WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.160 --> 00:00:10.759
I've honestly been pretty surprised at the
reaction from Colorado's Supreme Court decision being overturned,

2
00:00:11.359 --> 00:00:17.640
which has resulted in Donald Trump being
put back onto the ballot in Colorado.

3
00:00:17.879 --> 00:00:25.199
And for those who aren't following this, the basics are, there's this

4
00:00:25.239 --> 00:00:31.320
whole liberal line of argument that Donald
Trump engaged in an insurrection. On January

5
00:00:31.359 --> 00:00:38.079
sixth, the Constitution has this provision
saying that persons who engage in quote insurrection

6
00:00:38.399 --> 00:00:44.079
against the United States are ineligible for
a variety of offices, including to be

7
00:00:44.200 --> 00:00:48.679
an officer of the United States.
That sort of sounds like a general Catchell.

8
00:00:48.759 --> 00:00:53.320
Maybe it is, maybe it doesn't. And so Colorado had a group

9
00:00:53.359 --> 00:00:56.880
of citizens who sued to try to
keep Donald Trump off the ballot for the

10
00:00:56.880 --> 00:01:02.000
Republican primary in Colorado, and the
Colorado Supreme Court said, Yep, Donald

11
00:01:02.000 --> 00:01:07.000
Trump definitely engaged in an insurrection,
so he's off the ballot in Colorado,

12
00:01:07.480 --> 00:01:15.400
can't run for president. And the
US Supreme Court in a decision that everyone

13
00:01:15.560 --> 00:01:23.120
kind of expected. That's the thing. Most people expected this decision was going

14
00:01:23.159 --> 00:01:26.319
to happen. Most people expect that, I mean, most of the legal

15
00:01:26.359 --> 00:01:32.359
commentators I was reading we're expecting this
is not going to go far. This

16
00:01:32.480 --> 00:01:40.799
is a very difficult case to make
that Colorado its courts unilaterally have the authority

17
00:01:40.840 --> 00:01:46.760
to decide whether or not Donald Trump
should be on the ballot that he did

18
00:01:46.879 --> 00:01:52.079
or didn't engage in an insurrection,
when that's a kind of debatable question.

19
00:01:52.319 --> 00:01:59.640
What exactly is an insurrection, Like
there's a federal insurrection statute which Donald Trump

20
00:01:59.719 --> 00:02:06.599
has not been charged with, let
alone convicted of, and what exactly does

21
00:02:06.640 --> 00:02:14.360
insurrection mean it Insurrection as something that
disqualifies you from federal office is a term

22
00:02:14.479 --> 00:02:17.960
that's contained in the fourteenth Amendment.
And the fourteenth Amendment is one of the

23
00:02:19.000 --> 00:02:24.759
amendments that was enacted into the Constitution
right after the Civil War. So clearly

24
00:02:24.800 --> 00:02:29.599
the kind of thing that the people
who wrote the Fourteenth Amendment were thinking about

25
00:02:30.520 --> 00:02:34.800
was it was the Civil War.
That's what they were thinking about. We

26
00:02:34.759 --> 00:02:40.400
were saying, look, basically,
if you fought for the Confederacy after having

27
00:02:40.439 --> 00:02:46.639
sworn an oath to the United States, and you then participated in this insurrection,

28
00:02:46.879 --> 00:02:52.080
i e. A multi year civil
war in which you rebelled against the

29
00:02:52.080 --> 00:02:57.639
authority of the United States of America
to try to create another country. You

30
00:02:57.680 --> 00:03:00.560
can't just run for office again.
Okay, you can't just run to be

31
00:03:00.639 --> 00:03:07.960
a member of the House or the
Senate. Sorry, you're disqualified. Is

32
00:03:07.080 --> 00:03:12.199
January sixth the same thing as that, you don't have to think January sixth

33
00:03:12.280 --> 00:03:17.479
was good or not a problem to
think that. You can still say January

34
00:03:17.560 --> 00:03:22.039
sixth was bad, but it wasn't
really an insurrection as that term is used

35
00:03:22.039 --> 00:03:27.280
in the fourteenth Amendment anyway. So
the US Supreme Court gets this case.

36
00:03:27.280 --> 00:03:30.479
It's appealed from the Colorado Supreme Court
to the US Supreme Court, and the

37
00:03:30.599 --> 00:03:39.240
US Supreme Court rules nine to nothing
that states cannot make this determination on their

38
00:03:39.280 --> 00:03:46.319
own. A state court doesn't have
the ability to make this determination on its

39
00:03:46.360 --> 00:03:53.840
own that someone has participated in an
insurrection and is thereby ineligible for the office

40
00:03:53.879 --> 00:03:58.039
of the presidency. That that has
to be some kind of federal or congressional

41
00:03:58.080 --> 00:04:04.800
determination. So it was nine to
nothing that Colorado couldn't just make that decision.

42
00:04:05.360 --> 00:04:12.199
So that decision by the US Supreme
Court shuts down this whole Democrat line

43
00:04:12.199 --> 00:04:15.720
of argument. I talked yesterday about
the concept of deus ex machina. Deus

44
00:04:15.720 --> 00:04:26.480
ex machina was this sort of trope
in Greek dramas Athenian dramas, where you'd

45
00:04:26.519 --> 00:04:30.839
have all the difficulties of this play, the whatever the conflict is at the

46
00:04:30.839 --> 00:04:32.879
center of the plot of the play, and near the end of it,

47
00:04:33.000 --> 00:04:39.079
someone who is a god, one
of the Greek gods would descend from like

48
00:04:39.120 --> 00:04:42.879
some kind of rigging they would set
up on the stage in this Greek amphitheater,

49
00:04:44.399 --> 00:04:47.240
would literally descend onto the stage and
resolve all the problems that are at

50
00:04:47.240 --> 00:04:51.079
the heart of the play and the
rigging. So the Latin term for this

51
00:04:51.279 --> 00:04:57.120
was deus ex machina, the god
coming down from the rigging. Okay,

52
00:04:57.199 --> 00:05:00.879
the machina, the rigging, the
machine. Okay. Democrats have wanted some

53
00:05:00.959 --> 00:05:04.600
kind of deus ex machina solution for
Trump. And I'm going to go into

54
00:05:04.639 --> 00:05:06.519
this a little bit more. I
started talking about this yesterday. I'm going

55
00:05:06.560 --> 00:05:11.040
to go into this a little bit
more. I'm astounded though, at the

56
00:05:11.079 --> 00:05:17.000
reaction of the left to the Colorado
Supreme Court. And here's why. All

57
00:05:17.040 --> 00:05:24.480
these liberals are outraged that the Supreme
Court in a nine to nothing decision.

