Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 13, 2023 - Viva & Barnes

01:34:30

Trudeau the Prime Gaslighter! Quebec Amends Public Health Act? Ray Epps Sues Fox! & More? Viva Frei

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Ukraine's future is in NATO.
	And so we know, as you were mentioning, that a war is raging in Ukraine.
	Ukrainians are fighting for their freedom and for ours as well.
	And so we need to make sure that we continue to support Ukraine.
	At this point, Canada has invested $8 billion in financial, military and humanitarian support to Ukraine.
	Even when the war ends, Russia will still be a very dangerous neighbour.
	And in that sense...
	It's a never-ending war.
	It'll never end, even when it ends.
	George Orwell, the war was not meant to be won.
	It was meant to be perpetual.
	We need to be thinking about the long-term security needs of Ukraine.
	And offering long-term security guarantees is definitely important, because we need to make sure that there is strong deterrence and self-defense on the part of Ukraine, because we don't want Russia to eventually leave, re-arm and re-invade Ukraine.
	And so that's why we've been a steadfast supporter now, but also in the future.
	And we've been making sure that we're part of these very important diplomatic conversations that are happening.
	I'm going to say this without remorse and without any reluctance.
	She's an idiot.
	She's an absolute buffoon who has no idea what the hell she's talking about, who is in over her head.
	It's not because she's a woman and it's not because she's liberal.
	It's because she's an idiot.
	She's in over her head.
	She doesn't know what she's talking about.
	She had no credentials for this position in the first place.
	But the Trudeau regime is where incompetence fails up.
	Oh my goodness.
	Oh my.
	Vapid.
	Mindless.
	Oh, and she's on CNN.
	What better way to sell Canadian propaganda than to go onto CNN?
	To pitch to America why Canada needs to be involved in funding, financing foreign conflict when it can't even feed its own citizens.
	I'm going to play it again because I had a few choice things that I wanted to say.
	And then after this, I'm going to go look at Melanie Jolie's credentials.
	Oh, let's start this from the beginning.
	We were going to start with a gag reflex, but it's not going to be Justin Trudeau.
	It's just going to be his henchmen, henchwomen, Melanie Jolie.
	She's in Lithuania.
	She's on CNN talking about how the war was not meant to be won.
	It was meant to be endless.
	Ukraine's future is in NATO.
	Ukraine's future is in NATO.
	It's as though every step of the way, they said that the red line that would lead to World War III is now the line that they're crossing.
	We're not going to give them certain types of weapons.
	All right, now we're shipping them fighter jets.
	Ukraine, arguably, whether you like it or not, was never supposed to be in NATO.
	That was the entire, at the very least, the historical explanation.
	You might not like it as a justification, but you might have to get over what you like and what you don't like hearing that are nonetheless matters of fact.
	Ukraine neutrality, in the sense that it would not join NATO, was basically the sticking point to avoiding conflict in Ukraine.
	Some have argued.
	You don't have to agree with it.
	I'm going to steel man this like Glenn Lowry.
	You don't have to agree with it.
	Some have argued that the only reason you have this conflict in Ukraine, Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which started in 2022, which people think this conflict just started.
	It's not as though there were discussions about negotiating a peace in the eastern regions with Russia, recognizing not the affiliation to Russia, but the independence from Ukraine of the Donbass region.
	Any of that matters to anybody who has the memory of a goldfish.
	This conflict started with Russia's brutal unilateral invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
	Some have argued that this entire conflict did in fact result from NATO creeping into Ukraine, using Ukraine as a NATO ally when it was not supposed to.
	Ukraine has a very strategic geographic position as relates to Russia that is unique.
	So when people say, well, there's other countries that border Russia that are part of NATO, the borders aren't as big, the borders aren't as strategic, and they were not the source of the conflict that dates back to more than two years.
	We're not going to ship on fighter jets.
	Now we're going to ship on fighter jets.
	You got Ralph Nadler.
	Not Ralph Nadler.
	Ralph Nadler.
	What's his first name?
	Nadler.
	The penguin guy.
	What's his name?
	Nadler is his last name, anyhow.
	Like a bloated war whore talking about, well, we're going to give Ukraine, you know, we'll give them, I'm open to giving them weapons, even if I know they're going to go use them to attack Russia.
	We don't have to sanction it.
	We can still give them the weapons knowing that they're going to do things that would provoke a direct conflict.
	No, I don't care.
	I'm a bloated, rich, filthy, political protected old man.
	I got nothing left to lose.
	We don't have to sanction it, but we can give them the weapons knowing what they're going to do.
	Crossing red line after red line.
	And now here's Melanie Jolie, who I don't know if she could even locate the Donbass region on a map two years ago, telling us that Ukraine's future belongs in NATO.
	I thought this was not about NATO aggression and NATO infiltration into Ukraine.
	Ukraine's future is in NATO.
	And so we know, as you were mentioning, that a war is raging in Ukraine.
	Very, very fantastic observation.
	We know.
	You're so smart, Melanie.
	You've done your homework on this.
	Ukrainians are fighting for their freedom and for ours as well.
	May I stop you there and just ask the obvious question?
	How the heck are Ukraine...
	Not to say that they're not fighting for their freedom, and it's a brutal, gruesome war.
	How are they fighting for our freedom as well?
	Oh, if Russia succeeds in Ukraine, so goes the argument.
	They have a global conquest just like Hitler.
	They're fighting for our freedom as well is the most vapid, idiotic inanity, if that's a word.
	That anybody can possibly spew except for the purpose of trying to convince Canadians that there's a reason why our government is investing $8-plus billion of Canadian taxpayer funding to finance proxy wars against Russia for the regime change they want.
	If they're just fighting for Ukraine, it's going to be tough for Canadians to sit there realizing that 11 million Canadians can't pay for their groceries.
	But they're fighting for our freedom, so we better give them our money.
	We better give them more weapons.
	Oh, they're fighting for our freedom as well.
	I didn't know that, Melanie.
	And so we need to make sure that we continue to support Ukraine.
	At this point, Canada has invested $8 billion.
	Invested?
	In war?
	We've invested.
	So that means you expect to get a return on what you've spent?
	Is it humanitarian or is it an investment?
	We've invested $8 billion in war.
	In finance?
	$8 billion.
	At $8 billion, by the way, and according to the NBC report there, 30%, what was it, 30 or 70% that remains unaccounted for by the time the humanitarian aid and the military aid and the financial aid reaches the end line.
	Was it 30 or 70%?
	Of course, you know, CBS or NBC, whichever one it was, CBS, I think, had to retract that documentary.
	But even when the war ends...
	Even when it ends, it never ends.
	Russia will still be a very dangerous neighbor.
	It will always be a permanent enemy.
	Set aside the fact that it was Russia that beat Hitler.
	Even when the war ends, there will never be peace.
	Russia will always be an existential threat, even when this war is over.
	So this war is never going to be over, so long as Russia exists.
	And in that sense, we need to be thinking about the long-term security needs of Ukraine.
	She could not care less about the long-term security needs of the Ukraine.
	You know what the long-term security needs of Ukraine involve?
	Peace.
	Not endless war, but it's not Melanie that's fighting and dying.
	It's not Melanie's kids that are fighting and dying.
	It's Ukrainian civilians that are being caught in the crossfire of this proxy war with Russia.
	She's saying as much right here.
	Even when this war ends, Russia's going to remain a threat.
	We're going to have to keep the pressure on, keep shipping billions of dollars from Canada to fund a foreign conflict against Russia, our existential enemy.
	And offering long-term security guarantees is definitely important because we need to make sure that there is strong deterrence and self-defense on the part of Ukraine.
	Let's turn it into an endless slush fund.
	I now, in retrospect, in hindsight, appreciate people's objecting to...
	The endless subsidizing, financing, you know, other wars elsewhere in the world.
	Despite how righteous anyone may have thought one side was over the other.
	We don't want Russia to eventually leave, rearm and...
	What should we do?
	What should we do, Melanie?
	Tell me.
	First of all, hold on a second.
	Oh my goodness, have I gotten myself in a tiffy here.
	Melanie Jolie.
	Minister of Foreign Affairs.
	Can we just...
	I just want to refresh my memory as to her credentials.
	Minister of Foreign Affairs.
	Born...
	She's five months older than me.
	Canadian politician, lawyer, who has served as Minister of Foreign Affairs since 2021.
	A member of the Liberal Party.
	Jolie represents all that is wrong in Canadian...
	I'm sorry, that's not what it says.
	Montreal area...
	She represents the Montreal area riding of a Hunsic-Cartierville.
	Let me see.
	Early life in Paris.
	Born in 1979.
	She grew up in Montreal's northern neighborhood of Ahuncic.
	Her father is Clément Jolie, an accountant who was president of the Liberal Party's Finance Committee in Quebec and manager of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Her stepmother, Carol Marie, is a lawyer and a journalist who was an MP representing Laval.
	Okay.
	Education and career.
	I just want to see.
	I just want to see.
	After completing her Bachelor of Law, At Université de Montréal, she became a member of the bar.
	She subsequently received the Chevening Scholarship.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Okay.
	At the beginning of her career, Julie practiced law at two major Montreal law firms.
	Steikman, Elliot.
	That's where my father used to practice for 43 years.
	And Davies, Wards, Phillips, and Weinberg.
	Those are the two best law firms in Canada.
	And I'm not being sarcastic.
	Those are what they call the big sister law firms.
	Two of the five best law firms in Canada.
	Biggest, most rapidly, most well-known.
	At the latter firm, her mentor was former Parti Québécois Premier Lucien Bouchard, who supplied her with a letter of recommendation for her Oxford application.
	She worked primarily in the areas of civil and commercial litigation, bankruptcy and insolvency law.
	She was also a prosecutor before the Gomory Commission.
