Speaker 1: All right, guys, we are coming to you with some
Speaker 1: major breaking news. Once again, former President Trump has been indicted.
Speaker 1: This time, the charges have to do with January sixth
Speaker 1: and fake elector's scheme. Special counsel Jack Smith announced the
Speaker 1: charges in a press conference earlier.
Speaker 2: Let's take a liston.
Speaker 3: Today, an indictment was unsealed, charging Donald J. Trump with
Speaker 3: conspiring to defraud the United States, conspiring to disenfranchise voters,
Speaker 3: and conspiring and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding. The
Speaker 3: indictment was issued by a grandeury of citizens here in
Speaker 3: the District of Columbia, and it sets forth the crimes
Speaker 3: charged in detail. I encourage everyone to read it in full.
Speaker 3: The attack on our nation's capital on January sixth, twenty
Speaker 3: twenty one, was an unprecedented assault on the seat of
Speaker 3: American democracy. It's described in the indictment. It was fueled
Speaker 3: by lies, lies by the defendant targeted at obstructing a
Speaker 3: bedrock function of the US government, the nation's process of collecting, counting,
Speaker 3: and certifying the results of the presidential election. The men
Speaker 3: and women of law enforcement who defended the US capital
Speaker 3: on January sixth are heroes. They are patriots, and they
Speaker 3: are the very best of us. They did not just
Speaker 3: defend a building or the people sheltering in it. They
Speaker 3: put their lives in the line to defend who we
Speaker 3: are as a country and as a people. They defended
Speaker 3: the very institutions and principles that define the United States.
Speaker 3: Since the attack on our capital, the Department of Justice
Speaker 3: has remained committed to ensuring accountability for those criminally responsible
Speaker 3: for what happened that day. This case has brought consistent
Speaker 3: with that commitment, investigation of other individuals continues. In this case,
Speaker 3: my office will seek a speedy trial so that our
Speaker 3: evidence can be tested in court and judged by a
Speaker 3: jury of citizens. In the meantime, I must emphasize that
Speaker 3: the indictment is only an allegation, and that the defendant
Speaker 3: must be presumed innocent until proving guilty beyond a reasonable
Speaker 3: doubt in a court of law. I would like to
Speaker 3: thank the members of the Federal Bureau of Investigation who
Speaker 3: are working on this investigation with my office, as well
Speaker 3: as the many career prosecutors and law enforcement agents from
Speaker 3: around the country who have worked on previous January sixth investigations.
Speaker 3: These women and men are public servants of the very
Speaker 3: highest order, and it is a privilege to work alongside them.
Speaker 2: Okay, so you hear there.
Speaker 1: The specific charges, those are the ones that were listed
Speaker 1: in the document that Trump received announcing to him that
Speaker 1: he was a target of this investigation. So no huge
Speaker 1: surprises there, But there's a lot of detail to go
Speaker 1: through in this indictment. The Special Council goes to great
Speaker 1: lengths to assert not only did Trump assert false you know,
Speaker 1: election lies, not only did he use those lies to
Speaker 1: try to perpetetrate this fraud over across multiple states, involving
Speaker 1: slates of fake electors and going all the way up
Speaker 1: until January sixth, and pressuring Mike Pence to try to
Speaker 1: overturn the results of the election. But they also go
Speaker 1: into great detail trying to persuade what will ultimately be
Speaker 1: you know, a jury in DC, that Trump knew that
Speaker 1: those claims were false, and that he pushed forward.
Speaker 2: With them anyway.
Speaker 1: Just to give you a sense of you know, one
Speaker 1: of the pieces of many pieces of evidence that they
Speaker 1: used for this of this person and that person who
Speaker 1: had told Trump that these claims were false and he
Speaker 1: pushed forward in spite of it. They're talking about his
Speaker 1: claims with regard to Georgia, and they say, on November
Speaker 1: twenty fifth, one of the co conspirators, which by the way,
Speaker 1: six unindicted co conspirators, and we could talk more about that.
