Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 24, 2024 - Viva & Barnes

02:36:37

Ep. 203: Fani Willis; Letitia James; Amos Miller; Biden Crimes AND MORE! Viva & Barnes LIVE!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	So today we're doing a Easter egg hunt and it's a lot of fun for our children.
	We do it every year in the community.
	I've been doing it since actually before I was the elected district attorney.
	We do it with a nonprofit organization called WAVE, which is We All Value Excellence, that is mainly made up of police officers and law enforcement officers.
	And are there other events like this held throughout the year?
	Absolutely.
	We do a book bag hunt.
	Most of the focus of WAVE is to give back to either children or the homeless.
	It actually started giving back to the homeless, and then we found out there was such a population of homeless children, and so it kind of grew as a natural arm.
	And so we do things at Thanksgiving, things at Christmas, things just during the year.
	Do you feel like there's any difference at all this year than past years?
	Just with recent attention that you've gotten, do you feel different being out and about right now?
	I feel more loved.
	Actually, I've gotten a lot of support.
	A lot of support from women that surprised me.
	I wasn't thinking that I was going to be the face of women, but women of every nationality, African-American women, Caucasian women, have been embracing.
	Sometimes I think...
	They tell me they're praying for me, but just really, really embracing, very proud of me.
	So it's very interesting to see how proud of women are of what they tell me.
	That's very humbling.
	Humbling.
	Delusional is what it is.
	Keep going.
	Listen to this.
	While I check my audio levels.
	kind of reclaim your reputation in a way with Colton County.
	Oh, I don't believe it needs to be reclaimed.
	Something like this might help remind people who you are.
	I don't think my reputation needs to be reclaimed.
	So I guess we'll start there.
	This is what I would do.
	No matter what was going on, I'm not going to miss these events.
	We will be doing our book bag drive in July like we always do.
	We will do our coat bag drive in November.
	We will do our toy drive at the holidays.
	We're not going to miss it.
	to skip a beat because of all the noise or the distraction.
	The noise.
	We're gonna continue to do our work.
	I don't feel like my reputation needs to be reclaimed.
	Let's say it for the record.
	I'm not embarrassed by anything I've done.
	I guess my greatest crime is I had a relationship with a man.
	Let me pause it there.
	Your greatest crime could be any one of the following.
	Perjury.
	Tax evasion.
	Georgia ethics rules.
	Georgia law.
	Has she compared herself to Jesus yet?
	I think this is coming right now.
	That's not something that I find embarrassing in any way.
	And I know that I have not done anything that's illegal.
	And so I don't feel like my reputation needs to be reclaimed.
	And when I tell you the outpouring of women, and I'll tell you this, especially African-American women who will just say, we are so proud.
	You are such a good representative of us.
	But I would be lying to say it's only African-American women.
	But I would be lying to say it's only African-American women who come up to her.
	Infidel or adulterer.
	Oh, perjurer.
	You're such a good role model for us.
	But she'd be lying.
	It's not only African American women.
	It's all women.
	Jesus himself would be jealous of her.
	Caucasian women, Asian women, Indian women.
	I told Jeff one day, I didn't think I was the face of the feminist movement, but somehow I became it.
	And I think that women feel like women are treated differently when they're professionals.
	And they're proud to see someone that is strong and trying to do the right job.
	Certainly flawed, like every human being is flawed.
	My father has a saying, only one perfect man walked the face of the earth and they crucified him.
	I am not a perfect human being, but what I am is a hardworking human being.
	Oh, she works hard.
	That loves the community I serve.
	Oh, she loves them.
	The seat does not belong to me.
	It belongs to the people.
	And as long as I'm here, I'm going to try to do the job in a way that's honorable.
	I'm going to try to do the job in a way that's honorable by having sex with my co-worker, lying about it under oath, siphoning hundreds of thousands of dollars to him while he proceeds to conceal those assets from his wife that he's divorcing, while I threaten and intimidate his wife into not subpoenaing me.
	No, no, no.
	She's a role model.
	Oh, my goodness.
	But understand what that is, by the way.
	That is narcissism.
	That is someone who is so detached and so in love with themselves that despite everything that is plain to, you know, my blind dog Winston can see it.
	She still thinks that she's a role model, that people look up to her.
	Hey, hey!
	It's crazy and it's delusional.
	I don't want to get all into it because we're going to talk about it tonight with Viva Barnes Law.
	Good evening, everybody.
	I'm back in my office.
	A week-ish on the road.
	I look a little pale.
	I look a little pale.
	Back on the road.
	No, back home from being on the road.
	It's good to be home.
	We had a nice live stream yesterday afternoon.
	A little afternoon meander with Viva on a Saturday.
	We've got one heck of a show for you tonight.
	Because the news doesn't stop.
	And the idiocy does not come to an end.
	We're going to see tomorrow.
	We're going to see tomorrow.
	Not to get into the subjects too soon.
	We're going to see tomorrow whether or not Leticia James, the other role model who has not yet had her comeuppance with her alleged corruption, but I think that check is in the mail, whether or not they actually start to seize Trump assets.
	We'll get there.
	For those of you who are new to the channel, where is the link to Rumble?
	It should be the pinned comment.
	It's not the pinned comment?
	Well, shame on me.
	For those who are new to the channel, and there's a lot of yous who have discovered this channel, During the Leticia James gift that keeps on giving.
	My name is David Freyheit.
	There are people out there who think my name is Viva.
	It isn't.
	I'm sorry to burst your bubble.
	I am a former Montreal litigator.
	No longer a Montreal litigator turned current Florida rumbler.
	We do this thing every Sunday night with Robert Barnes.
	We've got our vivabarneslaw.locals.com community.
	I put out short videos from my car, from time to time, from my office called Vlogs.
	And I am exclusive with Rumble.
	As I'm sure many of you know.
	And so what we do is we support the platforms that support free speech.
	We start on YouTube, Rumble, and our beautiful community at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	I should make sure we are live there.
	Where's Barnes?
	Says Mikey12 in our Locals community.
	He's coming.
	I'll give everybody the link to Locals.
	We start on all three platforms.
	We end on YouTube about 30-45 minutes and sometimes an hour depending on how much of a...
	A rant Barnes is on.
	We end on YouTube.
	We go over to Rumble and vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	And then after we're done with the entire stream, we save a few select extra topics for our vivabarneslaw.locals.com community.
	We read the chats there.
	Five bucks and over, we read them.
	And it's an amazing, beautiful thing.
	We'll see...
	The news and this year is going to make for...
	What I hope to be the end of legacy media, I'm not saying mainstream media because alternative media might one day be mainstream, but we are seeing and witnessing, and what I hope is going to be the last year of legacy media, fighting tooth and nail to cling to whatever powers they had to steer public sentiment and manufacture outcomes.
	It's a big year.
	I'm sure everybody knows that.
	Now, what we do before we get started here, these wonderful things called Super Chats.
	Cheryl Gage, thank you very much.
	I'm going to read this in a second.
	YouTube takes 30% of those.
	So what Rumble has done, because Rumble is doing everything to kick ass on the internet, they have the equivalent of Super Chats on Rumble called Rumble Rants.
	They ordinarily only take 20% of that.
	For the rest of 2024, they're given 100% to the creators.
	Best way to support what we do, if you like what we do, is to join at vivabarneslaw.locals.com or alternatively.
	Let me see if I can see this here.
	You can get some merch at vivafry.com.
	But to read these things, I'm going to read the Rumble Rants, but I'll read these and just get into the show.
	Yes, Viva, you sure showed them teenagers.
	What for?
	I'm glad you didn't get hurt.
	This is when I climbed a tree in the Wikiwashi River and then jumped into the river.
	I did a front flip as I was being egged on to do a front flip with my GoPro by the teenagers.
	I assess risk.
	Like the Terminator.
	How can I get hurt?
	How can I get hurt?
	And how can this be awesome?
	But thank you very much, Gerald Gage.
	And we got, I feel New York is going to charge Trump with tax fraud if he doesn't pay taxes on the $450 million in New York City, even if he paid taxes on it in Florida.
	I don't know, man.
	I don't...
	Kiwi Exotics, I don't think they can get much more...
	They can go much more crazy than they've already gone.
	Cheryl says, Fanny brings to mind the Jane Austen line.
	Vanity working on a weak mind produces every sort of mischief.
	That's a good line.
	Life is good says, loved your Rumblecast yesterday, but the trolls make it unbearable.
	Any chance of a mod in the future?
	Take care.
	We have a mod.
	I don't like blocking people for being asses.
	People are free to be asses.
	Spammers get blocked, and if there's any overt calls to violence, flag it and report it.
	But other than that, I like to leave it free, even if it sometimes is a little annoying.
	It's annoying.
	Sometimes it even distracts me.
	Baron of Grey Matters says, Tom Waits, the world is a hellish place, and bad writing is destroying the quality of our suffering.
	And let's see if we've got any rumble rants while we wait.
	Barnes is due in in a second.
	Because I'm neurotic, I want to make sure that I actually checked a specific box on the platform, which I did.
	You might have noticed as you entered the stream, it said this stream contains a paid promotion.
	Because it does.
	People, we're going to be talking about Bitcoin tonight, or at least FTX and how no judgment and no shade on Bitcoin.
	I still don't know how it works.
	What I do know how something works.
	What I do know how it works.
	I do know how gold works.
	And gold has worked for eons.
	Let me maximize this.
	Gold has worked for eons and it is sort of the ultimate insurance to some extent until we figure out how to actually make gold, which I don't think we're going to be able to do.
	Or until we get to that planet that's like an entire planet composed of gold and diamond.
	Then all these things lose their value.
	Until such time.
	Gold over thousands of years has proven to be a good way to ensure your wealth.
	A new central digital bank currency is coming and could replace your dollars with digital currency.
	See this in Canada.
	With it could come the surveillance of our lives, freezing of our assets, as you've seen in Canada, and government control over our bank accounts and how we spend our money.
	As we've seen in Canada.
	Americans want to protect their liberty and not become Canada all stuff.
	And privacy need to prepare themselves for what's to come.
	That's why many Americans are turning to physical gold and silver to diversify their wealth.
	Heads up to anybody who's interested.
	Silver is a lot more cost effective.
	But for some reason, it does not appreciate in value the way gold does.
	Back in the day, I got a bunch of silver dollars from my grandmother.
	The old school ones.
	They're still not worth anything more than their weight in silver.
	If you want to help protect your retirement, I recommend that you...
	Go to preservegold.com forward slash Jiva.
	Get your investment guide today.
	They'll explore the right options for you and will help with the process to have physical gold and silver delivered right to your door or inside your RRA 401k and other qualified investments.
	And to make it easy, Triple B accredited with zero consumer complaints and hundreds of satisfied clients.
	I hear a kid screaming in the background.
	They're also founding member of the Precious Metals Association, so you know you're in good hands.
	And as an exclusive offer for Viva Frye viewers.
	That's you guys out there.
	They'll give you up to $10,000 in free gold and silver with a qualifying purchase or retirement account rollover.
	They'll even throw in an immediate $500 credit if you request an investor guide today.
	So don't wait.
	Visit PreserveGold.com forward slash Viva.
	I am live, children, for your free gold and silver investment guide to take the first steps towards protecting your wealth.
	Again, PreserveGold.com forward slash Viva.
	Get your free guide today.
	And how many times has that video stopped playing a while ago?
	Oh, man.
	But it's good.
	I got one.
	One little coin.
	My joke is, you know, you can hide it in your cavities.
	The old joke.
	They used to use gold to fill your cavities, and you can hide gold in your cavity, but I am told that's the first place they go to look.
	Oh, lordy, lordy.
	The link is in the description at preservegold.com forward slash Vivo.
	I don't give investment advice.
	Gold is just a surefire way to have, what do they say?
	Cash?
	No, they say guns, gold, and a getaway.
	If you want to protect yourself from everything.
	I hear a kid who's very, very angry for some reason.
	And I suspect it's because he's very, very quiet.
	While Barnes comes in and just to rehash a beautiful one that I...
	I will never let them forget this.
	This unhinged speech that Joe Biden gave.
	It wasn't yesterday.
	I don't know when it was.
	So all Americans, not just seniors, pay $35 a month.
	Have a $2,000 cap for prescription drugs.
	I want to make those $800 ACA savings permanent.
	Meanwhile, Donald Trump is about to pass in serving himself.
	This is the guy who doesn't care about science and reason.
	Remember, during the pandemic, Donald Trump told us to inject ourselves with bleach.
	He really said that.
	He said there's nothing to worry about if you do that.
	Nothing to worry about if you do that.
	Now Trump keeps telling us he's going to terminate the ACA.
	Think about what that means.
	It would mean 100 million Americans with pre-existing conditions would lose their health care coverage.
	Look at Nancy Pelosi.
	It would mean young people would be kicked off their parents' coverage.
	These are three of the worst people on Earth right here.
	10 million Americans would lose health care coverage as a consequence of all that.
	He wants to get rid of the power of Medicare to negotiate low prescription drug prices, driving up costs of insulin back to $400 instead of $35 for seniors.
	And Trump recently said Social Security and Medicare, quote, there's a lot you can do in terms of cutting, end of quote.
	Can you believe it?
	Just also a heads up, because it's going to be amazing as the segue into what I was talking about there.
	Tomorrow, I'm going to be moderating a debate between Roger Stone.
	I forget who it's between, actually.
	Roger Stone and somebody else on the why Trump needs to be the next president and two people from Occupy Democrats.
	It's going to be a live moderation of a debate.
	And I'm a pretty decent moderator.
	Despite what I believe, I can be very, very objective, will be objective, and will be a good moderator that will not allow a debate to descend into a Jerry Springer show.
	It starts at 7 o 'clock tomorrow.
	I'll be sharing the link as we get closer to the event tomorrow, some point during the day.
	So stay tuned for that.
	It's going to be fantastic.
	It's going to be cross-streamed on my platform and a number of other platforms.
	It's going to be amazing.
	And let me just make sure I gave Barnes the link.
	And until he gets here, let me just make sure here.
	Barnes.
	Bada bing, bada boom.
	Give him a little text.
	You got the link, question mark?
	Before we do that, I noticed some rumble rants.
	And we're going to get ready to kick it with this show.
	That's one thing that's coming this week.
	Tuesday, sorry, I should actually finish my weekly wrap-up schedule.
	Tuesday, Tommy Robinson.
	We haven't figured out the exact time yet.
	There's a bit of an issue with the time zone.
	But Tommy Robinson should be coming on.
	And it's going to be fantastic.
	That's a man I've been following for years in terms of legal scandals or legal issues.
	All the way back to his contempt.
	So that's going to be cool.
	Sometime Tuesday and then Wednesday.
	There's going to be a bunch of good stuff coming up.
	But that's Monday and that's Tuesday.
	Rowan Cowart says, I would love to see a blog of you going snorkel lion spearfishing down in Florida.
	Snorkel lion spearfishing down in Florida.
	They are an invasive species and you get some good eating while helping the ecosystem.
	Love you guys.
	Keep up the battle.
	Lion spearfishing.
	I'll check that out.
	Lord Sterling says, Viva would love to have you and Barnes on my show, Common Censored, covering all the big clown news every day.
	Let me screen grab that.
	Britt Cormier says, Viva.
	I don't think they can go much more crazy.
	All I can say is, you lack imagination.
	LOL.
	The engaged few says, no, you gibbering dootard.
	Trump didn't tell everyone to inject themselves with bleach.
	He warned you to do that.
	And he knew what would happen.
	He wanted you to do that.
	And he knew what would happen.
	Not sure I get that one.
	Oh, people.
	It's an outrageous...
	Just to get up and lie to your face.
	Hey, he really said that.
	He said if you do it, there'd be nothing to worry about.
	And spoiler alert, that's not at all what he said.
	Oh, I'm not even going to play.
	If you saw the stupid clip, I'd play it.
	Hold on, hold on.
	I'll get it.
	I'll get it.
	We'll play that one.
	It's not what he said in any realm of the universe.
	This is what he said.
	And it's quite a bit different.
	Not that we need to worry about fact-checkers fact-checking Biden.
	Not that we need to worry about, you know, community notes getting to Biden.
	This is what he said.
	And it's amazing how difficult it is to find this.
	With a tremendous, whether it's ultraviolet or just very powerful light.
	And I think you said that hasn't been checked, but you're going to test it.
	And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or...
	In some other way.
	And I think you said you're going to test that too.
