All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 23, 2026 - Viva & Barnes
01:12:53
"NO SEAT FOR YOU!" Trump Retracts Carney's "Peace Board" Invite! Car "Kill Switch" Passes! & MORE!

Support Viva: GET MERCH! www.vivafrei.com BUY A BOOK! https://amzn.to/4qBXikS SEND ME SOMETHING! David Freiheit 20423 SR 7 Ste F6319 Boca Raton 33498 TIP WITH CRYPTO! bc1qt0umnqna63pyw5j8uesphsfz0dyrtmqcq5ugwm THAT IS ALL!

|

Time Text
Proud Somali Testimony 00:02:19
Gentlemen of the interwebs, every now and again you see a video that is so out of context, so incomprehensible, many of the replies are, is this AI generated?
Well, your man Viva went and found the original clip in context in all its glory.
And you will see it was neither AI nor glory.
Behold.
Now I would like to call Nasser Ahmed for her to testimony and say a few words.
Does this mic work?
Yeah, it works.
Hello.
Okay, yeah, I just want to stumble a little closer.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Hi.
Hello.
I am very grateful to have this opportunity to speak in front of everyone.
And thank you to my senator for representing me and the people behind me for representing me.
I can never be more grateful than I am right now.
I'm not used to the attention and the fame, unwanted fame that I am receiving right now.
My image is out there, but it's an image for a reason.
It's an image that I will carry for the rest of my life.
And I am proud.
I am proud to say that I've survived.
I'm proud to say that I stood up for what is right.
And I am people are saying, many people are saying, including my family and friends, that I will go down in history.
And I will carry this on my shoulders.
And I will carry it even though I am fearful.
I'm going to pause it here, actually, because unless you actually know the context of what's going on, I didn't realize the audio was so delayed.
I'm going to post the clip that is not so delayed.
This is Nasra Ahmed, a 23-year-old Somali American who I say not claims to have been detained by ICE for two days.
I believe everybody concedes and acknowledges was detained by ICE.
The circumstances surrounding the detainment are at least disputed.
And she's giving a press conference about the circumstances of her detainment.
I listened to the full nine minutes of her press conference.
I don't understand even her version of events as to the circumstances leading to her detainment for two days.
Nasra Ahmed's Press Conference 00:10:11
But the video that's going viral is her talking about what it means to be Somali.
So I'm Somali.
I'm proud to be Somali.
To me, being Somali isn't just eating bananas with rice.
It's a lot.
It's like it's an interesting thing.
It's very hard to describe what it means to be Somali and what it means to be American, but it's like a cultural fusion.
It's kind of like the bananas and rice.
You know, people don't really see like, you know, it's, you know, people don't think, oh, you can eat bananas with rice, but that's what it's like to be Somali and American.
It's like that combination of banana and rice, but you're going to get what I mean.
No, I listened to the entire press conference and I never got what she meant.
It actually got even a little bit more confusing because at one point in the press conference, she's talking about how she's Somali and also black and how, I mean, it was like multiple layers according to her of discrimination where it's a foregone conclusion.
You know, according to her, if you're black in America, you suffer from racism.
If you're Somali, you suffer from a different form of discrimination than racism.
I mean, I guess if you're gay, you suffer from some form of prejudice.
If you're Jewish, you suffer from some form of anti-Semitism.
Whatever element of your identity you have, you suffer from some form of discrimination as a result of it.
You know, with the exception of the only, apparently the only group of people who are the patriarchs and the oppressors, you know, and you can interrupt church services and demonize them.
The only one out there that is at the lower echelons of this food pyramid of oppression.
The press conference, she goes on later to say, by the way, she had a bandaid on her head because she claims to have been concussed during her arrest.
The circumstances of her arrest, apparently, ICE was in the neighborhood and she knew that ICE was in her neighborhood.
Her neighborhood is a predominantly Somali neighborhood.
They were looking, I presume, for illegal aliens.
They're not out there looking for American citizens because you can't deport American citizens.
So presumably they're out there looking for illegal aliens.
And I couldn't understand what role Nasra was playing in terms of either impeding, interfering, or how she got caught up in this bit of law enforcement.
By her own testimony during that nine-minute press conference, she said they were looking at two men in particular.
She asked the men to open the door for her or something.
ICE came to get the two Somali men, and then somehow she got caught up in the crossfire, got detained for two days.
During the press conference, she goes on to talk about how she was detained at the Whipple detention facility, which she referred to as having been a concentration camp for Native Americans.
And now she's being paraded around as the poster child of alleged unlawful detainment by ICE because she's an American citizen.
I'm not yet entirely certain if it's naturalized or born in America, natural-born citizen.
And she's been detained.
And now the media will get their talking point that because ICE may have detained an American citizen for two days, that therefore ICE is targeting American citizens acting like total authoritarians.
I don't know if she was detained for another reason.
In her press conference, after going into the part about being banana and rice Somali American, you'll understand what it means.
Still don't understand what it means.
And I don't know if she's trying to say that, I don't know, culturally cooking-wise, you use bananas for cooking and rice for cooking as if rice is supposed to be the juxtaposition between North Africa and the West, as if rice itself doesn't come from Asia or have an origin in Asia.
I didn't understand it for the life of me.
I don't think anybody who watched it understood it.
The question is whether or not she was legit concussed and therefore incapable of formulating coherent thoughts to be expressed.
But the underlying story is what is important in all of this.
They're running with it now because this is what they needed in order to claim that ICE is targeting U.S. citizens like that schnook on CNN where Scott Jennings took issue with them.
I've got two different perspectives on this.
I went from the Fox News perspective and the totally left-wing nonsense.
Well, maybe Minnesota stars not totally, but maybe a little bit left.
But this is what Fox News is reporting.
ICE in Minnesota, U.S. citizens said she was unjustly detained, suffered concussion.
The brief, in case you don't actually want to read a four-minute article, three bullet points, 23-year-old St. Paul woman is Somali says she was harassed, assaulted by ICE agents.
She says they called her the N-word when they arrested her.
I mean, maybe it's because I'm just naive and stupid.
And, you know, I would be shocked that anyone, especially in law enforcement, would use the N-word.
I know people are like, Viva, you're a prude.
It's not a big deal.
Don't let people control language.
The N-word is a singularly unique word with a historical context that you don't use.
I would be flabbergasted if an ICE agent actually referred to her as the N-word.
I'd be flabbergasted, but we'll see.
Presumably, there's body cam footage.
She said she was detained for two days after asking two Somali men who ICE agents were tracking to keep a door open for her.
Well, now I've got questions.
Was she trying to aid and abet those two men from avoiding ICE arrest or detainment?
ICE agents called her racial slurs and forced, and the force of her arrest caused her concussion.
She has a large bandage over her right eye.
The backstory: Nasra Ahmed held a Wednesday afternoon press conference along with her father, Mohammed Ahmed, state lawmarker Samaqab Hussein to talk about her experience.
The incident happened at 11:30, January 14.
A cell phone video appears to show Nasra being detained by federal agents in what appears to be a parking lot of a complex.
She says there were two, she was following two Somali men.
When she asked them to hold a door open for her, she says ICE agents intervened, took her into custody, and she spent two days in a jail before being released.
Incident caused her mental, emotional, no doubt, no doubt.
What they're saying, her father, Mohammed Ahmed, was shaken by what his daughter went through.
He also said the Somali community in the Twin Cities is afraid to leave their homes, go to work, go to shopping, live their lives, etc.
