Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 29, 2024 - Viva & Barnes

01:57:39

From Jan. 6 to Butler Pennsylvania & BEYOND! Live with Ivan Raiklin! Viva Frei

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	The power I have as a prosecutor is that with a swipe of my pen, I can charge someone with a misdemeanor, the lowest level offense possible.
	And by virtue of that swipe of my pen, you will have to go to a courthouse and stand in line.
	You will have to come out of pocket and hire an attorney.
	You may get arrested for a few hours.
	You will be embarrassed in your community.
	You will miss time from coming onto the Google campus.
	All because with the swipe of my pen, I've charged you with a crime, which I may choose to dismiss two weeks later.
	It's an incredible amount of power.
	The power I have as a prosecutor is that with the swipe of my pen, I can charge someone with a misdemeanor, the lowest level offense possible.
	Tell us, Kamala.
	And by virtue of that swipe of my pen, you will have to go to a courthouse and stand in line.
	You will have to come out of pocket and hire an attorney.
	You may get arrested for a few hours.
	You will be embarrassed in your community.
	You will miss time from coming onto the Google campus.
	All because, with the swipe of my pen, I've charged you with a crime.
	Which I may choose to dismiss two weeks later.
	Which I may choose to dismiss two weeks later.
	Oh my god, people.
	This is Patrick Bet-David who tweeted this.
	And Patrick Bet-David doesn't swear very often.
	So when he does...
	You know damn well it's for a damn good reason.
	Holy shiat, this video is all you need to see to know how intoxicated Kamala Harris is.
	Kamala Harris gets with power.
	Imagine what she'd do as a president.
	Now, I'll steel man it, even though I don't really want to, and I don't think it deserves any steel manning.
	I have no doubt, maybe, somewhere down in that podcast.
	I have to go find the original.
	She said...
	I have so much power, and so I have to exercise it judiciously and respectfully.
	And that's why I am the best DA ever, because I understand all of the terrible things that happen when I swipe my pen.
	Horse crap.
	You know, when she talks about embarrassment, she's not talking about exercising justice.
	She's talking about the process is the punishment.
	That's amazing.
	Oh, lordy, lordy.
	Everybody, good afternoon.
	We've got one hell of a show today.
	I went for my morning exercise, which was a 50-minute bike ride today, and I've been listening to Ivan on podcast.
	He doesn't know it, but I've been listening to him all morning, and I know that this is going to be amazing.
	So before we get into anything, before we even get into the sponsors of today's episode, let me make sure that we are properly across all platforms.
	We are live on Commitube, where we will not stay for the better part of this, I don't think.
	And that's not out of fear of saying anything that the YouTube overlords won't like.
	They don't deserve us.
	We're live on Rumble.
	We look like we are live on the most above-average community out there.
	VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com.
	We are.
	And we're good to go, people.
	All right.
	Ivan Raiklin.
	If you don't know who he is, I think many of you do know who he is, but you probably don't know who he is.
	You've probably seen a lot of those infamous, famous videos of some dude sitting behind Anthony Fauci.
	A number of people during congressional hearings looking none too happy with the state of the world.
	Kind of looks like George St. Pierre.
	And I'm going to say that when he gets on also because that's why I feel like I know him better than I know him.
	Very cool guy, very intense, and it's going to be amazing.
	We're going to be talking about Jan 6, Butler, Deep State, and stuff that you all know and love.
	But before we get into any of this...
	We got two sponsors today, and we got to thank our beautiful, wonderful sponsors of today's episode.
	One being American Financing.
	Do you get stressed because your monthly income just doesn't seem to cover the bills anymore?
	You're not alone.
	Most Americans feel this way every day.
	Everything is still ridiculously expensive.
	The interest rates are obscene, and we're reaching more and more for our credit cards to cover basics like childcare, insurance, power, and food.
	It's tough.
	If you're feeling this way, call our friends at American Financing.
	They're helping working Americans just like you.
	Tap into their home's equity to pay off their high-interest debt and even create some additional savings to be ready for whatever life throws your way.
	With interest rates dropping, a company like American Financing that never charges any upfront or hidden fees is the perfect partner to help you get into a better financial position.
	Their salary-based mortgage consultants are saving homeowners over $800 a month on average.
	Waiting is not an option.
	Call today.
	You may delay two mortgage payments.
	Call today.
	You may delay two mortgage payments.
	888-991-9788.
	That is 888-991-9788.
	Or visit AmericanFinancing.com slash Viva.
	It's in the description.
	Oh, it's amazing.
	The inflation, it's the celebration parallax, by the way.
	Inflation's not happening, but it's transitory.
	And inflation's not happening, but price gouging is the...
	Price gouging is the cause of it.
	And by the way, if you want to make sure that you stay healthy in rough times, people, if you go to Field of Greens, you got to get your fruits and veggies in.
	Most people don't know this.
	You're supposed to eat five to seven servings of raw fruits and vegetables a day.
	Most people do not do this.
	Most people have Diet Coke thinking it's diet and therefore not toxic aspartame that's going to make you feel bad and not make you any healthier.
	Five to seven servings of raw fruits and vegetables a day.
	But if you can't do it, Field of Greens.
	It's the best thing out there.
	Field of Greens is the healthiest habit.
	It's whole organic fruits and vegetables.
	This is exactly what your body needs for proper nutrition.
	Each organic, super fruit and vegetable of Field of Greens was selected by doctors to support vital organs, heart, liver, kidneys, metabolism, and immune system.
	And only Field of Greens is backed by a better health promise.
	At your next checkup, your doctor will notice your improved health or your money back.
	Don't miss the massive end of summer sale.
	Go to fieldofgreens.com.
	Use my code VIVA.
	To save on everything, you need to jump on the deal before it goes away.
	Fieldofgreens.com forward slash Viva.
	Go check it out.
	Links are in the description, everybody.
	Thank our sponsors.
	Go support the parallel economy.
	Support people who want to make you healthier, who want to save you money.
	Bada bing, bada boom.
	All right, now, did I lose?
	Did I lose Ivan?
	That's it, I've gone.
	I took too long.
	Ivan's gone.
	Ivan's going to pop back in in a second.
	We need to talk.
	It's not just Kamala Harris.
	He's back in here.
	I was going to go off for another five minutes on Kamala, but forget it.
	All right, people.
	Ivan, if you don't know who he is, you're going to know who he is.
	I included his description from Wikipedia as a gag.
	You've got to love the way Wikipedia describes people.
	Ivan, you ready for this?
	Bada-bing, bada-boom.
	Sir, how goes the battle?
	Excellent. Viva, thanks for having me.
	The most famous Canadian on the planet.
	I say not.
	How they introduce you, right?
	Jim Carrey's first, Jordan Peterson's second.
	Who else do we have?
	Never heard of them.
	So there's some rock band who's apparently famous from Canada.
	Dude, Ivan, how often do you get George St. Pierre?
	I get that very often, especially with...
	I guess you're a francophone as well, right?
	Oh, yeah.
	Tu parle un peu le français aussi?
	Well, I should say I'm not a francophone, but I'm bilingual.
	I studied my law.
	I did law and French, studied in Paris for a bit.
	Okay, très bien.
	Where are you from, Ivan?
	So I was born in New York, in Bronx, okay?
	In the Bronx.
	But I did pick a few languages along the way.
	Spanish. You know, with a name like Ivan, obviously it's Spanish.
	It's Mexican, right?
	No. Your last name is Raiklin or Raiklin?
	Either one, but most of the time I pronounce it Raiklin.
	All right.
	And I won't dive too far into childhood.
	That's called Worst.
	Dude, I've read some bios and some articles.
	I know what you've been called.
	Do you talk about your...
	I didn't listen to your Tucker interview because I didn't want to know.
	Everything is open.
	I have nothing like...
	Every question is available.
	Not like Kamala Harris.
	Which zero questions are available.
	She could probably answer her childhood questions easily enough without screwing up.
	I fled the Soviet Union in the 70s to the United States.
	I was born a couple years later in 76. They were political asylees.
	And then I picked up Russian speaking at home as a heritage speaker.
	And then when I was growing up in New York and then later Iowa.
	And then from there I picked up a little bit of Spanish going to high school, college, exchange programs.
	As well as Arabic and the Special Forces Qualification course, and then a little bit of French along the way, just as a little side hobby, if you will.
	I'm five out of six UN official languages.
	I still have yet to learn Mandarin, as they say.
	How, I'll say how fluent, how proficient in all of the languages?
	So I would say, professionally, I'm fluent in Russian and Spanish, so I can hold my own and hold a debate.
	In a discussion.
	French, I understand it.
	I could basically get by, you know, survival at this point.
	Arabic, same thing.
	I used to be, you know, fluent in Arabic, but it's, you know, I haven't really used it.
	And then I think that's about it.
	English, you know, I'm having, I struggle through it, but I do have my moments.
	So both your parents married in Russia and then fled in the late 70s?
	Yeah, so...
	The story, here's kind of the story a lot of people ask me about, is that how did they come to the United States?
	Well, in the 1970s, you had what's called the Jackson-Bannock Amendment, which allowed for persecuted folks.
	In this case, it would have been my father's mother was Jewish, and so he was in a position to be able to flee the Soviet Union under that guise.
	But my mother, I grew up as a Christian, Russian Orthodox, right?
	So my parents had to flee because my father, when he was in his graduate program in the 60s, as Khrushchev came to Iowa and to the United States and saw that corn was growing from north to south in the state of Iowa, he wanted to replicate that in the Soviet Union, in the tundra, in the Siberia, in the Arctic Circle, all the way down to, you know, the Soviet Southern Republics of Georgia, Azerbaijan, etc.
	Well, if you're kind of a not even so critical thinker.
	But if you're like a geography, not 101, but 001, you can kind of tell during that time you probably can't grow corn in the Arctic Circle or Siberia, right?
	And so he was calling that out.
	As part of his thesis, he was doing his graduate program on economics, and he was calling that out.
	KGB caught wind of it and then talked to his thesis chair.
	His thesis chair was able to defend him from not going to the gulag for speaking truth to power.
	And so he was kicked out of university.
	And then found out a way through the dissident underground communications platform because, you know, Telegram didn't exist back then.
	Neither did Truth or Rumble or X 2.0, right?
	Or Twitter 2.0.
	And so through the underground tapes, he figured out a way to flee the Soviet Union with, you know, my mom and then my three siblings in tow came to the United States under this Jackson-Vanick Amendment and started, you know, fresh in America, fleeing the Soviet Union, fleeing communism.
	And now I'm at a position where we have to face it ourselves and there's nowhere to run to.
	So what part of Green Beret and constitutional lawyer did they not understand when they tried to take away my constitutional rights and those that I respect the most?
	And so that's why I'm in this fight.
	We're definitely going to get into that as well.
	So three siblings born in Russia, emigrated here.
	You're born here.
	Any other siblings after you born here?
	No, I'm the last.
	I'm the youngest.
	So my brother was 10 months old when he came over to the U.S. So baby.
	And then my sisters were, I think, four and five or five and six.
	So toddlers when they came to the United States.
	And your parents are coming.
	Do they have a job when they come here or are they coming?
	No, nothing.
	Clean slate.
	No English language whatsoever.
	So my father ended up learning English, obviously.
	He was an accountant before he was in his graduate program.
	So he was an accountant at a grocery store and then worked his way up to learn English sufficiently to get accepted to Columbia University.
	Did his first year at Columbia, which is a pretty respectable institution in New York.
	He didn't finish there because he was offered a scholarship at the New School for Social Research.
	He got his PhD in economics and then ended up teaching at the University of Northern Iowa.
