Latest / Brian Thomas / Wednesday's with Judge Napolitano 5/6/2026

Transcript

Wednesday's with Judge Napolitano 5/6/2026 · Brian Thomas

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: From the UCL Traffic Center. Get moving with Sincy.
• 0:03
  Speaker 2: Sweats powered by u sea Health one week of free
• 0:06
  Speaker 2: fitness classes at local studios. Find a class at Sincsweats
• 0:09
  Speaker 2: dot uc health dot com. Southbound seventy five continue slow
• 0:14
  Speaker 2: in and out of Lackland. Southbound seventy one's improving delayed
• 0:17
  Speaker 2: times have dropped under the ten minute mark inbound seventy four,
• 0:21
  Speaker 2: so a bit slow above Montana towards seventy five and
• 0:25
  Speaker 2: northbound seventy five better slow between Buttermilk and Kyle's Well.
• 0:31
  Speaker 2: Today is National Beverage Day, so why not just sit
• 0:35
  Speaker 2: back and relax with your cup of tea, your cup
• 0:39
  Speaker 2: of coffee, orange juice, maybe even something a little bit stronger.
• 0:44
  Speaker 2: The Judge is next, Chuck Ingram on fifty five KRST
• 0:47
  Speaker 2: the talk.
• 0:48
  Speaker 3: Station eight thirty two I fifty five KRCD talk Station
• 0:53
  Speaker 3: The Judge, of course, Judge Enna Paul Tyne, we are blessed.
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: I feel I'm blessed.
• 0:56
  Speaker 3: I know a listening audience is always interested in hearing
• 0:58
  Speaker 3: what Jude Jenna Paul has the Poultner has to say
• 1:00
  Speaker 3: about these legal issues that we encounter all the time.
• 1:03
  Speaker 3: Welcome back judging and a Polatana. Thanks for joining the
• 1:05
  Speaker 3: show again.
• 1:06
  Speaker 4: Thank you, Thank you, Brian. It's a pleasure to be here.
• 1:08
  Speaker 4: I'm not sure what Ingram was talking about neither mind.
• 1:11
  Speaker 4: I do have a friend. I won't tell you who
• 1:12
  Speaker 4: it is, a well known, well known public figure who
• 1:17
  Speaker 4: has sambuca with his espresso every morning. But he made
• 1:21
  Speaker 4: me promise not to say who it is, not me,
• 1:23
  Speaker 4: because I wouldn't drink at that hour of the day.
• 1:25
  Speaker 3: No, no, no, I got to wait till at least
• 1:28
  Speaker 3: ten o'clock in the morning to start getting your drink on.
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: Judge in these trying.
• 1:33
  Speaker 4: Times about espresso in.
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: My column, good for you and your column.
• 1:39
  Speaker 3: I you know, you know what I wrote on the
• 1:40
  Speaker 3: top of your column, and I read it yesterday and
• 1:43
  Speaker 3: I think you made great points there. But for the
• 1:46
  Speaker 3: grace of God, go anybody that participates in social media
• 1:50
  Speaker 3: in any way, shape or form. If the government can
• 1:52
  Speaker 3: go after you for a free speech post, and it's
• 1:56
  Speaker 3: their decision about what constitutes I guess an actionable offense.
• 2:00
  Speaker 3: We've got a lot of people that are going to
• 2:01
  Speaker 3: be hauled in and be subject to criminal prosecution by
• 2:05
  Speaker 3: the FBI. This is talking about James Comey's I think
• 2:09
  Speaker 3: vile post about eighty six forty seven, which everyone interpreted,
• 2:13
  Speaker 3: as you point out in your column, eighty six referring
• 2:15
  Speaker 3: to basically killing something or not offering anymore, and forty seven,
• 2:19
  Speaker 3: of course a reference to President Trump. At least that's
• 2:22
  Speaker 3: how many interpreted it. Judge Jenna Paltano, this is square
• 2:26
  Speaker 3: in the wheelhouse a protected speech in this country.
• 2:30
  Speaker 4: Yeah, it absolutely is. When confronted with us on the
• 2:35
  Speaker 4: Sunday talk shows, Todd blanche, the Acting Attorney General of
• 2:39
  Speaker 4: the United States, said, well, we have more evidence that
• 2:42
  Speaker 4: we can't reveal. Well, what more evidence do you have
• 2:45
  Speaker 4: and why can't you reveal it? How serious a threat
• 2:49
  Speaker 4: did the government believe this was if they sat on
• 2:52
  Speaker 4: it for a year and a half before they decided
• 2:56
  Speaker 4: to do anything about it. This is little more than
• 2:59
  Speaker 4: the President using the Department of Justice to make life
• 3:03
  Speaker 4: miserable for a person who made life miserable for him. Yeah,
• 3:07
  Speaker 4: Jim Comey, and he was the head of the FBI.
