Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 21, 2024 - Viva & Barnes

01:38:21

GET OUT OF NEW YORK! Alexander Smirnov Indictment! Julian Assange AND MORE! Viva Frei Live

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	An attack on one is an attack on all.
	That's what NATO's Article 5 says.
	It's a simple but powerful concept, and it embodies why one of America's greatest sources of strength is our alliances.
	They're not only important to us, they're important to the rest of the world.
	In the entire history of NATO, Article 5 has only been invoked once to stand with the United States of America after we were attacked on 9 /11.
	The whole world knows if any adversary were to attack us, Our NATO allies would have our back.
	And they know we would have their backs as well.
	And that's why what the former president said is so dangerous.
	He said he would encourage Russia to, and I quote, do whatever the hell they want, end of quote.
	A statement heard around the world that does nothing but encourage bad behavior.
	After Putin's most fierce opposition leader, Alexei Navalny, died in a Russian prison last week, the former president, Trump, and other Republicans refused to hold Putin accountable for his death.
	Instead, Trump said Navalny's death made him realize how bad America is.
	He said, and I quote, we are a nation in decline, a failing nation, end of quote.
	Why does Trump always blame America?
	Putin is responsible for Navalny's death.
	Why can't Trump just say that?
	Putin's responsible.
	We have to stand up to Putin and pass the national bipartisan bill, the national security bill, supporting Ukraine as they defend themselves against Putin's vicious onslaught.
	The Senate's already acted.
	It's time for the House to act now because the votes are there.
	The Speaker needs to call a vote and abide by the will of the House.
	A clear majority supports what the Senate supports.
	So we can stand with Ukraine and send them the supplies they need to defend themselves.
	And prove to the world once more America can be relied on.
	We stand strong with our allies.
	We have to remember who we are.
	We're the United States of America.
	We keep our commitments.
	We never walk away from our friends.
	And we sure as hell don't bow down to Vladimir Putin.
	Oh, first of all, bingo, bango, whoever said lots of edits, rock.
	Well done.
	Let me just bring this back up for one second.
	This is, I mean, like, I'll keep talking about it because I was fortunate enough to have a grandmother that lived to, I was going to say 301, 103 years old.
	Towards the end of our day, she was totally senile.
	This is the look that she had in her eyes.
	Look at that.
	Look at that.
	Glazed.
	Glazed.
	Reading.
	I mean, he's doing his best to read off a teleprompter.
	He looks like Will Ferrell.
	When Will Ferrell, you know, is playing a character of a demented old man.
	That's what NATO's Article 5 says.
	It's a simple but powerful concept.
	Notice that there is not...
	I mean, I think there might be one segment of this video that's longer than six seconds but shorter than ten seconds until an edit.
	You know why?
	I want to see the outtakes.
	And embodied by one of America's greatest sources of strength is our alliances.
	They're not only important to us, they're important to the rest of the world.
	In the entire history of NATO, Article 5 has only been involved once.
	To stand with the United States of America.
	Some of these might just be edits between two cameras.
	But a great many of them, I think we've vomited enough, a great many of them are edits because, look, dude, I know what I do when I get in my car and I make sentences and sometimes I need to splice one sentence where I started it off well and splice it with a sentence where I ended it well.
	I also know when there's not one damn sentence that was started and ended in one breath with this demented old man who can't string together a coherent sentence for the life of him.
	And I'm telling you this, I didn't start off with this belief.
	For the propaganda that the West is now waging subsequent to the death of Navalny, I now genuinely believe, suspect, or think it's not entirely implausible at all.
	I won't say Biden, because the dude can't do anything, but the Biden administration, the deep state CIA intelligence had Navalny killed.
	He was a CIA asset.
	These things are not totally outlandish, but to see the degree to which it's being milked and bilked.
	Send another $60 billion.
	We have to now.
	He just killed Navalny.
	We have a bipartisan in the Senate deal to send more money.
	You have to.
	They just killed Navalny.
	Trump bad.
	Why won't Trump criticize Putin for having killed Navalny?
	The amazing thing is the pure confession through projection in all of this.
	And Nancy Pelosi said it the other day, and I think I talked about it yesterday.
	Why won't he criticize Putin?
	Putin must have something on him.
	Biden's doing the same thing.
	Why won't they criticize Putin?
	Hey, why won't anybody criticize Zelensky?
	Oh, of course you can't because he's, you know, Jesus reincarnated in the body of a cokehead.
	Jewish man.
	Although there's some irony right there, actually.
	You know, Jesus.
	I don't want to get into theological arguments.
	Yeah, no, no.
	Can't criticize Zelensky.
	Why?
	I guarantee you he's got dirt on Biden easily.
	So we're going to get into it earlier today.
	Why is it at 666 viewers on YouTube?
	It's stuck there.
	It seems to be stuck at 666.
	Okay, I screen grabbed that.
	Oh my, why won't they criticize Zelensky?
	Why didn't they say a damn thing?
	When Gonzalo Lira, call him what you want.
	Oh, you think he's just a stupid grifter or was a stupid grifter because he used to be a coach, a life coach, and he found that the reporting accurately from the ground might be more profitable.
	Or you think he was just a Russian propagandist and he was reporting inaccurately from the ground.
	Okay.
	He could be a scoundrel of all scoundrels.
	He was an American citizen, detained and killed by or allowed to die in a Ukrainian prison.
	I mean, it's pretty analogous.
	Not a peep.
	Not one word of criticism, critique against Zelensky or the Zelensky Ukrainian regime for having killed or allowed to die an American citizen in their jails.
	Why not?
	Following their logic, Zelensky must have something on the Bidens.
	And I guarantee you he does.
	Well.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, it was stuck on 666 for a long time.
	Blaspheme the Almighty and straight to 6666.
	So that's it.
	It's wild.
	We're going to talk about a number of things today.
	I was like, I get up in the morning.
	I couldn't do the show earlier today because the garage door repair person came early.
	When one's garage door is broken, one does not say no to the early visit from the garage door repairman.
	And then I'm like, oh, is there going to be what to talk about?
	And then, you know, the day progresses and there's what to talk about.
	Boy, howdy!
	What was I going to say?
	Oh yeah, by the way, so for tomorrow, Kayla Pollack.
	And if you haven't heard her story, she's the Canadian woman who sustained a jab injury, myelitis.
	It's the paralysis where we'll get into the details of the adverse reaction.
	But where basically the body attacks the...
	If it's not the sheath around the nerves, it's the nerves itself.
	I'm going to just double check the distinction between Guillaume Barre syndrome, GBS, and myelitis.
	If you haven't heard her story, she's a Canadian woman.
	Got a 10-year-old kid.
	Took the jab.
	I don't remember which one it was.
	And then got this adverse event that gave her paralysis.
	And what ends up happening, as we've been warning, when you get into socialized medicine and it becomes cheaper to kill your citizens than to treat your citizens when you have a system that's already broken that can't even treat the ones you already have.
	From what I understand, this victim of an adverse event from the Jibby Jab, the government can't provide the required care, so they had offered her maids, medical assistance in dying.
	And I have to, even in private, even when I'm alone with my phone, not say certain things out loud because I don't want to be put on any more lists than I probably already am.
	That induces a rage in me that is indescribable.
	Like, a deep hatred towards the people in our government who are responsible for this.
	The woman does what she thinks she needs to do to, you know, meet her civic duties and then gets paralyzed from the jibby jab.
	It's confirmed, apparently, the doctor, there's a recording, the doctor says, yeah, this has been happening to a lot of people when she's talking about it.
	And then the government, you know, tough noggies, we can't help you.
	And it'll be cheaper for us if we kill you.
	So you want to die?
	Your life is, you know.
	Nuremberg-level trials.
	So I'm going to have Kayla on tomorrow at 1 o 'clock, so that's going to be there.
	I didn't say the word, Stephen.
	I said tabarouette, which is not a swear word.
	That is actually the humorous and non-offensive slang.
	But I've explained, for those of you who don't know, in French-Canadian, from Quebec, all of the swear words relate to religious symbols, religious iconography.
	The tabernacles, the wafer, colis, all of the French-Canadian swear words are religious-based, and ironically enough, or interestingly enough, all of the French-from-France swear words are all sex-based.
	Sex is in, like, prostitutes and that type of sex, not gender-based.
	So that's what's on the menu for tomorrow.
	Tune in for that one o 'clock.
	Permanent paralysis, that's one of the questions I have.
	I know that these things can sometimes get better, improve over time, but then the problem is in the interim, you still have muscular atrophy because it's a horrendous situation.
	We're going to talk about it tomorrow.
	On the menu for today, on the lighter note, you know, just the continued downfall of the American empire.
	Le déclin de l 'empire américain.
	The decline of the American empire.
	Trump comes out and says, you know, America's in decline.
	Joe Biden, he's very offended by that.
	America's not in decline.
	It's got a demented old fool for a president who can barely walk on grass, who's politically persecuting his political rivals, trying to lock them up for hundreds of years, who's already locked up political adversaries for hundreds of years and boasted about it, gives speeches that look like Hitler himself without the mustache.
	Weaponization of all aspects of the pillars of a what was civil Western society.
	And Biden has the audacity to turn and say, but look what Putin did to Navalny.
	He locked up a journalist.
	Sorry, that was an opposition politician.
	And he died in a Russian prison.
	And I now have strong suspicions this might have been intelligence-related death, but set that aside, even if it was...
	Putin, who allowed this guy to die in prison.
	Yeah, shame on Putin.
	Now do Zelensky.
	Oh, we can't do that because, you know, Zelensky's a reincarnated saint.
	Can't talk about Gonzalo Lira because he was an American citizen.
	They'll go trade the merchant of death for Brittany Griner, a basketball player out of Russia.
	But they'll let an American citizen, Gonzalo Lira, die in a Ukrainian prison and not say boo about it and then take a shot at Trump for observing.
	That America is in something of a decline.
	And my goodness, it had better reverse itself because if America goes bye-bye as we knew it, so does freedom in the world.
	And so, forget about the persecution prosecutions.
	Then we go to the New York State, which we're going to talk about today.
	Just a cool half-billion-dollar judgment against Trump.
	Victimless fraud.
	Victimless alleged fraud.
	We'll get there, Leticia James.
	We're going to seize private assets because we have become a full communist regime in New York.
	That's theme number one.
	Get the hell out of New York.
	Theme number two, Russiagate 2.0.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	Remember, what better way to hide Biden corruption than to just fabricate or recycle the same plays over and over again.
	When Alex Jones was on, he said it.
	They use the same play over and over again.
	And what surprises him is they don't change it, really.
	Mutandis Mutandis.
	We got Russiagate 2.0 coming up.
