Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 12, 2023 - Viva & Barnes

02:06:00

Interview with Journalist Glenn Greenwald - Viva Frei Live!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	We're doing things a little differently today for reasons which you're soon going to understand clearly.
	I'm going to start this show by thanking my sponsors and with our sponsors.
	Because we only have 50 minutes with Glenn and I want to use it efficiently.
	And then we'll get to the fun stuff afterwards.
	People, as the Biden administration's New Year's goals of tax and spend and turn a blind eye to inflation, well, they're at odds with your investment, secure, savings.
	People.
	I can't.
	I'll have to move off script just a tad.
	Everybody, my father always said growing up, it's hard to make money and it's easy to lose it.
	One way that it's easy to lose it, I was just looking through my portfolio today, Tesla's backup, which is good.
	But one way that's easy to lose it, bad stocks.
	In my life, Bitcoin.
	One way that's easy to make sure that you don't make anything off of it and just lose money year over year through inflation, plug it in a bank account.
	Put in a hundred bucks now, in a year from now, it's worth $92.
	The best way, or at least a historically time-tested way to save money, make money securely, you won't 10x it, but you won't 10x lose it, gold.
	Birch Gold is a company.
	It'll help convert your IRAs and 401ks into precious metal 401ks.
	There is something to be said about...
	It's idolatry.
	I recognize it.
	But there is something to be said about holding a hard gold coin.
	My experience is more with silver dollars because that's more in my range for the time being.
	But there's something beautiful about holding it.
	You're buying a stock in something.
	You can convert your investments into precious metals.
	Less volatile.
	But there's a reason why they have historically gone up in value for the last several thousand years.
	Why gold has always been the standard of investment.
	A-plus rating with Better Business Bureau.
	Thousands of happy customers because at the end of the day, it's a service and Birch Gold is the best.
	Countless five-star reviews.
	Secure your future with gold.
	Start today with a free intro kit.
	Zero obligation, but go to birchgold.com forward slash Viva.
	Hold on.
	What did the Viva...
	The Viva does something.
	Free info kit.
	Check it out.
	Gold will always be good.
	And even when it's not so good, it's still better than the alternatives.
	And go sit on $100.
	It's not going to be worth $100 tomorrow, especially the way our respective governments are spending and burning money.
	I just don't think Birch...
	Sends mails to Canada.
	So birchgold.com forward slash Viva.
	Surefire way to hedge your bets, especially in times of inflation.
	You can't eat gold, nor can you eat Bitcoin, because at the end of the day, everything needs to be bartered down into the Maslow's theory of what you need in life.
	Food, shelter, necessities.
	You can hold gold.
	It has proven to be far more reliable.
	The second sponsor of today's show, another product that I actually regularly use myself, Field of Greens, powdered greens.
	I was listening to the way Joe Rogan, you know, talks about these things.
	This is an easy thing to work with as a sponsor.
	It's an easy sponsor.
	It's something that I use.
	It's something that I do.
	I happen to eat a lot of vegetables and fruits, nonetheless, raw with a little bit of olive oil, salt and pepper.
	Most people don't know that you're supposed to have five to six servings of fruits and vegetables a day, and most people don't have five to six servings of fruits and vegetables a day.
	Most people are not as healthy as they should be.
	They don't get the exercise that they should, and they don't eat the way that they should.
	The Pediatrics Association seems to think that medication and surgery is the solution.
	Diet, exercise, healthy living.
	Medicine cannot always do better for you than what your own body can do.
	Eat healthy.
	If you can't get your five to six servings of raw fruits and vegetables a day, as most people don't, Field of Greens, it is a desiccated vegetable.
	Desiccated fruits and vegetables with all of the nutrients, powdered, pulverized.
	It's not a supplement.
	It's not an extract.
	One spoonful tastes good.
	Looks like swamp water, which is nutritious, but it tastes good.
	It goes down easy.
	One spoonful twice a day, which is what the serving says to do.
	One spoonful is one serving of fruits and vegetables.
	Fieldofgreens.com will bring you to BrickHouse Nutrition.
	Promo code VIVA.
	You'll get 15% off your first order, 10% off a subscription.
	It's good.
	It's a healthy alternative to bad habits.
	I am weaning out the energy drinks.
	Been reading some articles about how energy drinks are associated with heart conditions in young people.
	So I'm going to weed that out anyhow because it's a bad habit.
	And weed in a good habit.
	Fieldofgreens.com.
	A spoonful twice a day.
	It'll get your water.
	It'll get your...
	Antioxidants of the superfruits and vegetables that's in there.
	Made in America.
	USDA Organic.
	Good stuff.
	Something that I work with and I like them very much.
	To both Birch Gold and Field of Greens.
	Thank you.
	Good stuff that I work with.
	And thank you for having the courage and the audacity of sponsoring the hinged, fringed minority with unacceptable views.
	People, for a second I just got totally terrified that I hadn't actually started the stream.
	It's going to be amazing.
	For those of you who don't know who Glenn Greenwald is, what's beautiful about the tremendous good fortune that I have in this passion having become a living, my ikigai, is I have always been interested in this stuff.
	I've always been fascinated and passionate by it.
	Been living in a bit of a self-imposed prison for the better part of a decade from 2010 to 2020, where...
	I didn't want to express my opinion.
	I didn't want to make enemies.
	And then, you know, sure enough, you figure out, even through silence and passivity, you make enemies.
	So you may as well make enemies to the extent you're going to make them for the right reasons.
	I've been listening to Glenn Greenwald's interviews over the last couple of days.
	I watch his show.
	He's got a nightly show on Rumble exclusive now.
	He is a fascinating, fascinating individual.
	I mean, I've got some questions as to how someone does what he does.
	Without fear, we'll see if...
	I hate asking that question, but I'm going to ask it.
	But for those of you who don't know, and until Glenn gets here, I'll give you the brief bio.
	I think he used to consider himself a lefty, but I now know, having watched a number of interviews, that I think we share a great many philosophies that this left versus right dichotomy, it's a fabricated dichotomy.
	It's a dichotomy of convenience, both for simplicity of thought and for simplicity of judgment.
	Are you left or are you right?
	And then I'll know if we're tribalist enemies and I'll hate everything you have to say or love everything you have to say.
	Are you left or are you right?
	So that I can know, oh, if we find classified documents in your basement, it's an accident.
	But if I find classified documents in a secure location there, it's treason.
	Left versus right has no meaning anymore also because from the individual's perspective, it allows you to say, okay, well, this is how I should feel about these things and I don't have to critically assess.
	I think he did, however, consider himself to be.
	Of the Democrat left.
	And I don't think they consider himself to be that anymore.
	Glenn, very interesting stuff.
	I never even knew this, but studied philosophy, like me.
	Then went into law, or then studied law, like me.
	Then started working at a law firm, like me.
	Then left and went on his own, like me.
	Then ended his private practice to get into journalism.
	That's where I think our paths, the similarity of our journeys ends.
	And he is...
	Look, I know people find a way to hate and criticize and find fault with everybody, but to say he's a preeminent journalist is an understatement.
	I got so many questions.
	I mean, he broke exclusive stories with documents provided by Edward Snowden, historically critical of the Bush administration.
	He was a civil rights attorney and was very concerned about...
	I'm just going to go DM him and make sure...
	Oh, he's got it.
	Okay.
	Civil rights attorney concerned with civil rights overreach at a time when I was stupid.
	Young, dumb, and I'm not going to finish that quote for anybody who gets the movie reference, but young and dumb.
	I was so young and dumb, I still believed That the weapons of mass destruction, I'll qualify it as a lie now, was truth.
	I believed the weapons of mass destruction.
	And then, because I was young, dumb, and naive, I also believed the moving target.
	Oh, well, he doesn't have weapons of mass destruction, but he has weapons that he wasn't supposed to have.
	Let me just text him here.
	We're alive.
	All good on your end.
	Oh, he doesn't have the weapons of mass destruction that we said he had, but they have Scud missiles and they weren't supposed to have those.
	So our invasion of a foreign country that killed a quarter of a million civilians at least.
	I said, okay, well, I believe the explanation.
	Being so dumb and so naive that I didn't even realize that at the time, Bush could have had...
	Two expert reports from all the intelligence agencies.
	That was the catchphrase at the time, how little things have changed.
	We've got intelligence from CIA, FBI, MI6, whatever the French one is.
	I don't know if they were working with the KGB back then.
	And I believed it because I was young and I was dumb.
	I'm going to have to change my Twitter profile to no matter how cynical you are, you're still being naive.
	So we're going to do it.
	I see Glenn's in the background right now.
	Glenn?
	Get ready.
	Bringing you in in three, two, one.
	Sir, how you doing?
	Doing great.
	Sorry I'm late.
	It's everybody else's fault.
	My assistant, my team's everybody but mine.
	I just want the record to reflect that, but I'm glad to be with you.
	And don't worry about it because I got through the first five minutes of what I would have asked you in any case, which was your professional, your training and your professional progression in life.
	Glenn, ordinarily, I would dive into childhood.
	I won't do it this time, but if you could give us an idea, born, raised parents.
	What your childhood was like in order to understand how you have become who you are today.
	Sure.
	So I was born in New York, but my parents moved when I was an infant to South Florida, which is where I grew up in the kind of suburbs of Fort Lauderdale.
	And my parents divorced when I was very young, like a lot of couples in the early 70s did.
	And, you know, I would describe my upbringing as basically kind of like working class or middle class.
	My mother was a single mother.
	She worked at McDonald's and those kind of hourly wage jobs to support us.
	And my father was a nice, good, involved father, but he was on his third marriage very quickly and didn't make a lot of money to begin with.
	And three wives means that you don't have many resources.
	But I had decent parents.
	I think the predominant part of my childhood is realizing that I was gay.
	It was in the, you know...
	Early 1980s, I was 13 in 1980 when the AIDS epidemic began.
	That was the year Ronald Reagan was elected.
	There was a lot of social conservatism that was predominant in our politics.
	And so the first kind of awareness I had of even being gay was associated not with a spiritual sickness, but with a literal sickness.
	It made me question a lot of things about pronouncements of authority.
	When society condemns you, you can either internalize that.
	And hate yourself or kill yourself or you can try and prove to society that they shouldn't hate you by being very kind of pleasing and appeasing and, you know, sort of the Pete Buttigieg route.
	Or you can, you know, start questioning authority and asking what their credibility is for having judged you in this manner and instead turning the light not on yourself but back on them.
	And I think that would end up being my strategy and ended up...
	You know, kind of shaping how I look at a lot of things.
	And I kind of see that, even though it involves a lot of struggle, etc., as kind of a blessing.
	Because I think it taught me, you know, to question things.
	And when you have this rockier path, oftentimes you develop a lot of skills that you would be without if your path were smoother.
	Were you a troublemaker growing up as a kid?
	Yeah, I was a huge troublemaker.
	I was constantly suspended, you know, from like...
	Junior high and then, like, more serious things in high school.
	I almost didn't graduate.
	Yeah, I mean, that was my anti-authoritarianism finding expression.
	You know, not yet against power centers, but against, you know, my middle school chemistry teacher or the high school principal.
	One time, my best friend and I went to our school in the middle of the night.
	This was, you know, before everything was surveilled.
	You could actually still do things about detection.
	I know it's a shocking term.
	I didn't realize that there was actually a recent moment in our history where you could actually do things without constantly being monitored, but you could.
	And we spray painted the entire school with the most obscene and vulgar and offensive things we could possibly think of.
	And then I made sure that they knew that it was me, but only to the extent that they were just short of being able to prove it so that I was able to deny it with this huge smirk, knowing that they knew I did it.
	But not being able to prove it and just refusing to admit it.
	So that was the kind of mischief that I found myself into.
	Yeah, that was, I think, like the way my anti-authoritarianism, you know, is sort of a vehicle for that.
	I mean, it's phenomenal just because I was just mentioning the similarities.
	We both studied philosophy, both went into law, both went to a big firm, then both started on their own.
	I was also a pain-in-the-ass troublemaker, and I did something equally stupid, but even more stupid.
	I defaced it and then wrote my name, so it was much tougher for the...
	Yeah, you authored your work.
	You authored your work.
	I was an anonymous coward.
	Oh, I took a hockey puck and wrote all over the hockey rink, and then I put my name, like an idiot.
	Glenn, I'm going to end this on YouTube, and we're going to go over it exclusively to Rumble.
	It changes nothing from us, but I want to bring it exclusively to Rumble for the real stuff.
	Removing people, the link is in the pinned comment, and see you there.
	Three, two, one.
	Okay, Glenn.
	You study philosophy, you go to law school, and then you decide to go to a law firm.
	Quick question, like, why did you leave the law firm?
	Why did you start on your own?