Speaker 1: In a moment, filed a lawsuit against the governor of Georgia,
Speaker 1: falsely alleging massive election fraud accomplished through the voting machine
Speaker 1: Company's election software and hardware. Before the lawsuit was even filed,
Speaker 1: the defendant retweeted a post promoting it. The defendant, the
Speaker 1: defendant is Trump. Did this despite the fact that when
Speaker 1: he had discussed this far fetched public claims regarding the
Speaker 1: voting machine company in private with advisors, the defendant had
Speaker 1: conceded that they were unsupported and that co conspirators three
Speaker 1: sounded quote crazy co conspirator threes. Georgia lawsuit was dismissed
Speaker 1: on December seventh. There was a lot more that was
Speaker 1: similar to this, of you know, the Attorney General told
Speaker 1: him was false. This agency of the Department it does
Speaker 1: and told him it was false. This advisor told it
Speaker 1: was false. He went to Arizona and the officials there
Speaker 1: told him it was false. To me, this was some
Speaker 1: of the more compelling evidence though that he actually took
Speaker 1: some of this in because he was even saying like, yeah,
Speaker 1: this sounds kind of crazy.
Speaker 4: Yeah, so it's interesting.
Speaker 5: So, as you noted, in terms of the six co conspirators,
Speaker 5: we do have the what I guess alleged possible list
Speaker 5: of some of who these folks.
Speaker 2: Could you can kind of who it is?
Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, So we definitely know that Rudy Giuliani is one.
Speaker 5: We also know that John Eastman, he was the lawyer
Speaker 5: who helped come up with the legal theory around a
Speaker 5: lection certification, is one. We don't yet know if his
Speaker 5: former chief of staff, Mark Meadows was listed in the indictment,
Speaker 5: and we know a few other political advisors, Sidney Powell
Speaker 5: almost certainly likely to be one of those co conspirators
Speaker 5: as well. Noteworthy in what Jack Smith said, Smith said
Speaker 5: there crystal in the press conference was we this will
Speaker 5: not stop our investigation into other individuals. So let's all
Speaker 5: make sure we underlining that this could not be, you know,
Speaker 5: the last indictment. I wanted to give everybody a sense
Speaker 5: almost of the initial legal reaction in terms of what
Speaker 5: the two sides are going to be bringing. So first
Speaker 5: I think we should start with the defense. I guess,
Speaker 5: as they do in a trial. I actually was watching
Speaker 5: Fox News in order to prepare for this because they
Speaker 5: had both Andy McCarthy and Jonathan Turley.
Speaker 4: I guess they're whisperers right.
Speaker 5: Really of the conservative legal movement.
Speaker 4: And here's what they say.
Speaker 5: McCarthy in particular takes issue with Smith's use of the
Speaker 5: Civil Rights Act of eighteen sixty six in order to
Speaker 5: prosecute Trump. He says of Jack Smith, quote, he has
Speaker 5: extravagantly stretched these statues in order to try and capture
Speaker 5: this behavior. That's because this is a proxy for what
Speaker 5: should have been a political impeachment process. The second reaction
Speaker 5: from Jonathan Turley, he says here, quote, when I take
Speaker 5: red pen through this indictment that is protected by the
Speaker 5: First Amendment, it reduces to a high coup aka.
Speaker 4: Short poem for those are the uninitiated.
Speaker 5: Many of the things that are being charged here are
Speaker 5: protected speech. He follows up crystal by saying that this
Speaker 5: is quote a disinformation indictment, but that is all part
Speaker 5: of the First Amendment. And just right before we get
Speaker 5: into that, one of the things that McCarthy made clear
Speaker 5: to point out is that the statute, which is actually
Speaker 5: written here. Section two hundred and section two forty one
Speaker 5: of the Civil Rights Law says that actions of public
Speaker 5: officials addressing conspiracies to prevent them from exercising their rights,
Speaker 5: that prosecutors must show that a defendant acted not only intentionally,
Speaker 5: but with a purpose to deprive the victim of a
Speaker 5: constitutional requirement which has been made specific and definite. McCarthy
Speaker 5: points out that the Supreme Court actually, in two separate instances,
Speaker 5: has thrown out cases brought against former public officials and
Speaker 5: other individuals that were prosecuted successfully actually under these statutes,
Speaker 5: but for not being specific enough for the deprivation. And
Speaker 5: so that's I guess thelegal theory I want of the defense.
