Announcement: New Daily Barnes Brief: In this new daily edition, we will include Art of the Day; a Cultural Recommendation in books, films, or television; a Wisdom of the Day, insightful quote; any recent or scheduled Appearances, a Headlines top-5 of news items; a Library top-5 of curated articles of interest; a Cases of the Day, covering recent legal news; and, occasionally, but not always, a Closing Argument of a substack-style article on topical subjects of interest, though that will usually be reserved for the Weekly Barnes Brief published on Fridays. The Daily Barnes Brief will be published around lunchtime pacific coast time.  

Art of the Day: The wanderlust of travel and a time gone by. A time when dress style itself expressed elegance, with its top hats, suit vests, and tweed jackets for him, accompanied by an elegant fur, luscious gloves, and delicate dress for her, amidst the train travel amongst the mountainscapes that long shaped our ancestral world, finished by a warm croissant, a pain au chocolat, and an inviting, warm pot of freshly made coffee or tea in a tin container. My favorite place to travel would still be into time itself, but this would be the first stop. 

Cultural Recommendation: Great Power Politics, the defining book by Mearsheimer, the most prominent modern advocate of geopolitical realism. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/130333153-the-tragedy-of-great-power-politics-by-john-j-mearshimer

Wisdom of the Day: “The sad fact is that international politics has always been a ruthless and dangerous business, and it is likely to remain that way.” John Mearsheimer. 

Appearances

• Alex Jones
  
• Dr. Drew
  
• Rekieta
  

Five of the Top Headlines

1. Hillary Guilty https://x.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/1950980822552445156
2. Soros Russiagate Ties https://x.com/seanmdav/status/1950939509161386204
3. Massie Says No More Pharma Immunity https://x.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1950947329399202051
4. GDP 3% in 2nd Quarter https://www.bea.gov/news/2025/gross-domestic-product-2nd-quarter-2025-advance-estimate
5. Stock Market Ahistorical Rise https://x.com/Barchart/status/1950797584668279133

Five Curated Articles of Interest from Barnes Daily Library

1. BigAg Problems https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/7149391/where-is-brooke-rollins-no-relief-for-the-amish-and-were-about-to-lose-a-lot-of-choice-in-what-me
2. Medicaid impact from BBB. https://parentdata.org/what-the-big-beautiful-bill-means-for-medicaid/
3. China Rare Earth Leverage https://www.polytechnique-insights.com/en/columns/geopolitics/china-has-a-monopoly-on-rare-earths/
4. StableCoins Dollar Strategy https://internationalman.com/articles/can-stablecoins-save-the-us-dollar-or-just-delay-its-collapse/
5. War on World for Ukraine Backfires https://korybko.substack.com/p/western-pressure-on-india-over-russia

Five Cases of Interest: Legal News

1. Crypto Conviction Reversal 
2. Crypto Report
3. DOJ DEI Memo
4. Google Loses
5. Bad Covid Ruling

Forthcoming Closing Argument in the Weekly Barnes Brief: Grading Trump's First Six Months.  

Schedule

This Week:

• Live w/ Baris
• Live w/ George Gammon
• Live w/ RT
• Live w/ Vigilant Fox

Art of the Day: The Joshua Tree. En route to the desert to the home of the namesake of the best U2 album ever, surviving and even thriving in the water quenched land of the Mojave. The true origin of its appellation derives from Mormons escaping harassment to the southwest, and saw in its inviting, directing branches a promise to the promised land of survival and rebirth as in the prophet Joshua. Heading there now a for a summer escape of remembrance and rebirth.

Wisdom of the Day: “Most people, if they know they have done wrong, foolishly suppose they can conceal their error by defending it, and finding a justification for it; but in my belief there is only one medicine for an evil deed, and that is for the guilty man to admit his guilt and show that he is sorry for it. Such an admission will make the consequences easier for the victim to bear, and the guilty man himself, by plainly showing his distress at former transgressions, will find good grounds of hope for avoiding similar transgressions in the future.” Arrian, The Campaigns of Alexander.

