All Episodes
Previous Next
May 1, 2022 - Viva & Barnes
01:02:58
Ep. 111: Sunday Night Law Stuffs with Viva & Barnes!
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The Canadian Bill of Rights.
Know your rights, guys.
We are not on the private property.
This is a public property.
Section one.
We have the right to be here.
Right for a free, peaceful manifestation.
Know your rights, okay?
Know your rights.
This is a public place, especially this one.
So we have the right to be here, and we are here.
He just arrested.
Sorry.
It was a bump.
It was a bee.
It was a bee.
Freedom fighter.
I'm afraid of a small bee.
I'm a pussy.
Listen, I love you now.
No, no, no.
Thank you.
Yeah, I figured we'd have to start with the funny stuff before getting into reality.
For those who didn't understand, because the lady, I didn't get her name, had a bit of an accent.
I mean, you can go watch that part of yesterday's live stream from the Ottawa Rolling Thunder rally.
She was a Polish woman.
She is a Polish woman from Poland.
So has escaped a communist regime and knows what it smells like as it starts to fester and rot in an otherwise free society.
So we had an interesting discussion because she's from Poland.
She appreciates what communism looks like, what happens once it sets its fangs into an otherwise living creature and then sucks the life out of it.
And she was handing out printouts of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, French and in English.
And as she's telling me about it, and I'm very aware of its importance and how it has been systematically desecrated.
By the current regime in Canada.
It turned out to be a honeybee.
So it was a very beautiful, soft, fuzzy honeybee.
But when I hear the...
And I see it land on me.
There's no thought.
There's nothing.
There's me screaming like Homer Simpson.
And then she in her accent says, don't be busy.
And it was loving.
It was heartfelt.
I took it as...
What's the word?
A term of endearment.
It was hilarious.
Then she went on to talk about how her friend had been arrested because her friend had been shoved by the police and then responded improperly in turn.
And police seized on that improper response to arrest a 60-some-odd-year-old woman at a protest.
So, yes, I see people talking about the hair.
My wife wants me to...
She's hinting at cutting it, but I'm like, I'm on the verge.
Of getting a ponytail.
You can't cut it now.
Because then I won't get the ponytail.
So when I get the ponytail, it'll be effectively cut.
I'm not cutting it.
I'm not cutting it.
We put it to a poll and the internet rules.
So I said I was going to start with the funny stuff before getting to the unfunny stuff.
I just got back from...
Look, hey, Jim Watson, mayor of Ottawa.
You got seven and a half hours of life.
It might have been eight hours.
It was eight hours.
Of live stream footage to go look for your racist, sexist, homophobic provocation that you were warning, that you were warning people about.
Warning in advance.
We've entered minority report people.
Not only can the government read minds and attribute the illest of intentions, and I mean ill as in bad and not ill as in, like, you know, cool.
Oh, that's an ill beat.
They attribute the illest of intentions to everyone who disagrees with them, but they've gone beyond doing that.
They've gone to predicting the illest of intentions.
Like, they've gone to...
No, that's not what I want.
I want to share it.
They've gone to minority report prediction of the illest phobes and isms you can imagine before it even happens based on a fabricated, dishonest lie of it having happened in the past.
And for anybody who...
Might have any doubts.
I mean, this is a clip.
So if you want to say, you know, it's a clip out of context, go to Rebel News, find the original tweet.
It's two and a half minutes that I don't want to bore you with.
Because all that really matters is this gem of stupidity.
And a gem of stupidity predicting future crimes based on fabricated past crimes.
Listen to Jim.
Listen to this guy.
It would be...
It would be funny if it were a Saturday Night Live skit.
This actually would be funnier as a Saturday Night Live skit than Saturday Night Live itself.
But this is not a skit.
This is not fake.
This is reality.
This is the pedigree of the elected officials currently running things.
Listen to this crap.
So we're asking those individuals who have the right to freely come into our city to be respectful of both our residents and our businesses and our infrastructure and not to provoke some of the kind of racist, sexist, homophobic nonsense that we saw with the truckers convoy a few months ago.
He couldn't even get the verbal diarrhea out of his mouth.
He couldn't even get it out almost with a straight face.
This is the mayor of Ottawa, Jim Watson.
Respect our infrastructure.
Jim Watson, I've got 40 hours of livestream from that protest as a documentarian because I heard the same crap that you were spewing now.
I heard it back then.
Racism.
Transphobia, homophobia, anti-Semitism.
I didn't realize I was in danger for three weeks, Jim.
You should have told me earlier.
I wouldn't have gone down.
I felt so threatened myself.
I've got 40 hours of live documentary, documentation, documentarianism, whatever, of the protest in Ottawa, Jim.
Not only were the people respecting...
The infrastructure, they were actually treating it better than your own Ottawa police and Ottawa city workers.
They were shoveling the cenotaph.
They were salting the streets.
I literally commented on this because they were shoveling the streets in front of Parliament.
Yes, true, they were on those streets, so maybe the city workers couldn't get there.
But if you allude to the idea that you can go protest as you're within your rights, but respect the infrastructure, you are implying, suggesting that in the past, The infrastructure had not been respected by ralliers, protesters, whatever you want to call them.
40 hours, dude.
40 hours.
And there was salting, shoveling, 24-7 surveillance of the cenotaph.
They were helping people.
They were feeding the homeless.
Better than I saw the homeless getting fed when I was there on the weekend, Jim.
But no, you say, we don't want to see you provoking any...
Provoking?
How do you provoke racism?
Acts of racism.
How do you provoke acts of homophobia?
Are you suggesting that anybody who commits that type of act would have been provoked by the rallyers?
Like, they go around and say, hey, dude, you know what would be really cool?
If you act homophobic.
That would be awesome.
That's what we're here for.
The rally, the Rolling Thunder participants, they're there to get people to do racism.
Yeah.
Jim, you got it all figured out.
But when you have your elected officials spouting this type of, it's absurd conspiracy theory imaginings.
When you have your elected officials, Justin Trudeau, coming out, I saw racism, transphobia, homophobia on display.
When you have your elected officials from the top down coming out and spewing this nonsense, what do you think happens?
Do you think some people believe it?
Do you think some people who, you know, like, what was his name?
Igor from Top Secret?
No, it was Hans.
He believes everything he reads in the New York Post.
You think some people out there who only read the CBC and who only follow your idiotic Twitter gibberish, Jim Watson, you think some of them might believe it?
