Viva & Barnes - Ep. 273: Russia Hoax CONFIRMED! Will ARRESTS Follow? Trump SUES WSJ! Epstein Docs Release? & MORE!

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 20, 2025 - Viva & Barnes

02:13:55

Ep. 273: Russia Hoax CONFIRMED! Will ARRESTS Follow? Trump SUES WSJ! Epstein Docs Release? & MORE!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good evening, ladies and gentlemen of the interwebs.
	As you prepare to sit down and feast on the law of the Viva and Barnes, Law for the People, Sunday night, law extravaganza, have you ever heard the word law mentioned so many times in 15 seconds?
	We must not forget what's going on in Canada.
	Canada is on a descent into total authoritarianism and madness, lest we be reminded.
	I will not play the entire video, just a short portion of it.
	You are looking at Jeremy McKenzie, founder of Diagalon.
	Hello, everyone.
	It is I, odious dirtbag and de facto leader of the Diagalon, Jeremy McKenzie.
	I was in court all day, and I was already dressed, so don't read into this too much.
	I've come today to address directly Pierre Polyev, the Conservative Party, and its supporters.
	While the previous days have been a source of amusement, bewilderment, and confusion for many.
	The Leader of the Opposition wants to talk about extremism.
	Well, a week ago, he visited the Diagalon encampment.
	You have a leader of the opposition who proactively visits and cultivates the support of white nationalist extremist groups who has been identified by Canadian security and intelligence as a terrorism organization.
	People who have threatened wars on LGBTQ communities.
	And he went out of his way to visit and sit down with this organization.
	Who have threatened to gang rape female journalists?
	You cannot begin to understand the level of disinformation in what's going on in Canada.
	Just to address the number one that we just heard there, the sexual assault of female journalists.
	This, I believe, subject to verification, I may or may not be right on this, was a report from a Canadian journalist, Rachel Gilmore, who I think it might be the same story.
	And if it's not, well, this one's still equally as absurd, who suggested that there were threats to SA, sexually assault, Rachel Gilmore, because apparently people on the internet were playing a game, which I've never played before.
	I don't play these juvenile games.
	It's called Fornicate, Marry, Kill.
	And I mean, it's a game that people play.
	Whether or not it's funny if you're one of the ones who's not on the fornicate or marry end of it.
	F-U-C-K, marry, or kill.
	You're talking like women.
	It's like, who would you like to have sex with?
	Who would you like to get married to?
	Because they're not always the same person.
	And who would you like to terminate in a metaphoric sense?
	Our Canadian government or the Canadian government of Canada took the Diagalon.
	This is what some members of Diagalon sent me in the mail.
	It was the recruiting process.
	I was all down with it until they said, so we're clear on the rules and no Jews.
	And I'm joking, people.
	That's from the family guy.
	Jeremy McKenzie is a man who I've personally helped with a give, send, go.
	He's a man that I like.
	I actually, I don't care that you're going to get clips of him saying saucy things on the internet.
	I don't care that he has political views that some might call saucy, to put it mildly.
	You are talking about a Canadian government that manufactured a lie out of whole cloth so they could manufacture their own January 6th, so they could treat their own citizens like terrorists.
	And they had the government do it.
	They had the media defend it and propagate it.
	And they had nobody like what America is lucky to have in Donald Trump to fight back against it.
	People are going to crap on me again for needling Pierre Polyev, for losing an election that was an election to win, for what is it, snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.
	They don't have a Donald Trump up in Canada.
	They don't have really a Joe Rogan.
	They don't have many of the players that are pushing back and that have taken control, at the very least for the time being, touchwood, may it continue, of the government and fighting back against the corruption of old.
	They've got Pierre Pollier.
	They've got Maxime Bernier, who, I've always said it, not a reasonable prospect of a prime minister because of the way the system works in Canada.
	Government lies, propaganda media covers it up, promotes the lie, repeats the lie, makes truth out of the lie.
	And then they have their government-funded anti-hate organizations, which manufacture further lies, much like the FBI under, we're going to get into this, under the Clinton administration manufactured that steel dossier, or at least partook in the disinformation laundering of that steel dossier to create a coup to prevent democracy.
	Spicy, not saucy, someone just said in the chat.
	You're right.
	So don't forget what's going on in Canada.
	And also, don't forget how easily it can trickle down.
	I mean, it invades California.
	It invades New York.
	It invades Michigan.
	To some extent, Canada is a litmus test of what happens when people are sufficiently brainwashed to not know that they're brainwashed.
	I do what I can.
	I do what is within our limits.
	But what I do not do is jump on bandwagons and demonize the people who are the actual victims of government tyranny.
	Now, I don't actually wear the diagonal ring only because I don't wear, I wear one ring, one ring only, and it's my wedding band.
	Good evening, people.
	Viva and Barnes Law for the People Sunday night.
	Law extravaganza.
	Share the link around.
	We're going to have one heck of an episode tonight.
	I got a couple of other things on the front burner, but before we get started, for those of you who are new to the channel, and it looks like we have a new person to the VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com community, Persana Ogratin.
	That's a playoff persona non grata.
	Persana augratin, which is with cheese on top, seems to be a member of our vivabarneslaw.locals.com community.
	Welcome.
	We are live across all of the various planes of the interwebs.
	And we're live on CommiTube, only because it's the Sunday show and it's a good opportunity to promote my daily show on Rumble at three o'clock.
	And we've got some good stuff coming up this week, so stay tuned for it.
	We're live on Twitter.
	We're live on Rumble, obviously, and vivabarnslaw.locals.com.
	If I do not get to super chats or tip questions and you're going to be miffed, do not support the channel in such a manner.
	I do my best and will continue to do my best, but nobody is perfect or pobody is nerfed.
	And that's it.
	Now, I wanted to say one thing before we even get started, which is to thank our sponsor of tonight's show, Venice AI people.
	AI is going to be a topic of tonight and clean AI and ethical AI is something that is hard to come by, which is where Venice AI comes in.
	Did you know that Sam Altman, founder of ChatGPT, said AI will get to know you over your life?
	Chat GPT has the former director of the NSA sitting on their board right now, Ed Snowden, called this a willful, calculated betrayal of the rights of every person on earth.
	Alexa listens to us, recommends things based on what we search, what we ask for, our conversations.
	It took us all far too long to truly understand what social media companies were doing with our data for the last decade.
	Are we really going to make that same mistake again?
	OpenAI has hinted that they may start requiring their users to provide a government-issued ID.
	Would you feel comfortable with that?
	Enter AI with some solutions.
	Venice AI uses leading open source AI models to deliver text, code, and image generation to your web browser.
	There's no downloads, no installations of anything.
	You got private AI.
	Privacy architecture keeps your AI prompts 100% private.
	All data stays on your device, not on the interwebs.
	Private and permissionless, they don't spy on or censor on your messages.
	They're encrypted conversations.
	They're stored in your browser.
	AI can be extremely valuable, but we shouldn't need to give up our privacy in order to use it.
	They've got a pro-plan people.
	It unlocks the full platform and features, including PDF uploads, summaries or insights, the ability to turn off safe mode for unhindered image generation, and the ability to change how Venice interacts with you by modifying the system prompt, limitless text, and high image limits.
	If you want to use AI without fear or of handing over your most intimate thoughts to a corporation or the government, you can get 20% off a pro plan right now using this link in the description, venice.ai forward slash viva.
	Code Viva will get you 20% off.
	The link is in the description, people.
	It's fantastic.
	Check it out.
	And thank venice.ai for sponsoring tonight's show.
	I'm going to play a couple of videos that I wanted to play before we get Barnes in here.
	I see him in the backdrop, but it's going to be relevant for the discussion for tonight.
	I love Byron Donalds.
	And we're getting into some deep, deep government shiat tonight.
	Byron.
	Only thing I would add, Maria, and Ana's absolutely correct.
	The only thing I would add is this is about the Democrats as well.
	They want continuous power for their radical agenda.
	What they wanted all this entire time was a continuation of the groundwork they were trying to lay from Barack Obama.
	Donald Trump was the stopgap to that, and they were furious, and they did not respect the will of the voters.
	And all they want to do is bring the radical ideology, whether it's gender right ideology in schools, the crazy energy policies they've brought to the United States, the crazy environmental policies which are slowing our country down, and terrible economic policies, which will empower Washington and not the American people.
	And Donald Trump's, Donald Trump's movement has always been about putting the American peoples first, putting Washington last.
	That is something that the Democrats abhor.
	And so they went to any means necessary to try to stop his momentum and stop his movement.
	But we found out once again that they've lied to the American people.
	They have betrayed the trust of the American people and they should never be allowed to have power again in the United States.
	And it's just incredible the lengths that they have gone to to paint a picture of a man who they deemed as dangerous to upending their grip on power.
	Truly extraordinary.
	And I'm honored to have been able to talk with you all about it and to watch this up close and personal myself.
	They had to desecrate democracy in order to protect democracy.
	You know, it was a rough week or two.
	And then people are going to say, Viva, you know, it was a rough week or two because of the likes of people who wouldn't just shut up about the big unforced errors of the administration.
	And when I had Vince Coglianes on, or Kohlianes, Kulianes, when I had Vince on from the Vince show on Friday, and it wasn't the first time, but I really truly appreciated, like in my being, how frustrating it must have been to be Trump and the Trump administration for the last couple of weeks,
	an administration which has been having massive wins, an administration which was celebrating a bona fide God-given miracle that Trump is even alive today to be doing what he's doing in the White House.
	I can understand that instead of celebrating the one-year anniversary of his survival, instead of celebrating the border being tightened up, instead of celebrating court victories, which we're going to talk about tonight, we were distracted by what I genuinely believe to be unforced errors, things that can be remedied, that need to be remedied, but can be frustrating to talk about where on the one hand, you know, like when you do good, say you get a pat on the back at so many times.
	Like I say, like, you know, a good parent with their kid, you get credit for the things you do well, but they don't overlook the things that you need to improve on.
	And I could understand how genuinely frustrated Trump must have been in the administration the last couple of weeks because that either it's unforced or there's some bigger plan that I don't know about.
	Instead of talking about what's going on at the border, instead of talking about the deportations, instead of talking about the voluntary deportations, instead of talking about the jobs reports, people were rightly and understandably talking about the Epstein debacle in a couple of questionable truth social posts.
	We're going to talk about what they did to Trump.
	We know it.
	If you've been around this channel for the last damn near seven years now, you know, we talked about this in real time.
	There's nothing new in there except to the degree of their depravity and their tyranny and their abuse of power to frame an innocent man, to hogtie him for the first three years of his presidency, to lie to the American people in so many words.
	You know, it's an amazing thing as you watch, you know, life can only be understood backwards, but must be lived forwards.
	As you watch the way the biggest scumbag in American political history was answering questions, let's bring this one up.
	Obama back in the day.
	Remember, wordsmiths of the devil.
	Quite careful to say everything that is untrue, but in a way that I said it bears the earmarks of a Russian information campaign, the 51 intelligence officers.
	They know how to lie too.
	Listen to this.
	Did Clinton lose because of the hacking?
	I'm going to let all the political pundits in this town have a long discussion about what happened in the election.
	It was a fascinating election.
	So I'm sure there are going to be a lot of books written about it.
	We will provide evidence that we can safely provide.
	By the way, can I just point out?
	I'm going to leave it to the pundits to talk about it.
	Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.
	You know what a dog whistle is?
	That's a dog whistle.
	The party that screams dog whistles left, right, and center.
	They scream them because they hear them all the time, because they issue them all the time.
	I'm going to let the pundits talk about this.
	I don't want to lie.
	They don't know it's a lie because they don't have the insider information that confirms it's a lie, but they know what we want them to talk about.
	So I'm just going to let the pundits talk about it.
	And if they happen to talk about Russia collusion for the next three years, well, I didn't lie.
	That does not compromise sources and methods.
	But I'll be honest with you, when you're talking about cybersecurity, a lot of it is classified and we're not going to provide it because the way we catch folks is by knowing certain things about them that they may not want us to know.
	And if we're going to monitor this stuff effectively going forward, we don't want them to know that we know.
	So this is one of those situations.
	Listening to him makes me want to vomit.
	Like listening to him makes me as it really does tie knots in my stomach like listening to Justin Trudeau spew diarrhea from the mouth.
	Just gonna, we're gonna give you enough information to let the pundits go crazy with lies for the next three years.
	Russia collusion.
	I mean, we're gonna get back into the details of that, but Tulsi Gabbard is on it, people.
	And you know, you say, you, you, you, you criticize out of love to make sure that the administration is as much of a success as it can be.
	Because if you don't criticize, you're not doing anybody any favors because it's not because people are not vocalizing it, that they're not feeling it.
	And there's nothing worse than losing people and not knowing why you're losing them because nobody's out there complaining on their behalf.
	You got Telsi Gabbard, and she has indeed been a great appointment by President Trump.
	I don't know who's dictating the next year.
	Well, Massey Gabbard, who's Trump 2028 to 2020, 2028 to 2036.
	Who's that going to be?
	It's going to be Vance and whom else?
	I don't know.
	All right, until Barnes gets in here, by the way, one other update for those who are interested coming out of Canada, speaking of the good work that RFK Jr. is doing.
	The ostrich farm, Universal Ostrich Farm.
	Won't get into the thick of it because you should all know about it by now, but it's the Canadian food inspection agency that ordered the slaughter of nearly 400 ostriches because they were infected with H5N1 allegedly back in December.
	They've had their day at the Court of Appeal and RFK Jr. sent a letter imploring the Canadian government to not slaughter those animals, to use them for scientific value because they have scientific value in having survived H5N1 infection.
	And so there might be antibodies in the yolks of the eggs and whatever.
	So RFK Jr. has sent now his second letter to Canada, imploring them to spare the ostriches.
	So kudos to RFK Jr.
	Robert, sir, you're looking good.
	How goes the battle?
	Good, good.
	So you're in your new office.
	I see you're getting the backdrop there.
	What's the book behind you, if I may inquire?
	Oh, it's a great book about Johnny Cash.
	Johnny Cash.
	Okay, that's good enough.
	Robert, what's going on?
	I assume the sound, everything's okay?
	I think it's good.
	I think it's good.
	My internet was out much of the day, so it just came back on about two minutes ago.
	Here, I'm going to refresh this.
	I said audio book.
	I didn't mean audio book.
	Is audio good?
	There you go.
	You got any more of that government funding?
	We got a good meme in there.
	No, we're good.
	Tell the audience what's on the menu for tonight.
	And we're going to obviously cover Epstein.
	We're going to cover the Wall Street Journal lawsuit because I got a question about that and I wonder a couple of things.
	What else do we have on the menu for the evening?
	Yeah, we got the Epstein files that blew up into the Trump versus Murdoch Wall Street Journal case, as well as questions about grand jury secrecy, given the request to release at least some grand jury records concerning it.
	We've got the number one voted topic tonight at the VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com board, which is, of course, RussiaGate due to the very good work being done by Tulsi Gabbard.
	Mike Davis is predicting consequences.
	I've heard that before, Mike.
	We'll get to that in a bit.
	The Maha had some big wins.
