Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 6, 2022 - Viva & Barnes

01:48:20

Trump Wins, Biden Lies, & Political Pundit Hacks Get it Wrong AGAIN! Taco Tuesday with VIVA!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	He lied to voters, according to the New York Times, quoting aides of Biden's, about having marched in the civil rights movement.
	This is Biden making this false claim in 1987.
	When I marched in the civil rights movement, I did not march with a 12-point program.
	I marched with tens of thousands of others to change attitudes.
	And the New York Times reports, quote, more than once, advisors had gently reminded Mr. Biden of the problem with this formulation.
	He had not actually marched during the Civil Rights Movement, and more than once, Mr. Biden assured them that he understood and kept telling the story anyway.
	That is really, really weird.
	He lied to voters, according to the New York Times.
	I appreciate the formulation of the sentence, not the weird part.
	Attitude.
	In the New York Times reports, quote, more than once, advisors had gently reminded Mr. Biden.
	They gently reminded Mr. Biden of the problem with this forum.
	They gently reminded him he was lying, fabricating something that didn't happen.
	Gently, though, gently.
	Gently and so smoothly, reminding him that he's a liar.
	He's plagiarizing.
	There's an entire montage of Joe Biden, the plagiarizer.
	Not that he's the only one to plagiarize.
	It's a very popular thing to do when you haven't done your homework.
	But they gently remind him, there's a problem with your formulation.
	It's problematic in that it's not true.
	The problem with this formulation, he had not actually marched during the Civil Rights Movement, and more than once, Mr. Biden assured them that he understood and kept telling the story anyway.
	He didn't march with them, but he was there.
	So he marched in spirit with them.
	That's all that's missing from the sentence.
	And then you got Jake.
	That is really, really weird.
	Yeah, that's one way for calling something really, really dishonest.
	It's weird.
	It's weird how he lied then.
	How he lied consistently throughout his political life.
	And how it would seem he just got busted yet again for lying.
	Although he didn't do it.
	He sent his minions.
	To go live for him.
	But, you know, just one more thing.
	Listen to Biden.
	This is the way politicians speak.
	And it's alluring to some.
	And it's nauseating to others.
	When I marched in the civil rights movement, I did not march with a 12-point program.
	I marched with tens of thousands of others to change attitudes.
	If you don't know the person, it's compelling.
	It's almost persuasive.
	It's almost sincere and authentic.
	And then when you find out, and this doesn't just go for Biden.
	I mean, well, I don't know that there's anybody who listens to Justin Trudeau and thinks that he's being sincere or honest or forthright.
	But it sounds alluring.
	It sounds convincing.
	It sounds authentic.
	And it sounds sincere.
	And you realize it's just political, verbal diarrhea.
	Dishonest, plagiarized.
	Misrepresentation, verbal, political diarrhea.
	And, you know, it's funny how past this prologue, that which was true then, still seems to be true today, and then some.
	People, it's a big day today.
	I'm such an idiot that when I got lined up all of my notes for the day, I forgot to line up the biggest note of the day.
	It's all over the news.
	I don't know if you saw.
	The stock price has gone up 8.5%.
	I don't want anyone to misinterpret this as being anything less than a total joke.
	I do not own shares in Rumble or CFVI, the publicly traded stock.
	I never give investment advice because my investment advice, in as much as I give any advice from experience, it'll cause everyone to lose money.
	I don't trust anybody when it comes to investment advice.
	If people could give good investment advice, they'd keep it to themselves and they'd make money for themselves.
	The only people selling investment advice tend to be the ones losing other people's money.
	Not that I'm speaking from any specific experience, which I'm not.
	General Motors, Nortel.
	What was the other one?
	I once, with our Bar Society in Quebec, We could, what do they call them, like the investment funds or retirement plans?
	And I put in, once upon a time, $10,000.
	It was a substantial amount of money.
	Two years later, I'm at $7,000.
	Like, dude, if I wanted to lose money or have someone lose money for me, at least I could lose it myself and maybe have a little fun doing it.
	Spoiler alert, I bought some crypto.
	It's no more fun losing your own money than it is having other people lose your money for you.
	Gambling.
	That's a pension.
	That's right, American Dreamer.
	Gambling.
	I'm sorry, let me rephrase this.
	Stock market investment, in my mind, by and large, is gambling.
	It's legalized gambling.
	You're doing it at your own risks and peril.
	By the time the stock price has been affected one way or the other, all of the information is already baked into it.
	And like George Carlin said, there's a club there.
	And you ain't in it.
	So you're buying after everyone has already factored in all of the insider knowledge into the price of the stock.
	But all that to be said, the CFVI stock, the Rumble merging company stock, is up nearly 10% today.
	I can only surmise because correlation is causation, people.
	If something happens in the same day, it is causation, not mere correlation.
	The big news of the day, Nate the Brody's in the house.
	Hold on.
	Nate, I'm waiting for that video on Twitter.
	Nate, the lawyer, says, it's like saying, I don't know why my lawyer paid the porn star I slept with while I was married.
	Well, I don't want to argue.
	It's like this is an entire discussion of its own.
	All that to say, Nate, what's up?
	How's it going?
	I want my video evidence of San...
	What was her name?
	What was the press sec under Trump?
	I want the video evidence, Nate.
	The news of the day, people, before we get into Super Chats and before we get into the plan going forward.
	Where was it?
	Did I shut down the link that I specifically brought up for the purposes of going over the news of the day?
	I did.
	Why, people?
	Because I'm an idiot.
	I actually closed the tab.
	We're just going to go, David.
	Freiheit News.
	We're going to bring up news.
	We're going to bring up the news.
	Which is this, people.
	This is the news.
	We'll get there.
	We'll get there.
	You guys hear the nostril flaring.
	Share screen.
	Chrome tab.
	Live streamer.
	I love the fact that I'm called a live streamer.
	Legal live streamer.
	Live streamer Viva Frye signs exclusive deal with Rumble.
	Drops YouTube.
	As primary platform.
	First of all, everybody, I was contacted for comment, quite obviously, before this went out.
	And my comment is, I want to highlight the paragraph, my statement, how long it took.
	Viva Frye will produce four weekly live streams on Rumble, including his hit show on Sunday, Longbow Key, Florida.
	PR Newswire.
	Rumble, the video sharing platform, announced an exclusive partnership with David Fry.
	That's me, by the way.
	My name's not Viva Fry.
	An accomplished attorney.
	Thank you.
	I was, but I don't talk about it very often.
	And successful content creator on YouTube.
	The partnership will include exclusive live streams on Rumble, an average of four times per week, including VivaFly's popular Sunday show.
	At the end of August, his YouTube channel boasted over 540,000 subscribers.
	I think we're at 550-something now, who can find a new home on Rumble with the exclusive partnership.
	You can subscribe to their Rumble channel and Locals community today.
	Viva was one of the first major content creators on Rumble due to a viral video hit he created many years ago.
	We're going to show this, which had nothing to do with the practice of law, said Rumble CEO Chris Pawlowski.
	Viva can now continue to create content that remains authentic, insightful, and honest without having to worry about capricious or politically motivated censorship.
	The move will allow him to create even more compelling and impactful content.
	And I'm personally excited to see how his audience grows.
	And then my statement.
	Took me very long.
	Every word matters.
	Rumble is leading the movement for free speech and free thought at a time when the world needs it most, said David Frye.
	We are living in an era where a handful of politically and ideologically motivated tech companies control the parameters of public discourse and therefore public consciousness itself.
	This exclusive partnership with Rumble will allow me to continue discussing the issues of our time freely, openly, and without fear of censorship for the proverbial thought crime.
	It's the next phase in the democratization of free thought itself.
	That is the news.
	And I want to show this.
	What was it?
	Epic Dad Trick Rumble.
	I think we're going to find...
	Am I going to be able to find it?
	The video is so old.
	It's five years old.
	Oh, I might have to find that later.
	It was some weird description of the video.
	Ah, we're not going to find it.
	That's the news, people.
	Now, some of you might be sitting there thinking, if Viva's exclusive to Rumble, what the hell is Y 'all doing on YouTube right now?
	This is the way it's going to work for a little while.
	We're going to tinker with the format, see how it works.
	We're going to go live on both platforms for 30 minutes, give or take, at which point we're going to end the stream on YouTube and everyone's going to be invited to come join us on Rumble.
	The link to the stream on Rumble is, you'll notice, the pinned chat in the chat.
	And just so everybody knows, I'm not going to Rumble so I can...
	You know, become a salty cracker.
	And I say that with no disrespect to salty cracker.
	Salty cracker is fun to watch.
	I'm not going to rumble to change who I am so that people can say, look, rumble is this awful platform.
	It turned the good-natured, well-meaning viva into a monster.
	It's going to be the same tenor, the same discussion, the same public, the same, what's the word I'm looking for?
	The same positive outlook.
	And analysis of the world.
	But, you know, the fun thing is we can have discussions about the things that are not verboten on the YouTube.
	We don't have to create code words.
	We don't have to circumvent the ordinary use of language to have discussions that are meaningful and insightful.
	I do want to...
	Oh, the bots are in the house.
	We might also...
	Hold on.
	Customization.
	When am I going to learn?
	When am I going to learn?
	Okay.
	Funny thing is this, and I'm going to make sure it's damn well known to the world.
	I've been on YouTube for how many years?
	I know the first viral video I had was November 2014.
	It's going to be six years that I've been on YouTube.
	On my main channel, I have...
	Let me just see over...
	How many videos do I have?
	There's well over 2,000 videos on my main channel, including marathon live streams.
	I have never had a community guideline or terms of service violation that stuck on my main channel in all of that content.
	This is not a question of, you know, I'm in trouble on YouTube with the overlords, and it's a question of jumping ship.
	No.
	I have led...
	An impeccable by community guideline terms of service standards.
	An impeccable existence on YouTube.
	I never spoke in a way to deliberately, you know, push the envelope, so to speak.
	The community guidelines strike that I got once upon a time, there might have been two.
	I think there were two.
	One was a terms of service.
	One was, I forget.
	Alex Jones.
	My deposition breakdown of Alex Jones got a community guidelines strike for hate speech.
	Because I analyzed the deposition of Alex Jones.
	That was sort of my awakening to the madness, politically motivated insanity on YouTube.
	2.7 thousand videos, give or take.
	Wow.
