All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 26, 2022 - Viva & Barnes
01:46:46
Redacted Trump Affidavit; James O'Keefe to be Indicted? FBI & Facebook & MORE! Viva Frei-Days
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
But when they go to cancel you, ladies and gentlemen, it comes hard and fast.
You lose your Facebook, then your Instagram, then your Gmail, then your Discord, then your website hosting, then your domain name, then your payment processor, then your bank.
It's just like in real time, you're watching your phone and apps just exploding.
Boom, boom, boom.
It's crazy.
I don't want to go conspiracy theorist.
I'm just telling people what I've been through.
It's really crazy.
And if they'll do it to me for saying women can't park a car, which was a joke, sorry world, then they'll do it to basically anybody.
And you have to be prepared for that.
And that's one of the reasons why I've moved to Rumble now, because I've had long conversations with senior management there, and they promised that I can make jokes without being destroyed and annihilated, which is quite refreshing.
So I very much look forward to continuing my legacy and continuing my work on Rumble.
Rumble.com slash Tate speech.
And I know for a fact that my young fans will come with me.
So this is just the beginning of a mass exodus away from the influence of control by tech companies.
Won't someone please think of the children?
Young people are going to follow Andrew Tate to Rumble.
Where was my response to that?
First of all, before I even do that.
Once bitten, twice shy, three times traumatized.
How's my audio, people?
Is this the good mic?
We can hear me speaking moistly.
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
Is this the good mic?
I'm not going on until I get confirmation that this...
Okay, good.
All right.
Let's talk about this.
The funny thing is, Andrew Tate has been in the news this week.
Because he got deplatformed.
Allegedly because he's a misogynist and he's a threat of violence.
He's a danger because of his speech.
Now I'll preface this by saying I'm relatively familiar with Andrew Tate.
I don't...
I have kids.
My kids forward me or send me videos that their friends send them.
So I've known of Andrew Tate for a little while.
I'm more familiar with his work than many people out there now hearing about him for the first time.
I've seen clips, not just like the mashed together, spliced together five-second clips.
I mean, I've seen some one, two-minute unedited clips of things he has to say.
I don't think I agree with a great...
Let me rephrase this.
I know that I disagree with a great many things Tate has said and the manner in which he has said them.
So people in this oversimplified world are going to say a defense of Tate's speech is a defense of Tate's speech.
And it's a very subtle distinction that some people can't make or refuse to make.
The defense of Tate's speech as a human applies to everyone equally.
The defense of Tate's speech as a particular...
It's a substantive debate that people can get into.
I've heard some of the things he said.
I find them to be respectfully idiotic in either substance or form.
The one where he's talking about women selling, it's his product.
Yeah, it's idiotic.
He says some things that are not idiotic.
He says some things that are idiotic.
Surprise, surprise, Tate is a human.
Like everyone else, we'll be right, we'll be wrong, we'll be good, we'll do some things that are bad.
And all humans are like that to greater or lesser degrees such that one can overall characterize someone as overall a bad person because they do more bad than good.
Overall a good person because they do more good, but they still do bad because humans are humans and humans are imperfect.
And then you can come to an opinion.
So I'm familiar with Nate.
With Nate.
With Tate.
Familiar with Nate as well.
What I love about Tate is I don't know if it's confidence or...
Blind narcissism.
I even watched his hour and 13-minute video on Rumble, which I think it's interesting to watch.
You could see a lot of diverting blame.
You could see a lot of sort of faux assumption of responsibility.
But you see either confidence or narcissism, depending on your perspective.
When Tate says, they can do it to me, they can do it to anybody else, that's what everybody says.
After having not said exactly that, when they did it to Trump, the sitting president of the United States of America, it started with Jones.
That was the test.
That was the canary in the coal mine.
When they deplatformed and unpersoned the sitting president of the United States on the basis that his speech was violent or inciting violence, that's when everyone can fully appreciate if they can do it to the president of the United States of America.
They can do it to anybody.
Tate just happens to be the latest target, and one can ask why.
He's been saying the things he's been saying for a long time.
It's not new to anybody who's been on the interwebs.
What might be new is Tate's newfound political popularity and something that's coming up in the next couple of months known as the midterms, people.
Tate's got four and a half million followers, or he had at one point.
I think that's...
Not necessarily even across all platforms, on certain platforms.
Two months, two and a half months before midterms, a vocal Trump supporter now gets banned for things that he's been saying for quite a while on the interwebs.
Things which I can understand people find offensive, juvenile, idiotic.
It's not all bad advice.
Some of it's stupid.
That's what it is.
Some of it is performative.
Some of it's hyperbolic.
Some of it is juvenile humor that gets taken out of context.
Some of it's just juvenile humor that people pretend is serious.
But I tweeted, and it's caused some disagreements on the Twitterverse.
Did I bring up the tweet?
Hold on, let me see here.
Anybody who's been following me on Twitter would be familiar with this.
They deplatformed Tate.
And the pretext is misogyny and danger.
But Eminem gets a halftime show.
And just as one example of Eminem's...
If we're talking about misogyny that can lead little kids astray and cause them to do bad and dumb things, I'm not reading the lyrics.
This is an old song.
I could have picked a more relevant contemporary song.
I could have picked another artist who...
Can spout off the most misogynist, objectification, inducement of committing acts of violence against...
There are...
This is not the only example from 20 years ago.
Through the roof.
But not only do some people not get deplatformed for things such as what you can read in the lyrics here, they get the halftime show of the Super Bowl.
The biggest show in the history of America.
They get the halftime show.
Andrew Tate, who talks about women being his products and women not being able to drive and women having, you know, different functions in society and, you know, women not being allowed to have conversations because that's infidelity, but a man can go sleep around and that's not infidelity.
No, that's danger-inducing misogyny.
De-platform.
But this stuff, no, just give them the biggest bullhorn on earth.
And some people, I mean, the responses are actually...
Let me just take some of the dissenting responses.
What doesn't make sense to me is how you can compare Andrew Tate with a rap song.
What is Andrew Tate being deplatformed for?
He's being deplatformed for misogynist speech, arguably asking for conduct that can be misconstrued as...
Inciting violence.
Maybe it causes children to think violence against women is cool.
That's what he's being deplatformed for.
Some people are going to say, oh, he's got a Ponzi scheme.
He's being punished for that.
He's being deplatformed because they call them dangerous, misogynist, and making speech that should not be tolerated on platforms.
So how can I compare it to a rap song?
Very easily.
Because if the argument is that people might listen to Andrew Tate and then think it's okay to own women and mistreat women, Well, then when you're reaching, and if we're talking about stochastic terrorism, you know, like when you reach enough people, some people are going to hear your words differently.
Well, then it applies perfectly mutatis mutandis to a rap singer glorifying, objectifying, imagining violence against women.
So it's not just perfectly applicable.
It's mutatis mutandis if the accusation is that one person by their speech, which...
Arguably is performative as well.
One person by their speech is going to influence people, children, influential children, to do acts of violence unto women.
I don't even see how you can distinguish from this rap lyric in particular, but a lot of hip-hop lyrics in general.
Let's see here, some more.
Eminem is not selling $50 course on how to be misogynistic and have no regard for mental health.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Eminem's just selling $20 CDs and all of these rap singers are only just selling albums on how to be misogynist and making fun of mental health.
It's quite amazing how people will delude themselves into justifying what they want under one set of circumstances while distinguishing it in another set of circumstances where they don't want it.
Because the reality is everyone listens to hip-hop.
Everyone likes it.
And if we're going to apply this swath of deplatforming people based on speech, well, then you're going to have to apply it.
Equally and fairly to the people that you like and that you like despite the fact that it might be your dirty little sin.
I like hip-hop.
I like Eminem.
I don't take his lyrics seriously.
I listen to Tate.
I don't take his lyrics seriously, but the argument is going to be some 13-year-old boy is going to think it's cool what Andrew Tate says.
They're going to look up to him.
They're going to admire him.
He's got a good body.
He's got nice, cool tattoos.
He's a millionaire.
They're going to look up to him.
I'm sorry.
How is that different from all of these Eminem in particular?
Hip-hop stars singing about violence, singing about...
How is it different?
They're all selling something.
You just don't see it because you've already bought one product and you're not interested in the other one.
And by the way, someone says, oh, you're trying to get Eminem canceled?
No.
What I'm saying is that if this is the new standard, you either apply it equally or you don't apply it.
I'm not saying that Eminem should get canceled.
Whatsoever.
I'm saying that Andrew Tate shouldn't get cancelled, despite the fact that I think a lot of what he says is absolutely idiotic, or at the very least, idiotically formulated, idiotically expressed.
And then people say, he might influence kids.
There's going to be a lot of bad influences on our kids out there.
The solution in a free and democratic society is not to ban.
Or deplatform those bad influences.
It's to be an involved parent and know what your kids are listening to and then have the discussion with them about it.
Is it okay to take a machete even as a joke and make jokes?
No.
Is it okay to regard women as property?
No.
But Andrew Tate said, well, here, let me explain to you why that sentence, if it was in fact taken within context, is idiotic.
And so I tweet out that this is Andrew Tate.
Oh, sorry.
Let me steal my another argument.
Someone said, well, Eminem never did it.
First of all, neither did Tate.
In fact, between Eminem and Andrew Tate, between any number of hip-hop stars that I can name offhand who have grotesquely violent misogynist lyrics and Andrew Tate, a lot of them have been convicted of actual crimes.
Not necessarily against women, but actual crimes.
Actual felonious crimes.
Oh, so they sing about violence.
They're actual criminals.
But you say Andrew Tate is the one who's the bad influence and people might take him seriously.
But then some people say Andrew Tate does do it.
There's a video of him talking about choking a woman.
There's a video of him doing some bizarre S&M stuff that I as an individual am not into.
Some people are out there thinking that they've seen a video of Andrew Tate actually physically assaulting a woman.
