George Zinn Pleads Guilty? Lawyers Explain Trucker Class Action Scandal! Epstein Fallout & 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!
-----
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) is a Canadian non-profit legal advocacy organization founded in 2010 that defends constitutional rights and freedoms through litigation and education, often focusing on cases involving free speech, personal liberties, and challenges to government overreach (e.g., related to COVID measures and the Freedom Convoy).
Ladies and gentlemen of the interwebs, in today's totally random intro intended to highlight the beauty of nature, behold the beauty of the owl in the constant interplay between predator and prey and farmer who does not want predator eating his prey.
And listen to the sounds of the birds and how they all go silent at the end for a very good reason.
Behold.
Owls have strong talons.
This fellow here was eating my chickens.
Not gonna hurt him.
I just had to grab him to get him out of this fuck chicken house.
And I can't get my finger out of these talons.
This is fucking nuts.
I'm actually surprised the talons are not destroying his hands.
Talons are quite sharp.
Destroying his hand.
I got him.
Oh my God, he got me.
I don't know what he's doing right there.
There's a Napoleon dynamite reference in here somewhere, I'm told.
I wish we could be friends.
You're fucking cool.
It is amazing.
You look at the eyes of that animal.
And by the way, I've been told by credible scientists that the owl is actually not a smart bird, that it's a misnomer, and the wise owl trope is actually biologically and genealogically incorrect.
I don't want you eating my birds, however, sir.
Look at this amazing fucking owl.
It is amazing.
Rotate your owl for science.
Does everybody remember that?
They have their heads.
My wife is a neuroscientist, as many of you already know, and they have a way of maintaining wherever, I forget what it is, like a gyroscopic biological mechanism where they keep their eyes on the prey no matter which way their body's turning.
And there was a great scientific video called Row, Row, Rotate Your Owl for Science.
Now, what you don't want is you don't want that beak getting on you.
If those talons are that strong, I can only imagine what the beak is like.
All right, we're going to skip to the end.
Listen to what this goes.
This isn't allowed, sir.
This is not permissible.
Listen to the sound of the chickens go silent when the threat disappears.
Now, fly, Mordecai.
Fly.
That's flipping amazing.
I was once in the Living Desert Museum in California, and I was at the display with those birds that have the long tongues and they lick up the not the pulp, the sweet fluid that comes out of plants.
What's it called?
You know what the word is.
I forget what it is.
And we're all in the cage, and all of a sudden, all the birds basically flocked either to, I forget what they did exactly.
They all went and hid because a falcon was flying over the entrapment.
And they were all responding to that, even though there was no real risk of the falcon getting through.
No, it's not.
It's nectar.
It's nectar.
Janie Beans, not there.
You go.
Thank you.
Now it's coming in.
And it's amazing.
Science is amazing.
Nature is amazing.
And I figured we'd start with a bit of a palate cleanse, although I don't know if it's a palette cleanse.
Download Rumble Wallet Safely00:03:49
If it comes, you know, the first minute of the show, we're not really cleansing our palates.
It's a preemptive palate cleanse because today's show has a lot of supreme nastiness in it.
We're going to talk about George Zinn, the man who initially claimed to have been the shooter in the Charlie Kirk assassination.
He pleaded guilty, and that story has sort of slipped under the radar as another development in the investigation, prosecution, Charlie Kirk assassination case.
We're going to get to that.
We're going to get to the highlights of the Epstein stuff because it's flipping wild and flipping atrocious.
And, you know, you try to catch up on it.
It's sort of impossible to navigate through 3 million documents, video and audio.
And you do your best to aggregate.
the collective efforts of all of the nodes on the internet.
You know, like we are a bunch of information seekers, nodes on the internet that are operating and you try to aggregate the information from each and every individual node who goes about it in their own way.
And I'll do my best to be an aggregator.
You know, I tried to cover this as I was up in or down in El Salvador over the weekend for that Plan B Bitcoin conference where I was speaking, interviewing a number of people.
And it was quite interesting.
Rumble was down there, sponsored the event.
Tether was down there, major shareholder stakeholder in Rumble, sponsored the event as well.
And I was trying to filter through the information and I got what I thought were some of the good highlights, but there's been more and we're going to get into that.
And I'm supposed to have on the lawyers from the JCCF, who are the actual lawyers in the class action suit that I covered yesterday in our viva barneslaw.locals.com exclusive after party and subsequently published that clip to ComiTube and Rumble.
So we'll see.
And before we get into anything, for those of you who may not know who I am, Viva Fry, former Montreal litigator, turned current Florida Rumbler, David Freiheit.
Freiheit means la liberte, freedom in German.
We are streaming daily in the Rumble lineup at three o'clock.
And then after every show, we go for a shorter or longer locals only after party where we take questions, have our community discussions, and it's fantastic, cover some topics that we didn't necessarily cover during the show.
And it's beautiful.
VivabarnesLaw.locals.com.
When I was in El Salvador for the conference, it was primarily to highlight to the world, and let me bring it up for you, the innovation that is occurring right now at Rumble.
Innovation that ensures uncancelability of voice and uncancellability of finances.
And that innovation, the most recent, look at this crazy nutbag.
Hold on.
Primarily to, there we go.
That's better.
Is the tip button.
You can tip in cryptocurrency, receive in cryptocurrency, invest in cryptocurrency, hold cryptocurrency in a non-custodial wallet that Rumble has rolled out for everyone, not just for content creators.
You can buy, invest, trade in crypto if you're so inclined using the Rumble wallet.
Download the Rumble wallet, not the sponsor of today's show, but do it anyhow.
Download Rumble the app so you get immediate notifications when people go live.
And you can tip in Bitcoin if you so choose.
You scan on that if you have a crypto wallet.
You can tip your favorite creator in crypto.
You want to tip in gold because you have more faith in that than the tumbling Bitcoin?
You can go tip in gold tethered crypto, courtesy of Tether, hence the name.
Scan it, download it.
You can invest.
You can tip whatever.
It's amazing.
Rumble is the platform of the future in the present.
And I have no doubt that the CommiTubes and the other platforms are going to copy this model because it's amazing.
And you can go get the Rumble wallet at Google Play for Android and the Apple Store for Apple and download Rumble the app so that you get immediate real-time notifications.
Emergencies Act Controversy00:15:23
So you don't sit there and say, why didn't I get notified that Viva Fry was live with John Carpe, the lawyer from the JCCF who I now see in the backdrop?
And we're going to start the show with that.
Now, have we covered everything?
I think we've covered everything.
I want to, we'll get the good Canadian news out of the way before we get into the supreme nastiness of American politics and news.
And if anybody gets the reference for supreme nastiness, put it in the chat.
And I would like to see who gets it first.
It's a classic of all time of a movie.
Yeah, some supreme nastiness, yes.
Okay, so we're going to start with the Canadian story.
I gave the framework, the groundwork yesterday during our local show.
And why the hell didn't I get a notification, Bill?
Well, son of a gun, considering you're in our viva barnslaw.locals.com community, that might be because you, I don't know, turn notification off.
And we'll get to the rest of it later, but that's it.
I see John in the back.
John, if you can hear me and see me, activate your mic and camera.
We're going to bring you in and we're going to talk about what I'm predicting is going to be a mini scandal in Canada.
He's jumping on now.
Not used to this before, but we'll make it.
Yeah, I should have.
See, I use streamier typical.
Oh, there we go.
John, how goes the battle, sir?
Hey, well, we got a big ray of sunshine piercing through the dark clouds with the January federal court of appeal ruling, which upheld the lower court decision that Prime Minister Trudeau and the federal cabinet acted illegally in February 2022 when they used violence to crack down on peaceful freedom convoy protest.
They violated our charter rights and freedoms when they seized bank accounts.
And so the Justice Center had been involved in that at the trial level.
We provided lawyers for four Canadians to sue the federal government.
We got the declaration we were looking for in 2024.
Federal government appealed it and lost.
And so we got a great ruling.
Other than that, things are pretty dark in Canada.
Well, hold on.
We got ahead of ourselves already.
Before we even get into that, I know I was going to ask Grok how many times you've been on.
I think you've been on at least a half dozen times.
But for those who might be new to the channel who don't know who you are, tell them who you are.
So John Carpe in Calgary, heading up the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms, a national nonprofit registered charity.
We have a team of lawyers across Canada taking on dozens and dozens and dozens of court cases from British Columbia to Newfoundland in defense of our freedoms of expression, association, peaceful assembly, conscience, religion, travel, mobility, bodily autonomy.
And so we are fighting for freedom in the courts of law and also in the court of public opinion.
And we're funded entirely by voluntary donations.