	That's what took me to Iowa in 1986.
	I went to school there, my formative years, my work ethic, and my kind of moderated...
	You know, perspective on American society.
	I wasn't involved in politics whatsoever, just kind of growing up.
	And then I had joined the military, and then in 97, in the National Guard, ROTC later on, 25 years later, I ended up looking at myself in the mirror and was like, oh, wait, I got a quarter of a century underneath my belt as a Green Beret intel officer, military diplomat, speaking five languages across multiple, you know, deployed across multiple continents, countering ISIS, Taliban, MS-13, Russian aggression.
	So hitting that component of the constitutional defense known as foreign threats and enemies.
	And as I observed the illegal activity of our lawless and belligerent executive branch, specifically in 2020, but even more so back in 2017, I observed it in 2014, really, because I served on the Ukraine crisis team in the Pentagon at the National Military Command Center.
	As I observed the failed vice president, his crack baby son, Hunter.
	Traveling over there and his CLA director doing what he was doing, my kind of spidey senses woke up and I started to look and dig.
	And then later when what they did to General Flynn and the transition from 16 to 17, I've had a first or second row seat to a lot of that weaponization, which started off with General Flynn, which was their number one existential threat.
	And it didn't sit well with me.
	And knowing my background and what they did to my father, it's basically, What they did to General Flynn is exactly what the KGB was, well, not exactly, but at some extent similar or synonymous, rhymes with what the KGB did to my father.
	So really two aspects.
	Knowing the story of my, I'm glad you kind of started with that, with my father and my parents having to flee the United States and what I observed as an analyst at the Defense Intelligence Agency when General Flynn was the director, nothing that the media was putting out.
	Was any remote congruence with the reality that I observed myself and everyone that I knew in the system and respected had observed.
	So then I had to dig and dig further and dig further.
	And that's why I've basically at this point created what's known as the deep state target list.
	And that list is about a little over, you know, before it was 350, it is over 600 individuals by category where I can step you through Viva by name.
	They place in transgression the individuals that were involved from illegal spying operation on the Trump campaign and General Flynn and Carter Page all the way through all of the escalatory cover-ups that they committed, the same people and their affiliates to include the January 6th Fed Surrection, the Fed Surrection cover-up, the censorship industrial complex, the COVID con, the impeachment hoaxes one and two, the Mueller investigative team.
	I remember.
	I spent 25 years in the system.
	And when I say 25 years in the system, East Coast and West Coast, which are very important to understand.
	What I mean by that is my last assignment, if you will, as a contractor, I was an instructor at the Defense Intelligence Agency teaching at what's known as the Joint Military Intelligence Training Center.
	The program that I taught, a seven-week program that we run quarterly, and it brings in analysts.
	From our U.S. intel community, all intel agencies, and our international partners, NATO, European allies, Asian, African, throughout the whole globe.
	These are the students, the most technically premier professional designees of these nations that are partnering with the United States to be professional civilian and military analysts.
	So what do I teach them?
	I teach them about what is the United States national security apparatus.
	From A to Z, top to bottom, left to right, down to the individual, okay?
	All branches of our government.
	Article 1, the Armed Services Committees, the Intel Oversight Committees, right?
	Article 2, all 17 Intel community members, as well as the Director of National Intelligence and the broader U.S. governmental interagency national security system.
	And then the Article 3 branch of known as the FISA process in the courts.
	So I have a little bit more understanding and knowledge about The system, then let's just say anybody at Criminal News Network, MSLSD, Faux News, Washington Compost, New Woke Slimes, Raw Sewage, and on and on and on.
	Well, hold on.
	As well as the fact checkers at Twitter 1.0, Fakebook, Instagarbage, etc.
	Well, I'm trying to think, Raw Sewage is which one?
	All the other ones I got, Raw Sewage?
	Raw Sewage?
	They pronounce it sometimes story incorrectly.
	Okay, got it.
	Anyhow, and smother jokes, right?
	Or Huffington compost.
	You know those.
	Oh, yeah.
	I got nine out of ten of them.
	I just said the raw story was...
	But actually, before we even get there...
	One more sentence, if I may.
	So my East Coast Intel Community National Security Apparatus understanding, would you agree it's...
	There's not many people that have that insight, right?
	One or two.
	But then on the West Coast.
	So I was also a reservist, a lieutenant colonel in the reserves, as a technology scout as my last assignment in the Silicon Valley and Greater Bay Area, where I sought out companies and technologies in the artificial intelligence, mixed reality, and gaming ecosystem that could provide a capability, if they were interested in, in selling into the Army and the DOD and the national security apparatus.
	Meaning? I have knowledge, network, expertise, and relationships bi-coastally between the big tech ecosystem and the national security apparatus.
	And when they violated my norms and principles and my constitution, I wasn't going to sit idly by.
	So they basically weaponized me, a very, very insider, against them.
	And then, unfortunately for them, I am very clean.
	They've conducted over 20 investigations on me across DOD, DHS, DOJ.
	I have receipts for all of it.
	Thankfully, I have people on the inside that tell me and alert me when an investigation starts, and I get to know exactly who is investigating me down to the individual.
	And that triggers my investigating them to make sure that they are operating within their legal authorities.
	And when they deviate, that's when I put their name out publicly.
	On my social media channels for people to look into and scratch that itch.
	And so then they're in a predicament.
	Do I listen to the illegitimate Biden regime and try to get something on Ivan?
	And if I do that, I risk Ivan exposing all my transgressions personally, my family, my neighbors, my friends, my relatives.
	And it is a high probability that Ivan will go to the same shopping area that I shop because most of these people are my neighbors.
	I live in Northern Virginia, so it may be so that I might bump into a Brian Auten, who was the supervisory intel analyst on the Crossfire Hurricane team.
	Or I won't name some of the other names yet because I haven't quite found enough to go ahead and put their name out publicly for them to squirm.
	But if they're going to listen into this, which I'm sure they will, they know who they are and they follow every move I make.
	So that's the bi-coastal component.
	That I want you to understand as we go further and dig into the censorship industrial complex on the left coast and then those that promoted and manipulated that censorship industrial complex from the east coast.
	I can go into every single name.
	Look, we're going to get into a lot of it.
	Our crowd is going to know already a lot of this.
	We overlap probably in terms of audience and certainly in terms of information.
	My own curiosity, Green Beret for 25 years?
	No, so I've become a...
	So 25 years in the military, in the collective, okay?
	Okay. I became a Green Beret in 2010, and then I retired in August of 2022.
	So technically, if you want to fact check me, the technicality is from 2010 to 2022, I was a Green Beret.
	So 12 years.
	I'm under the impression that...
	Right up there with Navy SEALs in terms of badassery are the Green Berets.
	Am I wrong?
	Like, what does a Green Beret do?
	So, yeah, I would say that Navy SEALs aren't quite as intellectual as Green Berets, but physically, most Green Berets can't swim as well as Navy SEALs, but we do have scuba teams, and I've served on a scuba team, right?
	So, with that said, the main difference between a Navy SEAL and a Green Beret is this, and I want you to, like...
	Understand this very well, Viva, and apply it to what we're going to discuss.
	So, a Green Beret's primary mission that we train for is to conduct what is termed as unconventional warfare.
	That specifically means that a team that I lead as an officer, a detachment, goes into another country, example, say Afghanistan, link up with an indigenous force that is currently, from that government in Afghanistan's perspective, an insurgency.
	And we, America, are then authorized on behalf of the national security ecosystem, the team, the Green Beret team, to link up, train, advise, and equip that local indigenous force so that they can overthrow their own government and then are now in power.
	And then that's called unconventional warfare.
	Train, advise, and equip to overthrow the power that is inimical to American interests, to install somebody that is friendly to American interests.
	And then after that happens, The secondary mission is known as Foreign Internal Defense, which basically makes sure that that new government is now capable of fighting the former government to make sure that they don't come back and be an insurgent force.
	So imagine that framework and capability, and you limit it by the legal, moral, ethical, and constitutional framework that is allowed in the United States.
	That's basically politics, right?
	So knowing that as my backdrop, and knowing as a constitutional attorney, I focus on national security law and constitutional law, because I became an attorney, when was that?
	2005, right?
	19 years.
	Hold on a second.
	You became an attorney in later stages of life.
	2005. So 20 years ago.
	So you're 25 when you go get, no, 21, give or take.
	How old was I?
	23? 29 was I?
	And you get the age, later on in life-ish, but young life, you get your law degree.
	It's not like you dabbled.
	You have your law degree and you have a specialty?
	Yeah, so my focus is on personnel security, national security, and constitutional law, like in the national security ecosystem.
	What does that mean?
	Advising folks on how to gain and maintain a top secret clearance to be able to be involved in the government, and then different components, advisory as it applies to.
	The national security elements subordinate to providing for the common defense clause, right, of the Constitution.
	But then it expanded further.
	Once I saw the, observed the illegal 2020 election, this is where you probably have to get off of commie tube.
	I think I'm going to take a chance and leave it and tell everyone to go suck a lemon.
	Once we get into the unsafe and ineffective products, I think that's when we're going to have to get you off.
	Otherwise they're going to...
	You know, screw it.
	Let's just do it.
	No, we'll do it now.
	We're ending on YouTube now.
	I'm not at a fee.
	I'm going to post the entire thing afterwards, but screw them.
	They canceled me when I did Hogswinds like that, by the way.
	Shut up.
	Well, I'll take my chances later.
	All right, we're ending on YouTube.
	Come on over.
	The link is in there.
	Rumble Viva Fry or vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Removing now.
	Suck a lemon, YouTube.
	Okay. Yeah, yeah.
	Firm little fingers.
	All right, so which one do we start with first?
	Let's start.
	Okay, hold on.
	I saw the illegal election.
	And then I'm like, I have to do something to stop this from happening.
	Because it was totally raw illegal.
	And then what I mean by illegal is that when 39 states, so imagine this, Mikey Pence, this might go into a tangent here, Mikey Pence was the one that raised his hand and said, oh, Mr. President with such broad shoulders and strong look and my beloved one, right? Mikey Pence as he described President Trump.
	Me, me, me, Mr. President, pick me as the COVID task force lead in the White House, as he and Jared Kushner were the advisors, supervisors, and the controlled information flow agents on what Deborah Birx and Anthony Fauci were able to present to good old President Trump.
	He stands up and says, I want to be the policymaker for the COVID task force.
	Well, guess what?
	After that, 39 states ran their elections outside of The legislative mandate.
	So if you want to pull up, Viva, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, just to remind folks of what occurred, what was violated, how it was violated, and what we're going to do to fix this.
	Can we use expletives on your show?
	Oh, absolutely, please.
	But hold on, before you use the expletive, Article 2?
	Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2. For now, I'm going to start with Raisin Bran and then we'll heat it up because I want to make sure that people understand that I have range to speak in a professional, calm tone.
	Then I also have a passionate...
	First of all, I swear, probably more than I should.
	But actually, hold on.
	First question, before we get here, because we're starting in 2020, but this is actually going to start in 2016.
	But you're a government contractor.
	Did you have clearance at any point?
	And has your clearance been revoked?
	What's the word I'm looking for?
	Not credentials, but you're working with the government.
	You have to have access to things.
	Have you been...
	Reprimanded or had all access pulled since the time?
	A lot of questions there.
	Let me hit that.
	A lot of people ask that.
	So I received my first top secret clearance in 2002 and maintained that for the next 20 years while I was in the military the entire time until I retired.
	Okay? In August of 2022.
	Okay? Now, the second part.
	As I was exposing this illegal election in my...