	The media running with their headline.
	That the, not the snitch, what's the word I'm looking for?
	The whistleblower.
	One of the witnesses in the Hunter Biden, Joe Biden influence peddling scheme.
	He lied to the FBI about a story that was passed from Russian intelligence.
	So he lied after meeting with Russian intelligence.
	And I'm like, I smell bullshit.
	Someone sent me the link for Dan Bongino earlier today.
	And the reason why I don't like, I mean, I need to listen to people who I believe are smarter than me and who know more than me.
	The reluctance to do it is that I don't want it feeling like their opinion, their belief is influencing mine.
	And I called it Russiagate 2.0 before I even knew that Dan Bongino had called it Russiagate 2.0.
	It's not a particularly original title.
	But I don't want people thinking I'm being influenced and just regurgitating information that I hear from others.
	I want to process it, digest it, and try to make sense of it myself.
	I hear this Russiagate 2.0.
	I'm like, all right, bullshit.
	I'm going to go read the articles.
	Let me go back to the indictment.
	Let me go back to the filing that the government just filed to deny bail to this guy.
	His name is Alexander...
	Smirnoff, as if we have not enough Russian jokes in all of this.
	So we're going to talk about that.
	We're going to talk about Rumble, because I'm picking a fight with Wired, and I think I'm right.
	We're going to get into that.
	But before we do any of that, before we do any of that, you might have noticed when we started this stream.
	That it said, this stream contains a paid sponsor.
	And it does, people, and it's a great one because I only have great sponsors.
	Hillsdale College.
	First of all, the day you stop improving yourself and the day you stop amassing knowledge and information and trying to become smarter and more well-versed in whatever it is.
	It doesn't have to be politics.
	It doesn't have to be history.
	It doesn't have to be anything in particular.
	The day you stop learning is the day you start dying.
	And the day you start forgetting what you already knew is the day you become Joe Biden.
	Bada bing, bada boom.
	Hillsdale College.
	It's a fantastic free online course.
	Time is our most precious commodity, and I've heard from so many that they have to spend their time wisely and improve themselves and the people around you.
	Now, one way to do that, you can watch Viva Frye.
	Another way you can do that is free online courses at Hillsdale College.
	History, economics, the great works of literature, the meaning of the U.S. Constitution.
	Did you study these things in school?
	Probably not.
	I'm proud to say that I actually passed one random online US Constitution exam.
	I only got six on ten, so I was a little embarrassed to share my results, but I passed it.
	I'm not yet applying for American citizenship, but I think I'll be able to pass when I do.
	I'm tired of scrolling through TV shows and finding nothing but the same mind-numbing content.
	It's actually why I watch the likes of Bongino and others who I think are smart.
	That is why, this is the first time I'm actually doing Hillsdale College, offers more than 40 free online classes from those important and enduring subjects.
	You can learn about the works of C.S. Lewis, amazing quotes that I always pull from C.S. Lewis, the tyranny of those who do it with the blessing of their own conscience, the book of Genesis, if you want to get into the Bible, the meaning of the U.S. Constitution, the rise and fall of the Roman Republic might be more relevant today than it's ever been, or the history of ancient Christian church.
	Hillsdale College, online courses, all available free.
	That's right, for free.
	What I think is probably the most relevant for this day and age, Constitution 101, the meaning and history of the U.S. Constitution, a 12-course lecture.
	You'll explore the design and purpose of the Constitution and appreciate why it is so bloody genius and more applicable now than it ever was.
	How could they have foreseen what they put into the Constitution?
	Because they knew what they left and they knew what they wanted to prevent from happening here.
	And what are we witnessing today?
	The very things that they were trying to protect the future of America against were seeing it seep in slowly.
	The course is self-paced so you can start whenever you want.
	Enroll now, Constitution 101.
	Our country needs more Americans who understand the Constitution and can defend the freedom of the American people against the encroachments of an increasingly large and unaccountable government.
	Go to hillsdale.edu forward slash viva to enroll.
	No cost.
	Easy to get started.
	hillsdale.com forward slash viva to register.
	Just in case.
	Hold on a second.
	Oh, the link is not...
	Do I have it?
	Hillsdale.edu forward slash Viva.
	The link is in the pinned comment.
	You can never go wrong if you learn something.
	A day...
	I say a day without exercise is a wasted day, and a day without learning something is a wasted day.
	Boom!
	Now, where I forgot to check that we were live across all of the interwebby platforms.
	We are...
	We're live on Rumble.
	We're live on vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Doug Leifan, or Doug Leifan, with a tip, and I'm going to get to these afterwards.
	It says, Viva, how do members get information to get to the public?
	I have some with DEI hiring projections.
	Well, Doug, what's going to happen here, you see?
	I'm going to screen grab this question.
	I'm going to email you afterwards, and you're going to share it with me.
	And then I can give you some context.
	If it's not the type of stuff that I do, I don't really do the breaking news.
	If it's not the type of stuff I do, we will find someone to get it out to.
	Okay.
	First things first, people.
	Oh, and if you're new to the channel, if you're one of the, I don't know, 20,000 people who discovered the channel last week during the Fannie Willis hearing, we start on YouTube, Rumble, and vivabarneslaw.locals.com, where we have a wonderful community.
	Some of it's behind a paywall if you want to be a supporter, and much of it is not behind a paywall if you just want to be a member.
	vivabarneslaw.locals.com, $10 a month or $100 a year if you get the whole year at one shot.
	We end on YouTube.
	I don't know, 30, 40 minutes in typically and go exclusively on Rumble and VivaBarnesLaw.Locals.com when we're done on Rumble.
	Then we go over to Locals for the after party.
	So that's the order of things, so to speak.
	And I don't even know what the so to speak added to that sentence.
	Okay, first topic of the day.
	Listen to this.
	When you are...
	What is the expression you take the most flack when you're over the target?
	Rumble has been over the target for a very long time.
	I remember being a stupid, naive, wet behind the ears, short-haired Canadian running for federal office, and I get a call from that dude at W5.
	I don't remember what his name was.
	He's like, we're doing a piece on Rumble.
	We'd love to interview you and talk to you about your experience, your channel, your success there.
	I was like, oh, flattery will get you everywhere.
	It'll get you in my front door.
	I was prepared for an adversarial thing, but I was still not even stupid.
	In comes this W5 journalist, comes into my living room.
	They set up their cameras.
	It was all cordial, all wonderful.
	I recorded the entire thing just in case they tried to outright screw me.
	And they did.
	But I never needed the recording because they corrected their defamatory statements, maybe.
	But about halfway through the interview, I realized, oh, shit.
	This was always intended to be a hit piece on Rumble and they are exploiting of me as the middle person to get to a hit piece on Rumble.
	Then they publish their stupid journalism in which they write about the risks of an alt-right, far-right wing platform like Rumble where people say mean things in the comments.
	I'm like, dude, you ever look at the comments on YouTube?
	I gotta tell you, I've never had my religion used as a...
	Cuddle?
	I'm not even a religious person, but my goodness, on YouTube, they'll never let you forget.
	Oh, like the comments on YouTube are just all so lovey-dovey.
	Halfway through the interview, the guy's like, I saw some negative, mean comments in your comments.
	It's like, dude, there are 100,000 comments in there.
	Are you expecting to see all these things?
	You think people are not going to say something stupid on the internet?
	You think it's any different on YouTube?
	And all that to say, yeah, W5, question mark, because I are out of business now.
	They've been cut because The cream rises to the top, and the poo-poo sinks to the bottom.
	Although occasionally the poo-poo floats to the top, in which case, whatever.
	Yeah, they've been cut.
	They've been the object of cuts across Canadian media because they're rubbish, propaganda, garbage that nobody wants to watch.
	No one would watch it for free.
	Rumble has been over the target for a very long time.
	They've been the object of smear campaigns, advertiser boycotts, and one of the most recent came from...
	Wired.
	Here, let me see.
	Where's the article from Wired where they run a hit piece on Rumble?
	You think I'm going to subscribe to this crap?
	Hells to the bells?
	No.
	So this is an article from January 8...
	That says 2024.
	I thought it said 2824, and I thought for a second I had gone into the past.
	This is an article that Rumble posted about a month and a half ago.
	Rumble is part of, in quote, "Active and ongoing SEC investigation." Sounds very scary.
	The SEC confirmed to Wired that the financial regulator has launched an investigation into Rumble, a "free speech." It's a free speech platform, Biatch's video platform.
	The nature and probe remains unknown, but they're going to use it to try to drive down the price of Rumble.
	And if you have any doubts, don't worry, I'll quell them.
	Rumble, the so-called free speech alternative to YouTube.
	Publicity, by the way.
	There's an expression, any publicity is good publicity.
	There's also the better expression, good publicity is good publicity.
	Yeah, it's a free speech alternative to YouTube.
	Get used to it.
	It's the subject of an SEC investigation.
	According to the company and a letter from the SEC, the SEC confirmed its investigation involving Rumble in response to a public request.
	Oh, sorry.
	In response to a public records request that Wired first filed in November, seeking documents related to the company, the agency denied Wired's request on the grounds that related documents were part of an ongoing investigation.
	investigation it's all very very suspicious just like that you know well i don't know i don't know the context the circumstances how wired knew to go and ask for you know look for documents and then oh no we can't give you those because they're under an investigation oh we get to report on that now Confirmation of the probe follows public allegations that rumble inflated key user metrics, which the company denies.
	Because it's not true.
	The SEC says that the existence of the probe should not be an indication that, quote, any violations of law have occurred with respect to any person, entity, or security, end quote.
	Exact nature of the SEC investigation is still unknown.
	See, I don't know how much further we have to go down in this.
	How much is there?
	Let's see this.
	Let's see this here.
	In May 2021, the site was reportedly valued at an estimated $500 million.
	In September 2022, Rumble became a publicly traded company listed on the NASDAQ as part of a SPAC.
	Its valuation currently exceeds $1.2 billion.
	In April 2023, investment research firm Culper Research.
	Culper?
	I wonder if there's any culperability in there.
	Bada-big-bada-boom.
	I want to know who's short-selling the stock.
	That's what I want to know.
	Culper Research released a report expressing skepticism about the legitimacy of Rumble's claimed monthly active user accounts, a key metric for investors to evaluate the performance of a social media company.
	Culper Research said it had taken a short...
	Oh!
	I guess I should have read all the way down to the article before I said it because now I feel smarter, but I didn't...
	Culper Research said it had taken a short position in Rumble, meaning it stands to profit if Rumble's stock price decreases.
	That's why I was going to copy and double-check this.
	All right.
	Well, there we have our answer, people.
	So Culper shorts it.
	Culper then says, oh, we challenged something that might affect the valuation.
