Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #444 - Fauci Caught LYING AGAIN, Rand Paul ROASTS Fauci After Veritas Leaks w/Chris Pavlovski

Episode Date: January 12, 2022

Tim, Ian, Luke, and Lydia join the founder and CEO of Rumble to examine Dr. Fauci's roasting by Rand Paul, the new data showing that he's been lying, the media's goals for psy-ops, and how the Canadian government might try to crack down on free speech by going after Rumble. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Project Veritas has released documents corroborating earlier reporting and providing new information, an assessment from a major previously of DARPA, making a lot of very serious and bold claims based on his analysis of undisclosed documents. And I have to tell you, this may be one of the most important stories of, man, I don't even know, the past decade, the past two decades. Because if this assessment is correct, it's confirmed a lot of what the quote-unquote conspiracy theorists have said. And I will also point out that it'll basically get a, well, I'll be very careful about how I phrase things, but YouTube might not be too happy

with what the assessment is. So we will be careful, and I'll try to be as responsible as possible in the assessment of this information. But it's huge. This is information proving Dr. Fauci lied. Well, assuming one of these documents is correct, Fauci did lie. Assuming the documents that were previously released by The Intercept shows Fauci did lie. And then he appeared in front of Congress again today and made one of the most hilarious mistakes of holding up a piece of paper on TV, which is now on the Internet. And this is going to be crazy stuff. So we got that talk about Fauci was caught on a hot mic, apparently insulting one of the senators.

We've got another crazy story. The U.S. Army is going to be conducting drills, training special forces in overthrowing illegitimate governments and quote-unquote freedom fighters. This comes around the same time that the DOJ is establishing a counter-domestic terror unit, and the Financial Times says it's time to implement psychological operations against those who spread misinformation.

We got supply chain issues. Store shelves are empty. So this is going to be pretty interesting. We definitely got to talk about this disinformation stuff. We've got someone who can speak to us in terms of what's going on in the censorship battle and infrastructure battle. We've got the CEO of Rumble, Chris Pavlovsky. How's it going, man? Great. I'm super excited to be here. I've been watching you for a long time.

Appreciate you coming. Ian's been more critical than I have been, but we've also been a little defensive too of you guys over at Rumble, especially with the locals deal. So this will be a really great conversation to talk about your mission uh the deal you know you just did this um you're doing this special uh purpose acquisition company gonna raise a lot of money i think there's a lot of good news to be said here a lot of concerns but we'll get all that stuff uh do you want to just quickly introduce like who you are i know i said you're the ceo of rumble but yeah no sure i'm chris pavlosky i I'm the founder and chief executive officer of Rumble. I started the company in 2013.

I've been in this space for two decades. So I've seen a lot of stuff in the last eight years. If anyone were to look at and see what our politics were in 2013, it was cats and dogs. And then by 2020, everything kind of changed. And we had Congressman Devin Nunes join our platform. Now Rand Paul, right? Yeah, Rand Paul just dropped YouTube last week to come to Rumble. So we had the best week we've ever had last week.

This all comes together full circle too. So it's good that we have you here considering what's going on with Rand Paul once again talking about you. Because Rand Paul has tried to speak on the Senate floor and YouTube banned this content. This is crazy stuff. So we'll get into all that. We've got Luke hanging out. This should be a great conversation. Thank you so much for coming here.

And I think it's fair to say that the official story is definitely breaking. And people are realizing that you cannot comply your way out of tyranny. Just an important message that I wanted to remind everyone. And if you want to remind your local Karens and Kyles out there at the local supermarkets of that same message, you can very easily by getting the shirt that says you cannot comply your way out of tyranny, which you can get on

thebestpoliticalshirts.com because you do. I'm here. Thanks for having me. This should be a great conversation. Oh, yeah. Hey, Ian Crossland here from iancrossland.net and Chris, I'm glad you're here. You know, I worked with Mines for about a decade, co-founded the company, and basically running ethics. I'm the ethics guy. Bill asked me to come in and help him guide the process.

So I feel like I know I can empathize with a lot of what you're experiencing. I saw Bill go through it. And I'm excited to hear about what it was like to go public and the code – we already talked about freeing the code base. We'll go deeper. So it's great to see you, man. Well, I'd love to hear your thoughts on that because I argue with him all the time. But we also got Lydia pressing all the buttons.

I am here in the corner pushing buttons. I upload all the videos from IRL to Rumble as well. So I had a question that I already cleared up with him. It was great. He's going to be a great conversation this evening. Before we get started, everybody, head over to TimCast.com. Become a member to help support our fierce and independent journalism. We have a very large team of reporters, and I got to be honest with you guys. It's not cheap to hire journalists. Journalists

are specialists with special skills that dedicate a lot of time and energy. They never take time off. They're making phone calls all day. We got some of these people that wake up at 2 in the morning with breaking news they got to get to work you guys all of you signing up as members at timcast.com allow these people to keep doing this work and we take it very seriously we're also going to be implementing our fact-checking organization ramping it up very very soon and that will also be to a certain degree um funded through you guys aships. But it's going to have its own independent process for doing it. But we're going to try and make sure we keep them as separate entities. So that's important to mention.

And we'll get into more detail on how that's going to work in the next coming weeks and months. But you will also get access to exclusive members-only segments of the TimCast IRL podcast as a member. And we will have that members only segment up tonight around 11 or so PM 11 PM at Tim cast.com. So, so go sign up, but don't forget to like this video, smash that like hand. It's a hand smack it and subscribe to the channel, share the show with your friends. It's the most powerful thing you can do to, to help combat, to help combat the misinformation of the mainstream corporate press. And let's read this first big story from Project Veritas.

I can already hear the clacking knees of the YouTube ban agents or moderators with their fingers over the ban button shaking, saying, say the wrong thing. We're going to ban your show because we're about to talk about something big. Project Veritas reports military documents about gain of function contradict Fauci testimony under oath. Military documents state that EcoHealth Alliance approached DARPA in March 2018 seeking funding to conduct gain of function research of bat-borne coronaviruses. The proposal named Project Diffuse was rejected by DARPA over safety concerns and the notion that it violates the gain-of-function research moratorium. The main report regarding the EcoHealth Alliance proposal leaked on the Internet a couple months ago.

It has remained unverified until now. Project Veritas has obtained a separate report to the Inspector General of the Department of Defense, written by U.S. Marine Corps Major Joseph Murphy, a former DARPA fellow. The proposal does not mention or assess potential risks of gain-of-function research, a direct quote from the DARPA rejection letter. Project Veritas reached out to DARPA for comment regarding the hidden documents and spoke with the Chief of Communications, Jared Adams, who said, quote, it doesn't sound normal to me when asked about the way the documents were buried. Now, I want to say a few things before we get started. Very simply, consult your doctor and don't take any of this as medical advice. We're not here to provide that

and take it all with a grain of salt. I've seen a lot of people jump on this and say, I see two things. One, the left saying you can't trust Project Veritas. Their information is no good, and therefore it's bad. I see people on the right saying, this is definitive proof. It's finally what we're looking for. Let me just state, this reporting by Veritas, very well done, very, very well done. Veritas didn't just come out and release a letter from a Marine Corps major assessing certain information and then trying to claim it's true. They actually got corroborating evidence of an intercept story. This is from September 23rd, 2021. Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research, where

they specifically mention Project Diffuse, which Project Veritas has now corroborated. This is a left-wing publication and Project Veritas getting documents on the same thing. Suffice it to say, the left's assessment of Project Veritas being wrong is untrue. That being said, the assessment from the major, the U.S. Marine Corps major is just that. It is his analysis of undisclosed documents.

Trust him if you want to trust him or don't. I think it's very important to make sure that you take into consideration it's not someone involved in the projects admitting to anything. It's someone who had been at DARPA saying, I read these documents and here's my analysis. That being said, I don't know, Luke, if you want to start bringing up some of these points that you thought were most alarming. Yeah, I mean, if these documents are true, I mean, there's a lot of big implications here because this shows how Echo Health Alliance was seeking DARPA funding in specific gain-of-function research related to bat coronaviruses. They called this project Diffuse. And allegedly, according to these documents, this was rejected by DARPA in 2018 because of safety concerns,

and it would violate a lot of, of course, the protections that are in the United States that don't allow this kind of dangerous work, which could lead to some very serious ramifications. What did NIID do? What did Echo Health Alliance do after this? They just simply said, well, there's no regulations and safety concerns in China where the Chinese government gets to do whatever they want as long as they oversee every step of the process. And essentially, I think it's fair to assume now that they took this very dangerous work, which allegedly, according to these documents, DARPA didn't want to do because it was too dangerous. It was too unsafe. And they just did it in China, which proved that there was some warning, some hindsight here that that should be, of course, known about, that should be talked about.

There was also U.S. Senator Rand Paul questioning Dr. Fauci is being accused of concealing about a lot of the origin of this story coming from that Wuhan laboratory where this dangerous function studies were being sent to and downplaying this lab leak theory. That's big. We had, it was Peter Navarro who was on the show, and he said that at the time they were having these meetings about COVID and this potential pandemic, Fauci was there and did not disclose to them the things he had known about gain of function, about HECO Health Alliance. And even if they didn't believe the lab leak theory or hypothesis or whatever,

don't you think Fauci should have told the Trump administration, hey, there's something we considered, and it's this, that it may have come from this lab? You would think that if that administrative state answered to the executive branch, which apparently I'm learning in my adult years that it doesn't necessarily play second fiddle to the executive branch. What I'm saying is the administrative state, these people that have been there for 40 years, Fauci, been in that job for 40 years, he doesn't answer to Joe Biden. Highest paid government employee, right? Yep.

432,000, is that his salary? Yep. That's a huge amount of money, especially for a government worker. I've got to read a portion of this analysis because I'm not going to – look, I understand that this can be considered contentious. So I'm going to read this portion from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency document. From Commandant of the Marine Corps Fellow at DARPA to the Inspector General subject SARS-CoV-2 origins investigation with the U.S. government program undisclosed document analysis. That right there is very important to consider. This is somebody who worked at DARPA who read the following documents and is providing his analysis. But his analysis is absolutely insane.

Okay? And you can take that any direction you want. Someone on the left is going to be like, this dude's out of his mind. And people on the right are going to be like, yo, this is crazy in the more colloquial sense. He says, you ready for this? SARS-CoV-2 is an American-created recombinant bat vaccine or its precursor virus. It was created by an EcoHealth Alliance program at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as suggested by the reporting surrounding the lab leak hypothesis. The details of this program

have been concealed since the pandemic began. These details can be found in the EcoHealth Alliance proposal response to the DARPA preempt program broad agency announcement dated March 2018, a document not yet publicly disclosed. The contents of the proposed program are extremely detailed. Peter Daszak lays out step by step what the organization intends to do by phase and by location. The primary scientists involved, their roles, and their institutions are indicated. The funding plan for the WIV work is its own document. The reasons why non-pharmaceutical interventions like masks and medical countermeasures like mRNA vaccines do not

work well can be extrapolated from the details. The reasons why the early treatment protocols work as curatives are apparent. Now that is where he started to get into danger zone territory. But let me just, I want to make sure it's very clear. This is, this is a major at DARPA giving his assessment of these documents. Now this is an expert. I mean, this is a guy who's privy to information that was not publicly disclosed, talking about what he thinks about it. That being said, take it with a grain of salt. You've got to decide for you what you think is, you know, what's trustworthy and what's not. And I will very much add, as it pertains to what he's saying, that is the opinion of this major, not the show. It is not medical advice. And always consult a trusted medical professional on your medical decisions and what needs to happen

for you. And I'll just keep it, you know, I'll leave it there. it there yeah i mean this is his assessment after looking at some of the classified information that the public is not privy to i think right now the conversation has been started and for the government to clear everything up here to have some transparency and accountability they should release these documents immediately so they could set the record straight specifically so we know exactly what's going on here you want us us to trust us? Give us reason to. Give us these documents. Release them. The time is now more than ever to do so.

I'm weary a little bit. I'm weary. You know, I don't think – I think Project Veritas has released the other diffused documents, which is corroborating reporting we got a few months ago. And I think that was smart. It shows that these additional documents they received do come from a verified source. However, many people have pointed out, doesn't this seem a little too good to be true? Like too on the nose is a better way to put it. Maybe, but also it's kind of like the emperor is not wearing any clothes, you guys.

Duh. We've thought this. Maybe that there was a lab leak going on for like, I don't know, eight months. It's starting to be well more accepted or five months or six months. Well, just really quick. And now it's like, okay, just don't ban me for pointing out that the emperor has no clothes for a second. This could be a PSYOP, but we're going to talk about that in just a little bit. Right. No, no, for sure.

It might be invisible clothes. Yeah. This could be a PSYOP, perhaps. We know that there were attempts to provide false documents to WikiLeaks in the past, tricking them into publishing them so they could then say, aha, look, WikiLeaks in the past, tricking them into publishing them so they could then say, aha, look, WikiLeaks publishes false information. But I also want to point out, could it be that this major read the same news sources or watched Tucker Carlson and then wrote a report based on what he saw in the news? It could be fabricated, yeah.