• 3:10
  Speaker 4: I mean, under Jim Comey's stewardship. Mister Donald Trump, we're
• 3:16
  Speaker 4: back in twenty and fifteen now was surveilled by the government.
• 3:22
  Speaker 4: I mean, this is now a well established at the
• 3:25
  Speaker 4: time I made this allegation, I was excoriated at Fox.
• 3:29
  Speaker 4: But it's now well established that this happened. The President's
• 3:33
  Speaker 4: animosity board Comy is prof is palpable and understandable.
• 3:41
  Speaker 3: As much as Comy's as much as Comy's for Trump,
• 3:46
  Speaker 3: I said, as much as Comy's animosity to Trump, They're on,
• 3:49
  Speaker 3: They're equal in their dislife.
• 3:52
  Speaker 4: That does not give the DOJ cart blanche to prosecute
• 3:56
  Speaker 4: somebody for speech. Look, this was a stupid thing for
• 3:59
  Speaker 4: him to posted, but stupidity is not a felony.
• 4:03
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 4:03
  Speaker 4: But where we couldn't build, we couldn't build enough jails.
• 4:07
  Speaker 3: Yeah, and that's I was thinking of literally almost every
• 4:09
  Speaker 3: Hollywood celebrity who came out with something far more vile
• 4:12
  Speaker 3: than what Cony Coney put up. You know, the severed
• 4:15
  Speaker 3: head of Donald Trump, you know, in in the in
• 4:17
  Speaker 3: in that one so called comedian's hand, and you know,
• 4:20
  Speaker 3: the the suggestions of violence towards Trump. All of every
• 4:24
  Speaker 3: single human being who did anything like that could be
• 4:26
  Speaker 3: subject to the same kind of prosecution.
• 4:29
  Speaker 4: Uh, you're exactly right. So that's why the whole purpose
• 4:34
  Speaker 4: of the first of the first Amendment is to keep
• 4:36
  Speaker 4: the government out of the business of speech. So if
• 4:40
  Speaker 4: I'm haranguing a crowd and Hillary Clinton walks by, and
• 4:46
  Speaker 4: I say to the crowd, there's Hillary, let's get her,
• 4:49
  Speaker 4: and the crowd descends on her, I have can be
• 4:52
  Speaker 4: prosecuted for incitement to violence. But if I'm haranguing a
• 4:56
  Speaker 4: crowd and I say I wish somebody would get Hillary
• 4:59
  Speaker 4: Clinton and nobody is around there, it is absolutely protected speech.
• 5:06
  Speaker 4: In Comee's case, there is no incitement produced by it.
• 5:12
  Speaker 4: There For the speech is protected, and no matter how vile,
• 5:16
  Speaker 4: no matter how personal, no matter how off the wall
• 5:20
  Speaker 4: it may be. That's why we have a First Amendment
• 5:23
  Speaker 4: to protect the speech we hate. The speech we like
• 5:25
  Speaker 4: doesn't need any protection.
• 5:27
  Speaker 3: Yeah, and I think the worst example of you know,
• 5:30
  Speaker 3: hate speech we all can really point to and say,
• 5:33
  Speaker 3: no one agrees with that clown is that Brandenburg versus
• 5:35
  Speaker 3: Ohio case where the clan leader was encouraging violence against
• 5:38
  Speaker 3: blacks and Jewish people. That is protected. Nobody likes the klan,
• 5:42
  Speaker 3: nobody thinks we should. You know, well, I see nobody
• 5:45
  Speaker 3: with a broadbrush. But you get the point. If that's protected,
• 5:48
  Speaker 3: you got to take the good with the bad. That's
• 5:50
  Speaker 3: the point of the First Amendment.
• 5:52
  Speaker 4: Correct. Correct. The Brandenburg case, which took place not far
• 5:56
  Speaker 4: from where you are now, is the classic defense of
• 6:00
  Speaker 4: free speech. He's in Ohio, he encourages violence against blacks
• 6:05
  Speaker 4: and Jewish people in Washington, d C. No violence comes about.
