All Episodes
Previous
Feb. 6, 2026 - Viva & Barnes
01:26:06
Savannah Guthrie Mom Kidnapping: News & Theories! Canada's Death Cult! Epstein Disclosures & 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
Troll Meme Mishap 00:09:43
Ladies and gentlemen of the interwebs, in today's episode of Unforced Errors and Why I Choose to Do Absolutely Everything Myself, I present to you a post that Donald Trump had put on Truth that is no longer on truth.
See if you can catch why if you haven't already heard the news.
Behold.
Initiated by a court order, the Michigan investigation team obtained forensic access to a DS200 tabulator, the machine that counts the votes.
A TEL-IT 4G wireless chip manufactured in Taiwan was discovered embedded into the motherboard.
The voting machine tapes clearly indicate modem engagement and transmission of election data.
Some of the anomalies that we noticed in the 2020 general elections, that five key states all stopped counting at a certain time in these key battleground states.
These were all where the software, the mini machines, ESNS machines were used, the SmartMatic, the gems software.
So when the vote stopped counting, and this has been noted in other countries as well, President Trump was significantly ahead when reporting and counting resumed.
So far, everything's normal.
Just a standard, you know, political ad about the incongruent counting in Georgia, Michigan, sorry, but takes a twist at the end.
There was a massive spike occurred that favored Joe Biden.
So I'm not laughing at the substance.
I'm laughing because it's kind of funny.
This happened earlier today.
If you haven't heard, and I always say this, you know, like one of the good things about going at three o'clock in the afternoon is I've had time to let the news mature, to let the news sort of, you know, I don't know what the word is when you put wine into a decanter, to let the news decant a little bit.
And I get to get the full benefit of the initial stories, the initial reactions, and the actual story.
That was an actual post that is now no longer on truth.
And as you can see, it ended with what appears to be Obama's depicted as gorillas and orangutans.
Now, you know, I'm from Canada, and although we have race relation problems in Canada, it's not quite as sensitive an issue as it is in the United States.
Now, it's gotten worse in Canada since Justin Trudeau came into power and he brought up the race-baiting identity politics up in Canada.
One thing you cannot do is compare certain people to certain animals.
You just can't do it.
And it's not just the Obamas to that.
Don't compare people who happen to be Jewish to rats, and you might avoid some accusations of isms or whatever you want to call it.
Trump posted that.
And as I watched it, I'm like, okay, first of all, my initial reaction, which was pretty close to reality, is that he didn't watch the video to the end.
He saw a video that he liked.
He reposted it and didn't get to the end, much like many of us do on social media.
You post the video.
How did it start again?
That was a great video.
It was a great video talking about election issues up in Michigan.
And he reposted, didn't get to the end, and didn't see what might have been a troll in the video.
A troll insert, who knows?
I don't know who.
Let me take my face out here so you can see it was done by Patriot News Outlet.
So that was my initial reaction.
Benefit of the doubt, because nobody would do something like that maliciously because it's just not funny, even if you want it to be a troll.
And the news seems to be that it was something of an error.
And the sleuths of the internet have discovered that it was actually the next video coming up in some sort of auto scroll, and that whoever screen recorded it didn't clip that part out.
And you can see right now, watch.
There you go.
You see that?
It scrolls up.
Anyone who's familiar with how these things work, boom.
Next video comes up and plays.
Well, you know, when someone makes a mistake, good faith mistake, you know, depending on who you are, you may or may not get the benefit of the doubt.
You may or may not get forgiven.
And in the world of politics, the goal is not to forgive.
The goal is not to forget.
The goal is to use for political fodder in as much as humanly possible.
Now, Stephen Crowder had a good take on this earlier today.
And he said, look, even if you find that comparison racist, this was clearly a video that did not have any racist undertones to it because it was just depicting people as animals.
And here you have Whippy Goldberg as a rhinoceros.
Is that a rhinoceros or a hippopotamus?
A rhinoceros or a hippopotamus, both of which are, you know, kind of apropos.
And this is the actual video.
And it was the Lion King, Donald John Trump, although he kind of scary.
Am I going crazy or does that not have a hint of Benjamin Netanyahu to it in this image?
Maybe I'm going crazy, but this is Donald Trump as the king of the jungle and all of the animals bowing.
Am I going crazy or does it, does it really look like they've done something of an AI merge with BB?
I might be going crazy.
I'm going to look at the chat to see if I am or not.
I might be going crazy and still be right on this.
And I might be wrong and still going crazy.
Who knows?
Now, look, if you want to take that in its whole context and still say this was clearly made to be race, whatever, fine, you can have that opinion.
As you can.
And his point was that in the context, it wasn't.
What it looked like at first is that someone deliberately spliced in that particular image and as a troll at the end of a video that was serious about election, that's what happened.
Well, it does look like, in fact, it was the result of whoever shared that video or posted it not cropping out what was the autoplay to roll right into the next one.
And Mario Nafal says Trump posted a video on true social claiming vote counting stopped in Kingsweek States.
Yada yada yada.
In the final seconds, Barack and Michelle Obama depicted as monkeys.
And now, I think after the news has percolated, it appears as though it was, call it a good faith mistake.
And I want to get to Miranda Devine's post on this because I think she's right.
It's a mistake or sabotage.
I don't blame Trump for this at all.
My initial presumption was he just didn't watch it to the end and didn't realize either that was in by Hook or by Crook.
Miranda writes at the White House social media appears that the White House social media staffer was lazy and didn't check the autoplay.
If it wasn't laziness, he, she should be removed and all videos should be double checked before posting.
First of all, if it wasn't laziness, sorry, let me rephrase, if it wasn't sabotage, it was at the very least laziness or a type of mistake that you can't really make in politics.
I don't think I would have ever fired someone.
I don't think I would fire someone if they sincerely made a mistake where it just popped up in the auto feed.
It's the type of mistake that could have been any other video and it would have been inconsequential.
The Dems and their quote rapid response and quote media handmaidens are dining out on this.
And as usual, we'll go too far.
Well, you know what?
They might go too far and nobody might give one sweet bugger all.
You know, the amazing thing about race relations and the sensitivity of race relations.
I remember this.
This is a memory that I have from childhood.
I was at a shoe store called Tony's Shoes, and there was a guy who was working at the shoe store.
He happened to be black, and he actually happened to look like Eddie Murphy.
I was a kid and I had no idea that Eddie Murphy would not be working at a shoe store.
And I got his autograph and I kept his autograph.
And you know, you live in a day and age where people say, well, that's racist to suggest that a black person looks like another black person.
Like they say, oh, it's racist to say that a black actor, a black person looks like a black actor.
And I'm like, what the hell do you think I'm going to say?
If someone who's Ving Reims looking looks like Ving Reims, I'm not going to say they look like The Rock.
And I'm not going to say they look like Brock Lesnar.
And we live in a world where you can have race sensitivities to the point where they become absurdities.
Like when you're describing someone and you don't want to be called racist, so you describe everything about the person except for the color of their skin.
Everything about the person, except for the fact that they're Asian, except for the fact that they're black.
You don't want to be racist.
And the idea that to say, oh, it's racist to say that X looks like a black actor if they're black, you could call that racist, or I can call that logical.
Now, comparing people to animals, there is a distinct stigma that goes with that.
And you just shouldn't do it, period.
Someone can say, I look like, I don't know, a hairy baboon, and no one would cry racism.
And some people might agree with that.
You just can't do it.
And this is the type of mistake that in politics you just can't make.
But I do think the good thing at the end of this is: A, whoever did that original meme is going to get some, I don't say unwanted, but certainly some unpredicted publicity.
And I think that not many people are actually going to rage about this above and beyond the fact that innocent mistake of a humorous meme, and there was nothing ill intent about it.
In as much as Trump is a troll, he's not that type of troll.
He's not into that type of edgy content.
And for everyone freaking out at the beginning, calling Trump racist, et cetera, you just have to wait a couple of hours in order for the full story to come out.
Ransom Note Mystery 00:14:57
And I had that luxury of waiting until three o'clock for the Daily Show, people.
Viva Fry, how goes the battle, former Montreal litigator, turned current Florida Rumbler, three o'clock is my afternoon slot on the Viva Rumble.
God forbid Trump puts out a funny meme, get over it.
No, no, no, the only issue is it looked like it was deliberately inserted at the end, which would have been tasteless.
First of all, it also detracts from what Trump was trying to get at, which was the Biden bump in 2020.
And we're going to get to the bottom of it.
Like I posted the Georgia election fraud alleged issues, my interview with CanCon, Brian Lupa.
And based on the response, I think people are A, interested in the story, and B, hadn't necessarily heard of the story.
So you don't want to detract from what was your ultimate point.
And then some people say, well, maybe it was a cynical way of bringing more attention to it because now people are going to, whatever.
He deleted the truth post, which indicates it was straight up a mistake.