	And why did you pick constitutional rights as a focus?
	Yeah, I mean, I was never a person who was ever going to be comfortable in some big institutional Wall Street law firm.
	You know, I went there in part because the amount of money they pay people who graduate from elite schools, as you know, is insane, especially if you grow up.
	Kind of feeling, you know, always poor and then suddenly they tell you they're going to put this amount of money into your bank account at the end of each month.
	You know, it's a temptation that few of us can resist.
	I knew it was going to be very temporary but I also knew that entering that world would forever demystify it for me.
	I didn't want to feel like there was this kind of place that I never gained entrance into and therefore would never have the actual confidence that...
	I understood it or could thrive within it.
	So I kind of purposely wanted to go there in order to understand it.
	But also, you know, a lot of people who do evil or just to do banal things also can be very smart.
	And the firm I was at Locktail Lipton was full of extremely smart lawyers who are very good lawyers, despite the fact that they spend their lives representing, you know, Goldman Sachs and investment banks and insurance companies.
	They are very skillful in what they do.
	And I learned a lot.
	I stayed 18 months.
	They tried to get me to stay longer.
	They liked me.
	I was doing a good job.
	I found the work intellectually engaging.
	But I didn't want to be representing institutions.
	I wanted to be throwing rocks at institutions.
	And I probably should have stayed a little longer because leaving on your own after 18 months is a dumb thing to do.
	You know way less than you think you knew.
	It was a much bigger struggle than I anticipated it would be.
	For me, I never was really interested in politics in the sense of partisan politics.
	So this was like the 90s.
	So the Soviet Union had collapsed.
	There was no more Cold War.
	We were supposedly in this peace dividend.
	It was the Clinton years dominated by these really trivial scandals.
	I mean, not, you know, you can elevate them in importance if you want, like, oh, lying under oath or whatever.
	But the reality is, you know, it's like Monica Lewinsky and Linda Tripp.
	You know, there were some important things like the Oklahoma City bombing that was used as a pretext to try and control the internet before it could even grow.
	I'm not saying there was nothing that happened that mattered, but I was really not interested in the day-to-day partisan disputes at all.
	I was much more interested in the kind of conceptual framework that the founders had created.
	To this day, I find it ingenious, the kind of insight into human nature that...
	They developed in the wake of the Enlightenment that caused them to question things and then built a government to try and curb our worst abuses.
	I believed in it.
	And so I wanted to work on that.
	That was a much greater interest of mine.
	And so then you go out on your own and you're a lawyer at the time of 9-11.
	Correct.
	And we're going to get into the biggest scandals of modern history that we've been seeing recently.
	But 9-11 happens.
	What's your take on it?
	Not about conspiracy theories.
	What's your take on the official narrative?
	What was your take on the response to it?
	Is it a case of exploiting, weaponizing government incompetence?
	And how does that affect your career trajectory?
	Yeah, I mean, I lived and worked in Manhattan.
	I loved New York when I was there.
	You know, 9-11 was traumatizing, you know, in the sense that everywhere you went, on every street corner, there were, you know, everywhere you looked, pictures of people who obviously were dead under this rubble, but desperate family members, you know, were desperately hoping they had somehow, you know, made their way to an ER and forgot who they were or whatever.
	The smell, the smells were very much in the air for weeks.
	I mean, I remember, you know, it took me like at least a week.
	I went to a film to watch a film on purpose.
	And I remember...
	I had spent 10 minutes for the first time in a week not thinking about what happened.
	I mean, it was a very traumatic amount for people to live there.
	It was a big deal, is really what I mean.
	I mean, those two buildings came crashing down.
	The plane was flown into the Pentagon.
	You know, there was kind of this sense for the first time in American history in a long time of the uncertainty of the stability of the country and the society.
	And so because I wasn't very political, I was, you know, not very critically, I wasn't absorbing political.
	You know, I read the New York Times, I read the Atlantic, I read the New Yorker, the kind of things that, you know, well-educated, cosmopolitan liberals consumed.
	And I thought I was basically getting the, you know, the story often with a lot of, you know, errors and lies.
	And I wasn't that naive, but I didn't really, I wasn't reading things with much of a critical eye.
	I was angry after 9-11.
	I thought it was the right thing to do for the United States to go to Afghanistan and avenge this attack by going after the people who did it.
	I was not some immediate radical.
	But I think that wore off after a couple of months.
	And I think the big turning point for me was in February 2002, so let's say four or five months after 9-11, was the case of Jose Padilla, which a lot of people have forgotten, where a U.S. citizen, Jose Padilla, arrived.
	at Chicago's O 'Hare International Airport and was immediately arrested.
	John Ashcroft, the then Attorney General, was in Moscow at the time and held a quick press conference and accused Jose Badia of being a dirty bomber, someone who was trying to enter the United States to detonate a radiological weapon, which was obviously very frightening.
	But instead of arresting him and charging him with that crime, George Bush signed a decree declaring him an enemy combatant.
	Which meant he had no rights.
	He was imprisoned for the next three and a half years in a military brig.
	No due process, no charges, no access to a lawyer, no access to the outside world, incommunicado.
	And obviously, as a constitutional lawyer, the one red line you believe the government of the United States can and will never cross is to imprison American citizens without some function of due process.
	He was a citizen.
	He was a U.S.-born American citizen.
	You know, he was out of the country.
	He'd become Muslim.
	He was born, I forget exactly to what ethnicity, but to a Latin American family.
	I believe his parents were immigrants, but he was born in the United States.
	His parents were American citizens.
	He was a natural-born U.S. citizen.
	And so the idea that we were now in a climate, not only where this is happening, but very, very few people were willing to even ask questions about it.
	Because they instantly got branded, you know, anyone who asked questions at that time instantly got branded as sympathetic to Al-Qaeda, being on the side of terrorists.
	That really was the climate, not just months, but a couple of years at least after 9-11.
	That's what really started kind of awakening my sense that something had gone pretty awry here, caused me to seek out alternative amounts of information and just in general.
	Kind of uprooted my confidence that the American framework, the constitutional framework, would provide this kind of red line that no government would cross.
	I started realizing that the fears around 9-11 and then the anthrax attacks, which to this day I don't think we know the real perpetrator, that really intensified fears of Americans because that meant it wasn't just, you know, huge buildings that were vulnerable.
	Suburbanites in their homes.
	The anthrax could show up in your mailbox.
	And, you know, it was this, like, Bond-like story about this highly weaponized strain.
	I mean, it was frightening to people.
	The combination of that put the population in fear, and immediately that fear was exploited to get Americans to assent to things which would have been previously unthinkable.
	And the more I started thinking that way, the more alarmed I became, the more interested I became.
	And that kind of is what set my trajectory.
	By thinking, you know, litigating individual cases in a justice system that itself had been co-opted was woefully inadequate.
	I needed to find a way to kind of have a bigger voice in the broader conversation.
	And so that's when you decide to wind up litigation and move into, I guess, investigative journalism.
	Yeah, I mean, even that was kind of by chance.
	You know, I'd started like reading blogs.
	Which at the time seemed radical, and I guess to some extent they were.
	They were a little heterodox.
	I mean, looking back, they were, you know, people like Matt Iglesias and, like, Marcos Melitzis.
	I mean, the least radical people on the planet.
	But in that climate, you know, these are people who at least were writing in a different way and without constraints.
	There are a lot of them writing bloggers as well.
	So it took me a while, but it was really by chance I came to Brazil in 2005.
	Just trying to figure out what I want to do with my life.
	I met my now husband of 17 years.
	We couldn't live together in the U.S. because there was a law in place that barred same-sex couples from getting immigration rights.
	So we couldn't get a green card to live with me in the U.S. So the only choice we had if we wanted to be together, which I knew we did, was for me to stay in Brazil.
	And therefore, staying in Brazil obviously required me to find a way to make a living.
	I couldn't be a lawyer in Brazil.
	I'm not a licensed Brazilian lawyer.
	I don't know anything about the Brazilian legal system.
	And so kind of just on a lark.
	One day in September 2005, I just hit create blog.
	I never intended it for me to be a career.
	I just was finding a way.
	I had a lot of free time.
	I was trying to find a way to participate in that conversation, as I described, and very quickly found a big audience in part because of luck and in part because of, I think, just, you know, skill and work.
	And then it just quickly turned into a career.
	I mean, I presume the biggest initial story was the Edward Snowden leaked documents that you broke.
	Is that the first biggest story that you would say of your career?
	Yeah, I mean, well, certainly there was nothing on the scale of the Snowden story.
	I mean, that's like a once-in-a-generation story, right?
	It won the Pulitzer.
	I mean, you don't get those every year.
	But the reason Edward Snowden had come to me was because he was an avid reader of mine.
	Remember, Edward Snowden is somebody who believed in the U.S. security state.
	I mean, he enrolled, he enlisted in the U.S. Army and wanted to go fight in Iraq.
	He broke both his legs in basic training and couldn't, but then went to the CIA and the NSA as a true believer.
	And through a combination of seeing the things he saw, but also being influenced by several writers, one of whom was me, became very disillusioned that this...
	The whole thing was kind of a deceit.
	It was a fraud.
	And he was particularly offended that all of this machinery had been turned not against America's enemies, but inward onto American citizens.
	And so my work before the Snowden story, I broke some stories about Chelsea Manning's abusive treatment in prison that led to the resignation of a bunch of Obama officials.
	I did a lot of work on Obama's drone program, a lot of work on the war on terror.
	But, you know, it didn't break any story of the magnitude of the Snowden reporting.
	I mean, like I said, it's like a once-in-generation story until 2012, at the end of 2012, when Edward Snowden contacted me.
	And I've got to, I mean, I love to know the details of this.
	How does he, if you can, just explain a little bit, like, how does he contact you when he does contact you and you know that you're going to disclose leaked documents?
	I presume they were of classified nature.
	I mean, classified leaked information.
	You're making enemies and also enemies high up.
	And you know that once you let this out of the box, there's no pushing it back in, neither for Snowden, neither for yourself.
	How do you stomach that?
	What is the psychological process you go through to say, this could put me in danger and this will change the trajectory of my life?
	Yeah, I mean, these were not just classified documents.
	These were all top secret documents.
	From...
	The most sensitive and secretive agency in the entire U.S. government, which is the NSA.
	You know, for decades before the Church Committee, the joke in Washington was the NSA stands for no such agency.
	You know, people were petrified to even mention it.
	People barely knew it existed.
	And there had never been a leak close to this magnitude about the intelligence community.
	The only comparable leak were the Pentagon Papers, which Daniel Ellsberg leaked to the New York Times in 1971.
	To prove the American government was lying about the war in Vietnam, telling them publicly, we believe we're about to win, but internally knowing they would never win.
	But in terms of the intelligence community, the CIA and the NSA, there'd been nothing on this magnitude.
	And some of these documents were the most secretive and sensitive documents that exist in the entire U.S. government.
	And there weren't a few.
	It was a gigantic archive of many, many hundreds of thousands or more documents that he...
	And, you know, the way it worked was he contacted me by email through an anonymous account.
	And, of course, he knew at the time, but most of us didn't, which was the extent of the surveillance state domestically.
	And he, of course, is being very careful about what he was willing to tell me.
	And so he had a hard time getting my attention because, you know, people always pop up in your email inbox.
	I'm sure you've had this, you know, I have a big story for you.
	It's huge.
	And oftentimes they're crazy or they, you know, you can't.
	Drop everything you're doing the instant that happens.
	So it took me a while to establish a kind of safe communicative framework with him where he felt comfortable talking to me using encryption that no one at the time, you know, was using.
	It was very complex and difficult.
	But finally, we got that created.
	And he said to me, you know, I have the biggest leak in the history of U.S. security state.
	I need you to come to Hong Kong.
	In order to meet me and get it.
	And obviously that made no sense to me because senior U.S. security officials aren't in Hong Kong.
	They're in Northern Virginia or wherever.
	And so I told him, look, before I get on a plane and come there, I need to believe that you're real.
	I need to know that you're not a crazy person making wild claims.
	I'm not flying to Hong Kong to meet some insane person.
	So he sent me a tiny sample of maybe two dozen documents.
	And just those two dozen documents among them were the PRISM program, which is a top-secret program where the NSA was collaborating deeply with basically big tech.
	It was Apple and Microsoft at the time and Yahoo and Facebook, where those companies were turning over millions and millions of data pieces every day on American citizens.
	So just that tiny little, you know, sample he sent me made me understand that this is going to be a life-changing moment.
	This is going to be the biggest story in journalism in the generation.
	And as you said, you know, we were going to make enemies of the most power.
	I mean, the United States government, for all we're taught about how democratic it is, they do not fuck around when it comes to their secrets, especially from this part of the government.
