Speaker 1: The Channel nine first one to other hole cast today
Speaker 1: mostly excited to be windy though seven pm and after
Speaker 1: looking for some spotty showers, today's ygh forty two. That
Speaker 1: spotty shower turn into a wintery mix overnight. It's now
Speaker 1: possible it's going down to eighteen degrees Tomorrow's high twenty
Speaker 1: six because it's going to be greezy under sunny skys.
Speaker 1: It's going to feel more like fifteen overnight. Another cold
Speaker 1: night sixteen degrees, clear skies, sunny on Friday with aya
Speaker 1: thirty four twenty seven degrees. Right now, it's about PERCD
Speaker 1: talk station Chuck Ingram Tier traffor.
Speaker 2: I'm the u S Help Traffic Center you see help
Speaker 2: Weight Boss center offers comprehensive OBECD care and advanced surgical
Speaker 2: expertise called five to one three nine three nine two
Speaker 2: two sixty three. That's nine three nine twenty two sixty three.
Speaker 2: Cruise continue to work with the wreck East found two
Speaker 2: seventy five at seventy five in Earlwaninger left plane's blocked
Speaker 2: off traffic back some Miniova Pike, then northbound seventy five
Speaker 2: slows from there into the cut. Southbound seventy five continues
Speaker 2: slow in and out of Lachlan in South seventy one.
Speaker 2: You're offing on the brakes from two seventy five down
Speaker 2: to Red Bank. This is Santa's list Day. That is
Speaker 2: the day where everyone finds out if they're on the
Speaker 2: naddy or the nice list. A guest coming up next,
Speaker 2: I'm pretty sure he's on the nice list. The Judge's next,
Speaker 2: Chuck Ingram on fifty five krc DE talk station.
Speaker 1: Now, who can argue with that? Eight thirty and a
Speaker 1: very happy Wednesday reminder, since I know so many people
Speaker 1: are tuned in right now because it's the appointment listening
Speaker 1: with Judge enital Polatano. It's listener lunch day, last day
Speaker 1: or last lunch of the year. We'll be at price
Speaker 1: deal Chili. Judge of Politano will not he is. I'm
Speaker 1: looking at him right now on zoom call. Welcome back here, Honor.
Speaker 1: You know how much I look forward to this. It
Speaker 1: looks like you're at a different venue today.
Speaker 3: I am. I am. I'm in my office in New
Speaker 3: York City, where I will be for the next I
Speaker 3: don't know how long, slightly different schedules. You see me
Speaker 3: instead of follow shirt and unshaven with a coat and
Speaker 3: tie and clean shaven.
Speaker 1: Look, you're looking great. I'm sure you've got a whole
Speaker 1: lot on your plate, as you typically do. And we'll
Speaker 1: find out what's going on with judging freedom coming up
Speaker 1: at the end of the segment, as we always do.
Speaker 1: But this one, I've been calling all morning an upcoming
Speaker 1: constitutional law lesson. We're going to be We're going to
Speaker 1: be engaged in a deeper die because when I read
Speaker 1: the topic, or when I read your columns heading, you
Speaker 1: captured the column three cheers for Hunter's pardon, and I
Speaker 1: started worrying, because you know, every once in a while
Speaker 1: my listener's perspectives on politics and life will come into
Speaker 1: a measure of disagreement with the judge, like I can't
Speaker 1: believe he said that. And I'll defend you all day long.
Speaker 1: I'll defend your position even if I disagree with it,
Speaker 1: because we engage in a thoughtful conversation. And I wasn't
Speaker 1: expecting you to back up to where you went when
Speaker 1: I was starting to read the column, and the point
Speaker 1: being fundamentally the original point that you make regularly one
Speaker 1: that the foundation, the highest law of the land in
Speaker 1: our country is the Constitution, and it limits the size
Speaker 1: and scope of government, so much so that Hunter Biden
Speaker 1: shouldn't even have been charged into these because they don't
Speaker 1: have the authority for the various charges like, for example,
Speaker 1: the Second Amendment. You shouldn't have to fill out a
Speaker 1: form to have your exercise your Second Amendment. So go ahead,
Speaker 1: I mean you please.
Speaker 3: So there's two charges here, I mean, first of all,
Speaker 3: and no one can really analyze what's going on in
Speaker 3: Joe Biden's brain. I don't know if he knows what's
Speaker 3: going on fair enough in his brain. This is obviously
Speaker 3: Joe Biden, the father over Joe Biden, the institutionalist who
Speaker 3: were railed against the concept of pardons, who railed against
Speaker 3: Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon. There are, of course,
Speaker 3: just by way of background, two classes of pardons, one
Speaker 3: for a specific crime, and one a broad form for
Speaker 3: all crimes that you might have committed, whether charged or uncharged,
Speaker 3: whether known or unknown. That's the pardon that Ford gave
Speaker 3: to Nixon, That's the pardon that Joe gave to Hunter.
