Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 13, 2025 - Viva & Barnes

01:30:04

Ashe in America! Elections in Canada! Genocide in South Africa? AND MORE!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hey everybody, this is Jordan Keeley, Peace River North MLA.
	I took a chance to come to Universal Ostrich Farm here to have a look at their ostriches.
	These birds fought the avian flu and survived.
	And right now the CFIA and the federal government want to come after them and call them.
	And unfortunately the farmers, the owners, they have to now try and fight this in our court system.
	To get it so then these amazing birds can survive.
	But you know, these birds, they're flightless.
	They don't leave this farm.
	They've stayed inside their fences.
	Their only problem is that the government's let wild birds that are diseased and have viruses, like the avian flu, fly all over North America and spread this disease.
	Right now, them thinking that culling these birds is going to actually make a difference, you can cull every single one of these birds and bring back new ones, and those same wild birds are going to get them sick again.
	Right now, we need this government to step up and figure out a way to go forward to stop the wild birds from spreading these viral diseases to all different types of other animals because it's their job to deal with the wild animals.
	I don't care for this part of the video.
	I wanted to just play the update so that you can refresh your memories because I had on Katie from Universal Ostrich Farms a while back to talk about this case where the government, CFIA, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, went to their ostrich farm and determined that they had to kill I forget how many hundreds of ostriches they have on that farm.
	Cull, by the way, is a very polite word for slaughter.
	And the CFIA, a government agency, came in and said, yeah, you had a few sick ostriches before, and we did a test on them, some anus swab, and I'm not trying to be funny, it's just the lack of seriousness of the test, an anal swab PCR test, and determined that some of these birds might have had the avian flu.
	And so they've got to kill, slaughter, cull, the entire ostrich farm, several hundred of them.
	I forget exactly how many.
	The CFIA comes down with that order and Katie took to the courts to get an emergency injunction enjoining the imposition of that order to slaughter, to murder these ostriches.
	They were digging trenches because apparently they have to bury them several hundred per trench.
	They got a court order to enjoin the immediate enforcement of that administrative body ruling to slaughter these animals.
	And they went to the courts for a hearing on judicial review of that order from the CFIA.
	It's Sovietism.
	This is communism, statism, whatever the hell you want to call it.
	Administrative bodies to which the actual courts must show deference because of their specialties.
	And by the way, if you're listening to this on podcast, I'm putting all of these words in quotes.
	These are administrative Soviet tribunals that are specialists in that...
	Which the government says you get to now go and have basically exclusive jurisdiction to the exclusion of the courts.
	And if you have a problem with it, the courts are going to defer to the authority of these specialty tribunals.
	So Katie, Ostrich Farm, I had her on, we talked about it, tried to put on as much blast as possible.
	They got an MLA there, that's a member of legislative government, from the provincial government.
	Tried to put on as much blast as humanly possible.
	They went to a judge, a federal judge.
	And the judge today issued the ruling.
	I mean, I literally got it a couple of minutes before going live.
	Let me see if I can find the ruling.
	I had it opened here.
	A judge basically says, yeah, the decision is not unreasonable and we must defer to the authority of this administrative specialty tribunal and allow for the culling, the killing, the slaughter, the massacre of...
	However many hundreds of ostriches currently reside on that farm.
	By the way, it's been 120 days.
	None of them have been sick.
	It's been 120 days.
	None of them have died.
	None of them have, from what I understand, tested positive for the avian flu.
	This is what happens when you get a disgusting, stubborn, piece of shit government organization with their claws into your private business.
	They never let them out.
	And they'll never admit that they were wrong, because to do that would admit that they've been wrong in other circumstances.
	These ostriches have been healthy for, as far as I understand, 119 days now.
	No, no, but they're still going to enforce the original order to slaughter them because of the urgency of the situation at the time two freaking months ago.
	You know, I said that there's no way a judge could come to this order because by the time a judge comes to this order, any purported urgency for the slaughter is now definitionally no longer existing.
	I'm not going to read all of this because it's a 127-page ruling and I haven't read the entire thing yet.
	I skipped to the end, but the overview is pretty decent.
	Applicant, Universal Ostrich Farms, challenges two related decisions made by the respondents, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, under section whatever, the first decision, a notice to dispose, order the destruction of all ostriches on the farm.
	After laboratory tests confirmed infection of H5N1, highly pathogenic avian flu.
	It's so highly pathogenic, none of them have suffered from it in two freaking months.
	The second refused the farm's request to spare the flock on the basis that the ostriches formed self-contained.
	They were protected.
	They survived and now, therefore, have some sort of antibody.
	At the heart of these proceedings lies the inevitable tension between a government Soviet body that can tell you to kill your entire business.
	Some of these ostriches have been in the family for 35 years.
	Sorry, I'm yelling.
	Parliament has charged the CFIA with preventing the spread of designated zoonic and enzoonic diseases with the protocol, yada yada yada bullshit.
	They create a Soviet-style administrative tribunal that is lawless in its tyranny.
	The two applicants addressed whether the CFIA's decisions were reasonable and procedurally fair.
	I dismissed both applications for judicial review.
	The agency's decisions were reasonable based on the record before the decision maker.
	At the time!
	Two months ago!
	You want to tell me there's urgency to slaughter these animals now?
	They were made in a procedurally fair manner.
	No, they weren't.
	This is corruption covering corruption.
	It wasn't procedurally fair.
	They weren't allowed to do their own tests on the birds.
	They have to rely on the government's anal swab PCR tests, and we know how reliable those are.
	Courts must respect Parliament's choice to assign decision-making power to administrative bodies.
	While America goes in the right direction, overturning the chevron deference to administrative tribunals, who get to make their rules, interpret their rules, and enforce their rules, that's called tyranny.
	In Canada, they're going the other direction.
	We must respect Parliament's choice to assign decision-making power to administrative bodies, who get to tell you to kill your animals.
	The respect comes from the principle of separation of powers, a cornerstone of Canadian public law.
	Courts must also respect the demonstrated scientific and technical expertise of these agencies.
	You want to know what a fucking incompetent, corrupt agency looks like?
	Look no further than the CFIA!
	Judicial Review hinges on what was before the decision-maker.
	With very few exceptions, reviewing courts on Judicial Review must mentally travel back to the moment before the decision-maker.
	No, it doesn't!
	How about today?
	Two months!
	There's no outbreak.
	There's no spread.
	You're going to go order the slaughter?
	How many ostriches were there?
	Hold on.
	How many ostriches?
	Question mark.
	You're going to go order the slaughter of...
	I want to say...
	I don't want to make a mistake.
	Hundreds of ostriches.
	You're going to go order the slaughter of them?
	Well, because we have to respect the decision that was made at the time.
	Two months ago.
	This is...
	This is cruelty.
	This is abuse.
	This is tyranny.
	And if you sit down there in Canada and you say, well, that's what the courts have to say.
	We're not going to make a stink about it.
	Hey, where's Pierre Poilievre?
	Oh, that's right.
	Silence.
	Where's any meaningful opposition in Canada?
	Oh, that's right.
	Well, you better defer to the authority of the administrator of tribunals because the power begets the power and the government has given the power to the tribunals and taken it away from the courts who have to defer to the authority of the tribunals because they were created by the government.
	This is the holy trinity of government tyranny.
	Making you kill your animals.
	At least in America, there's some pushback to this.
	Listen to this.
	If courts conducted judicial review with the information that did not exist at the time of the decision-making, they would be faulting decision-makers for lacking crystal ball.
	How about you just adjudicate based on reality today?
	So help me God if they order the slaughter of these animals.
	I'll be the biggest, loudest, pain in the ass ever.
	I can sit and scream at the sky and shake my fist like Abe Simpson.
	If that's all I can do, that's all I will do.
	Concepts like reasonableness and procedural fairness have specific meanings in administrative law.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	This court's upset that there is a real and negative impact of the CFIA's two decisions on the applicant.
	Oh, you do?
	Killing all of her animals?
	You can concede that?
	How bold of you.
	Beyond the economic loss, the destruction of long-established ostrich population is also a source of emotional distress.
	Too fucking bad!
	That's basically what they say.
	Nonetheless, such personal losses must be weighed against the broader public interest for the greater good, people.
	Once you understand Ayn Rand, if you do not respect individual rights, you do not respect any minority rights, the greater good does not mean tyrannizing the individual.
	Respecting the rights of the individual is the greater good.
	Oh, God.
	It must be weighed.
	Yeah, your psychological torture, your distress, your destruction of property, your theft of private property, because that's what it is.
	Theft by murder.
	Must be weighed against the broader public interest of protecting public health and maintaining trade stability.
	Avian influenza is a virus capable of causing serious harm.
	Oh, sorry, you can't look back with a crystal ball, but you can look forward with a crystal ball?
	To combat threats like the virus, Parliament has authorized the CFIA to act decisively, making swift, merciless, brutal, murderous decisions with far-reaching consequences, often conditions of unscientific concern.
	Go to hell.
	Everyone involved in that can go to hell.
	If they're not already there, because hell will be when you cannot walk among your brethren on earth because of your inhumanity to men.
	So share that.
	Let the world know.
	This is the absolute state of Canada.
	It is full-fledged Soviet-style communism, statism, tyranny.
	I'm going to speak with Katie afterwards.
	I'm going to see if I can get her back on or her lawyers, and we'll talk about this, understand the consequences, the delays, the time frame within which they've got to slaughter their ostriches.
	Yep, I heard it was 400 if I'm not mistaken.
	I thought it was 400 and some odd.
	And they had to like, they can only bury them in tranches of a certain amount.
	So they got to dig like multiple trenches.
