Welcome to Leo Roundtable at leoroundtable.com. My name is Chip DeBloch and I'm your host. We're a group of law enforcement professionals that talk about today's news and issues, but we do from a law enforcement perspective. And let me introduce the crew guys. If you wouldn't mind waiting for the video portion of our show, have a he's back attorney Anthony Bandero with blue the gold at blue the gold.com former police officer as well. So thanks so much for being on the show. We also have Dr. Travis Schach retired police major from the Tulsa police department. So thank you gentlemen. A shout out to our sponsors. You know, our title sponsors, Gulls at Gulls.com.  Don't forget that discount code to get 15 % off your next order. It's radio 15. They type that in at goals.com. We also have compliant technologies.com gun learn.com. My Medicare.live safe. Recruiting.com. I'm still going to list them because they're still on the list. And I just read them and then two bells.com. They built a new online store at Leo roundtable.com. I shout out to the guys that are letting us put our content on their, on their outlets. We've got Brian Burns for the Tampa free press of Tampa FB.com. have Travis shades with law officer.com. And Ray Dietrich with former lawman.com and you know, I've got people saying, Hey, tell us how we can watch the show. You know, if it's on podcast, we're going to be on it, but we're certainly on Spotify and Apple iTunes and also on social media, rumble, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, true social, the best way to do it. Go to our website at Leo roundtable.com. And at the top menu bar, we have a listing of everywhere we're at dates, times, links, everything to watch our show, whether it's radio, TV, podcast or social media. So that's the way they do it now. Let's talk about what we're going to be talking about today. I'm going to wet the appetite here. You know, our first topic in Anthony is going to be all over this. We have is titled backpack blunder. New York judge allows suspected murder weapon  in the, um, in the, Mangeone trial,  but there was a hiccup with it. We don't want it to happen to other cops.  And we're talking about federal versus state as well. can get a little complicated, but don't worry guys. We have attorney Anthony Bandero here and this is his wheelhouse. This is where he excels. So I, can't wait to cover it and have, and have him explain it to us. And then what else were you talking? We have another very interesting story that's going to be coming up right after that. And as police officers on duty for the January 6th riot, they're actually suing president Trump Blanche and Besant over the $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund. that Trump just got established and they're, they're suing him. have two officers,  uh, but there is a couple of flags in the story related to the officers that we're going to go in and reveal.  have drone footage shows a bear cat  running over and killing an armed suspect  as they're taking income or incoming fire from this guy. And the same dude already killed uh a sheriff's detective.  Uh,  no sympathy for him, but it's all in video. Then we got Greensboro police officer justified in the end of death issue from August of 2025. Uh, Mark Furman, uh, the police detective convicted of lying during the OJ Simpson murder trial has died. Uh, we've got Illinois state police,  uh, they released a video from troopers fatal, uh, shooting of a bad guy. And we got an ice agent. They've charged him with assault charges in Minneapolis.  And,  but there may be some truth to that apparently. And then no charges for Gastonia police officers who shot and killed an armed guy in a convenience store. So yeah, we've got a lot to talk about as time permits. Let's start off with the first one. have two sources, Tampa Free Press at tampaepi.com and also at rumble.com. And that channel is from the Liberty Daily backpack blunder, New York judge allow suspected murder weapon in a man, Joan trial. I'm going to drop down. The other title was a little bit more sensational. I think I said judge  in, um, in the man, Joan trial, it rules that McDonald's backpack search was illegal. So that's kind of, you know, where we're going with this. So The New York judge ruled that while key evidence seized in this trial, which is the United Healthcare CEO assassin trial,  dealing with his backpack during his Pennsylvania arrest, it cannot be used at trial.  Jurors will still see the suspected murder weapon though. The ruling came from Judge Gregory Caro. It posted online ahead of a Monday morning hearing. Now the judge agreed with defense attorneys that the initial search of our bad guy's backpack at the Pennsylvania McDonald's, that it was unconstitutional. because the bag had been moved out of the suspect's  reach. So out of his arm's reach is what they're saying. And I'm going to go over what's in the article and have Anthony, there's a  lot of information guys, and we're talking about feds versus states. So he'll explain everything. The judge determined that a subsequent search of the same bag conducted at the police station now that that was lawful. And it was during that second search that law enforcement discovered the handgun allegedly  used to kill our UnitedHealthcare CEO, Brian Thompson. But it kind of almost implies they missed it on the first search. And I'm kind of wondering whether they did or they just didn't say anything to justify the search warrant. Maybe Anthony can explain that. Judge Carl also ruled that the majority of statements made by our bad guy to the Pennsylvania police that they are admissible. The exception applies to certain remarks regarding the alleged fake identification, which were made after officers read him his Miranda warnings, but it doesn't say that he exercised his right for an attorney. So I haven't, I have a lot of questions to the evidentiary ruling. It differs from our bad guy separate federal case. So this is the evidentiary on the state side, I guess.  