therapy.
	Can't even talk about it.
	Promoting it.
	And receiving financial or material benefit from conversion therapy.
	I hope to goodness this comes back and bites the asses of the doctors performing actual, literal conversion therapy.
	Biological, hormonal, genital mutilation conversion therapy.
	I don't think it can reasonably because it doesn't seem to be worded that way.
	But my goodness, it would be ironic if this law is used to criminally pursue those who cause, promote, materially, financially benefit from double mastectomies, or as they like to euphemistically call it, top surgeries, lopping off functional penises, what they call bottom surgeries, it would be...
	Ultimate, ultimate irony.
	But you know what?
	You don't need new laws to deal with that for which there are already existing laws.
	I don't need a new law to prohibit genital mutilation in children.
	Don't need it.
	But now we're being told 2 plus 2 is 5. Someone born a biological male, you have to call that person a she.
	And it's not genital mutilation to lop off the functional breasts or penises of young...
	People who are not old enough to consent to a tattoo, it's gender-affirming care.
	It's not genital mutilation.
	It's gender-affirming care.
	My goodness, everybody engaged in clitoral circumcision practices, just use the language.
	It's religious-affirming care.
	Without getting into the male circumcision debate, just change the terms.
	Flip it around on their head.
	Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Cal, David Lamedi.
	You may remember David Lamedi.
	He's the guy that replaced Jody Wilson-Raybould.
	And...
	Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Youth Marcy Yen introduced the bill on November 29, 2021.
	On December 1, members of Parliament and the House of Commons unanimously agreed to expeditiously adopt a motion to pass the bill.
	Do you know what this means?
	Bullshit.
	This means freaking institutionalized corruption.
	Expeditiously pass the bill.
	Because at one point it was called Bill C-6?
	And I don't know what happened to Bill C-6.
	I think it died the same way Bill C-11, the act to regulate online streaming, died and then they just rammed it through as Bill C-10.
	But they just did the same thing here.
	Bill dies with the legislature, rammed it through.
	Expeditiously.
	You know what you can't do expeditiously is pass laws.
	You know what you can't do expeditiously?
	Have thorough, meaningful public debate.
	And by the way, unanimously, When it comes to something of criminalizing words and thoughts, being unanimous is not a good sign.
	It means that people are drinking the same Kool-Aid or flipping cowards.
	And by the way, unanimously, that would involve the so-called Conservative Party of Canada.
	Soon after, the bill was also fast-tracked in the Senate, and on December 7, it was passed without amendment.
	The bill received royal assent December 8, 2021.
	The bill itself...
	There you go.
	Contents of the bill.
	This bill defines conversion therapy as follows.
	Conversion therapy means a practice, treatment, or service designed to change a person's sexual orientation to heterosexual.
	How the hell do you pass a law that's drafted like that?
	Why would it not just be to change a person's sexual orientation?
	Why would it not be that?
	How could it not be that?
	How could this have received unanimous approval?
	What do they call it?
	Unanimous!
	Nobody stopped to say, wait a minute, why would it only be, why would it only relate to changing a person's sexual orientation to heterosexual?
	So I can tell someone to be gay?
	I mean, that's what it means.
	So I can tell someone to be gay.
	I can tell a boy to become a girl.
	But I can't tell a boy who, in that moment of their life, thinks that they're a girl that, no, you're really a boy and you might just grow out of this.
	Change a person's gender identity to cisgender.
	Why wouldn't it just be to change a person's gender identity?
	Change a person's gender expression so that it conforms to the sex assigned to the person at birth.
	Why wouldn't it just be to change a person's gender expression?
	This law is intended to promote trans.
	That's it.
	It's intended to promote what is a diagnosed mental condition under the DSM-5.
	That's what it is intended to promote, exacerbate, and amplify what is recognized under the DSM-5 as gender dysphoria.
	Repress a person's non-cisgender.
	Oh, so you can then...
	Repress a person's non-cis...
	So you can change a person's gender identity to non-cisgender.
	You're allowed to do that.
	You're allowed that conversion therapy, but not to cisgender.
	You're not allowed repressing a person's non...
	You're not allowed...