	Have you ever seen an ostrich?
	300 pounds, it can kill a lion.
	No, go around and kill 400 some odd ostriches because they haven't been sick in two months.
	Two months.
	But we don't have a crystal ball.
	Serenity?
	There will be no serenity now.
	Horse crap.
	Don't lie to myself.
	We're going to get into the show today.
	We've got an amazing show.
	This was, say, hot off the presses.
	Literally, that judgment came into my inbox moments ago.
	And I haven't been able to read it, but I've been able to get angry about it because I know what it says.
	I could draft it if I want to be a...
	Mental gymnastics arriving at a conclusion and therefore arguing for...
	I could have drafted that.
	By the way, I did call it.
	We've got to show deference to the administrative tribunals who were created because of their areas of expertise.
	Bullshit.
	You ever worked with the government?
	Oh yeah, they've got an expertise on nothing.
	And they've got power over everything.
	And you put those two things together and you've got the absolute state of Canada in its current iteration.
	Ash in America is on.
	We're going to talk about the genocide in South Africa that's not happening, and if you don't like it, you can leave, also known as genocide, and a few other things.
	Ash in America, if you don't remember, we had a discussion a while back about her lawsuit that was taken.
	I don't want to misrepresent it.
	I also want to allow Ash to introduce herself.
	Let me just make sure that we are live across all interweb platform-ish things.
	We're on Rumble, Viva Fry, former Montreal litigator, current Florida rumbler, and I had a headache before we started.
	And I've just made it exponentially worse.
	We're live on Rumble.
	We are live on Twitter.
	We are live on vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	We end the show.
	We have our after party on vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	I don't know who rated us today, but thank you, Rumble, for everything that you're doing in the fight for free speech.
	And I will snip and clip and share portions of this on Commitube.
	It will be on podcast format pretty much every day.
	But I see the chat is chanting for Ash, and I've kept it waiting for longer than I said it would.
	I'm sorry, Ash.
	I'm bringing you in.
	Three, two, one.
	Bada bing, bada boom.
	Hey, thanks for having me.
	Well, thank you for coming, and I'm sorry about that delayed intro.
	I couldn't do that later.
	Literally, I got word six minutes before going live that, yeah, they're going to try to order the killing.
	It's insanity.
	They're raised for meat, right?
	Yeah, well, they're raised for meat.
	You can eat their eggs.
	I've done a number of videos of ostrich eggs.
	Their eggs contain like 24 regular size eggs.
	They're beautiful.
	I'm told they're smart animals.
	I think they're painfully stupid, but I defer to the authorities, but they are beautiful animals.
	Massive.
	Their meat is red like filet mignon, but without the fat.
	Super lean, clean.
	The eggs are amazing.
	You make stuff out of their feathers.
	They're also amazing pets.
	They didn't have this farm open to the public, but they're good tourism.
	Their claws are amazing because you can make like...
	Anyway, they're amazing.
	Yeah.
	Well, you mentioned that there's pushback in America, but the Canadian administrative state is enviable to our bureaucrats.
	So hopefully the pushback continues here because that's a crazy story.
	California, they're looking at Canada and they're taking notes as to how you do it.
	And you get the...
	Population propagandized.
	You get the population dependent on the government for subsidies, for employment.
	And then, lo and behold, you've captured a country.
	So, Canada is captured, and it's a damn shame, and it's outrageous.
	Ash, for those who don't know who you are, the 30,000-foot overview before we get into your, at least, when I say smashing victory, I don't know what stage of the victory you're at.
	This is smashing victory.
	It's amazing.
	And even with the victory comes hardships.
	But, yeah, tell the world who you are.
	Yeah, so I was on in November of 2023.
	You were sitting in for Alex Jones, and I had just been doxxed in President Trump's 14th Amendment trial.
	They spelled my government name into the record, looked into the camera and said, you can't stream, you're not a real journalist.
	And it was a bunch of lies, right?
	And I wish I knew then what I knew after going through the trial about our First Amendment protections and that the government can't tell you who a real journalist is.
	It's not actually something that they can do in America, but I didn't.
	So we stopped streaming.
	But the second day after that, they mentioned USCIP, which is the association that I see Holly in the chat.
	She's at USCIP in the chat.
	She's my co-defendant in this.
	And it's just an idea, really, that we should...
	It's the U.S. Election Integrity Plan.
	And the idea was that after the stolen election, which I believe elections are fake.
	So, you know, take that for what it is.
	And I've defended that position in federal court.
	That everybody was going to pop up an election integrity type of committee in the state of Colorado and that they should talk to each other.
	So we set out introducing people, connecting people and kind of wiring the state of Colorado from a grassroots standpoint to get people talking to each other.
	Part of what we did was We canvassed.
	So four counties across the state of Colorado went door-to-door and checked the government's work.
	This is what the official record says.
	Is this true?
	Did you vote?
	Did you vote in person or by mail or whatever the record says?
	All public data checked the government's work on the record.
	We found that 8% to 11% of the government's record was anomalous.
	Let me ask you the question.
	The obvious question is going to be for those who want to say, do you have the right to do that?
	Does it require specific authority to go canvas?
	Absolutely not.
	Yeah, so part of our defense is, with the words of the ACLU, you absolutely have a right to talk to your neighbors.
	You absolutely have a right to, it's First Amendment protected activity of speech and assembly to go door to door.
	And the people that sued us, the NAACP, League of Women Voters, and Mi Familia Vota, They all canvass.
	They canvass regularly.
	It was actually the content of our canvassing that they took issue with, and they sued us two days before our report came out.
	Their case was always complete bullshit.
	There was no evidence.
	We went through the discovery process.
	They were denied a TRO because the judge changed along the way.
	But when they asked for a TRO, the judge says, You're not presenting anything except for allegations.
	Like, I can't infringe upon their behavior because of allegations.
	You don't have any pictures.
	You don't have anybody that's talked to anybody.
	It was always a fabrication.
	So you're going door to door just trying to compare the answers you get with the government information, which is basically ring the doorbell and say, Answer these questions.
	I've got some questions.
	Would you like to answer?
	And if they say no, get the hell off my property, then you move on to the next one.
	And it's much like going door to door to say, would you like to sign my petition?
	Or would you like to vote for the Liberals or the Conservatives?
	And they answer willingly or they don't.
	And then you move on.
	And they were accusing you of voter intimidation?
	Voter intimidation, coercion, and threats under the Voting Rights Act, Section 11B, and the KKK Act.
	And they filed their case in federal court, March of 2022, and then immediately went to the press.
	And so we found out we were being sued under the KKK Act by the press when, I think it was a Washington Post reporter called Holly for comment, and she's like, what are you talking about?
	We got the filing from the reporter who took pity on her.
	We weren't served for another week and a half.
	Unbelievable.
	Okay.
	I'm going to pull up your give set and go in a second, but...
	Keep going with this story.
	It's a year and a half ago that we did this.
	It'll be two years in November.
	That's wild.
	So that moment in the 14th Amendment trial was really important because they mentioned USCIP the next day.
	And in my head, I'm going, they're going to roll us up.
	There's something bigger going on here because why would USCIP come up in President Trump's 14th Amendment trial?
	It doesn't make sense unless it's like a coordinated Effort in levels of government and to do this, go after anybody.
	Anybody that's talking about election fraud in the state of Colorado.
	Everybody that was vocal about election fraud in the state of Colorado had some sort of consequence.
	Tina Peters is the obvious one.
	Dallas Schroeder is another clerk who took images in the state of Colorado.
	He was attacked by the Secretary of State's office.
	There's a lot of stuff happening in the Colorado Secretary of State's office that's really interesting right now.
	But there's this coordinated effort.
	So at that moment, our attorneys were like, you guys should just settle.
	Like, just sign the consent decree.
	We'll all agree to keep following the law.
	It's totally fine.
	And we knew at this point that they had their only witness who said that they were intimidated by USCIP.
	They lied.
	And we know that the witness lied.
	We knew it then because she had like three conflicting statements, but we know it definitively because on the stand, it was a very dramatic courtroom moment where on the stand, she admits that she only ever named us because the plaintiff's attorneys told her to.
	They ghostwrote her declaration to beat a motion for summary judgment in December of 2022, and the case kept going because this woman lied.
	And at trial, that came out.
	But before that...
	I decided when they said, you know, just settle.
	Or if you want to go to trial, pay us $50,000 more.
	Holly and I fired our attorneys and decided to defend ourselves.
	What was the U.S. EIP, United States Election Integrity Plan?
	They were suing you.
	What conclusions were they seeking against you for voter intimidation?
	Like damages and permanent injunctions in joining you from canvassing?
	Yeah, they wanted to restrict us from talking to any voters, from spreading election denialism.
	They wanted compensatory damages.
	They claimed that they diverted resources, these three NGOs, and that was how they got standing.
	And they made those claims up until the pretrial order, and then they mysteriously dropped their claims for compensatory damages.
	Because they couldn't prove it.
	And later on in the proceedings said that they never made those claims.
	This case is full of conjecture and allegations.
	They alleged that we were going door-to-door and we were sending armed agents door-to-door intimidating voters.
	It was like mostly retirees that were, yeah.
	I guess the question is, showing their website, what is their, their objective is strictly to...
	Intimidate you and others out of canvassing to verify the government's data and potentially to discover what might be misrepresentation or fraud at the government level?
	So our intention was to find the truth about elections and expose it.
	That was our intention.
	The canvassing effort yielded, as I said, 8% to 11% where we have affidavits from people saying, well, I didn't vote and it says I voted.
	Or I did vote and it says I didn't vote.
	Places where you can't receive a mail-in ballot, and yet a mail-in ballot was cast from those locations.
