Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 27, 2024 - Viva & Barnes

02:05:39

Ep. 234: Jack Smith's UNLAWFUL Appropriations! Joe Rogan & Trump! Kamala Scandal & MORE!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Donald Trump is increasingly unstable and unhinged.
	Anyone who has openly said, as he has, that he would terminate the Constitution of the United States.
	Liar. Someone who suggests we should terminate the Constitution of the United States.
	She should never again stand behind the shield of the president of the United States.
	Is increasingly unstable and unhinged.
	I genuinely apologize to start a show off with your ears bleeding from the shrill, nasally voice that will echo through the ages, that being that of Kamala Harris.
	When was it?
	It was this morning or last night?
	I think it was this morning because that's what I spent the better time of my morning routine doing, was editing this together.
	I see a clip of Kamala Harris.
	And just so everybody appreciates which one it was, it's the one on the bottom left.
	Look at her.
	Look at her flicking of the hair.
	And she's shrieking like a psychotic Banji again.
	And I'm thinking, no, I'm going crazy or I'm hallucinating.
	That I thought she was wearing a black top when she did that and standing in front of the American flags, multiple of them, not this one.
	So I'm thinking like, okay, maybe I missaw and this is a zoomed in from a telephoto lens and so you only get one American flag behind her.
	The amount of times this crazy cackling idiot has said this same line.
	I saw another montage.
	They had nine of them.
	And they like synced it up better than I did.
	She's crazy.
	Like, this is crazy.
	Look at how...
	Manufactured. How inorganic, how inauthentic, how rehearsed this is.
	Look at her hand.
	Never again!
	Look at it in all of them, except the top left, which you don't see.
	We should terminate the Constitution of the United States.
	I need more drugs.
	Never again.
	Never again.
	stand behind the shield of the president of the United States.
	Never again.
	Like, it's ugly.
	And not because of what Kamala looks like.
	It's ugly.
	It's ugly for the eyes, it's ugly for the ears, and it's ugly for the soul.
	Oh, people.
	People. Good evening.
	Desperate, desperation.
	I'm having a bit of a back and forth with someone on Twitter, and who I have got nothing against her.
	She was on the show, and, you know.
	She says, it's rehearsed.
	There's nothing wrong with that.
	It's preparation.
	And I'm sitting there saying, no, there's a difference between preparation and rehearsal.
	There's a difference between being prepared and rehearsed so that you know the lines.
	One is based on understanding.
	The other one is based on memorization.
	If you understand and you're prepared for the knowledge, you never have to rehearse.
	My kid right now is the lead in a play.
	And it's not exactly the same thing.
	I was like, do you understand the lines?
	Like, yeah, I understand them, but I don't need to understand them to know that my cue is when I hear the word hear.
	My cue is when I hear the word sink.
	And I come in, I don't need to understand anything.
	I just need to rehearse the lines and memorize them.
	When you understand something, you don't need to rehearse for shiit.
	Because you have the knowledge baked in and you can answer off the cuff.
	And the fact that Kamala Harris can't answer a question off the cuff and needs to be rehearsed means that she is a vapid, ignorant buffoon of the highest order.
	But don't take my word for it.
	Listen to Kamala.
	Rehearsed. When I say rehearsed, fake, phony, a big, fat phony, to quote from The Family Guy, I see this, because I'm going through all of the clips this morning, trying to put that montage together, and I see things, and I see them in a different way now.
	This is from the Michigan, the Grand Rapids, Michigan one, the one where she...
	Never again!
	Never again!
	Never! Oh my God, makes your eardrums want to explode.
	And I see this, and I see it in a different light this time.
	Watch this.
	Fake, phony, staged.
	Thy name be Kamala Harris.
	He's going to threaten.
	The health insurance of 45. We need a medic over here.
	We need a medic over here.
	Watch that again.
	Do you know what the chances of that actually being authentic, organic, and spontaneous are?
	0.00479.
	Let me impress you guys with my ability to memorize numbers.
	The chances of that being organic and authentic, 3.1415926535897323.
	I believe that's the first 20 numbers of pi.
	It's fake and phony, and you can see it.
	She was just waiting for the moment of that speech to deliver it, much like her...
	Never again!
	He's going to threaten the health insurance of 45...
	We need a medic over here.
	We need a medic over here.
	I'm in control.
	She's in control, people.
	Let's clear a path so I can come through, please.
	Clear a path.
	Oh, is it over?
	That's it?
	The medical emergency's over like that?
	Oh, yeah.
	I'm so cool.
	And we got jokes over here.
	Oh, yeah.
	I'm cool on the question.
	We got jokes.
	Which accent do I got now?
	Okay, we're okay.
	That's it.
	Medical emergency is over.
	Where did she learn it from?
	Wait until you see Don Trump Jr. at the end.
	She doesn't just copy from Donald Trump.
	She copies from Don Trump Jr.
	This is purely set up by Democrats, and I think they're trying to get out.
	This is eight months ago, just so you know.
	Yeah, medical, please.
	Are they okay?
	A big, fat, phony copycat is what she's...
	Let me get to the Don Trump, because this one is truly impeccable.
	When she...
	I tell you, I think she ripped the script from Don Jr.'s speech five years ago.
	But what's really scary...
	Hey, guys.
	Hey, we need a medic over there.
	That is authentic.
	There was a little bit of edge in his voice.
	Not panic.
	Controlled. That's authentic.
	My goodness, I like this guy.
	Here, hold on.
	Hold on.
	Hey, guys.
	Hey, we need a medic over there.
	Need a medic?
	Make a hole.
	Let's deal with that first.
	Guys, is someone doing that?
	Guys, someone on that?
	Make a hole.
	Guys, can we get a medic in there?
	Make a hole, please.
	That is authentic.
	We need a medic over here.
	I'm filled with anger and irritation and rage and mostly vomit.
	Like, vomit.
	Okay. I think that's good enough for the intro.
	Sorry. There was one more.
	There was one more.
	Actually, I wanted to show this meme before we get going here.
	This is classic.
	Elon Musk tweeted this out.
	Can I see your ID?
	No, sir, I'm voting today.
	Hilarious and true.
	It's funny.
	It's funny and true.
	There was one more that Kamala Harris did earlier, and I just, I have to show it.
	I have to show it.
	I'm sorry.
	We're going to get into the better stuff, which is going to be the show and fun stuff.
	And I got a big announcement for Zachary Apotheker, the Border Patrol agent.
	This one.
	I don't know if I had it up.
	I think I had it up in the backdrop.
	Hold on one second.
	Last one.
	Relevant for tonight's show.
	When they say the quiet part out loud, loudly, proudly, and mostly loudly, you should listen.
	Remember, you know, they always say to Trump, when someone tells you who they are, you should trust them.
	He's holding a rally with a bunch of neo-Nazis at Madison Square Garden.
	He knows exactly what he's doing.
	These idiots just called 20,000 New Yorkers Nazi supporters.
	The one thing I love about Kamala and the Democrats' stupidity, they don't even learn from their own mistakes.
	That's how you know you're dealing with idiots.
	They just had their deplorables moment on steroids.
	Listen to this.
	Listen to this.
	This is Kamala.
	Again, as I'm listening to old speeches that you get, this is a couple weeks old.
	You hear things.
	You hear things new for the first time.
	Who have all, in one way or another, used the word that he is unfit to be president again and is dangerous.
	Listen to the report that what his former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a general, said about him that he is...
	Listen, it's coming.
	Listen to the crowd.
	And these are people who were in his administration who worked closely with him in the Oval Office and the Situation Room.
	And so I would caution us also, you know, because some people find it humorous what he says and think it's just silly, but...
	Understand how brutally serious it is.
	Well, the courts will take care of that.
	We'll take care of November.
	Yes. We'll take care of November.
	But it is brutally serious.
	Lock them up.
	The courts will take care of that.
	We'll take care of November.
	Whatever that means.
	She's already announced that they're lawyering up and they'll do what they need to for November.
	The courts will take care of that.
	Joe Biden's Department of Justice will take care of locking up Donald Trump.
	And they'll take care of the November election.
	Let me just slide this down.
	Let this be irritatingly off-center.
	Sorry I had to do that to you people.
	I do it because I love you because I think the world needs to know exactly what is on the ballot.
	And I'm saying what is on the ballot, not who is on the ballot.
	Because Kamala's not a person.
	She's a marionette being propped up and jiggled around by the hands of many, many men.
	Sorry. I didn't script that.
	But gosh darn it, is that funny.
	All right, good evening, everybody.
	Before we get started, before we get started, I'd like to thank our two sponsors of the evening.
	One you haven't seen in a while.
	We're going to get to that one, but we'll start with Be Naked.
	Talking about being men, people.
	Be Naked.
	These days it seems like society wants to turn men into soft, tofu-eating cuddle machines.
	Testosterone levels are tanking, and the world's pushing this weak, hand-holding agenda.
	But if you're the kind of guy who'd rather wrestle a bear than sip a soy latte, you need naked organs.
	I would rather wrestle a bear.
	My partially torn MCL, however.
	I'll have to wait a little bit until that heals up before doing it.
	Be naked.
	It's not some lab-made potion made from the land of participation trophies.
	100% pure bison organs, liver, kidney, heart, the kind of stuff that put hair on your granddaddy's chest, packed with B12 iron, zinc.
	It's the antidote to low T and all the nonsense out there.
	Keep your testosterone high and your masculinity unapologetic.
	Head over to BeNaked.com.
	Use promo code VIVA for 15% off.
	Let's make being a man great again.
	Head over to BeNaked.com.
	Promo code VIVA for 15% off.
	Hold on one second.
	Second sponsor, and this will be the last one of the night.
	One that I've been using, actually, and that I did not know that we needed until moving to Florida.
	How do I do this?
	I want to close this here so you can see it.
	Home title.
	Okay, let's close this one so you can see it.
	Home title lock, people.
	I want to tell you about a crime that's happening in the U.S. called house stealing, also known as title theft, where criminals can transfer your home's title into their name with just a single document and wipe out your equity without you even knowing it.
	Many of you know that I'm from Florida, where I live in Florida right now, which sadly has become the hotbed for this type of new crime.
	There's this family in Sarasota.
	Home Title Lock caught a cyber thief from New York trying to sell their property on a popular real estate website.
	The thief had fraudulently changed the title, but Home Title Lock quickly detected it and restored it back to the rightful owner.
	Imagine if they hadn't been subscribed to Home Title Lock.
	It could have been disastrous.
	If you're not monitoring your title, these criminals can get away with this, leaving you, the homeowner, to deal with the aftermath in court.
	It's a real thing.
	I actually looked into it a fair bit when we came down here because I had no idea.
	It's not as easy to do this in Canada as it seems to be in the States and Florida in particular.
	The best way to protect your equity with Triple Lock protection from our friends at Home Title Lock.
	Triple Lock is 24-7 monitoring, alerts, restoration services.
	You can get a free 30-day trial and a free title history report when you use promo code VIVA30 at HomeTitleLock.com or use the link in the description.
	It's in the description there.
	That is HomeTitleLock.com promo code VIVA30 for 30 days of protection and a title report for free.
	It's one of those situations where when you hear of it happening, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and in some cases, it's worth a whole hell of a lot more than that.
	So go check it out, and thank you to our two sponsors of the evening.
	All right, and now, people, an update.
	You remember I had Zach Apotheker.
	On the channel.
	Zach is the Border Patrol agent from James O'Keefe's new documentary, The Line in the Sand.
	By the way, do you hear...
	Hold on one second.
	I'm just going to see this.
	Do you hear this?
	Wait. Do you guys hear that?
	If you do hear it and it drives you crazy, let me know.
	I've given Pudge a bone to chew on.
	There's no way.
	Let me know in the chat if you can hear that.
	Zach Apotheker is the Border Patrol agent in James O'Keefe's new documentary, The Line in the Sand.
	He's the one who, you know, blew the whistle.
	By disclosing to the public the inadequacy of the border protections at the southern border and the real awful human trafficking that's going on.
	And we can all hear it, but it's fine.
	Okay, well, I'll take the boat.
	That is less annoying than her whining at the door, but we'll leave it at that.
	I'll turn the mic this direction.
	So Zach was in the documentary, and I had him on the channel.
	We talked for a long time.
	He's a great guy.
	I was like, you know...
	The hammer is coming down on you.
	Are you prepared for what's happening?
	And I don't think he was.
	And I don't think he is.
	And I think this is going to be a matter of him growing his wings as he's jumping off this cliff because he's jumped off the cliff for a righteous reason.
	I don't mean like suicide.
	It's the old Kurt Vonnegut, I want to say.
	Life is about jumping off cliffs and growing your wings on the way down.
	I've never forgot that expression since I heard it.
	I said, you know, the check is in the mail.
	They're going to come for you and they're going to make it.
	They're either going to fire you and let you battle out in court or they're going to try to make your life so bloody miserable that it's going to be a case of constructive dismissal.
	Oh, yeah, we're going to take away your gun, which they've done.
	We're going to relieve you of duty, which they've done.
	We're going to publicly humiliate you, which they've done.
	But the check is in the mail for Zach.
	And I set up a give, send, go for him.
	And I've turned it over to him.
	I have absolutely nothing more to do with it other than having set it up because some people are reluctant.
	To ask for help and some people might not know that they might actually need it.
	So I've set it up and it's turned over to Zach.
	From what I understand, the last of the update here or the last thing that they've done, Slash is paid by 30,000 bucks.
	So that's what I set the target at.
	And I said, like, we're living in a world now where the government abuses of the citizens, uses the full...
