What you are looking at now is the introduction for the Sunday Night Show.
A small bit of potentially good news.
But first, we shall play this video.
I never thought that a few nights ago that I'd be on the phone arranging messages between Kennedy and John Katamadidis at 3 in the morning.
And I was drifting in and out of sleep thinking I was dreaming.
But he said, And we got that!
Dear President McKinnon, thank you for taking the time to speak with us yesterday in connection with approximately 400 ostriches at Universal Ostrich Farm in Edgewood, BC.
We are very grateful for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's willingness to consider the proposal we discussed.
We value our partnership with CFIA and look forward to continued collaboration on this matter and others.
We are respectfully requesting CFIA to consider not culling the entire flock of ostriches at Universal Ostrich Farm.
Given that a proportion of these ostriches were infected with avian influenza last year, we believe there is significant value in studying this population for several reasons.
We'll pause it there because we can't play the entire video, and also there's no need to play the entire video because we've got Katie in the backdrop who's going to summarize this and tell us the latest developments.
For those of you who don't know, that is Katie, I'm not sure I remember her last name offhand, from Universal Ostrich Farm in British Columbia.
Her mother owns the ostrich farm.
That has been the order of a Canadian food inspection agency order to cull 398 healthy, big, beautiful ostriches.
There has been quite a mobilization to not allow this to happen.
There was some good news, I think it was about a week and a half ago, where...
And everyone was celebrating the fact that these ostriches would not be killed.
The CFIA, which is the Canada Food Inspection Agency, which is literally a seemingly a terminator of a killing machine, says, no, we still want to kill these ostriches.
And it seems that RFK Jr. and wrote a letter to Peter McKinnon, I forget his full name, the president of the CFIA, who has his tweet account, Twitter account, X account, protected even though it's a government account.
And I've been needling them for a couple of weeks now at the fact that they've protected their tweets to prevent the general population from directly expressing their absolute outrage at this absolute injustice.
Katie, Activate your camera because I got some questions.
There was some news this week about an ostrich that apparently was killed, seemingly shot in the head.
And there was some discussion as to whether or not there were drones involved in this.
Katie, before we even get into the RFK stuff, I saw the video.
I think it was Rebel News that was reporting it that you had...
I don't know what angle, but you tell me.
Correct.
Yeah, correct me.
Yeah, correct me.
On Thursday, it was quite large, quite loud, and in the morning we saw that one of our biggest beautiful roosters was right over where the drone was.
Had an entry wound in its ear, by its ear, cut open its neck and an exit wound.
So it was quite alarming and RCMP out of Necas, British Columbia here, did a great job.
Paul Britton and came and they helped us through that.
And we have saved some evidence that is still over there on site in a freezer now.
And hopefully we can get to the bottom of it because we just had more drones flying over our property last night.
So there was no...
But there's more drones, so I don't know what's going on.
Yeah, it's a little confusing.
Okay, so the audio was glitching a little bit when you came in.
There were drones flying, and you heard a shot.
Do you know if the shot came from a drone?
It's speculation, but the way the ostrich was, it goes right down the top of the head, and so it went in its ear, down its neck, and out.
So it would have had to come from up above.
See, the thing is, I want to absolutely flip out.
If it turns out to be the case that the government is killing anything via drone, because that is next level, like the running man level utopia, not utopia, sorry, what's the word?
Dystopia.
The ostrich had a bullet hole going downward from the top of the head.
No, yeah.
So out in its ear.
So it would have came in just on its sides and passed it to the bottom of the ear, down the neck, cut open the neck, ended up cutting open the neck, and then had a hole where it went out the bottom.
Did you hear any gunshots?
Some people asked if it was laser.
No.
So then some people were asking, could have it been a laser?
I don't know.
This is so, it feels like we're in a storybook.
Nothing, you know, if you would have asked me five months ago if this was going to be my life.
So we don't know if it was a gunshot, you don't know if it came from a drone, but there was one of your, you call them a rooster, it's a male ostrich, dead, with a hole in the top of its head coming out the neck.
One of our biggest.
One of our biggest, beautiful, big, big rooster.
It's one of our biggest roosters on the farm.
You don't have any video surveillance?
There's no 24 /7 cameras?
No.
We do have them, but we don't have of the sky.
So we don't have footage of it.
People tried to take pictures of it.
It was very dark out.
They did remember seeing a flash come out the bottom.
There had been two people who saw, witnessed like a flash come out.
So I don't know if that's laser, if it's or what it is, but it is, it's alarming just because we are in this battle and we're fighting so hard to try to save them all.
And when you wake up and you see another life lost meaninglessly, It's absolutely heartbreaking.
And, you know, we've been entangled in this controversial challenge with these PCR tests now for over five or five months.
I don't know.
Have you seen the drones personally?
Yep.
Yeah, last night.
So last night we were out and just same thing, but there was probably about four.
Four up in the sky over the birds last night.
So it's just, you know what, I think it's good.
Everybody's being really vigilant and looking up, eye on the sky.
And we are getting the RCMP very heavily involved now to protect and watch over the area.
It is a no-fly zone as well, so there should be nothing over there because we can't have low-flying aircraft or anything because of the ostriches.
So there's just no need for it.
But it's just an ongoing investigation and each day something new develops.
But it's, yeah, it's very alarming for the family, for all of us.
And obviously we're losing animals that are, you know, their lives are being lost and it's extremely disheartening.
Well, I mean, I guess we can get to the good news.
So can you explain what is going on with RFK Jr. and the president of the CFIA?
Yeah, so right now, when we got that letter, I obviously was crying.
It is probably one of those moments where you just see real hope because somebody sees the potential.
Somebody sees that this doesn't make sense.
Somebody wants to use the research, and that's Secretary Kennedy.
For him to go out and personally contact Paul McKinnon and put an olive branch out.
To them and say let's collaborate and do something.
It was a beautiful moment for the farm and everybody who wants to see the change that we all deserve.
I was on his Twitter as well.
I see Secretary Kennedy has it on his Twitter.
We've made some posts.
John Katamadidi is out of New York.
They're partnered up.
I know there was a New York post today saying that he Partnered up with Secretary Kennedy to save the ostriches as well.
So I'm excited for the opportunity to have some bigger players pushing for the big change that we're really trying to go for here.
Well, it's amazing.
It'll be like an exodus or operation, something to get the ostriches to the States.
I mean, the CFIA is nervous about them.
Let someone buy them, use them in the States and ship them there.
It will no longer be their concern to worry about.
I guess that's good news keep an eye on the It is good news.
Yeah, no, that's good news.
The drones flying over your property in a dead Austin is quite clearly not.
And the question is, if that was totally, not totally unrelated, but say a vandal doing some murderous things, or if, so help me goodness, if the government is actually installing lethal technologies to drones, we're entering the next stage of this dystopia.
It would be extremely disturbing if that's what happened.
I mean, you know, they said that they're going to come with no notice.
They still don't know.
I mean, how do you kill 400 healthy animals that run 65 miles an hour or, you know, kilometers?
Like, you don't.
You can't kill healthy animals and you can't do it effectively.
It's heartbreaking because even their challenging statements that come back at us saying they will come and they're going to come with no notice.
Why would you leave a family and everybody with such anxiety?
It's almost like a threat and it's unfair.
So it would be really alarming if this is just something that they're trying different techniques.
I don't know.
That's all speculation, obviously.
Active investigation, and we should know more.
And then as soon as we do know more, I will definitely let you know for sure.
Okay, amazing.
And CFIA's tweets are still protected as of the president, but do you know if McKinnon, the president of the CFIA, got back to RFK Jr.?
Have not heard anything yet.
Okay.
It's a small circle.
We'll see if we can get some information from RFK Jr.
Katie.
Come back on.
As soon as I news, text me and you'll come back on and give either good news and hopefully it'll be good news.
Absolutely.
Because with, you know, here with love and unity, the people's voice matters.
And I just, that's what we're doing here.
And we have to create the positive impact.
I don't know.
That's what we're trying to do across the world.
It's nice to be diplomatic like RFK Jr.
And it's nice to be positive like you, but if it's so help me God, if it turns out that the government actually used a drone to kill an ostrich, it wouldn't surprise me in the least, given what they did during COVID, given the propaganda techniques that they did in Nova Scotia, they might be just testing out new technologies.
Can we do it without scaring the rest of them?
Well, and I think, did you hear about that facility built in Ontario?
It's the new CFIA facility with like X.0 fellow fields?
I have not heard about that.
And it's a big drone research.
Yeah, actually, just, but if you Google it, X.0 Fellow Field, and it's, and the CFIA and this drone research center are on the same property.
I'm going to look it up afterwards, Katie, and I'll do, I'm going to do a segment on it tomorrow.
It is alarming, and someone brought that to our attention.
Sounds good.
I mean, that'll blow your mind.
We looked at that.
Sorry, go ahead.
Yeah.
No, that's good.
Yeah, just let me know what you find out on that, too.
I'll be waiting to hear from you.
Okay, awesome.
So you text me if there's anything, and we'll come back on later.
And so far, you know, a little bit of good news.
All right.
Have a good one, Katie.
I'll talk to you soon.
Perfect.
Okay, talk to you later.
Thanks, everybody.
There's a little bit of lag there, but I think there might be a lot of people using the internet in the general vicinity because at the farm they have a lot of people now keeping watch.
I'm going to look it up and chat crowdsourcing knowledge and crowdsourcing information.
CFIA and drones.
If it just so happens, well, sweet holy hell.
Would that be one hell of a coincidence?
That would not be much of a coincidence.
Now, before Robert Barnes gets here, everybody, and before I do the ad read, the ad read, before I thank our sponsor for tonight's show, oddly enough, The Wellness Company, which might also have an interest in this.
Good evening.
Viva Frye, former Montreal litigator turned to current Florida rumbler.
This is the Sunday Night Law Extravaganza with Robert Barnes.
they'll charge him with reckless discharge of a firearm.
I mean, you're living in a place where you have no rights to self-defense, no rights to protection of property, Tzedakah says, I just want to thank everyone for their thoughts and prayers.
We did all we could medically do for her.
Unfortunately, she passed away Friday.
We still have her sister, Bella.
And Talia, we're little mates.
Bella is definitely grieving with her sister with us.
This is Tzedakah, who I believe your cat passed away, which is...
Oh my god, yay.
Praying for the precious birds can be saved.
That is from Buffalo Betsy.
I do my best to get to all the tweet, all the rumble rants and the super chats.
And if I miss any and you're going to be miffed and that's going to be the condition, don't do it.
Because I don't want anybody feeling miffed, rift, rug, whatever.
Now, before Barnes gets in and we've got a great show tonight, I do want to thank our sponsor.
Our sponsor is The Wellness Company.
And there's a video that I'm going to play.
Along with this.
And oddly enough, it's RFK Jr.
And it has to do with what RFK was drinking on that plane.
Do we all remember this, people?
You've heard that RFK Jr., known for his sharp mind and relentless energy on the campaign trail, is taking methylene blue to stay focused, energized, and mentally resilient.
Now you can experience those same benefits with Recharge from the Wellness Company.
This doctor-formulated nutraceutical is the first to combine methylene blue with urolithin.
A, creating a unique formula designed to optimize Mitochondrial function improve energy and elevate cognitive performance.
Methylene blue crosses the blood-brain barrier to enhance memory, focus, and executive function by increasing ATP production, the true fuel of our cells.
It also works as a potent antioxidant and anti-inflammatory, helping protect against aging and cellular damage.
If you're looking for the real mental and physical edge recharge delivers, get 10% off plus free shipping.
Head over to twc.health forward slash viva.
Promo code VIVA gets you 10% off.
Feel the difference.
Think clear.
Recharge.
I remember when everyone was freaking out because some people thought he was, like, doing hard drugs on an airplane or something.
Like, he's relapsed.
He's putting something methylene blue.
From what I understand, a lot of people claim, you know, stand by it.
And the wellness company has put together Recharge, and it's a beautiful thing.
Wellness company does great work.
Thank you very much.
The link is in the description.
And that's it.
I had another video to start the show off with, but I think I'll save that one for tomorrow.
It involves Jasmine Crockett, people.
Mr. Barnes, sir, how goes the battle?
Good, good.
Okay, now, satisfied by asking...
Can you hear me okay?
We can hear you okay.
It doesn't sound like you're in the good mic, but maybe...
Can you do one thing now?
Can you move your camera just a little bit?
There you go.
That's it.
Is that good?
Yeah, that's good.
I won't push it too hard.
Sir, you're looking dapper.
You're looking great.
Have you left?
Are you still in Vegas now?
Still in Vegas.
Still in Vegas for a couple of weeks or so.
And what's the weather like, if I may ask the drive?
Is it hot as hell?
Not yet.
That's more July and August.
Especially August.
Now, hold on.
Let me see if anyone's complaining about the audio.
Barnes, good, good.
If you could just bring it just a little closer to you, that'd be great.
It's right, it's right.
That's about as close as it can get.
Mr. Barnes, if you can please put it in your mouth.
Sorry, Robert, what do we have on the show for tonight?
We got some good stuff.
First of all, did you hear RFK Jr. sent a letter to the president of the CFIA in Canada?
I have got to reach out to RFK.
We got to make an interview happen here.
That's very cool.
Oh yeah.
He's the one who successfully intervened to help with the, uh, uh, He intervened there, and now he's even intervening in Canada to save the ostriches.
Now, to be honest, Brooke Rollins should have been on the ball, but she wasn't once again.
But thank God Robert Kennedy was there to step in and help out once again.
It's amazing.
I mean, the idea of culling those ostriches, given their scientific value, I still think they have, I mean, not to be too cynical, someone asked, what does ostrich taste like?
It tastes like filet mignon, and I'm not joking, without the fat.
It's a very, very lean red poultry.
Oh, it's totally delicious.
All right, Robert, what do we have on the menu for tonight?
We've got a bonus topic off the top, a debate I got into today on X about...
Because there's a lot of people who apparently are unaware that there are two different, separate cases concerning Derek Chauvin.
And all kinds of people are making idiots of themselves, vouching for this guy.
We've got the Supreme Court on Trump.
On religious schools, on fraud cases, on the main legislator.
So we got some decisions.
This is the time of decisions for the Supreme Court this week and over the next several weeks.
The big cases start coming down.
Several of those cases we previously discussed.
We'll discuss the outcome of those cases.
Harvard is in the middle of a big dispute with the Trump administration.
Does AI have free speech?
The number one voted topic tonight, federal courts and immigration.
The insanity continues unabated.
Federal employees would like you to know that they are immune from elections, as well as existing law, as they continue to seek special exemptions and protections from the same rogue federal judicial branch.
