Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 8, 2025 - Viva & Barnes

02:35:42

Ep. 267: L.A. Burns AGAIN! Patel on Rogan! Elon's Meltdown! 2nd Amendment Win! SCOTUS & MORE!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Everyone, what you are looking at might look like two prods, prods, probes, whatever you're calling them.
	They are two meat thermometers and one of the sponsors of tonight's episode.
	Behold.
	They also have an Instapot and a mini oven.
	Get it.
	Get it now.
	And congratulations on choosing the smart thermometer, the world's thinnest and smartest wireless cooking thermometer.
	I'm not going to lie.
	I knew that she was going to download the app.
	All right, people, I'm going to put this on mute for the rest of the episode.
	We're going to start tonight's episode with one of our two sponsors because Father's Day is coming up next week, people.
	I thought it was today for a second.
	It's next week.
	And everybody knows the hardest part about barbecuing, if you're an amateur and even if you're a professional, is making sure the chicken is cooked, the steak is cooked to the right temperatures.
	The days of worrying are gone.
	I got the Chef IQ.
	They sent it to me and I tried it and my wife, who's the big brains of the house, downloaded the app.
	It's quite, quite very cool.
	The Chef IQ, it's brilliantly simple cooking sensor that goes into whatever you're cooking.
	It's a meat thermometer, people.
	You can put it in the oven, you can keep it in the barbecue, and it tells you what the temperature is, how it's progressing, and will notify you when it's time to come and get your meat.
	Ideal for roasts, and I'm not joking, I do barbecues more often than not.
	I'm a barbecue master, but when you cook a roast in the oven, you put it in, and it will tell you how it's progressing and when it's ready.
	And you got the app, Chef IQ Sense app.
	It's good for sticking, steak, fish.
	You pick your temperature.
	You pick how you like it.
	And it will tell you.
	Chef IQ Sense continuously monitors and predicts precisely when our food will be done.
	It's amazing.
	It's the smartest, simplest, wireless cooking device thermometer.
	And there's a flash sale going on for Father's Day.
	Go to Chef IQ.
	Put in promo code VIVA.
	And you will get 15% off.
	One week to get it so that you can use it on Father's Day.
	ChefIQ, C-E-F-I-Q dot com.
	Promo code VIVA will get you 15% off.
	And now I think we're watching something entirely different, which is over on Rumble.
	People, Sunday evening, it's time for the Viva Barnes Law Extravaganza.
	By the way, the links to the sponsors.
	Are in the description.
	Show some love.
	It helps us continue doing what we are doing.
	The thermometer, for anybody who's wondering, does actually get pretty accurate temperature when you put it in your mouth.
	Only your mouth, people.
	It's actually super cool.
	And if you get a three-pack, you can use one for chicken, one for fish, one for meat, depending on what you're cooking.
	Links in the description.
	All right.
	Starting with a nice, wonderful sponsor.
	I was going to start with some other video footage that might anger you, enrage you.
	Yesterday, I had on Christine Anderson, the European Member of Parliament, or Member of European Parliament, for an impromptu surprise Saturday livestream.
	Christine Anderson, for those of you who don't know, is awesome.
	She's with the AFD, Alternative für Deutschland, gets maligned, gets besmirched, gets demeaned, gets degraded, gets defamed, and all the other jazz that goes along with being on the right side of everything, pretty much.
	And we were talking about what's going on in Europe.
	On Friday, I had on Chris Cooper.
	And we were talking about what's going on in Canada.
	And how the Mexican cartels are now using Indian reservation land up in Canada to manufacture drugs, illegal narcotics, illegal tobacco, and shipping it into America and internationally.
	And it's the national security threat that Kash Patel was talking about.
	On Joe Rogan.
	I was going to start with this video because it will make you angry, as it should.
	Canadian MPs, members of parliament.
	So you got your MEPs, members of European parliament, and you got your Canadian MPs, which are members of parliament, and then you got your Canadian MPPs, which are members of provincial parliament.
	These dumb jackasses literally don't know what their own government is doing by way of destroying a nation.
	They literally don't know that They've decriminalized hard drugs in British Columbia.
	It's a federal offense.
	So like in Canada, you got your federal laws and then you got your provincial laws.
	And when it comes to the criminal code, it's a federal law.
	It's a federal offense.
	And these jackasses in the liberal government who have spent the last decade legalizing marijuana, which I don't have much of a problem with, but decriminalizing hard narcotics to the point where they have turned Vancouver into the fentanyl capital of the world.
	They don't know what they're doing.
	They don't know that they're doing it.
	And yet they give themselves more power as they do it.
	And then they tell Donald Trump that he's wrong for saying there's a problem at the border in terms of importation of terrorists and fentanyl.
	Gary Anandasangari.
	I'm not trying to make fun of his last name.
	It's just one hell of a long and hard last name.
	Minister of Public Safety.
	Doesn't know what the hell is going on in Canada.
	Roll it.
	I feel like Keemstar.
	Roll the video of the Canadian MP being a jackass.
	I'm a member.
	Mr. Chair, does the Minister of Public Safety believe the Liberal government's experiment to decriminalize hard drugs, including fentanyl, crack cocaine, and crystal meth, has been a success in my home province of British Columbia?
	Yeah, I'm a minister.
	Mr. Speaker, that is factually incorrect.
	This government decriminalized cannabis and did not go beyond that.
	This guy's either an idiot or a snake-tongued liar.
	They formally decriminalized marijuana under the criminal code, but are not enforcing certain criminal provisions as relates to possession of certain amounts of hard drugs, narcotics.
	So he's either a liar, a moron, or a perfect mixture of both.
	Remember.
	Mr. Chair, can I just get some clarification from the minister that he is saying that this government did not decriminalize fentanyl, crystal meth, and crack cocaine in my home province of British Columbia?
	General Minister.
	No, Mr. Speaker.
	It happened as part of a request by the British Columbia government for a short period of time.
	Mr. Chair, the Minister must know that the policy of decriminalizing these hard drugs still exists.
	It's set to expire in January of 2026.
	Will the Minister commit to ending this failed policy once and for all?
	The Honourable Minister.
	It's like a sick satire, Canadian government.
	The Honourable Minister.
	It's like watching the most embarrassing game of tennis.
	Except instead of watching the ball go back and forth, you've got some jacking in you on a throne.
	The Honourable Minister.
	Hey, go back to lying.
	What's he going to say here?
	We're going to end it in a second.
	Mr. Speaker, we look forward to working with our provincial and territorial counterparts What the hell did you just say, Gary Anandasangari?
	You know where he was born?
	By the way, not in Canada.
	Sri Lanka, it would seem, from what the interwebs are telling me.
	You know what the interwebs are also telling me here?
	Hold on a second.
	Let's bring this out.
	The interwebs are telling me exactly...
	what that politician was saying.
	I don't know what the guy's name is on the, Why can't I get this?
	Tell you exactly what the conservative parliamentarian was saying, which is they've decriminalized it as part of a trial that's set to expire on January 31st, 2023.
	Oh, sorry.
	It began on January 23rd.
	So it's 2026.
	British Columbia, BC is currently undergoing a three-year trial.
	Of decriminalizing the possession of small amounts of certain illicit drugs for personal use, the program which began on January 31st, 2023, is the result of BC receiving a federal exemption to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.
	This is not legislation.
	Oh, no, no, sorry.
	It's not legalization, as all drugs are still And possession remains a crime.
	However, adults 18 and over possessing a combined total of up to 2.5 grams of a substance such as heroin, fentanyl, crack, and powder cocaine, methamphetamine, and MDA will not be arrested, charged, or have their drugs seized.
	Instead, they will be offered health information and referrals.
	Can you believe this is what's going on in Canada?
	And that stupid jackass doesn't know what the hell his own government is doing?
	They should be voted out of office after illustrating and exhibiting that they don't know what the hell their own bloody government is doing to the destruction of Canada.
	So, yeah, that's what's going on in Canada, people.
	And I'm sure now you're glad, retrospectively, that we started with a wonderful sponsor and not with that.
	Good evening!
	Before we get into tonight's show, for everybody who's new to the channel, I am Viva Frye, former Montreal litigator turned current Florida rumbler, David Frye.
	I ran for the People's Party of Canada back in 2021.
	We tripled our vote, but we didn't do that well.
	And the party did even worse this time around because apparently Canadians are so happy with the Liberals, they decided to vote for them more, give them more seats in Parliament, and now you're going to be stuck with a de facto majority Liberal government for the next four years.
	Amazing.
	The Sunday show is live across all platforms.
	My weekly show, which is daily, I'm going to go back to four o 'clock next week, is on Rumble.
	And I post the clips to Commitube and Rumble as well.
	Robert Barnes is an attorney.
	And we're going to talk about some amazing stuff tonight because there's a number of stuff, a bunch of SCOTUS decisions that have come down that are fantastic.
	There is a trial going on that is not so fantastic.
	And we cover all of the news of the week.
	Now, Super Chats, Rumble Rants, and we have our locals, Viva and Barnes Law for the People after party.
	I do my best to read all of them.
	And if I miss them and you're going to be miffed, don't give it.
	If you're going to be miffed, if I don't read the Super Chat or the RumbleRat, I do my best.
	And then we get to the locals after party and read, I think all of them over $3.
	And before we get started, what I wanted to check was that there was a super chat over in Commitube to the effect that...
	Agent Guru was sending me a couple of them.
	Tim's moving up in the world.
	Who will slander him next?
	I'm a little jealous.
	Why aren't they slandering me on the Daily Show?
	They don't know I exist.
	That's why.
	Gorilla Strength Equipment says, Do you mind if I set up a promo code on my website for your viewers?
	I'll jump through the hoops if I need.
	Much love.
	Gorilla, post whatever you want in Super Chats, Rumble Rants, or Locals Tips.
	I can't do anything about it.
	But you are not a formal sponsor.
	Of the show.
	And therefore, it is money well spent if you do it on Rumble.
	It's better on Rumble.
	Commitube, not better all around.
	In vivabarneslaw.locals.com, we are all good and we are having a good party tonight.
	All right.
	Now, before Barnes gets here, I'm going to show some wonderful stuff about what's going on in Los Angeles.
	And you're going to understand what happened on January 6th.
	Now that Trump is threatening to bring in the National Guard, they're saying nothing to see here.
	It's a very peaceful riot and insurrection that we see in LA, but no National Guard.
	And now you understand what actually happened on January 6th, which was that the National Guard was, in fact, offered and declined.
	And now that it's being offered again, they're publicly declining and saying it's not necessary.
	It's an act of escalation.
	But before we even do that, I want to thank our second sponsor of tonight's show, which is The Wellness Company, people.
	There was a scandal going around that at one point you saw RFK Jr. drinking something blue on an airplane and everybody thought he was doing something unbecoming.
	But everybody knows RFK Jr. is known for his strength, virility, and muscles.
	And he was caught taking methylene blue, which is something that helps you stay focused, energized, and mentally resilient.
	You can now experience the exact same benefits of methylene blue with Recharge from the wellness company.
	Dr. Formulated Nutraceutical is the first to combine methylene blue with urolithin A, creating a unique formula designed to optimize mitochondrial function, improve energy, and elevate cognitive performance.
	Methylene blue crosses the blood-brain barrier to enhance memory, focus, and executive function by increasing ATP production, the true fuel of our cells.
	It also works as a potent antioxidant and anti-inflammatory, If you're looking for real mental and physical edge and change, Recharge delivers.
	Go to twc.health forward slash Viva.
	That promo code will get you 10% off plus free shipping.
	Feel the difference.
	Think clear.
	Recharge.
	twc.health forward slash Viva.
	And thank you to our second and last sponsor of tonight's show, The Wellness Company.
	They are doing great stuff.
	Los Angeles is on fire, people!
	And you got the same idiotic nincompoop boobs who didn't have water in the fire hydrants the last time, now telling Trump, don't worry, nothing to see here.
	You know that there's a syndicated message going around.
	You know, like these influencers who get caught tweeting paid tweets and not disclosing it.
	And like one of the clearest indications is that you see a number of people in tandem, like the Harry J. Sissons of the world and anyone with a Ukrainian flag in their bio.
	And they're tweeting out the same crap along the same lines.
	Mutatis mutatis.
	They're like, oh, Trump's got the cards.
	Look who's got some cards.
	No, sorry.
	Zelensky has some cards.
	Looks like Zelensky had some cards left.
	Oh, Trump was wrong about the cards.
	Catchphrases.
	And when you see them doing this all in tandem, you know they got the memo.
	Someone saying, hey, this is the message we'd like to get out today.
	You're seeing it happen right now in California.
	This is Rip Dave Min saying, As the LAPD is reporting, the protesters in LA are being peaceful.
	It's a bloody joke.
	Bloody, literally, joke.
	On the one hand, ICE agents are violently assaulting peaceful protesters.
	On the other hand, nothing's happening.
	There's no need.
	As the LAPD is reporting, we'll get to that in a second, the protesters in LA are being peaceful.
	This is not a rebellion or an invasion.
	Wait until I bring some receipts.
	There's no legal basis, including under Section 10, whatever, for Trump to take over California's National Guard.
	Trump is trying to cross the Rubicon and take this country into tyranny.
	Middle finger for you, Governor Gavin Newsom.
	Trump is sending 2,000 National Guard troops into L.A. County not to meet an unmet need, but to manufacture a crisis.
	Hashtag confession through projection.
	He's hoping for chaos so he can justify more crackdowns, more fear, more control.
	Stay calm.
	Never use violence.
	Stay peaceful.
	Hey, Gavin.
	Have you looked out the window of your mansion?
	Do they have windows at the French Laundry?
	Are you able to see past your espresso coffee and your martini?
	That's a little confession through projection on my end.
	My goodness, I'd love a martini right now.
	These people are lying to your face.
	Like Chernobyl, people are being born with fishtails and they're saying, radiation's not here, it's all in your head.
	Christopher Webb, another one.
	The National Guard arrived in LA.
	Note, if Trump can override California's governor, he can override yours too.
	This is a trial run.
	Hashtag confession through projection.
	If we can try to lock up a president, bankrupt the president, kill a president, this isn't a trial run.
	I mean, this is a trial run.
	Ted Lieu, who never gets anything right.
	It's amazing.
	I agree with Governor Gavin Newsom.
	Nothing like dumb and dumber.
	Tweedledee and Tweedledumber.
	Trump's takeover of the California National Guard is purposely inflammatory.
	I'll show you some flames, Ted.
	I also note this federalization is being done under Section 10 U.S.C.
	12, which means the Guard troops will be subject to the prohibitions in the Posse Comitatus Act.
	Remember, everyone, Nancy Pelosi totally did not decline the offer for National Guard on January 6th, just like they're not refusing it now.
	But it's good that they refused it on both occasions.
	That's called the Celebration Parallax, and I had some people say, Viva, you're not making any sense.
	I was like, no.
	The fact that you don't understand what I'm saying doesn't mean I'm not making sense.
	They said the National Guard was never offered on January 6th.
	They said Trump was derelict in duty because he didn't offer the National Guard and that's why things descended into chaos.
	And now we know that it's bullshit.
	We know that it's bullshit because A, criticize cash for some things, give them credit for others.
	They had offered the National Guard and it was declined by Nancy Pelosi and I don't want to say Yogananda Pittman, but the other guy there, Bowser.
	It was declined.
	So that they could have the violence that they called an insurrection.
	So they declined it for political purposes.
	Here it's being offered.
	And they're trying to refuse it for political purposes because it will highlight exactly what's going on in LA, which is effing crazy.
	But before we get to that, let's just hear what the LAPD PIO...
	PO.
	LAPD, Los Angeles Police Department Media Relations Division.
	Not monitored.
	24-7.
	Call 901 in case of an emergency.
	Thanks.
	LAPD, they put out this peaceful protest.
	Say the word, people.
	Peaceful protest.
	LAPD News, Los Angeles Police Department's statement regarding today's peaceful protests.
	Wait until you read this, peeps.
	It's going to blow your freaking mind.
	Today, demonstrations across the city of Los Angeles remained peaceful, and we commend all those who exercised their First Amendment rights responsibly.
	You feel like you're taking crazy pills.
	This is the definition of gaslighting.
	This is an abusive husband telling his wife that, no, she's not being abused.
	It's all in her head.
	They remained peaceful.
	Los Angeles Peace Department appreciates the cooperation of organizers, participants, and community partners who helped ensure public safety throughout the day.
	While today's events concluded without incident.
	It's not without incident because he didn't arrest the dudes throwing rocks at ICE agent vehicles.
	The Los Angeles Police Department remains fully prepared to fully respond swiftly and appropriately to any potential acts of civil unrest.
	Our commitment to safeguarding the rights, safety, and well-being of all Angelenos continues day and night.