	That was the intro to the political madness on YouTube.
	That video of a lawyer, it was super, super cringe.
	I'm on the roof of my old house wearing sunglasses.
	Doesn't matter.
	A lawyer breaking down a deposition in which there was no hate speech.
	It's not like even in the substance of the deposition that Alex Jones gave, there was hate speech.
	There wasn't.
	That got flagged for, first got demonetized, then got removed from the platform for violating terms of service for hate speech.
	I am not one to back away, to shy away from apologizing or acknowledging when I made a mistake.
	And in as much as I'm honest when it comes to that, I'm stubbornly stubborn when it comes to not letting someone get away with besmirching my good name and casting an aura of negativity on my good work.
	So I contested that.
	Appeal was rejected.
	And then lo and behold, out of the blue, videos back up.
	And if there was ever a guideline violation, it was removed.
	That was the only time.
	There was one other time when I was trying to figure out how to live stream.
	And I had an unlisted live stream going.
	And I brought up, just to see if I could bring up a screen, and I brought up a Do Perfect video.
	And then I got a strike for deceptive practices on an unlisted test stream that was just me pulling up, just to see.
	And I contested that.
	And then the appeal said no.
	Then I get on chat with support.
	I was like, no, this is not going to stand.
	I don't even care if it has no consequence.
	It's not going to stand because it's not fair.
	And it was taken away as well.
	2.7 thousand videos.
	Some are short, some are long.
	Marathon streams.
	With controversial characters.
	Alex Jones.
	Cernovich.
	I don't even know why.
	Some of them are not controversial except on Wikipedia.
	There shall be no besmirching.
	So I've done impeccably well at navigating the capricious Guidelines that exist within YouTube, but it doesn't mean I haven't made a stink about it.
	I had an entire playlist called YouTube Chicanery.
	So, that's it.
	I'm going exclusive to Rumble.
	I'm not leaving YouTube.
	All that's going to happen is, during these live streams, during the Sunday night show, we're going to go for 30 minutes on both platforms, and then we're going to say sayonara, YouTube, for now.
	We're going over to Rumble.
	I'm not going to have to say...
	What did I say?
	I'm not going to say Yahtzee.
	Hey, the bad words?
	We're actually going to be able to discuss matters like grown adults without having to worry about...
	I don't even think it's real people saying those words hurt me, demonetize.
	But people certainly do weaponize that aspect of the YouTube platform.
	So we're going to do that.
	And then the live stream, I'll put it on YouTube as a standalone the next day.
	People will be able to watch it because at the end of the day also, this is about getting the information out there to people who need it but don't necessarily know that they need it.
	There's 2 billion people on YouTube, give or take.
	I don't know, 1.5 billion.
	Tomorrow we're going to find out how many new users are on Rumble.
	I would say that as far as the Rumble user base goes, they're probably more politically aware.
	They're probably more politically informed than a lot of people on YouTube.
	You don't only want to preach to your choir.
	You don't only want to speak to your crowd.
	You don't only want to speak to the people who know that they need to know what's going on.
	You want to reach the other people.
	And you also want to direct them over to where the meaningful discussion is going to be held.
	Imagine, by the way, if a year ago, because YouTube just changed their, whatever it was, terms of service guidelines as to what you can say about the Fauci juice.
	Now you can say, from what I understand, that it might not prevent transmission.
	Now you can say there might be some adverse effects.
	You can say it now.
	A year later, they've changed the big tech narrative controlling censorship.
	A year later.
	Imagine how literally, literally, how many lives could have been saved?
	How many lives might have been saved had people been able to have this discussion openly on the biggest video hosting platform on earth?
	Maybe.
	Just imagine.
	You remember once upon a time, you couldn't say that the My Sharona Cyrus?
	Coronavirus?
	You couldn't even say that it might have originated in a lab in Wuhan, China.
	You couldn't say it.
	You even had some journalists suggesting it would be racist to say it.
	Oh, then a year later, it's mainstream news.
	Imagine how many lives could have been changed had that discussion been allowed to be had on the platform.
	I want to see this here.
	Hold on.
	I just saw this.
	I want to see what it says because it looks interesting.
	Dude, is that...
	It kind of looks like me on the mug.
	I'm unsubscribing for anyone that wants me to chase them to rumble when they can't talk about non-violent...
	Oh, okay.
	Well, then don't chase me, please, to rumble.
	You're not going to get that talk from me.
	You're not going to get that talk from me because I don't agree with it.
	I don't think it's right.
	And it will not achieve any desired results.
	I had to read that long chat.
	Imagine how many lives could have been saved now that the discussion seems to be changing around hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin.
	It seems that there might have been some stealth in the middle of the night updates.
	Imagine how much could have been different.
	Potentially.
	Potentially.
	How many lives potentially could have been saved had we been able to do openly and freely what is a God-given right for people with language, and that is to speak freely?
	bar Barbarian?
	Wait, we're getting ready to move it over to the party, but before I do that, I do want to bring up the superchats.
	ARJH says, Viva, what's up?
	Congrats on the Rumble deal.
	What's your current knowledge about unjabbed people going out and back to Canada by plane?
	What are the protocols to return there, if at all possible?
	Thanks a lot, brother.
	I'm going to put out a video, by the way, of a discussion that I'm going to have with one of the border, not the border agents, but the agents manning the Arrive Can app.
	This is not legal advice.
	This is not any form of advice.
	I just know now because I called up.
	If non-nationals, if you're not a Canadian citizen or someone with a right of entry into Canada and you're unvaxxed, you can't get into Canada from what I was explained.
	You can't get into Canada from what I was explained.
	Unless you get a compassionate reason excuse granted by the government, non-nationals or foreign nationals, unvaccinated, cannot get into Canada.
	I'm not sure if this is the same.
	For going into the US.
	If you aren't vaccinated as a Canadian citizen or someone who has the right to enter, you have to quarantine for 14 days.
	You have to download the Arrive Can app.
	If you don't have a phone, I believe you have to print out a hard copy or something.
	But if you're unvaccinated and Canadian, you can't be denied entry into your own country.
	You're just placed under some form of, call it detention, detainment.
	You could pick the place now, at least.
	At least it's not in a government-designated quarantine hotel.
	That's as far as I understand as the rules are now.
	Husar 1683 says, when FJB didn't march but was there in spirit, I see how they reason that the DT was leading the...
	When Joe Biden didn't march in spirit but he was there in spirit, I see how Trump was leading January 6th.
	It's another pledge and give.
	That's a Johnny Depp joke.
	And then we got Steve Britton.
	I just got told I need to send a whitty super chat.
	So here it is.
	Also, how will you handle Rumble Rants with StreamYard?
	So this is it.
	When I go live on Rumble, I'm going to come out of Rumble.
	I'm going to come out of StreamYards to go in Rumble itself, bring up the chats, and then I'm going to go back to StreamYard when I want to share screens.
	So people, we're 3,630 people in here.
	The first half hour is going to be an ordinary stream.
	And, oh, that's right.
	By the way, thank you.
	Djokovic couldn't come to the U.S. because he was unvaccinated.
	Yet we have thousands of migrants who are untested and unvaccinated are sent all over the country.
	You're right.
	So it's the same rule.
	I remember that.
	I thought they had changed that maybe, but you're 100% right, because Djokovic, unvaxxed, couldn't go play at the Moderna-sponsored tennis event where we had a sick, sad, ironic video of one player withdrawing from the competition, sponsored by Moderna for environmental reasons.
	Clown words.
	So...
	So that's it.
	We'll figure it out.
	I'll tinker with it.
	There might be some hiccups, you know.
	But we're 3,700 watching on YouTube now.
	We're going to go over to Rumble in seven minutes.
	You don't have to speak code on Rumble.
	Such freedom does not exist here on PooTube.
	You know, the funny thing is, though, I always took a bit of pride in the code that we had to speak.
	You know, the amazing Lucas had his own dialect.
	It was a source of pride to some extent to illustrate the absurdity.
	When they don't force you to say my Sharona Cyrus and allow you to say coronavirus, they don't look bad.
	When you have to use code to say the exact same thing in word sounds that don't hurt sensitive ears, it makes them look even stupider.
	And so it was kind of fun.
	It was community building.
	It was brand building, you know, in a sense.
	But it was tedious.
	But then the idea that, you know, like, over the election cycle, remember 2020 election when they suddenly changed the rules?
	You couldn't have any discussion that could ever question the integrity of elections because they've always been impeccable and unquestionable, except when NPR ran an entire series right before 2020 and didn't finish the series because Trump ended up losing one state in particular.
	You put in work, you have entire streams demonetized because you're going, or entire videos demonetized, because you discuss a Supreme Court decision, That dismissed one of the election lawsuits because you discussed the allegations.
	What kind of world is that?
	Oh, that's great.
	It's great.
	YouTube, thanks for basically stealing money, literally, out of a hard-working content creator's back pocket.
	Yoink!
	Like the Simpsons.
	The yoink.
	By the way, did you guys know that yoink was a word created by the Simpsons?
	True.
	Check it up.
	There's an article in the Epoch Times about embalmers finding 50 to 55% of dead people with blood clots post-jab.
	Ew.
	There was a video that Laura Lynn, a clip that she put out of an interview she did with the doctor where they discussed that issue.
	Send a link.
	The link is in the pinned comment.
	Unless we're talking...
	Are we talking about the link for Rumble?
	If it's the link for Rumble, it's in the pinned chat.
	And this way I'm going to go back to Rumble.
	I'm going to get to the Rumble rants and we're going to see this.
	Better read this comment or I'll be furious.
	Just kidding.
	Love the show, brother.
	Be well.
	Thank you very much, James Adkins.
	So that's the big news of the day.
	The menu items of the day, obviously, the Trump special master win.
	It's a W. I think it's an illusory W. I call it the IW.
	Or the EW.
	No.
	UW, a useless win.
	We're going to talk about that.
	And we're going to talk about some of the bad takes from the people on the interwebs who cannot admit that they are blinded by their own preconceived notions.
	They can't admit it.
	They come up with bad predictions.
	New information comes out which undermines their bad predictions.
	They got to double down and read what they want to read out of the bad...
	They make bold predictions based on inaccurate and factually incorrect, or at the very least, legally incorrect analyses, and then just double down after the fact.
	They're going to blame blood clots on red meat, stress.
	Well, the thing is this.