	The full force of the purse that they have, which are taxpayer dollars, to wage this war against the citizens, the truth-tellers, and the people who reveal the corruption and the insidiousness.
	And then the people who do this are left high and dry fighting on their own.
	So I've set it up.
	I might have to take that bone away from the dog.
	It's actually distracting me.
	And I made sure that I was the first person to donate to it so that you all know that it's legit and that there's going to be no risk of scammery with it.
	So here's the link.
	And if you can't give, because I understand you can't, share it around, because I think Zach is in for a world of reprisals that are coming sooner than later.
	All right, people, let me see what's going on in the chat here.
	I think, not Barnes, I think Trump is speaking tonight.
	Let's see here, we got over on Hrumble, the white trash panda.
	Guilty reading some of these usernames.
	Question for Barnes.
	My friend in Michigan was at January 6th and is now being charged with felony disturbance for swearing at a cop at the Capitol.
	Where can he get proper legal representation?
	Funny you should ask.
	I see Robert Barnes in the backdrop.
	When he pops in, we'll get an answer to that question.
	And before he pops in, or until he pops in, I want to highlight one highlight from the Rogan interview yesterday.
	On Friday.
	The Rogan interview is amazing.
	You want to know why they don't want people humanizing Trump?
	Because they don't want people seeing that Trump is not just a human, but a damn good human at that.
	Listen to Trump talk about, I think this is the General Millie clip.
	I put together a vlog today.
	If you haven't seen it, go check it out.
	I'm on Commitube as well, but share it on Rumble.
	Viva Frye.
	When I left, they started shooting our soldiers.
	But more importantly, what they did is...
	They did that whole thing with, you know, leaving.
	He shouldn't have left.
	Number one, should have left from Bagram because Bagram is this massive base.
	It's got tremendous acreage around it.
	Tremendous. It's a very big, it was built many years ago.
	And part of the reason you wouldn't have taken that is because it goes to China.
	One hour from where China makes its nuclear missiles.
	China. You should have never left Bagram.
	Number one, they should have left from Bagram.
	They should have left last.
	You know, we have Americans that are still there.
	They should have taken all their equipment out.
	Every plane, every screw should have been taken out.
	Every tent.
	And I said that.
	That's when I realized that Millie was a dummy.
	I said, we're leaving, but I want to get everything out.
	Sir, it's cheaper to leave it.
	I said, what do you mean?
	It's cheaper to leave it.
	Yeah, he said it's cheaper to leave it.
	Cheaper? Cheaper.
	He said it's cheaper.
	Sir. Not more dangerous.
	No, what he meant was, it's more profitable to leave it.
	He just said cheaper.
	I said, I want every plane.
	I want every tank.
	I want the goggles.
	They have night goggles.
	They have all this stuff that these guys now have.
	He said, sir, it's cheaper to get out and leave it.
	I said, so you think it's cheaper to leave a $150 million brand new airplane in there than it is to fly it out with a tank of jet fuel and put it in Pakistan or just fly it directly back?
	It's cheaper to leave.
	I said, this guy's nuts.
	I'm telling you.
	He was so stupid.
	He was so unwise.
	Now, I said that he's not stupid.
	He's corrupt.
	And people rightly pointing out in the comment section, you know, that's probably Donald Trump's way of saying it.
	That this guy is a corrupt, seditious, treasonous dog who thought it was not cheaper to leave the arms there, but beneficial to let them fall into the hands of the wrong people.
	That way you ensure that you're at a state of perpetual war.
	And... It's better for the military-industrial complex!
	Now you gotta rebuild!
	Buy some more stuff!
	You know, here, take it, take it, leave a...
	Hey, I left my...
	My bike got stolen.
	I get to get a new bike now.
	It's good for business.
	Alright, when Barnes gets in here, we're gonna get the show going, but that is it.
	Oh, Barnes is in...
	Sir! I love it.
	I'm always in the background, just don't know when to come in.
	And I love the fact that on the internet is the only place where I'm taller than you.
	Robert, so first of all...
	How goes the battle?
	Good, good.
	Cigar, book, and I have a question about where Trump is giving a speech tonight because people have been saying making Hitler connections and it pisses me off.
	What do you got?
	Oh, that's Liga Privada cigar.
	The book is a newly released book co-authored by John Grisham and another.
	Real life stories of people who were wrongfully prosecuted, wrongfully convicted, wrongfully imprisoned.
	And it gives you sort of a sneak peek into how that comes about, the corruption within the system that leads to wrongful prosecutions.
	I mean, some of the first case he details is just, it's so obviously outrageous, it's kind of mind-boggling that the entire legal system could fail, but it's a warning sign of how often it fails because of the collective...
	That they so often borrow.
	Their failure to have skepticism towards one another within the system invites abuse of the system and the railroading of the innocent.
	But yeah, excellent book.
	Highly recommend it.
	Robert, so Trump is speaking at Madison Square Garden.
	So now I'm putting you on the spot because I don't know if you know the history to this.
	My father gave me a bit of a...
	The history as to why they're saying that this is reminiscent of a Hitler rally or a neo-Nazi rally.
	Apparently there was a rally by New Yorkers in support of Hitler back in 1939 at the Madison Square Garden, but the context was a little different.
	Are you familiar with that history?
	Well, I mean, you could say that about any forum, right?
	I mean, there's not a major forum in America that's been around a while that hasn't been used by every single political group known to man.
	Right? It'd be like saying that you can't speak at a certain forum because the Klan once used it.
	I mean, it's illogical.
	The Madison Square Garden, one of our most famous venues.
	So, you know, trying to make the comparison to the 30s is just idiotic.
	You know, it's designed to scare the Democratic base, but it's not going to matter.
	And it's not who they need to reach to.
	So, historically, it's an illiterate comparison because you could say that about...
	Quite literally almost any venue of any history throughout.
	It's not like it's distinctively known for that.
	It's Madison Square Garden.
	It's the place you go.
	It's where the New York Knicks play.
	New York Islanders play.
	It's where you get some of the greatest concerts.
	It's almost designed for maximum.
	I saw U2 perform there years ago.
	A wonderful place to watch basketball and hockey, but also a wonderful place to catch a concert.
	It's just a world-famous venue.
	So the fact that it's been used by every political group known to man, Communist Party has used the Madison Square Garden before.
	Does that mean if you use the Madison Square Garden, you're now an homage to the communists?
	I mean, it's just one of the dumbest points you could possibly make.
	They have gone full hog with the Hitler-Fascist-Dictator comparison.
	I mean, they just don't know.
	The script is dead.
	I mean, whoever's writing the simulation...
	They must have got them from Disney and Marvel's most recent, and Star Wars and Star Trek's most recent writers.
	Because it's not just that they're ideological, it's that they're idiots.
	They're bad writers.
	You know, people like the Scottish, or maybe he's English.
	No, I think he's Scottish.
	Critical drinker, you know, neurotic, geeks and gamers, that whole cultural crowd.
	I asked them on Friday Night Tights a couple of weeks back.
	It's like, do you think the bad writing isn't just because of ideology, but rather these are bad writers who couldn't get a real job?
	So they use ideology to disguise the fact that they can't write in order to get a job.
	And I think, I mean, it's how Kamala Harris is where she's at.
	In a real competitive electoral environment, Kamala Harris is never the nominee for president of the United States of any major part.
	Well, I gotta tell you, your prediction, or at least your analysis of why it wasn't or shouldn't be her, because despite what everyone thinks, Biden was a more popular candidate.
	I mean, it's played out impeccably in real time for anybody who's been watching the channel long enough.
	Yeah, I didn't know that about it.
	It's just, but the idea you'd go back to the 2016 script, that had some plausibility when nobody knew Trump.
	When Trump as a White House person was uncertain.
	Eight years later, everybody's, people's view of Trump is baked in the cake.
	And all it's done is got better in the last four years.
	And so it will have zero effectiveness.
	Zero. It's almost, to be frank, it's the worst possible line of attack they could bring.
	The is to reinvigorate all the stereotyping and caricaturing that has got to the point.
	They've cried wolf so many times that now when people hear them cry wolf, they get annoyed by it.
	And so it's just it's it shows you that you have a despairing campaign, a despairing party run by incompetent people.
	And it's like the clip you were showing of Trump talking about Milley.
	This is the number of idiots we have in positions of power.
	We've just got to purge the idiots to start with.
	Not just the ideologues, but the idiots.
	And they're all over the place.
	My concern is that they do it.
	I don't think they expect to sway anybody, but they might get some unhinged lunatic like a Ruth 2.0 who thinks now, like, I've got to go do something, you know, do what you think you need to do to an actual bonafide Hitler.
	Madison Square Garden is a real secure, safe place.
	I mean, that would be a tricky thing to try to pull off.
	And would that solve their problem?
	I mean, that would intensify and amplify their problem.
	So, I mean, at this point, that ship has sailed, and none of those options are viable options.
	That's why all the big tech guys are on the phone to Trump saying, hey, you know, I never really disliked you, you know.
	I was always a fan, really.
	You know, that's why Bezos is telling the Washington Post, we're not endorsing nobody.
	I'm not going to be on the receiving end.
	Of those contract denials?
	Yeah, Chris Pavlosky's take on this was that Bezos and Washington Post, they make their money from AWS hosting, and so they don't want to burn any of the bridges that they see the right...
	To get some political cover.
	And so he doesn't want to be exposed.
	Same as the LA Times owner.
	He doesn't want to be exposed.
	So the smart people already know that this game is up.
	And it's only Democrats sort of being desperate.
	But this always happens in the last week.
	In the last week, everybody accuses everybody else.
	I mean, Joe Biden went around and said, if Mitt Romney's elected president, black people will be put back into chains.
	I mean, you always get insane rhetoric at this point.
	But it shows the ineptitude, political ineptitude, that your closing argument is this week, that it's an eight-year-old script that's like a bad rerun.
	So I say it's like bad Hollywood.
	It's the same kind of people who have completely eviscerated the quality of Hollywood writing for about the better part of a decade, particularly with great brands that had inherited value.
	These are the people who run campaigns for the Democratic Party.
	And that's why they come up with lame scripts, lame narratives.
	I mean, they are even running an ad saying...
	I can't vote Trump because then you'll lose your right to porn.
	I was going to start with that.
	What's going to resonate?
	Imagine a 23-year-old young woman who lives in Brooklyn, who's never worked a real job, who's never lived in the real world, who has inhabited safe spaces from the time she was five, who thinks that the view is an independent view of American politics, who thinks Rachel Maddow is an...
	It's an honest paragon of truth and value.
	I'm not going to play the whole thing.
	It's almost too obscene to even play.
	I'm going to turn the volume off.
	Look at this.
	I thought this was a gag.
	Like a Babylon Bee parody.
	And then it's apparently what they think is that Republicans want to be in your room while you jack off.
	I mean, it's also you're trying to make that look like Trump, right?
	You know, the whole Republican Party is too preachy.
	That works if your candidate is Romney or your candidate is Pence.
	Somebody like that.
	It doesn't work when the candidate's Trump.
	It's wild.
	What I was going to ask you is two things.
	There's been no update in the sentencing.
	The sentencing, if it should occur, in the New York case is after the election, correct?
	Yeah, that's right.
	There has been no update in the New York Court of Appeals case where they had what I think was some vigorous cross-examination by the judges.
	No judgment issued there, and we suspect that'll occur also after the election.
	I guess we'll go over the menu in a second.
	We'll just get one off the top here.
	Trump filed...
	Is it a notice of motion in the D.C. court asking for basically the dismissal of the case because Jack Smith...
	Unlawfully appointed.
	And the, what do they call it?
	Appropriations funds that he is being used to prosecute this lawfare persecution upwards of 20 million bucks is also unlawful because in as much as he was never lawfully appointed, he could never be lawfully procured funds from the purse of the Congress.
	What is the issue with a notice of motion versus just making the motion?
	That's just a protocol, a procedural protocol, dependent on the court.
	In some courts, you have to file a notice before, and you have to schedule the hearing date before you can actually file the motion.
	It varies by court, so that's just a procedural mechanism.
	It doesn't have any substantive consequences.
	The motion itself, we don't anticipate that corrupt commie Judge Chutkin is going to grant it, but meanwhile, what is going on that they are releasing portions of memorandi or memorandums?
	That's not what it is.
	Memorandi that Jack Smith is filing in this court.
	Am I understanding it correctly?
	The controversy here is that this case is supposed to be suspended pending an adjudication on the immunity argument and that Jack Smith is still filing stuff and disclosing stuff to the public when Trump himself is unable to respond to it?
	I mean, effectively.
	Mostly this is grand jury records and information.
	And the judge said that if she didn't allow the public disclosure of it, she would somehow be weighing in on the election.
	When obviously by allowing the public disclosure of it during the election, you're trying to influence the election.
	It just exposes sort of how political she is, but it will have zero impact on the election.
	So it's mostly a waste of time that will just further remind everybody how political the legal system has become as it concerns people like Trump.
	And one last one, Robert.
	Let me pull it up.
	I put out a vlog yesterday.
	I'm convinced that I'm in a portion of the...
	I don't care about commie too, but in the portion of the algorithm where I need to break through whatever suppression that they are putting on the channel.
	And I put out this video breaking down the McDonald's scandal of this picture that purportedly showed Kamala Harris in a McDonald's uniform.
	And I go full sleuth because I was suspicious that it didn't...
	Seemingly come from the Kamala Harris campaign.
	And then I go back and look, and it looks like the model of the uniforms from the 70s, late 70s, early 80s.
	And it turns out that whoever created this image pulled a photograph from an obituary of a Canadian woman who died in, I want to say 2007, from cancer.