Speaker 3: But the crimes for which he was prosecuted, you and
Speaker 3: I would not have been prosecuted for them. The tax
Speaker 3: crime he actually paid the taxes with interest and with penalty,
Speaker 3: and they still prosecuted him because of pressure the Republicans
Speaker 3: put on the Justice Department the gun crime. Under the
Speaker 3: Supreme Court's ruling, the current gun laws are supposed to
Speaker 3: reflect what they were in seventeen ninety one when the
Speaker 3: Second Amendment was adopted. In seventeen ninety one, you could
Speaker 3: smoke all the hemp you wanted and still carry a
Speaker 3: sidearm proof George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were millionaires by
Speaker 3: selling hemp.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think he can't make this upright.
Speaker 1: No, and at some point and maybe we can just
Speaker 1: look at that one specific issue, the FFL form you
Speaker 1: have to fill out, and also the barrel length restriction rules.
Speaker 1: You know, you have to have a special license for
Speaker 1: short barreled rifles and all these layers of laws. I
Speaker 1: am wondering whether now we have with the current you know,
Speaker 1: the Brewin decision and the others, if we have this
Speaker 1: opportunity now for someone, for example, Hunter of Biden could
Speaker 1: have defended himself and said, no, this FFL nonsense, even
Speaker 1: though I was stoned out of my mind and I
Speaker 1: lied on the form. This FFL nonsense is unconstitutional on
Speaker 1: its face because none of it existed at the time
Speaker 1: the Second Amendment was acknowledged by the Bill of Rights,
Speaker 1: and ergo, you can't put that kind of impediment in
Speaker 1: front of me when I'm trying to exercise my Second
Speaker 1: Amendment rights.
Speaker 3: So the standard definitions of crime, you know this, I
Speaker 3: know this, many of your listeners probably do, has three requirements.
Speaker 3: One that the crime is promulgated by a legitimate authority
Speaker 3: that has the authority to make the event a crime.
Speaker 3: Two that there was harm. Three that there was a victim.
Speaker 3: There was no harm here. The gun that he bought,
Speaker 3: he had his girlfriend throw away in a dumpster before
Speaker 3: it was ever even fired. There was no victim here.
Speaker 3: I suppose the government would claim it was a victim
Speaker 3: because he lied to the government, But the government can't
Speaker 3: show that it was harmed by its victimhood. And then
Speaker 3: we get back to where we started, Brian, does the
Speaker 3: Congress have the authority to make these things a crime?
Speaker 3: This will scandalize the public. What I'm about to say.
Speaker 3: You know this, and lawyers know this, and students of
Speaker 3: the Constitution know this. The Constitution authorizes just two crimes,
Speaker 3: debasing the money supply, you know, putting out a coin
Speaker 3: that's half gold and half pewter and claiming it's all
Speaker 3: gold and getting the full face value for it, debasing
Speaker 3: the money supply, and then that coin is out in
Speaker 3: the money supply. And treason, which is defined in the
Speaker 3: Constitution as giving aid and comfort to the country's enemies
Speaker 3: or waging war against against the States. How many crimes
Speaker 3: has Congress created five thousand, one and ninety nine and
Speaker 3: only two of them are authorized by the Constitution.
Speaker 1: And that's why I said we were going to law
Speaker 1: school today, because you know, a lot of people said, well, listen,
Speaker 1: anybody else on the planet, we would be prosecuted if
Speaker 1: we had that many suspicious activity reports on our multiple
Speaker 1: bank accounts with money flowing three the inflowing from from
Speaker 1: foreign governments into our own personal hands. They would have
Speaker 1: investigated us had we done something like that. They wouldn't
Speaker 1: have slow walked the IRS investigation to the point where
Speaker 1: they let the Statute of limitations run. They'd have been
Speaker 1: all over us like white on rises. My dad used
Speaker 1: to say, but to your point, there are five ninety
Speaker 1: nine federal crimes on the books now, only two of
Speaker 1: which really are legitimate under the limitations of the Constitution,
Speaker 1: the balance are in the hands of the states. The states,
Speaker 1: as you acknowledge in point out in your historical review,
Speaker 1: the in the column, would be responsible for prosecuting anyone
Speaker 1: who violated the law.
Speaker 3: Correct like the Whiskey Rebellion, where a bunch of farmers
Speaker 3: in western Pennsylvania in seventeen ninety one to two three
Speaker 3: and four refused to pay an exercise tax on whiskey
Speaker 3: because they needed to sell the whiskey to stay alive
Speaker 3: and operate their farms, and they resisted the tax collector
Speaker 3: with violence. They were prosecuted in a Pennsylvania state court.
Speaker 3: Two of them were prosecuted for treason. How can failure
Speaker 3: to pay a tax be treason? Well, they persuaded a
Speaker 3: federal judge that using violence against the federal tax collector
Speaker 3: was the moral equivalent of treason. They were convicted and
Speaker 3: George Washington pardoned them in the first pardons presidential pardons
Speaker 3: in American history. Now there was a downside to this
Speaker 3: to Joe not to Hunter. Last week. If Hunter was
Speaker 3: dragged before the House Oversight Committee and sworn to tell
Speaker 3: the truth and said, and they asked him, did you
Speaker 3: funnel money to your father from Barisma when he was
Speaker 3: Vice president of the United States. Answer. I refusually declined
Speaker 3: to answer on the grounds to the Fifth Amendment right.