When is a fee or a charge or a regulatory requirement a taking?
That was decided in a Louisiana state court this past week.
Obstruction of justice.
When is it obstruction?
When is it not obstruction?
Actually, the Takens case was Virginia.
Obstruction was the Louisiana case.
The lottery.
What happens when you win?
You finally cash in.
You get 83 million bucks.
And the state of Texas says, nah, we don't want to pay anymore.
Then we've got a couple of bonus cases.
We've got a ball most foul for the Colorado Rockies.
Many baseball fans would suggest the Rockies themselves are a foul ball for the Major League Baseball.
We've got James O 'Keefe.
This comes from our Viva Barnes Law.
.locals.com message board that produces the show notes for the Sunday show, both with their polling and with their replies, comments, and questions.
Here were some of the more liked questions in that regard.
What about James O 'Keefe's raid and FOIA?
Why wasn't an honest FOIA produced by the FBI run by Kash Patel and Dan Bongino?
I'm sorry.
I mean Bongino.
Up next, we have Data Republican.
Doing great work developing, as part of Elon Musk's Doge, searchable items where you can find where all the fraud is, where the Soros fraud is, where the Gates fraud is, where all the other NGO fraud is.
Mention that.
Are Chinese students, given Chinese law, actually foreign agents under FARA?
The archivist.
Who can fire them and who can't?
And how much secret power does the archivist have?
Should bonds be required before any injunctions get issued?
It may be one of the good provisions in the Big Beautiful Bill, as Trump calls it.
What about a brain-dead pregnant woman in Georgia?
Is the hospital forced to carry the pregnancy to term and not basically continue life-extending care even though she's brain-dead?
And last but not least, what's going on with Tommy Robinson?
Out of jail and now all of a sudden back into jail.
So that and more tonight.
On law for the people.
Robert, I think in order for the chat not to destroy us all night, can you turn your gain down?
Do you know how to turn your gain down?
Do you have a little box that looks something like this?
Yeah, I do.
Okay, there should be one of the knobs.
Is it too loud now or too hot?
I think it's distorting when you...
Actually, Viva, if you could turn yours down a little bit to keep the balance while he lowers the gain.
How is it now?
I've lowered mine.
Check, check, check, check.
Let's see.
Lower yours just a smidge more and we'll be balanced.
Okay, now I've lowered mine a touch more.
What about now?
Sounds as good as it's going to get.
It's a little bit metallic, but it doesn't matter.
We'll live with it.
Robert, let's start with the Harvard one.
not because it's also the one I've been the most interested in, but because it's also the one I've been following the most, that Trump, it was by way of...
So Kristi Noem comes in and writes a letter to Harvard saying, we want certain information on your foreign students.
We want you to comply within a certain period of time failing, which...
And they defaulted, I guess, and Kristina announces, well, hitherto you no longer were revoking your right to enroll foreign students for the year 2025-2026.
And they went and got an ex parte TRO in joining the, prohibiting the enforcement of that.
Revocation of a privilege.
The first question is, what authority does Kristi Noem have?
And in virtue of what can they revoke whatever privileges they were offering or Harvard was getting by way from the feds as relates to enrollment of foreign students?
So in general, basically, foreign students only can access American universities at the permission and grace, if you will, of the federal government and the executive branch in particular in this regard.
So it's long been recognized they are pretty carte blanche.
To give you an idea of how much carte blanche they have, in 1979, President Carter ordered that every single Iranian student in the country be expelled, not only from their universities, but removed and deported from the country.
There was no one who challenged his legal authority to do so.
So if you can mass expel and mass deport foreign students, By golly, you can prohibit federal funds from going to universities for those foreign students, just as you can just say you're not going to allow those foreign students to enroll at any particular university.
This is a far more limited approach than what Jimmy Carter did.
And so because Harvard has refused to comply with federal law in a wide range of contexts, discrimination law, federal grant law, I mean, the guy who ran the Harvard morgue just got caught selling body parts.
The other issue is that they are in bed with the Chinese Communist Party.
They have been for a very long time.
What will shock many Americans is that many Ivy League schools depend financially on foreign students, and often, as it involves in China and other places, For example, Xi's child is a Harvard grad.
The head of the Chinese Communist Party sent his kid to Harvard.
That's how friendly Harvard is to these idolatries, if you will.
And then it turns out Harvard's been repeatedly caught with professors and other people, students engaged in sabotage, engaged in seditious activities against the United States and trade secret deals, all the rest.
The Confucius Institute, which is very misnamed.
It's like they've been taking their advice from Jeffrey Sachs, who thinks that China is this beacon of peace and democracy because they're all Confucius-inspired people, which I was unaware that Sun Tzu's book was called Art of Peace.
I guess I missed that from the Chinese tradition.
And then Harvard got recently caught, institutionally involved.
In facilitating various sabotage efforts of the Chinese government.
So Harvard is an anti-American institution.
That's the reality.
It's seen as the penultimate American institution.
These days, it's the penultimate anti-American institution.
Why should we be subsidizing them and supporting them by giving them federal grants, by giving them federal funds, or giving them special permission to enroll foreign students?
It's a thing that I don't think most people are fully aware of.
27% of the students at Harvard are foreign students.
Of that, the biggest country that supplies foreign students to Harvard is China.
I do wonder how the Chinese students get their funding, their enrollment in Harvard.
But, I mean, at what point are you actually not just training the enemy?
I mean, they're coming in.
That's exactly what's going on.
But more than that, using federal funds to sabotage American security.
I mean, that's what, I mean, they've taken it affirmatively and aggressively.
Not just random, not, you know, a few professors, a few students.
The university administration was doing it.
And that's what made it intolerable.
Now, of course, Harvard immediately ran to their favorite federal judge there in Boston.
The same federal judge who said that their overt and open racial discrimination somehow didn't violate.
The Supreme Court, of course, reversed that.
Same judge magically got the case, of course.
And the same judge magically ran in to protect and salvage Harvard from its illegality and wrongdoing.
Democrats apparently think defending Harvard is going to be this rallying cry across the country.
And this tells you how out of touch they are.
They're like the characters from the Apple show, Your Friends and Neighbors, other than Jon Hamm's character.
They're like all the other characters.
They really believe that Harvard is the, because Harvard is the ultimate symbol of the professional and managerial class in America.
Harvard is not well respected amongst ordinary Americans.
It's not seen as an institution that represents or reflects American values.
None of the Ivy League is seen that way.
It's seen as very prestigious universities, but they're mostly seen as snobs.
That's why we always pick Brits to play our villains in America for a lot of American movies, because you hear that accent and you think, snob, as quickly or as easily as you think, maybe smart.
So Harvard is in legal trouble and in political trouble, and it's just doubling down, and it's hoping the judicial branch protects it from the legal consequences it should face.
I don't think ultimately they'll be successful in this regard.
Of course, you know what?
One out of four federal judges and federal clerks are at Harvard or came from Harvard or got a degree from Harvard.
So, you know, how likely are they to turn on their prior university?
We'll see.
But there's no question legally the president has the complete power to do what he's doing.
See no further than Jimmy Carter, Mr. Human Rights himself, and his precedent that he set with Iranian students in 1979.
It's not the case.
Like, Kristi Noem has not said that they're going to revoke their F1 visas.
They're strictly denying a privilege to Harvard in particular, who has failed to comply with what is basically a national security issue in terms of providing information as to the foreign students, what they've been doing, have they been participating in any, you know, campus protests and whatever.
And they say no.
How the hell do they go and get a judge?
It happens to be the same judge who adjudicated the case back in 2020 involving Trump, who issues an ex parte TRO.
That doesn't even let Kristi Noem and the state come and present their case.
How do they rationalize that?
I didn't see anything about that.
They don't care.
They see they think the ends justify the means.
They believe they're more righteous than the rest of us.
They believe they should run the world.
I shared a couple of articles in the Barnes Brief this week over at vivabarneslaw.locals.com, one by Professor John Eastman, another one by a good writer who was part of the Trump administration, talking about the wonderful decline of the Federalist Society, thank God, in the respect and appreciation.
Of the Trump administration.
And Eastman, of course, as well, demonstrating this is just rogue behavior.
This is a judicial aristocracy.
What the anti-federalists warned about, what Thomas Jefferson warned about, what Andrew Jackson warned about, what Abraham Lincoln warned about, what Franklin Delano Roosevelt warned about, has now come to full fruition.
We have a federal judicial branch that has set itself up as the superior branch.
That it should govern all policies, period, end of story.
And that they consider themselves superior to the legislative branch, and absolutely superior to the executive branch, and in all cases superior to the common person of America that they look down upon.
They're here to protect the federal bureaucracy, here to protect the corrupt NGOs, here to protect illegal immigration, here to protect open borders, here to protect the Ivy League from any degree of law enforcement in this country.
And they are going to continue to do so until the Supreme Court hems them in.
Or if they don't, Congress and the President hem them in.
They're creating a constitutional conference.
It's not a constitutional crisis.
It's a constitutional confrontation because they are exceeding their power.
And so when and if Trump has to say no mas to these rogue judicial rulings and say, you made your ruling, you can go enforce it.
Then until that happens, we're going to continue to see this.
The Supreme Court not stepping in right away, as we talked about and warned, this was going to open the door to every Trump-hating judge, which is two-thirds of the people that sit on the federal bench, because even a lot of the Republicans are Bushites.
They were either appointed by George W. Bush or Poppy Bush, and most of them hate Trump, despise Trump.
Trump, remember, destroyed the Bush family political legacy in this country, something that built up over a century and a half.
If you go back to Mama Bush, I mean, it was extraordinary.
I think it was Louis Black, years ago, did a thing about how the Bush family, if you go through their whole history, some of the worst politicians in American history all have genetic ties to Bushes.
You know, it's President Pierce, some others that have ties there.
But that's what you're seeing, and that they think that no one's going to stop them.
They think no one's going to hem them in.
They don't care what the American people think.
And they don't care what the law says.
They don't care what prior precedent is.
It's exactly what everybody warned about.
You set up this branch that naturally tends itself towards oligarchy and aristocracy.
You're going to sooner or later get an oligarchic aristocracy.
And that's what the federal judiciary now is.
And so hopefully enough normies have been red pilled to where Trump has enough support in the court of public opinion that he can put the court in the in the place it belongs, which is subordinate to the American people.
So.
So, I mean, I guess they're going to, what, have a hearing on an interim injunction?
I mean, when do they do that?
Next, they'll go to the preliminary injunction stage.
Then they'll go up to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which has a bunch of Trump haters on it.
And then we'll go to the Supreme Court and we'll see what they do.
But the Supreme Court's ruling on nationwide injunctions could have a broad impact on a lot of this.
That decision is coming within the next couple of weeks.
But hopefully they step in and fix something.
Or what's going to happen, if they don't fix anything in their decisions over the next month, then Trump is going to be put into a position come late summer and early fall where he's got to go full Andrew Jackson and tell him to shove off.
That he'll have no choice in order to protect the security of the American people, but more importantly, from my perspective, protect our constitutional liberty, which right now the greatest threat to our constitutional liberty are those wearing black robes.
Let me bring this one up here.
It seems to be on point.
Schnookums in our Locals community says, so as part of plans for dealing with China as an opponent, if the student visas require enrollment at an accepted educational institution, could they not ban all student visas for Chinese citizens to fight espionage and IP theft?
That goes to one of the questions asked on our Locals board for today's show, that given that Chinese law requires Chinese students to spy on foreign governments in foreign countries, and engage in various forms of sabotage as a matter of their legal obligation to their homeland that to me that is grounds by itself to not only require they register as foreign agents under the Foreign Agents Registration Act but more consequently just exclude them entirely Why
should American tax dollars, directly or indirectly, go to subsidize and support saboteurs and adversaries?
I don't see any reason for that.
Most of the Iranian students that Jimmy Carter kicked out of the country were not pro-Ayatollah.
In fact, they were pro-Shah.
Most of them had enrolled here while the Shah was running Iran.
Really, MI6 and CIA was running Iran, but that's another story for another day.
So I think, I have called for that.
I support the complete exclusion of Chinese students from the United States at this point, given Chinese law, until China changes its law.
To require China to reverse its policy of criminally or civilly prosecuting those Chinese students who refuse to spy and sabotage foreign countries and foreign governments.
Until they do.
No Chinese students should be let in the United States.
Let China spend the money paying for and educating its own population.
Why should we be doing it?
The illusion was that this would somehow bring peace and democracy and freedom and liberty to the Chinese people.
No, it hasn't.
All it's done is sabotaged America's security and prosperity.
That's it.
Enough is enough.
So we'll see.
I think at some point the Trump administration will consider that.
As the conflict with China escalates, which it inevitably and invariably will, I once again recommend The China Show.
You can follow on YouTube.
They may have rumbled in some other channels too, but they're really good.
A couple of gentlemen who spent a decade plus in China, have a lot of friends and family connections in China, and they do a great job every week breaking down their show.
They also have a Patreon show that they do that's sort of behind the scenes, and they get into certain topics that they can't on YouTube.
But they were on...
So I recommend those shows for both of that.
The China show is great if you want an independent China-skeptical perspective from on the ground in China.
The China show is, but without question, the best.
It's also often funny.
They really just do a fantastic job of entertaining as well as being educational.
But they pointed this out.
And you can also tell one's conservative, one's probably liberal.
They avoid discussing U.S. politics for the most part.
But they do a really good job of detailing what's going on in China.
I'll be on tomorrow, Memorial Day.
Hat tip to all the great veterans of our country.
We'll have it later on, a barbecue.
But we'll be on with the Duran at 1 p.m. Eastern Time, where I'll probably only offend and upset as many people as I'm about to offend and upset today, talking about Derek Chauvin and some others.
We're going to cover the whole landscape on the Duran.
It'll be a lot of fun.
So tune in tomorrow, 1 p.m. Eastern Time, YouTube, Rumble, Odyssey, elsewhere with locals for the Duran.
You know, to get up for the show, I'm going to use the magic straw of Chancellor Mertz and the magic handkerchief of Emmanuel Macron.
It has the same effect on me as Amos Miller's milk, apparently.
So we'll have some fun on that show and the rest.
But yeah, Trump is right about Harvard.
It's a political winner.
It should be, but it's not guaranteed to be a legal winner.
I disagree with my friend Jed Rubinfeld on this, who felt it was retaliatory.
I don't think it is.
This has nothing to do with retaliation.
Trump's not trying to retaliate against Harvard at all.
Harvard's not complying with federal law in every single area that governs them.
You can't continue to subsidize and support and give them tax benefits when they're flagrantly violating federal law to the detriment of American security.
Well, that's the issue.
They're training.
They take the information.
They go back home.
They infiltrate political parties here.