Holy crap apples.
Okay, we are live on Rumble.
We are live on vivabarnslaw.locals.com, where everybody is above average.
Even our below average people are still above average of the aggregate average of averagenesses.
I'm just making that up.
And we got a tip question.
We're going to start with this before we get into the show.
Sassafras says, I was wondering if you would consider having Alex Jones come on another sidebar to talk about the Epstein files and Bohemian Grove.
Dude, I'll have, I'll have Alex, I would say Alex Jones.
I'll have Alex Jones on any day of the week, every day of the week.
The only problem with Alex is that he's too busy.
And it's amazing.
Like, you know, we homeschool a kid.
We got three, I say, young kids.
And it's, I would, you know, I could, I could spend all Alex Jones is a flipping workhorse.
Starts first thing in the morning, goes all day.
And I say it's not the luxury of it.
It's just what happens when you no longer have kids in the house or young kids, you have to entertain kids that you're homeschooling.
So I couldn't do it.
Alex Jones is, he's busier than I am.
And I feel, you know, like it's 24-7.
Anytime, every time it'll reach out to him and try to get him back on because I did watch him talking about the latest in the Epstein files, and who did he have on talking about it?
It doesn't matter.
We're going to get into it because today we've got three big things to talk about: Savannah Guthrie mother kidnapping story, some breaking news, or at least it was breaking yesterday when I was live that there was a hoax ransom note in this.
We're going to talk about that.
We're going to talk about the Epstein latest disclosures and some overlapping connections between Guthrie and I'm just thinking out loud the Epstein files.
And I'm going to do a specific dedicated segment to the death cult in Canada that is medical assistance in dying.
I'm going to flesh out that tweet that I put out the other day because I want to memorialize my exhibits, my evidence, so that people can truly understand just how insane Canada is, just how death cult the country has become.
And I want it to live on for as long as the internet remains what it is.
But let's start with Savannah Guthrie.
Hold on one second before we do that.
Hello, NeuroDivergent.
I want to also, I don't think I thank NeuroDivergent One enough.
He's the moderator and helps keep an eye on things in the chat.
NeuroDivergent, thank you very much.
The latest in Savannah Guthrie, you all know that her 84-year-old mother, I'll say, was allegedly abducted.
I don't think there's any discussion, converse theories that she wasn't abducted.
Her 84-year-old mother was abducted, missing from her home.
There was a trail of blood allegedly dripping or apparently dripping from the house, and she's been missing now since last Saturday, last Sunday.
And just, you know, the story here is that Savannah Guthrie is a left-wing journalist.
And I say that only because, you know, Trump has come out and said full disposal of the DOJ FBI to help find her mother.
It's a race against time.
They're in Arizona, border town.
Question as to who could have possibly abducted the mother.
People are putting out theories, asking questions.
Let's just, you know, start off with getting the baseline good here.
FBI offers $50,000 reward for information on Savannah Guthrie's mother as search enters sixth day.
She was abducted between Saturday night and Sunday.
And I'm going to not connect two dots, just going to put the two dots out there.
This was a day and a half after the latest and potentially last disclosure in the Epstein files.
And it's just probably a coincidence.
Maybe not.
Who knows?
But those two dots are dots.
They exist.
You can connect them or not, or you can think that anybody who noticed those two dots is crazy.
But there is a Guthrie-Epstein connection, not just tangentially with her husband, who had some consultancy in firm.
Savannah Guthrie interviewed the victims back in 2019.
So we'll get there in a second.
So there's a reward out.
Police have not identified a suspect in Nancy Guthrie's appearance.
FBI is offering $50,000 for information on 84-year-old Nancy Guthrie, the mother of today's show co-anchor Savannah Guthrie, last seen at her home, Tucson, Arizona.
Now, if anybody watched Viva and Lord Buckley go to the movies yesterday where we reviewed Casablanca, we briefly talked about this.
And, you know, Buckley, Mark Robert, his initial reaction: it's a border town.
This looks like it could be something of a cartel kidnapping to try to get crypto ransom or other ransom to finance illicit activities.
And entirely reasonable that a woman was kidnapped, brought over the border into Mexico, being held for ransom.
So Tucson, Arizona is not an irrelevant fact to consider here.
Investigators believe she was abducted from her home.
Authorities found traces of Nancy's blood on the porch of her home in Pima County Sheriff's Chris Nanos told reporters Thursday.
He also said investigators believe Nancy is still out there.
She's obviously still out there because they haven't found her yet.
Phoenix special agent in charge, Heath Janke, told reporters his agents are investigating a ransom letter that listed a 5 p.m. Thursday deadline, which has since passed.
The note also listed a second deadline for next Monday.
He said, I don't believe they've mentioned the details of these deadlines, but apparently the Monday deadline is more important than the Thursday deadline.
Savannah's brother, Cameron Guthrie, shared a video on Instagram Thursday evening pleading for their mother's release.
Whoever is out there holding our mother, we want to hear from you.
He said, We haven't heard anything directly.
We need you to reach out.
We may need to communicate with you so we can move forward.
Investigators have yet to identify any potential suspects as the search for Nancy enters its sixth day.
Now, a lot of questions in that, how are there no security cameras?
Were they disabled?
I do think I recall reading somewhere that the cameras weren't working.
They got one ransom note, but the news that broke yesterday as I was live is that there was allegedly an imposter ransom note.
And the amazing thing is this: predators exist in the wild and in humankind.
And the second there's opportunity, you're going to get predators jumping in on the opportunity.
You're going to get fraudsters.
You're going to get scamsters.
And allegedly, one of the two ransom notes that's since emerged, one was sent to TMZ, the other one was sent somewhere else, has been an imposter.
And I believe someone's been arrested for it.
Individual arrested for imposter ransom demand relating to Savannah Guthrie's mom, Nancy.
This is from People Magazine.
When was this?
Yeah, yesterday in the afternoon, 3:21 p.m., right when I was live.
Need to know an arrest has been made in connection with a fake ransom note regarding Nancy Guthrie's disappearance.
Samantha Guthrie's 84-year-old mom was abducted.
Okay, we got that.
An arrest has been made related to the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie.
Yada, yada, yada.
Authorities said that an arrest was related to a false ransom note pertaining to Nancy's whereabouts.
Thursday, February 5th, the Pima County Sheriff's Department held a press conference to relate the latest information about the case five days after the mother of three vanished from her home in Arizona.
FBI agent Keith Janke shared that while the local authorities and the FBI are looking into the ransom notes related to Nancy's disappearances, they have arrested one individual who was accused of crafting a fake ransom note.
The arrest took place February 5th.
We made an arrest related to an imposter ransom demand, and a complaint will be presented to a magistrate judge later.
You gotta imagine.
Again, you can be a criminal, you can be dumb.
This is one hell of a dumb criminal.
Janke urged members of the public to avoid taking advantage of the situation, noting they will all be prosecuted as they should.
My next message is to those who are imposters trying to take advantage, yada, yada, yada.
We will investigate and ensure you are held accountable for your actions.
Ransom note currently being investigated by authorities is the one that was sent to members of the media earlier this week.
The false ransom note had not been seen by the media, according to the FBI.
So there are two that have been seen.
One that has been deemed to not been seen, but deemed to be fake and led to an arrest.
It was someone trying to profit from the situation, a total imposter.
Criminal complaint obtained by people.
It named Derek Kalella as the defendant citing two violations.
One violation to the intent to, quote, transmit a demand for ransom.
And the second was for using a telecommunication device without disclosing his identity and with intent to abuse, threaten, harass any specific person.
And let's see here.
Also shared during the press conference, there's been no contact by potential abductors in the Guthrie case since the ransom note went to the media.
Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos said there are still currently no suspects.
All right, so that's the latest there.
One ransom note, which was not seen by the public, deemed to be fake, arrest made, still missing, and people are starting to ask questions.
There was, I, you know, again, and this goes the same for Erica Kirk.
It goes for the same for everybody else who's going through some form of trauma.
And everyone out there saying, well, their reaction is not what I think it should be.
And therefore, I'm going to ask questions, which are actually not questions being asked, but accusations being made.
This is not so much of an accusation.
This is someone observing something which I wouldn't have noticed myself.
This is why the aggregate knowledge of the internet is an amazing thing.
It's what happens when you democratize access to information.
It's crowdsourcing information.
It's crowdsourcing knowledge.
Someone out there has seen the movie.
Someone out there makes a connection.
And it might be a coincidence.
But then there are some coincidences that are going to be Magnolia level, Greenberry Hill level.
Blackjack Dealer picking up the guy who lost the hand and dumping him on a forest fire level coincidences.
If you haven't seen Magnolia, do not be deterred by the fact that P.T. Anderson just made an abomination of a movie called One Battle After Another.
Magnolia is a work of art.
This is a coincidence that somebody noticed, and you can draw whatever inferences from it that you want.
