COVID Origin Bill + Rand Charges Fauci, FBI Media Misconduct OIG Report, Dennis Perry Exonerated

Media warms up with a new flurry of COVID headlines as the delta variant spreads throughout the United States. Rand Paul suggests criminal charges for Fauci while Democrats deny the COVID origin bill from advancing. The Office of Inspector General once again confirms the FBI is a mess from top to bottom and we review the summary. An innocent man named Dennis Perry is exonerated after serving 20 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.​

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

🔵 The spread of the delta variant is causing headlines to fly around the world, we check in the media.​
🔵 Australia is locking down in response to the Coronavirus.​
🔵 Senate passed the bill that would have declassified information about Covid’s origins, but the democrats in the house killed it.​
🔵 A review of the debate taking place yesterday over the Covid Origin Bill.​
🔵 Recap of the Rand vs. Fauci over the Wuhan Coronavirus gain of function funding debate.​
🔵 Rand Paul tells Sean Hannity is recommending criminal charges against Fauci.​
🔵 New Office of the Inspector General report details additional misconduct with “Then-Senior FBI Official”.​
🔵 The new report details the problem: FBI agents getting fits from members of the media.​
🔵 Review of the 2018 report that details the systemic problems within the FBI, including addressing leaks and dealing with “cultural attitude.”​
🔵 Judge in Georgia exonerates man who served 20 years in prison for a murder he did not commit.​
🔵 Dennis Perry was exonerated after DNA evidence showed he was not the murder.​
🔵 Major congratulations to the Georgia Innocence Project for their amazing work.​
🔵 We hear from Dennis Perry and his lawyer Jennifer Whitfield.​
🔵 Live chat after each segment at watchingthewatchers.locals.com!​

COMMUNITY & LIVECHAT QUESTIONS: ​

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

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

🎥 TIKTOK LATEST: https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMdVADCQs/​

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, July 24th at 7 p.m. eastern – Monthly Zoom Meet-up for Locals supporters.​

🥳 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​
🟢 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/RobertGrulerEsq/​
🟢 Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/robertgruleresq​
🟢 TikTok: https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMdCFry1E/​
🟢 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, book, coupon codes and more! https://watchingthewatchers.locals.com​

ALTERNATIVE PLATFORMS:  ​

🟡 ODYSEE: https://odysee.com/@WatchingTheWatchers:8​
🟡 RUMBLE: https://rumble.com/c/RobertGrulerEsq ​

#WatchingtheWatchers #Fauci #RandPaul #CovidOrigin #LabLeak #Wuhan #Coronavirus #Hawley #FBI #OIG #InspectorGeneral #FBIMisconduct #DennisPerry #InnocenceProject #Georgia #Exonerated

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:00

Hello, my friends. And welcome back to yet. Another episode of watching the Watchers live. My name is Robert Mueller. I am a criminal defense attorney here at the RNR law group in the always beautiful and sunny Scottsdale Arizona, where my team and I over the course of many years have represented thousands of good people facing criminal charges. And throughout our time in practice, we have seen a lot of problems with our justice system. I'm talking about misconduct involving the police. We have prosecutors behaving poorly. We have judges not particularly interested in a little thing called justice, and it all starts with the politicians, the people at the top, the ones who write the rules and pass the laws that they expect you and me to follow, but sometimes have a little bit of difficulty doing so themselves. That's why we started this show so that together with your help, we can shine that big, beautiful spotlight of accountability and transparency down upon our system with a hope of finding justice. And we're grateful that you are here and with us today because we've got a lot to get into today. We're going to talk about the Delta variant, which is spreading around throughout the world. And the media is responding as are a lot of our elected officials. And so we're going to check in with them and see what they are imposing or suggesting be imposed around the country. So we're going to spend some time on that. We're also going to take a look at what our government is doing to investigate where this all started, where this came from, because there was a bill that passed in the Senate called the COVID origin bill that was going to declassify a bunch of very pertinent information. Well that worked its way over to the house of representatives. And so we've got an update that is essentially dead. So we're going to talk about that. And we're going to see what is going on with this battle between Rand Paul and Dr. Fowchee, Dr. Rand, Paul and Dr. Fowchee, because now Rand is saying, I'm going to refer a criminal charges over there, a doctor to the department of justice. And so we want to analyze that and see if anything is going to happen there. We're also going to change gears and talk about the FBI report. A new FBI report came out from the office of the inspector general that is detailing some serious problems going on with the FBI. We've talked a lot about those here on this channel, kind of, you know, needling them here and there for being so grossly incompetent and a new report came out that is shining some new light on this. Apparently there was a former high-level FBI agent that was accepting some gifts and things like that from the media. And they're pointing us back to this 2018 OIG report that said that the FBI has a lot of problems from top to bottom. So we're going to go through that document a little bit in case you need a refresher, the FBI is in a lot of trouble and we're going to take some time to go through it in our last segment. We've got some very good news, very good day for one man in particular, his name is Dennis Perry, a judge in Georgia just exonerated him, released him. He's been exonerated. The government dismissed a case against him. He's been in prison for 20 years for murders that he did not do. And so he's out of custody today and the innocence project over from Georgia did excellent work on that. So I want to show you what happens. Right? Many people often think that if you've been charged with a crime, that that necessarily means you're guilty. No, and that's not so fast. The government screws up all over the place. And so when there is a travesty of justice like this, that gets reversed. That's a day for celebration. So as I said, we've got a lot to get into. If you want to be a part of the show, the place to do that, we've got two places now@watchingthewatchersdotlocals.com. There's a live chat right now going on. It looks like it's having fun over there. We've got speech unleashed. We have Jeremy[inaudible]. We got farmer's daughter. We have another farmer's daughter. And, uh, everybody's on over there. Want to know, and blue peas in the house. So good to see everybody. Three girls. I see you as well over on YouTube, let's say hi to Paul Smith. We've got Curtis Bartle. We've got Ronnie Cole. We've got Curtis, uh, there's again, newbie, death, rave reviews stuff, and, uh, and many other slow Joe's families here as well. So it's good to see you that one, Florida man, all chime in here, uh, on different platforms. I think that I might have the super chats figured out a little bit. So let me show you what I've got going on here if I press that button. Okay. So see, there's a super chat, uh, kind of thing that popped up on the screen. Let me move that, uh, over here a little bit. Yeah, there we go. So, you know, I'm, I'm playing around with some of these notifications. I'm not sure if that's gonna work or not, but, uh, you know, you can try that if you want to indulge in that. Anyways, we're taking questions from both super chats and from the forum over@watchingthewatchersdotlocals.com. I want to show you what that looks like here it is. And then we're going to get started. So if you're watching ed watching the watchers.locals.com, that's the form to use. And of course we appreciate all your support and love over there. All right. So let's get into the news of the day. The coronavirus feels like we're in season two, kind of coming around full circle. A lot of the headlines that we heard about the last time we went through, this seemed like they're coming back around again. And so now it's sort of got a new little, a plot line. We're talking about the Delta area. And that is something that, of course, a lot of doctors are very concerned about. So in this segment, what I want to do is just take a quick tour around the country and around the world, take a look at some of the headlines that we're seeing. Then we're going to dive in a little bit and figure out what our government is doing about this, because there is a debate about where the Corona virus originated from what is our government doing to prevent this from happening again? Were we involved in terms of funding, Wu Han and causing all of this in the first place? We kind of want to figure that out. So this doesn't happen again. So we're going to check out what our elected officials are doing or not doing. And then we're going to see what this battle between Rand Paul and Dr. Fowchee looks like because Rand, Paul is now recommending charges over it with the department of justice. So we'll take a look at that first. Let's go around and see what some headlines are from around the country. This is from CBS, Minnesota. You'll notice it says this doctor came out and he says, this virus is going to find everybody who is not immune. Right. Which is a big statement. So it's sort of like personifies the virus, right? He's going to find everybody who's not immune. It's going to go out there and get you to this doctor says all over the Delta area. He says that COVID-19 numbers are up in Minnesota, 625 new cases that presume positivity rate 11%. Right? So it's pretty a pretty substantial. The state health department says these new numbers are ticking up a sharp uptick. From last week, we have Dr. Gregory Poland of the Mayo clinics as he is still wearing a mask, even when he steps out of his Mayo office says, I think there is no question. We are going to see a surge. He says in a crowded scenario, I'm in a mask, indoors and outdoors. Okay. So we've got one headline from CBS over in LA. They're saying the coronavirus hospitalizations hit the highest point in months as Delta spreads. Once again, very familiar, right? We sort of see in these headlines come around. The new Corona virus infections are striking California's health care system, pushing hospitalizations to levels, not seen since early spring lending new urgency to efforts to tamp down transmission as a growing number of counties, urge residents to wear masks and doors. It's like a stinking rerun. And there's our first Superchat from Beth Cottington in the house. Farmer's daughter. So happy to see this again, they look at work. Hey, and I think I kind of screwed that up. So let me pull that down a little bit. Uh, so that's fun. Okay, cool. I'm gonna move that over there so that the bigger chats can come in. Good to see you. Farmer's daughter. Okay. So carrying on, it's saying my point was we're, we're sort of seeing these same headlines. It could have been a copy and paste article from about 18 months ago. Cause everybody was bracing for impact. Oh, this thing is really starting to come forward and we got to brace ourselves. So that's happening in California? My understanding is I think they're starting to lock down again, some restaurants or reduce some capacity. So, uh, we'll see what happens there, but feels like we're at the early stages. Again, the us of course now is limiting some travel. So we've got some travel curves going around Canada and Mexico. We're extending the travel limitations through August 21st and the U S government on Wednesday extended the closure. So it's going to go all the way to August 21st. And it's going to require visitors to have received the COVID-19 vaccine, right? So no more traveling unless you've got that vaccine in the house. So that will be coming the latest 30 day extension by the department of Homeland security, uh, came after Canada said on Monday, it would start allowing in fully vaccinated visitors for non-essential travel. And it forced a 16 month ban that many businesses have called crippling. Right? So again, more limitations, more sort of laying the framework down for what may be coming out, which might be locked downs again. So we'll see now it's not just happening here in Arizona. I'm sorry. In United States, as well as Arizona, it's also happening in other parts of the world. So I want to show you this very scary clip from Australia. They are reacting to this with some vigor. Now we've got a, this is a clip from their news agency. It's about 50 seconds. You'll see. And just listen. What they're talking about. They're going down on high capacity lockdowns. That's coming up good evening. Within

Speaker 2: 8:52

Hours. Sydney will be in the grip of much tougher restrictions. The premiere clamping down on the stubborn Delta outbreak with what she's calling a no regrets policy. And this is why from a record 82,000 tests, the state today recorded at 111 cases and tragically. The third COVID death in this outbreak, a man aged in his eighties from the city Southeast across greater Sydney. Retail shops will now close a small list of essential stores can remain open construction sites across the city, shut down. And from midnight tonight, 110 suburbs across Liverpool, Fairfield and Canterbury Bankstown will be sealed shut. That's 900,000 residents who can't leave their area. Even for work.

