Recently I wrote to LRC readers an introduction to the populist lawyer Robert Barnes.
This weekend I joined ($5/month) his Locals channel and binged on Barnes’ “Hush Hush” series (my wife was on a business trip). Barnes loves the style of James Ellroy, and his LA Confidential, hence Hush Hush, the name of the magazine in this novel that is based on the scandal sheet Confidential magazine.
These episodes are a tour de force of what seems to be extemporaneous exposition on topics that usually lead to the machinations of the deep state. Barnes is a real showman. First he briefly describes the institutional narrative and then gives his alternative narrative on historical and current topics. It is important to understand that Barnes is giving a closing argument as he would try to convince a jury for an alternative narrative; thus it is not documented and he admits that he does not necessarily believe in it himself.
I have never served on an actual jury, but did once participate in a law school exercise at Duke University Law School. It was a case concerning a traffic accident. The student lawyers made impassioned pleas to play on the emotions of the jury. This annoyed me and was the opposite of convincing as I calculated times and distances in my head. During the debrief when I explained my view of the students’ performances the professor simply stated that is why you never pick an engineer for the jury. Following this personal preference, despite the fact that Barnes is very entertaining and perhaps convincing to most, I prefer the style of James Corbett on his CorbettReport.com. Corbett is meticulous in providing detailed sources in building the case he is making.
Episode 1 describes the concept of the series. “Very soon after January 6, I posted this video for subscribers. Since then, much of what was forecast here has come true, including a range of evidence raising doubts about the Institutional Narrative. Hence, and as an example for all board members to see what content awaits them as subscribers, I am making this available to everyone on the board.”
A sampling of other topics are Ep. 3 “Who Killed JFK?”, Ep. 8 “Who Was Really Behind World War I?”, Ep. 10 (on Pearl Harbor) “The Day of Infamy: The Birth of the Modern Deep State”, Ep. 11 “9/11”, and the last episode 22 “Operation Gladio”.
The most discordant note to me, and I believe for LRC fans of Thomas Dilorenzo, concerned his Ep. 6 “The first American assassination Deep State plot?” In this episode he describes the Lincoln assassination. He pins the plot on Secretary of War Edward Stanton. Perhaps, but he also ascribes all of the dictatorial policies of the Lincoln administration to the corporate lawyer Stanton, not to the corporate lawyer president. Calling this the first attempt at the deep state in US history, he does not recognize the coup d’etat of the constitutional convention itself, and the Hamiltonian policies leading to the early version of central banking. Thus, if I would critique Barnes, it is as he goes farther back into history he has missteps. What is best is his current inside information applied with solid understanding of deep state modus operandi. Thus, I also recommend the closely related series specifically on “The Deep State”. He has initiated two other series on law, “Barnes Law School” and “Famous Cases”.I should also add that Barnes’ partner Viva Frie (David Freiheit) also posts content including their joint podcasts.
Barnes is a populist, not a libertarian. But he is the most active legal mind today trying to defend freedom with acumen and an excellent theoretical base. Thus I can further recommend his output to LRC readers.