Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 29, 2024 - Viva & Barnes

01:28:46

Bradley Texts are JUICY! SCOTUS to Hear Immunity! NY Appeal Judge Rules on Trump! Viva Frei

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Is really presidential immunity an open question?
	Because what's the most famous pardon in American history?
	Gerald Ford pardoning Richard Nixon once he had resigned and was a former president.
	Why did Gerald Ford pardon Richard Nixon?
	Quote, I think?
	so prosecuted depends on findings of the appropriate grand jury and the discretion of the appropriate authorized prosecutor The idea that this is an open question, that it might be that a former president can never be tried for something that he did because he was president when he did it, is disproven by a plain reading of American history and the whole justification for Richard Nixon being pardoned in the first place.
	So the idea that this has to be taken up is them saying the sky is green.
	And I think even for the non-lawyers among us to be able to say, you know what, the sky is not green even on our worst day.
	It is BS.
	You are doing this as a dilatory tactic to help your political friend, your partisan patron.
	And for you to say that this is something that the court needs to decide because it's something that's unclear in the law is just flagrant, flagrant bullpucky.
	And they know it.
	And they don't care that we know it.
	And that's disturbing about the future legitimacy of the court.
	Understand one thing, by the way.
	Everything that she said about what they know that they're doing to break the rules, but they're doing it anyhow and it's dangerous because it's going to...
	Can you imagine?
	Oh my god.
	Like, where do you start with such epic, monumental levels of stupidity?
	We're going to watch it again.
	There's an argument here.
	I appreciate the argument that Rachel Maddow...
	I was going to run her by her nickname, but I won't do that.
	I appreciate the argument that Rachel Maddow is providing here.
	If presidents had immunity...
	Jimmy Carter would not have pardoned Richard Nixon for his alleged potential crimes while in office, if they had immunity.
	Let me play this again.
	Is really presidential immunity an open question?
	Because what's the most famous pardon in American history?
	Gerald Ford pardoning Richard Nixon once he had resigned and was a former president.
	Why did Gerald Ford pardon Richard Nixon?
	Quote, as a result of certain actions occurring before his resignation as president, meaning as a result of stuff he did while president, quote, Richard Nixon has become liable to possible indictment and trial.
	Whether or not he shall be so prosecuted depends on findings of the appropriate grand jury and the discretion of the appropriate.
	It's Gerald Ford, right?
	It's not Jimmy Carter.
	He resigned and was a former president.
	The argument is compelling to raise the debate that there is a debate on whether or not presidents benefit from immunity.
	Gerald Ford did not pardon Richard Nixon because it was a foregone, accepted conclusion that you could prosecute Unimpeached or unconvicted presidents for acts they did while president.
	It sounds even reading what Gerald Ford, from what I understand, is one of the worst presidents in American history.
	It sounded like he's like, well, you do it just in case because we don't know, which would actually lend credence to the idea that it is something of an ambiguous open question, one that needs to be adjudicated by the Supreme Court justices, not by some nincompoop boob of a former president, Gerald Ford.
	But it's an argument.
	It is an argument.
	Can you prosecute a president for acts done while president?
	Who knows?
	Gerald Ford decided to save Nixon the headache of a weaponized, politicized prosecution, potentially.
	Yes, no, no, for sure.
	Nixon resigned before impeachment and before conviction.
	And so the argument's going to be that he was never impeached for it.
	And so he could never even raise the argument that he was acquitted for it and thereby could not be prosecuted as a result.
	So there's the question.
	There's the open question as to whether or not you can prosecute a former president for acts carried out while they were president.
	For Rachel Maddow, she gets paid $24 million a year.
	And I'm not saying that out of jealousy.
	Nobody needs that much money.
	And that much money corrupts.
	As you can see, you become dependent on $24 million a year.
	It buys your opinion.
	It doesn't remunerate you or compensate you for value.
	It buys your opinion.
	But Rachel Maddow is saying, okay, fine.
	It's settled law that you could prosecute a president for acts they did while president.
	Well, I would disagree with even her interpretation of Gerald Ford's statement.
	It doesn't answer the question, can you then prosecute a president for acts for which he was impeached and acquitted as president?
	Rachel Maddow, you raging buffoon.
	So, no.
	It doesn't answer the question.
	Let me start with A. It doesn't answer the question even on your own premises, Rachel Maddow.
	B. Gerald Ford is not binding precedent of the American judicial system.
	He was part of the executive, and the executive does not get to interpret the law and does not get to legislate the law.
	So it doesn't even answer the question on your own premises, and it certainly doesn't answer the question as to whether or not a president who was impeached and acquitted by the Senate could then, once he's out of office, be prosecuted by corrupt, malicious prosecutors.
	That's the question.
	And you know, and you can tell by the way these raging lunatics are frothing at the mouth with rage that the highest court of the land is going to adjudicate this question because they need their Orwellian two minutes of hate.
	They gotta get that.
	They've got to get that conviction in before the election so they can now say Trump is a convicted felon or whatever the hell they want, a convict.
	They need that.
	These crack addicts, I mean, they are crack for hatred of Trump.
	They're cuckoo for Trump puffs.
	They need it before the election.
	And the mere fact that the Supreme Court would take up a decision to adjudicate on perhaps the most important question that has ever concerned the presidency, it angers them.
	They were so happy when the Supreme Court decided not to take up many, if not all, of the 2020 election cases.
	They were so happy.
	They were so happy then because it was such a clear-cut case that the Supreme Court didn't need to take it up.
	And here they say it's such a clear-cut case the Supreme Court doesn't need to take it up.
	And they're enraged that the highest court of the land is going to actually render the highest court of the land opinion interpreting.
	A. Does a president benefit from conduct for which they were not impeached and convicted while president and or subsidiarily B. Can a president who was impeached and acquitted be nonetheless prosecuted after he's out of office despite the acquittal?
	I'm sorry you don't understand that, Rachel, with your $24 million a year in value-added stupidity to the propaganda war machine.
	But you don't.
	You're an idiot.
	You're a liar and or any number of other names I can call you.
	But she's not the only one, people.
	She's not the only one.
	And I hate to scream like I just saw an opossum.
	Let me just go to a legal mind, people.
	He's a freaking genius.
	Judge Lutig, who Robert Barnes, you know, shared his opinion on Justice Lutig.
	Let me just go back here and see who Justice Lutig is.
	Justice Lutig.
	What does it mean?
	Justice Ludig joined October 2020.
	Hold on, is this real?
	This is the actual profile picture he decided to use?
	Okay, I'm sorry.
	I've been picking on people's profiles pictures recently, knowing full well how people can pick on mine.
	Hold on, let me just show you how they can pick on me.
	Look at me, people.
	I'm crazy.
	But hold on, hold on, let me add this back.
	Justice Ludig...
	He said, of all of the pictures I've ever had taken of me, as a judge, as a politician, political commentator, whatever he was, this is what I'm going to put in my profile?
	Like, I'm constipated?
	Like, I'm sad that I just saw a dead puppy on the street?
	Okay, well, that's Judge Ludig's profile picture.
	His profile?
	I mean, this dude actually picked these pictures and decided to say, this captures the essence of my being as a human.
	It's got a very Peter Stroke-ian lying under oath face to him here.
	Okay, doesn't matter.
	Not picking on the way he looks, although it's just funny choice in pictures for profile.
	He joined October 2020 shortly after the pandemic.
	Okay, interesting.
	Doesn't matter.
	Piecing together dots that may or may not be connected.
	Back it up.
	What does Justice Lutig have to say on...
	Oh, is this MSNBC as well?
	So we're going from one propagandist moron to another.
	Let's hear what Judge Lutig...
	Has to say about this.
	I will not paraphrase Barnes's description of Judge Lutig, but I will invite everyone to go find that Sunday night extravaganza.
	I think it was two Sundays ago.
	But let's hear what he has to say about the Supreme Court deciding to rule on a case that the corrupt, partisan, hack D.C. Court of Appeal already ruled on.
	Apparently there's nothing left to answer because of the D.C. Court of Appeal.
	I mean, after all, you know, Biden wanted to take away all jurisdiction for border contestations under that border bill, which quickly became the foreign aid bill.
	He wanted to take away all jurisdiction from federal courts and bring it over to DC.
	This guy basically saying, you know, in as many words, well, once the DC Court of Appeal has ruled on it, the Supreme Court becomes immaterial.
	The second way through to that soundbite, which I'm glad you got a chance to hear, we received the breaking news that the United States Supreme Court, the subject of our first story in the last hour, has just announced that it will hear Donald Trump's immunity case.
	It will hear that case.
	How dare they!
	Sons of bitches on the Supreme Court!
	On April 22nd.
	So, Judge Ludig, I know this is a curveball.
	It's a curveball, eh?
	It's a curveball if you're a moron.
	But I know a little bit about your intellect watching you testify for the January 6th Select Committee, so I'm going to throw you this curveball.
	It's a curveball.
	Should the highest court of the land adjudicate on perhaps the most consequential question for the democracy, the constitutional republic, the future of the constitutional republic that is these United States of America?
	I know it's a curveball.
	Let's hear what you have to say about it, ever-genius legal mind Judge Ludig.
	Your reaction to the news just breaking in the last couple minutes that the United States Supreme Court will hear Trump's immunity case.
	Thank you for having me with you this afternoon, Nicole.
	I'm just hearing this moment.
	It's shocking.
	Who could have ever thought this would happen?
	Look, this is a momentous decision just to hear this case.
	There was no reason...
	Volker Frye.
	In this world.
	No reason in this world.
	For the Supreme Court to take this case.
	No reason.
	Pause it.
	Pause it.
	There was no reason in this world.
	At least he didn't say in this universe.
	That would have been a bridge too far.
	No reason in this world for the Supreme Court to take up this case.
	None whatsoever.
	There's your pinnacle of legal minds in America, apparently, according to MSNBC.
	The three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Had written a masterful opinion.
	It was masterful.
	I pleasure myself to it when I go to bed at night.