	There could be other reasons other than the reflexive one that we're all thinking about.
	It could be stress.
	It could be unhealthy lifestyle over the last two years.
	It could be excessive...
	No, drinking doesn't cause blood clots, right?
	Drinking thins out the blood.
	No medical advice, no legal advice, no election fornification advice.
	But there could be other factors that are related to government response.
	That's not a saving grace to the government.
	We either have problems because of a certain medical intervention or we have problems because of certain government intervention.
	Damned if one way or the other.
	So it's not inconceivable that you could find another plausible explanation.
	Well, the climate change, okay, that would be a stretch, Rob.
	Although, they say climate change causes people to be lethargic and not exercise.
	You know what?
	I've been in Florida now for, what, I don't know, two months.
	I've been jogging.
	I went out at two o 'clock.
	That was not smart.
	But, you know, jogging in the heat just makes exercise...
	More inefficient, which thus makes it more efficient, because the idea of exercise is supposed to be inefficient.
	It's supposed to get your heart going.
	Detain Viva Frye download...
	I'm telling you, this is a bot that's supposed to make Justin Trudeau look bad.
	Oh, and speaking of which, we've got some bad news for Trudeau using his political pawns, much like Biden is using his, to carry out his lies for him.
	Biden is using Jean-Pierre to lie for him.
	Justin Trudeau is using Omar Algebra to lie for him.
	We're going to get it.
	Dude, are we going to do the countdown?
	The final...
	Oh, and not to mention copyright issues on YouTube, but set that aside.
	Do we do the final countdown, people?
	Hold on.
	I'm not even going to sing it, because if I sing it, we might get a strike.
	Let's see here.
	I'm going to go to Rumble.
	Ooh, that was good.
	It looks like Tate Speech is live.
	Did I go live with Tate Speech?
	I didn't.
	I'm joking.
	We're going to end up invariably, invariably overlapping.
	And you can always watch the streams later.
	We got to get on Rumble Rant to get another function that they have on YouTube, which is called Super Thanks.
	YouTube has these things called Super Thanks, which is like a super chat after the stream has ended.
	We've got to get Rumble to get those.
	That's the link, people, right there.
	It's the pinned comment.
	Go to that link right now as we bring it on over.
	I was going to sing another song, and we were going to get...
	Will Viva notify us on YouTube?
	I'm going to notify you every time because we're going to do the first 30 minutes live on YouTube before moseying on over, bringing the party over.
	To the Rumbles.
	Good day.
	Thank you for all your effort.
	You are a noble person to always be held in high regard.
	Also, in Mexico, my birthday is 69. 69. Nice.
	Noise.
	All right.
	Lord Pepsi, thank you.
	Random, random super chat of the day.
	And that's it.
	So now we're going to...
	This is always the nerve-wracking part, people.
	Going to go.
	I'm going to remove this in eight...
	And if there's a problem, fingers crossed.
	I'm going to remove this YouTube from StreamYards and go straight to Rumble after this Super Chat.
	Is the push for the newest vax...
	Here, let me screen grab this and we'll talk about it over on the other side.
	Is the push for the newest vax by JT because he has to justify all those doses he pre-purchased or is it the first trial run of a human...
	I don't know about the second part.
	They've got...
	Okay.
	To be discussed in one second.
	I'm removing it, people, and we're going over to Rumble.
	Remove?
	I'm not deleting on YouTube.
	I'm just going to remove it.
	See you all on Rumble now.
	Close.
	People?
	Now I can't see, I can't see Rumble yet.
	I'm going to have to come back to the screen when it's time, but now I'm going live on Rumble.
	I'm going to see if I see my face.
	Hold on.
	I see a commercial.
	Patriots claim this free tactical ops backpack today.
	You know what?
	Instead of running the ad over the stream, maybe one day it'll just be a sponsor of the stream.
	Close ad.
	I see my face.
	And look at this.
	Now I can see the chat.
	And it says, The numbers are only relevant in terms of impact.
	All is vanity.
	And I will make sure not to.
	Not to be vain.
	That silver play button?
	Vanity.
	Idolatry.
	It's worshipping fake gods.
	It means something.
	It's a milestone.
	You want it, but you have to appreciate that the reason you want it is a form of idolatry.
	How do I slow the chat down?
	I want to bring up this.
	Nope, I missed it.
	This?
	There.
	Here.
	No.
	So if I bring this up now, test duty.
	Does anybody...
	I need to see the comments now.
	Do you all see, watching on Rumble, the highlighted Rumble rant now?
	Let me see if you see it.
	I brought it up.
	I see it on my screen.
	I've highlighted it.
	Vida, bring up the Rumble rant.
	Okay, I'm trying to bring up the Rumble rant.
	Do you not see it now?
	On my screen, if you can see what I see, I see it.
	Everybody says no.
	So now, how do I...
	Okay, stop moving.
	So if I bring up a comment...
	Okay, does anybody know how to do it?
	That's the question.
	I see no, and I see yes, and I see duty.
	So there is no way to highlight a comment here that I can see yet.
	We're going to work on this.
	I can bring up the Rumble Rant, and now I need to see what this looks like if I'm watching it as a third party.
	People, bear with the hiccup.
	Rumble.
	Okay, here we go.
	I just want to see what this looks like if I'm watching it live.
	Now it says service unavailable.
	That's...
	Rumble.
	That's me.
	Okay.
	Now I press play.
	No, you see, I don't see it.
	And if I bring it up, I don't see it.
	Okay, I'm going to figure out how to do it, people.
	I'll read them at least.
	To the extent I can see that.
	I'm taking that down.
	So that says Test Duty from G-L-S-A-S-I-H.
	I can see it.
	I can see Test Duty.
	Okay, good.
	$5 chat is at the top of the chat, yes, from Salty Maple Leaf, but is it highlighted the way it gets highlighted on YouTube?
	If not, I know a certain individual who I can talk to to work these kinks out.
	Okay, that's Super Chat, by the way.
	And by the way, can someone confirm that we're not on YouTube right now?
	Because...
	This plan has to be implemented if it is to work, people.
	Is the push for the newest vax by Justin Trudeau because he has to justify all those doses he pre-purchased?
	Or is it the first trial run of human microchips as per the WEF?
	I'm going to say something that I think some people may not like.
	I'm not sure I'm buying into the microchip thing.
	I know that guy Harari talked about it.
	We looked at the video yesterday.
	Transhumanism.
	I'm not there yet.
	And answering the question is not to entertain or to engage in that discussion.
	That's not my discussion to have right now.
	It's what it is.
	For anybody who hasn't seen it, actually, let me just pull up the video of Justin Trudeau pushing Something that nobody wants.
	Nobody wants it.
	And he's coming out.
	And the harder nobody wants it, the harder he has to push for it.
	This video that should be broadcast loud and clear.
	Let's be Justin Trudeau's bullhorn for him.
	He wants to get this message out.
	Let's get this message out.
	Did you guys hear this yesterday?
	Everyone should get out and get vaccinated.
	If we are able to hit that 80, 85, 90% of Canadians up to date in their vaccinations, we'll have a much better winter with much less need for the kinds of restrictions and rules that were so problematic for everyone over the past years.
	But every step of the way, government's responsibility.
	It's to keep people safe, to prevent our healthcare systems from getting overwhelmed.
	And that's where individuals choosing to make sure they're updated in their vaccinations with these new vaccines is going to help us all get through it and keep life open and free the way we want it to be.
	This guy thinks he has the power to shut down people's lives and to not allow them to be free.
	This guy thinks he has that power.
	So now, that's the video.
	Justin Trudeau wants to come out and push this hard.
	Let's amplify that message that he's sending and see how people respond to the message that he's putting out, to the product he's selling.
	There's two things to this.
	Setting aside the second half of that, is he doing it because he's already pre-purchased this?
	That would be one argument, and I can definitely see it.
	I would say that the argument against that The argument against that as an explanation is that he wouldn't have to compel them on his citizens since they've already been pre-purchased.
	He could be benevolent and donate them to under-vaccinated nations.
	He could actually probably do that and paint himself as more of the benevolent ruler than by trying to force them on people who quite clearly are not interested in them.
	So I actually don't think it's one or the other.
	I don't think he's trying to get I don't think he's trying to exhaust the stock that he's purchased.
	The stock is in the load of vaccines.
	And I don't think about the second part.
	I don't agree with the second part.
	I think he's doing this because he's got to keep the panic going.
	He's got to keep the emergency going.
	Like George Orwell said, the war was not meant to be won.
	It was meant to go on forever.
	And why?
	Because the longer that this war goes on, the longer that we continue to live in a state of public emergency, The longer we don't talk about Justin Trudeau's corruption, the longer we don't talk about Justin Trudeau's incompetent, ineffective, corrupt, unethical leadership,
	the longer we don't talk about the grievous problems going on in Canada, force people to live in panic, force people to live in a manufactured crisis, because at this point, at this point, anybody purporting that this is a crisis in Canada, that this is a pandemic and not an endemic, they're manufacturing crisis.
	I heard a thumb.
	Justin Trudeau is manufacturing crisis.
	And the reason why he's manufacturing the crisis is because he wants to govern through terror.
	There's no other way to describe it.
	He wants to continue with the crisis so that we ignore all of his other failings as a leader.
	We're not talking about WEF.
	We're not talking about the world.
	Not the WF, sorry.
	It's funny, though.
	We're not talking about the We Charity scandal.
	We're not talking about Aga Khan scandal anymore.
	We're not talking about SNC-Lavalin-Jody Wilson-Raybould scandal anymore.
	We're not talking about the creative makeup that he was wearing.
	We're not talking about inflation.
	We're not even talking about...
	We're not talking about that, and there's a lot of good questions that need to be asked about that that we're not asking.
	Instead, we're being forced to live through a continued fabricated crisis so that Justin Trudeau can continue to try to justify the draconian, unconstitutional, and inhumane measures that he has imposed on Canadians.
	So that he can continue to cause Canada to become something of a hermit nation where outsiders can't get in and where citizens can't get out to see what's going on in the rest of the world.
	And while all that goes on, we don't talk about what really matters, the corrupt, ineffective, destructive government that some might say, arguably, is beholden to interests that are not Canadian citizen interests.
	We're not talking about how he abused of the law to invoke the Emergencies Act.
	We're going to be talking about that soon, I think, but not now.