	In 2010, she became the first Quebecer to receive the Arnold Edinburgh Award, which recognizes philanthropic involvement within the Canadian cultural community.
	Yada, yada, yada, yada, yada, yada.
	Municipal Campaign, 2013.
	She announced that she was running for mayor.
	Federal politics.
	2015, she left municipal politics.
	She was Montreal's mayor.
	And she ran for the Liberal Party.
	In cabinet, Joly was named as the Minister of Canadian Heritage as part of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's new government.
	August 2018, she was named to the Tourism, Official Languages, and La Francophonie Portfolio.
	Minister of Economic Development in 2019.
	And 2021, she introduced Bill C-32, an act to achieve substantive equality of French and English, English and French, yada, yada, yada.
	And then she became Minister of Foreign Affairs.
	I mean, it's atrocious.
	It's atrocious.
	So suffice to say, yes, she may have had some interesting litigation experience and worked at two of Canada's top law firms.
	Let's see if she's WEF in a second.
	But we're not yet done with Melanie Jolie.
	I should have made sure that we are live on all platforms.
	Why is my computer not plugged in here?
	Hold on.
	I think we are successfully live.
	Hold on, peeps.
	Okay, there we go.
	That's me here.
	We're live.
	Oh, we're not yet done.
	We're not yet done with the madness because she put out another tweet earlier today.
	Yeah, look at this.
	$8 billion and counting, people.
	$8 billion and this was Melanie Jolie, July 12th.
	Yesterday, Canada is providing $541 million in funding, military support, cybersecurity assistance, and more, building on our 8 billion assistance to Ukraine.
	We stand alongside our NATO allies.
	You see what they're doing here?
	Now it's a foregone conclusion that Ukraine should be a NATO ally, a member of NATO, because they first take the incomprehensible, they take the impossible.
	And then they suggest it, and then they bake it into the statements they make going forward.
	We stand alongside our NATO allies in our commitment to a free, democratic Ukraine and strengthening transatlantic security.
	That's a load of Shiite.
	Let's see, are we going to get anything in here?
	Oh yeah, hold on one second.
	Let's just do this again.
	Melanie Jolie, WEF.
	I forgot this exercise, people.
	It's been a while.
	Oh, here we go, here we go.
	Look at that.
	WEF.
	I know.
	Who knows?
	Maybe they put her up on the website and she doesn't like it.
	She wants to have nothing to do with them.
	Reject cookies, World Economic Forum.
	The World Economic Forum.
	Melanie Jolie, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Global Affairs Canada.
	The Honourable Melanie Jolie was first elected to represent Ahansic-Cartierville in the House of Commons in 2015.
	In her ministerial roles, Minister Jolie has worked to promote Canadian culture and to grow and increase the visibility of Canada's 2040s.
	Yeah, it's a natural segue into international military conflict.
	She has also worked to safeguard Canada's two official languages while promoting the use of French.
	In Canada and around the world, including in the digital sphere, prior to entering federal politics, Minister Joly founded Le Vrai Changement pour Montréal, Real Change for Montreal, and ran for mayor in 2013 under its banner.
	Minister Joly holds an honours bachelor of law from the Université de Montréal and a magister jurist in European and comparative law from the University of Oxford.
	She is the author of Changing the Rules of the Game.
	What a generic cliché of a title in which she shares her vision for public policy and...
	There you have it, people.
	There you have it.
	All right.
	Good afternoon, East Coast.
	Good morning, West Coast.
	Good evening, Europe.
	And good morning, Australia.
	How goes the battle?
	Oh, my goodness.
	As you can see...
	I'm not in my ordinary studio or my temporary studio.
	I'm in my mother-in-law's sunroom.
	It's beautiful, but it's hot.
	So you might see me glistening as we go forward here.
	Holy crab apples!
	It's nuts!
	It's nuts.
	Good good says lovely flights.
	Yes.
	Oh, all right.
	So we are live across all platforms.
	Lord Justacost from our locals community has a...
	Comment about the degrees of Melanie, but I will not read it.
	WEF has penetrated the cabinets, says Crash Bandit.
	So we are live on YouTube, Rumble, and Locals.
	VivaBarnesLaw.Locals.com in about 15 minutes.
	Because I'm exclusive with Rumble, I'm going to end on YouTube.
	We're going to continue this on Rumble and Locals.
	And then after we've done all of the subject matter for the day, we're going to end on Rumble.
	And then we go to Locals and we have a little after party.
	And we've got...
	A great show.
	Still haven't gotten used to saying it's a great show, but it's going to be a great show today because I've been getting a lot of DMs.
	First of all, has everybody noticed Twitter seems to have changed or upgraded or updated its system, and now I'm getting, and I don't like it, so I'm going to have to find a way to get rid of it.
	I'm getting what are basically requests that you otherwise got in Instagram.
	So I guess while Instagram and Facebook were copying Twitter on threads, Twitter said, hey, maybe we'll create that Request for communication tab in your DMs because my DMs are not open because it does not invite anything good.
	And so they have this section now.
	It's exactly like Instagram.
	And there's too many requests that come in, but I've discovered it.
	And I've discovered that there's a lot of people saying, Viva, have you heard about this recent amendment to the Public Health Act in Quebec that now allows for mandatory vaccination?
	I even had a good friend send this to me saying WTF.
	And I looked at it and...
	Don't get caught up in the trauma of gaslighting.
	There's something to it.
	I'm going to start with that because it's important.
	What else do I have on the backdrop here?
	Hold on.
	Let me just see what my foot marks.
	My bookmarks.
	We started with Melanie Jolie.
	We're going to talk about that legislation.
	I'm going to pick on Jagmeet Singh for a little bit here.
	Some other highlights, some Canadian stuff, and then we're going to get into Ray Epps.
	The Ray Epps lawsuit because he sued.
	He has sued Fox News.
	He's filed a lawsuit.
	And, you know, he's filed a lawsuit on the basis that Fox News via Tucker Carlson engaged in defamation per se by suggesting that Ray Epps was a federal agent planted on January 6th to orchestrate and wreak havoc.
	And I've read the lawsuit and we're going to read the lawsuit.
	And in my humble opinion...
	Do you know who would have the...
	After having gotten away with their crimes, do you know who would have the audacity of suing Fox News for defamation per se?
	And also there's a false light claim in there.
	Do you know who would have the audacity after having literally gotten away with what put other people in jail for six years?
	Who would have the audacity to file a defamation lawsuit against Fox News?
	A federal agent.
	That's my humble opinion.
	Not a matter of fact, just a humble opinion.
	We'll get there.
	And then there's a bunch of other stuff, so...
	Let's start with this.
	I was going to do a separate standalone vlog, but children, obligations, not enough time in the day.
	Let's start with the first subject matter of the day.
	People have been sending me links saying, Viva, have you heard about this thing?
	The Public Health Act recently was amended in Quebec, and it added a provision, the amendments.
	Which are shocking, offensive, and are going to blow your mind.
	Section 123, 124, and 126.
	So I go and I open this up, and I read it, as does everyone else for the first time, because I've never read this particular provision of law before.
	This is the Public Health Act of Quebec.
	Let's go all the way down to the top here, just to see it.
	Legisquebec S2.2 Public Health Act.
	And it says, updated to April 1st, 2023.
	Okay.
	The object of this act is the protection of the health of the population and the establishment of conditions favorable to the maintenance and enhancement of the health and well-being of the general population.
	Thank you for empowering yourselves, government, to do whatever the hell you decide is necessary in furtherance of the protection of the public.
	I forget exactly what the terms were.
	People have recently discovered Section 123, and because people have never heard of it before, it's new to them, and people sent it to me and said, Viva, have you seen this recent amendment to the Public Health Act?
	It's shocking.
	Let's read this.
	Spoiler alert, it's not an amendment.
	Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, while the public health emergency is in effect, the government or the minister, if he or she has been so empowered, may, without delay and without further formality, To protect the health of the population,
	one, order compulsory vaccination of the entire population or any part of it against smallpox or any other contagious disease seriously threatening the health of the population and, if necessary, prepare a list of persons who require priority vaccination.
	Two, we'll go through it fast because that was the most important one.
	Order the closing of educational institutions or any other place of assembly.
	Three, order any person, government, department, or body to communicate or give to the government Wow.
	Wow.
	Four, entry into all or part of the area concerned or allow access to an area only to certain persons and subject to certain conditions or order for the time necessary where there is no other means of protection, the evacuation of persons from all or any part of the area of confinement.
	And if the persons affected have no other resources, provide for their lodging, feeding, clothing, clothing.
	That sounds like imprisonment.
	This, by the way, sounds exactly like the quarantine act, which I broke down in the early days of the pandemic.
	Five, order the construction to any work installation, sanitary facilities, yada, yada.
	Six, require the assistance of any government department or body capable of assisting.
	Fine.
	Seven, incur such expenses as necessary.
	Eight, order any other measure necessary to protect the health of the population.
	As if one through seven weren't exhaustive enough.
	Eight, everything.
	Carte blanche, as we say in English and in French.
	Okay, that's shocking.
	If that's an amendment, it's very interesting, especially since it only mentions here.
	Order compulsory vaccination against smallpox.
	Now, if you're reading this for the first time and you think this was a surreptitious secretive amendment and the government's trying to hide it by saying smallpox and not COVID, where one flag should be going off there already.
	Section 124, the declaration of public health emergency does not prevent the public health authorities from exercising the power granted to them under the provisions of this act.
	While a public health emergency is in effect, the minister shall act with the existence of the national public director.
	Is that the one?
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Okay, fine.
	125, where compulsory vaccination is ordered under Section 123.
	The minister shall make the necessary vaccines available and ensure that the required health services are offered.
	The minister shall bear the costs related to the dispensing of the health services that are required.