• 6:10
  Speaker 4: The Supreme Court says, this speech was inoculus, and all
• 6:13
  Speaker 4: innocuous speech is protected, and all speeches innocuous when there
• 6:17
  Speaker 4: is time for more speech to rebt, reject and neutralize it,
• 6:21
  Speaker 4: which in the Brandenburg case there was. He was convicted
• 6:24
  Speaker 4: in an Ohio trial court. His conviction was upheld in
• 6:29
  Speaker 4: an Ohio appellate court. The Ohio Supreme Court refused to
• 6:33
  Speaker 4: hear his appeal. He filed an appeal to the Supreme
• 6:36
  Speaker 4: Court of the United States, which unanimously reversed his conviction.
• 6:41
  Speaker 4: End of story.
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: End of story.
• 6:43
  Speaker 3: It's on the books and it's been the law since
• 6:45
  Speaker 3: what nineteen sixty nine? So with that guy in mind,
• 6:49
  Speaker 3: I got to ask them goohead.
• 6:52
  Speaker 4: I also found a case I didn't know existed when
• 6:55
  Speaker 4: doing my research of some kid he was a kid
• 6:58
  Speaker 4: at the time, might age now who when drafted in
• 7:03
  Speaker 4: nineteen sixty six that a Senate the government puts a
• 7:05
  Speaker 4: rifle on my hand LBJLB in my cross. Here he
• 7:09
  Speaker 4: was convicted for threatening to kill the president of the
• 7:12
  Speaker 4: United States, unanimously reversed by the Supreme Court.
• 7:17
  Speaker 3: Of course, this isn't support for threatening to kill the
• 7:19
  Speaker 3: president of the United States of America, but it is
• 7:21
  Speaker 3: a reflection of how broad our free speech rights are protected.
• 7:26
  Speaker 3: Correct you don't want If you don't like that, then
• 7:28
  Speaker 3: go ahead and move to the United Kingdom, where you
• 7:30
  Speaker 3: have no free speech rights. Unfortunately, briefly though, because you
• 7:35
  Speaker 3: and I are speaking right now to a listening audience
• 7:37
  Speaker 3: that I'm sure is not comprised of a bunch of
• 7:38
  Speaker 3: James Comy fans, most notably given the Russia Gate and
• 7:41
  Speaker 3: all the links he has to that. Of course he's
• 7:43
  Speaker 3: subject to a DOJ subpoena in connection with that. All
• 7:46
  Speaker 3: of our popcorn out collectively waiting to find out what
• 7:48
  Speaker 3: that reveals. But pivoting back to your comment about other evidence, well,
• 7:52
  Speaker 3: you don't have all of the information in reference to
• 7:54
  Speaker 3: Comey's eighty six forty two post. Wouldn't that information be
• 7:58
  Speaker 3: in the the indictment or the criminal charge? What's missing
• 8:04
  Speaker 3: here on that?
• 8:06
  Speaker 4: It's not, which is why those of us who monitor
• 8:09
  Speaker 4: it for a living, or questioning what the heck is
• 8:13
  Speaker 4: Todd Blinch talking about. If they have evidence that he
• 8:15
  Speaker 4: planned and plotted to harm the president or oblies to
• 8:19
  Speaker 4: lay that evidence out in the indictment and it's not there.
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: Well, I guess sounds me like a motion to dismiss.
• 8:28
  Speaker 4: Well, emotion to dismiss is coming, probably on First Amendment grounds,
• 8:33
  Speaker 4: and that will force the government to cough up whatever
• 8:36
  Speaker 4: else it has. And then if it's anything substantial, and
• 8:39
  Speaker 4: I can't imagine what it could be, but if it's
• 8:41
  Speaker 4: something substantial and credible, then company's lawyers will have to
• 8:44
  Speaker 4: deal with it, and I'll have to reevaluate what I said.
• 8:47
  Speaker 4: Maybe this is not a First Amendment case, but on
• 8:50
  Speaker 4: the basis of the indictment, the charge inst him this
• 8:55
  Speaker 4: is pure speech and it's absolutely protected in his speech
• 8:58
  Speaker 4: and speak alone, unaccompanied by any other behavior alleged in
• 9:03
  Speaker 4: the indictment.
• 9:04
  Speaker 3: Well, I will note that even if it is not
• 9:06
  Speaker 3: a free speech case, ultimately your comments provide a wonderful
• 9:11
  Speaker 3: The indictment based upon your perception serves as a wonderful
• 9:14
  Speaker 3: springboard to remind us how broad our free speech rights are.
