VivaBarnesLaw
Politics • Culture • News
This is the VivaBarnesLaw Community.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
December 22, 2024

Part 4:

"Abuse of Power: A Comprehensive List of Alleged Federal Crimes by Key Figures in Government and Society"

Introduction

The following comprehensive list details allegations of potential federal crimes committed by key figures across government, corporate, and other influential sectors. These individuals, including high-ranking officials, corporate executives, and policymakers, are alleged to have violated laws protecting the integrity of the United States' justice system, constitutional rights, and public trust. From obstruction of justice and suppression of free speech to mishandling classified information and fabricating intelligence, the alleged actions outlined below have far-reaching implications. Together, they paint a troubling picture of systemic abuse of power, lack of transparency, and an erosion of the principles of accountability and fairness. Each entry is meticulously detailed to provide clarity on the allegations, the crimes potentially committed, and the consequences these actions may have on American society and democracy.


28. Peter Strzok

Total Potential Penalty: 10 years imprisonment and $250,000 in fines

What He Allegedly Did:

1. Abuse of FBI Authority for Political Purposes:

  • Incident: As a senior FBI official, Strzok led investigations into politically sensitive cases, including Crossfire Hurricane, where he allegedly allowed personal political biases to influence decision-making.
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights).
    • Explanation: Used his position to target political figures and their associates under dubious pretenses, depriving them of constitutional protections.
    • Penalties: Up to 5 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

2. Misuse of Official Communications:

  • Incident: Text messages between Strzok and FBI attorney Lisa Page revealed potential coordination to undermine political figures, damaging the FBI’s credibility.
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 371 (Conspiracy to Defraud the United States).
    • Explanation: Engaged in conduct that undermined impartial investigations and violated public trust.
    • Penalties: Up to 5 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

Potential Victims and Impact:

  • Victims: Political figures investigated under compromised circumstances, and the American public.
  • Impact: Deepened public skepticism of the FBI’s impartiality and integrity in politically sensitive investigations.

29. Yoel Roth

Total Potential Penalty: 10 years imprisonment and $250,000 in fines

What He Allegedly Did:

1. Suppression of Lawful Political Speech:

  • Incident: As a senior Twitter executive, Roth allegedly coordinated with government agencies to censor information related to the Hunter Biden laptop story and other politically sensitive topics.
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights).
    • Explanation: Engaged in activities that deprived users of their First Amendment rights by suppressing lawful speech at the behest of federal agencies.
    • Penalties: Up to 10 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

Potential Victims and Impact:

  • Victims: Twitter users and the broader public, who were denied access to information critical to their decision-making.
  • Impact: Undermined confidence in social media platforms as neutral facilitators of free speech and deepened concerns about government overreach.

30. Laura Dehmlow

Total Potential Penalty: 10 years imprisonment and $250,000 in fines

What She Allegedly Did:

1. Orchestrating Suppression of Hunter Biden Laptop Allegations:

  • Incident: As an FBI official, Dehmlow led efforts to discredit information about the Hunter Biden laptop by characterizing it as Russian disinformation despite evidence to the contrary.
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights).
    • Explanation: Used her authority to interfere with lawful public discourse and discredit information vital to the electorate.
    • Penalties: Up to 10 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

Potential Victims and Impact:

  • Victims: Voters denied access to truthful information and journalists who reported on the laptop.
  • Impact: Undermined public trust in the FBI’s neutrality and fostered perceptions of bias in election-related matters.

31. Rob Flaherty

Total Potential Penalty: 10 years imprisonment and $250,000 in fines

What He Allegedly Did:

1. Coordinating Government-Initiated Censorship:

  • Incident: As White House Digital Director, Flaherty allegedly worked directly with social media companies to suppress content critical of the Biden Administration’s policies, including narratives on COVID-19 vaccines, lockdowns, and election-related concerns. He allegedly facilitated these activities by threatening regulatory action against platforms that failed to comply.
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights).
    • Explanation: Conspired with private platforms to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights to free speech.
    • Penalties: Up to 10 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

Potential Victims and Impact:

  • Victims: American citizens, journalists, and researchers whose posts were censored or de-platformed.
  • Impact: Undermined public trust in social media neutrality, exacerbated concerns about government overreach, and limited public access to a diversity of views during critical moments.

