Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Eight rods in today because dragging somewhere else because Shannon's
somewhere else, and then somebody else is somewhere else, and
because we don't have enough somewhere else's to fill in
with somebody's for the somewhere else is somebody somewhere else.
And so that's why I got stuck with ay Rod today.
And really, you know, now we're digging at the bottom.
We're just totally digging almost the bottom. And did you
(00:20):
get your Are you finished with your breakfast? Are you done?
Speaker 2 (00:22):
I am?
Speaker 1 (00:22):
Are you ready to go to work now?
Speaker 3 (00:24):
I made sure by nine oh seven I'm gonna be
ready to go just for Brownie, because God only knows
someone has to save the show with undivided attention.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
And you know I'm not here tomorrow, so today is
like a Friday for me, oh God. And so I
really just don't give a bad task about today's today's content,
the program or anything.
Speaker 4 (00:44):
Else, because I definitely didn't do tax pay of leef shots.
Speaker 1 (00:47):
Huh.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
I definitely didn't do tax pay of leief shots. Even
though it's your Friday, it's not our friday.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
Well, I know, and Dragon and I had a really
uh and you can send me a text if you
if you have a different opinion now that we're going
to change anything out because it's too late. But here
was the rationale I asked Dragon yesterday because I'm going
to my grandson's graduation this evening. We're flying up to Missoula, Montana. Wow, right,
(01:11):
pretty exciting, although the weather's supposed to be nice, a
high forty five fifties, kind of like here. So we
had this discussion yesterday about since today is my Friday,
should we do tax payer relief shots today and not
do them you know, or whoever is Philly and tomorrow?
Do do them tomorrow? One Dragon was, nobody else can
(01:33):
do tax pair relief shots, and we have to train
this new audience that it's always Friday at eleven am
when we do them. So we're not going to do
them today and you won't get them tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
The glorious thought process, right like you like that right
on the nose.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
So you agree, So you actually agree with me and Dragon.
Speaker 4 (01:54):
I mean I agree with Dragon. You I guess, okay,
all right, all right?
Speaker 3 (01:58):
And what's this camera doing here making you look good
for three hours? I gotta somehow fine, So I got
to capture ninety seconds of good.
Speaker 4 (02:07):
Show, so it might take a while, So you need
three hours.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
To find ninety seconds of a good rip's should should
I look toward the windows and the and the beautiful sunrise?
Is that a good side of me? Or should I
look over here to Fox thirty one and look at it,
you know, longingly? Like whoever that reporter is, like, well,
it's a what's.
Speaker 3 (02:28):
What's the exact middle of both of both of those
OUs just brings you right towards you.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
Don't have like the little red dot that tells me
that I'm on air. Oh you're on so I don't
hear rolling. I'm recording right for that whole thing today, yep.
And then I'll get a little light bulb up that
would be a good segment for social By the way,
at Michael Brown USA or at Michael D. Brown, based
on what platform you'll be able to see his ugly
mug later today. Well even I'll even let you know
(02:54):
when the video's up when Michael gives me good ninety
seconds of show, which would be timely. It could be
like eleven fifty two.
Speaker 3 (03:02):
Yes, whatever the hot button topic that people really want
to know about that could be really engaging for our audience.
You'll know it, I'll know it, and that video will
be up shortly across all platforms.
Speaker 1 (03:13):
What if I think the ninety seconds is a different
ninety seconds and goober A thinks it's another ninety seconds,
So why don't we just put the entire program up?
Speaker 3 (03:22):
Well, it depends what the ultimate goober thinks, and that's me.
I made the final decision what I think is good,
and normally.
Speaker 1 (03:28):
That's my point. Give anybody a little bit of power
and they just take it all hungry with power, hungry,
hungry with power. Yeah. Yeah, So if you for your
breakfast this morning, because it did look pretty than good.
Speaker 3 (03:42):
My wife, wow, glorious cook, best cook on her row. Yeah,
she really loves you, doesn't she?
Speaker 1 (03:48):
Breakfast at casserolea.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
Eggs, egg whites, bell Pepper's ground ground up, breakfast sausage,
all the good.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
Well, it did smell glorious when I back the yell
at dragon about something, I don't know what it was about.
Locked in.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
You're like the cartoon character when they lift in the
sky and they follow the plume of good.
Speaker 1 (04:07):
Yeah, that's right, they follow the plume of the romo.
You're about that's right, because you fast, I don't. I
have dinner and I fast, and I don't eat until noon.
And so right now, I'm okay, you know, but in
an hour so I'll starts, you know, the It'll start
to kick in and I'll start getting a little hunger pangs.
Speaker 3 (04:27):
Yes, I guess I fast as well. Fifteen hours is
we usually dinner at six and then breakfast at nine.
Speaker 1 (04:32):
So oh okay, yeah, good fast. Yeah, that's not bad.
I got longer than that. I go probably about eighteen hours. Well,
you're in bad by five thirty. No, because at four
thirty we're at Denny's getting the Blue Plates special. Oh
and then I get home and watching programs. Yeah right,
I watched Wheel of Fortune. So we go to Denny's,
(04:57):
we get the Blue Plates special. Then I go home
on I watch Wheel of Fortune, and then I go
to bed. So I'm in bed by six thirty. It's
given me a long three hours today, it's gonna be on.
