Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 11, 2022 - Viva & Barnes

02:08:54

Millie's Massive Ego; Orgy of Evidence; Canadian Crime & MORE! Viva Frei LIVE!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	We have to start with Justin Trudeau today.
	you Thank you.
	You deserve better.
	You deserve a government that's going to continue to say, get vaccinated.
	And you know what?
	If you don't want to get vaccinated, that's your choice.
	But don't think you can get on a plane or a train besides vaccinated people and put them at risk.
	We need to be strong in the decisions we're taking going forward, and we need to put people first, which we have always done.
	And I'll be honest, you know, like I do, there's lots of people out there who don't agree with that.
	And the reality is, that's okay.
	We're in a democracy.
	People can make themselves heard.
	And that's part of why we need to have this moment for people to make that choice for the future.
	The counter to tyranny is democracy, is elections, and that's exactly what we're putting forward, because we have put Canadians at the forefront of everything we've done, and we know that's what we're going to continue to do.
	So I need you, all of you, to keep stepping up.
	We need to keep working to protect and build a better future together, and that's why I need you.
	To continue to step up.
	Step up.
	Step up.
	Talk to those folks who are still wondering whether they should get vaccinated and tell them, yes, they need to get vaccinated.
	Give medical advice.
	Protect ourselves, protect our communities, and protect our kids who can't yet get vaccinated.
	That's what we need to do.
	I need you to get out there.
	Protect our kids who can't get vaccinated.
	Protect them.
	Dr. Kieran Moore, one in 5,000, as confirmed by German authorities, per dose, risk of mild, mild temporary heart inflammation.
	Turn it off already, please.
	My eyes are burning.
	I'm leaving it up for one second.
	It's been a while since we've all started with a little vomitus in our mouths.
	Vomitus a la Justin Trudeau.
	Let me see if we're still green.
	Because for some reason, Justin Trudeau intros tend to get us immediately yellow.
	What do you know?
	Green like the vomit in the vomit Twitter emoji.
	Okay.
	Did someone say orgy?
	I was wondering if orgy in the title would get also flags.
	But there are non-sexual orgies.
	As we'll discuss in the context of this stream.
	I'm leaving this up for one second.
	I want to show you one thing.
	I think I may have done it.
	I think I may have come up with a hashtag that can actually trend.
	Never forget, Justin Trudeau is worse than toilet water.
	Trudeau de toilette.
	Yes.
	Yes, people.
	For those of you who don't know, we've all heard of eau de toilette.
	It's cologne.
	Typically, it makes us nauseous just because of the way it smells.
	Eau de toilette, for those of you who don't know, means water from the toilet.
	Trudeau.
	The last three letters of his last name spell Eau.
	Trudeau de toilette.
	If this doesn't trend, people, if we cannot get Trudeau de toilette...
	Because he's a vomitous excuse for a politician.
	If Trudeau de Toilette cannot trend, I will give up my pursuit of making something trend.
	Hashtag Trudeau de Toilette.
	It's the best.
	I mean, it's the best.
	Oh, there was my verbal diarrhea text that I did not chat to the room.
	And a link.
	Trudeau de Toilette.
	I mean, I'll tell you one thing.
	I didn't look it up to see if anybody had thought about it before me.
	If it exists already, spontaneous creation.
	Like Picasso and that other guy who copied Cubism from him.
	I'm joking.
	Two ideas.
	It was an original thought for me.
	I do not know and I do not think that there's anyone who's done Trudeau de Toilette ever before.
	If they have, I haven't seen it.
	And so it would be a spontaneous, original creation of my brains.
	Okay, so hold on a second.
	What do we typically do here?
	The standard intros, people.
	First of all, good afternoon.
	Stop knocking the camera.
	Good afternoon.
	I didn't cut my hair.
	I wasn't going to make it the talking point of last night's stream with Steve Dace.
	It's all there.
	And now it's clean and brushed.
	So it's extra Bob Ross fluffy.
	Okay.
	Orgy of evidence.
	We talked about it yesterday, people.
	Lash out in violence, and lo and behold, you can actually turn the FBI into victims of injustice as opposed to the perpetrators of it.
	True to form.
	What I said yesterday, something happened today, and now you got those blue check marks running around saying, look.
	Look at how bad the FBI are the victims because people are lashing out at them now with violence, and it's objectively bad.
	We'll get more details as to who it is.
	We'll get into it.
	Orgy of evidence.
	To quote the movie Minority Report.
	Do you know how many orgies I've had in the business of crime investigation in his career?
	None.
	General Milley, who I might have been misspelling his name every now and again, Wrote a resignation letter which oozes with pomposity, arrogance, and confession through projection.
	We'll get there.
	And Canada.
	We'll talk about what's going on in Canada.
	Just another terrible incident day after day.
	Viva and his main event.
	That's not bad.
	And standard intros, people, because we might touch on some election fornification.
	No medical advice.
	No legal advice.
	No election foreignification advice.
	Super chats such as these.
	YouTube takes 30%.
	If you don't like that, we are simultaneously streaming on Rumble.
	Let me see if we're live on Rumble.
	Rumble has these things called Rumble France.
	Rumble takes 20%.
	So it's better for the platform to support a platform like Rumble.
	Better for the creator because 80% ends up in the supportive coffers of the creator.
	If you want to support in another way, That is neither through Rumble directly or YouTube.
	VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com Or you can become a member on YouTube.
	Patreon and Subscribestar.
	Okay.
	Superchats.
	I saw the beginning of your last video about maps and that lady defending them.
	I'm a survivor of five separate assaults from four adult males.
	I will never call them maps.
	They are...
	So, um...
	You know what?
	Let's do this now.
	I'm going to do this now because I didn't get to give the full commentary that I wanted to yesterday because Stephen Dace was in the background and I knew he had to be somewhere at 7 o 'clock and I didn't want to waste his time watching me have him watch me rant about...
	We're going to play this clip again because it's shocking.
	Now, it will be the standard argument.
	We don't know who this woman is.
	We don't know who she represents.
	She could be a nobody.
	Libs of TikTok go out and find the nobodies to then pretend that they represent something.
	No.
	There is a discourse going on right now that cannot be denied anymore.
	Whether or not it's a push from a vast minority who purport to reflect a meaningful percentage or, if not, the majority, there is a noticeable, undeniable push.
	To normalize criminal behavior.
	Not like what some people might call immoral behavior.
	Criminal behavior.
	Now, the attraction to minor persons in and of itself is not a crime.
	That would be something akin to thought crime.
	The acting on it is a crime.
	And it has a word.
	It rhymes with potato memorabilia.
	Then you get individuals like this who purports to be a sexual therapist putting out messages that seem to resonate or at the very least people are not thinking that there's something absolutely outrageously wrong about these messages in an attempt to normalize and I would dare say flip the script and
	make Objective criminal behavior seem like it becomes...
	The person who commits the crimes is the victim of their own circumstance.
	Listen to this.
	And I'm a licensed professional counselor and sex therapist in Erie, Pennsylvania.
	And today I want to talk about minor attracted persons.
	Let's just stop it right there.
	Minor attracted persons.
	There's the distinction that...
	Minor attracted persons don't necessarily act on it.
	Minor attracted persons, it's such a...
	Maps.
	Maps.
	Slight parentheses.
	I went back to look at John Podesta's email about the handkerchief with a map on it that seems pizza-related.
	Still couldn't make sense of the context, but it had nothing to do with this type of maps.
	It looked like maps relating to houses that they were visiting.
	Whatever.
	Parentheses closed.
	Minor attracted persons.
	And now you got Hochschul out of New York saying that they're going to revise the laws and not refer to convicted criminals who are in jail as inmates, but as, I believe, incarcerated persons.
	Because inmates, I don't know who attributed moral culpability or moral value to the word, as opposed to the acts that resulted in them being an inmate, but they said the word is demeaning.
	It marginalizes people.
	So we're going to call them incarcerated persons.
	MAPS refers to the big P word, potato files.
	But that's, wait until you hear it.
	Minor attracted persons because they are probably the most vilified population of folks in our culture.
	People who are attracted to young people, minors, potato files, that's what it is, are the most vilified.
	people in our society?
	You know what you think might be more vilified?
	And most folks, folks in our culture and probably the most vilified population of folks Hold on.
	No, you know who might be more vilified than adults who are attracted to children?
	Maybe adults who eat other humans.
	Cannibals.
	But we should probably call them cannibal attracted.
	Let's call them caps.
	Murderers are also Vilified.
	Are they maps also?
	Murderous, attracted peoples?
	Don't judge them.
	Don't call them murderers because that marginalizes them.
	Don't call cannibals cannibals.
	Just call them dietary diverse peoples.
	DDPs.
	...of folks in our culture.
	And most folks are making incorrect assumptions about them without actually knowing much about them.
	The assumption about minor attracted persons is that they are persons who are attracted to minors.
	It's not an assumption.
	It's definitional.
	It's in the word.
	That's what it means.
	That's what the judgment is about.
	That's what the presumptions are about.
	And they're not presumptions.
	I'm not saying whether or not they're good at math, whether or not they're good at sports.
	People are saying that adults who are attracted to minors are attracted to minors, which itself is not a crime to have the thought.
	But certainly a crime to act on it.
	So is the presumption that people who have urges don't act on them?
	Is that the presumption?
	And we're to assume that maps have these urges on which they don't act or they don't feel compulsion to act?
	What exactly presumptions are we making about minor attracted persons?
	Potato files, other than the fact that they are adults attracted to minors.
	Do tell, sex therapist.
	And those assumptions create harm for an already marginalized population.
	You may have noticed that I'm using the term minor-attracted person.
	Oh, we noticed.
	We're outraged, but keep going.
	...sometimes abbreviated to MAPS instead of the more commonly used term pedophile.
	And I'm doing this because the term pedophile has moved from being a diagnostic label to being a judgmental, hurtful insult that we hurl at people in order to harm them or slander them.
	So, interesting.
	Potatophile, pedophile, when used definitionally is diagnostic, and when used as an insult, it's not being used literally.
	It's the same issue with the original six-letter F-word, that it meant at one point it was a derogatory term for people who actually engaged in certain behavior, and then it broadened out to have derogatory...
	Insinuations or implications without actually meaning specifically what the term actually meant by way of specific conduct.
	Much in the way bitch is now used not even to refer to women, but rather men who have certain behavioral patterns.
	Or, you know, if you're just cooking crystal meth a la Jesse from Breaking Bad, you just use it in a totally different sense.
	So it does have a diagnostic definition, pedophile.
	And yeah.
	You got people like Elon Musk occasionally using it humorously to insult people without using it literally.
	But let's keep going on because she doesn't want to use it even diagnostically because it marginalizes people who might act on their attractions to minors.
	I also prefer person-first language that recognizes that any label we might apply to a person is only part of who they are.
	Minor attracted persons.
	We don't want to marginalize potato files.
	So murderers also.
	We don't want to marginalize them.
	So we're going to call them people compelled to take other people's lives persons.
	We're going to have criminals.
	We're going to call them criminal attracted persons.
	We'll call them craps.
	And then we're going to have...
	Say craps.
	Don't call them criminals because that's going to offend them.
	And people who have a propensity to commit fraud, we should call them faps.
	Fraud attracted persons.
	Faps.
	Those are all deliberate jokes.
	So it's a joke, but it's an offensive joke to people who have actually had a life experience.
	You don't want to marginalize people who have criminal thoughts, and you don't want to marginalize people who break the law.
	If identifying something, as a matter of fact, is marginalizing anything, we're using terms differently, and we're not using them properly.
	Let's see what the I'm not your buddy guy says.
	I was called a bigot back in 2012 for saying this exact thing would happen.
	Side note, I do think more people need to play chess as a child.
	The problem with this, and I touched on it yesterday and didn't want to get too far into it, is that this is now going to be used by those who said gay rights activists was the slippery slope because it was going to lead to this.
	I never bought that argument.
	I don't agree with that argument.
	Gay rights, when done as per actual civil rights, are what two consenting adults decide to do among themselves.
