Speaker 1: Time now for the nine first one weather forecast. Uh,
Speaker 1: pretty beautiful day today, party cloudie. I have seventy eight
Speaker 1: down to forty four of a night with clear sky.
Speaker 1: Sunny sky is to Mars sixty six overnight little forty
Speaker 1: two clear again and then a mostly sunny day up
Speaker 1: until a round five pm on Friday when we have
Speaker 1: a chance of rain and thunderstorms entering the area. Highest
Speaker 1: seventy eight Friday, it's fifty six now, Chuck Ingram, It's
Speaker 1: time for traffic.
Speaker 2: From the UCUT Traffic Center. When it comes to stroke,
Speaker 2: every second count. So that's why you see Comprehensive Stroke
Speaker 2: Center is your clear choice for a WRAPID life saving treatment.
Speaker 2: Learn more at U see how dot com cruise continue
Speaker 2: to work with an accident and easpend two seventy five
Speaker 2: and seventy one right side of a highway's block. Traffic
Speaker 2: now backs up past seventy five, getting close to seven
Speaker 2: forty seven. Bruis are also working with the recquest pound
Speaker 2: two seventy five. That's just the before you got the
Speaker 2: five mile traffic heavy from Ohio Pike and the Beach
Speaker 2: Box Ramp. Cold Ring Avenue remains blocked. That's between round
Speaker 2: Top and Common Circle due to an early morning accident.
Speaker 2: Coming up next, the guest who has his peanuts, he
Speaker 2: has his crackerjacks, and he's getting ready to root root
Speaker 2: root for the home team. Has his Yankees get underway
Speaker 2: this Friday. He hasn't done any kind of preparation for
Speaker 2: the Giants and Steelers game Sunday. Chuck Ingram on fifty
Speaker 2: five KRC the talk station.
Speaker 1: Kosy Talk Station Wednesday means for certain judge and an apolitan.
Speaker 3: Did the Giants still have a football team?
Speaker 1: You would know better than me, That's funny.
Speaker 3: Yeah, good morning, Brian. How are you, my friend?
Speaker 1: Doing as well as could be expected? I think I
Speaker 1: might have dodged a pretty significant s or RSV bullet.
Speaker 1: And my wife is just overwhelmed with a cough and
Speaker 1: my son had it, and uh, so far the cough
Speaker 1: has not attacked me. So I'm counting my blessings on that,
Speaker 1: because it's really going around the air. I would have
Speaker 1: missed work, and I don't want to miss a day
Speaker 1: of work between now and the election, your honor, so
Speaker 1: I'm thanking God and my lucky stars. Now you know,
Speaker 1: I was jokingly referring to your column last night as brilliant,
Speaker 1: I said, I bet you get tired of hearing the
Speaker 1: word brilliant in connection with your column. But that's the
Speaker 1: way I felt about it. And I know I love
Speaker 1: talking with you about the Constitution, most notably in connection
Speaker 1: with declarations of war. But let me throw something at
Speaker 1: you real quick. I know you don't mind a little
Speaker 1: curveball here, and I think you'll be all over this one.
Speaker 1: You have pointed out time and time again, and anybody
Speaker 1: knows the Constitution and the Bill of Rights knows that
Speaker 1: the first Amendment, the first thing, is the free exercise
Speaker 1: of religion. We enjoy that here in the United States.
Speaker 1: We are not a theocracy, and the government cannot interfere
Speaker 1: with the free exercise of religion. Kamala Harris, when talking
Speaker 1: with NBC News Washington correspondent Hallie Jackson, asked her, so
Speaker 1: is a question of pragmatism, then what concessions would be
Speaker 1: on the table religious exemptions, for ex Is that something
Speaker 1: that you would consider if the Republicans control Congress. That
Speaker 1: question in the context of abortions and roe v wade
Speaker 1: Her response, I don't think we should be making concessions
Speaker 1: when we're talking about a fundamental freedom to make decisions
Speaker 1: about your own body. In other words, the concept of
Speaker 1: a woman's right to control her body, which is not
Speaker 1: specifically mentioned in the Constitution. Trump's the specifically acknowledge free
Speaker 1: exercise of religion. There are many people in the medical
Speaker 1: profession who do not believe, based upon the religion, that
Speaker 1: abortions are appropriate under any circumstances. Should the government be
Speaker 1: in a position to force doctors to do something that
Speaker 1: they find objectionable because of their religion, And my quick
Speaker 1: answer would be, of course not, They can't.
