Speaker 1: It's Night Side with Dan Ray.
Speaker 2: I'm WBS Costin's News Radio.
Speaker 3: Oh, welcome back everyone, and we want to welcome our
Speaker 3: great friend and legal guru, attorney Harvey Silverglade. Harvey, welcome
Speaker 3: back to Nightside. How are you.
Speaker 4: I'm fine, I'm fine. It's great to be back.
Speaker 3: You bet you. It's always great to be somewhere, that's
Speaker 3: for sure, Harry. A few weeks ago, of course, you
Speaker 3: remember the New Orleans attack on New Year's Morning in
Speaker 3: which an individual, shamsu Din Jabbar, rented a truck rammed
Speaker 3: it into crowds as they were celebrating New Year's Eve
Speaker 3: on Bourbon Street, killing fourteen people, injuring dozens of more,
Speaker 3: dozens more. And I think it is fairly agreed upon
Speaker 3: at this point that this guy had been radicalized by
Speaker 3: visiting some websites, some ISIS websites on the dark Web.
Speaker 3: And we talked about that at the Knights and took
Speaker 3: the position that our government needs to get more aggressive
Speaker 3: and find out who's frequently in these sites for what purpose.
Speaker 3: And you know, opened up a conversation and two or
Speaker 3: three of the calls, So what do you think, Harvey
Speaker 3: silvergle Thanks, I said well, I don't know, but we'll
Speaker 3: find out. So I'm just wondering. I'm sure you have
Speaker 3: some thoughts on how how we need to treat these
Speaker 3: individuals who are going through this radicalization process. And I
Speaker 3: don't care if for somebody going to kiddie porn sites
Speaker 3: or going to is of sites or going to ku
Speaker 3: klux Klan sites. You know. I just I'm trying to
Speaker 3: balance it in my mind, and I'd love to know
Speaker 3: what your thoughts of this on this is.
Speaker 4: Well, you know, I I always lean over toward the
Speaker 4: privacy of the First Amendment, of course, and and this
Speaker 4: is a hard case. The authorities have a right to
Speaker 4: monitor public websites, that is I think clear, yes, and
Speaker 4: so they can do that. They do not have the
Speaker 4: authority to monitor a telephone calls without a warrant m hm.
Speaker 4: So that is clear. They can do whatever they want
Speaker 4: within the bounds of the Fourth Amendment and the First Amendment.
Speaker 4: So satisfactory answer or not?
Speaker 3: Well, well, well that's a legal answer, which I think
Speaker 3: I understand, and I suspect that some of the audience
Speaker 3: might be a little bit fuddled by that. Let's let's
Speaker 3: deal with some specifics. Let's Let's do a couple of
Speaker 3: law class reviews here. So let's assume that they monitor
Speaker 3: and some of these sites are on what they call
Speaker 3: the dark Web. I don't think I know what the
Speaker 3: dark web really is, but I guess some people are
Speaker 3: able to get to these places which are not easily
Speaker 3: accessible as I understand it. And if you know more
Speaker 3: about it, or someone else knows more about the dark.
Speaker 4: Web, that's definition okay, so.
Speaker 3: They know, you know, the the FBI, for example, or
Speaker 3: any law enforcement agency can have somebody go look at
Speaker 3: the dark web and all of a sudden they see
Speaker 3: that there are people who are posting there, and maybe
Speaker 3: they can figure out who the people are. So my
Speaker 3: question is, okay, you see who's on there, you see
Speaker 3: what people are beginning to regurgitate what the dark web says,
Speaker 3: I mean the dark Web. I guess they have a
Speaker 3: right to promulgate whatever theories they want. But you know,
Speaker 3: in the case of the guy Dylan Roof down in
Speaker 3: South Carolina who women and massacred the older black men
Speaker 3: and women inside of a church after having prayed with them,
Speaker 3: if if somebody goes on some site and starts to
Speaker 3: spout thoughts and ideas or having been exposed to thoughts
Speaker 3: and ideas, Is it going too far for the FBI
Speaker 3: to say, let's let's let's do a little temperature check
Speaker 3: on this person. Let's let's go up and knock on
Speaker 3: the door and introduce ourselves and see if they want
Speaker 3: to talk voluntarily and tell us what they're doing. Anything
Speaker 3: wrong with that?
Speaker 4: Nothing wrong with that. The FBI can do that. They
Speaker 4: can even they can go further. They can follow this
Speaker 4: guy as long as they don't go into his house
Speaker 4: unless he agrees to let them go into the house
Speaker 4: in order to search it.
Speaker 3: So even let us say this individual is somehow I
Speaker 3: don't know, beginning to meet with other people, he decides
Speaker 3: or she decides to to begin to move around, the
Speaker 3: FBI if there, if they have some level of concern,
Speaker 3: it doesn't necessarily have to be probable cause, because they're
Speaker 3: not seeking any sort of a warrant, but they they
Speaker 3: do have the ability then to follow them and say, well,
Speaker 3: who they meeting with? Who are the other polks that
Speaker 3: might be involved in this is what I understand you
Speaker 3: to say, right right, Okay, at what point, obviously, what
Speaker 3: what the concern is is, how do you get to
Speaker 3: somebody who obviously has been radicalized, and and the FBI
Speaker 3: has said in regards to this case, radicalized. That's the
Speaker 3: the quote as a matter of fact from the specially
Speaker 3: Deputy Assistant f BI FBI Director Christopher Ray Raya Thursday
Speaker 3: set investigators is what. No, we're not We're not talking
Speaker 3: about Chris Ray the FBI director. There's another guy whose
Speaker 3: name is spelled r Aia so I was trying to
Speaker 3: miss trying to pronounce that name correctly. He's a deputy
Speaker 3: assistant FBI director. And he said there were five videos
Speaker 3: posted on Jabbar's Facebook account before the attack. In the
Speaker 3: first video, he said he originally planned to harm his
Speaker 3: family and friends, but was concerned the news headlines would
Speaker 3: not focus on the war between the believers and the disbelievers.
