All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 23, 2024 - Viva & Barnes
02:34:28
Ep. 242: Barnes is BACK AGAIN! Trump, Fani, J6, RFK, Chip Roy, USS Liberty AND MORE! Viva & Barnes
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
You want us sick, you think we're dumb.
You want us blind and you want us drug.
You want us poor while you get more of everything.
Cause you don't get to tell me what to think and what to do.
No, you don't get to tell me what is true.
Cause you're just liars, jeans and crooks.
change the rules and you burn the books and so i don't believe a single word you say you're all lies fakes and cons watch out and we watch you gone so don't believe this time you'll get
away you want us trick you want us numb you want us scared and you want us stung you want us shot and you want us far in every way you want our minds you want our time you want us
friends up in your crime i hope you know that it's time to go and we're taking names because you don't get to tell us what to think and what to do no you don't get to tell us what is
true you're just lies keeps it crooks change the rules and you burn the books and so we don't believe this time
you'll get away all your lies all your lies all your lies
all your lies you don't get to tell us what to do what to think and what to do Alrighty, people.
It's the day before the day before Christmas.
You don't get to tell me what to think or what to do.
Why? Liars, Cheats, and Crooks.
Alright, people.
Five times August.
Liars, Cheats, and Crooks has become something of a de facto channel theme song?
Logo thingy thing?
Good afternoon.
Three o'clock.
It's December 23rd.
Lighting is going to suck because I don't have my flood lighting.
And, you know, it's three o'clock in Canada.
And God has said, yeah, you're about you've had enough sunlight for the day.
I'm about to put the sun down because it's dumb.
I'm exaggerating.
The sun sets at about four o'clock.
But there's basically no light anyhow.
I'm not saying it's dark, dreary, gray and nipple freezing cold, but it is.
And let me, before we get into the intro of the day, you know, I'm trying to see what to get my wife for Christmas.
And we went down to Alexis Neon, which is a shopping center.
I don't like public spaces anymore.
We went to Alexis Neon.
It's this shopping center.
I went to get an energy drink that is remotely healthy.
This is the best one I could find.
It's got very little sugar in it.
And I teach my kid to be aware of surroundings, situational awareness at all times, at all costs.
And we were in the fight or flight mode and I had him, you run and I'll do what I have to do to give you a head start because there were some interesting experiences waiting in line at the cash.
And we made it out and I got my energy drink.
But before we get into anything, people.
We got a sponsor.
We got two sponsors for today's show.
But before we get there, if you haven't heard the news, let's just open this up.
The Rumble stock of the day.
Can you imagine it was at over 100% up at one point today?
Can you imagine you wake up and your investment is now double what it was when you went to bed on Friday?
Or I guess when you ended close on Friday?
The news.
And we talked about it a little bit.
I'm still looking into it.
I've seen Rumble, Chris Pawlowski talking about it.
Tether, a crypto company, which has a digital coin that's tethered to the United States dollar, apparently, or that's the business model, has invested just a cool $775 million in Rumble.
And Chris Pawlowski tweeted out earlier today.
Can you imagine?
I'm going to make sure I don't misquote it.
Pawlowski. Dan Bongino, hold on, where was it?
It says, imagine you can easily tip your favorite creators with Bitcoin or USDT, that's United States dollar tether, I guess, directly on Rumble.
I'm an idiot.
A while back, I put out a tweet that said, Elon, you should be able to tip, subscribe, whatever, with digital currency on Twitter.
And my idea was with Dogecoin, because the branding works perfectly for...
Twitter, Elon, Doge, Department of Governmental Efficiency.
And I'm telling you, it looks like Rumble is leading the curve.
You're going to be able to, in theory, according to Chris's tweet, imagine being able to tip your favorite creators with cryptocurrency on the platform.
Freaking amazing is what that's going to be.
The news is obviously big news and the stock has doubled as a result of the announcement.
But... Let's listen to what Chris had to say about it on Matt Coors.
If you don't know who Matt Coors is, check him out.
Whenever we go to these Rumble events, we always end up meeting up and interviewing each other.
But listen to what Chris has to say to Matt about this recent development because this was from today's show with Matt Coors.
Do you have any, I suppose, initial thoughts if I were to tell you right now there's a $100 million bet against your company?
Talking about shorts.
You know...
When people bet against me, it drives a fire in me to prove them wrong.
I kind of relish in that.
Since I was a little kid, when my parents told me I couldn't do something, I always wanted to do the opposite.
And being even now, watching people say, we're going to run out of cash.
Oh yeah?
You think that's going to happen?
Let me show you.
Those things drive me.
It only emboldens me and it only pushes me harder, faster, and makes me work 10 times more.
It's a good thing that people say that to me.
Obviously, I don't like it, but it's something that drives me.
It really tests me in a major way.
I like that pressure.
Because I love proving people wrong.
I love showing that we can do incredible things.
It's pretty sad that there's that much pent up.
If that's true, I don't even know what's true when it comes to shorting.
The short position against...
Well, we can stop it there.
If there's 100 million bet against Rumble, shorting that stock, I would dare say that maybe...
The people shorting the stock or the hedge funds or whoever's shorting it might not have learned the lesson that ought to have been learned from the GameStop fiasco debacle.
But alas, we'll see when we get there.
Everybody, share the link around.
This is our Viva and Barnes Christmas special because we couldn't get it out yesterday.
And I'm not sure that we're going to get a show on Sunday.
So we're doing it today.
There's a whole hell of a lot to talk about.
But before we even get into any of it, speaking of kicking ass people, we got Chuck Norris in the house, our first sponsor of today's show.
Have you ever wondered what happened to the legendary Chuck Norris?
I recently saw a video of him.
I was in shock.
But I was happy to see him looking like he can kick anybody's butt in his 80s.
What's even more shocking is he's stronger, can work out longer, and has plenty of energy left over for his grandkids.
He did this by making just one change.
He still says he feels like he's in his 50s.
His wife even started doing it too, and she's never felt better.
She says she feels 10 years younger, her body looks leaner, and she also has energy all day.
He made this change.
And he explains it in a video, which you can go look at.
It's called chuckdefense.com forward slash Viva.
You're watching it now, but it's got audio.
The link is in the description.
Once again, chuckdefense.com forward slash Viva.
Click the link in the description to watch the video.
You won't believe how simple it is.
Just a reminder, Chuck Norris is a whopping 84 years young and has more energy than 99% of Americans out there.
He discovered he could make dramatic changes to his health simply by focusing on three things that sabotage our body as we age.
Watch his method.
Click the link in the description.
Chuck Defense.
And our second and last sponsor of today's show, another great company putting out other great products, which unfortunately are not available in Canada.
Let me get that out here so you can see it.
The Wellness Company, people, the holiday season is here.
I've had vitamin C. I'm going to exercise hopefully after this show, keep my metabolism, my immune system up.
But it is the holiday season, which means it's also six season, sinus infections, strep throat, upper respiratory hacking.
Everyone is traveling and everyone is passing it around.
But guess what?
You don't have to deal with it this year.
Why? Because this year you have a little blue case.
That's your mobile urgent care kit.
It has ivermectin, Z-Pak, amoxicillin, and six other prescription medications at your fingertips thanks to the wellness company's medical emergency kit.
You can tackle anything severe that your body comes across without it ruining your holiday plans.
...
...
which if you're in Canada where the kits are not available, unfortunately, you want to stay the hell out of the ER system in Canada.
The kit cuts through the red tape by allowing you to take control of your health versus being reactive and inconvenienced during precious family time.
You don't need a gatekeeper because their medical board created a guidebook that outlines the most common...
Illments, ailments, UTIs, strep throat, bacterial infections, respiratory illness, and more.
All it takes is filling out a digital intake form and your kit arrives to your door in one to two weeks.
Travel with peace of mind this holiday season.
Order it now by heading over to TWC.health forward slash Viva.
Promo code Viva gets you 30 bucks off and free shipping.
USA residents only.
TWC, the wellness company,.health forward slash Viva.
The promo code gets you 30 bucks off and free shipping.
Okay, let's see what's going on in the chat before Barnes gets in here.
We've got Deadly Little Jess who has joined and welcome to the community.
We got over on Commitube, Joe Dunnigan Jr.
I remember your name, Joe.
Merry Christmas to you and your family.
Same to you.
Is there a Bitcoin billionaire?
Viva, is there a Bitcoin billionaire?
I don't know yet.
I'm playing around with a little Dogecoin because I do have faith.
That something miraculous might happen.
I know it's not the Bitcoin, but you've got to have not a little skin in the game to make it more fun, but it does make it a little more fun.
Over on vivabarneslaw.locals.com, we are looking good.
Selling all this health and drinking energy drinks daily, says BFF of DM.
This is, I'm not trying to sell this because this is not a sponsor at all, OUYA.
It's got five calories and the ingredients are organic gyoza infusion, water and gyoza, organic erythritol, whatever that is, organic lemon juice, concentrate and organic natural flavors, and 90 milligrams of caffeine.
I'm trying to keep it healthy, even with the energy drinks.
Let me see what's going on here.
A little intro video.
I'm reluctant to play it because 60 Minutes are copyright prostitutes in that they just claim people's content for playing newsworthy segments.
We'll talk a bit about something tangentially related, but 60 Minutes is exploring the strict gun control laws in Mexico, and this is what they had to say about it.
Like the U.S., Mexico's constitution grants citizens the right to bear arms.
But unlike the U.S., that right comes with a long list of restrictions.
There's only one gun store in Mexico.
That right comes with a long list of restrictions, also known as no longer a right.
Sorry, sorry.
Just have to highlight that.
In the middle of a heavily guarded military base in Mexico City.
We were allowed in.
But before customers can enter, they have to show proof they've passed psychological tests, drug screens, and extensive background checks.
The store sells about a thousand guns a month.
Mostly shotguns, small caliber rifles, and handguns.
What civilians can't buy here are the weapons the cartel favors.
Those are not legally sold anywhere in Mexico.
Cartel's favorite weapons are weapons of war.
Belt feds,.50 caliber rifles, guns that you can shoot from a mile away.
The more expensive, the more powerful, the sexier they think they are.
It's a trophy.
It is a trophy.
It's a trophy.
I posted some highlights.
Despite the strict gun laws in Mexico, the gun violence statistics are absolutely through the roof.
Let me pull it up just because we all know it.
It's not anything rocket science.
And then the question becomes, well, it's not the guns.
It's the guns, but it's not the gun laws because it's the corruption when it's not the gun laws themselves doing what they're purported to supposed to be able to do.
Check this out here.
It is AI from the AI summary, but it's actually just unbelievable.
From 2015 to 2022, there were 188,397 firearm-related deaths in Mexico.
That might include suicide, so the one you want to pay attention to is homicide rate.
The homicide rate increased from 10% to 100,000 in 2015 to 16.8% per 100.
That's a lot, by the way.
I think, like, you take some very violent cities in America, and they're, like, between 5 and 7 per 100,000.
Firearm homicides by gender.
The proportion of male homicides committed with firearm increased from 60 to 71 percent.
That is very interesting because that means I thought it would have been higher.
But maybe there's a reason why women with firearms are committing acts of violence.
The bottom line, however, the obvious, to state the obvious, is on the one hand, if you have to go through a series of restrictions, or at least there are a series of restrictions on your constitutional right, it's no longer a right.
And if Mexico has shown one thing, it's that the strict of the gun law does not correlate to less gun violence.
And then people say, OK, fine.
That's because there's corruption as well, because that narrative, that explanation will allow you to then still want to implement.
Strict gun control in America, notwithstanding the constitutional right of the Second Amendment, and then skirt around the fact that stricter gun laws, as we see in Canada, not only does not correlate to less gun violence, but in fact, what you end up seeing is what you see in Canada.
As the gun laws get stricter and stricter over the last 10 years, gun violence has gone up and up.
All right.
What do we got here from Nils underscore Berlin?
Hello, Viva.
I would love to catch my favorite podcast on Spotify.
Any chance that will happen?
Every episode now should be on Spotify.
I fixed the problem a couple of weeks ago.
So, Nils, check it out now and do tell me if you don't see it on Spotify because it should be on Spotify.
Now, hold on.
While we get Barnes in the house, we got...
How do I bring this one up here?
This is a big super chat.
Hold on a second.
It is from Meredith Mark.
Oh, Mark.
Viva, you should interview A.V. to the seventh power, co-host of the lead attorney.
She's great.
I will screen grab that.
Mark Elechka.
And absolutely, absolutely.
Thank you very much for that.
And let me see where Barnes is.
Hold on a second.
Take this out of here.
I see Barnes in the backdrop, but he's coming in.
And let's go see what's going on on the rumble side of things over here.
How do lawyers not understand the Constitution, says Normandy 4. I'm not sure who the person is talking to.
Then we got then...
Okay, am I getting involved?
A polite society will be a safe society with guns.
Give guns to gang, and what do you get?
I can tell you what you get.
We're seeing it in Canada.
Robert, why are you on the left?
Hold on a second.
There we go.
I feel very discombobulated.
Okay, sir.
I am no scientist, but that's a blue screen or a green screen behind you.
Oh no, it's a real screen.
Can you hear me okay?
Yeah, you look beautiful.
I seriously thought that was like the Christmas green screen.
Sir, how are you doing?
Good, good.
Up in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, my sister Martha lives up here.
So here with my sister Ellen and a bunch of nieces and nephews for the Barnes family Christmas.
Amazing. Let me bring this up here.
I just saw a chat in our locals community and I can't bring it up now for some reason.
Oh yeah.
I made about $15,000 betting the election thanks to Barnes.
Here's a little to help you pay the bills.
We may or may not get into it tonight because I've been pinging Barnes like, hey Barnes, what do you think the margins are going to be on Cash Patel and the votes on the Hegseth?
Should I put a little 800 bucks on a bet on Predictive?
Sports Picks is where you're going to get to it when you get to it.
Robert, again, look, it wasn't on the menu, but we're going to get to it.
Do you want to outline the menu of what we have on for the day?
Absolutely. In this special holiday edition of VivaBarnesLaw.Logos.com, whether it's Hanukkah or Christmas or wherever you may be.
We've got the Trump New York case.
Judge Mershon is still a Grinch when it comes to the matters of the law.
We've got Bud.
Speaking of another would-be Grinch.
A big fanny has been removed from the Georgia case and her entire office, which spells the doom of that case, and will leave New York as the last one standing.
We have the Safe Bet Act, which is not so safe that some greedy congressmen are trying to propose.
We've got the National Communist Against Athletes, otherwise known as the NCAA, being sued by the good Attorney General Ken Paxton, who one of his top aides is being promoted to run all legal office policy for the Justice Department as a Trump nationalist.
We'll discuss some of those other Trump nominees and what their status may be in the latest smear campaign by the deep state apparatus against the one and only Congressman Matt Gaetz.
We've got January 6th class action being discussed by Jack Posovic and Owen Troyer.
Owen Troyer had to correct the record with one of these fake libertarians online.
Who, like Chip Roy, celebrated some of the January 6th cases.
And we'll discuss, I have personal professional experience with dear Chip Roy and why I'm not such a fan like President Trump.