	I was like, oh yes, Court of Appeal of D.C., tell me more.
	Oh yes.
	Denying the president's claims of absolute immunity.
	Under the Constitution and the laws of the United States, there's never been an argument that a former president Let me stop you there, Justice Ludig.
	Has there never been a question because there's never been a case?
	There's never been a prosecution of a former president for a crime, alleged crime, committed in office?
	And just love, it's so subtle, by the way, like the lies almost slip into the lexicon.
	No president has ever been convicted, been tried for a crime while committed in office.
	Former president is immune from prosecution for crimes that he committed while in office.
	For crimes?
	You mean like those high crimes and misdemeanors that he was accused of and acquitted of, you raging buffoon?
	On the more practical level.
	We're not going to get our conviction.
	We want a conviction.
	The Supreme Court is capable of deciding this very quickly.
	But we won't get our conviction before November.
	In time that the former president could be tried.
	Before the election.
	But today's decision makes that that much more unlikely.
	That's very upsetting to all of us because I'm a dirty communist and I want my kangaroo court conviction before the next election so that we can then say, how dare you elect a convict?
	Oh my goodness, it's outrageous.
	Now, I don't like being told I'm missing something here, so I'm going to bring this up.
	I haven't read the end of it.
	Viva, you and Mad Cow are missing the entire point.
	It is no acts while a former president cannot be charged for.
	It is official acts.
	Well, for DJ Painless, I'm not missing that.
	That's the whole discussion.
	No president has immunity from crimes they committed as a president.
	I'm sorry.
	First of all, crimes is a legal conclusion, not a statement of fact.
	You know, even if one were to say shooting your chef is a crime, well, not if it's self-defense.
	And so the idea even to frame it dishonestly as, well, no president's immune for crimes they committed while president.
	That's a separate discussion.
	Right now, we're not talking about crimes for which he was even found guilty or charged with.
	I guess you're going to say he was charged with them now that he left office, but he was acquitted for the very same allegations while in office.
	So it was deemed to not be a high crime and misdemeanor for the purposes of impeachment, probably because it was within the...
	Oh, wait, no, we're talking about the Florida case.
	So we're talking about the classified documents.
	Hold on, just got confused for one second.
	Immunity.
	No, never mind.
	It's all the same.
	Oh, God.
	Hold on, now I've just confused myself for one second.
	The immunity claim was D.C. No, okay, I'm right.
	That's the impeachment.
	Jesus, too many cases to keep track of here.
	The immunity claims will have an impact on a number of cases, but this is in the D.C. case that went to the D.C. Court of Appeal.
	So, yeah.
	Crimes.
	Official acts as president for which he was already acquitted because they were not high crimes and misdemeanors for the purposes of conviction, at least according to the Senate.
	Oh, so that's the news of the day.
	The Democrats are up in arms that the Supreme Court's going to rule on something.
	And by the way, you remember when the president, Donald Trump, would criticize the Supreme Court?
	Remember when the president would criticize judges and they're like, this is undermining the judicial system.
	Won't someone please think of the system?
	And now they are out there.
	Joe Biden, literally, as relates to the forgiveness of student loans, forget.
	Forget the Supreme Court.
	I'm going to do it anyhow.
	I did it despite what the Supreme Court said.
	You've got states coming out and saying, F you and your Bruin decision.
	We'll just make new Second Amendment violative regulations.
	When they do it, it's for justice.
	When anyone else criticizes it who they don't like, well, then it's insurrection undermining the pillar of a free and democratic society.
	They're up in arms that they're actually going to take on and adjudicate the immunity claim because It might prevent them from actually going to trial and getting a conviction in that corrupt D.C. courtroom before the election.
	A bunch of communists.
	CIA.
	Communists in action.
	That's what that is.
	FBI would be...
	I can think of a better one for that.
	I'll think of it later.
	Good afternoon, everybody.
	It is afternoon right now, right?
	Okay, so first of all, how's it going?
	Viva Furai, former Montreal litigator turned current Florida rumbler.
	David Fryheit, for those of you who are going to be disappointed, if you know my name's not Aviva, people were saying, go to CPAC.
	And what's going on with CPAC?
	Am I missing something?
	Is there a hearing that I'm supposed to be covering today that I'm not familiar with, that I'm not aware of?
	Admittedly, I spent the better part of the morning shooting the content for the vlog, which I'll be releasing after this live stream, going over the text messages.
	And Buck Fiden, you said in the beginning, this is yesterday's news.
	I have to assume that that's a joke.
	Because you'll all know, my goal is not to be first, it's to be right.
	You know the old expression, if you're not first, you're last.
	Well, if you're not, that doesn't matter.
	Anyhow, we're going over the text messages.
	Yeah, it was yesterday's story to some extent.
	It's also going to be tomorrow's story.
	Megyn Kelly first reported on it.
	John Hall, well, who, hold on a second, just so I don't screw up names here because I'm a total buffoon.
	Hold on, hold on, hold on.
	Phil Holloway, not John Holloway.
	Phil Holloway.
	Flip me the full PDF, which I published in our vivabarneslaw.locals.com community, and we're going to go over that when we go over to Rumble.
	For those of you who are new to the channel, there's a lot of you.
	We start the live streams on YouTube, Commitube, Rumble, and vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	As I say this, I realize I should make sure that we are currently live on all of those.
	Well, I've gotten into caffeinated, carbonated water.
	It only has 35 milligrams of caffeine per can, so I can drink more of it.
	It's carbonated water, and I don't have to have any bad sucralose or anything.
	But hold on one second.
	So we start on YouTube, Rumble, and vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	We end on Commitube and we go over, we vote with our eyes, we vote with our feet, and we vote with our dollar.
	We go over to Rumble, the free speech platform.
	When we're done on Rumble, we then have a bit of an after party on vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	That's the order of things.
	Now let me read in the chat.
	Is there something going on that I'm missing, people?
	No, don't troll me.
	I just, I want to, if I'm missing someone, someone said go to CPAC.
	I got accused on Twitter this morning.
	Very sinister suggestion.
	Hey, why hasn't a new Florida resident talked about the news out of Florida today?
	Nobody's interested in what's going on.
	I have no idea what the hell they're talking about.
	And so I looked up.
	Oh, we'll talk about it.
	I'll show you the tweet because it really pisses me off a little bit.
	It pisses me off more than it should.
	And maybe I have to not...
	Oh, we'll talk about it later.
	So I'm just looking through the chat to make sure that I'm not missing anything.
	How did Phil Holloway get the texts if they were under protective order?
	Thanks.
	No, they published it yesterday.
	Megyn Kelly had them too.
	By the way, I made sure they're public because I don't disclose things that are not public.
	Like I tell you, I'm not trying to be first to anything.
	And I also am not in the business of breaking stories.
	But holy crap, the Fanny stuff is wild.
	But I'm covering the other stuff as well.
	This evening, I will be on Dr. Drew with Kayla Pollack.
	Talking about her situation of having been rendered a quadriplegic from a Moderna booster and her lawsuit against Moderna, which was filed by chiclaw.ca.
	Check them out, by the way.
	On Twitter.
	Hold on, I'll give everybody his Twitter handle.
	U-S-I-N-D.
	U-S-I-N-D-A?
	He has a very bad Twitter handle.
	Bad in the sense that I can't remember it.
	At U-S-I.
	There it is, right there.
	Oh, it just disappeared.
	U-S.
	U-A-S.
	So, the lawsuit I put out of log yesterday, Kayla Pollack suing Moderna in Canada for damages from having been rendered a quadriplegic by the Moderna booster after two Pfizer jabs.
	These are allegations in the lawsuit.
	People have been asking me, how can you sue pharma companies in Canada if they had immunity?
	And I've been walking around thinking, In Canada...
	There was no legislation passed that immunized pharma.
	They received or apparently were provided indemnification clauses in their supply agreements, which would explain, in retrospect, Anthony Housefather's explanation as to how they negotiated terms in their contracts because of the liability for having rushed through developments, etc., etc.
	So, immunity in the States, but indemnity in Canada.
	Which means that they can be sued because there's no legislative preclusion from suing and they can then, being the pharma companies, can turn around and say, whoa, government, you agreed to hold us harmless with an indemnity clause, so we now call you in warranty and whatever we get ordered to pay Kayla Pollack, if she succeeds on her claim, well, you've got to indemnify us for because you agreed to under your contract.
	I suspect that if that ever happens, I should have mentioned this in the vlog yesterday, that if that ever happens and the pharma companies go and Seek to call in warranty.
	Bring the government in to indemnify them for any damages they have to pay to any of the vaccine injured.
	You got Kayla Pollack who's suing.
	You got Dan Hartman who's suing for the death of his son Sean Hartman.
	If that ever happens, that's when I think you're going to start seeing some really dirty infighting between the government and pharma.
	That's when you might see the government saying, yeah dudes, we agreed to indemnify you if you provided...
	What you agreed to provide contractually, if you abided by your contractual obligations of safety, efficacy, production, manufacture.
	And so if that turns out not to be the case, then you might see the government turning and saying, show us what you did, Big Pharma.
	We'll indemnify you if you respected the terms of our supply agreement, which you negotiated with the upper hand and got some beneficial clauses.
	So that's where we're at with Kayla Pollack tonight.
	I'll be on Dr. Drew and then on with another podcast shortly thereafter.
	And I keep forgetting the name of the podcast.
	So it's going to be a busy night.
	Okay.
	That's one piece of news that we're going to do on YouTube, Rumble, and VivaBarnesLaw.Locals.com.
	Let me see here in the chat.
	There were some super chats.
	Superstar.
	Superchats.
	How can they be surprised this was inevitable?
	200-watt studio, they can't be surprised.
	This is what you call shaping narrative and not reporting the news.
	They're not surprised.
	They're feigning surprise.
	It's like faux surprise.
	F-A-U-X.
	It's faux surprise so that their idiot minion viewers can say, oh, I should be surprised too.
	How could this happen?
	This was never supposed to happen.
	It was always supposed to happen.