	But, you know, I spent a lot of time talking to my husband when it happened, and we talked about the various risks, and he ultimately told me, like, you know, this is what you were born to do.
	This is what you went into journalism to do.
	You know, you don't want to go cover zoning boards for, you know, a local paper, nor do you want to be a puppet of the Pentagon for the Washington Post.
	That was never your goal.
	This was your goal.
	You know, as I talked about before, I wanted to throw rocks at institutions, not...
	Defend them.
	And there was really no choice, even though we were aware of what was going to come crashing down on us.
	And I got on a plane and I went to Hong Kong and was shocked to find not a 65-year-old grizzled national security official, but this 29-year-old kid.
	And I did start thinking maybe this was a fraud.
	And it took me a day or two to establish a rapport with him and then to see these documents and realize it was anything but a fraud.
	And we spent, you know, 12 days in Hong Kong together, never, always, you know, very scared of what was going to happen that the U.S. government or Chinese officials or Hong Kong officials or anyone else had discovered what we were doing in that hotel room.
	We're going to burst down the door.
	We were very eager to get the stories out as quickly as possible to give us the protection of that, you know, that kind of limelight.
	And so, you know, there's a film that was made about it, Citizen Ford, which is a real-time documentary that won the Oscar.
	That shows the kind of extreme tension under which we were working.
	I'm absolutely going to go watch that.
	I just have to talk the kids into watching that.
	But I haven't seen that documentary.
	I haven't seen any of this.
	And I only briefly remember living through it.
	Yeah, it's on YouTube, by the way, now for free.
	My kids, who hate watching anything that I'm involved in.
	Even they watched that film and they liked it.
	It's kind of this like, you know, has this like thriller vibe to it because it was, you know, very high drama.
	It's nuts.
	It's the stuff out of movies, but in real life, you're sitting in a hotel room.
	I mean, you get the documents.
	How do you vet the documents are even authentic when you get them?
	Like they're digital and paper or primarily digital?
	They're all digital because that's how he took them.
	He didn't take any documents printed.
	That was far too risky.
	So everything was on extremely encrypted thumb drives.
	He was, you know, obsessive compulsive about security.
	That's why he was able to do it without being detected.
	I mean, imagine the surveillance the NSA is under.
	The NSA itself is under.
	They don't just put the entire world under surveillance, but obviously within, you know, there's all kinds of protections that he very adeptly circumvented.
	Simply by just being a self-taught kind of genius when it comes to computer security and information security.
	And so it was all on tiny little thumb drives.
	And there are ways to authenticate an archive of this size.
	It's the reason why I knew the Hunter Biden archive was genuine.
	Or I had a similar archive that was given to me in Brazil in 2019 that the Brazilian government ultimately tried to imprison me for that let us do.
	Very destabilizing reporting about corruption in the Brazilian government.
	You have this gigantic archive.
	And as you, you know, the question you asked is always the question, how do you know it's authentic?
	So there are ways, you know, there's emails in the archive.
	So you go to people who are on the email chain that you trust and you ask them to show you the emails in their inbox.
	And if it matches what's in the archive, that's very strong indicia that the archive is authentic.
	You try and match it to public data, but also private data.
	And at some level, though, there's a leap of faith.
	Like, you can never have 100% certainty that it's authentic.
	But you get to the point where you're willing to stake your career and reputation on it.
	And I got to that point of comfort in Hong Kong, just like I did with the Hunter Biden laptop story and also the Brazil story, where you're convinced that, you know, the documents were of such complexity and...
	Some of them were verifiable through non-public means.
	We had an expert review the metadata on a lot of them to look for any signs of tampering or anything being fraudulent or forged and got very, very comfortable.
	And then we went to the U.S. government beforehand with the first story to ask for confirmation.
	They didn't deny that the very first story I did, which was about a Pfizer court order that authorized Verizon.
	Or ordered Verizon to turn over all telephone records, all telephone records of all American citizens to the NSA when the U.S. government didn't claim that was a forgery, tried to convince us not to publish it on national security grounds.
	We took that as confirmation that that document was accurate and we were kind of off to the races.
	An amazing thing you say, like you get the protection of the limelight.
	So the most terrifying moment is after you go to the government and say, Care to comment before you go public?
	That's the point at which you don't have the protection of the limelight, where you're too big a fish to catch now, and you're at your most vulnerable?
	For sure.
	I mean, and, you know, I had a war with The Guardian.
	I was at The Guardian at the time.
	Obviously, The Guardian is a big, old newspaper.
	They were being very careful about the story.
	They were behind the story.
	They were supportive of it.
	They wanted to do it, but they were also very, you know, worried about their legal exposure.
	I had a source, you know, a 29-year-old guy who had just done this incredibly courageous act.
	He unraveled his whole life to show the world the truth about what the U.S. government was doing.
	And I felt my primary obligation was to him and then to the public.
	And so, you know, I wanted these stories published, in part because I wanted to make sure they got published before anyone could take it away from us.
	Obviously, we hid the material, but, you know, nonetheless, if we're trapped in a legal investigation, it would be a big impediment, whereas The Guardian was kind of being more careful and slower than I wanted them to be, and so I actually got to the point where I threatened The Guardian and said, if we don't publish by 5 p.m. today, it was actually four days after I got to Hong Kong when I demanded that, when that first story was published, I'm going to just start publishing this on my own, and you'll lose the story of a lifetime.
	You'll lose a Pulitzer.
	You'll lose everything.
	I had also talked to a couple of other media outlets about their willingness to do it, like The Nation.
	But I was really prepared to just go do it on my own precisely for that reason.
	I knew it was urgent that we get this material into the public domain as quickly as possible.
	It was necessary to protect Snowden.
	It was necessary to protect ourselves.
	But also, it was necessary to protect the story, to make sure the story happened, that the government couldn't stop us.
	And The Guardian was put in a bad place because they weren't quite ready to publish.
	But they knew I was serious that I was going to just take my story and leave The Guardian and go do it on my own.
	And they decided to publish that first story.
	And from there, published every story thereafter that I wanted to publish.
	And we had a pretty good partnership over it.
	It's fantastic.
	I could carry on with this for much longer, but there's a few other things we need to get discussed before we're done.
	The Brazilian story.
	Now, I know that this is going to have a contemporary application.
	Can you explain what, I mean...
	I understand it, as we say in French, en diagonale, like loosely.
	But explain what happened in 2019 and its relevance to what just happened and what is going on now in Brazil.
	So Brazil is a country that has been plagued by systemic corruption for decades.
	You know, when you look at Western governments and talk about corruption, you talk about one congressman who takes a bribe or you talk about legalized corruption, right?
	The way lobbyists fund campaigns and incumbents in order to get legislation they want.
	When I'm talking about systemic corruption, I mean pretty much nothing in Brazil happens without major companies depositing millions of dollars into Swiss bank accounts of major political officials.
	That's how politics works in Brazil.
	And every political party is implicated by it, but the country, the party that had been running Brazil for many years from 2002 until 2016 was the Labor Party or the Workers Party founded by Lula da Silva.
	And they started digging into this corruption.
	They started putting billionaires in jail.
	I mean, like, the richest and most powerful people in Brazil.
	And I was very supportive of this investigation at the beginning, like a lot of people were.
	These guys became heroes, including the judge who oversaw it, who was sentencing these people to...
	Long prison terms.
	These people who usually had been immune.
	But after a while, it started looking to be very politicized.
	They became obsessed with putting Lula in prison, even though polls were showing, or because polls were showing, in 2017, that he was by far the frontrunner to be re-elected president in 2018.
	He left office in 2010 because of term limits.
	He was clearly the frontrunner.
	They wanted to put him in prison.
	They did not want Lula coming back.
	And I started suspecting that they were starting to kind of cross red lines, that these judges were starting to get high on their own PR.
	And then in 2019, a secret source had contacted me, told me that he had hacked into the telephones of the leading judge, who by this point, the one who sentenced Lula to prison, by this point, he was not just a judge.
	He was now Bolsonaro's, basically his attorney general, his minister of justice and security.
	So this kind of...
	Print quote pro happened where this judge removed Lula, the primary impediment to Bolsonaro's winning that election.
	And then in return, when Bolsonaro won, he elevated this judge to the most powerful position in the country.
	And the hacker who contacted me said, I've hacked into Judge Moro's phones.
	I've hacked into the phones of all these prosecutors.
	And he gave me this huge archive that showed immense corruption on the part of that judge who had become the most powerful hero in Brazil and the prosecutors.
	We began reporting it and it was extremely destabilizing to the Brazilian government because that judge was the anchor of Bolsonaro's government and the imprisonment of Lula was this kind of symbol of anti-corruption.
	And my cause was never getting Lula out of prison.
	You know, my husband's a member of Congress in Brazil.
	He was never a member of Lula's party.
	He was a member of a left-wing opposition party to Lula.
	My cause was...
	That, you know, you cannot have judges cheating and crossing every ethical line to imprison people with no due process.
	You know, he was plotting every day with prosecutors during the trial in secret.
	So the whole thing was basically rigged.
	And when we revealed that, it led to the reversal, the nullification of Lula's conviction.
	He was released from prison.
	The Supreme Court ultimately nullified his conviction.
	And that's what enabled Lula to run for president against Bolsonaro as he sought re-election.
	In this election, Lula narrowly won by one or two points.
	And we became, my husband and I, sort of public enemy number one of the Bolsonaro movement for an entire year because they thought we were there to just kind of help Lula.
	And I think the Bolsonaro movement now understands that that was never actually my goal.
	My relationship with that movement is much, much better.
	In part because...
	The Bolsonaro movement, for all the fears people had that it would be authoritarian, that Bolsonaro was Brazilian president, would be authoritarian.
	They ended up really being the targets of authoritarianism, primarily from the Supreme Court, which imposed a censorship regime that makes the one in the U.S. and Europe look like bastions of liberty and freedom.
	And I've been one of the leading voices denouncing this censorship regime named Bolsonaro and his movement.
	And that kind of recalibrated how I am understood in Brazil, both for the good, but also for the bad.
	A lot of members of Lula's party hate me now, even though I'm the reason they got to vote for him for president.
	So that story was a very intense story.
	It went on for about 18 months.
	It culminated in my indictment.
	They tried to imprison me for it.
	The Supreme Court intervened and said I have a free press right under the Constitution that prevents my imprisonment.
	But it became a very tumultuous story.
	I mean, it's nuts.
	It's actually nuts that you have two of these.
	These are cinematic experiences on their own.
	You have two of them.
	And now it illustrates also that the history of the 2022 election, 2023, whenever it was, of Bolsonaro, the dynamic is something like the war in Russia-Ukraine, where there's a lot more than most people are aware of because they only became aware of it within the last six months.
	You get Lula out of jail, which pisses off Bolsonaro, but then...
	But what happens with the reverse prosecution now?
	Sanctioning Bolsonaro's attorney, sanctioning Bolsonaro for contesting the elections.
	Is this just corruption as determined by whatever the powers that be are?
	What's the direction of the corruption in Brazil?
	Yeah, I mean, my main worry is not the return of the Bolsonaro movement.
	It's the authoritarianism of the institutions that united in the name of stopping him.
	It reminds me a lot of what happened in the United States where...
	It got decreed that Donald Trump was not what I perceived him to be, which was, you know, kind of an aberrational figure comportmentally, but really kind of just a continuation of the American political tradition.
	The idea that he was some singular evil, a new Hitler, was always completely laughable to me.
	But most of American liberalism and by American liberalism, I mean not just the Democratic Party, but a lot of the establishment sectors of the Republican Party really did come to believe that Trump was this unique threat.
	And therefore they united.
	And that was why that video of Sam Harris is just a few months ago went so viral because Sam Harris expressed what they were all.
	Trump is such a singular evil that anything and everything we do to stop him, including lying, censorship, imprisoning people with due process, no matter what we do.
	The ends justify the means because stopping Trump is such a high imperative.
	The same thing happened in Brazil.
	These institutions decided that Bolsonaro was such a grave threat to democracy and everything decent that anything and everything necessary to stop him became justifiable, including implementing a form of tyranny where any dissidents of the establishment, any supporters of Bolsonaro, were subject not only to being censored, And I'll just give you a statistic that's amazing.
	Ten members of Congress, ten members who got elected by the Brazilian people, including some with the highest vote totals, all on the Brazilian right, are banned by order of the Supreme Court from accessing any social media platforms, even though those social media platforms have found that they haven't violated the rules of the platform.
	So the most popular politicians in Brazil, some of them, are not allowed to use Twitter, Facebook.
	YouTube, Google, anything else.
	And some of them have been arrested.
	Journalists are in exile.
	And what concerns me, and it shocks a lot of people on the Brazilian left who thought I was their ally, was that I don't regard anything and everything done in the name of stopping the Bolsonaro movement as justified.
