reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The USMCA is a good deal, but the speaker had a bad relationship with a person who worked for Trudeau's predecessor because they disagreed on the deal. The speaker claims to have called Trudeau "governor Trudeau," which may have hurt his election. The speaker questioned Trudeau about why the US was taking Canada's cars and suggested a 25% tariff on Canadian cars, to which Trudeau allegedly responded that it would mean the end of Canada. The speaker finds it hard to justify subsidizing Canada, potentially to the tune of $200 billion a year, while the US protects Canada militarily. The speaker believes it's hard for the American taxpayer to be happy about subsidizing Canada.

Speaker 0 discusses the risks of fear and anger, emphasizing the importance of vaccination and the negative impact of a small fringe minority. Speaker 2 highlights the potential consequences of shutting borders on goods. Speaker 1 emphasizes the diversity of Canadians and their shared identity. Speaker 3 mentions democratic values and Speaker 4 announces new measures allowing financial service providers to freeze accounts. Speaker 0 mentions efforts to reduce emissions in the oil and gas sector and Canada's commitment to treating people with respect. Speaker 3 expresses support for human rights and the right to protest. The conversation ends with Speaker 1 expressing shock over a lady being trampled.

The speakers discuss their concerns about the current state of Canada. They criticize the government's actions, such as labeling truckers as racist and misogynist and closing down bank accounts of those who donated to the trucker movement. They also mention the ban on accessing news outlets from outside of Canada and the potential impact on creators on social media platforms. They express worry that their podcast may not be available in Canada due to their criticism of the government. Overall, they feel that Canada is sliding towards communism and becoming like a dictatorship.

The conversation opens with Speaker 0 arguing that there is no climate catastrophe or climate emergency. They claim that the threat narrative is pervasive, describing “tentacles” extending across the public sector, private sector, and academia. The speaker asserts that politicians, exemplified by Mark Carney, use fear mongering to secure votes, and notes that this phenomenon is seen globally, predominantly in left-leaning governments. According to Speaker 0, the climate discourse represents self-sabotage and economic suicide. They describe economies as being strangled by a left-wing agenda, contending that such forces are shaping markets, national policy, media output, education, and financial flows. The overarching claim is that this agenda is about power and control, with fear mongering used to imply a climate catastrophe. The transcript then shifts to a brief interlude welcoming Desiree Fixler. Desiree Fixler is thanked for joining again, with a note that much has happened since their last chat.

Justin Trudeau is criticized by members of the European Parliament for undermining democracy in Canada while condemning Vladimir Putin. German MP Christine Anderson suggests Trudeau should not speak in the house due to human rights violations. Another representative from Croatia labels Canada under Trudeau as a symbol of civil rights violations and dictatorship.

The exchange centers on content posted online to the Department of State of Canada and the implications of that content. Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1 about what she posted and asks for a screenshot to verify the online statements. Speaker 1 asserts that she referred to someone as “a Zionist scumbag” and says “he's not my prime minister,” adding, “But really, you're gonna come to my door and you're worried that I'm going to do something.” Speaker 0 notes that there were “threats” and explains the purpose of the visit: to address such threats, which could lead to consequences if continued. Speaker 1 responds that the focus should be on “actual real crime” rather than harassing her over online remarks, and argues that the visit is a waste of tax dollars. Speaker 0 warns that if the behavior continues, there could be an arrest and charge, stating, “if you made some threats that are concerning… you could be arrested and charged.” Speaker 1 demands to see what she allegedly said, asking, “Show me what I said,” and accuses the interaction of harassment and harassment for expressing dissent about the prime minister. The dialogue touches on the nature of the statements. Speaker 1 repeats hostility toward the prime minister and labels the act as “harassing people for what they say online because I don't like our stupid prime minister, and he's a Zionist sunbag,” while Speaker 0 reiterates the right to express opinion but cautions against threats. The conversation escalates with Speaker 1 calling the environment “Communist Canada” and questioning the officers’ pride in their work, challenging, “How do you like working for that?… Do you go back home and look at your family in the mirror and say, this is what you do for a living?” Speaker 0 emphasizes the possibility of documenting the behavior and filing a report if the conduct continues, with a vague reference to “the Trump Blah blah blah blah blah.” Speaker 1 maintains, “I will say whatever the fuck I want about our prime minister. You can't stop my speech. Sorry. Opinion. Yeah. Exactly.” The dialogue ends with Speaker 1 stating, “Okay. Have a nice day. Goodbye now,” and Speaker 0 reiterating the threat assessment: “Be threatening. That's all I'm asking you.”

