Speaker 1: Clouds, isolated showers eighty one. That's today over nineteen to
Speaker 1: sixty seven with a few clowns. Tomorrow eighty eight to
Speaker 1: high isolated afternoon showers and partly cloudy skies down to
Speaker 1: seventy over night with a few clouds, partly sunny with yes,
Speaker 1: a chance of showers of storms as well on Friday
Speaker 1: eighty six for the high end seventy four.
Speaker 2: Right now, let's see what Chuck has on traffic from
Speaker 2: the UCL Traffic Center.
Speaker 3: Nearly sixty percent of Americans waiting on an organ transplanterer
Speaker 3: from multicultural communities give the Gift of life. Sign up
Speaker 3: today to be an organ donor. A couple of wrecks
Speaker 3: in the clean up stages westbound on the Reagan Highway
Speaker 3: near Ridge Road that has the right lane block traffic
Speaker 3: back towards playing Field and a wreck on seven forty
Speaker 3: seven before you get to Milligan. Southbound seventy five continues
Speaker 3: slow through Wachman. Same for northbound seventy five out of
Speaker 3: Erlinger into town for an extra ten. Coming up next
Speaker 3: to guests who is just finished all who ex floor exercises,
Speaker 3: and it looks like yes, indeed, our next guest is
Speaker 3: going to take the goal for political commentary. Here comes
Speaker 3: the judge Chuck Ingram on fifty five k or see
Speaker 3: the talk station, Hey.
Speaker 1: Thirty three fiftybout karsee talk station. Of course, Chuck actually
Speaker 1: got a right on that one. Welcome back your honor,
Speaker 1: Judge Ennapaul Tane. When the hels of Congressman Messy the best
Speaker 1: one to two punching radio is always like to remind folks,
Speaker 1: but everybody knows that.
Speaker 4: Well, Thank you, Brian, and good morning, and thank you Chuck.
Speaker 4: The gold for political commentary is for my predecessor as
Speaker 4: a guest here, Boy, am I riveted when the two
Speaker 4: of you speak to each other. And of course I've
Speaker 4: voluntarily kept my mic on mute because it's Congressman Massy segment.
Speaker 2: It's not mine. One of these days we'll do the
Speaker 2: joint one, Yes we will.
Speaker 4: The thing he says is fascinating and quite frankly courageous
Speaker 4: because there are very few members of Congress. There are
Speaker 4: no members of Congress as devoted to preserve and protecting
Speaker 4: and defending the Constitution as Congressman Thomas Massey.
Speaker 1: Ay men to that, and of course you know it's
Speaker 1: a wonderful segue to your column which comes out tonight,
Speaker 1: Colleague Schik Muhammad and the problem of torture. We have
Speaker 1: talked about this issue before, but your column does a
Speaker 1: wonderful job and just showing how fast and loose people
Speaker 1: are willing to be when it comes to just eat.
Speaker 1: They're bad people. I'm not gonna argue these guys in
Speaker 1: Gitmo are are are angels and aren't worthy of some
Speaker 1: kind of punishment. But you got to go through the
Speaker 1: got to go through due process. But they have gone
Speaker 1: through twists and contortions, you know, from the torture that
Speaker 1: you we've we've talked about many times, to the venue situation.
Speaker 2: You know, it's it's it's expedient.
Speaker 1: It's just ignoring the law for the purpose of getting
Speaker 1: a result you want without going through the appropriate channels.
Speaker 4: And if they have gone through the appropriate channels, if
Speaker 4: George W. Bush had not listened to Alberto Gonzalez, his
Speaker 4: his then White House counsel and eventually as Attorney General
Speaker 4: and same person that's trying to get to bomb Iran today,
Speaker 4: Senator Lindsey Graham, If George W.
Speaker 2: Bush had not listened to them.
Speaker 4: And allowed these creeps to be tried in federal court
Speaker 4: where the crimes were committed. That would be Alexandria, Virginia,
Speaker 4: the Pentagon, New York City, Manhattan for the World Trade Towers,
Speaker 4: and I don't know where the venue is for Shanksburg, Pennsylvania,
Speaker 4: but they go have consolidated them all in one. The
Speaker 4: trials would have been over by now, no torture admitted
Speaker 4: in the federal courts, plenty of other evidence of their guilt.
Speaker 4: They would have been tried, convicted, and either executed or
Speaker 4: sentenced to Florence, Colorado, where al Chapo and people of
Speaker 4: that ilk are. But instead they created this military tribunal
Speaker 4: system because they wanted quick, rough justice quick.
Speaker 2: They've been waiting for.
Speaker 4: Their trials since two thousand and six, that's eighteen years ago.
Speaker 4: Now on the Verge trial, the government, the government says,
Speaker 4: we got to talk settlement. We can't try this case.