What you can't do is deny that it's the case.
Listen to this.
Okay, if you thought the Savannah Guthrie, Nancy Guthrie case was weird to begin with, wait till you hear this.
And I'm not talking about her husband potentially or being in the Epstein files.
This is something totally different.
This is about the press conference yesterday.
Did you guys see the press conference that was held where Savannah was sitting there?
I think it was with her siblings and reading a letter to, I guess it was the people that sent the ransom note.
Pause it there.
We played a bit of that.
I'm not going to play it again.
It's Savannah, her sister, and her brother.
And then some people were asking questions, saying that the sister looked like she was smiling before the video started.
And then she quickly turned into a frown, which is an indication that somehow the sister's in on it.
They did the same thing with the parents at Sandy Hook.
They did the same thing during any.
Oh, if they ever get a video of Erica Kirk smiling again, well, it means she was somehow in on the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
So there have been people making that observation.
Other people saying the brother in the back looks sus, whatever.
I'm not getting into any of that.
This is actually kind of interesting, and you might want to ponder what it could possibly mean.
That's what I'm that's what I'm talking about.
And before anybody gets bent out of shape, I'm not accusing anybody.
I'm not, I'm just merely pointing something out.
Okay.
And this comes from a friend who has a photographic memory and was watching this press conference yesterday and literally got chills when Savannah said this line because when she heard it, she was like, oh my gosh, that exact line was said in a movie and in the same tone and everything.
And not just any movie for those who are listening in podcast format from the silence of the lambs.
So I went and I found the movie clip and I have the clip of the press conference yesterday.
I'm going to show it to you in just a second.
And what I found odd, other than that, is after the line is said, the way that Savannah just pauses and kind of looks at the camera.
So here, take a look at the video.
She is full of kindness and knowledge.
Talk to her and you'll see.
Catherine is very gentle and kind.
Talk to her and you'll see.
Like, I don't, that's freaky one way or the other.
And you'll let me know in the chat what you think.
It's beyond freaky.
Doctor, and you'll see.
Now, I didn't slow it down.
That was slowed down in the original video.
That's a very unique phrase, and it's a very unique turn of phrase.
Now, we don't know who drafted the note that Savannah's reading.
And some people are hypothesizing it was a note from the abductors that she was designed to read.
Some people say she might have written it herself.
Others suggest maybe someone else wrote it.
And I don't know.
That is kind of bizarre.
And it's not the type of phraseology that can really occur by accident.
It's even curious why that would be something that you would say under the circumstances.
And there's the link for it so that you can all have it.
So that's one part of this.
People are wondering who's behind this abduction.
People are hypothesizing whether or not it's going to end well.
I don't think anybody's denying that it's happening.
And we'll see.
That Lord of the Lord of the Rings, that Silence of the Lambs reference is spooky.
People have picked up on it already.
Another thing, which is something that I initially thought is, I was looking through the Epstein files, putting in keywords and searching.
Surprising Links in Epstein Files 00:07:14
And one thing refreshed my memory is that back in the day, 2019, Savannah Guthrie interviewed a number of the victims.
This is a document that I found in the Epstein files, the most recent disclosure, and it's communications with the FBI from 2019.
Everything, you know, redacted and whatever.
But in it, it says, below is a list of those we know that were interviewed for dateline.
And we've got the names covered up, redacted.
One woman, unknown.
You go down to the thread.
It's another thread from September 18, which is the day before.
FYI from we don't know whom, two, we don't know whom, but they're at the FBI.
Underneath, September 18, 2019, from USANYS, U.S. Attorney New York State, maybe I'm not sure.
And to the FBI.
And then the email body itself says, just wanted to give you a heads up.
She's done another interview with Savannah Guthrie, the she we don't know who she is.
In it, she's said the following: one, she was interviewed by FBI in 2011 by a blank.
In the interview, she gave the names of all the girls she helped to traffic.
So this is presumably Ghelaine Maxwell or the other person there whose name I always forget and I don't want to say it to get a wrong person.
Two, she was also interviewed by SDNY, no timeframe.
Three, two other women also tell DOJ that Epstein specifically trafficked them to quote other men, end quote.
Remember this, everybody, because we're being told at the same time there were no other people who could be prosecuted for partaking in the sex trafficking that it was only for Jeffrey Epstein and his period interests.
This is a woman interviewed by Savannah Guthrie 2019, and this is what she allegedly said in the correspondence from the United States Department of Justice email.
Two other women also tell the DOJ that Epstein specifically trafficked them to quote other men, end quote.
And four, there are cameras in the New York City house and others where he could watch people in bathrooms and elsewhere.
They plan to air it on today on this Friday's dateline.
Hope that's helpful.
Now, this is my saluthing for what it's worth.
And I write in a tweet, Savannah Guthrie interviewed several Epsteins back in 2019.
The document from Epstein files, latest release last Friday, two days before her mother's abduction.
The interviews were from 2019, so it's not new information.
I can't think of any contemporaneous connection, though I could imagine some deeper conspiracies.
Either way, timing is very coincidental or very, very freaky.
And I can think of deeper conspiracies.
If I'm thinking out loud and there are no accusations in here, it's conceivable either before, during, or recently, other victims, other witnesses came forward to Savannah.
Maybe she had information on additional witnesses or additional perps, and that this is somehow related, that the timing set it off.
Who knows?
Probably not.
But these are two dots that are very, very big dots.
And to ignore one or its relation to the other might be more willful blindness than connecting dots that don't connect.
There was another connection in there.
This was an article about, I believe, a business that Savannah Guthrie's husband has that also comes up in the Epstein documents, the most recent disclosures.
It's from the Hindanistu Times, Hindustan Times, which has occasionally not been unreliable, but I recall it burnt me once, so I'm always cautious with it.
Savannah Guthrie, Jeffrey Epstein, the link, husband, Michael Feldman's Glover Park mentioned in files, quote, running network.
And this is from February 4th.
This is two days ago.
And it refers to actual documents in the Epstein files, which is how you can sort of rely on it a little more.
Today's show host Savannah Guthrie's mother, Nancy, has been kidnapped.
Authorities believe and authorities believe.
And a surprising link to Jeffrey Epstein has emerged in the files.
Nancy Guthrie, mother of today's show, she was kidnapped.
Okay, we got that.
We don't need to do that again.
The incident comes amid the Justice Department releasing files related to late convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
When news of Nancy's disappearance broke, it also put the spotlight on Savannah and her personal life.
As an old interview of her with Trump Resurfit, one person asked if she was the woman who had pushed for the release of the Epstein files.
While this was not the case, Guthrie had interviewed Epstein accusers for NBC News.
Now a document from the latest tranche has drawn another interesting connection between Guthrie and Epstein, her husband.
While Guthrie on her or her actions might not be directly linked to Epstein, there is a connection by way of her husband's work.
Guthrie married to Michael Feldman.
There's another Michael Feldman's name in the Epstein files that I don't think has anything to do with her, Michael Feldman.
It's not the most uncommon name in the world.
Michael Feldman, who helped find the Glover Park group, who helped find, maybe found, the Glover Park group in 2001.
The public affairs firm is based out of DC.
And during this time, Feldman helped the likes of Bill Clinton and Al Gore.
Glover Park is mentioned in the documents linked to Epstein.
One file mentions a communication involving Larry Summers, where it is suggested that Epstein speak to someone at the Glover Park group.
He has helped Clinton and General Petraeus.
The document continues.
Notably, this is a passing mention, and it is not known if there was any further communication between Epstein and Feldman's firm.
Person on X was quick to pick up on this.
Samantha Guthrie's husband, Michael Feldman, founder of Glover Park Group and partner at FGS Global, is directly tied to huge global politician influence firms named in Epstein files, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and personal relationships with Epstein.
Epstein was running his network all at full throttle, they wrote on X.
And so that's another potential connection.
But the bottom line, and we'll see if any news has broken since we've gone live, this is where we're at right now.
There's a lot of very, very bizarre circumstances around the kidnapping itself.
Some curious coincidences in the video.
A deadline apparently approaching on Monday and the contemporaneous nature of this abduction to the release of the Epstein files, Savannah Guthrie's relationship to this broader Epstein files, as we call it, and her husband's potential business connections to Jeffrey Epstein, Bill Clinton, who's in there as well, heavily.
Al Gore, I don't know that he is to a greater or lesser extent.
And that's the latest.
And we'll see where it goes.
And one way or the other, you hope that this has a happy ending.
And I don't know how it goes, but in the movies, they say the longer this goes, the less likely that is.
And Savannah's mother apparently has a heart condition, is on medication, and has been without that medication.
So the longer this goes, the bleaker it gets, but you keep your fingers crossed.
As they say, prayers up and hope for the best.
And that's that.
Now, Howard the Duke over in our vivabarnslaw.locals.com community.
I don't know what this says here.