Speaker 4 (05:10):
All four hours it could before it could use me.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Well, that's right, you know what? And and still how
well have I been doing this? Now? Four weeks? Long week?
I stopped counting. I try to forget I know, Mandy
tries to avoid me. Ross tries to avoid me. They
all just try to avoid me, like the plague. You
know what I do? I have bo do? I stink?
Is that what it is? I mean?
Speaker 4 (05:33):
I wasn't gonna say anything.
Speaker 3 (05:34):
I will say there is something that Mandy says about
you every time you leave the studio. But I'm not
gonna tell you what it is. Oh God, I want
to know. I really do want to know, particularly if
it's really bad. It's not bad, oh, but it's something
you should be concerned about.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
I'll let you steal on that. Okay, Well, give me
a hit. This exact has to do with how I.
Speaker 4 (05:53):
How the studio is arranged in some shape or form.
Speaker 1 (05:56):
Oh, it's how I leave the studio, correct, I bet
I know exactly what it is. What do you think
it is? The lights are on?
Speaker 4 (06:02):
Wrong?
Speaker 1 (06:02):
Oh? Really? Not it? The computer? I pulled the computer
strong so wrong. I pushed the chair back too far.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
Oh for three.
Speaker 3 (06:13):
We would have struck out by now. But we'll give
you a fourth pitch. It has to do it. Oh,
I know what it is.
Speaker 1 (06:21):
That's you.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
You knew it so well. The first three tries the
keyboard wrong as well. Okay, tell me, then tell me
what it is you should be concerned with how loud
your headphones are. Yes, she is very concerned that you
are deaf.
Speaker 4 (06:38):
Are going to exactly huh, it'll make a lot of sense.
Speaker 1 (06:41):
No, I'll tell you know why they're cranked up so loudly,
just because one does she use cans. I don't use cans.
She does use cans. Yeah, see, I don't use cans.
I use this little you know, Apple AirPod because I
hate the cans. They're just heavy and they're just like
you know, and when you're old like me and you
got those heavy cans on and you start to doze
off as you're talking, head kind of hits the microphone.
Speaker 3 (07:04):
You missed a great opportunity for why you don't wear it,
really wear cans, which is why I don't often wear cans.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
Why great hair?
Speaker 4 (07:11):
Just like, yeah, I don't want to. I know another
thing nothing worse admit that I know.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
I did not want to. I did not want to
admit that I hate the cans because you know, my
hair's been blow dried. I've been to advanced hair. I
got this great hair from advanced tair, and I don't
want the stupid cans. You know, you have this indentation
that goes from ear to ear.
Speaker 4 (07:31):
Nothing looks worse. I hate I'm gonna.
Speaker 1 (07:33):
Look at Mandy. So now I'm gonna come back at
three o'clock today and check out Mandy to see if
her hair's got the stupid indentation.
Speaker 3 (07:40):
There are guys that don't care about that indentation and
look terrible, and then there's guys like us.
Speaker 4 (07:44):
Yeah, the indentation don't look good. Guys, we're we're called.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
What's the word, not ragot, We're pompous, pompous, Yeah, we're
pompous to keep up the pomp a door. See what
I've been there, a little alliteration to get the program going.
You're you're welcome, You're welcome. Yeah, all right, let's go
to the article. There's no segue here, so let's go
to Article three of the United States Constitution. That's the
(08:10):
judicial branch. Golly, you should know that by now, federal
judges basically serve for life, but Congress created this incity
for judges to step down, and judges who reach the
age of sixty five, if they have enough years of service,
can take what's called senior status. It's a form of
(08:32):
semi retirement. A lot of friends of mine who are
federal judges have because rold of Farts have taken senior status.
Some judges go on the bench and they get they
get the appointment, and they decide they don't want to
just truly retire because I always thought I'd be a
(08:52):
good judge. I always thought I would make a good judge.
I've got I have judicial temperament. I can see both
sides of an issue. I try to be fair in
how I deal with people. And I think if I
had been ever appointed a federal judge, that would have
never happened that I would have at some point, at
age sixty five, I would have taken senior status because
(09:13):
it is kind of semi retirement. There are a lot
of professionals I know, including Tamer's dad. Tamer's dad, when
he decided to quit practicing medicine, wanted to retire. So
I was going through the process of selling as clinic,
and the buyer of the clinic was a doctor that
he had brought in that was working there with him,
(09:36):
and I pulled him aside, and his name was Rameres,
and I said, doctor Ramirez, I want to cut a
side deal with you on the clinic. I want to
make arrangements. I haven't even talked to Tamer's dad about this,
but I want to make an arrangement so that he
can maintain his office and that he can still come
in and work as much or as little as he
(09:57):
wants to still see a few pays, not see a
few patients if he wants to go to Canada on
a fishing trip, and can go on a fishing trip.
But if he wants to come in and see some
patients or for that matter, uh, you know, if you
have some overflow, and he can help do that, because
you know he's he was a just a great old doctor.
And so we agree. We made that agreement, put it in,
(10:19):
put it in writing, put it in the in the transaction,
and sure enough Tamer's dad ended up. I think it
kept him alive in additional ten years. I truly do,
because men need something to do. And these judges, you
think about it, you know, I you know, they deal
with really intense, high profile cases, really controversial cases, and
(10:39):
then they get sixty five and they can take senior status.