Some people out there have seen that video and think that that's what they actually saw.
No context.
No nothing.
They just saw the video, Andrew Tate doing things that I'm absolutely not into, calling women names that I absolutely don't call them, and engaging in behavior that I absolutely don't engage in.
And they're going to think, I saw the video of Andrew Tate abusing a woman.
I saw it.
Not going to know, by the way.
You may not be into these things, but a lot of people are into kinky S&M stuff.
Not me, but a lot of people are.
And, you know, that's their thing.
Consenting adults can do what they want, even if I find it somewhat bizarre.
People are going to see that video and think that they saw something and then not understand that the woman in that video subsequently came out and confirmed that that was role-playing.
She was into it.
He was into it.
And now people are going to say, I saw Tate commit an act of violence that he, in fact, did not commit.
And I'm going to ignore the acts of violence that these other people actually did commit because it wasn't against women.
It was just other acts of violence, like, you know, carrying a concealed weapon or killing people.
I'm not confessing people.
People.
What movie was it where...
That's my wife.
She kisses my kids with...
What movie was that from?
That wasn't The Sopranos.
It was a mobster movie, I remember.
So that's it.
Andrew Tate has not been...
He's not been indicted.
He's not been accused of a crime.
He's not been convicted of a crime.
He hasn't pleaded guilty to a crime.
A lot of what people think they saw that shows something doesn't actually show what they think they saw because...
People are not interested in actually delving into the truth.
They like to just have what they already believe reaffirmed.
I saw these videos.
I say, because I'm cynical, there's probably more to it.
If there's a video of Andrew Tate abusing someone, assaulting someone on the internet, chances are he got arrested.
Chances are he got convicted or pleaded guilty.
So if I see that video, and that's what people are telling me that video is, and I don't see any convictions.
Probably more to the story.
When there's video evidence of people committing alleged crimes, typically it leads to charges unless, you know, unless they're a Biden.
So that's it.
Andrew Tate running a pyramid scheme?
Let's steal man that.
Is he being deplatformed now for business practices?
Is now deplatforming people the de facto court system?
No trial?
No defense, just automatic guilt because he's running a pyramid scheme?
Okay.
Sorry.
Well, I disagree with that as a modus operandi.
I disagree with that as a question of fundamental justice.
And by the way, it's factually incorrect.
If he's being the platform for having run a Ponzi scheme, a pyramid scheme, that's news to me.
But if he's alleged to be running a pyramid scheme, that's why we have courts, people.
There are terms of service.
If he's violating the terms of service, okay, fine.
Duke that out.
That's not the rationale, nor could it possibly be the rationale for an instantaneous, across all social media platform, banning.
If he's running a pyramid scheme, press charges, let him defend himself.
Social media is not the substitute for the government, unless your Facebook and Twitter, at the request of the FBI, will get there.
Okay, we will move on to the next subject.
Was it analyzed this?
She kisses my kids with that mouth.
Where's my coffee?
Moving on, people.
Viva, I'd like to have a little deep dive into all these people who are SJWs and see the real quality of their characters.
Well, I can tell you one thing.
The people who are the most vocal about being virtuous, in my limited experience, both as a human, having lived on the internet, and as a lawyer, it's called overcompensation for a reason.
Harvey Weinstein was very vocal about his donations to women's charities or charities in general.
It's overcompensation because it's the cloak through which they set up a front of awesome, praiseworthy people so they can then do what they...
I can't even tell you some of the anecdotes because it might contain identifiables.
There is a benefit to having a proven history where there's some people who are just good.
They're vocally good, and you can track behavior over time.
But I can tell you those who tend to virtue signal the hardest tend to have a great many skeletons in the closet.
The Autistic Tiger, whom I met at the Project Veritas evening.
We're going to get to this.
If James O 'Keefe indicted, are Viva and Tiger next?
No, certainly not Viva, certainly not Tiger.
If James O 'Keefe is indicted, we're going to get to it.
We'll have to see the facts.
I have my sneaking suspicions as to what's going on there.
FBI, DOJ, Hoover, Ruby Ridge, Waco, Bundy Ranch, Death of Lavoie Finnicum in Oregon, X-Fi Hurricane, Laptop, Mar-a-Lago.
Are you coming?
Oh, I'm not reading that last part.
The government has some problems.
As if it becomes harmless, provided it's delivered as a lyric, a limerick.
With rhythm and a musical beat.
It's just double standards.
And I don't think Eminem should be deplatformed.
Even for lyrics that I find grotesquely, you know, not offensive, just idiotic.
I read American Psycho.
I don't think that book should be banned.
I think parents should probably make sure their kids, they know what their kids are reading.
But like, no, people, oh, it's just rap music.
It's just lyrics.
Well, let's just go check out the average rate of criminality among the people who have these lyrics.
Eminem.
I can think of a lot of them who end up in jail for a number of reasons.
Maybe not all bad.
Okay, never mind.
I'm thinking of...
Who's the other guy there?
Even Calhoun ended up in jail for a bit.
It's just lyrics.
It's just lyrics.
Just lyrics that treat the absolute objectification of women.
Everyone should listen to Reggie Watts, S-H-I-T, F-U-C-K stack.
If nobody's ever heard of it...
In the chat, people, who's heard of Reggie Watts' song called S-H-I-T, F-U-C-K stack?
Or is it an F-U-C-K, S-H-I-T stack?
It's one or the other.
It's actually a fantastically subtle, satirical rap song.
Druidic rap duo from Vermont Jinx INC drops album Stir Crazy September 22nd.
Please shout us out.
Love your channel.
Machete-ish records.
Well, I don't know anything about the lyrics, the song, the band.
I will read the Super Chat, a $20 suit, $19.99.
Again, this is the best advertising sometimes money can buy.
Machete-ish records.
Druic, Druidic.
Rap Duo from Vermont.
Jinx INC dropped album Stir Crazy September 22nd.
Please shout out to Love Your Channel.
Thank you very much.
And I hope I'm not going to get in trouble for...
Reading a super chat from a rap song album that might have bad lyrics in it.
Is there an arrest warrant for Jeremy McKenzie?
I've seen the rumors on Twitter.
I haven't heard any news.
Let me just check my...
Let me just check something here.
Give me one second, people.
Then we're going to get into the stories of the day.
Rumble.
Oh, jeez, I didn't even do the intro stuff.
Come on, people.
Getting too far behind here.
I love the Biden A-OK symbol.
Racism when everyone else does it, not when you do it.
It's the same double standard when it comes to freedom of speech, when it comes to applying terms of service in a weaponized political way.
I don't know if there's an arrest warrant for Jeremy McKenzie.
I'll see if I can find any information.
I saw that Twitter rumor being spread.
F the establishment type.
No!
What are you trying to get me in trouble?
You see, this is what I mean.
The proverbial.
It's a metaphor.
I love it.
People are going to take that literally as if guillotines are going to be a thing.
That's the weapon of 20th century political warfare.
But don't make tweets.
Don't make super chats like that, but thank you for the support.
Okay.
On the menu, people.
We've covered Tate.
Moving on.
Are they going to indict James O 'Keefe over Ashley Biden's stolen diary?
Barnes talked about it last night on vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
Someone had asked him, should James O 'Keefe go scorched earth?
Barnes said, first of all, James O 'Keefe has already gone scorched earth, but let's go even scorched earth more so.
That, you know, people are now starting to tweet the images of that diary.
Because now that the FBI's got a plea deal out of two individuals as relates to that stolen diary, diaries confirm, people.
Read that diary and you'll come to your own conclusions as to whether or not the contents of that diary are shocking and an indication of something very, very, very sinister.
Are they going to indict James O 'Keefe?
Based on the wording of an article that I read from The Guardian and the way they're framing the guilty pleas, it looks like that's what they're lying up for.
What else was there?
The affidavit, man.
I don't think the redacted Trump affidavit for probable cause has been released yet.
Let me see here.
It doesn't look like it has, but they've been releasing other documentation, and we're going to talk for one.
We're going to talk about one affidavit that's been released, but it's not the affidavit for probable cause.
So everybody, look, I can't say that I understand everything that's going on right now, but what you're looking for is the affidavit for probable cause, not any affidavit that might be in that court file for whatever the reason.
Affidavit has been released per OAN at VivaFri.
Let's see if we can pull that up in real time.
So there's one affidavit that's been released.
You know, only redacted for email addresses from one Patrick Burgey or Patrick Burgey.
Don't know who he is.
I read the affidavit five times.
I have no idea what it has to do with the Trump raid.
But the affidavit for probable cause, which is the important one, I mean, unless it's just been released.
Unless it's just been released.
It was not released as of the time of starting the stream.
So we're going to talk about that.
What else do I have on the backdrop?
Yeah, the duo pleading guilty.
Oh, and we are going to relentlessly, and I mean relentlessly, mock podcast movement.
Let's start with that, because it's just going to be...
We're going to start, people.
You think you can't achieve certain things through passive mockery?
I think you're wrong.
I actually think a lot of stuff is starting to turn around, even in the eyes of the middle ground.
Because we're living in a world of such absolute insanity that something like this occurs and you actually seriously, sincerely think it's satire parody because it's so preposterous and then you realize it's not.
Okay.
Okay.
I'm going to star some super chats.
We'll come back to it.
So podcast movement, I've never heard of it.
Apparently it's like a convention, a seminar or not.
It's not a conference.
You know, for how to run a successful podcast.
They have an ongoing conference in Dallas, apparently, like a current conference.
People attend.
Successful podcasters buy booths or whatever.
It's like one of those stupid conferences.
I mean, I don't know more about it than that because I only learned about this yesterday.
Okay.
So they're holding a conference right now in Dallas.
Podcast movement.
Let me...
Oh, what did I just do?
Here we go.
Podcast movement.
They're holding a conference right now.
Let's just go here.
