Derek Chauvin Sentencing Memo, New Fauci Email Drop, Pentagon UFO Report Sneak Peak

Derek Chauvin’s defense lawyer submits a memorandum to the Court asking that he be sentencing to probation only! Big new email drop reveals 3,000 more #FauciEmails. Pentagon UFO report is a big nothing burger. And more! Join criminal defense lawyer Robert F. Gruler in a discussion on the latest legal, criminal and political news, including:​

🔵 Derek Chauvin’s lawyer Eric Nelson asks for probation in new sentencing memorandum submitted to Judge Cahill.​
🔵 Chauvin, previously convicted on all 3 charges, is facing decades in prison.​
🔵 Prosecutors are seeking 30 years in prison to account for impact on George Floyd and the community.​
🔵 Review of the Derek Chauvin’s Motion for Mitigated Departure and Sentencing Memorandum.​
🔵 Over a year after George Floyd’s death, crews remove barriers and memorials from George Floyd Square.​
🔵 An organization called ICanDecide.org requested Fauci’s emails in a new FOIA request and received nearly 3,000 pages of new material.​
🔵 Review of the #FauciEmails shows Dr. Fauci was willing to accept virtual awards and was very excited about the compliments he was receiving from some in the media.​
🔵 Review of ICanDecide.org’s complaint against the National Institutes of Health requesting declaratory and injunctive relief.​
🔵 In a very boring report, the New York Times reveals that the government’s investigation into UFOs provides no new information.​
🔵 The government says the find no evidence of alien technology in flying objects, but can’t rule it out, either.​
🔵 Senator Marco Rubio says the Pentagon report is only the first step in the investigation and that more will come.​
🔵 Meanwhile, the Chinese are showing a great deal of curiosity surrounding what is known as the U.S. Navy’s Area 51 in the United States – we review.​
🔵 Your questions from Locals.com after each segment!​

LIVECHAT QUESTIONS: ​

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

Channel List:​

🕵️‍♀️ Watching the Watchers with Robert Gruler Esq. LIVE - https://www.rrlaw.tv​
🎥 Robert Gruler Esq. - https://www.youtube.com/c/RobertGruler​
📈 Robert Gruler Crypto - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUkUI3vAFn87_XP0VlPXSdA​
👮‍♂️ R&R Law Group - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfwmnQLhmSGDC9fZLE50kqQ​

​
SAVE THE DATE – UPCOMING VIRTUAL EVENTS!​

📌 Saturday, June 12 @ 12-2 pm / Noon ET – Law Enforcement Interaction Training Live Virtual Seminar with Robert (via Zoom)​
📌 Saturday, June 26, 2021 @ 7-8 pm ET – WTW Locals Community Monthly Virtual Meet-up (via Zoom)​

🥳 Events exclusive to Locals.com community supporters – learn more at https://watchingthewatchers.locals.com/ ​

Connect with us:​

🟢 Locals! https://watchingthewatchers.locals.com​
🟢 Podcast (audio): https://watchingthewatchers.buzzsprout.com/​
🟢 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/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​

🚨 NEED HELP WITH A CRIMINAL CASE IN ARIZONA? CALL 480-787-0394​

Or visit https://www.rrlawaz.com/schedule to schedule a free case evaluation!​

Otherwise, 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​

WATCH ON RUMBLE:​

🟡 MAIN: https://rumble.com/c/RobertGrulerEsq​
🟡 LIVE: https://rumble.com/vhzpnf-fauci-emails-fallout-scotus-cybercrime-van-buren-holding-dru

