Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 3, 2023 - Viva & Barnes

01:50:41

Fox News Making Themselves IRRELEVANT; Liberals Keep LYING! AND MORE! Viva Frei Live!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Let me pull this up here.
	We'll read the caption.
	Page isn't working.
	That's interesting.
	Okay.
	Let's read the caption.
	The line this morning at the Fort York Food Bank.
	The struggle is real in Toronto.
	This is Toronto, Ontario.
	Let me just make sure I have the right mic on.
	I screwed everything up today.
	I don't know why I put 1330 as the start time on YouTube.
	It's supposed to be one o 'clock.
	That's what I had on Rumble.
	So we'll see if the YouTube notifications work.
	Let me just make sure that I have the right mic because I was a little...
	There we go.
	I got the right mic.
	Okay, so first of all, this is...
	Get down here.
	This is out of Ontario.
	And you never...
	I mean, look, we're going to talk about a couple of things today.
	You never know what is accurate and what is not.
	This could be an old video.
	This could be a one-off.
	This could be a lineup to a movie theater and someone's maliciously and dishonestly saying it's a food bank in Ontario.
	Ashley Stewart.
	Don't know who this person is from a hole in the wall.
	Investigative journalist.
	Toronto via Dubai.
	Christchurch, Tokyo, Jakarta.
	Jakarta, sorry.
	Toronto, Ontario.
	So, 40,000 followers.
	It looks like this is not an outright lie.
	These are the lineups at the food banks in Ontario.
	And then, everybody, let's run to spin it politically.
	By the way, just to verify you go and you read in the chat, in the comments, I bike bar there regularly and it's getting longer every week.
	This is from someone purported to be from Ontario.
	Who knows?
	But you approach the information you get on the internet with a certain degree of skepticism and you do the best that you can.
	The people politicking this and you get your Trudeau supporters who, you know, some people are going to blame this on Trudeau.
	Some people are going to blame this on Doug Ford.
	The progressive conservative out of Ontario, whatever the hell progressive conservative means.
	And everyone's running to spin it the way they want.
	Oh, that's Doug Ford's conservative Ontario.
	Don't blame Justin Trudeau.
	Blame Doug Ford.
	As if poverty across Canada, food banks across Canada, children not getting breakfast across Canada is not consistent.
	Both are indeed at fault.
	We've got billions to fund proxy wars in Ukraine.
	Billions!
	We've got billions to fund proxy wars in Ukraine.
	And what do we have for Canadians?
	Food bank lines, censorship, and assisted suicide.
	Maids.
	Medical assistance in time.
	Because it's cheaper.
	I make a joke, but it's not a joke.
	Doug Ford.
	I don't know what makes anybody conservative versus liberal anymore.
	Concept of progressive conservative, I don't know what it means.
	It sounds like an oxymoron, like a flat mountain, a jumbo shrimp, an honest lawyer.
	It sounds like an oxymoron.
	Progressive conservatism?
	All that I know is that in policy, there's very little that distinguishes Doug Ford from Justin Trudeau.
	Both supported massive lockdowns.
	Both supported an outright...
	China-type style police state.
	Although I have a friend who I went to high school with who lives in China.
	He said it's not even as bad as it is in China.
	It's not as bad in China as it is in Canada.
	But buddy, I went to high school with this guy.
	He's living in China.
	We're messaging.
	He's like, this was like, you know, towards the tail end of COVID, two years in.
	Two years into the two weeks to flatten the curve, we're DMing.
	And he says, what the hell's going on in Canada?
	I'm walking around here.
	We're not wearing face masks.
	Nobody's locking us down.
	Doug Ford, the progressive conservative who took a big steaming dump on our Charter of Rights, locked people down, imposed vaccine mandates, wanted to empower the police to unilaterally, arbitrarily stop and frisk would have been nice by comparison.
	To stop people in public and ask if they had permission to be out of their houses during lockdowns.
	Yeah, he's real conservative.
	What the hell does conservative mean anymore?
	So blame progressive conservatives?
	Sure, do it.
	I blame them all for the radical increase in poverty hardships currently going on in Canada.
	I blame Doug Ford.
	Remorselessly and relentlessly.
	I blame Justin Trudeau, the one who wanted to finance to the tune of a billion dollars of provincial vaccine passport systems.
	Can you imagine this?
	We've got people dying and waiting in ERs.
	Doctors fleeing.
	The country because of the working conditions in hospitals.
	But Justin Trudeau, in addition to finding billions to fund the proxy war against Russia and Ukraine, while making the East Coast raise money for rehabilitation after the hurricanes last summer, he's got a billion dollars to finance a vaccine passport system.
	A billion dollars!
	Where the hell did that money come from?
	And where the hell did that project go?
	Because they dropped the vaccine passports.
	But I'm sure a number of people made a lot of money in the interim of that stupid system that we had in Quebec, the QR code system, an app that cost however many tens of millions of dollars.
	Justin Trudeau is not solely to blame.
	And my goodness, I would have never thought that one human could have single-handedly brought a country to its knees.
	Lo and behold, Justin Trudeau did it in no time at all.
	I think he was elected into power in 2015.
	Eight years.
	You know, you look at Venezuela and how it took, what, a decade to go from a prosperous, thriving economy to a socialist nightmare?
	Eight years under Trudeau.
	But hold on.
	Let me just...
	Oh, where's the tweet?
	There was a tweet while there's lineups to get food.
	And they're going to praise themselves and saying, we're able to get food to a record number of people.
	How the heck did I not bring up the tweet from Omar Algebra?
	While there are lineups for food banks at an ever-increasing rate.
	Increasing violence in Canada.
	Gun violence, no less.
	We're going to get into that in a second.
	Omar Algebra.
	Talking about financing electric vehicles.
	$5,000 credits for EVs.
	Where's the tweet?
	From Omar Algebra.
	What date is it today?
	It's May 2nd.
	I know it was yesterday.
	It was last night.
	Hold on.
	Oh, they can find things to finance.
	Ah, here we go.
	Here we go.
	Look at this.
	Priorities, people.
	Canadians are struggling to eat.
	Let's go subsidize electric vehicles for those who can already afford them, if you're already looking at one.
	Here.
	Omar Algebra, the man who laughs in the misery of Canadians.
	And I'll show you that in a second.
	Here, look at this.
	Is there no volume to this?
	Where the heck is it?
	It doesn't matter.
	If you're looking to lease or purchase a new zero-emission vehicle, zero-emission, let's just focus on this word right here.
	Our government is offering an incentive up to $5,000 to help you make the switch.
	Can you imagine this?
	This is Omar Algebra, Minister of Transport.
	They found millions of dollars for their stupid Christmas ads about Santa Claus getting the vaccine passport system.
	There are record numbers of people lining up at food banks, and this jackaninny, nincompoop, is talking about financing.
	Or leasing.
	Leasing or purchasing your electric vehicle.
	Hey, here's $5,000 to the people who are in the market for an electric vehicle.
	And I love zero-emission vehicle.
	Remember yesterday we talked about how to lie without lying?
	It's a zero-emission vehicle as a standalone vehicle at that moment in time.
	After production, after mining, after shipping, after charging, it's a zero-emission vehicle.
	You absolute buffoon.
	I don't know how many times I'm going to ask the question and not get an answer, but I think I'm on the do not reply list of Omar Algebra, some other Canadian politician.
	One blocked me this morning.
	Within two minutes of a tweet, we're going to get there.
	Zero emission vehicle.
	It's a lie while telling the truth.
	The vehicle itself right now, my iPhone, zero emission iPhone right here.
	How did it get here?
	How did the lithium get into that battery?
	How did it ship over from wherever it was made?
	Oh yeah, zero.
	How do I charge this phone every night?
	With electricity.
	Omar, what charges the vehicles?
	Question number one.
	Omar, where do the minerals come for the lithium batteries?
	Where do they come from?
	Question number three.
	How do they get from their mining origins to the factories where they are refined into batteries?
	How are they refined into batteries?
	How do they get from there into the vehicles, into the lots in North America?
	What happens to the batteries after the car has used its useful life?
	And most importantly of all, after all of that zero emission goes into producing the zero emission vehicle, how the hell do you charge the electric emission-free vehicle?
	How do you charge it?
	You flood the lands of the natives and poison them with mercury?
	You use...
	Coal-generated generator thingies so that you can have your electric charging stations across America that are coal-powered?
	How do they charge themselves?
	You'll never get an answer because we are actually being sold something that is as close to fraud as you can get legally.
	Zero omission is a lie by omission.
	Ooh.
	That's good.
	How do you charge the emission free?
	Just everybody go out there.
	Tweet at Omar Algebra and ask him that question.
	All right.
	Viva be cranky today.
	Let me make sure that we're good everywhere we started.
	We are live on Rumble.
	Holy crap, they're coming hard for Tucker Carlson, eh?
	Oh my goodness.
	I had to get one tweet out before we got live.
	Are we live?
	Yeah, we're live on Rumble.
	I see Rob A says, yeah, I have a one o 'clock start on Rumble, but 1.30 on YouTube.
	Whatever.
	I'm living with a mistake today.
	I'm not making those at Rumble wait for the YouTube.
	So those at YouTube, we'll see if they got their notification.
	Hey, people.
	People who are watching on YouTube, did you get the notification?
	Let me know.
	Okay, so what do we got today?
	Oh, the camera's back up there.
	Stupid, flipping camera.
	I have installed the application to disable...
	The function of tracking and it keeps re-enabling the tracking.
	Maybe I need to put like a little piece of tape over the sensor.
	All right.
	Standard disclaimers, no medical advice, no election fortification advice, no legal advice.
	Super chats, rumble rants, if you see them, YouTube takes 30% of them.
	If you don't want to support YouTube, but you want to support my channel.
	You can go over to Rumble.
	They have these things called Rumble Rants, which are the same thing as Super Chats, except Rumble only ordinarily takes 20%, except for the end of 2023, or for the rest of 2023, they're taking 0%.
	So 100% goes to the creator.
	At the end of the year, I think they're going to go back to their 20%.
	And hopefully they will have built their market share up so that they're taking a 20% of a bigger market because they've gotten people to come support the channel, support the platform.
	If you want to go to locals, vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	That's where we have a wildly intelligent, above average, wonderful community.
	Nearly 109 or 110,000.
	Members of the community.
	Is that camera made in China?
	Yeah, it's tracking you.
	You're the son of a beasting.
	Okay, whatever.
	I'm tired of disabling the tracking feature.
	What's the name of the camera?
	The camera is the Insta360 Link Controller.
	Look, I'd be surprised if it's made anywhere else because you can't get things made in North America anymore, at least.
	It's an amazing world that we've built.
	We've outsourced our pollution.
	We've outsourced our manufacturing.
	While at the same time becoming utterly dependent on foreign and oftentimes hostile nations for our critical infrastructure, while simultaneously further shutting down our critical infrastructure, natural gas, oil, things of that nature, under the guise of Paris Accord, good for the environment, let's cripple Canada.
	That is responsible for 1.8% of global emissions.
	Let's cripple it entirely and become further dependent on foreign, potentially hostile nations because it makes us feel good because on Twitter we can then say we've reduced our emissions by 60%.