	Remember... My last component in assignments were a contractor at the Defense Intelligence Agency 40 hours a week, and then I was also a reservist one weekend a month.
	But when I was not in those two statuses and when I was not presenting myself as an attorney, I'm private citizen Ivan Raiklin exercising my First Amendment to the max, right, when I'm off of duty, which means I'm not bound by any rules except for maintaining and following what's known as the 13 adjudicative guidelines.
	So that I can maintain a clearance, which I did.
	But they started to investigate me because I was getting too close to exposing Pelosi and Mike Pence and others at the highest levels of both political parties in their escalatory cover-up starting in 2016 and illegal egregious behavior.
	And so as I was teaching at the Defense Intelligence Agency, the director of that organization decided, To go ahead and say that Ivan Raiklin is no longer allowed to physically enter the premises and perform on his contract.
	I was not fired.
	And they literally had no D-Rogs on me.
	They were just investigating me.
	And guess, you know what?
	I'm going to break this for the first time.
	What's a D-Rog?
	Derogatory information, right?
	They put me under an investigation.
	Now that investigation started.
	In June of 2021, and the way I've been able to kind of reverse engineer and determine how this took place is that Nancy Pelosi's beloved Benny Thompson and Mike Pence's beloved Liz Cheney and their staff director, David Buckley, one of the 51 spies who lied, former inspector general for the CIA's John Brennan, I suspect those group of people decided Ivan Raiklin's First Amendment.
	It's a little bit too inculpatory of their operations, right?
	And so we need to stop him from doing this.
	So what do they do?
	Benny Thompson sends over a note, and this is public, if you can find it while I talk about it.
	He sends a memo over to Ali Mayorkas.
	So the chair of the January 6th cover-up committee, or before it was even launched, because this was June of 21, it's launched in July 22nd of 21. So in June of 2021, the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee in the House, Benny Thompson,
	the known domestic terrorist back in his heyday in Mississippi a few decades ago, Benny Thompson sends a memo to Ali Mayorkas telling him, I'll kind of summarize it, go ahead and use all your discretionary authority and beyond to investigate, violate the Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and First Amendment.
	Of everyone that was in Washington, D.C. on January 6th.
	And particularly those that have a high profile in ID.
	I had a higher profile.
	And so, next thing I know...
	Well, let's just say this.
	I have evidence that I have obtained that specifically lays this out, that that investigation started in June of 2021.
	It is like...
	Bulletproof evidence.
	In August, when I attended the cyber symposium hosted by Mike Lindell, the day after that, I get an email.
	I can send you this if you want to see the actual screenshot.
	I'll text you my email address.
	You already have my email address, right?
	I don't.
	I can do a screenshot where basically the...
	CBP, Trusted Traveler Program, sends me an email and says, hey, Ivan, you're no longer on the Trusted Traveler Program.
	And this is, oh, by the way, while I have a top secret at the time, while I have TSA pre, since the inception of the program, while I have clear since the inception of the program, meaning, oh, and then global entry.
	So I'm the lowest risk category of traveler in the entire system, right?
	In addition to all the other stuff that I didn't mention.
	So that triggers me going on to what's known as the Quad S program or the Quiet Skies program.
	And the Quiet Skies program, for those that want to know and that are listening in, that are on it, I'm going to go ahead and send you a report that details what that specifically looks like.
	It's where they put you through a Fourth Amendment rape process when you travel through the airports.
	And I'll kind of lay that out and what that looks like.
	Let me just send you that link first.
	On the Quiet Skies program here in the chat, so you can pull that up as we discuss it.
	And as I talk through it, go to the back where it kind of goes through a graph and a diagram and list of what they do to you just because you're a political opponent and target, just because they can, as they violate your Fourth Amendment.
	So what happens?
	Well, I try to get a ticket.
	I buy my ticket and try to, you know, 24 hours out, go ahead and check in online.
	It says, no, you can't check in online.
	I try to do it at the kiosk at the airport.
	No, you can't check in at the kiosk.
	You got to go to the desk.
	So I go to the airline and I say, hey, airline, here's my ticket.
	I need to check in.
	And the guy is in dismay.
	I've never seen this before in my 30-year career.
	I got to call the TSA.
	TSA is contacted.
	And then what does the TSA do?
	They're informed that Ivan Raiklin's in the airport and is about to go through security.
	Meanwhile, unbeknownst to me, at least on the first flight, Three federal air marshals are actually surveilling me from my home to the airport.
	And then at the airport, we go through this process.
	I go to the clear line.
	The supervisor is notified.
	I got to show them my ID.
	And then the supervisor of clear then has to notify the TSA that they're ready to go ahead and look through my stuff.
	And I go through what's known as secondary screening, meaning they check my ears.
	Earlobes, inside my ears, everything down, inside my belt, everything.
	My wallet, they swab everything.
	I have this on video documented.
	I was hoping to use this when we were going to go to a Senate trial in the Senate for Ali Mayorkas, but Mitch McConnell decided to side with Chuck Schumer and not even have a Senate trial for the impeachment of Mayorkas.
	Anyway, to fast forward, as I went through with five, six, a half a dozen TSA agents, Conducting the Fourth Amendment gang rape, I proceed.
	And then as my Federal Air Marshals follow me to the gate, at the gate, what do they do?
	They have another almost a dozen TSA agents in concentric circles basically waiting for me to conduct yet another Fourth Amendment gang rape before I even board the plane at the gate.
	And then the three Federal Air Marshals are sitting next to me on the plane.
	When I get to my destination, and then from my destination, when I land, they then surveil and follow me to where I go.
	That's their maximal jurisdictional authority.
	They go into the bathroom with me, everything, right?
	Where I eat, etc.
	So what does that mean, folks?
	That's what's going on to their political targets.
	And why are they doing, why are they expending so much energy, you may ask, Diva?
	It's because I was probably the lead figure in the country to try to convince the presidents of the Senate, And the speakers of the House of the different state legislatures in Arizona, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, I got to, New Hampshire, that they, with evidence, that they have an obligation to, legally moral and ethical obligation, to decertify their 2020 electors.
	Because I had compiled all the evidence much earlier than most.
	I know you've been tracking it, but I was doing it through the constitutional pathway.
	And that requires me to educate them in person.
	Well, the federal government doesn't like that because their belligerent, illegitimate one squatting in the White House is about to be decertified if this is triggered.
	And so they have to apply maximum pressure on me to try to intimidate silence.
	They did it digitally through the Twitter and all the other platforms.
	They tried to do it physically.
	But guess what?
	I just started driving everywhere once they started doing that to me.
	I was going to make a joke that digitally does have a double entendre in that level, but yes.
	The bottom line is you're not a threat.
	They know you're not a threat.
	It's a waste of resources and everything, but it's Dan intimidating.
	But they want to find something so that they can get me off of the battlefield of exposing them.
	That's the whole point.
	And I know for most people it is intimidating, right?
	Yeah, for sure.
	For me, I always respond with, what part of Green Beret and lawyer did you miss in this process?
	Like, hey, Federal Air Marshals, if you look at my background, I have way more training than they do.
	So I picked up using just training that I've done with counter-surveillance.
	And then when I noticed the Federal Air Marshals, like, hey, what's up, boys?
	Where's number three?
	I see two of you.
	You're supposed to have three.
	And if you don't believe me, check out the OIG report that basically tells you of what you're supposed to be doing.
	You might want to be following, at a minimum, your own rules.
	So I'm embarrassing them not even knowing their own jobs, right?
	And so at every moment, I try to do that.
	Now, you get active in 2020, although you were, I don't know, how involved were you in surveilling what was going on in 2016, 2017, where we had the peaceful transfer of power that involved spying on the incoming president and abusing of the FISA courts?
	Were you vocal or were you sort of observing in 2016, 2017?
	No, 2016, I was deployed to the Middle East, working with our Middle Eastern partners for countering ISIS, right?
	And so I came back.
	My deployment ended in December.
	Well, no.
	I came back in October and November.
	I observed the election.
	And I was in the process of actually onboarding to go work at the National Security Council for General Flint.
	We were going through that process on that transition team.
	And I think I would have probably been in the position which ultimately then went to your boy, Alexander Vindman.
	Remember him?
	Oh, yeah.
	Yeah, so Alexander Vindman and his brother Yevgeny Vindman, which I call the twin traders, right?
	The twin traders at the NSC.
	So I didn't know, gut feeling-wise, I knew what was going on in the 2016-2017.
	And it really only started for me when, as soon as General Flynn announced he was resigning, that's when I started to dig.
	That's when I went to every single hearing that he was involved in.
	That's when I started to kind of deploy my network.
	And it really wasn't until...
	I would say it just kept escalating.
	And when the Mueller report came out in 2019, that's when I got a lot more involved and engaged because there was no Russian collusion to be had anywhere there because I read both volumes.
	And I have...
	Spending 25 years in the system, Viva, I know people in the system.
	So technically, I know...
	I have access to be able to find out what's going on the inside of every single one of these hoaxes, either directly or indirectly, as I'm able to monitor that.
	And as I'm learning the escalatory transgressions that maybe the lower level folks that were involved didn't know what was going on, but because I'm so adamant about finding out the real truth, I'm getting closer and closer.
	And it wasn't until really that COVID con is really what weaponized me.
	When you try to mutilate my DNA, when you try to tell me that a product is FDA approved when it's specifically not, and you're trying to push that on me, it comes down to what part of the Second Amendment do you not understand?
	Because you're getting very close to triggering that when they did the whole COVID con.
	And so just the egregious lawlessness of our belligerent, illegitimate executive branch kept escalating.
	And I looked to my left and right, no one was really pushing back.
	And I'm like, well, if it's not going to be somebody like me in my background, then there's really, there's no one that is going to have the courage to do it.
	So then we have to start creating the mechanism to motivate folks to my left and right, of educating them of what's going on with these senior failures.
	Some people pronounce it leaders in our government.
	And so, kind of in summary, to answer your question of...
	In 2021, when they went after me, that's when all gloves are off, because it's all illegally predicated.
	And so now I have to go down to the granular level of who's involved.
	And in my research and investigation, all roads lead back to the illegal spying operation that was kicked off two weeks after Mike Pence was foisted on Donald Trump in 2016, in July of 2016, to be that unit party deep state's handler of President Trump.
	When they launched Crossfire Hurricane, the illegal spying operation, and then the subsequent illegal spying of General Flynn.
	As you start to dig deep into these names, Jamie Raskin's wife is one of the 39 that unmasked General Flynn.
	My deep state target list covers categories.
	As you look at the categories and the relationships of those categories, it's the same people.
	The Raskin family, who ends up being the Insurrection promoter slash fedsurrection cover-up impeachment manager for impeachment hoax too, right?
	And so I don't know where you want to go with this.
	We can go 40 hours if you'd like, or we can go a few minutes.
	We'll go certainly more than a few minutes and certainly less than 40 hours.
	Because it's interesting.
	I don't know if it's incest or it's the corruption.
	It involves the same players going back to 2016.
	I call it incestuous generational.
	Corruption. It goes back in some instances over 50 years when it comes to the Piglosi family, when it comes to the Biden criminal syndicate.
	It goes all the way back to January 3rd of 1973 as he becomes a junior senator from Delaware.
	And then he's on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is the committee that authorizes the FISA Act in 1978 when he's the senator.
	I've gone in so much depth and I'm glad you're giving me this opportunity because as an attorney, You understand some of these legal frameworks, and I've been following your work for quite some time as well, so it kind of goes both ways.
	As I'm listening to, I forget which podcast it was, you're talking about the Michael Flynn case, and my God, it's bringing back some memories where the judge refused to dismiss the case even after dismissal was requested.
