Viva & Barnes - CBS News "Debunks" The Blaze Pipe Bomber Story? Thomas Massie Threatened by Kash Patel? AND MORE!

Nov. 26, 2025 - Viva & Barnes

01:07:46

CBS News "Debunks" The Blaze Pipe Bomber Story? Thomas Massie Threatened by Kash Patel? AND MORE!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Ladies and gentlemen of the interwebs, for today's intro clip, if you are not familiar with a man named Hotep Jesus, you should be.
	And if you're not familiar with him, it means you're relatively new to the channel because I've had him on at least, at least once in person.
	He is a smart man.
	And here, he, and Tim Pooh, makes some darn good points about Candace Owens and her coverage of the Charlie Cook assassination.
	Behold.
	Come, nobody, I brought this up last night.
	How come nobody is asking whether or not she's involved?
	She's a suspect.
	Hold on.
	Like, honest question.
	I don't know about suspect in Charlie's murder, but isn't it strange that she's not being censored by YouTube despite as critical of Israel as she is or Spotify or Apple and that her own lawyers work out of the same building as the feds?
	Yeah.
	How come no one's talking about that?
	And that's an honest question.
	I'm not trying to make you assume anything.
	I'm saying for somebody who claims that you can't criticize Israel, she also brags she has the number one podcast worldwide.
	She's propped up on YouTube with millions of views and the other podcast platforms with no takedown.
	Nick Funtis is banned across the board.
	And then she accidentally points out that her own lawyers are registered the same address as the feds.
	She had a response to this, that it was just a registered agent.
	Well, no, that's what the internet slews.
	The internet slew said that, you know, they pulled the address from the Macron case and apparently that her attorney's office has a registered agent at that address, which happens to be the same address as the feds, right?
	FBI and other high-level intelligence agencies, et cetera, et cetera, right?
	But we got to zoom out and use Candace's logic.
	I want to pause it here for a second.
	I'm not totally familiar with that entire other sub, call it a sub-mini scandal of Candace Owens' lawyers being domicile, well, having their call it commercial domicile at intelligence offices.
	We'll get back to the how it is that Candace has the most popular podcast on YouTube, despite the topic that she covers.
	But this is the good point.
	Using Candace's logic, who's benefited the most from Charlie Kirk's assassination?
	It's been Candace.
	Her show's number one.
	Her show's number one.
	TPOSA is in just utter dismay at this moment.
	So TPOSA has to be taken off the table as a suspect.
	And we have to look at Candace because all she's done was, and this is messed up too, because if you are like really friends, like you toured the country with Sky, you were really friends and you're using his assassination for your own benefit and monetizing it.
	Like we just lost a great guy, Daniel, Daniel Naroditsky in the chess world, right?
	And most of the chess guys, when they covered Daniel, they took the monetization, either turned it off on a video or donated it to Daniel's fund.
	Yeah, I'll pause it there for one second to say that when you turn off monetization on anything on YouTube, it decreases its reach.
	And so the rationale, at least this is my experience, maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think I am, that the rationale is that YouTube's not going to waste its time, effort, algorithmic promotion to promote something off of which it's not monetizing.
	Now, there was some discussion a while back that YouTube was going to monetize even on content that was labeled demonetized, which was going to piss a lot of people off at the time.
	I'm not sure if they followed through on that.
	But turning off monetization actually only compromises or suppresses reach as far as I'm concerned.
	Donating the proceeds.
	Look, it's not because you're covering something that I think you need to donate, covering something that might be personal to you that you need to donate the proceeds.
	It's not because you're making money doing an analysis of something that you might have a connection to that you somehow become a grifter and need to give away the money that you make from doing what it is that you do for a living in order to prove that you're not a grifter.
	But the rationale that Hotep is adopting here is kind of interesting just to illustrate the absurdity of some of the accusations out there in terms of who profited off Charlie Kirk's assassination in order to cast aspersions or make suggestions of culpability or complicitness, if that's the word.
	Right?
	That's out of respect.
	She's not doing this.
	She's not taking the money.
	How is she monetized?
	Sponsors or YouTube?
	I don't know.
	No, no, but she's got YouTube ads and like mainstream normal sponsors.
	Right.
	I got to say, dude, I remember.
	I'm going to share that.
	You should have gotten to do anything.
	I'm not going to make that argument.
	I'm just wondering why it is that Nick Fuentes got deleted from Spotify and she's propped up and YouTube blasts her out to everybody.
	It's very suspicious.
	So the funny thing is, I've often talked about how the second I have any subject matter on Commitube that mentions the word Jew, Israel, Gaza, Palestine, anything, I noticed that it gets so algorithmically suppressed, even based on my own, what I believe are algorithmically suppressed views on Commitube.
	I remember I did a segment with Mark Grobert.
	I put the video out and it had, I forget what exactly it was about, but it had the word Israel in the title, Israel-Palestine Conflict.
	It was as though the video didn't exist on YouTube.
	It was as though it wasn't even being recommended or notifications turned on for, I think I got like 40 some odd thousand subscribers on Commitube that have notifications turned on.
	And I've noticed it consistently.
	You talk about Israel or Jews on YouTube and I say, it's algorithmic suppression.
	But the response I always say was, well, you know, Candace did that bit on the USS Liberty, USS Liberty, and that got millions of views.
	Candace does these podcasts on graphic events like the assassination, gets record viewership.
	And I said, maybe she's just doing something right and I'm not putting enough attention into titles or whatever.
	I don't think there's anything nefarious going on there.
	I just ultimately think at the end of the day, corporations like the prophets and they see Candace as profitable.
	She's not quite as edge lord as Nick Fuentes.
	And so they can rationalize keeping her on.
	She might have certain, I'm not saying this to be demeaning or degrading at all.
	It's just the way woke enterprises work.
	They might see some demographic reason to algorithmically promote Candace on YouTube, or she just does good work for whatever the work that she does, whether you like it or not.
	She's effective and she's got the eyeball.
	So she's doing something right, even if you disagree with what she's doing.
	But it is interesting.
	And I'm not sure if there's an exception being made for Candace, but Hotep makes a good point.
	Following Candace's reasoning in terms of suspicion, who profited from this?
	Well, they always suspect the wife whenever the husband is killed because of insurance and whatever, marital disputes.
	That was the twisted, morbid logic that people actually used to justify their attacks on Erica Kirk.
	They're casting aspersions on Erica Kirk.
	Sick, twisted fucking logic is what they used to justify that when I called them out for, well, well, Viva, you know, in 90% of the cases, the wife is behind.
	Yeah.
	Moron.
	That's in such cases as one which we covered a while back where a guy was stopped, executed basically in the middle of a road where a blockade was set up by some guy with a tire in the middle of the road.
	He gets out and he gets shot by a stranger.
	I'm like, yeah, it turned out the wife hired a hitman.
	Those types of situations.
	Anybody using those stats to cast aspersions on Erica Kirk is reserving themselves a special seat in hell.
	But the bottom line, following some of the rationale here, well, TPUSA stands to get some insurance proceeds, whatever.
	Or they received a record number of donations in the wake of the assassination.
	So they must have had, you're idiots.
	And following your own rationale, if that's the rationale, well, you know, someone could make the argument that by Candace's own rationale, key bono.
	Who benefits?
	She benefits.
