Viva & Barnes - Wall Street Journal DOUBLING DOWN on Epstein! Lawyer in Canada DEBANKED! AND MORE!

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 24, 2025 - Viva & Barnes

01:07:35

Wall Street Journal DOUBLING DOWN on Epstein! Lawyer in Canada DEBANKED! AND MORE!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Passed the resolution and the subcommittee of oversight to get that subpoena.
	And Chairman Coleman graciously agreed to follow through with it.
	Yeah, I would hope that we could get to the bottom of it.
	I want to know the money trail.
	I want to know who employed Epstein a foreign agent, who are his benefactors.
	I want to know the way that they access these children.
	I want to know names of the people that were involved.
	I don't care about people who flew on this goddamn plane.
	President Trump has stated multiple times he flew on his plane.
	As a matter of fact, he banned that dirt bag from Mar-a-Lago over 15 years ago.
	I'm tired of hearing people trying to pin Trump to it.
	Trump has been out front saying that he knew the guy and he banned him from Mar-a-Lago.
	They knew each other.
	They ran in the same circles.
	It's just like me.
	I know a lot of dirt bags myself.
	But I would hope that we could follow the money trail and just see where it all leads.
	And hopefully in all this, and I warn people, we need to protect the name of the innocent.
	And they were children at the time that were raped, over a thousand, apparently.
	And, you know, I've been told we could bring down governments and places all over the world.
	Well, if they're built on this, that gummet, we ought to bring them down.
	Who's going to agree with that?
	I just saw a meme, and it was the guy from the office pointing at the sign and then pointing at the other sign.
	And it said, if revealing the Epstein list would take down governments or be a national security concern, then we're governed by criminals.
	This man is on point.
	Let's let it finish before I highlight the important elements of what was just said.
	Because they are, to me, they're doing business with the devil.
	And I'm sure Mr. Epstein's dealing with him right now.
	So one of the big questions is how much does Ghelene Maxwell know?
	Constitutional law professor Alan Dershowitz believes that she holds the keys to the kingdom.
	Listen to what he said.
	She is the Rosetta Stone.
	She knows everything.
	She arranged every single.
	She knows everything.
	The Rosetta Stone stood trial.
	Over a thousand children abused.
	And we're being led to believe only by Jeffrey Epstein.
	The point to take away from that is there's a money trail.
	Was he intelligence?
	We haven't yet gotten that information.
	And this sure as hell is not going away.
	What I do like at this point in time is it's not incriminating Trump at all.
	Period.
	Full stop.
	This is not spin.
	You can take it as spin if you want to.
	This is not incriminating Trump.
	Trump's full relations with Epstein have been laid bare for decades.
	And anybody thinking, and I know what people argue, I can steelman it myself.
	No, no, the reason why they didn't disclose anything on Trump being intimately and nefariously involved is it would have taken down the entire cabal.
	Horse crap, right?
	Horse crap.
	Of all the people who've dealt with Epstein, not very many of them have banned Epstein from his private golf club, which is what Trump did.
	What I love is it's highlighting the godforsaken hypocrites and scoundrels within the government.
	The amount of Democrats now tweeting about the Epstein file is certainly more than it was last year.
	Certainly more than it was the year before.
	Certainly was more than the year before that.
	In fact, you'd have to go back to the last time any Democrat tweeted about it.
	Nancy Pelosi.
	Who's the other one there?
	Eric Swallowell.
	The last time they tweeted about it, when do you think it was?
	You'll know the answer if you follow me on Twitter or you're a member of our community or you have half a brain.
	The last time they tweeted about Epstein because they care so much about it was 2019 when Alex Acosta was appointed to Trump's administration and it was revealed that Alex Acosta was the dude who was involved in the sweetheart deal from 2007, 2008, 2009.
	It's an amazing thing.
	Look at this.
	I mean, I have to double check, triple check, because I don't want to make any wrong accusations.
	It's very difficult to go through.
	You can put an Epstein in someone's account and you'll see it for yourselves.
	Are we noticing a trend?
	Writes the Viva Fry at the Viva Fry.
	Many Democrats now tweeting about Epstein have only done it now.
	And in 2019 with the Acosta debacle, they only did it about once when they didn't tweet about it once when Biden was in office, a bunch of godforsaken scoundrels who couldn't care less except to use it for political profit.
	Hey, Grok, and I asked ChatGPT and I went through their Twitter feeds.
	How many times has Nancy Pelosi tweet about Epstein?
	Nancy Pelosi has tweeted about Epstein three times based on available information.
	Two of these posts were in July 2025, where she called for the release of the Epstein files.
	And one was in July 2019, addressing Acosta.
	Hey, whatever your name is, Grok, whatever.
	How many times has Swalwell tweeted about Epstein?
	Based on posts on X, Eric Swalwell has tweeted about Jeffrey Epstein 19 times in total.
	18 of these were made in 2025 during Trump's presidency, with most occurring yada, yada, yada.
	Only one post was made in 2019.
	None posted during Biden's presidency.
	Who else do we deal for here?
	Adam Schiff for Brains McSchiff face.
	Based on available information, Schiff has tweeted about Jeffrey Epstein four times, July 2025.
	Godforsaken hypocrites couldn't care less about anything, didn't tweet once when Joe Biden, Sniffy McPurface, was in office for four years.
	In office physically, but not cognitively.
	They don't care.
	They might think that they're never going to release the files for whatever the reason.
	Or they might think that in releasing the files, it will take down Trump.
	And it won't unless they screw this up or continue exacerbating a problem where people are coming to the conclusion that it must have incriminating information on one Donald John Trump.
	You know that the propagandists are out in full force based on who is out in full force.
	I want to bring out one here in particular.
	Pekka Gagliomieni.
	Where are we here?
	Pekka Gagliomieni says, oh no, this was in a different one.
	This wasn't his tweet on Trump being involved in the file.
	So I'll save that one For later, here we go.
	It was Eric Swallowell, the man who literally had relations, I don't know what type of relations they were, with a spy.
	Rep Swallowwell says they love it, they love it because they get to use it for political thought or they couldn't care less about the actual victims and they couldn't care less about actual justice because they had the knobs of power for four years and did nothing, said nothing, saw nothing, heard nothing.
	Like the three little monkeys there covering their eyes, covering their ears, covering their mouths, hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil.
	They are evil.
	Eric Swalwell.
	So we just found out the White House buried the Epstein files because it had two things in it.
	Donald Trump's name and CP, child pornography.
	So no one thinks I'm self-censoring for the sake of censoring.
	This is why we want the files.
	You effing idiot, Swalwell.
	You had Biden in power, a man who could have been manipulated to reveal anything.
	Four years you didn't say diddly squat because you are a Chinese spy-banging traitor to see who did what.
	I don't care what party you're in.
	We follow the facts without fear of favor.
	We just don't say anything when we're in power to do something and we only bitch and moan like a bunch of schoolchildren when we're not in power and we get to use the tragedy for our own political profit.
	And then you get to the Wall Street Journal.
	Exclusive.
	The Justice Department told Trump in May that his name is among many in the Epstein files.
	I'm going to, I can't pretend this information is mine or this theory is mine because it's damn smart.
	If you watch Bourbon with Barnes over at our vivabarneslaw.locals.com community, one of the many perks offered to our amazing above-average community.
