Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 1, 2025 - Viva & Barnes

02:23:16

Ep. 266: SCOTUS Allows Trump TPS Revocations! Glenn Greenwald-Gate! Alex Jones! Trans Madness & MORE

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good evening, everybody, and get ready for one heck of a banger of an episode of Viva and Bond's Law for the People.
	What you are looking at right now is a BBC propagandist.
	And mark my words, Paris, quote, erupts in celebration, will become the new, quote, slightly fiery but mostly peaceful protest.
	I screwed that up.
	Mostly peaceful protests.
	Enjoy the intro.
	Imperial Ministry, Samantha, have confirmed that two people have died and 192 others have been injured during those celebrations, as you say, after Paris Saint-Germain won that Champions League trophy final against Inter Milan in Munich.
	Now, the two people who died, the authorities are telling us it is a 17-year-old boy who was stabbed in the chest in the town of Dax during summer.
	of those celebrations.
	The other person to die, a 23-year-old man who was driving a scooter through central Paris and was hit by a car.
	Now, the prosecutor's office say the driver was detained, but that they tested negative for drugs and also Now, we know that there were a number of clashes in the centre of Paris and indeed 559 people.
	We're gonna pause it there.
	Just want everybody to understand what that man just said.
	Two people died as Paris erupts in celebration.
	He might not have said they erupted in celebration.
	Do you know what it's called when someone dies as a result of another person?
	Plunging a knife into their heart.
	You don't get to file that one under died during protests.
	That's murder.
	That's straight-up murder.
	And they're trying to write this off as mere eruptions into protests, soccer hooliganisms.
	Two people died.
	Now I want to know if the one on the street was an accident or if the guy mowed him over in his vehicle.
	One who gets stabbed in the chest and dies does not died.
	During a protest, they were murdered.
	A 17-year-old kid in a town called Dax that has a very small population from what I understand.
	I couldn't get any more details on that incident.
	There is apparently some video footage of what purports to be that attack.
	I can't vouch for it.
	I can't vet it.
	I'm not going to play it because it might be something totally different in another city and another time.
	Who the hell knows anymore?
	Two people did not die.
	One was murdered and the other one, the jury is out of.
	Trying to pass it off as just mere soccer hooliganism.
	It's absolutely crazy.
	There's the old expression, you know, no matter how much you hate the media, you don't hate them enough.
	You go and look for this here.
	Look at the phraseology.
	Paris erupts in celebration.
	Riots after PSG wins championly.
	That's from the Wall Street Journal.
	Reuters probably doing the same syndicated article.
	Paris erupts in euphoria before skirmishes?
	Oh, that's 23 hours ago.
	Maybe they didn't know that two people had died because one had a knife plunged into his chest.
	Paris erupts in celebration as PSG wins Championship League.
	Slightly fiery, but mostly peaceful protest.
	Two people died, one of whom was murdered.
	And you know why they're doing this?
	It's the persuasion.
	This is the fake news propaganda machine in real time, in full force.
	Here, let me just show you some footage.
	Of the so-called soccer hooligans, so-called erupting in celebration in euphoria in Paris?
	Let me make sure I got this one here.
	Yeah, check this one out.
	Just notice, you know, I had to find a clear footage of this one before I came to my own conclusion.
	There's a fireman coming to protect these individuals from being violent.
	I was just celebrating a hockey victory.
	I'm not drawing any broader conclusions from this, but I did want to make sure that the flag on the gentleman's back was not an Italian flag.
	I don't follow soccer.
	I don't even know who the hell won and who lost.
	What kind of flag is that on the screen?
	Bill?
	Yeah, that's neither an Italian nor a soccer flag.
	These gentlemen are not erupting in euphoria about a hockey soccer game.
	Sorry, you know what they're damn well doing?
	Everybody knows what they're damn well doing.
	That's why the propaganda machine is out in full force.
	This is why Emmanuel Macron wants to censor social media in France.
	France is done.
	France has been taken over.
	Paris, when I lived there 25, 26 years ago, was already bad.
	I'm not doing anything.
	I'm not doing anything.
	I wasn't just trying to strangle a man from behind while my buddy punched him in the face.
	Anybody who can detect accents if you speak French, you'll know.
	No, no, no.
	It's erupting in celebration, people.
	Nothing to see here.
	Just trust the headlines.
	Two people died as Paris erupts in celebrations.
	You have riots, burning vehicles, something like 265 cars have been burnt by now.
	Now, Paris, in fairness, is known for protests.
	It's known for riots.
	It's also known for migrant riots.
	You might recall such migrant riots as the one that occurred, I don't know, about a year ago?
	When Emmanuel Macron, the man who's totally not doing coke while he's being physically assaulted by his husband.
	Oh, I'm sorry, I meant his wife.
	Bada bing, bada boom, hashtag humor.
	The same Macron who wants to suppress social media, who might shut down social media sites because you don't want people spreading too much video footage of what the hell is going on in that flaming hellhole of a country.
	Flaming literally because it's on fire.
	I know.
	It erupts in celebration, people.
	Slightly fiery, but mostly peaceful.
	We know what happened there.
	And it is the exact same thing that's happening in France right now.
	The same persuasion fake news.
	What is it called?
	Astroturfing?
	It's lies.
	Two people died.
	Yeah, no, no.
	Two people died.
	Officer Sicknick was murdered by a group of protesters.
	And Roseanne Boyland had a medical emergency.
	And Ashley Babbitt was a domestic terrorist.
	And Michael Byrd was protecting nobody from nothing.
	That's what's going on in France, people.
	It's wild, it's outrageous, and the media is doing everything it can to protect the French royalty, the French government, from the consequences of their failed immigration policy.
	It's beyond the point of no return, as far as I'm concerned right now.
	I think Jack Posobiec was out there.
	I saw some tweets from him saying, good thing he got home early.
	You want to avoid that strangling, stabby, burning eruption of celebrations after a hockey...
	Soccer victory.
	Good evening, everybody.
	Welcome to another evening of Viva and Barnes Law for the People, Sunday night law extravaganza.
	Share the link around.
	If you don't know who I am, Viva Frei, my real full name is David Freiheit.
	Freiheit means freedom in German, or languages of Germanic descent, Germanic origin.
	This is our Sunday night show across all platforms, Commitube, Twitter, Free Speech Rumble, and vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	My weekly exclusive on Rumble lineup is weekly, daily, typically at 4 o 'clock.
	But next week, exceptionally, it's going to be the 2.30 to 4-ish time slot.
	So I figured I'd let everybody know that here.
	And we talk about law and everything that's going on in the world.
	You will be smarter.
	you will be maybe not happier, but you will laugh more than most people out there who don't watch this show, who probably get to the same point, but a little bit later, if you had watched us on a number of issues You would have been ahead of the curve on a great many issues, and you'd be more well-informed on every issue.
	So we will get to the show in a second because Barnes is on the road, as was I. I was up in Georgia for the cutting of the ribbon of an event called A Soldier's Journey Home.
	It's not an event.
	It's a charity.
	It's not a charity.
	That sounds almost demeaning for what it is.
	It's a charitable organization that builds a forever home.
	For a disabled veteran.
	And within the period of two weeks, volunteers from across the country get together and build a home.
	Build it from foundation to keys in the hand.
	Typically, it's fully furnished.
	This time, it wasn't because the beneficiary of this forever home had his own furniture.
	The man who received this forever home, a double amputee from Iraq.
	His name is Sergeant First Class David Matheson.
	Me scoozies everybody.
	I misspelled sergeant because I was spelling it the Canadian way, which is actually just totally improper.
	That's why I was being underlined.
	David Mathis was the recipient of a soldier's journey home, forever home in Georgia.
	The property was beautiful.
	I went fishing with my kid on a little pond.
	We caught pumpkin seed bluegill after fish.
	He gave a speech.
	It was short and sweet.
	I spent a lot.
	I talked to him the night before and his story is, This is his thank you speech.
	Have you got this?
	All right.
	First and foremost, I want to thank God for blessing me.
	I want to thank my wife, my kids, and the rest of my family for supporting me throughout my recovery and continued recovery.
	Like, I had a bad point at one point, like I think just about everybody do.
	So, but for them to stand by me, take care of me, make sure that I'm taken care of, I just want to thank all of them.
	And I want to thank the Soldiers Journey Home for this.
	I want to thank all the volunteers because without this, without y 'all, this wouldn't have happened for me or my family.
	I want to thank you and God bless.
	A soldiers journey home.org ginger ninja, a member of our locals community is one of the carpenters.
	I think that's the right term who did the cabinetry.
	He's an amazing guy.
	He told me about it, organized it so that I could get down there.
	A soldiers journey home.org Sergeant first class, David Mathis lost both of his legs below the knees or slightly above the knees in an explosive, I don't think they call it an IED, an explosion in Iraq in 2017 when he was in a vehicle with another person who didn't survive the attack.
	And we talked about the injury, the recovery, and the road to the life that he's living now.
	And it's an amazing story.
	So that's that.
	All right, before we get into the show for the evening, people.
	You know, I say that we do sponsors because you say, you know, you got to pay the bills.
	I eat this.
	This is like, there's some sponsors that you could.
	Field of Greens.
	1775 coffee.
	I jokingly say that a way to a man's heart is through his stomach, and the way to my heart is with a beautiful piece of steak, and that's why my Chicago Steak Company has a piece of my heart, because nothing beats the mouth-watering sizzle of a premium steak.
	Especially when it's from the Chicago Steak Company.
	Hand-selected, expertly aged, delivered to your door.
	The steak is steakhouse quality.
	Whether it's a celebration or just craving the best, their USDA Prime and Wagyu beef will turn any meal into an unforgettable experience.
	Packaged with care.
	Flash frozen.
	You order it.
	It comes straight to your house.
	Delivered at your front door.
	That's my family.
	That's Vinny Oshana.
	That's Humberto from The Unusual Suspects.
	And we are having a wonderful Chicago Steak dinner.
	You go online.
	You can get the burgers.
	You can get the steaks.
	It's all flipping delicious, but right now, Chicago Steak Company has an unbeatable offer exclusively for our viewers.
	Visit mychicagosteak.com forward slash Viva to receive 8-ounce gourmet steak burgers, plus free shipping on orders over $149.
	That is a $189 value.
	Absolutely free.
	It means juicy, tender steaks, deliciously seasoned with the best flavor.
	Chicago Steak Company's premium cuts from their beautiful ribeyes to their perfectly lean New York strips.
	They're exactly what you need to impress, and they are exactly what you need for the summer barbecue people, because nothing beats a summer barbecue with them.
	People running around and a nice cold martini.
	That is it.
	MyChicagoSteak.com.
	Link is in the description.
	Thank you very much for the sponsor.
	Now, before Barnes gets here, or until Barnes gets here, or as Barnes gets here, I want to put Sesame Street on blast.
	It's not often we get to say, let's put Sesame Street on blast for perversion, depravity, and what I think is bona fide criminality.
	Hashtag, in my humble opinion, IMHO, no defamation.
	In case you didn't know, I mean, in case you are not online, or in case you live under a rock, I think you would even hear the reverberations of Pride Month under a rock.
	It's Pride Month, people.
	You know, veterans get a day or a week.
	Veterans get a day.
	Memorial weekend, you get a weekend.
	Pride gets a month.
	Because, you know, like Norm MacDonald used to say, he's like, so proud of my kid.
	He likes penis.
	My son, I hear some pictures of him.
	Look at it.
	Norm MacDonald's bit on Pride Month for sexual orientation.
	It's a wild thing.
	But this is what Sesame Street, the groomer of children, have to say.
	On our street, everyone is welcome.
	Together, let's build a world where a person, where every person in the family feels loved and respected for who they are.
	Happy.
	Pride Month.
	Now, I think we can all agree on certain premises here, not conclusions.
	The premise upon which my conclusion of perverted criminal grooming is predicated on this.
	Sesame Street is aimed at children.
	It's directed at children.
	That's premise number one.
	Pride Month is aimed at sexuality.
	I think we can agree on that too.
	Pride Month, I would even argue, is directed at Adults sexuality.
	Therefore, you have a children's show, which is basically saying to kids, hey, look at this beautiful color coordination.
	Everybody's holding hands.
	Oh, really?
	What does that mean?
	Well, that means it's the pride month.
	Oh, what does that mean?
	Well, that means if you're a man, you enjoy penises.
	And if you're a woman and you are a lesbian, you enjoy vaginas.
	And if you identify as a they, them, because you don't know what sex gender you are, or you're a boy who thinks he's a girl, well...
	This is a little bit even before that.
	So you're not dealing with the confusion and the uncomfortability that comes into growing into a body as God's hormones kick in the way they should or sometimes the way they shouldn't.
	And then you might have, you know, whatever.
	We have the Sesame Street, the groomer of children, opening the discussion of sexuality, sexual orientation, and sexual proclivities with children.
	There's a word for that.
	It is called grooming.
	It's called perversion, and I dare say it should be criminal.
	Nobody should be talking about sex acts, sexual proclivities, sexual preferences with children that are not their own.
	And even when they're your own...
	Sesame Street, the groomer of children, apparently doesn't know.
	So you might want to go let Sesame Street know what you think of the perversion of grooming children who are impressionable, who rely on that property.
	Is that state funded?
	Do they get any USAID funding?
	There's a horrible joke in there which I won't make.
	Here's the link to the tweet.
	And go let Sesame Street know what you think of them saying, hey there little boy, do you know if you like penis yet?
	Hey there, little boy.
	Do you want to sit down and have a discussion with a transgender cross-dressing book reader at library hour?
	It's like we went from the episode of The Simpsons when Bart's imagining he's going down the street.
	He's like, hey boy, you ever seen a dead body?
	We've entered the world now where that was inappropriate for other reasons too.
	Now, hey there, little boy.
	What's sexual orientation?
	How do you identify there, five-year-old?
	Are you a they, them?
	Do you know if you're trans yet?
	All right.
	That's it.
	Let's get the show started.
	Robert Barnes will make his appearance immediately.
	There we go.
	Hear me and see me okay?
	Yes, there's a delay, so I'm going to try not to talk over you, and we will let the delay of the internet make its course.
	Mr. Barnes, you are quite clearly not home.
	May you tell the world where you are?
	Oh, sure.
	I'm up here in Appleton, Wisconsin, helping with jury selection and upcoming case.
	That I believe will be broadcast on, not the jury selection, but the trial itself, is going to be broadcast, I believe, by Children's Health Defense.
	It's a medical malpractice case.
	So I'll have more to discuss it later on the next week.
	I think that the judge wants minimal media coverage.
	Or media discussion on the case while the jury selection is ongoing.
	So we won't go into detail beyond what was previously discussed.
	But once I have the links, I'll post those for everybody so they can see and follow them.
	And it'll be a great MedMal case for people to follow that might be out there interested in something other than the Karen Reed or the P. Diddy case for those that are already caught up in that.
