All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 7, 2024 - Viva & Barnes
01:06:56
IT'S WAR! Google Abuse of Monopoly Exposed! Rumble and Google Going After "Illegal Boycotts"
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
It's good to see everybody having a good time.
The country's almost back to normal before World War III.
COVID was just so strange.
We lost a lot of people during COVID, and most of them are still alive.
Yeah, right?
Right? Yeah, there's a lot of people that I don't fuck with anymore.
Before COVID, I would have told you that vaccines are the most important invention in human history.
After COVID, I'm like, I don't think we went to the moon.
I think Michelle Obama's got a dick.
I think Pizzagate is real.
I think there's direct energy weapons in Antarctica!
I'm just kidding.
I'm just kidding.
Well, hold on.
I screwed something up here.
Where is that video?
We're closing this up here, people.
Yeah, you missed the punchline of the joke, which was he doesn't believe Michelle Obama has a penis.
Joan Rivers did.
We don't know if that was a joke or not.
Everybody, good afternoon.
I had to do some audio level.
Make sure that we're good everywhere.
Make sure that we are live across all of the various pages of the interwebs.
We're live on vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
We are live on Rumble.
Going to refresh one more time because this is a big, important show.
And it looks like we're live on Rumble.
And we're live on Commitube.
And the reason why we're going to stay there is because we're going to put this on blast on Commitube as well.
Because we've got Chris Pawlowski, for those of you who don't know who he is, the CEO of Rumble.
I know Chris well.
We go back many, many years.
I believe I've been on Rumble as a platform since 2014 or 2015.
Has to be 2014 or 2015.
And what a different world it is that we're living in today than what we were living in then.
Now I'm going to go make sure here everyone says volume's good.
I want to make sure everything's working perfectly here.
Let me make sure that I'm on the good mic because I'm pretty sure that I am.
Yes, I am.
We got Chris coming on.
He's going to talk about...
I got questions for him and we're going to talk about the lawsuit or the Google antitrust lawsuit on Sunday with Barnes.
But there is a direct impact that this decision, this antitrust decision has against...
Google that it has for Rumble.
And like I said yesterday, I don't think people are really piecing it together.
We're going to flesh it out today.
We're also going to flesh out what has been filed by way of lawsuit against GARM.
I keep forgetting the name of it.
I'll get the acronym afterwards.
We're going to talk about this because it's earth-shattering.
It's a revolution of sorts on the interwebs.
But before we even get there, and I told Chris I feel a little guilty, like asking Chris to wait while I do an ad read.
But it's a...
Rumble product that we are...
It's a Rumble partnership, and we're going to start building that big, beautiful parallel economy and supporting companies that like free speech and that respect us as clients.
Be Naked is the read for today, people, is the product for today.
If you're one of those people who uses the phrase toxic masculinity because you're intimidated by real men who embrace their primal instincts, you should probably turn this off right now, literally.
I made the joke, actually, in my...
Masculinity is only toxic to cowards.
That could be the new motto.
I thought of that.
It's beautiful.
As a man, you're the rock people depend on.
A shoulder to crown, a fighter, a lover, a protector to many.
We at Rumble created Be Naked as a brand that celebrates manhood and champions masculinity.
Men with real balls that share our enthusiasm for clean, non-woke, and agenda-free products dedicated to helping you dominate every challenge life throws at you because we all know that life will always test us, push us, and challenge us so when life kicks you...
And you need to kick back harder.
You need to tap into the primal strength.
This is why you need our supplement, Naked Organs.
Our signature product will help you unleash your inner beast, Naked Organs.
comes from the purest and strongest animals on earth, the fearless bison.
It's the nature's multivitamin powerhouse, delivering endless energy, re-regulating hormones, health, boosting testosterone, and enhancing muscle recovery with natural creatine.
Go to beNaked.com.
BeNaked.com right now.
Pick yourself some naked organs, people, to embrace your manhood.
That's BeNaked.com slash Viva.
Use code Viva for 15% off.
All this talk about manhood, I'm thinking Rumble needs to find that javelin, not the javelin, the pole vault guy from the Olympics who knocked over the bar with his manhood.
I think there's a potential partnership there.
Celebrate being a man, getting healthy, living naked, and putting your hard-earned dollars towards supporting freedom-loving creators like me on Rumble, not the woke mob.
The link is in the description.
By the way, did you know that the guy who knocked over the Polvark bar with his genitalia was offered a porn deal, from what I understand?
I should have probably checked that before.
Porn deal for Polvalter.
My parents told me this.
There you go.
Okay, fine.
By the way, my parents are like, Eva, did you know that the guy who knocked over the bar with his big penis, he got offered a quarter of a million dollar porn career.
I don't think he'll accept it.
Yeah, so it's actually a true story.
So that's it, people.
This is short notice, and I'm driving back from the Florida Keys.
I'm back home now.
The Florida Keys are amazing.
They're beautiful.
And as we're driving, I'm following what's going on in the news.
I'm following that Google decision.
I'm conversing with Chris.
I was like, Chris, you've got to flesh this out to people because the Google antitrust lawsuit decision that was just rendered by a judge meta, it's meta.
It's going to have massive impacts on...
Rumbles not one, but two pending lawsuits against Google.
So Chris said, yep, let's do it.
And Chris, if you can hear me in the backdrop, feel free to come in whenever you're ready.
If anyone's impressed about the guy knocking over the pole vault with his genitalia, you should check the one where the guy lands on his pole on the other end in his buttocks and very painful.
So we're going to talk about that today.
It's fantastic.
So get your questions in.
In our vivabarneslaw.locals.com community, we're getting it all in.
And I'll try to get as many questions as I can if I don't get to them in the natural discussion here.
But it's going to be amazing.
I hear Chris.
There you are.
Chris, sir, how goes the battle?
How's it going?
Glad to be on with you.
No, it's a battle.
Tell me about it, eh?
Can you imagine the world now and what you're involved in compared to what you were involved in 10 years ago when you started with Rumble?
Were you uploading a viral video onto Rumble and we're monetizing that viral video?
And now we're in an outright war with advertising agencies and councils and monopolies.
Just trying to get the system back to where it used to be 10 years ago.
Everything's kind of gotten all crazy.
We're just doing the good fight here, trying to tilt the system back to normalcy, where we were 10 years ago.
Maybe a little longer, but 10 years ago we were in normalcy, I would say.
Am I allowed to ask you where you are currently?
I'm in beautiful Florida.
