Speaker 1: What's going on.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much for listening to this podcast. It
is heard live every day from noon to three on
WBT Radio and Charlotte. And if you want exclusive content
like invitations to events, the weekly live stream, my daily
show prep with all the links, become a patron, go
to dpeakclendershow 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. So
let's talk about what's going on with the law fair.
Speaker 1: What are we up to now?
Speaker 2: Seventy thousand tros temporary restraining orders something like that that
have been filed by left wing groups to try to
resist Donald Trump in everything and anything he's attempting to do.
And they're getting temporary restraining orders or injunctions from these
judges that they target the left. Judge shops, they forum shop,
they go out and try to find a judge. That's
why you keep seeing the same judges names popping up
in these cases.
Speaker 1: It's because it's.
Speaker 2: Intentional and lawyers understand this at every level, whether it's
you know, going in front of a judge for some
sort of criminal offense and you're trying to defend your client.
Speaker 1: You know, Oh, we don't want to go in front.
Speaker 2: Of that judge because they have a reputation of being
a hanging judge, right, so they forum shop and judge
shop as best they can. And when you're bringing these
types of lawsuits, it helps to go in front of
judges that have long records of donations and service to
left wing organizations because chances are they are going to
rule in an ideological fashion for you because you're a
leftist also. And that's what we have been seeing. I've
talked about this before, and it's not going to stop
until the US Supreme Court or ComRIS steps in.
Speaker 1: I don't know which one.
Speaker 2: I think I would I mean, I think I would
like both, but the Supreme Court and John Roberts, who
is so protective of the Supreme Court, you know, credibility
and the name of the court and all of this
and the perceptions. If he is going to actually defend
the US Supreme Court and the judiciary, then it seems
like they're going to have to lay down some rules.
They're going to have to hold some judges accountable in
a way that maybe we haven't seen before. But that
would be a response to what we haven't seen before,
which is the abuse of the judiciary. Because always keep
in mind you've got the left. When they do not
control the legislature, they do not control an executive branch,
they will use the courts to try to get things
done that they otherwise cannot do legislatively.
Speaker 1: That's why we're seeing what we're seeing.
Speaker 2: It's why you don't hear the left right now talk
about packing the US Supreme Court anymore. Funny how that
all just went away?
Speaker 1: By the way, did you.
Speaker 2: Happen to catch a couple of days ago? Kristen Cinema,
remember her, the former US Senator. She was a Democrat,
then became an independent, did not run for reelection, but
she crossed paths with the crosspaths she crossed her own party,
the Democrats, over the destruction of the Filibuster. She and
John Fetterman were the only two Democrats to oppose blowing
up the filibuster because what the Democrats wanted to blow
it up for was to pack the US Supreme Court.
And by the way, just for the lefties that listened,
and I know you do, packing the Supreme Court does
not mean appointing people to vacant seats on the Supreme Court.
That is not called packing. You can come up with
a different word if you like. For that, I would
say it's simple appointments. We already have a word for
it and a process. But that's not packing. Packing the
court is what FDR threatened to do when the Supreme
Court would not allow him to do what he wanted
to do, and so he said, I'll just add more
seats and then I'll fill those seats with people that
will rule in my favor. And so the US Supreme Court,
in order to protect the norms and preserve the makeup
of the court as it was with the seat number
what it was, they caved and they said, okay, fine,
I guess your expansion of the federal government into all
of these areas that the constitution says you can't be
involved in, I guess it is constitutional. So the threat
of packing the court achieved FDR's goal. And that's what
the Left was trying to do again when they did
not control the legislative or executive branch. So when they
got the Senate, they're like, we're going to go ahead
and pack the court. So this way we'll have in perpetuity.