	That's understandable.
	But for somebody that may not be covering that, I think this would be a very useful case to cover.
	A case you often don't see covered.
	You know, most ordinary people don't get to see a civil medical malpractice type case in the COVID context, you know, broadcast to the world for people to watch for themselves.
	Well, and for those who don't know or have just tuned into the show for the first time, this is the case of a kid with Down syndrome who was admitted to the hospital with COVID and died.
	Was it with COVID or after the jab and died afterwards?
	And the argument is that, oh, no, this was...
	That's the same case, right?
	Yeah, yeah.
	So the issue is what exactly happened?
	How did a DNR order get put in there when there appears that there should not have been one?
	Was the medicine the correct treatment?
	What degree of intentionality took place and the mistakes that were made that led to her death?
	So all of that will be part of the trial.
	So I think it'll be Warner Mendenhall is part of the case.
	Others are part of the case.
	I think it'll be a fun case for young lawyers, other people interested in this subject matter to follow up on.
	And so once we have those links from Children's Health Defense, we'll share it with people and may cover it in more detail at some point later on.
	The only reason I'm not going into more detail right now is that the judge wants the more media quiet on this while jury selection is ongoing, which is understandable.
	And we shall respect that.
	Other than jury selection, how long is the trial scheduled for?
	Was it four to six weeks?
	Three weeks.
	Three weeks.
	Okay.
	Robert, what we can talk about and will talk about, what do we have on the menu for tonight?
	We've got the number one voted topic.
	It was also the issue of the Barnes Brief is NGO fraud.
	How the variant from Rockefeller to Soros, from Carnegie to Gates.
	Mike Benz was on with Tucker Carlson about the NGO fraud.
	Is there something that can be done by state and federal actors?
	Maybe there is.
	Trump tariffs go to court, and that's the up and down, over and sideways.
	We'll be discussing what happened there, what might happen going to go forward basis.
	The Supreme Court gave a little bit of relief to the Trump administration to execute at least a few.
	Of our immigration laws.
	Alex Jones might win even in front of that commie court in Austin, Texas.
	And if he's going to win in that commie court in Austin, Texas, Mark Bankston, you better be upping your malpractice insurance, bro.
	Because somebody's going to be suing you into oblivion.
	The only way that guy got into law school in the first place is he got a free ticket to the nut house because he was a lunatic.
	And the Uber driver accidentally dropped him off in law school by mistake.
	So those ambulance-chasing lawyers may not be getting any cash at all, screwing their clients along the way for their political cause.
	And let me just interject, Robert, that once exposure or the risk of exposure is known, people, you can't increase your liability coverage without disclosing that to your insurance provider.
	So a word of advice so that you avoid potential fraud.
	All right, okay.
	The Glenn Greenwald.
	Someone didn't like him appearing on Tucker Carlson, so decided to out some of his private videos.
	And how some people took the bait on that.
	They're like, oh, now they're suddenly interested in his private life.
	It's like, who cares?
	He's not a public figure in terms of elected official.
	Everything's legal, so move on.
	But he may have legal action himself, domestically and globally, especially if some governments might be involved, and I wouldn't rule it out.
	The Tate brothers, indicted in the UK.
	I voice my reasons for skepticism.
	We'll get into why I'm still The American Bar Association finally kicked out of determining who our federal judges are.
	And President Donald John Trump has been listening to some smart and savvy people about the Federalist Society and went ballistic this week, which some of us have been eagerly awaiting for quite some time.
	Climate change, you know.
	Are you in not the best health situation?
	It's probably climate change.
	You can sue him for wrongful death now.
	We'll discuss the insanity taking place in those cases.
	You know what?
	James Comey can go around bragging about threatening to murder and calling for the assassination of President Trump with no consequence from Dan Vangino and Cash, who was sitting on...
	You know, like a little six-year-old sitting on that chair during that interview with the feds.
	But the Biden...
	We'll discuss that.
	Also, we got the Fourth Amendment, what happens when it's private government actors acting on behalf of the government, stealing your records and information.
	Goldman Sachs.
	And the shocking, shocking news caught up in more bribery.
	Who could ever imagine such a Wall Street firm of integrity and institutional pride?
	Then we got a couple of historic cases.
	We'll be part of our ongoing Sunday series.
	We'll have a historic case or two that we'll discuss each week.
	What was recommended in part by our board was Dodge v.
	Ford and Bob Jones versus the United States.
	And then we got a few added topics from the most commonly asked or liked questions.
	From the VivaBarnesLaw.com board, including more war insanity in Ukraine, Fourth Amendment gun surveillance.
	These are the FBI hiding records from Brady disclosure, as disclosed by Julie Kelly.
	And some people think that they're just discovering that the government has lots of intel on people.
	And they're thinking somehow it's a Trump, Teal, Vance, Palantir conspiracy because they've been reading too much Whitney Webb.
	Yes, it is scary that the government has all your records, but Newsflash, folks, they've had it for two decades.
	So we've got that and all the other comments or questions that come in that may increase the legal landscape tonight.
	Well, actually, now that you mentioned it, let me just read a couple of the...
	Uh, glad you came to our side, Viva.
	Keep it up, says Raffle Safi over on ComedyTube.
	Viva, you are now a certified Americano buddy.
	Fishing in the South stamps the approval, buddy.
	Go for it.
	Not official yet, people.
	Uh, Robert, let's start.
	Speaking of governments and chains, we have to start.
	Well, let's start with Glenn Greenwald and I'll preface this.
	There are my saying a it's not that I don't care in like the high and mighty sense or in the fact that I am up to such acts of perversion in my own.
	There are two separate but parallel arguments going on when it comes to this, what is arguably but not arguably a criminal release of a private video, revenge form, whatever they call it.
	You know, there's the question as to whether or not it's relevant to him as a professional.
	And then there's the question as to whether or not it should exclude him from the world of conservatism or right-wing journalism or conservatism, you know, from the side of, call it conservatism, but I don't really think it's that, the club.
	Because he's been doing great work.
	He's, you know, he does great journalism.
	He is not in agreement with many on the Israel-Palestine question.
	So people want to say, okay, this man, he's not a conservative.
	He's a degenerate.
	This is why homosexuality is a sin, yada, yada.
	People want to have that moral and religious discussion about it.
	I, on the one hand, say I don't care about what people do behind closed doors in as much as it's clearly some sort of fetish or some sort of freaky deaky thing that some people are into, some people are not.
	All the people feigning moral outrage.
	How dare he lick the feet of maybe a person?
	A lot of people are into some really freaky, wild, bizarre stuff behind closed doors.
	It just doesn't happen to see the light of day.
	So nobody has to face a video camera recording that gets leaked to the public.
	My question in all of this is, I do just question the judgment of someone who is a controversial journalist, who would knowingly allow themselves to be exposed to this type of blackmail extortion, because obviously he doesn't want the video released, but he's doing this, recording it, making payments for whatever the sex acts were.
	I just question judgment as a whole, but people have self-destructive fetishes or self-destructive, what's the word, proclivities.
	The question is whether or not this was released by a government or government-related entity, individual, as reprisals for something.
	A lot of people are jumping on the Israel bandwagon, Mossad.
	My first reaction would have been Brazil, especially given the fact that the dude in the video is clearly speaking Portuguese and I believe is Brazilian.
	I would have gone with Brazil before the Zionists, but some people are going to say it's Brazil.
	Being puppet-handled by the Zionists themselves if they want to get to that end point.
	What's your take on who would be the most likely culprit to release this?
	The video looked like it was about a year old.
	What's your take on it?
	The American deep state or Israel would be my initial suspect, is who I would suspect.
	Though you can't rule out the EU and Zelensky and his crew.
	So for those that don't know, Glenn Greenwald, pretty long-standing American lawyer turned journalist, investigative journalist, started out with his primary focus exposing the surveillance state.
	He was the main primary individual who Ed Snowden had enough trust in to divulge and blow the whistle on the scale and scope of corruption of the surveillance state under the Obama administration.
	Something, by the way, Snowden only did when he realized his superiors were all lying to Congress and the world.
	And realizing, okay, writing them out probably won't end well for me.
	So Greenwald was a very sort of noble, courageous, bold journalist in that capacity.
	He has continued to pursue things independently.
	So even though he comes from the left, everybody's known he's gay.
	He had a gay husband who passed away from cancer, I believe, as I recall.
	They had adopted some kids, adopted a bunch of dogs.
	He's one of his dog lovers.
	He's got a bunch of dogs running around.
	But I don't think they're all blind and deaf and disabled like Aviva's dog.
	But, you know, he's a pet lover kind of guy, a people lover, you can tell.
	But it's always been open that he's gay.
	And anybody that's familiar with the gay subculture, let's just say they're usually into very eclectic and interesting things that most ordinary people are like, whoa, maybe not for me.
	All I can say, if you see any video of Barnes out there, it depends on if it's a hot model, that's me, definitely.
	Not a hot model, not me, not me.
	But, you know, fortunately, they don't have those kind of things circulating.
	So I found the timing peculiar because it was a day before he was his he'd already done the interview, but it was going to the Tucker Carlson was going to publish his interview.
	Glenn Greenwald has been a big thorn in the in the side of the deep state of the American surveillance state, of the global surveillance state, including very critical, as you note, of Brazilian authorities, the corrupt Brazilian judges who were.
	Even though many of those people were aligned with the left, it didn't stop Greenwald from publicly outing them and critiquing them.
	Same with Russiagate.
	It would have been very easy for Greenwald to have played politics and stayed on the anti-Trump train that he initially, with other left people, were aligned to.
	But he thought Russiagate had all the indicators of a deep state operation.
	And so he outed it as such and was one of the best investigative journalists in that capacity.
	Continued all the way through the Ukraine war to expose how insane large aspects of the Ukraine conflict were and the more lies that were being taken place by the war whores around the world.
	I don't happen to share his opinion on aspects of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, but he comes at it from a clearly more intellectually sincere perspective than many of the other Palestinian-aligned individuals in the media and journalistic space.
	I would put Greenwald in there with Aaron Maté and people like that who clearly are coming at it from a sincere perspective, even if I don't happen to share their perspective.
	So he's a very nice guy.
	Anybody that's met him behind the scenes, very nice guy.
	He's one of the few non-fake journalists of people in power.
	And I was out at the Bitcoin conference and there were some people that are legit, get you me.
	And there are some people that, let's just say, not so much.
	And so Greenwald's been one of those people you get to meet.
	He's like, well, a nice guy, friendly guy.
	You don't get any.
	You know, weird vibes off of him.
	You don't get any of that.
	And so the, you know, whatever his particular, you know, it's completely legal, as far as I know, consenting adults.
	And as people know, that subculture, that's really kind of tame by the comparison of what some people in that subculture really get into.
	It's nothing like John McAfee.
	You know, that was information I really didn't need to know.
	I did not need to know what John McAfee liked.
	I wish I would have never heard that piece of information.
	Just something like that.
	Allegedly, and I won't get into more detail, just look up the word coprophagia, because that was the second time I had ever heard of the term being used.
	Yeah, it's probably Grobert.
	Grobert's always putting those terrible ideas out there, making Viva research him, because he's much too literate in some of these things.
	It is, I mean, tame is going to be relative to what people are up to among heterosexual couples is, you know, quite freaky sometimes as well.
	My only issue, people, you know, were saying he was compromised a long time ago.
	know this video the dates on it appeared to have been 2024 and the only thing i ask is like His husband passed away.
	So, you know, that he suffered a really, you know, pretty traumatic, tragic loss.
	And then went out and partied.
	And by the way, in Brazil, if you know Brazil, let's just say I had a client who had a very, very famous ex-husband who his travels to Brazil were for a very particular type of woman, you might say.
	So there's a lot more egregious.
	I thought, okay, maybe there's something really wacky.
	It's like, oh, this is just meant to humiliate him.
	This is just meant to embarrass him personally.
	It was just being nasty and mean.
	Now, I agree with you.
	Always be careful.
	Always double-check yourself.
	But, I mean, Martin Luther King, who I'm a huge fan of, had some voracious appetites.
	It is what it is.
	I'm not going to use it to judge the man on a broader scale.
	And unlike Glenn Greenwald, I mean, Glenn Greenwald's single at this point in his life and suffered a very tragic loss of the love of his life.
	It's like, I'm not going to And he was, what was he on?
	Glenn Tucker and Park to talk about?
	The Epstein files and how it likely implicates Israel amongst other foreign governments.
	And maybe that's why Dan Bongino suddenly discovered that he hung himself.
	He's seen video.
	Video that was supposedly, I thought it was turned off.
	He clarified.
	He clarified.
	He claims.
	Well, no, because the clarification only admits of more conspiracy.
	it's not the video of the act.
	It's the video showing that the MCC was, He was the only one there.
	If you're going to get dog walked, just make it like a man.
	Crawl across the floor.
	But I thought what they were trying to do was – Just to be mean to him personally.
	Because I was like, this has no political ramification.
	He has a right to sue.
	And I hope he explores who might have been involved with that or connected to it.
	Does anyone really think this was just some rando off the internet that did it?
	I don't think so.
	No, I will wholeheartedly not apologize because I didn't accuse Ian Carroll of jumping to conclusions.
	Ian Carroll comes out and says, this makes the Zionists look bad.
	like, is there any indication that this was Israel or Israel or Mossad or Zionist agents?
	If it turns out it was, yeah, I mean, it Unless it was something to say, don't trust what this guy says about Epstein and blackmail and extortion, because look at this video over here.
	And if there's concern about that, that might be the answer.
	But otherwise, he's been more of a thorn in the side of the European colonial elites, the EU elites, the U.S. deep state elites.
	This is the man who helped get Ed Snowden broadcast to the world.
	And they couldn't do anything to him legally despite his success doing so.
	So those are the people who hate him the most.
	But I agree.
	I would try to be a little more careful.
	It goes without saying, if you're in that world.
	Barnes, we've got our three eternal truths.
	I'll give you the three best pieces of advice.
	Keep your schmeckle in your pants.
	Don't record yourselves doing any sex acts.
	Nothing good comes of it.
	And get married young, stay young, and don't get divorced.
	I mean, in Greenwald's case, he actually did a lot of that, and the love of his life died, so I empathize with him on that.
	But that's what makes it even meaner.
	The love of his life dies a year or two ago, and he's got dealing with it however he's dealing with it, and then you release this just to be nasty and mean because he's exposing the fact that Deep State is corrupt.
	I just found it as being personally vicious.
	I've seen them do it to Kennedy.
	I've seen them do it to other people.
	They're just personally nasty, nasty people that would do something like this.
	There's a question as to whether or not there were drugs in there.
	And then again, okay, you're going to judge people for doing drugs.
	Like, by the way, you do things that...
	But like when they came up with that video of David Hasselhoff drunk off his ass in front of his kids trying to, you know, eat a burger.
