"A threat of tyranny to the Constitutionally assured rights of a natural born citizen of the United States"

Flir v. Gambaro is worth a read for the text:

Mr. Gambaro responded four days later:

The Defendant Pro Se does not consider the statement of the Court to be a ‘final warning’ but more accurately a threat of tyranny to the Constitutionally assured rights of a natural born citizen of the United States. The Defendant Pro Se is outraged that these measures were even considered to the point of including them in an order. DO NOT THREATEN ME AGAIN IN WRITING. I do not take kindly to threats in any form.
Gambaro Ltr. to J. Brown (Mar. 29, 2011). Mr. Gambaro characterized the Order as “an act of Judicial Terrorism” and stated that he would never agree to the Aiken Con- struction because it was “FRAUD pure and simple.” Id.

YouTube is mentioned:

Two days later, he filed a progress report with a YouTube video that was purportedly evidence as to why the Aiken Construction was invalid. The district court issued two orders on August 1, 2011, warning Mr. Gambaro of the possible consequences of his violations and directing him to show cause why the district court should not impose a bond as security against future violations. Ten days later, Mr. Gambaro filed an unauthorized motion to bar the Aiken Rulings from the case, and the district court issued a supplemental order to show cause why the district court should not find Mr. Gambaro to be in violation of its prior orders.

The outcome:

We hold that the district court possessed the power to impose that sanction and did not abuse its discretion in doing so. See Televideo Sys., Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 916 (9th Cir. 1987) (recogniz- ing that district courts may enter default judgment to sanction abusive litigation practices and observing that such power is “necessary to enable the judiciary to function”).