Ep. 227: RussiaGate 3.0! Trump Sentencing! Elon v. Media Matters! RFK Ballot & MORE! Viva & Barnes
|
Time
Text
Be, in your opinion, supporting a mandatory gun buyback program?
Why don't I hear anything?
Listen, we're not going to be able to get where we need to go without action in Congress.
We've got to pass some laws to deal with this.
Now, I...
Well, crap, I think all that you guys heard was me complaining about where the audio was.
Let's back that up because my volume was not turned up.
Starting from the beginning.
Enjoy the show.
Coming in soon.
Should she also be, in your opinion, supporting a mandatory gun buyback program?
Listen, we're not going to be able to get where we need to go without action in Congress.
We've got to pass some laws to deal with this.
Now, I was heartened by the fact that two years ago we finally did a gun safety law, the Safer Communities Act.
And it was the first gun safety law we passed in 30 years.
30 years.
And it was modest, but it did save lives.
But clearly, in the wake of what happened just the other day in Winder, Georgia, it's not enough.
And the least we can do is move forward on the bipartisan spaces where ordinary people agree.
Clearly, there's a disconnect between what the people, the American people, want.
And what they're able to get out of their government.
Again, 87% of Americans believe in background checks.
And yet I hear politicians say that it's not guns who kill people.
It's people who kill people.
And yet we don't even want to know who those people are.
We won't even support.
Senator, yes or no, though.
Should she support the mandatory buyback program?
Look. Just a yes or no.
Look. Listen.
Listen. Sorry.
As a pastor, I've done buyback programs.
You can pick this issue or that issue.
But I think that, again, there's not one single thing that will make all of this go away.
Mandatory buyback.
Let me just go close this window down in the back.
There's another term for a mandatory buyback.
When someone comes and says, yeah, I want what you have, so you're going to sell it to me.
For how much?
It doesn't really matter.
We'll work out the terms later.
I'm buying it back, and you have no choice.
That's called confiscation.
Or, as the mob might call it, mob-like cartel behavior.
And, you know, it's not to say...
Unbelievable thing.
Warnock says, you know, the people expect more than what the government is delivering them.
According to whom?
The issue in all of this is they keep saying there's no background checks.
That's not my understanding of the law.
I'm fairly certain.
I stand to be corrected.
I'll pick Robert Barnes's big brain when he gets in on this.
I'm fairly certain that there are background checks pretty much everywhere.
Mandatory buyback.
And when he answers the question with a look.
Listen. I don't want to say what is...
If it was so politically popular that people wanted the government to come and mandatorily buy back your firearms, he would say it.
Look, there's a disconnect between what the people expect from their government.
Dude, if you're telling me that the population wants a mandatory buyback, you should be proud to say it quickly, unequivocally, and without pussyfooting around the fact that you don't want to say it.
Look, I don't want to say yes because that would be mildly unconstitutional because, you know, the Second Amendment shall not be infringed unless the government wants to buy back your guns, and in which case you've got to mandatorily sell them to them.
Holy hell.
I was thinking of the other mandatory buyback.
I think the buyback was for zero dollars and zero cents for the Lakota tribe back at Wounded Knee.
I think it's 1850.
I'm going to have to ask Barnes if he can give me more of a thorough explanation for what happened at Wounded Knee.
But, you know, the overview internet summary is the government comes in, tells the Lakota members of the Indian tribe, you know, we need your firearms for safety, and we're taking them.
And then a few days later, Arguably one of the biggest mass murders in American history.
247 Lakota members.
Unarmed, disarmed, mandatorily.
Slaughtered. So yeah, that's it.
It's an interesting way to listen to what...
Don't talk about price fixing.
People will call you a commie.
Don't talk about mandatory buybacks for Second Amendment constitutional shall not be infringed rights.
People might call you a commie.
Steal the ideas from the Republicans and then go after the commentators who pushed those ideas as being Russian propagandists.
Bada bing, bada boom!
People! Good evening.
Six o'clock.
Sunday. I should have checked that we were...
I think I did check that we were satisfactorily live across all platforms.
We are live on Rumble.
We are live on YouTube.
And we are live at the wonderful community at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
Let me just double check one more time.
That I'm using the proper mic.
Oh yeah, I am.
An unarmed society is a complacent society, says progtologists.
And the expression also goes, the invert of that, is an armed society is a polite society.
We're going to talk about the shooting up in Georgia because, as per usual, there's more to it than would meet the eye.
Just because this caught my eye, Bucklebrush Jones from Rumble.
If Lauren Chen is Canadian, foreign agent is given.
I don't know.
We're going to also get to that in a bit.
So for those of you who are new to the channel, I don't think there's going to be very many of you.
First of all, share out the link.
We're live.
This is awesome.
Every Sunday night, Viva and Barnes Law Extravaganza.
I get in the car at some point on a Sunday and I put out one of my vlogs, car vlogs, reminding everyone of the show.
Talking about an issue that we're going to cover in the show, and we start, for those who are new, on Rumble, on Commitube, aka YouTube, on Twitter, I believe we're on Twitter, and on vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
At a given point in time, we end on Commitube and Twitter.
Not ending on Twitter because it's commie by nature, but the way studios set up, you have to go to Rumble and Locals, and then after the show is over, we end on Rumble and we go for our Locals afterparty.
Where we take questions from all $5 tips and up.
And as we're live throughout, I read the Super Chats and the Rumble Rants in as much as I can.
If you're going to be miffed, if I miss your Rumble Rant or your Super Chat, do not give it.
I don't like people being miffed.
I got distracted because I got tagged here.
Mercina Lady in YouTube says, Viva, I continue to check if I have subscribed because YouTube has not been notifying me.
It always checks that I am subscribed, but YouTube is not notifying me.
I make sure it's checked all...
There is undoubtedly chicanery afoot on YouTube.
My Viva family channel was randomly demonetized for no good reason.
I think I know the reason.
I don't think it's political.
I think it's algorithmic and it has to do with licensing videos to licensing agencies.
So I will not...
I immediately, reflexively jumped to politics.
But there's definitely no question there's chicanery.
I got five on it.
It says TruthSanity1.
So, by the way, we're going to get into all this.
We have a great show tonight, and I got a few more videos lined up on the backdrop.
But before we even get started, we've got to thank our sponsors of the evening, and there are two of these wonderful sponsors.
The one is going to start, but you may not know that that's what I look like without my shirt on.
It kind of is, but it's not me on that.
I'll just take one more quick peek, make sure they're not using my body and likeness.
No, no, not quite.
People, we are living through a new realm of tyranny.
We have a secret service that takes down the shooter, but only after he shoots our president.
An FBI that fabricates cases, an ATF that wants to take away our guns, and an FDA that favors big pharma companies over our health.
Quite clearly, our government agencies have been weaponized against the American people.
In times like this, we have to stick together.
We need to back our leader that literally took a bullet for us.
We need to fend off the leftist media with And we need to...
Stay strong and healthy enough to protect our families.
Just like they are trying to take down Trump, they are also trying to take down Black Stars.
Black four-star product, NMN.
November, Mama, November.
And it's not because of safety or efficacy.
It's because of the greedy and evil powers that want to put a puppet president and jab us with another jibby jab.
Boost. You see Kathy Hochul's video the other day?
It's psychotic.
It's psychotic.
Now they're trying to turn MNM into the first ever anti-aging prescription drug simply to fill their never-ending pockets.
Why do they want to do this?
Because MNM works.
MNM is vital for the functioning of 37 trillion cells in our body.
A study by Harvard claims that NMN can help reduce weight, cholesterol, and even blood pressure in overweight adults.
It's the new thing that I know not only slows down, but can reverse aging, according to Harvard.
It's wonderful.
It's a game changer.
I've asked Black Forest to give my followers a special discount because I want to see you guys have a chance.
Get your hands on it before any potential restrictions come into play.
For the next 48 hours, you can buy two, get one free.
Black Forest Supplements is ready to fight for this.
They want to ensure that people have access to NMN, but who knows?
There might come a day when agents are at Black Forest's door, hopefully not at mine as well, trying to stop them from selling the life-changing supplement.
So I urge you to check it out now while supplies last.
Two, buy two, get one free.
The website is blackforestsupplements.com forward slash Viva.
Now, before we get into the second sponsor of The Evening People, I have so many videos on the backdrop that I don't even know which ones I want to go to.
We're going to go to...
Trip down memory lane, people.
No, you've all seen the vlog today.
We're going to go to fake news.
Did I talk about this one the other day?
I think I did, but I think it's worth...
Bringing up the next lie because all they do is lie.
Gavin Newsom talking about the school shooting out of Georgia.
J.D. Vance, cold, heartless bastard that he is.
I don't know where Gavin Newsom came from and whether or not he came from a silver spoon in his mouth as a childhood.
I don't hold that against people.
The idea to be so godforsakenly dishonest, in a way...
That is evil.
There's no other way to say it.
The news talking point as relates to the Georgia school shooting is that J.D. Vance came out and said school shootings are a fact of life.
Just a fact of life.
And I said, well, this is actually, this is the video clip.
Let's just play this and revel in the malicious dishonesty of the left.
Now look, the Kamala Harris answer to this is to take law-abiding American citizens' guns away from them.
That is what Kamala Harris wants to do.
He says, look, I don't like this.
I don't like to admit this.
I don't like that this is a fact of life.
But if you are a psycho and you want to make headlines, you realize that our schools are soft targets.
And we have got to bolster security in our schools so that a person who walks through the front door...
We've got to bolster security so that if a psycho wants to walk through the front door and kill a bunch of children, they're not able to.
And again, as a parent, do I want my kids' school to have additional security?
No, of course I don't.
I don't want my kids to go to school in a place where they feel like you've got to have additional security, but that is increasingly the reality that we live in.
Now look, it's such a disgusting, vile lie in that he didn't even say school shootings were a fact of life.
What he said was that it's a fact of life that if you're a psycho and you want to make the headlines, schools are soft targets.
Everybody knows it.
It's so freaking stupid.
That why do you have armed guards at a bank?
Well, you have things in there that are valuable.
And if you didn't have armed guards, it would be a soft target for something valuable.
It's an amazing thing that these lefty Democrats, who would sooner go after the constitutional rights to bear arms in whatever limited or extensive restriction they want to go after it for, will say, yeah, we acknowledge we want to protect our children.
We acknowledge they are valuable.
And yet somehow they are less valuable than money in a bank.
Do you know how many veterans would take the position of protecting a school?
Acting as a security guard?
Do you know how many veterans it would take to protect every school in America?
I can tell you.
With virtual certainty, although I've never crunched the numbers, for the amount of money that was squandered, lost, or misappropriated through corruption that was siphoned into Ukraine, you could easily protect each and every school across America with a veteran who would love the job and who would find meaning in civilian life after returning to civilian life.
But it's...
For every lefty Democrat who talks about Trump trying to politicize the border crisis for his own political gain, that is exactly, unequivocally, and without the slightest degree of shame, exactly what they're doing with each and every one of these school shootings.
Everybody hates them.
Would I rather see an armed security guard at the school like I do, incidentally, every day when I drop my kids off?
Yeah, it makes me feel a little better, and not just because of mass shootings, because of...
Any form of violence.
Schools are soft targets.
And if you think you're only scared of another kid who might find his dad's gun, well, with the open border or the porous border, so nobody fact-checks me and say, the border's not open, Viva, it's actually just porous.
With the porous border and the 15 million people that just came in, even if 1% of them are violent criminals looking for soft targets to make the headlines?
Yeah, no, forgive me.
I would rather there be two armed guards at every school.
The metal detectors, I think, are absolutely inane.
I don't think they do anything.
I think it's the illusion of safety.
An armed security guard or two at the front door with a police car.
Yep. Anybody who wants to try to make the headlines is going to go find another soft target, and it won't be that one.
Now, that being said, while we're talking about...
Well, we're talking about a corrupt government, people.
Listen up!
The world is getting more unpredictable by the day.
Political insanity, rumors of civil war, and an unstable stock market, and now the looming threat of a new global health emergency.
Did you know there's a bird flu summit coming in October?
Eerily similar to Event 201 that foreshadowed the COVID pandemic.
Whether or not you think the pandemic was planned, fake, weaponized, one thing is for certain.
It was politicized.
Get this, the first topic on the agenda.
Mass fatality management planning.
If that doesn't send chills down your spine, I don't know what will.
Here's the good news.
If there's any good news to this bad news, you don't have to be scared if you're prepared.
The wellness company created the medical emergency kit, and every home in America should have at least one of these.
They're packed with life-saving meds like ivermectin, amoxicillin.
And even Z-Pak.
And it's all backed by experts like Dr. Peter McCullough.
Imagine this.
No more frantic searches for a doctor.
No more emergency waiting rooms.
And no more worrying that you might not have it because there's a supply chain issue with the manufacturers of our job, i.e.
China and that job, I'm sorry, of our pharma medicines like China and India.
That's when I realized there was something fundamentally flawed with the North American system.
No more.
That's it.
Few clicks, a kit is delivered at your door.
In times like these, having a medical emergency kit, it's not just a luxury, it's a necessity.
Protect your family by preparing now.
Head over to TWC.health.
TangoWhiskeyCharlie.health forward slash Viva.
Using promo code Viva gets you $30 off.
Don't wait until it's too late.
Act now.
Control and ensure that you're protected against whatever comes next.
TWC.health forward slash Viva for $30 off and free shipping.
People. Before Barnes gets here, hold on, let's get to some of the chat before I fall too far behind.