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:00

Hello, my friends. And welcome back to yet. Another episode of watching the Watchers live. My name is Robert Mueller. I am a criminal defense attorney here at the RNR law group and 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. 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 system. With the hope of finding justice. We're grateful that you are here and with us today, we're going to be wrapping up a busy week here by starting off the show, talking about Derek. Chauvin's spend a little bit of time since we spoken about this case, but this week there was a sentencing memorandum that came out from Eric Nelson, which is Derek Chauvin's defense lawyer, arguing Derek Shovan should be sentenced to probation. That means get out of custody, go back to living your life. That's what Eric Nelson, his defense attorney is asking the court to do. Now the prosecution they're saying no that not so fast on that. We think that 30 years in prison is a little bit more appropriate. So we've got a little bit of a balancing act that the judge is going to have to play. We're going to break down what that looks like. There is a sentencing memorandum that Eric Nelson submitted. It just hit the internet recently, but I think it was actually submitted back on a Wednesday. We're going to go through that. It's not super long, but there are some interesting things we want to pull out of there. And I want to show you what a defense attorney does, because I think Eric Nelson is doing a good job to the best he can, right. In a very, very difficult case. So we're going to spend some time on that. Then I know we spend a lot of time on this this week. Oh, we're talking about the Fowchee emails again. I know, I know we spent like three days on it, but 3000 more emails came out last night and I went through them. So not all, not all of them, not all 3000, but some of them. And there are some interesting things that we want to point out. So the organization that released them, it's called I can decide.org so I can decide like not, you can decide, I can decide. And so they do these freedom of information act requests, and they got 3000 emails from Fowchee from last year. And so there are some interesting things that come out of there. And we're just gonna spend a little bit of time talking about those. Then the New York times got wind of what the new Pentagon UFO report is going to look like. We spent some time on this channel talking about it, seeing these weird things, flying all over the place. We checked out a time to talk about these things on Friday because you know, I think most people are concerned about getting abducted over the weekend. We want to know what's going on with these UFO's. So today we're going to give a little bit of an update that the New York times apparently was speaking with some other officials from our government who have seen the final version of this Pentagon report. If you're not familiar with this story, the Pentagon and our military has actually said that they're going to put together this comprehensive report about UFO's flying around our skies that is scheduled to be released this month. They're saying later towards June 25th. So, uh, whatever the case that that report ends up being the New York times has got some information that was sort of leaked out to them. So we're going to go through that story. We're also going to talk about Marco Rubio, who says that this Pentagon report was just a first step in a long list of investigations that he anticipates coming. And then there's something interesting that I didn't know was a thing actually, but we've all heard of area 51 where there's this, it's this sort of remote secretive lab out in the depths of Nevada underground in a hidden bunker somewhere. Everybody kind of knows what that looks like. We, we were all remembered that will Smith actually visited that with Jeff Goldbloom in independence day before he saved the country. So we all know what that is, but apparently there is another area, 51 style, uh, location that the U S Navy uses and that is floating around somewhere. Well, we're going to find out where it is, but apparently the Chinese are sort of poking their heads in there. They have these ships that are sort of looked like fishery, fish, fishermen, ships. They've got some pretty interesting technology in there and they're floating them around this Navy area, 51, what's going on with that. So we've got a lot to get to. You should be a little bit of an interesting show here. Some, some of the normal fare, some interesting things. So if you want to be a part of the show, the way to do that is by going over to watching the watchers.locals.com, which is our non-big tech platform, it's small tech platform and there you can actually participate in the show. So there's a live chat that's happening there right now. Do you want to ask a question, drop a comment, LABA criticism, feel free to do that. If you support the channel, you can get a bunch of great things over there as well. Things like free copy of my book. It's called beginning to winning. You can download a PDF for free over there. We've also got some monthly meetups coming up. We have one coming up in June. We have our law enforcement interaction training, which is coming up on June 12th. All of that stuff is available to you for free. If you're a supporter@watchingthewatchersdotlocals.com, and we really appreciate the support there as you know, we're demonetize here on YouTube, which kind of stings a little bit, but thanks to tremendous supporters and people like you. We're keeping the train on the tracks over there, watching the watchers.locals.com. Okay. So enough of that, it's been some time since we've spoken about Derek, Shovan on this channel, but we're back in the middle of it because he's coming up on sentencing, which means we know that he's been convicted of a crime at this moment, but he hasn't been sentenced yet. And so there's a difference here. The judge has, has the court has found that he has been convicted of these crimes. So there's no questions about innocence or guilt, but we are talking about the penalty. What is the F what is the maximum amount of time that he can go away for given the fact that he has now been convicted of three different crimes? And so the way that this works for those of you who are not familiar with the justice system, is there are multiple recommendations that are made as it relates to the sentencing. It's called the sentencing recommendation. So typically what we see is with criminal statutes is just kind of a range. You know, the judge has some discretion in determining what the ultimate penalty will be. The jury decides innocent versus guilt. The judge decides the length of the penalty. So we're in that phase right now where the judge has to decide how long has Shovan going to go away for. And the judge is going to be fielding, multiple requests for input. One of course would be coming from the government. They prosecuted Derek Shovan, they're going to have an opinion on how much time they think is appropriate for him to spend behind bars, the defense. Similarly, they're going to have their opinion. They're going to say, Hey, we think that this, even though he was convicted, that there are all these mitigating factors and that there should be a minimization of the ultimate penalty. So the government wants a real sort of aggressive push. Typically in these cases, sometimes they'll be reasonable, but in a high profile case like this, you would expect, they'd be asking for virtually the max. So the that's what the prosecution recommends. The defense is recommending almost the opposite of that, which is basically the minimums. And then the court is going to have their own sort of independent report. That's drafted by a probation department or what are, what are called, uh, uh, whatever they call them here in Minneapolis. Doesn't matter. It's an agency that is sort of part of the court port part of the, the case disposition entity that will also make a recommendation. So the judge gets these three reports that come in one from the government, one from the defense one from this independent agency. And the judge has to sort of wrap their head around what is the sentence going to be? So today we're going to learn about what some of these recommendations are for some background, let's take a look at what's happening over at CBS. It says Derek Shovan asks for probation as prosecutors seek 30 years ahead of sentencing. So we see kind of a pretty big split here, 30 years, or basically zero probation, right? Let, let him out of custody right now. Give him credit for time served. Just make sure that you put them on, you know, five, 10 years of probation, as long as he doesn't break the login. That's it, that's what Eric Nelson is asking for in terms of the penalty. So, you know, you might be sitting there saying for the George Floyd case for what we saw him do that day and for what the jury said, that he did the jury found based on all the evidence that they heard. I disagree with the verdict pretty vehemently, but whatever that, this is, this is what happens in the justice system. We have a, a very, very aggressive case where the media has already pre convicted somebody. And we see that the court of law does what it can to sort of keep the improprieties at bay. But sometimes they can't do that. And in this case we saw, I would say even a more aggressive travesty of justice because we had actual politicians weighing in on this people like Maxine waters flying in and lobbying their 2 cents in this. We had the city council drop a$27 million settlement, right in the middle of jury selection. So a lot of issues, but the question now becomes that even though there may have been issues, we got to set all that aside right now. Okay. We may have some disagreements about the verdict. This there, it's going to be appealed. There's going to be post-conviction motions. We already know that Eric Nelson is working on appeals. So that's fine for this case. We got to just at least deal with the sentencing. So what is the sentence going to be? And we, we now know that Eric Nelson is asking for basically zero time. He wants probation and he wants Shovan to be released as soon as possible. And so some people might say that that is totally unreasonable. And you might even find defense attorneys that agree with that, that say, ask, they're asking for 30, you're asking for bail for probation. Are you out of your mind? It's not even in the ballpark of reasonable. And so some defense attorneys might come out and say, well, okay, if you're asking for 30, how about we make an argument for 10? Maybe the judge splits it down the middle and give them 20. All right. So we saved them 10 years from the maximum, but we didn't quite get what we wanted. And so there, there are defense attorneys that will operate that way. And sometimes you do that for good reason. There are very, very specific reasons for, you know, for how attorneys negotiate and you have to wait the strengths and the weaknesses of your case, of course. But in this case, I got to tell you, I like what Nelson did. He just came out and said, no, zero. I'm not, I'm not going to be reasonable here. And he's going to go through and say why he thinks this is justified. So let's dig into this. The backstory here from CBS written by Erin Donahue says that Derek Shovan asked the judge to sentence him to a term of probation or shorter prison terms than suggested by the guidelines. So we have, uh, an initial request and then in the alternative. So they're going big with the first request to probation, or if not, well, then just give us a shorter prison term than what the guidelines say. So pretty standard stuff. The memo cites Chauvin's lack of previous criminal history, previous work as a police officer and the risk that he could be victimized in prison as factors the judge should consider as he weighs a sentence. And so, you know, I haven't taken a look in depth at the Minnesota statutes, but in Arizona we have similar statutes that say that there are these different factors that the court can consider for. What's called mitigation. So working our way down the statutory penalty towards something that's less than where you start in the middle. So when we talk about sentencing, many people don't realize this, but, you know, thank you to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. We have certain things like mandatory sentencing, and we have things like the three strike rule, all remnants of their work that they did in the nineties and eighties, and even previous to that for Joe Biden. So all of these sort of artifacts of their system, we still have to deal with now. And the way that this works is when you are sentenced, you'll start at what's called a presumptive term or a presumptive sentence. And in some states use different terminology, but it doesn't really matter. We're starting at the same point. So what, what lawyers will do literally is when they're negotiating, we have these things that are called sentencing charts, and we just open up the charts and we say, okay, well this charge and this crime, and this person has this amount of history and these factors, and we just go right there and we just find what that is. And in that chart, there may be what's called an open range. And we call this the presumptive kind of the starting point where you just start there at the middle, and then you have a range where you could go up to the max or down to the minimum. So here what's happening. Of course, the prosecution, the government, they want to go towards the max and Eric Nelson and the defense. They want to go towards the men. So here, they're talking about some mitigating factors that might push it, that direction, things like lack of criminal history. He used to be a police officer. This is a public servant, and this is somebody who actually, if they go into prison, they face a higher, uh, they're, they're more susceptible to potential recrimination. So in another memo filed Wednesday. Prosecutors asked for a sentence of 30 years in contrast for the convicted former Minneapolis officer. They said that this term would properly account for the profound impact of Chauvin's conduct on the victim, the victim's family and the community. So they're sort of looking for that much more expansive cascade of impact as a result of the conduct Shovan could face up to 40 years in prison. Sentence is scheduled for June 25th on top, he's got a second degree murder, sentencing guidelines suggest a term of just over 10 and a half years to 15 years in prison. So we're talking about that range, right? Apparently you could get probation for this because Eric Nelson asked for that. So we know that that's a possibility, and it sounds like from this, this article could go all the way up to 40 years. So the government came down and said, well, okay, well, how about 30? We know we could ask for 40, but they asked for 30 Nelson comes back out and asked for zero last month, judge Cahill, who we spent a lot of time with here found that there were in fact aggravating factors. And we talked about that motion that allow him to sentence Shovan to return longer than 15 years. He said that there are four, four factors that Shovan committed to crime in front of a child, right? So these are, would be aggravating factors. As we see here, the opposite of the mitigating