Hey guys, it's Nate, aka The Foot Account, and welcome back to the channel. One of the most exciting Fridays today on FIFA 23, as League 1 team of the season is here. And it's one of the craziest days into content as well, because we already have the full team leaked from supposedly pro FIFA players accounts that are unlocked. We know the official stats, dynamic images, and everything for these cards. Now, we're going to take a look at those leaks, and of course, seeing those cards, how might it impact prices on this market today? There might be a big market shift in some specific prices, especially on the lower tier. Could League 1 team of the season crash the market a bit? That's what I want to talk about in today's video. So if you're excited for League 1 team of the season, drop a thumbs up on the video, and of course, subscribe if you're new. Now, before we get into that, let's talk about the madness that was Thursday for the lack of content. The content that was delayed, we knew we were going to get an icon as PC. We knew we were going to get marquee matchups. I had never seen so many people wanting to know where marquee matchups was, bro. On SBC, that we get every single Thursday. But this time, of course, with the XP involved, everybody wanted it so they get their XP. We finally got it. It was like eight or nine hours delayed. EA cited an issue with the servers yesterday as to why content was not dropped on time. But marquee matchups is finally here. It's pretty much the same thing as normal decent packs in here. Nothing's super crazy. You get two squads done and you get the XP for it. Now, we also got the Javi Prime icon SBC. It's about 100,000 coins to do. If this is an emotional player for you, for why you love the game of football and why you play FIFA, go ahead and do the SBC. We just wish it was this trophy titan. So a bit of an L there because it's not the best version of Javi. But it is what it is. Decent price. Now, at the content drop yesterday, at least this was added in objectives. The new season swaps XP progress. And this, you can do all of these, but the league one premium and the top swap challenge. Every other one of these sections inside of here, you can complete right now on this game and get as much XP as possible. And that is big because today, I believe with the new content that drops today at 6pm UK, we will be able to get level 30 if you're caught up on all the XP. If you do the objective today, like we have XP from last week's Carasco objective, right? You get XP for doing one of these and completing one of these. I think you will be able to see that today as a part of a new league one thoughts objective. And that might just be enough to push people over the edge to get level 30. If you're not quite there yet, like myself, you'll probably be able to get there during this next couple of days anyway, as more XP is dropped and as we complete those objectives to get that XP. So that'll be the big question. Do you take the 84 times 30? Do you take that player pick because with league one thoughts cards that we of course are going to look at here in a second, that player pick might be pretty juicy. But of course, there's so many SBCs to do right now that fodder and also with a lot of tops cards and packs, you could still pack a blue. That's going to be a really tough decision for a lot of people upcoming on this game. I'm excited to see how good those player picks look. Now, also what I'm excited to see today is if this league one team of the season is as leaked right here. And this is something that we don't normally see. And let's talk about these leaks, guys, because this is crazy. Now, let me tell you about the backstory of how these pictures are coming about. This is one photo is a basically a combination of all of a bunch of photos from pro FIFA players. There is a pro FIFA tournament this weekend and evidently EA have given them unlocked accounts so that they can use any single player in the game. And these are the official league one thoughts cards. Evidently, the up the accounts updated and they have the official cards on them. And that's where all of these pictures are surfacing from. So take it with a pinch of salt because, again, sometimes, you know, this stuff is somehow wrong. It could be all, you know, faked and mocked up, but it does look a little sauce. But at the same time, it looks pretty real as well. We're not those Sanchez's stats and Boppe and Messi. They all match the loading screen. So it looks like it could be legit, guys. This is just kind of a crazy leaking situation. But if this is the legit team, some of these stats in here, specifically on the lower rated cards are nuts. And as I look at this team, I'm a little bit worried for some parts of the market today, specifically the low tier. And that's what I'm going to talk about. Look at this Musa Sasoco moments card 90 pace, 91 dribbling, 90 defense, 95 physical. Renato Sanchez is club 90, except for defense. Lacazette looks juicy. Jonathan David with arguably the best dynamic image of FIFA 23 with the sunglasses and the arms crossed.  You've got even some of the cheap cards, right? Nudelmenj, I think it's going to be pretty affordable, but so needed for links in this game. You've got Neymar with a Tots moments card as we expected. You've got a big juice on Ben Yetter. The Fulfa, the midfield here of these three guys, Fulfa and Sasoco, Renato look absolutely nuts. And I would almost guarantee you today that Renato is going to be the most expensive of these three. But Fulfa and Sasoco, to me, don't look like they're going to be more than probably together like 500 or 600,000 coins. I really feel like what I said earlier in the week with these cards, it will be interesting to see if these stats are true as they get put out into the game today. But these cards on the low tier might end up being really, really cheap right away and pretty packable, just because also there's so few gold cards in league one, which kind of makes the pack weight on the bottom tier of this team of the season a lot higher. So those are the cards that we have leaked right now. There are a couple of other ones that were not added into that graphic. The goalkeeper into the team is Samba and he has a nation swap from the Congo to France. He is actually going to be dropped as a French goalkeeper, which will help out with a lot of squad building, a nice link to Fulfa as well. And Medina the center back and then also leaked as a part of this squad is Klaus.  So no Hakimi as it seems. And that looks like a card. We're all going to get tired of packing and it's going to be one that's probably less than like 50,000 coins, even as early as today on this game. Honestly, guys, the low tier of this team looks really cheap. And I think we'll talk about that a bit more later and how it could impact the market. Now, the big league, you might see the flashback, right? We're going to zoom in on this in a second. This is our SBC. We're supposed to be getting today. We believe the flashback Kim Pembe. They did not give him 90 pace. I was hoping they would. They just gave him the 89 just to make us mad. But that looks like an absolutely insane center back that I would be very worried about center back cards on this game today with this SBC potentially dropping. It's a really nice upgrade over a centurion's card, which was needed. Now, the one thing I'll say is he's got 76 defense and also 76 agility. So I would imagine that his agility is not going to go over 85 today with his boost of going up to 83 dribbling on a flashback SBC. But if they do, he would no longer be lengthy. And I think it is crucial for you to keep this card as a lengthy card. But with this SBC dropping today is what it looks like. That is a crazy card with the links, with the stats. It all comes down to the price, right? We see the stats here. It comes out of the price. If this SBC is less than 500 K, it is going to be a bad day to own other center backs on this game. There are going to be prices dropping everywhere. If that card comes out at a very affordable price today, again, I think anywhere under like 600,000 K, 600,000 coins would be a decent price that can pay and a price that a lot of people would want to go and do right away, especially a lot of people opening packs today. Maybe some saved up packs, the league one specific packs, lightning rounds, store packs. I think today we're going to look at store packs in a minute. I think those are going to be huge for the pack weight for team in the season. A lot of people are going to be opening those. So can pay, I think it's going to mud center back prices today. Just watch out and we'll have to see what the price on that SBC is. And I want to talk about objectives because you may have seen these leaks yesterday for Openda, Treore and Bamba. Three cards here that are not in this leak from all the other cards we have seen leaked so far. This to me basically points to what we have seen this past week inside of the objective chase, where you got multiple cards inside of one objective, right? Inside of the Carrasco, you've got the Carrasco. Of course, you've got Pal Torres and Issy inside of like the the milestones for the daily login, we had the, what was his name? I forget his name, the Castellanos card. That almost to me is what this seems like. Maybe today we're going to get an objective with like Openda as the main card to claim, or maybe it's Treore or Bamba, right? But inside of that, you maybe get a couple other cards. So we don't have the official cards for those just yet. But those that might be how we see this card dropping out of the game today. These could also be SBCs. We don't entirely know. So we're kind of curious about those. But again, so many like solid cards, right? And I think what this team looks like to me is a lot of people are going to be transitioning out of some cheap cards that are in their team currently into some of these new cards. So that's kind of the team right there. Now let's talk about market. If these cards are going to come out today at really good prices with really good stats, again, the combination of good stats and affordable. We've seen that crash the market before. Who remembers Bruno Gamerash in the Premier League team of the season? This card was 200,000 coins just a week ago. He's down a little bit now already. But when he first came out, and this is a great example, right? Because we have a lot of midfielders coming today as well. When his Tots card was first released, it was a lot cheaper than we thought it was going to be because his max price started very low. It was like 350k and he wasn't as high rated as we thought he maybe was going to be. But if you compare this Bruno Gamerash card, who is 170k with like the Fofana, right? Who's got 90 dribbling, 98 physical, 90 defense. It's not that far off, a bit more physical and a bit more defensive for Fofana. But with the new card for his dropping on the game today, probably pretty high pack weight there, I would not be surprised if Fofana is like 200,000 coins, 250k or less by the time the dust settles on the game today. Unless the pack weight is like crazy bad, like it was for La Liga. I don't even see that being possible with these League 1 cards. I think the low tier is going to be super duper packable. And I think that could hurt your other low tier Tots cards on this game. That's where I'm most worried about the market today. Some of the lower to middle tier midfielders could be hurt in price because these new cards look cracked and they look cheap, right? That's how primarily it was. Cracked cards at pretty low prices and it really hurt a lot of the market. People were selling old cards that they had maybe for