Biden Nukes Gun Crimes, Kamala Beats Trump to Border, “World Deserves to Know” COVID Bill

Biden Nukes Gun Crimes, Kamala Beats Trump to Border, “World Deserves to Know” COVID Bill​

President Biden addresses gun violence with Attorney General Merrick Garland and we review the Administration’s plan. The Biden Administrations terminates the head of Border Patrol and Kamala races down to the border to beat Trump. Dr. Fauci out with a new message about the COVID-19 Delta variant and address America on Biden’s twitter account.​

And more! Join criminal defense lawyer Robert F. Gruler in a discussion on the latest legal, criminal and political news, including:​

🔵 President Biden address rising gun violence as new crime wave sweeps America.​
🔵 Biden gave a press conference yesterday where he reiterated a plan laid out by Attorney General Merrick Garland.​
🔵 Review of AG Garland’s press release which details the possibility of considering future gun crimes in gun license inspections.​
🔵 What are Ghost guns and why is the Federal Government interested in them?​
🔵 President Biden’s speech raised eyebrows when he suggested Patriots wanting liberty would be up against F15 fighter jets and nuclear weapons.​
🔵 How would Hunter Biden do under the Administration’s new rules?​
🔵 A young senator responds to President Biden.​
🔵 On the border, the Biden Administration forces the head of Border Patrol to step down.​
🔵 Former Border Patrol Chief Rodney Scott informed regional directors of his departure as being “completely driven by politics.”​
🔵 Meanwhile, 23 Republicans move to censure the President over his failures at the border.​
🔵 Vice President Kamala Harris has agreed to go to the border on Friday.​
🔵 Donald Trump responds, saying Kamala is visiting the border because he forced her hand.​
🔵 Dr. Fauci makes an appearance on President Biden’s twitter timeline today, twice.​
🔵 The first post about the Delta variant was deleted and the second post was slightly different – what changed? Disclose.TV captured the deletion.​
🔵 Who is Representative Elise Stefanik from the 21st District of New York?​
🔵 House GOP leadership holds a press conference warning about the #CovidCoverup and claiming that #ChinaLiedPeopleDied​
🔵 Rep. Stefanik introduces the “World Deserves to Know Act” and we review what is inside.​
🔵 Your questions after each segment at watchingthewatchers.locals.com!​

COMMUNITY & LIVECHAT QUESTIONS: ​

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

🧠 GUMROAD: https://www.gumroad.com/robertgruler​

💎 CRYPTO LATEST: https://youtu.be/rjs128IlTHA​

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 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: 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!​

☝🏻 Don't forget to join us on Locals for exclusive content, slides

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:00

Hello, my friends. And welcome back to yet. Another episode of watching the Watchers live. My name is Robert ruler. I am a criminal defense attorney here at the RNR law group in the always beautiful and sunny Scottsdale Arizona, where my team and I, over the course of many years of representing thousands of good people facing criminal charges 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 down upon our system with the hope of finding justice. And we're grateful that you are here and with us today, we're back, we're live we're in business. I want to thank you for giving us a couple of days there to host some premiers. Instead of going live. We had a very nice company event where we took the team out yesterday. We did a little bit of team building activities, and I think it's important for us to do that from time to time. And so thank you for allowing us to go and do that and being accommodating as you all are, but we're back in business and we're ready to rock and roll air conditioning's functioning again. Life's good. So I want to give you a quick outline on where we're going today because there's a lot to get to. We've got Joe Biden. Now. He has been for a long time, sort of slowly unveiling what his solution is to criminal justice. We've heard him talk a lot during the campaign about all of the ills and problems with the justice system. And now we're about six months into his presidency. That's it? And we're starting to see some framework here about what they're going to be doing. So yesterday he gave us a breakdown kind of, of what his plan was along with attorney general, Merrick Garland. So we're going to go through what the crime future looks like for the federal government, because really right now, what their focus is, is all on guns, gun violence, and we all know where this is going to lead. So we're going to talk about that for quite a bit. In the first segment on the show, then we're going to change gears a little bit, and we want to talk about the border yet again, because it's kind of heating up here a little bit. We have the former border patrol chief. His name is Rodney Scott. He was informed by the Biden administration. Now we don't really want you here anymore. So he has been terminated or, you know, asked to resign. So the former border patrol, chief, Rodney, Scott's no longer there. We have 23 Republicans now who are moving to center, president Biden due to the failures at the border. We've got Kamala Harris. Who's going to be going to the border tomorrow, kind of rushing to beat Donald Trump over there. And so we got to get an update on what is going on because we have, uh, we have a, an ongoing crisis there. So we'll see where that goes. Then we're going to finish and talk about COVID. Now COVID has been something that we've been talking a little bit more about because of the investigations that are now well underway. We have a number of Republicans that have introduced a bill called the world, deserves to know act, oh, I okay. I agree with that. I don't, you know, we haven't read through the bill yet today, but it sounds like we do deserve to know. I think that kind of mirrors some of the transparency we talk about on this channel. So I'm liking what on what I'm hearing here, but we have rep Stefanick over from New York who came out, uh, yesterday gave a press conference. I want to share with you what is in this bill. The world deserves to know act as well as what the GOP is saying. And if you have, are not sort of tired of this guy, Dr. Fowchee made two appearances on president Biden's Twitter timeline today, and only one of them stuck. The first post was out and then it was deleted. Then they repost sort of a little bit of a different video on the president's Twitter timeline. So we're going to break down really what happened there. We've got a lot to get into, and I want you to be a part of the show if you so choose the place to do that is by going over to watching the watchers.locals.com, which is a separate community where we do fun stuff. And we sort of have a little extra conversations outside in a part from this show. So if you go over there right now, we have a live chat that's taking place. If you have any questions that you want to share, or comments or criticisms, you want to love this way, feel free to do that over there. And we're going to integrate those questions into the show today. So head on over to there. And by the way, I did have a phone call with locals and they are slowly unveiling live streaming over there at local. So I'm very excited about that. And I still have not heard back from YouTube. It's been, you know, four or five months about the re monetization stuff. So we can get some of the live chat features over there, but it is still a work in progress. We are, uh, we'll keep you apprised on that. But the whole point is go over to watching the watchers.locals.com and be sure to check out some of the other links that are down in the description. We have some other channels and some other activities that are, uh, are, uh, uh, out there and available if you would like to partake. So check those out. All right. So let's get in to the news of the day. Joe Biden for a long time has been slowly sort of unveiling his criminal justice plan. Now on this channel, we spent a lot of time talking about Joe Biden because he was the author of the 1984 crime bill, 86 crime bill, 94 crime bill, and sort of the list goes on and on. He's been a Senator for about 30 something years. And for a long time, a big centerpiece of his entire career in politics has been focused on criminal justice reform. And so when he was running for office last year, we heard a lot about, you know, justice reform and George Floyd and a lot of that stuff. And, you know, I was sort of saying, Hey, wait a minute. This doesn't feel like the Joe Biden that we all know. So well, the same guy that introduced mandatory minimums and mandatory sentencing and author of the crack cocaine bill that adversely impacted African-American communities throughout the entire country, that Joe Biden, when he comes out here and start sort of sympathizing with BLM and George Florida going wait a minute, man, you've locked up more, more African-Americans than anybody else in history. So I don't know what you're talking about, but th th the whole, the whole point I want to talk about this is because now he's president. Now he has to act, okay, all of that political bloviation. I get it. I think it's reprehensible, but I get it, but it is something now he needs to actually take some action. We need some real policy decisions that are going to be made from Joe Biden. And, you know, it may feel like we've been dealing with this administration for like two decades, but it's been six months, we've got a lot more road to go. We've got at least three and a half more years of this. And so we're slowly sort of following the policies that are rolling out of this administration. And we know what it's going to look like because they're telling us pretty clearly, it's all about gun violence. And I want to just kind of point out, you know, let's think about this in terms of historical context, right now, we're talking about gun violence. But if you harken back to the nineties, we were talking about a different type of violence. And so let's just put a pin in that for now and see if there's some, maybe similarities between what Joe Biden's doing now, and when maybe what Joe Biden did back in the nineties. He's been focusing on crime for like 40 years now. So we'll see now he gave a press conference yesterday. We've got some reaction to it, and I want to go through some of the nuts and bolts. Let's frame it out a little bit. Let's talk about what's going on with, from the New York times. They say that Biden addresses rising gun violence, uh, made continued calls for police reform. So, you know, there was a crime wave story that we talked about yesterday. Lot of mayors are out there. A lot of city officials are saying, Hey, you know, w there's basically nothing we can do. There's crime in Baltimore, there's mass shootings taking place all over the country. And we need federal help, which I think is sort of embarrassing that mayors are, you know, can't get a handle on their own city without sort of begging for federal aid, but that's a whole separate issue, you know? All right. So we go back to this article here from the New York times, Biden announced new efforts to tackle gun violence. So he's saying that states could now draw up to 350 billion in federal stimulus money to shore up police departments and vowed to crack down on the gun dealers who failed to run background checks. Okay. And white house seeks to combat the alarming rise in homicide rates in America cities. So I'm going to try not to get too ranty here, because I did a lot of that yesterday and probably the day before that. And the day before that one, but you know, this is something that I have said for a long time, the pendulum swings both directions. We're going to see major calls for, for police reform, from the contingent that is unhappy with the current state of the justice system. And I'm not happy with it either, but when, when that gets so vitriolic, that it turns into, you know, reasonable, common sense, justice reform and morphs into this entire defund, the police movement, like we're just gonna eliminate law law enforcement throughout the country. That's the pendulum swinging one direction. And we just saw that last year with all the defunded police movement, there are actually city councils that did that. We've covered stories in Seattle and elsewhere where police just don't come around anymore. Just say, we're done. We're done. Thanks. If you don't want us, we're going to bail. And they're hiring problems all throughout the country. We're seeing that in homicide rates, we're seeing mayors and everybody now sort of raise the red flag. Now, if you, it, once you get that direction, once the pendulum swings that way, and you see an uptick in crime, well, naturally the population, uh, citizens are going to want and demand the opposite. So the pendulum's going to swing the other way. They're going to say, this is nuts. We've got homicides all over the place. We've got, you know, buildings and riots and everything's burning down and it there's, there's chaos and madness everywhere. So we're going to see this, this pendulum swing the other way. And then what is going to happen while the government's now going to come out and say, well, we've got a solution. We're going to fix this all for you because we are the government. And even though we've sort of caused a lot of these problems in the first place, now we're going to come in and ride in on a white Knight horse and sort of save the day. So you see what this cycle looks like. We've been through this cycle before. I'm going to show you some videos from the nineties here in a little bit, when we've already gone down this road. So now Biden's out here. He says his speech made clear. He intends to, to approach crime prevention by investing in, rather than defunding the police and Joe Biden to his credit. He's been consistent on that waiting into the national debate. Now Kamala Harris has not. Okay. So they did that little, you know, good cop, bad cop routine during the election. So joke. Nope. I support the police. And then comma was like, well, you know, here's a let let's bail out the protesters who burnt down the third precinct in Minneapolis. So they did the good cop, bad cop routine, but Joe Biden, candidly, he has been pretty consistent about this waiting into the, the national debate about whether the government should give police departments more resources or spend more money on mental health. He tried to appeal to both sides on Wednesday saying that from the white house, this is not a time to turn our backs on law enforcement or our communities. So, you know, 350 billion in federal stimulus money. It certainly doesn't sound like a defunding anything, right? So he's actually, you know, moving forward towards X, you know, sort of propping up some of these departments using the federal, federal stimulus money. And we're going to show you sort of exactly what that looks like here in a minute, but we've got some clips from Joe Biden, president Biden yesterday, and, you know, look, this is, this is one of the early clips when he's still got a little bit of energy, but he's, he, you be the judge. Tell me, you know, tell me what you think about this guy. So here he is in the white house, uh, talking about crime yesterday.

Speaker 2: 10:55

And, uh, we just met, as I said, with a bipartisan group of, uh, America's law enforcement and community leaders, we discussed a comprehensive strategy that I'm releasing today to combat the epidemic of gun violence and other violent crime that we've been seen in our country for far too long. It has spiked since the start of the pandemic over a year ago, crime is historically rises during the summer. And as we emerged from this pandemic, the country opening back up again, traditional summers summer spike may be more pronounced than it usually would be for folks at home. Here's what you need to know. I've been at this a long time. Yeah. And there are things we know that work to reduce gun violence and violent crime and things that we don't know about, but things we know about background checks, purchasing a firearm are important ban on assault, weapons and high capacity magazines. No one needs to have a weapon that can fire over 30, 40, 50, even up to a hundred rounds. Unless you think the deer were Kevlar vests or something, community policing and programs to keep neighborhoods safe and keep folks out of trouble. These efforts work, they save lives. But over time, these policies were gutted are woefully underfunded. In our conversation today, we talked about our strategy to supercharge. What works while we continue to push the Congress to act on sensible gun violence legislation.

