Viva & Barnes - Ep. 278: D.C. Peace Wave! Big Tish & Nipple Judge SPANKED! "Maryland Man" Trafficker FREE & MORE?

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 24, 2025 - Viva & Barnes

02:02:00

Ep. 278: D.C. Peace Wave! Big Tish & Nipple Judge SPANKED! "Maryland Man" Trafficker FREE & MORE?

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Ladies and gentlemen of the Interwebs, for all those who thought defunding the police would reduce crime, what did you learn?
	When the National Guard hit the ground in Washington last week, that city's crime fight went into overdrive.
	And now we're seeing the impact and the dramatic reductions in crime.
	When the National Guard rolled into Washington last week, the locals seemed skeptical.
	The crime is minimal here.
	There's not really a lot of crime here.
	Just look at the white window dresser for me.
	But with the guard on the ground, crime is on the decline.
	For the first time in a long time, DC has gone seven days without a homicide.
	We're up to nine days now.
	And can you appreciate what that guy just said?
	He said, There's not that much crime here.
	It's just window dressing.
	Those are mutually incompatible thoughts.
	And that's not all.
	Car jackings are down 83 percent, robberies are down 46 percent, car thefts down 21 percent, and overall violent crime is down 22 percent.
	What's that?
	You said car jackings were down a huffing 83 percent.
	Most people would be very happy about that.
	And in fact, many people there are, in fact, very happy about that.
	Here's one Maryland resident.
	I put the, I brought it to a highlight section of this, talking about how the crime has gone down and you can actually walk around without feeling as though your life is at risk.
	Watch what she has to say about the people complaining about what Trump is doing.
	little it's like there's always this look to them it's like a i don't want to say mental illness but it's like this like Anyway, I saw they had like this great big banner that says F. Trump and the guy's going to be there for four years.
	Y'all ain't going to do anything.
	And there's a sign saying, release the Epstein.
	What are you guys going to do if you have the list?
	Dance around it.
	You can't do anything about it.
	You can't even hold the people within your general group.
	You can't hold like, hold up.
	I had a millennial pause right there.
	You can't hold people in different tiers responsible if you can't hold the people around you responsible.
	The general public has to hold themselves responsible and they don't do that.
	What are you going to do with the Epstein list?
	Please tell me.
	I don't agree with that message, Pars.
	I just wanted to play the part.
	So right now I'm down here in Union Station, as you can see, behind me.
	Yes, yes, yes, yes.
	And I walked through Union Station.
	the union station it was different see i'm from dc i live here so i can tell you i can be honest i'm not gonna lie to you it was nice i don't even want to leave union it's nice it's better car jackings are down murder i think now they're on nine days without a homicide in dc and you'd think that most people would be happy about it and most people are happy about it but then enter the scene the white liberal woman.
	If you guys haven't heard this, I was slow to not jump on this story.
	I wanted to make sure that the.
	story was entirely accurate, I forgot who I originally saw it from posted a tweet that they said was now deleted from an account that was now discontinued nuked.
	They said, but I still see the account.
	It was just on protected mode.
	It was a tweet from a woman named at Jill Simonillo or Simonillo.
	I don't know how you pronounce that.
	Dear at Real Donald Trump, I've been car jacked in Chicago with my arm broken.
	I still don't want you or your troops here.
	TIA.
	I don't know what that means.
	TIA.
	Let me think about what that acronym means, by the way., there are no red hats here.
	Do you remember that time when Joe Rogan saw a tweet?
	I'm going to bring this back in a second, but he saw a tweet from a doctor, SolNet, that was parody on the original tweet from the doctor, but it was so parody that it was something like, Yeah, I got the jab and it caused me myocarditis, but I would do it again because I came from a place of love and all the antivaxers came from a place of hate and intolerance and anti science.
	And so even though I got myocarditis from it, it was worth it and I would do it again.
	It was a fake tweet, which we subsequently discovered because it exceeded the character limits for a tweet at the time, but it was so darn close to the original tweet.
	It might as well have been the original.
	I thought this was one of those cases of a woman saying, yes, I have been brutalized by crime, but I still don't want your troops here.
	Spoiler alert, it was a real tweet.
	The account went to protected mode, not nuked.
	I went to check out her social media profile.
	It's a real person who actually writes automotive reviews.
	And I'm not trying to put this person on blast.
	I want to understand the thought process to this.
	Yes, I've been involved in a brutal carjacking in which my arm was broken, but I still don't want you to help me, Donald John Trump.
	Trump, I would rather get beaten, maimed and possibly killed, but at least I would be a virtuous victim.
	So I, um, hold on.
	That's it.
	The way I determine that this was, uh, in fact real is that the original post on threads itself was deleted, but I could still see some of the chat in response to her original post, which was presumably the same post just as stupid on threads and was presumably deleted because she was getting railed against on threads.
	One guy replies to her, I was car jacked to but only got PTSD, no physical injuries.
	I don't want poop face within a thousand of Chicago wishing you a speedy and thorough recovery blessings.
	Well, the first thing that I discovered is apparently this carjacking that the woman is talking about occurred in twenty eighteen.
	But this guy was also carjacked.
	He only has PTSD, but he doesn't want poop face because they're ten years old and retarded within a thousand feet of Chicago.
	I'd rather get carjacked than have Donald Trump help me.
	Jill Simonillo says I slept with my light on for a year afterwards when I was alone because the defense had access to my address and actually sent a PI to stalk me.
	Still don't need or want troops.
	And that you are an automotive writer and reviewer as well.
	Brava, brava in your stupidity, your suicidal empathy, your homicidal stupidity.
	I got car jacked, but I refuse to be a victim.
	It was a real tweet.
	The person is an actual author for an automotive journal or whatever the heck she does.
	And she actually said, I would rather get beaten, assaulted, car jacked before I accept help from Donald, John, Trump.
	That's the liberal mindset.
	That is the white liberal woman mindset.
	Sorry if I'm getting a little gender specific on this.
	It is what Malcolm X warned the world about.
	And the irony is they only do it.
	Like I'm trying to understand the rationale here.
	I'd love to have Jill Simonillo on to understand the rationale here.
	You'd rather get murdered than accept security from Donald John Trump.
	You'd rather have other people get brutalized in the way you got brutalized before you have them get protected from Donald John Trump.
	This is not just suicidal empathy.
	It's homicidal empathy because you are willing to victimize other people for your stubborn political idiocy.
	And then I realized what it is.
	She is in fact a victim, someone who's been carja car jacked and had his arm broken will be traumatized for life to greater or lesser degrees.
	She doesn't want to prevent more victims.
	She wants more victims.
	This is a case of someone who is misery that wants company.
	Oh, and they'll sacrifice everyone else out there because they're already damaged and they're already broken.
	So why try to make it better for anyone else?
	No, join us.
	One of us, one of us.
	It's insane.
	I mean, it's certifiably bona fide insane.
	DC is now on nine days without a homicide.
	This is the longest since well before 2021.
	Now, I think it might be the 90s and Trump is floating the idea of bringing in the National Guard to Chicago, to Baltimore, to places that are so crime-ridden.
	You don't take the subway.
	You don't take your phone out in public.
	You don't go out in public.
	One of us, one of us, I was car jacked to.
	Isn't it terrible?
	Oh, but I'm so tolerant.
	I wouldn't dare prosecute the perpetrator of the car jacking because that might be racist or something.
	That is, I mean, and I guarantee you, that is the thought process there.
	Like in Canada, when they said don't call the police when someone's breaking in into your place because it could stigmatize marginalized communities.
	They actually said this back in COVID when the CBC ran an article said the joys and perils of snitching on your neighbors during a pandemic.
	The joys were being a communist snitch.
	The perils were that calling in to snitch might disparately impact minority groups, and therefore there was a little bit of a risk to snitching on your neighbors.
	Whitey, snitch away.
	Any other visible minority?
	No, don't snitch.
	It's not their fault.
	And you got a white woman who's prepared to sacrifice other women.
	This is like, you know, they say that the feminists are hardest on other women.
	Who's so virtuous in her suffering that she's willing to sacrifice countless other women because it's better than Donald Trump.
	Oh, lordy, lordy, lordy.
	Good evening, everybody.
	I'm clearly on the road yet again.
	If I look a little tired or if I lack whatever people think is my traditional energy, it's only because I got up at 3:30 in the morning so that we could catch a 7 o'clock flight to New York City because I have a nephew who's getting married and I'm going to come down and, you know, celebrate the wonderful moments of family life.
	We got up at 3:30 so that we could get on the road by 4 so that we could get to the airport by 5 so that we could get on the plane.
	And we got to New York, walked Central Park, saw my parents.
	It's fantastic.
	I I'm realizing I'm becoming a not a country boy at all, but big cities.
	I don't think I like them anymore.
	I appreciate I live in Florida and we're sort of off the beaten path in Florida, but man, you come here, it's it's it's it's it's it's noise it's air pollution.
	I mean, I guess I'm looking like my daughter loves it, wants to live in New York and not who am I to say no, I understand the allure to a young person.
	It's got an energy, it's got a vibe.
	The architecture is absolutely beautiful as beautiful as Florida is.
	No one has ever said, my goodness, that strip mall is architecturally beautiful, but it's loud, it's dirty, the air quality is terrible.
	And I get the sneaking suspicion that people in New York City.
	Don't appreciate what goes in to support this city.
	This might be my own bias right now and it might be my own blinders and my own political.
	leanings.
	You walk around and you get the impression that I say big city folks, city folks, you know, they pride themselves on their cafes, the architecture, the food, everything.
	And like, if they think the attitude is, we have it, we did this, we made this.
	And they don't fully appreciate the infrastructure from coast to coast in what they call fly over America that is responsible for supporting the infrastructure that is cities.
	And cities sort of pride themselves on their beauty and think that they've somehow earned all of that and built that without fully appreciating everywhere in between New York and Los Angeles that contributes to every major city in America.
	But that's it.
	So if I look tired, that's why, but I think I'll be fine.
	Now, before we get started, we have no sponsor for tonight's show, except all of the stuff that you can do to support the show.
	If you want to get some merch, people, you can go to vivafry.com and get some merch.
	If you want to support the channel, you can join us at vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	If you want to buy a Louis the Lobster kids book, you can find it on Amazon.
	I'll give you the link right there.
	Get some merch.
	Subscribe to us on Rumble.
	on rumble or subscribe on viva barneslaw dot locals dot com dot The easiest thing to do, if you don't want to financially contribute, just share my clips, share my channel, share everything and it will help us grow.
	We have one hell of an episode tonight.
	By the way, I hope the internet is fast enough.
	I actually asked if they had an upgrade to faster internet and they said, eh, no, but I think it's good.
	So that's it.
	I'm going to read all the super chats if I can.
	If I miss them and you're going to be miffed, don't give them.
	We have our locals after party afterwards where we basically read pretty much every chat, but we say we'll read them three dollars, five dollars or more.
	And we have some great stories.
	So when Barnes comes in here., we're going to get ready to go with the evening.
	Let me see what we've got already by way.
	Junk man 611 over in Viva Barnes Law dot locals dot com the best three hours of Sunday until football season.
	Look forward to this show weekly.
	Trump needs to market No Black Lives Lost in DC over a week.
	That's how you make black lives matter.
	Can Trump legally do the same thing in Chicago, Portland, Seattle, LA?
	We're going to talk about that in a moment.
	What's amazing is I did see a meme and it's like it said, Nine Days without a homicide.
	God, I hate Trump.
	Gosh, I hate Trump.
	It's been the wildest.
	Like, like, like, cut and dry.
	Who would have thought when criminals don't feel empowered to walk around being criminals, they're going to stop walking around being criminals?
	Carjacking's down.
	Everything's down in terms of crime.
	Oh, okay.
	Let me see here.
	Let me just do one thing here.
	I think I see Robert in the backdrop, and I'll see if I've gotten anything over on Commitube.
	Hold on a second.
	Let me see here.
	ComiTube.
	Everything's good.
	Okay, we're good here.
	Let me see.
	Let me just do this.
	We've got a bunch of tipped questions.
	You don't hear me.
	question.
	You know, here I'm going to read I'm going to read the tip questions until Robert gets here and we're going to do the inventory of the evening.
	Do you agree with Jessica Tarlov that Trump has ushered in Soviet style central planning by seizing the means of production?
	I'm going to say no for that, but we're going to get to that in a second.
	Stand up for health freedom.
	That was from Howard the Duke.
	All right.
	All right.
	He then says, stand up for freedom health by suing the CDC to get them to approve.
	All those 72 vaccines for kids are safe when grouped together.
	Will Bondi throw a wrench in the suit?
	Ask Rick Jaffe or Jaffe, a competent attorney to bring the suit.
	Donate now.
	And then we got famous.
	bank robber Willie Sutton was asked by a judge, Willie, why do you keep robbing these banks?
	Will replied, Judge, that's where the money is.
	CNN is asking why Trump keeps going after the cities run by black mayors.
	Trump answers, because that's where the crime is.
	Well, I see there's there's plenty of crime in some white mayor cities as well.
	They tend to be Democrats.
	However, I think it's ten out of ten of the cities with the highest crime.
	Robert, sir, how goes the battle?
	Good, good.
	You're, let me see if you, okay, say what's what book you have behind you?
	I'm going to see if your audio levels are low.
	So that's actually a gift from a Viva Barnes Law Locals member.
	The and then and then I think, yeah, I've been playing around with the different cameras, one camera's work and one camera's not.
