Latest / Cultural Wars | America Out Loud News / “A good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich.” What about James Comey?

Transcript

“A good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich.” What about James Comey? · Cultural Wars | America Out Loud News

• 0:11
  Helping to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.
• 0:15
  This is the Constitution Study on the America Out Loud Network with your host, Paul Engel.
• 0:31
  I hear it all the time.
• 0:33
  Someone wants some politician or bureaucrat in jail for what they did.
• 0:37
  But when does an investigation into wrongdoing become a political witch hunt?
• 0:43
  Hello there, everyday Americans, Paul Engel here with the Constitution Study, where we read instead of the Constitution, teach the rising generation to be free.
• 0:50
  Glad you could join me today.
• 0:51
  There's some some interesting news in the ether this about this time.
• 0:55
  And I'm starting with a couple of indictments.
• 0:58
  Well, first, we're going to start with the recent indictment of former FBI director Comey.
• 1:05
  Now, he's being indicted for alleged threats against the president.
• 1:11
  Now, he was already indicted once for lying to Congress, but a judge covered his backside on that one.
• 1:17
  Um that it still bothered me that uh that was never appealed.
• 1:22
  So now they're going after him again.
• 1:24
  What is the big deal here?
• 1:25
  What is it they claimed that Mr.
• 1:27
  Comey did?
• 1:28
  Well, if you remember, um, when was this?
• 1:32
  This was uh last year, I believe, where uh uh Mr.
• 1:36
  Comey was what claimed he was walking down the beach and he saw seashells that spelled out 8647, and he said, Oh, it just it just magically happened.
• 1:46
  Uh um, you know, isn't this this is a sign from the universe?
• 1:51
  Of course, when you see you know, letters spelled out, you know, that wasn't done by accident.
• 1:56
  That was man-made.
• 1:58
  And then the assumption was that it was actually Comey that's spelled out 8647, and that is people say, well, that's a threat.
• 2:06
  86 is basically terming to get rid of somebody on 86 them.
• 2:11
  Um, and of course, 47, the assumption being that you're referring to Trump as the 47th president of the United States.
• 2:22
  Now, the charge is that Mr.
• 2:24
  Comey violated Title 18, Section 871 of the United States States Code, which says, whoever knowingly and willfully deposits for conveyance in the mail or for delivery from any post office or by any letter carrier, letter, paper, print, miss of yada yada yada yada.
• 2:40
  Um any threat to take the life of to kidnap or under body harm on the president of the United States, the president elect, the vice president or any other officer in the line of succession, um, shall be fined under this title or in prison, not more than five years or both.
• 2:58
  So, what they're saying is that by spelling out 8647, and then transmitting it in this case via I think it was Instagram, uh, this was a threat to the president that uh Mr.
• 3:13
  Comey was making, and that's what they're alleging.
• 3:16
  Now, this to me seems incredibly thin.
• 3:21
  So I did a little bit of research into the entomology of the phrase 86, and it appears to come out of the restaurant industry, where it means to throw out, to stop serving, or to tell someone they are out of luck.
• 3:35
  In other words, this is not a threat of violence, it's not a threat of death or serious injury, it's we're not dealing with you anymore.
• 3:44
  So uh, how this became a question of harm or or or death, as I've seen so many people refer to, uh, it again, it it seems a very long stretch.
• 4:01
  Which makes me wonder is this really the best you could come up with?
• 4:04
  All the illegal things that Comey was was accused of, the best you could come out with is this.
• 4:11
  Besides, doesn't this come out come under the first amendment's deprivation um right to freedom of the press to publish a video where he says we should the the universe is telling us to throw out to get rid of or to refuse to serve the 47th president of the United States.
• 4:32
  Again, um this seems to be more than just a stretch.
• 4:39
  I mean, uh, the the fact to me, this is a perfect example of a good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.
• 4:49
  Because that's pretty much what we're seeing here is a is a ham sandwich.
• 4:53
  Oh, we want to get rid of, we want to throw out Donald Trump.
• 4:57
  How is that a threat to his his life?
• 4:59
  How is that a threat of serious injury?
• 5:02
  Why is that not simply I don't know, an expression of I don't like him as president and I'd like to get rid of him.
• 5:11
  In other words, this is a this is not the threat to take the life to kidnap or under inflict bodily harm on the president, it's a desire to get rid of him.
• 5:21
  That's what the term 86 means.
• 5:23
  It's another example of how the shifting assumption of what words means can actually become um problematic because everyone is assuming that the term 86 means to kill.
• 5:35
  Not just get not just leave, but to get rid of, to somehow dispose of and get and throw out.
• 5:43
  But I'll talk about throwing out of office, you know, and again, I'm no fan of Mr.
• 5:47
  Comey.
• 5:47
  I thought it was an evil FBI director.
• 5:50
  I think there's plenty of things that that I think uh the question of lying to Congress.
• 5:56
  Um I also have an issue with that as well from a constitutional standpoint.
• 6:02
  But you know, okay, I think he should have pursued that a little bit more than well, the judge threw it out.
• 6:07
  Well, have you thought of appealing that?
• 6:10
  If this is the best you can come up with, this seems more like a political witch hunt than a true search for justice.
• 6:22
  Now, at uh at the same time, almost the same time, uh, the Department of Justice also announced that it is indicted a an employee of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases for taking part in a scheme to conceal federal records regarding COVID-19 research grants.
• 6:43
  Now, of course, this is getting a lot of attention because this employee worked at the NIAID when it was run by, yeah, I got it, Dr.
• 6:53
  Fauci.
• 6:55
  David Morens, who's now 78, was uh the senior advisor to uh NI director Fauci from 2006 to 2022, and he is charged with conspiracy against the United States, which includes destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations, concealment, removal, or mutilation of records, as well as aiding and abetting.
• 7:00
  Advisor to uh and i director Fauci from 2006 to 2022.
• 7:07
  And he is charged with conspiracy against the United States, which includes destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations, concealment, removal, or mutilation of records, as well as aiding and a betting.
• 7:22
  Now, according to the indictment, Mr.
• 7:22
  Now, according to the indictment, Mr.
• 7:24
  Morens and two unnamed co-conspirators, co-conspirators, which I always find problematic, right?
• 7:24
  Morens and two unnamed co conspirators, co conspirators, which I always find problematic, right?
• 7:29
  It's like, well, there are other there.
• 7:32
  At least they're not named.