Now they can keep a full docket of cases, or
they can wind down to zero cases and then just
get appointed to you know, if suddenly there's a you know.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
Like.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
Try I think of an example, there's suddenly all take
take Timothy McVeigh and Timothy McVeigh case gets moved up
to Colorado to the district court in Denver. And so
maybe there's a judge that has senior status and they
want to give that particular judge that case so that
the rest of the docket doesn't get just overwhelmed by
(11:18):
that one particular case. And then while they're in senior status.
Now this may irritate you, but they continue to get
all of their compensation. They get full compensation. So as
a practical matter, judges strategically take a strategically time when
(11:39):
they take senior status a designation. Judges appointed by Republican
presidents are more likely to take senior status when there
is a Republican president, and those judges who are appointed
by Democrat presidents are more likely to do so when
there is a Democrat president. I don't think that's a mystery. Moreover,
(12:04):
some judges even request, either directly or indirectly, a preferred
replacement as a condition for taking senior status. One judge
even withdrew his announcement of senior status when the President
failed to nominate the judges preferred candidate. Federal judges are
and I say this with all due respect, because it
(12:25):
is a obviously it's a very powerful position. It's a
lifetime appointment, and so it's one where they kind of
want to, you know, if someone's going to take my seat,
and it's really not their seat, although it is for lifetime,
but when they take senior status, they really want to
know that the person's replacing them is someone that they like.
(12:47):
Federal judges kind of seem to judge their positions as
their positions over which they have complete control. And I
think that's a problem that Congress not to address us. Now,
this practice that I just described to you took a
turn for the worst during the Biden presidency. During his administration,
(13:10):
a law of the Democrat appointed judges predictably announced that
they were going to take senior status on upon the
confirmation of their successors. Now, even though the Democrats controlled
the Senate for Biden's entire term, a bunch of those
seats remained unfilled come December of twenty twenty four, and
(13:31):
then shortly before Trump got inaugurated, three judges announced that
they would no longer take senior status. Judge James Wynn
junior he's on the US Court of Appeals for the
Fourth Circuit. Max Cogburn of the U. S. District Court
for the Western District of North Carolina, and Algernon Marbley
of the U. S. District Court for the Southern District
(13:52):
of Ohio. All three judges, in case you couldn't guess,
were appointed by Democrat presidents. Now the judges offered no
actual explanation for their decision. Judge Wynn, for example, vrote
to President Biden that quote, after careful consideration, you know,
kind of like you'll spend more time with my family.
(14:14):
After careful consideration, he wrote, I have decided to continue
in regular active service. Now, what do you think after
careful consideration really means? It means, oh, based upon the election,
I've decided, I think I'll stay. So it really should
(14:35):
be after careful or after further election. I've decided to
stay since or Tom tell Us of North Carolina said
that Judge Wynn made this brazenly partisan decision because he
quote clearly takes issue with the fact that Donald Trump
was just elected president. There's a group called the Article
three Project. I can't say that I'm I'm not really
(15:00):
I'm not an active member of it, but I support
them and I think they do great work. The Article
three Project is how should I sput this? The Article
three Project filed a judicial misconduct complaint against those three
(15:21):
judges that I just outlined. The complaint charge that, for example,
Judge wins decision to rescind his announcement was likely made
because of the outcome of the twenty twenty four presidential election.
And they went on to say that this judge quote
had a change of heart solely because Trump won. Now
(15:41):
let me just add up parenthetical here, why do you
think that we're having all of these problems with all
of these nationwide injunctions? And is there a correlation, maybe
some causation between the election of Donald Trump and judges
deciding not to take senior status. Now, this particular judge,
(16:02):
Judge Wynn, responded to the complaint. He offered no actual
explanation for his decision to rescind his taking a senior status,
but he insisted that federal law does not prevent him
from changing his mind. So he said this quote choices
about retirement and senior status are deeply personal and often
(16:24):
influenced by multiple factors. You would think that a federal judge,
knowing the Constitution, knowing the rules about senior status, ought
to be able to really come up with a reason
to defend his action. He's always demanding of lawyers that
they defend their arguments. So defend your argument, judge, But
(16:48):
he offered none. He instead insisted that he was under
no obligation to explain his motivation. He maintained that quote
no court has ever found it, has ever found it
proper to inquire to ask about an Article three judge's
reasons for taking a not taking senior status. And then
he added accusations of partisanship should not be entertained about
(17:12):
specific evidence of misconduct. Now, I don't know, but if
this judge had made the decision for some legitimate reason,
it would have been straightforward to say that. But he didn't. Instead,
he hid behind a legal process, and that's one of
the reasons we got problems with these judges.
Speaker 5 (17:35):
Good morning, Michael and a rod Well. Hey, we all
know cameras and radio broadcasts don't really go well together.
I have it on good authority that Michael has the
perfect face for radio broadcast. But you know what, we're
here for it.
Speaker 1 (17:51):
We still love it.
Speaker 3 (17:54):
That was an easy layup. I just had to edit
that video. I already got it, and man, you are
so right. Texture If I.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Know it's gonna be on camera today, I would have
put my makeup on. But you know you didn't tell me,
so I didn't put my makeup on you. That was
really funny what I literally told you yesterday. I know
you told me yesterday. I was just being a smart ass.
Speaker 3 (18:14):
I know, but you never know. With old age, you know,
things happen. People forget stuff, forget what what do you what.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
Are we talking about? We were talking about federal judges.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
You're gonna have cans tomorrow. I'm not gonna have cans tomorrow.