	Here's the summary on the General Flynn story.
	He was never charged.
	The criminal information that the FBI was using was coerced, manipulated, doctored, What's his name?
	Pete Strzok and Lisa Page.
	And number three, when he pulled his guilty plea after they found out it was doctored, the judge refused to dismiss the case upon which, again, never a criminal charge, and the judge refused to dismiss it and to force a pardon of innocence.
	This was the beginning of my, really, the red pill journey.
	We're like, oh, I started off thinking, oh, Michael Flynn's guilty.
	He pleaded guilty.
	End of story.
	Do, you know, one summary vlog on it.
	It's like, oh, they seem to have set him up to get, you know, whatever.
	And then follow the progression of that throughout.
	And then you realize it's impossible to make people who don't follow this understand how deep, how insidious, how corrupt the entire institution is.
	But you're in it for decades.
	Come 2020, you get pushed off the ledge, so to speak, by COVID.
	And you go back and it's like, holy crap, this all goes back to...
	I've got a lot of time on my hands as I'm teleworking.
	Do you have a wife or kids or no kids?
	Yes. That was also one of the clinches with me.
	It's one thing to...
	I've got two boys.
	Tim and Greg.
	I've got a 14 and 12 year old.
	I say this a lot on podcasts.
	To me, I'm all in.
	When people are like, aren't you afraid this and that?
	I'm all in.
	What that means is...
	I'm going to go to the maximum.
	If that requires mutually assured destruction, I'm okay with that because then my kids don't have to deal with these scum, okay?
	And if they want to call my bluff, please, by all means, come knocking on the door.
	Call my bluff.
	So let me know.
	I guess we're going to start.
	We need to get to Butler.
	We need to get to Jan 6, Jan 13, and we need to get to what I think- July 13th.
	I said that.
	I've messed up too.
	It's J13.
	We'll go with J6 and J13.
	COVID. There are mutually conflicting theories.
	Some people say it didn't exist.
	It was not manufactured, but rather it was a weaponized version of a bad flu season.
	Others say it was engineered in China in a lab in China.
	It was real.
	It's a man-made, genetically modified...
	What's the word they use for that?
	Do me a favor.
	This is so important.
	I need you to pull up the source.
	Do a search for and follow along, folks, as you're listening in.
	Intel Community Assessment.
	ICA on origins of COVID and then type in DNI, the Director of National Intelligence.
	Let's just take a look at what our Director of National Intelligence analytic assessment states about the origins of COVID and the two hypotheses that they had literally in October timeframe of 2020, I believe, or maybe there's an updated one.
	Stay on the first page.
	Stay on the first page.
	So zoom in for me, please.
	Yep. The IC assesses that...
	I don't know if this is the right document.
	This is the first one that I got.
	The virus that caused COVID-19 probably emerged and infected humans through an initial small-scale exposure that occurred no later than November 2019, with the first cluster of COVID-19 cases arising in Wuhan, China in December 2019.
	Additionally... Stop right there.
	Scroll down.
	I mean, if you want, we can read the whole thing.
	But scroll down and go to that second paragraph after examining all available intelligence reporting and take a look at...
	Those three bullets.
	That's what's important.
	These are the top line assessments on what the entire intelligence community's assessment is on the origins of COVID.
	But before you do that, I want to give you some insight.
	Remember, I used to teach intelligence...
	I'll pull it back out and we'll bring it back up in a sec.
	Okay. Ivan Raiklin used to teach intelligence analysis, right?
	Within the Intel community's preeminent analytic program known as the Intel...
	Excuse me.
	The National Intel course and the Intel Analyst course as part of the Combined Strategic Intelligence Training Program, okay?
	Meaning, analysts that write what you're about to read were my students for three and a half years.
	That's who I taught to be able to go through the analytic process using the proper structured analytic techniques, analysis of competing hypotheses, and then all...
	Timeline, chronology, evidence check.
	I'm not going to go into my 80-hour course on how to be a professional intel analyst, okay?
	But now that you know that that's the perspective that I look at this with and my background, I want you to go ahead and take a look at the language.
	And the language that's used has specific word of art meaning behind it that I'm going to bring up.
	I'll read it slower so that in podcast format it's understandable.
	After examining all available intelligence reporting and other information, though, the IC, that's intelligence community, correct?
	Remains divided on the most likely origin of COVID-19.
	All agencies assess that two hypotheses are plausible.
	Natural exposure to an infected animal and a laboratory-associated incident.
	First bullet.
	Four IC elements and the National Intelligence Council assess With low confidence that the initial SARS-CoV-2 infection was most likely caused by natural exposure to an animal infected with it, or a close progenitor virus, a virus that probably would be more than 99% similar to SARS-CoV-2.
	These analysts give weight to China's official lack of foreknowledge, the numerous vectors for natural exposure, and other factors.
	Let me just make sure I read that.
	They say that it was most likely caused by natural exposure.
	So, two hypotheses, right?
	There's a disconnect.
	They're not sure which hypothesis is the prevailing hypothesis on the origins of COVID.
	But what does the second one say?
	Well, hold on.
	The first one says they assess with low confidence.
	Low confidence.
	So they don't believe it.
	It's less likely than...
	Right. And then the second one, it's moderate confidence, right?
	Yeah. So, one IC element assesses with moderate confidence that the first human infection with SARS-CoV-2 was most likely the result of a laboratory-associated incident, probably involving experimentation, animal holding, or sampling by the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
	These analysts give way to the inherently risky nature of work on coronaviruses.
	So, what does that mean?
	Low confidence...
	So there's different confidence levels on your analytic assessments in the intel community.
	How do I know I taught this?
	Low confidence, that's pretty clear, right?
	That means you don't have sufficient body of evidence that you would lend appropriate credibility to to give a high confidence to your assertion.
	But there is some indications of it, right?
	Moderate means that you have more evidence and the evidence that you have is...
	And you're using fewer assumptions to come to that conclusion.
	It's better than low.
	It's better than low.
	And then I, if you bring up that link that I just sent you in the private chat, Viva, so that people know exactly what these terms mean.
	Okay, hold up.
	The second one.
	Or it's dni.gov.
	Alright, now this is going to be a separate window, so give me a second.
	Even StreamYard doesn't let you bring up more than one window at the same time, and I'm too...
	Yeah, as you're bringing it up, so you have two analytic conclusions.
	Go to page four.
	This is the standards that the Intel community uses to teach its analysts to be able to come up with analytic conclusions and assessments, right?
	Oh, here we go.
	Right there, look at that diagram.
	For expressions of likelihood or probability, an analytic product must...
	Use one of the following set of terms.
	So, from almost no chance to almost certainly.
	So, as a criminal, are you a criminal lawyer?
	No, I did civil litigation.
	Go back to that.
	I want to stay on that.
	Oh, sorry, sorry.
	Bring it back up.
	Okay, hold up.
	Hold on here.
	For those criminal defense and prosecutors out there.
	Beyond a reasonable doubt, which is...
	Where would you place beyond a reasonable doubt?
	I would place that in the very likely, almost certainly, nearly certain range.
	So again, this is intel analyst speak versus criminal prosecution speak.
	And then when you're using low, moderate, high confidence, that also is in this document.
	So when you're an analyst or a group of analysts and you use terms such as high confidence that it is almost certain, that's when we're getting into the range of beyond.
	A reasonable doubt.
	Okay? Now, if you use this language and you go back to the analytic assessment of the origins of COVID, what do we see?
	The very analytic assessment by the DNI that you and I were talking about on Twitter 1.0, on Fakebook, on Instagarbage, on Commie Search and Commitube, they told you you could not say that.
	Because you would be suspended.
	So if you pull that back up, meaning it was a lab incident.
	What did they tell us if we said it was a lab incident from Wuhan?
	They told us that you were racist and that you were what?
	Promoting mismatch and disinformation.
	Well, my question is always, who are the bureaucrats that are guiding this at Facebook, InstaGarbage, and Twitter?
	And are they being directed by a governmental agency?
	We know that.
	Yeah, I mean, we know that if that happened, I can tell you the names of the individuals that did that.
	I know James Baker is the one name that's public.
	Let me see who else we can possibly name.
	Who was doing the dirty work for Jen Psaki when they were going in there and asking Facebook to nix RFK certain specific posts?
	So check this out.
	The senior, the supervisory intelligence analyst.
	Of the organization known as the Foreign Influence Task Force that Chris Wray created in 2018 in order to perpetuate the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax institutionally within the FBI, that dude's name is Brian Otten.
	And he was the one that received the Biden Criminal Syndicate laptop in 2019 and covered for it.
	Before he was the SIA at the FIDF, Brian Otten was the Supervisory Intel Analyst, the SIA, for Crossfire Hurricane.
	The same dude.
	And has brought up the section chief at the Fittiff, Laura Demlow.
	When you look up where Laura Demlow is right now, she's the number two counterintelligence officer within the entire intel community over in Bethesda, Maryland.
	Hey, Laura.
	I know you're watching.
	What's up, girl?
	Okay, I mean, the problem is this.
	Sorry, I got rain going on.
	Let me see if I can go inside.
	No, no.
	Is it raining on your head or the noise we don't hear?
	It's just loud.
	Can you hear it?
	No, not at all.
	Okay, good.
	All right, so the bottom line, now I've lost the original document, which I guess it went from, let me see, moderate confidence.
	Oh, yeah, and then the analysts at three IC were unable.
	Intel Community Assessment.
	It's called an ICA.
	So nobody said it was highly probable that it originated through gain-of-function research.
	Right. But here's where I need to educate everyone of the cog and how the sausage is made.
	So the way that an analytic assessment of this nature gets out there to the broader Intel community and later subsequently is declassified for the broader public, it has to go through a process.
	Through the intel community that then ends up at what's known as the National Intelligence Council.
	The National Intelligence Council was an organization within the CIA, CLIA, before it then became a part of the Office of Director of National Intelligence.
	It is still physically located at CLIA headquarters.
	So pretty much all of your employees Are CLIA or are just physically proximate inside of CLIA headquarters?
	Meaning, is it possible, Viva, that the 51 spies who lied, who were mostly former senior CLIA officers, coordinated with their former colleagues and surrogates and subordinates to make sure that this intel community assessment was written in such a manner as to downplay any CCP, Wuhan context to it?
	Is it possible?
	I would say it's definitive, but...
	Is it probable?
	Is it much more likely?
	Is it almost certain?
	That's where the court of public opinion has to decide, because guess what?
	There was like six former directors of the CLIA.
	That were the signatories to the 51 spies who lied covering for the Biden criminal syndicate laptop.
	You're telling me that they no longer communicate with their colleagues that still work at the CLIA, at the National Intelligence Council that were authors of this intel community assessment and the later intel community assessment that discussed foreign interference in our 2020 election?
	I would say that it would be, as a former insider, it would be disingenuous for someone to try to convince me.
	That there's no way in hell that those folks, that they say, oh no, there's no way they communicate with each other.
	I would say with a moderate level of confidence, you would have to disprove it to me.
	You would have to show me their entire text messages and communications to show that they never communicated and coordinated to make sure that those two analytic assessments weren't manipulated by the same people that covered for the Biden criminal syndicate laptop.
	And in addition to that, You had the FBI headquarters fit up working with the Elvis Chans of the world that were as part of the whole Missouri v.
	Biden lawsuit.
	And Joe Pientka III, who was one of the senior ops guys on Crossfire Hurricane, later goes over to San Francisco field office of the FBI to coordinate the censorship industrial complex.
	At worst, at best, just allowed it to happen.