Um, a different judge is presiding over the federal case and rejected the defense's argument regarding the property search, the federal judge and well, the federal trial, it will include  all evidence from the backpack, everything which encompasses the alleged murder weapon, the  3d printed silencer, a fraudulent ID used to check into the, uh, hostile. Uh, the journals that reportedly contain writings that are critical of the health insurance industry. Now our bad guy is 28 years old. faces both the state and federal charges for the December  4th, 2024 shooting of Thompson. The executive was shot from behind  and  outside of a Manhattan Hilton hotel while he's walking to an investor conference. Authorities said that the gunman fled the scene on a bicycle. He traveled to Altoona, Pennsylvania and He was arrested there five days later after McDonald's customers and employees recognized him from wanted posters and they alerted, um, you know, the authorities, defense attorneys petitioned to suppress the evidence by arguing that the police searched the bag multiple times over an eight hour period before they secured a search warrant. The defense maintained that because our bad guy was restrained and no longer had control over the bag. The officers were required to obtain a warrant before they even opened it. Prosecutors countered that the motion. by arguing that the police department from Altoona,  that they acted reasonably under certain circumstances when they checked the bag after the arrest or search engine to a lawful arrest. Our bad guy entered a plea and not guilty to all the state charges, all the federal charges. In New York, he faces the top charges, second degree murder, maximum sentence of life in prison. He's got six weapon charges  and one kind of criminal possession of a forged instrument. The judge previously dismissed terrorism related charges that carried a potential life. without parole sentence. The state trial is scheduled to start on September the 8th.  And in the federal proceeding, the Judge Margaret Garnett issued a January 30th order allowing the backpack evidence to stand while also ruling that the death penalty would be taken off the table. So that's what we have.  Anthony, can you make sense of this mess for us and just bring it down to the dummies here? Well, look,  I'll tell you that um this is a mess. And it's a mess because  I think this is a  a very interesting situation because you have these Pennsylvania officers who are from their perspective complying with Pennsylvania law and arguably they are. But then you have this federal this this New York judge saying you know what if this was if this same search was done by New York officers it would be unlawful you see the problem there the problem is that the way that the system works at least in New York is that if you're going to bring in evidence to a New York trial that was found out of state. They don't use those state rules. They use New York rules. you, can you see that? It's basically the form, right, your-  That's what's going on here, Chip. Because in New York,  okay, so let's break it down even more fundamentally, okay? So this is, we have a couple doctrines that are at play here. One is search incident to arrest, and the other one is an inventory. So under search incident to arrest, there's debate on this,  usually the item has to be associated with the person at the time of arrest. And associated means like immediately in their vicinity, right? Like the lunch area, wingspan, whatever you want to call it, right? Well,  most courts, not all courts, but most courts have held under the fourth amendment that if the item like the backpack, it was in his immediate possession at the time of arrest, then you can search it even though later he's not near it. Okay. Well, that's debatable anyway here because at the time, from when you read the case, they approached him, they took the backpack and they actually moved it like nine feet or so away from him while they're talking to him. And then that's when they did that cursory search, which discovered the  magazine, you know,  this red book  and so forth.  So New York though has an extra component anyway for surgeons, right? They say not only must the item be neck like in their meeting vicinity, but you also have to have agency at and agency like not only does that be near them, but it has to be as you in circumstances. Well, Florida, Oklahoma, no state really requires that except New York. So they said because no matter what there was no agency to search the bag, it's not going to comply with New York law. The cops, by the way, and this is no teaching point that I say in my classes, the cops, by the way, said, well, there could have been a bomb in there, right?  Um, but the court, I think the, the, judge in New York  rightfully dismissed that argument because that is a what if, right? I mean,  yeah, okay. He's a terrorist suspect at that time. And you know, he's, could be, uh, you know, motivated to, uh,  I guess the blow stuff up, but it's just like, it was such a, they said like, you're okay. You're searching for this bomb, but yet you're looking like coin purses. You know mean? You're, you're, and there's other people around going to the restroom and you're not clearing out the McDonald's. It's just basically it's, it's insincere. And I agree. Would you, you see the point there? Like  the training point there is cops sometimes say outlandish stuff  with a, with a  well, you know, my training experience says there could be a bomb in there because it's a political motivated attack, but they have no objective evidence to believe that this guy could have a bomb. No, I, I get it. So what you're saying is, is that the only way that they, in hindsight, knowing, I mean, look, this is a perfect storm because of the type of crime that we're investigating the suspect where he's located and where he's being tried at. So you're saying that when they grab the they look there's there's no issue with moving the backpack tactically sound decision to get it away from the bad guy until you do your thing. But at that point they should have gathered the PC document it got a warrant to get into the bag.  