	I mean, all right, so you want to judge people for doing drugs.
	Go ahead.
	You want to judge them for being gay.
	I understand that element of the discussion.
	Him being gay is nothing new.
	You want to say he's a degenerate for engaging in sex acts that are his own personal fetish.
	I would love to know what everyone who's accusing him of that does behind closed doors.
	It's none of my business.
	The more aggressive language, those are people that are the real sickos.
	You know what I mean?
	Those are the ones that got the gip coming out of the Pulp Fiction, right?
	You know what I mean?
	When people obsess a little too much over it, they're telling you something.
	Confession through projection.
	Now we'll move on because I think that the chat has had enough of this particular discussion, but we'll set, let's segue into the, I want to bring up just an article because I remember Googling the guy's name because back in the day, I can't find any of my tweets on it.
	I have to go find our show.
	Real brief before we get to that, do you wonder whether the message wasn't a message to Greenwald at all?
	Whether the message was to other people who might have really bad videos out there, say, hey, Dan Vangino, if you want to go further, we got 10 other videos like this.
	In other words, how much were they using Greenwald?
	to intimidate other people.
	And to make sure I understand, it would not be...
	Dan Bongino is a man who I think would not have any videos like that, Right, other people like Cash Patel, other higher-ranking people that are involved in the decision-making.
	And again, being absolutely clear, I'm not accusing any of them of that.
	But I'm just saying it could have been a message, hey, who knows what we have on you?
	Because surely Glenn Greenwald, the surveillance expert, didn't know he was being taped in this situation.
	Interesting angle that I wouldn't have thought of because, as I say, no matter how cynical I get, it's tough to keep up.
	And this is going to dovetail into a bunch of things, you know, the Trump administration pursuing things that maybe not ought to be pursued with such vigor.
	We covered this a while back.
	I remember saying at the time, this felt more like a smear against rumble than a bonafide, I mean, what the guy said is stupid.
	We could read some of his...
	I mean, it's stuff you can find anywhere on the internet right now involving threats against Trump.
	I mean, stuff like they should all hang or we need to send a message of da-da-da-da.
	This happens routinely.
	It's nothing as specific.
	As the former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, saying 86-47.
	I wanted to highlight this section because this was, as I read through the indictment again to refresh my memory, this was as serious as it got.
	Once these people start getting put to death, then the rest will melt like snowflakes and turn on each other and we will just sit back, he said, under his account.
	Pepe the Frog.
	When we first covered this, I said, this seems very weak.
	It seems like more of a smear on rumble.
	I've seen shit that is exponentially worse than that on YouTube.
	They just might not be able to get to the accounts as much.
	So the man got sentenced to, what, two years now?
	Three years in prison.
	Two, three years in federal prison.
	The Trump administration locking people up for making very generic, broad, kind of heated, overheated rhetoric on the internet.
	Again, while the guy was posing as a frog.
	So how serious are we supposed to be taking this?
	That guy's going to federal prison for several years because Pam Blondie can't figure out who's prosecuting her own cases.
	Well, at the same time, the FBI, Vangino, and Cash Patel can't find the retarded Tango and Cash, can't find a way to prosecute James Comey.
	James Comey made a real threat.
	This guy made a nothing threat.
	The only reason I think maybe I or you have been too harsh on Dan and Cash, I'm confused now about the authority as to who has the power to do what.
	And part of the thing, so Bongino and...
	Did somebody previously close the file?
	That means nothing.
	They can reopen any time they want.
	The FBI director can open any file he wants, any time he wants, on anybody he wants.
	He is under no restriction and no restraint.
	Do they have charging power?
	I mean, the question is this.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	No, they have to go to the Justice Department and ask the U.S. Attorney to actually go to the grand jury.
	Okay.
	The grand jury technically is who has charging power, and their internal rules recommend that a U.S. attorney be involved in that process.
	But as a practical matter, the FBI runs these cases.
	They go to the U.S. attorney, they say indict so-and-so, they go down to the grand jury, they indict.
	Maybe Bongino looks as angry as he does because Blondie's not doing anything.
	They can't get an attorney general to do it.
	The Secret Service, because my understanding is now, at least as relates to Comey, it was handed over to Secret Service who investigates it.
	And then they would go to Bondi.
	But look at this one.
	They didn't wait on just Secret Service to handle it.
	They used multiple agencies to nail the guy.
	And this is what they did in general.
	During the Biden administration.
	So it just frustrates me that we're, one, I don't know why these cases are still ongoing.
	These are threats cases that way exaggerated the threat that, in my view, are First Amendment violating.
	This is a nobody that nobody had ever heard of.
	They found no action he'd concretely taken towards the action.
	No evidence it was imminent or incited others to take such action.
	It was the kind of overheated rhetoric you can find every single day on the Internet, anywhere in the world.
	And that guy's going to federal prison for multiple years.
	Well, the former FBI director is on his book tour doing interviews on a late-night TV show, mucking it up, mocking Kash Patel and Dan Bengino's utter uselessness and utter futility to do anything about him.
	It makes the Trump administration on this issue look like a joke.
	Well, it is...
	If the explanation is that Secret Service is investigating this and they're doing nothing, which wouldn't shock me, by the way, because I wasn't none too crazy about the choice for the Director of Secret Service, given what happened to Trump.
	Maybe that's what Cash and Dan are trying to highlight.
	Maybe Bondi is doing not just nothing, but negative stuff for the administration.
	But yeah, there's no good reason why.
	I built the mensurea case for James Comey.
	In this particular case with the guy that they've now sent to jail for three years, when he says put to death, the context of that was always in the context of treason.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Going through an actual legal process.
	I mean, this was just nuts.
	And it's very unfortunate that this is still happening.
	We get the corruption of the courts.
	We get the corruption of the bowels of the bureaucracy.
	We don't need cowards in charge of the FBI.
	When we see low-level cases like this get wrongfully prosecuted, while high-level cases walk.
	They were supposed to end this.
	And so far, they haven't.
	I got something from TheNeebieJeebies.
	It says, Rumble, I keep getting unsubbed follow drop from your channel.
	Well, I'll double-check that.
	And Brian Martin over on Commitube says, Resending a message to others via Greenwald leak.
	It's worth considering.
	Honest people would be more concerned with more modest acts.
	Oh, yes, yes.
	Exactly.
	Glenn really doesn't care.
	They want to humiliate him personally.
	He's not going to be that effective.
	I'm not trying to be funny.
	You see worse stuff at a pride parade.
	People running around swinging their junk.
	Oh, absolutely you do.
	It's a big nothing burger.
	That's what made me think it was sending a message to someone else and other people.
	What do we have on you?
	The whole point of the Panopticon was to create self-censorship.
	What happens if you think they're always watching you?
	What happens if you think they can out you at any given moment?
	You become so paranoid, you become frozen.
	And you don't take any action at all that you should take constructively and productively.
	So I wondered a little bit whether the Greenwald message was a message to others.
	At a minimum, Cash Patel's got to hire a better PR representative.
	Don't sit on a chair that makes you look like the Green Goblin Zielinski.
	I mean, he looked like a six-year-old up there.
	He looked like he was there to participate in a dwarf-tossing contest, and he was the one that was going to get tossed.
	So, you know, just word of the wise there, Cash.
	Robert, before we get too far behind on the rumble rants, let me read a few of these.
	My real name says the Viva Dogs should be the name of your fan club, Viva.
	Yeah, it'd be like the Salty Army, the Viva Dog.
	Not bad.
	Although the dogs are blind and paralyzed.
	Okay, CJ Dagg says, confirmed terror attack in Boulder.
	Democrat firebombed a pro-Israeli-American.
	March, Cash has confirmed it's a terrorist attack.
	We'll wait for more details.
	I heard that and just broke before we went live.
	King of Biltong says, Biltong is one of the highest protein snacks in the world.
	Boasting nearly 50% protein and packed with B12, creatine, iron, zinc, and more.
	Visit Biltong USA.
	Use code BARNS for 10% off.
	I to the C to the E. Ice.
	Be upset.
	That Sesame Street celebrates Pride Month, be okay with Greenwald's degeneracy.
	Yeah, because one is an adult doing what he wants behind closed doors.
	The other is an adult organization targeting children.
	I think that's a clear enough distinction that makes my position justifiable.
	Also, if you decide to judge a person's character for what's illegally leaked, you are rewarding.
	The illegal leaking of that information, and I consider the illegal leaking of that information much more problematic to our liberties than the personal preferences of Glenn Greenwald.
	Well, I think my explanation is much better.
	Two adults can pretty much do whatever they want.
	There are some bizarre people out there who like doing bizarre things, but an adult organization that is in the industry of educating children, indoctrinating children and grooming them, that is inexcusable.
	They revel in fear and chaos.
	It's the daily luncheon.
	Who's the they?
	Who they, you, who they, you say, okay, format.
	Mother Goose goes to prison.
	Hitler gets a steak dinner.
	And Randy Edwards says, Hillary got her mic telling her staff, quote, if we do not win this thing, we are all going to hang together.
	Clearly, Democrats are aware of their crimes against humanity.
	Just ask yourselves, what would I do if I did it?
	All right.
	What do we segue into now, Robert?
	We've got a couple of big names in the news before we get to NGO fraud and the Trump tariffs and a range of other legal topics tonight.
	The two other big names in the news were Alexander Emmerich Jones and the Tate brothers, Andrew Tate and Tristan Tate.
	Well, let's start with the good news, I guess.
	Some people say the Tate's getting indicted in the UK is good news.
	It seems like more of the same political persecution that the UK has been on for politically relevant targets.
	Alex Jones.
	God, he didn't even win anything yet.
	And from what I understood, I didn't hear the hearing, but I was reading as much as I could on it.
	It's almost like a muted small W for the time being.
	This is Alex Jones.
	We've all seen the case in the Texas case when we went down there and I met up with you.
	A couple weeks to attend that trial.
	They hand-selected a jury after he was defaulted into liability, a jury that was tested.
	You know, they were grooming the jury to see who was amenable to issuing whopping illegal punitive damages awards, and they found that jury.
	Jury came down, said $4.5 million for compensatory damages for the two plaintiffs, $45 million for punitive.
	The legal cap in Texas was $750,000.
	So they might have had like a million and a half, maybe two million, something along those lines.
	That judge, psychopath, Guerra, Bella, whatever the hell her name is, authorized, approved the punitive damages of $45 million, which is just, it's wildly unlawful.
	Jones said he's going to appeal it.
	He appealed it.
	Apparently, he found a receptive judge who says, yeah, this doesn't make any sense.
	What was the And that's where it looks like it might be going, that they might overturn the punitive damages, but maintain the award.
	I say that's a very small W because from what I understood, Robert, correct me if I'm wrong, the same judge basically said, we're not going to overturn or we're more cynical or skeptical of overturning the liability verdict finding because of the default.
	And so Alex is going to be stuck with that horse crap.
	Finding of liability for alleged default on discovery obligations coming out of Connecticut, but maybe he'll only owe $5 million or $7 million instead of $50 million.
	Yeah, we'll see.
	Essentially, the plaintiff's lawyers could have got a deal that was much more lucrative than they're likely going to end up with.
	And it's because they were pursuing it for political reasons rather than the best interest of their clients.
	And that's how the lawyers associated with the Alex Jones cases in both Texas and Connecticut run a substantial risk of being sued for legal malpractice because they, I think, had a breach of duty of good faith to their clients because their real goal in the case was their personal political self-interest rather than what was in the best interest of their clients.
	And we're just seeing more proof of it.
	This is the commie court of appeals.
	So in Texas, people don't know, the courts of appeals are organized by jurisdiction.
	So the net effect of it is you have like a bunch of appellate courts.
	Like in most states, you have one court of appeals.
	You don't have like 30, but not in Texas.
	And they vote for them, but basically it's Austin gets to elect, not only it's trial court judges, but it's appellate judges.
	So they're all lefty Democrats.
	Who have been butchering defamation law to get at Jones, butchering default law to get at Jones, butchering due process of law to get at Jones.
	But one of the most egregious errors was this preposterous ability to try to circumvent the cap on punitive damages, especially when he had already retracted the statement so that he shouldn't have been subject to punitive damages anyway under Texas law.
	So this was just one of the more obviously glaring abuses of power that this judge did.
	And even the commie courts in Austin are recognizing they have to enforce at least a little bit of law in the city of Austin, which otherwise doesn't have any.
	And so I think you'll see sooner or later some set of courts is going to invalidate these rulings.
	The only question is, do they do it to help Jones?
	Or do they do it two years from now to say, oh, that was just the Jones case, we're going to reverse everything, and it's never going to apply outside of Jones?
	One of the others is going to happen because the only way in which Jones could have been found guilty, the only way in which Jones could have had to owe money is if they lied to the jury in the public.
	And the way they were able to lie to the jury was by these bogus defaults where he had substantially complied and where the default remedy is never supposed to be the death penalty of depriving you of a right to a trial by jury.
	Because they stripped him of his right to due process of law by not allowing him to file certain motions and means of relief.
	Then they stripped him of his right to a trial to have the jury determine whether he did anything wrong or not.
	Then they stripped him of the ability...
	And then they had the verdict be something that directly violated the plain language and the easy text of Texas law.
	And, you know, God bless Megyn Kelly, but she had people like, you know, Bankston on.
	These are fraudsters and bad faith actors.
	And mainstream media shouldn't have been promoting them.
	And they should be embarrassed they're ever part of the Alex Jones persecution.
	because it set a precarious precedent that endangers all of our liberties.
	Yeah, well, it's...
	All of a sudden, Apple Podcast was stolen and she was like, what's going on?
	He got red-pilled by Barnes and he's sharing all these dangerous conspiracy theories.
	I did get a little nervous.
	First of all, not to get a little nervous.
	I was a little not surprised.
	I was a little surprised at that angle.
	It looked like I actually said something new to her, which made me feel good.
	But then I didn't piece together the problems they did have uploading that afterwards.
	I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
	There's probably nobody over at Apple that...
	I mean, if Diddy had...
	It would implicate the highest-ranking people in Hollywood and the highest-ranking people in the tech industry and the highest-ranking people in the music industry.
	I think it implicates members of the New York government or the New York state and certainly Kamala Harris.
	But also, just to highlight, this changes nothing in Connecticut.
	What's the status?
	Connecticut's where he got the $1.2 billion.
	That's up to the U.S. Supreme Court.
	Because that was another insane ruling by a corrupt set of judges.
	But the Connecticut Supreme Court refuses to address it.
	Connecticut Court of Appeals covered for it.
	So it's now going to be up to the Supreme Court of the United States.
	Are they going to let this lasting stain on American constitutional liberty and the embarrassment to the rule of law in this country continue unabated or do something about it?
	Either way, I think whether it's the bankruptcy process, Texas process, U.S. Supreme Court process, somewhere along the way, the plaintiffs are going to end up with a lot less money because their lawyers cared more about politics than their own clients.