• 7:33
  Uh, he said that the he, the co-conspirates and the others allegedly conspired during the 2000s, the COVID-19 pand quote unquote pandemic to defraud the United States and commit related offenses after the MIH terminated one of the co-conspirators' grants.
• 7:51
  The grant named understanding the risk of back coronavirus emergence was terminated following allegations that COVID-19 originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China.
• 8:04
  The NIAID awarded the grant to company number one and conspirator number one, who in turn issued a subword to the uh uh sub-award to the Wuhan Institutes of Virology.
• 8:18
  Now, according to the allegations, Mr.
• 8:20
  Morens wrote to Peter uh Dazak, um uh part of this money funneling thing.
• 8:26
  Interesting, they sent he sent to his Gmail address rather than to his government account.
• 8:31
  Doesn't sound too good.
• 8:33
  He says, There are things I can't say, except Fauci is aware that I have learned that there are ongoing efforts within NIH to steer through this with minimal damage to you and NIH and NIAID.
• 8:45
  Um, there are other misses or there's other emails as apparently there's more.
• 8:51
  And um, again, this is an indictment, meaning uh apparently the DOJ is convinced at the grand jury that there is enough evidence to continue with the prosecution.
• 9:03
  Now, if that evidence, again, remember, you right, a good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich.
• 9:09
  Um the question is uh, you know, is this real?
• 9:14
  In other words, I'm looking at this saying, well, um, you know, um, is there is is there a there?
• 9:23
  And if the uh information in the indictment is correct, there does appear to be the destruction of documents related to the funding of research, uh, the that may or may not have involved COVID, the the funding of gain of function research in Wuhan, China, and uh I'm not sure exactly what else.
• 9:44
  I haven't been through the entire indictment.
• 9:46
  So here I have two cases, one of which appears really easily to be a witch hunt.
• 9:54
  It's a political witch hunt.
• 9:56
  Uh Donald Trump and company don't like umy because of what he did to Donald Trump, and it's almost like they're reaching for straws to find something to hold him accountable with.
• 10:10
  On the flip side, you have this this uh Mr.
• 10:14
  Morens, this David, Dr.
• 10:16
  David Morens, sorry, Dr.
• 10:17
  Morens, uh, who apparently there is evidence of at least some communication about uh funding and documents that is that is untoward and is moving forward.
• 10:30
  Now, this is why we have this uh a judicial, an adversarial judicial system, right?
• 10:37
  The idea is you know, the judicials it's about adversaries.
• 10:41
  You have the prosecution on one side and the defense on the other.
• 10:45
  And the defense has a right to confront their accusers.
• 10:51
  They have the right to compel witnesses in their favor.
• 10:54
  They have a right to put up a fight, and the prosecution has the right to compel witnesses to uh counter to cross-examine witnesses for the defense to put up a fight.
• 11:09
  This is where the the battle supposedly for truth and justice is supposed to take place.
• 11:16
  I'm not saying it always does, and I say it always doesn't, but this is why we have an adversarial judicial system, so that the both sides seeking their own best interest will hopefully expose the truth.
• 11:32
  It's also why people that the defense has a right to a trial by jury.
• 11:39
  In other words, it isn't a government actor that's going to decide if you're guilty or not, it's we the people.
• 12:06
  You're there looking for justice.
• 12:08
  And if the person is guilty, you're there to find their guilt.
• 12:12
  If the person is not guilty, then you're there to find them not guilty.
• 12:16
  It's not about sides, it's not about politics, not supposed to be outrageous.
• 12:20
  It's supposed to be about justice.
• 12:22
  That's why we used to call them courts of justice.
• 12:26
  Speaking of justice, the uh House Judiciary Subcommittee is taking a look at the freedom of access to clinic entrances act or the Face Act and whether or not the Biden administration used this law to target pro-life advocates.
• 12:44
  Now, it really shouldn't surprise you that there's political crowing going on.
• 12:48
  Uh, representative Chiproy, a Republican from Texas, uh uh told said uh, as we just saw with the Department of Justice's recent indictment of the Southern Poverty Law Center, important work is being done to hold the left-wing activist network accountable, especially those increasingly operating as de facto partners of the federal government to undermine the rule of law.
• 13:08
  That sounds great, Mr.
• 13:09
  Roy, but it's really just political witch huntery.
• 13:13
  Now, is there evidence?
• 13:15
  I believe there is evidence that the FACE Act uh was used, it was weaponized by the Biden administration.
• 13:23
  I also like to point out that the FACE Act is a blatant violation of the Fifth Amendment.
• 13:28
  Um, it's also a violation of the First Amendment, because this is a federal law, a law created by Congress that denies people the right to uh to peaceably assemble simply because you're in the entrance of a of a of a clinic.
• 13:43
  By the way, I find it always interesting that the federal government only seems to prosecute attacks on pregnancy centers.
• 13:50
  I'm sorry, on abortion centers, not on pregnancy centers.
• 13:54
  So you have the the equal justice question, but it's also a violation of the Fifth Amendment because you're depriving people of their liberty without due process of law.
• 14:00
  Of the Fifth Amendment because you're depriving people of their liberty without due process of law.
• 14:06
  If people are demonstrating outside of any entrance, if they are on public property outside of any entrance, then they have the right to peaceably assemble.
• 14:06
  If people are demonstrating outside of any entrance, if they are on public property outside of any entrance, then they have the right to peaceably assembled.
• 14:17
  They have a right to do that and be at liberty without without being uh dealt with by the police to not be deprived of that liberty without due process of law.
• 14:17
  They have a right to do that and be at liberty without without being uh dealt with by the police to not be deprived of that liberty without due process of law.
• 14:26
  If they are on private property, the private property owner has.
• 14:26
  If they are on private property, the private property owner has every right to tell them to leave, to deny them act, to trespass them.
• 14:35
  And it doesn't matter if it's if it's a clinic or a restaurant or a bodega or any other office building.
• 14:44
  This is where we turn these legal issues into political witch hunts, which to me is extremely dangerous because when the rule of law becomes a rule of political effectiveness, well then how do you know what laws will be applied when and under what circumstances?
• 15:03
  It's a very dangerous situation on my standpoint, which is why.
• 15:08
  You know, okay, are you the is the Senate uh subcommittee uh the house subject uh subcommittee not only looking at how the the uh face act was used, but the actual constitutionality of the face act.
• 15:22
  I'd love to see someone talking about that.
• 15:25
  In fact, I volunteered.