No,  because here's the problem with this. Oh, look, yes and no, it's still it's this is a very complicated case. But the problem is, that  The first lesson here is that this is not a legit search into arrest.  wouldn't be uh a legit search into arrest either under federal law, under Pennsylvania law, or under New York law, because again, New York adds an extra component of agency. But regardless,  the backpack was not near him at the time. So we'll pick it up when we come back. But it's a problem on three levels. Yeah, we're going to be talking about this for while. Guys, stick with us. It's only going to get better. We'll be right back. My family only cares about one thing,  that I come home safe.  At Gulls, every order begins with a promise. made with purpose. stitched for support. Back with pride. answered by dedicated hands. delivering the standard. you have sworn to uphold. We serve more than the mission.  We serve the person.  Each piece is engineered to help get our first responders through the shift and back home safe.  Welcome back, Leo Roundtable at leoroundtable.com, the law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip DeBloch and I'm your host. We are joined by attorney Anthony Bandiero and he's from Blue the Gold at bluethegold.com. We also have Dr. Travis Yates, retired major from the Tulsa Police Department. You know, we're talking about our United Healthcare CEO would be assassin  and well assassin and he's going to trial and stuff. And we're talking about some search and seizure issues along with, with.  the backpack  that they grabbed on him because he's got a federal trial and a state trial going. so Anthony Bandero has been clearing this up because some of the items have been declared  inadmissible in court, at least  for the state.  a lot  of things happened on the break.  Travis Yates brought up a case in point about when the cops said that maybe there could have been a bomb in there and the judge didn't buy it, Travis is saying, well, you know what? If they just simply would have said the guy had links to Israel and they were looking for a pager, that might've done the trick. And of course, uh if you guys are familiar, the people who aren't, uh Israel,  these guys are just brilliant.  And Hamas had pagers and they were still using these digital pagers so they couldn't get tracked. And they put explosives in these pagers that could be remotely detonated  whenever Israel decided to do that. And that's exactly what they did.  And they had the pager, I believe it went off first. And when they put it up to their head or their face to read,  What was being said on it is when they detonated in my bill. I'm not mistaken, the guy that I didn't want to, the guy I wouldn't want to be was the guy a couple of years earlier, delivering the pagers when he was obviously captured or whatever they did to him to, for them to get control of all of those pages that were being shipped over there. Cause I mean, they, they, they, they intercepted the pagers from the source and installed those in the pages.  You know, had it shipped from Amazon all the way over to there. You know, then when the time came, you know, I think it was a Sunday, you know, they were grocery stores, everything else. they all went off at same time. Yeah. So they're fingers, digits, all kinds, and their facial burns all then. And some of these guys got taken out permanently. know what? You know what Thomas Massey says? Don't cross Israel. Yeah. No, you're right. So, so, so Anthony, all that I'd asked. a question about, these guys simply would have done a search for, and you said that not necessarily. So no, they're not going to get a search warrant. we know this is high profile case, but you know, and even somebody on your comments said that, you know, in Utah, the 10th circuit, need warrants. That is not true. Okay. They may want to get warrants, but you don't need a warrant every time you arrest somebody and take their property and then search it. Right. What you need is a recognized exception. So Just to come, so in New York, we know that the search instance who arrest exception ain't gonna work here because  A, it's not close enough to the suspect at the time of the arrest. And two,  you would need action circumstances anyway and the judge rightfully throughout this whole, he could have a bomb argument. And what I teach at Blue to Gold is you don't go to court and search or seize on possibilities. You search or seize on probabilities, which is based on objective facts. Okay. So the next argument that the, that the New York court went through, and by the way, just as a little trivia, the, the trial courts in New York are called the Supreme court. knew that, right? Chip? think a lot of people do know that I know. I, I, didn't know that. I'll be honest. I, I'm excited. Yeah.  So a lot of people get confused by that because they'll say, Oh, the Supreme court of new, Oh, this already went to the Supreme court. It actually is just a weird. colonial thing for them that their trial courts are Supreme Court and their Supreme Court is a court of appeals. Okay, but I but but I dig it's just kind of interesting, but I digress. So anyway, yeah, it's kind of interesting. so now the next we don't have search and arrest under the Fourth Amendment or New York case law, either one is going to fail because it's not close enough. The second thing is inventory. Now that is what most cops are going to do. to a bag that's on scene. You arrest a homeless person, right? And their bag is, their backpack is 10 feet, 20 feet away, you know, at the McDonald's and you arrest them for, you know, trespassing and so forth. Are police going to go through that bag before, you know, bring to the police? Of course they are, But they're gonna call it, okay, but you can't call search and arrest, you gotta call it inventory. The problem in this case is that the judge did not buy that these Pennsylvania officers are doing a true inventory. at the McDonald's because of all this the bomb business and they're not doing a complete search. They're not referencing what their policy and practices are. They're essentially doing a protective sweep of the bag. But again, because the judge did not buy the bomb argument and the bag was not close enough to grab a firearm and there's like nine cops eventually on scene. You know what saying? So that's the problem. the New York judge ain't buying,  is not buying  a safety sweep of the bag. Travis. I have nothing of substance to say  except the fact that the only bomb that was in that McDonald's was on the menu.  