	Oh yeah, and by the way, those electric vehicles, Omar Algebra, where do you get the minerals from and which countries are you enriching through the subsidizing of the electric vehicles?
	I'm sure it's going to work out.
	All right.
	Let's get to a funny one before we head on over to Rumble in a bit.
	Oh, I tell you something.
	If they couldn't lie, even by omission, they would have nothing to say.
	We're going to start on the Canadian stuff, then we're going to get over to the American stuff.
	Oh, hold on.
	Oh, okay.
	Here, here, here.
	Look at this.
	Look at this.
	Oh, don't read my...
	Don't read the bottom part yet, because you don't want to get to the fake news part of this.
	This is Doug Aylson, Liberal Party of Canada candidate for Charles Wood St. James Asiniboya, Asiniboya, Headingley ER doctor, a progressive voice.
	Is he progressive conservative?
	No, he's progressive liberal.
	So he writes, talking about an article, which we're going to go read the article, because you have to know...
	Lawyer senses tingling.
	I'm being lied to.
	I'm being misled.
	Although, you know, it was a dead giveaway when his Twitter bio started with liberal candidate.
	I'm not partisan.
	I'm just realistic.
	Not that I don't trust many conservatives much more.
	Danielle Smith out of Alberta, I'm trusting a little more now.
	If I were in Alberta voting, I know who I would vote for.
	To the extent that they didn't have a People's Party of Canada candidate because it's provincial elections, not federal.
	So I don't trust Conservatives much more.
	But I just know Liberals, Liberal Party of Canada, are corrupt liars through and through.
	And I have yet to find an exception.
	I'm sure there is one.
	I have yet to find them.
	Of an honest, trustworthy, principled Liberal Party of Canada member of Parliament.
	Haven't found one.
	Dr. Doug Aylson says, it's almost as if rich people donate to parties that want to lower taxes for rich people.
	Hmm.
	That's such an amazingly insightful thought.
	Except you're a godforsaken liar.
	Hold on one second.
	Actually, let's just read the article real quick-lack.
	Real quick-lack first.
	Here's the article.
	Okay.
	First of all, I don't know.
	I'm not an election lawyer expert.
	But I do know that there are limits on individual donations.
	I know this because when I donated to the Conservative Party of Quebec, Eric Duhem, when I donated to them, I think I accidentally...
	I was running it through, and I think it went through twice, and then I got a notice saying, you've donated more than $200 maximum, so we've reimbursed your second one.
	If there's a $200 limit, I was fairly certain.
	I might be wrong.
	Maybe I'm wrong.
	So I just had to go read the article because it didn't make sense.
	Oh, look at that.
	Rich people donated to the conservatives.
	And there's another kicker in this that I'm going to get to in a second.
	Let's just read the article.
	Conservatives out-fundraised liberals by nearly $5 million in the first quarter of 2023.
	It's amazing.
	There's no way to win this, by the way.
	There's no way to win this.
	Well, okay, we'll get there.
	There's no way to win this because...
	If they don't out-raise the liberals, liberals run with the headline, conservatives can't even out-raise the liberals.
	That's how unpopular they are.
	Out-raise the liberals?
	Let's find a way to condemn that.
	One guy yesterday said, hatred, hate farming is a lucrative business, talking about Pierre Coilier.
	When they out-fund you, out-fund-raise you, it's either hatred or corrupt rich people looking out for their self-interest.
	If they don't out-raise you, that's because you're so much more popular than them.
	That is what you call motivated political dishonest reasoning.
	No, there's no way for Conservatives to win.
	Raise less, you're losers.
	Raise more, you're liars.
	But the Liberals are liars.
	Point.
	Full stop.
	New sentence.
	Conservatives out-fundraised Liberals by nearly 5 million in the first quarter.
	Okay, that's interesting.
	Let's hear it.
	It was rich people donating to the Conservatives for tax breaks for rich people.
	Okay.
	The Conservative Party of Canada brought in more donations during the first three months of the year than any other federal party.
	Financial statements from Elections Canada show that the Conservatives raised more than $8.3 million in the first quarter of the year from nearly 46,000 donations.
	Now, I'm no math magician.
	And I've already done the math.
	I'm going to do it again just to show you.
	So let's just see.
	Because when that liberal liar, Dr. Aylson, said it's rich people donating for tax breaks for the rich.
	What taste did that leave in your mouth?
	What was it here?
	Everyone who can do math at the top of their head.
	My dad's watching now probably saying, David, you idiot.
	I failed.
	You can't do this math in your head.
	8.3 million divided by 46,000 equals one...
	Are we seeing this here?
	You can't see this.
	Hold on.
	Yeah, you can.
	$180.43.
	I think the limit is 200.
	So what does that mean?
	It means that it's not rich people donating to the Conservatives, by and large, on average.
	Some people are like, well, that could have been $40 million from a handful of super donors and then a bunch of small, you know, $1 donations from $20,000.
	Horse crap.
	What is it?
	It's liberals lying.
	Period.
	How do you know that they're lying?
	They block the truth, people.
	So I went to this tweet after finding out the truth.
	And I wrote to Mr. Doug Aylson.
	I tried to be polite.
	Maybe I wasn't.
	You godforsaken liar, $8.3 million from 46,000 donations, that's a lot of donations, by the way, is less than $200 a donation on average.
	That's not rich people donating to lower their taxes.
	That's everyday Canadians donating because your party is a party of scum.
	Was that too harsh?
	Chat, was that too harsh?
	One, yes, Viva, that was too harsh.
	Listen to what your grandmother said to you.
	If you've got nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all.
	Two, hell no, they deserve it and also deserve to be voted out of office and never hold any position of power ever again.
	So maybe that was a little harsh.
	It took all of two minutes, all of two minutes, for that dishonest coward to block me on Twitter.
	Let me see where it was here.
	Did I get the block?
	I know, I know I got the block.
	Did I bring up the block is the question.
	It took two minutes to block me.
	And it's an amazing thing, by the way.
	The guy's not blocking me because he doesn't want to hear what I have to say, although he probably is.
	He's blocking me so that he can continue lying to his ignorant, willfully blind, or equally dishonest Followers.
	They don't block you so they don't hear you because they know the retorts to their dishonest arguments.
	They block you so that their echo chamber does not get a dose of the truth.
	C11.
	And that's another joke.
	Just wait until they don't have to do it manually.
	Oh, this is this pesky block button.
	Let's just make it not discoverable.
	Let's make Viva's truth not discoverable.
	You've been C-11.
	So that's it.
	So he blocked me within two minutes.
	Let me see.
	I mean, and then I just, you know, I jokingly tweeted, my goodness, it would be a shame if everyone just goes and ratios the truth on the lies.
	And it's an amazing thing.
	It's like, you have to know, have the inkling, are you being misled to?
	And what do you need to know?
	From the fact that's being alleged in order to disprove, attenuate, or confirm the fact.
	Rich people donating to the Conservatives.
	What Canadian doesn't want to lower their taxes, by the way?
	Spoiler alert, you also nincompoop.
	The people who pay the most taxes...
	They're not the uber rich who have uber creative real estate accounting methods of having properties and amortizing the loss of the property against income.
	They're not those people who are paying a lot in taxes.
	It's the middle people who pay a butt ton of taxes.
	Who wouldn't want to reduce their taxes?
	You think liberals like paying their taxes?
	So they can see Justin Trudeau going, paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to take holidays, vacations, go...
	Sing Bohemian Rhapsody at the Queen's funeral?
	You think any rational Canadian wants to be stolen from this corrupt government so they can then take their taxpayer dollars and ship it to finance foreign conflict while Canadians are sitting there waiting in record-long lineups at food banks?
	Oh yeah, no, that's conservative greed right there for the mother country.
	How dare you not want to pay your taxes?
	All of them pay taxes out the wazoo in Canada.
	Nobody has any idea how much we actually pay in taxes.
	If I can tell you, it's painful.
	But there was something else.
	Let's do the Canadian gun laws on YouTube before heading over.
	I talked about it.
	It was quite interesting.
	It was my introduction.
	To the wild world of the interest of gun laws in Canada.
	Let me see this here.
	I got it.
	Viva Frye.
	Gun ban.
	I did this video.
	I, at the time, knew very little about...
	I knew very little about firearm laws.
	And I knew very...
	I didn't realize there was...
	It brews under the surface, but it's there nonetheless, despite what the media tells you.
	Canadians are happy at being totally disarmed, having any form of lawful, having any form of firearm ownership criminalized.
	They're very happy being sitting ducks in their homes and, you know, just waiting for the police to get there in the event that they have to.
	There's absolutely no interest in Canada in firearm ownership.
	That was the impression I had until, you know, relatively recently.
	I did this video.
	God, who is that?
	Who the hell is that guy?
	Let's just hear what he has to say.
	Regardless of how you might feel about this particular law, this is not how laws should be passed in a free and democratic society.
	This video, 262,000 views.
	This was my confirmation that there's not just an interest in firearm laws and the criminalization of self-defense in Canada, but that there's a lot of Canadians out there who actually believe in gun ownership.
	That entire video...
	What year was that?
	I know it was in COVID.
	It was stuck in my car.
	That video, I did that video May 5, 2020.
	That was shortly after the Nova Scotia shooting when Justin Trudeau, under the cloak of...
	Wait, was it after the Nova Scotia shooting?
	Hold on a second.
	Nova Scotia shooting.
	Yeah, April 18, 2020.
	It was after the Nova Scotia shooting, just had to double check, because Justin Trudeau invoked the Nova Scotia shooting, which was done with unlawfully procured firearms from an individual who seemed to be uninformant or working with the government based on the fact that this individual took out almost a half a million dollars from his private banking account in the days leading up or following, you know, around the incident, had what was either a very good replica of an RCMP vehicle or an actual RCMP vehicle and uniform.
	It was on the loose for about 12 hours more before the authorities announced that the individual was driving a replica RCMP vehicle with a number of firearms that were unlawfully procured after having taken out several hundred thousand dollars from a private banking account.
	There's a lot of questions about that Nova Scotia shooting that remain unanswered.
	And Jeremy McKenzie is one of the individuals who blew the whistle on a lot of it and suffered the consequences as a result of it.
	So it was after that, under the cloak of darkness, In the shutdown of COVID, that Justin Trudeau comes in with an order in council ban on something like 1,500 firearms.
	There were some stories at the time that it actually included like airsoft rifles and other stuff.
	I'm not sure that those stories panned out to be true, but neither here nor there.
	Order in council means the legislation provided for the minister to unilaterally say we're amending this regulation to add firearms.
	1,500 firearms.
	Overnight cloak of darkness.
	I made that video.
	Made people aware of that problem, and people discovered that problem.
	Justin Trudeau, under his leadership, under his destructive leadership, has criminalized basically gun ownership at large in Canada.
	Since his tenure, since 2015, has put into effect The strictest gun laws, I mean, I think anywhere, it's an ironic thing that he's put in the strictest gun laws.
	And despite that, let's just take one graph here.
	We have to, we have to, despite Justin Trudeau came into power in 2015.
	This is the best, these are the best stats I could find, you know, summarily searching the interwebs.
	2015, 180 homicides by shooting in Canada.
	About the same as 2004.
	2021?
	It's not quite doubled, but close to.
	It's up.
	Let's just say it's up 100.
	It's up.