Not fabricated, just like, you know, he says, what does he say? He actually mentions in the article, as reported like you know he says um what does he say uh he actually mentions in in the article as reported you know oh uh the lab leak hypothesis as reported or whatever he says right so you think it might be partisan like political they're trying not necessarily political but you know his view you know it's it's tough out of sight out of mind and and the opposite right if people don't hear something in the news they don't talk about if people do hear in the news they talk about it i'm just saying it's possible that this guy may have just it may sound like a bit on the nose because maybe he's getting

for all we know this guy watches this show and then he's like wow that's crazy then he writes a report he reads the document says yep i see it and then we then end up reading it being like aha and it's just confirming you know what we what we already believed well i'm i agree with you on the timing of this this does seem a little bit suspicious to me because all of this all of these jake tapper is starting to agree with these crazy right-wing conspiracies they're admitting that like the menstrual changes that women were reporting that they said was nonsense all this is happening at the same time very convenient convenient. Yeah, so that's a good point. We've got NPR saying,

yes, actually the vaccines do alter your menstrual cycle. Something women had been saying for the past couple of years that was deemed a conspiracy theory. Then you get Jake Tapper outraged that COVID hospitalizations are inflated by some 40%. Then we get this document basically giving an expert confirmation

or an expert analysis, which lends itself to lab leak hypothesis. That does smell like a psyop to me. They were actually... I don't want to outright say it's discredited. Numbers would have been inflated by 60% if 40% of them were... Of the total had been inflated. That means when you have 60% is your full amount. To get to 100,

you're going to have to increase it by 40, which is 60% of 60 thereabout. So it's actually inflating the number by, it's a little, not necessarily kind of a derailment, but they inflated the numbers by 60% to get to a place where it says that 40% of them

had comorbidities and maybe even were asymptomatic. Basically, no, the inflation was when they said that people with covid instead of from covid yeah that was new york state announcing that with the governor officially saying there was a really funny tweet i retweeted someone said is is american democracy dying with covid or from covid and i was like that's actually that was a really really good one yeah but uh yeah in this instance with with Jake Tapper, the issue is someone bumps their head, goes

to the hospital. They say, we're going to test you for COVID. When I had COVID and I called the local hospital, I was like, what's the protocol? Like, what should I do? And they said, why don't you come in? And I said, okay, well, what do I do if I come in? They said, we'll run some tests. And I said, why would I need tests done?

Like I took an at-home test. It said I had COVID. And they were like, well, we'll come in and we'll do some tests. And then said, why would I need tests done? Like I took an at-home test. It said I had COVID and they were like, well, we'll come in and we'll do some tests. And then I kid you not that's and I said, and then what do you do for me? Are you going to prescribe medicine? It said, no. And I said, so I should just like leave my home and come here so you can tell me what I already know. Should I, I was like, I was calling because I was wondering if there was like a, if there was something you can do or if there's something I should do. And they were like, oh, I don't know.

It's a virus. Go to sleep. And I, okay. But they wanted me. I swear. So afterwards, I was like, they want me to just come in for tests? Is it because they want to just run billing or something? They get paid, baby.

We were talking about that yesterday, how much money these organizations are getting for having a COVID case, having a COVID death on file. Especially vented. On ventilator. Putting people on ventilators. And that's just on file. With COVID on file. And that it's treated as it was a COVID. Let's pull up this tweet here we got from the Oversight Committee Republicans.

Breaking. We've released never-before-seen emails showing Dr. Fauci may have concealed information about COVID-19 originating from the Wuhan lab and intentionally downplayed the lab leak theory. I got to say, all of this coming out at the same time is kind of insane. It's after Christmas. Everyone's fed up. My family was done with it over Christmas. They could be burning Fauci.

Fauci is, again, sort of a conduit and a middle player to a lot of other bigger players and also has a lot of communications with other individuals that are named Mr. Gates. But that's a whole different story to say itself. But I think the question is, is this a PSYOP? Is it an important one, especially when we're having so much information come out? I think we're at a very important turning point. I think a lot of things are going to change within the next month, within the next two months.

I think it's important to look out. And I think this could be also an attempt to release a lot of this information to save their buttocks, family-friendly show here, to sustain, to kind of soften their fall from the grace of COVID overlords. Many people have pointed out the Democrats aren't going to win if they're running on COVID lockdowns. Yeah, the polling is not going to be in their favor right now. Everything's turning. Like, you know, in Canada, where I'm from, you can see it. People are so fed up.

There has to be a turn here. And I think that's what we're seeing. Maybe this gives the Democratic Party and the establishment an out. Jake Tapper, oh, oh, I can't believe that these numbers. Can you believe it? I'm on your side. I'm angry, too. And then all of a sudden Democrats are like, we know Fauci let us down.

Vote for us. Yeah, I saw a tweet today. I was this lady was like, all the lies are coming out. You know, everything's being revealed. And I was like, no, lady, these Democrats have a 2022 midterm to drag out. They need to fix this now. And they're just now realizing they're a little bit slow, but they're they're on the case now. So so this this document release from the Oversight Committee, let me read a little bit for you.

They say, we write to request a transcribed interview of Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of U.S. National, we get it, enclosed, reveal that Dr. Fauci warned of two things. The potential that COVID-19 leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and two, the possibility that the virus was intentionally genetically manipulated. It is imperative we investigate if this information was conveyed to the rest of the government and whether the information would have changed the U.S. response to the pandemic. So Fauci had apparently, they say excerpts of emails we are making public today, reveal that information. Fauci, as we learned with the Fauci leaks, remember that? Anthony Fauci was communicating with several individuals, and they were questioning whether

or not this did come from a lab. That's why I mentioned Peter Navarro. He had stated that when he was in the Trump administration and they had Fauci there and they're like, what's going on? Fauci did not tell them that they believed it was possible that the lab leak happened. I think at this point, we may not have an official from the Wuhan lab, because you never will because it's China, coming out and definitively saying, yes, it happened. But I think when Jon Stewart rants on Colbert's show that there's no other reasonable explanation,

then we're already at that point, right? It is likely a lab leak. Now, here's where it gets fascinating. When Rand Paul said that Fauci was responsible for this, and then he said, I have no responsibility for this. And it's just crazy because who are they still trying to convince, right? At this point, I think you ask most people, they'll be like, yeah, it probably came from that lab. Jon Stewart said it, right? They're probably trying to convince the people to own Fauci bobbleheads.

That's a good way to describe them. What do you call those kind of individuals? I don't know. Bobbleheads? That's another reason. But there's a lot of information coming forward right now. Why did you think of Fauci bobbleheads? I don't know.

That's amazing. There's a lot of crazy mind. That's actually a really good way to identify like i almost got you one dude i'm gonna get you really yeah no like you can actually buy dr fauci bobbleheads the kind of person who has this yes or like those candles those votive candles oh yeah where it was like saint oh jeez oh my gosh he'd be a great guest i don't know if he'd actually say anything, if he'd just be defensive. We could even get him on the show. I think from today's hearings, especially with U.S. Senator Rand Paul, it's pretty clear that Fauci is not used to being asked any tough questions.

He was hammered by Rand Paul, I believe correctly so, on very important issues, on a lot of these emails, on a lot of these documents. And Dr. Fauci's response was, it's not true. There's people that don't like me and threaten me. I mean, does he know he's talking to Rand Paul, who literally was attacked by his neighbor, who was literally shot at? That was his argument. That's not an argument, Dr. Fauci.

Lay out your argument, present the data, present your information, and be able to reach across the aisle and talk to the other side. He has never done that. He only does softball interviews where the pundits, literally family-friendly show, do adult things to him with their mouth. All right, all right. Too much. I'm not going there.

Hold on. I didn't see it, but you mentioned Crowder shouted us out. Yeah, so right at the end of his publicly available show, he mentioned that we've been swatted more than Fauci has. Like Tim Pool's been swatted more than you have, so quit complaining. I appreciate the shout out. I think it's pretty clear.

When Dr. Fauci's on the corporate media, which he loves to be on, he always gets softball question. He always gets massage. He always gets, Fauci, why are you so great and awesome and super incredible and helping save the world? That's literally the type of questions that he's asked. And they answer questions for him, too.

They'll say things like, I was curious your position on the virus because a bunch of right-wing channels were lying by saying X, Y, and Z. And, of course, we know A, B, and C. So would you like to reiterate what I just said, Dr. Fauci? Yes, that's absolutely correct. The droplets and the masks. Exactly. And I think today's hearings proved that there wasn't any kind of real discussion. It was very testy. And I think it's pretty clear from everyone watching that Dr. Fauci doesn't have an argument here. And he's definitely on the wrong side of the larger debate that's unfolding right now with what a lot of people are thinking and were afraid to express. But now it's finally coming out to the limelight, as, of course, everything that's being exposed right now, the supposed conspiracy theorists were literally saying from the very beginning of this. They were censored on big tech social media.

They were denied having a voice in this conversation. And now those conspiracy theorists were really just spoiler alerts as, of course, everything's coming true. So in my 1 p.m. segment, I opened with a Princess Bride reference. I love that movie. It actually was hard for me to get right.

I had to try recording it like 10 times. I opened with, Fauci fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is never get involved in a land war in Asia and only slightly less well-known victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous of which is never get involved in a land war in Asia. And only slightly less, see, slightly less well known is never hold up a piece of paper on television because you will become a meme. You see, I couldn't even do it right now after all that practice.

But that's actually one of the funniest takeaways from that moment. Fauci actually picked up a piece of paper, which I will not do. And it said, it's a picture of him, and it says, fire Fauci, and he's pointing at it angrily, and I'm like, yes, we agree, Fauci, thank you for this pantomime of what we all should do. But it was funny, too, because it was Rand Paul's website, which is fundraising, and he was like, it says, fire Fauci,

and you can give $1 two dollars five i'm like this is a great pitch like he's advertising for it so i i don't know the whole thing was just ridiculous but what i love about fauci's responses to rand paul is the way i describe it is he's like rand paul goes dr fauci you were were engaging in gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute through funding EcoHealth Alliance. And Fauci will be like, no, we did not. The example I give is like Fauci's explanation is Rand Paul says, you put a door in my bedroom. And Fauci says, it's not a door. It's just a large piece of wood on hinges with a knob that when you turn moves a piece of metal which allows you to

open on the hinges and enter the room. And you're like, bro, you're describing a door to me. That's how he does the gain of function. It is not gain of function research. It is just the creation of chimeric viruses to increase transmissibility. You're describing gain of function, Dr. Fauci. No, I'm not. That's literally what he did.

That's crazy. I think this guy should be arrested. I'm not even kidding. Absolutely what he did. That's crazy. I think this guy should be arrested. I'm not even kidding. Absolutely. Subpoena, questioned thoroughly, release all the documents, release all the studies that he's done. And when you truly find out what he's been responsible for, there's no going back to the official narrative that he has set on the American people. Because you learn about things like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in his book, The Real Anthony Fauci, talking about how people were horribly affected by his studies, whether it was orphans, whether it was monkeys, whether it was beagle puppies. There's a long trail of just horrible misdoings by this man,

and I think it's more than time than ever that we hold him responsible for all those acts. Y'all, I want to buy a bobblehead event. Oh, yeah, let's get a bunch of them. Let's get different ones if we can find them. I almost couldn't because it's like inviting the devil into the house. It's hilarious. It is funny. Like, you know, we'd have it for the opposite reason that they would. We've got to get a Kyrie Irving bobblehead, too.

I mean, that's kind of cool, though. He's awesome. Yeah, but if I was playing, that would be funny. Yeah, they let him play again. Yeah, he's playing. Can't stop the signal, man. The money was more important than the pandemic, I guess. They couldn't have enough players because the players that were vaccinated kept getting COVID.

And they had to bring in the unvaccinated players. And this is not just happening with sports ball teams. This is happening in hospitals. This is happening in supermarkets. There's even official government notices saying, hey, if you test positive, just show up to work anyway. Literally, there's supermarkets telling people to do this because of the staff and labor shortages in major institutions. And we're at a point in this pandemic where the unvaxxed can't get work. The sick that are testing positive are told to go back to work.

That's absolutely crazy. It's actually very, very normal because this was only supposed to be 15 days to slow the spread anyway. You're not supposed to shut down the economy, and this is the economy gasping for air. We can't survive if we don't bring in anyone that may or may not have tested.

It doesn't matter at this point because our survivability is more important. It's like when you said people were climbing out of the bomb shelters even when the bombs kept dropping in London. You've got to get back to life at some point. Yeah, so last night, Mike Rowe pointed out, in the UK during, what was it, the Blitz?

Bombing of London. After a few days, people were like, okay, the bombs are still going off. I guess it's time to get back to work. Because you couldn't just stay locked in your basement. You would just wither away. They were using Zeppelins, right? The Germans were like, no. I guess it's time to get back to work because you couldn't just stay locked in your basement. You would just wither away. So even with what was it? They're using Zeppelins, right?