How good does it feel every time you cross over the border?
I feel bad asking you this question because you've got to go back to the asylum more often than me.
There's a vibe in Florida that's just different than...
Wait, you get that feeling too when you get off the plane and you walk in the terminal?
You get that feeling when you're walking in Florida and you're like, oh, it feels so good to be here.
No, Chris, I drive over.
So the second I cross the border, I see the big flag.
It's in Vermont or New York and I can't really wait to get through those states.
But no, it's different.
I forget who I asked, but I get down to Florida.
I'm talking with a random employee that I forget what business.
And I was like, everybody's happy here.
And he says, we live where people vacation.
What more do you need?
Look, I'm going to ask you a lot of questions.
I know that you are the CEO of a publicly traded company.
You might not be able to answer all of them.
And if I ask what you cannot answer, please let me know.
I'm sure you will, but I'm going to ask everything anyhow.
So the latest news of the week now is the Google antitrust decision that came down from Judge Meta, which declared Google...
A monopoly and abusing of its monopoly power to drive up ad prices on the platform.
Before we even get into the impact that this might have on Rumble's second lawsuit against Google, can you explain it to people who might not understand how Google exploited their monopolistic powers to drive up the ad prices for their clients such that it was sort of not usury but exploitive?
Yeah, so there's like two different things.
The DOJ stuff is I would say a little more different on the ad side than the first lawsuit we filed.
So we have two different distinct lawsuits, both one targeting the advertising business, the ad monopoly that they have, and the other one targeting with the search preferencing and mobile apps.
So those two are completely distinct and different.
With respect to the To the advertising one, which was more recent.
There's so many things going on right now.
I'm getting everything confused in my mind.
So bear with me here.
So the advertising one is what we basically allege there is that they have a monopoly in the advertising business with buying companies up and down the stack and really kind of fixing everything to...
When you look at Google and you look at the entire broader internet, you're going to notice that basically the majority of advertising dollars that are flowing through the internet right now digitally is coming from Google in one way, shape, or form.
You'll even have other exchanges like Index Exchange using Google to do things.
So Google's got everything from...
The ad server to the ad manager.
They basically have everything on lock when it comes to the advertising business.
And they are definitely a monopoly when I look at them when it comes to the advertising business.
But I would like...
That's a more recent one where we have...
That's, you know, a lot earlier in its stage.
What happened with the DOJ this week, though, is that, you know, they are now a monopoly power over internet searches.
And it has been declared that Google has used that power to harm competition.
That's the big news that I think that everyone has been talking about with respect to Google.
And I think, you know, from our point of view, That has a lot of relation to, I guess, the ad business, too.
It has relation to the ad business.
It has relation to the first lawsuit that we've had, too.
So it all kind of ties everything together in a lot of ways.
The big question was, is Google a monopoly?
Well, yeah, they are.
That's been determined now by a court.
So we don't really, in my view, don't have to make the allegation that monopoly is a fact now.
They are a monopoly.
We all know they're a monopoly.
And we also know that they are using their power to harm competition.
So for us, I don't see it.
That's just, to me, is just an incredible situation to be in, being that we have two separate, distinct lawsuits on two different markets.
I don't know if there's another company that has two lawsuits that's facing that amount of damages to a company.
There might be, but I'm not aware of one.
I think Rumble, in terms of being damaged both on the YouTube side, the video platform sharing market side, and the advertising side, those two separate markets, I think Rumble's in the driver's seat on that when it comes to being the...
I don't know if there's another business that has those kind of allegations out there.
Well, certainly not, but also we've covered both lawsuits.
The one that's easier for me to understand is the first lawsuit, you're suing Google, you're arguing sort of antitrust, abuse of monopoly power because Google or Metna, what is it, Alphabet owns YouTube, and Google is basically redirecting searches.
Away from siphoning, parasiting, if that's the word, away from Rumble and then redirecting towards its own owned video hosting platform.
And that one's sort of easy to understand in terms of the mechanism.
Yeah. And just like the DOJ, we argue in our lawsuit that Google has used its monopoly power to give its own product, YouTube, an unfair advantage in both search results and mobile phones.
Okay. And that's, I mean, that one is easy to understand.
It's also, I say, fleshed out by evidence quite clearly in that suit.
And that's one that everybody can sort of easily digest.
What came out in this meta decision, it's, by the way, everybody, it's meta, M-E-H-T-A, not M-E-T-A, although it is funny.
You know, they have these tying agreements.
You get phones and devices and computers that are preloaded with the Google app.
They're uninstallable.
You got YouTube.
Some of them are uninstallable.
And so...
They abuse of these time agreements to then further not just direct traffic, but redirect and siphon off of original upload videos from Rumble to YouTube.
Easy to understand.
That one has...
Gone through Discovery, Chris?
Are you familiar with that?
Yeah, we're in Discovery.
We're in the very late stages of that.
I think we might be at the very end, if not finished.
I don't know exactly.
But it's very, very, very deep into that stage.
I think there's a little more things left, but we're very deep on that stage.
And I know that some of the, some or if not all of the Discovery for the time being is not yet public, so I don't want to get you in trouble.
Although I'm curious to know what Discovery revealed.
We'll get there one day.
Okay, so that's lawsuit won against Google for YouTube and Rumble.
The second one, which was just filed, this is one where I think people have a bit more difficulty understanding in terms of how Rumble is being denied or deprived of advertising revenue because of Google's abuse of its monopolistic powers.
Are you able to explain how that plays out in the tech world?
So it's actually with respect to the newest lawsuit that happened yesterday.
Is with respect to the World Federation of Advertisers.
They created a group called GARM.
And GARM is a group and a collective of the most powerful media buying companies, advertisers in the world.
They have the biggest agencies and they collectively control like...
I think I heard like 90%, but either way, whether it's 90% or not, they can collectively control the majority, a significant majority of the advertising spend online.
And by doing so, what they have done is they started, they are now depriving their, they've set a brand safety standard across all these advertisers.
So these advertisers use this brand safety standard in order to make purchasing decisions.
And that brand safety standard is to boycott Rumble and X of receiving any of these ad dollars.
I just posted on X and Truth that Diageo has no interest in working with us because we have a person named Steven Crowder on the platform.
But mind you, I believe...
If I had to guess, Diageo is buying on YouTube where Steven Crowder is as well.
So why is it that Rumble is being discriminated against and not YouTube?
And they are on this...
What's the exact word?
I've got to make sure I'm correct with what I say here.
They're on the steer team.