We'll get to the Robert Francis Kennedy as he is being considered for a nomination of the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
And the smear merchants and the big pharma boys are out and about with the deep state apparatus and the Kennedy haters trying to find ways to derail.
And one of the ways they're trying to derail is the...
Many methods and mechanisms of libel that are the subject of a lawsuit in Maine, which apparently some reporters are not paying enough attention to because they're repeating and reiterating some of those lies and libels against Robert Kennedy, including blaming him for things like the Samoan measles outbreak, which is one of the more insane libels of anybody out there.
Uh, we've got a win.
One of the top voted topics at Viva Barnes law, that locals.com, uh, was the, uh, is this abusive discovery in federal court, uh, In this case, concerning vaccine mandate cases and third parties by a federal judge who imagines herself, I think, for a higher bench.
She never should have been put on the federal bench.
Unfortunately, she was one of Trump's weaker nominees.
But how this is happening routinely, regularly, with a disturbing basis.
We've got the Airbnb scams, while yours truly is considering as one of the founding members of Airbnb.
A class-action lawsuit against Airbnb for how they are scamming guests with fake reviews by owners and by removing honest reviews of bad property owners.
I was the recent victim of it myself, hence the inspiration for it.
But Airbnb is deeply complicit in it, in its ongoing corrupt operation of many of these so-called tech companies trying to operate the way they are, just like Uber.
We've got the FDA's latest attack on raw milk on the eve of various appointees by President Trump to replace that policy, including trying to blame it with the bird flu.
It's the new pandemic pretext to take away our constitutional rights and liberties, including our right to decide our own food and for farmers to make that food available to us.
Luigi Mangioni, the alleged assassin of the UnitedHealth CEO.
There's more developments on that front as he's now been extradited to New York.
And in honor of the Christmas holiday, for all you folks out there, when is Santa Claus a trespasser?
And will the crazy government prosecutor someplace, if in case some gifts don't show up for your kids, you can tell them that maybe the Justice Department illegally seized him under the Biden administration.
Is he a trespasser?
Why maybe he's not.
So that's the topics of this special holiday edition of evobarneslaw.locals.com.
Robert, we'll start with the one which is sort of the breaking news of the day.
It's going to segue into everything after that.
The Matt Gaetz smear is a very complex situation because it would seem that some of the allegations might be true.
It would appear that this has been looked into by a Biden Department of Justice and the decision was not to charge...
For any of the stuff that is now being released in the ethics report, I had on Mel, I don't know what her last name is, I'm not sure if I'm supposed to know it, Village Crazy Lady.
And I was actually, it's very funny, I went back to our episode, it was three and a half years ago.
Just remind me, that's her acronym, you're not referring to her.
Oh no, no, sorry, that is her.
It's her Twitter handle, Village Crazy Lady, without the A. And then I went back to our episode three and a half years ago, talking about the extortion scheme against Matt Gaetz.
And without belaboring the point, I'm not going to defend, you know, I say, unfortunately, Matt might have made it very easy for some of these smears to come back up, because I don't know.
You pay for, you know, sex even, or you do things that look like you're paying for sex, and you engage in activity of drug consumption and sexual promiscuity.
As a member of Congress, you're asking for trouble whether or not it's illegal.
This Ethics Committee report...
Those are common benefits of being affiliated and associated with the deep state.
Correct. And Barnes said if you're on the bad end of the deep state, because what is extracurricular entertainment can quickly become blackmail material if you fall on the ice, which is why keep your schmeckle in your pants and don't mess around.
You'll be a lot happier for it.
Gates, he's engaged in stuff.
He's a young man engaged in stuff with other young women.
And what we believe is the deep state...
Frame job is that and we went into this with Mel Village Crazy later on Twitter where there was a man who another Florida alleged criminal man although I guess he is an actual criminal I forget his name now who provided a fake legit state driver's license to a woman and then the question is whether or not he did it because they were all using the services of this woman or she was then offering them as an adult on a website where adult women offer their services and The question was whether or not this was basically a honeypot extortion ring to get Matt to do something which would otherwise have
been illegal, but for the fact that this woman allegedly, if it's true, stole identity in order to be an adult for the purposes of what would be otherwise consensual business transactions of a very ill-advised nature.
The Department of Justice never charged Matt Gaetz with anything.
How is this ethics committee conducting a further review?
After this, how are they releasing it now?
I mean, it was going to get released regardless.
Matt sued to try to have the release tamped down upon and lost.
What are they even doing this ethics report investigation for?
Maybe it's a stupid question.
If they can't charge him or they didn't charge him, they can have ethics sanctions.
What is the purpose of it?
What is going on here?
Because I still think it smells like extortion, although Matt should not have allowed this to happen by engaging in that behavior.
Yeah, I mean, it's entirely, he was, if anybody that is a critic or skeptic of establishment power, including especially critics of the deep state, and Matt Gaetz has been one of the most prominent and consistent critics of almost every aspect of deep state abuse of power,
whether that's at the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the Pentagon, whether that's bogus contracts through Congress, whether that's paying off people all around the world, money laundering with Ukraine, he's a critic of the Ukraine war, he's been a critic of certain aspects of He's been one of the Deep State's most principled and prominent critics.
On top of that, it's not a coincidence that this investigation, so-called investigation, commenced after he got Kevin McCarthy removed as the Speaker of the House.
And it was McCarthy's pals that it was personal payback to basically...
I mean, here's the thing.
Under the guise that they are monitoring their own members, they assert legislative power that becomes executive power and judicial power, right?
I mean, here you have a situation where Gates hasn't had a meaningful chance to respond.
He wasn't allowed to have meaningful participation in the process.
It wasn't a transparent process.
It wasn't an unbiased or unprejudiced committee.
You know, control over the House to target dissidents.
Because basically 85-90% of the members of the House, you could find much more damning material concerning.
And in fact, many of them, there are all these secret settlements involving members of the House harassing their own employees.
And none of this has gone public.
And so why is it they're public?
So one, it's an abuse of the power to begin with.
The pretext for the power is that it's their controlling their own legislative members allows them to have executive and adjudicatory power.
I've always had problems with that.
It's the reason why I don't like the entire licensing structure of attorneys, that it's the judicial branch usurping power that belongs in the legislative branch in terms of the rules that should regulate and govern a profession or occupation in law permitting and licensing in general.
And then secondly, the role of the executive branch is to enforce those laws, not the judicial branch.
And what does it allow the judges to do?
It allows them to target dissidents and outsiders.
Try to find all the cases where they publish reports on members of Congress, and you're going to find, nine times out of ten, that the person that they're reprising the report about has been a critic or a dissident from the establishment in some meaningful manner.
The actual scuzz bags and sleaze bags that percolate and pervade the city of Washington, D.C., the District of Corruption in Washington, they never have such reports written about them.
And yet, that is precisely what happens with critics and dissidents.
So I don't have any confidence or trust in the report because of the bias of the participants.
That's why we have a requirement of an impartial grand jury.
That's why we have a requirement of an impartial trial jury.
That's why we have a requirement of an impartial judge, is because we don't want people who have a motive to lie and fabricate evidence and spin things in a certain way to be in control over the adjudicatory process.
I don't trust their enforcement capacities, and they're using them in a conscientious and constitutional manner.
If you're someone like Gates, the goal is to hurt him politically.
There are limits on what he can do in terms of remedy legally, but that's the true nature of this.
So if the allegations ever had any merit in him, the Biden administration would have indicted him and prosecuted him, guaranteed.
They leaked the facts of the underlying indictment or potential criminal investigation and potential indictment months ago, years ago.
And the problem is there was no basis.
There must be such overwhelming evidence in favor of Matt Gaetz for the Justice Department to not prosecute him, given they hated him.
Or it would actually expose further criminality of other players if indeed it was not just a honeypot.
But an actual criminal setup of extortion by way of providing falsified documents in order to entrap someone like Matt Gaetz.
And you could have both.
But they know, like in the case of indictment, once the indictment's published, how often does the other information ever come out?
But Matt Gaetz is someone who's financially independent, so he doesn't need to cash in on his congressional cachet, like so many of them do.
He's one of the few non-corrupt members of Congress.
And thus, it's no surprise to be targeted.
I wouldn't believe any of the scurrilous, scandalous, factual allegations against them.
I find them all of a dubious character because, again, if there was credibility to them, a Biden Justice Department showed no limitation in prosecuting such people, even if it exposed them to potential legal or political risk on the backside.
I think it's our bonus grounds.
You make a good point when I brought up just that article talking about how much millions of dollars has been paid out by way of settlements for sexual misconduct.
If they're doing an ethics report investigation...
By members of Congress, they've hidden all of it.
And here you have something that's not an employee issue.
It is purely personal private conduct.
And they're just trying to smear.
I mean, while the Speaker of the House, former Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has been exposed by real clear investigations.
To have borrowed huge amounts of money under the COVID protection, the COVID PPP program, and used it to basically illicitly launder taxpayer funds for personal self-enrichment.
I mean, most members of Congress have gotten fabulously wealthy, while members of Congress, with no apparent source of that income, beyond insider dealing and frankly bribes.
So, I mean, that's what's going on in these cases.
I mean, you can boost or sink a stock as you wish.
Nancy Pelosi has the most extraordinary track record of any public stock trader.
She makes Michael Burry look like small potatoes.
So the idea of these criminals, accusing the one guy, exposing them as criminals of the bad act, is just preposterous, to be honest.
So I wouldn't believe any of the allegations or accusations against Gates.
It shows another problem in our system of justice.
And it sort of corresponds to maybe what we'll transition into.
It's like the January 6th Select Committee that was formed in violation of Congress's own rules, and in my view, the Constitution's own constraints.
Well, even before we do that, I'm not going to put one person on blast in particular, but I guess I will.
Because the attack on Matt Gaetz and what I'm noticing is it's almost incidental to Matt Gaetz now because he's withdrawn his name.
It serves no other purpose other than going after Trump tangentially.
and now you allow people on Twitter to say the follow.
Trump knew all about Matt Gaetz and still picked him.
Oh my goodness, let that sink in.
And you see that that's the new talking point.
The attack on Gates is only an indirect way to attack Trump for having picked him, knowing all these alleged, you know, whatever they want to detail in that ethics report, which was already known information based upon which there was no prosecution or charges laid Only based on an entire process that's secretive, furtive.
With biased participants at every level.
The other goal is two other goals.
The other is to try to continue to preclude Gates from having a political future.
Gates is considering a bid for the Senate seat that's opened up in Florida.
DeSantis, being the idiot that he is, has decided to pass over Laura Trump.
DeSantis is politically as daft as they come.
The guy is just dull.
I mean, how do you not know that that's not a smart move?
Trump's just got elected president.
A good way to get yourself into good graces back into the Trump world and the Trump broader public would be put Laura Trump in the Senate.
She made a great senator from Florida, though I wanted her to run it from North Carolina anyway, where she also has residency.
But instead, he passes her over for a DeSantis loyalist.
I mean, he convinced himself he was going to be Secretary of Defense.
Never going to happen, Ronnie.
The guy is just amazing.
So you have someone like Gates, who is willing to challenge the system, challenge the establishment consistently.
And that's the second message.
So the second message is to discourage...
I'm sorry, that's the third message.
One, attack Trump.
Two, attack Matt Gates to destroy his political future.
And third, discourage anyone else from doing it.
Look what happened to Madison Cawthorn, who started talking about...
Them running extortion, blackmail, and bribery reigns through orgies and wild parties in D.C. What happened?
It was Republicans in North Carolina, in that North Carolina hierarchy, the same group, by the way, that took out the governor, right, on personal conduct.
They know there's enough Republicans that will buy hook, line, and sinker, any personal accusation or allegation against somebody, that it will be enough to sink them when it should be frivolous.
You know, Trump was able to overcome all that nonsense.
Because he built deep loyalty before those accusations and allegations came.
But it's similar to what happened to Trump.
It's to send a message to everybody else.
Hey, if you come in here, as Chuck Schumer said, if Trump keeps challenging the intelligence community, they have six ways to Sunday to come back.
He publicly stated that on national television.
This is the same message that they're trying to send.
If you try to question the CIA, if you question the NSA...
If you question the director of national intelligence, if you question U.S. trade hierarchical policy, even, if you question anything, it's not a coincidence, Matt Gaetz, one of the first and foremost supporters of Julian Assange, one of the first and foremost supporters of Edward Snowden, one of the biggest antitrust advocates that is out there.
If you look at an institution of influence that has been corrupted, Matt Gaetz has been a critic of it over the last half decade.
That's why they are releasing this report.
That's the motivation of it.
That's the inspiration of it.
It's an embarrassment for everybody on that so-called ethics committee that shouldn't even exist.
Congress with an ethics committee?
Come on.
So that's all that is.
One big, fat scam, just like the January 6th Select Committee, which may find itself now in the crosshairs of both class action civil suits and its own criminal DOJ investigation because of all the illicit conduct.
Because that was...
Also, ask yourself this.
What about the timing?
Is it a coincidence the timing of this report came out right after the report documenting how the January 6th committee routinely and regularly flagrantly violated people's rights?
Was it to help bury this report?
It actually came after, I guess, three reports.
Now, it's sort of late after the subcommittee report on the COVID pandemic, but then you had the Jan 6th, and then you had the weaponization of the federal government.
Which is too long for anybody to read.
I just want to bring this one up because I'm going to make a joke about this guy.
Barnes is ashamed of the law, says someone whose name is Senator McHardcox.
Sorry, I thought that was funny, but that has to be a troll because otherwise you're just an idiot.
The Jan 6th.
Okay, so how many of these select subcommittees are going on?
Like, I didn't know that they had this.
COVID subcommittee going on for over a year.
I know that they had the Jan 6 committee.
I think I knew about the weaponization of the federal government committee, but I went through that Jan 6 report.
Hold on, I talked about it last week.
I'm going crazy with all these reports.
The findings of that report confirm it's an interim report, so it's not yet final.
It confirms what everybody thought about that January 6th committee, that it was unlawfully formed, which is no saving grace now for Bannon, who's already served this time, notwithstanding appealing the contempt of Congress or congressional subpoena for a subpoena that was issued by an unlawfully formed committee.
It confirms everything we know but a potential egregious criminality by the daughter of the war whore, war whore herself, Liz Cheney.
You have to explain this to us.
She is an attorney, Liz Cheney, bound by the Code of Ethics, but she's not acting as an attorney when she's on the committee, so maybe she's allowed directly communicating with someone who she knows to be represented by counsel.
She's alleged to have done things which are backhanded, to put it mildly, but potentially criminal.
What is your take on the findings of that interim report about the January 6th committee itself?
Well, it predicated both Owen Schroer and Jack Posobiec contemplating a class action suit on behalf of anyone and everyone who had been victimized by the January 6th committee because now they have more evidentiary support for such claims.
Based on this interim report issued by the select subcommittee on government weaponization and part of the House Committee on governmental oversight in general.
And it was what we talked about at the time, which was everything about this committee was problematic.
But what the report concluded.
So that binds not just lawyers, but any governmental prosecutorial enforcement act.
And in my view, what the committee was doing, since they were subjecting people to quasi-criminal investigations, criminal referral, criminal exposure, criminal risk.