32. Adam Schiff

Total Potential Penalty: 10 years imprisonment and $250,000 in fines

What He Allegedly Did:

1. Abuse of Congressional Authority to Suppress Information:

  • Incident: As Chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Schiff allegedly pressured social media companies to suppress content he labeled as "misinformation," including discussions on Hunter Biden’s laptop and pandemic policies. Additionally, Schiff is accused of coordinating the removal of specific accounts or individuals critical of his party’s policies.
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights).
    • Explanation: Misused his Congressional authority to suppress lawful speech, targeting specific narratives and individuals for censorship.
    • Penalties: Up to 10 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

Potential Victims and Impact:

  • Victims: Citizens, journalists, and organizations whose content was restricted at Schiff’s urging.
  • Impact: Damaged public faith in Congress’s ability to act impartially and fueled fears of political weaponization of government authority.

33. Jeffrey Zients

Total Potential Penalty: 10 years imprisonment and $250,000 in fines

What He Allegedly Did:

1. Suppressing Dissenting Narratives on COVID-19 Policies:

  • Incident: As White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator, Zients allegedly directed efforts to label dissenting scientific opinions on pandemic response measures as “misinformation.” He worked with social media platforms to de-platform medical professionals and organizations that opposed lockdowns, mandates, or vaccine efficacy claims.
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights).
    • Explanation: Collaborated with platforms to deprive individuals and organizations of their rights to free speech under the First Amendment.
    • Penalties: Up to 10 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

Potential Victims and Impact:

  • Victims: Medical professionals, researchers, and American citizens who relied on access to uncensored scientific debate.
  • Impact: Contributed to distrust in public health measures and government messaging, eroding confidence in scientific institutions.

34. Ron Klain

Total Potential Penalty: 10 years imprisonment and $250,000 in fines

What He Allegedly Did:

1. Facilitating Federal Pressure to Censor Speech:

  • Incident: As White House Chief of Staff, Klain allegedly played a key role in coordinating with federal agencies and private platforms to suppress content deemed politically inconvenient. His actions allegedly extended to social media posts on elections, economic policies, and government failures during crises.
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights).
    • Explanation: Participated in a conspiracy to suppress lawful speech critical of the administration, violating First Amendment protections.
    • Penalties: Up to 10 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

Potential Victims and Impact:

  • Victims: Citizens, journalists, and advocacy groups whose content was censored under government direction.
  • Impact: Increased public skepticism of White House integrity and deepened concerns about government control over public discourse.

35. Avril Haines

Total Potential Penalty: 10 years imprisonment and $250,000 in fines

What She Allegedly Did:

1. Misuse of Intelligence Resources to Shape Public Perception:

  • Incident: As Director of National Intelligence, Haines allegedly directed intelligence resources to discredit lawful narratives deemed politically harmful, including those related to the origins of COVID-19 and foreign election interference. She allegedly facilitated these efforts by coordinating with private platforms to censor critical perspectives.
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights).
    • Explanation: Orchestrated censorship operations that deprived Americans of their right to access truthful and lawful information.
    • Penalties: Up to 10 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

Potential Victims and Impact:

  • Victims: Independent researchers, journalists, and the public, who were denied access to transparent intelligence findings.
  • Impact: Reduced public trust in the intelligence community and undermined the credibility of government responses to critical crises.

36. Samantha Vinograd

Total Potential Penalty: 10 years imprisonment and $250,000 in fines

What She Allegedly Did:

1. Suppression of Lawful Speech on National Security Issues:

  • Incident: As a senior national security official, Vinograd allegedly advocated for suppressing narratives critical of the administration’s cybersecurity and national security policies. This included facilitating efforts to label dissenting opinions as “disinformation.”
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights).
    • Explanation: Participated in a conspiracy to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights by coordinating with agencies and private platforms to censor lawful speech.
    • Penalties: Up to 10 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

Potential Victims and Impact:

  • Victims: National security analysts, journalists, and the general public.
  • Impact: Undermined trust in government transparency, stifled legitimate debate on critical security issues, and reinforced fears of government overreach.