And in the bathroom, which  usually they are one comes before the other. So next thing.  we have an attorney though.  Yeah, look, they, they just,  okay. That's freedom of speech. McDonald's. Okay. I love McDonald's and so does the president of United States. Well, that is true. Yep. So, okay. So now, so they, they lose what they lose the, the magazine. They lose some underwear. They lose  suppressor.  They don't lose a suppressor. The suppressor is found at the police station. No, no, no. The gun, the suppressor was still on the car. You know what?  Got it. Yeah. But they lost some other documents, right?  The fake ID. Well, the fake ID was something else. But anyway, they and they didn't look and they did not lose his manifesto because they because the cops never opened the manifesto to read it during the safety sweep, which is good. OK. So then the Pennsylvania cops bring the bag back to the station and there they do a legit inventory. You know, they catalog things, they have a procedure on it. They know they tell the court convincingly that they're not gonna, you know, put a bag into inventory, you know, into  evidence without seeing that there's a dangerous item in there and so like a bomb. Okay.  So that's what comes in. Okay. So luckily what's interesting though, just like you said, Chip, is that they've actually missed that gun. I mean, maybe I look. When you pick up a look exactly maybe the reality is when you pick up a bag and you the guy's a shooter and you pick up a bag, you can a gun is is that distinctive weight, right? I mean, it's it's distinctive. It you know, sometimes the bag is unbalanced like, there's there's a metal object in here. The guy's a shooter. There's probably a bag in here. But but again,  to remind your listeners, I guess, according to the Supreme Court just judge in New York, if they would have found that gun on scene, it would have been out now. Let's go walk across the street and let's walk into federal court. So as we know, the suspect has federal charges as well. So they looked at this case differently. And what we have time here? 26 seconds. So basically the last thing I want to do when we come back, Chip, and we can go on to our next story is if you don't mind is look at it through the eyes of the federal court and see why that answer came out differently than the New York Supreme Court judge. We will do it. Guys, I hope you're enjoying this. I certainly am. Time for our next commercial break. Stick with us. We'll be right back. All right. It's time to talk about compliant technologies at compliant technologies.com and they are committed to providing non-lethal solutions to help officers gain their upper hand safely and rapidly in a humane, low-optic manner  utilizing what they're called their CD3, which stands for Conductive Distraction and De-escalation Device Technology. Now their flagship product, we all know by now it's called the GLUB. It's not only helped officers tens of thousands of times, but they've actually had over 250,000 deployments and guess what? No injuries, no deaths. They've actually achieved non-lethal status in an arena that predominantly can only offer less lethal results. And when it comes to weapons for attention, transitioning to a sidearm or connected energy weapon, the glove of complianttechnologies.com, they virtually eliminated weapons confusion. So stay ahead of the game with Comply Technologies and the revolutionary CD3, the hundreds of agencies have already turned to nationwide. And friends, take it from me when it comes to safety. This is one of the most common sense, hands-on solutions that's ever come along. to the complianttechnologies.com today. tell them that Chip and Travis sent you again, that is complianttechnologies.com. You'll be glad that you did. Welcome back, Leo Roundtable at leoroundtable.com, the law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip DeBlock and I'm your host. We're joined by attorney Anthony Bandero from bluethegold.com and also Dr. Travis H, retired Tulsa police major. We've been talking about the United healthcare assassin  and uh the trials that,  the  issues with evidence going to state and federal trial. Anthony's been breaking this down because there's been a, uh, a lot of hoopla with, uh, with what the local cops did when they found this guy and trying to get him into, uh, and trying to get everything in the court. So, I told Anthony what my last question to him is going to be, which will be what, what, not necessarily what should have been done because it's really hard to fault the cops from  the information Anthony supplied, uh, but what could have been done to make everybody happy. Just look, you know, the, the show, we just, we don't want the same thing. to happen again. So that's one benefit that we have on the show, especially smaller agencies that are watching it, that we can get this information out to them  because  you don't know what you don't know. And I got to admit that even coming into this, I've learned so much from Anthony Bandero. This is his wheelhouse talking about circumseizure. And at the end, I need you to tell agencies how they can get a hold of you, the lower liability for themselves and their officers. But Anthony, the floor is yours. I appreciate you. So the last thing is let's go walk through the, we went across the street to the federal courthouse. They upheld all of this and didn't have a problem with anything. But I'll tell you, this is my viewpoint. So what they said, what the federal court said was that this was a legit inventory.  