Latest / Brian Thomas / Judge Napolitano - The American Police State Has Arrived

Transcript

Judge Napolitano - The American Police State Has Arrived · Brian Thomas

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Continue to work with the rerec southbound seventy one below
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: fieldsirdle left leans block traffic backing up close to Western Row.
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: Then slow again between the Reagan Highway and Red Bank,
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: the earlier wreck and Kenwood clear southbound seventy five. That's
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: a slowgo in and out of Blackland northbound fourth seventy
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: one backs to Grand Now congratulations to Indiana winning the
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: national championship from college football. But quite frankly, our next
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: guest is a national champion in many categories, every single day,
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: no yellow flags, no unnecessary roughness. The judge is next
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: Chuck Ingram on fifty five krs the talk station.
• 0:46
  Speaker 2: Ay thirty two to fifty one KRC the talk station.
• 0:52
  Speaker 2: What is it with going on with Judge Enna Paula Tana.
• 0:55
  Speaker 2: Our video feed has frozen, suggesting that he's not hearing me.
• 1:00
  Speaker 2: I didn't see a reaction of the comments of Chuck Ingram,
• 1:02
  Speaker 2: so realize that that video is not working. Joe Strucker
• 1:05
  Speaker 2: is busily trying to get him on the telephone so
• 1:07
  Speaker 2: we can actually have a conversation about the American police
• 1:12
  Speaker 2: state arriving. So, Joe, did you successfully reach jud Jennen
• 1:16
  Speaker 2: of Politano, Yes, Judgin Polaitano, apologize to the technical difficulties.
• 1:20
  Speaker 2: This is two weeks in a row man. Welcome back.
• 1:23
  Speaker 3: No, there are grandparents out there that do not want
• 1:25
  Speaker 3: you and me to see each other.
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: That is true, but we still get to converse, and
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: that's good enough for me because what you have to say,
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: the words are what's important. Although I do like to
• 1:36
  Speaker 2: see your visage on the video screen. I hope you
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: and your your your loved ones are all well. Judgent Politano,
• 1:41
  Speaker 2: welcome back to the Morning show.
• 1:44
  Speaker 3: We do the right.
• 1:45
  Speaker 2: We have a freedom of assembly, we have free exercise,
• 1:48
  Speaker 2: we have the right to free speech, of course, and
• 1:51
  Speaker 2: we've got people on I guess I would argue both
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: sides of the political ledger seeking to curb and uh
• 1:57
  Speaker 2: uh and take away our right to free speech. Your
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: take on this the column which comes out tonight a minute.
• 2:02
  Speaker 2: I'm happy to get an early copy of it. The
• 2:04
  Speaker 2: American police state has arrived.
• 2:06
  Speaker 4: Judge Napolitano, Well, there are many aspects to this, but
• 2:14
  Speaker 4: the column just devotes itself to the freedom of speech aspect, whereby.
• 2:21
  Speaker 3: The government is attempting to chill the free speech that
• 2:27
  Speaker 3: it hates and fears detectives showing up at a lady's
• 2:31
  Speaker 3: house because she accuses one of the president's favorite members
• 2:35
  Speaker 3: of Congress of hypocrisy, a statement that is not violent,
• 2:40
  Speaker 3: absolutely protected speech, and is none of the business of
• 2:45
  Speaker 3: the police whatsoever. Our reporters home being raided by the FBI,
• 2:51
  Speaker 3: not because they're reported did anything wrong, but because the
• 2:53
  Speaker 3: government wants her cell phone, because she's communicating with whistleblowers
• 3:00
  Speaker 3: about the government, many of them about the FBI itself,
• 3:05
  Speaker 3: and of course efforts to threaten the governor of Minnesota,
• 3:10
  Speaker 3: of whom I'm not a fan, and the mayor of
• 3:13
  Speaker 3: Minneapolis a liberal Democrat. But these people have the same
• 3:16
  Speaker 3: free speech rights as the rest of us. You are
• 3:20
  Speaker 3: correct when you talk about rights clashing. So when freedom
• 3:26
  Speaker 3: of worship flashes with free speech, which prevails. Now here's
• 3:33
  Speaker 3: a great question. I used to ask law students, what's
• 3:37
  Speaker 3: the first right protected in the First Amendment. Every hand
• 3:40
  Speaker 3: goes up and says, free speech.
• 3:41
  Speaker 2: No, free exercise right?