You think some of them might be motivated to act based on your characterizing of peaceful protesters as whatever ist and phobe you can imagine?
Do you think it might motivate people?
Do you think it might give people the requisite political permission slip to carry out certain acts in their minds?
Justice against those who are fascists, racists.
Do you think, Jim?
Do you think, Justin, that might happen?
Don't think much longer.
Here it is, people.
Here it is.
Hard evidence that when your leaders spout rubbish, people are going to follow.
Now, I will add the caveat.
It's possible this incident is a hoax.
We've seen it before, and we can't pretend it's not.
Within the realm of possibility.
There have been people spray painting synagogues with swastikas and we find out it was actually a hoax.
What else?
I mean, we had a number of incidents that turned out to be outright hoaxes.
Then you had some incidents which actually turned out to be totally unrelated.
I think it was Philadelphia.
A bunch of tombstones in a Jewish cemetery fell over and people immediately rushed to vandalism.
Hate inspired vandalism and it turned out they fell over because of softening of the earth and high winds and it was totally natural.
But in this case, Jim, I wonder who could have motivated someone to vandalize a church because for those of you who don't know, what was referred to as the biker church where the bikers were meeting or parking in advance of the rally.
It had been vandalized.
Wait until you hear how they characterize the vandalism.
Demonize everyone who disagrees with, as whatever phoborism you can think of, anything becomes justified.
Now, I know what's going to happen as I bring this up.
It's not going to bring up the article, so let me just go back here, cut.
Let's just go to this article.
Let's just go to this article, people, and just see how they're describing it.
Police investigating hate-motivated mischief.
Hate motivated mischief.
I hate playing the game, imagine if this had been a synagogue, imagine if this had been a mosque, imagine if this had been a homeless shelter, or imagine if this had been an LGBTQ community event or something.
I hate to play that game.
They're calling the vandalism, for those who can't see it, it said, that's interesting, I can't see it from the...
Hold on, hold on.
It said no home for fascists, I believe.
No home for fascists or fascism.
Can't tell.
They're calling it hate-motivated mischief.
If this were any other entity, any other religious institution other than a church, this would have been front-page news hate crime.
We don't tolerate hate and division in this country, right, Justin and Jim?
Unless it comes from your mouths?
Police investigating hate-motivated mischief.
Oh, and by the way, if it's mischief, they better get locked away for two-plus months.
They better find the people who did this and put them in jail for months.
No bail.
And by the way, I'm not actually saying that seriously.
Even if they find the person who did this, they should not be locked up in jail the way Pat King is still locked up in jail.
The way Tamara Lich was locked up in jail on mischief charges.
They should have their day in court.
And they should be released pending their trial once they're found.
Ottawa police say they are investigating an incident of hate-motivated mischief.
Don't call it a hate crime because that's what you would do if it were another entity that had been attacked.
It's just mischief, people.
It's hate-motivated mischief.
Never mind.
At the Vanier Church, discovered three hours before a service was held as part of the Rolling Thunder bike rally.
Police received a call about the incident at the Capital Bikers Church on Carillon Street just before 7 a.m.
CTV News...
Come on, get out of here.
Where am I?
Okay, I don't think we care to...
CTV News Ottawa's Colton Prail reported...
Thumbtacks were strewn across the ground in the church's alley.
It's not going to do much to a wheel, people.
And someone spray-painted no haven for fascism on its walls.
Where could they possibly?
Where could they possibly have been motivated to think that a Rolling Thunder rally to actually pay tribute to the Cenotaph War Memorial by veterans for fallen veterans?
Where could they have been misled, indoctrinated, radicalized to believe that that had anything to do with fascism?
Where?
I don't know.
I don't know, Jim.
I don't know, Justin.
It's weird.
Like, you know, when you're forewarning about imminent acts of racism, homophobia, and what was the other one?
Sexism.
I mean, geez.
Who can be blamed?
Whatever.
I'll clip the article.
You can go read it.
You can just follow me on Twitter.
It's extremely insulting, Kimberly McGrath told the Canadian press.
I had to let it brush off my shoulders, but for a lot, it is traumatizing and it's hurtful.
Worshippers and Rolling Thunder supporters packed the church for the Bikers Church service Sunday morning, the final scheduled event of the weekend.
I wonder, I just, I wonder why there have been a spate of church burnings in Canada.
I wonder who could have possibly been misled.
Indoctrinated, radicalized, to think that the Rolling Thunder rally had anything to do with fascism.
And the ultimate, I mean, it's just, I know we're living in bizarro universe, bizarro times.
Who could think, who could not see the irony in spray painting on a church no home for fascism?
Who could not see the irony that maybe in some realm of...
You know, an accurate reality?
Spray painting on a church is the act of fascism?
I mean, the fascists literally engaged in what became known as Kristallnacht.
You know, breaking windows of synagogues.
That's how you fight fascism, people.
You become the fascist by spray painting on a church.
No home for fascists.
But you got Justin Trudeau's blessing.
You got Jim...
What's his name now?
Jim Watson's Blessing.
It's funny how these things happen.
It's almost like there's a cause and an effect between vitriol coming from the elected officials and people who listen to that garbage and their state-sponsored propaganda from the CTV, CBC, Global News, Radio Canada, you name it.
That feels good.
Okay, I feel better now.
And Good Times Music.
Welcome to the channel.
Now, I see Barnes in the background, so I'm going to do two things.
Standard disclaimers.
No medical advice, no legal advice, no election fortification advice.
The chats.
I'm going to miss some.
If I miss your chat and it's going to miss you, do not give the chat.
I don't like people feeling grifted, rook, shilled, whatever it is.
So don't do it.
But thank you for the support for those who do.
YouTube takes 30% of Super Chats.
If you don't like that, we are simultaneously streaming on Rumble.
I don't think we have Donald Trump numbers yet, but we'll see.
Rumble has a Rumble rant.
The same thing as a super chat, except Rumble takes 20%.
Better for the creator, better for the platform.
And what else?
You can support us at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
Drinking game every time Robert Barnes says it tonight.
Take a sip of whatever you're drinking.
I totally love you.
And I'll just catch up on six super chats that I missed.
And then I'm going to bring them up periodically as we go.
Seize the day.
I saw you yesterday at the rally.
Great to see you.
Pleasure meeting your hair.
Oops, I mean you.
It's funny running into actual, you know, you know them by avatars.
You know them by personalities through their comments.