Howard the Duke says, would it be overly insensitive of me to suggest to the networks that they ease back on the Nancy Guthrie coverage until there's some actual news?
I'm sure they have market data indicating their coverage is a ratings bonanza.
Dad Knows Goat 00:03:19
But for me, watching every Fox News staffer plus everyone in the Rolodex stand in front of cacti speculating about the case is a snooze button material.
I mean, first of all, no, I actually was having a discussion with someone who said, you know, this is not national news.
And I'm like, I respectfully disagree.
This is the family member of a prominent left-wing media outlet kidnapped, allegedly, purportedly, apparently.
That's freaking national news.
In today's climate of increasing violence in politics, it's national news.
And in the context of this, it's national news.
And also, put it on blast, everybody has an eye out, and you hope to tap into the aggregate knowledge of the interwebs and pray for something good to come of it.
That's all I'm going to cover it.
And I'm going to keep following up on it.
But, you know, that's where it's at.
Now, excuse me.
There was some stuff in the Epstein files, which I do want to kind of talk about.
Takabo.
But first, okay, this is what I was actually going to start the show off with.
Well, no, this wasn't what I was going to share at the show.
We'll just have a little, if I may, I might, I don't, I feel guilty about these things because I don't know who is the original source for it.
And I don't like playing the entirety of it so that people don't have to go to the original source.
I'll play 30 seconds of this.
It's an old proverb of, you know, when I was six years old, my dad knew nothing.
And by the time I was 30, he knew everything.
I'm surprised at how much he learnt in that time.
From dad knows nothing to dad was right about everything.
Five years old, dad knows everything.
Seven years old, dad knows a lot.
10 years old, maybe dad doesn't know everything.
12 years old, dad doesn't know anything.
14 years old, dad's gone crazy.
Well, we can stop.
You get the gist, and I don't want to steal this person's content.
I'm going to link it in the chat so you can all go enjoy it.
You know, when you're 10 years old and you realize maybe my dad doesn't know everything, that's true.
My dad's gone crazy.
That might also be true.
A slop meme.
But the old expression, it's amazing how much my dad learned.
There's a lot of truth to it.
The day you realize that your parents don't know everything, but they still know a lot more than you, and not because they're smarter, just because they've lived 30 years longer is a very important day for everybody to learn.
But it's the day when the 16-year-old thinks they know everything.
That is the most dangerous period of time for the 16-year-old and for everybody around them.
But no, that's not what I wanted to show you.
I was going to start the show with something hilarious, which was as close to a reality as you can get for what it means to be a parent.
First of all, I love this.
I love everything about this.
This is, I want a goat, is basically the long and short of this is Marion.
If you're watching, I want a goat or a pig, but I think a goat more so because I want to do this.
Now, the only problem is that helmets now needs to be retired.
It's no longer good for road biking.
That is, by the way, how you get Salmonella.
This is how a kid gets the brain-eating parasite, salmonella, or something terrible.
Culpable Actions 00:07:04
Not funny.
But cute.
And it goes on for eight minutes, people.
I don't know whose content this is.
I've seen that guy.
He's kind of funny.
All right.
Now, that's enough for the Palo Clanse, people.
Politicians are the scum of the earth, and there really is no question about it.
Some are more scummy than others, and the occasional politician is actually a good, decent human.
One politician who is not a good, decent human, who is a pathological liar, an idiot of the highest order, a man who defends criminals over American citizens, a man who literally traveled to El Salvador, where I was just at, to visit a literal criminal who was in an actual jail, Kilmar Abregio Garcia.
Kilmar Abrego Garcia is now taking the opportunity of congressional hearings with Secretary of Finance Besant to virtue signal and grandstand on the shooting of Alex Predi.
And he's an idiot.
This guy right here, Van Holland.
If he were saying anything insightful, it would be one thing.
He's an idiot.
And this is what he has to say.
Mr. Secretary, I think you would agree that the credibility of the Secretary of the Treasury is important.
And I want to give you a chance to retract a statement that you made on national TV.
Alex Predi was shot 10 times and killed by federal agents in Minneapolis.
I want to give you a chance to retract a statement.
Should swiftly be followed up by, if I wanted to retract it, I would retract it.
Let's hear what Van Holland has to suggest.
Let's hear what Van Holland has to characterize by way of the incident that occurred in Minnesota.
The administration, some administration called him a, quote, domestic terrorist.
You suggested that Alex Predi was culpable in his own killing because he had a gun in his waistband holster, which he was licensed to carry.
Culpable in his own killing.
Do we all know what the definition of culpable is?
It sounds guilty.
It sounds like you've done something wrong that maybe you had a role to play in.
Culpable, definition, deserving blame, morally responsible for wrong or harmful actions, often implying legal liability or negligence.
Let me see here.
Meriting condemnation.
This is Merriam-Webster, which gives you a bit of a better definition.
Meriting condemnation or blame, especially as wrong or harmful, culpable negligence.
The defendant is culpable for her actions.
Let's hear what Besant has to say about this.
When asked, you said, quote, I'm sorry this gentleman is dead, but, and you went on to say he had a weapon, suggesting that he was culpable in his own killing.
So I'm not even sure that he actually said culpable or suggested that he was culpable.
I'm sorry that the guy's dead, but if you're concealed caring while getting involved in police operations and getting involved in physical altercations, bad things happen, i.e., you're culpable or potentially contributed to the awful consequences that you suffered.
So, Mr. Secretary, today, would you like to retract that statement?
I would not.
And would you like to express remorse over the death of Ashley Babbitt here in the Capitol?
Oh, I have expressed remorse over that.
So I've done that, Mr. Secretary.
Mr. Secretary, please don't check.
So you think, I just, I have other questions, but I actually would have expected you to.
Have other questions, but I'm going to waste this discussion on the U.S. economy.
I'm going to waste two minutes of my five minutes talking about something unrelated because I want to grandstand like a virtue signaling jackass that I am and have been consistently for as long as I've known of this virtue signaling jackass.
Take this opportunity to rephrase your response to that question.
So you think the fact that he legally had a gun justified his killing?
I didn't say that at all.
You said, do you think he was culpable, partly to blame in his own killing because he had a gun?
They did not say that.
I'm asking you a question now.
Do you believe he was in any way culpable for his own killing because he legally carried a gun?
Again, this is an FSOC hearing.
Yeah.
So you're the Secretary of the Treasury.
Why do we talk about financial stability and oversight?
I'm happy to, Mr. Secretary, but your credibility is important.
And in that response, you really, I think, you know, let down the country.
Shut up.
Filthy trap.
Honesty after that kind of terrible transaction.
You're a filthy trap, Van Holland.
Here, it's, it is.
There's a way, when it's easy to play Monday morning quarterback or, you know, backseat driver, when you have the benefit of sitting here, not under pressure, and saying you know what, I would have responded to that.
You know what I would.
I would have responded this, first of all, you're an absolute idiot.
Van Halen, Van Holland, whatever the hell your name is.
Uh that's, this is my analysis.
Why are you asking the treasury secretary a question about the pretty shooting?
Second, he was indeed partly culpable in his own shooting, but not because he was legally carrying a concealed firearm, but because he was carrying a concealed firearm and chose to insert himself in and interfere with police operations.
Situations escalate quickly, quickly under such circumstances, with irreparable consequences that are truly unfortunate but entirely avoidable.
If he doesn't interfere with police operations, he's still alive.
If he doesn't conceal carry while interfering with police operations, he's still alive.
You, on the other hand, will always be an idiot.
You should go have some margaritas with Kilmart.
You have to understand that he he didn't have to insert himself into the operations.
He didn't have to carry a firearm either, and the reality is that when you're carrying a concealed firearm, you have the right to do so you also have some sort of heightened obligations.
He made a series of bad.
Maybe some people say well, he might have still been shot if he decided to interfere with those police operations.
Maybe much less likely however, and so yes, he is culpable for what happened to him.
He is partly culpable, if you don't want to say entirely culpable, because he made a series of decisions that ended in those unfortunate but entirely predictable consequences.
But way to waste your time with Scott Besent when you're talking about the economy, and you don't want to talk about the economy, maybe because maybe it's not going as bad as you would have otherwise wanted to.
So you go and belabor the point of an unrelated shooting of something that has nothing to do with Scott.
Besides credibility, holy shit, the man who went out and defended a wife beating gang member, alleged human trafficker, alleged cp carrier criminal, Is lecturing Scott Bassant on credibility.
Mature Minors and Medical Assistance 00:17:15
Get bent.
I was going to say get bent, Scott Bassant, but it's not Bassent.
It rhymed.
Get Bent Van Hollen.
And now we move on to the death cult that is Canada.
But first, let me see what's going on in the chat.
Let me see if we've got any.
Oh, bye, yeah.
Oh, King of Bill Tong's in the house.
Well, hold on one second.
We're going to check that out.