I mean, I say that.
When you use the word they, everyone already jumps to racism.
But it's a known thing.
It's nothing to do with race of China.
And nobody's more racist in the world than China and Japan.
I always get a kick out of it.
China loves to sell racial division in the U.S. Talk about how deeply bothered they are about racism.
Try to be black in China.
Good luck with that.
Robert, unless you play for the NBA, you're basically not allowed in.
I put out a tweet.
I deleted it because it might have been oversimplified.
Who's paying the Chinese students tuition?
Because it has to be indirectly the government, but how do their tuitions get paid?
That's a good question.
That should be answered because I don't know the answer.
How much of it's coming from federal subsidies?
How much is coming from indirect federal subsidies?
Because Harvard's allowed to raise and spend money without having to pay.
And then how much of it comes from federal scholarships or federal loans of those federal funds versus how much of it is actually being paid by the Chinese people of the Chinese government?
Very good question to be asked.
What I believe is it's technically not government organizations or institutions, but Chinese non-governmental organizations that raise their funds.
Which there's no such thing.
That's the reality.
Non-governmental organizations.
I didn't want to have semantic debates.
Yes, in the Chinese Communist Party, there is no private enterprise or private endowments.
It's indirectly but directly the government funding these things because they're the spies that then bring the information over.
Absolutely.
You can look at a recent Stanford scandal.
Where they found out that several students were Chinese spies right there on campus.
So this happens again and again and again and again.
And it's a problem that's been suppressed because of the corruption of American politics by the Chinese Communist Party.
Before we piss everybody off with the Chauvin thing, because I think I'll push back a little bit.
I think I know where you're going and I can understand the arguments on the other side.
Let's just go to the intro joke, Robert.
Dan Bongino and Kash Patel gave an interview.
last week with Maria Bartiromo, and it didn't go over well, even for the most ardent supporters of both men.
And I think I put out what I think is the most thorough and forgiving analysis, where like I say, we all have grown to know and trust Dan Bongino over...
Longer?
Decades?
And it's not the type of credibility and goodwill that one can just say, well, now he's, that's it, he's done, and he's turned on MAGA.
So there either has to be some good explanation or long-term play, but we don't get to simply write off Dan and Patel as humans because we disagree with this particular assertion, which it, What is your take on that Maria Bartiromo assertion in light of the evidence that we know and in light of what you know personally about both men?
Yeah, I think there's a threefold set of concerns.
So it comes against the backdrop that there's been no evident effort of dramatic policy changes at the FBI.
There's been no evident effort.
Of a major purge of rogue actors at the FBI.
And there's been no announcement or even leaked meaningful investigations into the people that engaged in sabotage against President Trump, against Trump supporters, that engaged in the lawfare on January 6th, that engaged in a lawfare by FBI offices across the nation, the Fednapping case of Whitmer, which is now before Ed Martin as part of the Weaponization Pardon Committee, that basically people had seen no positive news from the top of the FBI.
Local U.S. attorneys doing good work.
Harmeet Dillon at the Civil Rights Division, who was on with Tucker Carlson, doing fantastic work.
But we were not seeing any evidence of that occurring at the FBI by Patel and Bongino, despite very big promises that both of them had made before they got those jobs.
They talked real big.
And people are like, where's the results?
Or do we have another all hat, no cattle, as they say in Texas?
To describe the Cowboys that don't deliver.
Then they go on, and their first major interview, they don't provide any information that there's going to be any meaningful investigation on any of those things.
No announcement.
Contrast it to Harmeet Dillon on Tucker Carlson.
Harvey Dillon goes into details about how systemic the problem is, how institutionalized the problem is, how it shows up in policies in the various subcommittees, how it shows up in the personnel that are placed there.
And so what does she do?
She announces complete radical revision of those policies in each one.
Then she gets all the bad faith actors to voluntarily quit, thank God.
and then starts replacing them with really competent, capable people.
And then she starts announcing specific policies where they have, she And she starts announcing real cases, often in live time, on X. She's calling out various bad faith actors and discrimination by local and state governments all across the country.
Finally setting aside...
All of these, I mean, she's on top of it, and she was put in later than Bongino and Patel were.
She got in later than they did, and yet she was moving faster than they were.
Let me, I'm good.
People are going to call it steel manning or butt kissing.
I don't care which, but I'm thinking about it because the assertion, we've seen the file, he killed himself.
When nobody believes it, And even the most ardent supporters do not believe it.
And you have to know that people aren't going to believe it.
And if they're not going to be satisfied with an assertion, you know, trust me, I've seen the file.
Then you say, okay, are they doing it to pacify?
Some people suggest they've got to say this, you know, so that the wrongdoers think they're in the clear.
And I'm like, that's juvenile level thought.
Others are going to say they have to assert.
The government's position, because they're government employees now, or that they have to base it on the file as it exists, but it's a file that was prepared by a corrupt FBI.
I guess the question for me on this is, Harmeet Dhillon is in a position where, you know, the FBI versus Civil Rights Division, two very different animals.
The FBI dealing with terrorism, threats against the president, assassination attempts, domestic terrorism, international terrorism, fentanyl crisis.
They're dealing with the darkest of the dark stuff.
Harmeet Dillon's got a much easier job to turn around a ship without potentially murderous catastrophes if she fails to do her job.
Is it possible that they've just inherited something that is just so wildly broken, wildly corrupt beyond their wildest nightmares that they're overwhelmed with what they're dealing with?
Yeah.
Well, here's the problem.
So that's the backdrop of that interview.
Then they decide to use that interview...
And not just that, there's nothing to see here with the Trump assassination attempts.
And it's like, hold on a second.
So somehow it's so busy and so corrupt that you can't fix anything.
But instead you start vouching for the Bill Barr and Joe Biden Justice Department in your first big announcement after being complete failures.
In your first hundred days.
This could not have been worse PR, aside from the legal and policy issues.
This showed complete ineptitude that unless Amanda Melius is directing Cash Patel, he doesn't know what to say.
And unless Dan Bongino is on his independent podcast, he sounds like the idiot on Fox he used to sound like before he had his own podcast.
Is it possible?
Is he not allowed sharing his own personal opinion anymore because he's an employee of the state?
Oh, he is.
But what was his basis?
Oh, he read the FBI file from Joe Biden and Bill Barr's deep FBI.
Right?
So you're saying, hey, look, it's so corrupted that they're having difficulty.
Well, then why are they relying on such a corrupt agency for making such absolutist determinations?
Right?
That's the problem.
I mean, I wasn't as bothered by the ludicrous about the Epstein stuff, because I thought maybe that's Israel connected or something else, that they're playing ball and it's Trump's grip.
But there is simply no justification.
For the ludicrous claims Dan Bongino made about the Butler assassination attempt.
Add to everything about that.
Screams conspiracy.
But not according to Dan Bongino because he read Joe Biden's FBI file and he knows it.
That means it must be absolutely true and there can't be anybody else involved.
And he even said it arrogantly and condescendingly.
I think he's weighing over his skis.
He should resign now, go back to podcasting, and pretend to be a populist.
Because I have doubts about the sincerity of that.
I had doubts about it, honestly, at the time.
But, so, I have no confidence in either one of them at this point.
I just don't.
I don't think we're going to get anything out of them.
I don't think they're going to be, I think, down deep, they're institutionalist.
Down deep, they really think there was just a few bad actors.
And that's all.
The FBI is great.
Federal law enforcement is great.
The Justice Department is great.
J. Edgar Hoover is a hero.
The problem is, I don't think Bongino ever esposed that view.
I think Patel did.
He used to.
In fact, he did.
You know what the tell is?
Go back and look how often Dan Bongino ever defended Alex Jones.
Or go back and look at how snide and snarky he was about Alex Jones.
I know it was way back.
Dan Bongino used to be a conventional conservative.
Nothing about him screamed populist.
Then he got his own podcast.
He saw the success of Tucker Carlson and Rush Limbaugh died.
Then he discovered a populist voice.
I was a little skeptical of that populist voice, to be frank about it.
Now my skepticism is unfortunately coming to full fruition.
I hope I'm wrong and you're right.
I hope in six months we see great action at the FBI.
I just have no confidence and faith in it after that disastrous interview.
Following what has been an uneventful first hundred days.
Well, this is one thing.
The statements he made on the Butler assassination, I didn't think that they were as categorical or unequivocal as the Epstein stuff.
That, I don't understand why the answer wouldn't have been.
It's a current, ongoing investigation.
It's not possible.
It's close.
It's an ongoing investigation.
No comment would have been better than that comment.
On the Epstein stuff, the answer, if the position is, it's the position of the state that he killed himself, that's what the answer should have been.
It's the position of the state.
Not the answer that was given.
Well, there's so many other PR better answers, right?
You just say that's under investigation.
We're reviewing it, right?
Contrast.
I mean, look it.
James Comey is walking all over Kash Patel.
He's spitting in the face of Dan Bongino and smiling about it on late night TV.
They look like jokes.
I call him Dan Van Gino for a reason.
I had some other phrases, but...
I'll try to use just more innuendo rather than overtly bad language.
But James Comey, just dog walk Dan Bongino.
You cannot have the former director of the FBI come out and publicly call for the assassination of the President of the United States and then do nothing about it.
But that's what Dan Bongino has done.
Comey is busy doing this to Bongino.
I mean, it's an embarrassment.
I mean, if that man has any masculine pride at all, do something.
Get off your rear and do something.
I mean, it's like the meme of Chris Farley screaming, please do something.
Arrest somebody.
Do something useful.
Other than apologize for Bill Barr's corruption and apologize for Joe Biden's corruption in what happened in the Butler assassination, what happened in the Ukrainian attempted assassination.
Ukraine's all over the place there.
And in what he did.
In terms of the second assassination attempt, down the golf course, and what happened with Epstein.
I mean, Chris Martinson did a good breakdown.
Other people have done.
There is no credible basis to believe Epstein killed himself unless you're as dumb or as ballless as Dan Bongino.
The thing is, even if he did it with sheets that were linens that were provided to him, like he had extra linens according to whatever reporting at the time, you know, cameras off.
Security guards sleeping.
If they gave him sheets to do it, there's still the same conspiracy behind it.
The medical side of it, which I don't feel like I have the authority to get into, the three Bokken brones, where it would indicate this pressure and not a strangulation pressure, makes a lot of sense.
And I've heard some very smart people say it doesn't look like a hanging based on the file, based on the autopsy.
Is it possible?
If I don't want to get too conspiratorial, He just can't say what he thinks?
I mean, potentially, but then what use is he?
Again, if there weren't these seeds of doubt before, then maybe I would look at it differently.
But the seeds of doubt were how...
Alex Jones is a great proxy for whether somebody's really willing to take on the establishment or not.
Willing to take on the deep state or not.
Lots of people talk big.
Are you willing to back up Alex Jones?
Are you willing to be on Alex Jones?
Are you willing to platform Alex Jones?
To my knowledge, neither one ever did.
And that's always been a big problem.
And Steve Bannon, God bless his soul, has some of the worst taste in promoting people on the planet.
I mean, he's the one who put out a lot of the Dominion nonsense.
He's the one who pushed for lockdowns early on during COVID.
He's the one who platformed a whole bunch of these idiots.
Platformed Sidney Powell as the cure on election cases.
Bad decision, Steve.
The one that thought Robert Mueller was a straight shooter.
Bad decision, Steve.
I mean, there's a long litany of these.
At some point, got to hold him to account too.
I think he's a brilliant man, great architect, deep principles, one of the great populist advocates in the country.
But when it comes to recommending personnel, the last person whose advice I would ever take is deep in it.
It's just mistake after mistake after mistake.
It's just an embarrassment at this point.
So I have these doubts about both of them.
And here's my depth.
I don't think they're bad people.
I don't think they're corrupt people.
I don't think they're being held hostage.
I think down deep, they really believe J. Edgar Hoover's FBI is a great institution.
That was the question.
Oh, by the way, just a fact check.
This will be a yes and a no, or a 50-50.
He was on 2013-2014.
It seems the last time was 2016.
I forget when.
That tells you a lot, right?
As soon as Jones is under heat, he disappears.
I mean, come on.
Cash Patel comes out and says- I have problems with that.
And again, those problems by themselves could be nothing.
It's when you're taking no corrective action and you're vouching for the deep state.
That's what that interview was.
That was a vouching for the deep state interview.
And it's all happening while James Comey is making a public mockery of them.
I want to bring this one up.
This was Dan Bongino put this tweet out and I retweeted.
I said, well, you'd better effing arrest him.
We are now dealing with copycats sending cryptic threats to public figures using 86 reference.
Whether they turn out to be legitimate threats or not, taxpayer-funded public safety agents are going to have to run all these out and investigate them.
This is a reminder of the damage self-serving individuals with a history of extremely poor judgment can do.
That's fine.
Robert, some people are shitting on me.
Like I say, arrest him because it wasn't just free speech.
It was specific.
No, it wasn't.
It was a true threat given who he was.
Can you imagine?
Oh, please, next time, I'm going to write a letter.
I'm going to put out an ex-tweet saying, please don't do that.
That doesn't reflect bad judgment.
No, it doesn't.
It reflects a coordinated effort to get the President of the United States murdered, you dumb bastard.
Come on.
That's what DB stands for.
I mean, I apologize to my sister.
I mean, enough is enough.
I mean, so far, Dan Bongino has been the biggest disappointment of all Trump appointees.
And Kash Patel's a close second.
You want to reverse that?
Do something.
Don't say something.
Do something.
Because the things you've said so far have actually made you look worse rather than better.
I wanted to pull up James Comey's excuse that he was on the beach and they come across this and they thought it was someone's address written in shells.
But then his wife, who works...
Because everybody knows he's full of it.
He just wants to say, see how I can get away with it?
Mmm.
Mmm.
Please don't.
We'll have to spend more money.
How pitiful.
Disgraceful.
Disappointing.
If they have to go follow through on the 86s to see if they're real or not, then they have to follow through and investigate Comey, grab his cell phone, see if his explanation was true or not.
You have to send a message right away.
Look what happens.
Ukraine tries to drone bomb and murder and assassinate Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia.
Putin thanks them by bombing the living crap out of Kiev the very next day.
Right?
You can't sit there and say, oh, please don't do that.
I mean, it is pitiful.
Pitiful.
Disgraceful.
It is embarrassing.
Why did he take the job?
Montana just stayed making money on a podcast.
This is just great.
Why did he take the job?
If all you're going to do is, if you don't have the courage or the guts or the know-how or the skill.
I think because, down deep.
They thought there was just a few bad faith actors who just had bad judgment.
They weren't corrupt.
No, James Comey isn't corrupt.