It's nice.
It's beautiful.
It's surreal running into people in real life.
Cobes, I want to ask these men who are bold-faced lying if they think their mothers are proud.
Mendicino, etc.
I try not to go straight for the shame of the mother, but I do live as though my father watches everything I do.
Salting the streets, you say?
They were salting the...
Jack Spinney, I saw him, salting the cenotaph, shoveling it, clearing the snow, paying tributes to their brethren.
Only recourse is to ensure Poilievre wins.
I'll disagree with you on that, but I respect where you're going.
Ray K, Freedom Fighters Canada are investigating how the vehicles got on Rideau and heard you interview people who were told to go straight to the march.
Into what looks like a setup.
For good or for bad, my live stream is up there unedited.
People really need to appreciate they're on a live stream when they talk.
All right.
And Kinzinger submitted a resolution to send the truth to the Ukraine of Russia.
Supposedly uses...
Okay, I don't want to read this, but I'm going to read this.
Everyone can read this.
Now, on the menu for tonight, peeps.
It's lots of stuff.
I mean, the list Robert sent me was long.
The Trump criminal charges contempt.
I mean, it's a banana republic that we're living in everywhere.
But there's good stuff on them.
We're going to go over it all.
Who even needs to know what's on the menu?
Okay, I see Robert there, and I'm not going to keep him waiting much longer.
Robert, incoming.
Booyah.
How are you doing, sir?
Good, good.
Chat, let me know if the audio is off whatsoever.
Robert, before we get going.
What are you twirling around in your fingers, and what do you have behind you for a reading?
That's this week's book that we're going to be discussing on Friday at the VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com board.
Thomas Paine's Common Sense.
And this is Partagas Lusitania, which is a good cigar.
I think we have a total of 33 potential topics, which if we covered them in 3 minutes and 33 seconds each, might be within the 120-minute expected time frame.
You know, if we do anything within, hey, well, like Justin Trudeau's, I'm going to give you this, because it's 2022, I'm going to give it to you in 20 seconds, 20 seconds.
We'll get to the big stuff, and then we'll trickle through what some of the other stuff might be, more or less of import to the community.
What was I just about to say, Robert?
Oh yeah, so I mean, let's start with, I guess, the most obvious, anything new coming out of Russia-Ukraine this week?
Other than Nance, apparently, now, that guy that Nance, who was in, the standby guy who was in Ukraine, said he was going to go fight in the front lines, is now saying he's not going to, from what I understand?
Yeah, and Angelina Jolie, I think, is making her celebrity tour.
So, I mean, pretty much whatever Ukraine has accused Russia of doing, it's increasing evidence that, of course, in fact, it's Ukraine that's done it.
And this is across the board.
The confession through projection filter has been extraordinarily useful as our new Ministry of Truth here in the United States at the Department of Homeland Security is being run by someone that's deeply connected and embedded with the Ukrainian conflict.
Maybe that's the reason why she's been chosen.
But to give an illustration, not only is it, you know, like Russia was accused of mining civilian roads and dams and bridges, and it turns out it's the Ukrainians.
Russia was accused of targeting civilians and using civilians as a means of defense.
It turns out it was the Ukrainians.
Russians purportedly were doing mass desertion and mass confusion in terms of where their soldiers were located.
Ukraine had over 1,000 soldiers just quit.
You know, surrender yesterday while they had riot protests in some cities in the war, you know, old draft protests, which we used to torch New York City during the Civil War during the draft riots back then.
They're starting to have draft riots in Ukraine.
And all of that sort of craziness for people who want to follow the...
But what's happening legally, it's somewhat new.
Is that there's international lawyers gathering to support what appears to be a Russian intention of putting on a Nuremberg 2.0 set of trials for what took place in the last eight years by various Ukrainian militia and military components.
Militarily, even though the New York Times keeps predicting that it has military experts in the blue checkmark crowd and the D.C. Foundation crowd and the...
Some of those folks keep predicting that Russia's just about to lose the battle.
The more independent military analysts, and for those out there, I'll give you three YouTube channels as an example from pretty apolitical sources.
One military and foreign affairs channel.
He generally trusts Western sources more than I do, but he's apolitical in his analysis.
And to give an example, he recently broke down why Zelensky's claims that he was subject to this Russian special forces attack and his family and everybody was armed up and ready to defend themselves like something out of a movie was complete gibberish.
Just explained why using open source material that couldn't be true, but also give you breakdowns about terrain and weaponry because he knows a lot about that.
If you want someone that uses both sources and will cite the sources right there during the video, that's Defense for the Military Perspective Daily Updates.
Defense Politics Asia, as he pronounces it, I believe is from Indonesia, does really good military analysis on a daily basis with citations and sources.
And if you want a more pro-Ukraine perspective...
On the daily breakdown of the battle, the War in Ukraine YouTube channel provides that.
He has the various battalions and divisions listed on each side where they're located.
So you get a lot of...
Even though it's pro-Ukraine, it's not like the British Ministry of Defense that just makes up stuff on a daily basis.
As the BBC admitted this week, what we talked about from the very beginning, the ghost of Kiev was in fact fake.
I just read in the Times, I think it was called the Times of India, that they identified the ghost of Kiev.
In the spirit of it, which of course he wasn't.
They just grabbed some random guy and pretended he was related to the story of the ghost of Kiev or motivated, inspired it.
I mean, it's just one bogus story after another, after another, after another.
Everybody connected to this.
I'm sure people are discovering that our so-called military experts, these TV generals that are usually defense contractors, thinly disguised, but not fully disclosed on the media.
are as reliable as public health experts were during the pandemic.
They're discovering how much even some of their favorite conservative voices are in fact utterly unreliable on issues of war.
Sebastian Gorka has decided he's not going to follow me anymore.
He only wants to hear the Zelensky is Jesus propaganda.
You know, Mark, fake constitutional lawyer Levin, is busy lecturing everybody about why they should be on the side of George Soros and Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney and George W. Bush and the Biden administration in this war.
What will ultimately come out probably a year from now when Russia likely has won the battle in the East, Donbass, may go as far as...
Taking Odessa.
And in the interim, there's the risk of nuclear war still continuing to escalate as Ukraine does terror attacks inside of Russia.
Ukraine does various terror attacks inside this little region called Transnistria, which is a disputed region of Moldova, tries to expand the scope and scale of the war.
There's talk of Romanian troops coming in from the south, which is a NATO unit.