	Things like that.
	That was our intention.
	Their intention was to stop us.
	They did not want us going door to door.
	Now, they framed it as though we were being racist and going out and intimidating people, but they wanted to stop our behavior, and that came out at trial.
	They very explicitly said they sued us to stop our behavior.
	But they also have a great benefit of fundraising and headlines and fundraising out of this, right?
	They hit the headlines, the fundraising machine starts, they file a TRO, more headlines, more fundraising.
	They get a favorable, you know, they beat motion for summary judgment, more headlines, more fundraising.
	They never intend for it to go to trial.
	And most of the time, it does not.
	Most of the time, people settle because the process is the punishment.
	And that's what we're trying right now to impact.
	Because in civil rights cases, because of 1978 Supreme Court precedent in Christiansburg Garment District versus EEOC.
	The court determined that because prosecuting civil rights is so important, that the plaintiffs in civil rights litigation have strong, equitable considerations against fee shifting or any sort of penalty if they lose.
	And that might have been necessary in 1978.
	And in, I think, the original intent of it, the defendant was almost always a government entity.
	When that case was decided.
	What that's turned into in 2025 is that the NAACP can do whatever they want to do in a federal court of law, and they don't have to ever worry about paying anybody's legal fees.
	They just get away with it because prosecuting civil rights is just so important.
	So that's what the give, send, go is about.
	We've got a couple great lawyers.
	They're seeing this, you know, kind of the long game.
	It's a loophole right now that...
	You know, NGOs, leftist NGOs are able to exploit, abuse the legal process with no downside.
	And the process is the punishment.
	So what happened in the trial?
	Your lawyer says settle, just consent to not doing whatever it is they want to enjoy you not to do.
	So he fired them.
	And then you go pro se to trial.
	Yeah, so the trial was supposed to be, we fired them in December.
	The trial was supposed to be in February.
	We filed for continuance.
	And our goal at that point was really to preserve the record, Holly and mine.
	We thought we were going to lose.
	It was a Biden-appointed judge, only became a judge because Trump, and donated to Act Blue, and had biased statements on the record.
	So we were kind of thinking, we're going to lose this one.
	We're going to have to appeal.
	And so we were trying to preserve the record.
	Bought the federal rules of civil procedure, bought the federal rules of evidence books, downloaded all the case law of civil rights, You did the best that we could, and we won on 52C motion.
	A directed verdict.
	I mean, those people might not realize just how rare that is.
	Like, you have the whole trial, and the judge says, we're not even submitting it to a jury because it's so patently baseless.
	Yeah.
	Let me read this a little bit.
	We didn't even have to bring our defensive case in chief.
	It was ended before that.
	It was so absurd.
	And then they appealed.
	And then the court somehow said it's not frivolous.
	And it absolutely is frivolous.
	The legal battle timeline.
	NAACP League of Women's Voters Mi Familia sued you guys.
	Yada, yada, back in the day.
	Plaintiffs falsely accused us, the defendants, of voter intimidation.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Before we were even served, plaintiffs launched a global press campaign.
	Man, we talked about that at the time.
	Why were we served?
	Defendants won at trial.
	After nearly three years and a rare directed verdict, we decidedly won our case.
	The judge ruled the plaintiffs failed to make the case due to lack of evidence.
	Then they appeal.
	So the directed verdict on appeal gets overturned, so now you've got to go back and what?
	Have a...
	It hasn't been overturned.
	We're waiting for the 10th Circuit.
	I'm still pro se in the 10th Circuit.
	My brief is pretty fire.
	I'm pretty proud of it.
	It's up on my Twitter.
	People can read it.
	It lays out what their plan is.
	One of the things that we discovered is a divine inspiration type of thing as we were learning this and figuring out our defenses as pro se is there's an entire academic body that's focused on expanding the Voting Rights Act to apply to things like speech and assembly.
	It's NYU Social Justice Law Review.
	We found their article that is really a playbook.
	It lays out every civil rights case and how they won or lost.
	But it goes in to say, you should really attach the KKK Act because that's going to change people's behavior.
	That's going to brand them with those embarrassing associations, even though it's really unlikely that you'll win the KKK claim because nobody really ever has.
	You should still attach it because those embarrassing associations, We found their whole playbook.
	So my appellate brief really summarizes it and quotes it.
	Now, I can do that because in the case, their expert witness, who was an expert on the racist history of voter suppression in America.
	As if that had anything to do with anything.
	He relied on it in his expert opinion.
	And they cite it as an authority in their appellant brief.
	So I pulled it out and broke it down for the court.
	And I'm like, you guys should really read this and what they're saying.
	Because this is exactly what they did to us.
	One last thing, actually, just in the give, send, go.
	Which is, winning this appeal, we need to prove the case was frivolous, baseless, or meritless from the start.
	We have the evidence, once in a decade opportunity.
	Need to raise money to pay our legal team.
	For the appeal, if we don't raise the funds in time, we'll miss the crucial opportunity to stop the NGO lawfare.
	You've pleaded it currently before a panel?
	So there's two cases before the Tenth Circuit.
	One is the briefs are all done.
	I'm pro se in that action.
	We're waiting for the court.
	Everything was in in the beginning of February.
	So we're waiting for the court to rule on that.
	The second one is the brief is due.
	Our brief, we're the appellants in this action appealing the lower courts ruling that the case isn't frivolous, the Christianberg standard, all of that.
	That's a separate action.
	And that brief is due, I think, on the 20th.
	We have lawyers in that action because we're going after...
	Supreme Court precedent.
	That's the long game on this.
	And we are still attempting to raise all of the legal fees that we need.
	We've worked it out so that we're going to proceed, but we don't have any backing, any investors, anything.
	Just people that want to help us.
	And that's worked out for us since the beginning of USCIP.
	You know, USCIP never raised a penny.
	Never incorporated.
	It was literally the people coming together.
	That canvassing effort knocked 10,000 doors across the state of Colorado with just the people volunteering their skills, talents, and passions.
	It's one of the most beautiful things I've ever been a part of.
	And that's why I'm defending it so hard, to be honest.
	I'm just trying to get clear.
	So I understand the timeline on...
	The dismissal has not yet been pleaded, or was the dismissal directed verdict, has that been pleaded before appellate judges?
	The briefs are all in.
	There won't be oral arguments, but the court has not ruled yet.
	Okay, excellent.
	Now, do you know who the judges are in that?
	So there was three that were assigned, and then it moved to a different process.
	I'm not sure who it's sitting with right now, and that is a real question.
	The district court is Charlotte Sweeney.
	She's made headlines.
	She recently took on Trump on the immigration deportations.
	She issued an injunction on that.
	She's also been in the news for returning books, forcing a county to return gender books back into the school classroom.
	She's pretty anti-Trump.
	And we won before her, which was a surprise to all of us, I think.
	But she's been overturned quite a bit.
	By the district court, or by the appellate court.
	Okay, interesting.
	So the briefs have been submitted.
	Who finances the USEIP?
	Nobody.
	Has there been anyone looking into whether or not there was any government funding or recipients of government funds prior to DOGE?
	No, USEIP is us.
	It's just an idea.
	It's an association.
	It was people coming together.
	If we needed something, like we have a URL, right?
	You pulled up the website.
	I'm an idiot.
	I meant the NAACP, not the USEIP.
	Oh!
	Sorry, that was not government funding your enterprise, but rather the one that's suing you.
	Where do they get their funds from to sue you?
	They're fundraising, I presume, some government subsidies before the new administration?
	Yeah, so the NAACP also has the NAACP Foundation, right?
	If you date a Republican, did the USAID, follow the money tools, and you find NAACP, I did it too, NAACP all over that, League of Women Voters.
	These are, you know, 100-year-old NGO institutions.
	Now, interestingly, it was the local...
	Affiliates of those groups that suit us, right?
	The Colorado, Montana, Wyoming area chapter of the NAACP.
	When we deposed those plaintiffs, they had zero idea who was funding them, who was paying the legal fees, what the facts of the case were.
	Lady just said, I do not recall for like four hours in her deposition.
	They produced no documents during discovery.
	Their interrogatories were non-responsive.
	I mean, it was every violation imaginable.
	They withheld evidence.
	They withheld the identity of witnesses.
	They misrepresented evidence as having been produced and never produced it.
	And then the piece de resistance, they...
	They coerced a witness to lie on the stand and that came out at trial.
	It is 100% this is sanctionable conduct where when you look at what happened to Rachel Alexander or John Eastman or Jeffrey Clark and the way that they bent themselves into pretzels to say that they violated the rules or the professional conduct, these people used the rules and professional codes of conduct as toilet paper and they have had zero...
	They got away with it.
	As of right now, they got away with it.
	The directed verdict didn't issue any rulings on sanctions, legal fees, court costs?
	No.
	Costs she awarded in the final judgment.
	It was judgment entered in our favor and she awarded costs.
	The attorney's fees is a motion.
	It has to be done via motion.
	So we did the motion and she denied it and said, well, Christiansburg says they have strong equitable considerations and so we don't need to fee shift here.
	That's what we're appealing.
	Okay, interesting.
	That is very...
	Okay, so the fee shifting means there's a presumption that...
	Well, I don't know if it's a presumption, but in order to shift the fees, you've got to show that they were acting abusively or without any color of right in order to reverse.
	How much did you claim for legal fees?
	The total between the three of us across the three years, I think, was about $380,000, if I'm not mistaken.
	$380,000.
	Yeah, and it's more now, right?
	Because we had to fight their appeal and now we're doing this.
	But yeah, and it was baseless from the start.
	It was baseless from before they filed their complaint.