The first time you were on, I mean, it was during COVID.
I remember the first interview.
It was amazing.
You were representing some of the pastors who were fined and jailed, if I remember the details correctly.
You've been doing the Lord's work when it comes to contesting these tyrannical measures.
But before we get into Paul Champ in Ottawa, tell me if I'm being overly cynical.
You guys were involved in the recent federal court of appeal ruling, unanimous, which confirmed that Justin Trudeau's invocation of the Emergencies Act was, what was it?
They said, unreasonable and ultra-virus, meaning beyond legal authority, unlawful.
And it was unanimous, reaffirming the lower court, which was Judge Mosin, if I remember correctly.
Mosley, Mosley.
Mosley, sorry, Mosley.
And, you know, and people were rejoicing.
Now, my cynicism is that we're four years out of the COVID lockdown measures.
People have forgotten and people want to forget.
People have moved on and people want to move on.
And great.
You have a victory on paper that ordered no penalty, no sanction, no fines, no consequences.
Go for it.
The act doesn't provide.
I'm glad you brought that up because people ask legitimately, and I asked the same question, where's the justice in this?
And the Emergencies Act itself does not have a provision that says if Canadians take the federal government to court and they get a court ruling that the federal government was out of line and didn't meet the requirements of the Emergencies Act, which was the case here.
I mean, a local peaceful protest in Ottawa is not a national emergency.
But the thing is, if you added to that legislation that the politicians who use the Emergencies Act, that they could be personally liable if a court down the road says that they made a mistake,
think twice before you want that provision in there, because if there was a real national emergency, not a local peaceful protest in Ottawa, you might have a situation where the Emergencies Act should be used and then politicians are scared of using it because they're scared of going to jail or paying a fine in the future.
Anyway, just food for thought.
But the Emergencies Act, the reason why nobody's being directly held to account is that the Emergencies Act does not contain such a provision.
Same thing with the Conflict of Interest Act, where there's no penal sanctions.
There's some minimal fines if you're found to be in violation of conflict of interest.
But so the bottom line is nobody's going to jail.
Nobody's getting anything more than a political slap on the wrist.
And my concern is when I read that judgment, all that it did is lay out the framework, the groundwork, the verbiage that the next government is going to be certain to use when invoking the Emergencies Act in order to comply with the findings of this act.
So basically, in addition to doing nothing, although the legislation empowered the court to do no more than what it did, it basically just lays the groundwork for what the government needs to say the next time in order for it to be justified.
Am I being overly blackpilled cynical?
Not really, but bear in mind, look, it depends on the nature of the politicians that are in power at a particular moment in time.
If they have some honesty, some integrity, some love for truth, then they're not going to use the Emergencies Act unless it's truly necessary, truly warranted.
Now, if you've got a devious scheming, lack of integrity, not truth-loving government, then certainly they would read the federal court of appeal ruling and the lower court ruling, which is the level at which the Justice Center was involved.
They would read that and try to dress up their language to match up with the court ruling.
They would still be faced with a problem, though, if the facts on the ground don't align with what they're saying, they could still get another court ruling against them.
And then that was the other black pill element is, okay, so they'll do it again in the future.
It'll take four years to work its way through the courts again in the future.
And I mean, I guess now you have the precedent, which should in theory bar any immediate action or at least mitigate it.
And it's not to downplay the good work that you guys have done.
It's amazing.
It's just that this is the shitty system in which we live.
Justice at the end of the day, like I've been saying, is nothing more than a cessation of the injustice, and there's no retribution or actual compensation for the wrong.
The question a lot of people have been asking as well is what impact does this have on some of the other civil claims?
Positive.
Positive.
Civil claims against the government for the criminal cases, totally irrelevant, effectively irrelevant.
Actually, so the Justice Center is funding the legal representation for Diane Magus, who is the lawyer for Chris Barber.
We got a small victory in December.
The Crown failed to seize his truck, Big Red.
So that was very positive.
We were all, Chris was, of course, beside himself with worry and anxiety.
I was very worried.
You never know what the judgment's going to be until it's released.
But fortunately, we won that battle.
But the same lawyer, Diane Magus, has told me that the federal court of appeal ruling, she's using that in the criminal litigation that's still ongoing because it's under appeal.
So that's positive.
And anybody who is suing the government or the banks civilly, this federal court of appeal ruling, I think, is going to be a feather in their cap.
It's not going to guarantee a victory, but it's very, very positive.
Puts the federal government in a difficult situation when you've got a court ruling, say, you acted illegally.
The use of the Emergencies Act was not justified.
You violated charter rights and freedoms, and now you're the defendant in a civil action.
It's not going to be helpful to you to have a federal court of appeal ruling like that on file.
Yeah, and I mean, from the bank's perspective, their defense is always going to be we were authorized to do it from the government, and so therefore, you know, our hands are not going to be a problem.
We were just following orders, which I'm sorry to say it.
That's exactly the same thing which members of evil regimes say after you can say it's what it was the excuse that the people who collaborated with the Nazis said, just following orders, we were just looking out for our families and our paychecks.
Um, okay, now we're going to get into the other one.
This is uh, the case that we covered a bit, it's been sitting, I don't know, idle for a little while.
The class action lawsuit against the trucker organizers, some people who donated uh to the protest, it was a what did it start off at?
I thought it started off at $10 million and then it bumped itself to $290, $300 million.
$290 million is what the plaintiffs say that they are entitled to receive over losing a few nights' sleep for hornhonking.
Interesting but important side tangent there: the hornhonking at night stopped early on.
It did go on for a few days or a week.
Some Ottawa residents went to court and they asked for an injunction that there be no hornhonking at night.
The truckers agreed to that.
Their lawyer signed on.
After that, the truckers also wanted to get a good night's sleep.
The hornhonking at nighttime did not go on for weeks and weeks.
It did go on for a few days.
I don't think that that warrants $290 million in damages.
And then they whine about a business loss, which is questionable.
They'll have to prove that in court because there were thousands of people in Ottawa coming in from out of town, from all over Canada, and particularly people living in Toronto who drive out to Ottawa for the weekend.
Where do you think they were getting their food?
Do you think they were shopping at Safeway?
No, they were all going to the local restaurants who had a big boom in business.
When I went down there, that was my observation.
I said, any restaurant that stays open is going to make a killing because people needed to eat.
People were looking for coffee, good stuff.
And the businesses were not required to shut down.
They were told to by the government, which is almost the ebb and flow nudge-nudge of exacerbating alleged damages so they can then later claim them.
This was a class action lawsuit, still is filed by Zexie Lee.
Everybody knows who Zexey Lee is that young Instagram or, you know, I don't know if she's a social media whatever, but she works for the government.
She filed this lawsuit.
She's the lead plaintiff for this class action, also with some other restaurant owners.
But set that aside, it's a class action lawsuit that has not yet been certified, correct?
Correct.
How is, I mean, like, I know the system moves slowly, but this was filed in 2022.
How the hell has it not received certification or dismissal yet?
Well, for better or for worse, if you're a defendant, it's good news because court actions will drag on for three, four, five, six years.
If you're a plaintiff, it's bad news.
I think the root problem is that we do not have enough judges.
I believe that 99% of the judges are very hardworking and trying to render their, you know, do their work and render their rulings as quickly as possible.
You've got a few bad apples, but I think we have a fundamental shortage of justice of judges in Canada, which is why it's become normal, sadly, that, you know, we had a court action in Alberta.
In December 2020, we sued the Kenny government over these utterly unscientific and very destructive lockdown measures.
It took two and a half years to get a ruling.
This is on a violation of charter rights.
Two and a half years to get a ruling.
Yeah, the other one, challenging the airline mandate, you have to be vaccinated to fly.
It takes so long, they rescind it or suspend the measure and then argue mutinous.
So you get like, it's premature.
Then it's too late, and or then it's moot because they've allegedly rescinded the order.
So, wild, everybody, if you want to appreciate it, it's been four years that this class action has been in the legal machine.
It hasn't even received certification yet, but holy hell, have there been other developments?
So, for those who don't know, $300 million class action lawsuit seeking a class of plaintiffs, restaurant owners, citizens.
One of the defenses of the defense is that these are not similarly situated plaintiffs.
You can't really make a group for all of them.
Among other things, the amount claimed is excessive and exorbitant.
It's violating First Amendment, or not First Amendment, but constitutional rights to assemble and protest.
Paul Champ is the lawyer.
I'll name him because it's known, it's public.
Matter of public record.
He's the lawyer for Zexee Lee and the plaintiffs.
I've had a long history of issues with Paul Champ because he's a liar, he's a scoundrel, he's a scumbag.