From our locals community, Patty F. Weber, if a heavily armed gang arrives at your house, tries to break down your door, what are the best means to protect yourself should they enter your home if you have no firearm?
Is this a question for me?
If you have no firearm, run out the back door and let them take whatever they want in your house.
Call me the sissy Canadian.
I would always look for...
The path of least confrontation.
When we dealt with one of those Texas cases, where was it?
Someone was shot over property.
It's almost better to avoid confrontation over that which can be easily replaced.
We see what's going on.
It's nuts.
I've never understood it.
I grew up in Canada.
You know, the adage was what the Democrats in America always repeated.
You don't need an AR-15 to go hunting.
Yeah, the Second Amendment wasn't for hunting.
It was for the God-given right to self-defense, robust self-defense, and to fight the most powerful government on Earth, that being the British, required a well-regulated militia.
I understand it now.
So yeah, then we got love from the UK.
Wayne171717 and Ginger Ninja in the house.
He says, Ginger, oh, the chessboard is not, hold on.
The chessboard is not behind us.
Ginger Ninja made me a beautiful chessboard.
It was right there because I've been playing with it with my kid and it's the best chessboard ever.
But Ginger Ninja says, don't forget Matt Christensen has been attacked through this Russia 3.0.
Speaking of which, Barnes, Matt Christensen wants to interview you about Amos Miller and Amish cases.
Would you oblige?
I'm sure Barnes will.
And Ginger Ninja.
I didn't forget about Matt.
Matt's coming on tomorrow to talk about this at 12.30.
We're going to talk about it tonight when Barnes gets here.
Let me just make sure that he's got the link.
We're going to talk about it tonight, obviously.
But Matt is coming on tomorrow to discuss this.
And we're going to go into it tomorrow.
So 12.30.
The only reason I didn't mention Matt in my video today, I don't know the details of Matt's situation.
So I don't want to make a mistake.
When I say that the content was licensed, I'm not sure that Matt...
We're going to get into it.
But the bottom line, Matt's coming on tomorrow, 12.30, so stay tuned for that.
And we're going to get into some serious stuff tonight.
Holy sweet, merciful crab apples.
Cheryl Gage in YouTube says, Time Magazine used to be good 50 years ago.
Now, just a bad joke.
Yeah, Time Magazine did the top 100.
That was my handle, not my...
That was not gas.
Time Magazine did the 100 most influential people in AI, and Elon didn't make the list.
Hey, Barnes, we can hear you, just so you know.
I think we can hear you.
I can hear you.
Rumble has to, Studio has to fix something where if I try, sometimes I'm, Studio has this thing where unless the person coming in has disabled mic and camera, they're going to pop onto the stream if I'm live.
And so it's a little confusing for people who've never used it before and risky if they come on like, if they're pulling a tube and they come on butt naked and screaming bloody murder.
Robert, what was I just saying two seconds ago?
Matt Christensen.
Ah, shoot balls.
I absolutely just lost my thought.
Doesn't matter.
Robert, how goes the battle, sir?
Good, good.
Someone's going to remind me in the chat.
Oh, for good.
It was about Russia.
It was about Matt Christensen.
Oh, the licensing.
Oh, that's right.
So, sorry.
Sorry. So, I didn't mention Matt Christensen in my video today because I'm not sure what his situation is in terms of the details here.
Whether or not he had exclusive content for Tenant Media or...
Was licensing it like, from what I understand, the bulk of Tim Pool, Rubin, and any constant content was.
Robert, I think we're going to have to start with this one tonight.
But what's the book and what's the cigar?
And then tell us what we have on the menu for tonight.
Yeah, I almost forgot to put the book up.
Confessions of a Tax Collector.
It's a good book about, it's kind of like, you know, Lord Conrad going into the heart of the jungle.
It discloses what the IRS agents typically are like.
But also what the power that they have is, that it's really a surveillance network, a control network, as much as it's a taxation collection system.
So I recommend it for multiple purposes, politically, practically, legally, very useful text.
And then this is a non-Cuban partagas, which was recommended by the Sicar guys, so we'll see what that's like.
And just so everybody does know, Robert, you do smoke the cigars.
They're not just what people...
Oh, yeah.
It's good to chomp on, because, like, George Corley Wallace used to do this, too.
You get a little tobacco shot to the brain.
Yeah, there's no...
I mean, people who don't know that, it's sort of like chew, except it's in the lips.
Yeah, a lot of folks dip where I'm from.
I mean, I never did.
It just looked a little nasty.
It looked nasty.
It tasted nasty.
I never...
I never liked...
I like the bubblegum fake one.
When you do it as a kid in the South, you get the fake dip and you put the bubblegum in there and you act like you're a tough guy.
See, I never liked tobacco products ever, so I tried smoking when I was a kid and it just made me dizzy and nauseous.
So I luckily never got into it.
What do we have on the menu for tonight, Robert?
I got some fun topics.
We got the two top topics from the board poll over at Fever Barnes Law.
Dotlocals.com.
One is the Russiagate 3.0, which we've given some sneak previews to at the Bourbons and the various videos you've already cut on the topic.
Amazing how many people took the bait on that.
That's just sad and pitiful, but we'll get to that in a second.
The second most popular election-related cases, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court, busy finding new excuses to allow more ballots to flood in, just as they were doing last week and the week before.
The same court that Amos Miller's case will be in front of the week of October 7th in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Also, Robert Kennedy and Jill Stein and Cornel West all having different kinds of ballot battles.
So we'll give some updates on that as well.
Robert Kennedy trying to get off the ballot where they're trying to now keep them on the ballot.
West and Stein trying to get on the ballot where they're trying to keep them off the ballot.
Seeing courts try to do that without exposing themselves as partisan hypocritical frauds is definitely going to be something to witness over the next several weeks.
We've got another parent charged with a criminal activity for the behavior of his school-age son in a Georgia school shooting.
So what we saw in Michigan, we can probably expect to see more of.
Interestingly enough, we haven't heard of anything like that in the case of the person who tried to kill President Trump.
Maybe there's something else lurking behind the scenes up there.
Alex Jones fighting to maintain the right to own Alex Jones.
As the Sandy Hook family's plaintiff's lawyers try to seek to own the public image of Alex Jones, demanding the bankruptcy court give them control over his social media accounts and all public representation of Alex Jones.
This goes to an issue that's been burgling up for a little while legally in the background about the right to publicity.
Is it a right to property?
Is it a right to privacy?
Is it something else?
Is it alienable?
Is it alienable?
And we'll discuss that tonight.
We've got a case of mine involving how they're taking religious discrimination cases and federal courts are reconstruing them, reinterpreting them to become heresy trials.
I'm such an idiot, Robert.
That's your case I'm reading.
I was like, oh, I'm familiar with all of these facts or anything.
Okay, I'm an idiot.
We'll talk about that one.
3M. And authorizing federal discovery to invade people's privacy and basically persecute people all over again.
So subject them to a heresy trial and force them to disclose their most private, intimate relationships.
Federal judges, if you file suit for religious discrimination, are ordering particularly women plaintiffs to turn over their entire medical records, their entire medical history, their entire sexual history.
And by the way, it's overwhelmingly women Democratic judges, sometimes women Republican judges, issuing the orders.
Gives you an idea of the degree of prejudice and bigotry in the federal courts.
But these cases are now going to determine more than just your right against religious discrimination and your right against vaccine mandates, but your right to privacy and federal judicial proceedings and your right against heresy trials.
When does a thumbnail become protected under copyright law?
As you had Megan Fox on, we got a little bit of law tube litigation.
Disability discrimination finally extends itself the way it's supposed to before federal courts after Congress changed the law some years ago.
We've got Trump's trial up for scheduling.
We'll see what some of us predicted.
What happened versus what some other people predicted would happen this past week, both in D.C. and in New York.
The Internet Library being shut down on copyright grounds.
Elon Musk versus Media Matters, a big win right out of the gate in the federal court in Texas.
Probably chose the right court to file suit in.
So that's just the smallest of the fun topics tonight.
Now, I just shut my light because I think this makes me look a little less old.
I find with the headline...
Chat, you'll let me know which light you prefer, the way we started or this right now.
It's sort of the after dark viva.
We're obviously starting with the Russiagate 3.0.
And just to answer a question down here, has Lauren Southern made any statement?
Not that I know, but I'm not a thousand percent certain.
So, you know, the very summary of the facts, I think everybody knows what happened now.
This indictment came down.
I could not find out when the indictment was Not handed down, but submitted and approved.
There was no date on it that I could see, right?
Other than the date it was unsealed?
Oh, that's a good question.
Usually there's a date at the end where the grand juror is signed.
I'm going to go see if I can pull that up when you give us your feedback.
Did you see which district it was in?
Oh, Southern District of New York, Robert.
That's the first thing I go to.
Where is it?
SDNY. Oh, amazing.
Of all the places, of all where these defendants are located.
S-D-N-Y.
Alright, so everybody saw it.
Two Russian nationals, who from what I understand are not in America in any event, were named as the two defendants, alleged criminal defendants guilty of FARA violations and money laundering because they allegedly set up a persona through which they were funneling upwards of $10 million into a Tennessee company that,
at least according to the indictment, They imply that they knew that this money was coming from Russians sort of surreptitiously, but that's only as a matter of opinion, not as any matter of evidence in the indictment.
It happens to be Lauren Chen's company that she set up in Tennessee with her husband, and they were taking this financing, which I presume they thought was from rich right-wing Europeans who wanted to finance a startup right-wing conservative website or platform, and the money was used to license and sign on Big content creators, conservative content creators, Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, Benny Johnson, Lauren Southern, and Matt Christensen, who's going to be on tomorrow.
Okay. It turns out, apparently, that this is FARA violations and money laundering because, I don't know, those are the allegations of the lawsuit.
The only paragraph that suggests that Lauren Chen knew, does it by innuendo, there was no evidence in there, private DMs or correspondents that said, That admitted definitively, we know this money is coming from dark sources and we need to conceal it, period.
So what was the terms of the agreement?
Was it a $10 million loan?
Was it just philanthropic donations?
We don't know yet.
There is no that I saw, and if anybody can point me to evidence that shows Lauren Chen knew.
I'm all ears, but I didn't see that from the indictment.
And then they pass off these commentators as stooges who were promoting Russian disinformation, even though by the indictment itself...
There was no editorial oversight, no uniform messaging, and at least in the vast majority of it, it was material that Ruben, Poole, Benny were producing anyhow that they were licensing to Tenet to rebroadcast so they could build up this platform into something bigger, hopefully. All right.
That's the fact pattern.
Lauren, I don't think, has said anything publicly.
Neither has her husband, Liam, I think is his name.
And I had on the employee of...
Tenet Media, Taylor Hansen, on Friday.
He's an amazing guy, and hopefully he can land on his feet.
Robert, how the hell is this a FARA violation in the first place?
Yeah, I mean, all of it's a fraud.
Everything about it's a fake case.
So it's a case that's meant to never go to trial.
It's a case that's meant to never have discovery.
It's a case meant to hide the truth for forever.
Because of a pending criminal case, they can refuse to disclose under the Freedom of Information Act what they actually know from public inquiries, even of interested parties.
So it's a smear campaign and a spy campaign.
For those that don't remember, Russiagate 1.0 was to cover up a spy campaign.
The CIA, the FBI, the DOJ, high-ranking members of the Obama administration.
Conspiring with the Five Eyes Network, that's the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, were conspiring with the CIA to spy on the Trump campaign and to launder their illicit spying operations by having another country do it if they couldn't do it domestically.
That was part of the Five Eyes operation.
But they needed a pretext.
In the United States, that pretext was the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Which was intended to limit this kind of illicit spying.
It arose from the Church Committee in the late 1970s when they figured out that the CIA and the NSA and others were illegally spying on people all the time.
They said, okay, no more of this.
If you're going to be doing it as a foreign intelligence gathering, you've got to abide by certain limitations.
You've got to go to a foreign intelligence surveillance court.
Of course, it didn't take long for those legislative mechanisms and courts to become co-opted by the very intelligence community they're supposed to.
As Robert Kennedy recently told Tucker Carlson, the reason why he could never get appointed to head of the CIA is because the intelligence committee in the Senate is run by the intelligence community.
What used to be a select committee on intelligence, the church committee, meant to...
Govern and control and cabin and constrict the intelligence community has become a tool of the intelligence community.
Just look at the kind of people that are on those boards.
One thing, always sign, if you want to track somebody's investments, once they're on the intelligence committee, by golly, they tend to start to make a lot of money up on Wall Street.
However, that correspondence tends to work.
Not as good as Nancy Pelosi.
She's still got everybody beat for her magical ability to get those stocks to just go up and up and up that are in her portfolio.
But that's the nature of it.
So the first part of any kind of Russiagate scheme, the template, is come up with a bogus pretext to illicitly spy on people.
One giveaway that this indictment was really all about illicitly spying on people is their evidentiary sources.
If they have Discord chat, how the hell they got in there, nobody knows.
DMs. And I was wondering, like, people were saying, well, Lauren must have turned and she was one of their witnesses.
You know, she turned witness to the two Russian agents.
From what I understand, she was as shocked when they got raided and shut down and saw the indictment as anybody else.
So that's unlikely.
So how the hell did they get in there?
Probably another FISA application behind closed doors based on falsified evidence like they did in 2016.
Completely. So that's always the first goal.
You allege foreigners are involved.
That allows you to circumvent normal federal district courts that would have to be involved in any kind of search warrant.
It allows you to spy on everybody's communications and correspondence without them having any notice or knowledge of it.