Speaker 1: 9:41

Can't even leave your house for work. You can't even leave your place. That's like prison. Is there, is there any different it's like home detention folks. There are people here who have to do home detention too for jail. It's about like that. They can't leave their house for anything, not even work. So, okay. So that's Australia, that sounds very, very scary. And Brody chimed in there says the biggest corporation, the government wants full monopoly and control. That's what this is. That sounds appropriate. We're moving on. Now, the question being, this is what our governments are doing. This is the response. This is the sort of season two event of COVID. And the question always has been okay. Look, people can make mistakes in the early days of a pandemic. People can screw that up. I can understand Dr. Fowchee is, let's say masking up, not masking. I can get that. But the question is, where did this thing come from? And are they being transparent? And, and in my opinion, they really have never, never have been the idea that this thing just kind of, you know, came from a bat somewhere didn't ever fit because the response was not like that, right? We've seen other viruses hit the world stage. We've seen the world health organization respond to a Bola and to SARS and to the swine flu and to many other responses. And it's always been well. We're just going to send some people in some rubber suits down into that location and they'll take care of it. This was different. This was a military response. This was everybody reoriented and said, we're going to lock down travel. We've saw the streets of China. We saw them, you know, flogging, uh, with, with fog, fogging all over the place, you know, to, to disinfect their entire country essentially. And so it was something different. And in my mind that always made sense that this was something that they were taking more seriously because it was more serious. So now we've been asking, are they going to go properly investigate the case? The Senate did part of that job. They passed a bill back on may 26. So about, about two months ago, that would require the declassification of information on the COVID origins. Right? Josh Holly came out there, signed off on this with Mike Bron. They gave the office of the director of national intelligence. So it's sort of the clearing house for all of our intelligence agencies. 90 days to declassify all information related to potential links between Wu Han and the Corona virus. The D classifications would require activities that were performed to be declassified, including those that done by the PLA the people's liberation army, which of course is the Chinese army. It would also require the declassification of details of any researchers who fell ill in August autumn of 2019, which we saw. And it would require that all of that information be given over to Congress in an unclassified report. Sounds pretty easy. I don't know. What's so complicated about that. If the us intelligence agencies have it, I think the American people should know about it so that we can elect the appropriate individuals to dictate the appropriate response. And so you can understand why this might be problematic if China comes out and they're a big, big boogeyman, and everybody starts to reorient because they were covering this thing up or their military that was responding over to Wu Han, allegedly back in the early days of the outbreak, if that is the new world structure, while there was one candidate out there who was pretty dang tough on China, wasn't there. His name was Donald Trump. And so that might scare the hell out of the Democrats. If the entire country reorients themselves and says, whoa, whoa, whoa, China was responsible for this. And they're the nefarious actors. And so they start to, you know, want some retribution who's who's ready and prime ready to go to come back in and say, see, I told you so. And so that's why I think this is seeing a little bit of a roadblock and this was not something that was even contested in the Senate. This passed unanimously. Okay. Unanimously. How does that happen? Any, anywhere in American history recently, the U S Senate on Monday, this again, was back on may 26, unanimously approved the bill. This though is what we saw yesterday on the floor of the house. This is Darren Lee hood and he and rep Brad Windstrup. They wanted to declassify all of this information. A bill passed the Senate unanimously and Americans deserve full respect. He says, so let's take a listen in and see just what some of these arguments are here in the debate that took place earlier

Speaker 3: 13:43

Today. If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule of immediately and to immediately consider S 1867, the COVID origin act introduced by Senator Holly. It has been 55 days since the Senate passed this critical bill without a single dissenting vote. Yeah. Bill calls for three things. Okay. Listen, bill first establishes that we must identify the precise origins of COVID-19 because it's critical for preventing a similar pandemic in the future. Earlier this year, CDC director, Robert Redfield stated the most likely etiology of this pathogen and Wu Han was from a laboratory, right? Even director general, Ted of the world health organization acknowledges that COVID-19 may have originated in a lab and thought it was worth investigating second, given this scientific opinions and a whole slew of evidence, including what I noted earlier, the bill establishes that we have reason to believe the COVID-19 pandemic may have originated in the[inaudible] Institute of Rollins.

Speaker 1: 14:48

All right. So you get it. So there's a lot of good reasons for this. The went on all you know, of course, as is usually the case. Nothing substantial is going to come out of it because the house Democrats in the house, this blocked it, they voted to not allow the declassification of the document. So it says by a vote of two, 16 to 2 0 7, barely, barely, barely denied Democrats in the house, blocked consideration of the bill that whatever required the declassification specifically information about Wu Han, the Wuhan lab of virology, it was called the COVID origin act. It's now dead Burgess and others explain the importance before the Democrats shot it down. They said, the best disinfectant is sunlight. That's what we can present today, which we talk about regularly here, accountability, transparency, justice. And so now we've got, you know, another case where this is going to be a, probably swept under the rug. Now there was, I think probably a strategic reason why this happened. Remember, there's another simultaneous debate that's happening right now that is involving the Republicans and Capitol hill, right? The insurrection, we kind of have these two competing dueling inquiries battling out right now, right? And the Republicans are very interested in one of them. The Democrats are very interested in the other one of them. The Democrats really want to just needle this Capitol hill thing until the end of the earth, right? They want to just kind of keep skewering that until, uh, the, the horse is disintegrated after its bloody beating. So they're going to continue to do that. The Republicans by contrast want to do the same thing, right? They don't want to talk about January 6th at all. They would really, really appreciate reframing the entire conversation to make China the bad, bad bogeyman. So they are going to be really beefing that up as well. So the Republicans want their committee, or they want the declassification let's say so that they can form a committee so that they can go and hold hearings and do all the same things the Democrats want to do, but the Democrats want some help on the Capitol hill stuff. So I think all of this really is, is sort of a jockeying between the two parties, right? And it's a, it's a political football that both sides are trying to run down. They're there to their end zone so they can score. The Democrats, want the Capitol hill stuff to move forward. Republicans don't so Nancy Pelosi, because the Democrats are in control of the house. She can just, uh, rally her caucus and make sure that they vote this stuff down. And she sort of holds some cards here. Remember what happened today? Also with the one six committee, they're trying to fill it with some Republicans. Nancy Pelosi says, not those Republicans. Jim Jordan comes back out and says, well, I'm going to pull those off then and around and around we go. So it's more political nonsense from our bureaucrats. It would be good to get some information about both of those things, right? I've never been somebody who said that there shouldn't be an investigation into January 6th, as far as I can recall, as long as it's a meaningful investigation, right? If it's going to be a committee packed with Democrats that are just going to blame Trump and white supremacy and not maybe the failings of our 18 different intelligence agencies, well then that's going to be a pretty dang useless committee. Isn't it? It certainly feels like that. So while, while our Congress is not doing anything, fortunately we do have a, uh, one Senator who I appreciate his work here. Uh, ran Paul, who is going at it with Dr. Fowchee. And yesterday we played a couple of clips of this entire exchange, Fox news assembled a very good, a highlight reel. This is about 56 seconds. That's going to summarize everything that they were talking about yesterday. And remember, this is ran Paul really digging in on a particular point. And I think it's great that he's doing this, you know, most congresspeople, they're very superficial, very topical stuff, right? And so they, Zuckerberg comes in, let's say, and we have these house people who've never used a computer before they ask them, are you censoring the interwebs and Zuckerberg? No Senator. And they go, okay, well you said, no, that's the end of my inquiry. They don't ever actually dive in there and look at any of the data or the numbers, or have any real concrete points. Ran. Paul is doing that, right. This guy is reading these studies, these, these abstracts. And we talked about it in terms of hieroglyphics yesterday, you know, the genome CPF two, wh you know, whatever it is, all sort of, you know, being very complex. And so in this next clip, you're going to see two doctors that are talking sort of in circles. And this often happens a lot in the technical fields, right? People are trying to sort of have a conversation at a high level, but they're also trying to be politically persuasive. They also realize that their audience is not a bunch of doctors. Their audience is a bunch of Americans. And so they're going to be sort of, you know, poking at each other over a very, very hard to define word, which is Fowchee is argument. We're talking about gain of function. What is gain of function and was the U S actually funding it, were we helping to support this in China that may have led or been the first domino in the sequence that would have caused the Corona virus? And so what Dr. Fowchee is going to be arguing about is no, we didn't cause the Corona virus, that's not what Ram Paul is asking about. He's asking about gain of function research, which may have led to the Corona virus. But there's that saying? I think from Hamlet, oh, seems that death me thinks death protest too much or whatever that one was. And so Fowchee is out here, uh, you know, saying what we didn't kill anybody. And if you said that I did that's offensive. Rand Paul saying, well, I never, that's not what I was going out there, buddy. I was saying that you, as the director of the NIH and the NIH, maybe you were responsible for making some decisions to pursue gain of function research. After that, I'm not making any allegations. Here is the super cut over from Fox news. And it's about 56 seconds. Let's check

