Law&Crime Sidebar - What Happened to D4vd's Millions?

Episode Date: September 2, 2026

Accused killer and singer David Burke, also known as D4vd, has swapped his high-profile private attorneys for LA County public defenders. His claims of indigency come after Burke was charged in Los Angeles with the murder of teen Celeste Rivas Hernandez. The prosecution alleges Burke killed Celeste to protect his lucrative music career, leading the victim's family to slam his claim that he lacks the funds to afford a proper defense. Law&Crime's Jesse Weber breaks down the financial details and potential motives with former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: Taking care of your health just got easier – start here with Zocdoc: https://zocdoc.com/JESSE #sponsoredHOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger, Christina O'Shea, & Jay CruzScript Writing & Producing - Savannah Williamson, Heather Berzak & Juliana BattagliaGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrimeTwitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Instead of high-powered attorneys experienced in celebrity criminal cases, Singer and accused killer David Anthony Burke, David, is going to be represented by LA County Public Defenders at trial. Now that's no slight on them, but what happened? Could a lack of funds be affecting his defense? Is David, who is apparently once flushed with cash, scraping the bottom of the barrel? We're going to take a look at what we seem to know about the singer's potential money troubles, and how the victim's family called David out in a scathing statement.

Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. So Los Angeles is home to more celebrities per capita than probably anywhere else. And when those celebrities get into legal trouble, they retain the best attorneys that money can buy. But when they suddenly drop those attorneys or those attorneys decide to withdraw from the case, it could set the rumor mill in motion, right? That is what happened in the David Burke case. Now, you might know David Anthony Burke is David.

He's the young singer behind viral hits like romantic homicide. His fame has grown exponentially over the last couple of years, with millions already pocketed from one album so far, more big paydays on the horizon. But, LA prosecutors allege that those millions were part of the reason that David allegedly committed murder. Because according to the prosecution's theory, David was in an illegal sexual relationship,

with a teen girl named Celeste Rivas Hernandez. The two reportedly met online, first had sex when Celeste was just 13 years old. David was 18, that's the allegation. They broke up, got back together multiple times. Again, this is all according to the prosecution. And Celeste allegedly threatened to reveal their relationship, potentially to the families, to the general public. So the idea would be is that she was about to ruin his reputation

and likely cost him current and future recording contracts. Money. April of 2025, investigators, prosecutors believe David, Lord Celeste, to this Hollywood Hills home where he was staying and killed her. Prosecutors claimed David let Celeste bleed out in an inflatable pool in the garage before allegedly dismembering her and putting her remains in the trunk of his Tesla. Her body was found in September of last year months after her apparent death. This is after the Tesla was towed and workers reported a horrific smell coming from the front trunk. And just days after Celeste was reportedly killed, David released his debut studio album, Wither.

Now, his investigators began digging into what happened to Celeste. David became a focal point. And he hired renowned criminal defense attorney Blair Burke to represent him. This was well before his arrest in April of 2026. Burke has represented clients such as Leonardo DiCaprio, Jennifer Aniston, Reese Witherspoon, Harvey Weinstein, the late Ozzy Osbourne. This is all according to the Associated Press. And when he was arrested, Burke and her co-counsel, Marilyn Benarski and Regina Peter, put out this statement.

Let us be clear. The actual evidence in this case will show that David Burke did not murder Celeste Rivas Hernandez, and he was not the cause of her death. There has been no indictment returned by any grand jury in this case, and no criminal complaint filed. David has only been detained under suspicion. We will vigorously defend David's innocence. And they did defend him. They did defend him during the initial court appearances, and the preliminary hearing, which we covered here on sidebar. But on Monday, during his arraignment on these charges, we learned that David has decided to substitute his counsel. L.A. County District Attorney Nathan Hockman talked about this in an announcement after court.