	And they superimposed her face.
	Ironically enough, it was a white woman from Canada.
	I guess a lot of the sycophants were so happy they found their evidence that they could now shut MAGA, you know, Republicans up with by saying, here's the evidence that she actually worked there.
	And it was all a big fat scam.
	Someone in our locals community, I'm going to remember who it was in a second, rightly and I think astutely pointed out that it was probably, you know, a troll, a right-wing troll who did this, put it on the internet, and then the idiots took the bait.
	I mean, someone in our community had asked...
	Whether or not this could violate copyright, invasion of privacy, taking something off of someone's obituary page.
	Hypothetically, if this occurs in the States, I mean, is there any, not that there should be, but just for fun's sake, is there any cause of action for whoever was in the photograph, the family of, for someone ripping this off the internet?
	I wouldn't think so, no.
	I mean, this is somebody else's image and it's used for meme and parody satire purposes, which is an exception to copyright law in the first place.
	All right, what do we got on the menu, Robert?
	Next week, we'll have a special election edition.
	People had been requesting that we do an analysis of some of the referendums and initiatives on state ballots and give some explanation from a legal perspective of what they mean, because there's debate in some places.
	Does it mean this?
	Does it mean that?
	So we'll take some of the top, most contested and disputed state ballot issues.
	And we'll go through them next Sunday, right before Election Day, so people have a chance to have at least a better understanding of what these issues are, what the implications are, what the ramifications are.
	Sometimes these are deliberately written in a deceptive way.
	Sometimes there's conflicting ones.
	I think it's Nebraska.
	You mean the referendums of the issues that are on the ballot on Tuesday, like Vote Article 4?
	God, I thought you were talking about the Quebec referendum.
	Oh, there's ones in Florida.
	There's ones in Nebraska.
	There's ones in Arizona.
	There's ones in Nevada.
	There's ones in California.
	Good. You know, it's funny.
	I was talking about the one in Florida with my kid, my oldest daughter, like the marijuana one and the abortion one where I...
	Robert, I went and read them and I still don't understand what the hell they're asking for.
	I was like, well, would you want to vote yes or no?
	I was like...
	I don't know, honey.
	I have to go.
	And that's what a lot of other people are doing.
	So I figured we would, next Sunday, we'll take apart some of the more big ones, do a deeper dive into them to give some legal analysis of what the actual impact or ramification is, since it's not always apparent.
	Open primaries is on the ballot in some places.
	It's sold as one thing.
	It may be interpreted as another.
	So, you know, all of those things get a chance to break down so that people can, we'll probably have, we'll probably go through like...
	15 of them.
	Some of the more prominent big ones in the bigger states.
	But that'll be next Sunday, right before Election Day.
	Tonight, we got election cases galore.
	We got voter rolls.
	We got overseas voters.
	We got late ballots.
	We got drop boxes.
	We got James O'Keefe undercover in Arizona, all triggering legal or political controversy this past week.
	We've got the Elon Musk having to fight it out with the Biden administration and the National Labor Relations Board over a tweet.
	We got a big win for victims of vaccine mandate discrimination coming from a surprising place.
	Arbitration and court injunctions.
	If you want to see how creative courts can be when they want to and prevent other courts from competing with them, prevent arbitration.
	When they're the ones that were the people driving arbitration, we have a case out of the Second Circuit exposing how inconsistent and hypocritical the courts can be on issues of arbitration, court injunctions.
	A big Second Amendment case out of the Second Circuit.
	Unfortunately, it follows up what some of us previewed and predicted after the Supreme Court sort of walked back parts of Bruin, and now that's what's happening as that flows down.
	Across the cascading, across other courts, they're starting to strip away your Second Amendment freedoms all over again.
	So we'll get to that.
	Coach Gruden got a win over the NFL.
	We discussed that case previously, but the Nevada Supreme Court decided to reevaluate.
	And a big win for Coach Gruden.
	And last but not least, bankruptcy and retirement.
	People are asking about Rudy Giuliani and all the insane...
	Execution of judgment in that ludicrous Alex Jones-style case that was brought against him.
	One of the places you can protect yourself is knowing what's exempt under the bankruptcy laws and your state homestead laws.
	And often that gets litigated, what constitutes a retirement exempt from bankruptcy laws, etc.
	If Rudy Giuliani had a better asset plan before he went into that case, he might not be facing what he's dealing with now.
	But we'll recap some cases on that as well.
	Okay, let me just get rid, not get rid of, but get through some of these just, we don't let them pile up.
	Viva, have you heard that Quebec's public health guru during the pandemic has had his license to practice suspended?
	No, I didn't.
	And I'm certainly, I hope you're talking about Horatio Arruda.
	We got another one here from NetJess, who says, Viva, trying to reach out with content ideas, DM, screen grab, and I will email you.
	Because if I give my email out, it's going to just turn into, get too much.
	The rally was held by the German-American Bund, says the engaged few.
	And apparently it was also, first of all, it was before America had entered the war formally, from what I understand.
	And before Madison Square Garden itself actually existed in its current form.
	But they were a pro-Nazi group.
	There was a group that were.
	Ithaca37Cato says, did early voting in Maryland?
	This isn't scientific, but I saw only one Harris Wall sign while driving through the voting center.
	I did see one Trump Vance too, which I found surprising since this area is very blue.
	I'll tell you some interesting anecdotes if we're getting into that.
	If you want to know why the leftists make such lousy screenwriters, you should read an essay called, quote, What Shall We Ask of Writers?
	by Albert Moltz.
	He was one of the Hollywood at 10, and the essay cost him dearly.
	Well, let me go ahead and screen grab that.
	And the last one, Pinochet, the last one for now.
	Pinochet Helicopter 2 is in the house.
	The grab-by-the-pussy got married to a beautiful model wants to take away porn.
	Yeah, right.
	Okay. Agreed.
	Okay, we'll get to the rest afterwards.
	All right, so what do we start with?
	You pick it up.
	The number one topic for the board, unsurprisingly, were all the election cases.
	So we can start anywhere there.
	Let's start with one of the ones that I'm more familiar with that I still don't freaking understand coming out of Virginia, where a federal court comes in and enjoins the...
	Injoins, as in prohibits, the removal of non-citizens.
	There are 1,600 of them, so I don't know what major impact it would have.
	Injoins the removal of non-citizens from the voter roll that have been expunged over the last several weeks and months.
	The judge said, and to steelman it, because from what I understand, apparently they found, I don't know, let's just say a few dozen people who were expunged whose citizenship status is unclear, which I also don't for the life of me understand.
	First of all, how are they not able to know who is a citizen and who is not?
	And how in the name of sweet holy hell does a federal judge come in and say you're not expunging from the voter rolls non-citizens who are bona fide non-citizens?
	The key is there's a procedure in place under federal law to preclude states within 90 days of an election from doing any systematic purge of voter rolls.
	So if you're going to remove people from the voter rolls within the 90-day timeframe, it's supposed to be an individualized analysis consistent with state law.
	And so the part of the voter roll purge that took place outside the 90-day window is not being contested, challenged, or reversed.
	Only the one...
	That is within the 90-day window, which is far fewer voters.
	Okay, which means that they don't have enough time because it's within 90 days to, if it was done erroneously, to retract.
	That's the concern.
	They're allowed to do any individualized review.
	So it's just no systematic.
	This is designed to deal with people who flag something and just remove everybody without doing any...
	Deep dive into the individual that's on the voter rolls.
	It's to avoid those issues popping up right on the eve of the election.
	The decision is not nearly as impactful as Youngkin and others made it out to be.
	And this was just smart politics by Youngkin and conservatives and Republicans.
	And Biden took the bait.
	The goal was, let's purge some names.
	That we're pretty confident are not citizens.
	And do it in such a way that we get the Biden administration to sue us.
	So that it becomes front page news.
	That they're suing to keep non-citizens on the voter rolls.
	And if I understand correctly now, is it 1,600 within the 90 days, which is obviously not going to be determinative on the election?
	Well, in fact, you dig into the court's order, and the court's order says you can still remove anybody that's not qualified.
	You just need to make sure it's an individualized review, not a systematic review.
	That's literally it.
	So the nature of the decision is not that big at all.
	It was just brilliant politics played by the Virginia governor and Republicans to highlight an issue that makes the Biden administration look bad.
	Similar, you know, just like the voter ID.
	I mean, like a popular meme that's going around now is you get pulled over by the cops and just remind them, no, officer, this is election day.
	I don't have to have ID.
	It's so stupid.
	Okay, so the Virginia one, it's actually, it's interesting.
	Not impactful whatsoever, but the headline going around now, that massive victory...
	This is great politics by the Republicans.
	Now, one case that is impactful, going to your question, is the one brought by Texas Attorney General Paxton against the Biden administration, that here's how the rules work for citizenship.
	Federal law prohibits states from requiring proof of citizenship to register for federal elections.
	But at the same time, it makes it illegal for non-citizens to vote.
	And the way in which it's all enforced is the state has multiple access to all kinds of databases to confirm that someone is a citizen.
	The other thing they can do is they can request from DHS proof that an individual confirmation that someone is a citizen.
	And what's happening is DHS is refusing to do that under federal law.
	So that's where you have more problematic concerns is when that part of the gatekeeping process breaks down.
	And so Paxton is sued, asking a federal court, please force them to provide the information that we're requesting that federal law requires they give us to confirm whether or not this group of voters is for sure a citizen.
	And so that suit will be interesting to watch because it might have ramifications.
	If the DHS loses that one, they would be forced to disclose it in other jurisdictions as well.
	But that's one area where the legal system is breaking down.
	As some other people who wrote in to us were asking about, the other areas of great risk in the election are mail-in votes.
	And there's two-fold ways to flag those.
	One is to see Whether or not the address of the voter that requested the ballot and returned the ballot, whether that address is a legitimate address.
	In there you can look at change of address flags.
	You can look at is it a post office box?
	Is it a building where everybody's registered to vote but it turns out to be a church?
	Is that legitimate or not?
	Just having a flag doesn't mean it's an illegitimate vote.
	But it's flagged for further inquiry.
	And there are a range of these people that ask whether or not there's people out there paying attention to that.
	The answer is yes, there is.
	The second area of concern is people returning ballots that they didn't fill out.
	That's not really them.
	Somebody else did it in some manner.
	There's been criminal cases out of Iowa and Georgia in the last two weeks.
	Where people were trying to do things in postal offices or otherwise trying to prevent ballots from getting properly either distributed or returned.
	In Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, they caught 2,500 people or 2,500 ballots that were fake ballots.
	How did they catch them?
	Signature matches in particular, address checks in particular, voter registration confirmation checks.
	Those are the three mechanisms by which you can detect and pick up some aspects of the fraud.
	So there are cases all across the country, and of course, Trump keeps publicizing that if anybody tries it again, and he wins, that there will be great legal consequence to anybody who does so.
	That's basically a deterrent message, is what he's trying to send.
	So those cases continue to, and investigations continue to develop.
	Now, it's different than what James O'Keefe exposed in Arizona.
	Well, actually, just before we get there, on the same topic, California, I'm just trying to Google it right now.
	It's not urban legend, it's not misrepresentation that they actually did pass a law that makes it illegal to ask for ID on election day.
	Yeah. Well, at the voter balls, right?
	Yeah, but...
	I mean, the thing is, almost all ballots in California are sent by mail-in anyway.
	It's like 90-95%.
	Almost nobody votes in person in California anymore.
	No, but if you go to vote in person and you show up and they...
	I mean, if you voted by mail already, then they have your name scratched up.
	Almost most jurisdictions are that way.
	You just walk in to give them your name and they give you the ballot.
	But then how do they know that you haven't already received one by mail and sent that one?
	How do they know you're not voting twice?
	They don't.
	They can check it later.
	Are there two ballots that came back in a certain person's name?
	Because they do check your name off as having voted in person.
	Okay. That's how you're able to track.
	That's how you see all these data, early voting trackers.
	That's how.
	Once you vote, you go into the database that you voted and how you voted.
	And so if you show up a second time voting, that triggers a siren, if you will.
	And when you show up in person, the ballot doesn't have your name on it?
	It's not individualized?
	No. Not all.
	Just a generic ballot.
	You show up, they check that you're registered.
	And then depending on what state, like here in Vegas, it's more like a machine than a paper ballot.
	And you mark things on the machine, but then you get to see what it looks like, and they print out a receipt of what your ballot is so you know what it is before it goes in.
	Okay, so that at least quells not some concern, but I guess it would be easy to track that type of double voting, and that would be the only real risk, or if they somehow had...
	I don't know, a list of people who didn't mail in a ballot and they can get their names and have illegals or somebody vote in their name.
	Part of the Trump election contest from 2020 in Georgia was people we were able to confirm, or Trump's team, I was part of it for a period of time, confirmed, voted in multiple states or voted in multiple counties.
	And what that often is, is that isn't the person who did it.
	Somebody did it on their behalf.
	So that's how you track change of address forms and things like that.
	Those are not perfect.
	But one way, if you're going to try to steal an election, you do something with voter registration, either to change their address without them knowing, or you know they changed their address and you have access to the old address and you request a ballot at that old address.
	Things like that.
	And then that's how you can find people voting in multiple states, voting in multiple counties within the same state.
	Somebody else was doing the voting on their behalf.
	It's very rarely that that person is trying to vote over and over again.
	All right.
	And now, so what is going on with Nevada and James O'Keefe?
	I see that he's offering cameras.
	Arizona, sorry.
	What's the scandal?
	So he had some undercovers, sent some undercovers in to watch the training of people that were going to work the polls and the election offices in Arizona.