	Continue with the panic, and it's the ultimate distraction.
	Barb Barbisa Ariane says, So happy you're stealing people from YouTube.
	Salty Cracker brought us crazy berserkers here to follow you and Barnes.
	Thank you very much.
	It's a $25 rumble rant.
	I screen grabbed with my phone two more.
	One was from Navy Namvet.
	Let the rumble begin.
	And the other is from...
	Ashi Arafan, Mike.
	Horrible with messages, but here's some support.
	Thank you very much.
	Okay, so I'm noticing some things.
	When I want to watch live, I have to see my face.
	Maybe if I pause it.
	Okay.
	Oh, we got P. Moyer, Pasha Moyer, I think, from over on YouTube.
	Viva.
	I think you would be hard-pressed to overplay the motives of either the elites in Canada or those in the U.S. Like I pointed out yesterday to the CBC, Chrystia Freeland, our Deputy General, I forget what it is, Deputy Minister, WEF Board of Trustees, Justin Trudeau, the Prime Minister, infiltrated, penetrated by Klaus Schwab.
	It's egregious.
	And by the way, above and beyond continuing this manufactured crisis, it's conditioning Canadian citizens to think.
	That every aspect of their freedom and every aspect of their lives can be controlled at a whim by the government.
	What you put into your body when you leave the house, what you put over your face, who you can see, what you can say, when you can say it.
	Every aspect of free civil society is being controlled by the government.
	And people think I'm being hyperbolic.
	If you think that, you're living in denial.
	But this is about conditioning people to operate on the basis that their very freedoms are subject to the whim of an ever-knowing, all-benevolent dictator of a leader.
	Oh, what's that?
	It's too hot outside?
	Lockdown.
	Oh, what's that?
	A bad flu season?
	Lockdown.
	Don't want to overwhelm the healthcare facilities.
	You don't want to...
	You don't want to draw attention to another failed government policy, another failed government experiment, another failed institution that was run by the government, so we're locking you in your homes.
	Oh, what's that?
	You don't want to overwhelm the healthcare system, so now you have to inject your body with something that has not been tested on humans.
	And I'm not talking about the vaccine, we're talking about the booster now.
	They're just tinkering with the original vaccine, adding a few ingredients.
	Not testing it on humans before mandating it.
	Oh, they haven't mandated it yet.
	Before pushing it on humans.
	That's what I think.
	That's all I have to say about that.
	All right.
	Do we want to get...
	Let me see how rapid response the chat is.
	How fast is the chat?
	If I say Apple, first person to put an Apple in the chat.
	Apple, type Apple.
	Let's just see what the delay is.
	Darlene Dawn says, talk about the 50,000 square foot climate change building going up in Winnipeg.
	Yeah, I saw that Kian Bexty from Counter Signal was reporting on that.
	We got debt.
	Okay, Apple.
	So there's a bit of a delay.
	There's a bit of a delay.
	But it's no different than the...
	No different than...
	What's the word I'm looking for?
	Streamyards.
	Okay.
	Someone says, who cares about Canada?
	Everyone should care about Canada.
	Who said it?
	Who said it?
	It's not because I'm Canadian.
	I can't get the chat to stop.
	Someone said, who cares about Canada?
	Everyone should care about Canada because Canada right now might be the canary in the coal mine.
	It might be the guinea pig in the political cage.
	Care about what's happening in Canada because when we saw what happened in Australia and we're like, oh, how long until that comes over here?
	Well, now it's here.
	Okay, but we're going to talk about American stuff.
	The Trump victory of the day, people.
	The Trump victory of the day is Special Master was appointed.
	Do I pull up?
	I'm going to pull up the order.
	We'll go through the order later.
	No, you know what?
	I don't want to go through the whole order anyhow.
	I will bring up the order.
	The order.
	Let me see here.
	Okay, hold on.
	I have it on my computer.
	I just downloaded it.
	Give me one second, people.
	Close this down.
	This one right here.
	Bring this up.
	Okay, bring up the document.
	It's Barnes's highlighting because this was shared on our Locals community, vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Probably the best place to support if you're inclined to support.
	Okay, so I see myself now.
	Share, screen, window, a document.
	And now we have the document.
	Okay, this is the order from Judge Cannon.
	Public enemy number one now to the left.
	It's so amazing.
	And by the way, this is not to say that I don't disagree with judges or look up who they were appointed by if I want to assess their judgment, potentially from a politically, ideologically motivated perspective.
	Nonetheless, before you go and discredit a judge as a judge, like I'm thinking of Judge Sullivan, maybe?
	It was Emmett Sullivan, right?
	In Michael Flynn?
	You've got to have more than one decision to hang your hat on.
	And you've got to have...
	It's got to be pretty concrete black and white evidence of egregious bias before you can come to that conclusion and write off a judge.
	Right now, everyone's writing off this judge.
	Aaliyah Cannon?
	Because she ordered a special master.
	And people are angry.
	Because some people were saying that the appointment of a special master is legally untenable, absolutely bizarre, crazy to even have been requested.
	No legal precedent for it.
	You'd have to be an idiot to ask for it, let alone grant it.
	Oh, well, lo and behold, Trump asked for it and a judge granted it.
	Let's just hear.
	Plenty of the United States.
	Okay.
	This cause...
	I will not pull a...
	I'm not going to go through the whole thing.
	I was watching Robert Gouveia talk about it yesterday.
	I made a video, which we're going to play.
	This cause comes before the court upon plaintiff's motion for judicial oversight.
	Trump was asking for equitable relief, the court to exercise its inherent powers, appoint a special master to review, do a triage, and control who has access to the documents and the nature of the documents for the purposes of subsequent investigation, subsequent analysis, subsequent use by the Justice Department and the FBI, subsequent to the raid of Trump's Mar-a-Lago.
	The judge came to the conclusion that, yes, Trump has the right to it, as did James O 'Keefe when James asked for the appointment of a special master in the FBI raid seizure of his cell phones, which also, coincidence, passed his prologue.
	Once as an accident, twice as coincidence, third time as enemy action.
	When they seized James O 'Keefe's cell phones and that of other journalists within, And, you know, and they potentially had access to potentially privileged information.
	They appointed a special master in the James O 'Keefe raid.
	That appointment was also illusory because, as we subsequently found out...
	The FBI still had access to basically all of whatever could have been potentially privileged confidential because they had seized emails via other needs.
	So it was an illusory appointment of the special master.
	I suspect we're going to have the exact same thing in this case, but at the very least on paper, it's been granted.
	Pursuit to the court's equitable jurisdiction and inherent supervisory authority.
	And mindful of the need to ensure that at least the appearance of fairness.
	We're not going to necessarily have fairness.
	But at least we're going to have the appearance of fairness and integrity.
	Under extraordinary circumstances, the court hereby authorizes the appointment of a special master to review the seized property for personal items and documents and potentially privileged material subject to claims of attorney, client, and or executive privilege.
	Furthermore, in natural conjunction with that appointment and consistent with the value and sequence of special master procedures, the court also temporarily enjoins the government from reviewing and using This is what people are raising some flags about in the court order.
	It seems like an opening here.
	This order shall not impede the classification review and or intelligence assessment by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, ODNY, as described in the government's notice of receipt.
	So they're basically saying that some of it's going to be subject to the review of the special master before any continued investigative purposes, but they're still going to be able to review it for intelligence assessment by the ODNID.
	I've got to try to remember that.
	Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
	We don't need to do the background except for one part here, which we're going to then have to break out to a video.
	We all know what happened.
	The seizure of these documents.
	A raid.
	FBI shows up to Mar-a-Lago.
	With a warrant that had been issued apparently via WhatsApp by Magistrate Reinhardt.
	They seized a bunch of documents, boxes, 15 boxes, and Trump alleges that they might have seized solicitor-client privilege documents, executive privilege documents, personal documents, which could be confirmed because they seized the passports, expired and current.
	Of the former president of the United States of America.
	Although if you ask Joe Biden now, the word of the day is former defeated president of the United States of America.
	Remember that, people.
	We're idiots.
	They go to think tanks and they try to find words that they think are going to resonate with people and then they use them day in and day out.
	MAGA Republicans is one of them.
	Someone told Joe Biden...
	That's going to be your term now to demonize people.
	Someone also said to Biden, don't just refer to him as former president.
	Refer to him as former defeated president.
	Do it.
	Because he's not just a former president.
	He's a former defeated president.
	That's a further way of bringing him down a notch.
	What did I just do?
	I took it out of the stream here.
	Okay.
	On April 12th, listen to this.
	This is a bit of the pre-rate.
	Backdrop.
	And why is it important?
	On April 12, 2022, NARA notified plaintiff.
	That's National Archives.
	What's it called?
	National Archives and Record.
	Let's read it.
	The following is a summary.
	Through 2021.
	So this was dating back a while now.
	Former President Trump and the National Archives Records Administration were engaged in conversations concerning records from plaintiff's time in office.
	Trump was engaged in discussions with...
	The National Archives and Records Administration.
	He was engaged in discussions dating back to 2021 concerning the documents.
	Okay.
	Just make that, put a parenthesis on that when assessing the need for an unprecedented raid on a former defeated president of the United States of America.
	defeated.
	In January 2021, as a product of those conversations, plaintiff transferred 15 boxes from his personal residence to NARA.
	Upon initial review of the boxes, NARA identified the items contained therein as newspapers, magazines, printed articles, photos, miscellaneous, yada, yada, yada.
	NARA subsequently informed the Department of Justice of the contents of the boxes, claiming that some of the items contained markings classified in National Security.
	There's collaboration between Trump and NARA.
	He sends NARA the boxes.
	NARA says some of them have classification on them, and they go to the Department of Justice.
	But wait, there's more.
	On April 12, 2022, NARA notified plaintiff that it intended to provide the 15 boxes to the FBI the following week.
	Does this sound familiar at all?
	Like, let's fabricate a crime here.
	Does it sound familiar at all?
	If it does, it's because it should.
	If it doesn't...
	It's because you don't know the recent history.
	This smells very Carter Page-ish.
	Carter Page-ish.
	This smells very Carter Page-ish.
	They give the box to the DOJ because it contained classified...
	It contained the information marked as classified.
	NARA then notified plaintiff that it intended to get the FBI involved.
	I'm going to the FBI.