Diageo is on the Garm steer team.
So that says a lot to me.
So it basically...
You have these big, massive advertisers who create a brand safety standard, and you're not allowed to do that.
You're not allowed to monopolize all these advertisers, create a brand safety standard, and then boycott Rumble and X and other platforms based on that brand safety standard.
Because, number one, an advertiser might want to get a competitive rate on Rumble or X, and now they're being deprived of that.
They are now being forced to pay more money by excluding a portion of the market from their ad buys.
And that's what that monopoly power is doing.
And when they exclude a portion of ad buys, guess who makes money doing that?
The agencies.
Because the prices go higher.
So the advertisers end up paying more.
The agencies end up making more by excluding a big chunk of the internet by not accessing X and Rumble.
And that's not allowed.
That's not a free market.
Every advertiser independently can make their own decision, but you can't have an organization that oversees all that to set the standard.
That's not allowed.
That's antitrust.
That's an abusive antitrust.
They're abusing their power by doing something like that.
Let me bring up the actual tweet.
Diageo, for those of you who don't know, they own a slew of alcohols, yeast.
I mean, they actually bought out some of the Scottish Lagavulin Laphroaig, if I'm not mistaken.
And I just read, this is the response from Diageo.com.
Hey, both, your team has reached out to me before, and I've already expressed these concerns, so I'd appreciate no further contact unless the nature of the content on your platform undergoes a dramatic shift.
One of my responsibilities is managing Diageo North American's TMP process, trusted marketplace, and there is no scenario where we would approve a platform that has Steven Crowder, Alex Jones, or the like.
The content on your platform is non-compliant.
Pretty much across every category we try to avoid.
The thing is this.
I can anticipate what the naysayers or the critics are going to say.
They're going to say, look, it's a private enterprise, whatever that GARM is, Global Alliance of Responsible Media.
They set their own standards, and they can do what they want, and they can advertise where they want, and they're not obligated to advertise on Rumble.
The obvious retort is...
For goodness sake, you got all sorts of smarm on YouTube.
It's not like...
I don't know what people think.
It's like a kiddie playground.
You got Steven Crowder on YouTube.
But other than saying Alex Jones and whatever, you got worse stuff on YouTube by far.
And so it's not applying the rules.
It's applying them unequally or disparately for the purposes of applying a political prejudice.
So I want to point something out there in that email that I think kind of might...
that will get lost.
They said they will not advertise on a platform that has Steven Crowder.
They will not.
Does that mean they're not advertising on Meta, Instagram, YouTube?
Because Steven Crowder exists on those platforms.
Is that just an outright lie?
What is that?
We will not approve a platform that has Steven Crowder.
Is that a lie?
I'd love to see if there's a Johnny Walker ad, a Captain Morgan's ad, a Bailey's ad, a Smirnoff ad, a Guinness ad.
I'd like to know if that doesn't exist on YouTube and made up.
Because if it does exist on there, he lied.
Well, it's not, but someone's going to say he's entitled to lie also.
They don't have to do business with Rumble and the irony, which people don't seem to understand, you know.
Elon Musk says...
As an advertiser, as a single advertiser, you have the ability to choose where you want to advertise.
Absolutely. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
But as a consortium and as an alliance under GARM, which they are the steer team, you do not.
You now have a monopoly power to dictate to a whole bunch of other advertisers to adopt your strategy.
What does brand safety mean?
What does that mean?
Is the 45th president not brand safe?
Is Steven Crowder not brand safe?
To who?
To Garm?
Are they the ones that are going to dictate that?
Brand safety has to be individually chosen by each advertiser independently.
It cannot be chosen by a consortium or an alliance that ends up taking all the market power in deciding we're only going to give it to a platform.
That has this type of speech and condones this type of speech.
You're not allowed to do that.
When you're a monopoly, you cannot do that.
The law and the rules are different for monopolies than they are for just an independent single advertiser.
You're a lawyer.
You probably know more about this than I do.
Well, I know what argument I would make.
I also know what the counter would be.
But actually, I didn't realize this.
World Economic Forum, we'll see if it's just a landing page for them.
The Global Alliance for Responsible Media.
Nearly 3.8 billion people online.
The world is increasingly connected, and yet the increase of dangerous, hateful, disruptive, and fake content online risks threatening the global community.
Members of GARM recognize the role that advertisers can play in collectively pushing to improve the safety online.
Together, they're collaborating with...
Yada, yada, yada.
The goal is to accelerate the...
So I don't know if GARM is actually a partner of or how they're affiliated with the World Economic Forum, but people should probably understand that.
A subsidiary of the World Federation of Advertisers.
I'm not sure what their association is to the world.
I would not be surprised if there is an association there.
Well, no, if they are a subsidiary and they declare that they are a partner with the World Federation of Advertisers.
A subsidiary of a partner of the World Economic Forum.
Basically, it's like money laundering.
They don't care if people get charged more, if it's actually in the disinterest of the people they represent, if they pay more, fine.
That's what it is.
It's about controlling the narrative and bankrupting the competition so that one day you won't have to skirt around a rumble.
I just saw someone say, we need to sue GARM.
We have.
We did that yesterday.
We're suing GARM and Group M and WPP, the parent of Group M. GARM being the parent of GARM, from my understanding, is the World Federation of Advertisers.
That was filed yesterday.
If we want to step back, the first lawsuit we filed for antitrust was in 2021 from search, preferencing, and mobile apps.
The second lawsuit...
Was the monopoly of the advertising business that Google has earlier this year.
And the third antitrust one was yesterday against Garm in Group M. Which one is...
The $1 billion one is the second one of the three.
That's... Correct.
The first one is north...
We allege damages in the billions as well.
It's an amazing thing.
The market cap currently of Rumble is 1.5?
1.58?
Yes, some are out there.
Chrissy, I know this is public.
It's already in disclosures, but I just want to refresh my memory.
How has advertising revenue year over year been going for Rumble, notwithstanding all of this?
So we're all public.
All that information is out.
I haven't looked at it on a yearly basis quite yet.
And while you pull that up, about the lawsuit, I have not read it yet.
So what jurisdiction has the GARM lawsuit been filed in?
Texas. Okay, better.
And is that jointly with Twitter or two separate actions that are going to be joined later on that you know of?
It's two separate actions in the same district, or how would you refer to that?
Same district.
So they'll probably be joined at some point based on, they're based on, I guess, virtually identical...
So just, by the way, I'm pulling up Yahoo Finance.