I'm not gonna be here tomorrow. I'm gonna be. I'm
gonna be.
Speaker 1 (18:29):
I'm gonna be in Missoula, Montana, and like, and you know,
I guess I could wear the cans. Actually, you know
what I do that I could take my the big
apple what do they call them that? They're not those
little air pods, they're the big air pods. You know
that there were cans.
Speaker 4 (18:46):
Applets like the big old the headsets.
Speaker 3 (18:49):
Yeah, yeah, see what you can we can do Michael,
when I put out this video today, you can quote
post the video with a picture of you wearing cans
oh gotsch the hill together on the shil Yeah.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
I get you. And by the way, that would be
probably more interesting than listening to you know, whatever is
going on with the graduation? Why do you why do
you go to your why do you go to your?
No for your high school? But is this the one
you're going to high No? No, he's getting as he's
getting as bs in hydrology. Wow, someone related to you
(19:25):
being successful. Yeah. Yeah, it's shocking, isn't it. I know,
thank you, thank you. And then he's going to go
to graduate school either at Mine's see you. University of
Nevada a Reno has a really good hydrology program if
you're comfortable sharing.
Speaker 4 (19:40):
Does he have the brown name? Does he have to
carry that?
Speaker 1 (19:44):
Yes? Oh man, but he But the science side comes
from Tamer's dad's side because he was the doctor, and
that's where all the science comes from. Smart the science side,
the smarts my side. The lawyer's side is smart too.
Just back off there. The lawyer and the doctor there,
both professionals, but that the son got those genes, the
(20:05):
daughter got my genes, and we've all got Sidney Sweeney
jeans or we wish sure, let's go with that, let's
go with that. I almost said something, Yeah, let's just
let's let's just. I don't know where I was going
to go with that. Maybe I should. That's right forever
in blue jeans, Neil Diamond, right forever in blue jeans. Yeah,
(20:29):
that's right. October this year, the judicial misconduct complaints against
Judge Wynn and those other two judges got dismissed. The
Chief Judge, Debrah Livingston wrote the opinion in every single case,
and she found that there is no genuine issue of fact.
And then she added that whether quote the judge considered
(20:50):
the outcome of the election as one factor influencing his
decision to withdraw the January five letter, was a factual
issue you I need not resolve now. Had this judge
who was hearing this case simply asked judge when why
he rescinded his senior status, the judge could have defended
(21:14):
himself with some legitimate reason, but he never offered her reason,
and she never asked for a reason, because there is,
in my opinion, no plausible, legitimate reason he withdrew his
senior status simply because Donald Trump was going to be
the president and I want to be there because I
want to fight him every opportunity I get. Regrettably, this
(21:38):
is a brazen double standard for brazenly partisan federal judges.
The federal courts are always scrutinizing Trump's motivations for improper purposes,
but when it comes to rooting out judicial misconduct, they
hide behind a veil of ignorance. And this judge, in particular, judge,
(21:59):
when I think, has opened himself up to special criticism.
During the first Trump administration, the Fourth Circuit Court of
Appeals heard challenges to Donald Trump's travel bands, remember the
travel bans. A constant theme in that litigation was an
attempt to try the cycle analyze Donald Trump. The travel
ban policy, on its face was neutral and it was
(22:22):
based on very specific legal findings that aliens from certain
countries posed a national security risk. But judges looked beyond
the written policy to try to figure out what was Trump,
what was he thinking, what was he intending? What was
in his heart? What was in his mind? And then
one of their favorite pastimes was going over and reading
(22:45):
Donald Trump's posts on Twitter, his tweets, and then the
judges used the tweets to impute an impermissible animus to
Trump's policy. And that is pre basically what Judge Wynn did.
In December twenty seventeen, the Fourth Circuit had an on
(23:08):
bunk oral argument for the travel ban case. Judge Wynn
asked the lawyer for the Department of Justice about the
relevance of the president's tweets. The judge asked, what do
we do with those? Referring to the tweets? Do we
just ignore reality and look at the legality to determine
how to handle this case? Now, I know that most
(23:29):
of the people in this audience are not lawyers, but
I want you to think about this question. What do
we do with that those tweets? Do we just ignore
reality and look at the legality to determine how to
handle this case? What should be the answer to that?
You know, yes, the tweets are irrelevant. You look at
(23:53):
the policy. If you look at the four corners of
the policy, imagine the policy was written on an eight
and a half eleven eight and a half by eleven
sheet of paper. That's what you look at. What Trump
said about it, what he tweeted about it, how he
answered a question if press it doesn't make any difference.
The policy is the policy. In other words, this judge
(24:20):
was not going to get bogged down with the legalities
because that might force him to ignore what he saw
as the reality. Because at the top should what should
a judge do if the law cuts one way but
reality cuts the other way? And he was all too
happy to subject the leader of a coordinate branch of government,
(24:43):
an equal branch of government, to a now super strict scrutiny.
But he refused to engage in even the slightest bit
of self introspection himself. He declined offer any explanation for
his action. And so the chief judge who was overseeing
this judicial complaint should have posed the same question to
(25:04):
judge when the Judge Wynn posed to Donald Trump, do
we just ignore this reality and look at the legality
to determine handle how to handle your case? Maybe Judge
Wynn would have had an actual response to the complaint
filed against him, but I kind of doubt it. Judge
Win was all too eager to inquire into the president's
(25:27):
subjective motivations, yet implores you and me to ignore his
own subjective motivations in the emoluments clause litigation about you know,
whether Trump was you know, enriching himself when joined the
majority opinion that ruled against Trump. There's a shocker, right.