	But in fairness to Candace, you know, she talks about what the trending issues are and she goes deep on them.
	And sometimes she even makes the issues trend, like with Macon's wife.
	Or she likes to say Macon's husband.
	Prediction on that defamation lawsuit stands.
	Good afternoon, people.
	How goes the battle?
	Viva Fry, former Montreal litigator, turned current Florida Rumbler.
	Starting off with the Candace stuff, not to get into internet drama, and we're not going to get into internet drama today.
	At least not the internet drama that I was having with Julie Kelly on Twitter.
	If you want to follow that back and forth, you can go back, you can go to Twitter and catch yourself up to speed.
	We are going to talk about the CBS movie.
	Is it CBS?
	I think it's CBS.
	Whatever is in the thumbnail on the book.
	Yeah, CBS News.
	Allegedly debunking the Steve Baker pipe bomb story.
	We're going to get into that in a bit, and it's going to be amazing because it's absolutely wild.
	We're going to talk about Fannie Willis getting the final spanking on the Fanny, where that entire case has now been dismissed.
	Better late than never.
	The process is the punishment, and the people responsible for the punishment of the process will never see the justice that they do deserve.
	And we're going to get into some other stuff.
	Now, we are live across Rumble, Twitter, only because it's, you know, whatever.
	And viva barnslaw.locals.com.
	A lot of you always ask, hey, Viva, how can we support the channel and the fine work that you do at the channel?
	Well, the one way, let me just get to the, let me just get to the, here we go.
	Am I on my good mic?
	Yeah, I'm on the good mic.
	Well, here's one way to do it, people.
	The links are all in the description.
	Right over here.
	You want to get a book, Louis the Lobster, is right behind me.
	You want to send something?
	Here's my P.O. box.
	Use that address the way it's designed because it's, you know, I don't know, whatever.
	You want to get some merch, you can go to vivafry.com.
	And if you want to use the new crypto tipping mechanism on Rumble, Revolutionary.
	You go to tip, you go to this is how you, if you have a Rumble wallet, this is what you use.
	If you want to tip with Bitcoin, gold, or USDT, well, you click on that, you click over here, you scan this QR code.
	And if you are already in crypto online, this is how to do it.
	Rumble is beta testing their app.
	And if you go to Google Play or the Google Apps or whatever the hell the equivalent is, they've got the app for Android.
	It's called the Rumble Wallet.
	You download the app and connect through to your Rumble account, and you'll be able to access all of this if you want to do it.
	Do it, test run it, beta test it.
	If there's issues, let Rumble know, let me know.
	Tweet tag, go to the Rumble webpage and add some, you know, whatever feedback you have there because they're beta testing it now for Android and it's going to be available on the other one there, Apple App Store, when it's ready.
	And it hopefully, fingers crossed, late December.
	And download the Rumble app just in any event.
	It's free.
	You can download the Rumble app.
	You get immediate notifications when your favorite content creators go live.
	Instant, immediate notifications.
	The amount of times that people say, Viva, I didn't get a notification.
	I was like, are you on a desktop or do you have the app?
	Get the app.
	It's amazing.
	And if you want Rumble Premium, think about that as well.
	All right.
	People, let's start with some of the fun stuff before we get into the really fun stuff.
	This is what I was going to start the show with.
	We've got the, well, I forget her name now.
	Hold on a second.
	Hyman is a Tish Hyman.
	And I hate, I'm not even doing it.
	I'm not reducing people to their race, their sexual orientation.
	It does, you know, people do it for basically one of two reasons.
	Either to discredit the person, like you'll notice in the back and forth with Julie Kelly, the amount of people saying, he's just a Canadian.
	Hey, dumbasses, I'm of a Canadian citizenship.
	I live in America right now.
	Even if I were in Canada, he's just a Canadian.
	He should shut his mouth and stick to the Canadian.
	Piss off.
	That's not a response to any of the substantive issues in debate.
	He's a Jew, not a response.
	What it is is a lefty talking point to discredit an individual based on identity.
	Much in the same way, the left and some factions of the woke right.
	Well, they don't.
	I'm joking.
	James Lindsay is now.
	Oh, yes, I got Viva to say woke right.
	Factions of the left use identity politics to, let me rephrase this.
	Factions of what is colloquially referred to as the woke right will use identity politics to discredit somebody.
	And then factions of the woke left will use identity politics to strengthen somebody's argument beyond the merits of their own argument.
	Well, he's gay.
	As a gay, black, lesbian Jew, I say the following, and it must be more true because I'm a gay, black, lesbian Jew.
	So, where am I?
	Am I on the holy crab apples?
	Where did my screen just go?
	So I say this.
	This has been up the entire time.
	I say this not to reduce Tish Hyman to a black lesbian.
	Whether or not it makes her points more legitimate or not, up to you to decide.
	I do like seeing Eric Swalwell get humiliated in front of a group of people.
	Listen to this and listen to the white savior complex of, I should say, white male savior complex when he says, I will protect you, Tish Hyman.
	I'll protect you.
	Listen to me.
	First man, you asked the most emotionally questions.
	I want to start with a few.
	I was a prosecutor in Help Bridge for seven years.
	And where justice was warranted and mercy was warranted, I showed it.
	And where, you know, stiff punishment was warranted because somebody got hurt, or I saw.
	Yep, where stiffness was warranted with Fang Fang McBang Bang.
	Yeah, he also showed that.
	Okay, sorry, I'll stop now.
	By the way, this annoys me.
	This pretentious, pseudo-artificial method of connecting with somebody.
	It's so performative.
	And I don't like Eric Swalwell.
	I will not be a governor that tolerates violence against women in our state.
	It used to be that a man showing his dick to a woman without consent was the definition of violence.
	It used to be that a man flashing his ding-dong to non-consenting females was harassment, intimidation, criminal activity, until it became celebrated if that man and his ding-dong thought that he was a woman and a mangina, whatever you want to call that woman massive.
	You know, it's a big, it's just a big clitoris at the end of the day, right?
	You know, six-inch penis.
	Leah Thomas flashing his intact genitalia in front of the Riley Gaineses of the world.
	Well, it's just a big, it's just, it identifies as a massive clitoris.
	And it's totally not just not wrong.
	You're a bigot for not liking it.
	You're a bigot for taking issue with it.
	Oh, yeah, but he'll always stand against violence to women while simultaneously promoting men flashing their genitals in front of women in women's locker rooms, women's spaces without the consent of these women.
	Now, as it relates to the issue of men, trans kids, men, particularly men, men, in women's spaces, harassing.
	You said it wasn't a thing.
	14 times you said it wasn't a thing.
	So I need you to show all the women of California that you're going to protect us.
	I'm going to protect them from identifying.
	I'm going to protect women.
	You know what you can do?
	Nobody needs your fucking protection, Swal.
	Well, just don't deliberately, by the way of legislation, expose them to harm.
	Let me continue playing.
	Are there going to be men allowed?
	But do you understand what he's saying right here?
	Because I used to be a lawyer.
	I can think like a scumbag scoundrel of a lawyer.
	Notice how he says no women are going to be harassed.
	I will not tolerate harassment because his idea of harassment is active harassment and it doesn't include passive genitalia exposure because that's not harassment.
	That's liberation.
	I will not, no woman should be harassed.
	Well, you're not being harassed if Leah Thomas, intact male, flashes his genitals in front of females.