	Now, maybe they short it because they think it's false and they're just betting on their own research.
	Who knows?
	Maybe...
	They have the likes of Wired that can publish these articles without the proper updates so that it can, in fact, have an unduly negative impact on stock price.
	Okay.
	In the quarterly earnings...
	In a quarterly earnings call following the report's publication, Rumble reported that its monthly active users declined by 40% during the first three months of 2023 from $80 million to $48 million.
	In a financial filing, Rumble attributed the decrease in users to its popular creators being less active on the platform in the first part of 2023.
	Well, 2024 is going to be quite the opposite for Rumble.
	And I can promise you that and I will contribute to that.
	And news events slowing down following midterm elections.
	Yadda yadda.
	Okay, fine.
	Listen to this.
	Investors should be especially dubious of rumors peddled by short sellers who are attempting to distort facts for their own financial benefit.
	We are aware of misleading claims about Rumble's monthly active users' statistics, which we have previously disclosed are provided by Google Analytics.
	Rumble spokesperson Rumore says, any suggesting that Rumble has inflated MAUs is false, as any objective person quickly realizes upon even a cursory review of the data.
	Hold on.
	I kind of want to get to the update yet.
	Christian Lamarco, the founder of Culper Research, believes the change in reported users was a response to its report.
	That was a bit of validation in my view.
	He says, okay, the first update, by the way, immediately following the publication, Chris Pawlowski, Rumble's CEO, said in an expo that the SEC investigation was part of the playbook to try to destroy the Okay, before we get to the second update, let me bring that out.
	There was a tweet from the Wired article journalist guy who says...
	Let me see here.
	Is this it?
	Yeah, this is it right here.
	I think this will get us to the one.
	Okay, here we go.
	The market had responded accordingly, poorly, since our report that Rumble Inc.
	is the subject of the SEC investigation.
	The company has dropped nearly $200 million in value.
	This is a tweet from...
	It's no longer at this, by the way.
	It was trading pre-market above 7 today.
	I don't know what it closed at.
	I own zero stock in Rumble.
	January 11th.
	So they published the report.
	Take pride in or...
	Highlight the fact that it's actually had a negative impact on the stock.
	I want to know if William Turton short-sold any, or if he bought in at the dip.
	I want to know if anyone at Wired, directly or indirectly, had any financial interest in this story or the outcome.
	So he's like, oh great, look at that.
	It did have an impact.
	And then, look at this.
	Oh, I'm getting to the update.
	So now, I questioned it.
	I do wonder, does anybody, any journalist there, wired itself directly or indirectly have any interest in the outcome of the story?
	We now know that Culper Research, the one that spread the news in the first place, stood to gain financially and probably did, handsomely, with the help of their friends.
	Because, hey, you're doing it to an ideological adversary.
	Let's all get rich doing this hit piece takedown crap.
	Well, the news of the day, although you wouldn't know it from, you wouldn't know it from the article or the absence of any Clean new article.
	The news of the day, this is coming from Chris Pavlovsky, CEO of Rumble.
	Hey, William Turd, oh no, so William Turton and Wired.
	The SEC concluded its investigation.
	We sent you their closure letter yesterday, but you haven't updated your story.
	Why don't you want the public to know that the investigation is over?
	And let's go read the...
	Letter itself.
	We've concluded the investigation as to Rumble Inc.
	Based on the information we have as of this date, we do not intend to recommend an enforcement action by the Commission against Rumble Inc.
	We are providing this notice under the guidelines set out in our final paragraph of the Securities Act No.
	53, which states in part that the notice, quote, because the government never wants to close the doors to any future persecution.
	Must in no way be construed as indicating that the party has been exonerated or that no action may ultimately result from the staff's investigation.
	So we're not proceeding anything now.
	We're not recommending anything.
	But we always want to leave the door open.
	So this does not exonerate, to quote Mueller.
	Okay, fine.
	So that's the tweet.
	He tweets it out and you'd expect them to write an article and update.
	Like a new article.
	Because updating a two-month-old article is kind of irrelevant in most places.
	Is this the article?
	Let's get back to the article.
	Let's just see what that update that I didn't want to show you earlier.
	Is this it?
	Update.
	Hold on a refresh here.
	Dude, hold on one second.
	Where's the second update to the story?
	This is it.
	Refresh.
	Okay.
	Oh, here we go.
	Okay, good.
	We got another update, people.
	Update from today.
	What's the date today?
	It's the 21st.
	Here's the update from...
	Oh, my God.
	This is annoying.
	How do I get rid of that?
	I'm not subscribing.
	Oh, this is annoying with their stupid ads.
	Archive.
	Let's go to the link here.
	Boom.
	Save.
	Archived one month ago.
	Oh, is it going to have the update today, though?
	Go all the way to the bottom.
	The archive linked.
	The archived link does not have the update.
	That's interesting also.
	So no one's going to see their beautiful new...
	Here we go!
	I'm not touching anything.
	I'm not touching it.
	Don't touch anything.
	Don't touch anything.
	Update from today.
	Sorry.
	Rumble sent wire.
	Listen to this.
	Listen to how they say it.
	They can't say that the SEC announced they don't make any recommendations.
	They have to say Rumble sent a letter.
	Rumble said what the SEC said.
	On February 20, interesting that they only update it today, Rumble sent Wired a letter from the Securities and Exchange Commission that stated the agency had concluded its investigation into Rumble and that it did not intend to recommend an enforcement action against the company.
	And then they only quote this part.
	Quote, we are providing this notice under this guidelines, whatever.
	They only provide the part that says they...
	They haven't exonerated them.
	They still leave the door open to suing them, but they don't quote the part where they say, we're not recommending any further investigation.
	And they only update it 24 hours later, give or take, after Chris puts out a tweet that I promised him I would put on blast.
	I didn't promise that.
	I said, I'll help you make sure that this gets on blast when I retweeted it.
	They only do it a day later.
	Why?
	Because they're scoundrels of the highest order.
	And it's a war of information.
	It's a war for your minds not to channel Alex Jones.
	And that's how they fight it.
	Dirty.
	So they're not going to write a new article saying, oh yeah, there's been a new article.
	Refresh it in the public conscience.
	They'll go update a month-and-a-half-old article that you won't even see the update if you go to the archived links.
	And who gives a crap?
	Because the damage is done and someone made off handsomely.
	I suspect Culper Research.
	Not yet!
	But we'll see what happens.
	Thank you for the super chat.
	All right, that's the first story.
	Now, let me see something here.
	In Rumble, we have a Rumble rant.
	Now, the question is this.
	I feel guilty if I don't get to the cover story on YouTube, but we'll see if we're going to do it.
	A new Forbes article today claiming, quote, long COVID, end quote, is because of protein instead of clot shot.
	Is because of protein instead of clot shot.
	They want to claim that meat and poultry is at fault for health.
	Well, I ain't giving up meat, baby, so good luck with that.
	So the question is this.
	Do we do...
	We're going to move it over to Rumble right now.
	It'll be a good time to end it.
	Talking about how the MSM is out to try to screw Rumble.
	Screw them politically.
	Financially, link to Rumble.
	We're going to vote with our feet, and we're going to vote with our dollar, and we're going to vote with our eyeballs.
	And we're going to go over to Rumble.
	I'll put the entire stream up, or at least the Porsches that don't overlap in a bit.
	That's it.
	Don Bonka says, Just imagine how bad things will get in Canada once our lefties flee to Canada after Trump wins again.
	They ain't going anywhere.
	The reality is they want Trump.
	In office.
	They just don't want to be the responsible, the ones that are responsible for putting him there.
	So, yeah, that's it.
	Now, so that's the link to Rumble.
	It's in the pinned comment.
	Let me give the link to vivabarneslaw.locals.com for anyone who wants to come there now instead of going through Rumble.
	And it's, you're not cheating on Rumble if you come straight over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com because Rumble and Locals merge, so you're supporting the same entity.
	We're going to talk about the, um...
	Alexander Smirnoff.
	These jokes write themselves.
	We're going to talk about Russiagate 2.0.
	We're going to talk about getting the hell out of New York.
	And we're going to talk about whatever else we have on the list.
	And stay tuned.
	This entire thing will be...
	YouTube gets the leftovers.
	The stale leftovers.
	Okay.
	Ending on YouTube.
	Three, two, one.
	Peace.
	Okay.
	So, the news of the day.
	This is the question.
	Am I going to be able to hold in my pee through this entire stream?
	We're going to see.
	I'm going to try.
	I hate Starbucks.
	I mean, I hate Starbucks, but I wanted a caffeinated beverage, and I can't seem to find the good ones, and so my kid wanted to go, and we went to Starbucks.
	And I had a sweet vanilla cold brew.
	And by goodness, it just goes right through to my hyperactive bladder.
	Okay, the TMI is over.
	The news of the day.
	Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia.
	Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia.
	What is the article that I had on the backdrop?
	I want to start with the propaganda article.
	Then I want to get into the paperwork.
	Show you how this works, people.
	This is a problem.
	It's not just that you can't rely on the media.
	You can rely on them to lie to you.
	But then in order to find out how they're lying to you, you've got to go to source material.
	It takes time.
	It takes so much time that I have people tell me, "Viva, I don't have 20 minutes to watch a summary." That is how we remain in this state of ignorance and exploitation.
	But listen to this.
	Okay.
	The headline is this.
	February 20th.
	That's yesterday.
	Updated.
	What was updated?
	We've got to go to the bottom here and see what was updated.
	How did they update this?
	Okay.
	Is this the same article?
	Oh, look what they do here.
	Unlock article.
	I hate this crap.
	Donald, this is not the article that I wanted to look at.
	And now I can't.
	All right.
	Great.
	Hold on.
	I'm going to have to go find that article again.
	Share screen.
	Let's go here.
	We're going to just go here.
	Russian store near Boca Raton.
	Russian informant indicted smear.
	Indicted Smirnov.
	Here we go.
	We'll take it from CNN.
	Indicted ex-FBI informant told investigators he got Hunter Biden dirt from Russian intelligence officials.
	Okay, this is the headline story.
	Let me just make sure that we're seeing the same thing here.
	And we are.
	Okay.
	The former FBI informant charged with lying about Biden's dealings in Ukraine told investigators after his arrest that Russian intelligence officials were involved in passing information to him about Hunter Biden.
	Pay attention to this, and now I'm actually borrowing from Bongino's knowledge.
	What information?
	We'll get there.
	Or we won't.
	Prosecutors said she's a new court file.
	Okay.
	Prosecutors also said Smirnoff has been, quote, actively peddling new lies that could impact U.S. elections, end quote, after meeting with Russian spies late last year.
	Just try to piece this.
