Viva Barnes dissects a chaotic week, starting with an assassination attempt on Trump at the White House Correspondents' Dinner where suspect Cole Allen fired five shots. The host critiques the SPLC's indictment for alleged wire fraud and defends soldier insider trading cases involving $32,000 bets on Polymarket. Legal updates include Kash Patel suing The Atlantic for $250 million and Laura Loomer losing a defamation case against Bill Maher. Barnes condemns the Florida student indicted for joking about bombings as a First Amendment violation and analyzes the nullification of Virginia's redistricting referendum, arguing these events highlight systemic legal overreach and partisan manipulation. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Eastern Lubber Grasshopper Poop00:04:22
Ladies and gentlemen, in honor of John Fogarty's amazing interview on Joe Rogan, and to answer the question, I want to know have you ever seen the rain?
I want to know have you ever seen the Eastern lubber grasshopper poop?
I guarantee you the answer to that is no.
Behold!
Okay, you see the.
I don't know if they're not locusts.
Okay, I think they're the Southern Hubbard, Southern whatever.
They're crickets, but something that's very, very cool and gross.
Okay, you're in focus on my finger?
Yeah.
He just touched me.
Look at that.
High five.
Okay.
Watch when they get scared.
They seem to poop.
Okay.
Hold on.
Hold on.
Oh.
Okay.
Okay.
Like this.
Like this.
Oh.
Hold on.
Okay.
Look at it.
Look at it right now.
My fingers in focus.
Yeah.
Look at this right there.
Okay.
Look at that.
Look at the.
Is that the grossest thing you've ever seen?
That is the grossest.
I'm just going to go ahead and put that one back.
I just had a good joke.
That has been your lesson.
Of the day, how to express feces out of the southern hubbard, something along the lines of the cricket.
All right, that's it.
It's the Eastern Lubber Grasshopper.
Am I in this stream here?
Where am I?
Hold on one second.
The heck is going on here?
Add to stage.
I don't know if you heard any of what I was just saying.
It's the Eastern Lubber Grasshopper.
It's the largest grasshopper in North America, I think.
Maybe in America, maybe not North America.
And I have discovered.
That they poop when they get nervous, when they get manhandled by a man.
Now, the joke everyone says go out there and touch grass.
Well, I've taken it to the next level, people, and I've gone out there and I have touched the ass of the Eastern lubber grasshopper.
Totally amazing.
We went out for a meander in this place called Loxahatchee Wildlife Reserve.
It's a federal reserve, it's amazing.
And there's gators.
We were going there to go fishing.
And we drive a sort of a back road and we could see these big, fat grasshoppers.
Going through the grass.
And so we pulled over and we had some fun and, you know, walked around and saw these grasshoppers.
And I learned the difference between grasshoppers and locusts.
Locusts are a form of grasshopper that go into some form of transformation where they grow wings and they can fly and they devour everything around you.
And enough scat.
Well, scat is an amazing thing.
Also, you go on these paths and I'm going to find a better example of it for the next time.
But as I was going on these hikes and I would notice there would be animal poop.
And you could look at the poop and you could say, oh, this is quite clearly a herbivore because it's filled with seeds.
And that, you know, it's like reddish, sort of seedy poop.
And then I kept on noticing these little tufts, these beautiful little patches of green grass.
And I went to inspect them.
And then you could see that the seeds in the poop had blossomed into these lush little islands of green, whatever foliage it was.
I didn't go and taste it because I'm not quite there yet.
But it's absolutely amazing.
And so that's the Eastern Lubber Grasshopper.
They must be in full bloom right now.
They were devouring the grass, but I don't believe that they qualify as a locust.
And I just wanted to start off with something where, you know, a little lighthearted.
When people say, go out there and touch grass, do it.
It's amazing.
As my wife says, go out there and get the awe factor.
Oh, that's interesting.
Put the awe back in God, and you can go out there and experience God's playground in real time.
And I was experiencing it with the Eastern lubber grasshopper, as I had noticed that it pooped when it got nervous.
And then, even better one, which I also have, but I'm going to try to get it in slow motion.
The grasshopper kicks its poop out of its butt as it poops.
So, the ones that I was holding, they were, I guess, maybe a little nervous or whatever.
I noticed on another occasion that as the poop came out, it kicked it with its leg.
Natural mechanisms, you want to talk about amazing intelligent design.
That is as intelligent a design as it gets.
Now, that being said, all the talk about poop, people, and we want to talk about parasites and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is none other than the Wellness Company people.
Parasites in Sushi and Fish00:07:00
Americans love sushi, and over the last two decades, raw fish consumption has exploded.
Sushi bars are everywhere.
Grocery stores and gas stations even sell it.
Don't get it at gas stations, people.
And millions of people now eat raw fish weekly.
But there's a hidden risk most people don't ever think about, and that is parasites.
By the way, I looked up the parasites you can get from Eastern Lubber Grasshopper Poop.
It's okay.
Salmon, however, is one of the most popular fish worldwide, but it naturally contains more than 70 parasites.
Most are tiny and nearly impossible to see, and they're making their way into the human body every day.
Once inside, parasites can hide for years while frequently laying eggs before any symptoms appear.
This is why many physicians are raising awareness about parasites.
Exposure.
Dr. Peter McCullough recommends doing a parasite cleanse at least once a year as a preventative measure.
The wellness company offers a hard to access prescription parasite cleanse, USA compounded ivermectin, and mabendazole.
Ivermectin paralyzes the parasite's nervous system while mabendazole starves them out.
Each capsule contains 25 milligrams of ivermectin and 250 milligrams of mabendazole, lab tested for quality.
You can now get a budget friendly 45 capsule option that costs $250 less, giving you a 21 day parasite cleanse.
Same formula as the original.
Just smaller quantity, head over to TWC.Health.
What is it?
TWC.Health forward slash Viva.
Use code Viva for 35% off plus free shipping, USA residents only.
And you will find the link in the description and the pinned comment.
But one thing you can do to avoid the risk of parasites, people, is don't play with animal poop.
Don't eat freshwater sushi.
There's a reason why freshwater fish are much less.
Common when it comes to sushi, and make sure that your sushi has been flash frozen to kill the parasites.
Hold on a second, there's a dog that needs to get out of here.
You're on.
No, no, you're not coming in.
You're not coming in.
Holy crab apples.
My goodness.
One of the dogs, the voracious pig, Manny, wants to come in and eat what was left over from Winston's breakfast because this is like the episode of Friends.
Winston, if he doesn't eat fast, he won't eat because Manny's going to come in and get his food.
People!
It's an odd time because I've got an event tonight that we had to do the show a little bit early, noon on a Sunday.
So, for all those of you who didn't get the memo, well, you'll catch up with this later in real time.
And for those who did, thank you for being here.
Now, because I get in trouble sometimes when I don't read all of the crumble rants, tip questions, if I miss a super chat on commie tube, you will have to forgive me.
And if you're not going to forgive me for missing it, don't give it because I don't like people being mad, feeling grifted, shilled, whatever the heck is going on.
Steve Lynn Wolf, Atlanta, over on Rumble says, please read at Substack.
The America Cares Card Act solves U.S. debt immigration, childcare, homelessness, criminal recidivism, and fraud in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and NGOs.
There you go.
And we got Joden 80.
False flag, boys.
Don't fall for it.
Why did Trump agree to do the White House correspondence dinner after all these years?
It's all a setup.
They're going to try to blame it on an Iranian.
Everything is faking.
I'll get to that in a second.
Please read the Substack.
All right.
Well, I guess.
I didn't show them because I forgot that I have to bring this up to the stage here.
Those are the crumble rants for the time being.
And I guess Barnes is going to be here in a few minutes.
I guess we'll get some of the stuff out of the way that requires watching video.
You've all heard the news now.
Last night, there was an apparent assassination attempt on the president.
And I say apparent because you have mixed reviews.
You have mixed information as to what is going on, where the shooter came in, where he charged, how far from the president he was.
But I will call this a, what is it called?
A presumed assassination attempt where there is that type of event within proximity of Donald John Trump.
Apparently, there's a manifesto from the shooter who traveled from California to Chicago by train and then took another train to D.C. And then Rented a room in the same hotel where the White House correspondence dinner was being held.
Look, what's amazing is you can literally, and I mean literally, anticipate, predict, and even script all of the various conspiracy theories that people are going to have.
The incident, which was at least preliminarily caught on camera, occurred at the.
Apparently, it was on a different floor.
I'm not, you know, we're not quite certain as to the proximity to the dinner itself.
The shots were heard in the.
White House correspondence dinner when Melania was on stage with a magician mentalist who was guessing the name of the child of the other reporter, the CBS News chief anchor, who was also on stage right next to Donald Trump.
We saw surveillance footage that was released yesterday.
This is enhanced, color enhanced, and whatever.
Even releasing the surveillance footage or whatever CCTV this was caused people to say this is a fake, this is a hoax.
How do they release this information in the context of an investigation?
This is what occurred yesterday.
The man, you can see him on the left.
Is seen charging in and shoots one of the security guards at the fire.
The suspect was not shot.
One of the agents was shot in the leg, is expected to make a full recovery.
And that is the incident that occurred yesterday while the White House correspondence was going on at a hotel.
Where security had been described by some as quite lax.
This is being reported by Brendan Strach, and I'll just bring it up here.
And early stages, take everything with a grain of salt, fog of war, misinformation, disinformation, inaccurate information, albeit meant innocently and sincerely.
Brendan Strach at Brendan Strachka, message I just received from attendee regarding security failure tonight.
Quote, to get into the lobby of the hotel, they simply looked.
At the email confirmation.
This was because it was at a hotel where there were other events and other people staying, but they secured off the area where the White House correspondence dinner was.
Anyone could have shown a screenshot to get into the lobby.
There were protesters right across from the hotel screaming and yelling at attendees.
They had no scanning or metal detectors until you walked two flights down to the ballroom where the president would be the entire time I was questioning why the security was so relaxed.
That is what someone reported to Brendan Strzok allegedly, and I know Brendan, he's a good guy.
Don't deny that someone told him that.
The only question is how accurate is their assessment?
The other issue is, in general, my humble opinion is security is always the illusion of security.
Security Is An Illusion00:03:14
Anyone who's mildly hellbent on doing something can do it smartly or less smartly.
Charging at full speed through the metal detector is not the surest way to make sure that you're going to get within the proximity to achieve whatever you want to achieve.
The guy, however, by all accounts, the suspect is a little bit.
Potentially weird, I want to say.
I'll play a video of an interview he gave a little while back.
Is it this one right here?
Let me make sure I got the right video.
No, that's not the right video.
Hold on.
There was a video of him giving an interview where apparently he's a teacher studied at Caltech and designed something to make wheelchairs have an emergency braking mechanism to protect adults.
This is the alleged shooter.
You'll listen to him talk and you'll tell me if you get the same impression of affect that I get from listening to him talk.
Let's just read the tweet.
Video of.
Usha Vance and shooter Cole Allen together in 2017 review.
This is Cole Allen.
This is the shooter.
I'm going to see what the other one is about here.
But let's play this and you can hear.
College student Cole Allen developed a prototype for a wheelchair emergency brake.
The wheelchair brakes tend to lock the wheels, but don't actually lock the chair to the ground.
The idea with this is to prevent it from moving at all.
Recent Aging into the Future conference held by St. Barnabas Senior Services and the Eisner Foundation.
Offered a test run on products that have the potential to enrich the lives of seniors.
14 different tech startups got to present to over 350 people in the hopes of getting their projects into some sort of senior health facilities.
Now, by the way, not for nothing, I had the exact same thought about security.
Like, in, let me take this out for one second, I'll bring it back in.
In strollers, they don't have maximum speed.
I'm giving away a million dollar invention to whoever gets this afterwards.
In strollers, in wheelchairs, in Things that you use to get the mobility impaired around, they don't have like maximum speed, not brakes, but resistors in the wheel.
So if you drop your stroller and you realize this when you're an adult, father, parent, and you're going down a hill, nothing's going to slow that stroller down until it falls over.
But if you had something like a maximum speed hydraulic limit within the wheels that it couldn't go faster than a certain limit, and then if you lost control of it, whatever, well, then it wouldn't speed off out of control and kill the elderly person or the kid in the stroller.
All right.
This is the invention of the alleged shooter.
You listen to him talk, and you tell me if you understand or get the same impression of affect, of speech, of demeanor.
The wheelchair brakes tend to lock the wheels, but don't actually lock the chair to the ground.
The idea with this is to prevent it from moving at all.
I want to see in the chat if anybody has a similar impression as to whether or not this individual looks like he might be on the spectrum.
Mary Trump's Reaction00:16:26
We're going to get into conspiracy theories in a second, people.
I say humorously, but also not humorously because people are putting them out there already.
The guy looks a little on the spectrum.
And I've known enough kids and enough kids become adults to know how that looks, what demeanor that creates, what affect that provides.
Sounds like a nerd that says SVA.
Yes, and I won't say the traditional nerds might be on the spectrum.
I'm not going to say that.
I'm just saying that guy comes off like he might be on the spectrum.
That being said, Apparently, he's a teacher, and if he's able to maintain a regular job, regular schedule without getting fired, might be an argument around that.
That being said, you can script the conspiracy theories before they happen.
Now, anybody who wants to espouse a conspiracy theory is going to find the evidence that they think supports it and interpret it in the way that supports their conspiracy theory.
I'm familiar with Doc on Twitter.
I'm not saying this in any judgmental way.
I do believe that we are at a point in humanity where post truth on the one hand, but also that same level of conspiracy psychosis that Alex Jones talked about when he was being deposed on his statements on Sandy Hook.
We have seen so many conspiracies, at first denied and then admitted and then proven as true, that you end up seeing conspiracies where they don't necessarily exist.
And Alex Jones fell into that trap, I believe, with his minimal statements that he put out on Sandy Hook.
And it was used as the reason to discredit him and the basis to initiate lawfare to destroy him.
And so you live through enough conspiracies, you see them everywhere, even when they don't exist.
You want to call it psychosis, like Alex Jones did, whatever.
But it's to the point where you see things that aren't necessarily there, or people try to egg people on to seeing things that are not necessarily there, so they can then be discredited as.
Otherwise, legitimate sources as they did, you know, temporarily to Alex Jones, but then used it as a law for the bankruptcy.
So, Doc says, hiding the false flag.
And this, if you didn't hear this, there was a call into Fox News that was abruptly cut short, and people are hypothesizing as to why.
Listen to this.
I want to just quickly tell you I was sitting next to Caroline Levitt, the press secretary's husband.
He was one of our guests.
He was seated right next to me.
And, you know, right as the dinner was starting, you know, the national anthem happened.
And then He kind of leaned over and said, You know, I watched you on TV.
You did a great job.
You need to be very safe.
And he was just very serious when he said that to me.
And he kind of looked around the room and he said, You know, there are some.
And then she cuts out.
Sounds like we lost Aisha's phone there.
And this happens, by the way, especially when you have so many people attempting to utilize the same cell service at the same time.
Now, that's true.
Now, what I don't know is whether or not the shooting actually broke out as she was talking, but let's play it again and just listen to what she said.
Let me quickly tell you I was sitting next to Caroline Levitt, the press secretary's husband.
He was one of our guests.
He was seated right next to me.
And, you know, right as the dinner was starting, you know, the national anthem happened.
And then he kind of leaned over and said, you know, I watched you on TV.
You did a great job.
You need to be very safe.
And he was just very serious when he said that to me.
Well, but I mean, A, of course, it's a White House correspondence dinner.
Anywhere with the president is an area where you need to be safe.
I don't know what you can do to be safe.