	I don't regard left-wing authoritarianism as better than the right-wing strain.
	And this is now the driving dynamic.
	Especially after what happened on Sunday with their own January 6th that's obviously now going to be used to say that we have to even come down harder on the Brazilian right.
	Now, Lula's a very pragmatic guy.
	He has a lot of challenges in governing Brazil.
	My belief is that the reason Bolsonaro left Brazil for the United States on the last day of his presidency is because there was a deal made that, look, just leave Brazil, stay quiet, don't encourage your maniacs to...
	We just civil war.
	And in return, if you do that, we'll agree not to prosecute you and your kids for corruption.
	And the Bolsonaro family is pretty corrupt.
	And I think that was the deal that was made.
	But now that this kind of happened, this leaderless movement, you know, went to Brasilia and out of frustration and rage, they didn't kill anybody.
	There was no plan to overthrow the government.
	It was very much like January 6th, just kind of venting a lot of, you know, unexpressed anger.
	They entered government buildings.
	They did some property damage.
	It was not a good thing.
	And now it's going to be used, much like September 11th was, much like January 6th has been, much like every crisis always is, to crack down even harder on civil liberties.
	It's unbelievable.
	And it's fascinating.
	Now, as far as the media goes, you're working with The Guardian back with Snowden.
	They're reluctant to put this out, but they're still holding the government in check, holding the government feet to the fire.
	I mean...
	We're now seeing a media that's doing the exact inverse.
	Now, whether or not it sounds like your explanation might be, it's still the battle against Trump, so all is fair in the battle against Trump.
	But has the media always been like this, but it's just been amplified now?
	Or has there been a moment where there was a radical shift and they became a monster that they weren't prior to?
	Yeah, so, you know, it's kind of a symbol, like a kind of religiously held view on the American right that the media is left-wing and liberal.
	And there's an extent to which that's true.
	Like, obviously, with culture war issues, that's true.
	It's always been the case that journalists are more democratic aligned than they are Republican.
	But their real ideology is not leftism when it comes to things like foreign policy or economic policy.
	It's adherence to establishment authority.
	That's really what those media corporations are there to do, is to serve establishment power, much more so than advance a left-wing or right-wing agenda.
	And so I think people have forgotten.
	That the institutions most responsible for selling the lies of the Iraq war to the American people weren't Fox News and the Bush White House.
	They did that too.
	But conservatives didn't need to be convinced.
	They were lining up behind their party's president.
	What was needed were for liberals to get on board with that war and the war on terror generally.
	And that's where the New York Times and the New Yorker and the Atlantic and the Washington Post came in.
	They were being fed lies by the security state, giving anonymity to those people and mindlessly publishing under the front pages through.
	And that's what convinced at least half of American liberals and Democrats to support everything Bush and Cheney were doing.
	So one of my earliest critiques when I began writing about politics never wanting to be a part of those media corporations was that they were doing the opposite of what their job was supposed to be.
	They were supposed to be adversarial.
	To the FBI and the CIA and the NSA and the Justice Department, but instead they were totally subservient to them.
	So that's always been the case.
	That's always been true.
	But at least you have some, you know, examples, some counterexamples.
	Like I said, The Guardian was behind this note in reporting.
	We did expose secrets.
	We worked with major media outlets around the world willing to do that.
	Occasionally, you know, they exposed war and terror abuses and things.
	It was mostly left to WikiLeaks and whistleblowers, but sometimes media corporations were willing to do that.
	So I think the problem was there.
	But Trump, for exactly the reason you just alluded to, and that I described in my last answer, did change everything in the sense that they became convinced that their only mission in life is to destroy Trump and his movement.
	The CIA, the FBI, the Justice Department, Homeland Security are their allies in that mission.
	And therefore, I believe they're more subservient than ever.
	And more willing to spread false propaganda from these institutions than they ever were before.
	Now, this question might...
	We won't have enough time for this, but maybe if you can pick one or if your answer is they're all part and parcel of the same thing.
	The Twitter files drops that we've been seeing now for the last little while.
	I presume none of it is new whatsoever to you.
	If you had to pick one element, one aspect of it, or if it's impossible, what is the biggest...
	The most important of the Twitter files, the Twitter drops that we've recently seen.
	I think it's the union between the security state and big tech and the role that the security state is playing.
	I mean, it's an amazing thing if you think about it, that the security state is the dominant force in deciding what information we are allowed to have access to and what information we can.
	Who is allowed to be heard on the internet and who is not?
	These are not decisions being made by executives at Facebook or Twitter or Google.
	These are decisions being made by the U.S. government, the majority party in Washington, which is the Democratic Party, and particularly these agencies that dictate to, not with the force of law yet, but with implicit threats or promises of reward for compliance.
	Remember that companies like Amazon and Apple and Facebook have immense contracts they get from the Pentagon and from the FBI and the NSA.
	They're all in bed together.
	And so a month before the Twitter files began, two of my former colleagues at The Intercept, Ken Kupinstein and Lee Fung, got a hold of Homeland Security documents that they published that showed that Homeland Security has a fully formed plan in place to insinuate themselves inside the censorship decisions of all of these big tech companies.
	That's what that whole disinformation czar was about.
	They just picked a woman who was way too insane and she was a bridge way too far.
	For this to happen.
	But, you know, the whole plan itself is still going forward.
	They're buried in, they're burrowed within these companies that control the source of our information.
	You know, that's why inside all of these companies, just like in all of these newsrooms, you look up and down the list and you see nothing but former FBI lawyers and CIA agents and NSA operatives.
	I mean, the security state has penetrated the key media and big tech.
	And that is why it sickens me, sickens me to my core that Democrats in Congress are currently united unanimously to try and block investigations by Congress into these relationships.
	People are saying that there's not going to be any solution to this problem to the extent that half of the country approves of it.
	What is the advice that you would give to those who say, "I don't mind." You know, I mean, the argument that I've been using forever, you know, going back to when I was trying to get Republicans to be concerned about warrantless spying under George Bush and Dick Cheney, or the ability to put American citizens into prison without charges or lawyers or due process was, look, I know you trust George Bush and Dick Cheney, but what about when Hillary Clinton gets this power?
	Right?
	It's like the argument that you try and make to people who don't care about censorship on principle.
	I mean, you know, they should care about people being censored, their fellow citizens being censored just on principle because it's wrong.
	But okay, if they don't have principles, you still want to reach them.
	So you try and appeal to their self-interest.
	And you say you like the censorship regime now because it's your enemies being punished in silence.
	But if that machinery that you've...
	Endorse the construction of falls instead into the hands of not your political allies, but your political adversaries.
	Aren't you concerned about the fact that one day it's not going to be your adversaries, but yourself who will end up censored?
	Which is why I thought it was so funny when those handful of journalists, you know, those liberal employees of media corporations who have spent years agitating for a big tech censorship regime.
	got kicked off Twitter for 12 hours and they suddenly declared a free press crisis because for once it was them and their friends It's just very hard to get people to look ahead, even if you appeal to their self-interest.
	But I don't know.
	I mean, I think all of us who do what you're doing and what I do, which is wake up in the morning and try and participate in political dialogue and discourse, even if we don't admit it, have within us a certain kind of...
	Optimism about the power of human reason and the ability to persuade people through dialogue to see things they may not want to see or to think differently about things.
	If we didn't believe that, we wouldn't be doing it.
	No one would wake up and engage in futile behavior.
	So I do think that there have been times in the American past, like after Watergate, when people's eyes got open about these agencies and people were willing on a bipartisan basis to try and come together and limit what...
	They could do.
	It wasn't very successful.
	The intelligence community mostly immunized themselves.
	The reforms were mostly illusory, but at least the truth was dragged out into the light, and I'm hoping that's what happens this time as well.
	Okay, and last question, because I know you've got to go.
	You've got the show on Rumble every night.
	Glenn, people are going to look at you and say, How do you do what you do?
	Because your resume, it's not just impressive, it's almost unbelievable.
	How do you get away with doing what you do where you don't get the Snowden treatment, you don't get the Assange treatment, you don't get fabricated sexual harassment stories brought up from 30 years ago?
	How do you succeed in doing what you're doing without getting the treatment that we've seen other people get?
	Yeah, I mean, I've come close.
	During the Snowden reporting, I wasn't able to leave Brazil for an entire year because the U.S. government was...
	Threatening both publicly, but especially privately, that if I stepped one foot outside of Brazil, they would arrest me.
	The Brazilian government did actually indict me and brought 26 felony charges against me, which I happened also to be able to get out of.
	I do think a lot about how to, you know, manage that line where, you know, you don't want to compromise your core integrity ever, but you have to be shrewd and strategic because if you're sitting in a prison cell like Julian Assange is, your efficacy is going to be reduced.
	I don't mean to blame Julian at all.
	There's few people on the planet shorter than he.
	But when you become so much of a danger, they're not going to allow you.
	So I think I flirted with that line a lot.
	But I do try and think about how to stay on the right side of that line.
	Just enough to be able to continue to do what I do.
	But there have been very close calls.
	And I think part of it is luck.
	But I also think that part of it is once you build up a certain kind of profile publicly.
	It does become harder for these governments to act against you.
	We returned to the United States, you know, after a year, myself and Laura Poitras, my partner in the Snowden reporting, even when the U.S. government was privately threatening us because it was the week the Pulitzers were being announced.
	We were pretty sure we were going to win.
	There was a Polk award that we were coming to get.
	And so we kind of felt like it would make it much harder for the government to arrest us when we were coming to get our Pulitzers and Polks and then lecture the rest of the world about...
	The importance of press freedom.
	So a lot of it is just gambling sometimes, too, about how far you can go.
	Amazing.
	Glenn, I mean, people can find you.
	Glenn G. Greenwald on Twitter.
	The name of your show on Rumble?
	It's System Update.
	It's amazing.
	Okay.
	Thank you very much.
	I know you need to go, so thank you for doing this.
	I'm going to continue.
	I just knocked my computer.
	I'm going to continue rambling afterwards, but I'll message you.
	Thank you very much for doing this.
	Yeah, I just want to say, you know, I do a lot of interviews.
	Your questions were incredibly interesting and thoughtful.
	It makes, you know, being interviewed much, much more enjoyable and you're getting smart and thoughtful questions.
	I say that sincerely.
	So I'm happy to come back anytime.
	I'll probably persecute you and chase you to come on my show as well at some point.
	So it was great meeting you and great talking to you.
	The same.
	Thank you very much.
	All right.
	Have a good afternoon.
	You too.
	Bye-bye.
	All right, people, that was great.
	Now, what was driving me a little crazy, I left my window open.
	Hold on one second.
	Damn sunlight.
	We don't need that sunlight.
	I'll get sunlight on my own time.
	That's better.
	Now, when the sun comes out from behind the clouds, it's not going to make my greasy forehead shine.
	Oh, it's still shining.
	That was amazing.
	That was amazing, actually.
	Let me just see.
	Go, Glenn.
	Go.
	I'm just going back to the chat.
	Sorry.
	VivaBarnesLaw.locals.
	What the heck is my problem?
	VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com.
	I haven't been following the chat.
	Rumble, I haven't been following the chat.
	Glenn is smart.
	Viva, you and Barnes have Glenn on.
	It'll happen again.
	I hope my questions were good.
	I'll choose to believe the flattery.
	That's...
	You know what?
	And it's...
	The answer was there.
	I mean, the fact...
	I know people accused everyone of being a Mossad, being intelligence, being controlled opposition.
	Yeah, I didn't know that he was actually...
	I read that he was indicted and that they dropped the charges, but my goodness.
	Felony charges in Brazil.
	There's countries I won't even go to for fear of getting a parking ticket.
	Okay, that was great.
	We'll go on for a little bit more, because from what I understand, by the way...
	Timing is everything.
	There's another Twitter file that's being dropped, and I was not aware of this.
	I had a couple of stories in the backdrop that I was going to bring up as well.
	Okay, everyone, give me two seconds just to line up my other stories.
	I did a podcast with...
	Oh, jeez.
	I'm going to forget what the name was.
	I did a podcast.
	I'll send that one out afterwards.
	But hold on.
	There's Twitter files which we're going to get to.
	But I...
	I made it into NBC News.
	For reasons which I'd rather not have made it into NBC News for, let's pull this story up.
	I give myself the hardest time for my own mistakes.
	A harder time than anybody else.
	I'm going to pull this article up.
	I don't want to add to stream.
	I actually want to remove that from present.
	Okay, share screen.
	Let's go over here.
	And let's go to...
	A fake tweet spurred an anti-vaccine harassment campaign against a doctor.
	Two things, by the way.
	Are we on the...
	We're on the proper thing.
	I did not know that the author of this article, Brandy Zadrozny, is also the Brandy Zadrozny, or I don't know how to pronounce her last name.