	Robert Kennedy getting us out of not only the World Health Organization treaty that they were trying to push, but also the new rules they tried to push in as an alternative mechanism concerning those treaty COVID lockdown provisions.
	We've got multiple crypto bills.
	We've got SCOTUS in a couple of cases.
	We've got When Does ICE have Probable Cause to Make Arrest?
	We've got some federal judges who have different interpretations of that.
	We've got Airbnb caught doing surge pricing in LA during the fires.
	We've got the long list and litany of Pan Bondi failures that continue unabated and that might play into predictions about the probabilities of prosecutions related to the Russia gate malfeasance and misfeasance that took place.
	We've got a visa legal dispute amongst a broader controversy concerning Christians having access to Israel that has the Ambassador Mike Huckabee quite upset at the Netanyahu government.
	And we've got Mr. Colbert getting canned and some of his allies, including those in the Congress, blaming the Trump administration concerning an FCC pending approval of a merger between Skydance and Paramount.
	So a little bit of everything tonight.
	Well, we're going to start with the Epstein stuff and then we're going to get into the Wall Street Journal.
	Then we'll get into the court rulings.
	I'm going to bring up Ginger Ninja, 1776, a member of our community.
	He's on Rumble.
	He's been rightly Pissed all week.
	He says, quoting me, a couple of questionable truth social posts.
	That's an understatement.
	He literally called us dumb and told us he doesn't want our support, basically spit in our face and gave us the middle finger.
	I think he tried to make up for it, people, by the end of the week when he said we can make the request of Pam Bondi to petition the courts to unseal some grand jury testimony.
	We'll get there in a second.
	Robert, do you think we're in the bad books with the administration for being righteous in our criticism about the handling of the Epstein situation?
	Yeah, well, I don't really care.
	I mean, we'll see what they do.
	I mean, hopefully they do do something useful in terms of getting the grand jury records out.
	I saw a lot of excuses being made, including by Mike Davis, that are just completely bogus.
	I'm glad they are petitioning the court for the release of the grand jury records, but there's a lot of misinformation out there related to, which comes from the U.S. government over a long time period, about what grand jury secrecy is and is not, and the longstanding constitutional problems with having grand jury secrecy after a case is over, period.
	It really offends the First Amendment, offends the right to access to the courts, which is protected under the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, which includes a right to access the courts, including records and information the courts may possess concerning high-profile issues.
	But I mean, in general, the grand jury secrecy, I mean, the grand jury, there's a clause in the Constitution concerning the Fifth Amendment about no indictment but by grand jury.
	That borrowed from the grand jury construct created that you could find variations of it that go back to Athens, as the Alexanders at the Duran would be happy to know that many of our great Little Dee democratic tributes belong originally to the Athenians.
	But you can find versions of it with the Saxons.
	You can find versions of it with the Vikings, multiple versions in the United Kingdom itself.
	First one, 1368, they called it La Grande Inquest, was when this sort of construct came into its current formation, if you could call 1368 current.
	Then in 1681, the first case that went up through the legal system in England, the Earl was Earl of Shaftesbury, which I thought was funny.
	I guess he was going to get the shaft.
	His name was Shaftesbury.
	Or the Earl of Shaftesbury.
	So he's got both the shaft and the buries.
	Exactly, exactly.
	So the, well, this is, by the way, what the grand jury secrecy was originally intended for.
	It was secrecy from the government, from the executive branch, from the king.
	It allowed them to interrogate witnesses outside the presence of the king, outside the presence of the king's prosecutors.
	And it became a famous case because they refused to return an indictment, which enraged the king and some of his allies.
	But over time, of course, like many things, it devolved into something to protect the king.
	Prosecutors now are eagerly awaited inside the grand jury room, and they mostly control the grand jury, so much so that a federal judge once famously said out of Chicago, a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich if you asked them to.
	So the great role of the grand jury as an independent check on the abuse of executive power has instead become a exchequer inquisitor type secretive proceeding to protect the executive branch far more often than it does anything else.
	My brother was recently on a grand jury up in Rochester.
	So then you have the federal rules of criminal procedure and common law doctrine that has mostly been the way it's the courts protecting themselves.
	So the courts have decided what secrecy a grand jury has or doesn't have.
	And to be blunt about it, they make it up most of the time.
	Federal rules of criminal procedure are written by the Supreme Court, not by Congress, not by the Constitution, not by any elected official ever.
	So I've never been a huge fan of the way in which the grand juries have devolved into tools of secret inquisitorial type proceedings.
	But, you know, that's the way government tends to operate.
	And as long as the courts are interpreting their own power, they tend to be rather liberal in granting it to themselves.
	And so the, but even under grand jury secrecy, what the main thing is about is making sure the defendant doesn't know they're under investigation, making sure the names of the people participating in the grand jury are often kept secret so they're not the targets of something.
	And then purportedly to protect the innocent from false accusation.
	Anyone who believes that's how the grand jury works, I got a couple of bridges in Brooklyn to sell you.
	But that's the official narrative behind it.
	Now, you had the Dennis case in the U.S. Supreme Court, which finally began to recognize this was some of the better decisions made by the liberal-oriented civil rights-oriented court between the 1950s and late 1960s.
	And the goal was, they said, you know, disclosure helps a lot more to confidence in our justice system than secrecy does.
	And I agree with them.
	So they recognize that the courts have an inherent power to release information anytime they so choose within the, they have an a broad policy principle in place that they can evaluate and not be stuck by the limits and strictures of the rules.
	Now, the 11th Circuit has deviated from that.
	There's an old case of the last known sort of public lynching in Georgia in the 19, I think 1946, and they didn't indict anybody, even though the four people were unmasked and just went in and murdered some black Georgians.
	And the 11th Circuit, just in 2000, said, no, that information can't be disclosed.
	It doesn't fit within the strict confines of Rule 6E and so on and so forth.
	Supreme Court decided to dodge and not deal with the issue.
	We don't have to deal with that here, however, because this case was brought in the Southern District of New York, the main current case that went to a grand jury.
	Because Epstein cut a deal in the Florida case, and I'm not even sure they ever used a federal grand jury or not in that case.
	So that's the Second Circuit, and the Second Circuit does continue to recognize the right of the public to know and that transparency and disclosure is of greater value than secrecy more often than not outside of particular circumstances.
	Even then, just because information, A witness is not bound by grand jury secrecy.
	The only people bound by grand jury secrecy is the grand jurors themselves and the prosecuting lawyers that are part of it.
	It is not the witness.
	The witness is always free to disclose whatever they told a grand jury or whatever they were asked about in the grand jury.
	Not only that, one of the ways they try to launder and keep secret information through a grand jury is they subpoena information that belongs to other people, bank records, financial records, corporate records, you name it, emails, phone records, et cetera.
	Those records don't magically become grand jury secret documents just because a grand jury happened to subpoena them.
	That is not information that occurred before the grand jury.
	Those are records that independently exist and are not covered by grand jury secrecy, despite the claims often made, and frankly, Mike Davis incorrectly made about the Epstein file documents.
	This is only a small part of the Epstein files.
	The big, as you did a good interview with Mike Benz, there's tons of information at the CIA that will come back up when we talk about Russian gate, by the way.
	Well, so let me ask you this.
	I guess just to back it up a little bit, Andrew Branca, we know and we like him, law of self-defense, replied to a tweet of mine where I said, you know, this is a good start, but I'm a little concerned about Trump's use of the word pertinent grand jury testimony, a little bit nervous that it depends on the will of a judge.
	Two questions.
	Can the AG override a judge's decision not to unseal it?
	So, well, but what is that?
	In other words, the only thing that's sealed is going to be witness testimony before the grand jury, that the grand jury has.
	Again, you could just go to the witness and get that same information and not be protected by grand jury secrecy, right?
	So it's much a do over nothing to a degree.
	It's making something look more complicated and blaming the courts for something that really isn't the courts.
	The courts are not the reason why the Epstein files have not been disclosed.
	So there's certain information, let's say, Dershowitz can't disclose because he's subject to a gag order.
	There's certain information that as to what a witness testified to before the grand jury, if you don't have any independent access to that information and the witness is not willing to come forward now, then that information would be grand jury secrecy and it's up to the court to authorize its disclosure.
	There's a constitutional issue, however, constantly present, which is, you know, the executive branch's duties is to perform according to the Constitution.
	If you concluded in the executive branch that a certain piece of information was not covered constitutionally by grand jury, then you could in fact disclose it.
	As a matter of practical protocol, they don't.
	Now, they leak stuff that happens before the grand jury every day.
	So like I said, take that all with a big grain of salt.
	Let me pull something up because I want to ask you about this here.
	Bada bing, bada boom.
	Here.
	Every document was proved I was innocent.
	So let me tell you, I know for a fact documents are being suppressed and they're being suppressed to protect individuals.
	I know the names of the individuals.
	I know why they're being suppressed.
	I know who's suppressing them.
	But I'm bound by confidentiality from a judge and cases.
	And I can't disclose what I know.
	But I pan to God, I know, I know the names of people whose files are being suppressed in order to protect them.
	You do every document.
	Put it on pause right there.
	If there's an NDA and he's sworn to secrecy, I mean, I'm not trying to get Joshua in trouble.
	Did he not skate a line a little bit too close to revealing, like, it's one thing to say, you know, I can't comment on it.
	Another thing to say, there's a list.
	I know who's on it.
	I know it's being suppressed, but I'm bound by an NDA.
	Was he skirting a line or is that?
	It may have been part of the gag order because I think he went into unsealed documents and the judge's condition of the unsealing of the documents is that he not disclose the full details or contents of that publicly, but that he could look through those documents for the purposes of his purpose of proving and vindicating his innocence.
	So I believe that's what he's referencing.
	There's a possibility he's referencing attorney-client privilege.
	I didn't get that impression from him.
	Now, the thing that Andrew Branca had said is that there's a reason why grand jury testimony is sealed.
	We all know, you know.
	Yeah, Andrew, let's talk about the real reason, right?
	I mean, lawyers pitch this all the time.
	The real reason is to cover up corruption by the government.
	That's the real reason.
	This garbage that this is done for the benefit of the people is hogwashed.
	Let me see.
	To steel man it, the idea is where there's a pending investigation.
	You don't want the defendant.
	There's no pending investigation now.
	No, no, no.
	You don't want the defendant knowing.
	You don't want witness intimidation, interference, whatever.
	You don't want anybody knowing.
	It doesn't really work that way.
	Anyway, as a defendant, you're going to be entitled to a lot of those grand jury records if that witness is going to testify to you at trial or if you want to allege government misconduct in the grand jury investigation.
	So the question is this now.
	At this point in time, Jeffrey Epstein, allegedly dead.
	Virginia Guffray, allegedly dead.
	The argument or what Dershowitz had said in the longer segment of that clip, which I didn't get to play, is that a lot of this was to protect some of the accused because there were a lot of people who were falsely accused by false or fake victims.
	Would that still be a valid excuse?
	Not really, in my opinion.
	It became an excuse about a century ago within our court system for why it is that they wanted to keep certain information sealed in order so that the people that were under investigation that ultimately were cleared by the grand jury or not indicted by the grand jury don't have their name smeared because of the existence of a grand jury.
	If you go through the long history of the grand juries going all the way back through English law and before then, you won't find that excuse being proffered.
	So the it's and it's and again, they leak whatever they want to leak whenever they want to leak it.
	So the I'm not buying that, oh, it's to protect the innocent from being wrongfully publicly accused.
	That somebody accused them of something inside.
	Not only that, it really kind of doesn't make a lot of sense because if the person's accusing them, they can accuse them in any other setting.
	So, you know, it doesn't make any difference that it occurred in front of a grand jury.
	Some people are going to think like it must be even slightly more credible, even if it was before a grand jury that didn't bring charges.
	You know, there must have been some truth to that.
	And really, a grand jury Spain is a witness.
	A witness testifies in front of them.
	It's no different than testifying in any other case.
	Now, some people, to steel man people's concerns, now are going to say Trump felt the blowback, but this is sort of a band-aid.
	It's going to say, Okay, Pam Bondi, you go and do it.
	It's on her desk.
	We'll see if she ever does it.
	She'll go ahead and do it or not.
	But let's say she does it, and a judge comes out and says, She filed on Friday a request to release grand jury records.
	So, now a judge, the hypothetically, the concern will see where it goes.
	And I say, wait until it happens before flipping out.
	A judge is going to say, No, we're not unsealing anything.
	And then Trump and Bondi say, Well, we tried, and now let's move on and stop asking.
	The thing is, there was the, you know, Maureen Comey and others controlled what was presented to that grand jury.
	So it's going to be very limited.
	There's not going to be a lot of information in there.
	It's better to have it than not have it.
	But again, most of the key Epstein files are what's in the State Department, what's at the CIA, what's at the Treasury Department, his financial records, his bank records, his property records, all of these records that you follow the money, you find out very interesting things.
	The FBI did multiple investigations on Jeffrey Epstein going back to the mid-90s.
	I mean, there were state police investigations of him in California, in Ohio, in Florida.
	Presumably, when they were doing different Epstein investigations, some of that came in through the FBI's files.
	If it didn't, they could request it.
	If they don't have it, if it's been contaminated in some way, then just come out and say that.
	But this hiding everything and saying don't worry, anything useful is behind the grand jury firewall is not really being forthcoming.
	It's better than getting nothing, but it's nowhere near what the Epstein files really are.
	And I'm not going to belabor what I was going over, and I think rightfully so last week, which was now we are hearing Trump say you can't trust the file.
	First, I've been saying that from the beginning.
	I don't know if Trump was saying it to sort of preempt the story from the Wall Street Journal that I suspect he knew was coming out.
	And I personally don't believe the Doodlegate drawing is real.
	So maybe he did know that.
	And he's like, oh my God, these idiots.
	It does explain his rage throughout the week.
	He got wind of the story on Tuesday.
	So now we know where some of the rage was coming from that the Wall Street Journal reached out on Tuesday.
	So the story ran on Friday, I believe, but he actually had advance notice several days before then.
	But as a whole, it's like it was a nothing burger.
	And of course, as the best way to deal with a risk of some contaminated information in the file is to disclose everything, right?
	And then when you disclose that, you prove your innocence of it.
	Because if you were guilty, you would have hid it.
	If you're innocent, like here all it is.
	By the way, this allegation is garbage.
	By the way, that's false.
	By the way, we couldn't validate or verify that.
	That's all that is.
	It's not that hard.
	Now, I think what we'd really find is when the information is disclosed is how limited the grand jury inquiry really was.
	Well, and we would find that with the Acosta investigation in the first place.
	I want to read a New York one.
	Because this is, they're not looking to get anything from the Florida case out.
	They're only looking to get things from the New York case out, as far as I know.
	And the New York case, I think, was drastically restricted in what they allowed to be part of the record.
	Because here's the thing, there's always a small chance a grand jury actually does its job and actually executes its independent role and investigates everywhere.
	Because the grand jury is the legal authority to subpoena anything they want.
	They're not limited by the prosecutor.
	But prosecutors mislead grand jurors into believing this.
	But occasionally grand jurors will go and do their own thing.
	And so that's why as a prosecutor, you strictly control what they see and you mislead them.