And now, I think he's probably just put himself in some serious hot water.
I notice he's gone silent on social media about this case.
He was representing the plaintiffs, and I say it's not even allegedly anymore, it's confirmed.
He entered into, or I don't, I won't say the word coerced, but he exploited of an unrepresented defendant to the class.
His name, I forget, Chad Chad Eros.
Eros.
He exploited of that unrepresented defendant to enter into a settled agreement, settlement agreement, with only that defendant before class certification, pursuant to which Chad would make a certain sum of payments over a scheduled period of time and cooperate with the plaintiffs to communicate documentation and information without disclosing it to the court or to the other defendants who were,
from what I understand, conversing with this man who has now turned into a mole for the plaintiff without the plaintiff's lawyer telling the defendants, the defendant's lawyers, or the court to get authorization.
Are there not specific rules in class actions in particular about whether or not the court needs to authorize a settlement with anybody?
Yes, the guiding principle, and this would apply to class actions as well as civil litigation that's that's not a class action.
If the litigation landscape changes because one of the defendants pulled out, right?
So let's, you know, plaintiff is suing 10 defendants.
If the plaintiff makes a deal with one of the 10, one of the 10 defendants, whether it's initiated by the plaintiff or the plaintiff's lawyer, or whether it's the defendant on his own volition, I mean, that's neither here nor there.
But if they reach this agreement that the one of the 10 defendants is going to say, look, I want nothing further to do with this lawsuit.
I'm going to cut you a check for $10,000 or $100,000, and I want out, then the court needs to see that and know that and approve of that, especially if the defendant who's leaving is promising to switch sides and be a Benedict Arnold and go help the plaintiff and provide the plaintiff with documents and statements and swear an affidavit.
Pausing for Free Expression00:15:06
And that was the nature of the agreement that Chad Eros signed with Paul Champ that he would provide documents and be willing to swear an affidavit and sit down for hours and hours to talk about things with Paul Champ.
We have no idea if that happened or not.
We don't know, but we do know that an agreement was signed between Chad Eros and the plaintiffs represented by Paul Champ, where Chad Eros was going to pay a sum, it may have been 60 grand.
That money's not been paid, but still, it was to sit on that.
Paul Champ should have notified the other, the lawyers for the defendants the moment the ink was dry on the paper.
Well, I would argue, and maybe I'm wrong, he should have notified them of the ongoing discussions.
I mean, I can appreciate, I'm thinking out loud, I can appreciate him saying that.
Pre-signing, it's like, you know, that's, I'm not so sure about that.
But maybe you're right.
But definitely after signing this agreement, that Chad Arrows is going to switch sides and start helping the plaintiffs.
As soon as the ink was dry on the paper, that should have been disclosed to the other defendants, whether it was a class action or not.
I thought maybe there were some unique specific rules because settlements in class actions need to be approved, ratified by the judge, but that's only because all the members of the class have to accept it.
Or at least, sorry, it is because that's after somebody's legally as well.
Like, for example, in this lawsuit, they're going after people who donated to Freedom Convoy on the class of defendants, and we're fighting that tooth and nail, saying, no, there's remoteness.
That's way too far remote.
Something is glitching.
Say that again because I think you glitched out for a second.
Sorry, I lost my train of thought for a moment.
It was about the ratification or approval of the settlement.
Okay, can you hear me okay now?
Can you hear me?
I'm going to double check in our locals.
I can hear you now.
Yep.
But let me see if everybody else was glitching.
Oh, no, it wasn't.
It was maybe on my end.
Okay, sorry about that.
So go on.
So the plaintiffs are seeking class certification.
One of the classes that they're seeking is the class of people who donated to Freedom Convoy.
That was initially with GoFraud Me, otherwise known as GoFundMe, but then it was Give, Send, Go.
But to go after these donors, these good-hearted Canadians who are donating to a peaceful protest, they're not doing anything wrong.
It's not a crime.
They're not donating to a bunch of people that are smashing in store windows and setting cars on fire and threatening police and civilians, et cetera.
So we're fighting tooth and nail against the certification of donors as being a legitimate class because our legal argument is it's too remote, right?
There has to be, if somebody is going to be liable for something, it needs to be a direct causal connection, like the surgeon doing the surgery or the bad driver that rear-ended you.
It's got to be directly connected.
So that's another legal battle is to protect the legitimate interests of good Canadians who donated, who should not be held liable for anything.
I was sort of surprised that, you know, I was public that I had donated $1,000 to the give, send, go after the GoF me tried to steal all the money.
And I was saying, like, let him add me.
I mean, it would, first of all, it would only bring in a very big mouth who's very vocal on this particular issue.
But you want to try to incur liability for constitutionally protected activity.
I mean, that's, it is freedom of assembly.
It's freedom of association, freedom of conscience to donate to a lawful charity or a lawful not-for-profit, a lawful organization, and then to argue that those who donated were liable for the actions of the organization, even if what they did was what was alleged, which was not what they did.
It's insanity.
When you say that I'll avoid blaming Chad Eros, I think he obviously, I don't know how he could not have.
We have no knowledge about the conversations between the lawyer and Chad Aros, but and we don't know, you know, was it Paul who reached out to Chad or did Chad reach out to Paul?
We don't know.
It's quite possible that Chad Eros was the one who took the initiative.
Sure, no, and Paul Champ.
And he probably obviously should have told the other defendants.
I mean, there's betrayal and then there's betrayal, but set that aside, the legalities of this, you're seeking now the permanent stay of the class action.
What's the difference?
I appreciate a permanent stay is, you know, it's stayed, but what's that?
What's the difference between that and a dismissal?
Practically, it's not much of a difference.
Dismissal is more on the merits.
The judges looked at it and said, you're not bringing a valid claim, so it's dismissed.
State of proceedings is to say this action is not moving ahead any further.
It's not really making a ruling about whether the plaintiff's claim has merit or not, but the practical effect is the same.
Okay.
And in terms of potential professional liability of Paul Champ, I mean, I'm not wishing ill and I'm not trying to cause strife for the sake of it.
I would be very, I mean, I would, I wouldn't be afraid it would never have done.
I wouldn't be sleeping easy at night right now if I was Paul Champ withholding this agreement.
So the ink dried, right, on whether he was supposed to have told anybody anything prior to the signing of the agreement, the agreement was signed and at least six months went by where Paul Champ did not tell the defendants.
Chad Eros didn't tell the defendants or the defendants' lawyers.
They kept this hidden for a very long time, which to me appears to be highly unethical.
Apart from the rules of court and complying with the Class Proceedings Act of Ontario, apart from complying with legislation, complying with the rules of court, it's just highly unethical.
The litigation, you know, people have a disagreement, but the battle needs to be fought in an ethical manner that is fair to both sides.
And when you've got one of your defendants that's crossing over to the other side, the other defendants simply, as a base, even if the defendants are dead wrong in their legal position, just out of fairness, they have a right to know about that.
What's the next step in the case?
So this hearing is scheduled for what, end of February?
I believe so.
I apologize.
Don't have the date in front of me.
Okay, but this is a separate hearing to stay the action in its entirety.
And they're going to fight that out.
I anticipate that Paul Champ is going to argue that no money has changed hands.
He didn't get a 60,000.
So it really doesn't matter.
You can't say this.
Tough shit for him.
The agreement was the agreement, not relying on the default of the agreement.
I understand he's going to say, well, he didn't satisfy the terms of the agreement.
That's a default of a contract.
It's not, there was no contract.
And this man tried to, you know, through by hook or by crook or maybe Eros wanted out of this and he had $60,000 disposable money to burn to get out of it himself because he saw liability that I honestly do not see, but take that for what it's worth.
Okay.
So he defaulted on the terms of an agreement that he entered into and should have disclosed to the other defendants.
That doesn't absolve him of professional, ethical, and legal liability.
Well, I'm inclined to agree.
It's yeah, Paul Champ should not be sleeping easy at night.
If I were in his shoes, I would not be sleeping peacefully.
Now, John, how can people support the work that you're doing?
What other big cases are you working on right now?
Well, we've got ongoing, we're suing the federal government over its policy since 2017 to allow men who identify as women, who've not had any surgeries, male parts intact, can transfer into women's prisons, which has been horrific for female inmates, allegations of sexual assault, peeping toms.
You know, you've got a dude that's watching the women in the bathroom, in the change room, in the showers.
This has been going on since 2017.
The federal government is obviously digging in its heels rather than just changing the policy.
That's one of our cases.
We've got multiple freedom of expression cases.
We've got municipalities idiotically banning the recording of a public meeting.
It's so stupid.