That they were bound by those constrictions and appeared to acknowledge the same and went to great lengths to mask and hide that, which included illicit...
Basically, Liz Cheney conspired with witnesses to suborn perjury and submit perjured testimony to Congress so that they could publish lies and libels to the world.
And they cost people unnecessary attorney's fees and costs.
So, for example, the former attorney that was the target of this, He has already filed not only ethics complaints on behalf of America First Legal, or through America First Legal, I should say, concerning Liz Cheney to the various state bars that she's a member of, which apparently includes the District of Columbia.
But he's also brought a Federal Tort Claims Act suit against all the members of that committee.
And he brought suits against Andrew Weissman and others for conspiring with that committee to violate his rights.
So the question is, when can Congress be sued?
It's under the Federal Tort Claims Act, the Congress passed laws waiving their sovereign immunity, which is itself a made-up doctrine.
But putting that aside, Congress had purchased for itself, through the corrupt courts, immunity for their bad acts and their constitutional violations.
The Federal Tort Claims Act provides for some degree of remedy when a Any federal employee does something in the scope and course of their duties that causes you harm or causes your property harm to your property, but you have to get through many loopholes and obstacles that you've got to jump over and get around to get there.
It's very tricky to be able to sue Congress.
I have done so myself, sometimes successfully, sometimes not, because there is an extraordinary amount of judicial animus and hostility.
To being able to sue the government.
And so in this context, the question is who can sue the January 6th committee.
Well, you would need to allege a specific tort.
What the Federal Tort Claims Act starts out with is if somebody could be sued if they did this in a capacity as a private business, then they can be sued even though they're a government employee, as long as no other immunity applies.
So, for example, Congress put in the law, they exempted themselves from the defamation or libel being one of the claims you could bring under the Federal Court Claims Act.
They're not allowed to bring those claims.
Those will have sovereignty immunity attacks.
Unless, of course, you're deprived.
I mean, the degree of hypocrisy and duplicity by the courts and the government in these cases is embarrassingly bad to any conscientiousness.
individual with any degree of awareness of what the law actually is in the Constitution and care about the Constitution in any respect.
But the big immunity you have to get by here is usually discretionary function view.
If you talk about a crime that was committed, would deprivation of rights under color of law not be the go-to in terms of what the committee could be accused of?
I don't know how that statute is.
Yeah, guess who that statute doesn't apply to?
Federal employees?
Not federal employees.
Nobody in the federal government.
Federal civil rights laws only apply to non-federal people.
Isn't that great?
So the federal employment laws, federal civil rights laws, only apply to state actors or certain identified private actors, but does not apply to federal employees.
Or federal actors.
So you might be able to bring a civil rights suit against them on grounds they were not acting in their capacity as federal employees.
So good luck.
Yeah, good luck, basically.
Good luck with that.
It's tricky.
It's treacherous.
But I'm for them pursuing it just to at least see what happens.
So like Ashley Babbitt's lawsuit against Capitol Police, who's a separate Jake Lang has a lawsuit against the Capitol Police.
There's other class action lawsuits against the Capitol Police related to January 6th and the maltreatment that day.
Those are brought pursuits to the FDCA.
And then the question is, do they have discretionary function immunity?
And discretionary function immunity asks two questions.
One, was the act an act that was like a social, economic, political decision that was vested in that official to have the power to make?
If that's the case, then they go to the second question, which is, is this act the kind of act Congress intended to immunize?
And of note, federal courts have generally said a policy decision is a discretionary act that often enjoys discretionary act immunity.
Implementing that policy generally is not subject to the discretionary function immunity exception.
So here, for example, this wasn't a policy decision.
So what you would want to segregate out is when the J-6 committee made...
Certain decisions that could be subject to discretionary function immunity, that would be tough to bring under the FDCA.
Again, unless you bring the action that it's all ultra-virus because they were not an appropriately authorized committee, which the courts try to evade like they have so far by saying they're not going to second-guess what Congress is doing.
They pretend that that's discretionary function immunity when Congress is breaking its own rules.
But in fact, what the discretionary function of immunity says is that the rule creation is immune.
The rule enforcement is not.
That a policy decision is a discretionary decision.
The implementation of that policy is not a discretionary decision.
So in my view, there is a credible means to sue, but they need to be real creative and real smart about it, unless it just becomes a political stunt.
You know, if you would, and even if you're up against it, even if you know the odds are against you, even if you know.
I think there's good law to be made or at least to expose to the broader public.
Serious need for legislative reform because a conscientious Congress should subject Congress to the same law as everyone else.
Can't go around saying we can beat up on President Trump because nobody's above the law when every member of Congress is above the law because they passed the law making themselves above the law in terms of the constitutional principles that apply to everyone else and the common tort principles that apply to everybody else that Congress has exempted and excluded itself routinely and regularly from.
So we'll see how that goes.
In terms of that, one thing I would say, if you see some guy calling himself a libertarian, and he's celebrating the politically motivated, speech-directed, selectively prosecuted federal government's multiple cases that they brought against Owen Troyer that they didn't bring against anyone else that was similarly situated,
that in their own sentencing memorandum said his speech was why they wanted him sentenced to prison, that I brought his case before the Supreme Court of the United States, which was out and didn't take it, but identified exactly how You got these fake libertarians running around saying that, oh, you know, that was a fair case brought against Owen and it had nothing to do with the speech.
It's like, you know, quit lying and libeling Owen Troyer on top of everything else some of these people have done.
They say they're big libertarians.
They're kind of like...
I'm a real fiscal conservative congressman from Texas who really believes in integrity.
But when foreign governments come begging for cash, I'm the first one to write checks from the U.S. Treasury named Chip Roy in Texas.
Before we get there, let me actually just bring this up so people can know what we're talking about.
This was one of the text messages, not between Liz Cheney herself, but between Alyssa Farah, a journalist at CNN, back-channeling for correspondence with Liz Cheney with a witness they knew to be represented by...
So, Hutchison, and it's Hutchison saying, oh, who lied under oath, by the way.
Yeah, exactly.
They're coordinating and conspiring to deprive the civil rights of President Trump by having a witness lie and perjure herself before the committee so they could repeat that to the world.
But the only way they could effectively coordinate that was to circumvent her counsel, who was representing her at the time, so they chose signal and media cutouts.
To be the method, mechanism, and means of communication with these perjured witnesses.
These witnesses who apparently were suborned in their perjury by Liz Cheney.
And suborned as in they had to say...
She belongs in prison, just like right next to her dad.
They can give them names.
Liz Cheney.
Well, Hutchinson too.
But Liz Cheney and her dad belong in neighboring jail cells.
Maybe put Fauci in there.
And put Soros in there, and we'd have a righteous wing of injustice that would be behind bars.
And just to highlight it, because Hutchison didn't offer some information that she allegedly remembered afterwards, and they had to come up with, why didn't you offer this information, which was prejudicial in the first two interviews.
And then she lied and said her...
Basically, they conspired with her to say that...
Her lawyer told her not to say it, and then they tried to disbar her lawyer for allegedly not representing her interests properly, where behind these back channels, Hutchison was saying, no, my lawyer was representing my interests and was representing me well.
And they, in addition to lying, suborning perjury, then tried to disbar her lawyer.
I think his name was Passentino.
Yeah, that's it.
Criminals through and through.
Criminals through and through.
That's exactly what's going on.
And, you know, speaking of, you know, quasi criminals.
In terms of their mindset, I was like many conservative-oriented folks out there, thought Chip Roy gave great speeches and thought he was a great advocate and congressman.
One of the things that exposed the fact that he was not was how buddy-buddy he was with Liz Cheney, his prominent supporter of Liz Cheney.
He's one of the Bush-butt boys from Texas.
That's the real backstory of how he got into positions of power.
He gives these...
Righteous speeches denouncing the debt and excessive government spending and all the rest.
You don't realize what a fake and a phony and a fraudy is.
And the reason why Trump is pointing him out above others, because there were 37 other people that didn't go along either with the continuing resolution, because there could be sincere, conscientious objections to that.
I'm not ruling that out at all.
There's plenty of great Thomas Massey, other great congressmen on that list.
The reason why President Trump pointed out Congressman Chip Roy.
It's because those of us who have professionally experienced Chip Roy know what a fraud he is.
So let me give you my personal experience with Chip Roy, which came in the 2020 election.
Robert, give me 30 seconds.
While you do that, I'm going to listen on my phone.
I have to pee.
I'm sorry.
I should have had all that drink before.
It was non-alcoholic, but I had vitamin C and an energy drink.
Yeah, don't worry.
So the real history of Chip Roy, unfortunately, is his background is as he got into political power through connections to the Bush family political group in Texas.
This is why Chip Roy was one of the most prominent members of Congress in supporting the bogus impeachment of Ken Paxton, one of our best attorney generals in the history of the state of Texas and in the history of the United States.
So my personal experience with Chip Roy is in 2020, after being retained by President Trump, to come down and investigate, inquire into the Georgia election and see whether it was done in a constitutionally consistent manner, which again, what does that mean?
It means the Constitution delegates to the legislature of each state the power to determine how the electors for the Electoral College to the presidency will be chosen.
They get to set the rules.
If there are any rules set that were not set by the legislature of the state, then arguably they are unconstitutional depending on the circumstances.
So if you have governors doing their own rules, you have the executive branches of states doing their own rules, judicial officials, prosecutorial officials, others, election officials doing their own rules, or contravening the rules set by the state, that likely makes the election unconstitutional in most instances.
There can be excuses and justifications for it.
Namely, when one constitutional provision competes with another, like, say, the 14th Amendment right to due process of law, right not to have your privileges as a citizen taken away under other provisions of the Constitution.
These provisions can work together to make an election constitutional, even when state election rules are not being set by the legislature.
But so I went down to Georgia, and then one of the congressmen that promised to help President Trump, that was really, he was right there on the ground, right first one there, in the room, was Congressman Chip Roy.
And I was like, oh, this is good.
He's got some stature.
He's got some prominence.
He gives these great speeches denouncing Congress.
I didn't know the full story of Chip Roy.
I would learn it.
But then at the time, I thought, oh, he's going to be our ally.
He's going to be our pal.
I now suspect he was kind of a spy against President Trump all along, and I'll tell you what.
So as we got into the heat of the moment, when we needed people like Congressman Roy to go public, to say the governor of Georgia, who he had political ties to, needed to make a statement, needed to do an investigation, and all we were asking, to be clear, Was simply that the state election laws be enforced.
In particular, in this instance, it was that signature matches actually be done.
And that was the way in which they made sure there was a massive flood of votes and ballots that came in through the mail in Georgia.
Unprecedented. By the way, those votes disappeared in 2024.
Maybe because they were never real to begin with.
Some people might say in 2020.
And we had independent evidence.
That there were anomalies that couldn't be explained, namely like neighboring nursing homes.
One had 90, 95% turnout.
The one down the street had 60% turnout, which was more normal.
Apartment complexes of similar comparable demographics.
One has huge turnout.
One has regular turnout.
Certain precincts in certain areas that had comparable demographics.
One suddenly trended towards Biden.
The other didn't.
So I was like, there are all these anomalies all over the place.
We were able to document them with evidence.
We were able to build.
In fact, the biggest election contest ever brought was in Georgia, the only one brought by President Trump, 430-plus pages.
You can find it at viabobarneslaw.locals.com as part of the Barnes Law School program, which is going to be dramatically expanding in the new year, to basically give you a law school crash course right there at viabobarneslaw.locals.com over this coming year.
Recent events have inspired me to make sure I get all that stuff done quicker rather than later.
In case I get taken on another involuntary trip to other places I don't want to be.
So in that context, I thought, you know, this is when we need Roy.
Guess what happened to Chip Roy?
Disappeared. Disappeared.
Vanished from Georgia.
Vanished from the public.
Wouldn't talk about it at all.
I was like, what the heck happened?
Then a few weeks later, Chip Roy comes up and he says, any congressman who votes against certification, he challenges.
He wanted challenges brought.
If there was going to be any challenge in any state to the president's election, he wanted challenges brought to the Republican members of the House that got elected to say they shouldn't be allowed to be seated because now there's a challenge to that state to whether the electoral votes for the president were correct.
He went further.
He praised Mike Pence as a great hero for refusing to do his duties in supervising the Senate in the context of the presidential election.
But old Chip went a little bit further.
He denounced the people of January 6th and supported the January 6th committee, supported and defended Liz Cheney's criminal actions in that committee, supported the attacks on the members, the people involved in J6, and was an apologist for many of the worst conduct in J6.
So you have to ask, what was he doing in Georgia then?
Why did he say nothing?
Of that to me or anybody there.
If he was a conscientious congressman like he pretends to be, then he would have raised questions.
And he said, look, I think this is the limit of Congress's job.
I think this is the limit of an election challenge.
I don't believe in that.
I have no problem with somebody questioning that there.
He didn't.
He pretended to be on our side so that he could get inside information he would then use against the president in a deceptive and dishonorable way in Congress.
This guy says, oh, I just want to.
Protect against the budget.
But when the defense industry calls, Chip Roy drops to his knees and says, spend what you want, baby.
So that's why President Trump is targeting him.
Don't believe the big speeches Chip Roy likes to give, which are for show, not substance.
He's an untrustworthy, unreliable, dishonest...
Dishonorable member of Congress, in my experience.
And he was on with Steve Dace and some other people saying, well, if anybody wants to say that to me, they better come and say it to my face.
Well, Chippy boy, I'm happy to say it to your face anytime, anywhere, anyplace.
President Trump exposed you for the fraud you are.
But you know what happens when Chip gets fired by the voters in two years?
He'll cash in in Washington, D.C. with all those lobbyists he pretended to dislike and not want to be a part of.
So he can get his real paycheck and payday.
Robert, I'll read a rumble rant that's on point.
Barnes, you sound great, full of piss and vinegar.
And I have a joke about the piss part of that.
Let me read a couple of these here.
My understanding, under federal employment law, you can sue your manager supervisor for violating your rights under cover of corporate acts.
Could this be expanded to include Congress?
Merry Christmas.
It's if it's subject to the FTC.
So the Federal Tort Claims Act has a, both there are substantive limitations on who can be sued and when they can go forward, and there are procedural limitations.
You have to go through all this administrative crap before you can even file a suit.
Remember how long it took for Ashley Babbitt to be able to file a suit, right?
She had to go through all that administrative crap to be able to finally file a suit.
And now what's coming out about the man who executed her, he had a huge file on him that said he was a high-risk individual, just in general.
That he didn't know how to follow rules, didn't know how to follow procedures, was way too gung-ho, was a trigger-happy cop.
But because he was on the right side of politics, he was covered up for.
A lot of people connected to Capitol.
The truth about J6 should finally come out in this new congressional terminal, see if it is fully exposed.
The select committee has been exposed.
What has not been exposed is the corruption in the D.C. Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney's Office there.
What has not been exposed is the coordination with Norm Eisen and other people to deprive January 6th defendants of their constitutional rights and liberties.
But of course, also what has not been exposed is the degree of complicity and culpable corruption by the federal judges themselves in the District of Columbia who went to great lengths to cover up the corruption and fraud concerning those cases.