	He met with spies late last year and only now peddling these new lies, which might affect the...
	You know who's trying to affect the outcome of the election?
	These people right here.
	What do you mean, these people?
	Actively peddling new lies, yada, yada.
	Followed from the false bribery accusations.
	By the way, listen to how they peddled this.
	Late last year, and that the fallout from his previous false bribery accusations about the Bidens continue to be felt to this day.
	Smirov claims to have, quote, extensive and extremely recent, end quote, contacts with foreign intelligence officials, prosecutors said in the filing.
	Prosecutors.
	The same prosecutors who are trying to defend and protect Joe Biden at all costs.
	This is what they said.
	They said he previously told the FBI that he has longstanding and extensive contacts with Russian spies.
	I'd like to know which ones and where they actually are from.
	Including individuals he said were high-level intelligence officers or command Russian assassins abroad.
	By the way, the guy they're accusing of lying...
	They're relying on when he allegedly says things like this.
	So, he's a liar when he wants them to be, and he's telling the truth about his Russian asset spy ties when they want him to be.
	It's an amazing thing how you can suck and blow at the same time.
	Prosecutors with Special Counsel David Weiss' team said Tuesday that Smirnoff has maintained those ties and noted that in a post-arrest interview last week, Smirnoff admitted that officials associated with Russian intelligence were involved in passing a story about Business Person 1, that's Joe Biden's kid, Hunter Biden, passing a story.
	When you see how this plays out in the indictment, it's going to blow your freaking mind.
	The revelations about Smirnoff's alleged foreign contacts were disclosed as part of the prosecutor's arguments to keep him jailed ahead of the trial.
	Because, by the way, if you're a flight risk, you come back to America to be locked up and not let out.
	Though a federal judge later granted Smirnoff's relief with several conditions, including GPS monitoring and the surrender of his two passports, Smirnoff declined to answer questions as he left the courthouse Tuesday.
	Okay.
	Claims to have multiple foreign intelligence agencies.
	Prosecutors allege that Smirnoff, quote, claims to have contacts with multiple foreign intelligence agencies, end quote, including Russia, and that he could use those contacts to flee the United States.
	The explosive revelation comes amid backlash over how Smirnoff now debunked allegations played.
	Now debunked?
	They're not debunked whatsoever.
	And wait until you read the indictment, because they're not debunked.
	The indictment actually confirms, but just shifts a little bit of the window and adds a little editorial.
	Smirnoff has been charged with lying and creating false records.
	He has not yet entered a formal plea in his lawyers.
	Mr. Smirnoff is presumed innocent.
	Okay.
	I don't think we need to go through all of this crap.
	Quote, what this shows is that misinformation he is spreading is not confined to 2020, they wrote.
	He's actively peddling new lies that could impact the U.S. elections after meeting with Russian intelligence officials in November.
	He met with them in November, came back to America, and now is going to be denied bail, from what I understand.
	Okay, that's the news.
	Now, let's get to the source material, shall we?
	Where is it?
	Let's bring this up here.
	Share screen.
	And I brought up a few of the highlights.
	We'll get to the indictment in a second.
	I just want to bring up the highlights because at the end of the day, there's only a few sections.
	It's a whole big story of this guy, Smirnoff, who they're now saying is, you know, a big fat liar making up stories to interfere with the 2024 elections after having met with Russian officials.
	He was a confidential human source for the FBI for damn near a decade.
	Let me see if I can bring this up here.
	Listen to this.
	Oh, this is in the affidavit, but I appreciate that it doesn't contradict the allegations.
	It explains them away.
	The defendant, that's Smirnoff, met with officials from Burisma for the first time in 2017 after the end of the Obama administration.
	Thus, public official won.
	Who's public official won?
	I forget now.
	Oh, that's Biden.
	Then a private citizen had no ability to, quote, protect, end quote, Burisma from, quote, all kinds of problems.
	What they're basically saying is, it's all basically true, but it wasn't in 2015 or 2016, as this guy Smirnoff is alleged to have said now, it was 2017, after the former vice president was no longer in office, but, you know, presumptively going to run for office in 2020, as if...
	As if it becomes implausible now that, you know, he couldn't carry the influence that every...
	Bobulinski, the other whistleblower, he couldn't peddle the influence that was said that he could peddle, hence why his son got on the board of directors at Burisma, even though his son never went to Ukraine, which is even more suspicious.
	There was no discussion of public official one or business person one, Biden and his kid, at this first meeting with Burisma.
	No, not then.
	It wasn't in 2017.
	And so...
	It's a far-fetched story because by 2017, coming around when Hunter Biden's being paid handsomely by Burisma, Biden was no longer in office.
	This was from an article on PBS.
	Prosecutors say, though, Smirnoff claimed to have contact with Burisma executives near the end of the Obama administration.
	It actually took place after Obama and Biden had left office.
	Oh.
	When Biden would have no ability to influence U.S. policy, this is the defense.
	That what he said occurred in 2015, 2016, when he said it later on, it actually occurred in 2017, after Biden was out of office and could no longer affect public policy.
	As if anyone with half a brain is going to believe that a former VP, with the deep state apparatus being loyal to Obama quite clearly, spying on the presidential campaign and the incoming president of Trump, oh no, he had no impact on policy whatsoever.
	Knowing that he was going to run in 2020, presumably.
	He's a well-meaning elderly old man with a poor memory.
	He can't do anything.
	Pay his son 50,000 bucks a month to be on the board of Burisma and actually never spend any time in Ukraine.
	That's their defense.
	Well, Biden never went to Ukraine.
	That makes it even more suspicious that he's getting paid 50 grand a month for being on the board of a Ukrainian company and never actually goes to Ukraine.
	They don't understand what they're actually saying.
	Now hold on one second.
	Let me bring up the indictment.
	Is this the...
	Yeah, this is the indictment.
	So the indictment is relevant.
	The new document says that this guy just made up statements in 2023.
	But let's bring up the indictment for one second.
	Yeah, this is it.
	Yeah, that's the one.
	This is the unsealed indictment.
	Defender Alexander Smirnoff, resident of Los Angeles.
	The defendant was an FBI confidential human source.
	Appreciate this, people.
	The defendant was a confidential human source, CHS, with the FBI.
	As a CHS, the defendant was assigned a handling agent, the handler, who was special agent on the FBI squad that investigated violations of federal criminal law.
	As a confidential human source, the defendant provided information to the handler that was then used in various criminal investigations conducted by the FBI.
	Are they going to revisit those files?
	Defendant knew that information he provided was used in criminal investigations because, among other reasons, the handler advised him that he might have to testify in court based on information he provided on multiple occasions.
	Fine, listen to this.
	This is where it gets amazing.
	The defendant also knew that the information provided in criminal investigations...
	Okay, we got that part.
	No, that's the one I want to read.
	The defendant also knew the information he provided was used in criminal investigations because the defendant participated in a number of operations where he was authorized to engage in criminal activity as part of an ongoing criminal investigation.
	Can you understand what we're reading right now?
	The FBI...
	I don't know how you authorize someone to engage in criminal activity as part of an ongoing criminal investigation because to me...
	Right now, it sounds like the FBI is the criminal organization.
	He knew that he had to be...
	What did it say here?
	He knew that the information he provided would be used in criminal investigations because he was told when he was authorized to break the law that they might use the fruits of that law-breaking activity as part of other criminal investigations.
	I mean, it's wild.
	The defendant was admonished by the handler that he must provide truthful information to the FBI when he first became a confidential human source in 2010 and on multiple occasions thereafter, including but not unlimited to, yada, yada, yada.
	This is the indictment.
	The two charges in this indictment are lying to the FBI.
	Let me scroll all the way down and then we're going to see the elements here.
	Charge one is up.
	Where is it?
	It was towards the bottom.
	Here we go.
	Count one.
	We'll get to the evidence in a second.
	The grand jury re-elect is paragraph 1 through 55. On June 26, 2020, the defendant, Alexander Smyronov, did willfully and knowingly make a material false, fictitious, and fraudulent statement and representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of Yada Yada.
	The defendants claimed that, quote, in late 2015-2016, during the Obama-Biden administration, he met with Burisma Official 2, and that at that meeting, Burisma Official 2 told him that Burisma hired Business Person 1 Oh, he didn't say that in 2015, 2016.
	He said it in 2017.
	As if we needed this guy to say this, because we already had this confirmation from elsewhere, from other witnesses, Bob Alinsky for one.
	We have Joe Biden admitting to this basically.
	In real time.
	We'll get that.
	We'll go back to that clip because it only makes so much more sense in reverse.
	The defendants claimed that he met with Burisma Official 1. One or two months later in Vienna, Austria, around the time Public Official 1 made a statement about the then-Ukrainian Prosecutor General, Shokin, made a public statement about Shokin being corrupt and that he should be fired, removed from office, which occurred on December 9, 2015.
	No, it actually occurred.
	The man who was investigating Burisma was fired after Biden publicly said, we are going to withhold a billion dollars in aid unless you fire this guy.
	And they, whoa, son of a bitch, six hours later, they did it.
	And that the meeting, Burisma official won, admitted that he had paid business person won, Hunter Biden, $5 million, and public official won $5 million.
	That being Biden.
	So that, quote, business person one, Hunter, will take care of all those issues through his dad, end quote, referring to then-Ukrainian prosecutor general's investigation into Burisma, and to, quote, deal with, end quote, the then-Ukrainian prosecutor general.
	We're false, as the defendant knew.
	You know, it's funny, it's false, as the defendant knew.
	Except, you know what happened?
	Biden threatened to withhold a billion dollars in aid unless that guy prosecuting, investigating Burisma was fired.
	And son of a bitch, six hours later, it happened.
	They did it.
	The defendant's claims that he had a telephone conversation with Burisma Official 1 in 2016 or 2017, wherein Burisma Official 1 stated that he did not want to pay Public Official 1 and Business Person 1, Biden and Hunter, and he, quote, was pushed to pay, end quote, them, that nobody would find out about his financial dealings with Public Official 1 and Business Person 1, and that Burisma Official 1 had many text messages, end quote, recordings, end quote, that show that he was coerced to make such payments were false, as he knew.
	That defendant's claims in 2019.
	He was president when associate one called Burisma Official One.
	And Burisma Official One stated that he did not send any funds directly to the, quote, big guy, end quote.
	Of course, you wouldn't send it directly.
	You'd send it to other entities.
	Maybe you'd just, like, launder it through his son at $50,000 a month.
	Maybe, I don't know, you'd find a way to get it to his brother.
	I'm not saying that that happened.
	Which the defendant understood was a reference to public official one.
	I love how they just can't put their names in here.
	The big guy's Biden.