Speaker 0 accuses Mr. Trudeau of selling out Canada to globalism and working for his globalist partners instead of the country. The speaker questions how much Mr. Trudeau is being paid to betray Canada and suggests that traitors used to be hanged for treason. The speaker mentions that they know what Mr. Trudeau is doing and brings up the topic of oil.

Speaker 0: He's one of the greatest I've ever seen. Speaker 1: Don't mess with Whitey, I'm crazy. Speaker 2: Trudeau announced a 3-year exemption on carbon tax reform. Speaker 3: Will there be penalties or jail for not paying carbon tax? The government expects everyone to work. Speaker 1: We need to find ways to extract and use oil and gas with minimal emissions and carbon capture. Speaker 2: I demand the same carbon tax exemption for Saskatchewan families as others. It's only fair. Hopefully, it will be provided.

Speaker 1 asserts that Trudeau destroyed Canada economically, socially, and culturally, particularly through authoritarian COVID-19 measures and vaccine passports. Speaker 1 regrets not being vaccinated, calling it the best decision of their life. Speaker 0 suggests Trudeau systematically destroyed Canada, possibly on purpose, through actions like the MAIDS program. Speaker 1 claims Trudeau is a socialist and globalist who doubled Canada's debt in ten years, reaching $1.2 trillion. Mass immigration, combined with multiculturalism, has led to societal fragmentation and a decline in GDP per capita. Speaker 0 questions why Trudeau isn't in jail for these actions. Speaker 1 advocates for an inquiry into COVID-19 policies and a moratorium on immigration and mRNA vaccines. They criticize current political leaders for pandering to ethnic communities and supporting policies detrimental to Canadians. Speaker 1 states that Canada's democratic system does not produce democratic results. They claim globalists are destroying western countries like Canada by pushing mass immigration. Speaker 1 criticizes both Trudeau's Liberal party and the Conservative party leader, Pierre Polyyev, for similar policies on tariffs, immigration, and climate change. They accuse them of prioritizing foreign interests over Canadian citizens. Speaker 1 expresses concern over Chinese interference in Canadian elections and the presence of disloyal members of parliament. They advocate for a moratorium on immigration, citing strains on infrastructure and the economy. Speaker 1 says Canada has no gold reserves.

Speaker 0 accuses the Liberal government of attempting to censor Canadians online through bills like C-11, C-18, and C-63. They claim these bills give the Liberals control over online algorithms, squeeze out independent media, and criminalize thought. The speaker alleges that cabinet ministers are competing to oversee the latest online censorship law. Speaker 1 responds by stating that Google agreed to pay $100 million to support Canadian journalism. They accuse the Conservative Party of opposing this initiative, which they claim would prevent deaths and hinder the media from receiving funding for local content and journalists. The speaker deems this opposition unthinkable and immoral.

Speaker 2 stated he doesn't think they can change Donald Trump at this stage. Speaker 1 believes Pierre Poilievre, like Trump, will focus on the American worker, securing borders, ending fentanyl, and securing the world. Speaker 2 said he and Poilievre have a lot in common, but Speaker 1 says Poilievre is willfully blind to threats facing the country. Speaker 2 stated the U.S. doesn't want cars, steel, or aluminum from Canada because they want to make their own. Speaker 1 questioned how much steel is used these days. Speaker 2 recounted a conversation with Trudeau, whom he called "Governor Trudeau," about tariffs on Canadian cars. Speaker 2 claimed Trudeau said a 25% tariff would mean the end of Canada. Speaker 2 believes the U.S. subsidizes Canada to the tune of maybe $200 billion a year and that it's hard to justify. He added that the U.S. protects Canada militarily.

The speaker claims the prime minister is a climate zealot and eco extremist. They assert the prime minister has pushed for net-zero banking for decades, intending to prevent banks from investing in oil and gas. The speaker alleges the prime minister plans to increase carbon taxes on the oil and gas industry to eviscerate it, referencing the prime minister's book as evidence. According to the speaker, Canada's national identity, unity, freedom, and future are at a monumental crossroads.