	And what he found was that they were telling them that they could not enforce the law.
	On a whole bunch of areas, including ballot harvesting, that if somebody came in and they strongly suspected the person was harvesting ballots, they could do nothing about it.
	They couldn't flag the ballots.
	They couldn't ask any further questions.
	They couldn't follow up in any manner whatsoever.
	And if I may pause you there, harvesting the ballots meaning what?
	Now, they're coming in with multiple ballots not in their name, and the argument's going to be, well, we're just delivering them for an old person's home down the street.
	Even in Arizona, that's against the law.
	Outside of extraordinary circumstance.
	So loosely, that's what ballot harvesting is.
	You're returning somebody else's ballot.
	And depending on the state, there's different laws.
	Some states, you can up to a certain number of ballots.
	And other states, you can't unless you have an affidavit that shows you're a relative and the person's disabled.
	That was one of the issues that got litigated in Ohio concerning drop boxes recently.
	So it varies by state what the rules are.
	But in Arizona, there's specific rules limiting the ability to Bring other people's ballots into the election.
	And what they're being trained by, what James O'Keefe found, is that they're being told, you can't do that.
	Look at the Maricopa County election training.
	Quote, we're not any type of law enforcement.
	We're not any type of law enforcement.
	What are they doing then?
	No, but I'm a Canadian schnook, so then...
	They're not verifying elections or supervising elections whatsoever.
	They may as well just leave and go home.
	Exactly. That's the uptake from O'Keefe's point.
	So all the usual suspects in Arizona came out and attacked O'Keefe.
	Not only like Stephen Richer and that other Bill Gates, those guys, but also Garrett Archer, who's a former election official turned media guy.
	Who used to be more balanced.
	You could always tell he was a Democratic-leaning guy, but he wasn't over the top.
	Ever since 2020, he's gone over the top.
	He makes absurd statements.
	He'll go around accusing everybody else of lying and giving false representation.
	Anybody who challenges an election is now bad and evil.
	The election offices are the greatest in the world.
	He quit being impartial at all and became overzealous.
	In defending elections, particularly in Arizona, which have just been a disaster.
	And he's become an apologist for the bureaucratic ineptitude of the Arizona election machinery, who are many of his friends and allies.
	Now he works at ABC.
	And so he came after James O'Keefe.
	And so I responded in kind.
	And it was like, he accused James O'Keefe of misrepresenting.
	When in fact, the underlying quote he's referencing confirms exactly what O'Keefe says.
	What it is, they went and talked to people and they said, yes, that the local Arizona officials have interpreted the law to have no enforcement mechanism for a whole bunch of election integrity provisions, including prohibition on ballot harvest, which to me is absurd.
	And this is what Jeremy Duda actually...
	Let me see who Jeremy is.
	Dad, husband, Axios, Phoenix, okay?
	This is Arizona GOP chair Gina Svoboda tells me...
	The O'Keefe media video of Maricopa County poll worker training is a, quote, total misunderstanding, end quote.
	She emphasized that Arizona's ballot harvesting ban has no enforcement mechanism and that everything the trainer said is, quote, 100% accurate.
	So, now, by the way, that's a reminder that the Arizona local Republican Party is a complete waste of space.
	But, because that means there's no misunderstanding there.
	Because that's exactly what O'Keefe reported.
	And that's exactly what the person's saying.
	Where's the misunderstanding?
	How's there any misunderstanding there?
	The misunderstanding is that the Arizona officials are interpreting state law to be unenforceable when it comes to election integrity issues like ballot harvesting.
	And my point was that that confirms O'Keefe's reporting, and that's deeply problematic.
	And also it contradicts what people like Garrett Archer, this guy from Axios, others have tried to claim.
	Like when somebody will highlight, A problem with how elections are done in Arizona.
	They'll say, oh no, no, we have a law against that.
	And then when you point out, but you're not enforcing that law, all of a sudden, well, of course we're not.
	It's like, what was your point initially?
	Were you lying initially when you said, don't worry, there's a law?
	Or are you lying now, Garrett?
	Which is it?
	This is covering up and apologizing for election ineptitude.
	And these are election fraud deniers.
	We like to go around and call everyone else an election denier.
	Nobody's ever denied an election.
	It's people like Garrett Archer who are election fraud deniers.
	Because this is the same jurisdiction that says they're going to take weeks to count the ballots.
	Why? Well, they've got to follow the law.
	Unless, of course, it's prohibition on ballot harvesting, then you can't follow the law.
	I mean, which is it?
	I mean, the Orwellian double talk.
	From the apologists from the Arizona Election Administration is getting to a level that is just insane.
	It would be considered parody even if it was Orwell writing it.
	It would seem like a satire on Orwell because clearly it couldn't be this extreme.
	We can't enforce the law because we must follow the law.
	He actually said that.
	Garrett Archer said a version of that.
	We can't enforce the law because that would be taking the law into our own hands.
	What are you there to do but enforce the law and follow the law?
	And one minute, you're following the law by not enforcing the law.
	The next minute, you're enforcing the law by delaying elections for weeks.
	Well, and not just that.
	They say in one state, oh, it's going to take a while, a couple of weeks.
	We won't know.
	And then in Georgia, well, we can't implement that.
	That's Arizona.
	And then in Georgia, they say we can't work.
	The same state that says the law requires us to take all this time says they can't follow the law when it comes about.
	That's even more hypocritical.
	I was just going to compare Arizona to Georgia where they say we can't train the workers.
	It's going to cause delays.
	We can't have them count up the vote.
	All right.
	Okay, so this is a problem.
	Why should people not be panicking, Robert?
	Well, I mean, it's highlighting the severe issues in Maricopa County and with the whole system.
	And how we will need greater, more thorough, more detailed institutional reform.
	It's the main reason I engaged in this, aside from exposing the hypocrisy of the Arizona election fraud deniers.
	Was to defend the good investigative work being done by James O'Keefe, who's documenting, look at these huge flaws in our system.
	How is it that there can be a law in the books that says you can't harvest ballots, but if you're the election official who sees it, you're the very person who can't do anything about it.
	You can't even flag the ballot.
	I mean, that's a huge problem.
	And the same people apologizing for this, like Garrett Archer, are saying that our elections, he said our elections are the...
	So, so pure in Arizona.
	So pure.
	They're like the purest in the world.
	It's like, this is what you're defending?
	I mean, it's becoming levels of inanity and insanity to try to apologize for this nonsense.
	And it proves further substantiation.
	There needs to be radical reform and remedy in terms of how our elections are conducted at a nationwide level.
	That, you know, Attorney General Paxson has to sue the federal government just to do its job to determine whether it's legal or on the rolls?
	It's not complicated.
	It's in-person, exceptions decided, two pieces of ID, paper ballots, period.
	That's what they do in Canada.
	If it can work in Commida, if it can work in France, if it can work in all around the world, it can work in the United States of America.
	The irony is the only place now where it's not working is British Columbia, but I think they're using Dominion.
	I think they're using electronic voting there.
	Of course they are.
	I mean, was it Trump that was going into it?
	It was somebody that was going into, you know, all these complicated machines that just go on forever?
	Yeah, on Rogan.
	Piece of paper.
	It's not complicated.
	That's easy.
	Make it simple, make it basic, like it always used to be.
	Speaking of trying to pad the rolls, the state of Michigan and other states are trying to pad the rolls with overseas voters.
	That case also went to court this week.
	Okay, hold on.
	Let me get through these superchats before they disappear.
	How many months to know the U.S. election says not a banned account?
	I think we'll know the night of.
	Touch wood.
	Make it true.
	Then we got not a banned account.
	How much anti-Semitism would Trump's election bring?
	None? I mean, how could it bring it?
	Oh, I see.
	The accusations of Zionism for Trump.
	Okay. Don't worry about that.
	Thank you.
	Hold on.
	Bringing it down because these don't pop up in studio.
	How many Trump votes are being switched to Harris?
	Fritz von!
	It's not the same Madison Square Gardens that the Nazis were using.
	This one didn't open until 1968.
	The previous one at Madison Square Gardens was 17 blocks up on 8th Avenue.
	All right, thank you much.
	And then we got Flex Honcho.
	Check out Patrick Pat Davis' interview of a voting machine hacker.
	Very interesting and frightening.
	Yeah, no, we talked about that when they had their, whatever they want to call it, VidCon or VillageCon.
	In Vegas, they have the hacking...
	And they were determining vulnerabilities with 2024 electronic voting that could not be remedied.
	There was not enough time to remedy these before the election.
	All right, sorry.
	Now, back to Michigan.
	What's going on in Michigan?
	So, in a bunch of states, so what happened was, as Democrats got nervous about the results, where they have control over the state election machinery, where they control the secretaries of state, and those people have...
	Don't have the degree of control some people think.
	They don't control the counting of the ballots, the reporting, all that's done at the local level.
	What they do control is what guidelines they give as to who can register to vote, voter rolls, how you're supposed to conduct the election, and advice to the local election officials, etc.
	So that's where you want to monitor their activities.
	Well, they went out and they sent out a bunch of stuff to overseas voters.
	Saying, hey, you can register right here online to vote in Michigan.
	And the problem was, it was contrary to what the federal law says.
	Federal law provides for overseas voters to register to vote.
	Quote, where they were qualified to vote in the last place of domicile before leaving the U.S. So it's not this unilateral declaration of where you've decided to suddenly make your domicile a swing state on the eve of the election.
	That's not federal law.
	Federal law is you get to register in the state where you established domicile previously.
	And what they did in Michigan is they said, well, as long as you're related to somebody who's a Michigan registered voter, then, or a Michigan resident, then you too can send in your ballots.
	They're just desperate for whoever ballots they can get from whatever source they can get.
	So the suit was filed, and of course, the judge used latches, standing, all those pretexts to refuse to rule substantively on the merits.
	And it was the Court of Claims of Michigan, which is a Democratic-leaning court, and said even if the substance was dealt with, they thought everything was fine anyway.
	That's the nature of how elections are truly conducted here.
	So they're going to get away with padding the rolls with some oversight.
	How much are they typically?
	And they're talking in the millions now.
	And other than military.
	Which would lean right, I presume.
	What is the major demographic of overseas Americans who can vote?
	See, the issue is that most overseas voters that are really politically engaged, that are Democratic-leaning voters, are already registered to vote.
	The ones that are not, are not reliable Democratic voters, as they're probably going to find out the hard way.
	But even then, you can track voter registration to see how many are actually showing up.
	So there's people that, you know, have hit kind of a panic button that said, millions are going to be voting tomorrow.
	Well, that's not the case.
	I guess it's a good clickbait.
	You can track the registration rolls.
	It's going to be like a few thousand in different states that register related to this in new states.
	The other thing is this.
	A bunch of people don't want to do this because they don't want to be subject to a state's taxation.
	So, you know, there's a bunch of people that live overseas.
	By golly, they shift their domicile to a low-tax state.
	They don't want to suddenly be a Michigan resident.
	You know, New York, Pennsylvania, frankly, any of these states, you know, other than maybe Nevada, that you can convince them to do, no income tax.
	Florida, maybe no income tax, you know, taxes, etc.
	But they're not in a rush to do that.
	So the actual number impacted will be low, but it's another example of how the election laws need to be tightened because every cycle they're figuring out new scams to try to sneak in a few more ballots that are not legal ballots to begin with.
	Well, I'm trying to find the numbers for the Michigan voting in 2020.
	What was the...
	Michigan went to Biden.
	Millions of votes in Michigan.
	What was the difference?
	Well, not that the differential is going to make much of a difference, but...
	The difference in Michigan was bigger than it was in the other states.
	It wasn't big, big, but Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Georgia, but particularly Wisconsin, Georgia, and Arizona were the real tight ones, where you got 20,000, 30,000 votes deciding they were the winner.
	Between all three combined.
	I didn't check the markets for this, but you're obviously picking Trump to win Michigan this time around.
	Yeah, well, I got all the recommended bets up at sportspicks.locals.com.
	All the betting markets.
	Basically, for $50, you can get all the picks for the election.
	Senate picks, House picks, state picks, margin of victory picks.
	You name it.
	Just go to sportspicks.locals.com.
	Join, and you'll more than pay back that very, very modest investment.
	That's where I've got all the picks.
	Now, one state that is trying to impose some more election rules that won in court this week is Ohio.
	Okay, hold on one second.
	Before we get there, let me bring...
	Who was it?
	White Trash Panda said, don't forget my question for Barnes at the beginning of the stream, but I don't remember what it was now.
	Buffalo Betsy in our local screen says, don't forget Jan 6 legal counsel needed question someone asked.
	I'll go to that in a bit.
	Buffalo Betsy, I am loving what RFK Jr. said about Trump having no lobbyists in or on his transition team.
	I just heard that today, and I hope they are really putting that out there.
	I think that appeals to both sides.
	RFK coming up with the health issues stuff.
	The Maha is doing great stuff.
	Eric 4x4 says, I'm kicking myself.
	I just spent a week working in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and it wasn't until I got home that I realized I was only a few miles from Amos Miller.
	Robert, what's going on in Ohio?
	So, one of the issues that popped up in 2020 are all these drop boxes.
	Famously portrayed as problematic in the documentary film by Dinesh D'Souza, 2000 Mules.
	And the reason is it interferes with the chain of custody of the ballot.
	You don't know whether the person...
	If a person goes into the ballot, goes into the voting booth, fills out their name, goes in, fills out the ballot, brings it back, you know they did the ballot.
	Nobody else did the ballot.
	By contrast, you have some risk with mail-in voting anyway, but if somebody else is returning the ballot, that risk goes up dramatically, right?