	And by and large, to the extent it doesn't affect or hurt anyone else, it's nobody else's business.
	I'm so progressive, I don't care about people's sexual orientations, sexual preferences.
	I don't care.
	I'm so progressive, I don't even care.
	But this was the argument raised by people who opposed gay rights.
	They said this is slippery slope.
	They're going to go from here to maps where they're going to have to argue now to put the M at the end of LGBTQIA+.
	Some people already say the M is incorporated in the plus because the plus is everything else to be more inclusive.
	This was the argument used by people who were opposed to gay rights because they said this is going to be where it goes.
	And right now, these people...
	Like this woman right here, are proving those people who said that way back in the day right, unfortunately.
	They're fundamentally different arguments.
	Gay rights, like I say, consenting adults doing what they want among themselves, a question of equal recognition under the law for tax purposes, for marriage purposes, whatever.
	Consenting adults doing what they want among themselves that doesn't harm or intrude on anybody else's rights, nobody else's business.
	But people said it.
	You have people pushing it now, and I wonder what the reaction from the gay community is going to be, because this undermines their push for equal rights, and this is going to legitimize a lot of people who I think raise flawed arguments, but who are unfortunately now being proven right because of the spirit of the time, to quote Stephen Dace.
	Okay, Nate the lawyer.
	Trump has the search warrant.
	Should he release?
	I'm going to star this, Nate, and think about it.
	Strategically, Strategically, I am all about transparency.
	If he can release it without being accused of violating a gag order, without being accused of violating whatever provisions might apply if it is in fact a sealed warrant, I am a fan of transparency.
	I think I would release it.
	But then again, maybe don't release it because it'll keep people guessing.
	Maybe they'll keep one side of the aisle continuously clamoring that it has to be bad if he doesn't release it, which might be the best reason not to release it.
	Let them make their beds of...
	We got demonetized.
	Let them make their beds of false presumptions and scream and cry and then release it and show that it doesn't have any of the things that they said it had in it.
	Or it does have some of the bad things that they say it had in it.
	Let him scream and cry anyhow.
	I am a fan of transparency.
	I would probably release it if I could do so lawfully without running further risks of being accused by a partisan corrupt FBI of having violated a seal order as might relate to the warrant.
	Merrick Garland is speaking in 10 minutes live.
	Would you consider streaming this on your live?
	Yes, I would.
	Yes, I would, Brad.
	Yes, I would.
	Hold on.
	If anyone has the link, we're going to do it.
	We're going to do it.
	May I ask what Merrick Garland is speaking on?
	I think I can imagine.
	Do it.
	Do it.
	Ah, wait.
	Fais-le.
	Fais-le.
	Okay, je vais le faire.
	On va le faire.
	Je vais trouver le lien.
	I'll go find the link in a second.
	But you know what?
	Before we get there...
	I'll finish up the super chats, and then we'll do the FBI orgy of evidence.
	I missed the birth of my first child.
	I missed an episode of Matlock.
	My soup boiled into vapor.
	I didn't take out the pooch on time, and now I'm late for work, waiting for this stream.
	Worth it.
	Well, I didn't miss the births of any of our children, and I actually captured it on GoPro.
	It's kind of amazing.
	Dan has a link to the short version of my interview.
	Okay, good.
	I'll get it for my brother, Chet.
	Thank you very much.
	And...
	There we go.
	I got that too.
	Let's get the Merrick Garland.
	Let's do the Garland.
	Okay.
	We'll do it.
	But first, the news that I'm sure Merrick Garland is going to talk about.
	Do I quote myself first or no?
	Let's go here.
	No, let's go to Ron Filipowski.
	Reporting.
	There was some sort of a threat.
	That person appeared to be armed.
	There was some conflicting information about whether that person had body armor.
	There were some reports that they had body armor.
	There were some reports that maybe that body armor didn't exist.
	This is all still developing, so investigators are still trying to put all this together.
	But this is the FBI Center.
	It's very secure.
	You can see they have fences up here.
	There's cameras.
	There's a place you go through here.
	Then you go into another building.
	This is a pretty secure building.
	So whoever showed up here, they had a weapon.
	There was some sort of threat perceived.
	Sheriff's deputies came here just a short time ago, and they've been here and they have left.
	We are told that the FBI is sending what they call a...
	Response team.
	I have it here somewhere.
	Oh, it's an evidence response team.
	So what they'll be doing is trying to collect evidence from the scene here.
	So what they'll do is they'll come in with this crew.
	This guy knows his stuff.
	Mostly physical evidence is what they're looking for.
	They're not going to collect spiritual evidence?
	I mean, they're going to come in.
	They're going to collect, I think, physical evidence.
	Although, it'll be difficult to see if anything, you know, literally from here in the parking lot, it doesn't look like anything.
	but these are professionals and they'll be collecting anything that they can.
	And they'll be doing that.
	This guy's a professional.
	I'm told this is about to be taped off here.
	So that hasn't even happened yet.
	So this is going to be basically what's a crime scene.
	He got there before they fenced off the area, so he could be potentially interfering with evidence if it got to where he is.
	He got there before the FBI sealed off the crime scene.
	Interesting.
	And I'm not saying anything.
	I am not making any affirmative statements.
	I'm only finding it curious that media is there before the FBI seals off a potential, not a potential, but an alleged crime scene.
	It's almost like the New York Times being there when James O 'Keefe gets arrested.
	There are cameras here, and those cameras may have captured something.
	The person drove off.
	This is great.
	There are cameras.
	There are cameras.
	They may have gotten things, unlike those Jeffrey Epstein cameras in a maximum security prison.
	These cameras might have gotten something if it's incriminating.
	If it's Ray Epps showing up...
	The cameras might have been deleted.
	Well, the cameras might have malfunctioned.
	Got onto the highway out here on 71, apparently headed north.
	That's where the Ohio State Patrol got involved, and they've been chasing this suspect for some time.
	I'm told somewhere up in Clinton County, 71. I just want to go back to one thing he said.
	Sheriff's deputies came here just a short time ago here.
	Then you go into another building, put all this together.
	But this is the FBI center.
	It's very secure.
	It's very secure.
	You can see they have fences up here.
	There's cameras as a place.
	It's very secure.
	They have fences there.
	But fences and walls don't work, people.
	And it's racist to suggest that they do.
	FBI is racist.
	That is how it works, right?
	It was racist to build a wall.
	Trump was racist for wanting to build a wall.
	They don't work.
	And yet the FBI has a racist fence around its perimeter to keep it safe.
	Yeah.
	So that's what happened.
	Oh, yeah.
	Sorry.
	I got to go back to Filipowski.
	This is Filipowski who...
	What did he say yesterday that we were...
	Oh, yeah.
	He was making the FBI look like the victims.
	And I said yesterday, this is why you don't engage in violence, people.
	You turn the victimizer into the victim for the purposes of PR, because I know a lot of people out there are fixated on the idea that CW, we'll call it CW, civil whore.
	A lot of people are fixated on that idea.
	This is going to be, in as much as it might be metaphorically or mutatis mutandis, a different type of conflict of our era.
	It's going to be informational, and it's going to be about winning minds and winning hearts and souls.
	And you knew, Dan, I said it yesterday.
	Anybody who goes out and commits an act of any sort of violence, it's going to be weaponized and used against them.
	It's going to be exploited by the FBI, by the state, to impose more of what they already want to impose.
	And I said, treat anybody.
	I said it tongue-in-cheek.
	Treat anybody who encourages violence as false flag adversaries.
	Treat them as like if Ron Filipowski started a second Twitter handle, Anonymous, and went into conservative Twitter and said, yeah, guys, CW, it's the only way.
	Gotta go back and get it.
	It's the only way out of this.
	You can't laugh your way out of tyranny.
	Treat everyone who says that that way, even if they're not and even if they're sincere, and everyone will be better off.
	I said it yesterday, today, an incident, and look at this.
	Filipowski, an armed suspect threatened the Cincinnati FBI office today in the midst of 48 hours of denunciation of the FBI by right-wing politicians and media members over the Trump search.
	Well, wouldn't you look at that?
	Isn't that convenient?
	Sorry, isn't that special?
	Is the church lady, Archer.
	Well, isn't that convenient?
	All of this denunciation.
	You can't denounce the FBI anymore because some whack job might go out and commit an act of violence.
	Right-wing politicians can't complain about FBI overreach for reasons exactly like this.
	When you complain about something, you encourage other people to act.
	It's almost too convenient.
	It's almost perfectly timed.
	It's almost...
	Can I say scripted?
	Or is Judge Guerra?
	It's almost scripted.
	It's predictable.
	That's the bottom line.
	Predictable.
	Um...
	An attack in the wake of politicians complaining about massive FBI overreach.
	Can you imagine that pathological framing?
	And then I just, you know, I love it.
	I'm not sure that I remember liking the movie, but it at least had a good scene.
	And that good scene is this scene.
	Sorry, let me just go share the tab.
	Tabarouette.
	Here.
	Minority Report.
	This scene, I don't remember liking the movie, or I don't remember thinking the movie was the best movie ever made.
	I just remember this scene.
	And it stuck with me.
	This is what we call an orgy of evidence.
	No many orgies I had as a homicide cop.
	How many?
	None.
	None.
	This was all arranged.
	By the way, just...
	No many orgies I had as a homicide cop.
	Notice the qualifier.
	Know how many orgies I had as a homicide cop.
	Which implies that this individual might have had orgies.
	Not as a cop.
	It's an orgy of evidence.
	It might be totally bona fide.
	There might be individuals out there who are easily manipulated, who can be convinced to go out and do this, who can be enraged to the point of doing this, or it could be an individual who could be inclined to do this, could be motivated by, I don't know, you know, like the Ray Epsis of the world.
	We're going to go in the Capitol!
	In the Capitol!
	Or it could just be an absolute...
	There's variations of how this can go.
	There could...
	Mutatis mutatis.
	Some people can say this never happened.
	It's an outright lie.
	There was no individual.
	It's a lie intended to be used politically.
	Other people can say it's a total false flag.
	The individual who did this is actually on the FBI payroll, was in touch with the FBI, is an FBI asset doing it for them so it can be weaponized.
	Other people can say The individual actually did it.
	They did it sincerely, but they were egged on, manipulated, encouraged by FBI informants assets who egged them on to do this, a la, you know, maybe Gretchen Whitmer.
	And others can say this is an enraged citizen who's had enough and who snapped.
	Gradients of how you want to call this.
	None of which make a difference to my assessment yesterday.
	Don't do it.
	Don't support it.
	Don't promote it.
	Because...
	It will come back to bite you in the butt.
	You're not going to accomplish much except that which is specifically contrary to your interests and end goal.
	Therefore, it makes it counterintuitive, counterproductive, and I would say, above all else, immoral.
	Okay.
	Boom.
	111 for this being a great channel.
	Thank you.
	Glow sticks.
	I now know what that means.
	Glowies.
	What's Viva talking about?
	Who knows what Viva's talking about anymore?
	So that's the news.
	People want to whip people up into a frenzy.
	And by the way, it's not an accident.
	The media talking about this day in and day out, it's not just conservative media.
	It's also left-wing media, CNN, MSNBC, who love radicalizing people in the bad way.
	Not the good way like Stephen Day said yesterday.
	The bad way.
	They love it.
	They've got their fences.
	They've got their armed guards.
	They're safe.
	They're secure.
	They don't mind whipping people up into a frenzy.
	They don't mind if they, in fact, whip people up into a frenzy and it actually leads to people getting hurt because they then get to weaponize that even more.
	They don't mind, except when it's Bernie Sanders or Rachel Maddow who radicalized an individual who then goes up and shoots A bunch of Republicans at a baseball game.
	Then there's no causal connection anymore.
	Then it might just be Trump who turned this guy into a crazy.
	Who knows?
	Joe Biden's unused kickstand.
	I was suspicious of this avatar because the all caps is reminiscent of the Russian sex bots and those fake Trudeau accounts.