Book Recommendation: Blood Libel, a research deep dive into how European royal elites used Jews as scapegoats routinely to escape liability for their own bad deeds, and likely triggering multiple mini-Holocausts over the centuries before the Nazis, as entire Jewish genetic lines disappeared from the genetic record suddenly and without explanation. This text provides context for the libels of people like Fuentes and Candace. 

Introduction: 5 Top Headlines of the Week

1.    Covid Vax Removed

2.    Russiagate Deepens

3.    Japan Populism

4.    Judicial Insurrection

5.    France Palestine

*Bonus: A Rescue

The Evidence: 5 Top Articles Curated from The Barnes Library

1.    Smart Meter Problems

2.    Left Divide

3.    Butler Remembered

4.    AI Jobs

5.    Stablecoin Concerns Debate

*Bonus:  Hulk Hogan Hero

The Citations: 5 Top Cases TBD on Sunday

1.    SCOTUS win for Trump

2.    2ndA Win

3.    Lindell Wins

4.    Macrons Sue Candace

5.    Birth Control Suit & Prep Act Immunity

*Bonus: other topics: DOJ Reappointment in New Jersey & Blue Slip Senators, Epstein Grand Jury & Maxwell Proffer, Russiagate Update, MAHA Wins, Kohberger, Fed

Closing Argument: Why Candace Is Cooked, A Mini-Masterclass in Libel Law

·      The First Amendment heavily shapes libel law in America immunizing opinions that do not imply facts, statements that do not reference an identifiable individual, and claims made with a good faith basis and due regard for their truth remain. Other privileges or immunities may exist depending upon the jurisdiction, including the fair reporting privilege concerning governmental bodies, anti-SLAPP procedural protections, and the like.

·      A good start to assess how courts will likely construe the law on any given topic is the pattern jury instructions courts commonly issue as guidance for trial judges to explain the law to juries. To prove libel of a public figure requires: a statement made to a third person (“publication”); the statement could be reasonably understood to be about that third person (“colloquium”); the statement could be reasonably understood to state or imply a fact about that third person harmful to their reputation (“defamatory”); the statement was factually false (‘falsity”); and the defendant either knew the statement was false, had doubts about its truth, or disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk the statement was false (“actual malice”).

·      In the Candace Owens case, the Macrons allege the following lies and libels by Owens: that Mr. Macron is an MK-Ultra project whose parents are not his real parents, where he was kidnapped, abused, engaged in incestuous relations with his wife as a close blood relative as part of the Rothschild family, murdered journalists who asked questions about this topic, bribed and extorted other journalists who asked these questions, admitted he engaged in illicit sexual assault by his now wife when he was a 15 year old student and she a 39 year old teacher, that he engaged in the crimes of forgery, fraud, bribery, extortion, blackmail, attempted murder, murder, incest, and rape, while worshiping Satan and Baphomet in a cult, and was supporting the Ukraine War for as long as anyone asked these questions about these topics; that Mrs. Macron is a biological male, who fathered 3 kids with another woman hidden from view, that her brother doesn’t exist (but that she is secretly him), that she never married, never gave birth to any children, engaged in the crimes of forgery, fraud, bribery, extortion, blackmail, attempted murder, murder, incest, and rape, while worshiping Satan and Baphomet in a cult, and admitted she had no photos before the age of 30 and admitted she engaged in statutory rape of Mr. Macron; and that in effort to disguise sources, fabricate evidence, and ignore exculpatory evidences, lied about what documents or photos existed in books, articles, documentaries, and even the retraction letters sent by the Macrons repeatedly to her denying the allegations and providing substantial evidence proving the falsity of her statements.

·      The evidence presented to Owens rebutting her claims included birth records, marriage records, court transcripts of sworn testimony, extensive photographic records, and a wide range of records vetted and verified by third party sources. Candace Owens apparent sources include a self-proclaimed psychic, a self-proclaimed amateur detective, and a right-wing newsletter writer whose first libels predated the Macrons ability to now sue, including two defendants already found criminally liable for libel on these precise claims.  