I'm just going to see what podcast movement is.
The world's largest community of podcasters, news, resources, and the best events in podcasting.
Join us, August 23 to August 26 in Dallas and March 10. March 7 to March 10. 2023 in Las Vegas.
I have a feeling attendance in Las Vegas might be a little bit down year over year, given what just happened yesterday.
So I'm with the kids, just keeping up on my phone because they're doing something, I'm doing something.
And I read this tweet.
And it says this.
Hi, folks.
We owe you an apology.
Let me read it in a satirical voice because that's how I thought it was intended.
Hey, folks, we owe you an apology before a session kicks off for the day.
Yesterday afternoon, Ben Shapiro briefly visited the PM 2022 podcast movement year 2022 expo near the Daily Wire booth.
Because, you know, there's a bit of a correlation between Ben Shapiro and the Daily Wire.
Though he was not registered or expected, we take full responsibility for the harm done by his presence.
I swear to you, I thought that it was a joke and that I had responded.
Without realizing that it was a joke.
I was like, oh, okay, I'm an idiot.
I took this seriously.
It didn't have the forward slash sarcasm.
I'm an idiot.
My sarcasm detector's off.
You know, erratum coming from Viva Frye.
Then I read the next one.
There's no way around it.
We agreed to sell to the Daily Wire a first-time booth based on the company's large presence.
In podcasting.
Hmm.
Yeah, that sounds like an actual good strategic decision if you want to teach people about successful podcasts.
Seems like a good idea.
Also seems like a good business idea to get successful podcasters to want to give you money so that they can tell other people how to run successful podcasts.
That sounds like a great business model.
The weight of that decision is now painfully clear.
Bear in mind, people, I'm still not certain that this is satire.
Shapiro is a co-founder.
A drop-in, however unlikely, should have been considered a possibility.
This still reads like satire.
It was not satire.
Let's see if I can find...
It wasn't satire.
And in response to the...
First of all, so then they shut down comments, which is how you know it wasn't satire.
I'm just telling you.
They deserve to lose their whole business over this.
You're not in the business of what you're selling.
You're actually in something much, much worse.
Not only that, can you imagine saying we're apologizing for the presence of Ben Shapiro?
Now read it like Borat.
If someone, if you could just apply things equally, apply terms of service equally, imagine if someone...
Imagine if they had apologized for the presence of a visible minority.
Like a black person, a Muslim person, an Indian person, a Sikh.
Imagine if they had apologized for the presence of...
Let's even stack these things.
A visible minority woman.
Imagine if some...
And let's just even say they had good reason to do it.
Like it's...
I don't know.
I don't know what...
I don't know what someone has to do to have someone apologize for their presence.
I can think of examples.
Even if it had been someone of a visible minority woman, even if it were for the best reason on earth, like Carla Hamalka attends a conference, people would still say, oh, that is racist, misogynist, xenophobic, anti-Islam, anti-Indian.
That's racism.
How dare you do that?
You do it for a white male.
Nobody, you know, that reflex is not there.
The reflex is there must have been a good reason.
You do it for someone who's an Orthodox Jew.
And my first joke was, this is institutionalized anti-Semitism.
You are literally apologizing for the physical presence of a very non-assuming Orthodox Jew.
I can think of a number of groups that would be very happy with this approach.
Podcast movement.
Congratulations.
You're in good company.
We apologize for the presence of the Jew.
I mean, I'm trying to do Borat's expression here.
He's a Jew.
I'm so sorry.
I did not mean to invite him.
He's going to take everyone's money.
This is cut and dry.
If the shoe were on the other foot, anti-Semitism.
Shapiro is open about it.
He's open about his religious practices, about his religious beliefs, and now you've got podcast movement saying his presence was harmful and hurtful because of his beliefs, some of which are based in his Orthodox Judaism.
What is that, if not anti-Semitism, podcast movement?
No, but it's fine.
It's totally fine.
Apologize for the presence of an Orthodox Jew because it caused harm to people who saw.
Who saw this guy's aura?
No.
And by the way, from what I understand, though, I think there might be Jewish individuals involved in the podcast movement.
So the reflex is going to be, we can't be anti-Semitic because we're Jewish.
And I think the anti-Semitic angle is just to illustrate the absurdity that had this been fill in the blank.
It would be the automatic reflex, the act of apologizing for the presence of any sort of ethnic, religious minority itself would be an act of violence, and they would get canceled for apologizing for the presence of an ethnic, religious, or gender minority.
But no, podcast movements was serious all along, apologizing for the presence of a wildly successful podcaster who bought a booth at your, subsidized your business.
Podcast movement.
But there's nothing to see here.
He's such a vile, vile human being by virtue of his beliefs, which are so wildly, you know, wildly popular to some extent that he's become one of the most prominent voices, podcasters out there.
But apologize for the presence of the Orthodox Jew because it makes people uncomfortable.
And you're the good guy?
We are very sorry we invited him.
We have to be careful for the man.
He is a very dangerous person.
Come to the tree is a music reference, not a call to arms or anything weird.
Okay, thank you.
I thought it was the watering the tree analogy.
I got to be careful because, first of all, I'm always careful and I don't want anyone...
Ever suggesting that I've promoted something that I don't actually believe in promoting in the first place.
Any comment or knowledge on the current New York State pistol permit curriculum requirements going into effect on September 1st?
Not offhand, I suspect it's more of the same type of circumventing the most recent SCOTUS decision as state government said they were going to do.
So just to finish up on the relentless mockery of...
Of podcast movement.
They deserve it.
It's over the top.
It's shocking.
And people should vote with their dollar accordingly.
And maybe podcast movement is going to make off like bandits because those who are into institutionalized anti-Semitism are going to join their conference.
Maybe in Las Vegas in 2023, they're going to have a slightly different demographic.
People who are going to be very happy that podcast movement apologized for the presence of unorthodox Jew.
Wouldn't that be ironic?
Anyhow, so then I just have to say, it's been 24 hours since Ben Shapiro terrorized attendees of the podcast movement with his mere presence.
I demand to know what is being done to address the harm that podcast movement callously afflicted on those poor souls.
An apology is not enough.
It's just lip service.
Put the forward slash sarcasm so people know because you just don't know anymore.
You just don't know anymore.
Nuts.
Bat poop crazy.
It's bat poop crazy.
Ooh, that might be the new shirt that we might have to come up with.
Likely the only participant who is wearing a yarmulke atop his head, and they want to apologize for his presence.
Hmm.
What podcast movement did, some people would qualify as a hate crime.
Overt vocal discrimination.
Dog whistle discrimination.
Eva Sheva speech on current world situation.
Don't know what that is.
Podcast movement.
The day's not over, people.
There's still time for relentless mockery.
By the way, this is a prime example.
Stepping in poop.
Instead of just stopping, before just...
You know, freaking out and running around the house.
Podcast movement got one comment from an individual who was offended by the presence of the Orthodox Jew, the big, bad, scary Ben Shapiro.
What do they do?
Man, they took their other foot.
They took their other foot, stomped in it.
Then they ran around the house, sliding everywhere, doing like those, oh, they were doing jumping jacks.
They weren't just running around the house.
They were doing jumping jacks in their own bed.
Now they're going to have to sleep in it.
I'm trying to be more like Elon Musk.
I'm living in my shop now.
I'm not feeling any smarter.
Am I doing something wrong?
Every overnight success takes a lifetime to build.
That was also what Michael, last name?
There's a man in it.
That's what we discussed Wednesday night.
I'll stand firm, but appreciate the back and forth.
Ryan, thank you very much.
Don't stand firm.
I'm not standing firm.
I'm just...
I would be open to being convinced that I was wrong.
Please shout out Died Kindly by Kendley, my wife's tie-dye business.
You rock, Viva.
Binks underscore Jim, I can comfortably shout out a tie-dye business.
Please shout out Died Kindly.
You know what?
I'm going to do one better than that.
Hold on.
Died.
Kindly.
Let's see this.
This is not a promise to do this every time, people, so it's just fitting this time.
We're going to go, died kindly.
There we go.
This checks out, people.
The story checks out.
Hold on.
Died kindly.
I went to a business yesterday, an Italian shop, just driving around, and the person loved their business so much, it was an inspiration to see.
Died kindly.
Handcrafted art.
We tied and died for you.
Look at that.
That looks like a Grateful Dead.
Alien-like thing.
Beautiful.
Music schedule.
Very nice.
Peace signs.
Very nice.
I thought that was a middle finger on the right.
That's actually a guitar.
Even better.
Mushrooms.
I do not promote any illicit activities.
I presume those are shiitake and therefore good eating.
And let's just see here.
Pants, shorts, dress, contact.
All right, peeps.
There you go.
Boob shakalaka.
Story checks out.
And what do we got here?
Adam Curry on No Agenda goes deeper on that event.
He went, said it's terrible.
Well, we'll see what their attendance is like in Vegas.
Likely the only part...
Oh, we got this one.
Okay.
All right.
I'm going to start...
So moving on, but, you know, there's still 12 hours left in the day, and I'm not sure that I'm done trying to relentlessly mock...
What podcast movement has done.
In the name of being virtuous.
Hold on one second.
We can't move on because I see a super chat that's relevant.
Podcast movement provided pronoun pins, required racial quotas for speakers, and threatened to throw out Christian podcasters.
So you know what?
I made the joke that it was anti-Semitism.
It might actually be overt anti-Semitism.
The Jewish quota has been reached and exceeded.
Shapiro's presence no longer welcome.
And the Orthodox Jew is a threat to the comfort and safety of our attendees.
Viva, our live stream is being interrupted by commercials.
Not yet, but stay tuned.
They will be sooner than later.
By the way, that was a super chat and not an actual sponsored video.
And I keep forgetting to put contains paid sponsors and then I don't want to do the ad read when I haven't indicated that because that could be very deceptive business practices and I don't want anyone feeling duped.