	Oh, are we back to green?
	I think we might be back to green people.
	No, not yet.
	We were temporarily.
	So, are we live yet with...
	Garland is speaking.
	Let's do it.
	Come on, people.
	Let's go see what he has to say.
	This is going to be like ad lib free living.
	Ad lib free living.
	Here we go.
	Has been challenging, especially as we aren't funded.
	Before doing this work, we are doing it because we know it's important.
	It is urgent.
	And we are spending the time away in addition to our everyday duties adding this work.
	We are burnt out.
	We are fatigued.
	And we need support to get the people who are most impacted, people of color, those of us in the community, transgender people, and people who are engaged in contact sex work because they are having to face should they get sick or should they have work and pay rent.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	I wish I had gotten the beginning of that.
	Thank you, Zephyr.
	And now, Paul Nagel, Executive Director of Stonewall Community Development Corporation.
	What did we just walk into?
	Take the mask off.
	I'm the Executive Director of Stonewall Community Development Corporation, where our goal is to see New York City's LGBTQ older adults in safe, welcoming housing they can afford with access to health and mental health services that meet their unique needs.
	What did we just step into here?
	I'm also a 64-year-old gay man who survived full-blown AIDS and lost all infants who were dying.
	Right now, I have a friend who's got monkeypox and we're waiting to make sure that it doesn't get into his eyes, which is a whole new adventure for us.
	I'm really proud of the community and I'm very proud of the caucus.
	Their focus on evidence-based systemic responses is really awesome.
	And from actually citing the lack of evidence...
	Data collection that would create the evidence that we need to base these strategies on.
	Create evidence?
	That's not how evidence works, sir.
	And that they be very frank and culturally specific, because that was a very important turning point in fighting AIDS.
	Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak here.
	What did we step into here?
	I don't know what this is.
	I want to remind our viewers, we are on standby any moment.
	We will see Attorney General Garland stepping out at the Department of Justice briefing.
	As soon as he does, we will be taking that live rod.
	Wearing a mask like that is not just useless, probably counterproductive.
	But of course, we will be taking it in full for you as soon as he does step out.
	It was set to take place here about four minutes ago, so we are expecting these statements to be had.
	Any moment now, again, we'll be taking that info as soon as that does happen.
	So I'm going to put this on mute, and I'm going to take this out of the screen, and I will see when Garland comes live, because I'm going to have it in the top corner of my screen.
	Much like Minority Report, people, my screen looks like a kiddie version of Minority Report.
	Okay, I may be in the minority, and the fact that I'm an orderly and organized person, I would cut the fro to something more tame, just my two cents.
	I have considered your proposal, and I have dismissed it.
	Which might be the perfect time.
	I'm going to play something from Alex Stein.
	It's just glorious.
	I can't believe that New York...
	I saw some pictures of Monkey Poxy.
	It looks...
	Keep your schmeckle in your pants, people.
	Get married.
	You don't have to get married young.
	But promiscuity is not all it's cracked up to be.
	Of course, I might not know because I never was.
	Did this guy just say that he works at a community vomit center?
	No, I think he said...
	One of them said, you know, it's affecting sex workers.
	Okay, anyhow, no comment.
	Hey, Fry, can you look into FBI crossfire hurricane that Trump had declassified day before he left office as possible reasons for the raid?
	So I talked about it with Barnes yesterday.
	Oh, Garland's on.
	Someone's on.
	Let's see who this is.
	Okay, no.
	Garland's not on yet.
	There's no point really hypothesizing.
	I don't know what Trump declassified.
	I'm not exactly familiar with the procedure either because apparently there's a five-year limitation within which to potentially declassify or argue over the classification of documents after you leave.
	So it's...
	But Barnes' working theory is that this was information that Trump, to the extent that the allegations are true, that he actually left with 15 boxes containing classified information, that it might have been embarrassing information to the administrative deep state.
	Do I have a booger?
	Don't do that.
	Don't do that.
	That it might be embarrassing to the administrative deep state.
	They were negotiating.
	Trying to get it back, trying to ensure that Trump would not either release or whatever.
	That didn't work.
	And then they go in and purport that it's a violation of the Presidential Records Act and the warrant was totally legitimately issued by Judge Bruce Reinhart or Reinhold, who is an Epstein attorney, had to withdraw from a file involving the Clintons and Donald Trump for conflict of interest.
	And then two weeks later, signs off on this warrant from an FBI with a proven, demonstrable history of corruption.
	So yeah, we're only hypothesizing right now and there's not much going on other than recycling of similar news because there hasn't been much new news.
	Okay, let's see what this is.
	Kitty Cat says, Hey Fry, HR 1808.
	Assault weapons man.
	Passes house.
	Ultra MAGA under attack.
	Ray calling threats deplorable and dangerous.
	$78 billion for IRS.
	I'm just a salty shield maiden with questions.
	The 87,000 new IRS agents.
	And apparently, I could not independently verify on the link because whenever I clicked on the link of the IRS website to the job descriptions, it never went through.
	Might have been too much traffic even for the...
	For the IRS, but apparently, in the job description for the IRS, it says, must be willing to use deadly force.
	Use for the firearm, must be willing to use deadly force.
	That's from a screen grab, and I could not verify that from the IRS website itself, because every time I went to click on the link, it never went through.
	But they're hiring 87,000 more IRS agents.
	To audit.
	To investigate.
	Does everyone appreciate what that is?
	Let's just say the average salary for an IRS agent is $50,000.
	That might be close.
	Times $87,000.
	That's $870,000.
	Damn it.
	50, 1, 2, 3. Times $87, 1, 2, 3. Equals.
	That's a lot.
	The heck is my problem?
	$50,000.
	I don't think my calculator goes that high.
	4.35 E9.
	Okay.
	Billions of dollars.
	No, he's not on yet.
	Garland's coming.
	Can you imagine that?
	Just set aside your moral beliefs.
	Set aside everything.
	Just economically.
	Shipping billions of dollars in aid and monetary assistance.
	And other assistance to Ukraine.
	Billions on billions of dollars.
	Spending billions of dollars on IRS agents because you've got to come up with that cash somewhere.
	The government can't give your money away without finding new sources to collect it from.
	Billions upon billions while printing money with supply chain interference issues with a barely recovering economy.
	What does that do?
	What does that do as a matter of policy?
	But it's not an accident.
	At some point, you've got to squeeze the blood from a turnip.
	You're burning cash.
	You're printing cash.
	There's massive inflation.
	What do you got to do?
	Justin Trudeau is going to have to do the same thing in Canada.
	You're going to have to find more cash.
	And where do you find that when you're the government?
	Well, you either sell more arms to other countries, which is an immoral way of raising funds, or you just find more tax dollars.
	And how do you find that?
	87,000 new IRS agents.
	If anybody can confirm, I mean, I know it's been tweeted by reliable sources.
	I just could not see the actual link on the IRS website, which specified that one of those 87,000 agents, they should be ready to be armed and use lethal force.
	Okay, so stop sharing here.
	We'll bring up another article.
	Hold on one second.
	The video.
	It's classic.
	Alex Stein.
	You gotta hear this.
	You gotta hear this.
	I won't play the whole thing because you've got to go to Alex Stein's Twitter feed.
	Not that he needs me to tell you to do it.
	But go subscribe to Alex Stein on Twitter or wherever else he puts out his content because it's classic.
	Here.
	Hey guys, I'm Alexander Stein, and I'm a pansexual daycare employee.
	And this is the problem, is we're talking about zoning restrictions, but we do not have a monkeypox vaccine.
	And there's like a public speaking...
	Point of order, Mr. Mayor?
	Yeah, what's your point of order?
	What's your point of order?
	The item is not...
	What I love, it's the deadpan comedy.
	What's that point?
	Wait until he calls the guy Omar.
	He's not speaking on the item.
	Yes, it's about Z9, Omar.
	No, first of all, hold on a second.
	We don't directly address members of the council.
	Can you understand?
	I just have to pause it here.
	I'm not belittling or demeaning city council.
	Period.
	This guy doesn't think that he's city council.
	He thinks he's the queen of England or the king of England.
	The city council.
	Or public servants who serve the citizens.
	And this guy's sitting in his plexiglass castle telling the guy, you don't refer to me as...
	First of all, hold on a second.
	We don't directly address members of the council.
	Now, by the way, I understand the essence of the rule.
	It's that you don't want people getting up and attacking personally members of the council because it's not good for decorum, for debate, for discussion.
	You want to keep the peace.
	I understand the rationale of the rule.
	It's not all dumb.
	But this guy thinks that the rule, which is intended to avoid conflict, actually puts this guy on a literal pedestal where the lowly citizenry that this city councilman represents...
	You don't address me, pleb.
	Directly address members of the council.
	No, I'm not done talking.
	You get to listen.
	You get to listen.
	Because this guy's the judge.
	This guy's like Alex Jones' judge.
	I know the rules aren't fair, Mr. Jones, but you can...
	I can interrupt you, but you can't interrupt me.
	Just checking to see if Garl has me.
	I get to interrupt you.
	Life's not fair, Mr. Jones.
	This is my courtroom.
	This guy, city councilman, treating his position as city councilman like he's Queen of England.
	Now I have to find the tweet.
	Oh, oh, no.
	Let's keep going, because it gets fun.
	We don't address members of the council directly, and we are on item Z now, which is a zoning item, so I need you to limit your comments to that item.
	That's what I'm saying.
	I'm actually still talking.
	Oh, I'm still talking.
	You need to direct your comments.
	Shut your face, Pled.
	I'm not done yet.
	You are subservient to me.
	I'm not literally a civil servant to you.
	That item, and you need to identify yourself for the city secretary, because you are not signed up on this item.
	Okay, it's Alexander Stein, 7509.
	So this is a zoning issue, but we need to deny it because there's a huge danger with these kids.
	These kids, they don't have a monkeypox vaccine, so they're out there walking around, they're walking to school, and it makes them very vulnerable.
	And this is the thing, Omar, is you guys don't realize...
	I'm going to ask you not to do that.
	Do what?
	We don't address members of the...
	Do not say my name, Pleb.
	It's your Highness.
	It's your Royal Highness.
	Don't do that.
	It's counseled directly.
	And certainly don't do so by their first names and in a disrespectful manner.
	Don't do it by their first names and in a disrespectful manner.
	I'm sorry, Omar.
	I didn't realize calling someone by their first name was disrespectful.
	Unless, of course, you think you are some form of seniority.
	Seniority?
	Lordship.
	Do not call me Omar.
	You call me your lordship on the city council when I represent you.
	Keep your comments to item Z9, please.
	It does go on, and it's funny.
	It is funny.
	It's not walking the line as much as when he was making fun of that, not the Blaze, but the vice reporter at the CPAC.
	But go watch the rest, because I don't want to spoil the punchline for everybody.
	It's classic.
	Do not call me by my first name.
	I'm a city council person.
	I rule you.
	Peasant, you shall not address me directly.
	Don't look at me in the eyes.
	Bow as I enter the room.
	And don't look at my eyes.
	This is the mentality of the privileged political class.
	Right down to municipal politics.
	Alex Stein is quite funny.
	And ballsy.
	Because it takes courage and a little bit of stupidity.
	Not stupidity, but...
	Recklessness.
	Wanton disregard to do that.
	Less than 5,000 IRS agents carry a gun.
	They are used for special investigation and are not auditors.
	I used to practice before the IRS.
	Robin.
	Garland is chickening out.
	Well, he's not there yet.
	I got the screen running in the background.
	He's definitely not there yet.
	Oh, that guy's the mayor?
	I don't care.
	That changes nothing in what I just said.
	But it does make it a little...
	I mean, it's like they've gone into this type of feudalism.
	They think we are in some sort of royal system.
	And they are royalty.
	And...
	Don't use my...
	Don't address this directly.
	Certainly not in a disrespectful manner.
	You call me Mr. Or...
	Mayor.
	If that's who he is.
	Okay, so it's classic.
	Alex Stein, classic.
	I just saw a green come in here.
	Let's see this.