And then I'm going to remind everybody how you can support the channel via crypto, which is taking a bit of a rebound.
If you want to, if you give me a tip in crypto now, it might be worth twice as much next week and no skin off anybody's back.
King of Bill Tong in the house.
Bill Tong is one of the highest protein snacks in the world, boasting over 50% protein, packed with B vitamins, creatine, iron, zinc, and more.
Builtongusa.com.
Use code Viva for 10% off.
Now, Bill Tong, I'm going to get this out of the way for one second.
If you want to support the channel as well, you can go down here.
You see this little tip thing.
Download the Rumble wallet.
You can tip with crypto.
Go to Bitcoin.
If you have a Bitcoin wallet now, you can scan this QR code and tip in crypto.
What's it at?
70,000?
I think it went back over 70,000 today.
You can also tip with gold-backed crypto from Tether, which is now a stakeholder in Rumble.
Scan the QR code.
You can just invest.
Forget support.
The best way to support the channel, snip clips, share away, spread the word.
It's free.
It's easy.
But download the Rumble wallet.
It's available on those platforms that sell things, the app stores.
Download the Rumble app so you get real-time notifications of when I and others go live.
It facilitates your viewing experience.
It's amazing.
You'll never miss a show.
You'll never miss a notification.
Let me put that little asterisk on that.
You might from some technical glitches, but you will get immediate real-time notifications.
Download the wallet if you want to support the channel.
And the easiest way, come over to vivabarnslaw.locals.com, where every day after the show, we have our locals-only after party.
And if you want to get some merch, you can go to vivafry.com and get some merch.
Everybody needs a shirt.
Everybody needs a mug.
That's my wife.
That's me back with the actual fro.
Freedom over life.
Freedom finds a way.
I am not my brother's gatekeeper.
I like that one.
I thought of that one.
From the Bible.
Am I my brother's keeper?
We should take care of each other, but we should not safeguard the information to which the other has access.
Safeguard.
Learn or repeat.
You get some mugs.
You get some good stuff if you want to get some.
VivaFry.com.
Okay.
The death cult that is Canada.
I want to do an expose on this because I want people to appreciate it.
I want people to see the receipts in real time.
And I want people to understand where this goes.
And it's not an accident.
It may or may not be an inevitability, but it certainly is, as far as I'm concerned, part of the design.
Now, back in the day, Canada legalized medical assistance in dying.
And they did it because the Supreme Court came out and said, we can't deny people the right to ethically and peacefully take their own lives.
And we want to allow that to be something that people who are terminally ill can avail themselves of.
And after the Supreme Court came down with this ruling, it was 2016, 2017, give or take.
I'm going to get the link here.
This is a blog from the court.
There was a discussion as to whether or not they should also extend this privilege, this right to the mentally ill.
This was an unsolicited addition to the legislation that was being passed to codify the ruling from the Supreme Court.
This is law librarians of Congress legalizing legalization of medical assistance in dying in Canada.
July 26, 2016, posted by Ruth Lavouche.
Now, I know the history, and this is just one of the documents that will evidence the fact that I'm not pulling this out of my butt, and that this is actual the history of how it came to be.
Federal legislation.
On the federal level, legislation concerning medical assistance in dying was passed on June 17, 2016, after a very heated debate between the House of Commons and the Senate, Bill C-14, an act to amend the criminal code, because they had to make it not illegal.
They had to ratify the Supreme Court decision into law by amending the criminal code to create exceptions for what would otherwise be murder, manslaughter.
I don't know.
It would otherwise be criminal death.
And so they had to amend the criminal code.
An act to amend the criminal code and make related amendments to other acts.
Medical assistance in dying received the royal assent and came into force.
This new federal law amends the criminal code and establishes the conditions and procedure under which one may receive medical assistance in dying.
The legislation authorizes and governs active euthanasia as well as physician-assisted suicide.
However, it appears that the scope of this law is much narrower than the ruling of the Supreme Court in Carter versus Canada.
Now, at the time, you will recall, there was the addition, the unilateral addition of, well, you don't want to deny this constitutional right as adjudicated by the Supreme Court to the mentally ill.
And so we want to allow the mentally ill to also take their own lives.
How you can have people who are mentally ill, which is a defect of mind that sometimes actually precludes or prevents people from entering into contracts or entering into valid contracts, how they can enter into a valid contract to take their own life, set that aside.
It was added.
There was some debate.
There was some concern as to whether or not this would be abused, much like the Nazis abused of their mercy killings to kill the handicapped and the mentally ill and the mentally challenged at first.
They called it mercy killings because it was merciful.
In Canada, they just call it medical assistance in dying because euthanasia has too much of an ugly connotation.
Monitoring and follow-up.
Regulations regarding the monitoring of physicians-assisted suicide in Canada has yet to be established.
So they're going to set up a monitoring system.
When it comes to allowing the mentally ill to kill themselves, in five years' time, the federal government will hold a parliamentary review of the newly adopted law in order to address the issues of mature minors.
That's minors, young people under the age of ability to consent to contract.
They call them mature minors, not even emancipated minors.
And maybe I'm just being the lawyer here.
Emancipation is a legal status.
It's a legal fiction.
You can emancipate a minor so that they can have full freedom under the law as an adult would.
I'm not sure that they would allow them to drink alcohol under age, but they could contract, they could buy stuff, they could sign leases, et cetera, et cetera.
They wouldn't need parental consent.
They do this in the cases of kids that are actually sufficiently mature, coming from family situations where they can't rely on their parents.
Emancipated minors is a little bit different than mature minors in my view, but this is actually what they did at the time.
So they're going to wait five years in order to address the issues of mature minors, patients suffering solely from mental illness, as well as advance directives, an act to amend the criminal code and to make related amendments to other acts, medical assistance and dying, yada, yada, yada.
So understand, they actually put in a provision that would allow euthanasia for mature minors.
It would allow state-sanctioned killing for mature minors and people suffering solely from mental illness, not like a schizophrenic with pancreatic cancer, not like someone who is clinically depressed, maybe because they have stage four lung cancer and they don't have much time left.
Suffering solely from mental illness.
What's a mental illness?
Depression, schizophrenia, manic bipolar disease, obsessive-compulsive disorder, ADHD.
I don't know.
But what solely mental illness is going to qualify someone to have their life taken by the state in what would otherwise be basically state-sanctioned murder?
So that's step one.
Supreme Court legalizes it.
The government of Canada legislates it into law and sunsets.
In five years, we'll go back and see whether or not we want to let mature minors kill themselves and how we're going to implement that and how we're going to make sure it doesn't get abused.
In the interim, that was 2016, right?
In the interim, this is an article I've brought up a few times, but let's memorialize it forever.
This is from the CBC, state-funded.
So now you have the state that wants to kill citizens, mature minors, and people suffering from solely from mental illness, but there's a five-year pause, right?
What do you have to do in that five-year pause?
You got to convince people that it's not only not a bad thing, but it's a good thing to kill citizens.
Can't treat.
Cheaper to kill than to treat.
So let's take our state-funded Pravda, funded to the tune of $1.7 odd billion dollars a year.
That's the CBC and the Radio Canada, not to be distinguished with bailouts for print media, not to be confused with subsidies via direct subsidies, government advertising on other media.
CBC is a crown corporation.
And right now, in this five-year period where they have this provision that's been set aside, now they have their government-sanctioned propaganda telling you that not only is it not a bad thing, it'll save you money.
Medically assisted deaths could save millions in healthcare spending.
Report across Canada.
Journal calculates up to $136.8 million in savings.
CBC News posted it January 23rd, 2017.
Put it in the timeline, people.
Keep track of this.
New research suggests medically assisted dying could result in substantial savings across Canada's healthcare system.
May I just, you know, state the obvious?
No shit, Sherlock.
What do you think is cheaper?
Feeding someone or killing someone?
Holy crap.
New report shows that killing children prevents parents from having to pay for their existence for the next 10 years.
Hmm.
It's amazing.
New report says that after people are dead, there can no longer be a burden on society and it'll save the government money if the government kills those people.
Doctor-assisted death could reduce annual healthcare spending across the country by between 34 and 136 million, according to a report published by the Canadian Medical Association Journal on Monday.
The savings exceedingly outweigh the estimated 1.5 to 14.8 million in direct costs associated with killing.
Holy shit.
You know what you could do, by the way?
You could bring down that cost by using a bullet.
Just like a straight bullet, it'll be what, 85 cents?
I don't know how much a bullet costs.
A dollar.
Bring it down.
You know, when we get to the numbers, we're going to get to the numbers in a second.
13,000 in 2022?
Well, if you didn't do it ethically, if you did it really on the cheap side, a buck, 13,000 bucks, forget 1.5 million.
The takeaway is that there may be some upfront costs associated with offering medical assistance and dying, but there may be a reduction in spending elsewhere.
There will be a reduction elsewhere in spending.
You know what there will be a reduction in?