And the entire indictment is filled with your classic FISA material.
Almost nothing that would come from a traditional material.
So that's what the first rule...
And remember what FISA allows.
FISA allows what they call one-hop rule.
Basically, anybody that you have a FISA warrant on, you can also look at who they're communicating to their separate communications.
So what this was, was they could look at, and you look at it, they chose, they chose people that were influencers in the conservative space.
So they wanted to spy on Dave Rubin and anybody communicating with Dave Rubin.
They wanted to spy on people communicating with Tim Pool and anybody they were communicating with.
Spy on Benny Johnson and anybody they're communicating with.
Spy on Lauren Chen and anyone they're communicating with.
And spy on Lauren Southern and anyone she's communicating with.
That was the goal and objective.
By the way, that's a giveaway as to who is really behind this.
And I'll get to that in a little bit.
Now I'm just immediately regretting all of the pictures I've been sending Tim Pool.
I'm joking, people.
I talked about it with Alex Jones on Friday.
They have tried the same thing with Alex Jones.
They kept trying to approach Alex Jones with foreign investors.
over the last six years in order to, so they could illicitly open up a FISA operation on Alex Jones and everybody connected to him.
Jones, of course, sniffed it out every single time.
And in fact, frequently would report it to the feds.
And he's like, of course, you guys are probably not going to investigate because you guys are probably behind this, but just FYI.
So they finally quit after the third try of trying to entrap and ensnare Jones.
He didn't take the bait.
I see people in the chat a little confused and it's understandable.
Lauren Chen is the founder one and her husband is founder two in the indictment.
She founded the Tennessee company Tenet Media.
Lauren Southern is one of the conservative commentators.
Don't know if she's specifically named as an alien, whatever they call them, a commentator one in the indictment.
So it's Lauren Chen is the founder of Tenet and Lauren Southern is one of the Tenet people that their Tenet was promoting.
So the first goal, this was a spy operation.
And it was to come up with a pretext to spy on all these people.
The second goal was a political operation, a sort of October surprise that could boost the Democratic ticket.
So that, you know, when the time was right, when they milked all the information they could milk out of it, they would drop an indictment that would impugn the integrity of conservative media and that would boost the Democratic narrative because they still think modern-day McCarthyism works.
Extraordinary, they believe this, but they've convinced themselves of this.
So they think that it will work to discredit conservative media and to boost the democratic messaging.
The third goal is, to your first question, to extend and expand the scope of the Foreign Agents Registration Act and comparable laws.
To effectively criminalize dissident speech in the United States, simply because it is connected to, even in the most tangential, indirect, and unintentional way, funding from someplace outside the United States.
Now, of course, this makes literally no sense.
The idea of the Foreign Agents Registration Act was passed intended to limit Nazi lobbying of Congress.
Which actually was a problem.
But it was direct lobbying of the federal government.
And that if you were going to directly lobby on behalf of a foreign...
It was a foreign government directly pays you to go talk to that government and do work that's the equivalent of diplomatic work.
But you weren't being disclosed as a diplomat.
Congress wanted you to disclose, oh, by the way, I'm working.
I've been paid now by the French.
I've been paid now by the Germans.
I've been paid now by the Russians, whomever.
But that's what it was for.
Very limited, discrete context.
It had only been used prior to General Flynn six times in American history.
Just to clarify that, it's for lobbying the government, and people want to know if you're lobbying the government for foreign interests, that's where it makes sense.
And foreign governments.
On behalf of foreign governments.
Not just any foreign interest.
You have to be working directly for a foreign government.
The question will be whether or not, let's assume that, and let's assume they were lobbying the government, and let's assume that it's the two RT employees.
The question would be, were they acting in their capacity as RT employees, even if they were?
RT being state media, would that count as government lobbying?
But the bottom line, it's for lobbying the government, not for, I don't know, activism in the media?
The idea that it now applies to any form of speech, that they keep trying to expand far wider and wider and wider.
And I've been a critic of it from day one.
Like the sedition laws, those are horrendous laws.
The variations that people get excited about are treason laws.
A lot of the variations of our treason laws are unreliable laws that are used to go after political dissidents and outsiders.
And that's especially true with the FARA laws.
Ever since Flynn...
They've been wanting to extend and expand this to allow them to criminalize speech they don't like by just calling it somehow lobbying on behalf of a foreign government.
Remember, even in Flynn's case, they didn't have direct payments from the Turkish government.
They were going more steps removed, more steps removed, more steps removed, more steps removed.
The irony of all of this is pretty much every think tank in Washington, D.C. is funded by the Mideast.
For example, Ben Shapiro, Decided to be critical of Lauren Chen on these related issues, and they have different positions on Israel.
And as I was watching the clip, I was like, what are the odds?
Because Ben Shapiro is always doing ads, like there's these great parodies and satires of Shapiro, that he has to do like eight ads every 15 seconds.
But I was like, but what's the odds?
He does one that's funded by Israel.
I was like, oh, what are the odds?
He's going to sit here and criticize Lauren Chen for...
Allegedly receiving money unknowingly from a foreign government, and he's going to sit there and stop in the middle of it and do an ad on behalf of a foreign government.
That's exactly what he does!
He's a living parody, Ben Shapiro.
But the big money doesn't come from Israel, folks.
It comes from, ask yourself how Qatar could be hosting and safe-harboring the leaders of Hamas and get zero criticism in the United States or Western media.
Well, maybe not in Paris and in France because they own the famous French soccer team, the PSG, Paris Saint-Germain.
Maybe not in the United States because they own half the think tanks in Washington, D.C. If you threw a rock, you were going to hit somebody who's getting money from a foreign government.
So the irony of them coming after this very tangential indirect claim is just ludicrous.
By this theory, everybody in D.C. belongs in prison.
Well, it's not just that, Robert.
Since that indictment comes down, I got jackasses on the internet saying, Viva, you're from Canada.
You have no business commentating on American politics.
First of all, you morons, I pay taxes out here, so I think I have the right to speak to some extent.
But this is how it's like moving the Overton window to now everybody thinking a foreigner.
Talking about American politics, even in America, is somehow election interference or FARA violations.
It's wild, and I don't know how you push back at that Overton window.
FARA should be eviscerated.
FARA is a walking, talking First Amendment violation, and an honest, honorable Congress would take it off the books altogether.
Just take it off the books.
You can require people to register who are actually lobbying by referring to lobbying in the narrow terms it has typically been defined.
And that's it.
Don't have any criminal sanctions.
They will be abused.
They've always been abused.
It's because the federal government has way too much criminal power already.
That's the third part of this that's perilous.
The effort to criminalize dissident speech by connecting it to foreign money.
Aside from the glaring hypocrisy of this, Rupert Murdoch, foreigner.
He's a U.S. citizen now, but he wasn't always.
Carlos Slim.
Carlos Slim, Mexican billionaire, owns the New York Times.
By this definition, has every report at the New York Times, registered as a foreign agent, have any of them?
I mean, you know, it's one after the other.
These people are all getting all excited.
Megyn Kelly.
Megyn, you could be prosecuted under this interpretation of FARO.
So, why don't we find a red state attorney general or district attorney and bring charges?
Well, it's subject to the Justice Department only.
This is a federal crime.
I'm an idiot.
Okay, that's that question.
It's just a dangerous, perilous path to go down, and it should be scrapped and scraped altogether.
So that's their other goal, and people should have been terrified and horrified of it.
Now, let's get to, given the objectives of this operation, many of which they achieved, you should ask yourself immediately, what's the evidence that any of this has anything to do with any Russians?
Did Russiagate 1.0 actually turn out to have Russian involvement?
Not really.
People seem to have forgotten.
Like, I sort of tried to do the detailed breakdown in my car today.
The Steele dossier was funded, out of which that was born, was paid for by the DNC from a, I don't know if he was, he wasn't Russian, he was British.
Yeah, he had an MI5 operative working for MI5 and CIA, MI6 and CIA.
And working with the Five Eyes to spy on Trump, he was the principal source.
His first financier was a Ukrainian oligarch, anti-Russian.
His second financier was the British government and British government officials.
And his third financier was the Democratic National Committee.
So it turned out to have nothing to do with Russians.
So this culminated also in the Russiagate 2.0.
Russiagate 2.0, for those that don't remember, was Mueller was brought in to cover up...
The first version of Spygate.
So the first version of Spygate, the pretext was Russiagate 1.0.
He needed to create Russiagate 2.0 to cover up for Spygate 1.0.
That was under fake pretext Russiagate 1.0.
And so what does he do?
He culminates his case with an indictment against the Internet Research Agency in New York.
Big hoopla in the media.
Oh yeah, so Mueller's nailed him.
Mueller's got him.
He showed how they really influenced the election.
Now if you dug in, you found the same Factual weaknesses that you find in this case.
You're like, okay, so how exactly did they influence the election?
$40,000 worth of ads on Facebook.
Mostly bad trolling activity that politically conflicted with each other.
It's like, this isn't interference in an election.
That's a joke.
But the bigger issue, as soon as I saw it, I said, dollars to donuts.
The Russians aren't behind this.
This is a bogus indictment meant to create a fake cover story for Spygate 1.0 and Russiagate 1.0.
Now, you brought up a point that I would have never thought of in a million years because I lacked the knowledge of how things went sideways with Russiagate 1.0.
There are no American-based defendants named in this indictment.
And your amazing insight is that Well, this will preclude a certain amount of discovery because nobody's going to appear.
You won't have any American-based entity that's going to say, we want to fight this and we want discovery.
But flesh that out because I think I missed that the first time around with Russiagate 1.0.
Yeah, so Russiagate 1.0, steel dossier.
Russiagate 2.0, the internet research agency.
So Mueller just makes one mistake.
He indicts a bunch of Russians, says it's all, this is a big spook operation.
You read through it and you're like...
If you know anything about Russian intelligence operations, you know this is a joke.
I mean, every minute they're either portraying them as super sophisticated people who can get anybody killed anywhere with any kind of secret poison to being so incompetent and capable they can't even operate like a half-assed troll farm, right?
Somebody telling you that narrative is telling you one of those two is a lie, maybe both.
So the mistake he makes, though, is he indicts a company.
So you indict an individual, they're subject to not having bail, going to prison for life, etc.
They knew, Mueller's team knew by indicting those Russians, they're never going to appear in U.S. court.
They're not going to care.
So they're not going to risk their freedom and liberty on the credibility and integrity of the U.S. judicial system.
They're not naive.
But he gets a little greedy.
He indicts one of the companies.
Now a company can appear.
All they're subject to is fines and whatever assets are subject to your jurisdiction, which in this case were very limited.
So they showed up to the shock of the Mueller team.
And they come in and they say, we want to see what your evidence is in this case.
Why don't you produce discovery to see if you're not just telling one big fat lie, one complete fabrication.
No company would appear that was guilty because it would be subject to its own discovery and other issues.
The only kind of company that appears in that context is one that knows it's innocent and knows that its downside risk is low for proving its innocence.
So what does the Mueller team do?
They start panicking.
I remember predicting this at the time.
It's like, watch, they won't produce a single thing and it'll dismiss the whole case rather than produce discovery.
And that's exactly what they did.
They couldn't produce a single piece of evidence to document their case.
They knew if they produced that evidence, that evidence would...
Indict their case.
That Russiagate 2.0 was as big a fraud as Russiagate 1.0.
All to cover up Spygate 1.0.
And that's exactly what happens.
They go into the judge and they say, Judge, please dismiss.
They claim national security.
National security?
Where was the national security when you put all those facts in the indictment?
Why can't you prove those facts in the indictment?
What's your evidence?
Wouldn't you be eager to?
You got a Russian intelligence operation trying to shape American presidential elections?
Wouldn't you want the world to see that in a live trial?
Yet Mueller's team was oddly uninterested in that ever happening.
So much so that rather than go forward with any degree of discovery, any degree of trial, they dismiss the case against the Internet Research Agency entirely.
Of course, the media forgets to cover those facts outside of some...
Brief little, you know, page A12 at the bottom right-hand corner section.
So as soon as this indictment came down, I was like, all right, I bet it's a cover for another Spygate operation.
Proof of that is right in the indictment.
Second, my guess is intended to be an October surprise.
The timing of it tells you everything you need to know there and the media interpretation of it.
And last but not least, that it's intended to intimidate dissident speakers.
Hey, if you're out there and you want to be independent, you better make sure your money comes from the right place or we can put you in jail at any given moment because we're going to call you an unregistered foreign lobbyist.
You know, that routine.
So somebody don't have the date on the bottom of it?
Yeah, I'm looking...
Sorry, hold on.
Is there a...
Well, by the way, that's another giveaway.
Yeah, usually you see it's right there.
Usually it's stamped at the top also.
Hold on, what am I doing here?
It says...
Oh, cripe.
Come on.
I can't get my fat fingers off my cursor.
Hold on.
This is terrible.
I'll have to go up here.
Okay. Let me get...
I can't get my...
There we go.
I got it.
I got it.
Like, usually, you got a stamp at the front here.
It says whatever date it was filed.
So, no date on this flipping thing anywhere.
Okay. Yeah, yeah.
That's interesting, too.
That it was sealed and that they released it.
The timing of the release.
The day after.
Well, the day after...
What's the grounds to seal it?
What do they need to seal it for?
And not just that they sealed it.
I mean, I guess they want to identify any of the people.
And then in that indictment, it's so thinly disguising who the people are that everybody knew within five minutes.
But it was the day or two after how nobody's talking about the actual Chinese spies.
They may have planned on this being a couple of weeks later, but they keep getting caught with Chinese spies working for Democrats, so they had to put that out there again.