It's funny, as you say it, and I don't know if you saw, you might have had better things to watch a week ago.
I had on...
This guy named Pastor Ben, Benjamin P. Dixon.
He's talking about MAGA looking, MAGA explaining away white people killing black people in relation to Jordan Neely, which we'll get to in a second.
But now, you know, when you describe January 6th, and I don't see the world this way, but now that we put the pieces together, January 6th, you had a black man killing a white woman, point blank shooting her in the upper torso neck.
You had Roseanne Boyland.
An unarmed person.
At the time, I remember saying nobody knows what's in a backpack, but I now know all of the details of this.
Cops don't get to go, I'm like, sure!
Bam! That's not how the law works, thankfully.
I forget his name, Bird.
I forget what his first name is.
It's not Larry.
Bird killing Ashley Babbitt.
You have Roseanne Boylan getting beaten and stomped, trampled by the police.
At the hands of...
Ostensibly a corrupt, incompetent Yogananda Pittman, who also happens to be a black woman in this.
It's an amazing thing where the racial element of the January 6 murders, I guess I should call them homicides, get totally ignored.
Had it been inverted, it would have led to a summer of riots like you've never seen before.
And they continue to lie about that.
They continue to blame January 6 defendants for homicide when they caused no defendants, when they didn't cause any homicide.
Some sides are caused by Capitol Police.
But you have to ask yourself, why do we have Capitol Police?
Shouldn't the Capitol have to rely on the executive branch for executive actions?
We should.
What Daniel 26 Select Committee reminded us is that Congress abuses that power too easily and too often, that they should not have executive power, that they should not have judicial power.
There's a reason they weren't given it in the Constitution, and the court's got to start asserting their role to prevent.
This from reoccurring and repeating, because we saw what happened with the January 6th Select Committee.
We saw how abusive that power can be.
And we need to restore balance to our constitutional balance of powers, which has been eviscerated by the January 6th Committee's behavior.
And the individuals who engaged in criminal conduct need to be held criminally liable for that conduct.
And we'll see.
I mean, one promising indicator.
is one of the most important and significant nominees of the Trump administration.
Cash Patel.
Well, Cash Patel is part one, but the second part is Harmeet Dillard.
Harmeet Dillard has been nominated to be part of the Justice Department Director Office of Civil Rights.
And that Office of Civil Rights has extraordinary capacity to utilize that for its original intent.
And its original intent was corrupt state judges.
That was the number one target.
Go back and read the legal history.
Corrupt state judges were the primary concern of Congress.
The reason why they went to great lengths to write those laws after the Civil War ended was because they thought state judges would enforce federal law in the South.
They weren't.
They were deliberately conspiring with corrupt law enforcement and corrupt private participants.
People like Norm Eisen in the January 6th context, to weaponize their legal power against their critics and dissidents and outsiders.
The courts were critical to depriving former slaves, but also poor and working class whites who were forming political coalitions with those former slaves from their ability to vote, from their ability to sit on juries, from their ability to sit on grand juries, from their ability to own property, from their ability to perform their labor freely.
All of those violate, and then even further, were complicit in conspiracies of criminal violence against them.
Lynchings, cross-burnings, Klan activity.
Without the support of the state courts, without the support of the state law enforcement apparatus, it never could have happened.
It never could have occurred.
The federal civil rights laws were written to prohibit, preclude, and prevent that from happening in the future.
And yet, who is going to be...
Who is already the nominee for enforcement is Harmeet Dillon, who's done a lot of civil rights work over the last decade.
And I'm very hopeful that she puts into positions of power people around her that meaningfully restore federal civil rights.
Because when we have the president of the United States being routinely and regularly stripped of those federal civil rights by state courts and state employees, corrupt, rogue state courts.
Then we need remedial action to restore the balance of power.
And it relates to one of our top-voted topics tonight, which is the insane order by that hopelessly corrupt judge, Marchand, out of the city of New York.
Robert, when did this order come down?
I thought you were going to talk about the Fannie Willis case.
What's the order coming down from New York?
So, Marchand completely denied all of President Trump's motions.
For mistrial or dismissal by pretending that all of the things the Supreme Court of the United States already said are immune presidential acts from even being discussed in an evidentiary format before a grand jury or trial jury.
He just decided he was going to overrule the Supreme Court of the United States and decide no, no, no, none of that is privileged.
None of that is presidential.
It's always extraordinary what they decide is and isn't within the official scope of duty.
Remember, the same corrupt courts across the country as an institution covered for Elizabeth Warren when she lied and libeled and defamed the Covington kids, covered for then-Congresswoman, future Secretary of the Interior, Halland, when she lied and libeled those kids because they said, we have to have a broad understanding of what the scope and duties of a government official are.
Then Mershon turns around and flips and said, and a lot of these courts have said, Oh, no.
But if you're the President of the United States, talking about things that relate to the presidency of the United States, somehow that's not at all immune.
That's not at all subject to, that's within your presidential duties.
I can't believe I missed this.
I'll read a bit of it.
I mean, I'm going to go read the order afterwards.
Trump launched a vitriolic and factually baseless attack on the New York judge, yada yada, who refused to overturn the conviction on his hush money case that made him the first sitting president to a convicted felony.
The reason why the media likes to say factually baseless is because their buddies and pals on the courts have said, oh, that's just an opinion and nobody could interpret that as a factual statement.
But by definition, it's a factual statement.
In a completely illegal, psychotic order and deeply conflicted, corrupt, biased, and incompetent acting justice, Juan Marchand has completely disrespected the United States Supreme Court in its historic decision.
In a full, what is that word, fulminating broadside, he denounced Marchand, an experienced judge, yada yada.
Marchand... Rejected Trump's application to have last-base conviction delivered by a jury and overturned in a 41-page ruling delivered on Monday.
I guess that's why I missed it.
To those that don't remember, evidence concerning conversations and communications the president had with his staff were included before the grand jury for purpose of an indictment, were included in front of the trial jury for purposes of the trial itself.
And so given that sequence and set of circumstances...
That's exactly what the Supreme Court of the United States last year said is immune.
It says you cannot present this as evidence.
You can't use it, period.
And if it is, that's a constitutional violation.
So I thought Marchand would use this as an opportunity to escape out of accountability for the whole case.
As did I. I think I might have a bad prediction to update now.
He decided to double down, saying none of it was immune.
None of it ever could be immune.
As he overturned the Supreme Court of the United States.
Which, by the way, in case you're wondering, no, he does not have the constitutional power to do.
So it just, I mean, it will get overturned on appeal.
But Mershon belongs in jail.
He and his daughter are corrupt crooks who weaponize their power to enrich themselves and favor their political allies at the expense of the civil rights of the President of the United States.
And if someone like him doesn't end up prosecuted by Harmeet Dillon, God bless Harmeet, she ain't doing her job.
I'm hopeful there's at least a meaningful inquiry and investigation because, I mean, you have a state court judge whose daughter is cashing in on that state court judge's legal decisions and not disqualifying himself from further proceeding and overturning the Supreme Court of the United States.
That's what I need to hammer home here.
I had predicted that the judge was going to vacate the verdict and blame it on the Supreme Court and say, I have no choice in this.
The Supreme Court said there's absolute immunity for acts which are within the core constitutional powers of the president, presumptive immunity for stuff that fits within the ambit, and no immunity for personal acts.
In addition to that, they said evidence that is relating to official acts cannot be...
Even if it's to prosecute personal acts.
And I said, well, the judge can't uphold this verdict, which was based on evidence which included such evidence.
Send it back and have them re-adjuice everything.
And he said, no, I'm not vacating this verdict.
And now what?
So he's going to sentence Trump?
I'm going to overturn the Supreme Court on the law of immunity.
And he just goes about doing so.
But what impact is this going on?
To go forward sentencing the President of the United States.
When is he going to do that?
I don't know when it's scheduled.
It's scheduled at some point.
I don't know whether it's scheduled.
Okay, I'm going to go read that decision.
Once Trump is inaugurated, he'll likely stay the sentencing part of the proceedings until after.
But it's holding over Trump's head.
We'll put you in prison if we dislike you when you're done.
That's why I tell you.
And that's why the governor of New York belongs in jail.
The attorney general of New York belongs in jail.
The DA from Manhattan belongs in jail.
Judge Mershon belongs in jail.
His daughter belongs in jail.
And that has to happen.
Or some version of that has to happen.
Because otherwise, our Constitution will fall apart.
Our Constitutional government will collapse.
Let me bring up a super chat over on Commitube that I noticed earlier.
It was from Jay Mill.
I'll bring it up here if I can do this.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
We truly get to see everything start to course correct next year.
From your mouth to God's ears, Jay.
Speaking of course correction, one of the predictions we got right was the Georgia Court of Appeals.
Oh, yeah.
Well, the New York Court of Appeals might as well, but Marchand's got to get up to the Court of Appeals first.
This one I covered at length last week, but Fannie, I say full vindication because the Court of Appeal came down and basically said, is his name Scott McAfee?
It is Scott McAfee, the judge.
I get mixed up between him and...
He managed to get re-elected after he...
Hey, look, he played good politics.
Knowing the Court of Appeals could use that factual pattern to say she has to be kicked out, but this way he doesn't get blamed for it.
Oh, no.
So he came down with a decision which we said at the time made absolutely zero sense as a matter of fact, coming as relates to the legal conclusions to which he came.
It was internally contradictory.
Within the four corners of the decision, the Court of Appeals comes down and says, nothing of the proposed remedy does anything to resolve the conflict that Judge McAfee noted.
Disqualified Fannie and her whole office.
They did not dismiss the indictment, but as far as I understand, Robert, it's totally illusory.
Nobody's going to pick that up with a 10-foot pole?
They're highly likely to go in and dismiss any new appointed or assigned counsel.
Especially given Trump's election and then winning Georgia in the process.
Because that wasn't supposed to happen in 2024 for this effort to succeed.
So it means they're done.
They're out.
Fannie Willis, in my view, clearly conspired to enrich herself and enrich Nathaniel Wade with a bogus indictment.
It's very similar to the Mershon case.
And consequently, there needs to be comparable remnants.
I mean, in an honest system of justice, Fannie Willis is also in jail next to Judge Mershon.
I mean, because I think what's underappreciated, and this isn't about political retaliation or payback or anything like that, it's about restoration of confidence.
And if we don't, if they face no consequence, you're going to have millions and millions of people around the world who lose confidence in the American judicial process and legal process.
And that's what the court reiterated, said, when you've already been found to have violated the appearance of impropriety, and when it basically pervades your entire case.
There's only one remedy, and the remedy can't be simply forward-looking.
It has to be backward-looking.
You have to look at when, if someone was indicted by someone whose appearance of impropriety you can sincerely and seriously question, you have to at a minimum disqualify them.
Maybe you don't have to dismiss the indictment right away, but you do have to disqualify them from any further proceeding so that somebody that the public can have confidence in knows whether any forward, going forward prosecution...
Is actually credible and legitimate based on facts of law, not political prejudice and personal self-enrichment.
And now, in my view, I would have gone further and dismissed the indictment because I don't think you can have a conflicted prosecutor bring an honest indictment, have any confidence and trust in it.
I don't think the Georgia Court of Appeals doesn't have the cojones for that.
But because they know, practically speaking, they can politically walk away from any accountability because the successor prosecutor is most likely to do that favor for them anyway.
But at least that was a step in the right direction.
So that with the federal cases now being dismissed, with the Georgia case bound to be dismissed, how does the dumbest Jen Ellis look?
You know, God bless you, sweetheart.
You cut a plea deal that makes you confess a bunch of stuff that causes you a bunch of adverse consequences, both politically and professionally.
And it turned out the entire case was bogus and should have been thrown out from the inception.
By contrast, look at David Schaefer.
He took a stand, and he took a stand against it.
He still has a give-send-go that you can use for funding his legal defense because he stayed with it all the way through, contested it all the way through, fought it all the way through, and now is going to see victory all the way through.
So it shows, you know, don't force it so easily when powerful, corrupt people come for your head.
I mentioned a tweet that I saw last week saying Jen, it was a tweet, I have no idea if it's true, saying Jen Ellis is on the verge of a breakdown, because it's true.
Set aside the legal consequences, the political and social consequences have been dire.
And we talked about it at the time, and I still am glad for her.
I mean, credit to, I'll give an example.
You know, one of the great, David Stockman.
He has a great libertarian site you can find now, as he's been increasingly red-pilled over the years.
One of Reagan's top allies and aides was targeted by some corrupt Justice Department officials during the Obama administration.
Several of the people next to him felt such coercive pressure that they pled guilty.
He ultimately proved that there legally could be no crime, so they had to ultimately dismiss all the charges.
But the pled people faced all the bad professional consequences to pleading guilty to something that wasn't a crime they never committed.
So don't roll over.
Don't fold.
Don't go...
Don't... Maybe.
Oh, sorry.
I didn't hear what you said there.
It's easy and tempting at the time.
But it's a seduction that leads to more harmful consequences than helpful ones.
It's what James O'Keefe said.
The biggest mistake of his life was bearing false witness to himself.
Robert, I've got to bring this up because I don't know what this is.
I see these things going crazy here.
Sad Wings Raging is gifting memberships to a number of people now who have been gifting.
I don't know how this works.
I don't know how you pick someone to gift a membership to.
But Sad Wings Raging, thank you.
The community has gotten bigger.
It's amazing.
I've never seen this before.
But it's in there now.
Sad Wings, thank you very much.
Let me see if I can bring up all of these.
Are we still seeing the same screen here?
Let me read through these so I don't fall too far behind.
And it's Barnes, Barnes, Barnes and Frye and Viva Frye.
Sing. Barnes, Barnes, Barnes, and Viva Frye to the Ring of Fire.
Go Habs Go, Merry Christmas.
Love from Denmark says Flea Speech.
TZ Burton says Viva, Happy Hanukkah, Robert.
Merry Christmas.
In 2025, may the Castros welcome back their son, the Wicked Witch, return to the WEF and Jughead enjoy his pension like Scrooge McDuck.
We've got Randy Edward says, My understanding under federal employment law, you can sue your manager.
Okay, I got that one before.
Shofar says Barnes, you sound grateful of piss and vinegar.
I got that one as well.
King of Biltong.
In the House says, need some healthy high-protein snacks?
Biltong is packed with B12, iron, zinc, creatine, and more.
Perfect for carnivore keto diets.
Available at BiltongUSA.com.
Code VIVATEN for 10% off.
And he follows it up with, we will stream on Christmas Day, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Eastern. Shit-talking whilst cooking real food.
We cook interesting things and talk up a storm.
Follow our channel.
Eat at Anton's.
I still can't get over Judge Marchand did that.
I didn't hear that, and now I've got to go read that with morbid curiosity this afternoon.
What do we segue into from here, Robert?
So hold on.
Of all the cases, Florida's done.
Florida's tossed.
D.C. is withdrawn or dismissed.
Rico, Georgia, is gone.
What else was there?
Colorado's just New York, and civil leaders just New York.
So he just needs...
The New York Court of Appeals to finally do its job.