	That they may have intercepted the ballot, they may have stolen the ballot, they may have...
	Done the ballot, filled it out themselves, etc.
	And these drop boxes that were funded by Zuckerberg in 2020, in substantial part, facilitated untrustworthy ballots because of the interference in the chain of custody of those ballots.
	So Ohio came in and said, state said, look, we're not going to allow insanity to develop.
	If you're returning the ballot and you're not the voter, you need to fit the traditional legal definition.
	That's a certain kind of custodian, disabled circumstances, things like that.
	Not just Joe Schmo, not NGO whatever, not one of the 2,000 mules.
	And the Ohio court agreed and said that it's too late in the election to try to upset it now, unsettle it now, and that it wasn't clear that this contradicted the existing law.
	The Democrats on the court bitterly dissented.
	If you want to see how complete garbage standing is, watch.
	Republican judges find no standing in cases where the Democrats are suing and often the same courts.
	The Democrat judges will object and complain.
	Then when Republicans sue, it will be the Democratic judges saying there's no standing, no grounds to sue, latches, mootness, rightness, all the rest.
	And the Republican judges will complain.
	It shows how complete garbage the doctrine of standing is.
	It's not a legally sincere doctrine.
	It's a made-up fiction.
	But, at least in this point, the consequence of that is that Ohio election law will actually enforce a more higher integrity.
	And the reason why that impacts the whole country is if we see unusual election results in similar areas, demographically, that the only difference between those areas is the election laws governing those areas, then it can highlight potential That's why you want the standards to be such,
	you want the best standards in as many places as possible, because then you can contrast jurisdictions where those standards are not present with where they are present to see if any consequence flows from it.
	It's also a deterrent to fraud, because people know that, that are aware of it.
	They're like, if we're going to try to get away with stealing ballots, we've got to do so in such a way it isn't obvious.
	Given the county across the river in the other state doesn't allow these methods and mechanisms.
	And people will flag the difference.
	So net effect good ruling and the policy impact, but bogus legal way to get there.
	The question I had, we played the video two weeks ago, that old woman who had no idea where she was holding a pen and someone's telling her, are you going to vote for the first black woman?
	Like, what is the...
	I was asked this stupid question, what's the law?
	Like, the woman doing it was making sure that the woman had the pen in her hand, even though she was controlling her hand.
	Is it, unless you're, what's the word, in some form of declared state of invalidity, do you need to be holding the pen?
	When does it get illegal?
	Yeah, I mean, that depends entirely by state.
	This is the short answer.
	Because in some states you've got strict rules, in some states you've got liberal rules, in some states they're enforcing the rules, in some states they're not.
	We stayed for too long on Commitube, so we're going to bring this over to YouTube.
	We're going to bring it over to Rumble.
	The big, big, big case on election law that came down this week, and unlike some of those earlier cases, it is a big white pill for what's coming in the future for elections in America.
	Big, big ruling out of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
	Okay, now hold on.
	Before we even get there, and I forget to do this every single time, people!
	The new merch is up, and I think there might still be time to get it, but you can get it if you don't get it delivered before the election.
	You can certainly get it and give it to somebody after the election.
	Friends, don't let friends vote Democrat.
	Bada bing, bada boom, and you can get some fight.
	Viva Fry for merch and vivabarneslaw.locals.com, which is where we're not going there yet.
	We're going to rumble in the interim.
	Let me bring this here.
	And locals, the link is there.
	The link is here.
	Go. We're going to end it.
	On Commitube, and it's going to end us also on Twitter, which is not a commie platform, but we're going to rumble and vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Where we'll be discussing Elon Musk.
	Oh, yes.
	Okay, done now.
	Boom. Okay, so what's the white pill election case, Robert, while I go and shut down the stream on YouTube?
	Sure. So one of the big questions has been, does election day mean election day?
	Or does it mean election days, election weeks, election months?
	And the...
	Issue is, it arose actually out of Mississippi, getting up to the Fifth Circuit, is you have all these jurisdictions that in 2020 allowed ballots to be received after the close of the polls on Election Day.
	This was the great complaint about all the ballots that showed up in Pennsylvania and Michigan, Wisconsin.
	You know, the bringing in the ballots, the ballots they're pulling out from underneath the desk in Georgia.
	You know, a lot of questions about when were those ballots properly received?
	When were they properly counted?
	Georgia famously kept counting 99.9% of the ballots for like two weeks, it seemed.
	You know, it was like, hold on a second.
	How is there another 0.1%?
	How is there another 0.1%?
	So some of those issues are made more problematic.
	By the ability to have a ballot counted, like in Nevada, like in California, like in Mississippi, like in some other states, even if it is not received by the election official until days and days after the election.
	So long as it was post-dated prior to Election Day?
	Yes, but as the court pointed out, under federal postal rules, you can retract anything you've sent in the mail.
	They can send it back to you, and then you can put it back in the mail again, and it still have the prior postmarked date.
	So they're like, there's actually no guarantee that the person's even voting before Election Day merely because it's postmarked by or before Election Day.
	So that's where a lot of the...
	And then, of course, you have the concern of postal workers who are just backdating postal dates.
	Well, I mean, again, they're finding rogue postal workers in Pennsylvania, rogue postal workers in Georgia, other places.
	Again, the union that represents postal workers has endorsed the Harris campaign for president.
	And hold on, I'm not going crazy.
	There was a scandal of a whistleblower back in 2020 who said he was ordered to backdate ballots that were received that they were stamping afterwards.
	And then the person...
	Retracted the statement.
	I remember this leading to a lawsuit.
	They were put under massive pressure.
	James O'Keefe talked to them for a period of time.
	But there's just no guarantee of it, given as long as you're allowed to receive ballots after Election Day, you open the door to fraudulent ballots.
	And those ballots that were not, in fact, filled out by Election Day.
	So the issue goes, does that violate the law?
	So the U.S. Constitution has two provisions.
	For determining when an election can take place.
	The electors clause and the elections clause.
	Both of them give to Congress the power to determine when an election can be done.
	And for those unfamiliar with the history, we didn't used to have ballots.
	People used to go and vote in person, raise their hand.
	We went to the secret ballot, the official narrative, as we did this to prevent the chaos and da-da-da.
	No, we didn't.
	We did it to screw over populist political machines and immigrant political machines because they were handing out ballots that people could go and put in rather than having to fill it out otherwise.
	Also, once the state had a monopoly on a ballot, they would use it as an excuse to decide who has to go in or not on a ballot, as we've seen in all the crazy Robert Kennedy cases this year.
	One minute excluding him, next minute forcing him on the ballot against his own will.
	So that's really what the scam was.
	Broader history is that we always had an election day, and throughout the beginning, from 1800 through 1880, there have been various efforts by jurisdictions to maneuver around the rules.
	In fact, all the way through the 1990s, where you could actually have election day be different than when Congress said it.
	So what Congress did is they said, we're not going to have any of this.
	There has to be one election day.
	And for the presidency, one election day for any federal office.
	And in fact, it has to be the same day in presidential years.
	Every two years, you have other offices that get elected and so forth.
	But it has to be just one election day.
	Now, how do you allow early voting?
	They said that election day is when the ballot is received.
	So as long as you're voting before then...
	That can be part of election day.
	Doesn't make sense to a lot of people, but it's how the courts came up with the excuse.
	They said all that mattered is the ballot has to be received by the day designated by Congress.
	But these ballots are not being received by the day denominated by Congress.
	So the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals came in and said, well, that's illegal.
	That violates the U.S. Constitution and federal law, the Constitution, because it gives to Congress that power, and they're trying to usurp it at the state level.
	That you've got to return the ballot by the close of the polls, not postmarked that day so they can show up after midnight like it did in Pennsylvania, like it did in Michigan, like it did in Wisconsin, where they saw the trucks coming in with the ballots in the back.
	It has to be received before the close of the polls, which Florida's rules and others reflect this, and they don't have problems counting ballots or anything else.
	So, what it means is this federal court has ruled not only Mississippi's rules are illegal and unconstitutional, so are Nevadas.
	So are Californians.
	Now, they're not enforcing it for this election because they don't like to interrupt an election.
	But it won't change the fact that any ballots received after Election Day, now there's federal appellate precedent saying those ballots can't be counted because it violates federal law to allow them to be counted.
	I'm not going crazy.
	I was trying to find news from 2020.
	This was an issue where they were counting ballots that were received within four days, seven days of 2020.
	The Pennsylvania one went back up and down before the Supreme Court.
	The U.S. Supreme Court never resolved the question.
	Okay, and so that's what I was going to say.
	That issue was not adjudicated on the merits, obviously, in 2020, which is now we're getting a Fifth Circuit Federal Court of...
	So there are circumstances in which the Federal Court of Appeal can override a state's voting...
	Well, I mean, they're declaring whether or not these ballots can be counted legally.
	And they're saying these ballots are illegal.
	Now, what happens to that in terms of enforcement is an open question.
	But in my view, it means every candidate in any state where they try to count ballots after not received by the close of the polls has grounds to petition the court to require the local election officials to set those ballots aside.
	Say, look, if any of those ballots come in, even if state law allows it, put them aside, don't count them yet, because we believe they're all illegal ballots.
	And maybe it won't matter.
	Maybe the election will be so determinative that all of the ballots, even if they voted for the same candidate, couldn't change the outcome.
	But I think in every state that allows ballots now to be received after the close of the polls, every candidate has grounds to challenge and not allow those ballots to be counted.
	Until that issue is resolved, unless it's made moot by the election results, based on this decision.
	All right, amazing.
	Let me highlight something here, Robert.
	We've got a new member of the VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com community, Michael140.
	If I had a bell here, I don't have a bell.
	Here, I'll hit the lectern.
	Take a stand lectern.
	I was texting Adam.
	We've still got to auction this thing off.
	We're just waiting for a good time to do it.
	Becky S. says, is there a good guide for voting for Missouri judges?
	We talk about this.
	There's a member of our community that sort of wants to put together some sort of AI-generated aggregating results for judges.
	Basically, you have to find a way to develop the investment funds for that to work.
	And it'll be something for the next cycle to do.
	My cheap shortcut is look at their legal history.
	In other words, what have they done as a lawyer?
	So have they worked on the criminal defense side?
	Have they sued the government?
	Have they done civil rights work?
	Have they done constitutional work?
	Did they do local practice representing a wide range of ordinary people and small businesses?
	Or have they spent their life working for the government and big corporations like most judges?
	So, you know, if you have no other information, vote against the corporate lawyer.
	Vote against the government status lawyer.
	Vote for the lawyer that has neither of those backgrounds if that's the only information you have access to.
	Now, I then didn't understand it was a question.
	The White Trash Panda says, my question was where to send my friend for Jan 6-related legal representation.
	I don't know, to be honest with you.
	I mean, I know some people who are handling it, but I don't know if they're still handling it.
	Yeah, Norm Pattis was handling it.
	I don't know what he's up to now.
	And Brad Geyer was, former feds, that I work with on all my Pennsylvania cases.
	But I don't know if he's taking more cases.
	I mean, they can email me and I can see if I can do something.
	I'll reach out, see if anybody's able to do those.
	Ribo94 says, are you going to review the Fifth Circuit federal court ruling and the dates received on the bus?
	Yep, just done.
	So that is a big white pill where...
	People have got to get their votes in beforehand and make sure they're received if they want to avoid any potential problems.
	That's what they learned in Arizona, was that if you waited until Election Day like they did in 2020, if they did that again in 2022, what could happen is they could squirrel around and people would not get their vote in.
	That's why this time around, Republicans wisely chose mostly in-person early voting.
	In some states like Pennsylvania, the only thing that's really available is mail.
	So you had more people mailing their ballots, though there's still some Republican skepticism about that.
	But where it's available, I always encourage in-person early voting is the best way to do it.
	So you don't have to worry about something going squirrely on Election Day.
	I had one more question, and I don't think I'm going to remember what it was.
	Yes, it was this.
	Yeah, I bet on Arizona going to Republicans.
	What can people do?
	To make sure that justice is done and Carrie Lake gets elected over Ruben Gallego in Arizona.
	Like, are they...
	Early voting, has it started in Arizona?
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	Okay. What are the numbers like coming out of Arizona?
	I mean, we're a Republican leaning so far.
	We'll see how much it...
	Because a lot more people voted early this time.
	Okay. So you don't know what that means for the ultimate turnout.
	You know, there's different tea leaves that you can reap.
	I will be on tomorrow at 2 p.m. Eastern Time.
	Oh, actually, I even sent you...
	Ignore the first link.
	Look at the second link.
	I'll be on at 2 p.m. Eastern Time tomorrow with Richard Barris, People's Pundit Daily.
	What are the odds?
	On Rumble, also on YouTube, Locals, other places.
	And we're going to be breaking down all the election news and information.
	Latest polling information, latest data information, latest early voting information.
	But if you want accurate polling...
	Richard has been willing to sponsor what's called a public polling project, in which all he asks for is for people to cover the...
	He receives no profit out of any of it.
	Just defer some of the costs so that he's not going broke doing polling for the public to get them accurate information.
	So the public polling project is a great way to support it.
	Maybe you got a buck, maybe you got 50 bucks, whatever it is.
	If you want accurate information...
	Or you want other people, at least, to have accurate information, including candidates, including political organizations, including PACs, including news sources, etc., about what public opinion really is.
	Best way to support it is Richard Barris' public polling project at the Big Data Company.
	I'm trying to find the link.
	Did you send it to me by email?
	I sent it to you, oh, through the Rumble.
	Ah, well, holy cow, I didn't even know if I could...