	We will maintain a heightened readiness posture and remain ready to ensure the continued safety of our communities.
	Oh, by the way, because, you know, full transparency.
	Comments were disabled on that.
	Obviously.
	You can't have people replying to the LAPD with hard evidence of the peacefulness of the events.
	There's no emergency.
	Totally peaceful.
	Without incident.
	It's not an invasion.
	I just see Mexican flags in the streets with vehicles burning behind them.
	It's not an invasion.
	Without incident, because we didn't arrest any of them, so there's been no incident to report.
	This is one picture.
	Here's another one.
	Not an invasion, people.
	Nothing going on.
	Nothing to see here.
	This is not Beirut.
	This is freaking downtown LA.
	Mexican flag.
	Let me see.
	Do we have a face mask?
	I don't know what's going on with that, guys.
	What else do we have here?
	Oh, yeah.
	Here's a cop car on fire.
	Right in front of the CBS building.
	You think CBS is looking out the window reporting on this?
	Nope.
	Police said there was no violence.
	No incident.
	Nothing to see here, peeps.
	It was a peaceful protest.
	We thank all of you.
	We thank all the participants for remaining peaceful.
	And there was no incident because we didn't bother arresting anybody.
	So therefore, there's no incident because we didn't arrest anybody.
	Like the guy hurling freaking bricks at cop car windows and, you know, Dan Bongino coming out and saying, we're going to arrest you.
	We're going to find you.
	So, you know, you might as well turn yourself in.
	I don't think the person's going to.
	But in case you hadn't seen it, it was Nick Sartor who published it.
	It's just some dude throwing rocks, hurling rocks.
	And there were people on the internet who are actually into baseball more than me making some of, Let me just turn the volume down just in case it's a little too loud.
	No incident.
	Three.
	Three rocks.
	Four rocks.
	Let me get some more.
	Let me just wait.
	Yeah.
	Oh, yeah.
	You're not going to get arrested, bud.
	I don't wish for bad things to happen to bad people, but I was so wishing for one of those rocks to ricochet off and nail one of them in the face.
	By the way, note the shoes.
	Those are Nike retros.
	Oh, yeah.
	No incidents.
	What was it?
	The LAPDPIO would like to thank the Angelinos.
	We'd like to thank the Angelinos for remaining peaceful and not doing anything stupid.
	And then you want to talk about one screen, two films.
	I say I love it in a sick, cynical way.
	Let me just play this here.
	This is one of the good old versions of fuck around, find out, people.
	Watch as the person in front falls and hits his head on the ground.
	Oh, what did you do?
	What did you do?
	The guy was standing in front of your car trying to push it down.
	Oh, my God.
	It seemed like it was an injury, but then these agents then moved aside.
	And then immediately took off, and we watched these agents almost as if it was a chase.
	They got together in the caravan.
	You read the comments on this, and people are like, this is felony hit and run.
	This is a crime.
	And I'm like, what do you want them to do?
	Sit around for the mob to bash the windows in and beat the ever-loving piss out of them so that they have to use lethal force on them?
	You think that mob is just waiting around so they can exchange information, find out who's at fault?
	That guy was not a peaceful protester in front of the truck.
	That dude thought that he was going to force them to stop their vehicle so that they would then get assaulted by the mob.
	And that dude fell over.
	Got knocked unconscious, fucked around, found out, and now they try to accuse the ICE agents of felony hit and run.
	Don't worry.
	I'm sure they're going to file a proper report.
	And when they meet that guy in the hospital, they'll press the charges against him.
	Holy sweet, merciful Julius.
	ThinksNow40 says, thanks for just the facts, as always.
	ThinksNow40, thank you.
	This is in our vivabarneslaw.locals.com community.
	And Schnookums says, hearing that BC, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Alberta are getting together about secession, rather than the pain in the ass of creating a totally new country, they could come in as an uncorporate territories while they work out their internal structure.
	Remember, the states are seen as allowed to be their own social experiment.
	They could keep their existing parliamentary government structures they wanted.
	Well, that's the intro, people.
	And if you didn't have an aneurysm or the beginning thereof, you might be having one now.
	I see Robert Barnes is in the backdrop.
	We've got a hell of a show.
	Spread the link.
	Spread the word.
	If you're watching now, make sure that you're subscribed.
	Make sure that you have notifications turned on.
	Snip, clip, share away.
	And it helps the channel grow.
	But most importantly, Rumble is the place to watch our weekly stream.
	Well, mine.
	During the day.
	And vivabarneslaw.locals.com is the best above average community where you can actually directly support the work that Robert Barnes and I do.
	One of which is going to be getting a tutorial for Robert to He's in the backdrop right now.
	That about does it for our intro.
	Now, let me see if we have any more Commitube chats.
	I don't think we have any more of those.
	Let's see what we got here.
	Kay Trimbach over in our vivabarneslaw.locals.com community says, Trump is not making the mistake he made in 2020.
	Shut it down.
	Shut it down hard and shut it down fast.
	Robert, yeah, satisfy my neuroses and straighten up that camera, sir.
	How are you doing?
	How goes the battle?
	Good, good.
	Okay, let me see.
	Turn it a little more.
	OCD amplifying.
	Okay, good.
	And get your mic in there, and I think we are good to go.
	Encryptus, how's the audio?
	Are we balanced-ish?
	Robert, say something.
	Check, check, check, check.
	Actually, Barnes, you're a little bit low.
	Maybe you just aim that mic towards your face just a little bit more.
	Can't do it.
	What about the volume?
	If you bring yourself down a little, Viva, and people just have to turn up the overall.
	Okay, so I'm going to turn myself down, and this should be balanced now.
	Everybody jack up your volume.
	Robert, let me ask you a question that we haven't asked in a while.
	There's no books behind you anymore.
	You're still in Nevada, correct?
	Yeah, about to move out.
	But some people have asked, what are the books that are always behind me?
	And it's a combination of The Life of George Washington.
	There's the works of Kipling and some other great English writers.
	And those two brown leather books are Burke's Works by Edmund Burke, the sort of a more traditional understanding of conservatism than some of the contemporary forms.
	In fact, my brother will be discussing that in part at the 1776 Law Center inaugural conference.
	Mid-August, tickets still available.
	Going to have tons of people there, body language panel.
	Going to have Chase Hughes teach how to use Jedi mind tricks, amongst other things.
	Greg Hartley, who was with me with jury selection this past week.
	At the, up in the Shara trial.
	He, you know, Hartley was the guy you called in when you had to stop a terror event from happening and you needed to interrogate somebody around the world to stop it from happening.
	That's who Greg Hartley is.
	Scott Rouse, who's great.
	He'll be there coming down from Nashville.
	And then, you know, Richard Barris, People's Pundit Daily.
	I'll be on tomorrow.
	What are the odds?
	We'll do our June show Monday.
	I think it's 2 p.m. Eastern Time, as I recall, right?
	With People's Pundit Daily.
	So that'll be fun.
	But yeah.
	But my brother will come down.
	He does political philosophy, amongst other things, about the historical variations of conservatism and the debates within it.
	Robert, I'm showing the link for the website for 1776 Law Center.
	This is where people can get tickets to our 1776 event in Tennessee.
	They can donate to help the work that you're doing.
	And now I see that it's been updated in order to get to the new target, which is $500,000.
	This is for the work that you're doing in some pro bono representation and for the work of 1776 Law Center.
	Yeah, the supports, the four freedoms, financial freedom, food freedom, medical freedom, political freedom, has supported cases, everything from the Covington kids to Kyle Rittenhouse, from Brooke Jackson to Robert Kennedy.
	From Alex Jones to others that have been political targets of various forms of lawfare, weaponized legal system across the board, help create public education, help support those cases in the court of public opinion, also support them in the courts of law.
	So that's 1776lawcenter.com.
	We'll be continually updating it.
	Going to have some major updates this coming month.
	How to use the Freedom of Information Act.
	We're going to do master classes on that as well at the conference.
	The Constitutional Bill of Rights, there will be a subsection on that as well.
	Lexi Anderson, a young associate attorney, will be giving her lived experience as a young lawyer on the front end of freedom fighting.
	Currently representing Owen Troyer in a range of cases, including FOIA cases, including libel cases against the one and only Media Matters, amongst others.
	So a lot of key work is done there at 1776 Law Center, and it's kept afloat by ordinary, everyday people contributing.
	It's not a sugar daddy based site.
	We don't rely on big oligarchs and corporate donors to corrupt the purpose of the organization.
	The organization is there to fight for the freedoms of ordinary people and counterbalance it in the court of public competing in the court of law with people who don't necessarily have the same resources.
	They continue to harass Amos Miller, unfortunately.
	That does not go unabated.
	But yeah, so all that will be available.
	Chattanooga, Tennessee, mid-August.
	Going to have the inaugural 1776 Law Center with master classes, conferences, a chance to meet interesting, fun people, including the one and only Viva Frye.
	I will be there, and it's going to be amazing.
	Let me bring this one up just before we get started, because it's purple, and I want to see what's going on with this.
	Cupo Sooth says, desperately seeking shyster.
	Must stop evil lunatic John Menard.
	I have no idea who these people are of Menard's home improvement chain.
	False imprisonment, extortion, conspiracy against rights, civil recode details on my Rumble channel.
	That is not an endorsement for this statement.
	I have no idea what it means, but thank you for the Rumble rant.
	And FBI needs to arrest the mayor, police chief, City of Los Angeles, Sheriff Elliott, yada, yada.
	Then the city council members, state reps, and...
	Encryptus, do I hear your audio?
	Before we move on, Barnes is extraordinarily low.
	You're a little low.
	I've got complainers on every platform at the moment.
	Barnes, you have the gain knob on your focus, right?
	Yeah.
	Can you turn that dial to the right to be right around 5 o 'clock or so?
	Righty-tighty, lefty-loosey.
	How is it now?
	Oh my goodness, is it better.
	Now let me jack my knee.
	No, it was.
	That was the one that I had too high, so it had the tin weird tin sound.
	So I had turned that all the way down.
	You guys are wonderful now.
	I managed to look at it.
	You told me to turn down the gain thing.
	I managed to look at it, look at the gain button, and not turn it down last time.
	Would you look at that dial and turn it just a little bit to the right, Robert?
	Okay, good.
	We're on right now.
	Before we get into the substance, and let's get into the substance now.
	Robert, what do we have on the menu for the evening?
	So we got a lot.
	The two top topics voted on at BeaverBarnsLaw.Locals.com, where they produce the show notes each week with their replies, comments, and poll taking is almost a tie between the – They said all of them were good, good.
	But the two that otherwise got it were the L.A. riots, returning back to the scene of the Summer of Love, this time done with a Mexican flag symbol, no less.
	And then SCOTUS.
	We got some big cases that are coming this week.
	Next week's show should be lit, depending on what happens with the Supreme Court.
	But we had plenty of cases this week.
	Discrimination, taxes, religion.
	The what is a charitable operation, racial discrimination, religious discrimination, arbitration, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, personal jurisdiction, DOGE, elections cases now being taken up by the Supreme Court.
	We've got all the implications and ramifications of L.A. riots.
	We've got probably maybe the most compelling legal malpractice claim for anyone not named Sandy Hook plaintiffs and whose lawyer is not Mark Bankston from Texas.
	That would be the Maryland man.
	As they love to call him.
	It's like he's the Neanderthal man or something.
	You know what I mean?
	They just call him by the name of the location where he's from.
	Where he's not really from.
	The Maryland man has maybe the all-time malpractice suit against his commie lawyers who managed to get him a free ticket to federal prison for 15 years when he could be just hanging out in El Salvador or some other place instead.
	The International Criminal Court.
	We're seeing the Trump administration start to realize they need to take on these corrupt courts, in this case, sanctions on the International Criminal Court.
	I've always said it's a joke, no matter which side, no matter whose ox they're goring at the time.
	Bayer bought Monsanto, and now they're trying to create special immunity for Roundup with fake PR campaigns trying to target Congress and various states to get them to pass ridiculous laws to immunize the fact that they fail to warn people that their products can kill you.
	But that's pretty typical for Bayer.
	A good little Nazi-oriented drug manufacturer, amongst other things.
	We've got the big, beautiful bill.
	We've got a little news this week that developed between Elon Musk and Donald Trump.
	What is all this stuff about Trump Epstein?
	We can put that to rest once and for all.
	We've got the Shara trial ongoing in Wisconsin.
	That's what I'm coming back from.
	I participated in the jury selection and the opening statement.
	I helped with that.
	Warner Mendenhall gave a great opening statement.
	I recounted that in the Barnes brief that people can read and review for themselves.
	Encryptus has been broadcasting the trial.
	You can follow his channel on Rumble.
	This is an incredibly consequential trial, and it's becoming even more so as the trial progresses.
	As issues of COVID, as issues of what happened with hospitals during COVID, is all coming to light.
	And the verdict here may have major consequences on a go-forward basis for others seeking relief and remedy.
	And to prevent and preclude this from reoccurring what happened during COVID.
	Then we've got the woke U might face a little more trouble other than federal funding.
	Maybe they'll use their little crediting apparatus against them, as the Trump administration has awoken to.
	And then our Tina Peters, Trump again is asking Pam Blondie to maybe do her job and free Tina Peters.
	This is the second time he's commented on this.
	Ed Martin has joined it.
	We're yet to see any action from Pam Barbee.
	Meanwhile, Dan Vangino was running around telling everybody all the things that are not his priorities that should be, and Kash Patel was doing his hostage video routine on Joe Rogan, making some of the most ludicrous claims about the Epstein files that contradict himself from just a year ago and contradict what Pam Bondi said just about a month ago.
	People said James O 'Keefe, he didn't really disclose anything in disclosing what Pam Bondi knew about the tapes.
	Now people realize the consequence of James O 'Keefe's important investigative work once again on the Epstein files, because that's what they're now denying and pretending don't exist.
	And last but not least, our historic case of the week, we'll always have one of those as we go forward, is United States v.
	Amistad.
	I had some family relatives that were actually connected to the prosecution of that case about when the Supreme Court actually got something right, which was a rare instance.
	But we got more of that this week, so...
	Robert, let's start with the LA riots.
	I've given the breakdown.
	I'll just bring up the highlights so that we can have this in the backdrop as we talk about the totally peaceful, nonviolent protest that's not an insurrection.
	I put out a tweet, I think it was Friday, and I basically said, you know, Now, again, whether or not I sincerely in my heart of hearts believe that this is an insurrection in the legal sense, probably not.
	But to the extent we're going to apply the same standard to them that they attempted to paint with January 6th.
	If there were to be an insurrection between the two things, January 6th and this, I would argue that to a T, the criteria are met for what's going on in LA now.
	There's some discussion as to whether or not...
	Bonta?
	forget who the person is there.
	Well, whether or not he can face federal corruption charges, whether or not Trump is thinking of doing that.
	Other than what's going on in LA right now, which seems to be an outright problem, it does seem to be an insurrection.
	It does seem to be people aiding and abetting something of an invasion or a predatory incursion.
	They're waving foreign flags.
	The president of the foreign government, Mexico, is supporting it, at least indirectly, by protesting the expatriation tax, or in this case, the remittance tax, that goes back from Mexicans living in the United States to Mexico's government.
	People don't realize how much those remittances fund and fuel the entire economies in some of these foreign countries.
	Whoever did that photograph, that's going to be one of the most iconic photographs for the next 20 years.
	And you couldn't have a more damning, damaging photograph for the Democratic Party or the supporters of illegal immigration than this one.
	And to be honest with you, timing couldn't have been better from a certain perspective.
	The Supreme Court this week is ruling on nationwide injunctions.
	The Supreme Court this week is deciding whether to get into the birthright citizenship issue.
	And this is the, you get a predatory incursion taking over Los Angeles, endorsed at least implicitly by the governor of the state of California, by the mayor of Los Angeles, and by a foreign leader, the government of Mexico.
	So this is separate from the predatory incursion that the Venezuelan government did by sponsoring the dangerous TVA gangs incursion into the United States as payback and punishment for the Biden administration's sanctions on the Venezuelan government.
	But now you've got it at a whole different level.
	Your ordinary, everyday Mexican-American in East L.A. does not support this.
	This is being done.
	This is why they surged massively throughout the Central Valley of California towards Trump over the last eight years.
	This is why East Texas The main battleground on border issues, overwhelmingly dominated by Mexican-Americans of multiple generations, overwhelmingly shifted towards President Donald J. Trump.
	They do not support drug cartels and the Mexican gangs with the Soros-oriented NGOs taking over American society, American polity, or American economy.
	And those people you see out there are not citizens.
	For the most part, what you're seeing are gang members who are organized.
	And Antifa, I think Mark Grobert of America's Untold Stories was calling it Latifa, or Lantifa, depending on how you want to pronounce it.