	And that Burisma official once stated that he would take them, investigators, 10 years to find the records, illicit payments, etc.
	were false as he knew.
	Yeah, except we kind of have all of that information and evidence already anyhow.
	The statements to representation where he knew were false.
	That defendant met with officials from Burisma 1 for the first time in 2017 after the end of...
	Listen to this, by the way, because this is where they basically admitted.
	You have to understand this.
	This is in the indictment.
	I said, I'm reading this indictment, and it reads more like a defense pleading than an indictment.
	The statements and representations were false because, as Smirnoff then and there knew, the defendant met with officials from Burisma for the first time in 2017.
	Oh, okay.
	So, when Biden was not a VP, but former VP, with control of the deep state, as we now know, which for three years tried to oust Trump.
	The duly elected president.
	He met for the first time in 2017.
	After the end of the Obama administration, thus public official won.
	Then a private citizen.
	Talking point media.
	Private citizen, private citizen, private citizen.
	Say it over and over again.
	He had no ability to, quote, protect, end quote, Burisma from, quote, all kinds of problems.
	Do you understand what they're saying?
	Not that it didn't happen.
	It happened later.
	When Biden had, he had no influence to protect them from anything.
	Horse shit.
	Sorry to swear.
	And there was no discussion of Public Official 1 or Business Person 1 at this first meeting with Burisma.
	Listen to this.
	The defendant's second meeting with officials from Burisma also occurred in 2017, not at the end of 2015, when Public Official 1 made public statements critical of the Ukrainian Prosecutor General's office.
	The second meeting also occurred after Public Official 1 left office and after the then-Ukrainian Prosecutor General had already been fired in 2016.
	Wow, it's almost like you might be getting rewarded after you already did what you knew needed to be done.
	It's amazing how that works.
	Like the first meeting, the second meeting the defendant had with officials from Burisma occurred at a time when public official one was no longer had the ability to influence.
	I'm sorry, how the hell do you allege that in an indictment?
	You think that the former vice president and, by all accounts, next presidential candidate had no influence?
	I mean, you've got to be stupid to say that and corrupt to allege it in an indictment.
	This reads as a defense of Biden, not as an indictment of Smirnoff.
	The defendant also did not travel, listen to this, did not travel to Vienna, Austria in December 2015, as he claimed.
	and there was no discussion of Public Official 1, Biden and his son, at the second meeting.
	As to phone calls with Burisma Official 1 in 2016 or 2017 and then in 2019, in a subsequent interview with law enforcement in 2023, defendant told investigators he had never spoken to Burisma Official 1 on the phone after meeting with Burisma Official 1 in a German-speaking country in 2016, and that his last contact with Burisma Official 1 was early 2016.
	Further, Associate 1 never spoke to Burisma Official 1, Okay, fine.
	So those are the lies.
	It didn't happen in 2015 or 2016.
	It might happen in 2017, but by then, Biden was no longer in office.
	He had no ability to influence anybody.
	Load of shiot.
	Between on or about June 26th and June 30th, 2020, the Central District Court, defendant Smirnoff did knowingly cause the making of a false entry in an FBI Form 1023, a record and document with the intent to impede, obstruct, influence.
	Don't talk to the FBI, people.
	That's the indictment.
	For the false statements.
	And the talking point of the day, I'm going to have to go find it, because I linked it, but I don't have it in the backdrop.
	Let me see if I can get this here.
	Was the filing that the media is running with that says, oh yeah, he met with Russian officials.
	And now, let's see here, this, would you look at that?
	Smirnoff was a confidential human source.
	Let me see this.
	Oh, hold on, I'll get the, I just want to pull up one thing.
	The part where they say that Hunter Biden had never even gone to Ukraine.
	Could you imagine that?
	Oh, by the way, just before we forget, not for nothing.
	Holy cows, it makes so much more sense backwards than it does forwards.
	Life can only be understood backwards, but must be lived forward.
	I remember going over convincing our team or others to convincing us that we should be providing for loan guarantees.
	And I went over, I guess, the 12th, 13th time to Kyiv, and I was supposed to announce that there was another billion dollar loan guarantee.
	And I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from Yatsenyuk that they would take action against a state prosecutor, and they didn't.
	So they said they were walking out to the press conference and said, no, we're not going to give you the billion dollars.
	They said, you have no authority.
	You're not the president.
	The president said, I said, call him.
	I said, I'm telling you, you're not getting a billion dollars.
	I said, you're not getting a billion?
	I'm going to be leaving here.
	I think it was, what, six hours?
	I looked, I said, I'm leaving in six hours.
	If the prosecutor's not fired, you're not getting the money.
	Well, son of a bitch.
	You got fired.
	And they put in place someone who was solid.
	I remember going over convinced.
	That's the statement, people.
	This is the filing that the media is running with today.
	It rehashes a lot of the indictment.
	And this is where they ask for basically no bail, from what I understand.
	No condition or combination...
	Are we in the right document here?
	Let me see something here.
	We are.
	No condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant, Alexander Spinoff, as required.
	As discussed in more detail below, the nature and circumstances of the offense.
	Yeah, lying.
	Lying to the FBI.
	Lock him up forever, people.
	Weight of the evidence and the fact that Smirnoff's ties to the community are weak.
	Establish that Smirnoff should be detained.
	But in addition, there are four indisputable facts related to the characteristics of Smirnoff that compelled attention.
	First, he claims to have contacts with multiple foreign intelligence agencies and had plans to leave the United States.
	Two days after he was arrested last week for a months-long multi-country foreign trip.
	I mean, you'll tell me if I'm misunderstanding this.
	It sounds like what they're saying is he was on a months-long foreign trip, multi-country foreign trip, came back to America.
	First, he claims to have had contacts with multiple foreign intelligence agencies and had plans to leave the United States two days after he was arrested last week.
	Oh, he had plans to leave the United States.
	Okay, fine.
	Now it makes sense.
	contracts.
	We've got to believe now.
	Those foreign intelligence agencies could resettle Smirnoff outside the United States if he were released.
	Second, he had access to $6 million indirectly through his girlfriend, spouse, and whatever.
	Third, he didn't disclose the funds.
	And fourth, as an Israeli citizen, Smirnoff can obtain a new passport at any time by visiting an Israeli consulate.
	Then we get into a lot of the stuff here where it rehashes a lot from the actual indictment.
	Smirnoff was a confidential human source with the FBI.
	Oh, he listened to this.
	He was engaged.
	He was authorized to engage in illegal activity for investigative purposes, but he had to tell the truth.
	Despite repeated admonishments, we get to that part.
	No, that's it.
	I mean, that's it.
	It rehashes pretty much everything in the original document.
	This smells so bad.
	This basically smells like the FBI basically just said, we're going to throw our own asset under the bus.
	They can manufacture lies out of whole cloth.
	Maybe he made a statement and got mixed up on the dates?
	Who the hell knows?
	The bottom line is, this guy, Smirnoff, was not necessary for anything that we already knew.
	For any of the evidence that already exists.
	For the influence peddling.
	And even by the indictment itself, it doesn't say it didn't happen.
	It just says he was off on the dates.
	And this stuff occurred in 2017 when Biden was no longer VP.
	He was a private citizen.
	And couldn't have exercised the influence that he said he could have that he did when he was in office.
	And we have the video of it.
	And Hunter never went to Ukraine.
	A crackhead was just hired to the board of directors of a corrupt company that was being investigated by the man that they got fired for investigating.
	And he never stepped foot in Ukraine.
	Nothing suspicious about any of that at all.
	Oh!
	It's wild.
	And it's going to let the media now run with this bullshit narrative that's going to convince those who want to believe.
	Now all of the Hunter Biden influence peddling, it's all nonsense.
	The quid pro quo that they went after Trump for, that we have video evidence of Biden doing.
	The illicit profiteering off his crackhead son that we know happened.
	Well, now we can just say...
	The guy who was not actually the whistleblower or the main witness in all of that, well, he claims to have had ties to Russian intelligence.
	I want to know who those intelligence people were, because something tells me it might come all the way back to the DNC yet again.
	but now we can disregard everything because this guy apparently uh had ties to ma russia russia russia russia sammy says re your bon gino comment like your content because it's not the talking points du jour when podcast contents start feeling the same i'm out shut up and take my Thank you very much, Sammy.
	Well, the reason I listen to Bongino is I want to make sure, I mean, the dude's got experience.
	He's got life experience that I don't have.
	And so some of this stuff, I'm going to talk about it with Barnes.
	Like, man, I do my best to try to understand it.
	You go back to that indictment and I read an indictment that reads like a defense pleading for Joe Biden, making argument and not alleging fact.
	It's an argument that Joe Biden didn't have that influence when he was no longer VP.
	It's not a fact.
	Indictments are supposed to be facts that you're going to prove at trial.
	That is an argument to attenuate a fact.
	That fact being that he peddled out his son for influence, but the argument's going to be, well, I couldn't have because I wasn't in position of power to exercise that influence, to which any reasonable juror is going to say, that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
	A former VP has influence for life.
	I mean, unless you're Trump or Mike Pence.
	But a former president, even when they're not president, has political influence for life.
	They have connections for life.
	You're not investing in VP Biden and hoping that he gets elected.
	Otherwise, that investment goes to shit.
	You have an investment for life.
	You have a connection for life, whether or not he ever runs for president.
	And they knew that he was, in any event, paying off his crackhead son.
	10% for the big guy.
	This didn't come from the Smirnoff guy.
	This came from Bobulinski and the other witnesses.
	It was a peddling, influence peddling scheme from the get-go.
	And we have the literal receipts for it, but now they get to write it all off because Smirnoff allegedly lied to the FBI about alleged dates, and I'm not so convinced that he did.
	And the FBI is throwing their CHS of since 2010 under the bus.
	Because they're a criminal organization and it's more expedient to make a criminal out of their criminal than it is to actually address the criminality that is the corruption of the Biden regime.
	Have I forgotten anything, Chad?
	Have I got anything wrong, more importantly?
	Hey.
	Hedda Broccoli says, Bongino is great, but sometimes I worry about his blood pressure when he gets rolling.
	Forget Bongino.
	He's fine.
	His blood pressure's fine.
	Vinny.
	From the unusual suspects, his blood pressure we might have to look into.
	My blood pressure is perfect.
	115 over 75, 120 over 80. My pulse, typically resting heart rate, is about a 56 or a 58. That's a little higher now because I'm a little excited.
	So that's the indictment.
	I'm going to continue looking into it because I still don't know that I feel that I understand it in its entirety, the full context, the full nuance, and the full details.
	But it smells like a load of crap.
	I guarantee you it's a load of crap.