	My guess is the most interesting thing that will come out from the Epstein grand jury documents, and I think something will be revealed and something will be released, is how limited it was in scope.
	Yes.
	And I mean, is it a coincidence it's Maureen Comey, same one who just prosecuted P. D.D.?
	And now the timing is unfortunate, you know, looks bad for the Trump administration.
	Finally, they fire Maureen Comey.
	They should have fired her before the P. Diddy came.
	People were saying Viva should, they couldn't have fired Maureen Comey for the, what was it, 8647 of her father because the trial was underway.
	Pam was sworn in in February.
	That trial didn't start until May.
	She should have been removed from the file from day one, but they had every excuse they needed with 8647.
	Robert, let me read a, there seems to be a President Nixon strikes again over on Commitube is angry.
	Voidzilla, well-respected investigator, did a deep dive video, two plus million views, into Trump's doodle the other day.
	You think he's talking about me?
	I am being very disingenuous by not stating all the facts.
	Grandi justy is a joke.
	I don't know what that means.
	Then he follows it up with Wall Street Journal wants Trump to sue about the doodle.
	It's about discovery.
	Like I hear this argument all the time and unsealing documents.
	Trump must release all the Epstein info.
	Not doing so.
	Then he's saying.
	I do think there was a coordinated effort by deep state allies to guarantee the Epstein files not get disclosed by misleading Trump into believing that it would falsely implicate him.
	That does explain part of how they persuaded Trump to go along with this utter nonsense.
	So you think people are saying this, like that he's fearful they've inserted fake evidence to incriminate him.
	Someone's told him that.
	I think someone's told him that precisely.
	And that's, it's like, one, who cares?
	All right.
	You can rebut this.
	Just like, there was nobody who read that story other than Trump haters who believed it for half a second.
	Nothing about it said Trump.
	No, either.
	First of all, it's not even, doesn't really even implicate Trump.
	It's a 2003 birthday.
	It's before any conviction.
	It's a birthday card.
	So it's a bouty card.
	Who cares?
	I mean, even if it was true, it's a nothing burger.
	But it was using words Trump doesn't use, right?
	I can tell you who they're likely sources.
	There's sources like Glene Maxwell.
	So Glene Maxwell organized that birthday party.
	She even had somebody write a song.
	This has been detailed in various documentaries and other things.
	Had him write a body song for him.
	The body language, all that, that's Glene Maxwell.
	That isn't Trump.
	Now, maybe she signed Trump's name to something to pretend it came from Trump because Epstein wouldn't know any differently.
	And she was the one organizing the birthday party, to my knowledge.
	But nothing about it.
	We'll get to that when we get to the paradox too.
	But the short answer is it's good that Trump is at least getting something out there.
	Number one, number two, we will learn something.
	We'll get some new information and we'll learn something, even if the biggest thing we learn is how Maureen Comey used the Epstein case to cover up corruption rather than expose it.
	And President Nixon strikes back says, grand jury is a la carte for Trump to control evidence.
	Trump must release all the Epstein info.
	Pan is controlled by Trump.
	Viva, you are insulting us.
	Okay, well, thank you for the support, sir.
	I mean, I think the person's a little confused on some different things, but no question that he should disclose the entire Epstein files.
	You can go through it and at least if you decide not to disclose certain information, then you can say why.
	You can say we looked at that there was, say, 94 names came up in the context of the investigation.
	Only six led to any further inquiry.
	And if you decide not to include those names, okay, you can say you're doing so because you think they would be wrongly implicated.
	You know, that'd be a controversial position to hold, but at least it's more honest and forthcoming than the garbage we got over the last two weeks.
	So, okay, so the question also, I mean, they haven't even addressed the intelligence angle to it.
	So I hope people are taking.
	Where is Ratcliffe, the man who puts rat in Ratcliffe?
	Well, why hasn't he been asked any questions about what the CIA knows?
	As Mike Benz pointed out, you can just do a little on your CIA computer and find out all kinds of information on Epstein.
	So the same with the State Department.
	Same with the Treasury Department.
	This guy specialized in suspicious activity reports.
	I mean, you're telling me there's no, or suspicious activities.
	You're telling me there's no reports concerning the millions and billions he was moving around in very suspect ways.
	I'm not buying that for a half a second.
	Why did all these big banks write huge checks because of their involvement with Epstein?
	Because they did nothing wrong.
	They did nothing illegal, nothing suspicious.
	I mean, all these things are being hidden.
	I think Trump has been misled into believing that the file is littered with false information pointing the finger at him because they were, but it was always a lie.
	This is all they could come up with?
	A bogus card that Ghelaine Maxwell probably ghost wrote and pretended was Trump.
	That's it?
	That's all?
	I mean, this means they've been lying to him.
	They've been misleading to him, thinking he and his friends are the ones that are implicated when they're not.
	So I even want to try to follow.
	10 years ago.
	And if they wanted to falsify evidence, they could have done it one year ago.
	So this is a bogus cover story meant to mislead the president into covering up for the corruption of the deep state.
	That's what's happening.
	Amazing.
	There were a couple of chats over on Hrumble.
	I'm looking to see it in Viva Barnes if there's anything on this particular topic.
	Remember when the left attacked Jim Coviziel over the movie Sound of Freedom?
	Now they care, and yet the list could have been altered by the feds, just like the Iran contra with Oliver North.
	And in a grand jury, you cannot sue for what they testify to if it was false and defamatory.
	So now, okay, so that's true when they testify in court too.
	So that's no difference between open court and closed court.
	But any public, any statement you make, we'll get to it when we get to Russia gate.
	The statements made in court are completely immune.
	The years ago, and I'm only repeating what I said in court for the record, I said that Heim Saban, the famous billionaire, had bragged about having Mossad agents get people murdered.
	The biggest personal individual donor to the Democratic Party in history at that time.
	And he was adverse to a client of mine in a case.
	And of course, the news media ran with it all over the place.
	It agitated him to no great end.
	But I was just saying it in court.
	And as such, he couldn't sue anybody about it.
	We got a couple in our Viva Barnes law.
	First of all, it's Vahin.
	Vahini.
	Vahini.
	Okay, that's Vahini, which means a woman in Polynesian.
	Green truck says, Mr. Barnes, do you think the Obama manufactured evidence scandal is real or just a distraction?
	I think it's a good idea.
	It's a complete distraction.
	It's a complete distraction.
	Did somebody misled him into thinking you can't disclose this because it implicates a bunch of innocent people wrongly and they falsified it and they fabricated it and they got him to go along with something that is entirely about a deep state cover-up and that Trump is not implicated in it.
	If all they can come up with is a bogus birthday card, then you know there's nothing in there that wrongfully, that falsely implicates him.
	This was intended to mislead him and to deceive him into thinking he had to cover up for other criminals in order to make sure innocent people weren't wrongly implicated.
	It's a deep state op, top to bottom, left to right.
	Shame on Cash Patel for going along with it.
	Shame on Pam Bondi for going along with it.
	Shame on Todd Blanche for going along with it.
	And shame on Dan Bongino for going along with it.
	We got S. Ren says Trump was making posts about, quote, panicins.
	I hate that word.
	And anybody, I hate that word.
	Where did it just go?
	This weekend, I'm done with him unless he makes good on important things he promised.
	What happened to priority, that's called prescription pricing, make NATO pay their share.
	U.S. stops their support with the safety nets, and his own admin keeps touting transparency.
	We're going to get to a bunch of this stuff.
	Okay, fine.
	So people are pissed.
	I think he could make it right.
	Somebody did do their job this week.
	And on the other side, but we'll get to that in a second.
	We'll see Gabbert and Rushigate.
	But we should cover Rupert Murdoch making up obviously false claims.
	And he's so used to lying about President Trump that I guess he thought he could get away with it one more time.
	So we're calling it Doodlegate.
	This is the alleged letter that was at the heart of that bombshell.
	Wall Street Journal.
	I mean, look, Washington Post, I expect shit from.
	Wall Street Journal, I was a little surprised.
	I wasn't.
	They've been a hack publication for as long as I know.
	Everything Murdoch touches turns to crap sooner or later.
	They do a good job maintaining a faux air of what's happening.
	They're the best of the propaganda.
	They run this story that Trump gave this letter to Jeffrey Epstein in 2003.
	We've talked about the details.
	They have not produced the letter.
	They have not produced a copy of the letter.
	It's not clear that they saw a copy of the letter.
	Okay.
	They run with this story.
	They were told it was false beforehand.
	They said Trump never sent him a birthday gift, birthday card.
	He never authored that birthday card.
	He never wrote that birthday card.
	He never signed that birthday card.
	It's fake.
	And yet they ran with it anyway.
	So it's as close, classic case of defamation as you can get.
	I don't know if it's going to get $10 billion, but it's classic defamation, no doubt.
	But now, you know, in picking the minds of people with whom I even disagree, there was a legitimate point made or brought up that quickly.
	I think it might, it should have, I hoped, it started to trigger Trump's doubt about the story he's been told, that the Epstein files has all this fake information in it, that that's what he now, now we know what he means by hoax, that he's been misled because this is all they got.
	So they've been lying to him about what's in the, and because you notice after it comes out, he's like, fine, let's have, or knowing it's about to come out, hey, let's get the grand jury records.
	Just release it all because it will exonerate you, Mr. President, not implicate you.
	The question was, however, he sued in Florida and I'm not sure what the Florida anti-slap legislation, I mean, I know they have some, but someone raised the issue that under Florida law, as a procedural requirement before filing, you need to give five days notice to retract correctly.
	There's a bunch of those in various states.
	Texas have like a 10-day notice.
	Some have a 30-day notice.
	Different states have been passing that over the years.
	First of all, I mean, when I first, I was like, that's crazy because what you're basically allowing is five days of virality, which compounds the defamation, assuming it is defamatory, but it seems to be the statute.
	Does the case then you don't have to start?
	Then it has no consequence.
	Short answer.
	Usually it just limits your punitive damage claims.
	Okay, so it's not as though because it seems a state procedural rule and he's in federal court.
	So there's an argument that it doesn't apply.
	Okay, because I was under the impression that the feds would have to apply substantive state procedural law and that it is a bar.
	This is not really substantive is a good argument that it's not.
	In my understanding of the way the Florida law is crafted, it doesn't require dismissal if you don't comply with it.
	It just sometimes limits punitive damages and things like that.
	But there's a good argument it only applies.
	For example, this is why anti-slap law itself doesn't apply in most federal courts because they say that that's a procedural mechanism that contradicts federal procedure and consequently doesn't enforce it.
	I just even couldn't understand the raison d'être of the law.
	Let it stew, let it go viral for five days, let it spread wildfires.
	The idea is that you wanna give the media, It was the media companies.
	For example, they didn't follow it when they went after Alex Jones and the courts did nothing about that.
	But the people who wrote it were big media companies who wanted five days to clear up their mistakes.
	So, you know, that's the official narrative.
	But its enforceability and how it, especially in federal court, is usually in doubt.
	And I haven't seen it enforced very strictly in most, even state courts that have it.
	I'll be shocked if it occurs.
	Thinking conspiratorially, someone could say, oh, he did this mistake on purpose as though any lawyer would sign off on this mistake so that it gets dismissed.
	And then he can say, look, I tried to sue for defamation, but they tossed it.
	And now I can't challenge the authenticity of the letter.
	I could see people thinking that.
	But the idea that they would make someone wait five days while it goes viral before they take it away.
	And this is sort of preemptive also.
	I always thought you could get under certain circumstances, like injunctive relief to not publish what's going to be defamatory.
	Like, here's the manuscript.
	Oh, that's prior restraint.
	You can in England, maybe in Canada too, not in the U.S. because it's prior restraint.
	Well, then, may they get sued and may this lawsuit for 10 billion last.
	We'll see where that goes.
	Okay, good.
	Enough of the sort of the not good stuff.
	Let's get to the good stuff.
	Tulsi Gabbard, taking names and kicking ass.
	Robert, listening to what Tulsi disclosed this week, listening to her speak on it, did I listen to her speak on it?
	Or did I just imagine that?
	Yeah, she was on Fox.
	She was on a bunch of TV stations.
	I'm going crazy with what I'm consuming in a week.
	It was nothing.
	And I say nothing new.
	It was nothing new.
	We all knew they were filthy, filthy pathological liars.
	She used the word treasonous conspiracy.
	Now, I would never use the word treason because some people say to accuse someone of treason is something of a threatening statement given the penalties for treason.
	She used the term treasonous conspiracy.
	She's, I mean, the status to open inquiries into criminal investigations, whatnot.
	It's going to be good.
	Everybody who's blackpilled or doompilled says good.
	Strongly worded letter coming from Tulsi Gabbard.
	It's going to go somewhere else, go nowhere.
	We're never going to see justice.
	No one's going to go to jail.
	No one's going to get charged.
	Nothing's going to happen.
	What is the procedure now?
	Like Tulsi says, okay, let's recommend for criminal investigations.
	Who does the decision then go to after?
	Is this buck being passed over to Pam Bondi?
	Just one little tidbit to people asking the question in the chat.
	The grand jury records obviously can't be tampered with.
	So that's one of the utilities of the grand jury records.
	The idea that the Obama or Biden administration, well, it wouldn't be Obama, it'd be the Biden administration, went in and doctored everything and all the rest is very unlikely.
	So that that story or narrative doesn't, and if it were the case, that's a scandal of its own accord and you broadcast that to the world.
	It's not an excuse for hiding the Epstein files.
	It's another lame, pitiful attempt to run.
	And again, now it all looks like President Trump was hiding this because he was implicated in it.
	And again, they could have avoided all of this by just disclosing everything in an honest and honorable manner.
	Like technology is amazing, but between fabricating fake evidence.
	Are you going to fabricate the bank evidence?
	Are you going to fabricate the financial evidence?
	Are you going to fabricate State Department records?
	I mean, you know, it would be an extraordinary effort.
	Not only that, you don't know where there's double, triple bank records.
	Banks have those records anyway.
	There's other places that will have copies of those records.
	So that is highly unlikely.
	What is more likely is somebody lied to him, told him he's in the files all over the place when he's not.
	That is most likely.
	How do we know that?
	Because the only thing they could say that could possibly be in the files was a fake birthday card.
	I'm sorry.
	That means they had nothing.
	There was nothing in those files implicating Trump.
	Like we all knew from day one.
	People don't even appreciate like you fake a photograph that is impeccable, indistinguishable.
	It can be correlated.
	Dates, times, visits.
	There's easy ways to take it apart.
	Not only that, if that's the case, that's a scandal of its own.
	Of course, you can prosecute all those people for it.
	I mean, we'll get to it right here with Russia 8.
	It's 18 USC 1001.
	It's fabricating documents, falsifying testimony, falsifying documents.
	All those things are covered by 18 USC 1001.
	But you credit, I mean, what was most beautiful about the Gabbard memo, aside from the fact that it was proving beyond any shadow of a doubt that the Obama administration knew they were lying to the world,
	submitting false leaks, false intel reports, false information to the Senate, false information to the House, false information to all kinds of other foreign governments in order to falsely implicate both Russia and President Trump in the outcome of the 2016 election.
	They knew it was false.
	That was always the question was, I mean, everybody kind of knew it was BS, but did they admit?
	And that's what she got.