At that arraignment, David Anthony Burke entered not guilty pleas on all three charges. In addition, David Anthony Burke has substituted his counsel record out. Before it was Blair Burke, now it will be someone in the court. the public defender's office. With respect to what happens in the future, on October 19th, the court has set the next hearing. That is a pre-trial hearing, zero of 90 days. That means that the court could order a trial within 90 days if the defense is ready to proceed. As soon as a defense announces ready to proceed, the DA's office is ready to proceed. I got to say something real quick and then we'll jump right back into this. I don't know about you, but I kind of put off

scheduling my doctor's appointments, right? I don't want to deal with the phone calls, the voicemails, the endless phone tag, and then when you finally call, the next opening is somehow months away. It really feels too hard than it should. And that is why this episode is sponsored by Zock Doc. Zoc Doc is a free app and website that lets you search and compare high quality in network doctors. They show reviews from real patients, detailed doctor profiles, so I can compare my options and choose the doctor that best fits my preferences. You know what's great about Zock doc doc? I can see the actual appointment openings and click to book without all the phone calls and the back and forth. You can make so many of your appointments through Zock Doc right now.

You don't have to make a single phone call. Your health matters, taking care of yourself, shouldn't be complicated. Find and book the right doctor with Zock Doc. Head on over to Zock.com slash jesse to get started and check that appointment off your to-do list. That is ZOC, doc, dot com slash Jesse. Now, a couple things here. First of all, David is innocent, unless proven guilty. Have to say that, okay? But we don't know the exact reason that David chose to have someone from the public defender's office represent him, as opposed to going to private counsel. But it kind of harkens back to another major case in the same jurisdiction, Nick Reiner. Nick Reiner is behind bars, a waiting trial for the alleged murder of his parents, acclaimed director Rob Reiner and his photographer wife, Michelle. He was initially represented by very well-known attorney, Alan Jackson, who had famously represented Karen Reid.

And soon after Jackson backed out, and while the specifics weren't provided, there was a lot of speculation that perhaps Reiner couldn't afford Jackson. And it's not just Jackson, right? It's the idea of you're going to need to hire experts. This is going to cost money. Mounting a complex criminal defense is not cheap. And for Reiner, this would especially be true if he wasn't allowed access to all this. money in his trust fund. So what happened here? Did David run out of money? Is that what's going on here? Was there a disagreement in terms of legal strategy between his attorneys and him? Maybe,

but if you think about the money for a second, Celeste's family blasted David's claim of being indigent. This is a legal term, meaning he lacks the funds to pay for a proper defense and is therefore requesting representation from a public defender. In a press release titled simply David Anthony Burke is not indigent. The family's attorney, Patrick Steinfeld, said, the Rivas Hernandez family was shocked to learn that David Anthony Burke claims to be indigent. It is unfathomable that our justice system qualifies David Anthony Burke as indigent when David has five plus billion streams with 16 million monthly listeners on a single streaming platform and controls three corporations, David Entertainment, Skull Rose merchandising,

headspace publishing. The residents of Los Angeles County should be outrage because it will be the taxpayers that are picking the tab to defend this millionaire on charges of murder, continuous sexual assault of a minor under 14 years of age, and unlawful mutilation of human remains. David Anthony Burke is not indigent. His assets are protected by his companies. Perhaps he would have money if he just asked one of his corporations or if he had not fraudulently transferred assets to his mother manager, Colleen Burke, who is raking in 75,000. thousand dollars a year from David entertainment in a blatant attempt to protect his estate from any civil suit so the victim's family wouldn't be able to get that money as was testified to in

Burke's preliminary hearing. So what I want to do is I want to take a look at some of the details regarding or revealed about David's finances during that preliminary hearing, which if you remember lasted days, okay? There were no cameras that were allowed in the courtroom that day, but we do have the transcripts. And on day one and two, the state called Benjamin Greger, a member of David's management team to the stand. I want to read this to you. Quote, question, how much money did the defendant generate between 2023 and 2025? Answer, I would say he's roughly earned close to 10 to 11 and a half million dollars in gross earnings. Certainly not a bad haul over two years. Prosecutor Beth Silverman questioned Greger about the specifics of David's finances, which, it seems, were mostly

managed by David's mom, Colleen Burke, so you go to the transcript. Okay, I think you mentioned earlier the trust account. The Thorne Rose Trust was valued at 1.2 or 1.5. correct? With the real assets, yes. Could that be as much as 2 million? I don't know the value, the current value, or the two homes. Did you testify at the grand jury that the value of that account is around 2 million? We had, they had added other properties that his father owned. I don't know if they ever moved it into the trust or not. Do you remember testifying that he had over 2 million at a Morgan Stanley trust account? That's correct. Yes, he had liquid cash, yes. And Greger also revealed that there were discussions about trying to gather assets to cover potential base.