factors Shovan acted with particular cruelty. Did he act as part of a group, which of course were his, uh, other law enforcement officers and that he abused a position of trust and authority as a police officer. So pretty standard aggregate aggravating factors there as well, Cahill found that Shovan acted with particular cruelty because he killed Floyd. Despite Floyd saying he couldn't breathe. Floyd was begging for his life and obviously terrified by the knowledge that he was likely to die, but Shovan objectively remained indifferent to Floyd's please said Cahill, which you know, I don't, I don't know that I like that characterization, but he's the judge. Wednesday prosecutor said that the aggravating factor support their recommendation of double the 15 year upper end of the sentencing range or 30 years Shovan said Shovan. They said, quote, brutally murdered, Mr. Floyd abusing the authority conferred by his badge, his actions. They say traumatize, Mr. Floyd's family, the bystanders who watched Floyd die and the community and the conduct shocked the nation's conscience prosecutor's memo wrote no sentence can undo the damage that Chauvin's actions have inflicted the sentence. The court imposes must hold Shovan fully accountable for his reprehensible conduct. Right? So man, you know that that's a, that's a pretty big, uh, burden to bear for any person for any criminal defendant. Isn't it? I mean, yes. We can say that what Shovan did to Floyd was horrendous. Right? And we can say that because the jury found as a matter of fact, that Shovan killed Floyd. As a matter of fact, they're they're that now, as I've talked about ad nauseum on the show, I disagree with that. I think there was plenty of reasonable doubt here, and I can go through the litany. I'm not going to do that. But the jury said, in fact, Shovan killed Floyd. Okay. So now we have to ask ourselves as a society, what is the appropriate penalty to impose upon show? But if it is true, in fact that he did kill Floyd as the juror say he did well, what do you do when you think about consequences or about a penalty for somebody who created the harm, you've got to fix the harm, right? So if somebody punches you in the face, you get a black guy and you, maybe you need some stitches. Well, maybe that person pays for your medical bills because they're, they're making you whole again, they also get punished. They also, you know, have to maybe spend the night in jail or whatever, right? We're, we're, we're, we're, we're talking about the practicalities of making a person whole of, of rectifying the wrong that was occurred. How do we fix what happened? How do we find how to make the scales of justice balance out what Derek Shovan did was unjust. And so we want to balance the scales out. So how do we do that? Government here says 30 years, Nelson says zero years probation. And it's interesting that the prosecution now is sort of including in this harm, not only what happened to George Floyd, we know that he's dead. He's not here with us anymore. Not only his girlfriend, not only his daughter, not only his family, who've been pretty well compensated$27 million that highest in history in Minnesota. So, you know, we're, we're, we're balancing those scales out a little bit. Is it also appropriate to impute all of the pain and the suffering of the entire nation? Can we stack that on the back of Shovan to all of that? Because the cell phone footage was recorded and it was spread all over the internet and there was a lot of hurt there, right? The conduct, according to the prosecution memo, they say it shocked the nation's conscience and his actions traumatized were very traumatizing to everybody. The bystanders who watched Floyd died. Right? And so they're lumping all of that in to the consequences that Derek Shovan needs to answer for. And they're saying that is found in the 30 years, that's how we're going to write right the wrong. We're going to make society whole by making him serve more time. And it's going to be 30 years. But to me it sounds kind of heavy, right? If you're going to be having an entire year, you're going to say we're going to punish one man for the pain of kind of the nation. And I made this point many times that Derek Shovan, in my opinion, largely has been the scapegoat of this entire racial animosity argument that has been bubbling up and fostered around the country for quite some time now. And a lot of politicians now they're pretty quiet. A lot of the energy surrounding the criminal justice reform movement, sort of just dissipated didn't it. We have a BLM co-founder Patrice colors. She sorta resigns and drops off into the sunset we had on May 25th Biden really wanted the George Floyd act passed and signed on his, on his desk. So he could sign it that day. May 25th came and gone, not here, right? And everything is just sort of washing away. Derek Shovan has effectively the job of becoming the scapegoat and he's going to be paying the pressure or paying the penalty for the trucks and the conduct that shocked the nation's conscience all on that one, man. So he's the governor for men. It's going to ask for 30 years as a result of his action. So you can decide whether you think that's appropriate or not. Chauvin's defense team here in a separate filing on Wednesday, also detailed their arguments for why they believe Shovan should receive a new trial, alleging a series of errors on the part of the judge and the prosecutors. As he weighs the sentence, judge Cahill will consider the recommendations from both teams along with a pre-sentencing investigation or a PSI report prepared by doc. So that they're actually the department of corrections sounds like they do it. PSI will include an assessment of Shovan to identify his risks of re-offending other factors the judge can consider such as the defendant's individual characteristics, his circumstances, his needs, his potentiality, his criminal record and social history, the circumstances of the offense and the harm caused to it by the others and others in the community. The document is not expected to be made public. So, ah, that's. I wonder if that is permanent or can somebody get that through a foyer? Be curious to see what's in there now that is going to be, yeah, that will be, that will be confidential. We have, the report will also include a victim impact statement counts written by victims or relatives to express the impact of the crime. Judge will also weigh those statements in determining a sentence. Typically, people who provide those statements are allowed a chance to read them in court at the sentencing hearing if they choose. So that will be fun. Now, you know that during a sentencing hearing, everybody gets to come in and actually speak. When you see the, you know, the moms come in and kind of sobbing over their lost child or whatever that sentencing. Okay. And they can get it very emotional. They can also get very dramatic. They can become thing that turns into a much more of a spectacle than anything meaningful. And so we'll see how judge Cahill, you know, allows this to unfold on the 25th Shovan and the three of us, the Minneapolis officers are also facing federal charges. We talked about those, not clear when the trial will take place, the trial for the other officers. Remember those, those got bumped back to March 22nd, right? So Shovan had to have his trial in less than a year, tried and convicted in less than a year. But these other officers, uh, looks like probably closer to like two years. I wonder why that might be all right. So let's take a look at the actual, so we know how all this works. Now we know what the arguments are. We know what mandatory sentencing is. Some of the open range going from a minimum to a maximum going from mitigated factors to aggravated factors. Now let's see what Nelson actually wrote and submitted to the court. So this is the defendant's motions for mitigated departure and for any sentencing memorandum. So they're saying we know what the standard is. We know where we start. We're asking for a departure from the start, okay. We call them deviations here in America, in America, here in Arizona, where we know what the standard is. We know what the policy is. We're asking for a deviation down from that norm. So they're asking for a departure and it says the above-named court sent over to honorable Cahill. Along with the prosecutors, Matthew Frank, the defendants hereby asked for a downward dispositional departure or a downward durational departure. So asking for a better disposition, better sentence or a better duration motion is pursuant to Minnesota guidelines. The sentencing hearing is scheduled for June 25th follows after a lengthy trial, we have all the convictions that he has. The defense argues that the requisite substantial and compelling circumstances for a downward dispositional departure are present. In this case. They want the court to grant its motions to impose a probationary sentence. Okay. So this is what they're asking for right here. Important paragraph, a probationary sentence, meaning that Shelby gets out of custody and he's just served probation or limiting his incarceration to timed to time served or, oh, I'm sorry. And limiting his incarceration to time served. So he's already been in custody since he got convicted right back in may. So he's been in, he's been in custody. He was in custody previous to the trial for some period of time after the arrest took place before he bonded out probably a couple of days. So basically saying that time should count. So if he's been in custody for 35 days, give him a 35 day prison sentence, we're going to give you credit for the time and then let you out. If not, if Nelson saying, if you don't do that, how about a downward durational departure in crafting a sentence? So let's see what's going on here. We have the argument, sentencing guidelines are established, who promotes public safety, reduce sentencing disparity and all of that stuff. So they give us some guidelines. They say that the guideline rages are deemed appropriate for the felonies covered by them. Here. We see the language that I was telling you about earlier. A district court must impose the presumptive guidelines, absent, identifiable, or compelling circumstances to support a departure. So remember when I was talking about those charts, we have the presumption in the middle. Everybody starts right here, government, you got to work it up this way towards aggravation defense. You got to work it that way towards mitigation, Minnesota. They're saying, if we can identify something, then we can, we can have that conversation about moving one way or the other. The sanctions used should be the least restrictive necessary to achieve the purposes of the sentence. So you see this important concept here. We talk about this a lot in criminal law about the idea that the penalty should be the least absolute minimum necessary to achieve the goals, right? Because that's what we want. We don't want to overly punish people. We want to make sure that when we're imposing a sentence, that we start with an end goal in mind that we say, all right, well, we think that this is the, the appropriate sentence for this crime because society was X, Y, and Z harmed. And we think this, you know, balances the scales back out. But we have to ask ourselves, what is the purpose of the sentence? Is it for rehabilitation? Is it for punishment? Is it punitive? Is it restorative in Minnesota? They say, well, whatever it is, it needs to be the least restrictive necessary here. A stringent probationary sentence with incarceration limited to time served would achieve the purposes of the sentence in this case. So another important sentence here, a paragraph from Eric Nelson, he's saying, listen, we know what the say that these are, these are intended to reduce sentencing disparity, promote public safety, establish rational, sentencing guidelines. We know that we have to, we can, according to the Minnesota law, deviate down. If we identify things that are appropriate and we have done. So now let's take a look at what those are. He says, there are identifiable, substantial and compelling circumstances that warrant a downward deviation or dispositional deviation. And they give us some law here, MSG 2d 0.01. A departure is not controlled by the guidelines, but rather it is an exercise of judicial discretion that is constrained by the statute or the law. So the defense urges this court to use its discretion at their asking the judge, judge Kao, come on, we need to downward departure here. We want to give Shovan a stringent probationary term. I say, if not, well, just give him less time in custody. Okay. We want to reflect the seriousness of the offense, not the character of the offender. So we're going to go through some analysis on that. Certainly, uh, it says here, we've got one more slide here. Despite the court's findings, an aggravated departure is unwarranted. Although this court found the presence of four aggravating factors, the decision as to whether to pronounce an aggravated sentence remains in the courts, sound discretion. So Nelson is saying here that even though the court said that there are these aggravating factors that might be present. Remember we talked about those kid was present, did it with a group of other officers was sort of indifferent to his suffering, as he was saying, I can't breathe. And there was a fourth one. So now what they're saying is we know you've identified those, but we're asking you, you're saying that the conduct measured against those criteria doesn't warrant, an increased aggravated sentence is what Nelson is saying. Let's see what else it says here. A departure is not controlled by the guidelines, but rather judicial discretion. When a court finds facts that supported a departure from a presumptive sentence, the court may exercise discretion to depart is not required to depart. Okay. So in light of the foregoing, Mr. Showman request a court disregard it's Blakely findings, which is the aggravated cases, findings and pronounced a strict probationary sentence, along with a period of incarceration equal to the time he's already in the alternative, we request a downward durational departure submitted by Eric Nelson attorney for Derek Shovan. So it's a big ask, right? It's a really big ask. Almost unreasonable, almost ridiculous because we know he was, they did on all three counts. We know this was a case of national import. We know that the government wants 30 years. So why would it Eric Nelson be asking for this? It's because it's consistent with the defense. And really is the only thing you can ask for, in my opinion, if he came back and said, well, how about 10 years or 15 years? I think that the court, you know, the judge is probably going to find how the judge is going to find anyways. And this, this sort of recommendation, I think, is more consistent with what we're going to see moving forward with the appeals and any post-conviction relief motions that come down the pike later on. So I, you know, I would say, uh, commendations to Eric Nelson for taking a big app, making a big, they're like a good defense attorney and saying, know what the jury said, this is still BS. And we're asking for, and here's why, and you just let the judge do what the judge does. Then you move, you, you move forward and focus on the next phases of the post-conviction process. All right. So now that we are over a year