	You're not being harassed.
	He's just being liberated and you're being a bigot.
	Now, if he starts whacking you with his wingwang, then it becomes harassment.
	If he starts hitting you or talking, you know, accosting you, then it becomes harassment.
	But if he's just getting changed in the women's locker rooms because he identifies as a woman, well, you're not being harassed there, Tish.
	So quit complaining.
	We need to know.
	No woman should be harassed in a locker room.
	Answer straight.
	Are there going to be women?
	Are you against men in women's locker rooms and sports?
	That's all you need to answer.
	I'm telling you, I don't want men in harassing you in a woman's locker room.
	I know.
	I don't want men harassing you in a women's locker room.
	I might let the men in the women's locker room because that's not harassment in my bastardized white male savior.
	I'm protecting you from your own bigotry, Tish.
	Don't you see?
	Eric Swallow is so benevolent.
	He's protecting you from your own intolerance.
	Hashtag sarcasm, just in case anyone didn't get it out there.
	It's happening all around America.
	There are 45 men in the women's prisons right now, raping them, kicking them out like chickens.
	But trans men are not women and they're raping women.
	So I don't care if you're on the Democrat side, the Republican side.
	We need to be on the women's side, people.
	I'll pause it there.
	Even if it was not the case that you have women spontaneously getting pregnant as trans, whatever, as men are locked up in women's facilities with women, even if women were not getting raped by men purporting to be women, the mere fact that you have intact men flashing their genitals in front of non-consenting women is the criminality, is the harassment, and is what was once upon a time when I was a kid totally illegal.
	Sorry, let me make the screen.
	It's happening to our girls.
	It's happening to our women.
	And I'm here to let everyone know that this is happening.
	Who can y'all hide?
	I'm sorry.
	There are millions of people behind you, black people, who they're using our civil rights to push this shit?
	If you want to be the governor, you need to do something about it because I promise you this.
	I will not be the last to see a fish.
	Okay?
	Thank you.
	All right.
	I want to hear that again.
	You're very handsome, by the way.
	I'm going to protect you.
	There are no trans kids that are just children.
	Stop transforming children.
	No one can make a decision that young.
	When I was 12, I would have transformed.
	I'm going to be honest.
	Can you trans children?
	Who the who said that?
	I don't need to belabor the points that we've made over and over again.
	Trans children.
	Children can't get tattoos.
	They can't smoke.
	They can't drink alcohol.
	And yet they can consent in the minds of these idiots to life-altering, life-altering treatments.
	And, you know, people claim, you know, I'm a transfer.
	First of all, I'm not.
	Like, everyone growing up, let me play this out.
	Oh, it's wrong.
	It's abuse.
	Don't trans children.
	It's abuse.
	Enough.
	Shut up, woman.
	Someone said, every one of us growing up, once upon a time, had someone in our family, more or less direct, that was a cross-dresser.
	When we were kids, we called them cross-dressers.
	I don't know if there's a difference, you know, technically between a cross-dresser and a trans person because I guess it depends on the level of transformation that you go through.
	Adults, do whatever the hell you want and more power to you.
	There's no reason.
	If you want to tattoo your face and your eyeballs, go ahead and do it.
	I wouldn't do it, but that's only because of my own preferences.
	You want to be, you identify as whatever you want.
	Be the Caitlin Jenner and God bless, Godspeed, and may you find happiness.
	Transing children is child abuse, period.
	Promoting that among children is psychological abuse.
	And the idea that you would empower a child who cannot consent to contract, who cannot consent to life-altering body transformations, i.e., tattooing, you're not empowering them.
	What you are is a Dr. Mengele, Shouten Freud, not Shauden Freud, what is this called?
	Munchhausen by trans proxy, a monster of an adult who enjoys having such control over children, you can allow them, you can empower them to destroy themselves and feel as though you've done it in some sick, sadistic way while cloaking it in listening to the children.
	Sorry, the adults don't listen to the children.
	The adults educate the children.
	And I should say more specifically, the parents.
	Teachers educate the children as well, but the teacher does not listen to the child and the parent does not listen to the child any more than the therapist or the psychiatrist or the psychologist listens to the patient.
	You hear them, you understand what they're saying, and then you, in your professional expertise, treat them.
	And you, in your professional capacity as a parent, raise them.
	You're not raising your kid if you're listening to your kid.
	Your kid is training and raising you.
	So that's that.
	It was an interesting.
	She's amazing.
	And she's getting out there and she is doing the legwork at the ground roots, the grassroots ground level.
	People say, what can I do?
	That's what you can do.
	And she has to sit there and get lectured by a man and then berated by a, I don't know if it was a woman, berated and say, no, ma'am, we're going to protect you from your own bigotry.
	I love it.
	I'm actually going to, I'm going to keep that one.
	All right.
	Old man Toby's in the house.
	He says, Viva, I thought you did a great job interviewing that lady earlier this week.
	Why do you think she's got so upset with you?
	Seems like she was upset and she got scooped more than the blaze was wrong.
	So old man Toby, we'll get into it.
	That's, I don't want to get into the whole back and forth.
	It's ugly and dirty because, you know, I don't, I talk to people and so many people privately that you never know because I would never tell you.
	I would never tell you unless there's some very compelling reason to tell you.
	Like someone's lying about me and I'm like, no, dude, we have a back and forth and you're lying and here's the evidence that I need to disclose by way of our communications to prove that you're lying about me.
	It's the only, you know, and urgency and whatever.
	I had Julie Kelly on last week.
	We talked, and I thought I disagree with her.
	I disagree with her logic.
	I think I fundamentally showed the flaws in her logic.
	And some, you know, maybe she understood that and maybe she's embarrassed.
	Maybe it's defensive.
	But maybe, and this is the angle that I didn't truly appreciate, there's a jealousy among journalists as to who gets the scoop and who breaks the story.
	And you get so infatuated chasing that big shiny metal, to quote Wreck-It Ralph, that A, you want to be right and it means disproving the guy who might have broken the story properly.
	And there's also just some obvious clear animosity between Julie Kelly and Stephen Baker, Kyle Serafin.
	And there's no animosity between me, but she went effing nuts.
	Ad hominem, insulting.
	And it's a fun back and forth.
	You can go back on Twitter if you want to watch it.
	All that to say is that I had on Julie Kelly last week after having had on Kyle Seraphin November 10th, and we talked about all of this stuff.
	I heard what Kyle had to say.
	I heard what Julie had to say.
	I know what I believe fundamentally.
	And what I might believe, what I believe might be wrong.
	And if it's wrong, I'll say, oh, okay.
	A, I was wrong.
	And that's fine because the idea that people should fear being wrong is ego and insecurity.
	You want to fear being wrong for avoidable reasons, or you want to fear being wrong for wrong reasons.
	So like you overlooked something, you disregarded something, you didn't do proper work, you didn't do proper research, you were blinded by whatever, or you, you know, whatever.
	If I'm wrong on what is the most plausible explanation of the pipe bombing story as broken by Steve Baker, so be it.
	As we're going to do right now, I'm going to put on blast CBS News purporting to have debunked Steve Baker's Bonshell expose of allegedly having identified the pipe bomber.
	And now to backtrack it all the way to the beginning, Steve Baker, allegedly in his expose that he published in The Blaze, identified the Jan 6 pipe bomber.
