Latest / Brian Thomas / Judge Napolitano - Lawless Presidency

Transcript

Judge Napolitano - Lawless Presidency · Brian Thomas

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: I'm having us through lock On northbound, out of arrow
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: Linger into the cut. Everything is new in twenty twenty six,
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: including our next guest coming up is the brand new
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: draft consultant for the New York Giants, Judge Napolitano, you're
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: on the clock, Chuck Ingramont fifty five kr DE Talk Station, fifty.
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: Five kr SE DE Talk Station. Oh, you may not
• 0:26
  Speaker 2: think big plans for the Bengals this year. But if
• 0:29
  Speaker 2: Chuck ingram is right, got big plans for the Giants
• 0:31
  Speaker 2: this year, I guess they're gonna do really well with
• 0:32
  Speaker 2: Judge of Politano helping them out. Judge of Polaitano, Welcome
• 0:36
  Speaker 2: back to the fifty five KRSE Morning Show. Every Wednesday.
• 0:38
  Speaker 2: At this time we get the Judge's sage, wisdom and insight.
• 0:41
  Speaker 2: Constitutional purist he may be, and maybe suffering some slings
• 0:45
  Speaker 2: and arrows as a consequence of it, but we're running out.
• 0:48
  Speaker 2: We're we're running out of people who are on our
• 0:50
  Speaker 2: side of the ledger anymore. Judge, you are happy New Year.
• 0:53
  Speaker 3: And also suffering slings and arrows of it. Being a
• 0:56
  Speaker 3: long suffering Giant fan. If I had my drouts, I
• 1:00
  Speaker 3: would to hire Bill Belichick as general manager. And as
• 1:03
  Speaker 3: said coach, I like that, giants.
• 1:07
  Speaker 2: It's nice to have a little misery loves company going
• 1:10
  Speaker 2: on when you're a Bengals fan. So probably, well, you know,
• 1:13
  Speaker 2: we understand where you're coming from, Judge Anna Politano, and
• 1:16
  Speaker 2: finding ourselves in a bit of a minority with the
• 1:19
  Speaker 2: most recent unilateral military action by a president, and this
• 1:22
  Speaker 2: happens with presidents of all political stripes. With this one,
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: of course, we're dealing with Donald Trump goes in middle
• 1:27
  Speaker 2: of night grabs Manuel Noriega, and already we did that before.
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: The predicate may have been Manuel Noriega, among others, Nicholas
• 1:34
  Speaker 2: Madur and his wife for criminal violations. And it seems
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: to me, Judge of Politano, if you're using, for example,
• 1:42
  Speaker 2: Noriega as the predicate or the legal authority, and I
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: know you'll have a word or two to say about that.
• 1:48
  Speaker 2: To grab this guy, the idea that he was indicted
• 1:51
  Speaker 2: by a federal grand jury and facing criminal charges for
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: work that was unrelated to his position as the president
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: of a nation, in other words, make money on the side,
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: engaging in criminal activity. That's not a presidential thing that
• 2:06
  Speaker 2: we can grab him. But I think that is sort
• 2:08
  Speaker 2: of the precondition of the predicate, the sort of the
• 2:14
  Speaker 2: thing that they're hanging their hat on in order to
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: engage in what they're calling this don Roe doctrine, to
• 2:19
  Speaker 2: try to keep the Chinese out of the hemisphere, to
• 2:21
  Speaker 2: try to keep the Russians out of the hemisphere, of course,
• 2:24
  Speaker 2: to get rid of drugs generally speaking, but to bring
• 2:28
  Speaker 2: about some greater pro Western stability here, I think was
• 2:31
  Speaker 2: the goal. But you can't go in and grab somebody
• 2:34
  Speaker 2: just because they disagree with you politically. Oh look, we've
• 2:36
  Speaker 2: got a federal indictment for criminal charges. We can use
• 2:40
  Speaker 2: the Norriega example and go grab him. And I know
• 2:43
  Speaker 2: you disagree with all of that, But here we are.
• 2:46
  Speaker 3: Well, I do disagree with all of it because we
• 2:49
  Speaker 3: have this thing called the Constitution, and we have a
• 2:51
  Speaker 3: treaty that the United States drafted and the Senate ratified
• 2:56
  Speaker 3: and called the un Charter, and both prohibit this. The
• 2:59
  Speaker 3: President does seem to care about the Constitution, which he
• 3:03
  Speaker 3: took an oath to preserve, protect and defend, as we
• 3:05
  Speaker 3: all know, he doesn't seem to care about a treaty
• 3:08
  Speaker 3: with which he may disagree, even though under the lows
• 3:11
  Speaker 3: in the same category as the Constitution. This Constitution and
• 3:17
  Speaker 3: all treaties made pursuant to it, shall be the supreme
• 3:20
  Speaker 3: law of the land. I'm quoting from the Constitution itself.