What Nasra has experienced is not supposed to happen to anybody, Mohmed said.
Racial profiling, DHS response to alleged assault.
What they're saying, spokesperson for the DHS, Department of Homeland Security, late Wednesday night, issued the following statement on Ahmed's arrest.
The statement accuses Ahmed of assaulting federal agents.
Oh, not that I believe one side or the other, but there's plausibility at play here.
Even by her own story, which, if you listen to it, it didn't make a lick of sense.
Secretary Noam has been clear: anyone, including U.S. citizens who assault law enforcement, will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, assaulting law enforcement as a felony and a federal crime.
By what she said, she asked the two men that ICE was after to hold the door.
She said they called her a racial slur, which, when I was listening to the press conference, I thought was going to lead into the conclusion of her having defended her integrity and assaulting the police officers.
I don't know, hitting them.
You don't call me that.
And then she slaps them.
What we know is that after the shooting of Renee Good, in as much as unfortunate, tragic, I've come to the conclusion after having looked at and picked the brains of legal minds out there, Andrew Branca, Robert Barnes, even lefty leanings who say, Yeah, you know, just don't do things like this and situations don't escalate, that it was a lawful shooting in the sense of potentially not necessary,
but lawful under those circumstances because of the way it went down.
When I did hear DHS's description of the events versus how the left was describing it, and then actually seeing the video, the truth was the most accurate description was somewhere more in the center, but certainly more to the right than to the left.
It wasn't just a woman who happened to be crossing traffic, dropping her kids off.
This was an actual instigator, agitator, not to say she got what she deserved, but the descriptions on the far left were wildly inaccurate.
The descriptions coming from DHS were verbose.
Truth is somewhere in the middle.
I wonder if she assaulted the police officers.
Somali American, this is from the Minnesota Star Tribune, so you can get the other side of this.
Detained for two days, and we're going to go a little here.
U.S. born, a U.S.-born Somali-American woman said she was forcibly arrested and detained by immigration two days after the Trump administration's crackdown in Minnesota.
Bandages still covering her head.
They love the images.
Ahmed said they, listen to this, with bandages covering the scrapes on her forehead, Nasra spoke about her arrest at a news conference.
She said immigration agents stopped in her neighborhood and asked her for identification.
Ahmed said they then used a racial slur and pushed and detained her, leaving her with aches and a concussion.
Hey, you got to go with what you think is most likely.
ICE agents who know that they are the most demonized entity in law enforcement in America going to detain a young woman and use the N-word racial slur on her while they're trying to enforce immigration law in Minnesota.
And then we can just go to the rest there.
So, the question is going to be whether or not she assaulted the officers harshly or not, whether or not she was trying to assist in the two men that they were lawfully or not lawfully going after, got involved and got arrested.
Two days later, she's out.
And now, both sides are going to, I say, both sides.
The one side is going to parade around their victim like a trophy so they can get the talking points, clips, soundbites, and photographs.
But you watch that press conference.
It doesn't make a lick of sense.
It's convoluted.
And now they've got that one clip, which is going to go viral.
And you got to wonder what the heck she was even talking about in that comparison.
People, how goes the battle?
Michael Fanon's Subpoenas Risk 00:15:16
Friday afternoon.
Viva Fry, former Montreal litigator, turned current Florida Rumble.
I was looking at my shirt, and I don't know if I have a lot of dog hair on it.
I think I do.
I tried to do some errands this morning with the dog.
My goodness, that dog doesn't move, doesn't walk.
He's blind.
And so I, you know, I'm carrying him around.
I look like one of those old Florida types with a little dog in his hands.
Oh, he's so cute.
Anyhow, I had to do some messages this morning.
It was running a little ragged, but my goodness, do we have some stuff to talk about?
If you're new to the channel, David Fryhe, former Montreal litigator, turned current Florida Rumbler.
Daily shows three o'clock.
We are live across Rumble, vivabarnslaw.locals.com.
I post the clips to CommiTube afterwards.
And our Sunday show is the bestest show on the interwebs.
Six o'clock Sunday, Viva and Robert Barnes.
We call it Viva and Barnes Law for the People.
We talk about everything.
Pretty much, you know, the week is the prep for the Sunday show because we cover what we go over on the week and then whatever else happens over the weekend.
When are we getting another dog? says Zach the cat.
I went to the local shelter.
Nothing really, I figure we're going to wait and then see what falls into our lives, but we're definitely looking for a new dog.
Okay, at least we're going to, you know, get Winston a companion.
And we've gotten used to life with two dogs.
So, you know, once you get used to hectic life, when it goes back to less hectic, it somehow becomes a little bit boring.
All right.
There's stuff to talk about.
We're talking about Donald Trump disinviting Mark J. Carney from the Board of Peace, the new panel that Trump is the chair of, as relates to the rebuilding of the decimated Gaza area following the three-year military incursions.
It was three years, give or take, since October 7.
And we'll get into the thick of that.
I mean, the politics of it, the optics of it, and what's going on now in terms of Trump disinviting Mark J. Carney, three passport carrying globalist tour.
We're going to get into that.
There was one other thing that we were going to get into.
I'm going to pull up some tweets from Cernovich.
The discussion now is getting interesting with respect to what are the underlying problems, or at least what is the inherent problem within, say, not within the DOJ on a personal level, within the DOJ on an administrative level.
You recall at one point, I forget who it was, was basically saying, you know, the DOJ's hands are a little bit tied because their judicial nominations can't get through because they're not getting, they're getting effectively vetoed.
And we're going to get into this.
It's called the blue slip.
So we're going to talk about that because Cernovich put out a bunch of clarification tweets on the subject, which are interesting and worth going over.
And some other fun stuff.
Let's start with, hold on.
Let me just make sure I have one thing right here.
Yeah, we're good.
Okay, let's do this.
Bada bing, bada boom.
Okay, we're going to do some fun stuff.
And Michael Fanon, who had a meltdown in front of Ivan Ralaklin the other day, it's the most glorious thing on earth.
I should say Cara Castanueva, who was on the channel last week doing amazing journalism, ran into Michael Fanon, the man who was one of the key witnesses for the Jan 6 persecution, a man who can be described as what's the, there's a word that's not quite unstable, but borderline on the edge.
And Cara runs into him.
This was at the Jack Smith congressional hearings yesterday or the day before.
I think it was yesterday.
And she had a question for Michael Fanon.
Watch this and watch what is actual subtle physical intimidation.
Behold.
Officer Fanone, how are you today?
I'm great.
What happened in there?
What are you talking about?
Confrontation.
Jack Smith testified about how he had proof beyond reasonable doubt that Donald Trump incited, orchestrated, and funded the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.
We're going to pause it right there.
I didn't get to watch the entire press, the entire Senate hearing where they were interrogating Jack Smith.
I saw a number of the clips, and I'm sure you've seen them as well.
Jack Smith is a, in my humble opinion, he is an unconvicted criminal.
Hey, look, if you could have undocumented migrants or undocumented citizens, you can have an unconvicted criminal.
Jack Smith, in the political sense, is an objective criminal.
He is the face of George Orwell's 1984.
He is the face of Big Brother.
He is the face of Kafka-esque insanity, where Jack Smith got up there and under oath, under testimony.
I'm going to come back to that.
I just saw Kara is awesome.
Kara is awesome, fearless.
Under oath, in testimony, they were asking Jack Smith why on earth they kept subpoenas that they were effectively spying on members of Congress, kept it confidential.