Speaker 3: 20:05

It out, knowing that it is a crime to lie to Congress. Do you wish to retract your statement of May 11th, where you claimed that the NIH never funded gain of function research and we on, I have never lied before the Congress and I do not retract that statement. They shake an animal virus and you increase the transferability to humans. You're saying that's not gain a phone. Yeah, that is correct. And Senator Paul, you do not know what you are talking about. They took animal viruses that only occur in animals, wait for the fingers, increase their transmissibility to humans. How you can say that as not gain a funk, it is not, it's a dance. And you're dancing around this because you're trying to obscure responsibility for 4 million dying around them. You are implying that what we did was responsible for the deaths of individual. I totally resent anybody lying here, Senator. It is

Speaker 1: 20:58

You. Ooh, huh. And look at that. Rand Paul, just having that sip right there, which is just, just outstanding. Good for him. He's thirsty. You know, he just got done, uh, really taken it to Fowchee, which is a good thing. So, you know, look it, I want answers one way or the other. I think that more information is better than less information. I certainly think that there was a lot of, uh, very convenience maneuvering of data during the last 18 months. It'd be good to have a hindsight look and see what else is in there. Now this clip is, is percolating around the internet. This is of Dr. Fowchee from I think the about 20 years ago. And, uh, this is where he's, he's having a conversation. We can see he's in front of this sign here, something, something for strategic and international studies with some organization. And he's going to be talking about gain of function research. And we're also going to listen to him, use this phrase that, you know, if you're too restrictive on some of the research that you're doing, it really limits your creativity. And so people are passing this around saying, look, this guy has been a big gain of function person for a very long time. And so now today what he's doing is he's mincing words. He's saying, no, we weren't doing gain of function because a gain of function really falls within this one bucket. And we were doing other things that don't neatly categorize in there and ran saying, no, no, no, my, my friend, all of those buckets that you have over there, all 20 of those, those are all gain of function because what you're doing is you're adding functionality to the virus. You're, you're, you're, it doesn't matter where it came from or what you're doing or how your mastering mashing it up. It doesn't matter what recipe you use to make that it's still that it's still a loaf of bread and that's gained a function you're responsible for that. And so he's always been, no, we don't do any of that work. And that's totally a, um, it's preposterous and the head Bob going and the double finger point yesterday, all from pouchy. And so this clip came out today and you can judge for yourself. See what you think that,

Speaker 4: 22:44

That, where we are right now in science and molecular biology, and particularly in molecular virology and our ability to sequence and recombine and create various organisms in some respect is that the best way to prevent a nefarious act is to develop a culture of responsibility among scientists. You, you have to have some, um, restrictions in the sense of you don't do work that could actually hurt people. In the sense of, if you have a laboratory accident, you have to have the right containment. Um, once you start being too restrictive, then impede creativity for so many of the good things that could come out of the same type of work

Speaker 1: 23:40

Thing. Oh, impeding creativity. That's what people in eyebrows. Oh, okay. So, oh, you're getting creative there with your little Frankenstein viruses over there in China. So we'll see where it goes. Now. Here is Rand Paul yet again, to clean up this segment says, uh, that we're, uh, we're going to recommend charges over to the department of justice, which is fine. Right. He can recommend them all. He wants not gonna do anything. Of course. Department of justice is going to say, thanks, Rand, gonna just take this memorandum and just crumple that up and just dump that right over there. Thanks for the sending it over to us. But anyway, you know, at least he's, uh, he's, he's trying here he is.

Speaker 3: 24:15

Then I will be sending a letter to the department of justice asking for a criminal referral because he has lied to Congress. We have scientists that will line up by the dozens to say that the research he was funding was gain of function is doing this because he has a self-interest to cover his tracks and to cover his connection to Wilson. Wow.