He has had poor judgment.
What a disgrace and an embarrassment Dan Bongino has become.
One of my questions for Cash Patel was, you know, they talk about the 36,000 staff and maybe what Cash, what they're doing by removing the DC field office and they're going to spread it out across the country.
Maybe that's going to do the filtering that Harmeet Dillon has managed to do to sift out the bad apples who don't want to go live outside of the DC political system.
Especially what happens is normies out there see how the Biden administration handles.
As soon as they got in, they were lining up January 6th defendants.
As soon as they got in, Alex Jones was under major investigation.
As soon as they got in, Trump was under major investigation.
As soon as Dan Bongino and Kash Patel get in, they're here to tell you how Epstein killed himself, and there's nothing to see here in the assassination attempts on Trump.
That makes them look like jokes that James Comey is treating them as publicly for the world to witness.
Jay Comey is sending two messages.
One, please murder the President of the United States.
That's message one.
And message two is, hey everybody, the FBI is toothless.
Dan Bongino is a wuss.
Cash Patel is all talk, no action.
You can't be Cash Patel and say, Adam Schiff's the biggest criminal in the history of Congress, and then do nothing about it when you're head of the FBI.
It is they are becoming a walking, talking embarrassment.
Unless and until we see action, and we need to start seeing it now.
Robert, you make some valid points.
It's a shame, because it's not a shame.
We had a lot of faith in Kash Patel.
I never knew Cash Patel personally.
I know Bongino personally, which is why, to me, there has to be a good reason for which And a good reason in any number of ways.
It could be a good reason because I think cryptically, some people are uncorruptible but not uncoercible.
And I would argue that anybody with a wife and kids is not uncoercible.
Or flip side, it's...
If anybody out there feels they can be intimidated, don't take that job.
Just don't do it.
You know yourself well enough.
You've got to be Robert Kennedy.
You've got to be Donald Trump.
You've got to be Tulsi Gabbard.
You've got to be Harmeet Dillon.
You've got to not only understand how fraudulent the system is, but have no fear.
Not worry about it.
You've got to be Ed Martin.
Somebody spits him in the face, he doesn't care.
Senate blocks him from appointment to the D.C. job, that's fine.
He's going to take a more impactful job.
He's going to appear on Tucker Carlson and go into details about it.
That's what you need to have that mindset.
If you don't have a fearless mindset, do not take a job that requires you to have such a mindset to win.
Well, I wasn't depressed.
I hope you're right.
For the record, make it clear.
I absolutely hope you're right.
But I think there needs to be maximum pushback because unless they start hearing a lot of criticism, I don't think we have any chance of corrective action.
If that was a test balloon to see if they could just, hey, look, we're not Ray.
We're not Comey.
And that makes us better by default.
No dispute about that.
But that isn't why you're there.
You're there because people need these institutions cleansed so that it doesn't happen again.
And that they were seeing, unfortunately, no.
Corrective action so far.
Well, I'll only take one small victory lap in that I'm not a pussy Canadian for saying Comey should be arrested and charged and arrested for what you said.
No!
I mean, part of the world I come from, there'd be other ways to handle that.
But at a minimum, legally, lock him up the next day.
That's what I would have done.
I know the whole reason.
Let him run to the courts.
Let him do all that.
Let the courts bail him out.
Make the courts show that they actually want the President of the United States assassinated.
Fine.
But that would send the message to everybody else.
Oh, wow.
Hold on a second.
Like what Trump did on immigration.
Look at Tom Homan on immigration.
He's been fearless.
Look at Kristi Noem, to her credit, to my surprise.
Fearless on immigration.
Even Marco Rubio has been fearless on immigration.
So, I mean, these are people, this is how you have to handle it.
And why does Trump have people randomly picked up off the street that are accused of violating a visa?
Because it sends a message to the whole world that has a whole bunch of people lining up on free flights to leave the country because they don't, they think, by golly, Trump might pick me up tomorrow and send me to El Salvador.
And according to the media, that's a hellhole torturous prison.
They're exaggerating.
But who cares?
For Trump, that's all good.
He goes, I might blackbag you tomorrow and send you off to wherever, so you better get out of here now if you're here illegally.
That's the kind of message the FBI needs to send when people like James Comey are calling for the murder of the President of the United States.
Absolutely.
I mean, the whole reason why they're dealing with copycats is because Comey, the highest level up, got away with it, and why won't everyone else?
You got Dean Blundell in Canada saying it.
You got, what's it say?
Not Klippenstein, sorry.
That's the Krappenstein.
Krasenstein.
I'll call him Krappenstein.
Krappenstein.
That's apropos.
You get the Krasensteins saying, they should have all been arrested, charged at the very least, and especially Comey.
Well, especially as I see things like they're taking no corrective action on the P. Diddy case.
They're letting that case be presented as a fraudulent case.
He only trafficked people to himself.
Guys accused of sex trafficking.
To who?
To himself?
What the heck?
I mean, they're repeating and replicating the Epstein by letting Maureen Comey run that case.
Name one thing they've done that's been impactful and revolutionary since they've been there.
I can't name one yet.
I'm trying to think.
Maureen Comey still being on the P. Diddy case, which is now looking to be more of a cover-up than ever, and it's like the whole plot of the blackmail tapes and his extensive recordings has now been reduced to two people, his ex-girlfriend and Jane Doe, and we're just going to forget about it like we've forgotten about them.
Why even Whistleblower's been rehired?
I represent Robin Gritz, one of the long-standing great FBI agents.
She got fired by those rogue actors, McCabe and others at the FBI.
She still, according to the U.S. Department of Justice Council, I was like, really?
I was like, why is it one of the best agents the FBI ever had who got wrongfully fired and terminated by the corrupt rogue actors at the FBI?
Why isn't she being considered for reinstatement?
Because Dan Bongino and Cash Patel are asleep at the wheel.
Because down deep they think that what the bar administration, bar FBI and the Biden FBI did is just fine.
Right?
They think there were a couple of excesses.
A couple of political mistakes.
And that's it.
I mean, at this point, they're only marginally better than Comey and Ray.
I mean, they've been the biggest disappointment by far.
Every day, Robert Kennedy announces a new success for Trump.
Every day!
I rate a new one.
I get a new one.
I get another new one.
I get a new one.
I need to get one from Bongino and Cash.
RFK's getting involved in the ostriches.
It's almost like he's hearing what's going on in Canada and acting on it.
They're like the Tango and Cash, but the retarded version.
Okay, let me read some...
Yes, there's more triggering to do tonight.
No, but the thing is this.
I'm reading the chat of people who love Bongino, and when everybody agrees, I mean, it's true.
Give us time, give us time.
But there's give us time, and then there's Epstein killed himself.
In the Butler assassination, there's nothing to see here.
The Butler assassination?
The guy who's had, like, eight different phones and encrypted stuff and whose house was, like, completely cleaned out of everything, who they still can't explain how he was droning, drone-watching everything going on before that somehow nobody saw anything that he managed to climb right up.
I mean, come on.
I mean, next they're going to...
I mean, Babylon Bee was making fun of him.
There was no conspiracy.
I mean, that's how they have made themselves into a public laughingstock.
I'm going to read some chats, and then we're going to get into the Chauvin case.
Also, one last tidbit.
It doesn't help Bungino that now he's blocking, unfollowing anybody that raises any criticism of him.
Tom Fitton was critical of him.
Immediately he's blocking him or unsubstant.
Anybody who raises any criticism.
The quartering.
Says, why isn't something going?
I really like it.
He said, I would like to see this Epstein file you say is convincing.
Immediately unfollows him.
Right?
He's acting like a six-year-old.
An overgrown six-year-old.
I mean, it's just been a disgrace so far.
And, you know, I'm going to call it out as color as I see it.
The question for Encryptus, what type of...
Oh, lordy, lordy.
David, happy belated birthday.
I will be in Miami next weekend.
Love to take train up and buy you lunch.
Sent lure package with special design Viva Lure Friday.
Shoot me an email at HeartTackle.
I will definitely shoot you an email when I get those.
I'm going to be up in Georgia.
Oh, yeah, yeah.
Belated.
Happy birthday.
Yeah, I almost killed myself.
I almost killed myself on my birthday.
Like, does everybody know what dog fennel is?
I want to know how many people know what dog fennel is.
Because it's called dog fennel.
It looks like dill.
It tastes very good.
But it's toxic to humans.
So I'm on a farm.
The guy's showing me how to, like, use it as bug repellent.
I sniff it.
I say, is it edible?
and I start chewing on it and then my wife's like, And it contains a toxin.
What do they call it?
Like an alkaloid toxin.
So I spent the three hours on my birthday thinking I was going to die.
Dr. Drew said, you know, if you make it past two hours, you're good.
And yeah, it was my birthday.
46 years old.
I'm going to get to the Commitube chats because those are harder to keep up with.
Stop the China hustle fraud.
It says, check filing from December 31st, 2019, 32 DR 18187.
I think it's Roberts versus Bukes.
Can you check?
Email for me.
Kesef Gadol, Joel.
That means big money.
Research Joel Kaplan, Hunter Biden.
Heart Tackle over on Commitube says happy same belated birthday.
Thank you.
Gorilla Strength Equipment.
On AliExpress, there is a Chinese company using one of our product images to sell a clone my products.
Anyone think China is our friend needs to think again.
They are IP thefts.
Everybody knows that.
The appeal of the international students are that they are full payers.
They pay more.
And they also bring in, you know, they pay more for housing and everything.
They have to document funds to pay for full cost of attendance to get the J-1 visa.
That was from Joe Reddington.
I'm not your buddy guy says, this is why I push for Barnes to be AG.
We got David DeHout says, something going on at the blaze, going hard at Congressman Corey Mills for stolen valor, not a crime.
He served in four or five war zones, wounded twice.
Steve Baker's going to be on tomorrow with me at 4 o 'clock, so stay tuned for that.
I'll get to the other chats later because those I can keep on the side.
Robert Chauvin.
We talked about this earlier where people were floating the idea of pardoning Chauvin.
I think it was Marjorie Taylor Greene who put out a tweet.
Pardon Chauvin.
George Floyd died of a drug overdose, yada, yada.
I happen to, at the risk, in my humble opinion, I do believe that George Floyd died of a drug overdose and not of Derek Chauvin's knee to his neck.
He had 11 micrograms or whatever it is.
You know, they say like 3 milligrams or micrograms, whatever the unit is.
He had 4 times what would otherwise be a potentially lethal dose in a human.
People saying he was a habitual drug user, therefore he was conditioned to the drugs.
Horseshit.
It's not the first time users, as far as I understand, that are the ones who die of OD.
It's the ones who get habituated, get, what's the word, conditioned, and take more and more and more to achieve the same high, and then one day they took too much.
So, set all that aside.
Marjorie Taylor Greene says, pardon Derek Chauvin.
I tweeted out to say that it won't do anything.
He's a been convicted at the state level of the state level counterparts of the deprivation of civil rights, whatever it was at the state level.
He's also been convicted on other tax stuff, but I don't think I'm not sure that he's in jail or that the sentence for the tax stuff is any longer relevant.
But the bottom line, pardon all you want at the federal level.
He'll still get he'll still he'll still be in jail for 22 and a half years at the state level.
The only question is going to be, is he actually better being in federal detention than in state detention?
And it was Jake Lang also organizing, mobilizing for a pardon.
I'm like, you know, it's going to be without consequence from a practical level.
It's going to be politically unnecessarily toxic unless Trump wants to create a true distraction from something else so that people riot in the streets.
If he pardons him, no practical benefit, no political benefit.
And then people are going to say, well, fairness is fairness.
And if you don't do what's right, even for the ugly guys, then you'll never do what's right for the good guys.
How do you respond?
I think the only viable, valid argument is the last one.
If you think that he was politically persecuted and that his constitutional rights to a fair trial were violated, then you must pardon at the federal level, even if it has no practical benefits anywhere else, even if it's totally politically toxic.
How do you respond to that?
Yeah, well, the first thing is for people to know that there are two different cases, right?
So the case everybody is thinking about in terms of evidence rulings, in terms of the jury bias, in terms of George Floyd is the state case.
In the federal case, he pled guilty.
He didn't go to trial.
He pled guilty.
He admitted he was guilty.
That's part one.
Part two, what were the charges he was facing in the federal case?
Only one of those charges included George Floyd's civil rights.
The other charges included tax evasion.
They were investigating him for money laundering.
They were investigating him for a wide range of illegal source income, for a whole bunch of other activities.
The other thing they were investigating for him is that, contrary to what people think, it is very rare for any police officer to have multiple civil rights complaints against them.
Derek Chauvin had more than a dozen over a decade.
They were investigating all of them.
One of the things he pled guilty to in the federal case was his abuse of a 14-year-old kid.
He pled guilty to it.
Like, imagine George Floyd, the worst thing that you could imagine about what you think Chauvin did or didn't do.
But if you think Chauvin did bad on George Floyd, multiply that times 10. That's what he did to a 14-year-old kid.
He had at least, according to Grok, 18 complaints filed against him with the Minneapolis Police Internal during his 19 years, as reported by multiple sources.
Six confirmed instances of excessive force.
Well, if it includes the last one, then they all must also be fake.
So this guy was a bad cop.
I have doubts about whether the state proved their case against him in the state case as to whether he caused the death of George Floyd, given that George Floyd may have overdosed, and I thought there was insufficient evidence by the government in the state case.
In the federal case, he pled guilty, number one.
Number two...
It concerned all the other people whose civil rights he's abused, plus his tax evasion, plus his illegal source income, plus his money laundering, plus probably working for people who are involved in criminal activities.
That's, you know, who is it that doesn't disclose a whole bunch of things on their tax return?
People who are making illegal source income when you're a police officer.
And he had a long, and your average, 99% of police officers in this country have had no more than one complaint ever filed against them that's of the kind that were filed against Chauvin.
So as soon as I saw that history, as someone who's done civil rights cases for a long time, I knew this guy was a bad actor.
This guy was like, take the worst character from the TV show The Shield.
How much does it take to get booted from the force?
Why was he still on the force?
Is that a very good question?
Probably because that corruption favored a lot of politically connected parties.
I mean, I was very curious where that case would have led if they would have done an honest inquiry.
I thought he was scapegoated on George Floyd for multiple reasons.
One was to build up this fake movement around George Floyd being this heroic martyr when he wasn't.
He was a lifelong criminal, and he, in my view, most likely died from fentanyl abuse, not from what happened to him at that crime scene.
even though I do think there was excessive force used by Chauvin at that crime scene, I don't think it caused his death.
But that's not the main basis on which he pled guilt.
And he's saying maybe it didn't have this impact, even though, again, he pled guilty to it at the time.