Know where the exits are, have your head on a swivel, and I'm not saying it to be funny.
Know where the exits are and look for suspicious things and be ready to react.
He looked around the room and he said, There are some.
He looked around the room and he said, There are some.
And then the question is going to be, What was she going to say after that?
Now, honestly, and I'm not saying this to make fun of anybody, I don't know how anybody thinks this supports the idea of a false flag.
First of all, you got to know how we're using the term false flag, as in it didn't happen or it was facilitated to happen so that you could use it for political purposes afterwards.
A let it happen on purpose type false flag or a fake, it never happened, and I don't know, false flag.
When you want to talk about the reasons for which people are going to believe that this is a false flag, and then you're also going to have people saying, oh my goodness, it's more coordination among the right, why might anyone want this to be a false flag?
Well, here's some of the theories being floated around.
I'm not sure who this account is.
I just know that I saw this elsewhere and I had the same thought that I'm going to express with you in a second.
But this is from I am Mukhtar, but I saw other people posting this.
So weird and scripted.
And there's a montage of tweets.
And the montage of tweets is all related to ballroom.
From Andrew Colvay, this is why the president needs to build the White House ballroom.
Libs of TikTok, this is why we need Trump's ballroom.
Jack Posobic, thank God President Trump is building a ballroom at the White House.
Now you know why the left is suing to block Trump's privately funded White House ballroom.
Appreciate, by the way, they're not all actually making the same points here, but they are certainly talking about the correlation between the security that would be afforded between a private ballroom within the White House versus doing this to the frickin' Ritz Carlton or the Hilton Daily in the conference room.
Okay, White House, who's this guy?
Wall Street Mav, we need the White House ballroom.
Meghan McCain, I don't wanna hear anyone fucking criticize the Trump's ballroom, yada, yada, yada.
Cernovich, who has a pretty nuanced and insightful position also along the lines of end wokeness, the Democrat judges who stopped the construction of a White House ballroom did so to enable an assassination of Trump, which almost happened tonight.
John Roberts needs to get these thugs in order.
Everyone sees what they are trying to do.
Now, by the way, these are not all the same conspiracy points.
Some people are saying, but this is why you need the White House ballroom.
I made the point when.
They were forcing Trump to go in for the mugshots in Georgia, forcing him to go into the court in New York when they knew that there were violent, unhinged lunatic protesters up and about everywhere.
They want to put Trump in a vulnerable position so that one of their unhinged lunatic followers can do their bidding for them.
Now, but people are saying, oh, this was a hoax, false flag, so that it would support the argument for the necessity and security of the White House ballroom.
Now, by the way, you notice from that tweet, They cut off all of the timestamps from them.
So, you know, if it was within five minutes, maybe there would be something weird.
I looked at the timestamps of these tweets and they were all within, I think, about an hour and a half of each other.
This was not like some inorganic, spontaneous, and even if it were spontaneous, it wouldn't necessarily be inorganic when everybody's having the same effing reaction because it's the obvious reaction.
They are, to the extent you believe Trump is not in on it, Because people still believe Trump was in on Butler and that he put a packet of fake blood on his ear.
Like they rehearsed this.
Like Trump was able to act as though he got shot, magically make a blood pack spurt on his ear, and was in on it the entire time.
Idiotic to the point of being idiotic.
The fact that a lot of people who are in tune with politics have the same reaction within about an hour and a half, and some of them are probably feeding off each other, that is not coordination in a false flag sense.
It might just be the natural logical reaction to seeing something like this happen.
So, people are going to go look at that and then put together the tweets, even though they don't all say the same thing.
Cernovich is not saying we need a White House ballroom.
Cernovich is saying the opposition to the White House ballroom is specifically so that stuff like this can happen.
And they're not wrong.
Now, you're getting into who this individual was.
And my only bottom line to all of this, you want to get conspiratorial?
If it indeed turns out that this guy who's 31 years old happens to be black, I mean, he might be a mixed race.
His family definitely looks like, you know, family looks black and he's sort of paler to the point where you had some idiots coming out on Twitter and saying he wasn't black, he wasn't trans, he wasn't gay, he wasn't a lefty.
First of all, it looks like he was mixed race or black and quite clearly a lefty.
There's a manifesto out there, so congrats on the self owned.
Not that it matters, but if it turns out that this individual is indeed a 31 year old autistic black man, you want to get conspiratorial, and I say this almost glib tongue in cheek.
Well, you say, all right, now, if you want to somehow strengthen the argument that Brian Cole Jr. is the pipe bomber, despite not being able to make homemade rocket fuel without spilling bleach on the carpet, well, then you would allow a 31 year old, potentially on the spectrum individual, to try to pull something off like this.
I'm that, just so everybody appreciates, not serious.
This is probably just a case of somebody who has been radicalized by all of the people online.
You want to go see who can potentially radicalize people to do this?
Go to Mary Trump's Twitter feed.
Actually, let's do that right away.
Uh oh, someone's gonna bring a dog in here.
Go to Mary Twitter, Mary Twitter, Mary Trump's Twitter feed.
I'm gonna do it right now.
And you wanna look at someone who is putting out dog whistle after dog whistle, just hoping.
Mary L. Trump.
Yeah, oh yeah, yeah, look at this.
You wanna see demons in full force, people?
Go to Mary Trump's thing here.
What did she say?
So weird, Donald didn't stand up, ask for his shoes to finally raise his fist and say, fight, fight, fight.
Can you imagine being.
Let me just see if she's up.
She hasn't updated it with a sufficiently accurate photo that reveals her true ugliness inside and out, mocking it.
I believe that she's suggesting that the first assassination, not the first, the Butler assassination attempt was fake.
21 hours ago, by inviting Donald Trump to the White House Correspondents' Dinner, the White House Correspondents' Association, or whatever it is, is making common cause with the fascist who threatens the lives and livelihoods.
Of journalists and is out to destroy the fourth estate.
Well done.
Forward slash sarcasm.
And I realize I'm not playing it while you're looking at it.
Here's one of the tweets.
That's from Mary L. Trump.
21 hours before, some unhinged lunatic with a gun storms the place, apparently trying to kill somebody.
And by the grace of God, didn't.
But by some miracle, five shots were fired at him and somehow he didn't get shot once.
And then just to truly appreciate her demonic spirit.
Mary Trump Media.
And then what did she say here?
So weird, Donald didn't stand up, ask for his shoes, defiantly raise his fist, and say, fight, fight, fight.
It's not weird.
I'm not going to swear.
It's not weird when you don't get shot.
It's not weird when you didn't dive so quickly that your shoes came off or if he took them off for a speech.
It's not weird, Mary, but you're quite clearly putting out into the universe a wish that you had.
Disgusting, disgusting, awful woman.
Now, with that said, give me one second here.
We're going to leave the door open so that the dogs can come in and out freely.
I have not yet installed the doggy door room.
And I'll get to some rumble rants and tip questions before we go live.
Now, everybody, you know how to support the channel.
If you want to support the channel, the best way to do it, come over to Viva Barnes Law.
Locals.com.
Ten bucks a month, a hundred bucks a year if you get the whole year at the same time.
We have the after parties, we have bourbon with Barnes's, bourbons with Barnes's.
No, it's bourbon with Barnes's.
Mr. Mike says, with the Butler debacle in mind and Tom Fitton's recent Secret Service FBI revelations, was last night's attempt at the White House correspondence dinner a blatant effort to push certain legislation?
If yes, what legislation?
That presupposes that they allowed something like that to happen so they can push politics.
Mail order bride.
Let me just make sure that Barnes has the link and is not.
You coming in, question mark?
I'm using the Rumble studio.
We had one issue last week.
Oh, I see the mic unmiking and I see the camera uncammering.
And while we do that, I'm just going to read one more.
The org I work for holds an event in Washington Hilton once a year.
It looks like where the suspect was apprehended was the International Terrace West, which is on the floor right above where the dinner was being held.
The ITW is directly above the ballroom and it is in the room in which we hold our event.
That's why some people say, oh, it's not a big deal because it was so far.
Barnes, I'm bringing you in.
It was so far from the event.
But did you see Caroline Levitt before him where she said shots would be fired, stingray?
Yes, I wanted to bring that one up as well.
Shots fired is what everybody says when someone makes a joke that is, you know, a very poignant, stinging joke.
I'm not giving.
What do you think?
She slipped up and let it out that there's going to be shots.
No, it's the common expression for when a very, what's the word I'm looking for?
Mean joke, you know, is made.
So, no.
Robert, sir, how goes the battle?
Good, good.
You know, I think I forgot we moved up to noon.
I think.
You know, I mentioned it briefly, but I think most of the audience doesn't know we're live at the moment.
Well, it doesn't matter.
It'll still be up there at six o'clock tonight.
So when they want to eat dinner and they'll get their fix.
You know, I'll send pictures from the event.
I just don't know exactly what the event is and I don't know how to describe it.
But I'm going with my wife because when I get invited places, I go with my wife and I don't go without my wife.
So I'll send pictures in locals.
You'll get some updates there.
Robert Sir, how goes the battle?
Good, good.
I think you did a good coverage of the shooting incident.
The other top topics tonight, because that was the number one topic that people requested we cover the shooting incident or the attempted assassination or whatever it was.
Do you have any inklings, insights?
You might be a little bit closer to direct information than me.
Anything else to add or adjust?
Nope.
Trump's commitment to this came late, and that might partially explain the security, and it was at a hotel where people could stay.
Might partially explain it, but doesn't fully explain another security lapse by the Secret Service.
A lot of the people that showed up were surprised that they were not required from outside the building to be cleared.
Now, it's not clear that that would have prevented this because he was already in the building because he was staying at the hotel.
But usually they have two layers of security.
Here they only had one.
And that is another breach.
And again, until they completely reform the Secret Service, I think this problem will reoccur and repeat, is my take.
But beyond that, don't know anything other than apparently the latest information school teacher, well educated out of California, got radicalized sometime over the last year, hasn't in custody, has not said who he was there to harm.
Chaos at the Press Conference00:02:36
And then there were some unfortunate photos of his press people.
So you see in the chaos, People like stealing champagne, stealing beer.
Look, I was going to make a joke, but it's no time for jokes.
There's nothing, that stuff goes to waste anyhow.
Take it.
At least leave with a party gift.
But leave it to the press to do that.
So, apparently, they'll reschedule it in 30 days or so.
Just actually, one thing to add because people were saying, like, how did he get his guns?
He must have bought them there.
I think he took a train.
So, he traveled with his firearms, from what I understand.
So, it wasn't like he flew and then somehow had coordinated efforts from people, moles in D.C.
So, that's my understanding.
He had a gun with him.
And I think he supposedly put the rifle together there on location, is my understanding.
But that's all I've, you know, you always get, you know, hits and misses with early intel and information about all of this.
Um, you know, the conspiracy theories that are floating first was, Are they going to try to blame Iran?
Some accounts were, and I was like, I'm pretty sure Iran didn't have anything to do with this.
The uh, but then there were accounts trying to blame Israel, so it was like, You know, hey, Trump better go back in quick.
Oh, yeah, because one of the issues is that there's a photo that he posted of him wearing an IDF sweater or shirt, correct?
It's one of the things that I think is kind of you know, I say gross that you shouldn't monetize military attire or military fatigue, but the IDF jerseys.
It's people sell them, people buy them.
I would say some people wear them and don't even know what the hell they're wearing, but maybe not so much anymore.
But no, it's a thing like people wear it.
I think it's totally, totally tacky to do that.
But so the people thought Israel might be involved.
You know, there was Kash Patel's last but desperate effort to avoid being fired.
So, you know, you have those kind of, but I haven't seen anything credible in that direction.
It just seems like Secret Service is still inadequate.
And it was the main thing.
And there's a lot of radicalized people out there.
Those are the only two.
Immediate takeaways I had until and unless more evidence develops.
Well, actually, here, I'll bring this one up because Ginger Ninja from our locals community said that from the first, from the time you hear the first shot when he shoots, it took 18 seconds before the first Secret Service agent was standing in front of the president with security like this.
This is where, and it's not like they could have known it was a floor up.
It took a long time.
People were saying, why did they take JD off the stage first?
I'm just amazed that the Secret Service apparently unloaded on this guy.
Sorry, wrong way, Barnes.
Unloaded and didn't hit him.
Like you're shooting center mass at a moving object and, and, People are saying, well, they limited their shots for fear of friendly fire or whatever, but how did they subdue them if they didn't actually hit them?
Secret Service Unloaded on JD00:03:46
Yeah, that part isn't clear.
I mean, it looks like they tackled them.
Somebody tackled them.
But yeah, I guess five shots missed, all five shots missed.
So, you know, I mean, there's been a lot of competency questions about Secret Service now for quite some time.
And this won't answer those questions in a satisfactory manner.
So we'll see what happens.
But on the rest of the topics, the number one voted topic, other than this topic, At Viva Barnes Law.
Locals.com on this early bird version of Law for the People, the Southern Poverty Law Center indictment, a very, I think, controversial and legally dubious indictment of a military officer trading on Poly Market, was in a social media debate last night about this.
A lot of people have some assumptions.
The indictment has some assumptions I think are legally false.
The Ten Commandments are allowed to be shown in schools, according to the Fifth Circuit, in a case that is.
Probably bound for the Supreme Court of the United States.
Ghost Guns wins a partial victory before the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in another Camirato decision, a law partially overturned.
Defamation, we got a triplet set of cases.
We've got the CIA J6 pipe bomb planter saying it's not her bringing a defamation claim.
We got Kash Patel saying I'm no drunk suing the Atlantic.
And we got Laura Lahoozer losing, saying she wasn't having no affair with.
Donald Trump and Bill Maher got off because, hey, it's just a joke after all.
The AI, law problems and problems in law.
Big law, $3,000 an hour, big corporate law firm in New York City caught faking cases and falsifying citations.
And who do they blame?
AI.
AI surveillance being allowed and admitted into court against people when they didn't know they were being surveilled in their own homes by artificial intelligence.
And AI fakes.
The President of the United States got taken in by it this week concerning Iran.
And then, speaking of AI, we've got Congresswoman Lauren Boebert, also from Colorado, joining the great Thomas Massey of Kentucky to pass the Surveillance Accountability Act to try to restrain and restrict the use of AI to invade our private space and more.
Now that the new car is coming online for 2027, we'll be spying on you and can shut you down, your car down at any given moment.
The Virginia redistricting gets narrowly passes.
Now it goes to the courts.
Will the Virginia trial courts already set it's an illegal referendum?
Will the Virginia Supreme Court concur?
In Georgia, the counties are now suing the feds over FOIA law.
So, demanding to know the source of the investigation against the Georgia election authorities related to the 2020 election.
A young lady wanted to get out of some college exams, and as a joke, She asked Bibi, who loves to bomb schools, whether he could bomb her school.
Well, now she's been indicted for a crime because in the state of Florida, you can't be making those jokes about poor Bibi Netanyahu.
And Jerome Powell, his case dropped by Gene Pirro at the last minute as they're desperate to get warsh on the Federal Reserve.
And the Senate was holding it up until poor Jerome Powell had his federal criminal case dismissed or not pursued at the moment.
So, that and your questions on this early bird version of Law for the People.
Bank Fraud and Hate Groups00:14:04
Now, Robert, we're not futzing with the audio, but it might be time to replace the mic.
It might be too late.
No, no, it's crackling again.
Don't do anything.
Don't touch it.
It's good enough.
But I think it's clearly the mic because it doesn't happen when you use the computer mic.
Robert, let's start with the one I know that is near and dear.
What are you drinking?
How much coffee is there in that?
A lot of coffee.
Oh, my God.
Because you're six feet tall.