	And it's quite amazing that the Supreme Court has taken it up so quickly and will deal with it on an expedited basis.
	But this is what you call Mockingbird Press.
	They're not reporting the news.
	They are manufacturing consent, manufacturing emotions, manufacturing narrative.
	It's social engineering.
	Operation Mockingbird was intelligence infiltrating media to craft, shape, public opinion, public narrative.
	They're just not hiding anymore.
	We know who the assets are.
	So it's to shape public opinion, not to reflect the news.
	Ian says, FBI, fed boy insurrectionists, we all know they did January 6th.
	Yeah, but you can't, FBI, federal boys, I mean, it's redundant, but yes, that's not bad.
	What about Illinois' judge ruling that if Supreme Court differs, her ruling, hers stands?
	I didn't hear that part, but this is the news coming out of Illinois.
	Trump has been allegedly removed from the ballot there.
	I didn't see that news, so I don't know if it's...
	If she suspended her ruling as they did in, what was it, Minnesota?
	Was it Minnesota?
	And Colorado.
	Yeah, that's it.
	Time to rumble.
	Not just yet.
	We're going to cover one story.
	You guys tell me if I'm sensitive, if I'm just being petty.
	I get a tweet, or I get tagged in a tweet.
	And it pisses me off.
	It pisses me off because it's so bloody childish.
	Where someone says, I'll get the tweet so I don't get accused of misquoting anybody.
	And then we're going to get to the substance of the tweets, which is also very nice here.
	I get tagged in a tweet.
	Well, I only noticed it because I got re-tagged by someone who I follow.
	So I saw that.
	Here's the tweet.
	And you tell me if I'm a baby for getting frustrated with this level of stupidity.
	Stinson Norwood, I don't know who the person is, S. Norman, Storm and Norman, 1776, says, New Florida resident had us tweeted about Epstein today.
	This is today.
	This is February 29th, an hour ago.
	I have no idea what the hell this person's talking about.
	I was like, oh, what's the Epstein news of the day?
	So now I've said, oh, but by the way, you'll tell me, am I being defensive?
	Is there not a subtle insinuation?
	That by virtue of me not having tweeted about it, there's some sinister reason for which I would ignore.
	I'm obviously ignoring it.
	It's not like, you know, there's 50 other stories to follow.
	I'm obviously ignoring it.
	There must be a politically motivated reason for which I would ignore a story that someone else finds of interest that I did not immediately comment on.
	Am I being a baby, people?
	I can reflect and say, okay, maybe I'm being too sensitive.
	So anyhow, so I have to go see what the story is.
	I put in Epstein.
	You know, the news of the day is, it's like, it's crazy.
	I so hate DeSantis that, A, I've always defended the job, you know, defended him when he deserved defense, deserves defense, moved to the state of Florida because I think he's a damn good governor.
	But I didn't think he was ready for the presidency, so there must be, I must be ignoring this because I refuse to give credit where credit is due to DeSantis.
	This is apparently, I guess, is the news of the day.
	February 29, 2024.
	News release by staff.
	By the way, maybe if people aren't aware of a Governor DeSantis press release, that's on Governor DeSantis for actually maybe having a weak social media team, which might explain his performance in the presidential primaries.
	Like, if he puts out a PR and nobody's talking about it...
	Maybe it's not because people are deliberately ignoring what I think nobody would think is a wrong idea.
	Maybe it's because nobody's seeing it.
	And arguably because the online campaign that DeSantis has been running in the context of the primaries has been bad.
	So set that all aside.
	Apparently he just put this out today.
	Governor DeSantis signs legislation to authorize the release of Jeffrey Epstein grand jury documents.
	Who the hell would think this is a bad idea?
	Who the hell would be avoiding this for whatever the reason?
	Oh, no, is the suggestion that the Trumpers, extreme MAGAs, aren't celebrating this news because they think there's going to be something damning against Trump in there?
	I don't want to swear again, but Ichbaze, if there was bad news about Trump as it relates to Epstein, it would have been leaked already.
	Everyone would have leaked it because the Republicans would have leaked it, as the Democrats would have leaked it, as the deep state that has all of this would have leaked it.
	So there's like an underlying suggestion.
	If you don't immediately report on something that...
	Might make you say DeSantis did good.
	You're a Trumper who refuses to...
	Maybe think about why it is that more people don't know about this press release.
	More people are going to know about it now, I guarantee you that much.
	Palm Beach, Florida.
	Today, Governor Ron DeSantis signed HB 117, House Bill 117, which allows for the public release of grand jury documents such as those related to the 2006 Florida investigation into Jeffrey Epstein.
	Two victims of Epstein joined Governor DeSantis in Palm Beach to celebrate the justice that was being delivered.
	Quote, The public deserves to know who participated in Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking.
	As we all...
	Who the hell disagrees with this?
	It's an amazing thing.
	You've got two convictions for sex trafficking.
	Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.
	With no clients.
	That's the worst trafficking ring ever.
	Said Governor DeSantis.
	Quote, End quote.
	We all agree.
	Quote, Palm Beach County and the victims suffered from Epstein's vile behavior before the world ever knew his name.
	Palm Beach County and the victims suffered from Epstein's vile behavior before the world ever knew his name.
	End quote, said Representative Peggy Gassette Seidman.
	I followed the story as we were parents as we quote I followed the story as we parents kept our kids close but we never stopped seeking the truth.
	The police investigated relentlessly and now the governor opens up the last chapter of this sordid story.
	I don't know if it's the last chapter.
	This might be the beginning of a whole new installment in the trilogy.
	After 2006 investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, the Palm Beach Police Department asked the state attorney to charge Epstein with multiple felony charges, including unlawful sexual activity with a minor and lewd and lascivious molestation.
	Rather than charge Epstein directly, the state attorney at the time chose to present evidence to a grand jury, ensuring the names of those involved in the details of the accusations were kept sealed.
	HB 117 will allow disclosure of grand jury testimony if the following conditions are met.
	Let's hear this.
	The subject of the grand jury inquiry is dead.
	The investigation was about sexual activity with a minor.
	The testimony was previously disclosed by a court order.
	The state attorney is Hold on.
	Let me make sure I understand what I'm reading here.
	The bill will allow disclosure of grand jury testimony if the following conditions are The subject of the grand jury inquiry is dead.
	That would be Jeffrey Epstein.
	So that condition is met.
	The investigation was about sexual activity with a minor.
	That condition will be met.
	Presumably.
	And they're not going to release everything, I guess, but only that.
	The testimony was previously disclosed by a court order as opposed to what?
	Voluntarily?
	Or surreptitiously obtained?
	The state attorney is notified.
	Okay.
	Because all of the above apply to Jeffrey Epstein Florida case, the legislation will authorize the release of grand jury documents when it takes effect on July 1, 2024.
	To which I would ask, why does it have to wait until July 1, 2024?
	If anybody in the chat knows that, and here, link to a tweet.
	And go celebrate the good news.
	I don't know who thinks that's a bad idea.
	I don't know who thinks anybody would not be happy with that.
	I mean, people will not be happy with that.
	I don't know if anybody who thinks this is a DeSantis versus Trump thing is going to think anyone who is supporting Trump is going to think this is a bad idea.
	So if anybody knows, why would it only come into effect July 1st?
	I guess it has to go through a legislative approval process and that's it.
	All right, so that's it.
	We've given that story of the day.
	By the way, just tell me, am I being a baby or is it really irritating when people who know of a story take to social media to cast aspersions on people for not immediately covering a story that they find of interest?
	Why would anyone think it's a DeSantis vs.
	Trump move?
	I don't want to presuppose intentions, VR.
	I think people will because they're going to say the Trumpers are never going to want to give DeSantis credit for doing good moves as a governor.
	Or they're going to say the Trumpers are scared because Trump's going to be in those documents.
	He was alleged to have taken the flights.
	That's what I think they're going to say.
	Because I think they're using this as a tool to still complain about Trump having uh destroyed their candidate of choice in the GOP primaries that's my that's my um that's my take on it bills are not uh instituted instantaneously no I presume they got to go through I don't know second reading ratification and then they only take effect after they're published I don't know how it works in Florida uh but you know in Canada I think it's like it only takes effect after it's been published in the Gazette and then you know receives royal assent and
	whatever Okay, so what we're going to do now that we've given that story the biggest platform of the day, come on over to VivaBarnesLaw.
	Come on over to Rumble first.
	Let me get the link here.
	Give everybody the link.
	See the number go down on YouTube.
	I think the link is in the pinned comment as well.
	Yes, it is.
	And I'm going to give everybody the link to VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com as well.
	Locals.
	I think there's a couple more Super Chats before we head over.
	Indemnity was required in most countries.
	From what I understand, in Australia, collateral had to be guaranteed.
	India said stick it.
	Ray K. Well, that's my understanding as well.
	So we don't have a fully unredacted...
	This is going back to the supply agreements for the COVID shots in Canada.
	We don't have a totally unredacted contract with Pfizer, but South Africa released theirs, and they're identically drafted virtually.
	There's maybe a couple of extra...
	They don't match up.
	To the point, whatever is of the clauses, but the clauses are drafted virtually identically.
	So yes, indemnification definitely was in South Africa's contract.
	Australia as well, from what I understand, and Canada from what I understand.
	But everybody should understand the difference between indemnity, indemnification, and immunity and immunization.
	One is a bar to suit, and the other one is a defense.
	Or at least a defense to a third party in the context of a suit.
	So, that's it.
	Taint crew tainted itself.
	Well, this is the good segue.
	This is the good segue.
	Get the number.
	There you go.
	We're under 4,000.
	Ending on Rumble.
	Ending on YouTube.
	Come on over to Rumble or go over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	We've got more stuff to talk about.
	It's going to be fantastic.
	So, ending on YouTube.
	YouTube, suck it.
	We'll be back later.
	Peace.
	Everyone else, we're over on Rumble.
	Oh, yes.
	Oh, I should have read the Rumble Rants on YouTube before, but hold on.
	Let me take this down here.