	Holy moly, Viva.
	I've been catching up on your last three videos and 38 minutes behind on this one.
	Steve Dace was great.
	Huzzah for Blaze TV.
	It was great.
	Oh, you know what?
	While we're here, actually, I'll find the video that I saw which explained the history of the First Reich, Second Reich, Third Reich.
	Which we didn't really have time to get into yesterday.
	Don't speak unless spoken to.
	That's effective.
	You didn't sign up.
	The administrative state?
	You didn't sign up.
	How about you just let...
	First of all, the fact that Omar couldn't tell that that was a total goof, like it was a total goof on him, that it was a troll, that it was like those two California dudes that go to city council meetings, and the fact that he didn't know he was being played is a problem.
	The fact that he couldn't let what he obviously thought...
	Was a citizen, just speak for five minutes, even if you're not on point, and even if you meander, and even if you're rambling.
	The fact that he would not let a citizen who he thought he actually represented speak, speaks volumes.
	Classic.
	Oligarchs, that's the word I was looking for.
	IRS just bought $1 million worth of ammo, says Fox Clips.
	And you know what's going to happen?
	And I hate having these thoughts because I don't want to put the juju out in the universe.
	No pun intended, people.
	If this is in fact what's going on, and they're talking about arming more IRS agents, and you're going to have the IRS agents, if past is prologue, you're going to have IRS agents hired by a highly weaponized, politicized Biden administration, target, probably, maybe, maybe pull something like, The Obama-IRS scandal.
	You're going to have them target conservatives.
	You might have them target off-the-grid people.
	You might have them target people who might be anti-government so they ain't paying their fair share of taxes.
	And you're going to have these federal, employed, armed, partisan, and probably aggressive individuals confronting people who they're going to deem as inherent, intrinsic threats.
	Off the grid, anti-government, conservative, don't want to pay their taxes.
	Treat them as threats.
	You're going to have a confrontation, something along the lines of, who knows, past is prologue, history rhymes, Waco, Ruby Ridge, whatever.
	Something innocuous is going to escalate into something catastrophic, and you're going to have the media coming out and saying, look at this far-right extremism living off the grid.
	They don't want to pay their taxes when they're confronted by these IRS agents.
	Just hire to make sure everyone pays their fair share.
	It escalates into tragedy.
	That's my fear.
	And I hope to be wrong.
	Is the coward speaking yet?
	No.
	Garland's not there yet.
	By the way, very unprofessional to be 20 minutes late to a speaking key.
	Now, luckily, I have my notes lined up so we can kill the time until we get there.
	That's my fear.
	History rhymes.
	You can see where this is going in real time.
	Let me see what that says there.
	That says, take my glasses off.
	Thank you.
	I think that avatar says he tells it like it is and it's sheep presumably running off to the slaughter.
	So...
	Thank you.
	Was I 51 minutes late today?
	I set it up for 2 o 'clock so there's a problem.
	My computer is not still on Texas time.
	But I probably screwed something up.
	I lost all my firearms in a boating accident.
	Well, you know what?
	If we have time, let's get into this story, which is, I call it Canada crumbling.
	We're seeing massive, massive spikes in gun violence in Canada, despite the fact that there has never been more regulation, not just on firearms, on the types of firearms that are responsible for these crimes.
	We have never had stricter gun laws in Canada, and it's only getting worse.
	And it's not like we've had them for a year, so it hasn't had time to take effect.
	We have had the strictest gun laws, among the strictest in Canada, I don't know, since the long-arm registry, which we still have in Quebec, even though it's no longer a federal requirement.
	You get a rifle in Canada, to get a rifle in Canada, a hunting rifle, which has a maximum magazine capacity of five rounds, by law.
	Cannot have a rifle that has a higher capacity than five rounds.
	You have to take a two-day course.
	You have to have extensive background checks.
	If you're married, you have to have a letter of authorization from your spouse.
	You have to renew it every five years.
	And then in Quebec, you're on a registry.
	The government knows what you have, where to come look for it, where to come make sure that you're storing your ammunition in a locked box.
	Separated from the firearm itself, the rifle itself, which itself has to have a trigger lock.
	Cannot be stored loaded.
	Above and beyond, all that.
	They know where you live.
	They know what you have.
	Despite all of that, Canada has seen a surge in gun violence.
	It's a surge which, when all policy fails, because the policy's been there, it's not just that gun violence has remained plateaued.
	It's surging.
	What do you do?
	What does the government do when their existing laws and their existing governance screws up and doesn't achieve the desired results and actually produces the opposite from the desired results?
	Well, you give yourself more laws, you give yourself more power, you fail upwards, and you give yourself a raise when you screw up.
	But let's just see what's going on in Canada, my country, and my province, and my city.
	Listen to this.
	CTV News.
	The date, people.
	Let me just make sure I pulled up the right article.
	I hate...
	August 11th.
	That's today.
	CTV government propaganda.
	Two shootings within minutes of each other in Montreal, my city, leave one dead, two injured.
	By the way, one thing I will...
	One thing I'll guarantee you.
	These crimes...
	Let me just preface this right now so no one takes it out of context.
	Hashtag sarcasm.
	These crimes were undoubtedly, undoubtedly committed by someone who went out, followed the two-day course to acquire a small arm, had to register it because you have to register small arms.
	You have to get government permission before you transport it.
	This individual undoubtedly did all of that, did the background check.
	Got disposal permission to have the small arm and was carrying it around outdoors lawfully when he just snapped.
	That's undoubtedly what happened.
	Hashtag sarcasm.
	Let's just see what happened.
	It's funny.
	Despite all of the laws in the world, it's still happening at an exponentially increasing rate.
	Two shootings that occurred within minutes of each other in Montreal's north end left one person dead and two others injured.
	Wednesday night, last night, according to the Montreal police, 1020, two men opened fire in the direction of four people standing on the grounds of a high school on the Charney Street in Montreal North.
	Now, for those of you who don't know, Montreal North is not the safest place.
	It's probably among the highest crime areas in Montreal.
	When officers arrived on the scene, they found a 26-year-old man with serious injuries.
	So this sounds like it's...
	Drug-related?
	Sounds like it might be gang-related?
	Not random?
	But the guy obviously had a license for that firearm.
	He obviously took the two-day course because Justin Trudeau said that you have to in order to get a gun.
	That's what happened, right?
	I mean, the laws should have prevented this because he undoubtedly got the gun legally.
	He undoubtedly spent two days of his life...
	Following a course, taking an exam, passing the exam, registering the gun, getting permission to transport it.
	Undoubtedly, right?
	He was transported to the hospital where he later died.
	The second victim, 25, later showed up at the hospital to be treated for non-life-threatening injuries in his upper body.
	The suspects arrived.
	They were on foot, but we believe they had a getaway car.
	Police found several bullet holes in the parked cars, yada, yada.
	Couture says it's too early to know if the suspects and the victims knew each other.
	I could venture a reasonable guess.
	One resident says he's noticed police patrols in the area have gone down in recent years despite an uptick in violence.
	I'm sure defund the police, another great government initiative, has nothing to do with that.
	I'm sure vilifying the police at every step of the way has nothing to do with that.
	I'm sure demonizing the police for everything, scrutinizing them, and in some cases, jailing them when things go south in confrontations has nothing to do with that.
	It used to be two, three per day, but that was 10 years ago.
	Said, yada, yada.
	Around the same time, in Riviere de Prairie, RDP, also known as, a 20-year-old woman was injured when at least one shot was fired in the direction of the vehicle she was sitting in.
	Police say she was hit by shards of glass caused by the projection.
	She's slightly injured.
	Officers note that she had stopped her vehicle in a commercial parking lot on J&J.
	I don't know where that is.
	She was hit by gunfire.
	From a moving car.
	We still have to meet with her to find out exactly what happened.
	Was she targeted?
	Or just the wrong place at the wrong time and they mistook the car for another person?
	The death is considered the 19th homicide.
	It's unbelievable.
	It's almost like criminals don't follow the law and just creating more laws which penalize law-abiding citizens on the one hand...
	Empower criminals.
	And on the other hand, create an even stronger black market for weapons for criminals.
	It's almost like that happens all the time.
	Now, I'll actually have to verify something.
	I was told, let me see here, that in New Zealand, let's just see this, New Zealand gun crime rise.
	I was told the gun crime is rising.
	Oh, my sweet, merciful goodness.
	I was told this in the chat.
	You know, after the massive buyback in New Zealand, after the Christchurch massacre, you know, there was a gun buyback, solved all the problems.
	Listen to this.
	I don't know what the state of the media is in New Zealand, if it's the same as it is in Canada or the United States.
	I'll presume that it is, but I will not.
	I don't know if they're subsidized by the government to the same extent that they are in Canada.
	Gun violence is on the rise, but it's not as bad as you might think.
	Oh, thank you.
	I don't need to go on reading anymore, but we will.
	This is, just to make sure, July 24th, 2022.
	That's a month, half a month ago.
	Okay.
	who would think that crime would go up when the criminals are the only ones with the guns Hold on.
	I got it.
	I'm sorry.
	I'm trying to get rid of the chat.
	I'm not going to listen to it.
	Gun violence appears to be spiraling.
	I'm sorry.
	You just said at the top, it's on the rise, but it's not as bad as you think.
	Spiraling means it's out of control worse than I think.
	It appears to be spiraling.
	Don't trust your lying eyes.
	Trust us.
	With Auckland's latest incident, seeing a man shot through the chest at his Panmura home.
	Experts say the figures aren't as bad as people might think, but are urging the government to speed up the firearms registry.
	That'll solve the problem.
	When the latest shootings at two Christchurch marks happened in 2019, I can't believe it's already three years ago.
	Okay.
	Okay, the grab...
	Yazbek, the granddaughter of a Holocaust survivor, knew the target could just as easily have been a synagogue.
	Can we get to the actual headline of this story?
	I just didn't want to see it happening in New Zealand.
	Okay, fine.
	A trained economist with experience in regulation and legislation, including work in criminalizing cartels, Yazbek went on to co-found Gun Control New Zealand.
	The mosque shootings prompted swift changes in New Zealand's gun laws.
	We knew that.
	The firearms registry can't come soon enough.
	This year alone, Auckland has recorded more than 368 gun offenses where a firearm was involved, either present or discharged.
	Gun offenses involving gangs have also been on the rise, with more than 1,000 offenses nationwide in the last year to date.
	Auckland's most recent shooting happened on Friday night in Padmure, where a man was shot at his home.
	The previous Friday, two people and a dog were fatally shot in Glendale.
	Two days before that, a young woman was shot at Henderson.
	For almost 40 years, the 1983 Arms Act has licensed the person, not the firearm.
	People registered as license holders of the police, but millions of unregistered firearms kept moving through the country.
	Hmm.
	Hmm.
	That's interesting.
	So it almost seems like it's not a question of the law's not working, it's a question of them not being enforced properly.
	By the way, chat, I don't know how we're going to get to tell me if you...
	Garland is not yet on.
	It says, Attorney General Garland to give remarks at DOJ briefing.
	So I'm still staring at an empty screen.
	When Yazbek moved from South Africa more than 20 years ago, she assumed New Zealand had strict gun laws.
	She was wrong.
	I think after March 15, people were shocked to realize that the guns we had were nowhere near, the gun laws we had were nowhere near as good as Australia's.
	However, Yazbek also cautioned that while gun violence was reported on every single day, The number of people are killed by...
	It remained relatively low.
	Oh, that's unfortunate.
	More people die from COVID.
	Okay, well, this gives us a frame, a mental framework.
	Firearm offensive have been on the rise this year across the country.
	Police figures released under the Official Information Act showed there had been 386 events in Auckland alone.
	Since the beginning of the year, the city's figures were the highest in May due to gang conflict between the killer bees and the tribesmen.
	Was the Killer Bees not the name of the bowling team in The Simpsons?
	Okay.
	The turf war at Spill, yada, yada, yada.
	Shootings in Auckland since 2022.
	Firearm offenses committed by members of the National Gang List.