58
00:05:24.560 --> 00:05:29.680
By the way, so a lot
of the ire here, they're outraged that

59
00:05:29.720 --> 00:05:31.959
the Supreme Court ruled this way.
Their outraged that the Supreme Court didn't say,

60
00:05:32.040 --> 00:05:36.680
yes, Donald Trump is an insurrectionist, and Colorado, as one individual

61
00:05:36.759 --> 00:05:43.680
state, they have the ability to
determine for their state elections that Donald Trump

62
00:05:43.839 --> 00:05:49.240
violates this federal provision. Donald Trump, who's running for the one truly nationwide

63
00:05:49.439 --> 00:05:57.839
federal office, Colorado can decide for
itself whether Trump's on the ballot, a

64
00:05:57.879 --> 00:06:02.680
decision that could impact people living in
Florida, or in Alabama or in Alaska.

65
00:06:03.639 --> 00:06:13.040
Because Donald Trump's running in a national
election. The liberals all, there's

66
00:06:13.120 --> 00:06:15.199
this group of liberals who thought that
yes, the Supreme Court was going to

67
00:06:15.240 --> 00:06:19.920
go along with that for Donald Trump, for a man who, regardless of

68
00:06:19.920 --> 00:06:26.959
what you think about January sixth,
has not been tried with insurrection, has

69
00:06:27.040 --> 00:06:30.839
not been charged, has not been
charged with insurrection, has not been charged

70
00:06:31.240 --> 00:06:38.160
with any kind of crime relating to
the actual violence that happened on January sixth.

71
00:06:38.759 --> 00:06:47.199
He's been charged with obstruction of a
congressional proceeding against some kind of I

72
00:06:47.240 --> 00:06:51.199
think spurious fraud charge, which I
don't think makes a lot of sense,

73
00:06:54.680 --> 00:06:58.720
fraud against the American people for trying
to convince Mike Pen's not to certify the

74
00:06:58.720 --> 00:07:03.680
election results. But he hasn't been
charged with insurrection, let alone convicted of

75
00:07:03.720 --> 00:07:10.399
anything surrounding January sixth. But even
though he hasn't been charged with anything,

76
00:07:10.439 --> 00:07:14.439
even though he hasn't been convicted of
anything Colorado, these liberals think should have

77
00:07:14.480 --> 00:07:18.680
the unilateral authority to make this decision
that he is indeed an insurrectionist, strike

78
00:07:18.759 --> 00:07:23.360
him off the ballot, and make
that decision which impacts everyone in America.

79
00:07:24.560 --> 00:07:30.560
All these liberals were in this bubble
that not only should the Supreme Court do

80
00:07:30.680 --> 00:07:36.240
it, but even that they would, And so they are totally outraged that

81
00:07:36.240 --> 00:07:42.360
that's not what happened, And a
lot of the ire has gone towards the

82
00:07:42.439 --> 00:07:50.839
three liberals on the court, Kagan
Soda Mayor and Katanji Brown Jackson. In

83
00:07:50.879 --> 00:07:56.639
fact, Keith Olberman, for those
who remember the glory days when he was

84
00:07:56.800 --> 00:08:01.480
a pretty good SportsCenter anchor, I
almost feel like he kind of rode Dan

85
00:08:01.560 --> 00:08:05.680
Patrick's coattails a little bit. Oh, Dan Patrick and Keith Olberman, what

86
00:08:05.759 --> 00:08:09.600
a great pair. Everyone liked Dan
Patrick. Olberman was fine, but like

87
00:08:11.040 --> 00:08:15.319
you know, I don't know everyone
anyway. Keith Olberman, who went from

88
00:08:15.360 --> 00:08:20.199
being a sports broadcaster to hosting a
really blustering MSNBC show and basically burned bridges

89
00:08:20.199 --> 00:08:24.600
everywhere he went by being such a
jerk. He goes on Twitter, which

90
00:08:24.639 --> 00:08:28.800
is the absolute worst possible platform for
Keith Olberman to be on, and is

91
00:08:28.920 --> 00:08:35.799
ranting and raving that liberal women are
useless because because justice is Kagan, Jackson

92
00:08:35.279 --> 00:08:39.840
and Sodomayor didn't rule the way he
wanted them to rule in this case.

93
00:08:41.039 --> 00:08:43.279
And this is what astounds me,
all right, as a as a lawyer,

94
00:08:45.799 --> 00:08:52.879
putting on my lawyer hat here for
all of you. I don't understand

95
00:08:52.480 --> 00:08:58.519
how otherwise smart lawyers, all right, Lawrence Tribe, for example, is

96
00:08:58.559 --> 00:09:01.759
all angry about this Lawrence Tribe.
As a Harvard professor, he knows more

97
00:09:01.799 --> 00:09:03.240
about the law than I'm ever going
to know. He knows more about the

98
00:09:03.279 --> 00:09:07.159
law and his pinky finger than I've
known about about it my whole life.

99
00:09:07.720 --> 00:09:16.399
But he's a very partisan Democrat.
I don't understand how these hardcore liberal lawyers,

100
00:09:16.639 --> 00:09:26.639
but very smart lawyers, can make
the following mental transition. I want

101
00:09:26.879 --> 00:09:31.080
Donald Trump to be kicked off the
ballot, but I realize that that's not

102
00:09:31.320 --> 00:09:39.840
the right legal outcome. They go
from that to I want Donald Trump to

103
00:09:39.879 --> 00:09:46.080
be kicked off the ballot. I
think it's the correct legal outcome. But

104
00:09:46.240 --> 00:09:52.200
I understand that my opinion is not
broadly shared, or that the Supreme Court

105
00:09:52.320 --> 00:09:58.559
is likely not going to agree with
my opinion. And I understand why to

106
00:10:03.120 --> 00:10:07.440
Donald Trump should be kicked off and
the Supreme Court will kick him off the

107
00:10:07.480 --> 00:10:13.039
ballot. I don't understand how people
made that transition, all right, I

108
00:10:13.080 --> 00:10:18.360
can understand. I mean, I
can very much understand someone who is at

109
00:10:18.399 --> 00:10:22.120
position one. I don't like Donald
Trump. I would love for him to

110
00:10:22.120 --> 00:10:26.320
be kicked off the ballot, but
I don't think that's the right legal answer.