	But that's basically what it is.
	And hopefully somewhere along the way, the Justice Department gets off its rear and starts prosecuting the organizers of these events.
	Because you're not going to stop the rando, lunatic, trans sociopath.
	Who's on the Antifa email text list to stop behaving in this way, no matter how many of them you arrest.
	The way you stop this is by stopping the organizers.
	And you stop that by, one, defunding them, which President Trump has been working on, but not fully yet, because some of the organizations involved in these riots are paid for by government dollars, not just state tax dollars, federal government tax dollars, including ongoing.
	It should be an utter embarrassment to the Trump administration.
	That there's money still going to people sponsoring riots against law enforcement in the United States.
	The other, though, is the NGOs.
	I've been saying now for weeks, the NGOs are operating lawlessly at multiple levels.
	Not only are they engaged in overt, open criminality in the case of supporting these riots and seditious activity and obstructing of justice, obstructing federal enforcement proceedings, threatening federal officers.
	Remember, we had the Democratic leader in the House calling for the doxing of these people just a week ago.
	So, you know, we have the mayor coming out supporting the protest.
	We have Newsom complaining about...
	It's Newscom.
	I was like, I'll probably borrow that one.
	That's a pretty good one.
	He's got to come up with one for Bass there.
	You know, how do you catch a pass?
	There's got to be something in there.
	She's a pure commie.
	She's been a long-time commie.
	I mean, honest to God, commie, like John Brennan style commie.
	And the fact that these people are overtly and openly waging war on federal law enforcement.
	And who is federal law enforcement targeting?
	They are targeting the young, quiet gardener that's been working quietly for the last 15 years illegally.
	They're targeting people with criminal records, with record with an order of removal already in place in some cases for decades.
	And it's not just any set of crimes.
	These are pedophiles.
	These are rapists.
	These are murderers.
	These are hardcore gangbangers convicted of violent crimes affiliated and associated with some of the most dangerous criminal organizations in the world.
	And that's who they are interfering with.
	That's who they are stopping it.
	And we had other protests in Boston and New York and other places where there's now a mass effort to recreate the Summer of Love and to massively, they have the judges obstructing on one side.
	The rogue state politicians facilitating obstruction by not helping and being sanctuary cities and states and counties on the other side.
	And then in between, now they're arming and organizing mass Antifa-style protests to engage in all the conduct they accused, but were incorrectly accused of, the January Sixers.
	This is what a real insurrectionary behavior looks like.
	I mean, if the 1992 race riots in L.A. concerning the incident where they beat up an individual or accused of doing so, the Insurrection Act was invoked by President H.W. Bush to bring people in.
	Well, this is actually more like an insurrection, more like a predatory incursion.
	Foreign organized gains involved in the organized obstruction of justice at scale, using violence systemically to terrorize the local law enforcement population, as if it's the Mexican government trying to arrest one of the criminal young cartel members, Little Guzman, there in Mexico that they had to back down on because the cartels waged war on the local military and police force there, including taking women as hostages.
	They're just extending this behavior now to North America.
	Now they're taking over parts of North America and the United States, wherever and whenever they can, enabled by a corrupt governor, enabled by a corrupt mayor, enabled by corrupt law enforcement, local law enforcement.
	What needs to happen is, and it's all facilitated and organized by NGOs as being well-documented by one of the great contributors of Elon Musk, which is Data Republican on Twitter.
	Has been putting together the Soros NGOs, the other NGOs, how they work, how they function, along with Mike Benz, who's been documenting this work as well, and showed that this was funded.
	You don't show up with random brick, big whole groups of bricks, pallets of bricks, perfectly organized so that people can borrow and utilize.
	It's not a very sophisticated, organized effort.
	These are people that have committed government fraud.
	They've committed tax fraud.
	In order to facilitate and enable this organization, organized criminality at scale, this predatory incursion on the United States, which is what this is by any reason definition aside unless you're a lunatic federal judge.
	So this is proven without beyond doubt that Trump is right about what needs to happen on illegal immigration.
	Do you want to play this?
	Because one of the things I've realized, and people will call me naive or playing devil's advocate.
	I do wonder, in general, just how many pallets of construction stones are lying around in general?
	I can tell you, but in particular, this is identical to what people saw in live time here in Las Vegas during the BLM protests.
	These people that know Vegas went to the protest and saw these randomly showing up in key places that had no ties to a construction site.
	So this has all the telltale indicators.
	Of an organized effort.
	Part of it is the politicians giving a political permission slip on the Democratic side now for weeks, saying, absolutely, yes, you can dox them.
	Yes, you can invade their places like a member of Congress did, like the mayor of Newark did.
	Yes, you can tip people off like the mayor of Nashville did.
	This tells you how bad the Justice Department still is.
	The corrupt U.S. attorney...
	Mr. Marilyn Mann from El Salvador.
	You had a U.S. attorney who shouldn't have been there in the first place.
	There should have been a mass purge already of these commies in the Justice Department.
	And yet this guy resigned rather than even be affiliated with the case.
	That's how nuts so many of these people are.
	I mean, credit to Harmony Dillon.
	She got half of the people in the Civil Rights Division to resign because they're all a bunch of commies by saying we're going to change policies and if you're not on board, hit the door.
	That's what Pam Bondi should have done in every U.S. attorney's office in this country, but didn't.
	That's what Pampani should have done at the higher-ups at the Justice Department, but did not, but failed to.
	And so now we're seeing some of the consequences of that.
	The failure to take complete action on NED, on all these other NGO grants, they went part of the way, they didn't go all the way, including Rubio's State Department.
	These people need to be mass-fired, and then they need to be put under criminal investigation.
	And you're not going to stop this until you put some big NGOs right in your target site.
	They're violating tax laws by what they're doing.
	They're violating state laws by what they're doing.
	They're violating federal laws governing their funding for what they're doing.
	And, of course, they're systematically involved in a predatory incursion invasion of the United States to obstruct lawful enforcement in this country.
	So you need to see some high-profile NGO people put in the rack.
	And I'll tell you, the two biggest ones who are the most guilty in this context are named George Soros and Bill Gates.
	And if they were serious, these guys would be feeling the heat for their decades of illegality around the world in causing mass death and injury and promoting open borders.
	I mean, now you've got the Pope.
	If anybody had any doubts that the Protestants were right, God bless the Catholics.
	But, you know, there was Matt Walsh and some others saying, oh, you can have confidence.
	God picked the Pope.
	I was like, I'm not so sure.
	I'm not really a Catholic.
	I'm not a Catholic.
	And what do we see the Pope saying?
	He used the words open borders.
	Today of all days.
	Today of all days, he goes out and screams for open borders.
	The Catholic Church is the enemy of the American people.
	That's the reality under this papal leadership.
	They are corrupt.
	They've been a money laundering criminal organization for half a century.
	So much so that Godfather put it in the Godfather movie part three.
	And now you have them.
	They are the number one profiteers for the NGOs involved in illegal immigration is the Catholic Church.
	That's the number one group complicit in this criminal activities.
	And so there needs to be consequences.
	And the Pope needs a wake-up call.
	The Catholic bogus charities need a wake-up call.
	Otherwise, this will continue to happen unabated.
	What can happen and who can do it?
	The question is, can we like to give, well, say like to.
	Cash and Dan, we'll talk about them when it comes to the Epstein stuff.
	They're the FBI.
	They are investigating.
	And Bongino is, you know, vowing to get...
	You've got, I don't know, the DEA, the ATF, the DOJ.
	Who does have the power to do this?
	Is it Pam Bondi who has the power to remove?
	I mean, they can open up a criminal investigation anytime they want.
	As to anybody.
	And they can work with parts of DHS.
	They can work with parts of the Civil Rights Division.
	They can work with other divisions that maybe have a relevant or pertinent or material role in it.
	But the OJ is ultimately responsible.
	This should have been done out of the gate.
	You saw from Kash Patel's interview with Joe Rogan, Dan Bongino's interviews this week on multiple Fox channels.
	They're not focused on this at all.
	I mean, aside from apologizing and making contradictory claims about Epstein, which we'll get to later, they want the FBI to look like 1950s Dragnet.
	That's what they're focused on.
	I mean, Bongino was even doing the old post-9-11 script again.
	Look at all the terrorist events we've stopped.
	Well, you didn't stop this one, Danny boy.
	And it was out there in the open with politicians saying they were going to do it.
	But because you've taken no action against James Comey, who is dog-walking you on a daily basis, This is what we get.
	It can't be just, hey, we're going to arrest the 600 protest.
	Fine.
	Who cares?
	Those guys are career criminals.
	That's who those people are.
	They're not going to blink twice.
	That's not going to deter anything.
	If you want to deter something, go after the people with the money that are spending the money to organize it.
	That's how you shut this down.
	There's a reason George Soros is banned from multiple countries, including his home country, because that's who this Nazi enabler is.
	And because what he does is go around getting rich, destabilizing governments to profit himself.
	It's called open society for a reason.
	He believes in open borders, complete open borders.
	He is the principal advocate of it, the principal organizer of it.
	How has he avoided any, any criminal scrutiny by any Justice Department or any state prosecutor in this country is beyond me, other than they're all wusses.
	He's been handpicking prosecutors all across this country.
	At the county level to enforce his version of weaponized lawfare.
	And he's escaped any consequences.
	And the other big one, and it needs to be talked about, and some of my Catholic friends don't talk about it enough, Catholic charities are neck deep in this criminal operation.
	Criminal money laundering.
	It's not a coincidence.
	The Pope chooses this time when there's mass riots going on in L.A. I guarantee you we're promoted and pushed by Catholic charities.
	That he's out there saying, we need open borders.
	He's making clear where they stand.
	Well, the Pope needs a wake-up call.
	The Catholic Church needs a wake-up call.
	George Soros needs a wake-up call.
	And Bill Gates needs a wake-up call.
	Or Pam Blondie, Pam Barbie ain't doing her job.
	I want to fact-check one thing.
	It's so funny as I do this where, you know, trust but verify.
	And I do trust you, there's no but.
	I just love the fact-checks.
	Listen to this.
	There's no definitive evidence that George Soros himself has been personally banned from any country.
	Claims on social media, he's banned in countries like Russia.
	Here's the breakdown.
	Russia banned two branches of Soros Open Society Foundation and Open Society Institute, whatever, labelling them as undesirable.
	Okay.
	Oh, whatever.
	These are rumors.
	Yeah, so he's not banned, personally.
	Just, you know, his organizations where they passed the Stop Soros Law in Turkey because the guy goes in and burns shit down, literally.
	So would that be a case, Robert, with George Soros for some sort of RICO conspiracy to support?
	I mean, that's what they've been doing.
	is what they've been doing at scale now for a long time.
	And that's what it's And you see a fatal flaw.
	In Bongino and Patel, which I think they confirmed this week, my hypothesis, which is down deep, they think the FBI is a big, beautiful tree with deep, wonderful roots that just had a few bad apples at the top, that had a few hidden files in a few locations.
	The idea of protected files comes from the founder of the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover, was the man who mastered secret, separate files.
	But maybe Cash Patel doesn't even know this.
	Maybe Dan Bongino doesn't even know this.
	But here they are out there saying, oh, we're going to do this kind of law enforcement.
	They clearly don't believe there's any institutional problem.
	The problem with the FBI is the roots of the FBI.
	The tree is poisoned.
	The fruit is poisonous because the tree is poisoned.
	They don't understand that.
	So they see these kind of bad actions and rather than saying immediately, who are the institutional actors that are really behind this?
	They say, well, we'll find that one bad criminal and we'll lock that one little protester up.
	That's going to make no difference.
	They're doing a lousy job so far, and they continue to just make it worse.
	I mean, it's a disgrace.
	It's just a disgrace at this point.
	I've lost all patience for it.
	Cash Patel is either openly and overtly lying, or he's a moron.
	What he said about Epstein on the Rogan show made no sense at all.
	contradicts what Pam Bondi herself has said.
	Well, if I were...
	I know what I would pick away in terms of, yes, the internal contradictions to what he said during that interview, which we're gonna get to in a second.
	And I will defend Bongino because I'm looking for an excuse to defend him.
	I know, we all know that Bongino does not have faith in the FBI, or at least the institution, did not prior to becoming the deputy director.
	And I get the impression that he's being hand-tied or his wings are being clipped, and he now...
	He says it all the time.
	and I'm not convinced that he's right, but I'm not there.
	So I'm not going to defer to his opinion because I don't agree with it, but that seems to be his opinion.
	Bongino looks to me like, His style is being hampered, or he is being restricted in what he can and cannot do within the FBI for reasons that are beyond his control.
	But what do I know?
	I just know that I like him, and I don't want to believe that he's had a change of heart to the degree that he must have had a change of heart compared to what we all knew he felt of the FBI as an institution beforehand.
	Kash Patel writes American Gangsters, talks about—we're going to get into the interview now with Joe Rogan.
	Goes into detail about the thorough, insidious, institutionalized corruption within the FBI, that they falsify evidence, that they lie under oath, nothing they do can be trusted, and yet somehow, and I've asked the question publicly, I don't think I'll get an answer, but yet somehow, Patel comes out and says, we've looked over the file, prepared by the very same corrupt, weaponized, fraudulent organization that is the FBI.
	And we believe that Epstein killed himself and apparently nothing more to see here.
	And I say, how do you even rely on that file when it was prepared by the same FBI that falsified documents, that went after Carter Page, that went after Trump, Operation Crossfire Hurricane, and yet Patel can't fit that circle peg into that square hole?
	The other thing that he says in the interview is we go to the public.
	You know, we want to hear what you have to say.
	And if you have information, let's hear it.
	And then also, He said in that interview, as relates to the Epstein video, that we're not going to victimize the victims again because then he wins.
	Hate me if you want to, but we're not going to do that.
	Also, no such video exists.
	And I don't know if I'm being too critical because I want to believe what I already believe, or it just doesn't make a lick of sense.
	Pan Bondi says, I've got the videos on my desk, it's terrible, yada yada.
	He comes out now and says, we don't have the video that you want, Joe Rogan, or that people in the void have created the concern about, including Kash Patil himself.
	Let me get the Luke Rutkowski clip here.
	Including Kash himself, two years ago.
	Why is the FBI protecting the greatest pederast, the largest scale pederast in human history?
	Simple, because of who's on that list.
	You don't think that Bill Gates is lobbying Congress night and day to prevent the disclosure of that list?
	And why is it that the Senate, you know, and good for Senator Blackburn to try to get it out, but then Dick Turbin comes over the top and says, no, we're not going to release the names.
	I don't care about the list itself, but he released the names, right?
	Yeah, that's right.
	We don't need to hear the interview part.
	That's right, because he was a sex trafficker and we don't know who his clients were.
	And now he comes out and says, there's no video showing anything that's going to show what you want.
	But we're not releasing that video anyhow because it would re-victimize the victims, which is what he wants.
	Robert, I never knew Kash Patel before.
	Government, what he did with Operation Crossfire Hurricane is amazing.
	Are they strategizing for something or is this just laughably implausible now?
	It's laughably implausible.
	And my view is just that down deep, both of these guys, Bongino and Patel, are institutionalists.
	In other words, they're not reformers by nature.
	And you see that in what they appeal to.
	They tend to appeal to authority.
	They appeal to their own authority and so forth.
	And they're contradicting.
	I mean, O 'Keefe got Pam Bondi on tape saying there was a bunch of videos showing horrific things.
	And it's like, and now there isn't?
	You know, it's like, okay, which is it?
	Well, and if it is, we won't show it.
	Okay, well, is it you've seen it and you're not showing it or it exists or it doesn't exist?
	Which is it?
	And the idea that there was this massive blackmail file that has just disappeared from the FBI, if that's what Patel is saying, well, that's its own scandal.
	And by the way, you could tell from when Rogan started cross-examining him on his Epstein killed himself, Patel admitted he hadn't even reviewed key evidence.
	This is incompetency.
	Incompetency by both he and Bongino.
	And it's embarrassing incompetency.
	And they're so politically daft, they don't realize how embarrassing it is.
	As soon as James Comey dog-walked them publicly by calling for the assassination of President Trump, and they literally did nothing but whine about it on the internet, that told everybody they have no control.
	They're not going to do jack.
	They're going to talk.
	They're all hat, no cattle.
	They're going to talk big and deliver nothing.
	And that's what the message has been the last several weeks.
	And they blame it as, well, we just can't please everybody.
	No!
	Quit lying!
	How about you quit lying, Cash?
	Start there.
	Because what you told Rogan was a lie.
	Because it contradicts you.
	It contradicts the Attorney General.
	It contradicts the known evidence.
	And so I have just...
	Because he knows Bongino is somebody you can laugh at.
	Because he's gonna do nothing.