So stay tuned next week and do stay tuned and don't judge me when it happens.
I may get more in the habit of doing ad reads.
But only companies that I'm actually vetting, which makes it very difficult, but we'll deal with it.
Affidavit has been released and the servers are crashing for the number of people trying to access it.
LOL.
Love you, Viva.
Okay, so if we don't get to it today, at the very least, we'll get to one affidavit.
Let's just get to the one affidavit that I shared on Twitter.
Okay, no, forget it.
Podcast movement, we're moving on.
We're moving on from the rubbish to the madness.
Yeah, let's do this one.
Let's do this one.
In case anybody missed this.
In case anybody missed.
It's not just a bombshell.
It's a bombshell to anybody who's been living under a rock.
And even then, it's going to be so much of a bombshell that they're going to have to go from their rock to their bomb shelter to avoid the fallout from this.
The psychological fallout.
Listen to this.
How do you guys handle things when they're a big news item that's controversial?
Like, there was a lot of attention on Twitter during the election because of the Hunter Biden laptop story.
Yeah, we have that too.
Yeah, so you guys censored that as well?
So we took a different path than Twitter.
Basically, the background here...
Just stop for one second.
I am very conscious about it when I speak and when I answer questions.
How did Zuckerberg answer that question?
What was the first word of that answer?
The Hunter Biden laptop story.
Yeah, so you guys censored that as well?
So, it's not a hard and fast rule.
It's just a pretty damn good indication.
When someone starts an answer that has typically a yes or no as a preface, as a start, when they start with so, you're about to get lied to.
Or you're about to get...
What's the word I'm looking for?
Deceived.
There's going to be an attempt at deception.
It's funny.
I just had the biggest flashback to my childhood in camp.
And it was with this guy.
He'll remember.
I doubt he's watching.
But we had this whole joke.
And we would start every answer with, so here's the thing about that.
And it would be like...
So you accidentally ran over my dog and then buried it in the backyard and forgot to tell me and then tried to buy me a new dog.
Is that what happened?
So here's the thing about that.
Oh, that's such a random memory.
You're about to get lied to.
And by the way, you're about to get deceived or attempt to be deceived because it's not just that this statement starts with a so.
Look exactly where it goes right after.
Question about you.
What did you do?
So...
Top story.
So...
Yeah, so you guys censored that as well?
So we took a different path than Twitter.
I'm sorry, why the hell are you talking about Twitter in your answer?
I know the question was, okay, Twitter censored it.
Did you guys censor it too?
So we took a different approach than Twitter.
This is no different than when you try to get mad or when you do get mad at one of your kids because they did something dumb and they say, but you're...
My sister did something bad, too.
I'm not speaking from any experience that just happened yesterday five times every day.
Can you clean up?
Can you make your bed?
But she didn't make her bed.
Yeah, that's what children do to divert the attention from their own wrongdoing.
I'm going to stop interrupting now.
Yeah, so you guys censored that as well?
So we took a different path than Twitter.
I mean, basically, the background here is the FBI, I think, basically came to us, some folks on our team, and was like, hey...
The FBI basically came to us minimizing language.
Just like, oh, it just basically came to us.
Just so you know, you should be on high alert.
We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda.
By the way, I like Joe Rogan's style.
He's non-confrontational.
I would be much more confrontational.
I'm sorry, Zuckerberg.
How does the FBI come to you?
I doubt they show up at your offices with badges.
So I suspect they picked up a phone, organized a Zoom meeting.
I suspect they had a direct back channel to the most upper-level executives or players at Facebook.
I presume.
It's not like they showed up at the offices with their badges and then said, can we meet?
We have to talk to you.
So I'd like to know how.
I would like to flesh that out, Zuckerberg.
If you ever want to come on for a live stream, hashtag, let's make it happen.
Just so you know, you should be on high alert.
We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election.
We have it on notice that basically there's about to be some kind of dump that's similar to that.
The FBI, the intelligence of America, are going to Zuckerberg through whatever back channel or front channel they have, and they're telling Zuckerberg, like the other Russia, This Hunter Biden laptop story is Russian disinformation.
Appreciate that.
By the way, let's just back up now.
It was true.
So Zuckerberg right now is telling us that intelligence, the FBI, came to them and sort of led them with what is now itself misinformation, that this was Russian disinformation, because it wasn't.
But that's what Zuckerberg is telling the world now.
The FBI told Facebook.
Come in through their back channels or front channels.
Tell Zuckerberg that the Hunter Biden laptop story is Russian disinformation and you need to censor it.
So just be vigilant.
So our protocol is different from Twitter's.
What Twitter did is they said, you can't share this at all.
We didn't do that.
What we do is we have...
If something's reported to us as potentially misinformation, important misinformation, we also use this third-party fact-checking program.
We've seen the third-party fact-checkers, or as I like to say, they're third-party fact-checkers.
Those are contracts that work with Facebook, and that, you know, like parasites, siphon off traffic from popular Facebook platforms onto their own disingenuous misinformation fact-checking platforms.
We don't want to be deciding what's true and false.
And for the, I think it was five or seven days when it was basically being determined whether it was false, the distribution on Facebook was decreased, but people were still allowed to share it.
So you could still share it.
You could still consume it.
Do you want to say the distribution has decreased?
It got shared.
How does that work?
By the way, Joe Rogan's very soft.
Almost high-pitched voice here.
He tends to talk like that, but it's not an accident.
This is unassuming.
He doesn't want to make Zuckerberg...
He's loving the gold.
I would probably be making Zuckerberg recoil into his shell, which is why everyone has their own method.
I have been told that I'm much more of a cross-examining attorney as opposed to a laid-back, soft-spoken Joe Rogan, but he's getting the gold.
Maybe not all the details.
He's getting the gold.
It's not like the finely woven chain, but it's the nugget.
Basically, the ranking in newsfeed was a little bit less.
A little bit less?
Fewer people saw it.
How much less?
Than would have otherwise.
By what percentage?
I don't know off the top of my head, but it's meaningful.
But basically, a...
It's meaningful.
A lot of people are still able to...
I'm in a lot of shit right now.
It's basically what that was...
How do I get out of this?
A lot of people are still able to share it.
A lot.
We got a lot of complaints that that was the case.
Obviously, this is a hyper-political issue.
So depending on what side of the political spectrum, you either think we didn't censor it enough or censored it way too much.
But we weren't sort of as black and white about it as Twitter.
We just kind of thought, hey, look, if the FBI, which I still view as a legitimate institution in this country, it's very professional law enforcement, they come to us and tell us that we need to be on guard about something.
Then I want to take that seriously.
Did they specifically say you need to be on guard about that story?
No.
I don't remember if it was that specifically, but it basically fit the pattern.
This is bombshell stuff.
I mean, it's serious bombshell stuff.
The FBI...
They're just private companies.
I mean, how many times have we heard disingenuous actors argue?
They're private companies.
They can censor whatever they want.
Not when they're acting at the behest.
And I would dare say at the pressure.
When the FBI shows up or makes the call, that's not a request.
That is a, you better damn well do it.
That is a form of compulsion.
Oh, it's just the FBI suggesting that if we don't suppress this story...
We're going to be guilty of spreading Russian disinformation.
We just want to talk.
I mean, that's like Harold and Kumar.
Is it the second one?
Cops chasing you with batons, smacking them against their hands.
We just want to talk.
When the FBI comes to your door and tells you to censor something, that's compulsion.
So you have now a state actor.
Going to a private company, telling them to censor information, everyone out there who's ever argued it's a private company, they can do what they want, you just lost that argument, at the very least in fact, if not yet in law.
It would be a shame if something happens to your nice business.
You have such a nice big glass in front of you.
What does a pane of glass like that cost?
$3,000?
$5,000?
It would be a shame if someone smashed it.
So, there's a bit of a problem here.
That Zuckerberg, and by the way, I'm not sure that he's in a position to admit anything for Twitter, but I think he might be.
Twitter and Facebook, approached by the FBI, effectively ordered to suppress a story on a false pretext coming from the FBI itself.
Russian disinformation on the Hunter Biden laptop.
If the FBI truly believed that, we should be somewhat concerned.
If they knew that that was not true, we should be somewhat concerned.
So apparently the affidavit has been released.
Apparently it's heavily redacted.
And the bottom line of the affidavit is the documents were not being properly stored.
Remember the information being leaked, misinformation to the media, nuclear documents.
Remember what the judge said.
I authorized this unprecedented raid.
Because it is a raid, by definition.
I authorized this unprecedented raid based on that affidavit alone, and apparently, from what I've seen only in descriptions here and from a message I just got, the affidavit is largely redacted and basically says the documents were not being properly stored.
Some people's suspicions of the judge might just have been confirmed.
FBI turning Facebook and Twitter into their own Apparatus for providing disinformation, for censoring actual information.
I made a joke.
In 1960s, it was known as Operation Mockingbird when intelligence infiltrated the New York Times to get the New York Times to basically publish disinformation that was favorable for or to intelligence.
1963, it was Operation Mockingbird.
2022, it's Operation Zuckerberg.
This is interesting.
Richard Adams says, suppression is almost worse than banning because people don't know.
It's an interesting thing.
Someone once told me that their car wasn't stolen.
What had happened is that basically parts, components of their car were stolen and replaced with crappier components.
So it's not like their whole car got stolen and they knew they made a claim to the insurance company.
They didn't even know that.
I don't know if it was the engine.
I don't know if that's easy enough to do, but they took it to a garage and they replaced a good engine with a bad engine.
Give the car back.
Here's your car.
Nobody stole anything from you.
You don't even know that you've been swindled.
At least when you get robbed, you know that you got robbed.
You can do what you need to do to protect yourself, to seek justice.
When you don't even know that you've been robbed, it is worse than knowing that you've been robbed.
Because you find out at some point in the future, but it's too late to do anything meaningful.