	Sounds interesting.
	Right.
	And then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute.
	And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning?
	Almost.
	Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number of the lungs.
	So it'd be interesting to check that so that you're going to have to use.
	Medical doctors, but it sounds interesting.
	You got it.
	What Joe Biden said was exactly right.
	No lie, no twisting of information, no twisting of the truth.
	Everybody, share the link.
	Let's see, we're 2,500 on YouTube, which is good.
	We're 12,500 on Rumble, and in our vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	I have to refresh this because we're definitely more than 20. We are 1,400.
	So amazing crowds.
	Barnes is in the house getting ready to bring him in.
	We've got an upcoming meeting in April 13th for Barnes's 50th.
	Barnes, I'm bringing you in.
	3, 2, 1, sir.
	How goes the battle?
	Good, good.
	Here at Viva Barnes, we like to provide free legal education.
	So tonight we'll help answer a question for Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
	Well, what is a Rico?
	What do you mean?
	What is a Rico?
	That's like a category.
	It's not like a crime.
	Yes, it is.
	It will help explain it to everybody.
	It's beyond stupid.
	I mean, I almost feel bad for picking on her and I don't use the bartender trope because I've known bartenders who actually have better understandings of law than AOC.
	Robert, it wasn't on our menu for the night.
	I'll ask you about the book.
	I'll ask you about the cigar.
	Then I'm going to bounce off my conspiracy theory off your big brain in a second for what just happened in Russia.
	What's the book?
	What's the cigar?
	Liberty and Power.
	It's a good book by Harry Watson about one of the first great American populist political revolutions of Andrew Jackson, who's commonly and popularly defamed in certain scholastic and academic circles out there.
	And it's a useful book about how to be a transformational president rather than a transitional president.
	Trump was a very good person.
	Trump's decisions over the next six months for his campaign will shape whether he will be merely a transitional president who exposes deep state corruption but is unable or unwilling to institutionally make reforms that eradicate their constant.
	You know, pestilent presence in our system of governance.
	Or whether he chooses to become a transformative president in the vice presidential choices that he has made upcoming.
	Robert Kennedy will be announcing his choice this week, I believe, on Tuesday.
	I'll be up in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in fact, after the show, taking a flight up there to meet with folks in coordination of Amos Miller, which we'll have an update on.
	But yeah, so...
	That's the book.
	Good book about Jacksonian politics and how you can become transformational, not just transitional, as Trump faces major choices that will shape that over the next several months.
	Okay, Robert, this is the question that I have.
	It was not on the list you sent me.
	I'm sure you know where I'm going with this.
	The events in Russia, horrific and atrocious beyond words, beyond comprehension.
	News is still developing.
	Theories are still coming out.
	People are pointing fingers and blaming.
	I'm reluctant to believe any of the early reports, but you gather it all together.
	Some of the early reports are that a few of the terrorist murderers have been captured and were explaining that they were basically hired from a telegram chat, offered a certain amount of money to go and kill as many people as they could at a Russian target.
	Allegedly caught fleeing to the border of Ukraine.
	And I say allegedly because all of this is early information stuff.
	The first question I asked, and I talked about it briefly yesterday with our locals group, was who benefits from such a terrible thing?
	ISIS claims responsibility for it, but historically, for anybody who's been around, terrorist groups eagerly claim responsibility, even if they weren't responsible.
	And there's a number of theories going on here.
	From what you know as of now, what is your operating theory?
	I'm going to have a hush-hush on this later in the week at vivabarneslaw.locals.com explaining how each of the possible theories that one blames ISIS, another blames Ukraine, another theory blames people connected to France.
	And in the UK and the West in general, and then others are blaming Victoria Nuland in the United States, given statements she made relatively recently about going to have some nasty surprises for Russia in the next several months.
	And so maybe U.S. taxpayer dollars is being used to fund overt terrorism towards Russia.
	That will be one of the questions we'll explore in the Hush Hush.
	There's a little more detail I need to digest before getting out there, but there's already aspects of it that are undercover.
	People should just research France, Russia, and the Sahel region, and they might see a backstory about a war that's not being talked about in the Western press about what really might also be fueling this that might explain the ISIS connection in particular, for example.
	Maybe ISIS did this on its own.
	Maybe ISIS did nothing at all.
	Or maybe ISIS was being used as a tool itself.
	Wouldn't be the first time.
	So, yeah, we'll explore some alternative narratives on that.
	That relates to our, you know, well, I'll go through our topics, but we have a bonus topic also off the top.
	Was Candace Owens canceled?
	And how another Viva Barnes prediction came true.
	But before we get to that, top 12 topics tonight.
	The most popular one on the board, other than no favorites, was Trump.
	Trump's New York bond issue and his lawsuit against George Stephanopoulos and ABC.
	We have the Supreme Court, big First Amendment social media censorship oral argument that took place this week, and a case that's not getting as much attention, but probably should because of its collateral consequences on Trump cases, a retaliatory prosecution case pending before the Supreme Court.
	A big win in the Amos Miller case and the state of Pennsylvania's attempts to ignore the law and disobey the judge.
	There's efforts afoot already for them to do that.
	That's how rogue and reckless they are.
	And they're able to do so only because the politicians in Pennsylvania are still mute and not paying attention to their supervisory obligations and public duties.
	A big border battle.
	It happened in court at two levels.
	The Texas border trying to defend itself.
	Supreme Court says yes.
	Fifth Circuit says no.
	In between, they literally do an invasion.
	Most of the people who invaded are now here legally.
	Some of the people that are here legally are those protected for the Arizona Rancher case that is now pending before going to trial.
	Started on trial on Friday.
	This is that Arizona Rancher that was accused of...
	Well, not negligent, reckless homicide, second-degree homicide in Arizona for shooting his weapon that led to supposedly the death of an illegal immigrant crossing his path.
	One of the key witnesses in the case is a guy who's been repeatedly deported, but government's happy to use him as a witness and give him a free ticket to come right back in.
	And whether or not that rancher case is really an extension of the Democratic policy.
	Democratic Party's policy to prohibit states from enforcing immigration law, local county governments from enforcing immigration law, and prohibit ordinary Americans from enforcing immigration law because the Biden administration refuses to enforce the immigration law.
	Then we have the FTX fallout continues, a case against Silvergate Bank that also has broader consequences.
	For the banking and financial industry in general and others in cases of aiding and abetting.
	And by the way, they were citing in that decision some law that I helped develop in California.
	So that was always interesting to see.
	A big antitrust case brought against Apple.
	What consequences might flow from that?
	Matt Gaetz.
	Big win.
	Big First Amendment win in a case in California.
	We're going to help answer AOC's questions of what's a Rico and what crimes Biden has committed, such apparently she doesn't know that anybody's accused him of any.
	We'll explain who and what the Biden crime family is and how those are, in fact, also impeachable offenses.
	And last but not least, we have an update on the Brooke Jackson case.
	The government has filed their motion to intervene in order to dismiss the case.
	And you might be surprised at what they admit their reasoning and basis is.
	But first up, was Candace canceled by the Daily Wire?
	So I had to catch up a little bit on the news.
	Do I play the clip of one of the other gentlemen at the Daily Wire?
	Let me play this right here.
	I'm not picking on him because I'm not picking on him.
	I just, I thought this was a very interesting, I won't play the whole clip.
	He's grown.
	Here.
	You know, when I did this, by the way, the priest who baptized me said, you know, Christians won't accept you.
	You'll still be a Jew.
	And I said, well, I am.
	That's my race.
	I'm a Jew.
	I'm proud of my race.
	It's a great race.
	It's done many, many great things, including write the Bible.
	And, you know, I am a Jew.
	But that hasn't happened at all.
	Christians have welcomed me with open arms, except this Christ the King anti-Semitic crowd.
	Christ is the King.
	And one day every knee will bow and recognize it because he's not just my King.
	He's King of the universe.
	But when you use that phrase to mean that God has abandoned his chosen people, the Jews, through whom he came into this world incarnate, and that he's broken his promises, his covenant with the Jews, you are quoting scripture like Satan does in the Bible.
	I'm going to stop it there.
	This is why I don't discuss religion often.
	How do I get out of here?
	Robert, I don't discuss religion.
	I'm not sure who that guy is.
	I know he's on the Daily Wire, but I saw the clip and all that I could think of is the man converted, obviously, from Judaism to Christianity, literally just said Christ is king and everyone will bow the knee to him and the entire universe.
	But, and I don't know what the politics are here, but when people say Christ is king, it's anti-Semitic.
	And it's all part of this whole ecosystem of Candace Owens leaving.
	I don't know if she claims it's retaliation.
	I don't know the terms of which she left.
	But she's no longer with the Daily Wire.
	People are saying it's because of her beliefs or her statements towards Israel.
	Others are trying to drudge up some stupid tweet that she hearted and say she's a raging anti-Semite, which I don't personally believe.
	But what do you know of it, Robert?
	What do you know of the terms of the breakup?
	Whether or not they paid her out, bought her out, whether or not she quit so they don't have to?
	And what do you make of the entire kerfuffle?
	Well, I think it was six months ago or so.
	We predicted right here on this show that Candace Owens was going to try to get out of her contract with the Daily Wire.
	And the key issue for her was, one, how does she get out of the contract without her being terminated for cause?
	So that she couldn't be sued, so that she has certain financial benefits secured under the contract and is not at risk of any liability.
	And secondly, how does she do so in such a way that she doesn't come across looking like the bad actor?
	That she maintains her public image and even ideally can portray herself as a victim to get people to rally behind in the process.
	And it's like, how would you possibly do that with the Daily Wire run by Ben Shapiro?
	What issue could possibly get you terminated from there in a way that you could be made to look like the victim rather than the perpetrator?
	I've said for some while here that, and I said at the time, that's exactly what she was going to do, that she was going to use Israel to get herself, weasel her way out of the contract.
	It was clear all the way back to Stephen Crowder when she was busy, you know, pipping herself out for the Daily Wire to bash Stephen Crowder.
	It was dawning on her in live time that she didn't have such a great contract and that Crowder had kind of exposed that.
	And then she saw Crowder goes to Rumble, goes to Locals, and is maintaining more independence, probably doing better financially than she is, and increased influence, more influence than she had.
	So she's like, oh, man.
	And then she sees Tucker Carlson do the same thing.
	And it's like, I think without doubt, she was thinking, I got to get out of this.
	I got to get out of this.
	And there was an obvious path.
	The path was question Israel in some manner.
	Now the question is, how do you question it in a way that doesn't be a for-cause basis or severely damage her public reputation with her audience?
	And there you have these different constituencies that are anti-Israel.
	You've got the anti-Israeli left.
	That puts Israel, because everything is through the filter of oppressor or oppressed.
	That's it.
	They know nothing else.
	And before 9-11, they saw Islamists as oppressors.
	After 9-11, they saw Islamists as oppressed.
	That's why you get gays for Palestine and feminists for Palestine.
	You know, things that were a meme.
	It should be a meme or a joke or actually legit.
	Because the left has this oppressor-oppressed paradigm.
	But that wasn't going to be an appropriate place for her to go.
	Then you have the, nor would the Islamist part of the anti-Israeli movement be a very plausible path for Candace to pursue.
	And so then you have to look at the right.
	What parts of the right are critical of them?
	And there she had to walk a tightrope.
	There's a part of the right.
	Like what Andrew Clavin is talking about.
	That when they say Christ is king, they mean something different than what everybody else thinks of when they hear Christ is king.
	Most Christians hear Christ is king.
	Yes, that's great.
	That's our Christian tradition, belief.
	There is a percentage of people, I won't say Andrew Torba by name, but basically when they say this, everybody knows it's anti-Jewish and trying to spread blood libel.
	I think, as you pointed out, there's a difference between somebody saying Israel is committing genocide and Glenn Greenwald or others.
	That's an entirely ideologically merited position to hold, even though I think it's factually false.
	That's a consistent position for them to hold without being anti-Semitic at all.
	That does not mean everybody who says that isn't anti-Semitic.
	There is a percentage of people who are.
	So her goal was, how do I get on the right, the anti-war right that's...
	But it's not anti-Semitic.
	And there is.
	Even though Pat Buchanan was falsely accused of it, the Pat Buchanan side, the Thomas Massey side, the more libertarian side, the more anti-war side in general, that says, why are we giving money to foreign governments?
	Period.
	Don't care if it's Ukraine.
	Don't care if it's Israel.
	Don't care if it's Colombia, Venezuela.
	Don't care who it is.
	Why are we giving our money to other people that are not our citizens?
	Why are we doing that?
	So that's a longstanding, legitimate, independent criticism that applies to everybody, of which Israel, in their view, is a principal offender because of how much money goes to them, in their view.
	And then the second is getting entangled in the various Middle Eastern war conflicts hasn't exactly been a politically profitable path for the United States.
	And that's the sort of what I would call a combination of the libertarian right and your Dave Smith types who's more libertarian center to libertarian left, and your Patrick Buchanan side.
	And the goal was she needed to get into that without getting near the Nick Fuentes of the world, knowing that the Nick Fuentes of the world would boost her.
	Which would be just fine for Candace.
	Candace, I always say there's three categories.
	There's your real advocates, then there's your pure grifters, and then there's your hustlers.
	Your hustlers are part advocate, part grifter.
	Candace is absolutely a hustler.
	Do I think her views on Israel that she's been announcing over the six months are all that sincere?
	Let's just say I'm skeptical.
	It's just the timing.
	I shouldn't have been able to predict it.
	I shouldn't have said Candace Owens is going to use Israel to weasel out of her Daily Wire contract, right?
	This was her sincerely held view.
	Try to find her saying this two years ago, three years ago, four years ago.
	It's kind of missing, isn't it?
	Because Queen Candace wanted to be queen again, and she couldn't be so at Daily Wire.
	So I'm not believing the sincerity of her views, but it was a smart tactical decision.
	Because it would drive little Benji Shapiro absolutely up a wall.
	It would drive many of the patrons and supporters at the Daily Wire up a wall.
	Because Israel is a holy cause.
	Ben should just go be an Israeli citizen.
	I get it.
	I understand a lot of Jewish conservatives see Israel as an existential cause.
	I respect that.
	I'm not for leveraging American resources and risking American lives for it.
	At the same time, of course, it's almost impossible to give tactical advice in this debate because you're either a Zionist colonizer, if you say anything pro-Israel, or you're a Hamas apologist Jew-hater, if you say anything anti-Israel.
	You can't have a practical viewpoint.
	I would say I think your suspicion about 10-7 at the time is increasingly...
	I don't think Netanyahu is culpable because I think it's too big a gamble.
	But we look at Quibono, comparing Russia to this, what happened in Russia to this.
	You know, the hardliners sure have used this to gain a lot of influence on policy in Israel.
	And the hardliners in Hamas need each other.
	Hamas needs the hardliners to overreact in Gaza so they can sever the Trump effort to build a disconnect between the royalist wing of the Arabist world from the Palestinian cause and how many in the Arab world and Islamic world are no fans of Hamas.
	And at the same time, the hardliners need Hamas to do horrible things to justify the punitive actions they want to take.
	In their viewpoint towards security.
	But, you know, it seems like they were in bed together, frankly.
	I'm increasingly skeptical and suspect of whatever happened on 10-7.
	As soon as they were using 10-7 to sound like our American elites after 9-11, and how it's had that effect on the Israeli public, 90-95% don't question anything right now in Israel.
	It's like, mmm.
	And even while...
	You know, what we predicted here is that a punitive campaign in Gaza would be a public relations debacle, disaster for Israel, which is what Hamas needs to maintain the money train.
	And if you don't think it's about the money, why don't you check out how much money is in the bank accounts of Yes, Yes, or Arafat before he died, what they found out afterwards, or Hamas.
	They use the Palestinian people and Palestinian cause to rake in lots of money for their own genocidal inclinations that have been the Palestinian objective from the beginning of this conflict in the 1920s.
	So I don't think what Canis Owens did or said was anti-Semitic, but I'll give an example of how I'm skeptical of her motives.
	I didn't know the ADL or anybody was coming after her, except for her telling me over and over again.
	So it's like, hmm, somebody's trying to raise, elevate this issue above everybody else.
	So, but smart move with Candace.
	She now looks like she was canceled by the Daily Wire for her principled position in free speech advocacy.
	And she weaseled out of the contract and now gets to be independent, announce the locals page, you know, very quickly.
	You know, is going to be on Rumble probably very quickly.