	The CLIA, former current, and the FBI, former and current, were really the ones behind this entire manipulative scheme.
	And they really started this whole transgression process with that illegal spying because they didn't want to be exposed for illegally spying.
	And so they've been escalating their cover-ups, and more and more people are wrapped up into it because they've been polluting to cover up the initial original transgressions.
	And they can't have Trump back in the office.
	Otherwise, well, retribution comes immediately.
	Immediately. But now, the thing is, when you describe it that way, it becomes much darker and much more sinister in that everybody's jokingly saying Trump is going to threaten to lock up his political rivals, etc., etc., if he ever gets back into office.
	And I have good reason to believe that a lot of these intelligence people know damn well they broke the law in a meaningful way.
	And we've seen the escalating...
	I sincerely believe that the 2020 pandemic existed.
	The virus was real, but everything about it was weaponized, hijacked by government to interfere with the election.
	And then they've gone through every other step leading up to July 13. And then the question is, and I'll wait for you to sit down before you answer it, where do they stop, Ivan?
	Where do they stop?
	Because, I mean, there is no greater transgression, I believe, than taking a life.
	And the failure to do so.
	You know, 2016, they broke the law, they spied on the incoming president, and they falsified a Russia collusion hoax that they manufactured at the highest levels of intelligence and weaponized at the highest levels of media because they played together and everybody knows that.
	They did that.
	They went with impeachment number one, which was bullshit, impeachment number two, which was bullshit, the January 6th lie, which was bullshit, right after the Whitmer Fed napping.
	Then they go to the lawfare.
	They long play the lawfare.
	And then they go to assassination.
	And I genuinely do suspect that many of these people are guilty of serious, serious crimes.
	And they sincerely fear going to jail if Trump ever gets back in office, has an RFK in charge of whatever agency, a Vivek Ramaswamy, an Elon Musk who's got the evidence should he ever be lawfully compelled or authorized to produce it.
	Where do they stop, I think?
	Oh, give me a couple minutes to unpackage that.
	Yeah, it was a big one.
	If past is prologue, then let's take a look at what they've already done.
	They've murdered how many people?
	Mark Zuckerberg admitted to participating in genocide a few days ago to the tune of, if you use CDC's own data, 38,000 were murdered due to the censorship industrial complex.
	How many people were injured?
	Over a million were injured, according to CDC's own Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System.
	So they've committed genocide so far in order to stay in power.
	Number two, they've completely violated our constitutional construct, where 39 states, non-legislative actors, conducted their elections outside of what I started with, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2, because there were secretaries of state, there were county clerks, there were governors through edicts and mandates that said, you know what?
	Our state's election law that the legislative body in our state passed, we're not going to follow that, and so we're going to circumvent that federal constitutional construct.
	Mike Pence participated in allowing for that to take place when he refused to listen to me when I presented to him the Operation Pence card memo.
	And all of his problems started from that point on, and he now is a political zero, but he's still lurking in the background.
	They've also, point blank, have murdered.
	Using their law enforcement entities, murdering Ashley Babbitt, U.S. Capitol Police officer.
	Metropolitan Police Department officer has murdered Lila Morris, right?
	As well as on January 6th.
	John Brennan used a drone without due process, vigilante style, to murder an American citizen abroad, okay?
	This was back when he was the CLI director at the direction of Barry Hussein.
	So your question is...
	What lengths are they willing to go to?
	Name something worse than genocide, Viva?
	No, Kevin, it's the individual transgression, the worst of murder at a massive scale.
	I'm glad, look, the thing is this, you say it, people are going to say we're a couple of crazy, extreme, whatever, right-wingers.
	Mark Zuckerberg just admitted to it.
	Well, that's what people need to understand is the information that they censored at the beginning, the drugs that they criminalized at the beginning, it killed people.
	And the drugs that they prescribed.
	Right. Two billion people have access to his platform.
	He basically conducted mental genocide, right?
	They called it, oh, we got to look at cognitive information, the size of director, Jen Easterly, who's currently the size of director.
	Bottom line is like, I don't understand.
	I'm not sure why Mark Zuckerberg wrote it the way he did because his lawyers must not have looked at it.
	It is a clear admission of guilt that he thinks that, oh, the DOJ is not going to go after him because he's cut a deal.
	Well, Ken Paxton and Mark Bailey and Chris Kobach and you name the other AGs throughout this country, any resident of those three states, Missouri, Kansas and Texas and others, can go ahead now.
	With the evidence of the admission of guilt to a competent federal authority known as the chair of the judiciary and weaponization committees, Mark Zuckerberg admitted publicly that he participated in genocide.
	So if anybody was killed in that process of being forced into a DNA mutilation product, they have a cause of action against Mark Zuckerberg and Fakebook and Meta.
	This is how huge it is.
	Just so that nobody accuses me of not doing it.
	The steel man, and I'll steel man the contrary.
	He didn't admit to genocide.
	He just admitted to censorship that objectively led to the deaths of many, many people.
	Yeah, let's clarify that.
	I know where people are going to try to...
	We're taking direction from and colluding with FBI, individuals that I just mentioned.
	Laura Demlow, Brian Aughton.
	Elvis Chan, Joe Pianca, and others, right?
	Jim Baker.
	Well, and then folks at the ODNI that we haven't identified, all of them yet, the Director of National Intelligence.
	Then you, Mark Zuckerberg, what they were accusing us of, they actually did, meaning, hey, therapeutics, you're going to have to die in the hospital.
	Because we're going to tell you and all of the infrastructure that's supposed to protect you, meaning all the doctors, are going to be duped and manipulated into not consuming safe and effective products.
	Instead, we're going to promote the unsafe and ineffective DNA mutilation injections as the only end-all be-all as we promote myocarditis making heart exploding products into your body.
	And oh, by the way, we're going to choke you out with ventilators.
	Why? Because good old Mikey Pence and Jared Kushner were the ones that were doling out those contracts initially for the face toilets, the medical nose rapes, known as PCR tests, and then furthermore, as the transition into the fake government, the jabs, right? Whether it was the Pfizer fail or the Moderna mutilation.
	What I was going to say something was...
	Oh, no, sorry.
	Just to also...
	Emphasize it.
	It's not because we're lawyers and we understand this better.
	Everyone out there was saying, oh, Zuckerberg's coming clean.
	And I'm reading that letter.
	It's like, dude's not coming clean.
	Dude is ratifying the allegations of RFK against him.
	He's effectively saying, I did it, but I was just following orders.
	I mean, straight out of...
	He was being a good little Nazi general.
	Yeah. And what do we do with Nazis?
	I love precedent.
	Let's create some precedent on Mark Zuckerberg.
	This is where I can see...
	I'm trying to look at you and look at you in a way where someone's saying, okay, he's a deep state up.
	And I'm trying to think of, how can you be a deep state up?
	The one place where people might be able to raise that argument is to say, the rhetoric gets a little too heated and then it becomes counterproductive to the actual goal.
	Let's address that.
	I've seen that.
	A lot of people have discussed that.
	Here's the deal, folks.
	Most people that say that can only think one chess move ahead.
	If you start thinking second, third, fourth, and fifth order of effects, meaning third, fourth, and fifth chess move, think of a mousetrap.
	If I'm putting forth a mousetrap, you don't see the mousetrap, but all you see is the cheese, you go for it.
	That's what I'm effectively doing with my rhetoric, and here's how it is.
	Number one.
	When I catch your attention with spicy rhetoric, I can now bring you in to the more in-depth conversation, because otherwise you would have not have paid attention, right?
	Now that I have your attention, I can now explain to you the precedent that they've already set, which is completely belligerent, illegitimate, unlawful, and beyond what most Americans see as positive discourse and actions.
	So when I say, Expect to see live stream swatting raids when the evidence comes out.
	People are like, oh my God, he's calling on whatever.
	Worst person in the history of humanity.
	Jamie Raskin even publishes out there through his surrogates, Raw Sewage and others.
	Denounce Ivan Raiklin.
	He's telling Schumer and Mike Johnson to denounce me.
	Meanwhile, like, okay, I'll just text Mike Johnson and say, hey, why don't you put out a public statement saying the following?
	Or invite me to a press conference denouncing.
	Political violence.
	So when I bring them into the mousetrap, I respond with, oh, wait, so you're, wait, Jamie, you're saying that my rhetoric is bad?
	You're saying similar to how you are protecting Michael Byrd's murder of Ashley Babbitt?
	When are you going to denounce that political violence?
	When are you going to denounce the political violence of the murder of tens of thousands through the jab?
	When are you going to denounce political violence of, you know, your John Brennan's assassination attempt?
	So it creates an opportunity for pivot.
	To expose them and showcase what they have done to us.
	What would you call what happened to Roger Stone?
	That was a live stream swatting, raid, kidnapping, armed robbery and burglary.
	Why can't we do the same?
	But in this case, instead of the DOJ doing it, why can't the Texas Rangers do it?
	Or state police name the state with a red governor and red AG.
	Or name the county.
	That is red throughout the country with a red DA and a red sheriff where all they do is conduct the precedent already set by Fat Al in Manhattan or Fulton Fannie over in Georgia.
	Viva, they set the precedent.
	I love precedent.
	Let's roll.
	We have 2,500 counties that are red.
	Why are you not...
	Leaning on those officials that have the lawful authority to do exactly, if not more, than what was done in the collective to Roger Stone, Scott Perry, Steve Vannon, Peter Navarro, Marjorie Taylor Greene.
	What I mean by that, in the collective, it's, what did they do?
	Illegally spied, live stream SWAT, raid, kidnapping, armed robbery, burglary, intimidation, assault, and in some instances, battery.
	Well, in some instances, outright summary.
	See what I'm doing there?
	Well, I'm explaining what the FBI did.
	Most people agree that that is egregious, belligerent activity.
	But if they're going to consider that objectively reasonable, then why not objectively reasonably all sheriffs that are read throughout this country conduct the same objectively reasonable actions that Lila Morris did on Roseanne Boylan on January 6th as they perform.
	An arrest, lawfully, to 600 people on my list.
	How do you argue against that?
	Well, it wouldn't be an argument.
	It'll just be illustrating the only problem with the strategy is that there's an asymmetry on the one hand when quite literally, and I'm saying this literally, it's not illegal when the government does it on the one hand.
	And I'm advocating for the government to do that, meaning the state government, the county government.
	And then to deputize those that will go through the proper training or are already trained to do so, to be deputized, to do that governmental action.
	And in the case of Speaker Johnson, he can just go ahead and whisper over to his sergeant at arms to deputize me and 80,000 of my closest friends to go ahead and, I don't know, action the contempt charge of Jim Biden, Hunter Biden.
	And you name the rest of the members of the Biden Criminal Syndicate, of Ali Mayorkas, of Christopher Wray, of A.G. Garland, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, that conducted contempt of Congress, isn't that what they got Roger Stone for?
	I'm just here ready, willing, and able to perform the exact same thing that they did on Roger Stone and the rest of the names that I mentioned, using the appropriate governmental authority to do so.
	It's all legal, moral, and ethical to the maximum.
	Please, poke holes at it.
	No, no, I mean, look, more simply put, and let's call it more palatably described, it's either a national...
	If you want to turn the other cheek, then you can just observe as I try to continue to coordinate this.
	Oh, no, no, no.
	I'm going to read a chat in a second that's actually mildly on point to that.
	No, but basically, you're describing, it's either a national divorce...
	Or civil war, to some extent.
	No. Neither.
	Not even close.
	It's not even close, Viva.
	See, people are intellectually lazy.
	When they say that those are our...
	And this is no offense to you.