·      Delaware includes a “no mischievous nor malicious” purpose defense, and the complaint alleges she profited substantial sums for these claims while bragging about the reputational harm it would cause the Macrons, ignoring retraction requests and lying to her audience about the content of the redaction requests. Additionally, the Complaint identifies a recurrent pattern, including Owens past libels, fitting the Macrons into devil-worshipping, Baphomet-idolizing Satanists, drinking Christian blood, who use child sex trafficking to perpetuate their power through pedophile rape, as she alleges those identified as Jews are really these devil worshipper Kazarians, who wrongly disparage Nazi doctor Mengele, and include Josef Stalin, and now the Macrons.

·      Reviewing the complaint, it is useful to remember the Macrons only need to win on 1 single statement being libelous, not every statement. Reviewing some of the sources cited in the detailed complaint, it is nigh on impossible seeing Candace win at trial. Then compound that with the venue – a 2-to-1 Democratic jury pool to the left of Austin, Texas and a judicial pool that is one of the most partisan in the nation, and she is completely cooked.   

Table of Contents

I. Schedule

II. Art of the Day

III. Wisdom of the Day

IV. Book Recommendation

V. News of the Week

VI. Curated Articles from Weekly Library

VII. Cases of the Week for Sunday Show

VIII. Closing Argument

I. Schedule

a. Past

Live w/ Duran 

b. Future

LIVE AMA Friday at 6: Betting w/ Barnes

Saturday at 9 eastern: Movie Night

Sunday at 6 pm eastern: Law for the People w/ Viva

Monday at 2pm eastern: What Are the Odds w/ Baris

II. Art of the Day

Trains -- my favorite means of travel. Their melodic rythym, their comfort for work, rest, dining, conversation, eavesdropping, people watching, and touring the countryside, with echoes of history enveloping you. The glamorous stations of yesteryear reflecting the scene for the great old cinema of our past, recently reminded of my train wonderment in a brief trip from Penn Station NYC to 30th street station, where the film Witness commenced about the Amish under attack, as I traveled to defend the Amish from another attack. They beckon my wanderlust for travel, my curiositiy for people and places unmet and unseen before, and promise purpose along the way with its many ways to truly live on a train. The train sets of youth invite innocence as we explore the outer world in our inner mind. Honestly, I could live on a train, it so well reflects the nature of my spirit.  

III. Wisdom of the Day

"If, in the opinion of the People, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for tho’ this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free Governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit which the use can at any time yield." George Washington, Farewell Address. 

IV. Book Recommendation

Elephant in the Brain, a recurrent recommendation here for its revelatory role in reminding us of the power of motivation in mastering reason, and the means to improve our reasoning, to shift our motivation. 

V. News of the Week

a. Consumer Sentiment Strengthens

b. Epstein Files Debate Rages

c. Europe Balks at Paying for Ukraine War as Nutty US General Proposes War with Russia

d. Israel Upsets Huckabee & Pope while attacks Syria & American Israel advocates claim Epstein Files not important

e. Baris Polls Flash Warning

*Bonus: Unfunny Colbert canned

VI. Curated Articles from Weekly Library

1. Democratic Divide Deepens as Left Populism Resurfaces
2. Crypto Wins
3. Bye Bye Pravda
4. The Bibi Files & Ilan Hulkower Response
5. Massie Proposes Prep Vax Immunity Repeal

*Bonus: RFK Says NO to WHO

VII. Cases of the Week for Sunday Show

1. SCOTUS: Trump
2. SCOTUS: Trump 2
3. SCOTUS: Trump Tariffs
4. Crypto Laws
5. Grand Jury Secrecy
6. RFK Sued
7. Airbnb Price Hikes during Emergencies
8. Embarassing Bondi Cases: Brook Jackson, Roger Ver & More
9. NDA & Anti-Slapp
10. ICE Arrests