Cail costs, which David never ended up getting. Did you and Colleen discuss why you might want to help her moving money around? Yes, what was the reason for that? Bail. Last fall, after Celeste's body was found, but before David was officially implicated, the Burke family reportedly transferred property from David's name to Colleen. And there was speculation at the time that the family might be trying to protect assets from potential seizure in the event of lawsuits. Now, Beth Silverman drilled down on Gregor's testimony about that and how it differed from what he reportedly told a grand jury. Quote, and why did you tell her she should move the properties from under the defendant's name since they were his homes purchased with his money to her and her name? The understanding was the Hempstead House was for the family. So we moved title. Do you remember testifying that the reason that you told her to do that was to protect the state from any civil suit so the victim's family wouldn't be able to obtain those or get access?

to that money? I do recall, yes. Did you actually prepare documents for the defendant's signature in order to transfer title from the defendant's name to his mother's name so that you could prevent any sort of civil suit by the victim's family from accessing those monies? No, I did not. So why was the state even interested in David's earnings? Because there are special circumstances that are tacked on to the charges, including murder for financial gain. The prosecution alleges that David killed Celeste to keep her from ruining his crime. career. And it was interesting during the preliminary hearing because while Silverman was allowed to question Gregor about the money, the money that David earned, the judge had stopped defense

attorney Marilyn Benarski when she tried to ask what he did with that money. Quote, and this is from Ms. Benarski, and were you involved in the financial aspects of David's charitable giving? There was an objection from Ms. Silverman, irrelevant. The court said sustained. Ms. Benarski said, as part of your accounting on the expenses and income, were you aware of the amounts of money he gave in charity giving? Then Silverman had same objection. The court said, so let me clarify, counsel. The reason why I'm sustaining the objections is the amount of money coming in and finances may be relevant at a preliminary hearing stage to both motive and or financial gains, special circumstances, but how that money is being distributed is not relevant at this

particular stage. Whether or not someone chose to give it away to charity or keep it for themselves for their spending is not relevant for the probable cause, because that's what the standard is, Just simply the amount of money coming in may be relevant to probable cause and our special circumstance. But Narski replies, very well, Your Honor, no other questions. Now, on the second day of testimony, Silverman also called Lewis Poimaru, a senior vice president of finance at Interscope Records. And he helped drill down into David's income and future earning potential.

Okay, so $950,000 was paid in 2022. How about 2023? In 2023, 3.86. 9 mil the court says i'm sorry 3.869 million the witness is correct miss silverman says and who were the payouts made to in 2023 it was the david burke kugan trust account it was david entertainment LLC it was also under the merchandise agreement paid to skull rose merchandise LLC how about in 2024 how much money was paid in 2024 186 000 was paid now does it often occur that in between releasing whether you're talking about an album, whether you're talking about an EP or individual songs that the

income level goes up or down along with other factors like merchandising, publishing, things of that nature. It can, as it can in the case where advances are paid and then the earnings are recouped against those advances. Can you explain that? So in the case where the company's advancing money to be recouped against earnings, there might be an initial payment and as earnings are generated, it's recouping against that advance. So there may not be additional payments until either another advance is made or the earnings exceed that advance payment. So the agreement, the agreement specifies amounts and timing of the recording fund. So there is an initial execution advance that was paid upon signing. That was for 500,000. Was there also payments made out to the defendant regarding