Now, the issue for, as you point out, the issue for Chauvin is he would rather be in federal prison, and it's concurrent, Trump cannot pardon him on the state charges.
So the people screaming to pardon him don't realize, one, they're screaming to pardon him on charges that have nothing to do with George Floyd, at least for a big part of that case.
His main motivation to plead in that case was to not have all the other Charges added on.
He did it to this person, did it to this person, did it to this person, did it to this person.
And most likely to cover up whoever he was criminally involved with, that he was getting all of this illegal source income that he wasn't reporting on his tax returns.
Folks, police officers who are making a lot of money, they're not reporting on their tax return.
It's very unlikely they were just moonlighting and security workers for your local bar or pub.
They were more like a notorious B.I.G.'s crew out of the Ramparts division in L.A. that were running one of the biggest criminal enterprises in the country.
And so I think he was scapegoated because of other issues.
That doesn't change the fact he is a lifetime crook and criminal.
And Donald Trump should not use his pardon power to pardon a lifetime crook and criminal who violated people's civil rights on the regular just because he was falsely blamed of killing George Floyd.
The way I see it is it's like seeing Nazis and commies fight in the street.
Guess what?
They're both bad.
Just because one of them's a Nazi or one of them's a commie doesn't make the Nazi or the commie suddenly a hero.
So what was shocking to me was the degree of legal and factual illiteracy.
I had all these conservatives on Exeng started attacking me.
How in the world can you possibly believe?
That it's indisputable that he killed George Floyd.
It's like, that's not what I'm even talking about.
The federal case isn't the state case.
The federal case is about did he have a systematic history of violating people's civil rights?
According to Derek Chauvin, yes, he did.
And this included 14-year-old kids independent of George Floyd.
So politically, it would be disastrous for Trump to issue a pardon.
And what it would do is it would likely lead to Trump being less likely to issue pardons where he should.
If he gets stuck in making the mistake of pardoning a career crooked cop.
And fact checking in real time is, I mean, we all knew that he pleaded guilty to the federal charges violating George Floyd's civil rights.
He pleaded guilty to the 14-year-old boy in a separate 2017 incident.
The guilty plea was entered on December 15, 2021 in federal court.
I'm not like, I can appreciate, I read and I hear things, but I've never seen the inside of a prison.
I'm not, I am correct.
You want to be in federal prison, not state prison.
That's universally true.
Okay, good.
And the question is this.
Some would say, well, could he go to a state prison in another state or does he go to Minnesota.
There's no place for him to go.
He would be murdered in...
People are saying, hey, Trump, do something politically disastrous because we don't know the facts of the underlying case so Derek Chauvin can go get killed in state prison.
That's how stupid these people are, because they've spent so little time.
I mean, come on, spend 30 seconds at least Googling it.
I was like, Barnes, how can you approve of the jury selection in that case?
There was no jury selection in the federal case because he pled guilty.
I mean, it's like, oh, it was driving me nuts.
These people were bombarding me.
And then a few of the people come out with their real bias, which is, hey, BLM is racist, so now they get to be racist.
And some of the response, it was amazing, that person wasn't being racist.
They said they think all black people are criminals and belong in prison.
Yeah, that's racist.
So just because BLM is racist is no excuse to support other racism.
So people got so caught up in that that they have forgot what the facts are, that this is a bad faith actor, and it's a trap to get on the side of crooked, corrupt cops and lunatic racists.
That's a bad idea.
Now I'm going to have to go and fact check myself and criticize myself.
When I was saying that there was witness intimidation and that one of the expert defense witnesses had a pig head thrown at his former residence, that was in the state case, not in the federal case.
Oh, that was the state case.
Now my view is the feds were there to cover up what he did.
They got him to federally plea because he faced a ridiculous amount of charges, one, because he's been a 20-year criminal.
That's what he's been, as a cop.
But I think they did it to make sure he could never talk and evidence never came out.
Like, I was very curious, well, it happened with the tax charges, because everything about that screamed.
And there were stories.
There were stories that were connected to Chinese money launderers, connection to other criminal gangs and organizations around the Twin Cities.
All of that.
I was like, watch the feds.
They're going to do P. Diddy style, Epstein style, Maxwell style.
They're going to cover up the real crime.
And magically, the tax and money laundering charges just kind of went away.
So you pleaded just being a cop who loved to beat the heck out of people, no matter who they were, where they were, when they were.
You know, 14, 54, doesn't matter.
Derek Chauvin was there to beat the crap out of you.
That's who Chauvin was.
You pleaded that, and we'll keep all this other stuff.
The fact that you've probably been on our payroll, the rogue state payroll, the rogue bad faith actor payroll, the real criminal operator payroll.
You'll just keep quiet about that.
And we'll make sure you get serve all your time in a federal prison rather than state prison.
Well, if I'm going to go into defense mode and say now I'm going to defend my position, my mistake, which was the.
Was he under duress or coercion when he beat up people 18 different times over 18 years?
Quit lying to yourself because you hate George Floyd.
You're covering for a corrupt, crooked cop who's the bottom of the barrel.
And if you thought I was on your side, you're wrong.
If you're one of those racists out there, I'm not on your side.
Just because I'm against George Floyd ain't going to make me in favor of a corrupt, crooked, abusive cop.
And that's who Derek Chauvin was.
If you defend Derek Chauvin, you're defending a real criminal.
If there were constitutional violations at the state level trial, then I think I also said like, In the state case.
Different than the federal case.
And so then when I was talking about this, I was suggesting, so what are they thinking that they...
They're going to get Harmeet Dillon to go investigate a civil rights violation at the state level.
They'll never do that with any respect, because like I said, my guess is you dip in under...
I'm going to read some more chats here.
Your rants are on fire in the chat, and I think a great many people actually agree with you.
I feel like a total brain fart that the entire trial that we saw was in the state level, and the constitutional violations of the rights to a fair trial were violated at the state level, not at his guilty plea at the federal level.
Breck Nichols says, I'm no body language expert, but I swear Bongino looked like he was making a hostage video.
Very uncomfortable to watch.
Kicking Snow says, FYI, Kicking Snow, one word.
Dan, FBI, I need the truth now, says Shofar.
The Michael says, if Epstein was killed, why is Maxwell around?
Feel that one.
First of all, why would there be any need to kill Epstein, period?
Because he knew things that they didn't want him to accidentally talk about.
That's the only realistic interpretation of his course of conduct.
John McAfee magically died in custody.
I'm sure we'll have Dan Bongino and Cash Patel tell us that was just a suicide, too.
Very soon, the people who have intel and information that they think could be damaging or damning to other people is usually the explanation for the unexplained deaths of people under criminal inquiry.
I'm trying to say this because I realized I wasn't sharing the screen when I was trying to bring up all the chats so that no one thinks I'm making these up.
Here, now I can go like this.
Now I can go here.
And just to show you, here we go.
This is the body language.
Bongino, FBI need to know the truth.
Now, finally, I hear what I needed to hear.
Thanks, Barnes, since Kicking Snow.
Alex Jones eats Anton's built-on.
He looks better than he's ever looked in his entire life.
It's amazing.
KMGood329 says, Patrick David suggested maybe Trump told them to hold what they found for the right time midterm election, but then they just needed to sit...
What they did was damage.
Completely.
King of Biltong says, both Viva and Barnes eat our Biltong, so should you.
Packed with B12 creatine, iron, zinc, a great addition to a healthy diet.
Go to BiltongUSA.com.
Code Barnes for 10% off.
Sportfish says, Barnes, what's your opinion of packing the court as a solution to stopping lawfare and ensuring there is no bias in SCOTUS?
We talked about this.
What is preventing Trump from doing it?
I mean, will he get to the point where he will?
I mean, Congress would have to pass to add the numbers, but that's all.
Robert, this is from the other one, Sportfish.
DO7JJ says, Robert, do Harvard students still plagiarize Gordon Wood?
Maybe they don't like them apples.
LOLs, that's from, I think, Goodwill Hunting.
Pseudo-Bidon says, this is French.
Sudabidon, it has nothing to do with Biden.
Well, the funniest thing was when I wasn't nearly poisoning myself with the dog fennel, I was eating these little plants called Biden.
They're literally called Biden-Pelosa.
Like Biden-Pelosi plants, which I thought those would have been the ones that would poison you and kill you.
Frickin' dog fennel, man.
Don't eat dog fennel.
I think there might have been a chat in our local saying there might be some medicinal value to Biden, not Biden, to the dog fennel.
We'll get to the local stuff after.
So we're up to speed on Rumble.
Robert, what do we move on to now?
The number one issue tonight.
Voted on at vivobarneslaw.locals.com.
Are the federal courts and immigration as the insanity just keeps going further and further and further.
Where are we at now?
Where are we at now with the immigration issues?
All right, so we got a federal judge this week who ordered that people that had been convicted murderers, convicted pedophiles, convicted rapists, who had been ordered deported in some cases 30 years ago, who had been hiding out in America.
Finally, we get to deport them.
We send them to South Sudan, which is where they're from.
And a federal judge orders they be returned to America.
That's how nuts it was.
That they have to be, they can't be deported to South Sudan, even though they're militarily already there.
We have to take care of them.
We can't even take special security for them.
They get 10 days for this, 20 days for that, another 30 days over here.
None of this has any precedent in American legal history.
All of it directly contradicts.
We've got that judge doing that, and then we've got all the other orders to prevent this deportation, prevent that deportation, prevent this arrest, prevent that arrest, trying to hold the Trump administration in contempt, ordering a guy that was a convicted criminal return to the country in another case, saying you have to return him immediately.
Someone who was never legally here at all.
So they've just gone full.
They are using the federal judicial branch to enforce Osoros' open borders agenda on America, even though the American people voted the opposite way in electing President Trump in a Republican Congress.
What's the rationale for the South Sudanese guy, that he's going to be killed in his country?
Well, they keep extending, expanding, and diversifying what due process means.
As soon as the Supreme Court opened that door to suddenly reversing a century and a half of American Supreme Court law, which said, If you're here illegally, the only process you are due is deportation.
Because deportation is not punishment.
You're a trespasser.
I mean, imagine if somebody invaded your house, Viva, and you are not allowed to kick them out.
You've got to give them a room.
You've got to give them a meal.
Make sure they've got some good health care.
Make sure their clothing and bedding is good.
And if they're dangerous and a threat to your family, you can do nothing about it.
That's what federal courts are ordering.
Kind of sounds a bit like Canada.
Just leave the fob for your door at the front door with a little milk and cookies for the criminal.
They have real guns and they're loaded.
Leave your keys in the car so they don't have to take such efforts to steal it.
The funny thing is it also sounds like some of the squatting issues that are occurring in blue states where, yeah, you get the criminals into a house squat and then the owners can't get them out.
Who's the judge in the South Sudanese?
I'm going to look it up.
These are Obama appointees or these are federal judges?
I mean, it's facilitating the invasion, and they don't have to deal with the consequences of their own horrible policy because they live in Martha's Vineyard in places where they object to any such foreigners coming in.
Okay, Supreme Court decisions are coming out now.
I say the season.
This is now, we're in May, so when do they recess for the summer?
It's coming up.
It's coming up here in a couple of weeks.
And when born...
Are you too loud or not loud enough?
your mic, I think there might be a cable loose or something, but it doesn't matter.
When you move, you'll get settled into the new studio and it'll...
Their ears are bleeding.
All right, Robert, so what do we do?
The Supreme Court, what other rulings do we have right now?
So the other Supreme Court's activity, so that basically covers where we are in immigration.
If they would at least revoke the nationwide injunction power, that would solve at least a substantial part of the problem.
But of course, Supreme Court just doubled down on that aspect because credit to Fifth Circuit Judge James Ho.
Who called out the ridiculousness of the Supreme Court, pointing out that they were saying, if we're now supposed to have 24-hour notice, because they pretended that a federal judge had denied an injunction when he hadn't had the opportunity to hear the opposition yet, and they scolded him for it.
And Ho, to his credit, called out Amy Coney Barrett in particular because she was contradicting prior statements she had made about this.
And he pointed out the Supreme Court is the slowest court in the world, and they have the most clerks on the planet when it comes to making decisions.
And here they are scolding a federal district court with a ridiculous docket with an ongoing trial for not immediately responding overnight to the ACLU's latest case.
We'll see whether we get some relief from SCOTUS.
Either the Supreme Court will step in and take away nationwide injunction power, restore the president's power over policy, over personnel, over immigration, and the like.
Or if they don't, then the president's going to be put in a position this summer and early fall.
To refuse to obey the federal courts, because if the courts are going to claim they're in charge of immigration and foreign policy, and they're in charge of the executive branch, then the president will have no option but to remind them that no, they're not.
What the heck is going on here?
I want to keep the Riketa super chat up.
It's very annoying that it keeps shutting it down.
Reketa Law, the legit Reketa Law, says woohoo.
You all know Reketa from...
Get it, boys.
how did you like Trump embarrassing the South African president on genocide?
I thought, why does the super chat...
Riquetta, good to see you.
Robert, I thought it was, I mean, I haven't, It was the most, in my view, one of the most impactful things I've ever seen a president do in real time.
It was even better than the Zelensky embarrassment because that was Zelensky who did it to himself, kind of.
The South African thing, it was beautiful in that it was five minutes of watching that man squirm on a hook, look at videos of South African leaders saying, kill the Boers, and then you have the fake media fact-checking it.
And I knew they were going to do it, but they didn't even do it on the strongest point.
They just, they apparently picked one image from the five-minute montage.
That was from the Congo and not from South Africa.
As if that highlight, as if that proves anything wrong other than the fact that white people throughout South Africa and Africa might be a target.
It was one of the best moments ever that I think made me love Trump even more.
What was your feeling when you watched it?
I thought it was brilliant theater.
So the, you know, I wouldn't use the word genocide just because I see genocide as something that should be limited to mass expiation.
That's why I don't like its use in Ukraine or Israel or Gaza or South Africa or China or the Uyghurs or anyone else.
But that does not change the fact that there is...
And unfortunately, that has a disturbing history in parts of Africa when the government is failing to deliver for its people.
And pretending this isn't a problem, pretending racism isn't a problem in South Africa, of all places.
I was like, where is this coming from?
For 20 years, they've been openly and overtly racist.
I mean, if you're white, you can get assaulted, you can get raped, you can get robbed, you can get murdered because you're white.
I mean, that's what they've been doing now for a decade plus.
Because they promised to deliver them jobs, and they failed.
They promised to deliver them housing, and they failed.
They promised to deliver them health care, and they failed.
They made all these big, big promises, and they couldn't deliver on any of them.
And they convinced them that all of their problems are because a small group of white farmers are somehow stealing it all, which is nonsense.