That is a big ass drink.
If I'm holding that, that's probably going to be half the size of my body.
Robert.
The Southern Poverty Law Center indictment, I know it's near and dear to you.
You talked about it during the Bourbon with Barnes's last week.
They've been indicted.
I read through the indictment.
It's interesting.
On the one hand, it's an indictment of a corporation not naming any of its principals, not naming any donors, which I think would be dubious or specious given the allegations in the indictment.
But the bottom line of the allegations of the indictment is that the SPLC was recruiting or receiving donor funds to fight hate, fight racism, fight whatever, whatever.
In reality, They were not paying informants for information.
They were siphoning the money, the donation monies, off to basically agitators who were going and then creating the racist, hate filled events so that the SPLC would have something to fight.
And the allegation in the indictment that specifically ties it all together, which is why they knew it was wrong, is that they were running the monies that they received in donations through these shell corporations.
One was called the CIA, which was called Center for Information Agency, something along those lines.
It wasn't CIA, but that was its acronym.
Another one was Fox Photography.
And so they created these shell companies that actually did nothing.
They put the money into those shell companies so that those shell companies could then remit the monies to these people who were not, what is the word, not moles.
They were provocateurs.
And so it's wire fraud, donation fraud, all sorts of crap.
You're going to flesh out for those who are watching and might be new your history and animosity, righteous as it is, against the SPLC.
But also just answer, I mean, tell me how they indict a corporation without any of the principles.
And what's the purpose of this?
If the company dissolves now, what happens to the indictment?
And just why did they not go after the principals who are directing this corporation?
To do that which the corporation has been indicted for.
Well, he might have rushed the indictment.
That may be part of the reason why.
The goal may be the organization rather than the individuals.
That may be another reason why.
Some of the individuals that were the key culprits are no longer part of the organization.
So that might also be a factor.
So I don't know why they didn't add individuals, but it's not too uncommon when they go after a corporation or NGO to not identify individuals because that's a harder case to prosecute.
Generally speaking, more evidence demanded, more discovery turned over, et cetera, than is often the case with a corporate case.
So, you know, somebody, by the way, recommended an addendum to the Sunday show name.
You know, it's now Law for the People with Viva and Barnes to call it Sunday Law School with the Law for the People with Viva and Barnes.
I like that.
That's a good idea.
The, you know, some good merch.
Sunday classes with Viva and Barnes.
I like.
Yeah, yeah.
Sunday Law School.
Sunday School of the Law.
So, for those who don't know, Southern Poverty Law Center, founded in the late 1960s, early 1970s by Morris Dees, with its principal objective to take out the Klan.
It is not really Southern.
It's not really poverty.
It's not really law, even though it's based in Alabama.
Its focus entirely has been hustling money from mostly older Jewish ladies in New York City and Beverly Hills to thinking they're taking out.
The evil racial hate groups around the world.
And what they didn't realize is first of all, Morris Dees himself was a longstanding Klan lawyer who just saw, you know, before we understood the word grift, Morris Dees was the king of the grifters and created, said, ah, you know, there's no more money in raising money for the Klan.
We need to raise money going after the Klan.
And there's very few cases Southern Poverty Law Center can cite to or rely upon, aside from suing some already bankrupt, empty Klan entities in the 80s.
That you could say there was a real achievement of the Southern Poverty Law Center.
It rapidly devolved into an NGO grift machine, which often fed the various hate groups, financed and funded the various hate groups they raised money to defeat.
So they said, if you want to end this hate group, give us money.
Then they would turn around and give money to someone to promote that hate group and then turn around and say, look at this hate group.
Look at how strong they are.
We need more money to really take them out.
And the cycle would go on and on and on.
Sometimes start a hate group, sometimes.
Create new hate group sponsors.
As Alex Jones was right again, for which he got sued for, Charlottesville was led and organized by someone who was on the SPLC payroll.
So, just one of the many illustrations and examples of their criminality.
You know, it's sort of exactly like the movie with Bruce Willis, M. Night Shyamalan, where the guy was causing the disasters to find the hero.
What was the name of that stupid movie?
Unbreakable?
It was a stupid movie.
But they're literally creating the hate so that they have something to fight.
And I wanted to make the meme that put SPLC's logo over Frank Underwood's face on House of Cards.
We make the terror because it's exactly what they did.
And Charlottesville was the best example ever that Joe Biden ran with in order to demonize half of the country.
Are you looking at the dildo in the chat, Robert?
Yeah, that was funny.
Bill Brown is funny.
That was funny.
So, but yes, so the Southern Poverty Law Center's indictment basically alleges wire fraud.
I think they could allege bank fraud because in order to facilitate this, they had to hide that they were the source of the payments to all of these illicit hate groups.
And some of them are saying, oh, they were just informants to try to find out what was happening.
That is not mostly the case.
They were funding people who were the leaders of these organizations, who were the inspirers and instigators of the hate speech and its organization and its development and its hate speech activities, it's called, as SPLC chose to call it.
SPLC also weaponized their officers and public credibility within the press to try to defame and libel a wide range of people on the right and even on the left.
Calling people hate that had nothing to do with it.
Now, what is hidden in the indictment, but so in order, they really committed bank fraud because they created fake businesses.
They lied about the nature of those businesses, all to disguise the fact that, and this was an NGO, a not for profit charity, creating bogus for profit entities in order to fund money and funnel money into infiltrators and instigators of the various activities they were claiming to suppress.
That they're actually supporting and subsidizing and creating and festering and fostering in the first place.
So, to me, they also committed bank fraud.
And I think more people could be prosecuted.
It also may be the case that they slightly rushed this indictment in order to salvage Kash Patel's last gasp of staying in office as head of the FBI as more stories circulate that he's next on the chopping block due to his multiple and myriad failures as head of the FBI.
So, that may explain part of it.
But to me, there's no question of their criminality.
The institution.
Institutional media and institutional left are trying to run cover for them by just continually lying about them, which is what they've been doing now for 50 years from the whole history of this grifter organization's existence.
So, see what happens with the criminal case as it progresses and proceeds.
It appears the primary objective is to shut them down, to say that they cannot exist in this form going forward.
Some people asked why weren't the so called victims identified really as enabling and being complicit in this activity?
The reason is simple, then it's not bank fraud and wire fraud.
If they knew, if they wanted this to happen, if they wanted this to occur, then there's no criminality.
It's politically problematic.
There may be claims on the charitable side that could be challenged and contested, but the key to the crime is that the donors did not know what Southern Poverty Law Center was, in fact, up to.
And there's plenty of evidence of that.
You won't see in Southern Poverty Law Center them pitching, protecting, and promoting the fact.
That they were instigating and organizing the very violence they claimed they were out to suppress and stop.
One last component there was some missing aspects from the indictment, and this may also be why some individuals were not named.
Southern Poverty Law Center has long been a cutout for the FBI to run rogue operations.
Oklahoma City is tied back to Southern Poverty Law Center in a so called informants that were, again, actually the instigators of violence.
And so when you dig in, you find more evidence of that.
And that may be why they are only willing to go after the entity on part of the cases and not all the cases, and not want to go after the individuals because they would have to, the FBI would have to indict the FBI for being so deeply involved in using the SPLC as a cutout to create things like Operation PacCon.
People can go to the FOIA archive and find it, or they can go to the Viva Barnes Law.
Locals.com, look up the hush hushes about Oklahoma City and others, and see the nefarious history of the Federal Bureau of Investigations.
In depth entanglement in the various militia activities of the 1990s, including the Oklahoma City bombing, that FBI helped create the atmosphere and even the mechanism, method, and means by which it occurred, which is maybe why the man driving that truck that day never got caught, never identified, and they later claimed he didn't even exist.
I want to bring up the tweet from Chris Cuomo, who I can't tell if these questions are.
Naive or stupid.
But it was, does the FBI fund the mob when it pays informants?
Is what Chris Cuomo asked.
And I brought up the Gresham Whitmer.
Well, you know, it depends on the degree to which you're paying the informants facilitating the act.
In fact, one of the arguments is the FBI often helps create the criminality that it then goes about prosecuting.
I mean, someone should ask him, does he think, you know, the famous Boston mobster?
Who was an FBI informant was getting paid while committing worse crimes than the people he was informing against and was being immunized and his crimes covered up by falsely blaming others.
But let's be honest, nobody ever accused Fredo of having a high IQ.
That's why he ends up at the bottom of the lake in Reno.
I want to also just highlight who the SPLC is and who they've gone after because it's, again, it all makes sense when you go backwards.
Hate strategies exposed.
This is Southern Pave Law Center two years ago.
You remember who they went after, Robert?
Among the top, I mean, this is just in their website where they're accusing Rumble and Pavlovsky of hosting hate of far right extreme.
How many people, I did it again, how many people on Rumble posting these mean comments that the SPLC then goes in and gets?
How many of them were paid to post those effing comments?
How many of them were the moles?
Oh, no, but the informants.
Well, I'm going to take the money and then I'm going to go put some comments in a Rumble video.
And so that W5, when they're interviewing Viva up in Canada, can say, Did you notice that comment over here?
How can you not say this platform tolerates it?
Mother Efforts, first of all, go to YouTube if you want to see some hate comments.
But these are what the informants do they go and they plant the seeds so that they can then sprout and be harvested by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a criminal organization getting their comeuppance to those things.
If the donors were approved of this, Robert, I presume they wouldn't have had to go through shell corporations to transfer the monies to these informants.
They did that to hide it from the donors.
Yeah.
And then they would promote that.
They would be part of their, is you know, how we get to these organizations is we pay informants to get involved.
And so they never said that.
And these people were far from informants.
They were the actual instigators, organizers.
In some cases, the Southern Poverty Law Center paid people to create a hate group that didn't exist before.
So, that's, I mean, it's one of the biggest scams.
And to me, also, there's all kinds of IRS tax violations here.
There's all kinds of state law nonprofit violations here, along with an additional bank fraud allegation evidence here.
But I suspect the feds want to keep a lid on the scope and scale of what gets publicly disclosed.
Because they don't want information coming out that not only embarrasses them, but might lead to legal challenges in other cases when they realize the SPLC was the cutout for the feds to often entrap people or create criminality or lie and misrepresent their evidence in court to try to point the finger at certain people.
So it's just one more illustration.
The only thing that's missing from this indictment is the agency that brought it needed to be one of the agencies indicted with it, which is the FBI.
Let me bring up one over here on Commitube and possibly, you know, I don't say this very often.
Possibly one of the dumbest comments I've ever read in my entire life, coming from another account that has four numbers at the end of it.
Viva, with you and Barnes trashing Trump so often, it seems that you too have as much blame as the Dems do for last night's attack.
Dubious Indictment and Betting00:15:36
Sir, congratulations on.
They always got letters and names.
You notice that?
You almost never get like a normie account name.
It's almost always, you know, John 62493247.
You know what I'm saying?
Indians typing that out as we speak.
I made that joke when I came into the commie tube YouTube chat.
I was like, the first four comments are negative.
They're all names with four to six digits at the end of the number.
It's like, amazing how people who have never seen before with six digits in there.
Anyhow, all that to say, congratulations, Mark Gide 3081.
The dumbest comment we will read all day.
Amazing disgrace.
Oh, and he's spamming it.
Well, okay, that's good.
Now you know it's a logical person.
The security guy jumped out of the way of the attacker.
His job is to get between the attacker and the president.
No, but they were at the metal detector.
So it wasn't even as though they were.
Uh, you know, at protecting the president, I don't even know if those were secret service agents as opposed to just standard security operating a metal detector.
Secret service came on stage afterwards, but uh, before we get too far behind in the uh, where we know we have real people over on Rumble, but let me bring it up here and then we're going to get to our chats, our tipped ones afterwards.
Uh, on Rumble, Steel Shattered Hand says this is also the second time the assassination attempt was during a live stream.
Does the global elite want to show that?
Well, that's um, but the other thing is, everything pretty much involving the president is going to be live streamed.
I mean, it's a And then, you know, the golf one wasn't, but please ignore the four numbers at the end of my name.
Oh, no, Ginger, we know what those numbers mean.
Those are not, that is not a random number.
The train is the best way to travel.
No metal detectors, no getting felt up.
They let you take the bags as heavy as you can.
Yep.
Took a pocket knife with me to California, didn't get stopped.
Ginger, okay, we got that.
We're so happy that you guys are going to be on with Larry Sharp this Wednesday.
50 ballots.
Robert, you're in on this, right?
You're going to be there as well?
Yeah, the, yeah, I think I'll be.
Last week I was on with Daniel Davis, the Duran, and Alex Jones.
This week, yeah, the Liberty, the think there'll be Bourbons Monday and Tuesday, but not on Wednesday because we're part of this effort, a very sharp libertarian fundraising effort.
50 state ballot access goes through New York indeed.
And then Thursday, on late with Alex Jones because Infowars might be off the air.
It might be back to just, it might be a new show called The Alex Jones Show starting as early as next week.
It's not crystal clear, but it looks like Thursday might be the last night that the InfoWars brand is broadcast.
And I'm going to be on with Alex as his last guest on the InfoWars show itself Thursday night.
So we're going to wrap up the InfoWars brand as it goes to the Onion or whoever it goes to.
But Alex Jones will be still present.
Follow him online, the Alex Jones show, the real Alex Jones on X. All of that will keep marching onward.
Newsmax reported he, this is the shooter, gave Kamala $25,000.
It was $25 is what he donated.
I just was double checking that.
So, Texas for the second.
Yeah, the news is that he donated 25 bucks to Kamala in 2024.
Yeah, he's registered nonpartisan in LA, but with a long history of liberal associations, family, a lot of liberal democratic associations.
So it just seems like you know, he's young men gone radicalized from the left to commit violence.
And Ginger says the red seeds in the scat likely persimmon seeds, and that's likely coyote.
Well, now I'm not so comfortable.
All right.
Well, that's cool, Ginger.
Thank you.
And now we're going to go here, Robert.
Let's go.
So we did SPLC indictment.
What's the best stuff?
We had a couple of other indictments, but one of the big ones that got a lot of news coverage that I think is very legally dubious is the indictment of the soldier for trading on the success of the Maduro raid on Polymarket.
Well, so, I mean, look at this, Robert.
You're not taking a position that's anti to the betting on this one.
This is the story of one of the soldiers.
I forget exactly what his position was, but he was.
Actively involved in the operation itself.
And so he apparently created a bunch of, what's the word I'm looking for?
Pseudonym Polymarket accounts and then placed an aggregate of $32,000, which is ballsy.
I mean, that's faith that they're going to actually remove Maduro from power.
But an aggregate of $32,000 on Polymarket that Maduro would be no longer in power by a certain date.
So it didn't mean arrested, it didn't, you know, dead, arrested, coup, whatever, not in power by.
But he did this on the eve of his operation to go.
Participate in the extraction, arrest, and removal from office of Maduro.
And he would have netted $370,000, give or take.
It would have been a total amount of $400,000.
Gets indicted, but it's not on insider trading because these future markets don't have insider trading regulations.
It was using classified information for impermissible reasons or something along those lines.
Trump made the joke did he bet for us or against us?
And sort of like Pete Rose betting for his team.
Which definitely attenuates it.
Betting on a failed mission would be immoral and gross.
Betting on a mission that you're involved in, you've got insider information.
But the charges are for using classified information for improper uses.
What's your take on the likelihood of or what's going to happen with this indictment?
So I think it's a very dubious indictment.
So it appeared now at the top, Polymarket is so desperate to get U.S. regulatory approval in the United States.
That they apparently were the source of this and targeted this individual and got the government to go after one of their traders.
That doesn't look good.
What if it turns out people on the opposite side of the trade are tight with Polymarket, that it costs them money?