37. Anita Dunn

Total Potential Penalty: 10 years imprisonment and $250,000 in fines

What She Allegedly Did:

1. Coordinating Government-Supported Media Suppression:

  • Incident: As a senior advisor to the President, Dunn allegedly played a pivotal role in shaping White House strategies to influence private media organizations and suppress narratives critical of administration policies, particularly on economic and pandemic-related issues.
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights).
    • Explanation: Worked with federal agencies and private companies to stifle lawful public discourse and promote government-approved messaging.
    • Penalties: Up to 10 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

Potential Victims and Impact:

  • Victims: Independent journalists, political commentators, and the public.
  • Impact: Eroded trust in the media as an independent institution, raised concerns about state-sponsored censorship, and damaged democratic principles of free debate.

38. Fiona Hill

Total Potential Penalty: 10 years imprisonment and $250,000 in fines

What She Allegedly Did:

1. Misrepresentation of Foreign Intelligence to Shape Policy Outcomes:

  • Incident: As a senior advisor on Russia and Europe, Hill allegedly provided biased or incomplete intelligence to support specific foreign policy objectives, suppressing dissenting perspectives within the administration.
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (False Statements).
    • Explanation: Provided false or misleading statements during official intelligence briefings, affecting key decisions on U.S. foreign policy.
    • Penalties: Up to 5 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

2. Suppressing Alternative Foreign Policy Narratives:

  • Incident: Allegedly facilitated the suppression of dissenting voices critical of U.S. actions in Eastern Europe, labeling them as pro-Russian propaganda.
  • Specific Crime: 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Conspiracy Against Rights).
    • Explanation: Worked with agencies to censor lawful debate on foreign policy issues.
    • Penalties: Up to 5 years imprisonment and fines up to $250,000.

Potential Victims and Impact:

  • Victims: Foreign policy analysts, critics of U.S. intervention, and the public.
  • Impact: Limited open discussion on foreign policy, weakened trust in the impartiality of U.S. intelligence, and contributed to polarization on international issues.

End of Part 4.

More coming soon....

Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
January 06, 2026
My moment of greatness of the evening

It was pretty darn good.

00:00:20
January 04, 2026
Brian Cole Jr.

Another Jan. 6 injustice as Brian Cole Jr. ordered detained until trial.

you know the story. here's the vlawg.

00:11:58
January 03, 2026
ousting of Maduro

My thoughts post news-conference.

00:18:16
February 17, 2024
Appearance on Richard Syrette

I did a quick hit on Richard Syrette yesterday. Gotta keep Canadians apprised of the U.S. madness.

Appearance on Richard Syrette
The Barnes Brief, Podcast Format: Monday, July 17, 2023

Closing Argument: Birthright citizenship is deeply American, and wholly Constitutional.

The Barnes Brief, Podcast Format: Monday, July 17, 2023
Declaration of Independence

Audio podcast style.

Declaration of Independence
Questions for Bourbon with Barnes: Wednesday, January 7, 2025

Ask in replies & answering LIVE at 9ish eastern tonight...

43 minutes ago
Brian Cole Jr. Update

Brian Cole Jr's lawyers demand immediate release from custody of Cole.

They seem discharge from custody, not the dismissal of the charges, for failure to hold a preliminary hearing within the statutorily required delay to do so. They argue that the subsequent federal Grand Jury indictment the government got was not within the required delays.

You know what I think. He should have been released with conditions - conditions which could easily quell any concerns for flight / criminal behavior pending trial.

We'll see if this backdoor procedural method proves legally successful.

Link https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.288125/gov.uscourts.dcd.288125.41.0.pdf

post photo preview

Ken’s esophagectomy went great. There were no complications or surprises. He is remarkable already in his attitude and feeling quite good considering all he went through. He will be moved out of ICU as soon as a room becomes available today ! Thank God.. thank you for your prayers.

post photo preview
The Barnes Brief: Week of December 19, 2025

I.   INTRODUCTION

A. Art of the Day

Christmas music, my favorite season thanks to my father, by wondrous choirs, which also was my father’s favorite form of Holiday cheer. This particular album from the Vienna Boys Choir.

B. Wisdom of the Day

“Ignore them, and you get Fuentes, but worse.” Carl Benjamin on young men in the west.