Yeah. The Germans were like, they were using Zeppelins for sure. For observation. I don't know if they were dropping bombs from Zeppelins, but they were dropping bombs on London. People are like, eh, back to work and bombs are going off. Stay calm. Carry on.

I think we're at that point. They can rocket. I think we're at the point where hospitals are just like, okay, we can't function anymore. Just bring back the nurses. Bring back the unvaccinated nurses. Bring back Kyrie Irving. Bring back. Thank God, man.

That's the natural flow of any disease anyway, of any epidemic is eventually you get back to it. Let's talk about psychological operations, my friends. We got this story from the Financial Times. Psy-ops are a crucial weapon in the war against disinformation. Well, this is clearly fake news because mass formation psychosis isn't real. Oh, yeah. It's not real.

AP told me so. Reuters said it's not real. For those that watch Joe Rogan's podcast, you need not hear me explain this, but for those that missed it, Dr. Robert Malone brought up how in the early 1900s or 30s, people were trying to understand how it is that these authoritarian regimes took power, namely Nazi Germany.

And he mentioned something called mass formation psychosis, where people were all basically fixated on something. They were hypnotized. All of a sudden, the media comes out claiming it's not true. Google changes the search results, so you're not finding it. And now it's funny because you had many, many stories over the past several years from mainstream and corporate publications saying that Trump was hypnotizing people. But when, you know-

Even from the AP? The AP said that. Even from the AP. And so now you have, for the Financial Times, psychological operations are a crucial weapon in the war against disinformation. But far be it from us to claim that there's manipulation and hypnosis and propaganda. You know what the craziest thing to me is? When I would explain to people that there's a field of hacking, hacker culture called social engineering. The overwhelming majority of hacking that you hear in the news is actually just social engineering.

Someone's not typing away code and there's like, you know, smiling, laughing faces appearing on the screen, eating the numbers like ridiculous graphics. Hacking is almost always some guy pick up a phone, calling the bank and being like, hi, I'm John, a branch manager. It's, you know, at bank number 3942. I'm looking for your IRS, you know, a verification number and just tricking people. That's what hacking tends to be. This, when I try to explain to people this, they always just say, oh, that would never work on me. Never work. If it wouldn't, then why does it exist? If you can't

be manipulated, why does Coke spend so much money buying advertisements? So when they come out and say mass formation psychosis, of course, it's a real thing. Of course, people are trying to manipulate you every day. Now, the Financial Times is advocating for psychological operations over COVID misinformation, which brings me to what we have to deal with, the censorship, which is a prime component of this, making sure people can't share ideas. Sometimes the ideas are so dangerous, they'll shut off a live stream midstream. They'll ban a channel outright with no strikes because the information can't be allowed. Well, sometimes it's not even that they're dangerous.

It's just that they're misinterpreted, which is a problem. That there's a human that's capable of misinterpreting a message and then banning it. But this is different. This is army psychological operations literally using the power of information denying information lying about information making up information in order to have political games this is psychological warfare against the american people that the financial times is calling to be instituted here in the united states and they use sweden as the perfect example because in sweden they have the swedish psychological defense agency that couldn't be more of an Orwellian name than it could be.

But they are out there not only to monitor what's happening online, not just the political discussions, but they also are there to launch counterattacks against their believed falsehoods about vaccines, immigration and other very important issues. So they also talked about in this article how they use this psychological operation to deal with political tensions in Europe. So this is an important distinction to understand here. Financial Times is saying Sweden's doing this. We need to do this here. We already do this here in the United States. A lot of this is classified, and I think a lot of this is very evident

when you see the same kind of regurgitated talking points, the same kind of narrative, and anything questioning getting outright censored and banned. There's also, of course, people planting fake stories and fake disinformation in order to throw people off the original trail. There's a lot of things happening here. And I think once you institute psychological tricks by the U.S. Army to push an agenda that only clearly benefited the billionaire class. The billionaires are making more money than ever. This is something that is absolutely concerning. This is something that is absolutely worrying. And this is something that we need to realize is happening here in the United States on a huge level already. This is what we see with

the banning of the Hunter Biden laptop story on Twitter and Facebook. And so sitting before us, we got two people. We got the CEO of Rumble, and you guys are, is it fair to say you're anti-censorship on Rumble? Absolutely. What you're seeing right now. But you have to explain that. Anti-censorship? Yeah, you ban content, don't you?

Well, absolutely. Yeah, we do. And we have policies that have been in place since 2013, and we haven't moved the goalposts since that time. Obviously, terrorist organizations, promoting terrorist organizations, incitement to violence, child pornography, pornography, all that stuff's not acceptable on the platform. But what we're seeing here right now and kind of why you've seen companies like Rumble grow is not because of the terms and conditions that we put together in 2013. That really has no effect on what has happened. What you're seeing is that these companies, whether it's Google or whether it's Twitter, are now becoming arbiters of truth. They're being asked or they're being forced or they're being demanded by, whether it's journalists or governments, to basically determine what's good and what's not good.

Imagine me. How irresponsible would it be for me to be the person that's going to tell you what you can or cannot say? I went to university. I dropped out in third year. And you want me to be that person? That's irresponsible. You want the CEO of YouTube to be that person that determines what is right and what is wrong? Well, they're scared of losing advertisers, I think, is a big component. I do think that there is absolutely a national defense component. We've heard tons of stories

about federal agencies going to tech firms and saying, you have to do what we tell you, and if you tell anyone we told you to do this, we will destroy you. Yeah, gag orders. Someone asked me to kind of ask you, will Rumble volunteer information about its users to regulators and law enforcement, or will you guys demand a warrant? That's one of the questions that someone was really interested if you could answer. Yeah, we're not going to just hand over information. It's got to go through the proper channels. It has to be legally done. And if there's a subpoena, we'll follow the law.

In all cases, we have to follow the law. That's our duty. At Mines, we have a weird position. Well, interesting. It was if it's legal in the United States, then it's legal fine on Mines. It's part of the terms. And that meant like state law, like what state were we incorporated in? I think at the time was Connecticut.

So it's Connecticut state law. But then you'd get these things like lolliporn, which is like cartoon porn. And the people look young and they look under 18, but it's cartoons. So there's no human. There's no, it's not illegal, but it's devastating to smear a website with that stuff. So you're like, well, we have to do something about this. And so there's this clause, you can ban anything at any time. I mean, pretty much any network can ban anybody at any time.

Yeah. When we started websites like 20 years ago, that's like a standard term that every lawyer will put in. So it makes things easy. And that's one of the problems, right? Is that when we started Rumble, we have these sets of terms and conditions that were just so standard on the internet. Everybody had pretty much the same terms and conditions. But that's where everybody wants us to have that conversation. They want us to have the conversation around the really fringy stuff and all that stuff. But that's not what's happening here. That's not why companies like Rumble are growing. Rumble is growing because something more overt and egregious is happening. And that's

because you can't even have a conversation that you have at your dinner table anymore, an open conversation on the internet. Think about this. Think about what we're doing right now on YouTube. We can't have an open conversation here. There's a lot of things we cannot talk about that if these mics are off, you could talk about. That we will at timcast.com in the members only segment. And that's the craziest thing that we have to do that. And interestingly on iTunes and Spotify and other platforms, they're actually much more lax. Spotify is actually fairly strict because they've got internal people who will ban you and there's no appeal process worse than YouTube. But iTunes just goes, hey, look, we don't host any of the content. We're just linking to it.

Yeah, I think that's Google podcast position as well, I believe. And if someone violates the law, the state should get involved here, not, of course, the arbiters of truths, a middle person that's going to say, well, this idea is bad for you. That whole concept is patronizing, and it's very disrespectful to anyone paying attention, in my opinion. There's situations where the law is bad, and you want to, not necessarily, well, Nazi Germany, for instance. Well, I'm just talking about death threats and the free speech laws that we have on the books.

If, for instance, a law got passed that was so insidious and we're like well we have to violate that law because that's corrupt we can't absolutely that it's hard to to make a social network the one that's like we're going to uphold that and let people do and we're going to let people violate the law because then it's easy to find out where they live you know who owns that site you know where that data is hosted i i'm very nervous about centralization of authority um holding data on a centralized network of any kind whether it's email addresses um search history because the nsa can just go take it well let me let me ask the more data the worse right you guys yeah maybe there's a diminishing return on that but yeah you guys are based in canada we are that's not good

not good especially with the legislation that might come down in the next couple of years. It definitely is not helpful at this point in time. Well, so, I mean, you've got hate speech laws in Canada, right? That's right. If the government of Canada came to you and said, you are hosting illegal content, you must take it down, would you guys take it down? If it was illegal, absolutely. But illegal in Canada? Absolutely. I'm not going to jail so this so this means that like a misgendering i think that's one

of the laws in canada so one one of the things that we uh that we're doing is that we're headquartering down in sarasota florida we announced that a couple months ago that's a that's a big move that that we're going to be doing as a company. And super excited to go to Florida. Better weather, too. I actually would prefer the Canadian weather over Florida, to be honest. Really? Absolutely. What?

Yep. Well, if you're a snowboarder or a skier, then, yeah, I can understand that. I can always put on more clothes. I can't take all of it off. You can never put on enough beanies. That's right. Sweating's good for you. It gets rid of a lot of waste and hazardous stuff in your body.

It is. But Florida's good in January, February. I lived there for a year. It was brutal. Nobody goes outside. But in Canada, you've got some months and you've got long winters where you just make snowmen. But I digress. The important question here is there are a lot of people signing up

on Rumble right now. We're talking about psychological operations. We're talking about whether companies are willing to break the law. Obviously, Luke is saying if it's legal content, it should be allowed. But where you're at right now in Canada, I mean, have you been forced to ban anybody on hate speech or anything like that by the government or any? No institutions come to us uh with respect to that uh but i can tell you that you know we're the legislation that is going to come that's that i think is even more concerning

is uh bill c-10 in canada where the they want to have the government actually regulate what kind of content you are displaying and uh CRTC. And think about that. They're going to control what you see now. Whatever that may look like. That's the PSYOP, man. It's in full progress if that passes. And then there's other legislation that's being proposed now. We haven't seen it, but that could happen in the next year

as the Trudeau government is continuing. So the best thing for Rumble is just at this point is to be prepared for that situation. You know, we'll be in Florida by this year. So if I could just ask you on a follow-up question, if you're in Canada right now, the Canadian government says take this content down, you will. But if you move down to Florida, right, and you incorporate there, and the Canadian government says I want you to hide this video from our viewers will you get rid of those videos when you're not in their jurisdiction so jurisdictional issues is a whole different thing

because you have the uk that has one set of laws you have canada that has another set of laws you have the us that has their set of laws and we have to find a way to to meet the laws of of every country and this this gets so complicated when you think about it. Like as a startup, imagine a startup having to like have lawyers help you in every single jurisdiction and fall. It makes it so difficult. The barrier of entry just to enter this market is so difficult to be like YouTube

and to compete against YouTube. You need like significant financing, significant legal help. It is a lot to navigate. It's so complicated, and it makes it so hard, but we're lucky that we're in a really good place right now where we have a pretty good team,

and we're going to follow each jurisdiction the way it needs to be done. So if Canada says, get rid of this video, and you're in Florida, you will? I have to look at the situation and the scenario i can't you know let's just say someone misgendered someone on on a rumble video the canadian

government says we want you to take that down you're in florida what do you do so at this point i i don't have an answer for that because we haven't we haven't come up with that that policy we haven't looked at that um and one of the things that we want to do as we're growing, like I said, we've had a policy since 2013. It's been virtually the same in spirit all the way through. The key for us is to never move the goalposts like these other companies. Every two weeks, you're seeing them change. But we're also not good enough because in 2013, it was one world. And in 2022 now, it's a whole different world. So what we want to do is, after I did the podcast with Viva Frey and Robert Barnes, we had some chats after that.

We want to bring the community in. We want to bring guys like Robert Barnes and Viva Frey to help us develop this in a way that stays in the spirit of free speech as much as possible and really be able to handle these jurisdictional issues that are there, these app store issues that are there. We want to do it in a way that it's almost better if the community helps us develop this than one single authority like myself saying, this is how we're going to do it and this is the best way. Yeah, I'd like to build an app store. We're in talks to do that with viva and and robert barnes and uh we you know i i want to bring in as many people i want to seek your advice too like how do you

handle app store issues and policy in terms of conditions like these are such tricky things it's a cabal i mean let's be let's be real the a little. It's a cabal. I mean, let's be real. The Silicon Valley operates like a cabal. When Minds gets one tiny infraction that's negligible, they'll be like, we're going to knock you off the app store, whereas Twitter just does whatever they want. I think, I don't know if that's true. Porn. Particularly

porn. Was that public, that story? Yeah. Minds was often on the app store dealing with porn issues, whereas Twitter just had porn the whole time. Allows it. was that's unbelievable when you look at the double standard and and that's that's totally unfair how are we supposed to compete as a company if mines can't you know get the same rule set that twitter's getting or facebook's first thing you do is acknowledge it which we just did and then you got to start building a system where that is not part of the system, which is like a decentralized, uh, open free software metanet. I agree. And you know, decentralization is a huge key, but I think even before that right now,

and this is one of the things that we're really focused on is we got to build, we got to build infrastructure because you can't turn anything on without the infrastructure. You saw what happened to parlor. They got turned off overnight. And then once you have the infrastructure in place, common carrier-based infrastructure, then you can start building things. And you can really kind of take all kinds of different businesses and really build off of that.