VIII. Closing Argument: Brook Jackson vs. Pfizer

Our reply brief filed in the Fifth Circuit summarized: 

• Brook Jackson’s lawsuit exposed Pfizer’s unprecedented fraud on the United States and the American people. Sparked by her whistleblowing and fueled by collective work from an army of both renowned and citizen scientists, Relator has amassed a body of evidence showing Pfizer committed multi-layered fraud in its clinical trials to induce the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to issue an emergency use authorization (EUA) for its Covid-19 vaccines. With or without the government’s knowledge or assistance, Pfizer’s fraud has cost the taxpayers multiple billions of dollars for a product which, absent the fraud, could not have been authorized for use during the Covid-19 emergency.
• In her second amended complaint, Jackson alleged Pfizer fraudulently designed, conducted and reported its clinical trials to avoid showing negative efficacy in preventing Covid-19 disease. Pfizer knew that injection of its modified genetic product would not stop transmission or infection, and would lead to immune dysfunction and more disease. To obtain the EUA, Pfizer designed its trial protocol to avoid measurement of immunological responses of the human subjects. Then, when conducting the study, Pfizer misclassified and excluded treatment group subjects who became symptomatic soon after their injections. Only through fraud was Pfizer able to assert a claim of 95% efficacy. An adequate well-controlled clinical trial of the biologic would have exposed those facts and precluded issuance of the EUAs.
• Repeated studies now show “negative efficacy” – the more shots a person receives, the more likely that person will get sick or hospitalized for Covid-19. Had Pfizer not engaged in the clinical trial fraud exposed in this lawsuit, it would have obtained neither EUA nor federal funds on its contracts with the Government. Similarly, Jackson alleges that Pfizer fraudulently designed, conducted and reported its clinical trials to hide significant harm caused by its vaccine. Pfizer knew the modified genetic biologic would cause some recipients to make highly-pathogenic Spike protein throughout their major organs and that, over time, devastating Spike protein diseases would take root.
• To suppress exposure of the serious adverse events and deaths its vaccines would cause, Pfizer lied about the distribution and persistence of the genetic material, it falsely omitted reports of serious harm to treatment subjects, it cut the observation period short prematurely before many serious adverse events could occur, and it unblinded and destroyed the control group to obfuscate data on long-term vaccine injuries. Today, a confluence of scientific studies, medical reports, public health data (including from the CDC), federal disability statistics, and insurance actuarial calculations document alarming elevations in excess all-cause morbidity and mortality attributable to the vaccines. These include aggressive and recurring cancers, miscarriages and fetal deaths, blood clots and cardiac arrests, neurological disorders including prion disease, auto-immune disorders, and other life-threatening or disabling conditions. Again, had Pfizer not engaged in clinical trial fraud, the truth about these harms would have been exposed as part of the scientific record, precluding authorization under the EUA statute.
• Despite the critical importance of Jackson’s qui tam claims – or perhaps because of it – the Government filed a motion for a “later date” intervention solely to “voluntarily” dismiss her case. In its threadbare 11-page motion, the Government departed from its own reasoned guidance regarding when circumstances might warrant the rare motion to intervene to dismiss under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3730(c)(2)(a) and (c)(3). The entirety of the “record” supporting its request for permissive intervention was reduced to one sentence: the Government’s desire to have Jackson’s case dismissed alone was good cause for the later date intervention. The principal questions raised by this appeal ask whether, on the record of the Government’s motion, the district court erred as a matter of law or abused its discretion when it granted leave to intervene to dismiss Jackson with prejudice. Working with its limited record below, the Government’s answering brief fails to take issue with statutory and constitutional infirmities in its good cause arguments.
• First, the Government’s motion was based on a theory rejected by the Supreme Court in United States ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., Inc., 599 U.S. 419 (2023) – i.e., that the Government has an unfettered right to dismiss any qui tam case under the False Claims Act whenever it wishes to do so. Polansky held that once the Government declines intervention during the seal period, it is the relator, not the Government, who controls the action. Before the Government can seek dismissal under § 3730(c)(2)(a), it must first become a party by showing good cause for a late intervention. The Government’s stated position that its desire to dismiss alone shows good cause contravenes Polansky.
