Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 5, 2024 - Viva & Barnes

02:02:16

Ep. 209: Trump Trial; Ole Miss; Pennsylvania Farmers; Owen Shroyer; Whitmer & MORE!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	You might want to set the hook.
	I think you're on.
	No?
	Okay, I see the fish.
	I see the fish.
	Leave it.
	Whatever was at it is gonna come back.
	come on man He's on.
	He's on.
	Oh, he's on.
	There we go.
	Bring it up.
	That's a big one.
	Oh, yeah.
	Oh, yeah.
	Okay, all right.
	Oh, oh, oh.
	Oh my goodness, Ethan.
	Don't let it get in the weeds.
	Don't let it get in the weeds.
	Okay, hold up, hold up, hold up.
	Yep, yep, yep.
	Okay, hold up, hold up.
	Okay, it's stuck in the weeds now.
	So let it, let it, let it tug it out a little bit.
	Let your line loose.
	Okay, let it, let it, give it a second, give it a second.
	Now lean it down, let it down.
	Okay, now let's pull back.
	Now do it, now do it, now do it.
	Bring it up.
	Bring it up.
	Yeah.
	Oh yeah.
	Okay.
	There's no, the big don't let it happen.
	Oh my goodness.
	Oh boy.
	Okay.
	Hold on.
	Hold on.
	Ethan, do you want me to do this?
	Okay.
	Hold This is where it gets good people.
	We are live cross-platform people.
	Can I stop recording?
	Can he stop recording?
	Who's that woman in the blue shirt?
	Oh wait, that's me!
	Check this out, people.
	Apparently every alligator there is called George.
	No, no, no, no, bring it up.
	Bring it up.
	Oh.
	Boom!
	Ah!
	Don't hit him.
	Woo!
	Oh my gosh.
	Go, go.
	No, no, no.
	I'm gonna come in, let me go.
	No, no, no, no.
	Take the rod, take the rod, take the rod.
	Take the rod, come on, come back up.
	Back up.
	Wait, it's stuck in my fingers!
	Oh my goodness!
	Not this time!
	Oh my goodness!
	Go get the pliers.
	So that's a big, that's a big bowfin.
	Oh, come on.
	Oh, no, no, no, no, no.
	He's there, he jumped right into the, like, yeah.
	It's a big, fat...
	Okay, it's out.
	Now, watch over here.
	This guy comes in with a phone out and scans the fish.
	I think that's a three pounder.
	Can we keep it?
	No, no, this is a paper fish.
	Let me do it.
	Oh, Penny, it's a bullshit.
	That's not the biggest problem.
	That's what Penny did.
	Holy crap out of this.
	Holy crap out of this.
	Not today, George.
	Look at that thing.
	I feel bad enough for the alligator, but...
	Got it.
	Okay.
	That was good.
	We don't always have to start off with stuff that makes you want to gag and retch in your mouth, but we're going to get there.
	Who said grab it by the mouth?
	Someone wants me to get killed here.
	Head 5959, grab it by the mouth.
	For those of you who don't know, both of them have, like, wicked strong jaws and wicked chapped teeth.
	They're like wicked chap.
	And look, I will also tell you, I edited it out at least one of the times when I was trying to lift it up and I dropped it because I don't think people want to see me dropping a fish.
	The fish was fine and is going to go off to make fish babies or it's not going to be fine and it's going to go feed George.
	But that one, the alligator didn't get it, people.
	Oh, good evening.
	It's Sunday.
	I made the joke in our vivabarneslaw.locals.com community that I was cramming.
	Like I used to cram for exams in high school, because, look, Barnes sends me my homework, and this week he sent me the topics of what we're going to discuss, and I got to, you know, I knew half of them already, and I go fishing today with the kid, and we were with friends, so I didn't want to be sitting there listening to podcasts all day.
	Then I got home, and I figured I had to do an update vlog, a talkie vloggy, on Hope Hicks testimony on Friday's trial, for those of you who missed it, when we talk about Trump tonight.
	You don't want to be, like, totally clueless as to where things stand.
	And then I started cramming, you know, the Bitcoin dude who just got indicted.
	What else?
	Oh, the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping.
	I'm reaching out to two journalists.
	We're going to do a podcast.
	They have to come on.
	So we don't always have to start with the stuff that makes you want to barf in your mouth.
	We can start with some fun stuff.
	For those asking, we found a garage.
	A gas station down on the 441 that sells live minnows.
	And my goodness, we crushed it today.
	So we were playing, you know, it's a $3 game.
	You get a dollar for the first, a dollar for the most, and a dollar for the biggest.
	My kid got the dollar for the biggest.
	But we did not get the most or the first, but it was a good day of fishing.
	Do both thin taste good?
	So I googled this, Maureen, and people say that you can eat it.
	It's a light white meat.
	And that part of the Everglades is not like those retaining ponds on the inside that are disgusting, filled with garbage.
	That's right on the glades.
	Hence the alligators everywhere.
	So one day, if the fish cannot be returned alive, I will eat a bothan.
	And maybe one day we'll do a catch and cook of a bothan.
	Sunday would not be the night to do that.
	If I came back with a dead bothan and I was like, here, Marion, I'm going live.
	Enjoy.
	That might lead to marital problems.
	And another funny anecdote of the week.
	So I was going to go kayak fishing and do a live stream kayak fishing thing on a lake nearby that I know has...
	I've seen gators there.
	And I'm debating whether or not to do it.
	And then as I'm trying to load the kayak into the car, I pushed it into the front windshield and shattered or smashed the windshield.
	So that was what I'll pretend is a divine intervention to not go kayak fishing in alligator-infested waters.
	So we just went fishing in alligator-infested waters off the top.
	The dude who came by to replace the windshield.
	Safe light, repair.
	Safe light, replace.
	Amazing.
	We sat there talking for an hour and a half while he did the replacement and it was fantastic.
	Oof is right, by the way.
	And you know, the second I tried to close the trunk of the car and I heard a noise that was like soft breaking glass.
	All right.
	Now, when I said that we're not going to start off with something that's going to want to make you puke, I didn't say that we were not going to play something that's going to make you puke.
	I was going to start off with this, but nobody would understand the audio for who's listening on podcast tomorrow as if anybody's going to understand what they just heard by way of noise and wind noise.
	Everybody listening in podcast tomorrow, you missed Viva and mini Viva catching a beautiful bowfin and an alligator navigating the alligator waters to catch that fish without the alligator getting it.
	So go watch the video if you are listening on podcast.
	And for those of you who don't know, all of this goes on to podcast on Viva Barnes Law for the People on Podbean, Apple, Google, whatever, all of them.
	So I was going to start with something that's going to make you puke, but nobody would have understood what it was.
	So instead, we're going to just, you know, ease our way into it.
	People, yesterday was May the 4th, if you didn't know.
	And I find it very offensive that they're making fun of people with a lisp like myself.
	May the 4th be with you.
	That's very offensive.
	Offensive.
	And it's very, it hurts my fiefies.
	I'm joking.
	I have a bit of a lisp so I can make that joke.
	It's May the 4th yesterday, and holy hell was the crap running on Twitter.
	One-hit wonder Mark Hamill.
	I shouldn't call him a one-hit wonder.
	He might be a two-hit wonder, because I just saw a movie with Bert Bratkowski or something called The Machine.
	Freaking this guy's in it, and the movie was not good.
	No offense to Bert, it was not a good movie.
	Mark Hamill, who those of you may not know who he is, his claim to fame was Star Wars.
	And now he's selling out like a Star Wars whore.
	I'll call it a war whore, a Star Wars whore.
	Selling out like, ugh, oh, oh.
	Like if you didn't hate him before any of this, you might not like him now.
	I'll just play this one.
	It's going to segue into the one that's really going to make you puke.
	How many of you had Mark Hamill lead the press briefing on your bingo card hands?
	Yeah, me either.
	And look, I just got to meet the president, and he gave me these aviator glasses.
	I love the merch.
	Can I buy and bring up Star Wars too, sir?
	Well, you know, I called him, Mr. President, and he said, you can call me Joe.
	And I said, can I call you Joe B. Wan Kenobi?
	He liked that.
	How many of you had Mark?
	Some people say there's a difference between selling out and cashing in.
	Cashing in is when you've worked hard and it's time to say, I'm selling my assets at a high.
	Selling out is when you say, I've reached rock bottom and I need me a little bit of Joe Biden sniffing my hair.
	This is the most ridiculous piece of rubbish I've ever seen.
	I'm not going to make fun of him.
	He doesn't look well.
	And, you know, people are going to make jokes about him being a raging alcoholic, which I don't know.
	I'm sure some people are going to make jokes about a certain jibby jab because it seems that he's got, I want to say, potentially Bell's palsy.
	His face doesn't look particularly symmetrical.
	I'm not going to say any of that.
	I'm just going to say the dude's a freaking sellout.
	Like, it's grotesque.
	First, you got Howard Stern sniffing Joe Biden's butt.
	Then you got that other one there, the sellout.
	What's her name?
	Don't tell me, people.
	Drew Barrymore.
	Drew Barrymore.
	I want to go burn my DVD of The Wedding Singer.
	That's how bad she's gotten.
	She's up there kissing the butt, sniffing the butt of Mamala Harris.
	And now you got frickin' Mark Hamill selling out to shill for Joe Biden.
	But it gets worse.
	It actually gets worse, if you can imagine.
	Fourth be with you.
	Always.
	Do you hear the little eh at the end?
	Listen.
	Wait.
	May the fourth be with you.
	Right after the all.
	Always.
	Did you hear that?
	You hear that?
	I'm not going crazy.
	One more time.
	Listen.
	May the fourth be with you.
	Promise.
	Always.
	Someone doesn't know how to edit in the White House.
	And what the hell was going on that I hear?
	Disgusting.
	But, but, but, but, but, people.
	You think it's over?
	You think it's over?
	Oh, my goodness.
	You're going to need a detox after this.
	Don't worry.
	I got you covered.
	We're getting better, people.
	Gross.
	Seriously, watch Trudeau's vid.
	Oh, thank you.
	Hold on.
	Maureen, we're simpatico here.
	We're on the same wavelength.
	Watch Trudeau's fourth vid.
	Equally gross.
	Let's play it, shall we?
	It's funny that I should have that on the backdrop.
	Because I'm going to get to it.
	If I can find it.
	Which I will.
	Right here.
	Right here.
	Stop it.
	Stop it, Trudeau, you scum of the earth.
	I hope, Maureen, I hope this is the one you're talking about.
	The tweet says, worlds apart.
	May the fourth be with you.
	And this is the video that Supreme Leader Harry Trudeau puts out.
	this is If this gets claimed for music, I'm going to lose my poo-poo.
	Forget it.
	We're doing it.
	We need the music.
	We need the music.
	Take the chances.
	I'll contest.
	Fair use, biatches.
	This is Justin Trudeau holding up a lightsaber with a family.
	It's totally organic.
	Oh, and now we see Pierre Poilievre.
	It says, Poilievre leads march of convoy protesters beside men with far-right extremist ties.
	This is what he does.
	I'm going to put it on pause there.
	Poilier, the leader of the Conservative Party, leads march of convoy protesters beside men with far-right extremist ties.
	For those of you who don't know who that man is, because he's quite blurry in this pixelated, crap-ass video that Justin Trudeau, crap-ass McGee, put out, that's James Topp.
	James Topp is a military veteran, a hero to many, who...
	Literally walked across the country to protest Justin Trudeau's abuse.
	Look, it's a Saturday morning.
	I wake up.
	I'm just trying to, you know, not be despaired when I wake up first thing in the morning.
	And I have to see Justin Trudeau saying, worlds apart because this phony jackass can go to a paid propagandist house and mess with their kids and exploit their children for politics and pretend he's such a good dad and a good husband.
	Oh, God.
	And play lightsaber, and then contrast him to Pierre Poilier, who he then says is marching with a man with far-right extremist ties.
	James Topp is the furthest thing from an extremist imaginable.
	I watch this, and I literally sit there, angry, cranky, despaired.
	And I'm sitting there, like, the first thing I want to say is, go!
	Are we five minutes in?
	We're 50. Go fuck yourself, Trudeau, is what I wanted to say.
	The first thing I want to say, just go fuck yourself.
	That's it.
	We're done.
	Enjoy your day.
	But that's not good.
	That's not good because, A, it's devoid of substance, and I managed to work it in there anyhow, and it's too easy.
	Then, you know, go with the blackface, and I was like, okay, well, everyone, you know, that's going to be the go-to response for many people.
	I sat there for a good 20 minutes.
	I'm going to read it through all the way.
	And please, what's the word?
	Not entertain me, but...
	What's the word when you...
	Well, you know what the word I'm thinking of.
	I can't remember it.
	You'll kind of see now.
	Not entertain me.
	You know what it is?
	Tolerate it.
	Because I'm going to do it anyhow.