111
00:10:28.519 --> 00:10:31.679
I mean, to be honest,
that there's a part of me that

112
00:10:31.840 --> 00:10:35.519
sort of wishes that both Donald Trump
and Joe Biden were somehow deus ex machi

113
00:10:35.600 --> 00:10:41.120
nud out of our election and that
we could have the choice of someone I

114
00:10:41.120 --> 00:10:45.200
don't know who won't be in his
eighties serving as president. I would love

115
00:10:45.440 --> 00:10:48.840
a situation like that. So there's
a part of me that would love for

116
00:10:48.919 --> 00:10:52.159
Donald Trump to sort of be magiced
away and for the Republicans at the r

117
00:10:52.440 --> 00:10:56.759
at the Republican Committee, at the
Republican Convention to nominate Ronda Santis, and

118
00:10:56.799 --> 00:11:01.559
Ronda Santis rides in on a white
horse Joe Biden and becomes a great president.

119
00:11:03.559 --> 00:11:09.879
I would sort of love that,
but I know that striking Trump off

120
00:11:09.879 --> 00:11:11.519
the ballot in Colorado is not the
right thing to do. It's not the

121
00:11:11.600 --> 00:11:18.279
right legal outcome. It makes no
sense. It makes no sense for Colorado

122
00:11:18.320 --> 00:11:22.039
to wield this unilateral authority to strike
someone off the ballot as an insurrectionist who

123
00:11:22.120 --> 00:11:26.320
has not been charged with insurrection,
who has not been convicted of insurrection,

124
00:11:28.080 --> 00:11:33.759
whose conduct I think is a huge
stretch to even call it insurrection or try

125
00:11:33.759 --> 00:11:37.919
to call it insurrection, who I
don't even know. He's running for president,

126
00:11:37.919 --> 00:11:43.200
which I don't think is an office
that even that section of the fourteenth

127
00:11:43.200 --> 00:11:46.080
Amendment even applies to. It clearly
applies to someone running for the House of

128
00:11:46.120 --> 00:11:48.399
the Senate. I don't know that
it applies to someone running for president.

129
00:11:48.919 --> 00:11:54.480
So there are all these reasons why
as much as I kind of am not

130
00:11:54.759 --> 00:11:58.759
crazy about Donald Trump and would sort
of again i'd love to waive a magic

131
00:11:58.799 --> 00:12:05.879
wand and not have to choose between
two different octagenarians being president, I recognize

132
00:12:05.919 --> 00:12:09.279
that's the wrong legal outcome. I
could understand someone holding that position. I

133
00:12:09.320 --> 00:12:13.039
could understand someone holding the position of
I think this is the right legal outcome,

134
00:12:13.200 --> 00:12:16.720
but I understand that the Supreme Court's
not going to get there, so

135
00:12:16.720 --> 00:12:22.799
I'm not going to get my hopes
up. It's a tough argument to make

136
00:12:22.879 --> 00:12:30.759
that Colorado on its own, without
having convicted Trump, without Trump being convicted

137
00:12:30.759 --> 00:12:35.679
of insurrection, even charged with insurrection, that the Colorado State Supreme Court on

138
00:12:35.799 --> 00:12:37.840
its own can just make this determination
for the whole rest of the country,

139
00:12:39.879 --> 00:12:45.720
I think, And I think even
if you think it's the right outcome,

140
00:12:45.960 --> 00:12:48.279
which I don't. Even if you
think it's the right outcome, you'd have

141
00:12:48.320 --> 00:12:52.440
to sort of measure your expectations and
say the Supreme Court is not going to

142
00:12:52.519 --> 00:12:56.639
go along with that. The Supreme
Court wants to keep its hands off of

143
00:12:56.679 --> 00:13:01.320
this election, off of the harsh
politics of this election. They don't want

144
00:13:01.360 --> 00:13:05.799
to take some extraordinary step of saying, yep, Colorado was totally correct to

145
00:13:05.840 --> 00:13:07.919
do this, because they would have
to agree with Colorado that yes, Donald

146
00:13:07.919 --> 00:13:13.279
Trump is an insurrectionist. The Supreme
Court doesn't want to meddle with the election.

147
00:13:13.480 --> 00:13:22.360
They just don't, So I think, like I could understand even thinking

148
00:13:22.399 --> 00:13:26.159
that this was the right legal outcome, but not expecting the Supreme Court to

149
00:13:26.200 --> 00:13:33.799
do it. I don't understand how
otherwise smart lawyers managed to convince themselves from

150
00:13:33.000 --> 00:13:37.399
this is the wrong legal outcome,
even though I want it to happen to.

151
00:13:37.440 --> 00:13:41.159
I want it to happen and it's
the right legal outcome, I just

152
00:13:41.200 --> 00:13:45.720
don't think it's going to happen to
it's the right legal outcome, and yes

153
00:13:45.759 --> 00:13:48.799
it's going to happen. I don't
know how they get there to Yes,

154
00:13:48.840 --> 00:13:52.159
it's the right legal outcome, and
yes it's going to happen, But a

155
00:13:52.200 --> 00:13:58.759
ton of people thought that. When
we return, I want to talk about

156
00:13:58.799 --> 00:14:05.039
how Democrats have sort of overplayed their
hand with some of Trump's legal battles,

157
00:14:05.200 --> 00:14:09.639
how Trump has kind of just been
overcharged with a lot of this stuff.