Speaker 5: Let me get Brad Moss. So I asked him for
Speaker 5: a quote. Here's what he says in response to the
Speaker 5: Turly argument. In particular, quote protected speech does not permit
Speaker 5: you to rely upon knowingly false information to corruptly use
Speaker 5: the levers of executive power to subvert election laws. It
Speaker 5: does not allow you to corruptly coordinate with state activists
Speaker 5: to submit false electoral paperwork to.
Speaker 4: The archivist and the VP.
Speaker 5: It does not allow you to corruptly pressure the VP
Speaker 5: to act unlawfully on January Spick six speech is not
Speaker 5: what is that issue? It is conspiracy to command action.
Speaker 5: That action was unlawful, and so I think those two
Speaker 5: sides of it that effectively, I think is going to
Speaker 5: be the main line by Jack Smith in terms of
Speaker 5: convincing this DC jury. We should note here that the
Speaker 5: judge is not necessarily going to be friendly to Trump.
Speaker 5: Apparently this is a and it's not just that she
Speaker 5: was appointed by Obama, but apparently has sentenced January sixth
Speaker 5: defendants to sentences longer than the government has requested. It
Speaker 5: seems clear, Crystal that given the outcome, is very likely,
Speaker 5: it's very likely in order to be a conviction, just
Speaker 5: given where it is, although you know he'll get his
Speaker 5: day in court, that there's some major Supreme Court things
Speaker 5: that will be addressed here as a result of this,
Speaker 5: just because some of the questions here are so fundamental,
Speaker 5: and I you know, I guess regardless of this, Crystal,
Speaker 5: you know, when you're laying it out, you can't help
Speaker 5: but read this and just be like, oh, yeah, this
Speaker 5: was totally nuts. Like, regardless of whether he's guilty or not,
Speaker 5: you're like, oh yeah, this is actually insane, like the
Speaker 5: false elector scheme. So now we're talking here on a
Speaker 5: political level. And I thought that the best point that
Speaker 5: you made on our show a couple of I maybe.
Speaker 4: It was a couple of weeks ago. I don't know
Speaker 4: what it was.
Speaker 5: Everything blends is you were like, you know, in the
Speaker 5: eyes of most Americans, they don't give a shit about documents.
Speaker 5: They're like, this is what they hate him for, like
Speaker 5: the people who do hurt Trump, and so on a
Speaker 5: political level, we're reading these politically, not as an indictment.
Speaker 5: It's damning politically, you know when you read the judgment
Speaker 5: and the statements and the people around him.
Speaker 4: So that's everything that I'll say about us.
Speaker 1: I think that's a great point that you are referring
Speaker 1: to me having made previously, if I do sa myself.
Speaker 1: But the documents case may actually be more straightforward from
Speaker 1: a legal perspective. And Brad Moss, that's what he told
Speaker 1: us before. I mean, you know, he had the documents.
Speaker 1: He said, these documents, aren't he classified? We have the
Speaker 1: audio tape of that. There are highly you know, really
Speaker 1: top secret, top secret stuff. Okay, we have the pictures
Speaker 1: of the all of that stuff. Okay, the Document's case
Speaker 1: is probably more of a slam dunk legally, this one
Speaker 1: is a little bit legally diceier, although I still think
Speaker 1: that this is also very compelling because you also have
Speaker 1: to keep in mind the civil rights charge is different.
Speaker 1: I haven't seen that charged against any of the other
Speaker 1: January six, Like, you know, the people were just storming
Speaker 1: the capitol. The other charges have been successfully levied against
Speaker 1: some of the January six rioters, and so you know,
Speaker 1: if they were corrupting or revenue proceeding, then certainly it
Speaker 1: appears like the guy who was sort of directing things
Speaker 1: from above would be potentially guilty of that as well.
Speaker 1: So you know, when they go through the litany of
Speaker 1: what was going on in all the conversations that we're having,
Speaker 1: all of the text messages, all of the times Trump
Speaker 1: was told this is total bullshit, some instances where he
Speaker 1: basically agreed, He's like, yeah, we don't have proof, Yeah,
Speaker 1: it sounds crazy, etc. And then you see the you know,
Speaker 1: for trump Land, methodical effort to put together these slates
Speaker 1: of electors and actually snow some of the people who
Speaker 1: didn't want to be on the elector slates unless it
Speaker 1: was going they were basically put on them under false pretenses.