And then they get a warning letter from one of the lawyers in the Justice Center's network.
And then typically they fold like a cheap tent, or they do so after we file a statement of claim.
So we're fighting for free expression.
And yeah, dozens of cases all over the country.
They're all set out on our website, which is jccf.ca.
Justice Center, Constitutional Freedoms, JCCF.ca.
I gave the link for the donate page to everyone.
It's jccf.ca forward slash donate.
John, I love talking with you.
You make me feel like a little more sane, but Canada has not gotten more sane since I left and since we first spoke.
But I don't know.
It's a long game.
So this too shall pass.
John, I'm going to put the links up.
I'm going to put the links up when the show is over.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Have a great rest of the day.
You too.
Godspeed.
And I'll just show you that one thing.
If you thought John was exaggerating, well, I cover this story at length.
Quebecer, I'm not sure that he's a Quebecer, everybody, but whatever.
Quebecer, who killed wife, children, must stay in men's prison despite identifying as female.
Muhammad Al-Baluz, who transitioned while in custody.
I'm sure there's nothing exploitive about that.
Had asked to be incarcerated at the Joliet Institution for Women.
Joliet is up in, I think it's just slightly north of Montreal.
I covered that story at length.
But yeah, if you think John's exaggerating about the abject insanity of Canada, and if you think that the abject insanity of Canada is only north of the border, I dare you to go look at New York and Michigan and California.
What happens up in Canada is the trickle-down effects of communism.
And I'm using the word colloquially, people.
That is it.
I'm going to put the links up there.
Thank you very much, John.
And we're going to get into some stuff.
The main stuff of the day, right after we deal with some business, which is reading the crumble rants.
We got Dominant One who says, real men like to get pounded by Anton's furman juicy meat.
It's built on.
It's delicious.
Then I got a tip on the Rumble wallet.
Let's see.
OC.
Oh, it doesn't tell you who gets.
Let's see here.
So I go to the app.
It's so cool.
Rumble wallet.
And there's, yeah, some people don't like that it scans your face, but you can, I brought that concern to the team.
And apparently they're going to look into.
And look at that.
Notification.
Booyah.
Thank you.
OG Sin 13.
Oh, the original Sin 13.
Hey, John Viva Cyr Williamson says, John, what's your feeling about Bill 9?
Now that's been pushed back on schedule, pushed back in the schedule.
Also thoughts on C6.
When we have more time, I'll tweet that out and tag John or the JCCF so he can answer that afterwards.
Sorry I didn't get to that when he was here.
We got to get on to the other stuff, which is George Zinn and the Epstein files.
But first, before we do that, let's go see what's going on in our Viva Barnes Law.locals.
Canada 2 shall pass.
Hold on right there.
Sorry.
I do not necessarily agree with all the comments and memes that are posted in our beautiful Viva BarnesLaw.locals.com community.
But we have the best memes and the best community out there.
So join locals.
Boom.
And if you want some, I'd say above average merch, it's not the greatest merch on earth, I don't think.
I'm not selling it properly, but if you want a shirt, everybody loves this shirt when I wear it outside.
If they go to my channel, they might say, holy crap, Viva, I thought you were judging politics and not promoting politics.
I'm promoting sanity and politics does ruin everything.
You can get some merch at vivafry.com.
Everybody needs a mug.
Now, did you all hear the updates in the George Zinn case as relates to the Charlie Kirk assassination and other developments involving Lance Twiggs, Tyler Robinson's furry trans lover, who apparently was under FBI protection for the last several months because of threats that he and his family were getting.
It's amazing how these things fly under the radar and nobody knows about it, but for the fact that, you know, some people have certain stories on their radar and will follow up on these.
If you don't remember who George Zinn is, the day of Charlie Kirk's murder, immediately afterwards, an old man claimed to have been the shooter and was caught on camera with his pants falling down after he said, I did it, kill me, shoot me, shoot me.
This is George Zinn.
And I'll refresh everybody's memory because the day that this happened, you know, this man on site says I did it.
A very bizarre thing to say.
If you didn't do it, by all accounts, he's the campus crazy person.
Everybody knew that he's the campus crazy person.
That doesn't mean that there's not more to this.
This is the video from the day of the assassination.
How dare you!
How dare you!
Now, by the way, that phone that they just picked up is going to be mildly important because that is the phone on which the child pornography that he possessed that subsequently led to the charges after he was brought to a hospital.
But let's just play this out.
How dare you!
He's such a monster!
Back it up!
Back up!
Such a monster!
Monster!
A monster!
How dare you!
Back it up!
Back it up!
He was charged with obstructing justice, possessing child sex abuse material on his phone.
For those listening, this is a video of the arrest, video credit.
Natalie, her, Harry via Storyfully.
I don't know.
He said he shot him, but I don't know.
And that's basically it.
This is his mug shot.
I guess he got some scratches on his face afterwards.
I hate that noise because that noise reminds me that we're watching TikTok.
This was not my post.
This was Erica RN for USA.
And I'll give everybody that link so you can, you know, have it in case you need to reference it.
So George Zinn was arrested.
He gets to hospital, apparently, and at the hospital, confesses to having child pornography on his phone.
Discord Chats Revealed00:13:28
And the Guardian is reporting, this is from the other day, January 30th, last Friday.
Man accused of falsely confessing to killing Charlie Kirk faces up to 15-year sentence.
May he get every last day of it, given what he pleaded guilty to, but this man is not going to live to 86 years old in prison.
George Zinn, 71, further admitted to possessing child sexual abuse material and pleaded no contest to allegations.
A man accused of trying to thwart authorities investigating Charlie Kirk's killing by falsely confessing to the deadly shooting faces up to 15 years in prison after pleading no contest to the allegation and separately admitting to possessing child sexual abuse material.
I want to pause it here and I want to posit something here.
Pun intended.
When that happened and the man wrongly, dishonestly lied about having been the shooter, the question you ask yourself is, why on earth would anyone do that?
Some people are going to immediately say mentally ill looking for attention, and that's a perfectly plausible explanation.
Now, some people are going to say mentally ill looking for attention.
It would be less shocking and surprising that he has CSAM on his phone.
But the man wrongly admitted to it, tried to create something of a decoy, and then said he was trying to, I don't know, did he say he was trying to help the shooter get away?
When you have someone lying about this, obstructing, trying to facilitate whichever shooter it was that actually did this to get away with it, you can just write it off as being a loon who took advantage of the situation that he saw to be a loon.
You can call me crazy, and this is not asking questions the way some people ask questions.
My question would be, and has been, and I've asked it multiple times, was this guy in any of the Discord chats or group chats, whatever the hell other online community they had with these kids?
Because the fact that he is out there trying to protect the actual shooter and then is discovered to have CSAM on his phone leads you to believe that he's not only mentally ill, but a pervert fraternizing with other young perverts.
Back to the case, however.
The case centering around George Zinn all but concluded at a court hearing on Thursday in Provo, Utah, about five miles away from the campus, where Charlie Kirk was fatally shot on September 10th.
Documents filed in Zinn's case alleged that he began screaming, I shot him, now shoot me, at a university immediately after Kirk was killed by a sniper.
Video of the officers on the scene having restraints circulated widely online, leading some to believe he was the conservative political activist killer.
Well, that would be a reasonable expectation when he says it was the day that Charlie Kirk was killed.
But after experiencing the unspecified medical episode of being brought to a hospital, Zinn allegedly told officers he was glad he said he shot the individual so the real suspect could get away.
Good.
I thought I misremembered facts.
He's doing this to protect someone, and then you're going to suggest that he had no advanced knowledge that this was going to happen and it was just a split-second decision that he decided to make.
It's possible.
It's not one that I would bet money on, but it's possible.
He also purportedly said he had illicit child sexual abuse material on his cell phone.
So he was worried about investigators looking at the device.
Does any of this make any sense?
He has CSAM on his phone.
He's worried about investigators looking at the device.
So he claims to have been the shooter to immediately get arrested so that he can allow the real shooter time to get away.
Authorities subsequently charge him with second-degree obstruction of justice, as well as various counts of his child sexual exploitation of minors.
The latter counts were connected to more than 20 images depicting child sexual abuse, including minus believed to be the age of five and 12, along with explicit messages sharing the imagery with others.
Another question that I might have, that I do have, I'm just not sure if I asked it publicly.
He got those images from somewhere.
Are they investigating where he got those images from?
Who those images were of?
What pedophile ring might have been involved in procuring and transmitting or providing those images so that he could get them?
I presume they would have to be.
I would ask if there's been any developments in that.
Has anybody else been arrested in connection with this man's procurement of CSAM and possession of it on his phone?