You know, I have some.
The Polymarket saying, look at us, everybody.
We're the world's chief rat.
I don't think it's a great endorsement for their product.
Just saying.
But putting that aside, the.
There's no, to me, credible claim that he disclosed classified information or intel because he placed an anonymous bet on a platform using crypto that nobody could know came from the bet, came from anybody with inside information or intel, least of all him in particular.
And so, thus, he isn't disclosing information to anybody, in my opinion.
So, I don't see how it's disclosing classified information to place a bet on Polymarket.
Using an anonymous identity, right?
If it said Soldier so and so at Fort Bragg Special Ops placed a bet, okay, then you got a different story.
But that isn't the case here.
So, I don't see a violation of classified information.
The second claim in the indictment is that this is insider trading in a commodities market, that it's fraud on the commodities market.
There's one big fat problem with that.
Polymarket is not a registered entity, period.
There's a separate Polymarket entity that Polymarket has bought that is looking to become legal in the summer, but that is not the market which he was betting, where he made this trade, which he made this contract, futures contract.
The criminal law at references Dodd Frank after the 2008 global financial crisis included you can't, quote, use a device or false statement, manipulation or device on the commodities market.
Now, what happened is the CFTC, the Commodities, Futures, and Trading Commission, decided to expand their interpretation of that to sound just like insider trading in the SEC.
But it's rather preposterous when you read the statute.
The statute is talking about devices.
It's talking about somebody that's in the market making a public false statement to trick the market, not about insider information.
Indeed, it even has a provision in the statute that makes that clear.
So the idea that the commodities laws have the same insider trading laws, securities laws, is belied by the law itself.
And it's just the CFTC trying to violate it.
So I think even if Polymarket was a registered entity, I don't think inside information is supposed to be criminalized in this way.
But the biggest problem.
Is it requires under the Dodd Frank law that expanded this form of criminality on the commodities market, it has to be a trade on a registered entity under US law.
The entity he bet on was Polymarket International, is not a registered entity under US law.
So he could not have conspired to commit commodities fraud, could not have committed commodities fraud.
So then all that leaves is somehow the claim that because he had a non disclosure agreement, and that non disclosure agreement was like a non profiteering agreement.
Which is kind of weird.
You have a non disclosure agreement that says you won't profit on the information you receive that is sensitive or classified or otherwise confidential.
That's a breach of the NDA.
Okay.
There's an argument that interpreting it in such a broad way beyond actually implicit disclosure was the goal that was supposed to be limited under the contract.
That's why it's called a non disclosure agreement, not a non profiteering agreement.
But even putting that aside, even if you can interpret this contract in this broad way, How is that criminal fraud?
How is that wire fraud?
Are you going to interpret violating an employment contract now as fraud on the market as wire fraud?
That's not, you know, I don't see that at all.
And so I think there are huge flaws in every aspect of this indictment legally.
And then, last but not least, as Congresswoman Luna pointed out, the double standard that Trump was elected to get rid of two tier justice, not reinstate two tier justice.
You're going to go after a soldier.
Who bet on the success of his own operation, which even the president admitted, well, what's the big deal with that?
While the real insiders are massively profiteering on this war, everybody knows they're profiteering on this war, and nothing is done about any of them.
Nothing is done about any of the members of Congress getting fantastically rich on inside information.
The first time you're going to apply this novel application of the law is to a successful soldier risking his life for the country who made a little bit of money.
But you're not going to do it to the Howard Lutnicks and his kids.
You're not going to do it to the Scotty Besson's, Soros Scotty Besson's and his pals.
You're not going to do it to the Trump family and his friends who are making hundreds of millions of dollars on inside trading on Trump's information, which they did again on Friday.
I'm sorry.
This is the double.
Trump didn't drain the swamp.
He's making the swamp swampier than ever before.
What of the argument that this is intended to send a signal, a shot across the bow for everybody else who's doing it?
He'll pardon this guy, so no harm, no foul, and everybody else stop doing it because.
It looks bad.
The media is reporting on it and it's corruption.
I mean, a possibility it's a way of trying to.
I say.
On Monday, they'll be back to the Wall Streeters doing it again.
Yeah, it's a message to scare soldiers.
Hey, soldiers, if you're out there and you have any information and you could actually have a decent pension for being, like if you're on the certain, I think it's Gerald Ford, and you're out much longer than you're supposed to be.
If you're one of those people out there that's agitated about where things stand and you have a sort of a.
Catch 22 attitude to the way this war was.
It was the Saturday night movie, Evie Barnes Law.
Locals.com.
Catch 22.
That film is real popular with a lot of our soldiers right now because of the insanity of what's going on in the Iran war.
So it will send a message to them, but it's not going to send a message to these big insiders because they kept doing it all day Friday.
They did it late Friday.
After this indictment was announced Friday morning, late Friday, they were back making huge bets on what Trump was about to say.
And then magically, he said it 15 minutes later, which, by the way, just made it up again.
The number of people who buy this stuff that's just made up is incredible.
Oh, yeah, yeah, the Pakistanis have asked us to meet them tomorrow.
Iran has.
In Islamabad.
Yeah, yeah.
No, they haven't.
No, they didn't.
I pointed out that this is fake to fool the markets and all these Trump Tards, the seal clappers, saying, Oh, boy, where'd you get your intel on that?
One hour later, I was proven right, Dimwitz.
It's been obvious what this is.
But the idea that we're going to go after our soldiers.
Who are successful soldiers who bet on their own success is ridiculous, especially when you dig in and legally, there's no basis for this indictment, in my opinion.
Well, I thought we were going to, we're not getting into it.
I'm not bringing this up to bring up anything about Iran, but I didn't realize that oil, the oil markets had already gotten back up to $95, despite the people celebrating.
They got rug pulled once again by Trump.
I give Trump credit.
He's tricked the markets now like a dozen times in eight weeks.
I mean, well, actually, more like two dozen times.
I mean, he just suckers them again and again and again, and his insiders just make huge bank.
Huge bank, hundreds of millions, tens of millions, hundreds of millions, billions, billions they're making.
Robert C.A. R59 says, I'm out Trump hating.
I'm okay, I'm out Trump hating.
It's not Trump hate, it's called truth, it's called reality, it's called fact.
If you want to be in a cult, stay in your cult.
God bless.
Hope the cult works out for you.
Usually, it doesn't.
Keep drinking that Kool Aid, see where it leads you, my friends.
Ask the Jim Jones fans how it got them.
Uh, what's the third indictment?
I'm having trouble now getting it to together.
So, we got okay, so the SPLC.
Uh, weak indictment, we'll see where it goes.
Uh, this was the uh, soldier, which it seems like a weird test run to go after for the insider trading on from uh, you know, confidential information.
What's the third indictment?
I momentarily blanked on what it was.
We'll come back to it after.
I don't, I don't, I don't think there was a third indictment.
I think there were three defamations.
There was some other indictment that did come down, but I'm not remembering uh, which which one it was.
We'll get there in a second, Robert.
Sir, have you read the defamation?
We're gonna let's start with the funny one.
Kash Patel sued the Atlantic for a quarter of a billion dollars for.
Defamation for their, call it a hit piece.
I mean, call it what it is.
I mean, it could be a hit, it's a hit piece one way or the other.
Hit pieces can be based on true stuff and they can be based on lies.
The Atlantic's hit piece that Kash Patel has a drinking problem.
I mean, it's not a problem if you can work your way through it.
Just pro tip for everybody out there that he's got a drinking problem, that he had to be woken up.
He missed meetings for sleeping in.
He once fell asleep behind a barricaded room or a room that was locked and they had to get the SWAT barricade to bust it open.
That he's made statements that were alcohol influenced that were problematic.
That what else?
That he freaked out when he got locked out of his computer system, thought he got fired.
Weak Lawsuit Claims00:15:39
And they run this article, which was based on two dozen anonymous sources.
And I'm not going to repeat myself from last week, but always permanently, perpetually skeptical of all anonymous sources, period.
That being said, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
As Steve Baker pointed out, when three anonymous sources talk about Shawnee Kirchhoff playing with her puppies, and everyone's like, well, that's good.
But then 24 anonymous sources say that Cash is partying in Vegas, partying at Ned's or Needles or whatever the hell in DC.
Either way, they.
Give the news to Patel and they give him two hours to comment, which is dirty.
I mean, it's dirty.
It's what they do.
Here's 25, 30 questions that require meaningful answers.
You got two hours before we publish.
I tell them to go F themselves as well.
They publish, Cash says, I'll sue you, and he sues them for a quarter of a million dollars, a quarter of a billion dollars.
I'm sorry.
It's defamation.
It's alleging all the stuff that their actual malice was that they didn't rely on evidence that would have refuted their stories, that they didn't go and And what did they say?
It was something so ridiculous about going to verify with the bars as to, oh, yeah, bills and whether or not he paid for drinks and receipts and whatever.
That, you know, basically they didn't believe him saying he doesn't, you know, the story's not true and don't believe the 24 anonymous sources.
And he sued him for a quarter of a billion dollars.
I said it's an idiotic lawsuit only in that it's amplified everything they said in that lawsuit.
Now anything Patel says in public is going to be scrutinized.
Incentivized or empowered to come up with stories that they might have been holding onto in their back pockets because of deep animosity towards Patel and the Trump administration at large.
On the merits of the lawsuit, what do you think?
Does this meet the threshold of actual malice or is this just standard political journalism for an administration that doesn't like?
I think it should get past the motion to dismiss stage because in order to get past the motion to dismiss stage, all you need to show is a statement of fact or a statement of opinion that inferred a fact.
Number one.
So, is there a factual claim being made?
Second, is that factual claim defamatory?
In other words, is it false?
And is it tending to put your reputation in disrepute?
He's alleged that they've made certain factual claims about his drinking habits, sleeping, other things like that, that he says those facts are untrue.
He says that the inference from those factual claims does damage to his public reputation and that context.
So then the only question is Did he allege that they acted with reckless disregard for the truth?
And did he allege enough evidence to either infer or substantiate the intentionality requirement?
Now, my own view is that the intentionality requirement should often be allowed to be inferred at the dismissal stage because it's almost impossible for you to get in the other side's head.
So you just have to show what the other side knew or didn't know.
So you have his denials as to what they did or did not know.
And then other journalistic standards that they are occasionally incorporating into this, though they are very sporadic and erratic when they do so.
It'll depend on what judge he gets, quite frankly, whether he gets dismissed or not.
Robert, this is from our locals community.
If Cash is upset that someone referred to him as J. Edgar Boozer, don't let him know that I call him Rum Dog Millionaire.
All right.
Sorry.
I didn't mean to cut you off on that.
The jokes are just going to keep going.
So, now what's interesting is these huge amounts that everybody sues for these days.
Years ago, I had to defend a client who sued for $10 million for wrongful death.
Someone's wrongful death.
And the Seventh Circuit said it was outrageous that he said such an outrageous sum.
Where are these courts now in terms of scolding lawyers for suing for $3 billion, $2 trillion, $10 billion?
In Canada, we're nowhere near as a litigious society as America.
And in Quebec, even less so.
But in Quebec, you'd get in trouble if you made a ridiculous claim for a quantum that couldn't possibly be substantiated.
And you would get excoriated by a judge.
And here it's like, now it's like they think somehow by Saying it's worth a quarter of a billion dollars, it's somehow worth a quarter of a billion dollars or even a quarter of that quarter of a billion dollars.
All right, so they said he's got a drinking problem and that, in their opinion, it makes him a threat to national security.
Yeah, I wouldn't like anybody saying that about me if I'm the director of the FBI, but a quarter of a billion dollars, I mean, it's insane.
Yeah.
And this particular lawyer has not had a lot of success with these cases.
I think just had another Kash Patel case thrown out of court this past week.
Oh, was it?
Oh, my gosh, that was funny.
Literally, it was alleged in that lawsuit.
That MSNBC had run a similar bogus story, and they are currently facing litigation.
Four hours after this lawsuit news broke, that lawsuit got dismissed, whether or not it's coincidental or a point being made by the judge.
So I made a joke.
Well, now they're going to have to go amend that paragraph because it's no longer subject to litigation.
But it's also, to me, it's so petty.
You're the director of the FBI.
You know that people are going to say terrible, stupid, sometimes inaccurate, or even sometimes outright dishonest things.
You're going to go sue for a quarter of a billion dollars for every negative publicity now, negative press.
I mean, to me, it reeks of.
We're going to sue you if we don't like what you're writing about us, which is sort of the antithesis of First Amendment journalistic freedoms.
But maybe I'm too blind.
I hate, I hate, I hate, I have nothing against Patel, never had anything against Patel until they came and didn't do the job that they told us they were going to do.
Now, but Robert.
Before we turn to the libel lawsuit that should lose, let's talk about the other libel lawsuit that lost this week.
Oh, Lord Loomer.
This is another one that comes at a bad time given.
I'm not getting into the rumors, Robert, and I don't want you to get into the rumors, Robert.
But.
All I'll say is, you don't want to know what loomered means these days.
Getting loomered, you don't want to know what that means.
The other funny thing is, truth is the absolute defense, which would have been a funny line in the Bill Maher lawsuit.
She sued Bill Maher because Bill Maher made what was clearly intended to be something of a joke by suggesting that Laura Loomer was having an affair with Trump.
She sued him.
I didn't go through the deposition, and I think I might do it just for.
Poo poo for scat and giggles at some point because apparently it sort of goes off the rails quickly.
But she sued Bill Maher for defamation for making a joke, implying, suggesting, stating that she was having an affair with Donald Trump.
And it just got tossed.
I don't know at what stage it got tossed, but it got tossed.
And so I know that you've got no love lost for Laura Loomer.
That is the righteous, just end to that lawsuit, Robert?
You know, it's a close call because it was Judge Moody, who I've been in front of before.
Who's uh, and uh, he was he was now he's known as hanging Judge Moody, by the way.
Uh, why ruthless, vicious, and criminal cases.
Okay.
So he was the judge in a case of mine that he was paranoid the jury was going to acquit because it was maybe two years after the Snipes acquittals.
And Moody's down there in the middle district of Florida where the Snipes case was held.
He's in a different division, but same district.
And so he gave ex parte instructions to the jury without notice to any of the lawyers or the defense, without us being able to provide input.
Without us even being aware it had even happened, the U.S. Marshal knew about it and covered it up.
The court reporter knew about it and covered it up.
The court clerk knew about it and covered it up.
His law clerks knew about it and covered it up.
So anybody tells, oh, you know, you can't have 25 people in a courtroom with independent jobs all cover up a conspiracy.
I saw him do it in a lifetime because the judge admitted it.
He only admitted it when they came back with a verdict.
And he realized that the.
Uh, that the there was a very conscientious jury that was looking for something to acquit on.
My client was, you know, basically had the Bernie Madoff accounting mechanism.
And I did try to explain that he was really just a hard.
I remember the headline, Was he a Ponzi fraudster or according to Barnes, just a hard luck dreamer?
Uh, good luck trying to pitch that, boys and girls.
But hey, you know, it held the jury out for longer than the trial lasted, uh, because they they liked my defense, but they didn't like my client.
Turns out, you know.
Telling people what he did is he figured out, you know, instead of making money, just send them notices saying they're making you're making money, and then he spent it on Vegas and Lamborghinis.
So it was tough, it was not an easy case.
No, how does anybody think they're gonna get away with that?
I mean, it's you've got to be stupid or just think like I'm just you know, whatever living large for the moment and it'll catch up with me, but I'll hopefully just a hard luck.
Well, what it was, he convinced himself his investment ideas would ultimately work, so he thought, I can just he had a gambler's mindset, kind of like Trump and Iran right now.