Speaker 3: To ask him that question tomorrow he has to answer.
Speaker 3: He has no Fifth Amendment right. By accepting the pardon,
Speaker 3: he gave up his Fifth Amendment rights.
Speaker 1: And ergo, he could be a witness in some future
Speaker 1: prosecution related to some criminal activity on a federal level.
Speaker 1: Because this pardon only absolves him of federal crimes state crimes,
Speaker 1: it does not involve ergo, he could be still criminally
Speaker 1: prosecuted in a state had he done something during this
Speaker 1: window of time.
Speaker 3: I don't know. Go ahead testimony, of course, could also
Speaker 3: be used to embarrass humiliate the father. It's too late
Speaker 3: to prosecute the father. Let's say that Joe was bribed
Speaker 3: just hypothetically when he was vice president. The statute of
Speaker 3: limitations is five years, so it's too late to prosecute him.
Speaker 3: It's not too late to impeach him even after he
Speaker 3: leaves office, and of course it's never too late to
Speaker 3: tarnish his legacy. But his own Justice Department said, he's
Speaker 3: a dottering old man and he can't put him in
Speaker 3: the defense.
Speaker 1: Chair, and given his age and his obvious health issues,
Speaker 1: it could be that, you know, God rest his soul.
Speaker 1: Joe Biden's not around for a long time. Hunter Biden
Speaker 1: may very well find himself in need of money, and
Speaker 1: Ergo could write memoirs and expose everybody and everything that's
Speaker 1: gone on in the name of making literally millions of
Speaker 1: dollars correct.
Speaker 3: Correct. Most of the people that I interact with are
Speaker 3: furious about the pardon because they hate the father and
Speaker 3: they hate the son, and they think that the father
Speaker 3: it's a crook, and he helped the son get away
Speaker 3: with being a crook. But all of that is a
Speaker 3: legitimate opinion that is widely held. My analysis is based
Speaker 3: upon what I suggest and argue is a prudent reading
Speaker 3: of the Constitution, a Madisonian reading of the Constitution, which
Speaker 3: says the Constitution chains down the federal government. Congress can't
Speaker 3: give itself the power to enact laws that the Constitution
Speaker 3: doesn't authorize it to an act.
Speaker 1: Well, I can only wait for the day when someone
Speaker 1: can raise these arguments, have standing to raise them, raise
Speaker 1: them in a federal court, and maybe make it up
Speaker 1: to the Supreme Court, who would say, you know what,
Speaker 1: after two hundred and fifty years, You're right, this is
Speaker 1: gonna stop real quick. I just got to read this
Speaker 1: line of the judge who is dismissing the uh. I
Speaker 1: believe it's the tax case. And apparently the pardon wasn't
Speaker 1: properly filed. So he made a point about the appropriate
Speaker 1: nature of the filing. You know how courts aren't judges
Speaker 1: are with eyes properly being dot and teas cross. So yes,
Speaker 1: I'm going to dismiss it when it's properly filed with me.
Speaker 1: But he had this today, had this to say, and
Speaker 1: I thought it was rather funny something for the following discussion.
Speaker 1: The court assumes the pardon is effective and we'll dispose
Speaker 1: of the case. The Supreme Court long has recognized that,
Speaker 1: notwithstanding it's nearly unlimited nature, the pardon power extends only
Speaker 1: to past offenses, which to me sounded like this sort
Speaker 1: of perception that Hunter Biden was going to go back
Speaker 1: to criminal activity on a going forward basis.
Speaker 3: Right, imagine if you could pardon someone into the future.
Speaker 1: My god, judge edit of Politano, I always love our conversations.
Speaker 1: Thanks for taking everybody to law school today and reminding
Speaker 1: us that the Constitution is a limiting document. Enjoy yourself
Speaker 1: in New York, if that's possible, and have a wonderful week,
Speaker 1: and I'll look forward to next one day, Wednesday, and
Speaker 1: another great conversation with you, sir.
Speaker 3: Right right back at you, Colonel Douglas McGregor. Yeah, on
Speaker 3: Judging Freedom today. What's going on in South Korea? And
Speaker 3: why is Joe Biden continuing to extend the war in
Speaker 3: Ukraine to dump it into Donald Trump's lap.
Speaker 1: I think you're right on that one, sir. Can't make
Speaker 1: heads or tail out of that debacle. We're looking forward
Speaker 1: to checking out your podcast, Judging Freedom. Search for it
Speaker 1: where you find your podcast, and tune in every Wednesday
Speaker 1: at eight thirty for the Judge. Here in the fifty
Speaker 1: five KRS Morning Show, Love you my friend.
Speaker 3: Back at you, Brian, Thank you.
Speaker 1: It's a forty two here fifty five KRC, the talk
Speaker 1: stations stick around, got a little more talk about right back.
Speaker 3: Fifty five KRC dot com. Hey, it's the snee And
Speaker 3: for the