Humanity.
Well, more murders means less people to feed.
The researcher used numbers.
So I don't even care.
You got the point.
End-of-life care has high cost in Canada.
You're right.
Humanity has a cost.
By the way, this is in socialized healthcare.
If it were the people paying for it, or if it were privatized, I mean, you wouldn't worry about the government having to bear these costs.
And for people who couldn't get private care, maybe those are the ones who might look into government care.
But no, end of care, end-of-life care has high costs in Canada.
I should have actually added step one was socialized healthcare.
And then that way they can make all of this argument make sense in the minds of murderous people who are very, very, very similar, maybe not in direction, but in distance to actual Nazis.
Canadians die in hospital more often than, say, our counterparts in America and Europe.
We have lack of palliative care services, even though we are trying to improve that.
And therefore, people end up spending their final days in the hospital.
So let's kill them.
It'll be cheaper.
All right, that's the exhibit.
It'll be cheaper.
You got socialized health care.
You get legalizing the state-sanctioned murder, euthanasia, maids.
You get the state-funded propaganda telling you that it'll be cheaper.
And you want to see what happens to medical assistance in dying in Canada.
This is the actual chart.
And I'll preface this by saying, I don't believe the numbers.
I believe it's way more than what we're seeing here.
But look at that graph.
Where does it stop, by the way?
Look at this.
2016, 1,018 people medically assisted to death.
2017, it nearly triples.
2018, well, you can't triple from 2,800.
So it's only up by what?
It nearly doubles.
Now, you can't double from 4,493.
You can't go to 8,000 right away.
You got to wait a couple of years.
Then it goes to 5,600.
Then it goes to 7,600 in 2020.
Then it goes to 10,000 in 2021.
Then it goes to 13,000 in 2022.
Then it goes to 15,000 in 2023.
I think it's at, do we have the numbers for 2024?
I'm not sure that we have the numbers for 2024.
That's a parabolic curve, people.
That's the proverbial hockey stick, eh?
It's not really the hockey stick.
It's a parabolic curve.
I mean, who would have thunk?
It gets cheaper.
Look at this.
You're killing 15,000 people a year.
Imagine the savings.
The only thing you need to do right now is turn them into food or, you know, harvest their organs.
Then you'll really, you'll save on palliative care costs or you'll save on costs, especially when you go to mentally ill and mature minors, harvest their organs.
Oh, what's that?
Passing legislation at the exact same time that you're doing that?
I've talked about this.
Avery's law makes organ tissue donation automatic in New Brunswick with some exceptions.
What year is this from?
2023.
Note the timeline that we're on, people.
Yes, I'm crafting it this way, but these are the facts and this is the timeline of those facts.
New Brunswick, another province in Canada.
Province becomes second jurisdiction in Canada after Nova Scotia to move to this model, the model of presumptive organ donation.
Do you guys want to shit your pants?
And I'm sorry to swear.
Do you want to shit your pants?
You want to puke?
I'm going to show you the law of New Brunswick.
And you will not believe your flipping eyes.
I don't want to spoil the grotesque surprise.
This is New Brunswick, Canada, Acts and Regulations, Human Organ and Tissue Donation Act, 2023.
Human, Organ and Tissue Donation Act.
His Majesty, bind with the advice of the consent of the Legislative Assembly, New Brunswick, enacts as follows.
This act may be cited as Avery's law.
Let's just go down to a section that you'll read it and you're going to say, it's not possible that I read what I think I just read, but it's there in the law, section 17.
Pre-death approval by chief coroner.
I'm sorry.
Sorry, did you just say that this is organ donation pre-death?
So you mean alive?
Pre-death approval.
So you've been approved before you're dead by the chief coroner.
Listen to this.
The chief coroner may allow the removal of organs or tissue after the death of a person, notwithstanding that death has not yet occurred.
Can you read that five fucking times?
I apologize.
Read that five times.
The chief coroner may allow the removal of organs or tissue after the death of a person, notwithstanding that the death has not yet occurred.
Now, I'll steel man an argument right here.
And there are some people out there who are going to say that organs have to be harvested while the body is technically still alive.
Brain dead.
If the body and the heart has stopped, there's only so many hours you can have before things start to rot or become useless for the purposes of donation.
And so by and large, the body is still alive in all of these cases.
They're just codifying what is the reality of organ donation.
That's as strong as it can get.
That is garbage.
The coroner may allow the removal of organs or tissue after the death.
Here, they're actually saying after the death because it's a concept of a person, notwithstanding they're not yet dead yet, if, if, in the opinion of a physician, the death of the person is imminent by reason of an injury or disease.
So you're not dead yet.
They're reasonably certain you're going to die.
So start harvesting them organs.
This is the actual law as it's drafted, as it currently exists in reality.
You don't have to be dead.
They can start harvesting your organs while you're still alive or pre-death, notwithstanding that you haven't died yet, if, in the opinion of a government employee or the doctor, the death of the person is imminent by reason of injury or disease.
This is murder for the purposes of harvesting the organs, in my humble view.
Have there ever been cases where people's death was imminent, where they were brain dead and they magically, miraculously came back to life, didn't die?
Organs Before Death 00:06:56
Not anymore.
And who do you think that this is going to impact the most?
Homeless people?
Oh, that's right.
They were talking about doing it on homeless people too.
Homeless people, people with no family in the hospital, people who are the most vulnerable in society.
Do you remember that article from Canada where they were saying, you know, Canadians support euthanizing the homeless, if that's the cause?
It wasn't like 5%.
It wasn't 10%.
It was one-third of Canadians fine with prescribing assisted suicide for the homeless 2023?
Around the same time?
Sounded amazing.
Around the same time.
Say a homeless person got no family to advocate for them in the hospital, goes into the hospital.
And yeah, the physician, look, it's a homeless person.
Who's going to miss them?
Let's start harvesting them organs.
Not even dead yet.
And you think it's hyperbolic and you think I'm overreacting, rage baiting, as you say.
Well, this is where we're at right now.
This happened this year, February 2nd, 2026.
I covered the story, but I'm doing it again so we can have this insane, murderous timeline all together for the world to see, the world to understand, and the world to react to.
And Canadians in particular.
Mom outraged after mentally ill son, 26, was allowed to end his life with medical aid and dying.
He was not of sound mind.
Well, you found a murderous doctor that was willing to, you know, find a loophole.
Keanu Vafian was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes as a child, later blind due to diabetic retinopathy.
After struggling for years with mental health, the 26-year-old ended his life with medical assistance and dying.
His mother, Margaret Marcia, is now calling his case a failure of, I'll call this case murder, questioning how her son was approved amid mental illness.
They found another doctor who agreed to make an exception.
In 2022, Vafi had started to research how he could end his life with maids.
They love, they give it a maids.
So it's such a beautiful.
They don't want to call it mercy killings because the Nazis used that.
And in 40 years from now, they're going to say, oh, the Nazis 2.0 used the term maids.
And we're not talking about people with pancreatic cancer, lung cancer, terminal illness that is exceedingly painful.
We're talking about a mentally ill individual, 26 years of life.
He applied for MAID, claiming the diabetes and blindness were irremediable.
He was approved, but doctors ultimately did not proceed with this case.
He then sent, spent the following years trying to help him manage his on January 3rd.
The family received a call from a law firm, British Columbia, that was acting as the executives of Vivian's will.
The paralegal informed them that he had died four days earlier.
I forget the name of the doctor who finally approved him, but they found a doctor who could approve him.
Mentally ill.
We haven't yet gotten out of the sunset provision of that law.
It's been extended to 2027.
That didn't stop the Canadian government from killing someone who was mentally ill.
Oh, and you go from euthanizing the mentally ill, and this is another one: euthanizing people who don't want to be euthanized.
You know what that's called?
That's called murder, people.
This one's from UNILAD, but it's a story that's now hopefully going to say go viral in the most cynical sense, expose to the world the insanity that's going on in Canada.
Elderly woman allegedly euthanized, quote, against her will, end quote, after her husband became, quote, burnout, end quote, caring for her.
What did I say earlier?
We'll come back to this in a second.
You get to the hospital and you don't have people advocating for you, you'll literally die in the hospital.
You will literally be carved up in the hospital, your organs harvested because some bureaucrat says it'll be cheaper for the system.
We can maybe make a little bit of money on the side by harvesting these organs.
It's a win-win.
And there ain't nobody here to advocate for this person.
What happens when the person who's supposed to advocate for you doesn't want to care for you for the rest of their lives?
State-sanctioned murder is what happens.
Medical assistance in dying is legal in Canada if strict requirements are met.
An elderly woman who has allegedly changed her mind about assisted dying was euthanized, quote, against her will.
The woman in her 80s had put in a request to use MAID services in Canada, which stands for medical assistance in dying.
Mercy killing.
These include things like making decisions themselves for according to the official report by the chief coroner of Ontario's Medical Assistance in Death, Dying Death Review Committee.