If you want people to help you build, and if you want to build a community, you've got to build a lot of trust. So there's a big question. You guys got a lot of institutional money that usually corrupts companies. What plan do you have to show that you won't be corrupted? And what can you offer the people who are coming to you as transparency and oversight that you will treat them differently than YouTube did? Yeah, no, that's a great question. So one of the things that we did when we decided to merge with CFEI is we went out and raised money on the premise that we're going to be immune to cancel culture.

We're going to be restoring the Internet to its roots by making it free and open again, building a cloud that's going to be as close to a common carrier as possible, a rumble platform that is not going to censor. That's what we told investors. That's what we raised money on. That's what we're doing. That's what we went to Cantor Fitzgerald for. And we now, if we will be one of the first companies to enter the public markets once this merge concludes, on that premise,

we're not going into the into the public markets on the premise of a google that requires you know all these other things we're on the premise that we're going to be immune to cancel culture and if we don't live up to that then we now have a massive liability on our hands we have no choice but to stick we put the stake in the ground on that premise twitter was the free speech wing of the free speech party yeah big money we need we need to bypass fiat basically well twitter twitter initially when they got started they joked they were the free speech wing of the free speech party so they made all the same statements and promises youtube used to allow uh the craziest videos

pranks involving violence. And so I think it's really easy for you to say, like, here's our mission statement when you're growing and competing. But what happens when you reach that plateau where you're now on a similar level and all of a sudden you've got investors, you've got government interests, you've got Congress breathing down your neck. All of a sudden you're like, it is easier just to get rid of this and not fight. Yeah, in certain cases, you might think that. It all depends on the person that's there. Can you make corporate bylaws barring something? That's a good question.

I don't know the answer to that. Can we maybe make a pledge towards transparency, oversight, free speech? Well, one thing we did do, and I think this is unprecedented, is that after we announced the merge with CFEI, we had a company ask us to demonetize Dan Bongino. And instead of complying with doing that... Gave him a raise. Yes. We did. a raise. Yes. We did. You cloned him.

You finally released the clones. You respond to them. We're giving him 5%. So what we did is we canceled Tremor on Rulie and Tremor Media. They cited that they saw content that they didn't like, and we asked them, where's that content that they don't like? Does that violate our terms of service? No response.

And we said, basically, if you don't provide us the information that violates our term of service, we're effectively canceling. If you want to appeal with us to bring ads back on Rumble, let us know by this date. So it's on advertising. And we canceled one of the largest advertising networks on the planet because they tried to cancel Dan Bongino. That's cancel culture. Now you're...

No, I'm just kidding. Are you aware of the ESG score? Not particularly. I think that's with respect to environmental. So this is the environmental, social, and corporate government score that a lot of bigger financial institutions like Blackstone use as a way of funneling money into, of course, big companies. So to comply with that, you have to push a certain narrative, have certain beliefs, have certain amounts of people based on their identities and their race. And there's many different things. But they essentially, the big money guys come and say say you guys got to play by these rules you guys have

a good score you comply with our agenda you get more money you get more loans what's preventing you guys from being affected by the esg score well and blackstone like if blackstone came and said we'll give you a bunch of money would you accept it well they they i guess can't they just publicly go and buy the public shares on the market isn't that how it works they they have the option to do that they know what we're all about if they if they're supportive of our mission and what we're doing and the creators on our platform go ahead but like at the same time you know we're we're not gonna i'm we're not gonna bend our mission i'm not gonna bend this mission i have roughly 85% voting control,

and I'm not going to bend for changing this mission. The mission is to restore the roots, to create that free and open Internet we once had. What will happen is Blackstone, like State Street, big investment firms will collude to get like 20% of the company. They can't. There's only 11%, roughly 11%. Available, 11% available.

And then canters are roughly two to three. It's all public, this information. So you're only selling 11% of the company. I'll have about 85% voting control. It's all public on the site. You can kind of see the breakdown of the current holders versus, our current holders are a large portion of this, I think.

How big is your board? So I'm putting that together right now. I'm working really hard. Is that public? It will become public, that information. I would imagine that these companies will try to get somebody on your board, and then once they're on the board, they start to see discontent with other board members when you're not around,

and that's how they'll try and get you out. That's what they did to Dorset, I think. I have 85% control. Voting shareholder voting control. So that allows me to... I think the rules... I don't want to speak out of line, but I think the 85% allows

a lot. Like you could just kick somebody off the board? I don't know about that. I don't know about Canadian law, but it's not even that simple in the United States. In the United States, you still have to convene a meeting. The meeting has to be – There's process.

You have to abide by process, and you have to do everything by the book. But when you have 85% voting control to appoint boards of the directors, that's a significant controlling interest in the company. And it allows – it really allows us to protect that mission. But I also think that the bigger protection is not just me having that control. It's really drawing a stake in the sand of what this company is, our shareholder base, whoever is going to be buying Rumble, it really believes in what we're doing. I'm not sure if institutions, will

institutions be interested? They should be because it's going to, I think this is the future of the world. I think freedom is, you can't buy that. That's something that we need on this planet more than anything. Are you ever going to sell your stock? And if you do,

how much stock would you sell? That's a great question how should i answer that one um no so like at this point you know i'm all in and it what i'm seeing on the what i'm seeing on the internet and what i'm seeing how this internet has changed in the last 15 years um really really it's it's really more of a mission now than anything else in the in the world and i feel like we're we're the tip of the spear of really protecting the free and the open internet especially if we really build this infrastructure out and uh you know we get we really support a lot of businesses i i think that that's going to be a really important a really

important factor in in the next couple years and I really need to go all in on this. This is not about selling out and going out. Yeah, the networking thing is huge. If we can somehow build a meshed network, maybe with devices like the Freedom Phone or a sort of phone where we can host our servers, I think you might be the guy to lead

because I know your history in building servers and your interest in building up the network. I don't know if I have enough faith in people, be it you or Getter. I think that for the most part, whether people want to acknowledge it or not, they're moving only in the direction they can move in. So for Rumble, for Getter, for even Mines, there's an opportunity in that YouTube is killing conversations. You know, they make it impossible to have meaningful conversations.

It is harder and harder every day. And it's fascinating when I see how many channels will get a guideline strike over similar conversations we'd have. But obviously, we're a big show. YouTube's probably scared because that's that's the way the game is played that's the way the machine works youtube can only do what the culture will tolerate so what i mean by that is i fully believe like with what i saw at vice there will come a point where unless you put in legal bylaws or restrictions or something i don't even know if

that would work to to be honest. It's only a matter of time before Rumble becomes YouTube in the exact same way. But that doesn't mean right now what you're doing is bad. It means there's always going to be a new market opportunity for someone to bring back real and raw conversations. Yeah. I also think being private is more dangerous in a sense. Being public is going to require us to be transparent about what we're doing. And when you go out and raise money from shareholders on a specific mission

on what you're going to do, the second you go against that mission, you have liability. So it's a different standard when going public. And I don't know of any companies that are trying to go public that are saying that they're going to be immune to cancel culture. What happens when you get inundated with press? We do. And they say bad things? Every day. And it negatively impacts your stock price?

It doesn't. But what happens in five years? Let's put it this way. In five years, you end up with an overt communist, you know, on Rumble, who's building a big following, saying as close as he can, calling for insurrection and revolution without crossing any legal lines. And then you end up with tons of people just being like, yo, this is really bad. You know, this guy is purposefully manipulating the platform he's doing all these dirty things you need to get rid of them and then all of a sudden all these stories come out and

everyone says you guys you are you are allowing something evil and wrong and then you end up getting you know negatively impacting your stock then the shareholders revolt and say why won't you get rid of this guy he's clearly breaking the the rules. And then you ban him, right? We're going to ban someone that doesn't violate our policies? Not going to happen. If they're – so perhaps, and perhaps it's easy to say, the point I'm bringing up is – Like if he doesn't violate our policies, we're not banning. Doesn't your policy say you can ban anybody at any time? I don't have that in front of me.

I'm pretty sure it does. Most everybody does. Even if it. I'm pretty sure it does. Most everybody does. Even if it does, let's say it does. He's not violating any of our policies. We're not going to do that. I'm not going to do that. That's not something we're going to do. I can hear what you're saying, and perhaps that's as far as we can go.

You say it won't happen. I say I believe at some point it will i just feel like when you open the door to any public investor for any percentage when you start getting in you know shareholder revolt anger you know saying you are not staying true to your mission you're you'll have to abide by what the the people in your company the mission the mission is to keep it free and open and that that's the mission. So these shareholders that are not interested in that shouldn't be holding our stock. They shouldn't be part of that.

They should sell. They should get out of it because that's not what we're doing. It's not free and open to allow communists to advocate for the complete dissolution and destruction of the United States. If there's incitement and violence, that's a different story. But what if they're organizing Antifa rallies that have resulted in violence? They've never explicitly said to do it, but they've said everybody should come down here, wear all black, and then all of a sudden mass violence keeps breaking out. I guess the question is, are they breaking our policy or not?

If they're breaking the policy, then they're gone. If they're not breaking the policy, then they're not gone. And the NSA is going to be all over that one. I really doubt it. They'll be deep in your system watching. You might have an employee that works for the NSA for all this money. So how would you do it? What's the best way to make sure?

Decentralize the data so that you don't have control of it. So that you can't ban it. So here's an idea. What Ian said. That's a good thing. He's right. He's right in so many ways. And one of the things that we want to do, and I've talked about this before, is imagine that every creator on rumble, you get access to your data. It's your data, not ours.

Imagine that. That's something from YouTube for 20. That's something. Let me give you one. Let's say somebody here, here's your number one policy. You may not post or transmit any message which is libelous, defamatory, or which discloses private or personal matters concerning any person or entity. Let's say Vosh. He's not a journalist, but let's say one day he decides to go confront Stephen Crowder in front of his home and says, Stephen, you said this, that, or otherwise, and I want an answer from you.

And you can see his home. Would you said this, that, or otherwise, and I want an answer from you, and you can see his home, would you ban him for that? Or me doing that to David Rockefeller because I did that outside David Rockefeller's house. But I'm using Vodk as an example because Vodk is a big user on your platform. If someone shows up in front of his house where you can see his neighborhood and everything

and he's questioning him, would you ban that? So if it violates our policy, we'll ban and like but the policy is very vague we're asking does that violate your policy so this is filming crowder's address so this it's a good question because like the policies that we had since 2013 are vague and we we've changed them to tighten them up a little bit to try to get a little bit more transparent a couple of years ago, actually a year ago, and they're still not good enough. It's pretty much the same thing in spirit. So what we've done is we're going to, that I mentioned before, is we're bringing on Robert Barnes, Viva Frey, and a bunch of other free speech advocate lawyers to help us really define these in a way that everybody can understand it.

For me, this is lawyer stuff. If I go take it to our internal counsel, they're going to make it as general as possible, vague as possible to make it as accustomed and as good as possible for Rumble. But what I think we could do differently and what I want to do differently is take it to the community. Have people like yourselves, have guys like Robert help us build this and really come up with a solution and transparency around these things that are vague because you're right, they're vague. Absolutely. But that's the nature of us starting this business in 2013,

not us building this platform in the environment in the last year. So that's something that we're going to do, and we're going to address it, and we're going to make it clear. I'm going to make it as transparent as possible. But I also think this is the conversation everybody wants us to have because they're very difficult questions to answer. So whatever my policies are here, how do we make sure that we stay in the Play Store and in the App Store?

Because they have policies that are more vague than that. And it gets worse. Well, look. First, I want to make sure it's clear. You're only getting these questions because you're allowing them. I mean, Google, YouTube, Facebook, they wouldn't even come here and have these discussions,

which is why it was so insane that Jack Dorsey actually sat down and had a with with me and joe but uh that being said you have a rule number five you may not post or transmit any message which is abusive inciting violence harassing harmful hateful anti-semitic racist or threatening and so there's interesting questions about what abusive means what harassing means what harmful means i understand you mentioned vague absolutely but i will point out that you've already adopted the narrative of the left Silicon Valley tech giants. You've all, but before we've,

before anyone's even joined your platform, the rules you already had in place already align with Silicon Valley. Not entirely. That's not true. So the, what you're looking at is the same type of stuff that was on YouTube 10 years ago. We didn't really of stuff that was on youtube 10 years ago we didn't really have that many problems on youtube 10 years ago did we

uh no no i'm not i'm not sure they had these specific of rules definitely you could get away with a lot in the early days but once google in terms of like racism and anti-semitism that was on their platform you were not allowed to do that. So when it comes to the last two years, what's happened in the way they've moved and changed their terms is, like I said, this is a conversation they want us to have because there's no answer to it. And these are just general terms and conditions. And we're going to address this as good as we possibly can by bringing in the community to help us do it. But the real conversation is Rumble didn't grow because these terms are there and we're banning people.