	That's so nice of them.
	They don't charge you for mandatory vaccination.
	Where applicable to the costs requiring those vaccines.
	Section 126 blew people's minds.
	If a person fails to submit to a vaccination order under Section 123, a judge of the Court of Quebec or of the municipal courts of the cities of Montreal, Laval or Quebec, having jurisdiction in the locality where the person is to be found, may order the person to submit to the vaccination.
	In addition, the judge may, if satisfied on reasonable grounds that the person will not submit to the vaccination, and if the That sounds exactly like what it sounds like.
	And people who have not heard of this and who have not seen this law might be inclined to think, holy crap, this is a new amendment.
	They passed this under the dead of night.
	Now they're going to go ahead and be empowered to stick that jab into your arm.
	If you say no, thank you, I'd like to leave my heart intact.
	Here's the problem.
	And I had to double-check this with a couple of still-practicing lawyers because I don't trust my own memory sometimes.
	This little thing right here underneath, 2001, Chapter 60, Section 123, that refers to the date of the provision or the date of any amendment.
	And so what some people who have never seen this provision were reflexively thinking was a new, shocking, and appalling amendment...
	Is in fact part of the original law, which came into effect in 2001.
	You go down to section 125, it came into effect with the law in 2001.
	You go to section 126, it too came into effect in 2001 with this law, which came into effect, if we go all the way up to the top, sorry for the nauseating scroll.
	Sorry, maybe it's at the bottom.
	Hold on, let me expand this so I can see the side here.
	Bring it all the way down to the bottom.
	Well, it came into effect in 2001, anyhow.
	The law has always been there.
	And that's what should actually be revelatory and shocking for everyone.
	I'm going to close this, just so everybody understands that.
	You go down to Section 123.
	This law came into effect in 2001.
	This provision has remained unchanged since the law came into effect.
	And so the monkeypox...
	Was not a surreptitious way of not mentioning the Rona jab as relates to an amendment that was passed in the dead of night recently.
	This law has been on the books since 2001, much like the Quarantine Act, which we looked at a while back and found so shocking, had been on the books for decades.
	I mean, I think the Quarantine Act was amended from the original one, which has been on the books for 100 years.
	That law...
	Son of a gun, I hear myself now again in the background.
	All right.
	I hear myself again.
	Give me a second, people.
	StreamYard?
	No, it's not this one.
	Oh, this is annoying.
	Is it here?
	Yeah, this is here.
	No, I still hear myself.
	I still hear myself.
	I still hear myself in the background.
	In Echo, this...
	Okay, I'm going to have to find which window is it that's opened.
	Give me a second, people.
	Is it here?
	This is so...
	There it is.
	It's right there.
	I'm an idiot.
	Okay.
	The law has been in effect since 2001.
	And we never knew of these provisions of law.
	And this is how it works.
	Like, this is, I guess, the great awakening of sorts.
	That law has been on the books for two plus decades.
	Shocking as it was that it seemed to prima facie authorize mandatory vaccination, compelled vaccination.
	They can lock you up and bring you to a facility to be vaccinated.
	Why it wasn't invoked this time around might have to do with the status of the Rona jab, whether or not it was under the EUA and therefore could not be compelled as a standard vaccine.
	I don't know.
	I honestly don't know.
	But for everybody who's thinking that this is a new law that was recently amended, first of all, don't spread it because that's not accurate information.
	You'll end up looking foolish.
	It's not new.
	And that should be even more shocking.
	This, by the way, from McCarthy Tetro.
	McCarthy Tetro is also one of the top, you know, five or ten law firms in Canada talking about this act back in March 21 because it became relevant in March 21. It didn't become enacted in March 20. March 21, 2020.
	COVID-19, can they do that?
	Part 7, Quebec's Public Health Act and Civil Protection Act.
	And then it says here, this update is part of a continuing series.
	We are providing a brief overview of the current state of federal and provincial emergency legislation, how our government are using their statutory powers to confront COVID, and what affects their efforts, yada, yada, yada.
	Okay.
	What you need to know, on March 14, 2020, pursuant to the Public Health Act, the government of Quebec...
	We all knew that.
	We just weren't all familiar with the specific provisions of the PHA.
	Now that the provincial government has declared a public health emergency under the PHA, it may exercise significant powers to protect the population and to mitigate the impact of the pandemic.
	Among other things, the government can now restrict the movement of people, which they did, close schools, which they did.
	What else?
	Prevent people from gathering, which they did.
	Require the disclosure of personal or confidential information, which they did.
	Contact tracing, people.
	Do you remember the days of contact tracing?
	Oh, it's necessary.
	Quebec has not yet declared a provincial state of emergency under the province's Civil Protection Act.
	The Public Health Act.
	When the National Assembly enacted the Public Health Act in 2001.
	2001, people.
	It was considered to be a turning point in public health policy in Quebec.
	The legislation gives public health authorities coercive powers that they may exercise when they consider that the health of the population is threatened.
	The province's powers under the PHA were used, for example, to order mass vaccination campaign during the H1N1 pandemic in 2009.
	Things that occurred during the H1N1 pandemic in 2009 because we had just had our first kid.
	And I had a vague memory that this sentence brought back memories of.
	Not good memories.
	This is what it means to be red-pilled, people.
	This information has always been there.
	This law has been there in as long as I've been a conscious adult.
	And I never knew about it.
	I never cared about it until I realized that the power...
	The government has the power to declare itself authorized to stick a foreign substance in your body against your will.
	On March 14, 2020, the PHA declared a public health emergency.
	The government may declare a public health emergency in all a part, yada yada.
	Dr. Horacio Arruda, that's the guy who said that a curfew is useless to combat a virus, but it'll help people remember the severity of the situation.
	He used the powers conferred on him to prescribe to prohibit any gathering of more than 250 people or the closure of schools, gyms, bars, movie theaters.
	He could yet use his powers to impose complete or partial lockdown, which they did.
	This would be a first in the province.
	Yep, it was the first.
	It will never be the last.
	It was the first when he did it in 2021.
	It was the second time he did it in 2022 because it worked so well the first time.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Specifically, let's just see if they talk about Section 123.
	Here we go.
	Once a public health emergency has been declared pursuant to Section 118 of the PHA, the provincial government may exercise a wide array of powers to respond to the emergency.
	Under Section 1...
	This is from 2020.
	Like, this is...
	Just dead of night.
	Nobody even knew about this.
	It may, without delay or without further formality, order compulsory vaccination.
	And we just saw this.
	Order the closing of schools.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Can you believe it?
	We are now only discovering this provision of law, and it's so shocking to our conscience.
	We said they had to have just passed this in the dead of night and didn't tell anybody because they want to abuse of their powers to mass vaccinate, to coerce vaccination.
	And it's actually been law for 22 years.
	And we all knew that they were invoking the Public Health Act, declaring an emergency to lockdown, etc., etc.
	I did not fully appreciate.
	At the time that Quebec legislation provided for coerced, compelled vaccination.
	So that's it.
	So everybody who's seeing that now and you're seeing people saying, oh my God, I can't believe they passed this law.
	It's not new.
	And what's shocking about this is not that it's not new.
	Wait, what's shocking about this is not that it's a newly passed piece of legislation.
	What's shocking about this is that it's not.
	And such is the great awakening.
	The great red-pilling, the red-pilled, jagged suppository that has been rammed up our collective anis, anuses, anusim, amusim.
	That is the only good thing that has come out of the last three years of government abuse, medical tyranny, and absolute destruction of all that made the Western societies the free democracies that they always purported to be.
	All right, everybody.
	There's Rumble.
	We're going to end this on YouTube and head on over to Rumble.
	Before I do that, let's just see.
	Have we gotten demonetized?
	I'm going to refresh here.
	Let's just see.
	Whenever I start with an ugly video of Justin Trudeau or his group, it tends to get demonetized.
	We're still green.
	We're still green.
	Small miracles.
	All right, we're ending on YouTube.
	Come on over to Rumble, and we're going to continue with a number of stuff and the Ray Epps lawsuit against Fox News.
	And whether or not when Tucker Carlson said Ray Epps is a federal agent who was there on January 6th to stir up shit, whether or not he was making a bold statement of fact and defaming Ray Epps or a rather logical observation of opinion as to what seems all likely given the fact that Ray Epps is not only the only one who never faced any charges, the only one with the...
	Bald face audacity to sue for defamation after having literally gotten away with crimes that put people away for years.
	All right.
	Ending on YouTube, come on over to Rumble, Viva Frye, or go over to Locals, vivabarneslaw.locals.com for the continuation of the party.
	All right.
	Here we are.
	Oh, chat.
	Let's see what's going on here.
	Oh, I didn't put the Rumble rant thing up here.
	Let's see what's going on in the chat here.
	Dalvenius underscore TYVV says Nuremberg was a farce.
	The ones in charge were ferried off to Russia and the USA.
	And not to say that that's wrong, because it's not.
	Everyone should understand what Operation Paperclip was.
	That was while they were trying the low-level Nazi criminals, the high-level Nazi criminals, Nazi war crime, Dr. Mengele-type scientists.
	Britain, Russia was fighting for them.
	America was fighting for them because they wanted their knowledge.
	They wanted their nuclear knowledge.
	They wanted their experimenting knowledge.
	And the Operation Paperclip, which consisted of literally smuggling some of these Nazi war criminals out in the dead of night, some of them even after conviction, it was called Operation Paperclip because when they were going through the book of Nazi scientists that they wanted, they put paperclips on the pages of the scientists that they wanted, that they were all fighting over and smuggling out.
	And so they did.
	It's a stunning, fascinating thing.
	I think America's Untold Stories...
	Not I think.
	America's Untold Stories did an episode on this.
	Eric Hundley and Mark Robert.