	And if the past is prologue, we're going to find out that these so-called Russian assets, the Russian intelligence people that Smirnoff claims to have had ties to, that they're related to the DNC.
	And they say he's lying now, but he was telling the truth before.
	It's very convenient.
	We all know that you don't even have to lie to the FBI for them to prosecute you, persecute you for lying.
	They went after Flynn.
	For what were referred to as equivocal statements.
	I don't remember.
	Oh, no, you did remember when you said you didn't remember.
	And that's how they went after Flynn, in part.
	You don't even need to lie to the FBI for them to go after you for lying.
	That's why you don't talk to them.
	Of course, then you plead the fifth, and then they'll go with guilt by omission.
	So let me see in the chat here.
	Let me see here.
	I'm pretty close to real good.
	Oh, no, no.
	Let me see here.
	Okay.
	So, to be continued.
	But it smells like crap because it is crap.
	Now, get out of New York, people.
	I listen to Leticia James talk and I want to vomit.
	And you will too.
	Let me see here.
	Let me see here.
	Get out of New York.
	I mean, I want to puke because it's not stupidity.
	It's evil.
	And it's the C.S. Lewis type evil.
	Is it Lewis Carroll or C.S. Lewis?
	I'm pretty sure it's C.S. Lewis.
	Going back to our sponsor of the day, Hillsdale College.
	C.S. Lewis.
	The most dangerous tyrants are the ones who torment you with the approval of their own conscience.
	Because they can do it 24-7.
	She's evil and she has the approval of her own conscience.
	It's a short clip.
	If he does not have funds to pay off the judgment.
	Then we will seek, you know, judgment enforcement mechanisms in court.
	And we will ask the judge to seize his assets.
	If he does not have funds to pay off his judgment, then we will seek, you know, judgment enforcement mechanisms in court.
	And we will ask the judge to seize his assets.
	Can you imagine this, this...
	District Attorney who has accomplished nothing of value in her life that was sincerely hard to work for.
	She didn't build an enterprise.
	She didn't build a business.
	She didn't employ thousands of people.
	And maybe some of you are going to say, well, Trump didn't do that either.
	His daddy helped him.
	Whatever.
	It's the difference between communist bureaucrats and private enterprise.
	This woman has built nothing of value that I know of in her life.
	But I'll tell you what she has done.
	She's trying to destroy.
	What someone else built.
	She's trying to, hey, you got a nice building there.
	I'll take that.
	Oh no, but we're going to go through the legal process.
	We're going to go and ask the judge.
	Nipple Judge Engeron.
	The man who has all the tools under his belt to arrive at the judicial biases that he wants to arrive at.
	We're going to go ask him.
	It's not me doing it.
	I'm not the corrupt communist who's just stealing your stuff.
	It's been authorized by law.
	By a corrupt communist judge.
	Who has found a legal pretext to seize your stuff.
	Get the hell out of New York.
	And as a matter of principle, I will not support that place, that state.
	And it's a terrible thing.
	I don't even know if the city's beautiful.
	I mean, I used to love the city, but that was when I was a kid.
	And, you know, the wonders of the urban jungle, I found them alluring.
	Now I just find them repulsive.
	I prefer to be in nature than in urban.
	Jungle landscapes.
	The state is very nice.
	Oh, jeez, what's the word I'm looking for?
	Poco Moonshine, the rock climbing place.
	In the Adirondacks.
	Keene Valley.
	I mean, these are beautiful places of nature.
	But I won't spend a dollar there if I can avoid it.
	Because it's corruption.
	Get the hell out and don't take your communist policies to where you're going.
	I like to make the joke, you know, there's more New Yorkers in Florida than Floridians, but don't bring...
	And I can understand the fear of people seeing a liberal, Trudeau-loving, what they think is a Trudeau-loving Canadian coming down to Florida.
	Don't bring your shitty politics to our beautiful free state.
	Don't worry about it.
	But get the hell out of here.
	Do you understand what Leticia James just said there?
	Let me get the article.
	Is there an article?
	Yeah, we're going to go, and if he doesn't pay it up, we're going to seize his shit because his stuff is now our stuff.
	Because that's how we roll in communist countries.
	Oh, but we did it lawfully.
	He had a trial.
	Otto Warmbier was duly convicted.
	He had a trial.
	And they don't understand it.
	And they do understand it.
	I can't say they don't understand it.
	No.
	When Putin locks up his political adversaries.
	It's an injustice.
	We have to fight it tooth and nail.
	When we seek to lock up our political rivals, it's justice.
	Because we did it through the courts.
	Oh, but Putin did it through the courts as well.
	But his courts are corrupt.
	Our courts are kosher.
	Trump fraud verdict.
	New York Atissa LeJahidah James says she'll seize ex-president's buildings.
	It's not me.
	Don't get mad at me.
	I'm not taking your stuff.
	It's the government that's taking your stuff.
	And they got these, you know, execution provisions.
	If you don't pay up within the, what was it, 30 days to pay up or postbond or, you know, or put the amount up in court while you appeal.
	Well, they got execution mechanisms.
	$355 million fine.
	New York Attorney General T.C. James is prepared.
	She's prepared to try and seize former President Donald Trump's properties.
	If he can't pay.
	Do you know what would happen to her if she seized one of his properties?
	30 seconds later, it would be a dilapidated...
	Urine-soaked, peepee-soaked heckle.
	Leticia James knows how to run a building?
	You think she knows how to run a business?
	Not Leticia James in particular.
	You think Alvin Bragg?
	You think Jack Smith knows how to run a business?
	These people have never created anything of value in their lives.
	They've only taken the value of others.
	Oh, but she's prepared to seize his buildings if he can't pay, because justice, no one, is above the law.
	If he can't pay the nearly $355 million...
	Fine in the civil fraud case.
	Oh, yeah, and the $98 million in prejudgment interest.
	As questions swirl over how Trump will pay, the amount he owes now exceeds his estimated cash in the bank.
	He doesn't owe that money from a hole in the wall.
	Filthy communists.
	She's, well, we got the idea.
	So the $364 million plus interest, yada, yada.
	With interest, it's $453 million.
	And the interest will keep accruing at 9%.
	Can you imagine?
	The government's basically saying now, hey, yeah, private citizen, we're going to take money from you at 9% interest.
	Find me a, I mean, I don't know, find me a bank that pays 9% interest.
	I think the best you can get is like five and a half, and that's if you have the cash to invest.
	Meaning he'll owe an extra $31 million per year.
	$87,000 per day.
	James, who brought, I mean, it's just, it's theft.
	It's theft.
	And they think that they went through the courts.
	That it's any more legitimate than when Kim Jong-un sentenced Otto Warmbier to 13 years hard labor after a one-hour trial?
	They don't believe it.
	But they have the appeasement of their own conscience, so they can do it forever.
	Trump engaged in a massive amount of fraud.
	It wasn't just a simple mistake, a slight oversight.
	The variations are wildly exaggerated, and the extent of the fraud was staggering.
	James told NBC, if average New Yorkers went into a bank and submitted false documents, the government would throw the book at them.
	And the same should be true for form.
	You know what?
	If the government's going to fabricate crimes and lock up New Yorkers, get the hell out of New York.
	It's wild.
	And it's legally justified.
	what?
	She found her judge.
	Oh.
	Oh.
	Okay.
	But on that subject, here's what Trump had to say.
	And the idiots are out there saying, yeah, it's not the same at all.
	Listen to this.
	This is Trump.
	But it's happening in our country, too.
	We are turning into a communist country in many ways.
	And if you look at it, I'm the leading candidate.
	I never heard of being indicted before.
	I was going to...
	I got indicted four times.
	I have eight or nine trials, all because of the fact that I'm, and you know this, all because of the fact that I'm in politics.
	They indicted me on things that are so ridiculous.
	Fannie in Atlanta.
	We'll get into that.
	We're going to get into that.
	But it's happening in our country, too.
	We are turning into a...
	It's terrible to see.
	Like, I'll tell you, it gives me a certain degree of despair because...
	You got the likes of Heath Mayo.
	Who is this guy again?
	Corporate lawyer.
	That's great.
	He's a corporate lawyer.
	On Navalny, Trump says it's happening in our country too.
	No, it isn't.
	The U.S. is better than Putin's Russia.
	Is that the metric now?
	Is that the standard?
	If it's not as bad as Putin's Russia, if it's not as bad as Hitler's Germany, it's not bad?
	And if you can't see that, you don't really understand America.
	Infuriating.
	I don't get how any red-blooded American can sit and nod at this.
	I don't see how any red-blooded American can think that $450 million fine, $355 million fine plus $100 million in prejudgment interest for a victimless, alleged crime.
	Alleged fraud.
	I'm not even going to say a victimless crime or a victimless fraud because there was no fraud and there was no crime here.
	How any red-blooded human with half a functioning brain, Heath, can say, in a circumstance where the banks did not complain, in fact, I'm sorry, I should take that back.
	The banks did complain that they can no longer do business with Trump.
	The banks were happy.
	With their agreement with Trump.
	They got paid millions and millions and tens of millions of dollars in interest.
	They were happy.
	They wanted to do business with Trump.
	They entered into their contracts in full awareness of fact and law.
	And there's fraud?
	Oh, because he got preferential loan rates by allegedly artificially inflating the values of his properties?
	And the banks who did their own due diligences said we would have lent him the money if his value was half that?
	There's no crime here.
	There's no fraud here.
	And Heath Mayo, you are a jackass and you are a communist part of the problem.
	Period.
	I'm sorry.
	You put Christian and whatever conservative in your bio?
	You're a lawyer?
	The banks lent the money in full awareness of fact and law.
	The only one fabricating preferential loans from alleged fraudulent overvaluation of assets is Leticia James, who campaigned of persecuting her political rival.
	America at this point might be a little worse than Russia.
	At least you...
	I don't even think that Putin campaigned off prosecuting Navalny.
	I don't think Navalny was actually, from what I understand, a legitimate threat to the political power of Putin.
	America might actually be worse than Russia at this point in time.
	At least in respect of this.
	Not beyond savior.
	There's a hell of a lot more pushback here than anywhere else.
	So, yeah.
	I'm not saying a victimless crime or a victimless fraud because there was no crime, there was no fraud, except the persecution of Donald Trump by a woman who campaigned off persecuting Trump, who found a judge who was boasting to his alumni about all of the negative rulings that he was issuing against Eric Trump and Trump Org.
	A corrupt prosecutor, a corrupt judge, and you got your useful idiots on Twitter.
	I don't understand how any red-blooded American...
	If you don't see what's going on, Heath Mayo, you are part of the problem.
	If you do see what's going on, Heath Mayo, you're part of the problem.
	Get the hell out of New York.
	Speak your mind.