Moving on, on Thursday, in front of the Utah state court judge Thomas Lowe, Zinn pleaded no contest to reduce third-degree obstruction charge.
He also pleaded guilty to two of the sexual exploitation of minors.
Lowe sentenced Zinn to up to five years in prison for the obstruction plea.
The other plea got Zinn one to 15 years in prison, as Utah news outlets KSL first reported.
It's ultimately up to the state parole board to determine how long Zinn is going to remain in prison.
Zinn's history of criminal charges and convictions in Utah reportedly dates back three decades, notably days after the deadly Boston Marathon terrorist bombing in 2013.
He was arrested for allegedly asking Salt Lake City, Utah marathon organizers if they needed help setting up bombs at the finish line.
Utah state prosecutors charged Tyler Robinson with aggravated murder in Kirk's killing, which is one of the several prominent instances of political violence in the U.S. in 2025.
Prosecutors have said they plan to seek the death penalty against Robinson.
You will recall that there were a number of Discord chats.
There were a number of reports of people with advanced knowledge of something big going to happen at the campus.
George Zinn, a man with CSAM on his phone, who is a sexual deviant, to put it mildly, a criminal sexual deviant, a criminal pedophile, immediately, reflexively is there and then announces that he's the shooter to let the real shooter get away.
That, in my view, is evidence of advanced knowledge of what was going to happen.
And the question that I did have is whether or not he was involved in any of the group chats, Discord chats, whatever.
I don't think there's an answer to that question yet.
Although, from what I've read, the FBI has thoroughly examined the Discord chats.
And what is known, what is needed to be known is already known, which presumably means there were no other people conspiring with, colluding with this act of murder.
But it brought me to see, like, oh, we haven't heard from Lance Twiggs in a while.
Like, what's up with Lance Twiggs?
Remember, he disappeared off the face of the earth.
Nobody knew where he went.
There were rumors that he was under witness protection.
There were rumors that he was cooperating with the FBI.
And I appreciate that there's an ongoing, not just criminal investigation.
There's going to be a criminal trial, which needs to be held publicly with cameras in the courtroom for the entire world to see.
But it was, what happened to him?
Oh, location of Charlie Kirk's suspect's boyfriend, Lance Twiggs, revealed as family shares lovers descent into delusion before killing.
Tyler Robinson's transgender lover was under FBI protection after he seemingly vanished from his Utah home months earlier.
Family member and sources revealed.
When was this article from?
This was January 15th, a couple weeks ago.
In the family's first public remarks since Robinson was arrested for Charlie Kirk's September 10 assassination, the relative also cast doubt on just how cooperative Lance Twiggs is to the police.
The revelation comes as the Twiggs family member said the young lovers, both 22, were once talented, promising students who spiraled into delusion and video games on the Discord chat room.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Spiraling into video games on a Discord chat does not translate into politically motivated assassinations.
What was going on on that, Chat?
We're just going to assume that this was just one individual's decision.
No one had any advanced knowledge of it except for Lance Twiggs, who saw him engraving hey, fascist catch and chow bella bella chow on the bullets.
There was no advanced knowledge.
There was no political radicalization and there were no potential individuals radicalizing these groups or infiltrating the groups to further radicalize young trans community.
We're supposed to believe this was just a spontaneous decision.
Lance had no advanced knowledge.
Nobody on the chat Discords had any advanced knowledge, even though people were posting on the internet something big is going to happen.
Quote, being as anti-social as they were, from my understanding, you know, playing these games and being part of this Discord group, they didn't seem like they were in the real world, the unnamed relatives said.
There's a world of difference between game addiction, drug addiction, and murder.
And that type of radicalization.
And I've got potential theories that I would posit that may or may not be substantiated by the evidence that we don't have or don't have access to or may not exist.
But I would ask, what level of radicalization happened in these Discord chats?
And as far as I understand, we don't have the content of the Discord chats other than assurances that it was just gaming and idle chatter.
She said their distorted sense of reality was even evident in the now public text messages they exchanged immediately immediately following Kirk's murder, in which Robinson allegedly confessed to the hateful slain.
The world that they were in, like this gaming world, like this was a normal way they live and spoke, she said.
But that wasn't always the case.
Both of them are super smart.
Lance was a concert pianist.
He left.
He has a talent for piano.
His music was off the charts, not normal, very impressive.
And that's kind of what I heard about Tyler Yada Yada.
It's just a shame these kids had so much potential.
I'm sorry.
The shame here is not that these kids wasted their future.
The shame here is that they wasted Charlie Kirk's future and potentially the future of a movement and potentially the future of a political, a political movement, which might bring some people to ask the question as to whether or not this was just one loner, lunatic, acting alone, despite advanced knowledge by some or something bigger.
George Zinn happens to be there protecting the real shooter.
He didn't know who he was.
He just did it because he was crazy.
Authorities provided protection for Twiggs and his family as they moved places.
Yada yada yada.
At the time, Twiggs appeared to just disappear.
We were all asking this, and you can appreciate.
I have zero doubt he and his family were getting death threats, legitimate death threats.
I have zero doubt there are people out there who would legit want to kill this man.
Family, you're getting a little bit, you know, not guilt by association.
Family, you're not even dealing with the perpetrators anymore.
Zero doubt.
They were under, now we know, FBI protection.
Law enforcement source confirmed to Fox News that Twiggs was no longer under FBI protection, but he was cooperating with the authorities.
Oh, what does that mean?
If he had no advanced knowledge of this, there was no prior discussions, there was no evidence elsewhere.
What would that cooperation be?
Or what could be the substance of that cooperation?
His family, however, doubted to what extent.
When I first found out about what he was talking to the police, I know they said he was very cooperative, but they had to get him and bring him in.
He didn't voluntarily go in.
Let me just get to the rest of this.
Robinson is facing seven felony, is facing seven felony charges of aggravated murder, discharge of farm, yada, yada.
He remains behind bars pending trial and could face the death penalty.
So, George Zinn pleaded guilty.
He'll go to jail probably for the rest of his natural life.
Twiggs and family was under FBI protection.
They no longer are allegedly cooperating.
And the current running theory is that there was nothing else on those Discord chats.
Nobody had advanced knowledge.
There was no broader conspiracy.
And I had on Richard Barris from the People's Pundit a couple of weeks ago.
And he unabashedly suggested otherwise, as he was stating on Twitter, that he's disgusted by what he perceives to be the FBI not pursuing other venues, potentially not wanting to broaden the investigation for fear that it might compromise a conviction against Tyler Robinson.
And we explored the possibilities of how that might be.
If there were other people involved in the conspiracy, in theory, they can cast doubt on who was actually on the roof that day.
And so Richard Barris, People's Pundit, smart, wicked, smart man with amazing insights, and some insider knowledge that he was making known on Twitter, said that it's disgusting that they would choose not to investigate and potentially prosecute others for fear of complicating or confusing the prosecution against Tyler Robinson and the strategic decision being made to go after and only after Tyler Robinson so as to ensure at least a conviction against Tyler Robinson.
We know what we know.
We'll see what comes out.
I've asked my questions to the FBI.
Well, I didn't actually tag the FBI.
I just asked my legitimate questions, sincere questions, reasonable questions.
And they're out in the ether.
And I'll just review them, recap them here before we move on.
Have the people who were involved in the various Discords and chats with Tyler Robinson been thoroughly investigated?
My understanding is they've been investigated, nothing there moving on.
Was George Zinn involved in any of the discords or chat groups with Tyler Robinson or Twiggs?
As far as I know, there is no evidence to suggest he was, but there's no evidence to confirm he wasn't.
Twiggs was under FBI protection, was apparently cooperating.
Is Twiggs currently under investigation?
And to the extent that if he is, they may not want to disclose it.
And if he's not, they may not want to confirm it.
That's the latest.
Now, getting back to Humble, where I think there was another May Dog says, let's not forget that George Kilkilly took the rap for Heisenberg in season two of Breaking Bad.
Let's not forget that George Kilkelly took the rap for Heisenberg.
Dude, I watched it.
Let me just go remember, refresh my memory as to who that character was.
George Kilkilly Breaking Bad.
Email Disclosure Controversy00:17:19
Oh, that's the Bing Bing guy.
Fine.
Is it the bing bing guy?
Let me see here.
I think that's it.
No, that's Hector Salamaca.
All right, whatever.
I'll have to go refresh my memory.
I haven't.
I'll ask my, I'll ask someone what that means.
Shocking email from Epstein Files implicates former U.S. Ambassador Clinton Biden's first commander officer and SEAL Team 6 and more, Brian Lupa with Gateway Pundit.