Not even knowing that the story was suppressed versus being told, this story is being censored.
You're being made to be more ignorant unbeknownst to you.
And that is like stealing knowledge from you without telling you that we're stealing knowledge from you.
I like that analogy.
The affidavit is a meme.
If anybody can...
How could we do this?
If anybody can put a link to the affidavit.
Oh, no, it's on that website.
Hold on.
Let me see if I can not find it.
Let me just see if we're still green-lighted here.
I think we've been good.
Yesterday's stream got demonetized afterwards, and I think it might have had to do with some of the Justin Trudeau discourse because the highlight that I wanted to publish also got demonetized.
Supreme Leader Trudeau.
One cannot monetize videos while poking fun and pointing out the egregious hypocrisy of Supreme Leader Trudeau.
So, Twitter.
Let's see if I can't find the document.
I'll see if anyone has tweeted it.
Oh, here we go.
Okay.
Nate just put up a piece of it.
Hold on.
Let me just go see this here.
Dude, did I just shut down the stream myself?
Hold on, people.
Oh, I hope I'm still here.
Okay, I'm not going to pick my nose just yet.
I'm not going to pick my nose.
I might still be live.
Okay, I'm still here.
I'm still live.
I thought I just shut down the entire stream.
Here we go.
This is what Brody just tweeted.
LOL from the sealed affidavit.
So...
By the way, they did not redact jurisprudence.
That's how you know they're being transparent.
Information in the affidavit could be used to identify many, if not all, of the witnesses.
All right, so obviously that's not the entirety of the affidavit.
It smells like bullcrap.
It smells like exactly the joke that I made the other day, which I'm going to bring back up because I'm so funny.
Hold on.
Twitter.
Go here.
Go back.
Go to my home.
My version of the joke is better than the other versions of the joke.
And I'll tell you why.
As to what the redacted affidavit is going to look like.
And then we're going to actually get to that.
I've got to stick to the plan here.
Hold on.
So this was my joke.
I drafted this.
The unredacted version versus the redacted version.
While there is no reason to believe that Trump has unlawfully taken any nuclear documents, and while there was no imminent risk of unlawful disclosure, we believe that a raid is the only remaining option available to retrieve documents that we knew were in Trump's possession since at least February 2022.
Satire so that no one says I'm actually spreading this information.
Redacted version?
There is reason to believe that Trump has unlawfully taken nuclear documents and there was imminent risk of unlawful disclosure.
A raid is the only remaining option available to retrieve documents that we knew were in Trump's possession.
Now, my version is superior to some of the other versions because some of the other versions were...
Okay, this one might be more accurate.
Yeah, you see, like this one, my version is better than this.
This one says there's absolutely no evidence that Trump committed a crime.
Trump is correct that the FBI covered up on it.
The reason why mine is better is because mine can still actually be the affidavit.
There's no way any unredacted affidavit is going to say Trump was right.
Therefore, people, my satire trumps the other more egregious satire.
The victory has been won.
So we'll see.
But if the affidavit is just egregiously redacted, bring on Rolo Tomasi, friend of George Gammon, screen grabbed.
Your technical troubles on the Sunday stream, initially painful, have led, eventually led me to be a hearty and much-needed laugh.
The first, the time the feed froze, your face was an unflattering yet hysterical.
I saw that freeze.
I mean, look, my face doesn't quite make the same Philip DeFranco freezes, but everyone's face caught in a freeze.
Makes a funny face.
Viva Fry, speaking of suppression info, did you see the change in YouTube's policy on what you can now say about the jab efficacy?
I saw it only through Tim Pool's tweet.
And I said, that is the strongest argument against private companies censoring.
If they, a year later, have to revise and correct and...
Backtrack on what was restricted speech at the time because it is now turning out to be wrong.
That's why you don't restrict it in the first place.
That's why you cannot restrict it in the first place.
A full and frank discussion might have revealed this to be the case six months ago.
And then maybe YouTube would have had to make this correction if they hadn't made it in the first place.
The fact that they have to correct their restrictions on free speech because they are not accurate.
They are not scientifically based.
Means they were not accurate.
They were not scientifically based at the time.
And even if one thought that they were, the fact that you backtrack on them is exactly why you cannot ever implement them in the first place.
So yeah, I saw that.
It's released and it's a black wall.
The judge saw it.
Everybody, the judge looked it over and he made the determination that this is good.
Made it nice.
It's good to go.
This will reinstate, reinstill everyone's faith in the system.
I do appreciate Zuckerberg talking to Joe.
We all get to read between the lines and he doesn't have to get into trouble.
You know, it's an interesting thing.
Is this Zuckerberg's confession?
Is this like, now y 'all know, it was quasi-voluntary.
The left cannot stand the mere thought of the existence of those opposed to them.
Let that sink in and you'll understand where we are going.
The people will change.
The people who are susceptible of change will be changed.
Are you really surprised how racist these far left are?
You just talked about overcompensating.
Am I really surprised about how racist...
Oh, I see what you're getting at.
Eva Shovel is a Holocaust worker.
Oh, she was the one who gave the speech condemning all of the COVID measures because of analogies that she tied to her own lived experience.
Yeah, I think I do know.
I don't often put names and faces and events together, but when I do, it's garbage.
75% redacted.
They claim it wasn't properly stored.
That's it.
Okay.
And then we got, eh, the Trump raid affidavit seems to be out.
Okay, we got that too.
All right.
Nate the lawyer, yeah, I pulled it up as well.
Guys, we sort of knew what it was going to be.
They're going to block everything that would show what an absolute farce this was, and they're going to release only enough to allow some form of potential justification to subsist in the minds of those who are walking around with their eyes closed.
That's what I predicted.
That's what it is.
The judge has to protect his own butt, because if he releases that entire affidavit and people see that it was a joke, To have issued this warrant, the judge becomes the joke.
If he doesn't release any of it, the judge becomes the joke.
The only way out of this for the judge, release enough to maintain some suspicion, but not enough to reveal the joke.
Three-card Monty is what they're playing under the pretext of transparency.
If she survived the Holocaust, she's been around a while already.
That was a long-ass time ago.
Well, it ended in 45. If you have a memory.
My grandmother was born in 1916.
She died in 2019.
So there's plenty of people who could be born in 25, 30. Still alive now.
Old.
But can still, you know, old and can probably still recollect their childhood.
What did I have on the backdrop here?
There was the other affidavit that came out yesterday.
And for the life of me, I don't understand it.
I'm going to get to it.
Aggregate knowledge of the internet.
I'm not feigning stupidity.
I recognize that I don't know some of these players because I'm new to some of this game.
An affidavit was released yesterday by one Patrick Burgey, who's an author.
When I see who the signatory of the affidavit was, I looked them up.
Here, we'll bring this one up.
So this is one of the affidavits that was released yesterday.
Patrick Bruce Burgey, an author, wrote a book called How the Swamp Destroyed This 40-Year-Old Veteran.
It's an 11-page affidavit.
It was released yesterday.
It's not the affidavit that was released today, not the affidavit for probable cause.
I don't know what this affidavit is about.
I don't know why this affidavit is relevant for the Trump raid.
I don't know why this was filed on the 25th, but it was dated.
Let me just close this.
It was dated, it was seemingly dated the 25th, which is after the raid.
So date, signed, because an affidavit is signed, 8-25-22.
That's August 25th, 2022.
I don't know what this affidavit is relevant for, has to do with the raid.
And I don't understand why it's dated after the raid.
So I don't know if this affidavit was filed in support of some motions to unseal the documents.
I don't know.
Anybody in the chat that knows, please let me know.
I mean, I shared it with our Locals community yesterday, vivabarneslaw.locals.com, in PDF format, because Locals allows you to upload PDFs in its entirety.
Here I had to screen grab because I didn't have the link.
So I don't understand this affidavit.
I don't understand why it's relevant.
I read it five times.
I don't understand what it has to do with anything.
It's about Patrick Berge meeting with Millie Weaver and other people from two years ago.
Apparently, they're trying to get Patrick Berge to lie about something.
Patrick Berge is writing a book and in this affidavit seems to be pushing his fourth book.
Actually, I got to see if I can find that part.
The facts stated herein are based upon my personal knowledge, paragraph 3, documented evidence and belief as a fact witness and guest of Patrick Byrne, Michael Flynn, Sidney Powell, and others at Trump International DC, the Continental,
and others from November 15, 2020 to January 2021, where I was guest under an unsigned Or dated non-disclosure agreement with Rudy Giuliani, which I do not recognize.
My dialogue and evidence were documented and recorded in real time as their guest, as a whistleblower, and were published in my last book, Operation Shadowgate, The American Awakening.
I understand nothing.
I read this entire, David.
Don't understand anything.
Not too embarrassed to admit it.
But I did look up.
Patrick Berge, just like that, just to see who the affiant was.
And he wrote a book.
He's written a number of books.
But this is what I found particularly funny.
Victim of the Swamp, that's the book, is an autobiographical account of Patrick Berge's decade inside what has become known as the Deep State.
It's an amazing true story of his run for office in 2004, enlistment at the age of 40 in the United States Army, and as a private military contractor.
Mr. Berge was contracted as a subject matter expert.
To develop pioneering applications in social media psychological warfare for the Department of Defense.
Basically, he pioneered social network fake news.
He pioneered fake news for the U.S. Department of Defense when social media was in its infancy.
That's interesting.
I mean, it's just funny.
I spat on my computer screen again.
Maybe it's not anything.
Wow.
Thank you.
They just raided and arrested Gavin McInnes live on air, FBI rounding up everyone now saying he's a proud boy.
I don't understand what's going on in that affidavit.
Why it's relevant.
It's just kind of ironic.
Under the context that the affiant is an author of a book and pioneered developing fake news for the Department of Defense when social media was in its infancy.
Interesting.
Why'd they arrest Gavin?
The world is going mad, people.