a second album? Yes. So for the second album, 1.5 million was paid. And that was for exactly what? The agreement provides for 50% of the recording fund to be paid as an advance. So the recording fund, for album two was deemed to be $3 million. So 50% of that was paid. And that's paid upon commencement of what exactly? They're typically paid upon commencement of recording for that additional album. I can't speak to specifically if that was the thing that caused these payments to be made. So it's paid upon commencement per the recording agreement, right? It's paid upon commencement of beginning to record an album, correct? Correct. Okay. So assuming that the defendant's first album sold, well, eventually delivered his second album, which sold well. What is the value of this

exclusive recording agreement between Interscope and the defendant? Can you be more specific? Sure. We talked about how on the second and third albums, and I believe we talked about even the fourth, there was a minimum of three million, a maximum of six, assuming all of the options are exercised under the contract. What is this contract valued at? The minimum that the contract affords for the commitment, plus the options would be the $4 million initial recording fund, the $3 million minimum for album two, the $3 million minimum for album three, and the $3 million minimum for album four. So $13 million, correct? And that's just under the recording agreement.

They're not talking about the merchandising or under Skull Rose or the publishing agreement or the deals with Sony, correct? Correct. I know that was a little detail-oriented, but you can see why the prosecution is using money as an alleged motive in this murder. Look how much he had to lose. Look how much he had to gain. If it came out that David was sleeping with an underage girl, a minor, those potential

millions would disappear. That's the argument. And as the legal bills mounted, it appears David's family was doing what it could to free up some cash. TMZ reports that David's father, DeWood, sold one of the family's Texas homes. The Houston property sold for $229,000, according to TMZ. And around the same time, the outlet reports that have found information about a loan that DeWood took out against another property totaling more than $100,000. Now, whether that money is going towards David's legal defense or towards something else, it's not entirely clear.

So during the arraignment, David entered a not guilty plea, standard practice after a preliminary hearing in California. He is eligible for the death penalty if convicted, but DA Nathan Hockman says the office hasn't decided yet if they're going to pursue capital punishment. I personally believe, in my legal opinion, they're using that kind of as a potential bargaining chip to work out a plea deal. I think they don't want to put it on the table just yet. But I do have questions. I have a lot of questions right now, and I got the perfect guest to bring on to help answer those questions. And who is that perfect person to bring on? We got Nima Romani, former federal prosecutor.

He is out in L.A. He knows this case. He knows that jurisdiction. He knows that law. Good to see you, my friend. Thanks for taking the time. First of all, this was a lot. a big surprise, okay, this departure of his legal team. What do you think it's about?

Oh, big surprise, Jesse. I can tell you that, you know, I was in studio. I thought it was going to be a very routine post prelim arraignment, maybe a few minutes, enter a not guilty plea, set a future date. But all of a sudden, lo and behold, we hear that David is no longer going to be working with celebrity defense attorney Blair Burke and the court appointed a public defenders. So certainly surprising, not something that was expected. I know we're going to talk about his finances, of course, but it leads me to believe that this is about money. We saw it with Nick right now. So you don't think it's about a difference of legal strategy here? I don't think so. The fact that it's post-prelim, oftentimes you'll have lawyers that will have a flat fee through prelim.

But trial is expensive, especially a first-degree special circumstances case. It's going to cost a lot of money to get it across the finish line, regardless of whether it's Burke or someone else. Is that also because of the experts that might be required in this case if you're talking about a challenge to cause of death? No question. You're going to have a lot of experts. Obviously, you talked about some medical examiners. There's going to be digital forensics experts, right? There's a lot of evidence related to the cell phone, alleged, explicit images and videos. We've heard a lot of testimony about the Amazon and Postmates orders. obviously, there's the post-murder conduct, allegedly, the dismemberment of the body.

So you really have a case that really is going to be separated into three cases over many months. The first is, of course, their relationship and the sex crimes, the murder itself, and then the dismemberment. So you're going to need a lot of expert witnesses. Those have to be paid up front before they even allow you to retain them, much to show up to court to testify. I'm going to ask you a really difficult question, okay? But generally speaking, how much would the bill look like?