• 15:28
  If the uh House Judiciary Subcommittee would ask me, please don't subpoena me, simply ask, would you come and talk to us why I think and can I show that the freedom of access to clinical entrances act is unconstitutional?
• 15:41
  I would be more than happy to go to the belly of the beast, Washington, D.C., and testify in front of their subcommittee.
• 15:49
  Um I'm volunteering right here, right now.
• 15:53
  The only thing I asked is you subpoena me, you're gonna piss me off because you don't have the legal authority to deny me of my liberty without due process of law.
• 16:01
  But if you simply ask, Paul, can you come at this date and this time and come talk to us?
• 16:06
  I would be happy to.
• 16:08
  Because I think it's important that they understand.
• 16:11
  But the uh the you know, the while this may be a a completely legitimate investigation, Chip Royce sounds like he's turned like he's using it as a political witch hunt.
• 16:23
  Okay, I I have a break coming up.
• 16:25
  Before I go, though, you know, we were talking about uh the the COVID documentation that was hidden.
• 16:30
  We're still dealing with this.
• 16:34
  Vaccine injuries are real.
• 16:36
  The shedding of the virus, especially from those vaccinated, is real.
• 16:40
  As I've said, I I'm on the board of a not for profit where somebody had to retire because of lung COVID.
• 16:46
  And there are a lot of people that are very concerned that this is going to be around for a while because that that mRNA vaccine that was supposed to remain in the injection site but spread throughout the body, that was supposed to be done in just a few weeks and was found months later, telling your body how to produce the toxic and inflammatory spike protein, the part of the COVID-19 that was actually dangerous.
• 17:09
  We're gonna be dealing with this for a while.
• 17:11
  Now, our friends at the wellness company, they've come up with a product they call daily spike support.
• 17:17
  It is designed to block and dissolve that very toxic spike protein.
• 17:22
  Now, listen, I'm not a doctor, I'm not a virologist, I don't play one on TV.
• 17:26
  This is backed by documented research and is vetted by the chief medical board of the wellness company.
• 17:31
  So please head to AmericaOut Loud.shop and click on the Daily Spike Support panel and do your own research.
• 17:39
  Check the documentary research, look at what's involved, be informed consumers.
• 17:44
  And when you're ready to give it a try, use the code out loud to get 20% off of your order.
• 17:50
  So whether you've had COVID, had the shot, or you're just concerned that you may pick it up from shedding, head to AmericaOut Loud.shop, click on the Daily Spike Support panel, do your own research, and when you're ready to give it a try, use that code out loud and you'll get 20% off of your order.
• 18:34
  A serving, that's the miracle of sprouting.
• 18:37
  And I want to share that with you.
• 18:40
  Go to the Spouting Company.com slash out loud and use the code out loud for a special offer.
• 18:48
  Successful weight loss is about changing the gut-brain relationship with food.
• 18:52
  I'm Dr.
• 18:53
  Kelly Victory with the wellness company.
• 18:55
  If you don't like needles, you'll love oral dissolving terzepitide RX.
• 18:59
  This doctor design solution works by targeting the GLP 1 and GIP receptors that influence appetite and metabolism.
• 19:07
  Terzepatide helps with food portion reduction and satiety, while changing how the brain responds to engineered sugars and unhealthy fats.
• 19:15
  And unlike injections, these are fast absorbing sublingual tablets placed under the tongue, paired with an energy boost of B6 and B12.
• 19:24
  Visit TWC.
• 19:30
  Oral hygiene hasn't changed in 50 years, but our diet and the way we eat has, creating an environment in your mouth for bacteria to wreck havoc on your teeth and gums.
• 19:40
  For better oral health, get sprayed dental defense, an oral care line designed to combat acid-creating bacteria.
• 19:48
  The toothpaste, mouthwash, mints, and gum all contain xylitol and natural ingredients shown to dramatically improve oral health.
• 19:56
  Sprite can be found online and at all fine natural retailers.
• 20:03
  Well, did you see Google quietly updated its AI principles removing its pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance?
• 20:12
  A promise they agreed to in 2018.
• 20:15
  Well, the American people have seen Google's track record, prompt in the question.
• 20:19
  Is Google an untrustworthy player in the AI race?
• 20:28
  Now is our time, my fellow Americans.
• 20:31
  America outlawed.
• 20:33
  News, liberty and justice for all.
• 20:58
  For example, uh the EPA director, Lee Zeldon, was before the House Appropriations Committee, and he was answering questions from Connecticut Representative Rosa Delaro.
• 21:00
  Director Lee Zeldon was before the House Appropriations Committee, and he was answering questions from Connecticut Representative Rosa Delaro.
• 21:09
  And this to me started out with uh well, it was started out with a classic, but the back and forth I just found it interesting.
• 21:09
  And this to me started out with uh it was started out with the classic, but the back and forth, I just found it interesting.
• 21:17
  Let's take a listen.
• 21:17
  Let's take a listen.
• 21:18
  When climate change is flooding our streets, poisoning our air, driving up health care and disaster courts.
• 21:18
  When climate change is flooding our streets, poisoning our air, driving up health care and disaster cards.
• 21:26
  How can the EPA justify abandoning that duty to protect?
• 21:26
  How can the EPA justify abandoning that duty to protect Americans to appease polluters under the false flag of economic growth?
• 21:35
  Now, if this were a courtroom, I'd be objection, statements not facts, not in evidence.
• 21:41
  How many of our streets are flooded, and can they actually be tied to climate change?
• 21:45
  Where's the evidence that that our that our air is polluted because it's not there?
• 21:52
  That that that we all all her simple assertions, right?
• 21:55
  Without factor basis, how can you abandon the lack of science?
• 22:01
  Um how can you abandon my political agenda because you know, and claim that that you're just you know running up profits.
• 22:14
  Listen to Mr.
• 22:14
  Zelz's response.
• 22:16
  Following the law, section 202 of the Clean Air Act.
• 22:19
  Where does it say anything about fighting global climate change?
• 22:23
  Loper Bright, Supreme Court case, you're familiar with it.
• 22:26
  Wow.
• 22:28
  The law, the law, where does it say anything in the law that my job is to fight global climate change?
• 22:34
  Um, this very powerful answer.
• 22:36
  But the back and forth becomes really interesting.
• 22:40
  No, I I maybe others are not, but let me ask you.
• 22:43
  But that's really important.
• 22:43
  As a member of Congress, Loper Bright says that we, as as an agency, don't have the authority to get creative.