Speaker 4: Our lawyers can't defend torture. The CIA will go ballistic
Speaker 4: if all this stuff comes out. We've got to settle
Speaker 4: this case. They agree on a settlement, The defendants agree,
Speaker 4: the prosecution agrees, the judge accepts the terms of the settlement,
Speaker 4: and then the prosecution, in the form of Secretary of
Speaker 4: defense Austin, not a lawyer and probably not familiar with
Speaker 4: all the legal problems in the case that I've outlined
Speaker 4: in my article, says we don't agree now under the
Speaker 4: federal rules. As you know, once the court accepts the
Speaker 4: guilty plea, that's it. Neither party can change their minds.
Speaker 4: So I don't know what's going to happen next. Either
Speaker 4: the guilty plea will be accepted over Secretary Austin's objection,
Speaker 4: or we're going to have a trial that's going to
Speaker 4: expose the worst behavior of the federal government in the
Speaker 4: past twenty five years.
Speaker 1: And there's the first thing I thought of when the
Speaker 1: plea agreement was reached, was you, because of the points
Speaker 1: you've made before, torture is not allowed. You can't torture
Speaker 1: some many exact confession out of him. That torture is
Speaker 1: going to be thrown out. It would obviously have an
Speaker 1: impact on a potential outcome from a jury who would
Speaker 1: hear the evidence of torture. We would be made to
Speaker 1: look bad, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And the
Speaker 1: other component of this, the retraction of the endeavor to
Speaker 1: retract the plea agreement seemed to come on the heels
Speaker 1: of people's demanding that this guy be put to death. Now,
Speaker 1: I'm not a fan of the death penalty because if
Speaker 1: a state can take away life, I worry about that
Speaker 1: because the state screws up all the time. I don't
Speaker 1: want the life and death decisions being in the hand
Speaker 1: of a state, which regularly lies to us sometimes and
Speaker 1: over the history of our country, is quite often put
Speaker 1: up liars on the stand and corrupt prosecutors to present
Speaker 1: evidence that isn't there, or withhold evidence from defendants that
Speaker 1: might be exculpatory. We've heard that story before. It is
Speaker 1: written in the law.
Speaker 2: So that's me.
Speaker 1: But this demand for the death penalty when the guys
Speaker 1: agreed that he would just spend life in prison, what
Speaker 1: I mean, what more could you hope to do with
Speaker 1: the guy? You know?
Speaker 4: You know, I agree with you. I understand the demand
Speaker 4: for the death penalty. I'm against the death penalty. If
Speaker 4: the government derives its powers from the consent of the government,
Speaker 4: we don't have the authority to execute people that are
Speaker 4: found guilty of crimes, and we can't therefore delegate that
Speaker 4: power to the government. That's a philosophical argument. I understand
Speaker 4: people who say, my God, you commit a murder in
Speaker 4: cold blood in the streets, in a city, in a
Speaker 4: state that has the death penalty, you can be executed.
Speaker 4: These people killed three thousand people in them are not
Speaker 4: going to execute them. Blame Lindsey Graham. Blame the people
Speaker 4: that concocted this torture. Blame the people that prohibited the
Speaker 4: removal of these defendants from Guantanoa Bay for any reason,
Speaker 4: for trial, for sentence, or for execution.
Speaker 2: Isn't that absurd that.
Speaker 4: The Congress did that because Barack Obama threatened to remove
Speaker 4: them under cover of darkness to the MCC the Metropolitan
Speaker 4: Correstionalist Center in New York and dyte them, charge them
Speaker 4: and try them there.
Speaker 2: And the Republicans want reserves.
Speaker 4: Oh, they're too dangerous to be put in a jail
Speaker 4: outside of Gitmo.
Speaker 2: There's three of them. There are one hundred people that
Speaker 2: run the jail. It costs five hundred and forty.
Speaker 1: Million a year.
Speaker 2: Who do they think they're kidding? I know?
Speaker 1: And a president which has the worst of the worst
Speaker 1: of the worst murderers, rapist, thieves, thugs. If they can
Speaker 1: manage those guys, they can manage a couple of conspirators.
Speaker 1: And that's the other point you made in the article,
Speaker 1: which is really worthy point. They created the military tribunal
Speaker 1: because this, which is supposed to be for military combatants
Speaker 1: and military related issues, this was non military. These were
Speaker 1: not uniform combatants. They were conspirators. They directed the behavior
Speaker 1: of those who flew the planes into the buildings. But
Speaker 1: it's a conspiracy. Now you can be held accountable for
Speaker 1: the damage you do. You can be found guilty of
Speaker 1: murder if you are a co conspirator, even though you
Speaker 1: didn't pull the trigger. But as you point out in
Speaker 1: the article the Military Tribune, that's a legal issue that
Speaker 1: isn't dealt with in these tribunals. It's a federal law.
Speaker 4: Tribunals cannot try conspiracy cases. So again, Lindsey Graham Special.
Speaker 2: I'm sorry to be picking on him.
Speaker 4: It's actually a nice guy.