	Let me see if I can get this mental gymnastics in my head.
	You cannot repress a person's non-cisgender identity, but you can repress.
	You can conversion therapy repress someone's cisgender identity.
	You can tell someone...
	Dude, you're not actually what you...
	You think you are what you're in your birth certificate, but look at you.
	You got long hair.
	You're a little effeminate.
	Maybe you're not a boy.
	You can do that.
	You can do that conversion therapy.
	You can chop their dicks off.
	It's amazing.
	You can chop off their tits, and you can chop off their dicks.
	I should say that more politely.
	You can remove their breasts, and you can remove their male genitalia.
	That, oddly enough, would not be conversion therapy under this law.
	That's weird.
	Don't get angry, though.
	And don't object to it.
	It was unanimous.
	Even the Conservative Party of Canada agreed to this.
	So if you don't agree with this, as Maxine Bernier of the People's Party of Canada didn't, it's unanimous.
	It's unanimous.
	You can't argue with unanimity.
	Unanimity makes right, right?
	Especially when you're all...
	Oh my gosh.
	This is law in Canada now.
	A one-way prohibition on conversion therapy, which is a one-way free-for-all on the inverted conversion therapy.
	Thank you.
	Unbelievable.
	Unbelievable.
	Okay, there's more to it.
	Let me just get some rumble rants up here.
	Astro Sweat says, the madness coming full circle, women entering drag show competitions, and the trans community calls that an unfair advantage.
	Second Amendment or Die says, Viva, can't wait to see you in Chattanooga in the great volunteer state of Tennessee.
	Ginger Ninja here, by the way.
	Thank you very much.
	Until then, God bless.
	Thank you very much.
	Yeah, we're going to have our next meetup.
	In Chattanooga, Tennessee.
	It's going to be amazing.
	Viva!
	This is from Ant M. It's about control.
	He's not a woman.
	They want me to say that's a woman.
	And don't believe your lying eyes.
	It's the same as anorexia, a mental illness.
	Shesko S., $2 rumble rant, says YouTube is pulling down streams that show NCI, National Citizen Inquiry.
	Maverick News had a channel banned for covering.
	Well, that might make me want to cover it a little more.
	I haven't been avoiding it for any reason.
	Other than the fact that it's all day long and I haven't been able to.
	And I was waiting for clips so I can look at that.
	But that makes me want to cover it a little more right now.
	Interesting.
	Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Madness.
	It's absolute madness.
	Okay.
	That might be it coming out of Canada.
	No, hold on.
	Because that's segwayed into something else.
	Quiet dog.
	Okay, so this we already covered.
	Get that out of here.
	No, we might have covered Bill C-4, law in Canada.
	Let's see where this goes.
	Oh, that's it.
	Okay, good.
	No, hold on a second.
	So, here.
	One more thing coming out of Canada that will blow your mind.
	Remember when they froze the bank accounts of truckers during the Ottawa convoy?
	This is behind a paywall.
	I got a copy that was not...
	I got the full text of the article behind a paywall.
	But listen to this.
	From Blacklock's reporter, not to be confused with BlackRock, Fed blacklists went...
	Come on, get out of there.
	Far wide.
	A federal blacklist of Freedom Convoy sympathizers was emailed to foreign banks with offices from Wall Street to Beijing, records show.
	The RCMP placed no restrictions on distribution of the blacklist.
	Information was shared.
	So the government of Canada is trying to interfere with people's potential international banking.
	It wasn't enough that they overstepped their bounds, although it got ratified by Commissioner Rulo of freezing bank accounts and deemed acceptable.
	They are sending a list out to foreign banks, ostensibly in the hopes of getting people debanked abroad, bringing in a formal social credit system in banking itself.
	Mess around, get debanked.
	Espouse beliefs that the government doesn't like?
	Well, we're not going to tell the banks what to do.
	We're just going to send along a notice and let the banks who have these one-sided contracts of adhesion that basically allow for the unilateral, no explanations given, Termination of banking agreements online and in person.
	Just let them know.
	You might be dealing with a rabble rouser.
	You might be dealing with the fringe minority holding unacceptable views.
	It doesn't end.
