Sensitive content
This media may contain sensitive content.
Video wird geladen...
Video konnte nicht geladen werden
Oil on my sensitive nipples while wearing the swimsuit pulled down... can't hold back anymore 🥵 오일 바르고 유두 자위를 하다가 마무리를 했더니 잔뜩 나왔어 💦 Part 2 - Full version on Fansly/OnlyFans 👇 #Sissy #Tgirl #NipplePlay #Swimsuit #Gush2 #MtF #男の娘
0 Kommentare
Keine Kommentare verfügbar
Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt
![Pyotr Kurzin Pyotr Kurzin , host of The Global Gambit podcast, published an interesting interview with Peter Zeihan Peter Zeihan about Russia's war against Ukraine. I found it quite compelling, so I decided to share its main points: ▪️ "[Putin] has another seven million people he can mobilize if he wants to. Granted, that is the last generation of Russian men under 30. That obviously comes at a huge cost. But the Russians really have not put their shoulder into this war yet. They have tried to treat it as what they've said - a special military operation. We have not seen the full economy mobilized. We have not seen the industrial plants receive the investment necessary for a mass expansion. And we certainly haven't seen the population mobilized in a way past wars involving either the Soviets or the Russians have. We are starting to see that now. It is not risk-free. There's no guarantee they win this anymore. But to think there's going to be a political break in Russia without a significantly greater economic dislocation than we have seen so far is being over-optimistic." ▪️ "For the first time, we're actually seeing the Russians on a military economic footing. While that is, from the capitalistic point of view, wildly inefficient, that doesn't mean it can't work. It means that for the first time in 5 years, the Russians are actually fighting like this is a real war as opposed to something that's a sideshow. That does have consequences. It means we have to have, among other things, a full mobilization. But to say that that's going to break the system, I don't know if I buy that. It just puts stresses in different places." ▪️ "We have to have a much sharper break. And that means the apathy has to end. The best example I can give you is when Prigozhin led his rebellion. He marched his people 1,500 kilometers to Moscow. No regular military commanders joined him, and no regular military commanders tried to stop him. That really underlined just the huge degree of apathy in Russia, even among the security services, about what was going on. While that means it's really difficult for Putin to motivate people, it also means it's very difficult for Putin to be motivated against. Until we have a situation where we don't just have defectors on the front, but actually people shooting their commanders, I don't see Putin in significant domestic danger." ▪️ "Five years on, and Ukrainians are not simply still fighting, but they found new ways to give the Russians a bloody nose and actually change the mechanics on the ground. With the new military technology we've seen this year, that eight-to-one ratio is being achieved regularly. For the first time in this conflict, we are finally at an even fight. That doesn't mean the Ukrainians are going to win, but for the first time, they're not losing ground. And that matters immensely." ▪️ "The Ukrainians are trying to change the math of the war in a very intelligent way. The [drone] technology is innovative. Since the Ukrainians are launching hundreds of these a day, we're in a situation where the entire Russian system is running out of anti-aircraft capability. It changes the math because now the Russians have to defend every square inch and absolutely cannot. Putin has redirected air defenses to concentrate around a few specific areas, most notably Crimea and Moscow, and everything else is kind of open. What we've seen in just the last couple of weeks is that the mid-range strikes that the Ukrainians have been doing since March, basically destroying the logistical tail of the military forces within about 300 or 400 kilometers of the front, have had such an impact that the Ukrainians are actually able to go on the offensive in zones that are mined and win. For the first time, the Russians just can't get more drones, more men, more fuel, more food within the battle zone at all. And that's now affected their ability to hold the line." ▪️ "The amount of economic damage that the Ukrainians cause is really deeply immense. We've had over 140 attacks now on 'shadow fleet' tankers in the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea in just the last six weeks. We are looking at the end of Russia's ability to export through the Baltic or the Black Sea. Conservatively, that's three to four million barrels a day of oil and product. They'll still be able to use, for now, their Siberian export route, but collectively, rail and pipe there is less than a third of what goes west. Long-term impact. This is the end of Russia as a significant energy exporter. Once this physical infrastructure is destroyed, the wells will be shut in, and most of them are mature wells that require foreign technology for their development. The Russians will have to re-drill them, and they can't re-drill them until such time as the sanctions are gone. The Chinese don't have the technology." ▪️ "Strategically, there is no version of an independent Ukraine that can function unless Crimea is part of Ukraine, or at least neutral, because it commands the access to the rivers that are the lifeblood of the Ukrainian economy for their exports of steel and especially grains. And if the Russians control Crimea, they basically control the north half of the Black Sea and can project power west and south very easily. But that assumes that they can resupply Crimea successfully, which is no longer for sure. With the mid-range drone strikes, it basically turned Crimea into an island that the Russians can't support, which means it turns from a springboard into a sandbag. The Ukrainians don't need to make a push in order to drain the Russians. They're just forcing the Russians to use all of their logistical capacity to try to reach someplace that they really can't defend anymore. It's a good strategy." ▪️ "For the Ukrainians to win, they don't just need to get Crimea back. They need to make sure that the Russians lose the military capacity to threaten them. And that means neutralizing or occupying the two Russian cities that are the logistic hubs that enable the war - Belgorod and Rostov-on-Don. We're nowhere close to that right now. But if those two cities are removed from the equation, it's not just that Russia loses the ability to project power west; it loses the ability to project power into the Caucasus. And then you're talking about the entire southern rim of the Russian state falling. And all of those barriers are then completely up in the air, and the Russians are too far from all of them and can't defend any of their territory. And whatever vector a future threat comes in from, the Russians just can't deal with it at all." ▪️ "At this moment, it's a question of whether or not and how soon the Russians can copy what the Ukrainians are doing with drones against two other developments. Number one, the Russians are finally putting huge investments into their ballistic missile capabilities because that's a technology that the Ukrainians have no defense for. The first large numbers of those missiles will probably come online in about six months. That's about the same time that these joint facilities that the Ukrainians are building with the European NATO allies and a number of countries in the Persian Gulf will also come online. So, we're going to have many more Ukrainian memory drones at the same time we have many more Russian ballistic missiles. This war is changing month by month."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2090500581333021162/amplify_video_thumb/2090500437518528512/img/Qq6d8pbtKfIuoVWL.jpg)