Speaker 3: Jabbar said he had joined ISIS before this summer. Let
Speaker 3: me be very clear at this point, this was an
Speaker 3: act of terrorism. Raya said it was premeditated and an
Speaker 3: evil act. Added the attack was one hundred percent inspired
Speaker 3: by ISIS. So do they have to just wait until
Speaker 3: this person does does this attack or can they As
Speaker 3: they follow him, they find that he's gone to a
Speaker 3: gun store and purchased a couple of AR fifteen's or
Speaker 3: AK forty sevens.
Speaker 4: Is well, if he's got a license to the for
Speaker 4: the guns, and they can't do anything. But if if
Speaker 4: it turns out that he does not have a license,
Speaker 4: they can arrest him, Okay, that they can follow him.
Speaker 3: Right, right, So they have to figure out. So it's
Speaker 3: not beyond the realm of possibility. What I'm trying to
Speaker 3: get at is, it's not beyond the realm of possibility
Speaker 3: that this action by this guy who was somewhat public
Speaker 3: with his statements that that this action might have been
Speaker 3: intercepted before it happened, correct, okay, and it could have
Speaker 3: been done without constitutional violations if done properly.
Speaker 4: To quote an old alphemism, the Constitution is not a
Speaker 4: suicide suit right precisely, not a suicide document site. There
Speaker 4: are limits, So is the FBI.
Speaker 3: Do you think at this point, and this is now
Speaker 3: we're going to get the speculative, So if you don't
Speaker 3: want to go here, that's fine. Do you think the
Speaker 3: FBI is actually being as aggressive as they should be
Speaker 3: in view of the number of these sorts of and
Speaker 3: I think about the Dylan Roofe attack, this guy who
Speaker 3: clearly was off his rocker. I think about some of
Speaker 3: the sex trafficking websites and the kitty porn websites. Do
Speaker 3: you think the FBI, and again, obviously it's it's almost
Speaker 3: the race ipseloqu with a situation that we see the result.
Speaker 3: They obviously were not aggressive enough with this guy. And
Speaker 3: I think there were plenty of signs with this guy Jabbar.
Speaker 3: Had they stepped back from where they used to be
Speaker 3: or do you think there's just so much of this
Speaker 3: stuff going on? They drinking from a fire hose, Well.
Speaker 4: I think the FBI could have could be more aggressive
Speaker 4: than they have been. Whether there's they're drinking from a
Speaker 4: fire hose, that just tells you that we need more Asians.
Speaker 3: Well, I think I think the there's I forget the number,
Speaker 3: but I think there's a lot of agents. I don't
Speaker 3: know how many more we need. But let's do this,
Speaker 3: let's let's let's take a break here and invite callers
Speaker 3: to call. Whatever their point of view on this is.
Speaker 3: I just think that so many lives were in ultimably
Speaker 3: changed on New Year's morning, Uh yeah, three point fifteen
Speaker 3: on Bourbon Street, and it could have had you know,
Speaker 3: the people's lives have changed, and what signs were missed.
Speaker 3: It just cries out to me, and I I don't
Speaker 3: want to you know, I want to be as respectful
Speaker 3: of the Constitution. I hope that they're monitoring these these
Speaker 3: kiddie porn websites. I mean, do you think that that.
Speaker 3: I'll ask you the speculative questions on the other side, Harvey,
Speaker 3: my guest is Harvey Silverglade, love to hear what you think.
Speaker 3: Six one, seven, two, five, four, ten thirty six one seven, nine, three, one,
Speaker 3: ten thirty. If you have a comment or if you
Speaker 3: have a question for Harvey, feel free to join this conversation.
Speaker 3: I think we are changing administrations in Washington. There's going
Speaker 3: to be a new FBI director at some point, whether
Speaker 3: whether his name is Kash Patel or not, it will
Speaker 3: be someone who might be quite different from what we've
Speaker 3: been dealing with for the last six or seven years.
Speaker 3: I just think this cries out. There's so much stuff
Speaker 3: going on and has gone on in this country, and
Speaker 3: most of these people, they exhibit signs, They talk to
Speaker 3: their friends, they tell us always to see something. If
Speaker 3: you see something, say something. And at the same time, uh,
Speaker 3: there's a mixed signal there, because sometimes if you see
Speaker 3: something and you say something, some organization might come back
Speaker 3: and say, oh, you're profiling. So we got we got
Speaker 3: some conflicting signals, and I want to go through these
Speaker 3: with Harvey, but I also want to incorporate you six one, seven, two, five,
Speaker 3: four ten thirty six one seven, nine, three, one, ten thirty.
Speaker 3: We'll be right back on Nightside.
Speaker 2: Now back to Dan Ray live from the Window World
Speaker 2: Nightside Studios on WBZ News Radio.
Speaker 3: I guess Harvey silverglad, and we are talking, uh in
Speaker 3: the context of the attack on New Year's Morning in
Speaker 3: New Orleans, which left fourteen Americans, fourteen people dead and
Speaker 3: dozens of others injured. Harvey, again, I know that we're
Speaker 3: kind of getting into the speculative here, but how does
Speaker 3: it just seems to me it's an abject failure when
Speaker 3: within our country something like this happens, When in retrospect,
Speaker 3: they were all sorts of signs that were very that
Speaker 3: were very clear to authorities if they either wanted to
Speaker 3: look or pay attention. Do you share that that feeling?