	And Mark Robert's revelation, which I thought was phenomenal, was that it's not just that America literally protected and imported Nazi war criminals through Operation Paperclip, the ones that they wanted.
	Put the little paperclip in there.
	In so importing...
	Those Nazi war criminals, they imported Nazi ideology into intelligence in America.
	They imported Nazi philosophy into intelligence in America.
	And it's not an accident that some of these Nazi doctors that were involved in torture during World War II were subsequently involved in what could be qualified as atrocities committed by U.S. intelligence.
	Okay.
	Did everybody...
	Eric Hunley is a child.
	Gaylord Fokker.
	I have no idea what that means.
	Annie Jacobson, Operation Paperclip.
	Great book from Broken Records.
	All right.
	Matt, what do we move on to now?
	Oh, there's so much in the backdrop here.
	Oh my goodness, people.
	I forgot to...
	I should have done this on YouTube, but even better now.
	I'll use this as a clip.
	You all saved your gag.
	You saved your vomitus because we started with Melanie Jolie.
	By the way, ironically enough, her last name means beautiful.
	Jolie.
	Even if what she says makes you want a wretch in your mouth.
	Physiologically speaking, she's not as disgusting as Justin Trudeau is.
	But I don't know if Justin Trudeau could otherwise be a handsome man if he weren't the scum of the earth.
	So you save your gag reflexes in the beginning.
	Get ready for full gaggery now, because we're breaking down a video of Justin Trudeau.
	It's pathological in its gaggery.
	It's pathological in its narcissistic personality disorder.
	I don't even know what type of pathological behavioral disorder one has to suffer from to be like this, but wait until you see this.
	It's posted by Mocha Bezigran, who if you don't know him, I don't know if he's still with Rebel News.
	He was with Rebel News for a bit.
	If he is, he might still be with them, but it looks like this is posted on his own social media.
	I'm giving everybody the link.
	The Rumble Chat, so go give it some love and give Mocha some love.
	We're going to go through the, not the whole piece, but the clip of Justin Trudeau infantilizing, lecturing a Muslim man who does not adhere to the gender ideology that is being stuffed down the throats of our children on a daily basis in Canadian schools and in American schools as well.
	So this is Mocha Bezigran who says, watch Prime Minister Justin Trudeau dismisses Muslim parents' worries on gender ideology as far-right misinformation.
	I think it starts somewhere in here.
	This was after...
	Okay, I think it was somewhere in here.
	Wait until you see this.
	Let's play it.
	And get ready to puke.
	Uh-oh.
	Is the internet...
	The internet's still good.
	Au revoir.
	Oh, no.
	Let's refresh.
	I'm getting the two bars.
	I'm getting a weak connection because I'm in a place where, you know...
	Here we go.
	The federal government doesn't control what's taught in schools.
	That's not something that is directly on the federal government.
	But at the same time, the federal government is unequivocal, as standing with the everybody's rights in the group.
	And the highest expression of parental rights is, of course, the safety and well-being of the child.
	The highest degree of parental rights is, of course, the safety and well-being of the child.
	Your concern with the community is for the safety, the well-being, the strength and the protection for your children.
	But the one thing that is really, really important in Canada is the one place to stand up for everybody else.
	He's sitting there lecturing a Muslim man.
	Here, sir, the one thing you have to understand about what's really important in Canada, let me just lecture you.
	Let me infantilize you.
	Let me treat you like a child.
	What you have to understand here in Canada is, it's my way or the highway, sir.
	And then, certainly, when it comes to the Muslim community, this government has the leader of the government to push back against the conservatives that, you know, made a campaign against the UKAP that brought in a snitchling against Muslims.
	Muslims, yes.
	Islamophobia.
	By the way, you're a child.
	Here's how it works in Canada.
	Also, you're a victim.
	I've been in power for eight years, since 2015.
	You're a victim.
	You're a victim of the Islamophobia of the prior administration, and you're also a victim now.
	I hope I didn't skip the part where Justin Trudeau talks about pitting groups against each other.
	Hold on.
	You're a victim now.
	Remember that.
	You're a victim.
	We will be the strongest ally to all minority communities.
	What the hell does that mean?
	That means I'm going to go perpetually looking for victims to pander to, to pit against others, presumably, or at least in fact.
	Particularly Muslims.
	We defend all minorities, but particularly Muslims, because I'm talking to you now.
	Terrible violence.
	Your victims?
	The issue, though, is that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms...
	that protects your religion, gives you a freedom of religion, allows you to fully participate in the society of law protections, protects all minorities as well.
	It's not a buffet.
	This guy's not sold.
	...
	protections you want out of the charter and link aside others.
	Standing apart, you have a people's rights, you're standing apart, everybody's rights.
	Now, if you look at the various curriculums, you'll see that there is not what is being said out there about aggressive teaching or conversion of video.
	Let's just stop there.
	We all know what strawmanning is.
	Oh, there's not aggressive teaching or conversion of kids to being LGBT.
	There's just teaching of, promoting of, empowering of.
	You literally just passed a law called the Anti-Conversion Therapy Law.
	I don't know if it's literally called that, but it is a law that says medical professionals, psychiatrists, psychologists, parents, teachers cannot talk a kid out of the idea that they are trans, that they identify as another sex than the one they were born into.
	They're not aggressively doing it.
	And if you think that, if you believe your own eyes, You're just falling victim to far-right American misinformation.
	Being LGBT, that is something that is being weaponized by people who are not doing it because of their interest in supporting the Muslim community.
	These are people in the far right who are consistently stood against Muslim rights in the Muslim community.
	Oh, really?
	It's an amazing thing to say it that way, to even think of it that way.
	They're not doing it because they're trying to protect you.
	As if to suggest that Justin Trudeau is that diabolical when he does anything.
	He's not doing it for broader principles.
	He's doing it to pander to specific groups.
	And it's an amazing thing.
	Some might say, yeah, when we stand up for these rights, we're not doing it specifically to support the Muslim community.
	We're doing it to support each and every human's individual rights.
	A.N. Rand said there is no greater minority than the individual.
	And if you do not stand up for individual rights, you can hardly be said to stand up for minority rights.
	But the idea is that he's accusing the right of exploiting the Muslim community for political profit.
	Do you know what that means?
	That means that that is exactly what Justin Trudeau does, because A, confession through projection, and B, because we've lived with Justin Trudeau for long enough to know that that is exactly what he does.
	But they are weaponizing the issue of LGBT, which is something that, yes, Islam has strong opinions on.
	He's now lecturing Muslims on Islam's position on LGBT issues.
	Yes, okay.
	I'm a religious expert.
	I'm going to lecture you now on what the dictates of your religion are.
	After having infantilized you?
	After having made you into a victim?
	That should fear everybody except for me because I'm the only white savior here to save you, Muslims?
	The same way that the religious right in Canada, the Christian right, has strong opinions against as well.
	The Christian right.
	Did you hear how he just very discreetly just called Muslims far right?
	The Christian right.
	The far right, the American right.
	That's how Justin Trudeau just categorized Muslims.
	And that's totally fine.
	But it's the conservatives that are Islamophobic.
	He just wrote off the religion as being right in the same way that he wrote off Christians as being right, American far right.
	And he accuses others of promoting anti-Islamic, Islamophobic sentiments.
	They're using those fears.
	They're using those fears to drive away.
	Those people are putting us all at risk.
	Those people, they're putting at risk our kids.
	No, sorry, he actually said they're putting at risk their kids and they're putting at risk our kids.
	This guy is the one now accusing others of using fear to drive a wedge between citizens.
	I want to swear like it's nobody's business right now.
	I want to say things that I should not say or even think.
	This is the worst man on earth, at least in Canada.
	And he is nothing but a walking embodiment of confession through projection.
	Accuse your enemies of doing what you are doing.
	It's just awful.
	Between a government that will always stand up for all your rights.
	Unless your rights, you know, unless you don't support the ones I'm talking about right now, then you're sort of, you know, you're like the Christian right.
	Oh, and we see how the Trudeau regime has been standing up for the Christian right, locking up pastors, shutting down churches.
	Oh, hey, why do we have a rash of church burnings in Canada?
	It's almost like someone at the highest level of government has been demonizing Christians for the last two years.
	Those radical religious extremist fundamentalists want to actually hold church services during COVID, but they can't because it's unsafe.
	but you can go to Walmart and buy a made-in-China fishing rod.
	Just like I will always stand up for the rights of LGBT kids, including if there Can you imagine how offensive this has to be to this Muslim man?
	Including if they're LGBT Muslim kids.
	We know that your religion does not look kindly on this type of issue.
	We know you might have some religious problems with it.
	We're not coming for your kids, sir.
	But I'm going to stand up for your LGBT Muslim kids.
	You know that?
	We're not coming for your kids, but we're coming for your kids.
	And if you have a problem with it, you better understand what it means to be in Canada.
	And now, standing up for everyone's rights is what you get with the liberal revolution.
	We're going to defend your rights, even when you disagree with us defending other people's rights.
	And how we work together is for them.
	In this country.
	It's the conservatives that are intolerant.
	It literally has gone from the far right saying, immigrant, go home, to liberals literally saying, go home, send them home, make them appreciate why they're in Canada.
	But it's tolerant, peace-loving liberalism when they say it.
	Listen to each other and prevent people from activating baseless fears around lies.
	Baseless fears.
	We know what's being taught, Trudeau.
	I heard it myself during the Zoom classes in 2021.
	I'm not the type to record it and ruin a teacher's life.
	I heard it at Montreal Public Schools.
	Oh, but it's not the federal government that's doing it.
	It's the provincial government.
	And they're not aggressively teaching it.
	They're just teaching it.
	That is hurting.
	Hurking.
	Hurking.
	The fact of respect and openness that allows Canada to be one of the places where we support independence and community more than Canada.
	and just what any of us think is they do.