!["The label just says No Brand" GRWM w Desi Generated on Atlas Cloud Wan 3.0 Prime Esr upscale stitched together on ElevenCreative studio prompt Desi: South Asian woman, mid-20s, warm brown skin with natural, realistic texture — visible pores, subtle natural sheen, no airbrushed smoothness. Expressive dark brown eyes, defined brows, full lips. Long dark wavy hair, undone/messy at the start. No jewelry until the earrings beat. Gold jhumka earrings and thin gold necklace are her fixed accessories once applied. Environment — Desi's Bedroom: Modest, lived-in bedroom, soft neutral-toned walls, single window with sheer curtains, warm diffused morning light with real shadow falloff. Wooden/laminate flooring, small woven area rug. Flows from bed area to vanity/mirror corner to a closet/wardrobe area to a doorway. Bed: simple platform frame, unmade, muted duvet, mismatched pillows, folded throw, nightstand with a plain ceramic mug, analog alarm clock, small lamp. Vanity: wooden dresser, plain oval mirror, small ceramic dish holding her rings/studs/jhumka earrings, a plain glass jar labeled "NO BRAND" in small black sans-serif text, a plain wooden hairbrush — all visible on the surface from the start. Wardrobe area: simple open wardrobe/hangers with a small handful of plain unbranded clothing already visible. Doorway: simple wooden door, softly lit hallway beyond. Visual style (all blocks): Cinematic realism, not commercial polish. Soft natural film-like grain, warm slightly imperfect color grading true to real morning light. Skin genuinely textured, never smoothed or beauty-filtered. Smooth floating steadicam/gimbal camera movement throughout, cinematic framing sensibility, not raw flat phone footage. Audio style (all blocks): Warm, natural, close-mic room-tone quality, not sterile or studio-clean. Real object-contact sounds, natural room reverb on her voice. No music, no artificial sound effects. Standing negatives (repeat in every block): No AI morphing of any kind — no shifting, warping, or unstable facial features, body proportions, or object shapes. No items suddenly appearing or disappearing in frame — every object must already be visible in its place before she interacts with it. No over-polished or beauty-filtered skin — natural texture and imperfection required throughout. No overly clean, sterile, or commercial visual grade. No duplicate Desi in any frame. No identity drift from block to block. Every product/container shows either no text/logo or exactly the plain "NO BRAND" mark — simple black sans-serif on plain packaging. No recognizable real-world brand names, logos, or trademarked packaging/clothing design anywhere in frame. No extra fingers, fused hands, or distorted anatomy. No text overlays or captions. No music — natural ambient audio only. Mirror reflections physically accurate and consistent; camera never visible in any reflection. No sudden speed changes, no time-lapse compression, no rushed dialogue delivery. BLOCK 1 — [0:00–0:15] The Alarm, Waking, Yawn, First Line Continuity note: Opening block — no prior frame to match. Action: Dark, close frame on Desi's sleeping face, soft warm morning light beginning to catch her skin's natural texture. A phone alarm begins ringing on the nightstand. Hold on her unmoving for a real beat as it rings. Her hand fumbles slowly toward the sound, silences it. She lies still a moment longer, then opens her eyes slowly, squinting at the light. She yawns — full, unhurried, genuine — stretching slightly where she lies. A long pause settles after. Dialogue: (after the yawn, slow, groggy, real pauses) "Okay... (pause) ...so it is way too early for this..." (long pause, slow exhale) "...but let's get ready anyway." Camera: Static-to-slow-float — begins locked close on her face, only beginning the faintest float as she finishes speaking, ending the block just as she starts to shift toward sitting up. Block-specific negatives: The alarm sound must play first, before any dialogue or visible movement. Do not have her wake up abruptly or sit up quickly — the entire block stays in slow, groggy stillness. Do not begin the standing/sitting motion before the final line completes. BLOCK 2 — [0:15–0:30] Five More Minutes + Coffee Stretch Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 1 ended — Desi still lying down, having just finished her line, beginning to shift toward sitting up. Match her position, the room's lighting, and her expression precisely to Block 1's final frame. Action: She sits up fully, stretches with a real, full arms-overhead extension, laughs softly at herself. She reaches for the ceramic mug already present on the nightstand, takes a slow sip, holds it a moment, exhales contentedly. Only after finishing the sip does she swing her legs out and stand, unhurried. Dialogue: "Five more minutes..." (pause, small laugh) "...turned into not five minutes." (beat) "Classic." (pause, after the sip) "Okay." (beat) "...That helps." Camera: Smooth floating steadicam, holding a steady elevated angle through the stretch, following her rise to standing by the block's end. Block-specific negatives: Do not skip or shorten the full stretch. The sip of coffee must complete before she stands — no simultaneous drinking-and-standing. Do not have her rush to her feet; the stand is the final motion of the block, unhurried. BLOCK 3 — [0:30–0:45] Moisturizer Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 2 ended — Desi just risen to standing beside the bed. This block covers her walk to the vanity and the full moisturizer application. Match her position and the room's light to Block 2's final frame. Action: Camera drifts with her as she walks unhurried from the bed to the vanity, arriving at the mirror. The plain glass jar labeled "NO BRAND" is already visible on the vanity surface as she arrives. She unscrews the lid slowly, scoops a small amount, and applies it in full, unhurried circular motions across her face — the entire application shown start to finish within this block. Dialogue: (spoken only once the application is fully finished, near the block's end) "This is like..." (pause) "...the one step I actually never skip." (beat) "Everything else is negotiable." Camera: Floating lateral tracking during the walk, settling into a steady medium shot at the mirror for the application itself. Block-specific negatives: The jar must already be visible on the vanity before she reaches for it — no appearing mid-motion. The application must be shown completing in full before any dialogue begins. Do not rush the walk to the mirror to make room for the application — both get real, unhurried time within the 15 seconds. BLOCK 4 — [0:45–1:00] Hairbrush + Earrings Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 3 ended — Desi standing at the mirror, moisturizer just applied. Match her position and expression to Block 3's final frame. Action: She picks up the plain wooden hairbrush, already resting on the vanity, and brushes out her hair with several