And  I gotta tell you, I'm a little suspect of that. I don't know if that really holds water uh because inventories do require what's called good faith, meaning it should be, you know, they do care about why you're doing it. I think it's pretty clear uh based on what the cops said on scene. also during deposition, you know, during the suppression hearing, not deposition, but suppression hearing.  And it's pretty clear the way they acted that this was not a true good faith inventory. They're not looking to inventory items. They are looking for a bomb. They're looking, you know, whatever.  And uh it's just though, they didn't do a complete, you know, they didn't really do an inventory sheet. It's just, it doesn't look or sound like an inventory. However, so I  look, if I was the federal judge, I would not uphold it under that rubric. However, I would have upheld it under a classic protective suite for weapons because we absolutely have objective reasons to believe that that there's a firearm in that bag. And what I teach my cops Chip is that if you look if you're going to transport a bag, and for some reason, you're going to do the inventory at the station, which you don't have to do that you can do this, you can do the inventory on scene, which most cops do okay. But regardless for the weather, it's a lot of stuff. It's an unhoused person with the duffel bag. and  you have objective reasons to believe that there is a weapon and a firearm in there, would you really want to transport that item in the back of your exploder  and have nothing bouncing around and maybe have a trigger that's unguarded and  blow a round off? That's  my point.  I'm going to make it safe.  Correct. So now here's what's funny about it because either way we're going to win in federal court because under inventory you need what's called good faith. has to be,  you have to be like wanting to do an inventory for an objective for a legit purpose. But under a safety sweep, it's a different standard. It's it's just objective reason. This did these cops have an objective reason to believe that there's a firearm in that bag? Absolutely. All day, twice on Sunday. So  and and not only that chip, but they actually look like they did a protective or they didn't find the gun. But  but regardless, just call it a protective sweep. Okay. Yeah. And Now, but still just we can end this off. I can go on forever, but still they, in my view, they could have still done a complete inventory on scene. That's just, but they should have done a legit inventory. So one requires good faith. One doesn't. Okay. Which means don't care about what's what the officer motivated. Going back to your question, your last question is what would I tell my officers if this happened, if we hit the reset button? I would say one of two things. If it's a regular case and just using the regular rules, I would do an inventory on scene. Or I would do a protective sweep. way, I'm going to get into that bag on scene, just to make sure that there's nothing dangerous and so forth. If this is a high profile shooter, and we know this guy, this is international news, quite frankly, I probably would have got a warrant. Left it at the state at the McDonald's, got a telephonic, and then just at the McDonald's. That would have been the cleaner way to do it. But most cops are not going to get a warrant for shooting cases, OK? You don't need a warrant. Just do an inventory if it's outside their grasp. do an inventory, do a legit inventory and call it a day. I would have, I would have, I mean, in hindsight, I would have asked, I would have asked for consent in addition to prior to getting the warrant. I still would have got the warrant, but I would have asked for consent first, gotten it in writing. And then I would have asked for the warrant and I only would have done it gone into the bag if I got, if I, if I got the warrant now, will say why you asking for consent, if you can get a warrant regardless. Well, as a backup, just in case the war gets thrown out in court for whatever reason, I've got the consent. That's Haley's comment though. mean, having warrants getting thrown out is one of them. I mean, that's a unicorn. I the extent. Where I'm from, that's way we rolled. I mean, it's extra. I realize that. why not? If you can get it, why not? Why not? Yeah, yeah. with body cam and stuff, there may not be a need to get it in writing. I will say, I want to be cautious how I word this, and I'm not active anymore, so it may not matter, but there are many times in a law enforcement officer's life while he's working to where you may do something that you know that if you find something, you're not going to be able to charge the guy with it, but you're still going to do what needs to get done in order to get that weapon or get this or get that, even though you realize that, if I get this, I'm not going to be able to criminally charge this guy. It's not going to stand up in court. I don't like that the way you said it. But I would say I'm going to modify it. But it's true. But modify it. know. know it's true. know there's there's there's street there's street laws and there's you know, but the way I teach that because I understand what you're talking about is that if you have a wobbler, if you're like, look, there's a there's a chance that this gets thrown out. But yet I stay safe. And then then as long as you have an argument that you are doing something valid. But if you're like, but some cops, I'll just just because the problem chip is that I have some officers out there that were like, I'm doing it. I do a path on it. Everybody I get out of the car. I'm like, everybody, even if they're not, you don't consider. Yep. Because I'm going home at night. I said, you're violating the constitution. Did you take an oath? But if you like, Hey man, I think I have it. I'm a newer officer. I'm not really good at work. You know, I think this person could be armed and dangerous. I would say leaning the side of caution, do the pat down, argue what you think you, while you had it. And if it gets thrown out, then it is what it is. That to me is a better way. At least it's justifiable. Cause I don't like the cops that say I'll just do it because I want to go home at night. Well, you do take a risk being a law enforcement officer. by the very nature of the job. You know what saying?  