	Might try to do a deal with Tucker's people.
	But my guess is, if you know Queen Candace, and they called her, I got that introduction from others that were close to her world in D.C. in 2018 at the Trump Hotel, and then saw her walk around and interact with people, and I was like, ooh, I get it now.
	She is indeed Queen Candace.
	It was always an uncomfortable tie for the Daily Wire.
	She was one of the few people who could bring in a populist element to the Daily Wire that's otherwise just a culturally conservative institution, but an establishment Republican one for the most part.
	She was one of the few popular personalities that had independent market value other than Ben Shapiro at the Daily Wire.
	But they just like Crowder.
	It never made a lot of sense.
	Daily Wire is not going to be a populist publication.
	They're not going to push populist causes.
	I don't know if they've even talked about the Amos Miller case.
	I don't even know if they've talked about the Brooke Jackson case.
	I mean, I, from day one, have not been a big fan.
	They interviewed me, I think, one time in total.
	I get more interviews from mainstream media than the Daily Wire requesting information on the Covington case.
	Ben Shapiro originally jumped on the defamation.
	So everybody who knows me knows I'm not a big fan of the Daily Wire.
	And this marriage made no sense.
	But credit to Candace, you know, kind of like Steve Wynn's ex-wife.
	She knew how to work the divorce.
	And I think she did it very effectively.
	But I don't think the Daily Wire canceled her as much as she got herself weaseled out of a contract she didn't like and maintained her public legitimacy and can be perceived as a victim in the process.
	But do I believe any of her viewpoints on Israel are sincere?
	I remain skeptical.
	I'm going to read a bunch of the chat that came in, and there's a question that I want to answer.
	Have either of you heard about the eighth grade student in Massachusetts who were arrested for sharing spicy memes in a Snapchat?
	Someone needs to step up and defend the First Amendment.
	Where is the ACLU?
	Stop tyranny.
	Well, the ACLU is too busy.
	Defending other stuff.
	Anti-Christian Liberties Union.
	Or as they called it back home as a kid, the American Comet Loving Union.
	We got, nah, you missed it.
	Saying Macron's wife is a trans woman puts the Daily Wire into a lawsuit threat.
	She bet her career on it.
	Macron's not going to be suing anybody.
	But what is it?
	She wants to maintain that independence.
	I mean, her politics have been all over the place.
	Some people have honest conversions.
	Some people have convenient conversions.
	So, which Candace is in, let's just say I remain a skeptic of.
	And she's got a hot fuse.
	She's in a big ego.
	I mean, she's out there asking for donations.
	And I'm like, Candace, some of us know how much money you've made.
	You don't really need donations, darling.
	You can never have too much, Robert.
	You're not a real victim, darling.
	Trump has shown us you can never have enough FU money because they can take all of it.
	I guess that's true.
	I'm just saying of all the causes out there, there's a lot more compelling causes than Candace Owens' bank account, is my own view.
	I would just say in terms of the defamation threat, I'm not sure.
	I would check what France's defamation laws are, but that's a newsworthy issue that is being reported by a number of people, not just Candace.
	Sonia TK says we are giving old weapons to Ukraine, not money.
	I think both of those statements are false.
	And we took their nukes, so we owe them Budapest memorandum.
	I don't think it's only...
	That's false at multiple levels.
	We gave them a lot of new weapons.
	They just didn't work so well.
	Bad advertising for the defense contractors.
	That's why you started seeing the spin.
	These are really the old weapons.
	That's why they're not the old ones.
	They're not our new ones.
	Nothing advertises your defense product like war, but nothing advertises it badly like a poorly conducted one.
	We're giving them tons and tons of money.
	Yes, it gets laundered back into the western deep state.
	And the Budapest Memorandum is a ludicrous narrative.
	This wasn't for Ukraine.
	The bottom line is no one was going to recognize Ukraine, nor was the Commonwealth of Independent States.
	Those were Russian and Soviet missiles, and they were going to take them home because everybody wanted them to take them home.
	This was about forcing Ukraine to make sure that happened.
	That was a complete agreement.
	This idea that, oh, Ukraine would have had independent nukes to defend itself, but for the Budapest Memorandum is a preposterous claim, if you know any of the history of how that got done.
	It's one of the many dumb lies told by the Western press about this conflict.
	I'm bringing this one up here, and I'm going to read one in Rumble, too, because I...
	Clavin, I didn't know who he was as a person.
	I didn't misunderstand his statement.
	I'll get to that in a second.
	Viva, the guy is Andrew Clavin, and he wasn't contradicting himself.
	He was essentially agreeing with Barnes, but from a Christian perspective.
	I know what Clavin was saying.
	He's saying people say Christ is king is an antagonistic thing, and therefore it's anti-Semitic.
	But the problem is the statement does not become anti-Semitic because someone who might be anti-Semitic uses it in a provocative way.
	And so you're not saying the statement is anti-Semitic.
	You're saying the person who's making it is, and that's a different statement than saying...
	And the pro-Israeli side keeps taking the bait on all this.
	I mean, these hate speech, idiotic laws being passed in places like South Dakota and Florida that are meant basically to suppress speech, censor speech concerning Israel.
	And it's just preposterous.
	And you've got to draw the distinction between the people that are actually genocidal in their hatred towards Jews and people who disagree with Israel.
	Those are two very different things.
	But the pro-Israeli side refuses to recognize the difference.
	And they say if anybody that's anti-Semitic uses any particular phrase or argument, that anybody who then uses that phrase or argument is anti-Semitic.
	That's patently illogical.
	That's completely irrational.
	And it's obvious.
	People, I mean, I disagree sharply with Glenn Greenwald on Israel.
	I found it to be utterly unreliable on Palestinian news sources.
	He would tell me something was true, I would believe it, then research it, find out it's another ludicrous fraud.
	It's like the latest one.
	Supposedly, Israel was using drones to attack civilians.
	Maybe.
	I just, in my experience for 20 years, have seen those stories prove to be false over and over again.
	Maybe it's true.
	Alex Jones is sharing it.
	Other people are sharing it.
	But my advice to all of them is, look, I've been burned by it.
	I promoted some things that were critical of Israel, believing Glenn Greenwald, who's otherwise reliable, turns out on Palestine and Israel, he's just not.
	Think of all the leftist propaganda we get here.
	Black churches burned or Native Americans being attacked in Canada.
	In the modern age, you have to just be real skeptical, always be skeptical of a pro-Palestinian victim story.
	Well, I saw Jones share that same clip, four Palestinians killed by drones.
	Do we know if those people who were killed were perpetrators of October 7?
	I mean, I don't know anything what's going on with that.
	I'm not sharing it.
	And I'm not defending Israel reflexively.
	I've said from day one.
	Their strategy to clear out Gaza is going to politically backfire.
	And the biggest problem they have isn't the soldiers in Hamas.
	The biggest problem they have is the Arab and Islamic unity against Israel.
	And if they could sever that unity, undermine that unity, then they could, I think, achieve lasting peace.
	That was Trump's strategy.
	Separate the royalists from the religious hardliners within the Islamic and Arab worlds who don't really like Hamas or Fatah or PLO anyway, and especially don't like Hamas, and distrust Iran that wants to be the religious and geopolitical dominant.
	Dominant force in the Middle East by severing their support for Hamas and the Palestinian elite cadre that only uses its population as cannon fodder to line their pockets and support their genocidal agenda towards Israel, which goes back over a century.
	For those people that forget, the very founder of the Palestinian movement kept begging to join the Nazis since 1933.
	I mean, as soon as he took power, he was writing letters to the German, please let me be a Nazi, please let me be a Nazi, please let me be a Nazi.
	You know, that's who they are, so I'll never be sympathetic to this kind of Palestinian cause that follows in that ancestral legacy.
	At the same time, that doesn't mean tactically or strategically, creating a bunch of victims is good for Israel, a bunch of Arab Muslim victims.
	There's going to be innocent people, dead, period.
	And a lot of them when you bomb and raid and use tanks and all the rest throughout Gaza.
	So I'm still critical of that policy, not so that it's necessary for self-defense.
	But you can have a balance between the two, except not in the court of public opinion, because everything's virgin or whore in this context.
	You're either a saint or the devil.
	Honest objectivity is not allowed.
	And Candace Owens did a brilliant job of exposing that.
	And you're right.
	What all these people took the bait of is...
	I mean, when you're calling Candace Owens anti-Semitic, that's kind of dumb.
	You know, that discredits yourself.
	That doesn't discredit her.
	And the weakest argument is, well, she's got the support of the Groypers and the this and the that.
	It's like, all right.
	Who cares?
	I mean, sometimes they endorse people to sabotage.
	Anybody who's anti-Israel.
	Big shock.
	That doesn't make the person who's anti-Israel a Jew-hater.
	Glenn Greenwald is not a Jew-hater.
	I disagree with him on Israel, but he has a principled ideological opposition.
	Rand Paul and Thomas Massey's skepticism towards aspects of Israeli involvement is clearly ideologically rooted.
	It is not at all, by any means, anti-Semitic.
	As some groups on that side, they hurt themselves by mixing and matching.
	It's like what's happening on college campuses.
	They have a legitimate right to object to their kids getting harassed and stalked and threatened.
	They don't have a legitimate right to object to speech, and they should be able to separate the two.
	And their refusal to do that just damages their own cause, their own agenda.
	So, you know, both sides making mistakes in this political conflict.
	Now, we're going to wind it down on YouTube right now, so let's see that number 4067 drop wildly as I read the remainder of the Super Chats before we head over.
	FYI, Putin was in charge of the FSB when they were caught planting explosives.
	Google Ryazan Sugar.
	I'll check that out.
	KGB at heart?
	Possible.
	Thoughts on media focusing on GOP and or Trump?
	Why is he going to kill hundreds of his own civilians in this conflict?
	At the worst possible time.
	Would people repeat stupid stuff like that?
	It was like, why is Syria right in the eve of Trump pulling out of Syria all of a sudden going to use chemical weapons?
	I mean, sometimes you just gotta smack yourself in the face when you're saying something too stupid.
	How does Putin benefit from this at all other than losing confidence of his own people?
	So I would be inclined to minimize that possibility of a theory.
	Thoughts on media focusing on GOP and or Trump campaign asking for donations citing monies required for Trump from civil liabilities?
	I get it, but I think most of his fundraising people suck.
	They send annoying emails, annoying texts, stupid ideas, rather than smart, intelligent things.
	He should exercise more control.
	He's the most brilliant salesman marketer in the history of American politics.
	He shouldn't have some schmuck like Jason Miller or any of those others.
	Remember, that guy was so dumb.
	He not only cheated on his wife during a campaign and knocked up another campaign staffer, he went to a strip club in the middle of a debate.
	I mean, this guy is just...
	New levels of stupid.
	And he's at a high level of positions within the Trump campaign.
	And he's got terrible...
	Ask anybody.
	A bunch of Trump supporters absolutely hate the fundraising pitches they get because they're so lame.
	They're annoying.
	I don't know who I gave my email address to, but I get a ton of stuff, not just from Trump.
	It's like it's been sold to other people.
	Every campaign is usually lame.
	It's just lame as all get-out.
	I mean, I got five of them from Candace's fundraising group this weekend.
	I was like, they got that in motion fast.
	That's credit.
	I hope I didn't accidentally block somebody who I wanted to highlight the comment, not hide it.
	It was the last Super Chat.
	Oh, cripe.
	I hope I didn't do something stupid.
	Okay, well, whatever.
	We've radically dropped our number on YouTube.
	It sounds like Joe Biden every single day.
	It's only because I got fat.
	It's a stupid short fingers.
	Come on over to Rumble, people.
	Here's the Rumble link.
	And if you want to come straight over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com, that is here.
	I put out a public thing.
	If Candice wants to do an inaugural Locals interview, we can do one at the Longboat Keys.
	I'll drive over there.
	It'll be worth it.
	All right.
	We are ending on YouTube and getting into the other items on our show, and I'll do the Rumble rants.
	You know, after we've covered a few subjects.
	So removing YouTube.
	See you on Rumble.
	Now, Robert.
	Okay, what's...
	Oh, we should have done the...
	No, you know what?
	The Amos Miller update I'm going to post as a separate clip tomorrow.
	So let's do...
	Because it's a big thing that you got this week.
	It's a big victory.
	I don't want to oversell it, but I think you're going to explain why it's such a big victory.
	But before we get there, people have asked for a very brief synopsis of Amos Miller's crisis so that people can understand what the hell is going on and where he's at now.
	Oh, I could start by summarizing it, but I don't want to really screw things up.
	Suffice to say he was targeted...
	At first by the FDA and then by the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture for allegedly selling raw milk or unpasteurized milk.
	They say you're selling stuff without a seal of approval.
	They then go in and seize his food material, say he can't sell it to his customers.
	Give it a summary so that it will be the intro for those who don't know what's going on yet.
	Yeah, people want the links to the court documents, links to other media interviews about this case, links to other news site coverage of the case, a basic description of the Amos Miller case.
	We have all of that at 1776lawcenter.com.
	The Trump campaign.
	Unlike Candace Owens, we don't send out five solicitations every day for money.
	Instead, we provide things of value, like the Vegas 50th birthday party coming up that people, there's still tickets available for.
	We were able to give some away because people bought tickets for other people to go, which was great.
	From the VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com board.
	And there's merch and cool fun stuff that you can join in to support and broadcast support for Amos Miller.
	The Amos Miller case, Amos Miller is an Amish farmer, fifth generation Amish farmer, from Lancaster County, dairy country in Pennsylvania, the heart of the Amish in America.
	The Amish have a unique and distinct religious beliefs that carry over into their lifestyle.
	This goes back centuries.
	Movies like Witness partially portray it in the mid-1980s.
	Probably the best popular depiction of it.
	But the Amish are very unique.
	In modern society especially, because they don't use modern technology, so they've opted out of the big tech world.
	They don't follow modern media.
	They don't watch TV shows.
	They don't watch modern films.
	They're not part of modern gaming culture, so they've opted out of big Hollywood.
	They teach and educate their own children.
	several of them, including Amos Miller's grandfather, went to jail over the right to educate their own children and not have a state monopoly over the education of their They ultimately won that right before the Supreme Court of the United States in a famous case called Yoder.
	So they've opted out of big education.
	They have always considered health and medicine to be ideally done in a natural, beneficial way and lifestyle.
	So they have mostly opted out of big pharma.
	And last but not least...
	They've opted out of big food.
	They farm their own food.
	They're very proud.
	They're great carpenters, and they're excellent, superb farmers.
	And they use traditional organic methods.
	They avoid lots of chemicals.
	They avoid lots of additives.
	They don't lace their food products with a bunch of something created out of a lab.
	They make food the way our founders ate their food and made their food.
	So the milk is unpasteurized, so-called raw milk.
	It's really fresh milk, true milk, cow's milk.
	And they make a whole bunch of products from that milk that's not pasteurized or chemically altered or burns out all of the good and healthy bacteria that's otherwise in there.
	They make meat in the same way.
	They make poultry, like their chicken are free range.
	You couldn't have a greater contrast between an Amish farm and America's corporate farming system.
	I'll bring something up real quick.
	I brought it up before, but people tend to think that the Amish suffer from certain diseases much less than the broader American population.
	And even according to this fact check...
	It's true, but in order to be the fact-checking losers that they are, they have to make an absolute statement that no one's making.
	No, Amish kids aren't immune to cancer, diabetes, and autism, and they aren't vaccine-free either.
	Nobody says that.
	Bottom line, even in this Associated Press fact-check, it shows lower cancer rates, lower diabetes rates, lower autism rates, and they may not be vaccine-free, but they are certainly lower in vaccines than the broader American population.
	So it's demonstrably true that they...
	Live longer.
	Don't suffer from diseases that the broader American population suffers from.
	And you can attribute that to whatever cause you want, but the fact checkers refuse to accept it, so they make a straw man fact check to fact check and debunk.
	Sorry.
	Carry on.
	The other things they have much lower rates of is much lower rates of social discord, much lower rates of violence, much lower rates of crime.
	Much lower rates of mental health problems, much lower rates of anxiety, much lower rates of depression, much lower rates of self-harm.
	In other words, by pretty much every objective metric of what we consider happiness and a good life, the Amish are some of the happiest and best-lived people in the world.
	And so they provide a control group alternative that says, what if we lived life free of big tech, free of big pharma?
	Free of big food.
	Free of big media.
	What would our life look like?
	Well, it might look a lot like the Amish.
	And anybody who studies them or gets to know them thinks that's a lot better way to live.
	And that presents a threat.
	An existential threat to the Bill Gateses of the world.
	There's not a coincidence that this Bond-like villain is involved in all four of those areas.
	Comes from big tech.
	Major investments in big pharma.
	Major investments in big food, including buying up farmland all across America.
	To do what?
	To make that farmland useless because his big thing is producing chemical lab-created meat.
	Fake meat.
	Beyond meat.
	I.e.
	not meat.
	That's how it should be marketed or advertised.
	And big involvement in big media and the big educational systems.
	So the Amish show us the problems with the Bill Gates utopian world as the dystopian environment it really predicts and foretells.
	And so in that context, you have a simple farmer, fifth generation Amish farmer, making food the way his father did, his grandfather did, his great-granddaddy did, and his great-great-granddaddy did.
	And he's just making food that's so extraordinary, he's built up a deeply loyal customer base that have become members of his private organization.
	He doesn't sell to the public.
	He doesn't sell commercially.
	You can't find his food at a retail store or even a farmer's market.
	It's only available to people who join his Amos Miller's Organic Farm Unincorporated Private Association.
	But the reason why they join it...
	Is as they have testified to in the hundreds, under penalty of perjury before court, is that Amos Miller's food is the best food they've ever had.
	That Amos Miller's food was the only food they could find that could successfully deal with their medical conditions or the medical conditions of their children and their loved ones.
	That was critical to their religious and political beliefs and expressive and associative characteristics of being part of this Amish exit ramp.
	From big pharma, big food-controlled food supply.
	So then what happens?
	Because at some point, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture comes in and says, sorry, Mr. Miller, you're selling unlicensed or uncertified food that didn't go through the PDA approval process, and we're shutting you down?
	Well, essentially, he poses an existential threat, his success, as more and more people try to pursue the Amish exit ramp.
	From big food control.
	And for those that don't know, we went from 90% of our food being produced and eaten directly from the producer at the time of our founding to now 98% of our food comes from corporate-owned agricultural facilities.
	90% of our cheese has Pfizer-infected components in it.
	I mean, that's how people don't know how our food has become completely...
	Corporatized and commercialized and industrialized.
	And those companies have monopolized that food space by what means?
	By their collusion with state and federal regulators who have used their power to suppress independent small farmers, to try to wipe them out.
	In Lancaster County, as an example, heart of dairy country arguably in America.
	Almost half of dairy farmers have either quit in the last 10 years or say they will quit in the next 10 years.
	They are wiping out small independent farmers in America.
	And let's remember, independent of the food debate, small farmers, as Thomas Jefferson noted, were the foundation of human constitutional democracy and a republic.
	They were the basis, along with the workingmen, for Andrew Jackson's populist revolution and rebellion, free soil, free labor.
	Was really the political animation behind the movement for abolition of slavery in America.
	They have been the foundation of our core liberties.
	And the self-sufficiency they provide, the exit ramp from big food-controlled society they provide, presents an imminent risk to the big corporations who monopolize the food supply.
	And they want to use their collusive relationship with the regulators to suppress them.
	So what happened is almost a decade ago, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, in secret, began to surveil Amos Miller, who's the kind of guy you can just walk up to at the farm and say hi to.
	He'll greet you there.
	Amos Miller's business model was that of a local farm, and when did it become a subscription-based system where he would send his product out to out-of-staters?
	For almost the entire time, because it was his understanding that this was not a commercial sale within the meaning of the law, as long as the private members associated together to make sure they could get the safe, healthy food that they wanted.
	So he's been active for almost 20 years, but about midway through, he's becoming incredibly successful from a perspective of an Amish farmer having tens of thousands of people who've had his food products at some point over that time period.
	And terrified the corporate big food establishment.
	And so they called on their collusive relationship, corrupt relationship with big agriculture, with the big regulators.
	And the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture starts to secretly surveil Amos Miller and want to go after him.
	But they have a problem, the limits of the law.
	The law only is governed commercial sales to Pennsylvania customers.
	That's the state law limitation.
	The federal law from 1905 to 1967 explicitly said, all of our federal food laws said, this doesn't apply to food you buy directly from the producer.
	It doesn't apply to the small farmer.
	It has no application.
	None of it.
	In 1967, they decided to expand that by creating a custom licensed exception from all the licensure and regulatory requirements.
	But then the USDA and the FDA Decide they're going to misinterpret that to radically restrict who suddenly has access to farmer food.
	So the feds have their own legal issues with how broad they're defining the law, and the state has their own issues.
	So what the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture does is they refer the case in secret to the Food and Drug Administration and say, please go after this little Amish farmer, even though they admit it on the stand.
	That at that point, and to this day, over 20 years, Amos Miller produced millions of food products to tens of thousands of Americans, and there has been not one single complaint anywhere in the country in 20 years.
	You're talking about the best customer satisfaction safety record of any farmer in America.
	So PDA, Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, tries to collude with the Food and Drug Administration to say go after Amos Miller.
	The FDA, from what I recall, does take proactive measures, but ultimately backs off and says we're not going to get involved.
	Yeah, well, here's why.
	Around the same time, the FDA was waging a war on unpasteurized milk.
	This goes all the way back to the mid-80s, early 90s.
	The state of California did the same thing.
	They put the Altadena dairy farming family, the Stuvie family, out of business.
	I represented them years later in separate litigation involving things like the case we'll talk about a little bit later, legal theories of intended duties to third-party beneficiaries.
	But what happened was more and more Americans were waking up.
	If they got access to natural organic food, not the fake organic food that the FDA and USDA calls organic, it really isn't.
	Real food.
	The best made in the world, frankly.
	I've eaten at the best restaurants in the world, according to Michelin star ratings.
	The best meal I have ever had has been at Amos Miller's dinner table.
	Because it is fresh from beginning to end.
	I mean, the peas they make.
	Everything, the bread they make.
	I mean, all of it from scratch is made right there.
	It's like having dinner the way your grandparents would talk about having it at their grandparents.
	And it's extraordinary.
	So people introduced it.
	The first time I had unpasteurized milk was at a Stewie family farm up in California.
	And I was like, holy cow!
	Well, in fact, people noticed I had ordered some of Amos' milk and was drinking it.
	And it's like, is Barnes on cocaine?
	I mean, he's got all this energy, all this excitement, all this enthusiasm.
	That milk was amazing in its benefits.
	And this is what people have lived, their lived experience.
	People were willing to risk being targeted by state and federal agencies to testify under penalty of perjury on Amos' behalf to the hundreds, hundreds, and just days that we were able to gather that many sworn statements under penalty of perjury.
	Even the judge said, had to go out of his way to say, don't interpret anything I ever do as in any way questioning the sincerity of your beliefs that Amos Miller's food is fantastic.
	Go before there and we'll get to the president.
	We've got extraordinary safe food made in a way that threatens big food.
	But the FDA has a problem.
	They want to go after unpasteurized milk.
	They've been harassing it for years.
	Amos was going to be one of their potential first test cases.
	But before that, because of the PDA.
	But because of the resistance movement, right?
	You've got this massive movement of more and more people that are like, this food is critical.
	For some of them, they have unique medical conditions that the only means of dealing with it is this unpasteurized milk products.
	The only means.
	These are people that have spent years and years and years desperate to find something to treat their condition or their loved one's condition.
	And they finally find it in Amos Miller's product.
	People testified to this at the hearing, how their kid would suffer immediately when they didn't have access to Amos Miller's food product and regress quickly in their physical health and well-being and mental health and well-being, sometimes to the risk of their life.
	And that's why people traveled up their own penny and neck and dime to be there to testify.
	So that's the context.
	Well, the problem with the FDA is Congress has never passed a law prohibiting unpasteurized milk.
	The FDA made it up themselves.
	And they did it in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act.
	So a group got together and brought suit and said, if you're going to try to enforce this law anymore against raw milk products, then you're violating the federal law because Congress didn't give you that authority, violated the Administrative Procedures Act and how you passed it.
	And number two...
	You're violating our fundamental rights preserved and protected under the Liberty Clause of the United States Constitution, Fifth Amendment against the feds, 14th Amendments against the states.
	Well, all of a sudden, the FDA realized they were going to lose that lawsuit.
	So in the middle of this, they step in and say, Judge, Judge, we're just kidding.
	We're never going to enforce that law.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	You don't have to allow them to go forward.
	There's no standing because there'll never be any injury.
	Don't worry.
	We're not going to enforce it.
	So that's how they weaseled their way out of that problem.
	But what that meant was there could be no FDA enforcement of something that's not a real law in the first place without them losing in court.
	And more significantly, if the constitutional right was protected, it would gut 90% of what the FDA and all the state regulatory agencies do to small farmers and ordinary consumers every day.
	Understand this about our food safety laws.
	All of them are designed.
	To protect and promote the informed consent of the consumer.
	They are not laws governing producers.
	They are not laws governing possessors of food.
	They are not laws there to oppress small farmers.
	They are there targeting big ag and to make sure big ag isn't lying and deceiving and contaminating and adulterating the products that's sticking on our grocery shelves.
	But the corrupt regulatory agencies like...
	The Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, like the U.S. Department of Agriculture, like the Food and Drug Administration, have utilized their power to protect big ag and go after organic food makers, go after the small farmers, and strip people of their informed consent by denying them the choice of the food they want and need.
	So the FDA drops, the PDA goes after Amos Hart.
	What happened?
	It was a year ago.
	Then they refer a second time.
	So the PDA first time goes to the FDA.
	The FDA realizes they're belly up on the law and they don't want to lose.
	If everybody establishes a constitutional right, a fundamental right to make informed consent decisions about their own bodies concerning food, then all of a sudden Big Ag suffers a massive defeat.
	All the corrupt regulators suffer a massive defeat, and they can't interfere with us anymore in our choice of food unless they have a compelling interest with a law that's narrowly tailored, and there's none of these laws that meet that standard when it comes to this circumstance.
	So the FDA walks away.
	PDA doesn't stop.
	Continues to illegally surveil him.
	Continues to, in secret, monitor him.
	And then they go to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
	And they say, go after Amos because of his chickens.
	Go after him because of his meat.
	Go after him because of his beef.
	And what's extraordinary here is, if you go to the kind of food that's approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, just go see how the big slaughterhouses handle business.
	And ask yourself, do you consider that sanitary?
	Go look at how the chickens are treated, how the poultry industry has been monopolized by these big, major conglomerates like the Tyson Foods of the world.
	Remember, folks, in the proverbial words of a Chinese dissident, Tyson Foods is asshole and always will be.
	Got exposed for it again.
	But they have the chicken you eat from the Tyson Foods of the world.
	Chances are that chicken grew up in a tiny little cage eating other chickens' shit.
	That's what they consider sanitary at the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
	So the feds go after Amos.
	Years of going after him.
	On the verge of bankrupting him, forfeiting his property, taking away his farm, putting him in jail, taking his wife on the judgment.
	When you first took over, he was facing a quarter of a million dollars in fines and potential jail time?
	Yes, and adding his wife to the judgment and losing the farm.
	All of it in one clean swope.
	Once we get involved, one reason the government's target, the Amish, is the Amish do not believe in calling public attention to themselves in any way, shape, or form.
	And the Amish also do not believe in initiating legal action.
	This means they are very susceptible, vulnerable targets.
	Because, consequently, the government can get away with whatever they want, and the lazy, stupid media in places like Pennsylvania has become stenographers for the corrupt government.
	I mean, they shouldn't call themselves journalists or reporters.
	Just call yourself a stenographer.
	The government blows a leaf across your desk.
	You sign it and submit it to your editor for publication.
	They got away with it, particularly in the local Lancaster press, because Amos Miller and the Amish don't seek public attention.
	Don't do press conferences.
	Won't appear on videos.
	Don't do photographs.
	And don't bring initial legal action against anyone.
	But when I got involved, as I said, Jesus may forgive you, but I won't.
	God may love you, but I don't.
	And the Amish may forgive you and love you, but I don't, and I won't.
	And I'm free to do whatever I'm going to do.
	Amos may object to it, but I'm still going to do it.
	I'm going to seek out the court of public opinion exposing this criminal behavior of our government regulators and agencies.
	So once I got involved, there was a very smart U.S. attorney on that side of the case who said, ah, let's resolve all this.
	Let's get all this done.
	There's no reason to escalate here.
	Barnes, let's all be good.
	There's plenty of U.S. attorneys and high-ranking government agents that I helped lead to getting jobs in unwelcome places.
	In some past cases that we've done.
	One, my favorite, is one guy got reassigned to Alaska.
	And it isn't because he likes fishing.
	I enjoy every winter knowing he's up there in the dark making his life miserable.
	Another one was so badly reassigned he quit instead of taking the job.
	But it was a smart prosecutor.
	Recognized their legal risk.
	Recognized their political risk.
	Didn't want to make a martyr of Amos Miller.
	And so we got pretty quickly a full resolution, satisfactory resolution, throughout the process.
	During this time period, the federal judge kept notifying the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture and making them agree to these things, saying, there's no objection from you, right?
	There's no objection, even though there weren't parties to the case formally.
	You don't object.
	I didn't realize why.
	At the time, we hadn't yet done.
	Got back our Sunshine Open Records Act request from Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture.
	Hadn't yet discovered the secret history of what the PDA was doing in their conspiracy against Amos Miller and Amos Miller's members.
	So I didn't know.
	The judge knew, though.
	The judge knew these are the corrupt actors dealing with this.
	So you're going to green light all of this and keep your mouth shut and not complain.
	And they did.
	They didn't say boo that entire time period.
	Then that federal judge dies.
	Suddenly, unexpectedly.
	Within a month, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, recognizing the FDA is not going to take any legal action they have no lawful basis for.
	Recognizing the U.S. Attorney's Office has reached a very satisfactory resolution with Amos and will no longer be harassing him.
	Realizing both of those things, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture starts coordinating with other departments of agriculture across the country to figure out a way to get Amos Miller.
	In their internal email correspondence, they constantly joke about Amos Miller being handcuffed and dragged off to jail and forfeiting his farm at a foreclosure sale.
	That's who these people are, including high-ranking lawyers at Penn State University and others who are complicit in this conspiracy.
	They should have thought about his members when conspiring in this way.
	Just because Amos can't sue doesn't mean his members can't.
	And that's a little wake-up call that's coming down the road.
	So what they do is they claim that there's an E. coli outbreak, and we're going to blame Amos Miller's milk in mid-December.
	Of note, they make no effort to reach out to Amos Miller.
	If they really thought there was any problem, a health problem with his food product, wouldn't you immediately contact the producer of that food to say, hold on, we need to check something?
	December 2023?
	December 16th.
	December of 2023.
	It's three weeks later they'd do anything.
	So that tells you that their motivation is bogus.
	They know that there was no health problem with Amos Miller's food.
	In fact, their own testing would later prove it.
	They wanted to conspire to get Amos Miller and they knew the best way to do it would be to fabricate a safety crisis around his food and giving how duplicitous and supplicant The Pennsylvania Press and political class is to the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture and Pope Redding, the Secretary of Agriculture who must bless your food before you're allowed to eat it, who has his own corrupt ties to big agriculture, by the way.
	That's something we're further investigating, but it appears Secretary Redding has clear conflicts of interest.
	He's lining his pocket for monies from the competitors of Amos Miller.
	That's what appears to be the case.
	We're further investigating it and figure out the scope of what's taking place there.
	So they then go get a search warrant based on perjured affidavits.
	They lie to the judge and tell the judge, oh, there's this big safety risk, and we've been begging Amos to get out licenses and certificates, but he won't do it.
	He won't help.
	He won't let us even come and test and sample the food.
	They're lying to the judge.
	Because they had not reached out at all for years and had voiced no objection at all during all the federal process.
	They withhold all of that information.
	They omit all that information.
	The nitwit perjurer for the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture repeated that perjury by falsifying the evidence in front of the court at a later hearing where she tried to claim that there had been meetings in the fall of 2023 that Amos had rejected.
	Even the attorney general had to say, no, no, no, that was three years before.
	Please, please, please, you can't commit that level of perjury.
	You got to be careful when would you commit perjury here.
	So the judge just signs off on it, the magistrate, not knowing they've been lied to.
	They come and do a massive raid of his facility.
	They lock everybody out.
	They block out the independent press.