Speaker 3: You know and you do not? You know, You're you
Speaker 3: will tell me the truth, But I'm just do you
Speaker 3: do you feel that way or no, does that has that?
Speaker 3: It struck me that they afterwards it was like, these
Speaker 3: people are dead because someone was asleep at the switch.
Speaker 4: Well, there's something wrong with our society that we have
Speaker 4: produced so many of these people. That's clear, But it's
Speaker 4: the government is not a physician, They're not a psychiatrist.
Speaker 4: And what I think is happens is that if somebody
Speaker 4: acts is reported is acting odd dangerous, the FBI can
Speaker 4: look into them and they can even follow them. They
Speaker 4: cannot break into the house, but they can survey. They
Speaker 4: can do this, so they can put somebody on you know,
Speaker 4: there are things you can do without violating the Fourth Amendment.
Speaker 4: There's nothing there's no law against the gouvernt following the
Speaker 4: FBI following somebody.
Speaker 3: So then okay, So then the question to me it
Speaker 3: has to be, is the ask the FBI become so
Speaker 3: intimidated that they are not following following uh in looking
Speaker 3: for these leads. I just think that there, yeah, we
Speaker 3: can say there's something wrong with our society. This guy
Speaker 3: was had been in the military, that he should have
Speaker 3: been able at some point. You would think that someone
Speaker 3: in the military might have had a conversation with him,
Speaker 3: and they might have said the guy needs help. I
Speaker 3: think about, on a more neutral case, the guy up
Speaker 3: in Maine who killed all those people a year ago
Speaker 3: in the fall. He had been identified as a problem,
Speaker 3: the local police had visited him. He had he had
Speaker 3: a lot of weapons, high powered weapons, and he eventually
Speaker 3: used them. And it seems to me it's almost the
Speaker 3: equivalent of malpractice by law enforcement not to look at
Speaker 3: someone like that and realize this is a troubled individual
Speaker 3: and the minimum we should do is separate him from
Speaker 3: his weapons so that he could not commit mass carnage
Speaker 3: as the guy did on New Year's morning in New Orleans.
Speaker 3: I just feel that I'm frustrated and I'm probably not
Speaker 3: making as much sense as I should. But go ahead,
Speaker 3: I want your reaction.
Speaker 4: Well, you know, what can I say? I've said it
Speaker 4: in as many ways as as I know. If there
Speaker 4: is information that company is acting strange, they can investigate.
Speaker 4: They can they can follow the guides. There's no law
Speaker 4: against following somebody. They can put a stake out of
Speaker 4: the guy's house, but they cannot break in without his permission.
Speaker 3: Okay, So, but I'm taking it one step beyond here,
Speaker 3: and if I'm not articulating it properly, I apologize in
Speaker 3: view of what has happened in this country so often.
Speaker 3: I realize we're a free society, and I realize that
Speaker 3: that we have liberties that we all value. But I
Speaker 3: just wonder if specifically the Federal Bureau of Investigation has
Speaker 3: fallen down in terms of these these radical groups, be
Speaker 3: they the far right or the far left. That's you know.
Speaker 3: I cite to the guy in in Maine because they
Speaker 3: saw that as local law enforcement, which it's different. He
Speaker 3: was some sort of a lone wolf whack job who
Speaker 3: had been screwed up for what for all sorts of
Speaker 3: personal reasons, you wouldn't have picked him up. But I
Speaker 3: would think that this guy they could have figured out.
Speaker 3: I would I would think that some of the others.
Speaker 3: It seems to me that maybe the the agencies need
Speaker 3: to get a little bit more aggressive. And I don't
Speaker 3: expect you to join me in that hope. But but
Speaker 3: but that's but that's the that's the theory. I would
Speaker 3: like to see our law enforcement agencies staying within the
Speaker 3: bottles of the constitution, as you have articulated, but to
Speaker 3: get more aggressive. And my concern is that the public
Speaker 3: has been told if you see something, say something, but
Speaker 3: this there are other singles coming from the government. Well
Speaker 3: be careful. You know, if someone says, gee, I saw
Speaker 3: somebody and they look suspicious to me, and if if
Speaker 3: there wasn't really some action that, you know that let's
Speaker 3: say it was someone who was dressed a little differently,
Speaker 3: they might feel that I'm going to be categorized as
Speaker 3: being uh anti this or anti that. I think you
Speaker 3: understand the point I'm making.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I agree with the FBI is pulling down on
Speaker 4: the job. You know. I usually I'm concerned about the
Speaker 4: FBI being two as exactly, but right of these facts,
Speaker 4: they're not being aggressed enough.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I I'm glad to hear you say that.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 3: I also would like to get a quick response to
Speaker 3: you after the news break tonight, the Supreme Court, by
Speaker 3: a five to four decision, has allowed the sentencing of
Speaker 3: Donald Trump to go forward and judge one Merchan's tomorrow
Speaker 3: morning at nine point thirty. So I want to just
Speaker 3: ask get your thought on that as well. I don't
Speaker 3: know if you've had a chance to look at it,
Speaker 3: but it was an interesting five to four split in
Speaker 3: which for the conservative justices who you would expect Thomas
Speaker 3: and Kavanaugh and Gorsch basically said yeah, you know, they should,
Speaker 3: we should take this case up. Alito, of course, was
Speaker 3: in there and the majority Roberts and before female members
Speaker 3: of god to Lena Kagan so a signia sort of
Speaker 3: Mayor Katanji Brown Jackson and Amy Cony, Barrett said no,
Speaker 3: So the sentence will go on. I want to ask
Speaker 3: you about the come back, but I also want to
Speaker 3: continue this conversation and invite people to join us talk
Speaker 3: about again if law enforcement needs to get at this
Speaker 3: point in time just a little more aggressive maintaining observations
Speaker 3: of the rights that we all joy under the Constitution.