Otherwise, just bring up the AR-15 every time you do a traffic stop.  I just don't, I mean, and I'm not, I wasn't talking to the extreme you were talking about, but sometimes you're in a position where you know what, if I look here, if I put my head around there, and if I, I can't maybe necessarily put it with a bad guy, but I'm gonna go, and I'm not gonna charge somebody with something that won't stand up in court, but there are, I have found, hundreds of stacks of like printed social security cards that are blank. found, I mean, there's just been all kinds of stuff that because of that attitude, I found things and confiscated them, but put them in as found property instead of as, know, as a charging instrument for crime. So, um, that how you, is that just, just like cross the curiosity, is that how you're getting your 10 social security checks per month? Oh, I wish I wish I wish. Uh, well, Travis, we got, we got a little under three minutes, uh, before we, before we take our next or third commercial break. Any weigh-ins on this Travis Shates? No, I agree with Anthony that cops did nothing wrong. It was business as usual. Just happened to be one of the most high profile case of a generation. You think? And in a New York court and someone that's done expert work in New York, everything's different in New York. Literally. It's really wild when you do work in New York because a lot of my work is in is in police driving and police pursuits. And even that is different. And you'd be surprised it's not different against the police. It's different for the police. And  I was involved in a case that was the first time that they were ever successful of getting past uh immunity in a police pursuit because the laws are so strong for police, which you wouldn't expect in the state of New York, but it is.  Yeah, I, this is, this is just one of the most fascinating topics that we've covered in a while. And it doesn't all make sense. mean, I mean, you made you made sense of it, Anthony, but the fact that we're having the talk about, you know, a lot of the stuff just doesn't just  shouldn't it shouldn't be, you know, it's just the craziest thing. So thank you for for making sense out of this. And even though it doesn't still make sense, totally. You know what I'm saying? I just can't believe that New York is that whacked out. But yeah, they are.  They're upside down. They're literally upside down. The Supreme Court's on the bottom and the.  All right. Well. Perfect story for you because no one else would have been able to explain it that well. Hey, lastly, you know, if we have people watching the show and saying, man, this guy, this guy's really good. How do I, you know, I wish my cops understood stuff like this. I wish he could come and talk to us. How can they, if you're an, if you're an agency head or your command staff or just an individual officer, how can they get more? And you muted yourself, think, Anthony, but um, how can I hug you? Real quick. No, I were here for the audience, but a blue to gold. You see my name.com. Just go there. And we actually, what I do mainly not right now, chip, what I'm doing these days is closed training, meaning agencies bring me in and I train the entire agency. Wow.  Um, you know, like right now I'm in my, my beautiful home of a quarter lane, Idaho. So I'm teaching all of Kootenai County, which is our sheriff's department  and Right. I just teach, I teach Texas DPS. I teach all of them. go around the Texas and teach them. all their little regions. So the point is, that's go to Blue Gold, but we also have open training, which doesn't cost you a penny. All right. love it. BlueTheGold.com guys, check it out. And we're going for a third commercial break. We'll be right back. All right, guys. It's time to talk about GunLearn at GunLearn.com, but pay attention because there's some new stuff going on with GunLearn. Now, Guller and itself, it's the first and it's the only company to offer a step-by-step program that takes you from your present knowledge level to become a safe, accurate, and competent certified firearm specialist. Now, here's the deal. That firearm, that certified firearm specialist, now it's worth college credits. They have partnered with Smarter Degree and Smarter Degree's university partners. Even if you got that  designation five years ago, it's now worth college credits, and that's a pretty good fee. And they've been doing this since 1996. They've been teaching everything that LEOs, which is law enforcement officers, need to know about firearms and also ammunition to all factions of law enforcement. Now you can start today with online training or you can sign up to attend a live seminar. And if you have your own agency, if you're a chief or a sheriff, you can actually host a seminar for absolutely no cost. It's an amazing opportunity. You go to gunlearn.com, get more information. Also hook up with the founder, Dan O'Kelly. You can do all that at gunlearn.com. You'd be glad that you did. Welcome back. Leo Roundtable at leoroundtable.com. The law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip DeBlock and I'm your host. We're joined by attorney Anthony Bandero from bluethegold.com and also Dr. Travis Schaetz. He's retired police major from the Tulsa Police Department. And while we've been, it's just been a fascinating show. I've learned so much about our, United healthcare assassin  and, and some of the, uh not really