	So we'll see how the mic is.
	How's the mic?
	Is at least the mic working?
	Yeah, I think it's getting better now.
	Just waiting for locals to confirm.
	Yeah, it's is Barnes low.
	Can you increase the knob that says gain?
	Yeah.
	And now everyone get ready to have your ears blown out if it goes too high.
	How how does it go now?
	That's much better.
	Look at that.
	You see, I can give good instructions virtually over the internet.
	And I hope my audio is good enough.
	I'm going to try not to tap too hard on my keyboard because I don't have it's the native mic to the camera.
	Robert, what do we have on the menu for tonight's?
	So we got the discussion about security guarantees concerning a possible peace in Ukraine.
	What does that entail?
	Is there any history of that?
	So on and so forth.
	The Epstein files, the withheld from the grand jury, withheld in New York.
	Why was that done?
	The Congress is now receiving some from the Justice Department.
	And the interview of Glaine Maxwell was released and kind of disclosed what we thought might be happening in that matter.
	The James Comey, more evidence of his criminality.
	John Bolton raided.
	That's as good a news as any news I know legally for the last several years.
	The Trump, a big win at SCOTUS and a big win as we predicted in the New York Court of Appeals over Tish James.
	The Maryland man is back in the news again.
	He keeps finding his way into the news as the media just can't.
	It's like Brokeback Mountain.
	The Democratic Party just can't quit illegal immigration to save its life.
	The speaking of illegals, a case that you talked about made big news all of this past week, which is illegals operating commercial driver's licenses and driving trucks around.
	And the, uh, finally the Trump administration taking remedial action on exposing that systemic fraud that was taking place to the danger of ordinary, uh, drivers, but also to good truck drivers who were not getting employment.
	Uh, AR 15 ban upheld in Connecticut as they decide the second amendment doesn't mean the second amendment, thanks to a, uh, of a judge whose, uh, I've been in front of before.
	He's family related to the George Walker Bush family.
	Fact is, he's Judge Walker.
	Uh, Also one of the dumpiest human beings I've ever been in front of in my life, but that's not saying much when it's a Bush.
	The Trump versus the International Criminal Court keeps that battle going on.
	Jim's are being sued over the cancellation fees.
	Did you ever wonder why it's so hard to cancel your subscription to some of these places?
	Well, it turns out they're up to some shenanigans.
	The window seat, what happens when you get a window seat and you get on the plane and there's no window at your seat?
	Well, people are finally sick and tired of it.
	They brought a class action suit because it turns out airplanes have been selling window seats that have no window.
	There's a new deputy director at the FBI.
	What does that mean for Bondi or Patel or Bongino?
	And birthright citizenship actually gets a win for those that want a more limited definition of it, though it didn't go that far, but at least there was some recognition of some limits in a court.
	So that's what's on the docket tonight.
	I got so many questions about the birthright citizenship case.
	Before we even get started, I don't have a bell on me today, but ding, ding, ding.
	We got a new member of the Viva Barnes Law dot locals dot Greg 1578.
	I feel like you might have been a member and resubscribed, but if you're not, welcome to the channel.
	Robert, let's start with Michael Bolton getting raided.
	I'm going to do it all night because I just keep saying Michael Bolton instead of John Bolton.
	Bolton has got raided.
	We don't yet know the details of it.
	I was hypothesizing on Friday and going through this in real time.
	He was raided.
	It was a pre-dawn raid.
	I don't know if he was tweeting about Russia and Ukraine as he's being raided or before and then he gets raided.
	We don't know why he got raided.
	He hasn't been arrested.
	We don't know if there's an indictment or anything or grand jury that's been convened.
	And people are asking what this might be about.
	As I was walking through it in real time on Friday, you know, you go back to the accusations that he leaked classified information in the context of his release of his book.
	Let me just play not the whole thing, just a touch of this because it's pure confession through projection.
	Any given moment.
	But I don't think he cared about the classification system.
	I don't think he appreciated the sensitivity of this information.
	And he didn't appreciate the sensitivity of how it was often acquired, the so-called sources and methods.
	So I'll pause it there because Bolton goes on for another few minutes being an idiot.
	To me, it sounds like he's talking about himself when he wrote his book in 2020.
	Don't appreciate it.
	Don't really think he was bound by those rules or whatever.
	It's five years statute of limitation from what I understand for leaking classified information.
	And that's why I'm thinking like, okay, they're bringing this like five years almost to the day because he published his book, give or take around September 2020.
	Those are my thoughts for whatever they're worth.
	What do you think is going on right now?
	I think it's a combination of things.
	So that the investigation that was known about was his attempt to publish a book right after he left the Trump administration, which members of the Trump administration accused him of disclosing classified information as part of that book writing effort.
	Then the So there's some connection potentially to that.
	The another connection is that he, of course, has been identified as one of the people who covered up for Russia Gate that he was in key positions of information during the first Trump administration that he hid from President Trump that exposed his pals Clapper, Comey, Brennan, etc.
	So there's the possibility that he's being investigated.
	This didn't get a lot of news, but it came out over the last month that he was one of the key culprits covering up the criminal information.
	So it may be connected to that.
	The third possibility is it's long been known what Bolton does.
	Bolton monetizes what they accuse Trump of doing is what they themselves do.
	Joe Biden takes classified information, shows it around to people to see, look what access I have.
	Now give me money as a lobbyist for cause A, B, C, or D. So it's an illicit use of classified intelligence information.
	And it's in particular using national security information.
	I told people, look at the indictment of of Trump.
	It's a go through it because they'll have confessed their own crimes.
	So that when you get back in, you know exactly where to look because all the things they accused Trump of doing the Biden family had in fact done.
	And so the things that John Bolton was glad to attack Trump for doing are things he himself has in fact done.
	So the, so my guess is, so you have possibility one related to the book, possibility two related to his going around and lobbying as soon as he got out and monetizing that access to classified information for those purposes.
	And then third, the possibility that it's connected to his cover up while he was in the administration of the first Russia gate.
	Now, it's also apparently come out that in Tulsi Gabbard's review of all the files, he was emailing his wife and kids and others national security information, right?
	So by his own admission, that means he's dead to rights.
	And some of these laws are five year statute of limitations, some are ten years, depending on the circumstance.
	And then, of course, you can do conspiracy and aiding and abetting and extend the statute of limitations back to the original bad act.
	And so I think that they probably it's easy.
	It's no doubt to anybody that knows John Bolton that he's a class A criminal and has been for a long time.
	And I don't mean just as warhoring.
	I mean he monetizes in information right away for foreign governments who pay him huge sums of money.
	People should ask, how did he get these huge, beautiful homes in the DC suburbs?
	How does he have all this money to begin with?
	It's not like he's done anything, he's not like he's done anything successful in his business life ever.
	So it's by lobbying for foreign governments.
	That's who he is.
	That's why I've always explained that it's not an American empire, it's a globalist empire.
	In an American empire, you would actually love your own country, not these empire builders like John Bolton.
	They hate America.
	They despise America.
	They spit on the American flag.
	They prefer to be associated, affiliated with the globalist crowd.
	They prefer to be in Brussels as much as to be in DC.
	He's more on the neocon than the neoliberal side, but that gap has become thinner and thinner in the past decade plus.
	So they probably have him on disclosure of national security information, disclosure of classified information, the attempts to monetize that information, cover up of various illicit activities by his pals before, so they probably have dead rights on a half dozen serious federal crimes.
	But if they're going to be serious about prosecuting him, it needs to be in the Southern District of Florida or the District of Virginia, not in the District of Corruption, because that's where good cases go to die.
	And I just pulled this up.
	This is according to AI, but this confirms all the other searches.
	as well that his net worth is between eight and ten million dollars.
	So people can say, well, that's not as much as Nancy Pelosi, but that's still, you know, oddly high for a public servant.
	I also brought up the article from when Trump was explaining why they revoked his security clearance.
	Someone had rightly observed, I think, and tell me if I'm wrong or if they're wrong, if they revoke his security clearance, he's no longer allowed to even maintain possession of anything that was classified as of that moment.
	Is that correct?
	It varies on how you interpret that depending on what rules you were governed by before you lost your security clearance.
	Okay.
	Maybe not a setup, but maybe he either kept, retained or continued to have access, despite his security clearance, speaking for folks.
	And I'm sure he wishes to continue to disclose it.
	I mean, it's just who he is.
	It's who the guy is.
	I mean, it's how you get your money.
	You say, Look, look at this top secret file I have.
	I mean, it doesn't even matter if you're disclosing what's in the content of that file.
	It's marketing cache to get foreign governments to write you fat checks and your pals and friends and allies to write you fat checks.
	Not to mention his complicity in Russia gate, covering it up, advancing it.
	He knew otherwise when he was going out publicly saying the opposite of what he was saying, implying that his government position meant that he knew something when the rest of us didn't when in fact what he knew was that he was lying and these other people were lying.
	So I mean he's complicit in multiple levels of criminality.
	And this is the first sign we're actually going to this is what I meant when I said if there's a real case pending you will know because grand juries will issue subpoenas they'll issue searches.
	Everybody knew what Mueller was up to right away because the searches were everywhere.
	The subpoenas were flying.
	All kinds of people were making inquiries for counsel.
	To date, that hasn't happened on anything related to DC.
	So anybody claiming or pretending that they've been investigating this the whole time is lying.
	They haven't.
	But now we're seeing signs that yes,es, somebody is because when somebody is, you start seeing raids, you start seeing subpoenas, you start seeing grand jury disputes, you start seeing people start to panic.
	And you can tell in Washington they were utterly shocked that any consequence was coming to anybody by the raid on Bolton's house.
	And they didn't do it as aggressive as they would have done a lot of other people, as they did Paul Manafort, they didn't do this at 4 in the morning like they did Paul Manafort.
	They didn't drag Bolton out of his house like they did Roger Stone.
	So this was still more gentle and generous than has been that others have been treated by the same operation.
	But it's a promising sign.
	Nobody belongs in prison more than John Bolton.
	So you're sort of a serial killer on steroids for all the wars he's caused.
	But he is the centerpiece of the corruption of the deep state, along with John Brennan.
	And so the two of them get indicted.
	The Trump administration has gone a long way to have some degree of accountability.
	But it is promising that Bolton is getting the, you know, when I heard John McCain died, I got out a glass of very expensive champagne.
	I said, Thank you, God, it's about time.
	When John Bolton goes to jail, I'll have to get an even better bottle of champagne.
	So now, the jurisdiction in which they would bring this, DC is the most obvious.
	What would be the argument?
	I appreciate the argument of everything is connected to the Southern District of Florida because the Russia Gate raid that was held there, Mar Lago, Trump's raid, and Bolton was neck deep in all that.
	He was on TV broadcasting the wisdom and logic of it when he himself knew the underlying Russia Gate documents confirmed Trump rather than his side of the aisle.
	So to me, he has been complicit in this all the way through.
	So the you're not locked in to DC because his crimes have a connection to multiple jurisdictions all across the country and quite literally the world.
	Maybe we could do a deal with Russia and send him to Russia.
	Let him serve a little time in Siberia, where he belongs.
	I mean, one of the worst human beingsings in the history of man.
	Okay, so that is, that is, um, John Bolton.
	Uh, you mentioned Brennan, you mentioned Comey tangentially, but I guess we can get into Comey as well because, um, his, his purported criminality has now also been brought to light.
	The story about Comey is now, uh, credibly accused of being the one who was the source of leaking classified information that would have been prejudicial to Donald Trump during the Russia Gate era, uh, for the purposes of harming Donald Trump.
	I didn't get to read through the entire memo.
	I got the gist of it.
	But what is the evidence now that Comey authorized the leak of classified information for the purposes of harming Trump in the first three years of his presidency?
	So, well, it was known really at the time.
	There were whispers and ruminations of it.
	It was quite clear he was the source of the leaks.
	What Tulsi Gabbard has done, along with Cash Patel, is review all the available internal documents and information and sort of unmask.
	the steps and the smoking gun proof of what we suspected before.
	Not only did they know Russia Gate was a fake and fraud and a phony, they fraudulently doctored documents, information, testimony to in order to support it, propagate it.
	And that's what both Patel and now and Tulsi Gabbard have exposed.
	And it's just more smoking gun proof that he was coordinating with Adam Schiff and others efforts to get information illicitly leaked to the public that would smear the president of the United States that he knew was false.
	And then he said it was classified.
	And then one X factor will be, if it wasn't classified, then he didn't leak classified information.
	He just lied about leaking classified information.
	But there still might be other, me, all of this, and they're starting to catch on.
	Ed Davis is starting to catch on.
	Ed Martin is starting to catch on.
	The Pim is starting to catch on.
	You mean Mike Davis, Ed Martin?
	Yeah.
	Mike Davis, Ed Martin, the judge Gene Perot is now prosecutor Perot from the DC.
	And in people, in Harmony Dillon, Pam Bondi.
	Some others I heard from people in Pam Bondi's office this week that I might have made a few comments about her incompetency and aptitude.
	And at least they did fix one thing on the other.
	gun thing, so credit to them on that.
	There's a people in her Office doing good work.
	My skepticism towards her remains.
	But at least they started to figure out this is a conspiracy to deprive President Trump and others of their civil rights.
	Letitia James, same thing.
	That's what the New York case was.
	That's what the Georgia case was.
	That's what the federal cases were.
	That's what the harassment was.
	That's what Russia gate was.