	It's up 60%.
	Despite the increasingly stringent gun laws.
	What was the other one here?
	Oh, there was gun violence.
	Trends in violent crime and firearm-related violent crime.
	So I'm not interested necessarily in violent crime because, I mean, that's not relevant to firearm laws and firearm restrictions.
	But look at the violence here.
	Look at this.
	Justin Trudeau came into power in 2015.
	It was already sort of on the spike.
	And then it continues to go up.
	What was the context of the tweet?
	Let me refresh this here and just see what it was that Justin Trudeau was trying to sell us.
	Justin Trudeau.
	We're taking action to keep Canadians safe from gun violence.
	Last year, we introduced Canada's strongest gun control legislation in a generation.
	And yesterday, Marco Mendicino, liar!
	Marco Mendicino, the liar!
	Who lied about the RCMP asking the federal government to invoke the Emergencies Act.
	Liar.
	Marco Mendicino, he's the Minister of Justice?
	Minister of Public Safety, sorry.
	The liar.
	He is a bona fide, confirmed liar.
	He lied about the RCMP asking the federal government to invoke the Emergencies Act.
	They didn't.
	He lied about truckers going around threatening women with rape at the Ottawa protest.
	He's a...
	Confirmed, boldface, in-your-face, remorseless liar.
	So what did he have to say?
	Oh yeah, Marco Mendicino announced measures to make that legislation even stronger.
	It's ironic that he keeps making the firearm legislation stronger and stronger in a generation.
	Look at that.
	180, 230, 260.
	And this doesn't include 2022 and 2023.
	2023 is under, you know, currently going on.
	It's an amazing thing.
	As the laws get stricter and stricter, somehow, Somehow, the gun violence problem itself gets worse and worse.
	It's almost like criminals don't follow the law and ordinary law-abiding citizens are now left to be sitting ducks to the criminals who don't follow the law.
	So much for supporting the natives.
	Oh no, he was going to make an exemption for hunting.
	But I think Canadians are getting sensitized to this now.
	Let me see if I can find this.
	Viva Frye self-defense tweet.
	I was having a discussion with someone.
	I was having a discussion with someone who, you know, was basically saying, who didn't fully appreciate how our right to self-defense is literally criminalized.
	Literally.
	How do you spell nunchucks?
	Nunchucks?
	Find this tweet.
	It's classic.
	I won't be able to find it.
	In Canada, self-defense is literally criminalized.
	And people don't understand.
	They think it's limited.
	You know, firearms.
	Nobody needs a gun.
	Nobody needs an AR.
	Nobody needs an assault-style rifle.
	Nobody needs a handgun.
	Nobody's...
	Well, they're not...
	Nobody needs them.
	Nobody's allowed to have them.
	Period.
	You cannot protect your home.
	With a firearm in Canada.
	Why?
	Because if you go get an unrestricted license for a longarm or rifle, you specifically are getting it for hunting or competitive reasons.
	If you actually go out, take the course, and say, why do you want this rifle?
	Because you take an exam.
	It's a two-day course.
	You take an exam.
	You've got to say, why I want this rifle.
	You've got to go have a background check, certificate of...
	If you say that I want this 12-gauge shotgun for self-defense, you will get refused.
	You cannot get a small arm, a handgun for self-defense, either setting aside some very, very exceptional exceptions under the law.
	So long arms, which are not restricted, if you say you're getting one for self-defense or you want one for home defense, you won't get it.
	You can only get it for hunting.
	And small arms are just outright restricted and even more so now.
	And yet somehow...
	Gun crime keeps going up.
	But it's not just that guns are prohibited for self-defense.
	You can't own pepper spray in Canada.
	You can't own tasers.
	You can't own...
	What's the taser?
	You can't own a stun gun.
	You can't walk around with a baseball bat or have a baseball bat in the trunk of your car if the purpose of that baseball bat in the trunk of the car is for self-defense.
	You are not allowed carrying a weapon for the purposes of self-defense.
	And as the legal joke always goes, if you have a baseball bat in the trunk of your car in Canada, you'd better have a glove and a ball with it.
	Sitting ducks, and I think a bunch of Canadians now are starting to realize it, and there's nothing like having a tyrant behave like...
	An ever-increasing tyrant to make people realize, wait a minute.
	The RCMP now that has been weaponized against me, that's my last line of defense?
	I'm supposed to wait for them to come to my house if someone's breaking down my front door?
	I'm supposed to wait for them?
	The same ones that beat the ever-loving piss out of military veterans at Ottawa, those are the ones I'm calling for help?
	But you know what the other thing is?
	Good luck even owning a gun in Canada because in Quebec there's a registry.
	For the non-restricted long arms, good luck owning a gun in Canada.
	The government literally has you on a list.
	Ah.
	you Okay.
	I think we can move on over to Rumble.
	We've done good here, people.
	Tucker Carlson and I got a clip.
	Holy crabapple.
	They're coming for Tucker.
	They're coming hard and they're coming nasty because we are always honest.
	I don't like saying if we're being honest.
	I am always honest.
	It's very difficult to rationalize or to explain away at the very least one sentence in an otherwise extremely laudable private text message that was leaked to the public.
	We're going to talk about it.
	But it's outrageous.
	Oh my, oh my flipping god.
	I just got here.
	What about the diplomats getting permanent Canadian citizenship?
	I don't know what that is.
	Okay, we'll get there in a second.
	All right, everybody, let me see.
	I did just get the link here.
	Here's Rumble.
	Head on over to Rumble.
	We're going to talk about some stuff.
	And what else did we do?
	Did I forget anything here?
	No, I did.
	Oh, the camera just got...
	Look at that.
	Now it's trapped.
	What are you looking for?
	What are you looking for, CCP?
	I'll show you what I got.
	I got nothing back there.
	What does it say?
	Here, hold on, here.
	Okay, moreover.
	Okay, that says, that was the kid's sign when we're live.
	This, no.
	Well, these are fossils, and there's a Polaroid camera.
	Okay, get down here.
	There's a Polaroid cube that, once upon a time, a camera that I had that a seagull took.
	Flew off, dropped in the Lachine Canal, and I found it five months later.
	I made a video about it.
	It was great.
	Okay.
	Let's go to Rumble.
	Three, two, one, now.
	Oh, there was some stuff that I forgot.
	We'll do the fun stuff.
	Okay, so there was some stuff that I forgot to do on YouTube.
	Look, while we're on the subject of Trudeau, let's get this out of our system.
	It's going to make you puke.
	On the subject of, you know, trust the RCMP.
	Trust the cops.
	They're totally not there to pepper spray you in the face for not wearing a mask of the Tim Hortons.
	Listen to this.
	It'll make you puke.
	We've been making sure Canadian workers and Canadian industry stay competitive.
	That Canada remains an attractive place to do business.
	This guy thinks he is the most important person on earth.
	Listen to the dramatic pauses.
	I know I'm not the best or the one to pick on other people's idiosyncrasies, but I'm going to do it when it comes to Justin Trudeau.
	And that's what our Made in Canada plan is all about.
	Let me tell you.
	The momentum is pretty darn good.
	Oh, Trudeau.
	The momentum is pretty darn good.
	In the past year, Honda...
	General Motors and Stellantis have made major investments to upgrade and retool their assembly plants so that they can manufacture hybrid and electric vehicles.
	We've seen major investments in battery manufacturing, from UMACOR to BASF, and most recently, an announcement that Volkswagen has chosen Canada for its very first overseas electric vehicle battery gigafactory.
	Nobody's even asking what any of this means.
	François Phillips, a big fan of that one.
	Oh, I love you.
	Hey, hey, there you go.
	You worked very hard on that.
	Oh, yeah.
	Wait until he says something about paying 50 million bucks.
	This new Volkswagen factory is a major win for Canada and a vote of confidence in Canadian competitiveness.
	Our government worked hard to get this deal, but ultimately, it was the reputation and strength of Canadian workers that sealed it.
	Oh, what?
	Really?
	In all my conversations around the world.
	How much more?
	In pitching Canada.
	In telling people to come invest in Canada, the greatest competitive advantage we have is always our workers.
	Except the unvaccinated ones, and except the ones we put out of work, and demonized for the last three years, except them.
	Working, innovating, showing up for work, steady, well-educated, with healthcare, with strong community.
	Showing up to work.
	I mean, he's got to be doing it.
	To provoke a response.
	Showing up to work after we locked you down for three years.
	Showing up to work while the unionized workers now are protesting because the unionized federal workers are protesting because they don't want to go to work.
	They want to stay home.
	And the ones that literally wanted to show up and go to work had their businesses shut down.
	Great quality of life.
	A growing population.
	A growing population, by the way, the only way Canada and Justin Trudeau can make his population grow now is with massive amounts of immigration.
	Because the immigration rate, unless it's changed, people leaving Canada is at the highest it's been in the last 25 years.
	The only way they can compensate for that, open up the frickin' borders, just take everybody in so that we can say on paper the population of Canada is growing.
	These are the things that draw people in.
	Remember last year I was at a...
	Nokia announcement in Canada, suburb of Ottawa.
	Nokia.
	Nokia decided to make Canada one of their fifth, one of their only five research and development hubs in the world.
	And it wasn't because we offered them $45 million, although we did and they took it.
	Nokia decided to come to Canada.
	Because we paid them $45 million to do it.
	It might be a good long-term investment.
	It's a joke.
	It was because the researchers, the engineers...
	We're done with them.
	They decided to come.
	They came.
	We offered them $50 million.
	How much did you offer Moderna?
	How much was the Moderna plant outside of Montreal, Justin?
	I mean, you could give them all the money in the world.
	Come in and...
	Who knows what they do with that money?
	Who knows what happens to the company?
	But at least in the interim, you can pretend to have scored a victory for Canada at Canadians' taxpayer dollar expense.
	This entire speech, by the way, was given in the context of how to make Canada a more attractive location for investment.
	You know what you do to not make Canada an attractive place for foreign investment?
	You act like an authoritarian regime where everybody knows their dollar is not safe.
	You go and you freeze bank accounts.
	With no due process, with no court order, you authorize banks to freeze bank accounts unilaterally, arbitrarily, for politically motivated reasons, while immunizing the bank, that is how you destroy a country, that is how you chase people out, and that is how you scare people from investing in that country, because nobody with half a brain in their head, unless they're being bribed to come in, is going to say, hmm.
	I think I'm going to invest my money with a country that is run by a tyrannical dictator who unilaterally freezes bank accounts and immunizes the banks for such extrajudicial, and I would dare say, unlawful conduct.
	But they're coming.
	Because we paid them $50 million to do it.
	All right.
	All right.
	Do we get onto the American stuff?
	Hold on one second.
	We saw this.
	We don't need to see it again.
	Get it out of here.
	Yeah, let's get on to some American stuff.
	But let's start with our men of the week.
	Or the man of the week.
	I know some of you don't want to see Harry J. Sisson anymore.
	But that is because we as a community here as a whole are above average and we know what the hell is going on.
	I think people have to understand that sunlight is the greatest disinfectant.
	And ignoring something...
	I don't want to hear from that kid.
	You're just giving him airtime.
	He is speaking to people.
	People are hearing him.
	And by and large, the people who are hearing him, who are not fed up of hearing him, are probably more susceptible to buying into his crap.