(25:48):
The judge was appalled that a dissenting judge alleged that
the majority of the you know, there were three judges
one descendant, and said, I think the two have partisan motivations,
insinuating that there was quote something other than the law
is afoot here? Should the public not see partisan motives
(26:13):
behind this judge's decision? Uh, you know, kind of like
the Wizard of Oz pay no attention to the man
under the robe. No, there just seems to be this
never ending stream of full outrage about judicial ethics. But
these self professed experts ignore actual problems when judges engage
(26:37):
in partisanship. You know, in fact, I may take a
break here, but let me just tell you be thinking
about oh, the icon of the left, think about justice.
Ruth Vader Ginsburg.
Speaker 2 (26:51):
Michael, the bare minimum you could do is work a
full week after I paid for the entire package. Just
to hear you, you and your show and dragon. But
he bailed A Rod's fine too, Jiminy Christmas. This is ridiculous, iHeart,
what are you doing with this guy?
Speaker 1 (27:11):
You know, just because you, as a member of the
United States Military, never do a full day's work anyway.
What you know, he's a jag officer, a rod. And
so what's he doing right now? He's on a cruise
out somewhere in the middle of the Pacific and he
wants me to adjust my schedule to his vacation schedule.
(27:34):
He's on a cruise. He's on a cruise.
Speaker 4 (27:36):
What is he doing?
Speaker 1 (27:37):
I don't know. He's certainly not doing any military work.
He's not you know, he's not a he's not doing
any court martials. He's not providing any legal advice. He's
he's listening to this program. We're about the state of
the the readiness of our military. There's the example right there.
Speaker 4 (27:54):
I go chriss all the time.
Speaker 3 (27:55):
And now I understand when he says he paid for
the package, those are not cheap. Why my package is
per ricey depending on the cruise line. He is a
dedicated he is He's also why are you listening right now?
Speaker 1 (28:07):
He is a p one and he actually used to
intern in this very studio. Really yeah, yeah, he interned
for Rosen Back. I mean he's an old part too.
He he in turn for rosen Back when Rosen was
ninety five years old.
Speaker 3 (28:21):
He could be paying a lot of money to listen
to you right now, a lot of them.
Speaker 1 (28:25):
I'm trying to give him a little airtime, you know,
you know, And that's that's the father of the little girl,
this says Michael says, go here, that's who that is. Yeah,
I should just get out his cell phone number right
now and just tell everybody to calling. But maybe he's
got his roaming on. Please, for the love do it.
(28:45):
I would accept he's being paid by the military, so
he's not I know, he's not making squats, so you know,
I can't do that. And we know, or maybe maybe
he told us he's on a cruise and he's really
on some super secret mission somewhere. Now Rodney's actually down
in Caracas getting even to invade Venezuela. I don't know
what he's doing. We never know what he's doing. Yeah,
(29:06):
that's right, as as you should. As you should. In
twenty sixteen, before the election, Justice Ginsburg called Trump a faker,
and she just like Rosie O'Donnell except miss going to Ireland.
Justice Ginsburg said, I'm going to move to New Zealand
if he wins. And today, after the election, Justice Ginsburg
(29:29):
wrote her dissent to the court. She was clearly protesting
Trump's election. Yet Ginsburg didn't leave the country because I
would have given Trump the power to appoint her replacement.
And then when she actually died on her deathbed, her
last words were, my most fervent wish is that I
(29:50):
will not be replaced until a new president is installed. Now,
is this a gigantic generalization and indictment the federal judiciary? Yeah,
it probably is. But I know there are some good
judges out there. But if you ever thought about why
we're having such a horrible time with things like national
(30:12):
injunctions and every ruling against going against Donald Trump or
the administration, Yes, judges are human and therefore they're partisan too.
Eight rods in today because dragging somewhere else because Shannon's
somewhere else, and then somebody else is somewhere else, and
because we don't have enough somewhere else's to fill in
with somebody's for the somewhere else is somebody somewhere else.
And so that's why I got stuck with ay Rod today.
And really, you know, now we're digging at the bottom.
We're just totally digging almost the bottom. And did you
(00:20):
get your Are you finished with your breakfast? Are you done?
Speaker 2 (00:22):
I am?
Speaker 1 (00:22):
Are you ready to go to work now?
Speaker 3 (00:24):
I made sure by nine oh seven I'm gonna be
ready to go just for Brownie, because God only knows
someone has to save the show with undivided attention.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
And you know I'm not here tomorrow, so today is
like a Friday for me, oh God. And so I
really just don't give a bad task about today's today's content,
the program or anything.
Speaker 4 (00:44):
Else, because I definitely didn't do tax pay of leef shots.
Speaker 1 (00:47):
Huh.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
I definitely didn't do tax pay of leief shots. Even
though it's your Friday, it's not our friday.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
Well, I know, and Dragon and I had a really
uh and you can send me a text if you
if you have a different opinion now that we're going
to change anything out because it's too late. But here
was the rationale I asked Dragon yesterday because I'm going
to my grandson's graduation this evening. We're flying up to Missoula, Montana. Wow, right,
(01:11):
pretty exciting, although the weather's supposed to be nice, a
high forty five fifties, kind of like here. So we
had this discussion yesterday about since today is my Friday,
should we do tax payer relief shots today and not
do them you know, or whoever is Philly and tomorrow?