• 3:45
  Speaker 3: Correct, the free exercise of religion. This is what the
• 3:48
  Speaker 3: courts would do if they are splitting hairs. When free
• 3:53
  Speaker 3: speech and free exercise clash, free exercise prevails. So whatever
• 3:59
  Speaker 3: happened in that church, the other day was absolutely wrong
• 4:03
  Speaker 3: and criminal for those people to enter the church to
• 4:07
  Speaker 3: disrupt the service. If you don't like the pastor because
• 4:11
  Speaker 3: you believe, accurately or not, that he's really an ice agent,
• 4:16
  Speaker 3: you can say what you want about him in such
• 4:19
  Speaker 3: a manner, time, place, and manner as not to interfere
• 4:24
  Speaker 3: with the religious service going on. That's not what happened.
• 4:26
  Speaker 3: They disrupted the religious service. I don't know if those
• 4:29
  Speaker 3: people were arrested or not.
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: Right, I understand the DJ is contemplating charges involving something
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: called the Face Act, but I'm just glad you definitely
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: cleared that up for me, because again, I think when
• 4:41
  Speaker 2: I responded to your email with passing along the article,
• 4:43
  Speaker 2: I'm thinking, hmm, we've got freedom of assembly, we've got
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: free speech, we've got free exercise, and then also the
• 4:48
  Speaker 2: right to the private property element. I don't think churches
• 4:51
  Speaker 2: are considered public property. The church still has control over
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: the property upon which it has the service.
• 5:00
  Speaker 3: The church. I don't know the law in Minneapolis, but
• 5:04
  Speaker 3: since it is a liberal state like New Jersey, I'm
• 5:08
  Speaker 3: going to guess the law is comparable. A church is
• 5:12
  Speaker 3: a public accommodation, so you do not have to be
• 5:15
  Speaker 3: an adherent to go there, But that does not give
• 5:19
  Speaker 3: you the authority to disrupt what goes on there, because
• 5:24
  Speaker 3: your right to disrupt is subordinate to the right of
• 5:28
  Speaker 3: those gathered there to worship as they see fit. Can
• 5:32
  Speaker 3: you stand outside and chant your opposition of what's being
• 5:37
  Speaker 3: said inside? Of course you can, but not in such
• 5:40
  Speaker 3: a manner as to interfere with what's going on inside.
• 5:43
  Speaker 3: You know, it's the fascinating history here. To give me
• 5:45
  Speaker 3: thirty seconds. The Faith Act is federal access access to
• 5:53
  Speaker 3: clinic entrances. So in the early nineties, the late Senator
• 5:58
  Speaker 3: Edward Kennedy legislation that would guarantee women access to abortion clinics.
• 6:05
  Speaker 3: The only way he could get it passed was that
• 6:08
  Speaker 3: he threw in a paragraph there protecting access to churches.
• 6:13
  Speaker 3: So if you look this thing up, you'll find it
• 6:17
  Speaker 3: under abortion it protects both abortion clinics in churches in
• 6:23
  Speaker 3: the same set.
• 6:24
  Speaker 2: This is really only in America. That is really actually comical,
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: all right. So you have perhaps criminal activity, perhaps bringing
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: the law by doing that this sort of thing the
• 6:39
  Speaker 2: religious service from being done in the name of protesting
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: what's going in Minneapolis. What of impeding a federal law
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: enforcement officer doing his or her job. Now you have
• 6:48
  Speaker 2: on one hand your argument for free speech, which I embrace.
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: You know, if the governor wants to say something, if
• 6:53
  Speaker 2: the mayor wants to say something he doesn't believe in ICE,
• 6:56
  Speaker 2: he thinks they should be defunded. They're entitled to that
• 6:57
  Speaker 2: political opinion, and they may suffer as a consequace of
• 7:00
  Speaker 2: embracing it, or it may help them out in the
• 7:01
  Speaker 2: long run. But if you actually heed their advice, they
• 7:05
  Speaker 2: are suggesting that people should engage in disruption of ICE
• 7:09
  Speaker 2: doing its job. So this seems immaterial to whether or
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: not you think there should be laws on the books
• 7:13
  Speaker 2: allowing ICE to enforce immigration laws, whether the immigration laws
• 7:16
  Speaker 2: themselves are appropriate or accurate. But if they are engaged
• 7:20
  Speaker 2: in legitimate federal law enforcement, then it is a crime
• 7:23
  Speaker 2: to interfere with them, is it not.
• 7:26
  Speaker 3: But the crime is not committed by the speaker. No,
• 7:31
  Speaker 3: the crime committed by the person who does the interference. YEA.
• 7:34
  Speaker 3: You may argue that silently standing with your arms folded
• 7:39
  Speaker 3: in front of an ICE vehicle is a classic civil disobedience.
• 7:43
  Speaker 3: It is because it's not violent. You pay a price
• 7:47
  Speaker 3: for that civil disobedience, and that price is either either
• 7:54
  Speaker 3: a ticket obstructing the road getting out of the street
• 7:57
  Speaker 3: or a prosecution for obstructing justice. But the speaker who
• 8:05
  Speaker 3: calls for it, you know the case Brandenburgers not far
• 8:11
  Speaker 3: from where you are now. The speaker who calls for
• 8:14
  Speaker 3: this is absolutely protected. So I don't know where the
• 8:18
  Speaker 3: fens are going to go subpoenaing the mayor and the governor.