birthdays, fantasy foot and stuff like that to get these new primarily Tots cards in because they were pretty cheap. That might be the same situation today. These cards might look pretty affordable to most people. They will sell what they had as team of the season cards from before to try out these brand new ones in their squad. That's where I'm a little bit worried about the market today, which is also why I started to take some of the cash on, especially my Nuno Menj card. I had some Nuno Menj that I bought at 130,000 coins, selling them at 170K because, yes, his new card is going to have 99 pace, 87 defense and 88 physical, which is a really, really big boost. But I don't think this card today is more than like 300K. Maybe it's even less than that because, you know, you've had a lot of really good left backs in this game released already. And he just seems to be really packable. And he's only 93 rated as Tots card is. And again, I'm just so worried about the low tier of this team being pretty packable. So I sold those selling into the hype like we talked about yesterday is always the safe route. If you want to risk it, you can. Some of these cards from League One out of pack specials could go up further after content as people, of course, look for the Cup today and objectives and building out teams that may be linked to Campembe. But I would just be very careful. I'm not thinking it's a full on market crash. I actually picked up a team of the year Messi for 3.7 million coins just a few hours ago because I think the new Messi card today, even though it's got the same stats, maybe a little bit worse than you might think than this team of the year. The new Messi's got 94 pace, minus one shooting and passing. Still has maxed out dribbling, but it has plus two physical and it's got striker position change just because of the day one rarity. I picked up a Messi at 3.7 because I think this card could go up another 100 to 200,000 coins as people see the new Messi being super rare, super hard to get today and striker position change. So this one could go back up in price. We'll see gets a bit of a gamble there. But we saw it last week with Benzema and Militao and others. So I'm taking a bit of a gamble there on the Messi. But other than that, I am pretty liquid in terms of my coins. I'm waiting to see what sort of madness this market brings to us today. Now, remember, if you're trading with any cards today, the number one tip that I can give you is make sure you are selling those cards around two to four hours after the content drop today. Because that is, of course, when we are going to see the peak amount of demand for weekend league teams and people that are going to be playing weekend league and buying those cards for their teams. That is when you're going to see the peak amount of demand. I'm about to buy that Alexa Sanchez right there, 253. That's like this is like two videos in a row where we're getting like 30 K 20 K undercuts for these cards. And I can go ahead and sell that right now. It looks like for like 275. So I might go ahead and do that.  That's going to be when you will probably see your highest prices. And once again, I will tell you, just be careful with the market today. Man, with the way this looks, if the SBC content is really good, if the cards and packs end up being pretty cheap because they are packable, then things could get a bit messy. Now, the flip side is these cards maybe are all of a sudden like unpackable, like the La Liga team this season was. And these card prices could be very, very high. And in that case, you might see some of your La Liga cards actually go back up in value. Maybe not the center backs like Kune, Militao. I watched today very carefully because of the Kempembe. And especially some of your middle tier ones like maybe Modric, maybe Devandalski, maybe there's a panic sell on those cards after content and then they go up. But I feel like the best chance these cards have of actually going up this weekend would only be if somehow this team today starts out very expensive and I know these cards look crack and some of these cards are going to be very expensive. But to me, it comes down to Fofana, Sisoko, Verati, Jonathan David, those middle tier of cards, not the Mbappe, not the Messi, not the Neymar. Those we know are going to be expensive. But if the rest of the team is somewhat affordable and comes out on the market semi cheap today and is somewhat packable, I think that's going to mean some bad things for the rest of the market throughout the weekend. And maybe it doesn't mean like a huge crash today that might not take effect until we get throughout the rest of the weekend. So safe route is sell into the hype. If you're worried about something today that is in your team, that's kind of the way that I would go about it. Now, store packs as well today, I'm very interested to see in because I mentioned this in yesterday's video and I want to talk a bit about it now. We have some crazy store packs that have been added. Now I'm going to do a few more upgrade packs today. And speaking of packs, we also have to think about the flash upgrade SBCs. That's been the thing we have seen this last week, two or three weeks in a row now, we've had that 86 times two SBC that is dropped. That might drop again today and we'll talk about fodder in a second as it relates to that. All these store packs that are team and season related for La Liga, they're going away today. We're getting some new ones. Now, I don't think we're going to see all of these packs today. But remember that Bundesliga player pick that crashed all the Bundesliga prices last week? Yeah, it's coming back for league one this time. And it just looks like the exact same one that was dropped during Bundesliga. It looks like it's going to be in the store. Don't think that's today. That's probably going to be sometime during the next week. Probably Wednesday. It's when we saw when Bundesliga was dropped, but a league one tots tiebreaker pack contains 30 rare golds, five guaranteed from league one. You're going to notice inside of these packs that there aren't that many guaranteed league one players inside of it because there are not that many league one rare golds, right? So that's the thing that I have to say, just be very, very careful with because like this La Liga Tots foundations pack contains 25 rare golds from La Liga alone, 185 plus. But the league one foundations pack contains 50 rare golds, but only 10 of them are from league one, unlike 25 being from the La Liga pack. So again, that's another reason why I think the Tots weights going to be really, really high today because there's just so few of those gold cards in which we're going to now turn to the team in the seasons in the packs just because of less players being in league one on this game, league one tots starter pack. This one's probably going to be like that 30 K pack or 15 came back. There was out five rare gold players with one guaranteed to be from league one. That'll probably have a decent percentage of a tots and then you get the moments loans in there too. I don't know if they'll do the 10 coin pack today. I hope they do that. And then we have a new icon pack in the code 90 plus prime slash mid icon player pack. This is very underwhelming if that's going to be released as an SBC that is actually, you know what this is. This is compensation because people were getting the wrong pack from the pack that was in the store. That icon cheer pack was giving out 89 I continent. That's compensation is what that is right there for people that packed like 89 closer. That's a compensation pack. That's probably not an SBC league one tots essentials pack 20 rare gold players five from league one. Okay. And then your guaranteed league one and super league tots packs super league are going to be on Monday. One quick shout for MLS. I would not hold on to these cards today. Mukhtar, Vela, Almato, the cards that hold value. Definitely going to be dropping down in price because they're going to get supplied from the lightning round packs. But I think that what we might notice today is the pack odds for league one might be pretty good. Right. Again, as I said, there are just fewer players that are in league one in total and that could increase your chances for a team of the season player out of those packs. And I think that's going to drain more coins off of the market this weekend, which is a little bit scary to me in terms of how the market may look. Now, I mentioned the flash SBC. Let's talk about fodder. Will fodder actually rise up today? Here's what I would tell you. I would wait until we actually see the flash SBC released because it's been the 86 times two the last two weeks. But I think during prem tots or maybe it was community, whatever it was, there was like a player pick that was released as well. If they do the 86 double today, I would go straight to the market and I would buy up some 83s and 84s, even though 84s are stupid expensive, I would stock a couple of those and 83s as well. Last week, when this happened with 83s, 83s went from you can see right here on the graph last Friday, they went from 1.7 to 1.8 K SBC is released, boom, the next couple hours, they go to almost 3000 coins as people are doing that SBC, even after the content drop when all of those packs are being open for lightning rounds and stuff, those prices still went up. So that's what I would wait to see today is if we do get that 86 double, then I would go by the fodder because if we don't and they just require like a rare golds for a player pick, which it seems like they're kind of watering down the packs anyway, since there's less players in league one that could be a possibility for today, then you of course wouldn't want to invest ahead of time and risk losing some coins there because these 83s, if there's no flash SBC that requires them today, we'll go back down probably 1000 coins, 84s are going to go back down to like 4000 coins. If there's nothing that requires them today fodder is definitely going to drop and that's why you're starting to see the prices dip down already 9k for a bombing after all these guys were like 11k yesterday. So they're starting to drop, but that's because people know supply is coming. Now for the top tier, I would say top tier this weekend is going to be a really good investment opportunity, but wait for the supply once again today. And also we got to talk about this early league one upgrade packs are going to be in such high demand later on this week as early as tonight on this game. Start stocking gold rares at 650, 700 a piece, get them in your club, get them on the transfer list because they are going to start going up as soon as probably Saturday night, Sunday morning, those prices are going to start to rise because there will be so much hype to try to pack league one team of the season cards later on this week. So it's going to be a crazy day of content today. I'm super excited for it and I'm hoping that maybe just maybe one of these saved up packs can get me a big team of the season card. Of course, if you have 75 times 11 league ones, I packed Ben Yetter last year out of the safe pack right away. That could maybe happen again this year. I have to get very, very lucky again, but good luck to all you guys opening packs today. Drop in the Twitch stream. We'll be talking about the market opening packs and having a blast today for league one team of the season. That link is in the description once again. If you enjoyed today's video, drop a thumbs up on a comment down below if you have any questions and subscribe if you are new. See you guys in the stream today. Happy league one tots. It's been Nathan Wood Accountant. See you there. Peace out.