Speaker 1: 12:37

All right. So he's not, he's not really saying much of anything. He's just reading whatever somebody wrote for him, as you can see, right? He's even having a difficult time doing that, kind of stumbling over his words. I know he got a speech impediment. I get that, but there's something else going on there. So you heard him write in, I, it offends me when people come out, they're like, well, you don't need that to, you know, go hunt a deer. That's not what the second amendment is for. They're jerks. It's for something bigger than that. It's not a recreational amendment. It's for something more fundamental to Liberty. So enough with those stupid deer hunting, Kevlar jokes, they are ridiculous. Now, you know, that that sort of sort of kicking the issue aside. The big issue here is that they're going after the guns are coming pretty hard. You just heard him say, they're been doing this for a long time. We've known that this has been something that has been the centerpiece of sort of government in general, and it's continuing forward on the back of the summer of unrest. So they cause a lot of this, you know, inter inter demographic problems that are, that are happening all across the country. And then when people start demanding action and the federal government shows up, oh, here, we're here. We're here to help. Sorry. Yeah. We're here to solve the problem for you, but we do need just a little simple thing for you. Why don't you hand that gun over to us so that we can help you better? So, all right, let's go back to the article. Now what's going to happen with this money. It's this is how it's working. So under Biden's new plan, state, local governments are gonna be allowed to use their 350 Corona virus relief. Okay. So remember when they were just sort of passing, like just gut barrels of money, trillions billions here, 900 billion, 1.3 trillion doesn't matter, whatever, just throw it in there. So apparently there's an extra 350 billion of Corona virus relief funds that they're just going to just, you know, re reallocate. So they were just literally just dumping money, wherever they want. There's apparently a nice chunk of it though, that they can use for hiring police officers to pre pandemic levels. So they're going to beef them back up. They don't want them to sort of, you know, increase the funding. They're gonna bring them back to pre pandemic, paying overtime for community policing, supporting community-based anti-violence groups, city, government struggling with high crimes will be able to go further hiring even more officers than they had before the pandemic. Oh my goodness. So certainly doesn't sound like they're defunding the police at all. It sounds like they're refunding and then increasing funding on top of where it was previously. So we'll see what the left side of the aisle wants to do on that, because there are many people were saying that, that w when we were saying defund the police, that's exactly what we meant. We weren't like mincing words. No, we didn't mean like cut the police department in half or improvise a community supervision department into the current police. Like, no, I mean, it defund the police. Now what the mainstream democratic party has now learned is that general Americans don't want that at all. That's kind of sounds like an insane idea because it is, and they are running away from that quickly, which is why the New York times is making sure that that cover is provided here, say, oh, no, no, no, no pre pandemic post pandemic. And then also making sure that, you know, that Joe by has been very consistent about not wanting to defund the people. The new money is not new spending. They say, but the administration is for the first time encouraging them to use the funds for expanding policing efforts in crime prevention efforts. So it's not new spending. It was when they passed the, you know, the, the couple of trillion that they pass, but it's not new. Now it was then the funds can also be used for summer jobs. For young people, organizations aimed to intervene with at-risk youth before they commit the violence and not the criminal justice advocates who have called for political leaders to address the societal factors that drive the crime. Yeah. I know that many people might take a listen to this and, and take a look at that and say, that's kind of a total waste. I'm not so sure. I think that there are some very interesting projects like that happening around, uh, in various cities and states, we actually interviewed a guy, uh, on this show called Andre Norman, who does a lot of this, who does some sort of like intervention work actually goes into jails and prisons. And there are other groups where they have these mentor programs sort of like what you would get in. You know, the closest thing that I can analogize to is a 12 step group, you know, alcoholism or any other type of addiction. We have 12 step groups and there are these really kind of beautiful infrastructures that exist without a lot of administrative oversight. A lot of bureaucracy. I mean, these are sort of organically grown, naturally occurring institutions that sort of self-fund themselves. And they work on the principle of sponsorship. So in order for you to be successful, you got to have a sponsor. And in order for you to maintain your success, you've got to go and sponsor somebody. We talk about being fortified in this like middle position. So if you want to be secure anything in anything that you're doing, you want to have somebody as a mentor ahead of you, that's sort of guiding you through the process, right? You want somebody coming up behind you a little bit, that you can make sure that, that you're held accountable to, to ensure that you're providing them the same mentor experience that you got, and you create this little, you know, communities, you know, social knit, uh, environment. That's been very helpful in my life and many others. And you take something like that. I like that model. And you apply it to the criminal justice system. And you say, listen, you know, I came up from a neighborhood like this and you sort of help people work them out of a life of crime or a life of difficulty. And it's not about, you know, necessarily even really focused on crime. It's just about, you know, giving people some guidance and a path forward, showing them some opportunity. And there are some beautiful things that are happening in the criminal justice space. So I am, you know, look, listen, if we're going to dumping money out everywhere else, you know, I would personally be okay with, let's experimenting a little bit down that road and seeing if it goes anywhere. So now to be candid, a lot of these projects that I have seen have been funded by donations. I think some of them have been getting, you know, been given grants, we'll see how that funding trickles down. But I do like the idea of alternatives rather than sort of the bureaucratic justice system that we have, where everybody just gets processed, like a case number, kind of thrown through the meat grinder called the court system, spit out the other end, like, you know, sort of, you know, minced baloney. And we say that's justice. And like, that's supposed to rehabilitate that person. And we're supposed to, as a society, pat our back for doing justice and you go, well, that person gets out their lives are destroyed. They've got no future, well done, well done, good job society. So now we're going to have to deal with that person again, they're going to become a burden because they don't have any job they don't, they have on the list goes on. So you get my point. All right. So what I actually want to do is take a look at some people who are actually running things. Somebody here named Merrick Garland. We know him as attorney general. Now he actually spoke before the president. So he came out and actually detailed. What's going to be happening. Then Joe Biden came out and sort of stumbled his way through a teleprompter. He said, Hey, Mr. President, good to be here with you. Protecting our communities from violent crime is a top priority as participants of the round table have noted. Cause they met with some of the other law enforcement officials. We have seen a pretty big, big increase here in violent crime in 2020 and early 21 is deeply troubling. So they're seeing it. That is why last month we launched a comprehensive, violent crime reduction strategy. And we talked about this earlier yesterday in this week, what are the four priorities setting, strategic enforcement priorities. So got that fostering trust, earning legitimacy in our communities. Okay. Investing in community-based prevention, intervention programs, measuring the results of these efforts through a decrease in violent crime, not merely by arresting convictions as though they were in, you know, means in the ends themselves. So let's so as I said on yesterday, shelf, all sounds good. I like the idea that we've got, you know, smart enforcement priorities, not rounding people up for traffic tickets all day, doing these traffic enforcement things like let's go after the stuff that's actually hurting society. Not some of the more, you know, benevolent stuff. We also have fostering trust, earning legitimacy in our communities that I think that's very important now, as I've said historically on the show, when we talk about principles and missions and visions, typically those all sound great, right? You can talk, you go read Facebook's mission, go read Google or Twitter or any of these organizations that sounds beautiful. A unified world. Great, whatever the problem is, is in the implementation. So when we talk about, you know, prevention and intervention and a decrease in violent crime, what does that mean? We're talking about the federal government here. They have to either interface with the states or they got to sort of justify coming in there and taking action themselves. Or they got to use some sort of federal regulatory program to sort of force compliance with the states. So let's dig into this. So he says, now we know that an effective, violent crime reduction strategy must also address illegal trafficking of firearms. Okay? So I skip a big portion of his statement here, cause it's sort of talking about money and funding. Then he talks about illegal trafficking of firearms. He wants to focus on keeping guns out of the wrong hands. He said, they talked about this on may talking about ghost guns. We've heard this sort of, this is the new, scary word that is being thrown around. And this, um, we'll, we'll learn a little bit about that. What are ghost guns? This is over from Brady, which is sort of, you know, a big, a big case and a big, uh, campaign to, to end gun violence, ghost guns. They are uncivilized, they are untraceable firearms that can be bought and assembled at home, which I mean, oh my gosh, that's very, I'm scared already. They are often sold through ghost gun kits, which include all the parts are often equipment necessary to build these weapons at home. These kits are widely available, purchased by anyone, including prohibited, purchasers, domestic abusers and gun traffickers without a background check. Oh no. As these kits and guns are sold at gun shows and online every day throughout the country, they undermine all the life-saving policies that state legislatures have fought so hard to put in place. And when I went over to their website, you can see they, they were very happy about this Biden announces historic gun violence prevention plan, and they applaud him for adopting and taking it, you know, taking all of these issues that they think are important into account. So ghost guns, you know, it sounds like, you know, some of these things are perfectly legal. They're being sold at gun shows online everyday throughout the country. But you know, it's a little bit of uncomfortable for them because it's not going through a regulatory agency. You know, it's not going through the government. And that, that really scares them. They want everything to go through their fingers so that they can move the levers around a little bit. All right. So we go back to Garland's statement. He says on June 7th, we proposed a rule to clarify that pistols equipped with certain stabilizing braces are also not okay. Department published extreme risk protection order by the states. We are now taking further steps. He says, first we're going to hold gun dealers that break the rules accountable for their actions. Most federally firearm, licensed dealers operate legally selling guns to individuals who have passed background checks. But those who willfully violate the law increase the risk that guns will fall into the wrong hands. So all of this, okay, we're going to get to walk, stick with me on this. We're going to go through this all sounds good. Right? I don't, I don't want anybody to violate the law. I don't want guns falling into the wrong hands. I don't want anything like that. You know like, like that happening. The question is who defines what all that means, who defines what the wrong hands are, who defines what a willful violation is, who defines what a, what a law, you know, legal possession is versus illegal possession. These are where we get into enforceability is talking about the issues. I don't want innocent people being shot by gun. I don't want, you know, random shootings taking place at a mall or a movie theater wherever I'm eating dinner. No, not at all. The question is in the, the enforcement, the regulation what's going to actually happen. So let's take a look now, extraordinary circumstances. The ATF will initiate proceedings to revoke the license of dealers that will willfully violate the law by not doing background checks, falsifying records, okay. Failing to respond, to trace requests. Okay. So we'll see if, you know, are those legal or not refusing to permit ATF, to conduct inspections or transferring firearms to persons who are prohibited from owning them. Now I don't have a federal firearms license or really practicing this space at all. Uh, so, uh, my, you know, my, I don't know the intricacies of this, but if in order to get a license, you have to comply with all of those rules, which I'm going to guess that you do then what is the, there's no problem with that, right? You're a federal firearms owner. You have a license, you go apply for the license. There are terms and conditions with that same thing that you do when you have a driver's license. So you just go, no, I agree to follow the rules. If you don't follow the rules, you give up your license. That's how licenses work. Now we move on. So it sounds like in part one, all they're doing is just saying, Hey, look, we're just going to kind of, the laws are already in place. We're just going to uphold the laws and maintain the same licensing requirements that you came through. The G that you had to comply with. When you came through the first time around, then we get in here. Second, we are now seeking funding to increase ATF dealers, inspection capacity to improve its effectiveness. So in order to do all of this in order to make sure that you're actually following with the law, we got to increase our ability to inspect. We have very limited inspection resources. The president's fiscal budget now adds inspection positions to every field division. So they're going to bump that up hard. The infective, the effectiveness of the enforcement program depends on the ability to identify and focus on those dealers that pose the greatest risk to public safety. You still with me. So now what they're going to be doing is they say, well, we've got these laws. We got to make sure they're being enforced and we need some more enforcement mechanisms. We need more money. We need more resources. And we also have to prioritize as we learned in, in their, one of their pillar statements in the first place. So then they come back and they say, we have to identify those dealers that now pose the greatest risk to public safety. And so you might be asking yourself here. Well, I mean, if they're all kind of following the law, well, what about, what about those people that are not following the law and are you going to burden them with over overly problematic inspections, grinding into them by sort of harassing them based on their sales. So now we start to see maybe a little bit of a burden coming in in terms of the regulation, but we're not done yet. Starting today. It also says that ATF alcohol, tobacco and firearm will make clear to investigators in every field division, that as they prioritize inspections, they must consider the extent to which firearms sold by the dealer are later used in criminal activity. Okay. So you see what's happening now, firearms, which are sold by a dealer are later used in criminal activity. So somebody transacts sells a firearm. That person takes that firearm, they go do something illegal. And that, that, that firearm gets picked up in a federal investigation. They trace it back to that dealer. Guess what that dealer is now in hot water, that dealer is going to have is subsequently sort of, uh, you know, not necessarily criminally liable or civilly liable or anything like that quite yet, but they're going to be prioritized by the ATF. They're going to say, Nope, you're your guns are going out to, to, to bad people. And so we're going to focus on you specifically. And so, you know, now we talked about future crimes essentially, and you're responsible for sort of, you know, F for predicting anything that happens with anything that you do. It's like if I sell somebody a widget and they go do something bad with that widget, I could lose my license for that. And you're going well, that's, that's kind of strange. I mean, how can you be responsible for somebody that does something that's not foreseeable? There's a whole area of law talking about foreseeability and approximate cause and all sorts of causation issues. So this can open up into a whole thing. And the ATF is now saying based, you know, we're going to be able to sort of reverse the clock a bit. If we, if we found a weapon that was problematic, we're going to have to go work our way backwards, go harass the dealer. Even though the dealer may not have known anything about it. And just been now, that dealer is probably on the list priority list, and they're going to be subject to all sorts of licensing concerns, right? That maybe the, maybe the ATF just comes in, just revokes their license because they sold it to a proud boy or something like that. Right? What happens here? I don't know, but they're laying it out there. Aren't they we're going to see, we're going to see how this happens. When cases actually work their way through the courts and us attorneys pick them up and start prosecuting them. Third, they're going to impute improve information sharing. So they're going to be starting. You know, they're going to be, feds are coming in everywhere. Today. ATF has a point of contact in every field division to receive information from mayors, police chiefs and other leaders about firearms dealers, they think are acting unlawfully. Starting next month, we're going to begin sharing inspection data with 16 states also meeting next month, we're going to publicly post info information and in inspection frequency and outcomes by field division for enhanced transparency and accountability. We'll see fourth. Now they're going to establish a concerted effort to crack down on gun traffickers. We talked about this yesterday. They're creating these strike forces that within the next 30 days, they're going to go to places like New York, Chicago, LA San Francisco bay area, and Washington DC as well, cities and towns along the way. So the stormtroopers are working their way through the country. Now making sort of a five, six city stop. Maybe you'll be lucky enough to be visited by them. Justice department's violent crime reduction strategy and our initiatives to stem the rising tide of illegal guns will save lives. They say, but the steps alone will not solve the problems of violent crime. Oh, okay. So it depends on joining together, working to keep our, okay, so you know, more minutia on the closeout, then he introduces Joe Biden. So Joe Biden comes out. We heard a little bit from him, uh, you know, having a difficult time with the teleprompter these days and something, you know, I think he actually might be out of breath or something. You know, listen, we're going to listen to this here shortly. I'm not a doctor, so I don't want to diagnose the guy, but it doesn't look, doesn't look like he's got a lot of that, that, uh, Joe Biden vigor that we saw when he was out there scolding that, uh, press reporter before getting on board, the air force one, after he was leaving G seven. So I noticed it. Some other people on Twitter noticed it, the New York post noticed it. They say, Hey, is no one going to mention how confusing and out of it Biden was, they said, president Biden's topic was of utmost importance on Wednesday crime, gun violence. But you wouldn't know it from the way he spoke. He slurred his words called the ATF, the AFT, the AFT. They did correct himself. After that, he goes, oh yeah, the ATF. At one point, he talked about the history of the second amendment and the blood of Patriots before concluding that someone would need nuclear weapons to take down the government. If you weren't confused. You're horrified. Biden was obviously tired. Speaking in a barely, barely monotone couldn't pronounce the word cognitive media would pick apart everything. Trump did saying he was manic, exhausted, protective circle, formed around biting, preventing him from stating the obvious that he looked out of it. Here's that statement that you saw there. It says, if you willingly sell a gun to someone who's prohibited for possessing it, you will wail willfully. If you willfully failed to run a background check, if you willfully falsify a record, my message to you is this we'll find you. We will seek your license to sell guns. So, you know, there's, there's some people that I recall talking about on this channel that had a gun problem. I can't think about who that might be right now. Maybe, you know, maybe it's coming up. We'll see, but who could he be? Maybe who could he be talking about? Or what type of person, what type of crime could he be talking about right here? Let's listen to Joe in April. I