	Zadroni.
	I say Zadroni.
	Who did that five-part NBC.
	Is that where we're on here?
	NBC miniseries, Tiffany Dover is Dead.
	I'm not yet finished listening to that podcast, but I've got a lot of questions about it.
	And my goodness, the comments that I'm reading on that podcast or the YouTube versions of that podcast, it seems that a great many people are now more thoroughly convinced that Tiffany Dover is, in fact, has deceased or become incapacitated.
	Than before watching that documentary, that five-part miniseries.
	You imagine if you make a five-part miniseries called Tiffany Dover is Dead, attempting to or purportedly debunking the misinformation myth online.
	Tiffany Dover was the first nurse, one of the first nurses to get injected with the Rona Jibby Jab, who subsequently fainted shortly thereafter, apparently came back.
	After having fainted to say that she's all right, she's prone to fainting and fainted six times in the last month, which that would be your prime candidate to vaccinate live on TV for the first time, has never been heard from since.
	And now I understand why Gonzalo Lira starts his podcast off with, where's Tiffany?
	Mic check, can you hear me?
	Where's Tiffany Dover?
	So this author to this article did a five-part miniseries attempting to debunk the misinformation myth that Tiffany Dover's fine and well, and it's all a right-wing conspiracy theory that she had a...
	Very serious adverse reaction to the first administration of the Jibby Jab, which was the selling point of the jab at the early part of the pandemic to convince everyone else to get it.
	No interview, no picture, no live questions.
	Tiffany Dover, unless something changes, and I don't think it does, does not actually appear in this documentary at any point.
	There's some...
	So every comment...
	In the video and go look at it on YouTube.
	It's like, thanks.
	You know, I never believed the story until now.
	Now, the question is then, is this one of those double-fakey, make people believe a fake story so that, you know, was it done deliberately?
	Can hypothesize left, right, and center.
	We'll get there in a second.
	Let's just go to this article.
	This, you know what it's going to go to.
	It's going to go back to the tweets that now, apparently, and we have to accept confirmed fake tweets.
	That led to what is claimed to be a harassment campaign, but I have no doubt that that doctor got a lot of hate for that tweet, which was shared, that I retweeted the Joe Rogan bit as well.
	A fake tweet spurred an anti-vaccine harassment campaign against a doctor.
	That's the header.
	Listen to this.
	Listen to this framing.
	Despite the overwhelming success of the COVID vaccines.
	Okay, that's...
	Interesting framing.
	An aggressive and politicized anti-vaccine community has persevered and is using new tactics to try to smear a doctor.
	This is why you will have people who will entertain the notion that potentially interested parties or parties involved allowed this story to spiral out of control.
	Because the tweet was originally tweeted by an account called Ramsey Paul.
	We'll get into it.
	Part of the problem was that, as far as I know, because I looked into it before retweeting saying, I thought this had to be parody, but tweets are protected.
	Now I'm blocked, so therefore I conclude it's real.
	There was no public statement saying that this is a fake tweet.
	The account didn't come out and say this is fake.
	And now one can question that it is being exploited, whether or not it was by design or by accident.
	It's being exploited now to try to silence people who are critical of the jibby jab for reasons which they may or may not have.
	So this is the exact type of stuff, politicizing, framing the incident, that causes people to question, well, was that incident facilitated or exploited once it occurred so that it can now be weaponized for political purposes to demonize people who might have statistical, scientific good reason for being reluctant to a certain specific medical procedure?
	When Dr. Natalia Solenkova woke up Monday morning, she was greeted with a flood of Twitter notifications on her phone.
	The Miami critical care physician had hundreds of new followers and they, along with thousands of others, were angry with her.
	This is why, you know, even when you disagree with someone and you think their opinions are ridiculous, you still, in as much as possible, be respectful, especially when they're not politicians.
	Politicians, you know, you could be a little more rude or callous, but when it's humans...
	Which is why Joe Rogan, even in his 11-minute segment where he addresses it, still gave the benefit of some human doubt based on what is now confirmed to be a false tweet, a fake tweet.
	In tweets, comments, and direct messages across Twitter and other social media platforms, strangers demanded to know why she had deleted a tweet that read, quote, I will never get the vaccine even if it turns out I injected actual poison.
	I won't repeat it.
	We all know it.
	I'll have to repeat it.
	Even if it turns out I've injected actual poison, I may have days to live.
	My heart is in the right place.
	I got vaxxed out of love.
	Anti-vaxxers did everything out of hate.
	If I have to die for this, then so be it.
	I will never apologize.
	Okay.
	People thought it was real.
	And apparently the evidence that it's not real is that it exceeds the maximum character limit for a tweet.
	Other people who still try to make an argument that it might be real say it could be stitched together.
	We're going to operate on the basis that it's a fake tweet because I think she retweeted the original tweet, her authentic tweet.
	And then people sort of resort to the next wiggle out.
	They say, well, the original tweet was just as bad in essence, if not literally, which is not exactly how you have to apologize when you've made a mistake, and we'll get there.
	Salonkova hadn't deleted the tweet.
	In fact, she hadn't written it at all.
	It was misinformation that researchers call a cheap fake, a term for a piece of fake media, such as an image or video, that takes little effort to produce.
	Someone had clumsily altered one of Salenia's posts to portray a blind, even deadly zealotry.
	Over the next days, it went wild, yada, yada.
	And then the tweet would even make it to the popular podcast Joe Rogan, who would later apologize for discussing it.
	Sulavenka knew what was coming next, a wave of harassment.
	She didn't pay much attention to it, continued practicing.
	She didn't pay much attention to the comments and messages saying she was a terrible doctor, that she shouldn't be practicing, that she was murdering people.
	She ignored the hateful direct messages in her private personal accounts.
	I purposely didn't spend a lot of time reading them because I just wanted to find the original tweet and get it removed.
	This time, I didn't come across death threats, but I'm not looking.
	I've probably blocked a thousand accounts.
	Let's see here.
	She built a following.
	I started tweeting because people were dying and hospitals were unprepared, she said, and then disinformation became rampant.
	Despite the overwhelming success of the COVID vaccines, which have prevented millions of severe infections and deaths.
	Pretty sure this stat was disputed.
	An aggressive and politicized anti-vaccine community has persevered.
	Isn't it convenient?
	This mistake, and it was a mistake, will be weaponized to silence people's legitimate grievances with this particular jab.
	But let's just get to it here.
	Let's just get to the important part.
	By Wednesday, it went viral.
	Here we go.
	Ian Miles Chong, a right-wing Twitter commentator to whom Twitter's owner, Elon Musk, frequently replies, tweeted it along.
	She deleted it.
	I wonder why.
	Chong has since deleted his tweet.
	Jenna Ellis, a right-wing political commentator and former lawyer for President Donald Trump, attempt to overturn the 2020 election, tweeted it with the comment, delusional justification, in response to harassing messages.
	Sulavenka did what she could to stop the pie along, yada, yada, yada, and took her account private.
	But it took some time.
	But some took that not as evidence that their swarm was causing harm, but as proof that the tweet was authentic.
	At first, I thought it had to be parody, tweeted Canadian lawyer and YouTuber David Freiheit.
	Then I went to check her profile.
	Her tweets are protected, indicated it was not parody.
	And now I'm blocked, confirming it was not parody.
	And then it goes on.
	Now, first of all...
	You say perfection is not an end result.
	It's a process.
	And it's a process that admits of making errors because nobody's perfect.
	And occasionally we're all going to make mistakes just because it's the way it goes.
	Now, I tweeted out a reply because it's nice.
	You point out someone's mistake and you should point out the correction as well.
	In this context, when someone protects their account and blocks with no explanation, people can draw negative inferences.
	I sought verification because I said it's so preposterous, it should be parody.
	But to the extent that you highlighted my mistake, it would have been fair to also mention my correction and apology.
	And this is the correction at the time.
	The tweet purportedly from, it's parody from a tweet generator.
	I don't know why she would have protected tweets and blocked me since I thought it had to be a joke.
	I would have gladly blasted out the tweet was fake.
	And then we have the originals.
	And then the other correction, because responding to people who say, no, I still saw it.
	I say, you couldn't have seen it.
	She's lying.
	This is the original tweet.
	I saw, couldn't have seen it.
	It exceeds the limits.
	The tweet can't be authentic.
	It exceeds the limit for Twitter.
	Whether or not the tweet is just as bad as some argue is irrelevant.
	I thought it had to be parody, but then this stuck being blocked for confirmation of authenticity.
	My apologies.
	It's going to be weaponized.
	A good faith error from some people, followed by a correction.
	It's going to be weaponized to now try to silence people who may have legitimate grievances with a procedure that is potentially having its own statistical issues, statistical problems.
	Let's see what we've got here.
	So that's the story.
	I find it very interesting.
	But this is the author.
	Of this article is also the one who did the five-part miniserie podcast on Tiffany Dover is Dead.
	And that podcast, I've got to finish it.
	I'm going through it as fast as I can.
	But I'm not alone.
	Apparently, it's raising more questions than it's seeking to quell.
	And then the question is, is that on purpose?
	Is it on purpose?
	As in to revive the conspiracy so that people can be further mocked for now saying I'm even more convinced than I was before because of this reporting.
	Let's see what we got in the chat here.
	Okay, I'm reading some of the chat.
	I'm obviously not going to read some more of it.
	Now, I had more in the backdrop.
	Let's just see if we can get to the actual Twitter files.
	Going to go home.
	And bring this up when I see it.
	Hold on one second.
	Hold on.
	How do I find the Twitter files, people?
	Twitter files.
	Ah, yes.
	Surrey, Bob.
	Shall we do it?
	This is Russiagate lies.
	I tweeted out to Elon after having read, listen to that podcast, you know, is there a Tiffany Dover?
	Is there a Tiffany Dover?
	Twitter files.
	Okay, let me just read this here.
	Let me see here.
	Oh, hold on.
	I'm actually going to get to some of the super chats and rumble rants.
	We'll get to the Twitter files in a second.
	Let me just bring this up.
	Rampart, 100%.
	He does not vote.
	He answered, but it's sort of asked and answered.
	Yes.
	David Johnson asked Glenn Greenwald if he's going to vote for Trump.
	And I said, I think I heard him say elsewhere, he doesn't vote.
	I wasn't sure about that, but I'm pretty sure about that now.
	He doesn't vote.
	The reason why is that he doesn't want it affecting his partiality when dealing with subject matter, because if you vote for somebody, you might be more inclined to not report negatively on them.
	Mark Peterson says, Viva and Glenn together on YouTube means I've got to put up on a Zoom call, do not disturb on the door, LOL.
	Thank you very much.
	And I think I might have missed a few other super chats in Rumble, in YouTube.
	But let me read some of the Rumble rants.
	Because there have been a few.
	They're going to be way back.
	And then we're going to get into some of the Twitter files and just see where we're at on that.
	Okay, we got Roddy998 says, neither Greenwald, nor Assange, nor Snowden ever pointed the finger at the real culprit of the Mossad or the Israeli deep state.
	Well, I might have contemplated asking.
	That was a $1 rumble rant.
	Crazy Guru, $2 rumble rant, says, thank you for your work, Glenn.
	Thank you.
	Pamela R. Walker, so very brave to stand like that, Glenn and Edward.
	Heroes.
	That was a $2 rumble rant.
	We got a $5 rumble rant from I'm Not Your Buddy Guy says, I truly appreciate you having Glenn on and have a great respect for him.
	However, I am curious, has he investigated ties between Gates Foundation, the WEF, and the CCP?
	You're down with CCP?
	Didn't get that one either, but Viva asked them to bring Carla in Vegas back.
	What happened to her?
	All right, good.
	Do we do the...
	Oh, I still got...
	Let's take that down.
	Okay.
	Matt Taibbi?
	Shall we see what's going on with the Russiagate files in real time, people?
	See, the good thing is being delayed.
	We can actually catch up with it without having to waste too much time.
	Here we go.
	Let's see what we got here.
	Okay.
	Russiagate.
	The fake tale of Russian bots and the release the memo hashtag.
	Can you imagine putting this in perspective now when accusing Trump of election interference?
	Arguing now that elections cannot be questioned, cannot be attacked.
	In number two of whatever we're at now, at a crucial moment in a years-long furor, Democrats denounced a report about flaws in the Trump-Russia investigation, saying it was boosted by Russian bots and trolls.
	Twitter officials were aghast, finding no evidence of Russian influence.
	We saw this in a previous Twitter files where, what's his name?
	You got Vijay Gad and Yoel Roth, where he was saying he's taking flack now and getting bombarded with negative...
	Online commentary.
	When he was asked to find evidence that he didn't find, and then they said, go back and look closer, and he's like, oh yeah, okay, we found it.