And keep in mind also Charlie Kirk mentioned this the
other day also, which was had Donald Trump not one
in twenty sixteen, the Supreme Court would be would be
filled right now with lawyers in robes that agree with
what we're seeing these federal district court judges doing. They
would have no problem with this kind of activism, with
this kind of usurpation of presidential powers. That's what they're doing, Okay, John, Yeah, John,
Daniel Davidson, Actually no, this isn't Davidson. Sorry, he's a
writer at the Federalist. But this is Scott McKay quoting Daniel. Yeah,
quoting Davidson, and then expounding on Davidson's rejection of Roberts
and amy Cony Barrett from a couple of weeks ago
when they were presented with an opportunity to try to
rein in some of these federal district court judges and
they punted. Remember that, And what Scott McKay says is
the correct ruling would have been a sharp rebuke of
the district court on jurisdictional grounds and an unmistakable signal
that these restraining orders are all null and void and
it's time for the courts to stop granting them. That
was two weeks ago, and McKay says things have gotten
only worse.
Speaker 1: By the way.
Speaker 2: McKay's writing over at the American Spectator, he said, look
at trende' arawa. I think that's how you pronounce that,
by the way, a violent Venezuelan gang that has wrought
terror all over America since its members were allowed to
infiltrate the country, run guns and drugs, and inflict general
mayhem in our cities. It's been designated as a foreign
terrorist organization. As such, removing members of that gang illegally
in America is a matter of presidential prerogative. The friendly
government of l Salvador, which has prison space available for
hire at reasonable rates, has volunteered to house these undesirables
like Trend de Arragua. Accordingly, the Trump administration is now
flying planeloads of the TDA gangsters to El Salvador. By
the way, El Salvador's president began a crackdown on these
thugs and criminals and gangs, and everybody said, oh, you
can't do that. If you do that, it's gonna depress
our economy. They literally were making these arguments. And he
had a great response to this argument a couple of
months ago, and he told the story of a guy
who sells apples in the marketplace and may make five
dollars in the day. Right for long, hard work goes
and he picks the apples, and then he puts him
in a cart and he takes the cart to the
market and then he sells a couple of apples.
Speaker 1: He makes five dollars, but it's honest work. And then
on his.
Speaker 2: Way home he gets jumped by a bunch of criminals
who steals five dollars. What is the message that that
apple seller receives from this experience that it is better
and it is easier to just steal the five dollars
from somebody who does all the work. And when that
message is received by a larger population, you have a
breakdown in a civil society and you are left with
a gangster economy. I don't want to live in a
society like that. I suspect most of the leftists don't
want to live in a society like that. They somehow
think though that they will be immune from this kind
of thing. I don't know, or they think that their
political enemies those evil capitalists, they're the ones that are
doing it.
Speaker 1: No, or they're the useful idiots.
Speaker 2: The criminals are simply there to serve a purpose in
the short term, to destabilize, and then after the destabilization occurs,
then leftists sweep into power. Then they promise we'll get
rid of all the criminals, which they in fact had
released out onto the streets, and then they take control
and then they'll you know, round up some criminals or
make them leaders as in the Soviet Union, because that's
usually what happens in Marxist dictatorships. You end up with
you end up with the worst people that rise the
highest because it's an evil ideology, so the most evil
among you will rise the highest. So now you have
a judge named James Bosburg, Boisburg, bo Asburg, bo Asberg, whatever.
He's an Obama appointee. Because of course, this guy, you
may recall, he sprang ray Epps from legal sanctions, one
of the j six protesters that was literally calling for
people to storm the capitol, but somehow didn't face any
charges whatsoever. That guy ray Epps, that a lot of
people on the right believe is an informant and he
was a fed at the ear, either an informant or
a fed or both. I believe Boseburg was also the
same guy. He may have been the same lawyer that
what was Kevin Klin Smith from the movie A Fish
Called Wanda.
Speaker 1: I'm kidding. He wasn't an actor. He was the lawyer.
Speaker 2: That approved the wire tap on Carter Page changed the
documents or whatever that they sent over or got back
from the CIA when the CIA was like, oh yeah,
Carter Page a business guy. Yeah, he's one of our guys,
Like we talked to him when he comes back from Russia.
And client Smith changed that in order to submit the
false PIZA application so they could get the wire taps.
And Clin Smith got a slap on the wrist and
got his law license back after like a year or something.
Speaker 1: He's practicing again. I think this was the same judge.
Speaker 2: See again, not a coincidence that these judges always end
up in the news for these types of cases.
Speaker 1: Not in my opinion.
Speaker 2: 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 Ashville 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. Choose 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. A Cabins
Offashville Dot com and make memories that'll last a lifetime.