	And those are the people.
	You don't reach new people by staying in your silo.
	You don't reach new people by only listening to what you want to listen to and ignoring that which you think deserves being ignored, despite the fact that it might actually deserve being ignored.
	So while we're on it, Okay, this is it.
	This is Harry Sisson, the individual who spent the entire week defending the fact that he hasn't been paid by the DNC, by Joe Biden, by Hillary Clinton, by the deep state.
	Works for Pallet Management, which had a $200-some-odd-thousand-dollar retainer with the DNC for social media content.
	He's on Tim Dillon yesterday.
	I don't know when.
	He was on Tim Dillon recently.
	And we talked about the Gish Gallop argumentation technique, as we saw Mehdi Hassan do against...
	Matt Taibbi in that sabotage of an interview.
	Some people were pointing out, Viva, that's not Gish Gallop because three items is not Gish Gallop.
	It has to be at least five.
	Gish Gallop is throwing out too many specious arguments with little regard to the veracity of those arguments, but too many of them to allow your interlocutor to adequately rebut or respond directly to any of them.
	Some people were saying, Viva, you don't understand Gish Gallop because three is not Gish Gallop.
	And those were not...
	Patently untenable arguments that he raised against Mediasan, those were legitimate points.
	Gish Gallup is a technique.
	You can have the iteration of it where it's throwing out garbage arguments so that you can't respond.
	But the technique really is shotgun argument, throw a bunch of stuff out there, overwhelm so that it's impossible to pinpoint, identify, and retort.
	Which is exactly what Harry J. Sisson does in this beautiful, well-thought-out clip.
	He's totally not paid for by the DNC.
	He's totally not spouting off talking points of which he has zero understanding because I consider myself to be somewhat immersed in all of this.
	There are some of these issues where I wouldn't publicly venture a hard position.
	But, you know, what's the pitch for Joe Biden?
	Oh, man.
	I mean, do you want me to go down the list?
	Go down the list.
	I won't go into detail on each one, but I think there's a reason why you won't go into detail on each one.
	And it's going to be something to do with something that rhymes with pish pallop.
	All right, I won't go fish scallop to detail on each one, but I think generally his presidency has been incredibly successful in terms like one of the most productive presidents in modern American history.
	Productive?
	Oh, come on, get over here.
	Productive?
	Hold on.
	You stupid piece of junk.
	You're a piece of junk, camera.
	Productive and successful are two different things.
	You can be very productive at destruction.
	You can be productive without being successful.
	Okay, let's just keep going.
	Undoubtedly.
	American Rescue Plan, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the PACT Act, the CHIPS Act, the Inflation Reduction Act.
	I would ask him to explain just summarily each and every one of these.
	The CHIPS Act, from what I understand, you know, bringing back microchip manufacturing back home.
	What have been the beneficial results of it?
	Rejoining...
	Oh, sorry, let's just...
	The Paris Climate Accord.
	Rejoining the WHO.
	Historic judicial nominees.
	First black woman on the Supreme Court.
	Child tax credits.
	Capping insulin at $35 on Medicare.
	First black woman on the Supreme Court.
	What?
	Like, I mean, that's good.
	I mean, but she's also, like, aside from that, but...
	Do you know what the soft bigotry of low expectations is?
	I mean, this is what it is.
	A bunch of privileged...
	Politically privileged.
	Not white privileged.
	Politically privileged.
	Politically connected people.
	And all they can do is reduce an individual to their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender.
	The first black woman.
	I'll reply to all these things afterwards.
	Just putting an extremely qualified nominee on the Supreme Court.
	Okay, but say that.
	Well, I think it's a combination of things.
	Say like a first black woman who's an amazingly qualified, you know?
	Can't say that.
	Otherwise, we're just checking boxes.
	It doesn't seem to make sense.
	Can't say that.
	He can't say that because it's not true.
	And this has nothing to do with race, gender, or anything.
	It has to do with track record and her inability to be able to define what a woman is, but we'll get there.
	The point is there is that she is obviously far more qualified than any of the nominees at Trump.
	Oh, really?
	So it's like, do you want qualified people?
	Like, political ideology aside, do you want qualified people or do you just want people who are going to rule in Trump?
	Brett Kavanaugh is qualified.
	Amy Coney Barrett is qualified.
	You may disagree with them.
	Amy Coney Barrett is nowhere near as qualified to like a Tonya Bajak.
	Yeah, of course not.
	Well, listen.
	Well, define qualifications in that sense.
	Just time served.
	Like, Amy Coney Barrett only had a very short amount of time actually serving as a judge.
	Give him credit.
	He can remember his talking points.
	But let's go here.
	I mean, but she's also, like, Supreme Court.
	Childships Act, the Inflation Reduction Act.
	Inflation Reduction Act, which, according to everyone, did nothing to reduce inflation.
	Rejoining the Paris Climate Accord.
	Rejoining the Paris Climate Accord, which will continue to allow China to environmentally savage the world at the expense of virtue-signaling nations.
	During the WHO.
	Oh, going to the WHO, rejoining the WHO so that America can abandon its national sovereignty to a globalist institution known as the WHO and be subjected to their...
	Rules and regulations for a future pandemic.
	Yeah, that's great, Harry.
	Historic judicial nominees.
	First black woman on the Supreme Court.
	First black woman.
	I don't care what their experience is.
	I don't care that they happen to have, you know, been extremely generous on sentencing of convicted pedophiles.
	By the way, go fact check that.
	I was fact checking it to make sure that I know what I'm talking about before I post.
	Go check the fact check on, was Katanji Jackson-Brown lenient in her sentencing of convicted pedophiles?
	What you're going to find is the answer is not going to be no.
	It's going to be yes with a but.
	Yes, sure, she was consistently, or at least multiple times, sentenced convicted pedophiles to below the recommended sentencing guidelines, but other judges did it too.
	It's these...
	Fact checkers are wordsmiths for the devil.
	And when the fact check is true with a but, you know you're being lied to.
	Yes, she was lenient on sentences for convicted pedophiles by going under the recommended guidelines.
	But other justices did it too.
	My response to that would have been those other justices would have been equally unfit to serve at SCOTUS.
	That...
	And she can't define, she does not want to define what a woman is because she's not a biologist.
	But yeah, Harry J. Sisson understands the nuance of the points that he's not being paid to talk about.
	All right.
	Tucker Carlson, people.
	And to start with Tucker Carlson.
	Oh, no, no, no, no, no.
	Let's just, let's just, let's just look at this.
	Scratch that.
	Tucker Carlson's coming in a second.
	Jesse Kelly, journalist, host of I'm Right, on the first, anti-communist, world-famous author.
	He writes, I just love this.
	Remember when the flu disappeared for one year?
	There was this discussion.
	Where the hell did the flu go in 2021?
	And there's a number of explanations to that.
	One is the flu didn't go anywhere.
	It was just being diagnosed as COVID.
	Two, this was the explanation given by Dr. ZDogg.
	I think that's the name.
	You know who I'm talking about.
	The Dr. Z there.
	He said, when there's competitive viruses, the more contagious virus will succeed.
	So there were wildly more COVID cases than influenza.
	Some people say that's a load of pooey because the influenza cases were being recorded, just not as primary or cause of death.
	There was a third one.
	Oh, yeah.
	The third one was...
	They were all just being reported as COVID, so they can inflate the COVID numbers, even when it came to hospital admissions, cases, etc.
	Another explanation was that the COVID testing, PCR testing, might have been misdiagnosing flu as COVID, so that if you had the flu, you were getting a positive PCR or a positive antigen, whatever that thing was test, and it was coming up as COVID.
	Those would have been the four not-dumb interpretations, but if you want the world-class dumbest Of stupid interpretations of the phenomenon.
	You look no further than Adam Kinzinger.
	Look at this.
	People are, people really are this stupid.
	Masks and distancing prevents the flu.
	But no, it must have been a conspiracy because retweets.
	Can you imagine how dumb a human being has to be to actually say this?
	Masks and distancing prevents the flu.
	Oh, so the masking and distancing.
	Was so successful at eradicating the flu for the first time in the history of humanity, and yet it was unsuccessful at preventing COVID?
	The transmission of COVID?
	I mean, Kinzinger is so stupid.
	It can't be.
	I mean, it actually could be stupid.
	I don't think anybody who's smart enough to know that this is stupid would do this even for political reasons.
	There's no one who would sacrifice their soul and their self-esteem for political purposes.
	And he's accusing...
	Jesse Kelly of being stupid.
	Masks and distancing prevents the flu.
	We masked and we distanced so well we eradicated the flu and it didn't work on that pesky COVID thing.
	Just because.
	Science.
	Because retweets Kinzinger, right?
	Holy crabapple.
	Courier 626 says, not stupid, evil.
	It's possible.
	I can't read that much into things.
	All right.
	Well, actually, while we're on the subject of COVID, someone pointed this out to me yesterday, May 1st.
	This is an amazing thing, by the way.
	The vaccines are so safe, they're so effective, that the Biden-Harris administration will end COVID-19 vaccination requirements for federal employees, contractors, international travelers, Head Start educators, and CMS-certified facilities.
	I will not complain about the international travelers part.
	Because oddly enough, when we made the decision to flee Canada, if only temporarily for our freedom, the restriction on vaccinated travelers was not in effect when I got my stupid jibby jabs back in August 2021.
	But this became ironic that every time I was coming, crossing the border back into the States, I was being asked to show the papers.
	But they're doing it!
	2021, the Biden-Harris administration announced COVID-19 vaccination requirements to promote the health and safety of individuals and the efficiency of workplaces, protecting vital sectors of our economy and vulnerable populations.
	Yeah, except it didn't do anything.
	In fact, it might have just actually injured.
	A number of other people who might not otherwise have gotten injured.
	But since January 2021, COVID deaths have declined by 95% and hospitalizations are down by 91%.
	It must have worked.
	It must have worked.
	Can we see the chart for Switzerland?
	Was it Switzerland or Sweden?
	Sweden, I'm sorry.
	Can we see the charts for Sweden?
	I mean, are they down?
	They're down globally.
	I mean, it's funny how they're down everywhere, regardless of whether or not there were these requirements in place.
	It's an amazing thing.
	It must have succeeded there because of the requirements, and elsewhere, it was just dumb luck.
	Globally COVID, yada, yada, yada.
	Today, we are announcing the administration will end the COVID-19 vaccine requirement for federal employees, federal contractors, international travelers by the end of May.
	At the end of the day on May 11th.
	That's how the science works, people.
	You've got to wait for the science to work.
	May 11th.
	The same day that the COVID public health emergency ends.
	Additionally, HHS and DHS announced today that they will start the process to end their vaccination requirements for Head Start educators, yada, yada, yada.
	Our administration's vaccination requirements helped ensure the safety of workers in critical workforces, including those in the healthcare and education sectors, protecting themselves and the populations they serve, and strengthening their ability to provide services without disruption.
	This is like Orwellian bullshit.
	Our COVID-19 vaccine requirements bolstered vaccination across the nation.
	Bolstered is one way of talking about extorted.
	And our broader vaccination campaign has saved millions of lives.
	Can I see the data?
	Anyone going to fact check that?
	We have successfully marshaled a response to make historic investments in broadly accessible vaccine tests, yada, yada, yada.