There's talk of Polish troops coming in from the west, where there's often been Polish claims on Western Ukraine that go back centuries.
So that you're still going to you still have risks of that.
But the most likely probable outcome is Russia takes back the Donbass, add certain sections of Crimea and sooner or later, presumably Russia.
Zelensky retires to Miami in Hollywood, makes his movies.
The grift goes well.
And a lot of people will see what Nuremberg 2.0 looks like, which is a lot of militia members and military members who committed some of the horrific crimes.
I mean, you're talking about people who film themselves assaulting underage girls.
I mean, it's going to be as bad as the Nuremberg trials in certain aspects of individual war crimes.
Now, someone had asked for the three sources again, Robert.
Just give them one after the other now.
Military and Foreign Affairs Channel.
These are all YouTube channels.
Defense, Politics, Asia, and War in Ukraine.
Those are the titles of the three Ukrainian channels.
If you want a more...
Russian sympathetic perspective.
Then you can follow the Saker.
You can follow Moon of Alabama.
You can follow Southfront.
Those are all three websites where you'll get military.
I mean, the Moon of Alabama has a military background.
People that write on the Saker have military background.
People that write at Southfront have military background.
One of my favorite guys I've discovered is on Twitter.
It's like the pandemic where you discover these data nerds who gave great information or just apolitical beforehand.
And that's arm...
Armchair, like this armchair.
Armchair Warlord is his Twitter name.
He's a longstanding U.S. Army guy.
He does breakdowns that are really practical, like short Twitter threads, not like Nutty Seth-whatever-his-name-was Twitter threads.
Short eight tweets kind of thing, four tweets kind of thing, but explaining things like how do fortifications work in modern warfare?
How can you infer the supply logistics of Russia or Ukraine based on the amount of artillery used in a given day?
It's conceded by both sides.
Really practical but very informative technical analysis.
You can get that from there as well.
So those are some of the independent sources that I've come across.
You cannot trust any of the institutional sources in the West because all they do is lie day after day.
They tell lies that contradict themselves.
We're going to get to those lies.
Oh, I always recommend for geopolitical analysis, every day you can follow the Duran, theduran.locals.com.
A lot of their board members are really informative and source and cite a lot of interesting information.
And both Alex's have their own channels, Alexander McCourse and Alex Christopher.
I may have mispronounced his last name.
I'm sorry if I do, but I mispronounce everybody.
They are producing hours of video content every single day.
So if you want the geopolitical summation, and they review hundreds of sources of information, maybe even thousands when you include the Telegram channels and other things they follow from all sides of the equation, India, China, Brazil, plus Russia, Europe, and the rest.
The best analysis you'll get is from the Duran.
And again, you can get that at the Duran's YouTube channel, Duran.locals.com, or either of the Alex's channels where there's, again, they're producing.
Four to five videos on a daily basis.
They're destroying it in terms of the quality of the content, the engagement, and their daily covering of this.
And I was going to say, the reason why Robert did not mention the Duran, you mentioned it so many times and you go on it regularly.
I was referencing the other ones because the Duran is a geopolitical channel rather than a military channel.
They say that.
They advise people, go elsewhere for pure military.
We'll give you what our best take is, but we're not military experts.
So if you want geopolitics, that's the Duran.
People have been asking me, where can they follow the battle?
Because people that are interested in strategy, just interested in that, and they want apolitical information.
All those three sources have their biases in the sense of which sources they trust, but they're all apolitical in how they analyze that information.
And that's why I find it useful to use.
Patrick Lancaster is a journalist on the ground.
So is Eva Bartlett.
So is Graham Phillips.
All of them, Graham Phillips and Eva Bartlett are more on the anti-war left.
Patrick Lancaster has no apparent political bent that I can tell.
And there you can get on-the-ground journalism.
You can still get it from Gonzalo Lira.
What has been confirmed is what happened with Gonzalo Lira happened to hundreds of other people in Kharkov that same weekend because they decided, the Ukrainian special security forces decided to film it and show it to Western media because they were proud of it.
They're talking to this little old guy.
About how they're arresting him with eight guys with big guns because of his social media posts.
This is...
Social media.
I'm going to get this.
This was an Associated Press piece that Jack Posobiec tweeted earlier.
It's a four-and-a-half-minute piece.
You know, I'm so...
What's the word?
Not gun-shy, but I'm so afraid of retweeting something that might not be accurate.
Because this is an Associated...
It purports to be an Associated Press piece, and I think it is.
And it's four-and-a-half minutes of...
Showing that the Ukrainian forces are going around arresting people who are posting pro-Russia or anti-Ukraine social media posts.
And some of them are old people.
They're like really old.
These are not saboteurs.
And you see some of these fake right wingers like that idiot shipwrecked crew.
Again, never hire a lawyer who goes by the name shipwrecked.
Probably not a good idea.
Well, it's martial law.
You can violate all civil liberties during martial law.
Do you want a guy like that defending you in a January 6th case when he's celebrating the violation of core civil liberties and civil rights in Ukraine?
You think he's really going to fight for you?
This is the guy that covered for a lot of corruption over the past half decade.
Kept saying that I had some false incentive by questioning the great Amy Coney Barrett and how great she was going to be.
I mean, that's some of the people on the right.
As to why does Biden, you know, this will be a good bridge into the Ministry of Truth.
Why is Biden putting a ministry against disinformation out there right now and using a person deeply embedded and connected to all the Ukrainian politics to do it?
Because they're doing what they're doing in Ukraine to create as an example to do here.
I mean, think about what's the mindset of Ukrainian secret services.
Imagine if the KGB during Berea had the local Russian media follow them around when they did their various purges, Stalin purges.
That's what the Ukrainian secret forces did.
They were proud of this.
You see some of these people they're interviewing, they're old people.
You have a guy's old wife begging for him not to be taken away.
And they're proud of it.
Everybody, you know, Sebastian the Swamp Gorka, Mark Fate, constitutional lawyer Levine, these people should be ashamed of what they have supported and subscribed to.
Here, Robert, I'm going to bring this up.
This is part of it.
He posted a tweet that said, you know, the Ukrainian flag is a rag, I think.
We're showing it to him.
I mean, look at this.
Look at these guys.
I mean, this is secret.
Look at that guy.
That's a little old guy in a t-shirt.
All will be in accordance with Ukrainian law.
They're showing the social media posts.