Gavin McInnes was arrested live on air.
Viva, check out my Twitter.
The entire affidavit is uploaded.
The redactions are insane.
Oh, Nate, I pulled up the first page.
I'll have a look.
I don't think it's going to be worth walking through.
Let's pull up your Twitter feed again.
That's Nate, everybody.
We still talk to each other.
Okay.
What did I just do?
What?
Okay.
I get so nervous every time I open up a new screen.
Twitter.
Twitter.
Boom shakalaka.
Okay.
Good.
Good.
Okay.
Take this down.
No.
Take this down.
Bring this back up.
Okay.
And let's go to Nate.
Nate Silver.
Okay.
Let's see the redactions, people.
All right.
Nothing to see here.
Literally.
Okay.
All right.
The affidavit contains certain information that must be kept under seal pursuant to federal rule.
Yada, yada, yada.
Okay.
How do we go here?
What do we do here?
Get rid of that.
As the Supreme Court, okay, we don't care about precedent.
Okay, whatever.
You know, uh...
The government respectfully submits that certain portions of this filing may be unsealed, including the introductory segment, up through the first two paragraphs in the...
I suspect this is...
What date was this submitted on?
Whatever.
Okay, we'll get to it later.
It's not going to be worth doing now.
Talk about it on Sunday with Barnes.
But what is worth talking about now?
What is worth talking about now?
Are they going to indict?
They've arrested Gavin McInnes.
Are they going to indict James O 'Keefe?
The summary of the redacted version is two-line reading.
We had to look because we had a 5-0 look.
The summary of the redacted version is two-line reading.
We had to look because we had to look.
Okay, I see what you're saying.
Okay.
Do we?
Is James O 'Keefe going to be arrested?
Now, this is the news.
There's so much news that it's tough to keep up with the news.
I didn't hear.
I heard that a duo had been indicted or pleaded guilty.
I thought it...
Whatever.
This is from The Guardian.
That's Joe Biden, and that looks like Ashley Biden.
Listen to this.
Duo...
That's two.
Sorry.
Plead guilty to plot to sell Biden daughter's stolen diary to Project Veritas.
By the way, this is past tense of loved in French.
Amy Harris stole items from Ashley Biden's room and conspired Robert Kurlander to sell them to activist group.
I presume they mean Project Veritas.
August 25th.
2022.
Two people have pleaded guilty in a scheme to peddle a diary and other items belonging to Joe Biden's daughter to the conservative group Project Veritas for $40,000.
So this number, $40,000, is going to be very important in fact and in law and in allegations if any of them come up.
Just remember that.
Okay, I just got a notification from a news outlet.
The two, both from Florida.
This is why I got confused.
I heard people were arrested, indicted in Florida on voting fraud charges.
And I thought this was part of that story when it came across my brain feed yesterday.
Lo and behold, no.
The two, both from Florida, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit interstate transportation of stolen property.
Manhattan.
I think that's the Southern District of New York, if I'm not mistaken.
All authorities did not identify Biden, the type of property stolen, or the organization that paid.
The details of the investigation have been public for months.
Okay.
Okay, so the two pleaded, I think it's pleaded guilty, not pled, but pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit interesting, yada, yada, yada.
Case interviews and documents reviewed by the New York Times.
Biden left her belongings in the home of a friend at the time and planned to collect them later that year.
The friend, who also knew Harris, allowed Harris to also stay at the home as she was embroiled in a custody dispute and was facing financial struggles.
Some people have hypothesized that this is something of a halfway house or a type of house.
I'm not sure, but whatever.
This is all we know.
Prosecutors said Harris stole the items and got in touch with the other defendant, a man, who contacted Project Veritas, which asked for photos of the materials and then paid for the two to bring it to New York.
Very interesting phrasing here, by the way.
And if you're reading between the lines as though you would read something in a way that bad actors would want to manipulate it, they paid for the two to bring it to New York.
So, you know, they say, hey, I got this.
You want to buy it?
And Project Veritas says, well, I don't know if I want to buy it.
Come to New York so we can meet in person because you're not going to send the stolen goods yourself or you're not going to sell the goods.
We don't even know if it's stolen.
It's all very ambiguous.
If you look at it from Project Veritas' perspective here, if you don't know the items are stolen, someone contacts you and says, we have some good stuff.
Do you want to buy it?
And by the way, in law, even if it were stolen, I'm fairly certain there's precedent involving the New York Times about Where there's not precedent to protect journalists is if they conspire to steal, which is exactly where it looks like this is going based on the wording and seemingly based on what appears to be the plea deal entered into by these two defendants.
According to Williams, the pair sold the property for $40,000 and even returned to take more of the victim's property when asked to do so.
Harris and Kurlender sought to profit from their theft of another person's personal property, and they now stand convicted of a federal felony lawsuit.
That's Williams.
Sorry, Williams was the prosecutor.
Sorry, where did I just say?
Prosecutor said it.
What's the prosecutor's name?
Hold on.
Just want to make sure here.
Yeah.
Manhattan, U.S. Attorney Williams.
So Williams is making this statement.
What is this statement saying?
They were asked to steal more property.
They were paid $40,000 for the stolen property and then returned to steal more when asked to do so.
They sought to profit from the theft of another person's personal property, suggesting that Project Veritas was financing this scheme.
And they now stand convicted of a federal felony as a result.
I'd like to know what federal felony they stand convicted of.
Project Veritas has said it received a diary from tipsters who said it had been abandoned in a room.
The activist group.
Keep repeating it.
Just activist group.
Which identifies itself as a news organization.
Well, then shouldn't they be recognized as a news organization?
Guardian?
Tongue in cheek?
Said it turned the journal over to law enforcement and never did anything illegal.
They didn't say they turned it over to law enforcement.
They turned it over to law enforcement.
That's why law enforcement has a copy of it.
They didn't say they did.
I love it, though.
The activist group, which identifies as a news organization.
What a stupid thing to say, The Guardian.
What an absolutely idiotic way of phrasing that.
The news organization, the activist which identifies.
Now do CNN.
Call that one a news organization.
Doesn't matter.
They said they turned it over to law enforcement and never did anything illegal.
I'm sure they said they never did anything illegal.
That I know.
They didn't say they turned it over to law enforcement.
They turned it over to law enforcement after attempting to give it back to the lawyers who allegedly were the ones to contact Project Veritas to say they have this information, you know, come see this tip.
According to the group and its founder, James O 'Keefe, was not involved in any theft of the property and that all of the Project Veritas' information on how the confidential sources found the property came from the sources themselves.
Let me get into Project Veritas.
According to Biden's lawyers, the group...
Oh, here.
In efforts to verify the diary's authenticity, a Project Veritas operative attempted to deceive Biden.
During a phone call into confirming that the diary did actually belong to her.
Attempted to deceive her.
The diary belongs to her.
We know that it belongs to her now.
It's not stolen property if it's not actual Biden's diary.
We know that it's hers.
They tried to deceive her into confirming that what belongs to her actually belonged to her.
They tried to deceive her into telling the truth is how we're led to believe this is activist journalism, Guardian.
It's ironic.
That you accuse Project Veritas of activist journalism that identifies as a news outlet because that's what you are.
That's what this is.
According to Biden's lawyers, the group then contacted them in an effort to land an interview with her father prior to the election.
Biden's lawyers, who then reached out to federal prosecutors, accused the group of its extortion effort to secure an interview.
This really sounds like...
It's standard MO.
You press as many charges as you can against the defendant to get them to plead guilty to something.
You press as many charges against them as you can to get them to plead guilty to something so you can get a plea to a lesser infraction.
They can hang their hat on the victory.
Exactly what they did with Brandon Strzok.
Exactly what they did with Brandon Strzok.
Get them to plead guilty to something.
And the way to do that?
Throw everything in the kitchen sink at them.
And by the way, the way that they've gotten them to plead guilty to this?
We were paid for the stolen goods.
And then we were told to go back and get more.
We were profiting from a scheme to steal private property from another person.
And Project Veritas was the one funding and financing the known...
Solicited by Project Veritas theft of another person's property.
And they paid us $40,000 for it.
Now we're going to see.
We're going to see, but this looks stinkier than a bag of rotting fish.
My favorite round of gaslighting.
Are you sure I don't believe you?
Are you sure?
I don't believe you.
Are you sure?
Maybe you're dreaming this.
No, they tried.
They called Biden, tried to deceive her into confirming that her diary was her diary.
I mean, it's like it's sucking and blowing.
It's her diary.
It's stolen property because it was hers.
They pleaded guilty to it.
It's confirmed that it was her diary.
Otherwise, it could have been Biden's stolen diary.
But Project Veritas, the activist news agency, the activists that identify as a news outlet, called her to try to deceive her into confirming that what was actually her diary was actually her diary.
Yeah, we'll see what happens.
It's shocking.
I mean, it's shocking and it's outrageous.
But we'll see.
Maybe Project Veritas did ask.
Maybe there's text messages.
Can you go back and steal some more stuff for us?
And here's $40,000.
Maybe they have that.
Hmm.
Very interesting.
Wild, wild world.
Okay, let me just close up some of my back bookmarks here.
So, that's it.
It's confirmed that it's Ashley's.
End of story.
Now everybody can go read it.
You can go share it around.
I mean, it's still...
Two things.
I've read the passage that...
People are purporting, you know, indication of bad stuff doesn't look good.
When an adult claims to have trauma as an adult from what was done to her as a child, you know, that's sort of a more plausible attestation to being an actual victim as opposed to out of the blue coming out 35 years later and saying, yeah, Kavanaugh...
Did bad things to me at a house party 35 years ago.
I've been messed up ever since, but I don't really have much evidence to support that.
Diaries from the individual.
Stolen.
Contain admissions that are a lot more compelling.
And also, by the way, it's interesting, FBI entrapment.
If it's all a scheme, by the way.