	She got literal smoking guns.
	Tulsi Gabbard got multiple smoking guns where their own internal communication said this story is bogus.
	I mean, remember everybody, never in writing, always in cash.
	They should have learned that in the State Department.
	They should have learned that at the Obama administration.
	But I mean, that's why Susan Reich.
	Remember, we talked about it all the way back.
	Susan Rice's weird email on inauguration day.
	I was like, that screams that they were part of some complicit cover-up and she was just doing her own CYA.
	You know, Obama told me to do this.
	This was my fault, just in case anybody finds this down the road.
	Now, of course, Pompeo knew this and hid it and lied about it.
	Hespel, or what, Heispel, I forgot mispronouncing her name.
	She knew about it and hid it.
	Not only that, John Ratcliffe, who's the current director of our CIA, everybody, he knew about it and he hid it.
	Flesh it out because I think people need to appreciate this.
	John Ratcliffe, I know you've never liked him.
	Ratcliffe, Rat Ratzenberg, Rat Facebook.
	Signed from God.
	When your first part of your name is Rat.
	Jamie Ratzkin?
	Ratskin, Rat Burger down there in Georgia.
	I mean, you know, that's God telling you something.
	So refresh our memories.
	What information Ratcliffe had access to when this was going on and how he either must have known and concealed it, or I don't know how to give a second alternative.
	He was in Tulsi Gabbard's position in 2020 and he was there to do this and he never disclosed it to anybody.
	I mean, it's unbelievable.
	And, you know, you don't take just my word for it.
	Steve Bannon's been saying the same thing now for several weeks.
	Ever since we found out Ratcliffe was trying to run Tulsi Gabbard out of the administration, why was that?
	Was it just over the Iranian conflict or is it about things like this?
	Ever since he, God bless him, he was trying to blame his deputy counsel, a man we know, used to be general counsel for Rumble, for watering down that report.
	Remember a week or two ago to Congress?
	Now we know why he was trying to get ahead of Tulsi Gabbard's story.
	It's like whoever pitched that they needed to put out that bogus Epstein cover-up document, they knew this was coming.
	Like some people were saying, oh, this is just a cover-up for the Epstein.
	No, no, no.
	This was already in the works.
	Gabbard was almost finished with this.
	They knew it.
	So they created a complete disaster for the president with that bogus Epstein cover-up because they wanted to step on this.
	Because this isn't about, this is where Mike Davis, God bless him, and some others get things wrong.
	This wasn't partisan.
	This was the deep state.
	This was the deep state doing what the deep state does.
	They murdered one president.
	They murdered a presidential candidate.
	They murdered a civil rights leader.
	And here they were going to sabotage the president right out of the gate.
	And they were going to do it for two different reasons that people are forgetting about.
	It wasn't just to sabotage a judicial coup against Trump.
	It was to derail any effort at détente with Russia.
	It was an effort to continue their Ukraine was RussiaGate extended.
	RussiaGate continued.
	It was part of the same pattern all the way through.
	And who does it implicate?
	President Barack Hussein Obama, Vice President Joe Biden.
	He was also in those meetings and many of the key ones.
	NSA advisor Susan Rice.
	The people who are at the CIA or the NSA or the ODNI at the time, people like Clapper, people who, again, guy committed perjury right in front of Congress, so egregious that it forced Snowden to go public and blow the whistle.
	The Mr. Brennan, remember, this man was a literal member of the Communist Party in the early 1970s.
	How he became head of the CIA is mind-boggling.
	And of course, the one, the only, the inimitable, James Comey.
	But it didn't just reach to those people.
	It also reached Andrew McCabe, who was at the FBI, part of a complicit in this.
	Peter Stroke, everything related to Crossfire Hurricane.
	As people who were victimized by it have been saying all week, these people like Ben Ben Rhodes, what might Ben Rhodes have done as part of this conspiracy other than lie?
	He may have leaked classified information.
	Now, you know what Ben Rhodes' defense is going to be?
	He said it was classified, but what he was reporting was actually never classified because it was never put in the classified files.
	How's that for a defense?
	Yes, I gave information to people that claimed to be classified, but actually I was giving them misinformation because the classified information rebutted the lie that I was telling everybody.
	What happens if you lie about what's in the classified files?
	Well, then you haven't disclosed classified information.
	I mean, these guys are criminals times 10.
	But the other thing I love about Tulsi's report, she actually puts the words deep state in an official government intelligence publication, which is also beautiful.
	I mean, she's giving people, here's a little mini crash course.
	Whatever happens with it, she doesn't control the prosecution.
	That's going to be on Bondi.
	But what she says is she's giving people a crash course as to how the deep state operates.
	Here's how they took out President Trump.
	Here's how they derailed his entire first administration.
	Here's how they took out General Flynn.
	Here's how they took out a bunch of populist advisors who got completely derailed and almost went bankrupt, having to defend themselves for a better part of a decade against utterly fabricated charges that they knew were fabricated from day one.
	Their honest intelligence told them Russia had nothing to do with the 2016 election.
	Their honest intelligence said Russia didn't hack any DNC emails.
	Their own intelligence said Russia didn't care who won.
	Putin's been on record for 20 years saying it doesn't matter who wins in America.
	They're all well-meaning, probably.
	He goes, But then the men in gray suits show up and they run the show in Washington.
	So he has no faith or confidence in American elections to make any difference.
	And he's been proven right, honestly, more often than not.
	So any of us who knew how the deep state operates, knew how the Intel community operates, knew what Trump got elected on, knew how Russia operates, knew this story was BS from day one.
	Credit the people like Aaron Mate, credit on the left, Michael Tracy on the left, Glenn Greenwald on the left, who are outing this from day one because they follow the same sort of topics and subjects and had a good filter right away.
	That's Green V, George Samuelli, the gaggle.
	These people were on top of it from day one.
	And then others think, look at all the great grassroots journey.
	We should probably have some of these people on, like Hans and some others, like Jeff, that did Jeff Carlson and others, did great grassroots journalism that exposed this, that put together the stories, that connected the fraud, that showed how fake and phony it was.
	But this is the director of national intelligence of the United States government saying, quote, deep state officials in the intelligence community created a fake story to cause a coup against the elected president of the United States and to sabotage our foreign policy that could and has, in fact, ultimately led to war in Europe.
	So the great credit to Tulsi Gabbard, fearless, wasn't going to be intimidated, wasn't going to be put down, wasn't going to be pushed out, wasn't going to be shut up, wasn't going to be silenced.
	And as I put up a poll this week, how much crap did we take saying that Gabbard and Kennedy were going to be great assets for the Trump?
	Oh, barn, I guess you're going full commie now.
	They went to your lefty roots.
	They went, RFK is going to be anti-Second Amendment.
	The response was, well, he's not going to be in charge of gun issues, so don't worry about that.
	That he would deliver on health care and Gabbard would deliver on intelligence.
	And I even put up a Twitter poll just to see what people thought.
	Said, let's compare two people.
	Let's take Robert Kennedy and Tulsi Gabbard, two longstanding Democrats, prior harsh critics of Trump, who are part of this administration, who we said were going to be Trump's best assets, delivering for the Trump 2024 campaign promises, versus Pam Bondi and Brooke Rollins.
	Take it while guess what the poll results were?
	I said, here's your choice.
	You got, on the one hand, you got Kennedy and Gabbard.
	On the other one, you got Bondi and Rollins.
	Who has delivered better for the Trump 2024 voters?
	92%.
	98.
	98.
	It was like, I mean, even the CIA bots couldn't even get it up to 2%.
	I mean, that was it.
	It was almost as big as I asked them, who do you think is more mega, Thomas Massey or Lindsey Graham?
	It was, you know, that was 90 to 10 for Thomas Massey.
	10% for Graham.
	That's still pretty good.
	By the way, who was a congressman exposing this?
	Our Secretary of State Rubio, who somebody should have been asking him some questions this week or this coming week, he signed off on bogus Senate reports validating this garbage because he bought it hook line and sinker.
	Whereas who didn't ever buy it?
	Who was outing it?
	Who was drawing the connection to the mysterious Professor Misfood and Mr. Stephan Halper and others?
	It was a congressman from Covington, Kentucky, known as Thomas Massey, who, God bless the president, is obsessed with bashing day in, day out, while he kisses up to loser lunatic Lindsey Grant.
	So the credit to Tulsi Gabbard, great report.
	No doubt now.
	This puts the nail in the coffin as Matt Taibbi put.
	He goes, this is new information.
	Why?
	Because it's the smoking gun.
	They knew they were lying.
	President Nixon strikes back over on Commitube says the doodle is from the DOJ evidence.
	It's not about the card, but the other cards, in quote, linked, creditable that Maxwell had.
	Company that put together Doodle Binder, one of their clients is Epstein.
	I'm not sure I understand.
	I'm going to go watch the video.
	Again, watch Vodzilla, accredited investigator.
	He explains the company's linked to the Doodlebinder.
	Coffeezilla.
	No, no, no.
	I think it means, I guess he means Voidzilla.
	He said it many times.
	I'll watch it, but I don't think that changes anything.
	Binder company's client.
	If you're buying this as real, go home and check yourself, my friend.
	That screams fake.
	Everything about it screams fake.
	It was so fake at first.
	I thought maybe this is all theater because of how fake it is.
	So now, what charges could be brought?
	Now, also credit to Tulsi.
	She didn't pull any punches.
	She didn't pull any punches.
	She's not a wuss like so many others up there are.
	She goes out there and says, this implicates everybody, including President Obama.
	It was a coup.
	It was a treasonous conspiracy.
	That's real chutzpah.
	That's why you need people with a backbone, people that have actually, unlike the Mark Levins of the world, fought on real battlefields for this country, who have bled for this country, who risked their lives for this country, who was subject to wrongful persecution herself for coming out for the truth.
	So great credit to Tulsi Gabbard.
	Here's what Pam Bondi, if she knew what she was doing, which I have grave doubt, here's what the charges, they could be brought and they would be easy.
	Now, some people pointed out statute limitations is run.
	I'll explain how you can get around that.
	You get around it with the ongoing cover-up of the conspiracy.
	Exactly.
	It was ongoing.
	Conspiracy.
	The crime is 18 USC 1001.
	If you're an employee and you submit any fabricated information, they hid that they were relying on the steel dossier, even though they knew that steel docier was bogus.
	They hid that.
	That was a fabricated, falsified document filled with bogus intel and information.
	They knew it.
	They submit just that part of it.
	They're criminally on the hook under 18 USC 1001.
	And then they just flat out lied.
	Lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lied, lied to anybody and everybody they possibly could.
	That is an 18 USC 10 1001 violation.
	Now, that does have a five-year statute limitations.
	However, efforts to conspire to commit that violations, efforts to obstruct the discovery of that violation are their own crimes.
	There's ways in which you can attach 18 USC 1001 violation just by saying it was a conspiracy to commit this violation, aiding and abetting that violation, so on and so forth, by your further false statements.
	But a conspiracy goes to the last affirmative act meant to do the keep the fraud going.
	As here's another great congressman who should be our attorney general, Matt Gaetz.
	Matt Gates subjected several of these people to depositions when Congress took over, Republicans took over in 2022.
	He's got several of these nitwits lying on the record to Congress continuing the lie.
	So are there plausible charges that could be brought against them?
	Yes.
	Now, some people said, oh, the barns, you're going to be stuck in the district of corruption.
	No, you're not.
	Because you know, what do you, we talked about at the time.
	What was the raid on Mar-a-Lago all about?
	It was about continuing the cover-up of this crime.
	They wanted to know what proof Trump had kept.
	It was empty.
	I don't think they ever found the actual docs that Trump decided to keep for himself as a little insurance.
	But that Mar-a-Lago raid was about continuing to cover up RussiaGate and the Spygate that was part of it.
	Mueller was all about covering up Russia Gate and Spygate.
	So what can you do?
	So one, that extends your statute limitations.
	You're well within the statute of limitations, no problem.
	But number two, you can bring this case in the Southern District of Florida.
	Not only that, you can say it's a related case and you can make sure the judge who gets the case is the judge who dismissed the Russiagate case for various violations of federal law.
	Eileen Cannon.
	Indeed.
	Now, that's if, and that's in Bondi's backyard.
	Now, does Bondi have the courage or the intellect to do it?
	I wouldn't bet on it.
	I wanted to bring up something that had to do with this.
	Oh, someone had asked about treason.
	Treason is generally waging wars or some sort of war conflict.
	So I agree with the use of the phrase treason is conspiracy because she's getting to the broader conceptual idea of the word treason.
	Legally, that isn't where you would go, though, because we've restricted that definition for good reasons.
	And the same with sedition.
	Sedition generally requires force.
	But you don't need those.
	You've got conspiracy to obstruct justice.
	You've got conspiracy to commit a massive fraud on the American people in violation of 18 USC 1001.
	And the conspiracy gets you to an affirmative act well within the statute of limitations and places venue in the Southern District of Florida.
	But so we're at like the step one, which is disclosing the problem.
	Has an investigation been undertaken in order of gathering evidence?
	And then well, here she's she's giving him smoking gun evidence.
	Smoking gun evidence.
	I mean, she's hand-delivered.
	Even Pam Bondi's Bermuda Triangle of a desk couldn't miss how easy this.
	This is an open and shut case.
	Now, there's more stuff out there that you can gather and you can support.
	But when you, James Woods, the actors, like, this is obvious.
	This is easy.
	If you can't bring any prosecution here, you're not serious.
	And who should be there?
	Andrew McCabe should be clearly.
	Now, will they ever indict?
	Now, is Obama immune?
	That was one of the other questions people asked.
	presidential immunity.
	Well, I mean...
	Well, I also made the joke that treasonous conspiracies are not core constitutional duties.
	So even under the Supreme Court precedent.
	We're going to follow.
	I wonder when those liberals were writing that about no immunity and trying to limit the scope of presidential immunity.
	They thought it could apply to one Barack Hussein Obama.
	Obama could be prosecuted.
	The same with Vice President Biden.
	But at a minimum, Brennan, Comey, Clapper, McCabe, these people have got to be put on the rack.
	And I'll read it.
	It says, this was from the memo back in the day, 2016.
	We assessed that Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent U.S. election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure.
	The way you do with presidential immunity is you folks, if you do, they're not going to ever indict Obama.
	I'll tell you that right now.
	But if they were, it's for things he did outside of the presidency after he left the presidency.
	Because he went around repeating a lot of these false statements in multiple settings.
	So you could say that's an affirmative act intended to cover up prior crimes of his co-conspirators.
	Robert, if the Russians didn't hack the DNC, how the hell did they get to the emails?
	And are they going to reopen the investigation?
	No, here's another thing.
	Like, Pam Bondi, would you please disclose the Seth Rich records?
	Why are the Seth Rich records still being hidden?
	Why does Tom Fitton and everybody else have to sue you into forever and forever to get any records?
	I mean, even the Biden corruption records, they're hiding those.
	You want to know why?
	Because she hasn't changed the key personnel.
	I mean, people say, well, why do you have no faith in Pam Bondi other than the fact that she's Pam Bondi?
	My other, I mean, I mean, literally, the only useful thing on her resume is Delta, Delta, Delta, where she was a lead member when she was in college.