	While vaccination remains one of the most important tools in advancing the health and safety of employees and promoting the efficiency of workplaces, we are now at a different phase.
	Of our response when these measures are no longer necessary.
	That's really interesting.
	Yeah, good news, I guess.
	Better late than never?
	Okay, hold on one second.
	Before we...
	Oh, I just opened the wrong window.
	Before we get on to the Tucker Carlson.
	And we're really getting on to Tucker Carlson today.
	This is no longer Jablinski Games.
	Charlotte Louise said, please watch the National Citizens Inquiry in Vancouver now.
	Ed Dowd will be presenting.
	Viva, you are awesome at what you do.
	A pleasure to watch.
	Thanks.
	That was from MMAGA1.
	Thank you very much.
	Charlotte Louise.
	Well, how long ago was this?
	This was one minute ago?
	Do we want to try to do that?
	I'll watch Dowd later, and then maybe I'll do a summary of his testimony like I did with Jessica Rose.
	Let's get to Tucker Carlson.
	Okay, the news of the day, I mean, it's embarrassing.
	You've got to think of what Tucker Carlson meant when he tweeted this.
	And it's not a question of excusing the inexcusable, and it's not a question of, you know, it's not a question of defending the indefensible.
	The question is, what did Tucker Carlson mean when he tweeted?
	Not tweeted, I'm sorry.
	Privately texted this to one of his producers.
	In the New York Times, and I'm running it from an archive link, this is the news.
	Carlson's text that alarmed Fox leaders.
	It's not how white men fight.
	The discovery of the text messages contributed to a chain of events that ultimately led to Tucker Carlson's firing.
	This is what you call malicious ex post facto justification of a decision.
	At the very least, an attempt to manufacture a termination for cause.
	Bear in mind, whatever Tucker Carlson meant by this text, it was not public.
	It had been disclosed in the context of the court file, but it was not public.
	And so the question is going to be, even if you think Tucker Carlson is a racist, and I'll tell you this, I do not think Tucker Carlson is racist.
	Period.
	I don't.
	No.
	Maybe he is.
	One will never know.
	People say this private text message confirms his racism and xenophobia and anti-immigrant sentiment.
	I have never heard Tucker Carlson champion for Americans based on their spirit and citizenship as Americans.
	Having issues with immigration is not a xenophobia, is not a phobia, is not an ism.
	Maybe it's a nationalism.
	It is a question of protecting your own citizens, protecting your own nation.
	Much like it's not because people have families and take special care of their families that they hate other people.
	It means that people who decide to have families have to take care of their families first.
	And although there are radical and wild and unfortunate problems...
	Out in the world, but for the grace of God, it could be any one of us at any point in time.
	You have decided to have a family.
	Your first responsibility is to your family, and that's not selfish, and that's not hateful of anybody else.
	I have never heard Tucker Carlson propose, promote, encourage anything in pursuit of American populism that segregated Americans based on anything other.
	Based on anything.
	Okay.
	So just bear in mind this.
	This was a private text message that might have been disclosed nonetheless in the context of this lawsuit.
	Now it's become the basis of his firing.
	Because what is Fox News doing right now?
	They're colluding, conspiring with Media Matters to leak what were otherwise not public documents, not public videos, to a George Soros watchdog so that Media Matters for America can run this smear campaign with...
	Materials leaked to it by Fox News.
	There's nothing to see there, people.
	But wait until you read the actual text message as a whole.
	A text message sent by Tucker Carlson that set off a panic at the highest levels of Fox on the eve of its billion dollars.
	Bullshit!
	It's not a good text.
	I mean, that line out of the text is not a good line.
	There's no parsing words.
	What did Tucker mean by it?
	Was it a poor phrasing of what he meant?
	That'll be for Tucker, to say, and for Tucker only.
	Caught them off guard on the eve of the...
	No, it didn't catch them off guard on the eve of anything.
	And if it caught them so off guard and so damaging, why the hell is Fox leaking it now?
	Oh, okay.
	Yadierta showed its most popular host sharing his private inflammatory views about violence and race.
	You have to understand this, by the way.
	You're being lied to.
	Inflammatory...
	Means to inflame.
	In the context of messages, messaging, it means to publicly inflame.
	A private text message, however shocking and offensive that text message is, is necessarily and by definition pretty much not inflammatory because it's not public and not intended to inflame.
	Any public sentiment about anything because it's intended to be private.
	And that's not to say that private racism is somehow better than public racism, although I think some people might say if you're privately racist but publicly not, I mean, maybe that's better than being publicly racist.
	We'll talk about it because, you know, Joe Biden seems to be on the cusp of both of those.
	A private text message cannot be inflammatory by its nature because it's intended to be private and not inflame anybody.
	So you're being lied to.
	It's the New York Times, so it's par for the course.
	The discovery of the message contributed to a chain of events that ultimately led to Mr. Carlson's firing.
	In the message sent to one of his producers in the hours after violent Trump supporters stormed the Capitol on January 6th, 2021, Carlson described how he had recently watched a video of a group of men, Trump supporters, he said, violently attacking an Antifa kid.
	It was three against one, he wrote.
	He then expressed a sense of dismay that the attackers, like him, were white.
	Jumping a guy like this is dishonorable, obviously.
	It's not how white men fight, he said.
	But he said he found himself, for a moment, wanting the group to kill the person he had described as the anti-efficate.
	This is the sentence.
	It's not how white men fight, in the context of, it's a dishonorable way to fight.
	What is Tucker saying?
	That in his mind, people who are not white fight dishonorably?
	Is he saying that in his mind, white people fight honorably?
	I mean, Tucker Carlson, bearing in mind, has been complaining, criticizing, lamenting the war in Russia, which is a war between white people.
	So it's not like...
	What did he mean by it?
	I don't know.
	It's not how white people fight.
	How do white people fight?
	I'm asking this.
	Honorably?
	Like drone strikes?
	How do white people fight?
	Honorably by, you know, committing whatever war crimes are being committed in Russia and Ukraine?
	More explanation will be required, though it doesn't look good on its face.
	But wait until...
	Read the entire text, and you tell me, setting aside that one sentence, if this makes Tucker Carlson looks like a rabid, violent, supporting, insurrectionist, bigoted...
	Awful human?
	Let's read the text.
	Tucker Carlson, January 7, 2021.
	Bearing in mind, for whatever it's worth, he thought this was going to remain private.
	Or maybe he knows that everything's going to go public anyhow.
	A couple of weeks ago, I was watching a video of people fighting on the street in Washington.
	A group of Trump guys surrounded an Antifa kid and started pounding the living shit out of him.
	It was three against one, at least.
	Jumping a guy like that is dishonorable, obviously.
	It's not how white men fight.
	Yet suddenly I found myself rooting for the mob against the man, hoping they'd hit him harder, kill him.
	I really wanted them to hurt the kid.
	I could taste it.
	Then somewhere deep in my brain an alarm went off.
	This isn't good for me.
	I'm becoming something I don't want to be.
	The Antifa creep is a human being.
	Much as I despise what he says and does, much as I'm sure I'd hate him personally if I knew him, I shouldn't gloat over his suffering.
	I should be bothered by it.
	I should remember that somewhere somebody probably loves this kid and would be crushed if he was killed.
	If I don't care about those things, if I reduce people to their politics, how am I better than he is?
	Thank you.
	Does that...
	Setting aside the...
	It's not how white people...
	Where was it?
	It's not how white men fight.
	Does that make Tucker Carlson look bad?
	And the interesting thing here is, to contextualize it, he's saying it's not how Trump supporters should fight.
	It's how Antifa fights.
	Antifa typically tends to be white boys as well, white men.
	Typically.
	And incidentally, I would like to know what led up to this and what followed it, because...
	This is a weird text to send to your producer.
	First of all, it's a long text.
	Does he sit there on his phone dictating?
	It doesn't have many typos that I can see.
	Does he sit there preparing thoughtful texts like this for his producer, typically?
	Was there a discussion going on that might have had race in it somewhere in there that might attenuate this, what would otherwise be the very objectionable one sentence in an otherwise laudable self-reflection about putting your own hatred in check?
	Credit to Fox News, at least, for putting the entire thing in there, although they only seem to cite the one sentence.
	For years, Carlson espoused views on his show that amplified the ideology of white nationalism, but the text message revealed more about his views on racial superiority.
	Oh, yeah.
	The text alarmed the Fox board, which saw the message a day before Fox was set to defend itself against Dominion voting systems before a jury.
	None of this makes any sense.
	At all.
	The board grew concerned that the message should become public at trial when Mr. Carlson went on the stand, creating a sensational and damaging moment that would raise broader questions about the company.
	So they release it?
	So they leak it after paying nearly a billion dollars to Dominion and firing Tucker Carlson?
	This makes no sense.
	You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to understand that this makes no sense.
	In fact, in fact, it absolutely makes no sense.
	The exact opposite would make more sense.
	If you had this text message and your goal was to release it in any event, despite the fact that you don't want to go to trial because you don't want this to become public, but you have the intention of leaking it afterwards to malign Tucker Carlson, after having paid nearly a billion dollars of a settlement, you would want to go to trial.
	You would want to go to trial.
	Have this come out during the trial.
	And then say, well, look, oh my goodness, this terrible decision is because of Tucker Carlson.
	Then you might, you know, then you'd have a grounds to fire him.
	It would only cost you another $800,000 more, but you might not lose $800 million more, but you might not lose a billion in viewership dollars.
	You would want this to come out at trial, be able to then absolutely blame the negative outcome on Tucker Carlson.
	A negative outcome, which might not even be much worse, if worse at all, to the amount you've agreed to pay them.
	And then you can fire Tucker Carlson.
	As opposed to agreeing to pay $800 million, firing Tucker Carlson, and then releasing it?
	Fox, you've screwed yourself left, right, and center here.
	The day after it was covered, the board told Fox executives who was bringing in an outside law firm to conduct an investigation into Mr. Carlson's conduct.
	Let's just read this.
	The text message added to a growing number of internal issues involving Carlson that led the company's leadership to conclude he was more of a problem than an asset and had to go.
	Oh yeah.
	I will never watch Fox News again.
	Period.
	I don't even go to Fox for my news.
	I don't even go to fox.com anymore.
	And I've spoken to other people, old people, who will not watch Fox News anymore.
	Even though everybody thinks it's only the younger generation that's dropping in droves, that's leaving in droves.
	In other messages, he had referred to women, including a senior Fox executive, in a crude and misogynistic terms.
	Oh, they didn't show us the details on that.
	I suspect it's not what they're saying it is.
	The message about...
	The fight also played a role in the company's decision to settle.
	Oh, really?
	What was that logic?
	You're there for election, alleged defamation relating to election conduct that was not true, and a racist tweet from the only guy at Fox News attacking Sidney Powell is what you think creates exposure, liability?
	The text is part of redacted court filings and its contents were previously unreported.
	The contents of the text were disclosed in interviews with several people close to the defamation lawsuit against Fox.
	The people spoke on condition of anonymity because they did not want to be identified discussing a message that is protected by a court order.
	In public filings, it remains hidden behind a block of black text.
	That's interesting.
	People breaking the law.
	Are anyone going to go after them?