	They filed their complaint to get ahead of our report.
	There was never any merit to this.
	We never did anything wrong except engage in First Amendment activity.
	And it was so bad that even in their appeal...
	They claim that one of their grounds for appeal is that the judge committed error by not considering the broader context of our canvassing.
	And the broader context of our canvassing is that we're election deniers and we were at J6.
	Not in the building, not violent, not anything like in D.C. on J6.
	That's unbelievable.
	I think I might have confused a lot of people by confounding the acronyms when I was referring to one as the other.
	Sorry about that, everybody.
	I'm looking through the chat.
	You're still with Badlands, right?
	Yeah, absolutely.
	And for anybody who doesn't remember, it was live streaming the Colorado case when Kash Patel was testifying.
	That case was to remove Trump from the ballot.
	Refresh my memory when you got called out by name during this.
	It was because people were streaming it and the allegation was that, We're not allowed to be streaming it.
	Yeah, and everybody was streaming that.
	Everybody was.
	I don't know that I was.
	I was watching it on a stream.
	Yeah, but I'm the one that gets called out.
	And every party to that case knows who I am.
	Maybe not Trump's people.
	They might not know who I am, but the Colorado people definitely know who I am.
	I've given public comments in front of them.
	I've written them horrible letters.
	I've seen them talk about me in their open records requests, right?
	They know who I am.
	It's right after Kash Patel.
	Kash gets done, and they're about to call their next witness.
	And Eric Olson, who was the attorney for the petitioners, who had just come out of the AG's office, he was a senior solicitor for the AG's office, and left, launched his own law firm.
	His first case is Trump's 14th Amendment case, right?
	He's just on his professional journey.
	I'm sure there's no collusion or anything there.
	So he says to the judge, Your Honor, we've learned that somebody is streaming this trial without authorization.
	And Judge Sarah Wallace says, well, are you sure that they don't have authorization?
	Are they not included under the expanded media coverage?
	And he says, no, Your Honor, it's an individual streaming on her own accord.
	And her name is Ashley Epp, and they spelled my government name into the record, and the judge said, "Depp?" And he said, "No, EPP." And then she turns the camera, looks into the camera, and says, This is only for real journalists to stream.
	Now, first of all, that's bullshit.
	She can't say that.
	But second of all, I was not streaming as Ashley Epp on my own accord.
	I was on Badlands Media Company, Badlands Channel, with the Badlands logo on the stream, and I only ever have Ash in America on the screen.
	So he just lied to the judge.
	I filed a complaint.
	They ignored it.
	They ignore me all the time.
	Oh, that's amazing.
	I remember watching that at the time.
	I was like, what does that possibly feel like?
	Once I was streaming, I was like, I knew that you weren't streaming it because it was in Canada.
	So I was listening and I was verbally saying what was going on in the trial.
	And then during the trial, they stopped and said, we've got wind that someone is streaming this.
	And I thought they were talking about me, even though I wasn't.
	And like, my heart stops and turns out someone was actually streaming the actual Zoom thing.
	But that's got to make your heart fall out of your focus.
	Encrypt us, sir.
	How goes the battle?
	Amazing.
	I'm talking to a lot of people in chat.
	There seems to be a little bit of confusion as to what caused this lawsuit to begin with.
	Could you go through a little bit of what the underlying action was that you've been accused of?
	Yeah.
	So what we actually did was, as we talked about, go door-to-door.
	And it was, hi, we're concerned citizens.
	We're checking the record of turnout in the 2020 election.
	This is what it says about you and your address.
	Is it true?
	That's basically what we did.
	What they accused us of Was sending armed agents to minority voters' homes to intimidate them and interrogate them about their voting record and to interfere with their voting activity and support and advocacy, and they made a whole bunch of claims.
	And was it really interesting?
	You know, again, to the frivolity of it, they made claims in their complaint that they had personal knowledge of people that were intimidated within their organizations, and people within their organizations knew people that were intimidated.
	None of that ever materialized.
	It was never real.
	It was an intention to stop us.
	They got a whole bunch of headlines.
	They got a whole bunch of fundraising.
	And in the state of Colorado, they really were successful at neutralizing a lot of people's willingness to get involved.
	It's ironic, right?
	They accused us of going after people's support and advocacy by attacking our support and advocacy.
	And they actually did neutralize a lot of people that were pretty engaged because people got scared.
	And I think people in the chat are appreciating now, set aside by mistake, that USEIP is your enterprise.
	It's a striking resemblance to the EIP, which was the Election Integrity Project of Partnership, which was the corrupt one.
	And the NAACP and Mi Familia sued the USEIP, which was your enterprise, just to verify government information.
	In terms of verifying whether or not what government was reporting was accurate and whether or not people were voting and not knowing it.
	And the NAACP and Mi Familia didn't want you doing that.
	And they wanted to allege that you're intimidating voters, potentially going to reveal some chicanery.
	And the League of Women Voters as well.
	We can't leave them out.
	Okay.
	NAACP, Mi Familia, and League of Women Voters.
	Why does that sound like the worst Marvel movie ever?
	I'm going to shut my big mouth.
	How much time has this taken up of your personal and professional life?
	Oh, this has radically transformed my life.
	At the time that these people decided to sue me, I was the women in technology leader for my local consultancy.
	So the top of my career in cloud transformation consulting on the people in business side of cloud.
	So kind of people at the intersection of technology.
	I was loving what I was doing.
	It was published on AWS.
	And when you're accused of violating the KKK Act, you become...
	Consulting is a relationship based business.
	And it dries up your business pretty quick and ruins your reputation and destroys it.
	So, you know, I'm now full-time in the information ward trying to do the best citizen journalism that I can.
	You know, I cover the...
	They will not stop me from looking into the state of Colorado.
	Now they've just pissed me off and made me more rabid about it.
	So I actually am pretty optimistic about what we're seeing here in Colorado.
	The Deputy Secretary of State quit recently.
	He resigned and they replaced him with a Perkins Coy guy who's like an Obama campaign guy.
	The Deputy Secretary of State runs elections and pretty much runs the entire department.
	Jenna Griswold's a puppet.
	I'm going to ask you some broad questions about what's going on in Colorado to follow up on some stuff.
	There was talk about Jenna Griswold.
	There was a leak of some information in a tab of a document which contained election information back in the day, and there was some talk that maybe Jenna Griswold was going to get prosecuted.
	Has she faced any legal repercussions for anything that she's done during her tenure as Secretary of State?
	No, she investigated herself.
	And everything was okay.
	So they were caught in the middle of a cover-up with that, right?
	That came out.
	I actually got an advance notice that that was coming out, and I reached out to their office for comment.
	They ignored me, but then they had their favorite local syndicate do a spotlight with Jenna answering all the friendly questions that night.
	But they were caught in the middle of a cover-up with that.
	Then a few months later, she announced she was running for governor.
	Immediately got hit with campaign finance allegations.
	They lied and got caught in a cover-up again.
	Now, Phil Weiser, who's also running for governor, has dismissed those complaints against her, but she's now running for AG instead of governor, which sounds like a thing of value exchange to me.
	Yeah, well, Denver DA won't file charges over leak of Colorado voting system.
	All she had to do was drop out of the race, right?
	Oh my goodness.
	So nothing politically bad has yet to happen to Jenna Griswold.
	She has yet to face any consequences for anything she's ever done.
	Tina Peters, how much are you following of Tina Peters where she's at right now?
	Well, I'm pretty sure that I've written more about Tina Peters' case going back to August 2021 than any other journalist.
	I follow it very closely.
	I spoke to a person who visited her on Sunday for Mother's Day.
	She is, despite all of the horrors, she is in good spirits.
	She is witnessing and teaching people inside and battling.
	Inch-thick black mold and not getting access to medical care.
	And so there's some complaints, but also she's focused on the mission, man.
	And when I ask what can people do, because that's a question I get a lot about Tina, is people want to send her stuff.
	They want to fill her commissary, whatever it's called, for her to be able to be as comfortable as possible.
	And the answer to that is that she'll get her ass kicked.
	If she has a more comfortable life in there.
	What they're asking people to do is pray.
	What Tina and her team are asking people to do is pray.
	Watch Selection Code and share it and the Mesa reports and make sure people understand why she's sitting in prison right now.
	It's not because she lied to Jenna Griswold.
	It's because she exposed what the machines do.
	And if people are inclined to donate, TinaPeters.us is the only place to donate to Tina Peters Legal Fund.
	TinaPeters.us?
	Correct.
	Yeah.
	What's the state of...
	She's appealing her conviction, I imagine.
	Do you know what the status is of any appeal?
	No, she's had a bunch of motions.
	The appeal was supposed to be filed by the end of February, but I think they got an extension on it.
	She's had a bunch of motions that are denied.
	There's a lot of efforts to pressure.
	Jared Polis to commute her sentence.
	President Trump has directed the DOJ to take every action possible to get her out.
	And of course, they mentioned that they're doing a...
	Investigation on the weaponization of government against her.
	Now, this is the thing I'm most excited about, because if they do a real investigation on the weaponization of government against Tina Peters, it goes back to August of 2021, and it incorporates a whole lot more than Tina Peters' case.
	It is a coordinated effort where they went after Douglas County, Elbert County, Mesa County, and several citizen activist groups that were all looking into election integrity.
	They shut it down.
	They criminalized our lawfully protected First Amendment conduct.
	And it all comes together in a meeting of the minds in August of 2021.
	one.
	I'm hoping to get Harmeet Dillon on to talk about a number of the major civil rights violations, convictions going on in America right now.
	I was on the phone with Dexter Taylor the other day, New York, Tina Peters, Colorado.