We went in 2021 from roughly $9 million to 2022, $39 million.
Into 2023, 80.9 million.
Okay. So we've had some...
Exponential growth.
Yeah, we've had some great, great, great growth on that side.
And that's not because of the brand advertisers.
If we had brand advertisers, this thing would be...
This thing would have exponentially grew even more, in my opinion.
That's just based on direct response, performance-based advertisers, advertisers that have to make an immediate ROI.
And that kind of...
It really talks about how valuable the audience is on Rumble.
And the fact that brands don't even want to touch it, and we're doing that well without the brands, says everything.
It also says how much these agencies in GARM is depriving the advertisers of accessing such a great audience, which would be considerably cheaper than obviously a lot of the other platforms.
So it's just perplexing to me that...
Corporate America and the largest brands in the world don't want anything to do with half of America.
It really makes me scratch my head.
If you look at the second email that we disclosed, it was, we're pitching Dunkin' Donuts because we over-index on coffee consumption.
And by the way, this inspired us to create 1775 Coffee.
This case alone, because we couldn't get a coffee advertiser to advertise on Rumble, so we're like, okay, we'll go build it, just like we build a cloud, just like we build the Rumble platform.
We'll make sure that we'll get a product to put in the creator's hands to advertise so that both Rumble and the creator can generate revenue.
So we did that and we, and that's been an amazing start to a business in the last couple of months with respect to 1775 coffee.
But Dunkin'Donuts did not want to advertise on Rumble because of right wing competition.
Let me bring it up.
What does that mean?
It's so flipping stupid.
I was trying to go and just find movies in which Dunkin'Donuts has placed its product.
And I guarantee you, I keep coming across Van Wilder with the chocolate eclairs, but I don't know that that's Dunkin'Donuts definitively.
But like, it is...
It's a lie to say we don't want to advertise on the platform because there's too much right-wing whatever.
You'll have Cadillac in movies with villains.
You'll have product placements in violent, gory, sex-fueled, drug-fueled movies.
And then they say, I don't want to advertise coffee on Rumble because of politics.
It does blow the mind, and it shows that, as far as I'm concerned, politics and controlling the narrative is more important than profits, which is the most dangerous thing I can think of.
But here, this is the second...
By the way, Diageo went on private mode.
I don't know if you saw that.
Did they do that after I did the post?
I don't know how to verify if they were unprotected beforehand.
All I know is that they're protected after, because that's the only time I checked.
I'll see if Dunkin' Donuts is protected now.
Second drop.
We pitch Dunkin' Donuts and inspire brands because Rumble over-indexes with coffee consumption.
What does that mean, over-indexes?
Meaning our audience drinks more coffee than a typical audience.
Okay. Other audiences.
Meaning it's a great place to advertise coffee.
We know it to be a great place because 1775 is doing great and people are going to 1775coffee.com and buying coffee.
From there.
By the way, if you type in Studio 40, you'll get the 40% discount.
Don't do it.
Do Viva for 15%.
On a subscription-based coffee.
I was going to say, put it in Viva and you'll get a lot of...
No. First of all, the coffee is delicious.
We drink it here.
Put Viva Viva Fry.
There you go.
No, I'm joking.
But also, it's wild.
Here. The discrimination against right-wing culture inspired us to build 1775.
This is turning into a second ad, 1775.
It's amazing.
To be honest, I would be opposed to showing up on the current version of the platform.
The right-wing culture of the site is too polarizing from a brand suitability standpoint, but we are open to continuing discussions as the site evolves.
Sorry to show this.
So who has this discussion and who do they have it with, if I may ask?
So this is a discussion that a sales representative has with the agency or the marketing department of a specific company that represents that brand.
So it's coming from marketing departments and agencies.
Maybe the top of house doesn't actually believe in this.
Who knows?
It seems to be really a systemic problem at the marketing agencies and the marketing departments where they're Making discriminatory choices.
That's what it is.
It's discrimination against half the population.
They don't want anything to do with half the country.
I see that as full discrimination.
And it's wrong no matter how you look at it.
This was also a very difficult thing for me to do.
I didn't want to release these emails.
I didn't want to do this.
And it ultimately came down to when I read the email, I looked at that.
And both of them are like absolute matter of fact.
They're never going to advertise with us unless we change.
And guess what?
We will never change.
We're not going to discriminate against half the population.
So the only company that needs to change here is Diageo and Dunkin' Donuts.
Because we're not in the business of discriminating against half the population.
So that's why I ended up releasing these emails.
And that's why I...
I had to show the public and be transparent on this.
There's just no other way.
I presume you have many, many more emails of that nature.
You know, there's a few more.
There's one email, which is interesting, that comes from an agency representing the same agency that previously represented or may currently, I'm unsure, of the new vice president candidate of the Democratic Party.
And that email...
Was a lot more vulgar on how they described Rumble.
In quotes, Rumble is shit, is what they said.
Hold on.
Did they say Rumble is shit or Rumble is the shit?
Because a big missing typo there.
That could have been a big typo.
They said Rumble is shit.
And that was in an email as well from an agency slash marketing department.
I got to look at it.
But yeah, there's more.
I felt that like...
The emails that are released are of very big brands and they put the red line in there saying, we have to change and we aren't changing.
They're going to have to change.
We're not in the business of discriminating against half the population.
But Dunkin' Donuts and Diageo seem to very much be in the business of discriminating against half the country.
I say like, you know, the UNRU Act in California has political affiliation as a prohibited grounds of discrimination.
I don't know what Texas is like.
And Chris, I'm going to bring this up because I know Encryptus is going to go nuts.
And I'll mention this to you afterwards.
I would love to partner with Rumble to develop the AI infrastructure to rival OpenAI and AWS.
Chris, I'm going to give you some of this guy's info afterwards and you do with it as you choose appropriate.
Explain this also to people who don't know.
People want to advertise.
Every company's got an advertising budget.
They go through agents or agencies, and now this GARM is sort of like a conglomerate of agencies who abide by the dictates of this overarching umbrella that tells agents and agencies who they can or should advertise with.
So you saw through the House Judiciary investigation and the emails that came out that they were going to GARM to ask them what to do when...
Advertising on X. And they basically are assembling a boycott not to advertise because it was a free speech platform.
That's illegal because they have a monopoly of controlling massive amounts of ad budgets.
Okay, interesting.
Well, I'll get there in a second.
I just can't get over the idea that it's not like the first adpocalypse on YouTube where ads were running against a decapitation video.