	Carlson's messages were collected as part of the defamation lawsuit, which accused the network.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	In the text...
	Now, I do actually have my questions as to whether or not it would have been redacted even during trial because it would be unrelated to the trial itself.
	In that text, Carlson described his own emotions, yada, yada.
	Okay, we read this part.
	Fox has not commented about Mr. Carlson's house last week.
	Yada, yada.
	They agreed to part ways, thanking him for its service.
	It remains unclear how the text escaped more notice earlier, given that the Fox legal team was aware of it.
	And other offensive texts written by Mr. Carlson.
	Fox's lawyers had produced the text as part of the discovery process.
	They were involved in redactions and were involved in redactions.
	Carlson had even been asked about it during deposition, according to several people.
	It was not guaranteed that the text would have been revealed in open court.
	Dominion lawyers still had not decided whether they would introduce the text in front of the jury, according to people with knowledge of their plans.
	Probably, I mean, the judge might have authorized it anyhow, because apparently, you know...
	Probative value versus prejudicial value goes out the door when politics gets involved.
	But at first glance, why would that be revealed to the jury when it has nothing to do with the underlying defamation claim of the lawsuit?
	The two sides disagreed on whether the Dominion lawyers could have presented such a redacted message at trial if they decided to do so, a decision that would have ultimately fallen to the judge.
	The difference became moot after Fox struck the 11th hour deal on April 18th to pay $787.5 million.
	Oh, lordy, lordy.
	He attacked black social justice activists and portrayed immigrants from Central America as a blight on the nation.
	He said in 2018 that immigrants make the country dirtier.
	It's funny how some people hear immigrants and they immediately think race where immigrants come from everywhere.
	In the aftermath of the mass El Paso shooting at the hands of the gunman who cited white supremacist beliefs in his manifesto, Carlson declared on his show that white supremacy was not a real problem, likening it to a conspiracy theory.
	On Monday, the New York Times and other news organizations urged the judge overseeing the Dominion case to release some of the messages that were redacted.
	Well, there goes your justification, your pretext for having settled that lawsuit.
	We're going to settle the lawsuit because we don't want any of this coming, seeing the light of day.
	And it's all going to see the light of day anyhow.
	Through what seem to be disclosures that violate a court order.
	Department of Justice going to go?
	Anybody going to go after those leakers on this?
	No?
	Why not?
	Now the question is this, and I'm going to go to the chat on this.
	That text message, does it make Tucker Carlson look bad?
	One, yes.
	Two, no.
	And how does one interpret what he meant?
	By, it's not how white men fight.
	One, it makes him look bad.
	Two, it does not make him look bad.
	And what did he mean by it?
	But while we're on the subject of, you know, getting cancelled and destroyed, you know, for a private, and let's even take for granted it's a racist statement.
	Let's operate on that basis.
	It's not how I would talk.
	I don't think I'll ever...
	I don't think.
	No one will ever find a text message from me saying it...
	You'll never find a text message like that from me or anything because I'm afraid that all of my text messages are going to get leaked anyhow.
	Now, some are going to say, well, you might even have racist or whatever bigoted sentiments that you won't even put in a private text because you're so afraid of...
	Okay.
	Let's just operate on the basis anyhow.
	That Tucker Carlson's message, that statement is racist.
	What's good for the goose is good for the gander?
	Or isn't it?
	Like, a private message that you might think is racist is terrible.
	It's horrible.
	How can anybody do such a thing?
	He should be cancelled.
	He should be fired.
	He should be publicly excoriated.
	They should make an example of him, right?
	I mean...
	He privately says it's not how white men fight.
	Destroy him.
	But when someone else says, you know, poor kids can be just as smart as white kids, will they get elected presidents?
	We have this notion that somehow if you're poor, you cannot do it.
	Poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids.
	Elected president.
	Elected president.
	This is not...
	This is not something which might have multiple interpretations sent privately to your producer.
	This is something said publicly by a senile old man who has lost his filter as to what's appropriate to say in public.
	Elected president.
	We have this notion that somehow if you're poor, you cannot do it.
	I'll play the entire thing.
	Poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids.
	Wealthy kids.
	Black kids.
	Asian kids.
	Think how we think about it.
	Think about it.
	We think, no, we're going to dumb it down.
	They can do anything anybody else can do.
	Give it a shot.
	We have this...
	What did he say?
	I may be Irish, but I'm not dumb.
	What was the other...
	Oh, but by the door...
	Okay, so that's not so bad.
	He's just, you know, he's just a dawdling old buffoon who forgot what's inappropriate to say in public.
	It's not such a terrible thing.
	Poor kids can be just as talented and bright as white kids.
	Oh, well, let's just...
	That was when he was senile.
	He doesn't truly believe that.
	He just doesn't know what he's saying anymore.
	Let's be forgiving on the old bumbling buffoon who's, you know, walking the world into World War III.
	Oh, okay.
	Let's go back to 94. Or is it 93?
	When he wasn't senile.
	Or maybe he had signs of early onset dementia back then as well.
	Let's go here.
	This is going to blow your freaking mind for those of you who have never heard it.
	This is in the context of discussing, arguing Bill Clinton's crime bill, which was Condemned by Black groups back in the day, which in hindsight, in retrospect, is widely acknowledged to have been devastating on a generation of Black Americans.
	Let's hear what good old I'm not racist Joe Biden had to say about it while describing the objects, the individuals who are targeted by that piece of legislation.
	I'm going to let this entire thing run.
	Take back the streets.
	It doesn't matter whether or not the person that is accosting your son or daughter or my son or daughter, my wife, your husband, my mother, your parents, it doesn't matter whether or not they were deprived as a youth.
	He's talking about Black Americans.
	Just understand that as you listen to this throughout, because this is in the context of the debate as to what, you know, this law in general, which Black rights groups, Black rights groups at the time...
	We're vigorously objecting to, which in hindsight had the exact result that people were saying it was going to have at the time, criminalize an entire generation of black Americans, and it did, incarcerate an entire generation of black Americans.
	I'm sure the corrupt prison system in America that these politicians were or were not aware of or involved and had nothing to do with it, that's who he's talking about.
	It doesn't matter whether or not they had no background that enabled them to become socialized into the fabric of society.
	It doesn't matter whether or not they're the victims of society.
	The end result is they're about to knock my mother on the head with a lead pipe, shoot my sister, beat up my...
	Can you believe?
	This is like cartoonish level verbal villainy.
	94. I'm sure he's learned.
	At that stage of his life, that this is not how you talk about swaths of people.
	Maybe it was politically popular at the time.
	I guess it was.
	The law passed.
	Bill Clinton proposed it.
	I guess it was politically popular at the time.
	He learned his lesson.
	Take on my sons.
	So I don't want to ask, what made them do this?
	They must be taken off the street.
	That's number one.
	Who built the cages, Joe?
	They must be taken off the streets.
	There's a consensus on that.
	Unless we do something about that cadre of young people.
	Born out of wedlock without parents.
	Without Do you know there's a word for people, animals that have not been socialized?
	Feral.
	No conscience.
	No parents.
	Born out of wedlock.
	Feral.
	This is Joe Biden, 93. Not yet demented.
	We should focus on them now.
	If we don't, they will, or a portion of them will, become the predators 15 years from now.
	And, Madam President, we have predators on our streets that society has, in fact, in part because of its neglect, created.
	Again, it does not mean because we created them that we somehow forgive them or do not take them out of society to protect my family and yours from them.
	They are beyond the pale, many of those people.
	Beyond the pale.
	Beyond the pale.
	And it's a sad commentary on society.
	We have no choice but to take them out of society.
	Take them out of society.
	There's a difference between evolution and hypocrisy.
	And unfortunately, this came up with Kinzinger when he's sitting there I'm criticizing other people for their gun fetishes and posting pictures of them holding their guns in the context of the Second Amendment debate.
	And he says, like, your gun fetish is sick and terrible.
	And then I dig up a picture of him as an adult flaunting his AR-15 or whatever the rifle was.
	And he says, oh, I've learned a lot since then.
	I'm sorry.
	If you've learned a lot since being an adult, such that what you believed as a fully grown, as we say in Quebec, a fully vaccinated adult, if you learn...
	That a belief you held as a full-grown, educated adult was wildly 180 degrees the wrong thing?
	You've got a problem that you can't just walk your way out of and say, well, I've changed my mind since then, which was six years ago.
	Admittedly, this is 30-some-odd years ago, which shows just how long this decrepit politician has been in politics.
	But when you're an adult, a full-grown adult with a fully developed brain...
	But espousing these views and expressing these views, you don't get to say, oh, I learned a lot since I was 56. I mean, some people do.
	But if you were so wildly, racistly, offensively, out of line when you were 55 and you've come around, God bless.
	Everyone is entitled to redemption.
	But your judgment will always be suspect.
	And the truth is, we don't very well know how to rehabilitate them at that point.
	That's the sad truth.
	I'm the guy that said, rehabilitation, when it occurs, we don't understand it and notice it.
	And even when we notice it and we know it occurs, we don't know why.
	He's a doctor.
	So you cannot make rehabilitation a condition for release.
	That's why in our system, the federal system, you serve 85% of your time.
	It's a shame, but we don't know how to rehabilitate.
	But there is a consensus.
	Oh, no, but now I was wrong about that.
	The science has changed.
	We must make the streets safer.
	I don't care why someone is a malfactor in society.
	I don't care why someone is antisocial.
	I don't care why they've become a sociopath.
	We have an obligation to cordon them off from the rest of society, try to help them, try to change the behavior.
	That's what we do in this bill.
	We have drug treatment and we have other treatments to try to deal with it, but they are in jail.
	Away from my mother, your husband, our families.
	But we would be absolutely stupid as a society if we didn't recognize the condition that nurtured those folks still exist.
	And we must deal with that.
	Yeah.
	Tucker Carlson's the racist, though, because, you know, it's not how white men fight in a private text message.
	Destroy him!
	Go re-elect that guy.
	Shea Bosch.
	Oh my goodness.
	Do I have anything more on Tucker Carlson?
	Let me just double check in my footnotes.
	Fox News.
	Oh, I'll get to that in a second.
	That's something else.
	No, okay, good.
	I think we're good with that.
	Let me go and pull up some Rumble Rants so we can just look at those.
	They must be taken out!
	They have no...
	Conscience.
	They're going to hit my mother over the head with a lead pipe.
	Oh my God.
	And that man and those people accuse other people of inflammatory rhetoric because it's not how white men fight in a private text message to his producer, which I'm sure he's embarrassed about.
	Holy crab apples.
	All right.
	John.
	Oh, Johnson Cash.
	I thought that was John.
	Son.
	Cash.
	Dueling in a European tradition.
	Have you gone down the academic fencing rabbit hole?
	Johnson Cash?
	I can assure you I have not.
	I'm going to have to make sure I understand what that even means.
	Meme Comics says, loved your Chattanooga vid.
	FYI, the emergency powder you were holding is a Pfizer product.
	Just trying to help.
	You're trying to help.
	You're not trying to help.
	I got a box.
	Now I can't use it!
	I'm not going to burn it.
	I'm not stupid.
	I did not know that.
	I'm going to double check that in one second.
	XSSFDIT.
	Will all the employees terminated?
	This is going back to the, you know, no longer Vax mandates.