	You've got Barnes' client, I forget his name now, Ben Souf out of Seattle.
	It's wild.
	And Barnes laid out the groundwork, the framework in terms of how to investigate the Tina Peters case as a whistleblower case and not as a whatever the bullshit charges they convicted are on election interference.
	It wasn't election interference.
	She was convicted of lying to Jenna Griswold, basically, to her office.
	Every person, there was a, they used Jerry Wood's credentials to get Conan Hazen to take the images.
	Tina didn't dispute that fact.
	It was the intention and, you know, her purpose for doing it, which she was not allowed to present to the jury.
	What the jury was allowed to hear was very carefully controlled to deliver the outcome that they wanted in that trial.
	But the felony convictions is, it's the one act.
	But every person in the Secretary of State's office that she talked to and in Mesa County government that she talked to, they call it additional felony of the misrepresentation.
	Nine years.
	Nine years, yeah.
	And she was acquitted on the identity theft, which was, that was, I think they were pretty upset about that.
	I think they wanted to get a clean sweep, but there was reasonable doubt that was able to break through to the jury on the identity theft.
	She wasn't allowed to bring her affirmative defenses to get to reasonable doubt on the other.
	On the other charges.
	And then they threw the book at her.
	Nine years.
	And the judge admitted his biases.
	I put a couple of those clips on blast.
	He looked like the prosecutor.
	He looked like a scorned prosecutor issuing his ruling and talking about how she showed no remorse.
	None.
	That was the one where he talked about kicking a police officer.
	I'm going to go pull up that clip just to refresh everybody's memory.
	What else are you working on?
	Oh, well, you know, trying to track the golden age.
	I'm pretty pumped about what we're seeing.
	I think that the Saudi speech that President Trump gave today is so historic.
	Can you imagine Joe Biden standing up there in front of the Saudi kingdom and doing what President Trump did today?
	We're heading into a brand new world.
	For those who haven't followed that element of the news today.
	Myself included.
	What did Trump say before the Saudis today?
	Oh, he talked about the Saudis joining the Abraham Accords.
	There's talk about Syria joining the Abraham Accords.
	Yeah, like actual peace in the Middle East.
	Yeah, the bromance between President Trump and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman was on full display.
	I mean, it's a different foreign policy.
	We're in a different posture towards the rest of the world, and we see that not just with the Saudis.
	It's pretty profound to see the Saudi Kingdom so welcoming of an American leader and for him to get that much airtime.
	I mean, it was a very grand event.
	They signed agreements on energy and defense and some other collaborations.
	$600 billion of investment, I believe, was committed as well.
	The geopolitics of it all are being reshaped before our eyes, and it's quite...
	Quite a thing to behold.
	In fact, I know who the people that were pissed off today are, and it makes a lot more sense right now.
	You've got Netanyahu, who is going to be slighted by this, and you're going to have some of the...
	I don't know if the word is neocon, because that has a pejorative term to it these days.
	I'm joking, people.
	Community noted that neocon is not a pejorative word.
	Is that a Mark Levin reference?
	Yeah.
	I just got a notification that said...
	Neocon is not a pejorative term for Jew, as a community note.
	Well, he had to delete it, too, because when he first put it up, he put, it's a prerogative for Jew.
	And then he had to delete that, but he doubled down by putting it up again.
	Morons.
	It's incredible.
	What's your take?
	I talked about the gift of the Boeing, the $400 million plane.
	I don't know if you've spoken about that, but what's your perspective take on this gift to the Department of Defense?
	So I don't care about gifts, right?
	Like, I think they all give each other gifts all the time.
	We've certainly given blood and treasure around the world.
	We can accept some gifts.
	I don't particularly like the idea of my president flying on a foreign plane.
	And I think that there's, I put up on X, there's, you know, a thousand Trojan horses that you could put in in that technologically advanced digital plane.
	Can we actually, you know...
	Sweep that in a way and confirm that it's 100% safe such that we would put the leader of the free world on it and fly him around.
	I don't love that.
	I'm not, you know, I'm sort of a Luddite when it comes to technology.
	I mean, not really, but, you know, I'm...
	You make a decent point.
	If anything were to...
	God forbid, if anything were ever to happen, even if it was flying through a flock of seagulls or something, God forbid, it would be...
	There would always be the suspicion that it was a Saudi plant from the get-go.
	And the threat landscape is ever-evolving, right?
	That's part of the good guy's job is to try and stay ahead of the innovation around ways that we can attack each other.
	A lot of that war, that battlefield is digital now.
	And when we're talking about the palace in the sky, the flying palace, you're talking about exceptionally advanced technology capabilities.
	And with exceptionally advanced technology capabilities come an entirely new threat landscape.
	That is the fair concern it'll always be.
	You have to presume.
	There's a way to gut it, verify it, to sweep it.
	You would presume that with voting machines too, though, and we don't do that.
	One would be a desire not to.
	With this, I presume Trump's team is going to want to open up every nook and cranny.
	Plus, the general concern is it's still a Boeing at the end of the day, but we haven't had any headline news about a Boeing in a while.
	Throw some duct tape on it.
	It'll be fine.
	Ash, so TinaPeters.us.
	Ash in America, I've given everyone your Twitter.
	To support you and your venture, it's the Give, Send, Go, Stop NGO Lawfare, which I will also give to everybody in the chat.
	And I'll put it up in the pinned comment.
	Someone's going to remind me so I don't forget.
	Ash, what else can people do to support you?
	Badlands Media.
	Yeah, watch Badlands Media.
	With the Saudi thing, we're pretty pumped today because the guys, as I told you before the show, I'm pretty excited about it.
	I'm America first, and I want what's best for America and my people here in my nation.
	But the guys that do focus on geopolitics have been calling the relationship with President Trump and MBS and kind of predicting that we were going to see encouragement for Saudi to join the Abraham Accords on this visit.
	There's some things that has just been feeling pretty ahead of the game, which has been cool.
	So Badlands Media on all platforms.
	Rumble is kind of our home.
	We get dinged on YouTube every time we go.
	I get dinged on YouTube every time we go live.
	There's certain things you talk about on YouTube.
	It's suppressed as though it does not exist.
	I noticed anything with Israel in the title.
	It's inorganic suppression.
	There's no way to explain that.
	What time do you guys air?
	What time do you guys go live on Rumble?
	Kind of main show is a show called Culture of Change.
	That is Mondays at 9. We do an election.
	Brian Cancon.
	You know Cancon, I think, right?
	Yeah, Brian Lupin.
	Yeah, he and I do an election denialism show on Friday nights at 7.30 called Why We Vote.
	It's a lot of fun.
	And we have Badlands Daily every day at 10 a.m. Eastern.
	Our main show, Daily Herald at 11. No, that's my time.
	1 p.m. Eastern.
	We've got shows all day.
	The schedule for Badlands is pinned on all of our social profiles.
	So definitely check it out.
	We're growing and having a blast.
	It's really fun to not be owned by anybody and be able to say whatever you want.
	I see a lot of people that can't do that and it's unfortunate for them.
	To phrase it the right way is to say whatever you believe.
	It is an amazing thing to not be beholden and to be totally free.
	Sometimes you piss off your own, not your own base, but your own...
	I do that all the time.
	That's why they support you, I presume.
	If they want to hear, they'll go to...
	Whatever sycophant will say what they want to hear.
	Ash, amazing stuff.
	One other thing, if I could just shamelessly pitch one other thing.
	So Thursday night, G-Money is a Bitcoin maximalist.
	And he and I, we agree about a lot of stuff, but we disagree hard about a lot of stuff.
	And we're having a debate on Badlands, 10.30 p.m. Eastern on Thursday night.
	So definitely tune in for that.
	It's going to be fun.
	Amazing.
	And I'm looking at the price of Bitcoin is back to $104,000 a unit.
	Amazing, Ash.
	Thank you very much.
	We'll do this again, and we will keep in touch with whatever the news holds, because Colorado will undoubtedly be back in the news sooner than later.
	Godspeed on your adventure.
	We'll do a follow-up.
	Thanks so much.
	Always fun.
	Have a good one.
	Everyone, remind me to put all the links in the pinned comment when the show is over.
	And remind me also, I always forget.
	I almost always forget.
	What am I doing here?
	it.
	Yeah.
	Speaking of like, you know, supporting the platforms and the creators that you like, the sponsor of today's show is Rumble Premium, but I would be pitching this even if it weren't the sponsor of the show because people free speech is under attack and Rumble and its content You all know this.
	Major advertisers, I'll say allegedly, potentially illegally, but they conspired to pull their dollars, their advertising dollars from Rumble.
	Even so-called American brands like Dunkin' Donuts turned their backs, claiming Rumble had a, quote, right-wing culture that they didn't want to be a part of.
	Bullshit.
	As if nobody wants to advertise where the eyeballs are.
	Anyhow, Rumble is not here to fit the mold.
	We're here to defend free expression.
	To strengthen the mission, we're excited to offer you Rumble Premium, a completely ad-free experience with exclusive benefits for viewers and creators.
	You'll find exclusive content from creators like Russell Brand, TimCast, Mug Club, Steven Crowder.
	Tim Cassadol, I mentioned him.
	And it's more than just a subscription.
	It's a stand against free speech.
	Your voice matters if you can.
	Join Rumble Premium.
	It's $10 a month.
	I think you get $10 off if you use promo code VIVA10.
	So you go to rumble.com forward slash premium forward slash VIVA10.
	You'll get $10 off the annual plan.
	If you can't do that, at the very least, continue watching on Rumble.
	Continue sharing Rumble.
	Together, we can and will turn the tide, make free speech popular, make free speech cool, and make free speech profitable.