C. Cultural Recommendation

Greatest Christmas movie ever. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097958/

D. Appearances

  • LIVE w/ Tom Woods
  • LIVE w/ Dr. Bowden & Brook Jackson

II.   THE EVIDENCE

 *Note: A reminder — links are NOT endorsements of the ideas contained therein. The Library is big, and it often consists of ideas I do not personally share, but whose ideas are worth further exploring.

A.  Daily News of Interest

  1. Erika Kirk announces support for Vance 2028. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/erika-kirk-endorses-jd-vance-for-president/ar-AA1SEd5F
  2. Left populism rebuild. https://www.liberalpatriot.com/p/the-future-of-the-left-in-the-21st-ef0
  3. Big MAHA wins on trans interventions. https://www.themahareport.com/p/breaking-kennedy-signs-medical-declaration
  4. Somali fraud. https://archive.is/lMATr
  5. Georgia comes clean on 2020, in part. https://thefederalist.com/2025/12/17/fulton-county-we-dont-dispute-315000-votes-lacking-poll-workers-signatures-were-counted-in-2020/

*Bonus: Kimchi heals. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/12/251216081945.htm

B. Daily Deep Dive: Zoomer Men Rebel

  1. Zoomer men missing relationships. https://isaiahmccall.substack.com/p/gen-z-men-have-given-up-on-dating
  2. Condemned for their gender. https://yougov.co.uk/society/articles/52863-young-men-masculinity-and-misogyny
  3. No good jobs. https://fortune.com/2025/08/25/gen-zers-neets-jobless-men-unemployed-higher-rates-women-healthcare-coding-ai/
  4. No home. https://fortune.com/2025/12/12/gen-z-giving-up-on-owning-home-spending-more-saving-less-working-less-risky-investments/
  5. Carl Benjamin explains.

*Bonus: Hollywood attacks young men. https://slate.com/culture/2024/11/entertainment-hollywood-masculinity-male-role-models-movies-tv-social-media.html

C. Cases of Consequence

  1. Brown University murder case. https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/crime/claudio-neves-valente-reddit-brown-shooting-b2887811.html
  2. Epstein Files release.
  3. Bongino retires. https://x.com/barnes_law/status/2001725595022160288?s=20
  4. Judge convicted. https://www.npr.org/2025/12/18/nx-s1-5648584/judge-hannah-dugan-guilty-obstruction-ice
  5. 1stA & immigration judges. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/opinion-immigration-judges-free-speech-trump.pdf
  6. Maryland reparations legislation. https://apnews.com/article/slavery-reparations-wes-moore-veto-maryland-9c134edbf0410228035743a8dc546171
  7. Luigi. https://courthousenews.com/luigi-mangione-faces-uphill-battle-after-marathon-evidence-hearing/
  8. 1A & new antisemitism laws. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/antisemitism-lawsuit.pdf
  9. Minnesota whistleblower suit: bogus child abuse grant scam. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/sharon-vs-harper-complaint.pdf
  10. Walmart sexual assault. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/walmart-could-have-foreseen-sexual-assault.pdf

*Bonus: Baby Shark suit. https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/892398f9-ac03-458a-8ba1-dce37861e63c/1/doc/24-313_opn.pdf#xml=https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/892398f9-ac03-458a-8ba1-dce37861e63c/1/hilite/