	I mean, there's nothing in her resume that suggests she's ever going to expose fraud and corruption.
	She's been a DA, never did it.
	Attorney General, never did it.
	So far as you, as Attorney General, hasn't done it.
	But there's keeper, there's people who were involved in setting up General Flynn, who they put in charge of the Farah Division.
	Well, I mean, you know, he at least fired the wrong bad actors.
	Can we at least get some firings?
	Robert, why does Trump continue to defend her, to defer to her, to allow her?
	There's an old friend of his going way back when the Trump organization got into some legal controversy in Florida.
	She, well, when she was attorney general, came to his aid.
	So I think he sees her as personally loyal.
	What he doesn't understand is that doesn't change.
	You can't improve stupid people.
	I mean, there's certain limits on things.
	And you can't change courage.
	She doesn't have courage and she doesn't have the brains.
	I mean, it's pretty darn obvious at this point.
	And so she didn't make major policy changes like she needed to.
	She didn't make major personnel changes like she needed to.
	And what she loves to be on is Fox News.
	I mean, she's just incompetent.
	Like whatever you think of the Epstein files, there's no version of it in which you say, wow, she handled that really well.
	You know what I mean?
	My ongoing theory is that she should have been fired for Douglas Mackey inaction.
	She should have been fired for Dr. Kirk Moore, for Roger Veer, for the Second Amendment cases.
	Hold on.
	Brooke Jackson.
	Right now, her office is lying to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, telling them that the Trump administration has the exact same policy on vaccines, which is that no KTAM case at all can go forward in any court in America that accuses any vaccine maker of fraud, because that will raise doubts about vaccines.
	That was the Biden administration's official position as to why her case, exposing that Pfizer contractually Promised President Trump to deliver a safe, effective vaccine for the prevention of COVID-19 by October 30th, 2020.
	They delivered a dangerous, ineffective drug that wasn't even a vaccine, that didn't prevent COVID-19, and they didn't even deliver it until after election day just to screw Trump.
	She has the people running that case are the same bums running it before.
	Why haven't, and this is also on Patel and Bongino, why haven't the former FBI whistleblowers been hired?
	Let's look at the case of Robin Gritz.
	Robin Gritz was wrongfully fired by Andrew McCabe.
	She was one of the best ones, you know, the kind of person who could put together a good case like this, the Russell Gate case, is good FBI agents like Robin Gritz.
	But they refused to reinstate her.
	They refused to take any efforts to reinstate any of the whistleblowers.
	Instead, many of the people, why is James Comey?
	Why is Clapper?
	Why is Brennan sitting there laughing when they see Mike Davis say, get your lawyers, justice is coming?
	They're laughing at you, Mike.
	You want to know why?
	Because they know that their best pals are in the key positions of power in the FBI and DOJ to this very day.
	And someone in our locals community over the weekend said, Viva, what's up with Zach Apotheker, the border agent whistleblower who appeared in the James O'Keefe video, who got sanctioned for his whistleblowing, hasn't been brought back to work, hasn't been reinstated.
	Never force.
	None of them.
	Not one.
	Not one.
	And if you're willing to lie to cover for Pfizer, who, by the way, it appears she previously lobbied for, seems like a little bit of a conflict of interest there.
	I mean, telling them that the Trump administration vaccine policy is exactly the opposite of the Biden administration vaccine policy.
	So why mislead the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals?
	Come, you know, be honest and let us get to discovery.
	Let that case proceed.
	Let the truth come out.
	But she's not doing it.
	She doesn't want to rock the boat of any institutional power.
	They're going to go after some little low-level federal employee who likes to come up and harass Marjorie Taylor Greene.
	That's all they're going to do.
	They're not going to do anything serious or significant.
	Now, I would love to be proven wrong.
	I would eat crow till the day I die because that's how thrilled I would be to be wrong.
	But unfortunately, not on this.
	Let me bring up a bunch of the chats because I don't want to fall too far behind, which I already have.
	We've got Pinochet's helicopter tour says, empathy for your enemy gets people killed.
	When will you take this seriously?
	If these people aren't...
	It'll be a slap in the face of Tulsi Gabbard.
	Like, congratulations, you put yourself out there when you're on the.
	People, the American people who were lied to and gaslit for years and leading to wars.
	There's millions of people dead in Ukraine that would not be dead today if the truth had come out from 2017.
	Hans 1PAX says A.G. Barmey needs to take a lesson from Harmee Dylan on how to get changes at the office in person and agenda.
	Meredith G says, isn't it more damaging to Obama he is listed as an unindicted co-conspirator?
	Oh, that'd be awesome too.
	He deserves it.
	He's got to come it.
	Oh, he's got to, if only for the human experimentation of the COVID shot that he was so proud of.
	Pierre Chase Helicopter Tour says, treason by subverting the Constitution to globalist by slowly ceding sovereignty.
	The corrupt courts and treasonous chief justice should be ignored.
	There is no way.
	There are people who falsified the FISA report that that's perjury.
	That's fraud upon the courts.
	Now, it's not prosecutable under 18101 because 181001 exempts statements you make in court.
	But there's separate provisions for when you make those statements in court, particularly when it's an affidavit that you swore to under penalty of perjury.
	And the, I mean, the other thing is, I did get a kick and everybody tell me, oh, the indictments are coming and Mike Davis and all the rest.
	And I was like, I wish you were right, Mike, but I unfortunately don't.
	We've been down here before.
	Remember 2020?
	When we were talking about Klein Smith?
	And we were the only ones saying, hey, this means Bill Barr is slow walking this.
	That means he's going to bury it.
	By the way, that's another corrupt actor.
	He, Bill Barr, Bill Barr could be prosecuted.
	Bill Barr lied to the world about all.
	And is it really a coincidence that Bill Barr, a lot of these guys magically show up connected to the Epstein case?
	I mean, is it really a coincidence?
	I don't think so.
	My understanding is the statute of limitations clock runs from the time you become aware of the crime.
	No, it's from the commission.
	Yeah, the awareness is discovery in a civil suit, but not for a criminal case.
	No, because the time it occurred.
	Or if it's a conspiracy, the last affirmative act.
	Angie Kay, they should never put Tulsi on a no-fly list along with her husband.
	That's where they effed up by raiding and Melania's underwear.
	Ratcliffe has the crossfire binder.
	Ratcliffe knew all of this in 2020.
	He didn't disclose any of it.
	Why is Ratcliffe tried to put out a report two weeks ago that tried to whitewash this?
	And he's been running a campaign against Tulsi Gabbard now for months.
	He also lied to the president about Iran having nuclear weapons to try to get us involved in the war.
	So rat is what his real name is.
	Rat on a cliff.
	That's who Ratcliffe is.
	Pinochet's helicopter tour says, Tulsi's info all but proves 2020 was stolen.
	COVID was released on purpose.
	No Democrat had power escapes guilt.
	I am willing to sacrifice possibly anything.
	All right.
	Can we at least indict like Letitia James and Schiff?
	These people caught an obvious mortgage fraud.
	John Finn says today's the 416th day since Trump was accused of using the N-word.
	No video still.
	Hans One Pack says they could have avoided it by not putting in the memo in the first place.
	Serp says, why is Pan Bondi's DOJ shitting on our Second Amendment rights with her lawyers?
	Because she did the same thing when she was attorney general of Florida.
	Not only did she join that bogus Zimmerman case, false prosecution against his self-defense rights, but she often, but she supported red flag laws at their various times down there.
	So she's an unreliable ally on anything that matters to ordinary people.
	What she's really good at is covering up for corrupt actors.
	That's what she did well when she was, and covering up for connected parties.
	Now, some of those people were not corrupt that were just connected, but that's what she does.
	You have to be connected or corrupt.
	Otherwise, she doesn't care.
	King of Bill Tong says, taste our authentic Angus and Waggy U beef Bill Tong, premium air-dried with bold, savory flavors, high protein, low-carb snack.
	Order now at Billtongusa.com.
	Use code Barnes for 10% off.
	Anton's stuff is amazing.
	Snooty Man, shout out to all the mods on Rumble.
	We know you guys work hard here.
	Appreciate it.
	Barnes, and no, let me just go down.
	Oh, my goodness.
	How goes the battle, Vivi?
	I'm almost halfway through to my goal.
	This is Kimmy Hunt, who's undergoing chemo.
	I'm going to share this right now.
	Everyone, if you could support Kimmy, go to GiveSendGo.
	Kimmy Guy.
	Kimmy Guy.
	She's fighting cancer.
	hardworking, ordinary, everyday human being and we show our support for people by rallying to the...
	If the N-ward lady got a court, three-quarters of a million.
	Snooty Mim says Barnes Noble Kids book is section is filth by Louis the Lobster on Amazon.
	Character does matter.
	Join Barnes on locals.
	He's a Wikipedia of law.
	Get some healthy yet delicious.
	King of Bill Tong.
	Do it.
	Do it.
	If you could, if in grandeur, okay, I got that.
	I got that.
	Remember when the left attacked the video?
	Got that?
	Shout out to all the moths.
	Got that.
	Okay, good.
	Robert, well, there was something to segue into.
	Yeah, real easy.
	Here's another case.
	She is screwing up.
	Robert, Secretary Kennedy has said we need to get fluoride out of our water.
	A good fluoride group successfully litigated against the EPA and won a court ruling that said, yes, we need to get fluoride out of our water.
	However, Pam Bondi has decided that she's going to appeal that ruling to try to keep fluoride in our water.
	I haven't been following that.
	I've been told that they've removed it from the water, at least in South Florida.
	But what's the deal?
	So they bought time and time, and the hope was, and the people that got this great ruling that was EPA to declare there's unreasonable risk related to fluoride.
	Fluoride needs to come out of the water.
	And instead, Pam Bondi went to the big chemical companies, made sure the big chemical companies would be happy with that.
	They were not.
	So she decided to join them and is now appealing that ruling.
	You know, it's amazing.
	We've lived long enough, Robert, that the IQ being lowered by fluoride in the water was crazy chemtrail level conspiracy theory.
	If Alex Jones had a Alex Jones was right jar, that jar would have to be like the size of the Grand Canyon to fill it up.
	This is from AI, but I'm only getting this because once it hits AI, it's mainstream.
	A systematic review of meta-analysis of studies investigating the association between fluoride exposure and children's IQ found a statistically significant link between higher fluoride exposure and lower IQ scores.
	Unfucking believable, Robert.
	Yeah, it's one of the many ways they've been killing us.
	And here, that's an easy winner.
	You have somebody else who litigated against the Biden administration.
	Easy win.
	Go right in, celebrate it.
	I mean, Bobby Kennedy's doing great work.
	He's getting states to voluntarily do it.
	And yet this is all getting thrown askew because Pam Bondi's asleep at the wheel waiting for our next Fox News interview or caving into the chemical industry to make sure that the fluoride stays in our water.
	It's just one of the many, many, many mistakes he keeps making.
	Let me just do one thing, actually.
	Now, speaking of conspiracy theories and new merch, Robert, it's up.
	Here we go.
	I mean, I don't know if this has been done before, but it was my idea, and I love it.
	This is the new merch.
	It is good.
	It's not bad.
	It was going to be conspiracy analyst, but analyst, but it's even think about that.
	No, I was thinking it's YST versus IST.
	Conspiracy realist, people.
	And then you can get your thank you for your attention to this matter, vivafry.com.
	All right, Robert, let me put that in the chat.
	What else is going on?
	What do we got here?
	Well, we got a range of battles.
	We still have other Maha suits for Robert Kennedy.
	We've got crypto.
	We've got SCODIS.
	We've got anti-Slap and NDAs.
	We've got ICE probable cause and the unfunny Colbert getting canned, but blaming the Trump administration.
	All right, hold on, hold on.
	Before we get there, let's just do a few of these.
	Howard the Duke, are you following 23XI racing?
	I have no idea what these words are.
	If so, any predictions?
	My sense, despite the victory last week at NASCAR, will do almost anything to keep him from going to trial.
	That's interesting.
	Yeah, well, I was only barely familiar with it.
	Okay, we got two questions.
	If Biden didn't legitimately win 2020 election, would this mean his pardons are all he they're not undoing that election, so that's not going to be the basis to go for it.
	Yeah, they're not going to undo any of the pardons.
	It's a good scandal to pursue.
	I said Biden would come out and say he authorized them all.
	He already has.
	So it doesn't matter that it was by the auto pen.
	Legally, the way our court systems work, they don't want to second guess those things.
	And I don't think we really want that to happen because then they'll second guess Trump's pardons.
	don't want the courts to have the power to second guess pardons period yeah you know to to second guess it on the basis of outright fraud auto pen being operated without the knowledge of the president is different than saying he was of right By the way, this works for Russia Gate too, works for the COVID Truth and Reconciliation Committee recommended by Secretary Kennedy.
	He pointed out about Fauci, said, just call him in.
	He can confess or he can lie.
	If he lies, he gets prosecuted because the pardon doesn't cover it.
	Or he confesses and we get some truth and reconciliation.
	Are Jack Smith's false claims against Trump's lawful work on presidential records under 18 a criminal violation?
	Dictum, we covered this one, the immunity question.
	Thank you for that.
	And we got Viva, it's Vance.
	Oh, Vance Lee.
	Wait a minute.
	Vance Lee.
	Who's the Lee?
	I'm not sure who the Lee is.
	And then Lee Shannon.
	Shannon, and then Massey Gabbard.
	Trump was making posts about Pennekins.
	I got that.
	And Viva, you should have on party Bruce, who is a constitutional lawyer from Ontario and wrote Alberta's Declaration.
	For sure, it's just not enough time.
	I got guests all week.
	I forget who they are.
	Did I read right they're going to try to put her in for seven years?
	Oh, yes.
	I'm sorry.
	I wanted to mention that.
	Her for seven, Chris Barber for eight.
	That's Tamara Leach.
	Robert, it's.
	These are the trucker convoy people, right?
	Their only crime was organizing that protest, right?
	Yeah, they didn't even organize it.
	I mean, they were sort of the, they became the figureheads of it.
	it was an organic grassroots event in and of itself.
	She's already, I have to, Everyone involved in that fucking prosecution should burn in hell.
	It's insanity.
	They let actual rapists, murderers, cop killers, wife abusers out of jail with less than seven to eight years.
	And they did nothing but nonviolent mischief at best, which they didn't even do.
	And they're like arguing that it's so serious.
	It sets an example for lawless protests that they need to lock them away for seven to eight years.
	And Canadians have no problem with it.
	Canadians still think Diagalon is a terrorist organization, that Jeremy McKenzie got what he deserved.
	Briefly, speaking about the auto pen, as somebody puts out, it puts it in the chat, Bondi also covered for a lot of the mortgage fraud that took place.
	Remember, they were doing that signing routine, robo signing that ended up being all legitimate.
	She covered for a lot of those bad faith actors, probably after they made a donation to the right people.
	But yeah, look at if the president is, I think, correctly trying to take action against the wrongful prosecution of Bolsonaro in Brazil, I don't think tariffs is necessarily the best effective mechanism, but visa suspension, all those things.
	Why can't we do the same thing to the Canadian authorities involved in these two cases?
	Because these are outrageous cases.