	It doesn't end.
	All right.
	And before we head over to Rumble, people.
	Not Rumble.
	Locals.
	Before we head over to locals, I just wanted to bring...
	This we brought up.
	Adverse of X. We brought that up.
	Okay.
	Good.
	What do we have?
	Oh, that's what I wanted to bring up.
	The mask mandates.
	The masks do nothing.
	The mask mandates did nothing.
	Will any lessons be learned?
	It's an opinion.
	From Brett Stevens.
	The most rigorous and comprehensive analysis of scientific studies conducted on the efficacy of masks for reducing the spread of respiratory illness, including COVID-19, was published late last month.
	Its conclusions, said Tom Jefferson, the Oxford epidemiologist, who is its lead author, were unambiguous.
	There is just no evidence that they, masks, make any difference, he told the journal Marilyn Damacy, full stop.
	But wait, hold on.
	What about M95 masks as opposed to lower quality surgical or cloth masks?
	Makes no difference.
	None of it, said Jefferson.
	What about the studies that initially persuaded policymakers to impose mask mandates?
	They were convinced by non-randomized studies, flawed observational studies.
	What about the utility of masks in conjunction with other preventative measures such as hand hygiene, physical distancing, or air filtration?
	There's no evidence that many of these things make any difference.
	These observations don't come from just anywhere.
	Jefferson and 11 colleagues conducted the study for Cochrane, a British non-profit.
	That is widely considered the gold standard for its reviews of healthcare data.
	The conclusion were based on 78 randomized controlled trials, six of them during COVID pandemic, with a total of 610 participants in multiple countries, and they track what has widely been observed in the United States.
	States with mask mandates fared no better against COVID than those with that.
	Conspiracy theory, people.
	Trust the science.
	Here's the link to the article.
	I didn't give the archive link, so...
	Trust the science and they still have mask mandates in Canada and elsewhere.
	It's a bloody outrage.
	Should have done that on YouTube so that YouTube doesn't accuse me of medical misinformation because, you know, I can read and I know which scientists to rely on.
	And I know that there was a reason why on those boxes it said does not protect against coronavirus.
	I know there's a reason.
	But at least they cause no harm.
	Bullshit!
	And I've talked to a number of experts now that have confirmed.
	No!
	They don't not cause harm.
	Some say they cause an increased intake of CO2.
	I'm not sure that I'm convinced about that.
	What I am convinced about is that some of the masks were potentially toxic.
	And that's going to be a problem.
	Some of them contained a little microparticle known as graphene, which people were inhaling.
	Eight hours a day when they were being compelled by the government to wear these shitty, toxic masks.
	Oh, and then the government recalls them afterwards.
	They were being forced to wear government-specified masks with no alternative of bringing their own masks for hours on end, days on end, months on end, potentially toxic.
	Oh, but the good masks are not potentially...
	Yeah, well, that's if you get the good masks.
	So set aside the potentially toxic masks.
	There still is lasting damage.
	I've talked to dentists or dental hygienists.
	No, dentists.
	Who confirm an increase in cavities.
	Because apparently it's not good to keep that humidity in there.
	It raises the acidity level or something along those lines in saliva.
	Increased cavities in kids who are wearing masks.
	What was the other one?
	That actually blew my mind.
	They called it maskne.
	The kids at school have a word for it.
	It's called maskne.
	Acne under the masks.
	Mold on these masks.
	Because kids, like I always said, are idiots.
	Kids are idiots.
	Their brains are not developed, which is why you don't let them decide to lop off functional genitalia or take hormone blockers that are going to permanently screw up their physiological development.
	They're idiots.
	They don't dispose of the masks the way you're supposed to.
	They use disgusting masks day in and day out that have potential mold on them.
	Oh, it's not even that they were harmless.
	They were harmful and useless.
	But Justin Trudeau, listen to him.
	He knows the science.
	If you criticize masks, you're as idiotic as a flat earther.
	But don't take my word for it.
	I just know which experts I think are the good ones.
	Ugh.
	Ugh.
	Do we want to listen to that one more time?
	Yeah, let's listen to it.
	Before the pandemic, I'm really fascinated by flat earthers.