No, no, it's the Ruskies.
It's also meant to boost anti-Russia paranoia and all that.
Has that added little bonus to it for the deep state crowd.
But the giveaway, aside from it to the Southern District of New York...
And askers, I've said, the Southern District of New York, along with the District of Corruption, are the two most corrupt federal districts in all of America from a prosecutorial perspective.
And what's the connection to SDNY?
Nobody in Tenet Media is in the SDNY.
Nobody. Not Lauren Chen, not Lauren Southern, not Tenet Media Corporation, not Tim Pool, not Penny Johnson, not Dave Rubin.
There's no connections to New York.
So why is it in New York?
Because this is another...
Forensic fingerprints, this is a fraudulent indictment.
It's a bogus indictment.
It's a fake indictment that has fake charges brought by a bunch of frauds and phonies and fakes at the Justice Department and in the deep state.
And anybody regurgitating this garbage to attack Lauren Chen or anybody else should be embarrassed.
They should be ashamed.
They should go find a mirror, look at themselves, and then smack themselves in the face because that's how stupid they are just to wake themselves up, to buy this for a third time, for crying out loud.
But a giveaway, no company is indicted.
No American is indicted.
The only people they indict are two Russians they know will never appear in the United States to defend themselves because they don't care about it.
Now, by the way, I know some of the people that were connected to RT when they got the sanctions by the Biden administration.
They wanted nothing to do with the U.S. They wanted the heck out of the U.S. The idea that they would run this operation is ridiculous.
The idea that it doesn't fit their modus operandi, it doesn't fit what their mindset was when they were trying to get the heck out of the country, it doesn't fit their pattern of behavior in other instances.
If they were going to pick people, they wouldn't have picked these people.
These people are not even...
Tim Pool is mostly anti-Russian.
Dave Rubin is mostly anti-Russian.
Benny Johnson is mostly anti-Russian.
The indictment says, well, there was no uniform messaging, but it was totally so.
You talked about inflation.
Everybody knows that's Russian disinformation.
They talked about Biden being bad.
Everybody knows that must be Russian disinformation.
They talked about immigration.
That must be Russian disinformation.
How dumb do you have to be to believe so?
You have to be Ben Shapiro-level stupid.
To believe this kind of thing.
So this is just a complete fraudulent indictment.
Everything about it is fake.
Everything about it is phony.
It's based on a dangerous and wrong legal theory.
But I guarantee you, if you dug in, if they really believed there was a Russian intel operation, they would have let it run.
They would have gone to the Dave Rubens and the Tim Pools, and they would have entrapped the Russians even further.
They would have developed more evidence, more information, and tied in more people.
They would have been eager to do it.
They would have indicted everybody, including all the companies, to have a big full show trial on it.
Well, that's what I don't understand.
If they're alleging, as they did in one paragraph, that they think Lauren Chen knew and surreptitiously did not disclose this to the Ruben, Tim Pool, Johnson gang, and play that, because they're playing that to Ruben and Tim Pool.
They're saying, you guys are the victim of a crime.
Because Lauren knowingly did not disclose this to you, so you guys are the victim.
If they knew that and if that were in fact true.
So what if the money's from Russia?
So what?
Let me ask you this.
Most of American media has foreign investors.
No one has ever, until now, suggested that's a crime.
It's a ludicrous suggestion.
And all these people just took it at face value.
Oh, I guess, of course, of course, that's a crime.
I mean, unbelievable.
Aside from the fact you dig in, I guarantee you.
This money didn't come from Moscow.
It came from Langley.
That's what this money is.
They used two ex-RT people as their cutouts.
Those Russians have nothing to do with it.
My guess is they knew nothing about it.
Had no idea about it.
But they knew they were never coming to the U.S., would never step into the U.S., would never defend themselves in the U.S., so they could be easy cutouts.
They are just cutouts.
There is no Russians behind this.
There's no Russian money behind this.
I guarantee you dig into the money.
Notably, they track no money back to Russia.
Money's like Turkey and Dubai.
See, it's like, eh, there's other accounts Russians would have used.
On the other hand, if you're CIA, eh, that sounds like a convenient place for where you like to launder your money.
Let me bring this up.
I do not under...
It's not for lack of trying to understand.
This is count two.
Conspiracy to commit money laundering.
The allegations, so they repeat the whole indictment, from at least the dates, yada, yada, the two defendants and others, known and unknown, willfully and knownly combined, conspired, confederated, agreed, together with each other, to commit money laundering.
It was part of the object of the conspiracy that the defendants, they would transport.
But they don't.
What's the money laundering?
Unless you have an underlying FARA violation, which is a complete extension of FARA.
But what they're telling you is what they're doing.
Just remove the Russians, put Langley, and you get a confession of what took place.
They're the ones laundering money.
They're the ones up to fraudulent activities.
They're the ones trying to entrap people.
They're the ones doing all of it.
And they're going to keep running it over and over again until they get rid of FISA.
They're going to keep coming up with bogus excuses to use FISA to spy on Americans.
Now, I was...
So, I put on a video...
I was reluctant to put it out because I don't want anyone thinking I'm needling Ruben, Benny, or Tim.
I like them and I think they're good people.
I think Lauren's a good person also and I don't believe anybody's done anything remotely wrong here.
And I was going to DM them the video that I put out or my thoughts.
If anybody's in there, they're going to see my DMs anyhow, so I may as well make a video about it.
Ruben, Benny, and Tim come out and they say, you know, the FBI tells us we're potentially the victim of a crime.
And so on and so forth.
Tim says he's going to at least meet with him.
I don't know if he's serious or not.
My thought is just by virtue of the fact that they say that we're the victim of a crime, I know that they're in a tough spot right now in that they need to distance themselves from even the accusations to begin with.
Lauren has had a YouTube channel.
That's taking the bait.
I would not do that.
I'd be like, you guys are a bunch of frauds.
You illicitly spied on me.
I'm suing you tomorrow for illicitly spying on me.
Let's find out what the truth is.
You've got to be counter-aggressive with scuzz bags like these.
You cannot roll over because any sign of weakness or any sign of politeness will be seen as a sign of weakness.
Any sign of respectfulness or deference will be seen as a sign of weakness.
And by golly, don't be dumb enough, Tim Pool or Matt Christensen, to sit down and talk with the feds.
Come on.
I mean, they're like, oh, we're volunteer.
We want to prove how eager we are.
This is like being accused of being a commie when you're not in the 50s and being like, I'm going to run to prove how I'm not a commie.
That never worked out well, folks.
So you can't take the bait on any of this.
You got to call it out for the fraud that it is.
This is a deep state indictment meant to cover up deep state crimes against Americans that ain't got nothing to do with the Russians.
I like that response that should have been, and I can't blame them for what they did, because I can understand also, it's like...
Yeah, but it's a...
Come on, Tim.
I mean, how do you cover the General Flynn case and then make the mistake General Flynn made?
That's... I mean, come on.
I appear...
My reaction would have been, I don't even see a crime here.
What's your evidence?
The other thing is, Tim...
My first letter would be, I know you spied on me.
Turn over the evidence now, or when do I sue?
I'd have walked those...
Now, that was another question I had is, can anybody and everybody involved request the file that they built up on them?
Well, they've decided to hide that under FOIA because there's a law enforcement exception.
Only way you're going to get that is to sue.
Say this was an illicit spying operation from day one.
But, you know, that's why they made it so difficult for Carter Page to get legal relief and remedy because it was illegal spying for him and they found every excuse in the book to try to deny it to him.
But the only way you're ever going to try to get remedy is...
To seek it.
It may be uphill in certain places, but don't go and talk to them.
These are bad faith actors.
All they're there to do is try to entrap you into a mistake.
That's it.
And expect that they know every single communication you've ever had because they've been using FISA to spy on you for two years.
Well, that's what would be my advice to Tim is what information do you think you're going to give them?
Your communications with Lauren as to negotiations showing that you didn't know?
They already have that.
They have everything.
So what would you be able to give them other than stuff that they might not already have so they can go after you for a ledger entry in your corporate books to charge you with 34 counts of a deductible?
The easiest thing to get somebody for is a false statement to an FBI officer.
Always the easiest.
So their goal is always to entrap you into saying something they can later say is false.
That's why it never makes sense to sit down and talk with the feds.
And that's why, by the way, they invited them to a voluntary appearance.
By inviting them to a voluntary appearance, they can say there was nothing about this that was in any way custodial.
And so that they don't have to give them warnings and they can entrap them all they want.
So that's what that is.
That's just a trap.
Don't take the bait.
Let me see.
I want to get any chat that I might have not gotten to specifically on this because before we move on to the next subject, then we're going to move on to Rumble, everybody.
So get your butts on over there.
Let me just open it up here.
We got Freddy65 says, so if you don't believe Ukraine was involved in the Russian terrorist attack proves you are a puppet, only ISIS.
Well, I brought that up the other day is that it was either NPR or CBS.
One of them was saying...
Well, PBS, a bunch of people covered that because the people who committed the terrorist event in Ukraine, I mean, Russia went to Ukraine.
Yep. Russians waited to see where they were going to go before they arrested him.
And they got him going back in Ukraine.
And it's by the admission of Ukraine for the last six months that they've been waging terrorism against Russia.
So, I mean, it's like that was the only thing they could get.
That was the only example.
The indictment was so weak.
My guess is they planned on never unsealing it.
They just planned on having it stick there as an available option at some point.
But they really just wanted to keep spying on him.
The problem is, you know, all you got to do is say, me, Fang Fang, want to work for you.
And voila, the Democratic Party will hire another Chinese five.
I think she did a little more than say she wants it.
She worked with them, all right.
King of Biltong, good afternoon from Anton's.
Biltong is one of the most protein-dense foods in the world, packed with B12.
This is not an ad, but it's a super, it's a rumble rant.
He's figured it out.
This is the system.
Iron, creatine, and more.
Need a healthy snack?
Get yours at biltongusa.com.
Anton, I got the email.
My next package just came.
I'm going to go to the post office tomorrow.
Viva10 for 10% off.
It's delicious.
It's like prosciutto made out of beef.
222billyboy13 says, bad day.
Two weeks ago, Barnes, I asked if the kids...
One help.
Could earn it.
Not free.
Why would you act on that?
What the...
I don't know what that's about.
But Karantov says...
Karantov. That sounds oddly like one of the names in the indictment.
Karantov. I'm joking.
It was Kalashnikov.
Americans have 5,000 nukes, 10 carrier battle groups, and like to replace other countries' governments every few years.
Then are shocked that us Canuck...
Are interested in their country.
USA, get over yourself.
We got Viva and Barnes.
Can we discuss Convention of the States now, please?
Two wings of the same bird is like a record anymore.
That's the Z-Man 01. Not sure how Viva and Barnes got together, but they really are the best duo stream out there.
I think we're going to like five-year anniversary almost.
Truth Sandy.
How different the world was back then?
Freddy65. Has Lawrence other domain any statement?
Not that I know of.
I live in a deep blue state, New York.
And we got the rest of these.
Okay. And then let me see here over in Rumble.
Oh, crap.
I'm still in the screen, but I can't see myself.
Hold on.
Let me see here.
There was one super chat or Rumble rant.
And I'm not reading it because I don't want to get in trouble.
It said, sup my something that I'm...
It rhymes with something.
It's not even the bad word, but I'm not even reading it.
Trump should pound Harris so hard in the debate that Paul Pelosi would be jealous.
Oh, that's brutal.
That's brutal.
Sorry, I shouldn't have even read the second one.
That's even by my standards wrong.
I have such low standards.
I didn't get it.
Robert, okay, so we've got all of it.
I like that.
Well, Russiagate is fake.
I mean, imagine the same people who bought the idea that Hunter Biden's laptop was a Russiagate operation.
I mean, they've done this now four or five times in the last five years.
I saw so many straightforward conservatives just accept it.
Okay. The government says Russia must be true.
And they vitriolically go after Lorne as if they didn't just live through the Mar-a-Lago raid, which we know they falsified the evidence that they leaked to the media afterwards.
When it happens to Trump, clearly it's bad, but now it made for good.
I think a lot of it is about...
Rage-baiting or rage-clicking, whatever the hell it is.
I think there's a lot of people who the internet drama is just too much to avoid.
But look, it's not that I'm cynical.
I believe that this Merrick Garland DOJ is corrupt to the core, so I don't believe a damn word they have to say.
I know Lauren Chen.
She's a good person.
I met Liam.
They're good people.
And so even if they're guilty of having taken European money to finance their operations, so effing what?
Right. And if you talk about foreign influence, the top of that list, Britain would be high up there.
Canada would be high up there.
Europe would be high up there.
The entire Middle East, both sides, would be way up there.
People like to highlight Israel or anti-Israeli sources.
Both of them are high up.
Now, I can tell you the anti-Israeli sources, a lot more money.
They got a lot more oil.
So that's where the big money is, folks.
I cannot downplay or ignore the APAC.
So what would be the Qatar- Well, nothing compares to Qatar.
How do they do their lobbying?
I mean, they directly buy it in many cases.
I mean, there's jokes about it.
And then, of course, you have China, which has influenced 100 different directions.
So the China are the most...
You use the most subterfuge to influence.
But the Arab world is huge.
Just look into the various royal funds, and you'll find they're the source of all kinds of think tanks and universities and media operations across the United States.
I mean, Al Jazeera operates in the United States.
They're entirely foreign government funded.
And not only that, the ultimate capper of all this, the number one country in the world.