158
00:14:09.639 --> 00:14:13.000
And I'll talk a little bit more
about this Fourteenth Amendment business that's next on

159
00:14:13.039 --> 00:14:18.559
the John Gerardy Show. So it's
amazing to me how many people made this

160
00:14:18.639 --> 00:14:24.960
transition in the Trump being disqualified by
Colorado kicked off the Colorado ballot case,

161
00:14:26.200 --> 00:14:31.759
which again the idea was if you
engaged in an insurrection against the United States

162
00:14:31.840 --> 00:14:37.799
and you're one of these you're seeking
these kinds of offices, you're actually ineligible

163
00:14:37.799 --> 00:14:41.879
to seek those offices. You're ineligible
to seek all these different kinds of offices

164
00:14:41.960 --> 00:14:46.559
if you engaged in an insurrection against
the United States. That's what's in the

165
00:14:46.600 --> 00:14:52.000
fourteenth Amendment. Colorado said, Trump
has kicked off the ballot because he's seeking

166
00:14:52.039 --> 00:14:56.080
the presidency, which is I don't
think actually the presidency is clearly one of

167
00:14:56.080 --> 00:15:01.440
those offices you're disqualified from because of
insurrection. It's not explicitly listed. They

168
00:15:01.559 --> 00:15:07.240
say, well it The fourteen Amendment
basically says, if you've engaged in an

169
00:15:07.240 --> 00:15:13.320
insurrection against the United States, you're
ineligible to You're ineligible to serve as a

170
00:15:13.360 --> 00:15:18.080
member of the House of Representatives,
as a United States Senator, as an

171
00:15:18.120 --> 00:15:24.960
elector for the president. So one
of the flunkies that like, if Donald

172
00:15:24.000 --> 00:15:28.480
Trump wins Texas, some state party
official gets picked as, oh, you're

173
00:15:28.480 --> 00:15:31.559
going to be one of the electoral
college votes, and you and a group

174
00:15:31.600 --> 00:15:35.440
of however many electoral college votes Texas
has thirty, you and twenty nine other

175
00:15:35.440 --> 00:15:41.279
people will go to Washington to cast
your electoral college vote for Donald Trump.

176
00:15:41.279 --> 00:15:46.799
You're ineligible for that if you engaged
in an insurrection or to serve as a

177
00:15:46.879 --> 00:15:52.360
quote officer of the United States,
if you engaged in an insurrection. They

178
00:15:52.440 --> 00:15:56.320
never mentioned in that part of the
Constitution. They don't mention the presidency or

179
00:15:56.360 --> 00:16:02.279
the vice presidency. So is the
presidency quote an officer of the United States.

180
00:16:02.320 --> 00:16:07.559
I think it's actually kind of debatable. It's bizarre that the framers of

181
00:16:07.559 --> 00:16:11.320
the fourteenth Amendment would list your if
you engaged in an insurrection, you can't

182
00:16:11.360 --> 00:16:17.960
be an elector for president. But
they don't mention being president as something you're

183
00:16:17.960 --> 00:16:21.200
ineligible for. You're ineligible to be
in the House, you're eligible to be

184
00:16:21.240 --> 00:16:25.600
in the Senate, you're eligible to
be an elector for the president. They

185
00:16:25.600 --> 00:16:32.519
don't explicitly mention being president anyway.
So Colorado said, yes, Trump did

186
00:16:32.879 --> 00:16:37.440
engage in insurrection. Trump's never been
tried with insurrection. Trump's never been convicted

187
00:16:37.759 --> 00:16:41.360
of insurrection. He hasn't been convicted
of anything surrounding January sixth. It's been

188
00:16:41.440 --> 00:16:48.519
charged with a few things surrounding January
six nothing involving the violence that happened or

189
00:16:48.559 --> 00:16:55.879
the cops that got beat up whatever. On January sixth. Trump did engage

190
00:16:55.919 --> 00:16:59.240
in an insurrection. The Office he's
running for is covered by that section of

191
00:16:59.240 --> 00:17:03.720
the fourteenth Amendment. He he kicked
off the ballot. I don't understand how

192
00:17:03.879 --> 00:17:10.319
otherwise smart lawyers went from I want
Trump to be off the ballot, but

193
00:17:10.359 --> 00:17:14.240
I realize that's probably not the right
legal outcome to I want Trump off the

194
00:17:14.279 --> 00:17:17.440
ballot. I think it's the right
legal outcome, but I recognize that that's

195
00:17:17.440 --> 00:17:21.480
a pretty difficult argument to make and
that the court is probably not gonna buy

196
00:17:21.480 --> 00:17:25.119
it, to I want Trump off
the ballot, and yes, the Court's

197
00:17:25.160 --> 00:17:29.920
gonna kick him off. I don't
understand how that transition happened. A nine

198
00:17:29.960 --> 00:17:33.279
to nothing decision was widely predicted,
or an eight to one decision was very

199
00:17:33.319 --> 00:17:37.359
widely predicted, and nine to nothing
is in fact the decision we got.

200
00:17:37.640 --> 00:17:41.559
And now you have these liberals like
furious at Elena Kagan and Sonya Soda my

201
00:17:41.599 --> 00:17:42.960
are In and Katandji Brown Jackson,
which, by the way, if you're

202
00:17:44.000 --> 00:17:48.519
a liberal and you're mad at Sonya
Soda my Or, you got to like

203
00:17:48.599 --> 00:17:52.240
re examine your priorities, man,
Like, no one's a better friend to

204
00:17:52.279 --> 00:17:56.920
you than Sonya Soda my or.
All right, here's some of the other

205
00:17:57.000 --> 00:18:02.440
people, though, who were all
all lined up for this proposition because they're

206
00:18:02.440 --> 00:18:07.759
insane. I think Trump just has
made everyone genuinely insane. I'm certainly not

207
00:18:07.839 --> 00:18:11.680
the first person to come up with
that novel idea. But let's go through

208
00:18:11.720 --> 00:18:17.039
this. So first you have the
New York Times, not in an op

209
00:18:17.240 --> 00:18:22.400
ed, not in an editorial.
It's one of these quote news analysis pieces.

210
00:18:23.079 --> 00:18:29.640
This is a big genre that I've
seen a lot more in media analysis

211
00:18:29.680 --> 00:18:40.200
pieces. It's people who they're not
really straight news reporting, but they're sort

212
00:18:40.200 --> 00:18:45.119
of purporting not to be partisan opinion
giving. They're sort of in the middle,

213
00:18:45.920 --> 00:18:51.519
and it's the worst combo of both
because they kind of try to paint

214
00:18:51.599 --> 00:18:56.319
themselves these news analysis pieces. And
these are very popular, like New York

215
00:18:56.359 --> 00:19:02.000
Times, major media outlets, CNN, New York Times, like these guys

216
00:19:02.079 --> 00:19:06.240
have been promoted doing this kind of
work, Guys like Chris Silizza and others

217
00:19:06.440 --> 00:19:12.559
who they're sort of purporting to be
non partisan but trying to give like non

218
00:19:12.799 --> 00:19:18.400
partisan, more in depth analysis.
The only person I know who kind of

219
00:19:18.440 --> 00:19:23.519
pulls this off is Dan Walters,
who used to write for The Sacramento being

220
00:19:23.559 --> 00:19:27.839
the Fresno b and writes now for
Calmatters. Dot Org his own website.