Speaker 2: But again, a Republican Congressional special.
Speaker 4: Oh, even though it's a military tribunal, they can try
Speaker 4: civilian crimes and they'll follow the federal rules of criminal procedure.
Speaker 2: Okay, if they're going.
Speaker 4: To try civilian crimes and follow the federal rules of
Speaker 4: criminal procedure, why isn't it a regular federal jury trial
Speaker 4: before one judge. They've had four judges in this case.
Speaker 4: They've had four teams of prosecutors. They've had two teams
Speaker 4: of defense lawyers. The judge sitting on the motion to
Speaker 4: dismiss the indictment because of all the tortured do you
Speaker 4: know how many pages of documents are in that motion
Speaker 4: And he's a brand new judge in the case, forty
Speaker 4: thousand ages he has to read.
Speaker 2: This is mind boggling.
Speaker 4: The mess that they have created in the name of vengeance,
Speaker 4: George w not justice.
Speaker 1: Well, you put an exclamation point on that when you're
Speaker 1: on and the column comes out tonight, Colleague Sheik Muhammad,
Speaker 1: the problem with torture. You are laughing though and smiling
Speaker 1: at the conclusion, which is as good as we can
Speaker 1: hope for today given the subject matter. I always enjoyed
Speaker 1: this conversation, especially on the height.
Speaker 4: Too, but today was a special treat being able to
Speaker 4: listen to Congressman Massey. I'm so sorry for his loss,
Speaker 4: but I'm ecstatic that he.
Speaker 2: Is still his same old self.
Speaker 4: Indeed, I wanted to tip my hat to him for
Speaker 4: not showing up when Nettie, who spoke what a despicable,
Speaker 4: disgraceful thing. That was Netting, who had an audience he
Speaker 4: bought and paid for. Thomas Massey was not there because
Speaker 4: he's not bought and paid for.
Speaker 1: Well, we'll get this three way conversation that we had
Speaker 1: planned before his wife's passing back on board at some point.
Speaker 1: I know my producer work with your people in Congressman
Speaker 1: Massy's people to make that happen, and I am really
Speaker 1: looking forward to that day as well. Judging and Napolitano
Speaker 1: find him online and judging Freedom. Who you talking to today?
Speaker 4: I am talking to Phil Giraldi XCIA and the investigative
Speaker 4: journalist to Aaron Mate, who has some very interesting observations.
Speaker 4: I don't know how he knows this about the private
Speaker 4: conversation between Joe Biden and Benjamin nettinga who two days ago,
Speaker 4: in which Joe accused Biebe of lying to him, and
Speaker 4: he did so in very very colorful, blue collar Scranton language.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 1: Anxious to hear that one find a judging Freedom, look
Speaker 1: at Facebook and YouTube and just search online generally, that
Speaker 1: and judging Paull the time you will find him judge
Speaker 1: until next Wednesday. God bless you, sir pleasure having you
Speaker 1: on the program as all.
Speaker 2: Okay you Brian, thank you all the best coming up in.
Speaker 1: Eight forty four. If you have KRCY talk station cover sence,
Speaker 1: he's a number to call. Cover. Since the John Roman
Speaker 1: and the team will take great care of you, why
Speaker 1: would you do it? Well, you want to pay less
Speaker 1: for medical insurance and you want better coverage, don't we all? Well,
Speaker 1: that's what John and the team are all about. They
Speaker 1: work with hundreds of insurance companies, thousands of policies, but
Speaker 1: they work for you. It's a fiduciary like relationship like
Speaker 1: you have with your financial planner. They have your best
Speaker 1: interest in mind. So what they do is do an
Speaker 1: individual analysis of every single one of their clients. Like
Speaker 1: if you're a group, you own a business, you have
Speaker 1: like thirty employees, you want them to be able to
Speaker 1: afford insurance, but they can't because maybe they're on a
Speaker 1: bombacare pan ninety five hundred dollars out of pocket. They
Speaker 1: don't have that kind of money. They cannot afford to
Speaker 1: pay the out of pockets, so they ignore buying insurance
Speaker 1: and put themselves at peril. Could file for bankruptcy as
Speaker 1: a consequence of that. No, he can get them all insured.
Speaker 1: He looks at each of them individually, puts a package
Speaker 1: together with dollar one coverage for less money. I know
Speaker 1: it sounds amazing and impossible. Trust me, he does this
Speaker 1: every single day. That's why I say it's worth a
Speaker 1: few minutes a year time to see if he can
Speaker 1: save you all kinds of money monthly, as well as
Speaker 1: put dollar one coverage in the mix. Call him up.
Speaker 1: It's a eight five one three eight hundred Call five
Speaker 1: one three eight hundred two two five five. You can
Speaker 1: initiate the conversation by filling out a form online at
Speaker 1: his website, where you can learn more about the process.
Speaker 1: It's COVERSINSI dot Com fifty five the talk station Men.
Speaker 2: If you're