• 3:24
  Speaker 3: But the President doesn't care and probably will get away
• 3:28
  Speaker 3: with this. The Noriega example was just as unlawful as this,
• 3:35
  Speaker 3: but the courts did not interfere with it. Interesting thing,
• 3:39
  Speaker 3: Noriega argued that all he did was look the other
• 3:44
  Speaker 3: way while the CIA engaged in drug trafficking, because the
• 3:50
  Speaker 3: CIA asked him to look the other way. Well, question
• 3:55
  Speaker 3: who was the director of the CIA and Noriega was
• 4:01
  Speaker 3: engaged in what he says was cooperation with them? George Bush,
• 4:06
  Speaker 3: the same president who invaded Panama to arrest him, George H. W. Bush.
• 4:14
  Speaker 2: It's amazing how that list stars aligned on that. But
• 4:17
  Speaker 2: under legal theories, him looking away is a criminal act.
• 4:20
  Speaker 2: He is part of the broader conspiracy to involve the
• 4:23
  Speaker 2: involved in the drug trade, whether it's the CIA doing
• 4:25
  Speaker 2: the drugs or not. If it was a RICO claim
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: against him, he'd still be indictable and subject to prosecution
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: by because he helped facilitate it by looking the other
• 4:33
  Speaker 2: way and not doing anything.
• 4:35
  Speaker 3: What about the CIA agent no, no, I'm what are
• 4:39
  Speaker 3: they going to be defended?
• 4:40
  Speaker 2: So, which leads me to the ultimate point here. Let's
• 4:44
  Speaker 2: assume everyone agrees with you that right this is extra constitutional.
• 4:50
  Speaker 2: What is the response supposed to be in this insanely
• 4:54
  Speaker 2: politically divided environment. You can't get Congress to pass even
• 4:57
  Speaker 2: a bill if Trump wants it hated. If Trump doesn't
• 5:01
  Speaker 2: want it, then they want it.
• 5:02
  Speaker 3: I don't know what the response is. I think Trump
• 5:04
  Speaker 3: was correct yesterday when he told the Republican caucus that
• 5:08
  Speaker 3: if the Democrats take the House, he'll be impeached. They
• 5:11
  Speaker 3: won't be convicted, It'll be impeached it we'll be going
• 5:14
  Speaker 3: through that nonsense of tying up the government and knots. Again,
• 5:19
  Speaker 3: He's already been impeached twice. There just aren't the votes
• 5:22
  Speaker 3: to convict unless some more comes out. But that's really
• 5:27
  Speaker 3: the only remedy there is at this point. That Congress
• 5:30
  Speaker 3: doesn't have an LBJ. There is no person there who
• 5:35
  Speaker 3: can cobble together agreements that appeal to a majority of
• 5:39
  Speaker 3: Republicans and a majority of Democrats. It's whoever's in charge
• 5:43
  Speaker 3: gets their way. They don't want to go shape with
• 5:46
  Speaker 3: or talk to the minority party. The Democrats will probably
• 5:53
  Speaker 3: take the House in November. Anything could happen. That's nine
• 5:58
  Speaker 3: months away, ten months away. They hope to take the Senate.
• 6:02
  Speaker 3: That's a bit of a stretch, but again, anything could happen,
• 6:08
  Speaker 3: but the government will be steinied. It will accomplish nothing.
• 6:14
  Speaker 3: Maybe that's a good thing if Trump's in the White
• 6:17
  Speaker 3: House and one or both of the Houses of Congress
• 6:21
  Speaker 3: are controlled by the Democrats.
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: So we are left with this sort of I don't
• 6:26
  Speaker 2: want to call it an incentive to ignore the declaration
• 6:31
  Speaker 2: of war responsibility in the Constitution, the control the Congress
• 6:34
  Speaker 2: is supposed to have over these matters, because we run
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: into this brick wall that there won't be any consequences
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: if there is a questionable constitutional action here. So doesn't
• 6:45
  Speaker 2: that sort of facilitate presidents down the road doing the
• 6:47
  Speaker 2: same thing? And a suggestion I meet to you in
• 6:49
  Speaker 2: that email.
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: It's like throwing in.
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: The concepts of legal concepts of waiver and a stop
• 6:54
  Speaker 2: or whatever. Everybody's done it since World War Two. We
• 6:57
  Speaker 2: kind of like political expeeding. We don't have to put
• 7:01
  Speaker 2: ourselves down as voting in favor of something like this,
• 7:04
  Speaker 2: and it gives us an opportunity to scream and yell
• 7:06
  Speaker 2: about what the opposition president is doing, and yet since
• 7:09
  Speaker 2: they don't follow through and do anything, something suggests in
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: the back of my mind that I think they all
• 7:14
  Speaker 2: kind of like this cozy arrangements as well. It's by
• 7:20
  Speaker 2: the fact that the Constitution seems prohibited.