Speaker 3: Back on Nightside if you'd like to join. The best
Speaker 3: lines are six one, seven, two, five four ten thirty
Speaker 3: or six one seven, nine three one ten thirty. Back
Speaker 3: on Nightside.
Speaker 1: Right after this, It's Night Side with Boston's news Radio.
Speaker 3: Probably before we get some phone calls. Let me just
Speaker 3: get a quick response if I could. I hope you've
Speaker 3: seen the news story tonight that the US Supreme Court,
Speaker 3: by a five to four vote, one paragraph order issued
Speaker 3: by Chief Justice Rogers justices Sodamayra Kaigan, Cony Barrett, and
Speaker 3: Katanji Brown Jackson. They will not interfere with the sentencing
Speaker 3: that schedule for tomorrow morning, nine thirty UH, in which
Speaker 3: one Mershon, the judge in New York, is apparently going
Speaker 3: to essentially wrap the case up, uh, not order any
Speaker 3: jail time or for that matter of fine, but basically
Speaker 3: to make sure that it is on the record that
Speaker 3: president like Trump has been sentenced. The court apparently today
Speaker 3: said that the normal courses of appeal on the issues
Speaker 3: of the case could be could be litigated over time,
Speaker 3: but they would not interfere with the sentencing tomorrow. Now,
Speaker 3: you have represented John Eastman, who was one of those
Speaker 3: who were charged in relation to the twenty twenty one activity,
Speaker 3: and I'm not sure if you were still counseled to him.
Speaker 4: That's correct, if.
Speaker 3: You're still counseled to him at this point. But I'm
Speaker 3: wondering if you're comfortable in answering that question. Do you
Speaker 3: think the Supreme Court did the right thing tonight?
Speaker 4: Well, first of all, the judge who announced that he
Speaker 4: would send Trump before the inauguration but would not give
Speaker 4: them jail time, he avoids the constitutional problem of the
Speaker 4: jailing a head of state, the head of state before
Speaker 4: his inaugulation, and I think that that would be overturned,
Speaker 4: that he would not be allowed to do that. But
Speaker 4: he has avoided the problem by saying he did not
Speaker 4: give a jail sentence.
Speaker 3: And so, and by doing that it allows Merchon to
Speaker 3: conclude the case. And then whatever substantive issues the president's
Speaker 3: lawyers want to bring up at some point subsequent to
Speaker 3: the case, issues of evidence and issues of motions that were,
Speaker 3: they will go through the normal course.
Speaker 4: Yep, okay.
Speaker 3: And also Donald Trump will not appear in front of
Speaker 3: Merchon tomorrow. Apparently he's going to appear in some sort
Speaker 3: of a zoom capacity, a remote zoom zoom call. Ye,
Speaker 3: merch On will have the the honor, if you will,
Speaker 3: or the satisfaction of actually imposing a sentence, however light
Speaker 3: it is, and it probably will have us. It will
Speaker 3: be just simply note that the convictions will stand, that
Speaker 3: there will be no penalty, there will be no fine,
Speaker 3: there will be no no jail time, there will be
Speaker 3: no probation or anything like that.
Speaker 4: It makes the point that even the president is not
Speaker 4: above the war.
Speaker 3: Yep, gotcha. Okay, let's let's get back to our discussion.
Speaker 3: Handy going to go to Steven Braintree. Steve, we're talking
Speaker 3: about whether or not the FBI should become a little
Speaker 3: bit more aggressive with these sites on the dark web
Speaker 3: where people somehow get radicalized. Your thought or your question
Speaker 3: for Harvey silver Light.
Speaker 6: Yes, my question is, yeah, I understand that you want
Speaker 6: the FBI to be more aggressive.
Speaker 4: Yes.
Speaker 6: Well, one of the things that as far as people
Speaker 6: that you may say are in a mental crisis that
Speaker 6: they have been using is red flag laws. And I
Speaker 6: wanted to hear Hobby's opinion on those because I believe,
Speaker 6: based on how they are written, that red flag law
Speaker 6: is actually unconstitutional. I think that you have a right
Speaker 6: to face your accuser. And here's someone Now the government's
Speaker 6: going to come in and confiscate your belongings, and you
Speaker 6: have no idea who or what has done.
Speaker 5: This to you.
Speaker 3: Okay, So you're talking much more in the sense of
Speaker 3: the government comes in and says we're going to take
Speaker 3: your weapons away. I suspect that's your question. Is that right?
Speaker 6: Well, or the police or any entity. Basically, you're saying
Speaker 6: that they should be more aggressive, and yes, saying that
Speaker 6: there was information out there. Here's here's a procedure that
Speaker 6: they are now using that is completely in the dark.
Speaker 6: Someone goes in and and goes to a judge and says,
Speaker 6: I think this person is dangerous. I want you to
Speaker 6: confiscate this stuff. And sure enough the police come up
Speaker 6: and they.
Speaker 3: I don't know how. I don't if I go to
Speaker 3: court tomorrow and I go in front of a judge
Speaker 3: and I say I think that Steve from Brendwa, Braintree
Speaker 3: is dangerous. I don't know how how many judges would
Speaker 3: would authorize some agency to go in and confiscate your
Speaker 3: so called stuff with with nothing or some individual.
Speaker 4: Harvey jump in here, judge. Judge does not have that power.
Speaker 6: Okay, well then why are red flag confiscations up in
Speaker 6: some places? Two and sixty?