That directly funds, through all kinds of cutouts, media influence campaigns globally to interfere in governments is the United States of America.
Nobody does it as big as we do.
Nobody does it as much as we do.
Nobody does it as often as we do.
And now we're going to pretend it's a global crime against justice for supposedly somebody to do it in the United States?
Come on.
Do I have to be nervous that I routinely give interviews on RT for zero dollars and zero cents?
Well, that's their goal.
Their goal is to intimidate people.
Be careful what you say.
Be careful who you say it with.
Be careful what network.
That's all.
It's an intimidation campaign.
And by giving it credence, that's what Dave Rubin, Tim Pool, or any of these other people that concede to it at any level, they are, in fact, deferring to that intimidation.
You should never defer to intimidation.
I like Tim Pool's troll approach much better when he added the Israeli and Ukrainian flag to his Twitter.
It's like, there we go.
That's a more sensible approach.
Don't go sitting down and talking to them because they want a little chat.
There's no such thing as a friendly chat.
That's like having the mob come down and say they want a little chat with your business security needs.
That's never going to go well.
And the same is true here.
That's why I'm not sure if Tim is not trolling in a very dry show.
I hope he is.
All of them get intimidated by this.
They're all naive.
It's also a sign, by the way, of who they approached.
They didn't approach you.
They didn't approach me.
They didn't approach Alex Jones like they tried in the past.
That was a sign this was a government operation.
If it was an actual foreign government operation, they would actually go to the more effective voices, to be honest about it, that actually have more sympathy to their position on some key issues in ways these people mostly did not.
Most of these are Blaze people.
Same with Lauren Chan.
Same with Lauren Southern.
That was also a giveaway in its own right.
But the reason why they don't is they knew people like us would sniff it out 10 miles away.
You know, I'd be like, oh, okay, hold on a second.
Who's doing what?
You know, all right, you're already spying on my account.
You don't need another excuse to do it.
Let's try again, pal.
I've never taken a dollar for an interview because on the one hand, things get a little weird and ugly when you ask for money.
Maybe I'm leaving money on the table, but we maintain a smaller...
We're all getting overpaid, though.
I will say that for the record.
Tenet Media was a very mediocre operation.
God bless Lauren Chen.
She doesn't know how to run a media platform.
I remember when it launched and I was like, this is just stunningly mediocre in terms of its presentation.
And I mean...
God bless Tim Pool and everybody, but did they deserve those kind of checks?
No, of course not.
I know.
They got big names and you want to build it up.
You got to burn money at the beginning.
They're not worth that much cash.
If I'm writing the checks, no way I'm writing that big a check to any of them.
Well, maybe they just thought they got a filthy rich philanthropist who has so much money he doesn't mind if he burns it.
Lauren Chen got terminated by the Blaze.
So, I mean, and she got her channel canceled.
That was a wuss move by Glenn Beck.
So, is there...
First of all, first things first...
And YouTube canceled everybody's accounts.
Just started canceling accounts.
Now, they weren't going to cancel the moneymakers like Dave Rubin and Tim Poole.
Notice that.
They just canceled Lauren Chen.
Only people directly.
That they weren't going to go much further without risking loss of real revenue.
But it's why, you know, I mean, Poole goes back and forth on how much he's on Rumble.
I mean, this should be a sign, you know, that YouTube used this as a pretext to completely eliminate Lauren Chen from existence and sort of public existence.
And so I think it shows you where, I mean, the people that are skeptical of Israel, this will not help.
But, you know, Dave Rubin's very pro-Israel.
So Betty Johnson leans pro-Israel.
So even though Lauren Chen, that's why, like, there was no unity here.
Lord Chen was skeptical of Israel.
Ah, but Robert, don't you see the disunity is the sign of the disinformation?
Yeah, that was the funniest part ever.
I mean, everything.
I mean, they had to convert this and contort this and distort this in such preposterous direction.
I guarantee you there's another half dozen of these floating around.
Someone jokingly said, I made the list.
I can guarantee you I'm not on that list because I know where my sources of revenue come from.
I might just be on a watch list, but why is nobody suing YouTube?
Like, I've got a theory.
Deceitful business practices.
As a merchant, they take you on and they screw you through deceitful business practices.
Why has nobody sued them for this?
I mean, because so far the courts have thrown it out on Section 230 grounds.
Or First Amendment grounds.
That's been the hurdle so far.
But I agree, at least in theory, they should be subject to the same contractual rules as everyone else.
And the same tort rules as everyone else.
I made the argument years ago that...
Oh, geez.
Unjust enrichment would be one.
They bring them on, they make their money, and then willy-nilly they cancel them.
Reasonable business expectations.
Like, there's no fear hiding a wish here.
I don't want trouble.
But I would take the suit.
And I mean, I would take it in a state maybe that has like an Ashley Moody as...
Oh, geez.
Is she attorney general or is she...
Yeah, she's the attorney general.
What's her position?
Ashley Moody in Florida.
Yeah, the attorney general of Florida.
I was at an event yesterday with Lectern Guy and Ashley Moody gave a speech.
I'm going to DM her and see if she remembers who I am.
But I would sue them.
I would sue them for deceitful business practices, unjust enrichment, and some form of fraud because it's fraudulent inducements.
And then they just willy-nilly.
She wasn't even charged.
She was maimed.
It was nonsense at every single level.
They approached sort of mid-level influencers.
Who are sub-below politically sophisticated.
I know some of them would not like to hear me say that, but they just are, I mean, just to be honest.
I mean, Tim Pool was a skateboarding guy 10 years ago, right?
He's kind of new to all this.
None of these people are super sophisticated in the media business world, right?
In the sense of knowing how that, in the geopolitical space.
Say, for example.
They haven't been around that block very often.
And that's who they targeted, which was, by the way, a giveaway that this was not a Russian operation.
It's amazing.
They brushed off old scripts from the 50s.
And they just keep re...
It's like bad Disney.
They keep reissuing these.
It's the reboot.
Different characters.
It's the reboot with, like, rings of power, which is just atrocious.
I mean, atrocious in what they're trying to do to Tolkien on Amazon.
I mean, this past week, they tried to get YouTube to boot Nerdrotic, Critical Drinker, Geeks and Gamers, with a completely fake, libelous campaign claiming they had said things about people they actually hadn't said.
All right, we're going to end this on, speaking of Commitube, we're going to end this on Commitube right now.
Come on over to either vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
Let me just give everyone the link again.
This is Locals here, and I'll give everyone Rumble.
We're going to hit 20,000 on Rumble after this transition occurs, which is going to be fantastic.
But come on over to Locals.
I think I got everything.
If I missed any super chats, I don't think I did.
I'm scrolling down.
And you know what?
Just before we go over, there were two.
Crumble rants, which might be fun for the transition.
Arrested for tweets in Canada and give, send, go for money for attorney fees.
I don't want trouble, but if it happens, I'll, you know.
And Karen Toff says, never, ever, ever talk to the FBI without a lawyer.
Remember Martha Stewart.
I would just never talk to them unless they had a warrant and I was required to under penalty of law, period.
Then I would make sure that I want...
We have a fifth amendment right, again, in America.
You have a right to never talk to them.
All right.
How do I do this?
We're going to end on YouTube and Rumble.
No, YouTube.
I'm an idiot.
YouTube and Twitter.
And now we're going over to Rumble and Locals.
In now.
Okay. Which one do we go on to now?
Let's go on to the one that's fresh in my mind, speaking of suing shitty companies who are up to no good.
Elon X suing Media Matters for America.
I love it.
You know, there's the...
There's an MFR gene.
They call it the motherfucker gene, and it's a very bad gene that causes very bad things.
Media Matters for America, MMFA, sounds like it's that mother effer.
It has that sound to it, and they deserve it, rightly.
X is suing them for tortious interference, for basically orchestrating, fabricating.
I would say it's not falsified evidence because they actually generated the mainstream media or the mainstream brand ads running against Nazi whatever material on Twitter.
But they got it in a way that was inorganic and totally falsified.
Then they used it to try to drive a boycott of advertisers on X. Media Matters for America is getting their asses sued.
And they filed a motion to dismiss, arguing the standard stuff.
Texas is not the proper jurisdiction because, you know, we're based elsewhere and failure to state a claim because whatever.
Basically, the judge says, yeah, Texas is fine because when you publish these articles and whatever, it was destined to be consumed by people in Texas.
What's your bottom line takeaway?
This is in the District of Texas, not Southern District of New York, where it would have easily been dismissed for lack of standing.
What's your take on it?
Yeah, smart move by Musk to sue in Texas.
Sued in the Fort Worth Federal District Court division there of the Northern District of Texas.
And it was a proper analysis by the court.
So Media Matters tried to get the judge to disqualify himself.
It's always funny when Democrats are on the receiving end of some of these cases, you know, all of a sudden they're challenging the integrity and impartiality of judges and so on and so forth, which they make fun of when anybody on the right does it.
As soon as they're on the receiving end, all of a sudden they care about those issues all over again.
Because he had a very small investment in Tesla, things like that.
But this was simply X bringing suit because Media Matters went and told a bunch...
It was part of a campaign.
A similar campaign has been waged against Rumble.
You can get...
I mean, it's a good time for a promo.
You can get Rumble Premium.
Is that an option tonight?
It's... Rumble Premium, let me see if that's one of the campaigns we have on the side.
Oh, looky, looky what we have here, people!
Third ad.
This is going to be the third sponsor, but it's our sponsor, and we love them.
Check this out.
Look at this.
Using Rumble Studio, the Rumble Advertising Center, the Rack.
This sponsorship is from Rumble, one that is incredibly important to the survival of the company.
When Rumble first started in 2013, they built the platform for the small creator.
They didn't censor or have any biases.
They were fair and treated all creators equally.
They still do this, by the way.
No one thought platforms would censor political conversation or censor opinions on COVID, but they did.
Facebook admitted they fell to the pressure of the Biden and Harris administration.
Rumble did not.
They held the line.
They are attacked daily for giving us a voice to talk to you.
They are attacked in corporate media.
They are attacked by governments all across the world.
France, Brazil, Russia, China.
No one can ever accuse us of being Russian agents, Robert.
We're on a Rumble that is banned in Russia.
Corporate America is fighting to remove speech.
Rumble is fighting to keep it.
Rumble won't survive with brand advertisers.
They don't get much of it.
Watching our show on Rumble is the most they can ask from you.
If this is important for you for the fight...
And if you have the means, one major way you can help is by joining Rumble Premium.
Join the community that believes in the First Amendment and believes in our human right to free speech.
Rumble is offering $10 off with the promo code STUDIO.
When you purchase an annual subscription, go to rumble.com forward slash premium and use the promo code STUDIO.
Like I said, if you have the means and believe in the cause, now is the time to join Rumble.
If you don't have the means, we are just as happy for you to watch us.
Share us and drop a comment for us.
Subscribe, by the way, everybody in there.
Make sure that you are subscribed and thumbs up and whatever.
Rumble Premium.
Scan that QR code and it'll bring you over there.
I got it.
Obviously, I'm going to get it.
And if you have the means, it's good.
And otherwise, you know, watch the ads and maybe buy some products that you see on the company.
So that's it.
And that's what Rumble Advertising does to you.
It's beautiful.
Yeah, you know how they should advertise.
Rumble has the best rack.
So what was happening with Media Matters was conspiring.
To stop advertising to places like Rumble and X. And what they were doing is they would falsify and fabricate putting somebody's ads next to something that they would not want to be associated with, like the Nazi party or something else.
And they would say, look, your ads are appearing right next to pro-Nazi ads.
You better defund your advertising from X tomorrow.
And the problem was it was all a lie.
It was all libel.
It was fabricated.
So Elon wasn't going to take that standing down, so he filed suit.
Said this is tortious interference with business opportunity, with prospective business opportunity.
This is business disparagement in violation of Texas law, and so on and so forth.
And Media Matters' excuse was, well, we didn't know that Texas would have jurisdiction because we didn't intend any of these things to hit Texas.
Problem is, of course, they knew, as alleged, that X was in Texas.
Was relocating to Texas.
That Elon Musk was in Texas.
That the potential advertisers were in Texas.
And this was the argument I made in the Kennedy case in New Hampshire.
I made for the Covington kids' cases.
Where we ran into judges who were politically hostile.
And it said, look, what matters for personal jurisdiction purposes is if the person knew their statement was going to have an impact in that jurisdiction.
If so, that state has jurisdiction.
Instead, these judges go to great lengths to find excuses why somehow that doesn't apply and how you can get away with libel as long as you do it from your computer in some place that has difficult laws to sue or the statute of limitations is gone or something else.
And this judge applied the right law, said, look, it was clear what's alleged in the complaint is what I'm guided by at this point, not summary judgment, motion to dismiss on the pleadings.
I have to presume all facts in the pleadings are true and all reasonable inferences.
That could come from the facts alleged in the plea.
And under that, you guys knew, according to the complaint, that this would impact Texas, that these statements would be made in Texas, that they would be heard in Texas, and that they would hurt a company in Texas from receiving Texas revenue.
That's called personal jurisdiction.
That's targeted action.
That's specific jurisdiction under the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
So good ruling there.
And then they're like, well, we didn't really disparage the business, or if we did disparage the business, it's protected.
Or if we did, we really didn't breach a contract because it was an at-will contract.
And it's like, no, you're trying to hurt the business.
You did hurt the business.
That constitutes the claim of tortious interference.
That constitutes the claim of business disparagement.
And it's not a determination on the merits.
It's just saying we take these allegations at their face.
Right, I mean, the facts is alleged.