And we're expecting that decision now that he's been elected.
We'll see when they come down and determine...
We'll see if it's a political foolishness to do what Marshawn did.
Holy hell.
Okay, so we got that.
That's Fannie.
Judge Marshawn, I got him.
We got a bunch of other topics to cover, but one person being subject to the most ruthless lies and libels about any of Trump's nominees.
With a close second going to Matt Gaetz.
Is RFK Jr.
Absolutely. There's a bunch of people up.
Right now there is a libel lawsuit pending in the state courts of Maine, Cumberland County, against somebody who put out a bunch of lies and libels against Robert Francis Kennedy Jr.
And some not so smart media people are repeating and reiterating those same lies and libels.
In fact...
His motion to defense in the state court of Maine is, hey, look, other people are also libeling Robert Kennedy, so let me off the hook, state court judge.
And these people should pay attention to that suit before they repeat those lies and libels.
They might want to pay attention to the fact that even ABC News is writing fat checks to Donald Trump himself over lies and libels after the election.
Now that you mentioned that.
Stephanopoulos not being deposed.
Hey, Georgie.
How much money did you or are you associated with the Clinton Global Organization?
If you want to talk about rapists, let's talk about the things you knew about William Jefferson Clinton.
With that on deck, they're like, we'll write you a $15 million check, Mr. President.
Instead, well, there's going to be a bunch of other media people who, if they repeat these lies and libels about Robert Kennedy, are going to find themselves individually sued.
Don't think you can be protected because you work for some big media conglomerate.
You can be individually sued for this, and there's no better evidence of that than we are suing individuals for these lies and libels, as Robert Francis Kennedy Jr. was done with these lies and libels against him that now some other media people think they can repeat without legal consequence.
That'd be a bad assumption on their part.
Well, so refresh the memories of those who might have forgotten, because I'm not saying this to be funny.
The lies they've spread about RFK are so many.
The eating the dog, the anti-vax.
What specifically, what are the statements out of Maine and who made them?
So there's a writer called Downeast Dem on Daily Cops, the blogging site on the left, who hid behind his anonymity and thought that he would never get caught.
We finally caught up to him, sued him in the Federal District Court of New Hampshire, because at the time he was targeting a speech there, it was our opinion.
A federal district court said, oh, no, I don't have any personal jurisdiction over him, which was hogwash, but that is, you know, what you get sometimes from some judges who don't like certain kinds of suits, or don't like some of the names of the people involved in those suits.
But we tracked him down to Maine, where he thought because of the statute of limitations, he said this publicly.
That he could evade and escape liability once again.
Unfortunately for him, he apparently didn't know exactly main law.
For those out there, just because someone else has libeled someone doesn't allow you to libel them.
FYI, word of the wise.
You want to say, well, I was relying on this person's libel.
Nope, not an event.
The second one that is not an event is you don't get to repeat libels.
Well, you know, this one libel of Robert Kennedy I told four years ago, so now I can say it all over again to a new audience and not be sued because I'm outside the two-year statute of limitations here in the state of Maine.
Nope. When you republish lies, you get sued, and it restarts the statute of limitations, Clark.
And so this guy basically went through and looked at all the most nefarious lies and libels about Robert Kennedy Jr. and repeated them and broadcast them to the world.
So when Robert Kennedy, started off when Robert Kennedy was globally fighting the COVID lockdowns, spoke in Germany at this massive rally against COVID lockdowns that started the pushback.
Germany right now is looking at elections at voting in the populist right AFD.
And that's why the establishment there is using lawfare in Germany to try to keep them off the ballot, threatening all kinds of things to try to prohibit them, even though the German people are saying, we want to go in that direction because we don't want our Christmas markets dominated by Allah Akbar and people driving through and killing people.
We're kind of done with it, even in Germany.
Guilt from World War II doesn't last so long that we have to completely destroy the country and our people.
With illegal immigration from Islamist countries with Islamist ideologies.
And what this guy wrote is he claimed to be a German translator.
In fact, he had a separate site, a little blog, that translated stories from Germany.
And he said he was translating a German newspaper article.
And that the new German newspaper article said that Robert Kennedy has joined the neo-Nazi party in Germany.
And that he is coordinating.
Robert Kennedy, of course, had nothing to do with any of those people.
He comes from a family with multiple generations of people who fought the Nazis, including a great uncle who died doing so.
So that was his first line, but he didn't stop there.
When the New Hampshire court let him off the hook...
He thought, oh, I'm immune now.
I'm like an honorary member of Congress.
And so he repeated the lies and he added other, he tried to find other the lie he could.
So he said, Robert Kennedy pointed out early on that there is evidence that the virus may have been a bioweapon engineered in a bioweapons lab.
And he pointed out that it seemed to have unusual impacts on different communities based on ethnicity and ancestry.
And that was one of the signs of a bioweapon is it has disparate impacts on different communities because they engineered the virus to hit this group and not that group.
That doesn't usually happen in nature by itself.
Right. He pointed this out.
This guy contorted.
I mean, I mean, I mean, others, it was all these crazy things.
And he wants black people to die.
So he accused me of all this nuts.
But one of the biggest ones that the media has lapped onto, one of the biggest pretexts for vaccine enforcement ideology by government officials is to blame any outbreak of any disease on people not being vaccinated.
Remember, they tried to do this with the COVID vaccine.
Remember, they said, oh, it's only the unvaccinated that are spreading COVID.
Turns out we now know that was a big, fat lie.
But that was a script that they had previously written many, many, many times.
And what happens is anytime if there's an outbreak, even if it means like bird flu and they get like one bird or one cow with bird flu, all of a sudden raw milk has to be stopped.
We'll get to that in a second down the road.
But essentially what they do is they use the outbreaks, they say it's because of lack of vaccination, and they scare people into being vaccinated.
And they say just listening to people questioning vaccines can cause a vaccine outbreak.
Because it released a vaccine hesitancy.
Of course, we found just the opposite with COVID.
You dig in, you're going to find many medical outbreaks of diseases that we supposedly have vaccines for.
You really track it and trace it.
Guess what?
It often comes back to a medical drug or the vaccine itself.
There have been many spread, like polio, often spread from the polio vaccine in the last 60 years.
Not because of unvaccinated population.
Samoa had a measles outbreak.
In 2019, all Robert Kennedy did was identify sources of information and provide free information saying, here might be some of the sources to help you with it.
That's it.
He didn't tell people not to get vaccinated or anything else.
And what happens, there are people that he reported their findings.
Some of the people that he reported their findings got targeted because they were people raising questions about what was really happening.
Why was there this unusual outbreak of not only measles, but...
It was unusually lethal.
Neighboring areas had an outbreak but didn't have near the level of lethality.
Well, the media and government story narrative was, oh, this has to be because of low immunization rates.
When they dug in, it had nothing to do with low immunization rates.
It may have come from the vaccine itself.
Vaccine immune strains or vaccine-induced?
Well, it's that vaccine-induced because people forget the vaccine they were giving in Samoa.
Was a live attenuated vaccine.
What does that mean?
They give you the disease.
And the problem is, if they don't do it right, you can get infected with a disease.
They're trying to give you a weak version of it so that your body reacts.
And in such a way, and this is what most people thought of as vaccines, by the way, until the mRNA vaccines, which were totally radically departure from traditional vaccines, is that you can infect people and you can actually create an epidemic.
This has happened repeatedly.
By the way, you can find Anthony Fauci admitting this just a couple of years ago during COVID.
And one of the comments was like, well, here's why you want to be careful about vaccine introduction.
You can actually accelerate the spread of the disease.
He admitted this once.
This is why they were trying to be more critical and skeptical of Trump developing the vaccine and that narrative magically changed once the Biden was elected.
So one of the people involved in Samoa...
That Robert Kenney simply cited as someone who might have helpful information was targeted because he was telling people to take vitamin A and C and other things like this.
And it was an early test of what happened with COVID.
It was an attempt to go after anybody raising questions about the Samoan measles outbreak, what its source was, what the most effective efficacy in treatment would be.
And they targeted him.
The judge ultimately dismissed the case because all the evidence favored him.
Right? This is the scale.
The media is spreading.
The media sees there was this old libel against Robert Kennedy from half a decade ago, not realizing people are being sued right now for that libel in court because we'll prove it's false, and it was always false and known to be false at the time it was distributed by the people involved, including this individual in Maine, not realizing that, in fact, subsequent evidentiary inquiry and legal inquiry vindicated Robert Kennedy and vindicated everybody connected to it, and Robert Kennedy never even raised questions about the measles vaccine in Samoa.
And yet you have people lying out there saying he caused the death of people.
That's how insane these lies are.
It's they who caused the deaths of people like Anthony Fauci.
And so expect all the lies and libels against Robert Kennedy to escalate as his nomination fight continues.
But just a little word to the wise out there.
I mean, I am Robert Kennedy's counsel in the case in Maine.
We will seek, I mean, I'll at least recommend.
Kennedy does up to him.
Remedial action against anybody who lies and libels him in this nomination process.
You want to disagree with Robert Kennedy?
Fine. You can make your argument.
You're not allowed to lie and libel him because he's been lied and libeled before.
And expect, if you're a reporter, anybody else reporting, repeating these lies and libels without the requisite context and evidentiary information, you are putting yourself at risk of suit as you deserve to be.
So in a member's speech, right to press and free speech does not include the right to lie and libel Robert Kennedy.
And just because a lot of other people have done it doesn't mean you get to.
I forgot.
Well, first of all, that might be applicable to a lot of the people still calling Trump a rapist, although the problem is the precedent has not been one of defamation.
A $15 million check is a $15 million check.
Yeah, but I think that was more to avoid discovery than to admit defamation.
And we're going to win this case sooner or later for Robert Kennedy.
So anybody else who did it is going to be on the hook.
So again, engage in an honest debate.
Robert Kennedy is always willing, eager, able, open to an honest debate.
You don't get to libel it.
Quit libeling it.
There's a range of other lies out there, but this is the most popular current one being spread.
And it doesn't matter if the New York Times ever spread the libel.
Libel is libel.
You're still on the hook for it.
You don't get to say, oh, but this was a big, powerful source that I got the information from.
Still a lie, still a libel.
Especially when it is very easy with the most minimal level of due diligence to realize it's a complete.
I mean, that's it.
I mean, so it's just a complete libel.
I mean, just 30 seconds of even searching on Google would show that this is a lie and libel.
And so I think it's just a little reminder out there, but expect to see more of these lies and libels against more and more of Trump's nominees.
The next most libeled will be Tulsi Gabbard.
Expect them to back off of the attacking cashmere.
Patel has one of the most extraordinary backgrounds in this area and has previously litigated libel cases also.
So watch for them to shift.
To where they think they can derail somebody.
They lied and libeled about Matt Gaetz.
They lied and libeled Pete Hexer.
They lied and libeled Robert Kennedy.
The next one they'll lie and libel a lot is Tulsi Gabbard.
Remember, Tulsi Gabbard has also brought suit against people.
And she doesn't always have the best counsel.
But Robert Kennedy, I can assure you, has excellent counsel.
And Tulsi Gabbard will have excellent counsel.
And Kash Patel will now have excellent counsel.
So, yes, you can challenge the nomination process.
Libel ain't part of it.
Disagree with them policy-wise?
Have at it.
All these other people should be on full notice, especially when the ABC is even writing checks to Trump, who they hate, that they're going to be on the individual hook and they may not be able to rely on their company's insurance for that accountability.
They may be paying it out of their own pocket.
And so that was the point of bringing that suit, was to stop these lies and libels from continuing to occur.
And so we'll see what happens.
But there is a mounting moment as people meet Robert Kennedy in person in the U.S. Senate.
Even those corrupt acts in the U.S. Senate are having to realize, you know, the guy's a really reasonable, smart, attentive, attuned individual.
He recognizes part of the Trump administration so that Trump gets to set policy and that Trump has been clear on what policies he wants.
He wants us to have a healthier society.
What Robert Kennedy's advocacy showed during the COVID lockdowns and afterwards is he's been a lot more right than wrong for a long time.
But all the liars and libelers are about to face judicial relief and remedy if they continue to lie and libel him during this nomination process.
Robert, I'll say one thing.
First of all, everybody who's complaining about the typing, I'm not used to having the internal mic, so I forget to mute when I'm typing.
If I may ask the question, because I can be dense at times.
Do I surmise that you may be representing other individuals in potential upcoming defamation?
I'm happy to.
I understand this law as well as anybody.
I've taken some of the most difficult cases concerning these areas.
I've been willing to do so without payment of legal fees, do so on a contingency basis because it's conscientious work.
We need to restore the balance of truth and integrity to these nomination processes.
And these people need to start facing a consequence and remedy.
It's like, it's why I'm in favor of a well-brought January 6th class action.
Yeah, I mean, I brought, you know, I don't mind people tilting at windmills.
Like, this is a debate on the Chip Roy aspect.
I don't mind people tilting at windmills and voting for things, voting against things, even if it's not the most pragmatic path.
I oppose hypocrites pretending to be something they're not, like Chip Roy.
But I don't mind that principle.
I brought lots of lawsuits that were very long shot suits or defended cases that were very long shot cases is what I'm known for.
But there is going to be a greatly more coordinated effort that everybody who lies, it's going to be determined that they lied.
They'll be put on notice that they lied and that they need to take remedial action rather than step forward.
And it was clear that they haven't got the message of the Robert Kennedy libel lawsuit pending in me.
That, you know, there's going to be no more taking this lying down.
Enough is enough.
That, you know, you get to have an honest debate.
You don't get to have a dishonest attack of an individual because you don't like or share his political opinion.
We've been together long enough now that I do recall, in the early stages, you say, look, you file suits sometimes, even if they're long shots, you file certiorari, even if they're not going to get taken, because you insert the discussion into the political discourse.
And we've now been together long enough to actually see some of the legalities that you've alleged in prior statements or lawsuits making their way into the lexicon.
And you're a thousand percent right on the defamation.
It is wild.
That it's the same play over and over again with Gates, with Trump, with Bannon, with anyone affiliated.
It's defamation and lawfare.
Speaking of which, I may do a hush-hush on the Samoan measles outbreak and some other ones.
Because if you're of a certain mindset, if you're of a skeptical mindset, you might recognize that in Samoa, a year before, the same vaccine...
It killed two kids, two baby infants.
Now, maybe that would strike your paranoia if you're part of the Bill Gates big medical hierarchy, big pharma hierarchy that would expose the risks of these so-called 100% safe and effective vaccines for children.
So how about you discipline the local populace and the world to not start raising questions?
Maybe you release the epidemic yourself.
Maybe you do it deliberately, kill a couple hundred kids, and you blame it on being unvaccinated.
So you better not ask questions, boys and girls.
Or maybe your kid is next.
Maybe that had something to do with we really dug deep.
Maybe there's a reason why there's never been a thorough investigation of what happened in that outbreak.
Maybe that's happened more often than not, than people might expect.
And, I mean, it relates to a common script, or a popular script, in the anti-establishment world.
Look at V for Vendetta, the film.
How did they get the power?
Because it's like the raw milk birth flu.
They want to use the danger of infections to infect our constitutional republic and kill it instead.