	Was this the same thing here that I had?
	Yep.
	Okay, well, I don't need to listen to that again.
	I'm going to check my blood pressure now, see if my wife can bring in the...
	Not the defibrillator.
	Oh, lordy, lordy.
	And then the Julian Assange.
	Well, I guess the news about Julian Assange.
	I don't know that there's been any news in Julian Assange, but he's up in...
	Speaking of not much better here.
	No, we don't lock up journalists here.
	No, we don't do that.
	I mean, other than the fact that they prosecuted a number of journalists who were there on January 6th reporting.
	I interviewed one of them, Stephen Horn.
	We don't lock up journalists here.
	We get the allies that we're financing to do that.
	We don't lock up journalists here.
	We get them locked up elsewhere and then talk about assassinating them.
	You know, Julian Assange...
	Oh, okay, hold on one second.
	Everybody get ready for some supreme cringe.
	Supreme.
	We're going to have some supreme cringe.
	Yes, yes.
	Viva Frye, Julian Assange.
	Let me see if I can find this video.
	Oh, God.
	Get ready, people.
	It's so embarrassing to look back at how I used to look and how I used to deliver things.
	This has been a saga that I've been following for damn near six years.
	You ready for this?
	Don't worry, I haven't cut my hair.
	Oh god, that's me.
	It's so embarrassing.
	Listen to this.
	This is just a brief summary.
	I spent the better part of Saturday reading Julian Assange's indictment and breaking it down, and it's fascinating.
	Look at this, I had a different intro song.
	For those of you who don't know me, I am Viva Frye, a Montreal litigator turned YouTuber.
	I do these things called vlogs, V-L-A-W-G-S, where we break down and analyze something that's going on in the news from a legal perspective, simplifying it and explaining it so that it can be understood by lawyers and non-lawyers alike.
	For those of you who have been living under a rock, on April 11th, 2019, Julian Assange was arrested by the British police after spending seven years holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
	If you haven't seen my first video on the subject, go check it out.
	I'll link it right here.
	I have to stop.
	But in a nutshell, Julian Assange took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden on charges of rape and sexual assault.
	Because he risked extradition to the United States for having published highly classified information on WikiLeaks, information which was leaked to him by Chelsea Manning, who used to serve in the US military.
	Collateral murder, people.
	That's what he was on trial for.
	That's...
	So what do you think?
	Do I look...
	I think I look better now.
	Okay.
	I'll give everybody the link to that.
	So Julian Assange...
	When the Ecuadorian embassy kicked him out, took him out so that he could get arrested.
	Can you imagine being there for seven years?
	From what I understand, he never stepped foot out of the building because he couldn't because he'd get arrested the second he did because they have these rules that embassies are like basically foreign land within a country.
	So, you know, you get protections in the embassies.
	Diplomatic immunity.
	Not diplomatic immunity, but whatever.
	So he had holed up there for a long time.
	Apparently he might have become too much of a pain in the ass for the Ecuadorian embassy.
	They either allowed the British police in, or I don't know, I think they allowed them in, and he gets arrested, hauled out.
	I remember the moment he got hauled out.
	And then there's an extradition request to America.
	So bear in mind, people, you know, like, America doesn't lock up journalists.
	They just, you know, get them arrested in foreign countries and talk about assassinating them.
	They talked, and I say, they're trying to recreate history a little bit and make it look like Trump was the one who was talking about assassinating.
	Assange, I'm fairly certain it was Hillary Clinton under...
	When was she Secretary of State?
	Under Obama.
	So they want to extradite him back to America, where I don't think he can face the death penalty because I don't think he was brought up on charges of espionage.
	But they want to extradite him to America.
	But America is much better than Putin.
	They don't lock up journalists.
	They just talk about killing them abroad and then when they can't do that or decide not to, bring him home.
	Extradite them back to America.
	For what, by the way?
	For revealing government crimes.
	So the crime is how one goes about revealing government crimes.
	Because recall here, it was Chelsea Manning.
	I keep wanting to say Peyton Manning.
	That's a football player.
	It was Chelsea Manning who gave Julian Assange the documents that showed collateral murder.
	And they want to accuse Julian Assange of having had a hand in the theft or computer invasion to have gotten those documents.
	I'll read this article, maybe it'll refresh some memories here.
	Oh yeah, of course.
	He put people at grave and imminent risk.
	If the international community understands that the American government might be murdering people, committing war crimes...
	Yeah, that might put American soldiers at risk.
	You might be right, technically.
	The solution is not to hide the war crimes.
	The solution is to make sure they don't happen.
	Australian wanted by U.S. authorities...
	Okay, fine.
	Alleged conspiracy to disclose national defense information.
	Julian Assange put people at...
	So right now he's having a hearing as to whether or not he gets a further hearing in the U.K. because from what I understand, the court that authorized his extradition...
	What they call a magistrate court, which is a very low-level court, and he wants a full hearing at the higher-level court system in the UK to oppose the extradition to the United States because Lord knows what happens if Assange gets to the United States through extradition.
	Assange didn't Epstein himself type thing.
	Like Biden government is not a little bit angry still at Julian Assange.
	Like the American government, the deep state apparatus, the military-industrial complex is not a little bit angry.
	Still, at Julian Assange.
	He put people at grave risk by including the names of people who helped the U.S. in unredacted classified documents, which he quote, indiscriminately and knowingly, end quote, published to the world.
	The WikiLeaks founder failed to appear in the high court for a second day running.
	In his longstanding battle against extradition, where he's accused of leaking confidential military secrets.
	The 52-year-old Austrian faces 17 charges of espionage.
	So he is facing espionage.
	And one computer misuse is wanted by U.S. authorities over an alleged conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defense information following the publication of hundreds of thousands of leaked documents relating to Afghanistan and Iraq wars.
	His lawyer said that if extradited, he would face a "flagrant denial of justice" by "prejudiced judges" and was being prosecuted for "ordinary journalistic practice." You know what's going to confirm this fear?
	Everything that the U.S. court systems have been doing to Trump and anyone within his orbit for the last several years.
	That's what would show that this is a prejudiced system.
	Judge ruled in 2021 that Assange should not be sent to the U.S. given there was a real risk of suicide, but ruled against him on all other issues.
	That's right, he was on suicide watch at the time.
	Assange, who is in a Belmarsh jail in London, is now seeking permission to challenge the judge's dismissal of other parts of this case.
	Okay, that's it.
	So that's the hearing.
	Now, they were protesting, and I don't think that there's been any update.
	And I don't want to look like I'm jumping on a free Julian Assange hashtag.
	I've been covering it.
	I mean, I've been covering it for six freaking years now.
	There just hasn't been much development since the court.
	Ruled against his extradition for suicide reasons, but didn't grant it on all the other reasons.
	And so we'll be talking about it Sunday in further detail with Barnes, Biggity Barnes.
	Now...
	Oh, yeah.
	Okay, there we go.
	Remove.
	Okay.
	Let's see what we got going on in the rumble.
	Oh, there's rumble, France.
	So that's the latest on Julian Assange.
	I mean...
	There was talk about Trump pardoning Julian Assange, but then he would have surely been...
	Oh, crap.
	Now I'm hearing something and I don't know where it's coming from.
	I'm hearing music in the backdrop.
	Got it.
	Okay.
	There was talk about Trump pardoning Assange, but then he didn't and he should have.
	Vivek Ramaswamy.
	Pardon Julian Assange.
	Pardon Ed Snowden.
	Pardon the January Sixers.
	Pardon Donald Trump.
	Maybe even pardon crackhead Hunter Biden if it would bring unity to the country.
	And I agree with him.
	Okay, now let's get to the rumble rants and then some of the cobbets here.
	And then, let's see what we got.
	I love your show, Mr. Freiheit.
	Head of Broccoli, thank you very much.
	You see, some people use my name, and I know they're doing it as an act of aggression, as if they think they're disclosing something private to the world.
	And then I know when people use it, Lovingly.
	Thank you very much, head of broccoli.
	But you know, some might say that I have a head of broccoli.
	Bada bing, bada boom.
	GeorgePatriot22 says, sent a rumble rant about this a few weeks ago.
	Just wanted to make sure that you see it.
	And I'm going to go back down there on the bottom.
	Crash Bandit.
	New York needs money to fund those debit cards for illegals.
	Joke.
	Hashtag kidding, not kidding.
	And then GeorgePatriot22.
	Viva.
	Broken Truth would be a fantastic guest.
	You've played some of his stuff before.
	Here's the Twitter.
	Thanks for your dedication and skill, sir.
	My pleasure.
	I'm going to have to go to the car and get a vlog out about maybe, I don't know, I think...
	We'll see now, but hold on.
	Before, I don't want to get into trouble if I bring up a tweet that I shouldn't bring up, so let me remove this.
	Let me go here.
	No, I'll go to Incognito.
	Thank you very much, Patriot.
	Let's see here.
	Incognito.
	We've still got a couple of things before we head on over to the local side.
	Epidemic of Fraud, a Broken Truth subscriber exclusive premiere.
	Well, I'm going to share this with everybody.
	This is not an endorsement.
	This is sharing knowledge, which may or may not be entirely accurate.
	And I do not know, and I cannot vet it because I have not vetted it, but here's the link.
	And with that said, actually, it's a perfect segue into our next subject, which is trust but verify, people.
	I like DC Drano, and this is not a...
	As the children say, throwing shade on DC Drano.
	This tweet went around yesterday.
	And a lot of people were retweeting and saying, what's going on?
	Why don't they want to take...
	Why are they giving us this warning about people who've taken the COVID jab?
	Because it says...
	I'll read it.
	It says...
	DC Drano, I like him.
	This is not a shade whatsoever.
	I called up the number because I was curious about it myself.
	The American Red Cross is now asking blood donors if they ever received the COVID vaccine.
	If the answer is yes, they want you to call ahead to see if you're still eligible.
	I thought the vaccine was, quote, safe and effective, end quote.
	What info are they hiding from us?
	Now, I was curious because I did notice when I just gave blood and plasma a few weeks ago that I noticed a question there.
	I was like, oh, why are you asking?
	Are you asking?
	And I didn't ask the guy this.
	I just didn't want to get rejected because I, whatever.
	I answered it honestly, but I had seen the question as well.
	So I called up the number here.
	Look, this is what it says.
	Rapid pass.
	Have you ever had a COVID-19 vaccine?
	Yes, no, skip.
	If you answer yes to this question, please call 1-800-RED-CROSS before coming to donate to determine if this will affect your eligibility.
	Okay, so then the context, which I think is accurate.
	They ask you this question to make sure you haven't received a self-replicating vaccine.
	I don't know what that is.