	I say, I've never mentioned her name because A, I can't remember her name.
	And B, it's also irrelevant.
	Steve Baker put out a piece after having checked with legal.
	It was logical, relatively compelling, and raised some serious issues about the official narrative in any case.
	And his argument was that it was a Jan 6 Capitol police officer who he identified by way of gate analysis, which is in fact a legitimate form of analysis.
	You know, it's sort of like fingerprint.
	I don't know if it's more or less reliable than fingerprint in the criminal law industry, but it's a legitimate form of identifying someone based on their walk, based on their, you know, their gait, which is how they walk and what limps they might have, whatever.
	And there's various ways of assessing gait.
	Like if you can get cell phone footage, cell phone data, like your gyroscopic movements of your hips are very, very unique.
	So Steve Baker, by way of gate analysis, identified who he thinks is the culprit.
	He may be right, he may be wrong.
	One thing that's for certain, however, undisputed, even Julie Kelly acknowledged it, is that the person that Steve Baker identified as allegedly being the pipe bomber was definitively, the same person definitively, by all accounts, and it's, I don't think it's disputed,
	was one of the Capitol police officers who is seen firing on the protesters, the Jan 6, I say protesters for lack of a better word, firing on them with rubber bullets in a manner that was described as qualifying as unlawful use of deadly force because of where those bullets were being aimed.
	So I say, one way or another, I mean, the idea that like Steve Baker is going to get sued by the woman for defamation, it's like, okay, it might happen.
	Who the hell knows?
	Thus far has not even been, as far as I know, a request for a retraction.
	But if the woman, if Steve Baker's wrong, so be it.
	It's nonetheless the same woman who, based on analysis, is on footage, camera photographs, unleashing what experts qualify as potentially lethal use of force on the crowd.
	And some would argue in order to incite the crowd into some form of retaliatory violence.
	Okay.
	I had on Steve, did not have on Steve Baker.
	He has not yet done many interviews off Blaze that I know of.
	I had on Kyle Seraph and then I had on Julie Kelly.
	And Julie Kelly's argument was that it's not her, the person that Steve Baker identified, because what was the reason that she gave that her explanation was that she hadn't seen the expert analysis of the gate, the gate analysis, the evidence.
	hadn't seen it, except there was some that was disclosed, the limp, which was favoring the right foot, the height, 5'7, which is the same height as the pipe bomber, and some other issues of proximity.
	So Julie Kelly wasn't convinced.
	And Julie Kelly has her own theory, which is that the pipe bomb wasn't actually placed at the time the FBI says it was placed.
	It was actually placed the next day.
	You know, according to Baker's theory, the pipe bomb would have had to have been placed on January 5th and not January 6th.
	Julie Kelly's theory is that the pipe bomb was placed on January 6th by the woman she believes did it, who she more or less identified, but I forget her name as well because I don't care about her name, but the one who claimed to have found it while she was going to do her laundry, Julie Kelly has, you know, thinks that's suspicious, that story.
	So that's her theory.
	And the one thing I said to Julie is like, I said, you know, we had this whole back and forth about how the FBI then cleared an individual person of interest too, who was the one taking pictures and took a picture of the very same dumpster where the bomb was found the next day.
	That individual was cleared by the very same corrupt FBI that we believe is behind the Fed surrection.
	Julie believes that exoneration and yet simultaneously doesn't even believe that FBI or even the current FBI for that matter as to their official timeline of events.
	Okay.
	CBS News puts out a story yesterday purporting to debunk Steve Baker's story.
	What's even more amazing about it, Abudit, what's even more amazing about it is that it's more or less of an attempt to discredit Steve Baker's story.
	It actually is more of an attack on Tulsi Gabbard and the ODNI.
	Now, because I'm an idiot, do I have, where is the article?
	I'm going to get to, I'm going to have to pull up the article I thought I had in the bug.
	CBS News, pipe bomber.
	Let's just get this right here.
	Oh, yes.
	How an innocent woman's name, listen to this.
	And if you know the way CBS News works, it's not because how an innocent woman's name was tied to the Jan 6 pipe bombs.
	Let's walk through this, shall we?
	By Jennifer Jacobs, Pat Milton, Ardem Farhe.
	A federal security officer linked to a thwarted Jan 6 pipe bomb attack cleared her name by providing an alibi.
	This is not the Babylon B people.
	This is real.
	A federal security officer linked to a thwarted Jan 6 pipe bomb attack cleared her name by providing an alibi.
	Video of her playing with her puppies at the time the devices were placed, sources told CBS News.
	We're going to get back to that in a second, people.
	This was five years ago.
	She would have allegedly have just been cleared within the last three weeks since Steve Baker posted the story.
	She would have been cleared based on a video of her playing with her puppies at the time the devices were placed five years ago.
	So the questions that I have, which I would love the FBI to answer, first of all, the FBI has yet to formally confirm this story.
	So that's another question I've actually asked via social media.
	You know, the FBI rapid response is very quick on responding to certain stories.
	Can they confirm or deny this?
	But let's just set aside the FBI confirmed this.
	The idea is that she cleared herself by providing an alibi.
	She was playing with her puppies at the time the bombs were placed.
	Okay.
	Does she have the same cell phone that she had five years ago?
	Is my question.
	I don't know.
	And this is, you know, a first world luxury.
	I don't know anybody on earth who's got a five-year-old phone.
	And I'm not saying this is a snob.
	I'm sure there are, you know, actually, I shouldn't say that.
	I know a few people who might have a phone that's five years old.
	I don't know many people who have a phone.
	Dangerous site.
	That is five years old.
	Let me just go back.
	We're going to come back to that in a second because I don't know what the heck just happened here.
	CBS News.
	Is this a real?
	So that's one question.
	She has the same phone from five years ago.
	The other question is: how do they check the metadata on that video?
	The third question is: where was that video?
	Is that video posted on social media?
	Is that video still on her phone?
	It's one thing to have the same phone from five years ago.
	There are data issues.
	I mean, I go through one terabyte every four months or five months on my phone.
	The excuse is laughably insane.
	When were the pipe bombs placed?
	According to the FBI, it was like, I want to say seven o'clock.
	It might have been 17.
	It was the evening before January, on January 5th, in the early evening.
	Okay, let's get back to the article because it's hilarious.
	All right.
	The FBI has now ruled her out as a suspect in the 2021 plot, according to three sources, but only after her name circulated on social media and platforms and conservative news sites.
	Now, the three sources don't mention if it's FBI as one of the three sources.
	It could very well be her lawyer, her mother, and her best friend.
	I don't know.
	I'm just making that up.
	It doesn't say that it was confirmed by the FBI.
	How an innocent woman's name came to be publicly linked to the unexploded pipe bombs is a question that has raised concerns among some senior officials of the Trump administration.
	CBS News is not naming the security officer or her workplace.
	Well, this is public knowledge that the person Steve Baker alleged identified as the potential pipe bomber was hired by the CIA.
	This was even discussed with Julie Kelly, who acknowledged that whether or not this identified person is the person who planted the pipe bombs, Julie Kelly and I both agree that she violated the civil rights of the protesters by using potentially lethal force on them by firing her rubber bullets and pepper spray at above shoulder levels of the crowd.
	They won't identify where she works.
	Well, that's some great effing journalism, CBS.