We're not growing because there's racist content on Rumble. That's not part of Rumble at all. Rumble's growing because people can have conversations that they could have at the dinner table. Yeah, but that's now. But you could ban people in the future. And then if you want people to go to your network and put their blood, sweat, and tears

and whole careers into your network, you got to give them some reassurance. Absolutely. So I think the vague terms and services are one issue, but I think there's two possible solutions here that I think might be able to provide that. And I might be totally wrong about this, but I think having oversight, transparency, and accountability, especially when it comes to destroying someone's livelihood, someone's entire business, someone's entire work, would be something that should be done in a transparent way where people get to decide what to do and not some mysterious overlord that mysteriously just clicks off? And then second, would be possibly

having you or someone a part of the larger corporation signing a contract pledging, I will not sell this stock. I will uphold the First Amendment. And if I don't do so, I will have to give all my stock to the users or chop off my right hand. Would you be willing to sign an agreement like that saying, I promise not to sell the majority of my stock. I will uphold the First Amendment legally. I will reassure you what you're reassuring us today on a contract. Would you be willing to sign that contract? So who am I signing that contract with? The answer is- Just the general public, your users. The answer is- So instead of the user coming and

agreeing to your terms and services, you are agreeing to a term to services for the users. I would love to do something like that. That's a great idea. I think that's a really good idea. To the circumstance that you will chop off your right arm. We can make a vague one right now. I have a pen and paper. We can make a vague contract right now.

Would you sign it right now on this show? What I was thinking was... Wait, hold on. Would you sign it right now on this show if What I was thinking was... Wait, hold on. Would you sign it right now on this show if I say, I, your name, will chop off my hand if I violate this and sell off the majority of my stock? Well, you can't put it that way. You can say yes and you can say no. But will you sign this right now? That you'll chop his hand off?

Come on. I have a question. You want to ask a serious question. Sell off your stocks. Or give off your stocks to the user base. Well, that would just make the problem worse. Yeah, yeah. It's like coercion, basically.

Yeah. I got a question. As you guys were talking about how you should handle your network, I realized no one should own the network. Rumble should be part of a group of companies that are building a network that is there for all of us to utilize and that maybe we can help upkeep it, all of us. But I think of Minds, it's not Minds.com. That's a social network that was built by Minds.

Minds is a tech company. So that's, I think, the goal is to build a network that none of us control. So one of the concerns I had when locals, you guys acquired locals, which was Dave Rubin's subscription service. It's all good, right? It's good that these platforms exist. It's good that you guys acquired Locals, which was Dave Rubin's subscription service. It's all good, right? It's good that these platforms exist. It's good that you guys exist. We use Rumble for our website as well.

We post our content here because it's all a net positive. And aside from the fact that we're asking hard questions, the reality is I trust you way more than I trust YouTube or any one of these other platforms. And I don't think you guys will end up but no it's not it should be about trust we should never have to trust that someone has like it's not personal at all i don't want to be in control of other people's it should right i'm i right right right that's not the point i'm getting to i'm saying for now you know like i definitely would would prefer uh you know use it i prefer your uh guidance on or moderation over youtube's sure. But the issue I have is that centralization is still the main problem. Dave Rubin launches Locals and he's signing people up and everyone's like,

okay, I'm going to sign up for this. And I'm just, I'm confused by it. I asked some of the people who signed up, I'm like, how have you solved the problem? You haven't. And they're like, well, I know Dave. And I'm like, yeah. And I've spoken with the CEO of Patreon on numerous occasions and he's made a bunch of assurances to me and they're like well I trust Dave and I'm like okay well if you don't trust the guy from Patreon because he's banned people you do trust Dave you're still in the exact same position where Dave can make

all the promises in the world just like Jack Conte did and then you still get your income nuked because when push comes to shove Visa approaches you know you guys and says, if you don't ban Luke Rutkowski, we will terminate financial services to your firm. You will say yes. That's not true because locals, your subscribers are in your own accounts, not ours.

We don't control that. What does that mean? It means when you get a subscription on locals, it goes into your Stripe account or wherever account connected. We don't have access to that. And so what will end up happening is there will be some level of infrastructure because this is what actually happened to Patreon. They had, I think it was MasterCard, went to Patreon and said, ban this guy. His name was Robert Spencer, I think it was. He's a researcher on jihadism and stuff like that.

They said, ban him or we will terminate your use of MasterCard financial services. Does Rumble and Locals use Visa and MasterCard financial services for any part of their infrastructure? The subscriptions I threw the – Oh, that's not what I asked. I didn't ask about subscriptions. Not Rumble specifically, no. Not Locals.

Rumble as a company doesn't use Visa or MasterCard? We use, for example, Stripe. Yeah, they use the Swift payment system. So how does your company pay for things if you don't use Swift payment? Are you talking about Locals subscriptions? How that works? I'm talking about Rumble and locals as companies.

Do they ever make transactions using Visa and MasterCard? Oh, absolutely. And so what happens when they come to you and they say, ban this person or else? That's what happened to Patreon. So if that happened to a locals user and we had to ban a user because they they asked us to ban whether we would do it or not this is a whole different story they've already tried doing that with dan bongino and we told him to pound sand um but let's say we we did that just hypothetically uh you still have your account with all your subscriptions and your revenue it doesn't get nuked it's in your account

we don't control it that's yours yeah and that's so you can go port it and build your own website and run it. Well, that's great. That's how that's that's how it functions currently. That's that's that's good. But I still feel like, you know, one of the things that I found disconcerting just in the long term process, I think everything we're hearing right now are good short term solutions. But, you know, Ian pointed this out. We're effectively building the exact same the exact same machine we've already had problems with you know you have you mentioned you have the same rules that youtube had back in the day

and i don't disagree with a lot of the rules to be completely honest i don't want anti-semitic or racist crap you know floating all over the place but i also i i question why it is that we're in this position where certain people aren't allowed to express their opinions, even if their opinions are really, really awful. You know what I mean? It's a very difficult position that nobody wants to accept, but I'll put it this way. While I personally find anti-Semitism, racism abhorrent,

I don't feel that I should have the authority to tell people that they shouldn't be allowed to express their opinions because, in my view, sunlight being the best disinfectant, challenging those ideas is important. Except if you have too much mold, then sunlight even isn't going to get it out of there. That's a good point.

It cakes everything. But the real question, the harder question is, how do you get around the stores to access the larger side of the market? We need our own. We do. This is my point. Asteroid or something like that? Absolutely.

But we've got to get there first, though. This is my point, though. How do we get there Absolutely. But we got to get there first, though. So this is my point, though. How do we get there? Build a device where we can have it preloaded? Visa and MasterCard have their own terms of service, which include much of the exact same language. Banking institutions and even companies you've never heard of and don't realize you use have these same terms of service. So we've already seen people debanked and so the issue is even if you're pledging we're not going to do these things you're still a part of the big machine and so for us the discussion

we had you know when patreon banned carl benjamin and this exodus happened they banned lauren southern and they banned carl benjamin sargon of akkad and uh immediately i get you know jordan peterson and dave rubin are talking about doing the subscription service, and I said that doesn't solve anything because what happened to Patreon wasn't like Jack Conte, the CEO, one day said, I don't want Lawrence on the platform. He got external pressure from business – from company partners, and he was put in this position where he's like, I don't know what I'm supposed to do here because he's not a political guy. Carl Benjamin got banned, and he broke his promise that he wouldn't just terminate somebody. So they decide to make centralized platforms. Well, Ian and I had this conversation, and the only real solution is complete decentralization.

It's good that you guys, that have been on Locals, you have your own Stripe account with all your subscriptions, so even if they're banned from Locals, they still have Stripe. Stripe would have to ban them. That's great. That's fantastic. But ultimately, in the end, there needs to be, in my opinion, a way for people to ultimately control their own hosting so that they can't be banned.

Because I'll say this. It does still feel like a half measure. It's good. Their revenue won't be completely purged. But now they have no product and they have no place for it. I suppose they could then try and build a website. So what Ian and I had discussed was, okay, can we create a service that just instantly gives you your own website? So taking it one step further, how about, this is what I thought Locals was going to be. I thought Locals was going to be that you'd sign up and you would just get the code and you would have your own website with your own domain and you guys would have no ability to ban people. Then I saw very quickly that it was the same thing as Patreon,

but now it's your personal Stripe account where the accounts are getting logged in, which, again, better, but still a centralized platform. If, you know, look, when I talk to some of the people that use Locals, I ask them why they didn't just set up their own Stripe account and their own website and never have to worry about it again. And they said, I don't know how. And I'm like, okay, that's a good point. But that also means if you guys ban them, they don't know how. They're not going to just magically decide, figure out how to do it. In which case, to me, the solution was build a tech function, a service, an app, software that allows people to just click a button. They set up their own website and boom, it's done, ready to go.

Five minutes, tops. Yeah. And then no one can ban them. Yeah. You're still going to have to solve for the hosting, the video streaming. There's a lot of things to solve for in that. Yeah, they'll pay for it. And they'll save money, too, because the amount of money that Locals takes from their

creators exceeds the amount they'd spend if they did it themselves. Are you sure? Absolutely. So what's the economics there? Where are you running? What kind of... The percentage that Locals takes from the creators is more than it would cost for them to host their own content.

So let's look at that. If you're making... There's economies of scale for everything, right? Once you get to a certain scale, it makes sense to build it on your own. And let's say you're doing $10,000 in billing or $1,000 in billing a month. Does it make sense to build it on your own if Locals is taking $100? Yes. Are you sure?

Yes, because if you – Why? In the long term. So managing, hosting, streaming... Yes. Putting it all together. 100%, absolutely. Because when you...

You don't think it's worth your time. 100 bucks. So what you're doing right now is you're convincing people to give you their long-term prospects to basically put themselves in a position where they're beholden to your platform. That's not true. They're restricted. They own the subscriptions. They still have it.

If they could port their Rumble account to the Fediverse account that we're building and back and forth. Or the locals account, you mean. Yeah. They can. Yeah, that's a good function. They have all the subscribers. We don't own them. They have them.

That's absolutely fantastic. So whether they decide to do it today or tomorrow, they can do whatever they want. But they need a service that can function like Rumble that they can move it on to. So that's what move it on to. So how do you notify all of your subscribers that you're no longer on this platform and that now you're moving to a new website? The reality is you email them and it doesn't work. It doesn't work because, you know, look, I've been doing this for a long time. I saw how much money was lost by all the people who jumped from Patreon because you will never be able to get 100% of people subscribed to you to be notified. It's just not possible.

We've had issues where we weren't doing the show, for instance, and I'll put on the YouTube channel, for this reason, we're off tonight. And I get emails like crazy, like, where's the show? And I'm like, wow. I just assumed people would go to the YouTube channel and see the message which is right there on the page but they don't know you could have it when they go to the banned account it sends instead of saying this account no longer exists it says this account has been banned and can be found at and then the user is allowed to put in like a link where they're going to go i don't know if that's if that's considered a full ban but that'd be cool so uh for those that are asking because i see in the chat um we we do have was it a functioning

alpha it's not quite i wouldn't call it it's the chat, we do have – was it a functioning alpha? It's not quite – I wouldn't call it – it's not something you can play with yet, but we're quickly building out the early alpha. We're pre-alpha right now. Here's the issue they end up having with everything is that if someone – when someone comes to me and says, we want X percent of your revenue, and then you can be on our website. My issue is for a one-time investment that is a small multiple of that number, I never have to worry about any of these risks ever again. I completely own everything, and we're good.

If you sign up for Locals, it's better than Patreon in that you mentioned. It's your own Stripe account. But then in the future, you're giving – what's the percentage that locals take? Let me ask you. 10%. 10% of your revenue. Let's say that you decide you want to make a living doing this content. And locals says we're going to take 10%.

You say it's just $100. It's $100. Except what happens if they hit a viral video and within six months they have 600,000 subscribers on YouTube, for instance? That means they end up with like 10,000 people paying 10 bucks a month. Now they're giving you $10,000 per month for hosting service, which would cost them maybe $500 or $1,000. And sure, you can leave whenever you want. Good luck telling all of those people to port over to a new website to change their routines. It's extremely difficult to do. We could synchronize it so that once they start getting enough hits and they're making

10,000 and they're paying a thousand too much, they want their own server. Now they can just kind of move it over to their server, still be on Rumble, still be found. All the analytics can still go through Rumble, but they've now hosting their own thing on their own server. I hear what people are saying too, you know, because we've talked to people and they said it's good to be on the platform because there's like-minded people and it's a community. And I'm like, okay, you know, that I completely understand. I just feel like, you know, for you guys, obviously you need to make money. It's a

business. It's got to generate profit. 10%, I think is just, man, I guess I'm too much of a lefty in that capacity. To me, it just feels like you're ripping people off. Really? I think you're both making good points because at a low threshold, there's a value to it. But once you exceed a certain number of subscriptions, it's overly costly. I think it's a lot of work to manage your own site and hire someone and then connect it to AWS. First of all, AWS is a lot more expensive than typical hosts like Rumble.