And they're going to continue to do so at every opportunity they get unless we step up and take corrective action to preclude and prohibit them from ever exercising that power again.
But that's what the attacks on Robert Kennedy are, the attacks on all of us.
And not to get ahead of the game, you'll make...
I'm sure you'll have the predictions on sportsbets.locals.com.
Sportspicks.locals.com will have some Kowski-recommended picks on some...
Where I think, heck, you can even bet on what the temperature is going to be in Chicago at the end of the day.
You get some crazy, interesting, but you can bet on a wide range of topics.
Oscars, apparently, where we're going to get back to live Oscars markets.
That's going to be fun.
So a bunch of that kind of stuff.
But speaking of unsafe betting regulations, that leads us to the Safe Bet Act, which is anything but safe.
Okay, now.
The irreplaceable William Krakenberger, which you can follow online, Bill Krakenberger.
You can also find his exceptional sports picks himself at Crack Wins, Crack Wins app.
But he's been detailing at places like the Vegas Sports Information Network how this fake Safe Bets Act is anything but safe and is meant to strip us of our rights and liberties.
And isn't it interesting?
After calcium becomes legal because the courts determined the federal law is trying to prohibit it, we're...
We're not constitutionally consistent.
The regulations and rules trying to be imposed without congressional authorized legislation.
After the Supreme Court ruled that prior attempt to control the betting economy, the gambling economy, was in fact a violation of the Tenth Amendment rights under the anti-commandering principles of the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, all of a sudden Democrats are suddenly concerned about these betting markets.
Betty markets that told the world in the last three weeks that what the media was telling you and fake posters like Ann Seltzer were telling you that Trump was going to lose, the betting markets were saying, uh-uh.
And what does that do?
That informs the public narrative.
That gives more confidence to certain people.
Hey, I can support Trump because I think Trump is going to win.
And their efforts to create this Harris's inevitable narrative was crushed by the availability of betting markets to Americans.
Who are like, I don't think so.
I'm going to put my dollar, my money where my mouth is, and I think Trump's going to win.
The Democrats are so annoyed that they've now tried to create new laws that basically make it impossible to bet, to re-control federally the state betting markets.
They want to usurp under the commander again the control of their resources.
They also want to ban advertising, prohibit certain bets.
And they're the ultimate version of the nanny state.
They have an affordability standard.
They're going to decide whether you can really afford.
And they're going to impose on betting companies, re-reviewing your own, limiting how much you can deposit to place a bet, limiting the time frame in which you can place a bet.
By the way, all of these restrictions would have substantially undermined only one betting market in the last one.
And it was the election betting markets.
Is it a coincidence that they want...
To prohibit a repeat of 2024 and 2028?
Tell you something that the media doesn't want you to know?
It really almost sounds like what they try.
I mean, it sounds like what they're doing with election or campaign contributions to limit it to small people, but then have your super PACs be allowed to do what they want to do.
I don't know how they're going to allow for super PAC gambling.
I pulled it up.
I'm not as familiar with this as you are.
What problem are they trying to address?
The overall gambling problem?
Yeah, these poor kids need the nanny state to tell them which bets they can place.
And these poor gamblers out there, they're confused.
They need responsible gambling.
Even though the leading responsible gambling associations disapprove of the Safe Bet Act.
So, just FYI.
I want to read this.
Protecting you from yourself, Neva.
We want to protect you from yourself.
Betting is supposed to be a risk.
The difference is, they're calling this betting or gambling.
Robert, you've convinced me that this is not betting on a random roulette issue.
This is an investment in a stock.
And by the way, they're not trying to regulate any of those.
They're not trying to regulate like bingo, you know, church-sponsored, state-sponsored lotteries.
You know, those are actual gambling events.
Random events that are going to cost you money over time.
Almost guaranteed.
They are not trying to do anything about that.
They're trying to prohibit you.
They say it's about the sports markets.
It isn't.
They're trying to prohibit the political.
It's not a coincidence.
This news spiked right after the election.
They're still mad, but Cauchy got lead, that won their court case, and Cauchy exposed everybody, reinforced by Polymarket, which is funded by Bitcoin, that they were monetized by Bitcoin.
These two markets, what happened right after the election?
The Polymarket guy, they tried to indict.
And go after him personally.
And right after the election, they are talking about a safe bet act meant to prohibit most political bets is what it really is in the United States by prohibit by, oh, you need so much time before you can bet.
It needs to be affordable for you to bet.
What would happen is 90% of the people who bet they're going to determine under affordability standards can't bet.
Why? Because they're not concerned about the whale gamblers.
They're not even concerned about responsible gambling.
They're concerned about...
The ordinary person betting $20 that Trump's going to win, and that that influences the markets at such scale, when it's accumulated at scale, that it says, hey, by the way, the media's lying to you about the election.
They don't want you to know that in the future.
That's what they say.
But it also violates constitutional rights.
Tenth Amendment violates the anti-commandering law.
First Amendment, the ban on advertising does not comport with current constitutional standards for the regulation and restriction of commercial speech, which requires a substantial governmental interest and a...
A justifiably related mechanism of controlling, of exercising that substantial governmental interest.
What's a substantial governmental interest in people betting at the state level?
It just doesn't, you know, it's entirely intended.
Its real goal is to undermine the political market, but also it would be the ultimate act of the anti-state.
Imagine if Congress has the constitutional power through affirming the Safe Bet Act, and they got passed and enforced by the courts.
Imagine the power they have.
They can determine what's affordable for you and what isn't.
What you can spend money on and what you can't.
It's just another way to create almost a central bank digital currency system through enforcing a Chinese-style social credit structure, a structure that was invented and parched by Bill Gates-funded think tanks and organizations to impose it here on us through the United States using the guise of, We just want to make sure you're not gambling too much on sporting events or political events.
And we're protecting you from yourself when the real goal is for the government to control you entirely.
It's a way to, I don't know, undemocratize the betting markets to reflect the public sentiment.
It's sort of like the antithesis of the people taking control of GameStop.
It's another free game for censorship.
And this goes back, people can go back and read the old debate between Learn Hand, Judge Learn Hand of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals at the time, and Supreme Court Justice Oliver Holmes, who, while brilliant, was also an utterly unconscionable prick who was wrong about at least half the time on the law.
Just go back and read Buckley Bell.
And if that doesn't outrage you, you don't have a conscience.
We watched a documentary on the Virginia Eugenics Project and watched some of those interviews of those women tell you heartbreaking story after heartbreaking story.
about how the government robbed him of their rights because that arrogant prick Oliver Holmes said that three generations of imbeciles are enough when he was lying about the facts and lying about the legal record.
And the only case he cited for his authority was Jacobson versus Massachusetts, a vaccine mandate case that was, which just had a small fine It comes back from what I've called the Trilogy of Infamy.
Korematsu Buck.
And they each relied on one another to strip us of our constitutional rights or liberties in the name of war or infectious disease.
And also in commercial advertising, it's going to be an issue with trying to restrict pharmaceutical advertising.
The Supreme Court has extended...
So Holmes, by the way, didn't believe in free speech.
Contrary to what people don't remember this about Holmes.
Holmes believed only truthful speech.
So he was all for government censorship of the wrong opinions.
People shouldn't be allowed to have the wrong opinion.
And learned hand was free speech should be determined in the court of public opinion and the free marketplace of ideas should determine which idea is good or bad.
You don't get to unilaterally determine that in the government because you're likely to screw up anyway in terms of truth.
If what you care about is truthfulness and accuracy, then you should be even more of a free speech advocate, not less of one.
And he has the much better argument in his letters back and forth with Oliver Holmes.
So that's a problem like banning pharmaceutical advertising.
It'd be tricky.
You can impose.
Now, there's a constitutional argument about whether commercial speech was ever intended to be protected by our founding fathers.
There's not a lot of evidence that it was.
But to me, I'm for a robust interpretation of the First Amendment because if we have commercial exceptions to the First Amendment, you can eviscerate the whole First Amendment.
It's hard to have speech without spending money in some capacity.
So the Safe Fact Act is an unconstitutional First and Tenth Amendment-violating nanny state provision intended to prohibit election markets from exposing the falsehoods of the mainstream media narratives and institutional storylines.
That's what it's really about.
And no constitutionally conscientious member of Congress can affirm it, and I'm hopeful that it doesn't pass.
But credit to Bill Krakenberger.
For being one of the people out there exposing all the different scams built into the Safe Bet Act and other smart people along those lines.
Fantastic. I want to bring this up because Sad Wings Raging seems to have lost his mind over on the side here.
Sad Wings Raging is gifting one person after another a membership.
I understand what a good new year requires.
It requires a broader, wider, bigger community.
Everybody deserves the benefits.
Being over at vivobarneslaw.locals.com.
It's a great late Christmas gift you can give to people.
You can gift memberships there.
Just a great that he's gifting memberships here at Rumble.
Gifting memberships over on YouTube.
That's fantastic.
And it's credit to this community.
We've done good, I think, valuable and important work.
But it pales in comparison to the members of the community who have participated in these shows and episodes and podcasts.
Shared the information, shared information themselves on the board.
I get a lot of my primary sourced information about what's happening on law and politics from other members of VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com.
It's a fun community, robust community, smart community.
But above all, they have made a real political impact.
I'll give you an example.
Food Safety News, which by the way hates me personally, I believe, based on prior coverage.
Had to begrudgingly write an article they probably didn't want to write right after the election and certain results were revealed.
And this is a publication that has previously attacked Amos Miller, previously attacked me, so on and so forth.
The pocket of big ag is my interpretation.
And they wrote a piece that said, guess what?
The Pennsylvania election basically was determined the moment the state of Pennsylvania and the federal government went after one Amish farmer known as Amos Miller.
That the Amish turnout was the biggest in the history of Amish turnout in the history of this country.
They poured out in places like Lancaster County and other places across the state.
Credit also to Scott Pressler, who helped organize in those communities.
But the motivating factor, the main motivating factor, as admitted by a publication that, remember, doesn't like me and doesn't like Amos Miller, was that Amos Miller's case had changed the tide in the Amish community.
That the Amish community started to wake up and realize something's going on here.
Why are they just trying to destroy our way of life?
Why are they trying to wreck who and what we are?
Why are they betraying the promise William Penn made to their ancestors to protect their independence and autonomy?
Why is it good food made by good farmers is the only food they're trying to ban us from being able to consume, from being able to have for our nourishment?
And it raised a lot beyond the Amish community.
There are public health advocates also revealed that Robert Kennedy supporters in Pennsylvania overwhelmingly went.
Robert Kennedy prominently supported the Amos Miller case, prominently called it out as an abuse of government power to go after a conscientious Amish farmer who has, by the way, an impeccable food safety record.
Well, not one customer of his food has ever complained.
Quarter century, millions of food products, tens of thousands of Americans all across the country.
Zero. Zero.
Zero customer complaints.
And yet that's the one they're trying to shut down.
Some of the best food known to man, I speak from personal experience of that food.
The more I have that food, the healthier I am.
When I don't have access to Amos Miller's food is when I get into Trump.
But this article admitted massive Amish turnout that probably guaranteed Trump was always going to win Pennsylvania and thus the presidential election.
Two, that turnout, according to them, Again, their critics of Amos Miller was the Amos Miller persecution by the government in the state of Pennsylvania and the federal government.
And third, they very begrudgingly said, ever since Barnes got involved, the worm turned in Amos Miller's case in the court of public opinion and for the election.
But that isn't thanks to me, because I'm not registered to vote in Pennsylvania.
I'm one person.
That's thanks to you, all the ordinary, everyday people who refuse to keep their mouths shut.
Who stood up for their own rights and stood up for the rights of others.
Our board was founded by many people who are trying to find a way to preserve the jobs of themselves or their friends or their family without having to undergo experimental medical treatment under the new eugenics of the Fauci-inspired FDA.
And that's why.
So never underestimate your own impact.
We've been discussing this for five years.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled is convincing people he doesn't exist.
Greatest trick the system ever pulls is convincing you that you cannot resist.
Many of you conscientiously did, and you did in many different ways, but included supporting Amos Miller when he was under attack, going to Amos Miller Organic Farm and buying some of his great food products to keep him afloat no matter what, going to the Give, Send, Go that helped raise funds for him, supporting 1776 Law Center, but it was also spreading the news and information in every social media forum and every direct contact you had.
So the members of Congress heard about it.
Members of the Senate heard about it.
State representatives heard about it.
Political candidates heard about it.
And people like Robert Kennedy were talking about it.
People in Trump world, Donald Trump Jr., talking about it repeatedly.
People like Tucker Carlson talking about it.
That's because of you, ordinary, everyday people, making a difference that helped create the 2024 election results that is going to give us the best chance to restore the constitutional republic in the new year.
Robert, I've got to refresh my screen because I can't share the screen anymore for some reason.
I think it logged me out of Rumble.
Let me do it.
If it heats us out, I'll come right back.
Give me 30 seconds.
One area where the president could improve is his appointees in the Agriculture Department.
A lot of his appointees are fantastic.
The one area where Trump could be a little bit better is the Department of Agriculture.
God bless Brooke Rollins.
I don't know how...
Being connected to a big oil think tank, funded think tank, makes her qualified to be the Secretary of Agriculture.
Another person that has been nominated is a former general counsel at the FDA, which has been complicit in trying to crush small farmers, strip us of our bodily autonomy and rights to determine our own food, food freedom, that we put in our own bodies, crush small farmers.
You know, there have been some bad picks.
And the Department of Agriculture that need to be drastically and dramatically improved.
I would say 90% of Trump's picks, I think, are fantastic.
Drastic improvements.
But let's not have lobbyists like Brooke Rollins running the Department of Agriculture.
We had the retarded Boss Hogg last time, the Secretary of Perdue from Georgia.
I mean, literally looks like Boss Hogg and basically is retarded.
And that idiot screwed up the Georgia election.
It's one area where, so this is the message of Trump world.
Improve in ag.
You know, the Amish helped elect President Trump.
Remember that when it comes time to consider food and medical policy.
The small farmers helped elect President Trump.
Remember that when it comes to ag.
I don't want to see corporate lobbyists dominated.
I don't want to see, and again, Brooke Rawlings could prove me wrong, and I would love for her to prove me wrong.
And some of these other appointees I would love to have to prove me wrong.
But it's the one area where there needs to be an upgrade, in my opinion.
Unless, again, I'm wrong about these people and they can prove it.
And there's real easy ways they can prove it.
As soon as they're in power, if they go through the nomination process and Trump sticks with them, they can end the federal case against Amos Miller, which is still pending in the Federal District Court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
End it.
Say it's nonsense.
He has a right to distribute his food.
Number two, remove the lawless order by the FDA.
It was a lawless order.
That usurped congressional power, usurped state regulatory rights, that said that you cannot sell raw milk across state borders.
They've agreed not to enforce it for years, practically speaking, because they were sued for its unconstitutional.
But there's no reason for it to even exist on the books.
State governments are using it as a pretext to harass and orang people because they're claiming to enforce federal law.
It's the main basis that the state is asserting in state court, commonwealth court in Pennsylvania, to try to shut down Amos Miller again.