	And yes, everybody has noticed that Winston, they let him in the room.
	This is the blind dog whose breath smells not good, but...
	Robert, speaking of the Supreme Court, might this be a good segue into some of the Supreme Court rulings that came down this week?
	Yeah, we got the one on immigration.
	We also got the Tate brothers in the UK.
	I don't know if they're going to be going up there anytime soon.
	NGOs, Trump tariffs, and a whole bunch more.
	While we're on it, let's talk about the Tate brothers.
	was the next segue.
	So as far as I understand, they haven't been They haven't been indicted yet in the UK, but the UK prosecutors have announced that charges will be forthcoming for rape, for sex trafficking.
	it's been in the works for a long time uh romania There's one question.
	Is the announcement that they will extradite them after their Romanian prosecution that creates a perception that they're going to get convicted in Romania?
	Oh, yeah, that's true.
	I think what Romania means is the priority of prosecution.
	Sometimes they also require imprisonment.
	The whole prison term be served before they'll extradite someone for the trial.
	Sometimes they'll extradite him for the trial, bring him back to serve their prison sentence there first and then another place later.
	So it all varies.
	Because like you look at what happened in the George Floyd case, Derek Chauvin.
	Chauvin was prosecuted first in the state case, then cut a plea in the federal case, but ended up doing all his time in the federal facility rather than so he could delay doing any time in the state facility.
	So it can vary.
	So we don't know what, to my knowledge, the substantive merits of the allegations are.
	I'll say apparently all the conduct relates to almost a decade ago, number one.
	And number two, facts that were known a decade ago about the brothers.
	And three, that the timing directly corresponds to the Tate brothers getting political, weaponizing their audience, which was mostly brought in for business opportunities and things like that.
	And turning them against the EU and turning them against the Biden administration.
	And what I've told people is like, how do you not have skepticism about a case that the timing of which screams selective prosecution?
	And then, hold on, so you're going to tell me the most dangerous human traffickers in the world.
	It's not Jeffrey Epstein.
	It's not Ghislaine Maxwell.
	It's not P. Diddy.
	Who only trafficked people to themselves, according to Maureen Comey of our federal government, who controlled all three prosecutions miraculously and magically.
	But is the Tate brothers for running like OnlyFans before OnlyFans a webcam business?
	So I'm just skeptical about the timing of the case.
	Now maybe some facts and witnesses will step forward.
	That would change my opinion of the case.
	But people are like, hey, Martin, are you still skeptical?
	Yeah, you're darn right I'm still skeptical.
	The timing of it makes no sense to me unless it's politically motivated.
	And that makes me wonder whether the factual veracity of the allegations are true.
	And I have seen tons of women who were part of that business with Tate come out publicly and say that none of this ever happened, that they were treated well and so on.
	And that was one of the best.
	If you know anybody in that industry, it's like the Tate brothers are your top target.
	Do you know who runs the webcam industry around the world?
	I mean, that is a nasty business that involves some of the nastiest people on the planet, of which I guarantee you the Tate Brothers are nowhere comparable to what those others are, and none of them are being prosecuted.
	Does anyone really believe the Tate Brothers are being focused upon because somebody in the British government is moholy horrified at their webcam business?
	Or do you think it's because they don't like their politics and they want to send a message to shut up about your politics or we may put you in prison?
	Well, again, like you say, they're operating in a disgusting industry, which I like to say also, you know, keep your schmeckle in your pants.
	Don't go out after midnight.
	Don't record yourself having sex and don't operate in a business that is recorded.
	Webcam business, bad idea.
	A lot of that business is going to get you into trouble.
	You're going to deal with, you know, troublemakers and agitators and all kinds of other kinds of issues.
	And, you know, I have my own personal moral beliefs that disfavor those businesses.
	But independent of that, just practical advice, nine times out of ten, you'll get into trouble in that industry.
	Well, and I'm not going to relitigate the – You ask for trouble, eventually you're going to find it.
	But you're dealing now with the UK, which has gone after prominently.
	And these were known.
	You can go back and find the articles, the references, the videos.
	You can find everything.
	It's like, so you're going to tell me as soon as they get really political and successful politically.
	People should appreciate this.
	Viva Barnes, you haven't seen the evidence.
	He put the videos up there.
	There's a video of him slapping a girl, strangling.
	There is.
	The defense is going to be we were doing this in front of a camera because that's whatever the pervert fetishes want on that camera.
	The charges against Tate, or at least the time frame, is 2012 to 2015.
	And now you look at what the UK is doing to Russell Brand going back nearly 20 years.
	Julian Assange!
	Julian Assange!
	Remember, there was a bogus rape case they brought against Julian Assange.
	Well, this is the problem when they bring bogus rape cases against people like Julian Assange.
	It may cause people to question when they bring bona fide rape cases.
	I'm just skeptical of the Tape Brothers, one, because of how many women have vouched for them that were in that same business.
	Two, because of the timing and sequence of this being clearly politically motivated.
	And third, the Tate brothers don't give off that vibe.
	I've had to deal with this in a wide range of contexts.
	I've represented tons of victims.
	They give off the vibe of, you know, uber macho kind of guys that, you know, the fidelity might not be their strong point.
	But you don't get this.
	It's like Trump.
	The reason why I didn't believe the allegations against Trump.
	Charmers don't go out and sexually assault people.
	It just doesn't happen.
	I mean, it's extraordinary and exceedingly rare.
	It's power freaks that commit sexual assault.
	People who feel weak and impotent and incapable, who are obsessed with control.
	Nothing about them communicates that.
	So it's like they just don't fit the psychological forensic profile of someone who would engage in that kind of conduct.
	So the timing of it, the other witnesses, their course of conduct, the obvious politically motivated nature of the prosecutions.
	Combined with who they come across as being psychologically, forensically, make me very skeptical of the allegations.
	It doesn't mean the allegations can't be true.
	It just means we should approach them with a great degree of skepticism because we have lots of reasons to be skeptical.
	We shall see because I know there's a lot of people who are going to be dancing in front of the cell of the tape brothers.
	Who obsessively hate on the tape brothers.
	How do these people hate?
	Like when I was on with the Duran, there's somebody who still hates on Nick Riccato.
	And it was coming in and haranguing the, you know, but they get stuck with a lot of the Jew haters that flood their chats.
	But you get the, and Israel haters.
	But it was somebody who still, who follows me around to this day because they still hate Nick Ricada so much, they want to attack me on Ricada and pretend that there's been no factual developments in the last year of the case.
	Okay, he's doing the Karen Reed trial because most of the things that people believed about him were false.
	All he had was, he had a personal habit with some drugs.
	Okay.
	To me, I think it's a shame that we criminalize a lot of that stuff.
	But putting that aside, that was it.
	All the allegations involving his kids dismissed because they were false.
	And yet these people run around still doing it.
	So you're going to get the same obsession with it.
	And the Tate Brothers somehow triggers the craziest obsession.
	People just go nuts over it.
	It's like, I'm not even a huge fan of the brothers.
	I mean, I know them.
	I've never represented them.
	There are people that have made up those allegations.
	In fact, they make a big deal.
	Look it.
	Here's Barnes in a photo of the Trump Hotel 2018.
	Oh, there's Mike Cernovich.
	Oh, look.
	There's Paul Watson.
	Oh, there's Will.
	Oh, look.
	There's the Tate Brothers.
	There's a secret conspiracy.
	These guys do whole videos thinking there's a huge conspiracy over me being at CPAC hanging out with Cernovich at the Trump Hotel.
	It's like, you lunatics.
	I was glad they entered into politics, but what's the message?
	The message is if you've got a successful business model, stay out of politics because they'll put your whole life under massive, macroscopic, microscopic review, and you might go to prison for life.
	That's what the Tate Brothers case is really all about.
	You know, and if they can't get you on the sex stuff, they'll get you on the tax stuff.
	Like, I mean, well, they got McAfee on maybe both or just at least the big one.
	But it's like if you lead a clean life and you don't go around, you know, videotaping yourself doing sexy time, they'll get you on tax because there's nobody on earth that can possibly have a total...
	John McAfee, you kill his dogs?
	He comes and he kills you.
	You know, I mean, that's a guy committed to his animals.
	He's the original John Wick, Robert.
	Yes, yes, exactly right.
	The original John Wick, John McAfee.
	Wild story.
	For those who don't know, his neighbor, I think it was in South America, allegedly killed his dog.
	Yeah, in Belize.
	And he allegedly killed his neighbor.
	I think killed all of them.
	Poisoned a bunch of them.
	And there's probably good reason.
	He's dead now, so McAfee.
	There's good reason to believe he hired some people to whack the guy.
	But when I heard the story, I was like, you know, there's going to be some dog lovers are going to be like, well...
	Steve Bannon's running around saying to everybody, hey, you don't like right-wing populism.
	What happens when Luigi-style populism shows up at your door?
	Maybe you corporate execs and Jamie Diamonds better be rethinking your scripts and narratives.
	But I think there were some dog lovers that were kind of like, hmm, I'm kind of okay with that.
	I think you'd probably get, what, one out of third, dog lovers?
	If somebody deliberately poisoned your dog that you really love, Is it justifiable to go and have him whacked?
	A moral question, not a legal question.
	Legally, no.
	just FYI.
	From a moral perspective, I would say yes because a human that's willing to kill an innocent dog Yeah, exactly.
	There's sociopathic evil.
	So you better not whack Viva's dogs or you're going to not wake up tomorrow morning.
	One of them, you know, if she were to have an accident, nobody would – You know, I'm joking people, the paralyzed one.
	By the way, she got into the garbage and my wife said, Robert, SCOTUS.
	Let's do some of the good news of SCOTUS.
	a little good news in Alex Jones and a little good news coming out of SCOTUS.
	Trump can temporarily implement the the, was the tariffs last week?
	Tariffs were last week as were, as were Yeah, they were this week.
	Yeah, everything's been going bam, bam, bam.
	And then the Supreme Court finally said that the parole that Biden put in to They're like, parole?
	What is that?
	So in the immigration context, if you believe a category of immigrants are reliable enough and trustworthy enough to show up for their immigration hearing, you can parole them.
	You can say, you're released now into the country.
	You're kind of here legally, but not really.
	It's just that we're not going to detain you pending your hearing for your right to be here in general.
	So Biden was doing this en masse, paroling millions of immigrants across the country who had no legal status to be here for the most part, including over a half a million from a range of Central American and other countries.
	And the federal court told Trump that he's not allowed to change Biden's rules.
	They have to be permanently released into the country.
	And luckily, the Supreme Court at least recognized the excesses of that.
	You got to flesh something out because what's wild is, I forget where I read this now, that these were illegal migrants.
	And the reason why they were flown in was because they wanted to discourage them from crossing illegally through the border.
	So they illegally, they basically flew them in so they wouldn't break the law by crossing the border illegally, which I don't understand how that makes it legal.
	But after they've done that- Okay, so after they've done that and flown in, and I'm saying a bunch of Haitians into Springfield not to pick on one ethnicity race or country of origin.
	Let's remember, speaking of cats and dogs, you want to keep them safe from the Haitians.
	That's not right.
	I was going from the language perspective, Robert, where they're flying in illegal aliens, migrants who don't speak the language into, you can't get more central in America, like heartland America, Springfield, Ohio.
	They don't speak English.
	They require translators for their human services out in Springfield.
	And then we're like, why the hell are they doing this?
	And then they finally admit Adam Kinzinger, that human slave.
	Yeah, yeah.
	If you were talking about disturbing videos, that guy just, you know, he just seems like that.
	Something tells me if they were threatening Dan with a video of Kinzinger, he would say release the video.
	Exactly.
	So they're flying in what would otherwise be illegal immigrants who would cross the border illegally into heartland of America.
	They don't speak the language.
	They're being exploited for cheap labor by big corporations when they're not being given licenses and having car accidents that are killing children.
	But then to make it all really just to seal the bow on the ratifying the illegality, he then issues blanket TPS, temporary protection status, to 500,000 plus Venezuelans, Haitians, Cubans.
	The question is this.
	It was temporary, by definition.
	It was by executive decree.
	It didn't follow the right protocols and procedures anyway, so a challenge could have been vacated.
	And Trump, of course, should have the practice of the president to reverse something that was a lawless order in the first place for people that are not legally here in the first place.
	But more interesting than the ruling, so they say seven to two, he can, in the interim, while they adjudicate on the merits, he can revoke their status of TPS.
	They have other means of protecting themselves if they are bona fide asylum seekers and they can avail themselves of all that.
	Katamji Brown Jackson, these are the two biggest idiots.
	They come and say, this is terrible.
	They're now in an unthinkable position where they either have to self-deport or risk staying here illegally and being deported.
	What's the steel man for what were they thinking when they said temporary protected status?
	It means it's temporary.
	They knew that from the beginning.
	The deadline just came a little earlier because for whatever reason, like what's the, I don't even understand the legality of the argument.
	Well, now they have a terrible situation where they have to leave or they have to be taken out because they are no longer here with the blanket illegal TPS that was given to them by the corrupt previous regime.
	Well, it's really striking because you're the same two justices that didn't care to intervene at all when January 6th people were being held in solitary confinement for years.
	So I have no respect for either one of them in terms of legal integrity and independence.
	And what it shows is they're so biased in favor of illegals that they care far more about illegals than they do Americans.
	To them, the illegals are here to provide them votes in the future, their political allies, but also to provide cheap labor and to facilitate certain criminal activities that they welcome and want.
	And you're just seeing an aristocratic, let-them-eat-cake environment that only cares about the prosecution of their allies.
	They don't care about the prosecution of their adversaries.
	And so that's where you're seeing contradictory rulings from some of the same justices.
	It was interesting to me that Kagan is the one I'm kind of monitoring.
	How much is she willing to tolerate contradicting her own rulings from the past, coming from the more neoliberal tradition and the woke tradition that Sotomayor and Jackson come from?
	And here she didn't join them in the dissent.
	So I was like, all right, maybe there's a little bit of hope that she won't be a complete hypocrite and fraud in the big, big cases.
	That are going to be coming down this week and next week.
	So the big case that we are all looking out for is the nationwide injunctions.
	Yeah, that'll be the most impactful, but there's a dozen big cases.
	Trans-related cases, gender care cases, states' rights cases, bureaucratic control cases, the rights of Doge to do what they want.
	Elon Musk may be taking a step back from it, but Doge is still rolling.
	So it's power to do things, how it will work, all of that.
	Big, big cases with big, big consequences.
	And we'll decide, we'll see, Trump's need to go full Thomas Jefferson, full Andrew Jackson, full Abraham Lincoln, full Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and challenging and confronting the Supreme Court will depend on what they do in the next two weeks.
	The tariff one, it was D.C. Appellate Review that actually overturned the lower court, the commercial division.
	It's a specially created court.
