Is there a part or a couple of parts that you would suggest and recommend, starting with specifically with ISA 95 and go there, start there and then expand to the other sections?

Yeah, so my recommendation is always to start with part one and part two and just real fast about the standard.

There are currently eight published parts to the standard.

They continue to get revised.

So I think the last one that was done was actually part one.

Just had a 2025 release update and some of the others they've been in within the last, I would say, decade.

There's also a part nine that is forthcoming.

And while I'm sure we could go pepper you with a thousand specific questions about knowledge graphs, maybe for our listeners, can you set the baseline of what is a knowledge graph and how would you use it or why would you as David use it?

You can't create the action to make the thing unless you have the stuff to make the thing.

Yeah.

And so within when I say just, you know, the action of that, it's, you know, S-95 or I say 95 has what's called the definition land or, you know, the definition.

This is the what? It includes the materials.

It includes the equipment.

Those are the it's the role based of equipment where I'm going to do that.

They often get conflated or what the CMMS would call the asset itself.

Yeah, so I

Yeah

... of, of allegations.

Allegations of, of self-dealing, um, um, of issues regarding, again, the most recent one regarding is she, um, um, how much she's worth, et cetera, et cetera.

And, and so I don't wanna use that old phrase, where there's smoke there's fire, but there seems to be something going on here, um, and she escapes it.

Now, she escapes it for a couple of...

In terms of any serious scrutiny for a couple of reasons.

I think the first is the fact that, what? Um, her congressional district is one of the most safe Democratic districts in the United States, that she's gonna win, or any Democrat's gonna win with 65%, 70% of the vote.

Yeah.

Mm-hmm.

We're, we're out here protecting the health, safety, welfare of our people, um, and you, as the federal government, are coming in, are making it impossible for us to be able to do that." Uh, basically, my language, not theirs, "You're mucking around in our, our business, making it hard for us to do our job, and what you're trying to do is to force us in- or compel us into submission." That's a pretty good argument, and the reason why it's a good argument is that the Supreme Court, US Supreme Court, has consistently said that the Tenth Amendment prevents the federal government, except in rare circumstances, prevents the federal government from forcing states to do things.

The most famous example is when the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, w- you know, became law.

One of the things that Obamacare wanted to do was expand Medicaid coverage.

Okay.

Every attorney I've ever talked to says they get an offer that comes- a letter that comes from the Office of Professional Responsibility, the address is on there, and it's stamped, um, in red, "Confidential." Every attorney I've ever talked to says, "Oh, my God, what's gonna happen to my law license?" Um, uh, you know, a- and so the, the, the, the, a threat of having somebody report you and possibly being investigated by the Office of Professional Responsibility, the board that disciplines lawyers, and maybe losing your license, is so great, uh, that for 99 out of 100 lawyers, that's enough to say, "That's it.

I'm done, folks." So again, a lot- again, we're just doing a lot of speculation here, but this is the scenario-

So w- help us understand whether the Trump administration is able to legally make a connection between these fraud cases and what ICE has called the largest operation in its history.

Well, a lot of what's going on here is, a- again, we start with, as Matt pointed out here, we do have some legitimate questions about fraud, but also, in some sense, what's happening here is Minnesota is being targeted.

And, and Minnesota is being targeted by the Trump administration for a variety of reasons.

You know, one of them is the fact that our governor, um, was the vice presidential candidate for the Democratic Party two elections ago, uh, or a presidential election a couple of years ago.

Um, and as we know, Donald Trump does not look favorably upon people who have opposed him.

So to some extent, there's a very personal animus here, and many of us were predicting that all along, that this was going to be a very, um, difficult year, um, um, for Walz, um, if he were running for governor, and even if not running for governor, um, for the state of Minnesota.

And so we're partly being targeted.

These legal cases can take some time, but as you're hearing [sighs] the fact that tensions are ratcheting up in Minnesota, w- how quickly can this court case move forward? What are you, what are you tracking?

So what exactly in the language makes it so objectionable?

Yeah.

I- I would say there's two things that are really quite objectionable.

One is, it was mentioned just now that it says that it's, uh, improper to solicit information if it has not been approved for release.

But you know, what the Pentagon calls illegal solicitation, we would call news gathering.

And more important than the label, uh, soliciting information is an activity protected by the First Amendment.

Uh, and beyond that, the Pentagon is requiring reporters for the first time to affirm in writing that they understand that national security is harmed by disclosing information the Pentagon has not approved for release, even if that information is unclassified.

Tell me more about that.