• 22:50
  If Section 202 of the Clean Air Act, no, no, but you don't have excuse me.
• 22:54
  You do not have the right to say climate change does not exist, that it's a hoax, and that's where this administration is.
• 23:02
  I want you to understand, because Mr.
• 23:03
  Zeldon focused on Loper Bright, but think about it this way.
• 23:07
  The law passed by Congress, of which Ms.
• 23:10
  Del Delaro is a current member, doesn't say anything about dealing with global climate change.
• 23:18
  The courts have told Congress that the laws passed by Congress doesn't allow agencies like the EPA to simply make up the rules.
• 23:28
  They have to follow what Congress has said.
• 23:31
  And she's upset that a member of an executive agency is telling her I have to follow the law.
• 23:40
  But then she goes on and says, Well, that doesn't give you the right to say climate change doesn't exist.
• 23:46
  Um excuse me, Ms.
• 23:48
  Delaro.
• 23:48
  Um, First Amendment, freedom of speech.
• 23:53
  Uh he's he represents the administrative.
• 23:56
  You're telling me the president isn't allowed to express his opinion because you have sold out to this climate change.
• 24:03
  Yes, hoax.
• 24:04
  There is no evidence that man has had a significant impact.
• 24:10
  Uh, we do have an impact.
• 24:12
  It is a minuscule impact.
• 24:14
  But uh, this this in this craziness goes on.
• 24:17
  Anderson, you're upset that you don't know what Loperbright is.
• 24:19
  Do you know what the major policies doctrine is?
• 24:21
  I'm accept I'm upset because you know what the major policies doctrine is.
• 24:24
  You know what?
• 24:24
  Let me just you're a member of Congress.
• 24:26
  You should know.
• 24:26
  Well, you're you're you you have moved from someone who defended the environment to all of a sudden.
• 24:32
  I'm very defensive about not knowing the two biggest landmark supreme court cases of the last year.
• 24:37
  Regards to your question.
• 24:38
  You are very defensive about changing your policy and your positions with regard to the environment.
• 24:45
  What you see is a classic emotion versus logic debate.
• 24:51
  Right, Ms.
• 24:51
  DeLosa is upset.
• 24:53
  She has an emotional visceral reaction because she has worshipped, I use that term.
• 24:59
  I don't know if she'd use it.
• 25:01
  She's worshipped climate change, and now she accuses Mr.
• 25:06
  Zeldin, who is executing the policies of the president of the United States.
• 25:11
  Remember, all executive power is vested in the president.
• 25:14
  He isn't a part of the executive.
• 25:16
  He is exercising the presence.
• 25:17
  And now she's mad at him because he's contradicting her, because he's focusing on the law and not the emotion of supporting this climate change agenda.
• 25:31
  And this, by the way, it goes on to the point where the chairman eventually has to get them, has to step in to get them to stop.
• 25:38
  But again, notice you have a member of Congress who doesn't care about the law, who doesn't care about court decisions regarding the powers of the executive branch.
• 25:50
  She's just upset that a member of the executive branch doesn't follow her delusion, her emotional attachment to a political agenda not supported by actual science.
• 26:05
  It's supported by some scientists, but it's not supported by science.
• 26:11
  That to me is a definition of um well, a political witch hunt.
• 26:16
  That's what that has a particular interchange has turned into.
• 26:21
  Meanwhile, something that probably should be um investigated, once again, the farm bill, or as I like to call it, horculus, the uh one person called it the Save Our Bacon Act.
• 26:35
  Um this bill, which I think is on the way to the House floor, has more than three hundred amendments over key provisions, right?
• 26:46
  What is the what is in this god-awful, you know, pork-laden monstrosity.
• 26:54
  No, the the Save Our Bacon Act is that it's actually an amendment to the the farm bill that doesn't want states to implement their own production standards.
• 27:04
  Nothing big surprise, large stake industry stakeholders in the pork uh industry, they don't like the idea of states actually making their own rules.
• 27:13
  They like the federal government doing this, including, by the way, Smithfield Foods, which is a Chinese-owned company.
• 27:21
  Meanwhile, a uh may a main representative Charlie Pingry and uh Thomas Massey are leading a bipartisan effort to remove pesticide labeling provisions.
• 27:34
  Apparently, this is the let's save Roundup uh in the in the uh farm bill.
• 27:39
  Um, according to Representative Massey, if farmers contract a form of cancer or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma from this chemical, the the glyphosate that's part of Roundup, is that if this makes it into the farm bill, you won't be able to sue for that.
• 27:51
  Oh, great, let's give chemical manufacturers immunity from cancer caused by their products.
• 28:00
  Why?
• 28:00
  Why?
• 28:00
  Well, because somebody got not only represent the court Congress's year, but the president's year.
• 28:00
  Well, because somebody got in not only represent the Congress's year, but the president's year.
• 28:06
  We we need this in order to keep putting out this food, even if it's poisoning the people.
• 28:06
  We we need this in order to keep putting out this food, even if it's poisoning the people.
• 28:11
  And of course, the farm bill always includes the infamous snap benefits, the supplemental nutrition assistance program, which uh again, it's just pork by another name.
• 28:11
  And of course, the farm bill always includes the infamous snap benefits, the supplemental nutrition assistance program, which uh again, it's just pork by another name.
• 28:22
  It's let's take let's take an unconstitutional program.
• 28:22
  It's let's take let's take an unconstitutional program.
• 28:25
  Federal government's not authorized to spend money on supplemental nutrition.
• 28:25
  Federal government's not authorized to spend money on supplemental nutrition, but of course.
• 28:29
  But of course, that always gives it because like people, Congressmen like spending money, and people like getting money from other people.
• 28:36
  This is the mess that we're into.
• 28:38
  You know, the this this farm bill, this is how Congress hides all this garbage, all this refuge, all the pork, all the theft, all the unconstitutional nonsense buried in this ginormous pork list disaster.
• 28:53
  And it gets through.
• 28:54
  Why?
• 28:54
  Well, we we do we want SNAP.
• 28:56
  We don't want people going hungry.
• 28:57
  We're not willing to help pay for that themselves.
• 28:59
  No, no, no.
• 29:00
  We want the federal government, we want the federal government to take money from other people to pay with these things.
• 29:05
  And remember, it's not just SNAP.
• 29:07
  These are a lot of these programs have been found out to have a lot of fraud in them lately.
• 29:13
  Does anybody remember?