The idea that they're going to say the content on Rumble, what it is is it's political warfare fought through advertising dollars.
So you filed the suit.
It's in Texas.
There's a whole process for appearances or whatever.
What's the next step?
Are there no brand companies that are biting the bullet and then realizing that it's actually quite profitable to advertise on Rumble?
When it comes to brands in corporate America, let's say the Fortune 500, we don't see...
Any traction with the brands.
For us, it's about getting performance-based advertisers that are very aligned with our mission and winning that way.
So we've kind of built our advertising base in a way that's very...
Our advertisers are very pro-free speech.
They are not in the business of discriminating against our audience.
They're in the business of making money and selling whatever the product that they may have.
And that's been a huge success for us.
I showed you the growth there on our front.
And obviously, if we could attract the Fortune 500 companies.
To start coming in.
But when GARM has a stranglehold on the six biggest agencies and 90% of the ad budgets, it's near impossible.
There's a boycott being applied to free speech platforms.
And we have to break the boycott.
And that's what we're aimed at doing.
I want to break this monopoly.
I want to break all monopolies because it hurts the market.
In this case, it's actually...
It's dictating speech that they only want to see and hear and creating a narrative that they only want to see.
So we need to break that.
And it's not good.
It's not allowed either.
It shouldn't be allowed in America.
We have something called the Sherman Act and it should be used.
It's not used enough, to be quite honest.
So GARM represents basically, what did you say, 90% of?
From my understanding, 90% of the ad agency spend.
They're members of GARM.
Wow, that's actually...
Just looking at the World Federation of Advertisers represents 90% of global marketing communication spend.
Correct. They say it themselves then.
Wow. I'll bring it up just so that nobody accuses me of anything.
World Federation of Advertisers, it's right here.
Let me see if I click on this.
They're saying it themselves.
They're saying that they represent 90% of ad spend.
And when they're boycotting things like XM Rumble, it's not allowed.
Look at the diversity.
They make sure that you see about this.
I'm going to look into this.
Not look at this.
I'm just going to go do some screen grabs afterwards.
Chris, let me bring this one up because I think there's a good answer to this.
It says, What Rumble podcasters sell coffee to support All I Can?
When will Rumble have membership like YouTube for watchers?
And plan level options.
Do you consider the locals?
I mean, I guess you'd have to have a locals in order for that to work.
There's memberships for ordinary Rumble channels or for non-local Rumble channels?
Yeah, so we have the Rumble Premium now, which takes away the ads and it's going to give you check marks and it's going to give you all kinds of different things.
We're going to be bringing content in there too as well.
So access to certain content in the future through Rumble Premium.
That's one program that we have.
And then, obviously, the creators have their program as well.
So, you know, we encourage everyone to support their creators that they love by joining their locals community.
And those are the two components we have.
We're going to be probably removing the Rumble subscription for the creator and just fully integrating and...
Fully integrating locals into Rumble so that you don't even need to go to locals any further.
You can access everything through Rumble.
And that's pretty far along as well.
So the locals Rumble combination is going to take a whole new shape and form here in the next six months.
That's interesting.
And that would expand the locals communities to the broader Rumble market itself.
Correct. More directly.
Yes. Yeah.
And it'll be really easy.
You'll be able to get the local subscriptions straight on Rumble.
You're not going to need to head to locals to do that.
And you can access everything on Rumble.
Now, not that any company can survive off monetary damages from lawsuits, but the aggregate amount that is claimed, it's in the billions.
Set that aside.
Should Rumble be successful on the merits?
Hypothetically, Google sort of...
It changes the way it does business so that it doesn't deny or deprive Rumble of the ability to get full value on advertising dollars.
What is the limit on what or where is the limit as to what Rumble can do by way of advertising dollars and what's it dependent on?
Well, there's a whole bunch of things here right now.
One is to get distribution, we need to break the monopoly of the Google search and break the monopoly of, you know, the pre-installing of mobile apps.
The DOJ ruling this week, I mean, the court ruling with the DOJ and Google this week really, really helps us in a massive way of determining their monopoly, and they've been abusing their powers.
So that's the first thing that needs to break.
And, you know, we're alleging, you know, over a billion dollars in damage and just that alone.
The second thing that needs to break is the advertising monopoly that Google has on the industry in terms of their control and the advertising.
That needs to break as well, where we're alleging over a billion dollars in damages there.
And then the next monopoly that needs to go is that all the advertisers themselves, all the agencies, GARM in particular, needs to break.
And we need to destroy that monopoly and get rid of that monopoly as well because they're abusing their power as well.
So there's multiple iterations here of what we need to do.
Let's just say, you know, if one of them...
If one of them breaks, let's say the one that when it comes to search, you know, just imagine if you type something into Google's search engine and Rumble's equally treated as YouTube on the search engine.
Just think about the amount of different, the amount of more users Rumble would be able to benefit from that scenario.
If you said how to tie a tie or...
You know, a Trump video or whatever it may be.
And you were able to find it in Google search when you typed in something on search.
So Rumble would obviously be the recipient of a lot more search traffic.
And then obviously on the mobile apps, if they treat us fairly and they pre-installed us, like they do YouTube, then that's a whole different game changer for us as well.
So there's major benefits here outside of the dam.
They're hurting the industry.
They've monopolized everything.
And they're not allowing anybody to compete.
I just wanted to make sure I got the number right, but it says Google, and I think it was Google, was paying Apple, like, was it $20 billion?
It was in the double-digit bill to be preloaded on the app.
Now, how could it work?
Set aside buying your way in.
How would it work ideally?
Because not everybody's going to have the money to pay, and there's too many companies to expect Apple to preload any device with any number of apps out there.
So how would that play out?
If, hypothetically, DOJ steps in and says, you can't buy your way onto Apple phone, what would be the practical solution?
So, you know, the familiarity of those deals, I have very little familiarity with those deals between Apple and Google, but I did see that there is, they're paying to be defaulted on Apple devices for search.
Which is a complete abuse of power.
It's already been determined now that you can't do that.
They have a monopoly and they're now abusing their monopoly by pre-installing.
So the solution, that's wherever...
There's good lawyers that argue what the solution should be.
I'm not a lawyer in terms of exactly what the solution...
I can only speak more so on the rumble side and how we should be treated fairly with respect to Apple and Google.
I'm just less familiar on that topic to be able to give any kind of good opinion on that.
Well, we got a member of our locals community who is...
It's an above-average community across the board.