Speaker 2: 31:00

Announced that the justice department is going to be issuing an annual report on gun trafficking. So we can update that data today to the department is announcing as adjusted the major crackdown on stem. The flow of guns used to commit violent crimes. It's zero tolerance for gun dealers who willfully violate key existing laws and regulations. I repeat zero tolerance. If you will sell a gun to someone who's prohibited from possessing it, if you've willfully failed to run a background check, if you willfully false fire record, if you willfully failed to cooperate with the tracing request or inspections, my message to you is this we'll find you and we will seek your license to sell guns. We'll make sure you can't sell death and mayhem on our streets. It's an outrage has to end and we'll end it, period.

Speaker 1: 31:54

All right. So, you know, uh, he's reading the teleprompter. It kind of made his way through that one. Not, not terribly. Now he's doing the same, you know, reading cadence[inaudible][inaudible] and we're going to do this and my Samsung. Okay. And it's on and on and on and just, okay. Thank you, Joe. We already heard from Eric Harland. Thank you. Now his voice is also horse been kind of raspy. So, you know, maybe he was speaking a lot or, uh, just woke up from a nap or something, but who could we be talking about that may have some issues related to guns? You know, we talked about at the beginning of the show that they'll pass a bunch of laws, that the politicians may have a little bit of difficulty following. They pass them for you and me, but they try, they struggle sometimes. But can you think of anybody that maybe we talked about here on this channel before that is close to Biden? Could it be, how about hunter Biden? That's right. My friends sources remember this story from the secret service, this story came back about, uh, I think a year ago, it says that the secret service inserted itself into the case of hunter Biden's gun. Remember this one, the bizarre incident involved, a trash can, a man searching for recyclables and eventually federal law enforcement came around. So back in 2018, Joe Biden's son, hunter daughter-in-law Kelly, I think hunter was now sort of sleeping with, I don't know what was going on with that, but there was one point in time where Hunter's brother passed away and then hunter started a relationship with something were they were involved in a bizarre incident. So Holly took hunters gun and threw it in the trash. Holly's the daughter-in-law. Yeah, not okay. And you get the justice, Hunter's gone. They throw it in a trash can behind a grocery store only later to find it gone. So Delaware police, then they wanted to find this missing gun. They were concerned. The trashcan was across the school missing gun. Could it be used in a crime? According to law enforcement officials and Politico, they got a copy of the police report. Curious thing happened though. Secret service agents approach the owner of the store. We're hunter Biden bought the gun and asked them for paperwork involving the sale. According to two people, one of whom with firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by secret service agent actor. The fact gun store owner refuse to supply the paperwork, suspecting that the secret service officers wanted to hide hunters ownership of the missing gun. In the case, in case it turned out to be involved in a crime. The owner, Ron pal MIRI later turned over papers to ATF, which oversees federal gun laws. Huh? That's the same agency that, that blood Biden was just talking about secret service, as it has no records of that. Uh, Joe Biden was not under the protection at the time. He has no knowledge of any secret service incident. Now Politico of course obtained copies of the firearm transaction record and the receipt for the gun that was dated October 12th, 2018 hunter at the time. Let me move myself over here, hunter at the time responded no to a question on the transaction record that asks, are you an unlawful user of addicted to marijuana, any depressants, stimulant, narcotic drug, any other controlled substance, five years earlier, he had been discharged from the Navy after testing positive for cocaine. He and his family members have spoken about his history of drug use. Huh? So lying on the form is on the form is a felony prosecutions though are rare. Neither Holly Biden nor George or anybody else responded to the request for comments. So Joe Biden's coming down pretty hard on the guns. Isn't he? Do you think that the, the, the, the firearms licensee, the person who sold hunter Biden, that gun is going to get Dee licensed. He sold a gun to somebody who clearly lied on a form. And ATF says that they're going to make sure that guns don't end up in the hands of the wrong people. So what happened there? Are they going to go get that guy? I hope not because that's a stupid rule. It's a dumb thing that happens. Hunter Biden is hunter Biden. And, you know, unless there's something precluding him from having a firearm. Now, look, I'm not encouraging anybody here to violate law. I don't know hunter Biden's criminal record. If he's a felon, it's illegal to have a firearm. It doesn't sound like it was. And I'm in favor of making sure that people maintain, maintain their right to possess a firearm because it's an important, right. It's the second amendment for a reason. And we've gotten a little bit too cavalier in this country with taking firearms away from people, just up your felon, uh, for, for what a marijuana violation that didn't involve a firearm at all. It didn't involve violence at all. You're going to still take away somebody's second amendment, right? For that. Are you out of your mind? So unless hunter Biden was somebody who was also precluded based on a situation like that, I actually agree that he should have been allowed to, to purchase a gun. And I don't think that the gun license or licensee should be responsible for the sale. Now, hunter Biden acting like a lunatic with his gun, throwing it in a trash can across from the high school and secret service showing up and then cleaning up his mess is a whole separate issue. That's corruption and something that I think is beyond reprehensible that is separate and apart though, from whether or not a gun firearms dealer should be in trouble for selling a firearm to hunter Biden, unless there was some reason that he shouldn't have done. So, but it doesn't look like there was now Politico. They obtained copies. They say, okay, I already read that one. Let's now go, okay. Now let's go to the clip. This clip is making a lot of rounds on Twitter. First and foremost, you can see here in the bottom left 2.6 million views. So, so a lot of Americans are very interested in this. This was the one now where Joe Biden talks about sort of, you know, making sure that the tree of Liberty, something bumbling Joe, something or other, but then he mentioned that, you know, if you really want to sort of challenge the government, you're going to need F fifteens and nuclear bombs to do it. Here is Joe Biden. Now the

Speaker 2: 37:21

Second amendment from the day it was passed limited. The type of people could own a gun. And what type of weapon you could own. You couldn't buy a Canon. That was a, say the blood of the, the blood of Patriots, you know, and all this stuff about how we're going to have to move against the government while the tree of Liberty is not watering. The blood of Patriots what's happened is that there never been, if you want to think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F fifteens and maybe some nuclear weapons. The point is that there's always been the ability to limit rationally, limit the type of weapon that can be on and who can own it.

Speaker 1: 38:01

It's just pure arrogance. I think Eric Swalwell said something like this, you know, it's just, we're the government we're in charge of literally everything. There is nothing you can do to try to seize power or take control of us. It's arrogance. And it is very grading. Now it's a little bit scary that, you know, they, they start kind of throwing that language around. I don't like the idea of that, but I think it also just confirms why the second amendment is so important. Second amendment is not for hunting. Okay. You can use a firearm for hunting. It's a very, very nice thing to do. And it's a good way to, you know, to, to be self-sufficient. And I have no issues with hunters, but that's not what the second amendment is for there, Joe. And we all know that it's for self-defense it's for self protection, it's to protect families our lives and our property. And it's also to prevent tyrannical governments at every turn. And so it's, it's why it's the second amendment. It's not, you know, the deer don't need Kevlar. It's for lunatics who take control of government and think that they have unlimited power, that they can just start, I guess, nuking citizens or, or, uh, you know, using F fifteens to Trump, to drop bombs on, I guess, citizens, it's not a joke. This is not a joke. This is the president of the United States. If Donald Trump came out and said, something like this, Joe, Biden's off, off the cuff, right? He's not reading from his teleprompter. There are people, his aides are in the background going, oh God, but they can't, you know, they can't do anything. Cause he's just whatever he does, whatever he does, he does mostly what they tell him to do. But every now and then he kind of Springs off and does one of these rants, not a joke. If Donald Trump came out and said this, there would be a level five nuclear meltdown on every single cable news station throughout the country. Donald Trump is literally Hitler threatening to take over America, Joe Biden. You can say it's jokey or whatever, but he's the, he's the, he's the president. Okay. And we're talking about gun violence and gun policy. We're talking about criminal justice reform. And this is our president. It's our it's Americans. It's America's president, all the people saying, you know, Trump's not my president, this guy's your president. And here he is right here. And we've got three and a half more years of him now, you know, listen, as we were talking about Joe Biden, I've been ranting on this channel a lot about the nineties and all of the wreckage from the eighties. And a lot of the mess that we see in our current justice system. We have Joe Biden to thank for it. And you know, today we're talking about gun violence, but it sort of deja VU because in the 1980s, in the 1990s, even though I was just a wee little lad, they were talking about gun buy, I'm sorry, drug violence. Remember that dare drugs, blah, blah, blah. It's the same story wrapped up around with a new bow on it. We're just going to take those drugs off and put the guns right back on it. And we're going to expand the criminal justice system and expand the power and the infrastructure of the government more and more into your lives. Now it's going after the gun. So I wonder if there's another alternative. Let's say Joe Biden is saying that this is all about guns. I wonder if there's a different perspective. Maybe there's a Senator from 30 years ago that already gave this talk to us once before this plan,

Speaker 3: 41:02

I think the president has to join us in making a significantly greater this plan. I think the president has to join us in making a significantly greater commitment to these six areas to stem the rising tide of violence in America. That's what it is. Violence. First, we have to join together to ensure the drug dealers are punished swiftly surely and severely and align with what the president is calling for. We have to hold every drug user accountable because of there were no no drug users. There would be no appetite for drugs and there'd be no market for them. Let's take a look at what the real problem is. It's not just how many people are using drugs. As the president said, the number of people using drugs, cocaine in particular is down in our country. That's true, but the violence associated with drugs is spewing out all over America. And that's terrible. I know it's hard to believe, but this very day, violent drug offenders will commit more than 100,000 crimes on this day alone. And the sad part is it that we have, we have no more police in the streets of our major cities than we had 10 years ago. You want more and what the president proposes won't help much what he proposes is no increase of what the Congress has already approved last year. Oh, in a nutshell, the president's plan doesn't include enough police officers to catch the violent thugs, not enough prosecutors to convict them, not enough judges to sentence them and not enough prison cells to put them away for a long time. That's why right now, six out of every 10 criminals who are arrested on drug charges have their cases dropped. That's why we think the president should triple, triple the commitment that he's made tonight for police, prosecutors and judges for our cities in our states.