	How about you say that she went from Capitol Police to the CIA or whether or not she works at the upper levels with Ratcliffe or she's, what do they call it?
	A campus security at the CIA?
	She went to the CIA.
	Oh, you know what?
	You don't want to identify that?
	Because you don't want to be unfair to the person.
	First of all, even Baker's article said, you know, 90-some odd percent certainty.
	And when I was discussing, I was like, all right, well, that's, you know, 8% chance that he's wrong.
	They don't want to identify her workplace and they cloak that as responsible journalism when in reality, ignoring the fact that the person who, pipe bomber or not, fired on the protesters and is now employed at the CIA is relevant for everything.
	Federal agency, she protects, declined to comment.
	So federal agencies, she protects, declined to comment.
	So the CIA refused to comment.
	As far as we know, the FBI hasn't commented.
	Listen to this.
	Multiple sources said the unit overseen by the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, drafted a memo.
	Now we sort of understand how much more credible, like they purport to debunk Steve Baker's story.
	Now we understand how much more credible it actually is because whether or not it originated within the DNI or whether or not Baker got his leave from the DNI, it seems that the DNI drafted a memo suggesting this person might have been the person.
	Multiple sources said, okay, Tulsi Gabbard drafted a memo identifying the woman and describing allegations that she had placed the explosive devices outside the Democrat, the Democrat and Republican Party offices.
	The memo was written after ODNI was made aware of allegations from an outside source, an ODI spokesperson said.
	ODNI officials said the agency received a tip from a person affiliated with a media organization about a potential criminal wrongdoing.
	So it might be that Baker thinks he broke the case, reaches out to the ODNI, and they draft a memo potentially identifying this person.
	All right.
	Copy of the unfinished memo was given to senior staff at the security officer's officers' workplace.
	Sources said it also circulated among a few Trump administration officials, building expectations that the nearly five-year-old case might be solved.
	But the memo caught some officials at the FBI, Justice Department, and White House off guard, the sources said.
	What's interesting is you recall in the Charlie Kirk assassination, Kash Patel was alleged to have gotten angry at Joe Kent and Tulsi Gabbard for investigating a potential terrorist link to the Charlie Kirk assassination.
	So this is not implausible on its face.
	It's coming from CBS News, so I'm inclined to think everything they have to say is a lie, but this is not implausible based on other reporting of other incidents that we've heard.
	ODNI oversees the nation's foreign intelligence gathering, has limited domestic investigative authorities.
	The FBI is leading the pipe bomb investigation.
	A short time after the unfinished memo began to circulate, the conservative news outlet, The Blaze, published details similar to those in the draft, including the woman's full name.
	The November 8th, Blaze News article claimed that it had pinpointed the woman after a review of video evidence and gait analysis.
	Software matched her walking pattern to the gate of the person shown.
	In the surveillance footage, who authorities suspect planted the bombs outside the party offices January 5th.
	Blaze News said its work has been confirmed by several intelligence sources.
	Several sources told CBS News that the classified draft memo, classified, doesn't mean it's accurate, it's classified, which was an on-ODNI letterhead was written by Paul McNamara, who's the head of the director's initiative group, which is tasked with providing transparency and accountability.
	Spokesperson Olivia Coleman said, ODNI followed its obligations to report information received concerning the alleged activities of a member of the intelligence community to that person's employing agency.
	After a whistleblower came forward with an allegation, ODNI documented the accusation and lawfully reported it, fulfilling our legal duty to alert appropriate agencies when alleged potential security concerns are brought to our attention.
	Coleman said there was no predetermined conclusion, conclusions, or assessments made, and every action taken was done so in consultation with legal counselor.
	Blaze became the subject of extensive media coverage and discussions on social media, especially among supporters of Mr. Trump.
	So the pot, let's see, the bombing planting incident is one of the lingering mysteries surrounding.
	It's a mystery, a mystery, my ass.
	ODNI officials also said the draft memo hadn't been reviewed or approved by agency leadership.
	It's amazing what they're trying to do is sow discord now among the ODNI and make them look incompetent, make them look like there's internal conflict.
	Sources said the situation, this situation and others were viewed internally by some senior administration officials as interfering in areas that were beyond the purview of the National Intelligence Director's office.
	Axios reported, oh, was this one?
	Yeah.
	Axios reported in September that Justice Department officials believed ODNI had hindered their case against former CIA director John Brennan.
	New York Times in October reported that ODNI had accessed FBI investigative files regarding Charlie Kirk.
	So this is the debunking, by the way.
	Like, understand everything that we just read in that article.
	95% of it was a hit piece on the ODNI.
	The debunking was a video of the alleged person identified by Steve Baker playing with her puppies at the time the bombs were allegedly placed.
	Like, I'm not privy to any internal information.
	I have been sent other people's hard work, which I'm not going to disclose because it's their hard work that they should break to the extent that this is ever confirmed by the FBI.
	But when the alibi is someone playing with their puppies at the time the bombs were placed, well, some investigative journalists might want to say, all right, how many dogs does this individual have today?
	Unless some of those puppies went the way of Christy Noam puppies.
	Bada bing, bada boom.
	I'm sorry, I couldn't avoid that joke.
	How many, playing with puppies is multiple animals of a certain age.
	How many, how many, how many dogs does the suspected person have currently?
	And how old were they at the moment the pipe bombs were being placed?
	I'm sure CBS News looked into that.
	I'm sure other people are like, oh, well, it's debunked.
	Move on.
	Sue Steve Baker have looked into that.
	We'll see.
	But the debunking is based on one line in the first paragraph.
	The alibi is a five-year-old video allegedly with the metadata, allegedly, at the time the pipe bombs were placed, allegedly.
	That is the alibi exonerating.
	And now we can all move on and say, well, they did what they could.
	And then bringing it back to the disagreement with Julie Kelly when I had her on.
	And she's like, well, I don't even believe the timeline.
	It's like, okay, so I asked her, you know, in light of this article, if you don't believe the pipe bombs were placed at the time that they were placed at, how does this alibi actually exonerate the person?
	If anything, this now adds, even if you thought the pipe bombs were placed the next day, this would strengthen or at least leave intact the theory against the individual.
	They don't have an alibi that even fits with the belief.
	If Julie Kelly believes the pipe bombs were placed the next day, this woman showing that she was playing with her puppies, plural, of a certain age, at 7.45 on January 5 because of the metadata on a video, doesn't absolve her if these pipe bombs were in fact placed at another time.
	And then the one question which we didn't actually get an answer to is during the interview with Julie Kelly, at least, was the evidence that allowed them to come to the determination, the FBI, that is, that the pipe bombs themselves were in fact placed at that time.
	They have the picture of the person in the hoodie.
	The question that I don't yet have an answer to, or I'm not sure about, is when they say they were placed at this particular time, is it because they have video footage of the individual in the hoodie putting the package down at that particular time, or they're just guessing based on whatever.
	But now, you know, speaking of, am I going to go into the entire video?
	Mike Benz was on Benny Johnson.
	And I won't play the entire thing.
	I'll just read, I'll give you the link to the tweet and I'll read you the summary of what Mike Benz says.
	Look, it's not complicated if we want to get to the bottom of the Jan 6 pipe bomber.
	Mike Benz sends a direct message to the FBI and the DOJ on how to immediately fix the J6 pipe bomber crisis and deliver transparency to the American people.