Speaker 1: And you've got i think seven different states and all
Speaker 1: of the machinations that were happening here. Yeah, it's pretty
Speaker 1: compelling to speak to what Turley was saying, in particular about, Hey,
Speaker 1: a lot of this is protected speech. Jack Smith attempts
Speaker 1: in this indictment to address that legal defense. He says
Speaker 1: at the very top basically like, look, he could think
Speaker 1: it's still he's allowed to say it. He's allowed to
Speaker 1: take these claims to court, which he did. None of
Speaker 1: that is illegal. However, it is illegal to put together
Speaker 1: fake elector slates and then try to use these lies
Speaker 1: to actually subvert the election. That part crosses the line
Speaker 1: of illegality in the telling here, right. So I do
Speaker 1: think that, you know, in terms of the core of
Speaker 1: what people actually hate about Donald Trump, what they really
Speaker 1: don't want or repeat of if he were to get
Speaker 1: back into the White House, this is the piece that.
Speaker 2: Everybody has sort of been kind of waiting.
Speaker 1: To drop, because you know, it does speak to the
Speaker 1: heart of like what we're doing here as a democracy.
Speaker 1: It was an insane, horrendous day to watch all of
Speaker 1: that unfold on January sixth, and so, even though the
Speaker 1: document's case might be more straightforward legally, this gets the
Speaker 1: core of what people actually think.
Speaker 2: Donald Trump is a criminal for doing right.
Speaker 4: And then let's get to the political defense.
Speaker 5: So from my understanding, at least, I'm actually wanting to
Speaker 5: know what you think about this. Yeah, Trump's statement was
Speaker 5: he actually didn't deny any of it. He just goes
Speaker 5: they waited two and a half years to indict me
Speaker 5: while I was running. I mean, I do think they've
Speaker 5: got a point there, crystal, like, why did it take
Speaker 5: two and a half years in order to bring the case?
Speaker 5: Merrick Garland didn't end up bringing it, They shelved it,
Speaker 5: they put it on the back foot, They appoint Jack Smith.
Speaker 5: Then this guy brings an indictment right at the time
Speaker 5: that Trump is i mean, from a political quote unquote
Speaker 5: interference in the process. I mean, it really could not
Speaker 5: be a worse look, especially whenever he's surging over his rivals.
Speaker 4: I mean, I do genuinely think.
Speaker 5: That is a very compelling defense that Trump will be
Speaker 5: able to not only keep the GOP primary base around
Speaker 5: him on this, I think this will solidify his support
Speaker 5: once again. DeSantis is already out with the statement being
Speaker 5: like I'm going to dismantle the FBI so I can
Speaker 5: support Trump, and like, okay, we why should I just
Speaker 5: vote for Trump? Then, so again, like on a political level,
Speaker 5: that is going to be the best. And look, I
Speaker 5: was watching Fox. I was trying to im vibe, like
Speaker 5: the right wings, I'm like, all right, let me take
Speaker 5: it all in so I can try and convey like
Speaker 5: what the main thing is and the points the only
Speaker 5: points I really felt like not only should be reiterated,
Speaker 5: but which I think there's something to the McCarthy defense.
Speaker 5: We're gonna hear that in court, whether people don't like
Speaker 5: it or not. Something to the Turley defense as well.
Speaker 5: And then on the political front, why did you wait
Speaker 5: two and a half years, Like what if you know
Speaker 5: you could have impeached him, you didn't do that. And
Speaker 5: then if you really believed it, I mean, the best
Speaker 5: time to throw his ass in jail or whatever during
Speaker 5: January sixth is right after January sixth, when you assume office.
Speaker 5: So that's gonna be a tough one to talk their
Speaker 5: way out of. And I'm curious what you think.