The speaker discusses what they call the “woke right,” highlighting a claim made by a foreign leader who allegedly bragged about censoring Americans. The speaker emphasizes the irony of a country with about 9,000,000 people that is described as totally dependent on U.S. tax dollars to exist, while this leader says that Americans who oppose more aid to Israel or opposition to getting drawn into a war with Iran are not simply mistaken or wrong—these opponents are “a Nazi, part of the woke Reich.” The speaker stresses that the foreign leader would fix the issue by preventing Americans in the United States from hearing the other side. The narrative then shifts to actions the speaker alleges are being pushed here at home: pressuring Congress to force a sale of TikTok, which is described as a real effort, “TikTok. TikTok. Number one.” The speaker expresses a hope that this sale goes through due to its potentially consequential impact, framing it as part of a broader assault on free speech. Attention is drawn to the need to talk to Elon Musk, with the implication that free speech is central to the United States, described as “really the only thing that sets us apart from any other country on Earth.” The speaker contrasts this with the foreign head of state, reiterating that the foreign leader is “totally dependent on our tax dollars to exist” and is proposing or engaging in some form of “secret pressure campaign on Elon Musk to censor X because it bothers Israel.” Throughout, the speaker underscores a conflict over speech, censorship, and national interest, asserting that free speech is foundational to American identity and warning against foreign attempts to suppress or control American discourse, including outside interventions in private platforms and the shaping of opinion through perceived censorship. The overall message centers on opposing censorship by a foreign leader and defending American free speech principles in the face of international pressure and domestic policy movements aimed at limiting access to opposing viewpoints.

Speaker 0 argues that forming a closer economic union between Canada and the United States would create a strong economic force and notes that removing the artificially drawn border line would be beneficial. They also claim that such integration would be better for national security, stating that “we basically protect Canada.” Speaker 1 counters with several possibilities: the United States and Canada may become one, which would simplify border controls; or Canada might retain its hydropower, which could create an energy problem in the United States. They also reference a broader belief: “Now we all know that Trump wants to take Canada and Greenland.”

Speaker 0 states this is the most important election in most of their lifetimes. They claim Trump has made unacceptable threats against the economy, workers, and sovereignty. They believe a particular leader can address these issues and needs support. Speaker 1 accuses Catherine McKenna of losing track of 20,000 contracts worth $236,000,000,000, which they claim is why she is no longer in parliament. Speaker 1 repeats the accusation and insults Speaker 0. Speaker 1 continues to harass Catherine, repeating the $236,000,000,000 figure and using abusive language. Speaker 1 then states that everyone is "fucking retarded."

The speaker discusses Canada becoming interesting in January and February due to protesters in Ottawa. The job of reporters, according to the speaker, is to go out and ask protesters why they are on the streets, why they are there with their kids, and why there is a bouncy castle in the middle of Ottawa, to discover the story. The speaker claims the Government did not want that and that the Prime Minister decided in advance that the protesters were all the modern excommunications—Nazis, white supremacists, anti-Semites, probably homophobes, misogynists, probably transphobes, etc.—and then he brings in the Emergency Powers Act. The speaker asks what the mainstream media would do at such a time, and asserts they would question it, but claims the Canadian mainstream media did not and instead acted as an Amen Chorus of the government. Several examples are provided. A CBC host described the Freedom Convoy as a feral mob. A Toronto Star columnist said, “sorry for the language, it's a homegrown hate farm that was then jet fueled by an American right funded rat fucking operation.” The speaker notes that CBC claimed two indigenous women who were scared to go outside in Ottawa because of racist violence did not bother to mention that indigenous drummers had led the truckers in an 0 Canada rendition. The National Observer allegedly stated that many black and indigenous freedom convoy supporters were, in fact, duped by the truckers. A Globe and Mail reporter claimed, “My 13 year old son told me to tell protesters I'm not a Jew” out of fear of antisemitic violence, without mentioning that one of the convoy leaders was Jewish. The speaker argues this demonstrably rancid and corrupt behavior is rooted in a system where in Canada, the media is funded by the government. It is stated that in 2018, election year, there was a coincidence with the government funding; the Canadian media allegedly received $595,000,000 over five years, and the Toronto Star estimated it was going to be getting $3,000,000 from the Government in the first half of the year. The government is described as able to tell banks to shut down people’s bank accounts, and able to tell the media what to do, with the media then doing the bidding of the government camp. The speaker concludes that this is not a free society’s media.

The speaker claims former British colonies are becoming tyrannical, North Korean-style governments influenced by biased science. They allege Canadian news is propaganda, contrasting it with American news. A Canadian political YouTube channel was allegedly shut down by the CBC for expressing dissenting views. Canadians are supposedly blocked from viewing certain American content. Fluoride is being reintroduced into Calgary's water supply despite European bans, based on Health Canada's recommendation. Banks can allegedly close or reduce credit lines, reminiscent of actions during trucker protests. The speaker claims the Canadian government interferes with private property. The speaker alleges criminals are protected, and the MAID program is offered to children, the depressed, and those who can't afford to live. The CBC allegedly misrepresents Canada's economic performance, which is claimed to be the worst in the G7. The speaker suggests Alberta should separate from Canada.