Speaker 1: 43:01

Wow. Triple, triple, what president Bush wanted to do. You're kidding me. That's a lot of police. That's a lot of prosecutors. That's a lot of judges. That's a lot of people go into prison for drug crimes. So, you know, he's got a track record. He mentioned, I bet he's been doing this for a long time. The current state of our justice system is entirely, in my opinion, Joe, Biden's fault more than anybody else, if not entirely a big bulk of it. 84, 86, 94 crime bill think there was an 88 crime bill. Kamala Harris was a prosecutor attorney general, and the list goes on. These two people are responsible for the wreck justice system that we currently have and they're doubling down on it. But now what they want to do is sort of bring the feds in ATF is going on a Strikeforce tour around the country. So be on the lookout for that. Get your tickets and make sure you get good seats for it. Now let's take some questions over from watching the watchers.locals.com. We've got Sharon Courtney's in the house. What's up, Sharon. Good to see you live back here. We've got, have you heard any news about the mansion voting bill? I understand it's worse than Pelosi's. Bill is the current version. Uh, administration jurisdiction covers all federal elections instead of the states as is currently in the constitution. So I, I haven't looked at it recently, but the last I kind of thought on this thing, I thought that it was basically dead. So I know that mansion is opposed to reforming the filibuster. So is Kiersten cinema. So if the filibuster is not in play, then they need 60 votes to pass voting bills. But my understanding is, and I haven't heard from all of the Republicans, but largely Republicans are not interested in voting reform at all. So I'm not sure that they would agree to a mansion bill in any capacity at all. That's all that's about as much as I know on it. Good to see you, Sharon, we got wants to know, says, do Dems always named their bills? Opposite of what they, what they mean? Yeah. Well they all do that. It's like the right. Like you're a Patriot. If you think that it's okay for the government to just come gobble up all of your private things and you go, oh, well I'm a Patriot. Yeah, come on in government, come take whatever you want there, George. All right. We got, I'm not gas as well with the impending push for gun reform. Would you consider doing a show focusing on how terrible shipment is, especially glorifying the burning of children alive at Waco and the general incompetence and malice of the ATF? I actually love that idea. I'm not gas. So something like that would be a good, yes I, yes. The answer is yes, I would absolutely consider doing that. Um, I'm Al I've always been fascinated with Waco for some reason. I don't know why. I think I sort of was imprinted with that when I was a kid. When was that? In the nineties? So I must have been, you know, a boy, 10 something, maybe when that went on. I can't recall, but I've read a lot about it. I sort of remember watching it, not really understanding what was going on going what it's kind of like, you know, these people are just living here, the government's coming in, like, why are they bothering them? You know, I just didn't sort of instinctually understand it before I was even political. And I saw the picture of David Chipman out there, sort of taking a victory photo in front of the burndown building because these lunatics from the federal government just sort of, you know, I don't know what it is, but it's like a, like a trophy picture of, Hey, look what we just accomplished back there. And so that guy is going to be running ATF. That's great. So I would, I would absolutely consider that I'm not gassing. And uh, I'll, I'll, I'll see if I can carve out some time for something like that. It's a great idea. Want to know, says honestly, Rob, if every gun, including the military, they keep losing theirs were totally eliminated. Including the police. There would be more, no more shootings. If we eliminated all vehicles, we should have less vehicle accidents too. Like, like none. Totally. I know. And it would be awesome too, if we, if like, if we just didn't have like cancer, like that'd be great. Be great. We'd all live a lot longer, but we just can't sort of eliminate things with the stroke of a pen. We just can't reverse the clock on that. Right. Guns were invented. It would also be nice if we could. Uninvent the atomic bomb, for example, keep some of the good stuff of nuclear energy, but just get rid of the bomb, you know,'cause it, it's, it's, it's a, it's a dangerous thing, but then same time you kind of go, well, it kind of, kind of, we haven't had a world world major world war since that happened. So maybe it's sort of this mutually assured destruction and creates a little bit of peace. Right? So even there even there's an argument I think for that. But the point here is, yeah, you know, it's how many millions of guns are in America, not going anywhere. And people keep buying them. They want them. So what, what is this about? Honestly, I think it's just about being able to use it, the political levers of the justice system to go whatever way they want. Right. I've said this for a long time. I think when it comes to politics and federal law enforcement, a lot of this is more about sort of crafting policy that you can use to achieve other policy goals. So here let's just criminalize guns. Well, well, well we don't, well, we, you know, we want to eliminate guns. We have a lot of people on the left side of the aisle who are very opposed to firearms. They have a lot of interest in this, so why don't we just criminalize it? And then we can just sort of, you know, go lean on the firearms dealers. They're ultimately the suppliers of these bad guns. And so they're just going to use an enforcement mechanism that, that puts pressure on the suppliers rather than the, the, the people who are sort of buying the guns were using the guns. It's I think it's an asinine approach, but it's what their base wants to see. So they're going to be very happy about this. Unfortunately, I think they're going to be a lot of, uh, sort of innocent people that get wrapped up in this stuff. Of course, Joe Snow says gun dealers failed to conduct background checks. I seriously doubt it. Yeah. I agree with that. I mean, they're extremely, extremely serious about it everywhere I've ever been. We've got hack consulting says another threat from the president against his citizens. Great. He may have nukes, but the people under him in the military are the ones that control whether or not they are launched, get into their ears. They will not let those nukes fly. Well, I mean, yeah, yeah, you're right. You're right. I was going to say something about if he was going to nuke the protestors or the insurrectionists. Well then he's going to nuke the Capitol building. Now I can't, I can't support that. Not at all. We've got no violence on this show. I've said that repeatedly, no violence at all. As much as I don't like Congress gotta keep them around. We've got LT. 13 says the cities with the tightest gun laws have the worst crime because criminals aren't getting background checks obviously. Right? They're good. The criminals are going to get the guns. The law abiding people are going to be the ones that turn them in at the collections. But if they know there is a chance that a little innocent teacher like me is packing at the grocery store. They think twice about robbing you. Yes they do. Yes they do. And if you, especially, if you know how to use that thing, I mean, you know, and hopefully you never have to use it. But if, if, if people are, I think, I think you have a certain sense of additional confidence, right? If you know that you're, you're, you're more capable of defending yourself, then, then allowing yourself to become a victim. It just makes total sense to me. I don't, I don't know why people are, would be actually opposed to guns. You know, it's like, like, all right, I got to keep moving. I know I could go off these. These shows can go for hours. I got to keep up. We got, Kareem says, I'm glad to hear. Locals will soon have a live stream feature. I hope you can support these alternate platforms like rumble as well, so that they can further develop their systems. I think YouTube is still ahead in terms of expanded features and usability, but censorship is terrible. Yeah. The censorship is terrible. Kareem. And we actually, we actually also are live streaming on rumble right now. We should be we're on, but nobody's watching over there. So that's part of the problem, right? Nobody's really on there. So we've got, you know, a couple of hundred, about 800 on YouTube, zero on rumble. We've got one on Twitter, five on Facebook and one on Twitch. What's up, everybody. What's up Twitch. You're alone out there. What's up Twitter. You're alone out there. What's up Facebook. There's four of you. Good to see you. Nobody's on rumble. But the point is I am investing in that because I want to make sure that we are building separate parallel platforms. I've said this a lot. We know the information supply chains are very, very broken. A lot of people go to YouTube. They go to CNN, they go to the Washington post. But those integral information supply chains are just broken. They're compromised. They're not any good. Everything that comes through them is sort of corroded and just bad. It's bad data, right? You say, I'm not going to buy that product anymore because it's never right. It doesn't work. It's it's terrible. So we got to build our own information, supply chains with our own analysis, our own thought, our own journalists. A lot of people are doing this, you know, different independent creators now are growing to the point where they're starting to say, Hey, we're going to, we're going to go hire some writers and some authors and some journalists and people to call them through foyer requests and, and to do some very hard research. That was kind of where I wanted to go with the show, using some of the money that we were going to be earning from monetization until they demonetized us. And so I think part of the reason they did that is, you know, they, if they can put some speed bumps in front of some, some creators and people will just bail off the platform. But fortunately we're in a position where, you know, I have a little bit of freedom. I don't need to make a living from YouTube because I'm, you know, my primary practice is, is the law firm. And we come on here, we do a good show. We talk about some analysis. We connect with people. You thankfully, you know, sort of appreciate some of the conversations we have here. And you refer people over to our law firm that we're able to help and support them through their difficult time. And so we're kind of building this little community, you know, YouTube has made it a little bit more difficult for us to do that, but we're still getting the main function. We're still, you know, moving the needle in the right direction. And so we're going to continue to do it. But in the meantime, yes, we are also on rumble. We're also over on Odyssey. And so Odyssey will audits also sync up. And so we're trying to diversify and decentralize a little bit and thank you, Kareem for supporting us there. Hack consulting says, ask for the second amendment and nukes. We did own cannons as private citizens still do. Imagine owning your own nuke. How much, how would you make sure that you were not negligent and detonated it as such? The second amendment does require you to be a well-regulated militia that does not let your ammunition explode due to heat or fire or your nukes to go off by themselves, be stolen by terrorists or used by those that are not defending themselves. Yeah, I, I'm not. I'm a second amendment person, but I would not extend that to nuclear weapons. I just wouldn't. I know some people might have a problem with that, but I don't want people with nukes. We got Barbie and says, if the Dems get the gins, get the gins, then be prepared for more bloody messes, stabbings, pipe bombs. They need to go route, which is the ex shooter. We need real mental health care in this country. So I'll second that I want the guy with the gun around for now to take the crazy ones for now. Sad as that is. Okay. So I see what you're saying. So, so self protection, until we get, get a little bit more of a mental health stability with the mental health, uh, in this country, we've got, I'm not gas as we need to ban assault drills, immediately. Assault, drills, assault, bananas, assault, microphones, the whole thing. It's, it's a dangerous world out there. Assault drills. Also, we've got Jeremy[inaudible] says I'm certain, the only places online you can buy ghost guns are from websites provided by the FBI. When you go to pick them up, you don't get a gun, just a pair of handcuffs. So I would, I wouldn't, I wouldn't doubt that either for a minute. Good to see you. Jeremy, we got ghost. Gutter is in the house, says, do these people think that firearms bought on a form 44, 73 are traceable and in a database or something newsflash in most states, it is entirely legal to make your own firearms at home without a serial number. Sorry, Kelly, you can't join the fund. It is still illegal for a prohibited person to be in possession of a homemade firearm. Right? So it's right. That's my, yes. I think you're right. Thank you. Ghost gunner, ghost gunner comes in here, hot with the form numbers and everything. And I appreciate that. So it basically, you know, the argument here is totally legal. So what are you, what's your problem with the ghost guns you're allowed to do that? You can't do it. If you're a prohibited possessor, there's already rules for that, but there's already rules for that in general. And why do they end up, you know, how do, how do prohibited possessors ended up with guns in general? Because they don't follow the law, right? So the people now, if you're going to be banning ghost guns, it's probably going to be people who want to exercise their constitutional second amendment, right. To do so. Government has no business interfering with that. Good to see you ghost gunner. Thanks for being here. We got Sharon Quintin. He says, if you need five fifteens and nukes to take down the government, where were those weapons on January 6th? That was my point. So, so first of all, I do. Do you remember the crazy shootout that took place on January 6th with all those guns flying all over the place? The shootouts, the Trump maggot people behind the Capitol building shooting and the, and the Capitol police shooting back, and everybody was just mowing each other down and all the bullets and casings and oh, no, that didn't happen at all. In fact, the only firearm that went off as far as I know, was from the government shooting Ashley about it. Other than that pretty, pretty peaceful insurrection. So I'm not sure if Joe Biden still believes that he needs nukes in that 15, or maybe they, it may maybe if they had nukes, maybe they would take control of the country, but we all know this. You don't actually need to take control of anything. The only thing you need is the podium. If you take the podium from the speaker's house, you could Charlotte country, it's powerful. We have. Now I'm not gas. As you could buy it, you couldn't buy a Canon is a complete lie. There were warships in private ownership when the bill of rights was created also in Vietnam, Taliban, Al Qaeda at all, they didn't have heavy equipment or nukes and managed to at least hold their own against the strongest military in the world. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. That's a great point. So I don't know what, Joe, I don't know what Joe's talking about. Right. He's just sort of going on. He probably heard that from Don lemon on CNN and, and was repeating it. We've got Cove. Queen says, this is the only purpose that matters for the second amendment. Joe Biden is who the framers had in mind. Exactly. Being necessary to the security of a free state. Yeah. It's, it's, it's an one it's number two for a reason. Number one for a reason, number two, for a reason. And the rest fall in line as necessary. That's easy. The boxing cat is here, says, do you know who Josh Barnett is? He's running for Congress in Arizona. He said, he's the state constitution gives people the right to remove politicians when they break the oath of office. So I, I think I actually follow him on Twitter. Josh Barnett, I, I follow somebody who sort of fits that description, but I'm not positive. I might, I might actually follow him on Twitter. When you have sort of names like th that's kind of a common name, like Josh Barnett. I started thinking of like Josh Hartnett, isn't that an actor or something like that. So I'd have to double check, but I do believe I follow him. And I think he's been pretty active in the audit actually, which maybe we'll talk about on locals when that gets wrapped up. We've got our last question of the segment is coming from Treme. And this is in the house. As I've heard the theory from many people, including my brother, that the reason why the guns are so bad in Chicago is because people get them from the surrounding states that have looser gun laws. I'm sure that's partially true. But, um, I think the guns that were obtained 100% illegally is the bigger problem other than rolling my eyes. What do I say to him? So I guess, I guess, I guess I would need to know sort of a little bit more like, what is his point is his point is that there should be a federal law that sort of, that, that standardizes the laws for everybody. Because my response to that is if my response to that is that that's unconstitutional, right? If you're going to prohibit people from exercising, a fundamental constitutional, right, you got to have a good reason to do that. And we, we know through Heller and other cases from the Supreme court that there are, there's a strict scrutiny that must be applied when there are laws that are burdening that. Right? So, uh, you know, I would say that, I think that the, the law is on your side and there's a case, a DC versus Heller, I think where you can read that and, and, and sort of see what the constitutional underpinnings are from the Supreme court itself, send that over to him and see what his responses are there. Now we know that the federal government is going to be cracking down on firearms in Arizona. We have a crime called misconduct involving weapons, which is a class four felony here pretty serious, two and a half years in prison. And so if you happen to know somebody in the state of Arizona that is facing a crime like that, or any other type of crime, we would love the opportunity to help them. And we, we really have an amazing team of people here. I want to tell you some of the things that we can help with. We have drug charges, traffic violations, we've got DUI offenses. We can help with felonies, anything and everything in between. Anytime you're in trouble with the law, we can help. We'd love the opportunity to do so. If you take a picture with your phone, this will take you right to our website, this QR code, otherwise our phone number down here,(480) 787-0394. Anybody in the state of Arizona, we would love the opportunity to help. And if you don't need help with a criminal case, that's all right. Maybe some knowledge would be good for you. How about taking a law enforcement interaction training two and a half hours. We did this live with the locals community a couple of weekends ago. It's available here. gumroad.com/robert ruler, along with some other informational offerings. And I appreciate all of your support. All right. So let's carry on. We've got to move on. We're going to be getting over to the border, the border it's still well underway. Now this is something that we've had a little bit of conflict with the administration, trying to determine how to classify this thing. Should we call it a crisis? Should we not? We were very concerned about kids in cages when Donald Trump was in office now not so much anymore. So it's been an ongoing issue. We're now about six months into the administration and Camila Harris has been assigned the czar, the person who's going to go in there and solve this because Joe Biden has a lot of faith in her. So she went down to Guatemala. Then she picked up, went over to Mexico and, uh, everybody's mad that she didn't go visit the border. So she's getting ready to do that. We're going to talk about that here in a little bit later, but first I want to kind of give an update on what the congressional Republicans are doing yesterday. We talked about a couple of different things that are happening. So Republicans in the Senate and the house they're doing their very best to sort of keep the pressure on Joe Biden. We've we've seen a lot of energy surrounding the border from governors. Doug Ducey here in Arizona, sent a letter out saying we need help. Everything's a mess. So asking for support from other states, we also had the governor of Florida. Ron DeSantis suggested sending over law enforcement officials from Florida to go help Texas and New Mexico with the border. Governor Abbott from Texas also said 250 million bucks. It's going to be a down payment for a privately fund or for a publicly funded wall. Built on private land in Texas. The list goes on and on. It's a big one. And now 23 Republicans are actually going right after Joe Biden. They want to censure Joe Biden for a dereliction of duty. Let's go through this. This is an interesting little development here. Not that it's necessarily going to go anywhere, but I just want to show you some of the, the functionality and how this process works. So coming over here from the epoch times written by Isabel van Rooijen it says a group of 23 Republican lawmakers led by rep Lauren Bo Bert seen her a lot in particular because of her stance on firearms. I think on Wednesday, she introduced a resolution to censure. Joe Biden says it was a dereliction of duty at the time, the west border failure to enforce border