Speaker 1: 24:34

There you go. So he's going to send it over to the DOJ. We'll see if they do anything at all with it. My guess is not. So that's fun. All right. So let's take a look at some questions and some chats coming in. We had a couple super chats come in. Let's see. We'll get to those. Let me take a couple over from watching the watchers.locals.com. We've got a federal unemployment tax act is the name of this individual says the person who instituted instituted the lockdown is Gladys for Jacqueline. It's a pretext to get rid of people's rights. What she has done is said, you can't leave Sydney without papers saying you are COVID negative. As well as restricting the right of travel. She also wants people to install service and scan QR codes. The lockdown attempts are tyrannical and feudal. I hope she gets S uh, she gets thrown out by her party. That's from federal unemployment act. We've got a bunch of questions. LT 13 is here, says Joe Rogan had on the innocence project lawyer. That's cool. We'll get to them shortly. We've got Paul char, uh, hyper Patriot is here, says the party of transparency, quote in quotes is also the same party that claims this was the most secure election in history than writing letters to the editor highlighting our U S rep. I encourage others to do the same with today's votes. This, this should enrage both sides of the aisle. That's a good point. Hyper Patriot. Yeah, look, I, I really don't know why both sides can't come together on transparency. I do know why it's because they can't agree on what that looks like or what accountability looks like. They can't make a determination as to whether or not they can even form a committee. That's going to do a proper inquiry in the first place. That's how far away we are from actually being able to resolve any of this stuff. We have a, I'm not gases here. Don't see a question there wants to know, says is the migration from the south, it could be leading to higher numbers. Why weren't they that's that's off. Topic wants to know that's not. That's the immigration topic we have. I'm not gas as not health advice, but one secret weapon is to eat your veggies and exercise. That is from I'm not gas, right? That's not medical expert advice. That's just, that's just good living techniques. We have to under seven says, Rob looks as if there might be some accountability after all it's on record that she lied about funding, gain of function. It's in the leaked emails and filed. She lied directly to Congress. Fowchee is time is up a scientist who put politics ahead of truth. Yeah. And I, and I think a lot of, uh, personal vanity, if I can be candid about it, we have LT 13 here says, I want you to look at other interviews to see if faulty uses do not instead of don't. But did you notice he told Rand, Paul, you do not know what you're talking about. Just like I did not have sexual relations. I've been watching too many behavior videos. This is one of those speech things that is a giveaway. That's, that's an interesting observation. I like observations like that. I think that there's a lot of truth to those things. And once you, once you get practiced at it, I think that you'll, um, you sort of develop it as a skill set. I think, I think I've got a little bit of a skill set from having worked with so many people in really hard situations that there are certain things that I can just kind of pick up on, uh, not being braggadocious, but you know, when you see a lot of, a lot of permutations of, you know, one, one particular situation that exists in society, when you see sort of a million different permutations of that, in my case, somebody is being charged with crimes. You start to, I think, gain an insight on how people respond to certain stressors. Of course, the criminal justice system is a big stressor. And so you can start to see certain patterns emerge when people are under stress. And Dr. Fowchee right there with Ron Paul was under a lot of stress Sharon's here, says, my bet is that he will never see the end of the Corona. We will never see the end of the scare of the Corona virus. They will be wave after wave of variants till the whole system breaks down, or everybody gets sick. They're going to have hazmat suits for everybody all the time in bed. Well, we'll make some kind of activities kind of hard there, Sharon, if you're, yeah. If you're laying in bed there with your significant other, and you're both in rubber suits and face masks, well, I don't know what you do about that, but, uh, I think you'll have to technology. We'll find a way. We'll find a way my friend we'll we'll be successful there. Jeremy, my Trita says Rob Australia is instituting a no freedom policy. That is so wrong. In my opinion. I agree with you on that. Jeremy Ms. Lucky says to deal with the COVID spread, perfect excuse for the administration to revert to Trump policies and to close the Southern border. It would save face and deflect the negative negative situation. Are they smart? I doubt it. I agree with you on that. Yeah. I mean, right. There's a lot of COVID coming across the borders. We have Sharon Courtney says, how far do you think Rand Paul will get with pursuing charges against Fowchee? I don't think far at all. He says the DOJ is prime to blame libertarians, populous DJT, and anyone who supports them. That's from Sharon kidney. Yeah, I agree. I really don't think it's going to go anywhere. You know, the department of justice, I think is pretty much spoken for at this moment in time. Sharon also says accountability, transparency and justice lethal allergens to Dem rhinos and the unit parties love that. Yeah. Right. The Republicans aren't any better. We just happened to pick on the Democrats a lot here because they're in charge of everything. They have the white house, they have the Congress they're trying to take over the Supreme court. I heard today. So we'll get into that tomorrow. So yeah, they're going to get the bump, the brunt of the bear, the brunt here, but it's also, you know, Republicans are, I don't even know what they're doing. The only Republican that I ever see doing anything meaningful on COVID is random. All the other ones are just like, whatever you tell us to do pharma, okay. Speech on least says somehow I think I have a committee to find out the origin and hold those responsible. Especially since COVID resulted in deaths, it's more important to the world and people than January six with had no direct deaths. Yeah. That's a good point. You know, if we're going to be doing things with our government, don't we want an ROI. We only have so much money and resources and human productivity. Maybe we should be careful where we spend it. Kenny one B is here, says declassifying intelligence information is really complicated, very laborious. You don't want to compromise how you get information by releasing the information itself. So you can continue to gather information how and what to redact, to protect the sources while still allowing the documents to meet the classification is not so easy. You wouldn't know the process and review procedures unless you work with classified information every day. That's true. Right. I really don't know. I really don't. And uh, I've, I've been on the receiving end of classified information or, uh, sealed information in many of my cases, stuff that we're not allowed to look at, but I have not been on the other side of the aisle. Right. I've never worked as a prosecutor or somebody, uh, as a law enforcement agency, like to say, I'm pure blooded onto the defense side over here, which is, uh, offensive to a lot of people, but that's okay. It's it is important. I'm not trying to belittle that. I certainly don't want to compromise any life or property or damage, you know, the, the, the interests of our society. But I also want some answers, right? The, the, the, the response to that then is not to just say, well, we're just not going to do anything. I know. It's, I'm sure it's hard. I'm sure that it requires a lot of work. I think that, which is why I think we should get started. Good. Thank you for that. Great comment, Kenny would be appreciate that aircraft Mecca Mac 1, 2, 3 says while Rand, Paul makes good points, is any of this going to help or fall on deaf ears? I'm going to say that that falls on deaf ears. If I had to guess, I'd say, that's where that's going to come. We're going to get through a few more from locals, and then we'll hop on over. We've got some super chats coming in. Thank you very much for those. I see you, Curtis. I see you VP. I see you dab gangster and others. So we'll take a look. We've got, so Viking says, what do you think? Uh, this is the cause of the bizarre head bobbing Fowchee has had now intermittently. Yeah. You know, I don't know. I think that that is a, I don't know, it's kind of a new thing. You know, that he's doing it's new, it's new behavior. I don't know what it is. It's a good question. I don't want to say it's a side effect from anything. Cause that might be, uh, received poorly, but you know, that could be a one thing. Let's see, we've got a couple others just X, U X a, which is just Shusha. Thank you for that. Cause I was botching that for the last couple of months, just shoe shies here says didn't file. She just admit when he said you are implying, what we did was responsible for the deaths of, uh, I see what you're saying. I don't think so necessarily. I see what you're saying. He's saying by what we did that, that is implying that we did something bad. Didn't wait. All right. Let's take a quick hop over to, and let's see what we've got coming in. We had farmer's daughter, we saw that one. Piper, your music's here. We have Brody Z super. It said the biggest corporation. The government wants a full monopoly. We definitely saw that one. We also had a super chat, says that, does this mean that illegal immigrants coming across the border will be turned around if they aren't fully vaccinated? And so I saw that one come in from Titan tech, which is a nine zero S that's a good question, right? I I'm going to guess at the answer. There is no, I don't think anybody's checking COVID vaccinations. We have, what's the point of the vaccine that came in from VP says there is no vaccine exceptions to Australia's lockdowns. What the heck? Yeah, I guess, I guess they're just locking down just permanently. I mean, that's it, you don't really have much of a choice there. We have a D dab E gangsta says that the D class is such a long process, which I appreciate. So, uh, I think we covered that comment from a local's question. We also have over here, Jessica Cora is in the house as Democrats don't go to jail, you can cause the death of 15 senior citizens and they give you an Emmy. So that is over from Jessica. Let's get, let's get that one up on the screen. See, make sure that pops up. And then we had another one let's see here from Curtis Bartleby says, is there a whistleblower case for the 45,000 deaths from the jab, which we saw that one up on the screen here a little bit ago. And uh, all of those are coming over from YouTube, YouTube, super chats. Fouls, GS should be in prison. I see from Brickley 77 says he is untouchable. He must have dirt on high-end politicians that is over from Brickley 77. So a lot of great questions coming in here. We have Sharon says a culture of responsibility to tell that to the Wiggers. Uh, we have a couple more that came in on locals. Want to know Rob don't forget about Obama stopping, gain a function and doctors in the house. As Dr. N Y renal MD says, Fowchee now knows that they funded gain a function. They conspired to get around the federal ban on it. However, they think this discussion is too complex for the common people. Many well-known scientists sounded the alarm five years ago, Peter Dak EcoHealth we all we talked about them. Here are the children of this sort of notion. It should be looked into that's from a doctor in the house over@watchingthewatchersdotlocals.com. He's saying it should be looked into. I agree. Right? I absolutely agree. I think it's very important that we get to the bottom of it. So w we've also got a few more let's wrap these up before we get into the next one. A federal unemployment tax act says that Gladys is a corrupt tyrant. I think that is the woman over from, uh, from Australia, says they are both disingenuous to the leaders over there. Tree Mendez is in the house, a braggadocious. He says, I love when I learn a new word. Yeah. I was trying not to be braggadocious. Sometimes I can't help it dandy. Randy is in the house as Ron, Paul sounds foolish questioning and accosting Fowchee. We've got, uh, we've got, um, a different take here, which I appreciate it says all molecular biological research is gain a function at its essence. Everyone wants stem cell research and tissues, but no one wants to deal with mishaps. If they occur ran, Paul probably has no idea what his numbing creams to insert needles into eyes are made of most pharma is animal byproducts, horseshoe crab blood is a vaccine testing component. Ran. Paul is wrong in this point that comes from dandy, Randy, which I love that. Thank you for that. For sharing that ran a dandy, Randy, that was a dandy comment, right? And it's a little contrarian viewpoint over here because here I am just like, get them Rand, go get them. But you know, I'm, I'm not a doctor sounds reasonable to me, but you've got a different perspective and I really appreciate that. So thank you for sharing that we have blue tiger. Doug says, I like to see the questioning focus on who gave them authority to work with Wu Han, or was he doing this unilaterally blue tiger dog. And then we've also got a couple of questions on the Darbys here says, you know what that flip-flops wife is or whatever. I don't know if a change is the chief department of bioethics with the national institutes of health with me, and she's in charge of unethical behavior. So that is a conflict of interest that's from the dark. And then the last one on this segment is from aircraft. MEK says the sense of the vaccines have only been out for a short time what's to say people will need to be revaccinated right. I think if I had to guess, I think that that's where this is trending. They're already talking about a second and third, uh, you know, uh, sorry, third and maybe booster shots later in the year. So we'll see where it goes. All of those were great questions from watching the watchers.locals.com. And I appreciate all of the super chats as well that came in from Curtis Bartel. Brickley Jessica de Sarge, and many of you, others. I appreciate all of that. Thank you for it. All right. And so we're going to change gears and move on into the next segment. The FBI has been under a lot of criticism lately, majorly for failing kind of everywhere, including not securing the Capitol hill building or preventing that attack. There's been some allegations that maybe they had some undercover unidentified implanted agents that really might have been behind the governor. Whitmer kidnapping plot. We know one of those FBI agents was now arrested for allegedly a domestic violence offense and the OIG, which is the office of the inspector general just came out again today and published a new investigative summary that is detailing continuing malfeasance within the FBI. This is a two page summary, which doesn't give us a whole lot more information, but it does refer us back to a 2018 report, which of course we were not on the show, not covering