• 8:21
  Speaker 3: First of all, you don't subpoena the defendant in a
• 8:25
  Speaker 3: criminal case of dragging before the grand jury investigating him.
• 8:29
  Speaker 3: So maybe they've subpoena their cell phones or their office records.
• 8:33
  Speaker 3: It's hard for me to believe it's a subpoena for testimony. Secondly,
• 8:37
  Speaker 3: their speech is absolutely protected as long as there is
• 8:41
  Speaker 3: time you know the law as well as I may
• 8:44
  Speaker 3: be better time for more speech to challenge it. So
• 8:49
  Speaker 3: if if Tim Waltz or Jacob Price says, go block
• 8:52
  Speaker 3: those ice monsters, as long as there's time for Pam
• 8:56
  Speaker 3: Bondi or Christy Noms to say, don't block the ice monsters.
• 9:01
  Speaker 3: They're enforcing tederal law and we will arrest you if
• 9:04
  Speaker 3: you block them, then the speech is protected. If there's
• 9:08
  Speaker 3: no time it's hard to believe, but if there's no
• 9:11
  Speaker 3: time for countervailing speech, then the speech can be prosecuted.
• 9:15
  Speaker 2: Now, I'm not suggesting thessarily have probable cause for the subpoenas,
• 9:18
  Speaker 2: but taking that to the next level, if these elected
• 9:21
  Speaker 2: officials or even anyone out in the world coordinates and
• 9:25
  Speaker 2: encourages criminal activity on a coordinated basis. In other words,
• 9:29
  Speaker 2: I want you minions to go out there and obstruct ice.
• 9:32
  Speaker 2: I want you to go out there and block roads.
• 9:34
  Speaker 2: I want you to go out there. And they coordinate
• 9:36
  Speaker 2: it and fund it and even provide goods and resources
• 9:38
  Speaker 2: to help them accomplish that goal. Are they not engaged
• 9:41
  Speaker 2: in what I would argue is subject to RICO organized crime?
• 9:47
  Speaker 3: Well, RICO requires the accumulation of some of some wealth.
• 9:53
  Speaker 3: I mean, the lynchpin of RICO is to see its
• 9:55
  Speaker 3: wealth from people. But I don't think you need to
• 9:58
  Speaker 3: go to RICO. Let's say the city handed out two
• 10:03
  Speaker 3: by fours and gave these demonstrators two by fours and
• 10:07
  Speaker 3: they're standing in the streets with these two by fours
• 10:10
  Speaker 3: and they use them to block the ice vehicles. Well,
• 10:12
  Speaker 3: then whoever handed out the two by fours has engaged
• 10:16
  Speaker 3: in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice. That is not speech.
• 10:21
  Speaker 3: If the city says, on the other hand, go stand
• 10:23
  Speaker 3: in the street and make ice in their keep, that
• 10:26
  Speaker 3: speech is protected. So speech plus is the issue here
• 10:30
  Speaker 3: depends on what the plus.
• 10:32
  Speaker 2: Is it does indeed, judgedital Pulton, Judging Freedom? Is this
• 10:37
  Speaker 2: podcast or encourage you our listeners to check it out
• 10:39
  Speaker 2: all the time wherever you get your podcasts? Judgedital Pulton.
• 10:42
  Speaker 2: Who's going to be on Judging Freedom today? Sir?
• 10:45
  Speaker 3: I have two of my favorite academics, Professor Jeffrey Sachs
• 10:49
  Speaker 3: at ten and Professor Glenn Dieson from Norway with the
• 10:55
  Speaker 3: Norway understanding of President Trump's now infamous text message to
• 11:00
  Speaker 3: the Prime Minister of Norway. Hey, I'm going to go
• 11:03
  Speaker 3: for Greenland because you didn't give me the Nobel Peace Prize.
• 11:07
  Speaker 3: That's what we're talking. Yeah, hey, just like you have.
• 11:11
  Speaker 3: You can't make this up. You can't.
• 11:13
  Speaker 2: I'm with you all day long about that. I'm still
• 11:15
  Speaker 2: scratching my head of this old Greenland thing. Judg Jenenapallatina,
• 11:18
  Speaker 2: thank you for your willingness to participate in little time
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: here on the fifty five Carssey Morning Show. Every Wednesday,
• 11:23
  Speaker 2: and I look forward to next Wednesday as always, have
• 11:26
  Speaker 2: a wonderful week, my friend, back at you. It's a
• 11:30
  Speaker 2: forty three coming up next. Doctor Stephen urback running for Congress.