	So you have a court on just tariffs, and that court, any appeal from that court goes to the federal circuit, which is its own circuit.
	We got so many ridiculous circuits, whatever, 14, 15, 16. It just keeps getting more and more and more and more.
	But that was the court.
	And the reason they reversed Suddenly Trump's here and magically the tariff rules suddenly change as to his power.
	Robert, you know, you with your rant in our locals community, this photo, this is like what it feels like when you finally see the light of the red pill.
	It's like, oh my God, people are truly, truly evil out there.
	Thank you, guys.
	Okay, so that's good.
	So the tariff one, also, in interim, Trump can impose tariffs on foreign nations as he deems fit, pending the adjudication on the merits.
	It's wild.
	Yeah, there's a lot of confusion I'm seeing out there.
	Even though we've gone over it before, it's probably useful to go over some of the outer contours of what tariff authority is and isn't in the Constitution and how it all works.
	Please do that.
	And I was going to go grok up what the precedent was.
	It was a 1932 decision.
	What's the precedent in tariffs, the president's right to tariff that everybody cites?
	There's several big ones.
	Probably the three biggest are Marshall Fields from the 1890s, J.W. Hampton.
	Which involved the tariff laws from the 1920s, that might have been in the 30s when the decision was actually made, and the Algonquin case in the 1960s.
	So the Constitution provides that impost, duties, and excises, as well as taxes, can be laid by Congress.
	So it comes within the legislative power.
	Tariffs are generally considered an impost.
	So in that capacity, the Constitution delegates that power to Congress.
	However, Congress has in turn delegated that particular power in the tariff context to the president because of its unique interaction with the president's otherwise exclusive responsibilities on foreign policy.
	And so for that reason, the only question that usually arises is, does a particular congressional statute authorize the tariff?
	And then otherwise, did Congress have the authority to delegate that particular right to raise impost to the president?
	And every single delegation decision dating back to 1890, the courts have held that that is absolutely Congress's entitlement to shift to that power to the president because he's not writing the tariff policy.
	He's simply enforcing it and applying it as Congress has framed it for him.
	So Congress has the Trade Expansion Act, the Trade Act, the Tariff Act, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
	Those are the four most commonly used.
	You'll see certain references to subsections of those statutes.
	Section 232, Section 122, Section 301, Section 201, Section 338.
	All of these are different sections of either the Trade Act, Trade Expansion Act, or Tariff Act, where Congress gave broad authority to the President.
	If there's an imbalance of trade, then you can use tariffs.
	If there's a national security interest, then you can use tariffs.
	If there's an economic emergency, then you can use tariffs.
	If there's simply an imbalance of trade from unfair competition, you can use tariffs.
	There's all these excuses he has that Congress has explicitly given.
	In the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, Congress said that he has broad authority to do things in the trade arena where necessary if there's an economic emergency.
	Trump's view was we're in an economic emergency because we have insecure supply chains and we're running a national trade deficit that is unsustainable over time if we want to preserve both our security and our prosperity.
	No one had used that particular statute before for tariffs.
	That was the main one the court on trade was evaluating.
	And there are some people that think a particular appointee was a Trump appointee.
	They were not.
	The way the court works, there's a certain balance between parties, but that really wasn't a Trump pick, is the short answer on it.
	But it led to Trump remembering how bad the Federalist Society had been and finally seeing the culmination of the criticisms that we had made and others had made of them because tariffs is something close to his heart.
	And so what the courts held, for example, in 1890, Marshall Field's case, was that Congress, in quote, broadly delegate to the president executing the law of tariffs because he's executing, not writing.
	Later, same with the J.W. Hampton case, later with the Algonquin case in national security.
	I'll give you just one of the quotes.
	In international trade controversies, this is a highly discretionary field involving the president and foreign affairs.
	Every court and its predecessors, quote, have reiterated the very, very limited role of reviewing courts.
	There's supposed to be deference to the president.
	It's this deference they're refusing to grant him.
	Because they hate him, the individual, and they hate populism as a movement.
	So they have ruled for over a century.
	Every president has had their tariffs upheld consistently and continuously, no matter the scale of the tariffs, no matter the scope of the tariffs, no matter the statutory basis of the tariffs.
	This court's action is rogue and wayward and completely contrary to our precedent, the plain language of the law, and the Constitution's giving legislative grace in this precise field.
	in these overlapping areas of imposed and foreign affairs to the president, as Congress has chosen to do so in multiple cases, in multiple contexts, all affirmed.
	So there's unfair...
	As soon as the order was issued, first of all, a bunch of the tariffs were issued under other laws anyway.
	So the court's order was incorrectly portrayed by the media as, oh, like Calci, the famous betting exchange, completely got wrong.
	that they said, oh, Trump's tariffs are now invalidated and revoked by a final binding order.
	So people who had bet that the tariffs would stay in place were losing their bets because Koushi was mistaken.
	Whoever was making that judgment had made a mistaken judgment for two reasons.
	One, that order wasn't a binding order because it was reversed by the Court of Appeals almost immediately.
	But secondly, the court's order only applied to some of the Not all of the tariffs.
	It only applied to those tariffs imposed under one statutory subsection.
	It didn't apply to all the other tariffs.
	It applied from all the other statutory subsections.
	So Calci got that wrong.
	I hope they fix it and correct it.
	They've normally been really, really good.
	Much better than Polymarket at these things.
	But when there's national security at issue, when unfair trade is at issue, when there's an injury to domestic injury, then he already has the power.
	He can institute it that way.
	So he doesn't have to go through the Emergency Powers Act anyway.
	He just wanted as broad authority and as broad negotiating leverage as he could get.
	And so he went with the emergency law.
	Given everything that happened to us in COVID during the emergency law, the idea that you couldn't impose a tariff on China from the emergency law, but you could take away my right to go to church, go to school, see my family, leave my home, related to emergency law, is quite some judicial abdication of constitutional obligation and hypocrisy in their actions.
	But the Trump tariffs will stay in place in one way, shape, or form, and he will likely win, more likely than not.
	And because he's got so many alternatives, even if they were to say this alternative he doesn't have, there'll be other alternatives.
	Trump's tariffs are here to stay, whether people like it or not.
	Excellent.
	What do we segue into from this one?
	The next big one is some of the people that don't like those tariffs, which include all the corrupt non-governmental organizations, NGOs, which, credit to Mike Benz, has been putting on blast with Tucker Carlson this past week and before.
	Some of us have been talking about this issue for a long time, but it's nice to see people come around to it.
	But there are multiple ways to challenge these NGOs using the Bob Jones precedent, amongst others, that could put people like Soros and Gates and their allies behind bars once and for all.
	And so that was part of the Barnes brief, and I think the number one voted topic was more information about how the NGOs are operating illegally in the United States.
	Precursor question to that.
	Doge has come.
	Doge has gone.
	Elon had his whatever the window was for being a special government employee.
	Some people say that despite what Doge did, all they've done is identified where the waste is going, but they haven't actually cut the waste.
	Well, they don't have that power.
	I mean, now, where they did, they recommended, but all Doge could do is audit and recommend.
	It didn't have the power to eliminate contracts themselves, mostly.
	Okay, so then the question is this.
	Other than having identified exposure, now we all know where this USAID money is going.
	What is the Trump administration doing to actually now cut the events?
	You talk about disappointing heroes.
	So as a kid, I always loved U2.
	It was one of my favorite fans.
	How has Bono turned out to be a Bill Gates-loving, complete moron?
	I mean, utter idiot.
	A total idiot.
	Idiot, ill-informed, but it's what happens, like, insulated from the world.
	It happened to him.
	Rage Against the Machine.
	The Green Day.
	To some extent, it happened to a lesser degree to Mark DeLong from...
	Bruce would be the real boss!
	Now he's a fake boss!
	I mean, he should change his song to meet the new boss, same as the old boss, in honor of that other great band.
	I haven't seen all of it.
	They're just idiots.
	They live in an insulated silo of their own good fortune.
	And there's nothing wrong with wealth and everything, but when you lose touch with reality, That's what Bono said!
	Please!
	I mean, if I was Rogan, I would have just reached across and smacked him in the face!
	Oh my goodness!
	Rogan is a diplomat, and even when he had the Egyptian guy on that, you could tell they didn't like each other.
	He's still polite and diplomatic.
	But he's an idiot.
	He's an idiot.
	But the issue, Robert, like, okay, fine.
	So they've identified all of this right now.
	The argument is that none of it's getting cut in the big, beautiful bill, and that the current administration is still funding all of this crap.
	Yeah, that's certainly true.
	And my concern, what I've said from day one, is if you're serious about unraveling election corruption, serious about unraveling deep state power, serious at undermining these regime change efforts around the world, you have to start with groups like USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy and all these other fake organizations.
	But ultimately, you've got to get to the NGOs.
	If you want to stop open borders, open borders are, it is essential.
	That they have as a criminal co-conspirator in the mass immigration around the world, NGOs often using government funding to facilitate it.
	Without the NGOs, it doesn't happen.
	Illegal immigration is organized.
	And the leader of the organization, they are not drug cartels.
	The leader of the organization are NGOs, non-governmental organizations, so-called charities.
	So in the United States, they are organized under the Internal Revenue Code.
	So 501c3 literally means subsection 3 of section C of section 501 of title 26 of the Internal Revenue Code.
	Also, state laws have all kinds of restrictions.
	In addition, when they receive government funding, like they do from international agencies, state and federal governments around the world, not just the United States, they have to comply with certain things.
	They have to make affirmative representations in those things in terms of potential key TAM claims, fraud claims, etc.
	So you look at it, what's required just on the U.S. side of the equation.
	One, in order to be funded, they need tax deductions for people who make contributions to them, which means they need to be recognized under 501c3 of the Internal Revenue Code, which means they must have a charitable purpose.
	And that charitable purpose must serve the public interest.
	It must not be for a private purpose.
	It must not be having any private inurement.
	It must not be engaged in political lobbying.
	It must not be engaged in political campaigns.
	And it must serve the original purposes of its charter and all of the agreements in any contract for it receiving federal funds.
	For this, it gets to get funding through tax deductibility of its contributions, and it is tax-exempt on any money it spends.
	This is financially essential.
	To their day-to-day operations.
	So when you look into all of these limits, exclusive public purposes must promote the well-being of mankind.
	There's all kinds of things that have been interpreted as not fitting that.
	Look, go back to our historic case, Bob Jones versus the United States.
	Bob Jones simply did not allow interracial marriages of students on campus.
	That's about it, early in the 1970s.
	The IRS decided, oh, that's not a public purpose.
	Or that violates our public purpose.
	So even though everybody agreed Bob Jones was an educational university involved in public education, it didn't like the education it was providing.
	And it said because it didn't like the education it was providing on ideological terms, they could strip them of their 501c3 status.
	And in so doing, subject them to various state actions that could take their property or their assets, strip any deductibility for charitable purposes for any money given to them.
	Force them to pay taxes like everybody else and no longer be tax exempt.
	Hillsdale College went this route many years ago because they didn't want to be under governmental control under the 501c3 rules.
	So this is incredible power to go after the foundations that, as Mike Benz explains, are essential to this illicit operation of this deep state administrative apparatus.
	This goes back to Rockefeller.
	This goes back to Carnegie.
	This goes back to all of those guys.
	The two biggest culprits today are George Soros and Bill Gates.
	They use these to get fabulously rich.
	Soros is using his foundations to constantly, for private enurement and private purposes, they are constantly using it to undermine public interest.
	They are constantly using it to interfere in elections domestically and around the world.
	They are doing it today to interfere in the Polish elections.
	We'll see if they're successful or not at getting a pro-EU president elected to Poland.
	Looks like it's very close.
	This is illicit activity.
	They lobby all the time.
	It's all they do.
	All Bill Gates does is lobby.
	All George Soros does is lobby.
	It's influenced public policy that then they get privately rich off of.
	So this violates every single precept and principle to known to man about these NGOs.
	They are operating illegally in the United States.
	And if we had, hopefully, somebody at the Justice Department, somebody in the Attorney General's office in various states, wakes up and does something about it.
	But it's not even, set aside, there'll be argument over whether or not they're illegal operations.
	These are NGOs, they're funded by government, by taxpayer dollars.
	Directly or indirectly.
	They're all getting their government money from, I mean, it's like Harvard.
	They're getting the money from the Chinese students and others that come in here.
	But the reason why Trump, finally, it was great to see the Trump administration embracing what we talked about here, which was we shouldn't be funding Chinese communist students to come to the United States to steal our technology and undermine our country.
	I mean, Harvard is known as the favored school of the Chinese Communist Party elites.
	A little bit of a problem.
	Carney, your good buddy up there in Commida, I think one of his kids goes to Harvard.
	But these are institutions that only are around because we give them massive tax breaks.
	Tax breaks in the donations that come into them, tax breaks in their tax-exempting spending.
	And on top of that, we give them massive federal funding.
	This is what Doge was outing.
	So these are organizations that are the critical tools for the corruption of American and global politics to the detriment of everybody's sense of security and prosperity.
	So somebody somewhere has got to do something about it.
	You know, Mike Benz has helped detail and document it.
	That's very helpful in the court of public opinion.
	but it's time that somebody with legal power take action and the legal basis to take that power is already there.
	Who, okay, what would be the plan, the blueprint for how they would go about it, Robert, in a five-step easy way?
	I recommend the Justice Department.
	These are fake NGOs.
	Put them under massive investigation.
	Look at what they spent money on.
	look at what they received money for and put all of their high ranking executives in the Do what they did to Bob Jones, but do it on steroids.
	But hold on.
	That's it.
	We're going to tap into another case where, you know, Paxton can't investigate Media Matters.
	What if they try to investigate these NGOs and they're going to claim this is retaliatory investigations?
	And some of these insane judges and crazy rogue courts continue to interfere in the ability to enforce the law.
	There'll be time to ignore those courts.
	I mean, that day is coming quicker and quicker.
	We don't have a constitutional crisis.
	We have a constitutional confrontation.
	President Jefferson impeached the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court because of his rogue and wayward behaviors.
	President Jackson said, you made your order, now you go enforce it and refuse to enforce it.
	President Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus, and when the Supreme Court said he couldn't, he said, shove off, I'm still suspending it.
	When Franklin Delano Roosevelt was told that he couldn't pass labor law reform, he said, I think you boys need some more judges up there.
	Let me send you nine more.
	This constitutional confrontation is built into our political DNA in America because the courts often get rogue and often go wayward.
	It's thanks to the courts that Native Americans lost property rights in this country.
	It's thanks to the Supreme Court that we got stuck with the Civil War.
	It's thanks to the Supreme Court that we got separate but equal in segregation.
	That was an invention and creation of the courts to impose on our entire country.
	It was thanks to the courts that we got eugenics.
	It was thanks to the courts that we locked up people based on ancestry, race, and other.
