million is unreasonable, in light of those factors. while we have been given some details about the monitoring arrangement that the defendant has proposed, we have received nothing about the defendant's assets, both liquid or illiquid, the number and type of bank accounts and brokerage account his might have access to or the location of those accounts. and for these reasons, judge, the proposition that $1 million is too high a price for the doeft p defendant to pay for his price of freedom simply doesn't make sense. the idea that the defendant has substantial ties to new york or to the united states is actually belied by their own motion papers, your honor. the sole asset that is attributable to him, a us washington, d.c., is not even in his name, knit his wife's name. and the fact that his daughter is a student here is really of no moment. that suggests that she is most