Speaker 1: What's going on? Thank you so much for listening to
this podcast. It is heard live every day from noon
to three on WBT Radio in Charlotte. And if you
want exclusive content like invitations to events, the weekly live stream,
my daily show prep with all of the links, become
a patron, go to dpeteclendershow dot com. Make sure you
hit the subscribe button. Get every episode for free right
to your smartphone or tablet. And again, thank you so
much for your support. All righty, So Donald Trump sends
in the National Guard. Outrage ensues and the state of
California has now filed a lawsuit. I'm sure a lefty
judge will do some sort of a temporary restraining order
or an injunction of some kind, and then probably like
demand that he'd be brought in on like troop movements
and such before giving the president the green light to
allocate military resources. But at any rate, the California Attorney
General Rob Bunta or Bunta or Bunte, I don't know
how he pronounces it, but he, along with the California
Governor Gavin Newsom, the Gavineta sued President Trump and Defense
Secretary Pete Hegseeth in response to their orders seeking to
federalize the California National Guard for sixty days under Title
or A US Code ten, Section twelve, four to six.
I read the lawsuit, so you didn't have to. This
is from the press release though from the Attorney General's
Office of California. In the early hours of Sunday morning,
the US Department of Defense, at the direction of the President,
redirected hundreds of National Guard troops from San Diego to
Los Angeles without authorization from the governor and against the
wishes of local law enforcement. In total, the Department intends
to deploy two thousand troops across the state and inflammatory
escalation unsupported by conditions on the ground. In a lawsuit
being filed today which was actually yesterday, Attorney General buntda
and Gaviner Newsom will ask the court to hold unlawful
and set aside the President's order federalizing the National Guard
by way of a rarely used law, arguing that such
action exceeds the federal government's authority under the law and
it violates the Tenth Amendment. See all it took was
Donald Trump to get Democrats to recognize that the Tenth
Amendment exists. Well, I mean since the Civil War, but
like ever since then well actually yeah, no, probably like
civil rights era, like the sixties maybe, But at any rate,
Attorney General Rob Bunta said, let me be clear. Can
we just drop that? Can we like, let's just drop
the let me be clear thing? Can we do that?
This verbal crutch, it doesn't have any weight to it
any longer. It provides no service, no utility in your argument.
When someone says, let me be clear, you know what
I hear, it's like, it's not about the money. Like
if somebody tells you it's not about the money, then
it's about the money. So when someone tells me, let
me be clear, I know you're not about to be clear.
You're about to throw some propaganda at me that you
think is going to work because you prefaced it with
let me be clear. It's like, at the end of
the day, it's a verbal crutch. Anyway, let me be clear.
There is no invasion, there is no rebellion. The president
is trying to manufacture chaos and crisis on the ground
for his own political See the president is doing all
of this. Trump is doing. Trump is the reason why
the rioters burned and looted Los Angeles. It's all Trump's fault. Why, well,
because he was trying to enforce federal law, that monster.
How dare he enforce the law that he took a
constitutional oath to enforce. Federalizing the California National Guard is
an abuse of the president's authority under the law, and
not one we take lightly. We're asking a court to
put a stop to the unlawful, unprecedented order. It's not
actually unprecedented, by the way. You actually said that in
the beginning of your press release. But I digress, and
I will. I'll come back to that in a minute.
Then you got Governor Gavin Newsom quoted in the press
release donald Trump is creating I'm trying. I'm still working
on my Newsom impressions, So I apologize. It sounded a
little like Joe Biden Gavitt. Sorry, Donald Trump is creating
fear and terror by failing to adhere to the US
Constitution and overstepping his authority. Right, He's creating fear and
terror by enforcing federal law. Think about how asinine of
an argument this is. He continues, this is a manufactured
crisis to allow him to take over a state militia,
damaging the very foundation of our republic. Well, hey, look
baby steps here. People. We got a democrat now to
acknowledge that we are a republic. So let's take that win, right,
let's take that win. This is him intentionally causing chaos,
terrorizing communities, and endangering the principles of our great democracy.
Now we lost it, went right back to the democracy again.
These are the accusations because they were running ice operations.