• 29:15
  Was it the SNAP fraud in?
• 29:16
  I think it was California, where you had uh was thousands of um places that were not selling snap eligible stuff, but they were snap locations.
• 29:26
  Um that again that this fraud is is made easier by having all these programs that are doling out money.
• 29:37
  The federal government isn't legally allowed to uh to dole out, which means why is there not an investigation into the embezzlement performed by Congress?
• 29:47
  Now, listen, you can't you can't pick a specific congressman and investigate them for what they say and vote on in on the floor, but you can certainly investigate Congress for their um their illegal, their extortion, they're not extortion, uh, embezzlement of trillions of dollars of money from the American people, mainly to buy votes to keep themselves in office or to pay off donors who help them buy votes so they can stay in office.
• 30:19
  Maybe some of these investigations should be focused not simply on the people that the federal government attacks, but on several of the programs that the federal government promotes, even though, especially those that are not supported by a power vested in the government to the United States by the Constitution of the United States.
• 30:39
  For example, I mean they're they're investigating, uh at least the feds are now investigating the fraud in Minnesota, uh, where there is believed that uh roughly nine billion dollars was taken fraudly uh fraudulently from the state Medicaid system.
• 30:55
  Um if they're coming from the state system, some of that money came from the from the federal government.
• 31:02
  Are people looking at the accusations that the Biden administration embezzled money by classifying certain uh taxpayer-backed loans to planned parenthood as Benghazi?
• 31:14
  I mean, there certainly is plenty of fraud in the federal government, both today and in previous administrations that I believe should be investigated.
• 31:23
  Now, I don't want political witch hunts.
• 31:26
  I don't want people indicted because of their political positions or because they have previously harmed the administration or members of the administration.
• 31:35
  No, I want these criminal activities investigated and those behind them indicted and prosecuted.
• 31:44
  I don't want, like I said, you know, Comey, they may have had a case with the uh lying to Congress, but this idea of you know 86 to 47 is somehow a threat against the president is ridiculous.
• 31:58
  It's just a witch hunt.
• 32:01
  But we need to investigate these, and it shouldn't be a a partisan investigation.
• 32:06
  In other words, it shouldn't be Trump going after Biden things, and then whoever comes next going after Trump.
• 32:14
  No, the people should demand better.
• 32:16
  They should demand better of their representative representatives.
• 32:20
  They should demand better of their uh of their the public servants at both the state and federal level.
• 32:29
  We should demand better.
• 32:31
  And that's the problem.
• 32:33
  You see, the problem is we we we want someone to fix this, but we're not willing to make sure we hire people that are willing to fix this.
• 32:40
  We eventually say, well, you know, it's the best, it's the best donkey or it's the best elephant we can find, rather than looking for the best person we can find.
• 32:50
  We've we've turned this into a play, a game of of political touch football.
• 32:55
  And we have lost so much of the republic.
• 32:58
  We've lost so many of our rights because of all the things we've let the federal government do because our guys did it, or our guys supported it, or I benefited from it directly.
• 33:12
  Maybe the investigation needs we need to do a little investigating of ourselves, not just of the federal government, but about how we go about choosing our representatives that work in the that represent us in the federal government, in the state government, in the local government.
• 33:27
  Now, right here, right now here in Tennessee, we're in the middle of primary season.
• 33:31
  And so I'm talking a lot about these things.
• 33:33
  And I'm pointing out, hey, you know, a primary is a publicly funded election for a private organization to limit the the names on the actual ballot in November.
• 33:46
  Umbe we should be spending less time worrying about donkeys and elephants, D's and Rs.
• 33:53
  Maybe we should be looking more at the character of the people we're choosing.
• 33:57
  Maybe we should be holding them accountable a lot more.
• 34:01
  I don't just mean yelling in at Facebook or Twitter or whatever.
• 34:04
  I mean, do like I did when I saw my state reps doing something I didn't I thought was wrong.
• 34:10
  I asked them why.
• 34:13
  And uh, and when they came back with an answer I didn't like, I I challenged them.
• 34:19
  Right?
• 34:19
  This needs to be part of the process.
• 34:22
  And I think, you know, as much as we like to point the finger, those people work for us.
• 34:28
  We hired them.
• 34:29
  Therefore, we're responsible for what they do, especially what they do in our name.
• 34:35
  I understand.
• 34:36
  They're getting lobbied like crazy, right?
• 34:38
  They're lobbyists, there are our special interest groups or activist groups that are always pushing an agenda.
• 34:45
  The agenda, however, isn't always protecting our rights.
• 34:48
  Frequently, it's destroying our rights.
• 34:50
  And these agendas are often funded by the very corporations we do businesses with.
• 34:56
  Why do we buy from companies that don't believe what we believe?
• 34:59
  Why don't we seek out companies that do believe what we believe?
• 35:00
  We seek out companies that do believe what we believe.
• 35:03
  There's several companies I don't do business with anymore because they've shown to support agendas that destroy my rights.
• 35:03
  There's several companies I don't do business with anymore because they've shown to support agendas that destroy my rights.
• 35:11
  But there are companies that believe.
• 35:11
  But there are companies that believe.
• 35:13
  There are companies that work to secure our rights.
• 35:13
  There are companies that work to secure our rights.
• 35:17
  One of them is Patriot Mobile, America's only Christian conservative wireless provider.
• 35:17
  One of them is Patriot Mobile, America's only Christian conservative wireless provider.
• 35:22
  Now, I I didn't join them years ago because they're Christian conservative.
• 35:22
  Now I didn't join them years ago because they're Christian conservative.
• 35:26
  They are.
• 35:26
  They are, right?
• 35:27
  I didn't join them because of their 4G and 5G companies.
• 35:27
  I didn't join them because of their 4G and 5G coverage on all the same networks and towers the major carriers use.
• 35:33
  That's great.
• 35:35
  I didn't join them because their customer support is 100% U.S.
• 35:38
  based.
• 35:39
  It is.
• 35:41
  No, I joined them for the simple reason that they not only share my values, they put their money where their mouth is.
• 35:48
  They support organizations that are fighting for our rights, for freedom of religion, speech, press, the right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures, to not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
• 36:03
  They also support the sanctity of life, our veterans and our first responders.
• 36:08
  Join me at Patriot Mobile today by going to Patriot Mobile.com/slash Constitution.
• 36:14
  Find the plan that works for you.
• 36:16
  You can bring your own phone or buy a new one.