	And we appreciate that very much.
	Listen to this.
	That's probably a perfect example of what we saw in one of the implementing schools.
	When one of the teachers, she's Breton, and she holds those kids.
	You are not Canadian.
	You should leave Canada because you did not participate in Pride.
	And what happened to that teacher?
	Whatever you want to say.
	Just tell me how you feel.
	That teacher brought serious consequences because that is not something that is acceptable.
	We do not support that.
	We do not accept that.
	That is our You're free to have your religious beliefs and I'm free to call you a bigot and an enemy for it.
	I'm free to, you know, this is not Canadian.
	This is not what we do in Canada, sir.
	Oh, and by the way, that teacher was punished only after it became public, while they're writing op-eds in newspapers for how students should not be allowed to opt out of LGBT pride awareness events.
	We have to make sure we are standing up and defending everyone's rights to the community.
	That includes the right to be who you are and to love who you love.
	And that I know you feel, I know your parents'generation might have a little more uncertainty about that, and that's where this generation and your kids'generation, Understand what he just said there.
	Your kids are going to adopt this ideology.
	Your kids will be indoctrinated with this, whether or not your parents...
	Might have been uncomfortable with it, regardless of how you feel.
	Your kids are going to adopt this ideology, but they're not coming for your kids.
	The cost, the responsibility that comes with being in a free country that stands up for everyone's rights is that we will stand up for everyone's rights, including people from the LGBT community who are facing increasing levels of violence and hatred at the same time as the Muslim community is poor.
	You're a victim.
	Don't forget that you're a victim.
	Find somebody to hate.
	You're a victim.
	You have an enemy.
	They're victims.
	They have an enemy.
	But it's the conservatives who are trying to use fear to drive a wedge in society.
	Everybody's facing violence and hatred.
	The Asian community, the Jewish community, the Muslim community, the LGBTQ community.
	Oh my goodness.
	Everybody in Canada is facing violence and hatred, it would seem.
	The world is going in the wrong direction.
	One thing is for communities that are facing hatred to start turning on each other.
	Who do they have to turn on, Justin?
	Who do they have to turn on?
	Rather than figure out how to support each other, how to listen, how to understand each other, that's what Canada is.
	And it's crazy and it causes clashes in cultures.
	But when it comes right down to it, the ability to stand up for everyone's rights is what means Canada the freest and most successful.
	Ah!
	Who has vomited in here?
	Let's go to the chat here.
	Oh my goodness.
	It's pathological.
	And you have to, on the one hand, see the strawmanning of the argument, see the confession through projection, and see that he is in fact saying...
	He's saying that he's going to do exactly what he says he's not going to do.
	We're not coming for your kids.
	We have to defend the freedom of all.
	At the same time as they are literally positing, some are, that if you opt out of these events, if you opt out of these classes, you're a bigot.
	Some people are saying you shouldn't be allowed to do it because to opt out of this is to deny human rights.
	To opt out of 2SLGBTQIA+.
	Whatever the acronym is up to now in Canada, to opt out of it, if you have religious problems against it, is to deny human rights.
	And your kids, don't worry, don't worry, sir.
	We'll get your kids.
	They'll be on board with this.
	They will say, I love Big Brother.
	All right, I'm sorry we had to watch that entire thing, but go show some love to Mocha Bezigan.
	He's good.
	And my goodness, whoever recorded that clip was not convinced.
	Okay, now hold on a second.
	Is there other more Trudeau stuff?
	We've got the Ray Epps complaint.
	Oh yeah, no, no.
	Canada's the freest country on earth.
	All right, here's another one.
	Let's go.
	This was on Dave Rubin.
	So Tamara Lich.
	I haven't seen the interview yet.
	There's so many interviews I have to catch up on.
	Tamara Lich on Rubin.
	I think she was on Jordan Peterson as well.
	I've got to see Andrew Tate on Tucker Carlson, even if I, you know...
	I know that I'll disagree with certain things.
	I want to see that.
	There's a lot of interviews I've got to catch up on.
	Tamara Lich has written a book and she's now, by all accounts, allowed to do media because Canada is the freest country on earth when it's not gagging its political prisoners and suppressing their ability to operate their bank accounts, speak to public.
	Go on social media.
	But Canada is the freest country on earth.
	Check this out here.
	About 280 Canadians had their accounts frozen.
	And so what that looked like was mothers stuck at the grocery store checkout but had to leave their groceries there, which is a mortifying experience in itself.
	Like you just said, parents that couldn't buy medicine for their children couldn't pay their mortgage.
	These are all confirmed.
	Like, these are all individuals who had these real problems.
	Some of them couldn't pay their mortgage, had to rely on the kindness of strangers to undo the abuse imposed by the government.
	Pay their child support.
	I mean, I was arrested, and my husband was in Ottawa.
	We had a joint account.
	I mean, we don't anymore, but we had a joint account.
	So here he is in a strange city, doesn't know anyone, and has no access to funds.
	It's a free country, Canada.
	She was detained for, what was it, a total of 50-some-odd days?
	On non-violent mischief charges.
	Pat King, in as much as you might hate him as a human, you're free to do so, was in jail for four and a half to five months on non-violent mischief-related charges.
	Incitement of mischief was one of the charges.
	Detained for five months.
	Chris Barber.
	Jeremy McKenzie, although he was detained on gun-related charges.
	Fabricated as they may be, whatever, in my humble opinion.
	This is Justin Trudeau's free Canada.
	And the government, actually, of this free Canada that stands up for everybody's individual rights, unless you're protesting in Ottawa and embarrassing the government on the international scale, then they freeze your bank accounts.
	The government was actually trying to get insurance companies to cancel their insurance when the people couldn't actually pay their insurance.
	And the insurance company said...
	That's a bridge too far even for us evil insurance companies.
	But the banks, they were more than happy to freeze bank accounts.
	So check out that interview here.
	I'm going to just give you that link as well.
	This is the free country of Canada.
	And I think I had another highlight out there.
	Hold on.
	We started with this one, so we can end that.
	Oh, lordy, lordy.
	And they increased interest rates in Canada to 5%.
	I think it's like a record high.
	Oh, come on.
	Tell me.
	They increased interest rates to 5% now.
	I don't know how people with mortgages who are not locked in at a fixed rate, a reasonable fixed rate for any extended period of time, I don't know how they're going to afford their mortgages.
	You appreciate.
	You know, if you bought a house and you financed your house at what was 1.5%, 1.6% three years ago, and it's now up to like 6.5%, 7%, understand what that means in terms of interest payments on a mortgage on a house?
	I don't know how Canadians are going to pay mortgages now.
	But then you get Jagmeet Singh, the biggest hypocrite on earth.
	Justin Trudeau, in all of his evil, is at least not a hypocrite.
	He's quite transparent with the fact that he's an awful human.
	Jagmeet Singh comes out and says, this is going to be devastating on Canadian homeowners.
	Oh, God.
	What do we do?
	What do we do?
	Well, here's what you do, Jagmeet.
	You continue supporting the evil regime that is doing this through your coalition government with the liberals.
	That's what you do.
	And here he is.
	Look at this.
	This is beautiful.
	So for those of you who don't know, Chris Sky did not.
	Olivia Chow did.
	Olivia Chow, who's from an incestuously politically connected family.
	There are allegations of foreign interference, which I won't get into because I haven't looked into them enough to have an opinion one way or the other.
	Olivia Chow has been elected the mayor of Toronto and Jagmeet Singh.
	Because when you're a pathological, psychopathic narcissist, everything is about you.
	And so, Win, it's a huge congratulations to Olivia Chow for officially being sworn in as the new mayor of Toronto.
	Everywhere you see working people are organizing for a better future, Olivia's win is proof.
	She inspired a movement of people working to make Toronto a city for everyone.
	Let me just go ahead and celebrate with a picture of me.
	All right.
	That's it.
	What do we do now?
	We're going to do Ray Epps lawsuit.
	Oh my goodness.
	Ray Epps has filed a defamation lawsuit against Fox News.
	And the question is this.
	You know, I put out a tweet last week.
	I said, yeah, good.
	Be careful what you wish for, Ray Epps.
	Or it was the New York Times saying, Ray Epps is going to sue Fox News.
	Like, be careful what you wish for.
	We've all got a lot of questions that we'd like to ask Ray Epps.
	And some people rightly observed, well, you know, you're not a party to the lawsuit.
	And if he sues Fox News, they can just settle it.
	They can say, we want to avoid further conflict, further risk.
	We're just going to pay off Ray Epps.
	We're not going to go to Discovery.
	We're not going to ask him any questions.
	We're not going to ask to see his financial records.
	We're not going to ask...
	We're not going to ask to see any email correspondence that he may have had prior to January 6th.
	We're not going to ask to see correspondence that he may have had post-January 6th when the FBI and intelligence were looking for him, how he struck, whatever deal he struck with them.
	We're not going to ask for any of that.
	Let's just pay Ray Epps.
	Oh, I don't know.
	They just paid Dominion, nearly a billion dollars, 800 million.
	Let's just pay Ray Epps and we don't have to ask any questions.
	We can play ball with the administrative state, which is now what I think actually Fox News might actually be doing.
	In general.
	But he actually did it.
	And he filed the suit.
	And we're going to walk through this complaint a little bit here.
	Let's go all the way up to the top.
	Donna White says Exhibit A on the top.
	This is James Ray Epps Sr.
	Plaintiff versus Fox News LLC defended.
	Not Tucker Carlson individually because Tucker Carlson probably would not play ball if Fox News is going to want to play ball.
	And so, you know, you couldn't sue Tucker and then expect Tucker to settle to make this go away.
	You would expect Tucker to fight tooth and nail.
	He sued Fox News.