	So this was before.
	Twitter officials were aghast finding no evidence of Russian interference.
	We are feeding congressional trolls, not any significant activity connected to Russia, putting the cart before the horse, assuming this is propaganda bots.
	Okay.
	Twitter warned politicians and media the only...
	They not only lacked evidence, but had evidence to counter evidence the accounts weren't Russian and were roundly ignored.
	On January 18th, 2018, Republican Devin Nunes submitted a classified memo to the House Intel Committee detailing abuses by the FBI in obtaining FISA and surveillance authority against Trump-connected figures, including the critical role played in the infamous Steele dossier.
	Oh, do we go back and see this?
	For anybody who doesn't remember that, I mean, nobody can not remember that.
	This is the FBI falsifying documents, FBI attorney falsifying documents, submitting it to the FISA court to obtain a renewal of an unlawfully obtained FISA spy war, secret, everything's happening in darkness, against Carter Page so they can, what do they call it, the one-step, two-step to spy on Donald Trump in 2016.
	This is, remember, when they talk about a peaceful transition of power and how Trump refused to...
	Concede a peaceful transition of power to the Biden administration.
	This is how the Obama administration conceded power and transitioned power to the Trump administration by spying on him.
	By spying on him to sully the election victory in allegations that it was the result of Russian interference to basically saddlebag?
	Not saddlebag.
	Sandbag.
	Sorry.
	Definitely not saddlebag.
	To sandbag.
	Trump's presidency for the first three years in bullcrap accusations of Russian interference.
	He's a Russian agent, a Russian asset.
	He PPs on hookers in Russia, which is probably more confession through projection than anything else.
	The Steele dossier was the fabricated dossier paid for by Clinton.
	Democrat machine paid foreign interest to fabricate this bullcrap dossier which was then leaked to the media and uses the basis for getting unlawful spy warrants.
	So the irony in all of this, the people engaging with, interacting with, colluding with foreign interests to impact the 2016 election, none other than HRC and the DNC.
	The Nunes assertions would virtually all be verified in a report by Justice Department Inspector Michael Horowitz in December 2019.
	Let's just see what this looks like.
	Among other things regarding the allegations attributed to Person 1, the primary subsource of accounts of these documents, if true, was...
	Oh yeah, this is...
	Whatever.
	Okay, we don't need to go too far into that.
	Let's get that out of here.
	Plus, national media in January and early February 2018 denounced the Nunes report in oddly identical language, calling it a joke.
	It's amazing.
	Denouncing the Nunes report as a joke.
	The media.
	The media denouncing Hunter Biden's laptop as Russian disinformation.
	It's amazing.
	The media working with...
	The media working with...
	Whichever powers of government, intelligence working with social media, this is actual fascism.
	This is actual Orwellian level dystopia.
	On January 23rd, 2018, Dianne Feinstein, Congressman Schiff, published an open letter saying the hashtag gained the immediate attention and assistance in social media accounts linked to Russian influence operations.
	What was the hashtag?
	Can we zoom in on this?
	That's not going to be legible.
	This is telling us more of what we already know.
	Feinstein Schiff.
	Oh, and by the way, Schiff, the same one who's on Twitter now accusing others of misinformation, gaslighting, accusing committees of, what do they call them?
	Insurrection protection.
	Well, that was Hakeem Jeffries, but Schiff is echoing the same sentiments.
	Feinstein Schiff said, the Nunes memo distorts classified information.
	But note, they didn't call it incorrect.
	Adam Schiff was the one saying, I don't know if he said verbatim smoking gun.
	I've seen the evidence, hard evidence of Russian collusion.
	And the theory for which he could get away with saying that is because he could lie, knowing that no one could contradict the lie without breaching the confidentiality of the committees to contradict the lie that he was publicly making.
	Adam Schiff, among the worst of the politicians.
	Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal followed suit, publishing a letter saying, we find it reprehensible that Russian agents have so eagerly manipulated innocent Americans.
	Do you know what that means?
	They have manipulated innocent Americans through, I don't know, the steel guy, British.
	I think they had a Russian connection in there as well, through the media.
	Oh, it's reprehensible that...
	Other people are doing exactly what...
	that we're accusing others of doing exactly what we're doing.
	Reprehensible.
	Feinstein, Schiff, and Blumenthal and media members all pointed out to the same source.
	The Hamilton 68 dashboard created by the FBI counterintelligence official Clint Watts under the auspices of the Allegiance for Securing Democracy.
	The dashboard which featured a crude picture of Vladimir Putin deviously blowing evil red Twitter birds into the atmosphere.
	Okay, sorry, I thought they meant something else.
	Was vague on how it reached its conclusions.
	Inside Twitter, executives panned Watts, Hamilton 68, and the Alliance for Securing Democracy.
	Two key complaints.
	Hamilton 68 seemed to be everyone's only source, and no one was checking with Twitter.
	I encourage you to be skeptical of Hammond 68's take on this, which, as far as I can tell, is the only source for these stories, said global policy communicator Emily Horn.
	She added, it's a comms play for ASD, communications play for ASD.
	I'm just going to scroll down to see how far down it goes.
	Okay, it doesn't go that far.
	It goes to 31, or is that where it ends?
	Yeah, okay.
	Let's go back up to where we were.
	Oh, here we go.
	I just saw Yoel Roth's name come back up.
	Let me see what's going on in the chat here.
	It's totalitarianism, not communism, says.
	Ain't woke, don't fix.
	Okay, let's get back to here.
	And let's get back to here.
	I encourage you to be skeptical.
	Okay, fine.
	All the swirl is based on Hamilton.
	What was the deal with this?
	Okay, Feinstein, Schiff, and Blumenthal.
	Okay, this is the wrap-up smear, but this is the laundering of disinformation.
	My goodness.
	I hope it gets to the point in this that we find out that Schiff and Blumenthal and Feinstein knows that this source is...
	They make the disinformation so they can reference the disinformation, so they can publish the disinformation, so they can act on the disinformation.
	That is the disinformation wrap-up smear.
	Roth couldn't find any Russian connection to hashtag release the memo at all.
	I just reviewed the accounts that posted the first 50 tweets with release the memo.
	None of them show any signs of affiliation to Russia.
	When does UL Roth change his tune?
	We investigated, found engagement was, I guess that means was, as overwhelmingly organic and driven by VIT's very important tweeters.
	Oh, VIT.
	That's nice.
	Including Wikileaks and Congressman Steve King.
	For a second, I thought Stephen King at one point actually had a useful Twitter feed.
	Okay, Congressman Steve King.
	As for DiFi, Dianne Feinstein agreed it would be helpful to know how Hamilton 68 goes.
	The process by which they decide an account is Russian.
	But only after Feinstein published her letter about Russian influence.
	Let's see what Feinstein's letter says here.
	So, Carlos Mange, do we know who this is?
	Okay, whatever.
	I don't know what that is.
	When Twitter spoke to Blumenthal's staffer, they tried to wave him off because we don't believe these are bots.
	When Twitter spoke to Blumenthal's staffer...
	They tried to wave him off because we don't believe these are bots.
	Okay.
	Added another.
	It might be worth nudging Blumenthal's staffer that it could be in the boss's best interest not to go out there because it could come back to make him look silly.
	Don't worry, they don't worry about that.
	One Twitter exec even tried to negotiate implying an undisclosed future PR concession if Blumenthal would lay off this.
	It seems like there are other wins we could offer him.
	Blumenthal published the letter anyway.
	Execs eventually grew frustrated over what they saw as circular process presented with claims of Russian activity, even when denied, led to more claims.
	That's the disinformation laundering.
	Publish it, refer to it, recycle it, and make it truth.
	It's the way Nancy Pelosi talks about the wrap-up smear.
	Secret source leaks it to the media.
	Publishes it.
	You get to reference the secret source even though you're the one that leaked it.
	Although in fairness to Nancy Pelosi, just so that no one accuses it of being taken out of context, she was describing what she was accusing Republicans of doing while describing what has been done in politics forever.
	They say the best fundraising ticket is to throw a brick through your own window and claim the other party did it.
	They expressed this explicitly to Blumenthal's camp, saying Twitter spent a lot of resources on this request.
	Oh, they spent resources on this request.
	Okay.
	And the reward from Blumenthal shouldn't be round after round of requests.
	We can do a user notice each time this happens.
	Eventually, Twitter staff realized Blumenthal isn't looking for real and nuanced solutions, but just wants to get credit for pushing us further.
	Senior executives talked about feeding congressional trolls and compared their situation to the children's book, If You Give a Mouse a Cookie.
	I have that book.
	In the story, if you give a mouse a cookie, he'll want more and more and more.
	At the end of which, he just wants one more cookie.
	I didn't even realize that there was a moral for that story.
	I thought it was just an absurd tale.
	The metaphor...
	For the endless Russia request was so perfect, one exec wrote, I'm legit embarrassed I didn't think of that.
	Let's see this here.
	Please read in response.
	So does it start from the bottom?
	Seems like a recipe for conspiracy theorists release the Twitter attachment.
	Could we do a simple letter and tell them any explanation we don't want public orally?
	Nice as someone who has read, if you give a mouse a cookie, oh, they really referenced it.
	I'm legit embarrassed I didn't think of that.
	I like that approach.
	I think I might be a little confused as to what's going on here.
	Despite universal internal conviction that there was no Russians in the story, Twitter went on to follow a slavish pattern of not challenging Russia claims on the record.
	Outside counsel from DC-connected firms like Debevoise and Plimpton advised Twitter to use language like, with respect to particular hashtags, we take seriously any activity that may represent an abuse on our platform.
	Tara Bull, everyone involved with the Russiagate lies should be prosecuted.
	Well, that's the latest of the Twitter.
	But the thing is this, for those of us who lived through it in real time, there's nothing new about it.
	There's nothing new about it.
	And for those of us who didn't live through it in real time, I think this is too much for them to...
	Digest.
	This is like being red-pilled all at once and not over time.
	It has to happen over time.
	You have to go step by step.
	You can't just go from overweight to running record-level marathons.
	You have to lose the weight.
	You have to build up the muscle.
	You have to prepare yourself for the awakening that Russiagate is but one example.
	Russiagate.
	Huntergate.
	And now from what we've just learned with...
	With Glenn Greenwald, I mean, geez Louise.
	Evergate.
	Ah.
	Okay, well, that's interesting.
	Nothing new learned there.
	How long have we been going for?
	Hold on one second.
	Geez Louise, an hour and a half.
	Okay, there was something else that I wanted to look at.
	There was something else that I wanted to look at.
	Let me find the article, and while I do that, let me see what's going on in the vivabarneslaw.locals.com chat.
	Okay, let's not let the top end of big tech off the hook here.
	Fellow travelers and all, a special prosecutor for the Biden documents has been named per the DOJ.
	That's from Lamp Post Pundit.
	Oh, that was actually the story.
	So hold on.
	Let me just pull that one up right now.
	Oh, let's see.
	Yes, people, you'll see.
	I go to Fox News and read it with...
	Oh, boy.
	Oh, let's see this.
	See, I don't know enough about American politics.
	I'm sure that the person that they're going to appoint as special counsel...
	Let's see if this is a political hack, a deep swamp creature, as we say.
	So for those of you who don't know, A couple of days ago.
	Hold on a second.
	I don't want to hear that.
	A couple of days ago, some classified documents were found.
	Oh, no.
	No, no.
	That's not what we want to do.
	Stop.
	Remove.
	Stop sharing.
	I'm sharing myself.
	Stop sharing.
	Some classified documents were found in, apparently, Biden's lawyer's office.
	From Biden's time as VP.
	In office.
	And, you know, the mental gymnastics had begun.
	People were saying, well, it's not an accident.
	It's not illegal to accidentally take classified documents, government records, and not give them back.
	It's illegal to do it intentionally.
	So Biden accidentally took these or hid these or had these somewhere.
	And then he immediately cooperated and gave them back.
	So totally different from Trump, who took them seemingly under color of law, notified the government that he had them, was negotiating the release, and then was raided.
	Totally different.
	Trump, who happens to be president and has the authority to declassify, and Biden, who was vice president, and unless I'm mistaken, people, correct me in the chat, does not have the power to declassify.
	That's correct, right?
	I think there's a distinction between...
	Biden being VP and having had taken these classified documents and Trump being the president.
	I think they have different legal protections, legal remedies, legal privileges, legal executive privileges.
	I'm actually just waiting for the chat to confirm if that's the case or not.
	Come on, chat.
	Refresh.
	Refresh, damn you!
	JetPen, did I miss Glenn Greenwald?
	Yeah, you missed Glenn Greenwald.
	It was from...
	10 minutes to 60 minutes, give or take.
	Yes, VPs don't have the authority.