Now, what's interesting is the focus on the Boer, as one of our board members pointed out, contrasts to, say, old English money that still has disparate impact in South Africa.
There's almost no talk from the ANC about them because the ANC is in bed with several of them.
But I know it's a brilliant use by Trump to expose that this is horrendous policy.
I mean, the most overt, open example of race-based targeting for property dispossession and rape and murder and violence.
In the world right now, is South Africa towards white Boer farmers?
What's amazing, and I dare even say almost racist by way of a response, is they say it's not just the white farmers that are getting killed.
You know, a lot of black South Africans are getting murdered also because it's...
Well, the crime rate's way out of control.
Yeah, it's the top, top five.
Currently in South Africa.
That was a problem.
It has not been a problem since the end of apartheid.
The problem has been the reverse.
Some people were complaining about me using the phrase reverse racism.
It's just racist.
I agree.
I use reverse racism because the label...
You'll get white tourists who get raped and brutalized.
Once again, the same people that do the China show, I think it's Serpenza on his separate YouTube channel.
He was originally from South Africa.
So he knows of family members.
He knows of friends.
He knows of other people that have experienced the horrors of what's taking place there.
And what's really sad is this was explicitly promised that it wouldn't happen, that there wouldn't be racial retaliation, that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission would deal with this.
There had been some targeting before by Winnie Mandela.
Winnie Mandela would put her opponents, white or black, Put a tire around him and light it on fire.
Necklacing, as they called it.
They unleashed brutality.
When Mandela's policies didn't ultimately get the outcome they wanted, the ANC became this grifter organization that's part race grifter, part commie.
But what it really is, is lining their own pockets.
Because many of the top ANC leaders are fabulously well-off.
It's just the ordinary South African is not.
And the ordinary black South African is told, Your problem is the white man.
Your problem is white people.
So go rape them.
Go murder them.
Go steal from them.
And it's coming from leading political people.
And credit to President Trump.
He's like, well, here you are at this huge rally where they're chanting, kill the Boer.
I mean, imagine if you had a huge rally of white people that the president of that country was there chanting, murder a black person.
I mean, that's how insane it is.
So, yeah, credit to President Trump for calling it what it is.
It is a systematic racial oppression sponsored and supported by the South African corrupt grifter government.
Yep.
I totally agree with that.
All right, so now do we, sorry, we'll bounce back to the Supreme Court cases that are coming in fast.
Let's do the charter school one, which is interesting because...
There's a couple of things that are very interesting.
From Canada, I'm not sure that I'm even familiar with charter schools.
I had to look it up now in terms of understanding the difference between charter schools and public schools.
And you'll add more detail if I'm oversimplifying it.
You've got public schools that are fully funded by public funds.
You've got charter schools which receive some public funds, but they can receive some The government does not offer federal funding if the charter school is a religious charter school.
That is the debate right now.
Well, that's what Oklahoma didn't allow, was for religious schools to get the same benefit as everybody else.
It was a discrimination against religion.
Justices, Kavanaugh, Once again, Justice Roberts was the traitor he often is.
But why didn't they get to five?
Because Amy, how does that work?
She doesn't adjudicate on a case?
Yep.
She's self-recused for unexplained reasons.
Here's the thing.
The Catholics put her there in large part.
So to rule against a Catholic school.
Would have looked really, really bad.
So how does she avoid ruling against them?
She recuses herself so she can't vote on it.
And that's how we got a 4-4 split that affirmed and upheld religious discrimination in the state of Oklahoma.
It was still at a preliminary stage.
The Supreme Court's going to have to adjudicate on this on the merits at some point in time.
No, no.
This was done in such a way that they'll have other cases.
They'll have an opportunity to revisit.
But maybe she'll recuse herself from all of them.
And then unless you change the nature of the court, the balance of the court, then religious schools won't ever get these rights recognized or respected until that occurs.
It's one more reminder.
It was someone else.
I got a lot of heat from conventional conservatives, more so than my criticisms currently of like Bongino, Patel.
I was like, God, somebody hasn't been tuning in for the last month.
Pam Blondie, Pam Barbie, I'm plenty critical of that.
But Barrett wasn't going to be a disaster, and Barrett continues to be a disaster.
And so a case that should have restored and reaffirmed religious rights in our country has now been gutted.
Many of these state laws that exist were built in the late 19th century, early 20th century, to discriminate against Catholics.
And here the big Catholic judges on the Supreme Court abandoning them once again, because there's nobody.
Amy Coney Barrett won't betray.
But if you could explain to me, like, the charter schools, what's the idea that they have to be secular charter schools?
Like, what then goes into the charter?
You have a range of state laws that were designed to prohibit state funding of religious schools, and they're passed in states.
You're like, why is Oklahoma passing this?
Because it was a very Protestant state who wanted to screw Catholic schools.
And that's where these laws often originate from.
And they're starting to clean that up at the Supreme Court level.
This was a chance to clean it up for good, and they don't because Barrett betrays us again.
All right.
There was another one which was interesting, and this time I think it was Jackson, who was the vocal dissenting one, which was issuing or annulling the injunction.
Now, which way did it go?
Yeah.
Issuing an injunction that reversed the prior injunction.
And this was with respect to the main legislator who has been stripped of her official elected duties because she posted something on Facebook criticizing the fact that boys were competing in girls sports and was censured and prevented from voting on official state business that she was elected to do.
And she went up with an extraordinary recourse remedy to the Supreme Court who granted in her favor.
we're gonna open up the door to a Pandora's box of being called upon in extraordinary circumstances to adjudicate on cases.
Her rationale, other than the fact that it sounded kind of ill, She said this is a fact-specific, case-specific, no broader concern, whereas I disagree with that as well.
But nonetheless, good news for the main legislator, but Justice Jackson not necessarily flexing her intellectual might.
Am I wrong in being skeptical of her rationale for not getting involved in this particular case?
If she was consistent and said the shadow docket shouldn't exist and opposed every single shadow docket injunction, I wouldn't have a problem with her criticism because at least it would be principled.
I might disagree with its application or legal interpretation, but I would respect it for being a principled position.
Hers is not.
She only opposes the use of the All-Writs Act when she opposes who it is being issued for, especially when she has no legal basis, no credible legal basis to disagree with the merits of the decision.
So you're seeing this as a consistent habit.
I mean, she's not the brightest bulb on the block, nor a lot of the judges up there, to be blunt about it.
But I thought, but we were right, that this would be quickly reinstated.
By the way, why in part did the main, a big reason, the main legislator win?
It's because while Pam Bondi is usually, whoo, How in the world is he asleep on that one?
The only reason, I think, that the Supreme Court ruled so quickly in favor of restoring the Maine legislature's rights so the voters of Maine will have the representative they chose in that state legislature and not have her rights taken away based on her out.
Her out-of-representation speech is because Harmi Dillon at the Civil Rights Division quickly jumped in and submitted an amicus brief on her support that got key people's attention at the Justice Department.
So the main legislature won against Governor Mills.
This is going to be a continuous theme, I suspect, over the next year.
For those that don't know, Governor Mills went to the White House and challenged the president.
And said she would continue to break the law in supporting of men being involved in women's sports and that she would, quote, see him in court.
And Trump's like, good luck with that.
So, you know, we'll see how all that works out.
But this is a first big loss for Maine.
But it's thanks to Harmeet Dillon being proactive and being aggressively involved, monitoring the SCOTUS docket, stepping in where and when they can.
So credit to her for doing so.
And credit to the main legislator for standing up for the rights of women to have sports that don't have men in them.
The whole story is absolutely ridiculous that they can censure a legislator out of their elected duties.
It was one thing to reprimand and censure Adam Schiff like they did.
But imagine, I mean, it should be done to anybody.
It should be done to Adam Schiff.
What was it?
It was Jackson and Sotomayor were dissenting.
Were there any other dissenters in that case?
I couldn't tell from the...
I couldn't tell...
I think Sotomayor would deny the application.
Yeah, so in that sense, yes.
She didn't join the formal dissent, but she would have allowed men to participate in women's sports.
It's unbelievable.
Only the people who are not impacted by it that are the ones willing to do it.
You mean no one would confuse Sotomayor with an athlete?
Is that what you're saying?
Sotomayor is an idiot.
No one would consume...
But she was partially right in her concurrence this week with Gorsuch and Justice Thomas as they wrote separate concurring opinions.
She's too arrogant, frankly, to join Gorsuch and Thomas' opinion, which is what she should have done.
Well, Gorsuch's.
She would never have joined Thomas'.
But this is the last SCOTUS case to talk about this week.
We'll have probably a bunch next week because the big decisions are going to start rolling out over the next couple of weeks, including the big, big one on Nationwide Injunctions that everybody's watching.
But the federal government is criminally prosecuting people for not obeying illegal Biden-era rules.
This is a Biden order prosecution that required people that if you wanted to fix a bridge, if you wanted to paint a building and it involved any degree of government funds, you had to hire...
You sent it to me and it says fraud without fraud.
I'm like, okay, interesting case.
And as it goes, a company's trying to procure a contract, a government contract to paint something.
I forget what it is, a building.
One of the requirements is that they basically have an undertaking to use disadvantaged or racially...
The company lies about it.
They use a shell company to say, yeah, we're going to go through and benefit minority groups and use a minority business to do it, whatever.
They do the work.
They complete the contract for the price that they agreed to.
It's good work.
There's no problem with the work.
And then they get sued for fraud or they get prosecuted for fraud.
Criminally prosecuted!
Materially misrepresented material points of the contract by saying they would procure the services of whatever racial groups that they were supposed to.
And they shared a good amount of the money with one of these businesses that fits the disadvantaged category under the rules.
And they just said it wasn't sufficiently run by a disadvantaged group.
And they're making regulatory enforcement a crime.
Now, what's the problem with that?
The President of the United States has put out an official policy.
No more federal criminal prosecution through regulation.
No more federally prosecuting anybody because they didn't comply with a federal regulation.
No more of this.
This is over prosecution.
Yet we still have the Roger Veer case, which is a classic example of federal criminal prosecution through regulation.
There they're trying to write the regulation in the criminal case itself because they hadn't written it in advance.
Here, we have another example.
And why is this case, why did the Justice Department not step in once Trump was elected and said, look, we do not support this theory.
We are dismissing, we are reversing our position, and we support the defendant's position that this cannot be criminal behavior.
Because to be clear, these are people who got a contract to fix a bridge and to paint things.
They fixed the bridge and they painted things.
That's what they were supposed to do.
That's what they got paid to do.
That's what they did.
They even shared some of the money with a disadvantaged group as required under these illegal discriminatory rules.
And this is what Justice Thomas pointed out.
Justice Thomas only concurred because he said, I agree with the general principle that you don't have to have economic loss to have wire fraud.
However, he said, this is not an example of he would focus on a different element.
He said, this isn't material.
He goes, the person was paid to paint and build and work on a bridge.
They painted and worked on the bridge.
Their work was very satisfactory.
There's no actual material fraud here.
Not agreeing with every single little provision of the federal regulatory state doesn't magically become wire fraud for that reason.
And he's like, I don't think it's material.
Now, for whatever reason, the defendant didn't include that when they should have in their brief, so it wasn't presented before the court, and maybe they could have got the verdict overturned on that basis.
But to give people an idea, yeah, that is James Comey, to Dan Bongino and Cash Pontell, just making fun of him, mocking him, satirizing him in public for the world to witness.
To have your masculinity just eviscerated like that, I would think that would impact me if it was me, but maybe not for Dan Bongino.
And that's going to be his name until we see some reversal.
But if you look at, so Thomas was absolutely right.
Gorsuch writes a separate concurring opinion saying, hold on a second.
You guys have stuck a footnote in here that's trying to utterly eviscerate the requirement that there actually be fraud before you allege fraud.
Because this is deeply problematic.
He said we should limit this ruling to this very limited question and not suddenly drastically and radically expand.
The definition of fraud so that every single lie suddenly becomes a crime.
Every single failure to comply with whatever regulation is out there suddenly becomes a federal crime.
I mean, this is a trap for anybody who takes any federal funds of any kind.
If you don't cross every T and dot every I, you miss any little thing.
You could go to prison for 20 years, even if you delivered on exactly what you were contracted to deliver for.
Well, and that's why I'm reading it.
Other than the DEI racist, it's racist component to it.
I can, I can think of a great many circumstances where someone says, I will not do the, I will not sell you the house if it's going to go, if it's going to be not used for X, Y, and Z, but you know, I'll sell this to you because.
And they're like, haha, I lied about my kid and I fraudulently induced you into selling this to me, where you would have sold it for the same price to somebody else.
But the underlying racial component that it required the contractor to do something which is a racist provision to begin with, I can agree on that.
The law contradicts itself!
Here's what you're told as a federal contractor.
You're told two things.
In order to comply with this contract, you have to make sure somebody that's been And they presume if you fit within certain racial categories that you fit that.
They presume if you're a woman, you're disadvantaged.
And they have to have 51% legal control of an entity.
You got to share some of the federal funds with them.
But it also says you can't discriminate, by the way.
It's like, hold on a second.
If I don't discriminate, it's a crime.
If I do discriminate, it's a crime.
Either way, it's ridiculous.
And this is what Thomas points out.
Gorsuch and Sotomayor point out, this is very, very dangerous attempting to eviscerate the common law limitations on fraud.
Historically, you could not be convicted of fraud if you didn't defraud anybody, right?
If somebody got the value of the deal that they were intended, the essence of the bargain, that's not fraud.
And yet now it is.
And he can go to prison for 20 years because he didn't comply with some politician's interpretation of the DEI rules in this case or some other lame regulation.
So guess who wrote the idiotic opinion?
Take a wild guess.
Who would write a really bad, dangerous opinion that would give the state all kinds of expansive power in a place that it doesn't belong to criminally enforced DEI laws in America?
Well, it's going to be Roberts or Amy Coney.
Amy Coney Barrett, of course it was.
The dumber it is, the more likely Barrett was.
By the way, you know who was a big fan of Barrett when she was nominated?
Cash Patel and Dan Bongino.
Just saying.
Robert, you mentioned Roger Ver.
I do want to bring it back up again because he's got his motion.
Motion to dismiss in California in mid-June, and I'm going to see, or maybe towards the end of June, I'm going to see if I can get down there for it, but it doesn't look very likely.
Apparently, the prosecutors, I won't mention their names because it doesn't matter about this public record, apparently they have painted fingernails.
Because the nickname is Fingernails, and apparently it's because they literally have painted fingernails, which tells you a bit about the prosecutors out of the Central District of California who are continuing to prosecute.
And they're working with the tax division, the top-ranking people at the tax division, who are corrupt, rogue actors who facilitated going after President Trump.