III.     Best of the Board: Trump Admin Grade

On the 1st year of the 2nd term of the Trump administration

  • UncleBugbite: I'm a young man with decades ahead of me to suffer under our bullshit kleptocracy. Sure, Kamala Harris isn't president right now. But Trump's absolute failure to address the structural problems is laying the groundwork for something much worse and better prepared than stupid Kamala Harris, with a desperate population willing to risk more extreme measures for any sort of relief. Trump's weakness is wasting the tiny opportunity we had to fix things, and frankly I'm terrified.
  • JoeKD: This Country was a FUCKING MESS. You just don't clean up a Mess like that in 9 months. Give the man some time. It'll get there. As far as Foreign Affairs goes, he needed to spend alot of time on that to get our Allies back in line.
  • TJefferson: Positives: Immigration/border; JD vance/RFK jr/Tulsi; Multiple pardons; A single month of DOGE. Negatives: Everything else
  • Iceni2103: what are we comparing it to? compared to the alternative, it is B+ to A range. Kamala or Biden 2 would have been an utter disaster. compared to the promises: D+? some good things (mostly border, hard changes to trade, and some executive reforms), but he is falling down way too much (hyping up 'peace deals' that don't last, warmongering Venezuela, dragging out Ukraine, unforced errors on staffing and by extension big issues like Epstein, DOGE/BBB, and MAHA, listening to neo-cons like he needs to please them, focus on donors not voters).
  • Bdmichael09: The only thing hes actually done that truly matters is stop the insane flow of mass migration. That is great, but he hasn't delivered really on anything else. Russia/Ukraine is still a shit show. He bends over and takes it up thr ass for Israel daily rather than put them in their place as the welfare recipients of the US that they are. This nonsense with Venezuela needs to stop, now. He hasn't handled any of the corruption in the bureaucratic state. His push to lower interest rates is a recipe for disaster. We need more restrictive monetary policy after the covid insanity, not easy money policy. Its going to take at least a decade to recover from those awful Congressional decisions in 2020 and 2021. He hasn't actually held the DEI bureaucracy to account in Universities. Many universities kept all of the DEI people but renamed the departments/roles and there has been 0 follow up on actually stomping that out.
  • Ktrimbach: I go back and forth between B- and C+. He’s still the best President of my life (starting with Nixon), but Oh so much less than he could be!

IV.    Closing Argument: The Constitution, Article 1, The Power of Impeachment

  • Aside from the power of the purse, the other principal power afforded the legislative branch is the power to remove executive officers, including the President and Judges, in the power of Impeachment.
  • As always, we start, first and foremost, with the text. Section 3 of Article 1 provides the House
    shall have the sole Power of impeachment” while ascribing to the Senate “the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” The Constitution requires “no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.” The constitution constricts the impact of impeachment to “not extend further than to removal from Office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.” Further, “the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment according to Law” by authorities other than the legislative branch.
  • Of note, Article 1 otherwise remains mute on the issue of impeachment. The other Articles answer who can be impeached and the legal predicates for cause to issue such impeachments. Section 4 of Article 2 provides impeachment for the President, Vice President “and all civil Officers of the United States.” The cause permitted for their impeachment is limited to “treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” The power to impeach judges is only indirectly referenced, as section 1 of Article 3 provides judges can only hold their offices “during good behaviour.” The only other reference to cause for removal is the obligation for all judicial officers to be “bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution” in Article 6. The rules of impeachment permit “each house may determine the rules of its proceedings” in section 5 of Article 1. The “civil officers” subject to impeachment parallel the “principal officers” the Senate must be “advised” and “consented” to the appointment of under Article 2.
  • While executive officers can only be impeached for “treason, bribery or high crimes and misdemeanors”, judges can be impeached simply for not holding office during “good behaviour.” Some scholars argue the ‘good behaviour” phrase was just a limitation on at-will firing, and not an independent grounds for impeachment and removal, but early American practice and ancient English practice belies that construction. The contrast evidences that good behavior is a broader provision than treason, bribery or high crimes and misdemeanors. A judge can be impeached for non-criminal conduct. The phrase derives from the Latin – as long as they shall behave themselves well. The legacy of the phrase derives from old English practice dating to the 12th century, intended to protect against arbitrary removal or removal without any limits on discretion, comparable to the principle difference between “at will” employment and “for cause” limits on firing.
  • What constitutes such cause for judicial removal? Consider early American practice: merely being drink on the bench was sufficient for impeachment. The principal and paramount precedent of impeachment of judicial officers is the impeachment of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase in 1804. What grounds did the House recite: “arbitrary, oppressive and unjust” handling of a trial, including partisan prejudice especially, as reflected in the application of the law, exclusions of evidence, and inaccurate recitations of the law to grand juries. Two examples include the failure to remove biased jurors, excluding defense witnesses, and generally “tending to prostitute the high judicial character with which he was invested, to the low purpose of an electioneering partizan.”
  • Sound like any Judges you know? 
Read full Article
post photo preview
The Barnes Brief: Week of December 12, 2025

I. INTRODUCTION

A.  Art of the Week

As the birds make their winter trip in synchronized form, they almost magically make the form of their species in live time in the air, captured in the moment by a photographer’s film, reminding us of the Creator’s noble design and winking at us in real time. 