	These are all continued continuation of a conspiracy, a decade-long conspiracy to deprive President Trump and in many instances his supporters, depending on the situation or circumstance.
	Maybe it's George Papadopoulos, maybe it's Nicarter Page, maybe it's a voter, maybe it's somebody, maybe it's a grandma hanging out, Jane J six, whatever it was.
	These are systemic efforts to deprive them of their federally protected, guaranteed civil r civil rights, which is a crime and has always been a crime, and that there are provisions for it when it's federal agents doing the acting to be treated as a crime.
	And they're starting to see that's what all of this was, that whether it's lying to Congress, whether it's an internally fake document, whether it's lying to the media about what exists in those documents, whether it's efforts to get raids or blackmail them or blacklist them or be able to bankrupt them,
	whatever it may be, they all relate to the same core conspiracy, which was to deny President Trump his elected office, deny his voters the implementation of that agenda when he was in office and the propagation and continuation of the Ukraine war, which was all that could only occur because they were able to derail President Trump's Russia detente agenda in his first term, which is what all this was also all about.
	There's literally, there's now documented evidence that has been leaked by various hackers groups, but it's backed up and supported by a wide range of supporting documents that nearly two million Ukrainians are dead thanks to this conflict.
	1.7 million is according to what was in the Ukraine.
	I mean, those lives are on, though their blood is on the hands of John Bolton and James Comey and all of the and Clapper and Brennan and this whole crowd.
	They helped create the circumstances as President Trump has said, as President Putin has said.
	This war never would have happened in Ukraine had they not sabotaged President Trump in his first term and had that election fornication take place in 2020.
	And so these are serious crimes in which millions of people are dead because of it.
	So what we're seeing is just they're just documenting all the different ways.
	Bondi is going to be in a position where she has no choice but to bring indictments.
	Well, Bondi, because Gabbard and the rest have basically put so much overwhelming evidence.
	And when they're not seeing action, Gabbard releases more evidence.
	and then more evidence.
	And so I think that Bondi's increasingly going to have no choice but to see people like Clapper, Comey, Brennan and Bolton indicted.
	And where they belong is the Southern District of Florida because they were conspiring to deprive the former president and now again president of his federally protected civil rights.
	And he was a resident in Florida.
	Well, that is the part that people should snip and clip and share away so that the message gets to Bondi.
	Some are saying the message has gotten to Bondi.
	My operating theory is that, like you say, Tulsi, JD, I say Patel Bongino, Ed Mar Martin, the administration is putting her in a position where she has to act because they're giving her all of not just the tools, um, they're basically laying it up to say now if nothing happens, it's strictly because of Bondi's inaction.
	But we have Ed Martin who is, I think, doing the actual legwork at the DOJ.
	We now have, um, Andrew Bailey, who is the former Attorney General of Missouri.
	He's the one who sued China got a whatever billion dollar judgment, which we'll see if we ever get to execute on as co deputy director of the FBI.
	Your theory, which I'm borrowing and making it mine now, is that Cash Patel is presumably on his way out for whatever reason, and maybe it's because he's just fed up with Pam Bondi, as anyone with half a brain and half an iota of dignity should be.
	It's a formal appointment now, right?
	Co deputy director, there's two of them, you're not going to have two for very long.
	Is this, in your view, only Bondino going out?
	Is it Patel moving somewhere else?
	Maybe they're going to put Patel on the cartel fight and then bump AG Bailey up to the director, or what do you think?
	Well, apparently, so this assistant attorney general who became attorney general in Missouri, this goes all the way back to Holly.
	Hawley, the good populist senator from Missouri.
	Then the next populist senator was Eric Schmidt.
	Eric Schmidt was in the Attorney General's office.
	He did very effective work there on the vaccine mandate issues, second amendment sanctuary city issues, exposing China's role in COVID issues, the supporting opposing censorship, trying to deal with rogue Soros DAs, that really only two Attorney Generals in the country have really taken meaningful remedial action against censorship, et cetera.
	I should say three really, and it's been Texas, Louisiana and Missouri have been the three most proactive Attorney Generals in the country.
	And so the Missouri office is filled with an office that many of us have recommended along with the Attorney Generney General Paxton's office, the Chip Roy announced he was running for Attorney General.
	That's because that's the last gasp of the Bush administration of the Bush regime trying to take away the populist revolution that's taking place in Texas.
	Paxton is running for the Senate and his protege now runs for the Attorney General's position, who's a very smart guy too.
	So the, so Bailey is, uh, was seen as a potential FBI director or Attorney General, uh, before Trump chose Bondi and, uh, Patel.
	So they, so he was on the list from day one.
	Uh, you don't usually bring in a guy as a code deputy.
	So that is unusual.
	That would suggest that maybe Bon Gino did give his, say, hey, I'm out of here two months ago over how the Epstein files were handled.
	And they said, hey, just give us a couple of months so we can transition this out.
	And so he went along with it and they got Bailey to agree to give up the Attorney General's office to come in.
	But you wouldn't think he's there just to be Deputy Director that you assume he's there either to become Director of the FBI or to become Attorney General or to effectively be that.
	Like maybe you let Pat Cash and Pam run around and do all the press conferences, but you have someone like Ba Bailey making sure it's actually working at the reform side, actually working because Patel came out and said that he had a ten whistleblowers he had he was going to reinstate the but the whistleblowers came out and said they were unaware they were being reinstated.
	I represent one of those whistleblowers, Robin Gritz.
	We haven't heard anything at all.
	I hope that they're finally fixing that.
	Those I had seen Kyle Sarafin actually said the same thing on Twitter.
	We're like, maybe someone wants to let the whistleblowers know what is this?
	Are they I don't want to presume ill intent.
	they lying about it is there such poor communication that they didn't get to the are they pretending that it's happening so people are satisfied is it happening but there's such poor communication they didn't even let them know yet or um someone someone i mean i presume the whistleblowers are not lying about the fact that they don't know or is it 10 different whistleblowers who we don't know i represent one of the whistleblowers again maybe it's whistleblowers nobody knew were whistleblowers right so there's always that possibility that's a whole different group of people but the high profile one said they weren't aware so
	that included robin gritts that includes cow Kyle Sarafin that includes four or five others that are affiliated with him I think one is Steve Friend I want to say his last name I'm like it's it's it's Friend I know Friend I want to say Phil Kennedy was one, if I'm getting that name right.
	But to my knowledge, none of them have confirmed, you know, they've been complaining from day one that they gave a roadmap to Patel and Bondi and they weren't implementing it.
	And then, of course, a former U.S. attorney from the antitrust division came out this week unheard saying what he saw, which was that people in high-ranking positions around Bondi were corrupting the office and derailing important cases.
	So I've heard these concerns in broad base about it.
	What tells me that Bailey's coming in is Trump is unhappy with the progress that's been made at the FBI and the justice court and is saying, golly gee, I should have brought this guy in instead of these people.
	Why don't I just bring him in anyway and see if he will go along with coming in and let him figure out what the deal is.
	And then we will.
	But you're not going to have two deputy directors for forever.
	So so somebody's going somewhere.
	And it does look I think it's a promising sign because Bailey has shown great capacity as an assistant as assistant and then the attorney general in the state of Missouri.
	The that I've you know, I follow them and they follow me and so forth.
	I'm a little more aware of their office than some other offices because I've, you know, seen their proactive engagement, but he strikes me as the right guy to understand what's going on more so than what's happened so far over at the FBI and DOJ.
	Okay, before we get into the next topic, I want to bring up a couple of things.
	Here's some of the chats, but I want to bring up the meme, or at least it's funny.
	This is Jarvis back in November, says, I hope Trump is going to be cool about the whole trying to put him in jail thing update.
	He's totally not cool about it.
	I say, nor is he cool about the trying to murder him aspect of that.
	We're still waiting for the final findings from, well, we got more of all kinds of things that caused this whole sort of a stir over the DOJ and the FBI.
	We did get some more released files this week on the Epstein case.
	Whether they'll count as Epstein files for the betting markets is not apparently not yet.
	For me, the Ghislaine Maxwell interview was in fact some disclosures, but we'll see what they decide there.
	But we got another grand jury ruling.
	We got documents going to Congress and we got some of the Ghislaine Maxwell interview disclosed.
	The case that caused all this nightmare for those over at the DOJ and the FBI, the case that just won't die, Jeffrey Epstein.
	Well, despite what happened to Jeffrey, but well, Robert, before we get there, let me just do a couple of tipped questions.
	Kimmy Hunt in our local community says, Dear Viva, Robert, can you please share my give, send, go again?
	It has stalled.
	I need to keep on.
	So DUI, Kimmy guys, DUI, D. I'm going to give it to everybody.
	Give, send, go.
	That fighting cancer, not looking to raise tons of money, just enough to get all the cancer treatments done.
	So to the easy place to support, great place to support.
	If the Commons can raise 750 grand for a criminal like Andrew McCabe, we can at least raise 20 grand for someone going through cancer.
	That's a real American.
	Then we got Hi Bro from Bao.
	From Baumer Flairi, Kiki Blue says, tell mister Barris that if they raid Bolton and possible arrest and not going to raid or arrest any of the Bidens, they're still doing nothing to appease me.
	I am not, I'll be happy if they actually do.
	I agree with those people who want a full accountability, complete reform, but at least let's have something on that path.
	The Bidens are on the Bidens, I mean, they're all on their way out or they're never in.
	These people were instrumental in the greatest political coup in American history.
	Ithaca thirty seven Kato says, is there any change we'll have church two point zero congressional hearings on the deep state and which GOP lawmakers would be good to run the hearings.
	You'd need I would.
	Yeah, Roe Connor would be the only decent Democrat.
	I agree with you on that.
	You would need somebody like Thomas Massey running that or Marjorie Taylor Greene.
	The others have not proven consistent.
	Now Comer's doing okay on the Epstein files.
	We'll see how he does.
	I'll give him credit for subpoenaing Bill Barr, but he it appears he didn't go into much depth with Bill Barr.
	If apparently Barr conducted maybe they're just agreeing to do an interview behind the scenes and Barr just said, Oh, never incriminated Trump.
	Yeah, no duh.
	Well, what we want to know, Billy, Billy Boy is your father and your connections to Jeffrey Epstein.
	Doesn't look like they have the guts, Comer's committee's got the guts to actually go there.
	So in fact, it looks like it's going to be one big, hey, nothing, nothing incriminated Trump here, which was always correct, I think.
	But that's not what people are looking for in the Epstein files.
	They want a full disclosure of how he made his money and the grand jury records, as we suspected, what the judges are really revealing by not disclosing the grand jury records is that there are no real grand jury records, that it's very, very limited because we had the third judge because you had the Epstein Florida state case, Epstein Florida f federal case.
	Epstein, New York federal case.
	Glaine Maxwell federal case.
	I'm not sure what ever happened on the Florida state case, but the Florida federal case, they've got rules that they've never allowed grand jury records to be disclosed, which should be a rule that should be changed by the Supreme Court or Congress, because it's outrageous that we could that these, that information could be kept secret for centuries long after that the government has concerning major criminals, which is what they're doing in all of these kind of cases.
	But then in New York, where they do have legal authority, the for both the Glaine Maxwell judge and the Jeffrey Epstein grand jury judge came out and said, no, we're not going to disclose those records, which will only increase suspicion, by the way.
	Those judges now will be viewed with skepticism by a range of people wondering what they know and what they're hiding.
	So it's a mistake by those judges in my opinion.
	But putting that aside, what they keep confirming is that there's nothing there, that they use the grand jury as pure indictment grand jury, didn't use them to investigate anything.
	And instead, it's what we pointed out in the PDD case, the crime is the cover up.
	Much like the Russia Gate investigation was a cover up for Spygate by Mueller.
	That's what the goal was in large part.
	Part of it was to harass and harangue and sabotage and have a de facto coup of Trump's foreign policy, which it succeeded in because Trump never did a detente with Russia.
	Somebody should bring that up with Trump.
	I mean, the reason they did all this was to prevent a detente from Russia.
	And if you don't get a detente from Russia, they won and you lost Trump.
	You rewarded them for what they did if you don't get a detente with Russia.
	But putting that aside, what all of this information and evidence points to is the same sort of pattern of criminality.
	So we'll see what ultimately comes about because of it.
	Well, so the grand jury, the non release of the grand jury documents, no big surprise predicted from the get-go.
	So, and I agree, we'll look into it to find out.
	But the key was that it turns out we were right that the crime was the cover up and the crime was the cover up in that they used the grand jury to hide most of the bad evidence about Epstein.
	And so the not to expose it, not to eartharth it, not to investigate it, not to reveal it, that it appears they didn't do any request of bank records.
	How do you have a grand you're going in after Jeffrey Epstein?
	You have the grand jury, the most powerful investigatory tool in the world, and you never even subpoenaed a single one of his bank records.
	That's what these judges are implicitly suggesting.
	They're suggesting that these were true indictment grand juries.
	And to understand what that means, most grand juries are investigatory.
	They go out and they talk to witnesses, constitutionally and historically, that's what they're supposed to be.
	What these judges are saying is that these grand juries were purely indictment grand juries.
	And for people to understand an indictment grand jury, all they do is an agent walks in and says, I talked to you, you can do hearsay in an indictment grand jury.
	I talked to so and so.
	She said he harassed me on these three dates.
	Here's the dates.
	And then the US attorney gets up and says, here's what the elements are, indict, right?
	So they see almost no evidence.
	The only evidence they see is the same evidence the whole world saw.
	That's what these judges are saying.
