there was never any sort of show of excessive force that justified what he did so just because you get a call and and then he says i need help and there are snipers surrounding my property if all he did was travel there and sit with any that would have been one thing but what he did was he joined increases it in a conspiracy and he committed interstate travel and he did extortion and in fact he admitted as his plea agreement fully support that so it's not clearly erroneous make sure that they're going to work all the while saying that the reason that you're going the reason that you're doing it's interview with the government so there's a big disconnect between what he was  imus said that he was going to interfere with the government i don't see it anywhere yes so it was his his statements he said he was going there to be on office he said he wanted to stop a lawless government action against citizens and he admitted that things could go sideways and turned violent by his presence and so i think as your next question the reason why it's not quite as obvious of course he pleaded guilty to go to trial we have a little bit of a limited record here but the way that i can point you to it had dealings gone to trial and we put that in the record in the supplemental i've serves all the facts we had in support see the detention for mr de lima's as well as the fact that recall he did give and interview it's all on camera where he was bragging about what he was doing which is to interfere with the government so just because someone calls you and says i want you to come here doesn't mean that you can go there interfere with the government maybe if you go there and see what's happening i mean the if you've literally see an officer pointing a gun in body that's another matter because then maybe he could raise some kind of self defense but there was never any information that he had that warranted him to be a problem with that intent to interfere with the government and he tries to detract from his actions and his admissions and his own record of statements by saying well what i really had was a protective intent but he's talking about having some sort of pure motive where he's saying well deep in my heart what i wanted to do was protect that family and that's fine but having some sort of motive is different in the intent what you're going to go and his intent was to go and interfere with the government and we know that because he said so and so does this the charge include include recruiting i just mention it as a fact and something that happened as far as trying to discern his intent from his actions so i think it's one way you can study what his intent was because the question here are often that this information was not water and there's a picture of that in our answer brief in this case even airing out assault there was no excessive force by the government because the government was standing by doing carrying out the whole court orders they were allowed to have their service lap and that sort of thing and so whether it be on april th when i believe is called bundy i heard from him whether it was on april th when the armed assault took place the facts show that it at no time did any government agent engage in excessive force so that's the problem for salinas is self defense or defense of others theory because without that it's not going to be a valid defense for him and in addition this supreme court said in ruiz that when you're looking at the brady nature information and whether it's helpful to particular defendant it doesn't apply to impeachment and affirmative defense arguments that it wants to make anyway we're talking about the chorus someone still do these acts that are some facts that are out there but it wouldn't have impacted charges that you decided to plead guilty to and it wouldn't have in any way change the evidence that existed as it related to you and as it related to your intent then it can't be brady is to you and there's no prejudice because one of the things that mr dooley was has to show here understands as is objective lee reasonable likelihood that he would have gone to trial instead of because specific allegations in the indictment about to see those defendants and again as to be pointed out the just the truth they're all see here doesn't matter that he's had the information he had and he acted on that information he had it coming from private money there was never any excessive force and he decided to come to nevada is to interfere with the government and that is what was unlawful by his actions as a result if the government's theory against mr diviners was the same as very specific overt acts and those who were sitting indictment where they were accused of deceit so nobody else was accused of using to see to recruit they all came based on information they received and and then they chose how they were going to proceed with that information and that gets us to where mr de lima's was did he just come here know he had the intent to con here to interfere with the government and he had no right to do that even if he had it all that hey i think there's some oster is with guns i believe  to the sniper and i want you to come here there was no excessive force that warranted him doing what he did and that's where that criminal act comes from and leans his case and regarding overlapping liability if you look at what mr dylan is pleaded guilty to count one which was a conspiracy against the united states this specific over at that was admitted by him as part of his involvement and joint ability in a conspiracy with the assault and evil twelve so i had nothing to do with any of this to this day changes the fact that it will talk to solve and only mrs actual admission that he agreed to participate in this conspiracy he agreed to come here and help by having money and all react with that count remain sound understand what the purpose is and then when to find and start when conspirator has to commit one over act and so i just point out that over acts that de lima's admitted was committed as part of his conspiracy liability was something that nobody that splits people into three different groups so we have the sort of the architects and the leaders and organizers of the conspiracy itself and we have the mid level leaders and organizers and the reason that they were called that is what happened a little bit later and for the l example remember when he came out to the property he organized our patrols and he was doing checkpoints and he was using his military skills to tell other people what to do to kind of keep that what they were trying to do to keep the show force in the interference of the beyond wouldn't come back and so he falls into that group and then the rd group was people who were just involved more or less on the day standoff with arms of force against agents in the washing on the freeway bridge to stay in this case longer and or no circumstance where he's been in that group of those four defendants who were because the distinction is remember three of the four lived at the ranch it was their property and they're the ones and here's what's happening here one of the other ones was someone who came quite early and so the district court found relevant and helpful to those orders and it's all of the stuff that was happening early on because she said look if you had more information about what was happening early on it would have validated your claim to fear in your claims the st of four and those sorts of things then you could have made argument better to a jury and so it unless you were there during those early days which is well over a week before the actual assault that information wasn't particularly helpful relevant to you because it didn't you didn't see  organize trained and provide logistical support the gunmen and other all worst so it doesn't seem like the government did it used that's correct your honor and i'm sorry if i miss of but i think the distinction that i need to make is recruiting shortly after the assault early morning hours of april th then he does recruiting and organizing because he's saying our eight we got rid of the l m for now but we think you know to make sure that they don't come back to make sure they don't get the cows to make sure they don't come on property to make sure they the allegations of deceit and then superseding indictment or just to the family members and that forth and then who were in the tier one group and who were also underlying that how this decision by this court recently ok so you are over time