Speaker 1: As someone who supports these charges and believes the former
Speaker 1: president should be held accountable for what I see as
Speaker 1: crimes against our country, and as someone who desperately does
Speaker 1: not want him back in the White House, I wish
Speaker 1: that this had all happened a lot too. Yeah, there's
Speaker 1: and I don't. I don't really have a good explanation
Speaker 1: for why I didn't, because I respect the fact that
Speaker 1: this is a process. It takes time. You read this document,
Speaker 1: it's extensive. I know there was a lot of investigation,
Speaker 1: but it does seem like it could have happened a
Speaker 1: lot quicker. And even if you look at like the documents,
Speaker 1: one that that timing I understand because they were trying
Speaker 1: actually to go back and forth with him and resolve
Speaker 1: this in a way that didn't involve the criminal justice system,
Speaker 1: So that one, the timing makes a little more sense
Speaker 1: to me. But even with that one, we're talking about
Speaker 1: a trial date that's set for May. Okay, that's that
Speaker 1: means the GFP nomination is sewn up, right there is
Speaker 1: that one's done and dusted, no going back, and you're
Speaker 1: talking about a trial and potential sentencing coming right in
Speaker 1: the heat of a general election. Now, listen, I think
Speaker 1: he should be held accountable. I don't think that anyone,
Speaker 1: including a current, former, past, potential future president should skate.
Speaker 1: I don't believe in that form, you know, two tier
Speaker 1: form of justice. However, it there is just no denying
Speaker 1: that this creates an extraordinarily volatile and potentially chaotic political
Speaker 1: situation going into an election where there is no doubt
Speaker 1: that emotions are already going to be very high.
Speaker 4: In terms of my pros, yeah, yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 1: Oh, I was just gonna say, in terms of my
Speaker 1: actual like prediction of how this is all going to
Speaker 1: work out for him politically on the Republican side, you know,
Speaker 1: it doesn't take a genius to see that they got
Speaker 1: a majority of republic overall, like seventy percent of them
Speaker 1: think the election was rigged and stolen. So this is
Speaker 1: gonna you know, water off a ducts ass in terms
Speaker 1: of the Republican base, if any fig it just makes
Speaker 1: them like him poor. I'm sorry, Rond DeSantis. You could
Speaker 1: probably take Trump's advice at this point and drop out
Speaker 1: and give him your money for ballot harvesting or whatever.
Speaker 1: Not looking good for you, buddy. In terms of the
Speaker 1: general election, I do think that there is a sort
Speaker 1: of normy instinct of where there's smoke, there's fire. There
Speaker 1: was real revulsion among independents and not just Democrats around
Speaker 1: what happened on January sixth and Trump's role in it.
Speaker 1: We saw real revulsion in the midterm elections around January
Speaker 1: six and around stop the Steal. So right now you've got,
Speaker 1: according to the polling jump ball between Biden and Trump.
Speaker 1: I do think that this with a general election audience,
Speaker 1: is going.
Speaker 2: To be very difficult to survive.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I just don't know. It's one of those where
Speaker 4: I think you're right. I think it will hurt.
Speaker 5: I don't know on what margin. I don't know to
Speaker 5: what extent I think, you know, in terms of the
Speaker 5: prediction basis on that one, I genuinely like people cared
Speaker 5: in twenty twenty twenty two.
Speaker 4: Will they care in twenty twenty four. It's a little
Speaker 4: bit different.
Speaker 5: We're talking about Congress and Senate versus the actual guy,
Speaker 5: and you know his own political qualities.
Speaker 4: So I don't know.
Speaker 5: In terms of the indictment, I do think I want
Speaker 5: to see this First Amendment stuff litigated because I actually
Speaker 5: am genuinely curious to see.
Speaker 4: How and what the threshold that you have to cross.
Speaker 5: As you know, everyone famously is like you can't yell
Speaker 5: what is it fire in a crowded theater, And you
Speaker 5: know there's there's important exceptions I think to first amendent
Speaker 5: case law. That is the part where I really want
Speaker 5: to see like where that will be applied. And then
Speaker 5: on a political level, this is I think this is
Speaker 5: probably a net benefit to the Democrats because January sixth
Speaker 5: is so repellent, and it is the most repellent thing
Speaker 5: about Trump, So that's where I do think it will
Speaker 5: continue to hurt him. And then on the Republican side,
Speaker 5: like you said, I yeah, I mean this is it
Speaker 5: like this is because the documents one, there is no
Speaker 5: ambiguity that Trump obviously acted wrong, and your only defense is.
Speaker 4: Like, oh, they've got it out for him.
Speaker 5: But I want to return actually to the point that
Speaker 5: you made, which is on the document's timeline, there actually
Speaker 5: wasn't much of a delay. You know, basically as soon
Speaker 5: as he was obstructing, they indicted him. Here they waited
Speaker 5: two and a half years. Let's point back to the
Speaker 5: actual original statement by Jack Smith. Remember he said that
Speaker 5: he wants a speedy trial. Me too, you know, the
Speaker 5: whole country needs a speedy trial.