Just, hey, if I double down one more time at the blackjack table, I'm going to hit big and get back all my losses.
That's what he goes.
I just need to buy time with my clients so my investment system will work.
And in that sense, it wasn't like a true Ponzi scheme.
In other words, he was trying to have this investment plan work, it just didn't.
But it didn't help how he spent the money in the interim.
You know, Lamborghinis, Vegas, et cetera.
But that was moody.
I mean, it was one of the most corrupt acts you can do as a judge violation of core rights.
All of those issues.
Now, he ended up having, he ended up, the way he remedied the situation is he drastically reduced my client's prison sentence to way less than what the best plea bargain had been.
So that was his way to compromise after he got caught with his pants down.
He was nervous that the jury was going to yap.
And that's why he said, well, guess what happened to you guys this week?
So I'm not a fan of the judge.
We went back, we went at it back and forth throughout that whole trial.
But the way, Uh, Mar phrased this question.
Uh, it's almost like she brought this suit to try to disclaim the issue, knowing the suit would never get very far.
And the reason why I say that is because other people had made this claim and that she did not sue that were clearly making a factual claim.
Mar really didn't.
Mar was like, Hey, you know, Trump screws around everybody now.
I think it might be Laura Loomer.
Ha ha ha.
He was clearly a joke, so that isn't defamation.
He was right to get a dismissal, but you have to wonder why did Loomer sue him?
On such a weak claim, when she had other people she could sue on a strong claim, unless she wanted to publicly distance herself from this allegation because maybe the allegation isn't exactly false and didn't want it to be tested fully evidentially.
Saying during the show in question, Mar Maher, which means fast in Hebrew for anybody who doesn't know, we did an editorial here a few years ago.
It was like basically, who's effing?
Who's Trump effing?
He then added, I think it might be Laura Loomer.
I don't know how much more you have to attenuate a clearly speculative statement of opinion in order to make it litigation proof.
And I think he's a comedian who does it in the regular.
So you see the comedian making a joke over a factual claim that other people have asserted directly.
And it makes you wonder whether she wanted to distance herself from this out public allegation while actually not having it tested from an evidentiary perspective because maybe there's a little more fire behind that smoke.
Ron, I'm going to say is if the rumors are true, there's no better proof that Trump has lost his mind.
I'm sorry.
You're hanging it.
You know, I've got.
I'm out.
I'm out.
You don't know anything about it.
I've woken up surprised sometimes after a long night out.
I never woke up to know Laura Loomer.
And I tell you what, I've never woken up next to anyone other than my wife because that one time with that woman in France, I snuck out in the middle of dinner.
You're like, whoa, I'm out of here.
This was what it was about.
Okay.
Well, that's funny.
Now I'm sweating a little bit.
That's what Trump should have done when Laura Loomer came in the room.
The other defamation lawsuit, which you'll tell me what you think.
I might be not emotionally invested.
I might be.
Not bias.
I know Baker and I know Kyle and I know all these guys.
Shawnee Kirchhoff has finally sued.
So I once upon a time said the fact that they have not yet sued, talking about that law firm Claire Locke, is an indication that they cannot sue.
Because if they do sue and it survives a motion to dismiss, an anti slap, whatever, it gets to discovery.
In discovery, they get to ask for things like phone records, a number of things.
I make the cynical joke now not to like try to defend my tweet.
If they haven't sued, they can't sue.
Maybe, you know, they might have dotted their I's, crossed their T's, and bleach bit some hard drive.
I'm just saying, you wait long enough, you cover your bases, and then you go in and sue.
Or it could be that she's actually innocent and it's a bona fide misunderstanding, unfortunate as it might be.
But then the question becomes can you sue Steve Baker over that journalism for defamation when it requires actual malice, which is either knowing that the statements are false?
Or with reckless disregard for the falsity of the statements.
Reckless disregard would mean that there was no attempt made to justify the positions, assuming that they are statements of fact as opposed to speculative conclusions with certain probabilities.
I read through the lawsuit.
It's a 127 page novella, which I jokingly said reads more like a full throated defense of the behavior of the Capitol Police on January 6th, that they're the bestest, cleanest police department ever.
It read as a full throated attack on the ODNI because it's basically attributing a lot of the fault to the ODNI for having prepared and circulated an internal draft memo, indicating that even according to the ODNI, they suspected that Shawnee Kirchhoff might have had some role there to play.
That memo then goes to the White House, according to the allegations in the lawsuit.
The FBI then acts on that memo, apparently, or at least on that information, raids Kirchhoff's house, helicopters whirring overhead.
You know, it became clear to her this isn't a lawsuit.
This was about more than a pair of shoes.
And they go on to land based basically the idea, the conspiracy theory that January 6th was a quote, inside job that was used to discredit the far right.
This is from the lawsuit.
And I jokingly say this was an attack on the, I say jokingly, I'm serious.
It was an attack on the ODNI.
It's an attack seemingly on the FBI because Kash Patel was one of the people who full heartedly endorsed and promoted the idea that January 6th was an inside job, as did other members of the Trump administration, which is where if you view this, Defamation lawsuit as an attack on the Trump administration and Trump loyalists, it wouldn't have been drafted much differently.
Disguised Civil Suit Invasion00:06:49
Set all that aside, on the allegations of the lawsuit itself, do they succeed?
Can they possibly succeed?
Does Steve Baker, I mean, I know it's partisan politics and whatever, and they can Alex Jones, Steve Baker, prevent him from raising defenses, whatever, exclude him from being able to discover certain things from the plaintiff, declare that he's in default of discovery obligations himself, whatever.
What are your thoughts on the lawsuit from a legal perspective and from a political perspective?
Yeah.
So, I mean, I think there's multiple aspects to it, but what stood out to me is the motivation.
That the given to me, factually, the lawsuit is weak.
That the number one, that there's plenty of evidence that they had a good faith basis for their reporting.
And that means you're not going to get anywhere near actual malice.
You really shouldn't even be able to get through summary judgment.
There's an argument you shouldn't be able to get through a motion to dismiss.
But you're in the Eastern District of Virginia, so we'll see how they act and react because they tend to be very solicitous of Democratic and left wing causes and CIA aligned causes in that district.
It's considered the CIA's favorite legal district for a reason.
A lot of the judges that are appointed there get pre screened by the CIA before they get appointed.
So you have those components to it.
But the only real motivation, in my view, given that you're highly unlikely to win the suit because you're not going to ever really be able to prove.
Actual malice given the detailed work and research Steve Baker and his team did.
The question then becomes why sue?
Because there's an implicit embarrassment when you lose the suit.
If you lose a trial or you lose its summary judgment, people now think you may be guilty.
So, not only that, you now subject yourself to all kinds of discovery with Steve Baker and others that they would otherwise not be able to obtain.
So, the question is why run that gamble?
My guess is.
That they are afraid of a parallel, of a potential future criminal prosecution, and they want to railroad the black autistic Patsy they've set up for the crime that I believe this individual on the CIA payroll committed,
which was planting the pipe bombs on January 6th to escalate and elevate the risk profile of the event in order to scare a lot of Americans into not doing a meaningful review of the 2020 election, including members of the House.
Members of the Senate in particular, who were the primary and principal audience, in my view, for that theater that had all kinds of infiltrators and instigators and false flags and staged events mixed in with people unhappy and upset and that were physically attacked.
And when they responded, they were being accused of initiating and originating the attack that they didn't, so on and so forth.
And you go to the Viva Barnes Law.
Locals.com.
First ever Hush Hush was on.
All the risk and red flags of a false flag attached and associated with January 6th.
It's that in a criminal defendant, such as this Patsy that they're trying to frame for this case, who's when he determined he would go to trial rather than cut a plea, that all of a sudden this suit drops.
And the reason can be they know that Steve Baker's team is helping the defense and is a source of information for the defense.
However, the one advantage a criminal defendant has in the American justice system is they do not have to preview their defense.
They're not subject to discovery.
They can wait until trial for the most part to disclose almost all their evidence.
So I believe this case is masquerading as a libel case when its real goal is to further substantiate the government's prosecution in general.
Tell the judge, don't worry, there's nothing to see here with this other case because look, she's suing for libel.
But also to try to get into Steve Baker's files and their files to say, hey, what substantiated your claim?
When the real goal is they don't care about what substantiated his claim.
They care about what the defense might use at trial and cross examination and impeachment and Cole's own testimony and things of that nature that they otherwise could not get a sneak peek of.
So I think they're using the civil suit as a disguised method to invade the potential defense of the criminal defendant by suing those individuals who have information in support of his defense.
I think that's what I think it's a bogus case at heart.
I'll tell you right now, my bet they never take it to trial.
Watch that all of this is not about getting any kind of relief or any libel.
Claire Locke is a notorious deep state law firm.
They were the people that represented Dominion.
They were the ones who were running cover for rogue politicians against the Covington kids, going on places like Fox News and lying about the law in order to cover for their congressmen and other political high profile clients who they didn't want the world to know were their clients.
They're suing on behalf of Brigitte Macron against.
Candace Owens.
And so you don't get more deep state than Claire Locke.
Who's paying their legal bills?
Who's paying for all of this time spent?
Someone on a CIA salary?
I don't think so.
Somebody else is paying their bill, somebody else is taking care of their legal fees.
So I think this is a subterfuge for the CIA to continue to cover up.
They thought they had a patsy, they thought they could coerce the patsy into a false confession.
That effort failed.
Now they're panicking, and so they need to run interference on behalf of who I believe the true culprit is someone on the current CIA payroll, who was on Capitol Police payroll at the time, but maybe was always on CIA payroll.
Can't rule that out.
But I don't think they're going to have her sit for extensive discovery.
I think their goal is going to be to invade his discovery first, invade his files first, try to get as much as you can from his files to further try to frame this black autistic kid as the Patsy for January 6th.
Well, that's very interesting.
I've asked people, clip that part, people.
That is an interesting insight that when Robert made it the first time we talked about this, it never crossed my mind.
And it seems exceedingly plausible, if not outright amazing.
I want to bring this one up here because I'm going back to Mark Gidey, 3081.
Establishment Religion Logic00:13:27
I've been subdued for years.
Don't deflect criticism just because I have numbers in my name.
That is just stupid.
No, in fact, if you pay attention, I said that the criticism.
It was because your comment was really, really stupid.
Your comment was.
It was the quality, it was the extremely low IQ quality of the comment that was the predicated question.
But having all the numbers after your name makes you look sus, pal.
Still makes you look sus.
It was the insane, unfalsifiable stupidity of the comment itself.
We have as much responsibility as the Democrats for the.
You're an idiot.
How do you contradict something like that?
But it was also the spamming.
And then I go, you know, get here.
Tucker Carlson is a traitor and he is also gay and weak.
I'm sorry, sir.
The numbers in your name, you're right.
That might have thrown me off.
It was the substance of the comment.
But thank you for the commie tube super chat.
All right.
So that's the Kirchhoff defamation suit.
Do you think they, I mean, it would be ballsy for them to just not go with a motion to dismiss or anti slap sanctions?
It was in Virginia, so I don't believe there is any anti slap law at all.
I was going to say.
Well, it's going to be interesting to see what goes on there.
That is fascinating.
All right, Robert, what's the segue into what now?
So we've got some principles that you're supposed to live by now being published in schools.
And according to the Fifth Circuit's on-bonk decision, it's now legal to post the Ten Commandments in public schools.
So, this was, what state was this?
I don't want to say Texas.
Texas.
It was Texas.
And they're putting the Ten Commandments in schools.
There were some regulations as to who could pay for it or who would have to pay for it.
You wouldn't have to use school funds to pay for the Ten Commandments.
It's the Ten Commandments, people.
And as far as I'm concerned, okay, fine.
It's got its origins in the Bible.
This is not like a religious thing.
This is basic law.
I mean, you know.
Don't commit adultery is no longer illegal, but once upon a time it was when in certain places.
This was an issue where religious groups objected to the Ten Commandments being posted in public schools.
They said it violates the separation of church and state provisions.
And it's such an outrage that people have to be faced with 10 basic principles.
I mean, I can appreciate I am the Lord your God and thou shalt keep the Sabbath, which are two of the Ten Commandments.
If you don't like it, people, Don't look at it.
And if you want to say, well, then how about if they had some Islamic or Jewish Talmudic prayers?
This was not founded as a Jewish or Islamic country.
And if you want that, you can go to a country that has that and you wouldn't have to be worried about anything.
The bottom line, however, initial court said, yes, it violates the separation of churches.
What's the clause in the Constitution?
I forget what it is now.
It was the First Amendment.
There's two different provisions in the First Amendment that are applicable one is the establishment of religion, and the other is the free exercise.
It succeeded initially at the lower levels.
And then at the appellate level, they said, no, this does not run afoul of constitutional law.
Sent it back for what was it for?
I want to say remand, but I'm not sure now if the Court of Appeal rendered the decision that the lower court ought to render.
Oh, I mean, they reversed it and said it's completely legal.
And so their remand is to, you know, is basically to enforce their decision.
But it's highly likely to go to the Supreme Court.
Yeah, some people in the chat are like, not everybody with numbers in their name on account.
We're not saying everybody with numbers and name on a social media account is sus.
We're saying is when people.
Start to spam the chat with a bunch of trollish comments and they have eight numbers in their names.
I find that sus.
So that's the combination.
Just look online, folks.
Overwhelmingly, the crap comes from people with like 18 numbers in their name.
I'm sorry.
And it is well known that a lot of bots create them with a bunch of numbers in their name.
They don't go through the habit because it's more costly in the creation of the bot to do a real normal name.
So just FYI, the people that are paying, oh, no, no.
Everybody is sus that has numbers in their name.
Look, I can show you what it looks like.
It's a known flipping fact.
And the people who say, I've been here for years and I'm unsubbing, first of all, you're not, it's sort of like Fight Club.
Yeah, I knew you were going to say that if you were a bot as well, because that's exactly what the bots do.
I can verify who comments on the channel.
There's a website that allows you to put in a username and you can see how many times that account has allegedly commented over a decade.
So there's ways.
People don't know.
Bottom line, forget about it.
It was like when people like Mike Davis, some others were showing up in locals chat pretending not to be Mike Davis.
That was fun.
Because there's ways to track that down.
Yeah.
We have.
Not that we're doing anything illegal.
One of the selling points of locals is that we have access to.
Email addresses.
We own it.
We own it.
Rumble doesn't own it.
Only we own that information.
So your information can't be shared with anybody.
It's only with us, but allows us to verify authenticity and identity and so forth.
If something's looking a little sketchy.
But the Ten Commandments.
Oh, yeah.
So the two decisions one was the Lemon decision, the other was the Stone decision.
1980, Supreme Court said you can't put up the Ten Commandments in schools because that's the establishment of religion.
So, what this court said is that because the Supreme Court has recently said lemon was never really a good constitutional test and has undermined it, they've decided that lemon no longer exists as precedent, which is not quite as far as the Supreme Court went before, but this case will afford the opportunity for them to do so.
Lemon had a certain balancing test that didn't make a ton of sense.
So, the First Amendment says you can't establish religion and you can't prohibit the free exercise thereof.
So, how, what does the establishment of religion mean?
They want to interpret from a particular kind of originalist interpretation, which is what did establishment of religion mean back during the founding era?
And they point to these are the things it means.
It means attendance at a particular church, church doctrine, times of worship or obligation to worship at a church, the governance of a religion or a church, doctrine of a religion or a church, the method and manner of worship at a church.
Whether or not somebody dissented from such a church's beliefs, whether taxes were paid for or to a church, and whether public use of the church for public functions was done on a regular basis.