security and the immigration laws we're going to read through it. So we're going to skip that paragraph. This comes after a spike of illegal immigration. We already know this number. We've talked about it a lot, 180,000 illegal aliens in may says the customs and border patrol division 112,000 were expelled under emergency health provisions and put in place that were put in place. So it's, it's, it's a problem. We've gone through graphs. We've gone through numbers. We've, we've been playing around with the data for, for weeks now. And I want to show you what a center looks like. What is this? Is this, does this matter? Why are we even going through this? Does this is going to do anything to Biden? Is it going to let's let's take a look over Wikipedia. It says that a center is a formal public and group condemnation of an individual, often a group member whose action runs counter to the acceptable standards of their behavior. All right. So here in the U S it's done when they want to publicly reprimand somebody, the president, but really has little practical effect when done on Congress and basically no practical effect when done on a precedent. So if you really want to know what it is, it says it is something that is like, you know, it's sort of, it's stronger than a simple rebuke, but it's not as strong as an expulsion. So sort of in between a rebuke and an expulsion and an impeachment and an[inaudible]. So it basically, when you sum it all up, it says it's a form of public shaming in which the politician must stand before his peers and listened, listened to the censure resolution. Now this is for members of Congress. So they have to go and do that. Is Joe Biden going to have to get listened? And is he going to have to listen to this? Probably not. So if it passes, it's essentially just an angry letter. It's just Congress writing up an angry letter. Now that being said, this is a very interesting letter. And so I want to read it. This is the house resolution you can see. It says expressing disapproval of the F failure to uphold the constitutional duty, to take care of the laws, to be faithfully executed. And the usurpation of the legislative authority of Congress submitted by Mrs. Bert. And I want to show you how this works, because this is kind of fun. It's a, it's a central resolution expressing disapproval. And what we're going to do is we're going to go through sort of a, we're going to start at the starting point. We're going to go back to the constitutes. We're going to say, okay, well, this is why we're mad. Okay. And it starts with the constitution. Constitution says this and this an article two and article four and this case in this case. Yeah. And now Joe, that you're an office we've tried raced back your malfeasance to the very, very beginning rooted in the constitution. So we get a little bit of a history lesson here. Let's go through. It says, article one of the constitution, vests Congress with all legislative powers, article, section eight clause four says it, grants Congress clear jurisdiction regarding immigration matters. See what's happening. Okay. So the constitution article one, Congress, we got some powers. Oh, one of those powers happens to be immigration. Okay. How about article two? Oh, that's the president. So that this means that president Biden has to take care that the laws be faithfully executed constitution does not delegate the authority to the president to allow them to rewrite or amend the constitution. No power to do that. George Washington explained that the take care clause in the constitution as follows, he said it is my duty to see the laws executed, to permit them, to be trampled with impunity would be repugnant to them, duty, execute the laws. Can we talk about the three branches of government? One make the laws, the legislative branch enforce the laws, the executive branch. Tell us what the law is. The con the, the judicial branch. They are interpreting the laws. According the constitution, James Madison. Now he wrote in Federalist 47. He says the accumulation of all powers, legislative executive and judiciary in the same hands, whether of one, a few or many whether hereditary self appointed or elective may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. Okay? And so the Federalist papers were being wrote or being written, sort of to oppose the anti Federalist papers. When they were debating the framing of the country, very important conversations were taking place there. And they said, we cannot allow the consolidation of power. We need to break it up into these three co-equal branches that have checks and balances to make sure that neither one of them, you search the authority of another branch. And the checks and balances are intended to push back. You need each branch to exercise their strength, to say, wait a president executive, whatever you don't have the authority to do this. So get back on your side of the aisle over there, buddy boy, because we are the legislature, the legislation, we have the authority under the constitution to govern this stuff. Texts of the section immigration nationality act is talking about immigration. So now we say we were sort of working our way forward. We now talk about the immigration and national Nat nationality act. They say it's the duty of the president to faithfully execute the immigration laws. That means they've got to follow the rules department of Homeland security. They say they've entered more than 100 agreements under the immigration and nationality act DHS. They issued a memorandum now in June, January 8th, 2021 with the state of Texas who was president back then Donald Trump was remember department of Homeland security. They said that they were going to consult with Texas before taking actions or making decisions that would reduce immigration enforcement. So when Trump was in department of Homeland security entered into an official, uh, uh, arrangement with Texas before we stop enforcing things, we're going to make sure we consult with you about it. Biden comes in, something changes, right? Whereas the agreement required department of Homeland security to provide 180 days of notice before reducing enforcement, January 20th, Biden comes in, puts a hundred day, pause on it immediately, January 20th. Well, that's kind of the violation of the 180 days, isn't it? That was previously signed in and authorized by the former president. Us district court initially issued a temporary restraining order on the paws. Biden comes in, says, we're gonna put a pause on that. They appeal it. The court says that you can't do that. That was a lawfully entered binding agreement between the two. The court stated the statute does not imply a total discretion to pause or suspend a statutory mandate. Whereas the court followed with the preliminary injunction a hundred day pause. It was going to suspend the action of more than 1 million alien subject to final orders. 2015 court of appeals took some action. They held the Obama administration. DACA program was unlawful 2018. Southern district of Texas, Texas comes out. There's a hearing challenging DACA, January 20th, Biden comes out now issues a new order to, to preserve in four to five DACA, right? So we have all these policy changes. Something else happens January 20th, the GAO comes out. Biden comes out declares. The impoundment control act February 5th, president suspends, certain central American countries result. I'm sorry. How about this? February 5th now president suspended agreements with certain central American countries resulting in a massive surge of people at the Southern border, all claiming asylum. And I think that was the remaining Mexico program. At that moment, we have February 18th. President began allowing criminal aliens with felony records to come in. President threatens to ensure immigration countries by offering amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants. 180,000 illegal immigrants were encountered by the border in May, 2020. And see the list goes on. Now, we're almost done here one year ago under president Trump, there were 1400 unaccompanied minors, okay. In the department of health and human services. Now under president Biden, there are 22,000 and you have to assume that these numbers are fairly, fairly good, right? Because this is a Congress woman. Whereas Alejandro Mayorkas, who is the head of the department of Homeland security. He took an oath to defend the country. In, in more than four months, secretary may orcas has failed to faithfully uphold his oath. There's been a reckless abandonment of border security us, and this is violating the us constitution and the United States. Therefore we call on the president to remove mayor Gus, replace him with somebody who actually can get stuff done disapproves of the president's use or patient calls on the president to employ all lawful means to enforce the immigration laws calls on the president to execute the laws, reaffirms the preservation of the separation of powers and assures the president and century as the president for his failure to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. So very quick history lesson there. And I thought it was kind of a fun journey and, and how they're they're, they're taking that back now. You know what Biden is going to say of course, is that the, you know, this is perfectly within the purview of the federal government. And I think that he is he's, he's absolutely right. And that all of these things would be discretionary and that his perspective would be well, w w we have, you know, what we're doing here is actually addressing the problems and that, you know, I'm not, not executing laws. I am executing the laws. You don't like the mechanism by which I'm executing the laws, but I am doing it. I'm doing it differently than you. And of course, is this going to go anywhere? No, of course not. Right. The Republicans don't control the house of representatives and the, the, uh, the result of this would not do much anyways. Right. If it gets past, so what, what does it matter? It's more probably just politics taking isn't it. All right. So the article now says, that's we have C B P. So the former acting commissioner over from border patrol, he said in his, he says that the president currently is presiding over the greatest abandonment of immigration and border security. The country has ever seen Lauren bourbon's resolution. They say would rightly sensor the president. Of course he did not respond for comment. So I've been talking about for some time that the border has been unsolvable, right? My entire life I've lived in Arizona here for my entire life. And I've always been hearing that it's a problem. We've had Republicans try to fix it. Ronald Reagan tried to fix it. We've had everybody and their mothers come through John McCain, George Bush, you know, on and on and on. And I've largely said that it's kind of, because both parties kind of have an interest in this. They, they both sides get something out of it. And I, I sort of get the sense with government in general, that they're not really interested in solving actual problems, because if they did well, then they would sort of work themselves out of a job, right? If they, if you had president that came in and solved unemployment solved, you know, economic issues was able to reform the justice system. And we sort of, you know, had an epiphany. We said, this is a great way to do things. Thank you for showing us this with your excellent leadership. Well, first of all, that president's gone in eight years anyways, and it's sort of never, never be possible to, to have it, have it stay that way. So the whole point is you kind of, I need a fall guy, right? You, you need to sort of kick the ball back and forth for a certain period of time. You hit it, hit the ball over the net. They hit the ball back over the net, hit the ball back over the net. So the Republicans get in, they all get rich and ransack the treasury for four years. They kick it over to the Democrats. They do the same thing, kick it back over. They do it now. It's our turn now. Okay. And so every now and then when you see an administration come in, you see bunch of people sorta just get the, get the cut, gone with the wind. They are the scapegoat. They're going to be the fall guy for the issue for the last administration. And there's always that person. Now in the immigration context, I've mentioned Kamala Harris a few times. We're going to get to her in a minute. But right now, what we have is the forum border patrol chief. He got that acts very recently. Let's take a look at this guy here. His name is, is Rodney Scott, and he is a border patrol chief. So by an administration yesterday, forced him to leave his post immediately. They are forcing him out. He's a career law enforcement official. They're going to temporarily replace him with a second in command. He made a video conference yesterday with his plans to leave three people with knowledge of the conversation, told the Washington examiner Homeland security secretary Alejandro. Mayorkas made the final decision to get rid of Scott. And so we're going to know Kamala Harris is going down to the border. Alejandro Mayorkas is also going with her down to the border tomorrow. And they just, this yesterday just said, okay, well, we're going to get rid of the border patrol. Treif he? He's the guy, right? He's the person responsible for all this mayhem? It's not us. I mean, you know, this guy was around when Trump was in office, but it's, it's not his fault. It's not that we did anything wrong as the incoming administration it's his fault. So one person said the move was not related to Scott's performance over the last 18 months or how he handled the surge coming across the border. Instead, the move was quote, completely driven by politics, even though Scott's position is apolitical. He's a 29 year law enforcement official at the border patrol. Uh, this is unprecedented said the first person Scott was given what the border patrol agents refer to as the three R letter, which stands for resign, retire or relocate. Scott did not respond to a request from co for a comment in a post to his personal Facebook page. He wrote that he had received this letter today and asking him to leave his post. He said, quote on Facebook. I received my three R letter today. For those not familiar, that is the federal government slang for the letter issued to senior executive service level employees informing them of a directed reassignment. Recipient has three options, relocate, resign, or retire, no rationale or reason is required nor is a discipline. According to Scott. So kind of sounds like YouTube. That's kind of what YouTube did. Just a simple needs of the service directed reassignment. So the new administration can place the person they want in the position. A huge thank you to all those. Who've reached out prayer prayed and supported me. I remain confident that God is in control over 29 years. It's pretty good. Yeah. Wonder if, wonder if anything would have happened, but if he got to 30, okay, well the move comes five months into the Biden administration. While border patrol is parent agency, us customs and border protection has struggled to get a leader confirmed by the Senate. Biden, nominated Tucson police, chief, Chris Magnus for the job, but his department came under scrutiny or how his officers restrained a Hispanic man. Second person familiar with the considerations. Let's say they forced out Bob Perez too. So they're just cleaning house there in the Biden administration, which is, you know, to be expected. You know, I, I think it's politics, right? If you're, if you're taking over the company, you're gonna want to put your people in there. I get it bummer for that guy though. No question about it. Now he'll be the fall guy, right? They'll blame a bunch of stuff on there and they'll say, well, we're gonna, you know, we're making some major changes. We got, we replaced the border patrol chief, you know, CommonWell is down here. She went down to the border, leave her alone. Now stop asking her that question, please. She's terrible at answering it. Don't ask it. So she's gonna work her way out of that. And then we'll, we'll see what happens with Camila. But we do know because Jack[inaudible] over on Twitter, he's saying that after this El Paso trip is over, as we know CommonWell is going down, once that's over, she's done being the fall guy. And I said this when she first got the assignment from president Biden and I thought it was a hysterical sort of display there in the white house, Joe Biden. And he's, you know, they both got their masks on and he's sort of, you know, telling her, Hey, I'm going to give you this big bag of, uh, political excrement that you're going to have to solve. Nobody's been able to do it for the last 40 years, but I know you can come Lola. So I'm just gonna make the border problem. Your problem now. And she's sitting there, you know what? You can see it in her eyes just going, oh, thanks, Joe. Yeah, this is great. Thank you for ruining my political career by giving me this unsolvable problem. And she felt like the fall guy and I was going to Watts because now Joe Biden, you know, Joe, buy-ins, we'll see if he runs again, but he's got to make sure that his second in command, his little protege is primed and ready to take over on a moment's notice. And so when I first saw that I was thinking, wow, they're setting her up for a big, big failure. Why doesn't she see this? She went up, she went down there. It was very, you know, the trip was sort of a bust, got into it with Univision. Uh, w we heard from the Guatemalan president, we heard from the Mexican president, all of them saying, well, no. I mean, they, they, people are coming kind of, because you told them to, you kind of changed your policy and they are responding to, that has nothing to do with global warming or anything. But, you know, so I've always thought Kamala was going to be the, and I think she's, wising up to this. Let's see what's going on here on Twitter. We've got Jack, but Sobek says Ron wanted Camila front and center for the infrastructure deal photo. Okay. So today this is not an immigration photo. We're called we're in the middle of this infrastructure built, uh, that apparently there was an agreement here today. So they're going to spend another$900 billion on whatever who knows. It's almost like a joke at this point. I don't know how much money they've spent in the last four or five months, but it's a lot. And now they needed some more because the, the 350 billion that they're now reallocating for law enforcement is there. We need more infrastructure, more money. So they, they, they came to a deal and it's bipartisan. So that's how you know, it's terrible. Now you'll see that they're all just sort of standing around here, uh, in front of the white house. Now Jack says he wanted her front and center. So Ron Johnson, who's leading this wanted Commonwealth front center, but she refused. Why? Because she knows team Biden is trying to turn her into the scapegoat. Huh? And once El Paso is over, she's going to start playing hardball per a white house official. Yeah. So I mean, you look at the photo, right? And you just see, oh, you've got Joe Biden right here. It looks like you've got Ron, Ron Johnson over, over here. You've got Kiersten cinema from Arizona in her colorful outfit. As usual, we've got Mitt Romney's over in the house. He's sort of, you know, a little, little space over here. He doesn't want it to close. Probably COVID concerns or something. So, you know, you've got all these people here in the white house and somebody's kind of strangely missing. Aren't they, you really can't see them. Now, as I've mentioned on this show, fortunately the good news is I'm a criminal defense attorney. So I've got some of that CSI technology. We can just kind of zoom in and enhance on some of this stuff. Let's see what's going on computer. Can you enhance that for us over here? All right. So now we're zooming in and you can clearly see Kiersten cinema up there. And we're we're I really, oh, we've got Lisa Murkowski over here. I didn't see her in the background. This looks like probably Susan Collins over here. And so they're all very happy to be a part of the fray. Right? Uh, Susan Collins and, uh, Lisa Murkowski, they're kind of center people. Right. And so, and so is Romany and so is Kiersten cinema. And so, all right. Well, all right, computer, we're still missing somebody though. We need you to enhance just one more time here. Enhanced for us now that's Mitt Romney. Pretty close. Oh, there it is. Folks. Look, who's look, look, look, who's lurking back there in the corner. Who's that heightened behind that pillar over there. Oh, it's Kamala Harris. See her back over there. Look, look, computer zoom out for us. All right. So she is just kind of tucked back away right in there. You just kind of get in there. They're all, you know, all the, the, the, the popular kids are having their, their party at prom and Kamala Harris want watch she's back there with her arms crossed. Oh, no, she's not happy about this. You know, she honestly, folks to her credit good for her. She knows what's going on. And they are trying to dump all this garbage on her. But watch what else happened today? This is kind of a fun little thing, right? Jack Passover just said, Kamahl is going to start, you know, stepping it up a little bit, kind of exercising her bravado, showing those, throwing those elbows around a little bit, stop taking all of the gruff stop, taking the excrement assignments that Joe Biden wants to slide over her direction. And so watch what happens now. She gets she's, she's sorta, you know, encroaching into the Joe Biden frame here. So we've got this little nine, second snippet here that I'm going to show you and watch, two-sided kind of just kind of pops up here and makes a correction, but see who this is because Joe Biden doesn't know what he's doing. So we have the, the real person in charge coming up to take control.[inaudible]