	But talk big, talk big, talk big, do nothing.
	Talk big, talk big, talk big, do nothing.
	It is an embarrassment.
	I mean, why does Trump have to keep begging them to do something on Tina Peters?
	It doesn't take a brain surgeon to know how to do it.
	I mean, you simply do it.
	You release her as a federal witness.
	You have superior jurisdiction of the state.
	You get her into federal custody.
	On ground, she's a critical witness.
	They do this all the time.
	I mean, heck, they did it for Lucky Luciano when they let him out early so he could facilitate in World War II and the deep state could get into the drug dealing business full scale.
	I mean, so you know they can do it.
	They do it all the time, yet they can't seem to know how to do it.
	I mean, how is that?
	They're either incompetent or incapable.
	The only Harmeet Dillon is doing anything useful at the Justice Department that I can tell.
	It drives me nuts.
	It's like, there was an obvious question when Cash was talking about, he did it to himself, he was all alone in that cell.
	How the hell was he all alone in that cell?
	Period.
	Like, that's the question.
	How do you know that?
	Because at first they said there was a tape, and now it turns out there's not really a tape.
	So in fact, the cameras were off.
	Then what the tape is, is that somebody is later on after he's dead.
	Okay, that's not really useful.
	It's supposed to be a big coincidence the cameras went off.
	I mean, I just think these guys don't want to really rattle the cakes.
	They want to be known as the best sheriff in town, which means not looking at the serious crimes of the serious actors because that's where the power is.
	It's in deep state corruption.
	It's in NGO corruption.
	It's in bureaucratic state corruption being done by very powerful people, the kind of people that have connections and ties and are on the Epstein list.
	As Cash admitted, he knows...
	And yet no information about Bill Gates connected to Epstein has ever been released by the FBI.
	Why is that?
	Why is that?
	And now he's pretending there isn't a list.
	Now he's pretending there isn't videos.
	Now he's pretending he killed himself.
	He's trying to gaslight the world into one of the dumbest stories ever told.
	If you're this big of a wuss, Cash, go back to talking big on podcasts.
	Go back to talking big on books.
	Because so far, you've been in a pitiful, sad excuse and shell the person you claim to be.
	Let me see what the chat is saying over here.
	We're going to read some Rumble Rants.
	Base Kid said, Barnes take his fair to have if four years from now nothing happens.
	100 days in, you're nothing but a blowhard armchair quarterback who thinks he knows what's going on behind closed doors, don't know shit.
	No, I'm not talking about anything.
	I'm talking about what he's publicly said and how it contradicts publicly known evidence.
	And it's the...
	But when the warning sign, I remember doing this when I criticized President Trump for relying on Anthony Fauci during the COVID, early COVID.
	I got tons of critics.
	You don't understand.
	There's a grand secret plan involved.
	When I criticized Lin Wood.
	Oh, you don't understand.
	He's on the front end.
	No, he's going batshit insane.
	And the whole world discovered it in live time.
	That Sidney Powell didn't have a Kraken.
	That the Kraken was like some little mini thing you would get out of a box.
	I'd be like, oh, you don't understand.
	She's got the secret evidence.
	She's got the secret connection.
	Nope, she didn't.
	She didn't know what the hell she was talking about.
	She ruined the chance to effectively challenge the election.
	It's a reality.
	So I'm used to this kind of pushback.
	And if there was other evidence of it, I'd be happy of it.
	But when you have James Comey bragging to the world he can murder the president and he suffers no legal consequence, not even an announcement of an investigation, not even a subpoena, not even a visit at the door by the Secret Service, nothing, literally nothing.
	Then everybody knows you're a joke.
	That isn't based on what's behind closed doors.
	That's what all of us can see.
	And we can't just stick our head in the sand because these guys talk big before they got their positions of power.
	They're in positions of power.
	They're doing jack squat.
	And you see what happens is the more time that lapses from that Comey thing, everyone's forgotten about it.
	He deserves to be in jail for that.
	And maybe they'll do it by the end of the year.
	Or maybe...
	And it's not a free speech issue.
	He deserves to be charged for that.
	Denise Antu says, I'm reading overruled by Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch with the Badlands Book Club on Rumble.
	Highly recommend reading.
	It's insane that they can't even count how many ridiculous federal laws they are.
	FD Man says abolish the FBI and put it all into the United States Marshal Service and find a Wyatt Earp to run it out.
	FD Man says Putin would not have let any of these BS riot games to happen on the streets in Russia.
	Randy Edwards says Sinead O'Connor was right about the Pope in Rome, as were the nation's founders remembering Pope John Paul telling South America that they had a right and obligation to immigrate to the U.S. FD Man says they need to be indicted, those communists in the DOJ, State Department, the rest of the executive branch, while they're still on duty to justify the firing.
	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 BiltongUSA.com and use code BARNS for 10% off.
	King of Biltong is amazing.
	BiltongUSA.com.
	You use ice to prep-freeze fish.
	Bass like any fish needs to be put upon ice.
	Okay, sorry.
	I'll stop reading that one there.
	Yeah, I mean, and there's people that just want to pretend.
	That, you know, that these guys are, they're secretly up to something.
	When I start hearing the, you know, the QAnon type plan, it's like, okay, if they weren't running around lying about Epstein, then I wouldn't have as much of a complaint.
	If they weren't running around doing nothing while James Comey, the former FBI director, calls for the assassination of President Trump, then I wouldn't be criticizing.
	The problem is, now that they went public, I can tell someone that's in the legal world, you know when something's happening when it's not.
	Go back to Trump.
	You knew that he was under investigation right away.
	Because why?
	There's grand jury subpoenas, there's investigative requests, there's attorneys assigned, so on and so forth.
	Special counsel appointed, etc.
	January 6th, they were all being arrested right away and imprisoned under the most rogue and horrendous conditions.
	So there was immediate action.
	With Mueller, as soon as he's appointed, all of a sudden grand jury subpoenas are flying.
	Everybody's lawyering up.
	You've heard none of that.
	None of that.
	From anybody that got caught involved in the weaponized lawfare against the American people the last four years.
	They've been there now month five, month six, and you're hearing nothing.
	Nothing.
	You're seeing James Comey brag to the world, I can do whatever I want.
	And the rest of you can do whatever you want, and there won't be any real consequence.
	What happened in L.A. is an embarrassment to Kash Patel, an embarrassment to Dan Bongino, an embarrassment to Pam Blondie for not doing their job in advance, because this is what people think.
	They think they can stage riots on the streets of America, and the people who fund it and organize it will face no consequence.
	That's the problem with them not taking aggressive affirmative action and putting people on notice that they are going to be under investigation, even if it doesn't result in criminal prosecution.
	At least put them under investigation when you know they've been deeply engaged in these criminal behaviors.
	It's documented around the world for 25 years in the case of George Soros.
	So somebody do something somewhere.
	Otherwise, I'm not going to believe that they're secretly up to something that there's literally no evidence of.
	And in the legal world, Your ability to get away with something purely secretly in the criminal prosecution world is very low.
	Everybody will know as soon as the investigation starts.
	It's clear no investigation has even started on these key bad actors.
	And I want to, you know, based the kid says, it's fair to have this four years from now?
	No, because if you've done nothing after four years, your term is over.
	So you don't look at the end and say, well, you didn't do what you had to do because nobody held your feet to the fire.
	So yeah, in four years from now, you don't look back and say, oh, they didn't do anything.
	Because then it's over.
	And now you've missed your opportunity.
	And some people are thinking, I'm not anti-Catholic.
	I'm anti the hierarchy of the Catholic Church that is neck deep in corruption of open borders.
	And I think a lot of politicians are scared to expose it.
	The ordinary Catholic voter would love to know that their money that they give to the church is being misused and abused against their interests that is being used to undermine their country, their security, their prosperity.
	So this isn't about the ordinary Catholic.
	I think too many politicians, too many prosecutors are scared of exposing the hierarchy of the Catholic Church being neck deep in this open borders campaign with criminals like George Soros.
	Let me read this one because it reminded me of what I wanted to say.
	Harry Totoo says, Nicholas Tartaglione was Epstein's cellmate the first time he tried to unalive himself.
	No one talks about that.
	That was the biggest thing in that interview when Cash is talking with Rogan and Rogan says, yeah, but you know.
	I don't even know that he knew that he was on suicide watch.
	It seems that that came as a new fact to one of them.
	It's clear he's never looked at the Fox.
	You watch that interview, and he's never looked at the critics that laid out all the problems, including autopsies and independent medical examinations.
	Rogan brought that up a little bit, but at one point, Cash thought it was like the gotcha.
	He's like, oh yeah, so this happened two weeks after he tried to kill himself, or two weeks after he was taken off suicide watch.
	You leave a guy alone two weeks after he tried to kill himself and you don't ask where the conspiracy is if they let this happen.
	And purportedly attempted to kill himself.
	Remember, he was connected to an inmate who has killed multiple people who he claimed was the one trying to kill him.
	I mean, Patel wouldn't hold up.
	I mean, that was a very soft cross by Joe Rogan.
	And he couldn't hold up to that when it came to Epstein.
	So it's like, why is he running around making these public statements then?
	He has not reviewed the whole file.
	It contradicts what he has previously said.
	It contradicts what Pam Bondi has already said and was caught on tape by James O 'Keefe saying just a few weeks ago.
	Why is he doing it?
	I mean, someone explain to me why he's doing this unless he is on board with making it clear to the whole world, don't worry, I'm not going to actually touch the deep state.
	Because that's what the subtext of this whole Epstein campaign is.
	It's Kash Patel and Dan Bongino convincing the world, don't worry, deep staters, we're not going to touch you.
	We're not going to touch you.
	Whatever we do, we're not going to touch you.
	They've been screaming that now indirectly for three weeks.
	By the way, this is Nicholas Targlione, the guy who was in the cell with Epstein beforehand, who's not someone you'd want to meet up with.
	He has a long history of murdering people, and Epstein said he tried to kill him while he was in prison.
	And I was going to say something else, and I forgot what it was, and it doesn't really matter.
	Oh, yeah, I'm just saying.
	All Patel had to say was nothing about Epstein.
	We can't talk about it.
	That's my point.
	My point was that they're talking about it, and that they're lying about it.
	And that there's only one reason to send that message.
	It's a subtextual message.
	That's all that is.
	Whether they're even fully apprised of it, who knows, but at some level they have to be.
	There's a reason why Patel kept talking about it in 2023.
	He understood the Epstein case was a classic example of deep state corruption involving intelligence agencies and high powerful people, humans involved in one part, human trafficking of often underage girls.
	And on the other part.
	And that usually involves, according to Robert Mueller, who told Alex Acosta to back off the investigation of Epstein all the way back in 08 and told him to back off because he said he was a government intelligence asset.
	It was Robert Mueller that listed him that way.
	Robert Mueller has a history of it.
	Go back to the Asimov case and the very unusual history of the Asimov son and what happened there.
	That this is what Mueller is neck deep in.
	What the Bongino and Patel are saying right away, one of their very first big high-profile public actions is to convince the deep state world, don't worry, we're not coming for you.
	That's the message with the Epstein case.
	Like talking about, oh, we'll do something about Fauci, the guy that just got a pardon that covers everything you're investigating.
	I'm glad you're investigating him.
	There'll be zero consequence for it.
	And everybody knows that.
	So that's more of a show.
	Investigation than a real investigation that can lead to meaningful criminal consequences for anybody.
	People are not getting what the subtext that's being sent here.
	Combined with James Comey publicly threatening the president without legal consequence to this day, you combine those two events, the message to everybody is the FBI doesn't have the cojones to take on the deep state.
	Under Kash Patel and Dan Bongino, and they'll do nothing about it.
	They'll even go and gaslight you and pretend to you that everything you understand about Epstein really isn't true.
	What do you make...
	Here's a guy that made his bones on Russiagate.
	Before this, Kash Patel was just another run-of-the-mill prosecutor.
	That's all he was.
	You cut him, he bled government bloke.
	Same with Dan Bongino, dating back to his Secret Service days, right?
	These guys don't come from fighting the system.
	They don't come from being criminal defense lawyers or criminal defense investigators or independent journalists exposing.
	That's not their background.
	They stumble into Russiagate because it was just the latest, most egregious deep state scam to try to hijack American political power away from where the American people wanted it to go, which was more towards detente with Russia, not conflict with Russia, a country that should, in many respects, culturally and otherwise, be an ally.
	Not an adversary in the current political environment.
	We'll have on, this Wednesday, Sidebar returns with an honest-to-God true Ruski, the Russians with attitude.
	He's an honest-to-God Russian.
	He's like Russian to the bone.
	He's like everything about him is Russian.
	You know, speaks English, very good insight.
	They usually appear with like an image, so you usually don't see them.
	The person will be more of the podcast kind of version, but we'll see.
	Maybe we'll see what he looks like underneath the hood.
	Don't know.
	But that'll be a lot of fun.
	But that's what's going on underneath all of this, is that the fact they chose this to constantly make a high-profile case out of, after they decided not to release any files, is sending the wrong message.
	And if they want that message to be reversed, one, they should quit saying this about Epstein, but if they're still going to stay on that path, at least...
	That's not going to change the world, arresting that guy.
	Arresting the guy who funded him and organized him, that's what can change the world.
	And until I see any evidence they're doing that, they're big fat failures.
	Yeah, no, it's...
	Oh, no, announcing the reinvestigation to the cocaine in the White House.
	I couldn't care less, but whatever.
	But also, Patel in that interview says, we've discovered that the FBI was hiding evidence.
	You know, they had a box.
	They didn't think we were going to find it.
	And I'm thinking like concealment tolls the statute of limitations.
	So if they've concealed anything- There's obstruction.
	So he made his bones on Russiagate.
	And now they're saying, oh, golly gee, we would love to investigate Russia, but we can't because statute of limitations has passed.
	No, it isn't.
	There's been ongoing obstructive and conspiratorial efforts.
	Any affirmative action in favor of the conspiracy extends the statute of limitations under the conspiracy laws to get all of these people.
	What they're really doing is they're grandstanding, saying they're going to do something, talk about doing something, put out some big report, and then that's going to be it.
	That's the path they're clearly on.
	And some people, the other thing is right now, There's some people who are doing great work.
	Some of that work is behind the scenes due to the nature of the work.
	We're getting undue criticism like Robert Kennedy.
	By contrast, and so attacking Kennedy does nothing but help his adversaries, which is all a big pharma and the rest at this point.
	By contrast, unless pressure is put on Kash Patel or Dan Bogino, what they're trying to see is if they can get away with it.
	If they can get away with not doing anything about Epstein.
	And gaslighting everybody about Epstein.
	Then they know they can get away with not doing anything about weaponized lawfare, not doing anything about deep state corruption, and just get credit for the everyday cases that they bust.
	And you can tell if you've been watching them and following their social media, that's where their mindset is.
	And that's why I'm saying everybody should scream at them about this, because otherwise they're going to get away with it.
	They're going to get away with not doing their job, not what they got put in a position of power to do.
	And Maureen Comey is still the one of the lead prosecutors in the, in the P Diddy case, which is unraveling as, you know, an extortion ring and a sex trafficking ring that only involves I mean, just like Ghislaine Maxwell.
	For example, Ghislaine Maxwell's in jail.
	You could go and cut a deal with Ghislaine Maxwell.
	Not the one Dershowitz is recommending.
	Saying, oh, pardon, poor Ghislaine.
	Yeah, I don't think so.
	You've got more than anybody under similar circumstances.
	You can't keep working for Lady Rothschild for free forever, Alan.
	But is he – Because, I mean, you're talking about Robert, this all goes back to Robert Maxwell, who was running an entrapment operation and a deep state ally of all the deep states.
	I mean, he was tied to MI6, tied to KGB, tied to the Mossad, he was tied to everybody.
	He learned that, that's how he got rich and powerful after World War II.
	He learned how to manipulate that scene.
	And then he got into economic trouble, was gonna talk, went out on his boat, didn't come back, just fell off and drowned.
	About as realistic as Jeff Epstein hanging himself in a jail cell designed to prohibit you from killing yourself.
	Robert Maxwell, right when he's under peak scrutiny, falls off a boat and drowns.
	That's the official story.
	So she's got all kinds of things.
	I would have been going to Ghislaine Maxwell day one saying, spill the beans, we'll get you in better custodial arrangement.
	You'll stay in custody, but it won't be this prison.
	But just spill the beans.
	Tell us everything about everybody everywhere.
	Instead, they're sending the exact opposite message.
	They're saying, whatever you want, we're not going to be looking there.
	No, no, no.
	We're not going to look at that.
	Whatever you want.
	And it's a dangerous, perilous sign of how much the FBI will be utterly toothless under the Trump administration.