	President Trump can step up.
	Canada's not a friend anyway.
	They haven't signed a deal anyway.
	But putting that aside, if we can go after some UN official that is actually probably just properly executing their legal duties, even though I disagree with their political theories about Israel, then can't we go put individual sanctions on all the rogue Canadian actors, putting the trucker convoy people wrongfully in prison?
	I wanted to find the article, the op-ed in Globe and Mail, I think, that Canada, because America is an enemy, should get closer to China.
	It's outrageous.
	Canada is not a safe place to be a free person.
	For national security purposes, I think we do got to invade and then deport two-thirds of them.
	Deport them to China.
	Let them get real close to China.
	Only the liberals.
	Only the liberals.
	Conservatives.
	Exactly.
	All right, so what do we move on to?
	We got a couple of RFK cases.
	The one, the big news on the WHO and then him having to deal with big pharma already suing him.
	Okay, so the WHO, we had discussed this at the time when people were panicking about some treaty that was going to usurp national sovereignty and give that power over to the WHO with their international treaties.
	RFK, sorry, RFK basically came out and said, we're objecting to the wording of some sort of...
	I was going to say, what they did is they took all the crazy treaty.
	So it's the first thing, you know, President Trump pulled us out of the WHO altogether.
	It's like, we're not going to be part of this treaty nonsense.
	But what they were doing then is they were trying to sneak them into the rules that create this other governing protocol.
	So they took all the treaty craziness, which was basically give the WHO control of our entire lives the next time there's a pandemic.
	Let the World Health Organization take the responsibility for shutting down your church, your school, your job, putting you under massive house arrest, forcing things into your body, forcing medical Sharia law and what you had to wear outside, all of that nonsense.
	They've taken away your kid if you didn't go along with this nonsense.
	They were trying to shift that to the World Health Organization so they could be a true globalist control grid.
	And this is Bill Gates' dream, George Soros' dream.
	And the Robert Kennedy caught it and said, no, no, no, no, no.
	We're not going to be part of any of it.
	We're not going to support any of it.
	We're not going to enforce any of it.
	We object to all of it.
	So credit to Robert Kennedy for being on top of it and stopping this nonsense.
	Now, he's being sued for by Big Pharma.
	This was as a result of it was just the recommendation that the COVID vaccine only be given to people who actually need it because they have unusual health issues.
	They should not be given to children, should not be given to pregnant women unless they have an unusual vulnerability to COVID, which is a tiny percentage of the population.
	So these, all the medical groups, the big pharma groups, all have now sued him, saying that somehow is against the law.
	I mean, this tells you how eager, I've been trying to tell people he has to go through these protocols in order to establish the evidentiary foundation and scientific basis for it.
	And he did.
	He followed it strictly.
	Boom, boom.
	And he didn't even deny people who needed it.
	He didn't even deny people the choice.
	He's always been informed consent.
	You choose what you put in your body.
	I'm not trying to dictate it.
	I'm just going to tell you whether it's recommended or not.
	And I'm telling you, it's not recommended when it's the COVID vaccine for pregnant women and young children is much more likely to cause harm than benefit, as established by a wide range of scientific data and materials, which he used to substantiate it.
	They pretend that data isn't there in their lawsuit, but this gives you an idea of people wondering, why hasn't he just completely shut down mRNA vaccines altogether, et cetera?
	Because anytime he does any little step, they try to sue him and get the friendly courts to stop him.
	Yeah, I mean, it's, there's some people who are still a little bit irritated, Robert, at the Moderna getting approval for the updated version of it.
	But what it was, it was only for those small group of children that are unusually vulnerable to COVID.
	And again, it's only if the parent believes it's a good idea in the end.
	So the, it's only, so even the Moderna approval was very limited, very, for a tiny segment of the population.
	They're enraged that he isn't forcing it on everybody.
	So the also credit to my man, Thomas Massey, who put together legislation.
	People say, oh, Massey never does anything.
	Those people have never paid attention to Congress or Massey.
	Massey is the one proposing taking away the immunity under the PrEP Act once and for all from these bogus vaccine manufacturers.
	So that's the next step.
	But this is what Robert Kane has to deal with.
	They sue him every time he takes even one little step to erode their power.
	Also, the people that got correctly shit canned from the bogus vaccine recommendation committee, several of them are apparently trying to sue him.
	So their hopes are going out the window, given what happened, at least with the Linda McMahon and the Department of Education.
	No, that's great.
	That was a great transition.
	Yeah, well, smooth as a devil.
	Smooth as the devil, I was going to say.
	I went to look up the judge, Robert, in the lower court case.
	I think it was Massachusetts, right?
	This judge.
	Well, of course.
	That's a question, right?
	Well, why is the American Academy of Pediatrics and all these other organizations that are meant to undermine actual quality of care of children?
	Why are they suing in the district of Tassachusetts?
	It's because they know, I mean, not even in D.C., that they're going up there because Bobby Kennedy is the dissident Kennedy.
	So they're hoping they get some courts that are particularly hostile to him on those grounds.
	Well, they got a judge who, for whatever the reason, unless I'm mistaken in the case, is born in South Korea.
	Not quite as bad as North Korea, but I was going to make a tweet, but it would have been easily misinterpreted.
	Like America first for judges.
	I was going to say, I understand that I understand why people think only native-born Americans should serve in politics.
	It would be like saying to me to be a judge in the UK or Canada.
	Nobody in their right mind in those countries would trust me to put their values up ahead of American values.
	Imagine I become a federal court judge.
	Now, I happen to be much more pro-Second Amendment than many Canadians.
	We can make the occasional exception.
	I was going to say, we'll see.
	You know, maybe there's some people born in Columbia and some other Latin places that have seen real or Cuba, seen real communism.
	Yeah, okay.
	But as a whole, judges that are not naturalized, not born in America are judges that are less reliable than those that were.
	Well, the original judge issued the injunction enjoining Trump from laying off 14, was it 1400 employees?
	Give or take.
	Anything at all to restructure the wonderful, the great Department of Education that has clearly worked so well here in the United States.
	IQ has gone significantly lower, but it's the fluoride fault, not the education system.
	Now, and not to pull up the commie Canadian card, I understand the rationale of the lower court decision.
	They say, okay, fine.
	You're not allowed terminating, what do they call them, departments.
	But if you de-employ them, you've effectively terminated them.
	And so you don't have that power in the first place.
	The flip side, I mean, so I could steal amend that.
	Like, look, all right, you can't dissolve the Department of Education, but that's effectively what you're doing if you fire a substantial amount of the employees where it can no longer function.
	Flip side, it's almost like the Department of Education, as well as every other department, is just a proverbial blob.
	Once created, can only get bigger, can never get smaller.
	So the lower court judge issued that injunction injoining Trump from firing, dismantling, otherwise impeding the functioning of the Department of Education.
	Court of Appeal ratified.
	Supreme Court, in an unmotivated decision, it was the dissent that had the decision, said, no, we're issuing a stay on the stay pending the outcome.
	If the outcome ratifies the lower court's order, then our stay falls something along those lines.
	But the dissent, Sotomoyor, KGB, and who is the third?
	Kagan.
	And Kagan.
	They say, look, this is effectively doing indirectly what they're not allowed to do directly, which is allowed to do it either way.
	But they're getting rid of the Department of Education.
	Their claim was that only Congress can get rid of the department.
	Okay, fine.
	Keep the department, have one person there.
	The Department of Education was always a bad idea.
	Education is a locally rooted phenomenon.
	And I've never been in favor of a state monopoly on education from day one.
	So I like vouchers, private religious schools, et cetera.
	And I was going to say, like, okay, it's not inconceivable that one entity could run the entire thing.
	If you put in AI and it's very powerful, it could run the entire department.
	So it's not necessarily even true of an argument.
	If it's too small, it can't function anymore.
	But that was not the segue into the AI.
	There was another one where they were firing employees and the court came in and basically said you can't now.
	Yeah, there are two different ones.
	One involved reorganization plans, which was the one in the education context.
	The other one involved firing, just mass firing a range of employees.
	And the question was whether the president had the authority to do it.
	A lower court had said no.
	Supreme Court came in and said, we're going to stay that, which means he can go forward with it.
	So it's like, I think the left was going so crazy.
	They're like, Trump has won 26 times in a row at the Supreme Court or whatever it was.
	All they're doing is affirming the law.
	Matt Gates was saying, see, this shows Pam Bondi is good.
	No, this was obvious law.
	So credit to the people who handled it.
	She wasn't paying any attention to what was happening in the Supreme Court.
	We know that because she kept defending Biden policies that Trump disagrees with at the Supreme Court.
	So, but two good Supreme Court decisions.
	And then there was the, and a third pretty good one is whether or not courts other than the Court of Trade can enjoin Trump's tariffs.
	So we've discussed this, and I know, I mean, I don't want to get over my skis in terms of what I understand by way of American law.
	The argument that Trump has the power to impose tariffs stems from Congress empowering the president to impose tariffs.
	Correct.
	The argument is going to be, and I may be a little bit constitutionally controlling the borders and foreign policy.
	Reinforces Congress, because Congress has explicit authority to do tariffs under the Constitution, they have to delegate that to them, but it's more permissible to the courts because it goes into an area where the president's already dealing with foreign policy and foreign affairs.
	Now, the question is this, and I'm not sure if this is the argument they're raising, but tariffs for economic policy, one thing, tariffs for influence of foreign policy, another.
	Are they arguing that only the commerce courts have, screw this up, that only a certain division of the courts has the power to adjudicate on tariffs and not any federal court, lower-level judge?
	Exactly.
	I mean, again, for those that don't remember, the Constitution gives Congress carte blanch to decide any court other than the Supreme Court of the United States, any authority it has to do anything.
	That while they can't fire judges once they're appointed, they have a salary for life, they can take away every piece of power they could ever wield.
	So what they've said is tariffs are a unique issue involving foreign policy.
	So we're going to create a separate special court.
	Just like, for example, dealing with merit service protection board, court of claims.
	If you're a contractor or vendor or employee who thinks you've been wrong, there's the court of claims to go to because they didn't want it scattered out with a chaotic jurisdiction.
	If you're in a tax dispute with the IRS, there's tax court you go to.
	Again, trying to create specialized courts to deal with specialized matters.
	Congress goes out of the way to say, we're going to create a court of international trade.
	All tariff disputes go there.
	And the lefty lawyers didn't care.
	They sued any judge, any court they could, got a bunch of favorable rulings.
	And the Supreme Court stepped in and said, no, it actually belongs with the Court of International Trade.
	These other courts cannot issue injunctions on tariffs because they don't even have jurisdiction in the first place.
	All right.
	So another small win.
	Okay, so that's the tariffs.
	That's the Supreme Court rulings.
	The crypto laws, Genius Act, and what's the other word?
	Clarity Act.
	Clarity Act, yes.
	So did you see what Trump said what the Genius Act was named after?
	Him?
	Yes.
	Before he described the Genius Act, he goes, oh, this is a beautiful law.
	They honored it by naming it after me.
	I tweeted like, you know, despite being in disagreement over the Epstein stuff, like you got to love Trump and people who are still angry and want to fight about everything say, no, you don't.
	Until I get my way on everything or this particular issue, he's evil to me.
	I don't share that sentiment, and I also don't think that's a very productive sentiment.
	But set that aside, pass the Genius Act, Clarity Act.
	We know that Chris Pavlovsky, CEO of Rumble, is very happy with it.
	Not everybody's happy with it.
	Marjorie Taylor Greene is vocally not unhappy with it, but rather unhappy without an inclusion within the law that would prevent CDBC central digital banking currency, which she and others likened to the mark of the beast.
	And it was my kid's birthday today, and I had a nice theological discussion with someone for about two hours.
	I'm not yet converted.
	I appreciate the values and the learnings and the lessons of the Bible.
	The only question is whether or not you take them literally versus metaphorically, but metaphorically, still good enough.
	I can appreciate the mark of the beast.
	The good, the bad, the ugly.
	It is going to set parameters on AI, create ethics surrounding the application of AI, transparency, disclosures, et cetera.
	But Marjorie Taylor Greene is screaming bloody murder that it doesn't actually include any exclusion prohibition on CBDCs, which was integral, essential, stated was going to be included from the beginning.
	What do you make of it?
	So, I mean, fundamentally, it's a big win for the crypto world.
	The Genius Act is about stable coins and tying, and it's also part of Trump and Besson's agenda to shore up the value of the dollar and to create an alternative currency system long term, but that is rooted and based in the dollar.
	So a stable coin is basically just a digital dollar.
	It's just issued by a private actor and not issued by the state.
	And so some people are wondering, well, why is Marjorie Taylor Greene talking about it?
	She wanted a ban on the central bank digital currency, which President Trump has done in an executive order and which did pass the House.
	She wanted it included in the Genius Act because by doing so, it would not require 60 plus votes and would get signed into law.
	So she just wanted to make sure this could never lead to that.
	That because they took it out, Mike Johnson took it out of that bill and put it in a separate bill.
	And consequently, that may not get through the Senate, the ban on central bank digital currencies.
	However, the Genius Act does not by itself, in any way, shape, or form, create a central bank digital currency.
	So because it does nothing to do with what the government does.
	What the government is doing is regulating privately issued central stablecoin currency.
	And the stablecoin just has to be backed up by the dollar or U.S. treasuries.
	And it's requiring different forms of transparency, different reserve requirements.
	Also, both it and the Clarity Act were about taking away the power of the SEC to completely undermine crypto.
	We've been talking about this probably almost more than anybody for the last four years, highlighting the craziness of the Biden administration waging war on crypto and trying to suppress it by trying to call it a security, which would effectively muck up and undermine the ability to do crypto and to revolutionize the financial world, which is what crypto has the capacity to do.
	So here I generally agree with David Sachs.
	So I think these laws are generally net good.
	I agree we should continue to be concerned about a central bank digital currency.
	And I understand and empathize with Marjorie Taylor Green wanting to leverage the Genius Act to try to get that through.
	I thought that was smart politics.
	It just ultimately didn't prevail.
	But these two laws do not at all create a central bank currency.
	Yeah, not just that.
	I mean, to the extent that it's already in an executive order, it would be redundant and, you know, is literally the government.
	Now, practically speaking, we're already on that.
	There's a cat with cigarettes in the live chat.
	Leave it to Mr. Mike.
	No, he's coming with something good.
	But so we're moving that way anyway, folks.
	You know, I'm not a big fan of who currently runs Palinter.
	That guy's clearly a nut job, it seems to me.
	But this sort of central digitized world of a social credit financial system, we're already kind of there anyway.
	So what this really does is this frees up the ability of private entities to revolutionize the financial space, put the U.S. in the position to take the lead in crypto and AI.
	And crypto has many freedom orientation components with it as well.
	It's why Bitcoin Jesus, Roger Veer, should not be getting criminally prosecuted by Pam Bondi.
	Pam Blondie, Pam Barbie, got to come up with some other names for her.
	Just because of how do nothing she is.
	I mean, wow.
	I mean, I told people, hey, if you want to send your tax check in, but you never want it to get cashed, tell the government it's on Pam Bondi's desk because everything that goes to Pam Bondi's desk just disappears.
	But these laws are fundamentally net good.