The solution is no preload.
You just upload whatever apps you want when you get a naked new phone.
Period. Level the playing field so that the company, with the monopoly, then uses its profits from its monopoly to pay off billions of dollars.
It's nothing but...
Not extortion.
It's like a mom who's got it and saying, here's your money.
Keep us on there.
And then we get to charge more for ads because we own this and we can have to pay back ourselves for the $20 billion investment.
I had a question about Rumble.
Hold on.
It's going to come back in a second.
Oh, crap.
I forgot it.
Okay, hold on.
So you got three lawsuits.
Oh, sorry.
Fighting the countries now.
I know we've talked about this before and it's good to hear again.
Has there been any...
Further lawfare or techfare from other countries in terms of kicking Rumble, kicking Twitter out of those countries?
Since the latest I've spoke about it, Russia kind of banning Rumble, nothing new since then.
It seems to have been very quiet on that front, which is a good thing.
Maybe the pushback around the world is starting.
I do feel like the system is starting to tilt back.
I feel like we're winning.
And I feel that things are only getting better on a daily basis.
I'll even predict that I bet you GARM doesn't make it to the end of the year.
Which one was the one?
I bet you they're going to dissolve GARM and get rid of it very soon.
It's just a bet.
I think they...
People are waking up.
I think they know how bad it's been.
And I don't think they're going to...
I would be surprised if they make it to the end of the year.
Now, I could be wrong, but it's just a little prediction I'll make.
I'm going to bet that GARM doesn't make it.
And it's because of this exposing that we're doing.
It's because of the House Judiciary Committee exposing it.
It's because Rumble and X are suing them.
It's because we're not taking shit anymore.
We're not allowing this type of discrimination to happen against half the population anymore.
People are waking up, we're fighting back, and we're going to war on it.
We're not going to allow it.
It's absolutely unacceptable that they'll discriminate against half the population.
So my prediction is they don't make it to the end of the year.
Why? Because they're doing something very wrong and they all know.
Well, if Media Matters for America is any indication they had to lay off a bunch of people after they got sued.
They've been very quiet.
A lot of people have been very quiet.
I think there's a there there to all this.
We wouldn't be doing this if we didn't think there was a there there.
There's a there there, and they know it, and they've been screwing around, and now, finally, we have some fighters on this side that are going to fight.
I want to pull up...
The problem is, it's an amazing thing when you say it.
WFA, the World Federation of Advertisers, they represent 90% of the ad spend.
And then you go to the company, I want to pull up Diageo's brand list, because people don't understand, like, you have monopolies within monopolies within monopolies.
You try to boycott Diageo, and then you realize, well, crap, there's not much left by way of scotch.
But then you can go, like, local bourbon or whatever.
It's amazing the product, what's the word, not Arsenal, but...
A repertoire that these companies have, and then you try to boycott Bud Light, and then you go get Stella Artois, and then you realize it's owned by the same company anyhow.
Alternate parallel economies on Rumble.
So you got Coffee 1775.
You've got some good supplements.
You've got some good...
I mean, Field of Greens, God bless them, is another company that votes with their dollar, and I'm sure that they see...
The return on investment for advertising with a good active user base that has money to spend.
What other products has Rumble partnered with to create their own parallel economy?
So in terms of products that we did to create the own, we don't want to create products.
It's not something that we wanted to do.
We would love to just have the advertisers come in.
But if we don't, then we're going to do it ourselves.
We've done Pet Feud.
We've done Be Naked.
We've done coffee.
We've done 5G kits.
And what am I missing?
Three, four.
There's four of them.
That's it.
Oh, the pet one.
Yeah, positive.
So we've done those four.
And we'll do more as we see that we need.
But I would much rather have a brand come in and spend that money.
But if they're not, we'll go build it and we'll go compete against them.
That's what we're going to do.
So we're not going to sit around and wait until they come.
We're going to go build it ourselves, just like we did with Rumble, just like we did with Rumble Cloud.
We're going to do it.
We're going to do whatever we need to make sure that we can help monetize the creators and help monetize Rumble.
Crash Bandit over on Rumble asked, would dissolving Garm absolve them of discovery?
I'm not sure from a legal perspective, but I think them deleting emails might hamper any future discovery.
We'll see.
The pundits out in the fake news side of the internet are saying that, you know, the Twitter, the X and the Rumble lawsuits against Garm, they don't even get out of the batter's box.
I think it's not the case.
Some people say, what's an illegal boycott?
I say, well, on the one hand, it could be tortious interference, could be one way of framing it, but also exploitation of monopolistic powers could be another now.
And controlling 90% of online ad spends sounds a bit like Monopoly.
I think the threshold typically is 80%.
Chris, if there's another question in here, it says, would the removal of Section 230 help in any of this?
That's from Hyphen.
No, I don't believe it helps by removing Section 230.
If they remove Section 230, they're going to force moderation on platforms.
And force extremely strict moderation on platforms.
So removing it entirely is a bad, bad idea.
And I could see certain players, like publishers, like newspapers, really wanting something like that because then they get more power back.
But Section 230 allows...
It really allows the platform not to have liability on a lot of different matters, which, you know...
If we do end up having liability, you're going to force everything from YouTube to Rumble to moderate in ways that you never wanted.
Who asked this one?
It was in Cryptis who says, I want to know the forecast of what would happen with Google if Rumble is successful.
Would it involve breaking up Google, separating ad sales, serving search, and the video?
My issue, and I sort of not predicted it, but said it a while back, they don't need to be corporately tied in order for them to know what the other arm of the monster wants to do.
What would be?
Practically what Rumble would want implemented to level the playing field.
Well, there's a lot.
We allege and we put that in our complaint.
Like, one, we don't want them to be abusing their powers, which they are.
Two, they're pre-installing, which is illegal.
They're abusing their power there.
And we've lost billions and billions in revenue and users, and we want that back.
Plus, we want treble damages because it is antitrust.
We're going in to get what we deserve and we are going to be relentless on how we do it.
I have not given up since I started this business.
I am relentless when it comes to companies trying to screw us.
I'm relentless when it comes to monopolies trying to screw us.
I have not been shy.
I have sued multiple times, Google alone and others, when they abuse their powers.
I'm not in this business to sit around and watch companies like Rumble get screwed by the entire market.
And by monopolies out there.
That's not going to happen.
Not on my watch.
I will fight back.
I will push that system back to as far as I can possibly push it.
And until that happens, I'm not giving up.