	Plaintiff then requested an extension on the contemplated delivery so that he could determine the existence of any privileged material.
	Still collaboration.
	Still discussion.
	Still everyone's acting...
	You know, seemingly together.
	Urgency.
	Just keep that in the backdrop.
	The White House Counsel's Office granted the request.
	Okay.
	That's the attorney for the White House of the new president, of Biden.
	On May 10, 2022, NARA informed plaintiff that it would proceed with, quote, Providing the FBI access to the records in question as requested by the incumbent president.
	Beginning as early as Thursday, May 12, the government's filing states that the FBI did not obtain access to the 15 boxes until approximately May 18. They were providing the FBI access to the records in question as requested by Joe Biden.
	Let's put it on pause, people.
	Stop screen.
	Let's put that on pause.
	For one second, if I can do it.
	Stop screen.
	Let me go to Rumble, see what everyone's doing here.
	Pause.
	Viva, can you ask Rumble to move the chat up under your video so that way we can see both at the same time?
	Okay, screen grab.
	I'll ask.
	There was another chat, which I took a picture of.
	No, that was the one.
	Oh, no, there was another one.
	MNL Hayes says, special master decision on May 10. There we go.
	That's where I'm at.
	On May 10, 2022, NARA informed Trump they would proceed with providing the FBI access to their documents in question as requested by President Joe Biden.
	All right.
	Roll the video.
	Let me do another Keemstar.
	Roll it.
	I've got to find the video.
	Is this it?
	No?
	Is this it?
	Oh, this is it right here.
	Okay.
	This was a...
	On May 10th then, fast forwarding from April, one month later, NARA informed Trump that it would proceed with, quote, providing the FBI access to the records inquested as...
	Shut the front door.
	...as requested by the incumbent president beginning as early as Thursday, May 12th.
	Hold the...
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	He said, hold the phone.
	What did this just say?
	By the way, in case anyone thinks you might have remembered someone saying they didn't know anything about this, it's because someone said Biden didn't know anything about this.
	But here's the video.
	On May 10th, 2022, NARA informed Trump that it would proceed with providing the FBI access to the records in question.
	As requested by the incumbent president.
	That's Joe Biden.
	Joe Biden requested the documents go over to the FBI.
	Was the president or anyone at the White House aware of that search warrant?
	Or has anyone at the White House or the president been briefed in the aftermath of that search warrant?
	No.
	The president was not briefed, was not aware of it.
	No.
	No one at the White House was given a heads up.
	No, that did not happen.
	Liar!
	Liar!
	Words.
	You want to go crazy wordsmithing?
	They'll weasel out of it.
	They will weasel out of it.
	Because of the phrasing in the question.
	Watch again.
	Was the president aware of the search warrant?
	No, no, no.
	Totally unaware.
	I mean, I just told the FBI to do things.
	I didn't know they were going to issue a warrant.
	Or has anyone at the White House or the president been briefed in the aftermath of that search warrant?
	Briefed in the aftermath of the search warrant?
	Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope.
	I mean, he was well aware of everything right up until.
	He was directly corresponding and giving instructions to the FBI, but he wasn't aware of the warrant and he wasn't, you know, nobody kept him up to date afterwards.
	No, the president was not briefed, was not aware of it.
	The president was not briefed.
	Was not aware of it.
	That depends on what your definition of it is.
	No, no one at the White House was given a heads up.
	No one in the White House was given a heads up.
	That's true, because when you're the ones giving the order, you don't need a heads up.
	You just gave the order.
	You don't get a heads up for something you just issued.
	You don't get a heads up for instructions you may have just given.
	You don't get a heads up for what you might have been orchestrating.
	You don't need the heads up for it.
	No, that did not happen.
	How many times did she say no in that brief?
	Let me just see here.
	Anyone at the White House aware of that search warrant?
	Has anyone at the White House or the President been briefed in the aftermath of that search warrant being executed?
	No.
	The President was not briefed, was not aware of it.
	No.
	No one at the White House was given a heads up.
	No, that did not happen.
	That's from The Princess Bride.
	A perfect movie.
	Can you believe that?
	I mean, like, who is she trying to convince?
	The public or herself?
	I'm gonna go ahead and say I think she's trying to convince herself.
	Self-Loathing Lib says, I give Viva money.
	He doesn't read the rant.
	It's Taco Tuesday.
	Nary a taco in sight.
	Talk about miffed.
	Checkmate, Self-Loathing Lib.
	Do not self-loathe, however.
	That is a useless emotion, self-loathing.
	Okay, now hold on.
	Give me one second, please, because what I'm going to do, I'm just going to go to YouTube for one second, and I'm going to put the link in the pinned comment of this stream now that it probably has processed and certainly has.
	Okay, I'm just hearing myself here.
	Here we go.
	Streamed 28 minutes ago.
	Perfect!
	Okay, I'm just going to leave that.
	Give me one second, peeps.
	Link?
	Link?
	No!
	Sorry, guys.
	I screwed up here.
	I have very fat fingers that don't necessarily work all that well.
	Link to rumble.
	And we're going to comment.
	I'm going to give it a thumbs up because that's what you do.
	All right.
	Now, let me just make sure I didn't just shut myself down out of the stream.
	I'm still here.
	Good.
	Who is she trying to convince?
	I mean, but you know what is going to be the weasel out of it.
	Yeah, I didn't know about the warrant.
	I didn't get a heads up.
	You don't need a heads up for something that you're planning.
	You are the heads up.
	Your head's already up.
	Or it's just going to be the standard Joe doesn't remember anything.
	So he didn't remember having gotten the heads up.
	Or it'll be another thing.
	Joe didn't get the heads up.
	Because Joe is actually not calling any shots.
	He's not in control.
	He's, some might say, you know, some might question who is actually calling the shots of the U.S. government.
	And yeah, so that was the big revelation, in my mind, of the court order.
	Because it is.
	Now, let me get back to the document.
	Okay.
	What the?
	Come on, man.
	How does this work?
	Okay, the document's here.
	Open it up.
	Oh, the document has to be open in order for me to see it.
	Makes sense.
	Okay, let's go like that.
	Share.
	Okay, so that's the big revelation.
	Let's just go to see what Barnes...
	The equitable relief.
	August 8th, pursuant to the search warrant, the government executed an unannounced search, also known as a raid, by the way.
	That's the legal technical definition of a raid.
	An unannounced search by police authority.
	As reflected in the detailed property inventory, The agent seized approximately 11,000 documents and 1,800 other items.
	Sure, there was nothing personal in there.
	No solicitor client.
	And the executive privilege argument.
	We're going to see what she makes of that.
	Okay, so there you go.
	The special master, a detailed list of what was taken from the residence and from what exactly.
	Okay, moving along.
	Do we need to go with the...
	They're going through procedural stuff.
	As previewed, plaintiff initiated this action with a hybrid motion that seeks independent review of the property seized from his residence, a temporary injunction on any further review by the government in the meantime, and ultimately the return of the seized property under Rule 41g of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
	Though somewhat convoluted, the filing is procedurally permissible and creates an action in equity.
	I see this is where people are going to freak out.
	An action in equity, that's just the court making up its own jurisdiction so that it can adjudicate in Trump's favor because it's a Trump-appointed judge.
	But unless it's different here, I think injunctive relief is always...
	It's by its nature equitable, but I might be wrong under different jurisdictions.
	Derives from the court's inherent authority over its offices.
	People don't appreciate the courts have the right...
	Pretty much to do whatever they want, they have the full power to be the judge.
	I mean, that's what it means to be the judge, to be the court.
	If they can issue pretty much whatever order they think is justifiable under the circumstances to the extent that it's not contrary to law, equitable jurisdiction is reserved for exceptional circumstances of which this is.
	Oh, let's just go down a little further here.
	We don't need to get into too much of the...
	Here we go.
	The court takes into account the undeniably unprecedented nature of the search of a former president's residence.
	Plaintiff's inability to examine the seized materials.
	In formulating his argument to date, plaintiff's stated reliance on the customary cooperation between former and incumbent administrations regarding the ownership and exchange of documents.
	And by the way, not to tout Robert's horn too much.
	This has been something that we have been saying on this channel for a while, and by we, I have to say Robert.
	The customary cooperation between former and incumbent administrations regarding the ownership and exchange of documents.
	Because it is customary.
	And what you've had here, detailed by what are now judicial facts, you can piss and moan as much as you want in the blue checkmark, bad legal takes crowd, banana republic lawyer crowd.
	They were going back and forth for over a year on these documents.
	And then at one point they say, no, NARA goes to tattle to the FBI.
	The president tells the FBI what to do.
	And now you've weaponized the system against what is typically a customary cooperation between former and current administrations.
	The power imbalance between the parties, the importance of maintaining institutional trust, and the interest in ensuring the integrity of an orderly process amid swirling allegations of bias and media leaks.
	Oh, they're not allegations of media leaks.
	They're media leaks.
	Skip over the standing.
	The government's argument assumes that the privilege review team's initial screening for potentially privileged material was sufficient, yet there's evidence from which to call that premise into question here.
	People, you will recall in the Justice Department's brief, what they said is we don't need a special master.
	Special master.
	We don't need no special master because we've already gone over it.
	We don't need a special master because the Justice Department, through its privileged team, has already gone over it.
	And so...
	We don't need a special master because we've already done that work.
	But in the event, this was one of their subsidiary conclusions.
	In the event that the judge orders the appointment of a special master, limit that special master to the documents that the Justice Department's privilege team has said are in fact privilege documents.
	We're going to get to the tweet afterwards which referred to Trump's motion or Trump's...
	Trump's filing as legally untenable or bizarre and with no legal precedent.
	The Justice Department, in their response, said, we don't need a special master.
	Trump has no standing.
	There's no executive privilege because we are the executive.
	He doesn't have standing to assert any claim over private documents.
	We don't need a special master.
	We've already looked over the stuff.
	But in the event that you appoint a special master, That special master should be limited to looking over the documents that our privileged team has looked over and which our privileged team has identified as qualifying as potentially privileged or solicitor-client documents.
	They say they don't have any, but that their privileged team identified some and that if a special master is to be appointed, that the special master relies on the Justice Department's assessment of what it deemed to be a limited class of potentially privileged documents.
	Talk about investigating yourselves and finding no wrongdoing and then asking the independent third party to rely on your own findings of wrongdoing to not look any further.