	They're saying there's no evidence in the grand jury files that of any consequence.
	And that means that they had to have been covering it up.
	That means that they didn't let the grand, they were afraid.
	What happens if the grand jury sees all the bank records?
	What happens if the grand jury hears from a witness?
	One of the victims apparently the victims didn't even testify.
	According to these judges, they only had why?
	Why would you do that?
	You know, and some grand jury asking, who else did you see at the island?
	Did you see this famous person?
	What?
	Bill Clinton?
	This famous person?
	Bill Gates?
	This famous person, president of Israel.
	They don't want him asking those questions because then, all of a sudden, the grand jury goes, whoo.
	So we were confirmed indirectly by the non disclosure, discloses a lot that the FBI case was a cover up from day one.
	No, and you merge that with Ghislaine Maxwell's two day QA with Todd Blanche, and I didn't listen to all of it.
	I listened to a relevant portion, and then I read reviews and summaries because it's tough even to listen to that at one and a half.
	British accents are not easy at a higher speed and whatever.
	The bottom line, that two day transcript.
	Okay, great.
	So Todd Blanche comes in and says, look, no, nobody's giving you leniency.
	This is not going to be used to soften us up, to butter us up for a pardon and commutation.
	Wink, wink, nudge, nudge is my underlying impression.
	And then Ghislaine Maxwell says, yep, I never saw Donald Trump in any compromising positions or parties in whatever situations.
	Nobody suspected that.
	I didn't see Bill Clinton at the island.
	He was always a gentleman.
	And I only procured girls of age for Jeffrey Epstein.
	To me, it sounded like the most self serving and politically assuaging both sides.
	So that maybe in three years., if it's a Democrat president, she can get a pardon or a computation and only further confirms my suspicions as to how deep this goes.
	And also listening to what Ghislaine Maxwell is saying, what the hell did she get arrested and convicted for?
	So the Clinton, despite all the rumors and despite having been on the plane without secret service, allegedly didn't go to the island, she never saw him do anything unbecoming despite what Bon Gino and his insiders say they saw on that plane.
	And she's looking like she's just trying to protect everyone so that she either gets a commutation from Trump or a commutation from a next Democrat president.
	Yeah, that's exactly right.
	And what I said was that she would learn to, she would figure out what the songbook is.
	and sing from it appropriately.
	And that's exactly what she did.
	She saw the songbook and it's almost like the leaked letter that nobody signed that reportedly everybody agreed to according to Todd Blanche.
	The was designed for Glaine Maxwell and everyone else who was a potential suspect.
	Hey, don't worry, there's no further investigations coming.
	And if somebody knocks on your door, here's the answers you need to give.
	And the official answers were, nobody, everybody's innocent.
	Everybody's innocent.
	That's the official narrative.
	I mean, it's something to stick with, but everybody except maybe Epstein was a bit of a perverse.
	But nobody really even knew of that.
	I mean, that's the official narrative.
	It's an absurd and asinine and laughable narrative.
	But she saw that.
	I think she was behind some of the earlier leaks, including the Wall Street Journal leak.
	And so they realized they needed to talk to her.
	And she's like, you know, if I could get a much better set of accommodations away from this dangerous facility, then you might be interested in what I have to say.
	And so the lawyer sits down, she sees from the script, okay, here's the official narrative.
	I just got a scene from the official narrative, something she's known how to do her whole life, something her father knew how to do her whole life.
	Now she confirmed two things that were I long suspected, and then many long suspected that she believed, which was one, that her father was an intelligence asset.
	She finally, you know, put that officially on the record that yes, Robert Maxwell was an asset, CIA, Mossad, MI6, and KGB and others.
	The second aspect that she confirmed is that her father didn't kill himself in her view, that someone powerful killed him.
	The third thing she confirmed is that she believes Jeffrey Epstein, and she knows the eternal truth number two.
	Yes.
	Just like eternal truth number one.
	She knows.
	Gilly Maxwell even knows the eternal truth number two.
	Rubber, she said.
	Epstein didn't kill himself.
	She suggested that he might have been killed by another inmate over a commissary dispute.
	I mean, her experience.
	Yeah, that was her saying, don't worry, I know who not to say that it was, right?
	I mean, imagine admitting, I know my father worked for intelligence, I know my father didn't kill himself, I know Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself, but don't worry, I'm not going to blame the intelligence agencies.
	No, no, no, no.
	It was probably just some random inmate who had a big grievance over something over a $25 order at the commission.
	Yeah, right, yeah, sure.
	I guess she's willing, she was like saying, I'm willing to say anything you want me to to let me go to a lower level work camp and maybe leak me release me.
	And her point was, why didn't the system come to me?
	Because I would have sung whatever song you wanted me to sing from day one.
	That was her message.
	She's like, I'm not going to ride anybody out.
	You don't gotta whack me.
	You don't gotta leave me in prison for twenty years.
	You know, maybe I enjoyed some of the candy that Jeffrey Epstein liked to enjoy.
	But that shouldn't be twenty years in prison.
	Come on, everybody.
	Just to let Ghislaine's willing to inoculate and immunize everybody as long as the, you know, you're not too mean on her.
	So I think that was the message she sang from the songbook.
	That's why as soon as they were as soon as she got sent to the work camp, I was like, okay, she she sang the songbook they want.
	And this means they're stuck with this.
	So more Epstein stuff is going to come out, but they're stuck with an official narrative of there was nothing to see here and they're going to keep pushing there was nothing to see here, uh, despite how absurd that is.
	He was killed over commissary dispute.
	That I mean, that is, and they're a nod of saying, I'm willing to say anything.
	So that you guys don't whack me and get me into better accommodations.
	Outrageous.
	Okay, well, we'll see.
	It's not yet..
	I'm not satisfied with what has come out yet and I don't believe that there's no there, but that might be my own personal blinders.
	King of Biltong in the house says, increase your protein intake with some great tasting Biltong from Biltong USA, packed with B12 creatine, iron, and zinc, and much more.
	Get some on builtongusa.com.
	Use code Barnes this time for ten percent off.
	It's delicious, Biltong.
	I ate a ton of it over the last few days, and it's fantastic.
	Are you in the city in Manhattan?
	Yeah, we're Upper West Side, and it's, it's not, I mean, it's, it's nice.
	It's, but there's a lot of still, a lot of homelessness.
	A lot, it's, it's still pretty dirty, but it's New not as bad.
	Is it a whole family that's up there?
	It's going to be an entire family.
	So there's going to be, I don't know how many nieces and nephews, but all siblings, my parents.
	It's going to be a big, wild wedding.
	Robert, what's the hold on?
	There was one other thing here.
	Any news on the InfoWars case from Ithaca 37 Kato?
	I haven't I know that essentially the state judge is trying to grab and take over the company InfoWars and sell it before the bankruptcy court can sell it.
	I don't know of any update beyond that.
	I know that something is scheduled for September.
	And so you the state court trying to grab it and destroy InfoWars as a brand because that's always been the their goal.
	That's against the rules governing bankruptcy.
	But you remember, we saw that state court, Josh.
	Yeah.
	Remember that that judge is a nut job, total lunatic.
	Nut bank.
	And, and I realize exactly what they're trying to do with.
	I mean, you talked about it earlier.
	They want to buy, they want to acquire the rights to InfoWars and Alex Jones' own image.
	And now we've seen what they've done with the likeness and image of one of the Parkland victims, bring back an AI version of this kid or create an AI version and get that AI version to, you know, promote whatever political leanings of his programmers.
	They want to be able to do that with Alex Jones InfoWars and make them say things that they would.
	otherwise never say that support their political narrative, where they're going with that.
	I hadn't heard of any news in that.
	That's what you have, Mayor Bloomberg, trying to use the Union to the Union to do it.
	Wants to make these infowars into self-satire and to permanently black hole the memory and the image and the ideas of Alex Jones.
	And so Jones continues to fight it in bankruptcy court.
	The state court judge continues to be rogue.
	I think Texas Court of Appeals is going to step in ultimately and overturn that verdict.
	So that will deprive that state court judge of any rogue power.
	Swati Zeus says she wasn't saying you can be killed over a commentary dispute.
	She was saying you can order a hit as easy as putting money in someone's commissary, you dorkes.
	Oh, hold on, I'll I'll double check that.
	Yeah.
	Well, you know, that is true.
	The, but he's still just diminishing to a degree who is likely responsible.
	You don't have any client list, but you're sure and your father had no client list, but you're sure your father was an intelligence asset.
	You don't know whether Epstein was an intelligence asset.
	Can't believe that he was.
	You're just sure that somebody killed both of them and they didn't kill themselves.
	So what was their motive?
	I didn't listen to the whole interview.
	I assume Todd Blanche didn't ask.
	I assume didn't he ask, who do you think might have killed your dad?
	Who do you think might have killed Jeffrey Epstein?
	Because she was like, I know you whacked him, but please don't whack me and please let me out early and I'll sing whatever song you want me to sing.
	Hold on.
	Let me see if it worked for her.
	She went from medium security, rough facility to a very low level work camp in Texas.
	So she's already partially achieved her goal.
	And now she already told Congress she wouldn't talk to them, right?
	So, you know, that aspect of Blanche, he delivered.
	He got done what he needed to get done, which was to have, was to make sure she sang from the songbook from a certain way.
	And that's precisely what she did.
	And she knew how to, like there were some questions that you wouldn't have asked if you didn't know the answers in advance that I think that he, they already had arranged this in advance.
	Okay, I'm going to ask this, if, is she going to answer this way?
	Yeah.
	That's how you coordinate that in advance, in advance, by the way.
	You don't talk to her, you talk to her lawyer.
	And you say, I expect her to answer this.
	I expect her to answer, well, we're willing to sit down, do a recorded interview, as long as this is what we're expecting.
	We're not, and what you say is you say things like, I would interpret that as perjury.
	and that we could subsequently prosecute her for, on top of everything, and increase her sentencing risk.
	There are certain phrases you use to get this.
	This is a manufactured script.
	This is not a what an honest QA would reveal.
	Let me read it because this is the portion.
	She says, I do not believe he died by suicide.
	No, Todd Ballant says, and you believe that, do you have any speculation or view of who killed him?
	No, I I know I don't.
	And I ask because if you believe there's any truth in the allegations of blackmail or that he kind of had a list or that he had reasons for people to hate him, why would someone kill him?
	In prison where I am, they will kill you or they will pay someone can kill you for twenty five dollars worth of commissary.
	That's the going rate.
	So that goes to the third reason, which is kind of mismanagement.
	No, she's suggesting she is when he is asking you're right.
	She's suggesting both.
	She's suggesting that it could be over anything minor and insignificant because people will do it for dirt cheap.
	Yeah, no, no, it's I I got nervous.
	I misunderstood it.
	No, because and it's and it's she's basically ducking the blackmail saying, no, I don't think that's that.
	They can kill you for anything.
	And what does she start saying as far as the answer goes?
	In prison, they will kill you or they will pay someone can get you ambiguous, but what's not and I still think it is kind of legal.
	Yeah, you're right here because he's asking about the reasons yeah and he's saying it can be anything stupid the um but i appreciate that i'm sure that had to be advanced yeah the be careful criticizing viva the uh the it's more risky than criticizing barnes you know you got the uh you know they get exposed but yeah the uh i think that was agreed to in advance no way he asked that question unless he knew what her answer was going to be in advance i read now maybe he's just this nice naive rube who's stepping into something he has no idea what he's stepping into
	that wouldn't shock me um but that's how i read this i read this as you know it's like someone like mark robert scripted it in advance and they're reading from their script to make it look like it was an honest fourth go coming on a quiet QA, but make sure it didn't go anywhere like, uh, like, you know, she said that her father is intelligence and connection, but like he doesn't pursue that in great detail, I don't think.
	Well, he's, he's like, it's a loaded question.
	You don't think it was blackmail, do you?
	So this is Tog Wunch, which is a little bit different.
	Yeah, like, you know, wink, wink, not, you know, while you're there, the, I don't think there was any video camera recording.
	It was just audio recorded.
	And you can get away with a lot of audio recording.
	Yeah.
	She says, I think that's, I don't see that blackmail.
	I think, is it possible?
	Of course it's possible, but I don't know.
	of any reason why anyone would kill him for black.
	No, I don't know why Bill Gates doesn't think that he's sure he got killed.
	He's sure his father got killed.
	She knows his father's connected to intelligence.
	She doesn't know if he was, but by golly, she has just no idea what possibly could have led to someone murdering him.
	Yeah, right.
	All right.
	No, I stand by my I can appreciate it.
	I can see how someone reads it the other way and says it but she's definitely downplaying it saying I don't, black.
	Who would want to do that?
	Why would Bill Gates want to kill him for having you know, one of the answers you knew she had to answer and that's why I say it was prescripted because otherwise it would have you would have got a different answer.
	And then, by the way, she's similarly has said the same thing for years about her father's death.
	She said, Oh, I don't believe he killed himself, but I have no idea who killed him.
	So I just said, someone must have had a motivation, I guess.
	Not a lot of shit.
	I don't know.
	No, if someone whacked your dad and then whacked your boyfriend, wouldn't you want to know why just in case they were trying to whack you?
	You know what I mean?
	And Zeus, no, I didn't take it personally, but I do appreciate that that's a very plausible interpretation.
	Yes, yes, yes, yes.
	Well, speaking of security guarantees, a country that's trying to, you know, Ghislaine got her security guarantees by singing from the right songbook.