	Okay.
	Why have shootings increased?
	Asking the hard questions.
	Gangs have been center stage.
	Okay, fine.
	There have also been noticeable change in culture of gang use with...
	Okay.
	All right.
	Well, I think that's all we're going to need to read on that.
	Let's just see if Australia, gun violence rise.
	Let's just see if they're having the same problem.
	We need news.
	We need to get news.
	I don't want to...
	That's New Mexico.
	I'm going to have to look into this on my own time just to see if Australia is not seeing a similar problem.
	That's from too long ago.
	Okay, whatever.
	We'll do that later.
	But it's just amazing.
	It's almost like the existing laws which are not being enforced properly are not working.
	Let's have more.
	Let's have more laws on the people who are not the ones.
	Actually acquiring guns unlawfully through black market and using them for criminal activity, surely that will do something.
	It won't do anything, and don't call me Shirley.
	Be patient, people.
	It takes a lot of time and hard work to invent a proper justification for what happened.
	This, I presume, is in response to Merrick Garland still not being there.
	So, increase in gun violence in Canada, noticeable in my own city, in a way that people haven't seen.
	In our lifetimes, despite the last six years, ten years of the strictest gun laws Canada has ever seen, let's get Justin Trudeau to give us more laws on the law-abiding citizens who are not the ones committing the crimes.
	And like I said, because I'll steel man every argument possible, stricter gun laws on law-abiding citizens who acquire their guns lawfully could make sense.
	If the government could show, but it's not the case, that the majority or even a substantial amount of gun violence was committed with stolen, lawfully procured firearms, then it would make sense.
	If for whatever the reason, all criminals were getting their guns by robbing or stealing firearms from people who lawfully procured them, then there would be a correlation between the law, the restriction, and the objective pursuit.
	Unfortunately, we know it.
	The problem is black market weapons smuggled in.
	Garland's coming.
	Let's do this, people.
	Garland is entering the stage like a king coming to his podium.
	The Department of Justice will speak through its court filings and its work.
	Just now, the Justice Department has filed a motion in the Southern District of Florida FLOOR.
	LET'S HEAR IT.
	TO UNSEAL A SEARCH WARRANT AND PROPERTY RECEIPT RELATING TO A COURT APPROVED SEARCH THAT THE Court approved.
	Okay.
	That search was a premises located in Florida, belonging to the former president.
	The department did not make any public statements on the day of the search.
	The former president publicly confirmed the search that evening as is his right.
	Was he allowed to release the warrant?
	The FBI property receipt were provided on the day of the search to the former president's counsel who was on site during the We have a disagreement of fact on that.
	Submitted by a corrupt FBI.
	The property receipt is a document that federal law requires law enforcement agents to leave with the property owner.
	The department filed the motion to make public the warrant and receipt in light of the former president's public confirmation of the search, the surrounding circumstances, and the substantial public interest in this matter.
	Faithful adherence to the rule of law is the bedrock principle of the Justice Department and of our democracy.
	Clinesmith, corrupt FBI.
	Tell us more.
	Oh, really?
	Okay, that's nice.
	Liar!
	Liar.
	Liar.
	But some people are entitled to more presumption of innocence.
	When they fabricate evidence, they have to do it privately.
	Our outstanding department rules and our ethical obligations prevent me from providing further details as to the basis of the search at this time.
	I don't like hearing a saliva from his mouth.
	Oh, I'm not allowed talking, but I want to say this.
	I personally approve the decision to seek a search warrant in this matter.
	Second, the department does not take such a decision lightly.
	Where possible, it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative Where possible.
	Like they did with Project Veritas.
	Unfounded attacks on the FBI?
	I will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked.
	The men and women of the FBI and the Justice Department are dedicated...
	Oh, yeah.
	Every day they protect the American people from violent crime, terrorism, and other threats to their safety while safeguarding our civil rights.
	Even when they're planning it themselves.
	They do so at great personal sacrifice and risk to themselves.
	I am honored to work alongside them.
	That's because you're equally corrupt as they are.
	That's all you can say.
	Garbage.
	And at the appropriate time.
	Thank you.
	Now taking questions.
	No questions.
	Thank you all for your questions.
	But as I said, this is all I can say at this time.
	And I believe you because you're so trustworthy.
	All right, so the Attorney General not taking any questions, but some important key things were mentioned there.
	Nothing important was mentioned there, whoever you are from Fox.
	He said he wanted to point out that he did personally approve.
	Okay, I take it back.
	She's right.
	That search warrant of President Trump's Mar-a-Lago home.
	And he got a very convenient judge to approve it.
	A judge who had to recuse himself from a file involving the Clintons and Trump, who then signed off on a warrant, a criminal warrant, two weeks later.
	And of course, there was a lot of people who knew about it because former President Donald Trump himself had been the one who had talked about how they did...
	Did Biden know about it?
	Because Biden told us he didn't know about it until he saw it like the rest of us on the news.
	Come and raid his home.
	Now, another thing that was pointed out during this briefing was that not only did they have these copies, but they gave copies of those warrants to Trump's attorneys who were there.
	Disputed facts.
	That's a disputed fact.
	Just coming in here to our live now from Fox desk.
	Of course, we want to continue breaking down just some of these different issues, especially when it comes to these different legal battles that the former president has now been dealing with.
	Going to be doing some legal analysis with Will.
	Oh, let's hear it.
	Let's hear it.
	Do we want to...
	Lawyer on lawyer?
	Let's do lawyer on lawyer for a second.
	He personally approved the search warrant.
	I think that is unusual.
	Biden knew about it.
	You know, he's approving a search or the FBI was about to do a search on a former president.
	So I can see why they ran that one up the flagpole.
	You know, every time, you know, before law enforcement does a search, I've been a criminal defense attorney for about 30 years now.
	It's a long time.
	Every time that they do a search, they have to gather evidence.
	In this case, it appears, and this story's been unraveling, you know, as we speak.
	It's been unraveling all right.
	I learned this morning that an informant actually...
	That's old news.
	That's from yesterday.
	That was their insider.
	Specific information.
	told them where it was, which is why they had to go into a safe that contained nothing.
	There were efforts by the DOJ or the FBI to get these documents.
	and those efforts were resisted by President Trump.
	The efforts were allegedly resisted.
	So this was a last recourse, apparently, by the Department of Justice, where they actually issued a subpoena and That's interesting.
	Why could it not go by way of motion to court?
	Not seizure.
	Not raid.
	This doesn't make sense what he's saying.
	They always got to mention that.
	They always got to mention that.
	And then a judge...
	Bruce Reinhardt was appointed by Donald Trump in 2018.
	So it does appear that this was the normal process for going through a subpoena to get information.
	What was unusual was the person, the house that they were searching was, of course, President Trump's.
	But it does look like they went through the regular rigmaroles for conducting such a search.
	Here's what doesn't make sense.
	What you wanted to say is that there is not going to be silence when it comes to people personally attacking the population.
	Remind me, it's about the documents that they want.
	It's not about a search.
	They knew what they wanted.
	They're not searching for anything.
	They're trying to get certain documents.
	Remind me about that in a second.
	It's the new America, people.
	It's the new America.
	This is encouragement.
	Run for politics.
	This is what's going to happen to you afterwards.
	Well, I think what he's saying is that the FBI was just doing its job.
	He was just doing his job.
	Just doing our jobs.
	Everyone was just doing their jobs.
	Everyone's just doing their jobs.
	There have been efforts, apparently, to get these documents from President Trump since at least June.
	Then go to court and have a court order it, not by seizure rate.
	And so, you know, that could have been the problem.
	But, you know, what Mr. Garland is saying is that everyone is just doing their job.
	Yeah, everyone's just doing their job.
	And we can't villainize public servants for doing their job, especially the FBI.
	These people keep us safe.
	Why not?
	They keep us safe.
	Can I close this down, people?
	And so to villainize them for doing their job is simply wrong.
	I think that's what the director is saying.
	And let's just also kind of talk about this.
	And so we know that this is a separate issue from what the former president is dealing with in New York City.
	I don't care about this anymore.
	They keep us safe.
	And I'm not saying that they don't.
	I'm just saying that of recent memory, let me just pull up a window here.
	Of recent memory, they...
	They kept Gretchen Whitmer safe because they foiled the plot that they were setting up.
	I guess technically they kept Gretchen Whitmer safe because they protected her from the act that they were orchestrating.
	I guess so.
	What was the other one there?
	The Mohammed Khartoum attack FBI.
	Let me see if they kept people safe there.
	Cher.
	I forget the details.
	So I want to refresh my memory as we do this.
	Oh, here we go.
	Oh, it can't be reached.
	That's interesting.
	FBI knew the shooter.
	FBI knew.
	They keep us safe, people.
	FBI knew shooter might go to Muhammad at drawing contest.
	Do we remember this one?
	FBI Director James Comey said Thursday his agents learned hours before the start of a cartoon contest and exhibit depicting the Prophet Muhammad that one of the government had expressed interest in going to the controversial event in Texas, but there was no indication he was planning an attack.
	Oh.
	They keep us safe.
	They keep us safe.
	Let's just keep going here.
	Comey said the FBI sent an intelligence bulletin to local authorities through its Dallas field office that included a picture of Elton Simpson 30 and other details such as his associates and possible licensure.
	plate number.
	But we didn't know more than that.
	Hmm.
	Does the FBI typically send out an intelligence bulletin to local authorities about an individual if they don't think he's a risk?
	We just knew that this guy that we had been in contact with, we'll get there, was going to an event A controversial event that typically elicits this type of response.
	But we didn't know more than that.
	I mean, we knew that people were going to go protest on January 6th and they had gotten permits and that there was talk online that they were going to try to breach the Capitol.
	But we didn't know more than that.
	We didn't know it was going to be a risk.
	Simpsons and his roommate, Nadir Sufi, who lived in Phoenix, were killed by local officers as they opened fire at a conference center in Garland, Texas, where the competition was taking place.
	The two men were heavily armed.
	Yadda, yadda, yadda.
	Simpson was arrested in 2010 after he bought a plane ticket to South Africa.
	He was charged with lying to FBI agents in connection with terrorism.
	He was convicted, however, of a lesser...
	Do we all appreciate what we're seeing right now?
	This is burying the lead.
	FBI didn't know that he was up to no good.
	They had arrested him for traveling to South Africa and for connections to terrorism.
	But they didn't know he was going to do anything bad when he went to this cartoon.
	Depiction event thingy.
	They had no idea.
	How could they know?
	They keep you safe, people.
	They had no idea.
	What a load of crap.
	And by the way, it's outrageous.
	They just slipped that in.
	They had no reason to believe it.
	Oh, by the way, nine years earlier, they had arrested him in connection with terrorism.
	He was convicted of a lesser charge, sentenced to three years probation.
	But they'd never heard of him before.
	Although they had been in contact with him.
	And they had prior...
	Arrested him.
	Previously arrested him for terrorism-related stuff.
	Comey said with a straight face, the FBI continued to investigate Simpson until 2014.
	Agents in Phoenix reopened the case in March, Comey said, after we developed information that he was making statements on social media, which might indicate a renewed interest in jihad, but this time with the Islamic State.
	But they had no reason to suspect that when he was going to this event, he had any nefarious intentions.
	This is...
	This is the same FBI.
	They're trustworthy, they're competent, and they're totally not corrupt, despite their own lawyers falsifying evidence to obtain spy warrants against Trump indirectly through Carter Page.
	But they don't think that a man convicted of terrorist-related charges who had renewed interest in jihad in 2014 was up to anything bad when he was going to a Muhammad drawing cartoon controversial event.
	I mean, it would be laughable if it weren't tragic.
	Comey said the Bureau would review whether the Bureau made any missteps that could have stopped Simpson and Sufi before the attack.
	But he said he hasn't seen any indications that his agents missed a major warning sign.
	Oh, yeah, those social media posts that you just mentioned here that you knew about.
	Bygones.
	So there's that.
	Yeah, but totally.
	All right, what did I get here?