	And I'm going to read it in a nice, calm voice because people on podcasts listening to this tomorrow are going to need to hear it.
	I've been sitting...
	I'm reading my own tweet.
	Viva Frye.
	I have been sitting here for 20 minutes thinking of how to respond to this video.
	It's the most mind-blowing act of desperate, defamatory hate-mongering imaginable.
	There are literally no depths to which this piece of shit POS scumbag Justin Trudeau will not sink.
	My first thought was to tell him to go fuck himself, but that would be too easy and devoid of substance.
	Plus, my dad might be watching.
	He probably is.
	My second thought was to point out the hypocrisy of this blackface-wearing, woman-groping, ethics-breaching, Nazi-worshiping POS, accusing others of, quote, extremism, end quote.
	But he knows this.
	It's the essence of his provocation.
	He is the piece of shit he accuses of the being.
	He knows it.
	He portrays himself as the hero while provoking the victims of his abuse.
	My third thought was to remind him, no, reassure him, that he will go down as the biggest stain in the history of Canada.
	But I don't think he cares.
	He has betrayed Canada and Canadians for his 30 pieces of silver.
	Ultimately, there is only one thing to say.
	Trudeau may never face any meaningful or commensurate form of justice for his persistent, repeated evil conduct.
	But he will live the rest of his lives with the greatest curse imaginable to be so detested and so detestable that he cannot even walk among the people.
	He will live the rest of his days in a prison of his own making, a prison of his own pride, Contrast that to James Topp, a man Trudeau can only aspire to be in his wildest fantasies.
	A brave soul.
	A man who literally walked across the country among his brethren to protest the abuse.
	A man who loves and who is loved.
	A man of whom Trudeau is so rabidly jealous he feels compelled to use his governmental powers to defame and destroy.
	As Leonidas told Effialtes at the end of 300, may you live forever.
	I hope it was worth it.
	You blackface wearing, woman groping, ethics breaching, Nazi worshipping POS.
	Mic drop.
	That made me feel a little better.
	Although it took a lot of time on my phone sitting there.
	Although I was tanning my naked, bald face.
	So, you know, it was value added.
	Okay.
	Now with that said, after having listened to all that rubbish, you might need a detox, people.
	You might need...
	Oh, you might need...
	Hold on.
	I was preparing for this moment the entire time.
	You might need a detox because...
	You know, to cleanse yourself.
	Okay, but whatever.
	This is it.
	TWC.health forward slash Viva.
	On April 23rd, media outlets began the flood headlines of the latest avian flu development.
	The FDA said, quote, listen to the FDA because they've never lied to you before.
	It had detected viral particles of, they're calling this one H5N1 avian influenza in milk purchased at grocery stores.
	While the FDA cautioned that they believe the milk is still safe to drink, others were sounding the alarm.
	According to news reports, Dr. Topol, Founder of the Scripps Research Translation Institute said the finding of viral particles in milk at grocery shelves means the outbreak is probably more widespread than we've known.
	The dissemination to cows is far greater than we have been led to believe, Topol said.
	The FDA assurance that the dairy supply is safe is nice, but it's not based on extensive assessment yet, which they acknowledge and won't engender trust and confidence because it comes in the wake of the USDA mishandling.
	The chief medical board of the wellness company...
	has been closely watching the avian flu H5N1 outbreak in the United States over the last few weeks.
	And while it is far from certain that this will reach the standard of the bird flu result in a pandemic, we know that the medical tyrants are never going to be done with us.
	This is for certain.
	Didn't work the last time.
	They might have overplayed their hands the last time.
	They better make the next one much, much worse.
	With scientists still seeing that the bird flu strain could be 100 times worse than COVID.
	And knowing it's an election year, don't worry.
	You got us covered on the panic with the protests.
	Americans understand that now more than ever, we need to be prepared.
	Do you have what your family needs the next time around?
	Because most doctors won't even consider prescribing ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine, but we've got you covered.
	Keep listening.
	The one of a kind.
	The Prescription Contagion Emergency Kit from the Wellness Company provides you with a carefully selected assortment of effective medications for bird flu, COVID-19, and other respiratory illnesses.
	Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, Z-Pak, Tamiflu, Budosanine.
	I got it, finally.
	Along with the nebulizer so you can...
	Rest easy knowing that you have the emergency meds on hand along with a guidebook for safe use.
	It's a prescription, by the way.
	You've got to fill it out.
	It's not available in Canada.
	So I was going to make a joke like tough nogies, but no.
	It's like when the poo-poo hit the fan in Canada and I started panicking as to whether or not we can get nebulizers for asthma, then you realize maybe it's a national security issue that medications are not made at home.
	Who knows?
	Backed by research experts, backed by research from experts like Dr. Peter Bacala, the wellness company's Contagion Emergency Kit is a must-have.
	Go to TWC.
	.health forward slash Viva.
	Grab your contagion emergency kit.
	You get 30% off with the promo code Viva at checkout.
	So the good folks there.
	Oh, all righty then.
	And the link is in the description.
	Actually, I hope that didn't.
	Did I put the link in the description?
	Now, let me make sure that Barnes got the thing, but I got something to talk about before.
	I want to talk about something before Barnes even gets here.
	Oh, well, it's going to go back to making you wretch again.
	Let me just make sure that I actually put, I know I put the thing in the description.
	Man, what am I talking about?
	I did, I did.
	It's right there.
	Okay, awesome.
	The link is in the description and go check it out.
	First things first, I forgot to introduce myself, for those of you who are new to the channel.
	Viva Frye, David Frye, former Montreal litigator turned current Florida rumbler.
	We start on YouTube, Rumble, and vivabarneslaw.locals.com because we vote with our feet, we vote with our dollar, and we vote with our eyeballs.
	We end on YouTube, go over to Rumble, and once we're done with the entire stream on Rumble, we go over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com for an exclusive afterparty.
	I then post the entire stream the next day, either in its entirety or with highlights, so YouTube gets it, but the leftovers.
	These things, if you want to support the channel, the easiest way is by Crumble Rants over on Rumble.
	And we've got a bunch of them here.
	Britt Cormier says, Thank you, Viva.
	We know when you show up looking like Captain Hook with only one hand.
	Have a picture of the alligator that did it.
	Britt Cormier says, Mark Hamill may not be the great actor.
	However, I know he is a garbage human.
	He was trying to pressure his 37-year-old son's ex-girlfriend to get an abortion because he was not ready to be a father, if I recall correctly.
	Sweets Sweetie Zeus says, Probability no one was sabotaged her ghostwriter or someone stuck in obviously offensive quotes to remove her ability to be Trump's VP.
	No way she's that dumb.
	Dude, I know she's out there defending him.
	I'll talk about the dogs again.
	At least Justin got paid.
	Brandon did it for free ice cream.
	FJB.
	That's from Danny Phantom.
	Let me bring this out here.
	And we've got super chats in here.
	We've got Cheryl Gage says, the alligator, when you were taunting him, says, come down here and talk like that, tough guy.
	I did feel bad afterwards.
	I didn't realize we were quite that annoying to the alligator.
	Observations, you scream like a girl and God surrounds you.
	Thank you very much, seize the day.
	And we've got Hope Hicks, might be an angel.
	Discuss Roman 1219.
	Well, I've got to screen grab that.
	And we go...
	Luke fought the empire.
	Mark joined it.
	Not that I'm not your buddy guy.
	Smirk 808.
	Hamill was also Joker in the 90s cartoon.
	Yeah, I don't remember that at all.
	Canada loves James Topp.
	Lest we forget says Seizes the Day.
	And Therat Theophrastus 3.0.
	One of the things I hate most about Biden is that his tenure has led me to think the presidency can be no different than a mafia dons times as capo.
	Yeah.
	John Allen.
	This is John from over at...
	WTW.
	Bravo, Viva.
	I enjoy listening to you.
	Letting those demons have it.
	Oh, yeah.
	Now, by the way, we're going to address some fake news before we get into the stream tonight.
	And no, I'm not responsible for it because I'm neurotic.
	And if I happen to have...
	Let me make sure Brunt's good.
	You got the link?
	So there was an interesting thing going around.
	Not quasi-viral, but mildly viral.
	On Twitter and other social media.
	I'm not picking on Tracy.
	I don't know who she is.
	People make good faith mistakes or they see something and they tweet it.
	The best part, the Canadian government is going to charge you.
	Charge you $25,000 if you want to leave.
	And then you've got a screen grab.
	Never trust a screen grab unless you verify it yourself.
	Canada proposes $25,000.
	And then this seems to be part of an article in a bid to address the growing emigration crisis.
	The Canadian government under Prime Minister Trudeau is reportedly discussing significant measures to deter citizens from leaving the country.
	According to insider sources, they proposed strategy includes a $25,000 departure penalty, along with a doubling of existing departure tax for those seeking to relocate abroad.
	And allegedly stems to curb emigration.
	Now, having...
	I've been someone who broke residence with Canada.
	I do know this extremely well.
	Give me one second.
	I want to bring up my reply.
	So I know this extremely well because I paid the exit tax.
	And let me tell you, it hurt not quite as much as my colonoscopy, but it hurt metaphorically just as badly.
	And so I was like, oh, this is interesting.
	Let me go check this because I haven't heard it and it seems a little suspicious.
	It's a screen grab, yada yada.
	So I say three things are true.
	One of three things is true.
	It's true, but as of yet, unconfirmed.
	It's untrue disinformation.
	As far as I can tell, this hasn't been confirmed anywhere.
	Or someone posts this as a misunderstanding based on existing law.
	There is a departure tax from Canada.
	Many of you may not know this until you decide to leave or break residence, I should say.
	And that departure tax is a tax on the deemed disposition of certain assets, whether or not you dispose of them as you leave.
	This is from the website.
	This is from the Government of Canada website.
	I took it myself, so I know.
	Departure tax.
	I love it so beautiful.
	A departure tax.
	A death tax.
	A house tax.
	A property tax.
	A utilities tax.
	An income tax.
	A sales tax.
	I mean, holy shit.
	What's left?
	Tax in the air?
	I mean, they're going to tax the rain in Toronto.
	Sorry.
	That's funny, actually.
	Death tax.
	Capital gains tax.
	Income tax.
	Sales tax.
	Departure tax.
	Inheritance tax.
	Utilities tax.
	Departure tax.
	When you leave Canada, you are considered to have sold certain types of property, even if you have not sold them, at fair market value, FMV.
	And to have immediately reacquired them for the same amount.
	This is called a deemed disposition.
	And you may have to report a capital gain, also known as a departure tax.
	Your property could include the following.
	Shares and companies.
	That's more...
	Jewelries!
	Can you imagine this?
	How much jewelries you got?
	You sold it and you bought it and now you're going to pay the capital gains on it.
	Paintings, collections.
	If the fair market value of all the property you owned when you left Canada was more than $25,000, you need to pay a tax.
	And you do.
	And it's not...
	So you can understand where the misunderstanding came from.
	Do I doubt that the government is looking for more taxes?
	Not only do I not doubt it, they're doing it.
	They've just increased the capital gains tax.
	So they're looking for taxes because, you know, eventually you run out of...
	You run out of other people's money to tax.
	And they are absolutely looking for more taxes in Canada because people are absolutely jumping ship, much like they're looking for more taxes in the States.
	So it seems to be fake news based potentially on a bastardization of actual law, but don't repeat it and now you know.
	All right, Barnes is in the backdrop.
	He's either been kidnapped by the FBI or he's on the road.
	Barnes, I'm bringing you in.
	All right, everybody, let's get this show on the road.
	How goes the battle?
	How's the connection?
	I'm on a hot spot.
	You are...
	Well, I was going to say, you're good.
	You're good.
	It's a little tinny, but I know you're using the native mic to the...
	But you're perfect.
	Okay, good.
	I'm actually at my house.
	The problem is...
	There's been a problem for about a month or so where the internet coming into the house, they say, is fine.
	The Wi-Fi network within the house is fine, but it's not connecting the two.
	And it would disappear for like a day at a time.
	And it's just got worse and worse and worse.
	And I have multiple cables coming in.
	I have multiple internet service providers.
	All of them down at the same time.
	And the internet companies can't figure it out.
	So they're sending a service provider.
	They keep telling me, oh, recheck the router.
	It's like, we've done that six times already on the phone.
	So some professionals are coming out tomorrow.
	Only thing I would say, be careful where the mic is so that you don't tap it or crackle it.
	And Robert, do you think this means the government or the FBI are on to you?
	Who knows?
	It's something weird for sure.
	I mean, it's an older house, so maybe somewhere there.
	It's just weird that it would be both.
	There's two different providers coming in, two different wires coming in, and yet both of them keep going down at the same time.
	And then they would both come back on at the same time.
	There's two different routers.
	Both of them going down.
	It can't be the router.
	What's amazing is this is what the IT people tell me every time.
	Oh, it's the router.