Speaker 3: And yet my answer, my answer is the same as yours,
Speaker 3: and soar as the Supreme Court jurisprudence. She was not
Speaker 3: thinking clearly, and she's animated by almost a fanatal not almost.
Speaker 3: It is a fanatical support for abortion at any time,
Speaker 3: under any circumstances, and for any reason, even to the
Speaker 3: point where the government would force a medical team to
Speaker 3: perform a surgical procedure which they believe is homicide.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you can't force a guy to bake a cake
Speaker 1: for a transgender wedding. How could you force the doctor
Speaker 1: to kill a base?
Speaker 3: Correct? Correct? And your point is profound. There's no constitutional
Speaker 3: right to an abortion there never has been, even under
Speaker 3: a Row versus Wade. The constitutional right, long recognized and
Speaker 3: rarely disputed is the right to privacy. The fact that
Speaker 3: the abortion occurred in the zone of privacy gave it
Speaker 3: the aura under Roe versus Weed of being a constitutional right,
Speaker 3: But strictly speaking, no Mame court case has ever held
Speaker 3: there's a constitutional right to an abortion. So I don't
Speaker 3: know if the Vice President referred to it as a
Speaker 3: constitutional right, which it's never been, or a fundamental right,
Speaker 3: which is even for which there's even less argument to
Speaker 3: be made. A fundamental right is a natural right that
Speaker 3: comes to our humanity. There's no natural right to kill
Speaker 3: another human being. I would love to debate her. I
Speaker 3: actually like her as a person, but I would love
Speaker 3: to debate her on this not going to happen.
Speaker 1: Well, I want to give you an opportunity at least
Speaker 1: back me up, because I was talking about this earlier
Speaker 1: and a lot of my listeners are very very against
Speaker 1: the whole idea of abortion. But the legal notion that
Speaker 1: she's springing from I found smacked the First Amendment directly
Speaker 1: in the face, so perfect. Moving on to war in
Speaker 1: the Constitution, the Southery, the column comes out tonight at midnight.
Speaker 1: I'm a lucky man for getting a copy of it early.
Speaker 1: This is a subject that you and I have been
Speaker 1: over before, and yet we're still living it. In fact,
Speaker 1: it seems to be getting worse. That is that we
Speaker 1: are engaged literally with boots on the ground operating weapons
Speaker 1: of war into theater, maybe more theaters than just the
Speaker 1: two we're talking about here, both Ukraine and Israel. They've
Speaker 1: got sophisticated weapons systems that we've given them that require
Speaker 1: US Service personnel to actually operate them for reasons of
Speaker 1: security or technology. So we're actually pulling the trigger in
Speaker 1: conflicts that we're not engaged in.
Speaker 3: This is what prompted me to write the piece. I
Speaker 3: have written similar themes with respect to Ukraine. But when
Speaker 3: the White House announced twice last week that it was
Speaker 3: sending the FAD thaad an acronym for a very fancy,
Speaker 3: very expensive defensive missile system that shoots down incoming missiles
Speaker 3: in the sky, that was sending one of these to
Speaker 3: Israel and a team of one hundred troops to guard it,
Speaker 3: protected and operate it. Three days later they announced another FAD.
Speaker 3: We only have seven, so two are there now three
Speaker 3: days later they announced another fad going and another one
Speaker 3: hundred troops. That's what prompted me to do this. The
Speaker 3: president just can't send troops into harm's way on his own,
Speaker 3: but they all do. They've been doing this since the
Speaker 3: end of World War two. I mean, the last time
Speaker 3: we declared war was December eighth, nineteen forty one. George W.