	It won't be the saboteur it was in the first Trump administration of Trump's agenda, but it won't be the advocate he needs it to be for us to end this lawfare once and for all.
	Well, speaking of Epstein and speaking of Trump, Robert, what the hell did Elon do last week?
	I was live and Encryptus comes up and says, Viva, you might want to check Twitter.
	And then I go look and think it's like, you know, you couldn't believe what happened.
	It would seem also that by whatever coincidence of coincidences, J.D. Vance was recording live with Theo Vaughn and Cash Patel was recording live with Joe Rogan when the news broke to them as well.
	We're seemingly aware of the beef between Elon and Trump, but I think everybody was because of the big, beautiful bill.
	But the timing was, I didn't realize that all three of these things happened at the same time.
	Elon tweets out that Trump's on the Epstein file.
	That's why Bongino and Patel are not releasing it, while Patel is on with Rogan and J.D. Vance on with Theo Vaughn.
	Theo Vaughn is a weirdly funny dude.
	He seems to say things that are straightforward.
	You can tell Vance is like...
	Is this for real?
	This is for real?
	What was it?
	It was the craziest conspiracy about Frederick Douglass?
	There was just one crazy thing after the other.
	But Vance handled it with aplomb.
	Better than Elon handled the momentary separation this week.
	I'm not trying to be...
	He's on the spectrum.
	He's announced that he's on the spectrum.
	Sometimes you have a...
	Like, he made a joke.
	It was a weird one in front of Trump when he was at the White House about France.
	And nobody got the joke!
	And so I thought for a second, the tweet was supposed to be like, nobody was supposed to take it seriously.
	That's how stupid it was.
	Have a nice day, Donald.
	Like, hey, I'm going to say the worst thing on earth.
	Have a nice day.
	and everyone's going to understand it's a joke.
	The people who want to believe Trump is on the Epstein files jump on it.
	Elon knows more.
	Even I was thinking, Elon has access to DMs on Twitter officially, but if that's the information he's using to say this, he's breaking the law even if it's true.
	I was not off at all in terms of the concept of defamation by implication.
	Like hypothetically, well, not hypothetically, let's say he was serious and he says something which is technically true, but has implications that are...
	Trump, if he were so inclined and he didn't retract, he could have sued him for defamation through implication.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	No doubt about that.
	Remember that he makes two defamatory statements.
	One is saying he's in the Epstein files, knowing that that would be interpreted as something that was not publicly disclosed that was in the Epstein files.
	And it was not that he knew Epstein.
	We'll get to that in a little bit in a second.
	The various false statements being circulated now about Trump and Epstein, derived from that.
	But the other aspect of it is, remember he says, this is why the files are not being released.
	So that's a specific defamatory piece of information, right?
	So if it turns out, in fact, it has nothing to do with why the file's released, no matter what's in the files about Trump and Epstein, that's a libelous action that Trump could take action against the richest man in the world for.
	Now, he ultimately deleted that tweet and backed off a wide range of his aggressive commentary.
	I first thought, maybe, like Mark Robert thought, that maybe this is stage theater.
	I mean, you've got two of the most famous trolls in the world.
	And so that maybe it's not a couple of alphas going at it in competition for tribal loyalty, but rather Elon needs a little bit of a break.
	He needs them to quit shorting his stock.
	He needs them to quit burning down his cars.
	He needs various governments to quit hating obsessively on him.
	And so maybe he would create like a fake storm of a divorce with Trump so that people would stop hating him, trying to sink his stock, trying to kill him, trying to blow up his cars, trying to destroy his spaceships, etc.
	But the Epstein comment seemed like, oh, that's a step too far, bro.
	That seemed more like, you know, put an altist on ketamine.
	Not a good combo there, Elon.
	I've always had mixed sentiments on Elon.
	I initially started out as a skeptic.
	I have close friends who are huge fans.
	Now, I still think they might be a little compromised by the fact that he's made them a ridiculous amount of money.
	Them betting on Elon has paid off again and again and again and again and again.
	So I get it.
	But, you know, he delivered on Twitter.
	He delivered on the 2024 election.
	Now, I don't think he was responsible for why Trump won, but I think that he sure as heck helped.
	He didn't hurt, that's for sure.
	And Twitter was awesome to have some free speech space somewhere in the world.
	So I give him a lot of deference on that.
	I think some of it was policy dispute.
	Some of it was personality dispute.
	Taking, for now, at face value, this was a sincere dispute, not a staged one, to allow Elon some flexibility in his private marketplace space to have some distance with Trump.
	I mean, there were rumors and ruminations that Elon really thought he could control presidential policy.
	And there were some suggestions.
	Steve Bannon was an early critic.
	Now, God bless Steve.
	I still think Steve goes a little far.
	But, you know, you probably need that kind of junkyard dog on your scene.
	But he was like, ah, prison him today.
	Take all his stuff.
	Seize it all.
	You know, people are calling you, Yo, send him to Siberia or something.
	Yo, that's cool.
	Let's go.
	Well, nationalize SpaceX by midnight tonight.
	Yeah, nationalize that.
	Take that.
	Take his rockets.
	Take his car.
	Take that.
	You know, I mean, again, sometimes you need somebody like that.
	You need a little junkyard dog now and then to get people in line.
	But I didn't share those sentiments.
	I still think Elon means very well.
	I have some fundamental disagreements.
	I think that he does represent the libertarian school.
	But the libertarian coalition is influential in the court of public opinion, is influence in donations.
	They're not influential in votes.
	And in fact, I think both Massey and Paul have made big tactical mistakes making the big, beautiful bill the source of their opposition, just like I think Elon did.
	Because you look under the hood, there isn't the kind of problems they're identifying, and they end up looking like they're soft on borders.
	I don't think either one is, but that is the perception that both of them are now getting because of their obsessive focus on this.
	I think they've also misused their leverage and some other things.
	But the libertarian school of thought is generally more pro-immigration.
	Now, Elon's been very against illegal immigration, but he's also been very pro-legal immigration, H-1B visas, etc.
	They're very pro-globalist on trade policy.
	So Elon is against tariffs.
	Elon is deeply in bed in various ways in China, with China.
	So he's not a China hawk.
	He's a China dove.
	And so on some of those key aspects, the libertarian wing was never going to get what they wanted with Trump.
	Trump is on the budgetary policy.
	Priority one is going to be securing the border and funds to do so, including completing the wall.
	Priority two is going to be cutting taxes.
	Priority three is going to be restructuring the regulatory structure to encourage investment in the United States, using a combination of tariffs and depreciation bonuses and other bonuses to invest in the U.S. for manufacturing, construction and production.
	One of the key indicators of economic recession is construction employment declining.
	Construction employment is actually picking up.
	Yeah.
	In one of his construction, Trump understands this well.
	That's going to be priority one, two, and three.
	Priority four, five, way down, is going to be cutting the debt, is going to be reducing the deficit.
	Now you have different economic debates, modern monetary theorists, Steve Keen, other people, the Keynesians, the Austrians, all have different interpretations of the consequence of debt.
	But politically, Trump has long said you can monetize the debt so it's not his priority.
	I even did a little Twitter poll.
	Over 80% said it's far more important for Trump to cut taxes than to cut the deficit.
	And if I said, is it more important to secure the border or cut the deficit, that's going to be 90-10, 95-5 in favor of securing the border.
	I think Elon is on the completely wrong side.
	The thing with Libertarians is they tend to be utterly disconnected from the real world.
	God bless them.
	But they tend to think the whole world really agrees with him.
	No, they don't.
	They never have.
	Open Borders has been their Achilles heel for a decade plus now.
	You'll see Rand Paul say things now and then that kind of sound like Open Borders.
	So them opposing a bill that's the number one bill to secure the border isn't going to do well.
	If you're a betting man, and I am, I would bet that that bill is in fact going to pass.
	Whatever else may be problematic about its AI immunity or other provisions, that's going to have to be fought out a different day, different time, different place.
	But I think Elon misread.
	Patrick Basham, Democracy Institute, did a poll.
	Others have done surveys.
	Richard Barris has already done ones in the past.
	I told people right away, like, oh, this is going to be serious.
	MAGA is going to be split.
	It's going to be the Democrats are all silent.
	Elon will figure out he screwed up.
	We'll step back and walk it back within a couple of days.
	That's what he did.
	And second, Trump will realize he doesn't need to smack the Elon around.
	You know, he was having fun, I think, doing it at first.
	He's like, yeah, maybe we will investigate all his contracts and all that.
	And then he realized...
	Okay, yeah, all right.
	He's like, I wish him well.
	I just think he went off.
	And Trump realized, okay, doubling down on beating up on this guy is unnecessary, and I think unproductive for Trump's best interest.
	Elon, I think, will still long-term remain an ally.
	But the libertarian side has to recognize they just don't have majority support for prioritizing the deficit and the debt over tax cuts, over border enforcement, over a secure defense for the country.
	I mean, Rand Paul's out there talking about cutting Social Security and Medicare.
	That's a good way to end.
	The only cuts that Trump has approved are cuts to people who are legally not entitled to it.
	That they were loading up Medicaid rolls with illegal immigrants.
	And that's what he's cutting off.
	That's where most of the savings come from.
	And instead, you have people saying, this is the biggest spending cut for a reconciliation bill in the last 30 years.
	I was just trying to Google what the term was, because it's not a budget, it's a reconciliation bill.
	Can you explain to the world what that means?
	Because Congress has stupid rules that make it hard to do basic things to help the corrupt actors.
	Like, that's what people should be complaining about.
	They shouldn't be complaining about A lot of the other budget bills require 60 votes.
	The reason why they don't have separate single...
	Yes or no on that issue.
	Yes or no on that issue.
	Don't put it all together where you're stuck approving a bunch of crap you don't want because you need it in order to get through the stuff you do want.
	But, like, that should be the complaint.
	But the Senate has rigged their rules so that you have to have 60 votes for most budgetary items.
	The only way you get around that is you call it a reconciliation bill.
	For that, those cuts couldn't be included, period.
	Again, the Senate creates its own stupid rules, so people should be complaining about these stupid rules the Senate has created.
	They create, I mean, nothing in the Constitution says there has to be 60 votes for something, right?
	I mean, the only time you have to have two-thirds is certain limited personalities.
	But not for budgets.
	It's just majority.
	And yet the Senate creates new creative rules to make it hard to do that.
	Why?
	Because they want the corrupt deep state to have as many outs as possible.
	As many exit ramps as possible from any meaningful institutional reform.
	But the Big Beautiful Bill is likely to pass.
	It was a mistake of Elon to make it a big deal.
	He, I think, got caught up in his own...
	Hey, look, I own this huge platform.
	I'm the wealthiest man in the world.
	I've contributed a lot.
	And I think he's truly embittered that certain aspects didn't get through.
	That being said, and there are sincere policy disagreements on immigration, on trade, on China, between the libertarian wing and the Trump MAGA populist base.
	But when they did the surveys, it was like 90-10.
	85-15 in favor of Trump over Musk, right?
	Musk doesn't have broad-based public support, right?
	He's an interesting, eclectic billionaire who likes to bang crazy chicks, that is a genius when it comes to space and engineering in a wide range of spaces, clearly on the spectrum and a little bit off, has always hired terrible people politically.
	I mean, someday maybe he'll hire some competent, capable people, and then they would have given him better advice.
	Like how to navigate and negotiate through this terrain.
	Did great work with Doge.
	Does all he did he could.
	I think he's got an unfair, undue criticism from Bannon.
	I've said so all along.
	But there's also honest disagreements underneath it all.
	But what I would encourage the libertarian wing is to not sacrifice the good for the perfect.
	Because the perfect ain't coming.
	Perfect ain't happening.
	You know, is my criticism of Paul and Massey.
	And again, I have massive respect for Massey and Paul.
	But I get some people who are jumping on him because it's easy to jump on him.
	Rand Paul has been the most consistent, principled opponent of the surveillance state in the U.S. Senate his entire time and tenure in the Senate.
	So you're not going to find me bashing on Rand Paul.
	I'm going to disagree with him on this policy proposal, disagree with him on tariffs and trade, disagree with how he's using political leverage to support some of the more eclectic libertarian causes against the popular majority.
	However, don't lose perspective that Paul has more often been an ally than an adversary of freedom and liberty in this country.
	And Thomas Massey is the only one who's fought for small farmers in this country, literally the only one, the only one with any consistency in Congress that has ever done so.
	So he has my eternal respect no matter what the, you know, they could catch him screwing a sheep and I wouldn't care.
	So the, you know, he's got my immunity on that.
	So the, so the, But I think they're tactically wrong.
	What the libertarian wing is not getting...
	And those are not the issues to go to fight for, to battle Trump on.
	And use your leverage where you could get us out of a war in Ukraine, for example.
	That would be a useful place for Rand Paul to start using his leverage rather than letting loser Lindsey Graham, loony Lindsey, running around trying to sanction the entire world for his latest war whore cause while he money launders back for Ukraine, as was publicly disclosed this week by Larry Johnson, who has intelligence sources, that Lindsey Graham is personally guilty.
	This is why I'm going off on the Epstein stuff.
	All of that, it's like Ukraine.
	You just dig into Ukraine, you're going to find all kinds of corruption.
	But you know who it's going to implicate?
	Senators, congressmen, powerful donors.
	And that's who Cash and Bongino are running around saying, please don't worry, we're not going to rat you out.
	Hey Israel, don't worry, we're not going to rat out how deeply in bed Epstein was with Mossad.
	No, no, no, no.
	We didn't see any videos.
	What videos?
	Videos?
	"Ah, no videos here." And I think they all would be better served.
	Elon, as well as Rand Paul and Thomas Massey and others, focusing on where they can use their leverage to expose the deep state, not pursue causes that have no popular support within the country.
	Two things.
	Just to go back to Elon Musk and the degree to which he must have been insulted and also waste six months.
	Spend six months with Doge.
	Tesla gets firebombed.
	He has all sorts of business problems.
	And then they don't listen to him.
	I can understand why he freaked out and went a little haywire and then felt bad the next morning.
	And daily assassination attempts.
	On his family.
	Now, there are some staffers.
	I mean, Bannon was standing up for him.
	But if you're a staffer in the White House, do you really need to go around leaking to people about how you have a personal vendetta against Elon Musk?
	Just word of the wise for those people that are in that rank.
	And some of them are populist allies.
	But know how to play your cards.
	You got some kids up there that are talking too big and that need to not be talking so big.
	Just, you know, FYI.
	So, you know, some of them are watching.
	So it's just, you know, a little friendly, friendly advice, as they say.
	The issue of the AI section of the bill, Marjorie Taylor Greene admits that, you know, acknowledged that.
	The request has been that the Senate strike that before they send it back to the House.
	Is that how it works?
	Here's the problem.
	If anything changes in the bill, they have to start back from scratch.
	And so that's going to be a problem.
	So my guess is ultimately they don't want to start from scratch because they don't know if they'll get it through the House.
	So that's where I think you're better off with the bill.
	The only negative I've seen from the bill, for the most part, has been, I mean, there's some funding of some programs I would rather see cut, some Green New Deal vestigial programs and other stuff.
	But, you know, I'm not in favor of creating the SALT tax credit all over again so commie states like New York, Illinois, and California can get subsidized by the federal government.
	For their tax burdens imposed on their local population.
	But they couldn't get congressmen from California or Illinois or New York to vote for it unless that was included.
	So I think given that, now I think David Sack's argument on the AI is that the local democratic governments are trying to weaponize state governmental power to make AI into a woke engine or to shut it down altogether.
	And their point is that that will lead to the U.S. being behind in the AI race globally with China and some other nations that could substantially handicap us on a go forward basis so that in order to promote AI, you need it to be a one stop shop federal source of regulation.
	My own view is I'm against any form of immunity for anybody, anywhere, anyplace, anytime.
	So you're not going to find me championing it for AI or anybody else.
	I understand where Sachs is coming from.
	I would recommend a different resolution to it.
	But they can always take that up.
	They can come up with a new AI bill.
	That is a better balance of interest without obsessing over this being part of this bill, given there are greater priorities in that.
	Whether a state can regulate AI is not as important as securing the border.
	Whether or not a state can regulate AI is not as important as not having the biggest tax hike in the history of the country, which is what will happen if this bill doesn't pass.
	So that's where I think politically and policy-wise...
	All right.
	Some people in the chat are not happy with you on that, but what can you do?
	Robert, you can't please everybody?
	No, it's always priorities.
	This is politics, folks.
	You got to pick what you prioritize.
	We don't live in a fantasy land like libertarians live in.
	So we don't live in a world where everybody's committed to a balanced budget.
	We don't live in a world where any of this...
	You know what I mean?
	I mean, it's like...
	You'll find fewer, bigger advocates of Thomas Massey than me.