And the response was, you know, in the document itself that was submitted to a judge, they said, well, disclosing this to the individual that's under surveillance, you know, might qualify them or might constitute them as a flight risk.
And the question was, I forget who it was from.
And he says, these are members of Congress.
You know damn well there's no flight risk whatsoever.
And this guy, bumbling idiot that he is, and you listen to the way he talks and he talks with that nasally fake Kirby, all of those deep state apparatus, they have the same nasally, Victoria Newton.
We're concerned about his answer made zero sense.
And he's a bumbling criminal that is now being exposed for having unlawfully surveilled members of government in the context of four years of absolute tyranny.
Will there anything's going to happen?
We'll see.
I'm going to start this from the beginning and I'm not going to say anything.
I'm going to let my dog in the room here.
Hold on.
Officer Fanon, how are you today?
I'm great.
What happened in there?
What are you talking about?
Confrontation.
Jack Smith testified about how he had proof beyond reasonable doubt that Donald Trump incited, orchestrated, and funded the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.
You seem like there was a fight in there?
No, there was no fight.
Is it true, Officer Fanone, that you turned off your own body camera on January 6th?
No.
I saw your body cam.
You turned it off yourself.
You were playing dead.
I saw your body cam footage.
You're a fucking right-wing conspiracy theorist.
I saw you turn off your body cam phone.
Can we, sir?
But thank you for disrespecting me.
Psychopath.
Can we appreciate it is it is journalistic gold.
It'll work until they recognize her by face.
Obviously, Michael Fanon didn't recognize her.
Can we appreciate how amazing that is?
She comes up to Fanon with a question that she knows she's going to ask.
The answer to the question that she knows is the correct answer, but she lets Fanon get a little comfortable with her and offer his own propaganda before she gets into it.
So she comes off unassuming, builds a little bit of a rapport of trust, and then asks a question, which kind of catches him off guard.
Fight in there?
No, there was no fight.
Is it true, Officer?
And now to her question.
Fanon that you turned off your own body camera on January 6th.
Watch his face.
Watch his face right now.
It was at that moment he realized she was not a friendly journalist.
No.
I saw your body.
Did you see the way he gets ready to lie?
Let me think about it.
No.
I saw your body cam.
You turned it off yourself.
You were playing dead.
I saw it.
You turned it off yourself.
What do you have to say?
Look at the way he leans into her.
I won't make any judgments, but this is not a way any innocent man leans into anybody, let alone a woman, let alone a female journalist.
Look at the way he leans into her now.
I saw your body cam footage.
You're a fucking say it, Fanone.
What am I?
Conspiracy theorist.
I saw you turn off your body cam footage, sir.
Thank you for disrespecting me.
Psychopath.
It's glorious.
It's glorious.
All right.
That was Michael Fanone.
And yeah, I won't, I'm not even going to bring up some of these comments because I don't want anyone thinking it's defamation through implication of bringing up replies.
That's not a normal way to engage with anybody.
And by the way, maybe he doesn't know that she was a world-class national boxer.
I wouldn't lean into a child that way because you don't know which child's taking Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu MA and will clock you.
I mean, that is if he's getting into a fight, exposing his chin.
If he knew that she was a world-class boxer, maybe he would think that she won't get intimidated by that type of body manipulation.
But that was a form of manipulation.
That was a form of intimidation, not manipulation.
Now, hold on.
I just want to bring this up here.
This is the classic clip.
Congressman Brandon Gill.
That's who it was.
I say he looks like Superman because his questions are quite good.
Listen to this.
This is the only high-level play of Jack Smith.
And then just bear in mind, you know, what we're talking about here.
Michael Fanone is the hero of the Jan 6 Kangaroo Court Committee.
Listen to this.
In May of 2023, you also issued subpoenas for toll records of nine U.S. senators and an additional representative.
Is that right?
In May of 23, we did issue.
You did.
And there were non-disclosure orders in conjunction with those subpoenas as well, right?
That's correct.
Consistent with department policy and the law.
So again, nobody would know what you were doing.
The senators would, and the representatives would, and the American people wouldn't know what you were doing.
Is that right?
The toll records that we secured and the non-disclosure orders were consistent with policy and consistently.
And you knew whenever you were doing that that there was a risk you were violating the speech or debate clause.
Is that right?
The toll record subpoenas that we secured were with the concurrence of the public and television.
Your own analysis says that you knew there was a risk you were violating the speech or debate clause.
I have it right here.
This is an email from John Keller at Public Integrity Section to your team.
As you are aware, quote, as you are aware, there is some litigation risk regarding whether compelled disclosure of toll records of a member's legislative calls violates the speech or debate clause in the DC circuit.
That's from your own analysis right there.
So you did know, didn't you?
So with respect to the item you just put up on the screen, the last sentence states, we're going to get to the last sentence.
These are, look at this woman's face right here.
Like, I can't believe I have to sit through this shit.
And this guy, this guy right here is like, what the fuck?
Do you think we're stupid, Jack?
Holy his name is Jack Smith.
He's a Smith from the Matrix.
Can we appreciate that irony?
Fate loves irony.
Hold on.
Let's keep going.
Okay.
We're going to get to the last sentence.
And you cite case law in here.
Quote, the bar on compelled disclosure is absolute.
Is that right?
Or do you think that you didn't have to abide by that precedent?
To be clear, this is not, this statement is not from my office.
This is the statement.
This is your justification.
It's protocol.
Do you notice how they talk very calmly and through the top of their nose?
And everything is a very calculated lie.
This is protocol.
That's not my document.
I just submit that when I go and abuse of the courts to spy on members of Congress.
For those subpoenas and NDOs that you ordered.
This was part of your analysis.
It's a cursory analysis.
I think it's worth noting.
Let's get to that last sentence then.
Quote: Given my understanding of the low likelihood that any of the members listed below would be charged, the litigation risk should be minimal here.
In other words, you're using a novel legal theory, which you knew was novel, has never been tested by any court.
You're not charging any of these members.
Nobody's going to know about it because you issued NDOs.
And your non-disclosure orders, and you're going to spy and just see what you might get.
Maybe something good will come up.
Nobody's going to sue about it.
So sue this.
So who cares?
We're going to do it anyways.
You walked all over the Constitution throughout this entire process.
All right.
And then now, before we even get into this, because I see in the chat they're saying arrest him, arrest him, arrest people.
We're going to get into the difficulties of the DOJ for the deep state arrests and some difficulties with the explanation being given for the difficulties.
I want to refresh everybody's memory.
The voice of these trained liars.
You got John Bolton's got the same freaking voice.
Kirby, I forget his first name, has got the same freaking voice.
It's training.
And in as much as I'm rough and brash and maybe not on, maybe not polished, a little unpolished, I would rather look like that than these pathological, trained, professional liars.
Remember when Victoria Newman was asked about research facilities, biolab research facilities in Ukraine?
And then it's fine.
Do you remember this?
Jack Pisobic at the time put this on blast.
I at the time put this on blast.
Listen to the way that they talk.
And this is the female iteration of the professional training that they go through to lie and believe their own lies.
Ukraine has biological research facilities, which, in fact, we are now quite concerned Russian troops, Russian forces may be seeking to gain control of.
So we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces should they approach.
Ukraine has biological research facilities, which in fact we are now.
There's no biological, what do they call them?
There's no biolabs.
There's biological research facilities.
They're totally harmless.
And yet we are fearful that they might end up in the hands of the Russians.