Of course, because Ukrainian law allows them to lock people up for 15-plus years for voicing dissent.
He said the rag is a symbol of death, referring to the Ukrainian flag.
That's because in Kharkov, that's what happened.
After the coup happened in 2014, the U.S.-sponsored Maidan coup, Kharkov wanted to separate because there, the president that they had elected, had just been kicked out illegally.
And they wanted to create their own separate republic and not be part of this coup government.
So what did Ukraine do?
Kolomoiskoy, I can't even do his name.
That's a whole other hush-hush story, that guy, one of the oligarchs, that helped put Zelensky in power, now is hiding out on the land because he tried to go AWOL from the deep state.
But again, that's a hush-hush story for VivaBarnesLaw.Locals.com.
Is Harkov tried to rebel, and what did they do?
They sent in people to disappear people, whack people, massive civil rights violations, shelled the residences and neighborhoods.
That's why, for example, right now they're taking video footage from kids who are hiding out in basements in 2015 in Donbass, and they're pretending that's happening in Harkov from Russian bombing, which is actually not happening in Harkov at all.
And so you get a sense of it.
And you have the fact that our, as I broke down on a bourbon with Barnes, Oh, Robin, you're doing it on purpose now.
Yeah, exactly, exactly.
You have to force everybody to drink.
Is that General Milley and our military deliberately lied when they said that Russia could win this in 72 hours.
You have a country that's 1,000 kilometers from east to west, 500 kilometers from north to south.
You have a border.
The borders of the current conflict in just the eastern and southern sections are as far as Chicago to Memphis, as far as Chicago to New York, as far as New York to North Carolina.
That's the scope and scale.
Russia has already occupied a region of Ukraine.
It's bigger than the entire United Kingdom.
So that gives a sense of the scale of the conflict.
This was going to be an extended, prolonged conflict, especially with Russia committing to not targeting civilian infrastructure, to trying to, basically, unfortunately, they incentivized Ukraine to use civilians as shields, as has happened and as have stolen other places.
At the Steel Factory and elsewhere in Maripol and throughout Ukraine.
But there is confirmation on the Gonzalo Lira story that some people had questioned.
The fact that actually he was, what this AP story confirms, he was one of the 400, they don't mention him specifically, but he was part of this, clearly this, they went around and grabbed about 400, 500 people, according to the story, hundreds of people, filmed them, and solely because they were posting things they didn't like.
That's it.
That was it.
None of these people.
No evidence that they were actually providing material aid to Russia.
None of that.
Even though, again, in Kharkiv, heavy, heavy Russian population there that is aligned more in that direction and sought independence after the coup of 2014.
That's why they're targeting him to shut him up.
One of the questions I had from a while back, and we throw the number out, or the number comes up like 14,000 civilians that were...
Killed through shelling in Donbass as of, you know, since 2014 to present.
The one question is that 14,000, that includes civilians caught in the crossfire between the Russian, call them the royalists.
most of them were civilians.
Well, no, that's it.
I presume the 14,000 civilians is an accurate figure, give or take.
But it's, it's them dying as a result of shelling from both Ukraine against Russian loyalists and Russian loyalists fighting Ukraine.
So the 14,000, Just so that people can say you want to be totally objective and totally neutral in this.
The 14,000 includes civilians that were killed in both sides of the fighting.
The question is going to be, who do you attribute more to?
The vast mass of almost everybody that's been on the ground there, almost all those civilian deaths came from Ukrainian shelling of Russian positions.
Ukraine continues to deliberately bomb, including using cluster bombs in civilian locations.
You know, send out fake notices to have people gather at a particular square and then bomb it.
I mean, this is the mindset.
I mean, the people are going to be embarrassed.
As there's more and more surrenders, more and more arrests, more and more captures, what do they find?
They find these guys with Nazi books, Nazi symbols, Nazi things on their knives and on their belts.
I mean, and then the stories that come out, what they're confessing to is crime after crime after crime.
And this is happening relatively quickly.
The same thing is, and then what the refugees are reporting.
I mean, that's what they're reporting in mass.
Again, when refugees are given a choice between going to Russia and going to the rest of Ukraine, 90% of them in this region go to Russia.
So that gives you a mindset of who they think caused most of the harm and damage.
The actual residents there said almost all of it came from Ukraine, not came from the various militia units defending their attempts to be independent.
Remember, this region is 90, 95%.
Russian by origin or orientation politically.
If you look at a map, it's pretty much what my first hush-hush was about this conflict.
The part where Russia is is where there are a lot of Russians.
I still think that will probably be the endgame.
People are going to continue to get bombarded, unfortunately, with a lot of fake news.
And remember, people said that I was making this up when I talked about it.
They said, oh, this wasn't happening.
That's Russia.
Russia is where they're censoring the press.
Russia is where journalists and dissidents are disappearing and being imprisoned and being killed.
No, it's Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine.
And I want to play this.
There was another part that I wanted to...
Because, you know, this piece, presume it's accurate.
AP content.
I couldn't figure out if they were...
It's not playing now.
I couldn't figure out if the purpose of this was to show that Ukraine forces are doing good, like this is what they should be doing.
This is what Ukrainian thought, because they filmed it for the purposes of sharing it with Western media sources.
But I think even some Western media sources were a little unsettled by it.
But it's clear, Ukraine did this to, you know, who's a traitor?
A traitor is anybody who says something they don't like on social media.
So, I mean, that's...
And you have some people on the so-called right, like Shipwrecked Crew, justifying this.
Justifying this.
That's how dangerous this is.
This is why Biden thinks he can do his ministry of misinformation and get away with it, because you have idiots and traitors.
Like shipwreck crew, traitors to the Constitution, traitors to our liberties, traitors to our history who want to promote this nonsense.
And the piece here, in an attempt to justify it, they say what they're doing puts Ukrainian civilians at risk.
Just watch this here.
So now this is a neighbor fighting with another neighbor in a building that seems to have been shelled by Russians or struck by Russians.
That's what it's implying.
He will be cured.
This visual, you know, not knowing anything more than to the context of what hit that building and how it happened, it's still a shocking visual of the ravages.
It's like what Jack Posobiec says.
DHS is watching and taking notes.
They're using this as an example.
And they know they have corrupt, traitors, treasonous allies like Shipwreck grew amongst the conservative legal crowd.
People like Mark Levin, fake constitutional lawyer.
I don't know him to have ever taken a constitutional case in his life.
