Welcome back. It's time for a quick bit clip. The full episode will be linked in the description,

but this is the quick bit clip to keep you in the loop for everything that's happening on the

live stream channel. Let's get into it. The government thinks that Diddy's lawyers violated

the protective order over the videos in the Diddy Criminal case in their filing that I covered on stream on January 15th.

That filing has since been stricken from the docket and has been resubmitted in a more redacted version.

There was a fleet of filings from the government and a few orders from the court

because of what Diddy's lawyers filed. Are they still fighting over whether or not the

protective order should be modified? Yes. Diddy's lawyers put quite a lot of information

in their filing, information that characterized

the things they watched on videos that are subject to a protective order.

The government is less than pleased.

I imagine the victim is also less than pleased.

And when I covered it on stream, the Lawnerds were for sure less than pleased. And when I covered it on stream, the Lawnerds were for sure less than

pleased. At the end of the day, the defense has said, hey, Your Honor, we've complied with the

court's order. We have filed a substantially more redacted version, but we think it's unfair that we

have to. And we think it's unfair that we have to because if we have to do that, the result will be

an unfairly polluted jury pool manufactured by the government's misleading narrative and

widely disseminated by the press.

They say that their characterization of the evidence that they've reviewed is appropriate,

that it should not be sealed, and that the court should evaluate when something is proper

to be sealed and that public access reigns here.

I disagree with the defense argument on this because the protective order, including the

...