full, unhurried strokes, working through it completely. She sets the brush down, then picks up her gold jhumka earrings from the ceramic dish and puts them on one at a time — each fully finished and settled before she begins the second. Dialogue: (mid-brushing) "Yeah, I don't even know what's in that jar anymore." (soft laugh) "The label just says 'No Brand.'" (beat, as she puts in the second earring) "...Works though." Camera: Steady medium-close shot at the mirror, holding through both the brushing and the earrings without cutting away. Block-specific negatives: The hairbrush and earrings must both already be visible on the vanity from the block's start. The first earring must be fully in place before she begins the second — no simultaneous application. Do not shorten the number of brush strokes to save time; let the motion read as genuinely unhurried. BLOCK 5 — [1:00–1:15] Wardrobe Change (Revised: Explicit Detail + Locked Outfit) Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 4 ended — Desi at the mirror, both earrings now in place. This block covers her moving to the wardrobe area and changing. New Outfit — Locked Reference (carries into Block 6 and any future scenes): A simple, plain white or cream-colored short-sleeve cotton top with a round or slightly scooped neckline, no graphics, no visible branding — soft, everyday fabric with natural draping and slight creasing. Paired with plain straight-leg or slightly relaxed-fit trousers in a muted neutral tone (soft khaki, warm taupe, or dark grey), no visible logos, no stitched branding on pockets or waistband. Simple flat sandals or bare feet, consistent with the casual, staying-home-in-the-morning energy of the piece. This exact combination — top, trousers, footwear — must remain identical through Block 6 and any subsequent generation; treat it as a locked reference image once established. Action, explicitly detailed: Camera follows her as she walks from the vanity toward the wardrobe area, where the clothing has been visible on the rod/hangers since the environment was established — including the specific white/cream top and neutral trousers she will select, already hanging there from the start. She reaches the wardrobe, looks over the few items for a moment, unhurried, and lifts the plain white top and the neutral trousers off their hangers, laying them briefly over her arm or the chair. She turns slightly away from camera or angles herself naturally at the wardrobe (matter-of-fact, not performative), and removes her sleep t-shirt first — pulling it up and off in one unhurried motion, setting it aside on the chair or a nearby surface. She then pulls the plain white top on over her head, arms finding the sleeves naturally, settling the fabric down over her torso with a small adjusting tug at the hem. She then steps out of her sleep bottoms or loungewear pants — sitting briefly on the edge of the chair or bed if needed for balance, one leg at a time — and pulls on the neutral trousers, standing to fasten or settle them at the waist, a small natural motion to smooth them down her hips. Once fully dressed, she does a small self-check — glancing down at the outfit, smoothing the top's hem once more, rolling one sleeve cuff slightly — before turning back toward the mirror. Dialogue: "Okay..." (pause, mid-change) "...let's see." (beat, once dressed, considering the outfit) "...Yeah. That works." Camera: Floating steadicam following her to the wardrobe, holding a respectful medium distance throughout the change — matter-of-fact framing, never a close or lingering angle, treating the change the way an ordinary morning routine would actually look on camera, not stylized or drawn out for effect. Block-specific negatives: The white top and neutral trousers must already be visible hanging in the wardrobe from the start of the block — no appearing only once she reaches for them. The change must be shown as a clear, complete sequence — sleep shirt removed, new top pulled on, sleep bottoms removed, new trousers pulled on — with no skipped steps or instant swaps between states. The change must read as ordinary and unhurried but not sexualized or dwelt upon — medium-distance framing throughout, natural body positioning, nothing posed. No outfit teleporting at any point — every layer change must be visibly performed by her, not implied through a cut or dissolve (there are no cuts in this piece regardless). This exact outfit (plain white/cream short-sleeve top, neutral trousers, sandals or bare feet) is now the locked wardrobe reference for the remainder of the piece — it must not vary in color, cut, or detail in Block 6 or any subsequent scene. BLOCK 6 — 1:15–1:30 FINAL LOOK → WALK OUT CONTINUITY OPEN Block 6 begins immediately from the final frame of Block 5. There is no cut. Desi stands in front of the mirror wearing the exact outfit established in Block 5. Her: white/cream top; neutral trousers; footwear; gold jhumka earrings; gold necklace; hairstyle; makeup; facial features remain exactly consistent. --- 1:15–1:20 FINAL MIRROR CHECK Desi faces the oval mirror. The camera floats gently into position behind/alongside her. She looks at her reflection. A genuine pause. She looks down briefly at the outfit. Smooths the top once. Looks back at herself. A tiny satisfied nod. No exaggerated posing. No influencer-style presentation. She simply looks like someone deciding that she is ready enough to leave. --- 1:20–1:26 WALK TOWARD DOOR Desi turns away from the mirror. The camera smoothly follows. She walks through the bedroom toward the doorway. Her pace remains natural and unhurried. The camera never overtakes her. No whip-pan. No sudden acceleration. No speed ramp. The hallway beyond the doorway is already visible. Morning light spills naturally from the hallway. Dialogue Desi: "Okay." pause "Human." beat "Presentable." pause "Good enough." A small genuine laugh. --- 1:26–1:30 EXIT Desi reaches the doorway. She opens the wooden door. Warm hallway light falls across her. She steps through. The camera continues following her naturally. Just before she disappears completely, she turns her head slightly toward the camera. A genuine late-arriving smile. Dialogue "Alright..." pause "...let's go be a person today." beat "Bye." She exits. The camera remains inside the bedroom. It settles naturally on the empty doorway. Hold for one quiet beat. END. --- MASTER NEGATIVES & CONSTRAINTS BLOCKS 5–6 CONTINUITY One continuous physical camera take. Zero hard cuts. Zero hidden cuts. Zero jump cuts. Zero dissolves. Zero fades between states. Zero time skips. Zero time-lapse. Zero teleportation. Zero duplicated footage. Zero sudden camera repositioning. WHIP-PAN ONE WHIP-PAN ONLY. It occurs exclusively during the wardrobe change in Block 5. The whip-pan must: physically originate from the camera's current position; move through the same bedroom; temporarily obscure Desi; return naturally to the wardrobe area. It must never be used as a disguised cut. No whip-pan during Block 6. --- NO MORPHING / NO MESHING Absolutely no: face morphing; facial meshing; body morphing; wardrobe morphing; texture morphing; object morphing; environmental morphing; frame interpolation artifacts; identity blending; unstable facial geometry; unstable hands; unstable hair; unstable jewelry. Desi must remain the same woman throughout the entire sequence. --- IDENTITY LOCK Do not alter: eyes; eyebrows; nose; lips; jaw; cheekbones; skin tone; face shape; body