He's just another great con man conservative, like Sebastian the Swamp Gorka, who are these warmongers who are promoting lies.
And they will all be, when I was out there, when we were out there, by ourselves, for the most part, early on in this pandemic.
Saying this was bad public policy, this was not consistent with good logic or core liberties or our constitutional freedoms, whether the Charter Freedoms of Canada or the Bill of Rights in America.
We were mostly alone.
Fox News wasn't out there.
Mark Levin wasn't out there.
Ben Shapiro was coming out with excuses for it.
All these so-called conservative press were nowhere to be found when we needed them.
And unfortunately, they're going to be proven as embarrassingly wrong as what they did during the early stages of the pandemic.
I guess now, see, we need to touch on that book, chapter one, from the Grey Lady Winks, but I think we need to get to the...
Ministry of Truth?
Well, they're not going to call it the Ministry of Truth.
They've solved the problem.
You just call it Ministry of Disinformation, and then it's not the Orwellian Ministry of Truth.
Don't worry.
It's so beyond the pale.
They call it the Disinformation Governance Board.
Governance Board is a ministry.
Disinformation is another word for truth.
So you have your Ministry of Truth.
It's not even by another far-fetched name.
It's literally just synonyms for the existing words.
What the heck is this disinformation governance board going to do?
How do they set it up?
What powers does it have?
And is this not an overt example of policy trying to dictate how social media platforms...
What's the word?
When they curate their content.
I mean, is this not interference from the government with social media?
Yeah, I mean, it's multiple levels.
So it looks like they were originally going to make it part of the National Security Council and pretend it was only going to be foreign disinformation.
And this is consistent with the original Smith-Munt Modernization Act and all of that, which we discussed a couple of weeks ago.
And that was changed by Obama to liberalize the means by which the U.S. could disseminate disinformation domestically as well as internationally.
That government-sponsored, government-subsidized, government-paid-for, government-promoted propaganda could now be domesticated legally within the existing funding structure when before it was supposed to be only international.
We limited our lives just to foreign audiences officially.
Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, incubator babies.
You can figure out how well that worked.
But then they decided...
The theory there is you're monitoring foreign information.
That's the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
All of those things fit within that legal capacity that when you're monitoring something that's foreign...
Like stealing Russian assets, as an example, theoretically, it's not necessarily governed by constitutional constraint.
You're governing things outside of the border, and there the Constitution's application varies, hence Guantanamo, hence rendition to various foreign places where we torture people.
Under U.S. jurisdiction.
But they decided to step it up.
They're seeing how Ukraine war propaganda was working like a charm, especially including amongst the so-called conservatives, and said, hey, why don't we just put this under the Department of Securitas for the Fatherland, which I've always loved.
We created the Department of Homeland Security after 9-11, which sounded exactly like...
The fatherland securitas from the Nazi days.
It was like somewhere around Dr. Strangelove was up there designing this stuff with his arm.
He just can't try to keep it from doing the salute during the film.
That's how these people are.
And so, in fact, the woman they put in charge of, aside from being nutty and having a lot of very embarrassing social media posts, she has been herself a minister of disinformation for the past half decade, especially as it related to Russia, Ukraine, and Trump, but not limited to it or restricted to it.
Apparently has family ties to the far west of Ukraine, where a lot of the ultra-nationalism neo-Nazis originated way back before the first...
Before the Second World War, in between the First and Second World War.
But that's what it appears to be.
And what was amazing is that he let the cat out of the bag, the head of the Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security, at a congressional hearing last week.
Because apparently none of this has ever been legislatively authorized.
None of this went through any Administrative Procedure Act notice and comment as to its rules, its governance, its guidelines, its appointments.
None of that.
Nobody that's been appointed to it has ever been approved of by the Senate.
It was just created out of the blue and sort of hidden within our massive government bureaucracy to be...
To basically govern and control and censor and recommend censorial attitudes and behaviors and organize it in a centralized manner with governmental support and subsidy.
And you're right.
It raises everybody that's got a case, whether it's Bobby Kennedy's case against Facebook, Berenson's case against Twitter, everybody out there should now ask to supplement the record.
With reference to this body, because apparently this body's already existed.
It's been going for a little bit, apparently.
Jen Psaki admitted it.
We asked them.
We monitored.
And they have backdoor channels to social media platforms.
But Robert, first of all, we just hit 10,000 viewers live on YouTube.
So congratulations.
Here's your gift, people.
The video.
Robert, do you see this?
Yes, yeah.
Because this is the nut job that's ahead of all this.
That's it.
It's when a hot stick takes some lies and makes them sound precocious by saying them First of all, it's Hank's wife from Breaking Bad, but let's keep going.
Oh my god, it's that part.
What happens when you put cat ladies...
Who are big fans of Rachel Maddow with power over your information.
That's basically what you have.
You know she's got like eight cats in the background.
I did not notice that.
They're probably screaming and wanting to attack her for singing that badly.
Well, I was going to say, in fairness, she has, you know, it's decent voice.
It's high school, you know, pitch perfect stuff.
But that's good.
And by the way.
The Mary Poppins of misinformation.
Well, that's the thing.
It's not just an embarrassing video.
And look, if I ever become Prime Minister or, I don't know, Governor, and someone's going to pull up a video of me waxing my legs with a drone, fine.
That'll be embarrassing.
But it's on the substance of this video.
She's talking about misinformation.
I mean, it's almost describing exactly what they're doing.
But there are so many videos and her active role in promoting misinformation, it's very fitting that she should end up where she is.
But Robert...
This segues into, oh gosh, Gulf of Tonkin.
You give a bunch of examples of classic misinformation in the past.
Can you describe a few of them?
Gulf of Tonkin, for example, let's just deal with that one.
What's the deal with Gulf of Tonkin for anybody who wants to use this as an example in discussion with someone else tomorrow?
Well, that's going to be a hush-hush this week at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
I think it'll be our fifth false flag because I've covered...
Remember the Maine, the Hell of Spain, covered the sinking of the Lusitania, covered Pearl Harbor, covered, and which one?
Oh, I think I covered the Japanese excuse for invading China the first time.
So this will be the fifth in that series of false flags.
And then later on, we have the Gulf of Tonkin relates to the Vietnam War.
Then we will have the incubator babies, which is Iraq story number one.
Then we'll have everything related to bin Laden, which is Afghanistan.
Then we have everything related to weapons of mass destruction for Iraq war number two.