this at the time, but I was reading through that report to kind of juxtapose this altogether and it is worth diving into because it, it really uncovered a lot of the problems that the FBI is facing. So we're going to dive into all of that. Let's get into it. I want to start by taking a look at what we have here. This was posted on the OIG website. So this says its findings of misconduct, and I want to pay special attention to this. They don't actually tell us who this is. They say it's by a senior FBI official, right? So they're not going to label this person in the formal document, which is where this is all being investigated. So for those of you who do not know, the OIG is a separate, supposed to be an independent body that anytime there's a governmental problem, they're going to come in and investigate it. And you don't want to sort of investigate yourself like the police do because they always find that they did nothing wrong. So we have a separate body. The OIG that comes in and investigates, they're investigating the FBI because there's been complaints about the FBI. So they write their report. They spend all this time and money into it. This comes out yesterday, July 20th. It says that there were numerous findings of misconduct and it's event, senior officials. So we don't know who it is. And what's the problem. While they got unauthorized contacts with the media, why is the FBI talking with the media? Why are they accepting gifts from members of the media? It's all not good. This is the summation of it. The investigative summary, 2,196 as the findings of misconduct were for having numerous unauthorized contacts with the media. So we're going to go through this. We're going to sort of jump around a little bit. I want to go through this next paragraph and then we're going to jump back into 2018. Cause it's referring us over there. There was an investigation that took place after 2018. Remember all the big names that we heard back then we heard James Comey and Peter struck and we heard, uh, Lisa Page and the FBI level. And we heard the Steele dossier and we heard, uh, Paul Manafort and all of these different names that were sort of stemming from the idea that back from about 2014 to 2016, which were the years leading up to Donald Trump, being elected, that there was some malfeasance, some very big improprieties taking place within the FBI. And after the election, a lot of that started to come out. We started to see that that Steele dossier may have been funded by some nefarious. Actors may have been pushed, pushed over to the FBI so that they could get a FISA warrant so that they can go start spying on the Trump campaign, even though all of that evidence, the foundation upon which that Feisal warrant was executed was all sort of lacking in foundation. So in 2018, the OIG went out, did this very deep dive investigation and they put out a, I think it was a 500 page. I mean a really big report. And there was one little blurb in there that they needed to expand upon. So they took that out. They did a deeper dive on that one segment. And now two years later, we've got some information about it. So let's see what's going on here. It says the DOJ and the office of the inspector general. So the department of justice under which the FBI, it sits, started this investigation when they got records from the FBI insider threat units alleging that then senior FBI official. So there's an insider threat unit within the FBI. They report, they say, Hey, we've got somebody who's a senior FBI official who is talking to the media, had numerous contacts with members of the media, between January and November, 2016 in violation of FBI policy. Was there anything interesting happening between January and November of 2016? Uh, yeah, it was the entire election, right? Donald Trump was running in full steam. Hillary Clinton was running in full steam. We know that there a lot of conversations taking place between the FBI as well, and many other people who were investigating the Trump campaign. And now this inquiry is focusing on just that specific timeline January to November. This matter is among the other OIG investigations that are referenced on page 430 of the 2018 report. Okay. So you're seeing, they're referencing us back over to this 2018 report, which looks like this very big document published June, 2018. Right? So just coming up on the midterms during the Trump administration, and I'm not sure if you saw this, right. I didn't really spend any time on this because I wasn't on YouTube doing this stuff at that time. But it says a review of the various actions by the FBI. Very, very big document. We're not going to read it all. Of course, it's over 500 pages, but if you recall, they refer us over to page four 30, right here. They say, go check that page out because this is a continuation of that. So we'll get some background. What section are we in? This is page 4 28. It says that the allegations are that the department and FBI employees, improperly disclosed non-public information. And I know, look, I know when I start reading through some of this stuff that it probably can get a little bit boring, but there's some very strong language in here. And this is not like, you know, 40 years ago, this is three years ago. Many people who are a part of this are still at the FBI. And I hear a lot of people constantly say, well, it's just a leadership class at the FBI. That's a big problem. It's not the rank and file. Right? A lot of people on the right say this specifically. It's not everybody. It's just the people on the top. Like James Comey. Well, James, Comey's not there anymore. So, uh, we still have some problems with the FBI. Don't we? And you're going to notice as we go through this language, this is not a small isolated problem. So let's get back to the report. It says among the issues we reviewed were allegations that the department and FBI employees, improperly disclosed non-public information. Okay. Leaking information. We found the department and FBI raise considerable concerns about the leaks, particularly in October, 2016 regarding the mid-year investigation and the Clinton foundation investigation. Okay. Leaky all over the place or at least communicating things to certain people about those investigations. This doesn't necessarily mean that it's being made public. It just means that they're communicating it out, right? So in other words, you and I may not be getting this data, but the FBI is communicating it to other people inappropriately. One of which may be the Clinton foundation or the Clinton team against this backdrop, as noted at the time the OIG announced this review. We examined allegations that the, that the department and FBI employees improperly did that we focused in particular on April and may. And then October, 2016, we have profound concerns about the volume and the extent of unauthorized media contacts by FBI personnel. Okay. Pro okay. Not like slight concerns. Profound concerns about the collusion between the FBI and the media. Remember that word that they could not stop sputtering out of their mouth. Every two seconds, the FBI was colluding with the media. The office of the inspector general says we have profound concerns about the volume and the extent. So a lot of contact and some deep contact our ability now. So you might say, okay, well, who the hell was talking about the media? We've got to go find them and make sure that they get punished. OIG says, while we tried to do that, our ability to identify individuals who improperly disclosed is hampered two reasons. One, we frequently find that the universe of employees who have access to this stuff is substantial often involving dozens. In some instances, more than 100 people have access to that public or to that private information. They say, we recognize this as a challenge, but nevertheless, we think the FBI needs to consider if there's a better way to handle the dissemination of sensitive information. Second, the second reason, although the FBI policy strictly limits employees who are authorized to speak to the media, we found that this policy appeared to be widely ignored, right? Numerous FBI employees at levels with no official reason to contact the media were nevertheless in frequent contact with reporters, no reason to talk to the reporters, still doing it, large number of FBI agents who were in contact during this time impacted our ability to identify the source of the leaks. There were just too many of them doing it. Couldn't find it. We tried to identify this. We've got reports and the list goes on. And on too many people, we can't break it down. In addition to the significant number of communications between the FBI and journalists, we identified social interactions between FBI, employees and journalists that were at a minimum, let's say inconsistent with FBI policies. For example, in incidents instances where employees receive tickets to sporting events from the journalists, went golfing with media outings and media representatives were treated to drinks and meals. After work by reporters were the guests of journalists at non-public social events. We will separately report on these investigations as they are concluded consistent with our policy. They go on a couple of last slide from the 2018 report. Remember we're still in June, 2018. The OIG says the harm caused by the leaks, the fear of potential leaks and a culture of unauthorized media contacts is illustrated later. We detailed the fact that these issues influenced FBI officials who were advising director comi on consequential investigative decisions in October, 2016. Do you know what that means? That means that the reporters and the journalists were having an input and an impact on those FBI officials that then influence comi, right? It, this is not necessarily that this is being leaked one direction from the FBI back towards the journalist. It could also be that these, these officials, we don't know who they are. We're meeting with the journalists and getting information from them that they were then passing back up the chain to comi. And then comi was ultimately making charging decisions. In October two 16, relating to Hillary Clinton being charged member. She was not charged the FBI updated its media policy, restating its strict guidelines concerning media contacts and identifying everybody else. But they say, we do not believe the problem is with the FBI's policy. We found it to be clear and unambiguous actually pretty clear. Rather we concluded these leaks, highlight the need to change. What appears to be a cultural attitude. We recommend the FBI evaluate, educating its employees about the media contact policy, the ethics rules and its disciplinary penalties to deter such conduct. So that was in 2018. Do you think that that cultural attitude has changed or gotten better or gotten worse since 2018? Do you think that the FBI is more inclined to execute justice independently and fairly? Or do you think that maybe they are still as compromised as they were back in 2016 when they helped to not charge Hillary Clinton to make sure that she did not get that and to also continue to investigate Donald Trump think anything's changed? Probably not. Let's see what else this article says. So wrapping up here, the OIG, this is bringing us back now. So we're, we're, we're now back in July, 2021, the OIG investigated substan substantiated. The allegation that senior FBI officials had numerous unauthorized contact. So all of that appeared in 2018, I'm sorry, in the 2018 report. So they did a deeper dive on it. In addition to substantive communications with reporters, the media contact also included social engagement outside the FBI headquarters involving drinks, lunches, and dinners. They also violated federal regulations when the FBI official accepted tickets for members of the media to, to black tie dinner events, 2 25 and$300 at one end or the other senior FBI official retired from the FBI prior to being contacted for an interview. When later contacted for a voluntary interview, he declined. Isn't that nice? Oh, I G has the authority to compel testimony upon informing them that their statements will not be used against them, but the OIG does not have authority to compel testimony from former deploy employees, including those who retire or resign during the course of the investigation. So this guy or woman does a bunch of inappropriate stuff, retires, OIG can't compel their testimony. Th that that was the, the remainder of the conversation here. O I G completed its investigation, and they're going to provide this report to the FBI for its information. Isn't that nice? So, Hey guys, Hey, we found you have a, a really bad culture in that you're doing a bunch of inappropriate stuff. Here's a big fat report over here. Maybe you can do something with this. They're probably going to take that along with the Rand Paul's charging recommendation for Dr. Fowchee, and just throw that right in the bathroom, along with the other toilet paper, because that's as much respect as they give it all. So let's take a look@somequestionscominginoverfromwatchingthewatchersdotlocals.com on this topic of the OIG report. Let's see what we've got here. We have a couple that came in. FBI has a lot of problems says the federal, the federal unemployment tax act is here. It says in the governor Whitmer kidnapping case, apparently the FBI needed 12 informants to infiltrate a group of six, and the informant were training the group of six. And furthering the plot with this count is entrapment. Hence they use an entrapment defense. Yeah. So certainly if you're a defense attorney, you're considering that as, as an option, we covered this case some time ago and when we did cover it, we went through the report and we were reading through the affidavit. And I remember reading that there were some, uh, certainly some undercuts. There were some, there were some people that were not properly identified in there, but it didn't seem like it was that number, right, like 12 and six. But as more of this comes out, it's, it's, it's sounding like that there may have been other informants or other undercover agents that never made it into the documents. So it w you know, what made it into the documents where there were, let's say, you know, just by way of example, let's say there were 10 threats. Three of the 10 were undercover agents. That's what the reports look like. But if it really wasn't the case, they only talked about 10 people in the report, but there were actually about 20 people who are involved. And about 13 of those people were undercover. Agents will that tips the scale right now, the majority of the people who were involved in this are not of this, you know, militia or whatever they were calling themselves. It was really more of the FBI. And if the FBI was predominantly responsible for the commission of the offense, and if you recall, we went through this frame by frame and I even went through and I said, Nope, that's not criminal. Not criminal, not criminal, not criminal, because it's not a conspiracy. It's not an act in furtherance of, of anything to just sit around and talk about it. But the moment they got in the car and drove by her house, did art start doing surveillance? I started to say, okay, now we're talking about a volitional act that moves that ball forward. But if that volitional act was induced by the FBI agents, in other words, if they would not have done that thing, but for the influence of the