Let's see what these individuals pleaded guilty to and how much time they serve.
But it's also not just more of a compelling admission.
It is oftentimes, in reality, an actual cry for help.
That diary was published in National Review.
Not National Review.
Conservative Review.
It was published somewhere before.
You can go read it and draw whatever inferences you want from it.
But whatever inferences you draw from it...
It's now confirmed to be actually Biden's authentic diary.
Otherwise, these charges could not be the charges that they are.
They could not have pleaded guilty to a crime that they didn't commit.
It was Russian disinformation.
That's Seth Rich, for anybody who doesn't know.
Everyone should look him up as well.
That's not actually Seth Rich because he no longer is among the living.
Okay.
Try to...
Continue smiling.
Okay, let's see what we've got here.
Oh, and speaking of which, look at this.
This is a tweet from Joe Biden yesterday.
Repeat it.
Just keep saying it out loud, people.
In 2020, 81 million Americans voted to save our democracy.
That's why Donald Trump isn't just a former president.
He's a defeated former president.
That's really stupid phrasing there.
Now, you need to vote to save democracy again.
Ironic that this came out...
It's ironic that this came out yesterday, August 25th.
If it wasn't the actual date, it was the day after Joe Rogan's interview with Zuckerberg, confirming that the FBI suppressed material information which pollsters determined would have had a material impact on the election.
Other people are saying it's ironic that that came out on the day of a rather racy...
What's it called?
Promo advertisement for a video called My Son Hunter, which I think is...
Do I want...
I don't want to play it because I'm not interested in getting copy claimed here.
There's a promotional video.
What are they called?
The official trailer.
That's the word.
Trailer for a video, a movie, Gina Carano's in it, entitled My Son Hunter.
And it looks like a Brent Easton Ellis rendition of the true story that is the Hunter Biden laptop story and how it plays in with the big guy.
Coincidence.
I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
Joe Biden has to remind everyone 81 million people voted for him, saved democracy.
Democracy as defined by Time magazine.
81 million.
The day that...
Zuckerberg confirms the FBI pressured them to censor information that had a material impact on the election, i.e.
election interference.
The day this wickedly, stunningly biting trailer for a movie called My Son Hunter.
Joe Biden's got to tweet this.
I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
I don't know what cartoon this gif is from, but it was applicable.
Let's see what we got in the chat here.
I see.
Oh, there we go here.
Boom, shakalaka.
Mandrake says $20.
Just got here.
You may have done it already, but affidavit confirms to the court they knew where remaining docs were, requested further security, and to return.
Jeez, man.
So I don't know if the jeez man is in reference to me strawmanning the affidavit.
They knew where the documents were.
Absolutely.
They requested further security and to return.
So that's what justifies a raid on a former president.
That's what satisfied in the mind of Magistrate Reinhold, who was conflicted out of a file involving Trump a month and a half earlier.
That's what convinced him was sufficiently compelling to raid the residence of a former president of the United States of America.
So no nuclear documents anymore.
There was no dire urgency that we know of, no utter emergency, because they've known that he had these documents since at least February of this year, but probably earlier.
Okay.
That's not unprecedented in my view.
Maybe I'm pro-Trump.
Maybe I'm on the right, which I'm not.
I am very much open to discussion and disagreements and even being swayed.
The judge said it's unprecedented.
He said it in court repeatedly.
This is unprecedented.
A raid on a former president.
There had better be unprecedented reasons compelling it.
Knowing where the documents were, requesting further security, and to return, that's not sufficiently compelling to me.
Especially since we're now seemingly getting confirmation that there were no nuclear documents there, as leaked, apparently, at one point in time.
How do they steal her diary and how are they supposed to go back and steal more?
So that's one of the theories that if this is something of a halfway home or a rehab home or something along those lines, people can go in and out.
I mean, that would be the theory.
Viva is a national treasure, except he's from Canada.
I'm from North America.
I mean, Canada's in North America, people.
Mike versus everyone.
Thank you very much.
Trailers are fair use.
I mean, I'm not taking a chance.
It's got music in it.
No, I don't think.
Running the trailer in its entirety?
I won't take a chance.
But go look it up.
It's all over the Twitterverse.
I'm willing to bet Ashley Biden intentionally left the diary so people would learn of what Biden did to her, a cry for help, as it were.
That would be a very understandable human reaction.
Some people hypothesize it's exactly why Hunter...
Left his laptop at multiple different places, at the very least at a computer store.
Some people hypothesize that.
These are calls for help, and they're also acts of revenge.
They're calls for help from people who want the world to know, and they're acts of revenge to get revenge on the people who, in their mind, have wronged them, have abused them.
Has everyone seen the movie called The Celebration?
I think that's what it was called.
There's a scene from The Celebration.
It's a Danish movie.
Hold on just one second.
I'm going to see if I can pull it up here.
It's a Dutch.
My memory is so bad.
I just remember having seen it.
It's about kids who are angry at their father because they believe that one of their siblings took their own lives because of the father's abuse.
And so the father's hosting a big celebration where guests come.
No, I don't want to end the stream.
The father's celebrating an anniversary.
It's called The Anniversary Party.
Hold on, let me see here.
The Anniversary Party, 2001.
Comedian romance.
That's definitely not it.
It's not an American movie.
Chat, you're smarter than me, offhand, because I can't remember my own life.
What was the movie called?
Anyway, long story short of the movie, the father did naughty things to one of the siblings who ended up taking their own lives.
The other two siblings decide to get revenge on the father at this anniversary party that he's throwing for him and his wife.
They lock the doors.
They slash the tires.
And then they give a speech at the anniversary party, which basically says, we'd like to thank our father for doing the unthinkable, which led to the unthinkable.
And then everybody gets uncomfortable and tries to leave.
And then they realize they can't leave the party.
Yeah.
Is nobody in the chat knowing what movie I'm talking about?
It was not Fight Club, Mindless Turtle.
Come on.
It was not the Blues Brothers.
Come on.
Hold on.
I'm going to get it.
Someone's going to get it.
It's not the Rothschilds.
Come on.
Let's be serious here for a second.
The movie was called The Anniversary Dutch.
Maybe it was Dutch.
Danish movie.
Celebration is what it was called.
Yeah, at least I got Danish.
Okay.
Festin.
The Celebration.
Celebration.
Let's just get the synopsis.
Celebration.
Festin.
A budget of $1.3 million.
Directed by Thomas Winterberg, produced by Nimbus Films.
Budget of $1.3 million.
The film tells the story of a family gathering to celebrate their father's 60th birthday.
It is a dark comedy juggling subjects of death, trauma, and family.
Worth a watch if I remember anything from my life 22 years ago.
The Celebration.
Zefestin.
And it's not...
Okay, come on, people.
The Celebration...
Okay, there's a lot...
Everyone's a comedian.
All right, take that down.
So that's it.
What else?
Oh, this is the ultimate act.
Let me...
Okay, so we've dealt with the Project Veritas.
It's very bad.
We'll see where it goes.
It's...
Weaponizing everything.
You know, whenever I wear this shirt, politics ruins everything.
Everyone loves it.
Because it's true.
It will always be true.
And for anyone, by the way, with one exception, politics has not ruined me as far as I can tell.
I don't think along political lines.
I still think along objective, reasonable lines, I think.
But politics ruins everything.
Music, art, film, science.
Sports.
And politics, for that matter.
Politics ruins politics.
Listen to this, people.
Listen to this.
I just laid out for you how we're seeing this process and why this matters.
Again, I just laid out because of the work that we have done in the economy, because of the American Rescue Plan.
Sorry, I didn't mean to do that.
This is my own personal observation.
When I look back at old videos of me and when I look back at videos of people who felt uncomfortable behind the camera, what they often do, the eyes are always somewhat closed and long blinks because people have sort of the inner sensation that if they blink long and don't see the world, the world doesn't see them because they're uncomfortable.
They don't feel confident behind the camera.
Watch Jean-Pierre's blinks.
These are the blinks of insecurity.
She does not believe in what she's saying.
And she's being used as a pawn in this political game to get up there and spew lies.
I just laid out for you how we're seeing this process and why this matters.
I just laid out.
I just laid out because of the work that we have done in the economy, because of the American Rescue Plan, because of the Inflation Reduction Act, and because all of this work that this president has done is actually has brought down our deficit by $1.7 trillion, unlike what Republicans did when they added to our deficit $2 trillion and did not care at all or thought about how this was going to be paid for.
They did not actually put in a process or...
Think about how we're going to do this in a smart way.
This is not how this administration is doing it.
Again, we are happy to continue to have this conversation, but I'm going to move now.
I'm happy to have this conversation, but not now.
And I want to highlight one point.
It's preposterous.
It's one incident after another where Jean-Pierre is incapable.
Incapable of providing an honest, direct answer.
And understandably so, because there is no honest answer that is going to be a palatable answer.
How are they going to pay for all of this student loan forgiveness?
The Republicans didn't.
They're out of deficit, too.
I'd love to know the context, by the way, because adding debt while adding income is not necessarily the end of the world.
Adding debt when there's no income.
Is a problem?
She thinks the $70,000 job is worth her integrity.
Is that what they get paid?
You know what?
Before I make my point, I want to see what the press secretary...
Press secretary.
It's got to be more than that.
It's got to be more than $70,000.
Press secretary.
Oh, no.
She makes $180,000.
That's still not enough.
Your integrity has no price.
But that's much more than $70,000.
Hold on one second.
Here we go.
Biden, now take it for what it's worth, people.
Deseret.com.
Here's what Biden's White House staffers make each year.
What's her name?
Jean-Pierre.
Current White House press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, makes $180,000 annual salary.
On Wednesday, the Biden House revealed that the salaries of all its employees...
In an annual report.
With salaries ranging from $0 to $100.
So she's paid the max.
Now, there is no price for integrity.
There's no price for honor.