	Ukraine is trying to do the same thing by blowing up a peace deal with fake security guarantees.
	Okay, so there was a discussion last week as to what security guarantees Zelenskyy was asking for and what Trump was floating or contemplating by way of security guarantees, which people are saying very much resemble Article 5 protection, which is just Article 5 out of NATO, which is effectively what Zelenskyy is asking for and what some people thought Trump was offering was a de facto Article 5, even though Ukraine would not be in NATO.
	What is the administration's understanding of whatever security guarantees they might give and what is Zelensky saying about it?
	So traditionally security guarantees have a known nomenclature.
	There were security guarantees in the 2022 Istanbul Agreement signed by Ukraine and Russia to end this, end this from the beginning.
	And it was blown up by Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of the UK, and President Joe Biden and his administration.
	So this war could have ended right out of the gate had they had the West not prohibited Ukraine from signing a peace agreement.
	In those agreements were security guarantees, which have been around since the 1830s.
	So the first security guarantee is here's the exchange.
	So you as a nation decide you're going to be neutral, you're going to be non aligned, you're going to be in the modern age non nuclear, but you're also going to be, you're going to have a very small army.
	You're not going to have a big army.
	So the question then is, well, how do you protect your security from a foreign invasion if you're non aligned, you're non nuclear, you're not, you're effectively non militarized.
	You need someone to the great powers to protect you in case someone else invades you.
	In other words, your normal reason for having an army and for being aligned in some sort of treaty or pact with other nations is your self protection.
	How do you get that when you choose to be neutral between various great powers?
	Well, the great powers promise you their security in exchange.
	So the treaty of London that was done for Brussels and Belgium in 1839 provided for all the great powers agreed to protect the security and safety of Belgium in exchange for Belgium having no foreign troops, Belgium having a small military, Belgium being officially neutral, Belgium being not aligned with any other warring nation and the like.
	Flash forward, the same dispute happens after the Cold War in Austria.
	You've got leftover Nazi troops.
	You've got invading Soviet troops.
	You've got invading Allies troops.
	You've got Austria wanting to be independent.
	So the concern was how do you make Austria a neutral, non-aligned, non-nuclear country and still guarantee their security when they're right smack dab in the middle of the conflict between the Warsaw Pact and NATO.
	Well, the treaty of 1955 and 1956 established them as an independent, neutral, non-aligned, non-nuclear nation that whose security was guaranteed by both the USSR and the USA, along with Britain and France.
	As part of it, they had to denazify their military.
	Like the closest analogy to a functioning Ukraine treaty would be the Austrian treaty of 1955.
	And because they go to what to deal with property, what to deal with different citizens of different backgrounds, how to denazify the German and the Austrian army, how to make sure they never had any German troops in their army ever again.
	All of these kind of provisions that are analogous to Ukraine were there for Austria.
	And upon Austria agreeing to be non-nuclear, non-aligned, and a neutral country that had no foreign troops and a small military, the US and the USSR guaranteed their security against a foreign invader.
	The same proposal happened in Laos in 1962.
	It didn't solve Laos' civil war, but it did ultimately provide peace between the great powers.
	Again, secure the who are the security guarantors, USSR and the USA, the great powers, who and what was the security guarantee?
	It was that they would not be invaded by a foreign nation or these countries would come to their aid.
	Now, Article V is actually much vager than people think.
	Article V doesn't guarantee military reaction.
	It just says we'll come to your assistance after we go through our domestic internal purposes, which we can disapprove of.
	So Article V is not as big, it's strong as people like to make it out to be.
	In fact, the But this provision, what it required is all the parties agree, right?
	What you don't want is a ticking time bomb.
	You don't want a security guarantee to be a guarantee for war.
	What Ukraine wants, what Europe wants, is a fake security guarantee.
	They want a war trigger.
	They want something they can easily point to to trigger war.
	Either something they know Russia will never sign off on, so that's going to be their excuse to continue their failed war and continue to launder billions and billions of dollars.
	More stories coming out.
	You heard Mark Carney just promised another two billion in munitions to UK.
	Apparently the 22 billion Canada gave wasn't enough.
	So here's another two.
	Exactly.
	just massive laundry.
	They're going through their videos showing all the different absurd multiple mansions that Zelenskyy has around the world that multiple generals have around the world that many of these they've only acquired after the war began.
	So this isn't based on any independent wealth.
	Some of it's tied to corrupt oligarchs in Ukraine.
	Other parts are due to just ripping off the American taxpayer at scale.
	And so, you know, hiding the money in the AE, hiding the money in Panama, Panama.
	That's why Zelensky knows that the country that most of the people in the country would lynch him if they got the chance.
	Seventy percent of the country wants out of the war now.
	He is intensely unpopular and every candidate he runs against, he's lucky if he gets into the low twenty.
	So he's one of the most hated people in the history of Ukrainian politics, which is saying something because they've had a lot of losers.
	So he can't afford the end of the war.
	He can't.
	The moment the war is over is the moment Zelensky is done for.
	Then all of a sudden, the people that want him dead have a chance to see that happen.
	The people that want to see him in prison have a chance to see that happen.
	The people that want him bankrupt have a chance to see that happen.
	So all of his enemies and adversaries, it's open season on Zelenskyy the moment the war is over.
	The war is cover for him to continue to rob, continue to steal, and it's his own form of life insurance and financial insurance.
	And so that's why he is, that's why all he does is he looks for how can I blow this up?
	How can I blow this up?
	How can I blow this up?
	So any peace deal, that's his goal.
	His goal is never to get peace.
	His goal is to guarantee the war continues.
	And then even if Ukraine completely collapses, he leaves to go to the French Riviera and is the Ukrainian president in exile like the Shah's son forever, right?
	I mean, it never ends.
	And the money keeps flowing.
	He gets to be, he gets to, he gets to, he gets the role of a lifetime as this comedian actor has always sought to be the ex exileiled president of the oppressed republic of Oceania.
	So that's what and who he is.
	That's why his security guarantee is just the opposite.
	It's literally a guarantee of war.
	They don't want Russia to have any role.
	They want backdoor NATO.
	They want US troops on the ground.
	They want European troops on the ground.
	You look up the prior security guarantees.
	The guarantee is that there will be no foreign troops on the ground.
	The Belgian security guarantee, no foreign troops on the ground.
	The Austrian security guarantee, no foreign troops on the ground.
	Laos security guarantee, no foreign troops on the ground.
	And yet what is Zelenskyy demanding is his security guarantee., lots and lots of foreign troops on the ground, exactly what you're supposed to be guaranteeing against in order to prevent the revolt from the war, the conflict from being triggered on any little thing.
	They want a permanent armistice so they can rearm Ukraine and continue their war, their fruitless, feudal war against Russia.
	And they want if there be a collapse in the coming months, they want Trump to be blamed for it.
	That's why Trump has to get us out and get us out now, or he is at great risk of losing his presidency because the Ukraine could collapse overnight at any moment.
	That's the nature of a war of attrition is the.
	Is the, the, Russia is not looking at conquering territory.
	They're looking at destroying an army.
	That's why they, according to leaked hack reports this, uh, this, uh, this week, one point, Ukraine's own military has 1.7 million members of its military either dead or missing, 1.7 million.
	that's not that's not dead or injured that's dead or missing so it's dead or taken out of unable to fight is how Yeah.
	So it's, it would go more like a, uh, a, uh, a casuality.
	A casualty, not necessarily a death or unaccounted for.
	It's a casualty of conflict.
	And then, and again, they had 1.7 million.
	And Alexander Makoris had someone that had been literally tracking.
	They're somehow doing a detailed survey of both the Ukrainian and Russian soldiers that track that can geolocate them throughout the conflict.
	Of the, guess what percentage?
	So of the all the Russian soldiers, the 80 percent that were there to begin with, still there, still there on the battlefield, still fully capable, still fully able.
	What number, what percentage do you think of the Ukrainian soldiers that they've been tracking are still on the battlefield?.
	If I'm following the numbers, it would have to be like 18 to 15 to 20 percent.
	11 percent.
	Nearly 90 percent of the Ukrainian soldiers are gone.
	Literally gone that they've been tracking.
	That's how disastrous this war has been.
	They are destroying an entire generation of young Ukrainian men for you, for this European folly of trying to destroy Russia.
	And they want Trump to go down with it.
	And that's why it's in Trump's self preservation interest to demand that Ukraine sign this decree or at least declare elections.
	Declare elections because Zelensky knows the moment an election happens he's lost.
	That's why he has no interest in elections.
	That's why Trump was joking with him on Monday.
	You know, he's like, oh, wow.
	So all I've got to do is declare war and I can stay president forever.
	I wonder what would happen if I did that here.
	I wonder what the media would say about that here in America.
	They would go berserk, but not for dictator Zelensky.
	So the security guarantees, there's a legal history of what this means.
	You can look it up yourself, folks.
	You can go look up the 1839 treaty for Belgium.
	The 1955 treaty for Austria is really good and detailed.
	The 1955 one is the best.
	But if you're interested in actual peace, understand that it's the Russian proposal that will get you peace.
	The Ukrainian proposal is designed to never get you peace, designed to get you war, more war, because their entire machine, their regime survives on it.
	They've committed massive, take for example the kids issue.
	So what happens is Russia evacuates orphanages in the war zone so the kids aren't at risk of dying.
	These are Russian kids, so they get taken to Russia.
	Ukraine tries to pretend this is a mass kidnapping of 25,000 children.
	Utter hogwash.
	What Ukraine is not disclosing is one of the reasons Russia did it is they discovered Ukraine was using their foster homes to traffic young children to human trafficking including to sexual predators, all over the world because they saw Russian kids as subhuman.
	That's so that's what Russia was trying to prevent.
	The mass, I mean, if Melania Trump wants to cry, cry for the Russian kids abused by the Ukrainian government or cry for now is not the time to start talking about children dying in conflict, Melania, unless you have completely missed the news about Gaza.
	She looks embarrassing.
	I mean, this is someone that's had mostly untouched reputation in Trump's world.
	Now you decide to let the deep state use you to talk about children in a conflict where Ukraine has been far worse towards children than anyone and at a time when children are dying in mass in Gaza.
	Now is the time you choose to make children your moral stand.
	You look like a fool.
	You look like a sucker.
	So, you know, hopefully she gets some better advisors around her so she doesn't have the likes of John Bolton whispering things in her ear.
	But that's the reason for the security guarantee, a real security guarantee is what Russia's talking.
	That's historical precedent.
	That's what has legal precedent.
	That's what has policy viability.
	And that's what Trump was talking about.
	All other security guarantees are nothing but sabotage efforts to destroy the peace, to undermine Trump.
	to try to continue the foolish war against Russia that puts the whole world at risk of World War 3 because you have some rogue actors in Kiev who can't wait to get to their Monaco mansions next week.
	Well, speaking of Monaco mansions, I just want to bring this up because it's really hilarious how this is chat GPT frames it, listen to this, rumors of billions.
	Some Russian state media and conspiracy outlets have claimed that Zelenskyy is secretly worth hundreds of millions or billions, suggesting he hides offshore accounts.
	The claims have not been substantiated.
	It's still worth independent estimates, twenty to twenty five million.
	And hold on.
	Do they mention, by the way, the Panama Papers in there at all?
	I mean, there is no dispute about offshore accounts because he and his key people are all over the Panama Papers.
	I think, by the way, you called them Paradise Papers in an interview.
	Oh, no, because Canada has its own.
	Canada has the Paradise Papers.
	Oh, Canada does have Paradise Papers?
	Yep.
	Ah, I thought you were confusing Panama with Paradise.
	No, no, no.
	Oh, dude, no, we have our own.
	The Paradise Papers are in Canada that involves Canadian politicians with offshore accounts, not the Panama Papers.
	So he's in it.
	But I love it here.
	Yeah, he's got four to five significant properties, depending on how one counts family partnership holdings versus personal ownership.
	Oh, my goodness.
	Well, I've made my prediction.
	It's going to, you know, Trump is giving Russia a hard time now.
	I think that's for the media.
	I think the ultimatum is on Zelensky's table and we're going to see what I think is going to happen.
	I hope so.
	America hopes so.
	Peace hopes so.
	The people of Ukraine hope so.
	Now, speaking of people not dying, Robert, DC is now nine days into a homicide free streak, which is, I mean, it's like it's a, it's not a crime wave.
	It's a peace wave.
	It's a life wave going through DC.
	Trump has floated the idea of bringing this to Baltimore, to Chicago.
	And you got Pritzker, the, the, the biggest scum of the earth pun intended saying he's not going to accept the National Guard's presence in Chicago and then you got your idiot who I started this show with saying yeah I got my arm broken in a car jacking in in Chicago but I still don't want Trump's help to make it safe so what is a Pritzker's ability to refuse Trump bringing in calling the National Guard in Chicago does I don't for my understanding governors don't have a veto at
	all and Trump can do it notwithstanding but what are the legal rights of a of a governor to refuse assistance from the from the presidency if they offer or threaten to bring in the National Guard?
	The supposedly it's something that Chad is like, oh, Paris doesn't care about Ukrainian children.
	I do.
	If you care about Ukrainian children, then you want Russia to get peace with Ukraine.
	Because the greatest threat to Ukrainian children is the Ukrainian government kidnapping them off the streets and sending them into war when they're not busy kidnapping them into human trafficking.
	The number of people who think they can morally grandstand in, in, in, in, in, in, of Ukraine are delusional.
	It's just, it never ceases to amaze me.