FBI, well, then I think that certainly fits within the entrapment defense, but there's a lot more analysis that needs to be done there. We have missiles. Lucky says, Sergeant Bob is here. We've got Sergeant Bob's in the house. Good to see you. Sergeant says, oh, I read a book a long time ago, J Edgar well-documented on Hoover's control. He had so much dirt on politicians. They would not ever criticize or remove him for a time. He partied with mafioso and denied the mafia exists. Thus, a culture began worth a read. If you can get it J Edgar didn't they make a movie about that. I never saw that, but J Edgar. Yeah. J Edgar Hoover, the Hoover FBI building. Right. I, I was, I visited there as a boy when I went to DC with my mom as a child. And I remember being just fascinated by it, but we went through a, did a little tore down there at the FBI building. Very, very interesting. We've also talked about on this channel. I think whoever was in charge when they framed those four guys for the murder of, uh, I, it was the checks. There was a check. I can't remember the specifics there, but yeah, they framed for people for murder in the 1950s and sixties. This is not a new thing. Right? Secretive intelligence agencies that are part of your government that sort of have an unbridled power and can get away with anything, not a good thing. Right. We need to have some serious checks on those, uh, on those institutions. Uh, another no-name is here, says, how does the FBI operate correctly? When it looks, when it looks like DC looks like a ghost town? Well, I don't know. Yeah. I mean that, they're probably going to be just on Twitter and social media, looking for the insurrectionist thunder seven says this confirms what Trump has always said. The FBI and the media worked in collusion to discredit Trump. The FBI are totally corrupt and probably can't be reformed. Yeah. If it's a cultural thing, really hard to change that. Right. Really hard to take a ship and just adjust it, re change direction on a, on an entity, as big as the FBI, but we'll see random grab Graham is here. Good to see random Graham. All right, let's see. We've got good evening, Rob. I'm wondering, in regards to the FBI and the other three letter agencies, is there any chance, or even a possibility that the American people can hope to reduce the size of our federal government and bring back the power to the state and local governments? To me, it seems, this is why the entire DC machine media was so against Trump because he called out both the left and the right for their incompetence. Also, if you want to watch a good documentary check out Robert Barnes, half hour special on Robert Mueller, the deep state, very informative in regards to the current state of affairs of the FBI and how it impacts our current system of how laws are carried out. That's from random Graham. Thank you for that random grant. Very well put together paragraph and comment. So, uh, absolutely big shout out to Robert Barnes. He does these hush hush segments over on his channel@avivabarneslawdotlocals.com, which is a sister community to us way bigger, but we're the little, little, little, uh, sibling kind of, uh, you know, uh, annoying everybody, but they've got a big community over there, a lot of activity. And he does these segments called hush hush, where he sort of dives into some history topics. And, you know, it goes into some of those things that, that people might call conspiratorial. I don't, I just think it calls is if it means that you're asking appropriate questions. I was, I just got my hair cut if you notice, but I was having a conversation with miss Amanda over there. And, uh, we were, we were sort of asking ourselves, why, why are the conspiracy theories, conspiracy, theorists? Why is that word sort of used as pejorative now? Right. There's a lot, I, I sort of take issue. I think the person is the person who's more weird is the person who just believes everything. The government says, you know, that person, everything they say, oh yeah, obviously clearly, yeah, we got to just do that. Whatever they say, that's a little bit more weird to me than somebody who says, well, I don't really trust that. And maybe this might be an alternative explanation. And you know, that that was not always the case I think, in our society. And it's, it's slowly changing that way. And so I think, you know, we, we, we see this, I talk a lot about the pendulum swinging other directions, but you're starting to see some, some shifts in this country, right? A lot of people are leaving. The cities, people are moving into rural locations. People want to get out of the cities because they realize kind of how, how bad it was when, when things locked down, you know, no toilet paper, people are scrambling, food shelves are getting cleared up. And so people kind of just want to remove themselves from that. And I think that when you start to see some more, uh, demographic shifts, you will see some more local governance. And, you know, I'm starting to think that that might be my long-term plan, you know, 20 years down the road is to sort of see what I can do to, you know, unplug as much as possible from the burdensome parts of the system. And if, look, if the government keeps spending the way that it does and society continues to sort of, you know, balloon at the seams in terms of the responsibilities that the government tries to manage on a regular basis. I think it's going to start to collapse upon the weight of itself, right? People are losing faith in the government regularly, already buildings are falling down. They can't control fires. Water's running out all over the place. People can't keep the electricity on. They can't secure their own headquarters in Washington, DC. FBI is failing across the board. Internet's being hacked all over the place. We have a demented president in the white house. The systems are just sort of crumbling. The infrastructure is literally crumbling and the institutions are crumbling and that's a sad thing. And that doesn't mean that it's without an opportunity to repair and restore those. But sometimes they got, they got a crumble a little bit so that they can be rebuilt better. I talked not built back better, but I'd say rebuilt, right? He built with a more fundamental understanding of where this country, you know, originated from because there's a lot of entitlement. There's a lot of, you know, bubble wrap that our government likes to wrap around everybody and say, we're going to protect you. And the question is, is that the proper scope of government is that the proper size of government? And I think the answer is no, unfortunately in order to convince people of that, sometimes you just have to let certain things run their course. And I think we're well on that road. So, you know, random gram, my, my, my thought process on this right, is to, is to continue to develop your, your personal philosophy for living and then doing things that will help you reach those, those goals or, or, or reach the ends that, that those values will lead you to. Right? So, so like for me, right, one of my fundamental operating values is freedom. Think about that all the time. I feel like I'm being trapped. I am a less effective as a person, as a lawyer, as somebody here who spends time with you and the list goes on and on. So I like to do things that are going to contribute to my freedom. And that means a lot of things, right? That means all sorts of, you know, physical, financial things. That means mental things. That means certain relationships with different people. That means understanding my, my relationship in the context of the federal government. And so, you know, this is sort of getting out there a little bit, but my point is, you know, as all of this stuff is happening around us, that doesn't mean that even though these institutions are crumbling, that that doesn't mean that our lives are also okay. We are not the government, our lives are not the government. We are not what we see in Washington. Okay. We have our own lives, our own identities, our own communities. They like to connect us to them, but we are not them. So we can build our own lives that are better and separate. And apart from a lot of the bureaucracy and a lot of the maintenance that that is is required by the federal government. And I think that there are a lot of solutions that are well underway right now in terms of decentralized projects like cryptography, crypto, uh, that, you know, you know, new markets and new communities on the internet, a lot of things are happening. Let's see, we have[inaudible] is here, says Jack pus. Sobek posted their text messages on Twitter today. Oh, the FBI text messages. Oh, that's good. I wonder if it was the lovers were, were these new text messages or old text messages and hyper Patriot is here. It says, I realized over the last two years, yes. I'm late to the party that the federal government is not the American people's friend. It's not, it's not at all. No, no, it's not. He says abolish the FBI. Yeah. Um, I'd be okay with that. What do they do? They can't really do much of any is every day, like really an episode of 24 with Jack Bauer, you know, FBI agents like Jack Bauer saving America. I doubt it. Maybe. I don't know. All right. All right. Great questions. All of those from watching the watchers.locals.com. All right, we're going to move on our final segment of the day. We talk a lot of doom and gloom on this channel, but every now and then there was some amazing, incredible news. Today is one of those days. A judge exonerates, a man who served 20 years in prison for Georgia slayings, 1985 slayings happen in a Georgia church. And this guy spent two decades behind bars. Didn't do it, never committed a crime 20 years in prison, come and gone. And he's out. Now. I want to go through this story briefly and tell you what's happening here. And at big, big, big fat shout out to the Georgia innocence project. Congratulations to your organization. Just moments ago, they posted on Twitter, a Brunswick judicial circuit. Judge, Steven Scarlet signed an order fully exonerating. This guy, his name is Dennis Perry of the 1985 church murders of Harold and Thelma Swain. His exoneration as a result of the Georgia innocence, project king and Spalding. And you big, big, big, big news. Very good stuff there. Great. A write-up on this over in the Atlanta journal constitution. It's entitled. Perfect alibi. So if you throw that into Google, you're going to see a lot of good stuff where they go through this. And I want to show you some of the, the clippings that are in here. So here you'll see a clipping from the actual day on Wednesday, March 13th, 1985, where the newspaper wrote about this as the slangs of the church shock Camden, the deacon and the wife are gunned down by an intruder. During a meeting, he was a, uh, respected, retired pulp ward worker and deacon in the church. She was a devoted wife. Why, why would a long haired man in his twenties? Why are you go in church and interrupt them? Shoot down the couple. It's a mystery. That's plaguing Camden, Harold Swain, 66, 62 year old wife, Thelma shot, dead witnesses set a slender white man in his twenties with shoulder length, blonde hair entered the church, pointed out Swain and the other two in the sanctuary. And just to see them, another witness there said the stranger and the vestibule walked her to her car, told the police, heard four shots, rapid succession. And we go through the rest of the story. Swain died of small caliber shotgun, a shot gun wounds to the head. A church member had to drive to a nearby residence. Smith said the, uh, third, uh, the authorities thought that the motive was robbery described them as an exemplary couple, and the list goes on and on. Right? So a terrible tragedy happens back in March of 19 85, 2 beautiful people shot and killed pastor's husband, wife in a church, rising daughter, Baptist church shot and killed. And the witness who was there said that it was a long hair, blondish white person, right? And they actually did some photographic sketches of this. And here's what we had developed. This came over from once again, the Atlanta journal constitution, something that you'll see pretty regularly, right? Somebody draws a guy, goes to a sketch artist and flesh out a couple different skins watches. And what do we get? We get a guy that looks just like this, and it looks pretty, uh, resembles what we heard from the witnesses. Doesn't it, a white guy, some blonde hair going on. And then once that's sort of implanted in the law enforcement agents minds, they start looking for that. Don't they? And then they come across this young man here he is Dennis Perry circa 1979 from a family photo, right? A white guy, lengthy, like they said with long hair. Now this is not necessarily blonde hair, but you can see where they're going with this. And so you take a look at this guy. We take a look at this guy. It's pretty close. Isn't it? Well, good news is that a Glen county superior court judge granted a motion to dismiss the case. Scarlet last gig last year gave Perry the chance for a new trial after DNA recovered from the crime scene, matched a different suspect. During the reinvestigation of the case, he also ordered Perry's released from prison while prosecutors decided whether to refile charges, which is perfect. We're going to talk about that here in a minute. It says there are times when seeking justice means writing a wrong while this case was prosecuted. Prior to my administration, the new evidence indicated that someone else murdered Harold and Swain Perry maintained his innocence, said that he knew that eventually someone would see the truth. This indictment has been hanging over my head for 20 years. He said such a relief. The were killed inside the church. Perry was convicted in 2003, largely on the testimony of his ex-girlfriend's mother ex-girlfriend's mother sent this man to prison for 20 years, who said, Perry had told her he planned to kill Harold Swain. So what's going to happen to her, right? If she's still around any repercussions for her, the state didn't disclose to the defense that the woman was paid$12,000 in reward money for her testimony. The state didn't tell the defense that the ex-girlfriend's mother of Dennis Perry was paid 12 grand in 2003 to testify reward money. So what happened? This fake testimony came in Perry received two consecutive life sentences in prison. Two consecutive life sentences. New DNA evidence has cast suspicion on another. Man. Authorities were led to that suspect. After reporting by the Atlanta journal constitution found his alibi was fabricated. Did you see that the Atlanta journal constitution investigated another suspect and found his alibi was garbage. The Georgia law enforcement officials took his word for it. And they apparently gave another woman 12 grand to come in and testify about this guy. And he got two consecutive life sentences. We are thrilled. The Dennis and his family can now begin. The long process of recovery said, Jennifer Whitfield an attorney from the Georgia innocence project. It takes so little to convict. And yet there's so much to undo a wrongful conviction 20 years for something you didn't do. I didn't do it 20 or, oh, we think you did 20 years lying witness in competent prosecutors or malevolent prosecutors. I don't know. Here he is. He's out. He's going to have a statement for us. Let's listen in. See what Mr. Dennis has to say. I just want