And they're saying the mere showing of the Ten Commandments, because this is what's clear here the students aren't required to observe the Ten Commandments, they're not required to agree with the Ten Commandments, they're not required to recite the Ten Commandments.
They're not required to acknowledge even the existence of the poster on the wall of the Ten Commandments.
The teacher makes no reference to the Ten Commandments, doesn't recommend the Ten Commandments.
You literally just have a poster on a wall citing the Ten Commandments inside a public school.
That's it.
And they're saying the key component is some form of coercion in order for it to be the establishment of a religion.
And they said it doesn't interfere with your free exercise because you're not required to do anything as a student.
And the teacher is not trying to indoctrinate them because it's literally just a poster on a wall.
And the question then becomes, is it okay?
And now my question for religious conservatives would be, would you be okay if Dearborn, Michigan put up the Sharia law as a poster in Michigan schools?
The answer is going to be, I would have a problem with that.
This is a country that is founded on Judeo Christian principles.
It says, in God we trust on the money.
And If you don't like that, and if you wanted Sharia law, there's plenty of countries that have it.
So I would say that the country was founded on principles.
President Trump did say praise to Allah on Easter.
So for all the Trump seal clappers out there.
The uh, but so my instinct, I get where the court's coming from, and I had this debate with uh, William Kunstler many years ago at Yale.
I'm sorry, what was his name?
William Kunstler, the legendary uh, civil rights criminal defense lawyer, he was the Chicago Seven guy in Big Lebowski.
Uh, Lebowski's like, I want, I want like Ruby, I want William Kunstler, dude.
Uh, you know, he's in Malibu, he's like, get out of my town, get out of Malibu, Lebowski, you deadbeat.
The uh, no, it's it's an unfortunate, I mean, I knew I heard that, hold on, I gotta bring it up.
So that it's Kunstler.
There's a lot of unfortunate last names.
That's one of them.
Okay, sorry.
Legend.
One of the great criminal defense lawyers of all time.
But I debated him because he wanted to prohibit the Catholic Church from participating in the St. Patty's Day parade or sponsoring a St. Patty's Day parade in New York.
And I was like, dude, that is an establishment of religion.
That's their exercise and expression of religion.
So I'm generally sympathetic, but I'm not a big fan of incorporating explicitly religious tenets.
Publishing them in public schools because it's like, how do you contain it?
You know, I'm all for the Ten Commandments, but how do you then prohibit the school that wants to do the Buddha principles, the Hindu principles, the Islamic principles, the other principles?
I don't know where you draw that line real easily.
Well, at the same time, I mean, so I'm all for students being able to have voluntary prayer on campus, for coaches being able to do prayers and things of that nature.
But these are religious tenets of a very particular religion that.
I mean, for the most part, almost every religion shares every single one of these, other than probably what number one and number two, right?
Yeah.
Maybe you could argue number three and number four.
So, yeah, but like everybody agrees with the rest for the most part.
You know, those are pretty, pretty, pretty good principles to live by in general.
But because it explicitly references 10 commandments, I'm not super comfortable with this.
Even though I lean much more on the free exercise and that a lot of what's called establishment is really not establishment of religion historically.
Where do we draw the line?
If it's okay, as long as it isn't state funding and isn't state promotion and isn't state coercion.
But the difference is it's the state permitting or the state, this isn't the state permitting a coach to pray.
This is more the state putting up a poster promoting a particular religious tenets.
Inside the school.
And the problem I have with that is, okay, where do you draw the line?
As long as people are saying, hey, it's okay if Dearborn puts up Sharia law in the school, okay, that's, you know, then at least that's consistent.
My guess is the people that are cheering this decision would go absolutely ballistic if you put up Sharia law in their public school.
Well, no, absolutely.
And I mean, I say understandably so.
And the argument is also going to be, well, then you have to tolerate the trans flag or all of this 2SLGBTQIA stuff.
If you object to that flag and those, Tenets being put up in schools, then you should object to this one as well.
They're both ideological.
I just say that the bottom line fundamental difference between all of them is the Ten Commandments and Christian, Judeo Christian values, if you want to call that, is what America as a country was founded upon.
And therefore, it's fundamentally different from other foreign religions and other degenerate ideologies.
And so, like, and I mean, that would be the argument.
Then the only question is going to be, well, you know, you have the constitutional arguments for not.
Separation of church and state and not compelling people to have to be exposed to that.
But it's like, I love that.
It's like holy water, it touches their skin and they go crazy and it's just water.
Yeah.
I mean, that, yeah.
So that, my guess, if it goes up the Supreme Court, they'll wrestle with this.
I think it'll probably get overturned, is my best guess.
They're going to say something like the state has to have no role in it to that degree.
In other words, a state official doing something is, will be, I considered protected, like the pastor with the, like the coach with the prayer, voluntary prayer, where there's opt out and all the rest with an after school duties.
But then putting it up on school property probably will be considered too far, is my best guess.
I get a kick out of the partisan logic.
Oh, Barnes is done like Ten Commandments, but he wants boys and girls' schools.
No, I don't, Nimrod.
I've been against this for forever.
These people that literally can't think out of partisan blocks.
If you disagree with me on X, you must be a liberal Democrat.
They literally can't think any other way.
It shows you the incredible rigid limits of their thinking, the partisan filters.
You see it online all the time now.
Robert, if you disagree with Trump on anything, you must be a commie lefty Democrat because there can't be two other, there couldn't be any other opinion out there because their minds are that cabined and contained.
I said it yesterday, Robert.
Partisan, what is it?
Partisan Thinking Limits00:14:44
Tribalism is not a partisan issue.
It's a human condition, which is why I'm most excited about it.
Well, that's why our founders said factionalism will undo our constitution before anything else will.
Let's get through some of these because I'm falling behind here.
Dragon Wizard God says, I'm Protestant Christian.
Viva Fry, what's your opinion on Jews and their worship of the six pointed star Saturn?
Revelations 22 says, I can answer this question.
I have no idea what you're talking about.
The six pointed star, is that the Maghen David?
Oh, second.
It said Jesus was born from the body of Viva?
Jesus is the morning and day star born from the body of David.
Dragon Wizard, I have no idea.
All that I know, by the way, is that the reason why there was a joke going around that it was someone finding a Jewish star in the smallest atomic particles.
Do you know why a snowflake, Robert, has six points, six stars, or six edges?
It looks like a Jewish star.
There's overlapping triangles.
There's a lot of sacred geometry theories about the origin of it.
So, a water molecule, when it's pulled down to its smallest, it'll be basically six equally sized molecules fitting around one.
That's basically you could fit six quarters around one quarter, and that's what a snowflake six pointed thing looks like.
Anyhow, all that to say is no comment on the rest because I'm not a particularly no idea what you're talking about.
King of Biltong says, try Viva's favorite.
This is true, however.
Piri Piri Biltong.
Great Biltong flavor, added mild heat, over 50% protein, packed with B vitamins, creatine, iron, zinc, and more.
Go to Biltongusa.com, code Barnes.
For 10% off.
I hope these rumble rants are yielding dividends because, yes, Piri Piri is my favorite Biltong and it's delicious.
Guys, this may be a bit off topic, but is important critical survival for the channel.
A Bobcat's favorite food above everything is Biltong.
Okay.
May Dog, thank you.
How was that built on there?
They're not bots.
They're just names of Elon's kids, says Ginger Ninja.
Bars, let's be reasonable.
Go after the guy who gained in the order of thousands, not after those poor saps who are scraping by with their hundreds of millions each weekend.
Have a heart, Bob.
That's sarcasm.
Little Johnny Canuck.
Viva, have you looked into the Anti hate CA being the Canadian version of the SPLC.
Yes, very briefly, because I believe they worked together.
I'm going to double check, but not in any meaningful depth.
I just know that the anti hate network is literally the Canadian iteration of the SPLC.
They are liars, defamers, and they get funded by the government to manufacture the hate that they exist to then combat.
Ginger Ninja, please go into the phone.
Okay, so I got that.
And then hold on, to be fair to the other guy there over at Robert, you're going to be small again.
Hold on.
Like this remove.
I want to go back to Commitube because I saw he had another one.
I don't know if I'm going to be able to get it.
Maybe I will.
Hold up.
Hold up.
And we're going to get to all the tip questions on, obviously, on locals.
Where was it?
I think I lost it.
Anyhow, it said Viva.
It was the same guy.
He said, You didn't address the substance of my criticism.
Okay, whatever.
Book recommendation was Jonestown, a CIA experiment, a review of the evidence.
Michael Myers, CIA, two third Nazi, JFK assassination, Iran Contra.
Sending the same comment twice.
It is spamming.
Yes, Mark, your day.
But you had another one, and I screenshotted it.
It always amazes me when leftists think the separation of church and state means America has to adopt a Soviet style state atheism.
Yeah, that's a good point.
Oh, here we go.
Do you deny that Dems clips of your vids for use of them as anti Trump crowd?
Do I deny?
I drink coffee.
Are they going to do you deny that also the gunman drank coffee?
It's are you suggesting that we shouldn't make a righteous point because of how an adversary might use that point?
So I don't know what the hell Dems are doing.
I don't think they're watching us.
But if that's your argument for not saying something because someone you don't like might use it in a way that you don't like, go to your silo and enjoy your ideological silo.
Um, individual who uh, you know, doesn't want to hear anything that uh contradicts your foregone conclusions, uh, that's why I'm not just the uh, I think the general logic of the it sees the world through partisan filters, uh, which uh, I you know, I don't so I don't care who uh really responds or reacts to it, it's the best understanding as we see fit, and maybe it's right, maybe it's wrong, you can judge it on its merits, but I don't judge it based on oh, Democrats are going to like this, so I better not say it.
That's not how I uh, it's is it true.
Is it likely to be true?
Is it the honest, authentic opinion?
That's the metric that we use, not, oh no, I can't say this because it goes against my tribal identity.
Well, and not just now, if Trump said anybody who stays on the Epstein files is, you know, I don't want their support.
Well, now I guess I'd better not stay on that because the Democrats might say, oh, look, Viva Fry is criticizing Trump over his Epstein debacle as they did in the past.
Which his own wife has done.
Melania Trump has been implicitly very critical of him on that regard.
But it's people who see the world as either pro Trump or anti Trump, see the world as either Republican or Democrat.
And they know no difference in between.
They don't know, they think truth is defined through that partisan filter.
And that's why they're thinking, believing.
I mean, a big, huge report out of NBC this week about all the damage to our bases.
And this was being denied in the sort of Trump Tard world, the seal clapper world.
And there it is.
That's the Pentagon leaking that, by the way.
Well, yeah, but there was another one.
The Pentagon is worried about where Trump is trying to escalate, trying to encourage him to de escalate.
To give you an idea, as a transition to our next topic, Which we have a trilogy of topics related to artificial intelligence.
The president got taken in by one of the worst hoaxes I've seen in the modern military era.
The account of a guy who's this huge Israeli advocate who, you know, cried about how people were mean to him at Penn.
I think it was Penn put up an account of eight hot looking models at fashion shots and claimed, and, you know, they ran it through AI, and AI is like, this sure looks like AI.
My favorite one was one of them had blonde hair.
Now, almost all of them are blonde, by the way, which is amazing.
But the blonde hair that folded into a burqa, because AI has that weird way of screwing these little things up.
And they said these eight beautiful, hot models that look just like AI photos are about to be executed by Iran tomorrow.
Mr. President, please help.
And then Iran comes out and says there's nobody facing execution tomorrow.
There's no eight women facing execution.
These are the only women that were ever arrested for related to the protest are either serving light sentences or already been released.
The, they're like, we have no idea what you're talking about.
And the president said, Aha!
I have freed these eight women.
These eight beautiful hot models have now been freed thanks to the almighty action of Jesus Trump.
Roman Emperor Trump has stepped in and freed these eight artificial identity image women.
And what has got to be one of the most globally humiliating things for Trump to get taken in.
Everybody gets taken in by AI.
We'll get to a huge corporate law firm that bills $3,000 an hour to repeat AI slop in a second.
But the president of the United States got snookered and suckered by AI slop.
But, Robert, what's really astonishing and a little bit discouraging, I felt like I was taking crazy pills.
Now, A.L. Yacoby, I know to be an account that is, you can trust it to be untrustworthy.
It's as bad as Dom Luker breaking of narratives.
It's as bad as some of these channels that they just put out clickbait garbage, and you'll get bitten once by them.
I've never had, but you just know it.
So he puts out this tweet breaking the Islamic Republic is preparing to hang eight women.
Not a word from the international community or so called human rights organizations.
These are the images.
Set aside the fact, However, he cites no source at all.
He cites no source at all for this claim.
This is a Mossad cutout account of this kid from Penn who's a huge Israel firster who has been caught libeling and defaming people repeatedly.
He puts out this claim with literally zero source citations zero.
And then you look at the pictures and you know they're fake.
That screams AI.
People started running it through every AI app.
They're like, yep, looks like AI.
They didn't have names, they didn't name them.
It was un.
They're all pretty.
They're all pretty.
Look, if it was honest, they'd all look like Laura Loomer.
Well, okay.
Set that aside.
The point is, they didn't have any names.
The guy puts it out.
It gets retweeted, retweeted.
I'm trying to be charitable.
Everybody wants to share good information.
Trump puts out a post based on that saying, I would greatly appreciate if the Iranian regime would not kill these women.
Then the news breaks that they're not going to be executed.
And then Trump thanks the Iranian regime.
Then the Iranian regime, on account, I don't know if it was real or not, comes out and says, You also save these eight women and it says, Thank you, Chat GPT.
But then I, you know, what they did is they took eight classical Iranian women and they just put different percas on them.
No, the thing is, I got to give them credit.
These Iranian embassy accounts, they troll rather brilliantly.
Like at one point during the ceasefire, they put up, Mr. Trump, please post.
We're getting bored.
This is during war.
This is the most crazy.
And they got all the Lego.
They made a Lego one of Kash Patel, of Kash Patel getting drunk.
They made a Lego video.
I don't believe in sharing those.
Those I think are, that is, that is, that is pure propaganda, but it is funny as crap.
It's like, wow.
It wasn't just Trump.
Then he comes out and then Caroline Levitt comes out.
And this is all within like a 24 hour period where it takes time for the information to correct the disinformation, but the entire administration came out and, you know, was celebrating this as a massive success.
And I'm not trying to be an asshole.
And I'm not also trying to, I don't want to be wrong on contradicting what, if it's a success, it's an amazing success.
But like, By all accounts, it looks like it's 50% true, only in that only four of eight women were still in jail, and they weren't even slated for any form of execution or substantial punishment.
But everybody ran with it to the point where it felt like the Truman Show, where if I don't clap, Piers Morgan said, Way to go, way to free these AI simulators.
You know, that's one of the most popular memes now.
They put Trump or other characters on the Ed, what's his last name?
Hopper.
No, not Hopper, but that's the Ed Harris, the actor from the Truman Show.
They're like, Now do this.
Now, do this.
Now, because some of this, did you see?
Now, this was the weirdest thing about the attempted assassination attempt before we jump back into AI.
Because speaking of AI, you see that weird account that posted many years ago that only posted one name, which is the name of the guy that got arrested.
And it turned out he's part of a time travel program at NASA.
And that the guy that they arrested for the attempted murder was interning at NASA at the same time as this guy.
And this guy has this like Groeper looking account that's literally not posted anything except many years ago, this guy's name.
And then the.
I hadn't heard that.
I'm going to find like.
Dude, maybe we are in a simulation.
I mean, we're in a screwed up simulation.
If we're in a simulation.
But it's like, maybe we got some time travel going on here.
Well, okay.