So if I'm talking about if this is a full case, right, death penalty, let's say, for example, the death penalty is on the line, so then it's bifurcated, right? You got the guilt phase. You got the punishment phase, experts, multiple charges, this kind of case. From beginning to end for somebody like David, how much would it cost to have retained Blair Burke and counsel and experts and all that? How much would he be looking at as a legal bill? Yeah, I'm going to answer this in two ways. Death penalty and not death penalty. If it is indeed a death penalty case, there are two trials, like you said, it's bifurcated,

and then there's mandatory state and federal appeals if he's convicted and he's on death row. That type of case could potentially reach somewhere between $5 to $10 million when it's all said and done. It is expensive. No death penalty, and even though California, theoretically, has the death penalty, the governor has issued a moratorium. We haven't had an execution in California in 20 years. Then it's going to be a less expensive case, but it's still going to be millions of dollars, in my opinion, to get it done if you're talking about trial and the first appeal to the court of appeal and petition to the California Supreme Court. And I apologize. Is this also because

of the quality of attorney that he was hiring? Because some people would look at this and say, okay, why does he just hire private counsel, you know, less well known than Blair Burke and company? Why not somebody else? Or are you still looking at high costs no matter who you maintain as private counsel? It's because of who he's hiring. It would be less if it were a non-Blairburg, Alan Jackson type lawyer. Those lawyers charge a lot, and it's not just themselves handling a try like this. They have associates, they're paralegals. It's a small army. So it would be significantly less if it were a less experienced, less well-known lawyer. Explain to people who are not understanding this.

Okay, so he has public defenders, what's the difference? Because let's be clear, public defenders are very, very competent attorneys. They do great work. But what really is the difference in the quality or the degree of representation? I mean, if he has to have experts, isn't it just going to be the taxpayers paying for? What is the difference between realistically from him, practically for him, being represented by private counsel with private experts versus public defender and the experts that you'd be allowed to, I guess, pay for. The state would be allowed to pay for.

Great question, Jesse, and there's two big differences. Public defenders are fantastic. They only handle criminal cases. They know their way around the courtroom. The issue with a public defender is they're not going to have the time to devote exclusively to David's case. That's really the bottom line. So if you have a Blair Burke, if you have a firm that is going to throw lawyers and resources at it, that's an advantage. It's the bottom line.

I mean, time is money. Now, with respect to the experts, of course, if you're paying out of pocket, you're going to hire the best experts in the world. But if you need to get court approval to retain an expert, which often happens in public defender cases, then the court's not going to write. those types of checks using taxpayer funds, so you may be more limited in who you can retain. This is not a judgment question, but it is something I wonder. There are some high-powered attorneys when the case is that big, that well-known. They may do it on, I don't know, a pro bono basis. They may, you know, say, hey, there's a lot at stake here.

There's a lot of eyeballs. There might be a value to us than just the fees. but I guess that wouldn't make sense in a case like this? I think that's right. I think there are some lawyers that want to make a name for themselves that will take a discount, maybe even a take on a case like this pro bono, but this is going to be a lengthy representation, right?

This isn't going to be a quick trial. It's not going to be a matter of days or even weeks. It could go for a long period of time. The facts here are egregious. I can't see this case pleading out. If you're a district attorney Nathan Hockman here in L.A., and you ran on a tough on crime approach, you can't give David anything less than life

without the possibility of parole. Maybe life with the possibility of parole. That would probably be the lowest you can go because you have a young girl that was sexually abused who was stabbed and killed and she was dismembered. And it's a high-profile case. Everyone's watching. Everyone's talking about it.

So given those types of deals is how you get voted out of office. So if you take this case as a lawyer, you better be prepared to try it, Jesse. And look, he is innocent unless proven guilty, no matter who is representing him. I just want to make that clear. Going back to one of the thing, this idea of, and I want to talk about the death penalty in a minute,

but this idea about the finances, you heard Celeste's family release that statement where they do not believe that he doesn't have the money. They're like, he's got the corporations. The money's tied up there. Have the corporations give him money. The idea, this allegation that he was moving assets as a way to protect himself from a civil judgment.

Does he really not have the funds? If that's what the case is, if that's really what the situation is, and we don't know for sure why there was a separation between him and his counsel, but assuming it is about the money, he really doesn't have it? I talked about how much money and the streams and all this.