of the carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions that are building up in the atmosphere, hence the term carbon majors. So these cases, and I'm about to show you a chart, which is a little hard to read, but you can have it for future reference. These cases are tort cases for the most part. They're not the usual environmental cases, seeking compliance with regulatory standards, permit requirements, and so forth. Nor are they constitutional cases. We've got examples of those kinds of cases as well with the famous Giuliana case, which is still sort of lurching along. I guess I'd characterize right now back before Judge Aiken in the Oregon Federal District Court with an argument tomorrow on whether that case should remain viable or be dismissed entirely. But we're not talking about constitutional claims either, although there are lots of those in various stages of litigation around the world. We're zeroing in on tort cases and specifically state law-based tort cases. So state common law is the basis for all of these, well, state common law, and in some cases, state statutes, we should amend to say, which I'll show you on this chart. So let's see if we can pull this up and you can take a look. So it's a little bit hard to read and you don't have to try to read it word for word, but it gives you kind of a sense of the, you know, sort of the tremendous scope of all the cases that we're talking about. And then I'll circle back to the Baltimore case more specifically. So you can see here that these are cases filed by cities, by counties, and by states. We don't yet have any tribal cases, but I can predict that we will be seeing that before too long. And as I mentioned, they're tort cases. So you're going to be familiar with a lot of the tort theories that are being brought in these cases. The early cases focused a lot on nuisance and particularly public nuisance, but also as you see there, trespass, negligence, strict liability, defective design of the product. And of course the products we're talking about here are oil and gas products, you know, the oil we burn in our furnaces or the gas we burn in our cars, unless we have electric vehicles. And by the way, I'll put in a plug for Hyundai's Kona, which we just bought, it's a fabulous car, check it out. And lots of great benefits and discounts to buy one these days, even for struggling law students. So design defect, failure to warn, and then there's a whole category of consumer protection-based cases, which you can see here. And those consumer-based cases are not seeking the same kinds of damages that some of the other tort cases, the nuisance and trespass and failure to warn cases are seeking. These are based on state consumer laws, which typically are codified in statute. And as you see here, they're being brought by the attorneys general. These are obviously blue state attorneys general. We don't know of any red state, Republican state, attorneys general that have brought any of these cases. In fact, the Republican attorneys general can intervene in opposition to these cases and in defense of the oil industry or file amicus briefs and so forth. So, you know, this just kind of gives you a sense that, you know, we're talking about a return really to basic common law doctrines. And if you remember towards, you remember that that involves a question of duty. You know, what duty do these companies owe to the public, to their customers, their shareholders and so forth, and then breach of whatever that duty is, and then damages from the breach. So, the framework of these climate liability cases, you know, although they're dealing with the global phenomenon of climate disruption and all of its manifestations, the legal framework for the cases is the same as it would be in other tort cases, whether you're talking about the tobacco cases, the MBTE cases, which involve the gasoline additive that has contaminated a lot of public water supplies. More recently, we're seeing a wave of litigation against PFOS and PFOA, the forever chemicals, you know, celebrated in the movie Dark Waters, which some of you have seen. And on and on, you know, Monsanto's Roundup, Glyphosate has now resulted in four multi-million dollar judgments. All of these tort cases are based on that same basic formula, duty, breach, damage. And the same is true of these climate cases, although as we'll see, the climate cases do present a lot of novel questions, not only of law, but of proof and evidence and burden of proof and allocation of responsibility. So, the next thing to note in this chart is, you know, where do these cases stand at the moment? You know, all sort of in the framework of, do these cases actually have a chance of succeeding? In other words, will one of these cases actually result in a jury verdict, which would be, you know, measured in the billions, multi-billions of dollars, or not? Or will they fizzle out and disappear like so many of the climate cases so far? And so, a quick rundown is that all of these cases were brought in state court and under the federal rules of civil procedure, they can be removed to federal court. The oil industry has attempted to remove all of these cases to federal court. So far, none of those efforts to remove cases filed in state court to federal court have succeeded. All of the cases were actually remanded back to state court. And with one exception, that's the New York City case, but that case was actually filed in federal court, so it was not removed from state court. I'll talk a little bit more about the New York City case time permitting as we go, but stay focused on these cases that were filed in state court, removed to federal court, and then remanded back to state court. And you can look for yourself on the right hand here for the procedural status of each one of these cases. Time just doesn't permit to go through every single case. So let's talk about Baltimore and how it affects the progress of these cases on this chart. Baltimore, you know, brought its case in Maryland district, Maryland state court, and it was removed to federal court and then remanded back to state court. Then the industry appealed to the Fourth Circuit, Court of Appeals, and in the appeals to the Fourth Circuit, the oil companies focused quite a bit on the doctrine of federal officer participation. And their theory was that because oil companies almost everything they do in one way or another involves the federal government, either through leasing or contracting or regulation, the federal involvement in oil and gas development is of course pretty extensive. So the industry was trying to make the argument that in some cases they were actually acting at the direction, as they put it, of various federal officers. I mean, in one case, for example, the federal government was buying oil and gas and putting it in the National Petroleum Reserve for obviously emergency use. And, you know, the industry was arguing that kind of federal directive or federal involvement triggers federal jurisdiction. They had seven other possible grounds for federal court jurisdiction in addition to the federal officer involvement. And so when the Fourth Circuit took up the appeal of the remand of the Baltimore case back to state court, it focused solely on the federal officer question, not the other seven grounds that the industry was arguing. And it's a convoluted argument based on the text of federal law, federal civil procedure, which I'm not gonna spend any time on because it really doesn't matter at this point. What the Supreme Court said is the Fourth Circuit was wrong to just focus on that sole ground of federal officer involvement. The Fourth Circuit should have considered every conceivable basis that the industry was arguing for why the court, why the cases belong in federal court, not withstanding that the cases, the pleadings in the cases, the complaints in the cases make out solely claims based on state law. There's no reference whatsoever to federal law in the complaints that have been filed in these cases. They're strictly state common law based claims. And the reason for that is twofold. One, the Supreme Court has ruled in another case called AEP, American Electric Power, versus Connecticut, that there is no federal common law basis for claims for either injunctive relief or damages against the oil companies. No federal common law basis for those cases. So there've been several cases brought based on the idea that there was federal common law. They've all been dismissed and no one argues any longer that there's any basis for these cases in federal common law. Second, nor is there any basis in the Clean Air Act for these cases. These are damage cases. These are cases seeking money for the damage that climate change is causing, not injunctions. These are not cases seeking to enforce any regulatory requirements of federal law at all. So the Supreme Court didn't reach any of those specific questions in the Baltimore case. It didn't reach the merits. Justice Gorsuch wrote the opinion. His very first paragraph in the opinion said flat out, this case has nothing to do with the merits of the claims that have been brought, which of course was a big sigh of relief to the plaintiffs in these cases because there was some concern that the Supreme Court, even if it didn't explicitly rule, which was unlikely on the merits of the cases, it might say something fairly negative about these cases, but it didn't. It stayed completely away from the merits of the cases. So the upshot of the Baltimore case is that not only was the Baltimore case sent back to the Fourth Circuit to consider these other possible grounds for first federal jurisdiction, but several of the other cases that are on this chart were also sent back, including the Boulder case. The city and county of Boulder have brought actions against the oil companies for, among other things, the drought and the interference with water supply and snowpack and so forth that's occurring in the West. The same thing for Rhode Island. That case was sent back to the First Circuit for further proceedings. And the Ninth Circuit cases involving San Francisco and Oakland, San Mateo. So four different circuits had cases pending, appeals pending on this question of federal jurisdiction. And as a result of the Baltimore case, it's clear now that we're gonna see another period of time pass while each of these circuit courts deals with these remands. And there may be further appeals of some of these other cases as we go forward. And the rule now is gonna be whatever bases the oil companies are arguing for federal court jurisdiction, those have to be adjudicated through the appeals process in the federal courts. My prediction on this is that these are not stoppers. I've looked at every single opinion that's been written in these cases. And with one exception, they have all rejected every one of the grounds on which the oil companies are claiming federal court jurisdiction. If there's questions about that, you can ask me at the end. But my read of the cases so far and the law sort of in general, is that there is no basis in federal court for these cases to be removed from state court. And therefore, after this period of time, while we sort out some of these jurisdictional arguments my prediction is these cases are gonna wind up back in state court. Now, one thing to keep in mind is that even though the cases are being litigated in state court, that doesn't prevent the oil companies from making arguments like federal law does preempt some of these state common law cases. And one of the arguments that the oil companies is making is that the Clean Air Act preempts any of these state common law cases. The problem they're gonna face in that argument is that the Clean Air Act, like the Clean Water Act, contains a specific savings provision which was specifically designed to preserve state common law claims against entities regulated under the Clean Air Act. And we have quite a bit of precedent for that point. What we haven't seen, of course, is a case quite like this which is against the producers of the products not the power plants that are emitting or the other industrial sources that are emitting the greenhouse gases. So there is an interesting legal question of does the Clean Air Act apply at all in these cases? The industry, of course, is gonna argue, and it's true, that the basis for the state claims for damages is based on the emissions. It's not based on the process of extracting and transporting the oil and gas. It's based on end-use consumption of oil and gas and the emissions that result from that. So that's one of the novel questions presented in these cases, and that is how should the Clean Air Act be interpreted in the context of these cases? And more specifically, how should the savings provision be interpreted? If the Clean Air Act applies, then the savings provision does apply and it must save something. It can't be a dead letter. It can't be a null set. And so we'll