out, now that we're almost done with the Shovan case for the sentencing portion of it, we still have all post-conviction coming up, but they are now moving on in Minneapolis, Cruz, remove barriers and memorials at the George Floyd square. So this was posted yesterday, June 3rd, by Janell Griffith over at NBC news. It says that the city crews removed concrete barriers Thursday morning around the south Minneapolis intersection, where George Floyd was killed more than a year ago, disruption of the Memorial site prompted local activists. Some of who were anger and surprise to respond by erecting makeshift barricades city leaders. Describe the process in a statement as a community led reconnection of the intersection, which has been close to vehicles and traffic since may of 2020 Sarah McKenzie and a spokesman for the city said that the work began at 4:30 AM at 38th in Chicago, in formerly known as George Floyd square to crews using bulldozers and other equipment about four hours to clear the barriers aren't working flowers and other items like how they did that 30 am, which makes sense right before people get up and go to work. But it's also when nobody else is out there clean house. All right. So great care was taken to preserve some of the Memorial artwork and artifacts as possible. Some pieces were collected and moved away from the right of way. Intersection has been close to traffic. Floyd's killing galvanized. The movement city leaders on Thursday said crews had dismantled barriers. They're committed to establishing a permanent Memorial at the intersection, preserving the artwork and making the area a space for enduring racial healing. City's three guiding principles said somebody, okay. It says the, a got bay movement, the community organization that has kept watch over the area coordinated the clearing of the intersection, Steve Floyd, senior advisor at the movements of the group coordinated. We were expecting pushback. He said, we expected that he credited those who had overseen them Morial for taking good care. Both women. I live near the George Floyd square. This thing was held down by women. We, and we felt that they did an amazing and incredible job says the Floyd, but now it's time to open it up. We've got some pictures of what happened here, but we're going to finish this article quickly. The modifications at the site included a shrinking garden news conference on Thursday, which Floyd also attended. That was a hu what Floyd was that skipped over that Steve Floyd, Steve Floyd was there. He said Jenkins. Kaino. Floyd had listened to concerns of the residents and business owners. We recognize they're still paying around here. She, uh, let's see. See, no one seems to take into consideration that even in the midst of activism, just maybe just maybe that we might be black people grieving too. We got more pushback than help. Someone says, people are asking me what's next. We have not had the time to process. We need that. City officials are also facing backlash on social social media, who were saying that their actions are insincere. And we have an image here. So this looks like this is, look, this is what was going on. So this was posted on Twitter by David Gilbert. Peterson said the community has held this intersection for over a year as a living Memorial to George Floyd and a gathering space for black joy and commute the building. They can whitewash the record and either themselves, but we will never forget shame on Jacob Frey and the city of Minneapolis city crews taking down the memorials at George Floyd's square. So we've got, now, they're just, they're getting to work. Oh, somebody posted this. They can destroy the space, but they can never erase the memory of the state sponsored, killing. Here's another image, bright and early this morning. A lot of people out there clear in this space up, you can see the traffic lights are off, right? They're just out. Haven't been using this for a year. Uh, can't tell it doesn't look like that was cut foods, probably, you know, somewhere over on the other side of the camera, that's where the cup foods was, where the whole thing went down. But you can see, they sort of built a little bit of a, like a, like a makeshift garden or something. We have the raised BLM fists. This looks like here, so right. It's blocking a perfectly good intersection. So back to business, they say, they're in Minneapolis here, or they're cleaning out some of this garden. You can see clearing out the road. Uh, this is the cup foods that we saw. So this is where remember when, uh, George Floyd came out, they was kind of over here in this area. This is where a lot of that took place. And then also on this side, uh, vehicles were all over the place. We watched a lot of that. So that era is, um, moving on, moving on. How do you feel about that? Kind of been a long one coming, hasn't it, we're still not quite there yet. We got there[inaudible] sentencing, but, and then we're going to have appeals and post convictions, and then we have the other officers. So we're going to be following this one for some time. Let's see what the questions are today over@watchingthewatchersdotlocals.com. First up in the house, his speech unleased says if Nelson offered any prison time, wouldn't that be essentially admitting guilt when that hurt and appeal? Not really. He's already been found guilty. So it's sort of acknowledged that now you're operating with that as a fact. So it's not emitting anything. It's like, that's what, that's a fact. Okay. He's found guilty. And so judge, based on that, now we're talking about what the penalty should be. So if he did, you know, sort of increase the, the amount of time that he, that he was asking for, I wouldn't have, have considered that an admission of guilt. And it doesn't matter because he's been found guilty. Eric Nelson can say, I don't think he's guilty. Nobody cares because he was found guilty. So legally you could have your opinion. That's fine. You can go appeal it and submit post-conviction release. But you know, I, I I've seen it go the other way. Yeah. Or defense attorneys will start of, you know, try to negotiate upper in the upper range. And I've never really thought that that was that great of a strategy. Underscore shade says, is someone going to investigate? Why Floyd's family received 27 million? The real reason, no one else is getting anything. Something is not right on this one. It's a lot of money. 27 million. Yeah, lots, lots. I think it was the highest in Minnesota. There was the case that happened year before. And I think that was 20 million. So they they're paying out for sure. We have the Dar blessed Sierra says, I'll let you kill me for, for a smooth twenty-five million. If it goes to my mom, like Floyd's mom got from the city already, I feel like that's more than enough justice for George Floyd could have hoped for and will actually benefit them in a major way and help a lot more than Shovan sitting in his cell. Yeah. It's this valid. And we talk about restitution in criminal cases all the time. We talk about money. Yeah. All the time know w with lives. Okay. So this is not a far out concept. We're talking about criminal law here, but happens all the time. Okay. Thank you. About the OJ case, right? He won in criminal court, lost in civil court, had to pay 20 something million, right? They put a price on people. It's just reality of life. They put a price on all sorts of things. They'll put a plight, a price on your eyeball. If you lose an eye, what does that cost? If you lose an arm in an accident, what does that cost? That 25,000 or a hundred thousand dollars? What do you think it costs? What would you give up your arm for anything? They put numbers on that more personal injury cases that I don't, I don't spend much time on a zero time on, but there are, there are other areas of the law where we just talk that way you just said, yeah, 25 million. That's pretty good compensation for, for the loss there, of course sounds really calloused, right? Because how could you to be somebody who loses somebody in your family and says that any amount of money would ever compensate you? Right? You would never say that because it really can't it's money. It's not a person. So there's a lot of, you know, you're walking a fine tight rope there. When you say 25 million, that's enough, that's compensation. The other side you go, what are you talking about? It's money. W w w w w we lost a person here. So it's not quite the same, but, but then we can't fully compensate you for a person. This is the next best thing that we've got. So what amount then fills the void. It's a complicated question. You can see where it gets tricky. Sharon Queenies here says the whole thing about Shovan being a scapegoat is extremely disturbing. It totally negates any notion of justice. It opens the door to coming after anybody for anything so that they can atone for imagined quote, traumas to society. I, yeah. I agree with you. I mean, we're seeing this trend start in America, and I think it's very concerning where the criminal law is being and weaponized, and we're seeing it all over the place. We're seeing it as being applied to Antifa and some of the BLM protestors we're seeing that they're getting very nice diversion deals. We've seen some of the Capitol hill rioters facing a little bit of a different set of legal circumstances. Now we haven't seen ultimately what the judges are going to be sentencing them to, but if it's not diversion or a dismissal or time served, well, then I think it's a pretty, a clear example of a miss balance and imbalance in our sentencing schemes. And what, what is the reason for that? Can you identify a variable or a factor that might cause one or the other political ideology? Maybe. I think so. Hack consulting is here. It says before people go to work, now they closed off the square before could get up and go shoot each other up. Gosh, that's from hack consulting. So yeah, peaceful. I thought they were all peaceful protests. So there would be no shooting there. Heck obviously everything is peaceful. We love peace. Don't we? All right. So great questions. Thank you for all of those. Those came over from watching the watchers.locals.com and we appreciate your support over there. All right. So we're going to change gears here, Dr. Anthony Fowchee. We've been spending a lot of time going through his emails. I know you're probably sick of looking at them, but I'm not. I've been going through them a lot. And I went through some more last night and we're going to share what those look like here today, because this is an important topic that I think a lot of people in the media are just kind of forgetting about. Especially if you are in the mainstream media, they're already moved on. They want to talk about anything other than this stuff. So of course, we got to do it. And I want to share with you this organization that released these new emails, it's called ICANN, right? And it says here eradicate man-made disease. I can decide here is where they're at. Over on Twitter. They joined April, 2017 and they say in a medical world, manipulated by advertising and financial interests. The truth is hard to find. I can put the power of real health information in your hands, so you can go check them out if you'd like to give them a follow, but they posted this last night, June 4th. This was this morning, actually. Uh, which is strange. Cause I was looking at these last night, but I can set. I can't forget yet, which is a freedom of information act requests, NIH, the national Institute of health for docs on COVID-19, including requests for[inaudible] emails. We received over 3000 pages of emails dating from early February, 2020 through May, 2020 read or read Fowchee was saying privately about mass therapeutics, ventilators and more. So I was actually able to pull these, put, to pull the document. It was about 650 megabytes. It was very big. I posted a link to the full file over on local. So you can go check it out if you want. I did spend some time last night going through the emails and there are a lot of them, thousands of them, 3000 of them. I posted a couple of clips on Twitter that we're going to look through today that, you know, kind of, I think humanized Fowchee to some degree and reveal a little bit more about his inner workings and about where his priority was. And so we're going to talk about that before we do want to show you quickly, what's going on here from icon. So the informed consent action network, they've got 3000 pages. They say that last year, I can't, they made a foyer request. They received 3000 emails. We already read all of that on April 10th and May 5th. We submitted the following two foyer requests. So I wanted to show you how this works. So when you request a foyer, you know, you can't just submit a document and say, give me everything you got. I want all of vouchers, emails, they'll go. No, he's not going to know, like, we're not going to give you all of his emails. What do you want specifically? You got to tell us. So they do. They say all emails sent by Fowchee, but they give us some specificity here. They say between November one and the present time that include the term Moderna right. So it's gotta be specific that term or[inaudible] in any portion of the email. So they will look that up. If you submit a request like this, they will look that up. And they did. They sent a second request, all emails between November one and the present that in term, that includes terms like SARS, cov COVID or COVID-19 or coronavirus in any portion of the email. So they sent those out boom, they got a response. No, they didn't actually, they said they had to file a lawsuit. Look when NIH failed to respond, I can brought a lawsuit against them. On June 29, 2020, in response, they agreed to produce vouchers emails on a rolling basis to date, we received 2,957 pages of them that are dated through may. We're going to continue to receive email production on a rolling basis. So they actually had to file a lawsuit. No kidding. We're going to take a look at that here, but before we do, let's see what they found. So here are a couple of highlights that they posted. I'm not sure that I caught any of these, but let's see when you go through this document, it's, it's really big. It's like 3000 pages. If you've never opened a PDF file with 3000 pages and I've got pretty decent computers around here, but it's still, it's like, it's just like lurching through the emails and it's hard to navigate around. And the search function doesn't work that great. But, uh, here's what they were able to find. Let's take a look. February five to six. Fowchee is asked to recommend names for world health organization group with a broad mission to quote, look at the origins and evolution of COVID faculty responds by seeking to reframe the mission in a manner that would only look for the natural and not lab made origin. So you can take a look at that. They have that marked as zero zero two three nine, February 7th out, you set an internal Nia ID communication saying that it was unlikely that COVID originated in a wet market. Huh? That's different because it was sort of we're, we're talking a lot about the natural evolution theory and if it came naturally, then one of the, the major areas of concern was of course the wet market, or it came from a cave in, in, uh, south China, February 16th, we have Fowchee tells the CBS reporter that if the mortality