Then we have maybe Gaddafi's got weapons for Libya.
Then we've got false flags of chemical weapons attacks.
Twice to justify attacks on Syria.
We have bombing the wrong place in Sudan and Somalia.
We have some of the exaggerated and one-sided allegations related to the bombings of Serbia.
So the false flags are numerous and endless.
And then we got it for every other country.
We got, you know, the Reichstag for Nazi Germany that justified their seizure of emergency powers.
We got the Soviet Finnish War where they, you know, they bombed themselves just like the Japanese did to justify going into Finland.
I got some Finnish ancestry in my DNA.
So there's a long history and litany of these.
I mean, again, Orwell's predicted this.
1984 was not supposed to be a predictive script or prescriptive script for governments to utilize.
But as Zelensky's speech, remember, Zelensky's speech to Congress looked almost exact.
Somebody took...
The 1984, the cinematic version of it, and said, hey, let's replicate that for Zelensky's speech to Congress.
These people really think this is a guidepost to utilize.
I've got to bring it up, Robert.
You're going to have to do USS Liberty as well.
Oh, I already have.
I've already covered that at a hush-hush.
It's not what people think it is.
Well, I'm going to go back and watch it because I know what I think I thought I'd learned about it.
And I want to talk about this.
Cats cause insanity.
It is...
I'm wondering if there's some truth to this because there is toxoplasmosis, which you find in the feces of cats, which causes insanity.
Possible.
I have another reason to dislike animals.
That's good.
And Robert, wait a minute.
Where can we watch this hush-hush?
At vivobarneslaw.locals.com Now, Robert, I'm going to...
There's nothing left here.
Speaking of like...
You know who one guy...
That they've accused of spreading fake news, who was right about Trump in 2016, right about the pandemic in 2020, right about election fortification from the get-go.
A lot of these other guys, Levin, Shapiro, others were late to the party on the election issues, and who's been right about this war from day one, but is facing ridiculous litigation, and that man is Alex Jones in Austin, Texas.
What came out this week is that he had offered...
As part of the settlement structure, the plaintiffs refuse to dismiss these entities that they're just interfering with and have no assets.
They know the other entities that are not part of bankruptcy can cover any of the debt.
They refuse to do it.
But what was even more stunning is the amount of settlement that was disclosed that they have turned down in the paperwork, according to the Austin Statesman, which is that Alex Jones offered...
$10 million to these Sandy Hook plaintiffs.
More than half a million each.
And by the way, several of these Sandy Hook plaintiffs have no connection to anyone who died.
You got former feds suing because they're so traumatized that Alex Jones would question the great integrity of the FBI.
We'll get to the Ranieri case and some other cases about the integrity of the FBI in a little bit.
At what point do we get to start second-guessing these victims?
I mean, there's this whole moral mantra over the past several decades which says the bigger of a victim you are, the more of a hero you are.
And this is where I always like Trump's joke about John McCain.
I like my heroes not to get captured.
Part of what he meant was we shouldn't celebrate people for failing, should we?
Or for getting captured.
Why does being a victim make you a hero?
It doesn't really.
Now, I understand plenty of POWs, you know, great people, etc.
Before I get all the hate from all the POWs or POW supporters, I understand that's a caveat.
But there was a point of truth to that that definitely applies to this culture where we have a pyramid of hierarchy of where you are on the victim chart gives you better moral standing.
And that's what's happening at this point.
Nobody wants to second guess anybody in these Sandy Hook plaintiffs, even though, frankly, they're lining their pockets, standing on the graves of dead kids.
And again, some of them don't even have any relationship to the kids who died.
But it's like, I mean, they're attacking the First Amendment, they're attacking the Second Amendment, and now they're not even willing to accept a bankruptcy proceeding where they're getting the corrupt United States trustee who has caved to illicit influence from the Biden Justice Department and has gone into bankruptcy court.
A lot of the U.S. trustees are corrupt.
One of the first things people ask me, well, what should a new president do?
Fire all the U.S. attorneys and all the U.S. trustees.
Start there.
Fire everybody that's in the FBI that's anybody in the hierarchy.
Just fire them all.
Fire anybody in the Pentagon that's above a certain level.
Because, frankly, you couldn't get worse than what we currently have.
Just promote randomly, and you'll be better off.
The U.S. trustee interfered in the case, is trying to force, prevent the now, I mean, this is Alec Jones, he's been denied a right to bring his motion to dismiss, denied a right to bring a motion for summary judgment, denied a right to bring an anti-slap motion,
denied a right to speak about the case outside of the context of the case itself, or he will be punished inside the courtroom, denied a right for a trial on the merits, and now they're trying to deny him a right to use the bankruptcy laws to Come up with what is an incredibly generous settlement to these greedy, grifting, ambulance-chasing plaintiffs who want to violate the First and Second Amendment.
And I know what you're doing.
I know this tenor is going to rub people the wrong way.
I know, but people got to quit.
Because something bad happens to somebody you know.
Or to a family member does not give you immunity or impunity to attack the First Amendment, to attack the Second Amendment, and to line your pockets and go after people who are not responsible for that injury.
And I had only heard previous to this that Alex Jones had offered like $150,000 per plaintiff.
But no, it is what it is.
It's a weaponized system to treat.
People differently based on political ideology, political leanings.
And to say I'm immune from criticism because some tragic event happened in my past.
If that's going to be our standard, free every criminal.
Because there's not a criminal in the world that hasn't had some trauma in their past.
So all the criminals now get a free pass.
We've got to quit giving a free pass to these Sandy Hook plaintiffs just because something bad happened to some of them.
Again, not all of them.
To some of them in the past.
Because Alex Jones had nothing to do with that.
He had nothing to do with it.
Quit blaming him for something that he had nothing to do with.
This is nothing more than politically motivated and financially motivated grifting at its core that's undermining our Constitution and disrespecting our legal system and encouraging a lot of people who are watching this to say our legal system is a joke.
Alex Jones is being denied basic core constitutional rights and basic liberties and protections just because of his political beliefs.
I'm bringing this chat up.
I have a bunch of starred chats, which I'm going to get to afterwards or in a pause.
But Plaid Padre.
Viva, you mentioned Diagon the other night.
It's 100% true.
You should reach out.
I'm the Padre for the community.
Now that I know what a Padre is, like a religious chaplain, government coming down hard on us.
Padre, are you the Padre who spoke at the rally yesterday?