have to wait for further developments on that front, but just put a pin in that preemption question, because it's clearly one that ultimately is gonna have to be resolved by the US Supreme Court. The question there is when the industry was actually hoping that the Supreme Court in the Baltimore case might say something about that and it might even go even further and sort of cut through everything and just say, rule by fiat almost, oh, all of these cases are preempted, but it didn't do that. It was very careful not to do that. So now we're gonna have to wait and see how the industry seeks to inject this federal preemption argument into the case and whether it can get that argument back in front of the Supreme Court before one of these cases actually gets to a jury, gets to trial. So that's something to keep an eye on. So that's enough for now on sort of the procedural status. Again, people can ask questions before we're done on any of that. It is convoluted and it's multi-layered. So if there's a little bit of uncertainty and confusion, that's not your fault. Let's go to the broader question for a moment. What kinds of damages are these cases seeking? What are they alleging? And what are they gonna have to prove by a preponderance of the evidence before a state court jury? These are all jury cases so far. Maybe some of the consumer protection cases might be bench trials, but let's stick with jury trials for the moment since that's the big game. That's the major focus of these cases. And so the first point is what kinds of damages and the early cases, the California were the earliest cases and those were almost all based on a combination of sea level rise, coastal erosion and saltwater intrusion. They didn't actually at the time, the cases were filed bring in the wildfire, the catastrophic wildfire damages that are occurring. It would not surprise me to see those come into these cases at some point. Same thing with the Boulder case. It was primarily about water supply and the interruption of sort of the regular pattern of both precipitation and runoff and the need to build bigger reservoirs to capture more of the runoff and so forth. In some cases, Baltimore being one flooding with intense downpours and rainfall that's creating these enormous sinkholes. If you go online and Google Baltimore sinkhole, you'll see exactly what I'm talking about. I'm sure it'll be an exhibit in the case and an entire roadway in Baltimore collapsed with all the cars that were on it falling into a 30-foot hole in the ground and so forth. And we know that sea level rise and the associated impacts of flooding is being exacerbated by climate change. Flooding happens without climate change. Sea level rise to some extent, not much happens without it. Drought happens of course, wildfires happen of course, but as you must know by now, what human-caused climate global warming is doing is it's exacerbating, amplifying all of those effects. It's weather on steroids is the way that the climate scientists explain it.  And this introduces the whole concept of attribution science. And there are two ways to think about the question of attribution. One is how much of the damage that we see from sea level rise, drought, wildfire, so forth, attributable to temperature increases, global temperature increases and the related effects of those temperature increases like increased precipitation in the atmosphere and so forth. So that's one question. How much of the damage you see in these extreme events can you attribute to climate change? And then the second question and the most important question for these cases is how much of that damage that's being caused by climate change be attributed to these individual defendants, these individual oil companies? So that's called attribution. You might also think of it as allocation of responsibility for a tort. This is a mass tort kind of context we're talking about. And you have to figure out how to allocate responsibility when you have an indivisible problem which climate change is because all of these gases, greenhouse gases, mix very well in the atmosphere. So these are indivisible harms in the context of tort law, which means that parties that are found liable are jointly and severally liable for the damage. And that means that any one of them can be tagged with the entire cost of the damage being caused. If you think about Superfund and the cleanup of hazardous waste sites, that's the most outstanding example we have in environmental law of joint and several liability. And so that concept is embedded in these climate cases. So keep that in mind. So one question is gonna be, you know, what can science tell us about the percentage of damage that's occurring from these events that we're witnessing that can be attributed to climate change? An example of this, by the way, would be Hurricane Harvey, which hit Houston and the Texas Gulf Coast in 2017, post-mortem and then dumped 50 inches of rain on Houston in two days. Post-mortem analysis of that event said that at least 40% of the damage caused by Harvey would not have been caused but for global warming, climate change. So that's an example of what I mean by attributing some percentage of the damage from these individual events or effects to climate change. When it comes to attributing responsibility to individual companies for this damage, there's another body of science that was pioneered by a man named Richard Hede, H-E-E-D-E, and now many others. And these scientists have done very sophisticated modeling and calculations that can actually tease out how much of the emissions that are in the atmosphere are actually attributable to individual oil companies. So that will be another major piece of expert testimony. And of course, if you think about evidence law, you know that in a jury case, the judge is the gatekeeper for the evidence that the jury is allowed to consider and the judge will have to determine what of the scientific evidence that'll be induced in these cases, which is very cutting edge science, how much of that is gonna get to the jury and a vaudeer of individual experts under the do-bearer doctrine is gonna be at the center, I would predict, of these cases as they move closer to trial. But the plaintiff's lawyers are of course, well aware of all of these challenges and are working day and night in preparation for bringing this kind of evidence into court and getting it to the jury and then getting the kind of jury instructions that allows the jury to apply this complex scientific evidence to the claims that are made in the cases. So let me now throw one other kind of central, I think, concept in these cases into the mix. And that is, which of these various theories, tort theories offers the best prospect for success. And I don't think it's nuisance. I think nuisance law, it's not only complicated, it's very uncertain. I mean, nuisance law has been used in these other tort cases. It's been used in tobacco. It was used against the paint companies for lead paint contamination of residential dwellings. It's been used in the PFOA cases and others. So it's not like the nuisance claims don't have some legs, they do. But I think the claims that have the best chance are the ones that are based on failure to warn. And these really are garden variety or plain vanilla tort claims. What the states and cities and counties are alleging, which we've read about now for years, is that these companies knew, going all the way back to the 1970s, that their products were creating emissions that were changing the climate of the earth and warming the globe. It's been documented over and over again in internal corporate documents that the company's own assessments, their own scientists, their own technicians were warning the companies for decades that global warming was real, climate change was real. It was gonna get worse. It was gonna create serious harm. The companies needed to take account of that. And instead of taking account of it and admitting it and disclosing it in securities filings, in promotional materials, in advertisements, instead of acknowledging what they knew, they covered it up. They lied. This is a basic, simple, in concept argument that the tort here, the wrong here is the lying, the deceit, and here's the key for what the plaintiffs are gonna have to prove in court to win. They not only have to prove the company's lied, I don't think they're gonna have any trouble proving that, but they have to prove that the lie caused or contributed to the damage that they're claiming. They have to be able to show that had the companies fessed up, had they been more honest, more transparent, more candid about what they knew, and also had they taken action to address the dangers that they knew were being created and certainly not taken actions to oppose government efforts to address climate change. For example, the Waxman-Markey bill, which died in the Senate in President Obama's first term, the industry organizations were solidly against that legislation and are credited with killing it. So that's the link that the plaintiffs in these cases are gonna have to make, not just that the companies lied, people do lie, companies do lie, but what was the result of the lie? And can they make a strong enough argument to get passed a motion to dismiss or a directed verdict and get the case to the jury on the basis that, but for the lies, we wouldn't be in the situation we're in. We wouldn't be facing the damages that we're having to deal with. We wouldn't be facing the challenge of building seawalls and beach renourishment and bigger reservoirs and moving people out of high hazard areas and floodplains, all of which, by the way, we're facing and so on.  If they can get a court and a jury to accept that the conduct of the defendants was tortuous and is at least a significant contributor to the damage that's being alleged, they have a chance of winning a verdict. So how would the damages be calculated? That's another tricky part of these cases. In the first instance, states and counties and cities are shelling out money left and right, dealing with all the effects of climate change. Sea level rise, saltwater intrusion, loss of precipitation, heat waves that are hitting major urban areas, causing heat stroke and on and on. So they're gonna have to then get economic testimony that calculates how much money, not only is already being spent to deal with these effects, but going forward, how much money can be anticipated that will be required to adapt to the extent possible to what's coming. We've just seen another UN, it's actually an IPCC report that's even more discouraging and scary than all the others. It's still in draft form, but it'll be out by early next year. So these impacts are bad, they're gonna get a lot worse and they're gonna cost a lot of money. We know that extreme weather events are already resulting in multi-billion dollar loss and damage, particularly in the United States because we have such high value real estate, but all over the world. So that's another piece of these cases is, how should the damages be calculated? How should they be apportioned among the defendants? And on apportionment, the theory is gonna be market share. That was the same theory that's been used in all of these other tort cases, tobacco, lead paint, glyphosate, PFOA, all of these cases come down to individual defendants share of the market. What percentage of the oil and gas is Shell and BP and Exxon and so forth responsible for? And as I say, the emissions that result from the production and promotion of those products, all of that gets thrown into the mixer in these cases and out spits numbers, which will have to be vetted and tested in court. And then finally, the jury will be charged with coming up with a figure to award by way of damages. And as I said, even if these cases get all the way to avert it, this overarching question of preemption will remain. And I'm almost positive that that's got to be resolved by the US Supreme Court. The arguments in favor of preemption are pretty straightforward. The industry is saying, not just preemption, but frankly, a defense to liability in general is number one, we're making products that people want. It's ultimately us, the consumers that are responsible for these problems, if we wouldn't be buying all this gasoline and burning it in our cars, we wouldn't be causing these problems. That's a little clever, but that's one of their arguments. Another one is, this is a global phenomenon. And it can only be dealt with in the legislative, in the political process. It can only be dealt with by the other branches of government, the courts have no business assigning blame and responsibility. That's not really going to in the end solve the problem. And to a certain extent, they're right. Awarding damages doesn't reduce emissions. In fact, the premise of these cases is that emissions are gonna continue and that's the problem. Even if they gradually get reduced or even if they