The woman who was referred to as Mrs. B was suffering from complications after coronary bypass graft surgery.
Following her, quote, physical and functional decline, she reportedly asked her family to investigate the possibility of her dying.
We've covered stories where the government offers it unsolicited.
Her spouse reached out to MAID, and the next day, a practitioner assessed her for maid eligibility.
However, she reportedly said that she, quote, wanted to withdraw her request, citing personal and religious values and police.
Well, she was close enough.
You know, the chief coroner came and said she's close enough.
I don't know what organs you can get out of an 84-year-old who just went through heart surgery, but close enough.
The report added, she communicated that pursuing inpatient palliative care, hospice care, and palliative sedation was more in keeping with her end-of-life goals.
Well, it costs a little bit more money.
So you said yes before, consent no longer required.
You gave consent, and now you can't withdraw your consent.
You're dead.
At the time, her spouse, quote, was noted to be experiencing caregiver burnout, and a request was put in for hospice care, which was denied.
Oh, kind of like that case of the Ontario woman who had multiple chemical sensitivity and was denied adequate living conditions because the government couldn't provide it.
So they killed her.
They did.
Multiple chemical sensitivity, aka severe allergies.
A second maid assessor was then consulted after her spouse's request, who objected to assistant diet.
The report said this maid practitioner expressed concerns regarding the necessity for urgency and shared belief for the need for more comprehensive evaluation, the seemingly drastic change in perspective of end-of-life goals, and the possibility of coercion or undue influence, i.e., due to caregiver burnout.
The assessor requested to meet with Mrs. B the following day, but this request was denied, and a third assessor instead went to meet with her.
Mrs. B was then euthanized after allegedly having told assessors she had changed her mind.
Now, members of the Ontario MAID Death Review Committee have voiced worry that the decision was rushed based on the short timeline with their concerns coming, forming part of a report from the office of the chief coroner.
Their concerns included the impact of being denied hospice care, additional care options, caregiver burden, consistency of the made request, and divergent made practitioner perspectives.
It added many members brought forward concerns of possible external coercion arising from the caregivers' experience of burnout and lack of access to palliative care in an inpatient or hospice setting.
Meds, Liberal Euthanasia Concerns 00:06:22
We're there, people.
We're there at the timeline now where you don't need to be dead.
They don't need your consent.
And if you don't have someone who's vocally advocating for you, you go into a hospital, you're going to come out literally in someone else's body.
And that is the absolute state of Canada and euthanasia.
And you see how it starts.
Starts with benevolence.
As if people tend to think that the Nazis thought they were doing anything wrong with their mercy killings.
They know better.
They can kill the people who are mentally ill.
They can kill the people who are mentally challenged.
They can kill the handicass because, you know, it's cheaper to kill them than it is to care for them.
They're making society better.
They're enhancing the gene pool.
You think the Nazis thought they were doing anything wrong with their mercy killings?
If you think that you're bound to make the same mistakes again because you don't understand that they too, I don't say presumably, they too thought what they were doing was for the greater good.
And that is how the greater good becomes the oppressors of all.
Ayan Rand said it.
I haven't read the book, but I have to.
There is no greater individual.
There is no greater minority than the individual.
And if you do not support individual rights, you don't support minority rights.
And you'll get the hell that you deserve under the pretext and guise of the greater good.
That's what's going on in Canada.
Share it.
Make sure that you subscribe when you're watching this in clip format, Viva Fry.
Make sure you watch daily, three o'clock on Rumble.
And go to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
And that's that.
I'm going to clip that mofo and I'm going to put that on blast like it's nobody's business.
It is truly astonishing.
Like you think you're living through.
You think you're living through insanity.
But you are.
And it's absolutely insane.
Now, let me bring up the tip questions over here.
In Crumble.
And what do we got?
No, sorry.
Hold on.
Oh, shoot.
Did I not bring them up?
Let me see if they're going to come up.
They're not going to auto-populate.
So let me bring this out here and I'll bring them up on the side here.
From top to bottom, bottom to top.
See the veil says a website that needs to be checked out and understand what is happening in our society.
A website that needs to be checked out and understand what is happening to our society.
We need to fund this group so they can help put an end to a very abusive technology warfare system that is aimed at us citizens here in the USA and around the world.
What is it?
Targetedjustice.com.
Well, let me see what that is.
Targetedjustice.com.
Let me take the comment out and then bring this website up and see what it is.
I have no familiarity with this.
Targetedjustice.com, Liberty and Justice, Targeted Justice.
501c3, fighting for freedom, peace, and restorative justice for targeted individual.
Let's just dust.
Anna goes to Washington.
All right, I'm going to definitely check this out afterwards and everyone else can check it out now.
I do not vouch for anything in this website.
It's the first time I'm seeing it, but I'm definitely going to link to it.
Look at it afterwards.
Here's the link.
Now, bring this up here.
Ginger Ninja in the house.
Now, see if I, this one should come up here.
Okay, Ginger Ninja's in the house.
I don't want to care for this person who requires me in order to live.
I thought abortion is protected in Canada.
Yeah, no, it's like postnatal abortion.
Till death do you part, till death do us part, or till maids do us part.
Yeah, honey, you've become something of a bit of a burden.
I'd rather have the money to live my time out.
What do you need it for?
The hospice is just going to be, you know, what do you have left?
Another six months.
It's going to be miserable.
You know, I've got a good few good years.
I don't want to waste all of my end of years money with you in hospice because the government can't really cover it.
So, you know, sorry.
Survival of the fittest.
Will to push forward.
Viva, New Brunswick has been heavily liberal, especially in Gloucester County area, Lamech Island surrounding area.
They have windmills set up in places barred off from people able to go into.
Yeah, no, no, I know.
Look, look, the Maritimes are heavily liberal.
They ratified the, you know, the COVID, what do they call the maritime bubble?
It's the conservatives out in the Maritimes are more liberal than liberal.
200 watts.
Wasn't this the premise of the film Coma 1978?
I don't know, but I'm going to have to check it out.
Old man Toby says, Viva, I take meds for schizophrenia and PTSD, so this is scary as hell.
How is this again?
How isn't this again Nuremberg?
It's crazy.
Because you imagine, like, I look, I've known several people who manic bipolar, and when they, when they come off their meds, because they feel better, you know, so the cycle of it is you have an episode, you either get institutionalized or you take the meds.
You feel better.
You don't want to take the meds because it either causes facial twitches or it causes you to put on weight.
You feel good.
You come off the meds.
You slip again into an episode.
You don't know it.
Everybody else around you knows it, but you don't know it.
And then you think in that decision, you're going to in that state, altered state, where you're literally off your meds and literally not in a world where you're viewing reality objectively, you're going to be able to consent to having your life taken.
It's madness.
Old man Toby, that was it.
And then we got mature miners like Jumbo Shrimp or Flat Mountains, Ginger, or Pregnant Virgins.
So that happened once.
It's technically possible humans might be able to spontaneously impregnate.
Roostang says Viva can get his own tips like quarterback Joe Burrow frosted tips.
That's not a sex thing, is it?
All right.
Well, with that said, people, I think we're going to.
Do I have anything else in the backdrop before we head on over to Viva BarnesLaw.locals.com?
I don't think I do.
Unless we do.
Hold on a second.
Let me see here.
Let me make sure that I haven't, I've covered everything.
Jake's Ice Defense 00:12:01
That medical assistance and dying story, I want specifically wanted to put it on Ultra Super Duper Mega Blast.
Steven Crowder, legalization of medical assistance.
Oh, I got one more.
One more here.
Let me just see something here.
I was going to start the show with this as well, but it did require a little bit of prefacing.
Let me play Stephen Crowder for one second, and then we're going to come back to this.
Now, look, if you want to take that in its whole context and still say this was clearly made to be race, whatever, fine.
You can have that opinion.
Okay.
I think it's pretty obvious.
I mean, you have black people who are not monkeys, who are turtles, who are rhinoceroses.
You have white.
It's silly.
It's the internet.
If you think, fine.
What's not okay is deliberately re-uploading something to mislead people as though Donald Trump created this and personally uploaded just a screen capture of Michelle Obama and Barack Obama as monkeys out of context.
That's not what happened.
And because it is not what happened, I don't care.
And I'm tired of people like, oh, you know what?
You should still be a little more prudent.
Oh, okay, sure.
Granted, I got it.
It doesn't mean we have to give anyone a win on this when they're being dishonest.
It's that simple.
Also, if you're going to make the comparison, I think that Michelle Obama, I would not compare her.
I wouldn't make the comparison to a gorilla.
Obviously, I wouldn't do that.
I understand why you shouldn't do that.
looks more like a photo negative of the predator i don't know how that i don't know how that i don't know how that doesn't if if If the other is going to get you in trouble, why that wouldn't is quite funny.
See, I did.