proportions; age; hair texture; hairline. No identity drift. No alternate version of Desi. No duplicate Desi. No phantom Desi. --- WARDROBE CHANGE The wardrobe change must be physically believable. No: instant outfit swap; outfit teleportation; clothing appearing on her body; clothing disappearing from her body; clothing growing onto her; magical transition; glowing transformation; particle effect; dissolve; morph. The single whip-pan simply gives privacy while maintaining the continuous physical flow of the camera. --- OBJECT CONTINUITY No object may suddenly appear or disappear. The following must remain spatially consistent: wardrobe; clothing; chair; vanity; mirror; jewelry; dresser; plants; rug; door; hallway. The white/cream top and neutral trousers must be visibly hanging in the wardrobe before Desi selects them. --- OUTFIT LOCK Once Desi finishes changing: WHITE/CREAM SHORT-SLEEVE TOP + EXACT NEUTRAL TROUSERS + SAME FOOTWEAR must remain unchanged through the end. No recoloring. No redesign. No different sleeve length. No different trouser cut. No different footwear. No spontaneous accessories. --- MIRROR CONSISTENCY Mirror reflection must be physically accurate at all times. One Desi. Reflection matches her movements exactly. No reflection drift. No alternate face. No duplicated reflection. No delayed reflection. Camera never appears in the mirror. --- ANATOMY No: extra fingers; missing fingers; fused fingers; duplicated hands; malformed hands; warped arms; elongated limbs; distorted torso; unnatural joints; anatomical meshing. --- VISUAL STYLE Cinematic realism. Natural morning light. Natural skin pores and texture. Subtle film-like grain. Slightly imperfect real-world color. No: beauty filter; plastic skin; excessive skin smoothing; glossy commercial lighting; HDR; hyper-clean advertising aesthetic; artificial glow; excessive sharpening. --- AUDIO Continuous natural audio only: footsteps; fabric movement; clothing rustle; jewelry movement; room ambience; natural breathing; door movement; hallway ambience; Desi's natural voice. No music. No cinematic impact sounds. No artificial transition sounds. No sound effect accompanying the whip-pan. --- VOICE Warm low-mid female voice. Natural morning rasp. Close and intimate. Slow. Unhurried. Conversational. Real pauses between phrases. Never sounds like a commercial, narrator, actress, or influencer reading a script. Do not compress dialogue to fit the timestamps. Natural delivery takes priority. --- FINAL GENERATION LOCK ONE DESI. ONE BEDROOM. ONE CAMERA. ONE CONTINUOUS PHYSICAL FLOW. ONE WHIP-PAN ONLY — BLOCK 5 WARDROBE CHANGE. NO CUTS. NO MORPHING. NO MESHING. NO TELEPORTATION. NO IDENTITY DRIFT. NO OBJECT POP-IN. NO WARDROBE TELEPORTATION. NO DUPLICATION. NO TIME-LAPSE. NO RUSHED MOTION. Block 6 must begin exactly where Block 5 ends, with the exact same Desi, exact same face, exact same jewelry, exact same hairstyle, exact same outfit, exact same environment, and exact same spatial continuity. #AtlasCloud](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2093701367797785024/amplify_video_thumb/2093701197957869568/img/ZREoSERJvFSA0lqh.jpg)
![Well, friends, the interview the John O'Keefe and Karen Read trial world didn't know they wanted has finally occurred. I appreciate The Glarer for having me on his program. We discussed Kate Peter, I defended Lindsey Gaetani's honor, both sides agreed as to the importance of civil debate and leaving people's families out of the fray and then Will helped Olivia and I move towards amicable discussion. Overall, a 10/10 way to celebrate the day towel become a YouTube partner. Here are my two favorite quotes from Will and myself; [Grant] "If any of you took 10 minutes --not on camera-- to talk to Lindsey Gaetani, you would find someone who believes in God, who cares about her children, who's a good mother, and who's not any of the things you made her out to be. And by God I will defend that 'till my last day." [Grant] "I realized that there was just this toxic atmosphere surrounding this case, and I couldn't just say I thought it needed to change — I had to reflect that change in my actions." [The Glarer] "If you believe so much in Karen Read’s guilt, then the facts should speak for themselves. You shouldn’t have to bring people’s family members into it. [The Glarer] "But you know what I think, Grant? I think that you're a really smart guy. And I think you know you're a really smart guy. And I think what you do is, you convince yourself — because of how smart you are — that if you came up with it, it must be gospel. And that's where I think you get cloudy between the truth and your opinion." Here's the full transcript: [Grant] Well, good afternoon towel friends. My name is Grant Smith Ellis and in addition to becoming a YouTube partner today I also decided to call into The Glarer's show. It was the collaboration that the world didn't know they needed but now they have. And if you'd like to listen to this fascinating conversation, related to new allegations as to Kate MafiaMasshole Peter being a PI in the orbit of the Aidan Turtleboy Kearney prosecution, as well as somehow both Will and I eventually coming to a discussion where I defended Lindsey Gaetani's honor, along with a closing segment about the importance on both sides of the Karen Read and John O’Keefe case of being mutually respectful, even if we have differences of opinion on those facts, you can do so right now. Will and I shared a belief that positive changes in the Karen Read and John O'Keefe trial world, at least in terms of that improving dynamic as to disagreeing without being disagreeable, are evident. So enjoy the conversation, folks. It was certainly an interesting one. [The Glarer] You're on — who am I speaking with? [Grant] Hey, Will, it's me. I'm Grant... [The Glarer] — hold on, I gotta give you applause, buddy. You made it. [Grant] Well, we certainly may have different views on the case, but I think we share respect for Jesus and we can talk bad about Kate Peter for sure. [The Glarer] Yeah, that we can do. Sure. Sure. So what's up, bud? What do you got to say? [Grant] Well, I think if people have been following me on X, they will know I've been yelling about Kate Peter taking an envelope of cash in the Chick-fil-A parking lot in front of me for months. And I feel vindicated as of the news of this weekend. [The Glarer] Okay. Okay, so wait a minute. That tracks. So the person who is in this sworn affidavit who claims to have seen Kate Peter with the manila envelope — you're claiming to have seen her with the same envelope. Is that what you're saying? [Grant] It wasn't a manila envelope. Well, there's two pertinent facts. So Kate Peter and I met up for the first time — I would say it was in the winter of 2024 — in a Chick-fil-A parking lot somewhere on the South Coast, maybe near Raynham or something. Anyway, she came and got in my car and she was like, "Well, I'm waiting for someone in a white Toyota Corolla to drop me off money. We try to do it with cash so it doesn't leave a record." And I was like, "Well, this seems a little weird." And then the car pulled up. I didn't actually see the car. She got out, went over to it, came back into my car. It was a white envelope with a green thank-you card. She opened it. There were probably four or five hundred — four or five fifties and a bunch of twenties. [The Glarer] Wow.... Okay, now Grant, I gotta ask you a tough question, buddy. I would be remiss if I didn't do