Speaker 4: Here on this. We should have tried this whole case
Speaker 4: two and a half years ago.
Speaker 5: Well we kind of did, you know, in the Senate
Speaker 5: well for impeachment, but if you were going to bring
Speaker 5: charges like doing this in the middle of primaries, you
Speaker 5: know your point about we can't be having this in
Speaker 5: May of twenty twenty four.
Speaker 4: We should have this wrapped by Iowa.
Speaker 5: But you know, I mean, looking at a calendar, it's
Speaker 5: pretty clear that's just not going to happen. So we're
Speaker 5: all up for some serious chaos I think timeline wise
Speaker 5: throughout this election.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no doubt about it.
Speaker 1: And I just yeah, it's hard to speculate on exactly
Speaker 1: how all of this is going to play out politically
Speaker 1: when you get to.
Speaker 2: A general election.
Speaker 1: But you know, part of the challenge with Trump is
Speaker 1: because he is charismatic, because he is charming, because he's funny,
Speaker 1: because Biden is like super old and falling apart and
Speaker 1: has all the problems.
Speaker 2: That Joe Biden has, it's easy.
Speaker 1: To forget the worst parts of Trump, right, It's easy
Speaker 1: to forget that. And so when you have a trial
Speaker 1: going on reminding everyone constantly about the very worst parts
Speaker 1: of Trump, and by the way, on a just like
Speaker 1: personal gut level, reminding people of like you want to
Speaker 1: go back to this dude who wouldn't even give it
Speaker 1: up last time. I remember what that felt like, Remember
Speaker 1: that chaos, Remember that stress and anxiety. That was a
Speaker 1: very tense time in American life. What other side you
Speaker 1: were on of what was going on. It was very stressful,
Speaker 1: intense and chaotic time. So I think having that reminder
Speaker 1: front and center going into twenty twenty four, I have
Speaker 1: to think that that's going to be very damaging for
Speaker 1: Trump and gives Biden a chance when frankly, I don't
Speaker 1: know that he would otherwise because he's got a lot
Speaker 1: of problems of his own.
Speaker 5: But then imagine this, he gets convicted, it's still at
Speaker 5: the top of mind, and he still beats Biden.
Speaker 4: Then what does that say about Joe Biden?
Speaker 2: Wow, I don't know what any of it.
Speaker 1: The fact that we even have these two men as
Speaker 1: the likely party nominees says nothing good about the country
Speaker 1: to start with.
Speaker 5: So I saw an interesting tweet I just want to
Speaker 5: end kind of on this from DC Draino. He's a
Speaker 5: huge Twitter account, really, and he basically was like he
Speaker 5: put out the tweet where he just said, Look, it's
Speaker 5: either the present. It says quote. If he wins, e
Speaker 5: can pardon himself. If he loses, he.
Speaker 4: Will be imprisoned. That's what's at stake.
Speaker 5: Interesting too in terms of the messaging there being directed
Speaker 5: at the base. So I think that's important.
Speaker 2: And he's like a Trump influencer account got it.
Speaker 5: But for him to like put it that starkly in
Speaker 5: the shows the seriousness and also the way will be
Speaker 5: relentlessly messaged I think to the GOP primary base.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I have been thinking about you know, is there
Speaker 1: a chance of political Of course, there is a chance
Speaker 1: of political violence. I don't think anyone could deny that.
Speaker 1: But I will say, you know, the last two indictments
Speaker 1: that came down, there were calls for people to come
Speaker 1: out in protest. Not many people really did. Thus far,
Speaker 1: it's been relatively calm, so we'll hope that that continues
Speaker 1: to prevail.
Speaker 5: Hopefully Counterpoints are going to have a great show for
Speaker 5: everybody tomorrow thanks to our premium subscribers that enable all
Speaker 5: of this snap reaction and all this other stuff. And
Speaker 5: we'll see everybody on Thursday, or if any other some
Speaker 5: crazy stuff happens, I guess maybe we can log on
Speaker 5: for that quer.
Speaker 2: We will be prepared ready.
Speaker 4: Hopefully not, but we will be. We'll see you guys
Speaker 4: later