grief, some of the stuff that happened on the search and seizure side of it. And Anthony provided some great insight. and the difference between in this particular case, federal and state law and what the officers could have done, but not necessarily what they, what they should have done. You know, you don't know what you don't know. And  this would have, this  would, would have happened to anyone, to any one of us watching, watching the, uh, you know, watching the show, there's, there's no way that almost every cop would have been able to avoid what happened to the, to the guys that got involved in it. And they caught a bonafide bad guy. So I'm glad that it worked out. And of course, if anybody wants more information about how to lower liability for the individual officer or the agency, go to the blue, gold.com hook up with attorney Anthony Bandier. He's already proven that he's worth his weight in gold and then some this next story, just the news.com. have police officers on duty for the January 6th, right? They're actually suing Trump, Blanche and Besant over the $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund. So we've got a little over eight minutes. I want to cover two stories. So on this one, these two cops, they were at the U S capital. January the 6th, 2021, protest filed a, well, they were at the protest. They filed a lawsuit on Wednesday seeking to stop payments from the $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund that Trump had established. Now, President Donald Trump set up the to compensate those people who the administration believes received unfair treatment under the Biden Justice Department. There were 1,200 people who were charged in the January 6th, 2021, right at the U.S. Capitol. Charges ranged from unlawful entry, all the way to sedition and assaulting a police officer. Trump has pardoned everyone who had been federally charged, federal, charged federally. The lawsuit also names acting attorney general, Todd Blanch and treasury secretary, Todd Vesson in it. The lawsuit argues, now there's a flag coming up. Let's see if you guys pick up on it. The lawsuit argues that the fund is unconstitutional and illegal. Now these are two cops that are, that are following this lawsuit, but they say it's unconstitutional, it's illegal. It also claims that the fund will endanger the lives of the plaintiffs, Harry Dunn and officer Daniel Hodges. who defended the Capitol during the protest. The fund will, according to their complaint, encourage violence against the officers, these two officers, and it will fund violent actions of writers, paramilitaries, and their supporters. Now Hodges, one of the complainants, he is a Metropolitan Police Department officer, so he's a current Metro cop. And Dunn is a former U.S. Capitol Police officer, but guess what he's doing now? He's a Democratic candidate in the... in the house primary for Maryland's Maryland's fifth congressional district, according to the Associated Press. So that gives you any insight on the background of why the motivation for these guys following this lawsuit. Travis, any commentary on this one? I was just going through the dictionary this morning and looked up the word useful idiot and saw these guys pictures. know, American cops from 2020 just called and they don't care what these guys say because last time I checked they were battling. rioters for a year across this country and these guys have a bad day and we keep hearing about it. you know, everything in politics is through a lens of deception and misperception. This fund isn't necessarily for people that were rioting. This fund is for the hundreds, if not thousands of people that were targeted by the DLJ during the Biden administration. So it could mean some people there. I there were grandmas there  that were targeted and abused. I mean, I actually had a friend That was there. He walked by the Capitol and he saw the doors wide open and he thought they were given tours. And now we've, we've heard witnesses talk about this, how they were coaxed inside the Capitol. He literally saw the door open his buddy goes, Hey, they're giving tours of the Capitol. You want to go and something in his mind said, no, let's keep walking to the hotel. He kept walking in the hotel. A weeks later,  FBI is banging on his door. He didn't even go to the Capitol. Okay. because they pulled cell phone data and credit card data from every American in that city at the time, and they started investigating everybody. So it's these individuals that I think that that fund is probably designed for,  but we can't be honest about anything in politics. We have to make everything about Trump and everything about January 6th and everyone's losing their minds. So hopefully people can read through this, about half the country can't, but I'm certainly hope that they can actually read and go from there. And by the way, if I hear one more time that cops were killed on January 6th, I'm to get in my car and drive to their house myself because Once again, it's all a lie. No cop was killed on January 6th. The only person killed on January 6th was killed by a cop for trespassing and breaking a window. So that's, that's the truth. And you can read the after action report from the Washington DC Metro police on that case to tell you what was going on. They were shocked that it happened. They were standing right next to Ashley Babbitt. know, there's only, you know, most cops are conservative. So we found the two cops with these two agencies that were not. So yeah, it makes a lot of sense. Now, lastly, we've only got a little over four minutes. Rumble.com, this is Butter, our favorite law enforcement video channel.  Drone footage shows a bear cat running over and killing an armed suspect who killed uh a Tulare County Sheriff's Office detective.  Good shot!  One good shot! Oh, shut up! driver side,  five feet, feet, our side of the fence,  laying down, prone down, just up against the fence.  