We're going to get there in a second, actually.
And now we got the Bill Tong in the house.
And I'm going to show it today, Bill Tong, for all the jokes.
That dominant one makes of your Bill Tong.
Bill Tong is one of the highest protein snacks in the world, boasting nearly 50% protein, packed with B vitamins, creatine, iron, zinc, and more.
Visit Bill Tongusa.com.
Code Viva for 10% off.
Check it out and look at it.
Flipping delicious.
It's like it's beef jerky, but made from beef.
It's like prosciutto, but made from beef.
That's beef jerky made from beef.
It's like it's like beef jerky, but it's just tender, delicious.
They also have beautiful USA Turkish apricots, USA mango slices.
USA, US.
Hey, all right, go check out Bill Tong.
He does great work.
He's a man of South.
He's born in South Africa, fled that hellhole to come to the beautiful America, these United States of America, and the almost as beautiful as free state of Florida, Texas.
And he's doing great work.
And let's just go over and catch up with our Viva BarnesLaw.locals.com community.
Sugar is poison to us, just like dogs.
We've just grown an immunity to it.
Don't you speak ill of sugar.
It's not.
Honey is very good for you.
Maple syrup, I don't know if it's good for you, but it's flipping delicious.
Yep.
I don't recommend it.
Okay, hold on.
Let's see here.
What is this?
The other, okay, all righty, people.
Now we're going to go back.
Let me go pull up the article from Brian Lupa.
Brian Lupa Epstein.
The Epstein stuff is absolutely wild.
Okay, hold on.
Let's just back it up here.
The Epstein disclosures, there's too much to keep up with.
There's so much to keep up with that there's almost too much to properly redact, to properly make public.
I hadn't, you know, I had heard that it had occurred, but I was skeptical.
Maybe it was sort of fake news.
But it is, in fact, not only is there so much there that had previously, you know, people were told didn't exist there.
Now there's so much of it that needs to be disclosed that they're bungling the disclosure of the Epstein files by not properly redacting victims' names, by publishing nude photos of victims, by publishing banking information of alleged victims to the point where the victims' lawyers have had to go to court to get the government to fix it.
And this is one of those constructive criticisms where you don't get credit for doing your job properly, and you sure as hell deserve blame for bungling your one and only job at the moment.
This is from KSAT.com.
Government says it's fixing redactions in Epstein-related files that may have had victim information.
May have had Washington.
The Justice Department said Monday that it had withdrawn several thousand documents and quote media related to disgrace finance here Jeffrey Epstein after lawyers were told after lawyers told a New York judge that the lives of nearly 100 victims had been turned upside down end quote by sloppy redactions in the government's latest records.
Do you remember the first time?
It's not, I'm going to break this up.
I'm not being an ass for the sake of being an ass.
You want this administration to succeed.
The Trump administration, you see that right there?
That's not for show.
You see that hat?
That's not for show.
Those shoes up there?
I got those to support the Trump administration, to support Trump.
I have been a vocal supporter and continue to be of Trump.
Supporting someone means not egging them on or letting mistakes be made that compromise their likelihood for success.
And I'll say it over and over again: you are not supporting someone if you don't hold them to a standard of success.
This is the second time they've bungled the redactions in the disclosures.
Set aside the entire nonsense about how there was nothing to disclose.
And if you're still pushing this, you know, you're not a true Trump supporter, and you get all the sycophants who had their little NPC chip replaced.
I won't name names, but you know damn well who they are.
The ones who a year ago were saying Epstein files, Epstein files, Epstein files.
Come March.
You need to switch a little button in their small little brains and they go, Who cares about the Epstein files?
Move on.
Nothing to see here.
No disclosures.
Phase one is embarrassing all of these influencers, actual independent journalists.
Phase two is nothing.
I mean, I'm going to bring this up right now.
What's his name?
Sean Davis, who was complimenting or thanking Dan for referencing his email from, when was this email from?
Not email, sorry, a tweet was from July 13, 2025.
Mike Davis at the time had this to say: anyone who rapes kids deserves the death penalty.
I think we all agree on that.
Here's the problem with the Epstein mess: the FBI doesn't have the evidence many thought it did.
Well, that didn't age very well.
It may not have had the evidence, and in which case, we're playing legal semantics games.
It had documentation that could have been disclosed that they actually fought not to disclose while saying it didn't exist.
There are not tapes with powerful men raping kids.
Well, we'll take your word for that because I don't know how you would even communicate that.
There is not a list.
Again, we're playing legalese here.
There's not a list.
There's just, we know what we mean by the Epstein list.
We don't mean a Rolodex.
We mean a bundle of information that identifies, oh, I don't know, like Swedish UN CHR representatives who were going to Epstein Sex Island.
That's what we meant by a list.
Oh, I'm sorry.
You know, it was, it was like goes back to my days of practicing law where I was, you asked for a communication of documents in discovery.
Please communicate to me any and all emails, written correspondence in any form whatsoever between you and you, between X and Y, and Z dates.
I asked a lawyer for any and all communications between X and Y, between A and B dates in email, letter, fax, any form whatsoever, text message, et cetera, et cetera.
I get a bunch of documents back.
Woohoo!
I got the documents.
I find out three months, whatever, a couple months later, that one of the emails that was forwarded to me had the initial email to which it was replying cut off.
And that initial email, I've told this story before, indicated a date of knowledge of alleged copyright infringement that would have precluded the action in the first place.
And then I took this to court and I said, sanction that fucker of a lawyer.
He deliberately cut off what he knew was a material element that established the date of knowledge from an email thread that I had asked for.
And the lawyer said, you asked for the emails.
You didn't ask for the original emails to which they were replies.
And you know what happened?
Nothing.
The judge said, all right, well, you have it now.
So make your arguments.
Holy hell.
This is legalese crap.
When we said list, we didn't mean a to-do list.
We didn't mean a handwritten.
Here are the list of my pedophile clients that I traffic children to for favors.
And the file is largely unreleasable for many reasons, including grand jury, court records under seal, CP, child pornography.
I don't want anyone thinking I'm censoring for self-censorship, protection of victims, protection of victims is number four.
Unsubstantiated, even double or triple here.
Say bogus claims.
The bogus claims were the ones against Trump by unhinged nutbags, who the FBI subsequently determined were unhinged nutbags.
Does anyone really believe that Pam Bondi, Cash Pratelle, or Dan Bernino would cover up for the likes of Bill Clinton or Bill Gates?
Irrelevant question.
What was disclosed now was clearly damaging to Bill Gates, and it was covered up.
So nobody cares about motivation.
The outcome is that after Thomas Massey, who had war declared on him, to pass a law to compel the disclosure of the documents, which were disclosed.
So all of these grand jury materials, court records under seal, whatever they might have applied to that might not have been releasable, that may not have been released, other stuff was released after they fought tooth and nail against Massey and Rokana, and it did embarrass Bill Gates.
So whether or not their intention was to protect Bill Gates, because no, I don't think at least one of these people, I don't think Dan Bongino in a million years would ever protect Bill Clinton or Bill Gates from these types of accusations.
Kash Patel, I'm not so sure anymore.
Pam Bondi, there might be other overriding interests.
But whether or not they ever would deliberately cover up files, they did in fact, and only under compulsion of a law that was passed and tardily so, release information that holy mother mercy, it embarrassed Bill Gates.
Contracting an STD from sex with a hooker and then spiking his wife's drink so that she doesn't contract the STD.
I don't care why they did it.
It was done and it was covering up information that embarrassed the living shit out of Bill Gates.
How that man still has a position or any role of influence in society is beyond me.
What am I?
I'm just a nutbag screaming at an Insta camera in a sunny Florida afternoon where it's finally reached temperature where the iguanas are thawing out.
The Trump Justice Department wanted to be fully transparent, but it can't for the reasons above.
This is a case of no good deed goes unpunished.
Okay, this is the line that I took issue with.
The Trump department wanted to be fully transparent, but it can't for the reasons above.
There are two interpretations to this statement.
One is more favorable than the other.
That the Trump Justice Department, Bondis, wanted to be fully transparent, but couldn't.
So they lied, but they had a good reason.
They were deliberately not transparent, but they had a good reason.
That's one more negative inference.
And the other one, which would be favorable, is they wanted to release everything, but they couldn't because of the reasons on the prior page.
Well, the reality is they fought a bill that would have allowed for the lawful disclosure and thus either bypass the prior alleged restrictions or at least allowed for the release of the information that would not be barred by these.
And they've released new information.
Its damning is held.
And now we're seeing that there really was no good reason not to do it because it didn't incriminate Trump at all.