Speaker 5: 1:07:09

To thank everybody that was involved in the, in the case. I just want to thank king and Spalding, uh, the innocence project, the Georgia innocence project, Jessica Keith Higgins, all of them for looking at my case and finding the truth in there, looking for the facts and to reopen the case back up and to follow it, just to see that I was innocent. And I was just wanting to thank all of them for that today.

Speaker 1: 1:07:39

So yeah, I mean, you know, prison prison will, will change a person, you know, very, very, very significantly 20 years. Uh, probably a good portion of his life has been in there, man. It's just, it's just, it's something. Okay. Well, his, uh, his attorney gave us a little bit of a statement as well. See what she has to say is this the end of things for Mr. Perry? Are there going to be some repercussions? What happens when you put somebody in prison when you steal 20 years of their life? Is he going to get an apology? You just, from the prosecutors that they're going to decide whether or not to file charges again, I guess not right. Cause his DNA wasn't there and he didn't do it. So now he's exonerated, he's out, let's see his, his, uh, his, his attorney done, she quite done. Let's see.

Speaker 6: 1:08:30

Um, and obviously, uh, how does it feel as well after coming anther courthouse today?

Speaker 7: 1:08:34

Well, um, you know, we're very privileged to represent Dennis, um, and to have been able to play a role in helping Dennis win back his freedom. Um, you know, this is the end of Dennis's legal battle with respect to his indictment, but, um, we know it certainly isn't the end of the burden, um, that he has carried in and the wrongful, um, prosecution of him. Um, he spent 20 years in prison. Mr. Perry was in present for 20 years for crimes that he did not commit, um, as a result of, uh, prosecutorial misconduct. Um, and you know, it took a Herculean efforts, new DNA evidence and adjust and fair judge, like judge Scarlet to look at the evidence and finally do what, um, what Jackie Johnson and the prior, uh, DA's office refused to do, which was to, uh, recognize that, um, Mr. Perry is innocent of these crimes. And so today is, uh, is a great day. Um, and we're celebrating with Dennis, um, that, um, the world finally knows what, um, has been obvious to us for so long, which is that Dennis is innocent.