Speaker 3: Bush did get authorizations from Congress, about three or four
Speaker 3: of them, to invade Afghanistan and invade Iraq. Biden has
Speaker 3: gotten no congressional authorizations. Now, Biden will say, well, look,
Speaker 3: they're paying for it. They obviously don't object to it.
Speaker 3: That's a legitimate argument, But it's a way around the
Speaker 3: Constitution because only Congress can declare war. So Congress avoids
Speaker 3: the Constitution by paying for a war without declaring it
Speaker 3: without a great national debate. The president avoids the Constitution
Speaker 3: by putting troops into harm's way without getting a congressional
Speaker 3: declaration of war. They both avoid and evade the treaties
Speaker 3: we've signed, which say we can't declare war, we can't
Speaker 3: engage in offensive war unless the other country presents an imminent,
Speaker 3: grave threat to the security of the United States. Does
Speaker 3: Iran present a grave imminent threat to the security of
Speaker 3: the United States? No? Does Russia pose a grave threat
Speaker 3: to the security of the United States? Answer? No, are
Speaker 3: we fighting wars against both? We are against Russia and
Speaker 3: we're about to against Iran. Totally unconstitutional, Now what, Brian?
Speaker 3: They all took a note to preserve, protective, defend the Constitution,
Speaker 3: the same oath I took when I became a life
Speaker 3: tenured judge.
Speaker 1: They don't give a damn well, they don't. And of course,
Speaker 1: the same people who swear note to the Constitution and
Speaker 1: in the next moment out of their mouth they'll talking
Speaker 1: about ways of taking away our Second Amendment rights. We
Speaker 1: all know that that oath is a bit of a joke,
Speaker 1: and that's a sad, sad thing to behold. But as
Speaker 1: many of our conversations have debt, they trod upon our
Speaker 1: First Amendment rights, they trod upon our Fourth Amendment rights.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's it's just an amazing thing that.
Speaker 3: There's only one person in the Congress that complains about this. Correct, correct,
Speaker 3: I mean your listeners know, you know, I know. But
Speaker 3: he's a voice in the wilderness. He's the conscience of
Speaker 3: the House of representatives the conscience of the Constitution, but
Speaker 3: they don't listen to him. They do whatever they think
Speaker 3: will put money in the coffers of their campaigns, and
Speaker 3: we'll get them re elected. That's what they are concerned with.
Speaker 3: Who authorized the mass wars, Well, we're enriching the military
Speaker 3: industrial complex. Who authorized the mass spying. Well, we got
Speaker 3: to be kept safe from terrorists behind every refrigerator. I mean,
Speaker 3: they gave us a society where the government is so overbearing.
Speaker 3: I have a friend who asked another friend of Vietnam veterans,
Speaker 3: our age, my age, Brian, what were you fighting for?
Speaker 3: They can't answer. He asked the guys who came home
Speaker 3: from Iraq and afghanists there, what are you fighting for?
Speaker 3: They can't answer. There's no valid, legitimate, moral answer to
Speaker 3: that to those questions.
Speaker 1: Well, and the other component of this, and you know,
Speaker 1: the parallels with Vietnam cannot be understated. We start with advisors,
Speaker 1: and then we start growing the number of advisors, and
Speaker 1: next thing you know, we have a large military foothold
Speaker 1: in there. And it sounds me like, you know, say, ooh,
Speaker 1: it's just one hundred troops and we're only engaging in
Speaker 1: defensive these thad right, they're only if something comes at Israel,
Speaker 1: then we'll shoot it down. That's not offensive use of
Speaker 1: military hardware, but that we are there and we have
Speaker 1: a military presence there. If they start shooting rockets at
Speaker 1: us and harm our military personnel, I can see that
Speaker 1: as being used as a pretext to expand into a
Speaker 1: much broader conflict. So it creates an opportunity to make
Speaker 1: a great case where we got to go after him.