• 36:18
  They've got plans that meet all the people, every need you could possibly need.
• 36:22
  And by the way, they've also got discounts.
• 36:24
  If you're a veteran, a first responder, or just a family with multiple lines, you get discounts as well.
• 36:30
  Check it out at patriot mobile.com says constitution.
• 36:34
  Speaking of checkout, when you're ready to check out with your new line, use the code constitution to get your activation absolutely free.
• 36:41
  Join me today at America's only Christian conservative wireless provider by going to Patriot Mobile.com slash Constitution.
• 36:47
  Find a plan and discount that works for you, and don't forget to use that code Constitution at checkout to get activation absolutely free.
• 36:55
  I also hope you'll join me here at America Outloud.news.
• 36:59
  I go there every day for news and information.
• 37:01
  And not just because of the radio program or the website.
• 37:04
  Corporate media's been lying to us, they've been hiding information from us.
• 37:07
  We need sources we can trust, yet still verified.
• 37:10
  For me, one of those is America Outloud.news.
• 37:13
  So join me.
• 37:14
  And then do your part.
• 37:16
  Take read the stories, read the articles, then share them.
• 37:20
  Listen to the podcast, watch the videos, share them.
• 37:23
  You'd be surprised how many people say, I never knew about that.
• 37:26
  That's right, because the corporate media doesn't want you to.
• 37:29
  But when you share this information, when you're letting people know the news that the government and its lackeys don't want you to know, you're helping to secure the blessings of liberty for all of us.
• 37:42
  In just two minutes per day, you can reclaim your health and vitality and cut your grocery bill in half with one simple convenient product.
• 37:51
  Our doctor formulated green 85 juice formula's powerful dose of ultra-concentrated essential nutrients, stops hunger in its tracks and supplies your cells with what's missing in the grocery store food.
• 38:03
  It's packed with wheatgrass, Corella, dandelion, moringa, spirulina, broccoli sprouts, asaiberry, beetroot, probiotics, enzymes, vitamins A, D, K, B12, just to name a few.
• 38:15
  Go to ChemicalfreeBody.com forward slash out loud today.
• 38:19
  Get nature's super multivitamin Green 85, empower your immune system, cut down on your grocery bill, and save 20% on your first order.
• 38:28
  Are you looking for a healthy snacks?
• 38:30
  But you've had enough of all the sweet sugary energy bars.
• 38:36
  Good news.
• 38:37
  There's new bars to try.
• 38:39
  That's savory, crunchy, and pack with goodness.
• 38:43
  Bear bars are based just on six simple natural ingredients, a certified organic veggie, nut and seed bar.
• 38:52
  That's low temp dried, never baked or fried.
• 38:56
  Bear bars are plant-based, gluten-free and loaded with nutrients and protein.
• 39:02
  Head over to Bearbar.com slash out loud and get the exclusive discount just for America Out Loud.
• 39:11
  Listeners.
• 39:12
  That's B E A R, B A R slash Out Loud.
• 39:20
  Feeling off lately, bloated brain fog, low energy.
• 39:23
  It could be parasites, these sound invaders that weaken your gut, immune system, and mental clarity.
• 39:28
  That's why Dr.
• 39:29
  Peter McCullough and the doctors at the wellness company formulated ivermectin and mabendazol cleanse, a medical grade solution designed to help eliminate parasites and restore balance.
• 39:38
  No gimmicks, just real medicine trusted by top doctors.
• 39:41
  Go to TWC.health forward slash out loud and use code out loud for 20% off your first order.
• 39:48
  Take control of your health today.
• 39:54
  Welcome back, everyday Americans the Constitution study.
• 39:58
  We've been talking about indictments and investigations.
• 40:02
  Well, I'm gonna throw out a couple things that uh, well, not legally indictments, but uh certainly things that the American people I think should be um much more outraged about and just seem to be letting things go along.
• 40:15
  And I'm reminded of a line from Ronald Reagan back in 1961 where he said uh freedom is never more than one generation away from instinct from extinction.
• 40:26
  And I have to wonder is this the generation?
• 40:29
  Because it seems like the American people are willing to simply roll over and accept any infringement on their rights that that that uh Congress can come up with.
• 40:37
  Uh for example, the um uh the latest is the the uh in-car monitoring mandate.
• 40:46
  Right back in 21, Congress passed a completely unconstitutional law, right?
• 40:51
  There's absolutely no basis for this law that involves, among other things, um, every car that will be built starting with the 2027 model year.
• 41:03
  The law requires that such vehicles include a system that monitors drivers to see if they're impaired and can intervene if necessary.
• 41:13
  Now, again, I do not drink, I barely drink, I don't drink and drive, and I think people that do should be severely punished.
• 41:22
  But the idea is that first of all, the federal government has the authority to dictate policy over transportation violates the Constitution.
• 41:30
  It violates the 10th Amendment because it's not a power delegated to the United States by the Constitution, therefore they don't have that power.
• 41:36
  It violates the necessary and proper clause because Congress can only make laws that are necessary and proper to put into effect powers delegated to the government of the United States.
• 41:45
  This did not happen.
• 41:47
  Now they say, well, most of these cars are sold through interstate transport, but you're not in your interstate commerce.
• 41:53
  You're not regulating the interstate commerce, you're regulating the vehicle simply because it passed through interstate commerce.
• 42:00
  This to me goes way, way back.
• 42:00
  This to me goes way, way back.
• 42:02
  Now you have to understand a couple things.
• 42:02
  You have to understand a couple things.
• 42:03
  When I was a ch when I was young, when I was small, uh my dad and my mom rode mini bikes, and I wanted to ride a minibike and my made a deal that uh when I could ride my bicycles with certain tests, then he would teach me to ride a minibike.
• 42:03
  When I was a child, when I was young, when I was small, uh, my dad and my mom, they rode minibikes, and I wanted to ride a minibike and my made a deal that uh when I could ride my bicycles with certain tests, then he would teach me to ride a minibike.
• 42:18
  When I passed the test, we teach me to ride a mini-bike.
• 42:18
  When I passed the test, we teach me to ride a mini bike.
• 42:21
  He handed me a helmet.
• 42:21
  He handed me a helmet.
• 42:23
  Now, this wasn't some cheap old helmet he bought at like the Kmart.
• 42:23
  Now, this wasn't some cheapo helmet he bought at like the Kmart.
• 42:27
  This was a race-rated helmet, and he made it quite.
• 42:27
  This was a race-rated helmet, and he made it quite clear.