Yeah, suffice to make a legal claim.
And that means they get into discovery.
And you know that's going to be embarrassing.
They're going to fold up faster than...
What was the international one that folded up after they got sued?
It was also an X one with Rumble when they sued them.
Oh yeah, that fake organization.
Someone in the chat is going to get it.
Like Guard or something like that.
The chat will get in a second.
I'll get there.
Also, just so people understand how the...
Falsification worked.
From what I understand, they were newly created accounts that would bypass certain security features.
They would follow only neo-Nazi accounts and only big brand accounts.
And they just continually refreshed, refreshed, refreshed until they got that one in a million.
And the irony is it shows how good the protection is on Twitter and not how reckless it is.
But that's how they falsified it.
So it wasn't like a stitched together image.
It was just an entire mechanism that was totally inorganic that yielded a totally inorganic result.
Yeah, it's like Tyson Foods advertising on our show on YouTube because YouTube had scheduled anytime Tyson was mentioned to have an advertisement.
Of course, if you watch our show, Tyson Foods' advertisement will remind you why you never want to buy food from Tyson Foods.
It was GARM, the Global Alliance of Responsible Media.
Yeah, it was like germ with an A. So that's good.
It'll proceed to discovery.
MMFA, I don't...
This is what people think, like, oh, they'll fold up shop and they'll dissolve, but even still, there are going to be lingering obligations for directors of the company to not destroy evidence, and they can't get out of it so quickly.
Yeah, yeah, hopefully, yeah.
I mean, Musk is not taking his laying down, and taking on Musk was probably a mistake.
All right.
Well, let's go to the next one that I'm going to be sufficiently familiar with.
The other one that everybody wants to talk about as well, the Trump sentencing.
I got it, and Andy McCarthy was wrong.
So, for whatever it's worth, I'm a Canadian schnook with no practice in America of law experience, but I was right, and Andy, you were wrong.
He said, get prepared for Trump to be sentenced on September 16th or 18th, and lo and behold, that totally not corrupt Judge Juan Marchand wrote a letter, a four-page letter, three and a half pages of which was patting himself on the back, stroking his own ego and stroking his own phallus.
I am so objective and impartial.
Okay, the bottom line.
The judge said, some people don't think it's a victory for Trump.
I think it's a scheming, disgusting, weasel way of actually screwing Trump for the next two months.
The judge said, they've asked to postpone the hearing, postpone the sentencing because they want to...
Pursue their appellate issues, that it would interfere with the election.
This court is so damn objective and unbiased.
By golly, we're going to do it.
We're going to postpone it until November 26th, if necessary.
They used the word if necessary for the sentencing, I think, twice, if not three times, maybe more, in that four-page letter.
And no, so that's it.
So they postponed the sentencing, if necessary.
And I still believe that the judge is going to vacate the verdict come time to do so, but it'll be after the election and we'll see what happens.
I don't think he's going to get empowered for a sentencing, even if Trump does not win the election, but touch wood, all things, may he win the election.
But they get to now nonetheless float for the next two months, convicted felon, even though he hasn't been sentenced.
And I think this actually is just a deceitful way of getting out of doing now what he's going to have to do inevitably.
Robert, do you think ultimately?
Win or lose, the judge sentences him, or do you think ultimately the judge vacates the verdict?
Well, I think we're probably some of the only people predicting from day one.
I even gave it out at sportspicks.locals.com, a bet recommendation that there would be no sentence of Donald Trump before Election Day.
And the odds were like 10 to 1 against that.
And so those people already, cha-ching, cashed another...
This is on Polymarket?
Yeah, another cash-in winning bet.
They got good markets on Polymarket.
They've got many more than predicted, but Polymarket says, I can't deposit into my account.
Yeah, you have to have crypto, and it's legal for people to place bets there, but the feds are harassing Polymarket, so they have an official policy of not taking bets knowingly from an American.
So, even though an American founded it out of New York.
So, what Del...
Probably about two-thirds of the funds on Polymarket are coming from Americans.
But it's crypto, and they use VPN, and they use things like that.
We don't have a VPN advertisement in there, do we, for Rack?
Not yet.
I've never done that.
They should have a VPN one.
Well, let me check what's on the campaigns out here on the side.
Maybe there has to be a VPN.
And so everybody understands, in Rack, Rumble Advertiser Center, after you do one ad...
There's a 20-minute time frame, so you can't do another ad read for another 20 minutes.
No, I don't see any VPNs, but I'll ask the Rumble team, because we probably should have a VPN sponsor.
Yeah, yeah, we should.
I know there's been this few on America's Untold Stories with Eric Conley.
I was on there with he and Mark Robert on Friday for a Freeform Friday edition.
I was supposed to come on, Robert.
So I did the conversation with Adrian Dittman, and I don't know if you know the Twitter account.
Everybody thinks it's either Elon Musk, Nom de plume.
Or an Elon Musk AI bot that's actually indistinguishable from the real Elon Musk.
Or somebody who just, you know, as a curse or a blessing, sounds exactly like Elon Musk.
I still don't know which way to go, but we ended up talking for two and a half hours.
And so I started at 4, ended at 6.30 only because I had to start a barbecue.
It's amazing, everybody.
Go check it out on Twitter.
I think I shared it in our Locals community.
Yeah, I was trying to catch up with you guys there, but I got caught up with Adrian Dittman.
Okay, so the sentencing...
Oh, sorry, hold on.
Yeah, so I always said that the only question was...
This judge is politically motivated.
The question was, did he think sentencing would help the Democrats or hurt the Democrats?
I think they realized, despite Norm Eisen and these other people screaming, please sentence him, that no, this would probably backfire.
This would probably not work out well.
And so instead, they want to continue to smear Trump by delaying everything.
The second factor was this.
The moment he sentences him is the moment he loses control of the case.
It's the moment the case goes up to the higher courts to determine bail pending appeal, for example.
And he doesn't want a higher court to say the sentence was garbage.
The trial was garbage.
So there are multiple motivations for him not to sentence Trump.
It's why I predicted he wouldn't sentence him in September.
In fact, he won't even make a ruling on the mistrial motion until the election is over.
D.C. judge did exactly the same.
I said there would be no trial before Election Day in either one of the federal cases.
There won't be.
There will be no trial before Election Day, no sentencing before Election Day either in the New York case.
Just as predicted.
And why is the D.C. judge doing it that way?
Because she doesn't want the higher courts to overturn another dumb ruling she makes against Trump that makes her look bad and makes Trump look good.
So she's delaying everything until after Election Day.
So she can keep control of the case.
Jack Smith can use it continually to hurt Trump politically.
Harris can keep using the language they want to use to hurt Trump without having the D.C. Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court of the United States, which is the one they're really worried about, stepping in before Election Day and saying, hey, by the way, America, all these cases are garbage.
So that's the goal.
But if you're Trump, you still prefer this.
I know there are people like, I mean...
Would he have maximized them sending him to Rikers?
Of course.
Would have probably guaranteed his election?
Yes. Was he really eager to go through with it?
No. I mean, Trump is still human like the rest of us.
So it's one thing to get shot at and survive.
It doesn't mean you want to go through it again.
It's one thing to be a political martyr and political prisoner.
It doesn't mean you really want to do it.
You know, even Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane was like, can I get out of this?
Can we find a different path?
Maybe take Peter.
He kind of looks like...
It's just being human.
It's the nature of humanity.
Am I being too optimistic, or does the judge not have to vacate the verdict, reassess the evidence, and reassess the charges themselves?
He has to make that decision.
But he's going to let Election Day make that decision for him.
That's what's going to happen.
Either which way.
The whole goal of all of these was just embarrass Trump in the court of public opinion and hope it damages him enough to cost him the election.
And it hasn't worked to the degree they thought.
So they're just trying to keep alive what they can keep alive to hurt him without boosting him further by doing some sort of inflammatory proceeding before Election Day.
My guess is after Election Day, sooner or later, all these cases get dismissed.
It's only a matter of time.
Let me bring a few of these up here.
We've got Just Thinking says, so can Trump still file appeals even though sentencing hasn't happened, or does sentencing have to occur first?
Now, he can appeal in the Second Circuit to removal, but the instigator for removal was the imminence of the sentencing.
So the Second Circuit could just kick it down past Election Day, too.
FBI asks, you plead the fifth.
This is Jonah Finn.
Even lawyers aren't safe.
Ask any former Trump lawyer.
Well, that's what I was saying.
Under bar review, Tim Pool is a master troll.
He's not even on the Ukraine hit list despite trying hard.
We got CM Jones 1117.
Didn't this tenant thing launch a day after Tim stated he was going to launch the defamation suit against Kamal?
Three days after that.
One day after the Chinese spy story.
But, I mean, they had to have drafted it long before, but obviously it's not dated.
You're right.
It's really weird.
There's no date anywhere.
I looked, and I felt stupid for not finding it.
Maybe they had the cover page that they didn't scan or something.
Sportfish177 says, Great show as usual, Robert David, but if Mr. Barnes could post the design for making a necktie from Reynolds Wrap, heavy duty, I'd appreciate it.
And then we got this.
All right.
Now, speaking of...
I don't know, corrupt, politically motivated decisions.
I didn't hear about it until you mentioned it, that they're charging the father in the Georgia shooting with, what are they charging him with?
Felony charges in connection with the shooting.
What is it, negligence?
It's got to be negligence.
What are they charging him with?
Okay, the swift decision by prosecutors to charge the father of the 14-year-old suspect in the Georgia high school shooting will be another test of whether parents can be held criminally responsible for their child's actions.
What are the charges?
It's got to be good.
I mean, they charged him with murder in Michigan, so it wouldn't surprise me if they're going that far in Georgia.
They're saying manslaughter here.
Oh, it's...
Okay, so Colin Gray rocked back and forth.
My goodness.
It's not even 48 hours.
The charges were four counts of involuntary manslaughter, two counts of secondary murder, and eight counts of cruelty to children in the second degree.
Yeah, I mean, it's a...
I have...
I opposed it in the Michigan case.
I oppose it here.
The real goal here is to use the school shooting cases as a gun control mechanism.
And part of the gun control mechanism is to prohibit parents from ever bringing their child up with guns in any way, shape, or form.
And to say, hey, by the way, if your kid ever does anything, or anything ever happens with that gun, or anything ever happens with your kid concerning a gun, we're going to put you in prison for life.
So the best way for you to avoid this is never be around guns yourself.
Never let your kid around guns in any way, shape, or form.
To undermine gun culture in America.
The fact that they charged the parents, and facts are still emerging, and I've been hearing stories of the mother called the school the day of.
They said there's something urgently wrong.
The grandmother had called the school within the month.
Are they charging the school for negligent manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter?
Because it sounds like the parents were notifying the school that the school seemingly failed.
Why not the people really responsible?
The Federal Bureau of Investigation, who he confessed his intentions to long before he did it.
And so once again, the FBI, what happens when you confess?
The FBI seems to make sure that you go and do it.
That's what it looks like to me.
Because now this is happening over and over and over again, where the FBI's tipped off, and it feels like, hey, I'm pretty sure I saw that grandma hanging around the lectern guy last week.
Maybe she had an unauthorized tour of the Capitol.
Bam! SWAT raid next day.
Kid comes in.
I plan on going and shooting up a school.
No, I really plan on doing it.
The FBI's like, okay, how can we help?
It's the sick joke.
You phone in, there's a mentally unhinged person threatening people, and the FBI goes and recruits instead of arrests.
Yeah, that's exactly what they do.
There's more and more evidence pointing in that direction.
And I'm waiting for it to come out with the dude, I don't care to say his name, from Butler.
The parents somehow never even looked at.
Nobody's looked at the parents in Pennsylvania.
Kind of interesting how that is.
He was at a shooting range 43 times in a year.
Wasn't it the father's gun?
I mean, it was an even more compelling case, arguably.
And yet, that's the one case where no one's even talked about looking at the parents.
Son of a bitch, Robert.
No matter how cynical I get, it's hard to keep up.
Yeah, well, that's wild.
Two days after.
Felony charges.
Another trial to...
What is the solution to it, though?
Because, I mean, it's an abuse of existing law.
So what is the...
I guess we need to make crystal clear what parents...
I thought it was clear what parents are responsible for.
Dershowitz believes the Michigan Appeals Court or Michigan Supreme Court will correct it.
I don't have as much confidence as he does.
He just officially abandoned the Democratic Party he's been a part of since his youth.
Over the politics of Israel and wokeness.
It's interesting to witness.
But sometimes we can't trust the courts, unfortunately.
So maybe legislative reform needs to happen.
Because this is a disguised war on the Second Amendment.
That's what this is.
It's very, very thinly disguised.
Ryan's Rumble 32 says, What's the deal with Benny Johnson and the Russians?
Dude, come on.
Go watch the first hour of the show.
We're not going over that again.
Okay, so there's that.
That's another court system gone wild.
Let's go with the other court system gone wild with the RFK Jr.
First of all, Mark Cuban is a moron.
One of the best replies to any number of his tweets are, Mark Cuban is a living...
Proof that you don't need to be smart to get rich and that it can happen to anybody.
He's almost an upswing, Mark Cuban, related to some employment practices that he was trying.
But it turned out he was trying the opposite of what it appeared, by the way.
I don't know what contract he cut that has to make him say dumber and dumber things on behalf of the Harris campaign, but it's getting pretty embarrassing at this point.
Well, it seems that, you know, he says, I didn't donate to the Harris campaign, but there was a $35 donation to the Democrats.
I don't think he's donating to them.
I think he's taking money from them because nothing can explain what he's doing.