	One, upload all 39,000 raw files of the pipe bomber from different angles.
	They have 39,000.
	If you ask me, it is impossible that they cannot find the pipe bomber.
	And it's impossible that they do not know who the pipe bomber is.
	Whether or not Steve Baker got it right, we'll find out sooner than later.
	He made a compelling case.
	And there's a lot of coincidences that come out of his compelling case that are astronomical in their improbability.
	39,000 raw files.
	Upload them.
	Upload all 400 plus interviews the FBI conducted.
	Redacted as necessary.
	Upload the FBI, all FBI and DOJ forensic assessments.
	Upload every internal DOJ email and text message relative to the case.
	Run an internal search on main FBI agents and DOJ officials in charge of the investigation.
	Trace the physical chain of custody for the cameras and footage.
	Request all data from the pipe bomber's phone.
	Well, that would presume that they know who the pipe bomber is or the suspect.
	Let us bring your long arm of the extension to help.
	Let us be your long arm extension to help with this.
	By the way, the term autists at 4chan could figure this out in a heartbeat.
	Let us be the long arm.
	That gives us something to do with the real evidence and real facts to add to our public body of record while continuing to run the traps internally.
	We're over four years past it.
	You can't hide behind ongoing criminal investigations anymore.
	This has been four years.
	Help us help you.
	Some might say that the deliberate nefarious plan is to let the statute of limitations run on this because of reasons, which I have no idea about, but that is one of the conspiracy theories.
	There's a link to the tweet.
	Now, also, an interesting thing in terms of allegations.
	Thomas Massey, I'm going to play the entire thing, and I think it's important to play the entire thing.
	Listen to this.
	Also, I'm going to say this here on camera because it's important.
	One of Kash Patel's staff threatened my staff with a criminal investigation if we didn't straighten up play ball.
	I was going to ask you about that, but since you brought it up and I didn't.
	I'm bringing it up.
	Okay, you brought it up.
	And so like a criminal investigation having nothing to do, he said it was going to be a fraud.
	We're going to investigate one of your staff for fraud.
	And he told another one of my staff this.
	If you guys don't straighten up, you know, if you want to play hardball, if this is how you want to play it or something like that, this member of your staff is going to get criminally investigated for fraud.
	A very specific threat.
	Right.
	And that had just happened.
	So I told Bongino, I said, one of your guys is threatening my guys with an FBI investigation if we don't do what you want.
	And he said, I'll take care of that.
	I'll take care of that.
	Because even he understood that was not a good look.
	It's probably illegal, right?
	So, but let me so the fallout of that is the FBI employee who threatened my staff.
	I have to tell you all this, by the way, Steve, and I have to tell all the listeners this, because this is the context in which I'm worried for the whistleblower.
	If they're willing to retaliate against a congressional office, which has speech or debate immunity and a lot of other protections, they may be willing to retaliate against the whistleblower.
	Now, let me bring up the tweet because it's somebody, it's got all of the also, I'm going to say this here.
	All of the telltale signs of idiocy in the banner, anti-fascists.
	I believe they're on Blue Sky as well.
	Yeah, Blue Sky, there we go.
	And the Ukrainian flag in bio.
	So you can forgive the person for getting something wrong.
	Cash threatened Massey's staff with an FBI investigation over Epstein.
	Bingo Bongo tried to clean it up.
	It's probably illegal, right?
	Well, I listened to what Massey said.
	First of all, it wasn't about the Epstein debacle.
	This was about the Jan 6 pipe bomber, allegedly, if you believe Massey.
	Bingo Bongo didn't try to clean it up.
	It sounds like Bingo Bongo, Dan Bongino.
	I'm not using that term to call him a Dan Bongino.
	It sounded like he has the integrity that I sincerely believe he has.
	And he's like, this isn't right.
	I'll fix it.
	I'll take care of this.
	Not in the sense of covering it up.
	I'm going to go talk to somebody if this actually happened.
	I don't know that we've had an actual confirmation or denial from the FBI.
	This is Thomas Massey's affirmation in an interview with Steve Baker.
	Some will say Steve Baker has an interest in potentially this narrative.
	I don't know that the FBI's and Kash Patel have confirmed or denied this.
	But even listening to that, first of all, it was about the pipe bomber allegedly.
	And it sounds like Dan Bongino is like, this is not how things are done at the FBI and did what he had to do.
	But this does not sound like an FBI under the director of Kash Patel that is doing everything he can to use the aggregate knowledge of whistleblowers and independent journalists.
	This sounds like a Kash Patel who gets angry when Joe Kent and Telsey Gabbard impede or encroach on the Charlie Kirk investigation.
	And allegedly, arguably, when we saw the back and forth on Twitter a little bit where Thomas Massey said, look, it looks like there's some retaliation against the pipe bomber whistleblower.
	But at the end of the day, what I find truly surprising is the FBI rapid response rapidly responds to certain things, but not to others.
	Does the FBI and Kash Patel have a statement on what Thomas Massey is saying?
	I'm not taking Thomas Massey at his word here at all.
	This is what he said.
	I don't think I'd be shocked if he would lie about something so big to such a massive audience.
	Was there a misunderstanding?
	Was it a rogue element?
	You know, a young gung-ho, young dumb, and full of testosterone individual at Kash Patel's FBI thinking he was doing the good work for Kash Patel.
	Did it happen?
	Is there a response?
	Is there a response to the CBS news article?
	And is the FBI actually going to make the argument that the exonerating piece of evidence, the alibi, is a video of the suspected person playing with puppies on January 5 at 7.45 at night on the eve of Jan 6?
	We'll see.
	That debunking is no debunking at all.
	It's almost laughably stupid and almost as laughably stupid as the alibi.
	It couldn't have been me.
	I was playing with my puppies at 7.45.
	And here's the video on my iPhone.
	Good, sir.
	Look at this.
	That's me.
	Those are my puppies.
	Yeah.
	All right, let's get to some of the tipped questions over at Crumble and viva barneslaw.locals.com.
	Start from the bottom up.
	Old man Toby Viva, I thought you did a great job interviewing the lady.
	Okay, thank you.
	King of Bill Tong says, happy Thanksgiving to the Viva and Barnes Law crew and all the Rumble supporters.
	Grateful for your support and love of real Bill Tong.
	Have a great turkey day from Bill Tong USA.
	Hans One Pack says, how did she become suspect in the first place for Baker?
	How does she become suspect in the first place for Baker?
	I don't know exactly how if it was, I have to double check that.
	I don't know if it was just cross-referencing height and things like that.
	I don't know to answer that off.
	And I can probably get an answer pretty quickly.
	In fact, someone might, if they're watching, might be texting me in real time.
	Anyhow, we'll see.
	I'll find out and I'll actually answer that question later.
	Viva, I just want to wish you a happy Thanksgiving and say hi to your twin Vincent O'Shaughnessy TZ Burton.
	Thank you very much.
	And we're going to go over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com before we get to the next item of the day and see what's going on over there.
	Bring Minime back.
	Okay, get this.
	Okay, all the way to the bottom.
	Viva, why does she sound like Bernie?
	Okay, I don't know what that's about.
	All right.
	Well, we'll get that back there in a second.
	All right, let me see what else is going on that we have in the backdrop of stories for the day.