Speaker 3: But do you want to cite some example, Steve again,
Speaker 3: have you been in New York? Let me ask you,
Speaker 3: have you been involved in a similar situation in a
Speaker 3: situation like this or are you speaking about some statistic
Speaker 3: or study that you've seen.
Speaker 6: No, I am this is a specific New York has
Speaker 6: ramped up and asked all law enforcement if you see
Speaker 6: a person who is acting aggressively in any situation that
Speaker 6: you then need to file a red flag law on
Speaker 6: it if you know that they are in possession or
Speaker 6: have owned firearms.
Speaker 7: Here.
Speaker 3: Okay, So the observation is by the officer of aggressive
Speaker 3: behavior is what you're saying in.
Speaker 6: New York or any family member, any family member period,
Speaker 6: without any any other criteria they are implementing in UH
Speaker 6: filing red flag wives.
Speaker 3: Well, okay, Harvey's going to jump in here, but there's
Speaker 3: a difference between an officer who sees someone doing something
Speaker 3: or acting aggressively in public, UH and a family member
Speaker 3: who says, gee, I was threatened last night by by
Speaker 3: my spouse or my boyfriend or whatever. Harvey, go ahead,
Speaker 3: if however you can handle this would be great.
Speaker 4: If somebody is doing something completely bizarre, there is a
Speaker 4: there is a procedure for involuntarily committing them to a
Speaker 4: mental institution and having them examined. That that is that
Speaker 4: is a constitutional It's been around for a long time.
Speaker 6: Yes, I understand that. But the way that these are
Speaker 6: being if two people are yelling at one another, that
Speaker 6: is now being conceived as aggressive behavior here. Now, nobody's
Speaker 6: throwing a punch, nobody's been well, again, all.
Speaker 3: Of Steve, all of those cases would be would be litigated.
Speaker 3: A police officer would would would have to say, look,
Speaker 3: I have a I have a belief that the the
Speaker 3: actions of this individual, uh, you know, rose to a
Speaker 3: certain level that that we need to find out if
Speaker 3: someone makes threats I'm gonna shoot you that that's a
Speaker 3: different story between two guys throwing a punch. I wish
Speaker 3: you had a specific to give us, Steve. But obviously
Speaker 3: in this case of domestic abuse, if there's.
Speaker 6: A case of the only reason why I'm saying this
Speaker 6: is because you are saying that you want the FBI
Speaker 6: to be more aggressive. Yes, you want police forces to
Speaker 6: be more aggressive in handling these situations.
Speaker 3: In terms in terms of what I'm talking about is
Speaker 3: in terms of the dark web, uh, and in terms
Speaker 3: of individual rules who are becoming radicalized, like the guy
Speaker 3: in New Orleans, they visit public websites. There's a way
Speaker 3: in which that's that's different than private conversations. Harvey has
Speaker 3: agreed with me, Whether you like it or not, I
Speaker 3: think that's an entirely different scenario than someone who's a
Speaker 3: legitimate gun owner gets into some sort of a road
Speaker 3: rage conversation and you know, there's an argument or whatever,
Speaker 3: and that moves on. If on the other hand, some
Speaker 3: guys in the middle of the streets saying a guy,
Speaker 3: I'm going home, I'm getting my ar fifteen and I'm
Speaker 3: going to find you an off you. I bet you
Speaker 3: the police have an obligation at that point to red
Speaker 3: flag him.
Speaker 6: Fair enough Again, I understand where you're coming from, Dan,
Speaker 6: I'm just telling you that what is happening to gun
Speaker 6: owners across this country, this is.
Speaker 3: Not a Yeah, this is not a gun owner. I mean,
Speaker 3: I know you want to go there with the gun owners,
Speaker 3: but this is not a gun owners. I mean, you
Speaker 3: know gun owners situations. It treat it. If you want
Speaker 3: to talk about that some night, send me some specifics, okay,
Speaker 3: and we can we can talk about it. I'm the
Speaker 3: specific I'm talking about tonight is fourteen dead people in
Speaker 3: New Orleans as a result of a guy who did
Speaker 3: use apparently public websites ISIS websites and was radicalized thereon.
Speaker 3: And fourteen people are dead and dozens of others were
Speaker 3: badly injured. So I just don't want to go off.
Speaker 3: I'm giving you a lot.
Speaker 6: I I will get you that information.
Speaker 3: Look forward to it. Thank you very much. All Right,
Speaker 3: we're going to take a quick break back on Night's side.
Speaker 3: Right after this, more phone calls with Harvey Silverglade. Again, Harvey,
Speaker 3: I just didn't I didn't want to go down a
Speaker 3: rabbit hole. And I hope you understand that I wasn't
Speaker 3: trying to be interruptive. Six one seven, two ten thirty
Speaker 3: six one seven, nine thirty back of Nightside to this.
Speaker 2: Now back to Dan Ray live from the Window World
Speaker 2: night Side Studios on WBZ News Radio.
Speaker 3: I guess there's Attorney Harvey Silverglade. Let's keep it rolling here,
Speaker 3: gonna go to ed in Worcester. Ed You're next on Nightside. Welcome,
Speaker 3: you're all with Harvey Silverglade? Is Ed there or no? Okay, Okay,
Speaker 3: why don't you figure it out if he's there or not?
Speaker 3: And well, Harvey, I appreciate you know the conversation tonight,
Speaker 3: and I honestly did not know where you would come
Speaker 3: out on this. But I am gratified because I do
Speaker 3: you think that twenty years ago you would have had
Speaker 3: the same position. Yes, you do, Okay, of course, twenty
Speaker 3: years ago we were not dealing with with some of
Speaker 3: the various ancendric groups that we're dealing with at this point,
Speaker 3: do you feel uncomfortable? You really, for the most part
Speaker 3: in your career spent a lot of time on the
Speaker 3: other side of the courtroom from police authorities. Are you
Speaker 3: at all uncomfortable at this point acknowledging that, hey, maybe
Speaker 3: a little bit more needs to be done.