turns out to be 0.2 or 0.4, then COVID should be treated like a severe seasonal flu. But when the case fatality rate was later revised between 0.2 and 0.4 vouch, he continued to ask if actives as if the virus was something more dangerous. Hmm, weird. Alright. February 17th Fowchee receives communication from a Chinese citizen as part of an international student program stating that based on his contacts back in wool Han, including correspondence from a nurse nurse, working in the Han hospital, there is far more spread of the virus. And for far more deaths than China is admitting as we all suspected. And then we have February 21 Fowchee asked director at the NIH to quote, please handle an email received by a group of doctors and scientists, including the virologist that a pine quote. We think there is a possibility that the virus was released from a lab in Wu Han. Right? And so if I actually did that a lot in his emails, you can see when you really read through his emails, I posted about this on locals earlier this morning, you know, it feels like a big portion of what his job duties were, was sort of just being a public relations person. That's kind of it, you know, not really a lot of strategy in there forwarding some information back and forth, kind of connecting dots between different people. Somebody would send him a report. Hey, Dr. Fowchee saw you on CNN. I'm a doctor at this hospital at someplace. And I have a lot of very important information, sends that into Fowchee, FA Fowchee forwards it off to somebody else and says, please handle or, or give me, you know, give me an update on this or send this over to whatever agency. And so his, his emails are not even that interesting. They're a little tidbits here and there, but it's mostly stuff coming in him, sort of processing it and then delegating it out. He sends a lot of stuff to his assistant. He says, please handle, look into this forward to John. You know, all of that type of stuff, which is how a lot of people use their emails, sort of, it's a, it's a catchall inbox. That stuff comes to you and then you delegate it back out. Still. There is some, some, some stuff that we can glean from that obviously, which is why we've been talking about them so long, so much. Let's take a look at the complaint. So this was filed by the informed consent action network. So this is I can, they are suing the national institutes of health and what do they want? They want a declaratory and injunctive relief. So they want the court to say something. And in order somebody to do something introduction, they say, and you can see your, I can assuming the national institutes of health. So they had to file a stinking lawsuit for this filed, uh, June 29th of last year. SARS coronavirus has resulted in the federal government officials recommending numerous restrictions on everyday life in America, in response, all 50 states implemented the recommended restrictions. The NIH is at the center of this Fowchee serves as the director of this organization. And aid has been funding and leading the development of the[inaudible] vaccine, which is being produced by modern. I believe plaintiff is this organization that we've talked about. They've received a litany of inquiries about the Corona virus and the vaccine and further it's of its mission to respond to those inquiries. This organization I can is now suing. They want all the safety and efficacy data regarding the MRI and a phase, one of the clinical trial, NIH granted processing for this request. But then they fail to further respond to this and the other related requests. So for further requests, and I neither provided a determination letter, which is required by the law nor produce any of the documents. Each of the requests was proper sought documents they could have and should have been easily able to produce. I can therefore brings this action, seeking an order, directing the defendants to produce the records, responsive to the icon's foyer requests, wherefore. Here's what they want. They want expeditious proceedings in this action. So tell him to hurry up, enter an order, telling the NIH that within 10 days, give us the documents produce the requested documents and award the plaintiffs, its costs and reasonable attorney's fees for bringing this action. So, oh my gosh, this guy is in Arizona, major hat tip over there to Aaron Siri over there. Sorry if I just triggered everybody's, uh, devices over there, but that is his last name. He's over here in Arizona. Whoa, Arizona, boy didn't even realize that. How about that? So there's a lot there. This is what the full document looks like. You got a, you can see here 648 megabytes, which means it's big. It's very, it's very big. There's a lot in there. And I saw two things that I wanted to point out to you. Now these are petty. I get it. First of all, they're they're not that petty. They're actually, I think, indicative of a deeper systemic issue that we have in this country. But I understand that this is kind of like high school garbage. I get it right. So you're going to see what I mean. Let's take a look. This is from Anthony Fowchee. This was sent Friday, the 10th of April, 2020. And so let's start down here at the bottom Friday at 10 20 in the morning, we have this guy David Bradley and you'll notice his email. It says at the Atlantic, oh, we all know what the Atlantic is, right? It's a very, very prestigious, reputable organization. It's a magazine and they produce all sorts of content. It's part of the media. You can go on Twitter. They've got 2 million followers. It's a big organization, right? The Atlantic. Oh my gosh. Well, we have, uh, David Bradley from the Atlantic, sending an email, notice his title down here. It says chairman of Atlantic media, okay. The chairman of this entire organization, it's massive. He says, Hey Tony, we see this redaction here. Probably some, you know, somebody else, you know, Hey, take Tony, Kathy. And I send you greetings. And the deepest appreciation, I am only one of your millions of followers who feel in your debt. But I am only, I am the only one with a magazine that has dedicated a whole article to quote the thirst for Tony Fowchee. Do you remember when this was going on? I kind of remember this when everybody was like singing the songs for Fowchee and like weren't kids like doing, you know, jumping up and down and the whole thing, it was like, everybody was like, I've got a crush on Fowchee and all of this stuff was going on and you're thinking what? We're in the middle of a pandemic. They've turned this guy into like this Demi gods celebrity that everybody is like drooling over themselves, falling all over themselves to like kiss the ring of Fowchee. And we're all sitting here going, this is, this is a weird, so we have this CEO guy, this chairman, he says, I'm the only one with a magazine out of your millions of followers that has dedicated a whole article to quote the thirst for Tony Fowchee and thirst. If you're not familiar with, you know, generation Z vernacular, it's kind of a, you know, it's kind of what it sounds like, says, this will be the least important item on today's to do list, but someday your grandchildren and their children will in turn will want to read this article and the article, if you click over it, it says Anthony Fowchee, Corona virus crush. Right. And in his, in his, uh, subject, he says subject Atlantic's coverage, Fowchee as a quote heartthrob. So he sends out email over to Fowchee. Fowchee, opens it up, forwarded over to somebody and says, David Bradley is the chairman of the Atlantic. Jeez. Okay. And he puts the Atlantic in a Tallix. David Bradley is the chairman of the Atlantic, he goes, oh, geez. So I can't tell if he's saying like, like, like, jeez, oh man. He's the chairman of the Atlantic has a thirst for Tony Fowchee and he wrote an article in a magazine called the Corona virus crush. And then I'm a heartthrob. This guy's a whack job. This guy's the chairman of the Atlantic. Geez. What a lunatic. All right. No, thanks for that. Right. I'll get back to work. Solving a crisis is what I would like to think. He responded as that's how I would have responded. I'm not, what are you talking about? A Corona virus. You have a thirst for me for, for dealing with the coronavirus Panda. I go, okay. I appreciate that. I guess that's but I'd say, geez, that's kind of weird. Or is Fowchee going? This is the chairman of the Atlantic. Oh. Oh geez. This is crazy. This is wild. Right? I am getting a lot of accolades. And the reason why this kind of stands out, it may not seem like a big deal, but there's a lot of this that goes on in his emails. Not anything. Is this sort of in your face or this is the chairman of the Atlantic. Jeez, but he's getting a lot of love. I mean, a lot of people are spilling into, in his inbox, which is great, which is a beautiful thing, honestly, to have a bunch of American saying, gosh, you know, I just want to send my thanks for your service, regardless of what you think of Fowchee and his service. It's a good sign. I think that a lot of Americans go, we are in the middle of a crisis. There's somebody who I think is trying to solve the problem. I'm just going to send them some love. And so we get a lot of love in his email, a lot of accolades, a lot of people just kind of doing what this guy's doing, the thirst for Tony Fowchee. And so when you start to see him respond and forward it to somebody like, oh gosh, the chairman of the Atlantic kind of shows you maybe what motivates a person? What is enthusiastic? What makes him enthusiastic? You know, this is, this is, uh, this isn't a article about a lab escape theory that he goes, oh gosh, right. This is, this is, uh, a big media person that he loves probably probably grew up reading the Atlantic and now he's going, wow, this is crazy. They're actually reaching out to me. We have another one here. This one, I actually, this one actually of all of the emails that I've seen from Fowchee makes me really appreciate the man. I can, I can empathize with this. Let me show you what I'm talking about. And he says on Saturday, April 10th, we have this email that comes in on April 9th. It says to the NIH forward council of scientific society, presidents support of science award. So the council of the scientific society, they have a president's support of science award that they want to give to somebody and they want to give it to Anthony Fowchee. And as I mentioned previously, a lot of people want to give them a lot of stuff. You know, baseball players, Hey, come on. My Facebook live with me. And Zuckerberg was emailing him, everyone. He bought one. He, everybody wanted to be close to Fowchee. Cause he turned, they turned him into a celebrity. He was piloting the ship. When we were going through a storm, everybody wanted to be close to him. So this organization sends them an email, says, Hey, council of scientific society, president support. We want to give you this award. If you, the rest of the email, they tell you what the award is. It's basically meaningless. But what I thought was so hilarious as he forwards this over to Conrad, Patricia, Patricia Conrad, who is his assistant over at the NIH and aid. And he says, let us discuss. They want to give me an award. An award virtually probably should accept if, if it requires no time or work, let me read that again because I just botched that. Cause I'm laughing. Let us discuss. They want to give me an award. Virtually probably should accept if it requires no time or work. Which I mean I can get on board for that. Right. I mean sure. I'll take it. Yeah. Send it over. Well, what's it for science? Oh, the scientific society. I like science. Do I have to do anything for this though? Like do I have to go anywhere or speak or do anything? No. Zero time. Zero effort. We just want to give it to you virtually. It's it. Send it over, right? No problem at all. I appreciate that. I love it. Yeah. So put them in the stack over there. Drop them in. Wait, did this come from China? Is this a Chinese gift? No. Perfect. We'll take it in that stack. Put the China gifts over there though. Put those in that Z brings those over there. So we'll keep those separate. So that is what Fowchee is up to. Which I actually, I think, I think it's kind of kinda humanizes the kite a little bit. What is this garbage award? Do I have to do anything for it? No. Then just give it to me. All right. So we now know that China is pushing back on this argument. So we've been seeing a lot of these emails from Fowchee. We've been having a lot of conversations about what China did and how unhelpful they have been. Now that we have hindsight, we're able to look back. They are now saying things like this from, from their official government spokesperson. This was on Twitter said that the people who hypes up the wool Han lab leak hypothesis is the same people who fabricated the fake information about Iraq's attempt to acquire nuclear weapons 19 years ago. Oh, so he's uh, he's calling, he's calling us a bunch of liars, I think, I think. Wow. All right. So apparent. I mean our government, you know, not me. I had, no, I don't, I don't know anything about nuclear weapons. 19 years ago, I was not concerned about that issue. But our government was, they told us there was a bunch of stuff over there in Iraq. Apparently why we went there. I don't know. But apparently that's why. And so China comes out here and they've been doing this a lot. You notice, remember when Anthony Blinken went back in there and had a meeting with the Chinese delegation and he started coming down on them for the treatment of the workers in China. And they said, don't, you dare scold us. You racist pieces of garbage in America. Look, what's happening in your country, buddy. Boy, you have riots and you have your own people burning down and torching Wendy's and use Carlos all around your society. So before you start throwing stones, our direction, maybe you should clean up your own house. And so they're doing it again right here. They're saying to the United States, oh, you're thinking that this was our, our, our problem. How about we say that you morons are the same morons who invaded Iraq and wrecked the middle east. So it sort of, you know, don't POL pot calling the kettle black, whatever that phrase is. And what was so funny about this tweet is I posted a link earlier today to a different tweet that was actually up there. That was a little bit more volatile than this. Something along the lines of like the U S was intentionally throwing people in China. And we cause the virus in China. Now I clicked the link and I shared it to Ms. Faith to have her clip the video for us. And when she went to go pull it, that one was deleted. So they deleted that video and then they posted up another one and the other one was a lot more volatile. And so she spent the afternoon trying to find it, but I don't think that we could, let's see what this one is because China, they posted something volatile and they deleted it, which kind of is a weird thing for a totalitarian government. You think that they, they would want to see it. So we have this year, this guy is the, from the ministry of foreign affairs. His name name is Wang Wayne Bean. He is a foreign ministry spokesperson. And uh, let's hear what he has to say. He's speaking very shortly. And then they posted this on, on this. This is, this is what the, this is the video from this post. Let's see what he says.