	Wait a minute.
	There's a private chat right there.
	Check this out.
	Okay, hold on.
	Let me bring it up.
	I'm sitting there looking through my emails.
	Yeah, the second one.
	The first one is the link to this by accident.
	Big data poll has to be the right one.
	Big data poll.
	That's a big data poll, people, and not big data poll.
	Here we go.
	Very cool.
	Okay, so I'll definitely be...
	So he's doing more?
	So it's just the final polls to get funded?
	And again, this is just funding.
	This is done in a ridiculous, extreme discount.
	For those people who don't know, Richard Barrett's been the most successful, accurate pollster going back to 2014.
	I used him to make a lot of money in 2016.
	I'm a donor.
	Again, I donate all the way through all the time on these.
	But they're great.
	I want more people to support it because it provides a means of independent information.
	The reason why they put out fake polls is to try to shape the narrative and create their own self-fulfilling reality.
	So that's why we need honest, accurate polling to rebut that.
	For people that are running for office to see, for people that are in the public to see, it's important that accurate, honest, independent information go out there, and he's been the best at it anywhere.
	And he'll put it up no matter what happens, if it's Trump up.
	You post it.
	Trump's down.
	You post that.
	You want accurate information, which is impossible to come by in the current corporate media environment.
	When it comes to Arizona, there's nobody with half a brain that's voting Trump in Arizona, but then voting Gallego at the Senate level?
	Oh yeah, there are.
	Why? I'm sorry, why?
	Various reasons.
	So in some cases, it's the name.
	So you have a big Hispanic vote, big Mexican-American vote in Arizona.
	And so you think, oh, Gallego.
	You know, the un hermano.
	I'll probably butcher the Spanish, but you have some of that.
	You have that he has a lot more money.
	And so, like everybody knows Trump.
	Once you're talking about the Senate or the House or a governor or statehouse or any lower-level office, you'll have about a third of voters who don't know either one of them.
	So their opinion will be shaped by name, by party.
	Reference identity by general advertising.
	And so, like, Gallego has received extraordinarily favorable media coverage.
	They've been very nasty towards Carrie Lake.
	He's received far more money than Carrie Lake.
	So that's why she's such an underdog in that race.
	That if you're a normie who doesn't pay much attention, you're much more likely to receive positive Gallego news and negative Lake news about people you don't really know well.
	And that's how you get people like, oh, I like Trump.
	But down-ballot, think Gallego.
	The other reason is party identification.
	The generic Republican brand is still toxic in many circles.
	Many working class, the groups trending toward Trump are skeptical of the Republican Party brand.
	And so in those cases, someone like Lake actually is burdened adversely.
	By the R next to her name.
	Same is true of Brown in Nevada.
	Same is true of Marino in Ohio.
	Hovedy in Wisconsin.
	Rogers in Michigan.
	McCormick in Pennsylvania.
	Now, I don't think people can tune in tomorrow to see what I think will actually happen in those elections, but that's the issue.
	So that's how you can have a Senate candidate underperform the top of the ticket.
	Carrie Lake's run a great campaign, great candidate, fantastic.
	She's the only one who gets it out of any of the Senate candidates, quite frankly.
	But she's underfunded quite badly.
	And the media has been nastier towards her and more favorable towards Gallego.
	I mean, the guy is literally, you know, comes from a drug cartel family.
	I mean, it would be like the mob running for office.
	And that's what you have in Arizona.
	That makes sense.
	That's who runs Arizona anyway.
	He said he doesn't...
	If his father made any money off selling drugs for one on behalf of whom, they never saw any of it.
	And his uncle, well, he never bothered to look into it.
	Are we done on the election lawsuits?
	Yep. Now we have Tesla, Musk, the right of cross-examination, arbitration, injunctions, big Second Amendment case, bankruptcy, retirement, and...
	John Gruden's win over the NFL.
	Okay, now I'm going to bring in King of Biltong is in the house with a bright red $100 rumble rant.
	King of Biltong, add some Biltong to your diet.
	It's a high-protein snack alternative packed with B12, zinc, iron, creatine, and more.
	Get yourself some at Biltong USA Viva 10 for 10% off.
	They have dried fruit.
	Biltong is like prosciutto, beef prosciutto.
	It's freaking delicious.
	This is not a sponsored ad.
	It's just a rumble rant.
	The Piri Piri is the best.
	Period. The Wagyu might be a little too spicy for the normies, but it's delicious.
	Eric Specula says you should auction that lectin for January 6th.
	I think I might.
	I've got one to auction and then one to keep, but I might auction the one that lectin guy gave me to keep.
	Not on the menu, but let me just...
	Did you watch Joe Rogan?
	Oh yeah, watch the whole thing.
	And usually I don't sit there and watch like a three-hour thing.
	So I'll give Rogan credit, his ability to be smooth and fluid in those sort of conversational interviews and still be interesting and engaging is a real skill.
	And then what is, is Trump is also a master of that style of presentation, which I think some people forget because of the caricature or because of the sort of formality of public speaking and the nature of debates.
	But Trump has always been fantastic.
	See, I grew up on him, on Larry King, on things like that.
	He was always great at that.
	Because, as he likes to talk about it, the weave.
	And that's what Rogan shows all are.
	They're just big, extended weaves, as Trump would call it.
	Where you hop over here and you hop over here, but then you come back to where the original theme was.
	And he was very honest, very forthright, very forthcoming.
	You know, once he embraced Kennedy, he's publicly embraced that...
	The mistakes, because he's not the kind of guy normally to say, I screwed up and here's where and here's how.
	That's just not in his nature.
	But he was very forthcoming about it.
	It's like, yeah, I had no idea and I had to trust all these people and they gave me terrible people and they completely screwed me over all the way through and they limited my ability to be successful and I'm going to fix that this time.
	And you can see certain reflective reactions.
	He was like, well, you know, aren't people concerned about Robert Kennedy being...
	A key part of your administration that have power in the Republican Party?
	He's like, oh yeah, of course.
	It's a whole bunch of...
	He goes, but I don't care.
	And if you knew Trump, that's one of the most deeply honest statements that are out there.
	Yeah, I don't care.
	It doesn't bother me.
	You're not going to faze me.
	But, I mean, there was tons of...
	There was so much memeable material that there now...
	It reminds me of Tucker interviewing Putin, where Putin did that long, random...
	Trump is the most light.
	This will surprise people, but in a different way than the media would like to say.
	Putin is probably one of the most knowledgeable, informed, intelligent foreign leaders out there.
	He can do any kind of format.
	He'll sit there for eight hours and be interviewed by foreign press.
	It strikes me as the further east you go, the smart, the more educated they get.
	Because I'm comparing them to Macron, who's a buffoon.
	Angela Merkel, I don't know who the current chancellor is.
	I mean, they get...
	Schultz. Schultz.
	I don't want to say they get dumber towards the West, but we did end up with...
	You go like Trudeau and Biden.
	Or Jagmeet Singh and Kamala Harris.
	Then, who's in the UK right now?
	Keir Starmer.
	That dude's as dumb as a doornail.
	He's tyrannical as well.
	They just can't last.
	They're part of the permanent professional class, political class, that has risen to power in these very confined ways that can't do this kind of communication.
	And Trump is like Putin in that regard.
	Two ways.
	One, he can do any style of format.
	It doesn't matter.
	Short, long, extended, structured, unstructured.
	It's irrelevant.
	He can do all of them and excel at them.
	But the other thing is he's extraordinarily knowledgeable.
	And he has a key trait that I always encourage people.
	If you find people that are uniquely intelligent in a certain kind of way, it's because they're curious.
	You'll discover that's a very common trait in people that have unique kinds of intelligence.
	You look at Trump.
	He would repeatedly...
	Ask Rogan questions.
	He could tell he was curious.
	What do you think about this?
	Where does that come from?
	Remember the UFC guy?
	Right? And you don't always see that side of Trump's personality in the formalized, structured political environment.
	So people got to see a different side of Trump.
	People got to see...
	How incredibly well-informed he is on a ridiculous number.
	He's conversing on an absurd number of times.
	People take for granted.
	Oh, he was just a business real estate developer.
	He's an idiot in six bankrupt companies.
	He starts talking about the consistency of cement and how you have to lay cement and why that stupid skating rink took so long to build.
	Amazingly smart.
	We're like, most people don't even know that those are questions that you have to ask.
	And then when he started talking about Russia and he's like, If I'm in power, the crude oil doesn't go up to a price where it finances this war in the first place.
	And try to get that past Kamala Harris's thick skull.
	She'll have no idea what the hell he's even talking about.
	When she reviews it, she looks at it and says, oh my goodness, there's too much gendered language in here.
	Literally, that's what she did.
	She read intelligence reports and demands they go back in and change the gendered language.
	It's beyond Dunning-Kruger.
	It's just absolute stupidity.
	If Harris wins, I'm going to have to build a bomb shelter because of how stupid they are.
	You know what I mean?
	I mean, it's like you're trying to escape from persecution.
	No, here you just...
	They're going to get us all killed because they're morons.
	That was Trump's key point, too, which was dead on accurate.
	No, and I had to go back.
	He talks about the crude oil.
	He talks about Putin financing the war because of the increase.
	Why California doesn't have water?
	And then, I mean, in some of the memeable moments, he was like, I want to be a whale psychiatrist.
	And he explained like the whales and the windmills and how the two things interact and all the rest.
	And so like some of the memes are coming, like after Putin's interview with Tucker, some of the memes would be like, you know, a deep dive into the Lord of Rings or a deep dive into some random part of medieval history.
	They would have Putin answering these questions as the memes.
	Now all those are with Trump.
	No, you don't understand, Joe.
	You have to fight the dragons here to go over here.
	It was striking.
	It was like, it's directly parallel.
	I mean, AI is really, it's revolutionizing memes and humor.
	Let me see.
	There was another great one.
	I'll see if I can pull it up.
	But fantastic.
	New audience.
	You can see Rogan's come around.
	I mean, the slow, steady conversion of Joe Rogan was representative and reflective of his audience.
	Younger, working class, independents of a diverse background, racially, religiously, regionally, who were divorcing from the Democratic Party's inanity and insanity.
	And Trump made himself accessible and funny and all the rest.
	I mean, the windmills are driving them crazy.
	Can you imagine Kamala Harris doesn't even know what that's about?
	And like the Democrats' criticism of this, people like that idiot, Kyle, whatever his face is.
	Kyle Kalinsky.
	Yeah, he's become a total loser.
	You know, he's now like a poor man's Matt Taibbi.
	And they couldn't even process how successful it was.
	So they pretended it was terrible.
	And it's like, okay, you're just discrediting yourself in this process.
	It was at 30 million views last I checked earlier this afternoon.
	Yeah, 30 million views now.
	It's going to be the most one ever.
	Because I think the most one ever before this was on 65 million.
	This one, within a year, will be the most viewed, downloaded podcast in world history.
	It's an amazing thing.
	You watch it.
	It's three hours unscripted.
	And you look at Trump and you say, he's like a...
	A happy, jovial grandfather, but not a senile buffoon who knows why California has a water problem in a way that was the first time I'd ever heard that described as someone who lived in California for many years.
	I was like, oh, I didn't know that.
	I mean, it was brilliant.
	And he's absolutely right about the bureaucratic state.
	He's like, the bureaucratic state is a shakedown operation.
	That's all it is.
	He goes, the environmental guys, go make sure there's a bunch of rules and legislation restrictions passed to force you to give them money to get the permit.
	It's nothing to do with the environment.
	The same thing to do with the practice of law.
	They make it not understandable, so you have to get a lawyer to figure it out.
	And they make these...
	When you talk, it's like, yeah, I'll get you the fixer, the guy who can get you through all the paperwork.
	And then it just stifles...
	And innovation.
	Him talking about the windmills was also just stuff that people don't know.
	Killing the birds.
	Not biodegradable.
	They have a lifespan of 10 years.
	After that, you've got to bury them.
	Everybody has to watch it.
	His ability to just cover random cross-section was fascinating.
	And notice he knew certain people that Rogan is close to, like Elon Musk, Robert Kennedy.
	Dana White.
	Dana White.
	And notice Trump went out of his way to praise all those people.
	He praised Rogan throughout.
	He found ways to praise each of those three people.
	Talking about how great is Robert Kennedy, that Dana White's always been a stand-up guy, and those other aspects as well.
	Elon Musk, he was like, look at it, man, the dude can catch a rocket.
	He can catch a rocket.
	He was always watching that thing, and that thing was about to blow it.
	He was like, no, he can catch a rocket out of space.
	And explain how Starlink would solve the problem that the Biden administration spent $40 billion on.
	But speaking, instead of authorizing Starlink, instead of expanding rocket access, the Biden administration has been busy harassing Elon Musk for the last four years.
	The latest one just got to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
	First of all, I thought the latest one had to do with the United Auto Workers filing a complaint against Trump for the joke that he majored in the Twitter space.
	The legal theory for that was what first did this.
	So this was Elon Musk putting out a tweet basically saying when someone says...
	Whether or not your workers are going to get unionized, he says, if they get unionized, they're going to lose their stock options.
	And then, I don't know who, the UAW, the same one who filed a complaint against Trump for his joke during the Twitter space, or the X space, said that was intimidation of employees to deter them from unionizing, and that the tweet had to be deleted.
	Elon Musk, in the Twitter thread that surrounded this, said, I wasn't threatening to take it away.
	It's a matter of fact that the unions are going to, if they get unionized as part of their collective bargaining, whatever, I don't know if they usurp the stock options or they just don't have them included in their collective bargaining.