	Barnes has an operating theory that the deep state has somehow successfully convinced Trump or members within the administration who are either gullible or not necessarily the most trustworthy slash loyal, have convinced Trump that his name is in the files either in an incriminating way as a result of fabricated evidence, which would explain Trump's previous truth posts about the hoax of the Jeffrey Epstein file, or that his name is in there.
	Let me rephrase that a little bit.
	That his name is in there in a way that is either incriminating, though he knows he's innocent, because I presume, assume, and have concluded that Trump is not in there in any incriminating way, because it would have come out already.
	Or they've manufactured fabricated evidence in that file now, such that if he releases it, it will incriminate him, even though it's fake, fabricated hoax material.
	Someone's convinced Trump of that.
	And now we have the Wall Street Journal seemingly supporting that theory.
	And I don't trust the Wall Street Journal any further than I can throw their printing presses.
	But this is what they're doing with it one way or the other.
	Either it's accurate and someone has, in fact, convinced Trump that his name is among the many.
	And that's why he has to hold, he has to kill the story now, tell people to stop talking about it as if that's going to work.
	And he might legitimately fear that there's manufactured evidence there, like the body letter, the body, B-A-W-D-Y letter that has now been revealed.
	There's more that, Mr. Trump.
	We manufactured evidence.
	And if you reveal those files, fabricated evidence falsely incriminating you, but people are going to believe it will be exposed and it will take you down, kill the story right now.
	It's very possible that that's true.
	Justice Department told Trump in May that his name is among the many names in the Epstein file.
	Bondi also told the president at the meeting that justice decided to not release more Jeffrey Epstein documents because of the presence of CP and they need to protect victims.
	Well, we all heard that part loud and clear.
	Don't you just love it, though?
	The propagandist out there now get to say, oh my goodness.
	They get to use the phrase Donald John Trump and CP in the same sentence.
	And I'm not saying CP here to self-censor.
	I'm saying CP here because they want those words to be appearing together in Google searches because they are Godforsaken scoundrels.
	When Justice Department officials reviewed what Attorney General Pam Bonte called a truckload of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein earlier this year, they discovered that Donald Trump's name appeared multiple times.
	Big effing deal.
	We know that Melania was in the black book along with Alec Baldwin and others.
	Big effing deal.
	His name had better come up in the files because he banned Jeffrey Epstein from his Mar-a-Lago club.
	So it better come up in the files.
	More suspicious than his name appearing in the files in whatever capacity they don't specify they appear.
	It would be weirder if it didn't appear in the files.
	In May, Bond Eater Deputy informed the president in a meeting at the White House that his name was in the Epstein files, the official said.
	Many other high-profile figures were also named.
	Trump was told, being mentioned in the records isn't a sign of wrongdoing.
	No S-H-I-T Sherlock.
	The official said it was a routine briefing that covered a number of topics.
	They told the president at the meeting that the files contained what officials felt was unverified hearsay about many people, including Trump, who had socialized with Epstein in the past.
	Some of the officials said.
	Oh yeah, Geraldo Rivero.
	What if releasing the Epstein files showed disgusting misogyny of Donald John Trump in the 1990s and 2000s?
	Oh my goodness, Geraldo.
	Stick to opening empty vaults.
	They also told Trump that senior Justice Department officials didn't plan to release any more documents related to the investigation of the convicted sex offender because the material contains CP, victim's personal information, etc.
	We all know this part.
	The meeting set the stage for a high-profile review to come to an end.
	Bondi had said in February that Epstein's client list was sitting on her desk for review.
	Trump said last week in response to a journalist's question that Bondi told him his name was in, hadn't told him his name was in the files.
	Another fake news story by the Wall Street Journal, and I think we all pretty much agree with that.
	One of Maxwell's lawyers, David Oscar Marcus, confirmed the discussions and said, we are grateful to the president for his commitment to uncovering the truth in this case.
	Maxwell has been seeking to have her conviction overturned, contending she didn't receive a fair trial.
	This is in respect to Maxwell potentially talking and for whatever the reason, making it known that Maxwell might potentially talk.
	FBI Director Cash Patel has privately told other government officials that Trump's name appeared in the files, according to people close to the administration.
	No shizzle sherlock.
	Patel declined to answer an inquiry from the journal about the Epstein case, but said in this statement that the memo, yada, yada, yada, they wouldn't release it was consistent with the thorough review conducted by the FBI and DOJ.
	We don't need to go into the rest of that.
	So now they get to run with the nonsense that Trump was told his name is in the Epstein files, along with pretty much everybody else in government, in entertainment.
	They knew each other.
	Trump, a lot of people take that statement that Trump said, you know, we're good friends.
	he likes, he has a taste for women, a little bit younger than me.
	People take that to be some sort of smashing endorsement of Epstein, not realizing that it was more likely than not Trump trying to out him as the pedopur that he was.
	But now you got these hypocrites, scoundrels pretending to care, didn't say boo for the last four and a half years, and conveniently and predictably, by the way, you can go look at this.
	Just find anybody who's now clamoring for this.
	They will have been silent during the four years of Biden's presidency.
	Oh, lordy, lordy, lordy.
	Good afternoon, everybody.
	How goes the battle?
	Viva Fry, former Montreal litigator, turned current Florida Rumbler.
	We are streaming across Rumble and Twitter because no better reason.
	And we're on VivaBorn's Law.locals.com, where we have an amazing above-average community, and we have a number of tipped questions coming in already.
	Let me get to these before I get to the sponsor of today's show and our special guest for today.
	Gray101 says, now that President Trump admitted to being in the quote, fake Epstein files on Real America's Voice, will Congress appoint a special prosecutor?
	Red, white, and blue coup says, hope for the better.
	That last one came from Gray 101.
	Gray 101 says, we need to indict all of the Epstein clients, no matter which political parties or leaders were involved.
	Justice delayed is justice denied.
	And Kiki Barnes says maybe Barnes' theory is true.
	And that's why Tulsi released the DNI files on Russia hoax so that the fabricated Epstein file loses their impact.
	I have a different theory.
	Some people are saying that Tulsi Gabbard's story on the Russia, you know, the Russia collusion, is it the distraction from the Epstein files?
	That would presuppose that Tulsi Gabbard threw together that file or rushed it out in the two weeks of this Epstein debacle.
	This is Barnes' theory as well, and I think it's a very interesting one, that convincing Trump not to release the Epstein files, knowing what a debacle it would cause, was the deep state's distraction from what they knew was coming from Tulsi Gabbard's disclosures on the Russia gate hoax.
	Tulsi Gabbard didn't work on that for the last two weeks.
	That was months in the making.
	People knew that that was going to be dropped soon, and that was going to be a bombshell, earth-shattering.
	Holy crab apples, they're finally implementing justice against the people that we know implemented a coup in 2016 and stole the election in 2020.
	Holy cows, it's coming.
	You think they didn't know that?
	And you think they didn't say, hey, now we've got to make Trump convince Trump not to release the Epstein files despite everything everyone in his administration has said for years, including his own son, who's not in the administration.
	Let's convince him not to release the files, knowing what a dumpster fire that would lead to.
	That was the preemptive distraction from what they knew was coming with Tulsi Gabbard and the Russiagate hoax.