If it's true, I'm going to pull up the link if I can.
But if it's true, A, he could have changed his name.
Cole Allen is not exactly as unique of a name as like Xavier.
Can you imagine only posting once, like eight years ago?
I mean, would they?
This, okay, Robert, not that I'm fact checking you in real time, but I am.
And this, I'm getting ready to get freaked out here.
If this is, if this is, okay.
Right here, Herney Martinez.
So they could have changed the avatar more recently.
12,000 subscribers, Cole Allen, December 21, 2023.
Yeah.
And so apparently, at that time, that guy was the guy that they, Cole Allen, was interning at NASA around that time.
And they said they've traced this account.
This is what, but what's saying, I have no idea whether it's true or not.
This was what's been published so far that is connected.
To working at the time travel program at NASA.
I'm just saying, it's like, whoa, we're living in a wacky world if any part of this is true.
What in the name of sweet holy hell, Robert?
Zero.
How does he get 12,000 followers?
I think it's because over the last day when this became public, when somebody said, hold on a second, what's this about?
Can you imagine?
I wish I had been the first person to have actually found that link on media.
What does this mean?
He hasn't posted media.
He hasn't posted any replies.
And he has one post.
Yeah.
And they say it's the guy that works at NASA time travel program.
Oh, my goodness.
Well, that, okay.
Now, now I'm going to, I know what I'm doing this afternoon.
If the event is boring, I'm going to be looking into that.
It's not going to be boring.
Okay.
So back to, I don't even know what we're talking about now, Robert.
Oh, speaking of AI slop, the Sullivan and Cromwell, one of the most established, prestigious law firms, white.
Chew law firms, as they call them, Wall Street law firms in New York City, who that bills out as much or over $3,000 an hour.
$3,000 an hour got caught in federal court making up a bunch of fake cases and fake citations and fake legal precedents and fake factual patterns because they had to admit they used AI.
They used AI slop to write some of their briefs that they turn around and build their clients.
$3,000 an hour for.
I'm doing something else, Robert, while you're talking about this because I need to see.
So there was this, there was another account which was posting out all sorts of outcomes for potential sporting events.
And as each outcome didn't occur, they would delete the tweet that provided, that said, the Cubs win 8 1, you know, 8 1 in the ninth.
And so I'm just looking to see if this account hasn't any recent deleted.
This is also getting, I'm getting freaked out, Robert.
I went to ask Rock, does it have any recent deleted tweets?
And it's telling me, retry, thank you.
Does that account have any deleted tweets?
Deleted tweets can't be found using usual searches.
So, I'm just trying to think of a way to work around this.
Could this person have put a bunch of tweets of random names, deleted all of them when something happened?
Okay, I'm going to think about this.
That is very, very bizarre.
Time Travel Account Mystery00:02:12
Apparently, they found his tweet by searching Cole Allen when his name first got published.
And apparently, that's how this account popped up in the search engine.
But even the name of the account, HenryMaw79561893.
Anyone wants to pull some numbers up?
Go pull up some numbers on the wall.
I don't know how they tracked his account and whether that information is accurate, but they purport to have tracked it to someone who worked at the NASA program on time travel.
Oh, and then the weird thing was that Cole Allen apparently was an intern at NASA in an overlapping time frame.
The account has been completely dormant since then.
The account went viral due to its connection to real world shooting.
Online speculation and replies in forms suggest the user might have posted multiple names and deleted the rest to create a predictive effect.
That's what I was.
This is pure conjecture.
Okay, fine.
No way back machine snapshots, Google, whatever.
Yada, yada, yada, yada.
In short, only one tweet, publicly verifiable from this account.
Nothing indicates any other posts were removed.
Holy hell.
Okay, wild.
We're all part of a time machine.
Maybe that's why he can't explain what he was doing there that day, that it was all part of a time machine test.
The pipe bomber's name is Brian Cole, not Cole Allen, but that's still kind of Brian Cole, Cole Allen, 31 year old autistic.
Potentially on the spectrum, man, Cole Allen.
I did think I saw something report that now.
And yeah.
Okay.
What else, Robert?
Oh, yeah.
What else?
And what do we got?
We got two other AI components.
The AI, what happens when AI on these various apps?
I don't know if you've noticed with your email that now your AI is being added involuntarily to your email and it's summarizing your email for you.
When you open up your email, there'll be a little AI summary at the top.
All that information is going into an AI database.
They're scraping your emails.
They're scraping your text.
They're scraping your social media content.
Shut the front door.
I see it right here.
It says summarize.
Yep.
Three messages.
Robert shared a list of topics for a discussion.
David provided a link for the discussion.
Oh, my effing word.
FISA Surveillance Scraping00:03:22
Yes, exactly.
And now, and all that's going into the AI databases.
And now the government is using access to it to incriminate you, to use your private communications and private conversations and introducing it as evidence.
Including when your computer's watching you, when your phone's listening in on you, when your smart apps are paying attention at all times, all the time.
They're now incorporating AI into that and AI having an independent third party database for that.
And what's his name?
Steve Letter, Leader.
What's that guy's name?
Does a YouTube channel from Michigan that covers a lot of stuff.
Oh, Steve Leto's Law.
Leto, that's it.
Leto.
So he covered it and it was admitted into court.
So that takes us to the importance of very relevant litigation, legislation that's needed.
While they're trying to push through an expansive FISA, they just passed a law that Thomas Massey had fought against over and over again to turn your car against you, where your car can automatically go off, where your car is going to be spying on you now, too, as part of this whole AI surveillance system.
By federal law, it's mandatory.
So the Congressman Massey with Congresswoman Bobert. Is proposing the Surveillance Accountability Act.
And what it would do is it would require a warrant before any search happens at any time of any database of information, AI or otherwise, that derives from any form of surveillance, biometric requirements, what's happening when you drive your car, the license videos that they're taking, the traffic videos that they're taking.
All of it would require a warrant before any law enforcement officer or authority can ever search it.
Second, no more third party exceptions.
That there's no right now, they say if your records are with the bank or the records are with a utility or your records are with a corporation or your records are with the telecoms, e.g., all your phone and internet and texting conversations and email conversations, that those are third party custodians whose records they can search and seize.
They would exclude that entirely statutorily to make the Fourth Amendment read in the words it was written in.
And last but not least at all, give you a private right to sue with attorneys' fees and damages anytime anybody comes after you.
This is going to be a 1776 Law Center signature item.
The annual conference will be August 1st and August 2nd in Chattanooga, Tennessee.
If you want tickets, that's available at 1776lawcenter.com.
But this is a fantastic bit of legislation being proposed and couldn't be more timely from Congressman Massey and Congresswoman Bobert.
Amazing, Robert.
I want to get to some of our tipped questions over in locals.
We've got to show our love there.
See how these false flag ops work, says Arby Hem.
President Trump says now is the perfect time for Congress to immediately approve the FISA domestic spying program for national security reasons because the military really needs it.
Trump says he is willing to give up his liberties and safety.
Well, I say not really in this case because FISA would, if they're going to use FISA properly, it wouldn't have had any impact on this particular case.
Pope himself publicly said in his Truth Post, he is glad to give up his privilege and liberties.
Trump Giving Up Liberties00:09:46
Oh, yeah, no, no.
He said, is that one in that post?
Yeah, he put it in his Truth Post.
It's been misused against me, but I'm willing to sacrifice my freedoms and liberties to invade your privacy in the deep state.
I just assume it's happening.
So I govern myself accordingly, but I don't like it.
Often Wrong John says, I wonder if someone at X has been doing something to predate a post as a hoax.
That's also, I would, that has to be the more likely outcome or possibility, but on a totally dormant account.
RB Ham says, if heads don't roll over the fact that the White House Correspondence Center incident was a complete failure, it proves that the incident was actually a successful psyop to bolster Trump's image and perhaps fast track his big, beautiful ballroom.
Well, it'll do that anyhow.
But it was, I mean, it's hard to say that it was an abject.
Security failure because the guy didn't get very close on a different floor and got nabbed right after charging through the metal detectors.
But it shows the nutcases out there.
Gray 101, and we don't know.
Satire or not?
Mr. Barnes, most of my normie associates are confused by the straight closure, often thinking it's open or over.
How aware of the situation do you believe most Americans are?
Oh, yeah, I would say within Trump world, like the Trump Tard world, the dear leader world, they think that all of our weapons have been.
Tremendously precise and successful, and we haven't hit any schools or churches or parks or universities or residential neighborhoods.
We've only hit military targets.
They think that the Iranian weapons have had no success at all.
They haven't hit any of the U.S. bases.
The U.S. bases are just fine and pristine condition.
That the interceptors have intercepted pretty much everything, and that when Iran hits something, they just kill civilians because they can't hit anything at all.
It's like shotgun style attacks.
They think the Iranian regime has internally, has such deep internal conflicts that every time President Trump said he had a deal, he really did have a deal.
But that the Iranian regime is so conflicted and contradicted that one side revokes the other side's authority to do a deal.
They think that if the president escalates, that it would end Iran as we know it and they would quickly and immediately capitulate.
They think that the Straits of Hormuz are open whenever President Trump wants them to be open.
They think oil and gas prices aren't really going up at all and will stabilize very quickly, and that gas and oil prices will be down to where they were before this started within a month or so, and that there'll be no longstanding economic damages.
They think the city of London is somehow being secretly destroyed by this conflict, and that China and Russia are really getting hammered, and that the United States will now be able, through Trump's 12D chess, to completely control the world.
These are the kind of things they sincerely believe.
They believe all the The slop, the Fox News Boomer Con slop that is fed to them through all of those networks.
And anybody who challenges any aspect of that is called a traitor, is called a liar, is called a TBS person.
They won't listen to any criticism, even if that criticism is from Alex Jones, even if it's from Tucker Carlson, even if it's from Jesse Kelly, even if it's from Megyn Kelly, even if it's from longstanding, lifelong supporters of President Trump.
No, no, no.
Those people must all be crazy.
Those people must all be nuts.
Only dear leader knows the truth.
Let me bring up the next one here, which was I heard Mark Mitchell was seen running through the lobby of DC Hotel.
Is it true?
Robert, was Mark Mitchell there yesterday?
Oh, we'll find.
I don't know.
I don't know if that was supposed to be true.
Mark Mitchell is soon to be free.
And it will probably be on live with Richard Barris sometime soon.
The Mark Mitchell ransom fund has sufficiently raised enough capital and cash to potentially free him quicker, sooner rather than later, will be my prediction.
S. Ren says, Have you seen the reports of cars now checking faces and other metrics?
Yeah, we talked about that.
They say it's for safety, theft protection, yada, yada.
You won't be able to drive if AI thinks you're not fit.
The age, ID, condition, verification is getting out of control.
How long before and should you?
Won't be able to access your phone.
Won't be able to access your internet.
Won't be able to access your emails.
Won't be able to access your car.
Sooner or later, you won't even be able to turn on the temperature in your house.
Won't be able to turn on your oven.
Won't be able to close and open your own doors.
That's where this is going.
Gray 101.
I'm going to read these begrudgingly.
Has President Trump surviving last night's attempt been touted as proof God supports his war of Israel against Iran yet?
If RFK really cares about health, why is he in the administration cheerleading glyphosate?
David got here late.
That's a fair point on Monday.
Guess who's taken up the lead argument, oral argument on Monday in defense of Bayer getting immunity for its glyphosate injuries?
Who's taking up most of the oral argument?
Do you think it's Bayer and its amicus?
No, it's the Justice Department.
The Trump Justice Department is the lead.
Arguing for Bayer to be completely immune for the injuries and illnesses, including cancer and disability and death that its product glycevate causes.
David got here late as a paraplegic, that dude's invention, dumbest thing I've ever seen since Cameron won in Minnesota.
Is Vance on track to exit this Iran conflict very soon if he fails and Democrats win 2028, big and dominate for a decade, life and death?
He's doing everything he can.
Absolutely.
And hopefully the president listens to him, takes his advice, and we get out of this.
Exiting rather than escalation.
Is the best risk reward strategy to the president available?
And the question is whether he takes it or not.
Vice President Vance is doing all he can to get him to take it.
How many topics do we have left, Robert?
We have the big one, or one of the bigger ones, arrested for a BB Netanyahu joke.
The criminal case against, then we got some pretty shorter ones.
The criminal case against Powell, Fed chairman, dropped.
Ghost guns gets a partial victory before the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Virginia redistricting going up before the Virginia Supreme Court.
And the Georgia 2020 election takes a whole new turn.
Okay.
We'll do, I guess, two more here, and then we're going to head over to the after party, and then I'm going to go get into my finest suit.
But before we go, Robert, what do you have coming up next week?
So on Monday, bourbon with Barnes at vivabarnslaw.locals.com.
On Tuesday, bourbon with Barnes at vivabarnslaw.locals.com, where we do AMAs and cover the topics of the day.
Wednesday, Viva and I will be on with Larry Sharp, Money Bomb, to help get the Libertarian Party on the ticket in New York, not only for that elect for gubernatorial election, but hopefully for future elections as well.
And on Thursday, the closing night, the last broadcast of Infores.com in its current form.
It will survive just in a different name and in a different way.
For the last hour of the show on Thursday night, ever to be broadcast on Live with Alexander Emmerich Jones.
And then we'll have the Barnes Brief on Friday at viva Barnes Law.locals.com.
Movie night Saturday night.
And probably a Hush Hush or Barnes Law School forthcoming this week, also at viva Barnes Law.locals.com.
And if you want tickets, the tickets are going.
The tickets are going fast, but there's still some left.
1776lawcenter.com.
Alexander McCorris.
Larry Johnson, Daniel Davis, Richard Barris, Viva Fry.
Like that.
Yeah, that guy.
Freedom planning, food planning, medical planning, the medical freedom, food freedom, health freedom, financial freedom.
All of these issues will be a part of the conference.
People talking about how to reform the CIA, how to reform the military, what's the future prospects for the world, covering the world with Alexander McCorris and Alex Cristoforo.
Visits to the United States.
All of that you can get.
Larry Johnson doesn't make many appearances.
Daniel Davis doesn't make many appearances.
Richard Barris doesn't make many appearances.
Chase Hughes covering how to deal with a psyop.
Greg Hartley, how to handle an interview.
Scott Rouse, how to do negotiations.
Of the behavior language panel, also all present and in place.
Plus, a lot of cool, fun, and interesting people in a nice little town.
Chattanooga, Tennessee, my hometown.
It's going to be amazing.
Lawcenter.com.
1776, Lawcenter.com.
You can And still get tickets, but tickets are going.
And once they're done, they're done because we got a hard cap on how many tickets we can do for this.
And I'll be live throughout the week, three o'clock.
And, you know, oh, the people were asking over what time with Larry Sharp.
Larry Sharp's money bomb thing is all night.
So we have different time slots.
I'll tweet out my time slot.
I said early because, you know, I fall asleep.
I'm going to be like maybe six ish, give or take.
I forget the exact time, but I'll tweet it out.
But everybody, before you go anywhere, so we're doing it, Robert.
Mark and I have been doing the, Movie reviews.
Movie reviews that I finally uploaded yesterday.
Dealing with Mark is like dealing with my father.
Well, I would say my father.
He's not quite that old.
But we have technological barriers, and I'm pretty bad as well.
We couldn't figure out how to.
You mean he's a boomer?
I think he might even accept that.
The entire library is on Rumble right now.
And next week will be streamed live on Rumble.
So everyone go subscribe.
What was your favorite movie that you guys have covered so far?
Well, thus far.
Mark Hunley.
Don't share some of his political takes.
Brilliant, brilliant storyteller.
Great film reviewer.
Uh, uh, great.
He's his storytelling is just off the charts.