There's a, I'm convinced that they go and they have professional speech orators say, you know, this is how you're going to convince people.
This is how you instill confidence in undiscerning, gullible sheep.
And if you speak with a higher pitch through the back of your nose, slowly, people will be prone to trust you.
Holy crap, I'm getting bored listening to myself talk like that.
Now, the question is, why the hell haven't they been arrested yet?
Why haven't there been massive deep state arrests?
Why Haven't They Been Arrested? 00:15:28
Well, I'm not getting back into the drama, but I believe I made a salient point, so salient that the only retort was to block that we've seen what they did in Minnesota, how quickly the DOJ can act to arrest people, whether or not those arrests stick.
I watched Bourbon with Barnes last night on vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
Barnes is taking the unpopular opinion that the charges against Don Lamon should not have been brought because he's not, in fact, in violation of the material elements of face act violations and the KKK Act.
We're going to talk about it Sunday because I've got my questions.
I believe Don Lamont should be charged, but I appreciate that I don't have the expertise of American law.
And so I've got to go pick the brains of others and then try to come to my own conclusions.
We're going to talk about it Sunday.
Barnes doesn't think the material elements for charging Don Lamon, Don Stinkyfingers Lamont.
If you don't know why I call him that, go Google it.
Don't Google it.
And with respect to the other two that have been charged, Barnes is predicting that the charges either get dropped or they get acquitted.
Because for it to be a face act violation, there has to be actual intimidation, actual blocking of access to and not just disruption of and not just using words.
But we'll talk about it Sunday and I will press Barnes on my concerns about his theory as he eloquently explained them during last night's bourbon with Barnes.
So they can move fast to arrest them.
The DOJ can.
And yet after a year, there have been, I'm not going to pull up the meme and I'm not going to reduce it to the meme, but there have been no arrests of deep state assets with the exception of James Comey, who had two measly charges for lying that were dismissed.
And now they have to appeal it because the statute of limitations on perjury has lapsed.
So they can't refile.
So they have to appeal and try to get those charges reinstated because they were dismissed because Halligan wasn't properly appointed.
And now, from what I understand, Halligan's out of the DOJ.
I think it was the Eastern District of Virginia or the East Virginia District of East Virginia.
It was East Virginia.
So they got James Comey and they got Letitia James.
Letitia James charges also dismissed and have not yet been brought.
Other than that, nothing.
And so the question is, how can the DOJ act so quickly in Minnesota and a year later have nothing to show for whatever labors they are undergoing behind closed doors?
And obviously, the obvious argument is more complex cases take more time to put together.
The evidence for Minnesota was broadcast for the world to see.
And the other obvious explanation is you mess with churches and it's a bit more of a pressing concern of administration than going after the deep state as much as that is important for actual meaningful judicial reform.
Okay.
Cernovich put out a tweet and he's now explaining the blue slip element, which is basically a veto power of state senators to not approve judicial appointees that the president makes.
And the president can't really do anything about it, even though this is not law.
This is custom that Chuck Grassley does not seem to want to override.
So they can't even get in their appointees because of this effective Senate veto.
I'll go down.
I'll go down Cernovich's Twitter thread.
Unless, let's see what we're going with here.
Oh, okay, hold on.
I guess I'll go this way.
Why haven't there been more arrests?
Asks Cernovich.
There is an answer to this.
Under the blue slip process, one Democrat senator can block Trump's U.S. attorneys.
The staff inside these districts refused to indict.
The situation played out in Virginia, Recomey.
It's like this everywhere.
He says Trump can't appoint his U.S. attorneys, his U.S. state attorneys.
One Democrat can block entrenched staffers, slow walk indictments, or insert poison pills for the judge to activate, which is effectively what we saw in, Oh, well, first of all, I think it might be what we're going to see in the Brian Cole Patsy charge, but set that aside.
Yelling at Harmeat or cash all day is low IQ.
You should be yelling at Grassley.
Time to abolish the blue slips.
Now, it doesn't look maybe, I don't know if I hope this doesn't look crazy.
I know Cernovich and I, we get along, and I actually respect Cernovich's assessments as well, which is why I do rely on him to hopefully make my brain a little bigger.
I just said counterpoint number one, because this is what they're basically saying, it sort of goes back to what we had talked about.
I forget whose tweet it was, which is basically we're understaffed, so we can only get so much done because we can't get our appointments through.
And the blue slip process, I'm going to explain what that is in a second, in a little more detail with the help of AI, but I've understood the point now.
Counterpoint: if there's a problem, then the administration should acknowledge the problem instead of saying there isn't a problem, calling everyone with legitimate concerns black pillars and continually saying there isn't a problem and Bondi is performing fantastically.
In fact, even if this is the explanation, if it's true, though it would not account for everything, it highlights the problem that the fact that time is in fact running out.
And if reform does not occur, it will not occur.
This is where being told to sit and wait, you might be just the frog in boiling water.
You might just be waiting for your own demise.
So if it's true, it highlights the problem.
And then, you know, people are retorting, but Barnes, Trump has talked about it multiple times.
First of all, Trump has brought up the blue slip in early December over the course of the summer, but that is not the explanation for why the DOJ hasn't carried out deep state arrests.
In fact, the assurance is the exact opposite.
You don't know what's going on.
Shut up.
You don't know what's going on behind closed doors and they're moving and you just you wait, just you wait.
Don't be impatient.
But if the reality is that they're understaffed, they can't get it done because they can't get their appointments through because of this effective Senate veto.
That's a problem that needs to not only be admitted openly, put on blast.
And yeah, then you got to get on Grassley and say, forego this unwritten law.
It's not even unwritten law.
It's not a law.
It's basically an unwritten rule.
And Grassley, the octogenarian geriatric that he has, for whatever the reason, is not listening to the concerns of the people he purportedly represents to do away with this so that Trump can get his appointments in.
But then I said, second counterpoint, it's out of chronological order.
Bring indictments in favorable jurisdictions.
Multiple days of the bring them in your jurisdiction.
I hear people say, Viva, you can't cherry pick and you can't do that.
For anybody who thinks, you know, I don't think Barnes is a black pillar.
I know that I'm not because blackpillars don't provide solutions.
How long has it been that Barnes has been saying bring these indictments in favorable jurisdictions such as Florida?
And then people say, Viva, you can't bring them and you just can't cherry pick.
No.
The Mar-a-Lago raid classified documents case to the extent that there's a conspiracy there, elements of it occurred in Florida.
So bring it in Florida.
If you can't bring them in the jurisdictions that you can't bring them in because you can't get your appointments through, and there's entrenched, corrupt deep state apparatus, you know, Apparatchic employees there, then bypass those jurisdictions and then go find a favorable or more favorable jurisdiction that can be legally justified, like Florida.
And then third, possibly the last, they still have some of the holdovers in that DOJ.
Jocelyn Ballantyne still works at the DOJ, the woman who prosecuted the Jan Sixers.
How can you tell everybody to sit tight and wait?
Things hopefully, and undoubtedly are going on behind closed doors.
Time is running out.
And if the problem is, in fact, this blue slip tradition where Trump can't get his judicial nominees through at the state level because it just takes a state senator to veto it.
The blue slip is when you get the approval, they write the name on the blue slip and send it back to the president or DC.
So they're not giving the approval.
So you've got entrenched TDS-afflicted partisan hacks and their staff.
You can't get your appointments through.
It's already entrenched with partisan hacks who will do everything they can to frustrate you.
You're not looking to find a way to get into more favorable jurisdictions.