	DVR down mark.
	Good.
	Thank you.
	So let's just read this now.
	So the mental gymnastics had begun.
	Oh, it was an accident.
	It's my first day.
	I wish I knew how to say that in Spanish like Homer Simpson when he's on the front of the submarine.
	It's my first day.
	It was an accident.
	I'm VP.
	I didn't know that you can't take classified documents and forget about them for years.
	Now they found him in a second spot.
	Let's just see the mental gymnastics.
	Oh, it's not as bad because he's cooperating.
	It's not as bad because he only had 12 compared to Trump's whatever.
	The only legit argument to all of this is that there probably is a great deal of overclassification of these documents in the first place.
	Now that we know that embarrassing memos can be justified, classified, you know, you can classify something that might embarrass intelligence or embarrass the government.
	So that's the better argument.
	But nonetheless, Classification means something, and unless it's leaked for the purpose of it, you presume that executive officials or government officials, federal officials, are going to abide by that.
	Pamela R. Walker, $2 rumble rant, says, third batch of classified found in Biden possession.
	Correct, he does not have the power to...
	Oh, he does not have the declassifiability.
	Awesome, thank you.
	So let me just get back to this article.
	White House lawyer found another stash of classified documents at Biden's home in Delaware.
	Something tells me that this might be the deep state saying we've had enough of Biden and let's go find some documents.
	Oh, what are the chances?
	We've gotten what we need out of this figurehead and he's become too much of a political liability.
	Let's go find some classified documents.
	I'm not saying that's the case.
	I'm just saying if I were thinking, making predictions that might make me look like I was ahead of the curve if they ever come true.
	Biden's utility as the lame duck in real time president has served its purpose.
	He's become too much of a liability.
	Maybe the deep state knows something is coming up with Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, Ukraine, Burisma.
	Maybe they know something there and they don't want that to come up.
	So let's get him out now on another more innocuous reason.
	Who knows?
	I'm just thinking out loud.
	Seriously, these are not accusations.
	These are just if we're going to write, if we're writing a novel.
	If we're making the prediction that you look smart for having made in the future, this would be one way to preemptively avoid slash cover-up what they might know is coming up the pipe, pike, whatever it is, of much worse, much more damning information for the US government.
	And so this might be a good pretext.
	We'll see.
	We'll see where it goes.
	But flip side, nothing might come of this because political double standards are what they are.
	The media will find a way to distinguish it.
	Talking blue check marks are going to say, oh, let's not jump to any conclusions.
	This is Biden.
	Oh, what's that, Trump?
	What did he have?
	Nuclear codes?
	Okay, he didn't have nuclear codes, but he had classified documents.
	Okay, he didn't have classified documents.
	He had some folders as well.
	He had classified documents.
	Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed a special counsel to investigate President Biden's handling...
	Can you imagine?
	I mean, Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State, appoint...
	Inspector handling of classified information, documents.
	Joe Biden.
	Trump.
	I mean, Trump in all of this is the only one who, as president, had the right to do this.
	Garland tapped Robert Herr.
	Who knows who this person is?
	Former United States attorney to handle the investigation.
	We're going to Google this up in a second.
	The Justice Department escalated to a special counsel investigation from a mere review.
	After a second stash of documents was found inside the garage of Biden's Wilmington, Delaware home.
	How does this happen?
	Hey, Joe, we're just going to go through your garage today.
	What's that in that box right over there, sir?
	What is that?
	It says classified on the box.
	How does this happen?
	I mean, this is like, it's like a comedy.
	Oh, I just saw a rumble rant here.
	XSSF.
	D-L-T, D-I-T, says, let's say if they impeach and remove Biden, Harris becomes POTUS, who becomes VP?
	Couldn't that affect legislation in the Senate?
	Hmm.
	We'll have to look into that a little later.
	But we're going to go look up the lawyer just to see what the history is.
	Okay.
	Earlier today, I signed an order appointing Robert Hur, a special counsel for the matter I have just described.
	Garland said, after locating...
	The document authorizes him to investigate whether any person or entity violated the law in connection with this matter.
	The special counsel will not be subject to the day-to-day supervision of any official of the department, but he must comply with regulations, procedures, and policies.
	So they're not going to go raid Joe Biden's home?
	Or are they?
	Hur worked in the DOJ's criminal division investigating counterterrorism, corporate fraud, and appellate matters, Garland said.
	He served as...
	I just had a funny joke.
	What are her's pronouns?
	Okay, sorry.
	Had to.
	Attorney for the district, Maryland, until he left in the DHA.
	Confident that her will carry out his responsibilities in an even-handed and urgent manner in accordance with the highest...
	Look at that.
	A face you know you can trust.
	The White House Counsel's Office searched Biden's...
	And this also, now if I'm thinking again out loud as a thinking-ahead-of-the-curve conspiratorial...
	Maybe they're going in there now just to make sure that it's not discovered what classified documents Biden had there.
	Oh, let's just put these under here.
	Oh, they weren't so bad what they had, so no harm, no foul.
	And then leave to the imagination what they might have shredded or set aside so that the public doesn't know those documents even existed in the first place.
	There's so many ways this can go.
	The White House, they were searching his two residences in Rehoboth.
	Rehoboth, I don't know what that is, and Wilmington this week after news of first documents broke.
	White House lawyers say they immediately contact the DOJ when they discover the documents inside his Wilmington garage.
	There has been no indication that the documents contain, what they contain, or whether Biden or anyone else read them after leaving office as vice president.
	Lawyers discover them among personal and political papers, a small number of additional Obama-Biden administration records with classified markings.
	All but one of these documents were found in storage space in the president's residence garage.
	The White House says no documents were found at the Biden residence.
	Biden's administration has also arranged to deliver the documents to the DOJ.
	Wilmington documents are the second stash of Obama-era classified documents to be uncovered.
	The first was...
	This is fascinating.
	I actually want to know what they were.
	Hopefully we'll find out.
	The discovery echoes revelations last year from the former President Donald Trump of a trove of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago home after leaving office.
	The FBI ultimately raided the residents to recover some 300 documents.
	Yeah, it echoes revelations, but it's not identical to revelations because Trump is president.
	And Joe Biden wasn't.
	And I want to know what these documents were.
	Oh, Rob A says, yes, locals chat dead.
	Didn't think Viva knows.
	Rob A., one of our community members, hold on.
	Let me refresh.
	I did not know.
	I did not end it, but I'll stop the chat now because it does look indeed dead.
	Okay, we've stopped the live chat.
	Anybody watching?
	If you want some good, you know, exclusive community stuff, vivabarneslaw.locals.com is the place to be.
	You can be a non-financially supporting, one of 100,000 non-financially supporting members.
	Or you can choose to support.
	Seven bucks a month, 70 bucks a year.
	And you get some fantastic exclusive content.
	It's a great community.
	All right, so there's that.
	We'll see where it goes.
	Locals chat have been having some issues.
	Okay.
	Protected class, says Nexus 1775.
	Okay, that was the other story.
	Okay, so I had that on my list.
	Ow!
	What did I just do to my foot?
	It's such rough skin on my heel, I actually scratched my own foot.
	There was one other story that I think we should cover.
	Oh, this is what I wanted to start the episode with.
	I made a remix.
	I made a remix, people.
	I don't always meme.
	But every now and again when I do, it's good.
	Okay, you ready for this?
	Just imagine.
	Just imagine what world we live in.
	Our fellow Americans.
	Right now the COVID-19 vaccines are available to millions of Americans.
	It's an older video, obviously.
	Look, they have to look serious.
	Look at Bill Clinton.
	He's got...
	Raise your eyebrows, Bill.
	Look sympathetic as you're telling people.
	This.
	Do it.
	Our fellow Americans.
	By the way, a man in the middle who 20 years ago many regarded as a war criminal.
	Now he's a savior.
	Our fellow Americans.
	Right now the COVID-19 vaccines are available to millions of Americans.
	And soon they will be available to everyone.
	Yet despite the fact that we've now essentially clinically tested.
	The vaccine on billions of people worldwide.
	These vaccines will protect you and those you love from this dangerous and deadly disease.
	They could save your life.
	So we urge you to get vaccinated when it's available to you.
	That's the first step to ending the pandemic and moving our country forward.
	And yet, despite the fact that we've now...
	Have to play it again.
	...essentially clinically tested the vaccine on billions of people worldwide.
	It's up to you.
	And this is from Canada.
	This one is from Canada during the election.
	We're all in this together.
	Our fellow Americans.
	Hold on, hold on.
	So for those who don't know, this was from our election season when all of these nincompoops were running for office, including myself in my writing.
	Justin Trudeau on the left, Aaron O'Toole next to him.
	I forget the guy's name from Parti Québécois, or is it the Bloc Québécois?
	It's the Bloc Québécois in the middle.
	Jagmeet Singh from the NDP, and I forget the Green Party woman on the right.
	The guy in the middle represents a separatist movement, which I say that without judgment.
	The Bloc Québécois is a federal party dedicated to Quebec separating from the Federation.
	It's ironic, but I have no problem with that political aspiration, even if I don't entirely share it.
	I'll just give him credit.
	He's the only...
	Clapping seal, not clapping.
	This guy is embarrassed to be there.
	Doesn't move his hands.
	We're all in this together.
	Doesn't say the words.
	We're all in this together.
	My only question is, what do they have on this guy that they coerced him to be there in the first place?
	We're all in this together.
	In my original montage of that, we're all in this together.
	I showed article after article, clip after clip of every one of those pathological...
	Liars who broke the rules that they were imposing on us while telling us we're all in this together.
	GentryD48, $10 rumble rant says, WEF stooges.
	I agree.
	In fact, I cannot disagree.
	Jagmeet Singh has a wonderful profile on the WEF website.
	Justin Trudeau, a wonderful profile.
	He's been penetrated by the Kalas Schwab.
	Pamela Orwako says, the special counselor appointed is a Christopher Wray buddy.
	They all have to be buddies, though.
	Pamela Orwako, that's a $2 rumble rant, thank you.
	They're all...
	Please stop the eye torture, says DVR Dalmar.
	They all know each other.
	It's a big, fat, incestuous party.
	You're not going to get an outsider on the inside.
	The only question is, do they have a history like Bill Barr or Jim Baker type history?
	And that was a $10 rumble rant from Gentry48.
	A $5 rumble rant from MNL Hayes.
	Biden responded to the press corp, Peter Doocy's question, about the second stash of documents by saying the garage was locked.
	Good grief.
	Good flippin' grief is right.
	That was a $5 rumble rant, MNL Hayes.
	Crash Bandit, $5 Romance, is treating Biden just like they did to Cuomo before they investigated his coup policy.
	I'm going to be There's an analogy in there, people.
	Oh, look at that dog.
	Pudge, that little fat piglet, is lying on her back, rubbing her back.
	She woke me up twice again last night.
	I had to feed her at 1.15 in the morning and 5.20 in the morning.
	I don't know if she's getting fatter.
	I don't know if she's got a worm in her, a tapeworm that is causing her to eat incessantly.
	Sorry, oh God, I hear that again.
	What am I supposed to function like?
	I'm getting woken up above and beyond my own pee habits in the middle of the night.
	I am now having dreams of hearing her whining downstairs that are waking me up before she whines.
	Okay, there was more.
	There was more.
	Oh, well, here, let's just...
	Let's get the mental gymnastics while we're still on the topic of the classified documents here.
	Let's see this here.
	This is it.
	The office where the first batch for aides to President Biden have apparently discovered another set of classified documents, this time in a different location than the office where the first batch was discovered, according to a person familiar with the matter.
	I want to bring in now the team breaking this story.
	NBC News White House correspondent Carol Lee, Justice and Intelligence.
	What do we know?
	Aides to President Biden have been conducting an exhaustive search, we are told, of other locations to make sure they've gathered up all the classified documents.
	Can you imagine?
	Don't worry, people.
	They're being responsible.
	They're conducting an exhaustive search to try to see where classified information might just be willy-nilly hanging around.
	What a bunch of incompetent buffoons.
	And I'm not going to say, but Trump is better.
	But Trump is a little bit better because at the very least...
	It was kept somewhere proper where they didn't have to go fishing.
	He knew where it was.
	It was in a secure location, only to be debated as to whether or not it was legally there.
	These bumbling idiots.
	We're responsible.
	We're seeing how badly we screwed up.
	We're just going to go everywhere.
	Are you going to go to Hunter Biden's computer guide?
	See if any classified documents are there?
	Oh my gosh.
	It went to the wrong place because if it happened once, it could happen again.
	And what were these documents-Did you just hear that?
	To make sure they've gathered up all the classified documents that went to the wrong place Is he a journalist or is he a Biden spokesperson?
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	Did you just predicate all of this on they went to the wrong place?