Speaker 4: 1:21:26

Can

Speaker 2: 1:21:26

We ask you about the Lord and what you can learn and the whole yes, I apologize. Yes. Thank you.

Speaker 1: 1:21:34

All right. So she comes up and she's saying, uh, Joe, uh, uh, the Florida thing, the building fell, fell down in Florida and you see, she came right up to him kind of crammed in the, in the limelight and says joke, correction, the Florida thing too. Oh yeah. Sorry. So he goes, and he makes that nice little quick correction for, so that's what we're going to see more of. And I'm looking forward to that. That's going to be fun now, Kamala, as we know, she set to visit the border. This is happening tomorrow. So we're going to go through this relatively quickly. So she set to visit it. She was tasked by Joe by, and she's going to visit El Paso and she's going to be joined by Homeland security, secretary Alejandro Majorca. So Simon Sanders, vice-president at the senior advisor, chief, the vice-president senior advisor and spokesman said earlier this year, the president asks vice-president to oversee this El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras. Now, as part of that work, she first traveled to Guatemala and Mexico. She's going to travel to El Paso on Friday. So they've been repeatedly pushing back against criticism. We've been criticized. I've been, you know, we've been having fun with this topic. I've sort of seen it both ways. You know, I understand the symbolic nature of needing to go down to the border, show your support. You're the vice president. You're in charge of this issue. You gotta go out there and make a stand and show, just symbolically that you're behind the efforts and rally the troops. Right? That's what a good leader does. But I also understand some of the, you know, some, I recognize that a lot of the hyperventilation from the Republicans is just political expediency, masquerading as, as genuine outrage, is, is anybody expecting comma? Let it go down to El Paso when that's going to solve the problem. No, of course not. Right. But it is a symbolic political kind of thing you have to do. And so when somebody that you already maybe don't have a lot of love for is sort of just stepping in it one day after another, you just go, oh, okay. Okay. She literally tried like four or five times to answer that question. Why have you not gone down to the border? She just doesn't want to answer it anymore. Now she's finally going to make it down there. So they've repeatedly pushed back. Now. They're going okay. Her trip was complicated by continued questions over whether she would go to the border. This was last year, Senator Ted Cruz, and many others, uh, pile on for announcing the trip. Cruise is echoing Donald Trump's assertion that the vice-president was merely trying to get out front of his visit. So Donald Trump said that, uh, he's going to go to the border. He's going to be joined by Texas GOP, governor Greg Abbott, and a group of house Republicans shortly after the news. Trump released a statement claiming that if, if he and Abbott were going there next week, she would have never made it down there herself. So suddenly, uh, Ted Cruz is out there now says, suddenly president Trump is going to the border and they realized, oh crap, we got to do something. So they're racing down their white house, press secretary argued that the trip was no, it's just simply part of her broader mandate to address the root causes. You know, here she is from the podium, uh, uh, uh, um, whenever they so

Speaker 4: 1:24:23

About today's announcement, why is the vice-president visiting the border this week, one earlier this month, she just missed a trip like that saying it would be a grand gesture. She also said, um, in an interview with NBC that she would be open to going to the border. If it was an appropriate time, she said that after she said that. So that's important context as well and important context. I've got the NBC interview right here. She was talking about how she hasn't been to the border. She hasn't been to Europe either. So does she think that these two things are the same? Uh, and again, uh, Peter, I think she also said in the same interview that she would be open to going to the border at an appropriate time and about today's announcement.