	Don't worry, I'm not.
	I love your content and we talked earlier.
	The reason why it's a no is because we have not even come close to exhausting all of our legal, moral, ethical, peaceful remedies.
	To be able to apply the maximum necessary pressure to have these folks cave and essentially do what Jim Comey is already alluding to.
	He's saying that FBI agents are already planning to flee the country if President Trump returns.
	That, to me, is an indication that my First Amendment sounds and you allowing those First Amendment sounds to take place on a platform as big as yours is creating sufficient court of public...
	Opinion, knowledge, moving the Overton window over to our side to be able to pressure folks like Mark Suckabuck to admit guilt.
	Jim Comey is basically admitting guilt as well when he makes those statements on MSLSD that FBI agents are afraid and concerned.
	They should be because we in the collective and the millions and millions of viewers that we get access to are demanding.
	They're lusting for accountability because they've already seen enough evidence.
	To make sure that the justice is had.
	You know, some people call it accountability.
	I call it retribution.
	Retribution is the just, lawful accountability for illegal activity and criminal behavior.
	And the reason why I choose retribution starts with my last name, Raikland Retribution.
	Ivan, we're nowhere near done.
	I just want to read a few of the chats.
	Okay, good, good, good.
	I got more, but primarily also solution-driven stuff.
	But Pinochet's Helicopter Tours, who's got a great name, says, Viva, making people pay dearly for what they did is never dark and sinister.
	You don't have to participate.
	Just stay out of the way, which is virtually identical to what you just said.
	I want to participate in the conduct of this.
	But it has to be done beyond reproach, okay?
	And it has to be done in a very transparent fashion.
	I'm publicizing and indicating what should take place.
	And at no point in time do I ever advocate anything outside of legal.
	I always say this.
	People know me like, what do you mean?
	It's always legal, moral, and ethical.
	What does that mean?
	Well, that means we have to go through the process of, hey, Elon Musk, go ahead and work with Ken Paxton now that you moved your Twitter headquarters from California to Texas and he has jurisdiction over it.
	Go ahead and expose the criminal trove of evidence that you have.
	of the DMs of Jim Baker and his communications with everybody on my deep state target list and then find out where that communication took place by geotag location so that Ken Paxton's office can dole it out to the county and the state for actioning, criminal actioning, and if they need more resources to be able to conduct the necessary and perform the arrests, then why don't we go ahead and deputize 80,000 of us that refuse to comply with the illegal DOD jab mandate.
	That are already 90% trained to be able to conduct this stuff, right?
	To assist and support those law enforcement entities that may not have the necessary resources, we would be willing to do so pro bono as lawful deputies as we haul these criminals in.
	It's not just a fantasy idea.
	I'm traveling the country explaining the details of this with sheriffs.
	At the Texas Sheriff's Association, I have numerous folks coming out to me asking, well, how does this look?
	Where do I go to get deputized?
	I explain the process, right?
	And so while some people are like, oh, this is wild.
	Well, then it's not for you.
	It's for the people.
	We don't need everybody.
	We just need you to understand what is about to happen.
	It is inevitable because as more free speech takes place through X, as rumble grows, we are supplanting the narrative of those that were complicit in this.
	And there's no way for them to defend themselves because no one is believing them.
	People are coming off of commie tube and commie search.
	Twitter is now number three in terms of sticky website.
	It is number one in terms of downloaded news app.
	So what are they doing in response?
	They are making public service announcements saying that they're going to take down, indirectly, they're saying they're going to take down election information.
	Remember July 31st, the public service announcement from FBI?
	They said, oh, there's going to be a DDoS attack.
	Yeah, they did a DDoS attack on Elon's conversation with President Trump.
	Yeah. Didn't work too long.
	And I'm going to say, in as much as Twitter is sticky and Twitter is popular, I think they're sending a message to Elon with what they're doing to Pavel Durov in France.
	Yep, exactly.
	The reason why they went after Pavel is actually most people don't realize this, that are U.S. listeners.
	Telegram is by far a larger platform than Twitter globally.
	They have almost a billion monthly active users.
	Twitter, I believe, is only in the 350 million range globally.
	So on a global scale, Telegram is a much more threat, a much larger threat to the global order of what is currently in place with the corrupt, incestuous generational relationships than Twitter.
	And then now number two, Obviously, Twitter's growing, but it's a shout across the bow.
	It's a warning.
	I think at this point, with Elon and a lot of us, we're all in.
	They're all in.
	We're all in.
	We're going to see how this plays out.
	FAFO, bring it on.
	Pavel, a bigger platform is correct.
	I think he's also a politically easier target because he's not as...
	Popular as Elon Musk, not as, say, connected to American politics as Elon Musk, and it's a less shocking...
	Correct. In terms of most influential figure on the planet, absolutely.
	I would agree that Elon Musk, because not only is he a billionaire, but he's created an infrastructure.
	Tesla is not a car company.
	It's an AI company, and it is an electrical infrastructure company.
	And solar, right?
	So it's such a diverse portfolio, and he has so much leverage over a lot of institutions globally, and especially now that he's purchased X, that in the collective, he is absolutely the most influential figure, whether it's, you know, with Starlink and SpaceX, whereas Pavel Dorov, in terms of the information landscape, yes, he has the outsized influence compared to anyone else, but in the totality of the leverage and relationships and influence that Elon has.
	You got to remember that Elon has the biggest influence in big tech in Silicon Valley.
	So he can make a phone call, a conference call, and then after 30 minutes, you have a dozen of the most influential leftist venture capitalists are basically like, ooh, I better change sides here because otherwise I'm hosed.
	And that's why I think Mark Zuckerberg's situation, the admission.
	I'm guessing that Peter Thiel had a role in nudging.
	I was guessing even if it wasn't a nudge, it's sort of like Zuckerberg is looking and saying, I now want to be on the side of the cool kids because this ship is turning.
	And like you say, like...
	It's joking.
	Well, there are theories that the fall of the Soviet Union had to do with Chernobyl, where it was the lie that nobody could believe anymore, and they weren't having any more of it, being told, you're fine, it's not radiation, and go on living, and we're dying, and we can no longer even go back to the government after this level of psychological abuse and trying to tell us up is down.
	And I think we're at that level in America now, where...
	Two months ago, Joe Biden's good for another four years, and then two months later, Kamala Harris, the most unpopular VP and idiot ever, is now the greatest thing since sliced bread.
	Yeah, and then you had the first moment in world history where a billion people consumed the same piece of content, meaning the conversation between Elon Musk and Donald Trump, and that was really an opportunity for Donald Trump to respond at scale.
	To all the BS lies that they laid on him while they censored him, right?
	It's like, attack, attack, attack, but you don't get to respond with truth.
	So now it's our turn to come back boomerang style.
	Let me read these just for a second.
	I don't want people feeling miffed here.
	Viva, you need to have Kim Brooks on to talk about what she uncovered at the Georgia Automatic Voter Registration, and it's being used to register migrants.
	Screen grab that.
	Sammy says, if anyone wants, asks information through a fire hose.
	I will point them to this Viva episode.
	Amazing. I will be watching probably 19 more times.
	King of Biltong.
	Amazing stuff.
	Says Biltong is one of the most protein-dense foods in the world.
	They need to watch my Alpha Warrior interview.
	Three hours of in-depth explanation of J6 Fed Surrection.
	All that were involved and all that covered it up.
	Actually, that is the...
	Remind me, Elon Musk, one more thing that we talked about July 13. Ginger Ninja says, Per Gouveia.
	He says something to the effect of July 13th needs more investigation than January 6th.
	Absolutely no question about that.
	Ivan Raikland, please reach out to HotGranny94017.
	Sounds like something.
	Be suspicious.
	I'm joking.
	This is a number in a Hot Granny.
	A friend of yours, a veteran is in trouble.
	Okay, fine.
	Hot Granny with five digits is always a bit of a red flag.
	Yeah, not myself.
	Although I don't do mandates, I am a devout heterosexual.
	I'll send you that afterwards and you'll do with it what you will.
	Okay, Elon Musk.
	And again, I'm listening to it.
	I'm saying, okay, people want to say that this guy is a deep state operative to sabotage the movement.
	Him egging Elon on to disclose private DMs would basically...
	That's a red flag.
	You're asking someone to do something that would necessarily land them in jail instantaneously.
	The more I listened to it, I fully appreciated it, especially in light of what you just said a moment ago.
	It's not a question of doing something illegal, but changing the political landscape and the political environment where the Ken Paxton's then summon Twitter and say, disclose these DMs under penalty of whatever.
	And then Elon's like, well, got no choice.
	Here you go.
	And here's your evidence.
	Like what they tried to do when they summoned or got a warrant for Twitter to get Trump's DMs.
	Exactly. Jackie Boy Smith, illegitimate Jackie Boy Smith, pulled all of the Twitter data of Donald Trump.
	Oh, at real Donald Trump.
	It's the same exact thing.
	So all I'm advocating for is already precedent set by what they've done.
	So they didn't think this through on like, oh, we're going to do this and it's going to have a precedent.
	Well, I'm relying on their precedent.
	And in addition, there's a doctrine known as if you're sitting on criminal evidence, you kind of have a duty to provide it to competent law enforcement entities, right?
	Otherwise, you are then considered complicit in obstruction of justice.
	Right? And so, politically speaking, Elon wasn't really necessarily in a position to do so when his Twitter company was in California because of, you know, Gavin Newscomb, Nancy Keglosi represents the district that is actually where Twitter headquarters is located, right? Yep.
	And so, you got to, like, look at all those things.
	So, from a political calculus, you have to de-risk that by moving to Texas.
	The other thing is, when people are like, oh, it violates privacy, this and that.
	Remember, in December of 2022, Elon said that Twitter is not only a social media company, it's a crime scene.
	So he already knows it's a crime scene.
	He then immediately started doing Twitter files releases, and this was well before he endorsed President Trump.
	I mean, think about this, Viva.
	Imagine you're Elon Musk.
	You just went all in for Trump.
	Are you going to hold back on what you can do to support him?
	In order to create more risk for yourself and your companies and yourself in terms of physically?
	No. You're going to want to basically look at every single avenue of leverage that you have to help the person that you just endorsed.
	Because otherwise, you're toast.
	Elon is done as a human being physically and his businesses are toast if President Trump doesn't win.
	Because they're going to destroy him.
	The next question that he has to answer is, What can he do to maximally guarantee or create the maximum upside and de-risk supporting Trump?
	I call it the mother of all Twitter files.
	So I had a five-hour meeting with Matt Taibbi, which is one of the authors of Twitter files.
	I've communicated with Schellenberger more superficially, but I've communicated some of this stuff to him.
	I've also communicated with the respective committees, whether it's judiciary, weaponization.
	Oversight. Let's see.
	What else?
	The COVID Select on some of these components.
	The Oversight Subcommittee, as it applies to January 6th.
	And other members of Congress that are interested in exposing a lot of this stuff.
	And we're at a point here where I think the best time for him to release what's known as the mother of all Twitter files has to be next week, as early as Tuesday.
	Okay? And because now we know who the Democrat nominee is now that the convention is over, right?
	Everyone's focused in on the matrix information, meaning college kids are moving in this week, going back to college.
	You got people finishing up their summer vacations.
	You have Congress coming back from recess, returning on September 9th, and their staff is basically coming back in on Tuesday after Labor Day, right?
	And so...
	It begs the question, Elon, when is the best time for you to have the most maximal political impact and business positive impact with the next trove and maximum dump of the Twitter files?
	I'd say Tuesday, because then it helps inform the upcoming debate the following week on September 10th.