	Trump was president, doesn't have the right to wipe his...
	Doesn't he have the right to wipe his rear end with classified documents because he is the highest office?
	Also, you missed a chat by me.
	I'm not your buddy guy.
	I can't get all of them and I missed it.
	I can't see it anymore.
	But I'm going to get back to that chat.
	Viva, I heard that he didn't show up to court today.
	Is this Trump or is this...
	I'll see.
	I'll check.
	IRS agents need guns so they can take our money, your stuff, your house.
	Some citizens might resist and need to be convicted to suit YouTube.
	Thank you.
	Mike Sutherland, thank you for the super chat.
	And what do we have here?
	Concentration camps were just doing their jobs.
	Doesn't mean they were doing nothing wrong.
	They were just following orders.
	So this is getting back to that lawyer who said they exhausted all means to obtain documents.
	Okay.
	I'm not besmirching that lawyer, period.
	I don't know who he is.
	I'm just going to pick out a flaw.
	In his description of the events and his reasoning.
	It was a search warrant.
	He confuses searching for evidence with searching for specific documents.
	We understand from the circumstances now, this search warrant pertained to the retrieval of allegedly classified information that Trump allegedly took out in 15 boxes from The White House after he left.
	And I'm saying allegedly.
	It's not clear the...
	It's alleged because there could be very legitimate defenses here.
	The documentation could not be...
	It might not be classified.
	It might have been declassified.
	I don't know.
	He might have had a lawful reason to take it.
	He might have a lawful defense from what I understand under the Presidential Records Act.
	There's a certain period of time within which they discuss what should remain classified and what should not remain classified.
	He might have lawful precedence in this, in that...
	From what I understand, Obama did the same thing, but with slightly more documents.
	He might have a defense in that the restriction on removing classified documents is not about the documents themselves, but ensuring that they get properly archived.
	I don't know, and I'm throwing this out there.
	There may be legal defenses, in which case it is not true as a matter of fact that Trump took classified documents from the White House without permission, and all they're doing is getting them back.
	Allegedly.
	Fine.
	Let's even operate on that basis.
	He took classified documents.
	The intelligence knew.
	FBI knew because they knew what they were looking for.
	According to this lawyer, they exhausted all remedies to get the documentation back.
	There was cooperation, or at the very least, dialogue.
	They couldn't get it back.
	There was a lack of cooperation, and this was the last resort.
	To collect evidence?
	If they knew what they needed back, they knew he had it because there was open dialogue, if not potentially a lack of some cooperation.
	If they knew he had documents, is a raid the appropriate remedy as a last straw?
	I might argue and take it with a grain of salt because I'm a Canadian lawyer and I just understand Quebec law, but it's, you know...
	For all intents and purposes, roughly the same.
	If I know someone has a document, and the purpose of my procedure, my application to the courts, is to get the document back, there are a number of ways that you would do that, short of a police raid.
	To the extent that you know someone has something, you petition the courts with a motion for retrieval of documents, return of property, etc.
	There presumably, and I suspect definitively is, a procedure through which to petition the courts to get back documentation, property that someone else has that you know they have that you want back.
	If there's a risk that they will destroy the property, then you could petition the court ex parte on an emergency order, say, we have reason to believe that Donald Trump is going to destroy evidence or documentation that we know he has because here's correspondence that proves that he has it.
	We know he has it.
	We've been talking about it.
	We're concerned that he's going to destroy it.
	So we go ex parte with an emergency order from a court, not a warrant, but an order from the court after allegations are made to seize before judgment or place under the guardianship documents that you fear in the absence of a court order might get destroyed.
	Was there a fear here that Trump would destroy the documents if they didn't go in with a nighttime police raid?
	Who knows?
	I'm skeptical.
	But there's a big difference between retrieving property that you argue is yours, that you know is in the possession of somebody else, and gathering evidence, because one is a specific objective, the other is a fishing expedition.
	So I might say that this is probably more akin to a fishing expedition, but above and beyond all else, this is a muscle flex and a warning to all future politicians.
	You will not be safe from political persecution from your ideological and political adversaries, even after you're out of office, especially if you are talking about running again.
	And especially if they fear that if you run again, you will crush the current incompetent, corrupt regime.
	You see here, all caps, which is an indication of blocking the sex bots.
	Couldn't they just email the Trump's lawyer to preserve evidence?
	That would be another, presumably, reasonable way of doing it.
	You are hereby put on notice not to destroy any evidence pending proceedings.
	You're not giving back documentation that we know you have.
	Preserve it.
	If you destroy it, you will be punishable by contempt and probably criminal charges for destruction of evidence as well.
	Probably.
	But it doesn't look quite as good.
	As a raid on an ex-president's office.
	Home!
	Sorry, not office.
	Home.
	Doesn't look as good.
	It's not quite as scary.
	But I'm suggesting that this did not have the desired impact that they thought it was going to have and that the backlash is not what they expected, which is why they're going to milk any purported act of reprisal coming from an outraged public so that they can...
	Not only criminalize what is already criminal activity of the criminal reprisal, but so they can criminalize public dissent and public outrage because it's going to motivate people to commit acts, certain acts, unlawful acts, which is why don't do it because it's not going to be weaponized only to prevent what is already criminal acts.
	It's going to be weaponized to criminalize language and outrage.
	It's going to be used to criminalize people into silence.
	We have ignored the federal government deep state for more than 50 years.
	This is the price we pay for complacency.
	People make the jokes that we moved from Canada to the States right in time for a national divorce, and I'll call it that instead of what Tim Pool calls it.
	But this applies equally, mutatis mutandis, to Canada.
	We have lived, we have ignored in Canada.
	And I maybe didn't ignore it because I didn't see it.
	So I just wasn't aware that it existed.
	We have ignored in Canada the gradual, steady infringement on our fundamental rights.
	What did we expect?
	Whether or not I have gone from the frying pan to the oven, what's the expression?
	From the pot to the frying pan?
	One thing I can tell you, Americans, at least a large portion of the American citizenry and the American political class are fighting back politically, vocally, and vigorously.
	I'm not quite as inspired by what I've seen in Canada.
	We've seen some pushback.
	We've seen some vocal opposition.
	But I have seen far too much passive acceptance or just outright acceptance, which actually brings me to the experience here.
	I'll bring it up.
	I never share.
	Stories that I'm not entitled to share.
	I don't share stories that I'm not entitled to share, that I'm not authorized to share, or that are not mine to share, or that will put people in positions that they are not prepared to be put in.
	Private persons.
	But I'll share one from today.
	Cripe.
	That doesn't matter.
	I now know personally another individual.
	Who has suffered a spontaneous neurological condition, contemporaneously with something that's totally unrelated.
	Spontaneous neurological condition, contemporaneous with a certain procedure.
	And I've realized how the fundamental degree to which we are broken and divided as a society.
	I learned of this incident, and I now realize that people who experience it, they don't even want to talk about it anymore.
	They don't even want to talk about it for a number of reasons.
	And it's very interesting, diverging reasons for which people don't want to even mention it.
	One, they get demonized for mentioning it because there's no connection.
	And if you make the connection...
	You must be one of those right-wing conspiracy theorists, far-right selfish extremists, who went and subjected yourself to this procedure, and now you can't even talk about what happened to you as a result because you'll get called a far-right selfish extremist conspiracy theorist despite having submitted yourself to what the powers that be insist you submit yourself to.
	So you can't talk about it because you're going to get demonized by the media.
	And by people around you.
	You can't talk about it either because you feel ashamed.
	Because you, who has now suffered this neurological condition, might have been a big proponent of this.
	And it's not a big deal until it happens to you.
	And then it's a big deal.
	And then you start wondering, holy cows, who else did this happen to who is now equally silent because of the support that I gave to this?
	Because of the compulsion and the pressure that I put other people under to do this.
	How many other people out there are suffering exactly like I'm suffering right now?
	I'm ashamed to admit it.
	If I come out now and say it, even if I don't get demonized and mocked, I'm going to get blamed.
	I'm going to have to recognize that I am not only a victim of the system that I have been promoting, but other people are probably victims of the system that I have been promoting as well.
	I'm too ashamed to publicly admit it.
	Just close my eyes and pretend it was from my dog stepping on a bee.
	Another reason why people cannot necessarily bring themselves to admit it, they don't want other people to weaponize it.
	In their minds, and it's a very similar analogous mentality, the people who are afraid that other people are going to use their tragedy for political purposes tend to be the ones Who would use other people's tragedies for political purposes?
	You know, the people running around saying after the dude doesn't get the Fauci juice and then confesses on his deathbed and they say, oh, conspiracy theorist, anti-vaxxer so-and-so, Joe Schmo, dies today from COVID.
	Everyone should learn a lesson.
	The people who think like that, they project that onto others and they think or maybe even know that other people are going to say, I told you so.
	The people who...
	Are prone to say, I told you so.
	Are prone to see, I told you so, in others.
	And so they don't even want to give the other that, I'll call it a victory for a lack of a more tragic word.
	They don't want to give other people that political victory.
	Because they would do it themselves.
	They have done it themselves.
	The media that goes out there and says, anti-vaxxer dies from COVID, regrets on it.
	They run with it.
	They exploit it.
	They weaponize it.
	They know, or at the very least, they project onto others.
	Other people are going to do the same thing if what they said was going to happen to them happens to them.
	Sigh.
	Thank you.
	And it's sad.
	And then you have friends and family who now have to live with this.
	It's not so bad.
	What's a little Bell's policy?
	What's a little...
	What was Ramsey-Hunt syndrome?
	What's a little facial paralysis?
	Okay.
	I know of the rules for radicals.
	Saul Alinsky.
	I know of the rules for radicals.
	I've never read the book.
	I just read the 12 rules.
	Because one that is often attributed to Saul Alinsky, which is wrongly attributed to Saul Alinsky, is accuse your adversaries of doing what you are doing so as to create confusion.
	That apparently is more accurately or more plausibly attributed to Joseph Goebbels, the great Nazi propagandist.
	So that's it.
	And it is depressingly sad.
	And you know the terrible thing is?
	It has to happen to enough people to have the conic spread out impact.
	But...
	Can't even talk about it because you cannot even publicly talk about your own misfortune.
	We've been greenlighted again, people.
	Maybe the truth, the truth shall set you free or the truth shall set you green.
	Green as in monetized.
	I've just refreshed and it looks like we're monetized again.
	I don't care about the monetization aspect.
	I care about the visibility and how YouTube kills the stream when they demonetize it because they have absolutely no incentive to promote it.
	To put it on people's recommended pages because they're not running ads on it or they're not running quality ads on it and they have no incentive to do it.
	So it's their own vicious cycle of soft censorship.
	Garland is Mr. Burns.
	I see it.
	I see it, but I like Mr. Burns more.
	So there's that.
	That was my story of the day.
	But we still have time.
	I'm not getting harassed to end the stream yet.
	So I'm going to...
	Pick up one of the related stories.
	Related stories, people.
	I mean, related, but totally not related.
	This is from the Mayo Clinic.
	Okay?
	The Mayo Clinic, one of the most prominent medical clinics in the world.
	Just make sure we're good dates, people.
	This is recent, June 10, 2022.
	Not that long ago.
	Sudden death in young people.
	Heart problems often blamed.
	Yeah, when you die suddenly, it's one of two things.
	A brain clot or a heart clot or a lung clot.
	One of three things.
	Heart problems often to blame.
	Sudden death in young people.
	Sudden death in young people is rare.
	But those at risk can take precautions.
	Find out more about the risk factors, causes, and treatments.
	Sudden cardiac death is the swift and unexpected ending of all heart activity.
	Breathing and blood flow stop right away.
	Within seconds, the person becomes unconscious and dies.
	Sudden cardiac arrest.
	Oh, no.
	They've got the SCA.
	They don't have the S-A-D-S.
	How common is sudden cardiac arrest in young people?
	I'd like to know when this article...
	Most sudden cardiac deaths are in older adults, particularly those with heart issues.