	He sued in the state of Delaware.
	Interesting choice.
	I don't know enough about jurisdiction.
	We're going to read the intro.
	We'll go through some of the key facts, some of the key factual allegations, and I'm going to commentate as we go across this.
	But listen to this, by the way.
	This is a lawsuit of Ray Epps against Fox News about alleged defamation vis-a-vis Ray Epps.
	The entire intro, or at least two-thirds of the intro, talks about the Dominion lawsuit because Fox News has set the precedent and now Ray Epps...
	Is going to appropriate whatever wrong and whatever confession Fox News made vis-a-vis Dominion to appropriate it as though they did a similar wrong to Ray Epps and his case is as clear cut as Dominion's case against Fox News, which I still think Dominion had a decent defamation case against Fox News and said it from the beginning, whether or not they should have settled for $800 million.
	No, they should not have, in my humble opinion.
	But what do I know?
	I'm just a Canadian schnook.
	Yada yada.
	Complaints.
	Listen to this.
	In the aftermath of the events of January 6th, Fox News searched for a scapegoat to blame other than Donald Trump or the Republican Party.
	Eventually, they turned on their own.
	Because Ray Epps is one of their own.
	Ray Epps is, hey, how's it going, fellow school kids?
	Telling a fantastical story in which Ray Epps, who was a Trump supporter that participated in the protests on January 6th, was an undercover FBI agent and was responsible for the mob that violently broke into the Capitol and interfered with the peaceful transition of power for the first time in this country's history.
	Perhaps most notoriously in the days following the 2020 presidential election, Fox broadcast, amplified, and endorsed false claims about a rigged election.
	And now we're just going to go into multiple allegations about the Dominion lawsuit.
	The chief villain in Fox's story were two voting machine companies, Dominion and Smartmatic.
	Fox recklessly disregarded the truth, ignoring independent audits, hand recount, bipartisan election officials, election security experts, judges, and Republican officials, and persisted in sticking to the false narrative.
	Behind the scenes, away from the red lights of rolling cameras, executive producers and on-air personalities rejected This is all about Fox vs.
	Dominion.
	Thus far, we have nothing about Ray Epps yet.
	Oh, yada yada.
	They lied in front of the cameras.
	The power of Fox's megaphone turned Dominion and Smartmatic into household names and led to the company's employees being harassed and leaving the companies to suffer significant economic harm.
	Thus far, we have nothing about Ray Epps yet.
	The lies were told by...
	Oh, the lies told...
	The lies Fox told were heard by Ray and Robin Epps, loyal Fox viewers and fans of Tucker Carlson and other personalities.
	Ray and his wife voted for Trump in 2016 and in 2020.
	By the way, all of this might be true.
	It doesn't mean that they did not turn, if that's the theory that one is going to expose.
	Ray and Robin were persuaded by the lies broadcast by Fox, asserting that the election had been stolen to exercise their perceived responsibilities as patriotic citizens to gather in the Capitol on January 6th, 2021, to stop the steal.
	Ray and Robin decided that Ray Epps should attend the January 6th, 2021 rally to protest.
	What they were concerned was a rigged election.
	Epps flew to Washington on January 4th.
	He proudly wore his red Trump hat throughout Washington, D.C. on the 5th and January 6th.
	He vocally supported and encouraged peaceful protests.
	We need to go into the Capitol!
	Into the Capitol, he said on January 5th.
	Yeah, but he encouraged peaceful protests.
	He encouraged peaceful protests by trying to get a mob to go into the Capitol.
	His own words, the video's out there.
	We might pull it up just to cover our asses for this analysis.
	The events of January 6th are well known.
	Some of the attendees of the January 6th attacked the Capitol, violently gaining entrance to the building and stopping the electoral vote counting that was underway.
	Reports indicate that 120,000 people...
	Attendees as many as 2,500 illegally entering the Capitol.
	Having promoted the lie that Joe Biden stole the election, having urged people to come to Washington, D.C., and having helped light and then pour gasoline on a fire that resulted in an insurrection that interfered with the peaceful transition of power, Fox needed to mask its culpability.
	It needed a narrative that did not alienate its viewers who had grown distrustful of Fox because of its perceived lack of fealty to Trump.
	This is one hell of a story he's telling.
	At first, Fox and its on-air personality sought to blame Antifa for the attack.
	There were Antifa people there.
	It's a known fact.
	As information about the rioters circulated, the false narrative became too easily disproven.
	Ooh, I don't think...
	I think there's some argument there.
	Still, Fox had focused on voting machine companies when falsely claiming a rigged election.
	Fox knew it needed a scapegoat for January 6th that would absolve itself and would appeal to its viewers.
	It settled on Ray Epps.
	He's an innocent victim in all of this.
	It had nothing to do with the fact that he was riling up a crowd, telling them that they needed to go into...
	The Capitol on January 6th.
	He was called a fed by the chanting crowd on January 5th.
	He's an innocent victim.
	He did nothing but go there to peacefully protest.
	It settled on Ray Epps and began promoting the lie that Epps was a federal agent who incited the attack on the Capitol.
	And with that, Fox, and particularly Mr. Carlson, commenced a years-long campaign spreading falsehoods about Epps.
	Those lies had destroyed Ray Epps and Robin's lives.
	Fox recently learned in his litigate...
	Oh, as Fox recently learned in its litigation against Dominion voting, its lies have consequences.
	Okay.
	Factual allegations.
	Epps is a poorly cast villain for Fox and Mr. Carlson.
	Prior to 2022, Epps had consistently voted Republican.
	He's a former Marine who voted for Donald Trump twice.
	He was an avid and loyal Fox viewer and a fan of Mr. Carlson's.
	When Fox, through its on-air personalities and guests, told its audience that the 2020 election had been stolen, Epps was listening.
	He believed Fox, and when Epps kept hearing that Trump supporters should let their voices be known on January 6th, Epps took that time.
	He's an innocent victim.
	He was brainwashed by Fox News, telling a crowd to go into the Capitol.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Okay, he didn't want to go.
	Well, let's actually hear this for a second.
	At first, Ray Epps didn't think that he could attend Stop the Rally.
	He and his wife Robin owned and operated a profitable wedding venue business on their Arizona property.
	On the property in Arizona, and December and January are extraordinary busy times for outdoor weddings, yada, yada, yada.
	However, when Robin learned that their son, also a Fox dealer and Trump supporter, would be attending to stop the rally, she insisted that Epps go as well.
	She purchased Epps plane tickets on January 1st, 2021, and reserved for a rental car the same day.
	They have the receipts.
	Good for them.
	Okay.
	He arrived on January 4th, spent the day touring Virginia and his son's family.
	Listen to this.
	It was a special trip for Epps as he showed Jim where their ancestors settled centuries earlier.
	And he's shown some tombstones.
	He's a patriotic victim in all of this.
	After the day sightseeing, Epps, Jim, and Jim's friend returned to D.C. Epps went back to his hotel while his friend went out exploring.
	Okay, I think we could skip a bunch of this nonsense.
	We want to hear what the statements that Tucker Carlson said that are allegedly defamatory.
	On July 14, 2022, Tucker Carlson had his guest star, Darren Beattie.
	Darren Beattie from Revolver, who did the best breakdown of Ray Epps, scaffolding man, the pipe bombs.
	Darren Beattie, he's been on the channel twice, did the best analysis of the events of January 6th, how Ray Epps...
	was caught on camera on the 5th saying we've got to go into the Capitol and the crowd was chanting fed, fed, fed.
	How Ray Epps was on the FBI's most wanted list and how magically Ray Epps and Scaffolding Man are the only two who managed to have evaded not just conviction for years on end in prison, not just pre-trial detention for years on end until a politically motivated trial.
	They escaped charges altogether.
	Beattie was the principal person driving the false story.
	Why aren't they suing Beattie, actually?
	Interesting.
	Epps?
	Why aren't you suing Beattie as well?
	Probably because I suspect Beattie would not bend over and pay you to make this go away.
	I'm going to say this now.
	If Fox News pays to settle this, they are in on the deep state game here.
	They are playing the deep state game.
	They are playing to protect the deep state.
	If Fox does not fight this tooth and nail...
	Insist on Discovery and take Ray Epps through the Discovery machine.
	They are a deep state participant, player, tool, asset, whatever.
	Because now the more I think, they haven't sued Beattie, that I know of.
	They didn't sue Tucker Carlson, that I know of.
	And those are two people who you could guarantee would never settle and would take Ray Epps to the Discovery cleaner.
	I don't even know if that's a proper analogy, but Beattie was the principal person driving the false story that Epps was a federal agent planted as a provocateur to trigger the Capitol violence on January 6th.
	Beattie had advanced this theory on his own conspiracy website.
	Oh, it's conspiracy.
	Revolver.
	Here is a transcript for the entire Tucker segment.
	Do we want to read this?
	Yeah, let's read this.
	It's good.
	Darren Beattie.
	Oh, sorry.
	Let's go over here.
	Tucker Carlson.
	Darren Beattie is one of the reasons this piece was first written.
	He's editor-in-chief of Revolver News, which published the first stories about Ray Epps.
	Obviously, the New York Times is very worried about his reporting.
	We're happy to have him on join.
	Darren, thank you so much for coming on.
	What do you think of this?
	Darren Beattie guessed.
	Well, it's pretty remarkable.
	I mean...
	Just let's take all of this in.
	The one person caught repeatedly urging people into the Capitol as early as January 5th is the one person of all of the January 6th riot participants that the New York Times just happens to write this ultra-sympathetic puff piece for.
	It's quite remarkable.
	And to look at the piece itself, I broke this down at the time because the New York Times wrote, beyond a puff piece, it's a puff piece because it's blowing smoke up Ray Epps' ass.