are dramatically reduced, there's still gonna be residual damage. That's the theory of these cases. So these cases are not about solving the climate problem at all, they're about compensating the victims, if you will, or those that are affected by climate change. And then finally, the companies are gonna appeal to the Supreme Court and say, even if the Clean Air Act itself can't be read to preempt all these cases, the court should adopt the doctrine of absolute preemption. This is mostly a conceptual doctrine. It's only been applied in a couple of cases that have little to do with environmental law or climate change. And it's usually where Congress has taken an action that the Supreme Court has deemed to be completely occupying some field. And that's really not the case with the Clean Air Act or any other environmental law, for that matter. But the industry is intent on trying to convince the Supreme Court it should fashion sort of a new rule of jurisprudence, which is there are some problems, some issues for which the resolution does not lie in court, any court, not just not in the federal courts, but not in the state courts either. And that only the Congress and the president, the executive branch can deal effectively with a global problem like climate change. So at some point, I expect to see in the US Supreme Court those kinds of arguments being laid before the court. And as I say, we'll have to wait and see how that works out. So with a couple of minutes to go before I stop, let me bring the shell case into the mix here a little bit because it is an important development. Some of you probably have heard about, read about, studied the Urgenda case, which is the Dutch Supreme Court decision, which is so far the most significant judicial decision on the question of climate mitigation in the world. And the Dutch Supreme Court actually ordered the Dutch government to immediately reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25% by 2020. And the Dutch government complied and adopted a whole bunch of policies and shut down some coal plants. And rather than fight the decision of the Supreme Court, it decided to accept it and actually enact policies and actions to achieve it. And the Urgenda case was based on primarily the European Convention on Human Rights and two provisions of that convention. But it was also based on Dutch tort law, Dutch constitutional law, and clearly the Dutch courts are more open to judicial intervention in cases where the courts are convinced that that intervention is justified with due regard for separation of powers. The, you know, the Urgenda decision goes in great detail in explaining why climate change presents the kind of existential threat that requires judicial intervention, particularly where constitutional human rights are involved. So that's the background to the Shell decision is the Dutch Supreme Court decision in Urgenda. And then the same organizations that brought the Urgenda case followed up by suing Shell, Royal Dutch Shell, again, under constitutional and human rights arguments. And in this case, it's the district court in the Hague of the Netherlands that issued this really remarkable decision within the last month ordering Shell to reduce its emissions by 45% based on 2019 levels by 2030. Obviously a very rapid drawdown of emissions. The most amazing thing about the court's decision is that it wasn't just talking about the emissions from Shell's own operations. It was talking about what we call scope three scope two and three emissions, which means Shell's entire supply chain for delivering oil and gas to customers and end use by the customers themselves. Those are so-called scope three emissions. Now, if you read the decision carefully, you'll see the court distinguished between the duty to immediately reduce those emissions that Shell actually controls. That was a hard 45% reduction by 2030, no excuses kind of ruling. When it came to the consumer uses the scope three emissions, the court said that Shell must use something like all practical measures to reduce those emissions, because you see those obviously involve individual actions of millions of people and intermediaries. So those are the most difficult obviously to get a handle on and the court recognized that. The interesting thing is, this is the first time a court has ever ordered a private company to take action like this. The court did leave it open to Shell to decide how to do it. It mentioned things like offsets through planting trees, carbon capture and sequestration, promotion of alternative means of meeting demand for these fuels through like hydrogen. Shell has actually invested quite a bit in hydrogen technologies. It is beginning to invest in renewables as a percentage of its forward-looking business plan. So the Shell decision is one to take note of. Certainly the financial markets around the world are taking note of it. Other companies are certainly taking note of it, but it will be appealed to the court of appeals in the Netherlands, and that will then probably go to the Dutch Supreme Court and that will take no doubt several years. It took several years for the agenda decision to finally get resolved. But it's one to look at and it's part of this larger point that I'll close on, which is that so much is happening right now in the energy space, not just energy transportation and others as well, that it's clear that things are changing, that we've reached some kind of inflection point in the world on energy policy and climate change and investments in new technologies. It's not fast enough. It's not at the scale needed, but things are happening. And these decisions that are emphasizing the risk, this is in this case the financial risk of continued reliance on fossil fuels, that understanding is penetrating the markets, the major banks, the brokerage firms like BlackRock, these are all indications that things are changing. And I'll close by saying they need to change a lot faster and at a much larger scale. And now I'll stop and take some questions. Great, thank you so much, Professor Parento. Intimidatingly knowledgeable, as always. So to our audience, we do have time for some questions. And as a reminder, if you're watching on the live stream, you can click on the icon at the bottom of the video and that'll bring up the chat box where you can log in and add your question. Or if you're watching on Facebook, add your question to the comment box below and we'll try to get through as many questions as possible. First question is, you talked about how climate change is of a scope that really isn't within the judicial branch's jurisdiction. It's really a problem for the legislature. And yet, the reason that we haven't really been able to see any action is it seems like it keeps getting bounced around between different branches of government. And so what's a person to do if the legislative branch won't do anything and they're looking for remedies in the judicial branch? So what's your reflection on that? You said that the legislature's best, but they're not doing it. Yeah, I mean, I agree with that. And I think the judicial branch failed in the Giuliana case by not recognizing that even though ultimate solutions reside in Congress, there were still constitutional issues that deserve to be answered. For example, do we as Americans have a right to, as Judge Aiken put it, a climate system capable of sustaining human life? That strikes me as a rather important question to answer. If our constitution does not guarantee, in colloquial terms, a livable planet, then my goodness, where does that leave us? I mean, the constitution protects lots of rights that aren't written into the constitution. And the Supreme Court has found many rights which we highly value, not in the language or text of the constitution, but in sort of an understanding that what rights people really should have. So the idea that we need Congress and the executive branch to do more, adopt more laws and policies, fund more infrastructure development and so forth, you know, to me, that doesn't change the responsibility of the courts to answer questions about constitutional law or in this case, common law. I mean, that's, in these tort cases, we're talking about judge made law. That's what tort law is. And it fills gaps when the legislation itself doesn't provide a remedy for damage that's occurring from people that are responsible for the damage, then that's the precise point at which the court should step in and provide the process by testing the evidence and determining rights and responsibilities and compensating people that deserve compensation. And it has to be done in a fair way, in a due process way, but you know, the fact that this is a big problem shouldn't change to my way of thinking the responsibility of the courts to deal with it. In fact, if anything, the fact that it is a big problem demands even more scrutiny by the courts and involvement by the courts with due respect for the limits of what courts can do. You know, the courts have lots of tools. They have injunctions, declaratory judgments, penalties, mediation, all kinds of possible remedies. They don't have to take over, you know, the United States government, which is what some people claim they're doing, but they can certainly articulate duties and responsibilities that aren't being met that are creating an existential threat to the wellbeing of citizens. That's what we're talking about. You mentioned the Giuliana case, you know, that was a case that was filed in 2015 when Obama was president. You know, one of the reasons why advocates like our Children's Trust and the youth in that case have gone to the judicial branches that of the three, it seems like the one that's supposed to be the most apolitical. And so often we hope it will be a reprieve from some of the partisan politics around issues like climate change. But the federal government really fought, some would say kind of dirty in that case in their procedural attempts to avoid having to say anything substantive in the case, you know, you know, applying for cert on every little procedural stay. Do you anticipate any changes in that type of approach to litigation on these cases under President Biden? I was hoping that President Biden and the new Department of Justice leadership would heed Judge Aiken's plea most recently when she sent the parties to mediation before magistrate judges retired now coffin. I was hoping that somewhere within the Biden administration, somewhere within the White House, someone would say, this is an opportunity for us to show good faith and recognize that what these youth plaintiffs are claiming is true, that the federal government is not only failing to act, but it's deliberately taking actions that are making the situation worse. And that's unfortunately even true of Biden. Biden's doing a lot of really good things, talking about doing a lot of really good things, but he's also, you know, part of a system that is continuing to develop new sources of oil and gas. He just declined to, you know, review and cancel leases in the Arctic National Petroleum Reserve. He is agreeing to review and potentially cancel leases that were issued in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, but that little vignette kind of shows you the balance that even Biden feels he has to strike in these instances where he can't take the position that there will be no further oil and gas development. I mean, there are legal reasons why in some respects he can't do that. So, you know, but back to your question, Jenny, it doesn't look like the Biden administration is gonna take advantage or the opportunity to reach some kind of an agreement in the Juliana case that would solidify some of the commitments he's made in the executive orders, for example, that he's issued. He has to do it carefully. You know, he's gotta be careful not to set himself up to be sued. Of course, he's being sued every day by committing to take actions before he's complied with the procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act, for example, and other legal requirements. So it is a tricky thing for Biden to settle a case and commit to doing certain things, but a refusal to do anything in that direction would be a missed opportunity in my mind and an unfortunate signal to send to these youth plaintiffs who were looking, you know, justly for some sign that we're on the way to addressing these problems in a more meaningful way. Thank you. I like that caveat on Biden's doing lots of good things, asterisk, talking about doing lots of good things. I recommend that as a revised title for your talk today. Yeah. All the branches are talking about trying to do good things. Okay. Well, we are out of time. That was super interesting as always. Thank you, Professor Parento. And thanks to everybody who joined us today. Our next talk will take place here on June 29th at noon Eastern time. And we hope to see you then. Thanks everyone. Have a good day.