	But you can keep watching Rumble to support the platform that respects you and free speech.
	We're going to get to more stuff, by the way.
	Let me just see what I've missed, because I'm doing it on StreamYard, exceptionally because I didn't want to have a headache with a potential guest who may not have been familiar with Rumble Studio.
	But now I can go.
	South Africa.
	Speaking of South Africa, King of Biltong in the house.
	Not a defector, but an emigre from South Africa who left the white genocide that's not happening, but it's the natural political blowback from 400 years of oppression.
	King of Biltong.
	Makes some amazing stuff.
	Biltong is like beef jerky.
	Biltong is like beef jerky, but made from beef.
	It's like prosciutto made out of beef.
	It's beef jerky, but soft and moist.
	Moist, if I can use the ugliest word in the English language.
	It's like prosciutto, but made out of beef, and they've got a bunch of products.
	He says, looking for some healthy snacks to add to your diet.
	Try our Biltong, almost 50% protein, plus it's packed with B12, creatine, iron, zinc, and much more.
	Go to BiltongUSA.com.
	Code Viva for 10% off.
	Go get some.
	It's freaking delicious.
	And you will not regret it.
	Lucy the dog, remember this, that Qatar was funding Hamas and is still saying that Israel should be destroyed.
	Also, Witkoff accepted money.
	I'm going to get to the...
	Okay.
	Afternoon Viva says D07JJ.
	Viva, did you see Mazda move their SUV manufacturing from Canada to U.S. over tariffs?
	Carney reminds me of the song Sober by Tool.
	What's your take on the Carney cabinet?
	It's the Trudeau cabinet.
	It's the same government.
	It's just got a new figurehead who happens to be a little less detestable at face value, pun intended, than Justin Trudeau.
	Minister of Chrystia Freeland now, part of the cabinet.
	It's the same freaking cabinet through and through.
	I have to go see who the new...
	They're not new members.
	And Carney was basically the advisor to Trudeau.
	It's the same government.
	So you're going to get four more years of the same...
	Frickin' bullshit.
	What do I think about Mazda leaving Canada?
	I don't want to say, ha-ha, machaya, like you get what you deserve, because it's Canada, and I've got nothing against, obviously, I've got nothing against the Canadian people.
	Maybe I've got something against some of the Canadian people.
	I don't wish ill on Canada, but they voted Liberals, and they're going to get what they get, but they're going to get what they vote for.
	The only problem is, so are a lot of other people.
	The remanded.
	Does Election Canada put the wrong postal code of a block voter?
	And Canada Post sent it back undeliverable.
	I'm going to get to this.
	I have it in the backdrop.
	We have a tie in Terrebonne and potentially a by-election within 90 days of the writ returned.
	FYI.
	Oh yeah, remanded.
	I'm waiting for that writ because a market...
	I'm waiting for a coalition government where arguing over one or two by-election results is not going to impact a majority if NDP crossed the floor and joined the Liberals.
	My bet is on that it's going to happen.
	However, it's a very unlikely outcome.
	You know, everybody's quibbling over the Terrebonne riding, which is now back to being even.
	I'm going to get to that video.
	It's amazing.
	But the numbers are there that you don't even have to worry about one riding.
	They can have a 175 majority clean cut tomorrow if they so chose.
	And they're going to, I think.
	We got Eric John, pizza artist.
	Now I know who you are, Eric.
	Viva!
	Thanks again for the shout-out yesterday.
	That was awesome.
	Ha-ha.
	Now, more importantly...
	What's your favorite pizza topping?
	It's important.
	The future depends on it.
	What's my favorite topping?
	Well, what are the options?
	Pineapple.
	I'm joking.
	Bacon is obviously...
	It's bacon.
	Bacon.
	And that would be easy for the hair if you're going to do one of me.
	Bacon and otherwise meat.
	And chili peppers.
	Like very, very spicy habanero peppers.
	CanCon says, help support Ashi.
	Before you move on, before you move on from Eric, you should know...
	I don't see the screen.
	Yeah, sorry.
	You are the star of his stream on Saturday.
	You are the face he's doing on his stream.
	Hold on one second.
	Oh, I was going to make an ugly face.
	I won't even make an ugly face.
	Someone's going to screen grab it.
	I'll make a good face.
	My smolder face.
	And I also asked him if it would be okay to clip it and use it on our stream here, and he said absolutely 1,000%.
	Well, we shall be doing that then.
	It shall be done.
	You can mail me a piece of the pizza also.
	I don't know where Eric is located or how long it would take to get that pizza, but we'll figure it out.
	We'll do a road trip.
	What state?
	Do we know what state Eric is in?
	Why am I thinking pizza now?
	I'm thinking like...
	I'm talking to him right now on Twitter.
	I'll get some more information to get back.
	All right.
	Help support Ash's crucial appeal.
	GiveSendGo.com slash Stop N-G-O Lawfare.
	And then there was another one that came in up at the top, which I got already, Elections Canada.
	Well, you know what?
	While we're on the topic of Elections Canada, we're going to get to the genocide that's not happening in South Africa.
	It's so irritating because...
	This is the one-screen, two films where people are going to say, it's genocide, what's happening in Gaza, where it's an atrocity, and I don't even qualify it as anything less than that.
	An atrocity in terms of war is an atrocity.
	And nothing less than that.
	But you get people demanding people state that what's happening in the occupied territories is genocide.
	It might be an act of war if you go to the international ICJ, whatever.
	It's an atrocity in that war is an atrocity.
	You get people saying that's genocide, but what's going on in South Africa is not, where you actually have not population growth, but population stagnancy reduction.
	You have laws that are racially motivated, targeting individuals, specific classes of people, but no, it's broader.
	For expropriation.
	I'm getting too far into it.
	But we're looking at one screen, two films, where you just apply the reasoning that you want to the comparable circumstances or mildly comparable circumstances and just come to the conclusion that you want, which is it all comes down to what is the conclusion you want to arrive at.
	And now we're seeing people saying, it's not genocide.
	It's just laws targeting groups of people, social justice for 400 years of oppression.
	Expropriation without compensation.
	Targeted violence with no repercussions.
	And if you don't like it, leave.
	There's a word for that.
	We'll get to there.
	In the meantime, coming out of Canada, the big news of the day is that this will require a real-time translation.
	This is from Demetrius Sudas, and I don't know who that is.
	Entrepreneur, former ancien director of communications to Stephen Harper.
	So he's a political type.
	So you're going to want to...
	The description says, Elections Canada printed the wrong postal code on its own return envelopes.
	Not envelope, but envelopes.
	If that were done on multiple envelopes, I presume we would have heard about it by now, but playing this video, it seems to be the case, at least with respect to this woman.
	That's not a typo.
	That's like a bank wiring your money to the wrong account and calling it an honest mistake.
	How many ballots disappeared because Elections Canada forgot its own address?
	This isn't minor, and yes, this election needs to be done all over again.
	I guess what we're saying is if it would return to sender because it had a wrong postal code, there would be a number of people who would say, I got my vote back, and we would hear about it.
	As it is now, we've got one case all translated in real time.
	It's in French.
	Here it says, Emma, here is the vote that could possibly make the difference in this election.
	This is the riding in Terrebonne that was initially won by the Bloc Québécois by, I think it was over 100 votes.
	Then they had a judicial recount where they included a bunch of ballots that had been rejected to give the Liberal a victory by one vote.
	This is like the movie Swing Vote, but in real life.
	I think it was Kevin Costner.
	So he says, this is the ballot that could make the difference here, and I'm going to translate what Emma's saying.
	Maybe, yes.
	Because, yeah, I voted for the block, moi.
	I voted for the block.
	And now it's playing by, like, one vote.
	It's a one vote difference.
	So it might have more importance now than, you know, before.
	Nobody might think.
	Why is this vote in your hands and not at the office, the bureau, the Elections Canada office?
	That's a good question.
	There's a mistake in the postal code.
	So I think that's why it was returned to me.
	You voted by mail.
	They gave you an envelope.
	They gave you this envelope.
	It's not me that wrote the address.
	It's very much Elections Canada that gives you the envelope like this.
	With the small sticker.
	I just had to write my return address over here.
	Fill in my vote.
	Put it in the postal box, whatever the mailbox.
	We're so technologically advanced we forgot the word for mailbox.
	The stamp is already paid.
	So the argument or the accusation is that it was a wrong postal code and so it came back to send.
	This is Elections Canada.
	Encrypt this.
	Can you double check this address right now and see what the postal code would be?
	So this is the sticker that they put on it themselves.
	They give you the prepaid postage so that you go and you mail by vote, and it says that it got rejected because the postal code is not J6W4R9, and then it was returned to sender.
	It says, someone inconnu, that means moved or unknown, retourne, l 'expediteur returned to sender, and then they blocked out her address over here, and then you got the little Canada posting here.
	The guy who posted this, who's a former conservative political type, says that this must have been done with more than one ballot.
	If that postal code is in fact the wrong postal code, encrypt us?
	That postal code comes back to Terrebonne, Quebec, Canada.
	And what's their postal code in that office?
	Let's see here.
	Elections?
	Canada office, Terrebonne address.
	Where is my local election office, Terrebonne?
	See, there's so many.
	And by the way, the funny thing is, I think, I'm beginning to think it might not have been a wrong...
	I noticed that when I had to renew my passport, you could send it to two different offices.
	They went to the same address, but they had different addresses and different postal codes for some reason.
	I'm looking at this over here.
	Locals election.
	Where is my office?
	Elections Canada.
	Is this Levis?
	This is the main office.
	I'd look into that.
	I would be shocked if this were widespread on all the ballots.