Speaker asserts that large American online platforms have become seas of racism, misogyny, antisemitism, Islamophobia, and hate in all forms, and are used by criminals to harm children. The government promises to act and announces a plan to fight crime, protect Canadians, and build communities that are safe, secure, and strong.

Opposing or questioning the president, his administration, or policies in Canada can lead to being labeled an enemy of the state. The autocratic leader in Canada has used authoritarian tactics to suppress peaceful protests, including emergency powers, freezing bank accounts, seizing children, and destroying livelihoods. This situation raises the question: what are they afraid of? The answer is simple: they fear a free people and a free society. Thomas Jefferson's words about leaders preferring despotism over liberty seem fitting. They fear the freedom that allows us to seek truth, speak freely, and question their decisions. They fear losing power, even though our founders believed in the people's right to alter or abolish a destructive government.

The speaker, from Canada, warns about the gradual suffocation of free expression in the name of fairness, common good, social justice, and safety. They highlight examples of restricted free expression, such as not being able to share news stories on social media, being punished for expressing certain political views, receiving lenient sentences based on skin color, and being arrested for peaceful protests. The speaker emphasizes the need to protect free speech and urges the audience to defend their liberties and rights. They mention similar measures being considered or adopted in other countries and urge America not to succumb to illiberalism and authoritarianism. The speaker concludes by asking the audience to keep fighting for what is right.

By 2035, Canada will mandate that citizens can only purchase electric vehicles due to a change in the Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) quietly put in place by the environmental minister. The mandate stipulates that all vehicles made in Canada must have zero emissions. A speaker argues that the government is overreaching, citing issues such as cold climates, the needs of rural Canadians, and power outages, such as one that occurred in Peterborough three weeks prior, as examples of why the mandate won't work. During the five day outage, electric vehicles were rendered useless. The speaker suggests that families should be able to choose to buy electric vehicles if they want, and the government's role should be to ensure the infrastructure is in place to support them.

Speaker 1 asserts that Trudeau destroyed Canada economically, socially, and culturally, particularly through authoritarian COVID-19 measures and vaccine passports. Speaker 1 regrets not being vaccinated, while Speaker 0 agrees. Speaker 0 claims Trudeau systematically destroyed Canada, possibly on purpose, citing the MAIDS program. Speaker 1 accuses Trudeau of being a socialist, globalist, and follower of the World Economic Forum, doubling Canada's debt in ten years. Speaker 1 blames mass immigration, promoted by Trudeau's multiculturalism policies, for declining GDP per capita and societal fragmentation. Speaker 0 questions why Trudeau isn't in jail for his actions. Speaker 1 calls for an inquiry into COVID-19 policies and a moratorium on immigration and mRNA vaccines. Speaker 1 criticizes current political leaders for pandering to ethnic communities and supporting mass immigration, echoing the "replacement doc theory." Speaker 1 claims the democratic system isn't producing democratic results and that the mainstream media cancels opposing viewpoints. Speaker 1 says globalists are anti-western, targeting majority white Christian countries. Speaker 1 accuses Carney and Polyyev of prioritizing foreigners over Canadians, and says they love power. Speaker 1 says Canada has Chinese interference in elections, with some MPs not loyal to the country. Speaker 1 says immigrants bring internal conflicts to Canada. Speaker 1 says Polyyev and Carney want to impose a carbon tax. Speaker 1 says Canada has no gold reserves.

Justin Trudeau's proposed bill in Canada aims to address online harms, including hate speech and child exploitation. However, critics argue that it could be used to silence dissent and control information. The bill would hold online platforms accountable for harmful content and establish a censorship organization. It also introduces stricter penalties, including life imprisonment, for hate offenses. Trudeau's government has been accused of authoritarianism and limiting freedom of speech. Similar legislation is being introduced in other countries, suggesting a coordinated global effort. Critics fear that these laws could be misused to impose control on the population and suppress dissent.

The speaker alleges that Mark Carney and Justin Trudeau are setting up a system where companies must buy carbon credits from companies like Brookfield if they are not "eco and green." They claim Brookfield will profit immensely from this. The speaker points to SEC filings showing Carney has 209,000 shares of Brookfield at $35 and 200,000 shares at $40, potentially netting him $6.8 million if sold. They suggest Carney's promotion of net-zero policies could greatly increase Brookfield's stock value, further enriching him. The speaker demands transparency regarding Carney's investments, questioning if he owns additional shares of Brookfield. The speaker plays audio of Carney discussing a $100 billion a year market in carbon offsets and stating that financial institutions expect to "make a lot of money off of this" transition to net zero. The speaker concludes that Carney has significant conflicts of interest and should not be Prime Minister.