	But there are problems in Paradise, people.
	There are problems here.
	As reflected in the Privilege Review Team's reports, the investigative team already has been exposed to potentially privileged material.
	But no, but their privileged team was supposed to go through it.
	The institution that is not supposed to be leaking information to the media, but doing so nonetheless, like they did with James O 'Keefe, by the way, passed this prologue, people.
	The FBI, the institution, which through their lawyer, actually falsified evidence in the Carter Page FISA renewal, FISA warrant renewals.
	They are to be trusted, but there's already evidence that the investigative team has already been exposed to potentially privileged material that the privileged team itself identified as such in their review.
	Without delving into specifics, because that might be embarrassing, the privileged review's team's report references at least two instances in which members of the investigative team Those are the people that are not supposed to see the documents that were reviewed by and identified as potentially privileged by the privileged team.
	They were exposed to material that was then delivered to the privileged review team and following another review designated as potentially privileged material.
	Those instances alone, even if entirely inadvertent...
	Oh, yes, yes, yes.
	Yield questions about the adequacy of the filter review process, even if entirely inadvertent.
	Like that one time that FBI lawyer inadvertently deleted something from an email to which he was neither the sender nor the recipient, added something to that email to which he was neither the sender nor the recipient, then submitted that email to a secret FISA court to obtain an unlawful renewal of an unlawfully obtained search warrant.
	That was entirely, it was good faith.
	It was good faith.
	He just thought that it was true and that it was appropriate for FBI lawyers to physically alter evidence by deleting and adding things to emails to which they were neither sender nor recipient without disclosing that to the judge.
	Perhaps most concerning, the filter review team's report does not indicate that any steps were taken after these instances of exposure to wall off the two tainted members of the investigation team.
	What did I say about China Walls, people?
	Les murailles de Chine.
	When you create, when you section off departments, they're not supposed to...
	Dude, sit around a courthouse at lunch and just listen to lawyers talk among themselves and then...
	Think about whether or not there's the slightest bit of seriousness to the statement that within the same institution, setting aside all the historical evidence of corruption, it's a plausible suggestion that there's going to be an effective and true division between the privileged team and the investigative team.
	Whatever.
	It's atrocious.
	Here's another legal argument, actually, that we've discussed on the channel.
	In Nixon v.
	Administration of General Services, a case involving review of presidential communications by a government archivist, the Supreme Court expressly recognized that, one, former presidents may assert claims of executive privilege.
	Interesting.
	That seems to run afoul of what many of the online blue checkmark lawyers were saying.
	The exception...
	The confidentiality of executive communications is subject to erosion over time after administration leaves office.
	Okay, another point.
	The incumbent president is in the best position to assess the present and future needs of the executive branch.
	Okay, whatever.
	A former president must be able to successfully invoke the presidential communications privilege for communications that occurred during his presidency, even if the current president does not support the privilege claim.
	That's very interesting.
	I can see people having a legal problem with this assertion.
	Let it be debated as a matter of law.
	Okay, and then we get to the conclusion.
	Temporary injunctive relief.
	The court determines that a temporary injunction on the government's use of the seized materials for investigative purposes, but not ODNI's national security assessment.
	I just hope there's no leaking from the ODNI to the investigative team, but we'll see.
	Oh, also, by the way, It's already been done.
	They've seen it.
	This is all illusory.
	If nothing else, it's a technical W for Bush.
	I'm thinking GW.
	It's a technical victory for Trump.
	They've already seen it.
	The court is satisfied the plaintiff has a likelihood of success on the merits.
	Oh, that's not what the Justice Department said.
	They said he has no chance of success.
	For the same reasons, chiefly, the risk of the government's filter review process will not adequately safeguard plaintiff's privilege and personal materials in terms of exposure to either the investigative team or the media.
	Or the media people.
	Oh, this judge is totally biased because she gets it and she's seen what has happened routinely, historically, and repeatedly.
	Two of those are the same.
	Plaintiff has sufficiently established irreparable injury.
	Lastly, with respect to the merged third and fourth factors, plaintiff has shown that All in all, that the public and private interests at stake support a temporary enjoyment on the use of the seized materials for investigative purposes without impacting the government's ongoing national security review, yada yada.
	Yes.
	Nothing can happen.
	Oh, get out of here.
	We'll talk later.
	Close the door.
	As plaintiff articulated at the hearing, the investigation and treatment of a former president is of unique interest to the general public.
	You don't say.
	And the country is served best by an orderly process that promotes the interest and perception of fairness.
	Appoint a special master to review the seats, probably close the door.
	The government is temporarily enjoined from further review, with the exception of...
	Okay, that's it.
	Pretty self-explanatory.
	You could have written it.
	I think they have to go through and get the footnotes and they have to get the jurisprudence to support it.
	I'm not an American lawyer.
	I'm certainly not a constitutionalist.
	I might be a constitutionalist.
	I'm not a constitutional lawyer.
	That decision just makes sense.
	It makes sense, save and except for the fact that the damage has already been done in my assessment.
	In my understanding of the facts, the damage has been done already.
	So, good luck.
	But it makes sense.
	And people freaking out about the fact that it doesn't make sense tend to suffer, if not from TDS, at the very least, potentially, arguably, maybe, motivated reasoning.
	Motivated reasoning brought on by TDS.
	Let's just get one good example.
	Eh?
	Eh?
	No?
	Dude, I set this up.
	So that I can get to these...
	Whatever, I think we're just going to have to do this.
	This is one of the tweets from August 30, 2022.
	This was the day that the Department of Justice, the Justice Department, filed its response.
	Let's read it, shall we?
	First of all, look at this.
	Look at this.
	Thread.
	What?
	Should we make of the DOJ's response to Trump's motion for a special master?
	Among other things, Renato Malati, former federal prosecutor.
	We can have different opinions, but when someone is so radically wrong in a prediction, it's time to take a step back and reassess.
	Reassess method.
	Reassess motivation.
	Tonight, shortly before midnight, Eastern Time, DOJ filed a response to Trump's motion seeking a special master.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	As a starting point...
	There's a word for when your starting point is a conclusion and not a fact.
	There's a reason for it.
	There's a name for it, and it's called motivated reasoning.
	It's called arguing from conclusions and not towards conclusions.
	It is basically fallacious reasoning pursuant to which you start with your conclusion and then look for everything that you need in order to come back to that conclusion.
	As a starting point.
	It's apparent, it's obvious, that the DOJ was concerned that the judge took Trump's motion, which was bizarre, unprecedented, and without basis in law, seriously.
	They only filed it because Trump's motion was so stupid, but they were worried that the judge was going to take it seriously.
	Their filing is full of factual information.
	By the way, their filing was full of allegations, not factual information.
	And I'll say it time and time again, regardless of the side that I'm on.
	A filing contains allegations of facts.
	It does not contain facts until a judge says, here are the facts.
	And do you know what the judge came to by way of finding a fact in this case?
	The FBI and the Justice Department were screwing up their review of the documents.
	Their filing is full of factual information rebutting Trump's false claims.
	Oh, Trump's motion contains false claims.
	The Justice Department's filing contains factual information as a starting point.
	Unprecedented without legal basis in law.
	Oh, okay.
	Let me just go back to what actually happened.
	Well, actually, I was reading Jonathan Turley.
	I don't often cite Jonathan Turley.
	Every now and again, I do.
	Turley put out a blog post in which he said, Department...
	Oh, sorry, sorry.
	That's halfway through a sentence.
	As with the compelled release of a redacted affidavit, the Justice Department, this is Jonathan Turley's opinion.
	He's entitled to it, but it just seems to be more substantiated in light of the ruling from the judge.
	As with the compelled release of a redacted affidavit, the Justice Department seriously overplayed its hand, as it did in earlier filings, in claiming that an appointment would undermine national security and making extreme, unestablished legal arguments.
	Hold on.
	I'll tell those kids to stop playing the piano.
	Stop playing the piano!
	We finally had our stuff delivered from Canada, and we got an out-of-tune piano, which is surely going to cause some headaches.
	This is Jonathan Turley's opinion.
	And you say at some point, how does this legal analysis turn out?
	It seems according to other legal minds, and people take it, you've got to read some of the comments.
	Like Jonathan Turley, it was not Trump's position which was bizarre, unprecedented, and without basis in law, but rather that of the Justice Department.
	I stand by my analysis.
	That's fine.
	That's fine.
	But some of the other remarks.
	I stopped at Turley as a legal mind.
	I'm sorry.
	Why?
	I'll even grant that Mariotti is a legal mind.
	It's just that one happens to might have a better track record than another.
	And therefore, they're legal minds.
	They just might be more reliable when it comes to certain assessments.
	Turley, legal mind.
	Ha, ha, ha.
	Oh, you see, he is, but he's gone off the Trump deep end, yeah.
	When...
	I can't tell, is this person...
	Tell me you haven't read the...
	I hate these tweets.
	I make these tweets every now and again.
	He is just telling us he never read the judge's decision without telling us he never read the judge's decision.
	You can find the actual decision here.
	Oh, that's so witty.
	That's so witty.
	Anyhow, just bad legal analysis and double down.
	I stand by my assessment and my prediction, which was wrong.
	Don't think twice about it.
	Don't reassess.
	Double down.
	Let me bring this out of here.
	The folders.
	There were empty folders that were marked classified.
	StreamYard.
	Sorry, I've lost my stream here.
	I'll get better with this in a bit.
	Right now, I'm toggling between Rumble and Twitter.
	I'm trying to keep up with the comments.
	I cannot keep up with the chat in Rumble.
	Not a chance.
	There's not a chance.
	Oh, let me crack my back here.
	We've got a Rumble rant that says self-loathing.
	Oh, no, that's way back.
	That's way back.
	So now I'm looking in Rumble, and I see comments in the comments section, and then comments in the live chat.
	And now I hear a dog barking.
	My goodness, man.
	There's no rest for the wicked.
	Okay, let me go back to some more bad legal takes.
	Let's see this here.
	Let's see this here.
	Oh, we're going to get to some more of that afterwards.
	This.
	CNN Politics.
	I put the black dots to illustrate the fact that I cut and pasted a paragraph and put it over the headline.
	CNN Politics.
	Takeaways from the ruling granting Trump's request for a special master in Mar-a-Lago.
	Canon.