I mean, it's the fourth time they've tried to shut him down in a year.
It's how nuts and insane they are.
You would think, after they realized they just helped elect President Trump these Democratic hacks in Pennsylvania, that maybe this is a bad idea, but they haven't stopped.
They're red-pilling the Amish on a daily basis.
But people have asked, why haven't the Amish been politically active in the past?
They are only politically active when they are directly at risk, and they can have trust and confidence that the people will defend them.
And that means Republicans need to deliver.
McCormick is a senator from Pennsylvania today solely and wholly because of the Amish in Pennsylvania.
But to date, he hasn't said Jack.
He needs to.
So you can't keep betraying these audiences or you get what happened down ballot in 2022 and 2024, which is a lot of blue-collar voters are like, I trust Trump, but I don't trust no Republican.
You need to earn that trust.
You know what's a great way to earn that trust?
Stand by the small farmers.
Stand by the Amish.
Stand by our rights to control our own bodies and restore our founding fathers' principles that we can buy food directly from the farmer without government permission from some bureaucrat in Scranton or Washington DC.
I gotta bring up that article again because it's actually mind-boggling where it's talking about bird flu virus has been found in raw milk.
Here's a reminder of how pasteurization improves safety.
I mean, this is like...
Straight up advertising.
Just put under the author, big ag whore.
But read this.
It says they recalled two batches of raw unpasteurized milk after bird flu virus was detected in the milk.
Can you imagine?
So they found one example of bird flu at one farm and one place concerning raw milk.
By the way, you can find...
There's other plain examples.
Pasteurized milk has caused more illness, injury, and death than raw milk, period.
You can look at the data.
I'll debate anybody on this anywhere, anyplace, anytime.
The information is overwhelmingly in favor of raw milk.
It's the milk that we lived on for centuries until the corporatized agriculture took over the dairy industry in the United States and got these rules passed to disfavor.
And so the bird flu is just the latest scare to try to control the food that we eat, to try to shut down independent competitors to Big Pharma and Big Food, and as another pretext to strip us of our constitutional liberties and rights.
Because they got so excited by what they got away with in 2020, they will keep doing it again and again and again.
Until and unless they are disciplined and the law rightly restores constitutional balance.
There's several examples of bird flu going to raw milk and infecting someone and causing serious illness.
Well, that's what I was going to ask.
You know how you know?
Because it ain't in there, right?
They're willing to lie about Amos Miller for years.
Say there are two people that caused illness.
We got the actual data during the suit.
It turned out their own data proved that they could not, could not have been caused illness by Amos Miller's product.
Could not.
And that no customer had ever complained according to the government's own sworn testimony on the stand.
So that it was fake.
It was a fake allegation.
And it's why it's a power grab.
They want to control the food.
They want to strip us of our constitutional liberties.
They say, a scary pandemic means we don't have a choice.
That's where they're going.
We've been down that path in COVID.
Let's not revisit it.
I forget who I was talking with where they were talking about how...
COVID itself spreads not through, like, saliva on the face, but through particles that you have to inhale in order to be absorbed.
And, like, the idea of drinking something with bird flu would give you the bird...
And that's it.
Two batches of unpasteurized, and that allows everybody to go and say it's totally...
I think it's not trying to gin this up.
You know, I've spent some involuntary time at some recent medical health institutions, some hospitals across the country.
And what you discover, I mean, like, right now, I'm working with Warner Mendenhall.
Massive cases are going to be coming down the pipeline in 2025.
And they concern hospital executives knowingly, fraudulently obtaining money from state and federal governments, as well as insurance companies, based on fraudulent VAERS reports.
What is VAERS?
VAERS is the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.
It was imposed as a quid pro quo with immunity for vaccines in the mid-1980s.
Congress was like, well, we want to make sure that everything's going on in the up and up.
So we're going to give you this immunity, but everybody's got to report what's really happening.
That was supposed to be the quid pro quo.
What has happened under VAERS is that hospitals, especially during COVID, according to nurse whistleblowers all across the country, falsified the VAERS reports.
They knew about vaccine injuries, the vaccine, COVID vaccine cause.
Some cases disability, some cases death.
The nurses saw it.
They reported it.
They were instructed by their superiors to remove it from the medical records so that they could submit reimbursement requests with no adverse event, vaccine adverse event report being contributed.
Why? Because they didn't want to require an investigation that could derail that reimbursement of that big fat cash.
And I've been in some hospitals recently where, let's just say, some folks there treat you as a guinea pig.
And let's stick this in you, stick that in you, stick the other thing in you.
And I tend to be less than a deferential patient in that regard, which doesn't always please some of the higher-ups.
Though I try not to detail too much of my legal record, because then, by golly, I probably won't be getting out of there.
I'll get that special treatment they have in those hospitals in D.C. for wavered politicians.
So, yeah, that's why I got lots of friends and family around.
And I want to give a shout-out.
One of the doctors that's a member of our community, Sweetheart, has been available to provide free feedback all along through the process.
So I got lots of, you know, the good Lord, I always set him on God's clock, and I'm going to be, I'm going to check out when the good Lord decides.
He's done with me, or done with me, at least on this level of existence, depending on how you may perceive the supernatural.
But, you know, the key is having lots of friends, family, and folks look after you.
To make sure things are done in the up and up.
But, I mean, imagine what it says about our medical system.
That hospitals all across the country were so willing to flagrantly lie.
I mean, this didn't even get into the ventilator debacle, the hemisphere debacle that hospitals were complicit in.
Taking, as you pointed out, why, if we have an airborne infection, did they create hospital wings that guaranteed the spread of that airborne infection?
Go back and look at the Spanish flu.
Go ahead and try to find where were we putting the excess facilities?
We were putting them out doors.
In the sunlight, where the expression sunlight is the greatest disinfectant came from in the first place, vitamin D. It's very hard for airborne illnesses to spread with ease from person to person in open air.
It's much easier in confined spaces.
And it raises serious questions about our entire medical hierarchy.
Some might have been intimidated.
Some might have been, you know, they say, I don't want to be Dr. Mary Bowden and have to undergo.
Harassment after harassment after harassment.
I don't want to be these other doctors, these brave, noble doctors.
But they should be paying attention in the pharmaceutical industry.
They should be paying attention in the medical industry.
Who just got appointed to be head of National Institute of Health?
Who just got appointed in the Food and Drug Administration?
We've got some great appointees.
Followers of the show, by the way.
Doesn't hurt any.
There's some high-ranking Justice Department officials who are.
There's Secretary of Defense.
The Vice President of the United States.
The son of the President of the United States.
In fact, you could say sons of the President of the United States.
But that's all thanks to the people out here that help it make a difference.
So we have to continue to do so to expose these bad actors, protect and promote the good actors, so that we can have a more constitutional government in the future and have less fraud and corruption in our medical industry and our agriculture industry.
That has so badly infected the COVID reign of terror that we witnessed in 2020.
It was a tangential thing that I wanted to ask you when you mentioned about the lawsuits.
It's not on the menu, but let's add it.
Trump is suing the Des Moines Register and Ann Seltzer for that poll under the...
I want to say it's the Consumer, not Consumer Protection Act, but it's something similar, Consumer Practices Act of Iowa.
Are they going to be denied on standing?
Are they going to say that the law does not apply to elections, specific laws apply to elections, or that they're not providing a service that is the object of the law?
Does that thing get tossed?
When you think back, was it information?
Yes. Was it accurate?
No. Did they have reason to know it was false?
Yes. And did they promote it as something else in exchange for subscriptions and money from the public?
Yep. Doesn't that sound like a consumer transaction subject to a consumer trade protection act?
It does to me.
And Ann Seltzer knew exactly what she was doing.
Richard Barris, still the best pollster in America, definitely one of the best pollsters in the world.
Go back and look.
I mean, he got North Carolina within a point.
Got Pennsylvania within a point.
Got Michigan within a point.
Got Wisconsin within a point.
I mean, he was nailing it state after state after state after state.
Election after election after election after election.
Those don't know that's people's pundit daily.
He's been nailing election after election after election and state after state after state over and over and over again.
Perfect? No.
A better track record than anybody else out there?
Absolutely. There's other good posters.
Patrick Basham.
Robert Trafalgar, others.
They just, Rasmussen reports with Mark Mitchell.
But Barris is the best.
He's also been subject to more libel than anybody in the entire polling industry.
Not a coincidence, probably.
But what his, like there was confirmation today, this week, I think from a Reuters report, that Barris told you three years ago, what his polling showed early on was that more and more Americans were skeptical of what was going on with the COVID lockdown.
Skeptical of the COVID interventions.
Skeptical of the COVID vaccine.
And today, the vaccine skepticism is at the highest rate it has been in over a century.
And the reason for it is because they were exposed to the lies by the medical establishment and the medical industry.
And the same sort of theory that's being used.
And so we detailed before, as soon as Seltzer's poll came out, he told everybody the poll was coming out.
And there was going to be a fake poll.
How did he know?
Because it was leaked to people from inside the Seltzer operation that knew it.
By the way, that's how you know Ann Seltzer knows it.
People within the organization were like, hey, by the way, Richard, something's wrong here.
She's going to waste her reputation as a credible reporter for whatever payoff is coming down the pipeline to try to shape the narrative to stop Trump.
And if those don't know, she put out a poll that said Harris was going to win outside the margin of error the state of Iowa.
She lost by almost 14 points.
It was a fake poll.
The Des Moines Register knew it was a fake poll, and Seltzer knew it was a fake poll.
And yet, when you lie in libel for money, you can be held accountable for it, as they're likely to soon point out.
Question to teacher, Robert.
Was she lying, or was the poll intended to try and sway the election?
Yeah, absolutely.
Why was she sharing it with Democrats in advance of its public release?
Well, but some people are going to say, like some people raised the argument, if people are told that Kamala's going to win Iowa, they're going to be less likely to go out for their Democrats.
Others are going to say it's intended to be demoralizing on the Republicans.
Historically, it's demoralizing on the Republican side.
Okay. But there's a coincidence they didn't, Biden administration didn't want betting markets in the United States.
They knew that election betting markets would expose the fact that people who are very sophisticated wouldn't put money where their mouth is.
It would raise the risk that they would expose the lies.
And so, but yeah, her own data contradicted, as we can point out.
Baris and I went through it.
We're like, this is completely fake.
Her own internal data contradicts it.
She went out and gave fake narratives.
She said, oh, here's what the data shows to play into this media narrative about how women were going to shape the election and women were rejecting Trump and joining Harris.
This was right on the eve of the election.
Key State, it was meant to shape the election, create a sense of an aura of inevitability around Kamala Harris that would be just enough to tip her over.
That was the goal.
And she knew it.
She went out and said, but her own polling data didn't support what she was telling people her polling narrative was.
So that was more evidence.
She knew she was lying.
So she put out a fake poll.
She knew it was a fake poll.
And now she's going to be held accountable.
Because what it is, Trump is like, no more people profiting off of lying and lying.
I'm going to start making Robert Kennedy has a comparable mindset.
Why? Because Kennedy just wants to save people's lives.
You know, I mean, the only people who managed to go to D.C. And end up poorer afterwards are named Trump and Kennedy.
Nobody else does that have.
That hasn't happened since Washington and Jefferson and those boys, our founding fathers, who are similar.
You go to the wealthiest presidents, the top six were wealth outside of the presidency.
Then everybody's got wealth after the presidency.
Barack Hussein Obama, top on that chart.
Bill William Jefferson, Clinton, pretty darn close with him.
People who were dead broke when they left the White House.
Magically worth $100 million plus within a few years.
How did that happen?
You know, this is late-stage Rome, decaying empire kind of behavior.
So I think if Des Moines Register is smart, they'll write a check and issue an apology.
Otherwise, they're going to be gambling.
But I think what it will do is Trump is trying to set the precedent.
Save your fake polls.
Stop it.
Because maybe you'll be held individually, legally liable.
The next time you submit in support.
This is the third presidential election involving Trump in which they fake the polling data.
Third in a row.
At some point, they've got to start facing consequences.
How much do we have left?
I've got to read a bunch of chats.
Do we want to head over to Locals soon?
Yeah, let's see.
There was one top one that people really wanted so that we could cover here.
So we'll probably cover Discovery concerning third parties and federal court abuse.
That I'm experiencing currently and where the problem is and where some of the solutions may be.
That was one of the top votes at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
And then we can save for the after party over at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
The NCAA, well, we can add this quickly here.
The NCAA getting sued for consumer fraud by the great Ken Paxton.
But the ones we'll save for the after party are how Airbnb can scam you.
And why I am considering suing Airbnb for its fraud.
The real story, or alternative stories, or the debate concerning the USS Liberty.
God bless Candace Owens, but, you know, Candace, you can't trust every Jew-hating source in the world for the love of Jesus.
Appropriately phrased, by the way.
Luigi Mangione, is he an MKUltra product, as some people are starting to be curious about?
And is Santa trespassing when he brings your kids gifts on Christmas Eve?
Let me do one thing real quick, like, bring this over here.
HeartTackleBackInTheHouse says, Merry Christmas, guys.
Happy fishing.
I might be able to go ice fishing.
I think the water, after a few days of minus 17, might have frozen over.
Is that legit ice fishing?
Oh, I'm going to go, like, I'm going to be on the water.
That's not a secret message.
No, Robert.
Robert and I have a secret word in case I get jailed by him.
In case Trudeau comes for you before he gets taken out in the election.
In case Castro's bastard kid comes knocking on the door.
We got one way to return judicial fairness in politically motivated cases is to dissolve the D.C. circuits.
Can't have a circus circuit that's 96% Dems.
That's from PowerCell.
No D.C. court.
Drain the swamp.
Drain the District of Columbia.
We got Ryu Kiritoi says, there is a GOP congresswoman from Texas in a nursing home and has been there for nine months.
This has to stop.
Who has been voting?
Yeah. All right.
We got the rest.
V6 and Yan.
I know that you've mentioned the Amish don't like, what did they say?
That they don't like lawsuits, but...
As they were smear to campaign to help scare the food and milk produced, couldn't there be a slander or a similar lawsuit?
Oh, absolutely.
But that would have to be brought probably by someone outside the Amish community because the Amish killed, too.
Okay, Robert, you're going to have to do the last one because I don't think I know what is going on with this.
The top suit.
The national communists against athletes or the Airbnb scams?
No, no, no.
The federal...
Oh, the federal court of use.
Yeah, sorry.
Here's in the United States.
So I represent people who were victimized by the vaccine mandates.
And in particular, 3M, a company that they left off their full name, known as 3M Effers, is who they are, discriminated against its employees' vaccine mandates.
And including those who had sincere, conscientious religious objections that 3M admitted were religious, they still discriminated against.
And either fired them or demoted them.
I represent some of the people suing 3M.
3M went up.
There's these labor law firms out there who were created right after World War II disproportionately, often in places like the border south, the deep south, solely to break unions.
And here's how you know who they are.
You go to their website, their law firm website, and all they do is talk about labor law.
All they do, in some cases, is represent management and labor disputes.
In other words, they literally have no other business.
So why did they originate?
They originated because of labor unions' success in the 1930s.
