Latest / Newsradio WGAN / Release Of Dobbs Decision

Transcript

Release Of Dobbs Decision · Newsradio WGAN

• 0:00
  One of the most explosive claims from Molly Hemingway's new book
• 0:05
  Books concerns the Dobbs decision at the Supreme Court.
• 0:09
  As we all recall, after the leak of the Dobbs draft on May 2nd,
• 0:12
  2022, it became apparent that the justices would face serious
• 0:17
  security threats. Indeed, a deranged liberal
• 0:21
  traveled from California to DC with weapons and made it to the
• 0:26
  threshold of Justice Kavanaugh's house.
• 0:29
  Yet after all of this happened, the Dobbs opinion was not
• 0:31
  released early. The court held onto it until
• 0:35
  June 24th. There is no obvious effort to
• 0:39
  expedite the release of the opinion, and all told, there
• 0:43
  were few changes made between the leaked draft and the final
• 0:46
  published opinion. At that time, some speculated
• 0:49
  that there may be changes to the opinion or perhaps the majority
• 0:52
  had changed their mind or flipped.
• 0:54
  Yet the five held strong. So what was the hold up?
• 0:58
  Hemingway reports that Justices Sotobayor, Kagan and Breyer
• 1:02
  refused to expedite the release of the opinion.
• 1:06
  Quote. On Thursday, May 12th, the
• 1:08
  justices gathered in conference to go through their circulating
• 1:13
  opinions and set the dates for their release.
• 1:15
  Justices grade the decisions based on when they will be ready
• 1:19
  for release and A is for those decisions and descents that are
• 1:24
  done. AB is for those that are almost
• 1:26
  done, AC for those that are near completion, etcetera, etcetera.
• 1:29
  The Dobbs decision was graded AC.
• 1:31
  The majority opinion had been done for more than three months
• 1:36
  and was waiting only for the descents.
• 1:38
  Alito asked the dissenters to make the completion of their
• 1:42
  descents their priority. Because delay of the decision
• 1:44
  was a security threat, abortion supporters had an incentive to
• 1:48
  kill one or more of the justices in the majority to change the
• 1:53
  outcome. Before the actual decision was
• 1:56
  released, Gorsuch spoke up, asking for a date by which they
• 2:00
  might be done. They simply would not give a
• 2:04
  date. Following the conference,
• 2:06
  Justice Elena Kagan visited Justice Stephen Breyer's office.
• 2:09
  Though he had not said that he would accommodate the justices
• 2:12
  whose lives were at risk by getting out of dissent, he was
• 2:15
  the member of the liberal block most willing to do so.
• 2:18
  Fiercely liberal in his jurisprudence and a strong and
• 2:22
  in strong disagreement with the majority decision, he
• 2:24
  nevertheless was a gentleman and a friend to all on the Court.
• 2:30
  Kagan remonstrated. Remonstrated.
• 2:33
  Excuse me? With Breyer, not to accommodate
• 2:36
  the majority screaming so loudly, observers noted that the
• 2:40
  wall was shaking. This is all sort of the backdrop
• 2:45
  to a recent decision here in the Supreme Court in the Calais
• 2:50
  decision. Why?
• 2:52
  Why would that be connected? Well, Justice Alito included an
• 2:57
  unusual footnote in his Calais concurrence.
• 3:01
  The dissent would require that the 2026 congressional elections
• 3:06
  in Louisiana be held under a map that has been held to be
• 3:11
  unconstitutional. And there is a little star at
• 3:14
  the end of that sentence. And it says that constitutional
• 3:17
  question was argued and conferred nearly seven months
• 3:21
  ago. This is something I, I, the
• 3:23
  caller called in and talked about this very, very briefly, I
• 3:26
  think yesterday or Monday, you know, like, what is he talking
• 3:30
  about there? What's, what's Alito talking
• 3:32
  about? And by the way, I love that you
• 3:33
  guys read Supreme Court decisions.
• 3:36
  The question of why Alito would write that was on many people's
• 3:38
  mind. What difference does it make
• 3:40
  that Calais was argued in October and conferenced shortly
• 3:44
  thereafter? The implication, though, is that
• 3:47
  Calais descent was slow walked, just like the Dobbs decision.