This is now from the press release. In implementing this
direct the Department of Defense circumvented authorization from the governor
and began deploying National Guard troops to Los Angeles over
the objections of local law enforcement actively on the ground,
although LAPD's chief eventually like he said, yeah, like, we're
gonna have to do a reassessment as to whether or
not we need the National Guard because things are getting
out of control anyway. Notably, by the time the National
Guard arrived Sunday morning, the protests had dissipated and streets
were quiet, But soon after the National Guard arrived, tensions reignited,
leading to the very sort of unrest the National Guard
was supposedly sent into quell. So this is another asenine
argument because every morning early morning hours, you know, eight am,
nine am whatever. The rioters are not out they're you know,
back at their parents' house, sleeping in their basement bed
like they're not out there rioting. But give them a
couple hours and then they you know, get some breakfast
or something, and then they show up out on the streets.
They get their gas masks handed to them by the
NGOs that and funding those types of supply drops. Yeah,
we had of it on video. Pickup truck driving through
the crowd handing out some pretty high tech, expensive gas masks.
Don't tell me there isn't Dengo coordination. They've already tracked
the money, all right. So then the press release goes
on to note that Trump's unprecedented order is actually precedented.
They cite this statute twelve four h six that has
been invoked on its own only once before in modern history,
so that would make it the precedent. Trump's use of
it would then be based on precedent. It's not unprecedented.
See how that works. Once something happens that breaks the precedent,
that sets a new precedent, and then others can do
it as well. So the first time this was used
nineteen seventy, President Nixon called upon the National Guard to
deliver the mail during a nineteen seventy postal service strike.
This is also the first time since nineteen sixty five,
when President Lyndon Baines Johnson sorry Saint LBJ to the
left sent troops to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators.
That was the first time that a president activated a
state's National Guard without a request from the state's governor.
So let's see here, that's a one and then to
carry the seven and then that would be two precedents actually,
so again not unprecedented. So their argument is that the
federalization of the California National Guard deprives California of resources
to protect itself and its citizens and of critical responders
in the event of a state emergency. So because he
took two thousand National guardsmen, in case California wants to
ignore another wildfire, they're not going to be able to
call upon the National Guard to not do anything there, right,
so just in case, like what do we need them?
So I don't think that's actually a pretty solid legal
argument because usually you have to prove that some harm
did occur, not that something could occur that's completely unforeseen
at the moment. Also, they say that this section twelve
four h six requires the governor consent to federalization of
the National Guard, which Newsom was not given the opportunity
to do prior to their deployment. I don't believe that
is actually the case either. And then it says that
the order infringes on the governor's role as commander in
chief of the National Guard and violates the state's sovereign
right to control and have available its National Guard in
the absence of a lawful invocation of federal power. So
not sure that's going to apply either, because, as I mentioned,
the President Johnson sent troops to Alabama to protect civil
rights demonstrators and he and do that with goodnatorial approval.
All right, So spring is here a time of renewal
and celebrations. You've got graduations, weddings, anniversaries and the special
days for mom and dad. Your family's making memories that
are going to last a lifetime. But let me ask you,
are all of those treasured moments from days gone by?
Are they hidden away on old VCR tapes, eight millimeter films,
photos slides? Are they preserved? Because over time these precious
memories can fade and deteriorate, losing the magic of yesterday.
At Creative Video, they help you protect what matters most.
Their expert team digitizes your cherished family moments and transfers
them onto a USB drive, freezing them in time so
they can be enjoyed for generations to come. I urge
you do not wait until it's too late. This spring,
celebrate your past. Visit Creative Video today and let them
preserve your legacy with the love and care that it deserves.
Creative Video Preserving Family Memories since nineteen ninety seven, located
in mint Hill to four to eighty five. Mail orders
are accepted to get all the details that create a
video dot com. We got a call during the break,
Gary wanted to know who's funding the protests. I'm going
to go deeper into this tomorrow, but just shorthanding it.
It's you've got left wing NGOs funded by George Soros,
you have Mexican slash cartel money, you have the State
of California tax payers. A little sprinkling of the Tricom's
in there as well. So it's really a team effort
as to who's funding it. But it is being tracked.
Now what becomes of that, I don't know, all right,
So the lawsuit that was filed by the State of
California against the administration over the deployment of National guardsmen.