• 7:23
  Speaker 3: I was literally interviewing the late great Congressman Charlie Wrangle
• 7:28
  Speaker 3: of Harlem when President Obama came a national television from
• 7:35
  Speaker 3: Brazil and announced that we were bombing Libya. And I
• 7:41
  Speaker 3: looked at the Congressman Wrangle and I said, did I
• 7:44
  Speaker 3: miss something? Did you guys declare war on Libya? I
• 7:47
  Speaker 3: won't try and imitate his voice yet, I remember him
• 7:49
  Speaker 3: a famous way of speaking, with a very scratchy sounding voice.
• 7:53
  Speaker 3: But he said, well, no, we didn't. We just hope
• 7:57
  Speaker 3: it's a successful outcome, and then it's a win win
• 8:00
  Speaker 3: for us. We didn't declare war, but we'll reap the
• 8:03
  Speaker 3: benefits for more. So we privately hope it's successful, but
• 8:08
  Speaker 3: publicly we'll say the hell are you to do this?
• 8:10
  Speaker 3: Follow the Constitution. The attitude is the same amongst the
• 8:14
  Speaker 3: Republicans today.
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: It is.
• 8:17
  Speaker 2: That's why I think it's going to continue. If there
• 8:19
  Speaker 2: isn't a political ramification or some illegal ramifies, then.
• 8:23
  Speaker 3: We don't have a constitution and we don't really have
• 8:26
  Speaker 3: a democracy. We just have a term limited monarch in
• 8:31
  Speaker 3: the White House. He may not even be term limited
• 8:33
  Speaker 3: in his own mind.
• 8:35
  Speaker 2: Well, and you know, you could move over to different
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: areas of topics. I just had a conversation with a
• 8:41
  Speaker 2: gentleman who wrote a book, Ary Benoit. He's been with
• 8:43
  Speaker 2: the johnsh Burt Society since basically it's founding. But he
• 8:45
  Speaker 2: put it out a COVID nineteen and I brought up
• 8:48
  Speaker 2: the fact that free exercise of religion was eradicated, like
• 8:52
  Speaker 2: to free assembly was eradicated, all in the name of
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: all COVID. So our constitution gets trampled on. You and
• 8:59
  Speaker 2: I have talked many times about their they're trampling all
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: over the Fourth Amendment. There are right to be free
• 9:05
  Speaker 2: of unreasonable searches and seizures. And what's going on with
• 9:07
  Speaker 2: FISA courts, I mean here and there in everywhere.
• 9:11
  Speaker 3: The drug war in the sixties, seventies and eighties and
• 9:16
  Speaker 3: then the overreaction to nine to eleven have obliterated the
• 9:21
  Speaker 3: Fourth Amendment, and the courts have gone along with it.
• 9:25
  Speaker 3: There are very few of my former colleagues in black
• 9:29
  Speaker 3: robes who believe that the Constitution means what it says,
• 9:32
  Speaker 3: very very few. It's hard for me to find one
• 9:35
  Speaker 3: on the Supreme Court of the United States. I might
• 9:38
  Speaker 3: have said that about Justice gors Such a year or
• 9:41
  Speaker 3: so ago, but he seems to have fallen in line
• 9:44
  Speaker 3: with his right wing colleagues, including my college debate partner
• 9:48
  Speaker 3: Sam Alito.
• 9:50
  Speaker 2: What of? And I just I have to bring this
• 9:52
  Speaker 2: up because been the subject of a lot of discussion
• 9:54
  Speaker 2: going back to Venezuela. The Democrats, Joe Biden's wanted to
• 9:57
  Speaker 2: put a twenty five or fifty million dollars bounty on it.
• 10:00
  Speaker 2: Is there something to a bounty? Is that extra constitutional?
• 10:05
  Speaker 2: I mean, and I don't know what that means. If
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: you put a bounty out and someone's being offered millions
• 10:09
  Speaker 2: and millions of dollars to bring me the head of
• 10:12
  Speaker 2: Noryega or Maduro or whoever. It seems to me that
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: that's a suggestion that the American military is going to
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: do it, because who among us can go into a
• 10:20
  Speaker 2: foreign land and actually successfully capture somebody who's under guard.
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: But is there something wrong with that concept, And how
• 10:27
  Speaker 2: can you advocate for putting a bounty on a man's
• 10:29
  Speaker 2: head and then run back the next day and screaming
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: yell about someone actually extra or taking action on that.
• 10:36
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I never looked at the constitutionality of bounties. The
• 10:40
  Speaker 3: American government'smen using bounties since right after the Revolutionary War.