	But my point to all of them is, okay, what's the alternative that's going to pass?
	And Thomas knows his alternatives aren't going to pass.
	He knows there's no chance it's going to pass, or at least I think he does.
	Now, he might have his own reasons for grievance.
	I mean, Trump promised a whole bunch of people certain things would happen in the agriculture department that haven't happened.
	That the Amish community has not delivered the promises that the Trump administration made to it during the campaign.
	Now, a lot of those were behind the scenes, not public or formal, but they were still there, and there were promises made to Massey that have not been kept.
	So that's on Trump's team.
	And, you know, that sort of midwit, Brooke Rollins, from the America First Policy Institute, has done no favors, done Trump no favors in that regard.
	But there has to be a more practical approach than...
	It's like when I debate Israel.
	It's like, okay, in reality, if Israel or Hamas, who do you want to have nuclear weapons?
	And once you decide that, then you decide 80% of the other issue.
	It doesn't mean you can't criticize Israel.
	It just means you realize, okay, two-state solution, maybe.
	A one-state solution that includes a right to return.
	No, no, I'm not giving Hamas nuclear weapons, right?
	But we live often in binary choices, difficult choices.
	My brother does this all the time in moral philosophy.
	And pretending that we don't have to make those choices.
	Which is why the Republicans love to be in the opposition, because they can pretend they would do all these things when they're in the majority, which they don't have the majority support to actually do.
	And that's where they always wuss out in favor of the donor class in the deep state, because those are two biggest people that could easily take them out of future electoral office or future profits or riches, which are easily available and accessible through board fees and book fees and movie deals and think tanks and all the rest.
	Those are the people that employ them, not Joe Blow back home.
	You have to make practical choices.
	You either prioritize reducing the debt or reducing taxes.
	As I'll at least give Paul credit, he's starting to admit he wants there to be a lower tax cut.
	He's admitting he wants there to be less money for immigration enforcement.
	And he gives his policy reasons as to why, but I was like, at least be honest about that.
	Because what they all know is that 85-90% of the Trump voter base will choose tax cuts over deficit cuts.
	They will choose border enforcement over deficit cuts.
	And for those people that don't like it, well, take it up with the 90% who disagree with you.
	Because that's your problem as a court of public opinion problem.
	Maybe you think they should focus on the debt.
	Maybe you think they should focus on the debt more than the border, on the debt more than taxes.
	But that's not where the American people are, nor to be honest, where they've ever been.
	When you say that it's either that or, or, or taxes go up, just hypothetically, if the bill gets voted down or the, um, Reconciliation.
	If it doesn't pass, what happens?
	Taxes go up because the tax cuts are going to expire.
	So they weren't locked in.
	So unless these cuts pass, there'll be a massive tax hike.
	There'll still be taxes on tips, still be taxed on overtime, still be taxes on Social Security.
	There won't be a depreciation or other investment for infrastructure in the United States, particularly for manufacturing.
	None of it.
	It'll all be gone.
	All the money for the border won't be there.
	Money to finish the wall won't be there.
	Money to get the agents in force in order to be able to increase the numbers that we're deporting won't be there.
	It'll all be gone.
	That's what Democrats want, of course.
	By the way, the cap will still be increasing.
	It's just you give Democrats the leverage instead of Trump having the leverage.
	This is where I have been unhappy with some of Massey and Paul's public representations.
	They, in my view, haven't been fully honest about that, of dealing with that.
	And they know that as well as anybody.
	And I get where their concerns are.
	I mean, they represent the libertarian wing of the party, and they do a very effective job of it.
	But in this area, it's just not pragmatic or practical.
	They're not giving people the real-world tradeoffs.
	Like, I have to do this all the time in legal cases.
	I'll settle a case that was up to me I'd never settle.
	But I have to look at my client and recognize, okay, if we don't go forward, there's a chance that you have no means to live for the next three years, whereas the settlement gives you the means to live for the next three years.
	And it doesn't get you the public verdict you want, doesn't get you the apology you want, doesn't get you the potential high-end verdict you want.
	But it gives you at least the ability to sustain yourself.
	You have to make those choices.
	You don't get to live in a fantasy world where it's ideal one versus ideal two.
	It's the ideal versus the real.
	And I see people not—and you can still complain about it, but that's why I would focus on.
	Complain about why the Senate has these ridiculous rules in place that require supermajorities to deal with basic everyday budget items.
	Take it up with the Senate and the House having these ridiculous rules in place that prohibit single-issue voting.
	Make more people run on it in the primaries.
	Are you in favor of single-issue bills?
	Are you in favor of not requiring supermajorities for anything that concerns the power of the purse?
	We need these institutional reforms.
	Highlight those.
	Focus on those.
	Rather than pursuing things that just can't happen.
	Let me read a couple of super chats.
	I can't bring them up because you'll see my DMs.
	From Pazbo over on Commitube, who says, What a bullshit false choice, Barnes.
	Either Israel, ethnostate, or Haman nuclear weapons.
	South Africa has no nuclear weapons.
	How dumb do you think we are?
	Well, that is what's called real world.
	Let's do the number one.
	So he's comparing it to South Africa.
	Do you really want to be saying that Israel will look like South Africa once Hamas comes in?
	That's your endorsement for Hamas being in control of Israel?
	Is the example of the ANC running South Africa?
	Hey, bro, you might want to pick a different example.
	Number two, Israel already has nuclear weapons, their genius.
	South Africa never had nuclear weapons.
	At least to my knowledge.
	So the idea that a country that never had it will suddenly get it because Hamas gets there, that's not my point.
	My point is Israel already has it.
	If Hamas takes over Israel because the right to return is granted, in which they would have a majority, and in which they have been the elected representatives of the Gaza Strip, for those that don't remember.
	That want to blame Hamas on Israel.
	There's reasons to criticize Israel regarding Hamas's rise.
	But don't forget, they were voted in legitimately by the Gaza people.
	Now, they haven't been running honest elections since they initially got in.
	But that's still the case.
	And that's the reality.
	And people just don't want to face that.
	Because then it exposes the problems of their view, the problematic nature of their views.
	To say it's either this or this.
	It's like people say, oh, it's so much fun.
	It's like little Zelensky.
	So much fun to attack nuclear capacity or nuclear bomb-carrying planes that were easily available to attack because of compliance with international treaties and customs and protocols on that meant for nuclear deterrence.
	And then you're hanging out in your bunker whining and telling everybody to stay strong as you don't like Russia's retaliation.
	It's called real world.
	And there's a lot of people that don't want to live in the real world.
	They want to live in a fantasy world.
	This is why the Republicans love to be opposition.
	Because then they can just pretend, when we're in power, this will happen, and this will happen.
	Because they know they don't have to make any promises because they're not actually in power.
	And then once they get there, they deliver on next to nothing.
	Because of other institutional corruption, but also because it's not easy to get to a majority in the House and the Senate.
	And you have to, these are binary choices, and people don't want to pretend they don't have to choose A or B. And this is like the great thing in my brother's moral philosophy questions.
	You know, the train has lost control.
	It's heading to a group of 100 children.
	There's four people on the train.
	You can turn the train that will likely lead to the death of the four people on the train, or not turn the train and kill 100 kids.
	That kind of situation happens at some level on policy all around the world.
	And so what a lot of people want to do is I would just like to not choose.
	Not choosing leads to the death of 100 children.
	So it's like you have to choose.
	These are the reality of the consequences people that in actual decision-making roles have to make.
	And people got to quit deluding themselves that they can pretend that they don't have to face the consequences of their failure to choose.
	Robert, there was another last chat over there before we move on.
	Roger Stone exposed Steve Bannon's relationship with Epstein today on his show.
	Roger Stone exposed Steve Bannon's relationship on the show today.
	It seems they hung out in New York and Paris a lot.
	I know nothing of that.
	His personal grievance about Steve Bannon has got it is way, way, way, way in excess.
	I know nothing about it.
	And there's absolutely no truth to those claims either.
	I mean, briefly for those that don't know, Epstein was a guy who was built to entrap powerful people.
	He was hired at the Dalton School, 1969, 1970, as an exiting gift, you might say, by its headmaster, Bill Barr's father, who then would write a book about how much fun it would be to have underage sex with underage girls in a science fiction.
	This is all true, people.
	I'm not even fact-checking this again in real time because it's all true.
	At some point, he hooks up with Ghislaine Maxwell.
	Who's Ghislaine Maxwell?
	She's the daughter of Robert Maxwell.
	Who's Robert Maxwell?
	Robert Maxwell is a man who escaped.
	I think Ukraine, by the way.
	It's like you can get almost any corruption involving the world somehow connects back to Ukraine.
	It's like every virus somehow connects to China.
	Almost, I mean, Asian virus, Hong Kong virus, COVID.
	You know, it's like China, China, China.
	You know, a lot of Ukraine.
	But Maxwell was a deeply connected guy.
	MI6, Mossad.
	The KGB worked with all of them, set up honey traps, was likely involved with those honey traps, then mysteriously died when he fell off his boat after he's under investigation for massive fraud and theft of a pension fund in the UK for the various publications he ran.
	It's his daughter that magically ends up meeting Epstein.
	Okay.
	The Epstein was running a...
	There are cameras everywhere in his place in New York, in his place in Florida, in his ranch in New Mexico, and in the island, especially on the island.
	And they said they were in the weirdest possible places.
	Only reason you would have that is for entrapment and blackmail, etc.
	He was always trying to entrap everybody.
	So there's all kinds of people that are in the Epstein files that mean nothing.
	There are people that he failed to successfully entrap.
	He tried to hang out with rich people, powerful people, connected people, popular people, invited them to dinner parties, other events, tried to donate his way into Harvard University and other places, deep ties to Harvard.
	But his relationship with Bill Gates goes much further than that, much more cozy.
	But there's probably nobody in New York that at some point he didn't invite to a dinner party of influence or consequence.
	So there's photos of him showing up, hanging out at places where Trump hung out.
	He would offer free plane rides to everybody and their brother as a way to try to entrap him.
	Did it to Robert Kennedy.
	Did it to Donald Trump repeatedly.
	But that doesn't mean anything.
	It has any consequence.
	The Epstein files that people want to know about is who went to the island and who is portrayed in those videos that Kash Patel maybe has or hasn't looked at, depending on what day you're listening to Kash.
	Or does or doesn't exist, depending on what day you're listening to Kash.
	And so in that capacity, he ultimately gets caught.
	And then the investigation gets covered up.
	Then he gets caught again, magically dies in prison in a place that was not supposed to be capable of suicide.
	And that's the official excuse.
	So the camera was turned off.
	But for Trump along the way, Trump was one of the first people to rat him out.
	So Trump kicked him out of Mar-a-Lago, one of the few people to take corrective action.
	He hinted in a big favorable cover piece in The Atlantic in 2002.
	He tries to tell everybody who he really is.
	And he compliments.
	Oh, yeah, you know, he loves the party, loves all the things, big guy, loves beautiful girls even more than I do.
	But, by the way, he tends to like him on the younger side.
	Anybody with an IQ over 50 knew what Trump was trying to tell the world about.
	And let me stop you there, because everybody quotes that and says, oh, Trump spoke highly of Epstein.
	I'm like, if you want to publicly out somebody, you do it either the way Seth MacFarlane did it with respect to Harvey Weinstein and making all those jokes.
	Ha ha, just jokes.
	people listen or you say, yeah, he's a good guy, but see, And if you have an IQ, you know exactly what Trump was trying to do, which is out him as a potato pedophile.
	And when he was under investigation, Trump was one of the first people to help out the lawyers involved.
	Trump was on UK media in 2015.
	And somebody asked something about Epstein.
	He was like, well, you should probably ask Prince Andrew about that.
	I mean, right on the UK, he's like, ah, British royal family!
	He's pointing at him.
	So the Clinton campaign knew this would be a problem.
	So they created a fake lawsuit against Trump claiming to be a victim connected to Epstein because they knew how much Epstein was a problem for Clintons and the Democrats as a massive red herring.
	And so it was always bogus.
	There's absolutely no basis whatsoever in any fact.
	To believe that Trump has anything nefarious whatsoever.
	If you thought there was any possibility of it, it would have been outed and exposed a decade ago.
	Yeah, but I had a theory about that just to steal, Matt.
	That if they out it, but it involves outing all of their friends and family and brothers.
	They would have selectively outed him.
	Like they selectively outed whomever they wanted in any other context or something.
	So there was never any truth to it.
	And Trump wouldn't have been the guy to kick him out.
	Trump wouldn't have been the guy to tell the world, hint, hint, this is who he is, long before he was ever caught.
	Trump wouldn't have been the one doing BBC interviews, pointing out the Prince Andrew connections.
	Trump wouldn't have been the one helping the principal lawyer bringing the case against Epstein.
	So nor would Trump have said he wanted the Epstein files released if this was the case.
	He would have buried it on his own accord.
	So there's no foundation for it, no credibility for it.
	Anybody who alleges it is full of it.
	And you can discard them as a reliable source if they say so.
	I think Elon was doing it just in an escalating troll tweet with Trump to see.
	I think he was kind of frustrated and seeing if he could escalate.
	And then he realized it backfired.
	It didn't work the way he thought it would work.
	And he was like, hold on a second.
	Once the ketamine high faded, he woke up the next morning.
	I mean, God bless Elon, but he did.
	Voluntarily choose to be in a relationship with Ashley St. Clair and with Amber Heard.
	I mean, you couldn't have two crazier people on the planet than those two.
	Hold on.
	He had a relationship with Amber Heard?
	Oh, yes, yes, yes.
	He cheated with Amber Heard.
	I mean, seriously.
	I mean, God bless him, but even I, you know, it's like.
	There was nothing about her that was that persuasive to motivate getting anywhere near that loon.
	Why did I know?
	Yes, Elon and Amber Heard were in a romantic relationship, and it's reasonable to infer they were intimate, because I asked Rock if they had sex.
	I was just telling my kid today about what a batshit crazy biatch Amber Heard was, because he didn't understand that it was Johnny Depp from Pirates of the Caribbean, and he lost, however, he lost 50 million on the sixth one because of what she said about him.
	My kid was angry.
	He's like, yeah, you stay away from crazy women because they will ruin your life.
	Oh my God!
	So you're teaching him good homeschooling there.
	Yeah, he's already ready.
	You know, I mean, there's an old frayed crazier in the head.
	you know, da-da-da.
	But, you know, the...
	So I think Elon means well.
	The people that were just utterly bashing him, I disagreed with.
	I disagreed with what Steve Bannon was calling for and all the rest.
	But I side on the populist side with the Trump portion of that agenda, not with the Elon libertarian side of that agenda.
	And I think Elon will be an ally on a go forward basis more so than I think he was experimenting with something and he realized he doesn't have quite the foundation of support to do what he's trying to do.
	To prove Trump clean, they're going to have to release the files.
	We'll see about that.
	Don't hold your breath, people.
	Robert, we should move into the case that you were in.
	Yeah, all the big SCOTUS cases, the ICC, Bayer Roundup, Shara, Woke U, Tina Peters.
	Well, Tina Peters already mentioned, and then Amistad.
	Let's do Shara before we do the SCOTUS, because the SCOTUS will be its own block.
	Shara, I am pronouncing it, it's Shara, who is a 19-year-old girl with Down syndrome, admitted to a hospital in Wisconsin.
	We're in Wisconsin, right?
	Appleton, Wisconsin.
	Appleton, Wisconsin, who was being treated for COVID.
	She was ill.
	I mean, I don't know how much of it was COVID versus the treatment that she got.
	Down syndrome.
	She apparently had a do-not-intubate.
	Order that her father was in charge of, which you'll explain to me the legal scope of.
	I mean, I know what it means.
	I just don't understand why someone would have a do not intubate, except if it's just to prevent from the murderous treatment that they were giving people who were on COVID, which was intubating them, which effectively just killed them faster.
	At some point, you know, because the father thinks that they're actually poisoning his daughter and not treating her property properly.
	He is this is based on the evidence that was adduced in the first week of trial.
	He was basically.
	And at some point, however it happened, and there's some questions as to how it happened, a do not resuscitate appeared on her file, even though it was never signed off on, even though there was never a DNR, according to the father and according to the family.
	And according to the doctors themselves, said, yeah, we don't know how this got into the file.
	There was a DNR after they finished over-medicating her and malpractice.
	Effectively killing her, she goes into arrest, and they do not resuscitate her, and they effectively killed a 19-year-old woman with Down syndrome after kicking her family out so that she had no protectors in the hospital.
	They're having a trial of the family versus the hospitals and the doctors for malpractice, civil.
	I think I've effectively summarized the first week of trial, but let me know if I've missed anything and tell us what's going on with this and why this is a damn important case that everybody should be paying attention to.