that, all right? Now, a lot of people are thinking the same thing I'm thinking right now, which is: how can we believe you? Where's your credibility? Because you've lied about so many other things so easily. [Grant] Well, I would challenge that and say maybe you have different perspectives on me, but that should reinforce what I'm saying here. The Melanie Little and Alan Jackson Aruba thing — I apologized for that on stream and in a post (because Melanie Little told people not to go after Lindsey's kids, and I found that honorable). [The Glarer] Fair enough. [The Glarer] You did apologize. Okay, so you apologized for that. Okay. [Grant] But I'm critiquing someone [Kate Peter] who would ostensibly be aligned with what I believe about the case, and I still believe what I believe about Karen being responsible for John's death— we don't have to get into it — but I'm critiquing someone who supports that view. That should reinforce my credibility here. [The Glarer] Yeah, and MicroDots backs you up at least on this thing, you know, he says he believes you on this thing. I'm just saying — dude, I've read what you've written. You're a talented writer, clearly. But I can honestly say I've got a whole community of people here — a shit ton of people in this chat right now — that I know would agree with me that if you made a habit of reporting the truth, you'd have support, you'd have readers, you'd have a whole audience. I'd be a fan! But your credibility is fucked with me right now, dude. You know, and I hate that, because I actually enjoy reading what you write. [Grant] I appreciate what you're saying. I think I would just say maybe it's smaller than your community, but I just got made a YouTube partner today. I'm actually celebrating that. I have a small community, people do support me — maybe not as many as support your channel, but it's just people with different views consuming different content. [The Glarer] Yeah, but the thing is — like, I'm content with my audience. My audience could be bigger, but I cuss a lot and I use words that offend people and I just don't kind of play by the normal YouTube game that most creators play when they grow, you know? And I'm okay with the rate at which my channel grows because I get to be myself. But I don't hold back and I don't play by these rules. So I get all that. But I mean, I'm not ethically doing anything wrong. If I were spreading misinformation or contributing to any spread of misinformation, I would have a problem with myself and what I'm doing. You see what I'm saying? Like, it's a little bit different. You're telling me that you're content with your audience being small because you like to make shit up? You know what I mean? [Grant] No, no. Because it's a new channel. That's why the audience is growing. Anyway, the reason I shake your hand is I do think you're authentic in your beliefs, even if we disagree. And well — before I forget, one more thing about that Chick-fil-A parking lot cash that's actually important: when Kate got that money handed over, she told me it was for a donation drive to help other people offset babysitting costs or whatever nonsense. Someone sent a text message — a family member of the person who paid her that cash — and they put in writing that they sent the money for Kate's own expenses. So she lied to me in the car about what the money was for. Something’s up with that. [The Glarer] So she told you in the car that the money was for... [Grant] She said it was to pay for babysitters for people who need help and to donate to other people, which I don't believe. Like, of course not. Nobody believes that. [The Glarer] And then you found out — through what — that this money was actually for her personal expenses? [Grant] Eventually a text message got released from someone in the orbit of whoever paid Kate. It was a family member — I don't know who it was. I've only seen the text message. I'm happy to reshare it on my X later. In that text message, it says — quoting the person — "I sent that envelope with my sister over to Kate. It was for her expenses" or something like that. So even that is evidence. [The Glarer] Wow. Okay, so you are strictly of the opinion, based on things you've seen yourself, that Kate Peter is absolutely being paid by the Commonwealth to spin narratives? [Grant] I'll give you one more piece of information, Will, and maybe you or your audience can track this down: I don't think Kate was involved in the Karen Read investigation directly, but I think starting in the fall of 2023 she worked for a private investigator named Marty Kraft. And I believe by proxy she was then retained to work on Aidan's case through that PI firm. [The Glarer] Okay, and then she just became the mouthpiece between the PI firm and the Commonwealth is what you're saying. [Grant] I will say a few things: I reasonably believe she does have direct contact with the DA and agents of the Commonwealth — I've said that before — and I also believe that she has favoritism towards specific witnesses in the orbit of this case. Not all of them — specific witnesses. [The Glarer] Okay, well, I mean, we know who they are, but okay. [Grant] I will also say — I think — that your caller was prescient earlier, and they mentioned there might be some mutual blackmail. Well, we know that Lindsey Gaetani’s phone extraction was manipulated to remove messages from Brian Tully to Lindsey and from Kate Peter to Lindsey. [The Glarer] ...what's your deal with Lindsey? [Grant] Hold, on let's pull it back first. First of all, I think there was a bifurcation: there's charges from October 2023 against Aidan and December 2023 against Aidan. One set of charges, from October of 2023, involved the Karen Read witnesses; the other set, from December of 2023, involved Lindsey. I don't think anyone set Aidan up in December 2023. I think he was just in love with Lindsey and it kind of got out of control. [The Glarer] Bro... [Grant] Well, but hold on, Will... [The Glarer] I'm listening... [Grant] I think that cell phone extraction goes right to the mutual blackmail point your friend talked about earlier. Someone, during the course of the Aidan Kearney investigation involving Lindsey, manipulated that cell phone extraction, and it could have only happened while it was in State Police custody. That is the whole — that's everything right there because of Kate Peter is the only person who could have gotten Brian Tully to get Nick Guarino to manipulate that extraction while it was in State Police custody before Tully leaked it, by hand, to Aidan's lawyer. [The Glarer] Okay, so listen, Grant. Like, we know that Kate Peter and Lindsey were colluding. Now, I think Lindsey was used. But come on, we know that Kate Peter and Lindsey were colluding to try to set Aidan up. Like, you know this. [Grant] No, I disagree, because I've looked at the timeline closely. Aidan begged to go over there when his indictments got handed down in December. [The Glarer] Well, listen — why? [Grant] Because he got charged in October, but the indictments for the October thing came down December 20th. [Grant] Then when did he beg to go over to Lindsey's? [Grant] I'm about to explain. December 21st, Lindsey tells him, "Hey Aidan, I just got a subpoena for a grand jury." Aidan's mind has gotta' start racing. "Why would there be another grand jury? Is it about me and Karen Read? What is this about?" So he begged her to go over there so he could find out. And that's — like — he looked at her phone that night to see the messages between her and Kate to try to find out about what this new grand jury was about. So no one set him up. He begged to go over there. [The Glarer] So you're just assuming that he begged to go over there based on...? [Grant] I know he begged to go over there. He was pleading because he wanted to find out what the new grand jury was. [The Glarer] The difference between you and Aidan is Aidan posts receipts, dude. But you don't. You get the difference? That's why Aidan has as much of a following as he has. [Grant] If you're asking for receipts of him begging to go over there on that day, I'm happy to provide those. I'll post them. [The Glarer] Then why didn't you do that already? [Grant] Well, I think because what I understand to be the evidentiary record from going to all the hearings is different than what people consume, because not everyone goes to every hearing. But I'm happy to do that. I have it all archived. [The Glarer] Okay, but the point is — like MicroDots is saying — that he was baited to go over there. So even if he begged to go over there under whatever circumstance, we have proof — we've seen proof — that he was baited to go over there based on false information that she was pregnant. [Grant] No. No. She was pregnant. [The Glarer] Oh my, Grant, bro... [Grant] Okay. I will swear on my God about that. [The Glarer] Hold on... [Grant] Well, to move on, I was going to give you some credit. I was going to say you might have been right that the subpoena issued to Lindsey, without her knowledge, could have been to bait Aidan. [The Glarer] But she wouldn't — how do you explain the metadata on the pictures that she sent him of the sonogram, dude? [Grant] First of all, if you're talking about someone's pregnancy — that's a medical issue, and to bring it up on air disgraces Jesus. [The Glarer] Oh, come on, Grant. [Grant] Let's not. [The Glarer] Alright, fine. We won't talk about that anymore. But let's face it, dude — you're making excuses for this girl. And why? Like, do you have a crush on her? Is that what's going on here? And it's okay. [Grant] Oh, oh, please. When I first came into this case, I saw a woman walk into a courtroom, and I started listening to her story. And even in this conversation, there are multiple things I corrected where you were willing to say, "Okay, Grant, maybe that is what happened." And Lindsey doesn't have anyone out there who is voicing that for her, so I'm taking the opportunity to do it. [The Glarer] And do you wonder why she doesn't have anyone voicing things out for her, dude? [The Glarer] Because Aidan isolates people! [The Glarer] Get out of here with that. Stop. Again with the whole "it's Aidan's fault" shit, man. That's between you and Lindsey, dude. I'm asking — like, I asked you why you think that. Nobody is going to bat for Lindsey. And I saw receipts. I heard a recording of her — you're talking about somebody who I heard a recording of [that night with Aidan in December of 2023]. This is... Come on, Grant. [Grant] I was in the courtroom. I saw the people crying when that tape was played. And you know what I also heard, Will? I heard the original version of that tape that didn't have her consent to record, which is why Aidan got charged with felony wiretapping. [The Glarer] Okay, but you're not denying that she said that, right? [Grant] Listen, I have never been awake at 12:30 in the morning. I'm not a woman. I've never been confronted with that situation. I would never pass judgment on someone in that situation. [The Glarer] Every woman that I've ever heard express their opinion on it — pretty negative, dude. Just saying. Pretty negative. Especially the moms. Especially the moms. [Grant] So I don't think any people talking in that way — I don't think you've even met this woman. [The Glarer] You're right. I have not. I have not met her. [Grant] And if — I don't know if she will ever do this — but if any of you took 10 minutes, not on camera, to talk to this woman, you would find someone who believes in God, who cares about her children, who's a good mother, and who's not any of the things you made her out to be. And by God, I will defend that 'till my last day. [The Glarer] Alright. Declared. Got it. I gotta' ask you one more question though. Why are you saying stuff about Olivia Nile — Olivia Nile and her mom — being paid agents for the defense? Come on. [Grant] Okay. Hold on. Hold on. Let me just explain that. I know that's Olivia Lamb. Okay? [The Glarer] Right, yeah, same person. Yeah, yeah. [Grant] Okay, so we all know Christina Lamb does boutique PR consulting for lawyers. She's good at it. Olivia’s good at it. They should own it. I want to interview her. [The Glarer] What — how is that proof, though? That Olivia Lamb is being paid by the defense in some way? You see the problem? [Grant] Hold on. That is an extrapolation some people may make. My argument is only that what she does looks like PR for the defense. I think Olivia hasn't been paid since last year. [The Glarer] But she's saying that's not even what she does, dude. [Grant] Okay, maybe it's not. But I think Olivia's contract ran up at the end of the first trial, if you want me to be very blunt with you. [The Glarer] Contract? [Grant] Mm-hmm. [The Glarer] But her mom doesn't even do that either — what the fuck’s her mom got to do with it? [Grant] Well, why would her mom run some random boutique PR consulting firm for lawyers, and then Olivia just shows up with this extremely high-level acumen, rivaling lawyers? [The Glarer] But that’s not what she does. She's saying that's not even what her mom does or what she does. [Grant] Okay, well, I looked at her mom's website. I archived it going back a few years, so I can post the screenshots again. And I know what she advertised herself as doing. [The Glarer] But you know what I think, Grant? I think that you're a really smart guy. And I think you know you're a really smart guy. And I think what you do is, you convince yourself — because of how smart you are — that if you came up with it, it must be gospel. That's what I think. And that's where I think you get cloudy between the truth and your opinion. Because you state your opinions as though they're fact. And I think that's an ego thing. I don't even think it's malice. It’s just ego. That's what it comes off as, anyway, dude. Because everything you say — every time I ask you, "Where's your proof?" — you explain how you came to your opinion. You give me a laid-out story. Go back and listen to this later on — you'll see what I mean. [Grant] Well, I don't even doubt you, actually, that I'm firm in my convictions. If I'm not there to experience something, I do not know the truth. But I've seen the screenshots. I only found out Olivia Lamb was Olivia Lamb because I found an archived X post where she shared something very sentimental about her grandfather. I didn't like that. I didn't appreciate having to talk about that. But it became relevant because I wanted to know why she was involved in the case. I will listen to her tell me I'm wrong. I want to interview her. [The Glarer] Yeah, but you can't just, like, trap people into interviews by threatening to spread lies about them if they don't, bro. What kind of shit is that? [Grant] Nothing that I said about her grandfather, her acumen or her mother's work was incorrect... [The Glarer] But why are you even talking about her family, dude? Like, that's really low, man. Like — that's... It's low, man. It's low. Her family didn't have nothing to do with this, man. She's doing this because she cares about it. And then people start talking about people's family members and shit. And it's like — it comes off as a not-so-subtle form of intimidation, frankly, Grant. You know, trying to get somebody to shut up. [Grant] No, I don't want to do that. I want to learn about why she's interested in the case. [The Glarer] But you could see how somebody could see it that way, right? Because what if her family starts telling her, "Hey, stop talking about this. Why are we being brought into your shit because you're passionate about something?" What if her family does that and puts her in an awkward position? And then people are cheated out of some really good insight because of that. [Grant] My brother — my brother who at four years old had a colectomy, three-stage, and is developmentally disabled as a result — has a profile someone made mocking him on X. That's a profile that people I respect engage with. Usually I overlook that stuff because I don't believe the people engaging in it are trying to do that. And I hope people realize I'm not doing that to her. I authentically want to know why Olivia's covering this case. [The Glarer] That's all right. So — but that's my point, Grant. I'm just saying, like, if you believe Karen Read is guilty, why not just stick to the facts? Because you don't see me going after anybody's family. You don't see Olivia going after anybody's family, talking about people's family and exposing their family and what they do. You know what I mean? That's not cool. I don't do that. And Olivia’s saying that she will happily talk to you anytime about why she's interested in the case. You see what? That's my point. That's my point — if you believe so much in Karen Read's guilt, then the facts should speak. Everything that you put out there — the facts, the details of the case, and the way you interpret those facts — that should be enough. You shouldn't have to bring people's family members into it. Come on. I feel like you're better than that. That's all. I still have faith that you're better than that. [Grant] Yeah. And I think that's the perfect place to end, because you've given me a lot of time and I share your sentiments. I think that is crucially important. You don't see me out there in the past six months or twelve months talking about Melanie Little, or Olivia or her parents anymore. [The Glarer] I have seen improvement, yes. I have seen it. [Grant] And let me just say why: because I came to believe that there was this toxic atmosphere surrounding this case, and that I couldn't just say I thought it needed to change — I had to reflect that change in my actions. And that's why that happened. So that's it. That's how I feel. [The Glarer] Okay. Yeah, I mean, everybody’s entitled to their feelings and opinions, man. We all are. But yeah, I’m glad that we got this talk. I got to express some things I wanted to express to you. You were very receptive, and I appreciate you coming on and being respectful and being cool. And you’re welcome here anytime, Grant. I can see that we could talk about pretty much anything, and it's fine. That will always be welcome here — no matter what we disagree on. So I appreciate you, Grant. [Grant] God bless, Will, enjoy the rest of your Saturday. [The Glarer] Have a good one. Alright, Grant, y'all. Alright, I'm gonna take another call. Let's do that.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1916273688736940311/amplify_video_thumb/1916261346590515200/img/hUvZMgeSmwtcpp9Y.jpg)
![‘Doctor Death’ Gives Life to Gold Mines Dave Fennell chain-smoked and studied law while winning 6 Grey Cups. He sent 3 quarterbacks to the hospital in one game, becoming 'Dr. Death' and a household name in Canada. Next Dave turned to gold exploration, building 5 ventures worth ~$5 billion. He's never shared his story publicly—until now. After dominating football, Dave Fennell's Midas touch in Guyana could lead to his greatest victory. Mining legends Louis Gignac, Rick Rule and others weigh in. "I was capable of playing very violently," recalls Fennell. "If you're going to survive as a defensive lineman. The people who are opposite you, have to be afraid of you." He played 10 seasons for the Edmonton Eskimos (renamed Elks in ‘21), appearing in 8 Grey Cups (Canada’s Super Bowl). The Eskimos won 6, including 5 in a row 1978-1982. Fennell, who turned 71 Feb 4, is chain smoking Marlboros on a Zoom call with me Feb 5. He’s reflecting on a career that spans beyond the gridiron to golden ventures. His resume includes co-founding Golden Star (US $467M sale in ‘22) and Miramar ($1.5B sale in ‘08). Fennell was a tenured director of Sabina ($1.1B sale in ‘23) and Torex ($1.2B market cap). His Reunion Gold ($485M market cap) has rapidly discovered a major gold deposit after setbacks. Fennell's sons picked up his drive too. David Jr. played Michigan State football then turned engineer. John raced luge at the Sochi Winter Olympics, now he's a corporate analyst. – Raised in a middle-class Edmonton, Alberta family, Fennell was the second of four children. “I was taught very early on, you're not allowed to quit when you start something. It was not acceptable.” He completed a 4 year undergrad degree at U of North Dakota in 3 years. Fennell could have gone to the NFL, but chose to stay in Edmonton, joining the Eskimos on the condition he’d also go to law school. It's hard to imagine a pro athlete smoking, studying law, and winning six championships today. But Dave Fennell did it all. He planned to play pro for 10 seasons, and wondered, “What do you do when the cheering stops?” Joining a law firm next, the bosses leveraged his "Dr. Death" fame for networking. Fennell recalls, “They loved taking me to the Petroleum Club on Mondays.” His law practice worked with many small miners. After three years and a Guyana field trip, Fennell decided to get into gold mining himself. At 32, Fennell founded Golden Star Resources (GSR). He partnered with Roger Morton, a U of Alberta geology professor, to explore Guyana. GSR spent $20K staking the forgotten Omai gold deposit. “It was open ground.” Anaconda Copper explored Omai extensively in the late 1940s but stopped when the Korean War began. Secrets of the Anaconda Library A private detective helped Fennell find Anaconda’s geological data. They learned of a cavernous library in Montana, holding 100 years of records. A librarian, just laid off, liked Fennell and sold him the Guyana files for $30K. GSR hired SNC Lavalin, with their top supercomputer, to process this historical information. It showed a big potential mine. Placer Dome partnered on Omai in ‘87, before walking away. Fennell didn't give up. He invited Louis Gignac’s Cambior to visit Omai during a 3 day rainstorm. Cambior ended up funding construction for a 70% stake. It produced 3.7 million gold ounces from 92-05. Renowned mining investor Rick Rule says Fennell is easy to underestimate. "The physicality obscures a great intellect and a guy that's actually very kind. He's the classic entrepreneur. When he sees an opportunity, he can't not grasp it.” Next, GSR pursued Cambior to partner in Suriname. “If I had a mine each time someone told me a story about a property, I'd be a very rich man,” Gignac says. GSR’s Rosebel discovery was in region reeling after Suriname’s civil war. “David, why don’t you settle down, get married, do something easier than this,” Gignac advised him. Fennell persisted, inviting Gignac to tour Rosebel. It poured rain again on that trip, which Gignac saw as a good omen after Omai’s success. Cambior eventually built the mine. Rosebel became one of South America’s largest, yielding over 6 million ounces. Today, it’s operated by Zijin. GSR stock jumped 600% in the early '90s thanks to these wins. Investor Mike Halvorson says GSR’s work in the Guianas and Suriname put the area on the map for mining. “Back in those days, from a political point of view, it was considered high-risk to go into the Guianas,” Gignac remembers. “It took a lot of guts for [Fennell] to get involved, and a lot of guts to follow him there. We eventually mined about twice the [initial] reserves at Omai. By doing Omai, it was that much easier to do Rosebel. We were comfortable with the region and its people. There's a lot of advantages in these countries. It's simpler. Decision makers are easier to know and be in contact with.” Halvorson remembers Fennell throwing a 'chirping' analyst into a pool on one Suriname stay. The guy skipped on the water like a stone. Fennell and Halvorson connected in Edmonton in the 1980s through their love of migratory bird hunting. “Anything that walks, flies or swims, Dave has killed,” says mining engineer Bruce McLeod, who hunts and fishes with Fennell. A massive Anaconda snake skin once adorned the crown mouldings in Fennell’s Montreal offices. At 41, Fennell lucked out as the sole bidder for Sigrist House, once King Edward VIII's Bahamian villa. Fennell lived there 28 years before downsizing. In the late 90’s, Fennell clashed with GSR's board and was pushed out. Later, GSR refocused on Africa and was sold to a Chinese company. To avoid GSR conflicts, Fennell eyed new gold regions. BHP's Hugo Dummett offered him all their gold assets for $80 million. But with few flush bidders, BHP sold the portfolio in pieces. Ivanhoe got Mongolia and discovered Oyu Tolgoi. Randgold took West Africa, and Harmony got East Africa. "If you'd have kept that package together, it'd be the second largest copper company [today]. And you'd be arguing with Newmont about who was the biggest gold company," Fennell says. He bought the Canadian assets for US $20.4 million. It had Hope Bay, a 4 million ounce gold discovery in the high arctic. Fennell dealt through Cambiex Exploration (CBX), where he’d been appointed Chair and CEO in January ‘99, when CBX was a 15 cent stock with a $3.5 million market cap. CBX split the tab with Miramar, a modest gold miner sitting on cash. Miramar swallowed CBX in 2002, appointing Fennell Executive Vice Chairman. Miramar invested about $100 million in Hope Bay and led it through permitting. In 2008, Newmont bought Miramar for $1.5 billion. Every $1 invested in CBX’s equity funding when Fennell took over in early ‘99 was worth $19.50 when Newmont acquired Miramar 9 years later. CBX shareholders made even more money through a spinout company, Ariane Gold, acquired by Cambior in ‘03. Rob McLeod, a geologist at Hope Bay, admired Fennell's strong presence, humour, and optimism. Fennell built bonds with Inuit partners through fishing and Crib games, easing the permitting process. Fennell would need that optimism for his next venture. – In 2004, Fennell listed Nevada explorer New Sleeper. A name change to Reunion Gold (RGD) came in 2006, after recruiting former GSR colleagues and pivoting again to the Giuanas. The stock ran from 30 cents to over $2 in early ‘07 on the back of a Suriname gold find. It didn’t pan out. RGD crashed to 3.5 cents during the ‘08 financial crisis. “When you take your shareholder's money and you say you're going to do this, and if it's not successful, my job is to fix that and I'm not going to roll all the stock back. I'm not going to wipe shareholders out,” Fennell says, explaining RGD’s current 1.23 billion shares. Reunion roared back above $2 again after a Guyana manganese discovery. Then, metal prices crashed, cutting RGD to one penny by 2016. “You're going to fail a hundred percent guaranteed in both exploration and football,” Fennell says. “The real question is, what are you going to do after you fail?” A US $10 million sale of the manganese project provided a lifeline. In 2019, Barrick partnered with Reunion on exploration, committing $4.2 million. Reunion was a 7 cent stock in 2020 when they found gold at Guyana’s Oko project. But, Barrick quickly abandoned the alliance and skipped a $3 million commitment. They even sued Reunion after Oko's success. In 2023, Barrick and RGD settled, owing nothing to each other. Oko moved from a prospect to a major gold deposit rapidly. An initial 2023 resource estimate showed 4.3 million ounces (indicated plus inferred). Fennell believes Oko could be the best gold mine in South America. He sees a 300--400,000 ounce per year, low-cost mine, with a 12 year initial mine life. "It’s going to be much bigger and longer,” Fennell says, optimistically. “Whether we're going to live longer is a whole different question." Reunion aims to publish a PEA study on Oko before Summer. Fennell also looks forward to a feasibility study and final permits in Q1 2015, with construction to start soon after. "From a discovery to a tier one mine in [potentially] six years, it doesn't get any better," Fennell says. He’s in Georgetown this week, talking with the Guyanese government about Oko's future. Reunion’s looking at options: build, sell, merge, or partner up. Fennell wants RGD to avoid execution risk and debt. G Mining Services, led by Fennell's old friend Gignac, is advising on Oko. They've successfully built many mines, like Fruta del Norte in Ecuador (Lundin Gold - $3.7B market cap). Gignac's G Mining Ventures, doing well and on track in Brazil, could be a key player in Oko's future. “There will be a mine [at Oko]. There's absolutely no question,” says Gignac. “The size, grade, and gold content. That's going to be the next one to put on his record.” There’s a slight problem with Venezuela’s claim over Guyana’s Essequibo region, where Oko is. Fennell isn't worried. He says the US will protect it because of Exxon and Chevron’s huge oil investments there. Gignac says Fennell hasn't changed since they first met in the late 80s. "Always glass half-full, always enthusiastic. A track record as good as anybody at finding deals, doing exploration, and developing orebodies." Fennell is honest and a consummate salesman according to Rule. “I don't think in 35 years he ever lied to me, but he would polish the living shit out of the rear view mirror.” Some colourful highlights of my 2 hour Zoom with Mr. Fennell were published in raw video form below. It’s full of wisdom about gold exploration and football. “David is one of the most low key and commercially successful entrepreneurs in [mining],” Bruce McLeod wrote. “He has played a huge part in mentoring others too. Without David I wouldn't be where I am today.” Fennell says, "We always overcome challenges. I never give up." Reunion Gold (RGD-TSXV) is worth $485 million at press time, last at 39.5 cents. Fennell owns 61 million RGD shares. He has warrants and options to purchase 12.6 million more. B. McLeod, Rule & Halvorson all own the stock. All figures CAD unless otherwise indicated. Like, Share, & Follow me Tommy Humphreys for more Big Score stories!](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1756310764544197095/ext_tw_video_thumb/1756167133699141632/pu/img/HDmCXr4un9vC0uxD.jpg)