	Yeah, he was saying they would probably not profit from unionizing, in his opinion, about given where he thought the union contract directions would go.
	And it wasn't a retaliatory threat by him.
	He was saying...
	Here's one world, here's likely the other.
	What was extraordinary is the Biden administration came in and ordered him to delete his tweet.
	They were ordering official state-sponsored, state-coerced, state-compelled censorship of Elon Musk, pretending somehow it related to the National Labor Relations Board.
	So they reversed it and said that he doesn't have to delete the tweet, and then they...
	Yeah, the Fifth Circuit said this is nonsense.
	Nobody in the Biden administration has the power to censor anybody.
	You can't order the deletion of speech.
	You can order the deletion of something that's not protected speech.
	So you can order defamatory statements to come down.
	You can order pornography down, obscenity down, other things down, stalking harassment violations down.
	You can't order just speech down because you don't like the speech.
	And that's never been within the power of the National Labor Relations Board or any aspect of the federal government.
	So another big win by Elon Musk in federal court.
	And another reason why that win came about is because he moved his operations to Texas.
	Because if it hadn't been, it wouldn't have been in the Fifth Circuit.
	It might have been in the Ninth Circuit.
	It might have been in the Third Circuit.
	Not as reliable courts there in this current political environment.
	Everybody knows, but Trump is speaking now at Madison Square Garden, so people will be able to either watch him later or watch us later.
	They had everybody.
	They had Robert Kennedy up there.
	They had Dr. Phil.
	Dr. Phil was up there.
	You know, the body language people, behavior panel folks, they're doing a bunch of shows with Dr. Phil now.
	So they're breaking out.
	That's amazing.
	Oh, yeah.
	Those guys are great.
	Well, by the way, before I forget, I'm going to be on with Dr. Drew tomorrow night, or tomorrow evening, so I'll send everyone the link when that is...
	You know, his wife is a big fan of the show.
	No, yeah, no, no.
	I see them all the time.
	Whenever they're down in Florida, we meet up for a podcast.
	He was a little nervous about raw milk.
	You've got to get him some of that Amos Miller.
	You can get AmosMillerOrganicFarm.com as long as the corrupt Pennsylvania state doesn't shut him down.
	Go to AmosMillerOrganicFarm.com and get some of his food.
	Today, but we got to get Dr. Drew to taste some of that milk.
	Maybe give him some corporatized, pasteurized, homogenized milk, and then Amos Miller milk, but don't tell him and say which one's better.
	Well, I think it's Amos Miller cheese in our fridge.
	We're not in person tomorrow.
	Tim Adderhall says, if you want to know what a Harris admin looks like, watch Don't Look Up.
	Oh, dear goodness.
	And we got here, since Carrie Lake...
	Well, basically, like they said at the New York rally today, increasingly, a Harris administration looks like a P. Diddy party.
	We haven't, but we haven't seen the...
	I'll get there in a second.
	Since Carrie Lake ran for governor, wouldn't that elevate her recognition in a Senate race?
	I thought it would.
	I would agree, but remember, your normie voter doesn't vote in off-year elections.
	Now, by the way, I was going to actually start the show with George Santos' tweet, video tweet, where there's rumors.
	I mean, I said, like, I'm not jumping on it.
	I'm certainly not making a fool of myself by jumping on it like that McDonald's photograph.
	John Collins, I'm looking at you.
	But Santos was saying, and I don't think he answered my question.
	The rumor is that Kamala Harris was at a P. Diddy party.
	Not that she was doing anything illegal, but just that she was there.
	That's the rumor.
	Haven't seen a flipping...
	Iota of evidence, and I don't like this, that George Santos puts out a tweet.
	And I said, did you?
	He says, I can't talk about it because the journalists are sitting on the story in legal exposure.
	First of all, I asked him, did you see the video yourself with your own two eyes?
	Because if you didn't, you shouldn't have said what you did.
	But we'll see.
	The other thing is, there were a lot of people that went to P. Diddy parties that weren't necessarily part of those P. Diddy parties.
	True, but also...
	I'm sure a lot of celebrities went to a range of his parties that were not...
	The special parties.
	And I think here it's important to draw distinctions because Epstein did this all the time.
	So Epstein would invite people over for dinner or various get-togethers that were not his other events in order to later make them look bad or to try to entrap or extort them.
	And some people think, oh, if anybody ever had any association with Epstein, that means they were part of the Epstein sex trafficking.
	No, those are two different things entirely.
	Same with P. Diddy.
	So don't draw immediate conclusions because somebody was at a P. Diddy party.
	You want to know what their other affiliations and associations with P. Diddy are.
	Though I'm sure, I mean, Kamala Harris's husband has had this reputation going way back.
	So he's a Californian lawyer.
	He's had a reputation of attending his own...
	P. Diddy-style parties.
	That part wouldn't surprise me at all.
	Kamala Harris being there would surprise me.
	Her husband being there would not surprise me.
	Well, if she were there and nobody said anything until now, that would surprise me.
	And also, yeah, the husband who impregnates a young nanny.
	But clearly the feds went and stole all those records for some reason.
	Well, that's...
	Now, when Santos tweeted that out, I'm like thinking, oh, now it goes right back to what you said, that the investigation into P. Diddy was the cover-up, and it was to cover-up because they might have known...
	I went down that way, but until I see a shred of evidence, I'm not jumping on that bandwagon in Santos.
	You know, the black insurrectionist account turned out to be a bogus account.
	They claim certain things about ABC, claim certain things about Tim Walsh.
	So beware of misinformation, disinformation.
	Red herrings will be out and about election season.
	Yep. What was I just about to say?
	Nothing. What are we moving on to now?
	So we got the right of confrontation and cross-examination, arbitration and injunction and judicial hypocrisy, the Second Amendment in New York, big case, bankruptcy and retirement protection, big vaccine mandate verdicts.
	And Coach Gruden beating the NFL.
	The vaccine mandates.
	I forget now what state these are coming out of.
	This is BART.
	It was the Bay Area...
	That should tell you what state it is.
	Well, that's...
	Yeah, it's...
	Yeah, it's California.
	Bingo! I don't think it's either that or...
	No, the Bay Area.
	Maybe Oregon.
	But hold on.
	Bay Area.
	What was it?
	Not radio.
	Rapid Transport.
	Rapid transport.
	Okay, a bunch of employees who lost, who were fired because they refused to submit to the Jibby Jab.
	And what I found interesting is that it's in the Bay Area and they basically said that no go and they get, what were they, hired back with back pay or just compensated?
	I guess the determination was they couldn't be hired back.
	I mean, I'm getting the transcripts ordered.
	But all the big corporate defendants who are so super eager to take these cases to trial.
	Should now notice there have been two high-profile vaccine mandate discrimination cases reach a jury in two radically different political jurisdictions, one of them my hometown of Chattanooga, Tennessee, and this one in the San Francisco Bay Area of California, where most people were the most pro-vaccine of any part of the country.
	And in both of them now, they're issuing verdicts that are seven-figure verdicts.
	And so, I mean, each of the BART employees, a million dollars plus, according to the public information, awarded.
	Now, that's probably because California governmental jobs could pay well, etc., and hard to replace those.
	But this should be a shock to the insurance companies and the big corporations that are telling themselves they don't have any risk.
	So far, when they've been going up on appeal, they've been losing over and over and over again.
	And now, when they go to jury...
	They're losing over and over and over again.
	I just want a recommendation from the federal magistrate in the Tyson Foods case in the Western District of Tennessee that Tyson Foods said no jury should be allowed in the case.
	It should be a bench trial case concerning the Tennessee state law violations.
	And the magistrate agreed with us and said no, it really should go to the jury.
	And that will now be decided by the district court.
	So we'll see where that goes.
	But all these people that justified and rationalized these discriminatory vaccine mandate impositions against people's religious beliefs should be paying attention to both what appellate courts are doing and now what juries are doing.
	Even, you know, they could say, well, Chattanooga, that's a conservative place.
	San Francisco's not.
	And they issued an even bigger verdict than Chattanooga did.
	So people don't like being treated like cattle.
	And it doesn't matter whether the left or the right.
	This was one of the key points the 1776 Law Center poll did by Richard Barris of Big Data Poll and People's Pundit Daily.
	Data that was shared, by the way, with President Trump and his people several months ago before he united with Robert Kennedy.
	And part of the reasons that gave motivation for that was these voters across the political spectrum, particularly younger working class minorities and millennials and Zoomers, We're disproportionately negatively impacted by the vaccine mandates.
	They know more people injured by the vaccine than do other groups.
	Why? Because when their friend dies, they know it isn't because of old age.
	When their friend is 18 years old, dies on a college football field, or a high school football field, or a soccer field, or suddenly after work, or within a week of getting the vaccine, they know what caused it.
	When people suffer severe disability, they know what caused it.
	And when they were discriminated against...
	Disproportionately, they know what caused it.
	It was their schooling that was taken away during the lockdowns.
	It was their opportunity to celebrate significant events that was taken away during the lockdowns.
	They were disproportionately, adversely impacted by the lockdown.
	And now they've been adversely impacted by a range of other things.
	They are the group that overwhelmingly, disproportionately, likes financial freedom.
	Issues of crypto are very popular with young communities.
	Millennials and Zoomers, disproportionately.
	Food freedom.
	They want to shop at food markets.
	They want to shop at farmer's markets.
	They want to shop directly from a farmer.
	They want to be able to get food directly true farm-to-table.
	They don't want it being corporatized, mechanized, industrialized, and monopolized by big chemical companies dosing us with God knows what, as Trump was discussing with Joe Rogan as well on the show.
	So it shouldn't surprise these big corporations, but I know, as a matter of fact...
	They've been advising their legal team.
	They suffered no risk at the time they gave the advice to impose these mandates without religious accommodation.
	And to this day, they think that there's going to be low jury verdicts when the jury verdicts come in.
	Now, every time they're going to jury trial in a big case, no matter the politics of that jury, they're getting hammered.
	And the smart ones will come to an accommodation and find some remedy for their discriminated against employees, the ones that are dumb enough.
	Like, you know, the corrupt 3M means 3MFers.
	They just took F-E-R-S off to disguise their true nature.
	These companies are going to pay a real consequence and a real price for the way in which they harmed the ordinary American.
	It's fantastic.
	All right.
	And I know you're into the Gruden one.
	We covered it a while back.
	This was a guy who was forced to resign after someone...
	Probably someone in the NFL leaked his DMs and whatever.
	Matt, Roger Goodell was a real punk.
	And I had to...
	And remember, this was the one where they forced him to go back to Roger Goodell, who was the one who discriminated against him, and let Roger Goodell be the judge of whether Roger Goodell discriminated against him.
	Well, it was forced into arbitration, the civil claim, from what I recall.
	But I wanted to, like...
	And what is the arbitrator in that case is picked by Roger Goodell?
	The... I just wanted to...
	I had to refresh my memory because I remember thinking...
	This is not so bad for private messages.
	Gruden's messages were sent to Bruce Allen.
	They call them homophobic.
	And now, by the way, they've got Eminem, who's endorsing Kamala Harris, speaking of homophobic lyrics, but whatever.
	In the emails, Gruden called the league's commissioner, Roger Goodell, a faggot.
	Is Goodell a known...
	The coolest anti-football was.
	That's what he is.
	The coolest anti-football was.
	Nevada Supreme Court initially ordered...
	Jay ordered Gruden to let Goodell pick the decision maker over his dispute with Goodell.
	Robert, he signed the agreement.
	He knew what he signed.
	He knew what he agreed to.
	Even though all of this impacted things that either arose before the agreement or after the agreement.
	So after the agreement was terminated.
	It's like, how do you have an agreement that lasts into perpetuity, that reaches back before anything ever happened and can reach into the future when it's not governed by it?
	But credit to the Nevada courts.
	They realized they made a mistake, went back and reconsidered.
	Or maybe, you know, Roger Goodell failed to make the timely payments that were due to some people up there.
	I don't know which it was.
	But either way, Gruden, it looks like, will now get an opportunity to have a real trial on his case.
	If he just gets into discovery, they should just write him a check or just publicly admit their crime and shame and go away.
	Roger Goodell should be forced to step down.
	But Roger Goodell is not gay, right?
	It's like, there's nothing wrong with it.
	Oh, no, exactly.
	That's why it's not that.
	It's that he's a wuss.
	It's that, you know, he's, you know, he caved and capitulated to BLM right away.
	I mean, that's just who he is.
	You know, he's a corrupt corporate guy who's, you know, who's tried to fix the league and rig the league in the last year by having Taylor Swift involved with Travis Kelsey and boost the Kansas City Chiefs and, you know, hand deliver them a Super Bowl trophy they didn't deserve.
	In every high-profile game, the Chiefs magically get miraculous calls all go their direction over and over again.
	I mean, he's damaging the brand of the National Football League, the primary sport unique to America globally.
	And so him being out of business would be a good thing for everybody.
	I just want to play something.
	It's a documentary.
	It's a documentary of sorts.
	Hold on a second.
	Let me close this.
	Let me come here.
	It'll explain what I was getting at in terms of whether or not this is homophobic.
	It's from a documentary called South Park, and this is a clip in particular which I think is very relevant right now.
	I'm trying to understand this.
	How is it that you boys think referring to gay people as fags in today's world is acceptable?
	Because we're not referring to gay people.
	You can be gay and not be a fag.
	Yeah, a lot of fags aren't gay.
	I happen to be gay, boys.
	Do you think I'm a fag?
	Do you ride a big, loud Harley and go up and down the streets ruining everyone's nice time?
	No. Then you're not a fag.