	Yeah, it's the first medical battery case and batteries outside of the medical malpractice caps and limitations in Wisconsin to be brought in more than 50 years.
	But it goes past that because it's the first major COVID care case to reach how hospitals and doctors and nurses treated people in the COVID context as malpractice to reach any jury trial in America or, to my knowledge, anywhere in the world.
	So this is about COVID.
	To give you an idea of what's been referenced at the trial already, the fact that the hospital was being given huge bonuses by relabeling things a COVID injury or COVID illness or COVID death has come into trial.
	The fact that, and the hospital did blame COVID for her death, even though there was no real evidence COVID had anything to do with her death.
	It was medical malpractice that caused her death.
	The mixed doses of things.
	Gave her morphine when they shouldn't have given her any morphine.
	They failed to get the informed consent from her or her guardians, which included her father, her mother, and her sister, all of whom were excluded from knowledge and information about essential aspects of her medical care during the entire time and tenure of her medical care.
	She went in with mild COVID.
	She came out dead.
	And unfortunately, it's a story many families across America and the world Was the do not intubate specific to the treatment for COVID that you know of?
	So, yeah.
	So what happened was they said if at some point her breathing reached a certain level, they wanted to ventilate her.
	For anybody familiar, ventilation was one of the worst policies that were done by hospitals during COVID because it killed about 80 to 90% of the people.
	Right.
	I mean, you couldn't have had a worse protocol for handling COVID than mass ventilation.
	And so the doctor tells them this.
	80% chance if we ventilate her, she's dead.
	And they're like, well, then we're not in favor of ventilation.
	That led to do not intubate.
	Don't put the main thing that causes the deaths from ventilation.
	It had nothing to do with, of course, do not resuscitate at all.
	As everyone has now admitted, her file had a do not resuscitate.
	As everyone has now admitted, it's why they didn't try to resuscitate her.
	And now, as everybody has admitted, No, there was never any authorization or legitimate medical basis for DNR to be interfiled.
	I just thought of this.
	I don't, and I try to keep up, but haven't seen the whole thing.
	Is there any argument or is there any suggestion that it was literally a typo, that it went from DNI to DNR?
	No, they haven't claimed that.
	They admit they had a conversation with DNI, but they have no explanation for how DNR gets.
	Because imagine a hospital saying, by the way, we tend to have typos.
	So that order that said to give you this drug that could save you actually said the order that could kill you.
	Oops!
	Sorry about that.
	It's a place you can't have typos.
	Definitely not one you can admit to it.
	And I don't think there was.
	I think it was a delivery.
	The bottom line was this was someone that came in and they saw them as cattle to line their pockets.
	And they didn't like anybody questioning or challenging what they were doing because what they were doing wasn't working for her benefit.
	And this happened all the time during COVID.
	They were instituting sort of globalized standards and protocols of ventilation, of exclusion of guardians.
	There are reasons why they excluded her father, her sister, and her mother at critical times from any information about her essential care.
	And she entirely depended on them for advocacy for her.
	She was often unconscious during this time period and has Down syndrome.
	So she needed them to be her medical advocate.
	They excluded it.
	And what do you think their excuse is?
	COVID.
	Oh, because of COVID, we couldn't allow that.
	Because of COVID, we couldn't have had people in the room.
	Because of COVID, they restrained her.
	They restrained her constantly.
	So when they weren't sedating her unduly, they physically restrained her to where she defecated on herself in her own bed.
	I mean, this was some of the most egregious medical care in history.
	This was intentional.
	This was a hospital and doctors lining their pockets.
	At the expense of the health and well-being of ordinary people, in this case, the life of a young girl with Down syndrome, whose family was literally begging on FaceTime as she was dying, begging them to do something, and they did nothing and let her die.
	So I hope the jury sends a verdict that is proportionate to the bad conduct the hospital and the doctor sent in.
	Have you, the one thing I don't get from any of the reviews is the looks on the jury's faces.
	Do you have any insider information on how the jury seems to be reacting to the evidence thus far?
	Well, I helped pick the jury and was there for opening statement.
	So I think that the evidence, I think Warner Mendenhall and his whole team have done a great job.
	Scott Schar, her father, has spent every penny, nickel, diamond dollar he has to help bring this case to trial because the harsh caps in Wisconsin make it very difficult for plaintiff's lawyers to ever take the cases.
	They cost more to prosecute than they do in recovery.
	Warner Mendenhall gave one of the best opening statements I've ever heard.
	I recited it all in the Barnes brief this week, and I'll be using it as an example to teach and train people how to give an opening statement in the future.
	I've only cried twice in a courtroom, and the second time was listening to the opening statement in the Grace Schauer case.
	And I'm someone who knew what the opening statement was.
	I knew about the case.
	I'd helped select the jury.
	And it was still that emotionally impactful as you listen to the horror.
	I mean, this wasn't a case of them screwing up at one point.
	It was, oh, they almost killed her once, then almost killed her twice, and then they killed her a third time.
	And it was again and again and again, they had the opportunity to do the right thing and they do the wrong thing.
	Again, opportunity for the right thing, they do the wrong thing.
	Again, I mean, imagine sitting there as family begs on FaceTime to do something and you do nothing.
	What degree of cruelty?
	This goes beyond callous.
	This is cruelty.
	And I hope that the jury...
	And I have confidence, in fact, that may occur.
	And I'll get into more details of the case once the case is wrapped, avoiding disclosing or discussing anything that was discussed in confidence or private up until this point.
	But to me, watch the defense bar.
	The defense bar is it's okay to murder a 19-year-old girl with Down syndrome if her father voices concerns about COVID policy in America.
	I mean, that's how sick these people are.
	I have no idea.
	I have no doubt in their minds they were doing the right thing and letting her go pee.
	And they think us.
	We're the problems.
	We're the problems for protesting.
	We're the problems for raising concerns.
	We're the problems for second-guessing what hospitals and doctors and nurses were doing.
	The bottom line is they were engaged in reckless medical conduct that was effectively, if not intended to be, at least effectively, eugenics at scale.
	And that's what they did.
	They killed vulnerable people.
	Elderly people, people with Down syndrome, other lower-income people, and they did so often deliberately to line their pockets and to serve the agenda of the Bill Gateses of the world.
	That's why they did what they did.
	That's why she is dead.
	And there needs to be legal consequence.
	And if there is, maybe finally.
	I mean, imagine, how can you still be here defending this case?
	And not only defending it, These are cruel, callous people.
	These are the people who said yes when they said they wanted to lock up people who were unvaccinated.
	And now they have legal and political power and medical power in the medical establishment.
	And the only way we're going to ever hold them to account, the only way we're ever going to deter them from doing, is that cases like this get brought and cases like this get tried effectively and juries do the right and righteous thing.
	And I'm very hopeful that that's what we get in Wisconsin, because they could send a message around the world.
	They can't admit it, Robert, because if they admit they did it once, then people know they've done it more than once, and then it becomes just a Pandora's box.
	All right, so we'll see.
	We'll do the weekly follow-up next week.
	Encryptus, agentguru__io on Twitter, IO, the letters India Oscar, has set up his own channel now, and he runs it all day long, so if you want to go and watch it.
	Yeah, he's covering the whole shower trial.
	The sound system's not great from inside the courtroom, so you have to strain a little bit on that.
	And it's not set up for those purposes, but it's effective enough, and it's often startling.
	A lot of people that have been following the trial have been shocked at the aggressivity of the defense bar, at the arrogance of the hospitals and the doctors and the nurses involved in this.
	That, you know, like the nurse is making bad jokes with the jury.
	I mean, you're responsible for the death of a girl with Down syndrome.
	Yeah, you'd expect to see at least some level of sorrow about what happened.
	You're not seeing any of that.
	Let's get to the SCOTUS decisions because there's a bunch of them.
	And I'm going to see if I can remember offhand.
	I'm going to pull up the notes just to summarize these.
	First of all, the SCOTUS season, Robert, it ends when?
	Their judgment season.
	Oh, it's, I mean, next week is, I mean, in my end, by next week, we'll see how many decisions they issue.
	Sometimes there's a few more lagging weeks, but we're right up against the end.
	Some of the other big, more contested cases, a lot of these were unanimous, the big contested cases are probably coming down Thursday.
	So we'll have an eventful show next Sunday, depending on what the show does.
	Now, so starting off with one of the unanimous ones was discrimination, or it was a discrimination case against a straight white lady who claimed that she was fired or not hired to the benefit of a lesbian woman and then demoted to the benefit of a gay man.
	And then she sued for discrimination.
	And they basically said, I...
	They were talking about the comparable background circumstances that she had to prove in order to prove that as a straight white woman, because if she were not white, she would have had her identity checkmark, that she was the victim of discrimination.
	Her case was dismissed at a preliminary stage.
	And the Supreme Court, I believe it was unanimous, said the criteria of background circumstances that you want to apply to this, the member of the majority.
	Doesn't make sense and basically deprives them of their, not a presumption, but a reversal of the burden of proof once they've established that prima facie, she was fired for discriminatory reasons, but because she's the straight white majority woman.
	And they sent it back, remanded to go with further consideration.
	But if I didn't do a good enough job summarizing that, tell us why the importance of this decision shall reverberate throughout the ages.
	Well, it's utterly absurd that there's been any standard other than the same standard for discrimination.
	But what courts came up with, in this case, I think it was the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, that a lot of the courts had put in added burdens that don't exist in the statute.
	Thomas wrote a great concurrence talking about this is a systemic problem and we should stop courts from doing it writ large.
	If it's not in the statute, don't add to it.
	Now, Thomas could take his own advice on that for his volume standing, but that's another point for another day.
	Tom is still our best jurist on the Supreme Court.
	But these courts were saying, if you're in the majority, if you're straight, if you're white...
	They always applied it.
	Somehow that was different.
	But basically, if you are in the racial majority or you're in the religious majority or you're in the lifestyle majority, to even get to discovery than anyone else.
	And finally, the Supreme Court put an end to this nonsense.
	Nine to nothing, by the way.
	Even the lefty judges had to admit this.
	Said it was been crystal clear.
	That the laws just bans discrimination, period.
	There's no special burden because you're in the majority group.
	It's whether or not you're discriminated against.
	End of story.
	Same pleading standards.
	Same proof standards.
	Period.
	End of story.
	And that was a very good ruling to restore our anti-discrimination laws.
	And it means diversity, equity, inclusion, in case anybody had any doubts about it, is illegal.
	And has always been illegal.
	And it was good that the Supreme Court reaffirmed, yes, it's still illegal.
	Just the facts of the case are enraging.
	Not having a boss, I don't get demoted for being a straight white male, but that she was bumped back to her secretarial position.
	That's true.
	Instead, your wife wants you to be a guinea pig on her experiments.
	It's like, yeah, come on in.
	I'll attach these little things to you.
	Let's see what's going on in the brain.
	She tested on herself first.
	Okay, that's a good decision.
	The other 9-0 decision was the Second Amendment case where the government of Mexico was suing firearms manufacturers in the States, alleging that they're participating or contributing in the unlawful sale or complicity in crimes by allowing, facilitating cartels to own these guns with which they commit crimes in Mexico,
	and they bypassed an exclusion under the law or were arguing that this exclusion doesn't apply to the firearms manufacturers in that they are actively somehow We're actively participating in facilitating the unlawful procurement of firearms by known criminals.
	And the court came down 9-0 and said, no, you're not getting around this exclusion that doesn't allow you to sell because you haven't done a lick of evidence to show that the Smith& Wesson and the gun companies are actively participating or facilitating cartels for owning these guns.
	And it's not because cartels like these guns.
	So do everyday Americans.
	And so, you know, bugger off with your lawsuit and maybe go try to tackle your own law enforcement yourself.
	Essentially what happens, Congress passed a law that said you cannot sue the manufacturer of a gun for a third party's unlawful use of that gun, unless you can show the gunmaker was directly and deliberately and knowingly and intentionally complicit, which you could show by aiding and abetting the illegal use of the gun by violating federal laws concerning the marketing of that gun.
	And things of that nature.
	Mexico pretended.
	We talked about this suit from the day it was brought.
	Said it was a garbage suit.
	Should get thrown out, but don't know when it'll get thrown out because you got so many common courts.
	District Court of Massachusetts, no less, threw it out.
	Said, well, this is obviously why it's the law.
	The first circus up there in Boston reinstated it.
	Another nutty ruling.
	They thought they could get away with it because of the nutty rulings that came out of the Sandy Hook cases.
	Saying that somehow those weren't covered by the law where they were suing Remington.
	For the misuse of that gun, which was ludicrous.
	That's what I was just going to ask you.
	I was going to say, how did they get around it in that case?
	But Remington settled in that case.
	Yes, because the Supreme Court wouldn't take it.
	So that was the problem as they sat on it, didn't want to touch the Sandy Hook cases, decided to screw Remington and had to write a ridiculous check to the Sandy Hook families for something that was not their fault.
	In fact, the Sandy Hook families were mostly really good at not suing.
	Who was at fault?
	Namely, the corrupt politicians in Connecticut who line their pockets.
	Rather than protect their children.
	Something that they've hidden for many years.
	Now, there were a couple of conscientious parents who did pursue those cases, but many parents did not.
	And the Connecticut courts quickly shut those down.
	Amazing.
	You can blame Alex Jones for it, sue him into oblivion.
	You can blame the gunmaker and sue them into oblivion.
	But God forbid you sue our corrupt Connecticut pals who are actually responsible for the lapse of security that day because they pocketed the money that led to the deaths of those children.
	Those people the Connecticut courts rush in to give immunity to.
	Shows you what frauds they are in the Connecticut court system.
	Always have been, really, to be honest with you.
	So here, unanimously, the Supreme Court said, you have to show, for intentional knowing, aiding, and abetting, something beyond negligence.
	You've got to show that they directly helped the cartels get the gun, that that was their intention, that they violated federal law in the process.
	You don't even allege that because there's no evidence of it.
	They don't even control the supply chains you're accusing them of.
	It's the most indirect possible claim, and that gets nowhere near the plausibility because if this was allowed, gun makers are going to be bankrupted throughout the whole country.
	So it's a big ruling for restoring Second Amendment rights because those rights are only enforceable as there is somebody making the gun for you to be able to possess the Excellent ruling, just plainly consistent with the law.
	All the commies on the left had to go quiet because they couldn't even get a single lefty justice to agree with them to negate and neuter the law.
	So it was a good ruling from the Supreme Court.
	We had several of those this week, to my pleasant surprise.
	The other one was, I'm just double-checking, was it unanimous?
	was the religious case where a Christian organization was denied some employment benefit under the law that would apply to charities.
	And the argument was that, this is in Wisconsin, that they were And the lower courts had said, well, even if you're a religious organization, if you're acting non-denominationally, then you don't get this, what was it, an unemployment benefit?
	Yeah, well, unemployment compensation.
	Unemployment compensation.
	So if you're acting, even if you're a religious organization, if you're not acting with religious partisanship, then you no longer get this benefit.
	And the Supreme Court came down and said, no, you get it if you're a religious organization, even if you are offering your services to everybody.
	It was a good, broad restoration of the right of church autonomy, as Thomas wrote in his Concurrence, which would have been an independent legal foundation for their decision.
	As well as making sure the state doesn't discriminate against religion or try to dictate or determine what religion is beyond its legitimate parameters.
	And here they were saying because they didn't proselytize, because they decided to form as a corporate organization and their subsidiary charters, because they were not exclusionary in their services to people that were not co-religionist, that somehow they didn't have a religious purpose, which didn't make sense.
	Now, by the way, how could you know they were going to rule in favor of the church group in this case?
	It's going to have something to do with Amy Coney Barrett, but I'm just not going to be able to figure it out.
	Well, it does have a relationship, but seven of the nine justices share a particular religious orientation, and the group bringing the claim have the same religious orientation.
	It relates to an earlier topic tonight as to why it is that certain charities get away with the legal support of illegal immigration.
	This was a Catholic organization.
	Seven of our nine Supreme Court justices.
	Are Catholic.
	I thought there were three Jewish judges.
	Hold on.
	So the remaining Jewish judges are, is it Sotomayor?
	She's not.
	She's Catholic, I believe.
	Hold on one second.
	Let me see who the Jewish judge is.
	I thought there were three.
	No, two of nine still.
	Yeah, because I think it's now just Kagan.
	Who would be the other one?
	Alito's Catholic.
	Thomas is Catholic.
	People don't know that about Thomas.
	Most African Americans are Protestant, but Thomas grew up in the Catholic school tradition, educated Catholic schools before he went to college and law school.
	Alito is Catholic.
	It's only Kagan.
	It used to be Breyer.
	I knew his daughter, by the way.
	I knew he was going to be on the Supreme Court before the world knew.
	That was an old Yale connection.
	Robert, what are the other two Supreme Court rulings?