	By the way, I'm now convinced there was a reason why YouTube was promoting Flat Earth for a little while.
	Flat Earth theorists.
	It's specifically, and why the media paid so much attention to it, it's specifically to lump everybody into the most untenable theories.
	Even though, you know, the moon landing, I now understand the arguments, and they're not as absurd as some might have you believe.
	Flat Earth, I had the interview with Mark Sargent.
	I know where the, not the sophistry is, but rather the Zanonian...
	The Zenonian logic, they've created a set of rules that can never be disproven.
	People are free to believe whatever the heck they want.
	But now I sort of get the feeling I understand why the media, why social media, why platforms were giving so much attention, such a big bullhorn to Flat Earth in particular.
	It's so they can then lump in everything.
	Legitimate.
	Legitimate conspiracy, legitimate theories, legitimate objection, lump it all together.
	If you think masks are useless and cause problems, you're as out there as someone who thinks the earth is flat.
	And sort of the thinking behind them of people who decided actively to create an identity for themselves that was to just clearly reject...
	Clearly reject.
	Science settled thousands of years ago with the ancient Greeks.
	Yeah.
	Boys have penises.
	Girls have vaginas.
	You might be able to manufacture something that looks like a penis, but in as much as a woman who has her ovaries removed for a hysterectomy is still a woman, a man who has his penis removed and turned into a vagina is still a man.
	You know why?
	Because we know.
	What do they call them?
	Whatever it is.
	It's like sucking and blowing.
	What we've known for thousands of years about the round earth makes these people lunatics.
	And what we've known for thousands of years about procreation, biology, and basic sex, we've now criminalized discussion about in Canada.
	I can't listen to him.
	I can't listen to him.
	Okay, before I actually get in trouble at home, I'm going to go share in the link section here, locals.
	Come on over to Locals.
	I'm going to do the Locals exclusive portion of this at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Locals, if anybody wants to support the channel, it's the best place to do it, to support Barnes and myself, to support me and Barnes in our venture.
	It's an amazing community.
	We are now at over 107,000 members.
	So, 500 and whatever thousand on YouTube, 333,000 on...
	And we're at 107,000 in our vivabarneslaw.locals.com community on Locals.
	They're not all supporters.
	They're just members of the community.
	There's some stuff that's behind the paywall for the supporters, and then a ton of stuff that is open for everybody.
	It's a great community.
	As Robert says, we are all above average in our vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	We're going to go over there and have the remainder of the conversation.
	So if you're so inclined, head over.
	Seven bucks a month, 70 bucks a year if anybody wants to.
	You get a ton of exclusive content.
	And you get the benefits of the...
	What's the word I'm looking for?
	The exclusive stuff after the public stuff.
	We like to stay on YouTube to drive the traffic over and awareness over to Rumble.
	From Rumble to our beautiful community on Locals.
	And what's coming up for the rest of the week, people?
	I don't know, but I'm going to play us out on YouTube.
	I'm going to play us out on Rumble with something that's just...
	I went to Robbie's Marina yesterday.
	I love Robbie's Marina.
	So I said we're on our road trip, you know, spring break, five days down in the Florida Keys, which I had no idea.
	It's barely over two hours away from where we live.
	And it's just a magical place.
	Robbie's Marina is the magic of all magic.
	And I go to Robbie's Marina, and I told my wife, I said, I'm just going to make a short, dedicated vlog to Robbie's Marina.
	In the 30 minutes that we're there, because my kids said, Dad, you're not feeding the frickin' tarpon for more than 30 minutes.
	You have 30 minutes.
	Do what you need to do.
	We're going to get an ice cream.
	In the 30 minutes that I was there, I saw a manatee.
	I saw multiple manatees, because the manatees were at the dock drinking fresh water and fraternizing with the tarpon.
	I saw sharks.
	In the tarpon pit, eating the fish that people were blowing in there, dropping in there.
	I dropped my GoPro into the pit by accident because a tarpon sucked the GoPro and I was holding it on a stick and it pulled it out of my hand.
	A man went into the pit to get the GoPro at the bottom of the ocean.
	We then saw a pelican with a hook in its mouth that had lodged its own beak to its own wing.