	So what if a guy is gay and rides a Harley?
	Then he's a gay fag.
	I mean, is this really this hard?
	I don't know.
	This is fucking ridiculous.
	Alright, look.
	You're driving in your car, okay?
	And you're waiting to make a left at a traffic signal.
	The light turns yellow.
	Should be your turn to go.
	But the traffic coming at you just keeps coming.
	And even when the light turns red, a guy in a BMW runs the red light so you can't make your left turn.
	What goes through your mind?
	Bag. Right!
	But you're not thinking, oh, he's a homosexual.
	You're thinking, oh, he's an inconsiderate douchebag like a Harley rider.
	This is making insanely good sense.
	It's so good.
	I think more children need to watch South Park.
	There, I said it.
	Okay. What do we have left?
	We got arbitration and court injunctions, bankruptcy and retirement, the right of confrontation and cross-examination, and a big Second Amendment case out of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
	Shall we do the Second Amendment and then head over to Locals?
	Locals. Now, not to put all of it on you, but I think you're going to have to refresh my memory on the Second Amendment case.
	That thing is massive, because that's the one that's like 228 pages or whatever.
	But it's what, unfortunately, predicted.
	Was when the Supreme Court walked back the opportunity to extend Bruin to the red flag context of orders of protection, taking away people's gun rights, and instead they said no.
	What happened is the three constitutional conservatives, Gorsuch, Thomas, and Alito, would have continued to protect the Second Amendment.
	The three liberals, Kagan, Sotomayor, how am I blinking on the third one?
	Oh, Jackson.
	The, you know, of course, eager to eviscerate the Second Amendment whenever they can.
	And so you're stuck with the three corporatist, statist, centrist, you know, party, you know, Hampton cocktail party crowd that hates it when people get mad at them, that are in the elite, that are in the establishment.
	It shows you how the Court of Public Opinion works.
	It absolutely worked with those three.
	So they walked back the Second Amendment protections and said, well, if they're dangerous, yeah, then that's a different dynamic.
	And there's other ways you could walk back the Second Amendment.
	So they remanded a whole bunch of cases and told a bunch of courts, now that we've made this ruling, go back and reconsider your prior ruling.
	The Second Circuit came in because New York came up with every excuse in the world to deny people their Second Amendment rights, including, okay, you can't have a gun in this situation or that situation or at this place or with those people and so on and so forth.
	And they made it so basically the only place you could have a gun is in your own home.
	That's pretty much it.
	And even then, you might not get a permit for it unless you pass their character test, and their character test requires you to disclose their social media, disclose anybody that's cohabiting with you for any reason, and any other information that they'd simply request.
	So very broad, very invasive.
	And with a lot of discretion about whether you have the character to own a gun or not.
	So initially, a lot of lower courts were saying this is nonsense, it's violated Second Amendment rights.
	The Supreme Court makes its ruling, Second Circuit reconsiders, and now there are two big wins for the Second Amendment, but there are a lot of losses in their decision.
	The big wins are the state of New York tried to make it so that if you're on private property, you couldn't carry a gun without the permission of the owner.
	We talked about this one last week, and so they said that that's not historically congruent with the history of the Second Amendment, and that it has to be...
	Specifically excluded and not excluded by default.
	And by definition, that implies, like most places, that you would need your right of self-defense, which the right to bear arms is an expression and extension of.
	They also said that you cannot force disclosure of somebody's social media accounts as a precondition of their applying to prove good character.
	The right to carry a gun in the first place.
	But then they said you can ban guns in theaters, any place where there's crowded, any place where liquor is served, any place where kids are, any place that are fairs, markets, parks, and zoos.
	So they just drastically expanded.
	It's so stupid because some of these places are the specific place where you would want to, maybe not so much a bar.
	The way to think of it is, do I lose my right of self-defense in those settings?
	And if I don't lose my right of self-defense in those settings, why would I lose my right to bear arms in those settings?
	Well, I can imagine not wanting to...
	Where alcohol is involved, I can understand that, although that might be...
	But the traditional rules was you can't sell a gun to someone that's intoxicated, that someone who's intoxicated can't have one.
	They said, no, if there's even alcohol somewhere served on the premises, which, by the way, that covers all kinds of places.
	Yeah, but what was the historical analog, like back in the old days in Texas when you go into a saloon?
	Only the ones that devolved drunks.
	And they kept citing laws from after 1868.
	And it's like, hold on a second.
	I mean, I said at the time, the Supreme Court watering down that provision, watering down Bruin, would be interpreted by lower courts as, oh, we can go back and just gut Bruin now.
	And that was what Thomas warned, and that's exactly what's happened.
	And these lower courts are like, oh, we only have to allow just a little bit of protection.
	We don't have to allow much.
	Yeah, you can have it in your home, and you can have it in certain places open to the public as long as it's not crowded.
	Doesn't serve liquor.
	No kids are there.
	It's not a theater.
	It's not a public performance.
	It's not a conference center.
	I mean, it's ridiculous why they've effectively eviscerated your Second Amendment in New York again.
	And then on top of it, they said, yeah, it's okay to delegate to random officials the ability to effectively shake down people for bribes.
	Really, New York's got to keep that corruption business rolling.
	But they said it's fine to do character tests.
	That delegate to random local officials whether you have the good character because that's just measuring whether you're dangerous or not.
	No, it's not.
	This is exactly what some of us warned.
	Once you start saying, oh, somebody can just call somebody dangerous and strip them of their Second Amendment rights, then you're going to eviscerate Second Amendment rights because they can decide all of a sudden dangerous is really just good character and good character is whatever they decide it is.
	And so they said you could be required to disclose who you're.
	Partners are, who you cohabitate with, who your kids are, just to get a gun.
	Your right of self-defense.
	How does that relate to dangerousness?
	Sounds annoying to me.
	In Canada, I had to get my wife to sign an attestation that she would tolerate having a firearm in the house.
	Background check.
	They're tracking communist restrictions.
	Maybe the Supreme Court will get some guts or cojones and reverse itself somewhere down the road, but as long as you have these three We need corporatist, statist types.
	You're not going to get vibrant, vigorous constitutional enforcement, sadly.
	All right, I'll read a bunch of the tipped questions while we're here on the big audience.
	We got Denise Antu over in our vivabarneslaw.locals.com community says, at the time of the Constitution, people brought their firearms everywhere they went.
	That's what I thought, at least from the movies that I've seen.
	Alien Baby says, I recently got to visit your beautiful city of Montreal.
	Let me see where this is.
	That looks like old Montreal.
	Shame that Canada has turned...
	Commie, as Montreal is a culturally rich and magnificent city with extremely friendly and caring citizens.
	And let me see if I know...
	Yeah, this photograph here is like a half a block from where...
	In fact, I think it's the block past my office in Old Montreal.
	I know exactly where the street is.
	That's a famous restaurant over there.
	And that's the Old Port.
	And it's got Cobblestone Street.
	There's not that many places in Montreal that still have the Cobblestone Street.
	Yeah, it's a beautiful city, except not safe anymore and full of communism.
	Let me go over here.
	Escape. And that was from Alien Baby.
	Then we got...
	Hackwright says, Arizona Secretary of State posted voter registration requirements that show a non-citizen can get a ballot in this election, but it's a, quote, federal-only, end quote, ballot, so only POTUS and U.S. Senator and representative races.
	How is this constitutional?
	My state sucks.
	They don't have a right to get a ballot.
	What it is is a federal-only ballot doesn't require proof of citizenship to get.
	That's different.
	It's still against the law for a non-citizen vote.
	That hasn't changed at all.
	So there's been some confusion about that aspect.
	It's how do you find out whether someone is a citizen or not in terms of enforcement.
	And in some cases you can ask them, in some cases you can't.
	But the federal government is supposed to be providing that information to state agencies because they have access to all these databases.
	They know who is and isn't a citizen.
	For the few that they don't have access to, the federal government is supposed to provide that information because the federal government has it all.
	Here's one I'm going to ask, and it's going to be a personal bearing.
	It's from RyanPD911.
	It says, Barris and other pollsters are pushing towards a much deeper landslide.
	Should I keep my 65-104 victory margin and push on 105-154?
	I was going to say, keep both.
	I'm just looking at my numbers here.
	I am up.
	I'm double up on 65-104.
	And up 50% on 105 to 154.
	So, okay, no, never mind.
	Go to SportsPix.
	I'm not going to pick Barnes' brain for free here.
	Go check it out, people.
	But, yeah, I mean, it's touch wood.
	I just want the pot.
	There's some real money-making opportunities, I think, in this election.
	And I've had as much success betting on elections as anybody in the world.
	Thank you both for the work from Toronto fan Brigida.
	Oh, Brigida.
	Thank you very much.
	That's Biluksko.
	Then we got Gray101.
	How committed is Trump to abolishing federal income tax, giving American families much-needed relief?
	He touched.
	I think he touched on that.
	He did.
	He talked about tariffs are a very effective mechanism for making the world a more peaceful place, for re-industrializing American wealth, and for being a source of revenue independent of the confiscatory and invasive nature of the income tax system.
	So, it's at least putting those ideas in the right direction, in my opinion.
	Fantastic. We'll do one more, and then we're going to go over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com for the after party.
	Is there a good guide for voting Missouri judges?
	Okay, I got that.
	I think I got everything, actually, here.
	Aloha, longtime supporter.
	Love you both, longtime.
	I look forward to the stream every week to follow you both.
	Otherwise, thank you so much for all the wisdom.
	Kathy, that's Devil Dog Mom.
	Will the race be called for Trump on election night?
	I know you and Barris are...
	I mean, not just you embarrassed.
	I know a lot of other people on CNN that are thinking that that's going to be the case.
	Jonathan G94 says, what's up with Trump praising Pompeo in the Rogan interview?
	He still likes Pompeo.
	I don't think Pompeo will be part of another administration, but I think he underappreciates still that Pompeo was a bad actor.
	That was from Jonathan G94.
	Net just says, Bill Clinton was nominated in MSG in 1992.
	What is it in MSG?
	Oh, Madison Square Garden.
	Madison Square Garden.
	Okay. Jimmy Carter.
	Well, I'm going to screen grab that and steal your knowledge and make a point on the internet afterwards.
	All right.
	Let me go.
	Last one.
	This is the last one.
	Odie of the North.
	Five bucks.
	Holy schlitt.
	You watched Tony Hinchcliffe at Madison Square Garden's Trump rally.
	Incredible roasting.
	You can audibly hear the buttholes puckering.
	I'll have to go back and watch that.
	Yeah, everybody out there.
	J.D. Vance, Dr. Phil, Robert Kennedy, Tulsi Gabbard.
	It was an all-star show there in New York.
	I had it on mute, and I saw J.D. Vance looked quite fired up, but I couldn't hear anything, so I could only see his body movements.
	Cash Solo on Rumble says, Ask Barnes if he knows Buddy Perry from Tennessee.
	Let's find out if he knows the Mafia.
	Buddy Perry from Tennessee?
	Yeah, it doesn't ring a bell with me.
	Okay, good.
	Alright, so this is what's going to happen.
	We're going to get some more tips we're going to get to in the vivabarnslaw.locals.com afterparty.
	I will have Tyler Fisher on either tomorrow or Tuesday.
	I will not go past 2 o'clock, and if I do, maybe a few minutes past.
	You're on with Barris tomorrow at 2 o'clock.
	Then I'm going to be on with Dr. Drew tomorrow night, tomorrow afternoon, evening.
	And then live all week, going to have some great guests.
	Wednesday is the unusual suspects.
	There's something else going on in there.
	Robert, I'm so nervous.
	I don't know how to get through the next week.
	When I was a kid and I used to get a new pair of glasses, I just got to make it through the next three days until I get my new glasses.
	Getting to election day is proving to be very, very anxiety-inducing.
	Well, I recommend, you know, getting a boat you can get out fast if it goes the wrong way.
	Oh, dude, well, if it goes the wrong way, they're going to kick me out.
	They'll send me back to Canada, and then Judah won't want me back.
	It's going to be great.
	They're going to be fighting over who doesn't keep Viva.
	Okay. What's the worst part of Canada you could get sent to?
	Up in the Eskimo territory, I guess?
	The Eskimo territory is beautiful.
	It's just everything's expensive and there's not much sunlight.
	I would say, actually, the worst part is Toronto.
	Even Vancouver is a bit of a dirty poop hole, but at least it's got nice mountains.
	Norm1320 says, I posted a video from Remember the Titans on the locals' feed this morning.
	Can you bring it to the attention of some meme makers who could make something of it?
	I'm going to screen grab it and go see what it was.
	I did love it.
	Did you see the one with the...
	Trump doing CCR, his fortunate son, making fun of all the world's leaders.
	No, I did not.
	Making fun of Macron, making fun of Trudeau, making fun of Obama, making fun of Harris, making fun of Hillary, making fun of Biden.
	It was a Halloween-themed, and it has Trump on the guitar and Putin on the drums.
	Cash Solo says, read mine.
	I read your ears already, Cash Solo.
	Let me see here.
	I just want to make sure I didn't forget.
	I work at the California Election Center, says Jenny Rae.
	The voting system accepts only the ballot per voter and the locks.
	Voter record from accepting additional ballots.
	Addresses are also used to validate the person's voters.
	The signature is also checked.
	Okay. Okay, last one.
	Last one, really.
	Buffalo Betsy.
	I am loving what RFK Jr. said about Trump having no lobbyists.
	Okay, I got that one.
	All right.
	Now we end it on Rumble.
	And you all know the schedule of the week.
	And it's going to give us 30 seconds while we do this.

▲