	That's it.
	Hold on, peeps.
	Let me do this right now.
	All right.
	So by the way, let's sponsor today's show.
	Venice.ai, amazing, good, ethical AI that doesn't steal your information, that doesn't search through your inbox as you do things.
	By the way, it's an amazing thing that you start getting ads and targeted ads from things that you only actually have in discussion with family.
	But I wanted to do this.
	This will be sort of a segue just to see what answer Venice.ai produces for us.
	Watch this.
	How old was Emmanuel Macron when he had, well, let's just say, when he met his wife, Brigitte?
	Actually, you don't take out Brigitte.
	But his wife.
	When he met Brigitte Macron.
	Watch this.
	I've been doing the test to see how various AIs produce this.
	Listen to what Venice reports.
	Emmanuel Macron was 15 years old when he met Brigitte Macron, who was his drama teacher at the time.
	She was 39 years old.
	Their age difference of 24 years has been a notable aspect of their relationship, which began when Emmanuel was a student and Brigitte was his teacher.
	What was the age for statutory rape when they met?
	I know the answer to this, and I got a wrong answer from another AI.
	When Emmanuel Macron met Brigitte, the age of consent in France was 15.
	This means that their relationship, while unusual due to the significant age difference and authority relationship that people need not forget, and the fact that Brigitte was his teacher, was not considered statutory rape under French law at the time.
	That is our sponsor for today's show, by the way.
	Venice is a private and uncensored AI platform.
	Venice keeps your AI prompts 100% private, unless you make them public during a live stream, and the data stays on your device, not their servers.
	Venice offers, not our servers, sorry.
	Venice offers the most advanced open source uncensored models for truly unrestricted AI experience.
	You can go to Venice AI, go click on the link, sign up for Venice, tell your point of contact which email you signed up with so that you can be marked as a pro.
	You can also sign up for pro on your own if you wish.
	Ensure that you have a simple, there you go.
	This is, oh, gosh, let me see this here.
	By the way, it's also Sam Altman talking about ChatGPT.
	It says you can now reference all, it can reference all of your past conversations.
	They can gather all your stuff.
	Do you feel comfortable with those types of people having your info?
	Sam Altman also said, ChatGPT will get to know you over your life.
	It was the ChatGPT's got the former director of the NSA sitting on their board right now.
	Edward Snowden calls it a willful calculated betrayal of the rights, ever, the rights of everybody on earth.
	Who needs the NSA when you have ChatGPT stealing all of your info?
	Let me refresh this thing here and go back here.
	I want to see what the, show you what you get with Venice.ai.
	Image generation, private AI, uncensored.
	You get beautiful stuff.
	It's an amazing thing.
	Private interference, private inference API.
	And you can go get the pro model right now.
	Go to venice.ai, promo code Viva, and enjoy the pro with a discount.
	All right.
	Why did I use those prompts in that ad read?
	Because I wanted to get to a bit of the story of the day now, which is Brigitte Macron and Emmanuel Macron suing Candace Owens.
	Now, before we bring in our guests, I'm just going to give you my prediction on this.
	I've read through the lawsuit, in as much as you can read through a 217-page lawsuit.
	Holy crap, oh my goodness.
	Nearly had my computer go dead.
	Oh.
	It's a 200 and how many pages?
	219 pages.
	And I thought maybe it would be like, you know, just a cool 100 pages and 120 pages of exhibits.
	It is not a thesis.
	It is a treatise that does nothing but well, it does allege the life story of demonize Candace Owens and as much as you love her or hate her.
	And you try to make your way through it, which I did.
	And I've come to this conclusion.
	A lot of people are predicting that Candace Owens is cooked.
	And they're predicting she's cooked because, look, the lawsuit alleges what it's supposed to allege if it's drafted by counsel for the plaintiff.
	That everything Candace Owens said was a lie, that she knew it was a lie, that there's no basis to believe it.
	And the evidence that they produce or the allegations with the substantiating evidence.
	I'm going to show you just a few of the highlights.
	Because, oh, I don't have it open.
	That's why I can't find it.
	Because I'm not convinced that Candace is going to lose this defamation lawsuit.
	In fact, reading it over, what it basically is, is Macron telling everybody to believe everything they've already said, not without adding more, but believing what they say is true as alleged in the lawsuit.
	Here, hold on a second.
	Let's bring this up here.
	I'm going to show you this.
	Going to make a bold prediction, apparently less popular than most, that Macron, not MacCron, that Candace Owens is going to not lose this defamation lawsuit.
	The bulk of MacCon's argument is that Candace didn't accept and repeat everything they said in their December retraction demand.
	December retraction demand contained photocopies of newspaper clippings from 50 years ago.
	It contained a debunking by the Daily Mail.
	But I'm going through, this is one of the examples.
	It says, oh my goodness, this is her brother right here.
	Look, he appeared in public in 2017.
	And also, it looks more like Don Wrinkles than anybody else, but haha, bada bing, bada boom.
	They want you to believe that this guy right here is the same one as this guy right here.
	Maybe there's a bit of an angle off and whatever, but I know that people are going to say those look like two different people.
	Look at this.
	He appeared in public.
	He's right there.
	Don't you see him?
	Therefore, they disproved what Candace was saying.
	Listen to this, by the way.
	Paragraph 84, the December retraction demand also informed Owens that Jean-Michel Tounio is alive and well.
	This is in respect of that photo.
	Emmanuel Anison, a journalist for L'Orles magazine, reported having contact with him in 2023.
	Some journalists said she met him.
	This too was included in the Daily Mail's 2024 debunking.
	All right.
	In fact, Ms. Anison wrote an entire book disproving the disinformation campaign surrounding Ms. Macron.
	Shockingly, Owens cites her book in the series, but fails to tell her viewer it completely disproves her central thesis.
	Oh, so you're telling her what conclusions to come from the stuff that's in the book that you told her allegedly disproves it?
	That'd be a good argument.
	Listen to this one.
	Paragraph 88.
	Further, Owens initially claimed that the photo of Ms. Macron, in which she is described as a 36-year-old teacher named Brigitte Ausière, is not actually her, but rather of the fictitious Brigitte Probois Aussière.
	In doing so, Owens recklessly disregarded the facts that the photographed woman in this picture, one, had the same name as Ms. Macron did at the time.
	That's still true under Candace's theory.
	Had the same occupation, the teacher of the 15-year-old she would later go on to have relations with.
	And three, bears a striking resemblance to a younger version of Mrs. Macron.
	Owens later admitted that this was false, but she never removed the episodes, including this false claim.
	I mean, I made the cynical joke that, no, no, no, she is in fact a woman, and this is a picture of her three years before she had sex with a 15-year-old student of hers.
	Well, that's one hell of a big defense, but it wasn't statutory rape because the age of consent at the time was 15 years old.
	It's a bold move, Cotton.
	Paragraph 223, on the podcast with Michaels, Owens boasted that Owens boasted that Joe Rogan was fully convinced of her claims after two episodes.
	Owens then repeated her claims to Michaels, starting by exaggerating the MacCon's age difference, saying the president MacCon was only 14 years old when he met her, and she was a 45-year-old woman.
	Owens then describes her claims, saying, quote, Ms. MacCon is just a dude.