• 42:30
  If he ever caught me on that mini-bike without that helmet, getting into an accident would be the least of my worries.
• 42:37
  All right.
• 42:38
  So I rode my motorcycles for years.
• 42:40
  The idea of riding without a helmet was just it made my skin crawl.
• 42:45
  But it doesn't mean I think the government should have mandated them.
• 42:48
  They did in New York.
• 42:50
  But to me, that's government overreach.
• 42:52
  Same thing with seatbelts, right?
• 42:53
  When I was a child, my sister and I we'd get in the back of the car and my mother would say the three ups.
• 42:59
  Lock up, buckle up, and shut up in that order.
• 43:02
  I don't get into a car.
• 43:04
  It's it it to without wearing my seatbelt.
• 43:07
  It's is normal.
• 43:08
  It's it's it's it's the right thing.
• 43:10
  Do I think the government should be mandating that?
• 43:12
  No.
• 43:14
  Now I just bought a car.
• 43:16
  Uh it's a used car, but so it's it's 22.
• 43:18
  I'm not worried about the new stuff.
• 43:20
  But guess what?
• 43:21
  It won't even go into gear unless the seatbelt is buckled.
• 43:25
  So if I'm just trying to move my car around my driveway, I have to buckle the seatbelt.
• 43:32
  Going too far.
• 43:34
  But now you have so that somehow this thing is supposed to, not because you've done anything wrong, right?
• 43:39
  There's no due process in any of this.
• 43:42
  They simply say you must prove you are not impaired to be able to exercise your right to operate your own motor vehicle.
• 43:51
  Some critics they like they throw a name on, they call it the a kill switch.
• 43:55
  And I have to wonder.
• 43:57
  How are they going to detect impairment?
• 44:00
  Are they going to make you blow in a tube before you start the car?
• 44:04
  Are they going to monitor your eyes?
• 44:05
  Are you going to have the car monitoring your face and your eyes and transmitting that to some database to be tracked?
• 44:14
  How are they going to and what happens when it malfunctions?
• 44:18
  What happens when, God forbid, some single mother is, you know, trying to get go home from the the, she went out to the with her friends to the movies, and she's trying to get home, and she's in, you know, maybe in a not nice neighborhood, and there's there's a gang of guys come up and she wants to flee.
• 44:38
  She wants to get away, but she can't because the car won't start because she's nervous and it thinks she's impaired.
• 44:45
  But this bill passed.
• 44:47
  And as far as I know, no one has challenged this yet.
• 44:51
  Because this is something where to me, prior enforcement is very important because you now have car manufacturers that are designing, they've already designed these systems.
• 45:00
  The 2027 model year is probably is already in the books.
• 45:04
  It's going to be manufactured soon.
• 45:07
  They've spent money on this, and nobody has said who.
• 45:12
  And to me, this is what we to me, as bad as it is that Congress passed this.
• 45:18
  I think we need investigations to why the American people put up with this.
• 45:23
  Because this is an infringement on your rights.
• 45:26
  It's not like you've been, you know, it's one thing.
• 45:28
  If you've been caught a DWI and they say we're going to put a you can only drive a vehicle with a monitoring system in it, that is a punishment for a crime.
• 45:39
  To me, the biggest problem is not that cars will operate if someone's impaired.
• 45:44
  It's how it's the abysmal record our justice system has in punishing DUIs.
• 45:52
  So once again, we see rather than punishing the guilty, Congress wants to once again punish the innocent by having them pay for a device they don't need, they don't legally need, but they required, they they they told the real regulators, these illegal regulators, the unconstitutional regulators to set up these stand the what they call safety standards for advanced impaired driving prevention technology.
• 46:18
  Congress has no authority to do that.
• 46:20
  The regulators, even the regulators don't legally exist.
• 46:24
  This is why I say I ask, is this the generation where freedom dies?
• 46:30
  Because now again, I understand there are people that are that are impacted by uh by drunk driving, and it's terrible.
• 46:38
  And I think the people who do that should be punished severely for the danger they pose to others.
• 46:44
  But rather than punishing the guilty, we're gonna punish the innocent.
• 46:48
  And that's um again, that seems to be the way of things.
• 46:52
  And ladies and gentlemen, that's not a free country.
• 46:57
  If your rights can be infringed upon because they're afraid you might do something bad, you are not free.
• 47:05
  So as you go back, we look at these investigations and indictments, right?
• 47:09
  We look at the the indictment of uh of a former FBI director come for a post he made that you know, I get I know Trump was saying, well, you know, 86, that's mob turn for killing.
• 47:23
  Actually, it's entomology is um restaurant for don't serve the guy.
• 47:29
  But now, even you know, the the this thin, weak, feeble attempt to get back at a political opponent, doesn't say much for our justice system, does it?
• 47:41
  And now we have uh uh the the Fauci assistant who it has been um uh indicted for destroying data.
• 47:49
  Well, okay, that's to me that sounds like a good deal, or at least he's been indicted, which means a prosecutor convinced a grand jury that they have a case, at least a case worthy of going to court.
• 48:02
  Uh doesn't mean that Mr.
• 48:03
  Morns is guilty, right?
• 48:04
  It means that there's evidence enough that the prosecutions put enough evidence that uh during his tenure, he um I love the way he defrauded the government by um tampering with evidence.
• 48:19
  Yeah.
• 48:21
  And again, I put this uh this regulation from the uh infrastructure distract infrastructure destruction and and unemployment act.
• 48:29
  Of course, they didn't call it, they call it the infrastructure investment and jobs act, but it was not, along with the uh the the push by Congress of to check question the Face Act.
• 48:40
  The FACE Act is unconstitutional, the infrastructure act was unconstitutional, this regulation is unconstitutional, and the American people do nothing.
• 48:53
  And then we wonder why our freedoms and rights keep disappearing.
• 48:58
  We stuff our we we stuff them in in you know pork list bills like the farm bill or or you know, regulations where where uh government simply embezzling trillions of dollars to the American people, and then the shock, shocked to find that there are people that actually commit fraud.
• 49:00
  We we stuff them in in you know pork list bills like the farm bill or or you know regulations where where uh government simply embezzling trillions of dollars to the American people and then the shock shock to find that there are people that actually commit fraud.
• 49:16
  Oh my god, there are people that commit fraud, there are people that that you know manipulate the government to their own personal or political benefit.
• 49:16
  Oh my god, there are people that commit fraud.