	I agree with Marjorie Taylor Greene that we should have in law a ban on central bank digital currencies, but these laws themselves do not create that.
	And they have a lot of freedom, liberty-oriented components to them that I think are of high value.
	Well, I would even, you know, if we're going to ask for amendments, I would ask for an amendment to be added that states that banking services are a human right and that they can't be unilaterally shut down without any, you know, period.
	Absolutely.
	Absolutely.
	Prohibiting political discrimination by financial institutions is another big legislative area that needs to be pursued.
	Let's not fall too far behind over on Viva Barnes.
	Robert, we got, does anyone here have a recommendation for a business lawyer in Wisconsin specializing in manufacturing?
	You can email me.
	I'm licensed in Wisconsin.
	Bender is great.
	Is also a great member of their regular member of our community.
	Bayanula.
	Bayunola says the thing about Epstein files is not really about Epstein.
	It's about holding the elites accountable.
	And if Trump allows the deep state to lie to the American people, then we have no trust in our government.
	That's at least I understand now how he got tricked into this.
	They tricked him into thinking it was a bunch of fake information implicating him.
	That was always a lie.
	Pitiful of Bondi, Blanche, Bongino, and Patel to buy into it.
	I'm still not convinced that Bongino really did buy into it.
	I mean, Blanche keeps saying Bongino signed it.
	And I'm like, nobody signed it, Todd.
	Wait, where's the signatures?
	Show me the signature, Todd.
	All that we've had is a alleged threat to leave from Bonji and then Bongino and then silence, you know, I would imagine coming up.
	I mean, it's if they don't fix that, at least they move towards fixing it.
	So we'll see.
	But the crypto law has moved the needle in the right way.
	But this is from Andrew Piscadloe.
	The ballooning Russia Gate scandal doesn't even surprise me at all.
	I kind of wish it did.
	This is better now knowing what we're up against.
	The prosecution will fail in D.C. You can't bring it in DC.
	If you're serious, you'll bring the case in the Southern District of Florida.
	Okay, we're going to bring this down here.
	I went all the way to the bottom.
	What, if anything, do you know about Tether, Robert?
	Oh, so isn't Tether what's connected to Rumble?
	Yeah, Tether has its own coin, I think, that's separate from a true stable coin.
	well no I think they've got a stable coin that's tied to the US dollar they've got they're the I'm going to double- I don't know very much.
	I don't know all the details.
	I just know Tether's got tight relationships with Rumble.
	I know there's some people that are critical of them.
	They seem okay by me, as far as I know.
	Yeah, and they're trying to allow for crypto transactions on the Rumble.
	I'm for anything that gets us free from the Fed.
	More stuff that gets us free from the Fed.
	I'm all for it.
	Kira One says, last Tuesday, the Independent UK reported J.D. Vance met with Rupert Murdoch.
	He met with him about a month ago when he was on a tour in Montana.
	It had nothing to do with this other stuff.
	By the way, that was another giveaway that Murdoch was attempting to sabotage Tulsi Gabbard, sabotage Vice President Vance by trying to claim, pretend.
	The Murdochs hate Vance.
	They were screaming at Trump not to make him vice president.
	So people putting out that, and you look at which press that's reporting this, it's Murdoch's press.
	So, I mean, Murdoch has lost the script.
	He really has.
	Those that don't know, even Murdoch has a cameo in the Epstein files because of his long-standing rivalry with Robert Maxwell.
	Trying to go up here so I can come back down.
	Okay, here we go.
	We got happy birthday.
	Okay, smoochies from Robert, from Barr.
	There's going to be tons of fake memes of Trump birthday cards now.
	From Rocket Boy.
	Don't forget the Durham and Mueller.
	How did they not report the same information that Tulsi put together?
	Yeah, exactly.
	Exactly.
	Where would these putative trials be for the treason?
	DC, can we talk about that?
	Susie C, how will Tulsi's report affect change Trump's course of action?
	Well, I think he realizes that Tulsi is actually delivering for him because Ratcliffe and some of the deep state crowd was trying to persuade him otherwise because she provided honest intel about Iran.
	But now he sees with this, he's like, wow, she's really delivering.
	So that hopefully Trump realizes who his real allies are.
	It's Vice President Vance.
	It's Defense Secretary Hegseth.
	It's ODNI Gabbard.
	And it's Secretary Kennedy.
	Those are his truest allies, not people he's known for a long time who don't care one iota about fulfilling his agenda to his voters.
	Grunt 167, is the attempt to gut the power of the DNI just introduced by little Tommy Cotton going to pass?
	Unlikely.
	But yes, but that tells you how effective she's being.
	Just this report and just her being there has the deep state terrified.
	Dennis T says, your thoughts and commentary regarding Alex Jones' conversation with Roger Stone on Friday, I don't know about that.
	I get the concern about But otherwise, it was the risk of contamination in the Epstein files.
	But again, that's an opportunity.
	That's an opportunity.
	If there actually is such contamination, those are big crimes.
	You can put them all in prison.
	But Maureen Comey can go in with her daddy Jimmy.
	Okay, I'm going to read one more.
	It's always been on Barnes Slim Shagan.
	Barnes, my mom works for the VA Veterans Affairs in April.
	She had a stroke.
	Now they're saying she needs to tell them that she's returning to work or not by mid-August.
	Still recovering, not ready.
	She feels like she's being forced to resign.
	Early 60s, concerned about her pension.
	We're just short of qualifying for.
	Would you know a lawyer in Minnesota who might be able to help?
	That sounds like a veteran.
	You need a federal lawyer to deal with that.
	A lawyer that there are lawyers that specialize in federal employment and things like that.
	Okay, Robert.
	The Maureen Comey, we touched on.
	Let's get just a little bit more and pick your brain on this.
	Maureen Comey, how she stayed on the file is one thing.
	She was involved in Epstein.
	She was involved in Maxwell.
	She was involved with P. Diddy.
	By the way, is that something else that we called?
	Did we call that in advance?
	I think somebody did.
	I think somebody was on the Megan Kelly show and called it in advance.
	I've been on a roll.
	I'm not going to pat myself on the back just because it's not far.
	Well, okay, I'm making a short joke.
	We were saying, like, how is she still on the file?
	Pan Bondi comes in.
	They fire her basically, I don't know what, a couple weeks after the acquittal.
	There's no reason given.
	Comey puts out this memo, this heartfelt memo, and we must not yield to the powers of fear because whatever, blah, blah, blah.
	Why did they fire her?
	To falsify what was in the Epstein files in order to hide what was really in there by falsely accusing Trump?
	Might that have something to do with the timing of her firing?
	Do I think that might have had something to do with it?
	You think Maureen Comey was attempting to do something?
	I think Comey, we know the files were at the Southern District of New York.
	Yeah, we know that they defied Pam Bondi's request back in February to provide documentation, much to her astonishment.
	How much do you want to bet she gave false information to Pam Bondi that Pondi falsely believed in that said, oh, you know, by the way, there's a lot of Trump stuff in here.
	And then realizing what a fraudster she is, finally enough pressure was brought to finally get rid of her.
	But I always said, you can't clean up the deep state if you keep the deep state employed.
	Just word of the wise.
	So what recourse does Maureen Comey have, if any?
	At this point, none because there's not like a wrongful discharge claim.
	Now the embarrassment that the cover-up didn't kind of work the way she wanted it to be partially worked, but Diddy got to completely walk.
	But on the other hand, maybe that was part of the goal, too.
	Let's see if she starts working for big firms that have certain kinds of Diddy connections, maybe.
	Oh, there's exactly what her poppy did.
	That's what her poppy did.
	Poppe rotated.
	He was investigating people for big corporations and big banks for money laundering.
	He left the FBI or the U.S. Attorney's Office, went to work for those very same companies.
	I'm just coming back in and back into the government.
	She will be, I just want to get the, oh, let's see.
	Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman.
	No, who is Agnifilo?
	Where did he work?
	She'll be with one of them.
	Market, bookmark this, clip this.
	She will be working with one of those firms that represented P. Diddy.
	More likely, it'll be somebody who got covered up.
	So it'll be an entertainment connected high-end law firm, one of the bigger corporate firms.
	Because the people she really protected wasn't so much Diddy as the people she kept out of the Diddy case.
	And they'll be happy to welcome her back.
	If Harvey was still around, she'd go to work for Harvey.
	Some people are hypothesizing, well, it's retribution for having screwed up the Diddy file, assuming it was a screw-up.
	You can't fire prosecutors for losing cases.
	You can't fire them for any reason.
	Especially the federal side.
	Or state side.
	Pretty much.
	I mean, there's not many limitations on what you can fire a prosecutor for.
	but to me, the timing was more connected to Epstein than Diddy.
	So now the conspiracy version was they're firing her so she can't expose that they're trying to hide certain Epstein docs.
	Like you have to be delusional about Maureen Comey to think that's the narrative.
	Much more likely, she gave false intel and false information.
	And who knows?
	Maybe she's one of the sources for Murdoch is Maureen Comey.
	I wouldn't rule it out.
	Remember, James Comey was a specialist at this, at laundering information through the media.
	So she's a chip-off-the-o-blocky bite set.
	No, that's a very good point.
	That even goes back to the other guy over on Barnes getting near the prosecutorial special counsel rule because Maureen Comey would get to see what the life would look like as a defendant.
	It would be so tempting to indict her and her father together.
	That would just be sweet.
	Her father deserves it over the 86 points.
	Absolutely.
	Arizona man over on Commitube says, no, F. Trump politically alienated.
	I'm going to use that word, not his own base.
	One of the dumbest posts he's ever made.
	And again, I think it's because he got taken for a ride thinking that the whole file is doctored with stuff implicating him.
	It's clear.
	That's false.
	That was fake.
	That was fake information to cover for the real criminals, who Maureen Comey and James Comey have spent a lifetime dedicating covering up for the real criminals, disguised as prosecutions.
	President Nixon strikes back, says adding up all the wins does not give justice for the potato files.
	I don't think Trump is protecting the pedophiles.
	I don't think Trump is on the right.
	No, I think he was misled.
	He was misled.
	Now, I think a certain foreign government has a strong interest in this file coming out.
	Robert, speaking of which, they're busy offending everybody in the world as we speak.
	You'll take that one away.
	I'll segue with that because I don't know if we were going to talk about this.
	Robert, was it last week or during one of my streams, someone said, oh, BB gave Trump a golden paper.
	And I'm like, what the hell is a golden paper?
	I look it up.
	You know, maybe it's like something out of a book, a religious passage.
	He gave Trump a golden pager to celebrate the intelligence victory that was the pagers blowing up in terrorist crotches.
	He gave Trump a golden pager.
	Trump signed a picture.
	I was going to put out a poll, but I don't want anyone thinking like there's fear hiding wishes or whatever.
	I see that.
	I'm a neurotic hypochondriac, whatever.
	I see that as a threat.
	Like, do I need to scan this pager?
	That is another way of thinking about that.
	I mean, I'm curious what the chat thinks, but like, yeah, I mean, you look at it.
	Well, actually, we did our weekend topic poll that I'm going to start introducing at vivabarneslaw.locals.com to get a wide range of perspectives from our way above average board.
	The is that even the trolls are above average at viva barnslaw.locals.com.
	The is was about Israel.
	The Israel has just gone, in my view, Bibi's in a position where he's facing a trial that I don't think he can likely win, that if he loses, he loses office and likely serves some time in prison.
	More significantly, because of that, the center and the left have abandoned any coalition with him.
	So his only coalition partner that keeps him in power is the hard right.
	And the hard right sees this as their only opportunity to get what they want.
	They think as soon as Bibi is gone, they're gone.
	And so they have sort of greater Israel goals as a way to defend and secure Israel.
	So for them, take out all the power players that are surrounding that could be hostile or adverse.
	And they don't care if it ends up, you know, a shithole like Syria is about to become.
	I did get a kick out of people telling me, you know, we got to defend the Druze.
	One of the co-editors of Babylon B got into trouble saying it's okay that they bombed a Catholic church in Gaza.
	Yeah, you see, he says, because the only Christians remaining, 20 some odd of them or 200 of them are supporters of Hamas or whatever.
	When you think the little Catholic kid in Gaza is Hamas, you've probably lost the script, Joel.
	I've got to bring it up because it's effing wild.
	This is it.
	And it says, press with both hands to President Donald J. Trump, our greatest friend and greatest ally, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
	And it says, press with both hands.
	Why would those be the instructions to President Trump for something that exploded and killed people?
	No doubt.
	There was a story in Axios today about how much frustration there is in the Trump camp about Israel.
	I don't even necessarily attribute this entirely to Bibi.
	This is that the hard right has control of the defense, and I don't have confidence that their tactical beliefs are what is in America's best interest.
	We did a great survey at Viva Barnes Law at locals.com about what people thought.
	He laid out four or five, five different options, and then people gave nuances and all the rest.
	So if you want to read a really productive conversation, at least I found it productive, you can go there.
	You can see all the perspectives on Israel.
	But what got them in legal trouble this week, aside from Bibi always getting into war whenever he has a trial date hearing upcoming, is attacked Syria purportedly on behalf of the Druze.
	But of course, the Druze were just fine under Assad.
	So if you really cared about the Druze, you wouldn't have removed Assad.
	And then they're shocked that this former head of al-Qaeda doesn't have reliable allies in Syria, that his militias might go kill a bunch of Alawites, Christians, and Druze on any given day.
	And then people are trying to pretend that Israel was defending them.
	It's like Israel created this problem with the U.S. and Turkey.
	But in the midst of all of that, they're bombing Lebanon and everything else.
	There was an American who was visiting in the West Bank, who was a bunch of Israeli settlers, went and murdered him, just murdered them on the spot because they're losing control, in my view, because the hard right is just running everything.
	And I think they're way past the script.
	But the one that got Ambassador Huckabee so upset was the, I've tried to explain this for a long time to my Israeli friends.
	The number one reason why they have evangelical allies in the United States is they've made it really easy for evangelicals to visit the Holy Land.
	And they were surprised, to be honest with you, going all the way back.
	They're like, you know, Israel is Jewish.
	So they probably aren't going to be big fans of having evangelicals tour through the whole country all the time.
	Israel was great about making that very liberal and easy.
	For some unbelievable reason, I mean, I think it's connected to this hard right group, whatever it is.
	They've started shutting down visas for evangelicals to Israel.
	And I mean, to give you an idea of how bad it is, Mike Huckabee, who's one of the biggest Israel supporters in the entire world, is screaming bloody murder at them and saying, I am going to start saying that Israel is unsafe for Christians unless you start to fix this now.
	And they're still not fixing it.
	So that's a little bit of the backstory as to what's taking place in Israel.
	But if you've lost Mike Huckabee, maybe you've gotten a little too far.
	I could not, when I figured out that it was a golden pager, not a golden paper, I pictured a scene out of The Godfather.
	Yeah, yeah, exactly.
	Hell no.
	You keep it.
	I would scan it.
	And if it's actual real gold, I would melt it down, bring it to Trax NYC, and take the cash.
	It's a little shelf park joke.
	Carmen's going around and he's asking, Kyle, Kyle, everybody knows all the Jews have a little gold right around their chest that they keep seeking.