Speaker 4: Well, I wouldn't say. I don't think my view of
Speaker 4: these things have changed in fifty years. My analysis of
Speaker 4: this case tries to pit the rights of the defendant
Speaker 4: against the rights of the state, and these facts might change.
Speaker 4: The atmosphere might change, but they constitution it doesn't change absolutely,
Speaker 4: but you have to adapt it. And I think that
Speaker 4: in this case, I've come.
Speaker 3: To a.
Speaker 4: Point where I'm satisfied with the solution that I've come
Speaker 4: up with.
Speaker 3: Ye as well, I got ed from Wooster back here,
Speaker 3: so I want to accommodate him if I can. Ed
Speaker 3: appreciate you calling me back. I don't know what happened
Speaker 3: we lost you Go right ahead. You're on with Harvey
Speaker 3: silver Glader.
Speaker 5: Yeah, new phone that I've paid a lot of money
Speaker 5: for that it's less reliable than the old step Why
Speaker 5: that's what happens a couple of things about your observation.
Speaker 5: You know, you said it's government and competence, and I
Speaker 5: sort of agree with that, except my one comment about
Speaker 5: that is, you know, we know that people who commit
Speaker 5: these acts or get arrested in a sting or get arrested,
Speaker 5: you know, when they're in the final stages of planning.
Speaker 5: But we don't know how many people exhibit these same
Speaker 5: behaviors who never do anything about it. It's like a
Speaker 5: fraction where you know the numerator, but you don't know
Speaker 5: the denominator.
Speaker 4: Yeah, but in my yeah, go ahead, a lot more doing.
Speaker 5: This kind of stuff than you would think. There are,
Speaker 5: like doing these making these kinds of noises online than
Speaker 5: you would think.
Speaker 3: Well, I think that's why my suggestion, and it was
Speaker 3: made out of frustration with the loss of life and
Speaker 3: the a lot of those people who are injured New
Speaker 3: Orleans New Year's warning, they're gonna have they're gonna deal
Speaker 3: with those injuries for the rest of the life. I mean,
Speaker 3: it's it's more than you know, a pulled back muscle.
Speaker 3: A lot of those people were badly injured, and I
Speaker 3: just think that there are and I've never been to
Speaker 3: any of these dark sites, but I think I have
Speaker 3: a sense of what they're all about, and if average
Speaker 3: American citizens can access the dark websites, then I would
Speaker 3: think FBI agents or investigators of some level should be
Speaker 3: able to access those sites, find out who's on those sites,
Speaker 3: find out what people are saying on those sites, and
Speaker 3: try to figure out the difference between people who are
Speaker 3: there out of curiosity. Maybe some people are there because
Speaker 3: they're they're doing research, academic research, I get that. But
Speaker 3: there are other people down there, particularly this fellow who
Speaker 3: acted out on New Year's Morning, who pretty clearly became radicalized.
Speaker 3: I mean, ten years in the US military, everything seemed
Speaker 3: to be pretty squared away, and this guy ends up
Speaker 3: driving down Bourbon Street mowing people down. I'm willing to
Speaker 3: give the authority to agencies, you know. I know that
Speaker 3: those who give up privacy for security at the end
Speaker 3: will have neither. I know all of the the aphorisms,
Speaker 3: but I just want to I want to see. I
Speaker 3: think we're going to see more of this over time,
Speaker 3: and I'm hoping that more of these incidents can be prevented.
Speaker 3: Go ahead, and I didn't mean to interrupt.
Speaker 4: Go ahead, Yeah, I agree.
Speaker 5: I'm not against your your remedy. I'm just saying I
Speaker 5: think if we start doing that, there's a lot more
Speaker 5: people who are going to get caught up in the
Speaker 5: in the net than we might think. And I get
Speaker 5: sort of on a related thing. I wanted to respond
Speaker 5: to your last collar their Steve from what was different
Speaker 5: Brain Trade, who was talking about you know, if they
Speaker 5: come in and take your stuff. Yeah, I'm very sympathetic
Speaker 5: to his argument. And I do think, you know, if
Speaker 5: you read the Constitution, it's it's he's he's got the
Speaker 5: better of that argument. Except all that was done contemplating
Speaker 5: a world where most people exercise self restraint, and we
Speaker 5: are increasingly living in a country where people don't exercise
Speaker 5: self restraint. And you know, there's a whole I can't
Speaker 5: count how many times you see on YouTube or wherever. Yeah,
Speaker 5: these people who there's their fast food order is incorrect
Speaker 5: and it on fire.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 5: And I just think in a world like that, you know,
Speaker 5: I just think the authorities are going to be a
Speaker 5: lot more aggressive in in in reaching out than I
Speaker 5: wish they were, you know, But I think it's just
Speaker 5: gonna happen if if we live in a world where
Speaker 5: people are gonna and and you had a thing a
Speaker 5: few weeks or months ago. But there was a fender
Speaker 5: bender on kid Cod and didn't one guy get killed
Speaker 5: and the other guy's now facing murder charges.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that that was done. It's actually in Plymouth. And
Speaker 3: the guy got out and shot and then was rendering
Speaker 3: a life saving efforts of you know, ten seconds later literally.
Speaker 5: And there was one in Providence last week when there
Speaker 5: was a fender bender. Guy took mother, grabbed her out
Speaker 5: of her car, inverted her and like gave her the
Speaker 5: piles I saw that, yeah, advert into the pavement.