Speaker 2: 54:31

[inaudible] family.[inaudible][inaudible][inaudible][inaudible][inaudible] okay. So

Speaker 1: 55:11

That didn't work out very well because I don't speak Chinese and neither do you. And unless you're reading the subtitles, then you're not going to get much out of that clip. So what basically what he's saying is he's going through this same story that we just talked about. He's saying that anybody who's making the allegation or implying that there's a connection between Wu Han and, and the Corona virus is misinformed. He goes through, he starts talking about Dr.[inaudible] that we talked a lot about here and he's telling you, this is all crazy. And how do we know this? Well it's because the Americans, their intelligence is just garbage. Look what they've been doing in the middle east for the last 20 years. Nothing they're useless. So why are we going to believe anything that they have to say about what was happening in our Wu Han lab? We wouldn't, he's telling that to the Chinese people and to the rest of the world. And so we'll see what America does as a result of this and why renal MD is in the house as I can. His Twitter account was suspended for tweeting. It obtained his emails. So that's great. So the Washington post can, can reveal that. And who do we get the other emails from previously, yesterday? Oh, from Buzzfeed, Buzzfeed, uh, Leopold posted a bunch of those so strange that I can would be banned, but those other two entities would not be wonder if there's anything more to that story. Well, we covered there, there a topic here, hopefully YouTube doesn't get mad at us for that. Now let's take a look at eat Don tests. He, I think Dr. Fowchee has fallen victim to his own celebrity. I think, I think you're right on that. It says, I saw the same thing happened with sheriff, Joe Arpaio, good intentions at first, but then celebrity took over. He spent more time serving as ego than serving as office. I think Fowchee is in a similar situation. I think that's a pretty good observation there actually eat on tests. And when I, when I go through his emails, you know, you, you sort of see what an impossible task he was a part of. He was getting something like 2000 emails a day, I think. And a lot of them were just, just sort of, uh, you know, information that he couldn't do much with because there was so much of it coming in. You just can't process this. And then there was also a lot of public relations, just media stuff, just dealing with, who's kind of a front person for just the, the name to accept the name and the face and the entity to accept all of the data coming in from the country. It's like drinking from a fire hose. You're impossible to do, but that, I think begs the question, why is our situation? Why was the situation set up that way? It was sort of a top-down approach. Wasn't it? We had all these elitist scientists and bureaucrats, you know, scientists and bureaucrats and these doctors who, you know, who knows if they've ever seen a patient in the last 10 years, nobody knows they're all a bunch of desks, you know, jockeying papers around and they're, they're mostly politicians more than they are doctors. So if we are listening to them, then it's a very top-down approach. Why are we not listening to the people on the ground floor? I spoke to a lot of doctors all throughout the COVID era. A lot of them, as part of my networking groups, people on the ground, people boots on the ground, people with, uh, actual, uh, clinics, right? They have actual doctor's offices and they're treating people on a daily basis and they had a lot of different thoughts on how this works. Then did Dr. Fowchee and did all of the bureaucrats out there in Washington. So it Fowchee his main role. Really, if you go through his emails, you'll see that the bulk of his time is, is really dealt with, is spent dealing with other people, communication and moving information around, and then communicating his conclusions back to the country. That weren't it from, from what I can gather really based in science, because we now know that science shows, there are a lot of alternative explanations for a lot of the same stuff that he has been spouting for the last year. So what, what is that then, you know, if our country is set up, so that it's a top-down approach, maybe that is something that we should revise. Maybe we should think about maybe the next time this happens. We listened to the people who are on the ground rather than having the big tech companies tell us about what medicine we can talk about or about who can interview whom or about what studies you can even read from on your channel. Less, you be hit with a strike like somebody else got hit with yesterday. And that I think is the bigger problem that is sort of being unveiled as a result of this whole thing. Fowchee was just sort of a front man. Nothing really substantive was happening there. And he was just kind of, you know, being carted around from one press conference to another, they said, Hey, here are your talking points, go out there and say it. And he's been in, in government for 35 years or however, a lot longer than I've been alive. I think director of the NIH since 1984, longer than I've been alive. So that's really what the primary purpose was. And in the question that we need to ask ourselves as Americans is, is that a good idea? If that's our response to a global pandemic, is there a better approach? Maybe we can do things a little bit differently, which is why I think this retrospective is so important. All right. Great questions. All of those came over from watching the watchers.locals.com. I thank you for those very much. All right. And because it's Friday, we're talking, UFO's, you know how this goes here. The U S is set to deliver a report to the Pentagon. That's going to detail whether or not we've been visited by aliens. Now, obviously we have right. We can get that out of the way, but they're telling us that we have not, their Pentagon report is not scheduled to come out until the end of June, June 25th, to be official, supposed to be a government comprehensive report from all of the different agencies that are being coordinated through the office of the director of national intelligence, talking to the army and everybody, the Navy, we've been seeing a lot of these things floating around our skies, where are they coming from? Who's responsible for them. So this report is supposed to be drafted. It's coming out here in a couple of weeks, but the New York times got a hint. They got a peek inside. They're going to tell us a little bit more about what's going on. So they tell us that the U S finds no evidence of aliens or of alien technology rather in the flying objects, but they can't rule it out either. Oh, okay. So, all right. So this reminds me of the Corona virus conversation that we're having about lab escape or natural origin. If you say it's not the lab escape, well, you got to show it. There's some evidence that th that it is a natural origin. Don't you? You can't just say it's not that. And then not show us an alternative, but that's exactly what the government is doing here. They're saying, oh, there's no evidence of alien technologies. Okay. Well then what is, what is the revenue? Well, we can't tell you that, but we can't rule out the aliens either. All right. So sounds good. Kind of like a useless report. Was anybody expecting anything differently from Washington American intelligence officials have found no evidence that the arrow phenomenon witnessed by Navy pilots in recent years are alien spacecraft, but they still cannot explain the unusual movements that have mystified scientists in the military. We have an highly anticipated report coming out, and they are already speaking to senior administration officials that have been briefed on the findings. So it's coming out, we're going to go through it once it's released should be unclassified. So we should get the entirety of the document, but we'll see report determines that a vast majority of more than 120 incidents over the past two decades did not originate from any American military or other advanced us government technology. The officials said, so, does anybody believe that government's gonna come out? And it's not us. It's not the Chileans, but it's not. You believe that I don't, that determined nation would appear to eliminate the possibility that the Navy pilots who reported seeing unexplained aircraft might've encountered secret programs, the government meant to keep secret. But that is about the only conclusive finding in the garbage dumpster classified intelligence report says the officials and while a forthcoming classified version, unclassified version, that's expected to be released by the 25th. We'll present few other from conclusions, senior officials briefed on the report, conceded that the very ambiguity of the findings meant the government could not definitively rule out the theories that the phenomenon observed by military pilots might be alien spacecraft. So they could not definitively rule the theories. Hm America's long running fascination with you of both as intensified. Barack Obama went on the late show and talked about it. He said, what is true? I'm actually being serious here is that there is footage and records of objects in the skies that we don't know exactly what they are. We played that clip here. The report concedes that much about the observed phenomenon remains difficult to explain, including their acceleration, as well as the ability to change directions and submerge. One possible explanation, whether balloons or other research balloons does not hold up in all cases because of the changes in wind speed, right? Times some of the interactions, they're not weather balloons. Folks. You saw those, those are not weather blind floating around. We're just gonna float from the sky and then go into the ocean. We're going to transduce transmute between different mediums, not a weather balloon I've seen at least let's just leave it at that. All right. So we know that the report is coming out. We know it's not going to release anything. We know that the government's not going to tell us anything about anything, cause why would they? And, um, is it going to stop there? Well, probably, but Marco Rubio says that they're going to continue to investigate it. So this comes over from the sun space. Oddities UFO, according to Rubio says, quote, must seriously be investigated. So the Pentagon report is just the first step. So UFO's need to be seriously investigated on Thursday. He spoke to the son that they're going to be investigating the mysterious flying objects, dubbed the unexplained aerial phenomenon. So the UAPs men and women haven't trusted, we haven't trusted with the defense of our country. Our reporting encounters with unidentified aircraft with superior capabilities said Rubio. We can not allow the stigma of UFO's to keep us from seriously investigating this. The forthcoming report is just one step in that process, but it will not be the last. So this article says that they're going to release the report on June 29th, within the 180 day deadline, which was laid out in the legislation from January one. The memo is being prepared by the office of the director of national intelligence and the UAP task force established last September to probe the military encounters with the UAPs he's comments came after the Navy release classified footage of a very strange object in 2004 and 2014, 10 years apart. Hmm. Yeah. And so if you're not familiar with the ODI and I, the office of the director of national intelligence, as I mentioned, this is kind of the, the hub and spoke model, the hub and wheel model. So the ODI and I, the director of the national intelligence communicates, he's kind of the clearing house where she now is kind of the clearing house for all of the different agencies that are in our intelligence community. So sort of asking everybody, Hey, CIA, what do you have? Hey, FBI, what do you got? Hey ATF, Hey, Navy army, all of you, what information do you have about the UFO's? And they're all going to say nothing, no idea. Here's your report. So they can type it up into this big thing and just give us a bunch of nothing. The protection of the methodologies yeah. Is an important part of how the UATP task force operates. So they're