	It's like, okay, so both routers keep going down at the exact same time and both coming back on at the exact same time regardless of what I do.
	This happens repeatedly for weeks on end.
	They clearly can't figure it out.
	They finally agreed to send somebody out to try to figure it out.
	I've got to hit the road anyway.
	Some other folks will be here to help take care of it.
	I've got to get up to arguments for the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in Minneapolis on Tuesday.
	I've got a friend's wedding in New Orleans this weekend.
	Then I have another court hearing up in Pennsylvania next week.
	I've gone for about Another week or so, anyway.
	And just got back, you know, last night.
	Oh, dude.
	Well, we're going to talk about your big week last week.
	But Robert, okay, tell us what's on the menu.
	And I'm going to add one on the top that we didn't discuss because it just basically happened on Friday.
	Yeah, we have the Roger Ver indictment, which really is correlated to the Biden administration's attack on Bitcoin and crypto.
	It's also their extension of criminal lawfare.
	And relates to what you were just talking about, the exit tax and departure tax, the U.S. version of it, but also it relates to the current attempt by the Biden administration to basically impose a direct property tax on everybody.
	They want complete control at multiple levels, and they are basically trying to now criminalize not paying tax on income you didn't make while you were a U.S. citizen.
	The allegations against Roger Ver...
	Are dangerous allegations for the government to make against anyone.
	Trying to criminally prosecute and punish someone who's not been a U.S. citizen for money they received or for money they never even received based on the appreciation of an asset they claimed wasn't an asset at the time.
	The government itself did.
	So that has an interesting case and the unconstitutionality of the exit tax, the wealth tax, and this new unrealized capital gains tax.
	The Biden administration is trying to force through.
	I was in court last week in Beaumont, Texas, on behalf of Brooke Jackson against Pfizer.
	It was another almost whole-day hearing, at least a half-day hearing, four or five hours in the courtroom.
	Good attendance, including by members of VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com.
	Some really nice and good people got to interact and meet them as well.
	They got to see the argument.
	We'll be talking about what happened in that argument.
	Pennsylvania, the farm workers that we've been talking about now for two weeks, still in prison.
	It appears that one may be, that they may get out early this week.
	But, you know, one for sure is still in prison.
	There was, you know, the court should have taken immediate action, but the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania has gone rogue.
	And we'll talk about what are the remedies.
	Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
	Maybe we're going to have to start suing some judges in Pennsylvania, some more judges on all the insanity taking place.
	And the latest insanity from the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture concerning Amos Miller.
	They now want to dictate how he serves, quote, garbage.
	Food is garbage.
	How he serves food to his own pigs.
	They have a long litany of rules over this that they have now decided that they get to universally enforce.
	And it might relate to an attempt by the state Pennsylvania Department, other Department of Agriculture across the country, including Michigan, using the bird flu now for a complete surveillance state.
	Not only on food and cattle, requiring them to be electronically tagged and digitally surveilled, but also every human being who comes in contact with any food.
	Got to keep the license plate down, take their ID down, and send it to the government.
	That's what this has always been about.
	People that have been ignoring the connection between these things.
	Are missing the forest for the trees.
	We filed a cert petition to the Supreme Court of the United States on behalf of Owen Schroyer.
	We'll be discussing that case tonight.
	George Kelly, the Arizona rancher who was accused of homicide against the illegal alien smugglers going across his backyard, missed trial.
	And it appears the government will not go after him further.
	We'll discuss briefly that verdict and its public policy ramifications.
	The Trump trial, the case that keeps on giving, not only in New York, and the Hope Hicks testimony and other testimony being excellently followed by Robert Gouvet, as well as Inner City Press Online.
	We will discuss that, plus the not-so-shocking developments in the Florida case.
	The classified documents case concerning selective prosecution, concerning the targeting of President Trump by the Biden administration, the complicity of the DOJ with the FBI, with the National Archives, with the people at the White House, as we said was the case from day one, now more evidence of it in Trump's motion to dismiss that's been unsealed by the court.
	We have the Whitmer-Fednapping case that we talked about from the very beginning, finally reaching the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
	What might be the outcome of those few convictions they obtained through a judge rigging the trial?
	We got the states, as we predicted last week.
	We said states will sue the Biden administration over their attempt to impose radical new reinterpretation of Title IX.
	In fact, that's happened all across the country.
	We'll discuss that.
	And we got some fun cases.
	Might be for the after party.
	We got win the Kentucky Derby, which was this Saturday.
	What happens when you get stuck with a losing bet that should have been a winning bet?
	Can you sue the people that are responsible?
	That case went all the way up to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
	We got Lunchables.
	Turns out the Lunchables aren't so Lunchable.
	While the government is obsessed with what Amos Miller feeds his pigs.
	What they're feeding your kids turns out to be laced with chemicals, lead, metals.
	We'll discuss that class action suit that's been brought.
	The Arizona Supreme Court finally recognized it's not a sanctionable activity to file an election contest.
	Good unanimous decision there.
	And then last but not least, all the newspapers are not happy about AI.
	And Microsoft now heavily involved in open AI.
	Stealing all their work, as they put it.
	Massive, more copyright class action suits as the AI issue continues to work its way through the courts.
	Robert, and now we'll add two quickies to the beginning here because they're popular and people want to talk about them.
	And I want to know what you think.
	I don't know if you've been too busy to pay attention to what happened at Ole Miss University of Mississippi.
	Just saw your brief description of it.
	Well then, okay, so I'll share this.
	We can talk about this now real quick.
	I won't play the entire video, but I think we've got our Covington Catholic 2.0, where there are now accusations of racism abound, doxing, you know, sicking the digital and, I don't know, I want to say maybe real-life lynch mob on this kid.
	This is the video.
	The accusations everybody's seen are racism that the man was doing a racially motivated animal call, whereas if you pay attention here in the background, you still hear chanting and everything.
	I don't know about Ole Miss as a university, Robert.
	People have been saying it's been getting kind of woke and they might react the same way Covington did to Sam and Al.
	What do you know of the university by reputation in terms of what their knee-jerk reaction might be or might not be?
	Yeah, so Ole Miss is located in Oxford, Mississippi, northeast Mississippi.
	It was the centerpiece of a lot of civil rights controversies and people trying to get into school there in the early 1960s.
	It was for a long time, their symbol was the rebel, and it was a little Confederate general.
	They decided sometime, and I forget when, there's something stupid now.
	Obviously, there was some political controversy about always having the Confederate rebel as your symbol in the modern age.
	They changed it to something dumb.
	It was like Chattanooga.
	Chattanooga was the moccasins, and we could have changed it to water moccasin if we didn't want it to be named after the Native American tribe, or it could have done a deal with the Native American tribe like the Seminoles did, Florida State and the Seminole tribe.
	But instead, they changed it to mockingbirds, which was so stupid.
	Robert, I think I just Googled it.
	Did they change it to the...
	Is this a joke, or did they change it to the red solo cup?
	Fourth time...
	I think that's fake.
	I don't think it's that bad.
	Okay, sorry.
	This might be like an onion.
	A lot of people who go to Ole Miss, it's a school predominantly, particularly the fraternity and sorority.
	It's known for its cocktail parties.
	It's the Old South school.
	So you have a lot of old money that goes there.
	Now, you also have had a really robust...
	Intellectual tradition, you know, Faulkner lived in Oxford, Mississippi, near Ole Miss, the great novelist, the great writer.
	So there's a mixture of political trends in Ole Miss.
	I don't know what the current culture of the campus is.
	I mean, historically, like I said, old money planner culture.
	I mean, that's who founded Ole Miss, that's who funded Ole Miss.
	That's why it had a Confederate rebel as a symbol for so long.
	I'm not a big fan of the Old Money South.
	It's a place Amy Coney Barrett would feel very comfortable, put it that way.
	So that's not part of it.
	I went to those prep schools.
	I was a scholarship kid at those schools.
	And that's where they taught me to hate them.
	So you're not going to find tons of empathy or sympathy from me for Ole Miss in general.
	But I don't know about the specific story.
	Okay.
	And I'll...
	I mean, people are saying, look, if he's making a racially motivated animal comparison, then it's racist.
	The only question is, was that what he was doing?
	You can hear the child going, who, who, who.
	You know, the Arsenio Hall crowd always chanted, who, who, who.
	It's a sports thing.
	It's like...
	But the fact is that...
	People didn't play the other angle of this video where she's giving them the finger.
	She's up on the backdrop of a pro-Palestine protest, which has been saying things that might be questionable at best.
	So it just felt like another Covington Catholic people jumping on the bandwagon and going hog wild.
	Robert, another one which you may or may not have been following, but did you hear this?
	Judge Scott McAfee apparently held a fundraiser attended by Roy Barnes and Governor Ken.
	And they raised $40,000 for Scott McAfee.
	Roy Barnes was allegedly Fannie Willis' first choice to be the special prosecutor.
	Roy Barnes also allegedly is representing Fannie Willis in the state legislature investigation.
	I flagged this and I talked to people about this.
	And then they say, Viva, you're getting a little crazy.
	That's not corruption.
	That's just politics.
	Robert, am I wrong in thinking that...
	Knowing this now, it might explain why Scott McAfee didn't boot Fannie Willis from the case, or had he booted her, maybe Roy Barnes wouldn't have been at his house or at the event raising 40 G's.
	That's not an unreasonable inference.
	Welcome to the Georgia legal system.
	And welcome to Governor Kemp and his world.
	That's what we were dealing with.
	And for all those people out there, a critical factor that Trump's lawyers don't always repeat and reiterate.
	The only reason January 6th happened is because the Georgia courts, corruptly, in violation of the law, particularly Bolton County, failed to schedule a hearing within the time required by law to hear Trump's election contest, the only election contest President Trump ever filed.
	And so that's why January 6th happens.
	That's why all these charges have now been brought concerning January 6th.
	...activities related there, too, is the corruption of the Fulton County Courthouse.
	And I do wish the Trump people would repeat this.
	Frankly, they haven't raised it at all, effectively.
	They should be making...
	It's because most of the Trump lawyers, legal team, have no connection to his election contest.
	All those people, a lot of them were indicted.
	It's to remove them from the equation as part of it.
	But I don't think his team has done a good job making themselves familiar, familiarizing themselves with those facts.
	So, some of them, you know, Sadow and others are very good, competent, capable criminal defense lawyers, but none of them have an election law background.
	And I think they would benefit from having someone really knowledgeable about all the facts concerning that part of Trump's team, because the Fulton County Leak Courthouse and the Atlanta legal system and the Georgia state judicial system should be on trial, and they should be reminded for what they've done in these cases.
	That their corruption, their culpability is at issue.
	These judges for too long, as we're seeing with the craziness in the Pennsylvania courts, have gotten way out of hand.
	And as we're seeing in the Trump cases in New York and in D.C., they have for too long been without any kind of limit, without anybody coming in and saying, hold on a second, this is a little crazy.
	So hopefully the Georgia Court of Appeals is paying attention.
	I mean, he's doing it overtly.
	Hey, look, I got Trump's opponents here.
	They're going to raise money for me to make sure I get reelected and keep my position after I made sure that the corrupt prosecutor stayed on the case.
	I mean, you couldn't have it more blunt than this.
	Just like in New York, the judge's daughter raising money on that judge's criminal prosecution of Trump.
	I mean, this is insanity compounded with insanity.
	With that, people, we're going to end on YouTube, bring it on over to Rumble and then on over to Locals.
	Let me just give everybody the link one more time.
	This is the link to Rumble.
	It's on the pinned comment as well.
	And if you want to just skip the step and come over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com, here it is to Locals.
	And we shall...
	Let me just actually get the super chats before we go.
	Hey, Viva, I just want to say that...
	As a Rod Buster, Norm's story about how Rod Buster are freaking idiots was quite possibly the truest statement I ever heard.
	I ever heard.
	And we've got John Allen.
	Well, I messed the last dono up.
	I go by Hunter's Crack Dealer over at Robert Govea, WTW.
	By the way, by the way, the way.
	We all love you and Barnes over there.
	You are both awesome.
	God bless you and keep up the good work.
	Thank you very much.
	And we've got Viva.
	Phase one alligator tag drawing is open now.
	Deadline May 13th.
	Most intense Florida fishing you'll ever do.
	Okay, that's awesome.
	And I might actually screen grab that and just think about that.
	Ending on YouTube, come on over to...
	Why am I...
	See now, ending on YouTube.
	Okay, done.
	No, it's like I do it only every week and I still think I'm screwing up whenever I do it.
	Okay, Robert, let's start with the Bitcoin one because I read the indictment of this guy.
	I never heard of this case before, Roger Ver.
	Okay, so for those who don't know, this guy apparently was, what did they call him?
	I don't want to say the Jesus of Bitcoin.
	Did they call him the Jesus?
	Or a Bitcoin Jesus.
	Bitcoin Jesus.
	I'm going French.
	The Jesus de Bitcoin.