221
00:19:30.079 --> 00:19:33.559
But I think Walters is now getting
criticized, and maybe I only like him

222
00:19:33.559 --> 00:19:37.680
because he's critical of the Democrats,
supermajority and Sacramento all the time. Anyway,

223
00:19:37.119 --> 00:19:41.960
New York Times had a story about
the Colorado case where they cited a

224
00:19:41.079 --> 00:19:48.519
quote expert. They cited an expert
who said Colorado's case was quote legally sound

225
00:19:49.480 --> 00:19:55.720
and that the only thing that could
stop it was politics. Meanwhile, the

226
00:19:55.759 --> 00:20:00.200
case got to the Supreme Court and
all nine justices you know, reversed it.

227
00:20:00.839 --> 00:20:04.559
So was it really only politics?
Yes, Katanji Brown Jackson and Sonya

228
00:20:04.599 --> 00:20:08.160
Sonamai, or they really want Donald
Trump to stay on the ballots? No.

229
00:20:11.759 --> 00:20:18.079
The Washington Post they repeated this narrative
in a headline that oh, this

230
00:20:18.160 --> 00:20:21.960
is a this is a legally sound
thing, and they're they're experts say oh

231
00:20:22.000 --> 00:20:27.960
there's a strong case for this.
Again, there was never a strong case

232
00:20:29.000 --> 00:20:33.960
for it. Everyone with a brain
thought this could be a nine to nothing

233
00:20:33.039 --> 00:20:45.079
decision. ABC News they again cite
experts to claim both that Colorado was right

234
00:20:45.160 --> 00:20:49.160
to kick Trump off the ballot that
Trump and company were wrong to object to

235
00:20:49.200 --> 00:20:55.920
it. So it's amazing how that's
a lot of what's happening in these quote

236
00:20:55.960 --> 00:21:03.000
analysis pieces like they are citing.
They find some expert and they call them

237
00:21:03.039 --> 00:21:08.359
an expert to sort of clothe them
in some sort of value neutrality when they're

238
00:21:08.400 --> 00:21:14.880
not. These experts all have partisan
political opinions. Show me a lawyer anywhere

239
00:21:15.000 --> 00:21:19.319
who's a non partisan quote expert.
I want to meet a non partisan person.

240
00:21:19.400 --> 00:21:25.240
Where do I find these people here
on election day? Who are they?

241
00:21:25.359 --> 00:21:32.000
Where are they? I'd love to
meet one, And especially lawyers.

242
00:21:33.480 --> 00:21:37.519
Lawyers are jerks. They're the most
They're opinionated jackasses, like they all have

243
00:21:37.640 --> 00:21:41.480
really strong opinions about politics. You're
not going to find some lawyer who's a

244
00:21:41.759 --> 00:21:48.839
value neutral tabula raza, a political
quote legal expert. All these guys wanted

245
00:21:48.880 --> 00:21:52.400
Trump kicked off the ballot, and
so they sort of talk themselves into circles

246
00:21:52.440 --> 00:21:59.519
to think that, yes, this
was a likely outcome. Legal scholars increasingly

247
00:21:59.680 --> 00:22:03.599
raised the constitutional argument that Trump should
be barred from the presidency, writes CNN,

248
00:22:04.240 --> 00:22:08.119
The Opposite of Politics, a conservative
legal scholar says kicking Trump off the

249
00:22:08.119 --> 00:22:14.640
ballot is unassailable. According to Politico, citing judge Michael Lettig, Michael Ledig

250
00:22:14.680 --> 00:22:17.759
was this Republican appointee judge. A
lot of people thought he should have been

251
00:22:17.759 --> 00:22:22.759
appointed to the Supreme Court rather than
John Roberts. He hates Trump so much

252
00:22:22.799 --> 00:22:27.039
that he's gone completely insane at any
legal argument as long as it's negative towards

253
00:22:27.079 --> 00:22:32.839
Trump. Judge Lettig trots out a
piece to support it, and he's made

254
00:22:32.839 --> 00:22:40.039
an idiot of himself. Salon dot
com, Vox dot com, MSNBC,

255
00:22:41.200 --> 00:22:47.079
Lawrence Tribe, the AP. All
these people thought Trump was gonna get kicked

256
00:22:47.119 --> 00:22:52.200
off the ballot, and I just
I can't fathom how people have just sort

257
00:22:52.200 --> 00:22:56.000
of talked themselves into circles about this. So anyway, let this be a

258
00:22:56.359 --> 00:23:00.799
grain of salt for all of you
to take. Anytime you hear anything about

259
00:23:00.960 --> 00:23:07.160
allegedly non partisan quote legal experts assessing
the merits of some case before the Supreme

260
00:23:07.200 --> 00:23:11.400
Court, they may just be wish
casting. They may just be saying the

261
00:23:11.599 --> 00:23:15.119
likely outcome is the thing they want
to have happened. And then if you're

262
00:23:15.160 --> 00:23:18.720
gonna be a good lawyer, that's
not how you operate. You have to

263
00:23:18.759 --> 00:23:21.920
operate with a sense and I hope
that's what I do, with a sense

264
00:23:21.960 --> 00:23:26.119
of I want X to happen.
But I recognize that maybe X is not

265
00:23:26.200 --> 00:23:30.359
the right legal outcome, and or
I recognize that it's not the outcome the

266
00:23:30.400 --> 00:23:34.039
court is going to go for.
When we return, I want to talk

267
00:23:34.079 --> 00:23:40.240
a little bit more about how Dems
have overplayed their hand or Jack Smith has

268
00:23:40.240 --> 00:23:42.759
overplayed his hand with the mar A
Lago case, with the Document's case,

269
00:23:44.000 --> 00:23:48.880
with the January sixth case that's next
on the John Girardi Show. I think

270
00:23:49.400 --> 00:23:56.000
that Democrats, and I think I
will say Democrats have overplayed their hand with

271
00:23:56.759 --> 00:24:02.799
these prosecutions of Donald Trump because outside
of the big news about Trump not being

272
00:24:02.920 --> 00:24:06.319
kicked off the ballot in Colorado,
which which by the way, means he's