	Due to not getting the jab, get their jobs back.
	Will they get back pay?
	Will they get an apology?
	No, they won't.
	Because the way that was drafted, it was necessary at the time.
	You selfish anti-Vax bastards.
	You should have just done it at the time.
	And we could have lifted the restrictions three months ago.
	Had you just done it, you selfish bastards.
	I'm being facetious, tongue-in-cheek glib here.
	Sarcastic.
	Um...
	Thank you.
	Emergency.
	Is this how it is?
	Emergency product.
	Please be wrong.
	I would like you to be wrong.
	Emergency.
	Okay, this is it.
	This is the one.
	Don't know what's going on here.
	Reject all.
	No, thank you.
	Pfizer?
	I don't find it.
	I don't see it just yet.
	And I'll tell you this, in my defense, Pfizer acquires a leader.
	Oh, no!
	It's right here!
	Sweet geez.
	Marion!
	No?
	Well, that's it.
	That's it.
	I'm done.
	I'm done with it.
	Thank you for letting me know.
	Remember, I don't so much support boycotts as I believe in voting with my dollar.
	Damn it.
	Now, in my fairness, because there is fairness to me, I discovered emergency back before Pfizer bought it.
	I didn't even know that Pfizer bought it on my honeymoon in Hawaii.
	Because back then, you know, it hasn't happened in a while.
	Back then, whenever I would get a cold, I would immediately get a sinus infection.
	We land in Hawaii for our 10-day honeymoon.
	And it's a flipping trek.
	It was like virtually 20 hours door-to-door.
	Montreal, wherever, West Coast.
	I think we had like Montreal somewhere, somewhere LA, LA, Hawaii.
	And you got to get in the cab, get to the airport.
	I had the worst sinus infection that I've ever had.
	And I discovered emergency back in the day.
	It was like a total small mom and pops thing at the time, I think.
	2007, fact check me.
	Oh, well, that's it.
	I'm done with emergency.
	Crap on a stick.
	Oh, by the way, everybody, go hit the thumbs up button in the thingy thing.
	I've lost all the Rumble rants because I closed with...
	No, they're still there.
	Okay.
	Go hit the plus button on Rumble so that we can jack up that algorithm, I'll tell you what.
	Okay.
	A couple more articles and then we're going to get to some chat here.
	Okay.
	Let's see here.
	Fox News.
	So apparently, Fox News related, I watch Rebel News because I like Rebel News.
	Oh, by the way, everybody, Unlearned16, you might have noticed it's not a Twitter war.
	We're not having a Twitter war.
	Although she is definitely sassier than me on Twitter, although I can be a sassy prick on Twitter.
	We're going to have a...
	We have set up...
	We have agreed upon a stream.
	It's not going to be a debate like...
	I don't like debates.
	I prefer discussions.
	But it's going to happen.
	It looks like it's going to happen Saturday.
	Just a question of whether or not we do it at 2 o 'clock or 5 o 'clock.
	I think 5 o 'clock is better for a Saturday early afternoon stream, like Saturday, 2 o 'clock in the afternoon, West East Coast time.
	It's happening.
	So Unlearned 16, I forget what it is.
	Many of you might already know her Twitter feed.
	We're going to have a discussion.
	I think I may have scored the W on her perception of Tucker Carlson supporting the election fraud narrative.
	But we'll have what to talk about.
	But here, Fox News shells Tucker Carlson's documentary on Freedom Convoy.
	Carlson's documentary was set to expose Trudeau's authoritarian use of force against the Freedom Convoy protesters who took to the streets on October.
	It's funny.
	It's amazing.
	I didn't know that there was this documentary.
	This was against what someone told me yesterday during the stream.
	I think it might have been in our locals after party.
	We have the locals after Rumble, and someone said, "Did you hear about this?" And I said, "No, I hadn't heard about this." I didn't know it, but I hope, I question, wonder who has the rights to that documentary.
	It'll be a shame if there's a feature-length documentary that Fox is going to decide not to release now, but we'll see.
	Following Tucker Carlson's sudden departure from Fox News last week, the network has decided not to air a documentary in which the host weighed in on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's crackdown on Freedom Convoy protesters.
	Carlson's documentary was set to expose Trudeau's authoritarian use of force against the Freedom Convoy protesters who took to the streets, yada, yada, yada.
	Rebel News extensively covered the protests from beginning to end.
	Fine.
	The documentary's trailer featured People's Party of Canada leader Maxime Bernier and prominent members of the Freedom Convoy movement discussing Canada's COVID-19 restrictions.
	The documentary was intended to investigate the question of whether a U.S. invasion of Canada could be justified in order to release Canadians from what some view as oppressive government policies.
	Who the hell does not view it as oppressive government policies?
	They can only be...
	I don't know who they could be.
	According to the Canadian press, a Fox News spokesperson has confirmed that the documentary will not be aired, much to the relief of some observers.
	Bruce Hyman, a former U.S. ambassador to Canada, has called Carlson's presence in the media landscape, quote, dangerous for American democracy, end quote.
	and expressed his approval of the decision to shelve the continent.
	Yep, that's what you've got to do.
	Despite the documentary's cancellations, questions around Carlson's opinions on US-Canada relations and the potential consequence of airing such content will likely to be continued.
	You know, if they can leak the text messages, they can leak the bloody documentary.
	I want to see that documentary.
	And I think a lot of people might not...
	Be wildly offended by the idea of America coming to the aid of Canada.
	Some people think it's a joke.
	First of all, I don't think Tucker Carlson is serious about it.
	We played the clip yesterday when he was talking to the guy from Media Matters for America.
	I think that was him.
	How can we talk about defending Ukraine against the authoritarian Putin?
	And we're not talking about liberating, protecting Canada against the authoritarian Trudeau.
	But for the fact that Trudeau is a threat to Canadian freedom, but not to American national independence, I don't think anybody's going to care.
	The issue is going to be if what goes on in Canada actually becomes something of a national security threat to the United States.
	Training Chinese soldiers in Canada for wintertime conditions, fighting.
	Could become an issue for America, where they might say, what the hell is going on north of the border?
	Once upon a time, we nearly went to nuclear war because of nukes.
	In Cuba, you're training communist soldiers up in Canada.
	You have the biggest land border in the world, I think.
	That becomes an issue of national security.
	then you might get America saying, maybe we got to do something about that.
	So, we'll see anyhow.
	I'd love to see the documentary.
	I would love for that to be leaked and just see what that documentary would have looked like.
	Oh, yes.
	Back to Canada stuff.
	And this might be the best thing we've talked about all day.
	Oh, my goodness.
	This might be the best thing we've talked about all day.
	It goes back to Canadian politicians, liberal liars, and the authoritarian regime that is the Trudeau regime.
	It's not a government.
	It's a regime.
	They just passed Bill C-11.
	Okay?
	Bill C-11, the Online Streaming Act.
	I'll probably talk about that with Unlearned16 as well.
	They just passed Bill C-11.
	Online Streaming Act.
	As of now, internet content, including user-generated content, is going to be governed.
	By the CRTC, the Canada Radio Television Communications body, it's going to be subject to the Broadcasting Act, which is going to impose Canadian content requirements on online streaming, including user-generated content, even if they say that they're not going to, impose fines for noncompliance.
	It's going to affect discoverability of Canadian content, CANCON, which is a great move, a great acronym, because it's a CANCON.
	It passed.
	Senate reviewed it, made some recommendations.
	The House said, thanks for the recommendations.
	We'll take some and we're not going to take the other big ones and piss off.
	And it received royal assent last Thursday, 6.55, time of death of Canada's demise.
	Pablo Rodriguez, this guy that you see here, the one who looks like...
	I won't make fun of him.
	I can make actor jokes, which I won't do.
	Porno actor jokes.
	He's being interviewed.
	Primetime politics.
	Let me just see what this is.
	I don't know what this is.
	Today's Canadian politics from breaking stories to developments on longstanding issues, key moments, interviews, panels, and in-depth analysis.
	CPAC.
	Okay, that's fine.
	They're worthy of an interview with the government.
	Let's hear what he has to say here.
	I'm concerned that this might actually have overreach.
	Now, there was also a concern that this might actually have overreach and affect the individual content creators, user-generated content that are posted onto these kind of websites.
	But you don't think that's going to be an issue here?
	No.
	Even though the Senate wanted to pass an amendment that would actually make a distinction, say it would not apply to them.
	But that amendment had a loophole in it.
	That amendment had a...
	Elaborate, please, Mr. Rodriguez!
	Remember, I've talked about it, I won't go into it in greater detail, but one of the amendments to this bill was that it would specifically exclude user-generated content.
	So it would specifically apply to the Netflix, the Hulus, the Disney Pluses, the online streaming companies.
	Not to user-generated content.
	There was a specific exclusion in there.
	In the dead of night, under the dead of the COVID lockdowns, the liberals...
	Removed that amendment with that specific exclusion for user-generated content.
	And then the then minister at the time, Guilbeau, that buffoon, says, no, no, we're not going after user-generated content.
	Then why did you remove the exclusion?
	We didn't need it there in the first place.
	Then why did you remove it?
	Oh, we might go after you if we think you're acting like a broadcaster.
	That's what happened.
	Listen to this pathological liberal liar.
	You know, try to assure you we're not coming after user-generated content.
	How about it?
	First, I say we're not interested in looking at the content of creating.
	I mean, even if it's great, we're among the best in the world.
	But it's not what we're looking for.
	But even if we were, how do we do that?
	Did you ask the questions to these people?
	How would we do that?
	I got it out!
	Teacher!
	Teacher!
	I got an answer.
	I got an answer to that.
	There's millions and millions of things uploaded on the internet every day.
	Who would be watching that?
	Has this buffoon never heard of artificial intelligence, AI, algorithms?
	Has this pathological liar never heard of it?
	Or does he think that liberal supporters are so dumb, naive, willfully blind, or happy to be the tyrants that they won't care about it?
	Oh, because by the way, liberal government might not always be in power.
	The conservative government now is running on, we will repeal BLC-11 if we win the next election.
	They might change their minds.
	Hey, power.
	Is always good when it's in your hands.
	It's always dangerous when it's in the hands of your ideological adversaries.
	How would we do that?
	I've never heard of this thing called artificial intelligence, AI, algorithms.
	Oh, there's millions and millions.
	How would we do that?
	Oh, that's how.
	You liar.
	Someone at the government?
	The CRTC?
	It's impossible.
	It's impossible.
	Are we not interested in watching and passing comments on the content?
	There's no way we could do it anyways.
	Not interested.
	They are interested because they have a financial interest in doing it.
	Hey, why not impose financial obligations, Canadian content requirement obligations, penalties on user...
	Why not?
	It's more money in your pocket.
	And more importantly, if you had no intention of doing it, why did you eliminate in the dead of night the exclusion that would have specifically provided to exclude user-generated content?
	But hold on, it gets better.
	But it does, for example, apply to, as you just said...
	Streamers like Disney +, like Netflix, Apple, as well as Prime.
	Are you willing to expand the definition of what qualifies as Canadian content in order to satisfy the intent of this law?
	The next step, is for me to draft a policy directive to the CRTC.
	And in that directive, I will ask the CRTC...
	To look at the actual definition of Canadian content and to modernize it.