We launched our website for, what was it, like $1,000? That's what the software we're building basically does that for you. Yeah, and if you were to use Amazon for streaming video, it would be significantly more expensive than it is using Rumble. We do use Rumble. I know. I'm very much critical in a lot of respects, but we absolutely do use Rumble. I know. I'm very much critical in a lot of respects, but we absolutely do use Rumble. But we make it very cheap and we make it very accessible in that sense that if you were to go to any other provider, Amazon is significantly more expensive.

How do you cheapen it? Well, we own our own stuff. We're not reselling anything. It's coming straight off of us and we have our own stuff. We're not reselling anything. It's coming straight off of us, and we have economies of scale. When you have economies of scale, it really brings down the pricing and allows you to be aggressive on things, a lot more aggressive than anybody else. As in like virtual servers that you open up?

Yeah. So like we have – Rumble does so much bandwidth that we're able to get it at prices that are from carriers that are much cheaper than what you'd pay. I think if you enter Amazon, you're paying at $0.08 a gig, a rumble at scale when you're coming to us, and you're like eight times cheaper. Well, this is fascinating, actually, because you are a rumble and you are locals, and we use rumble for our members

only content and we post to Rumble because it's a great service and it's substantially less expensive than your competition and I don't have to worry about censorship to a certain degree. Like obviously we're asking these questions but Locals

is still something different and having used your infrastructure and seeing how cheap it is to host per gig and then to see how much locals takes from the creators i'm like you see it's kind of it's kind of strange to me seeing both sides of it right yeah it's significantly better than twitch or youtube um on locals uh in terms of the cut that it's taking it's it's actually quite low but so so for me when um you know obviously i was looking at locals before you guys acquired them i know how much it costs us to host these videos i know how much it's going to cost us if we were using vimeo at one

point we switched to you guys because honestly it was it was better and vimeo is risky for our business because of their staff. So we don't want to do that. But so I'm looking at, we put up a video for members only. Here's how many views we get in the members only video. It's actually, I'll tell people who are listening,

it's decently expensive because we have so many subscribers, but the subscribers are paying. So the costs, it covers the cost of all that. It allows us to have journalists and make this robust website. Then I take a look at, you know, so, so very early on, when we were looking to build the website, I see all the costs on mapping all this stuff. And I've been in this business for, you know, a decade plus. And then I see locals and they're

like, here's how much we want from you to do the same thing. And I'm like, oh, that's absurd. That's obscene. The amount of money you'd end up taking is ridiculous. And then I see all of these people signing up. And so I'm all of these people signing up. And so I'm not trying to drag you guys because I think it's good that Locals exists. I think it's good that Rumble exists and we use Rumble. I'm just saying I think the long-term solution is actually not any of this.

Well, the functionality is definitely a long-term solution, but it's the way that it's co-built. Like if it's proprietary, then it's going to get co-opted at some point when you either decide to quit or die or sell or whatever the hell something's going to happen eventually one day you'll no longer be so then it's going to go into somebody else's hands and if they control it then we still need the function we just need access to the functionality 24 7 uninterrupted

people should be watching your stuff and subscribe yeah and one of the things about you know the rumble cloud that that we're coming out with is that you know this is a service that uninterrupted. People should be watching your stuff and subscribing. One of the things about the Rumble Cloud that we're coming out with is that this is a service that can support whatever you guys are building. If you guys are building something that's good for deploying it, people don't have to use Locals. They should have choice.

They should be able to use other things. You could use Locals too. We're providing that Cloud and we'd love to work with you guys on that, too. And when you say that cloud, can you explain exactly what is the hardware? So we're building POPs across the United States. What's a POP? Oh, now.

Okay. Better question for someone else on my team. But I think it's point of something. And so we have data centers across the U.S., and we're putting in our own hardware, our own switches, and connecting to carriers. Is this post office protocol, POP, POP? No.

Okay, something different. I think it's something different. So you're building servers? Yeah, so we're putting in our own hardware, our own switches, routers and stuff, and data centers across the United States, multiple different places. We're looking to have, I think, five in total by the end of this year five data centers yes um we're we're at three right now so uh it's it's a big job it's something that uh

we we took on early last year and uh we're trying to accelerate that as fast as possible and then make that service available for what you guys are doing. I understand some people might not like the 10% fee, and that's totally fair. If there's another solution that can do better than that, then that's great for the market. And if we can be a provider on the bandwidth side because we're the best and most competitive on that side, that's why we should win. I think another way to counter that, if you are taking 10%, showing people where the money's going to,

I think will also provide a level of oversight. And some people gladly being like, yeah, I'll give 10% when I know exactly what it's going towards. And I think there's another aspect here that is worth mentioning here because a couple of years ago, Julian Assange released information that was accurate and he got punished by PayPal. He got punished by all the credit card processors and they shut down his ability to raise funds for his independent media organization.

It would be very interesting to ask you what you would do in that situation, but not even just going there, would you be potentially interested in providing some kind of alternatives to the current financial system regarding cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin that's there as a plan B just in case if they do squash down on you, you could say they can't shut us all down because we have this alternative which is related to Bitcoin or cryptocurrency? Yeah, so on the crypto side, we need to do something there. And I've been looking i've been trying to study it uh i i think i want to whatever we decide to do needs to provide immense value to the creator and to the user not that's key number one and i think a lot of the stuff that you're seeing out there right now is providing immense value to whoever creates that token yeah um and i don't really like that so until like we can find a real viable way and

i'm looking and i'm seeing what people are launching in the video space and a whole bunch of different other things um once once there's something there we need to adopt it and when that technology and tech gets there we we need to definitely adopt it probably there um i think what's happening what you're talking about the ponzi scheme is where a creator will create a bunch of tokens and they hold most of them in their own personal wallet and then slowly they get send them out there and they just become massively rich but like what mines did is create a utility token that it keeps in an account that it doesn't have access to none of the people have access to it and every day it spreads out like 10 000 tokens to the community there there was a really good i forget the site they tried to

compete against twitter um it was like something that started with a b i think like michael errington and a few of these uh anderson horowitz was behind it and it was like what they did is they basically said like every single creator will have its own token and based on like how much following and how based on how much following and how much people want to donate to that creator, their token has a higher value and price by creator. I thought that was pretty interesting. You'd have to build software

where you could spin up your own token really quick. Someone could spin up a utility token that allows like, if you pay in subscriptions to the user, you pay 10 bucks a month. But if you pay them with their own token, you get a discount of their choice. They get to set a discount level.

That will create utility value for the token. And then it's not a security. So the SEC isn't as concerned about it. Yeah, well, we definitely need to look deeply into the whole crypto world on Rumble and figure out blockchain and figure out what is the best way to approach that. It's just, we're, we're,

we're in, I guess the early days of it. And, uh, I haven't quite seen the perfect solution yet. I don't know if we're going to wait for a perfect solution, but something that's going to provide some really good value to the community on the minds token.

It's one token gets you a thousand views of, of basically advertising on the network and on library. You put tokens into a video and then that elevates it in the search algorithm, the more tokens it has. So it's like a passive boosting. If you could blend those somehow or utilize both. I think the big challenge with any platform, no matter what you do, is that you're responsible for the platform. You are allowing people to post stuff, whatever it is. And so what happens if someone posts an address?

Now you might say, oh, Section 230, but you're still going to get sued. And so a lot of these companies just don't want to deal with it, and that's why you end up in this position. I think personal identifiable information or something like that and violates something i don't know i'm not a lawyer but i think the one of the issues with youtube for example if you are an independent reporter and you confront someone in front of their home they'll ban you if you're cnn you get away with it why because youtube's going to be like cnn this is your problem you deal with it and cnn is probably going to say sure we're worth billions of dollars we don't care either no one's going to be able to do anything to us.

But it's different in that in reality, if you're walking down the street and you're waving a sign, it's public property. So who are you going to sue? The person waving the sign. On social media, they'll sue you anyway. Section 230, be damned. So I think this is one of the reasons many of these platforms are going to implement these rules no matter what. That if you're James O'Keefe and you walk up to the CEO of a company

and say, you know, we want to ask you some questions, you're gone. It's why central control of authority seems to always lead to this totalitarian crackdown of its own network. I think that's why you just got to get rid of the control of the network and kind of oversee its construction and survival, but allow it to function on its own.

I think maybe... Community policing and stuff. We need to have some kind of, I don't know, I don't know if Twitter or... It's got to be some kind of public utility communications platform because we don't use the city hall anymore. We don't use town hall. We don't have these public commons. It's controlled by interests, people who either, you know, can afford to build the platform

or who do so but don't want to take responsibility for the things put on the platform, in which case, until we can say this is a public, you know, institution, you can't sue anyone for hosting it, but you can sue the person who said it or did it or file a complaint against them. That's when I think we actually start fixing these problems. For the time being, YouTube will get – Twitter gets sued when someone does something. You know what I mean?

Even with Section 230, they're like, so we don't want to take responsibility and put ourselves at risk for hosting this. So until we – I don't know. I don't know if nationalizing is the answer. But until we have a platform – No, nationalizing is not the answer. No, absolutely not.

Having a national platform would be cool in addition to other. Canada tried that with their CBC. But I understand your aversion to nationalization of a platform. But there is a value to having one national program as well. Right. But take a look at a public park. The police can come in and tell you to leave. You can complain about it.

They can arrest you. It's annoying. And sometimes people like they shouldn't be allowed to do it. But who are you going to sue? The city, I guess. Okay. Well well that makes sense if the city does something specifically but if someone is in a park holding up a sign with a picture of like a fetus or something well you can't do anything about it people are allowed to express themselves what's wrong with common carriers why isn't that solution then maybe that is a solution like verizon at&t

they're uh they they're they're deemed to be common carriers they're they're monopolies that's one problem with them but they are but they are common carriers they don't stop you from buying the phone no matter who you are but they will send your text messages to the nsa without a batting an eye and the security camera filming the park will send all of the video and as you're walking down the street the surveillance state is a problem in of itself itself. But that could be the solution. I feel like that's one of the things that we want to make RumbleCloud closest to is make it close to as common carrier as possible. I think that could be a solution.

Yeah. We'll build a parallel system and people will be like, oh, that works better than this old carrier system. This is the internet telephone market blended into one. Instead of them trying to sell it give people phone numbers What the heck like that's 20th century tech. You don't need a number associated. Yeah What if everyone just started in some getting phone numbers? You just got like your handles or your name or you like you gave me a call, you know I had Tim cast and then they press it like I don't I don't give out my phone number more

It's like hit me up on Facebook and stick like message me on some of these I'll video chat you on element Yeah I only get I only get phone calls from people who want to talk to me about my car's extended warranty or who are talking to me in Mandarin for some reason. I had an idea before we go to Super Chats, Chris, regarding if you're headquartered in Florida and Canada gets you like, hey, this is illegal in Canada. So we're not going to show it in Canada. Take it down. You tell them what we do at Mines. You tell them, no, it's legal. This is our terms. And if the country wants to ban Rumble from the country,

they will. And that's unstopped. And that'd be hilarious if Canada was like, we're already banned in a few countries. China, I believe. China banned Mines. Iran, probably. I'm not sure, but definitely China. We got to notice that we got shut off

in China. Google built their own Chinese, I don't know, Dragonfly? Is that what it was called? Their own Chinese Google? Didn't they go and do that when Google didn't want them in the country because they were too free? Yeah, it led to a revolt. But when Google, when China didn't want them.

That's an interesting thing. You cut off the service in the country that doesn't want to play fairly. And once they become like that, then maybe you cut them off. Social media. That's an interesting idea. It's more powerful than countries, social media companies. Like if, imagine Google said, hey, we're not going to operate in Canada

because you don't operate around the First Amendment. That'd be crazy. That sounds pretty good. I like that idea. Let's go to Super Chat. If you haven't already, get that Super Chat in. We'll be reading as many as we can. Smash the like button.

Go to timcast.com, become a member. We're going to have a members-only segment at timcast.com around 11 p.m. Let's read what you guys have to say. Jemis says, Please shout out the January 23rd anti-vax mandate protest with Dr. Robert Malone. Do you know the website URL? I don't.

What is it? March Against the Mandates. March Against the Mandates DC, right? Yeah. I don't know. Google search March Against the Mandates, and they're doing a big protest in DC. So good for them, man. It is defeatthemandatesdc.com.