	We rescued the pelican.
	I mean, it was like 30 minutes of magic.
	Like, mind-blowing magic.
	I'm going to share it with...
	I'm going to share some of it.
	Not all of it.
	Because I want you to go watch it on Rumble.
	Where's that video?
	I love rubbish marina.
	Here we go.
	I'll play some of this.
	This is a Tempur-Pedic mattress.
	This is a quality app.
	A thing of the past.
	By relieving pressure points and supporting your body in a way no other mattress can.
	For a limited time, save $300 on select Tempur-Pedic mattresses.
	This is a good sign.
	Check it out.
	Oh my goodness, there's a lot of cars.
	I'm doing a specific, dedicated short video about Robbie's Marina.
	Because I love Robbie's Marina.
	You hand feed tarpon.
	I may not hand feed the tarpon quite letting it ingest me again because my hand is hurting.
	Look at this.
	Look at that.
	That hurt.
	There's good ice cream?
	I think.
	So I drop my GoPro into the tarpon pit.
	Oh my goodness.
	Dude in the back.
	He works at water.
	Check this out.
	Just another day at the office.
	And I'm off.
	Oh, he's in the water.
	He's in the water.
	Okay.
	So he gets the GoPro.
	He gets the GoPro.
	What kind of idiot does this?
	Plays with a stupid thing and drops it in the water and makes a man go in the water.
	Oh my goodness.
	It's only been 11 minutes also.
	Look at the video.
	Oh, everyone, cheers!
	There's an Operation Pelican Rescue.
	You're gonna man the phone?
	You man the phone while I see what they're doing here.
	Oh my god.
	Teller, look at my big, my good pliers for my electrical kit.
	So check, see if you can, um, you can clip the barbin.
	Like from here?
	No, no, no.
	Here, watch out.
	Just if you go to look here.
	I pinched the barb.
	Let's try first with the big pliers.
	So what's it stuck into its mouth here?
	Probably the line.
	Slide that up.
	I learned a thing about pelicans.
	They have to have their mouths open to breathe.
	Watch your hands here.
	Watch this.
	The hook is through its beak.
	Into its wings.
	Now you should be able to get the hook through.
	A stainless steel hook.
	That little hole there won't be too bad.
	No, no, no.
	Put it on my tail.
	Here, hold on.
	Just do it like this.
	There you go.
	Now hold his beak.
	You can lose that hand.
	I got it here.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	And that's it.
	You can probably pull it through the wings.
	I think it's the bone right there.
	One, two, three.
	There you go.
	There you go.
	It's okay.
	I got it.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	Go watch the whole video.
	It's great.
	I love Robbie's Marina.
	Hashtag not an ad.
	Some products are so good.
	Anyone who experiences them will sell them willingly.
	Robbie's Marina.
	All right, everybody.
	Make your way over to Locals.
	I'll see you there in a few seconds.
	And let me go here, just see what's going on in the chitty chat.
	Oh, did I miss any rumble rants?
	I did.
	Let me get those before we leave.
	Hold on.
	Share screen.
	There's only a few.
	I don't want to ignore them.
	Crafting with bits.
	When they start the gender surgery, they are legal.
	But when they are done, since they make a woman a woman...
	They are in violation of the law.
	Love your new studio.
	This is Siantharia.
	Thank you very much.
	Astro Sweat.
	The madness coming full circle.
	Okay, we got that one.
	All right.
	So now what we are doing, we're going to end on Rumble and go over to Locals Exclusive where the party shall continue.
	Chattanooga, April 21st.
	It's going to be amazing.
	I can actually drive there.
	I'm going to see Chattanooga.
	Barnes and I are going to do like a historical tour of the city.
	It's going to be amazing.
	Ending on Rumble now.
	See you all on Locals, vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Even though I know that this is going to get cut off anyhow when I end the stream, but ending it, see you all tomorrow.
	If you're not following us on to Locals, vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Booyah.
	And now, Locals people, how we doing?
	We're still live on Locals?
	This is from ZBK1.
	The reason that gender can't really change is because of chromosomes.
	Male XY, female XX.

▲