• 3:53
  But why would it be slow walked? Well, as you all know, the
• 3:56
  longer an opinion would take to publish, the harder it would be
• 3:59
  for the Republicans to implement the order for the 2026 midterm
• 4:03
  elections. In other words, if what the
• 4:05
  decision was was delayed long enough, then that decision could
• 4:11
  basically take off the map the notion of the redistricting,
• 4:15
  which I was just talking about in the prior segment just 10
• 4:18
  minutes ago in places like Louisiana and others, because it
• 4:22
  would have been too late in the calendar, just couldn't do it at
• 4:24
  that point. The fact that they actually did
• 4:26
  get it out in time is an interesting story in and of
• 4:29
  itself. But there was clearly an attempt
• 4:32
  to delay for political purposes this decision, and Alito was
• 4:37
  basically giving you bread crumbs by saying that.
• 4:41
  A fascinating subtext to some recent Supreme Court talk.
• 4:44
  Let's go to the phones, though. As I said, I want to hear from
• 4:46
  you today, so let's do that. Al from Portland is with us.
• 4:51
  Al, how are you? Well, with a heavy heart today
• 4:55
  I'm calling to send my condolences to the people from
• 4:59
  the Shalom House. Very, very upsetting.
• 5:04
  I I was a client of the Shalom House in the 90s and they do a
• 5:10
  lot of good work. I'm just very saddened by this
• 5:15
  cool woman's death. Thank you very much and pray for
• 5:20
  everyone. Thank you.
• 5:21
  Yeah, of course I'll appreciate your call.
• 5:23
  Obviously I share the thoughts that you were you're talking to
• 5:28
  us about right now. So you know it's a very
• 5:31
  unfortunate and sad situation overall.
• 5:34
  So appreciate you bringing it up. 642 WGAN Morning News if
• 5:39
  you'd like to be a part of the program, go ahead and give us a
• 5:41
  call on any topic that you have in mind here today, turning our
• 5:45
  attention to some other stuff here You know, I just wanted to
• 5:47
  briefly mention the Supreme Court thing for a moment.
• 5:51
  I had a cause yesterday to tune in to something that I would not
• 5:57
  ordinarily tune into. If you wonder how much Matt
• 6:00
  hates himself, well, yesterday I'm, I hated myself enough to be
• 6:05
  scanning around on YouTube TV after I got home from a baseball
• 6:09
  game way too late, like 8:00. And I noticed that there was a
• 6:13
  California primary debate on TV. They were broadcasting the
• 6:21
  California gubernatorial primary debate.
• 6:24
  And in case you didn't know how that works in California, and
• 6:29
  again, I know I'm talking about other States and their politics,
• 6:31
  but it, you know, it is important.
• 6:33
  It is important. If you don't know how they do
• 6:37
  it, they have a jungle primary there.
• 6:38
  So it's not like we do here and most states do, whereby you have
• 6:46
  the parties that each have their own primaries, like, you know,
• 6:48
  Janet Mills versus Graham Plattner, which we've been
• 6:50
  talking about for literally months.
• 6:52
  That is a Democratic primary. Meanwhile, over on the
• 6:55
  Republican side, there is no real primary.
• 6:56
  Susan Collins is basically by herself.
• 6:58
  So it's going to be Susan Collins, but if she had a
• 7:01
  competitor, there would be a Republican primary too.
• 7:03
  And then at the end, at the end of all of that, you would get to
• 7:07
  a, a final, you know, one Republican versus one Democrat
• 7:11
  general election. And that's what you would vote
• 7:14
  on when you get to November. In California, they have
• 7:19
  something called the jungle primary.
• 7:21
  And that jungle primary means that everybody who's running is
• 7:25
  running in one race. And how they will decide who
• 7:30
  ends up getting to the fall campaign is they will take the
• 7:34
  top 2 finishers of the jungle primary.
• 7:39
  So you will have, I don't know, there's like 5-7 Democrats
• 7:43
  running right now. There's several Republicans
• 7:46
  running as well. And they're all sort of vying to
• 7:49
  be in that top 2. This is important because you
• 7:55
  have you have this situation where after Eric Swalwell, who
• 7:59
  was running for governor of California, dropped out of that
• 8:01
  race. After that happened, you had
• 8:07
  some polling that was showing that the top 2 finishers in
• 8:12
  California were both Republicans.
• 8:17
  We're both Republicans now. That may not be the case
• 8:20
  anymore. Steve Hilton seems to be on the
• 8:23
  top of all these polls. He's at about like 20% overall
• 8:27
  in the latest survey, USA One. He's closely trailed by Tom
• 8:31
  Steyer and Javier Baquera, while Chad Bianco, who is the other
• 8:37
  Republican, remains a significant factor in the race
• 8:40
  with 12% support. But at one point he was at like
• 8:43
  18. You know, it was especially when
• 8:45
  Swalwell dropped out, he was basically ready to go.