The Trump Memo authorizes personnel to quote perform those military
protective activities that the Secretary of Defense determines are reasonably
necessary to ensure the protection and safety of federal personnel
and property. End quote. That's from the Trump Memo. Then
it cites Section twelve four h six, which I've mentioned before,
but here's the actual language. Whenever one the US or
any of the commonwealths or possessions is invaded or is
in danger of invasion by a foreign nation, two there
is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the
authority of the government of the United States, or three
the President is unable with the regular forces to execute
the laws of the United States. Okay, so those are
the three circumstances when the President then quote may call
into federal service members and units of the National Guard
of any state in such numbers as he considers necessary
to repel the invasion, suppress the rebellion, or execute those
law orders. For these purposes shall be issued through the
governors of the state or, in the case of the
District of Columbia, through the Commanding General of the National
Guard of the District of Columbia. So that's what they're arguing,
is that it says shall and so he didn't do that. Now,
Andrew McCarthy, former US attorney, He says there are genuine
political arguments against President Trump's deployment of military forces in
response to the rioting arson and potentially lethal attacks on
law enforcement agents in California. Those, however, are muted by
the left's long standing endorsement of political violence and illegal immigration.
In any event, the legal complaints against Trump's response are specious, Okay,
So we have to we've got to separate the political
arguments from the legal arts arguments. And he points out
the president has broad authority under Article two and statutory
law to use force as necessary to suppress unrest that
creates violent civil strife and impedes lawful federal functions. The
ICE operations, no matter your view, it is irrelevant whether
you think ICE is the new Gestapo. It doesn't matter.
They are operating under federal law. They are legally allowed
to be doing the operations that they are doing, and
all you're crying about it doesn't matter. And when you
impede that, you obstruct that the federal government can take
steps to make sure that their operations function. These are
lawful federal functions. Section twelve four h six authorizes the President,
as I just went through, to call state National Guard
forces into federal service. Prior to the democrats overwrought response
to the events of January sixth, twenty twenty one, it
might have been possible to have a discussion about whether
what's happening now in LA rises to the level of
a rebellion or know an insurrection. Right, these terms in
our history have been reserved for large scale, organized uses
of force that in time and space vary resemblance to
the Civil War. But Democrats insisted on hyperbolizing the capital
riot into an insurrection that caused the deaths of tons
of police officers when the number was actually zero. So
now that ship has sailed, folks hoisted on your own petard,
as it were. Either way, though, McCarthy says that debate
would be just academic because the excerpt of the statute
quoted says there need not be an actual rebellion only
the danger of one, and then the President can call
in the National Guard. The explicit purpose of the ongoing
riot and mayhem is to thwart the enforcement of federal law.
Section twelve four h six expressly authorizes the use of
military force when ordinary law enforcement has been violently prevented
from carrying out federal functions and forcible attacks are being
trained on federal facilities. As the Biden Justice Department and
its Special Council Jack Smith constantly reminded us after the
Capital Riot, the federal government has a high interest in
the protection of federal facilities and personnel. Right, the bone
of contention that the governor in Californians making is about
the shall be issued through the governors of the relevant states. Right,
that's the lynchpin. Here, here's a great idea. How about
making an escape to a really special and secluded getaway
in western North Carolina. Just a quick drive up the
mountain and Cabins of Asheville is your connection. Whether you're
celebrating an anniversary, a honeymoon, maybe you want to plan
a memorable proposal, or get family and friends together for
a big old reunion. Cabins of Asheville has the ideal
spot for you where you can reconnect with your loved
ones and the things that truly matter. Nestled within the
breath taking fourteen thousand acres of the Pisga National Forest,
their cabins offer a serene escape in the heart of
the Blue Ridge Mountains. Centrally located between Asheville and the
entrance of the Great Smoky Mountain National Park. It's the
perfect balance of seclusion and proximity to all the local
attractions with hot tubs, fireplaces, air conditioning, smart TVs, Wi
Fi grills, outdoor tables, and your own private covered porch.
From thirteen cabins, six cottages, two villas, and a great
lodge with eleven king sized bedrooms, Cabins of Ashville has
the ideal spot for you for any occasion, and they
have pet friendly accommodations. Call or text eight two eight,
three six seven seventy sixty eight or check out all
there is to offer at Cabins of Aashville dot com
and make memories that'll last a lifetime. Andy McCarthy, former
US attorney, writing at National Review headline, President Trump has
legal authority to suppress the siege in La he says,
I doubt Governor Newsom's claims are going to get much traction.