Speaker 3: Yeah. And and clearly that guy should should suffer the
Speaker 3: consequences of that. I mean, the woman looked like she
Speaker 3: weighed about one hundred and five pounds, soaking wet, and
Speaker 3: he looked like he was two hundred and fifty pounds.
Speaker 3: It was, you know, it was a mismatch of enormous proportions.
Speaker 3: Let's put it like that, right.
Speaker 5: But well, my point is we're just living in and
Speaker 5: I mean, I guess this would be my response to
Speaker 5: both you and Steve. We are living in a society
Speaker 5: that is increasingly violent, increasingly tolerant of law breaking or
Speaker 5: just law disregarding increasingly tolerant. This is where I probably
Speaker 5: disagree with Hardy of anti social behavior that is short
Speaker 5: of law breaking, which I don't like, and just increasingly
Speaker 5: tolerant of government incompetent incompetence. I mean, I think the
Speaker 5: story in southern California is not so much the fires,
Speaker 5: it's just government incompetence at every imaginable level.
Speaker 4: I think it was today.
Speaker 5: Yeah, Karen, Karen Bass said if you need, you know, assistance,
Speaker 5: you can reach us at you r L. Obviously that
Speaker 5: was like something somebody had put in her and they
Speaker 5: meant to put the correct website in before I get it.
Speaker 3: Well. Yeah, do you think that Karen Bass has ever
Speaker 3: actually utilized a computer? I'm sure never in her life.
Speaker 5: People older than Karen Bass who would not make that mistake.
Speaker 3: No, I understand that, but I'm sure she's had staff people. Hey,
Speaker 3: I'm so glad you called in. I appreciate it, ed,
Speaker 3: and I get you none of the wires, So we'll
Speaker 3: talk soon.
Speaker 5: I appreciate that call.
Speaker 3: Thank you much. You give me an idea for a
Speaker 3: couple of other shows. In the meantime, Harvey is always
Speaker 3: thank you, sir. I look forward to seeing you in
Speaker 3: early February. Looking forward to that that that morning. Okay,
Speaker 3: as do I thanks, Thanks Harvey, talk to you soon.
Speaker 3: If you're on the line, I'd like to stay there.
Speaker 3: Feel free. If you've called into late, I apologize because
Speaker 3: Harvey's is departing. We could talk about this for a
Speaker 3: little while into the next hour if you want, and
Speaker 3: if not. I want to talk about the Jimmy Carty
Speaker 3: Carter funeral today, which I thought was done very well,
Speaker 3: and I also want to talk about the interactions that
Speaker 3: I had with him as a reporter, and I suspect
Speaker 3: many of you probably had a moment up close and
Speaker 3: personal with Jimmy Carter, and i'd like to, you know,
Speaker 3: putting aside the politics of it and all of that,
Speaker 3: an incredibly decent man who lived a very full life
Speaker 3: and remain true to his values and was the victim
Speaker 3: I think of circumstances much beyond his control. We'll be
Speaker 3: back right after the Tentacle News on Nightside with Dan Ray.
Speaker 1: I'm telling you easy Boston News Radio.
Speaker 3: All right. So I want to thank Harvey Silverglad for
Speaker 3: joining us. Harvey is as fierce a defender of personal
Speaker 3: liberties and rights under the Constitution as anyone I know,
Speaker 3: and we had that conversation. It was New Year's night,
Speaker 3: actually it would have been a week ago, in which, yeah,
Speaker 3: well it would we could go last night, pardon me.
Speaker 3: And I just became very frustrated when all this evidence
Speaker 3: poured out that this guy who had engaged in this
Speaker 3: this slaughter on New Year's morning at about three point
Speaker 3: fifteen by driving down Bourbon Street and having mowed people down.
Speaker 3: I've been on Bourbon Street in New Orleans. I suspect
Speaker 3: many of you have been as well, And it just
Speaker 3: seemed to me that these websites, these dark websites, the
Speaker 3: FBI should know about them. They should see what Americans
Speaker 3: are visiting them, and it's open to the public that
Speaker 3: they don't need a search warrant. And then depending upon
Speaker 3: what they begin to suspect about individuals, they should be
Speaker 3: able to use their law enforcement experience to maybe isolate
Speaker 3: some of those who are there not just for the
Speaker 3: kick of going to one of these websites, but who
Speaker 3: actually seem to be in the process of getting radicalized,
Speaker 3: and maybe maybe spare the lives of some Americans or
Speaker 3: Americans to spend the rest of their lives with terrible injuries.
Speaker 3: I mean, the FBI had interviewed the Boston bombers up
Speaker 3: here before the bombing and everything was fine. And I
Speaker 3: think what happens is that politically there's a lot of
Speaker 3: pressure brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, and I
Speaker 3: think that a lot of the law enforcement agencies somehow
Speaker 3: become influence. We see that with the Boston Police Department
Speaker 3: at this point. I'm sure you saw the stories in
Speaker 3: the papers. The last couple of days with a number
Speaker 3: of serious detainers were not honored by the Boston Police
Speaker 3: and they basically have have set up a brick wall
Speaker 3: between them and Ice. Well that's going to change fairly soon.
Speaker 3: And I just think it's important to talk about this,
Speaker 3: and you can agree or disagree. And let's see what
Speaker 3: Jack and the Cape says. Jack's held over, so I
Speaker 3: assume he's looking to talk about what we talked with
Speaker 3: Harvey Silvic late about last hour. Jack next on NIGHTSAGA,
Speaker 3: right ahead.