	They block out Amos Miller.
	That, too, they will lie about later on at the hearing.
	They will take selective photographs.
	While suppressing the body camera's footage in order to try to falsely claim there's some issue with sanitary conditions by falsifying the photography at a later hearing.
	But they don't actually allege any sanitary problem at all, just like the feds never alleged a single sanitary problem in decades and years of inspections and surprise search warrants and raids at his facility and at his farm.
	Anybody that's been there knows how clean it is.
	So the nature of it is that's how they do it.
	They go in and detain his food.
	They order him.
	He's not allowed to sell his food.
	He's not allowed to distribute his food.
	He's not allowed to give away his food.
	He's not even allowed to feed himself or his own family with his own farmed food.
	And that was the injunction that they got, which was ratified by and large the last time we did the update about this.
	Yeah, so what happens is that gets issued.
	They then issue an order of destruction, ordering that food, they conduct a bunch of tests, and guess what?
	There's no E. coli in any of his food.
	There's no E. coli in any of the environmental samples.
	There's no E. coli in any of the water.
	There's no E. coli anywhere.
	They can't find any E. coli.
	They were trying to blame him for E. coli problems, and it turned out there was none.
	None.
	Not only that, it turned out the people that claimed got really sick from E. coli didn't actually get really sick from E. coli.
	They had no favorable testimony at all.
	They had none, no safety evidence at all.
	They had accused them falsely eight years before of a listeria illness, and it turned out we got evidence of access to the records and database, and that person had listeria six months before they were ever even near any food product of Amos Miller.
	They knew that was fabricated for nearly a decade, submitted perjured affidavits on that basis before the courts.
	But despite all that, despite the clean food test, They find microscopic aspects of listeria in a small sample of products of other farmers' food simply being stored at Amos Miller's freezer.
	And they use that to claim, oh, we've got to shut him down completely.
	We do the detailed review and discovers there is no risk.
	We isolate where the listeria came from.
	None of it came from any of his stuff.
	And it wasn't serious enough to be a health risk, according to standards that even communists in Canada and Europe...
	Admit is not a health risk.
	And they love their regulations there.
	And so, based on that, we have a hearing.
	And at that evidentiary hearing, one of the leading experts in the country, who worked for a decade and a half on these issues at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, doesn't testify for the government, testifies for Amos Miller, says his food product is extraordinarily safe.
	Her review of all the testing, her review of all the data, her review of all the conditions and safety record of the farm.
	Not only that, heart doctors testify on behalf of Amos Miller's food.
	One of the leading food advocates in the country, Sally at Weston Price, she testifies on behalf of Amos Miller.
	And then all hundreds of...
	Actual customers testify on behalf of Amos Miller, and all the government has is their low-IQ lardasses, who are physical examples of why you shouldn't eat what the PDA approves, lying and perjuring themselves on the stand.
	At the conclusion of that hearing, the judge drastically limits the injunction.
	There's no injunction on possessing food.
	No injunction on producing food.
	No injunction on distributing food.
	No injunction on non-commercial use of food.
	No injunction on personal use of the food.
	It was so severe the state of Pennsylvania was actually requiring that Amos Miller ration what food he could feed his own family.
	Rationing a farmer's food to his own family.
	That's how nuts the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture is.
	And so the only thing the judge did is say you can't market and sell certain raw milk products.
	That's it.
	No other provisions of the injunction.
	We request the judge modify it.
	Our request is, judge, that there should be a third condition there.
	That if there's a sale and marketing of raw milk products within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, because that's what the law says.
	And this goes to the interstate commerce rule where you can't prevent someone from one state selling to another state because that is a state exceeding its constitutional limits of power.
	Exactly.
	And the judge said over and over again, I'm not here to amend the law.
	He was clearly moved by the testimony of all the individuals, saw the state didn't have a credible safety claim, was clearly agitated about things.
	Like, so we're really only here because he doesn't have a permit?
	That's the only reason we're here?
	Because you want me to enjoin him and prohibit him from doing something because of a permit?
	And he wanted the state to reconsider their position, but they refused.
	And he said, look, I think that maybe this is a bad law.
	But I interpret the...
	I'm just here to enforce the law, not here to write the law.
	And so I said, you know, I feel stuck in how I do it.
	So that's how he ruled the way he did.
	But he made clear he wasn't going to write the law and he wasn't going to amend the law.
	And so our position was we came in and said, hey, judge, here's what the law says.
	The law says this only applies within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
	That's what the state legislature of Pennsylvania has decided.
	All of its food safety laws only protect...
	Pennsylvania customers.
	Pennsylvania consumers.
	Pennsylvania residents within the state of Pennsylvania.
	That's it.
	Because remember, that's what all of our food safety laws were sold as.
	They were never sold as farmer control laws.
	They were never sold as big ag monopoly promotion laws.
	They were sold as you, the consumer, will have informed consent choices over your own food.
	But because of the Interstate Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, which Pennsylvania itself, when it tried to regulate food outside the state, went up to the Supreme Court and lost almost a century ago, with the Supreme Court saying, no, you can't do that.
	The Interstate Commerce Clause says commerce between the states cannot be governed by any of the states.
	It can only be governed by Congress.
	They have an exclusive control over interstate commerce.
	Not only is there, that's how it's called the dormant.
	Because the active one is Congress has a right to regulate interstate commerce.
	The implicated inference of that is states do not have the right to govern interstate commerce.
	There's also other rights implicated.
	Your right to travel under the Constitution, which is protected.
	You're the privileges and immunities clause of the U.S. Constitution, which protected.
	The fear was one state would try to compete with the other.
	One state would try to regulate the other's citizens.
	And they're like, no, no, no, you can't do that in commercial transactions or releases.
	Your power ends at your borders.
	So that's what we submitted.
	We said, judge, just make it clear this only applies to sales within the state of Pennsylvania, like the law says.
	Pennsylvania, PDA freaked out.
	PDA files an opposition, and they say this is outrageous.
	That in fact, they said, judge, if the only way you could even consider this modification is if you add the language.
	That you're not allowed to possess or purchase or produce food in the state of Pennsylvania if there's any alleged intent to sell it to people outside the state, to people in foreign countries.
	The problem is the law says no such thing.
	It says just the opposite.
	So the judge got our submission, got their submission, came back from vacation.
	And he rejected every single request the government made.
	every single one, so the government did all these, add this, add this, add this, add this, add this, And what he did is he used our exact language verbatim, which said this injunction only applies to sales within the state of Pennsylvania that cannot apply.
	For constitutional reasons, to sales to people outside the state of Pennsylvania.
	And the court necessarily made that decision by rejecting the explicit and express request of the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture.
	So what it does is it opens, it allows Amos to get his products to his members outside the state of Pennsylvania, which is 95% of Amos Miller's membership.
	which were many of the people who testified in front of the judge that said their physical health was at risk if they didn't have access to his food, and particular raw milk products especially.
	Now, what does the PDA do?
	They go around lying to the press, saying that, oh, pretending the judge had signed their version of the order when the judge had just rejected their version of the order entirely, saying, oh, we can still go after Amos.
	And in fact, we're hereby declaring.
	That if you possess food inside Pennsylvania's borders that were not permitted by a Pennsylvania permitted producer, we can arrest you and imprison you for having food, possessing food, with the intent to sale.
	If you merely distribute it across their borders, if you merely produce it in Pennsylvania, this would make illegal...
	All kinds of everyday acts.
	Food is shipped, distributed, transported, produced in that state every single day that's not by a Pennsylvania-permitted producer.
	It would be a disaster for the food economy in Pennsylvania and globally.
	It would be a complete, as my point to the judge was, they don't want you to just amend the law judge.
	They want you to amend the Constitution of the United States.
	They want you to eviscerate the Interstate Commerce Clause and make the PDA the FDA of the world.
	The WHO's version of the world.
	And remember, it's the same Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture that was caught lying in these same Pennsylvania health authorities that were caught lying by based Judge Dickman during the pandemic.
	And remember, it's one of their highest ranking Pennsylvania authorities is the trans person, doesn't know whether they're a man or a woman, working for the Biden administration.
	So that's how corrupt these regulators are.
	And so the judge explicitly rejected it.
	Massive win for Amos Miller.
	Massive win for farmers across the state of Pennsylvania.
	Massive win potentially for farmers everywhere.
	They're getting harassed in Oregon as we speak.
	They're getting harassed in Ohio as we speak.
	I love Senator J.D. Vance.
	Time to get involved in Big Ag, bro.
	Time to speak out.
	There's Ohio farmers, Ohio people now being targeted.
	There's a nice-sized Amish community there.
	I mean, you got Benny Moreno elected through the primary.
	He's going to win.
	God bless.
	Now it's time to get on to some of these issues.
	Some other politicians, too, need to start speaking out.
	A certain president needs to speak out.
	A former president of the United States.
	But the background of the Amos Miller case is it's just an Amish farmer who wants to farm healthy food that people really need.
	And they're trying to crush him and stop him, not because of safety concerns, because he's one of the safest food producers in the history of the state of Pennsylvania in America.
	But rather because the Amish way of life presents an exit ramp to ordinary Americans who don't want their diets controlled and dictated by corrupt politicians and regulators and their friends in big agriculture, who only want to give us corporatized, industrialized, mechanized food laced with God knows what in today's chemicals, stuck and injected with the latest Frankensteinian concoction from the likes of Pfizer.
	So Amos Miller's case is about.
	Food freedom for all Americans.
	The Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture is so corrupt, I'm sure they will continue to try to harass and array him, continue to try to illicitly and unlawfully surveil him or search him, continue to try to crush him because it's been their goal and objective.
	But it's ill-advised because the longer this continues, the more their risk politically and legally runs.
	Because before this case, no court had established what this court established.
	Which is these state agencies trying to regulate food products that are only being distributed outside of the state are acting illegally under their own state laws and unconstitutionally.
	They wanted to set a precedent of destroying food freedom by destroying Amos Miller.
	And the food precedent they're going to set is going to set about the destruction of the rogue aspects of the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture and the discredited improper pope of food.
	That's the path they're on.
	The U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. government recognized that risk and got out of it in the federal case.
	But the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture is not politically astute enough to recognize that they need to exit quickly before it's the end of their rights.
	Amos isn't going to sue, but his members can.
	And if you keep dragging him into court, he's going to get to establish constitutional rights and liberties he wouldn't have otherwise been in a position to do.
	This is their own foolhardiness, their own eager egos that are just so out of control.
	And all the lazy politicians in Pennsylvania and the supplicant press in Pennsylvania need to wake up.
	Why did a judge reject every single request the PDA made?
	Is PDA deliberately, materially violating constitutional rights and privileges throughout the state by interpreting and enforcing their laws in a way that directly contradicts what the legislature itself said?
	It's time for them all to take action.
	But thanks to Amos Miller's steadfastness, his dedication to truth on a go-for it basis, his caring for all of the members of his private farm, their food they now have access to.
	Again, snow sales can take place within the state of Pennsylvania.
	It has to be outside the state.
	But for all of them, they can get access to his fresh food again.
	And I'm sure the harassment will not end.
	But this is one of the biggest wins in food freedom in more than a decade.
	One of the biggest in the history of the country.
	Has the precedent to be to establish precedent to benefit not only farmers in Pennsylvania, but across the nation.
	Federal civil rights claims by the members are forthcoming.
	And I want to thank everybody who helped at 1776lawcenter.com, where you can share the link, share the information.
	You can get the court documents, read them for yourself.
	You can get the press reports, including hostile press reports.
	We put it all up there.
	You can get links to other interviews and statements and people who watch the actual hearing and proceeding.
	So at 1776lawcenter.com.
	And if you want some cool merch, we got that too, to help promote the cause.
	Everybody who helped.
	It's one of the biggest white pills in my legal experience.
	Well, that's the thing.
	I don't think I can overestimate it enough for you or overstate it.
	The victory is massive and monumental.
	So it is a big congratulations, Barnes.
	And may there be more.
	Touch wood.
	As we say in both Yiddish and Christian.
	Touch wood means touch the wood of the original cross.
	And I had an Indian daycare teacher who said in Indian culture, it's touch gold.
	Godspeed, Barnes.
	But people want to go from the big farm to the big ass of Fannie Willis.
	I've been waiting.
	I've been waiting with that segue forever.
	We're going to go from the big farm to the big ass to the big fraud in New York.
	But starting with Fannie Willis.
	Jeez, Louise, what was the latest of the Fannie Willis?
	Robert, I'm totally blacking out for a second.
	Well, I mean, the trial court certified the question.
	Oh, that's right.
	So, they made their motion for immediate review to Judge Scott McAfee.
	People out there saying, I knew it, Scott McAfee was compromised, yada, yada.
	He's in bed with Fannie.
	If he were compromised and in bed with Fannie, he wouldn't have drafted his decision the way he did.
	I think he gave all the factual legal basis to a court of appeal to overturn his own decision.
	I won't say he was threatened or intimidated.
	Some might say he's just playing smart politics.
	I still think he's a judicial coward, but I'm prepared to forgive him.
	So Trump's team filed a motion for immediate review.
	And that is, from what I understand, under Georgia law, you could wait for the end of the trial to appeal this decision, or you can ask for an immediate review now because if you don't appeal this decision now, irreparable harm could result.
	So they say, judge by your own decision, the odor of mendacity, legal improper statements made before the church.
	We need to review this now.
	It needs to go straight to the Georgia Court of Appeal.
	Scott McAfee said, and he motivated it in his certificate, said, yeah, this is sufficiently important, novel questions of law to some extent, we need guidance, immediate review, certificate to go straight to the Georgia Court of Appeal.
	But from what I understand, the Georgia Court of Appeal still needs to accept it.
	In theory, they could say, no, we're not taking it, move on with the trial.
	Robert, what's your take on Big Fannie and where this is going in Georgia?
	Well, she's going out and showing she will disrespect any court recommendation for ethical professional guidance.
	She made that clear that she didn't take any of his discouraging words as a disincentive to continue doing what she's been doing.
	So it shows how it's a rogue, out-of-control prosecutor and a ridiculous prosecution that an honest...
	Judge of conscience would have already dismissed on its legal merits.
	And he's made an embarrassment of a Fulton County judicial system whose corruption is what caused this case to even exist because without it, January 6th doesn't even happen because it was the Fulton County Courthouse that unlawfully and corruptly failed to conduct the expedited timely hearing that the law required on Trump's election contest.
	So right now, he hasn't stayed the case pending the appeal.
	Frankly, he should have, but he didn't.
	So now it's up to the Georgia appellate courts.
	Are they going to allow this charade of a case to continue to the disgrace of the Georgia legal system, or are they going to finally step in, take the appeal, and stay the trial pending their adjudication of the appeal?
	They should, if they're politically astute or judges of conscience, do that.
	But once again, the open question in our entire legal system is, are these judges either politically astute enough or judges of constitutional conscience sufficient to do their duty and obligation under their legal ethical oaths?
	That's still sadly an open question in all of these courts.
	Robert, I'm going to go get the duty meme in a second, but the question is...
	Scott McAfee, in his order, odor of mendacity.
	That's a smell.
	It lingers in the file.
	When you're talking about an appearance of conflict of interest, the appearance of conflict is basically the visual iteration of an odor of lies, which is what the odor of mendacity means.
	He says there is an odor of mendacity, but I'm relying on one case law, the Williams decision, which does not give me sufficient grounds to disqualify.
	And he's basically saying, look, give me guidance, Court of Appeal.
	What is the political, I don't know if you know it offhand, the political makeup of Georgia's Court of Appeal?
	It's the state Court of Appeal.
	What are they tending to be politically leaning?
	Well, all I can tell you is that in the election context, they refused to force Fulton County to do its job.
	So, you know, I'm skeptical of their ability to act with constitutional conscience and political astuteness in this context as well, unfortunately.
	Now, it was easier for them to get away with it.
	Ironically, in the election context, because of the red herrings of Dominion and Sidney and Rudy and the rest who went down that path.
	So the public was not even recognizing this was happening.
	In this case, they're going to have no such luck.
	So the question is, how long will they sustain this?
	And it continues to embarrass Governor Kemp.
	Who's been a fraud of a governor ever since his original election.
	He's the guy who ran on him.
	I'm a Trump type.
	I dropped him a pickup truck.
	I'm going to stop illegal immigration.
	I mean, you know, it was all fake.
	It's what the American people are increasingly recognizing, how fake and fraudulent so many of our elected officials are.