Because if you are, one heck of a speech.
And if you're not, Padre gave one heck of a speech also.
I'm going to see how I can reach you.
Robert.
On more promising social media sides, Alex Berenson's case did survive part of it.
Part of it.
We predicted survived a motion to dismiss, and he will get some discovery against Twitter.
So Berenson had sued Twitter for First Amendment violations, for, I guess, breach of contract, because that's where, or breach of some form of contract.
Promissory estoppel.
Okay.
And because everyone remember, there were two aspects to the claim.
One is that...
Twitter defamed via the manner in which they removed his content and branded him.
And the other was that they violated an agreement which was not to remove the content.
And to comply with their own COVID misinformation policy.
And so he filed suit.
They filed the typical motion to dismiss on two grounds.
One...
Section 230.
They succeeded on the Section 230 but failed on their...
Explain that aspect of the terminology in the states.
So, I mean, I still disagree with this application of Section 230, but it's what we predicted would happen because it was in the Northern District of California.
So even though he had some novel theories, including common carrier duties and other things, I had raised aspects of some of these theories before in the state court in California proceeding, ran into similar hurdles.
In my view, that these should have been exceptions, but you just can't get any judge in California to say so, state or federal.
And so the court said Section 230 immunized anything they did.
In terms of censoring him, in terms of suspending him, in terms of speech they made about him on Section 230 grounds.
Now, the part of the claim we said he had a chance to succeed on was that he said that there was specific...
People who are agents with ostensible authority at Twitter, including an executive vice president, made a specific promise to Alex Berenson that they would not suspend him without notice and that they would comply with their own COVID misinformation policy.
They didn't.
They suspended him without notice and their suspension was not consistent with their own COVID misinformation policy.
And then people lied later about what had happened.
That claim, the court said, is outside of Section 230, is outside of Twitter's First Amendment protections, and said he denied the motion to dismiss and ordered expedited discovery on that question.
Although it might be moot soon if Elon Musk is successful in his purchase of Twitter, because one of the first things he may do, other than reinstating the Babylon Bee and Donald Trump and some others, is probably reinstate accounts like Alex Behrens.
Reinstate?
And explain what happened and make sure that it doesn't happen again.
It's a victory and a loss in a sense because it's just such unique circumstances to Berenson's claim in particular.
Twitter doesn't talk with the hoi polloi or the lowly peasantry before kicking them off for the most part.
Berenson's lucky in that he had direct dialogue and said, we won't do this to you or we'll give you a chance and we will...
I'm reluctant almost to mention the nature of the tweet.
That got Berenson kicked off, but it is now currently undisputed fact that a certain intervention does not prevent a certain transmission.
It's an undisputed fact now, and the narrative has shifted to, well, it decreases symptoms and reduces hospitalization, whatever.
What he got booted for is now an undisputed, admitted public fact.
But at the time, he's just, I guess, very, very lucky in a sense, because but for that, his suit would be tossed.
He had certain assurances that they violated.
But they still get away with the Section 230.
And it's like...
Robert, I don't understand how the courts at a preliminary motion to dismiss stage are taking for granted certain fundamental principles of law that, as far as I'm understanding, haven't been formally affirmed, approved, and ratified by the courts.
That 230 immunizes any and everything.
Has there been a hearing on the merits, a judgment, other than the original two?
And the same thing as the state actor theory.
He's just dismissive of that right out of the gate.
I mean, like a couple of sentences.
And essentially what the courts are requiring is you need proof that Joe Biden called up Twitter and said, remove Bobby Kennedy's account.
And if you don't have that...
Then they're not allowing you to sue in the Ninth Circuit.
Now we'll find out with Bobby Kennedy's case because he had a lot of evidence of the scale and scope of direct collusion with Fauci targeting Children's Health Defense and Bobby Kennedy to remove him from Facebook and to demonetize as much as possible everything related to Bobby Kennedy speaking out about what was happening with COVID especially.
And yet the district court didn't allow that case to go forward.
So that's going to be argued, oral arguments coming up in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and we'll see what happens.
We'll see if the U.S. Supreme Court takes one of those cases to assess it.
But what's happened is the courts have basically interpreted Section 230 to mean complete immunity for everything except exceptional circumstances.
I understand that's how they've interpreted it.
Yeah, it's not what the law says, but it's...
When has there been...
Settled law.
When has there been a decision from a higher court that says, indeed, this provides blanket immunity that precludes suit to even get to the merits?
There's a Ninth Circuit decision.
There's some California appellate decisions that use language to that effect.
But they never go that far.
It's by implication rather than straightforward.
Because the plain reading of the law doesn't support the breadth of their claims.
But it started slowly and steadily.
And the key, in my view, also was big tech.
Corrupted the legal academy and legal news publications.
So big tech was often sponsoring professors, sponsoring think tanks, sponsoring certain publications, sponsoring advertising in some of those publications.
And so some of these publications that report to be independent legal analysis of issues related to Section 230 were in big tech's pocket.
So almost every academic law review article supported big tech, an expansive interpretation of Section 230.
Almost all the everyday, you know, your courthouse news, all those, your legal publications, Tech Dirt, some others, all were just, you know, some of the blogs, extremely pro-big tech on everything related to Section 230.
And if Section 230 didn't cover it, then the First Amendment immunized big tech.
You know, it was that combination.
You're David French's of the world.
What I call on the conservative side, a lot of your corporate whores.
A lot of those, you know, that crowd was very much has helped create a belief amongst judges on both the left and the right throughout the legal professional class that Section 230 was a magic, was meant to be a magic pill that immunized.
Almost anything Section 230 did.
But credit to the court for being able to at least carve out this part of the claim so Berenson's claim can go forward.
And he'll either get legal relief, I believe, or legal remedy.
Twitter would be smart to settle, not to subject themselves to discovery.
Or Elon Musk will reinstate him because it looks like his purchase is likely to go through.
Especially given his very big, huge win in Delaware court this week.
Do we get to that right now?
One question before that.
People are worried about whether he has the money for stuff.
Winning that case was worth at least $13 billion to Musk.
And probably when you aggregate its value, including its market impact, winning that verdict from that judge was probably worth more to Musk than the entire cost of the purchase of Twitter.
Okay, now hold on.
Before we get there, Berenson's case.
It's going to proceed.
He's going to get to discovery.
Is that discovery going to be...
The judge ordered expedited discovery.
▲
Export Selection