	She transitioned when she was in her early 30s, became a teacher, got the Adams Apple surgery, met MacCon.
	I mean, everything they told you about this, this woman was just fictitious, and it was made up because she's connected to a tremendous amount of power in France.
	Owens repeated that Mrs. MacCon took, quote, somebody else's identity.
	Owens then stated Préside MacCon was 14 and Ms. MacCon was 40, contradicting her earlier claim, stating it's statutory rape until the end of this year.
	Brigid MacCon could be tried for this.
	They're arresting journalists, yada, yada, yada, because it's true.
	And then there was one other thing in here, but you can read the lawsuit.
	It's just them saying, we told her these pictures are what we said they were.
	We told her the people in these pictures are who we said they were.
	And she's wrong for believing it.
	And now we're suing her.
	I'm telling you, I sincerely believe that Candace sincerely believes it.
	And I think that in and of itself will be thoroughly proven.
	And the actual malice.
	Can you imagine saying there's actual malice in suggesting someone is a transgender individual?
	The bigotry.
	All right.
	We're going to go to Canada for a bit, people.
	You won't believe what's going on in Canada because it keeps getting worse.
	I happen to have a bank account with RBC, the Royal Bank of Canada.
	At least I have one up in Canada.
	I think it's got a few hundred bucks in it.
	I'm kind of egging them on.
	I would love to see RBC try to debank me.
	Ready when you are.
	The news of the week coming out of Canada is that they've debanked someone who I know very well and Is not just a respectable, good person, but an attorney.
	The news of the week, I've already covered it.
	They're trying to put Tamara Leach and Chris Barber in jail for seven and eight years, respectively, for nonviolent mischief conviction of a bullcrap prosecution, which I define more as a persecution.
	Ebba Chipiak, I'm fairly certain she might be one of the counsel on this, puts out a recap of the events this week in Canada.
	Recap events in Canada this week, and it's only Thursday.
	In Ottawa, the sentencing hearing resumed for Tamara Leach and Chris Barber after being found guilty of mischief earlier this year, the Crown is now seeking seven years in prison for Tamara, eight years for Chris.
	The defense is calling this what it is, cruel and unusual punishment.
	They're asking for leniency, including an absolute discharge for Chris, citing their lack of criminal records and the fact that it was a peaceful protest in charter-protected rights.
	This was not a violent uprising.
	It was a protest sparked by unprecedented government overreach into personal autonomy.
	Yes, it was loud.
	Yes, it was disruptive, as protests should be.
	But blame lies squarely with elected officials and police for the massive mismanagement that led it escalate.
	Canadians were standing up to the decisions that deeply affected their lives, livelihoods, and freedoms.
	So how did a protest resulting in minor criminal charges turn into a threat of nearly a decade in prison?
	Also this week, Parks Canada revoked permits for an American Christian musician set to perform at national historic sites.
	Why?
	Public safety concerns.
	You got pro-Palestinian protesters burning shit down, defacing monuments, but a Christian singer from America is having their outdoor concert venues canceled because of security concerns.
	No doubt, because there might be empowering of terrorists within Canada as opposed to enforcement of law on those terrorists.
	They arrest the journalists and beat the shit out of the journalists.
	But they let the good protesters run rampant and slash tires and spray paint, vandalize, et cetera.
	Then a man from Nova Scotia was removed from an Air Canada flight for wearing a t-shirt showing a real photo of former PM Trudeau in blackface.
	Offensive, maybe.
	Illegal or untrue?
	No.
	To top it off, the federal vaccine injury compensation program has now been exposed for what it really is, a bureaucratic nightmare and frankly, a fraud on the people it was supposed to help.
	Years later, most injured Canadians still haven't seen a cent.
	And once again, RBC froze my bank accounts, citing vague, quote, risk concerns, just like 2022, no charges, no hearing, no explanation.
	This is not about whether you supported the protest or not.
	It's about principle.
	It's about fairness, due process, the rule of law, and the kind of Canada we want to live in.
	What kind of country is this becoming?
	And are we okay with it?
	Well, we might already be there.
	And for those of you who don't know who Eva Chepyak is, you're going to know right now because I'm bringing her in.
	Eva, how goes the battle?
	Hi.
	Well, I wasn't expecting to have a conversation about the Royal Bank, but that seems to be where things went yesterday.
	I hope that was clear enough when I asked you.
	Okay, good.
	Eva, tell everybody who you are for those who may not know.
	I'm a lawyer in Canada, and I had the opportunity to take on some of the really interesting cases over the last number of years with government overreach.
	Starting first with there was an action against the federal government on the federal travel ban.
	So Canada implemented these mandates where Canadians can get on a flight to leave Canada or travel within Canada on a flight train or boat.
	So that was one of the first.
	And then I was very involved with some of the more well-known Freedom Convoy protesters in Ottawa, representing them on the ground, had an opportunity to cross-examine Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and have since been suing the government and trying to get some accountability in this country and trying to right some of the wrongs that we've experienced.
	Who from the who and I sort of forget I don't want to make a mistake, who from the protests were you representing or still representing that you can mention?
	Well, it was Tamara Leach and Chris Barber and a number of the more well-known protesters on the ground for this civil stuff.
	We have nothing, I have nothing to do with any of the criminal charges.
	And interestingly enough, Tamara Leach and Chris Barber are right now in court on a sentencing hearing three years later or whatever for the longest mischief trial in Canadian history.
	Actually, there's a few things we should cover here.
	The civil lawsuit against the class action led by Zexee Lee against everybody and anybody.
	Tamara Leach is a defendant in that lawsuit.
	Yeah, and that's not something I'm on, but yeah, 100%.
	There's a $300 million class action, I think, for people that were either at the protest, honked, or donated money to the protest.
	And so area residents started a class action against protesters, honkers, or donators to the protests.
	$300 million.
	Has the class been certified yet?
	Not even close.
	It hasn't gone there.
	There's been a number of preliminary matters in advance, but they're not even at the certification, which is pretty long too.
	That's wild.
	Okay.
	So for those who are from America and don't appreciate this, some of the residents in Ottawa sued a number of people involved in the protest, $300 million class action.
	And it hasn't even been certified yet.
	It's now, what, three years old or a little over two?
	Well, it was filed originally.
	Like the, we got in, a few of the lawyers got in on a Thursday.
	We were served on Friday and we were in court initially on Saturday for an injunction hearing.
	And that stemmed into, I don't think at the time it was a class action and it was for $10 million, conveniently the amount they had in the donations at the time.
	And then it turned into a class action with expanded defendants and as well as $300 million.
	I want to pull up a video of Zexi Lee talking about committing assault on some of the protesters by dropping eggs, potentially frozen eggs on the crowd, but set that aside.
	Okay, so the class action suit is currently pending.
	It's trudging along.
	Were you in court during Tamara Leach's and Chris Barber's recent hearing?
	I attended a few times.
	They've been back so many times.
	It's unbelievable.
	But I was there at one point during the actual trial to see if they're guilty.
	I was there for the verdict, which was, I think March, and now it's a sentencing hearing.
	So it's been because they needed so much time, allegedly, they've been doing it in chunks.
	And even the sentencing hearing, which is talking about how long these people need to, you know, what their sentence should be because of mischief, they reserve two and a half days for this.
	Like it's just the amount of time they've dedicated and the amount of resources is just astonishing.
	It was two and a half days of pleading on the sentencing that occurred this week, correct?
	Right now, yeah.
	Okay.
	It's still ongoing.
	When does it end?
	The sentencing arguments, because you're not going to get a ruling on the bench, I presume.
	Right.
	No, and it's been, it sounds like it's going to have the ruling will happen in August, but they're two days in now.
	And again, they've reserved half of tomorrow in case.
	You have to flesh this out for people who are not there and cannot possibly imagine what's going on.
	How many attorneys from the prosecution from the Crown are there?
	Yeah, it sounded like there was quite a number yesterday.
	So that, and it looks like each time both Tamara and Chris have two to three lawyers as well.
	And in addition to the Crown, just to add, there's always my understanding is the homicide detective, the two homicide detectives that were charged with this case, even though it wasn't a homicide case at all.
	It was mischief.
	Two homicide detectives put on this trial.
	How long did the trial last again?
	It was several weeks over a couple of years.
	So I think somebody just posted today, I think it's been like 43 days is the amount of time they've been back and forth.
	So it was like a chunk of weeks, you know, a few five, six, seven days in a row, and then they had to come back.
	And yeah, so my understanding is over 40 days.
	Unreal.
	And now the Crown is seeking seven years for Tamara, Tamara, and eight years for Chris.
	I sort of went over it, but you want to break it down a little bit?
	Explain how on earth.
	I mean, the maximum sentence for mischief under Canadian law is 10 years, isn't it?
	Yeah, and that's what they're saying is that could be the maximum.
	But if you look at protest law and the sentences because of protest law, my understanding is that the maximum is about four months and generally not because this is, you know, protest, it's on exceptional circumstances where, you know, somebody lied on the stand or there was some, I don't know, vandalism or something like that.
	In this case, everything is the opposite.
	They worked with the police.
	Crime went down in Ottawa.
	And these people are just taking the fall on behalf of all of the people that came to Ottawa.
	And more so, the disruption caused not by just the protest.
	And I always want to make this point as much as I can, is it was mismanagement and incompetence by elected officials, by police force.
	Why was it loud?
	Why was it mismanaged?
	Whose job is that?
	Certainly not Tamara Leach and Chris Barbers to manage these random people that came to Ottawa.
	That's the job of the police, the local police.
	That's the job of elected officials when they're there to protest political issues.
	And all of these people failed then.
	And so I get it, some of the Ottawa residents were mad.
	It was loud, but they're targeting the wrong people.
	They should have gone after the city.
	They should have gone after the police and said, you guys really screwed this up.
	We were like, you guys didn't enforce bylaws.
	That's their job.
	That's their role.
	That's what they get paid to do.
	Tamara and Chris don't.
	There was another issue.
	The idea that they blocked off downtown, and that was, you know, people were complaining that they couldn't get around.
	This was after, how long was Ottawa downtown court closed down during COVID itself?
	It was over a year, right?
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	And businesses were thankful that there was some people there that were buying things.
	But one thing I like to say too, because it wasn't really clear is, again, it was mismanagement.
	So people came from who'd never been to Ottawa before.
	So they, what do they do when they get to Ottawa?
	They just park randomly.
	At the beginning, there was a couple police that escorted them right to where they were going.
	And then the remainder of the truckers, the hundreds behind them, were just left to find a piece of real estate to set up on.
	So again, where's the onus?
	Who is to blame?
	It's not these random truckers and particularly Tamira and Leech, who just happened to be the more vocal and kind of took on the lead of trying to organize the chaos that resulted.
	But had somebody directed these people appropriately, responsibly, this could have been a very different discussion.
	Let me bring this.
	This is Zexie Lee.
	She's the lead plaintiff in the class action lawsuit.
	And this was what came out during the Rulo Commission where you did the closing, the closing cross-examination, or at least the cross-examination of Justin Trudeau.
	Listen to this.
	Well, you know, there were very large trucks parked everywhere.
	And in some of these instances, they were parked right next to some high-rise condo buildings.
	And as a result, someone, some people may have gotten some cartons of eggs and, you know, had their little retaliation in frustration because really, what else could they do?
	And when that incident occurred, I remember.
	We can stop it there.
	This is the lead plaintiff talking about how some of the people inhabiting the buildings were dropping eggs, frozen or not, on the truckers.
	They're seeking seven and eight years.
	Alexa Lavois from Rebel News was on the street talking to people, at least in Ottawa, and admittedly, Ottawa is sort of Canada's DC, and they want to turn the protest into Canada's January 6th.
	What's the sentiment?
	Are people repulsed, or is it only the educated minority that are absolutely outraged by this?
	And the majority of Canadians are not only cool with it, but want more of it?
	What is really sad is it's like two separate silos, it seems like, and we can't seem to reconcile That and I think a big problem has been is that those that were anti-the protest really had a massive megaphone thanks to MSM and elected officials that were branding people as the worst scum of the earth in Canada, and that narrative continued on to this day.
	And so people view it as the worst offense ever committed on the history of Canada, or you see people that it gave them hope and it gave them relief and it caused them not to commit suicide.
	Like literally people were saying this to them day in and day out, that they helped bring them out of darkness.
	And so you have these two crazy camps.
	And this is the sad part is because nobody in a position of power is taking responsibility and having a discussion about what it is we went through, this just psychology of all of it and the harms and all of that.
	We're still in these two separate camps and I don't see how we're going to reconcile until we act like adults and have conversations about what really went on and how people really were harmed.
	Which cases are you currently actively involved in that you can talk about?
	Yeah, so there's two in Alberta right now, two large class actions.
	One is based on the businesses that were closed in Alberta, and it has already been found by the court that all of those were implemented illegally because a court found that the only person that had the authority to issue those public health orders was the public health chief CMOH, the chief medical officer of Alberta, Dr. Dina Hinshaw.
	And in fact, we found out that it was Premier Kenny and his cabinet making those decisions.
	So the court found it was ultra-vires, the Public Health Act, and all of the orders were illegal.
	So on behalf of all of the businesses in Alberta, we've started a class action at Rath and Company with my colleague Jeff Rath.
	He started a class action on behalf of all the businesses to get for compensation due to all of the illegal orders.
	The second case is a case we start, I started with Carrie Sakamoto, that she was vaccine injured.
	It's been proven by the federal government, but we're suing based on misrepresentation that the government and public health agents told everybody in Canada and in Alberta, we're suing both the federal and the provincial governments, that it was safe, effective and interchangeable.
	And we found out obviously that that is not the case.
	And then also on the fact that they have a duty to take care of people after they have been vaccine injured.
	And as you were just reading from that last tweet there, it's been really now more exposed.
	Finally, the mainstream media has exposed how bad the vaccine injury program is in Canada.
	And it's really not done its job.
	And there's a duty on the government to provide compensation.
	There's a duty to take care of people, especially when you're coercing them.
	So there's a class action on behalf of vaccine injured as well that I'm involved in.
	I covered that story when it was breaking.
	I mean, it's again, it's nothing new to anybody who has had any direct or indirect experience with the VISP, the vaccine injury support program.
	Bunch of buffoons.
	They had a budget of 50 million bucks.
	13 million thus far has been given to awarded to, I think it's 13 million, maybe it's less, to vaccine injured.
	And basically had employees saying it's a joke.
	We had drinking Fridays.
	We sit around.
	We don't do our job.
	And it's a joke of a program that thus far, Dan Hartman, Sean Hartman's father, has been under appeal of his initial rejection of his son's death from the Pfizer jab.
	Two years later, still doesn't have an answer on his appeal.
	Ineffective would be an understatement.
	They're a money siphoning black hole that is actually ignoring and injuring the vaccine injured a second time.
	Okay, now we're going to get into the bank stuff.
	There's a meme in our locals community.
	It's not accurate.
	I just checked the stock price of RBC.
	Let me see if I can bring this up here.
	This purports to be, it's not the person who posted it, but it's a tweet says $182 yesterday, $132 today.
	I just double-checked.
	RBC is up on the month and down on the day, or down on five days, but not by that much.
	You're a lawyer in good standing in Canada, Eva.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	You've had your bank frozen previously or you've been de-banked previously?
	Was it by RBC?
	So yeah, I kind of wrote a quick there, but it was RBC has frozen my bank account for the third time.
	And for me, that was the last time I was going to move it because I felt like I always had to go in there, you know, begging for access to my own money back.
	And so after this last incident where I had withdrawn some money to buy some crypto and they froze it on me, again, without telling me, you know, if this is really about fraud and ensuring protections, then it's also helpful if you let me know that I've been flagged for some reason.
	But no, I went to do some regular banking, saw it was frozen, had to call.
	Then they told me that wasn't good enough.
	I have to go in.
	And then when I went in, the crazy part is, is then this guy who was actually lovely had to ask me these very uncomfortable and demeaning, in my opinion, questions about the transaction or Bitcoin.
	And for example, whether or not I had to put on software on my computer.
	I need to pry.
	And I'm sorry.
	You have to tell us what questions he asked you.
	Well, I posted it because as he asked the first and second question, I was in disbelief that these were the questions he kept asking me.
	Let me get your post if I can find it right now.
	I didn't see that post.
	I was bringing up the letter.
	Well, let me bring up the letter first because you will not believe the letter.
	Unsigned, obviously.
	So you don't know who's making the decision.
	It's just a bureaucratic, could be AI for all you know.
	Termination of banking relationship.
	As a federally regulated financial institution, they should not be allowed to terminate any business relationship.
	Set that aside.
	RBC is required by law to comply with applicable legislation.
	says nothing.
	These laws require we implement certain processes and procedures which directly support the formulation of RBC's positions with respect to risk.
	This says nothing.
	After careful consideration, we regretfully advise you that recent activity in your accounts is outside of RBC's client risk appetite.
	What the hell does that mean?
	And consequently, we're no longer in a position to continue our banking relationship with you.
	We recognize you'll need to seek alternative yada yada.
	In order to assist you, we have prepared a helpful summary of accounts.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	And then there's a little, what is this?
	If you have electronic, okay.
	First of all, other than that saying absolutely nothing, what were the risky transactions that they claim you undertook that led to their termination of your banking agreement with them?
	So it says recent.
	And like I said, it was, I made, I was at a Bitcoin conference.
	It all started with the Bitcoin conference.
	So I was inspired to buy some again.
	I had previously, not, you know, just a little here and there.
	And it was two days in a row.
	I made a withdrawal, I guess, or whatever.
	And on the second day, it blocked it.
	Can I ask, let me pry a little bit.
	Is it a cash withdrawal or do they see that it's going to a Bitcoin purchase?
	They could see it because that was the email address.
	So you are buying what you want that's not illegal with your own damn money and they say that that violates their risk assessment.
	What risk does you buying Bitcoin with your own cash imply for a federally regulated bank?
	Yeah, that's where I'm unclear.
	And so.
	You're very polite.
	I would have been equally polite because it's like, you're done with it.
	I wasn't polite a lot of the times because this was the third time, like I said, and it's me begging for access to my money.
	And it just didn't feel right, obviously.
	But that time I was on the phone.
	Then they said, go to the branch.
	And already, obviously, not particularly happy about all of this.
	I go to the branch and then they call the fraud department.
	The fraud department gives these five random questions, like they're random.
	And I said, you're making these questions up.
	And that's the one that like, if you play it, you'll enjoy it.
	I'm sure it's just.
	Hold on.
	It was a very strange circumstance.
	And was it a video or did you list the questions?
	I'm just a video.
	It's I posted it a couple of times when it was funny because I just held it and then people responded from the Bitcoin community being like, this is what Bitcoin saves you from.
	And I'm like, actually.
	Oh, crap.
	I can't find it.
	I'm scrolling through your feed.
	I'm not finding it as quickly as it was it recently posted?
	Yeah, I could find it for you if you.
	Okay, yeah, find it.
	I got to see this.
	I have difficulty envisioning you rude or impolite.
	No, like I could, the thing is, is you, I get argumentative when they're telling me these things.
	Yeah, like, obviously, how is anybody supposed to reasonably deal with people when they're saying that you can't be, you can't access your own money?
	You have to go there and beg every time.
	It's Bill C2, the bill that would outlaw cash transactions greater than $10,000 is not yet in effect.
	And I presume maybe wrongly that this was not a cash transaction in excess of $10,000 cash, but it doesn't even matter.
	So they say, we don't like you buying Bitcoin.
	You can go buy marijuana at the dispensary across the street.
	You can go buy whatever the hell else.
	You can go buy hard narcotics in British Columbia.
	And they haven't rescinded or retracted or revoked their termination of your account.
	They're standing by this.
	Whether or not you'd ever want to stay with them, they're standing by.
	That's the thing.
	And when I did go in that last time, I'm like, I will not be banking with you further.
	This is like the last time.
	But after I did, and I just sent you those questions.
	Yeah, I got it.
	They opened my account and the guy said, okay, everything is good.
	Just be careful buying crypto in the future.
	And I'm like, thank you very much for your.
	Okay, hold on.
	Let me bring this up here.
	Eva Chippy.
	No, not this one.
	I've started.
	Oh, there we go.
	I got it right here.
	I started using two computers for the first time in my live streaming career.
	And it's both good, but requires some getting used to.
	Check this out.
	So what was your first question again?
	My first question was, how did you learn about this opportunity with the cryptocurrency?
	Yeah, I was at.
	Here's an answer.
	Go fuck yourself.
	I'm sorry.
	I'm sorry.
	I thought you're so loyal.
	Well, this is the thing.
	I was, you know, but at this point, I have, I felt like I had no option.
	I had to answer these questions.
	Okay, hold on.
	I'm going to let it play.
	Oh, my, the answer to every one of these questions would have been go after self.
	Okay.
	So that was your first question again.
	The first question was, how did you learn about this opportunity with the cryptocurrency?
	Yeah, I was at a Bitcoin conference.
	Okay.
	Is there a third party involved or is this all on your own merit?
	Yeah, it's all on my own merit.
	And just for the- Oh, I'm sorry.
	Is your husband telling you what to do?
	I mean, is that the essence of that question?
	Recording, I'm doing this totally against my will because Royal Bank is not allowing me to access my own money without these questions being answered that I totally am not comfortable with.
	Continue.
	Do you have full access to your own crypto wallet?
	Yes, I do.
	Okay.
	This is by the way, now this is scary now because this is a federally regulated institution.
	For all you know, you know, the government, they want to know, they're getting info with you on your access to your own cash so that they can know where you're putting stuff.
	This is, this is, this is Orwellia.
	Are you able to withdraw funds from there if you need from the cryptocurrency?
	My answer.
	It's much easier than the way Royal Bank is treating me at the moment, in fact.
	That's fair.
	I'm just asking you some questions.
	Yeah, which are that you've made up.
	Were you promised a specific rate of return on that?
	No, I wasn't.
	They want to make sure that you're not making money that they can't track.
	Holy hell.
	Were you asked to install any software on your computer?
	No, I wasn't.
	How long have you been investing in crypto approximately?
	Mind your own effing business.
	Well, and I was looking at him being like, no.
	Sorry, sorry, sorry.
	Is this reality?
	That's what was going through my head as I'm answering the questions.
	This is insanity.
	Anyone in a free country is listening to this right now and saying, oh my goodness, thank goodness.
	I don't live in Canada for years.
	Years.
	Okay.
	And you are able to sign into the crypto website yourself, sell, trade, and withdraw.
	Much easier than with the Royal Bank as I'm experiencing right now.
	I will answer those questions and I will get back to you.
	Oh my goodness, Eva.
	It's worse than I thought it was.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	And then I had to stand there for about 15, 20 minutes, like the big criminal that I am until they said, okay, you have access again.
	Then I got the letter.
	Was that a branch manager or was that a clerk?
	Like the hierarchy?
	That was a clerk and he was lovely.
	The manager there, not so lovely.
	He was kind, I have to say.
	It's actually astonishing because you understand exactly what they're doing.
	They want to know where all of your money is.
	They don't want you making money that you're not going to declare capital gains on, I presume.
	They want to basically be able to procure access to your funds wherever they are and to know everything that you're doing.
	This is Big Brother in Canada for your own good.
	Oh my goodness.
	Yeah.
	I always found it very uncomfortable.
	And like I said, every time I my bank account was frozen for different reasons, always, you know, this technicality or that, it would be a fight to get it back.
	I'm like, I am telling you, it's my transaction.
	Like, I don't know what more you want from me.
	That's amazing.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	All right.
	And then if we can cover the other one that sort of tangentially touches on American American news, I didn't know who the singer is, but this, this is the, I've been sent this reference from a number of people, but you mentioned it.
	Quebec City cancels concert of MAGA musician following lead of other Christian of other Canadian cities.
	Presence of controversial artists was not mentioned in contract.
	I don't know who Sean Fucht is.
	I don't think he's controversial.
	I'm going to go see what Venice.ai has to say about it.
	The first, I only had heard that it was an outdoor venue in a provincial park in Quebec.
	They canceled for security reasons.
	I didn't know that other cities had followed lead.
	What the heck?
	Yeah, I just read a couple of headlines, really.
	So I'm not the person to ask.
	I thought it was Parks Canada.
	So either it might be federally regulated.
	Like you, I don't know the artists.
	So clearly not that controversial.
	I understand it has some.
	Yeah, I'm sorry.
	You're right.
	It's federal.
	It's Parks Canada.
	Yeah, no, it's this is just the absolute state of Canada.
	I was going to say for good and for bad, but I'm having trouble seeing the for good at this point in time.
	Eva, what else is going on in Canada that Americans should know about if I haven't asked you already?
	Well, just that I think that it's time for some accountability.
	And I think what I see is the United States people are, they're not sitting back and waiting for things.
	And Canadians are more inclined to sit and wait and think the government is doing good and is there to take care of us.
	And I sue the government.
	So I see that they're not generally there to work in the public interest.
	And it's difficult for me to say that.
	I've just seen too much mismanagement, too much incompetence to say that, you know, they're acting in good faith.
	They've got away with a lot.
	Americans, I see, standing up for their rights, standing up for their freedoms, standing up for transparency, accountability for their government.
	And I encourage Canadians to recognize how important it is, that it's our civic duty to be doing that.
	It doesn't mean you're, you know, a bad person for demanding that your government be accountable to you.
	That's our job and we must hold them to account.
	It's just getting to such a degree, it's nonsense.
	And the banks in Canada, so that Americans know, they're basically a branch of the government at this point.
	And same with our mainstream media.
	So it's regulated so much more.
	They're not independent.
	And that's what we're seeing.
	Yeah, no, it's not a crown corporation, but banks are all federally regulated.
	It's federally regulated.
	They want to know where all your cash is.
	They don't want you hiding it.
	They don't want you squirreling away little bitcoins here and there because they might not be able to freeze those if ever they decide you've engaged in a little too much wrong thing.
	Eva, people can find you on Twitter.
	There was a fake account.
	I don't know if they figured it out yet.
	Is there still the fake account?
	There's always imposters, but they generally don't look like my profile.
	They're funny memes or something.
	But it's E. Chipiak, plain and simple, first initial, last name.
	I've given the link to everybody.
	They can follow the amazing work that you are doing at Wrath and Company.
	Eva, is it Eva or Eva?
	It's Eva.
	Eva, you got it.
	Good, good.
	You will come back on anytime there's more news to report.
	Will do.
	Okay, amazing.
	Thank you very much.
	My pleasure.
	Thank you, Pratt.
	Have a good day.
	All right.
	Bye-bye.
	I just saw a super chat or a Rumble rant over on Humble, which I'll bring up because let's start with the other one.
	Let's focus on the important stuff.
	Viva, is she?
	Oh, fuck.
	Come on, get on it.
	Don't make me read that.
	King of Bill Tong says, Bill Tong is one of the highest protein snacks in the world, boasting nearly 50% protein packed with B12, creatine, iron, zinc, and more.
	Visit Bill Tongusa.com.
	Use code Viva for 10% off.
	For those of you who don't know, Bill Tong is beef jerky, but soft and delicious.
	It's South African.
	It's like prosciutto made from beef, like dried meat, but not like that disgusting, not jacklinks.
	What's the other one that you get at the gas station?
	It's delicious.
	It's healthy.
	It's soft-ish beef jerky and it's beautiful.
	Preambalist says, geez, you've got to catch some breath.
	Those were some standard anti-fraud questions.
	Have you ever heard of Indian scammers?
	I get a call like this if I make a purchase at a foreign country on my credit card.
	All right, Preambalus, did you watch the show?
	Do you get your banking arrangement canceled because it's not within the risk assessment of the bank?
	Maybe you didn't get there yet and you're commenting early and I should let you catch up with the show.
	Trust me, I make sure that when I freak out or show righteous indignation, it is justified and warranted righteous indignation.
	This was not a, we're putting a freeze on your bank account so we can verify the services.
	I get those text messages also when I go buy baseball cards online.
	yeah, this was not a confirm that this is not a fraud.
	This was we're debanking with you because what did the letter say again?
	Because you're not within our risk profile because you are using your own cash to buy Bitcoin.
	Holy crap, people.
	We got one more story before we go and raid.
	Um, before we go and raid redacted, I think we're gonna hold on.
	I'm not sure.
	I want to give everybody my PO box in case anyone is inclined to send love mail, hate mail.
	Let me switch.
	I gotta get my, I gotta figure out what my own PO box is.