During this time, the suspect fired additional shots, striking the driver's side and undercarriage of the Bearcat. Here you can see the gunshot to the driver's side window. So we're in Bakersfield, California right now. The Kern County Sheriff's Office released this body cam footage on Tuesday of this incident that led to the death of the suspect. But don't feel sorry for a bad guy because he shot and killed a Tulare County Sheriff's Detective, Randy Hoppert, back in April. So law enforcement, they were involved in a standoff with this guy.  His last name is Morales, our bad guy, for several hours. The bearcat used... Um,  it, uh was provided by the current County Sheriff's office. So good for them that they've got some of this, uh,  uh, I don't know if it was from the military surplus equipment, but thank God they've got it. So they're helping out the other Sheriff's office. At this point, the drone repositions and captures the third and final use of force viewer discretion is advised.  And so the current County Sheriff's office is supplying it. Eric Morales or bad guy. He's 59 years old. He shot at the bear cat striking it. And subsequently the bear cat runs him over and kills him after he shoots at it. Now the Kern County, uh, sheriff deputy Chad Clark is placed on routine critical incident leave. So I suspect that he was the driver that took out the bad guy and the suspect David Eric Morales. He shot and killed this, uh, detective Randy Hubbard. Um, and the incident stemmed from an earlier, something happened earlier in the day, back in April the ninth, 2026, 10 20 in the morning. Deputy's attempt to serve an eviction notice to the 59 year old Morales and the Tulare County Sheriff uh Mike Bordeaux said that uh he had been notified about a month earlier that he's going to have to be that he's going to be evicted that he has to leave. Morales opened fire with a rifle prompting an officer involved shooting. Now look they had cops from Porterville police,  Visalia and California Highway Patrol showed up and during all the chaos going on Tulare County Detective  Randy Harbert was ended up being shot. They took him to the hospital. He later died. Unfortunately, He leased behind a wife and a four month old baby. If you can believe that the current County Sheriff's Office are investigating the deadly use of force in the incident and they're going to submit it to Tulare County on May 12th. Kern County Sheriff's Office convened an incident review  and everything was above board. Use of force was justified. Um, Anthony Bandero, uh, we have drone footage of this. What do think? Well, just real quick, I thought it was uh a great job. I mean, this this guy's obviously a clear and present danger. I've never seen anything like seeing something similar with like running over people with like the Crown Vic and stuff and blown to pieces. I did talk to the officer involved in this. The driver he says, Yeah, so when I was involved in this OIS and he was talking about he kept saying OIS when I was in. I said, because I said, what I'll do respect. It's not really an OIS. He says, Yeah, it is. I said, how he says  officer involved squashing. Wow. Wow. You went, didn't even see that coming. I thought we should go with this. I, yeah. Yeah. Wow. Squashing. Trap. You should like that one. Yeah. You got me on that one. mean, I can't remember. I don't know if Anthony's ever, uh, been funny, but that one was getting close. That one was getting very close. That was a one. That was a good one. I that one. He definitely got squashed though. He definitely got squashed. So the bear cat. The bear cat had, it had wheels and tires, not tracks. Correct. If I'm going back from memory, think  it's a regular bear cat. Yeah. It's a, it's a Ford, you know, five 50, whatever, know, well, I have five 50. And apparently chip, they're not racist anymore. Now it's shot spotter of it's racist because back during Barack Obama's days, we had to all get rid of the bear cats because apparently they targeted certain people.  Uh, but I'm we have them because  as I,  yeah, I mean, they came down on the federal funding for. I was, I was doing a lot of federal grants back during the Obama days and man, you couldn't hardly get anything that actually helped cops to the federal government during those eight years. It had to be,  right, right. You purple hair dye and things like that, but you couldn't get actual equipment to actually help cops. So,  uh, pretty unfortunate. Oh yeah. And nose rings. Don't forget the nose rings. The symptom, the symptom rings. Now you guys are too much. um,  wait, we got, we're winding it down and,  for Robin Mims and Sean Bell and all the guys over on Facebook and on YouTube, assuming that we're still alive on YouTube after  Anthony handled the little thing that he handled earlier and also on Rumble. I know that's my fault. And thanks for the support guys. We appreciate it. Thanks for watching the show.  Big thank you to attorney Anthony Bandero. Don't forget, Blue the Gold, the bluethegold.com. And Travis Yates,  I do wanna mention the window blue, thewindoblu.org, but how can... people get, I know you've got a lot of stuff going on, Travis. I'm going to pull up, I'm going to try to find that banner real quick about what you've got going on. think it's focused certified. How can people get more information in 30 and 30 seconds? Well, my main website, just go to my name, travis Yates.org. Don't go to.com. It definitely isn't me. You'll know that when you go there, but focus certified, uh, kind of deals with a lot of the videos that we talk about. Chip, we're trying, we're studying what's happening before violence, because if we know what's happening before violence, we can prevent violence. No one has seemed to have cared about this up until now. In fact, the latest de-escalation study out of New Jersey that came out this week showed force and injuries going up. So we're trying to fix all of that through actually doing real research on what's occurring before violence and then training cops to do it. Go to focuscertified.com, figure it all