There is a meme.
There's a meme that Samuel Jackson looks like a pug.
I always said this, which is quite funny.
I just wanted to see.
Yeah, look at this.
It's an actual thing.
People make their anyhow.
All that to say is don't be too sensitive and don't lack a sense of humor.
You'll never get out of this world alive.
Now, a man who might be pushing certain limits is one who I've had this discussion with before, Jake Lang.
And before going live, someone said, Did you hear Viva?
Jake Lang got arrested.
And I had read a tweet from Jake Lang saying that he had been arrested for destroying a pro-ICE ICE sculpture outside the Capitol in Minnesota.
And it looks like it's true.
I'm going to play you the video in a second.
Far-right influencer Jake Lang arrested for vandalizing sculpture on Minnesota Capitol steps.
Updated February 6, 2026.
Law enforcement arrested, pardoned Jan 6 insurrectionists.
Sorry.
What a bunch of assholes.
No one was charged with insurrection, let alone convicted.
Jake was among the violent Jan 6ers, and I think he, I would dare say he'll say proudly so.
If he sees officers beating a woman, he's going to respond with whatever bat manifests its hands into his time.
He's not an insurrectionist.
This is idiotic.
Where's this coming from?
CBS news.
So you'd expect nothing less.
Okay, the insurrectionist and far-right influencer Jake Lang in St. Paul for destroying a sculpture on the front steps of the Capitol on Thursday.
Lang posted a video on social media of him kicking the newly installed sculpture that reads, prosecute ICE.
State trooper arrested Lang a short time later near Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and University Avenue.
What an odd detail to include.
He was booked at the Ramsey County Jail for suspicion of criminal damage to property.
In a post on X, Lang claimed he's being charged with a felony.
Sculpture had been put up earlier the same day by a group of veterans who were protesting ICE's ongoing presence in Minnesota.
Lang says he plans on holding rally inside the Minnesota State Capitol on Saturday, but officials say he does not have a permit to do so.
Last month, Lang, who is from Florida, led an anti-Islam rally in Minneapolis, which drew a large crowd of counterprotesters.
So that's the news.
And I'll show you the video and you can decide whether or not you support this.
I'll tell you what I think in a second, but the tweet from Jake Lang, and I thought I had it in the backdrop.
Ah, come on, where is it?
Hold on, give me one second.
I'm going to get it.
Jake Lang.
We said a little while ago, I mean, the dude's gonna, he's he's looking to get arrested, looking to make that type of, I don't want to say content, that type of protest.
And then the question is going to be: is it legitimate protest to interfere with other people's right to legitimately protest?
I believe this is the video.
It says, I'm currently being arrested outside the Minnesota State Capitol for turning the prosecute ICE sign the Democrats erected into a wonderful pro-ICE sign.
President Trump, we support you, we support ICE.
Our country was made for Americans, not for Somalis.
Wise, baby!
America first, America only!
We'll see you here February 7th, Saturday, 12 noon, outside the Minnesota State Capitol.
Okay, well, I'll give Jake credit for one thing.
That's kind of creative.
It's not prosecute ICE.
It's an actual legit statue that was up there.
And he turned it into pro-ice.
Okay.
Outside the Minnesota State Capitol.
What I'm kind of shocked about is that there's literally nobody there, literally nobody protecting it, literally, no security guards.
The bottom line to this is First Amendment rights don't include vandalism.
And I, you know, I, I, it's not, I, you know, what I feel about some of Jake's antics.
This seems to be denying other people their first amendment rights.
Now, some people are going to say, why would you be allowed to put up a prosecute ice made out of ice?
It's not going to be there forever.
I don't know what the temperature is like on the steps of the government building.
And others are going to say this is vandalizing and interfering with other people's legitimate First Amendment rights.
And he certainly got what he wanted because this is certainly what he wanted.
I might be of the opinion.
I want to read the chat to see what the chat thinks.
I'm of the opinion that this is legally a wrong thing to do.
And you go counter-protest, but it's no different than someone running up and taking a MAGA hat off somebody's head, except that it doesn't involve an active human.
So it's no different than taking down a pro-MAGA sign because you don't like it.
I don't know if they got permits.
I presume they did.
And I'm, you know, he'll get the protest he wants, but I think he's don't think he's in the right here.
Vigilant vandalism laws do not apply to snowmen and ice statues.
Yay, Jake.
Let's see what people say here.
It will melt eventually.
It's not a monument.
I don't think vandalism applies only to monuments.
Oh my God, going to jail over frozen water.
Did the state allow that to be put there and then claim it?
Otherwise, who is the victim?
He exercised his free speech by correcting it.
It was great.
It's all stupid.
The ice melted today.
Anyway, we'll see what happens with him.
He's doing this in a state where they are going to look to and deliberately want to make an example out of Jake.
No permit.
He had no permit.
That's for this weekend.
Who's damaged?
I think the people who, I don't know if they're, let's, let's hold on.
Actually, let's do this in real time.
Did they have a permit to put up that?
Did they, I'll put the they have a permit to put up the prosecute ice statue before Minnesota.
Was it Minnesota or Capitol?
Minnesota or Michigan.
I think it was Minnesota.
Let's see here what the Grok is going to give us, and then we're going to compare to a reliable one.
Let me see here.
That was Senator Van Hollen.
Yes, the group responsible for the Prosecute ICE sculpture at the Minnesota Capitol had a permit to display it.
The sculpture was commissioned and installed on February 5th.
See, this is, yeah, I'm not sure.
Whatever.
You have to go about things the smart way so that you don't make the wrong, set the wrong precedent.
The sculpture was commissioned and installed on February 5th by the veterans organization Common Defense, also referred to, yeah, as part of the protest against ICE activity.
Multiple news reports, including Fox and the criminal complaint against Jake Lang, who damaged it, confirmed that the organization obtained an official permit from the relevant authorities to place the sculpture at the Capitol grounds.
It was C.
It was authorized under, it was authorized from 6:30 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. that day.
They paid $6,000 for its creation, additional $600 for its removal at the end of the permit, with plans to donate the remains to a local business.
It's ICE, people.
This contrasts with some social media claims suggesting no permit existed, but reliable reporting, including NPR News, Fox, others, consistently states a permit was secured.
The incident gained.
So, but when did he destroy it?
Let's see here.
At what time did Jake destroy?
Let's see, damage the monument.
That's not the right thing.
The display.
Let's get it properly.
At what time did Jake now?
If they had it from, if he's outside of the time frame, be after 11:30, make it interesting.
Ooh.
So let's see here.
The sculpture was commissioned by here, Fox News.
It was authorized from 6:30 to 11:30 p.m. that day, being February 5th.
Jake, multiple reports.
Okay, he destroyed it at 2:30 p.m.
Hmm.
Let me think like a lawyer here, people.
If they were no longer within their timeframe and it was going to be removed anyhow, did he interfere with their lawful permit to display the sign?
Hmm.
I think Jake might have a defense here.
Well, sir, I destroyed it beyond the hours of their display.
So at that point in time, it was nothing more than ice that was going to inevitably melt in any case.
Therefore, my provocative destruction or correction of it did not violate their permit, did not violate any law, and cannot be qualified as vandalism.
Hmm.
2:30 is before 11:30.
Hold on one second.
Am I going crazy here?
Someone's saying 2:30 is before 11:30.
Am I being, am I being trolled?
2:30 p.m., that's before midnight.
That's afternoon.
And their sculpture.
Oh, darn it.
11:30 p.m.
Sorry, I thought that was 11:30 a.m.
Well, Jake, there goes your defense.
Sorry, I mean to scream.
Sorry, so it was good for the entire day up until damn near midnight.
All right.
Well, now that's it.
So it's 11:30 p.m.
It wasn't just a morning display.
Well, it was, you know, that would be, that would be a good answer for an exam, but it would be factually incorrect because you made a mistake on the facts.
So, Jake, good luck.
I tried.
Real America Voice 00:01:08
All right, peeps.
We're going to end our show and go over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
And what else?
Oh, there is no show this Sunday because it's the Super Bowl.
So I might do something live.
Barnes is going to watch the football game in respect, out of respect for everybody who actually watches the Super Bowl.
We will not have the Sunday night Viva and Barnes Laughlin people on Sunday.
I'll check with Barnes.
Maybe we do it Saturday or maybe we do it Monday, but not Sunday because it's the Super Bowl.
Now, that is it.
Everyone, come on over to VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com.
Locals link is in there.
Support the channel.
You know what to do.
Who do we go raid?
Let's see who we go raid.
We'll go raid Friday Night Tights is in replay.
Let's see who's on live here.
Hmm.
Yeah, we'll go do a Real America voice.
That's that's an easy one to raise.
Real America's voice.
Let them know from whence you came, and thank you all for being here.
Godspeed and locals, I'm going to see you in exactly one second.
Viva Raid Booyah.
Export Selection