I have a message from Dave who wants to know
why I say program instead of program. Is it a
New York thing? It is not a New York thing.
But thanks for asking. Uh h, Now that's an old
that's an homage to the old spires and Krantz bit
that they would do program anyway. Um and uh. John says,
just for the record, Pete, whenever a radio talk show
host has gone for two consecutive days without advanced warning,
I just assume that they have been fired.
Speaker 1: That's a good.
Speaker 2: Assumption, man's assumption. But like that's the thing in today's
day and age. I'm on Twitter, and I would tell
you on Twitter, right you'd still see me posting and
that sort of thing.
Speaker 1: If I you know, every job as a shelf life.
Speaker 2: When this one comes to an end, and it will,
because every job does, I will be sure and let
everybody know that I am no longer on the air.
So like that's how that that's how that'll play out.
But I know, like talk radio audiences have PTSD on
this stuff.
Speaker 1: I understand.
Speaker 2: But I actually, in my defense, I believe I did
say I was not going to be here, thank you. Okay,
I'm getting two affirmative nods. I did say on the air,
I can't make you listen for the full three hours
every day.
Speaker 1: If I could, you know, I would. I would totally
do that.
Speaker 2: In alignment with my libertarian principles. I would strap you
down and put those things over your under your eyes
to keep them open for no reason. On the eye thing,
because you don't have to watch, but I would make
you listen to the podcast for three straight hours so
you would know these things so you could be informed.
It's for your own good, all right. I am now
recently an expert on the seventeen ninety eight Alien Enemies Act.
I don't know if you knew this about me, but
it is. I have become an expert on this Act
because I read it. But I've read no of the
none of the case law about it and all of
the rulings and all that, because honestly, why bother Because
in another forty eight hours or something, I'm gonna have
to be an expert in something else.
Speaker 1: Okay, So.
Speaker 2: Here's what the Alien Enemies Act states. Whenever there is
a declared war between the United States and any foreign
nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted,
or threatened against the territory of the United States by
any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public
proclamation of the event. All natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects
of the hostile nation or government, being of the age
of fourteen years and upward, who shall be within the
United States and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to
be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies. And
so what this comes down to, as I understand it,
is a disagreement I'm being charitable, a disagreement over what
this means. Do you need an actual declaration of war?
And the Trump administration is saying no. When you just
read it, it says, whenever there is a declared war
between the US and a foreign nation or government, COMMA
or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrate, attempted, or
threatened against US by any foreign nation or government, and
the President makes public proclamation of the event. Okay, so
they're saying there didn't have to be a declaration of
war right by Congress, They could say the president makes
the proclamation. They've been designated trendy Aragua designated as a
foreign terrorist organization. This is an invasion. The Trump administration
has argued also that this was done that the Trende
Aragua members were sent here by the government of Venezuela, which,
by the way, that's not a new tactic. Cuba did
it to us something about Kami's opening their jails and
sending all of the criminals into America, So this is
not a new strategy. And what the left is saying
is that the judge, this one judge should be able
to figure out if any of these people have been
denied any kind of due process rights before being shipped out,
and then there's no declaration of war.
Speaker 1: Hence this shouldn't control all right, If you're listening to.
Speaker 2: 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.
Speaker 1: The blind spot.
Speaker 2: Feature shows you which stories get ignored by the left
and the right. See for yourself check dot ground 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. You probably
are hearing this word often now in the news judiciable
or judiciable. I don't know what the correct pronunciation is.
I have never allowed that to stop me before, so
I'm going to pronounce it justiciable. In other words, is
it appropriate, allowable, legal constitutional for the court to hear
a case about the issue. Is it something that the
court should be determining. So that's sort of the first
thing that they have to go through in order to
arrive at a conclusion for the lawsuits removing criminal illegal
aliens from America, by the way, an action that is
supported by the vast majority of Americans, including a majority
of Democrats. Removing criminal, violent offenders who are not citizens
is a popular thing to do, but the left always
looking for the issue that the majority of Americans oppose.
A jump on this one pounce, I might say, c
is upon the issue, if you will. So this is
Ed Morrissey at hotair dot com. I read a little
bit of this piece in the last hour.
Speaker 1: He says the.