	As you suggested in your intro, there are some real glaring omissions from a journalistic standpoint to have access to this guy.
	Number one, in the entire piece, there is no blanket explicit denial on the part of Ray Epps to have been associated with any intelligence group.
	DHS, Department of Homeland Security, JTTF.
	I don't know what that stands for.
	Military intelligence, so forth, just reiterates his very legal denial of being involved with law enforcement.
	Number two, the piece describes Epps as a Trump supporter.
	He just went to D.C. to defend Trump and to attend the speech on a last-minute thing with his son, to attend Trump's speech on election fraud.
	The only thing is Epps didn't attend the speech.
	Epps travels all the way from Arizona to D.C., this big Trump supporter, and he doesn't even attend the speech.
	Instead, he fixates on this bizarre mission to get everyone to go into the Capitol.
	And by the way, he just happens to be hanging out right by the initial breach point near the peace monument on the west side of the Capitol before the Proud Boys even got there.
	The Proud Boys, which we now know, had been infiltrated by intelligence, by FBI, by informants.
	We now know that.
	Because they were convicted on seditious conspiracy because they had been infiltrated in advance of January 6th, and yet somehow intelligence had no idea what was going to go down on January 6th.
	So he's there on the West Side right before the Proud Boys even got there.
	The Proud Boys, who we now know, had been infiltrated by FBI intelligence and informants.
	And thirdly, where did Ray Epps get this idea?
	This whole piece doesn't explore the question at all.
	Here is the one person calling for everyone to go in.
	Where did you get that idea, Ray Epps?
	Did it occur to you out of nowhere?
	Did someone tell you to do it?
	This piece shockingly does not explore that question at all, which is the paramount question that's really the animating, the alleged animating focus of the January 6th committee.
	So this is so dirty.
	Dirty, dirty, dirty.
	Ray Epps' behavior was so egregious that he was one of the first 20. He was featured as a star in the New York Times' own documentary on January 6th, and now he's unarrested, unindicted, and he's the only January 6th writer about whom Adam Kinzinger has nice things to say and the New York Times is writing puff pieces about.
	He's the smoking gun of the entire Fed-surrection, which was a term coined by Darren Beattie.
	Carlson.
	And they go crazy when you ask simple questions like, what was the role of federal law enforcement or the military in this state?
	And it's been our experience that when they won't answer a question and call you names for asking it, it's because there's something there.
	I appreciate you pulling this thread relentlessly, Darren Beattie.
	Thank you.
	That's so defamatory.
	We've got another segment.
	Do we want to read this whole one?
	Let's hear this.
	We'll just go to 53. On March 26, Carlson...
	We know this.
	They were.
	We know it.
	In fact, now we know, because of Tucker Carlson's interview with Russell Brand, that he had interviewed, while at Fox, one of the head of the security, I forget who it was, and he got fired before it could air, and it doesn't look like Fox News is going to air.
	That interview with Tucker Carlson and the security guy, in which they admitted there were lots of federal agents in the crowd on January 6th.
	Holy shiot.
	Here, let's go.
	To be clear, Fox personalities and guests took up his line, too.
	Laura Ingram.
	Very odd that Epps' photo was taken off the FBI list.
	Why is this defamatory?
	She added that Epps may have led the breach team that first entered the Capitol on January 6th.
	The Chiron segment read, Were federal assets involved in a Capitol riot?
	That sounds like a question.
	That sounds like a matter of opinion.
	When someone says Ray Epps is a Fed, are they making a statement of fact, susceptible of defamation, or is it necessarily and clearly a matter of their opinion that things don't add up and the fact that Ray Epps is the only one who remains unindicted, unarrested, unjailed, despite being on camera?
	Saying we need to go into the Capitol.
	Well, we got questions.
	Some of us call us crazy.
	Might come to that conclusion.
	What do we got?
	Will Cain says, brand new photos, yada, yada.
	Laura Ingram, Marjorie Taylor Greene.
	Question was why Epps was removed from the FBI's list and not arrested.
	I got questions.
	Why was that?
	Oh, because he cooperated.
	You know who else cooperated with the FBI?
	Adam Johnson, who spent 74, 71 fucking days in jail.
	He cooperated too.
	What did he do?
	Oh yeah, he picked up a lectern.
	He didn't say storm the Capitol.
	He didn't breach the Capitol.
	I mean, sorry.
	He didn't violently that we know of, and I believe him, breach any lines.
	Ray Epps was there.
	Ray Epps breached the lines.
	Ray Epps told people to go to the Capitol.
	And as we're going to see in a second, Ray Epps texted his, was it his son or his nephew, afterwards and said, I orchestrated it.
	Oh, he regretted having said that.
	Okay, and it goes on.
	I mean, it's...
	Mr. Carlson made clear to his audience that he was not offering an opinion, but fact.
	He stated as recently as March 11, 2023.
	A lot of this was clearly influenced by federal agents and informants.
	It was.
	I'm not reading...
	I'm saying it was.
	We know it.
	Influenced.
	It was, okay?
	But do I want...
	But I did want...
	I did not want to suggest someone was a federal agent or informant unless I knew for a fact because you really could get someone in trouble, right?
	If you're like...
	Like, this was the guy.
	And like, we don't know.
	I do know for, I mean, it's very clear something very strange is going on with Ray Epps.
	I think we all agree with that.
	So strange that he now feels emboldened to sue Fox News.
	We've named him repeatedly.
	We've invited him on the show repeatedly.
	I mean, don't lie to my face.
	The Ray Epps thing isn't organic.
	Sorry.
	That seems like a lot of opinion in there, Ray.
	Mr. Carlson was bluntly telling his viewers.
	And it was a fact that Epps was a government informant.
	Oh, it's interesting.
	I really see him saying something strange is going on with Ray Epps.
	That's what I see it saying here.
	You know, just if I'm reading the words that actually came out of Tucker Carlson's mouth.
	Oh, and then I guess what did they say here?
	Carlson was telling his viewers that Ray Epps was a government informant and they believed him as shirts being sold online by individual creators calling for the arrest of Ray Epps.
	Well, hold on one second.
	This doesn't make any sense.
	If he was a federal agent...
	You wouldn't call for his arrest because he wouldn't get arrested.
	So if you're calling for his arrest, presumably that's because you don't think he was a federal agent.
	You just think he was someone participating in the events and deserves to be arrested like everybody else.
	But shorts being sold by other people somehow evidenced that when Tucker Carlson said something very strange is going on with Ray Epps, it was a statement of fact that he believes Ray Epps is a federal agent.
	And then you got some other good stuff there.
	Okay.
	And it goes on.
	We don't need to go through all of this.
	You got the gist of it.
	Then we go through some depths.
	Okay, fine.
	Whatever.
	Here we go.
	Let's see this here.
	We don't care about this.
	It goes on forever.
	Irreparable damage.
	They get into the harassment.
	We saw this on the Fox News puff piece.
	Ray Epps is a victim in all of this.
	He's getting death threats.
	There's no condoning death threats.
	Don't do it.
	Full stop.
	No buts.
	Don't do it.
	Period.
	You don't do it because it allows the victimizers to then pretend to be victims.
	You don't do it because it's illegal.
	It's wrong.
	It is...
	You don't do it because as far as I'm concerned, anybody who does it is deliberately trying to sabotage what would otherwise be the righteous, factually correct fight by muddying it with illegal acts that allow the victimizers to pretend to be victims.
	It's counterproductive.
	It's illegal.
	It achieves the exact opposite of what you're trying to achieve.
	Therefore, the only people who would do it in my strategic analysis would be people who are trying to sabotage the movement.
	So don't do it.
	Full stop, no but.
	I can go on a shirt.
	Then they go through some voicemails.
	He's a victim.
	People are threatening him.
	It's all because of Tucker Carlson.
	Yada, yada, yada, yada, yada.
	Okay.
	Emotional damage.
	Okay.
	Defamation per se.
	Fox publishes the defamatory statements identified above, including all statements made about yada, yada, yada.
	Okay, fine.
	Defamation per se are statements that are defamatory on their own.
	On its face, with no need for any other information to interpret in order to determine that it's defamation per se.
	Calling someone a pedophile.
	Calling someone a convicted pedophile.
	Because you can call someone a pedophile and it might be like an internet insult and not a statement of fact.
	Certain factual accusations are so defamatory, they're defamatory on their face.
	Defamation per se.
	Defamation per quad means it requires a little context to understand why it's defamatory.
	Yada, yada.
	You can go read it.
	I don't really care about that.
	Defamation per se.
	Now, there's a false light claim, which is quite interesting.
	The action and statements by Fox described above have placed Epps before the public in a false light.
	Typically, as far as I understood, false light were potentially factually correct statements, but done in a way to misrepresent.
	So we'll see what this is.
	Statements by Fox would lead the public to believe that Epps was a federal agent working to provoke or otherwise incite others to attack...
	No.
	Not the statements by Fox, the statements by you, Ray Epps.
	I can't believe that he's filed this lawsuit.
	And I'm saying it now.
	If Fox News does not fight this tooth and nail, if they settle this quietly, they are a deep state asset.
	An administrative state asset.
	Fox published the statements about Epps' involvement.
	Fox did not falsely assert.
	To reiterate, Fox did not falsely assert that Epps was a federal agent acting with a legitimate law enforcement purpose.
	Fox did not falsely assert that Epps was an informant for a federal agency.
	Instead, Fox falsely asserted that Epps was a federal agent who was encouraging and inciting others to engage in unlawful activities, and not just any unlawful activity, but rather to engage in an attack on the United States and the Capitol itself.
	That seems like defamation, not false light.
	I'm going to just Google false light in a second, just to refresh my memory.
	Because false light, I believed, I understood, had to be a factually correct statement.
	False light tort.