	There were some Rumble Rants, which I'll take.
	Answer.
	Bring up before we move on.
	Lost Core.
	I thought that said lobster, which makes me want to eat lobster now.
	Lost Core says Viva.
	Lost Core.
	What do I have to do to get you on the Future Conflict channel?
	Well, this is a good way of getting my attention.
	DM me.
	In Twitter, if you haven't already, apparently the DMs go to like a separate folder if they're not people I follow.
	So every now and again I go over and peruse that.
	But I've screen grabbed this, so I'll look into this afterwards.
	Cuper True says, Sorry, I got here a little late.
	Had you heard the government watchdog group, AAF, requesting Georgia State Bar open disciplinary proceedings against Willis Wade for violations of Georgia rules of professional conduct?
	I have not heard that.
	Cooper True.
	If that's true, I might have to add a little segment to the vlog that I'm going to publish this afternoon.
	And then we got, I thought that said, The Bomb Obsessed.
	That says, Tom Boesel.
	Tom Boesel says, You're only a baby when you give credence to their passive-aggressive nature.
	They can't help themselves.
	I am sure they don't mean anything by it.
	It's possible.
	It's also possible they do mean something by it.
	Very irritating.
	Oh, Viva hasn't talked about this.
	It happens so often.
	And the thing is, it happens so often, but it's not one of those things that you write off the more it happens.
	It's one of those things, the more it happens, there's so much to try to keep track of.
	Maybe if there's a story of interest, tag me and say, have you heard about this?
	Not, why haven't you covered this?
	One is a question, the other one is an accusation.
	All right, done.
	And then again, also sometimes I might also recognize I'm being a baby and I'm cranky.
	Before we get to the Fannie Willis, the other news of the story, well, it's the other news of the story, it's not enraging anybody, and nor should it come as a surprise to many.
	And a judge of the New York Court of Appeal, one, temporarily granted in part interim measures in the N'Goran ruling against Trump and refused in part certain requests.
	What's amazing is you read it on different outlets and you see how they spin it.
	From what I understand now, this is the fifth, if not more, times that New York nipple judge Engelrung has been overturned in part by the New York Court of Appeal.
	But you go to the other side and they're going to say they want to protect New York nipple judge and career criminal...
	Oh, I'm sorry, career criminal prosecutor.
	Now, career criminal Leticia James, they're going to say he affirmed a part of it and shut down Trump's request for delaying payment of the award, $450 million.
	So this is the news.
	Let me bring it up here.
	I got the archive link.
	Yeah, there we go.
	From the Washington Compost.
	Why do I take it from the Washington Compost?
	A, I know that they're going to come at it with the most favorable spin in favor of New York Nipple Judge Engelron and criminal Leticia James, criminal prosecutor Leticia James.
	And so I want to see what they have to say, and then I'm going to try to make sense of it and explain it as much as I can.
	It's not a big deal.
	It's totally an interim measure issued by one Court of Appeal judge, as far as I understand, subject to the review from a full Court of Appeal, or a three-panel judge.
	Judge won't delay Trump financial penalty.
	Oh, that's bad.
	But let's sons temporarily remain a top company.
	So Trump asks, he says, look, the judge's order said preclude, prevent Trump and his sons from running businesses in New York for three years and get them off the company right now.
	I don't know, appoint an interim...
	What do they call it?
	A trustee?
	A monitor?
	And have somebody who's not familiar with the intricacies of a very complex real estate business appoint some government schnook to try to operate this business and see what happens.
	I'm sure it'll go well.
	Trump appealed immediately.
	He says, look, appealing, period.
	Filed the notice of appeal.
	We're appealing.
	But asking for interim relief, don't make me put up $450 million of a judgment or 10% by way of bond and let us continue to run this business because you don't want to run it into the ground in executing the order, the outrageous order, but the corrupt New York nipple judge does want exactly that.
	Let me just make sure that we're looking at the same thing, and we are.
	Okay.
	New York nipple judge on Wednesday rejected...
	No, it's not the nipple judge.
	A New York judge on Wednesday rejected a request from President Donald Trump to delay enforcement of the judgment, totaling at least $450 million.
	Leticia James hasn't tweeted the Daily Interest in a while, has she?
	Hmm.
	I wonder if the Board of Ethics said, what the hell are you doing, you idiots?
	For those of you who don't know, Leticia James, Attorney General of New York, tweeted out, just a tweet, just one tweet, just a word, a number.
	450, whatever, 460 million dollars.
	Just a number.
	And then the next day tweets out another number, 117,000 dollars, give or take.
	One was the amount of the order she's taking to Twitter to troll someone who she persecuted into this absurd award.
	And then the other was the daily interest on the award.
	The daily interest that Trump has to pay on this obscene order is 117,000 dollars American.
	That's like 2 million dollars Canadian people.
	It's not.
	It's times 30 cents for every dollar, 117.
	So that's like 140,000 Canadian dollars.
	That's a lot of money.
	Interest per day.
	Okay.
	Sorry, I got sidetracked.
	Okay, so the judge rejected the request to delay enforcement while he appeals the order, but he did allow the Trump's adult sons to remain in leadership positions atop the Trump Organization for the time being.
	The decision followed a separate judge's decision this month to hit Trump with mammoth fines and also blocked him and his sons, Don Jr. and Eric Trump, from holding top jobs.
	The judge, that judge, that's New York nipple judge, New York judge Arthur Engram.
	Concluded after a civil fraud trial.
	This pisses me off.
	The trial had already concluded by way of summary judgment, so this was after the kangaroo show trial on the quantum, but whatever.
	That Trump and others had given false data to financial institutions so they could borrow money at lower rates.
	And he ordered Trump to pay a hefty financial penalty.
	They don't mention that the banks said we were good with it.
	I won't go over that because you all know that news already.
	Trump on Wednesday asked an appeals court judge to stay that judgment and his attorneys offered to post a $100 million bond rather than a fuller bond amount that they suggested could top $500 million.
	Your Honor, will $100 million satisfy your corrupt communist needs?
	Appeal judge?
	Nope.
	His attorneys also suggested that if the stay was not granted, it was possible that the defendants would be forced to sell properties.
	That's what they want.
	You're raising as an argument what they want as an outcome.
	We're going to Google this guy's name afterwards.
	afternoon rejected the attempts to delay the judgment.
	Singh did not directly address the request to allow Trump to post a hundred million bond amount, but his decision declined to delay quote the enforcement of monetary judgment, which appears to mean that Trump still has to post the full amount.
	Okay.
	But in a potentially significant detail.
	This is how you know it's a big detail.
	Because they waited one, two, three, four, five paragraphs to get to the important detail.
	But they, you know, bury it down there.
	So anybody who just needs that two minutes of masturbation of anti-Trump Orwellian two minutes of hate, they got it.
	And if they got here, they're going to find out, oh, wait a minute.
	He did grant a temporary stay of Engron's orders directing...
	institutions oh you know that's actually i didn't get to that part but in a potentially significant detail singh did grant a temporary stay on anger on's directive blocking trump and his company from seeking loans from financial institutions for three years which trump's attorney suggested was a hindrance to posting the full bond I'm going to swear, people.
	No shit, Sherlock.
	You think Engeron doesn't know what he's doing?
	Holy shit, you gotta post the amount or a bond.
	How am I supposed to get a loan if your order precludes me from getting the loans for three years?
	It's wild!
	I didn't even appreciate that detail.
	Yeah, you could appeal.
	Remember in that two-line email, Judge Angeron writes to Trump's lawyers?
	I'm sure the New York Court of Appeal will preserve your rights in appeal because I've just taken a steaming dump on them.
	Here's my order.
	You don't get to borrow from banks for the next three years.
	Good luck posting bond, MF-er.
	That's basically what he said while he's, like, tweaking his nipples.
	The moves on Wednesday came only from Singh, and they could be altered or undone in the coming weeks.
	Yeah, or they could be undone and the entire decision stayed.
	A full panel is expected to review the case and issue a decision March 18th.
	So mark it in the calendar, peeps.
	In requesting the delay earlier in the day, the attorneys, what do they say here?
	Unprecedented punitive punishments.
	Yeah.
	What is it?
	Eighth Amendment violations under the Constitution.
	They said Engron imposed a financially absurd financial penalty as part of a zealous quest to inflict untoward punishment in the case.
	Absolutely.
	During the hearing, okay, whatever.
	They've talked about it.
	No one, including Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Donald Trump, has $500 million laying around.
	I think Musk might.
	He doesn't have 50 billion because of the activist judge out of Delaware, which he's currently appealing, but whatever.
	The case had originated...
	We don't need to go with this.
	No, they accused Trump of, including his adult sons, of committing years of financial fraud.
	That was only after accusing him of money laundering from foreign governments because he couldn't get borrowed money from domestic banks, which turned out to be bullshit.
	So Leticia James in her Lavrenta Barria, you know, show me the Oh, what's that?
	He's not money laundering from foreign entities because he's actually getting loans from domestic banks?
	He must be fraudulently obtaining preferential loans from those banks, those poor itty bitty baby banks who don't do their own due diligence.
	Released his decision on February 16. Yeah, that was after he released his summary judgment back in November, I believe.
	He ordered Trump to pay more than $354 million in penalties plus interest, putting it at more than $350 million.
	I'm not going on with the rest of this.
	I thought that was the end of the decision.
	Ugh, too long.
	Okay, well, we're done there.
	That's it.
	So it's very interesting, actually.
	I didn't fully appreciate that anger in addition to, you know, barring the kids from operating the business and doing business in New York for three years.
	Prevented Trump from getting loans in New York.
	Wild.
	Corrupt.
	And it's exactly what you would expect of communists.
	Tyrants.
	Who have the tools?
	I have tools.
	Do I need to play that video again?
	I got tools.
	I got collateral estoppel.
	I got summary judgment.
	Oh, you raised that argument in another case.
	You can't raise that argument now.
	What color shirt are you wearing?
	Is it red or is it blue?
	Oh, Trump, your shirt's red?
	Different facts.