• 9:17
  Speaker 3: And again, thank God, for it real quick here, If
• 9:20
  Speaker 3: swirling in the background of all this is the burn
• 9:22
  Speaker 3: bag stuff, the Russia gate bag, that apparently on some
• 9:25
  Speaker 3: level may reveal that this was a concerted, coordinated plot
• 9:30
  Speaker 3: by folks in the Justice Department to go after Donald Trump.
• 9:34
  Speaker 3: If that is true, and maybe some of the subpoene
• 9:36
  Speaker 3: information and the research will will bear that out, is
• 9:40
  Speaker 3: that a prosecutable offense, the coordinated effort to undermine Donald Trump?
• 9:45
  Speaker 4: Not anymore because the statummentations this five years than it's.
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: Past missed opportunity.
• 9:52
  Speaker 4: Yes, yes, it would have to have been done in
• 9:57
  Speaker 4: the Biden administration or in the first year of the
• 10:01
  Speaker 4: Trump administration. But it's more than five years since all
• 10:05
  Speaker 4: this happened.
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah, why why the.
• 10:09
  Speaker 4: Trump DOJ sat on it? It tells me either they
• 10:13
  Speaker 4: had other priorities or there's no there there.
• 10:16
  Speaker 3: Yeah, and this burn Bag, with all this juicy information,
• 10:19
  Speaker 3: it sounds like it's a brand new breaking story now.
• 10:21
  Speaker 3: They found this last year. Even Caspi tell even said
• 10:24
  Speaker 3: an interview last year that you're going to see everything
• 10:27
  Speaker 3: we found in that room one way or another. But
• 10:29
  Speaker 3: as of at least the time of our current conversation,
• 10:32
  Speaker 3: Judge of Platano. I haven't seen any documents, and I
• 10:35
  Speaker 3: don't believe that any documents have been released from that
• 10:37
  Speaker 3: burn bag hm.
• 10:38
  Speaker 4: You know, mate, worse than making a promise and not
• 10:41
  Speaker 4: keeping it, it is making a promise that cannot be kept.
• 10:44
  Speaker 4: I don't know why they keep boasting about what's going
• 10:47
  Speaker 4: to come out, just like with Epstein, Yes, and then
• 10:49
  Speaker 4: nothing is there.
• 10:50
  Speaker 3: I know I wrote at the top of the article
• 10:53
  Speaker 3: about that Epstein files. Question mark, Judge.
• 10:56
  Speaker 4: Edited, did you know that the government released jfk assassination
• 11:01
  Speaker 4: files there was nothing there, meaning the CIA or somebody
• 11:05
  Speaker 4: denuded the files before they were released.
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: Yep. Well maybe there's a room.
• 11:10
  Speaker 3: It's not on any any blueprint where those documents are
• 11:14
  Speaker 3: being held currently. Judgment Poulatan like this burn bag room.
• 11:18
  Speaker 3: Judge of Paulaitano, it's Judging Freedom the Man's podcast. You
• 11:21
  Speaker 3: got to check it out throughout the week, Judge of Pultana,
• 11:23
  Speaker 3: who are you going to speaking with today?
• 11:25
  Speaker 4: I have a professor Muhammad Mirandi born in Alexandria, Virginia,
• 11:30
  Speaker 4: now professor of literature at the University of Tehran, who
• 11:34
  Speaker 4: comes on with me nest Wednesday to tell me about
• 11:37
  Speaker 4: life in Iran. To the professor Glenn Dieson from Norway
• 11:43
  Speaker 4: who fills us in on the European reaction to the
• 11:46
  Speaker 4: war in Iran and the war in Ukraine. Pepe esco
• 11:51
  Speaker 4: bar from Beijing. And Phil Geraldi, the CIA agent whom
• 11:57
  Speaker 4: was kicked out of his office when he told him
• 11:59
  Speaker 4: what we now well, No, that Saddam Lussein did not
• 12:02
  Speaker 4: have weapons of mass destruction.
• 12:03
  Speaker 3: Yeah, another regular guest on a Wednesdays on your show.
• 12:05
  Speaker 3: As I've come to understand, we'll check it out. Judging Freedom,
• 12:08
  Speaker 3: Judge of Politano. Tune in every Wednesday at a thirty
• 12:12
  Speaker 3: for the legal analysis from our dear friend, the Judge
• 12:14
  Speaker 3: of Polaitano. Have a great week, my friend. We'll talk
• 12:17
  Speaker 3: again next week.
• 12:18
  Speaker 4: Back at you, Brian, Thank you all, thanks, thank you,