	The Bitcoin Jesus, like the OG of Bitcoin, bought it, promoted it, paid with it.
	And at some point, I don't know what happened, he went to prison on charges for fireworks.
	Something related to fireworks where he spent some time in federal prison, which according to a friend of his, who I listened to his analysis, soured him on America.
	And so he left America, became either a citizen or at the very least a permanent resident of Spain.
	I think it's a citizen where he's been living for the last little while.
	He had, I don't know if the numbers are accurate, but like many, many hundreds of thousands of shares of Bitcoin, not shares, hundreds of thousands of Bitcoin or at least...
	Like billions of dollars worth of Bitcoin, apparently, but held through companies, held personally, whatever.
	And he goes to Spain.
	And I don't even think I understand the mechanism through which he failed to disclose or failed to report his ownership in Bitcoin.
	And he's been indicted and they're seeking his extradition to America.
	I know there's some factual things that just go above my head.
	As to the details, how did it happen that he gets indicted for tax fraud or tax evasion for not declaring ownership of Bitcoin through corporations and what, paying income tax on it?
	Well, there's many problems with the Roger Ver indictment.
	So the first is he hasn't been a U.S. citizen since 2012.
	And they're not alleging that prior to 2012, he owed any tax at all.
	All the tax they're alleging is owed is for things that happened after 2012, when he was not a U.S. citizen.
	So the first striking thing is the U.S. government weaponizing its criminal law enforcement power to prosecute and punish people who are not even U.S. citizens concerning U.S. tax.
	That's problematic aspect number one.
	One of the rarest prosecutions ever witnessed raises all kinds of issues.
	Under the Constitution, under extradition treaties, under international law, you name it.
	And if I can stop you there, because it's not simply as though they're reassessing American corporations or corporations doing business in America.
	They're seeking the extradition of someone who's no longer an American citizen based on act or conduct that occurred while he was no longer an American citizen.
	Allegedly.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	I mean, imagine if some foreign country decided to indict you out of the blue.
	On Canada.
	Let's say I'm no longer a Canadian citizen, and Trudeau's like, I didn't like that tweet, you son of a bitch.
	Exactly, exactly.
	So the second issue is they're trying to get around extradition limitations on tax charges by doing something the Biden administration is doing in many cases, which is the overt, open weaponization of the legal system by extending and expanding criminal jurisdiction in ways it never should have been done in the first place.
	Arguably, the law doesn't allow.
	The Constitution never intended.
	And Congress never assumed would even happen.
	And what took place effectively is that they are charging tax evasion as mail fraud.
	They're setting up a predicate to effectively take tax crimes, which are supposed to only be charged as tax crimes under Title 26 of the Internal Revenue Code.
	And charge them as fraud charges, charge them as mail fraud, wire fraud, RICO fraud.
	They're probably going to even try money laundering, even though there's explicit prohibitions on this.
	And forever, the IRS and the DOJ convinced the courts not to limit the law explicitly by saying, well, we would never prosecute this.
	We would never prosecute tax charges as fraud or mail fraud.
	But I mean, what happens when, if you ever use the phone and you ever use the internet, Now the federal government says they can indict you on something that they call fraud, which can be an opinion they don't like.
	Remember, they consider misinformation a form of fraud.
	This is extremely dangerous.
	This is weaponizing the criminal justice process to go after critics and dissidents of the American financial and political systems in ways that directly violate the intention of both the mail fraud laws, the RICO laws, and the tax laws.
	The third problem is Using the exit tax at all as a basis of criminal prosecution.
	The exit tax is a property tax, which means it has to be apportioned amongst the states and it has to be uniform.
	It's not.
	That means it's unconstitutional.
	End of story.
	The only tax that is allowed in the United States that is a direct tax, which is what an income tax is.
	It has to meet the definition of income under the 16th Amendment the time it was passed in 1913.
	The Supreme Court of the United States says that income is limited to what a dissenting Supreme Court justice said it was in the mid-1890s when they struck down the first income tax as unconstitutional for failure of apportionment and uniformity.
	And it said income is gain severed from the source.
	So it can't be a tax on property.
	It can't be a tax on you as a person.
	And for those folks that don't know our history, the two most hated taxes in America were, and throughout, frankly, the Western world, were the head tax.
	In other words, you exist, so you've got to pay me money.
	You've got to pay the Lord $10 a head, per capita tax, if you will, and tax on your property that you needed to survive or to economically develop.
	Income was supposed to be separate.
	It was the gain severed from the source, the property or the labor.
	The Congress has deliberately played games with this by never defining the word income.
	After the Supreme Court issued its decision in 1916, it rewrote the income tax laws, and every subsequent income tax law says in lieu of the Revenue Act of 1916, not the Revenue Act of 1913, because they wanted to stay flexible as to what the definition of income was.
	The so-called tax protester movement originated on a very legitimate complaint.
	That's why the media goes to great lengths to demonize and caricature them and to make fun of them.
	Oh, sovereign citizens.
	I'll be frank, those people know a lot more about the law than many of our so-called lawyers do and many of our so-called judges do and many of our so-called prosecutors do.
	The word income is not defined in the income tax, which is insane.
	That's from very conventional tax lawyer experts before the Supreme Court of the United States in the last decade.
	They said the definition of income is, quote, self-referential and circular.
	Why?
	Because they're trying to get around this constitutional constraint.
	They want to tax you for existing.
	The IRS said so in the 1930s.
	They said people shouldn't be upset at what we tax.
	They should be pleased at what we don't tax because we should tax people for the labor they do in their own homes.
	If you do any kind of physical work that could be done by somebody else, the government wants to tax it.
	You cook yourself a meal, now you owe a tax, as if you were the chef, as if you paid a chef to do it.
	You cleaned your own clothes, you owe the tax, just as if you paid a maid to do it.
	You clean your house, same dynamic.
	That's what they believe, because it's the ultimate form of control, is tax.
	Taxation is about control.
	It's never been about roads and bridges and schools and all the dumb stuff they try to tell you.
	We had roads and bridges and schools, and we didn't have an income tax.
	Tax, as the Federal Reserve people have said over the years, as other high-ranking professionals have said over the years and political actors, is about control.
	It's about surveillance.
	It's about control over you.
	And the issue here is that when you decide...
	First of all, the U.S. government's unique in that it claims...
	You are a U.S. citizen, even if you don't.
	That's what's incredible.
	So if you say, no, I'm not a U.S. citizen, they don't care.
	Oh, yeah, you are.
	You didn't know you were.
	They want that because they want the power over you everywhere.
	The U.S. government is one of the only governments in the world that taxes people based solely on their citizenship.
	In other words, most countries around the world tax you based on whether you made money in their country.
	Not the U.S. The U.S. taxes you based on what label they stick on your head.
	And so in order to formally and officially renounce your citizenship, you have to go through an expatriation process.
	The government decided when they saw a bunch of people started doing this in the early 2000s, when some people started realizing, hmm, America may not be the safest place to be long term.
	Maybe I should have some backup options.
	The government decided, well, we're going to impose an...
	Exit tax on you.
	Problem is, that's a tax on property.
	It's not a tax on income.
	That's a tax on property.
	Now, it has always been, in my view, unconstitutional.
	You can find other legal scholars that have said this.
	I've negotiated exit tax issues for multiple clients.
	And one of the ways in which we achieve a very satisfactory mutual resolution, what Roger Ver probably should have got a lot of people to sign on to, but that's another story for another day, It's unconstitutional.
	So to say, look, if you want to litigate this, if you want to say my client owes more money, okay, we're going to challenge the constitutionality, and you and I both know it ain't constitutional.
	But here they've taken it to a whole new level.
	They're now saying that, because what the exit tax is, it says whatever your property is, we're going to tax it as if you sold it on the day you expatriated from the country.
	But you didn't sell it, did you?
	So that's what's called a Property tax.
	It's based on legal fiction.
	Call it government fantasy.
	Call it lie.
	Call it government fraud, because that's what it is.
	And so they want to pretend he sold his Bitcoin on the day he exited when he didn't sell his Bitcoin.
	So the issue is the unconstitutionality exit tax.
	Now they're trying to put somebody in prison for not paying what they think for their unconstitutionally imposed tax.
	Didn't disclose certain information to his accountants who then filed his whatever returns.
	That's where I didn't understand what the issue was.
	I know what that...
	I mean, here's what likely happened.
	He probably hired your big high-end corporate types or people like that.
	Those people, as soon as the IRS knocks on their door, run for cover.
	And the first thing they do is they blame you, the client.
	Because they don't want to get indicted.
	Because in the tax world, there's unique criminal defense.
	We don't put people in prison.
	We're not supposed to.
	For debt or dissent.
	So just owing money to the government can't be a crime.
	Disagreeing with the government about the meaning of the laws can't be a crime.
	In addition, due to the extraordinary and inordinate complexity of America's tax laws, which are just preposterous and ridiculous, no ordinary person could figure it out.
	Most of the people who are tax law experts become insane sooner or later.
	The judges have made jokes about this from the stand.
	You have what's called a reliance defense.
	If you gave your information to an accountant or attorney or tax expert or someone you believed was, and they're the ones who filled out the tax return information, you cannot be criminally prosecuted.
	So to get around this, people make two mistakes.
	First, they hire an accountant that's not hired under the attorney.
	If an accountant's hired under the attorney, it's called a coval privilege.
	From a case out of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
	You can't get that accountant's records.
	So when I do any kind of tax review work for a client, I hire an accountant under the attorney-client privilege.
	They're never getting those records.
	They're never seeing those records.
	Good luck with that.
	The second mistake is they tend to hire institutional people, some of your big corporate names, that crowd.
	Those people, the moment you're put under pressure, capitulate and sell you out and claim you didn't tell them things often that you did tell them.
	But they made sure you never put it in writing so you can't prove it.
	My guess is that these accountants and attorneys are lying and that they are to cover themselves in order to try to go after Verne.
	So he probably has a robust reliance defense, probably has a robust good faith defense.
	He clearly has a constitutional defense that this is a patently unconstitutional tax because they're taxing him for things when he was no longer a citizen.
	So they don't have the basis to impose a tax in the first place.
	And because they're imposing a property tax, that's what the exit tax is.
	And that doesn't even get to the last issue, which is during this time period from 2012 to 2020, the U.S. government couldn't decide what Bitcoin was.
	Was it a commodity?
	Is it a currency?
	Is it an asset?
	Is it speculative like trading cards?
	What is it?
	And they kept changing their mind as it was convenient for the government.
	And if you own Bitcoin, you had no idea what your tax responsibility was.
	So the idea you're going to put somebody in prison because you think they misinterpreted how Bitcoin was supposed to be taxed is itself insane.
	But it tells you where they're going.
	They want a property tax.
	They want a complete control grid.
	And they want to go after Bitcoin.
	So Bitcoin and folks cannot be independent.
	It's not a coincidence.
	They're going after them through the SEC.
	They're going after them through the CFTC.
	Every other three-letter agency we have, which basically is a four-letter word in the kind of lexicon you're not supposed to use in front of children.
	And now through the IRS.
	And so I think Roger Ver has a...
	I mean, remember they went for John McAfee on these grounds.
	And then McAfee was also subject to an expedition proceeding in Spain.
	And what happened to him?
	He got Epstein.
	So I hope Ver gets a robust defense.
	And they need to start raising the decision in the court of public opinion and the court of law.
	Because some of these underlying issues, constitutionality, illegality, extraterritorial jurisdictional authority, can be challenged in the extradition proceedings in Spain.
	So they should do both, a parallel challenge in Spain and the United States.
	I've dealt with this for Larry Williams and other clients over the years.
	There's many more robust defenses than they realize.
	But Spain, by the way, is not a safe place to be, just in case anyone hasn't figured that out yet.
	I was going to ask about the extradition and then touch on the McAfee.
	But the idea that they would tax you as though you disposed of your assets.
	So let's just take a round number.
	That's what the Biden unrealized capital gain tax is, right?
	If your asset goes up, they're going to tax you on it, even if you'd made no income from it, even if you never sold it.
	That's a property tax.
	Well, I'm just trying to, like, logistically, how would it conceptually work?
	You have a billion dollars in Bitcoin.
	They say, okay, well, now you've deemed disposition capital.
	Let's just say it's $250 million.
	You need to get that cash to pay that amount.
	So then you're actually going to have to dispose of the asset.
	In which case, you'll probably be, I mean, you'll have your write-offs or your, whatever it's called, the washes if you pay tax in one country and not another.
	But it basically is, I mean, it's presumed income that compels liquidation of assets as though...
	People have the cash sitting around to pay for whatever the unrealized, presumed deemed disposition capital gains would be.
	I guess I'm just complaining.
	I'm not actually asking a question there.
	Correct.
	Oh, it's a pragmatic, practical disaster.
	All right.
	Well, interesting.