	Oh, you guys don't want to see that video again, right?
	Won't somebody please think of the bankers, says Little Indian.
	It's a criminal injustice beyond words for anybody who's followed the trial.
	Leticia James' theory of the case is that he defrauded the banks by overvaluing his assets and getting preferential loan rates from the banks.
	The banks said, we did our own due diligence.
	We did this in full awareness of fact and law.
	We made a lot of money off this.
	We were very happy.
	And we are in fact now pissed that we can't keep doing business with them because of your filthy communist actions.
	And people are pulling out of New York.
	Do it.
	Okay.
	I think that does it for that decision.
	No, not the judge.
	Okay, nobody wants to see that video again.
	We've played it ad nauseum.
	It's funny, I listen to a lot of Rogan, listen to a lot of Bongino, and we've all got our favorite videos that we play to refresh our memories of a specific emotion that's important to us.
	With Rogan, it tends to be bad videos on Instagram.
	And with Bongino, it's other stuff.
	With me, I want that anger on video.
	It exemplifies everything that's wrong.
	Not just with America, with a weaponized judicial system.
	Okay, we're getting there, people.
	We're getting there, but I saw some...
	Oh, King of...
	Jeez, you know what, Anton?
	Oh, I'm screen grabbing it.
	I'm going to remember.
	King of Bildung!
	Some might accuse me, Anton, of not emailing you so I can keep getting these every day.
	No!
	I'm gonna email you, I'm gonna get that, I'm gonna taste it, and then we're gonna talk.
	Okay, King of Biltong says, good morning from Anton's in Roanoke, Texas.
	Free shipping for your Biltong using code Viva.
	I wanna know what the...
	What the success is or what the conversion rate is on using this promo code.
	You got the stats, Biltong, Anton.
	We're going to talk.
	Okay.
	Biltongusa.com or Antonusa.com.
	Biltong is similar to prosciutto, but made from beef.
	So even the heathenest Jews like myself can eat it without feeling guilty.
	Although I like prosciutto as well.
	Send me your address.
	Done.
	Thombosauce Thombosauce says, Maybe there is $500 million under the bed asking for them.
	Unbelievable.
	Cupertrue says, James O 'Keefe also released a video of himself in the gym with anger on.
	He had a great spaces yesterday with undercover journalists, apparently creepy guy with dark vibes hitting on women.
	That I think we can watch.
	I don't think James O 'Keefe would get mad if we played that here.
	That was funny.
	O 'Keefe...
	He didn't get what he...
	He didn't get anything gold because I think Engeron is a little bit smarter than that.
	You'd think that, actually.
	Engeron doesn't brag about his political persecution successes to strangers.
	He only does that to his alumni website.
	For anyone who hasn't seen it, we'll play a bit of it here.
	James O 'Keefe, Breaking Boom.
	Okay.
	Here we go.
	This is it.
	Try to talk to him.
	This is so good.
	Oh, this is so good.
	Keep your head on you Okay, so hold on.
	I love this.
	He's saying his real name.
	He's wearing his real merch so that no one's going to accuse him of lying.
	About his identity.
	Look on his sleeve, it says OMG Media on his sleeve.
	Can I say it's all music?
	Sure.
	I know right here too.
	What's that?
	I said I know right here.
	Oh yeah?
	Absolutely, 100%.
	I don't know if you get here.
	Like now usually?
	Skip ahead here.
	There's Judge Angro.
	Oh, here we go.
	I'm saying that $354 million in damages Barring him from running businesses in New York City for three years.
	One source even sent us a video saying that Arthur Enderon creeps girls out in an Equinox gym in Long Island.
	At the end of the clip, the woman is visibly annoyed by the judge and tells him to back off, gesturing with her hands.
	Other sources confirmed the Equinox he works out in at 5 a.m. is in Great Neck, New York.
	So we decided to work out alongside.
	Well, I think he's going to find a new place to work out.
	Thank you for working.
	That's the body we saw.
	Trying to get, like, malice or bias out.
	I was wearing the OMG t-shirt which said O 'Keefe Media Group, but the judge didn't know who I was.
	My day job?
	I work in publishing.
	I print magazines.
	But it really means a lot to me.
	Here he is.
	Now he's on that.
	Here you go, my man.
	I'll keep it up.
	Thank you.
	Here, everybody go check it out.
	So that's it.
	Would I have any problems believing that Judge Angeron is a creep who creeps out women at the gym?
	I would have no trouble believing that.
	Link to tweets.
	Okay, so that's the latest in New York.
	So the hearing before and ruling by March 18th, so put it on the calendar.
	Did I get to all the rumble rants that I intended to before that?
	So that was...
	James O 'Keefe has a video.
	Okay, we got that.
	Boom.
	Done.
	What else do we have on the backdrop before we get into the fanny?
	I did want to play this one earlier, and I wanted to actually start the video with this.
	The teacher, the critical thinking teacher, whom I had on the channel, who I had on the channel, has now noticed what happens when you run a foul.
	This teacher, Warren Smith, has now discovered what happens, not when you yourself change anything, but when you get noticed by.
	People who are right of Stalin.
	And he's going through a learning curve, and it's beautiful, but he put out this video.
	Warren Smith, you'll find his stuff if you go look it up.
	I've heard about these kind of things happening, but I've never experienced it for myself.
	And one teacher is doing just that in a video of him dissecting these lies and facts about J.K. Rowling is going viral for all the right reasons.
	Let's watch.
	So these guys want to talk about J.K. Rowling?
	So what's going on with that?
	What do you want to know?
	He is going viral.
	He is a teacher from Massachusetts, and his name is Warren Smith.
	Candace Owens talks about you?
	You know you're going to get some heat.
	He did it.
	It's amazing.
	That's me.
	I know that guy.
	Elon Musk tweeted out, too.
	I did receive a very supportive message, though, yesterday from the college, which really meant a lot.
	Because eventually they get hungry.
	They're not expected to be in this position.
	And we've been flooded with activity.
	I don't know what's going to happen.
	This person is Jewish and afraid.
	To be fired if they disagree.
	I didn't quite understand why I went viral.
	It's kind of sad that this video is something that is worthy of praise and going viral.
	I know there's no going back.
	It's sad that it's controversial.
	They won't be very happy with you.
	I wonder, have you had any flack for this?
	I didn't ask for this to happen.
	It's a great montage.
	I didn't put my name in that cup.
	What is the best life advice you can give me from all your Harry Potter studies which will enhance my life?
	Do love Harry Potter.
	Voluntarily accept the unknown.
	Dude, I'm going to go ahead and take that advice right now.
	I think I've taken that advice a little while ago.
	If I live as though God exists, I have noticed remarkable differences.
	Hmm.
	Well, Shiat, that last line is damn good.
	And that's a way of reconciling.
	Not necessarily being religious, but acting as though one were religious.
	Hmm.
	Okay, interesting.
	Link to the tweet is there.
	Warren Smith.
	Check him out, follow him, and support him because it's a journey.
	And it's not a bump-free journey.
	Godspeed, Warren.
	Alright, that I had in the backdrop.
	Now I think we can get to the text messages.
	I'm going to put CNN on blast one more time, people.
	It'll be repetitive for whoever sees the vlog this afternoon.
	CNN actually put out an article this morning in which they said, and cast dispersions on Ashley Merchant, like to say that she wrote a check her butt can't cash is the crude expression, to suggest that Ashley Merchant relied on...
	Terrence Bradley alone and insufficiently to substantiate her accusations, allegations that Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade started dating before the contract in November 2021 and certainly before they claim it started in 2022.
	CNN writes, The text messages raise question about Bradley's credibility.
	These are the text messages that were recently disclosed.
	And the degree to which Merchant, Ashley Merchant, Michael Roman's attorney, appeared to rely on his claim.
	That she was then unable to substantiate elsewhere.
	And like, I'm reading this and I know facts because I follow things and I'm like...
	Do you know?
	You guys are...
	It's like you have to be lying one way or the other because if you didn't watch the trial and you don't know that is wrong, you're making a positive assertion without knowing that it's true or with no reason to believe it's true.
	And that's another form of lying.
	Two types of lying.
	Saying something that you know is false...
	And asserting as true that which you have no reason to assert as true.
	So they've done one or the other.
	And then I see you guys are effing liars.
	Do you know if Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade started dating in October of 2019?
	I don't know if it was October of 2019.
	Was it roughly?
	Could it possibly be November of 2019?
	Could possibly.
	Could possibly.
	And when we spoke...
	You said it was shortly after the Municipal Court Conference.
	Is that correct?
	Yes.
	So you know that their relationship, their personal relationship, began shortly after this Municipal Court Conference.
	Can't get much clearer than that.
	That's what you call networking people.
	When I say personal, romantic.
	Okay, we don't need to see the whole thing because we've already seen it.
	CNN comes out and lies.
	And they are going to come out and lie to their ignorant viewers who did not watch the trial, many of whom probably did not watch me doing this live.
	Robert Gouveia reporting it live.
	Good Logic covering it live.
	Nate Brody covering it live.
	And they are just going to hear a lie and repeat the lie.
	Well, enough of us are now speaking the truth and speaking it loud that I don't think many people are going to have an excuse for repeating the lie.
	The text messages...
	That Ashley Merchant was continually going through on her phone, trying to show opposing counsel, trying to admit it as evidence, trying to ask Terrence Bradley questions on when he kept invoking privilege, because whatever I told you, Ashley, in those text messages was only as a result of information I acquired through my professional relationship as attorney for Nathan Wade.
	They're out, people.
	They're out, and holy shiot.
	Who has seen Megyn Kelly yesterday talk about this?
	I didn't see all of it, but I saw enough of it.
	But they're out.
	And we're going to screw them.
	Sorry, Freudian slip.
	We're going to scroll through them.
	Because it's amazing.
	And we'll have some fun commentary.
	And for anybody who finds this too tedious and long-winded, this afternoon, I'm going to put out a short vlog.
	What was this?
	Oh, no.
	We're going to cover this before we end.