	Yet sudden cardiac arrest is the leading cause of death in young athletes.
	Estimates vary, but some reports suggest one in 50,000 to one in 80,000.
	Okay.
	Was there anything new in here?
	Why did I...
	Who should be screened for sudden death factors?
	You know, if there wasn't anything particularly interesting in this, I don't know why I brought it up.
	Other than the date of publication, but I need to go back to the archives to see if this article was up there before.
	That might have just been for my own reading knowledge.
	Hold on a second.
	Yeah, here, let's do this.
	I'm going to star a couple things and come back to them in a second.
	So what I wanted to do was this article.
	PolitiFact.
	PolitiFact, people.
	Holy...
	Fact checkers should be illegal.
	Not illegal.
	I shouldn't say that.
	According to international...
	The date?
	This one is from June 20th.
	Oh, I think...
	Well, now I remember how I got the connecting of this article to that study.
	According to International Olympic Committee data...
	An average of 29 athletes under the age of 35 suffered sudden death per year from 1966 to 2004.
	From March 21 to March, 769 athletes have died or suffered cardiac arrest.
	People, let's take our guesses here.
	What angle are they going to twist or go at?
	The statement is this.
	Historical averages and the last year's average.
	Okay, so those are the statements.
	Let's see.
	Let's see this.
	The claim.
	Claims connecting.
	By the way, do you see?
	They just did it.
	Do you see it?
	Do you see it, people?
	Let me just go to the chat and see.
	Just critical thinking, people.
	Let me just take this down here.
	You should read about Talleyrand's Napoleon's right-hand man was Machiavellian before it was cool.
	Thank you, Cameron, for the super chat.
	Do we see what's going on here?
	They had the stat.
	There was no in the claim, because that's the claim.
	This doesn't have a causal link to COVID.
	This just had stats.
	But they go and say, now, the claims connecting the sudden death falls short of scrutiny.
	Wow.
	You want to talk about some equivocations?
	The claim connecting it.
	First of all, I didn't see any claim connecting it here.
	I know that that's what people's brains immediately do.
	I just saw the stats.
	That's all I want to know right now.
	PolitiFact.
	But it's not false.
	It's not unsubstantiated.
	It falls short of scrutiny.
	You know what else is short?
	Me.
	If your time is short, scientific reviews, medical experts, and sports cardiologists have found no association between sudden death and athletes.
	That's nice.
	Are the statistics accurate?
	Are those numbers accurate?
	Figures used to support the claim are inconsistent and often include unconfirmed and incomplete reports that don't confirm vaccination or involve any emergency.
	I don't care about that.
	PolitiFact fake f***ing.
	Frickin' fact-checkers.
	I don't care about that.
	They include unconfirmed.
	Death is not something that I require much evidence of confirmation for, unless the claim is they didn't die.
	In which case, political fact, be careful.
	We just saw what happened to Alex Jones.
	If you question anything, even if you entertain a third-party statement about something, we saw what happened.
	They often include unconfirmed.
	That is associational, I presume, and not...
	The death aspect, I presume.
	Incomplete, I presume that refers to cause of death because oftentimes they might not do biopsies, autopsies.
	That refers to causation and not statistics.
	And they don't confirm vaccination or involve any emergency episodes.
	And that is towards causation and not statistics.
	Might I be...
	Might you be so gracious as to give me whether or not the stats are true?
	Sudden arrhythmic death syndrome has been studied for years.
	The syndrome is caused by undetected genetic heart conditions and often occurs in young adulthood.
	And by the way, the question is not whether or not the death was triggered by an underlying condition.
	It's whether or not the underlying condition might be exacerbated by other factors which might Exacerbate that underlying heart condition, such as, I don't know, triggering heart inflammation, which might trigger any pre-existing underlying condition that you might not have actually been aware of.
	Okay, but ever since COVID-19, yada, yada, yada, people have continually suggested, Sean, I want the stats, PolitiFact.
	I want the stats.
	I haven't read this in a while.
	Articles, social media posts highlight instances of young athletes collapsing, et cetera, et cetera.
	Take this Instagram post.
	Okay, take this Instagram post.
	SADS, according to International Committee, On average, 29 athletes under the age of 35, sudden death from 1966 to 2004.
	From March to March, it was 769.
	Where's the COVID causation here?
	Is that number accurate?
	Oh, it's flagged as part of Facebook's false information.
	Awesome.
	Awesome.
	There are a number of issues here.
	First, the data itself.
	Good.
	While the study post described an International Olympic Committee data only reflects sudden deaths, the 769 figure it is being compared with incorporates deaths and cardiac arrest episodes that did not result in death.
	Oh, okay.
	PolitiFact's review of some of the reports that were counted in the figure also found the number included reports of cases that didn't involve any emergency medical episodes at all.
	I don't understand that.
	So they're saying the number's too high because it includes things that the first number doesn't include.
	It includes all cardiac episodes and not just death.
	Secondly, we review some of the reports.
	I'm sorry, so how many non-death figures did it include?
	Did you see any actually?
	Secondly, the study the Instagram post said looked at.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Wasn't, as it suggested, conducted by the International Olympic.
	Rather, the findings were presented at a December 2004 committee hearing by researchers.
	So?
	Oh, okay.
	So they got wrong who did it, who investigated it, but the numbers were accurate.
	We were unable to get in touch with the researchers involved in that study for more detail.
	And the International Olympic Committee told us that it doesn't track this kind of data.
	Oh, so it wasn't the Olympic Committee that did it.
	It was another independent committee, and we couldn't get to them.
	So we're going to come to a conclusion nonetheless.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	The 769 figure, meanwhile, comes from an April 22 segment on One America News Network, a conservative cable news network that in the past has shared problematic COVID-related posts.
	Go after the source.
	More than 69 athletes who have collapsed during a game on the field over the last year from March.
	However, Sinner and Barboa...
	So there was actually one video of a collapse that didn't occur this year or the year before.
	Oh my goodness.
	Okay, well.
	PolitiFact and others have repeatedly investigated the incidents cited in these claims.
	The details of these episodes show the vaccines are neither...
	Oh, okay.
	Do you notice how they glossed over the most important part?
	The causation we're never going to agree on because there's never going to be definitive causation, even if it happened right away.
	Too soon, it couldn't have been anything.
	Too long away, it was something else.
	The causation is something we'll never agree on.
	The statistics, the numbers, are something we can understand, we can agree on.
	Glossed over.
	I hear a dog who seems to be making noise for food.
	They are political spin masters, is what they are.
	Gloss over the most important part so that they can confuse you on a portion which will never be demonstrably verifiable.
	People don't appreciate either.
	VAERS, the V-A-R-E, Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System.
	It was never intended to actually be a definitive way of definitively attributing causation.
	It was intended to be sort of like a bleep, a tracker.
	So that when something's happening, if you see anomalies in the reporting, which is nonetheless relatively serious in terms of reporting, sanctions for false reporting, when you see blips, statistical anomalies, it's supposed to send signals to the medical community.
	When you see abnormalities in reporting, or I should say inconsistencies with historical averages, it is not intended to definitively attribute causation because you'll probably never be able to do that in most cases.
	Certainly not when there's no autopsies being conducted.
	So the causation is a red herring because there will always be ways to weasel out of it.
	You know, I was thinking today, has there been an uptick in cancer diagnoses in the last year?
	I think we all understand the answer is yes.
	What's it attributed to?
	You will never be able to definitively attribute it short of, you know, some very invasive investigations or invasive autopsies.
	Or very specific circumstances where there are no other factors, overlapping factors at play.
	There will be an uptick in cancer diagnoses.
	Is it because people didn't go to the doctors in 2020 and they had underlying conditions that went undiagnosed and got worse over the years?
	Probably.
	Might it be because another procedure might, I don't know how it can happen, weaken immune systems, trigger certain responses?
	Possibly.
	We will never be able to definitively Place the blame 100% on one cause versus another.
	But the anomaly is there.
	And I would argue it's arguably a distinction without a difference, since it all results from absolute grotesque government response.
	And so as far as government culpability goes, there is no distinction.
	Whether or not they beat you to death or shot you to death, they killed you.
	And to the extent that it's one entity that did it, at the end of the day, whether it was from punches or from weapons, the outcome is the same.
	And the blame is the same as well.
	So there's that.
	But the PolitiFact, they are not fact-checkers.
	They are paid liars.
	And they are often paid by the very entities that use them as fact-checkers.
	As we saw in Candace Owens' lawsuit against Facebook.
	They contract with their fact-checkers.
	The fact-checkers hijack.
	And it's nothing shy of hijacking.
	Massively popular posts, massively popular pages, so they can fact check false and then redirect the traffic from those pages to the dwindling, absolutely unvisited, garbage websites that are the fact checkers, thus siphoning traffic, ad revenue, etc., above and beyond being paid by Facebook or contracting with Facebook to do it.
	Independent third-party fact checkers, my butt.
	They are parasites.
	They are propagandized partisan parasites.
	The 3P.
	Someone has got to feed that dog.
	Oh, the front gate just called.
	Damn it.
	Partisan propagandist parasites.
	Literally.
	Okay.
	Moving on.
	I think there were some super chats that I wanted to get to.
	Kenneth G. If you work for the Clintons, the truth will get you killed.
	Allegedly.
	And thank you very much, Cameron.
	We got to that one as well.
	Trending Tuesday.
	Ever coming back?
	Oh, no.
	Probably not.
	But we can make something trend on a Thursday.
	Trudeau de toilette.
	Hashtag.
	True.
	No.
	Trudeau de...
	Is it du de toilette?
	Oh, I hope it's not du toilette.
	Hashtag.
	Trudeau de toilette.
	Okay, so that's it.
	But there was one thing that I wanted to do.
	Now, by the way, when I talk about spontaneous creation, cubism, it was Picasso and Braque who spontaneously, simultaneously, roughly at the same time, not copying each other, came up with a similar form of art known as cubism.
	Had they been in the same town, one could say that one copied the style of the other.
	I believe it was Georges Braque.
	But it was Barack and Picasso, or definitely Picasso and somebody else, who they had contemporaneous creation with Cubism as a style of art.
	I just saw a tweet from Jack Posobiec before coming live.
	He was doing a dramatic reading of General Milley's resignation letter to Trump, which just became public.
	And I was like, damn it.
	I'm going to do something similar, but not exactly like a dramatic reading.
	So I'm not copying Jack Posobiec.
	We'll say great minds think alike and fools seldom differ.
	Give me one second.
	Great minds think alike and fools seldom differ.
	So I don't know if we have great minds or we're fools.
	He did a dramatic reading of General Millie's self-aggrandizing resignation letter.
	I'm just going to go through it for the sheer arrogant pomposity of it and the confession through projection.
	Let me just see.
	I'm still live.
	Can I give me 15 minutes?
	Let's just get to this.
	Where is the letter?
	Where is the letter?
	Millie's resignation.
	Millie.
	We're going to get into Millie in a second.
	Reportedly stated, I regret to inform you that I intend to resign as your chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
	Thank you for the honor of appointing me as senior ranking officer.
	The events of the last couple of weeks have caused me to do deep soul-searching, and I can no longer faithfully support and execute your orders as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
	It is my belief that you were doing great and irreparable harm to my country.
	Anybody who's Jewish is going to know this.
	I'm not talking religion.
	It's just the four questions of Passover.
	You got your ignorance.
	You got your son who doesn't know how to ask a question.
	Your ignorant son.
	Your vengeful son.
	I forget the other one.
	The aggressive vengeful son.
	He says, what is the meaning of this ceremony to you?
	And the whole moral of the story is, by saying you, he excludes himself from it.
	The vengeful son.
	Excludes himself by saying, it's your ceremony, it's your this, I have nothing to do with it.
	This pompous human, the irreparable harm you're doing to my country, because it's not also Trump's country, it's not our country, it's my country.
	Arrogant pomposity is what that is.
	Juvenile, arrogant pomposity.
	You're doing irreparable harm to my country.
	Mr. President, I believe that you have made a concerted effort over time to politicize the United States military.