	The human trafficking, money laundering capital of the whole world where they had over thirty biological weapons labs, and that's who you're championing.
	That's who you're the a disgrace if you're a champion of Ukraine.
	You just what a joke.
	But the idea they can get on there and the point Richard Barris constantly makes and Mearsheimer and others make, you can't get more realistic in foreign policy anyway because it's almost always a trap to a bad policy decision to try to get snookered into that.
	If you go back and look at human trafficking in Ukraine, it was talked about before the war, but before Ukraine became holier than critic, Ukraine, this is just chat GPT, but I know the answer.
	It's a long, complicated history of human trafficking, both as a source country, people being trafficked out and as a transit destination country.
	Here's how it goes.
	And yet it was, they had to have legal reforms in the 2010s.
	I mean, this answer I knew already.
	Yeah, they've been doing it for a long, long time.
	And people got to stop buying into Western propaganda on this stuff.
	But the people regurgitated with ease.
	Now, I see DC as separate from these other cities.
	Yeah.
	So I get why, like, for legal, it's completely separate.
	DC is governed by the, the Constitution gives exclusive control to Congress.
	Congress gave the power to the President to declare an emergency and put people on the, uh, military on the ground for security purposes.
	There's no issues there constitutionally atal at all.
	Trying to extend it to any other city, I'm not in favor of it because then you're trying to militarize the police.
	This is what Obama tried to do in his own way using the Justice Department.
	Now that Trump is talking about doing it using the Pentagon or using the National Guard, I'm not in favor of this.
	Chicago's a nightmare, that's the Chicago's problem.
	That's Illinois' problem.
	That is not America's problem.
	But it is to say, it is to say, if Pritzker said, we would like to work with you, then it becomes a state issue.
	But if it becomes the Fed's issue, we'd like to work with them and propose some stuff.
	Okay.
	But the idea, it's one thing to put National Guard in DC where you've got different.
	Okay, the you have a different animal in Chicago, very different animal.
	Those are gangs.
	Those are sophisticated global gangs that are operating.
	The, and like, I'm not in favor of us sending down a bunch of military ships outside Venezuela.
	Are we going to do regime change again?
	Did we keep, I mean, did President Trump mean what he said in Saudi Arabia or not?
	I mean, we said no more regime change.
	What are we doing down there?
	We're talking about fifty million dollars bounties for his arrest and now we're putting in a bunch of, you know, it's embarrassing.
	Remember we pretended that fake president was the president?
	That was in, and Trump even congratulated him on the State of the Union.
	It's like, we look like a joke.
	We have to get out of this, get out of this regime change business for the love of God.
	That's what he was elected for.
	and he keeps getting tempted by it.
	Oh, it'd be so much fun.
	Let's just try it one more time.
	What the heck?
	So I hope that's not what's going on, but who knows?
	the guys were going to be fighting the cartels.
	I see, I see, you know, even Steve Bannon's all pumped about this.
	Well, when does this work?
	Well, when does a war on drugs ever work?
	It's never worked.
	It has literally never worked.
	It always invites more trouble, more surveillance state problems, more invasion, more loss of privacy, more loss of liberty.
	I despise these people as much as anyone, but when does this strategy work?
	Regime change efforts, military efforts?
	How is DC fine?
	The whole world?
	No, he's starting, he looks like a caricature.
	The guy who once, he's now are buying into companies.?
	Is that a great idea?
	US is going to have private, public, shared ownership of Intel.
	He threatens the CEO and says the guy should be removed and then he gets ten percent.
	This doesn't look good.
	And somebody's in Trump's White House is not telling him this doesn't look good.
	I see the only pushback would be I appreciate the problem being the feds coming in and saying, well, now we're taking over the police with the state.
	But I think more police tends to decrease crime and that's up to the states to do.
	No, not for that.
	It's just the, do we want to militarize the police?
	Do we want to federalize the police?
	No, DC is a different animal.
	DC is a federal property.
	So of course it should be federal.
	I have no problem with that.
	Sticking our nose, sending the military in everywhere else as what?
	A special crime defense unit?
	Crime, we're going to send them in New York City now.
	We're going to send them in Chicago.
	Look, politically, this will be very popular for Trump.
	The only libertarians will be very bothered.
	Everybody else would be all for these are criminal ridden but terrible neighborhoods.
	Send whoever in to clean them all up.
	I get the mindset.
	Legally and constitutionally, I'm not in favor of federalizing the police.
	It was part of the problem with the FBI.
	So it's like if you're a constitutionalist, if you care about legal precedent more than you do immediate short term public policy gains, then this is not something you should be cheerleading that I understand and empathize with the George Gammons and others who are skeptical about this, and the Rand Paul's and the Ron Paul's who are skeptical about this.
	They're like, hold on a second.
	One thing to clean up DC where you have federal control and you have absolute constitutional right to do so.
	Whole different animal to start saying, We're going to replace the police of Chicago, we're going to replace the police of New York.
	No, bad idea.
	It's going to backfire.
	You know it's going to backfire, right?
	So let's say we send some National Guard guy happen.
	Some, some, some kid gets shot because it's going to happen.
	Some kids get shot.
	Boom.
	All of a sudden, Trump's killing kids on the streets, in the city streets because he's a quasi fascist.
	That politically blows back in five seconds.
	That's a disaster waiting to happen..
	DC, different animal.
	Don't extend this past DC.
	You can offer it.
	I don't mind him offering it, saying, I offer the governor, I offer the mayor the federal resources to help with their major crime problem, but offer it.
	Don't compel it.
	Don't start federalizing police because that's a trap.
	It's a trap against constitutional liberty long term, and it's a political trap because it will blow back in some major way in six months.
	Well, and now I feel easily manipulated, but I think you've actually just convinced me about my idea of not defunding the police, but actually enhancing their capabilities and not having transit, what do they call them?
	Transit ambassadors, but have police on the subway.
	I appreciate absolutely and I appreciate your argument for why you shouldn't.
	Well, let me let me read this over from CommitTube.
	This is two from CommitTube.
	Remember John McCain hand delivered the steel dossier to the FBI.
	He received it from Sir Wood.
	Nobody talks about him.
	You're damn right.
	No, I actually did that.
	Lindsey Graham.
	Lindsey Graham was integral to Russia Gate, as Paul Danes pointed out in our interview with him.
	He'll be on Monday with Richard Barris, People's Pundit.
	What are the odds?
	Who he came down, Viva saw it in person.
	Yo, Barris came down even though his foot was like blown up.
	I mean, I didn't know.
	I noticed he looked a little.
	I think he's a soldier, so you don't see the extreme pain.
	No, I know.
	He left quickly after, like, oh, I guess you get it.
	He was like, oh, I guess you get it.
	He was like, oh, I guess he's back in the site.
	I was like, oh, whatever, Bears.
	I was like, oh my God, his foot's all up.
	And then fortunately we got that sweetheart doctor who, you know, she saved Bears.
	And last time we had a vet in Chattanooga, he literally saved someone's life.
	Literally someone was ODing, I believe, was having an overdose and they did freaking CPR and killing.
	She saved him right there, right there on the foot.
	And she's become, she's become my go to.
	She saved me.
	First of all, I had a toe infection as well.
	And then she said, go get the stuff that kills staphylococcus and put it on your foot.
	Because I, like an idiot, pulled out a toenail and shouldn't have done it.
	Robert here, hold on.
	Let me bring this up.
	Do you all have any resources?
	This is from smirk 808.
	Do you have any resources for legal advice?
	I was swatted last week.
	Looks like I have a slam dunk case against the punk that I did.
	You can go to the it will be, we're going to continue to update it.
	1776 lawcenter dot com the 1776.
	That's what this is, a gift of Ginger survival techniques from his homeschooling, the he'll be ready to rock and roll.
	The but yeah, the now Trump did have some other wins this week which were good, two big ones, big one in New York and a big one at the Supreme Court, even though Barry Roberts did everything possible to undermine it.
	Let's do the I'll do the New York one, you do the Supreme Court one, because I'm much less familiar with that.
	The New York was obviously the Court of Appeals.
	It was unanimous on turning the quantum of the penalty, but not unanimous on turning the legality of the persecution itself.
	There was a dissenting decision, which is the legally righteous and the legally right decision saying that this was a political persecution from the get-go.
	This was in the Trump bank loan, high, inflating the value of his property so that he could procure more favorable loans.
	The Fed, the Fed, sorry, the state government prosecuting a civilly, a private actor between two private actors, despite there being no, no, no plaintiff, no claimant, no aggrieved party says, no, Trump has frauded the people by overvaluing his assets to get a more preferential bank loan from the bank.
	Although they said they were happy with it, they would have given the same deal on their own.
	Then New York nipple judge Engeron ordered.
	Angkoron orders a discourse to four, it was 360 million dollars.
	It came to like 460 with interest and all this other crap.
	In the appeal, the appeals court was reasonable, although if they knew that they were going to turn this to still order him to post a 150 million dollar bond is still obscene.
	But they basically turned the entire quantum, saying this is violative of the constitution, the excessive penalties and fines.
	And the only question is whether this goes up to a higher level appeal, do they turn the prosecution itself, which many believe to have been an obvious political vendetta because Letizia James campaigned off of it and did it.
	And the court upheld the legality of the civil, I don't want to say prosecution, but the civil trial itself.
	Robert, I mean, do we take a victory lap?
	They got it absolutely.
	We were dead right from day one.
	This was a ridiculous case.
	All the lefty law fair advocates look, I mean, they couldn't get a single liberal New York judge to approve it on appeal, the amount, not one.
	They couldn't get even the full blown Commons to say this verdict was legitimate, not one.
	They looked like a total disgrace.
	This case was so open and shut that even the Commons appellate judges.
	of New York had to recognize that the attempt to bankrupt Trump was utterly without a basis, factually or legally.
	So that was so huge win for Trump.
	And that I saw Donald Trump Jr. was trolling Leticia James, because remember, she put out the money and she put in plus interest and he put up, now he goes, yeah, you just need to modify that.
	It's now zero point zero zero.
	Well, I have two, two questions.
	People were asking this.
	Trump had posted $150 million bond.
	Interest accrues to that.
	Does he, does he get interest on his bond?
	Yeah, usually he does.
	Yeah, it depends on how it's done, but typically the interest is earned to the person who wins on the bond.
	Okay.
	is that there be interest accruing so that that money is secured for whoever prevails.
	Okay.
	And then the second question was, some people are going to say, Robert, this is us spinning it because the majority of the appellate level affirmed the legality of the prosecution itself, which is ridiculous.
	You see the meme they put in the chat they have the lounge court is open with the nipple judge.
	The let me get this.
	I have it on the tip questions.
	I don't want to lose those.
	So I'm just going to bring this up here.
	Let me see the because I mean, I agree with you.
	It's outrageous.
	They didn't agree that the whole case.
	Everything about it was garbage.
	I agree with the dissent that this was a garbage case from top to bottom, left to right.
	Yeah, it's that cloud courtesan session.
	That's exactly right.
	You know, credit to the great meme makers over at viva barneslaw dot locals dot com.
	Even Taylor Talix was back in the house recently, had some cool memes.
	They, yeah, we get We get cool fun memes every single day, which is awesome.
	But the I agree the dissent was right.
	The whole case is outrageous.
	But you know how outrageous it is when you can't get a single judge to buy in on the outcome.
	And instead their TDS was so compulsive that they still had to justify the case, even though they knew they couldn't justify the consequence that was being Trump couldn't care less about the court saying you're bad.
	He could literally care less.
	He would like there to be no conviction and no $500 million.
	The rest is all garbage, is all show.
	And this was the first confirmation that these show trials were the show disgraces that we said they were.
	And credit to him for that.
	Discredit to the New York Court for not exposing it and ending it forever, because all they've really done is green lit a future politically motivated.
	It's a wild thing to say, yeah, I'm going to call it a prosecution, even though it's a civil thing, but that it was righteous, but the amount was too much.
	And so we're not going to bring it down to a reasonable amount.
	We're just going to annul it.
	But don't worry, the process was fine.
	It's incongruous on its face.
	And it was the dissenting judge who said, What you had here was a private transaction between sophisticated private actors, both of whom did their own due diligence, both of whom were happy with the transaction.
	And this was never the intended purpose of the statute to allow the government now to go and review private transactions among sophisticated private actors.
	There's no other way around it.
	Now someone got a disgusting version of Judge Argeron Danting, which is really, really disgusting.
	You made a face that I've never actually seen before.
	Hold on.
	Oh, dear.
	Okay, everyone.
	This is a.
	Be prepared.
	Be prepared.
	Shock value.
	It's nipple warning.
	Let's just see it's booting.
	Like the computer doesn't actually want to.
	Yeah.
	Even the computer is disgusted by Judge Orgeron.
	Look at that.
	That was the look.
	I mean, if you need a shock in the morning, you need to wake you up.
	Just a little photo of Judge Orgeron by the bed will get it.
	That's disgusting.
	Okay.
	Sorry.
	So now that's the good news.
	They're going to appeal it so they can still, in theory, successfully appeal the invocation or the interpretation of the statute.
	What would it be?
	A full panel or a higher appellate level in New York?
	Yeah.
	The Court of Appeals of New York is the Supreme Court of New York, and they have not yet heard Okay, okay, good.
	So there's still time.
	This was the court of appeals.
	Maybe this was the court of appeals.
	No, this wasn't it wasn't I think I recall it wasn't a full it wasn't a full benchmark.
	It was it was I'll double check.