It actually exonerated him for the reasons I went over the other day.
That clip appeared on Vince's show.
So that explanation makes no sense.
But they've bungled it again in a way that's going to compromise the administration, make them look like, I mean, I'll get to the way they phrased it here.
The exposed materials included nude photos showing faces of potential victims as well as names, email addresses, and other identifying information.
Remember Sean Davis' reason?
We can't release it because it'll potentially expose the victims.
Well, you were supposed to release it to redact that information, and now you didn't even do that.
And that's after the first bungled redactions.
Remember when they blacked out the information, but you could save it and open it in Adobe or whatever and remove the blackout so you could see what was blacked out?
And I said at the time, that would be one hell of a funny way of looking like you're trying to do your job while allowing for the disclosure of the information that you want to disclose.
But the bottom line is, A, it could be sanctionable in law.
And B, it makes you look like bungling idiots.
And it happens again in the letter to the New York judges overseeing the sex trafficking cases brought by Epstein and confidant Glenn Master.
Notice how they always have to say disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein and confidant Ghillain Maxwell.
U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton wrote that the department had taken down nearly all materials identified by victims of the lawyers and a substantial number of documents identified independently by the government.
Clayton said the department has, quote, revised its protocols for addressing flagging documents after victims and their lawyers requested changes.
Documents are probably pulled down and flagged, then evaluation before a redacted version of the document can be reposted.
Once it's on the internet, it's out there forever.
You're never getting it back.
You could try to go and put a band-aid on the busted fire hose.
It's going to, the document is out there.
Once it's on the internet, it's out there forever.
You cannot, as one of our favorite lawyers said, you cannot put the shit back in the horse.
You cannot put the toothpaste back in the thing.
Emily Baker, another great channel to watch.
Two lawyers for Epstein's victims wrote the court Sunday seeking immediate judicial intervention because of what they described, you know, failure to redact.
Eight women who identify as Epstein victims added comments in the letter to Richard Berman.
One wrote that the records release was, quote, life-threatening.
Another said she'd gotten death threats after 51 entries, including included her private banking information, forced her to shut down her credit card accounts.
Quote, this is the quote, you know, soundbites and quotes: there's no conceivable degree of institutional incompetence sufficient to explain the scale, consistency, and persistence of the failures that occurred, particularly when the sole task ordered by the court and repeatedly emphasized by DOJ was simple: redact known victim names before publication, the lawyers said.
We don't need to go into the rest of this.
I'll give you the link anyhow.
I said, hypothetically, remember you float the idea.
If the goal were to embarrass people within the administration, within the Trump administration, to discredit the progress that the Trump administration has made, if you wanted to sabotage them and look like you were trying to do your job at the same time, what would you do differently?
So they have now bungled the disclosure after denying that there was any additional intel info to disclose in the first place.
And what do we find out in this additional disclosure?
So we find out that Michael Wolfe, who now might be getting sued by Donald Trump, you'd presume that Trump himself would want to have known about Michael Wolf attempting to suborn blackmail material from Jeffrey Epstein for the purposes of blackmailing Trump.
You'd presume Trump would want to know that.
You know, the media is running with the, you know, Trump's name appears thousands of times in the documents.
True.
Not in any meaningful way.
In fact, only in an exculpatory way.
But if you have incompetent buffoons, or worse still, people who are trying to sabotage Trump to convince him not to disclose this by saying your name appears in it 5,000 times.
Well, that's what you would say.
That's what the media would say.
His name appears in the five.
Irrelevant.
His name appears in it because Michael Wolf, I say the wolf in the White House.
That's damn good, by the way.
If I ever write a book, I'm going to call it Wolf in the White House about Michael Wolfe biography.
Michael Wolfe colluded with Epstein to try to get blackmail extortion material on Donald Trump.
Oh, yeah, but his name was mentioned five times in that email.
Whooped he freaking do.
So what else was released in this?
This is going to blow your freaking minds.
This is a UN representative.
What's her name again?
Joanne Rubinstein.
Joanna Rubinstein.
Swedish UN official resigns after contact with Epstein revealed.
Chair of Sweden for UNHCR, the United Nations health and human care resource.
I don't know exactly what the CACR steps.
It's for the refugees.
That's what it is.
It's for refugees.
Steps down after newly unsealed documents show she visited late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
She visited him.
By the way, her statement is so damn damning.
Not only after he had pleaded guilty and was known to be a sex offender, a pedophile sex offender, after her knowledge of it.
Istanbul, Joanna Rubinstein, chair of the Sweden for UNHCR, resigned from her post on Monday after newly unsealed documents.
There was nothing new.
There was nobody to investigate.
Isn't that what Kash Patel said at one point?
After newly unsealed documents revealed that she had visited late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein on his private island, quote, Joanna chose to leave her assignment after what appeared in the media over the weekend.
This was not something that the organization or the board was previously aware of.
Well, I'm going to take your fucking word for it, you lying scumbags.
We'll get back to the UN and there's sex trafficking in a bit, said Daniel Axelson, Daniel Axelson, press officer for the Swedish UNACR.
In 2012, Rubenstein visited Epstein's private island with her family and later thanked him in an email describing this day in positive terms.
At the time of the visit, Epstein had already been convicted of sex crimes.
Listen to this.
She said this, allegedly.
I mean, unless this is a false publication.
Quote, I was aware of the verdict at the time of the visit.
What has subsequently emerged about the extent of the abuse is appalling and something I strongly distance myself from.
Rubenstein told experts, I was aware that he sexually abused children, but I wasn't aware of the extent of it.
Just a little bit of sexual abuse of children, I would be prepared to whine and dine with and take money from.
Appalling Abuse in Haiti00:04:27
I wasn't aware it was so bad.
Can you believe that's her actual excuse that she is reported to have given?
I knew about it.
I knew about it, but I didn't know how bad his child rape was.
I didn't know how bad his solicitation of prostitution from a minor was.
Bullshit, you didn't know that.
And even if you didn't, if that's your judgment, you are one hell of a scumbag as well.
The U.S. Justice Department recently released a trove of 3 million pages, 2,000 videos, 180,000 images related to Epstein under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which was signed into law by U.S. President Donald Trump on November 19.
He did the right thing, Trump.
Took a little pressure, took a little pushback from his loyal base, not his yes man, yaysayer, idiot base.
From his sincere people who want him, need him to succeed.
Yes, he actually reversed track from his own mistake, and we can forgive people for mistakes.
We are all human.
We are all sinners.
We are all prone to make mistakes.
He signed it into law, and people look like a bunch of idiots right now.
Not the least of which are all the people who said, release the files, only to then say, don't release the files.
I've got my new marching orders and are now eating crow.
The files include photos of prominent figures, grand jury transcripts, and investigative records.
Well, you know, Sean Davis's tweet on it didn't age very well.
Epstein was found dead by suicide, allegedly, while awaiting trial.
Now, when I say that I have reason to suspect that Joanna Rubenstein, who knew of Jeffrey Epstein's criminal pedophile predilections, it might not be as innocent as she says.
Do you guys remember the stories of the UN and child sex trafficking?
You guys know this, right?
The UN has a nasty history of, and whether or not it's directly related to Epstein, whether or not Epstein was benefiting directly or indirectly, indirectly from sex trafficking that occurred under the UN's watchful eye, I'm allowed to think so under the circumstances.
Just by way of example, later, thank you, close advertisement.
AP exclusive.
What year is this from?
2017.
AP exclusive, UN child sex ring left victims, but no arrests.
Oh my goodness.
I didn't actually get all the way through this article because I didn't.
Let me see here.
Let's just.
Oh, Rubenstein's name doesn't show up in it.
Okay, fine.
Portal Prince, Haiti.
Oh, who was heavily involved in Haiti rebuilding?
Who was alleged to be involved in human trafficking in Haiti?
Oh, yeah, that's right.
Bill Clinton.
Hillary Clinton.
The Clinton Foundation.
Portal Prince, Haiti.
In the ruins of a tropical hideaway where jet setters once skipped, sipped rum under the Caribbean sun.
The abandoned children tried to make a life for themselves.
They begged and scavenged for food, but they could never scrape it together enough to beat the hunger until the UN peacekeepers moved in a few blocks away.
The men who came from a faraway place and spoke a strange language offered the Haitian children cookies and other snacks.
Sometimes they gave them a few dollars, but the price was high.
The Sri Lankan peacekeepers wanted sex from girls and boys as young as 12.
This is the same UN that Rubenstein.
She's in the Swedish part, different branches.
You can't paint the entire UN in one broad brushstroke.
They do a lot of good work across the country.