	It was thanks to the courts that decided to intervene in a haphazard, reckless way that undermined the ability to racially integrate America because of their ridiculous busing orders in places like Boston, Massachusetts.
	So it was the courts that decided to weigh in and decide that they are our priest for whether we would have gay marriage or what abortion law would be in our local community.
	So they have been failed institutions.
	And it is long overdue that we relegate them to the place that they belong in, which is more writing advisory opinions that we can take into consideration and then resolving individual disputes between individual parties with individual consequences.
	Beyond that, they need to be hemmed in.
	They've been constantly hemmed in by our founding generations.
	And they're putting us in a place, like the Paxton case reveals, like these other Trump cases reflect, where Trump is going to have no choice but to confront them for their wayward and rogue behaviors.
	Because Congress doesn't have the hoots but to do it.
	And the Supreme Court so far has not shown the courage.
	Now, maybe they'll fix everything in the next two weeks.
	But if they don't, a real confrontation is coming.
	Well, I'm going to snip that and clip that, Robert, and turn it into a short that's going to end all shorts.
	I guess it is a good segue, unless you have something more on the NGOs.
	I've got to get Mike Benz back on or back in studio so that we can talk about this again.
	I'll tweet at him and everybody.
	Well, here's a nice little transition.
	A couple of bogus NGOs finally getting outed.
	The American Bar Association and the Federalist Society.
	It was funny watching all the normies be like, wow, Trump is saying the Federalist Society is bad.
	If you've been listening to Viva Barnes, you would have known that five years ago, boys and girls.
	I'm trying to think of a legit NGO.
	It seems that everyone that I've come across has been in the context of immigration, asylum seeking, which are, I say, illegitimate.
	You have the EcoHealth Alliance, which are into...
	I didn't know that the ABA and the Federalist Society were NGOs.
	I don't even know what I thought they were like political organizations, but that, that were deemed neutral American bar association getting slapped down by the Trump administration saying you're no longer getting any, They were literally pre-screening judicial nominees and they could kill someone's ability to even be nominated by a president because the commies at the ABA called them unqualified.
	It was a disgrace and an embarrassment that they ever had any role in any of this.
	And people get confused because what people don't know, there is no bar association that runs our licensures in America.
	Licenses are controlled entirely by the local court system.
	That is the Supreme Court of each state and then the local federal district court.
	They determine who gets licensed and who doesn't.
	The bar has no role in that whatsoever.
	The only role the bar has is that in some states, they give them enforcement power as agents of the Supreme Court, but they do not have independent power.
	So I'll often get somebody to email me and say, what's it like to be a member of the British Accreditation Registry Barn?
	And it'll be like, bro, you're on the wrong path.
	I've still got people trying to convince me that Canada is a corporation that doesn't actually exist and you don't have to pay income taxes.
	I'm like, okay, fine.
	Believe what you want to believe.
	I'm going to pay taxes because I don't really want to go to jail at this point in my life.
	Yeah, I mean, there may be means of effective tax minimization, but that's another story for another day.
	So that's what the ABA was basically pre-screening it to make sure only institutionalists, only corporatists, only wokesters got nominated as often as they could.
	And it was long overdue.
	This should have been done on day one, to be honest, if Bondi knew what she was doing.
	I don't think she does.
	And so this is belated, but at least better late than never.
	What was beautiful to watch, something I've been complaining about for 20 years, is that the Federalist Society, which has plenty of good, honest, decent people, but the people at the top were a bunch of corrupt corporate whores.
	That's who all they were.
	That's all they believed in.
	That's all they supported.
	They didn't care about the Constitution.
	They didn't care about individual liberty.
	They didn't care about the American people.
	They only cared about protecting and promoting their corporate pals.
	And so I've been highly critical of ever using them as a tool or technique to pick judges, to pick attorney generals, to pick nominees.
	And I said throughout Trump's first term, he is going to regret using the Federalist Society to put these people in.
	But credit to President Trump, better late than never.
	He outed him in full blast.
	He's like, I got this advice.
	I took it.
	I was wrong.
	They gave me a bunch of terrible advice.
	He outs Leonard Leo, a corrupt billionaire who's been corrupting aspects of the Federalist Society for years.
	But the Federalist Society has always been a bunch of corporate whores.
	That doesn't mean there's nobody good there.
	There are plenty of good people in the Federalist Society.
	But the people with the most leverage, the people with the most influence within it, were always recommending Amy Coney Barrett's and never enough Scalia's.
	And that is why we got to where we're at.
	Credit to President Trump for putting the Federalist Society, and people get confused.
	The publication of the Federalist has nothing to do with the Federalist Society.
	There are very good conservative populist publications, Sean Davidson, others that are there.
	Julie Kelly writes for him, others write for him.
	This is the Federalist Society, which is founded by some constitutional conservatives that was co-opted and infiltrated by big corporate whores.
	Who diverted its attention to protecting and promoting the most corrupt actors within our deep state and corporate state ever could.
	Thank God President Trump woke up and said, no mas to the Federalist Society.
	And something I've been, you know, depending on your perspective, whining or crying or yelling about for the last 20 years, finally going to get to see some political fruition for it, which is beautiful to witness.
	This is the Leonard Leo.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	He kind of looks like a creep.
	You know what I mean?
	He looks like somebody that looks like a mug photo from the local, you know, child human trafficking arrest shot.
	And I'm just saying he looks that way.
	I'm not saying he's guilty of it.
	Just saying he kind of looks that way.
	What's been his life situation?
	Like, I presume you know a little bit.
	Billionaire.
	Billionaire.
	Okay.
	Billionaire had very strong ideas, some of which were good, a lot of which were bad.
	And he decided to co-opt the Federalist Society to further push a lot of his corporate or ideas in particular.
	There were some good ideas mixed in.
	But there was a lot of corporate whoredom that was counterproductive.
	Corporate whoredom might be worthy of a shirt, Robert.
	So the ABA will no longer be an advisory.
	They'll no longer have early access to private confidential vetting.
	Which means we're going to get some good, much better judges coming down the pipeline.
	You get rid of the Fiddler Society, you get rid of the ABA, and I think Mike Davis is doing a little bit better.
	Mike was a little idealistic on the parrot nomination.
	He wasn't sure I was right about that criticism.
	He's now come around to the other side.
	But Mike's a good guy.
	He's been on our Article 3 project.
	He's been here on Sidebar.
	It means we're going to get a lot better nominees in Trump's second term.
	You remove the Federalist Society.
	You remove the ABA.
	You put in people like Mike Davis.
	And maybe some others that might be having some input.
	And I'm very hopeful that we're going to get some of the best judges we've got in a long time, which we need at this time more than ever.
	Let me read a few here.
	Goldfold says, name the person that single-handedly destroyed Parler.
	I'd go with Apple, not Dan Butgino.
	I don't think he had any hand in Parler getting pulled with that pretextual pulling from the app store.
	Formash says, it's one thing to piss on my strawberries, quit another to kill my dough.
	I was going to say, speaking of fake but real, how did you like reading that climate change lawsuit?
	We'll get there in a second.
	Holy crab apples.
	Bono, dressed up as a Hasidic Jew, got hit by a car bicycling in Central Park.
	No hate because Jews hate Hasidic.
	I didn't know that that happened.
	That's from your baby.
	Barnes, how is the Obama's DACA different from Biden's TPS?
	If I recall correctly, he said Trump wouldn't be able to cancel DACA.
	Well, because you had individual due process rights vested in a certain group of people, according to the Supreme Court.
	I disagreed with that.
	But that's not the case with temporary protective status.
	That's not the same as you now are on a path to citizenship.
	You have these rights.
	No, it was just pending your arrest and removal.
	You don't have to be detained pending the hearing for that.
	That's all that meant.
	I can't read this one.
	Francis Montgomery says, Viva, you should definitely come to the Florida Young Republican Convention in Sarasota.
	Any excuse to get out there, I'll do that.
	All right, now, Robert, how do I feel about the fake climate?
	I'm reading the lawsuit, and I like reading it a little slowly just so I can see where it's going.
	The basis of the lawsuit is an estate suing Exxon and a bunch of oil companies for climate crisis.
	I didn't look at the jurisdiction until afterwards because I'm thinking, okay, there might be something here.
	I don't know how this lawsuit could possibly be legitimate, but I'm waiting and I'm being open-minded.
	A woman, I don't know how she's in her 60s, 70s, dies as a result of the sweltering heat in Portland, Oregon.
	What do they call it?
	There was some phenomenon.
	It was like the hottest summer they'd ever had.
	The woman dies from hyperthermia, which is the exact opposite of hypothermia.
	She got too hot.
	I'm like, okay, she was probably unhealthy.
	So I start reading faster, getting inpatient to the lawsuit.
	Then I scroll through to see what medical conditions the woman had before she died.
	She was obese.
	She was going for the bariatric surgery, voluntarily submitting to get healthy.
	I was like, okay, fine.
	So she was obese and died because it was too hot.
	Then I read that she went to a medical appointment.
	During this sweltering heat, they called it like a heat dome over Seattle or over the Pacific Northwest.
	She goes to an appointment in the dead of the day, like noon.
	And on her way back, she's driving with her windows down.
	I'm like, why would she be driving with her windows down?
	Because her air conditioning in her car wasn't working.
	She gets overheated, pulls over, and eventually passes away.
	whether or not there's any medical malpractice in this because they were applying like rounds of CPR to her and I don't know how you do that.
	An old obese person She didn't sue the car company for the broken air conditioning.
	She didn't sue the fast food industry or whatever the hell she's eating that made her obese.
	She decides to go after the oil fossil fuel machine.
	And in King County, which I'm like, oh, that sounds familiar.
	That's where you have the judge sentence, Ben Sooth.
	Ben Souf?
	Ben Souf.
	Yeah, or Ben Chu if you can add.
	Many, many years behind bars.
	So it's the most idiotic, baseless, stupid lawsuit that gives the litigious society that is America a bad name.
	I'm not against litigious societies.
	It keeps people, you know, tending to their front lawns, making sure there's no loose stones.
	This is the bad side of the overly litigious American society that the estate decides to go after Exxon and hope for a million.
	Hey, they'll be happy with a million dollar settlement.
	Just go away.
	No, this should be tossed and they should be sanctioned.
	But have I misunderstood the...
	Yeah, it just took climate change nonsense to an entirely new level.
	And I was like, at least find somebody that was otherwise healthy.
	You find somebody who's about to die from one of six medical conditions, whose car didn't work correctly, whose air conditioning is malfunctioning on a hot day, and you're going to blame all the coal miners for it?
	I mean, come on.
	I mean, this is how nuts climate change has become.
	They started off with, she was born in 1957, about the same time fossil fuels began to really take hold of mainstream society.
	She was a poet.
	She loved to write.
	It's terrible.
	There were other things going on here.
	That triggered my Darwin Award sense of humor.
	It's so hot, I wish it were not.
	What would the poem or poetry be?
	I won't laugh, but my goodness.
	Drive it with your windows down when it's 102 degrees.
	Hey, if I go hike in Death Valley and die like many do, climate change people, because it's 140 degrees in Death Valley.
	All right.
	Speaking of special rights, big law apparently has special rights.
	We got that.
	We got Fourth Amendment private agent collusion.
	We got Goldman Sachs bribery.
	We got the historic case of Dodge versus Ford.
	And then the bonus topics recommended by the board on the Ukraine drone terror attack today in Russia.
	Fourth Amendment gun surveillance.
	The FBI hiding Brady files in special computer programs.
	And the Palantir government surveillance project that people are just figuring out has existed for quite a while.
	Let's do...
	Oh, and then we got the Abbott, the insane Media Matters DC case.
	Oh, you know what?
	Oh, I should...
	Here's one more.
	Tran, they're going to let men and women spas.
	Speaking of King County being cray-cray, they're going to make men...
	Do that one right after.
	I'm going to read a few from our locals community so I don't fall too far behind there.
	Pager9587 says, Can you tell me why Trump pardoned P.G. Sittenfeld?
	What a mistake.
	He's a dirtbag living in Cincinnati.
	He was my Ivy League educated.
	He was Ivy League educated and knew better.
	And he involved city council people who were not as aware.
	I mean, I think there's been some good pardons.
	There are some other cases that I think warrant higher priority than some of the cases they've paid attention to so far.
	I don't know how the internal process is working because I think some of the more compelling cases have got less attention than the less compelling cases.
	But hopefully that improves as Ed Martin gets involved.
	And now we actually got one that's on point.
	It'll segue perfectly for us.
	Thoughts on Ukraine hitting Russian bombers, asks Susie C. So, uh, I guess we could, let's, let's, let's deal with this one.
	It'd probably be relatively short.
	It, as you, what did they say?
	As you fight corruption, corruption fights back.
	And, you know, as the beast dies, it flails out and strikes at everything it can.
	Whether or not Ukraine thinks it can now turn the tides of the war and actually win this thing or drag Europe into World War III, you pick your, you pick your options here.
	I know which one I'm leaning with.
	I didn't, I don't know the full details.
	I just saw that they striked or they had struck, striked or struck, they struck a number of Purportedly struck a number of bombers within Russian territory.
	I don't know how far it was in and if this is uniquely deeper into Russian territory than previously, but it certainly is exactly what a rabid cornered animal would do when it sees the funds for its support drying up, public opinion drying up, do something outlandish that would expand this to or require whatever Article 5 intervention if Russia decides to strike back.
	What do you know of it, and what do you make of it, to ask an obviously loaded question?
	So I was on last week with the Duran, discussing a lot of the global landscape, including Ukraine, and best estimates as to where things might be progressing.
	They are meeting again in Istanbul this week.
	And on the eve of that meeting, Ukraine launched a mass terror attack on the Russian population and on the Russian military.
	And they snuck in a bunch of drones that apparently were being operated by AI, according to Ukraine, to attack nuclear submarines, various planes and airports, and a range of other locations.
	Now, according to Russian media, there's about eight planes that got damaged.
	It sounds like it's expensive, like a billion dollars worth of damage.
	So it was effective, but didn't have the horror effect it could have.
	I mean, there were people laughing.
	With joy at the possibility of this triggering nuclear conflict.
	That's how insane the people are that are pro-Ukraine in this conflict.
	They're as nuts as Lindsey Graham.
	If people have problems with Glenn Greenwald's videos, imagine what Lindsey Graham's private videos show, everybody.
	So he was over there desperate to inflict more war around the world.
	He's the ultimate war whore.
	And the peace deal has always been obvious.
	The Russian parts of Ukraine go back to Russia because it's clear, after 30 years of experimentation, that Ukraine will not respect Russian language, Russian speakers, Russian populations within its own country.
	Even when somebody gets elected, they overthrow them.
	Even when there's a Minsk Accords, they ignore them.
	Even when they have a chance of peace in 2021 and again in 2022.
	They eviscerate it and refuse to abide by it.
	They have violated literally every single ceasefire that has been imposed.