	And he gives it to him.
	And he goes, Carmen goes, uh-uh.
	Everybody knows the first one you give is the fake one.
	The real one is underneath.
	Just everybody knows I got, I don't wear jewelry except my wedding ring.
	Robert, okay, we'll get a few more and then we're going to, I guess what?
	How many, how many?
	Yeah, we got Colbert.
	Is there a connection to the Trump administration get Colbert fired or was him losing $40 million a year part of the reason why he got fired?
	We've got anti-slap.
	People think your non-disclosure, non-disparage agreements are completely protected and contractually enforceable.
	Not under any slap laws or not.
	We've got when does ICE have probable cause?
	We've got Airbnb surge pricing during an emergency.
	And the future of juries in the United Kingdom.
	As Russell Brand was pointing out, is AI our future jurors?
	I might trust it more than a jury in D.C., unless it's programmed by programmers in D.C. I trust AI better than any judge in America.
	That's the God's honest truth.
	Not named Thomas or Gorsuch.
	KM Good329 says, Viva, watch any Chuck Missler vids on prophecy.
	He is dead now, but I guarantee you will blow your mind and you will love and respect his intelligence.
	God bless.
	Let me see this.
	Oh, I did want to give out condolences.
	John MacArthur, a great minister who passed away this past week.
	Very, very good.
	Yeah, I didn't always agree with him on politics, but a very good man who did a lot of good work.
	Hans One Pack says, SCODIS also has to strike down district courts thinking they have jurisdiction on immigration.
	I think we're getting close.
	We'll get into that in the ice case.
	Ginger Ninja says, look at those federal employees walking out.
	98% of them are overweight, middle-aged cat ladies with toxoplasmosis, Ginger.
	No wonder this country is going to shit.
	All Trump has to do.
	I said, look at the Miamis Miller case.
	If you saw the people that worked for the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, you would never want those people determining your health.
	I mean, literally, they were all low IQ LARD asses.
	All Trump has to do with the Department of Education is what Congress mandate.
	All other function can be removed, says Hans 1 Pack.
	Rocket maniac says, Viva, the point continues to be missed about Epstein.
	I disagree with you on this, but I'll read it.
	His operation was obviously to set up a blackmail and control influential people.
	What laws were lost passed?
	What security exposed?
	So he was a middleman fixer.
	So a great little interview by Tucker Carlson, I think that probably also motivated Trump to start saying, okay, maybe I should start disclosing some stuff was, you know, because he did that while that interview was being broadcast live on Tucker's network and in various social media platforms.
	But I'll tell you, if you followed the hush-hushes at vivobarneslaw.locals.com, you would know more than either Tucker or the person interviewed about Epstein knew.
	Let me read this.
	Apparently I missed some.
	I'll get to whatever I can.
	Blondie covering up fraudsters.
	Blondie covered up foreclosure fraud in Florida.
	Yep, we talked about that.
	Razorfist did a good video on Joe McCarthy, how he was slandered and libeled by corrupt actors and comics and some interesting truths about Truman and Eisenhower.
	Give it a listen.
	Check out the world through limericks on Amazon.
	Numa Pepe, Pinochet's helicopter.
	Okay, so I think apparently I missed some early on.
	Let me see how far back.
	I mean, the sardonic nature of Pinochet's helicopter.
	Okay, Robert.
	You know, BB's pager business.
	Okay.
	Colbert gets fired.
	Do you remember when he was funny?
	I swear to you, I actually do because it was the last, well, I don't want to embarrass it.
	He used to be funny, and the only people who find him funny now are Democrats.
	And they don't find him funny.
	He just gives him that dopamine rush of propaganda.
	People are saying, like, he used to be funny, but now he's a propagandist.
	I'm like, the dude danced with syringe needles for COVID shots.
	He's a propagandist that would make Joseph Goebbels green with envy.
	He gets, they cut his show.
	I don't remember when it was last funny.
	It's a decade ago.
	He's not just unfunny.
	He's not just a propagandist.
	He's a truly awful, unhappy, mean-spirited jackass.
	For the people who accuse the right of wearing tinfoil conspiracy theory hats, conspiracy realists at vivafraud.com, they're saying this was part of retribution against him for having criticized NBCRC, whatever one he works for, paying Trump $16 million.
	I think it was for the 60 minutes.
	Sorry, I forget which one of these three-letter agencies were talking.
	I mean, they're all shit garbage propaganda outlets.
	They say it's retribution for that.
	I think it's pretty easy just to find out his viewership numbers, how much money he must be losing because nobody wants to advertise with that toxic jackass.
	But they're created a scandal out of it, which I don't think anybody cares about.
	What's any insight above and beyond trying to rationalize and cope with the loss of Stephen Colbert, once funny man?
	Well, Colbert was the one who put this idea out there in the zeitgeist because he said the $16 million was a bribe by CBS to President Trump to get the FCC, Federal Communications Commission, to approve the pending merger between Paramount, the owner of CBS, and Skydance.
	Basically, it's really a trade between the Redstone family and the Ellison family.
	I think I knew the Ellison kid.
	He may have shown up at one or two of my Malibu poker parties back in the day.
	And it is pending before the FCC.
	And the FCC had said that while this lawsuit was pending, that raised issues about whether or not the murder should be approved.
	But the idea that the $16 million was a bribe is nonsense.
	It was because they did wrong and they didn't want to get exposed in bad detail how wrong they were with discovery and extending the suit.
	Also, the new owners, the Skydance, this is, you know, Larry Ellison is the father.
	This is the son that owns Skydance, Did like Top Gun, Maverick, you know, some films like that.
	So, you know, isn't as woke as everybody else.
	And Larry Ellison's kind of a mixed bag.
	Oracle is his tech company.
	He's a big Elon Musk fan.
	Things like he's kind of all over the place.
	He owned a huge place up the road from me in Malibu when I was there.
	Bought a bunch of real estate and whatnot.
	I wouldn't fully trust him, but that's another story for another day.
	Maybe a hush hush when it's appropriate.
	But here's why.
	But first of all, if you're trying to do a merger, can you have one of your lead employees out saying you're bribing people?
	Isn't that a reason to fire him right away when that's false information, ridiculous levels of defamation when you just had to settle a defamation suit?
	But the big reason is everybody knew this was coming.
	Skydance is like Paramount's been bleeding cash now for a decade.
	The Paramount Plus is not cashing in the way they thought it would.
	And they just got to cut, cut, cut, cut.
	And Redstone, rather than doing the cuttings, wanting to cash in and cash out and get out quick.
	She's being sued by various pension groups and other groups saying that she's got a, that they've diluted their stock to boot her stock and selling, not a big surprise there, in terms of the allegations.
	But basically, everybody knew Colbert was going to be the first guy cut because Colbert loses $40 million a year.
	Can you imagine paying somebody to cost you more money, to lose you more money?
	That's how unfunny Colbert was.
	I mean, he had the big pharma advertisers and all of his pimping for them.
	Still wasn't enough to get eyeballs.
	Still wasn't enough to get people to actually watch.
	I haven't watched Colbert in forever.
	I mean, back when he was doing his Bill O'Reilly imitation with Stewart, he was actually kind of funny half the time.
	Now he's utterly unfunny.
	He's a bad propagandist.
	And when he didn't have writers during the pandemic, he was awful.
	This was pointed out well by the Friday Night Tites crew and by Nerd Roddick and Geeks and Gamers and all that cool crowd.
	They were pointing out Johnny Carlson, you know, years ago, Johnny Carson explained why he doesn't get involved politically in serious issues back and forth.
	He goes, you know, I'm here to entertain people, keep them, and I'm not here to be a politician.
	That's the way you do it.
	They played that clip amongst others.
	But so this is a fake news story meant to circulate by the press, meant to circulate by the politicians, Bernie Sanders and others who love the kiss-up routine they got from Colbert, pretending it was cool and chic and hip when it was just loserville times 10.
	So there's no grounds for it, no basis for it.
	Now, that deal probably will go forward in the coming months because Skydance now has the ability to start cutting people like Colbert.
	So maybe they can actually not lose tons of money every year.
	He gets paid $15 to $20 million a year.
	Holy unfunny.
	I mean, that's just to be a propagandist.
	No, it's to be a propagandist.
	And the problem is he's not even a good one.
	He's not even a good one.
	If you're going to beat Goebbels, at least be as effective as Goebbels.
	You know what I mean?
	I want to see if I can get...
	I want to get the...
	Oh, I'm...
	That would go down as his most famous skit.
	That embarrassing, humiliating one with a vaccine.
	I think I can.
	An appropriate punishment for Colbert would be to make him take the COVID shot every single day for the rest of his life.
	way to reassure the grindstone all pink it's It's funny or entertaining or you know what I mean?
	It was just about it.
	He looks dead in the eyes.
	Look at the crap.
	Holy crap.
	All right.
	He looks like Dan Bongino and Cash Patel trying to explain to you that Epstein killed himself.
	I'm going to be ragging those two about that forever.
	I'm telling you, some people were hypothesizing that Dan and Patel were being so deliberate in their body language to let people know.
	Others were saying, Trump, you want a great, sorry to interrupt.
	You want a great body language thing.
	Look at the behavior language, the behavior panel, body language panel.
	Chase Hughes, all those guys, Greg, Scott, Mark, they did a great breakdown of the initial press, like not like when they're sitting in the cabinet room, and they nailed it.
	Chase Hughes nailed it.
	He said, you know, Rubio's eyes start going like this at one particular point.
	Same with Pam Bondi's.
	Her eyes, which means high stress, nervous, nervous, nervous.
	And even Trump goes, ooh.
	And what was it?
	It was the moment the interviewer asked, was Epstein an asset of intelligence?
	So it was brilliant, beautiful breakdown by anybody who wants to break it down.
	Those guys are great in general.
	It was amazing.
	And they also nailed Bondi on some of her answers.
	Like, we're not going to put up some of that sick information.
	And they said it's a great political tactic to like shame people out of what nobody was asking for because who could disagree that nobody wants to see CP?
	It was a great analysis.
	Robert, do we take the party over to Viva Barnes?
	Yeah, we got the anti-slap NDAs.
	When are NDAs unenforceable if there's an anti-slap claim?
	When does ICE have probable cause to arrest the federal judges saying you will never have reasonable suspicion or probable cause under her interpretation of what counts?
	Turns out speaking Spanish in an accent at a place where all legals tend to get together is not things you can use as evidence to ask somebody questions about whether or not they're legal here.
	We've got Airbnb with the surge pricing.
	And last but not least, AI jurors over at viva barnslaw.locals.com, where we'll answer all the tipped questions of $5 or more.
	Probably more also.
	This will be a week and end up answering time to go anyway.
	Colbert Skydance Merger Late Show cost $100 million annually, losing $30 million.
	RFK Jr. about to cut farm ads.
	Yeah, that's it.
	Let me do, oh, it's not sharing my screen anymore.
	Hold on, Robert.
	I'll be back in one second.
	I'm just going to refresh so I can share.
	Back in and bring me back to this side because I don't like being on the right.
	I don't like being on the right.
	Hold on.
	And then there was, I'll just do a few more here in our locals.
	Am I at the bottom?
	I don't think I'm at the bottom.
	Please pray for my husband, Ben.
	We received good news about last week that his blood is clear of cancer.
	We are waiting for the results of his lymph nodes.
	However, his skin is so tormented that he's asked me to pray for his will to live, says Sadaka.
	Absolutely.
	Will do.
	We got.
	That's a great one.
	Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and do Alex Jones and me and you as American revolutionary generals.
	I like it.
	I like it.
	No, they didn't put me in the red coat.
	Also, Trump should make an official apology statement to Putin.
	I see, I think he should make just an apology statement to his base.
	I don't think he has to apologize to Putin.
	I don't think he entertains.
	He's saying dumb stuff with Putin, but Putin doesn't care.
	Yeah, but no, but his base does care.
	But I don't think he lent any idea to the collusion at the time.
	I don't think he suggested.
	Oh, I see what the person's saying is America should apologize for falsely accusing Putin of Russia on America's behalf because they were lying about Trump and lying about Russia in order to provoke war.
	Spam Ranger Mark of the Beast in the original Greek text is Bismillah with the swords of Islam.
	Interesting.
	It's very funny.
	Okay, then we got, what do we got here?
	In honor of Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulos, get the thing out of here.
	George Papadopoulos, charges should be made against James Comey, Brandon, Clapper, Barack Obama based on false statements because they are most likely to succeed.
	It would be the irony and the beautiful thing.
	And you can include Susan Reisler and Lynch Andy McCabe into the mix.
	Not that charges would likely succeed for these.
	There were like 50 others that were wrongfully put under massive investigation and harassed for years and bankrupted and run out of business.
	The people that I know that there are several of them talking about how young their daughters were that they had to grow up with this insanity.
	There's a lot of people who rightly deserve.
	And I support Mike Davis calling for it.
	I just don't have any confidence that Pam Bonte can deliver it.
	Well, we'll see about that.
	Get over to locals, everybody.
	Who are we going to raid that is live right now?
	They didn't have the landing page.
	I did love Salty Cracker.
	Every time somebody told him, you need to stop talking about Epstein Salty, he goes, that just got two times longer.
	Let's see if Salty is live.
	I don't know if he's got the things turned on.
	Let's see if we can do this.
	Restream.
	And I hear, why'd my dog all of a sudden just start barking?
	Okay, I got to go back here.
	Give me one second before we head on over to vivabarnslaw.locals.com, people, where the party is at.
	Forward slash like this.
	And he can't be rated.
	So we're going to go with whoever's on the front page here.
	Rumble.
	The Mel K show looks good.
	I know Mel Kay.
	Okay, good.
	I'm not familiar with the work and I don't want to.
	You've been on the show once or twice.
	Here we go.
	Hold on a second.
	Somebody did describe us earlier as that we're the pre-stream before the restream.
	I always thought the restream, he was re-streaming something.
	I didn't realize it was the reason crime.
	All right, so that is it, people.
	The raid has been enacted.
	Go on over and the mail.
	Hold on a second.
	Am I going to CNR, Robert?
	Hold on.
	I got to go.
	Let's go see the raid.
	I have no idea.
	I have no idea how this thing works whatsoever.
	They've got Carlin Born.
	Come on.
	Maybe don't say Viva raided you guys.
	Barnes raided you.
	Barnes did it.
	Yes.
	Bongino and Patel, you know, put me under investigation for me back to America.
	You know, it was my evil twin, and it was all Viva's idea.
	It was all Viva's idea.
	Viva's like, hey, Barnes, can you call him Dan Bongino?
	It was all Viva.
	Okay, so coming over to Viva.
	What do you have?
	Who are you doing this week?
	So Monday, we got a special, what are the odds with Richard Barris, People's Pundit Daily, that will be on at 2 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday.
	We're going to break down who is the new key swing voter in American politics.
	So we're going to do a deep dive on that.
	Then we'll have Bourbons with Barnes Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday.
	Amazing.
	And I have a guest on Tuesday, I think a doctor coming on to talk about some COVID stuff.
	Tomorrow, I forget who is popping on for a bit.
	I've got to go check my DMs.
	So every day, three o'clock, people on Rumble.
	And that is it.

▲