B.  Recommendation of the Week

An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States by Charles Beard unmasked that many of the men at the Convention Hall in Philadelphia were not as enlightened and allied to the Founding generation as later history would tell the tale. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/187702.An_Economic_Interpretation_of_the_Constitution_of_the_United_States

C.  Wisdom of the Week

Affording politicians “a universal, unbounded permission” to take another’s liberty or property in the name of the public fisc will “when the expenses of the nation, by their ambition are grown enormous” inescapably “oppress and subject” the citizenry.” William Symmes. 

D.  Appearances

  • Dr. Bowden
    placeholder

E.  Best of the Board

  1. Birthright citizenship. https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/7341595/is-the-nationality-act-of-1940-the-proper-starting-point-for-analyzing-the-scope-of-subject-to-th
  2. Viva done w/ Candace. https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/7516832/update-about-a-month-ago-i-asked-for-prayers-for-my-mom-since-we-were-going-to-get-an-update-on
  3. Curated content from @CCandent https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/7516486/title
  4. Massie: let’s leave NATO. https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/7516236/massie-introduces-bill-to-get-us-out-of-nato-by-paul-dragu-the-new-american-representative-thom
  5. Nice ruling in PA. https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/7516323/robertbarnes-well-at-least-there-are-still-a-few-judges-in-pa-that-follow-the-constitution-good-r

*Bonus: Personal hope. https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/7516832/update-about-a-month-ago-i-asked-for-prayers-for-my-mom-since-we-were-going-to-get-an-update-on

F.  Best Across the Internet

  • Disconnect from purpose.
    placeholder

II. THE EVIDENCE

A.   NEWS OF THE WEEK: The Library

  1. EU crosses Rubicon. https://x.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1999358779763183953?s=20
  2. Vaccines & chronic disease. https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/125
  3. Disney’s AI gamble. https://x.com/HedgieMarkets/status/1999170314580746623?s=20
  4. Lindell goes for Governor. https://x.com/realMikeLindell/status/1999191330829009327?s=20
  5. Honduran election dispute. https://x.com/SalvaPresidente/status/1998955182277722383?s=20

*Bonus: Foster kids helped. https://x.com/MAHA_Action/status/1999241337745670236?s=20

B.    DEEP DIVE: RUSSIA-US Reasons for Alliance

  1. Tucker: Russia-US natural allies. https://x.com/AFpost/status/1998968887724183834?s=20
  2. Russia: world’s richest resources. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-top-10-countries-by-value-of-all-their-natural-resources/
  3. Russia: world’s largest country. https://x.com/World_Insights1/status/1999029803458965765?s=20
  4. Russia: world’s largest nuclear arsenal. https://www.icanw.org/nuclear_arsenals
  5. Russia’s GDP replaced Europe. https://x.com/IslanderWORLD/status/1978510171589513504?s=20

*Bonus: Russia’s traditional culture. https://x.com/MyLordBebo/status/1998812811171082739?s=20

C.   HOMEWORK: Cases in Controversy

  1. SCOTUS: Trump authority over bureaucracy. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-332_7lhn.pdf
  2. SCOTUS: campaign spending limits. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/24-621_q86b.pdf
  3. SCOTUS: sentencing the disabled. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/24-872_b07d.pdf
  4. SCOTUS: Covid immunity limits. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-180_8m59.pdf
  5. SCOTUS: Bondi defends Whitmer Fednapping convictions. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-5249/387036/20251210183835177_Croft_Opp_12.10.pdf
  6. Courts extend special protection to Maryland Man. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/paula-xinis-grants-abrego-garcia-tro-block-rearrest.pdf
  7. Share Ryan v. Crenshaw. https://x.com/ShawnRyan762/status/1999554231842349564?s=20
  8. Pipe Bomber Patsy. https://x.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1999541341466866022?s=20
  9. Big Tech contempt. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/epic-games-vs-apple-ninth-circuit-opinion.pdf
  10. Pentagon wins trans ban. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/dc-circuit-trans-soldier-ban-opinion.pdf
  11. Russia Euroclear Arbitration possibilities. https://share.google/FdKIPKgvLfEeJXsUz & https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/international-investment-agreements/treaties/bit/3645/belgium-luxembourg---russian-federation-bit-1989-
  12. Doctor liability for patient’s drugs. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/oregon-supreme-court-cyclist-doctor-liability.pdf