	That's one that was one of my questions as well is whether or not this can still because there is still an appeal on the merits of it being processed.
	So I'm just hoping that the dissenting judge can one day be right.
	Okay, the victory in the Supreme Court, this was on another one where, which case was this?
	This was the one we discussed being on the shadow docket of Robert Kennedy's grants.
	DA.
	Who he can who he can defund and who he can fire.
	Which one was it?
	It was who he can defund.
	whether he could cancel the DEI grants for NIH.
	Okay.
	And this was at the appellate level that they said it was.
	Well, we reached the Supreme Court because they were ordering him to continue to pay the grants, which is insane, directly contradicted prior precedent.
	Yet, despite that, so you have the three liberals who are all for anything against Trump.
	They've gone full TDS.
	Then you've got the four conservatives.
	Now Kavanaugh has joined Alito, Thomas, the and Gorsuch at opposing all of this nonsense.
	So it came down to the two establishment institutionalistsist, uh, Roberts and Barrett.
	Roberts voted for the three liberals, so he reversed his own decision from earlier this year about the proper place for these cases to be handled, probably reflecting a bias not just against Trump but against Kennedy is my guess from where Roberts comes from.
	And then Barrett split the baby and Barrett said, yes, it's the, it really should go to the, you know, Court of Claims and some other issues should be prosecuted in this way.
	So she was going to sign off on not requiring the administration to write checks to organizations violating federal civil rights law.
	But she didn't go full scale.
	She wouldn't go along with the four conservatives that said got this nonsense all once and for all.
	So they're continuing, Barrett and Roberts are continuing to try to carve out this institutionalist moderate middle that ends up being just mush.
	And so that's why the decision isn't as impactful as it should be.
	Still a good win for Trump, a good win for Kennedy.
	But it should have been a full scale win, and we can't get full scale wins because we can't bet on Barrett and Roberts doing the right thing consistently.
	I can just my very sophisticated on the road lighting here.
	Robert, let me bring up a bunch of the rumble rants, and then we'll get some of the tips afterwards.
	Can you explain how the bond system works?
	Can you make money from a bond?
	It's dependent on the state.
	Many states have eliminated bonds.
	is to secure your appearance.
	In the old days, it used to literally mean a physical bond.
	In other words, let's say Viva gets arrested, I would go forward and say, if Viva doesn't show up for his sentence, I will serve his sentence.
	So that's how a bond used to work.
	And you would literally physically replace the person being persecuted if they didn't prosecute, if they didn't show up.
	In the modern age, it's more monetary.
	It says that if the person doesn't appear for their trial, under the eighth amendment to the US Constitution, the only thing bail is meant to secure is their presence for punishment.
	That has been interpreted to increasingly meanly imposed all these conditions of release.
	And now they say Bond is to meet the conditions of release.
	Often becomes, as we pointed out, you pointed out the same thing this week.
	The mayor of New York wants a minority, literally wants to take the movie Minority Report and make it the future of policing in New York City.
	That, you know, people wondered what does a communist, uh, what is a Marxist Muslim approach to policing in modern time?
	It's full scale Minority Report.
	That's what it turns out.
	And people were saying, like, you know, these, these ambassadors, the outreach people, those are snitch lines.
	Those are snitch lines.
	That's exactly what that is.
	That's what they live on.
	I remember when I was in Cuba.
	They, hypothetically speaking, when I was in Cuba., they said that they said that there's, you know, they go for every twenty people there's twenty police officers or twenty snitches.
	Like literally they put snitches in every single neighborhood.
	So they're monitoring everything that's going on.
	So I've told people you can you can shut down the drug cartels if you become a totalitarian state.
	The only countries that have succeeded at massively reducing street crime are pure totalitarian countries.
	Well, I mean, I have a tradeoff.
	Your tradeoff is the cops become the criminals.
	Very little crime of certain types in North Korea and Cuba as well.
	But Robert, you're actually on that point, by the way, the engaged shooters.
	By the way, the Engage Shoe says this gift, this gift makes this gay man want to find a way to start liking women.
	Gabby Iglesias says, Barnes is wrong.
	I'm from Panama and we are happy that the USA took Noriega out.
	Latin America wants Maduro.
	At least that's the official line in Panama.
	I've worked extensively in Panama.
	I worked with lawyers in Panama and they were thrilled whenever they testified in the United States.
	If their name was spelled wrong because they said, Barnes, you don't understand.
	Something goes wrong for you here.
	Somebody sues you.
	Something goes wrong for me here.
	Somebody, I go out to my car.
	Somebody knocks on my head and I disappear.
	So that was a sophisticated Panama lawyer's perspective.
	So the idea that the Panama people just love.
	Just love, love the US's presence.
	Yeah, I'm sure they'll tell you that officially.
	Ask them behind closed doors.
	They have a very much more negative view, unfortunately, of the United, I mean, not entirely, but in general.
	The idea that they love imperialist daddy US coming in is delusional if you know many people in Central or Latin American public opinion.
	It's not if if we were to go into Venezuela, it would cause a massive backlash throughout Latin America.
	Randy Edwards has, is President Trump doing anything right asking for a friend?
	Oh, he does tons of things right.
	Yeah, do you know what it is?
	Some people will highlight where we are critical and conveniently memory hold.
	Memory hole, memento memory style like the movie Memento, memory hole, all the positive that we said for which we've taken tons of heap.
	Absolutely.
	I have, first of all, I said this with Trump is the best president of my lifetime and I think what your top three in American history is a radical change agent, hopefully wanting to be as transformational as possible.
	Point out the risks along the way that if he takes certain risks, things will explode on him, not just on the country.
	You can agree or disagree with the tactical assessment or the policy perspective, but the idea that the what is some of these people can't handle any criticism of Trump, can't handle any criticism.
	And so my question to those people would be, when was the last time you said any anything negative about Trump?
	Or are you in a kind of cultish?
	And if Trump does this or the opposite of it, in either way, you endorse it, chances are you in a cult.
	My line is he's one of the best presidents ever because he listens to the feedback from his, uh, and In fact, that's critical to him.
	His ability to perform depends on his supporters being honest with him, not cheerleading when he makes mistakes.
	Randy Edward also says, I for one do not know why she would accuse you two of being dorkes.
	Neither of you are ever at any of the meetings.
	Booboo Fiu says rapists and child molesters are very low in prison hierarchy.
	And Jetchi Jetchi says Viva Barnes.
	Any updates on Tina Peters in Colorado?
	She's stuck, still stuck in prison.
	Trump called her out, called out for what I think a third time, called out his own Attorney General saying, why isn't something being done?
	And they are starting to pick up on the message put out early on.
	So her case, Kurt Benchouv case, these other cases, two things, they're civil rights division cases because these are violations of people's federally protected civil rights using the machinery of the state legal system to do so.
	So I think Harmony Dillon has jurisdiction to investigate everyone in Colorado, including the judge who violated Tina Peters' federally protected civil rights.
	I think the same is true in Seattle in the Kurt Benchouv case.
	The same is true in many other law.
	In New York with the Dexter Taylor case.
	In New York with the Dexter Taylor case.
	Absolutely.
	Multiple cases.
	In all the cases against President Trump.
	And they appear to be doing that in the investigation of Letitia James, recognizing it's a federal civil rights investigation.
	It's the same for Tina Peters.
	It's the same for Kurt Benchouf.
	It's the same in these other cases.
	So I continue to urge them to take action for them.
	The president has now called on Bondi to do it three different times.
	I hope she finally gets around to it.
	Again, I don't have a ton of confidence.
	Though it does.
	I think it was a smart move bringing Bailey in over at FBI.
	Someone who you need people to understand.
	understand the legal system in this way a little bit better than I think Bondi does.
	That aside from her reputation as pay for play, Pam, which is problematic of its own accord, American Prospect was talking about that at the time of her nomination.
	I've pointed it out because there have been multiple high profile examples.
	Sadly, that's what she has done.
	She continues to protect Pfizer from its dangerous ineffective drug.
	It lied to the world about, including US taxpayers, about as a COVID vaccine.
	More information coming out from Japan by different medical doctors showing that as the rate of vaccination went up, the rate of death went up.
	And it directly corresponds to vaccination.
	So the evidence just continues to mount.
	Probably continues to do good work at HHS, but Bondi, you know, continues to cover for Pfizer along with others.
	So in the Brooke Jackson case, she continues to tell the federal court that case cannot be investigated because vaccines cannot be questioned, even though that has been completely reversed.
	This week, the gun owners of America were told by the civil division at the Justice Department that there was nothing that could be done about a reversing course on the Biden administration's policy on a range of gun policies.
	The gun owners of America called it out.
	And then people in Pam Bondi's office had to come out and say, no, that was a mistake what those people communicated.
	Our position is not to continue the Biden-era issues on the Second Amendment.
	But the reason why it's happening is not enough of the key allies of the Trump administration are in key positions throughout the Justice Department.
	And Bondi pays more attention to lobbyists than she does the voters.
	in my opinion.
	So the, you know, that's an area that needs to be improved.
	Now, one area they did get the message.
	It shows the power of public opinion despite people who don't like anything negative or critical or questioning of President Trump or his administration continues to pay off when it happens.
	You know, they wake up a little bit on Epstein.
	They wake up a little bit on these risky war efforts.
	They wake up a little bit on regime change efforts.
	They wake up a little bit on bad domestic policies like AI immunity that was back being proposed got killed thanks to public outrage.
	Well, another good one, I think you were one of the first people to really highlight this case, but we finally woke up the administration to the severe problem of illegal immigrants getting commercial driver's license and stealing jobs from truckers and endangering the American people.
	It's an amazing thing because like I, my knowledge, you start off with no knowledge and then you start learning enough to even know where you don't know, you know, even the questions to ask.
	And Gordon McGill, who's a, he's a Canadian, he's a been talking to me and messaging me like this over the last little while.
	And then when this happens with the Indian guy in Florida, how he's back in California and where he is now, I have to double check.
	And Gordon McGill says, this has been a problem for a very long time.
	They talked about a shortage of commercial driver licenses or commercial truck drivers, and it's a lie.
	What they want to do is create a supported shortage so they can import foreign labor and not people call us racists.
	The discussion was not just India, not Pakistan, Russia, Eastern Europe, Slovakia, Slovenia.
	import unskilled cheaper labor under the pretext that we need more of it so they can exploit them and make more you know be more profitable but people are dying left right and center on the roads as a result of this um yeah no it's it's it's it's certainly eye-opening to see and now people are getting sensitive to it and the trump administration is now pushing back on these policies and and doling out not you know justice and and preemptive uh measures to prevent similar tragedies in the
	future what did what did trump announce this week that they're they they shut down or they pulled the license of the company that employed this uh harjinder singh what else are they doing the a wholesale overview of the process by which commercial driver's licenses are issued to truck drivers and their companies.
	For example, they're supposed to pass an English test and this particular driver didn't and they passed him anyway.
	Well, they pulled, they pulled him over in New Mexico.
	He failed a roadside English proficiency test.
	He could barely read street signs.
	They let him go and he kills three people a matter of days later.
	Correct.
	And so that they need to strictly enforce those rules and start and the key with all these is go after the companies is the key.
	Going after the workers is only going to have marginal impact.
	You've got to go after the companies.
	If you stop, if you penalize the companies with civil penalties, revoking of the approval permission to issue commercial driver's license across interstate borders and the, and look at criminal prosecution in certain cases, you're going to shut this down overnight.
	And that's what they're starting to do.
	So, it was credit.
	I mean, the Court of Public Opinion got attention.
	Your interview with the truck driver that this was systematic.
	Well, he ended up on Steve Bannon actually afterwards.
	I mean, he's bigger voices in America than me.
	So, yeah, it is getting out there.
	And the thing is, Trump had implemented an executive order about English as a proficiency.
	I guess they just weren't enforcing it.
	Maybe there's too much to do, but it was the bureaucratsrats to know you could get fired or even get prosecuted if you don't start doing your job.
	So you're going to see a systematic shift which will protect our roads and protect our workers in a way that's great.
	And it highlights the problem of illegals, that the, I mean, commercial driver's licenses for truck driving is one of the highest paying jobs for working class men in America.
	And this, even this was being stripped by illegal immigrants.
	They were never supposed to have these jobs.
	And here's the feds have a lot of control over the CDLs because they cross state lines.
	So it's a very much a federally regulated enterprise.
	So they can strip them of their money overnight and shut them down overnight.
	And it looks like they're moving in that direction.
	So great, so good reaction from the Trump administration, but great, the Court of Public Opinion making their voices heard because this has been a problem, but it wasn't recognized as such until the Court of Public Opinion got its voice heard in Washington.
	Robert, let me read a few over here because there was one that I missed earlier.
	Kiki Blue said, Can you tell me if this Intel investment of a percentage of the company given freely, it seems, to the United States is the beginning of Trump fascism, possible bribery, or is this acceptable and done before like our history with tariffs?
	It doesn't sit well with me.
	There's a lot of people that doesn't sit well with it, and the devil's going to be in the details.
	So it's one thing to want to enforce these agreements to say, okay, Nvidia or Intel or someone wants to be able to trade with a particular country.
	We don't want them to trade with that country, but they say they have to.
	So we want them to invest in the US in exchange for us letting them trade with that country.
	How do we enforce that?
	We enforce it with some shared ownership of the company.
	So I get where the incentive is coming from, and I don't have a problem with that.
	But I agree that the question is the devil's in the details because as a whole, I don't like the idea of the US getting an interest in private companies.