Speaker 2: Words from the seventeen ninety eight law, the word invasion
does not directly involve a foreign nation or government, nor
as Congress declared war on any of the countries in
the Western Hemisphere. So one could argue that even when
it says you know or an invasion, that that remains
dependent on a state of war, and that is the
crux of the decision made by the federal judge in
this case, James Bosbeck boasb Eck Boas bec Bosbeck. Trump, however,
did cite involvement by Venezuela's government in the trende or
Agua's predatory incursion in a declaration that was signed on
Friday and released Saturday morning, Trump said, I find and
declare that TDA is perpetrating, attempting, and threatening an invasion
or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States.
TDA is undertaking hostile actions and conducting irregular warfare against
the territory of the United States, both directly and at
the direction clandestine or otherwise so secret or otherwise of
the Maduro regime in Venezuela. I make these findings using
the full extent of my authority to conduct the nation's
foreign affairs under the Constitution.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: And so now you've got this really weird development where
the judge, a federal district judge, is saying, well, I
want to know. I want to know how you made
these determinations. I have top secret clearance, I can read
these classified things.
Speaker 1: I'm a judge.
Speaker 3: We can do this.
Speaker 1: I can do this.
Speaker 2: Why would you need to do this? Why would you
need Why would a judge need to be looking over
the shoulder of the president when he is engaged in
what amounts to, in my opinion, is foreign policy. This
is foreign policy. So now we got judges that are
going to have to sign off on any foreign policy
decision of a president. I'm just kidding now, not any president,
just the Republican ones. You guys are not going to
like the rules when they are applied to you. So theoretically, yes,
there are arguments in both directions. Morrisey says in terms
of a political reality, though, why bother with this? Why
challenge this? If you're the lefties, why are you doing this?
In what world would it be an abuse of executive
authority to deport illegal aliens affiliated with an international cartel
that's associated with murder, drugs, and human trafficking? And in
what world would it be a good idea to oppose
their removal? Maybe it sells in academia, but even there,
you got to imagine some saner voices might be questioning
why the left and the Democrats are putting themselves in
a position to oppose removals of crime syndicate members that
have created all sorts of misery in America? How does
anybody imagine? This looks to ninety percent of voters who
wonder why they were allowed to come into the country
in the first place. By deporting illegal alien criminals is
literally the most popular position that Trump has put in place.
Yet here are Democrats and progressive activists championing these murderers
and pimps that are in the country illegally, and then
they wonder why polls show that their favorability keeps going
lower and lower and lower. This comes in connection with
the left's push to make Makumud Khalil into a free
speech caused celeb. Khalil emigrated to the US legally, but
he has organized protest at Columbia University, which would be
fine if protests were all he was organizing, but he
also disseminates propaganda from HAMAS, which is also a terrorist
organization listed as such by the State Department, listed as
such since nineteen ninety seven. He helped organize the violence
seizure of at least one building at Columbia University and
included the false imprisonment of two custodians that were on
duty at the time. Those are crimes, it's speech. Those
are crimes, and we are under no obligation to allow
people into the country or to allow them to stay
when they commit such crimes.
Speaker 1: So you got this Judge Boseburg.
Speaker 2: He's overseeing a case that was brought by the ACLU
and something called Democracy Forward. This is a Lawfair entity
that was created by Mark Elias, Right, the nefarious Trump
Russia hoaxmonger, the guy who sued North Carolina about a
billion times over redistricting maps. Right, this guy is at
the center of this Lawfair. And so this judge ordered
a halt to the deportations after the planes had left
US airspace and he literally told them turn the planes around.
The hubris of this judge, this lawyer with a wardrobe change.