	Or if it's even accurate.
	They might have made a mistake that there might be two postal codes for the same Elections Canada office.
	Because if it were widespread, there would have been more than one person saying, I got my ballot back.
	Why is this?
	Or people just don't care and they gave up.
	So that is the situation in Terrebonne.
	It's now back to a tie, apparently.
	Although I don't...
	I think it is back to a tie.
	On paper, they're going to say, yeah, this makes the difference, but it's been judicially counted, and those are the official results subsequent to a judicial review.
	So I don't know if they reopened that judicial review.
	All that to say is chicanery is afoot, people, and it looks dirty, it smells dirty, and it probably is dirty, dirty, dirty.
	Oh.
	Okay, I don't think I have anything more for Canada.
	That was the very interesting news of the day.
	Okay, that's it.
	Now, let's get to the genocide that's not happening, that is happening.
	It's freaking wild.
	You get 4950 Afrikaners who are the white South Africans of South Africa, descendants, or not descendants of the Boers, they are the Boers, the Afrikaans, descendants of the Dutch Germans, who've been in South Africa for 400 years.
	Now, the stories of oppression, white farmers owning the land to the detriment of black South Africans.
	There have been wars going on.
	I am by no means a master of the history of South Africa, full stop.
	I haven't even gotten into a sufficiently radical learning curve like I did with the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the Donbass region, etc.
	My understanding of the history of South Africa is cursory, and that might even be a bit...
	Lofty of a way of describing it.
	I went back and re-watched Laura Southern's Farmlands, a documentary she put out five years ago when I first started getting some knowledge of what was going on in South Africa.
	The Afrikaners are white South Africans who have been in the country for 400 years.
	There has been systematic violence.
	Whether or not it's directed at white South African Afrikaner farmers or not, I guess it's only a matter of perspective.
	I made the very sick...
	It's not white genocide because it's not just murdering white farmers, it's murdering everybody in South Africa.
	Horrible crime, horrible poverty.
	A lot of black South Africaners are getting murdered as well because of rampant crime.
	So it can't be white genocide because the violence is across the board.
	No, it isn't, by the way.
	No, it isn't.
	And getting to a fight with Grok.
	I got to have people telling me, Viva, I asked Grok if this is true and Grok says that you're wrong.
	What do I do with that?
	Mark, what is his name?
	Michael McFall.
	War whore extraordinaire.
	Put on Twitter yesterday.
	There is no genocide of Afrikaners in South Africa.
	This is a false statement.
	And he goes to BBC News because a war whore likes the war whore propaganda news outlets.
	Oh, by the way, just so you understand the authority for why it's fake.
	Because South African courts rule that white genocide in South Africa is not real.
	I mean, holy hell, you want to talk about investigating yourselves and saying we haven't committed white genocide?
	It's almost as bad as the federal court attempting to verify the legitimacy of a government decision as relates to the bureaucracy that the government created, and now it's going to the courts to verify, validate the government.
	It's nonsense.
	Claims of white genocide, not real South African court rules.
	When was this?
	February 25, 2025.
	A South African court has dismissed claims of white genocide in the country as clearly imagined and not real.
	Undermining comments made by U.S. President Donald Trump.
	I would love to know who the judges were on that.
	If you're able to find out who the judges are on this, not by name, but by politics.
	Michael McFaul comes out with this, and the court has looked into its own genocide and determined it's not genocide, it's just spontaneous acts of racially motivated violence.
	It's like...
	It was like the Clinton, I remember it back in the day, clear as day.
	Is there genocide going on in Rwanda, Mr. Clinton?
	There are acts of genocide going on.
	Well, how many acts of genocide does it take to become genocide?
	We've looked.
	The ruling came as the court blocked a wealthy benefactor's donation to a white supremacist group.
	So it also sounds like it's what we call a...
	An obiter.
	Like, not even the main issue of the decision, but just something that's said in the decision.
	But yeah, this is what McFaul is citing to make the claim factually incorrect, in my humble opinion.
	If there's no white genocide, it's all.
	It's a figment of your imagination, farmers.
	You know how many hundreds of thousands of farmers have been killed in the last 20 years?
	White farmers?
	In the most brutal manner?
	manageable.
	The United States, where your administration is going to welcome them as refugees.
	Now, this comes as you've halted virtually all refugee admissions for people to claim famine and war from countries like Sudan, the Democratic Republic, the Congo.
	Why are you creating an expedited path into the country for the Congress, but not on the Because they're being killed.
	And we don't want to see people be killed.
	Now, South Africa leadership is coming to see me, I understand, sometime next week.
	And, you know, we're supposed to have a, I guess, a G20 meeting there or something.
	But we're having a G20 meeting.
	I don't know how we can go unless that situation's taken care of.
	But it's a genocide that's taking place that you people don't want to write about.
	But it's a terrible thing that's taking place.
	And farmers are being killed.
	They happen to be white.
	But whether they're white or black makes no difference to me.
	But white farmers are being targeted.
	Brutally killed.
	And their land is being confiscated in South Africa.
	And the newspapers and the media, television media, doesn't even talk about it.
	If it were the other way around, they'd talk about it.
	That would be the only story they'd talk about.
	And I don't care who they are.
	I don't care about their race, their color.
	I don't care about their height, their weight.
	I don't care about anything.
	I just know that what's happening is terrible.
	It's being confiscated without compensation.
	And Cryptos, what up?
	So, I was just sent a link by Anton, dropped it in your DMs, talking a little bit about that crime.
	He said that you would find this interesting to show.
	In the DMs on Twitter.
	Okay.
	And by the way, there is no mention about the specific judge in the case.
	It just says high court in a few different places.
	I want to bring up this one, and you'll forgive the potty mouth people, but this was...
	Michael McFall.
	Michael McFall, you can go back and look up Michael McFall, the Viva Fry, where I systematically call this war horror out on his absolute rubbish on Twitter.
	You are a wicked, dumb, dishonest piece of shit, Mike.
	To which someone replies here.
	Look at this.
	They go, Grok, can you review Viva?
	This is what people are doing for knowledge now.
	Based on evidence, Michael McFaul's claim that there is no genocide against Afrikaners in South Africa appears to be truthful.
	Why?
	Because Grok goes and scours the internet for the BBC.
	Listen to this.
	South African courts and officials supported by crime stats show farm attacks are part of general crime, not racially targeted, with only 12 farm deaths in the fourth quarter of 2024 being of a white farmer.
	Viva Fry's response calling the fall...
	McFaul's stance, wicked, dumb, and dishonest, lacks data, and aligns with refuted, quote, white genocide claims.
	While some, like Trump, cite farm attacks, these are not systematic or genocidal per UN definitions.
	The debate is complex, but evidence supports McFaul.
	Oh, he said, what did he say here?
	They don't target any, what did he say, not racially targeted.
	Oh, that's interesting.
	That's interesting, Grok.
	You know why it's interesting?
	Because...
	They don't do racial breakdowns of their crime, and it's for obvious reasons.
	I had to reply to this individual to say that we've entered the realm of the world now where we look to Grok.
	Hey, Grok!
	Well, Brondo's got electrolytes.
	It's the stuff plants need.
	Why do plants need electrolytes?
	Because Brondo says it does.
	Listen to this.
	You just go, phew.
	Claims of white genocide, not real.
	That was the BBC article.
	South Africa, but despite numerous claims in the past of systemic targeting of the country's white Afrikaner minority group, local crime statistics figures paint a different picture.
	Go on.
	South Africa does not release crime figures based on race.
	Well, then what the fuck does it show?
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	There's no white genocide because we don't break down statistics based on race.
	There you go.
	Grok, give him the answer.
	Ask Viva next time.
	Don't even ask me.
	Use your own effing brain.
	God gave it to you for a reason.
	There's no white genocide.
	But we don't know who's getting killed.
	We don't break down crime stats based on race.
	But the latest figures reveal that 6,953 people were murdered in the country between October and December 2024.
	Of these, 12 were killed in farm attacks.
	Of the 12, one was a farmer while five were farm dwellers and four were employees who are likely to have been black.
	In contrast, 961 women were murdered alongside 273 children.
	We don't...
	Do it.
	We don't break down crime based on stats.
	By the way, don't worry about it.
	There's other places to find it.
	87% of farm murder victims since 1990 have been white.
	What do you call targeted crime?
	Sorry, crime that targets or at least disparately impacts a specific race for which no protections are implemented by the government which wants them dead.
	I mean, literally, chance.
	Death to white people.
	Literally have politicians saying, we're not yet systematically killing the whites, but we might soon.
	What was the third one here?
	Oh yeah, that guy.
	South Africa.
	Is Julius Malema inciting white genocide?
	There was the joke, kill the white people from Saturday Night Live back in the day.
	This is where we're at right now.
	He's chanting kill the white people.
	87 plus percent of farmers killed since 1990 have been white.
	But there's no genocide.
	You've got to listen to this gem of absolute brain rot coming from a Twitter account that I just described.
	And I think I'll probably be blocked by them sooner than later.
	CNN.
	So you know it's going to be good.
	Let me bring this one down.
	Okay.
	So if you think about the history of South Africa, it being an apartheid system where I think it is 80% of the population that are black Africans.
	Only own 4% of the land.
	That is because they were put in shanty towns and moved into areas where they had no rights.
	And so 35, 30 plus years ago, they went through a revolution, the apartheid system ended, and they reformed their constitution under the great leader of Nelson Mandela.
	And that allowed for a racial reconciliation, one that this country has yet to do.
	It's a racial reconciliation is what's happening.