	We had talked about it earlier, but I don't know what the latest developments are on the proposal to tax unrealized capital gains in the States.
	Has that gone somewhere different?
	The Biden administration is trying to push it through now.
	And really what they're doing, like we're seeing in Title IX, like we're seeing with student loans, like we're seeing in the Trump cases, like we're seeing in the January 6th cases, is that it's the Biden administration using the executive branch, everything about weaponizing the legal system, to just short-circuit the legislative process, short-circuit the American public's input, short-circuit the constitutional constraints on government.
	And they get away with it because the courts are culpable and complicit.
	And not holding them to account.
	And because here they're trying to do an unrealized tax through criminal punishment and prosecution.
	Robert, before we get into the topic that everybody wants to talk about, we have 17,200 people watching on Rumble, and there's only 985 thumbs up.
	Now, if you're not yet subscribed, subscribe, and if you haven't hit the thumbs up, hit it.
	I know it does something magical with the algorithm, but I wanted to do, before we get into the topic that everyone's just, you know...
	It's on everybody's radar because it's just wild and insane.
	The New York prosecution of Trump.
	I'll just read a few super chats.
	End the income and property taxes now because the government needs to learn to tighten its belt and learn to make do with less.
	Arkansas crime attorney.
	How goes the battle?
	Sir, just got a huge...
	Increase $300 a month to $1,500 a month property tax on Airbnb property I own in Branson, Missouri.
	I think they've done it, or they're proposing it, or they're going to do an increase on capital gains in Canada, so they're going to tax you not on 50% of your capital gains, but on 66%.
	Get the blood from the turnip people.
	Rufus, when my dad took me fishing, it was 4 a.m. in the Bay of Fundy to Gill Net Herring.
	Wow, that's amazing.
	Living in Gatineau now.
	Fantastic.
	Didn't Spain...
	Oh, that was from Ruffus.
	Didn't Spain pick up John McAfee, too?
	Yep, we did that.
	This guy is toast, just like John.
	Pinochet's helicopter tours.
	Watched Flynn documentary today.
	Can't believe they let Amazon air it, says Freddy65.
	You know what?
	I'm going to read that.
	Hello.
	Would a legit second-term Trump have the legal authority to tear down the taxpayer-funded Great Wall of Biden around Beijing-Biden-Delaware summer home?
	DD-2225.
	Robert, do you know what that's about?
	Oh, have we lost Robert?
	I do not.
	Oh, okay, fine.
	I thought you froze for a second.
	Can you hear me?
	Yeah, you're good.
	You're good.
	The bird flu is the New World Order, says a Holfer, Arkansas crime attorney.
	What is the Eighth Circuit case in Minnesota?
	I have been there several times.
	Pay 30 bucks to leave La Madeleine.
	Oh, I talked about that last week, E. Harris.
	And then we got Pennsylvania government trying to keep Barnes off the webs.
	Okay, what we're going to do now, before we get into Pennsylvania, before we get into anything, the Trump trial.
	Hope Hicks testified.
	Michael Cohen has been humiliated multiple times, and he hasn't even taken the stand yet.
	Robert, I mean, the thing is this.
	They're going to drag this trial out so that people get fatigued about it, and so that when there's a conviction, because I think there will be a conviction despite all of this, people are not going to have paid attention to it and then say, oh, well, I guess he was guilty.
	It's like, we're day 11 now, so you had five days or four days of jury selection.
	Now they started the trial.
	Prosecution is up on their witnesses.
	I mean, it's going nowhere except for not defaming character, but impugning character.
	They want that Access Hollywood tape in.
	They want Trump to be like the pussy-grabbing demon that they know that Joe Biden is.
	But they had Hope Hicks, and this was the news of the week.
	Hope Hicks took the stand on Friday and basically gave...
	I mean, apparently, I didn't listen to MSNBC's coverage.
	They say her testimony was damning for Trump.
	I did as best I could.
	I was following Inner City Press' tweets.
	I was picking Robert Gouveia's brain and listening to what he had to say about it.
	And I agree with Gouveia that it was humiliating to Michael Cohen.
	I mean, the guy looks like an unhinged, scorned woman who didn't get the position that he was expecting in a Trump cabinet.
	He was an idiot, a buffoon, that nobody wanted to deal with him.
	Apparently, some of these people were getting paid extra.
	To deal with Michael Cohen on the phone.
	They call him the fixer because, as Hope Hicks said, he breaks shit before he fixes it and then charges you to fix the stuff that he broke.
	And Hope Hicks comes up and says, yeah, look, he was interested in getting this story out because it was going to impact Melania negatively.
	He even asked, I think he asked Hope to make sure that the newspaper doesn't get delivered to his apartment so that Melania doesn't see what's going on in the news.
	And that she had nothing to do whatsoever with the Financial records as relates to the hush money settlement payment that now feels abundantly clear was Michael Cohen, if not extorting, at the very least, creating problems so that he could build to solve by buying the rights to a story or paying off a mouth that they didn't believe in the first place.
	What's your take on it in as much as you've been able to follow it given the week that you had?
	Yeah, I mean, it was interesting.
	What's the Scott Adams phrase?
	Two films in the same theater?
	Two screens.
	The liberals.
	Sorry, there's actually a delay now, so I'm going to wait a lot before letting you go.
	Go for it.
	Oh, no, go ahead.
	You're explaining to Scott Adams what the reference was.
	It's one screen, two films.
	But, Robert, I think there's like a good four-second delay between us now.
	So, you go, say it, and I'll shut my mouth.
	Okay, yeah.
	So, basically, the Democratic takeaway was that Hope Hicks damaged the Trump case, whereas most people who observed it thought it was the opposite.
	But I think what you have is a very Democratic biased jury pool.
	So, I think the fact that the truth is fully coming out, that Michael Cohen was a cheap extortionist.
	Who was often extorting his own client while joining in the extortion of his own client, supposedly paying off efforts by other parties.
	And that, you know, he was delusional, thought he was going to be an attorney general and going to have all this power, was committing crimes all the time, and that the case is completely bogus.
	I think an honest, objective, third-party view, that would be what they conclude.
	It's just you can't assume that a New York jury pool like this with this judge...
	We'll conclude that, unfortunately.
	It's much like the bogus rape case.
	We're seeing much like the bogus fraud case.
	These cases are laughably bad when you see them in court.
	And I think what's interesting is now you see why the judge didn't want this case to be video broadcast.
	Because the trial is so weak, so humiliating and embarrassing that they don't want the American people to know what a complete show trial this is.
	And so they're hoping and relying upon that gatekeeper control and public confidence in the legal system that a verdict means something bad about Trump, even though increasingly there's almost nobody left other than people that hate Trump who believe these trials anymore.
	I think we might be a bit faster connection now, but when I was a kid and I was living in France and I would talk to my mother back in the day of a cable telephone.
	And we would always do the test where I would say Apple and then she would say Apple as soon as she heard Apple to see what the delay was for words to go from Paris to Montreal, back to Paris.
	We'll get it on the response to this, Robert.
	The judge has fined him, Trump, $9,000 for repeated violations.
	The most bogus contempt violations you can imagine.
	Do you think Merchant is going to put him in jail or are they going to be content with the W on paper that they'll just keep fining him and they won't dare actually try to imprison him?
	I can't see them being so crazy that they try to imprison him.
	I think their goal has been to create a judicial imprimatur of Trump bad.
	Get verdicts that say bad things about him, whether it's civil verdicts or criminal verdicts.
	Try to fine him and freeze his assets as much as can be done.
	Issue gag orders to try to restrict and restrain his speech.
	Issue seizure orders or liens or levies.
	That preclude his access to full financial remedy and relief.
	So I think that's what you're going to see.
	I think actually putting him in Rikers, what they recognize would politically backfire in ways that even they are probably not willing to do.
	But you never know because they're clearly nuts.
	Speaking of Rikers, a little bit of a segue between our next topic, which is going to be your week in Pennsylvania and Texas.
	I got a call on...
	I want to say Friday from Rikers.
	And it's not often anybody gets a call from Rikers.
	And it was Dexter Taylor, the man who I interviewed three weeks ago, who was arrested on having an arsenal of ghost guns in his New York apartment.
	We did a podcast when he was standing trial.
	He was convicted and hauled off to Rikers swiftly, like right after conviction.
	He's requested release pending appeal.
	He had a hearing before a single panel judge or whatever it is, administrator, that Determines whether or not bail should be granted pending appeal.
	And he wanted me to relate to the world that he's doing well.
	He's doing prayers, push-ups, and playing chess.
	So three Ps.
	And he sounded actually surprisingly upbeat.
	And he wanted me to get the word out there and get the word out that people should pay attention to his case.
	I don't know that he's going to be doing interviews anytime soon, but I put out a short vlog and I wanted to, now that we have the big audience, let everybody know he's doing well.
	Seems very upbeat.
	He seems to be in a good section of Rikers, so not young, violent offenders, but middle-aged men who seem less violent.
	And he's building spirit, and he's building his brain, and he's building his body.
	So there's that.
	Robert, speaking of people being locked up arguably unconstitutionally, your Pennsylvania case, the one involving Ethan Wentworth?
	And rusty hair.
	Two Pennsylvania either farmers or technicians who operate a company called Noble LLC.
	They do ultrasounds on cows.
	And they apparently were hauled off based on a warrant from the Bureau of Pennsylvania something occupational affairs.
	Whisked off and hauled off to jail on the basis of criminal content for not paying a fine for 30 days.
	You get involved in the file.
	You issue a writ of habeas corpus that you present to a judge on Monday, which is show me the body and release the bodies because this is totally outlandish, unconstitutional.
	So, yeah, before the Commonwealth Court...
	Because once we got into these secret files, these Star Chamber-like proceedings that the Commonwealth Court and the state of Pennsylvania engage in, where they're issuing secret arrest warrants, secret orders of imprisonment, secret seizure orders, secret subpoena orders, you name it.
	The state of Pennsylvania acknowledges at the hearing that there's absolutely no constitutional basis for criminal contempt.
	There's no statutory basis for criminal contempt.
	None of the legal process was followed for criminal contempt.
	So they said, Judge, just please pretend this is civil contempt.
	And Pennsylvania law, like federal law that applies in Pennsylvania, has been very consistent for a very long time.
	It is not civil contempt unless you have the keys to your own jail cell.
	A civil contempt order is conditional, and it's something that you have the voluntary means, the volitional means, of ending at any time.
	Whether it's a fine or imprisonment or anything else.
	In addition, they disfavor imprisonment as a mechanism or method of civil contempt at any time in Pennsylvania and under federal law.
	And they don't dispute that at the hearing.
	Judge doesn't dispute that at the hearing.
	So what does the judge do?
	When he got his hand caught in the cookie jar issuing illegal orders of imprisonment, he's a civil judge.
	He's not a criminal judge.
	The Commonwealth Court has no criminal jurisdiction whatsoever.
	It never has.
	So he's issuing an order imprisoning someone that's patently unlawful, got caught doing so, and what is his reaction?
	He just issues like a one-paragraph response.
	Nah, I don't care.
	I'm going to leave him in prison.
	That's how rogue the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court has become.
	The very court charged with being the guardian of liberty and the supervisor and restrainer of governmental agencies in the state.
	Has become the accomplice of the most corrupt portions of the state of Pennsylvania's bureaucracy.
	An enabler, an enforcer of that corruption.
	Here you have a judge issuing a patently unconstitutional, illegal order, has no defense for himself at the oral argument, nor does the state, and yet just refuses to admit it or acknowledge it, and just double down on an illegal imprisonment order, a kidnapping order.
	A malicious prosecution false imprisonment tort.
	And he never even had personal jurisdiction over either one of them.
	Neither one has ever been named a party to the case.
	Neither one has ever been served in the case as individual parties in the case.
	All they had was a subpoena concerning a corporate entity that had not produced documents, and that's it.
	And based on that, he's issuing orders of imprisonment.
	That have no conditions attached whatsoever, no means of release whatsoever, did so without any hearing, without any trial, without any charge, without any arrest, a legitimately criminal probable cause arrest, or anything like it.
	I mean, there's people who are responding to me on the internet, you're making this up.
	I'm sure there's a criminal charge.
	No, they all admit now.
	The state admits there's never been a criminal charge.
	The court admits there's never been a criminal charge.
	They're just lying and pretending this is civil contempt.
	It doesn't.
	And the question is, will the Pennsylvania Supreme Court get off its butt and fix this nightmare, or do I have to start suing judges for somebody in Pennsylvania to wake up?
	The only sad thing is, guess what happens when you sue?
	You're back in front of Pennsylvania judges!
	And it's clear Pennsylvania judges like to cover up for other Pennsylvania judges.
	Let me ask you this question, because people might not understand this.
	You're the lawyer in the file now.
	Your understanding, or the actual position of the court, is that the companies didn't reply to subpoenas of requesting documents, so they locked up the executives on the basis of contempt, even though they were not the ones who were summoned by the subpoenas.