	The judge bought into the skepticism Trump's lawyers raised about the unprecedented search of the Florida resort as they questioned whether investigators could be trusted to properly filter through the thousands of documents that were seized.
	The judge rejected the Justice Department's assurances that its internal filter team had already sorted out materials that could be subject to attorney-client privileges.
	Hey, if we want to play that stupid game that I hate so much, If we want to play the stupid game, tell me that you didn't read the decision without telling me that you didn't read the decision.
	CNN gets the cherry on the top of that cake.
	The judge rejected the Justice Department's assurances that its internal filter team had already sorted out the material that could be subject to attorney-client privilege.
	Yeah, she found that they didn't even respect the protocol internally.
	She didn't reject their assurances that they would do it well.
	She came to the conclusion that they had already screwed up.
	Oh, no.
	But ultimately, the special mass report may really...
	Whatever.
	This is CNN misinforming its readers.
	The judge rejected the Justice Department's assurances that its internal filter team had already sorted out the materials.
	No, it didn't.
	It didn't reject it.
	It came to the conclusion of fact.
	You can disagree with it all you want.
	It is now a judicial fact that the Justice Department, whatever it was, the Justice Department screwed up.
	And gave access to documents they had identified as privileged by their filter team to the investigative team.
	That's a fact.
	The judge gave the team the benefit of the doubt.
	Maybe it was inadvertently or careless or whatever and not deliberate.
	But it's a judicial fact now.
	You can disagree with it, but then you are disagreeing with judicial fact.
	You can still choose to believe the allegations in the Justice Department's filing, but then you are choosing to believe allegations and disregarding judicial fact.
	She bought into the skepticism.
	This poor, helpless judge, she just bought into the skepticism.
	The same way all those January Sixers bought into the accusations of election fornification.
	Now I'm doing it reflexively.
	The same way those poor January Sixers, they were convinced by Trump, they were mesmerized by his power into believing disinformation.
	This poor, vulnerable, gullible judge.
	She bought into the skepticism Trump's lawyers raised.
	Thanks, CNN Politics.
	I do like my joke.
	You've got to love CNN Politics coverage.
	That poor, vulnerable judge with no mind of her own bought into the skepticism Trump's lawyers raised.
	If only they had a guiding hand of a CNN legal analyst to show her the way of the law.
	Does Avenatti still work for CNN?
	Will you give legal analysis?
	In as much as I can.
	Barnes and I will discuss it.
	Yeah.
	You got that.
	Oh, yeah.
	Just double down, people.
	Double down.
	Repeat the lie.
	And anybody who comes to a different conclusion, it's because they're brainwashed.
	Now.
	What would I be saying if this judge had come to a different conclusion?
	If she did not appoint the special master?
	I probably would have said the same thing.
	Makes no difference.
	Makes no difference.
	And then people are going to get into all sorts of hypothesizing.
	Is she delaying it?
	Appointing a special master?
	It'll cause delays so that it times perfectly with not announcing any indictment.
	Prior to the midterms, because they're not going to do that because of long-lasting procedure, protocol, whatever.
	We'll see.
	But as of now, at the very least, it was an obvious court ruling.
	It was an obvious court ruling because even in the Justice Department's filing, for anybody who took the time to read it, they acknowledged that they found documents which might be privileged, which might be solicited a client.
	They acknowledged it.
	A limited set.
	Of documents that might be privileged.
	They said it.
	How are they not going to appoint a special master?
	And if you predicted that there wouldn't be the appointment of a special master, as did others, you might have to take a step back and question your own analytic skills.
	Period.
	Okay, now I've gone back.
	So that's the end of the story right there.
	Now I'm going to go back to the chat.
	And there is strictly no way that I can keep up with this chat.
	I can't highlight comments the same, even non-super chat comments.
	So we're going to have to, I'm going to have to ask Chris P about that.
	What is wrong with this live chat?
	Stopped working for 10 minutes.
	Maybe we've, I'm now, that chat came from PTE8.
	Did Viva talk about the red speech?
	I came in late.
	Oh, I've talked about the red speech many times.
	That's from Chris T. I went over the Red Speech last Friday.
	You've got to go check out that stream.
	So yeah, that's it.
	I can't keep up with the chat, and I can't bring up comments, and we're going to have to fix that.
	Okay.
	Noted.
	Now, that's not all that we have on for the day, although we've been going for an hour and a half.
	The kids are home, the dogs need to walk, and I've got to get on a call at 3 o 'clock.
	Okay, so hold on.
	Fantastic Journalism, Jake Tapper.
	Okay, we've covered this, so I'm going to close that.
	Let's go back, see what else we've got.
	There's a story of a teacher.
	The headline is that a teacher was jailed for improper use of pronouns.
	There's always more to the story when you see a headline like that.
	You may not like the more to the story, and the more to the story might not change the offensiveness of the story, but there's more to the story.
	Always, when there's a headline like that.
	Thank you.
	Okay, and we got CNN's coverage.
	Fine, we can close that down now.
	I want to bring up Omar Algebra.
	Oh, and by the way, you want to know what's funny?
	I could show this video on YouTube, but the video will get demonetized.
	Because YouTube, the video contains what is objectively police abusing people that they're arresting.
	This video, every time I include this video in any video, any vlog, any commentary to criticize Justin Trudeau and his response to the trucker's protest, it gets demonetized.
	Now, I'll play the video, just so there's no audio, so you can see what it is.
	It's not graphic violence.
	It's violence.
	It's shocking.
	It's offensive.
	It's soul-crushing.
	But compared to what other...
	You know, incidents do not get demonetized on YouTube.
	I am left questioning why this particular video will always get demonetized on you, or at least it has in my experience.
	Look at this.
	And I'm going to tell people what's going on in this video as it continues to play.
	Just wanted to see it.
	That video, YouTube determines, is demonetized as an entire video, an entire stream.
	This video, for those of you who don't know, was...
	Surveillance.
	No, this video here, I believe, was actually captured by Live from the Shed.
	I think.
	I'm fairly certain it was.
	One of the videos of the police abuse was captured only because there happened to be a 24-7...
	I think it was Live from the Shed capturing it.
	As the police came in on the Friday when they violently broke up the most peaceful protest in Canadian history, beating the ever-loving piss out of people.
	Truckers.
	Veterans.
	It happened on multiple occasions.
	We just happened to get two videos in real time.
	And by the way, this video was accidentally aired by CBC.
	I don't know what happened to it since because I think that Chiron on the bottom is CBC.
	This is how Justin Trudeau's militarized police subdued a peaceful protest.
	Beat the ever-loving piss out of veterans, truckers, protesters, journalists.
	Yes, I consider Alexa Lavoie from Rebel Media to be a journalist.
	Let's get to the gaslighting people.
	The day's not over until you've got some wicked gaslighting coming from Canadian politicians.
	Omar Algebra, Minister of Transport and MP from Mississauga.
	That's who he is.
	Look at that.
	Look at that banner.
	Cloth masks, outdoors.
	Elbow bumping.
	Buffoonery.
	I mean, it's buffoonery!
	This is madness.
	This is institutionalized madness.
	Bumping elbows, wearing cloth masks, outdoors.
	Idiots.
	There's no other way to say it.
	There's no other word for it.
	It's idiocy.
	And idiocy is performed by idiots.
	But Omar Algebra says, this is September 6th.
	Many of the goods we count on every day are brought to us by truck drivers.
	This could have been parody based on how they've acted, and you would say, my goodness, that is awesome.
	The bee.
	That is awesome bee material right there.
	Many of the goods we all count on every day are brought to us by truck drivers.
	I've had the chance to meet many of them this year and to listen to their stories.
	Your work is essential for our supply chain and for all Canadians.
	Thank you.
	Hashtag National Trucker.
	Hashtag National Trucking Week.
	To which I said, and my goodness, am I glad.
	I love it when I ratio the living daylights out of this misinformation.
	Oh!
	173 retweets on an original tweet that had 32. Oh, I'm sorry, 38, because there's six retweets there.
	40. Let's round it up.
	This is how you listen to truckers.
	You are a disgrace.
	This was this year, by the way.
	This was this year, February of this year.
	This is how Justin Trudeau and the Minister of Transport, Omar Algebra, listened to the truckers.
	He listened to them cry.
	He listened to them wince in pain.
	He listened to them moan.
	But they didn't listen to their protests.
	They didn't listen to their words.
	They didn't listen to their message.
	They just came in and beat the ever-loving piss out of them.
	And by the way, I was there.
	There was more than just two incidents, but we didn't capture it all on camera.
	This guy comes out after his police physically abuse you.
	He then comes out and commemorates you.
	My sweet, merciful goodness.
	It's shameless.
	Just going back to the chat here.
	All right, well, we got, I mean, it has to be highlighted and it has to be shared.
	It's, you know, Justin Trudeau wants to go push the booster now that hasn't been tested on humans onto Canadians.
	Let's amplify that message.
	If he's proud of it, he'll be happy that more people are hearing it.
	Let's amplify Omar Algebra tweeting out National Trucker Day.
	What was it?
	National Trucker Week?
	Oh, he's met with truckers.
	He's listened to them.
	Bull crap.
	Bull crap.
	And we've got the video to show you.
	Thank you.
	Can you imagine?
	The in-your-face gaslighting it takes for this man to celebrate National Trucking Week.
	The government that refused to meet with truckers to hear their concerns and instead sicked a militarized police on them now celebrates their work?
	No shame is the only way to describe it.
	Okay.
	I think that's it from Canada for today.
	The shame of the day.
	Shame.
	Okay, sorry.
	I'm going to close just all of them down so I can get the last story, people.
	Because if you hear a story that sounds too absurd to be true, it might be slightly absurd.
	And there might be more to it than what you think.
	Okay.
	The headline was going around.
	Teacher jailed for mispronouns.
	The reality is not much better, but we need to make sure that we know the reality and we don't get caught retweeting inaccurate headlines.
	Irish teacher imprisoned for continuing to teach after refusing to use gender-neutral pronouns.
	Now, you know, a distinction without a difference, that argument can be made.
	If they don't get you on the charges, they get you on the process.
	That is, you know, who was it?
	It's Michael Flynn.
	Bring in a slew of charges, get him on lying to investigators.
	An Irish teacher was put in prison after he refused to use gender-neutral pronouns, telling the judge he would continue going to school to teach despite a court order barring him from the premises.
	Okay, this is not to nitpick.