Speaker 1: Those suns and so and so they murdered our troops
Speaker 1: that were stationed in Ukraine and Israel.
Speaker 3: So the troops are a tripwire. It's reprehensible human beings
Speaker 3: as a trip wire. This is what Prime Minister Netsigyaho wants,
Speaker 3: and this is apparently what President Biden wants in order
Speaker 3: to justify to the American public a massive US involvement
Speaker 3: in a war against the country that just wants to
Speaker 3: trade with us poses no threat to us whatsoever. By
Speaker 3: the way, do we have a treaty with Israel that
Speaker 3: requires us to do this? No? Do we have a
Speaker 3: treaty with Ukraine that requires us to do this?
Speaker 1: No.
Speaker 2: All the more.
Speaker 3: Reason why there should have been and still should be.
Speaker 3: And even though we're at the tail end of a
Speaker 3: presidential campaign. They don't debate this stuff a great national
Speaker 3: debate about whether or not the United States should be
Speaker 3: involved in a war in Europe and a war in
Speaker 3: the Middle East. That's at least what Madison wanted. By
Speaker 3: putting the power to declare war in the Congress, not
Speaker 3: in the presidents well.
Speaker 1: And whether or not you're in favor of it or not,
Speaker 1: it is putting the American security at risk because, as
Speaker 1: you pointed out, we only had seven of these THAD
Speaker 1: missile batteries. Now we have lost a bunch of them
Speaker 1: to foreign powers, and we can't even protect our own ourselves.
Speaker 1: Our military hardware is running out. I know you're against
Speaker 1: the military industrial complex, but you know there are threats
Speaker 1: foreign and domestic. We need to be prepared for them.
Speaker 1: And from what I understand, our hardware is running out.
Speaker 1: Our military is short on tree groups in personnel for
Speaker 1: a variety of reasons. And oh, there's that whole thing
Speaker 1: going on in the South China Sea and around Taiwan
Speaker 1: with the Chinese getting very itchy at the trigger finger.
Speaker 3: I agree with everything you've everything you've said, we have
Speaker 3: depleted well, we have almost down to zero of one
Speaker 3: hundred and five one hundred and fifty five millimeters artillery shells,
Speaker 3: which is the meat and potatoes of artillery. But we
Speaker 3: are seriously depleting our military hardware by everything we send
Speaker 3: to Israel into Ukraine. The numbers are vastly different. I mean,
Speaker 3: it's about twenty billion to Israel, it's two hundred and
Speaker 3: sixty five billion with a B to Ukraine. It's just
Speaker 3: an unbelievable number that has produced the deaths of six
Speaker 3: hundred thousand young men, an entire generation dead for what
Speaker 3: for what American purpose?
Speaker 1: Well, and it certainly hasn't worked out to the benefit
Speaker 1: of Ukraine. They can't find any soldiers and they're losing
Speaker 1: more and more land every single day to the advancing Russians.
Speaker 1: Judge Napolitano always love talking with you. Controversial, maybe, but
Speaker 1: maybe not when you look at it in the light
Speaker 1: of the Constitution of the United States. What's going on
Speaker 1: today with judging freedom.
Speaker 3: I have the great investigative journalists, Max Blumenthal and Aaron Mate.
Speaker 3: I have the former CIA agent who told George W.
Speaker 3: Bush there were in Saddam Hussein did not have weapons
Speaker 3: of mass destruction. Phil Giraldi and I am on a
Speaker 3: show of the Great George Galloway, the anti war warrior
Speaker 3: in the House of Commons representing Scotland. He's a fabulous
Speaker 3: character and I'm looking forward to.
Speaker 1: It and we will look forward to enjoying it as well.
Speaker 1: Judging Freedom Judge Otopolton until next Wednesday, my dear friend,
Speaker 1: God bless you, sir, and back at you, Brian, all
Speaker 1: the best, Thank you very much. A forty four fifty
Speaker 1: five Caro City Talk station. Don't go away, be right back,
Speaker 1: stay right here.