	They're seeing that in Congress with, you know, conscientious conservatives suddenly retires in a way that prevents a special election from being held before November.
	That's going to give Democrats a chance to steal the House within the next six months.
	Do you think he wasn't bribed for that?
	I mean, seriously.
	I mean, but that's who these constitutional conservatives in Congress are doing.
	A hundred of them just voted for Speaker Johnson's corrupt deal that Lyson gave money away to everybody that didn't need it and shouldn't get it.
	So, you know, the Governor Kemp and the corrupt Attorney General of Georgia.
	The longer this case goes on that they don't take corrective action, the more people are going to question what they're doing, and they're going to be destroying their political futures.
	Now, Kemp thinks he's a future president.
	That's how arrogant the guy is.
	He runs over to the World Economic Forum to get pats on the back from the Davos boys every chance he gets.
	I remember a conservative was trying to convince me he was a true conservative.
	I was like, you got to be kidding me.
	The attorney general was completely corrupt in Georgia.
	He'll do an occasional case against Antifa and conservatives will be suckered into cheering him, cheering for him, not recognizing he's a corrupt corporate hack who's a deeply anti-Trump.
	And there are corrupt connections between the Kemp and Perdue political machines and Dominion that people correctly pointed out.
	It just wasn't why 2020 happened in Georgia.
	They didn't need to.
	They stole it the old-fashioned way.
	They just padded the box with bogus ballots.
	So I don't have a great deal of confidence, unfortunately, in the Georgia Court of Appeals.
	I think everything increasingly, like the New York court that's trying to rush that trial despite it.
	Florida federal judges taking some positive action.
	That proffers some hope, Judge Cannon.
	No hope out of the D.C. courts and no hope out of what we're seeing so far out of the bond issues in New York.
	So increasingly, this is all going to come down to the Supreme Court of the United States.
	A broad immunity ruling and, as we'll be discussing, the retaliatory prosecution ruling on a case they already have, which is not concerning Trump, but Trump lingers in the background.
	Those two cases could put an end to all of this.
	Including the embarrassment of the New York courts currently taking place in the bond proceedings.
	We'll get there in one second, but you just blackpilled me a little more where you said the Georgia Court of Appeals will say either not to take it up or to take it up and dismiss it.
	And then Scott McAfee can say, I did everything in my power to lay it up for them to just put it in the net and they just didn't do it.
	Crap, Robert.
	I think you...
	Oh, okay.
	So either way...
	Do you know what the timeline is for the Georgia Court of Appeals to say we're taking it up and then if they take it up to render a decision?
	It depends on them.
	You would expect within three months.
	But no guarantee.
	Sadly and unfortunately.
	It's like the New York appellate courts seeing what an embarrassment that proceeding was.
	Seeing non-Trump or even Trump-hating New York businessmen.
	Go on national television and say this is a disaster for the state of New York, what you just did, Judge Ingeron did.
	The laughingstock.
	I mean, the only thing that exceeds the laughingstock of criminal justice in the Fulton County case is the laughingstock of civil justice in the New York civil case.
	Hold on.
	I've got to get Eric.
	Eric the Caffir said, I told you, Viva, LOL.
	I said, Eric, we'll see.
	But now I'm...
	Doubting it.
	Okay, so that's Georgia.
	And now we'll go from the big farm to the big fanny to the big fraud.
	Leticia James.
	So first of all, I put out a vlog before tonight's stream.
	Oh, it's so annoying.
	I edit it.
	I'm going to the beach.
	I edit it in the car.
	I upload it while we're on the beach.
	And then the version I uploaded had like a 15 second of me going, like one of the bits I should have edited out.
	So I only got it up by about 5 o 'clock.
	This is Leticia James registering liens against Trump properties.
	I say she's not that stupid to actually seize, but we don't know.
	But before we even get there, has you heard about the story of the American Irish Historical Society lawsuit?
	Had you heard about that before the news broke?
	So Miranda Devine puts out a piece, I think it was a week ago.
	It's amazing, and she's going to come on the channel, hopefully.
	Just about a lawsuit that involves actual fraudulent overrepresentation of the value of property, actual fraudulent inducement from a guy named Doyle to put up $3 million to save a building on the basis that it's worth $80 million.
	It's the Irish.
	The American Irish Historical Society owns an amazing building.
	Dude gives a $3 million loan on the basis that the property's worth $80 million.
	Turns out they lie.
	There's no airspace, air value, whatever.
	It's not worth $80 million.
	It's not worth $40 million.
	It's maybe worth $20 million.
	Still enough to pay him back for his loan.
	He looks to foreclose, sell it so he can get his $3 million back.
	Leticia James gets involved and says, oh, it's a charitable organization.
	The Office of the Attorney General needs to approve the sale.
	She says, no, I'm not approving the sale because it's a beautiful building.
	We've got to restore it.
	And dude, your loan is invalid because you were a board member.
	If you haven't heard that, Robert, maybe you might do a hush-hush on that in a week and a half.
	But the bottom line, Leticia James is a corrupt crony.
	There's no question about it.
	Hold on.
	The appeals.
	They're appealing the decision.
	They've appealed the bond and requested a stay of the order, saying, we can't get a half a billion dollar bond.
	We can't put up a half a billion dollars cash.
	The bond actually, ironically enough, requires a billion dollars in liquidity, as opposed to the order itself, 500 million.
	And, you know, Engeron, when he's tweaking his nipples, writes an email saying, I'm sure the Court of Appeal will protect your rights under appeal.
	They've registered the judgment against two Westchester properties, the golf course and a mansion.
	Maybe they're the same thing.
	Two properties.
	The deadline is tomorrow, Robert.
	They've registered the judgment as liens.
	Do you think they're going to move to seize and sell the properties?
	Well, that's actually a very drawn-out process in New York, for which there's multiple methods, mechanisms, and means to freeze and prevent.
	So I think it's more political theater than realistic risk.
	But at this point, it benefits Trump to highlight the risk rather than the theatrical aspects of it.
	Anytime you try to seize property, physical property, real estate, it's never simple.
	Unlike levying a bank account, levying a financial institution, levying a safe deposit box.
	These things are very easy to attach.
	I defend and represent, well, I both go after fraudsters and defend people from rogue creditors.
	And so consequently, I can answer questions about what is secure and not secure from a freedom perspective all across the world.
	I can tell you which banks and which countries are really, are very unlikely to ever disclose your information.
	And which one's for five grand?
	I can find out everything in your account.
	Dubai.
	You might think it's wonderfully safe.
	Nah, five grand.
	You want to know what Jared Kushner's got stashed there in Dubai?
	Five grand.
	You can find it all out.
	That's how easy it is to get it from these players.
	Unbelievable.
	Monaco?
	Try to do that.
	You're going to end up in prison.
	So, you know, two radically different nations.
	I do some of what's called plan B advice, exit plan advice.
	I call it freedom planning advice.
	You know, imagine you're Jewish in 1928 Berlin.
	What do you need to plan for in case the Nazis actually go from 2% to 30%?
	You know, have that planning in advance.
	You don't want to wait until after they're coming and knocking on the door to have the plan.
	You want to have the plan and not need it.
	Not need the plan and not have it.
	Robert, it's 3G, right?
	Guns, gold, and a getaway.
	If you've taught me anything.
	And there's multiple methods for people at multiple level of means to do that.
	Self-sufficiency is a critical importance.
	Everybody having their own independent means of food access, including food storage, is important.
	There might be some interesting developments on food, on storable food coming soon, of really productive producers.
	Let's put it that way.
	Said food.
	So, you know, in this space, real property is difficult to practically seize.
	But Trump politically benefits and legally benefits by highlighting the risk, by saying, look, they want to freeze all my money so that I can't spend any money on my own campaign.
	This is election interference.
	This is unconstitutionally an excessive fine in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution, enforceable through the 14th Amendment as one of the fundamental rights under the Due Process Clause, an Equal Protection Clause.
	This prosecution is a retaliatory prosecution, even if it's a civil case, still retaliatory, which relates to a Supreme Court case they're handling right now.
	And his argument to the New York Court of Appeals is this is unprecedented.
	What's happening here?
	So put a stop to it or just allow the New York court system to be a laughingstock of a political tool that we should strip of its power and authority on a go-forward basis.
	And everybody who's complicit in this should be looked at for...
	Criminal civil rights violations by a future honest administration.
	Because judges aren't immune from that prosecution more than anybody.
	In fact, they were the original targets of the civil rights laws were corrupt judges.
	And that's what the New York courts would prove to be if they don't stay this case pending appeal.
	But Robert, there's two things here.
	I want to get to Elon Musk meeting with Trump last week.
	I'll get there in a second.
	I will not swear.
	It's a flipping no-brainer that the New York Court of Appeal comes in and says, nobody on the state level is going to be prejudiced.
	Trump is not selling these properties and absconding to Russia with the cash.
	There's no risk, no prejudice, no nothing to the state.
	The properties appreciate in value.
	He continues to manage them the way he's been doing it.
	And you only have more assets to execute against if we say this ruling stands.
	What's the steel, man?
	To the risk argument, we need to sell it now.
	There isn't.
	I mean, they've already overturned.
	The New York Court of Appeal has already overturned this judge's attempt to take over the Trump Organization without appeal rights and remedies.
	So the logical decision is here you have no harm, no risk to the state by giving a stay pending appeal of collecting and enforcing the judgment.
	By contrast, there's all kinds of harm.
	Not only do you interfere in a presidential election by allowing a collection to take place now, by depriving available assets and funds for the Trump campaign, you potentially do severe damage to the Trump brand and the Trump business.
	And they've already established it's irreparable injury to lose physical real property.
	So that's not replaceable by money.
	So New York law is already clear on that.
	So that's the stay argument in favor of Trump.
	And then you have all the collateral damage done to other employees, to other people connected to these businesses and enterprises that are operated at these facilities and locations.
	And it just creates a debacle, disaster, for independent third parties.
	So, I mean, every grounds to grant the state pending appeal exists, and no grounds exist for denying it.
	Short of political corruption of the New York courts, using and weaponizing their judicial power to try to interfere with a presidential election and violate our civil rights.
	And in my view, every single one of them will be guilty of crimes under the Civil Rights Act if they allow this fraud of a proceeding to go forward, and they'll continue to embarrass and humiliate.
	the judicial and legal system in the United States to become a global laughingstock of the world.
	And they will terrify and terrorize every independent investor and businessman from getting anywhere near the state of New York.
	And if you're there, get out now.
	Get out, get out, get out while you can.
	That's the message the New York courts are sending businesses and investors.
	At one point, they were discussing there's three options for Trump.
	He can postbond.
	He could allow, he could, I forget what the third one was, but the other one was, let him do it.
	Do it.
	Like, seize it.
	Take it over.
	Try to sell it under judicial sale.
	And he gets to then sue them or at least claim damages.
	If he gets overturned in appeal, they'll have to pay him back the amount plus interest, whatever.
	But if they've sold the property, he can't get the property back, but he can get the money back, yada, yada.
	Well, but that's the other thing she's doing.
	If she loses, she's cost the state over $100 million.
	It's not funny, but it's funny.
	You get what you elect for.
	Elon Musk met with Trump last week or the week before.
	People are asking, oh, you think Elon's going to lend him money?
	Elon's never going to lend him money, but is it conceivable that Elon says, if it goes for judicial sale, I'll buy it.
	Whatever I auction it to buy it for, I'll hold it.
	You can buy it back for that amount of money.
	Is that a plausible theory?
	Oh, sure.
	Anybody can come in and...
	Take over the business and do so on Trump's behalf and behest.
	No question about that.
	But anybody who does it will be looked at with sharp scrutiny.
	So that's the real risk they face because they're making everything around Trump criminal.
	It's the overt, open political weaponization of our entire legal system to the infamy and disgrace of America's law.
	It was my disagreement with Vivek.
	I get where Rebecca's coming from, that some of the motivation to do away with bar exams is diversity, equity, inclusion arguments about people who can't pass the bar exam.
	But this presumes there should be a bar exam.
	This presumes there should be credentialing.
	This presumes the state should have a monopoly on licensing a profession or occupation.
	This presumes that the state should have power and control or force you to go to law school in the first place.
	Where do you think all the wacky commie theories are coming from?
	They're coming from law schools.
	Now, what would happen if people didn't have to get a law degree anymore like they didn't at the beginning of the country and for most of the history of the practice of the profession of law?
	You didn't have to go to law school.
	All of a sudden, you no longer need your degree in diversity, equity, and inclusion to get to the bar.
	And that's what Vivek is missing.
	He's missing that the bar is the problem.
	The bar exam is the problem.
	Credentialing is the problem.
	Licensure is the problem.
	If you give the state a monopoly on this, then they are going to abuse it.
	Just look at what's happening to Trump in New York.
	You give them power over anything, they will misuse and abuse the power.
	Look at what they're doing to Amish farmer Amos Miller in Pennsylvania.
	You can cite any case.
	The problem usually comes back to giving the state power in the first place.
	And this is another example and illustration of it.
	Robert, I'm going to do some of the...
	Rumble rants, and I think I brought up the wrong window, but hold on one second.
	Adolf Hitler for Troy, and he says, damn, you look Jewish.
	Sorry, that was too loud.
	You know why I look Jewish?
	Sorry, I'm going to stop that.
	That was not the window that I wanted to bring up.
	Holy cows, that's funny.
	Okay, this is the one I wanted to bring up.
	I'm going to read through these Rumble rants, and then we're going to get to the next subject.
	Shofar from...
	From damn I love Jewish to shofar.
	Barnes, what is going on with the Lisa Murkowski?
	Her father would be rolling over in his grave she has bought and paid for.
	I know her father.
	What a disappointment she's become.
	Who's Lisa Murkowski, Robert?
	Senator from Alaska who's threatening to go independent so that Republicans won't have a majority in the Senate even if they win the 2024 elections.
	Well, that sounds damn dirty, Robert.
	T-1990, that made it damn near impossible for most of the population to start companies on their own and compete against abusive ones.
	I love Fannie Willis' face in the backdrop.
	Like, for example, the employer abuses the 20th century was able to happen because of those companies paying local politicians and got them to put onerous rules and regulations.
	It's like mob cartels who inform on their competition to take them out.
	I mean, it's no difference.
	It's just corporate cartels.
	I actually think we're going to see a comment like that later on.
	Like, for example, Roosevelt Media News.
	In the interview yesterday, Fannie, at her DA's office, gave out 20,000 pieces of candy to her favorite charity.
	We played that clip.
	It doesn't matter.
	But most people don't know because they went through the government-run education and the government is obviously going to leave out parts of history to make them look bad.
	Again, we're going in...
	So this should be going the other way, but it doesn't matter.
	Deregulation, it's the government's involvement in these industries that has allowed assholes like Gates to have their monopolies.
	Timothy...
	Tinklev says, thank you, Barnes, for leaving the book you're reading or have read facing the camera.
	Just as I appreciate your legal opinions, I appreciate the mind, your mind that informs them.
	When it comes to food and most other industries, a lot of the deregulation, so anyone can get in, and so Bill Gates and Soros can have monopolies we have right now.
	V-Racks 1, apparently the odor of mendacity is a colorless gas, so it can't be seen.
	Sidebar with LawPodDaily.
	I have no problem there.
	Let me just screen grab that like that.
	Whatever.
	Close enough.
	Andy Pearson.
	Here's five bucks for the love of all things.
	Stop saying constitutional rights.
	The government cannot grant rights to the creators.
	I understand the argument, but we operate within the bounds of the law.
	MSN.
	Machinations, sophistry, and narcissism.
	See Rachel Maddow reference.
	Maddow annuals.
	24 million bucks, people.
	What exits her mother?
	24 million dollars a year.
	The engaged few.
	I'm not saying the government bureaucracies are evil, but I wouldn't need a fainting couch if I were told that.
	If Amos Miller prevails, the PDA deliberately infected his land by deploying a WMD.
	King of Biltong!
	I ate it all day, by the way, today.
	I ate an entire bag.
	I know it's a lot of calories.
	It doesn't matter.
	Good evening from Anton's Meat and Eat.
	Free shipping for your Biltong using code Viva on BiltongUSA.com.
	AntonUSA.com.
	Try our all-natural Wagyu made from hormone and antibiotic-free beef.
	170 calories a serving because I'm neurotic.
	Arkansas Crime Attorney.
	I spat.