• 49:20
  There are people that that you know manipulate the government to their own personal or political benefit.
• 49:26
  Inconceivable.
• 49:26
  Inconceivable.
• 49:28
  You give you some.
• 49:28
  You give you some thinking as what you're thinking miss.
• 49:33
  But yet we live this life every day, and it's up to us.
• 49:37
  Now, before I call it a day, there's a little thing that's been getting under my skin lately.
• 49:42
  Uh, we've recently had a visit from King Charles uh of the UK, and of course, a lot of people, because they they talk about our special relationship, and I suppose we have one, and they talk a lot about the different types of government.
• 49:57
  They make a I've heard a lot of people make a big point about the fact that the king is the head of state, but not the head of government.
• 50:07
  And that the um the prime minister of England is the head of government.
• 50:12
  Whereas in the United States, the president is both the head of government and the head of uh state.
• 50:19
  And um, that grates on me.
• 50:22
  Because it's not true.
• 50:25
  Let me make a point.
• 50:26
  The head of government or the head of state or the chief of state is defined as the formal head of a nation, distinct from the head of the government.
• 50:37
  And if you look, the president's job is to execute the laws.
• 50:40
  He is not the head of this nation.
• 50:44
  He is not the head of the government.
• 50:47
  He is a public servant.
• 50:49
  He is the boy, he'd be a servant of the nation, a servant of the government.
• 50:55
  It shows the fundamental misunderstanding of the role of president.
• 50:59
  His job is not to run the government, his job is to execute the laws of the United States.
• 51:07
  His job is not to be the head of the nation.
• 51:10
  Now, this one, he's his job includes receiving foreign ambassadors and ministers.
• 51:17
  In other words, his job, part of this job description from Article 2 is when foreign dignitaries uh come is to receive them.
• 51:26
  That is his job.
• 51:28
  Um, you know, call it but to say that that he's the formal head of a nation simply because he's his job includes receiving that shows how much we've lost of the freedom and independence that was the foundation of this country almost 250 years ago.
• 51:47
  It'll be 250 years this July.
• 51:50
  We declared ourselves independent from a government that said that they are the head, that they have a king that that rules.
• 52:00
  We don't have a president that rules, he's not the head of government, he's not the head of state.
• 52:07
  He is a servant, specifically, he's a servant of the states, he is a hireling whose job it is to execute the laws of the United States, to receive ambassadors, to oversee the military under the direction of Congress.
• 52:25
  Congress says the laws and rules for the military.
• 52:28
  The president is the chief commander taking his direction from Congress.
• 52:33
  This whole thing makes the president sound more and more like a king.
• 52:40
  Even though they say, well, you know, it's it's no, yeah, because if he's the formal head of the nation, he's the king.
• 52:49
  As opposed to if he's the head of government, well, then he's the king.
• 52:56
  And that's not the role.
• 52:57
  Now, I don't know if this is just some um anglophiles going nuts, but based on what I've read and based on what I've seen, and not just now, but for decades past, we think of the president as a king, even though he specifically is hired as a servant.
• 53:18
  I say again, he is hired by the states as a servant of the states.
• 53:26
  His primary job is to execute the laws of the United States, to be the commander of the military, executing the laws and regulations established by Congress.
• 53:37
  Just because part of his job involves receiving foreign ministers, doesn't make him head of state, doesn't make him head of government uh government, doesn't make him some quasi king.
• 53:51
  And I point this out because it these statements leave in the mind a position of the president that is far beyond his legal boundaries.
• 54:00
  To me, that's dangerous, and that is a destruction of our freedom.
• 54:06
  Because when we have a head of government and a head of state that gets to rule over us, our rights are in jeopardy.
• 54:14
  Now, if you like the work that we're doing here, you can support us by going to the Constitution Study store.
• 54:19
  Just go to Constitution Study.shop or look for the store button at the top of the website, and uh you'll see I've got books up there, t-shirts, mugs.
• 54:28
  Nobody gets a salary here.
• 54:30
  So every penny made goes to keeping the constitution study up and running.
• 54:35
  Uh again, you can like I said, you can get my books.
• 54:37
  If you buy paperbacks, you can get them signed, but it's a great opportunity to support the work that we're doing here.
• 54:42
  And if you just want to donate to the cause, there's a donate page where you can make a one-time recurring donation that again helps keep the constitution study up and running.
• 54:51
  It allows me not only to help with this radio program, the and the website and the in all the articles and videos, that money goes to helping me speak at other locations without charging them.
• 55:02
  I'm going to be in Eustace, Florida this May, speaking to the Lake County uh Constitution Party at their uh uh convention uh the the recognition of the opening of the constitutional convention, and um I can do that because of people like you that support the work that we're doing here, either by buying my products or by donating the cause.
• 55:26
  So please help and help me bring the freed, the words of freedom and liberty to as much of the nation as I can.
• 55:35
  Now, I also hope you'll come back here and join us for the constitution study heard on America Out Loud Talk Radio on the iHeart Radio Network every weekday at 4 p.m.
• 55:44
  Eastern time.
• 55:46
  Now you get to listen.
• 55:47
  We've got our media player, we've also got apps.
• 55:49
  So if you like to have it and Apple and Android or an Alexa, you can listen through those devices.
• 55:55
  And of course, all the episodes go to podcasts.
• 55:57
  Now it does take a couple days to go from talk radio to podcast, but you get to listen in your favorite podcast app.
• 56:00
  Go from talk radio to podcast, but you get to listen in your favorite podcast app.
• 56:05
  But I do ask a favor, subscribe to the show, rate it, especially on Apple Podcasts.
• 56:05
  But I do ask a favor, subscribe to the show, rate it, especially on Apple Podcasts.
• 56:11
  It helps the algorithm show us to more people.
• 56:11
  It helps the algorithm show us to more people.
• 56:14
  They're more likely to click the link and join us here for the Constitution study.
• 56:14
  They're more likely to click the link and join us here for the Constitution study.
• 56:19
  Speaking of links, you can find all the links you need at the homepage at AmericaOut Loud.news.
• 56:19
  Speaking of links, you can find all the links you need at the homepage at AmericaOut Loud.news.
• 56:26
  But please share those links.
• 56:26
  But please share those links, share the episode, share the story.
• 56:28
  Share the episode, share the story, share the work that we're doing here.
• 56:32
  It's the act of sharing, it's the act of exposing people to this type of content that helps share the blessings of liberty to everyone who calls this great nation home.