And you're not getting rid of purging the elements.
I mean, I know that they've gotten rid of a lot, but then the question is: how the hell is Jocelyn Ballantyne still prosecuting the January 6th Pipe Bomb Patsy case?
So these are, these are all legitimate concerns, but I appreciate what Cernovich is saying.
And I'm actually surprised that members of the DOJ are not angry at Cernovich because what he's basically saying is they can't do the job that they need to do, period.
And the problem doesn't lie with Pam Bondi.
I respectfully disagree because some of the elements that I've outlined lie squarely with Bondi.
Not reinstating Brooke Jackson's key TAM fraud lawsuit against Pfizer is squarely and only on Pan Bondi.
It's not because they don't have enough staff.
It's because the one who's at the head of the chain won't reinstate it.
And maybe Trump doesn't understand just how important it is to reinstate that case.
So I don't agree with Cernovich entirely.
He makes a valid point.
And his valid point is that they can't get through their appointment.
So they can't do what they need to do.
So get on Grassley about it and don't get on Pam Bondi about it.
Well, if that's the case, then Pam Bondi has to admit us telling you to shut up, sit down, and wait longer will not resolve this problem.
And so they need to be told actually what to do to proactively give it the kick in the ass it needs to actually start solving this problem.
And that is to get maybe get on Grassley's butt.
Maybe get on Pam Bonte's butt and pressure her to take action where she can.
Pressure Grassley to drop this antiquated unwritten rule that is not a rule that would allow Trump to get through his nominees.
And then you have to come through with the reform that is needed and the window is closing rapidly.
There's a difference between administering a system, managing a company, and reforming a company.
Arresting the church protest people is management.
Getting rid of the rot is reform.
And right now, that is what is needed.
Serenity now.
Does that make sense?
I mean, I try to piece it together.
Sorry, I just saw something in our local screen.
I try to piece it together.
I know I've got my predispositions.
I know people tend to get entrenched with their past opinions and they don't want to evolve reform or maybe admit that they misunderstood something from the beginning because it hurts the ego.
But I'm doing my best and I'm hoping I'm breaking it down.
Cernovich is not an easy target like a Canadian podcaster is.
Well, it's also probably kind of a scary thing.
Like I love this.
I want to take a citizenship test sooner than later and see how well I'll do.
I did one of those stupid online IQ tests again.
I knew that I was going to get screwed by the end of it.
It only cost a dollar to get my results.
And I was doing it very, very fast while I was bowling.
And I got a 126 for whatever that's worth.
It's a stupid, you know, 35-question quiz and wasn't even paying attention.
So, you know, yeah, I got a good, I got a good one.
But no, the reality is it's been a learning curve for me.
And I want to make sure I understand it.
I want to get it right and not be right.
So even if what Cernovich is saying is true, and I would love to have the discussion viva voice because maybe I'm missing something or, you know, maybe it's more nuanced in certain respects.
There are the three elements to it.
Okay, fine.
Certain jurisdictions are tainted, are corrupt.
You got to get out of those jurisdictions in as much as you legally can.
And you got to purge what you can.
And I know that they say they've been doing it.
I know that we've received conflicting reports.
You know, 138 FBI employees have been fired or purged.
But the window of opportunity is rapidly closing and people's faith is rapidly fading.
And that's almost more important than anything.
You can buy some time if you show some results.
And if you, I won't say show transparency.
It's not a question of suggesting that they are deliberately concealing something, but be upfront.
Be forthright.
Don't tell us it's all good and you're a black pillar for having concerns while simultaneously having the message come out that, well, yeah, our hands are kind of tied through institutional corruption, but it's Grassley's fault, not Pam Bondi's.
And that's all I have to say about that.
Jinja Ninja says, please read my comment under the comments.
Jindra Ninja is the man who made the chessboard behind me.
And the reason you don't see the chessboard behind me is because I've actually been playing with it with my child and not just leaving it for decor.
Let me go over here and refresh.
What is going on there?
What the heck was that?
That looked like an eye.
Oh, that is an eye.
Okay.
Jinger Ninja says, Barnes has me angry.
He said in his Burden with Barnes last night that the church protesters and invaders didn't violate federal law or the FACE Act.
Yeah, no, I heard that.
Here's the language of the FACE Act.
Whoever, by force or threat of force or physical obstruction, intentionally injures, intimidates, or interferes with, intimidates or interferes with any person lawfully exercising.
It takes a lot of motivated reasoning to argue that they didn't violate the FACE Act, FacePalm, get yourself together.
No, but here, I'll say two things.
I don't know what video Robert saw.
There is a lot of video going around.
I would say that, and this is why I would say, Don Lamond's charges, the magistrate didn't sign off on them.
Go back and redraft them.
You know what the evidence?
And I want to have this discussion with Barnes, Viva Voce.
You know the evidence that they were intimidated.
They said they felt intimidated.
You have Don Lamon interviewing church attendees, acknowledging that they must feel terrified.
I'm not convinced that the protest got started the way one of the ladies said it got started, the one who got arrested.
And so it also depends on which set of facts you believe.
And Robert's theory or interpretation was predicated on the version of events that they went in, they sat down and didn't immediately disrupt.
Once the service was over, then they started asking questions about which pastor works for ICE, and then all shit broke loose.
So it depends on which set of facts you are accepting and what video you've seen.
But in my view, and I take it as, you know, you take it as a Canadian podcasting schnook who has a pretty damn good track record when it comes to these types of things.
There was, from all that I saw, the threat of intimidation by their own rejoicing and by Don Lamond's own admission.
A clandestine operation.
You know, it's true, the trespass.
I don't know if that's federal trespass.
I presume it is not federal trespass, but I'm skeptical of Robert's interpretation.
So we'll talk about it on Sunday.
We got King of Bill Tong in the house who says most Bill Tong talks a big game.
I don't think most people even know what Bill Tong is, Bill Tong, King of Bill Tong, Anton.
It's beef jerky made out of, it's prosciutto made out of beef jerky.
It's delicious.
We focus on meat quality, clean ingredients, and doing it right.
We then let customers decide.
Check out Bill Tongusa.com, code Viva for 10% off.
Go support Bill Tong.
Get some Bill Tong.
It's delicious.
You never, I say you never regret buying food or clothing or coffee mugs because everybody needs them.
Go buy some food.
Let me give myself a thumbs up here.
Rules-Based International Order 00:14:38
What I was going to say is if you want to support the channel, go download the Rumble Wallet.
It's on Google Play for the Android and it's on Apple for the iPhone.
You can scan this if you have crypto and tip with crypto.
I'll leave it up there for three seconds.
You can go to vivabarnslaw.locals.com to support the work that Robert and I do.
You want to tip with gold-backed, tether-backed, whatever it is called, scan this one.
Tether partnered with Rumble.
Tether is now a shareholder in Rumble, and they've incorporated this ability to actually own, invest, tip with crypto by downloading Rumble Wallet.
It's associated with your account.
Do not lose your 12-password CBOR thing.
This is back to gold in that you can actually redeem your XAUT by going to Switzerland, if you so choose, and getting your XAUT in gold.
And you can tip with the, this is dollar back.
Okay, so that's it.
That's it.
We're all done there, and let's go like that.
Okay, we're not going to not get to the three passport carrying globalist who are, but let me see what's going on in the chat over on Crumble while we're there.
Enjoy the show, eh?
Okay.
Send Grassley blue slips with three words written, abolish the blue slip.
Okay, that at least didn't go where I thought it was going to go.