Oh, nice. I believe that's it. Gerald Armstrong says, how many times do we have to hear Ian say, I co-founded mines? Probably in the next year. Probably 37 more times. Well, I think what people need to understand is- Maybe less. Maybe 20, 17 more times. Ian, I think what people need to understand is Ian hasn't met these people. And so if they're trying to understand

the context of what he's saying and they're like, I met this crazy hippie guy, Ian, why should I listen to him? And then he says, I actually worked on mines. I'm trying to balance when you're on TV every night. Basically, if I told the story a year ago, in my mind, I already told you. Everyone that's listening, you already know. But a lot of times we have new listeners, so you want to

reiterate. And sometimes Tim will tell you about Occupy Wall Street, just in case you haven't heard. It's kind of a meme that it can be overdone too. So if I'm overdoing it, I'm sorry, but I'm still going to tell people that I'm the co-founder of Mines. All right, let's read some more. We got the meaning of nerd. He says, hey, Tim, the meaning of nerd here. Thanks for checking out my video. I'm really glad you liked it and thanks for sharing it on Twitter. It helped out a lot. Keep inspiring people

the way you have men. P.S. If you're looking for an editor, I would love to offer my skills. We had a few people ask for jobs and then it turned out they weren't American and we can't hire people

who aren't American citizens. Yeah, we just can't do it. Man, if you guys really want to get angry at google and facebook look at how the the the you know how the visa system works right like h1bs yeah how the big tech basically just floods the entire system so that they get them all and you can't even bother that's just the way it works i guess all right john hensley says love rumble is there any way to get the mobile app to play always on top and minimized or with screen off? Coming.

Coming very soon. That's an important one. We get a lot of people saying, like, I want to listen to the show on the website. It depends on Android. That's already happening, I believe. And on iOS, you can have it set. I have to double check, but that should be available in this new launch that we're coming with the app on iOS. If you use the Brave browser on mobile, my understanding is that it can play audio from

the browser when it's off. Yeah, try that. That's really fantastic. It's useful, yeah. I love the Brave app. They're doing a lot of great things. Those guys are great. Are you guys integrating with them at all?

Have you had a chance to chat with them? We haven't chatted with them, but we've been looking at it as well. Is there any other cross-collaboration with any other kind of alternative, independent kind of platforms or in the works or possibly that you might be even interested in? No, I'm interested in collaborating with anyone for sure. I think there's a lot of great ideas out there that we need to look at. Any specific companies?

I haven't. I like Brave. Brave has been very interesting in terms of how they've been doing their crypto and the BAT, the BAT. I did look very closely at that. We're actually looking very closely at that right now. Gap's went off the Dissenter browser,

off of the Brave browser. That's pretty cool looking. Did you guys hear? Quebec is doing a vax tax? An unvax tax. A tax for the unvaxed instead of mandating it. That's crazy. That's insane. I have friends in Quebec that I'm praying that they're going to be okay because they're

talking about hefty fines for individuals who just want bodily autonomy. That's a new level of tyranny that the world hasn't seen. It's like evidenced bodily autonomy at this point. That's a new level of tyranny that the world hasn't seen. It's like evidenced bodily autonomy at this point. There's a lot of evidence that the vaccines don't stop the virus, that it doesn't even stop the spread of the virus. It might reduce symptoms. So there's reason to this. It's not just, don't get away from me for no reason. There's a lot of data. Nick Rose says, Tim, do a Fauci impression if he actually were a guest on IRL.

After you ask him a question, what his response would be. That's a job for Seamus. If Seamus of Freedom Tunes wants to write that up, that could be fairly funny, I suppose. Dr. Fauci on IRL. Tough interview.

All right. Nate Parrott says, my work plays for news in break room. I walk past and the screen was black with white scrolling text that stated the channel was showing restricted content weird strange what is that about all right where we where we go anzu love says watch rogan's show with adam curry he clears up malone's explanation of mass psychosis. I love that guy. Yeah. Adam Curry, man.

I love that guy. OMG Puppy says, watch Century of the Self by Adam Curtis. Did it say Curris? Same person, right? Great documentary about social engineering from Freud to neurolinguistic programming used by Bill Clinton to campaign. What's the documentary called? Century of the self

here's an important one daryl 90210 says ask about the success of salty cracker pulling viewers away from youtube please interesting yeah so uh i like i think uh what a lot of salty cracker character so they they have channels on YouTube, I believe. And what they do is they shut off the stream after 30 minutes and ask them, or I'm not sure the timing. I don't want to say that because I don't know. But, yeah, they use Rumble, and they're quite big. Yeah, they get tens of thousands of viewers, I think.

Is that what it is? Yeah. Wow. There's a bunch of them. Crowder does a significant amount. What does Crowder get when he streams on Rumble? He was, in December, he was hitting 50,000. Wow.

I think he just came back today. I didn't take a look. But he's back on YouTube today. I'd like to do a live stream on Rumble at some point. It's all set up to do that? Yeah. You bet. That'd be fun. Well, I suppose people have to just take a look stream on Rumble at some point. It's all set up to do that? Yeah. You bet. That'd be fun.

Well, I suppose people have to just take a look at Salty Cracker's content on Rumble and YouTube to better figure out because, you know, to get a better assessment of what the channel's about and why they're so successful. I do notice that people post the salt emojis all the time. Right. So I'm not completely unaware. Weepy says, I don't buy for a second that social media censors in order to not scare advertisers. Where else are they going to advertise? Advertising isn't pulling out of spaces with that large of an audience. I completely agree with that.

Absolutely. And also, if you're advertising with Google or YouTube as an advertiser, you have the right to say, I don't want to advertise with this content creator. You could easily do that through the back door. You could easily do that through, of course, just clicking, hey, I don't like this idea. I don't want it associated with this and this and this. You could easily do that. You don't need to censor people's voices. Chris, Bill Altman texted me and was like, ask Chris a question. So I'm going to ask you.

Hey, he's cheating. Why do you use Google Analytics, which spies on all users for Google? It's a good question. We've got to get rid of it. We went through that with Mines in the early days. It was just so easy to use. It's what we used when we started in 2013. And these are legacy things from when we started in 2013 that we definitely need to move. What's your roadmap to move away from that?

Well, we want to dump that. That's for sure. And there's a few other solutions out there and open to recommendations. If anybody wants to super chat some ideas, we're open to ideas on that front. All right. Captain says, what is the policy on gun videos on Rumble? YouTube has been demonetizing gun videos that have high-capacity magazines and more. It is stifling gun culture that was created on that platform.

There's no policy around that. There's nothing in our terms about guns. So if I bought like a hand-cranked 9mm Gatling artillery thing that Luke's trying to get me to buy, we could put it on Rumble and just ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, and there's no issue? I'm not too familiar with what that is, but if... I'm not entirely either, to be honest.

Luke sends me this thing, he's like, hey, Tim, buy this. It's a weapon that goes pew, pew, pew, pew, pew, pew, pew. That's what it is. Hand crank,

nine millimeter Gatling gun. There's quite a few channels with respect to hunting and guns and stuff like that on rumble. No issues.

Another person asked a similar question. Restless Medic says, I'm a native Floridian and my fiance is Canadian. I'd much rather live up there with him because like Tim said, I can put on more clothes if I'm cold. I can only take so many off before it becomes a felony.

Yeah, but how much communism can you deal with? That's the larger question, right? Exactly, exactly. I would take a permanent 100-degree day at maximum humidity and freedom over communist snow. Well, you can't even leave your house right now in Canada. That's nuts. Like, everything's shut down. You can't go to a restaurant.

You're stuck at home. Like, it's house arrest. Are you staying in the States for a while? Well, I'm here right now. I'm heading to Florida tomorrow, so I'm excited. Freedom is a great thing. Like I said earlier, when the plane got off the ground in Canada, it was a good feeling.

Nice. The Real Fallen Demons says, I'm a very heavy Mines user, and it's great. But Ian, mate, the UI is bad. I'd build my own client, but there's no real API for it. If you could give devs more than just source, we could make it amazing. Well, man, I haven't worked

at the company in a while. Bill's listening, apparently. What's up, Bill? I love you. I don't know. So you're looking for an easy way to spin up the system because you don't have the API. Is that what he said? Well, he wants to make his own UI. I hear that a lot from people that the Minds

UI is just bad. It's just a bunch of back-end code. Well, the UI, it kind of looks like it's very clean and sterile almost. It's like a robot. Everything is straight lines and kind of boxes of information. That's not bad. It's just there's so much going on. There's a lot going on.

It's tough. You've got to know where to click. UI is really hard like we we have issues with our ui too we get a lot of complaints about that and you know when you're when you're a bootstrapped company we didn't get investment until 2021 it was like the first time i remember people laughing us out of the room in 2013 to say that we're going to compete against youtube um i'm sure they want to be in now but that's a different story but like when it came to ui it's uh you know we we really couldn't really forward that and get really deep into that until we could afford people that would that are really good and they're very expensive and uh you know we have that and now we're coming up with it so but like i understand that that's that that's a you gotta it's expensive There's a lot of people, really good talent that a lot of the big companies suck up.

And it's a tough thing to really get good. Yeah, and it's also like an artistic choice how you want to design your UI. That too. You've got sites like Drudge and Reddit that didn't really go into that direction of UI. And then you got, you know, nicer things like Instagram that came up with all these flat designs and cool designs, which people now desire quite a bit and TikTok and all that. So, you know, we're putting a lot of money into that and it's not cheap. It'd be cool if you could design your own UI on the website while you use it as a user. Yeah.

Well, what if things open and move things? What if you could log in and then while you're editing your profile put in like html code even like mp3 music maybe have like glitter and like hulk hogan like a space where you could do that yeah yeah you could like make like your own space your your space what would you call it your space moogle minion says ian have you read into exo politics if so do you have any book recommendations no I have not well maybe you should Ian

D.E. Poland says Tim being in Florida for one year makes you a snowbird tourist and we do go outside we also have springs with pure water Miami is southern New York so I lived in Miami for a year just over a year and in January and February I saw people all over the place throughout the year. And in January and February, I saw people all over the place.

Throughout the year, everybody was at Miami Beach. I saw them outside and all over the place. But through all these neighborhoods and at shopping centers, in the summer, everybody was indoors and the windows were soaking wet because the air conditioning inside, the humidity outside, it would condense. And then it was just all the windows were always drenched. And I'm pretty sure there's a statue of the guy who invented air conditioning in Miami. Is that true? I'm not sure. I was told that.

Probably. I think so. Yeah. Carrier or something? The guy who invented air conditioning gets a statue? Hey, man, good for him. I looked up what exo-politics is, the study of key individuals, political institutions, and processes associated with extraterrestrial life. Interesting.

Interesting. That's a real thing. Hodel Rodeo says Bitcoin magazine's live stream on YouTube was stopped and the channel was removed today. The channel was later restored. That is crazy. Man. I heard about that. An admin's mistake can disrupt a user's life, like their income. because the day your video goes up is when you get most of the views.

If it's demonetized for that day because of some idiot doing the wrong thing, it's just devastating to that. I got to deal with this all the time. And it's not even that's the automated system now. So it used to be that every video I'd make would be demonetized. And then they finally backed off and fixed this problem. But now you still get it. And what happens is I did like a video on Fauci and they said it was harmful pranks.

And then I've got to email Google. And then three days later, they get back to me and say, sorry about that. And I'm like, the video made no money. Three days later, I might as well not even bother emailing you. But the issue is the more videos get demonetized, the more they demonetize you. So you've got to send them all in and say, fix fix it if they had to pay you back for all the ads revenue

you would have made if a company had to pay back for miss misadministrative ship man but they're not making money that's the problem like youtube wants to make money they also have political issues for sure but they want to make money so they don't like it when you know when i get demonetized they were like oh we're so sorry this keeps happening to you it's the automated system and it's like yeah and it takes three days to get it fixed even when i can email google so that's that's on them i suppose they lose money whatever that's why i think you know rumble is good that's why we've set up the website that's why we're focusing on an editorial the editorial side of things we can't just think you know we're going to be on this platform forever youtube at a certain it's look it's 2022 we've been we've

been swatted we've been hit with a ddos attack good times what and it's it's only the 11th of january it's been a good month yeah how about that man so we've got a bunch of crazy redundancies and backup systems and everything like that security so. But it's just, you know, this is why we got swatted. All people notice as a cop walk by and then walk out because we do have layers of security here. All right. James Lamb says, I personally think it's great for overt communists to voice their opinions. Opinions shows everyone how bad communism really is. I agree.

Yes. Absolutely. Yeah, it's crazy. I saw Kim Iversonon tweeted she's like a center left youtuber that she's voting straight republican love her and then i saw vosh respond to a tweet about it saying this is totally you know unexpected and shocking or whatever and i'm just kind of like when the center left is jumping ship to join republic Republicans and you mock them on the way out. Are you just trying to lose on purpose? You know, I guess.

But Kim's cool. I'm not surprised she's voting Republican because so many people are like, I'm done with the mandates. She got red pilled hard the last couple of years. That was awesome. Well, it's not that it's the mandates. I mean, but yeah, that past couple of years, all of a sudden she's like, I'll vote for anybody who's going to end this. Yeah, we're having a vaccine. Yeah. Oh, good. I'll vote for anybody who's going to end this. Yeah, we're having a vaccine. Yeah.