saying it's not, uh, satisfy UFO aficionados. They're saying this is as an intelligence driven effort. Reports are going to deal with data collected by highly sensitive sensors and the U S army that they use in a data, different data driven approach. All right. So the comes after the Navy reported orbs shape footages flying off in San Diego in 2019, Florida politician told 60 minutes, they're going to be investigating this. I want to take it seriously. He's on the us Senate intelligence committee. He's asked the director of national intelligence to figure this out. We got footage from the USS Omaha, July, 2019. We talked a lot about Jeremy Corbell and others. There was also an encounter on the USS Nimitz. We talked about that one. We have Steve Bassett, he's the executive director of the paradigm research group. He thinks that the U S intelligence is preparing to end a so-called 74 year truth Bargo. Wouldn't that be fun? Do you think that's going to happen? That count apparently started back in 1947, when the Roswell army airfield in New Mexico distributed a press release, claiming they recovered the remains of a flying disc. They crashed in the desert the next day, the us army backtrack track claiming the recovered object was just a weather balloon. I knew I heard about the weather balloon somewhere. They always say that is it actually that well, we're gonna find out on June 25th or June 29th, whatever, whenever they release this report. Now at the start of the show, I told you that we spent some time here talking about area 51. I would love to go there and see what happened there. I mean, will Smith got to go there? And Jeff, Goldbloom got to go there and saved the whole planet. Maybe one day I'll be afforded that same opportunity. One can only hope, but if I don't get to go to area 51, maybe I'll go to the Navy's area, 51, it's called something else. And I had no idea this thing. Yeah. Even existed, but apparently it does. And apparently China is, uh, sort of poking their fingers around in this space, which is causing some concern, of course, for our U S Navy. I want to show you this article here from a N D it's a website called a and D magazine.com and it is the expert analysis and commentary article. It says breaking the silence, Chinese spies, zero in on us Navy's area 51. So the U S Navy apparently has something very similar to area 51 out in the depths of Nevada. So let's figure out what's happening here. China is aggressively pursuing its expansionist agenda across the globe. That includes right off our shores in The Bahamas where China has been involved in a port building and efforts to secure commercial fishing rights for a number of years may not sound like a national security threat, but it is as ramp up between the U S and China. We focus more and more on the possibility of direct military confrontation. The balance of power between the U S and Chinese navies becomes ever more significant of particular importance is the ability of American submarines to operate in the Pacific in relative proximity to communist China, and deny the Chinese Navy, the ability to gain access to the open ocean and pass beyond what is known as the first island chain, which includes Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines. And this is something, you know, when I was in college, I took a class, it was called, uh, international security in the Asian Pacific theater. I think it was, it was the name of the class, and it was one of the best classes I ever took ever my whole life. I forget the name of the professor. He wrote like a million books, class was packed and it was just outstanding. And he was taking us through all of the power conversations that are taking place on a global scale. And a lot of it had to do with China and Taiwan and Japan and the Koreas. And it's, it's a fascinating area to study. And what we're sort of talking about here in this, in this context is power projection. And we talk about the strength of navies and about how sort of powerful the, the waters are, why it's so critical to control them so that you can keep your supply chains open. And there's a great guy. Uh, his name is Peter Xi'an. He talks a lot about this in his book called the absent superpower. And he wrote another one that I didn't read, but I watch a lot about it on YouTube, where he talks about sort of the, the global order. I think it's called a Britain with Brexit and Britain would Bretton woods. There was some sort of a meeting that took place between a lot of world leaders in American leaders, where they created this new sort of world order really where the United States would essentially become the global hegemonic power by promising security guarantees on the seas. So in other words, as long as you were under the umbrella of the us Navy, as long as we sort of could, could send our ships and have a big enough force that had power projection on a global scale, then you could be under our umbrella, w you're you're part of our team, but you allow us then to sort of patrol the seas and make sure that we can guarantee global security on the, on the ocean, around the world. And so that has been something that has sort of been in place, right? And the United States, according to Peter Xi'an and his books has been sort of insuring this global protective order by maintaining security of the seas. And we did that for good reason because we needed to make sure that our trade routes were good. It was mostly out of self-interest. We needed the oil, we needed a lot of the resources that were being shipped all around the world. And so we had a strong interest in contributing to the global security of the world. And he sort of saying that that might be changing, that maybe America doesn't have as strong of an interest in that regard anymore. And he was saying that Donald Trump might have been accelerating this process because the question now becomes, what do we really need to do that anymore? What is America getting out of this global order by ensuring that we are, I guess, being the policeman of the seas, what do we get out of that historically, you know, 20 years ago, when the United States domestic production of oil was lower, we needed ships to bring the oil over from the rest of the world, into our country. But now that we've got a lot of the shale activities here in, you know, domestically, do we need that oil anymore? Do we, in other words, can our domestic production makeup from some of the gaps that would be evidence if we remove ourselves from the world order and stop promising protection of the seas long, long convoluted, um, uh, explanation there from yours, truly very good, better explanations from some of these other individuals that I mentioned, like Peter Xi'an and others who talk about this, but this is a very, very critical component of international security and international relations. It's sort of who controls the seas. And if one super power like the United States is going to give up a portion of that, well, then some of those trade routes and the navigation that, that, that is necessary in order to maintain all of these alliances might be shattered a little bit. And they might be saying, well, the United States, they sort of made sure that nobody else interfered with us. They're not doing that anymore. Maybe that shifts some of the old world order of alliances here on the world scale. So we'll see. Now what they're talking about here is some of that the Chinese and other words are moving forward, moving close to the United States, seizing control over part of the shores of The Bahamas, building ports, securing commercial fishing rights, and sort of encroaching upon that sacred space, which is the geography of the oceans, which is extremely powerful to international security. So this article continues. It says American submarines in such a conflict would not win by numbers. They would win by superior design and capability, and in particular, by their ability to remain undetected, that variability may be one of the reasons the Chinese are so focused on The Bahamas. And if they are able to establish a permanent presence of their fishing fleet, then where that ability may be threatened. Okay. And so look at what he posted here. Uh, there's a mysterious Chinese ship engaged in strange activities in the Moroccan waters. The vessel is equipped with two powerful engines and generators, more suitable for spy or research vessel rather than an ordinary fishing vessel. And so see what this looks like a fishing vessel, doesn't it, we've got all, you know, all of these sort of attachments on the sides. It doesn't look like a military boat. It looks just like a regular, you know, vessel that just kind of goes out there and fishes, but it's maybe something more than it seems. Chinese fishing fleets do not operate as normal commercial operations. They function as part of what is known as the maritime militia ships are armed and routinely used to protect Chinese or to project project Chinese power and force the ships of other nations out of particular areas more to the point for this discussion, they also provide cover for intelligence collection operations. Some of these fishing boats just spice shifts. That's all they are. And it seems like they are hovering around a very important area that we see right here, China in The Bahamas, according to at CCP, watch over on Twitter, give them a follow up building a road, runway the entire length of the island. So we can see that down here. Uh, the size of the equipment is not related to the stated plans of the Chinese owner who say he wants a few small resort, cabins and products for rent need to monitor this. All right. So we've got The Bahamas was down here. We have this island NESU. It looks like we see maybe a strip here or maybe bird K. I'm not sure what island they're talking about, but we see, we sort of see some, some roads or some areas where they're creating some landing strips or who knows what's going on there, but enough to cause some concern. Now, the Atlantic undersea let's learn about this. The Atlantic undersea test and evaluation center is known as Alltech located on the BA BA Bahamas Bohemian Bohemian island of Androse in the intermediate proximity to what is known as the tongue of the ocean or the Toto. We're learning a lot today. The long deep trench with a flat bottom provides a perfect area to test sonar and communication technologies in an area free from outside noise. It's been there for 56 years. Did you have any idea? I didn't. This is where the U S Navy conducts much of the work that guarantees its submarines remain undetectable and that we maintain Maritimes. Okay. It's very important testing ground for our subs. The Atlanta under sea test and evaluation centers, detachment on Andrews is Island's main job is managing what amounts to giant underwater test ranges. So the Navy can measure the acoustic signatures of the submarines and validate those signatures before deployments in the game of cat and mouse. That is the modern summary and operations. If you can be heard, you can be killed. So they have this little area in the ocean. Sounds like it's sort of like a soundproofed ocean floor where there's this big, long, deep trench called the Toto, the tongue of the ocean. All right. Just yeah, just dragging it's this gross, but they go down there and they test submarines so that they can measure how loud they are. They are, we have this almost naturally acoustic barrier. We can ship a submarine through there, listen to loud. Don't send that over to the Chinese waters. So they're gonna here. You send it back. Do it again. Lou Lou does it again. Oh, there you go. Now you're quiet. Okay. Keep your voice down when you're in there. Chinese are listening. All right. So the article continues. Chinese commercial fishing fleets operate in large groups, hundreds of vessels at a time swarming area often literally stripping it clean of sea life. Hmm. Was such a hoard of vessels operating out of The Bahamas on a regular commercial basis. It would be child's play to deploy a handful of vessels with the kind of sensors and communications gear required to collect critical intelligence on American submarines as they go through their pace, their places at the Alltech, in preparation for deployment around the globe. The information gathered from session Teligent could quite literally change the balance of power on the globe and provide a decisive advantage to the Chinese Navy in any future engagement with the U S for that reason, quite obviously we ought to be intervening aggressively to prevent any further Chinese encroachment into The Bahamas. Existing port facilities should be shut down discussions about future projects and anything that justifies the Chinese deployment of its thinly disguised spy ships should be turned off, whatever combination of pressure and inducement required to make that happen with the government of The Bahamas should be employed. It won't be, he says, this administration is owned by the CCP from top to bottom at dances disease tomb. We will all pay the price. And in this case, the very first to face these consequences, maybe the men and women of America's silent service. Oh, yikes. Right. That's scary stuff. Sorry for, uh, unveiling that to you. But the Chinese are in The Bahamas now, and they've got some very important spy ships, and it sounds like they're going to basically figure out what we're doing it to Navy area 51. Let's take some questions here, norovirus in the house, as what most people don't realize about the government in USO releases that they are doing it on purpose on a certain timeline. And if it's truly evil people releasing the info, then they will put a spin on it. That will be beneficial for them on many levels, not just financial. What I'm trying to say is that there is a lot more to this story. Next step is their plan is to tell us the aliens are real and they are dangerous to us. Just wait and see. That is not the truth.