	You know what I got to do?
	I got to refresh over on Viva Barnes Law.
	Oh, hold on.
	I got, I got, I got kicked out.
	That might be why I was not up to log in.
	I've been logged out of my use password.
	No, I don't want to use password.
	I want to use my fingerprint.
	Here, here, login.
	Okay, give me one second to get back into the stream in Viva Barnes Law.locals.com.
	And we got.
	Oh, you murdered an imperson of the lady.
	Sounded like Bernie Santa.
	Well, all of them.
	They all sound like Bernie Santos.
	Bridles, do a good thing!
	I sound like Seinfeld's Seinfeld's parents.
	Here we go.
	Was it the gate analysis, Viva Fry?
	Well, no, see, I would be surprised if they did a gate analysis on everybody or if they had an indication based on the gate of the pipe bomber and they knew, allegedly, because allegedly, the gate analysis matched up a limp in the right leg, which they attribute to a catastrophic, at least from a sports perspective, injury that this, the person that Steve Baker identified as having been the potential suspect.
	And so they say that was the reason for the limp, and that's how we gated it.
	I can help you analyze constitutional, historical, and statutory requirements for the FBI director, but I can't endorse or support restricting appointments based on ancestry, ethnicity.
	Yeah, I don't believe that either.
	Viva Castanja.
	All right, let me go all the way back down here.
	All right.
	Let's go to the next story of the day, peeps.
	Which is, do we got all of that there?
	Okay.
	Let's bring up.
	Oh, yeah, just for what it's worth.
	This was my tweet.
	Can FBI Director Cash or FBI response confirm the accuracy of the story?
	That the person identified by Steve Baker and the Blaze as being the potential Jan 6 pipe bomber could not have been the culprit because of her alibi, a video of her playing with her puppies at the time the devices were allegedly placed.
	Is the FBI able to confirm this?
	I don't think I got a confirmation from them or denial, but not that I expect one anyhow.
	But if you wanted to go tweet that around, if you were so inclined, feel free.
	Bada bing, bada boom.
	All right.
	Now, what else?
	I was on with Alex Jones earlier today talking about the arguments to investigate.
	What's that guy's name?
	General, what's his name again?
	What's his name?
	Kelly or Kerry?
	I always get missed up.
	This is a post from Benny Johnson.
	And, you know, when we are critical, lovingly critical of the Trump admin and some of the inaction on certain things, it's only for the preservation of the Trump administration and ensuring that they are fighting, not fire with fire, but that they are fighting fire with water.
	Ooh, I like that.
	You don't defeat the monster by becoming the monster.
	You defeat the monster.
	If it's a vampire, I won't use any inflammatory comparison so people are going to think I'm encouraging violence.
	You fight fire with water.
	And you go after the people who were overtly promoting seditious insurrection.
	Benny Johnson tweets, this was from yesterday, I'm pretty sure.
	November 24th, two days ago.
	Department of War is reviewing a potential court martial for Senator Mark Kelly after he urged military personnel to refuse unlawful orders.
	And then we got the statement from the White House, Department of War.
	The Department of War has received serious allegations of misconduct against Captain Mark Kelly, United States Navy, retired.
	In accordance with the Uniform Code and other applicable regulations, a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty, recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures.
	This matter will be handled in compliance with military law, ensuring due process and impartiality.
	Further official comments will be limited to preserve the integrity of these proceedings.
	Now, when I was on with Alex Jones and they're playing videos of Ruben Gallego of Arizona talking about talking about how anybody who participates in this investigation, well, the Democrats are going to come back into power one day and they're going to exact retribution against you.
	This is what the fight is against right now.
	It's against a party that says nobody's above the law.
	And if you investigate a man for suspicion of seditious behavior, because Mark Kelly gets up in a PSA in a scripted PSA, because it was nothing shy of absolute scripted rubbish, they even admitted.
	Oh, Gallego in an interview says, Yeah, they, you know, I didn't get the script in time, so I wasn't able to participate.
	They literally had a script that they circulate to people.
	And what it is, is the proverbial political permission slip that Robert Barnes and I talk about all the time, the political permission slip for sedition.
	I won't belabor the point, but like when they come out and say, defy illegal orders, you have the constitutional duty to defy illegal orders from the president.
	They're not talking about illegal orders.
	Nobody needs to be reminded of the law, but to the extent that we're reminding people of the law and just reading the letter of the law, well, there is a punishment for sedition that Trump was just reminding.
	He wasn't calling for anybody to be anything.
	He's just saying, well, since you are reminding everyone to not follow unlawful orders, I'll remind everybody what the lawful punishment is for sedition if we want to play this stupid ass game.
	But when they come out there and they say, you have an obligation to defy unlawful orders, they're doing that meme.
	Wink.
	How do you define if it's unlawful?
	Well, it hasn't gone to court.
	So use your judgment.
	Overtly encouraging and threatening military men, people in intelligence, Slotkin up there, former CIA, I don't think you're ever former CIA, getting up there and encouraging CIA to defy unlawful orders, failing which, as Ruben Galley, do I have do I have that video?
	Let me see if I can get that.
	Gallego unlawful orders.
	Let me see if I can get it.
	Basically, overtly threatening political retribution for anybody who for anybody who doesn't listen to their actions to defy unlawful orders.
	Because when they get back into power, people, shit's going to hit the fan for those who went along with this.
	What would you say directly to Pete Hexaf, the Secretary of Defense, of course, renamed the Secretary of War about this issue?
	Well, I think, number one, you will never, ever, ever even be half the man that Senator Kelly is.
	You, sir, are a coward.
	And the fact that you are following this order from the president shows how big of a coward you are.
	And I can't wait till you no longer are the Secretary of Defense.
	Well, that's powerful, man.
	You're a total, total jackass.
	Let me see.
	Is this the one that I want to play here?
	Did you consider why were you not part of this video?
	Oh, here we go.
	Yeah, actually, so I was part of the first video.
	The second video is by the time the script got to me and it was in the middle of a lot was going on.
	I just didn't have time to actually record it, but I'm 100% in alignment with them altogether.
	This stuff happened.
	You know, it just happened not to end up being a recording.
	There's really no other 3D chests to this.
	The logistics of human life.
	Yeah, but by the time the script got to me, I couldn't get there.
	I'm not sure I'm going to find the other video, but that was the one.
	There was another one of Gallego basically saying, they're not always going to be in power.
	Trump's got three years left.
	After that, we're going to be in power.
	And you're better off just, you know, either actively defying orders right now or not doing anything.
	Because when we get back into power, we're going to do to you what we tried to do to Trump, what we tried to do to Giuliani, what we tried to do to Jenna Ellis, which is going to be the segue into the last story of the day.
	They're playing for keeps.
	And in case it's not abundantly obvious, everyone within the Trump administration who is not similarly prepared to play for keeps, but not to fight fire with fire, to fight fire with water, they will come for impeachments and more on all of you.
	And they're basically trying to instigate full sedition right now by telling people to defy unlawful orders, wink, wink.
	Now, why did I bring up Jenna Ellis?
	Because Jenna Ellis in the Georgia RICO case was one of the ones who took flack for cutting a plea back in the day.
	And I think I was sympathetic to not judging her because if you've never been in those positions of facing these types of political persecutions, you can't really judge someone for how they respond to it.