Speaker 7: Thanks Dan for carrying the conversation. The only thing I
Speaker 7: want to interject, as far as the Louisiana and the
Speaker 7: Las Vegas thing, both didn't both of those individuals experience
Speaker 7: some kind of a marital loss.
Speaker 3: You know, I don't know. I do know that the
Speaker 3: guy in Colorado apparently, now, yeah, he was a Green
Speaker 3: Beret and shot himself in the head and then had
Speaker 3: had the wherewithal to blow up the car a very
Speaker 3: different situation than the guy down in Houston and that.
Speaker 5: Well.
Speaker 7: But but what I'm doing at here is the you know,
Speaker 7: you take emotional frustrations that we all experience, but you know,
Speaker 7: you really hit the red line with some of these
Speaker 7: marital situation's girlfriend emotional situations and you you know, and
Speaker 7: then you couple that with uh, these acts acts and terrorism.
Speaker 7: I really think that you know, that has to be
Speaker 7: examined in context.
Speaker 3: Well, well let's take him, let's take him, let's deal
Speaker 3: with them. Okay, the guy in Las Vegas, I don't
Speaker 3: know that you would characterize that as an active terrorism.
Speaker 3: I think that was an act of absolute lunacy and insanity,
Speaker 3: and that this guy, I don't know what he went
Speaker 3: through in the Green Beret. Apparently he was deployed a
Speaker 3: lot of places around the world. Obviously a lot of
Speaker 3: men and women have relationships that dissolved.
Speaker 7: I'm really referencing his immediate emotional environment. If you lose
Speaker 7: a loved one, a love, abby, divorce, adult whatever it
Speaker 7: traders an emotional response, and uh, I think you know what.
Speaker 3: Wait but hold on, wait, wait a sec hold on
Speaker 3: just for one second. Okay. First of all, there's a
Speaker 3: mountain of evidence that the guy in Houston was radicalized
Speaker 3: on an ISIS website, and that he's slowly but surely
Speaker 3: I guess he was a practicing Muslim, which had nothing
Speaker 3: to do with There are plenty of practicing Muslims in
Speaker 3: this country who are not UH terrorists and who are
Speaker 3: driving down Bourbon Street on New Year's New Year's morning
Speaker 3: killing people. That guy went through a metamorphos from being
Speaker 3: he was in the US military for ten years, right,
Speaker 3: and so I don't think he he had a metamorphois
Speaker 3: which was very different than what the guy in the
Speaker 3: tesla at Las Vegas. I have no idea what the
Speaker 3: guy in the tesla was trying to do.
Speaker 7: Uh.
Speaker 3: Maybe he wanted to make a criticism of of Trump
Speaker 3: UH and and his policies. He parked at the Trump
Speaker 3: hotel in it in a tesla. I have no idea.
Speaker 3: But he drove from Colorado, drove from Cold He had
Speaker 3: a break He had a breakdown with his wife. There's
Speaker 3: no nothing to suggest that the guy in Houston was
Speaker 3: motivated by by a divorce. I guess he's had two divorces.
Speaker 7: Well okay, well okay, but we're we're dealing with thee
Speaker 7: with a species, the human species, that has incredible emotional context.
Speaker 7: And I'm not I'm not justifying oralida, but uh, you know,
Speaker 7: we we live in an insanely uh emotionally energized So what.
Speaker 3: What's your solution?
Speaker 5: What? What?
Speaker 3: What is your solution? Person who goes through a divorce
Speaker 3: or an emotional breakup, somebody breaks up a relationship, we
Speaker 3: then have to do something with them. I'm simply I
Speaker 3: don't know.
Speaker 5: I don't think.
Speaker 3: Well, I think that there's thousands of people or who
Speaker 3: tonight will have a split breakup and and either of
Speaker 3: both of the parties will be crestfallen, and none of
Speaker 3: them are going to engage in any sort of terrorist activity.
Speaker 3: I don't think the guy in Las Vegas was engaging
Speaker 3: in terrorist activity. He was making some sort of a
Speaker 3: weird political statement by renting a rest a tesla, killing
Speaker 3: himself and blowing the car up in the proximity of
Speaker 3: a Trump hotel. The guy in Houston was clearly making
Speaker 3: He left notes, he left videotapes, he was he considered
Speaker 3: himself a soldier of isis.
Speaker 4: Okay?
Speaker 3: Different situation, Jack.
Speaker 5: All Right, I'm going to say not trying to fight you.
Speaker 3: I'm just I could sit here and say, yeah, no, Jack,
Speaker 3: you might be right, but I'm not going to insult you.
Speaker 3: I think that they're two very different situations. They both
Speaker 3: might have gone through some domestic discord or divorce, but
Speaker 3: so do millions of Americans every every month, every year.
Speaker 3: All Right, thanks Jack, Sorry to shoot down your theory.
Speaker 3: All right, we'll take a break week, go back. I
Speaker 3: want to talk about Jimmy Carter. I want to talk
Speaker 3: about some of my close and personal experiences with him.
Speaker 3: Very decent guy in my opinion, and a very moving
Speaker 3: ceremony today at the National Cathedral. So, if you've ever
Speaker 3: met Jimmy Carter, I'd love to get your reaction. I
Speaker 3: met him on several occasions, and every occasion he was
Speaker 3: easy to work with. I was a reporter, he was
Speaker 3: a candidate, then a candidate for president, a president and
Speaker 3: a former president.
Speaker 5: Uh.
Speaker 3: And I don't want to boy you with all of
Speaker 3: my stories. I want to be entertained. By Your Stories six, one, seven, two, five,
Speaker 3: four ten thirty six one seven, nine three one ten
Speaker 3: thirty Coming back on Nightside