Who Pam Blondie has failed to fire.
They've all been fired by now.
They're bums.
They're corrupt bums.
Most people at the tax division are corrupt bums.
Guess where Rosenstein was?
I'm blanking on his last name now.
The number two under Sessions.
That corrupt actor that put Mueller in charge.
He started out where?
Before he was a U.S. attorney in Maryland?
Tax division.
I know because I beat him in three consecutive cases and humiliated him for half a decade.
But that's the bums that are up there.
How is this case still standing?
Is anybody going to at least check what's on the Supreme Court docket?
What's in these high-profile cases?
Because these cases directly contradict the president's express policy to not bring cases against crypto solely because it's crypto, to not create selective prosecution based on crypto, to not have selective prosecution based on political statements.
And this is all done in the Roger Ver case.
And the government lied to secure the indictment, lied to steal his attorney-client files, lied to try to get him extradited from Spain.
And they still haven't done their job.
Well, this is my question.
First of all, this is not a call to docs.
The information of these people is all out there.
I was just curious that I couldn't find a photograph of the prosecutors with the fingernails.
So anybody attending these trials, I'd love to see the fingernails, but it's emblematic of what the prosecutors are doing in this case.
These are Biden.
And then I'm thinking to myself, it's interesting.
Bondi is AG.
She could, I mean, I don't know.
Can she fire them?
Can she fire these guys?
Can she?
Oh, yeah.
All of them can be.
All of them.
It's ridiculous that they haven't been.
She could dismiss the charges.
It wouldn't require a presidential pardon.
Trump, if he were so inclined, could pardon it.
It wouldn't require Bondi's approval or the prosecutor's.
Why the hell are they still in charge of the file, is the question.
Because the same reason Maureen Comey is running the P. Diddy cover-up disguised as a criminal prosecution.
Well, so then this is my question.
Is Pam Bondi ignorant, inept, or over her head and doesn't have a team that is capable?
All three.
All three.
It's very, it's very despairing because like it's as though they, they, I don't know if they want to make the changes that they can't, or they don't want to make the changes.
And then they say, well, I think they don't recognize the need for the changes to occur.
They recognized the problem was institutional.
They realized there needed to be institutional policy changes.
There needed to be institutional personnel changes.
And they highlighted specific areas where they could completely change the direction of their agencies.
And that's why they're having so much success.
Success for President Trump, success for the American people, success for constitutional liberty in this country.
By contrast, people tie it into the America First Policy Institute, not America First Legal, which is Stephen Miller's group.
the America First Policy Institute, funded by big oil, funded by oligarchs that want to distort and divert Trump's populism and MAGA agenda into a traditional conservative institutionalist agenda.
Those are the ones causing all the problems.
And that's U.S. Department of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins.
That's Attorney General Pam Bondi.
That's Military Advisor General Kellogg.
That's FBI Director Cash Patel.
I mean, what annoys me the most about Patel is he talked so big when he was on Steve Bannon.
And he looks like such a joke now.
He looks like the little kid who talks big and then gets the crap kicked out of him.
I mean, it's just embarrassing to witness.
But, I mean, you've got to fix personnel.
I mean, imagine if Tulsi Gabbard had all corrupt rogue actors working for her.
Joe Kent is her recommended chief of staff.
That's somebody who gets what needs to be done.
I know other people that are high-ranking positions that she's fixed and fixed quickly.
She comes out right away and denounces what James Comey is doing.
She should be the one to have to do that.
Just like it shouldn't depend on Robert Kennedy intervening to save ostriches in Canada when Brooke Rollins is supposed to be in that role of being the U.S. Department of Agriculture head to coordinate with Canada.
But anybody connected to the America First Policy Institute is unreliable and undependable.
And I think it's not because they're necessarily corrupt or mean or being coerced.
I think it's because they're institutionalists.
Who don't share Trump's populist agenda, who want to moderate that agenda, and who think that all that's needed is a few better actors at the top.
They think there's only a few bad apples in these agencies as it relates to policy, as it relates to personnel.
It's almost all bad apples.
You're not going to get, you have fruits of a poisonous tree.
You don't have a few bad apples on that tree.
The tree itself is poisonous.
Kennedy understands that.
Gabbard understands that.
Harmeet Dillon understands that.
Pam Bondi does not.
Cash Patel does not.
Dan Bongino does not.
Brooke Rollins does not.
And that's why we're seeing such gaps in performance.
I was going to say something.
Oh, yeah.
I was curious as to why it was Tulsi Gabbard talking about James Comey and not Kash Patel.
I don't know what the respective values It would seem to me it's the DOJ that would charge Comey.
It's the FBI that would recommend charges.
I don't know what the hell the DNI would have to do with it other than maybe if it's inciting terrorism.
Imagine if it was reversed if Comey was at the FBI and Kash Patel said 86-46.
He would have been picked up that night.
Let me bring up a bunch of Rumble France, and then we're going to get to some tip chats in a second.
Judge Ho...
Conium macalutum, a.k.a.
poison hemlock.
It's pretty, but will kill you.
I've learned a very valuable lesson, everybody.
Judge Ho, this is not a Denny, says, billdozer.
9065 says, what about the rookie cops convicted in the George Floyd case?
Still state charges, but that might be more Only as it related to Floyd.
They did not have the history, nor were they facing any other tax charges, civil rights, systemic abuse charges.
And they went to trial.
They did not plead guilty.
They definitely got railroaded.
There's no question about that.
When asked about the blatant racism against South African whites, South African Bishop Desmond Tutu said, of course, they are human too, as if it were acceptable and justifiable.
Hypocrite.
Salt City Blue says, speaking of corruption and deep state collusion, please take a look into...
Ridiculous what they have put him through for not having the correct political views.
Definitely look at that.
When the wine is sour, throw it out.
Now you can cook it.
You can cook with it.
And let me bring up some in our locals community.
We're going to start reading these.
In as much as sales commissions are in a reflection of a customer's level of satisfaction with the salesperson, i.e.
a fee-for-service, what would prevent someone from declaring commission income as tips and thereby securing one big, beautiful tax refund?
Asking for a friend, Howard the Duke.
Robert, I guess that's a good segue.
The big, beautiful bill passed on Friday.
What level of government did it pass?
It just passed the House.
We'll see what happens in the Senate.
I think we'll discuss it in more detail next week.
There's all these conflicting stories out there.
There's different people who say different things, and I don't know what's accurate, what's not accurate.
I haven't had the time to look at the bill myself.
I usually wait until it's closer to passage because so much stuff that's in there gets taken out.
So much other stuff gets added at the last minute.
And so that's why I haven't taken a position one way or the other on whether it's a good idea or a bad idea, because I wait for it to see a little bit more of what the sausage looks like while it's still getting made.
And I wait for it to actually look like what it looks like closer to when it's actually made than earlier on in the process.
I'm trying to size it perfectly so that we're underneath our respective rocking rocking selves in that in that meme up there.
This is the best I think I want to say Finboys.
That is Dave Rubin in the back, eh?
Yeah.
Okay, praying for the presses.
Buffalo Betsy.
Which artificial intelligence generator for AI with AI race?
Why no one talking about AI data?
We're going to cover whether AI has free speech in a case that went to court this week.
Pam Walker Viva.
Okay, we got that one.
I just want to thank everyone for their thoughts and prayers.
Okay, this was Sadaka.
We got that earlier.
None of it.
Unite the body.
That's not bad.
Hey, Viva and Barnes.
Thanks for everything you guys do.
Bring honest, clear-minded coverage to important events.
Doing the Lord's work.
Just wanted to plug my very first novel just released on Kindle, Seasons of Darkness.
This is from Tiderion.
A new collection of horror novellas, a fresh take on classic themes, wokeness not included.
Schnuckham says, so as part of Plans for Dealing with China is in a point.
We got that one before.
Happy, have a great Memorial Day, says Susie C. I don't know if you guys already covered it, but Joe Biden was not cognitively healthy enough to run the country.
Is KBG a point?
So let's actually talk about this one.
I'll bring these up.
We'll talk more about it in a local party.
Sorry, this is going to drive me crazy.
I'm going back to this side.
They come up with a Joe Biden mystery or sudden cancer diagnosis.
Nobody's fooled by it.
Medical professionals say it's impossible.
People are trying to go with the DEI angle by showing that photo of the doctor who looks a little DEI, if you ask me, related to Rachel Levine.
They're going with cancer.
I think it's the cover-up.
Look, in reality, there's nothing that anybody can practically do to undermine any of the Yeah, not realistically.
Generally, they don't look at how the sausage is made.
So now, that doesn't mean that individuals can't be prosecuted if they committed fraud in that process.
And what Ed Martin is looking at and a potential special counsel might be appointed for.
And Joe Biden, some high-ranking names on that list.
So that's a very legitimate area of inquiry.
However, Sure.
They don't ever look at whether the president did it or didn't do it in terms of these kind of things.
It was like one of the questions people asked was about the archivist.
Because I'd previously pointed out the Supreme Court and other courts have said that if the archivist declared something was passed by Congress or some amendment was passed by the Constitution, that his decision is non-reviewable.
Even though they kind of like, they kind of know there's lots of laws that, In the Constitution, it's even worse.
The 13th, 14th, 15th, and 16th Amendment probably didn't pass.
Anybody think they're going to vacate those now?
No, not a chance.
They weren't going to vacate them at the time.
Nor do I want, this is my main point I made procedurally, I don't want to shift more power into the courts.
So I don't want to challenge Biden's pardons.
I don't want to challenge Biden's actions in terms of giving power to the courts.
Because that's much more dangerous.
I don't want to give courts to say, well, you know, we think Trump really wasn't competent when he signed all those January 6th pardons.
So we're going to vacate them all and everybody gets to go back to prison.
Do we want to set that precedent?
I don't.
Do you trust courts?
I don't.
So that's why I'm not even in favor of going down that path legally.
All right, let me bring a few more of these up and I think we'll do some other.
Yeah, we got AI free speech.
We got federal employees saying elections don't matter.
We got when is a taking a taking?
Obstruction of justice getting set aside?
And what happens when you get screwed on the lottery?
O 'Keefe's raid.
What happened to those FOIA documents?
A bond injunction legislation that has Mark Elias all whining and yelling and whooping and hollering.
Remember, he's criminal money launderer, Mark Elias, everybody.
And then the brain-dead pregnant woman case in Georgia.
And Tommy Robinson harassment.
So we got a few.
These cases won't take as much time.
Yeah.
That's what's left on the docket.
Some of it we'll handle at locals.
Some of it we'll do here.
Yeah.
Chinookum says, the Feng Feng didn't start as a student visa.
Ithaca 37 Cato says, Officer Barbanjino Brady to Barnes.
That's exactly it.
Yes, yes.
We need more memes like that.
Memes that mocked up the heck out of these guys to try to get them to return to their roots and do the right thing.
Barnes rants are priceless and true, says Susie C. I will shatter, it will shatter my heart if cash turns out to be all talk and no action, says Buffalo Betsy.
Ask the body language guides of Dan.
We're going to talk with him, Robert.
They have to do it.
Choose EQ.
Choose EQ.
Buffalo Betsy, if there's a place, is there a place for winsome seers in the Trump administration?
Marine, educated, conservative, pro-Second Amendment, etc.
There should be.
We need you guys to help bring light to George v.
Hernandez and the outstanding work of attorney Catherine Bernhardt.
One doctor's opinion had a family's two-daughter taken on suspicions of abuse for two years and two hours.
Only after two-hour medical statist first saw the child, Robert, the judge, was almost as bad as the Benzhoof.
We have a rogue judiciary.
All right, let's go.
Wait, one last one over here, and then we're going to get back to the subject matter.
James O 'Keefe, we're going to talk about that.
I just want to bring this one up because you two rock and I love you, says Turaj.
Thank you very much.
It wasn't James O 'Keefe.
AI free speech?
Ah, Tommy, yes.
Okay, so Tommy Robinson had been...
I mean, it's irony that writes itself.
He had gotten out early last week.
Did he get hauled back?
Yep, they arrested him right away.
Shut the front door.
Harassment that could cause fear.
It's interesting, it relates to that chat that was just talking about the Ben Shoof case from Seattle.
Another case that hopefully Harmeet Dillon, the Civil Rights Division, investigates and others because of how rogue and wayward it was.
The Washington Court of Appeals was threatening to issue sanctions against him for not responding to mail that was only sent to him.
When he's in jail!
Well, God bless the Washington Court of Appeals clerks there.
So we had to correct that nonsense.
They didn't send a copy to me.
They only sent it to him.
And they only sent it to the address that's his home address where he's not at because he's in jail, thanks to the judges.
But what I said was one of the great dangers was they were trying to expand the definition of criminal harassment so they can do what they're trying to do right now in the UK to Tommy Robinson.
Which is, you made a statement that could lead somebody else to feel bad.
I mean, that's not what harassment's supposed to be.
But that's how it's applied in modern-day Britain.
And so they continue to censor and suppress in the UK based on dissident information.
And they are using him as the example.
And they're unsatisfied with a lawless 18-month jail cell.
So now they're just adding on to it, adding on to it.
I need to find out the two men.
Does anybody in the chat know?
I didn't hear about this, but does anybody know who the two men that he allegedly harassed are?
The argument was that he didn't even harass them.
It was harassment because public statements he made could lead somebody else to harass them.
That's how nuts it is, as I read it.
I'll see if I can get Tommy.
It sounds like he's out at least, but they're going to try.
He needs to get the hell out of that country and claim asylum in America, period.
Sadly, yes.
That's what he has to do.
There was a funny story coming out of Canada, Robert.
It said, "Halifax men charged with something." I wanna see if I can get the, why can't Twitter, Oh, no.
Dude, Twitter's not loading.
It doesn't matter.
It was Halifax men charged with And then you read into the article, Halifax man charged.
Let me see here.
You won't believe it, Robert.
Halifax man.
This is, you know, this is Maryland father.
Halifax man, 27, charged with forcible confinement after incidents at shopping mall.
Police say man wouldn't allow two teens to leave a bathroom stall unless they drank alcohol.
Listen to this.
Police in Halifax have charged a 27-year-old man with two counts.
Yada, yada, yada.
Oh, where's his name?
Where the heck...
I won't be able to get his name properly without reading it.
Oh, here we go.
Mahir Ali Ibrahim.
that's the halifax but this is how they're doing it and now in in england if you if you Now, maybe he was born in Halifax.
Doesn't sound like an Akkadian name as far as I know.
If you bring attention to this, in the UK, this could be qualified as harassment, where you're drawing attention to the fact that the Halifax man, as reported by CTV propagandist, is Mahir Ali Ibrahim, 27 years old, who was trying to ply children, 15-year-olds, in a bathroom to do Lord knows what.