colonic crypts contain a small population of stem cells which divide and differentiate into either absorptive or secretory cells. The proportion of these two types of cells must be maintained at a specific ratio for proper functioning of the intestine. A new study has found that these stem cells divide in a way that reduces the amount of variation in their numbers, ensuring that the correct ratio is achieved. This article was authored by Beta Toph, Shani Ben Moshe, Avis Hai Gavish, and others.


Okay, we're back folks and we're having a sell-off in the stock market today after being stronger earlier. The bonds are still up about a full point. People are running for cover, I guess, looking for a flight to quality. We've got the E-mini Dow is down about 440 points by far the weakest. S&P is down 45 handles. The NASDAQ is down 111 handles. We've got gold selling off for the first time in a while. We almost made a new high at 1930, but then it backed off a little bit. The interesting one today has been copper. Copper was up substantially at one time and now it's lower. It got all the way up to the 61% retracement on the weekly charts up there at 431 and 432 was a number and then it went to 435.50 and then dropped not too much, it only dropped about 25 cents which is not much for copper anymore given the fact it's up 11 days in a row. The other one that looks really interesting here folks is we need to pay a very, very close attention to natural gas. It isn't ready yet, but it's getting pretty close, so keep your chart focused on that because it's coming into a strong cyclical period that we talked about several times this past week and it's just not quite ready yet, but it is getting close. So those are a couple of the ones that we're looking at here today and we'll have some fun here today. Those of you that would like to hear Jeff Hughes of Alpha Insights, he will be my guest on my show that's coming up here in a few minutes and it's always a lot of fun to listen to him. Remember folks, we have a Chinese New Year on Sunday, I believe, I can't remember what it is, it's a year or something, but I don't remember. Might be the lamb or something, I don't, someone's told me but I've forgotten already. Anyway, those are the things that are happening today. Make sure you use stops on everything you do because if you don't, you're telling mother market that you know more than she does and she doesn't like that kind of action. So we'll be back with you folks tomorrow. Stay tuned for my show, Feminacci 24-7 here at TFNN. If you're looking for potential trading setups in the future, I'm going to be putting out a video that's coming up soon.


TfNN, The Tiger, Financial News Network. Update. Everyone, Basel Trapp, on this Wednesday, February the 16th, halfway through the month, and while we're looking at, we're looking at the Dow down 193 at 34,796. Really good session yesterday. I was mentioning that it was getting towards the resistance levels that we've seen before as the Chapman Wave inside track repellent zone. We've been repelled from that level, but the day is young and what I'm really looking at is the pattern that is unfolding. Today is critical in this particular phase because this should be at least by tomorrow. It can't go very much lower than it is right now, but by tomorrow you want to be tackling the high of yesterday, tomorrow or Friday. Not only are you going to tackle the high of yesterday, which was 35,047, but you really have to be trading in that band. I'm not sure with all the news coming out. A lot of really good news, market news, and that's not great for bonds after all. If the market, if the economy is doing well, the natural tendency for decades, I mean 100 years or so has been to see rates rise because there's a demand for loans. I mean it's just as simple as that. S&P, right now the S&P is down 28 at 44, 42. Now this one also is starting to, this is very important. There's a little bit weaker pattern. This really says M shape pattern at best, but it says 44, 68 to 44, 72. Sometime in the next two days, preferably a close above that and then Friday is a good session, options expiration. One, two, three, here we go, QQQ, not a very good pattern at all. It's in the sideways H pattern that says running out of time. Within another two bars, if you don't break into the 357s and 351 right now, down four and a half, that's just not good action. IWM, so overall the market, the trend, the major trend still remains down. IWM is acting quite nicely. It's down 86 cents, but wait a minute, gold, I had a big pullback yesterday, but it's holding very, very well. I think gold is telling us that the geopolitical situation is something that we have to monitor and if you're looking at the dollar, gold's holding okay. It's down a little bit. It's kind of holding. It's a real mixed market there. Look at crude oil. Crude oil is holding beautifully. It's up to $94.14. And wait a minute, the TLT, the bonds, a-y-y-y, bonds, I've tried


What a way to begin So here we are Yeah What can we say?  So I guess we'll just kick on I don't know is there anything anyone wants to say I'm almost just curious to see I want them to explain the sister and then I want to call it on stuff Where did the sister come from how does it work? Do you think they'll just cop out and not explain it until the end of the season? I'm not sure what they're gonna do. I am ready to go is everyone else.  I feel like I'm gonna need it So I'm gonna make some predictions for this show Alice is obviously going to escape I think it's obvious mouse is going to Think anyone anything's gonna happen a mouse. Thank you.  I feel like they don't know what to do with him I feel like you're right. We just kind of shows up. Oh, we have a mouse Oh, yeah, his role in the last episode sucked cuz they needed him They needed him for their little mask thing and now that they've done that I feel like they're just sitting there going But like he could literally impersonate Alice, couldn't he could he I mean, how can he They would be able to pull that off I thought they just do it with magic like he puts the face on he just becomes the person Well, the size has definitely changed, but it's always been like a man and a man. It hasn't been a woman yet Yeah, I think he hasn't done a woman.  Let me grab a beer It's okay. The editor will totally cut out this bit 100% Yeah, you do the you do that this is the part where we normally horrendously racist, but then we cut out When we're gonna get our heterosexual episode since we had the gay one Never we have a hero Like I am heterosexualoid. I Discover and battle That's that's one of the things I do agree to when they save the multiverse only on only the gays Imagine Thanos snapped out all the heteros That'll slow down population No, this is gonna end Not that's two babies will be fine. Snoke's Snoke's for everyone What was that about her mentioning like a captain America character, I think that was supposed to be that cop guy I don't know if that was acknowledgment that the the Marvel universe is known or if it was actually her being like He is a captain and he's like America boy sort of like he's a captain America over here. All right, well, I'm back All right, let's go Happy birthday. Oh my god wait enterprises keeps changing as a building. I'm back Oh, they're gonna show this whole scene again. It's bad enough that they converted my apartment into a boys dorm room And no one she's not even fazed by the fact that a whole apartment was converted Like that's weird It's weird, it's like Distance was a race. It's kind of strange. Anyway, how are you?     I'm not gonna run out of the house. I promise Kind of He'll find out eventually. Oh, maybe he'll kill it. It's gonna be a horrible scene where they find the body of the cat Oh, it's a Cheshire cat. That's what it is. Get it.  What an amazing connection.  I wish I was free. I wish you were dead. I wish I was with my parents eat it Oh, would you wish for? Ned was about to say lame. He just goes like Good one if you say you wish out loud. It means it will never come true So she's now coming to realize that if she only didn't say it out loud, she would have been okay. Damn.  She can pull out of her clothes. It's like 17 butterfly knives They're just like don't make the mistake I made it'd be a mistake to not even try to interrogate Alice We should we should probably try it he's saying don't interrogate Alice Just let me go to jail. She'll just do riddles at you. There's no point. It's like, oh, I don't know They all give it a shot sir after that Goodbye, what are you talking about? She showed up in my office just now She's been in a holding cell for the last eight hours. Is that a live feed? Yes with two guards. No No, I have a video of it playing on repeat I just like to see her lock unlike you apparently Mary's are two Exact match for Alice's Prince in the Coast out of a doing exact match for Alice's Prince in the Coast out of this Like there's more she's a clone. I found this in her wallet. That is hands down the best pick idea they've ever seen. Oh She left the bag behind Theoretical extra galactic astrophysics and cosmology.  She not if she not told anybody about crisis no she has Oh, yeah, yeah, also that has a lot of big implications Has she like supplanted an actual Kate who existed in this universe? I don't know no matter what they tell us it won't make sense behind you. Her buck was behind her Her buck who was on the back So you think when that galactic dude put all the earths in a blender somehow she landed on this one What do you know somehow it's exactly what we thought maybe there was no crash Oh my god That doesn't make sense. Maybe there was no crash. What do you mean? What about the crash here?  It's totally makes sense. Nobody else even knows who I am Yeah, how can you not like a police station?  She'll turn it to Alice I wish came true No, no, no, be specific. No, you need to You need to tell this woman that her whole life is ruined.  I'm sorry Yeah, all the people you love they've been replaced by people who don't even know you like shitty-ass people in this universe Myself included.  