Okay.
Is everybody familiar with the board of peace that Trump has constituted or is proposing for the rebuilding of Gaza?
If you haven't heard about it, we're going to get into it in a second.
There's a board of peace that they're proposing.
Trump is going to be the chairman of, and it's going to consist of nations that are going to voluntarily join.
There's a, I don't know if it's a financial requirement or just a preference of a $1 billion investment in order to join the Board of Peace from state heads.
And you join the Board of Peace.
You'll have a, not a say, but you'll be involved in the rebuilding of Gaza.
Presumably, you're going to get certain economic interests in whatever nation joins.
And you're going to have state heads who are going to be the representatives, bring in a billion dollars, and we're going to use it to rebuild Gaza.
There's a, you know, and you don't have to agree with it to understand that this is what people are going to think.
It's what people are going to feel.
People are going to feel very vindicated in a lot of the so-called conspiracy theories that have been floated since the first day of the retaliatory incursion, the military response to the October 7 terrorist attack that people were saying they're just going to raise the entire territory.
Israel's going to occupy it as part of Greater Israel, or it's going to be the Palestinian people are going to be dispossessed of their land and someone else is going to come in and take it.
And that's the broader, that was always the underlying point.
This was a conspiracy theory, and the way it has turned out is not going to dispel that.
It's going to confirm it in a great many people.
The flip side argument to that is the realpolitik argument.
It's what it is right now.
You may not like how it got there.
There's no reason to like how it got there.
Nobody on either side should like how it got there, but that's where the world is right now.
The realpolitik also element of it was things were not working before.
We are where we are right now.
How do you prevent it from going right back to where it was before?
You may not like it, and I can understand a whole hell of a lot of people won't.
Well, the way you avoid going back to the way it was before is you have an international community come in, basically take control over rebuilding, development, possession of it, and then you have effectively kicked everybody out through conflict, and you'll rebuild.
And hopefully it'll be an international community where there will not be a constant threat tension between Israel and a neighbor that is hell-bent on its destruction.
Trump has been going around inviting people to the or issuing invitations to join this board.
And there's been a number of countries that have actually already accepted the invite.
And again, whether you like it or not, and whether you like how we got here, this is where it is.
A lot of the countries that have accepted the invitation thus far are countries with interests in the Middle East and an interest for stability in the Middle East.
But Trump has withdrawn his invitation for Carney.
After Davos, I love how the Washington Compost calls it a Davos spat.
The pair traded barbs in the World Economic Forum speeches, where the Canadian leader said the rules-based world order was over.
You don't trade barbs among political, economic, military unequals.
What you have is one person flapping at the gums and writing checks that their butts can't cash.
And that is Mark John.
They don't even know who his middle name is, John.
Mark J. Carney, three passport-carrying globalists who are sucking at the proverbial communist Chinese party leader, She's TTs.
But Trump has done what he's done, and Trump has done what Trump does, which is bombastically withdrawn his invitation for Mark J. Carney and Canada to have a seat at the table.
President Donald Trump has rescinded his invitation to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney to join the Board of Peace.
I hope I called it the Board of Peace, right?
Not the Board of Development.
After the Canadian leader gave a fiery speech in Davos, Switzerland, in which he said a new assertiveness by the United States and other superpowers meant that the rules-based international order was over.
What the hell does that even mean?
But we'll get back to that.
He urged medium-sized powers to act together to avoid being, quote, on the menu.
The rules-based international order, it's not over.
It's just evolving.
You know, I've always said, people say that, you know, well, there are rules and there are exceptions to the rules.
My philosophy and my insight or intellect on this is that there are no exceptions to rules.
There are just overarching or overriding rules or subsidiary rules.
Like, trying to think of a good example.
Oh, yeah, I before E, except after C.
Well, that's not an exception to the rule.
That's just I before E is the broader rule.
And then the overarching or the underwriting, whatever you want to go by, is except after C. That's it.
So, friend, F-R-I-E-N-D. C.
Now I can't think of one that, oh, geez.
I before E, except after C.
I can't think of a word that goes C-I-E.
Oh, forget it.
But you know what I'm saying.
So there's not a new, there's no, it's not that there's no internet rule-based international order.
It's evolving.
It might be being written, rewritten, or you might just be discovering new layers to that rule-based international order.
One thing that is for certain, it is hardly up to a man like Mark J. Carney to declare it over for no better reason.
You might not like the rules that are being applied right now, which might be economic rules, realpolitik rules.
He may not like them, but there are not no rules.
He just doesn't like the rules that he's being forced to play by right now.
Dear Prime Minister Carney, Trump wrote on True Social.
Sorry.
Please let this letter capitalize his letter.
Please let this letter serve to represent that the Board of Peace is withdrawing its invitation to you regarding Canada's joining.
What will be the most prestigious board of leaders ever assembled at any time?
Trump didn't explain his reasoning, but his withdrawal of Canada's invitation is the latest in escalations and tensions between the leaders of the neighboring powers who traded barbs in the hyperfamily.
The White House declined to elaborate on Trump's post.
The Canadian Prime Minister Office did not immediately respond to requests.
The White House sent invitations to at least 50 countries to join the Board of Peace.
That's $50 billion.
And international presence to ensure An international representation in rebuilding.
People out there are going to say, What right does the international community have to rebuild on what many people would feel?
We're not talking about Israel proper, Gaza Strip, stolen land.
Like, what right?
Even if it's a portion of it, what right on earth does the international community have to come in and rebuild there?
Well, you know, one of my theories and one of my suggestions or possibilities for how you could have peace in the Middle East was, you know, if you, Hamas is a terrorist organization.
I don't care what anything else.
Hamas is a terrorist organization and they are the elected government in Gaza.
Have an interest.
I mean, I know it hasn't worked exactly in the past.
The UN hasn't exactly been the cleanest of hands organizations and sometimes has been caught participating in, you know, things like human trafficking, terrorism, whatever.
Have an international body govern Gaza and take away power from Hamas.
So, you know, in a way, it's the solution that might have been the only solution all along.
Hamas is a terrorist organization, the elected so-called back in the day and has never held another election, and they can't be in power.
But you also don't want to have Israel govern the Gaza Strip.
So you have an international community.
This is effectively what it's going to be: 50 countries to join the Board of Peace, which the Trump administration envisages as a sweeping body intent to resolving global colleagues with global conflicts with a scope rivaling the United Nations.
Davos Thursday, Trump was joined by representatives from 19 countries at a signing ceremony.
While more than two dozen nations have accepted, several traditional allies, including European nations, have denied or equivocated citing the need to study the proposal.
I wanted to get to the countries that have accepted.
Canada had accepted an invitation on principle, but said it would not pay the $1 billion for a permanent seat.
Carney said separately, he thought Canada's participation would be conditional on the resumption of a full flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Carney's Frank speech Thursday, Tuesday, received a rare standing ovation.
You know, it could have been a flipping pug giving the speech.
They would have given it the standing ovation, not because of the quality of the speech, just because in their mind, what it represents, oh, somebody's standing up to Trump.
That, and you give him an Obama-type delivery, and, you know, you give it Carney, like, eh.
The same way of talking as Jack Smith and Victoria Newland, they would have given a standing ovation to a statue.
Middle powers must act together because if we're not at the table, we're on the menu, Carney warned.
Who's fear-mongering here?
In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in the countries in between have a choice: compete with each other for favor or to combine to create a third path with impact.
Oh, that's after he went and suckled at the tee of President Xi or leader Xi.