	It's very easy for everyone to say fight, fight, fight when you're not the one who is at the end of that fight.
	Fanny Willis charges have been dropped entirely.
	Let me bring this up.
	I want to bring up, I realize I haven't had Phil Holloway on in a while.
	Phil Holloway took to Twitter earlier today and said, breaking news, Fanny Willis fiasco is over.
	Georgia prosecuting attorney counsel, attorney's counsel, has moved to dismiss the case.
	And what we're reading right here comes now the state buying through Peter J. Scandilakis.
	His name is Scandilakis.
	Is that funny?
	Okay, sorry.
	Not the Greek aspect of it, but the fact that scandal is the first word of that name.
	He made a proper decision here.
	District Attorney Pro Tempore.
	And after a thorough examination of the case, consideration of applicable statutory and case law and prior to submission to a jury, the state hereby moves for entry of a nola prosechi, not going to prosecute, for the following reason, to serve the interests of justice and promote judicial finality.
	See exhibit A. For all remaining defendants, the disposition meets the criteria for the Georgia Crime Information Center to rescind, to restrict, sorry, access to the criminal history for this arrest pursuant to.
	So the only question that I had actually is what's going to happen to those who already pleaded, because I'm not sure that this is going to apply to them, but withdrawn.
	Now, no le Prosecchi, it means a ferifancia.
	It's not Italiano.
	I think it's Latin.
	Not going to prosecute anymore.
	So let's see what NBC News has to say in terms of how they describe it.
	Look at that smile.
	Yes, that is victory.
	That is vindication.
	But of course, everyone's going to say, well, all the other malicious prosecutions were, you know, totally legit, totally clean, and nothing to see here.
	Where's the article?
	Ah, hold on a second.
	Now I want to come out.
	Let me take this out and bring back the article.
	Georgia prosecutor.
	Here we go.
	Who took over the 2020 election interference case, drops charges against Trump and others.
	Peter Scandilakis, who took over the case after Fulton County District Attorney Fannie Willis was disqualified, said the case was without precedent.
	May I pat myself on the back again?
	I was wrong that the judge, I forget his name now, the judge of first instance, had the judicial balls to do it.
	He didn't.
	I was wrong about that.
	I was right that Fannie Willis was going to get disqualified.
	She got disqualified, and now the case has been dismissed.
	Georgia judge ended the sprawling 2020 election interference case against Donald Trump.
	His co-defendants, yada, yada, yada, said he was dropping the charges.
	The decision from the Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee was his name, came shortly after prosecutor Peter Scandilakis notified the judge he would not proceed with the charges.
	Scandilakis took over the case earlier this month after the original prosecutor, Fanny Willis, was disqualified.
	In my professional opinion, the citizens of Georgia are not served by pursuing this case in full for another five to 10 years.
	Scandalakis wrote, quote, to serve the interest of justice, promote judicial finality.
	He said the decision is not guided by a desire to advance an agenda, but is based on my beliefs and understanding of law.
	Do you remember at the time, it was a novel RICO case theory.
	Like that's always what you do to a president.
	A novel, never-been-before bullshit theory case of RICO conspiracy to steal an election.
	Trump's defense lawyer, Steve Saddow, praised the decision.
	Political persecution of Trump by disqualified D.A. Fanny Willis is finally over.
	This case should never have been brought.
	A fair and impartial prosecutor has put an end to this law fare.
	Trump and the 18 other co-defendants, including his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, were hit with wide-ranging racketeering indictment in 2023.
	Go to Twitter, put in judicial horseshit.
	It was either judicial horseshit or judicial horse poop.
	It might have been judicial dog poop.
	That was my assessment the day it came out.
	And I remember highlighting certain paragraphs.
	Judicial horse crap is what it was, always.
	Four of Trump's co-defendants took plea deals.
	The others, including Giuliani, pleaded not guilty, spoke to me.
	Okay, we can get through this.
	Scandalactus' decision might not be much of an aid in getting the former New York mayor's law license back.
	He was critical of some of Giuliani's conduct.
	In the 22-page memo explaining the reasoning for his charging decision, Scandalactus noted the entire case is, quote, without precedent and pointed in part to the challenges of trying a case against the sitting president.
	Well, you know what some of them are going to try to do?
	Wait for him to no longer be the sitting president and then lock him up like they just did to Bolsonaro for a very long period of time.
	So that was the news.
	Anyways, we can't take a little bit of a victory lap.
	It's amazing.
	All right, people.
	Let's go see who's on Rumble.
	Russell Brand is on the featured spot.
	Let's see who's going live.
	I don't know who's off for Thanksgiving.
	But I was okay.
	Yeah, we might go raid Russell Brand in a second anyhow.
	Do we have anything more here?
	Let me see what I got by way of chat over on vivabarnslaw.locals.com.
	Viva is still soft on her.
	Jenna Ellis turned, states evidence.
	Viva, didn't she become a rat for the prosecution?
	No, Rustang.
	What she did, first of all, I did fault her for the statement that she did make.
	She didn't have to make that statement.
	I did fault her for that.
	I'm just about faulting her for pleading.
	I did fault her for the statement.
	She got up there sobbing and said, I was just basically following the legal advice of the senior counsel.
	And I said she was throwing under the bus.
	I gave her, I did give her a flack for that, but I'm not going to give her flack for pleading.
	What is F. Charton?
	Viva, you better cheer for the Lions tomorrow.
	I don't know who that is.
	So, okay, so I did hear this, that there was a shooting at, there was a shooting of two National Guardsmen.
	This was apparently going live right before, right, happened right before we went live.
	3.42.
	That's 20 minutes ago.
	This is from Nick Sortor.
	Secret Service seen running directly into danger to help render aid to downed National Guard troop near the White House.
	These agents are heroes.
	Keep praying and pray hard.
	It's awesome.
	Two guardsmen confirmed dead after horrific shooting.
	Shaw dead in DC blocks from the White House.
	This is just horrendous.
	Shot dead for doing their job.
	We'll see if it's terrorist related.
	Thanksgiving week.
	Let me see.
	I'll go to Fox News and just I see some tweets and we'll see if there's anything.
	Two National Guardsmen shot dead in D.C. blocks from White House.
	Washington, D.C., was thrust into chaos the day before Thanksgiving.
	They were shot, critically wounded, just blocks from the White House.
	Police said a suspect is in custody.
	So there's news.
	I'll see what the news is.
	That's her.
	All right, people, what we're going to do right now, if you want to support the channel, you know what to do.
	Come on over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	We're going to have a relatively short after party because I got to get somewhere before five o'clock.
	But let's go raid.
	Let's go raid Russell Brand.
	Raid notes forward slash raid forward slash raid.
	Russell Brand, let him know from whence he came.
	Say hi to him.
	Wish him a happy Thanksgiving.
	Viva, Viva Raid, happy Thanksgiving.
	Spell it properly.
	All right, let's go take our party to viva barnslaw.locals.com and see what we can get by way of aggregate knowledge of the interwebs.
	Everybody, what day is it today?
	It's Wednesday.
	I will be live tomorrow, and I'll be live Friday.
	Obviously, same bat time, same bat channel.
	Happy Thanksgiving.
	Godspeed.
	Give everyone a God bless right now.
	Be well.
	And let's take the party over to VivabarnesLaw.locals.com.

▲