This is from S. Ren who says, people don't understand the reality of what GARM does.
If you dissent, then the top ad firms will not work with you.
It's blackmail.
It's interesting.
I don't think...
Well, first of all, I guarantee the majority of the people have never heard of GARM until now and didn't know what a...
What's it called when a mob...
A cartel this is and has been from the beginning.
The parallel economy and the brands that work with Rumble.
So you create the own brand.
I mean, it becomes sort of an unanticipated source of revenue, not necessarily as easily generated as advertising dollars, but alternate products that are Rumble products.
I don't want to ask what's coming forward.
It's proving to be sustainable, profitable enough?
I'll speak about Rumble Coffee because that's obviously the most mature.
Rumble Coffee is off to a fabulous start.
I think in a recent press release we quantified that.
Let me quantify it.
I just want to make sure.
Being public is one of those...
Absolutely. And while you do that, I'll pull up a $5 super chat which says, the ultimate way to combat this is for consumers to write the companies in the millions and not buy their products.
But the thing is this, I don't believe they're motivated by profit at this point.
Because quite clearly, when YouTube starts kicking off profitable content creators, it's not...
Because it's making the money, it's because it's giving them political power or at least political narrative control, which might even be either more important than money, or they're playing the long game and they're saying once we win elections because we interfere with dissemination of information, then we'll make back our money that we lost while doing it.
So just, I got that quote now.
So in a press release on July 15th, we said...
That we launched the three new brand partnerships comes on the heels of Rumble's early success with 1775 Coffee.
After launching in February, annualized run rate sales of 1775 Coffee are now exceeding $1 million.
So that's within months of launching that brand.
It just says how valuable our audience really is.
How unfortunate a company like Dunkin' Donuts doesn't want your business.
It's disgusting to me.
I can't believe I have to be in a situation where I have to create a coffee brand so that half of America would feel comfortable buying a coffee brand that's not going to discriminate against them like Dunkin' Donuts seems to want to discriminate against right-wing culture.
First of all, what is right-wing culture?
That's half of America.
That's crazy.
Discriminating against any culture is just pathetic.
No, it's implausible considering what they do support and left-wing culture.
The content creators on YouTube are not prim and proper.
Whatever. It's pretextual.
Now, I can keep you all day and I know that you're mildly busy, Chris.
Up next, so you got this stuff going on.
What else can you disclose either for the first time or what do you want to let the public know?
What rumble is up to?
Well, I just disclosed a bunch of emails today.
Who's that?
So there are more to come.
No, no, I'm going to keep it to these two.
Maybe one more, but I kind of described that one already on this show.
Yeah, I'm going to keep it to these.
And I will say I'll make the prediction that, you know, there's definitely some dirty laundry, as Elon Musk put it today on X. And I think that because there is, I think that just a little prediction of mine and completely my opinion and nothing else, but I don't see GARM making its way to the end of the year.
I think they know they're doing something illegal.
And I think behind the scenes, They're pretty freaked out about what's going on, and I'd be surprised if they're still there by the end of the year.
But it's pretty disgusting what we've seen.
These emails are disgusting.
If you look at them, I look at them and I'm like, crap.
These guys are asking us to change?
They want us to leave half of America so that we could get their ag dollars?
No. You're going to change, and you're going to change your policies, and you're going to need that other half of America because you're going to lose a lot of business if you treat and discriminate against half of America.
I say it's like high school.
It doesn't change.
It just gets bigger, and they think they're the cool kids, and they want to stick it to the people who they think are uncool.
Getting back on in France, has that progressed at all or no?
I haven't heard anything on that front, but it has been a while.
I would imagine there's some kind of developments around the corner, but I'll check in on that.
I haven't heard anything.
And Brazil, still the same problems as always?
Still the same.
It's been status quo here for a couple months on that front, which is good.
I think like the world is kind of waking up and other countries are not following this type of behavior, which is great.
You know, it seemed to be in the last couple of years it got crazy and then things are seeming a little okay for the moment.
But you never know what happens in a week from now.
It's always something new.
And with the elections around the corner and with the type of potential censorship, you know...
I think on Rumble's front, I don't think we have much to worry about, but I do think if you're on YouTube or if you're on any of these other incumbent platforms that are sitting on these big hosting providers, I think that you could be running into some serious problems, especially if you're talking about politics in the coming months.
So there's that, but I don't fear for anything on the Rumble end at this point.
I'm feeling pretty good about what we have.
I love the product suite that we have.
I love what I'm seeing.
I'm just really, really pumped about where things are going.
I think the system is tilting back.
I do think brands are going to wake up and they're going to come back.
I think this type of pressure will eventually move them back to the center and they're going to have no choice but to do this because what they're doing right now is discriminating against half the world, half the country.
And I don't think that's sustainable.
I don't think it's sustainable for the brands.
And I think people are waking up and they're going to vote with their wallets and they're going to vote with their pockets and they're going to end up suffering if they're going to discriminate.
Not just half the country, but half the country which might, I don't want to judge, but might have more to spend or might be more active spenders to support companies they like.
SRN said, since Rumble is a Florida company, can we expect a Rumble speedo soon?
We'll get swim trucks.
I'm going to stay away from doing Rumble.
Did you say Speedos?
Is that what you said?
Yeah, Speedos.
I don't think Speedos are a Florida thing.
I would have said maybe something else.
Swim trucks.
You know what?
We'll do Rumble swim trucks.
We'll get something in the Rumble store for that.
Chris, let me real quickly just see if anybody's got any last questions.
I think I've got everything.
Godspeed. Enjoy Florida.
Are you here for an extended period of time?
I should be here for a little bit.
Yeah, I'll be here for a bit.
Alright, that was the last question.
This will be the last question, I promise.
Life up in Canada, not just life.
Politics, legislation, how is...
People are concerned that, you know, things were getting hairy for disfavored platforms up in Canada under new legislation.
Are you able to comment on what life is like business-wise in Canada?
I think things are changing in Canada.
Like, you saw that election in the middle of Toronto and the sea of red went blue.
Blue meaning...
It's the exact opposite.
Blue is actually Conservative in Canada.
And the Conservatives won in the middle of Toronto for, I think, the first time in 30 years or something like that.
It was a complete upset.
And they won big.
And I think the tide's turning, even in Canada.
I think Canada...
I'll make a prediction.
I think Canada goes over 50% Conservative between the PPC and the Conservative Party in the next election on the popular vote.
I think it's going to be massive for them.
And I think they'll win a majority of seats in the Parliament.