	And if you have, there's a two-week wait.
	Most COVID vaccines are not self-replicating.
	And I think that means the ones that use a live COVID particle.
	But don't quote me on that because I'm not a...
	So I called them up.
	Bottom line, by all accounts, the question has been there since they rolled out the vaccine three years ago now.
	And I was told by the woman who I spoke with...
	That it is indeed to determine if you receive one of the...
	I think it was AstraZeneca.
	One of the vaccines had a different type and didn't use the mRNA that Pfizer and Moderna used.
	It was, yeah, if you got that one, then you had to wait a two-week period.
	But then she also said, you know, if you've gotten the vaccine and if you've had symptoms, then you can't give blood.
	And I was like, what sense does that make?
	If you have symptoms, period, you can't give blood, vax or no vax.
	And she's like, yeah, that's a good point.
	But the bottom line, the question's been there.
	It's not new.
	It's been there for three years.
	And that's the explanation they gave.
	And then I did ask the woman that I was talking with, do people ask for unvaccinated blood, blood from unvaxxed people?
	I'm just like, yeah, they do.
	We get that.
	And we do try to accommodate.
	So that's that.
	So just be careful.
	It's just like, yeah, people are conspiratorially traumatized where we have been lied to for so long.
	And we have been gaslit for so long that we reflexively see conspiracy where there might not otherwise be.
	And that's the two steps back that you always have to take before reacting to something.
	All right.
	I think we did good today, people.
	We did good.
	Now, before we head over to...
	Now we're going to do it.
	Okay.
	That's it.
	We're going to head over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Should I play us out with a little cringe?
	I think I will.
	I didn't miss any more.
	I didn't miss any more rants.
	Hold on a second.
	That's not in trial.
	Kenzie67 says, Viva, that's not in trial too.
	They have turned down live unvaxxed blood for kids even.
	I haven't heard of that, Kenzie.
	We'll just get some chat here.
	Claire, let me see here.
	ClaireCat367 says, We've had the Red Cross blood van here in our tiny town two weeks in a row looking for less polluted blood supply among the rural deplorables.
	I think they're just looking for blood everywhere, man.
	I mean, it's like...
	I know the only time I didn't give blood was during COVID because, you know...
	No further reason.
	It's just like, you know, they make it impossible to do normal things.
	Let me see here.
	Okay.
	Trump did hire a bunch of swamp.
	They are stabbing him in the back now, says ex-skater.
	Trump's chief White House advisor, Boris Epstein Ashkenazi Lawrence...
	Okay, so I didn't mean to read that.
	Okay, so what we're going to do now, people...
	Come on over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	I'm probably going to be able to get a car vlog out or maybe an office vlog and just talk, maybe do a condensed version of the indictment bullshit and why you should not be swayed by it.
	But other than that, tomorrow, 1 o 'clock, Kayla Pollock, and we're going to have an amazing interview and raise as much awareness as we can.
	But hold on a second.
	Actually, just before, while I have you all here and before you go, she sent me the link to her Give, Send, Go.
	Let me get that to you right now, please.
	Actually, if I can go here, I'm going to retweet it right now.
	And I'm going to go just tweet it here.
	Okay, give me one second.
	I want to share this thing with everybody.
	Let me bring it up.
	Let me just bring it up so you know what's coming tomorrow.
	Here, this one right here.
	It'll make you angry, hopefully in the good way to help raise awareness and...
	Ensure that there will be political hell to pay for this.
	It's just made me very despaired.
	But this is the story.
	Exclusive young Ontario woman's life becomes a living hell after Moderna booster shot leads are paralyzed.
	Doctors confirm vaccine connection and offer medical assistance in Dine.
	The government can save on the front end and the back end.
	They don't have to incur the cost to treat her properly.
	And they can save the money by telling her to end her life.
	Thus indicating that they have no intention of helping her.
	And then who knows, maybe they'll harvest whatever, you know, they'll harvest her organs while they're at it.
	Because we're one step off from that.
	So I'm going to give everybody the link, but this is what I want to give everybody.
	The link to her Give, Send, Go.
	And I'm going to share it tomorrow, obviously.
	She's going to need, from what I understand, she's going to need more than $80,000.
	Because the government, she's got to get a, she's got to fend for herself now.
	Wheelchair.
	A vehicle.
	Life.
	And that's not even the punitive damages that I believe that she should be entitled to from this government that brought this on her.
	Link to give, send, go.
	I've given to it, so I'm not asking people to do anything.
	I'm not asking anybody to do anything.
	But I'm not pushing something that I have not now put my own skin in the game, so to speak.
	The government...
	Hey, but no, no.
	Ask her if she wants to die.
	She's got a 10-year-old kid.
	Oh yeah, it's too...
	Time's tough here with the government.
	We've got a lot of these things.
	We can't be helping accommodate everybody.
	It's socialized healthcare, after all.
	Alright, that's it.
	I'll leave you on something of a...
	No, look, I'll leave you on something of a cringe pill.
	Come on over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com and we will end with just a couple more minutes of this painful, painful cringe.
	Enjoy.
	If you're not coming to Locals, I'll see you tomorrow at 1 o 'clock.
	Kayla Pollock.
	Eastern, one o 'clock tomorrow Eastern.
	And thank you all for being here.
	Viva Fry on Rumble.
	Viva Fry on Twitter.
	VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com on Locals.
	And...
	Mr. Winston.
	He's going down.
	He's going to...
	Get that face out of here.
	Hold on one second.
	Winston wants to say something.
	Hello.
	I love you all very much.
	My breath smells like fish and I don't even know why because I don't eat fish.
	It's just gross.
	He's had enough.
	Okay, down you go.
	And, um, back to cringe.
	See you all on Locals in one or two minutes, or however long I can let this thing play for.
	I'll let it all play out.
	See you on Locals.
	Peace.
	After seven years cooped up in the Ecuadorian embassy, literally not having been able to step one foot off of that embassy, he was arrested after the government of Ecuador withdrew their asylum and invited British authorities into the embassy, where they subsequently arrested Julian Assange.
	Noteworthy is that about a month prior to the Ecuadorian government withdrawing Julian Assange's asylum, the United States had gotten an indictment against Julian Assange on a variety of crimes.
	And just to open a parenthesis to explain what an indictment is, it's just a fancy word for saying formal criminal charges being brought.
	An indictment is obtained by presenting evidence to a grand jury, which is basically a group of citizens, who then determine if there is sufficient evidence to bring formal criminal charges.
	A sealed indictment means literally just that.
	The indictment itself is not public.
	Witnesses'names are redacted to protect them.
	And the indictment itself is only made public at a later date.
	Julian Assange's indictment was a sealed indictment up until the day of his arrest, April 11th, 2019.
	When it was unsealed, we got to see what the criminal charges were that were being brought against Julian Assange, and they will be the fodder for speculation for everyone.
	When I first heard that Julian Assange was arrested, I It presumed that it was on the basis of espionage.
	Espionage being a fancy word for spying, which is potentially punishable by the death penalty.
	Hence, in my first video, I said there might be an issue as to whether or not the United Kingdom will in fact extradite Julian Assange to the United States, where he might face the death penalty for the charges brought against him.
	In fact, Julian Assange has not been indicted on espionage.
	He has been indicted on a seemingly much lesser crime of conspiracy to access a computer, which carries with it a maximum sentence of five years.
	And a number of news outlets are reporting that Julian Assange only faces a maximum of five years if convicted.
	That is true and not true.
	In fact, there are multiple crimes being alleged against Julian Assange, some of which actually have a maximum sentence of 10 years.
	Not the death penalty, but nonetheless 10 years in prison.
	Couple that with the fact that any sentence can be ordered to be run concurrently or consecutively, meaning, if Julian Assange is found guilty on two charges of something with a maximum penalty of 10 years, if a judge orders these sentences to be served concurrently, it's 10 years on top of 10 years, maximum 10 years.
	If a judge orders the sentence to be served consecutively, it's 10 years, and 10 years after 10 years, total 20 years.
	And from the little that I understand of American criminal law, it is discretionary as to whether or not a judge orders sentences to be served concurrently or consecutively.
	And the considerations are the nature of the crime, the defendants, etc, etc.
	But what are the actual charges brought in the indictment?
	For that, we're going to have to go to the indictment, so let's just do that, shall we?
	Let's just look at the indictment for a second.
	It's not that lawyers are smarter than anybody else despite what lawyers might think.
	Lawyers are not smarter than anybody else.
	We have just been trained to read what is effectively code that only makes sense to people who know how to read it.
	We have the header which refers to the judicial district.
	We have the date the court file was opened.
	We have the parties, United States of America versus Julian Assange.
	And then we have the articles of the criminal code that serve as the charges being brought against Julian Assange.
	And then we can go ahead and read the specifics of the indictment which we don't really need to do for the purposes of this vlog.
	Suffice to say that Chelsea Manning was an intelligence analyst within the United States military.
	She sought Julian Assange's assistant to crack a password such that she could access classified information to give it to Julian Assange who would then publish it on WikiLeaks as was done in May to November 2010.
	The classified information related to operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
	And if we go to the conclusions, we can see what Julian Assange is being accused of specifically.
	Conclusion A reads as follows: You can go ahead and read the rest of it.
	The bottom line is that Julian Assange is being accused of having conspired to access a computer illegally.
	He's not being accused of espionage.
	He's not being accused of something more serious than conspiracy to access a computer.
	And if we go to Conclusion B, it reads as follows: Some of the criminal infractions have a 5-year maximum sentence, others have a maximum of 10-year sentence.
	But they are undoubtedly less serious than espionage.
	And another important thing to consider here is the statute of limitations.
	Statute of limitations basically means a period So that is a breakdown of the criminal accusations brought against Julian Assange.
	And until there are further developments, this is going to be fodder for speculation by everybody.
	People are going to be asking themselves why Assange I'm just looking.
	I'm just double checking in real time.
	He was charged.
	They brought 17 new charges of espionage on May 23rd, my birthday, 2019.
	When was this video from?
	This was before.
	How do I get out of here?
	You know, that's all we need.
	This was from, let's see here, Moore.
	April.
	Oh, those little bastards did it barely a month after I made this video.
	Alright, well, that's the material change.
	They actually indicted him on 17 charges of espionage, which should frustrate the indictment, considering the penalty for espionage.
	Alright, everybody.
	That is it.
	I will see you all.
	Are you sure you want to end?
	I will see you all on Locals.
	Enjoy the night if you're not coming.
	Peace out, peeps.
	Booyah.
	Alright, Locals.
	I don't want to age exponentially.
	Let me see what I look like.
	I don't think I look older.
	I just noticed this bag.
	If I just go like this.
	There we go.

▲