You're not the president. You're not the president. Like Stephen Miller,
one of the advisors to Trump, was on CNN, he
made the point, does the judge know how much fuel
is in that plane? Does the judge know how many
hours those pilots had, because there are rules about how
many hours you can fly. This judge had no idea
before he issued that order. And besides, they waited until
the plane or the plane had taken off before the
written order came out. And so that's what the Trump
administration is arguing that they're not in violation because the
written order wasn't put out, but the judge had said it,
but it wasn't written. And so in the interim before
the order got typed up, that's when one of the
planes left and there were other flights that did not
leave right, And the timeline on this matters because I
think this is important. Margo Cleveland, she's a senior legal
correspondent at the Federalist. She's also a lawyer for the NCLA,
and she was a former Seventh Circuit law clerk for
like twenty five years. And she makes this point that
all of these temporary restraining orders, all the lawsuits, right,
this is part of it. An unprecedented effort. We have
never seen this before. And she says the administration has
faced an avalanche of unconstitutional court orders from these individual
federal judges because most of these things are getting overturned,
proving that the judges were wrong to try to throw
the sand in the gears. So they were wrong, and
they keep getting it wrong, and they keep getting these
things things wrong in one direction. It's not a coincidence,
all right. So spring is here a time of renewal
and celebrations. You've got graduations, weddings, anniversaries and especial 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 Midas Hilt, just off four eighty five mail orders
are accepted to get all the details that create a
video dot com. All right, let me jump over here
and get Pete on the program. Hello Pete, great name,
what's going on?
Speaker 3: Hey Pete? I guess the first principal of democrats is
I believe they're criminally insane. But beyond that, I think
there may be two reasons for this, you know, bringing
up this case on the illegal immigrants that are criminals.
Pardon criminals. By the way, right finger of criminals first
is kind of throws stuff up against the wall, let's
see if anything sticks. I think that's the first first thing.
The second more importantly, I think if somehow, if somehow,
Trump doesn't it is unable to do this. He can't
even deport hardened criminals better illegal so you know, we
got you know, his whole thing is it's going to
go beyond the hardened criminals that are going to be deported.
So this will be the first block. And I think
each step of the way they'll probably try to you know,
clip them, to be honest with it. But yeah, that's
kind of my theory on it.
Speaker 2: So I wrote something when I was reading through one
of these, This was an editorial from the Washington Examiner,
that paralysis is the purpose. Right, to paralyze the executive branch,
that's the point, and to slow it down, throw sand
in the gears long enough to outlast Trump's presidency. But
what the Trump administration, I think is toue go. But
what Trump's administration is doing is trying to build the
legal framework for what comes later. To Pete's point about
all other deportations. This goes to what Margot Cleveland was writing.
She says, more temporary restraining orders and the injunctions have
been issued against the Trump administration in two months than
in four years of Joe Biden. And while appeals process
is still ongoing for many of these, appellate courts have
already stayed. In other words, they've stopped several orders.
Speaker 1: Showing.
Speaker 2: That these were unconstitutional actions by the judges. Supreme Court
stayed one judge ordering the payment of two billion dollars
in thirty six hours and told judges to be more specific.
Three appellate judges said that Trump likely would prevail on
the firing of special counsel Hampton Dellinger and ruled that
he remained out not to be reinstated, so a lower
judge lost on that one. Another appellate court stayed in
order of one judge, undoing Trump's dei policies. Another judge
reversed as tro and refused to grant an injunction on
putting USAID workers on leave. Many other injunctions will be
overturned on appeal because lower courts lack juris diction to
decide employment and grants or army policy. The breadth of
overreach by lower courts, you know, a single judge, a
district court injunction interfering with Trump's Article two power cannot
be overstated. And so that's what the Trump administration is doing.
Every time. The administration has worked to find a way
to read the order that they get so they can
comply with the order and not pit Article two, which
is the executive branch right against Article three, the judicial branch.
So they've they've been trying to avoid this kind of
induced constitutional crisis. He did that in cases reading exceptions
the court allowed for otherwise terminating funding. He did that
in the Alien Enemies Act case two. Right, they did
not turn the plans around, to be true, but that's
not saying they were saying you can you cannot order
me to do that, but that you didn't order me
to do that, because only the minute order, the written
order is binding. Right, So they're making the case that
you couldn't. You didn't have the right to tell me
to do that. But even if you did, it wasn't
the correct way to do it. Right, So they keep
they keep leaving room here to avoid the very constitutional
crisis that the left is egging on. They're trying to induce.
Speaker 1: All right, that'll do it for this episode. Thank you
so much for listening.
Speaker 2: 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 dpetekaalanershow dot com. Again,
thank you so much for listening, and don't break anything
while I'm gone.