	That President Trump should get the heck out of there now.
	The longer he hangs out with this Ukrainian conflict, the more he endangers his future.
	Vice President Vance, get out now.
	Because otherwise, your presidential aspirations will be dead in the water.
	You cannot be continually involved with a country that wants nuclear war, which is what Ukraine and the EU are pushing for.
	This is insanity at an entirely new level.
	They're right on the eve of another peace deal, and they're doing everything possible to sabotage it.
	They want to trigger Putin to respond aggressively, more aggressively than he has before.
	So you've got a lot of these fantasy land fictional versions of Russia.
	The reality is Putin is holding Russia back.
	If they attempted a drone assassination of Putin just two weeks ago, if that had worked, Russia would become ten times more hardcore, more nationalistic, more aggressive, more violent.
	They may use nuclear weapons, you morons!
	So we've got idiots like General Kellogg, total disgrace, part of that fake America First policy institute.
	That organization is a complete fraud.
	Don't confuse it with Stephen Miller's America First legal.
	It's not the same.
	Paid by a bunch of corporate whore, big oil money people.
	These are the people that bought positions into power.
	They bought it through their donations and connections.
	That's how Brooke Rollins became Secretary of Agriculture.
	She was bragging this week about how she's going to unleash more regulators on small farmers.
	Woohoo!
	What a failure she has been.
	But a failure, Pam Blondie, Pam Barbie has been, also America First Policy Institute.
	What a failure, Kash Patel has been, also America First Policy Institute.
	You know, even people that were otherwise good get near the America First Policy Institute, and it's the reverse Midas touch.
	They turn from gold to shit.
	And that's exactly what has happened here.
	Kellogg is a moron.
	They put out a 22-point plan.
	It has no realistic chance at all.
	It says, Russia, you better capitulate now.
	Kellogg is the kind of guy who got us World War I. He makes Milley look like he's intelligent by comparison.
	That's how stupid this guy is.
	He's a disgrace to the Trump administration.
	He's making Trump look like a joke.
	He's making J.D. Vance look like he has no political future at all.
	So if anybody has an IQ, now is the time to rally to the cry of what Trump was elected to do, which is get us out of stupid wars.
	Get us out now, not tomorrow, not the next day, before we have a nuclear conflict with the insane lunatics in Ukraine and the insane nuts in the EU.
	So hopefully that will happen.
	I don't have any confidence Ukraine will do it on its own.
	I have no confidence that Kellogg will do it on its own.
	So President Trump may have no alternative but just to pull out, get out, get away from it now.
	No more money, no more arms, no more support, no more intel, no more military control.
	These people are nuts.
	Nuts.
	They're willing to engage in any kind of terror campaign to provoke another nuclear world war because that's how insane they are.
	And just, I want to read Zelensky's tweets here because they're not irrelevant.
	Today, a brilliant operation was carried out on enemy territory targeting only military objectives.
	Which is false, by the way.
	I'm immediately skeptical when they have to say that.
	They were blowing up innocent truck drivers who had no idea what they were driving because they sabotaged them in.
	Specifically, the equipment used to strike Ukraine.
	Russia suffered significant losses entirely justified and deserved.
	Here, today a brilliant operation was carried out.
	The preparation took over a year and a half.
	What's most interesting is that the, quote, office of our operation on Russian territory was located directly next to the FSB headquarters in one of the regions.
	In total, 117 drones were used in the operation with a corresponding number of drone operators involved.
	34% of the strategic cruise missiles.
	So they're using drones.
	Presumably they're using American-supplied weapons to strike deep into Russia now.
	They want to bring in Taurus missiles, which are nuclear-armed potential missiles, to launch deep inside the interior of Moscow.
	And let's, for those people in Russia, remember, Russia has more nuclear weapons than any country in the world.
	Why do you want to provoke them or put them in a corner?
	Are you people insane?
	I get Lindsey Graham is.
	That, you know, he was born to be a bottom guy to the deep state.
	That's who that man is.
	But why in the world are we anywhere near this?
	I mean, I get Kellogg lied to Trump, gave him this bogus story about Russia weakness and was all garbage.
	At this point, Trump's got to know it's garbage.
	Just get out.
	You can't get a deal done.
	You're not going to get a deal done when you don't put pressure on Zelensky, when you let the EU dog walk you all week in the last six months.
	You got to get out.
	Get out, get out, get out.
	Get out now before it's too late.
	Don't make the mistake of Richard Nixon, who had a peace deal on the table in 1968 that he sabotaged, but he could have put it right back in in 1969, and instead he extended the war four more years to his complete detriment and the detriment of the American people.
	It achieved nothing.
	We got a peace deal that was worse than the one that was on the table in 1968.
	Get out.
	Ukraine cannot win this conflict.
	It's ordinary people are running away from every time they try to draft him and drag him into that conflict.
	They've been wanted out for a while.
	Zelensky's not elected to power.
	He's a dictator, a 10-cup dictator.
	The kind of Brit Humes, the fake journalists, the fake conservatives, the man who put Khan in conservative, Brit Hume, those kind of people believe in.
	But anybody that has any sense or a political IQ over 50 knows we should not be getting us closer and closer and closer to nuclear conflict.
	Trump has managed to solve the India-Pakistan problem for the time being or help or facilitate it.
	Is on pace and in progress to get a peace deal with Iran, to have nuclear nonproliferation with Iran.
	There's no reason for us to get dragged into a potential nuclear conflict with Russia over the Green Goblin, that little dwarf, midget, useless individual, Zelensky, that coked-up lunatic, that unelected to power, a man who has suspended more human rights than any leader in the entire world in the last five years.
	No more.
	No moss.
	Get out.
	Get out now.
	And I'll just refresh everyone's memory here.
	This is Richard Woodruff.
	I don't know who this person is.
	A British Cossack volunteering in Ukraine.
	All right.
	He says, we've just hit a fucking nuclear-armed submarine.
	With all these smiling cries.
	I mean, can you imagine this?
	These people are insane.
	They are insane.
	These are like the people that killed President Kennedy.
	They wanted to wage nuclear war around the world.
	Bombs away LeMay.
	People should not underestimate how dangerous a time period this is.
	And if Putin has ever had a power in Russia, we're going to be in a much, much, much, much, much more dangerous time period.
	Because unless you listen to fantasy news, and if you have a real understanding of what's going on geopolitically in the world, you understand how dangerous this is.
	And I hope the president gets us out fast.
	I know Vice President Vance wants us out.
	I know Secretary of Defense Hegseth wants us out.
	I know a lot of people in the administration, Tulsi Gabbard, Robert Kennedy, want us out.
	They understand this conflict.
	Trump, the longer he gets dragged into this by losers like Lindsey Graham, the greater danger it is to his administration that he has no success and the greater risk the entire world is to nuclear war.
	If you think Putin and Russia is just going to, The very nationalistic, militaristic side of Russia and the Russian people and the Russian population.
	And at some point, they're going to want a lot more.
	And he won't be in a position to have a restraint.
	And people don't understand how restrained they have been.
	Russia has far more military power than Ukraine.
	Again, it has more nuclear weapons than any country in the world.
	They can use them.
	Do you want that to happen?
	If not, quit playing Lindsey Graham dress up, because that's all that man loves to do is play dress up, and get us out of that war.
	Get us out now.
	It's what Trump ran on.
	Time to deliver.
	Everyone, feel free to snip, clip, share that, and tag Trump and the entourage to let him know.
	Let me read a few more here from our locals community.
	Buffalo Betsy says, The shit with Glenn Greenwald hurts my feelings.
	I've never been so upset about something happening to someone I don't actually know in real life.
	I'm praying for him.
	Dale Koperenis says, I'm near Appleton fishing.
	Would the court mind me being in shorts and a t-shirt?
	If so, what time would be best?
	It will be when the trial starts, is when you have a right to public access, not the jury selection part.
	That is presumed to likely be Tuesday.
	Generally speaking, I don't know what the dress code is.
	Usually it's pretty casual.
	I don't know about shorts.
	I would say in the audience, they will not care.
	They probably won't, yeah.
	Pam Walker says, Awful.
	This is about the Molotov cocktail terror attack in Colorado.
	Alehouse20 says, Do protected hidden FBI files that turned up nothing during Mueller-era inquiries on Sentinel allow extension of statute of limitations?
	I've heard these people say that there's no way they can go after everybody related to Russiagate.
	This was an ongoing conspiracy to engage in obstruction of justice.
	There have been plenty of things that have happened within the statute of limitations, and that allows you to indict all of them.
	P. Diddy right now is facing charges over things that happened 18 years ago.
	So surely we can do something with the Russiagate people if Bondi Patel and Bongino have the courage and know-how to do so.
	Common Sense 10, we got to that one earlier, and we got, my adult son was a shaken baby before we adopted him.
	As a result, he completely disabled and requires 24 hours a day.
	Hence, he gets SSI, especially since he was in a foster system.
	No issues until this month, now demanding he can't have a balance above Can SSI restrict his bank balance?
	I don't think so, and I think there's going to be some mistaken applications of some of these fraud limitations that people have a legitimate concern over.
	They need to be very careful and make sure that doesn't happen.
	That legitimate people don't have their benefits cut for the wrong reason.
	And that was hide one-erd.
	Hide one-erd.
	And we'll stop after this, get back to some quick decisions here.
	How do we get Republicans to stop treating medical malpractice victims like lazy bums?
	I watched it firsthand.
	Crash injury, three weeks in a coma, stroke, skin grass filled.
	I was just a construction worker.
	They nearly let my arm rot off.
	I couldn't get remedy because I was too messed up.
	One year passed.
	Post-injury law shields doctors.
	Patients suffer in silence.
	That's Andrew Pisco.
	Well, hopefully this case here in Appleton will help change the equation on that.
	Go forward.
	You know, the public precedent it may set for people.
	All right, let's get to some more stuff, and then we're going to...
	Did you know that big loss The Soros and Gates have a right to their NGOs with taxpayer funds without scrutiny.
	But apparently big law firms have a right to classified information, that the President of the United States, who's supposed to have exclusive and complete control over what is and is not classified, is, according to the federal courts, not allowed to now determine what is and isn't classified.
	A federal judge in D.C. will do so, and is dictating he provide for the deep state's NGOs, their personnel, their money, all the rest, but also demanding their lawyers get special access to our government secrets, according to these lunatic, insane, Seditious judges in the District of Corruption.
	Which law firm was it?
	I think it was WilmerHale.
	It was one of the biggest corrupt corporate law firms in the country and a classic deep state firm.
	This one, I forget which law firm it was and I won't mention it, but there was one that, you know, they were very upset that they were told that they can no longer have access to classified information, but they were actively involved in prior investigations and persecutions.
	surveillance agenda around the world, undermining our constitutional rights and liberties.
	Wilmer Hale has been caught doing this repeatedly during the Trump era.
	And that's why Trump was like, no more, no mas.
	We're not going to give you special access anymore.
	And a federal court said, you're not entitled to that.
	The D.C. courts run the White House, not the President of the United States.
	What's going to be the remedy to this?
	I mean, it seems...
	Stanley, think about deactivate the cards.
	Get an injunction to order them to have access to...
	I mean, that's what they've done in some cases.
	They've ordered injunctions that money be spent, power be given, personnel be not removed, computer access be granted.
	I mean, it's just insanity.
	Utter insanity.
	The Supreme Court either fixes this fast or Trump will have no choice but to fix it for them.
	All right.
	Yes.
	Okay, so the Media Matters, there's two parallel cases going on here.
	XX is suing Media Matters, and I'm fairly certain Rumble is as well, but I don't know if Rumble is going to trial.
	One of them is going to trial, and I'm fairly certain it's the X versus Media Matters for tortious interference and the unlawful attempt to get companies to boycott.
	They're going to trial in a month or two, sooner than later.
	I don't know exactly when.
	Paxton, Attorney General Ken Paxton out of Texas wanted to investigate into Media Matters for potential criminal collusion, a conspiracy to defraud, whatever it was that he wanted to look into because Media Matters actively And constantly liable people in the process.
	Yeah.
	And so Paxton issued, I forget what it is.
	It's sort of a subpoena, but there's a special.
	It's an investigative request for information.
	And they got an injunction that basically declares that...
	I'll steel man it just to say that, according to the ruling, I don't know what evidence was adjuiced.
	They said Ken Paxton didn't even make the argument for what he was looking for or why he needed to issue these CIDs.
	I forget what they stand for, but the subpoena is to investigate.
	And so he didn't make any plausible arguments.
	I take them at their word as far as I can throw them.
	It was utter insanity.
	So to get the people understand, the elected attorney general of Texas Media Matters created a fake story which claimed that X was profiting by pushing racist advertising and racist promotion next to advertising.
	It was a completely fake story.
	It was false.
	Elon Musk called it out for being false.
	X brought suit.
	Because Media Matters was repeatedly involved in this, Media Matters also had made repeatedly false statements about Alex Jones, another Texan resident, and others in Texas.
	So the Attorney General says, I think they're up to something.
	I think they're up to something illegal, violating Texas law, consumer protection laws, amongst others.
	But I'm going to do what's basically an investigative request.
	It's a letter.
	It's not even self-enforcing until he goes to court and requests it.
	Media Matters then goes to a federal court in the District of Corruption.
	In D.C. It has nothing to do with the state of Texas.
	It has no legal authority over the people in Texas.
	And says federal court in D.C. don't allow Texas to even investigate our corruption.
	And the federal courts in D.C. ran to their protection.
	And the appellate courts of D.C. ran to their protection.
	And they said that Texas elected officials cannot even investigate.
	Criminality in their own state without federal judges in D.C. pre-approving it.
	You will not find another precedent like this anywhere, and the D.C. Court of Appeals could not cite one single analogous case ever allowing this.
	Not only that, they found venue in D.C. It's like, how is their venue in D.C.?
	They're like, well, Media Matters is here.
	So what?
	The issue involves their Texas conduct.
	He's not investigating their D.C. conduct.
	He's investigating their Texas conduct.
	And they concluded that it had no connection to Texas because it didn't involve any Texas plaintiffs or defendant, whatever you want to call it.
	Even though it did.
	Even though X is based in Texas.
	And the conduct is all concerns.
	Public statements they made in Texas to Texas about a Texas company.
	That's how Paxson's got authority in the first instance.
	The second issue was, how do they have personal jurisdiction over the Attorney General of Texas in D.C.?
	They decided that because the Media Matters Company is in D.C. and was served paperwork there, that constitutes personal jurisdiction.
	A ruling no court has ever made in American legal history.
	That's how ridiculous a claim it was.
	To claim you have personal jurisdiction, like in the Covington Kids cases, no personal jurisdiction.
	No personal jurisdiction of everybody who lied about kids in Covington, Kentucky, according to these same federal judges and federal courts.