Good luck with that Since I highly doubt that you'll grant me my freedom or my Butterfly knife So Do they not have to charge you with a crime and they can just hold you indefinitely is that how Surely the police this is this is not the police is the crows, right? So surely they have charged it. She's committed a bazillion different crimes. Yeah, everyone knows Well, that is no way to treat someone on their birthday. I wouldn't hold out hope for me throwing you a party That's okay One's already being planned. Oh She has a plan. What's that supposed to mean? Kate always hated surprises Turns out she's so quick all along to get arrested and sent to this house Like come on. No, I oh you have something. I want and I have something that you'll want back Commissioner for this son. Oh So no good. Can you trade? Can you trace this upload right now? I feel like you could it's probably got a fire wall. Yeah Here's a better surprise than actually announcing it just do it literally no one knows me on this earth Wow, you're chill about this on the upside. I guess the max is no me here either Dealing with this well doesn't exist everything you've done doesn't exist.  Yeah, so what was it on your earth?  None of it counts I think she just thinks it'll all be undone pretty easily. Hopefully I don't know if they go with that Well, this is the thing that was annoying in that crisis thing They're like so confident that they can just undo it whereas in Avengers There was no preach like they didn't think it was even possible that they could undo it. This is how you have stakes Alternate reality where she didn't go to you climbed back into the car and you saved me So now she's gonna think if only I would have done that in real work then Kate with this wouldn't have happened Yeah, okay gonna be guilt-ridden now. Why are you telling her this? This is gonna crush her in my hair. She just happened to reveal this information casually What did you do in this world? Yeah, how are you not asking about where I am in this world right now? You know, yeah, where is you with me?  Oh, sorry. Who is the boss of the crows now?  How are we doing on the location of hostages?   What are you talking to me on my way?  What is this music? Oh wait, yeah, I guess this is her normal bike not a bat bike I thought they were the same I like how it's raining in some shots, and that's not right. They consistently do this Yeah, they're really good at that.  Can we look at that again, please can we go back I need to see that again.   Like this is there is no way they could have There's no way because they would have had to have known that she was going from a certain place at a certain time But a certain speed They have like Second light they would have missed their window of opportunity to be at that place at that time is like point two of a second And like all you need to do is put her in a car It would have been a lot more believable because you could easily trace a car where it's going and it's easier to crash into it And but she just doesn't own a car, so I guess I can't do it.   Yeah, she'll never walk on that thing again Mouses there look at his walk How would she be how would you hit your eyebrow? Okay, did you enjoy your now? Oh, wait with her A little cut she got off pretty good all things considered I'm surprised. She doesn't have a concussion or like a brain hemorrhage. Honestly, I'm gonna go with I'm surprised. She's alive Yes, she should be dead. I may have someone that they might care a bit more about Sophie Kate Are you hurt? Why would you believe it when he can impersonate voices? Yeah, that's just that make any sense. Oh, yeah They do know that yeah unless Kate didn't tell Sophie, but Sophie should obviously know cuz she can she knows he can do Jacob's voice. So let Alice go. Let Alice go. You're not gonna let her go. Are you? No way I understand Good No, I think they do in the double language thing.  I understand it's cuz like the bad guys and the good guys it'll satisfy I'm just looking for cave even kidnapped Sorry, no easy way for me to get that out. Oh, why would you do that?  He's gonna tell her everything for no reason.     She was saying don't Let Alice go They did code and messages Quick get closer to her It's only the red king snoring that was a little code Sweater Yeah, that cat's not making it to the end of this episode You know, I've almost started Did one of you just make that noise guilty don't look guilty gaslight him or just go meow Must kill it because I'm evil Man I'm on a roll for predicting this episode Yeah, he killed the cat like that She's done this before this is weird trope in the show where she tells people about her history They feel really sorry for it. It's like guys. She's done way worse. He's killed like seven trillion At least like six or so now call my dad. He's in jail What for killing your stepmother, but he didn't do it Alice did wait She's only just found out Jacobson jail Kate didn't tell her Jacobson jail Do police exist on this earth? Honestly the Wonderland gang is always a few steps ahead The script they have the script we can't fight the script we pray to the script every day But it does not speak back to those we gotta find a way to boost it enough to get a lock on location That's she's gonna tell him what to do in the cavalry. There is no cavalry No, they'll be ready for that and that'll just get Kate and the others killed. Why what no real SWAT team doing it works Mouse demanding Alice. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah What if we give her to him? Yeah Yeah, and you know what you know why you knew that was about to happen because he was like no There's just nothing we could do. Nope. Nothing. We could do it all It's like why man whenever a man says there's nothing we could do a woman will be there to correct him and give him the How dramatic We're gonna get one of those seeds all the way with this happens in Buffy one for one by the way So I'm expecting that she will she'll get away with it at first and then she's gonna say something and it'll make mouse Look at it. Yeah, which is retarded because she shouldn't be able to get away with it at all She doesn't know anything about Alice. She doesn't know her mannerism. She doesn't know her history Dude, what if there's a throwaway line like Luke is like, okay? I've shown you all the files we have about Alice and all the recordings Maybe you can you know just they just say something like that. I could do all the trading you need for Alice Alice my heart breaks for that little girl who was trapped in that cell What are you I know Somewhere deep down.  She was really successful. She tried to specifically kill you No, did you make this make what what did you make this? No? It was on the cat already. What does it matter? No the cat knitted it itself. Wait, why was the book in pieces before?  You've been replaced. You've been replaced with an Asian Wait, how many years has it been? I thought wait, yeah, I mean she looks like she's the same age Well, did she say it was was it 15 months that he gave up after did you? Make this worse. I did. I'm the only other What this is exactly the kind of delicate craftsmanship that John You can just get graphs. That's totally the same. Oh, so that explains how she knows how to do them Okay, good job show you wanted to explain something You got one. Oh, do you immediately give some pieces of flash?   No one was coming Well, yeah, I mean your death was faked. Yeah, you seem to forget that a lot either say something terrible in a really sweet Oh, there you go. Mary's teaching her. This is not helpful Be sort of quirky Yeah, of course also, I was joking by the way, but I actually think it would be a good idea to just show her some video of Alice Oh shut up, you know, it's about recognizing it Killed my mother the last time I looked into those eyes my mom was dying in my arms I feel sorry for Beth. She's like this is all good That wasn't me though, but okay No, she's not really not that's not how humans work. You are not the same person.  Oh, okay You know, they're gonna be okay in there, right?  Oh Are there any lions or tigers about here, what are you talking about? Oh, God I should have suspected you were from an alternate universe Wait, what would what would he suspect what would his conclusion be here? Who are you? Are you another face-shifting person like me?  Oh, he splashed it over But it'll just burn off the gasoline and don't know they'll get really hot inside right sweat to death Oh my god, I hope this person didn't have a if you make it faces. I might free you They thought that shot was amazing Thank you for helping me look normal. Are you kidding me? So like she was at her first attempt, I hope that wasn't Just like the faces we can fix you are just like Alice best You are falling into those rabbit holes at least my life. He's like are you like thinking about this? Why is the lights off? Why don't you turn your lights on so they can have a job? Oh My god, did you guys catch how the music matched her eyes? Oh, this is where she turns into an insane person already. You can call me Alice. Oh, right? What what okay your mouse I'm Alice Yeah, I buy that I totally buy that.  You're crazy. Yes.  She's just like kind of elect her again Who will find line about being who was Sophie line about being? Into the arms of that Well, no, we're divorced get her out of here what what do you mean? This is the holding cell you just leave maybe Arkham will have better luck bringing out who you really are Why would you send a truck instead of interrogate?   Oh, there's still like Beth's people. It's not the real book.  Oh my god Another two kills for Alice you only had two people go with her come what?  Where is everybody guns have been fired? I may be free of my cage, but you're still trapped So yeah, I'm just gonna tell you right now.  She is even though how could she disappear in touch? She's literally Q Alarms going on She can't escape she cannot escape like there's all these also guys I'd like to highlight how long we've been away from this drama, you know, oh It's gonna be a little it's gonna be a crisis for her She has to pick one or the other you got to say Beth of these They're fine in the car. They're fine. It's just fire on the top of the hood. You're fine. Yeah, it'll burn off in just a few moments All right, you guys are free right cut through the back.  No, don't come through yet. It's not a space. That is not gonna work Oh, I kind of wanted to die they have to get rid of her they can't have her continue to exist Yeah Sony if any Luke had given you something to work with no, she's not she's definitely gonna get her out It's not really one of them to kill her. I actually would have complimented the show.  