	It was the corporations, and they're the executives, that's fine.
	They were not named party.
	They were never the named parties in the case.
	They were never individually served anything in the case.
	They were never given notice of anything individually in the case.
	And there's a dispute within the judicial system as to whether or not, if a court doesn't even have personal jurisdiction, can they issue any order restraining that person's liberty or property?
	Some courts say that means you have no immunity anymore as a judge.
	Because you know if you don't have jurisdiction over the person, by golly, you can't be issuing orders of imprisonment of them.
	Other courts say, nah, we're judges.
	We've got to cover for each other.
	And you know what case they cite as the foundation of judicial immunity in America?
	They cite a case from all the way back in Old England, and when you research it, guess what chamber they're citing?
	They're citing the Star Chamber.
	The Star Chamber is the basis of judicial immunity in America.
	Constitutional provisions that were meant to end the Star Chamber are now being used by corrupt courts to cover up for other corrupt courts.
	And when you compound this with the other Pennsylvania case where you have judges trying to put people in jail or leading prosecutions, initiating and instigating prosecutions because they exposed judicial corruption in their very courtroom for recording proceedings.
	And then you see in New York, where they're doing everything possible to prohibit good logic and Joan Ehrman from getting a fair and full hearing on his gag order challenge against President Trump, you're seeing that the judicial system itself is becoming a laughingstock of the world.
	We were supposed to be the beacon of the world for integrity and impartiality and independence.
	Instead, we're the laughingstock.
	We make Lorentia Berea look like a beacon of impartiality by comparison.
	The legendary Soviet spy who said, show me the man and I'll find you the crime.
	And that relates to our next case, which is Trump's motion to dismiss his Florida case, because what they've been able to prove is that Trump's cases have all been show me the man and I'll find you the crime.
	The embarrassing part is they keep not finding the crime and they keep exposing themselves in the very crime.
	Not only did Biden commit the crime and Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton and everybody else, That they're accusing Trump of, but especially Joe Biden, while he was senator and vice president.
	But it turns out the prosecutor apparently committed the crime.
	Prosecuting Trump for mishandling classified documents just admitted to the court this week.
	He mishandled classified documents in the case!
	You're going to have to flesh that one out because I've been following Julie Kelly, but tangentially.
	But Robert, before we do that, I'm going to say this.
	You say Apple when you hear me say Apple.
	Apple.
	Apple.
	It's a full four-second delay, so that's wild.
	All right, so as to not talk over each other, and because I haven't been following it fully, Julie Kelly has been reporting on this.
	It's amazing.
	I'll get her Twitter handle in a second.
	Look, I understand what I'm reading on Diagonal, like, you know, skimming over it.
	What the hell did Jack Smith basically admit to this week?
	Or last week?
	So what Jack Smith admitted to...
	Is that he and his office, contrary to what they had promised the court, contrary to what the law required, was mishandle the classified documents they seized from President Trump.
	So they're prosecuting Trump for mishandling and misstoring classified documents, and the prosecutorial team who did it mishandled those exact same documents and lied to the court about it and got caught.
	So it's just, it's a laughingstock of a case.
	The other things that came out is it detailed that the archivists, the people involved in the National Archives, people at the White House, people at the Department of Justice, people at the FBI, have been conspiring for years to set up Trump concerning the documents.
	They were often in control of how the chain of documents were removed, how they were moved, the conditions on which they were moved.
	It was all one big fat entrapment.
	And so Trump has moved to dismiss on malicious prosecution, selective prosecution, and other governmental misconduct.
	Outlined that what you have to have for selective prosecution is similarly situated people were not prosecuted.
	He's got tons of those.
	That happens everywhere.
	I can think of four offhand.
	Bill Clinton, Joe Biden.
	Do I want to say Hunter Biden?
	Maybe not throw a Hunter.
	That's not similarly Obama.
	And I don't know.
	Let's just throw in George W. Bush.
	And of course...
	Hillary Clinton.
	Damn it.
	I forgot Hillary Clinton.
	How stupid of me.
	But Robert, there's no chance Eileen Cannon tosses this.
	I mean, she'll be impeached, disbarred, and I don't know what the hell the mob would do to her if she actually grants what ought to be granted here.
	That's the question.
	Does she have the guts to do what the law says she should have done and what all the courts should have done, which is dismiss her selective prosecution, malicious prosecution?
	Everything about the Trump prosecutions violates and offends our basic constitutional liberties at every level, whether it's a state or federal case under both state and federal constitution as is applicable to each one.
	If she is going to keep her oath and hold up the integrity of the judicial branch, she will dismiss.
	But you're right.
	Most judges don't have the courage to stand up to corrupt government actors.
	And it's discouraging.
	To the American people to see judges more often complicit and culpable in government corruption than exposing it and disciplining it and preventing it and punishing it.
	Robert, before we get on to the next one, which is going to be what you were doing in Beaumont, Texas, I want to...
	Biltong, I thought it was just going to be a standard super rumble rant this week.
	Banana your fake news, CNN said, so says iHall86.
	King of Biltong.
	Says, good evening from Anton's Meat and Eat.
	Free shipping for your Biltong using code VIVA on www.biltongusa.com and antonusa.com.
	Mrs. Biltong had our fourth kid today at 11.35 p.m.
	World Meat Boy.
	Cheers.
	Congratulations, Anton.
	I could go for a fourth child.
	Maybe I'll see what the missus is doing tonight.
	All right, all right, all right.
	T.I. Robert.
	What happened in Texas?
	Beaumont, you're there for the Pfizer, Brooke Jackson, the state trying to intervene to kill the case because they don't want people investigating them.
	They prefer to say, we've taken over and shut it down, boys.
	What happened?
	You're pleading this.
	How did it go?
	What happened?
	What do you think happens next?
	Yeah, so for those that don't know the background of the case, Brooke Jackson is the whistleblower who exposed...
	Corruption and fraud in the COVID vaccine case from the very inception in September of 2020 to the Food and Drug Administration and other officials.
	She brought what's called a KETAM or False Claims Act claim to the attention of the Justice Department under Bill Barr in October of 2020 and the Trump administration under the FDA.
	It is not clear that Trump was ever told about this during this time period.
	It is not clear the Defense Department was ever told about this during this time period.
	The U.S. government then sealed the case, which they have the legal power to do, on the grounds that they're conducting a very thorough and important investigation.
	And they do that for a year.
	That the uptake of this vaccine continues to expand now to young children and that this is a dangerous vaccine that has not been adequately tested clinically within the guidelines.
	She's someone who spent the better part of two decades only doing this work.
	She's someone who believes in medicine and believes in science and believes in the clinical testing methods.
	And what she saw at Pfizer in their clinical testing trials was an embarrassment.
	It was a complete joke.
	I mean, basic things.
	They weren't blinding people correctly.
	They weren't doing the temperature on the vaccines correctly.
	They weren't monitoring or reporting adverse events correctly.
	People's private medical information was plastered on the walls.
	Needles were sticking out of bags.
	I mean, it was an utter disgrace and debacle.
	So there was nothing you could assess as safe and effective based on that clinical survey from what she saw at multiple clinical test trial locations and what high-ranking officials there had confirmed to her was systemic.
	Across all the clinical testing places.
	It included money being paid under the table, friends and family being brought in in a way that violated all the clinical guidelines, you name it.
	As soon as she was there, she was subject to all kinds of questionable activities by Pfizer and its affiliates and associates, including what would be illicit surveillance and libel campaigns and smear campaigns.
	Went for it anyway.
	And then the government...
	What they were really doing was not investigating.
	They were hiding the corruption for as long as possible so they could force as many people to take the drug as possible because Big Pharma and Joe Biden are in bed together.
	So she hired me.
	We got the case unsealed, got the information public.
	That led to a radical reduction in the number of people who were taking the vaccine.
	Brooke Jackson's actions likely saved millions of lives, but there are millions of other lives that were harmed that she wasn't able to save due to the corruption and culpability of the Big Pharma, and it appeared at various levels, the Justice Department.
	So we brought this action, and the case, we had filed a complaint, judge had dismissed part of it, allowed a part of it to be amended.
	We amended that part, brought additional legal theories before the court, and on the eve of a hearing on Pfizer's motion to dismiss, the U.S. Justice Department suddenly intervened and demanded the judge dismiss the case as well.
	Let me stop you there.
	They let you carry this case for how long and at what cost before they then finally decide to intervene to kill the case?
	Years.
	For years.
	So, you know, I've been on the case, I think, I'll go back more than two years now.
	And we've spent seven figures in terms of legal time and investigative time on the case.
	And not compensated at all.
	So that gives you an idea.
	And the government never said that, in fact, in their motion to dismiss, they didn't cite any factual grounds in terms of questioning the complaint.
	No one said anything under penalty of perjury.
	Not a single official at the FDA, the DOD, the White House, the Justice Department.
	Nobody would say anything under penalty of perjury as to any questions they had with the factual or empirical basis of the suit.
	And instead, what they said is, look, the official position of the Biden administration is that the COVID vaccine is good.
	So we can't allow any lawsuit to go forward that will expose the COVID vaccine.
	It's not good.
	Which is preposterous.
	And the point of the KETAM claims allowing individuals to pursue it, Congress deliberately chose not to give exclusive power to the U.S. government officials while U.S. officials might be embarrassed by the exposure of the fraud.
	They might also be culpable.
	They also might be complicit, not just embarrassed in the fraud.
	That's why it's up to the American people to vindicate the interest of the American people.
	So our argument was that this extraordinary motion to dismiss at this last minute violated her right to petition and the American people's right to remedy under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, offended basic principles of due process and equal protection of law, and was contrary to the intention of both the good cause requirements for intervention under the federal rules of civil procedure and under the Key Tam and False Claims Act.
	And we had the hearing.
	They had a dozen lawyers.
	On their side, a lot of good folks came out to the hearing, participate in the hearing, to observe the hearing.
	The folks from our VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com board, I got a time to chat with them both before and after court, which was always great.
	Nice people, good people, right people doing righteous work.
	And my closing, Warner Mendenhall made excellent arguments.
	Jeremy Friedman.
	Both my co-counsel showed how the law was clearly on our side.
	And my conclusion was that this case about the American people in Brook Jackson, one of the things the judge did is the judge thought there could be other remedies.
	He's like, well, if this vaccine turns out to be dangerous, if it turns out to be ineffective, if the FDA's decision ought to be wrong about labeling and marketing and authorizing its labeling and marketing under its emergency powers, Then why can't you sue the FDA under those circumstances?
	Why can't you sue Pfizer under those circumstances?
	The judge was unaware that, in fact, you can't.
	As I got up and finished my clothes, the government's talking about suing the FDA.
	I've sued the FDA on this exact issue.
	And you know what the FDA says?
	And the courts go along with them?
	No standing.
	You can't sue them.
	Nobody has any right to challenge the FDA.
	We're bringing that up for the Supreme Court of the United States in a cert petition we filed last week.
	And they say, sue Pfizer.
	No, Pfizer's immune.
	Can't sue Pfizer either.
	The only court where there can be any account for what happened, any responsibility for what happened, any truth to what happened, is the Brooke Jackson case.
	It is the sole mechanism and means of remedy in the United States court concerning the fraud about this vaccine.
	And it's like what we all know is they promised to deliver a safe, effective vaccine for the prevention of COVID-19.
	What they delivered was dangerous, ineffective, not a vaccine, and never prevented COVID-19.
	They lied.
	Pfizer lied.
	People died.
	Are the courtrooms closed or not?
	And that's what we're going to find out from the court.
	Robert, I have to pull something up because people are going to sort of forget about this.
	The work that Brooke Jackson did and...
	The work that people like Hochul did.
	Listen to this, people.
	I had to go find this because I knew that I was...
	Oh, no.
	Hold on.
	That's not the right one.
	I knew that I was outraged at the time of this.
	In this case, they literally recommended that everyone six months and older should get a shot.
	You do not want your baby, your young child to have to go to the hospital.
	So don't wait on this.
	Six months is the age.
	Sounds young, but children get shots from birth.
	They can do it.
	I encourage everyone, don't let your baby be one that is in a cold, dark, scary place, unknown to them, scary for your child.
	Think about them and get them vaccinated.
	I had to have said something mean to her because this makes me...
	I encourage everyone, don't let your baby...
	I quote it, six months, you're damn right it's young, almost ludicrously young for a new shot that has literally not even been around for six months.
	This is the face of the banality of evil.
	Robert.
	I just wanted to bring that back up.
	But I also want to bring this one up because people seem to have forgotten, like, you know, Brooke Jackson may have, and like you say, did in fact save lives.
	And then there's others whose lives have been utterly destroyed.
	Kayla Pollack being one of, who I've interviewed on the channel, who's rendered a quadriplegic as a result of the Moderna booster.
	And, I mean, it's not Pfizer, but I presume all of these test trials were equally as superficial.