	Arkansas Crime Attorney.
	Robert, what was the case?
	In the 40s or 50s, not allowing farmers to eat their own food.
	Do you remember that, Robert?
	It's a misunderstood case.
	So the case actually didn't interpret that power.
	It interpreted, could Congress, under the Interstate Commerce Clause, put restrictions on how much a wheat farmer grew, even if the wheat farmer was not growing it for interstate commerce?
	And they said because the amount of wheat he grew could impact Interstate commerce, even if his wheat wasn't in interstate commerce, it was allowed under the interstate commerce clause.
	Now, I think that was a breach.
	But the separate question of whether or not he has a constitutional right to feed himself or feed others or others have the right to get that food directly from him was not before the Supreme Court.
	So the Supreme Court only adjudicated the scope of the interstate commerce clause.
	But by the way, in this context, Amos Miller's context, that hurts the state because it says the Interstate Commerce Clause governs a person who's not even producing food for outside the state if it could, quote, influence interstate commerce.
	So that means the state has no business controlling or making it illegal to merely possess or produce food for sale outside the state if the Interstate Commerce Clause is so broad.
	It can reach food that's not even being sold outside the state.
	But the separate question, it's commonly been interpreted as that, but that legal question was not actually before the Supreme Court.
	The courts have actually never fully adjudicated what the scope of the fundamental right is to produce food or purchase food directly from the producer.
	And to the person's earlier statement about rights, it's called the Bill of Rights for a reason.
	The government didn't give us those rights.
	It's the government's recognition of those rights as it gives the government.
	They were given to us by God, Robert, with a capital G. And Karentoff, I'm laughing at two comments right now.
	Karentoff said the best representation of the Amish is the movie Kingpin.
	I haven't watched that with my kids yet.
	I'm going to have to watch that.
	Where he says, I bowl a 250.
	He's like, oh yeah, because you bowl 13 frames instead of 10. Woody Harrelson, I'll watch it again.
	Triumph!
	Maybe it's just me.
	I like David.
	The other guy's ruining the stream.
	That's on you, David.
	You are free to leave, Triumph.
	That's Triumph the dog that shits all over the place.
	By the way, everyone's outside of their opinion.
	Not all opinions are created equally.
	Sliding edge.
	What's the federal government acquisition cost for adult diapers?
	Who had budgetary discretion right now?
	Owen Boom.
	Pinochet's helicopter tours.
	As someone who has interrogated, who has...
	I've maybe been interrogated.
	I would not want to be interrogated by the Russian manor.
	Remember, no Russian.
	Slammer, Trump should fill the Trump Tower with illegals and homeless.
	Trump should fill it and let it be seized.
	New York City can try to evict them.
	Dude, it's the other way around, slammer.
	They're going to try to take his towers and then fill them with illegals because that's it.
	Who shows this?
	It's mine.
	No, it's mine.
	It's ours, for goodness sake.
	Slap me in the face, Robert.
	Separately, they have a problem.
	With any kind of...
	Like the Trump Towers.
	That's why they're looking at the country clubs and other stuff.
	Because other third parties have independent legal ownership interest in those towers.
	So that's not something they can foreclose on anytime soon anyway.
	Jim Sitala, those explosions looked like IEDs or landmines.
	If you watch the videos without the blurry spot, you can see they occur at the hand.
	Alright.
	Okay, so...
	Yeah, that I won't get into.
	How is it possible for the state to arrest six eighth graders for sharing memes saying naughty words on Snapchat?
	Seems like a direct violation of the First Amendment keeps happening.
	It has to stop.
	Engage few.
	I think we got this one.
	Oh, no.
	YouTuber Tree of Logic has a lot of information on Candace Owens.
	Going back to the social autopsy when Candace docks Tree.
	Fine.
	Tovax.
	There are several independent internet hosts, not just Candace, that are speaking out about the Zionist Project and its supporters being true ethnic supremacists, aka true racism.
	Lord Sterling.
	Barnes, thank you for properly pronouncing anti-Semitic.
	LOL.
	People seem to always reverse to the E. Anti-anti.
	Okay.
	Then we go.
	Oh, wow, David.
	You don't know Klavan.
	He's referring to the group not making the statement.
	Triumph.
	No, I think you're wrong.
	He was actually saying, saying.
	Christ is great.
	Christ is king.
	It's anti-Semitic, so I think you're wrong on that.
	Bill Dozer.
	Israel has been taking over the area.
	They tell the occupants, just move south.
	We won't hit the areas you move to.
	Then they say, move further south.
	Rinse and repeat.
	It's a land grab.
	Just own it.
	That is an argument that is not anti-Semitic, and that is difficult to retort at this point in time.
	To me, the question is, is it self-defense or not?
	So Robert Kennedy's defense of it is that it's self-defense.
	My argument is I don't agree that it's necessary for themselves.
	But now I understand the debate about the 67 borders.
	I'll say, oh, here's an attack, and now we get to go hog wild, and then we get to use that as a new frame of reference, and I can understand now how what I was taught about the 67 war might have been whitewashed or...
	But on the flip side...
	If it was the Palestinians in control, they would have taken everything.
	A thousand percent.
	That I don't disagree with.
	They're always the worst actor.
	That's when people ask me the difference between Israel and Hamas.
	Israel and the Palestinians.
	That's not a choice, bro.
	Nobody with an IQ over 50. You don't want to be Nick Fuentes.
	And I have to admit during my debate with him on Alex Jones that he wants Hamas to have nuclear weapons.
	When you're there...
	You're nuts, right?
	You're taking such insane positions.
	That's where that position logically ends up.
	But at the same time, it doesn't mean you have to go along with every nutty notion the hardliners in Israel have, who want war with the whole Middle East.
	Let's just say, okay, fine, you assume that Netanyahu is just as genocidal as Hamas.
	Well, if he spreads out his genocide over 100 years, that gives you a better defense to it.
	It's very hard to argue genocide when your population is expanding twice as fast as it is.
	Not if you go by the...
	That's not exactly ethnic cleansing.
	If you really wanted to do ethnic cleansing, by golly, they would have done it.
	You know who was really good at ethnic cleansing in the Middle East?
	Let's see.
	Oh yeah, every Middle East country towards Jews.
	But Robert, the ethnic, the genocide definition under NATO, it's very broad.
	It could include part or...
	Yeah, that's ludicrous.
	I've always found it ridiculous.
	Genocide should be limited to actual genocide.
	Yeah, well, I never understood that.
	The better argument on the Palestinian side is to argue ethnic cleansing.
	To argue genocide is stupid.
	Now, I don't agree that it's ethnic cleansing, but my point is that at least would be analogous.
	When I hear somebody say, oh, such and such is genocide, I immediately discredit that person.
	It doesn't matter who's saying it.
	Whether it's pro-Russian against Ukraine, Ukraine against Russians, Israelis against Palestinians.
	Now, what's true is you can make a strong argument that the Palestinian cause has been genocidal towards Israelis.
	Genocidal in intent without the capabilities versus...
	Yeah, exactly.
	But Robert, in Canada...
	That's why he went to...
	I mean, go look up.
	Founder of Palestinian cause, Nazis.
	Hanging out with Hitler.
	Hanging out with Himmler, created his own Nazi unit.
	The number of people who don't know this, that call themselves well-informed on the Palestinian side, are just pitiful.
	So I just can't.
	And if you call me Zionist, it's like saying anybody who criticizes Israel is anti-Semitic.
	It's just as stupid to question any pro-Israeli person as Zionist, as if it means racial supremacy.
	That's a patently absurd, asinine, and ludicrous claim.
	I don't take those people seriously.
	But the number of people who can engage in this debate, honestly, tiny.
	Well, honestly and with knowledge of fact, I'm trying to find the argument, the report.
	Hold on a second.
	There was a report in Canada.
	Here you go.
	Look at this.
	In Canada, they use the word genocide to talk about the treatment of Indigenous people.
	Let me bring this up here.
	The national inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women and girls concluded in its 2019-2013 Robert, do you know what they were including in the murdered and missing Indigenous women?
	Do you know who they were including by way of perpetrator in the Canadian genocide?
	Murders perpetrated by Indigenous men.
	No judgment.
	I mean, it's like, take Native Americans.
	95% of them died from disease.
	That wasn't genocidal.
	And I'm a strong critic of how large parts of our government, particularly post-Civil War, handled, and to some degree on the Cherokees, the handled Native American relations.
	So I come at it from that.
	But I don't come at it from an idealistic, naive perspective.
	There wasn't a tribe in America that had the land they had that didn't conquer another tribe and get it.
	I mean, so the whole peace pipe-smoking tribes, well, it wasn't a lot of tribal history.
	There was a little bit of cannibalism mixed in.
	You know, research the history of the Chickasaws in Oklahoma and Texas and other places.
	So you can have a balanced perspective.
	It's just some of these debates are so hot.
	It's very difficult to have a balanced perspective.
	I'll take it one step further and cancel me if you will.
	It's about blaming white men and more importantly white Christian men.
	The people on the right who've become deeply anti-Israel, when they're adopting the rhetoric of the left, the framework of the left, the lingo and language of the left, oppressor, oppressed, genocidal, colonizer, you should immediately smack yourself in the face.
	Because you're borrowing an idiotic paradigm that is dangerous and perilous to your own well-being.
	That is meant and intended to also eliminate you from the face of the planet Earth.
	So, you know, it's just nonsensical.
	I mean, I gotta read it.
	Actually, I didn't get to the most important parts.
	This genocide is the underlying cause of the contemporary murder and disappearance of Indigenous women and girls committed by Indigenous men.
	By and large.
	It's so wild.
	The only other people I would be suspect of is see if Bill Clinton was in town recently.
	Or the Clinton Foundation was visiting.
	Ask Katie what happened to a lot of those orphans when the Clinton Foundation came in after the earthquake.
	They don't go to this part of the country of Canada.
	They go to places that are easier to exploit than traffic.
	That's true.
	Okay, fine.
	Now, Robert, what do we have next on the menu?
	All right, so we got a couple left.
	We got Supreme Court, First Amendment, social media censorship, and retaliatory prosecution.
	We got explaining what RICO is for AOC and Biden's many, many impeachable crimes.
	Brooke Jackson update.
	We may do that separate in the after party at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	And we got a couple of others.
	We got the Arizona Rancher goes on trial in a border battle.
	Big case that isn't.
	A lot of people aren't paying as much attention to that.
	I think it's being broadcast.
	So I'm hoping, you know, Good Logic or Self-Defense Guy or one of those people.
	Oh, the Runkle of the Bailey.
	You know, maybe somebody, you know, maybe Robert Gouvet.
	He lives there in Arizona.
	I'm hoping somebody covers that trial because I think it's being...
	Available to broadcast live.
	The thing is, I would commit to doing it, but once you start, you've got to go to the ends, and I'm not sure I can sit on my ass for eight hours a day.
	I think covering opening statements is always good, because that at least gives you a good opening intro, whether he testifies or not.
	Matt Gaetz, big First Amendment win for him.
	The FTX fallout continues.
	And Apple, suit on antitrust grounds.
	Robert, at the risk of getting in trouble, I think I might get in trouble right now.
	I don't know what this video shows, but I saw it come up, and it's the Rabbi Shmuley.
	It goes back to Rabbi Shmuley.
	This is the rabbi that apparently Candace Owens had.
	This dude seems like a weird dude.
	I swear to God that Candace...
	This is where Candace is good at what she does.
	She gets an opponent that she highlights that's easy to caricature and dislike.
	And owns.
	And presents her well.
	Now, she doesn't always do that well.
	Taking on Steven Crowder was stupid.
	She was going to lose that contrast.
	She backed herself out of it after a week.
	She also has such a hot fuse and is such Queen Candace.
	I'm probably ruining your chance to get an interview with her.
	I don't care, Robert.
	I don't care about any of this.
	And again, I've supported Candace in a lot of contexts, backed her in a lot of contexts.
	You know, it's her personality.
	It's obviously around it.
	Just so you know, you know that I...
	I don't give a sweet bugger all.
	The only thing I'm trying to figure out here is, what the fuck?
	This dude is a weirdo, and he's decided...
	What the fuck am I looking at, bro?
	He's being...
	He's pretending that he decided to dress up like Candace Owens' stereotype, which is not actually Candace Owens' stereotype.
	And so it's...
	But what he's doing is he's elevating himself.
	He's using the opportunity of the conflict with her to elevate himself, and he's coming across as a nut.
	Well, but you bring your kids in for politics, it's one thing to jump off a tree.
	Bad form, bad presentation.
	Well, apparently, isn't he connected to something that sells interesting things over the internet?
	Yeah, he sells sex toys with his daughter, which doesn't matter.
	It matters, but I'm not...
	Okay, but hold on.
	It's pouring people, and just so you know, you're supposed to bring...
	You're pretty smart on Candace to make that her opponent in this, right?
	Because she knows he's going to do this kind of stuff.
	It's just going to boost her even further.
	It's good to make the ADL her opponent.
	Like, she's managed to treat...
	The separation from the Daily Wire without making the Daily Wire her opponent.
	I mean, she's got real political skill.
	Zero doubt about that.
	Sincerity of beliefs?
	Big question, Mark.
	But, you know, that was pick your opponent.
	That's one of the best ways to win these kind of debates, win these kind of contests, is to get to pick your opponent.
	I often don't get that privilege because the government picks it for me.
	But that doesn't stop them from being low IQ lardasses like the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture.
	We could do low IQ lardasses as a meme merch, but I don't think anyone's going to want to buy it.
	But Robert, Purim is the holiday where you're supposed to drink to the point of not being able to distinguish between Haman and Mordechai.
	So I don't know if the guy's drunk.
	I don't think he would be because he wouldn't be uploading a video while he's drunk.
	Okay.
	Are we seeing this?
	Am I uploading?
	Yeah, okay.
	I do not know what this is going to say.
	For Purim, I've dressed up as a Candace Owens Jew.
	Or is it just dress up?
	Or are we Jews deep down always like this filth money drunk on Christian blood?
	And...
	Okay, I'll get to the Christian blood in a second.
	Dual loyalties for Israel.
	That's a legitimate criticism.
	Drinking Christian blood is almost a joke.
	Dual loyalty is a legitimate concern for people.
	It's an old libel that Nick Fuentes has spread repeatedly.
	Nick Fuentes actually blamed the pandemic on Jews.
	That's how nuts that guy is.
	Maybe there's some trolls in the chat.
	If you want to get attention, make sure to put in a $20 tip.
	Maybe we'll read it, you Fuentes fans out there.
	Groiper is embarrassing.
	That's just embarrassing.
	That says you're not a real man.
	You know what I mean?
	You cherish a guy who likes to run around as a cat.
	You know what I mean?
	Come on.
	But this guy is as big a loser as McQuentes.
	Well, we're going to get there.
	I felt that since Candace got fired on Friday, now I don't think she actually got fired, but whatever.
	I may as well try and bring some Purim cheer by validating all of her views about the Jews, at least for one day.
	Happy Purim.
	May All Israel enemies fall.
	TYPG.
	What does TYPG stand for?
	Thank you.
	Hi, everybody.
	Purim is a day of celebration.
	We feel bad for Candace Owens that she lost her job.
	So I figure with her image of what Jews are supposed to look like, why not at least validate her?
	I am dressed up as a Candace Owens Jew.
	Now, this is not a Christian child.
	But if it would be, I got my Christian blood.
	Mmm, spicy, delicious.
	I got my Jewish nose.
	I have filth because Jews are all filth.
	And more than anything else, what does Amy have?
	Money!
	Yeah, we Jews are all about money!
	Wait, wait, wait.
	I don't think I can actually watch all of this.
	Where's the matzah?
	I don't want to finish the whole thing and not mix it into the matzah.
	So can someone just bring me...
	She did say, one second, she did say that I was getting, she liked that tweet.
	This makes me very, very uncomfortable.
	So let's do it to the right hand.
	So good.
	I have to let it play out of mere morbid curiosity.
	Poor Mr. Daze, but our enemies fall, my brothers and sisters.
	This is the way they want us to look.
	I'll do it for one night.
	I'll indulge them.
	If it floats their boat, why not?
	They're covered by my arm.
	Okay, happy poem, everybody.
	That's her picking a good opponent, right?
	The guy comes across as very unlikable and is weird and is kind of kooky.
	That's the genius of how she did it.
	Don't make Daily Wire your opponent.
	Make Daily Wire separate from you on favorable terms for you.