[inaudible] norovirus has the, the aliens are here or they're coming. I'm going to go hang out with them. Okay? I don't care what the government says. If they say they're dangerous, whatever, there's a lot of, there's a lot of dangerous things in this world. I'm going to go see how they, how they are. We're going to, we're going to hang out. Hat consulting says, why is America protecting the sea so that we can get cheap products from China? If you define the global police imagining, imagine the pirating that will spawn from nowhere. People need to shut the hell up and recognize that the minimal protection we provide overseas helps make life better for us immediately. Not some convoluted in direct path. Good perspective on that. Yeah. I mean, there's, there's a good reason. The U S does what it does and it's good reason we've been doing it for a long time. So there's, I think a pretty evident attempt from China to undo some of that progress so that they can seize control of more of the oceans and play a bigger role on the global scale. All right. We've got Jeremy Machita says, looks like the Chinese boat's cover has been blown. That's right. We did it right here. So if you see any of those fishing ships from China, don't buy it for a second folks. They're trying to hack our submarines. We have underscore shades is in the house, says interesting. Since the Dutch east India co have been dominated over the seas for several hundred years and still is to this day maritime history for thousands of years, which still have the same family bloodlines gaming. Them sounds more like families battling over the world. Well, there's a lot of people who say that, right? That you go back to, you know, the, the Rothschilds and the Vanderbilts and the Rockefellers and the, uh, all of those people, right? That they're all part of this big banking scheme. And they rule the world sounds as good as anything else. We have Jeremy[inaudible] last one in the house, as I would guess, any quote intelligence, the Chinese gain is what the U S wants them to believe to be Intel. I would hope so. You know, I would hope maybe, maybe down there at the Navy area, 51, they're sort of, um, maybe they're sending them Rick Astley songs. Never going to give you a never going to let you down. I'm going to run around, right. Maybe they're sending that to the Chinese. That's. What I would do is just play that around the clock. See what they have to say about that. We have Nadar Bluss Sierra says Golin Maxwell was also into submarines and has some sort of foundation or company in the submarine, tech field rumor has it that they use the subs to bring in discreet shipments. Oh my gosh. Are you serious? Are you kidding me? I had never heard that, but that's a wild. Oh my gosh. What if Jeffrey Epstein and Colin Maxwell are the aliens? Oh, no. Look, I don't mean to make fun of it. Glenn Maxwell. You know, these people, it's just kind of bizarre when you start talking about these stories and they all just inter interlink with each other. Isn't it weird. All right. Norovirus says, just to clarify, please, don't go hang out with them. She says, norovirus has just to clarify. Thank you for clarifying. All right. Gosh, that could have been bad. Please. Don't go hang out with them without proper research. The ones that harm people could take you up on that invitation. Maybe that's too far out there for this show, but don't go up into the ship. I mean, I was going to, you heard me here, Nora, you just saved my life. I was going to do it. I'd be like, yeah. All right, beat me up. Let's see what's going on up there. Um, I'm ready. Let's go do this thing because you know, folks that could be my big debut, you know, I could, I could be like, will Smith and launch that nuke in the, in the, in the mothership. Sometimes you just got to take that opportunity, you know, like, oh, I want to leave a mark on the world. That's one way to do it. But norovirus saved my life. Thank you, Nora. I will not go up into the spaceship probably, probably won't. We'll see. Thank you for the warning though. All right. Great questions. All of those came over from, you know, who you are, speech on lease underscore shades and the dogs in the house. Sharon's here eat on tests, hack consulting, that doctor renal MD's here and norovirus all over, coming from watching the watchers.locals.com. And it's a great place to be. There's a lot of good stuff you can get over there. Things like a free copy of my book. It's called beginning to winning. You can download the PDF for free right here. You can download a copy of all the slides that we just went through today. You can download a copy of my impeachment party documents or my personal productivity device called the systems template. And you can download this template for free, adjust it to your own liking and hopefully use it. There are links and stuff that we share throughout the day. There are great people that are there as well. And we have a monthly meetup coming up on June 26. We did one in may. It was a lot of fun. You can register@watchingthewatchersdotlocals.com. The link is not up there, but if you're a member, you're going to get the link. When I post it. The next event is coming up June 12th at 12 to 2:00 PM, which is going to be Eastern time. So that's going to be 9:00 AM my time. We're going to talk for about 90 minutes or so should be somewhat interactive. It depends on kind of the size of the group, but should be fun. And I'm looking forward to it. It's gonna be my first attempt at this sort of virtual conversation. So we're gonna sort of work our way through it, but it should be a lot of fun, very interesting stuff. How to deal with the police all for free. If you are a member over@watchingthewatchersdotlocals.com and we really do appreciate your support. As you know, YouTube has really kind of, uh, not been happy with us on this channel. For some reason, I don't know what we did, but we're, we're not monetized here. And so by supporting us on the different platforms, you really keep the energy up and keep us going. And it's, uh, I think it's a good move. Long-term every time that we are able to kind of vote with our dollars and vote with our time and vote with our eyeballs and vote with our clicks on different platforms. That's a great thing. That's one step that's one brick in the new facade, in the new building that we're building elsewhere. And so I just appreciate everybody who is a part of that migration really does mean the world. I also have some other channels down below, and we were sort of diversifying a little bit here because of some of the YouTube kerfuffle, but there are, uh, there's a crypto channel down below. I'm having a lot of fun with yesterday. I made a video about Elon, Elon Musk posted a tweet at, uh, like was like seven oh seven Arizona time. And if you look at the markets, he posted a breakup heart. So they break up emoji and Bitcoin Bitcoin breakup. And he posted this meme and the markets took a dump. All of them like immediately one oh seven, one oh eight crash. And they all just went down and it was, uh, it was a wild thing to see, but I made this video where I show you the simultaneous drop-off across eight markets. So across, uh, theories, Cardona, Solano, ICP, doge coin, all of them, right? They're all in there. Uh, dosage is not in there, but the other ones are anyway. If you want to watch it fascinating stuff's going on there, it is linked down below. I also have another video where I do a deep dive on another channel where have a deep dive on the Wu Han lab stuff. So go check out those other channels. If you're interested in it, if you're interested in Arizona law, we're putting out a lot more Arizona only content. So there's another channel for that as well. Just want to keep you apprised of that course. If you're only interested in this show, definitely make sure you're subscribed here because this is not going anywhere. We're going to continue to do this. We're having a lot of fun and we appreciate all your love and support here before we get out of here. One final reminder that I am a criminal defense attorney. We're in Scottsdale, Arizona. I'm at the RNR law group. All of the contact information and links are in the description below as well. And we love to help good people who are facing criminal charges to find safety, clarity, and hope in their cases and in their lives. And I mean that, I mean, we have a whole team of people here that are just passionate as hell about helping people get things back on track. And when I say good people facing criminal charges, I mean that, you know, a lot of people think that just because you're charged with a crime that you're some sort of, you know, or elective society, that's not the case. There are many, many good people that sometimes just get caught up in bad situations. And we want to help them through that and make sure that the justice system doesn't wreck them on the, on the way through the process. So if you happen to know anybody in the state of Arizona who is facing a criminal charge, it can be anything minor things like DUIs, misdemeanors, domestic violence, offenses, or things, you know, major offenses like aggravated assault or sex crimes. We handle all of those and everything in between including traffic cases, we can clear up old cases, old warrants restore your right, get your civil rights back so you can vote again and, uh, possess a firearm, you know, potentially based on your background and some of what the future prospects look like. So there's just a lot of work that we can do. And I want to make sure that people know that there are things that can be done when you are facing, see a situation like this, and we would love the opportunity to help. So if you happen to know anybody in the state of Arizona who is facing a criminal charge, we would be honored and humbled. If you sent them our direction, we offer free case evaluations. And once again, all of the contact information is linked down below. Really appreciate it. It means the world and it helps us keep our mission moving forward. We love to help people and we appreciate you helping us do that. So that is it from me, my friends, we're going to be back here. Same time, same place on Monday. It's going to be at 4:00 PM, Arizona time, 5:00 PM, mountain 6:00 PM. Central 7:00 PM on the east coast. And for that one, Florida, man, everybody thanks so much for sticking with us this week. Have a tremendously long weekend, get some nice food, get some nice rest and definitely unplugged from politics because we're going to, you're ready to rock and roll right back in it on Monday. And I'll see you there have a great weekend. Everybody bye-bye.