He also urged fellow world leaders to take an unfettered worldview, call it what it is, a system intensifying great power rivalry where the most powerful pursue their interests using economic integration as coercion, yeah, or just you know, as what it is.
He said he warned that the status quo international order was over and is not coming back.
Okay, I want to get to the part here.
Trump told the audience Wednesday that Canadian lies, Canadian lives because of the United States.
It was a rebuke of global proportions.
Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements, Canada gets a lot of freebies from us.
Trump told the Forum they should be grateful also, but they're not.
I watched your prime minister yesterday.
He wasn't so grateful.
Let me go see here.
Canada and the United States have built a remarkable partnership in the economy, security, yada, yada, yada.
But Canada doesn't live because of the United States.
Canada thrives because we are Canadian.
This is when you let your pride just get in the way of practical realities.
I mean, imagine if the U.S. superpower wasn't south of the Canadian border.
It would have been taken over yesterday by China, but the problem is it's already been taken over by China, just not militaristically.
Now, where is the one that tells us which countries are part of this board of peace?
Hold up.
Wait a minute.
Something ain't right.
Trump withdraws.
Republican slammed.
I have it here in the backdrop somewhere.
Maybe I don't have it.
Let me just get this.
We can at least probably agree that AI will give us who is on the board of peace so far.
There's United Arab Emirates.
I think they've accepted.
There's let's see here how quickly this is going to give me an answer.
Nope, not fast enough for my ADHD.
Where is it?
Oh, here we go.
Yeah, the membership-led board of peace requires an invitation from the chairman, a billion dollars contributing to the Gaza reconstruction.
Invitation only, three-year term operational.
As of January 2026, countries that have agreed to join include the UAE, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Morocco, Argentina, Hungary, and others.
So, you know, oddly enough, the countries that have the most interest in stability in the region have joined.
How on earth you're going to manage the interests, the expectations, and the potential rivalries between all of these countries?
Who knows?
I can tell that a lot of people out there are going to view this as vultures coming to pick up the pieces that are left in Gaza for their own financial development interests.
But it doesn't look like Canada is going to have a seat at that table anytime soon.
Of course, if China joins, then Canada doesn't need a seat at the table.
It'll have a de facto seat at the table.
They'll be China's plus one to the board of peace.
Whenever Xi comes for events, he'll have his date.
He'll invite Carney.
It's his plus one.
I don't think we'll see if China even joins, but I've been thinking about that joke all day.
Delivered.
Five on 10.
People, let me see what's going on in the chat and see what anybody has to say about my musings.
You proved me correct.
Failure.
Okay, I don't know.
Let's see what happens here.
Trump's owned by the Edelson, says Rabbi Shvarzi Schmek.
He owned by, or he look, you cannot deny that the Edelsons, or at least Miriam Edelson's surviving wife of her late husband, has access to and influence over the administration.
And that's what comes with it's dirty.
Let Them Raise Their Defenses 00:03:56
Get money out of politics.
So you can't really disagree with the substance, but perhaps only the formulation of that thought.
Canada and America's relationship is over.
There was one over here.
Boiling point live says there are three major elements.
There are three major element definitions of the FACE Act.
There is more than sufficient probable cause to charge Lemon.
That's the other element that I would discuss with Robbie.
Like, all right, he might have some legit defenses.
Let him make those defenses.
I'm not saying let him prove his innocence.
Let him raise his defenses.
Right now, we're at the stage of we've all seen it.
And whether or not they get off, I mean, the question is: if you want to set an example, are you setting the bad example by charging them and having them get off versus not charging them and setting a bad precedent?
I would say there's prima fasci evidence to charge.
Let them raise their defenses, have their day in court.
And if they prove their innocence, we'll get clarification on how FACE Act and KKK Act violations have to materialize in real life.
But I don't, I think if you don't charge based on what we've seen, you're going to encourage a whole hell of a lot more lawlessness and you're going to have escalations that are going to lead to much more serious consequences than what we've already seen.
And we've only not seen worse consequences by the grace of God.
Mandalichi.
Viva, you seem so passionate about the law and surely enjoy being a podcaster.
Have you thought on becoming a lawful USA bar attorney so that you can help?
I asked Barnes last week about joining the U.S. government attorneys to fight back.
Ranting helps, but actions with knowledge behind it better.
I'm not an attorney, but I'm dang good at researching.
There's two things.
There's an expression that exists for a reason, which is politics is downstream from culture.
Is that the way it is?
It is arguable, and I'm not, I'm not going to, there's obvious jokes that I know you can make.
You can have more of an impact, not just ranting, but in terms of public opinion, public awareness, education.
I mean, I don't consider this like I'm not a teacher, but I hope people learn something from this.
You know, if you hold seminars and have this is basically a daily seminar of helping people become aware, I don't think I could ever practice again.
I think I've, you know, there's too many saucy tweets out there.
I look like a lunatic.
Nobody would take me seriously in a courtroom.
You know, a judge, I can't get past the decorum element of it.
And I don't think that that's where you effect the most amount of change.
But maybe I'm only saying that because I'm making an excuse for what I've chosen to do in life.
It's, I've been in the courtroom.
I mean, I did 13 years.
It was civil.
It wasn't, it was, you know, you take cases that you think are important, and then you take cases that also pay the bills.
Not in terms of compromising your integrity, just because some of them are not interesting.
Some of them are more interesting.
Some of them are interesting in law, but rich people fighting among rich people, which is basically what the majority of commercial civil litigation is.
But then you, you know, to get into something like what Charlie Kirk was doing is far more impactful in politics and law than going and getting bogged down in Congress.
It was when I ran for office for the PPC.
I was like, okay, I'm going to go, I'm going to run for government and I'll get, you know, idiot I am.
I'll get elected and I'll be one of 332 MPs or however many they're at right now.
We'll get nothing of what I want done.
It'll give me some leeway to express my politics publicly without embarrassment.
You get nothing done.
So politics is downstream from culture.
I prefer to be part of the cultural element of it and hopefully inform and educate in a humorous and enlightening manner.
If I can't do that, then I have to reassess what I'm doing in life.
We're going to get to one other thing here.
Let me bring up a couple more over in our viva barnslaw.locals.com before we get rid.
Empowering The Government To Dispossess You 00:11:02
What is this?
Okay, that's not real.
You're not a lunatic.
You are a Florida man now.
Yeah, maybe I still don't think I would be any more contextually appropriate in a Florida courtroom.
But I also just, I can't, I can't deal with it.
I can't deal with that level of paper pushing, grinding your wheels.
And they have, and people have to pay for it.
Like, it's like, everyone, everyone encourages everyone to give their life away and to give their time away.
But like, you know, you need to get paid for the work that you do.
And then the clients are like, this was my problem as a lawyer.
It's like, you felt, I felt like shit sending out these invoices and collecting, where ultimately, at the end of the day, it's like you don't feel like you're getting anything accomplished.
Then I realize, holy crab apples, you can make money on a video catching a fish with a drone.
It's like, holy crab apples.
Ick a guy, people.
Ick a guy.
Okay, last thing, I guess, before we go over to Viva Barnes Law.locals.com, which is what I was going to do.
Hold on, what was it?
Oh, yeah, that's right.
It was the kill switch.
Barnes mentioned the kill switch yesterday in the Piece of legislation that Massey proposed an amendment that would have eliminated the program of installing kill switches in vehicles.