	False light is one of several parts under the category of invasion of privacy, where a defendant is accused of spreading falsehoods about a plaintiff that would be considered objectionable by the average person.
	A defendant is accused of spreading falsehoods about a plaintiff that would be considered objectionable.
	The tort overlaps often with defamation where the lies spread.
	Can also be defamatory.
	The difference between the two torts vary greatly depending on the jurisdiction, with some states not even recognizing false light.
	In jurisdictions where false light claims are allowed, the two torts tend to be distinguished based upon the type of injury.
	False light is supposed to help compensate the plaintiff for emotional and personal harm stemming from the false claims, but defamation tends to be portrayed as compensation for harm done to the plaintiff's reputation.
	Okay, interesting.
	Sir.
	I'm almost done.
	I'm almost done.
	15 minutes.
	Here, take my phone.
	I was playing golf outside.
	Yeah.
	And I hit the ball so far.
	Okay, take this.
	Play on my phone, play there, and I'll be there soon.
	Four more minutes.
	Five minutes.
	Get out of here.
	Okay, sorry.
	Close the door.
	All right, so that's the lawsuit, people.
	But hold on.
	We're not going away yet without Ray Epps go into the Capitol Viva Fry tweet.
	I mean, I know I've tweeted it multiple times.
	Let's see here.
	Let's see here.
	Let's just...
	The evidence.
	The evidence.
	What?
	No!
	Into the Capitol!
	What?
	No!
	No!
	Peacefully!
	Fed!
	Fed!
	Tomorrow, I don't even like to say it because I'll be arrested.
	Well, let's not say it.
	We need to go.
	I'll say it.
	All right.
	We need to go in.
	Shut the fuck up, Boomer.
	He's Fed posting?
	Hey guys!
	I don't even want to say it because I know I'll get arrested.
	I mean, it's amazing that, you know, when Trump showing those documents, you know, I could have declassified these when I was president.
	Not obvious.
	He didn't.
	Not obvious what documents he's even showing.
	Criminal!
	He's admitting that he knows what he's doing is illegal when Ray Epps does it somehow.
	I'll say it.
	I don't even like to say it because I'll be arrested.
	Well, let's not say it.
	Well, let's not say it.
	We need to go in.
	Shut the fuck up, Boomer.
	I love that.
	Best super chat ever.
	I didn't see that coming.
	This is from...
	You can see the numbers on the top.
	I believe this is from Revolver's analysis, Revolver's expose.
	This is Ray Epps.
	This is the man who's blaming Tucker Carlson for people thinking he's a Fed who was there to orchestrate the events, instigate the crowd, tell them to go into the Capitol.
	It's Tucker Carlson's fault there's video of Ray Epps doing exactly what Ray Epps is accusing Tucker Carlson of having falsely spread by way of false light defamatory statements.
	We need to go into the Capitol.
	Where our problems are.
	Please spread the word.
	All right.
	No, Dave, but one more thing.
	Can we go up there?
	No?
	When we go in...
	Are we going to get arrested if we go up there?
	You don't need to get shot.
	Did you arrest the call?
	We're in the West Ham!
	There you go.
	That's violent entry right there.
	That's violent entry right there.
	Oh my God!
	Let's go!
	Let's go!
	Thank you.
	If Fox News settles this lawsuit to make it go away...
	They are a deep state asset.
	I'm going to say that over and over again.
	I don't believe...
	Ray Epps did not sue Darren Beattie for defamation.
	He didn't sue Tucker Carlson.
	I have to double-check.
	Chat, does anybody...
	Did he?
	From the lawsuit, it doesn't look like he did.
	Oh, yeah, no, that's it.
	But by the way, it's not just that there's video from the day of, the day before, Ray Epps saying we've got to go into the Capitol.
	I don't even want to say what we have to do because I'm going to get arrested.
	Go into the Capitol.
	The day of telling people where to go.
	The day of breaching a fence.
	Violently breaching the fence to enter a restricted area.
	People went to jail for that for years.
	Oh, it's Tucker Carlson's fault that everybody believes he's a federal agent because he somehow disappeared from the FBI's most wanted list and is the only one who remained unindicted, uncharged, unimprisoned.
	Boo who?
	Victim me.
	But there was also something else here.
	Oh yeah, that's right.
	What did he say here?
	What did he say?
	This was from the January 6th committee.
	They said, Mr. John Blishak.
	He asked, how do you pronounce Dallin's name?
	Mr. Epps.
	Dallin.
	Okay, good.
	Who is Dallin Epps, first of all?
	Mr. Epps.
	He's my nephew.
	He's 28 years old.
	Okay.
	And can we scroll down just a little bit?
	To the middle of the page.
	Alright, perfect.
	So it looks like around 9am, your nephew texts you.
	You and Jim be safe.
	And then at 2.12pm, after you've gotten exactly what you wanted from the crowd, on January 6th, after you're on video saying we've got to breach the Capitol, we've got to go into the Capitol.
	I don't want to say what we've got to do because I'm going to get arrested.
	After you successfully get everyone to do what you did, you text him back.
	I was in front with a few others.
	I also orchestrated it.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	So you're on camera saying, let's do it.
	We got to breach the Capitol.
	I don't want to say it.
	I'm going to get arrested for it.
	After it happens, you boast to your nephew, I orchestrated it.
	Somehow, magically, you escape any form of punishment and you're suing, not Tucker Carlson, but Fox News for defamation.
	Okay.
	If that makes sense, get that out of here.
	If that makes sense to you, You might just be a fan.
	Might, in my humble opinion.
	Because I know something beyond fucked up is going on.
	I'm sorry for swearing.
	Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.
	Ray Epps, you are pissing in everyone's face and telling them it's raining.
	Oh my goodness.
	That's the lawsuit.
	Oh, so what I'm trying to bring up, I'm trying to bring up this one crumble rant here.
	And then I think we're going to end this because my kid's going to kill me.
	And then I'm going to go on with the day.
	Hold on.
	So there's one crumble rant right here from Amon's Inn, which is like that almond paste pastry.
	512 says you should have Peter Schiff in to discuss the liberal policies that are hurting Canadians and Americans.
	I will look for it.
	I'm going to look for it.
	I screen grab that and look.
	And I will look afterwards.
	Let me see what's going on in the chat here.
	Yeah, okay.
	Nothing.
	Now, hold on.
	There's some other stuff still, I think, left on the backdrop.
	Melanie Jolie.
	No, we did that.
	What was this?
	What's this here?
	No, that's just my Twitter feed.
	No, that's it.
	Everybody, we've done it.
	Oh!
	Ray Epps' suit.
	Let's see where that lawsuit goes.
	It's Thursday.
	I'll be live tomorrow with something.
	I'm going to go over to Locals right now.
	We'll have a little after party there.
	I might have my vivabarneslaw.locals.com Red Bull.
	I've been schvitzing like an absolute pig in this sunroom.
	It's beautiful.
	Let me see what we're seeing here.
	We've got some binoculars right there.
	Maybe we'll go birdwatching afterwards.
	We went...
	For a brief stroll through a swamp and the mosquitoes were torturously bad.
	I mean, torturously bad.
	So we might stick by the water and do some fishing this afternoon.
	Come on over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com and we're going to carry on the party there.
	I'm going to end...
	I'll play us out on YouTube with a fun video.
	I'll play us out, sorry, on Locals with a fun...
	I'm going to play us out on Rumble with an amazingly cool video while everyone can choose or not choose to trickle over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com for the after party.
	I'm going to be taking some tips over there.
	I'll be having a chat with our community, our above average community.
	You know what to do.
	Like, share, subscribe, snip, clip, share away.
	If you want some merch, go to vivafry.com.
	You can get some merch.
	You can support us at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Seven bucks a month, 70 bucks a year, discounted rate.
	Tons of exclusive content or just become a member of our community.
	Tons of stuff open to everybody.
	In the meantime, everybody, nature is damn beautiful.
	And this is freaking cool because I was not even expecting to see this because I didn't know what I was looking at.
	I just thought I was looking at a cool fish eating crap off the floor and I didn't even know what I was about to see.
	Enjoy this.
	A minute 26. I'll bring myself out and we're going to carry on on Locals.
	Thank you all for being here.
	Thank you for spending the afternoon.
	And there's a lot of chat in...
	There's a lot of all caps going on in Rumble.
	Enjoy this.
	It's super cool.
	See you on Locals.
	See you tomorrow if you're not coming over.
	And see you on the interwebs in general.
	Oh, that's really cool.
	It's going through the...
	Oh, hold on.
	That's actually...
	Oh my gosh.
	You can see it.
	It picks up the sand and then spits it through a part under its neck.
	Oh, is that cool.
	That's freaking cool.
	That's how it filters through the sand.
	But it doesn't spit the sand out through its mouth.
	It spits the sand out through the bottom part of its neck.
	Hold on.
	This is the coolest.
	They're both doing it.
	This is the coolest thing I've ever seen.
	What?
	That is so cool.
	What kind of fish is this?
	What kind of fish is this?
	Oh, that's...
	They suck up the sand with their mouth, filter out the food, and then spit the sand out from under their neck.
	That is super cool.
	That is...
	And I got such amazing detail on the video.
	Look at that.
	I'm sweating.
	Hold on a second.
	I can zoom in?
	Oh, that's even better.
	Oh, is that...
	That's so cool.
	Let's see this right here.
	This guy right here.
	Oh.
	All right, well, that is in and of itself worth the trip.
	Look at this.
	It was.
	Okay, possibly the coolest thing ever.
	All right, amazing.
	And now I've got to put together that vlog.
	All right, ending on Rumble.
	Last time linking it over to Locals.
	See you there.
	Everybody, thank you all very much for being here.
	See you tomorrow.
	Peace out, peeps.
	On Locals.
	On Rumble.
	See you.
	All right, locals.

▲