So I think Trudeau's days are numbered, and I think Polivier will be the next Prime Minister of Canada.
Yep. Politically speaking, people, it's going to be a political bloodbath in the next election because the NDP and the Liberals know it.
I'm still not saying, I'm not going to get behind Pierre Poilievre.
For me, it's PPC all the way, but it's going to be a shift.
Let's just see what happens in America.
Are you concerned?
I have a question for you, though.
Hold on a second.
Before we end this, question for you.
Can Canada pull off the same stunt France pulled off?
In terms of having the split vote among the various parties and having the...
Telling the NDP to kind of drop...
Or having the Liberals drop out of the ridings?
I don't know.
I'm trying to think of what that would do.
It's not like they haven't already had that option.
I mean, it's sort of like how they've been maintaining this bullcrap coalition government, a de facto coalition between the NDP and the Liberals.
The two big parties, NDP, Liberal on the Liberal side, maybe the Green Party, but they're not that big.
I don't know.
I don't think it could happen.
Any more than it's already happened.
That's the only reason why there hasn't been an election declared.
Can they pull off what Macron did by getting one of the parties to pull out of certain ridings so that the other guy can win on the left?
I don't think it would be that effective.
You don't think so?
If you pull out in that riding that Toronto did, where the Conservatives won, the NDP and the Liberals, you would have lost.
So if you take the Liberal off the ticket...
Or take the MVP off the ticket.
Does he get the seat now?
That's what I'm asking.
That's because they're doing some nasty games in Europe.
Why wouldn't they do those nasty games again?
It's a good question.
And now that you mention it, I remember seeing the...
It's one of the nutcases.
Oxlad. Oxlad.
I forget her name.
She's a batshit crazy woman.
But she said congratulations.
And she tallied up to the NDP and the Liberals and said had they voted together, they would have beat the Conservatives.
If anybody wants to know what that future looks like, look to what's happening in Britain right now and understand what that would hold by way of the future of Canada.
I'll look into that in a little greater detail in terms of how it breaks down.
But if it happens, Chris...
Next year in Florida.
Well, if it happens, I think the PPC needs to make a hard choice too then.
So, like, it's...
Beware, because the games are going to be nasty in the Canadian elections.
I foresee it to be very nasty.
Stephen Britton in our local says it would be very effective because the votes will migrate.
But then Finboy Slick says the NDP is way too greedy to play along.
Dude, I don't know.
It's true.
If you pull a party out, then people lose their pension or people lose their prospect of a pension political power.
Let's just hope that the devils don't play that cooperatively among each other.
We'll see what happens.
It's 2025 is going to be Canada's year.
Remember, if we sit and watch, we're going to lose.
We have to be as smart and smarter in order to win.
Encrypta says we need a Rumble web browser.
Am I allowed asking you or are you allowed answering?
Is that on the horizon?
Not something I've looked at.
Oh my goodness, I almost forgot.
This will be it.
The cloud technology, finding an alternative to AWS.
How has that been working out for Rumble?
So cloud, we launched, was it March?
I think it was March.
So it's very early stages.
And obviously, we haven't really reported much on that.
And we have earnings next week.
So I just want to be careful what I say on that front.
But obviously...
Our cloud is available to the public.
It was a massive undertaking for us to do.
It's something we needed to do.
This is why I'm not very worried going into this election season, as other platforms should be worried.
No one can turn the plug off on us.
We're running on our own rails.
I'm very excited about that and very excited that it's open to the public.
The cloud is an important part to this business and a very important part to our future.
The cloud that's up in the air like a cloud.
Did you see that?
That was hilarious.
Well, Chris, I'm an idiot and I can describe the cloud better.
And the bottom line, for those who don't know, it's the infrastructure that allows a company to exist on the internet.
And to the extent that it's not owned by a politically compromised entity like AWS, if you're on the rumble cloud, you don't have to get worried about getting parlored.
The only issue is that it costs a lot of money to get the hardware.
To keep the servers and all that other stuff.
And so it has to be profitable on its own or at least sustainable before it can become profitable.
Yeah, no.
That clip, though, I just couldn't handle that clip.
I was going to comment on it, but I try not to get too politically involved.
Chris, I'll say what I think you're thinking.
She's the biggest idiot on the planet.
That clip is tied for inflation.
Inflation means prices are higher.
It means people are paying more.
She's an idiot.
There's no other way to put it.
What really is getting me blackpilled these days is that people are just being swayed by branding.
And you understand what happens when you have a machine behind an empty vassal that is Kamala Harris.
People are like, oh, I like the images.
She's smiling.
She's waving.
She's a woman.
And so I want to vote for her.
Nothing else.
She's an idiot.
A stupid person.
Period. Okay, I don't expect you to agree with that because you have to be more diplomatic, but in two years, you're going to be 10x what Elon is these days.
Lumpy Potato, I know Lumpy Potato, says, thank you, Chris, for holding the line.
It's amazing.
I don't think you could have ever anticipated being where you are right now, but Chris?
We'll end it.
We're going to say our proper goodbyes afterwards.
Thank you for doing this.
I think I've asked everything that I know that I can ask publicly.
I'm staying tuned for next week's...
So next week, what?
It's going to be earnings quarterly?
Yeah, Monday.
I'm going to do a live with Matt Kors on...
I think it's Monday or Tuesday?
Monday. I think it's Monday.
And I'll be doing the recap with Matt Kors in the evening.
But I'll be watching Barnes and Viva on Sunday night.
I'm sure you guys are going to have a lot of lawsuits to talk about.
Are you going to start on the Google one?
Are you going to start on the GARM one?
We have to start Google, then move into GARM, because I think the GARM is sort of predicated or influenced by the Google.
Matt Coors, for anybody who doesn't know on Rumble, it's a lot of financial tech talk and stuff.
Matt's the guy I run into at all the events.
He's fantastic.
Chris? We shall end it.
Everybody out there, thank you for being here.
Stay tuned.
I'm going to do a quick car vlog after this when I go pick up the dogs because the dogs have been in the kennel for two days.
Okay, we're ending it.
Thank you, Chris.
You are very responsive on Twitter.
What's your handle on Twitter again?
It's Chris Pavlosky on Twitter.
It's Chris on Truth.
And it's Chris Rumble on Rumble.
Okay, Pavlosky with an I, not with a Y. Everybody, thank you for being here.
I'll see you soon.
Chris, stick around.
We'll say our proper goodbyes.
▲
Export Selection