No self-respecting human, let alone a man, would do it with the groveling and bootlicking that Mark Cuban is doing.
What was the segue into this?
Maybe he's a Martha Stewart favorite then.
Oh, the segue was that Mark Cuban comes out and says, He fought for or was promoting the idea that RFK Jr. should be kept on the ballot after he basically moved to be removed from the ballot because he's suspended his campaign, but not in every state.
And Mark Cuban, who was talking about, I forget which way he was financing this here, but said, hey, he fought to stay on the ballot.
Now they shouldn't take him off.
And I'm like, you're an idiot.
The Democratic Party, within a week, in the exact same states, the same officials went from demanding courts kick Kennedy off the ballot to demanding they keep him on the ballot.
I mean, if this doesn't expose what a complete and utter fraud the Democratic Party is, but all these election laws are and all these courts are that exclude people from the ballot, then nothing is more compelling than the Kennedy example.
Now, because it was so embarrassing, the courts in North Carolina...
The courts in Michigan, the appeals courts, stepped in and they're like, no, no, he wants off the ballot.
Let him off the ballot.
We're not going to look like such obvious frauds that we're manipulating the ballot on behalf of one party.
We're supposed to be actually following the law here, and we can't even pretend to do that and go from removing him to forcing him to stay on.
And similar appellate court reversals in some cases for Jill Stein and Cornel West, though it varies by state.
You know, the Wisconsin, they were trying to kick off Jill Stein.
Now she's back on.
So the Pennsylvania, they were able to kick off Cornell West.
We'll see.
But all it did is force Kennedy to renounce the 50-state alternative strategy and say, everybody everywhere, just vote Trump.
If you're, for me, vote Trump.
That's it.
Doesn't matter which state you're in, just vote Trump.
Because they're playing all these games, they're trying to confuse people, so forth.
So I'm just full in, all in Trump.
Gonna campaign for Trump, organize for Trump, advertise for Trump, promote for Trump, and he's become one of Trump's best surrogates and spokespersons.
That's all they forced him to do.
I mean, the Democratic Party's historical amnesia about the political pragmatism and intellect of the...
Of the Kennedy family, particularly his father and uncle in that generation, is extraordinary to me.
Because he was always going to adjust on the fly.
And if you try to hurt him this way, he's going to counter it another way.
And that's all they did.
They accelerated and escalated the Kennedy-Trump alignment.
And Trump this week was saying in speeches, Kennedy talking points.
Saying, you know, I'm going to put Kennedy in charge of the WHO and the CHD, CDC and the FDA and all of them, because they're all a bunch of corrupt organizations captured by big corporate interests.
It was everybody connected with censorship of speech.
We're not only going to fire him, we're going to criminally prosecute him.
I mean, he's escalating.
Kennedy's out there with Tucker Carlson talking about we're going to have a come to Jesus for all the COVID criminals that took place in 2020, like Anthony Fauci.
So, I mean...
The efforts to escalate against Trump have backfired.
The efforts to escalate against Kennedy have backfired.
And the appellate courts, being politically pragmatic, realizing they don't want to look like complete jokes, stepped back from the breach of how they were manipulating the ballot this past week.
Didn't stop the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, though, from finding new creative ways to stuff that ballot come Election Day.
Well, hold on.
Before we get there, we got Donald Trump.
This is a chat from...
If I can read it underneath, it says...
The latest post from Trump Vance on X showing...
I don't even know what I'm looking at, actually.
I should have looked at that more thoroughly before I brought that up.
Hold on.
What am I looking at there?
I got to go back to locals.
I think their age.
It said the latest post from Trump Vance on a like and follow and it's Trump Vance Lee status.
It's Trump president, the advanced vice president.
I always like the one that, what's his name, did the funny meme maker, Carpe Donctum.
Oh, yeah.
That way he did Trump 2044, Trump 2052.
It drove the left crazy.
They're like, oh, Trump has to be dictated for life.
Robert, can you comment on Colin Gray's arrest?
We did that.
This is from Ganthet.
And the reason why he's charged, it's just another attempt to circumvent the Second Amendment.
Good. I just want to make sure that I'm not missing anything specifically on point here.
Oh, Robert, do you agree with Kash Patel that Biden will step down before November, October surprise, Harris becomes president and pardons Hunter as part of the agreement for Barnes?
Well, I mean, that's a good transition to Hunter Biden.
As predicted, there was no way they were going to let that case go to a jury trial.
So I'm not...
I have to back it up because I sort of forgot when I learned, if I remember, that he was charged with the tax issue.
Because at first he wasn't.
He was charged only with the gun issue.
And the argument was that they're not going to charge him with the tax issue because that would reveal, you know, potentially get into a lot of family Biden crime stuff.
I forget when he got charged.
He did not long after that in California.
Okay. Then he gets charged, and then he pleads not guilty, which I remember we were saying at the time, I was like, do better plead guilty, because then you avoid a trial.
He says, I'm pleading not guilty, go into trial.
A lot has changed since then.
Biden withdrew from the race, so I guess there's a lot less of a political incentive to, I don't know, to go through the trial.
I think they timed it so there never would be a trial on the tax case, and sentencing would occur after Election Day.
I think the example was to say, hey, see, look at how impartial we are.
We're not prosecuting Trump for political reasons.
We're even prosecuting the president's son.
But they were never going to go forward with actual trial that exposed all the evidence that in order to show the financial evidence of tax evasion, it would inevitably show all the foreign money flooding into Biden.
And so that would be embarrassing to have peak election season.
So the goal was...
Do different tactics to delay the timing of these indictments so that the gun indictment goes first that isn't that problematic for the family.
And the tax indictment goes last.
And once it gets close to trial, just cut a deal.
But make sure sentencing is post-election day so there's never any embarrassing trial, not even an embarrassing sentencing report.
And then after election day, Papa Joe can come in and issue the requisite parts.
Which, by the way, he needs to do.
Even if he doesn't care at all about his son, which you can't rule out when it comes to Papa Joe, because if Hunter was actually stuck with a four- to five-year prison sentence, which would be the norm for what he pled guilty to on the tax charges, by golly, he starts singing like a bird about a whole lot of people in places.
And you'd either end up Epstein-ed inside, or a lot of high-ranking Democrats and deep state people would get tied in.
So that's why Papa Joe's got to issue the pardon before Hunter serves a day in federal prison.
I like this idea that in order for it to be politically palatable so that it doesn't look totally corrupt, Biden has an issue, resigns, and then Kamala pardons Hunter, and so it's not, what's the word when a father met the prison?
Yeah, but if you're Papa Joe, you've got to trust Kamala to do the right thing.
You know what I mean?
Now, like I said, there's a lot of deep state people there tied in.
But if you're Papa Joe, do you fully trust her to do that?
I think he might step down to say, hey, look, I haven't got a black woman president.
That's how great I am, Joe Biden.
I mean, he's taken literally 48% of his presidential time has been vacation time.
It's unbelievable.
You physically witnessed it right on the beach.
He's setting a record for vacation time.
He's like a no-show job in New Jersey that the mob used to have that ties in with the unions.
But putting that aside, I think if I'm Biden, I don't know if I trust anybody else to issue the requisite pardons or commutations.
My prediction is still the same.
The one I made two years ago, he will pardon Trump at the same time to make it look apolitical.
I understand that we need to move past these problems.
We need all these disputes.
So I'm going to pardon everybody.
Throw in maybe a Hillary Clinton pardon for kicks and giggles.
But throw in a Donald Trump pardon with Hunter Biden.
Same time.
Say, see, this just shows I'm an honest, honorable, stand-up guy, not a politically corrupt guy covering up for my family's crimes.
I'm just looking as you're talking, Robert.
The predicted has a market.
It says, the market shall resolve to yes in the event that President Joe Biden resigns and permanently departs from the office of the presidency before the end dates listed below, that being January 20th, January 20th, 2025.
Temporary transfer powers.
I could see that.
And Harris would end up the 47th president.
Yeah, and it would screw up all the merch.
Yesterday I got a Trump 47 hat.
Trump 48 instead.
Would you take those odds at 8-1?
Yeah, I would say the odds would add 4-1.
But he's going to pardon first.
But I think he does it after the election just for his boosting his ego.
Boosting his legacy.
He's not going to step down if it looks like that means he was too old to be in president.
That he won't do.
But if he thinks he can step down by saying, see, I wanted an opportunity for a black woman to be president of the United States, that's when part of my legacy, you know, step down like for a month or something, like around Christmas Day or something, that I could see.
I would assess that at one in four.
People are underestimating the size of Biden's ego because he got railroaded, but they had to get a medical problem and...
Here in Vegas.
And then lock him away at his beach house for him to step back for the presidency.
So I don't know if for a re-election, it'll take even more to get him to step down.
Harris doesn't want to step down prior to election day.
Or step in.
Yeah, then she's got to own a lot of the problems that he's built.
Yeah, she's pretending she doesn't know who's in the White House.
I'm also laughing because in our locals community, there's a good scream to meme and it's the woman who was screaming during the inauguration.
Okay, that's fascinating.
That's fascinating.
I like the logic behind all of that.
I mean, it's become such a joke that Biden is not president that it's almost a formality that he just leaves.
Like, okay, goodbye.
Go. And interesting, though, pardoning Trump and Hillary.
That way, Trump, when he wins, no longer has to face the calls to jail.
Hillary in jail pardoned himself.
Kamala pardons Joe!
Hmm. All right, I might have to go make an investment.
An investment.
Okay, I'm joking.
What do we segue into now?
Well, back to the Pennsylvania elections issue.
Oh, that's why we haven't gotten there.
Sorry. So this one, I gleaned through it.
It's something about accepting improperly dated mail-in ballots, and I didn't understand the details, and then I lost interest.
Basically, there's all these mechanisms in place to make sure mail-in ballots are honest.
And one of them is you put inside a secrecy envelope your ballot.
You put that inside your declaration envelope, that you sign a declaration that only you filled out that ballot, signed that ballot, did that ballot.
That makes you criminally liable in case somebody else did.
Or you did it by coercion or by the ballot being stolen in some manner.
That's the only real mechanism in place, other than signature matches, which are sporadic by state.
To make sure that the ballot isn't a stolen ballot.
Well, what happens when somebody doesn't comply with that, right?
The secrecy ballot isn't there.
The secrecy envelope isn't there.
The declaration envelope isn't signed.
It isn't dated.
So a lot of these people will then go in and they give them a second chance to vote with a provisional ballot.
But what's supposed to happen is it's supposed to fix the original ballot.
And if they don't do the original ballot the right way...
Then they've lost the means of casting a ballot because they never did it the right way.
Instead, the Pennsylvania courts are coming in and saying, nah, Commonwealth court in particular, are coming in and saying, nah, there's no strict compliance with these rules.
So if you don't date it, no problem.
If you don't sign it, no problem.
If you don't include a secrecy envelope, no problem.
You can still vote.
So they're coming up with excuses to make sure to remove the disincentive.
Of sending in fraudulent ballots, obviously, evidently, manifestly fraudulent ballots, and rewarding those efforts by giving them second, third, fourth bites at the apple in case they get caught.
And it's no coincidence it's the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania taking the lead in case after case after case, often with the same judge, Democratic judge, who illegally imprisoned farm workers magically being assigned to panel after panel.
So that's what's happening in Pennsylvania.
When does the early voting start?
It depends on the states.
I mean, there were some ballots that were supposed to go out this past week, but they actually had to be put on hold in North Carolina because they were going to take Kennedy back off the ballot after originally being on the ballot.
But some ballots get sent to overseas for certain people who live overseas, certain veterans, certain people who have live military duty, so on and so forth, beginning this week, actually.
And so what are the Republicans doing?
Are they pushing hard for the mail-in ballots before?
Some. Some.
I mean, to a degree.
What is showing up is that both in terms of voter registration and mail-in ballot requests, Democratic requests are way down.
Pretty much everywhere.
That's interesting.
Okay. And one thing I learned last night is that apparently the Republican registration in the state of Florida are now one million more registered Republican voters in Florida than Democrats, which I think is like an all-time high.
Yeah. Oh, yeah, yeah.
Florida's been an old-school Democratic state.
I mean, it was always a politically marginal state because Democrats were conservative.
But it used to be people who really registered Democrat, thought of themselves as Democrat.
And they lost the folks up in the panhandle some years ago.
But now they're losing the Puerto Ricans in the central part of the state.
And then they're losing Cubans and Venezuelans and Colombians in Miami-Dade.
Miami-Dade, that used to be the Democratic heart of that state, may actually vote for Trump this election, which would just show you how radical it shifted.
And they're even suffering erosion amongst the older Jewish retirees along the Florida coast that used to be 80% Democrat.
They'll still be Democrat, but it'll be maybe like 65%.
And you mentioned it.
I was at the beach homeschooling with the kid the other day, and I saw an old couple reading, and the page that was facing the ocean said, are Democrat Jews, or are Florida Jews, something along the line, is the Jewish vote abandoning the Democrats?
And I tried to get a picture, but then they flipped the page before I could.
I hope so.
For goodness sake, I don't know how dumb you have to be.
I don't understand the ideological conformity among the Jewish demographic, the black demographic in terms of voting Democrat.
Hopefully there's something at least a bit more of an even spread.
Yeah, there's definitely erosion.
I mean, you see people like Dershowitz.
Dershowitz is the kind of guy who would take a lot for him to say, no, he's not a Democrat.
I mean, he still voted for Joe Biden.
He still voted for Hillary Clinton.