	But you serve legal papers to a D.C. entity that happens to be in D.C. about something that happened in Texas, and miraculously you have personal jurisdiction over the Attorney General of Texas, while pretending it's not really the state because it's prospective relief suing him, even though you're really trying to stop the state of Texas from being able to investigate you.
	Again, you'll find almost no historical precedent for this.
	And then last but not least, it's like, how in the world is this a First Amendment claim?
	When they haven't even been required to do anything, when they're not even subject to any form of sanction for not doing anything.
	This was a letter request, in which the next step of that letter request was for the, then you go to court and ask for it to be enforced, in which they have all this expansive, extensive remedial process under Texas law.
	These were federal judges saying, we're going to determine what states can investigate that are not even the District of Corruption.
	This is how power mad the D.C. courts have become.
	They're now stopping the attorney generals of other states from even enforcing those laws in those states.
	That's how nuts they are.
	They do not have jurisdiction.
	They do not have venue.
	They do not have a legal cognizable claim.
	There's abstention issues, a wide range of issues they just ignore and pretend don't exist.
	They make up standing claims that directly contradict their other standing claims.
	So it is an embarrassing decision that shows just how power insane these judges are.
	It contradicts what the Ninth Circuit has previously said in a related case where other companies tried to, where Twitter was Twitter, tried to stop him from investigating him.
	And the Ninth Circuit's like, there's no role for federal courts in that.
	But it's a 501c3, first of all, media matters.
	It's subject to some government oversight for the privileges that they get.
	But second of all, if they're not subject to...
	No doubt about it.
	Well, they did do business in Texas because they raised money in Texas.
	They were trying to interfere with a Texas company's ability to do business in Texas to Texans.
	They lied about a Texas company to Texas people.
	I mean, that's real personal jurisdiction.
	Being served a document?
	Now means I have the personal jurisdiction over whoever.
	Legal service required that he serve the documents in D.C. And now they're saying because our legal service rules require that D.C. companies be served here, now D.C. courts have personal jurisdiction forever and can interfere in every investigation around the entire world.
	This is a power-mad court that an honest Congress would already include completely defunding.
	Get rid of the D.C. courts altogether.
	They cannot be trusted.
	They are power and mad.
	They are insane.
	They are endangering our constitutional liberties on a day-to-day basis.
	And a bunch of them should be impeached and indicted and arrest.
	But this is just insane.
	You won't find an analogous example.
	Where was the same concern when President Trump was being harassed?
	Not a single federal court would step into the plate to try to stop that harassment.
	They said, this is horrible First Amendment retaliation.
	No, it isn't.
	It's a corrupt company engaged in corrupt illegal behavior that is actionable under Texas law.
	They did not make out any, They didn't even try because they knew how ridiculous it would be.
	You give no protection to January 6th defendants.
	You give no protection to President Trump.
	But you rush to the protection of a corrupt organization like Media Matters.
	It tells you everything you need to know about our D.C. courts.
	Yeah, the point, the thing I didn't explain it properly, but these are, they're granted federal privileges for being a 501c3 to operate within all the states of America.
	They should be, I mean, they're, Every state is supposed to have governance over them because they're a charitable entity, acting as a charitable entity, which subjects them to the state's rules and laws governing.
	But not according to D.C. courts.
	Oh, no, no, no.
	These are our buddies and pals.
	You can't cover...
	So who can investigate media matters then?
	Nobody.
	Nobody in America?
	Not by the logic of the D.C. courts.
	Nobody can.
	unless they approve it first.
	David Brock, Media Matters'boyfriend, James Elephantis, owned Common I don't know.
	I mean, I know where those allegations come from.
	David Brock used to be conservative, then became a lefty, became a hitman and a smear merchant.
	He's gay.
	He has a range of relationships.
	Some of his relationships did relate to where Pizzagate originated, the concern over.
	Though most of that concern came from the emails leaked out that showed very unusual And they managed to cover that up quickly by making it sound like it was only about a pizza place when it was really about the unusual language in those emails that appeared to be code for something that some people suggested.
	Law enforcement records considered that the code words using and phrases being used referenced child sexual human trafficking.
	And there was a particular obsession with that particular place, but that was never the big priority of the people who were trying to research it.
	The media tried to characterize it and caricature it as only being about this one place, when really it was the broader, bigger concern of the Epsteins of the world acting with immunity and impunity, and seemingly some of the most powerful people in the Democratic Party being complicit in that activity.
	But here you have a politically corrupt actor, another corrupt NGO operating out of the I was going to pull up some of the John Podesta artwork, but some of it is not accurate.
	Others is, and I don't want to make the mistake of pulling it up live.
	But yeah, we all read those emails.
	A handkerchief with a pizza-related map.
	Do you want it back, Mr. Podesta?
	No, thank you.
	There are things that made no sense at all, outside of some sort of coded language and communication.
	But speaking of less than coded communication involving sexual perversion, according to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, if you set up a Christian woman's spa where the women are all naked, you have to allow trans people in in the state of Washington.
	I'll put trans in quotes because it's a man.
	And I was going to pull up a picture.
	Yeah, it's a man.
	He has his penis.
	So the lawsuit was- Pre-op, pre-op transits.
	They haven't had the gender-affirming care to align their genitals with their mentally deranged view of their own bodies.
	This was a South Korean spa, which I didn't really appreciate the religious element to it, it was dedicated for women who want to have a spa, not like a massage spa, but rather some sort of spiritual-based spa.
	It's an Asian Christian spa.
	The Descending Justice goes into the history of how...
	Well, the Descending Justice was South Korean, so I think understood it more.
	But it's a quasi-religious type spa, not the one where you go have...
	Hot rocks put on your back and whatever.
	Run by a Korean, a South Korean, and a trans individual, I guess, was invited to some party that they were having there or some event that they were having there and was excluded because it's a man with a penis.
	Like, he has a penis.
	And he was going to be in naked in spas with other women showing his penis.
	And the court came down two to one and said, but I thought it was more of a technicality on the law because what they were suing was for not to declare the law unconstitutional or invalid, but just basically saying.
	Okay.
	Under the first.
	They weren't challenging the drafting of the law, which required recognition or non- So they weren't challenging the constitutionality.
	were just saying that law as drafted as ratified as passed by the state legislature does not apply to our institution because it's a religious-based institution and we don't want men with ding-dongs hanging around with women who are trying to have a spiritual women-only moment and they said you didn't challenge the constitutionality of the law and it's not being applied in uh Well, I think how do they put it?
	They said that basically it was neutral.
	The rule was neutral to religion.
	It's like, does the rule sound neutral to you?
	You have to have men in your women's spa.
	And when your religious belief is that there's gender separation, it's a complete lack of respect for religion.
	And then as the dissenting judge noted, It's not clear at all that this even applies to pre-op trans men anyhow in the insane state of Washington where there are more lunatic laws.
	It just shows how things are just out of control.
	It's institutionalized insanity and misogyny.
	Homophobia.
	I will say that over and over again.
	I remember.
	I just was shocked by the language that they were using.
	You listen to this.
	Okay.
	It's a long sentence.
	The panel affirmed the district court's dismissal of a complaint brought by two Korean spas alleging First Amendment violations when Washington Human Rights Commission initiated an enforcement action pursuant to the Washington law against discrimination.
	W, lad.
	Against the Spofford's policy of granting entry to only biological women and excluding, in addition to men, preoperative transgender women who have not yet received gender confirmation surgery affecting their genitalia.
	How come I not highlight this?
	They have not yet received gender confirmation surgery affecting their genitalia, meaning So you have a man.
	And they're saying, this man needs to be granted access.
	And by you discriminating against this man because he says he's a preoperative, not having had the gender-affirming, conforming surgery, you need to let this guy in to hang out with a bunch of naked ladies in a religious South Korean Christian spot.
	It's abject insanity.
	And what will happen is these spots will just shut down.
	Well, they'll move states and they're just going to move out of that hellhole.
	That's the nature of the state of Washington.
	But speaking of spying and stealing and things like that, the state of Texas bureaucrats, this shows you how even in conservative states the bureaucrats are all lefties, got caught colluding with a private agency to harass a pro-life group and in the process violated their Fourth Amendment rights.
	And they thought they got away with it because they employed a former employee of the business rather than doing it directly.
	But that, too, can be subject to Fourth Amendment.
	So what happened is there was a bunch of efforts during President Trump's administration to shift resources towards pro-life organizations in a wide range of medical care contexts.
	In other words, they thought maybe we shouldn't have eugenicists be our main provider of certain key healthcare to poor women.
	Maybe that's probably a bad idea, which is what Planned Parenthood is, rooted in the ideology of eugenicism.
	But the problem is that I try to explain to people is the bureaucracies, even in conservative states, are all run by lefties.
	This is how they've co-opted control over so much of corporations and schools and academies and think tanks and governments.
	Well, Robert, I just had that experience when I interviewed Jake, the farmer from Coastal Pastures, where he's having problems in Broward County.
	And like, yeah, everybody that is governing your farm sound like the same people running our HOA, like a bunch of activists.
	Petty tyrant, you know, Democrat, liberal progressives who want to govern what people can do on their own private property.
	And in as much as it's a free state of Florida with Governor DeSantis, who's a great governor, at the lower level, it's run by a bunch of activist lunatics who are not far off from the folks up in Washington State, Portland, Oregon, and Michigan and New York.
	And it was a reminder that the Federal Court of Appeals found that this pro-life group that the state of Texas bureaucrats had employed private actors to go in and steal information off the cloud file and hack into their records to get information.
	They're like, oh, the Fourth Amendment doesn't apply because the government didn't do it.
	And they're like, yes, but you requested it or instigated it or supported it or told them you would give them protection.
	In that capacity, that person is acting as your agent.
	Thus, their actions are not private actions, but actions of the government itself.
	And thus, they said the government, in fact, could be sued and were not immune for that pro-life organization's case marching forward.
	A good reminder that the Fourth Amendment does not stop at the private-public distinction when there really is no private-public distinction.
	What do we move on to now?
	How many do we have left?
	And what do we leave over for the after-party?
	We'll leave the historic Dodge v.
	Ford case for the after-party and the Goldman Sachs bribery corruption.
	And the Palantir case for the after-party, because that otherwise wraps it up for tonight.
	Amazing.
	Let me read a few more.
	Just make sure I haven't left any unread.
	I got EncryptusAgent underscore Guru, who's helping us out backstage here.
	Robert's tie is top-notch.
	Says, dug it up from Commitube.
	On Hrumble, do we have any more?
	Age-old proverb, pull out.
	LMAO says Formash.
	Let me read a couple of the chats up over on Viva Barnes Law.
	Andrew Piscadlo says, one Utah mom's baby was brain damaged after a boshed U of U delivery.
	What does U of U mean?
	She sued but missed the one-year notice.
	They tried to toss her case.
	UT Supreme Court sent it back, upheld the $100,000 damages cap.
	Then legislature made it worse.
	Lose your case.
	You pay the legal fees.
	Aunt M says, if someone poisoned my dog, I'd be happy to.
	Whack them myself.
	The Engaged Few says, when we finally get around to arrests for corruption, can they be held for trial at ADX Florence?
	I don't know what that is.
	We could even build a facility for remote trials so they don't have to be brought back to DC.
	And upon conviction, they're I feel like I might be getting into trouble here.
	I don't know.
	The problem with NGOs, says CatZap, and non-profits are the huge holes in allowing administrative costs to be 98% of the entire amount and only 2% going to the purpose for which they were given legal status.
	Denise Antu says, David, is this your Facebook?
	I know you said in the past you don't use Facebook, so I want to make sure it's really you.
	It's me.
	Don't expect anything active on Facebook.
	I just wanted to get in.
	I'm such a effing boomer, Robert.
	When I was trying to regain control to my account, I couldn't get the freaking cell number off.
	Not that anybody called, because I don't use Facebook, but I'll be posting video there on the VivaFry non-family side.
	Facebook makes me very angry, so I still don't like it.
	All right, so what we're going to do now, in cryptos, who do we raid before we head out of here?
	First of all, everybody, before Encryptus even pops in to let us know, like, share, subscribe.
	Oh, no, you can, right, Encryptus, get back in.
	Robert, you're going to jury selection tomorrow, so we'll revisit that in a week.
	I understand you want to be respectful to the court's requests, not to be too public about it.
	Any other appearances, you're working all week, and I'm going to be streaming all week, so stay tuned, everybody.
	I'll be 2.30 for the next week.
	We'll see how that time slot works out.
	And that'll be on Rumble.
	Encryptus, who do we rate?
	Nick Ricchietta.
	Let us go.
	Piss some people.
	Oh, Ricchietta's up?
	He is.
	Ah, sweet.
	Yeah, that's good.
	So go check out Ricchietta.
	Kate is covering the Karen Reed trial.
	Good Logic is covering the...
	InnerCityPress.
	They're doing a great job.
	Nick Ricchietta, Ricchietta Law.
	Doing a great job following the Karen Reed trial.
	He's doing some also good summations of certain subconstituate components of those trials.
	So if you like trials, those are two to watch.
	And we'll see who covers the Appleton case, because I believe the Children's Health Defense is going to be covering it.
	So others might be able to sort of tune in at different times to take in the case, because I think it'd be a very educational, informative case to observe as well.
	Well, I can't find a copy of the book.
	Go get Louie the Lobster, people.
	Oh, yeah.
	Who was it that loved it?
	Somebody that liked Louis?
	Ginger Ninja, his kid.
	Oh, yeah.
	I saw Ginger Luke, who also made this beautiful chessboard behind me.
	We had a good time out there.
	The Crawdad dinner, I had some straight-up Georgia moonshine, and it was...
	Like, it's amazing.
	And I'll say this before we leave, and everybody, come over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	Yeah, we got Goldman Sachs corrupt.
	We got Dodge versus, we got the historic case of the week, Dodge versus Ford.
	And is Palantir part of a secret conspiracy or an ongoing surveillance state?
	Come on over.
	I was going to say, sitting in that Georgia field with the volunteers who put the last two weeks of their lives building a home for a disabled veteran, American flags.
	It felt beautifully American.
	And it's like, it is the America that is the true America.
	And I'm thinking like, I don't want to compare it to big city folk or highly judgmental political types.
	That's the beauty of America.
	And that's what those who hate America actually hate.
	Family, community, and the beauty that is there.
	With that said, people, come on over to vivobarneslaw.locals.com or head over to Ricceta.
	Let me see if the, has the raid been initiated in Kryptis?
	I believe it has, so go check it out, peeps.
	Otherwise, who else is live if you don't want to go see Riquetta?
	Well, go see Riquetta.
	Ricceta.
	Ricceta, hello.
	He is live right now.
	All right, good.
	Hold on.
	Why don't I see if we've been raided?
	Have we raided him or no?
	Yep.
	All good.
	All right.
	Awesome.
	Go, people.
	Enjoy the night.
	VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com for the after party.

▲