273
00:24:06.319 --> 00:24:11.559
not going to get kicked off the
ballot anywhere, okay, Because that was

274
00:24:11.599 --> 00:24:19.039
the Democrat's hope was that the Supreme
Court would uphold this notion that Donald Trump

275
00:24:19.039 --> 00:24:22.240
could be kicked off the ballot in
a whole bunch of states on the grounds

276
00:24:22.279 --> 00:24:26.680
that he engaged in insurrection. And
their hope was maybe they could find some

277
00:24:26.759 --> 00:24:36.960
of these battleground states like Michigan,
like Wisconsin, like Arizona that have liberal

278
00:24:37.720 --> 00:24:41.599
maybe more liberal leaning courts and or
more liberal leaning you know, secretaries of

279
00:24:41.680 --> 00:24:47.519
state who could kick Trump off the
ballot and thus cause Donald Trump to lose

280
00:24:47.519 --> 00:24:51.119
the twenty twenty four election. That
is not going to happen. Trump's going

281
00:24:51.160 --> 00:24:56.279
to be on the ballot in all
fifty states. The other thing, though,

282
00:24:56.440 --> 00:25:03.039
that has gone unnoticed, is the
Supreme Court agreeing to hear an appeal

283
00:25:03.039 --> 00:25:11.279
from the DC Circuit about presidential immunity. And this is in the context of

284
00:25:11.319 --> 00:25:15.839
the Special Council prosecution of Donald Trump
for his conduct surrounding January sixth. Now

285
00:25:15.880 --> 00:25:22.440
this has gotten a little less press. It's gotten kind of eaten up by

286
00:25:22.960 --> 00:25:29.079
the Colorado Supreme Court being overturned on
Monday. So let me let me opine

287
00:25:29.079 --> 00:25:33.160
about this, because liberals are also
tearing their hair out furiously over this.

288
00:25:33.119 --> 00:25:42.240
So let's go back a couple months. Jack Smith is the special prosecutor appointed

289
00:25:42.240 --> 00:25:48.119
by Merrick Garland to prosecute Donald Trump. He is prosecuting Donald Trump for all

290
00:25:48.160 --> 00:25:56.400
of his alleged federal offenses. He's
prosecuting Trump for the mar A Lago illegal

291
00:25:56.440 --> 00:26:02.240
retention of documents case, and hesper
uting Donald Trump for all the stuff that

292
00:26:02.319 --> 00:26:07.640
happened around January sixth, specifically with
January sixth, I think the charges against

293
00:26:07.680 --> 00:26:15.519
Trump. There are obstruction of a
Congressional Act or of a congressional proceeding because

294
00:26:15.599 --> 00:26:21.200
Trump was trying to pressure Mike Pence
not to certify the election results, and

295
00:26:22.240 --> 00:26:26.160
fraud against the American people. And
that's kind of a I think, a

296
00:26:26.319 --> 00:26:33.960
kind of clever charge that is difficult
to sustain. I think it's also kind

297
00:26:33.960 --> 00:26:40.559
of difficult to sustain the idea that
he obstructed the congressional proceeding. So that's

298
00:26:40.559 --> 00:26:44.680
what he's being charged with with regards
to January sixth, and for his January

299
00:26:44.720 --> 00:26:49.799
sixth charges, Trump his legal team
has tried to raise the defense of presidential

300
00:26:51.160 --> 00:26:56.079
immunity. Now, presidential immunity the
idea that the president should be immune from

301
00:26:56.200 --> 00:27:02.880
criminal prosecution for his conduct in office. It's an odd concept because it's not

302
00:27:02.920 --> 00:27:06.359
really in the Constitution, and frankly
it was kind of cooked up by the

303
00:27:06.359 --> 00:27:11.599
Supreme Court. It actually has a
lot more to do, I think,

304
00:27:11.640 --> 00:27:18.079
with ancient Roman law. So one
of the principles of the Roman constitution was

305
00:27:18.200 --> 00:27:22.680
if you were elected to be a
magistrate, if you were a consul or

306
00:27:23.279 --> 00:27:33.039
a praetor or equaister or whatever,
you were not subject to lawsuits. And

307
00:27:33.720 --> 00:27:37.359
in Rome. In ancient Rome and
the Roman Republic, they didn't have the

308
00:27:37.480 --> 00:27:41.720
kind of division and a lot of
civil law systems. I think this might

309
00:27:41.759 --> 00:27:45.200
still be the case. Legal systems
that aren't so much based in English common

310
00:27:45.240 --> 00:27:51.119
law are more based on Roman civil
law. You didn't have the division between

311
00:27:51.119 --> 00:27:56.000
criminal prosecutions and civil lawsuits like we
have in America today. Okay, in

312
00:27:56.039 --> 00:28:02.960
America, the state prosecutes you for
crimes, but a private person can only

313
00:28:03.039 --> 00:28:06.680
sue you. Okay, if I, you know, crash my car into

314
00:28:06.680 --> 00:28:12.119
your house, the state can maybe
prosecute me for drunk driving. You can't

315
00:28:12.240 --> 00:28:15.160
sue me for drunk driving and put
me in jail. You can sue me

316
00:28:15.640 --> 00:28:18.000
for you know, damaging your house
and I'll have to pay you money.

317
00:28:18.240 --> 00:28:22.319
But you can't sue me and put
me in jail. The state has to

318
00:28:22.440 --> 00:28:26.880
prosecute me criminally to put me in
jail. Not so in the Roman Republic.

319
00:28:27.960 --> 00:28:33.119
A private citizen could charge you with
crimes and then you could suffer I

320
00:28:33.119 --> 00:28:37.759
guess the Roman equivalent of criminal penalties, maybe subject to the death penalty,

321
00:28:37.839 --> 00:28:41.759
or be banished from the city of
Rome, have to leave Rome, or

322
00:28:41.559 --> 00:28:47.319
you know, something like that.
Rome didn't really have prisons, So that

323
00:28:47.920 --> 00:28:52.960
was they weren't holding people in holding
cells or in max security prisons or anything

324
00:28:52.039 --> 00:28:57.240
like that. So banishment and or
execution was kind of how they handled a

325
00:28:57.279 --> 00:29:04.119
lot of stuff. So, but
in the Roman system, when you served

326
00:29:04.119 --> 00:29:07.079
in office, you weren't subject to
those kinds of prosecutions. And I guess

327
00:29:07.160 --> 00:29:11.480
the Roman way of thinking was,
well, how can this guy actually do