*Bonus: Ferrari Tennessee tax case up in flames. https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a69556804/whistlindiesel-tennessee-allegations-ferrari-tax-evasion/

**Bonus: Class Action AI in Healthcare. https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/news-insights/new-class-action-targets-healthcare-ai-recordings.html

***Bonus: What does AI own? https://www.commonplace.org/p/matthew-b-crawford-ownership-of-the

III.  CLOSING ARGUMENT: Masterclass -- The Constitution Article I, The Power of the Purse

  • The first power of the purse the Constitution affords the legislative branch of government in Article I is the power to pay themselves, as section 6 of Article 1 provides: “The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States.” 
  • The second power of the purse is Article I's most controversial and most consequential: the power to tax and the power to borrow, or, colloquially, the power to “raise Revenue” in section 7. The mechanism for “raising revenue” shall be by legislation that “shall originate in the House” and then be concurred with by the Senate. The power finds explicit enumeration in Section 8: lay taxes; collect taxes; lay duties; collect duties; lay imposts; collect imposts; law excises; collect excises; pay debts; borrow money on credit of the US; coin Money; regulate the value of Money; regulate the value of foreign Coin; fix weights and measures; appropriate money to support Armies (capped at 2 years); provide and maintain a Navy; provide for arming the Militia; and the broad “necessary and proper” catchall in Section 8. The power of the purse finds further enumerated restrictions within Section 1 itself, though subsequent Constitutional provisions could further constrain and restrain the power of the Purse: section 8’s requirement that all “duties, imposts and excises” must be “uniform”; section 9’s prohibiting a tax on importation of people capped at $10 per person; prohibiting any tax that constitutes a bill of attainder or ex post facto law; no direct tax unless apportioned amongst the states; no tax on exports; no port-preferential tax; and no money spent that is not “in consequence of appropriations made by law”. 
  • The Sixteenth Amendment clarified one key aspect of the power of the Purse: enumerating Congress “power to tax” including the power to “law and collect taxes on incomes” regardless of “whatever source derived” without requiring apportionment. This removal-of-the-source rule was later interpreted to be a Congressional reversal by Constitutional Amendment of the Pollock decision of 1896, and enshrining the dissenting opinion as the authoritative interpretation of the power of the Purse in the court’s Brushaber decision by the dissenting Pollock Judge turned Brushaber Chief Judge White. White would treat any tax on income as an indirect tax, and decided that’s all that the 16th Amendment authorized, codifying his 1896 dissent into the Constitution in 1913.  White used the 1794 Carriage Tax Act to claim a direct tax was a tax on an object whereas an indirect tax was a tax on use, effectively affording a broad power to tax “incomes” as long as the subject of the tax was the gain severed from the source rather than a tax on existing or ownership.  The absent clarity from the court enabled Congress to evade ever defining income itself subject to tax since 1916. 
  • This power of the purse exceeded that intended by many in the founding generation, as the Articles of Confederation did not authorize such centralized, federalized power to begin with, and the anti-federalists proved prescient in their warning against the bond-holding elite that packed the text-writing segments of the Constitutional Convention, as well detailed in Charles Beard’s Economic History of the Constitution. https://cdn.mises.org/11_1_6_0.pdf#:~:text=The%20Antifederalists'%20fundamental%20and%20most%20enduring%20objection,in%20nearly%20all%20of%20the%20Antifederalist%20writings.
  • As one of that generation, known only as Federal Farmer, forewarned: “The only semblance of a check is the negative power of not re-electing them. This, sir, is but a feeble barrier, when their personal interest, their ambition and avarice, come to be put in contrast with the happiness of the people. All checks founded on anything but self-love, will not avail.” 
Read full Article
post photo preview
The Barnes Brief

I.  Schedule

      A.  Interview on World Apart RT https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/7495641/interview-w-rt

      B.  Interview w/ Michael Malice https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/7495633/michael-malice-interview

      C.   Interview on Duran https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/7477013/live-w-duran 

II. The Evidence

 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals