Watching the Watchers with Robert Gruler Esq.

Biden Addresses Congress, Rudy Giuliani Federal Raid, Feds Plot Chauvin Arrest

April 30, 2021
Watching the Watchers with Robert Gruler Esq.
Biden Addresses Congress, Rudy Giuliani Federal Raid, Feds Plot Chauvin Arrest
Chapters
Watching the Watchers with Robert Gruler Esq.
Biden Addresses Congress, Rudy Giuliani Federal Raid, Feds Plot Chauvin Arrest
Apr 30, 2021

President Biden addresses Congress after his first 100 days in office. Federal prosecutors planned to arrest Derek Chauvin if he was acquitted in his trial. Rudy Giuliani’s office is raided pursuant to a federal warrant. And more! Join criminal defense lawyer Robert F. Gruler in a discussion on the latest legal, criminal and political news, including:​

• President Biden speaks to a half-empty joint session of Congress about his vision for America at his first 100 days.​

• Biden calls the January 6th Capitol Hill Riots the “worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War.”​

• Criminal justice reform gets just 3 minutes of air time, with no specifics as to future changes in the Biden Administration.​

• Biden says intelligence agencies have identified “white supremacy” as the biggest threat to America.​

• Feds were reportedly planning to arrest Derek Chauvin in the event he was acquitted after trial!​

• The Daily Mail reports that federal prosecutors had a secret backup plan if Derek Chauvin was not convicted of George Floyd’s murder.​

• The Star Tribune reports that the federal prosecutors will be presenting evidence of civil rights violations against Derek Chauvin and the other officers involved.​

• Federal agents raided the apartment of Rudy Giuliani in connection to dealings in the Ukraine.​

• According to the New York Times, federal prosecutors obtained a search warrant to investigate misconduct connected to Rudy’s time working for President Trump.​

• Federal agents seized Giuliani’s computer, cell phone and other devices pursuant to a court order.​

• Your questions from Locals.com after each segment!​

LIVECHAT QUESTIONS: ​

• https://watchingthewatchers.locals.com/​

NEW! EXISTENCE SYSTEMS ONLINE COURSE!​

• www.robertgruler.com/existence-systems​

Connect with us:​

• Locals! https://watchingthewatchers.locals.com​

• Podcast (audio): https://watchingthewatchers.buzzsprout.com/​

• Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/robertgruleresq​

• Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/RobertGrulerEsq​

• Robert Gruler Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/RobertGrulerEsq/​

• Miss Faith Instagram https://www.instagram.com/faithie_joy/​

• Clubhouse: @RobertGrulerEsq @faith_joy​

• Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/robertgruleresq​

• Homepage with transcripts (under construction): https://www.watchingthewatchers.tv​

Don't forget to join us on Locals! https://watchingthewatchers.locals.com​

Why Locals? We head over to Locals to continue the conversation before, during and after the show. You can also grab the slides (and other stuff) from the show as well as a free PDF copy of Robert’s book which is also available to buy on Amazon here: https://rcl.ink/hHB​

Other tips? Send to [email protected] or tag @RobertGrulerEsq on twitter.​

#WatchingtheWatchers #BidenSpeech #DerekChauvin #RudyGiuliani #RudyRaid #ChauvinTrial #GeorgeFloyd #100days #BidenAddress #SleepyJoe

Show Notes Transcript

President Biden addresses Congress after his first 100 days in office. Federal prosecutors planned to arrest Derek Chauvin if he was acquitted in his trial. Rudy Giuliani’s office is raided pursuant to a federal warrant. And more! Join criminal defense lawyer Robert F. Gruler in a discussion on the latest legal, criminal and political news, including:​

• President Biden speaks to a half-empty joint session of Congress about his vision for America at his first 100 days.​

• Biden calls the January 6th Capitol Hill Riots the “worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War.”​

• Criminal justice reform gets just 3 minutes of air time, with no specifics as to future changes in the Biden Administration.​

• Biden says intelligence agencies have identified “white supremacy” as the biggest threat to America.​

• Feds were reportedly planning to arrest Derek Chauvin in the event he was acquitted after trial!​

• The Daily Mail reports that federal prosecutors had a secret backup plan if Derek Chauvin was not convicted of George Floyd’s murder.​

• The Star Tribune reports that the federal prosecutors will be presenting evidence of civil rights violations against Derek Chauvin and the other officers involved.​

• Federal agents raided the apartment of Rudy Giuliani in connection to dealings in the Ukraine.​

• According to the New York Times, federal prosecutors obtained a search warrant to investigate misconduct connected to Rudy’s time working for President Trump.​

• Federal agents seized Giuliani’s computer, cell phone and other devices pursuant to a court order.​

• Your questions from Locals.com after each segment!​

LIVECHAT QUESTIONS: ​

• https://watchingthewatchers.locals.com/​

NEW! EXISTENCE SYSTEMS ONLINE COURSE!​

• www.robertgruler.com/existence-systems​

Connect with us:​

• Locals! https://watchingthewatchers.locals.com​

• Podcast (audio): https://watchingthewatchers.buzzsprout.com/​

• Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/robertgruleresq​

• Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/RobertGrulerEsq​

• Robert Gruler Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/RobertGrulerEsq/​

• Miss Faith Instagram https://www.instagram.com/faithie_joy/​

• Clubhouse: @RobertGrulerEsq @faith_joy​

• Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/robertgruleresq​

• Homepage with transcripts (under construction): https://www.watchingthewatchers.tv​

Don't forget to join us on Locals! https://watchingthewatchers.locals.com​

Why Locals? We head over to Locals to continue the conversation before, during and after the show. You can also grab the slides (and other stuff) from the show as well as a free PDF copy of Robert’s book which is also available to buy on Amazon here: https://rcl.ink/hHB​

Other tips? Send to [email protected] or tag @RobertGrulerEsq on twitter.​

#WatchingtheWatchers #BidenSpeech #DerekChauvin #RudyGiuliani #RudyRaid #ChauvinTrial #GeorgeFloyd #100days #BidenAddress #SleepyJoe

Speaker 1:

Hello, my friends. And welcome back to yet. Another episode of watching the Watchers live. My name is Robert ruler. I am a criminal defense attorney here at the RNR law group in the always beautiful and sunny Scottsdale Arizona, where my team and I over the course of many years have represented thousands of good people facing criminal charges. And throughout our time in practice, we have seen a lot of problems with our justice system. I'm talking about misconduct involving the police. We have prosecutors behaving poorly. We have judges not particularly interested in a little thing called justice, and it all starts with the politicians, the people at the top, the ones who write the rules and pass the laws that they expect you and me to follow, but sometimes have a little bit of difficulty doing so themselves. And that's why we started this show called watching the Watchers so that together with your help, we can shine that big, beautiful spotlight of accountability and transparency back down upon our very system, with the hope of finding justice. And we're grateful that you are with us today. We've got a lot to get into. We're going to be starting off by talking about president Biden's address to Congress because he was speaking last night for about an hour, did a nice job, went through the whole hour, good for him. And he unveiled a little bit about what they want to do in this country. And so we want to break down what he talked about, and then we're going to go through a little bit of the reaction because there's a lot of that that is happening today. Then we're going to change gears. We're going to talk about Derek Shovan again, and I want to show you what's going on there. Uh , apparently the federal prosecutors in this country were just primed and ready to go in the event that Derek Shovan would have been acquitted. Then they were going to be arresting him anyways for a federal civil rights violations and , and civil rights , uh , charges or whatever they were plotting against him. On that particular day. We're going to get into that story , uh , both from the star Tribune and the daily mail. In other words, Derek Shovan was doomed no matter what was happening, whether he got convicted or acquitted back in Minneapolis, he was going to be in some hot water with the feds, because it sounds like they are moving forward with an indictment against him anyways. So if he was going to be acquitted, they were going to be primed and ready to go to rearrest him. And if he was convicted, well, he's going to get re indicted again anyways. So we've got two stories about that. And Derek Shovan, then we're going to change gears and talk about Rudy Giuliani, who had his Manhattan apartment rated yesterday. A very interesting little situation going on there. Some allegations that Rudy and , uh, and the Ukrainians engaged in some malfeasance over the last couple of years, some in close connection to Trump , Trump really, and Rudy's close proximity to Trump is, is what many people are speculating is leading to this. Let's say focused prosecution. We have the changing of the guard. We have a new administration in the white house. Now, a new department of justice, a new attorney general. And now we have federal raids on the pre prior administrations lawyers. I think Victoria Townson also was the subject of arrayed . So we've got a lot to get into. And before we do, I want to invite you to be a part of the show. I'll ask you to go on over to watching the watchers.locals.com, because

Speaker 2:

That is where you can ask a question, leave a comment, or throw out a criticism. If you don't like anything that we're talking about here, and we will address it on the program. We're going to go through each different segment one by one. And we're going to take questions in between those different segments. So watching the watchers.locals.com is the place to do it. There's a lot of other great things there like a promo code for my new existence systems course, which is [email protected] You can also download a copy of my book for free. It's a PDF that's downloadable over there. Get a copy of the slides that we're about to go through. And the real reason is to meet some amazing people who are over there and part of that community, every single time that you sign up to be a part of that group, you are laying one brick in the next pillar of free speech. And so we appreciate that very much. All right, so let's get into the news of the day. President Biden spoke to Congress yesterday. If you want to call that, that he was speaking to Congress and he was giving a joint address to give them an update gift America and update on the last 100 days of his administration. He has been in the white house for about a hundred days today and, or , uh , recently, and he wanted to give us an update about what is going on there. And so we've got to get into some of this. Now I'm not particularly interested in this story. These types of speeches are just very boiler plate , right? It's sort of just like droning on to even have to talk about it, but it is the , the president. It is the leader of our country and they have a lot of power right now. You can see, even from the thumbnail, what are we looking at? We've got Joe Biden, we've got Nancy Pelosi, we've got Kamala Harris and they are all , uh , you know , back there sort of laying out their vision for the next three years. And we want to make sure that we are up to speed about what they want to get into. So , uh , we're , we're going to go through it. Nothing really stood out to me on this whole speech. I I'll be honest. I didn't watch it. I read the transcript today because Joe Biden talks very, very slowly. And it's just hard for me to follow along for an , you know, 60 minutes or whatever it was, but it, it, you know , it's boiler plate stuff. He's got to come out there and check a bunch of boxes. And so, you know, any, I think of the outrage that you see on either side, whether, you know, this is or any type of statement that seems like it is a level 11 statement, you know, people on the left, Oh my God, this is the best, whatever that's insane. Right? It clearly wasn't. And the people on the other side that say, this is a communist dictator, who's going to wreck America. And it wasn't that either. It was sort of something just like a bland, very vanilla , uh, updates from a political figure. Who's been in government for like 50 years. So nothing really exciting there. Now let's take a quick look at what the breakdown looked like in terms of talking time. So Brett Bayer posted this, and we see here that it says legislation, including relief, jobs, families, and plans. He spoke for 19 minutes about that, right? So that was the brunt of that . The crux of the speech. Then it sort of worked its way down from there, condoms and jobs , seven minutes, foreign policy, seven minutes, healthcare, five minutes guns , five minutes, which is a lot of time given the fact that, you know, it's sort of a lesser problem. In my opinion, we've got war and national security, five minutes. So guns get the same amount of time as healthcare it's kind of, okay, then we have a , we have another healthcare for another five minutes. Then we get over to COVID. Then we go down to immigration. So guns get more time than immigration is what that looks like. Then we get police reform and George Floyd, which is what I am most interested in. So we're only going to be spending time on this section right here today, police reform and Floyd, because he spent three minutes on that. And not much, not much was really in there , uh, but we are going to dive in and see what he is getting into. We've got, you know , bipartisanship less than one minute voting rights, less than one minute , uh, families, two minutes, China criticism, three minutes climate, two minutes education, three minutes and on and on and on. Right. So very, very bland. You know, how do you, how do you say anything about everything in 60 minutes? It's hard thing to do. So he's just going out here and just checking the box, which is why these things are very, you know, typically pretty bland and , uh , you know, not, not many people watch this one, to be honest. And we're going to show you those numbers here in a minute. So here is Joe Biden. Uh , here's a picture of sort of, you know, the scene we've got Maxine waters. It looks like , uh , down here , uh , taken a look at the president, then we've got, it looks like Bernie over here, we've got Joe Biden, you know , everybody's masked up. Of course, these are all senior citizens. They're all vaccinated. They're all, you know, some of the most powerful people in the world. So they have the best healthcare plans and they've all, you know , uh , clearly, you know , got the best treatment , uh, immediate access to vaccines and so on, but they're still doing the mask theater as well as the social distancing theater. So the chamber was only half full. Uh, they , I think AOC didn't get an invite. She got sent home because they're still doing this social distancing, you know, whatever, they're welcome to do that. That's fine. Uh, it's just kind of a strange thing to be doing. It's kind of a weird message to be sending to the country. You know, we have like, he's , he's on the verge of this 100 days. This should be sort of a triumphant moment. We're sort of coming out of the, the, the, the wave. You know, everybody has seen the charts at this moment in time. You've seen sort of the big spike that we just had over , uh, you know, very recently sort of coming out of that many people were expecting a fourth wave would be coming and it looks like maybe the vaccines are stopping that they're nipping that in the bud. And you would imagine that, you know, one of the initial things that you, the sort of your, your introduction to the American people after your first 100 days would be something like, Hey, we did it. You know, this is great. Uh , and everybody come back in all Congress, people are vaccinated and you bring them in and, you know, sort of a return to normal things, sort of as symbolic return to order. And obviously they didn't do that. So they're , they're all still social distancing , uh , for whatever reason, then we have the, you know, the, the real image of the day that everybody's happy about is this sort of, you know , transitional figure, this, this image here that we've got, where it's not the old people right now, it's Biden, we've got Kamala Harris and we've got Nancy Pelosi. We've got these two from California. We got Joe Biden over from Delaware. And, you know, they're sort of up there. And Joe Biden made a pretty big point about this as , Hey, you know, Madame vice-president , it's about time. We said that it's about time. We got a woman up there. And so they're , they're really, you know, making, making a big, you know, I would say , uh , identity politics based distinction,

Speaker 1:

You know, really milking as much as they can out of that thing. And so let's get into the content. We're going to take a quick look at Jim Acosta, who yesterday gave us a little bit of hint about what Joe Biden was going to be speaking about. In particular. He said that , uh, this line really stood out. A lot of people are seizing on this, around the media, kind of on both sides going, wow, this is a head scratcher , but Joe Biden last night said something like the January 6th insurrection is the worst attack on our democracy since the civil war, which what they said that. So Jim Acosta posted this before the speech and he actually is linking to the white house press release. And so they put this out also, and you know, they really want you to know this. This is why I wanted to point this out is they are, you know, they're Acosta got the talking point. Then they release this as a formal memorandum. You know, they're there , this is part of the document. It says here, 100 days since I took the oath of office , uh , the worst pandemic in a century, the worst economic crisis, since the great depression and the worst attack on our democracy since the civil war. So they , they, you know, they're specifically putting this paragraph front and center right near the top. And this is what the full context of it looks like. So I want to go through this. I want to read it. Then we're going to listen to a president Biden talking about it. He says, tonight, I come to talk about crisis and opportunity about rebuilding the nation, revitalizing our democracy and winning the future for America. I stand here tonight, one day shy of the 100th day of my administration. A hundred days since I took the oath of office, lifted my hand off our family Bible and inherited the nation. We all did. That was in crisis. The worst pandemic of the century, the worst economic crisis, since the great depression, the worst attack on our democracy, since the civil war. Now, after just 100 days, I can report to the nation. America is on the move again. So keep that in mind, right? What happened on January six , which we covered, we were sort of live streaming that very day, and it was the worst attack on our democracy since the civil war. And so you're going to see a bunch of people out there saying, well, you know, what he meant is the Capitol building was attacked. Uh , it hasn't been attacked since the civil war. All of these other things are attacks on other buildings or other, whatever we're going to get into it. So here is Joe Biden. Last night,

Speaker 3:

I'm here tonight, one day shy of the hundredth day, my administration, a hundred days since I took the oath of office and lifted my hand off our family Bible and inherited a nation, we all did. That was in crisis. The worst pandemic in the century, the worst economic crisis, since the great depression, the worst attack on our democracy, since the civil war. Now, after just 100 days, I can report to the nation. America is on the move again.

Speaker 1:

Yeah . Yeah . Joe. Okay, great. So a lot of cheers , a lot of happiness, right? And so the worst attack since the civil war that happened a long time ago, that was, you know, in the 18 hundreds, for those of you who don't remember that it was a long time ago. And I recall that I was alive when there was another attack, right? It's actually a couple of them. So the first one that came to my mind and everybody in the media is running a law . Everybody on conservative media is going down this list , laundry list, going through all of them. I got to do it too, because it's so insane. I mean, what is he talking about? The worst attack on American democracy was January 6th. What is he talking about? Officer Signac died of natural causes. The other people who died, who were part of the, you know, the , the, the mega mob, but many of those people, it was like heart attacks and sudden death because of the stress of the events. You know, a lot of officers were injured. Yes we know. But , uh , the other person who was killed was shot by an officer, working for the government as she and Ashley Babbitt , as she was walking in, or , or , or sort of going into the , uh, the court chamber, the , uh , Senate chamber. And so that was it, right when we compare and contrast that to other attacks, if you want to say this was an attack on the federal government, there are other attacks that have been on the federal government, especially when I was alive. Here's one that I remember back in 1995, I was 10 years old. Remember this one, the Oklahoma city bombing. Okay. The Alfred P Murrah federal building was blown up. The target, according to Wikipedia was the U S federal government, right . They used a fertilizer truck bomb. And , uh, it was a truck bombing, mass murder. How many people died? 168 and 680 were injured. Perpetrators, Timothy McVeigh, and Terry Nichols. There was anti-government sentiment and retaliation for the Ruby Ridge and Waco seasons . Okay. This wasn't an attack on the federal building. This is an attack. Okay. What happened at the Capitol building did not look like that. It's a little bit of a different thing, but that was worse than that. According to Joe Biden, the next one that we have of course, is Pearl Harbor. Okay. Also a pretty big thing. And if you'll take a look over here, as you, as I mentioned, the civil war really took place in the 18 hundreds. You'll notice that over here, this says, this happened in 1995, which is significantly after the civil war. This one also over here per Harbor, if you don't recall, this was 1941, which is also after the 18 hundreds, because 17 hundreds, 18 hundreds, 19 hundreds, this happened after the civil war and in this attack on our American democracy, we have a lot of people were killed in this puppy. Take a look over here. We have a 68 were killed. Uh , 35 wounded, three aircraft were shot down for battleships sunk for battleships damage, three cruisers damage . And , and those were just civilian casualties. Let's take a look over here. We have , uh , uh, casualties and losses, 2,335 killed. Oh, Oh yeah. That's a pretty big number there. Uh, significantly more than I think, five who died as a result of the Capitol building. And this was another nation state , uh, uh , actually attacking one of our ports where we have our military house and it looked pretty bad. This looked dramatically worse than what we saw on January six . Take a look over here. I mean, that is an entire stinking battleship that is going down right now. Very, very big explosions. I don't seeing that on January six . I think if I remember correctly, it was like some broken windows and some flagpoles and some pepper spray and things like that. But I don't remember entire battle carriers sinking to the bottom of the ocean or anything close to that. And so I was course it was not alive for the Pearl Harbor attacks. Uh , but I was alive just like I was when I was 10 for the , uh, for the Oklahoma city bombings. I was also around that . I was in high school. In fact, I think it was a freshmen when nine 11 happened. Okay. We have another, almost 3000 dead, 2,996 people died that day. 25,000, 25,000 more were injured as terrorists took down the world trade center. And so, again, you know, another attack on American democracy. This one was really not from a nation state, but it was from a sort of a pseudo nation state that is in the form of Al Qaeda and terrorism and whatever I can get into all of that in a separate show. But the point is, here are three that I just came up with off the top of my head. Wikipedia has some pretty good information about them. Somebody should send that stuff to the white house because I feel like there's a mismatch on a reality here. They're saying that this was the worst attack on America since the civil war, I just pointed to three others. So my real question is if that is their barometer, if that's how they view the world, we got a problem, right? Because one of these is less significant than the others. And apparently they have that relationship or that idea inverted not too good. Then we have Joe Biden continuing on. And so we're going to get into the criminal justice stuff. There's not much of it, about three minutes, and I'm going to read it. Then we're going to listen to his clips. So here is Joe Biden today says we won't ignore what our intelligence agents have determined to be the most lethal terrorist threat to our Homeland today. White supremacy. Okay. So that is the big, big hit right here. White supremacy. He says it's terrorism, white supremacy is terrorism. We are not going to ignore that. Either. My fellow Americans, look, we have to come together to heal the soul of this nation. It was nearly a year ago before her father's funeral. When I spoke to Giana Floyd, George, George Floyd's young daughter, she's a little tight. So I was kneeling down to talk to her so I can look her in the eyes . She looked at me, she said, my daddy changed the world. Well, after the conviction of George Floyd's murderer, we can see how right she was. If, if we have the courage to act as a Congress, we have all seen the knee of injustice on the back of black Americans. Now is our opportunity to make some real progress. So you're gonna note this, right? Our intelligence agencies have determined the most lethal terrorist threat to our Homeland today is white. Supremacy is terrorism is what he said. All right. So here's Joe Biden last night,

Speaker 3:

Or what our intelligence agents have determined to be the most lethal terrorist threat to the Homeland today. White supremacy is terrorist . Oh, we're not going to ignore that. Either. My fellow Americans, look, we have to come together to heal the soul of this nation. There was nearly a year ago. Her father's shoes . When I spoke with Gianna Floyd, George flora , young daughter, she's a little tight. So I was kneeling down and talk to her so I could look her in the eye. She looks at me, she said, my daddy changed the world. Well, after the conviction of George Lord's murderer, we can see how right she was. If, if we have the courage to act as a Congress, we've all seen an even justice on the neck of black Americans now is our opportunity to make some real progress.

Speaker 1:

Okay? So , uh, this is what I've been waiting for. I've been waiting for this for a very long period of time. What are you going to do there, Joe? Because you were in the white house for eight years when you were vice-president and do it, didn't do anything. Then prior to that, you've been in the Senate for like 45 years, and you have done nothing on this. Other than the opposite of justice reform, you have been the person who has been promulgating more and more of a strict, strenuous criminal justice state. You'd this sort of this overly aggressive, bureaucratic mess that we live in today. That's yours . You did that. You did all of it from nine 1984, 1986, 1988, 1994, all of the different crime bills. And you quoted yourself. You said any criminal justice bill that it came out of pencil , uh , Delaware, or came out of Congress, I think was your quote since 1976, had your name on it. So you have been in government for a very long time. What are you going to do about it? What's going to be the change here. What, how are you going to solve this issue? Well , he just identifies it as white supremacy. So we're going to deal with white supremacy. He does tell us in the next clip that he's, he does have a solution. We're going to learn about that in a minute, but I want to take a quick minute on this white supremacy thing, because is that the root problem here are these cops killing individuals because of white supremacy. And if so, can you just come out and say that? I mean, we really just let's get down to brass tacks here. If you think that Derek Shovan is a white supremacist, even though Keith Ellison and many other people said that race didn't really have, you know, didn't factor into it. The people who were prosecuting him have questioned that sentiment. Well then , then what is the bigger problem here? And we need to really identify it in order to solve it. So I get really tired of these, these, you know, these racial things being thrown around without any other evidence or without anything to back it up. So he says white supremacists are the biggest national security threat, according to our own intelligence agencies, but folks, other than January six , have you, what have you seen out there from white supremacists? Okay. The only people that I see on a regular basis out there, torching America, lighting up stores and causing damage and wreaking havoc across this country have been two groups and neither one of them have been white supremacists to my knowledge. Now I know that there have been sort of scattering of stories where they will show up sort of counter protesting, but by and large, what's been happening out of Portland, out of Seattle, out of Minneapolis, it has been Antifa and BLM. It hasn't been the proud BARR boys, to my knowledge. It hasn't been the KKK running around in robes and hoods. It's been the Antifa people with their little, you know , barrel shields and their red helmets and their black outfits. That's what we're seeing on a regular basis. So they keep telling me that there's white supremacists running around and then we're all on the verge of them seizing control of the country. But I don't see that. And you know why I know it's not out there because if it was happening, it would be on the front page of every stink of newspaper every single day, it would be on the Washington post, New York times everywhere. It's not. And what we do see is from people on the ground, doing the reporting like Andy, no , who says they're there , they're burning another building down and another one and another one night after night after night. And then you have people like the Portland mayor coming out now and saying, well, I'm , I'm flipping the whole script right? A year ago, very pro Antifa, very pro letting this protest continue because he wanted people's voices to be heard. And now everybody's going, no , no, no, not so fast. Right? This isn't about justice. This is about sort of wrecking America and undermining capitalism because they've identified it as fascism for whatever reason. And so that , that, that is really in my opinion, where the issue lies where this whole thing boils down to, but he wants to come out now and say, it's all about white supremacy. When the root of the problem is from other groups that I can identify as white supremacists. And we are also seeing this trickle down into other facets of society. We talked about this in North Carolina when we were covering the Anthony Brown, Jr case. We talked about this this week, okay? The judge is not letting that video out. You can have an agreement or disagreement with that. Video's not coming out for the time being. And there are already protests that are bubbling up around North Carolina. They shut down schools. They said, no, we're going back to remote learning because we're so petrified that the protests are going to get out of control, that our children will not be safe. So we have to go back to remote learning. Was that, why is that white supremacists who are, who are, you know, riding around waving burning crosses and donning hoods? No, no, it's not. It's a different demographic. So why didn't he mention them? Because they're as big a threat to our justice system as anything is he didn't mention them. He mentioned white supremacists . And because he wants to realign the whole thing in that direction and folks, I am not trying to cover for white supremacists at all. I've told you many times on this channel, how reprehensible, I think the whole conversation about that is anybody who even tries to sort of jockey people based on racial or gender or any sort of orientation is, is reprehensible. To me. I don't care what you do with your life, what you look like, where you came from, if you're a good person and you provide value in this world and you do something meaningful with your life, I love the hell out of you. So I'm not trying to cover for those people, but I am somebody who is passionate as hell about reforming our justice system. I got a whole company. We have been working on my, my entire professional career to see some movement on this thing. So we got to call out the problem for what it is. And I I've been practicing criminal law. I've been practicing justice for seven years now, 10 years , uh, since 2013, okay. I've been licensed. And I was an intern before that. I can't do the on the fly when I'm heated. But my point is I have not seen white supremacy as a problem in our justice system. Is there a racism short? Of course there is. Are there other problems that I think have bigger, bigger return on investment if we solve them app? So stinking, lutely . And so when I have this guy, the father of the crime bill, in my opinion, the guy who's responsible for more black people in federal prisons than any person living or dead is Joe Biden. Kamala Harris is a close second. Now these two are out there preaching to the rest of us that this is all about white supremacy. Well, folks, you, Hey, Joe, you wrote the laws. Are they white supremacists laws? Because you wrote them. Now you're going to preach it. The rest of us scolding us because because police departments and citizens in States and society around our country are enacting the laws that you drafted. You're going to turn around and call them white supremacists. Now, 30 years later after people are sick and tired of the policies, you've been cramming down everybody's throats. And then lecture us, give me a break. Now he goes on, he says the vast majority of men and women wearing a uniform, speaking about cops and a badge serve our communities and they serve them honorably. I know them. I know they want, I know they want to help meet this moment as well. My fellow Americans, we have to come together to rebuild trust between law enforcement and the people they serve to root out systematic racism in our criminal justice system. Right. And enact police reform in George Floyd's name that passed the house already. Okay. So this is the solution. This is what his proposal on this pass the George Floyd act. Right. And we're gonna take a quick look at that here today. So he's saying, it's the problem he's identifying the problem is systematic racism, which is, which is different than systemic. I think so systematic. He probably just kind of butchered that word. I think he means systemic racism , uh, or maybe he means systematic. I don't know George Floyd's name. So he wants that bill to pass. He says, I know Republicans have their own ideas and are engaged in productive discussions with Democrats in the Senate. We need to work together to find a consensus, but let's get it done next month. All right . So he's giving us a target. So in may we want action. All right . So in may , the president wants action on the George Floyd. Bill passed already passed the house. Okay. Now we gotta go over to the Senate. They got to peel off a handful of Republicans and it should pass because they control that chamber. Plus they have Kamala Harris. We'll see, he says, the country supports this reform in Congress should act. We have the giant opportunity to bend the arc of the moral universe towards justice, real justice. And with the plans outlined tonight, we have a real chance to root out systematic racism that plagues America and American lives in other ways, a chance to deliver real equity. And also maybe he means systematic, which is a little bit of a different word change. I think so he's talking about, you know , real equity now, right? So now we're talking about sort of , uh , equal opportunity versus equal outcome. And I think everybody in America is okay with equal opportunity, give everybody a same starting position, but equal outcome. That's a whole different political philosophy. It's a whole different theory of governing and not a good one has a pretty bad track record throughout this country. Just go ask Mao . Here is Joe Biden on crime reform.

Speaker 4:

The vast majority men, women wearing a uniform

Speaker 3:

And a bad serve our communities and they serve them honorably. I know them. I know they want [inaudible] . They want to help all over myself. My fellow Americans, we have to come together to rebuild trust between law enforcement and the people they serve, drew it out, systemic racism in our criminal justice system and on act police reform and George Lord's name that passed the house already. I know Republicans have their own ideas and are engaged in a very productive discussions with Democrats in the Senate. We need to work together to find a consensus, but let's get it done next month. By the first anniversary of George Florez death, [inaudible] the country supports this reform and Congress should act, should act. We have a giant opportunity to bend the arc or the moral universe towards justice, real justice, and with the plan .

Speaker 1:

Oh, okay. You see Maxine waters up there just standing and clapping away. Yeah . We love the police. Come on, give me a break. I just was trying to take a sip of water and I just dumped it all over myself, laughing my butt off at her standing up. All right. So let's so what does he want to do? The George Floyd bill? He wants that past inmate. What is in it? Let's take a quick look here. It is over from the congress.gov website. So it was sponsored by rep bass, Karen Bass, out of California. And it's the George Floyd justice in policing act of 2020. You'll notice down here, the tracker says that it has passed the house of representatives. So on it looks like July 20th. It was red . The second time it is now placed on the Senate legislative calendar. So it's over there with the Senate. Now, here is what it is introduced as called the justice and policing act. The bill addresses a wide range of policies and issues regarding policing practices and law enforcement accountability. Okay. That sounds good. It includes measures to increase accountability for law enforcement misconduct. Alright like that. To enhance transparency yes. And data collection and to eliminate discriminatory policing practices. All right. Well, we'll see what that says. The bill facilitates federal enforcement of constitutional violations. For example, the excessive use of force by state and local law enforcement. So it facilitates federal enforcement of constitutional violations by state and local law enforcement. What does that sound like? Facilitates federal enforcement. Huh? So it sounds like we're going to have a , sort of a federal agency managing all the local agencies, federal agency monitoring, state and local law enforcement. Okay. Well, cause that's one way to federalize the police force. Then we also have it lowers the criminal intent standard from willful to knowing or reckless to convict a law enforcement officer for misconduct in federal prosecution. No . So it's like changing the entire standard of the law. So if you are a regular person and you do something that is a crime, then you're held, let's say to the willful standard, right. You have to, that conduct has to be willful. I intended to do the thing that I did. It was a willful act. So they're saying that's a pretty high standard. They want to drop that down. Sort of there wasn't a willful act, but it was kind of a reckless act. So it's easier now to prove that, right. So you can say, well, I didn't intend to do that. It wasn't a willful act. That's a higher standard. There's a mental state there that requires a little bit more culpability in order to prove that element. Then we drop it down to a reckless less. Okay. It doesn't have to be intentional. It doesn't have to be willful. Now it's just one , it's just kind of a reckless thing to do, easier to convict somebody in that manner. And so they're going to drop that standard down just for the cost. Not for anybody else, kind of the , kind of the same thing they want to do for hate crime legislation, right? They want to take something that's already criminal and then sort of change it a little bit. So amplify the penalties by making it even more serious, based on an aggravating factor, that's already an underlying element of the offense typically. So what they'll do is , is , is sort of, you know , aggravate it out here . What they want to do is aggravate this by lowering the standard that protects police officers. So if you're a police officer, you know, you're not going to like this obviously limits qualified immunity as a defense to liability in a private civil action against law enforcement officer or state . So , uh, I've , I've had a lot of qualms about qualified immunity. I think that's probably a good thing. Authorizes the DOJ to issue subpoenas and investigations of police departments for a pattern or practice of discrimination. So again, the department of justice now is going to take over subpoenas and investigations of police departments. So it is the federalization of a lot of judiciaries of a lot of courts, right? Because the courts in local levels will, will grant the subpoenas and authorize a lot of the investigations to move forward. The department of justice wants to take it. So the federal government wants to come in and just subsume a bunch of the roles and responsibilities of local States and governments. That's going to be the George Floyd act. So why would that not? Right? What of course, everything else is supposed to be going towards the government. Anyways, governments getting bigger, accepting more responsibilities, want more and more control of your life. Don't even want you to leave the stinking house if they can help it. And so they are now going to be trying to subsume local law enforcement up to the federal level, take a lot of those lower level responsibilities and say, Oh, you guys are incompetent. You can't handle that. We're going to take those up because we're more competent because we know how competent the federal government is. They everything very well

Speaker 2:

For us here is the rest of this. The bill also creates a national registry, the national police misconduct registry to compile data on complaints and records of police misconduct, which is not a bad idea, right? This is something that I have sort of spoken about. And I don't know how this would work in practice. I would definitely like to learn more about this. Don't like the idea of a national registry, but I also don't like the idea of police officers being able to get in trouble in one state and go across state lines. We have this already in the United States. If you get a traffic ticket in one state and you say, well, I've got I've , I've lost my license in Arizona because I've been driving like a , you know, like a , like a speed demon. And I don't, I have too many points on my license. License is lost and revoked. Well , what happens if you just pick up and let's say you move over to Colorado, I'm going to go to a different state so I can get my car back or go just North. And it is

Speaker 5:

Now a clean slate. Can you start over? No, because

Speaker 2:

We were part of an interstate compact. I don't know if Colorado is or what they would do with that. I don't practice law there, but they would typically because all of the States are part of this interstate compact. They all communicate with each other. So even though they have a different DMV or MBD or whatever, our, our system will still say, Hey, Arizona revoked this person's license.

Speaker 5:

Just want to let you know, other 49

Speaker 2:

States. So if you want to take action yet

Speaker 5:

Can Colorado would then theoretically yeah ,

Speaker 2:

Take action. And that person would also not be able to drive there. So same type of concept for police, right? Why does one cop, why does one officer in Arizona get in trouble? Right ?

Speaker 5:

And then get disciplined, sanctioned, whatever, pick up , be able to

Speaker 2:

Go across state lines and then get a job somewhere else or just kind of poke around for a little bit. No, I haven't been disciplined in the last year or whatever, and then get a job doing security or something along those lines. So I would be open to an idea like that. I don't know practically how that would work because national registries, I'm not a fan of that concept in general, we have it establishes a framework to prohibit racial

Speaker 5:

Profiling. So again,

Speaker 2:

I don't know what that means or what that entails, but it also establishes new requirements for law enforcement officers and agencies, including report data of use of force incidents, training on implicit bias and racial profiling. So if that's, you know, if that's anything like , uh, you know, CRT that they're doing elsewhere, that is a problem also to wear body cameras. All right . So that's probably at least one good thing in this, which is wearing body cameras. The rest of it, I don't know yet now. So that is what the president is wanting to proffer forward for the rest of us. We got three minutes of justice reform, even though it's one of, I would say it's one of the top issues in this country, is it not? I mean, it's captivated the entire nation's attention, the Shovan trial. And we've got several more that are coming down the pike. We've got

Speaker 5:

Several more that , that, that we don't even

Speaker 2:

Know if the officers are going to get charged yet or not. So my point is, we're gonna be re reliving this thing over and over and over again. So you would think that they would maybe expedite this and maybe they will, maybe they'll get something passed that will satiate people throughout the country. I'm guessing not all right . So did anybody watch thing last night? Not really about half the people did that watched Donald Trump in 2017 deadline over his posting here from Dominic Patton , Ted Johnson posted this about one o'clock today says , uh , Joe Biden's address to Congress snares 22.6 million viewers in near final numbers, way down from

Speaker 5:

Trump. His first

Speaker 2:

Address to a joint session of Congress drew 22.6 million viewers across seven major networks, 47% drop from 43 million or so who to turn tuned in to Donald Trump's first speech that was back in 2017.

Speaker 5:

So almost half and half

Speaker 2:

Million on MSNBC. I'm sorry, ABC 4 million MSNBC, 3.9, NBC 3.5, CBS 3.3, the list goes on and on. Right ? So not many people watching it. Uh, and I, it, when , you know, what can you take from that, right? Is it COVID or people just check out of politics? Is Joe Biden really the most boring president in American history probably probably has something to do with it. Other people are saying, Oh, well this is just a return to normal. You know, these are just normal numbers. We had Obama who was a, you know , uh , an orientation. This is somebody who could speak out there and captivate hit an audience that we had Donald Trump, people are saying, well, he was just a train wreck. So everybody wanted to watch the train wreck. Now, now this is just a return to form. This is just a return to normal. And nobody's interested in this because America's back as they say, so, you know, split it however you want. I think that nobody wants to listen to Joe Biden because he, he, he is speaking so slowly. It's re it's very difficult to even pay attention, honestly. I mean, you , you listened to those clips. It takes him seven minutes to say something that you can say in 30 seconds, it's, that's really difficult to listen to. All right. So here is what else do we have other reactions, New York post not happy about it. Their editorial board says here that the speech bombs

Speaker 5:

On all counts failed on all counts.

Speaker 2:

Didn't sell his latest spending plan. Didn't sell his larger agenda. And worst of all, it didn't sell him, started with an utterly bizarre mask theater. All the politicians in the room had been fully vaccinated. Biden's own. CDC says that's enough. So why didn't the universe? Why the universal masking and social distancing the message cutting across the president's occasional optimism was that this nightmare will never end simply. Isn't true, which is the point I made earlier equally, obviously false false was Biden's now routine effort to claim all the credit for the vaccinations. All that was set in motion before he took office, then he moved into a series of disjointed claims about the American family's plan that barely tracked . Even though he was reading a prepared text, it seems like he was just skipping whole paragraphs and even pages. You could see even Democrats wincing above their mass, Oh, and a classic Biden. Non-sequitur attacking those who oppose his plans to hike taxes on the rich says, ask them whose taxes are you going to raise? No one's is the answer because the opposition isn't looking to spend trillions more than the feds already do yet. He never gave any clear unifying theme for the family's plan because it doesn't have one. It's just another grab bag of items off the Democrats. Wishlists wandered into something like a state of the union speech taking off the most sales pitches for a host of bills. He'd like Congress to pass, which they won't mixed in were lies about how he'd solved the border crisis. As vice-president plus vague waves at foreign policy and trade, he talks by American as much as the guy he replaced and some noise about that. Being tough militarily. When the DOD is the only agency doesn't wanna spend more money on Horry. Cliche's empty rhetoric about unity spice with blather about white supremacy and systemic racism. Even as he was insisting that nearly all cops only work hard to protect the public. After all that his effort to close with the traditional message of hope fell pretty flat. He was out to show confidence in America after failing to give America reason to have much confidence in him. Right? So now that's , you know, obviously, you know, folks, I am , I am not, I'm not, I'm not even trying to be neutral on this one. Right? I, I get so irritated when I hear these people talk about justice reform. It's almost personal to me because I see what they have done to people. And I see that they are in power now, and it's getting three minutes on a speech, even though the whole country is just up in arms over all this stuff. And you know, to be honest, if you're a Democrat too , are , are aren't you a little bit tired of this? Are you tired of all these politicians just paying lip service to these issues, right? He S he said, nothing about justice reform. Other than we want to go pass the George Fort Floyd belt , use the name, check the box, move on to the next thing, because he doesn't care about it, but they will grift off of the entire democratic party for the foreseeable future. They're going to raise a lot of money. They're going to use this as a bludgeon against the Republicans. You know, who suffers people in the justice system really that's who it is. It's people who are going through the system. People like you and me, good people who just are looking for a little bit of help. One thing that I would love to see from Joe Biden is some actual criminal justice reform. He's sort of done the mayor culpa thing on the last 30 years of wreckage on our system. And so if he did just a little bit to sort of unring that bell, I would be happy with him . I would say, good job, man. I'll, I'll praise you on it, but it's not going to happen because he has a record. You have to look at the record. He may say, and talk a lot about justice reform and that he's he's down for the movement or whatever's happening right now. But he is not. He's got 30 years of consistent pro enforcement , anti rights legislation that is now ineffective in our country and has been that way for a long time. I got to move on. I'll just keep going off on this. Kevin McCarthy says this whole thing could have just been an email, which is hilarious, right? Because it is accurate. And you could have just, Hey, just send us all the bills you want. Okay? We're not going to do any of that. Thanks. Go back to bed. Now we have CBS, CBS news says that a tremendous speech really, really good, actually in fact, 85% of the people who watch the speech loved it. So 85%, if you take a look at their numbers over here, you'll see here. This is from their CBS news poll. It was a YouGov poll. It looks like 85% of the people who watched the speech approve only 15% disapprove, which is, which is, you know , kind of crazy. I was wow.

Speaker 5:

It must've been a home run.

Speaker 2:

Let's look at who they pulled though, where these numbers come from. Oh, of the 943 people that they asked,

Speaker 5:

54%

Speaker 2:

Of them were Democrats. So over half, 510

Speaker 5:

People, then we have 25%

Speaker 2:

Of people who are independence and then 18% who are, who are Republicans.

Speaker 5:

Okay. So

Speaker 2:

That makes sense. So the Republicans, about 18% of them, they liked it.

Speaker 5:

Maybe , maybe, maybe every one of them did, but then

Speaker 2:

Independence and the Democrats 3% of the Republicans , uh, all , all approve of this speech. So it's just a total stinking scam folks, stunning, CBS poll claims that stunningly duplicitous story aimed at shoring up the response to Biden speech. They wrote on their website. Most viewers are too turned into watch. The president liked what they heard and came away feeling optimistic about America. What they didn't tell their viewers and our readers is that the poll was widely bile was wildly biased towards self-identifying Democrats and traditionally left leaning independence. So it's just, yeah, it's on brand. The whole things. It's just it's AstroTurf. All right. And so here is what CNN said. So CNN, they said , uh, that, that the speech was actually worse than Donald Trump. So according to them, only 51% of the largely Democrat speech Watchers approved of Biden's comments. But the corporate media outlets still label the ratings as very positive. The reaction is more than a 20% drop from when Obama addressed the body and got a 68% approval or when Bush did and got a 66% approval. So , uh , yeah. So here is CNN trying to do their little spin game here. You can see this. This is from Manu, Roger , who is actually over at CNN, the speech Watchers tonight, overall leaned democratic. So binds at 51% Trump at 57 Obama at 68 Bush at 66. But over here they say very positive reaction.

Speaker 5:

Well, not , not really kind of lukewarm

Speaker 2:

Is what I would say, Obama. Yeah, that sounds very

Speaker 5:

Positive. Lukewarm, I think is the more appropriate solution there . All right .

Speaker 2:

Alexandria, Ocasio, Cortez didn't make it to the events. So , uh, because she was forced to stay home, 200 people were hand-picked by the administration to attend. Normally a thousand people will go, many legislators are vaccinated against

Speaker 5:

It's the virus, but they still limited capacity AOC not invited. Oh , dang it. Sorry.

Speaker 2:

Sorry. AOC. All right . We got some questions over from watching the watchers.locals.com. Let's take a quick look at them. We've got Chris underscore John in the house has one really good question about last night's gathering is why if they trust the vaccine, they're all vaccinated. Are they still masking up in social distancing actions are always more honest. They don't seem to trust the vaccine. Yeah. That's, that's a reasonable takeaway, right? Either the vaccine works and it stops you from getting sick

Speaker 5:

Or it doesn't right. Theoretically, I don't know . I'm not, I'm not a, but these are

Speaker 1:

Our elected officials. I thought that they'd been telling us to get vaccinated so that we can get kind of back to normal, but maybe not. We have leafy bug in the house says if you believe the Dem MSM NAPE narrative, that the Capitol riot was a genuine attempt to halt the congressional process of appointing a president. If you believe it was a genuine insurrection, if you believe all the spin in the lies, then you'd agree with Biden's claim. Yeah . Um, yeah, I guess, I guess so. I guess that's, I don't think so. I mean, honestly, like, even if you did,

Speaker 5:

You know, comparing that to the Oklahoma city bombing or to Pearl Harbor, those seem worse. We have my Fox say

Speaker 1:

As , uh , Rob El Paso, Pittsburgh, synagogue shooting unite, the right vehicle attack, Portland train attack, Lafayette.

Speaker 5:

So are those all,

Speaker 1:

Let's see much of those ma I mean, I know there's a lot of shootings. There's like every time that there's a three to four person shooting taking place in this country, that's all happening. Pittsburgh, synagogue.

Speaker 5:

When was

Speaker 1:

That? Am I just totally off on this?

Speaker 5:

I could be

Speaker 1:

What I see in the news on a regular basis. It's consistently more Antifa and BLM torching buildings every, every day, every night are these people setting up their

Speaker 5:

Own governments.

Speaker 1:

We have Chaz and chap four proud boys, are they setting up their own little cities within cities and being allowed to fester there. I understand that there are, there are bad groups in this country that do bad things. No question about that. But there is one group that is allowed to sort of operate in the shadows without any real repercussion. And Donald Trump didn't do much here either. Right? A lot of people were saying, you've got to go crack the whip on them . And I'm not sure that would have been the right strategy. There are of course, bad people on both sides. I'm not endorsing the proud boys or any of those things. I vehemently disagree with them and I condemn the hell out of all of them, honestly, because I don't know much about them. And if they are out there screaming or doing things that are

Speaker 5:

Racist and vitriolic

Speaker 1:

Towards other demographics, I got a problem with that. But if they're not doing those things and they're being labeled in that manner, that's a problem. And if we're , we're sort of blaming that the , the downfall of our justice system on white supremacy, when I don't see any of that in our justice system, that's a problem on I'm trying to just identify the right solution. It feels like there's way different standards for two different demographics. One group is, is aggressively demonized. The other group is forgotten about and thrown by the wayside. And that is not justice in this country. That's my only point. Right. All right. So thank you, mom . We have feisty lady says if Biden leaves office, regardless of what removes him and Harris becomes POTUS, how is the vice-president spot filled? Um, I think the, the vice-presidents , uh, the vice

Speaker 2:

President who becomes a president nominates that person, then the Senate confirms that person. So it's sort of like the same thing, right? The president then gets the nominate. The vice-president Senate confirms them . We have it's ed said, I love the passionate about justice reform . I agree. We need to make changes. Not sure what those changes are, but the first step act is a step in the right direction, right? The , the first step I think, is accountability and transparency, right? We need more of that. And so any act that supports that I'm in favor of, we have no doubt says the only white supremacist I've been in movies sounds like Joe has been watching too much Hollywood. Now it could be true hugging Mon and says, wouldn't it, wouldn't a good start to solving a lot of those problems with the legal system, be setting standards for sentencing, no more than five to 10, just you did this, get this amount of time, mandolin a black , white , you don't matter what you did to get this. So hugging money. And we already have that. It's called mandatory sentencing. And there are a lot of problems with that, right? And this was sort of in response to some of the racial disparities, because what was happening previously is there would be, there would be a , you know, let's say a white judge who sentences a white man to one year in prison and a black man to five years in prison for the same offense. And so they would say, well, why is that? And the judge would make up a bunch of stuff. So they said, well, now we have to cap this. We have to put a low end cap and a high end cap and make sure that , uh, that , uh , judges are not exceeding that it's mandatory. So they set the ranges. Now the problem with that is then they have mandatory sentencing. So now you can get a drug addict. Somebody who let's say has a conviction on January, March, April, they get in trouble. All of those cases are prosecuted. Uh, they can file those charges five years later, they do. So that person has since gotten sober, gotten job, got married, had kids, started a family, whatever they bring those charges seven years later. And now that person has mandatory sentencing. It's a three-strike rural state. So we've got three strikes that person's out. They go to prison, big, big problem. That's mandatory sentencing, right? That, that doesn't work out well for them. So that's why I have a problem with that. We have it's ed says every time Biden talks about justice, I shutter , he just , his justice sends a lot of people behind bars. We had a president that signed the first step act and got rid of him for a president that incarcerated more people than anyone else. And his VP and Carter rated the second. Most people it's insane. And they still claim the mantle of justice reform. And they're still blaming our problems in our society, as it relates to our justice system on white supremacy, which is my whole point here we have Quain in the house says, Hey, Rob, it does seem like the Democrats project an issue onto their adversaries, that they are actively committing a confession through projection. If you will, the hypocrisy is ad nauseum for me. Yeah. And I totally agree with that, right? They , they, they, they do a very good job of this. They're doing exactly what they're claiming the other party to , to be. And it's so frustrating for somebody in my position, because I see the consequences of this. And I'm so sick and tired of hearing these politicians not accept responsibility for it and shook off responsibility to other people, Joe Biden pass the bills. Now he's out here saying that it's white supremacy. No, Joe . It's about the bills that you passed . It's about the powers that you gave law enforcement. It's about the infrastructure that you've created over the last 30 years. Now you can blame white supremacists. All you want. It's not going to solve anything. And it really irritates me because there are people in our society who are hurting as a result of his actions. The Darby Lussier says January six , wasn't even the worst attack on the Capitol building. Since then, one of these bombers got pardoned by bill Clinton works with BLM. So now, so I'm assuming she hasn't changed much terrorist bond . The Capitol building in the early eighties, November seven, 1983 female led group called the communist organization, or [inaudible] bombed the Capitol building. Reagan's imperialistic vision of the country. Got it. We have see the veil says recklessness. An officer takes a person to the ground to subdue the person to arrest. And that gets called recklessness handcuffs. Cause skin rash equals recklessness pursuit suspect gets into a car, chase, recklessness, arresting the perp and the innocent goes free or recklessness. Yeah , that's exactly right. They want to lower the standard so that they can, they can prosecute police with very little hurdles, CACs access . Let us celebrate the mob out for blood against those who descent a man dead from drugs, a jury too afraid. Another imprisoned we must celebrate justice has been served. They told us the news. They tell us what we know, who has time to verify. Let us rejoice for our will has been served. It's poetry from CACs acts . Thank you for sharing that with us. CACs acts , we have no doubt says, will they now go after Sherri's that refuse to enforce unconstitutional laws using that bill? Will they now go after Sherri's that refuse to enforce unconstitutional law using that? I don't know what a Sherry is. What is a Sherry Sherry's I'm blanking on that? I don't know what a Sherry , I don't know what it is. A Patriot Musk says, Rob, I'm worried that they are going to use the white supremacy narrative and Floyd incident in some way with primary school curriculums to indoctrinate children, to hate white people. I think they're already doing that. I think that is called critical race theory is that I think that's already thing . So , so it's already happening across this country. Isn't that nice. We have Liberty or death says , isn't it great though, that we have cured all diseases except for the clunk flu and cancer, as we know it. Oh my gosh. What a day we got the dark says what political thought about the big speech Biden just gave the most ideologically ambitious speech of any democratic president in generations.

Speaker 6:

Yeah ,

Speaker 2:

It's too funny. There was one. I was reading on the New York times by , uh , uh, Robin today. I didn't clip it because it was so funny. I was going to be giggling my way through the entire story. I couldn't even, I couldn't even believe what I was reading. It was like somebody was , was talking about a messianic figure in Joe Biden. You know , he , he walked through the doors the same that insurrectionists tried to breach down on their mission to eviscerate America, Joe Biden. America's renewed inspiration, walked through those double doors and entered into the forum with new hope and new vision for America. And you're going ,

Speaker 1:

Who is this person? What is she talking about? Did you watch him? He kind of just, you know , hobbled on in there,

Speaker 2:

Like any other person does, but it's this glorifications deification of Joe

Speaker 1:

And of all of these political figures. We saw it with Obama. Trump Trumpers did it with Trump, right? A lot of people, Oh my God, it's Trump. And anything he does is without reproach. And you're just, you're going, Oh my gosh, can you ,

Speaker 5:

Uh , can we

Speaker 1:

It's fresh. I don't even know what to say. How do you even address those people? Because you're not on the same playing field. They're playing a game of puffing up and

Speaker 5:

Being so

Speaker 1:

Sick of Fantic that you, you can't

Speaker 2:

And even have a real conversation about them. They're too enamored. It's it's not a logical conversation. It's an emotional one. And we know how those go. We have Joe Snow in the house says, Rob, not sure if you watched it, but Donald Trump's Jr's speech or Donald J Trump's speech can't remember 17 or 18 was one of my favorite political speeches. Maybe ever. There was one, the one where he gave rush Limbaugh that , uh, that presidential medal of freedom was very impactful on me. Also, not just because of that one, but there was, that was a very powerful that might've been his 2017 one. He had people standing up , uh, veterans officers, all sorts of great American heroes. And it was pretty profound. I'm obviously a big rush Limbaugh fan. I know a lot of people don't like the man, but he was a hero to me in many ways. Big inspiration for why I do this show really. I mean, it was listening to him growing up , uh, in my , uh, with my mom in

Speaker 5:

My mom's car . And so , uh ,

Speaker 2:

That was, that was very impactful. I totally agree with you. Okay. So, all right. We got one more question from miss faith. Let's see what else we've got woodworking medic says, couldn't agree with you more. I work every day with people who were first responders during the Oklahoma city bombing, they felt like former president Biden's words were ridiculous. Yeah , they were ridiculous. They weren't ridiculous because it's supposed to further a narrative. It's this white supremacy narrative that they are trying to cram down. Everybody's throat. They're saying it's the biggest problem in the country. I don't see it Masisi .

Speaker 1:

Some other people see it. I don't see it. And so I want to know what they want to do about that. What are, what is their solution

Speaker 2:

And other liberties? What other new bureaucracies, what other things do they want to do in this country in order to solve that problem? I'm open to , for it passing the George Floyd bill. I don't know how that addresses that at all. So it's the other, is it everything else? I mean like literally everything else he went through, he talked about food, water, healthcare, border, immigrant ,

Speaker 5:

Everything else in the term of equity, we're going to have to remake

Speaker 2:

Society in order to root out

Speaker 5:

This white supremacy, the entire

Speaker 2:

Structure, economics education,

Speaker 5:

Culture law .

Speaker 2:

Everything's gotta be reformed in order to root out the systemic cause which as they are now defining it to be, which is systemic racism. All right ,

Speaker 5:

We'll see where it goes. Let's change gears. Shall we try to recenter myself? Just do it .

Speaker 2:

Do a little , uh , Zen meditation. Oh my gosh. I should do some four, seven, eight breathing, but that takes too long. Let's change gears. We're going to talk about Derek Shovan again, Derek Shovan is still in the news. We are now learning that federal prosecutors were going to arrest him regardless of what happened during his trial. He was of course convicted, but had he been acquitted, they would have arrested him because he was not walking out of that courtroom. Not in handcuffs because this, as we now are seeing is really a prosecution that has a lot of political tentacles. Shall we say? We know that back on April 20th, the attorney general Merrick Garland told us that they were looking into this case. And so this was a press release. They sent out back on that day, Tuesday, April 20th, us attorney general Merrick Garland statement, following the verdict in the conviction of Derek Shovan. He said the jury and the state trial of Derek Shovan has fulfilled its civic duty and rendered a verdict, convicting him on all counts while the state's prosecution was successful. I know that nothing can fill the void of the loved ones of George Floyd have felt since his death, the justice department has previously announced a federal civil rights investigation into the death of George Floyd. This investigation is ongoing. Okay. That was on April 20th, 2021. So 900

Speaker 5:

Days ago. Now we know God they're , they're moving

Speaker 2:

Steam ahead on this Shovan and the other officers are going to be indicted. According to the star Tribune start , your viewing of course is out of Minneapolis and they've done a great job following all of the Shovan news. So they are breaking the story or they've, or at least reporting on the story today that the federal government is in fact planning to continue forward with indicting Shovan Chauvin's in custody. He's going to be due for sentencing, I think in June, early June. So he's going to be transported back. He's going to be sentenced. We don't know how much time he's going to get in custody right now. And so, you know, who knows if this matters or not, if he's, if he's, you know , sentenced to serve what amounts to be a life sentence, which it won't. But if it did right, this doesn't matter because he's going to spend the rest of his time in custody. Uh, but we'll, we'll, we'll see where it goes. Anyways. Let's break down and figure out what is happening here. According to the star Tribune says Fed's plan to indict Shovan and other three X officers on civil rights charges. Leading up to the murder trial justice department. Officials had spent months gathering evidence to indict ex police officer on police brutality charges, but they feared the publicity. Publicity frenzy could disrupt the state's case. Yeah. Good call somebody. Should've told Maxine waters that in the city council. So they came up with a contingency plan. If Shovan were found, not guilty on all counts or the case ended in a mistrial, they would arrest him at the courthouse. According to sources, familiar with the discussions , backup plan would not be necessary. As we know, he was in fact convicted. Now is Chauvin's trial out of the way prosecutors are moving with their case. They planned to ask a grand jury to indict Shovan and three X officers involved in Floyd's killing Kung lane and foul on charges of civil rights violations. If the grand jury votes to indict, the former officers would face new civil riots, civil rights charges on top of the state's cases, meaning all four could be headed toward another criminal trial in federal court. The backup, a restaurant and meticulous planning over the timing of the charges illustrates the con complicated synchronicity of two parallel investigations into the most high profile case of police brutality. In decades, we have , uh , over the past year, Keith Ellison's team pursued murder and manslaughter charges. Federal authorities have been mounting their own case in private before a grand jury, a group of 23 citizens who meet in secret to hear evidence and ultimately decide if there is probable cause to charge. Proving how delicate outside publicity was Cahill repeatedly expressed frustration during jury selection about the $27 million settlement to see the jurors had to be dismissed under the contingency arrest plan. The us attorney's office would have charged Shovan by criminal complaint, a quicker alternative for a federal charge that doesn't require a grand jury. So they're talking about as an interesting, so they were, they were just waiting. So there's, there's typically two ways to sort of bring charges against somebody. One is through a direct complaint where you just file a complaint. So this is all this happens, like let's say , uh, in a DUI case, right? You get pulled over for DUI. You get arrested, taken down to the station, they draw your blood, put you in handcuffs, you know, the whole thing. And they will then write a traffic ticket and complaints , a direct complaint. They pass that over to the prosecutors , uh, to the, to the courts. It gets filed. Prosecutors grab it, it moves forward. There is no grand jury cause an officer saw what happened. They have enough probable cause to make that distinction, that determination. But in this case , uh, what, w w it sounds like they were good. They were, they were trying to go that route if needed. And I would have been, it would have been very curious to see how they would have drafted that complaint and what that would've looked like, because I'm not so sure that they , they have enough cause to start that cause of action anyways. So then they , uh, they didn't th th they didn't need to do that because he ultimately was convicted. So now they're going to take it back through a grand jury. And a grand jury is in the more traditional way that these, these types of cases typically will , uh, we'll move forward because you need them to review the evidence and then determine whether there's enough there to move forward. So it's , uh , interesting some technical stuff going on there, but, but it is interesting. Prosecutors want to indict Shovan in connection to two cases for pinning down Floyd for his neck for nine and a half minutes, and for a violent arrest of a 14 year old boy in 2017, in the latter case, Shovan struck the teen on the head with his flashlight, then grabbed him by the throat and hit him again, according to court documents. So why wasn't he let go then in 2017, why was he still on the force for another three years after beating a 14 year old in the head with a flashlight? Maybe that's a problem. I wonder what color that 14 year old kid was. Is this a police problem? I think so. It a cultural problem. I think so we have, Shovan beating a 14 year old in the head with a flashlight. Three other ex officers would be charged only in connection with Floyd's death. Federal case is going to be prosecuted by the justice department attorneys in Minnesota, in DC. They're going to run in, in addition to the civil investigation, into the Minneapolis police department in general, they announced this investigation after the Shovan verdict. Yeah. So they're going, the justice department is doing an investigation into Minneapolis. I think they're also looking into North Carolina. Uh , they're looking into a lot of different places now. Let's see where that goes. Now we also know from , uh , from the daily mail here, they give us a little bit more information. They were ready to also, if it, if it ended in a mistrial, they were going to be, you know, ready to pop up they're in there and make an arrest. See if there's anything else good in here.

Speaker 5:

I think we

Speaker 2:

All, I think we've covered most of this. The secret plot saw DOJ investigators collaborate with their state counterparts. Wow. So the federal prosecutors were communicating with state prosecutors

Speaker 5:

To arrange, to charge Shovan by Chris

Speaker 2:

General complaint, which is not required grand jury. Yeah. Because it would have

Speaker 5:

Prompted fresh riots.

Speaker 2:

So those, those four officers, all right, we've got a couple of questions coming in. Let's take a quick look at them . Lassie 91 says it seemed to me during jury selection, that there was not one fair person involved. The only one I would've picked didn't get picked. My theory is that there was corruption in the initial process of sending out letters to prospective jurors. Is there any way to investigate this? It's a very good question. Lastly , 91, and I don't know, I don't know what, what the process is there in Minnesota and how they would do that. Uh , think

Speaker 5:

That there would be, there would certainly be good argument for that. Right.

Speaker 2:

We're doing a lot of audits elsewhere in this country right now, right here in Arizona. In fact, and

Speaker 5:

Then I think that you would be with him

Speaker 2:

Then your rights, if you're a defense lawyer to go to the court and say, Hey, I just want to ask about this. What zip codes did you target? Okay, what's a addresses. What names, what age range? How does this whole thing work? Is it a truly random sample? Or do you have somebody just saying, well, we're going to pick that quadrant this time or that quadrant, what is the system look like? How are they rotating jurors? How big is the, is the massive pool that, that, that letters get sent to and all and on and on and on. But I would be curious about, about that. And then once, you know, the process, that's how you would investigate it. Leafy bugs says there was a lot of speculation about a prior relationship between Shovan and Floyd. I heard that, but I didn't see any evidence actually come through of that. Apparently they both worked at a club as bouncers at some point in the past, but this wasn't raised at trial to my knowledge. Nope. I didn't see that would this mean they didn't know each other and the speculation was wrong. If they did know each other, that would surely be relevant. Uh, I think it,

Speaker 5:

I mean, I think it would, I don't know that legally it would be relevant, honestly, you know, the,

Speaker 2:

It would be relevant I guess, for intense , but they weren't even charging the intense , uh, charges .

Speaker 5:

So I think

Speaker 2:

It might be relevant. You know , I don't know. I , I heard these rumors as well, but I never heard of anything about George Floyd working as a bouncer or anything like that. It doesn't mean it's not true. It's just, I just haven't seen it. And I didn't see any of it come out in the trial either. We have Tim MCD says, listen to Tim, pool's take on the Fed's plan to arrest Chauvin . It seems that there is an undertone of abolishing police in a way to eventually promote a deployment of federal police thoughts. I actually agree with that. I, and so I think that there, there is a trend in this direction, a trend would be, as we see, right? And we just talked about that with the George Floyd bill. It's about, federalizing a lot of the police. It's about bringing those things upstairs from the local state governments up under federal control of federal police force, I think is exactly where this is going. And one of the things that is what support that would be the defund, the police movement, right? So stop funding, police departments so that the federal government picks up the bill and they get to dictate the rules. They get to tell you how to do stuff, because they're the feds. If you want the federal government money and you want protection, since you just funded your own police, you need the feds to step in. So then suddenly you started have people clamoring for that. I think the other thing that is going to happen, I saw this on, over on ranting Lee , before we hopped on the show, I didn't clip it, but I think 200 Seattle police officers have sort of bailed over the last two years. Numbers are plummeting. So if you create an environment, a political environment where it is so,

Speaker 5:

So , so difficult to be a police officer,

Speaker 2:

Because if you do something and you do something that's even marginally

Speaker 5:

Questionable, if

Speaker 2:

You're going to lose everything and including your life and your freedom and your Liberty and your family and all of that stuff, then it's too big of a risk. Why would you do that?

Speaker 5:

If, if they don't want you, if they're going to punish you

Speaker 2:

On the close call cases, like for example, the McCaya Bryan Case is that officers are going to get charged.

Speaker 5:

It was the cleanest shoot I've seen since we've been doing this show, didn't even have to

Speaker 2:

Think about it, right? She was swinging a knife at somebody else obvious, easy.

Speaker 5:

So, and I'm

Speaker 2:

Somebody who likes to sort of, you know , take the defendant's side on these things. The victim's side on these things, very clear, obvious

Speaker 5:

That guy is still

Speaker 2:

In , in a, in a bucket of hot water, boiling water, talking about theoretically charging him and stuff like that. So if you're a cop now and you say, Hey, you know, you asked me to show up,

Speaker 5:

To do a job, to preserve life and protect our stuff .

Speaker 2:

Society. I did that. Now you want to theoretically charge me with the crime and lock me up. Like Derek Shovan, are you kidding me? Now ? I'm done. I've had enough of this high-risk job. I'm going to bounce. I'm going to go to a different state or a different city, and I'm not going to be around anymore. If you get a trend of officer's doing that. Well now not only do you have defund the police because you have , uh , you know, woke liberals around this country saying, Oh yeah, I support BLM. No matter what I support the fund, the police, no matter what do you realize? Do you know what they want? You know, what they want to do to your city and to your local

Speaker 5:

Police department? Well, okay.

Speaker 2:

See what happens then you have police officers who , who aren't there. So now you have police departments that have no funds and no employees, because nobody wants to work for them. Now you have to have a federal police force and they have unlimited money. They have, you know , unlimited personnel. Everybody will work. They only give you benefits until the end of the world will give you all the time off in the world and they make it a cushy job. So then they'll replace local law enforcement with a federal law enforcement.

Speaker 5:

I don't know where else this goes, honestly, because the , the current government is

Speaker 2:

Creating a system where it's almost impossible to have

Speaker 5:

A fair trial, right? Even with Shovan we had Biden weighing in, they were

Speaker 2:

Sequestered, right? We had Maxine waters, a federal elected official weighing in

Speaker 5:

Many people were , were Dogpile

Speaker 2:

On the Shovan case in a way that made a fair trial

Speaker 5:

Difficult, and that that's not going to be good people .

Speaker 2:

We're going to start demanding action. And the feds are going to be more than happy

Speaker 5:

To step in. All right , we got justice

Speaker 2:

First in the house, says the blood thirsty , rarely

Speaker 5:

Let up. That is why cities

Speaker 2:

Of rest refuge, where the biblical solution were the biblical solution to manslaughter. Should they give Shovan a changed identity and send him to a remote country to live?

Speaker 5:

Uh, no, I don't think so. I don't think so.

Speaker 2:

Did they give them a change in identity and send them? No, I don't think so. I mean, I think right . He was convicted in an American court of law. I don't agree,

Speaker 5:

But that's our system. I don't think that ,

Speaker 2:

Uh, that he shouldn't be broken out or anything like that. You know, it's, it's the system, the system is working,

Speaker 5:

I guess maybe [inaudible] .

Speaker 2:

He says the fact that the justice department did not officially,

Speaker 5:

It's an outcome based backup plan. Just show

Speaker 2:

Shows you the federal government has the FBI as its political police. What happened for the search for justice while they're searching, they're searching Rudy Giuliani's apartment. That's where they're searching for justice. We're going to get to that in the next segment we have inky . Woe says if our justice system is based on white supremacy, then what is the alternative public stoning or no reference to we? I don't know. I don't know what the alternative is.

Speaker 5:

I don't know what they want to do. I'm curious. What's the solution.

Speaker 2:

The George Floyd bill, federal police force.

Speaker 5:

No, not okay with that. Sorry. Nice try. But no, not okay. Uh, because you already do a terrible job running, literally everything. So we're not going to give you money

Speaker 2:

Or unlimited authority and monopolistic power over our lives. We already have enough of that locally with our local law enforcement. Okay. Local law enforcement is important

Speaker 5:

And it's local because they live where they patrol. We don't need foreign Browns ,

Speaker 2:

Coats , Brown shirts coming in from Washington, dictating how we all live our lives. It's too far removed. We want them local. All right . So let's

Speaker 5:

Change gears. What kind of show is this today? What kind of person am I today?

Speaker 2:

Faith's laughing at me for some reason. All right . So we've got one more segment to get to, and we're going to do it

Speaker 5:

Right now.

Speaker 2:

Rudy Giuliani is still in some hot water. We spent a lot of time talking about him and Sidney Powell and some of the others after the 2020 election. And very recently, the federal government, federal agents burst into his home in Manhattan and seized a bunch of items, things like computers and cell phones and other information. This is a big deal. Rudy Giuliani was president Trump's attorney for a long period of time. Somebody who worked in the administration and is a very high , high level official somebody with very sensitive documents,

Speaker 5:

Including Hunter. Biden's hard drive. What is going on?

Speaker 2:

How does this happen? Let's take a quick look and see if we can piece it together. This is over from the NYP post as federal agents raid Rudy Giuliani's New York city apartment in the Ukraine probe . They raided his office on Wednesday to law enforcement sources. Briefed on the matter, told the post agents executed a search warrant, which means a judge signed off on this seizing electronic devices from both locations. The moves were tied to an investigation into Rudy Giuliani's dealings in the Ukraine. He lives on the upper East side bill building. They a doorman described as greeting the agents at 6:00 AM and letting them pass when they displayed a search warrant, bad way to wake up raid marked an escalation in the feds probe of the former mayor, who is being investigated over whether he illegally lobbied former president Donald Trump on behalf of officials and oligarchs in the Ukraine, Ukrainian officials were also reportedly helping Giuliani dig up dirt on Trump's political rivals, including then democratic candidate, Joe Biden, and his son Hunter. Remember this, we talked about some of this. There was sort of this, this allegation that, you know, Trump won was , was going to do something . It was a quid pro quo argument that they wanted some, some dirt on Biden and Hunter in exchange for something else. Uh , and then it turns out that actually Hunter Biden was largely involved in a lot of that. Remember we had Tony, Bob Gallucci and that whole preelection debacle that nobody covered, except we did the warrant sought communications between Giuliani and other people, including colonists John Solomon, who talked with Giuliani about the effort lawyer. Robert Castello told the journal that the warrant outlined an investigation into the suspected violation of overseas lobbying regulations. Giuliani was awakened by the feds. They took a cell phone and other devices at his office. They seized a computer used by his aid Joanne's Afante who has also been appeared , uh , had been subpoenaed to appear before a federal grand jury. Next month, they're trying to make Rudy look like a criminal says Costello. New York times also says here that , uh,

Speaker 5:

They executed

Speaker 2:

The search warrants around 6:00 AM. They say, this is an extraordinary action for prosecutors to take against the lawyer, let alone a lawyer for a former president. And that is an understatement , uh, an understatement. And I brought this up, right? Let's say for example, that the feds wanted to come in here and raid my office

Speaker 5:

For some reason, they , they shouldn't because we're very lawful. We pay our taxes. All right , take it easy. But if they did, that would be a big problem for us ,

Speaker 2:

Our clients, okay. We're a law firm. We've got a lot of very protected, confidential information here. And that is the highest protection that we have in our law. It's attorney, client privilege. It's so sacred that this is a big deal. If the feds are going to come in and get access to that stuff, if they're going to crack the shell on that egg, there's a good reason for them to do that. And there's a good reason for the judge to sign off on this, right? The judge would have looked at this and said, wait a minute, hold on a minute. You want to go to whose house

Speaker 5:

Rudy Giuliani. The like from president Trump, you want to go and raid his house. I'm going to need to see Sam good cost for that. Judge heard something and said, okay, go ahead. Right here you go, go check that out.

Speaker 2:

So , uh , it will be very curious to see what that means. This is a big deal. When, when a lawyer gets rated like this, especially a president's

Speaker 5:

Lawyer, it's a big deal. So

Speaker 2:

It marked a major development into the running investigation. Many of these things were at the, at the center of the first impeachment trial. It was a remarkable moment in Giuliani's long arc as a public figure, going from September 11th, took down organized crime, Giuliani denied any wrongdoing, argued the search warrants demonstrated

Speaker 5:

A corrupt double standard on the part of the justice department, which he said had ignored blatant crimes by Democrats,

Speaker 2:

Leon lawyer Costello called the searches unnecessary because his client had twice offered to answer prosecutions prosecutor's questions, except those regarding Giuliani's privileged communications with the former president, what they did today was

Speaker 5:

Illegal thuggery. One of the warrants for Giuliani's devices indicated that

Speaker 2:

Several prosecutors were searching for communications between him and several Ukrainian officials, including Pete Petro, Poroshenko, and two prosecutors that helped Mr. Giuliani collect information about the Bidens in the Ukraine. FBI agents also executed a search warrant on Wednesday morning at the Washington area, home of Victoria town Singh . Another lawyer close to Giuliani who had several dealings with Ukrainians as well. The warrant was for her cell phone warrants are not an explicit accusation. As they say to obtain a search warrant, they must persuade a judge. They have sufficient reason to believe a crime was committed and the search could turn up evidence of the crime. So a judge listened to it and signed off on it. And I don't know what judge it was. Right. What if this was judge Sullivan or something like that?

Speaker 5:

All right . That's that's

Speaker 2:

Not an unbiased judge. So, you know, this could be a very bias judge. It could be an unbiased judge. We don't know.

Speaker 5:

Yeah . Regardless, it's a big deal that a lawyer had

Speaker 2:

Their office rated. And in particular, because it was Rudy's who is the lawyer we're talking about? Now he posted on Twitter. He said the FBI left behind the only electronics that contain evidence of crimes. The Hunter Biden hard drives. Ooh , mayor Giuliani offered them on several occasions, but the agents steadfastly declined. Keep in mind that the agents could not read the physical hard drives without plugging them in, but they took Mr. Giuliani's word that the hard drives were copies of Hunter. Biden's hard drive and did not contain anything pertaining to Mr. Giuliani. He says, think about what that tells you their Alliance on Giuliani's credibility tells you everything you need to know about this case. So here is the statement from Rudy's attorneys. It says the Biden department of justice has completely ignored, clear evidence, which the FBI has had for over a year in texts and emails on Hunter. Biden's hard drive a failing to register numerous times as a foreign agent. Okay. So we're going to talk about this, the, the federal , uh , the foreign agents registration act. We're going to talk about failing to register as a foreign agent

Speaker 5:

Is

Speaker 2:

The same type of allegation that they're making against Rudy Giuliani. So Rudy's talking about this in the context of Hunter, but they're going to be making this claim again,

Speaker 5:

Rudy. Okay. It's the, the, the, the foreign agents

Speaker 2:

Registration act. If you are somebody who is doing business

Speaker 5:

As with, with, you know , foreign entities, foreign countries, you've gotta be registered according to our

Speaker 2:

Or government for many different reasons. Now, what Rudy was saying is that Hunter was doing that with Ukraine and that Joe Biden, when he was, vice-president said something to the effect of stop, that prosecution of that person. Otherwise you're not going to get the billion dollars in foreign aid to the U S government was giving to the Ukraine. And then lo and behold, that prosecution stopped. They get paid Hunter, Biden's put on the board of barista making, you know, a million bucks a year or whatever, doing nothing. Okay .

Speaker 5:

And that seems like it's a violation of the foreign agents registration act. Now they're gonna be doing this

Speaker 2:

Same thing against Giuliani. They're going to be saying, Oh no, no, you ,

Speaker 5:

You were the person who was coordinating all of this with the

Speaker 2:

[inaudible] . So we're going to charge you not Hunter. They raid his apartment. He says, Oh, the, the hard drive that you want. It's right there. I know you're taking mine, but there's hunters right there. They all know we don't need that.

Speaker 5:

We need yours. Rudy goes on

Speaker 2:

The justice department decided it was higher priority to serve at Dawn search warrants for electronics at the home and law office of Rudy search warrants involved only one indication of an alleged incident of failure to register as a fool

Speaker 5:

Or an agent. Okay. So why are they searching? He says, it's

Speaker 2:

Just that one account. It's that one alleged incident Giuliani not only has denied this allegation, but offered twice in the past two years through his attorney, Bob Costello , to demonstrate that this is entirely untrue. Twice, the offer was rejected by the SDN SDNY . By stating that while they were willing to listen to anything Costello had to say, they would not tell Giuliani or Costello the subject matter. They wanted him to address. So they want to investigate the hell out of you, but not tell you why.

Speaker 5:

Got it contracts

Speaker 2:

With multiple proven incidences of failure to file a foreign agent on the Hunter Biden hard-drive justice departments focused on him,

Speaker 5:

Not on Hunter. All right .

Speaker 2:

Clear example of the corrupt double standard electronics are taken. They're covered , uh, the materials that they took have attorney client privilege and other constitutional

Speaker 5:

Privileges. Yeah. It's gonna be a big deal. So he goes on and on,

Speaker 2:

On and on. Of course, I'm sure you will not be surprised. The FBI left behind all of Hunter's electronics. Okay. So I want to show you this, a woman over here. Her name is Leslie McAdoo Gordon.

Speaker 5:

She is a lawyer who graduated Georgetown law in 1996,

Speaker 2:

Licensed in DC, Maryland, Virginia, federal trials, appeals courts appear as a Supreme court, former DOD special agent. So security clearance, background investigations. She does criminal investigations, trials and appeals clearance, and debarment cases.

Speaker 5:

All right . Which , uh, so you can see here , uh , uh, you know, on Twitter. So sorry ,

Speaker 2:

Buddy , who practices in this area of law, foreign agents, foreign agents, registration act. And we've also got , uh , sort of debarment cases, which would be if you're a lawyer and you're accused of some sort of misconduct you get in trouble, they can throw you out of the practice of law. It's called being disbarred. And so she apparently helps lawyers with some of this stuff. So , uh , she posted a very nice thread on Twitter, explaining some of this stuff about what's going on with Rudy. And I wanted to show you that. So here is what she posted. She says here, the Giuliani

Speaker 5:

Case, unless the government knows

Speaker 2:

SIG , unless the government knows significantly different facts from what is being and has been historically reported about Giuliani's dealings in the Ukraine. I see little to no facts to support probable cause for a FARA violation and therefore to execute a search warrant. Okay. Foreign agents, registration act. This case looks extremely suspect to me. She says, this is a technical statute aimed at specific conduct. It is seldom prosecuted. Criminally DOJ has been trying to expand it in recent years, not just against political figures as is typical of agencies looking to solve,

Speaker 5:

Expand why pose article about it today?

Speaker 2:

Tellingly devoid of facts that would actually constitute a violation of the statute. It reads like it was somehow illegal to try to investigate the Ukraine, Biden, barista , you Ivana Vich issues, which it wasn't under the fr F a R a or otherwise certainly possible that Giuliani could violate FARA , but the facts put forward publicly to support the allegation. Don't add up to the actual elements of the offense, which is what she studies. So who is the foreign client for whom Rudy is supposedly trying to affect us policies . So see what this is all about. If he's repping Trump, his client isn't foreign. What us policy is he trying

Speaker 5:

To influence? If it's to

Speaker 2:

Get the investigation of Biden, how is that on behalf of the Ukrainians? How is he working? How's it really working on behalf of the Ukrainians? If he's trying get the Ukrainians to investigate Biden, how is that influencing us policy? Was he lobbying the state department and Trump to get rid of the ambassador [inaudible] on behalf of Ukraine in the Ukrainians, it was reported that that was because he didn't think she was

Speaker 5:

Loyal to Trump, just

Speaker 2:

Mixing together foreigners U S policy and a client in some kind of combination, doesn't create a far out violation. The statute requires disclosure that you're representing foreigners in such a way that you're influencing us policy through a contact with the federal agency

Speaker 5:

Or official. Did Rudy do that

Speaker 2:

Has a foreign Ukrainian client. Okay. What us policy is he tried to influence by contracting a federal agency or official on those client's

Speaker 5:

Behalf. That is the relevant

Speaker 2:

Inquiry investigating foreign conduct, including with help from foreign persons on behalf of a us client. Even if the goal is to influence you as policy is not a violation of foreign Afara because the client is not foreign. Okay. So you see what she's doing. She's just going through all the different elements here and showing how Rudy fits them or in this case, doesn't she goes on and she continues. She says, and doing things for your us client that also happened to benefit or align with the interest of foreigners. Also isn't a FARA violation. If you don't represent those foreigners, it is possible to be covered by FARA without directly lobbying the government. This is one thing that makes it separate from lobbying disclosure act. Another statute, one farro section basically applies to things like trying to influence us political opinion and views generally, but you still have to be doing that

Speaker 5:

Influencing or quote political activities on behalf of highlights this on behalf of a foreign client. So he's ruined it .

Speaker 2:

Rudy doing that, who knows a couple other things bother me about the case. First far isn't

Speaker 5:

Is almost always handled non

Speaker 2:

Criminally. Why is this one being handled criminally? Because it's a Rudy Giuliani. And because we have a Biden administration, you know, that especially where the target is a lawyer has counsel and has previously offered to talk to investigators. That smells.

Speaker 5:

Yep . It does. Doesn't it. Awesome job. Leslie. McAfee ,

Speaker 2:

Gordon, go check her out. McAdoo Gordon. Very, very good follow, very awesome summary here. M C a D O O

Speaker 5:

Gordon over

Speaker 2:

On Twitter. Give her a shout because that I think is a very nice summation of this. It does smell fishy. It is a big overextension, and I'm very curious to see where this goes. Let's take some questions over from watching the watchers.locals.com . We got Sharon Quinney in the house as what they were after was Hunter's hard. Drive the implications for national security, not to mention attorney client privilege, not good. And it's also not good if this is a trend, you know? Oh , she's okay. I get it. Now. It was that X-Files space, time warp . We went through. That's why I keep hearing that old song from that old movie. This is not America. Good to see you, Sharon. Uh, what else we have, we have best semi Anto in the house as can Giuliani appealed a seizure to a higher court. So

Speaker 5:

Yes. So

Speaker 2:

He , he , he doesn't necessarily need to appeal it, but yes, he can challenge the search warrant, everything, all of that can happen in this same court. Uh, but yes, he can, he can challenge this a lot and he absolutely will. We have Ankito says is the FBI being sent to destroy all traces of Hunter's laptops . So it disappears from history to hammer them all like Hilary's cell phones she used.

Speaker 5:

Um , what do you mean like with a cloth number that, Hey, Hillary , do you wipe your emails ? Oh, what do you mean? Like with a cloth?

Speaker 2:

No. Like, did you delete the incriminating evidence that you were keeping on your private hard drives so that the oversight committees couldn't see any of it? That's what I was asking Liberty says I would love to see the warrant . Do you think they will release

Speaker 5:

It? Can we

Speaker 2:

Find it on pacer? I wonder if they persuaded the judge the same way they persuaded the Pfizer court. That's a good question. In other words, they didn't really have to do much persuading

Speaker 5:

At all. Just kind of, Hey, we want this. Oh, you need it. Yeah. We need it. You sure? Yeah. You got it. Do whatever you need. You're on your own go hog. Wild. Good to see you Liberty , uh, about the warrants.

Speaker 2:

Oh, am I going to see that on pacer? I don't know if I'll see that on pacer. Well, first and foremost, we got to see if there's an actual case. If they charge that , um, I'm going to guess that that is all probably sealed right now. So I'm trying to think about how I could ,

Speaker 5:

Uh, I will look, I'm going to ,

Speaker 2:

I look on it . We're going to be following this one. Rudy's going to fire back because this is a big, this is a big deal. Anytime you go into a lawyer's office and it's the president's lawyer, that's a big deal. Joe Snow says, does this raid or, and search for communication, have anything to do with Biden being convicted and Ukrainian court for bribery

Speaker 5:

And the like, I don't know .

Speaker 2:

I didn't even know that was happening over there in the Ukraine. I don't follow the Ukrainian news, but maybe right. Maybe this is a, a shake, the tree type of a thing to go

Speaker 5:

And crack

Speaker 2:

Heads a little bit. We have N Y renal MD says with what certainty do we have that information involving Hunter Biden will be treated without bias. Just like the Hillary Clinton email scandal, the feds will draw a wide circle around Ukraine, make it secret during the investigation because of justice department rules, likely key players will be offered immunity. We will never know about any possible media misdeeds. We need a special prosecutor. I was Durham supposed to investigate any of that. Is he still around what happened now ?

Speaker 5:

Um , yeah, I , yeah , look, I

Speaker 2:

Think we kind of need a new justice department.

Speaker 5:

Just the whole, the whole thing, not just a special process. The whole thing be brave says, Hmm . Would Biden be used

Speaker 2:

The FBI to persecute his political enemies? What's that called? The name escapes me.

Speaker 5:

Well,

Speaker 2:

I don't think it would be the first time in this country. We have Patriot Musk's as Rob. This is interesting that Rudy is Trump's attorney, which would mean he has very high security clearance. Would you would think FBI would have been on top of this for years in advance with Rudy?

Speaker 5:

You would, you would think so. It it's, it's, it's very strange, right? Somebody

Speaker 2:

Who is that high echelon. I mean, he was running for president

Speaker 5:

At one point. I remember that America's mayor big deal, Rob, if they can do this to Rudy,

Speaker 2:

Could they do this to you? How often do you find yourself self-censoring to protect your practice and clients? Um, uh, I, you know, I, I don't say a lot, but I do. I absolutely do. I mean, you'll notice this channel has, has changed, right? We covered a lot of the underlying election litigation. Don't really do that anymore. I used to do the deep dive frame by frame analysis on the body cameras can't really do that anymore. I mean, there's a lot of things that we can't talk about. I've got a lot of complaints and things to say about , uh, sort of the over encroachment of the government as it relates to the pandemic and about how they're the stepping all over a lot of our

Speaker 5:

Private, very

Speaker 2:

Important liberties on a daily basis. Got a huge problem with that. But, you know, kind of leave that one, leave some of that stuff off the platform, unfortunately,

Speaker 5:

And it's , it's a bummer, right? And

Speaker 2:

It's, I think a necessary thing to do right now, which is why I'm so grateful to those of you who are helping us build a different platform, brick by brick, [email protected] . And I mean that genuinely, you know, at some point there will be enough of a user base in an alternative platform where we can go and talk about everything and it's going to take time. It's going to take years before we have enough people taking their , taking their ball from the , the , the current tech world and saying , I don't like playing with you guys anymore. You guys are not nice and fair, and I'm going to go to a different platform. And so we're, we're transitioning the whole, the whole world is right. There are many people who are really working hard, very smart people on decentralized applications on the back of blockchain and some other pretty amazing things that are happening out there. So the tide will turn the other direction. Free speech is going to win out every time. It , you know, Liberty is gonna win out every time. It's not about the authoritarians, the people who want to take total control of your life, they are on the dark side. They lose, they do not win these things right now. They'll seize power for a certain period of time. They'll cause a lot of madness and mayhem throughout the world. We've seen it historically in different nation States around this country and even non nation States , uh, before we really, before those were even a thing. And there is a new way of doing, you know, of doing life and , and sort of negotiating now because things are going digital. And when we can reorganize regroup, right? Many people who are interested in Liberty had all of their eggs in the big tech platforms

Speaker 5:

Basket, and nobody was

Speaker 2:

Expecting really what happened during that .

Speaker 5:

The Trump Exodus , that they would cancel

Speaker 2:

Sitting president off of every stinkin platform in this country, big deal. And so now everybody got punched in the face. Now everybody has to reorient a little bit, but there are amazing people out there who are out there speaking, organizing programming, doing all sorts of very cool things. And there will be a time ,

Speaker 5:

Time and place where there's a lot of these ,

Speaker 2:

These main platforms where you do have to do some of the self-censorship , it's going to be part of a bygone era. And I'm looking forward to that. And I really appreciate all of you who are helping us build that, you know, going over to locals. Uh there's it's not just for our community. There's a lot of other amazing communities over there, like Viva and barns and other people who like to engage in controversial

Speaker 5:

Topics, who don't just

Speaker 2:

Bow down to authority at every turn and accept whatever the government tells them. As fact, it's going to take time to get over

Speaker 5:

Over there , but we're doing it. Okay .

Speaker 2:

And yes, if the feds wanted to come in and rate our office, they, they could do it. Right. W w what am I going to do to stop them ? Uh , it's not something that I, I , you know, they don't have any basis for it. We don't do any business with the Ukraine or any foreign business or anything like that. I mean, we're a local law firm. We practice in Scottsdale, Arizona. We are ,

Speaker 5:

Uh , you know , reputable,

Speaker 2:

Not a single one of our lawyers has ever been disciplined. I mean, we

Speaker 5:

Clean record here because we know we're aggressive.

Speaker 2:

No, we're out there on the forefront. I'm on this channel every day, railing against the government, against police, against prosecutors, against judges. So I know, and I think our is small. It's still quite small. I'm not on anybody's radar yet, but fast forward that, right? I don't want them looking back through my closet and saying , Hey, remember when you thought you were a small YouTuber back in 2021

Speaker 5:

That you were untouchable.

Speaker 2:

No , it's like, Hey, we gotta, we gotta protect ourselves. We gotta protect our clients. We've gotta protect our family. We've gotta protect our society. We've gotta protect America against these things. And so you gotta play by the rules

Speaker 5:

To some degree, right? You can't just be reckless with your conduct, but it's

Speaker 2:

Part of the master plan. It's all part of improving things and meeting other people and being part of a movement, finding something bigger than ourselves that we can plug ourselves into and help

Speaker 5:

Think to create the world in which we want to live.

Speaker 2:

We're moving that direction. Now sometimes before you build something great, there's going to be

Speaker 5:

Some, some, you know , destruction in , in the path. Some things need to be broken in order for them to be rebuilt. And

Speaker 2:

We're seeing that happen in this country right now, largely I think with the media a lot with our political elected class, I mean, people are checking out. I don't even know what the Republican party

Speaker 5:

Is doing. You know what I mean ? Really, there's a, there's a realignment happening and I'm not, I'm not too upset about it because I think we're going to lose a lot of the very weak elements that have just been an anchor on society for a long period of time. And I mean that,

Speaker 2:

You know, politically, there's a lot of

Speaker 5:

Baggage in our

Speaker 2:

Political system that people are tired of. And they're looking for different solutions. We have [inaudible]

Speaker 5:

Says, could it be that the FBI

Speaker 2:

Is trying to intimidate temp from Trump, from running that his enemies will have sensitive information about him, a subtle message, that he will not be able to have any safe, legal relationship with anyone. Yeah. So this is already on record is happening, right? We've seen this, we saw this during the election litigation prior to January six, many of Trump's attorneys, people who were filing lawsuits in different States, challenging the results, stop working for him because they were getting threatened and harassed by other citizens around the country. So they just kind of bailed out it's it's reprehensible. In my opinion, that lawyers would do that. I think that lawyers should be stronger than external criticisms. We've got a duty to our clients. We've got a duty to represent people who need it

Speaker 5:

Against difficult

Speaker 2:

Environments in difficult situations. And so if you have an attorney, who's just, Oh, I'm scared because some people on Twitter are tweeting at me. You got the wrong attorney on that one, for sure. But a lot of that happened, right? And these are people with families and lives and kids and stuff like that. So, you know, if you have somebody who's used to practicing civil law, right? And suddenly she gets a thousand emails a day saying you are a racist, tyrannical, Nazi enabler, that attorney is going to bail. Cause that's a lot of pressure that nobody wants on their backs. So yeah, I mean, if , if, if they can continue to keep Trump subdued, keep him off the internet, keep them off the, you know, the , the social media platforms really pull back all of his tools, including his professional help, you know, take his colleagues off the board. You can kind of mute

Speaker 5:

Him and it's working

Speaker 2:

Right now. Leafy bug says, I reckon Trump is the ultimate target. They're fishing for Trump people. They want to find another Cohen to rat on Trump. Yeah . And Cohen actually said that Cohen said that Rudy was going to rat on Trump. I think that's on the front of , uh , the Drudge report the last time I checked. All right. So great questions . Kind of a strange show today. Thanks for bearing with me on that. But I , uh, I appreciate you being here today. I want to welcome all of our new suburbs [email protected] Big. Thanks. Big. Thank you to Jaak yacht rock guy. Welcome. We have the middle

Speaker 5:

Sister in the house. Good

Speaker 2:

To see you. The middle sister. I was the oldest brother. You are the middle sister. We have econ two 53. We have JT, TX Oh eight. We have H V N a a H van Allen H van Allen is in the house. We have look to G we have , uh , Doug McBride or DG McBride is in the house. They all joined our community [email protected] And we are very appreciative of that. As I mentioned, you know, you are helping us to create a separate platform that will last, that will be available for people like us, who want to have these conversations and ask these types of questions. Like

Speaker 5:

These people here . What's up

Speaker 2:

To all of you. Thank you so much for chiming in on the show today. And we'll give some shout outs to the rest of the suburbs over there on locals. Before we button it up for the day , uh, we got Kay Ramsey in the house. We have our holiday welcome or hello to you. You guys have been around for awhile . We have rags in the house. We have Rob Frawley. We have tweaked want to say hello to L crew S S one big hello to interested party. We got in the house. Kimber 20, 20 it's ed, Robert Barnes . I see him poking out. We got snuck , arms gust, click be campy. We have sea Wolf , 74 Liberty or death saw him today. What's up noro Vajra we have deadliest Jamie Boyd. K K O sock 71 saw him today. We got, sir, Michael in the house does a few SKO Lassie 91, and others. Thank you so much for supporting [email protected] If you're not already over there, you can get some great things for free copy of my free book. You can see down here in the bottom left, that is called beginning to winning. Also available on Amazon. You can download a copy of my slides that we just went through today. The impeachment party template is available here. You can download my existence system template, which is also

Speaker 5:

This one, which is you can, you can

Speaker 2:

Actually get a copy of this template and you can download the entire course. It's called existence systems. It's this personal productivity tool that I use on a daily basis. And I was writing down my gratitude list today. Oh no, I have to call it my weekly must . So I put down that I have to reach out to my mom. So my mom was a , had a big thing that happened to her today. She was a little backstory, right? Many of you know that I lost my younger brother in 2016 to suicide. He had a long battle with opioids and drugs. So when I lost my brother, my mother lost her

Speaker 5:

Back in 2016, very difficult, couple of years for us. And

Speaker 2:

No, we sort of pulled it together. So my mom in 2016, lost

Speaker 5:

Her son today. Five

Speaker 2:

Years later in 2021, she was invited to speak in front of a big group of people by governor Doosan ,

Speaker 5:

He's wife, Mrs. Doosey invited my mom to come

Speaker 2:

And then speak to a huge audience of people about grief, suicide loss, and overcoming all of those things .

Speaker 5:

It's pretty amazing to go from a grieving mom in 2016, to somebody who's helping other people recover from their loss five years powerful.

Speaker 2:

So I made that on my list. I put that on my list because it's inspirational

Speaker 5:

As hell. So I gotta make sure I check with her. See how that went today. I heard it went well. So we got to have

Speaker 2:

A phone call about it. So anyways, right. That's a good, that's a good thing to do. This helps me do those things. And you can create your own version of this by going to Robert griller.com

Speaker 5:

And purchasing

Speaker 2:

It. It looks like this. If you want to take a quick look at the templates, you can download this. The course will actually walk you through every one of these blocks block by block, by block, to customize these

Speaker 5:

Yourself and print out your sheet and rock and ,

Speaker 2:

And roll . So check that out. Robert griller.com . Before we get out of here, I also am a criminal defense attorney here at the RNR law group. You can see it right there. We offer free case evaluations in Scottsdale, Arizona, and we love to help good people who have been charged with crimes, find safety, clarity, and hope in their cases

Speaker 5:

And their lives. We help people with anything, DUIs, drugs, violence, assaults,

Speaker 2:

Anything, and everything in between misdemeanor cases, felony cases, old warrants, restoration of rights. So you can get a firearm , uh , restore your right to vote, apply for federal benefits and many others. We can expunge old cases. There's a lot we can do to help. And we're very passionate about it. We think that people deserve the opportunity to get their life back on track and that people are inherently good. There's just some things that happen that are bad in our lives. And we could all use some help and support to get through those difficult times. We want to be a part of that solution. So if you happen to know anybody in the state of Arizona who has been charged with a crime, we would be honored and humbled. If you trusted us enough to send them our direction, we'll make sure we take good care of them and they leave our office better than they found us. My friends. That is it from me. Woo . All right. So we're going to be back here tomorrow. Same place, same time, 4:00 PM. Arizona time. 5:00 PM central, no 4:00 PM Arizona time, which is the same as specific. How many months has it been? 5:00 PM. Mountain 6:00 PM. Central 7:00 PM on the East coast for that one, Florida. Man, everybody. Thank you so much for bearing with me today. We're going to be back here and going to do it all over again. So have a tremendous night's sleep very well. I'll see you then. Bye . Bye .