Do do them tomorrow? One Dragon was, nobody else can
(01:33):
do tax pair relief shots, and we have to train
this new audience that it's always Friday at eleven am
when we do them. So we're not going to do
them today and you won't get them tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
The glorious thought process, right like you like that right
on the nose.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
So you agree, So you actually agree with me and Dragon.
Speaker 4 (01:54):
I mean I agree with Dragon. You I guess, okay,
all right, all right?
Speaker 3 (01:58):
And what's this camera doing here making you look good
for three hours? I gotta somehow fine, So I got
to capture ninety seconds of good.
Speaker 4 (02:07):
Show, so it might take a while, So you need
three hours.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
To find ninety seconds of a good rip's should should
I look toward the windows and the and the beautiful sunrise?
Is that a good side of me? Or should I
look over here to Fox thirty one and look at it,
you know, longingly? Like whoever that reporter is, like, well,
it's a what's.
Speaker 3 (02:28):
What's the exact middle of both of both of those
OUs just brings you right towards you.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
Don't have like the little red dot that tells me
that I'm on air. Oh you're on so I don't
hear rolling. I'm recording right for that whole thing today, yep.
And then I'll get a little light bulb up that
would be a good segment for social By the way,
at Michael Brown USA or at Michael D. Brown, based
on what platform you'll be able to see his ugly
mug later today. Well even I'll even let you know
(02:54):
when the video's up when Michael gives me good ninety
seconds of show, which would be timely. It could be
like eleven fifty two.
Speaker 3 (03:02):
Yes, whatever the hot button topic that people really want
to know about that could be really engaging for our audience.
You'll know it, I'll know it, and that video will
be up shortly across all platforms.
Speaker 1 (03:13):
What if I think the ninety seconds is a different
ninety seconds and goober A thinks it's another ninety seconds,
So why don't we just put the entire program up?
Speaker 3 (03:22):
Well, it depends what the ultimate goober thinks, and that's me.
I made the final decision what I think is good,
and normally.
Speaker 1 (03:28):
That's my point. Give anybody a little bit of power
and they just take it all hungry with power, hungry,
hungry with power. Yeah. Yeah, So if you for your
breakfast this morning, because it did look pretty than good.
Speaker 3 (03:42):
My wife, wow, glorious cook, best cook on her row. Yeah,
she really loves you, doesn't she?
Speaker 1 (03:48):
Breakfast at casserolea.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
Eggs, egg whites, bell Pepper's ground ground up, breakfast sausage,
all the good.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
Well, it did smell glorious when I back the yell
at dragon about something, I don't know what it was about.
Locked in.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
You're like the cartoon character when they lift in the
sky and they follow the plume of good.
Speaker 1 (04:07):
Yeah, that's right, they follow the plume of the romo.
You're about that's right, because you fast, I don't. I
have dinner and I fast, and I don't eat until noon.
And so right now, I'm okay, you know, but in
an hour so I'll starts, you know, the It'll start
to kick in and I'll start getting a little hunger pangs.
Speaker 3 (04:27):
Yes, I guess I fast as well. Fifteen hours is
we usually dinner at six and then breakfast at nine.
Speaker 1 (04:32):
So oh okay, yeah, good fast. Yeah, that's not bad.
I got longer than that. I go probably about eighteen hours. Well,
you're in bad by five thirty. No, because at four
thirty we're at Denny's getting the Blue Plates special. Oh
and then I get home and watching programs. Yeah right,
I watched Wheel of Fortune. So we go to Denny's,
(04:57):
we get the Blue Plates special. Then I go home
on I watch Wheel of Fortune, and then I go
to bed. So I'm in bed by six thirty. It's
given me a long three hours today, it's gonna be on.
Speaker 4 (05:10):
All four hours it could before it could use me.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Well, that's right, you know what? And and still how
well have I been doing this? Now? Four weeks? Long week?
I stopped counting. I try to forget I know, Mandy
tries to avoid me. Ross tries to avoid me. They
all just try to avoid me, like the plague. You
know what I do? I have bo do? I stink?
Is that what it is? I mean?
Speaker 4 (05:33):
I wasn't gonna say anything.
Speaker 3 (05:34):
I will say there is something that Mandy says about
you every time you leave the studio. But I'm not
gonna tell you what it is. Oh God, I want
to know. I really do want to know, particularly if
it's really bad. It's not bad, oh, but it's something
you should be concerned about.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
I'll let you steal on that. Okay, Well, give me
a hit. This exact has to do with how I.
Speaker 4 (05:53):
How the studio is arranged in some shape or form.
Speaker 1 (05:56):
Oh, it's how I leave the studio, correct, I bet
I know exactly what it is. What do you think
it is? The lights are on?
Speaker 4 (06:02):
Wrong?
Speaker 1 (06:02):
Oh? Really? Not it? The computer? I pulled the computer
strong so wrong. I pushed the chair back too far.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
Oh for three.
Speaker 3 (06:13):
We would have struck out by now. But we'll give
you a fourth pitch. It has to do it. Oh,
I know what it is.