	This is just to be accurate.
	It sounds like he went to jail for defying a court order, telling him not to go to a premises, not to go to a school.
	It might not be better.
	It might not be any better in the minds of some.
	By the sounds of it, he did not go to jail for refusing He might have been wrongfully dismissed.
	There might have been a court order, by the sounds of it there was, enjoining him not to attend the school, not to go on the premises, and he did nonetheless, in which case he's not being jailed for refusing to use gender-neutral pronouns.
	He's being jailed for violating a court order, being jailed for contempt, which can carry with it the risk of imprisonment.
	Enoch Burke was temporarily suspended on full pay from the Wilson Hospital School after refusing a request from the principal to address transgender students by they instead of he.
	Well, at least he wasn't being asked to use A. So, if they is gender neutral here...
	I'm sorry, let me see this.
	They did refer to this as gender neutral, right?
	Yeah.
	If they is gender neutral, why was that other individual insisting that Time magazine use...
	A and air instead of they and there.
	If it's gender neutral, what is A and air that I don't understand?
	I don't understand it.
	It's a serious question.
	The evangelical Christian continued to show up to work every day despite the suspension leading the boarding school to get an interlocutory injunction restraining him from coming to the building.
	It's not going to make it any different for a lot of people out there.
	Interlocutory injunction.
	Basic legal 101, but the terms will vary by jurisdiction because I think in the States you have TROs, which are temporary restraining orders and not provisional injunctions.
	But you have injunctions, interim court orders.
	The duration of the scope or the temporal duration of the injunction will depend on what stage of the proceeding it's at.
	Emergency injunctions, temporary restraining orders, like emergency until we can get to court to have a preliminary hearing.
	Interlocutory injunctions.
	Typically until you can get to a hearing on the merits.
	And so basically they fire him.
	No, sorry, they didn't fire him.
	They put him on paid leave because of a gender-neutral pronoun verbal disagreement.
	He continues showing up to work despite being put on temporary leave.
	Asked not to come in.
	They get a court order that says, don't come.
	There's now a lawful order of the court, presumably, enjoining him.
	Meaning...
	Prohibiting him from coming on the premises.
	Not much different in procedure than a TRO telling a spouse they can't approach their other spouse pending a domestic violence dispute.
	That might be criminal.
	There's a civil equivalent.
	Stop harassing, stop emailing, stop calling.
	And if the person continues doing it, they're not being jailed because they emailed someone.
	They're being jailed because they violated, knowingly, a court order enjoining them not to do it.
	Technical distinction, but it's material because it is the distinction.
	When Burke persisted in showing up to work, the school's board of management filed a further application for contempt of court.
	On Friday, Justice Miriam O 'Regan ordered Burke to be arrested and brought to court.
	In court, Burke continued to insist on showing up to the school teach.
	Oh, sorry.
	Read properly.
	In court, Burke continued to insist on showing up to school teach.
	Okay, no, I read that, right?
	Okay.
	Saying, I love my school.
	I am here today because I would not call a boy a girl.
	Staying away the school.
	Dude, what's going on?
	Am I reading this?
	This is staying away the school.
	Who writes this?
	I thought I'm having my reading comprehension issues.
	This is drafting comprehension issues.
	Staying away from the school is not something I will do.
	It is a violation of my conscience, Burke added.
	The teacher claimed that his suspension was invalid and that he would have had to, quote, commit an act of gross misconduct for it to be justified, according to the outlet.
	It is reprehensible that anyone's religious beliefs could be taken as a ground for misconduct or gross misconduct.
	Okay.
	Were I to obey the order of the Board of Management and the order of the court, I would have to accept that sticking to my belief in male and female is wrong.
	It's not something I will do.
	It's a violation of my conscience, he said, yada, yada, yada.
	Justice Michael Quinn ordered Burke be committed to Mount Joy Prison.
	And remain there indefinitely until he purges his contempt or until further order of this court.
	Burke refused to comply with the court's order after the judge's decision, saying, I cannot purge my contempt by holding my Christian beliefs in contempt.
	Wilson's Hospital School is a secondary school.
	Okay.
	That's the story, people.
	The headline is not misleading.
	It's just a headline.
	And people are going to repeat it.
	Fire the editor.
	Minimum underdrive.
	I recognize that I have trouble reading sometimes.
	That wasn't me.
	There's a lot of typos in there.
	I'm not one to pick on typos, but at the very least, it wasn't my reading skills that were at issue there.
	So that's it.
	I mean, look, he's not being jailed for misgendering someone.
	He's now being jailed because in the context of a dismissal with pay, purportedly for misgendering someone, They got a court order telling him to not come onto the school to teach.
	He did it, said I'm going to continue doing it, and now he's going to jail for contempt.
	I did Once Upon a Time, people.
	Let's see if I can find this.
	No, oh, I almost got myself out of the stream.
	Once Upon a Time, I did a contempt video involving a contempt vlog about Tommy Robinson.
	And I went over some of the amazing cases of contempt that have existed.
	There was a guy who was jailed for contempt for...
	Over a decade?
	It was an issue where he refused to disclose assets.
	And I think it was in the context of a divorce.
	Let me see here.
	Contempt.
	I don't want to...
	Contempt record sentence.
	14 years?
	News.
	Oh, I'm not going to be able to find it.
	Contempt sentence years.
	Jail.
	Oh, where was it?
	I won't be able to find it, but there were some very, very bizarre cases of contempt.
	People went to jail for a long time.
	There was one guy who went to jail for refusing to abide by a court order enjoining him to give his wife a religious divorce in Judaism, a get.
	He wouldn't give her the get, so he went to jail.
	You have to have anger for a spouse.
	To go to jail for refusing to give your spouse a legal religious divorce.
	There was another one.
	I think it was concealing assets in the context of a divorce.
	Ultimately led out of jail because the judge came to the conclusion that the jailing was having no effect on the contempt.
	But contempt is what we call a quasi-criminal proceeding because it can result in fines or imprisonment until the individual complies with the court order.
	This guy has some beliefs.
	He has some beliefs that he's willing to violate a court order and go to jail indefinitely in order to support those beliefs.
	Skip the YouTube chat, Viva.
	It's more fun here and you can write vaccine without gets removed.
	That's Swexit.
	Dude, we haven't been on YouTube Live for an hour and 13 minutes.
	I only see the chat from...
	What we left off with here.
	Now I'm back to viewing the stream.
	Got 5,193 people watching.
	This is beautiful, people.
	The revolution might not be televised, but it might be live-streamed.
	So that's it.
	Stick to your beliefs, says Sliced and P.O. Anybody watch the movie Children of Men?
	I did.
	I have to see that movie again.
	That's MAGA USA 76. I got to watch that movie again.
	I think I remember liking it.
	People, how did this experiment work?
	I think we did good.
	I think this is going to work.
	This stream will be on YouTube tomorrow.
	People who are watching it on YouTube tomorrow can feel empowered, inclined to super thanks, which is the super chat after the stream has gone.
	You'll see there's a little button that says super thanks.
	But the best way to support the channel.
	If you want to support the work that I do as an individual creator, Rumble.
	If you want to support the work that Robert Barnes and I do as...
	I was going to say partners in crime.
	I'll just say partners in law.
	As content creators, legal analysts of our time, of this time, vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Merch, people.
	The Hinged, Fringed, and Proud merch is available.
	vivafry.com.
	And I'm going to go blast that link out because I didn't realize it was available and I want me...
	Some of my own merch.
	Let's see what the people on chat are saying here.
	We can make this work, says Paola Grande.
	Christine454 says good.
	The pace of the chat here is good.
	Well, I don't know if there's any slow mode for the chat here.
	Long live Viva Fry.
	Buck Sergeant or Buck Sergeant.
	Hulk Smash says Swexit.
	And Children of Men has an amazing master shot.
	One continuous scene of intense action with no edits or cuts for about one minute of running through an active war zone.
	Yeah.
	LOL, hinged, fringed.
	Nature lover freedom.
	I think I know.
	I can recognize some people carrying over from YouTube.
	Now we got Delix Croix.
	Make a Rumble account, my friends.
	First time on Rumble myself.
	Support freedom of speech.
	Deli.
	Delicroix.
	Delicroix, which means something cross.
	Delicroix.
	Delicroix.
	Beautiful.
	Let's rumble.
	Okay, there's a funny chat here, which I'm not going to read because it'll make for a funny soundbite.
	People, Viva Peeps in on rumble.
	MNL Hayes.
	Viva viewers increased 2,000.
	Jones Phones.
	Yeah, heartbreaking movie.
	Viva viewers.
	Okay, so we got that.
	Okay, people, congrats on Rumble Deal.
	Now, can you tell them to fix the damn app so we can rewind a live stream on the damn app from a stream device like Roku?
	First thing I'm going to do right now after this stream, I'm going to go message Pawlowski and give him some of the feedback.
	And we'll make some changes here.
	User integration, user experience is going to be upgraded.
	It's going to be modified.
	It's going to be bettered over time.
	Rock and rumble, biatches!
	Nature-loving freedom.
	Okay, thank you all.
	Let's make this work.
	Share, snip, clip, share away.
	VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com Still going to be on YouTube.
	It's just going to be one day late.
	And the exclusive live streams are going to be here on Rumble.
	And just wait for Sunday night stream.
	I am going to figure out timing, I think, for Sunday night with Salty Cracker because I don't want to overlap too much with...
	I don't want to force people to choose.
	So we'll see what we can do about making timing work for Sunday night streams.
	But this is working.
	People, go!
	Enjoy the day.
	Exercise.
	Talk to people outside.
	Talk to people in real life.
	Winston, get over here.
	Let's get some...
	Oh, some good vibes.
	You want a white pill?
	Here's the white pill, people.
	It's a white furry dog.
	I am Winston.
	I'll say hello.
	Oh, God, that dog smells good.
	Okay, I'm going to go walk him, squeeze some pee out of pudge, and go.
	Oh, no, hold on.
	I've got to remember to end it with my new standard ending.
	Conduct yourselves in your discourse with friends and ideological adversaries in a way that would make both your parents and your children proud.
	If your parents are no longer among the living and if you don't have children, the memory of your parents and hypothetical proverbial children.
	Conduct yourselves in such a way that your parents and children will be proud and you cannot lose.
	With that said, people, enjoy the day.

▲