Oh, good. I don't disagree. She's great. We need to build a cloning machine and bring a bunch of more DeSantis' all over the country so that we can end this stuff. I don't think Texas... Texas does an okay job, but it seems like that's mostly about cultural pressure. DeSantis seems to be on top of things, to be honest.

All right. Raymond G. Stanley Jr. says, we're a based audience. We see into the future. But DeSantis seems to be on top of things, to be honest, you know? All right. Raymond G. Stanley Jr. says, We're a based audience. We see into the future. Wow. I believe it. I like it.

All right. The Wholesome Grail says, How is it a free speech platform if they ban racist or hateful speech? Isn't racist speech still legal even if you don't like it? Not good if the free speech guy already has racism banned. Like I said, that's something that we put in since 2013.

We've always done that. We haven't moved the goalposts. We've stayed with the same moderation since day one and we need to be better and we need to be really transparent with these terms and we need to do something different than these other platforms really transparent with these terms and we need to do something

different than these other platforms did. It's, this is not something I predicted to happen. Um, in this world, this is something that, you know, things happen really fast in the last two years where they started banning all

kinds of political talk, et cetera. Um, but we gotta, we, we, we gotta come up with something that's new and something that's stronger and it's better and more resilient and more and more in line with free speech.

And that's what we're going to do. Yeah, like trying to administrate like gross stuff like gore or like racism because it's tough because in a free speech world, it would all be there. And anyone that wants to look for it's going to find it because they have the right granular search mechanisms. But in the social media world right now, it's like waking up in the morning and it's there in front of your face. And you're like, ah! And everywhere you look, there's just more gore. So unless an admin is there deleting it or blocking it, even though it's not illegal, people are going to be deformed by it. It's a new thing.

Humans didn't used to deal with this until 15 years ago. It's really one of the most complicated issues of our time right now is really kind of understanding this and navigating this in the way that we're trying to do. And I think our approach and why we've grown

is just being consistent and not changing things in the last couple years. I think one of the ways of dealing with this is just by letting people see what they subscribe to and not curating an algorithm. Would that be something that you guys be? That's what we're doing. We're a chronological feed. We don't have an algorithm that's putting things up based on how interesting your content or how many likes it gets or how many re-engagements it gets. It's a chronological feat.

That's all it is. And you guys will be changing your terms and services? Yeah. So we're going to bring on guys like Viva Frey and Robert Barnes, like I said, and we're going to work on coming up with like, whether it's like a constitution or terms, all kind of combined, something very new, something kind of built from the community more than ourselves. I would love to be a part of that process.

Absolutely. We'll bring you in on that. This is something we really need to solve for. And like I said, we haven't solved for it. We didn't even think we needed to solve it. Who thought we were going to sit here and worry about the First Amendment in 2022? There's that problem of being the guy who's like like we should allow people to be racist on our platform it's like nobody man i nobody wants that that's not why rumble's growing we don't allow that it's not there's not

even a percent of that doesn't exist on our platform so the challenge is you know when uh there oliver darcy of all people wrote an article about me when i said banning the alt-right was bad because it's a slippery slope. You want bad ideas to be fleshed out so we can challenge them. But to be the person who then comes out and says reinstate all of the racists and bring them all back have a lot of really bad opinions we just need a space where people of all different backgrounds and ideas no matter how awful or how good they might be they can they can have those debates i i think you know you know i really believe it's good to know who's bad and not hide them when you hide people that are bad that that makes them better yeah that doesn't help them i I mean, that helps them. It doesn't help us.

We should know everything about everybody if they are willing to scream it out loud at the end of the day. That's how I feel personally about it. When you guys are doing your terms revamp, check out the Manila principles. I don't know if you've heard of them, but it's like basically an internet constitution that's been worked on by the community. It's very cool. You know what Mines does, the jury worked on by the community. It's very cool. You know what Mines does, the jury system? I've heard.

It's cool. I don't know about Mines, but I've heard some jury systems. So what will happen is if a piece of content gets reported by someone, it goes into a queue, which is then sent to anyone that wants to opt into this jury system on Mines, and then it goes out to like 12 random jurors that then vote on is, does this violate terms or does it not violate? You get poisoned by bias in the jury. And then some people will say, I like this content. So, but they don't, they're not doing it right. Cause they're not saying, does it violate the terms or does it not violate the terms? And then, so there's noise, but over time you can appeal. Does it go through a minds filter first? Like minds thinks it's bad

and minds doesn't even touch it. And just a user reports it and it goes into this queue that people want to be a part of anyway. So it's not bothering anyone. And then we just, over time, if someone abuses their position in the queue as a juror, they're no longer able to be a juror. That's a really interesting idea. Maybe even having it go, like if, let's say a Rumble moderator wants to remove something, if something's going to get removed or someone's going to get banned, take it to a jury for the final outcome.

Except for if it's illegal. That's a really interesting idea. If it's illegal, you've got to get it out of there immediately. Well, if it's illegal, absolutely. Or put it into some sort of stasis or something. Depends. But also, I think that one of the issues with mine is the jury pool needs to be way bigger than 12.

I think so, too. I'd like to see it as 100 people or even 1,000. I mean, mine would be scalers. Whoever's available. Up to. That's a really good idea. I really so too. I'd like to see it at 100 people or more. Or even 1,000. Yeah, it has to be scalers. Whoever's available. That's a really good idea. I really like that. In fact, you can even have like a tab that says jury pool and you can opt in and then get like a blurred thing and says like, okay, click it to show the image because people have to opt in, have to go to the space. Maybe even you have it at the bottom because they're going to see some really awful stuff.

There's going to be some really bad stuff. Yeah. What you want to do is you want to kind of filter out the illegal stuff and the overt stuff. And then when it comes to the controversial and very vague stuff, then you take it to a jury. That way the vague stuff is determined by the community, not determined by any overlord. And if the jury gets it wrong, the user can appeal again. It goes to a new jury of all fresh people. If they get it wrong, the juror can appeal again a third time.

If they get it wrong again, then they can go to the admin. Then they can go to Mother Mind's admins and appeal. And so do a lot of people appeal it? Yeah, a lot of people think they've been wronged regardless, and they'll usually appeal it. But it's fun for the jurors, so it seems to be working really well. Yeah, I think as long as you have good protections for how you opt into the jury, because people are going to see some really nasty stuff. Yeah, 18 plus. Yeah.

And then maybe the jury should actually have an emergency hit. This is going to be... So it's like, does it violate the rules? Yes, it's gone. No, it doesn't. Are you wearing a seatbelt? We're solving the internet. Emergency admin notification.

Because if someone posts like a crime or like a murder or something, you need to be able to immediately be like, yo, this is beyond. This is like warning. It violates and is illegal. It could be a thing. Yes, perfect. Yeah. But I think, I wonder if like, it shouldn't even be, does it violate the rules? Should it be, should this be allowed on the platform?

That's another question. This one's more, is it, it's more like, does it define the rules? Should it be, should this be allowed on the platform? That's another question. This one's more, is it, it's more like, does it define the terms or is it against the terms? But should it be, that's another cool idea. I think we could experiment with a platform where it's like, people just decide, should it be allowed or not? And so someone could see something, they'll flag it. And then they'll be like, should it be allowed? And then a hundred people see it. And if the majority say it's allowed, it's allowed.

And then have the AI write an algorithmic terms of service based on the behavior of the... I don't know about that. 800 rules. It would be a free software. If a cat sneezes, you're banned for seven days. And then the AI takes over the world and then dominates all of human civilization. I'm so glad you're here. It's a lot smarter than everyone else, which, of course, could be the next nuclear weapon.

But that's another story. I just wish we had a platform that allowed all speech and allowed me as an individual to be responsible for myself and have discernment. I would love that. The problem is order because there's so much chaos that then the loudest mouth gets – If I want to subscribe to something, I'm going to subscribe to it. I don't have to subscribe to something that I don't want to listen to. But when Screamy Guy gets in the way and you can't even see the thing you – I'm not going to subscribe to him.

But he's in the way of you seeing what – No, he's not. No, he's not. I subscribe to who I want to listen to him. But when Screamy Guy gets in the way and you can't even see the thing you... I'm not going to subscribe to him. But he's in the way of you seeing what... No, he's not. No, he's not. I subscribe to who I want to subscribe to. He's not going to be in my way because I'm not going to follow him because I don't want the Screaming Guy in my inbox. What about the comments? I don't...

Free speech. Let them comment whatever they want. Like, I don't censor comments. People criticize me. Good. Great. I love it. Spam.

You know, we need comments. We need people... Spam. Spam. Yes. It's on minds. Fine. Let people spam. Good. Great. I love it. Spam. You know, we need comments. We need people. Spam. Spam. It's on minds. Fine. Let people spam. No. I'd be down to let you delete. That's my first

comment. No. I'm okay. There's a big difference between trolling and spamming. Trolling's fine. Spam's like a DDoS attack with comments. When people are speaking at a college and then someone goes in and starts screaming at the top of their lungs, I'm like, you can leave. It's a comment section, right?

So people get to upvote whatever comments they like and they don't like. So the chat we have, the one rule I say, I'm like, I don't care if you're saying whatever you want to say. I don't know. YouTube will ban you if you say something, whatever. But the spam is the problem because you're stopping other people from saying what they want to say. So I'm like, I want more free speech. If you're going to try and disrupt that free speech, then I think we can ask you to leave. I would respectfully kind of disagree and let it play out and have a little bit more chaos and kind of accept that and understand that.

I think spam is an issue for sure that needs to be addressed. But in terms of like I think the creator should be responsible for their comments and choose what they want there and what they don't want there that would be the the best i think yeah that's true too every creator every every creator you know controls their own space in their own home it's not my home it's your home exactly we got a whole bunch of uh super chats with salt emojis. The salty cracker. We should get him on the show because I'm seeing a lot of it. I'm seeing a lot of salt in the chat. He's really big on Rumble.

He's got a big stream on Rumble. Not the biggest, but he's definitely a big one. Right on. Who are the biggest users on Rumble right now? Dan Bongino is by far the biggest users on Rumble right now? Dan Bongino is by far the biggest. He crushes it. Crowder,

not there yet. He's not one of the biggest? The biggest live streamer we have on Rumble is Donald Trump. Oh, yeah, that's right. Yeah, that makes sense. So what,

did he scrap his network? He does 500,000 live streamers he can hit on his rallies. Wow. I don't think I, and that's post election but is that trump's account or is that yeah that's on donald trump's official account on rumble so they were building a social network are they just hosting their back end on rumble is that what that is

or is this a different thing yeah we'll be their cloud infrastructure for truth social oh cool but this is something different that he's using right now he's got his so he came on to rumble in june of i guess so six months ago he opened his official account on rumble to uh do his uh rallies and uh he hits numbers that uh will just i've never seen like and nobody's even close the power of uh of his live streams hitting hitting a half a million on rumble and he's not promoting it on twitter or anything anymore because he doesn't have any accounts so he people come they watch and and this is post-election too i can't even imagine if i don't think we would have been able to handle his live stream infrastructurally if it was a pre-election times but uh virtual we almost went down on his first stream we went went to like 100% capacity, and we were ready to shut off countries one by one just to keep the stream up in the United States.

That's how big it was. All right, everybody. Smash that like button if you have not already and go to TimCast.com. Sign up because we're going to have a members-only podcast coming up around 11 or so p.m. uncensored behind the scenes. Don't forget to smash the like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show, the URL, post it wherever you can if you really want to help us out. You can follow the show, TimCast.io

basically everywhere. Follow us on Instagram for clips. You can follow me at TimCast. Chris, you want to shout anything out? You can follow me on Rumble, Chris Rumble. I'm also on Twitter, Chris at Rumble, at Chris Pavlovsky on Twitter, I should say. And then the Rumble. I'm also on Twitter, Chris at Rumble, at Chris Pavlovsky on Twitter, I should say. And then the Rumble account as well, I think it's Rumble Video, at Rumble Video on Twitter.

Chris, thank you so much for coming. Thank you for answering our questions and taking the questions. I know a lot of other kind of big tech CEOs don't do that, so I appreciate you for doing that. And it's good to at least have this dialogue. Anyway, I have my own media organization called We Are Changed. It's available on wearechanged.org. I also made a very interesting video on lukeuncensored.com. Hope to see some of you guys there. And thank you so much for having me.

Well, you're welcome. You looked right at me when you said that. I like that. Bye, everyone. I'm Ian Crosland. Check me out at iancrosland.net. Chris, great to see you, man. Tim, I love you. Hi, Lydia. Hi. I Crosland. Check me out at iancrosland.net. Chris, great to see you, man. Tim, I love you.

Hi, Lydia. Hi. I'm still alive in the corner despite my coughing fit. Very sorry about that. I hope I don't have Omicron. You guys may follow me on Twitter at Sarah Patch Lids. Thanks for hanging out, everybody. We will see you over at TimCast.com in that members-only segment at 11 or so p.m.

And again, thanks for hanging out. Bye, guys.