Speaker 1 (06:21):
That's you.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
You knew it so well. The first three tries the
keyboard wrong as well. Okay, tell me, then tell me
what it is you should be concerned with how loud
your headphones are. Yes, she is very concerned that you
are deaf.
Speaker 4 (06:38):
Are going to exactly huh, it'll make a lot of sense.
Speaker 1 (06:41):
No, I'll tell you know why they're cranked up so loudly,
just because one does she use cans. I don't use cans.
She does use cans. Yeah, see, I don't use cans.
I use this little you know, Apple AirPod because I
hate the cans. They're just heavy and they're just like
you know, and when you're old like me and you
got those heavy cans on and you start to doze
off as you're talking, head kind of hits the microphone.
Speaker 3 (07:04):
You missed a great opportunity for why you don't wear it,
really wear cans, which is why I don't often wear cans.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
Why great hair?
Speaker 4 (07:11):
Just like, yeah, I don't want to. I know another
thing nothing worse admit that I know.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
I did not want to. I did not want to
admit that I hate the cans because you know, my
hair's been blow dried. I've been to advanced hair. I
got this great hair from advanced tair, and I don't
want the stupid cans. You know, you have this indentation
that goes from ear to ear.
Speaker 4 (07:31):
Nothing looks worse. I hate I'm gonna.
Speaker 1 (07:33):
Look at Mandy. So now I'm gonna come back at
three o'clock today and check out Mandy to see if
her hair's got the stupid indentation.
Speaker 3 (07:40):
There are guys that don't care about that indentation and
look terrible, and then there's guys like us.
Speaker 4 (07:44):
Yeah, the indentation don't look good. Guys, we're we're called.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
What's the word, not ragot, We're pompous, pompous, Yeah, we're
pompous to keep up the pomp a door. See what
I've been there, a little alliteration to get the program going.
You're you're welcome, You're welcome. Yeah, all right, let's go
to the article. There's no segue here, so let's go
to Article three of the United States Constitution. That's the
(08:10):
judicial branch. Golly, you should know that by now, federal
judges basically serve for life, but Congress created this incity
for judges to step down, and judges who reach the
age of sixty five, if they have enough years of service,
can take what's called senior status. It's a form of
(08:32):
semi retirement. A lot of friends of mine who are
federal judges have because rold of Farts have taken senior status.
Some judges go on the bench and they get they
get the appointment, and they decide they don't want to
just truly retire because I always thought I'd be a
(08:52):
good judge. I always thought I would make a good judge.
I've got I have judicial temperament. I can see both
sides of an issue. I try to be fair in
how I deal with people. And I think if I
had been ever appointed a federal judge, that would have
never happened that I would have at some point, at
age sixty five, I would have taken senior status because
(09:13):
it is kind of semi retirement. There are a lot
of professionals I know, including Tamer's dad. Tamer's dad, when
he decided to quit practicing medicine, wanted to retire. So
I was going through the process of selling as clinic,
and the buyer of the clinic was a doctor that
he had brought in that was working there with him,
(09:36):
and I pulled him aside, and his name was Rameres,
and I said, doctor Ramirez, I want to cut a
side deal with you on the clinic. I want to
make arrangements. I haven't even talked to Tamer's dad about this,
but I want to make an arrangement so that he
can maintain his office and that he can still come
in and work as much or as little as he
(09:57):
wants to still see a few pays, not see a
few patients if he wants to go to Canada on
a fishing trip, and can go on a fishing trip.
But if he wants to come in and see some
patients or for that matter, uh, you know, if you
have some overflow, and he can help do that, because
you know he's he was a just a great old doctor.
And so we agree. We made that agreement, put it in,
(10:19):
put it in writing, put it in the in the transaction,
and sure enough Tamer's dad ended up. I think it
kept him alive in additional ten years. I truly do,
because men need something to do. And these judges, you
think about it, you know, I you know, they deal
with really intense, high profile cases, really controversial cases, and
(10:39):
then they get sixty five and they can take senior status.
Now they can keep a full docket of cases, or
they can wind down to zero cases and then just
get appointed to you know, if suddenly there's a you know.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
Like.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
Try I think of an example, there's suddenly all take
take Timothy McVeigh and Timothy McVeigh case gets moved up
to Colorado to the district court in Denver. And so
maybe there's a judge that has senior status and they
want to give that particular judge that case so that
the rest of the docket doesn't get just overwhelmed by
(11:18):
that one particular case. And then while they're in senior status.
Now this may irritate you, but they continue to get
all of their compensation. They get full compensation. So as
a practical matter, judges strategically take a strategically time when
(11:39):
they take senior status a designation. Judges appointed by Republican
presidents are more likely to take senior status when there
is a Republican president, and those judges who are appointed
by Democrat presidents are more likely to do so when
there is a Democrat president. I don't think that's a mystery. Moreover,
(12:04):
some judges even request, either directly or indirectly, a preferred
replacement as a condition for taking senior status. One judge
even withdrew his announcement of senior status when the President
failed to nominate the judges preferred candidate. Federal judges are
and I say this with all due respect, because it
(12:25):
is a obviously it's a very powerful position. It's a
lifetime appointment, and so it's one where they kind of
want to, you know, if someone's going to take my seat,
and it's really not their seat, although it is for lifetime,
but when they take senior status, they really want to
know that the person's replacing them is someone that they like.