	This is what we talked about yesterday exclusively at Locals.
	Okay.
	I sent the PDF.
	To our locals community.
	Behold, people.
	Drumroll.
	Open up the backdrop.
	Okay, open it up here.
	There it is.
	There's 31 pages.
	Not all of it is particularly interesting.
	And it reads like a sordid comic book.
	I feel bad for Bradley.
	I think Bradley actually comes off as a decent human here who has been intimidated into silence.
	Some will say that's a result of cowardice.
	Some will say that lying.
	Because of pressure or coercion shows weakness of character.
	I could not put myself in Terrence Bradley's position to be facing what he could be potentially facing by way of threats.
	It's quite clear that he's facing threats.
	Bring on the text messages, people.
	Here they are.
	Look at this.
	So this is the document that Ashley filed opposing counsel, that dweeby southern guy.
	Who kept on saying like, I don't have all of this in order.
	I don't know what I'm looking at.
	I don't know if he's Southern.
	He might have been from...
	It sounded like he had a Georgia accent, the state's attorney.
	So they filed this.
	The judge looked at this in camera and said, this is not privileged.
	And you can ask questions to Terrence on this, but this alone.
	And then, you know, they were tendering it as evidence after the hearing.
	And they said, well, rule of completeness is what the state's attorney said.
	Oh, you want completeness?
	You got completeness.
	So look at this.
	We're going to scroll through this more or less quickly.
	Hold on a second.
	Let me just make sure that it's...
	Okay, good.
	And if I enlarge this, does it make a difference?
	It does.
	We'll keep it like this.
	Okay.
	Messages from Ashley Merchant's iPhone 2 with Terrence Bradley.
	PDF generated on...
	February 27th, using Decipher.
	Oh, it's so good.
	Starts off with Ashley Merchant.
	We'll go a little faster and skip to this.
	So the FCDA Open Records is saying that they don't have an original contract for when Nathan began work with Fanny Willis in November.
	They only have his renewal, which was after they had entered into the contract.
	Sorry, that's after they had entered into sexual relations.
	And then there's an image.
	He says...
	Terrence Bradley says, wow, they're stalling big time.
	Yes, they are, says Terrence Bradley.
	Stalling big time to...
	They don't have the original contract?
	I guess they were trying to figure out what date they can plausibly say their relationship started that did not come before the date that the contract started.
	Or they didn't have a contract.
	Wouldn't be surprising either.
	Okay.
	Call you back?
	Fine.
	Thanks.
	Okay, we got this stuff here.
	Listen to this.
	Any idea...
	This is fantastic.
	Page two.
	September 18, this is before all the Shi 'at hit the Fian.
	This is before the Shi 'at hit the Fian.
	Ashley Merchant, who obviously has a prior relationship with Terrence Bradley, and I don't know if she's using him and playing him along to get information or their friends.
	Terrence Bradley wants to help, just didn't think that he would get lobbed into the limelight or into the crosshairs like he has.
	Ashley Merchant says, any idea who I could get an affidavit from on the affair?
	This is how you know these people lead a corrupt regime through coercion and intimidation.
	Terrence Bradley says, no, no one would freely burn that bridge.
	Okay, not freely, but if they're compelled to, they might have to.
	Like Yurti, subpoenaed under oath to testify and confirms the date of the relationship from 2019 when they met when they were judges.
	If Chris asked under oath...
	Would he know?
	No, says Terrence Bradley.
	Wow, I figured he would.
	I didn't expect them to be so careful.
	He says, he knows, but he won't admit it, says Terrence Bradley.
	Would you be interested in being a program director at the GACDL?
	That's the Georgia Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers seminar.
	I'm president next year.
	Would love to get you involved.
	Here, I don't know if Ashley's like, when you're trying to get someone from someone, offer them, hey.
	Would you like to do an interview with me?
	I can get you an interview with...
	I don't know if that's that or it's sincere.
	He says, I'm interested.
	Let's chat.
	Yay.
	Hey, you still want to chat about the Georgia Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers?
	I'm only saying it to impress everybody that I can actually remember it.
	Yes, he's still interested.
	Okay, fine.
	March seminar.
	Who cares?
	All right.
	Then we got another day now.
	Another month.
	A month later.
	There are probably other texts that we're not privy to here.
	Hey, just following up on this, I'm getting ready to appoint program directors.
	Okay, fine.
	So that's it.
	That's fine.
	Okay.
	Love, good afternoon.
	I got some confirmation about Fannie and Nathan.
	Still can't get anyone to go on the record.
	It's amazing, eh?
	December 13. Actually, you can't get anyone to go on record because you've got a corrupt, malicious, basically, you know, a criminal in disguise as an authority figure at Fulton County.
	And everyone knows you mess with her, she'll mess back with you and hard.
	It now leads me to wonder why people might have been protesting on her front lawn.
	It had nothing to do with Trump.
	It might have had to do with the fact that everybody knew that she's corrupt.
	See this.
	I still can't get anyone to go on the record.
	This is Ashley Merchant, December 13. But I also got the evidence that Fannie did not and does not have a county approval to pay Nathan.
	She violated county policy left and right.
	Oh my god, Nathan, and took Fannie on a cruise.
	I mean, I can picture this as a month later now.
	Ashley Merchant's just sitting on her and like, holy F. She violated Georgia law, or Georgie, whatever it is, rules, by appointing him and paying him.
	Oh my god, they went to Napa.
	I think this is after she got the records that they went on cruises, trips, and that Nathan paid for her.
	This is in the divorce case.
	Is he that dumb?
	Bradley says, wow.
	I'm on a plane from Dubai, landed at 3. This was in trial.
	She says, nice.
	Okay, we'll call you when I land.
	Okay, fine.
	I assume you knew about the trips.
	Wow, wow, I'm shocked, yada, yada.
	Bradley says, no, I didn't know about those trips.
	When did it happen?
	Oh, the last trip was this summer.
	Oh, I was already gone by then.
	Of course, I didn't know about those trips, but I knew about the ones that they took when I was there with them.
	Florida, Napa, California, Texas.
	Here.
	I didn't know I was gone by then, says Bradley.
	Doesn't surprise me they took many trips to Florida, Texas, Napa, California.
	Yep.
	When she moved her daughter to California, remember there was a question about that.
	I can't believe they were so carefree.
	I'm trying to anticipate her response when I blow this up.
	This is so amazing to see behind the screen of all of this.
	Her daughter flunked out of FAMU.
	I don't know what that is, FAMU, and moved to Cali.
	Listen to this.
	He went with her to help her move.
	That's...
	Oh, jeez.
	Nathan Wade, of course.
	Why would she hire him?
	It's insane.
	Yes, he says.
	Like, date.
	Don't hire.
	Do you think it started before you hired him?
	This was the crux of all of the testimony.
	Absolutely, says Terrence Bradley.
	It started when she left the DA's office and was judge in South Fulton.
	Wow.
	They met at the municipal court.
	This was the one that was...
	How did you know this?
	How did you know this, Terrence?
	Speculation.
	I won't do the Cajun man again.
	That's what I figured when he was still married.
	And then she asked him, is this accurate?
	Because this is a paragraph from the motion.
	Upon information and belief, Willis and Wade met while they were both serving as magistrate judges and began a romantic relationship at that time.
	And Bradley says, no, it was when they were at the municipal court.
	Thank you.
	But you can't put where they met.
	Not many people know that.
	Bradley's like, holy shit, not many people know that.
	If you put that in there, they're going to come after me.
	They're going to know I'm the one giving this.
	I'm feeding you this information.
	Oh, it's so wild.
	It's magnificent.
	And I don't think Ashley was trying to burn Terrence in this.
	She doesn't seem like a malicious person.
	She didn't need to burn Bradley for this anyhow.
	You can't tell them that.
	I might be one of only not even Chris Campbell.
	Bradley knows it because he knows it.
	Speculation.
	I'm not.
	I got the stuff from the divorce lawyer, she says.
	I got a ton of stuff.
	Like, what else?
	When will it drop?
	This is so cool.
	Monday is my filing deadline.
	You won't be involved at all.
	He finally turned over his financial docs, which show he paid for his Fannie's flight, which showed that he paid for Fannie's Delta flight.
	It has her name on it.
	It's a California Napa vacation, and he paid for a Royal Caribbean cruise for them.
	She's like, she's just ecstatic with this.
	The divorce attorney noticed Fannie for a depot.
	In two weeks.
	Okay, then we get into the deposition.
	I'm shocked they were so careless.
	Damn, what else did you get?
	Okay.
	Do you talk to him anymore?
	Let me think.
	No, I don't.
	I don't talk to him.
	Just landed.
	Okay, fine.
	Almost done with my motion.
	I'm not filing until Monday.
	Go home and sleep.
	I will send you a draft.
	Can't wait to hear about your trip.
	Okay, fine.
	To your knowledge, has Nathan...
	This is the best part also, by the way.
	This is just amazing.
	Has Nathan ever prosecuted a felony?
	I can't find a single one.
	Remember Fannie Willis up in front of the church?
	Superstar.
	They don't attack the credentials of the two white people.
	Only Nathan.
	What's wrong with him?
	Suggesting racism.
	Has he ever prosecuted a felony?
	I can't find a single one.
	Terrence Bradley says, never in his life has he prosecuted a felony.
	That's what I found too.
	It's bad.
	Send me a draft.
	It's legit.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Send me a draft.
	Okay, promise not to share it.
	I don't want it leaked before I file it.
	I protected you completely, by the way.
	I promise.
	Okay.
	Not that you needed protection, but I kept you out of it.
	Sent, let me know your thoughts.
	Thanks, I appreciate it.
	Like that.
	Okay, fine.
	I really appreciate you keeping me out, but I think you need to add me in the footnote.
	Oh my goodness, it makes even more sense.
	I really appreciate you keeping me out of the motion, but you need to add me in footnote 15 because I had documents as well.
	Okay, I don't want to get accused of lying.
	It's footnote 15 how much I made.
	Okay, thank you.
	Good point.
	Yes, add it back.