	Divorce.
	Without making it, it's kind of like a wife who gets divorced, who doesn't want to be blamed for the divorce, who finds a third-party mistress to blame, right?
	Where conveniently, he's not to blame.
	Let's say he was a popular person, right?
	And they wanted to maintain the court of public opinion.
	So it was really well done to how she maneuvered.
	So great political skill that she employed.
	I feel very dirty right now.
	I don't know what I have to do.
	It was too weird for me to pay attention to.
	I was like, I'm going to skip that.
	But speaking of crazy and kooky, we probably should explain what Rico is.
	Alejandro Ocasio-Cortez.
	Well, speaking of it, Robert, I will steal man AOC's stupidity.
	Is that she can't distinguish between, what is it called?
	It's called a predicate offense.
	Between a category and a crime.
	Like, Rico, a crime?
	Like, I always wonder, what would it be like if the Valley Girls from the 1990s, in that movie that, what's her name, was involved in?
	Clueless.
	Yeah, Clueless.
	What would happen if they actually got to Congress?
	And now we know with AOC, she was so egotistical about it.
	Rico's not a crime.
	That's just like a category.
	What's the crime?
	But the thing is, I could steelman her argument.
	Well, there's crimes and there's predicate crimes and those we can qualify as a category.
	I'm trying to think of aggravated assault is not a crime unless there's a predicate offense of assault.
	She's an idiot.
	There's no steelman in this.
	She's a bloody idiot.
	But here's one.
	Bribery is a...
	Under Rico, it has certain predicate crimes to make it racketeering.
	Racketeering is its own crime.
	But the way in which you establish or approve it is to show what's called predicate acts.
	And those predicate acts are also separately criminalized to make them legally sufficient predicate acts to be the separate crime of racketeering.
	And in one of those, she's like, what crime has the Biden crime family committed?
	Well, bribery is one of those predicate acts.
	Wire fraud is one of those predicate acts.
	Money laundering is one of those predicate acts.
	Obstruction of justice is one of those predicate acts.
	And the Biden crime family is guilty of all four.
	And those are impeachable offenses under the United States Constitution when they leverage governmental power to achieve and obtain it.
	So the predicate offense is to say the racketeering activities itself include murder, bribery, kidnapping, theft, whatever.
	But racketeering activities, am I wrong?
	It involves any activity that contributes to an organized criminal activity.
	But what is in order to prove, Rico, you have to have predicate acts.
	The predicate acts have to be separately crimes under the statutes.
	So that's what she was confusing.
	Is that RICO is its own crime.
	It's not a category of crimes.
	It's a statute, Robert.
	Yes, exactly.
	It's its own crime.
	People have been prosecuted for under the RICO statute for racketeering as the crime.
	It just has predicate acts that are separate crimes that are necessary to prove to prove RICO.
	But fraud, by the way, sometimes people think the fraud has to be through the mail or using the wires.
	All you have to do is...
	Ever use the phone, ever use the internet, ever use the mail, and separately be committing fraud.
	The two don't have to be tied at all.
	That's just the interstate commerce link to make it a crime.
	So here you have bribery, obstruction of justice, money laundering, wire fraud, mail fraud, all predicate acts, only need two.
	You got five against the Biden crime family.
	All of them impeachable because Biden has obstructed justice into that investigation while he is president of the United States.
	Robert, I gotta go to the Rumble rants for a second because they're funny in their beauty.
	The first one is, AOC reminds me of how a generative AI has problems understanding what a hand is so randomly draws six fingers like a one-year-old crayon drawing.
	Then we got Mild111 who says Christ is king and now I feel very much threatened by you.
	Mild, I'm reporting this for hate crime.
	And I'm joking.
	And then we've got Just Thinking says, for brainless morals that can't think rationally, everything bad that ever happens is either the fault of the Jews or the Rothschilds.
	Our dual loyalties...
	Somebody in our live chat pointed out AOC might have been thinking of Rico Suave.
	My name is...
	There's a song with Rico in it, but...
	Yeah, it's Rico Suave.
	Isn't that the song?
	I thought it was Rico Suave.
	It's up there with Suave.
	Rico Suave.
	They got a meme of the picture of the dude from the song.
	Are dual loyalties really even possible?
	Perhaps it's really one or none wearing a cloak.
	Barnes, do you think discovery of the Amish Mafia was an Obama-era PSYOP nudge public sentiment against the Amish?
	Hollywood was doing it.
	Remember Hollywood in the show Banshee created this Amish mob.
	There's no Amish mob.
	I've been around the Amish.
	They wouldn't know what a mob is.
	I mean, it's absurd.
	The Amish mob.
	But yes, of course, because guess who popularized that culturally?
	Before Banshee, the most popular political portrayal of the Amish was the film Witness, which is very sympathetic and much more accurate.
	Very violent.
	It traumatized me as a kid.
	My father let me watch that when I was eight.
	Traumatized.
	The bathroom scene.
	I haven't seen it since.
	You never went into a train station bathroom again.
	No, and the guy got his throat slit in the bathroom stall in front of the bathroom mirror while the kid was hiding in the bathroom stall.
	I know how to hide in a bathroom stall because of that movie.
	What year was it, Robert?
	1988?
	1985, I think.
	We watched it as one of our Saturday night movies at VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com But instead, the show Banshee...
	Popularly portrays the Amish as being part of some criminal organization and other sick activities.
	Utterly ludicrous.
	It was like, for example, you knew they were going to go after Alex Jones when the show Homeland created this complete caricature of this fake version of Alex Jones that both the media and the law firm suing him believed in.
	So Hollywood is neck deep with this stuff.
	Just tune on to a random TV show.
	How often do they celebrate?
	New York prosecutors, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the CIA.
	These are constantly propagandized and popularized on mainstream television.
	Probably not a coincidence that they're there to propagate those institutions, just like they were there to start propagating an anti-Amish message in order to prevent people from asking, why are they so much healthier and happier than the rest of us?
	Oh, you're still on mute.
	Because I'm an idiot.
	It was 1985 and just...
	I tell you, I think I'm tapping into something in my childhood.
	This movie traumatized me.
	I remember where I was when I watched it on the floor of my parents' bedroom.
	They had two separate beds and my mom used to sleep in a separate room not because of divorce issues because my dad snores like a pig.
	I remember this.
	It was traumatizing to me as a kid.
	Robert, I want to watch this movie again.
	I'm going to watch it again for the first time in 38 years.
	Great film, great film.
	Harrison Ford, fantastic as always.
	But, speaking of social media, we've got the big censorship case.
	Oral argument was just held this last week.
	It was a little disturbing to people who sat in on it.
	Okay, so I didn't get to the end of it yet.
	And I'm reading the news saying this is the oral arguments in...
	Robert, hold on one second.
	It's the Biden versus Missouri, whether or not you get to interfere with social media.
	I don't think I got to the crux of it where Kontaji, Jackson Brown, or whoever else asked their questions.
	I heard some interesting questions.
	Is it coercion?
	Is it strong influence?
	Where's the line?
	I read the media, MSM, saying they were giving them a hard time on the coercion argument.
	Who asked the dumbest question of the bunch?
	So it depends on how you interpret her questions.
	Because some of her questions came across as skeptical of the government's position.
	And then some of her questions came across as suggesting the First Amendment needed to be taken away.
	So it was the latter that got most of the media attention.
	She actually asked different questions.
	Members of our board were tracking in live time.
	They highlighted she'd been on both sides of this, depending on which question you highlighted.
	And in my view, she'll be good on certain civil rights issues and civil liberties issues, but otherwise will be a liberal democratic vote, typically.
	And in the context of pandemic politics, which is what the social media censorship case has been strikingly reduced to, She's going to have a conflict.
	Because on one side, once individual rights against the state, but on the other side, thinks individuals are at risk from a scary, scary pandemic.
	And the state needs to have all the power it can to prevent misinformation from being out there.
	Especially in the context of the unique circumstance of a pandemic.
	And that don't we need to allow the state to restrict this kind of speech?
	She was just more blunt than other judges up there, justices, are willing to be.
	And other people are shocked, like, hold on, that's what the First Amendment is there for, to restrain the government in these precise contexts.
	Down deep, they don't believe, the new liberal state does not believe in the First Amendment.
	People are slowly getting that.
	Now the more disconcerting indicator came from the so-called centrist on the bench, came from especially Roberts and Barrett.
	So a lot of people went in there thinking that this was going to be unanimous affirmation.
	And I was curious as to why they thought that, and I realized, okay, they don't understand how unique and excellent, but against the grain, that district court and Fifth Circuit decision was.
	That, you know, Robert Kennedy, along with others of us, have brainstormed this idea for about a decade.
	How to stop social media becoming the state tool of suppression and censorship when they had become the digital public square most influential in the court of public opinion.
	And we've been trying a bunch of different ways to sue.
	Bobby Kennedy himself has tried a half dozen ways to sue, including going after Elizabeth Warren, trying to suppress his book, all kinds of other things.
	The courts have been shutting him down, not letting it happen.
	This court, one of Trump's good district court appointees, saw through it, recognized the problem, and stepped into the breach and said that this was state-coordinated action based on a long history of precedent.
	See, you don't have to always show coercion to show state action.
	You can show various forms of collusion to where it's de facto state action.
	The disconcerting thing is a lot of the advocates on the state side, the First Amendment side, didn't always do a good job of making that argument to the Supreme Court.
	And the Supreme Court seemed to be walking back their collusion arguments, like Bantam Books and other arguments.
	And instead saying, no, you have to show coercion.
	Well, we'll get to the Matt Gaetz case and some other cases later about the coercion issue.
	Coercion is a way too limited a definition of state action.
	The state can do things and all.
	They can coordinate.
	They can conspire.
	They can collude.
	It's not merely coercion that's unconstitutional.
	It's not speech when they're coordinating to suppress other people's speech.
	That's an action, not words.
	And unfortunately, the so-called centrist on the court seem more concerned with...
	They apparently want to pull back the First Amendment and say it only applies to coercion, allowing coordination, collusion, and conspiracy to occur and allowing the state to effectively delegate and enlist the most powerful controllers of the public square in the social media world.
	To censor all they want, as long as they're not coercing them to do it.
	It's a cowardly way out by a court that is still corrupted by its pandemic politics.
	And the leader of that court so corrupted is Amy Coney Barrett, as some of us suggested she would be.
	Sometimes I'll get letters, emails, texts, other comments, replies, that thought...
	I criticized, I said Amy Coney Barrett would be bad on everything.
	She won't be bad on everything.
	A lot of religion issues, gun issues, abortion issues, issues between corporations and the government.
	She'll be a good conservative vote.
	I said on the pandemic issues, on individual liberties issues, on criminal defense issues, on the election issues, she would be bad.
	And so far she's been bad every single time.
	All of her defenders were wrong.
	All of her apologists were wrong.
	And Trump was wrong.
	To put her on the bench, pretending she was Minnie Scalia.
	She's Minnie Roberts.
	That's who Amy Coney Barrett is.
	That's what happens when you put the ancestral heir to a Southern aristocratic family on the bench.
	Someone who had quoted the Jacobson decision while she was a judge, for crying out loud.
	But it is clear that Roberts wants to open the door to allowing mass-scale state censorship, as long as it's not coercion.
	Because emergencies require it.
	And what makes their whole argument now embarrassing is Justice Jackson was dumb enough to let the whole world know that what they're really doing is taking away the real meaning of the First Amendment.
	Robert, before we head over to locals, for anyone who's thinking like there's omens in the world, I'm swimming in the ocean today.
	At Deerfield Beach.
	And I see this literally floating in the ocean.
	And I was like, oh, I don't know what this is, but it's a...
	Hold on a second.
	It's a beautiful bracelet.
	And I pick it up.
	I don't think it's called a rosemary's.
	But if everybody can see what's in there.
	So I found this in the ocean.
	And I've taken it.
	And I've made it mine.
	If you couldn't see it, it's religious symbols.
	It's very weird.
	It's just literally floating in the ocean.
	And I grab it.
	Because I'm there at that moment in time.
	It's on my wrist.
	Robert, what we're going to do right now is take the remaining party over to Rumble, to locals, unless we have one that you want to get to hear.
	You're laughing about something I love.
	One of the memes in our chat combines Barack Obama and George Bush, and he really kind of reminds me of John Roberts.
	Hold on, hold on.
	Someone asked in the chat, what's wrong with Justice Roberts?
	See his Obamacare decision.
	See his refusal to take up the election issues at all, ever.
	See a bunch of other decisions where he's issued a cowardly decision.
	This is who you're thinking of, right?
	See, I look at that and I kind of see, like, you could blend him in pretty easily to Roberts.
	Just like, you know, the George Soros kind of looks like the Emperor from Star Wars.
	Yeah, we combine Barack Obama and George Walker Bush, you get John Roberts.
	That's a pretty good depiction.
	Oh, man.
	Okay, so what I'm going to do right now, we're going to end it on...
	Yeah, we'll discuss the Brooke Jackson update over on the after party.
	We got the Supreme Court's retaliatory prosecution case.
	Matt Gaetz winning a big First Amendment case.
	Continued fallout from FTX that will be big for the crypto world.
	Oh, yeah.
	And the Apple antitrust case.
	So we're doing that.
	Okay, so we're going to take this party to rumble.
	It's two and a half hours in on rumble.
	And how do I do this?
	I seem to forget how to end it.
	No, oh, hold on, hold on, hold on.
	Before we do it, I'm going to just do this.
	Stop, scream, present, get the last of the Rumble rants in so that nobody feels inconvenienced.
	Barnes, how is Lloyd Corporation Limited versus Tanner?
	Not an argument for social media.
	Is the public square?
	I was momentarily distracted.
	I was checking on how my bets were doing for March Madness.
	Don't worry about that.
	Cashing and cashing and cashing.
	And it was cha-ching, cha-ching, cha-ching again today.
	Don't do it, Robin.
	That's a bad lesson.
	That's a bad lesson.
	That's a wonderful lesson.
	Only gamble.
	Only bet with Barnes.
	Never bet against Barnes.
	Only bet with Barnes.
	The question is, how is Lloyd Corp limited versus Tanner?
	Not an argument for public square.
	I don't know if you know the...
	There's several.
	There's a more recent case as well.
	I mean, there's many cases.
	We developed this with Robert Kennedy and a former Yale law professor.
	Went through great detail to figure out the strategies and theories for this.
	And it was the predicated suit against Facebook, predicated suit against Senator Warren, predicated him trying to join this case.
	And I could see why Alito wanted to admit it.
	Because if Robert Kennedy had been there with that oral argument, it would have gone a different direction.
	And they would have had a much harder time pushing the direction they wanted to go in.
	And it turned out it was a bad sign that Roberts and Barrett and the three liberals blocked Kennedy from being able to participate in that case because it made the quality of the oral arguments weaker and politically less impactful than if the number one target of the censorship had been able to make his legal constitutional arguments right there in the halls of the court.
	But yet there's a bunch of cases.
	The state can be an actor a hundred different ways.
	We'll discuss this in the Gates case.
	They don't have to do it themselves.
	They don't have to do it through coercion.
	And taking the bait on making that the limitation on the First Amendment's restrictions is perilous to all First Amendment freedoms beyond just the social media censorship case.
	And now we're doing it.
	Now I remember how to end it on Rumble.
	We're going to end it on Rumble, go over to Locals, and we're going to talk over there.
	The link is there.
	You all know what to do if you want to not come over and watch something else.
	There's another good guy live streaming right now.
	You all know his name.
	I don't have my shirt on.
	Salty Cracker.
	Whatever.
	He'll be there.
	You can catch up on him.
	Come to us or make your own decisions.
	We are ending on Rumble.
	VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com We will see you there in five seconds.
	Robert, do you have anything coming up this week that we should know about?
	No, I gotta go up to Pennsylvania to help coordinate Amos Miller and all of the...
	Oh, this will be up there for a couple of days.
	Well, it's damn good, but you can't document that in real time because I presume you can't record them.
	And I will never go to violate any rules.
	So, awesome.
	Tomorrow, I got something.
	Tuesday, you know what I got?
	Okay, vivavarneslaw.locals.com.
	If you're not coming, enjoy the rest of the interwebs.
	But we're going there now.
	Ending on Rumble.
	Peace out, people.
	Booyah.
	Robert, now we've got to go.
	Oh, lordy, lordy.
	We've got to go to the tip chats.

▲