	I thought I could change that.
	It's like Johnny Depp thinking he could change Amber Heard.
	This guy is no Johnny Depp.
	Millie is no Johnny Depp.
	I've come to the realization that I cannot, and I need to step aside and let someone else try to do that.
	I'm going to come back to this.
	Second, you are using the military to create fear in the minds of people.
	And we are trying to protect the American people.
	I cannot stand idly by and participate in that attack, verbally or otherwise, on the American people.
	The American people trust their military.
	They trust their FBI.
	The FBI is there to protect the American people, and you're trying to scare them.
	They trust us to protect them against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
	And our military will do just that.
	Can you imagine this guy lecturing the President of the United States?
	We will not turn our back on the American people.
	How long does this drivel go on for?
	Third, I swore an oath to the Constitution of the United States and embodied within that Constitution is the idea that says that all men and women...
	I'm sorry, Millie.
	Did you just say that there are only men and women?
	Are you a biologist, Millie?
	I think you get canceled for things like this.
	They're all created equal.
	All men and women are created equal no matter who you are, whether you're black, Asian, Indian, no matter the color of your skin, no matter if you're gay, straight, or somewhere in between.
	Men or women that are somewhere in between.
	It doesn't matter if you're Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Jew, or choose not to believe.
	None of that matters.
	It doesn't matter what country you came from, what your last name is.
	What matters is we're Americans.
	That sounds jingoistic.
	We're all Americans.
	That under these colors of red, white, and blue, the colors that my parents fought for in World War II mean something around the world.
	It's obvious to me that you don't think of those colors the same way I do.
	It's obvious to me that you don't hold those values dear and the cause that I serve.
	And lastly, my deeply held belief that you're ruining the international order.
	Do you know what another word for international order is?
	A world order.
	Almost a new world order.
	He's talking about America, American interests, being proud to be American, ruining my country, and also talking about destroying the international order and causing significant damage to our country overseas that was fought for so hard by the greatest generation that they instituted in 1945.
	Between 1914 and 1945, 150 million people were slaughtered in the conduct of war.
	They were slaughtered because of tyrannies and dictatorships.
	That generation, like every generation, has fought against that, has fought against fascism, has fought against Nazism, has fought against extremism.
	It's now obvious to me that you don't understand that world order.
	You don't understand what the war was all about.
	In fact, you subscribe to many of the principles that we fought against, and I cannot be a party to that.
	It is with deep regret that I hear.
	Holy crab apples.
	What did he say?
	That you are doing irreparable harm to the country?
	That you're politicizing the military?
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	Have we forgotten about this?
	Talking about doing damage to America?
	Talking about Nazi communist regimes.
	Headline, under fierce Republican attack, U.S. General Milley defends calls with China.
	Oh, talking about world orders, international orders, Nazi communist regimes who we fought hard against.
	Milley confirmed that call, let's see here, sorry.
	When asked, Milley acknowledged talking to the Washington Post.
	Author Bob Woodward for a book that showcased Millie's role in trying to avert a crisis over apparent Chinese fears that Trump might attack Beijing in his final months in office.
	The book detailed supposedly secret calls with General Li Zushong of the People's Liberation Army on October and said Millie had promised to warn China first if he were ordered to attack.
	I'm sorry, was Millie just lecturing the president on undermining?
	American interests?
	The sovereignty of America?
	The security of America?
	Was he just lecturing Trump on weaponizing the military?
	The guy who is now having secret calls with a tyrannical, fascistic, genocidal regime that is China?
	This guy's now talking about American interests?
	This guy's lecturing Trump on not understanding what our forefathers fought and died for to fight Nazism?
	Communism and fascism and genocide.
	This guy is giving a little heads up to the genocidal Chinese regime who are massacring Uyghurs, putting them in re-education camps.
	This guy giving the heads up to an international enemy, pretty much of the free world, lecturing the president.
	Pompous arrogance.
	Arrogant pomposity.
	Milley confirmed the calls but said that they were not secret to U.S. government officials.
	Oh.
	And that he was acting on instructions from some of Trump's top aides to de-escalate tensions.
	Yeah, nothing de-escalates tensions.
	Nothing pacifies an international bully.
	A genocidal international bully than telling them you're going to give them a heads up in a conflict.
	He acknowledged trying to send a message that, quote, we are not going to attack you, end quote.
	In other words, this guy is undermining the presidency of the United States, and he's accusing Trump of weaponizing the military, of politicizing the military.
	But to pull a but wait, there's more.
	But wait, there's more.
	And then we're going to have to end it on this.
	Because I believe talking about weaponizing or politicizing the military, I believe, think, Millie, I'm pretty sure Milley was involved in something which could only arguably but not so arguably be described as weaponizing the military, politicizing the military, sorry.
	General Milley's critical race theory and why GOP's woke military concerns miss the mark.
	When it comes to developing future military leaders, Congress needs to be following Milley and Austin's lead, not the other way around.
	During the hearing, rep Matt Gaetz challenged Austin about, among other things, the teaching of critical race theory in the US military.
	But remember, people, Trump is politicizing the military.
	A relatively amorphous term, often referring to the academic study of race and anti-race movements.
	No, I think it's pretty much predicated on the idea that...
	There is systemic racism perpetrated by whites against other races.
	Maybe I'm misunderstanding critical race theory.
	And viewing the world always through that CRT blinders, that whatever is, has been, or will be is always the result of systemic white racism, white oppression.
	I think.
	Maybe I'm wrong.
	CRT has become a catch-all co-celebre.
	For culture war conservatives, I love it.
	Don't address the issue.
	Just call people names.
	Later in the hearing, another Florida Republican noted that CRT appeared in an elective at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, and White Rage was the focus of a seminar voluntarily attended by 100 cadets.
	Remember once upon a time when they told you that CRT was not being taught in schools and the military, and now they're saying, oh, I'm sorry, CRT appeared to be in elective.
	That's a YouTube video.
	Oh, that's the hearing.
	CRT is not being taught in schools because we've called it something else.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	Okay, it's there.
	There's a West Point.
	There was something called White Rage was the focus of seminar, voluntarily attended by 100 cadets.
	Milley made it clear that the U.S. military does not teach critical race theory.
	It's an interesting caveat.
	And dismissed as offensive.
	It's offensive.
	You're a liar.
	How dare you?
	I don't give a crap if you're offended.
	That's actually typically the resort of someone who has been caught in a lie.
	A la Fauci.
	Mr. Paul, I find those accusations.
	You're a liar and I find it offensive.
	Who cares?
	Oh, hold on.
	Hello.
	Yeah, you can let them in.
	Thank you It's it's I'm offended.
	Nobody cares.
	Just give me the facts, not your being offended having gotten caught in a lie.
	We don't teach CRT in the military.
	We don't teach it.
	We just offer courses, and if anyone wants to attend, that's up to them.
	But the general also reminded the committee that West Point is a college and that it is crucially important for those in uniform to be open-minded and widely read.
	I'm offended at the accusation.
	But it's true.
	But it's important that people know that thing.
	And as for the learning more about white rage, I want to understand white rage.
	And I'm white, he said.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	I thought you were offended at the idea that you were not teaching critical race theory that was predicated on Something about whiteness.
	Oh no, but now, because he's an open-minded, woke idiot, we all have to be.
	As far as learning more about white rage, I'd like to learn about white rage.
	What the hell are you talking about?
	I want to understand white rage, and I'm white, he said.
	What is it that caused thousands of people to assault this building and try to overturn the Constitution of the United States of America?
	What is wrong with having some situational understanding of the country we are here to defend?
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	There were only white people?
	On January 6th, protesting at the Capitol?
	My God, you know what?
	You're racist, Millie.
	But by the way, no, you're not politicizing the military.
	You're not teaching CRT, but you are because you're white and you think it's okay that you want to learn about white rage because white America was protesting on January 6th and not America.
	Racist.
	I could go on.
	I don't even want to go on with this crap.
	Okay.
	Just crap.
	It's just crap.
	Garbage in, garbage out.
	And at least the garbage is out now.
	Okay.
	Let's see this.
	We're going to end this soon.
	Let's take this one.
	Just found out Trump has a binder still about...
	Just found out Trump has binders still about...
	Just found out Trump has binders still about Crossfire Hurricane and FBI reclassified it when he left fight.
	I would start paying attention about Crossfire Hurricane.
	I will screen grab that.
	It will be interesting if they retroactively classify information that when he took out was not classified so as to therefore say he now has classified information in his possession.
	Interesting.
	Because you can retroactively classify.
	Can you retroactively classify or declassify?
	I forget.
	Interesting.
	We'll pay attention.
	Although I paid attention to Crossfire Hurricane.
	That was the basis of the Russiagate investigations.
	I told you about 2,000 mules way in the beginning and now hope you and Barnes can do a show on the pit.
	From 2,000 mules, also search Rumble for Jovan paper analysis, his Arizona report.
	Thank you, and will do.
	Screen grab as well.
	Were I Trump, I would have refused Milley's resignation and charged him under UCMJ Article 88 for contempt towards officials.
	There was a discussion as to whether or not what Milley did was contempt under that provision of law.
	Sidestepping the absolute authority of the President of the United States of America.
	It's atrocious.
	To give a heads up to a political enemy.
	There's nothing wrong with saying it.
	China is a political, economical, financial enemy of the United States.
	There also happened to be a communist genocidal regime.
	Give them a heads up.
	Don't worry, buds.
	We'll warn you if we enter into conflict.
	That is, I think, very close to the definition of treasonous.
	Since that is...
	Alerting an enemy in the event of a war to give them a heads up against a potential attack.
	You're notifying your enemy, a genocidal enemy.
	Okay, sorry, sorry, I got that one too.
	So that's that, people.
	That is that.
	Rock, oh, hold on, I want to bring this.
	Rock on, people.
	Thank you for being here.
	Thank you for spending an afternoon with me raging against the machine, raging against the dying of the night or the dying of the light.
	That Merrick Garland addressing the nation.
	Oh my goodness.
	Yeah.
	I have nothing more to say except the FBI can always be trusted except when they're fabricating evidence and setting up crimes that would never have existed but for their involvement.
	And we take this all very seriously.
	Oh yeah, and by the way, I personally approved a raid on a former president of the United States of America.
	But trust me.
	And trust the FBI.
	Totally justified.
	And it was signed off on by a judge who represented Epstein and Epstein, potential co-conspirators, with close ties to the Clinton, who had to recuse himself from a file involving Trump and the Clintons, only to two weeks later sign off on a warrant to raid the former president of the United States of America's personal residence.
	I know that is the punishment for treason.
	I do not.
	That has to be go through trial.
	And I don't know when the last time that occurred was.
	Wally Tango Foxtrot.
	Thank you.
	I'm going to go breathe.
	I'm going to go breathe as I go for a jog.
	Everyone, I will end this stream the way I ended it yesterday.
	And agree or disagree with me.
	Victory is useless if you have forsaken your humanity and your decency.
	And one person said, no, because sometimes survival is the most important thing and then you can walk it back.
	There was a movie by Gaspar Noé called Irreversible.
	I do not recommend anybody watch it.
	But there are certain things in this world that are irreversible.
	And there are certain things.
	Chemical changes.
	You can never unboil an egg.
	You can never unboil an egg.
	And when you boil your soul by forsaking your decency and your humanity, that is an egg that does not unboil.
	And it's totally counterproductive because it will result in the exact opposite consequences that you are pursuing.
	So that's it.
	Stay civil.
	Stay vigilant.
	Stay peaceful.
	I will see you all.
	Oh, no, sorry.
	One more super chat from the Rumble Rants.
	Almost forgot.
	Super buff shaft.
	Everyone needs to watch this event from the 2000 Mules group, and it's on Rumble.
	Stay civil.
	Stay vigilant.
	Stay civil.
	Stay peaceful.
	Retain your humanity and fight in an intelligent, productive manner.
	All right, peeps.
	Go.
	Enjoy the day.
	Get some sunlight.
	Talk soon.

▲