	About his contract and having gotten $74,000.
	Looks good.
	It looks good.
	Okay, everything's good.
	Did you look at campaign contributions?
	I can't remember what we gave her when she was running.
	Good idea.
	And Sonia Allen, listen to this.
	And Sonia Allen now.
	How will they react to this?
	Attack me?
	Give the stupid no fear or favor speech?
	That's another conversation.
	No, they will deny it, says Bradley.
	No way.
	They won't attack you yet.
	OMG.
	They will say those trips and cruises were for work, even though he didn't submit them for reimbursement.
	Lulz.
	Sonya, I keep trying.
	Yes, they're going to deny it.
	Oh, no, they're going to make up that she paid him back in cash with no trace and no records, whatever.
	There have to be so many witnesses.
	If they deny it, they will become public liars.
	Well, Merchant was right about that.
	So many people know about it, not publicly, but so many people have seen them, like most of the office staff.
	Oh, let's get into the NDAs.
	Do you know that when she was elected, he was on her executive team and was a part of all interviews for people she hired and fired, he being Nathan.
	They will still deny it.
	I did hear that, but didn't include it in the proof.
	Didn't include it because I didn't have any proof.
	Was he just not paid for that?
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Listen to this.
	I'm shocked by they did this.
	So careless.
	Why not just not pay Nathan arrogance, says Bradley.
	Well, that's a lot of arrogance.
	Okay, fine.
	Let me see here.
	I don't care about that.
	Where was the NDA part?
	I may subpoena the detail, the security, but wasn't sure if it would help much.
	Those guys know it all.
	Yeah, but...
	And then Terrence Bradley says, yeah, but they changed security detail.
	You need to subpoena her original detail and current detail.
	They really want the guys...
	You really want the guys when she was initially elected.
	Okay.
	Fine.
	Okay.
	One cruise he took with Fanny and his mom.
	Damn.
	Okay.
	Bank records show both their names.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Okay.
	So careless.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	What do we say here?
	Other than the security detail, can you think of anyone else who can confirm their romantic relationship?
	Obviously leaving you and Chris out of the mix.
	Maybe her kids, co-workers, command staff, Dexter, her administrative assistant.
	I think that's Yerdy.
	Yep.
	Okay.
	We go through here.
	And then we got...
	There's a URL.
	Dexter Bond.
	This guy would know.
	I subpoena him.
	Okay, fine.
	We got some more stuff.
	Yes, but they may lie.
	Who is her chief investigator?
	Okay, Capers knows.
	And he was married to the executive.
	Oh, yeah.
	Okay, fine.
	Let's just scroll through all of this.
	We don't really care about this.
	I'm sure Daishina knows and doesn't care.
	Daisha knows.
	That's one of her besties.
	Okay, yada, yada, yada.
	Adam, no.
	Lauren, no.
	They're probably not.
	Definitely.
	They're too high up now.
	Where do we get to the NDA?
	They mention subpoena all of them.
	Oh, this is fantastic.
	This is like Ashley Merchant knows that she's sitting on...
	It's not a goldmine.
	She's sitting on an explosive bombshell with a corrupt DA.
	That's the thing.
	Even without the evidence he paid for...
	That's the thing.
	Even without evidence of sex, he paid for her plane tickets and her travel.
	Subpoenaed them all.
	I am nervous.
	This is huge.
	Terrence Bradley, you are huge.
	You will be fine.
	You are one of the best lawyers I know.
	Go be great.
	She liked it.
	Thank you.
	It's fantastic because, jeez, when Terrence Bradley is telling the truth, he certainly is a much more likable character.
	Certainly more trustworthy.
	Okay, so hold on a second.
	Do an open record request.
	Thomas Ricks was her security.
	Yada, she hired a girlfriend like a bestie.
	It was her plan.
	Yada, yada.
	Okay, fine.
	Green was security.
	We don't need to go there.
	Send some photos.
	Okay, we could skip through this.
	Send me a pic.
	Does Fanny know about Sonia Allen affair?
	Yes, that's her.
	That's the East Point.
	Okay, fine.
	She is key.
	Thank you.
	She also knows about the media company payments.
	Not sure Fanny knew about him and Sonia.
	Keep your schmeckle in your pants, people.
	Have you spoken to her, Robin?
	No, but I found her name because I didn't open records for the media company Fanny hired to track her media.
	She was monitoring it, and then they yanked her privilege, so I figured it went bad.
	Yes, she was fired.
	Yeah, I don't think Fanny knows about Sonia.
	I can't believe that.
	Oh, why fired?
	I could tell when I read.
	For something like disclosing confidential information to a relative.
	Okay, yada, yada, yada.
	Scroll through this.
	Her bestie, be careful.
	She's probably still loyal.
	Not many people knew about the apartment.
	Yes, that's helpful.
	Not many people knew about the apartment.
	I have received so many tips and info this week.
	It's crazy.
	They made everyone sign NDAs this week.
	That was the week when we announced.
	I think Govea certainly talked about it.
	I don't know who broke that information.
	Fannie Willis made everyone that she worked with sign non-disclosure agreements.
	I heard, but she's fired, so no NDA.
	This person got fired before Fannie came in and said, you all are going to sign NDAs, and if any of you talk, I'll destroy your lives the same way we just destroyed Terrence Bradley.
	How far in are we here?
	Dexter Bond.
	Okay, fine, we can scroll this down.
	Jeff DeSantis.
	I know there's some scandals about the Jeff DeSantis character being a Democratic operative.
	I haven't looked into that, so I can't comment on that.
	Hopefully, I'll look into that for tomorrow, so I'll be able to comment coherently, or at least...
	Pertinently on that.
	Cuffy was fired too.
	Damn, everyone gets fired.
	I can't believe she fired them.
	Maybe he will talk.
	Why was he fired?
	My main question has always been, how did Sonya feel about Fanny taking her man?
	It's like a Jerry Springer episode at the end of all this.
	Not sure how she felt or feels.
	Her and Nathan are extremely close now.
	It started romantic, but when I left, it was more brother-sisterly.
	But occasionally they would mess around.
	Cuffey was fired because he slept with a subordinate.
	He's gay.
	He had a party at his house and a subordinate came and they ended up sleeping together.
	Then Cuffey ended up having to reprimand him.
	This is the DA office that puts people in jail.
	I mean, it's just incompetence, corruption, immorality, amorality.
	Oh, then the guy went and reported to Fanny.
	Damn, Cuffy is extremely close to Fanny, too.
	Be careful with him also.
	Wow, I can't believe these folks still like her after she fired them.
	I think she is going to admit the relationship.
	Well, it was because of something they did.
	She had to fire them.
	Makes sense.
	Totally get it.
	Like, she needs to fire Nathan, but she won't.
	Yep.
	No, she won't.
	But she doesn't dispute it.
	She will go down in flames for Nathan.
	Did you see this?
	What is it?
	This is her, uh...
	Oh yeah, that's a link to her first speech in front of the church.
	Superstar.
	Taking to the pulpit of God to lie to a church of congregants.
	I mean, how much more sacrilegious can you possibly get?
	Okay, we donated to her initial campaign.
	I think this is pretty much it.
	Let's see here.
	Oh, then they get into how much cross was paid.
	Cross was paid $250,000, Floyd $150,000.
	Okay, I'm not sure what that is there.
	Oh, my God.
	They went to Belize, Australia, Bahamas, Napa, Panama City, Royal Caribbean, and Norwegian.
	Happy birthday.
	Love the picks.
	All right.
	I'm okay with it.
	Let's see what we got there.
	Subpoenaing Chris Campbell and Nathan's office stuff.
	I fear it would look suspicious if I did not also subpoena you, but I plan on putting Nathan and Fannie on the stand and only have others under subpoena for backup.
	I will leave you out of this, but I don't think...
	But if I don't subpoena you, it would look fishy.
	What would you...
	What do you want me to do?
	I'm okay with it.
	Oh, that's fantastic.
	It is my hope that they do the right thing before then.
	They won't.
	You are my friend and I trust you.
	They will not.
	They are arrogant as F. She thinks she won the other day when she didn't have to be deposed.
	That wasn't a win.
	Thompson set them up.
	Nathan can admit it all on the 31st.
	And if he doesn't, then Thompson will make Fannie sit.
	He basically gave Nathan a chance to protect her.
	This is in the divorce file.
	But if he doesn't tell them all, Fannie will have to sit.
	Nathan's finances make it look like he owed a lot of money when he began this.
	Ode to who?
	Loans.
	Oh, interesting.
	It may have been just a coincidence.
	He was highly leveraged.
	That's on paper.
	What do you mean he wasn't leveraged?
	How is he leveraged?
	This is amazing.
	He took out a lot of loans and then paid them off when he cashed Fannie's checks.
	None of the co-defendant lawyers know I know you.
	At all.
	So they are all wondering if Nathan owed you and Chris money.
	They are all speculating it's interesting to sit quietly and listen.
	Do you know if Nathan went to John Marshall in Atlanta or Chicago?
	News keeps saying Atlanta, but his bar thing says Chicago.
	Atlanta.
	Thanks.
	Yadda yadda.
	File.
	Yup.
	Bing.
	Bang.
	Bong.
	Good.
	Yay.
	Larry said I want to check it out.
	Gabe called me out of the blue.
	Wow.
	I wonder...
	Okay, some other stuff.
	Interesting.
	I have...
	27. I think this is all...
	He's going to say he doesn't know.
	Okay, this is all...
	That's it.
	She fired him on day one.
	He supported Paul Howard.
	Oh, yeah.
	I don't know.
	Who's Paul Howard?
	I don't know who Paul Howard is.
	That's the...
	Those are the text people.
	And they're wild.
	Oh, my goodness.
	They're sleeping around.
	They're all...
	They're all...
	It's a freaking Jerry Springer.
	Deplorable American says, Viva, being religious and being a believer of the gospel of Christ aren't the same thing.
	1 Corinthians 15.3, being religious has requirements per se.
	The saving of grace of Christ is freely given there.