• 10:49
  Speaker 3: But sometimes we put bounties on the heads of people
• 10:52
  Speaker 3: like the president of the current President of Syria, and
• 10:54
  Speaker 3: then we just take the bounty away and embrace him
• 10:57
  Speaker 3: in the oval office. So it's more political than it
• 11:02
  Speaker 3: is legal or financial. Who's going to get the fifty
• 11:05
  Speaker 3: million that the State Department put up? Is it going
• 11:08
  Speaker 3: to be shared amongst the guys that actually grabbed him
• 11:11
  Speaker 3: in his bedroom?
• 11:13
  Speaker 2: Or maybe the intel that came from within the administration
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: that no longer exists. There probably that person or persons
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: that gave the intel to our American military.
• 11:23
  Speaker 3: Well, the likely culprit is still a general and still
• 11:29
  Speaker 3: subject to the new president, Maduro's chosen vice president. It's
• 11:34
  Speaker 3: very interesting that unlike the Bush Cheney administration, which when
• 11:39
  Speaker 3: they took over Iraq through the whole government out, the
• 11:45
  Speaker 3: Trump people have decided, let's work with the people that
• 11:48
  Speaker 3: are in place. We can't fill the potholes, we can't
• 11:50
  Speaker 3: deliver the mail, we can't collect the garbage. Oh, we
• 11:53
  Speaker 3: can't even do that in our own country. How are
• 11:56
  Speaker 3: we going to do it in Venezuela.
• 11:58
  Speaker 2: Well, and I think the threat of the same thing
• 12:00
  Speaker 2: happening to those current leaders may force them or cause
• 12:05
  Speaker 2: them to be more inclined to work with Trump to
• 12:07
  Speaker 2: achieve the goals that Trump's looking for, like bringing out
• 12:10
  Speaker 2: fifty million barrels of oil.
• 12:12
  Speaker 3: So that's just theft, that's just a schoolyard bully saying
• 12:18
  Speaker 3: give me your lunch money or I'll beat your face in.
• 12:21
  Speaker 2: Yeah, they can say no. Though it's complicated, isn't it. Hey?
• 12:26
  Speaker 3: Should we need more bullies in the world to oh,
• 12:30
  Speaker 3: a neutralized one in the White House?
• 12:33
  Speaker 2: Should I mention even the word greenland?
• 12:36
  Speaker 3: Oh? God, let's not go there anyway, you.
• 12:39
  Speaker 2: Know, going back to Seward's folly, the idea of buying greenland,
• 12:43
  Speaker 2: that's been done before. So if you write them at
• 12:46
  Speaker 2: check and they accept that, and that can be an
• 12:48
  Speaker 2: arms length negotiation, that's one thing. But this talk of
• 12:50
  Speaker 2: military intervention to take it over, I don't know what
• 12:53
  Speaker 2: planet that comes from Judge of Poltone. I kind of
• 12:55
  Speaker 2: feel you feel the same way on that one.
• 12:57
  Speaker 3: I do feel the same way. It comes from the
• 12:59
  Speaker 3: President's brand. I mean, the sale of it requires a
• 13:03
  Speaker 3: willing seller as well as a willing fire. In this case,
• 13:07
  Speaker 3: the willing buyer would have to be the Congress of
• 13:09
  Speaker 3: the United States, right, can't be Trump and his billionaire friends,
• 13:13
  Speaker 3: So I don't I don't know how this could possibly happen.
• 13:15
  Speaker 3: I can't imagine the Senate going along with us exactly.
• 13:19
  Speaker 2: So conceptually it's possible, but reality has to step in
• 13:23
  Speaker 2: and say no, it's not possible. Judge Editapolitano, always an
• 13:27
  Speaker 2: outstanding discussion with you. I appreciate your willingness to come
• 13:29
  Speaker 2: on the morning show, and I hope we continue to
• 13:31
  Speaker 2: do this throughout this calendar year.
• 13:33
  Speaker 3: Sir, I hope the same, and I'm deeply grateful for
• 13:36
  Speaker 3: all our time together, my dear friend.
• 13:38
  Speaker 2: Thank you in a wonderful bunch of years.
• 13:40
  Speaker 3: Man happy hell Ingram, tell Ingram and Streker that I.
• 13:43
  Speaker 2: Love them you already did. Thank you, Judge. We'll talk
• 13:47
  Speaker 2: next Wednesday. Safe week and health for you fit eight
• 13:50
  Speaker 2: forty two right now, if you five cares the talk
• 13:51
  Speaker 2: stations got a little time to talk. The phone lines
• 13:54
  Speaker 2: are open. Feel fear to respond. I'd love to hear
• 13:55
  Speaker 2: from you. Five one, three, seven, four nine, fifty five
• 13:58
  Speaker 2: eight two to three Talk fifth John at and T phones,
• 14:01
  Speaker 2: be right back, fifty.
• 14:02
  Speaker 3: Five KRC dot com.
• 14:04
  Speaker 2: The New Year means new resolutions, not just for