328
00:29:11.519 --> 00:29:15.599
what he's trying to do if all
these other ambitious politicians could just file lawsuits

329
00:29:15.599 --> 00:29:18.400
against him to try to banish him
from the city, Like, it's not

330
00:29:18.440 --> 00:29:22.279
going to work. How can you
really do your job if you're constantly under

331
00:29:22.279 --> 00:29:27.519
this sort of damicles that you're going
to get prosecuted. So the Supreme Court

332
00:29:29.039 --> 00:29:33.359
issued a couple rulings sort of in
the pre Scalia days before, like originalism

333
00:29:33.480 --> 00:29:37.480
as it's kind of commonly practiced today, really took hold. The Supreme Court

334
00:29:37.720 --> 00:29:41.799
had a couple decisions saying, well, president shouldn't be subject to prosecution while

335
00:29:41.799 --> 00:29:45.039
he's in office, and therefore he
is not because we're the Supreme Court,

336
00:29:45.039 --> 00:29:48.960
and that's what we're going to say. So this doctrine of presidential immunity developed,

337
00:29:49.039 --> 00:29:52.359
and Trump is trying to say,
hey, I shouldn't be prosecuted.

338
00:29:52.440 --> 00:29:57.039
Not only should I not be subject
to criminal prosecution while I am serving as

339
00:29:57.119 --> 00:30:04.160
president, but even after I'm president, I shouldn't be subject to criminal prosecution

340
00:30:04.680 --> 00:30:11.759
for allegedly criminal things I did when
I was president. So it's kind of

341
00:30:11.799 --> 00:30:15.319
a novel idea. And there he's
raising a challenge to this whole lawsuit,

342
00:30:15.319 --> 00:30:19.680
saying, Hey, this whole lawsuit
against this whole prosecution of me is illegitimate.

343
00:30:19.920 --> 00:30:22.440
These were official acts I did while
I was president. I'm subject to

344
00:30:22.480 --> 00:30:30.279
presidential immunity. I should be protected. So Jack Smith, the prosecutor in

345
00:30:30.279 --> 00:30:33.720
this case, he tried to get
rid of the issue quickly by going directly

346
00:30:33.759 --> 00:30:37.839
to the Supreme Court. Tried to
bypass the normal court. He would appeal

347
00:30:37.880 --> 00:30:41.400
to the d C Circuit Court,
and he said, no, we need

348
00:30:41.400 --> 00:30:48.559
to get this done quickly. Well, the Supreme Court said, why do

349
00:30:48.599 --> 00:30:52.519
you need it done quickly? We
don't need this done quickly. Go to

350
00:30:52.519 --> 00:30:55.200
the DC Circuit. So he goes
to the d C Circuit. D C

351
00:30:55.319 --> 00:30:57.480
Circuit gives their opinion. Then Trump
appeals it to the Supreme Court. And

352
00:30:57.480 --> 00:31:02.119
now the Supreme Court has taken the
case, and the liberals are outraged.

353
00:31:02.920 --> 00:31:06.519
How dare the Supreme Court meddle in
the election in this way? What do

354
00:31:06.519 --> 00:31:10.119
they mean? Isn't that exactly what
the liberals wanted? They wanted the Supreme

355
00:31:10.119 --> 00:31:18.160
Court to decide this issue. Right, No, Jack Smith and his prosecution

356
00:31:18.359 --> 00:31:23.279
of Donald Trump, all they really
want is to have the trial and get

357
00:31:23.319 --> 00:31:30.960
the trial done before election day.
They want to convict Donald Trump before the

358
00:31:32.039 --> 00:31:41.799
election so that he will lose.
Smith has made that quite clear. Smith

359
00:31:41.119 --> 00:31:47.359
keeps talking about the need for a
speedy trial, and the right to a

360
00:31:47.359 --> 00:31:49.680
speedy trial is a constitutional right that
we have, but it's a right that

361
00:31:49.799 --> 00:31:57.839
criminal defendants have. It's not a
right that the prosecution has. Trump and

362
00:31:57.880 --> 00:32:02.039
his legal team are saying, no, we don't want We want to resolve

363
00:32:02.119 --> 00:32:08.599
these complex legal questions with enough time
for full briefing, et cetera. There's

364
00:32:08.680 --> 00:32:12.359
a ton of documentation that we need
to go through, especially in the mar

365
00:32:12.400 --> 00:32:15.640
A Laga Oh case. No,
we don't want the trial to happen right

366
00:32:15.680 --> 00:32:20.240
away. We need more time to
go through these legal issues than these complex

367
00:32:20.279 --> 00:32:28.319
factual inquiries. But Smith is saying, well, the constitution demands a speedy

368
00:32:28.359 --> 00:32:31.759
trial. No, it doesn't demand
a speedy trial. It says that the

369
00:32:31.839 --> 00:32:37.480
defendant has a right to one so
that you're you know, you're a criminal

370
00:32:37.519 --> 00:32:38.799
defendant. You don't have the money
to post bail like Donald Trump does.

371
00:32:38.839 --> 00:32:43.440
You're not cooling your heels in the
county jail for you know, months and

372
00:32:43.480 --> 00:32:45.240
months and years and years and years
and years waiting for your trial to start.

373
00:32:45.319 --> 00:32:51.359
That's the idea behind the right to
a speedy trial. You have a

374
00:32:51.440 --> 00:32:57.839
right to get your legal issues over
with in a relatively efficient fashion as the

375
00:32:57.839 --> 00:33:04.000
criminal defendant. It's not a privilege
for the prosecutor to get this thing over

376
00:33:04.079 --> 00:33:07.799
with. And that's the whole That's
why I that's why I think it's very

377
00:33:07.839 --> 00:33:09.920
fair to say. And again,
as I said earlier in the show,

378
00:33:10.640 --> 00:33:14.920
I would love to waive a magic
wand and to not have to vote for

379
00:33:14.960 --> 00:33:19.039
someone who's going to be an octagenarian
while he's president, whether he's a Republican

380
00:33:19.119 --> 00:33:28.559
or a Democrat. But I also
fully believe and acknowledge that the prosecutions against

381
00:33:28.640 --> 00:33:36.000
Donald Trump are highly highly politicized.
The timetable they're on is ludicrous, how

382
00:33:36.000 --> 00:33:40.079
politicized they are, Like no other
trial would be trying to rush to get