	Robert, so you're going after Pfizer.
	Speaking of Moderna, do we know if the tests and the trials and whatever were roughly the same with Pfizer, Johnson& Johnson, Moderna, and AstraZeneca?
	It appears so, yes.
	It appears so with all of them.
	And now, I don't want to disclose our private discussions, but your prediction on what the judge is going to do?
	Well, I got into trouble.
	For calling the judge, for saying the judge previously, his previous opinion, when he originally dismissed the case, and then later modified that opinion, didn't fully dismiss it.
	I called it a wuss opinion.
	But in my view, we need judges to have courage.
	And they cannot continue to cower in front of corrupt corporations and governments and agencies.
	We have a, you know, they're the Justice Department official participating in the case.
	Made no oral argument, even though she appeared to be lead on the case.
	Was that the FDA when this was going down?
	I mean, that's a conflict of interest.
	The entire Justice Department is a conflict of interest.
	The Biden administration is a conflict of interest.
	And nobody wants to talk about what's obvious.
	This is corruption and collusion between Big Pharma and the government that's causing the deaths of disabilities and discrimination against millions of people around the world.
	This is a public health disaster.
	And are our courts really closed?
	Is there really no third branch of government?
	Does the petition for redress of grievances under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution mean nothing?
	Merely because Amy Coney Barrett forgot it existed at her congressional confirmation hearings?
	So I hope the judge...
	The judge was very fair in the hearing.
	I hope he has the courage to do it.
	And the judge himself was asking...
	Has any other judge stood up to the government, basically?
	Has any other judge refused these requests?
	Like, it's very rare.
	And we know it's very rare.
	But what they're doing here is even rarer.
	So, I hope the court has the courage.
	We'll find out.
	The refusal of the request is nothing more than the allowance or the allowing of the lawsuit.
	It's not like the refusal of the request suppresses rights.
	The refusal of the request enhances rights.
	Exactly.
	I mean, so...
	Just deny the government.
	And we said we can do it without prejudice.
	At least make them sign something under penalty of perjury.
	Really think it's safe and effective?
	Say it under penalty of perjury.
	Not in front of the press.
	Not in front of the cameras.
	Not in pleadings where you're not bound by anything.
	Say it under penalty of perjury.
	We had leading scientists and doctors put their names under penalty of perjury in this very case.
	Brooke Jackson put her name under penalty of perjury in this very case.
	Why can't one single government official do it?
	If this drug is so safe, if this drug is so effective, why don't they welcome a trial, a public trial, if they're right?
	Because they know they're wrong.
	They know what they...
	Pfizer lied, people died, government is culpable.
	Will the courts answer the people's call and cry for help?
	That's what we're going to find out.
	Robert, so that I can live vicariously through you, did you say Pfizer lied, people died in court?
	I know I did last time.
	I'm not sure if I said it.
	I said a version of that.
	The government lawyer that I had called out for having a conflict of interest was there.
	She chose not to speak, which I found interesting.
	They both came up to me afterwards.
	I think that the lead government, the guy who made the lead argument, wanted to say hi.
	I think she wanted to strangle me by the nature of the way in which he came up.
	So I was like, hey, don't be corrupt, and I won't call you corrupt.
	Okay, so we got, that's Brooke Jackson, we got Pennsylvania, and the other one that you're involved in that's working its way up the ladder is the Owen Schroer.
	So I don't know, is this the one, the appealing of his sentencing of 60 days which he's served, or what is this with Owen Schroer?
	That's exactly right.
	It's what we talked about at the time.
	They used the sole basis of Owen Schroer.
	Being sentenced to 60 days in prison and serving most of that time in solitary confinement, by the way, put in a hole, for those people who don't know what that is, was his speech.
	It wasn't his conduct.
	It was his speech.
	It was the fact he said the words 1776.
	And, of course, the law center that I helped found that is helping his case in other cases.
	Like Amos Miller, like Brooke Jackson, like the Pennsylvania farmers, like taking on the Federal Reserve, is 1776lawcenter.com.
	So, of course, we're going to help out Owen, who is being imprisoned because a judge was horrified that he said 1776 on the steps of the Capitol.
	Well, but Robert, I got to steal, man.
	The bigger argument is that he was on the steps of the Capitol when he shouldn't have been there based on his prior arrest or his prior Herb Nadler thing.
	But what does that have to do with his speech?
	There's supposed to be a clear nexus between the speech and the crime you're charged with.
	He was simply charged with being in an unauthorized location.
	Trespass.
	Misdemeanor.
	Trespass.
	That has nothing to do with his speech.
	That has nothing to do with the word 1776.
	In fact, what the judge was really horrified by, aside from him saying 1776 on the...
	On the Capitol steps?
	How dare you say that in America?
	But the other thing the judge was horrified by was he still thinks that there was something wrong with the 2020 election.
	So it's like I get these judges in D.C. live in a fantasy land of their own making.
	It's why what Mike Davis agreed with us on the sidebar, we'll have Jeremy Carl on the sidebar this Wednesday about his book that he was just on Tucker Carlson discussing.
	But the We got to get rid of D.C. But so we brought a cert petition to the Supreme Court of the United States on behalf of Owen Schreuer asking one simple question.
	Can you use somebody's speech, even dissident speech, to imprison them, to increase their punishment when that speech has no factual nexus to the underlying?
	Critical issue for everybody.
	Expansion of the criminal justice empowerment.
	Of the Biden administration that wants to lock up everybody who disagrees with him.
	And that's why Owen's case is everybody's case.
	You actually glitched out right at a key point.
	Can they use speech to criminalize when even the underlying, and then you went blank for a second.
	So there must be a factual nexus, a marriage between the speech and the crime in order for the speech to be relevant to sentencing.
	Trespass has nothing to do with the word 1776.
	Has nothing to do with thinking the election was stolen.
	That is precisely what courts have repeatedly said you can't do.
	And that's what this court did to Owen Troy.
	Okay.
	Phenomenal.
	And this is going to be not for this year.
	This is going to be for 2025, right?
	They've already decided for the rest of 2024 what they take up on cert?
	No.
	They could decide that this year.
	Okay.
	Well, Godspeed, Robert, from your mouth to the Supreme Court's ears.
	Now, hold on one second.
	I know that I like the next topic.
	I just got to get to it here.
	Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	No, we're going to...
	I don't know how to segue.
	No segue.
	No, we'll say it.
	The abuse of the courts or abuse of the state, Robert.
	So the guy, George Kelly, the rancher, who allegedly...
	Shot an illegal immigrant who's, you know, among many who are going across his property.
	The details of the case I'm not totally familiar with.
	And I know that there was a question as to whether or not he was even responsible for the murder.
	Like, I mean, not whether or not he shot his gun, the bullet came down, and it killed the illegal immigrant.
	Not whether or not he did it, but not maliciously.
	Or not with, you know, criminal intent or criminal act.
	There's an argument or a question as to whether or not he even did it, as in to say whether or not this guy wasn't killed by other illegals, drug dealers, whatever, what do they call them?
	It wasn't wolves.
	Robert, what was the word for what Trump called the people who were trafficking people?
	Not hyenas.
	Coyotes, right?
	Coyotes, I'm sorry, thank you.
	So there's an actual meaningful disagreement as to whether or not this guy even caused the death of the individual.
	Set that aside.
	They charged him with murder.
	They took him to trial.
	They ran him through the wringer and they destroyed his life.
	And there was a hung jury.
	And then they decide not to retry from what I understand or not to re-prosecute because if there's a hung jury, the state can decide to retry or not.
	And they've decided not to because the man's old.
	What the hell's going to happen?
	He's never going to re-offend, yada, yada.
	How the hell is that not the biggest injustice on the face of the planet?
	To me, double jeopardy...
	Should attach when you can't secure a conviction.
	And so mistrial should be treated as legal acquittals under the double jeopardy clause.
	And I've always seen it's a violation to do otherwise.
	But it's because judges are in the pocket of prosecutors that we don't have meaningful enforcement of the double jeopardy clause.
	And it's the same reason they came up with exceptions for Indian tribes and states.
	They can selectively and consecutively prosecute people.
	This was a case that never should have been brought.
	He got enough good people on that jury to not lynch him like the prosecution wanted.
	The prosecution got enough authoritarians on the jury who were eager to go along with him no matter what, even though the facts of the case showed there was no evidence beyond a reasonable doubt he was ever guilty of what he was being accused of.
	And it was an attempt by the government to not allow people to exercise self-defense.
	When they want illegal immigration to be flooding the country for the purposes of cultural transformation, labor, cheap labor, and future votes.
	And this was a man that was an elderly individual who was wrongfully prosecuted from day one.
	And the real reason they're not pre-prosecuting is they're terrified of a full acquittal.
	Because it appears that 10 or 11 of the jurors wanted full acquittal.
	And they didn't want the embarrassment of a full acquittal.
	And that's the only reason they're not.
	Putting this guy through the ringer again.
	It strikes me as being...
	Yeah, I mean, look, you've more eloquently and legally described it, but they have the right to decide, do we try this guy again?
	What is he, 80-some-odd years old?
	It's torture.
	76, he's up there.
	And not to say he looked older than he is.
	It's just like, he's old.
	You can't try him again.
	He's too old.
	Okay, so that's the rancher case.
	It's amazing.
	It's like a silver lining.
	But didn't make the news, and it was not as big as Rittenhouse for a number of reasons, but it seems to be equally as much of an injustice for factual and legal reasons.
	The other one, Robert.
	Hold on.
	Let me go here.
	Hold on.
	George Kelly.
	Trump dismissal.
	No, no.
	Oh, the Whitmer.
	All right.
	Before we move on over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com, Whitmer, Robert.
	Now...
	I thought you were going with a different angle when you sent me the homework, and I was starting to listen to this podcast of these two.
	I think they're New York Times journalists who might be realizing, holy shit was the FBI involved in this.
	I don't know if that's the angle you were going at with this, but there's a podcast and I'll get the name for it, but I'm going to try to get them...
	Hold on, hold on.
	I'll tell you who did the work to give them credit, even if they are among the enemy.
	Jessica Garrison, LA Times, and Ken Bensinger.
	So they had their oral argument before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals this week.
	The nature of the questions is very promising for a complete reversal.
	For those that don't know, when there was an honest trial, when a judge allowed all the evidence to be fairly and fully presented, everybody connected to the Whitmer case was being repeatedly acquitted.
	In this particular trial, the judge had seen that result in the other cases, so he rigged the case.
	And what he did is he disallowed all the evidence of entrapment.
	He didn't allow them to see the government saying, please go do this.
	Please go do this.
	Please go do this.
	Are you a loser?
	Will you please go do this?
	And here are some prepaid credit cards, and we'll show you how to put together, Bob.
	We'll drive by the place together.
	It's not just entrapment.
	They were the ones carrying it out.
	That's my personal view, and if everyone disagrees with it, that's because you're ill-informed.
	Sorry.
	Go on, Robert.
	Just as J6.
	It was a fedsurrection, not an insurrection.
	The Whitmer kidnapping wasn't a kidnapping, it was a fednapping.
	And the Sixth Circuit correctly pointed out this completely gutted their defense, that they're in a constitutional right to present that defense, and don't they basically have to overturn?
	And I suspect if they do, the prosecutors may not be dumb enough to risk a bunch more acquittals by going back to trial with a real trial.
	So hopefully this embarrassment of a proceeding will finally reach an end if the Sixth Circuit does the right thing and throws out these bogus convictions.
	Let me read a few of...
	Sorry, go ahead.
	One brief addendum, both on the Trump trials, great work by Robert Gouvet, Intercity Press covering the New York case, but also both of this and the Whitmer case, one person who has covered both extensively has been Julie Kelly, can find her work in American Greatness.
	Sometimes the Federalists, other places, but social media.
	But Julie Kelly's done great work.
	We've interviewed her before on Sidebar, but I continue to recommend following her work on these related issues.
	Oh, and by the way, and I've been not needling, but rather pinging Julie Kelly via DM.
	I'd love to, anytime she wants to come back on to talk about it, because she's in depth that I can't get into.
	But I'll have her, as soon as she was able to come back on, I'll have her back on.
	But also, un-gag Trump.
	The fight for the First Amendment brought by Joe Nierman.
	Oh, dude, he's $14,000.
	Okay, so he's halfway or more than halfway to his goal.
	This Joe Nierman, good logic.
	Sorry, Robert, go for it.
	I was going to say briefly, this case, there's also a give, send, go for the Pennsylvania farmers.
	That case is going to cost me a quarter of a million.
	They'll be lucky to raise 10 cents on the dollar for that.
	But there's a give, send, go for that.
	This is a great give, send, go for Joe Nierman, good logic.
	It's great work.
	Very low price.
	I'll be honest.
	Conservatives look like losers when they raise 400 grand for frat kids.
	Oh, look, the frat kids got together and put an American flag up.