That's the same UN who has been involved in child sex trafficking and child rape.
And this woman was just fraternizing with a human sex trafficker and child rapist, allegedly.
I don't even know if that's alleged, if we have to say allegedly anymore.
And these were the documents that they didn't release because they couldn't release them and they fought the reason that would compel them to release them.
And then when they released them, they screwed everything up for many of the victims, allegedly.
And we were the bad guys for saying this is a big, unforced error.
Release it.
Nothing in there is going to compromise Trump.
If it were in there, it would have been out already.
Morons under four years of Biden's corrupt DOJ.
If there were anything in there that could have legitimately bona fide sunk Trump, they would have released it.
They would have leaked it.
It would have gotten out already.
But what we're noticing is absolutely stunning coming out of this.
Documents Debunked00:02:46
Now, Mike Benz did a breakdown.
I'm not going through the whole thing because Benz, he was just on Rogan, and I'm going to listen to that podcast on my next jog.
Put out a tweet and he says in his tweet, when is this from?
Yesterday, February 2nd.
I'm utterly blown away by this new audio in the Epstein files.
It shows the secret conversation you fear every high-level government official might have with an outside fixer to hook them up the moment they, quote, leave government to enter the private sector.
Here, Jeffrey Epstein teaches Ehud Barak, former Israeli prime minister.
While he, and by the way, I've gone into depth about Ehud meeting up with Epstein 19 times after he was a known sex offender to take millions of dollars from him for his online streaming platform that would also geolocate.
He didn't know.
It's not like Israeli intelligence would do some due diligence on someone who you're taking $2 million from and going to the prize of residence.
That's crazy, Viva.
While he was still minister of defense in Israel, but on his way out, how to make millions of dollars in the private sector by first compiling a list of people who owe him favors from his 40 years in government service.
Epstein then told Ehud Brak to pursue Peter Thiel, whose name, at that point, Ehud Barak did not even know how to spell to accompany Palantir, which they also didn't know how to spell, which existence Ehud Barak had never heard of.
Credit to Ryan Grimm, whose clip I first saw to look for this.
I used Grok to backtrace the source link from the audio.
Ryan assesses this meeting took place in February 2013, which seems to line up with the audio saying Ehud Barak is about 71 at the time.
Now, I just had one section.
It goes into the beginning, and go watch the entire thing.
I'll give you the link, but I just wanted to play one highlight right here.
This is actual Jeffrey Epstein talking with actual Ehud Barak.
I'm going to keep on.
This person owes me.
Okay.
And so you got to work backwards and say, here is my, instead of thinking about what the opportunities are first, because right now you're focused on opportunities.
I need you to focus on your personal balance sheet in terms of competences.
What's your real strengths?
What's the liability?
One of the liabilities is you're 71 years old, so you can't be in business.
It takes 20 years to make money.
You have to make money in the next three years.
So people, competence, things.
So I talked to Ian yesterday.
I asked him to come.
He flew into money.
He's crazy for an hour.
He's in person for the easy.
So same thing.
Because he's very connected to Samsung.
Very fuck.
Samsung.
Korean.
Wink-Wink Nudge-Nudge of Corruption00:07:07
Yes.
Very.
They pay him $3 million a year just to make PR.
Yes.
Just to make PR.
...companies like that now.
Okay.
So he said there's this company called Lookout.
He said he mentioned it to you.
L-O-O-K-A-L-L-K.
He thinks they'll pay you a couple million dollars to be on the board.
That would be good.
I understood.
Oh, yeah, that would be good.
A couple million bucks to be on the board would be good.
No shit, Sherlock.
You know, sort of like 50 bucks, 50,000 bucks a month to sit on a board would be good.
It would shield the company from potential investigations.
That's what you witness right there is, like I always say, corruption is not someone showing up with a briefcase full of cash and saying, this is what you have to do, and here's the cash.
It's the wink-wink nudge-nudge of corruption.
What they're discussing right there is the political, you grease my back, I grease yours, or I'm your personal balance sheet.
Well, let's just see how you go about getting that personal balance sheet by hook or by crook.
And it's shocking.
It's nothing that we didn't already know, but it's new.
And it's new, and it highlights that the entire handling of the Epstein debacle has been a massive, unforced error that at the end of the day, I think will still be net positive for Trump.
And maybe some people out there who are into the whole 4D, 5D chess say, oh, he had to do this to release it now so that it fully sinks in and has massive impact for the midterms, which by all accounts, everybody is projecting Democrats to win and Republicans to lose.
No.
There's sacrifices in chess, and you do it for strategic advantage or for the knockout checkmate.
You don't just give up pawns.
You don't trade a bishop for a pawn and say, well, it's a strategic sacrifice.
You just don't see it yet.
And then 4D chess later, you're checkmated or resigning.
And so that's the latest of what's coming out of the files.
It's mind-blowing.
And you couple all of this together with what we know.
And it is disgustingly fishy.
What the hell is going on?
Epstein fraternizing with institutions that you know were involved in human sex child sex trafficking.
And the tweet on it: Swedish UN official Joanna Rubinstein resigns after Epstein disclosures show she visited Sex Island after knowing he was a convicted sex offender.
Why would a Swedish UN official serving as the chair of the fundraising foundation for the UN Refugee Agency have anything to do with sex offender Epstein, let alone why she would visit his pedo sex island.
You know why?
It makes perfect sense.
If you're a pedo, sex offender looking to traffic children for sex, where do you look?
You look for war zones and you look for disaster zones.
You look for children who have been separated from their parents by war, by environmental crisis, or by crossing a border, human trafficking, and you have those children to sex trafficking.
If you think that wasn't at least part of the reason why the Biden administration opened up the border and lost 300,000 kids, which under this FBI, they have found tens of thousands.
If you thought that wasn't one of the reasons why, then you, sir, not only lack a creative imagination, you lack basic critical thinking.
And that's that.
Now I've gone a little bit long on that.
Let me see what's going on in here before we head over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com for our after party.
Bucklebrush Jones, whoever controls the redactions gets to decide what co-conspirators get to be redacted victims.
Cash changed co-conspirators in victims in massey testimony.
Hold on, I'm going to screenshot that and read that slower afterwards.
Whoever controls the redactions gets to decide what co-conspirators get to be redacted victims.
Cash changed co-co-conspirators into victims in massey testimony.
Oh, well, okay, so that I, and I, I, I will not make statements about whether or not uh cash perjured himself with some of the statements he made before the Senate.
But uh, and then we got May Dog says, My apologies, Viva.
It was James Kilkilly's first episode with Saul, who some might call a criminal lawyer.
Might have been the funniest episode of the entire series.
Yeah, that okay, that makes more sense.
May Dog says, Okay, fine, we got that.
So that's it.
I got some stuff that we're going to go over on the viva barnslaw.locals.com after party side of things.
Let me see what we got by way of tip questions before we go.
By the way, come join vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
Tip questions: Zero morals or standards, zero, says Bill Brown.
And Roostang says, Viva, two reminders: contact David Martin to come on your show.
Call the bowling alley, make sure they play on.
Let's have more, let's not have any more excuses for not getting a half-ass score.
Last week, my average was 197, Roostang.
197, and I struck out the game starting from the fourth frame, fifth frame, seven strikes in a row.
It's going to be a good one tonight.
Now, with that said, let's go my duties to Raid Redacted.
Redacted today.
Is there war in the title?
There isn't war in the title, but the title is, is Epstein still alive?
That is not a conspiracy theory to which I adhere, though I don't blame anybody for potentially thinking it might be the case.
But we're going to go raid them.
Say hi for me when you get in there.
Raid has been confirmed.
Viva Raid Howdy Redacted.
And what I'll ask everybody to do, if you want to support the channel, you know what to do.
VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com is the best way to do it.
If you want to get some merch, vivafry.com.
I personally, my favorite, I mean, it doesn't happen very often, but I love the crypto via the wallet because it makes me feel like I'm also a good spokesperson, spokesman for Rumble and their innovation.
Tip crypto, come to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
Buy some merch.
The free, easiest way.
Like, share, subscribe, turn on notifications.
Before you go, make sure that you are subscribed.
And I'm maintaining the CommuteTube channel.
And what's amazing is you see how the soft censorship continues to work there, or at least, you know, the algorithmic suppression.
Just you'll never get new subscribers if they never recommend your channel to non-subscribers.
But go show some support there, but only to divert everybody back to the free speech, free finance platform of Rumble.
And now, with that said, everybody, Rumble, thank you for being here.
If you're not coming over, you're missing out on the party.
Let me give you the link.
And let's see if they finally have they adjusted it so I can do Rumble Premium as well.