He really doesn't have it. He can't get the money? Well, it came out during the prelim, right? One of the special circumstances is murder for financial motive, and the DA presented a lot of evidence of how much money he was making. And it was in the eight figures, more than $10 million.

So now I'm sure the Rivas Hernandez family has some sense of David's assets and income because there will be a civil lawsuit in this case. They already have a lawyer who is a plaintiff's lawyer. So that's coming. And to the extent that David is hiding or moving assets, that's something that's likely going to come out in the civil case and any civil judgment. So they're probably uniquely qualified to opine on it. The question, though, is if you're the Rebus Hernandez family, do you want David blowing all of his money on a lawyer? Right? Number one.

And number two, if you think that maybe a public defender is differently situated than a privately retained Blair Burke, is this necessarily a bad thing for you and your family? That's the question that I have. Can you talk about that for a minute, what the relationship is between the outcome in the criminal case and how that might affect a civil case? if there is a conviction in the criminal case then that conviction can be used and it can be preclusive in the civil case because it's a lower standard of proof of course even if there is an acquittal or mistrial in the criminal case that won't affect the civil case the most famous example of course is o j simpson right acquitted in l.A. The goldman's file a wrongful death lawsuit one of the lawyers i worked for our law school was the lawyer dan petrcelli who handled that wrongful

death lawsuit on behalf of the family and that wrongful death lawsuit was successful, you got a multi-million dollar judgment against O.J. Simpson. Let me go back to what's at stake here. And you mentioned how much is stake for Nathan Hockman. The death penalty hasn't been announced. My personal opinion is because I think they're waiting to use that as a bargaining chip. I think they're waiting to use that strategically. Right now he's just having new counsel. I think there's a question, do they lay that out there and say, we will not move forward with the death penalty or we'll take the death penalty off the table so that you plead guilty. There is a debate about the strength of the evidence in this case, right?

And there is an argument that evidence maybe more strongly supports certain charges rather than other ones. But am I wrong as to what might be going on why the death penalty hasn't been announced? The death penalty is always a bargaining chip. We saw it in Brian Coburger, right? Where the defense, before he tried to unwind the plea, which is due now, got a pretty good disposition of life without the possibility of parole plea in exchange for taking. taking the death penalty off the table. It happens all the time. The problem here, Jesse, is any lawyer that knows what they're doing has no real fear of the death penalty. And again, it's not about politics, but politics matter when it comes to the death penalty. So if you're

representing David and you're really concerned about the death penalty being imposed in the case, it's probably not a realistic fear. There's been no Republican elected to statewide office in California, Jesse, since Arnold Schwarzenegger. I think that was back in two. 2006. So it's not a real possibility in this case. Let me ask you this, though. Is there a concern about being on death row? So you might never be executed, but is your life different if you're on death row as opposed to, you know, general population or something like that? Potentially, yes, you're isolated, but you know, usually people that are convicted of murder

and penal kill section 288, lewd and lascivious with a child, they're going to be separated from the general population anyway because they are at risk. of being attacked in prison. So any type of child predator, in this case, you allegedly, obviously, he's presumed innocent, but assuming he's convicted, if a child murderer and a child molester, David's gonna be separated in any facility,

regardless of whether he's on death row or not. Before I let you go, being represented by the public defender, you talked about the backload of cases, can that delay this trial? Can that be an issue where they're like, look, judge, I apologize, you know our work, You know what's going on here. We can't just dedicate it all our time and expense.

Can that delay the trial for years? It can. And obviously, we know the defense has the right to a speedy trial. They frequently waive that right. And if they tell a judge, look, we're new to the case. We need more time to prepare. Judges almost always grant that request because guess what? They don't.

That's an issue on appeal. They force the case to trial. Nima Romani, thank you so much for coming on. I love having your perspective. Give us so much to think about here. So thank you, sir. Good seeing you. Thank you.

And that's all we have for you right now here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you should get your podcast. You can also check us out on NBC's Peacock as well. If you want to follow me, X Instagram, My News Nation show, Jesse Weber Live, Monday through Friday, 11 p.m. Eastern. See you next time, everybody.