Speaker 1: 1:25:01

So, so, you know, Jen Sakio on that one was pretty good, right? She knew exactly what two interviews she was talking about. So she had watched every interview and she knew the full context and she's kind of threw it back at that guy. But the, the question is, well, you know, kind of really what did take so long and she's gone so we can stop complaining about it or stop having fun with it, I think is more appropriate. Now, Jeff, uh, Jennifer Frank over here actually has the statement from Donald Trump. She posted it first and it says here after months of ignoring the crisis at the Southern border, it is great that we got Camila Harris to finally go down and see the tremendous destruction and death that they've created a direct result of Biden ending my very tough but fair border policies. Harrison Biden were given the strongest border in the American history. Now it's by far the worst in American history of governor Abbott and I we're going there next week. She would have never gone. It's probably true. Now I'm, I'm sort of also of the belief that maybe she's just like, let's just, can we just go already? Cause I don't know how to answer this question. It's like a bad, you know, law school exam. I don't know what the answer. Can you help me? Can we just go so I can get it over with so I can just say, look, I was there on 25th, 2021. I'm never going back again. So don't ask me again, right? Just get it out of the way. All right. First up questions coming over from watching the watchers.locals.com, which is really the place to be. If you want to participate in the show and meet some great people, we have our first, I'm sorry, our second monthly meetup coming up this Saturday, you can register@watchingthewatchersdotlocals.com. If you are a supporter. So Sharon Whitney's in the house as the only reason comma is going to the border at all is because Trump announced it, that he was going, wouldn't it be fun if they showed up at the same time? I actually think it'd be hilarious if like Trump's down there right now. Like he just posted a video. Hey, it's Greg Abbott and I down at the border. I love these races. I think it's fun. We have Jeff Bezos now also racing Richard Branson up, up to outer space. Cabela's racing Trump down to the border. It's just a lot of fun. It's very exciting. Kareem. 1 65 says, I think the establishment already decided long ago that Camilo would be president regardless of the will of the people. I absolutely agree with you. I have no idea why she's the vice pro. I do know why she's the vice-president because of exactly what you said, but in terms of capabilities, there, there were many other higher, better qualified candidates than her. I mean, she was a terrible candidate. She flamed out, I think, before voting even started. So nobody liked her, but she fits. She she's somebody who is very, very low agency. So she'll just do whatever you put her in there. And you know, the puppet masters can just, okay, go over here, go over here and say this, say this, say this, whatever. And that's, that is enough to give her fulfillment in her life because she's a power hungry maniac. We have want to know, says how can the Fox poll show Camila is doing a correct, correct job at 41%. Who are these snowflakes? Are there really that many sheep? This is really scary. Yeah. I want it to know. It's we're, we're, we're, we're doing our best here to push back on it. And thanks for being here and helping us. We've got Sharon quit and he says all of this political posturing about the border was costing peoples lives. How many lives have to be sacrificed on the alter of the Trump derangement syndrome and it's politics. You're right, Sharon, that's a good point. And I shouldn't, you know, sort of, you know, come back to that point, right. You know, I have fun sort of wagging my finger back at Camila. She's always wagging at us. We wag it right back at her and it is kind of fun to poke fun at her over this stuff. But, but it is true, you know, and it really does make my stomach turn. I don't just say that when I put those videos or the images of the people migrating across the border, stacking themselves in layers in the back of pickup trucks, that's not okay that, that this is happening at all. It is a very horrendous thing. This is what we see. I can't even imagine what is below the surface. That's taking place on the way here. The, the humanitarian crisis, you're talking 180,000 people, 180,000 people journeying up one month, not a year, one month. Just say let's, let's just say, you know, a percent of them die along the way. That's, that's a big problem, ah, or, or get raped or assaulted or robbed or taken it, you know, it's really bad. And I think they're causing it now. We've got ju ju I gotta be careful with Juppa. Is that a bad word? I trust you completely, but I just gotta be careful playing a fun game if where's Waldo. I mean, Kamala. All right. So ju pause in the house. And he said, where's Waldo. I mean, Camila. I know. Well, I we're going to see her down at the border. We've got ZZ. The boxing cat says, Robert griller. Imagine if any American citizen abandoned, abused, neglected their child, they would end up in the, in the pokey yet the illegals are guilty of this on a daily basis. This is truly disgusting and heartbreaking. Uh, yeah. So yes, yes. I mean, there, there are major tragedies that are happening down there, right? Kids, we, we we've seen the numbers, the statistics on the children. And there are folks, there are allegations that these children are being taken from other people and used as admission tickets into the country because once they get here, oh my gosh, it, I don't have kids, but I can imagine what these people are going through. It's, it's awful. And they're being incentivized by our own government who are then turning around and blaming the people who aren't as sympathetic as they are for causing the problem. Little, do they not recognize or realize that they are causing the problem in the first place wants to know, says how far can someone walk in Arizona, Texas, sun carrying warm water with them. If they're 10 years old, not far, not, not far if you're 20 years old, okay. It was 118 degrees. And people don't really realize what that feels like. It is. It is something, let me tell you, uh, you, you, you actually walk outside and if you live in Arizona, you know what I'm talking about? It, it actually feels like your skin is burning like immediately. All right. And I, and I've got some color to me. I'm gonna tell him I, you know, Italian guy and I've got some nice, you know, nice greasy skin. And I stay pretty well hydrated. I don't burn easily, but it, it, it, it's a weird thing when it gets 118 and your indirect sunlight, it can be 10 o'clock in the morning and you step outside and it feels like your skin is burning. I'm not kidding you. So if you're out there for 10 minutes in that type of heat, I'm not sure how you do well on that. I mean, honestly. And so that's why they're packing themselves in new halls and 106 degrees in there that was back in may. Okay. The temperatures are dramatically different now, now today's not terrible, but we had a heat dome here for about five days. If you happen to be caught in the middle of the desert without water in the middle of a heat dome, they're probably dead people sadly to say this in Mexico, just kind of strewn about the desert that nobody talks about. I would, I would, I would, I would bet you that there were some very serious, um, Ms for reporting or w we just don't talk about that. Right? There's certain areas of life that we just kind of, nobody has, nobody likes to talk about that. Cause it's just a little too, it's a little too much K kids in cages. Like that's the acceptable level of, of, of horrendous for the American psyche. We can put that on the New York times. We can talk about that on CNN. We can show people who are not, you know, getting raped and murdered in the middle of the desert. We're okay. Putting that on TV because that makes people outraged. And they're, you know, they'll keep the channel on for that. But if you actually show them, what's actually happening, you show them the dead bodies, the, the drug war that's taking place in, in New Mexico and what the people are going through. As they're working their way ups, you can't put that stuff on TV. Can't put that on CNN because it's just too gruesome. And we don't talk about that. And how much of that is going on? It's a humanitarian crisis of epic proportions. And it's the same people who are out there scolding everybody for not being humanitarian enough, who are causing that. And it's a wild scene to see it happen. And for them to sort of blame people, maybe like you and I, who are critical of their policy decisions saying, Hey, what you're doing is causing way more harm than good. All we want to do is sort of help you, help them a little bit. Maybe look at it from a different perspective. They just turn around. You're a racist, you're a bigot, you're a xenophobe. You hate brown people or something like that. That's not at all the situation. It's the opposite of that. We just have a rational grounding in, in policy and why people come in the first place we know it's because of your incentives. It's not because of global warming. That's taking place in Guatemala. All right. Want to know? Last question says, what do you honestly think what Kamala thinks about Trump kind of forces her trip on the border. I realize what do you honestly think will Kamala thinks about Trump kind of forces her on the border? I realize you're on YouTube. Yeah. So I, I think if your question is, is, come on, y'all are racing down there to beat Trump to the border. I think that's absolutely accurate. Yeah. I would guess that that is 100% correct because Kamala Harris doesn't want to get in trouble. And she knows that it looks really bad if Donald Trump beats her there. Uh, speaking of, uh, of, uh, looking bad, you know, an old criminal record can look pretty bad. We want to make sure that you don't have one. And so our law firm can help you resolve an old criminal case or a current criminal case. So we can clean up your record, whether it's pending or historical, we can help you file a motion to set aside a conviction. If it's an old marijuana violation, we can expunge those. We can help restore your right to possess a fight arm, your right to vote again. We can help make sure that your life is a little bit more full than the criminal justice system ordinarily would allow to be, and we can help with any type of criminal case in the state of Arizona. I'm talking about drug charges, traffic violations, felony offenses, DUI cases, anything and everything in between. Anytime you're in trouble with the law, we offer free case evaluation and we would love the opportunity to help. The phone number is(480) 787-0394. Or the link is down in the description below. You can schedule online and we would love the opportunity to speak with you if you don't need any of that, that's great news, but there is maybe something that you might be interested in over on gumroad.com/robert ruler. Some of my friends, informational offerings, law enforcement interaction training is a good course. We had a lot of fun with that. And if you're a lawyer or an attorney or somebody interested in, in using video for your firm, or just sort of a masterminding with other attorneys, we meet twice every month, you can check that out as well. All right. So thank you all for your support. And once again, those questions came over from watching the watchers.locals.com. Okay. So we'll change gears. We've got one more segment of day. The Delta variant is back dunk dunk is everybody freaked out? Well, the government certainly is, and Joe Biden and Dr. Fowchee are back doing the same thing that we're used to them doing, right? They're giving us all their PSA's and giving us some guidance about what we're supposed to do here. So I want to show you what's taking place on Twitter because Dr. Fowchee was on president Biden's timeline twice, today. Very, very interesting what happened here. So this is the first one that we saw. Now. We're not going to watch this cause you know, you can watch it on your own time, but president Biden posted this on Twitter, he said, here's the deal? The Delta variant is more contagious is deadlier. It's spreading quickly around the world, leaving young unvaccinated people more vulnerable than ever. Please get vaccinated. If you haven't already let's head off this strain before it's too late. So I don't want to take any vaccination questions. I don't want to, you know, go into this. Is this legitimate or any of that stuff because YouTube doesn't like that. I mean, seriously, right? They have been very hard on some of this stuff. And so I'm not necessarily interested in, in talking about the Delta variant or whether the vaccine works or not, because I'm not a medical doctor, do it, do what you want with Dr. Fowchee information. I know what I do with it, but there's a lot, you know, th there there's a whole separate conversation that we can sort of spiral off on this tangent. What I want to point out is the little bit of information that changed in between the first post and the second post. And you can come to your own conclusion about that information, why it was left out the second time around. Don't want to get into it. As I mentioned about why they might have left that off. Just want to flag that for you. So, you know, kind of what the, what they're doing. So let's take a quick look again at the first. I'm sorry, this is the second post. Okay. So the first one was deleted Biden, posted this the second go round. And you'll notice when I took this screenshot it's earlier, uh, earlier I think earlier today, or whenever, whenever I took it doesn't matter, but the time code down here, it is two minutes and nine seconds long. Okay. The full video is down here. Now this video got 574,900 views Fowchee on the Delta variant posted by the white house posted by, at POTUS, the U S government official account here by president Joe Biden, two minutes and nine seconds. But also today, we saw that disclosed TV said, well, in case you missed it, a tweet with a video message from Dr. Fowchee had been deleted because earlier in the day, it was, there was another video that was posted, same title, same text, same everything, except the video was just a little bit different. What was this one? So remember on the first video, what was the time? 2 0 9 down here, two minutes and nine seconds on the new video. What does it have? Oh, this one down here is two minutes and 25 seconds. So it's actually a little bit longer when we compare the two. What you'll see on the, on the first one, the first in time posting the screenshot that was captured by disclosed.tv. They say that it's about two minutes and 25 seconds. It actually may have been a little bit longer. He may have taken this screenshot, uh, before the video was actually over. Cause it's about, I think about, uh, 20, 20 seconds or whatever was clipped the title. The text is the very same in both, but the video is a little bit different, right? In the video you'll notice, uh, is, is actually off a little bit. So this one has the gray areas. I was at the black bars on the side, so it's not properly cropped. Okay. Not properly crop. This one is properly cropped it's properly formatted for Twitter. And so you'll notice Dr. Fowchee is all certainly massed up, right? He's got his mic on a good lighting. He's got a nice big, you know, white light coming in here. Background looks a little bit blurry back here. So we've got some bulky effect here and you know, it's, it's, it's a nice setup. He's got a nice light. He's been powdered. He's got some makeup on, probably done a bunch of different takes here for the Delta variant. So there, there is some production that went into this and what happened was probably the social media person for Joe Biden, just posted the wrong video. They just posted the wrong, the wrong format, the wrong edited with the wrong wrongly edited video, because this one is not formatted for Twitter. So they posted an unedited or, you know, prerecord some, some version that should not have gone out. Then when they repost it, it, it looks good now, right? The, the black bars are gone. It's perfectly formatted for Twitter. So they pick the rec the correct file, but they cut out a little bit of time. So what is it? Well disclose TV. They captured it. They got the video of it. And you'll notice about 24 seconds in total does not make it into the new video. So what is this? Let's take a listen. And again, not going to take any questions on the vaccine stuff because YouTube will flip out. I know I apologize, but let's take a listen. And what is happening

Speaker 5: 1:39:32

Vaccinated people, even though they're very, very well protected, they still should try as best as possible to avoid congregate settings in which there are a lot of unvaccinated people, particularly if you happen to live in an area where the infection rate is high and the vaccination rate is low.

Speaker 1: 1:39:56

Okay. So you can do what you want with that information. But talking sort of a lot about that same language that we heard about previously, sort of remember when the CDC came out and said that even the vaccinated people have to do a bunch of stuff and everybody goes, well, what the hell is the point of getting vaccinated? And then like seven or eight days later, Rachel Wollensky from the CDC came back out and said, oh no, you actually don't have to wear a mask anymore if you're inside because you're vaccinated, everybody goes, oh, so I guess the science select much has changed because you were out there a couple of weeks earlier, screaming about science and mass, mass, mass, mass science, science, science. Now you just sort of changed or is it that, you know, the, the, the, the current vaccine is not as applicable to the new Delta variants and Fowchee was giving us that message, but then they clip that out. So there's some questions, questions about, about this variant and about the messaging. And then we got, we got a little bit, we got a little bit of a message, but they cut some of the message out. So that sounds about right. You know, this is kind of par for the course. Now we do have a very interesting Congresswoman that I want to talk about here because she introduced a new bill called the, we deserve to know bill. And I think this is a good bill saying, well, we want to get to the bottom of the origin story about the coronavirus. Where did it come from? Did it come from a cave in the outskirts of China, or did it escape, or was it released from a lab in Wu Han the Wuhan Institute of virology this woman. And I'm going to call her a Congresswoman because she actually posted that on her website. Okay. I usually say congresspeople because you can't tell anymore. She said, Congress woman. So get mad at her, not me, Elise Stefanick here representing 21st district of New York. He's a proud representative of New York house, Republican conference chair. She's also on Instagram and her house address is@stephanie.house.gov. So let's take a look at her fourth term in office member of the house armed services committee committee on education and labor Congresswoman, uh, innovative technologies serves on higher education workforce. In may. She was elected to house leadership. She's the chair of the house Republican conference, right? So she's working her way up and she gave kind of a fiery press conference this week. And I wanted to just share that with you. Cause they're talking about calling for a full investigation into the origin of the COVID-19 virus. And this was over here on Twitter earlier today, about a minute and 22 seconds. I want to play the whole thing because it is, it is good. And she uses two interesting, uh, kind of catch phrases here. See if you can catch them. I think they're quite good. Actually. One is a reminder of the Iraq war after 2001, when, uh, when a lot of people were using this particular catch phrase, see if you can think about what this is, it goes like this, bump a bump. It goes 1, 2, 1, 2. So it goes, uh, you'll see what I mean. So she, she, she starts off with that, pick this up and then she's got another sort of alliteration. That's also pretty good. So this is, this is a good marketing, uh, concoction going on here. Here is Elise Stefanick and the house Republicans.