Section twelve four h six neither requires the President to
seek a governor's permission to federalize the National Guard, nor
gives a governor a veto over such federalization. In addition,
Trump's order expressly directs the Secretary of State to coordinate
with the governors of the relevant states. Newsome is entitled
to nothing more. It is in his interest, the President's interest, California's,
and the nation's interest that the state and federal authorities
work together to restore order. But you can't prattle on
about the rule of law while endorsing sanctuary cities designed
as sanctuaries from the rule of law. Pick a side,
exactly right, exactly right. You do not get to make
an argument about rule of law if you are saying
we are a sanctuary city, because the sanctuary is from
federal law. He goes on to say, if you indulge
a thought from the mists of time, he says, I
once prosecuted terrorists by invoking the seditious conspiracy statu This
is a different laws. Section twenty three eighty four of
Title eighteen the statute is broad. It criminalizes forcible opposition
to the government and violent action to quote prevent, hinder,
or delay the execution of any law of the United States.
So federal law is very clear that the President has
the authority to use whatever force is required to protect
federal functions and facilities. And here, unlike the Capitol riot scenario,
there is no ambiguity about whether the rioters believed they
were acting at the behest of the government's highest official.
Comparatively speaking, seditious conspiracy prosecutions against the LA rioters should
be a layup. Now there are some risks. Is there
a danger there could be a Kent State like incident
that could make matters much worse? Sure, the President and
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth must be crystal clear about the
rules of engagement regarding the use of force and the
objective of ending the violence, not exacerbating it. The Justice
Department should aggressively prosecute people who participated in or plotted
to carry out forcible attacks right, trace the money, trace
the organizations and the leadership structure, and the people who
were organizing this. And these have been organized. There is
clear evidence that these are organized. This is not grassroots.
This is what they call astroturft. President Trump from the
Oval Office talked about this today. He said, you know,
paid agitators. There are people involved in these protests that
are parts of larger operations. I keep saying it, right,
the issue is never the issue. The issue is always
the revolution. That's the intersectionality. I am oppressed, you're oppressed,
but look we're both oppressed by the US government, institutional racism,
white dudes, whatever it is, whatever you need it to
be at any given moment. And then, because you're a
victim and I'm a victim, let's be victims together. We're
part of a coalition of victims with a single target,
and it always happens to be Western civilization. That's the point.
So any organization that wants to tear at the roots
and foundation of Western civilization institutions, they are involved in
these types of activities. That's why they look a lot
like the Black Block Vote rioters. They look like the
Occupy Wall Street crowd. They look like the BLM crowd. Right,
they have the same tactics, they have the same chance,
They are the same people. There is a reason for it.
It's because the issue isn't the issue. The issue is
the revolution. And then I happened upon this. The President
of the Mexican Senate today holding up a map of
the boundaries between the US and Mexico in eighteen thirty
and he says, the Mexicans living there, meaning in America,
are in what has always been their homeland. Have you
heard of Larraza. I used to talk about them when
this organization first really got off the ground and became
sort of into the public space during the immigration fights
in early two thousands. LaRaza means the race. They have
this belief that called Aztlan. It's like a reconquista. They're
going to reconquer all that was lost. They say that
this is their heritage, in ignoring the fact that they
speak Spanish because they were colonized by Spain. They were
conquered by Spain first, Like, how far back do you
want to go here? Folks? You better find some Aztecs
or something to turn it over to. All right, if
you're listening to this show, you know I try to
keep up with all sorts of current events, and I
know you do too, And you've probably heard me say
get your news from multiple sources. Why Well, because It's
how you detect media bias, which is why I've been
so impressed with ground News. It's an app and it's
a website and it combines news from around the world
in one place, so you can compare coverage and verify information.
You can check it out at check dot ground, dot
news slash pete. I put the link in the podcast
description too. I started using ground News a few months
ago and more recently chose to work with them as
an affiliate because it lets me see clearly how stories
get covered and by whom. The blind spot feature shows
you which stories get ignored by the left and the right.
See for yourself. Check dot ground, dot news slash pete.