There's no price for self-respect.
But $180,000 is a hefty salary.
U.S. no less.
That's like $200.
Let's get the math here properly.
It's like $25.
25 times 8 is going to be 16. That's like a $220,000 Canadian.
That's a lot of money.
There is no...
After tax, there is no price on integrity and respect for oneself.
I look at Brian Stelter and the reason why I feel pity for him after everything he's been through...
There's no amount of money that can really compensate for that amount of shame.
There's an amount of money that can make it easier to hide from that shame or make it easier to deal with that shame.
Used and abused and all it cost him was everything.
But this is my problem with Jean-Pierre.
People don't really remember this.
The New York Times comes out and Jean-Pierre did it to herself as well during the first press conference.
Reduces an individual to A series of aspects of identity politics.
Jean-Pierre came out, it was one of her first press conferences, and says, I'm the first black, openly gay press secretary, raised with immigrants, yada, yada, yada.
As if, it's not just that any of that is totally irrelevant for the job position.
These elements of, this is where we have to draw the nuance.
These elements of identity.
They're relevant for discussion, for understanding a person, their perspectives on the world, for understanding who the person is.
And it's great.
You want to understand why someone doesn't answer the phone on Saturday.
These things become relevant.
You want to understand dietary habits, historical perspectives, views on the world.
They're relevant to understanding an individual as an individual.
They are not relevant for assessing concepts, for discussing issues as issues.
As a blank, Fill in the blank.
Does not add legitimacy or detract from one's opinion on an issue.
As, and I'll just take mine so no one accuses me of anything.
As a Jew, as a born Jew, does not make my views on the Holocaust any more legitimate than a non-Jew who has opinions on the Holocaust.
It doesn't make my assessment any more valuable, and it doesn't make anyone else's assessment less valuable.
As a man...
Does it make my opinion any less valuable on other issues?
When it comes to, let's say, parenting.
As a parent, if the issue is child-rearing, it won't make my opinion any more valuable.
It just might make it more empirically based in order for other people to test.
Someone without kids can have a very perfectly legitimate opinion on parenting.
It might be more likely than not that they might not have an accurate opinion, but...
It doesn't disqualify the opinion to begin with.
What is the purpose of objectifying Jean-Pierre?
What's the purpose of objectifying her?
Reducing this complex individual human with a job to check marks of identity politics?
Well, it certainly opens up the argument that any critique of her for the ideas is actually going to be based not in critique of the ideas per se, but in critique of the individual aspects of identity politics.
New York Times' Karine Jean-Pierre unlikely rise to the White House electorate.
As an individual accomplishment?
Okay.
What the reality is, in my humble view, parading out pawns, objectifying these pawns so that it becomes difficult or at the very least weaponizable to go after the critique of these individuals as critique not of the ideas being...
Expressed by the individuals, but as some form of underlying critique of the individual themselves.
You know, criticizing Hillary Clinton was misogyny.
But criticizing Ben Shapiro is not anti-Semitism because, you know, it's different.
Parading out an individual to spew lies of the administration, and then in a way, like, you know, arguably shielding that individual from...
I don't want to say ridicule, from public scorn because of the absolute idiocy of the answers being provided.
It's strategic, and it's strategically dishonest.
Sook's saying they didn't want to be the deciders of what's true or false, so we use fact checkers.
The fact checkers are to skirt around Section 230.
The fact checkers are mandated by them, so they are nonetheless, through their agents, Saying what's right and what's wrong, what's true and what's false for the purposes of curating content.
It's such a disingenuous way of attempting to skirt Section 230, but it's also just a disingenuous argument.
They are their agents.
They're not independent when they're contracting with Facebook.
They are their agents.
Facebook did more than suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story.
Sorry, I'm looking here.
They erased links and comments to the story that were in private messages in Messenger.
By the way, I can attest to that.
I noticed that I couldn't even share the links through private DM on Twitter.
By the way, everyone should know I've been locked out.
Not locked out, but I have not been able to access my Facebook account in a long time because the SMS confirmation code that they're sending me is going to my old cell number, which I don't get texts for on my new phone.
Very frustrating, but I don't care enough about Facebook to solve that problem.
Okay.
Let's see what we've got.
Share screen.
I think we've gotten through all of our subject matter.
Are there any...
I'm choking on my own tongue here.
Any questions in the chat that I haven't gotten to you?
Do you understand what is happening with the blockade of RCMP in Fort McLeod in Alberta?
Think something similar in Saskatchewan.
Not sure.
I haven't heard about that.
Do you understand what is happening with the blockade of the RCMP?
Let me see here.
Let's pull up an article.
Blockade.
Fort McMurray?
Is that where it's at?
No, no, no.
It's Fort McLeod.
McLeod.
Fort McLeod.
Fort McLeod.
That's my problem here.
News.
Yeah, I don't see any news.
Sorry, I don't know what's going on there.
Fort McLeod counselor.
Yeah, I don't see anything.
Yeah, I don't know what it is, Doug, so I can't answer that.
I'll see if I can look into it.
Well, I missed the car vlog.
They will always be on the internet for a long time, but evolution is inevitable.
And obviously now I can't sit in the car.
Even if I wanted to right now, it was just not...
From an information perspective, it was not information effective.
Too much time to cover one little subject, and it prevented me from actually being up to speed on other subjects.
Oh, so Gavin McInnes was arrested on stage last night.
We'll go look into that.
That's amazing.
Mounties are like the FBI.
I would say rather the authorities...
Are always used by the government.
Authorities are exploited and abused by the government in similar ways.
Okay.
Crumble rants.
I don't see anything there, but I see some chat.
Oh, no.
Fort McLeod.
Someone wants to see Winston.
So I got these.
Oh!
My check!
Oh, come on.
Off the ground.
I got these off Amazon to try to...
You know, soundproof the room.
They've all fallen off the wall, but the dog is using them as a bed.
So they found a use.
Sorry.
Around 30 to 40 protesters have gathered outside the RCMP detachment in Fort McLeod to demand the release of freedom activist Alex Vought Van Herc.
Politics ruins everything.
Let's add to the list.
Security.
Police.
and intelligence.
questions.
Okay.
Come here, Winston.
Get over here.
People want to see you.
Oh, yeah.
He's stretching.
He's stretching.
He's making his way.
He's moseying his way over here.
So, tonight, I'm going to be on America's Untold Stories with Mark Grobert and Eric Hunley.
Winston, get over here.
Get up, get up, get up.
Get up.
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
I'm going to be on America's Untold Stories with them at 5.30.
Winston is here.
What do you have to say?
You know what?
Yes.
Such a long, healthy yawn.
He still smells good.
I forget how you do it.
I'm going to forward over.
This stream, so it'll direct everyone who watches this to watch them.
5.30, we're going to talk about some interesting stuff.
VivaFry.com for merch.
VivaBarnesLaw.Locals.com for support, if you want to.
And there's also an unpaid subscriber community and paid supporters.
Lots of exclusive content there.
Viva, any soft blanket can absorb sound.
Yeah, the echo's gotten better.
The room was totally empty when we moved in, so now that I put some...
Fold-out bed and some crap.
The reverb is better.
5.30 tonight.
America's Untold Stories.
Show some love for Eric.
Share that link away so people can know the awesome work they're doing there.
I am going to be looking into Gavin, people.
This is an orgy of politicized weaponization of all levels of government.
It's outrageous.
And we got a bot who subscribed to Troll.
Viva Fry attended Justin Trudeau rally.
I don't understand.
I don't understand.
But you're blocked.
And that's not blocked because of ideas.
That's blocked because those are bots.
I don't understand.
They found us, Marty.
They found us.
Moderna suing Pfizer over the vaccine market.
My God.
I'm going to go look into that.
No honor among scoundrels, people.
And that's it.
Every day, every day, every day.
I'm getting high with Viva Fry.
Cannot put that on a shirt.
People, before we leave, what should we put on a shirt?
I was thinking hinged and proud.
But I think hinged could be misread from a distance.
And I don't know if I like the way it could be misread from a distance.
Let's just have some random ideas thrown out now so we can have a new release of a shirt, mug, bumper sticker design for next week.
Viva!
You have come out viva.
You have to come out here to Nouvelle Orléans, New Orleans, for a fishing trip with me.
Great show today.
Keep up the great work, you and Barnes.
Thank you very much.
I'm scared of the world, Mark Hargis.
I'm scared of the world.
New Orleans, I look up.
Wherever I go, the first thing I look up, crime rate.
Intentional homicide, crime rate.
That's what I look up.
It's neurotic.
It's ridiculous.
But one day, Barnes knows the places to go, although Barnes doesn't like fishing.
But one day, I'm going to do the cross-country road trip, my bucket list item.
Thus far, I've been from, you know, Montreal to Florida, Virginia, Texas to New Brunswick, to New Mexico, in California, went through Utah, not New Zealand, Nevada, et cetera, et cetera.
One day, one day.
Frydom, not bad.
Viva fries, with the fro being the fries.
Mm-hmm.
Hillary for prison.
Fringed and proud is not bad.
How about the fry fringe?
Fry fringe.
Proud member of the Fry Fringe?
Hmm.
That's not bad.
Okay.
Proud member of the Fry Fringe.
That has a good ring to it.
People got fried.
Not bad.
Not bad.
Okay.
Go.
There's time left in the day.
Exercise.
Get outside.
Fresh air.
Sunlight.
Talk to people in real life.
We among each other are not the problem.
We among each other are the solution.
And I think people are realizing that.
Keep talking, keep speaking the truth, and speak it loud, unapologetically, and mock the fools relentlessly when they do things like apologize for the presence of Ben Shapiro.
Everyone, listen to the wise words of Winston.
Go and enjoy the day.
It is beautiful outside.
He's falling asleep.
I'm going to go walk him, squeeze him, pee out a pudge.
Everyone, enjoy the day.
▲
Export Selection