Oh I don't even know there was just some fire at the top Alice is back on the streets Well, you nearly had a rags, maybe she has super cats or she's gonna die at the end as a surprise Did they arrest mouse he was impaled or did they just run off?  I've mouses out of surgery. They're just so they got him. I came to ask you the same thing rattled embarrassed to piss I can't believe how are you not? How are you not guilt-redden? How are you smilingly fired? How are you not even in jail for criminal negligence at this point? You got two people killed they have families more than likely Like this is insane. What happened to your husband by the way?  This is gone What's going on at the gcpd?  Why would it surprise? It's not a shock at all. She's literally a superhero Why would they be like what this is totally normal got like 50 extras there? Oh boy This is a real big tear out should have spend a little bit on the CGI Turn the light on Yeah, wow that looks terrible And how horrific the music is gosh she is such a vain superhero Complete opposite of Batman Yeah, that would never do this the thing there is so much character to Kate Kane that is awful It's insane and then she shows up in front of the building before everyone else and it's so heroic everyone cheers Everybody clapped Anything happened to Alice when she was in cross custody we have to answer for it. Yeah fugitive now We could put a bullet in her know what bad an eye. What yeah, I know right do exactly that I like how she's looking shocked Absolutely correct. Yes, like every time we let her go.   You're gonna have a random heart attack or something She's so happy for someone who's entire like yeah, I know and here and Mary that they're on they're on good Tim's now Remember how they look the blowout. Yeah, they're fine.   Oh, I feel like She builds for all those people not open this is a private affair I let you die in this world But in I asked to say to different you from another world who came into this world So I feel good about myself talk about taking a potentially effective scene and not do anything with it by the way She's like she can't get to her through bars and she just walks up. Oh Supercance Oh that can't both exist the universe is gonna have to get rid of one of you. Oh good This is even more reason to kill Alice They're gonna cut the credits. Yeah, of course I want to just you kill it Just want to clarify what Mary said was imagine all the infinite universes coming together and then some of the leftover bits We're put in implying that when you put earth one and two together Everything that's slightly different just gets dropped into earth one additionally basically which like that as if that explains here But that wouldn't explain all of the other things that should be floating around this place Many many many things this just can't work.    There's an inside lever. Just pull it. That's also true. Yeah, I'm surprised that that was But also we can't have character development. So can you do that while the key is in there in the lock? Yeah, I'm sure you can yep I think it's been standard in cars for ages so that you can't get locked in the trunk Yeah, is it precisely for moments like what though has happened? Like it's so that kids and stuff don't lock themselves in trunks and so it's stuff like that It's probably almost entirely for kids because you know It only has to happen a couple times before it becomes a requirement like airbags or something probably not a big deal Anyway, just to put a latch on the inside. So, yeah, I guess Yeah, that was the thing that happened. It's not as not as bad as the one before it, but that was pretty terrible They started to say the agenda got super obvious.   It's like they persecute anybody who isn't that The first time that this has happened this is like instance number six or seven where this has been a problem for her And it's just insane to me. She hasn't even used the back crossbow man What's Alice's body count now nine are we up to nine people? I think so That scene was so frustrating. It was very painful. Yeah, it's just like wow. We knew this was gonna happen Why did they keep her the book? Why did they even give it to her? How did she get it out of there? She would have had to have opened the book, right? And kept it in her hands and you guys can go to a thirty three thirty eight I guess that's where she begins to break out I'm just giving it a little old check out as you do so she's clearly got the cuffs attached still She pulls out the string or the thread She like moves her arms and a guy's like whoa, and then she punches him. He falls over. She somehow She literally lassoes the motherfucker and And he's like he turns around by the way for no reason he turns around he just flips around she kicks the guy in the leg He falls over again, and she kicks that guy pulls out his gun. There's no safety on it She just fires it immediately.  She just shoots him Moves that guy over with it. How strong is that thread? Look how thin it was and that's wow Also, if that cuffed her arms behind her back, that's just the end for her She's an Arkham forever. So it's pretty lucky that they cuffed her at the front It's pretty lucky that he put cuffs on her legs, too Because she wouldn't have been able to do this if they were on her legs He both appeared out of nowhere and disappeared to nowhere when she threatened Sophie as well just hits the first guy with her Fist she just hits them with their hands Don't people She somehow gets the string around his throat. She laughs so is it it's impossible It's cuz she's kind of walking behind them. She's kind of behind them, which is weird Like these guys should be in front of her. No, they should be behind the way they filled that the way she hooks it around His neck is ridiculous, and he spins around they straight up cheat Okay, so they straight up just have her not in handcuffs in one moment when she pulls the gun I knew something looked off about that.  Yeah, they cheated, right?   She can't use still in handcuffs here, but she can't grab the gun with both hands and have him controlled She can't show it. Yeah, there's no way that this can happen. It's impossible. Wait What Her foot she's hooked the thread with her foot how long is that thread? She's they're actually oh my god So they're saying she hooked the thread all the way around his throat and all the way back down to the ground and stood on that While she grabbed the gun. I don't know how did the string get to that is one long and strong thread She's out out of her handcuffs when she surprises Yeah, well you can argue she got the keys off them at that point you can you can argue this they would have Yeah, you can actually see keys on the guy. She kills last. I'm okay with that part Just to clarify right because this technically makes sense. It's insanely lucky. It's not like logically impossible Like it doesn't break any laws of physics The only things are she had to have a super strong and super long thread and she had perfect control over it I can't believe the way she wraps that around the dude that is incredibly impressive How she does I'm trying to think in my head the action of throw the string because it's just a string, right? She has to take one in the string Throw it at him. She throws it at him. She doesn't throw it above his head and around yeah Yeah, she throws it right not only that but when she pulls it toward her He just spins around for no reason Yeah, because if he had if she pulled him towards her and he was facing it He could just tackle it instead.  Like how is this insane? That's so frustrating that was pretty ridiculous, but I think the motorcycle accident moments probably The peak of this These were both terrible.  That's for sure So like she gets hit by the thing on the motorcycle on her Her left and on the right eye She's got an injury that wouldn't be she would her eyebrow connect with anything if the helmet is intact Like what did she hit that he kicked her in her helmet and that knocked her out I'm still watching the fight scene the other guard the guard that she shoots first He like gets up and then he gets knocked to the ground and it takes him like a solid three seconds before he can pull out His pistol like he's really struggling to get it out. Yeah, it's one of those. I've hit you but she pulls She pulls his out and shoots immediately And he's having trouble and he had way more He had a head start on her if the safety was on that's just the end for her Well, yeah, we haven't even talked about so she fires a gun several times in pro hq So why are they not descending? There's just yeah, there's no swarm. Where's the swarm?  No, there's a hallway from the interrogation room all the way over to this place Yeah, the viewers are dropping tanks. Yeah, well guys We got a guaranteed season two and I think that that makes me very happy It's so interesting that they got the big boost from crisis there that you could see for episode eight and then it just I don't think people watch these shows outside of these crossovers at least not in the same number because i'm pretty sure We are their primary patronage I mean like only Just above 800,000 people are watching this and how many people are still staggering to me Plus however many people watch it like on demand or you know, whatever it is like vod But this is what it means super girl has similarly low ratings It has like less than a million and then it spikes for the crisis show and then it's down again I'm pretty sure this is just a trend across this entire. How is this series successful enough that they can keep renewing it? I like that as a screenshot. It just amuses me The virgin bat woman versus the chad's bet If only you were this violent to palace mass murder Yeah, I can't believe we found out by the way that this Beth she woke up one day or I guess she I don't know she got teleported and she was like, huh, that's weird My house is not my house. Oh, that's weird. Nobody knows me. Oh, that's weird. My sister is pretending. I'm dead It's like what How did she get into this universe did she just wake up one day or something?  I just it just on an awful show. I can't wait for the next We're back. We're fine. I mean it's just honestly. I kind of prefer this kind of nonsense though Oh, absolutely. At least it's comprehensively bad Yeah, because infinitisms man, we're dealing with the fundamentals of reality Can we just go back to the cop was dumb Uh, it's one of the things were just a much simpler time. That was episode 11 and uh, it was it was wonderful See you next time folks.