	Thank you.
	Okay, so what am I looking at here?
	What's the judge rule with Trump?
	Okay, we talked about that earlier.
	So that's the text messages.
	It's freaking outrageous.
	And, oh, we're still up here.
	I'm going to get this out of here.
	Boom.
	What did you learn?
	So it all picks up again tomorrow.
	I don't know if it's 9 o 'clock with closing arguments and it's going to be fun.
	It's wild.
	Okay, let me see if I missed any questions and chat before we get into our one last...
	Story of the day.
	Much more litigation is coming after Willis and Wade.
	This is just the tip of the iceberg, says Michael 4-4-NC.
	Oh, that's what I wanted to look up.
	Have they been, has there been a complaint opened to them?
	Terrence was threatened in open court by the corrupt DA's office with, do you know Ana Rodriguez, says Verax Juan.
	Oh, no, I said he was, I put out the clip when, When Nathan Wade is standing up, staring at him, staring at him, and then once he's sure that Terrence is going to play ball, he leaves the court.
	But no, it's an implicit threat, and undoubtedly they did it directly or indirectly, that they criminally prosecute.
	They'll go after Terrence Bradley criminally for the alleged sexual assault.
	Who the hell knows if it even happened?
	Seems that Terrence was nice and pissed with Nathan Wade.
	Purported they were still friends, but nice and pissed.
	And who knows if it actually happened?
	Who knows if he was strong-armed out with fabricated accusations of sexual impropriety?
	Who knows if it was totally consensual, but then used as a pretext afterwards to not just oust Terrence Bradley from the partnership, but also usurp 20,000 bucks he had in escrow at the firm?
	Who knows?
	But one thing we've learned from the weaponized system is you don't even have to have committed the crime.
	In order to have some psycho biatch make up a story from 30 years ago about how you touched her in a Bergdorf stall and get a corrupt enough politically prejudiced court to find you liable.
	Is it Fanny Willis or Willing Fanny?
	Ooh, bada bing, bada boom, Lex Rex 1964.
	Fanny is exposed in more ways than one.
	They're going down.
	And not going down the way they're used to.
	They're going down.
	It's wild.
	Okay.
	Because I also have to check out early after the locals after-party people.
	Big news to be following today.
	Oh, I will not be able to go live with Barnes tonight, that's for sure.
	Solo parenting tonight.
	Only for the night, though.
	And gonna have to put a kid in front of a movie for a little bit.
	But this is the big news of the day.
	And it made Fox News.
	Everybody should tweet this out and tag Vivek.
	Because Vivek, tag him not accusatorily.
	It's not clear that a lot of people know about this story, but the fact that it's now, like, I don't like Fox News anymore, but the fact that it's, you know, front page Fox Digital, people are going to know about it.
	So maybe Vivek is not familiar with it.
	I've politely pinged him and said, dude, Robert F. Kennedy is on this now?
	Get on this story, start following it, and start putting it on blast.
	It's on Fox News, so for the moderate conservatives out there, the people who still read this crap, it's going to reach a very broad audience.
	Conservatives rally behind Pennsylvania Amish farmer who suffered police raid over milk sales.
	Should be conservatives.
	Peace-loving, democracy-loving people.
	Donald Trump Jr. says police should have other priorities to focus on.
	Probably.
	Republicans on social media are rallying behind an Amish farmer in Pennsylvania after he suffered a police raid last month for selling milk in violation of government regulations.
	It's a Babylon Bee article.
	You got a license for that milk?
	I'll tell you what.
	Amos Miller argues that he sells his products only to his, quote, private membership association, end quote, and not to the public, exempting him from government regulations.
	However, the state's agricultural department, sad state agricultural department, sad, alleges that his products have been connected to E. coli outbreaks.
	Well, okay.
	I think we know the truth to that there.
	You raid for E. coli outbreak accusations, allegations, anyhow, that's obviously what you do.
	Okay, that's right.
	Have countered saying the raid was just...
	I was going to say, geez, if that's what the raiding police officers are saying, that's weak by their own sauce.
	Okay, that's lawyers for Miller.
	Countered, saying that the raid was justified by reports of a 2016 death supposedly linked to Miller's products.
	The problem is, it never happened!
	Attorney Robert Barnes wrote in a court filing last week, according to Lancaster Online.
	For those of you who don't know who Robert Barnes is, we have this wonderful community called vivabarneslaw.locals.com, and we have an amazing Sunday night show, among other live streams that we do together.
	And it all comes out on podcasts, so check it out, Sunday night, 6 o 'clock.
	Barnes wrote in the court filing last week, according to Lancaster Online.
	You know, you could reach out to him, Fox News.
	Bastard cowards.
	Reach out to him.
	I'm sure he'd be happy to talk with somebody at Fox.
	In fact, I can give you his number.
	Reach out to me.
	I'll give you his number.
	Quote, In fact, the elderly lady who died had advanced cancer, never drank any raw milk products of Inez Miller, as her caretaker testified to under oath, and a former Wall Street Journal reporter had already previously investigated and independently found.
	Thomas Massey condemned the raid as, quote, shameful, end quote, in January, arguing it was a classic example of government overreach.
	It's a shame that small farmers have been pushed into these situations by...
	He told Newsweek in a statement Wednesday.
	I support small farmers and consumers who wish to engage in voluntary transactions.
	It's imperative that Congress take up the PRIME Act, that's what Massey put forward, I can't remember what the acronym is, to ameliorate the plight of small farmers like Amos, he added.
	Then you got Donald Trump weighing in on Twitter.
	You know what, I'm gonna go put that on.
	I'm in the archives, so that's why.
	I just got nervous.
	I don't want to accidentally bring up my...
	Not all Republicans are siding with Miller, however.
	David Zimmerman, who represents nearby Lancaster County, argues that Miller is not above the law.
	I don't like anybody who uses the expression, not above the law.
	It's a Democrat expression to be used when they are pushing someone beneath the law.
	Let me be very clear.
	I don't like it when people start any statement with, let me be clear.
	90% of the time, what follows is bullshit.
	Let's see if this is one of those times.
	I'm 100% against government overreach and have spent much of my time in the legislature fighting over regulation, end quote, he wrote.
	I also recognize that while limiting...
	The government is critical.
	Some government is necessary.
	Thank you for saying nothing.
	Mr. Miller's case is not about the buying or selling of raw products, as some have suggested.
	Many farmers throughout the state sell raw products.
	I can go to a local...
	There are many farmers with roadside stands.
	Mr. Miller's case is about following basic agricultural regulations that every other farmer in the state is subject to for the production of safe food.
	Are you suggesting his food isn't safe, Mr. Zimmerman?
	I mean, I know you'll have immunity, but are you suggesting his food is not safe?
	Is it too much to ask for farmers to follow these basic requirements to ensure food safety?
	Zimmerman sounds like a Democrat in disguise.
	What's his name?
	Dave Zimmerman.
	Just want to go Google that for a second.
	Is the solution to ignore Mr. Miller and allow him to violate basic regulations that other farmers must follow?
	Won't somebody flee stick of the children?
	That would certainly not be fair to other farmers, he said.
	Miller's defense against the state is ongoing, but authorities have placed hundreds of products of Miller's farm store under detention order.
	In other words, they spoiled it.
	Dave Zimmerman, Pennsylvania Legislature, Lancaster County, PA General Assembly.
	Biography, occupation.
	He seems to be Republican.
	Was he ever a Democrat?
	Ooh, ooh, ooh.
	No.
	I'll look that up afterwards.
	That's the story, people.
	Barnes has made it to Fox News.
	Let me close this, close this.
	Did I just close my screen?
	Panic.
	I'm right there.
	That's the news, people, coming out of a small hamlet in western Pennsylvania.
	If anybody gets that reference, you've been watching Saturday Night Live since the 70s as well.
	All right.
	Calamity Sue.
	It's all caps, so it caught my attention.
	As the FDA poisons everyone on the daily, fluoride in the fucking water, poison on the big ag crops.
	Fuck the NDA.
	Fuck the entire fucking government.
	Calamity Sue, your gratuitous use of the expletive fuck has...
	It caught my eye, so...
	Well done on that.
	I know Calamity Sue.
	I've seen her name.
	I've seen you in the chat a lot.
	Good seeing you today.
	The standing in the court, that standing in court threat was straight out of the godfather, too, says 201.
	That's what I thought, too.
	It's wild.
	That was a $5 rant.
	So that's the news, people.
	What I'm going to do, because I do have to actually solo parent for the better part of the day, I'm going to go over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	We're going to have the after party.
	There's a number of tips there, and we're going to engage with the chat and have a discussion, get some questions in, people.
	If anybody wants to...
	Okay, we got some questions in vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Here, link to locals.
	Come!
	It's not an obligation to immediately support financially if you don't want to.
	You can be a non-supporting member, and you get access to 90% of the stuff out there.
	The community's amazing.
	Come and join vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Or if you want to support, $10 a month or $100 a year.
	Not free.
	It's not cheap.
	For what it is, I say it's a damn good value, people.
	And you can skip watching Fox News and cable television.
	Come get the news from trustworthy, honest people, despite what they look like.
	That being me looking like a crazy person.
	So the join button is right there on Rumble.
	And that's it.
	No locals for me today.
	I have...
	Oh, have a good one, Viva, says, and very ginger.
	I will see you tomorrow.
	I will be live streaming the hearing tomorrow, so stay tuned for that.
	And I see FJT, which stands for Forget Justin Trudeau, which we can all agree with, Mr. Ray K. Enjoy those messages while you can, because if and ever that law, Bill C-63, comes into power, you're going to jail.
	And me too.
	I'll see you there.
	All right, so what we're going to do is we're going to end on Rumble.
	Come on over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	See you tomorrow.
	See you tonight.
	See you all over the interwebs.
	Peace out, Rumble.
	Locals, here it comes.
	Bada bing.
	Ba-da-boom.
	And we're done.
	Now, been solo parenting for years now.
	Of course, I only have one son, Bill Brown.

▲