	By the way, just understand what this person, I don't know what authority she carries or what influence she has in the world, but understand what they now want by way of racial reconciliation because they're referring to what's going on in South Africa as racial reconciliation.
	What they really mean is racial retribution.
	And when they talk about that in America, at least you can glean from this individual.
	What they want by way of racial reconciliation in America is what they see going on as racial reconciliation in South Africa.
	South Africa did it, and they reformed their constitution.
	And part of that is that the people who are native to that land deserve their rightful land back.
	That is not what the Afrikaners actually want to have happen, which are the white Africans.
	And so who are...
	Not originally from Africa, who colonized South Africa also.
	And so that is what they are saying is discrimination.
	Now, if the Constitution in South Africa is discriminatory, they have their checks and balances in that land, just like we do.
	And that is for them to...
	So if the Afrikaners don't actually like the land, they can leave that country.
	They are.
	I understand what you just said.
	If you don't like the racist discriminatory laws...
	And the expropriation without compensation, you can leave.
	If you don't like the targeted violence and the lack of protection or punishment from the government, you can leave.
	Do you know what you call expropriation without compensation, targeted violence, and racist or discriminatory laws, and if you don't like it, leave?
	That's called genocide.
	By the UN definition of genocide.
	Like, if you don't like Nazi laws, and you don't like the Nazis stealing Jewish property, and you don't like the random pogroms or christomachs, You can leave.
	You can leave until you can't.
	You can leave unless you can't.
	And then they'll take your land.
	Then they'll murder you on your farms and claim it's not happening because they don't break down murders by race, but someone does and it's out there.
	If you don't like it, you can leave.
	Check some balances in that land, just like we do.
	And that is for them to...
	So if the Afrikaners don't actually like the land, they can leave that country.
	They are.
	They're leaving to come here.
	No.
	These refugees are coming here.
	They can actually leave and go to where their native land is, which is probably Germany.
	Are you against them coming here?
	Go to their native land of 400 years ago.
	That's no longer native.
	And you could apply her twisted logic in a way that would come back to bite her in the tush.
	That's exactly what I wanted to say.
	Wouldn't that logic also mean that black people should go back to Africa?
	But that's effectively what...
	400 years on the land, if you don't like the laws of the land, you can leave?
	Holy shit, it's the most racist thing I've ever heard coming out of her mouth.
	I don't even think she understands that she said it.
	You don't like the racist laws of the land, you've been here for 400 years, go back to your native land.
	Holy merciful goodness.
	That's basically what she said.
	It's not basically.
	It's what she said.
	Apply it mutatus mutatus.
	The thing about logic is if you apply it evenly, you'll see the absurdities and the racistness of what you're saying.
	Oh my.
	Holland.
	Holland?
	I'm against the hypocrisy of this administration.
	No, no, that's not the question.
	The question is, are you against them coming here?
	If there was actually a genocide happening, like there is in other places in Sudan and the Congo, I would not...
	Who's performing the genocide in Sudan or the Congo?
	Oh.
	I'm not opposed for Congolese and for the Sudanese to come to Africa just like I'm not opposed to Venezuelans and South Americans coming to America if they are fleeing and looking for asylum.
	What I am against, it's not about being against them.
	What I am against is that they are being given special treatment when there is not a genocide happening in South Africa and they just don't like the law of the land.
	They just don't like the law of the land.
	Clip that.
	Put that on black.
	You don't like the law of the land?
	Get the fuck out.
	Imagine that that's the logic that this person is actually adopting.
	There is no white genocide.
	And the more they say it, the more you know it's true.
	The more the Michael McFalls of the world and the BBCs of the world say there's no white genocide, the more you know it's true.
	Targeted violence against farmers.
	87% of the farmers who have been murdered since 1990.
	Well, a lot of black people are getting murdered because it's a shithole country where everybody murders everybody.
	Yeah, that might be true.
	That's not the question, however.
	Disparately impacting white farmers.
	Expropriation without compensation.
	Targeted violence that the government basically greenlights.
	That's called genocide.
	So, yeah.
	Sorry.
	And you want to understand exactly what's going on in South Africa.
	I mean, there's places in this world I'll never get to see.
	I'm not sure that I'm going to particularly miss not seeing them.
	I've never been.
	I've been invited to go to South Africa, and the answer is a resounding, big, fat no.
	Check this out here.
	Can hear everybody saying, Viva, get...
	You're waiting for a buyer.
	How did you get them?
	We take it with a gun.
	What can we do?
	Only money that I want.
	And to hurt people?
	Yeah, the people.
	I will show you with your last bone.
	If you don't want to give me a man, I will show you with your last bone.
	Took him to shower or to the hot shower.
	I like to show you that I want money.
	Or to the oven, micro oven.
	i put it like this to the oven then you see i want money if i've got a child there you're saying you would uh you would hurt the child to find out the information child i put it in the oven this This reporter, by the way, was so nauseated.
	He's like, I can't.
	Later on, I watched this already.
	He's like, this is what's going on in South Africa to farmers.
	Oh, well, they're not doing it because they're white.
	They're doing it because they're landowners.
	They're not doing it because they're white.
	They're doing it because they're wealthy.
	I don't even know that it's a question of wealth.
	They're not doing it because it's white.
	It just happens to disparately impact.
	The whites.
	87% of those murder victims are white.
	Government does nothing, expropriates land, and goes out and occasionally chants for the death of white people.
	It's not genocide, though.
	It's a myth.
	And anybody who says it is a white supremacist.
	Yep.
	It's not happening, but it's what they get for 400 years of oppression is basically what that woman on CNN just said.
	Anyway, that was the way to end the show on a very dark note.
	Make sure that you're subscribed before you leave.
	We're going to go over to locals for our after party.
	I haven't heard a kid come knock on a door to see what's going on, but I haven't heard any bad news.
	Encrypt us, sir.
	What's up?
	Please pitch the book before we go...
	Oh, the book!
	Oh, what book?
	This thing right here?
	Louis the Lobster?
	I got 50 copies.
	What the heck was that?
	Oh, my...
	Oh, God.
	I got this in British Columbia in 2001.
	2002, and we got it.
	It was...
	Perfectly smooth and closed.
	And by the time we got home, it had blossomed and then it had massive seeds inside each and every one of these.
	Yes, the book.
	Louis the Lobster Returns to the Sea by David Frye, illustrated by Abigail Martin.
	Hold on.
	Hold on.
	About the illustrator.
	Abigail.
	is a 15-year-old up-and-coming artist who normally specializes in realism but could not pass up the opportunity to work with David to make Louis the Lobster come to life.
	She wanted to challenge herself to come up with a unique style for his book that reflects the childlike wonder that David brings to this charming story.
	Illustrating this book has helped her with many of the challenges common to those living with autism, learning and developing ways of dealing with overstimulation and burnout while working collectively with others.
	Abigail loves art, obviously music, classic movies, and...
	Traffic cones.
	Well, if Abigail loves traffic cones, she will love Canada and Montreal in particular.
	The land of the orange cone, people.
	It's on Amazon.
	Louis the Lobster, if you put it in there.
	Louis le Lobster.
	Louis Lomar.
	Oh, we've got to put it in French.
	Louis Lomar, retour à l 'océan.
	It doesn't quite have the same ring to it.
	Here's the link.
	I think probably a neurodivergent or someone might have already put it in there.
	Here's the link.
	Bada bing, bada boom.
	Thumbs up before you head out.
	Yes.
	David, do you plan to return to Canada ever permanently?
	Says Kicking Snow.
	Let me bring this one up here.
	Do I plan on ever returning to Canada permanently?
	Once you break residence and you've paid your exit tax, you'd have to have a darn good reason.
	Compulsion or...
	I paid my exit tax.
	So...
	We'll see.
	We have an amazing raid this afternoon.
	It is Dr. Drew live with Tulsi Gabbard.
	Oh, shut the front door.
	Go raid.
	And also say Viva wants to interview Tulsi Gabbard.
	Is it live now in Cryptos?
	They start at 5.15, eh?
	Everyone go.
	And make sure to let Drew know from where you came.
	Show some love and text.
	Not text.
	Comment!
	Whatever.
	You know what I'm saying.
	Tulsi should do an interview with Viva.
	In person.
	I'll fly up to D.C. Or in Florida.
	If she happens to be here, we can go to the local city.
	It would be beautiful.
	Everyone, thank you all for being here.
	Seriously, this is a good one.
	Ash in America.
	I'll put all the links up there.
	And that's it.
	Okay, go the...
	Let me see here.
	Okay, we got no more to...
	And the raid has been...
	Impacted.
	Affected.
	In fact, the grade is on, people.
	Go to Drew.
	Share the love.
	Say hi.
	And hold on.
	So how do I do this?
	Because I'm using StreamYard today.
	So I'm going to end it on Twitter by removing.
	Yes.
	Okay.
	And I'm going to go to Rumble.
	I think this one's the Rumble.
	Rumble, see you all tomorrow.
	I'm going to remove it like so.
	And Locals, I'm coming over for the after party.
	VivaBarnesLaw.Locals.com.
	Everybody, whoever doesn't want to go do the raid for whatever reason, today is the day.
	To come over to Viva Barnes Law because it is not supporters only.
	Today, because I'm using StreamYard, you just have to be a member, just email.
	So you have to sign up.
	But it is not for those who financially support our work at Locals.
	I did a Locals spontaneous fishing live stream today.
	It worked actually quite well.
	We caught a fish.
	So come on over to Locals if you want to.
	And otherwise, I'm going to now go and pull the stream from Rumble.
	Peace.
	See you tomorrow.
	Tomorrow is...
	Tomorrow is Wednesday.
	Gosh, it feels like Thursday today.
	Okay, go.

▲