He was apparently also harassing young girls in the shopping center.
And it looks like Halifax, Nova Scotia, is on its way to importing its own grooming gangs.
And if you talk about it and you don't refer to them as a Halifax man, well, then that might be hate speech up in Canada.
Okay, sorry.
So Tommy Robinson, I will reach out yet again and hopefully he can talk.
Get the hell out of the UK.
So this is an AI, which was an AI, I want to say, I'm not thoroughly familiar with the facts of the case.
It was a kid who was calling, who was looking for counseling to avoid self-harm suicide.
Yeah, they created like a Game of Thrones AI, like everything else the big tech machines tend to do.
They got him addicted.
And then after he got addicted, engaged in self-harm.
When certain issues arose.
And so the issue was whether they did this deliberately, intentionally, or part of reckless behavior.
And their defense was, everything AI does is just free speech and you can't sue over it.
The AI said something like, we'll be free together, or something along those lines that caused the kid to take his life.
And then the AI, I mean, I have not seen Game of Thrones, but...
So the family is suing for damages.
Google moved to dismiss on the grounds that they cannot be sued for anything related to AI because AI is First Amendment protected free speech.
And the ruling was that?
Credit to the court.
The court was like, I don't think AI is actually a human.
And you kind of got to be human to have free speech.
So thank God, at least we recognize.
That the First Amendment does not extend to algorithms designed by big tech.
So luckily, no AI does, just like it can't copyright, AI does not have free speech protection.
But there is a risk then, because we've discussed this previously, I forget in what context, of liability for the AI programmers for the consequences of their AI as programmed.
Yeah, yeah, exactly.
And it was good to see that.
It was good to see Big Tech being held responsible because probably nobody has caused more psychic harm, more emotional harm to the people of the Western worlds in the last two decades than Big Tech.
And at least now they're finally being held at least somewhat accountable and can't hide behind the Constitution.
When the Constitution was never intended to protect them and their bad deeds.
Well, and not to get ahead of ourselves, there's been no ruling on the merits of this particular case other than to say it can proceed that it doesn't get dismissed at the First Amendment arguments and Google could be held for damages for having had an AI program that eventually led to this kid susceptible and broken as he was to take his own life because this Game of Thrones AI said we can be together in bliss.
I don't even get the reference because I've never seen Game of Thrones.
All right.
I mean, I guess it's, again, a small step in the right direction.
The algorithm is amazing.
And I guess I'm lucky now.
All that I've got recommended to me on Commitube shorts is David Goggins.
David Goggins.
I guess they heard me talking about it after I saw an episode of Joe Rogan.
Now, nothing but David Goggins' videos of Stay Hard, Stay Hard.
James O 'Keefe.
So what's the dealio with James right now?
So credit to James O 'Keefe.
You know, there's a guy who wrote Cajones, right?
O 'Keefe.
And especially he developed those after he realized how, more fully, after he realized how corrupt the system was when he went through the nonsense in Louisiana.
Well, when he understood never to bear false witness to anyone, especially yourself, I mean, that changes someone's perspective in life and we can contemplate how a number of people that we might have discussed tonight.
Might be bearing false witness in some metaphoric or mutandous mutandous sense.
Sorry, I cut you off there.
So James O'Keefe is...
James O 'Keefe requested through the Freedom of Information Act all the information concerning, for those that don't remember, the Biden administration put him under massive criminal investigation.
They raided his house.
They raided his apartment.
They raided his business.
They stole a bunch of information they had no legal right to.
Harmeet Dillon represented James O 'Keefe in trying to stop that rogue case.
Ultimately, the rogue case had to be dismissed because there was no factual or legal basis for it.
And O 'Keefe is currently trying to get back in control, apparently, according to public information, of Project Veritas after he was pushed out by rogue actors there.
I had a moment that people shared with one of those rogue actors when I was at the Republican National Convention because this little punk was challenging me on James O 'Keefe.
I had to give him the Lord's Law on that, which he wasn't appreciative of.
But James O 'Keefe is a truly right and righteous actor and has continually and consistently been.
And so he used the Freedom of Information Act to figure out what nonsense they had done.
And he gets it back, and it's almost all redacted.
Who is running the FOIA department at the FBI?
Are Patel and Bungino doing anything useful?
Anything?
I mean, this is just embarrassing.
Why is that information still being hidden?
It's like the Epstein file, still being hidden.
Why is this information being kept secret from the American people?
Enough is enough!
And that was another embarrassing example of failure at the FBI, that they are hiding the relevant bad acts that's in those redacted parts of James O 'Keefe's file from the FBI.
The bottom line is because they've got a bunch of TDS-afflicted, lower-level staffers.
That's the bottom line.
They don't realize the problem is the tree, not the fruit.
The fruit is bad because the tree is bad.
You gotta cut down the tree.
And this is just one more illustration that as long as you have a bad tree, you're going to keep getting bad fruit.
And we keep getting bad fruit from the FBI.
I was going to make a, not even a joke about cutting down the tree, but I, that, that, given the words that led to violence in certain countries, you won't, I won't even say that, but that the tree.
This is my question.
I don't know what the solution is, but 36,000 lower-level employees at the FBI...
I mean, you can't.
Yeah, you got to get rid of them.
I mean, you got to do like Harmeet Dillon did.
Said, first she came in and said, we're changing all our policies.
And if you have a problem with any of these policies, leave now.
Half left.
Good.
She got achievement overnight.
Robert Kennedy did the same with the USDA and the FDA and the Department of Health and Human Services.
Tulsi Gabbard is doing the same throughout the intelligence community.
We need that at the FBI.
And this is another glaring example of failure by the Kash Patel, Dan Bongino, Pam Bondi, FBI.
Well, before we wind up and go to the after part, let me highlight another failure, which is Kayla Pollack, who is rendered a quadriplegic from the Moderna booster, can't even afford her own physicality.
I put out a tweet yesterday.
I'll share with our locals community so that we can help her.
But the other man who's suffering the injustices up in Canada, Dan Hartman, the father of Sean Hartman, who died after the first Pfizer shots of like 33 days after the first Pfizer shot, They're forcing them to put warnings on the labels in the States.
And I say, yeah, the warnings only work for the people who haven't been killed or injured by the shot already.
Dan lost his son.
But then meanwhile, labels are one thing.
Why haven't they taken a hold of the Brooke Jackson case and reinstated the case?
Do they not know about it?
Robert, it's not to...
I don't think...
And an honest, competent Department of Justice head would have already replaced them.
Pam Bondi has it.
I haven't even heard from her.
I've reached out to other people connected to her.
Haven't heard from them either.
It's unbelievable.
I mean, there's all kinds of people I can get immediate responses to that are high-ranking cabinet officials, just not at the Justice Department, which is another sign that they don't know what they're doing.
They're in way over their heads, and they're going to get run over and run around again and again and again and again until we get some other people in key positions there.
That's my conclusion.
Or they wake up to how much anger there is at them over this.
I don't think they understand that.
They don't understand how much of the base, of the Trump base, is very unhappy.
I put out a poll on Twitter.
I was curious.
I was like, all right, you think they're doing awesome?
Think they're doing average the best they can under the circumstances?
Do you think you're just disappointed?
Or, hey, how about just giving them more time?
In other words, I gave people three out of four okay options.
60% said disappointed.
They chose the most negative option available on the ball.
And I think it's representative if you – And I get it.
Federal employees are suing to go to court.
Even if we have a federal merit selection board, which has a specific process, if you're an individual employee you go to, or if you're a vendor, the federal court of claims you're supposed to go to for trade, or for the trade court, if you have a trade issue, they're all going to other courts because the rogue courts are behaving badly.
But these people haven't had to go to those courts when it comes to Kash Patel and Dan Bagino and Bam Bondi because they haven't even made the effort to clean up their agencies.
And that's the problem.
And it will continue to be a problem until they realize the problem is the agency.
The problem is all the core policies and personnel of these people.
Could you really, did you really think an agency created and started and nurtured and founded by J. Edgar Hoover?
Was ever going to care about constitutional liberty in America.
That was, I mean, it's like, it doesn't get back to the roots of being a pristine institution.
It was corrupt from its core from day one.
That was the purpose of it.
So I don't know enough to know if it was ever not corrupt.
Nah, that was always corrupt.
He created the FBI out of nothing.
It didn't belong there.
When I spoke at Hillsdale, I made the point, there is no FBI in the Constitution of the United States of America because it was never intended for us to federalize law enforcement.
That's supposed to be a local issue.
All right, Robert, let's take the party over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
We're going to raid someone who doesn't know that we're coming.
We'll talk about takings.
We got obstruction of justice.
When is doing anything with a law enforcement officer magically obstruction?
What happens when you win the lottery, an $83 million lottery, and you get stiff, like the state of Texas is trying to do?
We got a ball, a foul ball, a guy hurt by a foul ball.
He wants to sue for a bazillion dollars, can he, in the state of Colorado?
To me, going to having to watch a Colorado Rockies game would be worthy of intentional infliction of emotional distress.
When can the archivist be hired and fired?
Will they actually finally require bonds for injunctions like federal rules require?
A key aspect of the Big Beautiful Bill that might actually be both big and beautiful.
And last but not least, a person that is brain dead in Georgia is pregnant.
Must the hospital keep her alive under the pro-life laws?
or is there a different law that's actually applicable here and they're trying to falsely use the case to lobby for a change of the abortion laws when actually the reason why she has to be kept alive has nothing to do with abortion law?
I had no doubt that that story was as much of a lie as...
And remember, this week, tomorrow, Duran, 1 p.m. Eastern Time, live, covering the whole global landscape, where I'll be making even more people angry and upset and raiding the chat.
I forgot to plug the book, Robert.
Okay, there's two things.
Get Louis the Lobster the book.
I'm going to put it in the chat before you guys go.
We're going to raid Apostate Radio.
Let them know from whence you came.
Apostate Radio.
They're talking about the South Africa stuff right now.
It'll be good to introduce our crowd.
It'll be fun there.
Get a Louis the Lobster book.
It's right there.
Louis the Lobster returns to the sea.
The other question was this.
I bet Louis knew not to eat the dog fennel.
Can you imagine I die on my birthday?
You can do a sequel.
Louis the Lobster tells Viva, don't eat the dog fennel.
I'll do that.
It'll be a new episode of A Thousand Ways to Die.
Idiot decides to eat some grass because it smells like dill.
That would be a bit of a Darwin Award winner.
I gotta confess.
A lot of people would be laughing their asses off on the internet.
Four o'clock tomorrow, I'm going to have Steve Baker.
He's going to be talking about...
He broke a story on The Blaze, and it had to do with...
I'm just too many things in my head.
Steve Baker, four o 'clock tomorrow.
It's going to be fantastic.
Encryptus, are we good?
Have we done the raid?
Let's see here.
No, I actually didn't know we were raiding them.
I haven't looked that channel up.
No, I haven't done any meaningful due diligence, but the link is in the private.
Let's do this, and we're going to bring it on over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
While we do that, show me where the AI touched you, says kicking snow.
And a few more in our vivabarneslaw.locals.com community.
We got that one.
Encrypted says, Well, Sir Barnes, you changed my mind on Boncino and Cash.
I was wrong.
Dogfinal won't kill you.
Keep unknown plants out of your mouth so you'll live another 46 years, says Nancy P. We got from Care Grant, Robert Barnes, I have never gotten the sense that Dan Bongino has supported or held himself out as supporting any political persuasion or movement other than conservatism.
That's fair.
That's fair.
What I mean is that he was more of, when he was at Fox, more of a traditional conservative.
Only during the Trump era did he become more populist.
And I had doubts whether that was something that was in his bones, if you will, as an ideological interpretation of the world.
My issue is that I know, like, and trust Bongino so much that I say there has to be a good reason for which this is happening.
And a good reason might not be a good reason, but a reason that we would all understand after the fact.
And that could be any number of reasons.
And he's got plenty of time to deliver.
So hopefully, my view is the reason to escalate the criticism is the hope that he gets the message.
And I don't understand why someone would take that job at losing the amount of money he's going to lose, putting himself at the risk he's going to do, if he's just going to be like a normie with the job.
You know what I mean?
Happy birthday, young whippersnapper.
Now, quick, blow up those candles before the studio burns down.
Pasha Moyer.
They had Chauvin training a young officer, so he is or was a model officer for the force.
Well, model in what sense?
Yeah, the wrong kind of model.
Robert, are you aware of the part of the big, beautiful bill someone slipped in that allows people to be enrolled in medical trials without their consent or knowledge?
I've heard that concern raised.
I've heard a bunch of concerns raised, so I'll take more of a look at it this week.
The worst police shooting was Daniel Shaver.
I'm not watching it.
The Daniel Shaver video is traumatizing.
Still a big fan.
No arguments tonight.
Says tzipora, which means bird in Hebrew.
The identity grift is there to make sure the base takes their eye off the ball on important issues.
Let's talk about Chauvin or a woman saying the N-word.
Yeah, whatever happened to her?
Shiloh Hendricks just poof!
$750,000 disappeared.
Not Doge or Ukraine are even pursuing Pfizer for defrauding the USA and killing millions over time.
Ben Shapiro is a merchant of the identity and distractions among many.
Don't fall for it, Viva.
They want you a prosomner of the...
Let's look this up.
Look up prosomner.
I don't know.
I'll have to look that up afterwards.
Hold on.
I want to make sure I understand this dread, Robert.
Don't fall for it, Viva.
I don't play identity grifts at all, period.
Oh, yeah, yeah, exactly.
Trump declassified all FBI files related to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation four and a half weeks ago.
seems there are uh be slow walk for release agree or disagree well that's agree All of it is.
All of it is.
And just, it's embarrassing to them.
And again, it's one of those things like, okay, maybe there's a backstory here.
Maybe there's a backstory there.
What's the backstory for not giving, for redacting the James O 'Keefe FOIA request?
It doesn't make sense.
It's like they don't know what's...
It's like their hands...
Not their hands are tied, that there's just too much going on Let me make sure.
We have raided a posse.
Let's see.
Oh, yeah, boys.
Okay, well, who goes into his...
Viva Barnes raid.
It's on.
Okay, and I'll screen grab this and reach out to them afterwards.
Random chance of making friends.
Okay, we're going to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
This will be on podcast format and everybody can bitch and moan about the audio.
Barnes will clean his mic after the show.
You'll be good for tomorrow with the Duran.
At 1 p.m. Eastern time, covering the global landscape.
Upsetting and offending at least half their audience.
We're going to end it everywhere except for vivabarneslaw.locals.com.