To try to crush unions in the 1940s right up to World War II, that's how they were formed.
That's their legacy.
Second, what's their motivation?
Their motivation for these big corporations that almost always have big corporate counsel and can easily get local counsel.
Why are they representing these?
What's the marketing pitch and niche for these anti-labor law firms?
It's that we'll be nastier than even your big corporate law firms.
And 3M has hired some of the nastiest lawyers in the country.
And they even put Tyson Foods to shame at their willingness and readiness to harass workers.
I'll give an example.
Ordinary blue-collar worker who was doing great work for 3M.
Is fired because of her religious objection.
A federal district court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, helmed by a judge who was born outside the United States to people born outside the United States, in the case of her father, who is the, you know, she's the chancellor of a foreign university, and yet she sits on the federal bench of the United States federal court, dismissed her case because she asserted privacy objections to the invasive discovery.
The 3M lawyer's MO is basically just harass the employees.
Just harass them.
So if you want to assert your suit, fine.
You have to disclose everything about your personal life, your religious life, your medical life, your sexual life, you name it.
These kind of things that they sought compel in complicit federal courts who don't care about constitutional rights and liberties were enforcing.
And against this one individual, the judge dismissed her whole case, didn't allow a jury trial.
Based solely on her asserting objections, constitutional objections, to the invasive nature of the 3M law firm and 3M's discovery request.
Well, how does 3M respond to that?
They harass her again using other lawsuits involving other 3M employees who have brought suit, pointing out, they sued 3M, and they were like, we want to go back.
And we're going to issue third-party subpoenas to demand more invasive information from this individual who's not a part of this case, whose prior case was dismissed and is on appeal because she asserted constitutional objections, to demand invasive discovery all over again.
And now we want to use the contempt power and sanctions power of federal courts that they routinely and regularly abuse in violation of the First, Fifth, and Seventh Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.
What happens if do monetary judgments require a jury trial?
Are sanctions somehow a magic exemption to the Seventh Amendment?
Is contempt somehow a magic exemption to the Seventh Amendment?
Because they're corrupt courts who love asserting more power for themselves, they decide it is.
And so in this case, they issued a third-party subpoena demanding all over again the information that she had previously asserted constitutional objections to that she no longer even has access to.
And we assert objections.
The first thing the judge does is the judge demands that I take service of process for someone who's not my client in that case.
In the courtroom?
Yeah, in subject of contempt, saying you have to accept personal service.
They don't have to personally serve the subpoena.
Am I wrong?
I thought you could not serve in a courthouse to begin with, as a rule.
No, there wasn't any courthouse.
It was outside the courthouse, but the court has issued an order saying, you're going to accept service to process.
Okay, fine.
It's like, okay, did we just waive the Constitution here, Judge Wilson?
On the Eastern District of Pennsylvania?
Another bad Trump appointee, sadly.
Someone who is not competent and capable to be on the federal bench, in my opinion.
So we object.
She overrules.
She's basically a rubber stamp for 3M.
3M could blow a leaf across her desk and she'd sign it at this point.
While I am in the hospital, which 3M is aware of, they go to the court and they send a letter.
They just send a letter.
What happened to motion practice?
What happened to the due process rule?
Let me interject here.
I'm only laughing because I know where this is going because people will not believe what they did.
Okay, sorry.
I'm not laughing at your misfortune, Robert.
I'm laughing at the bottomless scoundrelness.
And of course, 3M doesn't tell the judge, by the way, the counsel, Robert Barnes, the lead counsel to handle this aspect of the case is in the hospital, though they know that.
So it's until after I get out of the hospital that I even find out that while I was in the hospital, they went with this letter request and within four days got the judge to issue an order saying that the individual could be subject to contempt unless...
Within basically one business day, they just turn over their entire social media account.
Hey, Judge, when you took that oath to the Constitution, did you actually listen to what you said?
Because it doesn't seem like it.
So it turns out, I mean, she didn't even have the information anyway, because she complies with the court order.
They're going to still be a pain to deal with all the way through.
But I was talking to other people, and I'm like, How in the world can a court order me when I'm not even a party to a case to disclose all of my private information about me?
It's like, how does that even happen?
That's what the law is in Judge Jennifer Wilson's court in the Middle District of Pennsylvania, following up on what Judge Beelstone did in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
What is the idea of federal judges who don't like either religious discrimination claims or COVID vaccine claims?
You have federal judges out there that are complicit in the deaths and disabilities of individuals because they mandated and ordered the vaccine themselves.
They have a personal conflict of interest in these proceedings.
But the question is, how did we ever even get here?
We got here because of the laziness of the Supreme Court of the United States to fail to consistently enforce due process limitations on the invasive nature of discovery.
We're also here because federal judges have decided That they don't like discovery disputes, so they're just going to circumvent the Constitution of the United States and the federal rules of civil procedure, and in this case, in my view, the local rules of the federal district court, because they just create their own rules.
They're going to, oh, just send in a letter.
We don't need a motion.
Just send in a letter.
And, oh, by the way, you get three days to respond, not the 14 days or 20 days that is traditionally allowed under the local rules or federal rules.
And here you have a judge threatening contempt.
Without going through any of the requirements of due process, you're supposed to be given fair notice, opportunity to contest, opportunity to debate or present your argument, an evidentiary hearing if needed or necessary or requested, under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that governs federal courts like everybody else.
Problem one is, what happens when you have judges judging their own power?
What's the likelihood?
You see, our separation of powers was supposed to protect against this, but it doesn't work in this instance because judges usurp executive and legislative authority in the way they go about doing this, and then they don't limit themselves in their power, and when they don't limit themselves, they abuse that power at the behest of behalf of parties and participants in many instances.
The second problem is there should be a right to appeal discovery rulings that go to constitutional rights.
And they need to amend the federal rules of civil procedure and federal rules of appellate procedure to explicitly provide for that.
Instead, the Supreme Court has gone to great lengths to make it nigh on impossible for the ordinary individual.
We'll get to who they exempt is.
You have to go through contempt if you want to challenge it.
If you want to assert, hey, I think I'm right and this district court is wrong.
You have to be willing to go to jail.
That's insane.
That requirement should never have to be the case.
By contrast, when it involves the government, when it involves big corporations, courts go out of their way to say, oh, do you have personal jurisdiction?
Probably not if it's a third-party subpoena.
And then secondly, even if you do have personal jurisdiction, you have to afford all this time and opportunity for them to make objection.
And they often will take the appeals of big corporations and the government.
When they object on discovery ground, they just won't allow it for individuals.
So that's why the federal rules of civil procedure and appellate procedure have to be modified.
The federal rules of civil procedure need to be modified to stop all this letter-writing garbage.
And it happens in state courts all the time, too.
We have motion practice for a reason.
We have detailed rules governing that motion practice for a reason.
It makes absolutely no sense if you could just throw out all the rules governing motions by just saying, hey, send me a letter.
And I'll decide the timeframe.
I'll decide if you even get a chance to respond.
I'll decide whether any other procedural remedy or relief is affordable, available to you in contravention of the explicit language of the federal rules of civil procedure and even local rules and the Constitution of the United States.
And the second issue is federal courts need to be stripped of their power to issue monetary sanctions.
Unless they go through, if they want to present, they should have to go through an order to show cause procedure, remove themselves from the procedure, have somebody else So if they don't like your case, what they do is they create a bunch of sanctions.
That you sometimes don't even get a hearing on, sometimes don't even get meaningful notice on, like here.
There's no meaningful notice, unless you consider 72 hours while I'm in the hospital, of going and undergoing a medical procedure.
I was mostly unconscious for substantial periods of time, a fair notice.
I mean, it's just been embarrassing.
But it's, around Europe and much the rest of the world, they are shocked and horrified by the invasive nature of discovery against individuals in courts.
And it's a huge problem in our system of justice.
The discovery should have to be necessary, material, not invade privacy, meets constitutional scrutiny.
Judges are not enforcing that at all.
I mean, no better example than somebody who has an appeal pending before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals on this precise issue is in a different case that they're not even a party to being compelled to disclose their entire social media account.
Like, what?
I mean, that's how insane the courts have become.
And so we need real legislative relief or remedy.
But that's how bad it is, and that's how we got to where we're at.
Yeah, I knew the story.
It's impossible.
It's why people get pushed out of the practice.
You can't compete with that level of scoundrelness where taking advantage of someone in a hospital, not extending the same courtesies that are extended.
It's like you get no reward for being good.
They did it another thing with this labor law firm and another one of these anti-labor law firms in another case.
Knowing that...
Some people have met her.
My associate on these cases is Alexis Anderson, who is very conscientious.
They knew because they'd been told that her mother went through a very difficult time.
She was her principal caregiver, the only daughter, only child.
And her mother passed away this past month.
And it's like, so you're a corporate lawyer.
You know the other side.
If one is in the hospital in a severe situation, the other one went through a very difficult tragedy, and you think, how can I take advantage of this to hurt an employee that my employer client wants to harass?
I mean, what kind of person does that?
One person even wrote to other people accusing me and implying I hadn't been in the hospital and that I was on a self-promotion campaign.
And it's like, pal, if you libel me as a corporate lawyer, I'm suing you personally and your law firm.
Coming for you personally.
No more of this nonsense.
But you're absolutely right.
What drives good people out of the law is these nasty, vicious lawyers.
Huh. I think I may have lost them.
No, no, you're still there.
I still see you.
Oh, well, he's gone.
He'll be back in a second.
Yeah, he's coming back in.
I see him in the backdrop.
Well, there he is.
Oh, now you're a potato, Robert.
You're all corrupt judges.
I never intended to say anything adverse about any of these honorable men and women who sit in those black robes and are routinely and repeatedly violating their oaths by violating the civil rights of the individuals before them.
Let me bring up one thing here, by the way, because it's from our locals community.
Just to change the topic a little bit, look at this beautiful, sharp image.
Look at the detail on the wing that you got of that beautiful landing bird.
All right, before we head over to locals, Robert, Alex Jones and Infowars gave me, or offered me, I don't know if they sent you the email, but an affiliate link, people.
So if you're going to get Alex Jones merch, Alex Jones merch, get it from here.
Give credit to the bankruptcy court.
So people think I'm just critical of judges.
I'm not.
When judges do conscientious, constitutionally constitutional, contentious behavior, I'm one of the first to celebrate them.
The is that Alex Jones, once again, exposed the fraud of what took place.
Oh, yeah.
The efforts of them to steal his company failed.
Steal his company, steal everything, his social media, and fraudulently so on the basis of bonifying, I don't know if that's the word in French, but...
Increasing the offer by foregoing monies that The Onion would have to pay to the judgment creditors with Alex Jones' future earnings, which become nothing if they steal his assets.
They tried to steal it.
The Judge Lopez rendered a good decision.
And now Alex Jones is still selling stuff to stay afloat if you're going to buy stuff.
I'm going to turn it to like Poso, the Lindell Poso 10. Go to, I think it's forward slash Viva on Alex Jones.
TheAlexJonesStore.com forward slash Viva.
Promo code Viva.
Barnes, Robert, we're going to do some more party stuff over on VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com.
What I'm thinking about soon, Airbnb.
A scam I recently was the victim of related to Airbnb.
Luis de Manzion, the alleged assassin of the United Healthcare Executive.
Why does he give off MKUltra vibes?
As Mark Robert of America's Untold Stories with Eric Hunley has partially discussed already.
Is Santa a trespasser?
NCAA sued for consumer fraud related to trans.
And last but not least, what's the true story about USS Liberty and the nation of Israel?
And if you want to get some merch, our merch, you can go to VivaFry and get that.
VivaFry.com.
I got a video, by the way.
When we talk about Luigi Mangione, wait until I pull up a clip.
Let me make sure that we haven't missed anything here before we head on over.
Did I hear correctly you're going to members only to refute Candace?
That's sure brave, Barnes.
I think the person must be joking because I published the entire stream afterwards.
Part of the show is the after party and is part of the incentive and reward for those who are members of EvaBarnesLaw.locals.com.
It's not behind a paywall.
You can go to mewithbarnslaw.locals.com and watch the rest of the show.
Oh, no, no, no, no.
The supporters-only portion is behind a paywall.
Oh, yeah, the supporters-only is.
But the show...
Don't worry, we'll clip it, I'm sure.
Oh, I'm clipping it.
Barnes vs.
Keynes Owens on USS Liberty.
What really happened on USS Liberty?
And by the way, your Hush Hush is available.
I think that's not behind a paywall, correct?
I originally put it behind a paywall, but then removed it from that so that anybody could watch it and read it and review it.
If you want the more extended version, you go to the playlist at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
There are over 80 Hush Hushes that get into debates about alternative interpretations of events, of great historic events and contemporary events that you can find there.
We'll be adding those throughout the year.
We'll get to 100 before the...
Next New Year rolls along, and it's a great opportunity to do so.
I'm going to snip it and clip it.
This is the incentive for, and not the incentive, but this is the perk for our supporters.
And the entire podcast...
Join the live chat and join it.
Because this community, you put a little bit of skin in the game, and it motivates you to be participant, to be involved, and it does help provide a monetary foundation by which 1776 Law Center can have me and other lawyers Doing work that is otherwise completely pro bono, you know, because, I mean, as many, I mean, over half of my work has been pro bono effectively now for five years.
But what makes that possible is the support at feebobarnslaw.locals.com.
So knowing you get great exclusive information, a fun community you get to participate in, you also support very important work.
That's happening across the country.
For people like Gamis Miller, for people like the Covington kids, Kyle Rittenhouse, I never asked him to pay me a penny, nickel, diamond, or dollar for advocating for him for many years because he was a good kid.
He was wrongfully indicted.
But what makes that financially possible without going broke is the support of people at VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com.
Absolutely. Go there, people.
If you're not going, I'll see you.
I may not be live tomorrow, but I'll definitely put out a shorter video tomorrow.
I have to go see Marchand's order.
Maybe I'll just do a quick summary on that.
That is it.
Well, come on over.
Everyone's coming over.
Let's see.
We're over a thousand people watching in Locals right now.
So ending on both platforms.
I forgot to end on YouTube today, but whatever.
Entire stream.
Oh, someone was asking what the new podcast is.
The title on Spotify, I shared the link.
It's Viva Frye, Recovering Litigator, and I didn't...
Remove Barnes for any pride or whatever.
The majority of the podcasts are not the Sunday show, so I didn't want people getting misled and say, I came for Viva Barnes and all I see is Viva's daily ranting.
It's on Viva Fry, Recovering Litigator, on Spotify, everywhere.
Robert, are you going to get any bourbon with Barnes's out this week?
You're with family and I don't know what your schedule is.
Maybe a pre-recorded video or something, potentially.
We'll see how it goes.
But it's good to catch up with family up here and appreciate it.
Okay, fantastic.
So everybody, Merry Christmas, but I'll see you before then, maybe not live.
Peace out.
You know where to go.
InfoWars. It's alexjonesstore.com forward slash revo.
Okay, ending on all platforms except for local supporters only and everybody who wants to hear Barnes' takedown of Candace.
I don't even know where it's going because I'm not sure yet.
I'll play it.
You'll get it tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection