Lex is here -

, and he also created his accounts on Vimeo - https://vimeo.com/lexblazer - almost all his videos are already uploaded there. YouTube completely deleted both his channels in less than a week after the recovery.

"And I am not buying it that they are worried about getting sued by someone for videos about cannabis." - Please, don't buy. They can't be sued, because they are protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act since 1996 from being liable for their content. Section 230 gave blanket immunity to online entities that publish third-party content from civil and criminal prosecution.

YouTube presents itself as a platform, not a publisher. As a platform, it is not responsible for content. They really couldn't sensor 20 years back. But now I just can't wait when Section 230 is revoked based on the ability of YouTube and others of its kind to apply heavy censorship on content creators.

"The dominant social media companies must choose: if they are neutral platforms, they should have immunity from litigation. If they are publishers making editorial choices, then they should relinquish this valuable exemption. They can’t claim that Section 230 immunity is necessary to protect free speech, while they shape, control, and censor the speech on their platforms. Either the courts or Congress should clarify the matter." From the article by Adam Candeub and Mark Epstein:

https://www.city-journal.org/html/platform-or-publisher-15888.html