Speaker 1: 1:09:47

All right. So, uh, I believe that was Jennifer Whitfield over from the justice project at Georgia innocence project and, uh, kudos to her major victory. There also let me translate what she's saying there, she's very diplomatic about that and I appreciate it, but what she said there was, uh, we're going to Sue the ever living pants off of everybody, the entire state, you're all getting lawsuits, so just get ready for it. Uh, and, and she's absolutely right. You hear her say in their prosecutorial misconduct, right. That, that was the government had an affirmative duty to prosecute the case properly and they didn't do that. So she was using that phrase. She also said an abuse of discretion, right? Maybe a lot of this evidence was brought to these prosecutors and said, listen, this alibi is garbage. This other guy didn't do it. You know? And so on and so forth. And a prosecutor looked at it and said, yeah, he did. I'm not reading that. I've already looked at this stuff with that smug egocentric face that they always have. You know, that basically we've seen this a million times, take it or leave it. And, um, well now they're going to have to pay the consequences for it. And so we'll see what that number looks like. But hopefully it is a significant one as it should be. My question of course is always well, what happens to the woman who was paid$12,000 to make up some nonsense? What happens to the prosecutors? You know why, so the prosecutors are going to be fine. They're all going to be protected by qualified immunity. There's not going to be any repercussions personal for them or criminal for them. They are probably not even practicing law anymore. It's been 20 years. So they're probably retired, you know, off riding into the sunset. So who cares if they lose their law license or anything like that, they're not going to have to pay a fine, they're not going to go to jail. And meanwhile, they were involved in a situation negligently, very likely something that was an abusive discretion, something that was prosecutorial misconduct that resulted in another man going and losing 20 years of his life and his family losing 20 years of their lives because their loved one was out of custody. So it's reprehensible conduct. I wanted to make sure we called it out here. Congratulations to the Georgia innocent project. Congratulations to Dennis Perry. And it's very, very good news. Let's jump in and see what's going on over in the chats, uh, over on YouTube. I see, let's see, um, ladies August says, Robert knows, well, how the da review their case tort reform, but won't hear it comes from playing hockey. We have Zorro says by the standards of Mike Nifong prosecutor, prosecutorial misconduct, 20 years in jail, the prosecutor should get 18 to 12 hours of jail. Yes. See, okay. We've got some K beans over there on YouTube. I'm just giving shout outs over there, over on, uh, watching the watchers.locals.com. We're going to check some form questions that came in and I just clicked the wrong button. Sorry about that. Want to know? Is there, we got Relic hunter RQ Ariens joined us. No doubts in the house. We also have three girlies. Good to see all of you. Let's take a look at some of the questions that just came in on the forums. If there are any, yeah, we've got a handful of them. Let's see, we got Dennis Perry, Exxon Sharon says, I'm really glad to hear about the exoneration of Dennis Perry, but how will he get those 20 years of his life back? He won't. He absolutely won't. Those are gone. Those were taken from him. Those were stolen from him by our government. So he's going to get some monetary compensation. Surely would you take, how much, how much would you take 20 years for how much money would somebody have to pay you for 20 years of your life? Anything, is there a number somebody came in in my office and said, Rob, I'd get, uh, I'll give you a hundred billion dollars. You got to give me 20 years. I'd say I don't, I don't want that. No, I don't know. I don't want that or need that. Right? Because there's nothing as important as your time. Then what happened here? It was from him. Reprehensible LT. 13 says the FBI agent and the informant in the Whitmer case text message where the agent tells the informant. I have a few goals for, for today and then proceeds to tell him who to invite. Wow. Okay. So those are, those are juicy, spicy meatballs. I'm going to take a look at those. Uh, if I was on the jury, hard to believe and an ex wife's mother, there's an impartial witness. Yeah. Right on cross examination. How do you as a D as a defendant, lawyer, not eviscerate that you just go to the jury and say, listen, this is his ex-girlfriend's mother. Anything else you need to know on this witness? Not credible. Get her out of there. Uh, probably didn't work though. Obviously three girly says I see a big fat lawsuit leading to a very big fat paycheck in Perry's no question about that. And his attorney was, uh, was pretty, was pretty, uh, you know, kind of diplomatic about it, but they're going to get a nice payday. We have COVID queen oh, four, three says, can we make this a regular thing, a happy moment to counter some of the sad I was thinking about that. Maybe we'll just have like a little, a little, uh, you know, some good news more often. I'm not sure if I'll do it every day, but there should be some good news. There's a lot of doom and gloom out there. It's a great, it's a great suggestion. Cool queen. I appreciate that. Now Darvas here says what if judges and the others involved in the false imprisonment had to serve the same amount of time that the innocent had to serve. That might change a little bit of their behavior, right? If they're going to penalize somebody I've said this about the, you know, the false accusations for rape too, right? What if, what if, what if a person says that I was raped and that person loses everything and they go to prison for 10 years and it turns out that never happened. Well, what happened to that other person? The response to this argument is that that would chill speech that would, this argument has been made before many times, but it is the idea that if you, if you create some penalties for reporters, then people will just won't report anymore. Don't know if that's true or not, but I think it's a good, it's a Mo it feels, it feels good, but I don't know how that would work in practice. Thunder seven says, hi, Rob, next time the woke Dems talk about racist. America. Just point out this case, along with so many white men convicted of crimes, they never committed in Canada. There's a famous case of David Milgard who served something like 20 years like this poor guy and, and Paul Morin was convicted all exonerated by DNA evidence. It's fantastic that they were all released, but how many people that are innocent you actually think are in prison. It's a scary thought, and it's a scary number, but I think it's a lot more than anybody would let on. It is a, uh, it, it is a scary system. And, and you know, I, I don't even necessarily think about it in those terms. I think about how many people are in prison for nonviolence. Non-dangerous basically victimless crimes. That number is very high. If you look at the prison data, my friends, it's insane here. We have the highest number of people in prison per capita, right? So we have more people in prison, like more physical number of human bodies in prison than China does. Right? And they have 1.3 billion people. We have 370 million. They've got a significantly more amount of people and they have a less, less, a smaller total volume of people in prison. That's our problem, not theirs. Okay. It's we live in a, in a prison happy society and it's too bad. And why renal MD, the doctors in the house says, given the fact that the innocence project has evidence, it's less likely to be him and the prosecutorial misconduct. Wouldn't another filing by the prosecutor problematic. And couldn't it be negative for them? Could they use a promise, not to prosecute, to get an agreement from this poor guy, not to Sue the government. So they're, uh, they, they could try to do that, but he would never do that. Right. He would never agree to that. He is going to Sue them and he absolutely should. And he should Sue them for a lot and they should all pay for it for what they had done done to this man. All right, next up, we've got speech on leash and I saw Superchat come in from Chris Walden. You were going to get there. Also, thank you for that. Chris. We've got speech unleashed says, this is exactly what scares me about the legal system. It seems like a lot like a game of egos and who is the better lawyer, big egos, oh my gosh, massive egos. And you can get into situations like this, right? This is why I've never been one of those lawyers that is always like a scorched earth. There are scorched earth attorneys out there that they want that brand, right. They want to be that person that goes out there files every single motion and clause over every period and, and, you know, battles it out over everything. And it's a strategy. It's fine. That's sort of on one end of the spectrum, there's also lawyers on the other end of the spectrum who just roll over for everything, right? They didn't ever fight. They never take cases to trial. They just sort of never file substantive motions or do anything that really is, uh, you know, combative in a court of law because they're trying to sort of get by, on their charm and their charisma and their smooth talking and all of that stuff. But that, you know, that is also I think, not an effective strategy. And so I think there's a, there's a, a better framework for being an attorney. And it's somewhere in the middle, somewhere where you find comfort, you know, turning it up into kind of psycho mode, where to file motions. And we're going to go nuclear when it's appropriate. But I know lawyers, that's just their standard setting. Every morning, they wake up, they just want to go destroy somebody, which, which, which can be very effective in certain cases. But it can brand that lawyer as a, as an a-hole. Right. And then, and then you start to get into these games of egos where it might actually harm your client. I think more than it helps because you're dealing with a prosecutor, who's going to start off giving you a bad deal because they think you're an unreasonable lawyer. Conversely, you can have lawyers who look like they're pushovers, where they never get good plea deals or anything like that because they know the prosecutors know that this attorneys, you can just steam roll right over them. So it's a, I think it's kind of an interesting, it's a very interesting field. This is why they call it practicing law. It takes a lot of work a lot of years to find that that frequency Sharon Quinny is here, says lawsuit, Ooh, you got a lying witness. Prosecutorial misconduct. Hope he gets a trainload for those last 20 years. Yeah. So do I, all right. We had a super chat come in from Chris. Wolney let me see if I can pull that up over here. We've got, Chris is here, says if the real criminal who got away victimize more people, the former prosecutor and officials should be prosecuted as accessories to those crimes. Yeah. Yeah. Interesting. That's a good comment there over from quiz, Chris Wolney uh, of course that would never happen, right? That's not, it's not going to be anything. Those prosecutors are going to be completely protected by qualified immunity. And I don't think anything comes of it. Ms. Lucky is here with Sergeant Bob is in the house as I'd like complete info on the role of DNA. I support appreciate your part in seeking justice in competent investigation must be questioned. This is from a Sergeant in the house. My friends, we have a Sergeant here, K a liaison to law enforcement is here in saying, Hey, I support in competent investigation being questioned, which just makes sense. So do I, Sergeant Bob and Ms. Lucky, thank you both. I hope to see you on Saturday. We're we're doing our monthly zoom meetup, which we're going to talk about here in a minute. We also have three girls in the house as I really wish he could file civil lawsuits against the detectives personally, and the ex-girlfriend mom. There is nothing that will give him his life back. Yeah, you're right. I agree with you. I think there should be repercussions if they're going to it, it, yeah. It's almost like murdering a person just differently for sex. 74 is aircraft mech. 1, 2, 3 says while this was the happy segment of the show, is it really? Or is this just another example of our system failing? It's true. It's kind of both. It kind of depends if you're a, if you're going to be a glass half full kind of guy on this topic. Right. And I TA I typically tend to be optimistic. This is, this is certainly horror. I'm not saying that you're not an optimist aircraft Mack. I, I understand that you're, you're joking. This is a good news because this guy got out of custody, but it is horrible news that he was in custody. So it's sort of like bittersweet. It's like, oh great. He got out of 20 years of prison. Why was he there in the first place? That's like a horrendous, it's a horrendous fact that, that, that exists. So I totally appreciate what you're saying. Aircraft Mac. Uh, yeah, it is. Yeah. It's a, it's a, it's a horrible bull symbol of a failed system, but it's so he's out of custody. So, so celebrate it. Uh, oh my gosh. It, it actually, it makes me emotional man. These stories, it makes me emotional because I just man, you know, 20 years, alright, we have LT. 13 says Joe Rogan had the innocence project lawyer on twice and they decided he would come on quarterly to highlight cases. I wrote this earlier. Oh yes. So thank you, LT for re, for re hitting that I go in order. And so if you ask a segment from a later, if I could ask a question from a later segment early, I'm going to probably miss it and forget to go back to it. So thank you for re for resubmitting that I think I listened to that the last time he was on and that guy was excellent. I love the idea that there are more people having these conversations because this is something that we can deal with as a society. Right now, we have full control of our justice system. We can just pass some laws, get some, get some momentum and really reform the system. There are other things that there are a lot of debates about like the Corona virus and how do we deal with that? And what's proper, you know, it's a new thing. Our justice system has been around for a while. I think we can make some serious changes, but that's not going to happen under the current administration. We already know that they have already made successfully the flip-flop for being, from being pro justice reform to now being pro-police. Did you see how they did that? It was very impressive. I mean, I'm impressed. They did a good job of just sort of, oh yeah, no, no. BLM is all about, you know, defunding the police and we're just going to slowly sort of up just kind of move you over here. And now all of the BLM ERs are like, well, we support the police now. So, um, fund them up. You have Jen Saki out in the white house saying the Republicans defunded the police, not us. It's wild, wild times. We're living in very impressive. We have be brave says, are you saying that China's social credit scoring system is keeping more people in line and out of prison? I don't, I don't think I said that. Maybe I did. I don't believe that if I said that, uh, if I don't, if I, if I implied that I'm not really into a Chinese social credit scoring system in any way, shape or form, uh, I think I'm missing a joke or something. It's good to see you be brave. I apologize for botching, whatever, whatever, whatever I just did there, I'm not gas as Mr. Griller. I'd like to posit a question. If it pleases the court, should Dr. Pepper hold a license. If Mr. PIB can adequately do the same job as a layman. Well, this sounds like a case of sort of mistaken identity identity is always a very critical component to any criminal case. We often have identity hearings just to confirm that the government says you are who you are. So should Dr. Pepper hold a license if, uh, I'm not sure this is, uh, this is really a criminal legal question. Well, you know, Mr. Look, I look, I'm not a big Dr. Pepper guy in general. I have to just acknowledge that. So I'm having a little difficulty with this question. If I had to pick a Coca-Cola beverage, it would be Coca-Cola. In fact, this is a great question that I've heard of many times. What do you call it? Coke, pop or soda. I would love to see what the chat has to say about that. A Coke pop or soda. I am a Coke person. I call all the bubbly drinks, Coke. That's just how I was raised. But I think it's different in different parts of the country. Different areas say Coke or soda or any of those other things. All right. So a couple of other questions we've got, uh, so and so over on YouTube. Oh, so we got soda pop speech on leash says pop wise, one says soda Coke soda from Joe Snow. No doubt says Coke. We have Coke. Pop soda Coke. Dr. P soda tap cocaine. Absolutely not. Coke says crystal Owen. So absolutely not on that one. Soda pop says Clint boroughs. We have fresco that is from alt knack. A lot of soda doctor poop. Is there soda Coke, Coke, uh, it's cocaine, soda, soda Cola Cola is a good one. Pop over there. We've got, uh, not Coca-Cola soda soda. I'm from Pittsburgh. A lot of people say, pop pop, oh, sock says beer. It's just beer. It's all the same thing. It's all beer. And, uh, there you go. I think that that kind of lumps it all into, into a bunch of other stuff. We have somebody asking me my opinion on an Arizona revised statutes. I need to know more about, about that. My opinion on the statute is, is probably that I'm not happy about it. If it's charging you with a crime, I'm probably not happy about it. All right. We got, I think we got one more, two more questions over from the form. Let's see. LT 13 says that was also the lawyer that blasted law for extending sentences for work and for holding evidence. That's right. LT 30. And I remember that. That was a very good interview. Yeah. He, he skewered her as she deserves it because she was the member. Kamala Harris was making fun of people in prison saying that they're begging for food. There's oh, water and food. Thank you. Poking fun at people in there at ridiculous. N Y renal MD says, notice how the press has finally allowed the Biden administration to flip-flop on COVID-19 vaccines, police reform and sentence reform. Yeah, totally. Total flip-flops finally, Dr. Pepper is prune soda, which seems criminal on its face. I agree with you. I don't even know what it is. I, you know, Dr. Pepper. Okay. All right. I guess it's a thing. So, all right. Great questions. Thank you. All of those. We got one more coming in hot. I'm not gas as it's popped in the Midwest soda in the east Coke in the west and Cola. If you're a Patricia, so good. All right. Well, I'm learning things. So it's soda in the east Coke in the west. I'm in the west. So that's why we get, that's why we get Coke. Oh, that's funny. Somebody says fresco. That sounds bougie. Yeah. So we'll just, we'll all upgrade our, our drink. Excuse me, sir. I'd like a fresco please. Wow. A fresco honey, that guy just ordered a fresco. He must be very famous. Well, it's like that. Seinfeld where they're, uh, eating there. They're Snickers bars with a fork and knife. It's bougie as hell. Give me a fresco and a Snickers bar with a fork and knife. Okay. So those were great questions. All of those from watching the watchers.locals.com, we had some great super chats as well that came in. Let's see. And we had Chris Wally, we caught that one. And so thank you for that. I'm going to, I'm going to work on the formats with the super chats and we'll see if I can get those to look a little bit better, but it's baby steps. You can see what's going on in the office. I'm just moving stuff around and I'm going to patch that wall up. You see, I got some paints over here and some, uh, some spackle, I've got some other, some other, uh, you know, disposable paint kits over there. So I'm going to patch that whole sucker up. And we're going to get this thing humming again, back in full order. I'm a little bit embarrassed. Kind of like when that person shows up at your house, you're like, gosh, I'm so embarrassed. I haven't, I haven't cleaned up. So it kind of feels like that, but we're, we're all here. And I appreciate you, uh, uh, uh, having fun with me as we're, we're evolving on the show. And so those were all the questions for the day. My friends, I want to thank everybody who was a part of the show. Want to welcome some newcomers who came over last week? This was last. Week's welcome. This was this. Week's welcome. I'm going to be updating this for tomorrow. So if you don't see your name on here and you signed up last week, uh, you know, you'll see your name it's coming. I just forgot to update. The slide is really what it came down to. But shout outs to George clouds, Trump Trump, Trump went 1, 3, 1 7 3 6, shout outs to be a girl 74 Shelby Berenger Zau. AI is here, aircraft mech 1, 2, 3, very active today. Good to see you, Tim Flynn, we've got, uh, engineered 12 volt, blue tiger dog. Siskey H rad, super ironed, Bob and CBD rail. Number one, all for the yearlys. Thank you to all who signed up and watching the watchers.locals.com five bucks a month or 50 bucks for the year. If you want to join in on the fund, we have our monthly locals zoom meetup coming up on July 24th, this Saturday 7:00 PM Eastern time, uh, which is going to be a lot of fun. So I'm going to post the registration link probably tomorrow. Uh, if you're already registered, you should get the reminders. And I really hope to see you, you there, if you want to sign up, it's a lot of fond. Camera's on, camera's off. We're just going to do a quick hour Q and a, and you know, I'm open to the feedback, comments, criticisms. If you have any thoughts or ideas for the show, if you have any suggestions for topics to cover, uh, that's kind of what this is for. It's just kind of get to hang out and, um, you know, put names to faces and kind of build a case community that we talk about. So we, uh, uh, let's see, we got another super chat that came in just from Curtis Bartel says, let's see where that one is. Why is that not showing up Curtis Bartel with the Superchat says just because we all love you, dude. I love you back, Curtis. Very much appreciate that. And, uh, I'm grateful that we're having there. It is. I'm grateful that we're having that. Some of this is working again so that we can have a little bit more interactivity on the show. It's kind of more fun, right? Look at that. Look at that. The police sirens are here. It's fun. All right. So I, uh, uh, that's all for me, my friends. I want to thank you so much for being a part of the program today. Quick reminder, we're going to be back here doing the same thing at the same time. Hopefully I see you as well. 4:00 PM Arizona time, 5:00 PM, mountain 6:00 PM. Central 7:00 PM on the east coast. And for that one, Florida, man, everybody else have a tremendous evening sleep well. So you're right back here tomorrow. Bye-bye.