• Second, the Government’s argument for good cause reconstructed on appeal is unsupported on this record. Its contentions – that Jackson’s claims are “not viable,” that the case imposes undue discovery or litigation burdens on the executive branch, and that continued prosecution of the fraud committed by Pfizer would be inconsistent with the nation’s health policies – are unsupported. Moreover, they are foreclosed by undisputed facts on the record, and by Relator's offer of proof to test the adequacy of the Government’s good cause showing. Jackson’s qui tam claims against Pfizer are overwhelmingly supported, there has been no demonstration of undue burden on the government, and this action is entirely consistent with national public health policies.
• Third, the district court erred as a matter of law when it held that the Government need not satisfy the requirements of Rule 24, including balancing the extreme prejudice to Relator by permitting the intervention. Although the Government forfeited the right to raise the issue on appeal by failing to raise it below, the Government now asks the Court to hold that the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure does not apply to False Claims Act cases – a contention rejected by Polansky. When the proper legal standard is applied, the record demonstrates that the prejudice to Jackson – and the potential harm to the future operation of the qui tam statute – should have weighed heavily against granting the motion.
• Fourth, the Government’s motion to intervene to terminate this action does not survive strict scrutiny of viewpoint discrimination under the First Amendment. Based on her own interests as a whistleblower, and acting on the partial assignment of rights by an act of Congress, Jackson had a constitutionally protected right to remedy grievances against Pfizer for defrauding the United States, free of unjustified interference by the Government. The Government’s motion was squarely predicated on the content of Jackson’s allegations, as it conceded when it labelled Jackson’s allegations “misinformation.” The Government singled out Relator for dismissal because it did not want her to expose Pfizer’s clinical trial fraud, information it tried to suppress in the general marketplace of ideas, writ large. The Government forfeited its opposition to this issue by neglecting it below, and the Court should reject the views it expresses now on limited scope and extent of protection afforded by the First Amendment.
• Fifth, the Government’s motion disordered the separation of powers between government branches. Avoiding offense to the separation of powers doctrine must weigh heavily against the finding of good cause here. Executives are empowered to intervene in qui tam actions for legitimate purposes of prosecuting False Claims Act cases – including the purpose of dismissing actions that are truly meritless, parasitic, interfering or contrary to legitimate government interests. Such executive power is not vested to shield corporate partners from exposure for fraud. Nor is it vested to insulate government officials implicated in, or acquiescent of, fraud. Exercise of executive power to move to intervene is particularly pernicious in this case, given the material falsities by Pfizer and the objective criteria used by Congress in the EUA statute.
• Sixth, the motion to intervene to dismiss violates the Equal Protection Clause because it fails the rational basis test, and exceeds the constitutional limits attending any exercise of executive authority. Termination of this important case – already shown to the public to be meritorious and likely to recover billions of dollars for Pfizer’s fraud – is arbitrary and capricious in the constitutional sense. It shocks the conscience, represents an abuse of executive power, and perpetrates a fraud upon the Court and the American people.
• Finally, it was error as a matter of law to voluntarily dismiss Jackson’s case with prejudice. Relator had not previously filed an action against defendants based on the facts or theories presented here, and under the terms of Rule 41, any voluntary dismissal should be without prejudice. On appeal, the Government’s insistence that dismissal be with prejudice as to Relator but not the United States merely shows its discriminatory animus against Jackson for exposing Pfizer’s fraud. Thus, while the Government has the authority to seek to make a “later date” intervention to dismiss qui tam actions based on good cause and legitimate government purposes, the district court’s granting of the motion in this case on the present record was inconsistent with the False Claims Act, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Constitution. The lower court’s order should be reversed and remanded.