	That literally is the legal definition of fascism is when the government and the corporations co own each other effectively.
	So I'm not interested in that kind of approach at all.
	And I'm concerned that Trump could get tempted by it, the way he got tempted by using tariffs for foreign policy rather than using them for economic policy, that he'll get tempted with, hey, I could own a piece of this company and this company and this company.
	You know, Trump could get or the US, you know, own it.
	And then there's a lot of risk in that.
	Now some people were saying, Oh, well, this will help them censor.
	Actually, it will make it harder to censor.
	The US government owns a share of a company.
	Anything that company does is much easier to allege as a state actor than when they're not.
	So that side is actually improroves being able to hold companies responsible for censorship once the US government is a shared owner.
	But I agree this.
	It also just came out of the blue.
	Like there, there wasn't much discussion about this idea or debate in the public court of public opinion before they just announced it.
	And the thing that looks bad is if you're a George Gammon libertarian type, you see Trump threaten the CEO of Intel, say he should be, you know, canned and then turn around and he's given the US government's given a ten percent share.
	And so from your libertarian perspective, they look at this and they don't like the message that that sends.
	And I think that's a problem too.
	So I understand where the Trump administration is coming from.
	and given more grace than their critics.
	But I understand the critics' perspective and the risks if this were to not be carefully cabined and controlled going forward.
	Real quick, Spygate versus Russia Gate.
	Spygate, I thought was So Spygate was what Russia Gate was meant to cover up.
	So Spygate was the that they used Russia, the false accusations of Russian influence to spy on Donald Trump.
	To spy on Donald Trump.
	Mueller comes in and covers up that fact by trying to legitimate Russia Gate.
	In other words, his goal is, how do I cover up the massive crimes committed against President Trump in Spygate.
	I pretend Russia Gate was real and I do everything possible to justify and rationalize.
	Hence the conclusion.
	I, you know, he's not incriminated, but he can't be exonerated and that, and that all that rationalizes and justifies Spygate.
	Exactly.
	Interesting.
	Can we do a fundraiser?
	Sometimes the investigation is the crime.
	Well, that's what I'm thinking.
	I mean, as you nailed with Pete did.
	Petey.
	Sorry, I think I lost you there.
	Okay.
	Yeah.
	You should be there.
	Okay.
	No, no, good.
	You're still here.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Can we do a fundraiser for a 7076 Pundit pol poll.
	I recommend a right track, wrong track shirt that has people pundit and quality pollsters as the right track and the bad polls are the wrong.
	That's Jamie.
	That's a good idea.
	I like that.
	Big O would love to see Roberts reaction to the translative Henry's Peter, Patrick Henry's speech in real time.
	How high up in the chain can we expect Trump to arrest the deep state?
	We already got to that Bill and Hillary never, but I don't think they'll go that far.
	Okay.
	If we raise social security age to 75, how much more funding can we guarantee for Israel?
	says a great 101.
	I get sarcasm.
	Okay.
	But Robert, what's left?
	It's not going to be a marathon tonight, but I haven't yet gotten the text that the family's coming.
	What's left on the menu?
	So we got the Maryland man back out again.
	We got AR 15s getting banned in Connecticut.
	We got Trump v.
	the International Criminal Court.
	We got so we got a lot of quick topics.
	Let's do it.
	Jim's getting sued over cancellation fees, those fake window seats on airplanes, now class action.
	I don't know if you saw the image of the DC prosecutor trying to escape justice.
	Oh my goodness.
	She fought like a, like a, like a bangy.
	It was crazy.
	They couldn't get her into the.
	Okay.
	So we're here.
	Kilmar Breggo Garcia, this judge and Obama appointed, only because I discovered it on chat GPT, I didn't know beforehand.
	The first black chief justice or something of Tennessee comes out and and I didn't realize it was him.
	I know him.
	Yeah, he he he he's a he's a hardcore lefty.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	He comes out and ratifies the release of Kilmore Obregu Garcia saying that he has seen no definitive evidence that he's tied to MS thirteen and that he's got 48 hours to get back to Maryland so that he can report to the ICE agents so that he can have his periodic I don't know check-ins while he's on out on bail to con while fighting the charges of human trafficking that were brought when he got back to America.
	I this is where I say like, okay fine.
	I don't agree with pretrial detention when someone's not a flight risk.
	And I guess this guy's, you know, he's not a he's not at risk of repeat human trafficking and maybe not he's at risk of repeat illegal alienism and he sure as hell is not a flight risk because he was fighting tooth and nail to come back.
	So I mean, I can understand it, but what do you what do you think of it legally in terms of authorizing his release pending the trial or pending the I have no problem with authorizing release under the eighth amendment.
	It's the ICE release that I have a problem with.
	He's still here illegally.
	That gives ICE the right to detain him, period.
	That's outside the coverage of the eighth amendment because he's not legally here in the first place.
	And that's what the judge is interfering with.
	Now apparently mister Marilyn Mand, as he's come to be known by the media.
	They're telling him either he can commit to detention here in the US or we're going to deport him to Uganda.
	I don't know where they came up with Uganda, but somehow they came up with Uganda.
	Like we're going to send your ass to Uganda, which I found kind of funny.
	And I have no sympathy for this guy.
	Not only is he human smugglers, they caught him with kitty porn, so you don't have to guess what kind of sick o this guy is.
	I got zero sympathy for this guy.
	You know, granted, everybody's innocent until convicted at the trial, but everything about this guy screams giggity giggity giggity guilty.
	The same way Boris Yeltsin used to say, Lil Lil Likor, the same thing.
	So my view is we'll see if he.
	But these courts continue to try to stop every form of immigration enforcement.
	How can the state enjoy federal detention?
	Well, it's a federal court.
	I'm an idiot.
	I'm an idiot.
	Forget it.
	Stupid.
	Scratch that.
	But you're right fundamentally.
	How can a federal court prevent ICE detention, which is deliberately stripped of federal courts having jurisdiction over it?
	They just keep pretending they have the jurisdiction anyway.
	And so now we're going to get into another fight.
	This Maryland man is going to get it.
	It's going to go on forever.
	This legal fight over this.
	But what a criminal.
	If you're a Democrat, do you want to make your standard bear a human smuggler caught with CP and domestic violence?
	I just made the joke that the Democratic Party is mister Maryland man.
	No, I'm just like, I'm sure his wife is so happy the judge sent him back into her loving face so that he can go and and and and, you know, abuse her like he did the last time she went to the police for it.
	We'll see where it goes and we'll see what he does while he's out on bail.
	Uganda is not a safe country, so I was looking to see if it was like one of the relatively safer ones.
	All right, now speaking of the now, of course, maybe he's not worried because if he is, if he, I mean, there is evidence he has MS thirteen ties.
	They just haven't introduced all of it.
	If he is, he doesn't have to worry about where he goes to be blunt about it.
	The, he's kind of why he's so nonchalant about it all.
	But things you used to be able to protect yourself with, you can't in Connecticut, because once again they used the Sandy Hook incident to justify taking away people's rights and liberties by covering up the corruption of the politicians that let Sandy Hook happen in the first place by not adequately funding its security and safety, a story they were able to permanently hide by running a show trial in the Alex Jones case.
	It was interesting your interview with James O'Keeffe that O'Keeffe was not fully aware.
	Just what a utter disgrace the Alex Jones case was.
	Here's the show trial.
	Let's deal with it.
	No, it's manufactured memoriesies in people, even people who pay attention to it.
	It's it's amazing thing.
	I love blowing people's minds with it when we're phrasing it the way, the accurately.
	But this is another case where the courts are coming out and, as far as I understand, effectively undermining the Bruin decision where Connecticut they're saying no high capacity magazines, no the restrictions on what were the restrictions?
	No AR fifteen's.
	No AR fifteen's, basically.
	And now, I'm not wrong on the level of the court.
	This was not Supreme Court.
	This was the appellate level.
	This was the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
	Okay.
	The Federal Court of Appeals out of the sovereign district of New York.
	But where they came out and applied the same historical test that the Supreme Court applied in Bruin, and then just came to the different conclusion.
	No, this was, this was a highly regulated weapon back in the day.
	Therefore, it's within the, within the bounds of the historical interpretation of the Second Amendment.
	It's just, it's just, it's just getting to the conclusions they want to get to.
	Absolutely motivated reasoning on steroids.
	The judge was John Walker.
	I've been in front of him before.
	He's a family relative.
	He's a Walker of the George H. Herbert Walker family comes from that family.
	Complete moron.
	One of the dumbest judges I've ever been in front of, which again, is not saying a whole lot when you're dealing with the Bushes, uh, because I mean, they, they, they, they all rode the special bus to school, uh, when it comes to moral IQ.
	So it's not a surprise that he would write such a ridiculous ruling, but it shows how little respect the lower courts have for Bruin, for that they have been constantly challenging it and escalating, escalating.
	I mean, to now they're saying that the one, the most common self-defense weapon in the world, an AR 15, can be completely banned within the meaning of the Second Amendment, according to the Second Circus.
	They announced they were going to defy it right after.
	So now they're just rationalizing it legally so that the Supreme Court is going to have to say, no, your interpretation of the historical interpretation of the limitations of the Second Amendment is totally won't, and we're going to turn it.
	Yeah.
	Now, speaking of wonky courts.
	Don't you think that's a funky court?
	President Trump continues to sanction the International Criminal Court for being the open disgrace that it is.
	Whether it's now they're focused on the International Criminal Court coming after Israel and the United States.
	They've also come after previously Yugoslavia and Russia.
	I've always considered them a joke of a body.
	They're not a deliberative body.
	They don't have reliable, consistent precedents.
	They're made up of a bunch of sarcastic lefty women who are like the worst.
	It's like combining Nurse Ratchet with a busy body, like a moral busy body, the kind that CS Lewis complained about.
	Combining the moral busy body of CS Lewis.
	I'm sitting there talking about the body of CS Lewis's text with the nurse Ratchet from the one flew over Cuckoo's nest.
	And that is most liberal democratic women in control today, especially on courts.
	Whenever I'm in front of, in front of judges, man, I'll tell you, it hasn't done anything for my chauvinism.
	I'll tell you that much.
	Chauvinism's got much, much worse.
	Much, much, much worse.
	I'm sitting there talking around with buddies and I'm like, maybe we should reconsider women voting.
	You know, you know, that kind of thing, right?
	Because you're in front of them and they're just so sarky and mean and stupid.
	And it's just, and it's clearly, you know, I've been in front of a lot of, you know, Walker was an idiot judge.
	He's a guy, so they've been in front of idiot male judges, to be clear.
	It's just these women liberal judges are the worst.
	And they're so over top about it.
	Like, you're your mother and they know they obviously know better when they obviously don't.
	But I'm glad Trump is trying to take some action against the International Criminal Court.
	We should just disregard them entirely because they're not a reliable, trustworthy court.
	These internationalist institutions are damaging and damaging of our political and public liberty long term, and we should disrespect them and disregard them more thoroughly and consistently.
	Same with NATO, same with the World Health Organization, same with the World Trade Or Organization.
	These globalist organizations we should run away from.
	America first, if it means anything, means nationalism and it means not globalism.
	As President Trump said, we will not die to the siren song of globalism.
	So they let's, it's a step in the right direction, but I would like to see more assertive steps of just discarding the ICC forever and for good.
	Robert, can we take the rest of the show over to the locals right now?
	Gyms are getting sued over cancellation fees.
	We got airlines getting sued over their fake window seats.
	We got a prosecutor trying to escape justice.
	You don't understand.
	I'm a prosecutor.
	I'm an AG.
	I'm an AG.
	What did you say?
	It was an AG, I think.
	I'm an AG baby.
	I'm an AG.
	I got it.
	I got it lined up for the best part of that video.
	And birthright citizenship.
	Somebody claimed they have it.
	A federal court said, no, you don't.
	It's good.
	Seventy years in the country.
	Pledge the oath.
	Five.
	It's going to blow your minds.
	The link is there, everybody.
	Robert, what do you have coming up this week for Rumble while we have the audience?
	Oh, the we'll have everything at viva barneslaw dot locals dot com.
	We have barnes briefs.
	We'll have a couple of those up this week.
	We have some hush hushes forthcoming on Vladimir Putin, on Zelensky, on Epstein, on Ghislaine Maxwell.
	We've got some Barnes Law School classes coming forward on the Freedom of Information Act and Freedom Planning and some other aspects for those that came to the conference last week, preparing and sending out special videos for them.
	So all of that, but everything will be up at vivobarneslaw dot locals dot com this week.
	All right, and we've just raided Codex, which is doing a 911 documentary, which looks fascinating.
	Actually, I'm going to have to go.
	I was only following the chat, not listening to it, but I'm going to go watch that.
	So I'll be, I'm going to try to, I should be live every day this week.
	Tuesday might be off or not at all.
	It's a Cracker Barrel.
	You still can because it's it's gone full like Hunter, Hunter, Hunter Biden Crack Barrel.
	They they they they they They've gone completely woke.
	It started in Tennessee.
	I love Cracker Barrel.
	And they're making it like a mainstream corporate bland establishment that loves LGBTQ, whatever.
	So Cracker Barrel will be dead in a year or two at this pace.
	So get good Cracker Barrel while you can still before the Commys destroy it.
	All right, we are going over to Vivivivarns Law dot locals dot com right now.
	I'm going to get to the remaining of the tip questions chat stuff over there and go watch the documentary.
	And everybody, I'll see you tomorrow.

▲