	Just like, remember when Biden said, hey, 51 intelligence officers said it had all the earmarks of a Russian.
	If only we knew.
	Just before the debate.
	Why can't we do the same, Elon?
	Release everything you have on Jim Baker.
	And it's not only his DMs, his emails, his internal Slack channel communications as they coordinated who to censor and how much to censor them.
	Remember, if Jim Baker is an employee of Twitter, it is very, I would say this, my analytic assessment with high confidence, it is almost certain that Jim Baker had a company-issued phone, tablet, laptop.
	And he communicated with either one or all of them with his former colleagues at the FBI.
	How about we take a look at all of that and then expose that and disclose it?
	What is Elon violating?
	He's not violating anything!
	I tell you, you have your moments, not of clarity, but of clear reflection when you're exercising.
	I'm like, yeah, you can't disclose user data or user DMs without a court order, but...
	What belongs to the company...
	Who said?
	No, no, no.
	Independent... Well, I'm trying to wonder what the terms of service say in terms of, like, we reserve the right to...
	The government has limitations.
	A private citizen owning the company, like, he can just change the terms of service for a specific individual unaware.
	But I would say the better tactic, like you were just saying, is the employees, it's...
	Twitter's data.
	They don't need to ask any users for permission.
	We'll disclose our own data.
	I mean, it is what he did with the first.
	The question is, though, you seem relatively confident that there's more data or more information that Elon has that has not been disclosed through either one of the Twitter files, one or two.
	Oh, absolutely.
	And I'll give you two just simple data points.
	During my meeting with Taibbi, he told me.
	I have so much more information that we haven't even released.
	And he asks me, if you were to give me one name where I should start the next trove of digging, he's like, who would that be?
	And I was like, well, the Deputy General Counsel, who formerly was the General Counsel of the FBI, Jim Baker.
	Start with him and start digging.
	And number two...
	When we were talking about the direct message component, he's like, you know what, Ivan?
	We had to sign an agreement saying that we would not go into anybody's Twitter DMs.
	And I responded with, hmm, Matt, do you think Jim Baker himself was the one that drafted that language for you to sign to not look at DMs?
	And he's like, huh, interesting.
	That leads me to believe that the DMs have the biggest goldmine information that exists within Twitter holdings.
	It's very...
	Now as I'm thinking...
	He's really protecting himself.
	Well, no question about that, but also...
	I don't believe that...
	One last thing, I'm sorry.
	Vijaya Kade, who was his boss, general counsel at Twitter, she had a meltdown when Elon purchased.
	Twitter. I wonder why there was a meltdown, Vijaya.
	Are you going to be criminally complicit?
	I am almost certain she was involved in this.
	Sorry, go ahead.
	No, no, please.
	Well, I was on a Twitter space and someone floated the idea that Pavel Durov was arrested for his own protection and I don't buy it at all.
	I can appreciate how people have those, you know, you want to think like next level conspiracy theory in quotes.
	No, I mean, I hate using that term.
	It's like in analytic speak, you have to come up with all possible hypotheses.
	And then you have to find evidence that is inconsistent with it.
	When you have sufficient evidence inconsistent with it, then it's no longer a kind of a prevailing hypothesis.
	And a lot of people still dig into those.
	That's why I say, like, hey, what do you think about this?
	I'm like, well, I haven't seen any evidence to really either bolster it, but I do see a lot of evidence that is inconsistent with your theory, right?
	That's science.
	And that was my point to that theory is, okay, they're arresting him to protect him from Russia, who for the last five years had done nothing to him, so it doesn't really pass a smell test.
	It doesn't pass a smell test either.
	But in a pretextual arresting...
	How about arresting Elon Musk to protect him, where they can then go in and discover all sorts of...
	There is no doubt that there would be evidence of criminal activity in the DMs of a great many...
	Government officials and government official accounts.
	Yes. I am curious now that I speak out loud again, what would be the terms of service for government official accounts in terms of their government records?
	They should be, in theory.
	Remember, these are accounts created by government officials and entities on a private platform.
	It's the same thing as a private citizen going on, right?
	Because it's Twitter-owned data.
	Whether it's the DMs, whether it's the emails, remember, the two silos of information that were used primarily in the Twitter files releases, the first dozen plus, was from email exchanges between Twitter employees and government officials, and number two, the internal Slack channel communications between Twitter employees and those governmental entities that organize the censorship industrial complex.
	What we haven't looked into yet, meaning What hasn't been public, I should say, yet is any direct message communications of those Twitter accounts.
	And number two, any other communications that took place between Twitter employees from their Twitter-issued devices.
	Because there's that jurisdictional hook.
	It's like, hey, that's my device that I gave you.
	I own it as a company.
	And then I can look at your signal messages.
	Your wire messages.
	You name the encrypted app if it's on your device.
	It doesn't matter because that's a Twitter device.
	And there's no need for FOIA because it's not a government-controlled device or account.
	It's a private company Twitter and private company device that has that data.
	Well, I'm trying to Google it as we do this.
	I'm only thinking of government accounts.
	True, it's on a private platform.
	But I do wonder if the laws of, you know, say presidential records apply to that because it was one of the arguments raised where in asking for Trump's DMs without advising Trump and without going through the National Archives and Records Act, they were violating what could be asserted as presidential privilege over his correspondence.
	And so if in as much as there might be federal laws that apply to the preservation of tweets of government officials...
	My gut feeling on that is going to be it's a private entity.
	In order to assert that presidential privilege, I think they're going to rule on it has to be done through a government-controlled, sponsored, and funded communications method, right? Or in confidence to another government official that direct report to the president type of thing, or along those lines.
	So we'll have to wait for the Supreme Court to decide, but in the absence of that, it's really...
	It's a lose-lose for them, right?
	Because if they're able to obtain it, it sets our precedent for all of them.
	It's literally like a kill switch for them.
	Because if they allow it to take place and use it against Trump, well, we're going to use it against them.
	Bring it.
	Bring the precedent.
	If, for example, Trump prevails, it doesn't matter for them either because they don't have presidential immunity.
	Only Trump would.
	So it's a lose-lose for them.
	This requires the palatability or the implementability of all of this.
	It requires a massive shift in the public sentiment, the public opinion, and the public perspective on all of this.
	And pressure on the media.
	The media, in as much as they are...
	That's why we're here.
	That's why I'm basically begging everyone to have me on to explain in as much detail as you have time for, To go through methodically all these scum.
	On Tuesday, I'm going to probably do an eight-hour, line-by-line of everyone on my Deep State target list, Twitter space and Rumble discussion.
	You obviously haven't been on Rogan yet.
	No, he's a coward.
	He wouldn't have me.
	That guy's a complete coward.
	Well, I don't know how it works to get on Rogan, but my goodness, if there was a social media, it would be amazing, and you might blow Rogan.
	Would I go on Rogan?
	Absolutely, I would.
	Does he have the courage yet to do so?
	I think he's almost there.
	He's almost there.
	Now, speaking of almost there.
	It's now easy, right?
	It's easy for him to do it as a sunshine patriot, because guess what?
	Elon is on board, right?
	Peter Thiel is on board.
	He just had Peter on.
	RFK is on board.
	Tulsi Gabbard's on board.
	Mark Suckabuck just went ahead and admitted to genocide.
	Joe Rogan has no base of support if he continues down the path of cowardice because the society has surpassed him in terms of understanding what the issues are.
	You know why?
	Because you exist.
	Because others, even like Sean Ryan, is now putting stuff out on X. You know, I'm always hesitant of people that are still on Commitube and the legacy platforms and haven't been censored.
	To me, that means you are a coward and you have not pushed the First Amendment space into the truth realm.
	You've been limiting yourself and actually pushing back against this lawlessness.
	And so to me, like, I don't want to be associated with betas, right?
	That's not for me.
	And people can say, well, you're going to get a platform here.
	I don't care.
	They don't deserve it.
	We need warriors to continue to motivate those that are ready to go and conduct maximal impact against those that literally not only destroyed our constitutional order.
	I mean, genocide was conducted during this COVID con.
	At what point are you going to stand up?
	They mutilated your DNA.
	They mutilated your children.
	They mentally mutilated 2 billion people through this schemery.
	There's no...
	What's the word I want to use to be careful here?
	There's no forgiveness at this point.
	There's only accountability.
	That's fantastic.
	I'm just going to make sure that I remember exactly the moment of the stream and clip that particular minute.
	137.28.
	Yeah, that's what I got.
	It was 137.30.
	Okay, so now, I mean...
	It's fantastic.
	You're not going to find much disagreement with me.
	I only try to look at you the way the bad faith media who wants to demonize you would look at you.
	Yeah, please.
	I like it because it gives me an opportunity to really dig into my thinking on this.
	And I can guarantee anybody who reads the hit pieces on you probably has not heard a minute of you speak and they might think you're crazy until they hear you speak.
	Because, look, an hour and a half, you're going to know if someone's crazy or not.
	Yeah, I'm pretty lucid, I think.
	Most people would agree.
	Not just lucid.
	You're well-informed.
	And even if I disagree on certain non-issues or strategery, you're informed and knowledgeable.
	Connections. You're involved in that community for 25 years.
	You're a good person and you seem like you have an untarnished reputation.
	You've got deep connections that are lasting that you can tap into whenever you need to.
	Yes. No, I'm just trying to find a face here.
	You're going to hear some music in the background.
	It's raining outside massively.
	We'll take the rain over the music, but it's good.
	I don't think many people are noticing.
	It goes January 6th to July 13th, but then it goes from Gretchen Whitmer's Fednapping to the January 6th Fedsurrection.
	It's impossible to dissociate any one of these events, but for those who don't know, because I think everybody watching does, Just flesh out the overlap in personnel between January 6th and July 13th.
	And I mean, how much more evidence has to come out in order for there to be some form of legal repercussion or social backlash, societal backlash against what we witnessed?
	So I'm going to use this phrase.
	July 13th rhymes very closely with January 6th.
	They're almost synonymous in the way that the indicators show what the government did on the date of the event and then its subsequent cover-up.
	Okay? So let's start with January 6th.
	Watch my three-hour episode with Alpha Warrior.
	And the reason why I'm, like I explained with my background and my subject matter expertise on these analytic assessments, etc.
	By God's grace, I have been in the right position at the right time.
	And so I'm the guy that put out a tweet in December 22nd of 2020 where I explained, Mike Pence has the obligation to send a memo to the state legislatures of the six contested states secretaries of state at a minimum.
	It should have been to 39 states to tell them, hey, the electors you transmitted were actually In violation of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2. Because you, state XYZ, ran your election not according to your state legislative election laws, which triggered the federal constitutional violation.
	Meaning it is up to the state legislatures on determining the allocation of those electors.
	President Trump retweeted that memo, and then it got, whatever, tens of millions of views.
	In that memo, it laid out, and in the discussion, it laid out that it was up to the states to remedy that.
	Not for Pence to dictate how the vote should take place.
	It was to remedy the illegality by doing what?
	One, have a joint session vote of their legislature to allocate the electors.
	Number two, abstain.
	Or number three, rerun the election according to the state election law.
	And then whatever the result was of one of those three...
	That would be what would be accepted as lawful, constitutionally transmitted electoral slates.
	Mike Pence refused to do anything in true fashion as the world's biggest, toxic, feckless, stone-cold, coward, gutless simp that he is, at a minimum, best-case scenario, or due to more intentionality.
	So that was my First Amendment sounds that I made publicly that got out there in the court of public opinion.
	To the masses.