Subscribe through that link and you'll get fifteen percent off
any subscription. I use the Vantage plan to get unlimited
access to every feature. Your subscription then not only helps
my podcast, but it also supports ground News as they
make the media landscape more transparent. All right, so this
is from this is a public appearance like a press
conference the President of the Mexican Senate today. Now this
is going to be in Espanol, so I shall translate
reading the translation on the bottom of the screen. I
was at Trump Tower when President elect Donald Trump said,
who was sixteen days away from taking office for the
first time as president, about to assume the role, and said, yes,
we'll build the wall. Yes we'll pay for it, but
we'll do it according to the map of Mexico from
eighteen thirties. And now he's showing a map and it
shows Mexico going up, you know, all the way up
to like you know, Oregon or whatever, in all the
state of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and then all the
way over to the coast. He says, this is what
the United States was in eighteen thirty and this was
part of Mexico. It wasn't all Mexico. If you can see,
maybe a third, at least a quarter of the North
American territory was part of Mexico until eighteen forty six.
We were stripped of these territories. We were settled there before,
we were settled there before the nation now known as
the United States. The Tragedy of Guadalupe Hidalgo establishes rights
for the people, or the treaty rights for the people
of those territories which were not respected. The city of
Nuevo Laredo Laredo was a Mexican city in the city
of Nuevo Laredo was formed by the Mexicans who lived
in Laredo and didn't want to stay on the United
States side, so they came over to what is now
Mexican territory. With this geography, how can they talk about
liberating Los Angeles in California? The United States government liberate
them from whom leftists. The Mexican men and women who
are settled in that place are settled in what has
always been their homeland. Names don't yeah, names don't lie.
The most spoken language in Los Angeles is Spanish. Huh.
You don't need to speak English to be in Los Angeles.
And here we are in the current situation. This is
part of the United States. Yes, the United States government
has the right to implement whatever immigration measures it deems appropriate, certainly,
but they have no right to violate the dignity of migrants. Okay, actually, yes,
I'm not advocating that. But yes, I don't know what
you mean by dignity. But yes, because that's not actually
a constitutional right, it's not a civil right. I don't
even know what the dignity, the right to dignity is.
There is no such thing in any of our governing documents.
So not sure what he's talking about. But this is
what the left does, right. They conflate words and they
try to formulate a narrative that makes their positions seem
like the humane and morally superior one. But it doesn't
work when you actually use language that describes reality. It
only works if you conflate different words that have different
meanings in order to get emotional responses. So you know,
the brain shuts off the logic switch. They have no
right to separate families. They have no right to act. Well, okay,
that's not true either. We do. We do have the
right to separate families. If a family has two kids
that were born in America, they are citizens and they
don't have to be deported. But if the parents are
illegal aliens, they do, and that would separate the families. Right,
So parents are gonna have to make a decision do
you take your kids with you? Right? Government has that right.
A nation has this right to deport people from its
country who do not belong there. Mexico knows this because
Mexico does this. So they have no right to separate families.
They have no right to subject them to suffering person
acution or harassment. They have no right to break the
law that the United States government and the people of
the United States set themselves. Okay, we're not breaking any laws.
In fact, we are enforcing federal law. But I do
find it a bit interesting that Mexican political leaders feel
so comfortable telling us how to enforce our laws against
people that fled Mexico, people that hated your country so
much that they left to come here, but apparently now
love it so much that they don't want to go back,
and so are flying your flag of the country they
don't want to go back to. This is also confusing,
except it's not. It's not. Again, the issue isn't the issue.
They're just throwing out different excuses so they can continue
the behavior that they have been implementing, which is to
some of the more radical elements ray conquista. Right. If
you are just a run of the mill Comi Marxist,
you're just in it to tear down Western society, dismantle
the capitalist state. Right. If you're an adversary, you're throwing
your lot in with this crowd as well, because you
want to week in America. But isn't that interesting that
the Senate leader of Mexico is pointing out the fact
that English is not the predominant language in Los Angeles
as proof of some sort of what claim on the land.
The US actually acquired those territories through the Treaty of
Guadalupe Dalgo after Mexico lost the war that it started.
The land was purchased, it wasn't stolen, and Mexico agreed
to the terms. So no, you don't get it back.
All right, that'll do it for this episode. Thank you
so much for listening. I could not do the show
without your support and the support of the businesses that
advertise on the podcast, so if you'd like, please support
them too and tell them you heard it here. You
can also become a patron at my Patreon page or
go to thepetecleanershow dot com. Again, thank you so much
for listening, and don't break anything while I'm gone.