And 57 Republicans, along with the Democrats, voted against the amendment, such that now the government is going to, in addition to funding $5 billion for more illegal aid and whatever, they're going to fund kill switches in cars to pretextually prevent intoxicated people from driving vehicles.
What's amazing is, and this is partisan nonsense in terms of the attacks on Massey.
Like, Massey can do no right, even in the minds of people who think Trump can do no wrong, or Massey can do no right in the eyes of people who think he doesn't sincerely hold beliefs and is just trying to be a grandstanding, whatever.
And so I saw people dumping on Massey for voting against this continued funding bill.
And I heard Barnes say, no, that's not what the bill is.
The bill is, A, it contains like $5 billion for funding illegals.
And there's this kill switch element.
And I don't even know how these things all fit together because they slap all of these things and it makes it impossible to understand what the hell is going on.
January 22nd, 2026, House of Representatives, they passed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, and it contains $800 billion for the Department of War, $13 billion for a Golden Dome, modernization, yada, yada, yada.
Department of housing, rental assistance, $34 billion, $35 billion to renew all existing tenant-based rental assistance.
Homelessness, $4.4 billion for homeless assistant grants.
And where was the part about the $5 billion?
Public health, $4.6 billion for community health centers and investments in rural health.
Okay, that wasn't necessarily it.
Refugee assistance.
Labor HHS portion of the bill includes $5.69 billion for the Office of Refugee Resettlement.
This funding is for legal refugees, asylees, victims of trafficking to receive medical and employment assistance.
And in case of a decrease, it's a decrease of $6.3 billion.
Okay, so there's that.
Then this thing comes in about the kill switch.
And DeSantis.
I mean, look, for anybody who loves DeSantis, I guess you have to love Massey right now.
And for anybody who loves Massey, you got to love DeSantis.
And for anybody, okay, whatever.
This is what's going on.
House GOP slammed by conservatives for joining Dems on controversial kill switch amendment.
DeSantis blasts the federal requirement as something you'd expect in Orioles 1984 after Massey's amendment fails.
It's always difficult to understand how these things go.
They propose an amendment which doesn't get the required votes.
People voted against the amendment.
57 Republicans voted with the vast majority of Democrats on Thursday to keep a Biden-era mandate enabling government remote control of vehicles, drawing backlash from conservatives like Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.
The group voted to defeat the amendment proposed by Rep. Thomas Massey that would have rolled back the government requirements for the development of a kill switch to disabled cars of impaired drivers.
The amendment failed by 164 to 268.
If successful, the amendment would have been folded into a much larger bill to fund the Department of War, housing, urban development, transportation, et cetera, et cetera.
The larger package went on to pass the chamber 341 to 888.
And I'm fairly certain Massey voted against it.
The group went to Z. Massey included his counter, yada, yada, yada.
He voted against it.
I think that's what he's taking the crap for, where they're saying he voted against the bill and he's anti-American and it's anti-Department of War.
And the argument is he wanted an amendment in there that would not fund a program that will empower the government to install kill switches in vehicles.
Oh, but they're only dealing with kill switches for intoxicated, inebriated drivers.
It'll save a lot of lives.
Every tyrannical law is justified as being for the greater good.
It's justified as for the children.
It'll make people safer.
You know what would make people real safe?
No private vehicle ownership.
Now, I appreciate the argument that there's a, I mean, you can make the compelling policy issue that being able to turn off drunk people's cars is great.
How about just preventing them from getting cars if they have convictions?
I mean, and then where does it stop, incidentally?
I mean, where would it stop in terms of firearms?
In terms of heavy machinery, in terms of any machinery.
And this is more laws, less justice.
You already have laws against drunk driving.
You have the ability to enforce it.
You have the ability to impose sanctions.
Now they want the ability to turn off your cars.
Does everybody remember what Vault 9 is?
Hold on a second.
Hold up.
Vault 9.
What is it?
Was it called Vault 9?
What was it called?
No, no, hold on.
What Alex Jones, what was the program Alex Jones mentioned about hijacking cars to kill people?
I thought it was called Vault 9.
Chat's probably already gotten it.
I don't see it.
It was called based on the globalist deep state agents are connected to a car technology to remotely hijack vehicles and kill specific agents.
What was it called?
What was the disclosure called?
Oh, I need to go to the chat.
It's not coming fast enough.
Locals, do you remember what it was?
It was Vault 7, not Vault 9.
What kind of stupid FIFA?
Get your stuff together.
Vault 7.
What was it?
Vault 7 is a code name for a massive series of confidential documents released by WikiLeaks beginning March 7, 2017.
These documents deal sophisticated cyber warfare surveillance hijacking capabilities by the CIA between 2013 and 2016.
So you think you're going to give them the right to turn off your car, shut down your car in the middle of Death Valley?
Good luck to you.
Remote start your car and drive you into a tree?
Sorry.
That's bad.
That's bad.
And I'm not going to, I don't know.
People are not going to look back at me now in 20 years and say, I sound like the first guy who said, you can't tell me I can't drink and drive if I want to have a beer when I'm driving home from work.
No, not the same thing at all.
Empowering the government to literally dispossess you of your vehicle.
I mean, that sounds like a takings violation already.
That's all I have to say about that.
All right.
Before we head over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com, let us see who we shall raid.
Hmm, Badlands.
I guess we can go raid Russell Brand.
Russell Brand looks like he's eulogizing his dog.
So we'll go.
Go say hi to Russell Brand.
And before you go, come on over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
Sunday Night Show is going to be a banger.
Thank you all for being here.
Go raid and tell them I said hi.
If you're going, you can opt out.
If you want to stick around for a few minutes, I'll take the chat and we'll see what's going on.
Then we're going to go over to vivabarnslaw.locals.com for our daily after party.
And I'm looking around my desk.
I think I got everything.
Check my chat.
Okay.
Go.
Raid has been confirmed.
Tell Russell I say hello.
Viva Raid.
What's up, Russell?
Does Russell have two L's or one L?
Two L's.
Okay, there we go.
Uh, that is it.
We got Cheen Visage, which means dog face in French.
Baby organ harvesting.
Good question.
What say you?
What say you, gesticulating Viva?
Hold on, what's the Viva?
No, that's what's the dude.
What you can't.
Oh, options available for Canadians.
Made, no guns, health cue, and die while waiting.
No more knives, have to eat with sporks, left to drink one, left to drink oneself to death.
And then I think Sheen Visage says, don't forget baby organ harvesting.
Hold on, what's the baby organ harvesting?
But in Canada, they had that report that came out that said basically Canadians are going to resort to foraging for food within the next 10 years.
And I don't know if they were just describing what's actually happening right now, given the demographic of people that are being led into the country who are currently forging for food.
Netting fish illegally, poaching animals.
And that's it.
Okay, let's do a couple of chat over here, and then we're going to go.
We want a divorce.
Oh, no, that's all the way.
Let's go to the bottom here.
I put gas in my EVN.
They already have an interlock device you can put in a car so drunks can start the car.
This is just about control.
Absolutely.
I mean, and that requires a court order and good reason to put into an individual car.
So there's a good reason for the taking, and as much as that argument could be made.
Remote boomer, turn signal shut off.
Well, I know I wanted to get an old, an older school car.
I got the Bronco, and apparently, any car that has, what is it, like those screens, they can shut off.
But anyhow, that's it.
Okay, let's do it.
We're going to go to vivabarnslaw.locals.com after party, booyah.
And see you Sunday.
Locals.
Godspeed.
And locals, here I comes.
Export Selection