• 8:47
  So it's probably not going to happen, though there probably
• 8:50
  will be one of these Democrats that emerges as the second
• 8:53
  choice. But would it not be somewhat
• 8:55
  hilarious if the jungle primary somehow ended up producing 2
• 9:02
  Republicans and that's who California had to decide
• 9:06
  between? I mean, seriously, think about
• 9:10
  how funny that would be. I did watch the, the, the debate
• 9:15
  a little bit. I can only stomach about 5 to 7
• 9:20
  minutes of it before I was just like, I can't do this.
• 9:23
  I got it. I got it.
• 9:24
  I got to stop. I got to stop watching it.
• 9:27
  And in case you don't know who he is, Tom Steyer, he's he's,
• 9:31
  he's, he's floating up there as potentially now the second place
• 9:34
  finisher. Tom Steyer is one of the most
• 9:38
  pervasive, vile forces within American politics writ large.
• 9:45
  He is a terrible person. He is an awful human being.
• 9:49
  And he is a corrosive. You know, he's basically an
• 9:53
  incredible, I think he's a billionaire.
• 9:56
  He has an incredible amount of money which he dumps into the
• 9:59
  most stridently progressive Democratic causes.
• 10:02
  And he has done so since, I mean, the early 2000s, I
• 10:06
  believe, is when he really started to do it.
• 10:08
  You know, everybody's always on the right obsessed with George
• 10:11
  Soros. Mr. Steyer is someone who you
• 10:14
  should be paying a great deal more attention to.
• 10:15
  And he wants to be the next governor of California.
• 10:17
  And yeah, I'm sure governor of California State's lost.
• 10:21
  You know, maybe you shouldn't care about it.
• 10:22
  Maybe you don't care about it. But honestly, if that was a, if
• 10:26
  that was a country, it would be, I think, the 5th largest economy
• 10:28
  in the world. California is a pretty important
• 10:30
  place. It's pretty important part of
• 10:32
  America. And it's sad and pathetic that
• 10:36
  that state is is struggling as mightily as it is and is as
• 10:38
  broken as it is. And it should be something that
• 10:41
  is fixed. And if Tom Steyer ends up
• 10:44
  somehow becoming the governor of California and literally watch
• 10:47
  one of his answers from that debate and you're going to start
• 10:50
  getting the sweats from just listening to him talk.
• 10:53
  Like, let alone what he says, just how he says it.
• 10:56
  It's a horrible, I hate that guy.
• 10:58
  Can't stand him. That would be a bad thing for
• 11:00
  America. It would be.
• 11:02
  I mean, it was wild to me too to listen to all these people
• 11:05
  talking. They're talking about housing,
• 11:08
  they're talking about employment issues, they're talking about
• 11:11
  migration. They're talking about every
• 11:13
  problem that everybody's talking about right now.
• 11:16
  And as they talk about it, there seems to be absolutely 0
• 11:18
  self-awareness in the Democrats that are on that stage that they
• 11:22
  have been in control with absolute super majorities in
• 11:27
  California for the better part of 15 years now.
• 11:32
  And at some point, when do you stop taking seriously people
• 11:37
  that say, well, we need to take seriously housing is the problem
• 11:39
  and we're going to do it by doing this and in record
• 11:41
  investments and all this. I mean, like, it's just the same
• 11:44
  nonsense. And it is produced one of the
• 11:47
  worst places in the entire country for that housing crisis.
• 11:52
  And to to continue to vote for these people, you would have to
• 11:56
  believe that it's just happening to them.
• 11:58
  It's not as a result of the policies that they choose that
• 12:02
  California isn't struggling because 15 years of them being
• 12:05
  the only ones making decisions has produced really crummy
• 12:09
  investments, bad ideas, horrible regulations, and a terrible
• 12:12
  state. It's just something that kind of
• 12:14
  just happened. Sorry about that.
• 12:16
  And they just happen to be there while it happened.
• 12:18
  So vote for me again because I'll make it better this time.
• 12:20
  This time is different. If there is a motto of the
• 12:24
  modern Democratic Party in Maine, in California, in so many
• 12:27
  states, it would be. This time's different.
• 12:31
  Don't pay any attention to the failures of policy that you've
• 12:34
  seen in the last five, eight, 10-15 years.
• 12:39
  No, this time will be different. So vote for us.