383
00:33:40.240 --> 00:33:45.279
to the date of the trial before
November for some real oh before all the

384
00:33:45.440 --> 00:33:50.759
latter half of twenty twenty four,
when nothing important happens, you know,

385
00:33:50.799 --> 00:34:00.160
the first Tuesday of November. It's
baldly political. And don't think I think

386
00:34:00.279 --> 00:34:04.759
that Joe Biden is insulated from this. Look, Joe Biden said openly,

387
00:34:04.839 --> 00:34:07.960
especially after the January sixth Commission and
all the other stuff, it was trying

388
00:34:07.960 --> 00:34:10.639
to uncover that we're going to make
sure that Donald Trump can't run for president

389
00:34:10.679 --> 00:34:19.760
again. He said stuff like that. His Attorney general picked this special Council,

390
00:34:19.960 --> 00:34:22.360
and the idea of the special Council
as well. The Department of Justice

391
00:34:22.400 --> 00:34:25.880
is too you know, it has
a conflict of interests, so therefore you

392
00:34:25.920 --> 00:34:30.199
need to bring someone in from the
outside to do it. There's no conflict

393
00:34:30.199 --> 00:34:36.400
of interest for the Department of Justice
as currently constituted to investigate Donald Trump.

394
00:34:36.480 --> 00:34:39.760
Donald Trump's not part of the chain
of command anymore. They brought in this

395
00:34:39.800 --> 00:34:45.559
special Council so that Biden would make
it look like he's not directly trying to

396
00:34:45.599 --> 00:34:51.119
prosecute his chief political rival. But
that's precisely what he's doing. His hand

397
00:34:51.119 --> 00:34:55.320
picked attorney general picked this guy,
Jack Smith, who's an absolute bulldog and

398
00:34:55.440 --> 00:35:01.559
is actually when we were turn In
the next segment, I'll explain how I

399
00:35:01.599 --> 00:35:07.280
think Jack Smith has shot himself in
the foot by overcharging Trump. That's next

400
00:35:07.280 --> 00:35:13.119
on the John Girardi Show. I
think Democrats have overplayed their hand against Donald

401
00:35:13.159 --> 00:35:17.239
Trump. The headline for a story
I could have written at any point over

402
00:35:17.239 --> 00:35:23.920
the last eight years. Specifically Jack
Smith, the special prosecutor who is overseeing

403
00:35:24.039 --> 00:35:30.159
the prosecutions of Donald Trump, both
for alleged conduct around January sixth and for

404
00:35:30.599 --> 00:35:35.840
alleged conduct around the unlawful retention of
documents in mar A Laco. I think

405
00:35:35.880 --> 00:35:40.960
he's overplayed his hand. Let me
explain. The pickle that Jack Smith finds

406
00:35:42.039 --> 00:35:49.920
himself in is that he's brought cases
that are too complicated and as a result,

407
00:35:50.360 --> 00:35:52.320
he's not going to be able to
get Trump to a trial in all

408
00:35:52.480 --> 00:35:59.400
likelihood before the November election. And
if Trump wins, he can probably shut

409
00:35:59.440 --> 00:36:08.320
down all these prosecutions against himself.
That's the problem that Jack Smith faces.

410
00:36:08.920 --> 00:36:15.760
He's overdone it. Right now,
all these liberals are furious because the Supreme

411
00:36:15.800 --> 00:36:22.280
Court agreed to hear an appeal about
whether Trump had immunity for his presidential actions.

412
00:36:22.280 --> 00:36:25.440
For actions he took while he was
president, still on January sixth,

413
00:36:27.519 --> 00:36:30.320
because the Supreme Court is going to
take that appeal. And the Supreme Court

414
00:36:30.360 --> 00:36:31.880
says, we don't care about the
political calendar. If you want us to

415
00:36:31.880 --> 00:36:35.679
solve this legal issue, and we
want to solve this legal issue, we're

416
00:36:35.719 --> 00:36:37.719
going to do it at our pace, thank you very much. We don't

417
00:36:37.719 --> 00:36:46.159
care about your desire to prosecute Trump
before November. He's also screwed up the

418
00:36:46.159 --> 00:36:52.239
mar A Lago documents case because he's
charged Trump with thirty one bazillion counts of

419
00:36:52.559 --> 00:36:57.639
unlawfully retaining this document, unlawfully retaining
that document. Every single document he retained

420
00:36:57.679 --> 00:37:04.599
unlawfully was a separate felony charge.
And guess what that means that the discovery

421
00:37:04.679 --> 00:37:07.960
and the oversight of the facts of
the case and the evidence in the case

422
00:37:08.039 --> 00:37:14.440
is going to take freaking forever.
If they actually just wanted to convict Donald

423
00:37:14.480 --> 00:37:16.840
Trump, what they could have done
is just charged him, just in the

424
00:37:16.880 --> 00:37:22.239
mar A Lago case, just with
obstruction of justice. Don't try to make

425
00:37:22.280 --> 00:37:25.840
the comparison between well, Joe Biden
retained documents and we're not prosecuting him,

426
00:37:25.840 --> 00:37:30.599
but Donald Trump retained documents and we
are prosecuting him. You could avoid all

427
00:37:30.639 --> 00:37:35.519
that the obvious unfairness of that.
All you would have to do is say

428
00:37:36.599 --> 00:37:38.679
we asked Donald Trump for all the
documents back from his house, a grand

429
00:37:38.760 --> 00:37:45.559
jury demanded that he returned all the
documents. He didn't return all the documents,

430
00:37:46.119 --> 00:37:50.039
and we have evidence that he deliberately
tried to hide the documents. He

431
00:37:50.079 --> 00:37:52.960
knew he wasn't turning them all over. I think that's a really easy case

432
00:37:52.960 --> 00:37:57.960
to make, and a case you
could make quickly and actually convict Donald Trump

433
00:37:58.039 --> 00:38:01.280
for it before November. Because they
were so greedy, their eyes were bigger

434
00:38:01.280 --> 00:38:07.199
than their stomach, They're not going
to get a conviction. So yeah,

435
00:38:07.239 --> 00:38:09.039
I think Democrats have wildly overplayed their
hand. All right, Well, Happy

436
00:38:09.039 --> 00:38:12.360
election Day, everybody that'll do it
for John Girardi Show. See you next

437
00:38:12.360 --> 00:38:13.159
time on Power Talk