	Actually, there are four, really.
	So on the FSIA, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, they said that all you have to do to establish personal jurisdiction is what's allowed under the statute.
	You don't have to go beyond that and establish even more.
	That was in an arbitration context of enforceability.
	But they were saying foreign governments could get away with illegal activities that made them subject to suit and waive their immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act if there wasn't personal jurisdiction over them beyond what was alleged in the FSIA claim.
	And the court correctly corrected that so that you can get legal remedy against foreign governments.
	You don't get the opportunity to re-examine that choice with a Rule 60 motion unless you can show exceptional, extraordinary circumstances beyond the mere request for an amendment.
	So they limited the ability to effectively amend.
	It's more of a tactical impact on everyday litigants, which has 100 traps built in unless you monitor it carefully.
	There was a couple of small cases where they just issued either took cert, rejected cert, Or issued an immediate stay.
	The trilogy of impactful ones, they were wusses about taking other Second Amendment cases.
	Maybe in part because they got nine to nothing on the not to be able to sue gun manufacturers.
	Leave it at the Supreme Court to care more about big corporate gun manufacturers than care about ordinary people's self-defense rights.
	Because they refuse to take cert on a bunch of compelling Second Amendment cases, though Kavanaugh noted sooner or later they're going to have to because state courts and lower federal courts are refusing to enforce Bruin in its Second Amendment enforcement, especially as to so-called assault weapons and the like.
	They did take a case, but maybe for the wrong purpose.
	We'll see.
	This is the Fifth Circuit case we talked about that said the requirement of elections being conducted on Election Day mean that the state is not at liberty to accept ballots for federal office after Election Day if they receive them after that date.
	This is Mississippi that does this.
	The Supreme Court is taking that.
	Hopefully it means they're going to affirm the Fifth Circuit, but you can never know with this court.
	That may not be the positive indicator that some were assuming it was, because given that it's Mississippi.
	Here's the other question.
	Why is conservative Mississippi governed by Republicans at every level of state power?
	Why are they trying to create these broad election laws that allow states like Pennsylvania and California to corrupt our election process?
	Someone should ask that of some of the election officials in Mississippi because they're the ones who are challenging this all the way up to the Supreme Court because they want to be able to accept ballots whenever they want.
	Credit to Tom Fitton and Judicial Watch.
	Who also, by the way, shares my criticisms of Dan Bongino, Kash Patel, and Pam Bondi because of what he's been experiencing in his interaction with them.
	Credit to them, by the way, for getting a settlement on behalf of Ashley Babbitt's family, close to $5 million.
	And just so everyone understands with Fitton, his complaint was that he's getting documents that are redacted from the DOJ, which should not be redacted or frustrating his abilities to...
	Because the same people are running the show, apparently.
	So it's an ongoing problem.
	And then last but not least, a nice SCOTUS win for President Trump on Doge.
	Said, yes, indeed, Doge can have access to what the president needed to have access to in order to rat out the remainder of the fraud and corruption in our federal government.
	So that was a nice win for the president this week.
	Next week, we'll see if we get the big wins as nationwide injunctions, birthright citizenship, whether states can regulate the craziness of trans laws.
	A lot of those big cases coming down likely this coming Thursday.
	Does that do it for the main show now?
	We're going to head over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com for the after show.
	We got four topics and we can figure out which one you want to cover here before the after party.
	Sanctions on the International Criminal Court.
	Buyer wanting immunity for its Roundup product that it purchased from Monsanto when it purchased Monsanto itself.
	Wolk University.
	Columbia University might be not only decredited, it might be discredited.
	We'll be talking about its accreditation process, as some smart people at the Office of Civil Rights in the Department of Education are doing their job over there, outing these universities, stealing our money, getting special tax treatment that they don't deserve in order to indoctrinate our children.
	The Chinese Communist Party's favorite university in the world is Harvard University.
	They are busy spying from there, spying from Michigan, trying to bring in the various new things to contaminate our food supply, in this case, that they got caught doing.
	Got caught in Stanford.
	University of Michigan, I think, has had The China Show, guys.
	They do a great job.
	The China Show.
	That's all it's called.
	The China Show.
	Pretty easy.
	Find them on YouTube.
	They always do a great job each week with a good mixture of comedic and informative insight and entertainment about China.
	They document it.
	There's a half dozen espionage cases in just the last decade involving students at the University of Michigan.
	Something is going on in our universities.
	That we saw the agro-terrorism of last week out of Michigan.
	Oh, and then last but not least on our quartet, so you can pick which one you want to cover, is our historic case of the week, which had some family members involved in the grassroots level up, which involves the Amistad case that the Spielberg even made a movie about.
	To piss off everybody on Rumble, let's do the ICC because people are now going to claim that Marco Rubio, like you say, you don't need to be a Jew, Robert, to be Jew-ish.
	And they're going to say Marco Rubio might not be a Jew, but he's Jewish and a Zionist, and now he's going after the ICC who are righteously going after Netanyahu.
	What was funny is that some people were like, Barnes, why don't you talk about George Soros being Jewish?
	Because he loves Nazis and because it has nothing to do with who and what he is.
	And for those people that are obsessed with it, So how are you going to explain that?
	Those that just coincidentally talk about Jews when criticizing Israel.
	So what is...
	Rubio is now investigating or sanctioning for the judges who issued this arrest warrant for Netanyahu, which...
	By the way, Canada, I believe, could not guarantee that they would not enforce the arrest warrant for Netanyahu.
	So I'm not sure what happened with his planned visit to Canada, but I remember there being, they couldn't, they weren't committing to not executing the ICC arrest warrant.
	What is Rubio and the State Department doing to sanction or investigate these four judges?
	Well, this was a credit to President Trump as soon as he got in, said that he was announcing a sanctions policy involving all these globalists.
	Organizations and institutions, including withdrawal from the World Health Organization, considering withdrawal at some level from the World Trade Organization, resetting all relations with the United Nations and with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
	But part of that has been this rogue, woke court, the international political court, international criminal court.
	My friends on the left correctly criticized the ICC.
	They're just a bunch of rogue, woke political actors.
	Who are busy sabotaging and undermining various liberty around the world on behalf of their globalist pals.
	Remember Jack Smith?
	The rogue special counsel who has never figured out who exactly or if he ever took the proper oath to the Constitution of the United States.
	A separate subject we're going to try to investigate and cover on a future Sunday show.
	What happens when these rogue politicians don't follow their own oath?
	The only oath they take to the Constitution of the United States of America and our liberties and freedoms.
	So he said, look, Trump's a...
	And I want these rogue actors sanctioned henceforth.
	Don't allow them into the U.S. Take away property or money they have in the U.S. if they continue to threaten our liberties here in this country.
	And finally, they did.
	The four of the judges are going after either the U.S. or Israel.
	They have sanctioned.
	I think they should just sanction the whole court.
	They're all a bunch of bums.
	I don't know of anybody there that's any good.
	It's a crap court.
	It's a joke court.
	It's a crock of a court.
	It's a political court.
	It's a court that doesn't care about any freedom or liberty anywhere in the world.
	And it doesn't matter who's ox they're goring.
	The ox they're goring that bothers me is freedom and liberty around the world and honesty and transparency and integrity in the rule of law, none of which they respect at the ICC.
	So credit to President Trump for taking action, credit to Rubio's taking enforcement as This is how you deal with rogue judges.
	You make them face consequences for their rogue actions.
	Let's read a few of these more.
	Androm12 says, while checking out the local grocery store, the young checker who saw my Viva Barnes University shirt commented how he wasn't aware of that particular school.
	I explained it's much better than money.
	It's much better money spent.
	That's funny.
	Amdron says, my mother-in-law is visiting us for the second week.
	We have introduced her to Viva Barnes.
	Never too old to learn the truth.
	Thank you very much.
	And then we go, where do bees go to the bathroom?
	A, the BP station.
	That was a joke she told her father.
	I heard the father in an interview.
	Where do bees go to the bathroom?
	Answer, the BP station.
	The bees gotta pee.
	I would never have gotten that.
	All right.
	I can't read jokes.
	That's a classic dad joke.
	Do you tell any dad jokes to the kids?
	No, I tell some real jokes to the kids.
	Like Andrew Dice Clay jokes.
	I'm joking.
	Randy Edwards says, President Trump witnessed George H.W. Bush send the IRS after Ross Perot.
	President Trump has been intimately aware of how nefarious politics are for over 30 years living his life accordingly.
	Barnes is right.
	Thomas Sowell, there are no solutions, only trade-offs.
	How dare Barnes introduce logic into the conversation?
	Gorgeous mayhem.
	I want no tax on overtime.
	I will make thousands of dollars from Harry Toe.
	Robert, didn't Dan...
	I counted three times.
	I don't think he did specifically, but he definitely said it's a massive conspiracy that don't forget about it.
	Keep it up and keep the pressure on.
	All right, let me see.
	So much for that.
	And again, I don't think either one of them is bad guys.
	I just think they have a fundamental flawed assessment.
	I think it's twofold.
	One, I think Down Deep believe the institutions are not the problem.
	They think there's a few bad apples.
	You saw them make statements like that in multiple interviews over the last two weeks.
	And then second, I think they've made the tactical choice, for whatever reason, to not use their power to go after the deep state.
	And maybe they think that's the best way to have regular law enforcement.
	Just turn the FBI into an ordinary, everyday law enforcement engine.
	Depoliticize it.
	Rather than deal with the people who corrupted those institutions in the first place if you operate with their theory that the institution itself is not a problem.
	I think that will backfire badly and undermine the president's ability to get his agenda through because it will allow the same corrupt criminal actors to do like what they did in L.A. this past weekend, like what James Comey did a couple of weeks ago in publicly threatening the president, and that the president's ability to get his job done will be severely curtailed.
	by the FBI and DOJ not cleaning up what needs to be cleaned up.
	I think we're going to raid Salty Cracker tonight, not because he needs it, but because he might need a...
	I was told that he might have made some suggestions about Dershowitz that he shouldn't have on Friday.
	But we're going to raid Salty Cracker tonight and say hello to him from the Viva Army.
	What do we call it?
	The Viva Dogs, I think.
	I forget what it was.
	It was something good.
	I forget what it was.
	But before we do that, or as we migrate over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com, let me read some of the tipped questions over there.
	Ithaca37Cato says, so how many charities, especially Catholic ones, are engaged in or profiting from trial trafficking, illegal immigration?
	At a massive level, especially the illegal immigration.
	The number one group of charities.
	Other than Soros charities that are facilitating illegal immigration at scale in the world are Catholic charities.
	And again, it's not being anti-Catholic.
	It's being the corruption of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church that is misdirecting resources away from the purposes of the Catholic, the ordinary Catholic wanted to be in support of this.
	But it's not been called out enough, I think, because people don't want to run.
	Don't want the church to be after him.
	And not to let the H-I-A-S, or is it the H-A-I-S?
	Hebrew, the Hebrew Immigration Aid Society, which is a big one, just so that nobody thinks you're only picking on the Christians or the Catholics.
	You can pick on the Jewish one as well.
	Encrypt is what up.
	There's some commies and some Protestant charities and Jewish charities and Muslim charities and other ones.
	It's just not as, they're nowhere near the scale of the Catholic church.
	Encryptus.
	We cannot raid Salty.
	He has his raids acceptance turned off.
	Oh, really?
	Well, now I retract the offer then.
	Encryptus, whoever you think is best, do it at full discretion and everybody go enjoy.
	Salty thinks he's too good for the video.
	He's going to give Cool Frog.
	Our audience seems to like it and he has some similar topics that we're talking about tonight.
	Awesome.
	And do that while I read a few more of these locals-tipped questions.
	Tony7682 says, any predictions on whether we will have Supreme Court retirement later this summer?
	Any tea leaves like clerks not getting hired for the upcoming?
	No tea leaves as yet.
	I mean, Sotomayor will only go out if she's like literally dead.
	She's not going to let Trump in place.
	The Ginsburg treatment.
	No, but there is talk that Thomas and Alito are considering it.
	Ithaca37 Cato says, two questions.
	Is there a good book or article pointing out the politicians who should be playing for Sandy Hook?
	No, there isn't, unfortunately.
	Good book or report on the history of eugenics.
	This one I know you'll know, Robert.
	Kind of, but not as good as needs to be out there.
	Okay.
	Robert, this is from NetJess.
	diehard libertarian here and immigration hawk.
	There's property rights...
	To be clear, I'm talking about institutional libertarians have had a bias towards open borders.
	The ordinary voter that has libertarian ideas That's where there's been a gap between the libertarian voter base and the libertarian political types at the top.
	Who is the libertarian that admitted at the very best to statutory rape on Twitter this week, Robert?
	Oh, Peter Schiff!
	I mean, what a moron.
	God bless Peter.
	I mean, I defended his father.
	I've defended him at times.
	I disagree with him on tariffs and some other policy.
	But he was somehow trying to defend Ghislaine Maxwell, and he was like, you know, I banged underage girls when I was in college.
	He said underage!
	Newsflash!
	Don't admit to being underage girls, right?
	I mean, I assume he meant, you know, 18, 19, something else, but...
	I was like, dude, that was not good phraseology there, bro.
	Yeah, I'm trying to say, I want to find the tweet just so that...
	I'm just saying it's not pedophilia.
	When I was in college, I had sex with underage girls.
	That's got to be one of the dumbest self-owns ever.
	And the only thing I was going to try to be smarter than everybody said, like, well, if he was 19 and 17, maybe it's true.
	It probably makes you a pederass.
	I mean, you know, so just not a smart thing to publicly admit.
	Just FYI.
	Robert, okay, so we got that.
	We got, don't forget, Carlo Delevingne says Schnuckums.
	Spam Ranger says Line...
	Okay, for a single item.
	What progress has been made towards overturning Clinton versus New York City to restore the Line Item Veto Act of 1996?
	They have to pass an amendment at this point.
	Okay.
	We've got five suggestions, hush-hush, on the Coalition for Humane Immigration Rights, cheer-lap, and the other so-called NGOs, which appear to be supporting the LA riots while the NGOs...
	I guarantee you, you dig deep, you're going to find a Soros-funded connection.
	Somewhere in there.
	And you're going to find a Catholic charity-funded connection right in.
	Put this away, it's not a coincidence the Pope felt the need to scream for open borders today while the LA riots are going on.
	It means if people dig deep, they're going to find Catholic charities supporting the riots and the underlying activities for the riots.
	And he wants an excuse in advance, and he wants to discourage and deter anybody from investigating Catholic charities lining their pockets off mass open borders.
	And now we're going to leave, actually, just go over to the locals because now I remember everybody who's watching gets bumped to the rated stream, so difficulty watching the stream.
	Robert, so who are you on with this week?
	Looks like Monday we'll have a What Are The Odds with Richard Barris, People's Pundit Daily, over on Rumble and on YouTube and Locals.
	And the otherwise will be live bourbons all week long at VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com where you can ask any question.
	We answer tipped questions, the most liked questions, random cross-section of other questions.
	Got some hush-hushes coming.
	It's clear Ukraine is on Operation Gladio, the sequel.
	So I reintroduced people to Operation Gladio, the first hush-hush.
	We'll be doing a follow-up Operation Gladio hush-hush along with some others this week, including some on James Comey.
	Some on Robert Mueller, some on Jeffrey Epstein, to remind people who and what these folks are all about.
	I'll be live every day.
	We've been rated in two ways, Robert.
	So if you guys don't want to come over to Locals, nothing's going to make you want to come over more than we're going to look through my kid's baseball book now, which he spent the day organizing.
	Oh, those baseball players?
	Do you have baseball cards?
	We're getting into it slowly.
	We're going to talk about it briefly.
	I used to have a bunch of those as a kid.
	I'll show you.
	We've got some good ones in here.
	Locals, we're coming over now.
	By the way, good little random estate planning.
	Things like baseball cards.
	If you own the right combination, very portable.
	Not reportable.
	Mechanism and method of wealth.
	I'll show one on local.
	You're probably already teaching them already.
	How to avoid the government when the government comes.
	Ethan's got a survival attack.
	I'm just waiting for you showing Ethan how to use the machine gun.
	I'm sure Ethan would be gung-ho on that.
	All right, we're going to end it.
	Come on over to vivobarneslaw.locals.com for the after party.
	Going to do it right now.
	I'm going to go like this.
	Yeah, well, Bayer, Roundup, Monsanto, Woke Universities, United States versus Amistad.
	And any and all questions of tips of three coins or more over at vivobarneslaw.locals.com.
	Though Ethan says it even better than I do.
	He can't hear anything.
	He has no idea what we're talking about.
	Okay, update in the screen, people.
	That's why his eyes didn't light up when I talked about machine guns.
	Okay, locals, we're coming.

▲