Good screenwriter, comedian guy can I mean, wild, crazy life history.
He and Viva do movie reviews.
What, each week?
Every Thursday.
Look, I mean, Fight Club is my favorite movie of all time.
I did very much appreciate it.
True Threats vs Jokes00:04:10
I didn't know that.
Oh, really?
Well, that sounds like it.
We know who Viva's alter ego is.
He's down there.
Oh, no, but hold on.
But the best review that I got the most out of was actually LA Confidential.
I mean, I didn't like the movie the first time I saw it.
Great film.
Great film.
One of my favorite authors, James Elroy.
Yep.
And the insights that went on behind that, you know, what that movie represented.
That I appreciate in an entirely different way right now.
And then LA Confidential.
Yeah, that was the water wars of California.
So go check it out, everybody.
All right.
So, Robert, let's do the last two topics here the big one.
Oh, gosh, the woman, the university student getting charged, indicted for threats.
Okay.
So she made these jokes like that they're going to have their ceremonies and exams.
And then maybe they could.
She tweeted this to a group thread, group chat.
Maybe Netanyahu can drop some bonbons.
And it was one of them, Bonbons, which I guess is a euphemism where she was using it for bombs.
And she made some jokes about Netanyahu or whomever bombing their whatever the places where they write the exams.
She gets, I mean, she knew at the time that people were reacting badly to the jokes.
They didn't like them, and then she sort of had to highlight it was just a joke and maybe felt bad.
I think they deleted the text.
But she gets indicted for these, what are obviously not just, call them a stupid joke.
They're not threats because they require the action of a third party who is not going to act on this.
But she gets indicted anyhow on what?
On terroristic related charges, Robert?
Terroristic.
It's garbage.
It's utter garbage.
There was a lot of concern in some parts of social media that this was because it was BB specific, that if it had been somebody else, it wouldn't have been interpreted and the Florida state authorities wouldn't have reacted the way they did.
I don't know if that's the case or not.
What I do know is it's a preposterous and asinine indictment.
Don't treat jokes like true threats.
True threats are constituted.
The First Amendment limits every law in the country.
And every criminal law in the country, in terms of how it can be interpreted.
So it doesn't matter what the statute says.
It doesn't matter what the legislature intended.
What it matters is what the First Amendment allows to be prosecuted and punished in America.
And the First Amendment only allows true threats to be prosecuted.
It requires a likelihood of action to be taken, it requires an imminence of risk, and it requires objectively verifiable intent.
Here, this was an obvious joke.
She is in control whether Bibi Netanyahu can bomb the school.
I mean, come on.
This is preposterous.
This is asinine that this is being considered subject to criminal prosecution.
The prosecutor should be embarrassed.
The cops should be embarrassed.
The judge should be embarrassed.
Governor DeSipp should be embarrassed.
They all should be embarrassed.
I don't know whether it's because they're so in the tank for Israel or whether the.
Because this is part of the right has gone nuts on hate speech codes, trying to impose it on behalf of Israel.
Maybe that's what this is.
Whatever it is, it's ridiculous.
It's hot garbage.
This is a first amendment, flagrant first amendment violation on what is an obvious joke to anybody with an IQ over 50.
Now, I forget the account.
I just couldn't find another account where I saw the video.
This is the judge basically excoriating the woman.
A 23 year old FIU student charged with a felony over messages she wrote in a school group chat.
Gabriella Saldana.
Facing a judge Thursday morning.
According to her arrest report, this went down in a WhatsApp group chat of about 215 students, where students were discussing an event that was to take place Friday at the Ocean Bank Convocation Center on campus to make their capstone presentations.
An FIU police officer read some of the statements in court.
The exact words utilized were there's going to be a bomb in the Ocean Bank Convocation Center, and it's going to be at Jonathan's fault, one of the members in the chat.
Seven News obtaining some.
Garbage Cases and Judges00:05:18
Here you go, Nick.
But Nick, if you can hear me, drop some bonbons.
For us capstone students and ocean bank conventions, I can appreciate it makes people feel uncomfortable and you shouldn't make jokes like that.
But yeah, it's a joke.
In fact, good jokes often do make people uncomfortable.
That's the whole point and purpose of the comedic attempt.
But this is a waste of judicial resources, a waste of legal resources, and a flagrant First Amendment violation because so many state court judges don't take the Constitution seriously.
So many of our state prosecutors don't take the First Amendment seriously and the Constitution seriously.
And so many state police officers.
Don't take the Constitution seriously.
That's how garbage cases like this end up here.
Robert, was that audio particularly loud for you as well, or is it just on my end?
No, it was a little loud, yeah.
I don't know.
Instagram doesn't seem to be, you can't toggle the volume thing, switch up and down.
We got the Powell case dropped for the Fed chairman.
We got ghost guns on the 10th Circuit.
Virginia redistricting goes to the Virginia Supreme Court.
The Georgia 2020 election challenge takes a unique turn.
A quartet of cases left to cover.
We do one more here, and the rest at the end.
After party on Rumble Premium and at Viva Barnes Law.
Locals.com.
Let's do the Virginia redistricting one here.
We'll do the rest over there and I'll read some over, I'll read, get to all of our tipped questions in locals.
And there were a couple of new Rumble rants that came in.
Last week I had on Ivan Rakeland when I had on Tommy Tatum talking about the Roseanne Boylan shooting on January 6th.
And in the after part of the show, Ivan Rakeland said, You know, this is Tuesday.
It was Tuesday of last week.
We've got this referendum vote that's going on, which if it passes, it'll steal four seats in favor of Democrats.
And the intent at that time was to get the awareness out, not that anyone was going to get out and change the results of that vote.
The vote went down 50.7% to 49.3% in favor of this redistricting, whatever you want to call it.
These things always make my brains go numb.
Redistricting gerrymandering that somehow redistricted to the result of Democrats gaining four seats in which part of government, Robert?
Congress.
In Congress.
And it succeeded.
And then, no less than a day later, a court comes down and says, We had put this on hold because the issue might have been moot had the amendment not passed.
But now that the amendment passed, we're going to declare it null and void because it didn't even follow the procedural rules that were required.
And therefore, we set the results of that referendum aside because it's violative of the rules for redistricting.
And it doesn't matter that the people voted on it, although it was decided by 1.4% of the people who are now going to destroy democracy for 100% of the people.
But the judge basically said, we had sidelined adjudicating on this because, pending the outcome of the referendum, it might have been a moot point.
It's no longer moot.
We're reversing it because it didn't respect the rules.
I don't know what the rules are for redistricting.
The stuff always confuses the hell out of me.
But it seems that the judge got it right and that the referendum, the question as asked, was unlawful because it did not follow the procedural protocol to begin with.
Yeah, that's what the court should determine.
They had an opportunity to decide this before the election.
The lower courts, like the lower court just did now, said the election should not go forward because the way in which it was done procedurally violated Virginia law.
But the substantive phrasing of it violated Virginia law because it was partisan, preferential, and misleading in many respects.
And that you need, when people are voting on something, they need to know what they're voting on.
It was phrased like a Tony Fabrizio poll for the president, which is to say it was rigged.
That, you know, the, and so that's what should happen.
But before the election, the Virginia Supreme Court refused to enjoin the election.
So the concern people have is will the Virginia Supreme Court turn chicken again now that it passed?
I think the Virginia Supreme Court was hoping that it failed and then they wouldn't ever have to make a ruling and wouldn't make anybody mad.
The issue is that the Virginia Supreme Court justices are not appointed by the governor, they're not appointed by the voters.
Instead, the Virginia Supreme Court is appointed by the legislature.
Which is currently overwhelmingly Democratic, which is currently heavily in favor of this law.
So the fear is that they will chicken out again.
I would say at least 50% chance they don't.
I think it's 50 50 that they come in and set it aside because it's so flagrant in the way it barely narrowly passed.
And it's so flagrant in its language that there's really no doubt, had it had honest, impartial language, nonpartisan language, then it wouldn't have passed.
And that's the point and purpose of that Virginia legislative restriction on referendum in the first place.
And so I'm still hopeful that Virginia Supreme Court overturns, despite a lot of skepticism, because of the political fear of the judges involved that they will be sacked come time to get reappointed if they simply uphold the law in this state and this case.
So we will see.
Download Rumble Wallet00:08:00
I was laughing at a chat, which I'm going to get to in a second.
But before that, anything, Robert, one more thing, by the way, if you want to support the work that we do, support the channel.
Locals is the place, but download Rumble Wallet, people, because I noticed I got a $10 crypto tip and I can't seem to find it to thank the person.
Download the Rumble Wallet and you can tip with crypto using Bitcoin.
You go here, click on that thing, and you can scan the QR code.
You can tip with gold backed crypto.
But bottom line, download the Rumble app, download the Rumble Wallet.
They're both key assets to have.
XAUT is gold backed crypto.
And you support Rumble, you support the creators.
And thank you, whoever gave me that tip via crypto, because I can't pull it up right now.
But I want to highlight it.
But I can't, but maybe I can bring it up here.
Can I do it like this?
Ah, whatever.
Stephen Lynn Wolf, Atlanta says, please read the Substack.
The America Cares Card Act solves U.S. debt, immigration, childcare, homelessness, criminal recidivism.
Thank you very much, Stephen Lynn.
Ginger, which is what I was laughing at.
So, in order to successfully convict her, the state is going to have to argue in a court of law that it is likely that BB will bomb a U.S. school.
Seems against their interests.
Data 12 says, the Ten Commandments is a large part of the customs of the last 1,000 years about and also not written to the Constitution.
Should the then The customs be ignored, shunned, and hidden.
Progressivism dilutes jurisprudence, including customs, which is common law, right?
If not, why let Gavin Newsom in 2028 oversee men unite with dolls and adopt babies?
And then I got that.
Okay, now.
Oh, I didn't bring him up.
I'm sorry.
For goodness sake, I'm sorry about that.
I'm still defaulting.
Here, these are the rumble rants.
Thank you.
Ginger, well played.
And Dad at all.
Okay, now let's do this.
We're going to go raid into another person as I read some tip questions.
And Robert, maybe there'll be a question in here for you to answer.
Let me add this to the screen.
In vivabarnslaw.locals.com, Shofar says that soldier did nothing different than half of Congress does every day.
They use insider information to get rich.
Let's hold the congressmen and senators liable for the same thing.
Let them go.
Patrick T. Carey, 82.
Rich people's pundit tweeted a voter profile of the suspected shooter.
Yeah, apparently he's a lefty.
I mean, I think that's a known fact at this point in time, but I'll double check.
Howard the Duck says maybe the Washington Hilton shooter was unhappy with the room service and was just looking for a decent meal.
Chris Craft says, Lord have mercy for mighty pay.
Hold on, hold on.
Remove, remove, remove me.
Do it, Robert.
Lord have mercy for Mighty Pay.
And I'm back.
All right.
Oh, did you see the good little meme of Laura Loomer in the chat?
I don't know that I did, and I'm fairly certain I don't want to.
She really does look like a goblin.
I'll look at that in a second after the more important stuff.
Barnes, why was Rico not utilized in the SPLC case?
Robert, feel that way a little bit.
Racketeering is infiltrating other entities for the purposes of.
Sort of criminally stealing from them.
And so RICO is often thought of as a catch all conspiracy statute, but it's really not.
It's a racketeering statute and influencing corrupt organizations.
And the idea is that it takes over a legitimate organization, corrupts that organization to embezzle from it, steal from it, intimidate them into extort money from it, et cetera.
So racketeering doesn't quite apply in this or in most contexts outside of mob type.
Behavior.
I can't find who would be an appropriate channel to raid right now.
Let me see here.
Who's live?
God's Wife is Strange.
I don't want to go to a gaming thing that'll just irritate people.
Is there anything that's Harvest Rock?
Oh, no, this is a gaming thing.
Let me see here.
View all that's live.
Oh, here.
Okay.
We're picking.
Alex Jones is live, but I don't know.
Wait, is Alex Jones?
I got George Galloway, so that might be good.
Well, Galloway's good.
Yeah.
Yeah, let's do that.
Okay.
We're going to raid George.
So everybody, you know how to get to locals.
Get to locals.
Let's raid George.
He's talking about the shooting, and you'll get some news there.
Forward slash raid.
And we're going to take this party on over to vivabarnslaw.locals.com.
If you want to opt out of the raid, this is going to be for Rumble Premium and locals in a second.
But here's the raid going in.
And let me read two more while I do this.
Is InfoWars really being shut down this coming Thursday?
Howard the Duke asks.
And has The Onion really acquired the website?
They have, right?
It's a done deal.
It's not a done deal that The Onion has it, but it is assumed that either way, InfoWars will be shut down.
Midnight, Thursday night.
They're going to do Project Veritas InfoWars.
He's going to start a new company.
He's already got his own independent operation.
He's going to be up and going and rolling.
And the genius with him was they own no library because he never copyrighted anything he produced at InfoWars.
So it's free for the world to share and distribute.
So that's why there's almost no value to what they're getting.
They're literally just getting a web domain and a name.
We should expel from Congress Jeffries, AOC, Ratskin, and the other nutjobs that are inciting violence with their rhetoric.
Show them that it has no place in America.
Do something other than an ex post condemning them, make it hurt.
I don't know if there's any legal basis to do it, but this was the only carpet that this.
Okay, first of all, do you know why the.
I was wondering if you were going to read that all the way out.
I read it.
I only got the joke towards the end.
I thought it was going to be a joke about the carpet patterns.
Do you know why hotel carpets are always ugly patterns like that?
It drives me crazy.
Now, one exception, you know which carpet, which hotel casino has beautiful carpet is Steve Wynn's.
Wynn Casino carpets, gorgeous.
Carpet's gorgeous.
Ceiling's gorgeous.
Everywhere you look is beautiful.
Apparently, the reason, Robert, is that it shows dirt less.
So, all of those hotel patterns, they have these wild patterns because it doesn't show dirt as much.
Ah, here we go.
Bender is great.
Celebrate 250 years of American pride.
Homemade waving wooden flags.
Each piece is carefully carved and finished to capture the spirit of the stars and stripes in a timeless design.
Perfect for your home.
A gift.
Or honoring USA's 250th anniversary, use discount code LOCALS50 to get $50 off any full priced item.
Re NixWoodWorking.com.
And they're beautiful, and everybody should do that.
Did Calan Levitt interview?
Did you see the interview?
Yeah, I said that.
I think we got to these.
Okay, so I got to all of those, and if I missed any, well, you guys will not get too mad at me, and then we're going to jump down here.
Is Ellen feeling better, Chris Craft, Robert?
Been in the hospital, but feeling better now, yeah.
Barnes can go on cough some projection there.
Baby, any of that pushes back against you are a retard.
Okay, I'm not sure I understood that, but I'll go a bit.
Based on growing American outrage, how many more years will Israel be in charge of.
Okay, probably skip that one too.
Andrea6270 says Money bomb for Larry Sharp is April 29th from 6 to 9.
Viva and Bards are scheduled for 6 10 to 6 45.
Andrea, thank you.
I forgot.
Don't forget to text me, please.
I won't forget, but I might.
That's in three days.
Okay, and then I think we're going into.
This, we got this one.
Okay.
So now what we're doing is I'm removing this.
I'm going here.
I'm removing this.
I don't like being on this side.
I have to go back here.
And now we are going to update to go to Rumble Premium and locals and everybody else.
I will see you tomorrow.
Check it.
Stay tuned for some pictures tonight.
We'll cover the why did the case against the Fed chairman, Powell, get dropped by the Justice Department?
Ghost Guns gets a partial victory before the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.
And what's going on in the Georgia 2020 election challenge that it takes?