Speaker 6: 1:43:02

Thank you, Steve. The evidence is very clear. China lied and Americans died. We want justice for the American people, transparency for the American people and accountability for the more than 600,000 Americans who lost their lives from the COVID-19 virus. Every American deserves to know the truth about the COVID coverup. That's why one of the bills house Republicans are highlighting is the world deserves to know act that I co introduced with my colleague from Virginia, Rob Whitman, this bill calls for a full investigation to determine the extent of China's actions and coverup it sanctions Chinese health agency officials until there is an independent investigation into the origins of COVID-19. And it requires president Biden to work with the intelligence community, to members of the Chinese communist party involved in the persecution of whistleblowers and citizen journalists and save them for human rights abuses. Unlike Nancy Pelosi and house Democrats house Republicans will never be Chinese communist party sympathizers, and we will not rest until there's a full investigation into China's role in the COVID 19 virus, outbreak and coverup. Thank you, leader McCarthy for hosting this press conference. And I'm proud to introduce our foreign affairs ranking member, Congressman Mike McCall.

Speaker 1: 1:44:25

All right. So pretty good there. Did you catch those two? So first of all, did you see rep McCarthy back there going like kind of laugh? Oh my gosh, this man came out there with a little fire in her belly, two things. Did you catch them? China lied. People died. Remember that from, uh, from the criticisms of Bush, Bush lied. People died, mother, all of that. She's just kind of sees that, commandeered it for her own. Now it's China lied. People died. That was a pretty prolific catchphrase back when I was in high school, I think that was then we also had the alliteration, which we all like the COVID coverup. Oh, it's beautiful. So some good marketing there. And then she also said that unlike the Democrats, we will never be communist party sympathizers. So I think she's got a bright future in the GOP. Here is her bill. Now we're going to go through this it's 13 pages, but it is very small. So, you know, you can see here, uh, w when, when the Congress people write bills, they sort of use that high school cheat method. You got double spacing here. 1.5 spacing. You got, you know, like a two inch margin down here at the bottom. Uh, all this filler space means nothing blank spaces. You squeeze the margins on the, on the right and the left. So the whole, thing's just a giant, you know, it's perfect for Congress, but this one's actually fun. So it says this bill is to impose sanctions with respect to members of the Chinese communist party. Oh, and the heads of the Chinese health agencies relating to COVID 19 being enacted that this is the world deserves to know act. We're going to go through it. It says number one, section to the imposition of sanctions with respect to certain members of the Chinese communist party. So this thing just starts off with a bang. We're just gonna start sanctioning the Chinese communist party members. Paragraph a, the president shall impose sanctions under the Magnitsky human rights act, including anybody that the president determines knowingly is responsible for or complicit in or directly or indirectly engaged in any of the following, the disappearance of whistleblowers or journal and citizens related to Chinese pandemic coverups, or the establishment of limits on freedom of speech or academic freedoms in the PRC related to the COVID-19. So they're saying if, if, if it looks like in China, they're doing those things, they should be sanctioned here in the United States. They say the president shall coordinate with the intelligence community. They're talking about Chinese health agency heads. So gal Fu known as George Fu gal is the, of the CDC control and prevention in the PRC. So they're talking about sanctioning specific people. We've got Maggio way. Minister of the national health commission also want sanctions for them. What kind of sanctions should they say are appropriate? Well, we want to block some property. Presidents shall exercise, all efforts, all authority under the international emergency economic powers act to block and prohibit all transactions in property and interest in property. If they are in the United States in possession or control of a us person. So gal Fu and Mau Xiaowei, they're saying if this bill passes, we just basically seize your property. If it's under control of the U S or any person here in the United States, they're also saying you're not coming back to the country and admissible to the United States. You're not allowed to come back, not eligible at all to be admitted or paroled into the United States under any immigration act. Also your current visa is going to be revoked. We've got some exceptions. Okay? So like, if you want to comply with the United nations headquarters agreements, that's okay. How are we going to implement this? Or another exception would be if you're here to help law enforcement. So implementation, then the president is going to exercise all forties to carry out any of these regulations, licenses as necessary penalties, any person who violates or causes violation of any one of these regulations is going to be subject to a penalty here. So sort of a, uh, some teeth in enforcement, right? If you don't, or if you, if you try to hamper, this is going to be problems for you. President may waive the application of sanctions with respect to a foreign person. If the president determines it's in the national interest, not later than a date where they basically talk to Congress about this, so how to penalties, sanctions, and president can terminate them. If there's credible information, 15 days after the fact, they've got to notify the secretary of state to that, they get, they can terminate the authority of the sanctions. Okay. What else? Exceptions related to the importation of goods. All right. So we also have now section three, this is the prohibition of new contracts. So we know that there were all sorts of agreements taking place between the NIH, the NIH, the national Institute of health and the national Institute for allergy and infectious diseases. They were all sort of contracting with government money, allegedly through EcoHealth Alliance to do work in the Wu Han lab of virology, working with Dr. Shi, the Batwoman bat lady. So the question is, how do we stop that from ever happening again? Why is the U S government funding gain of function research in Wu Han? Well, if this bill passes not going to happen anymore, no federal funds may be made available to higher education that enters into any contract. Oh, so this is for local. Okay. So this is for here in the U S any element or department of the people's Republic of China. So this is talking about higher education institutions. If they're going to be doing work with, with Chinese, no new contracts with them, they don't get any of that money. We've also got program participation agreements under the higher education act. You have the national academy of sciences, no federal funds that are going on. The national academy of sciences may be used to enter end into any contract with China. They want to review the NIH funding. We've talked about that conduct a full review of the national institutes of health directly before, during, after fiscal year, 2010, all the way through, including the people's Republic of China, any Chinese entity, they want sense of Congress. So Congress now is sort of giving us a little bit of framework here. They're saying it is the sense of Congress that given Taiwan's early alerting to the global health community on the dangers of COVID-19 while senior officials in the Chinese communist party, downplayed COVID Taiwan should be granted observer status in the world health assembly. We also have some definitions here. So they're going to define what admitted means, what appropriate congressional committees mean. Some more definitions, not, not really that relevant, but us S person means know any person in the United States. So that is the entirety of the bill. Very strong, very forceful, actually names, a couple people who should be sanctioned, make sure that all, excuse me, make sure that the federal government does not continue to fund health. I'm sorry, educational institutions that are engaging with it PRC. So, you know, a full time investigation, full audit of the NIH, NIH ID. Think it's a pretty good start. Not too bad. Now let's take a look at some questions coming in hot from over watching, watching the watchers.locals.com. First up is Sharon Quinn. He says, I think Fowchee was totally discredited. Well, only if you look for it, you know, you have to actually go and look for that stuff. If you, if you're somebody who still gobbles up anything that's on CNN or the Washington post or New York times, I'm not sure you heard any of that stuff. Did you even follow any of the Fowchee email stuff? I was talking to somebody who is, uh, let's say, uh, a Fowchee acolyte. And I mentioned, uh, you know, I read in his emails that Fowchee said this, and the guy goes, those Fowchee, his emails, what are you talking about? I said, oh yeah. Huh? All of his emails came out from like the last, like six months, uh, from like the first six months of the COVID pandemic. I read a lot of them on that. Oh, well, what'd he say? Well, he had a lot of, you know, a lot of conversations and we went through a lot of stuff. Oh, is he gonna look, can do it any further or is he just going to turn on whatever Brian Stelter tells him and follow orders? Probably the letter. All right. We've got, want to know, says the Fowchee pitchers show up neck line, like a mask. Do you think it's real? Did they? I didn't see that. I don't know. Did they, did they make up a mask, a mask line? I didn't notice that Jeremy[inaudible] is in the house as glad to see you life today. You too, Jeremy, it feels good to be back. You know, when I was doing the prerecorded shows like really rushed because I had to finish it and upload it, like get out the door to the next event. So it's good to kind of slow down a little bit and actually talk to you. Uh, it's more fun to do the show this way, so I'm glad, I'm glad to be here. Hope your AC issues got resolved. I'm back in business. I'm good. Nice and comfortable. I heard a great phrase today. It says some people are like clouds when they go away, your day gets brighter. Oh, that's a great phrase. I like that. That's a great phrase. I do like that. Uh, let's see. We've got good to see you, Jeremy. Thanks for being here. We have another question coming in from ZZ the boxing cat. What is the picture behind Rob? The one in the gold frame. LOL. Oh, that, that is, that is John Barron. That's John Barron. Yeah. John Barron. You may have learned about John Barron, uh, during the Trump years, you know, they, they, um, John Barron's this, this historical figure. That was pretty, it was pretty volatile at times. And so this picture is kind of like a Rorschach test. People look at this picture and some people seem what they want to see you. They see a Napoleonic figure. Somebody who is a tyrant and a small man and a little dictator. Some people look at this picture of that historical figure known as John Barron. And they see somebody who's willing to sort of rock the boat a little bit. Somebody whose side, uh, sort of shaken up the old order. So, uh, it's a fun picture. It's fun to see people's reaction to that. I get a lot of different reactions of John Barron. It's a good one. And, uh, have a lot of fun with that. Faith knows what I'm talking about. People at the office know what I'm talking about. It's a Rorschach test tells you a lot about a person pretty quickly. All right. So great questions coming over from watching the watchers.locals.com big shout out to those of you who support us over there. And it means the world to me when you do that, because as you know, we've got some big, big visions for this. This is a long-term play. We're just getting started on this. Haven't even been doing, been doing the live show for a year yet. Not even one year yet. I've seen some, some growth. We've had a lot of great conversations. We've got some big visions. You know, I want to start sinking some more time into some deep dives, maybe some, some other, some other more provocative stuff. And so I'm sincerely grateful. Every time somebody goes over to locals and joins us, it means the world to me. So I want to welcome Elle bell. The last villain. Welcome to you both. Thank you so much for signing up and supporting us. We've got ZZ. The boxing cat saw you today. We got Holly. How, how cyan blue? How cyan blue. I think, I think that's how cyan blue. The sirens, right? That was from that great TV show. Battlestar Galactica. Yeah. That's such a good show. All right. I miss that show. Okay. So also want to thank all of you who asked questions today? Very good question. It feels very nice to get back in here and have some great conversations with all of you. Thank you for making the show fun and lively and keeping things on track. If you're not already a member over at locals, go check that out. It is available. You get a lot of good stuff. Yeah. Free book. My PDF free PDF version of my book. Good Lord called beginning to winning. You can see that here. You can download a copy of that@watchingthewatchersdotlocals.com as well as a copy of my PowerPoint slides and existence systems template we have, oh, that's over there. We share links throughout the day. There's a lot of great people over there. We have our zoom meeting coming up tomorrow. It's going to be no. Tomorrow is Friday, Saturday, June 26, 7 Eastern time. So four o'clock Arizona time, 7:00 PM Eastern time. I'm going to post a new registration link today because we need to do that. And uh, because last time I picked the wrong, I picked the wrong formats. We didn't have cameras on last time, but we're going to fix that. Cameras are going to be on this time because I figured that out. I think I hope also if you have not already done so I would love it. If you went and checked us out at gumroad.com/robert ruler, Robert ruler, Esq is the name of this platform. I have some informational offerings. I'm working on some other ones right now, but law enforcement interaction training is probably the most pertinent it's for people who want to know how to deal with the police. I have a 1, 2, 3 rule, very simple. You can kind of get it all in, in about an hour and a half stick around for the last hour. If you want to participate in the Q and a, but you can also, if you don't even want to listen to it, you can just purchase a copy of it and just download the slides that tell you exactly what the 1, 2, 3 rule is. I'd encourage you to listen to the whole thing, but if you're, if you just need the rules it's available, you can go check that out. Also, lastly, before we wrap up and get out of here for the day, I am a criminal defense lawyer at the RNR law group, we have an awesome team of people who are seriously dedicated to helping good people find safety, clarity, and hope in their cases and in their lives. We're passionate about what we do. We offer free case evaluations. We can help with all sorts of criminal charges in the state of Arizona. Things like traffic violations, drug charges, DUI charges, uh, anything and everything in between my friends we can help with at all. We have a very strong passion for helping people, awesome team of people. We would love it. If you happen to hear about a case, if you just said, Hey, I know these guys over at the R and R law group, give them a call. See if they can help. We're going to do everything we can. If we can't help them. No problem at all. We'll introduce them to somebody who can or give them some, some, some thoughts on what the next course of action should be. Otherwise if we end up working together, we'd very much appreciate it. And, uh, that is it for me, my friends, everybody. Thank you so much for joining us. We're going to be back, live again on schedule in air conditioning without a melting Arizona, and I'm looking forward to it. So I want to thank you so much for being here. Everybody have a tremendous evening sleep very well. We're going to be back here at 4:00 PM. Arizona 5:00 PM, mountain 6:00 PM. Central 7:00 PM on the east coast. And for that one, Florida man, everybody else be very well. I'll see you right back here tomorrow. Bye bye. Yeah.