	The problem with Jackie Boy Smith and Jamie Ratskin and the J6 cover-up committee, so they mentioned my name during the third hearing and they mentioned that tweet in the Jack Smith indictment of Donald Trump.
	The tweet that I tweeted.
	But they don't want to mention my name, Viva.
	Why is that?
	Why don't they come question me?
	I'll tell you why.
	Because these complete morons try to equate that tweet, That I explained, as it relates to the rules under the Electoral Count Act, they try to confound it with January 6th, but they're too retarded to understand that December 22nd is a different day, month, and year than January 6th of 2021.
	And on January 6th, I explained to Kevin McCarthy and to Mike Pence's Chief of Staff, Mark Short, that all they had to do on January 6th to make sure that it was a lawful election...
	Was to object by state delegation on the objections to those votes.
	A separate theory than the one that I just explained.
	That theory relied on the absence of a mechanism and manner in which to vote on the objections on January 6th.
	Because it doesn't say in the Electoral Count Act when there's an objection if you vote by state delegation or by one person, one vote in the House.
	And so in the absence of that, I said, hey.
	Why don't you run it by state delegation?
	And Kevin McCarthy is the chair of that construct where 27 states are Republican, 20 Democrat, and three are tied up.
	And then I told if that occurs, then when it comes before the floor, when the House and Senate reconvene, it's up to Mike Pence as the presiding officer to rule either in favor of the Nancy Pelosi-styled one-person-one vote or the Kevin McCarthy-one-state-one vote procedure under the 12th Amendment.
	Well, guess what happened?
	Nancy Pelosi caught wind of this being out there, because I publicly explained this in the run-up to January 6th, meaning I never advocated for a delay.
	I disagreed with Senator Ted Cruz's 10-day delay, because at that point it was already too late in the game.
	I disagreed with sending it back to the states, because that was for December 23rd under Electoral Contact Title III U.S. Code Section 12. On January 6th, it was for a non-delayed actual vote by state delegation.
	And if everybody voted by political party, three to six states would have been objected to, which meant no one would have gotten 270.
	And then it would have triggered the overall contingent election, thus guaranteeing the re-election of Trump in the House.
	And then with 52 Republicans in the Senate, because Perdue and Loeffler were still in, it would have guaranteed the Senate voting.
	For Pence, for a re-election.
	But when Nancy Pelosi caught wind that this could take place, usher in the Fed's erection.
	Meaning, this is what people don't understand, Viva.
	I urge you, I have to ask you to pull up Title II, U.S. Code, Chapter 29. Okay?
	And bring that up.
	This is the most important aspect that...
	Everyone misunderstands about January 6th.
	Say it again.
	Title II, U.S. Code, 2020.
	Chapter 29. Chapter 29. Pull that up.
	This is the law that lays out the authority, roles, responsibilities, and jurisdiction of what's known as the U.S. Capitol Police and the Capitol Police Board.
	Everybody that you consider as a...
	Advocate or champion or whatever of January 6th, they are fucking clueless, okay?
	And here's why.
	Go to Section 1967 for me.
	So 2USC 1967.
	When you find that, it lays out the two jurisdictional zones upon which...
	The U.S. Capitol Police have, well, it lays out the jurisdiction of U.S. Capitol Police unilaterally, which is all the office buildings on the inside, meaning all Senate, the Capitol itself, the House and Senate side, and the House office buildings and the Library of Congress.
	The Capitol Police has different divisions.
	The Senate Division, the Capitol Division, the House Division, and the Library of Congress Division, right?
	They also lay out in this section, if you read through it, Where they have concurrent jurisdiction with Metropolitan Police Department.
	That jurisdiction extends to the Union Station, where Clay Higgins identified 200 people and several buses, right?
	Of FBI agents within the U.S. Capitol Police and Metropolitan Police Department jurisdiction zone.
	All the way down beyond the DNC and RNC, where the pipe bombs were placed.
	See where I'm going here?
	There's also a secondary jurisdiction zone laid out on the Capitol Mall, the eastern part of it, which is concurrent U.S. Capitol Police jurisdiction with U.S. Department of Interior Park Police.
	Because no one was arrested for any activities in that jurisdiction, I'm not going to talk about that.
	Let's focus in on the jurisdiction that's concurrent with Metropolitan Police Department.
	So it begs the question.
	When the pipe bomb is placed in U.S. Capitol Police's jurisdiction, what triggered the process and the investigative lead and path to react and respond to that?
	Well, because I know and knew the lead security guy at the RNC, I interviewed him to find out.
	What does he say?
	It was a total diversion decoy.
	Okay? He's got the footage, right?
	Next. When they found out he was communicating with me, I'm going to break some news here.
	He was asked to resign.
	Or I should say, fired-ish.
	Okay? Because I'm getting too close.
	My running hypothesis is that the pipe bomb was deliberately there in order to divert the assets Over by the Capitol from protecting the Capitol to be placed down there that were within the U.S. Capitol Police so that Chief Sun could focus his efforts on there, number one.
	Number two, Nancy Piglosi decided to not request any executive branch support because she was facilitating the breach.
	Because the only way to stop Ivan Raithlin's path of a re-election, which was being discussed publicly and internally, Look at her sergeant at arms and say, hey, we're going to have to create an insurrection or a fedsurrection because otherwise we're going to lose this election because all they have to do, McCarthy and company, right, is to do the state delegation vote.
	So there's so much to this that I don't want to rehash, but I go into excruciating detail to say this.
	My top, like using the analytic speak, at this point, I have high confidence, and I can go to as many sources as you want because it just takes time.
	I have a high level of confidence, and I'm almost certain that Nancy Pelosi conducted a fedsurrection as the senior authority hosting the joint session on January 6th as the Speaker of the House with her Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving to facilitate the deliberate breach of the Capitol and subordinate to her authority.
	were elements of the executive branch that were in the crowd that day to ensure Those subordinate elements include FBI, DHS likely, and some other elements.
	That is why she refused DC National Guard because she did not want any entities from the executive branch that were under the control of Trump from stopping Trump.
	The Fed's direction from taking place.
	Because they would have kind of picked up on it, right?
	And she coordinated that with the authority that was concurrent jurisdiction law enforcement entity known as the MPD.
	Her name that runs the MPD at the highest levels is the mayor of D.C., Muriel Bowser.
	Okay? So when Muriel Bowser on January 5th tweets out a memo saying that...
	You're not going to send any executive branch assets into supporting and protecting the Capitol without our approval.
	That, to me, was a very clear indication that something's up.
	And then when Mikey Pence was beating his chest on January 6th in the evening with the D.C. National Guard, as he's ordering around General Milley, I asked myself, under what authority is a vice president, the commander-in-chief, and ordering around, A chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that is also not in a chain of command role, only an advisory role.
	This parliamentary coup that took place on January 6th had multiple layers, and it involved Milley, it involved Pence, it involved Pelosi, and to a lesser degree, the evidence doesn't really, I don't have sufficient evidence to rule this out.
	That McConnell and his senior security guy at least had knowledge of it as well as McCarthy.
	I know that part's a stretch because I don't have that much evidence for it, but my gut feeling with a low confidence level includes those two based on their actions subsequent to the January 6th fence direction.
	If you want to go and step through every single layer, it's going to require at least another hour.
	We might have 20 minutes, but now you might want to go outside.
	The rain might be better than the music.
	Now, Ivan, do you mind if I...
	I'm going to have the last 20 minutes on Locals.
	You're okay with that?
	We'll get to the Butler failed assassination attempt?
	Yeah. Are you sure you don't want to go a little bit longer?
	I do, but I have to pick up a kid at 245-ish.
	Alright, family first.
	Ivan, come on a second time.
	We'll do this.
	We'll get through all of this.
	So what I'm going to do, I'm going to end this on Rumble.
	Everybody come on over to Locals.
	This is not going to be only for supporters.
	Did I just do something?
	Oh, wait.
	Before you go.
	Yeah. By the way, for those that are skeptical, should I bring in some of the sources of information that I use to inform me on this?
	Or should I do it on Locals?
	Do it on...
	Well, let's do it on Locals.
	But then just give me the links and I'll put it up for everybody afterwards.
	But I just want to make sure that we're still live.
	Name one person in your ecosystem, Viva, and in the movement that communicates with Chris Miller, Chief Steven Sund, Tarek Johnson, I know you have, Barry Loudermilk and his staff, for starters.
	I wouldn't name anyone by name, but you're in my ecosystem now, so I get to name you?
	My point here is that all these people that have their theories about what happened on January 6th and the internal deliberate decision-making, you can't come up...
	I argue that you cannot come up with a legitimate assessment if you have not talked to those four individuals who was the former Secretary of Defense, who was the former Chief of the Capitol Police, who is the current committee chairman that has oversight over January 6th and the U.S. Capitol Police and Capitol Police Board, and you have not read through...
	All of the transcripts of the January 6th cover-up committee and you have not read through every single book published by a member or a witness in the ecosystem of the January 6th events that day.
	Because you're not just knowledgeable enough.
	And so I can go through the list of some of the books that I'm referring to.
	How about this?
	Can you just send me the link and I'm going to post it in our Locals community to Twitter?
	I can't send you the link because I have it all in my Audible.
	I've listened and blew through all of these and have evidence.
	Say it right now.
	How long is it going to take to read through this, Ivan?
	About 20 seconds.
	Okay, do it now and then we're going to end it on Rumble and take it over to Viva Barnes Law.
	And I got some questions there from our community for you.
	Okay, so this is my J6 reading list.
	The January 6th report.
	Sedition Hunters by Ryan Riley.
	January 6th by your beloved Julie Kelly.
	I have my own thoughts about her.
	Enough by Cassidy Hutchinson.
	Midnight in Washington by Adam Bolschiff.
	Endgame by Eric Swallowswell.
	Unthinkable by Jamie Ratskin.
	The January 6th tapes, meaning all ten hearings.
	The Chief's Chief, Mark Meadows.
	Oath and Honor by Liz Cheney.
	Dick Cheney's daughter, right?
	Renegade by Adam Crybaby Kinzinger.
	Standing My Ground by Harry Dumb, one of the USCP officers.
	Pronounced dumb as in dumbass.
	Hold the Line by Michael Fanone.
	You know, that guy with Tourette's as well as a drug user, MPD officer.
	The Breach by Denver Riggleman.
	And he mentions my name in his book.
	And his co-author, Hunter Walker, is one of the two authors that's been doing hit pieces on me.
	Huh, what a coincidence.
	The Deep Rig by Patrick Byrd.
	Troy Nels, The Big Fraud.
	Steven Son, the former Capitol Police Chief.
	Courage Under Fire.
	Government Gangsters.
	They all write books and try to cash in on their experience here.
	Mike Pence, so help me God.
	Chris Miller, Soldier Secretary.
	And then Akanilo Ganel, the other witness U.S. Capitol Police officer by his book American Shield.
	So as I read through all of that and leveraged my knowledge and network of 25 years in the system, I come up with my hypotheses and conclusions of what happened on January 6th, run it by Tarek Johnson, run it by.
	And my one question to them is, every time I produce a piece of content on January 6th, please watch it and tell me what I got wrong.
	And that's my conclusion.
	And that's why it has a high level of confidence with almost certainty.
	It was a Nancy Pelosi-led Fed Surrection, and those that covered it up created their Patriot target list to stop us from exposing them and creating consequences for them.
	And it goes back to, what are they going to stop at?
	Nothing. Which means that we can't stop at anything as we play the game of chicken.
	We'll see how it plays out.
	We're not ending it.
	We are just going to end it on Rumble and we're going to have...
	We're doing a part two.
	There's no question about it.
	So I'm going to end on Rumble.

▲