	Switch account.
	Go to Viva Fry so I can get the PO box and learn more.
	Ah, come on.
	This is, this is, I can't believe I can't get my own PO box offhand.
	No.
	Anyhow, we're going to raid redacted in a couple of minutes, but first I'm going to get, there we go.
	The PO box, people, 9170 Glades Road, P.O. box 139-33434.
	If anybody wants to send stuff, I have, I've got a bit of stuff.
	Tomorrow night, we're going to do another unboxing.
	Let me give this over here.
	Don't poo box me, bro.
	Okay, link.
	Here we go.
	There's the PO box.
	If in case anybody wants to send stuff, raid them harder.
	We're going to go raid redacted.
	Well, I do the last story.
	Then we're going to go over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com for our after party.
	Today, there's no paywall because I was using StreamYard.
	So if you want to come, see what our locals looks like.
	There it is.
	If you want to go see some merch, because we've got some damn good merch people, let me show you the merch at vivafry.com, where you can get conspiracy realist.
	You can get thank you for your attention to this matter.
	Good merch, great merch.
	Support the channel, vivabornslaw.locals.com.
	Now, what we're going to do, we are going to raid redacted.
	And the way to do that is by going here, getting redacted.
	They started, it's starting DOJ Strike Force going after Obama Hillary criminal.
	Okay, there you go.
	You're going to enjoy Redacted today, peeps.
	And raid confirmed, go.
	And until ye go, what we shall do is read some of the tipped questions over on our vivabarnslaw.locals.com community and then a quick story about corruption in Ukraine and how they're going after corruption by empowering themselves to not go after corruption.
	F. Charton says, since this is the appropriate time, I will say it again.
	The Ambassador Bridge protest was an RCMP operation to justify the Emergencies Act.
	They caved to the auto sector.
	Ottawa had to be justified later.
	They failed.
	Kiki Blue says, maybe Barnes' theory is true.
	And that's why Tulsi released the DNA files on Russia hoax so that the fabricated Epstein files lost their impact.
	No, I think his theory was the opposite way around.
	And that's it.
	Okay, good.
	Now, just a quick story coming out of Ukraine.
	What's amazing is you go and you post something negative, critical of Zelensky on a Zielinski feed.
	There are many, many a bots that come out of the woodwork to accuse you of being a Russian bot, which is very interesting because of the many things I am, short, stocky, neurotic, obsessive, compulsive, generally anxious.
	I'm not a Russian bot, nor have I ever been directly or indirectly paid, received remuneration, compensation, or any consideration whatsoever from any entity that I have known to be Russian.
	It's very easy when you have, you know, unless people are going to call, you know, Rumble a Russian asset.
	Vlodymir Zelensky just said this.
	I've just approved the text of a draft bill that guarantees real strengthening of Ukraine's law enforcement system, independence of anti-corruption agencies, and reliable protection of the law enforcement system against any Russian influence or interference.
	This text is well balanced.
	Most importantly, it includes real tools, excludes any Russian ties, and upholds the independence of NAU and SAPO.
	The draft bill will be submitted to the Verkonarada of Ukraine today.
	It is important that we are maintaining unity.
	It is important that we are persevering independence.
	It is important that we respect the position of all Ukrainians and are grateful to everyone who stands with Ukraine.
	Respect the position of all Ukrainians.
	I say, hey, dude, how about you hold some elections?
	The amount of people saying it would be unconstitutional to hold elections in Ukraine once they've declared martial law viva, you're an idiot Russian bot, how stupid of you.
	Holy shit, do people either not know when they're getting played or are they the ones getting played and just don't care?
	But the news out of Ukraine, which was even coming by stern condemnation of even Ukrainian allies or what were hitherto pro-Ukrainian outlets, Ukraine anti-corruption.
	You got to hear what's going on here.
	Let's just pick NPR, shall we?
	No one has ever accused NPR of being anti-Ukrainian.
	Is this the one?
	Zelensky faces outcry after signing a bill curbing Ukraine's anti-corruption agencies July 23rd, 2025.
	Kiev, Ukraine, a controversial new law removing the independence of Ukraine's top anti-corruption watchdogs has sparked the first major protests in the country since Russia's full-scale invasion three and a half years ago, despite a ban on mass gatherings under martial law.
	Because of course, you can't hold elections, you can't let people protest, and then you can claim that Russia is the authoritarian totalitarian regime, which it might very well be.
	But, you know, when you beat the shit out of protesters at a peaceful protest in Canada, you no longer get to lecture Putin on being an authoritarian Trudeau.
	When you declare martial law, suspend elections, ban public protests, lock up journalists and kill them in jail, you no longer get to call Putin the authoritarian.
	You might just have to say, we are among similar company.
	Despite a ban on mass gatherings under martial law, thousands of Ukrainians took to the street in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities chanting, shame, Ukraine is not Russia.
	Surveys have repeatedly shown that Ukrainians are as concerned about corruption in the country as they are about ending the war.
	Quote, get this out of here.
	It's totally a betrayal of everyone who is in the front line, for everyone who is fighting for our liberty, for everyone who is fighting for Ukraine not being Russia.
	Polina Timochenko, a 29-year-old doctor, told NPR, and it's definitely not an honest move.
	The protests happened just before the third round of the ceasefire talks between Russia and Moscow.
	Ukraine's parliament, which is controlled by Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, servant of the People Party, passed the law on Tuesday and Zelensky signed it later that day.
	The law gives Ukraine's prosecutor general, appointed by Zelensky, new powers over the National Anti-Corruption Bureau and special anti-corruption prosecutor's office.
	In his nightly video address Tuesday, Zelensky justified the move by saying corruption cases took too long to be investigated under the agencies.
	He also suggested the agencies were compromised.
	Yep.
	Anti-corruption infrastructure will work without Russian influences, said he.
	The anti-graft agencies were created in the wake of Ukraine's pro-democracy Euromaidan protests.
	The move forced Viktor Yanukovych, a notoriously corrupt former president, aligned with the Kremlin to flee the country in 2014.
	It's giving us more power to investigate ourselves.
	We've investigated ourselves to determine there's no corruption.
	Now we have the power to investigate ourselves and to not investigate ourselves, all in the name of not being like Russia.
	So continue with the martial law protests being banned, elections being suspended, and call Putin the authoritarian.
	Wait until we see how harshly they come down on these public protests.
	It's also an amazing thing that you want to talk about courage, the courage of people to actually defy martial law and protest in the streets what is being banned against what is nothing shy of an actual dictator, regardless of what you think about Putin.
	That takes courage.
	And that also takes grassroots, true grassroots origins, because it's not being financed by the deep state like the Maidan revolution was.
	All right, peeps.
	Go raid redacted.
	Let them know from whence you came.
	Let me see how it's going down here.
	Yeah, it looks good.
	Scroll up.
	Okay, good.
	Go watch Redacted.
	If you're not going to come over to vivabarnslaw.locals.com, if you're coming over to vivabarnes.locals.com, it's going to be awesome.
	Locals link here.
	Come.
	There's no paywall today.
	And otherwise, I will see you tomorrow is Friday.
	And that's it.
	Godspeed, Rumble.
	Bye-bye, Twitter.
	And bye-bye.
	Remove Rumble from this stream.

▲