	Let's give them 400 grand for a kegger.
	But we can't raise 25 grand to challenge the illegal gag order on President Trump.
	We can't raise money for two people illegally imprisoned in Pennsylvania.
	Conservatives need to put their money in the right places.
	What's the Give, Send, Go for the Pennsylvania?
	I'm looking at what's on my bookmark to make sure I didn't disclose it.
	If you just hit Give, Send, Go, Wentworth, Her, No Bull Solutions, any of those combinations.
	Alright, No Bull Solutions.
	I'm going to bring this one up.
	My search history is clean.
	Even then, was I looking up maybe pimple popping?
	Okay, hold on.
	Here we go.
	No Bull Solutions.
	Here you go.
	They need to get to 100,000.
	This is the family of the two people.
	They're not even raising all the legal costs.
	This is just for a small slice of the legal cost, just like with good logic.
	And it's just extraordinary to me that conservatives just don't put money where their mouth is when it comes to legal fights.
	The reason why the left wins is that, you know, corrupt James Coney will raise a million dollars.
	You know what I mean?
	McCabe, the corrupt FBI guy, raised like $700,000.
	And then I see conservatives raise a bunch of money for frat boys.
	Hey, great, they've raised the American flag.
	400 grand, what do we look like to the world?
	We'll give money for symbolic, shambolic, empty gestures to college kids, but we won't raise money for two illegally imprisoned Pennsylvania farmers.
	We won't raise money for a sole practitioner trying to fight the entire state to free up...
	Trump's from his illegal and constitutional gag order.
	We've got to get our priorities straight, to be blunt about it.
	I do not disagree.
	What I'm going to do here, I'm going to read a few of the VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com's tipped questions.
	RyanPD911, this is for Viva's Boat Fund.
	Time to take the kiddos fishing and not have to worry about George, George of the Swamp.
	And we've got, scrolling through, I just want to get a few of these.
	LocoLocomotive.
	Alternative theory for Mark Hamill could be that Biden had been tapped Hollywood and had Mark give out ridiculous speech.
	Okay, that's possible.
	I can help you out on the Mark Hamill part.
	He thought Star Wars meant Stark Wars.
	So that's why he's...
	Not nearly as dirty as I thought you were going to go, Robert.
	I have so many jokes.
	Oh, you mean like...
	His thing with Princess Leia reminded him of Biden in the first movie.
	Is that what you're saying?
	I'll just say this.
	I had a tweet that said, I never thought Mark Hamill was a pedophile until now.
	Okay, and I'll leave it at that.
	Canada masking breathalyzers.
	Oh, now Canada masking breathalyzers.
	Okay, now Canada making breathalyzers mandatory.
	Quarter native.
	All drivers in the greater Toronto area who are pulled over by Ontario police, Highway safety officers will now be asked to provide breath samples no matter what they're stopped from.
	I know my brother, Lion Advocacy on Twitter, is pissed off about that.
	I know that.
	So you can check him out too.
	Junkman611, at what point does Judge Cannon throw out the classified documents case against Trump?
	Can Jack Smith be more exposed for corruption before Judge throws out the case?
	We talked about that.
	20 bucks from Hampton...
	Because I don't always agree with you two, but love Sunday PM for Viva Barnes Law.
	And Bossman Barnes called me out on the last week with Bourbon with Barnes.
	Booyah.
	Anyway, Barnes has time for a quick meetup in Minneapolis.
	We'll get to the rest of the vivabarneslaw.locals.com in a bit on the VBL after party.
	We're going to do a few here.
	Sounds like a trailer for a city.
	Civil action 2. No difference from the Love Canal disaster outlined in a civil action.
	Let us know, Robert.
	That's from Randy Edward.
	Tech crisis.
	Can you give us a reenactment of your close as a standalone video that we can share?
	Robert, would you do that?
	You could recreate your closing arguments or your statements.
	I did it spontaneously.
	So when we get the transcript, I could do that.
	We'll order the transcript and publish that, and maybe I'll redo it from there.
	That would be damn good.
	Freddie65, didn't know Robert's favorite Judge Sullivan was involved in Flynn's case.
	He seems...
	Oh, dude, even I remember that one from the never-ending judicial saga of Michael Flynn.
	What's Michael?
	His first name is Michael.
	Viva, how about...
	A shout-out to...
	Dude, I didn't even know that you sent this when I did it.
	How about a shout-out to GoodLogic and his fight to get President Trump gag order removed and give, send, go.
	Dude, I did it, and I didn't even see this before that.
	So I feel good about myself.
	Okay.
	Barnes question, what are the good books about Bill Clinton's corruption?
	Death in Arkansas.
	I just made that up.
	They don't make that book.
	All right.
	What do we do?
	Do we end this now and go over to Viva Barnes Law?
	We can cover two more here, and then we'll save the Lunchables case, the Newspapers AI case, the Derby case, and the gun case.
	I forgot to mention, they're attempting to ban...
	Well, no, let's do the gun case and the Title IX case, and then we'll save the rest for the Arizona election case and the other cases for the after-party.
	Title IX...
	Go ahead.
	No, I was going to say, Title IX can men compete with women, but forget it.
	I'll just let you do both, because...
	Well, the gun case, when we talked about Reuben King, the Amish farmer that they were trying to lock up for many years based on selling his own guns to people, because they said he wasn't a licensed gun dealer, even though he really wasn't a gun dealer, he was a farmer, as he kept telling them.
	Well, I kept saying that these cases, they're going after the Amish to make an example for everybody else.
	To both scare and intimidate the Amish and to crush the Amish so they can't be an example to everyone else, and then to use that as an example to go after everyone else.
	And what's happening is, well, guess what the ATF did?
	The ATF just issued a new set of rules.
	And the traditional laws are that if you're a gun dealer, you have to be licensed.
	But that meant someone, historically, that that was their profession.
	That was their occupation, their principal profession.
	That it wasn't something they did occasionally or as a hobby or they had a gun collector or anything else.
	And the law is supposed to always exclude that.
	Well, the ATF has come in under the Biden administration and said, no, that's not what gun dealer means.
	Gun dealer can mean a single sale of a gun.
	What they're trying to do is prohibit anyone from being able to sell a gun anywhere without being controlled by the licensure state.
	There's a variation of the Pennsylvania farmers being imprisoned because you now can't do basic farm work unless you have a vet license, if it involves anything related to the care of an animal.
	You can't sell your own milk if you're Amos Miller without a special permit from the state.
	Now you can't sell a gun unless you have permission of the federal government.
	It's part of the control grid.
	Credit to Attorney General Ken Paxton of Texas.
	He is challenging that, along with the gun owners of America, continue to do great work, challenging that because it's a patent violation of the law.
	The law was intended only to apply to actual gun dealers, not to apply to people who do occasional sporadic private sales as a hobby, as a side business, as an everyday business.
	And it's the same reason we're pursuing the Ruben King case on appeal.
	But it shows you this is what they're going to use, licensure, federal criminal power to, this is a common theme, as a control grid over the rest of us.
	And in Michigan right now, the Michigan Agriculture Department is saying if you don't tag all the food, tag all the animals, surveil everybody, the bird flu will get out, destroy everything.
	They love viruses because they can use that to justify every form of surveillance.
	Doing that too.
	So this is another variation of that.
	And then as we predicted last week with the Title IX, where basically Biden rewrote Title IX without Congress and said, now gender no longer means gender.
	Gender means whatever somebody wants.
	And basically to help the trans community and undermine women's sports.
	But also to force, to redefine sexual harassment to being you don't refer to someone by their chosen gender.
	So that, you know, the South Park meme is now a reality.
	And you could lose your funding and be kicked out of school.
	On top of that, they tried to gut the due process limitations that were put in because of the moral panic that happened with campus rape cases, where they were transferring that from the legal process of courtrooms and criminal cases, which have due process, to having no due process.
	You know, somebody could do it for politically weaponized reasons.
	Somebody could do it because they woke up and decided, oh, geez, I was too drunk.
	I really shouldn't have been with you last night.
	And bam, all of a sudden, it's an assault charge.
	And now, of course, an assault charge can be, it's, you can probably find that man pretending to be a woman.
	It's her.
	It's she.
	It's miss.
	You know, if you don't say it, bam, you're kicked out of campus, kicked out of school.
	All over half the states.
	Already sued the Biden administration saying this patently violates the law.
	They failed to consider relevant factors.
	They failed to consider relevant evidence.
	It contradicts the plain text of the law, contradicts the plain purpose of the law, and I believe they will get an immediate injunction and the Title IX provisions will not be enforced in most states of the country.
	I was going to make the joke, but it might hit too close to home.
	Or you don't last long enough, and then it's sexual assault because it went from a consensual encounter to an unsatisfied...
	That's never happened to me.
	That's terrible.
	That's not how I met my wife.
	Hold on one second.
	This, Robert, I think is what you were talking about.
	I'm just going to move on.
	Excuse me, it's ma 'am.
	It is ma 'am.
	You need to settle down and mind your business.
	Ma 'am.
	Once again, ma 'am.
	I said both of you.
	No, you said sir.
	Once again, it's ma 'am.
	I actually said both of you guys.
	Right beforehand, you fucking said sir.
	Motherfucker, take it outside.
	Call me sir again.
	I will show you a fucking sir.
	Motherfucker.
	No, I'm not stopping it.
	I'm letting it go.
	Robert, I haven't watched this in a decade.
	I need corporate numbers.
	Because I'm going to call them and talk about how I was misgendered several times in the store.
	I need your corporate number now.
	I'm going to stop it right now.
	Robert, Joe Biden may have just ratified that ma 'am's ability to claim damages for not being called a ma 'am.
	I'm sorry it's not funny because it's reality.
	Robert, do we bring the party on over to vivobarneslaw.locals.com?
	Let me just see when that's from.
	I feel that that's from 10 years ago.
	Hold on.
	Hold on.
	It's five years ago.
	Well, holy hell has the world gone crazy in five freaking years.
	Okay.
	Everybody, we're going to go do a few more stories and the rumble rants and the chats and whatever on vivabarneslaw.locals.com, which means I've got to go over to Locals and say, all 20,000 of you, hit the like before going out, subscribe, and come on over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com, and I'm going to end this.
	Yeah, we got a Kentucky Derby case, a betting case.
	By the way, if you were a subscriber to sportspicks.locals.com, you would have got a free pick from one of our many great board members who gave out the winner for the Kentucky Derby in advance of the Kentucky Derby.
	Happened to be named after him, by the way, in part.
	But we'll discuss also the AI copyright dispute.
	We'll talk about Lunchables, having all those heavy metals in them.
	The real dangerous food.
	The government's trying to stick down your throat rather than stop.
	And the Arizona Supreme Court saying, yes, it is okay to actually file an election contest.
	What do you have, Robert, coming up this week, if I may ask?
	I leave tomorrow on Monday for the Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
	I have an oral argument before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals on a religious harassment case.
	The courts are not recognizing religious harassment as a claim, basically.
	So I'll be up there making oral argument in St. Paul, Minnesota, Twin Cities.
	Then come back to Vegas.
	We have a range of legal cases.
	We're filing a big case this week with America First Legal concerning race discrimination, gender discrimination, religious discrimination, vaccine-related discrimination against Red Hat and IBM.
	It's going to be one of the lead cases in the country on that issue.
	So we're making sure that gets all finalized and processed and put into motion.
	And then just some other legal work.
	Hopefully we'll have some bourbons not Monday or Tuesday, but probably again Wednesday and Thursday.
	Then in New Orleans this weekend for a good friend of mine's wedding, which is a reception Friday night and a wedding Saturday afternoon there.
	And then up to Philadelphia.
	Where all the crazy cases keep developing and continuing with some court hearings that week.
	So Wednesday night, we have a sidebar.
	Yes, that's right.
	So Wednesday night sidebar with Jeremy Carl.
	Okay, amazing.
	Wednesday during the day, I'm going to have Chris Martinson on at 11 o 'clock.
	I got something Tuesday and Monday, but I forget what it is.
	Thursday, I go to Toronto and I'll be there Friday and then back on Saturday.
	Okay, we got a big week, Robert.
	What we're going to do now, I'm going to go over to Rumble and say, come on over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	And before we do this, I'm going to give everybody the link.
	Bada bing, bada boom here.
	Didn't know Robert's favorite was Sullivan.
	Okay, we got that.
	We got a new member.
	I can't read the black and white.
	Born Free Dave is now a monthly supporter.
	Honest money is harder to earn, says Born Free Dave.
	And that's it.
	We are going to end this on Rumble and take the party over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Oh, shoot.
	I did it.
	Okay, we're done.
	Let's do this.
	I'm going to refresh.
	Okay, am I sure I want to end this?
	Yes.
	I think I've done it now.
	It was not a smooth transition.
	But let us come over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com and get the tipped questions.
	Spam Ranger.
	I had a similar problem with my internet.

▲