	After the law is passed, after the law has been passed, this is procedure in Canada.
	After the law has been passed, after it has received royal assent, Pablo Rodriguez, Canada's Minister of Censorship, will issue a directive to the body that has been empowered under the law to supervise, to regulate, to govern online streaming.
	After the law has been passed, he issues a directive in which he can specify, clarify, or what's the word I'm looking for?
	I guess specify is the word.
	In which he can make more specific the definition of the criteria.
	This is, in real time, the embodiment or the realization of we need to pass the bill in order to see what's in it to some degree.
	They pass this bill, which they know is ambiguous as to who it governs, and then the protocol procedure afterwards is for the Minister of Censorship of Canada, Pablo Rodriguez, to issue a directive to outline what the powers of the CRTC are going to be, or to empower the CRTC to outline their own powers.
	Is it going to cover user-generated content?
	I'm going to issue a directive right now to the CRTC to outline, define their own powers.
	Pass the bill before we even know specifically who it does and does not apply to.
	What could go wrong?
	CRTC is definitely one of those trustworthy governmental bodies, administrative bodies, that wants to limit their own power, right?
	They don't want to enhance their own power, increase their own power to censor what Canadians do and do not see online.
	They don't want to increase what they can dip their hands into in terms of the back pockets of online content creators.
	Surely they want to limit their power, limit their revenue, limit their So we'll see what they come up to.
	But a lot of things are very important.
	For example, the IP, the fact that we need to hire more Canadian people, being actors, directors, technicians.
	We want to help.
	What a bloody liar.
	But look at this.
	It gets better.
	Hold on.
	Hold on.
	How would we do it?
	There's millions of things.
	We can't track the internet.
	Come on.
	Hey.
	Oy.
	Oh, cripe.
	Cripe.
	Why won't it refresh?
	Oh, hold on.
	Maybe if I do that.
	There we go.
	Okay, fine.
	Bring it back here.
	Was this the original tweet?
	Prime time.
	Ugh, I screwed up.
	How would they do it, people?
	How would they do it?
	Here's how they do it.
	No thanks.
	Get this out of here.
	Here's how they do it.
	National...
	National Post.
	33 million devices.
	Spy.
	Oh, tracked.
	I think it was tracked.
	How would they do it?
	They already did it!
	Canada's public health agency admits it tracked 33 million mobile devices during lockdown.
	How would we do this?
	Oh, we can't just gather the data and then look at it.
	We can't just hire more government officials to look at the interwebs.
	Why would we?
	There's literally, we're not going to go and see what every...
	33 million mobile devices during lockdown.
	The Public Health Agency of Canada accessed data such as cell tower location to monitor people's activity during lockdown, it said.
	I've talked about this many times anyhow.
	How would they do it?
	Due to the urgency of the pandemic, the PHAC collected and used mobility data such as cell tower location throughout the COVID-19 response, a spokesperson said.
	The program's existence was first brought to wider attention by Black Locks reporter.
	It's amazing.
	How would they do it?
	They've already done it, people.
	They've already done it.
	They've already done it to you.
	Get down, camera.
	But, no, trust them.
	Trust them now.
	Okay, sorry.
	I had the article up here already, so let's just get rid of that.
	Okay.
	We're going to end on just another Canadian thing.
	Jagmeet Singh.
	Let me see if I missed anything here.
	TX47 with a $5 rumble rant says, King Charles'ascent to Canadian Bill C-11 is not a good start.
	TX47, another $5 rumble rant says, I was personally sworn to Her Majesty as one of her hounds.
	What I saw as her failure to not command Justin Trudeau's resignation for imposing the act was a disappointment.
	Yeah.
	Thank you.
	Yeah.
	No doubt.
	But look, Justin Trudeau is not the only disappointment here.
	Check out Jagmeet Singh, by the way.
	Jack Layton, in as much...
	The thing is this.
	I thought I remembered Jack Layton was a good, principled, honorable man.
	And I say that still believing it.
	But I say that now still believing it, now knowing I cannot even trust my own, not my own memory of history, but my own memory of my understanding of history at the time.
	I remember Jack Layton being a genuinely good, loving, patriotic Canadian citizen.
	He...
	He brought the New Democratic Party or the New Democrat Party.
	He created...
	That was his legacy.
	He was a true Canadian in as much as my memory of my understanding of Jack Layton at the time is accurate.
	He also looked like my father-in-law.
	So whenever I see a picture of him, it brings back good memories of my father-in-law.
	Jagmeet Singh, 12 years ago today, you made history.
	We'll never forget what you did for this country.
	And for Canadians, love, hope, optimism.
	We miss you, Jack.
	The problem with these types of tweets really piss me off, but I have to be loving and forgiving.
	Maybe people who do these are genuine and sincere.
	We miss you, Jack, is the most self-gratifying sense of attributing importance to yourself.
	Jagmeet, the man who has not single-handedly, but single-handedly assisted the other man in single-handedly destroying our country.
	He has destroyed the new Democrat party.
	He has turned it into a party for the government and not a party for the people.
	We miss you, Jack.
	Is to imply that Jack would say, I'll miss you, Jagmeet.
	Like, like, like, like, Jack.
	Rest in peace if there's a heaven or an afterlife to sit in there saying, thank you, Jagmeet.
	I'm so happy I finally got your affirmation after you've taken a steaming dump on the party that is the NDP by propping up this tyrant that is Justin Trudeau.
	Oh, thank you so much for paying tribute to my memory today.
	Oh.
	The new Democrat Party used to stand for something.
	It used to stand for the workers.
	It used to stand for Canadian citizens.
	That's why Jack Layton succeeded in doing what he did to that party.
	Jagmeet Singh?
	Look at that.
	Jagmeet Singh, listen to this.
	I mean, I have to think that he regrets this article.
	Poses for pictures.
	The greatest showman, Jagmeet Singh, the man of the people, sitting there for this photo op, twirling his mustache.
	The thought is behind this mustache.
	Is he twirling his mustache like a villain?
	Is he showing off his pink turban because he's such a trendy, kitsch guy?
	The greatest showman?
	That's not a compliment.
	The left has pinned its hope on Jagmeet Singh, a charismatic leader with a taste for flashy suits and a following that should make Justin Trudeau nervous.
	The making of a political superstar.
	He thought when he said...
	He at the time...
	This is what he thought was popular.
	A political superstar.
	This is what he did to the NDP.
	Took it from a party of the people to a party of someone aspiring to be a political superstar.
	I'm not going to go into this entire article I've done.
	I just want to read.
	I just want to read one part, which is absolutely beautiful.
	Just...
	Jagmeet...
	And I'm not saying his name improperly to make fun of him.
	I'm actually saying his name properly.
	It's Jug Meat.
	And that's how he says it.
	Jug like a jug and meat.
	Oh, Jug like hug and meat like nice to meet you.
	Jug Meat has a taste for dandy luxuries that don't comport with the monkish minimalism of his party.
	He wears bespoke suits in the slim British style.
	His favorite is a brown tweed with cobalt blue stripes designed by a tailor in New Delhi, which he often pairs with a millennial pink turban.
	He owns two Rolex watches, an Oyster Perpetual Datejust and a Submariner.
	Both were gifts.
	Oh, that's I got more questions.
	A crimson BMW coupe.
	I just have an absurd number of bikes, he says.
	More than one person should have.
	His cure pattern.
	The ceremonial Sikh dagger he wears under his jacket is a steel design by a metalworker outside Boston.
	Since joining Queen's Park in 2011, Singh has become one of the city's most devoted partygoers, a regular at King West night spots and gala fundraisers at fashion shows and Raptors games.
	You pay tribute to Jack Layton, Jagmeet, and he's rolling in his grave looking at what you've done to his party.
	All right.
	That's it, people.
	That is it for the day, people.
	What day is it?
	So sidebar, I don't think we have a sidebar for tonight.
	I think, if I'm not mistaken, that we might have an amazing sidebar for next week.
	So I don't think we're going to have a sidebar today, but stay tuned.
	But for the time being, operate on the basis that we don't have one.
	What was I going to play us out with today?
	There was a short video.
	That I was going to use to play us out.
	Oh, hold on.
	Let me just give everybody the link to locals.
	LawrenceLaw.locals.com.
	Head over for the after party.
	you Thank you.
	I'm just reading here in the...
	Jack Layton is rolling in his grave, says URS 8243.
	Perfect Champagne Socialist, says Dalvanious underscore TYVV.
	Rich Bastard says Race 99. Hey, I think he got four.
	Are they up to four pay raises since COVID?
	Four pay raises while he shits on CEOs of grocery stores.
	How does he make his money?
	Gifts banned from YouTube.
	How does he make his money?
	Gifts.
	Okay, head on over to Locals.
	I gotta find something.
	I gotta find something to play us out with today.
	Because Rumble has this thing where they seem to...
	It gets cut off at the end, so in order for the cutoff part to be a video...
	Am I gonna have anything?
	I might not have anything.
	Head on over to vivabarnslaw.locals.com For fun stuff.
	Yeah, so, okay, there's what's going on in Russia.
	We'll wait until we have more news on that.
	And, oh, you know, let's just end this with a tweet that's one-year-old.
	Bear in mind, by the way, this tweet is one-year-old.
	I don't remember where I was when I did it, but look at it.
	My wife said my hair is going to stop growing.
	She's wrong.
	My hair is never going to stop growing.
	This is me.
	I think this was from the protest, so maybe February 2021.
	Oh, look at that.
	That was when the Freedom Frode, guys.
	That's what I started growing the Freedom Frode.
	Okay, we're going to end on this.
	What I said then is even more true today.
	Enjoy the play out.
	I'm going to head on over to Locals and I'll see you all there.
	Thank you for being here, peeps.
	Peace.
	And Locals, I'll see you in one minute and ten seconds.
	We're still a free country, though, by the way.
	You can still protest for as long as the government says you can protest.
	For 20 minutes?
	Fine.
	23 minutes?
	It's an occupation.
	Break it down.
	You can protest so long as you follow the neat little itinerary that the government authorized you to take.
	And if you take a wrong turn, occupation, arrest.
	No, it's a free country when the government can tell you when you can protest, how you can protest, how long you can protest for, and if you dare push what they might think is the envelope, they will come in and destroy your life.
	This guy's not.
	Malicious, incessant prosecution.
	Right there.
	They have all the money in the world to prosecute Tamara Lich, to prosecute Pat King, to prosecute...
	Jeez.
	Brian Peckford.
	To prosecute Randy Hillier.
	To prosecute, rather.
	To litigate with Peckford.
	To prosecute Randy Hillier.
	They have all the money in the world to waste on judicial systems, judicial resources, prosecutorial resources, all the money in the world for that.
	Go down there and talk to the homeless people?
	It would be nice if the government gave them as much attention as it gave those rowdy protesters.
	Ken.
	It's not even worth the calories.
	I can't do it.
	Sorry.
	Locals, I'm back.
	Just so everybody understood what was going on, I remember that.
	That was at the protest.
	And I had gotten an A&W coffee because I hadn't had coffee that morning.
	It was undrinkable.
	Undrinkable coffee.
	And I needed the coffee and I hate wasting money.
	If I don't drink a coffee, it's undrinkable.
	Are we still good on locals?
	Let me see here.

▲