If the Democrats had maintained even a little bit more, Of a pro-Israeli posture.
And from the perspective of their Muslim and anti-Israeli critics, they think they've been too pro-Israel, the Biden administration.
But there's no way you can walk in between those issues.
You can't be partially pro-Israel and partially anti-Israel.
They've tried to walk that as tea leaves.
But by the way, that's why the fake Logan Act investigation got launched.
I don't know if you heard a couple of weeks ago.
Yeah, you mentioned what happened to it.
They talk about Trump having met with, is it Bibi?
Netanyahu. Yeah.
It was very simple.
It was a threat across the bow to Netanyahu.
The Harris administration wants to coerce Netanyahu to get a ceasefire done prior to Election Day to mitigate their losses amongst the progressive left and the Arab Muslim vote.
Which isn't big, but it exists in places like Minneapolis, places like Dearborn, Michigan, parts of New Jersey and New York that could influence some down-ballot races, etc.
And then Jewish votes, a bunch of different places.
She's losing votes on both sides and figures she could avoid losing votes on both sides if there was a ceasefire.
And the fear was Netanyahu meeting with Trump would discourage a ceasefire.
So they put it because what they would have done if they were in Trump's position is they would have told Netanyahu, Don't do a deal so you can drag this out to hurt the incumbent.
I guarantee you that Trump had no such conversation.
But that's how they think.
So they wanted to float a Logan Act investigation to intimidate Netanyahu and Trump into trying to coerce Netanyahu into doing a ceasefire before Election Day to boost Harris.
I think that was purely political from day one.
So effing dirty.
I had never heard of these things.
Logan Act, Farah Act.
I had never heard of these things until...
I'm trying to think of when I first heard of the Farah.
Farah was 2016.
Yeah, 2017 really.
A lot of them didn't even come up in 2016 and started popping up until General Flynn was the test case.
Let me see here.
I'm looking down at the list.
We did a lot of stuff here already.
Alex Jones' right to publicity.
We got the right to privacy and discovery, religious discrimination, heresy trials, law tube litigation, copyright thumbnails, disability discrimination, internet library shutdown.
We can save some for the after party.
Maybe we cover one more here live.
We'll do two more here so we can end roughly at two hours.
We'll do the law tube and we'll do the Alex Jones because those are a broad enough interest.
Alex Jones, we covered this at the time when the estate was looking to Own the rights, likeness, images, arguing that that was part of the estate, personal estate of Alex Jones, so they could own his voice, not just his social media, but likeness in perpetuity.
Why has this come back up into the news?
Because they are reigniting that effort.
They are demanding the bankruptcy court.
They're claiming that Alex Jones, what's colloquially called the right of publicity, but it's better understood as the right to your own name.
People in the college football arena will be familiar with this.
This relates to the name-image-likeness lawsuits that happened over the last several years.
That was with the video games where they were using the likeness of players to sell video games.
Exactly. The college athletes had no right to it under the...
Do I want to say the NAACP?
Was that it?
Well, the NCAA claimed...
NCAA. Yeah, the NCAA, National Communist Against Athletes, claimed that they had assigned those.
And so the issue was, when is your right of publicity something you can even assign?
When is it what's called inalienable?
People may remember the Declaration of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, where we talk about inalienable rights.
What that means is that there are certain rights an individual has that they cannot sell, that they cannot give away.
That they cannot transfer to someone else.
Hence, inalienable.
They're not subject to being alienated from the individual.
And the question has always been the right to your public image, which is what the right of publicity really is.
And in college football, we now know this as NIL, because you can get contracts and get paid by boosters for your name, image, or likeness as a college football player.
That was the settlement of those suits.
They ultimately determined the players.
Owned their own rights to name, image, and likeness in a way that wasn't being fully and fairly compensated for by the NCAA.
And that some of those rights are inalienable, at least to some degree.
So the claim is that the right of your public image, which is your social media accounts and the red, but it's anything in your public image, anything you ever do in public.
And so some people see this as a property right.
Other people see it as a privacy right.
The right to your own personality, the right to your identity, you might say.
Or at least the public representation and presentation of your identity.
The claim of the creditors of Alex Jones is they're claiming they own Alex Jones' identity.
That they own Alex Jones' public, anything he says or does in public.
So that effectively they could permanently gag him and prohibit him from speech if they were to win this argument.
They could force, they could, in Alex Jones' name, they could get an injunction preventing him from doing or saying anything they don't want in public.
Take it one step further, could they hypothetically then use AI-generated Jones voices to put out whatever messaging they want?
They could even compel specific performance.
They could say, we own your public image.
You've got to go on there right now and endorse Kamala Harris.
You've got to go on there and denounce Donald Trump.
And so it goes right to the issue of, when do you own your identity?
And they're trying to use the bankruptcy court to claim that your identity can be owned by creditors, or owned by the government, whether that creditors the government or anyone else.
It's a terrifying notion.
It would eviscerate certain principles of privacy, autonomy, control, identity, personality, you name it.
It would eviscerate core constitutional rights, protections, and liberties.
Now, the reason why this doctrine isn't as well understood as it should be in the law is the first legal scholars to advance the right of publicity were secretly on the payroll of Hollywood companies.
And their goal was to establish an alienable right of publicity because they owned the right of public attention of a whole bunch of their actors and actresses.
And they wanted to control it.
And they pretended to be doing this in the name of individual autonomy, but they rooted it in doctrines of property because they wanted it alienable rather than inalienable because the big film companies had purchased it.
This dispute has popped up in baseball card company context, etc.
To give you an idea, this can come up in a divorce.
Imagine if somebody, the wife or the husband, says, I own your publicity.
So let's say Megyn Kelly.
I mean, it's a terrifying notion.
Now, it's only fully met case law adjudication in one case.
And it's the case.
Of an innocent man, wrongly accused, known as Orenthal James Simpson.
O.J. Simpson.
Those that don't know, O.J. was actually innocent.
But they sued after they won in the civil case, and they wanted to collect against his right of publicity.
They wanted to own O.J.'s image into perpetuity.
And the court said, what you're really asking is to make him an involuntary servant.
This would literally be involuntary servitude.
We've got constitutional prohibitions on that against peonage, against involuntary servitude in specific, against being able to be bonded for your debt as your labor.
So no imprisonment for debt anymore in America.
So the court quite correctly said, no, that's an inalienable right.
You can, by consent, agree to sell some aspect of your public image, but it has to be consensual.
It's not an alienable privilege.
It's an inalienable right.
And hopefully that's what the court rules.
But it's another case where the Alex Jones cases are going to set the precedent for all of us.
Because if the courts say that they can own us, quite literally, they can make us into chattel.
It's similar to the vaccine cases.
If they own our body, they own us.
It's similar to the food freedom cases.
If they can decide what food we can eat, they own our bodies and they own us.
If they own our public image, our right of publicity, they own us.
And so once again, Alex Jones is going to set the template for the rest of us.
As you were talking about that, and I was just still thinking about whether or not Joe Biden leaves the office before the end date, if Kamala Harris gets elected, God forbid, then the incentive for him not to...
Resign is eliminated.
If Trump gets elected...
Okay, very interesting.
I'm thinking about this in a bit.
So, well, this is interesting.
Speaking of likeness, I guess it is a good segue into this law tuber drama, which even...
Megan Fox was on on Thursday.
She's amazing.
She's going to come back on.
I love the fact that she's in the law sphere that is not political, but when the world gets sane again, maybe we'll just go back to Johnny Depp and...
I was going to say Kyle Rittenhouse trials, but those were not politically sane.
This is the DUI guy using a thumbnail and using someone's likeness image in the thumbnail.
And the woman, who seems to be highly litigious, I'm almost nervous talking about her, bada-bing, bada-boom, joking, suing that he's not allowed using her image, her real image in thumbnails.
And she's suing a bunch of other lawyers, a bunch of other people involved in this for, I don't know, invasion of privacy.
How closely are you following this?
So, yeah, I mean, Megan Fox let me know about it.
At first I thought, somebody's really suing under this theory?
That they own, like, this is a different version of right of publicity.
This is claiming that you own your public image to such a degree that no one else can ever make reference to it, even if you are a subject of public news and information.
And it's like, okay, that's taking it a little bit too far in the opposite direction.
And I forgot one other element to this is that the woman is basically suing for a portion of whatever proceeds, if not all of the proceeds that are derived from the exploitation of her likeness and image, to basically say, you talk about my story and you use my public images for the story.
Now I get a portion of the profits that you get off your reporting or whatever.
Sorry. Okay.
Yeah. I mean, imagine if you put anybody in a thumbnail or made any reference to it in an article or a story, and suddenly they're entitled to enjoying you from ever doing it.
They're entitled to taking it down.
They're entitled to all the money that ever was made related to it.
It's a little bit crazy, but it shows you the opposite extreme of these kind of cases.
Now, typically speaking, copyright law...
Carves out an exception for fair use involving news and commentary.
And the Florida state law version that she's suing under comparably carves out newsworthy reasons for your image to be publicly disclosed.
So you don't own your name to such a degree that you can preclude public discussion of what you've been up to.
Though this lady seems like a whole new level of crazy.
It looks like unhealthy crazy, to put it mildly.
Although, I don't know.
Maybe she's right, and who knows.
I'm giving everybody the link to Locals, and I want to do one thing, actually, before we go, because I would do it if it were not part of the Rumble Advertiser Centre, but I'm going to, to show you what Rack is, and this is another company.
If you get sued, and you need to get a fundraiser, do not go to the Go F Me.
You go to the Give, Send, Go, which is a beautiful sponsor right here.
Look at that little...
QR code, scan it.
Finally, we're beginning to see legitimate alternatives to big tech companies in all spheres of society.
Now, anytime you have a fundraising need, start a campaign on Give, Send, Go and invite your community to stand with you.
Give, Send, Go has become the number one choice for so many who were not given a choice because of what they believe.
When other platforms silenced, Give, Send, Go came in and stood for freedom.
Give, Send, Go is a family company.
I've had the CEO on at least twice.
That shares your values.
They are the only fundraising platform with a, quote, hope team, end quote, of dedicated individuals who personally...
By the way, I did the end quote on purpose because I'm being technical.
Hope team.
They call every campaign.
They pray for them in all situations.
There's even a pray button on every campaign, too.
So if you can't donate, you can still give...
Thoughts and, you know, positive thoughts and energy.
With 20 fundraising categories, currencies in over 80 countries, and more money in your pocket, go to the platform preferred by Jordan Peterson, Kyle Rittenhouse, and Eric Matexas.
GiveSendGo.com and avoid the Go ethne.
That company should be soon into oblivion, but GiveSendGo is the only one to use.
And then there were a couple of rumble rants.
Before we go on over to the locals, if they take AJ's identity, should they not serve his sentence?
He hasn't been sentenced, but it's all nuts.
I don't know when that gets overturned, when some semblance of sanity goes back to $1.5 billion.
Let that sink in.
That was from JinVR.
Operations consultant says, can Biden proactively pardon Garland, Ray, and Fauci?
Yeah, you can proactively pardon anybody.
Would they need a proactive pardon if they benefit from government immunity for their behavior, which the president should not be gifted?
Hold on.
Sorry. There was one more that I missed just before we get on over to locals.
It is from Tarpon.
That's a big, beautiful fish out in Florida.
After all the corrupt and often illegal behavior by the Dems left, why would you trust them to comply with discovery or house subpoenas as if the Dems will play by the rules all of a sudden?
Okay. Thank you.
And now we're going to take this party.
It's going to be supporters only because that's the way Rumble Studios is designed.
But if you're not yet supporting us, come support us.
It's a wonderful place.
$10 a month, $100 a year at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
The alternative, you can get like those coins and tip willy-nilly.
It could be a member and it's no member.
Oh! I almost always forget to do this.
Holy crap, Robert.
I have not yet gotten my new merch.
But you're going to want to get your new merch, people.
Go and get the fight hat.
I'm going to show you the hat that I got in a second last night.
And socks.
Oh, the socks are...
Am I going to knock something over here?
I got these socks.
These are not a troll on Trump.
These were being sold at the event.
They're socks that have Trump's hair on them.
And then I got a hat, which I'll show you.
But Viva Fry, go get some merch if you want some merch, and it's wonderful.
Now, we are ending.
Robert, what do you have scheduled for this week?
Probably a trial.
I'm waiting to find out on Monday morning whether I'll be in trial in Orange County all week.
Orange County, California.
Not a bad place to have a trial if you have to have one.
Yeah, so it might get continued.
I'll find out until Monday morning.
So if the trial does not go on, then I'll be able to do what are the odds Monday afternoon at 2 p.m. Eastern with Richard Barris, People's Pundit Daily.
And we'll be active doing some bourbons throughout the week.
The trial does go on.
The next time you'll hear from me is next Sunday on the show.
We got another one from 222bilibob13 over in Rumble.
It says, Blondes easily suck them in, yet pay mechanics to replace their steering wheel, which won't fix their car's steering issues.
You two do not know how the world is truly run, so you'll never fix the true issue.
I don't mind being compared to an attractive blonde, so thank you.
Okay, we're ending it on Rumble.
The entire podcast will be on Viva and Barnes Law for the people.
It's on Podbean, people.
And I've been publishing the daily stuff pretty much more proactively.
Needed to be a little bit better at snipping and clipping, but whatever, we'll get there.
So this will all be on Viva Clips in its entirety on YouTube and Podbean.
Now we're going to end it.
Come on over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
And if you're not, I'll be live daily, 12.30.
Matt Christensen coming on tomorrow, so it's going to be amazing.