	How about if they actually went to the very right place?
	How about if they were taken out of the right place to put somewhere else?
	Oh, this is the media.
	This is the media that is supposed to be the government's watchdog acting as the government's lapdog.
	Just bake in the premise it was a mistake and we're sorry.
	...locations to make sure they've gathered up all the classified documents that went to the wrong place because if it happened once, it could happen again.
	And what we're told is that...
	They have found at least one additional batch of classified documents.
	Now, that's basically all we know.
	We don't know the extent, the nature of the classification on these documents.
	We don't know exactly when they were found.
	And again, we don't know whether this was anything more than inadvertent error by whoever was packing the documents as they left the Biden White House.
	But it's significant because it shows that the scope of this Maybe more broad than we first realized.
	We were initially talking about a set of less than a dozen documents in one location at the Penn-Biden Center.
	Now it appears there are more classified documents.
	I'm just going to make sure this guy went astray after Joe Biden left the Obama administration.
	What was his name?
	What was this guy's name?
	Kara Lee, our justice and intelligence correspondent.
	Okay, he's a correspondent.
	He's a correspondent conducting himself like a White House spokesperson.
	By the way...
	Press Secretary Jean-Pierre, that's how you do it.
	That guy's a better press secretary for Joe Biden than the press secretary for Joe Biden.
	Oh, they're checking to see if things went to the wrong location because if it happened once, it can happen again.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	Is that how you investigate potential crimes?
	Incredible, says Super Axiom.
	That's a correspondent doing better White House PR than the press secretary herself.
	Okay.
	That was one of the...
	Sorry, stop that.
	I don't want to hear that anymore.
	How do I go back here like this?
	Okay.
	And I think that might be it for the stories.
	Yeah, I think yesterday...
	Oh no, I want to end on this one.
	Because A, I want to draw some attention to what's going on in Canada.
	B, I want to draw some good attention to Rebel News, who they are where I would like to be right now.
	I would have loved to have gone and documented the protest that is currently going on in Ontario for the benefit of Jordan Peterson.
	Let's see this here.
	Let's see this here.
	Let me bring it up.
	Okay, it's right over here.
	Happening now, this is from yesterday, however.
	I think January 12th.
	Yeah, it's from yesterday.
	Let's just open this up and we're going to end with this.
	We're going to end actually with a video to play us out.
	But this is...
	Jordan Peterson.
	His license is under attack by the Order of Psychologists.
	This is Canada.
	I want to make jokes, but, you know, how long until Trudeau freezes their bank accounts?
	I mean, can't make the joke because the obvious reply is going to be, well, they're not freezing bank accounts because this is a...
	This is a peaceful protest.
	This is a tolerated protest.
	It's not big enough to actually cause disruption, and therefore, you know, they won't suffer the same consequences that the other ones did.
	But that's what's going on in Canada.
	Jordan Peterson, for those of you who don't know, is being investigated by the order of psychologists and being demanded that he take...
	A re-education program of online etiquette, because some of his tweets might have offended people.
	All right, before we play it out, and I'm going to head on with the day and get some exercise, play with the kids, and squeeze Pudge and walk Winston.
	Denise Ann 2 says, Dave, is Pudge on heartworm prevention?
	Several parasites could be responsible for increasing appetite that heartworm prevention would take care of.
	Also, Florida has mosquitoes year-round, and they could have heartworm.
	I'm going to look into that.
	I'm fairly certain she's had heartworm pills.
	The other thing is she's paralyzed.
	It's not like we walk that far, but I guess there are mosquitoes.
	It's not like she's not rolling in the grass or running through meadows.
	Pissed Off Vets says they are trying to backtrack due to the coverage of the Trump files.
	$5 rum rant.
	No question about that.
	All right, people.
	I could do this all day, but we've got to have some content for tomorrow.
	Tomorrow, by the way, I'll be doing a live interview with Roger Stone.
	So I've got to go start doing some more homework now in person with Roger Stone.
	And I'm told I should probably wear something nicer than a T-shirt, which I probably will.
	We'll see.
	Oh yeah, and then, so Humperdu says, I think Peterson said he'd do the retraining if it was videoed.
	That'd be funny.
	Winston, proof of life?
	Oh!
	Oh, here we go.
	Boom, shakalaka.
	What do you say, Winston?
	He's showing...
	Oh, there you go.
	Look at that.
	I love this dog.
	You got the little chuzzies in his eye?
	Okay, get that out of there.
	Oh, gross.
	Okay.
	See you soon.
	Oh, okay.
	Let's see.
	What are we going to play us out with?
	I posted something good on Locals.
	Let me see if I can...
	Let's see if I do this.
	Let me see if I can do this.
	Okay.
	Here we go.
	I think I can do this.
	This, for anyone who follows us on Locals, you would have seen it already.
	How do I?
	Not sure I can do it.
	I can't figure out how to share screen here.
	This?
	This?
	Bear with me, people.
	Bear with me.
	Let me see what I can do.
	Okay, like this, like this.
	I can't do it.
	Son of a gun.
	All right, you know what I'm going to do?
	I'm going to play the Viva Family video from over the weekend.
	Everybody, I have a second channel.
	It's called Viva Family.
	And we went to the Aventura Mall.
	It's a nine-minute video, so don't feel compelled to watch the entire thing.
	It's the lighter side of life.
	It's not all nasty politics and hypocritical, weaponized judicial systems.
	Sometimes it's just $10 ice cream at a mall.
	We had a good day there.
	Apparently, it's the largest mall in Florida.
	Okay, so I'm going to stop screen.
	I'm going to do this.
	I'm going to bring it back up.
	Go to Chrome tab.
	Discovering the world's biggest mall.
	Everybody, thank you all for being here.
	Thank you for spending the afternoon with me.
	I hope that interview with Glenn was great.
	I feel as though it was great, but I have to go back, rewatch, torture myself, because that's what neuroses is about.
	I hope you enjoyed it.
	Tomorrow, Roger Stone, live, in person.
	Should be great.
	Do we have a white pill?
	I think Glenn is the white pill.
	That's a man who's doing what journalists should do.
	And may he be a good influence on others who are not doing what journalists should do.
	That's the white pill.
	The other white pill is keep up the good fight.
	Righteous indignation.
	Don't give in.
	Don't...
	Have blind faith in any plan.
	God helps those who help themselves.
	Lord loves to work in men.
	Work, fight, raise awareness in a respectable manner that will not give your ideological adversaries the fodder they need to justify shutting you up, silencing you, deplatforming you, demonizing you.
	So fight in a way that makes your parents, your children, and your pets proud and you can do no wrong.
	And with that said, people, enjoy the video.
	Apparently this is the world's biggest slide.
	It's big, it's big, okay.
	Let's go do it.
	A lot of steps.
	I'm gonna count the steps.
	There you go.
	Go, go, go.
	We almost didn't get in because one of the kids was almost not the proper height until he tiptoed.
	Booyah!
	Guys, you need your carpets.
	We're at the top, quite a few steps, and they give you these carpets that you sit down and put on your feet.
	There she is.
	That's mommy.
	Yeah, they're coming.
	Yeah, go.
	There you go.
	There you go.
	Get it.
	Alright, not bad.
	Not bad at all.
	Okay, we can do this.
	That was pretty good.
	Okay, we're doing it again.
	Doing it again?
	Here we go.
	Ah!
	Oh, oh, oh!
	Oh my God!
	Oh!
	See?
	Mommy!
	Mommy!
	It's never a good sign when the vultures are circling.
	Are they gonna eat us?
	They're looking.
	Anybody who's smart is going to take a screen grab right now and see the menu at MoTeC.
	Apparently, this is the largest mall in Florida.
	Aventura Mall, and we didn't know that, so this is turning into a video now.
	This looks like good food.
	This looks like good food.
	Oh, yes.
	Yeah, this is how you make a healthy salad and also healthy all of a sudden.
	No, no, no, we don't need both.
	We don't need both.
	We need both.
	We definitely want both.
	Try to put it in places where it doesn't already have dressing.
	And this is the schnitzel.
	Taste the schnitzel.
	Taste the schnitzel.
	That's good schnitzel.
	That's terrific schnitzel.
	This is like dipping sauce, crunchy coleslaw, salmon.
	Turned into a food review too.
	Okay, so the schnitzel is delicious.
	People don't appreciate schnitzel means pounded.
	Breaded, and whatever.
	This has got sesame seeds in the schnitzel, which makes it unique.
	And I'm gonna take a little bit of the chunky cabbage.
	And look at the hummus, mom.
	Look at the hummus.
	I'm gonna take a little hummus.
	No!
	You ruined it!
	I thought I was supposed to eat it.
	Lemon.
	You're not supposed to eat it?
	Why would you eat it?
	for decorations!
	Cut the lid.
	How was your meal, Lila?
	Delicious!
	Alright, your mission?
	Should you choose to accept it?
	And you have no choice.
	Go get a video of the sign.
	What side?
	What side?
	Let's try not to get arrested.
	I did it!
	I thought I was going to get arrested again.
	Nice.
	Yeah, there's boobies here.
	Oh, give me the quarter.
	We're going to make somebody's day.
	We're going to make somebody's day by putting it right here.
	Just like that.
	And someone's going to find it.
	There you go.
	The Viva family.
	We're making coffee as a family affair.
	Don't spill it.
	I think I just made a subscriber with the waiter.
	Picked up one.
	And I think we also tried to introduce him to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	no one there but you Let's go inside and check out the mall.
	I may have found a place to get Barnes a gift.
	I feel like cigars in a mall is not the place to get cigars.
	That's because you're big on Monte Cristo.
	I got a gift to Barnes.
	But I think he's probably going to see the video before he gets the package and the mail.
	Let's get some here.
	What?
	This place is actually kind of amazing and apparently this turns into a farmers market on the weekend.
	What day is it today?
	Hey, it is the weekend today.
	It's the weekend.
	Why isn't there a farmer's market?
	This is a farmer's market.
	Oh, it's like a different type of farmer's market.
	It's a farmer's market where you can buy guacamole and cigars, I guess.
	$12 cotton candy.
	I hate shopping centers.
	I hate them.
	I was just thinking, this is a weird place for us to end up with shopping centers.
	Okay, interesting.
	All right, interesting.
	and interesting.
	You want to get a Tesla?
	Yeah.
	There you go.
	You have to put that back, though.
	It's heavy.
	It's heavy.
	Those are birds.
	I think they're real birds.
	Alright, that's the slide.
	And we're looking...
	Oh, the love sign is right there.
	We're gonna go to the love sign, then we're gonna go to the balcony.
	Oh, yeah.
	they're off.
	Oh, he's in the grass.
	We might need a family picture in there.
	It does not say no climbing.
	It specifically does not say no climbing.
	Cornhole.
	There's Cornholio.
	No trip to the Aventura Mall is complete without a game of Cornhole Ace.
	Cornhole Ace.
	Who's the ace of the Cornhole?
	I am the ace of the Cornhole.
	Did you just get it?
	I didn't see it.
	When you hand someone your logo sticker, you put your brand out into the world.
	Because of the cornhole.
	Wow.
	I got a video.
	Mom.
	Okay, let's go.
	I took a picture too.
	We gotta go home.
	Mom, mommy.
	All right, Angie's, move your face.
	See, I get very apprehensive when there are steps to ordering ice cream.
	One small, one topping, go.
	That's $1.25 for four mini marshmallows, just so you understand that.
	She doesn't understand that.
	Yeah, my...
	Yeah.
	That ice cream was $8, and that bubble tea, $9.
	Plus tax, plus tip.
	How's the ice cream?
	I don't always get ice cream, but what I do.
	Feed me, woman.
	Hashtag cancer.
	That's very passionate.
	Being good passionate.
	And food.
	And food.
	Mwah!
	Don't drink it all so fast.
	Enjoy it.
	That's the best bubble tea I've ever tasted in my life.
	All right, everyone's happy?
	Let's go home.
	They have dogs that have undoubtedly peed and pooed on the carpet.
	There's no carpet on the floor.
	What the heck am I talking about?
	Okay, let's go home.
	I hate shopping centers.
	I still hate shopping centers.
	Alright, so from a technical perspective, this is absolute.
	This is cotton candy.
	This is cotton candy.
	And like, the thing is, you're supposed to devour Eeyore's face or Yoda.
	It's amazing.
	$15, I think.
	Let me just make sure.
	Please, hold on, hold on.
	Oh my god.
	Alright, alright.
	Ooh, coconuts.
	Yeah.
	I finally got my florida coconut.
	You guys want to taste?
	Yeah.
	I like to take one of these water.
	Yeah.
	Tastes like coconut water.
	Want to taste?
	Watching you eat it is the most important part.
	How much was this?
	Ten dollars.
	It's good for you.

▲