(12:47):
Federal judges kind of seem to judge their positions as
their positions over which they have complete control. And I
think that's a problem that Congress not to address us. Now,
this practice that I just described to you took a
turn for the worst during the Biden presidency. During his administration,
(13:10):
a law of the Democrat appointed judges predictably announced that
they were going to take senior status on upon the
confirmation of their successors. Now, even though the Democrats controlled
the Senate for Biden's entire term, a bunch of those
seats remained unfilled come December of twenty twenty four, and
(13:31):
then shortly before Trump got inaugurated, three judges announced that
they would no longer take senior status. Judge James Wynn
junior he's on the US Court of Appeals for the
Fourth Circuit. Max Cogburn of the U. S. District Court
for the Western District of North Carolina, and Algernon Marbley
of the U. S. District Court for the Southern District
(13:52):
of Ohio. All three judges, in case you couldn't guess,
were appointed by Democrat presidents. Now the judges offered no
actual explanation for their decision. Judge Wynn, for example, vrote
to President Biden that quote, after careful consideration, you know,
kind of like you'll spend more time with my family.
(14:14):
After careful consideration, he wrote, I have decided to continue
in regular active service. Now, what do you think after
careful consideration really means? It means, oh, based upon the election,
I've decided, I think I'll stay. So it really should
(14:35):
be after careful or after further election. I've decided to
stay since or Tom tell Us of North Carolina said
that Judge Wynn made this brazenly partisan decision because he
quote clearly takes issue with the fact that Donald Trump
was just elected president. There's a group called the Article
three Project. I can't say that I'm I'm not really
(15:00):
I'm not an active member of it, but I support
them and I think they do great work. The Article
three Project is how should I sput this? The Article
three Project filed a judicial misconduct complaint against those three
(15:21):
judges that I just outlined. The complaint charge that, for example,
Judge wins decision to rescind his announcement was likely made
because of the outcome of the twenty twenty four presidential election.
And they went on to say that this judge quote
had a change of heart solely because Trump won. Now
(15:41):
let me just add up parenthetical here, why do you
think that we're having all of these problems with all
of these nationwide injunctions? And is there a correlation, maybe
some causation between the election of Donald Trump and judges
deciding not to take senior status. Now, this particular judge,
(16:02):
Judge Wynn, responded to the complaint. He offered no actual
explanation for his decision to rescind his taking a senior status,
but he insisted that federal law does not prevent him
from changing his mind. So he said this quote choices
about retirement and senior status are deeply personal and often
(16:24):
influenced by multiple factors. You would think that a federal judge,
knowing the Constitution, knowing the rules about senior status, ought
to be able to really come up with a reason
to defend his action. He's always demanding of lawyers that
they defend their arguments. So defend your argument, judge, But
(16:48):
he offered none. He instead insisted that he was under
no obligation to explain his motivation. He maintained that quote
no court has ever found it, has ever found it
proper to inquire to ask about an Article three judge's
reasons for taking a not taking senior status. And then
he added accusations of partisanship should not be entertained about
(17:12):
specific evidence of misconduct. Now, I don't know, but if
this judge had made the decision for some legitimate reason,
it would have been straightforward to say that. But he didn't. Instead,
he hid behind a legal process, and that's one of
the reasons we got problems with these judges.
Speaker 5 (17:35):
Good morning, Michael and a rod Well. Hey, we all
know cameras and radio broadcasts don't really go well together.
I have it on good authority that Michael has the
perfect face for radio broadcast. But you know what, we're
here for it.
Speaker 1 (17:51):
We still love it.
Speaker 3 (17:54):
That was an easy layup. I just had to edit
that video. I already got it, and man, you are
so right. Texture If I.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Know it's gonna be on camera today, I would have
put my makeup on. But you know you didn't tell me,
so I didn't put my makeup on you. That was
really funny what I literally told you yesterday. I know
you told me yesterday. I was just being a smart ass.
Speaker 3 (18:14):
I know, but you never know. With old age, you know,
things happen. People forget stuff, forget what what do you what.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
Are we talking about? We were talking about federal judges.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
You're gonna have cans tomorrow. I'm not gonna have cans tomorrow.
I'm not gonna be here tomorrow. I'm gonna be. I'm
gonna be.
Speaker 1 (18:29):
I'm gonna be in Missoula, Montana, and like, and you know,
I guess I could wear the cans. Actually, you know
what I do that I could take my the big
apple what do they call them that? They're not those
little air pods, they're the big air pods. You know
that there were cans.
Speaker 4 (18:46):
Applets like the big old the headsets.
Speaker 3 (18:49):
Yeah, yeah, see what you can we can do Michael,
when I put out this video today, you can quote
post the video with a picture of you wearing cans
oh gotsch the hill together on the shil Yeah.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
I get you. And by the way, that would be
probably more interesting than listening to you know, whatever is
going on with the graduation? Why do you why do
you go to your why do you go to your?
No for your high school? But is this the one
you're going to high No? No, he's getting as he's
getting as bs in hydrology. Wow, someone related to you
(19:25):
being successful. Yeah. Yeah, it's shocking, isn't it. I know,
thank you, thank you. And then he's going to go
to graduate school either at Mine's see you. University of
Nevada a Reno has a really good hydrology program if
you're comfortable sharing.
Speaker 4 (19:40):
Does he have the brown name? Does he have to
carry that?
Speaker 1 (19:44):
Yes? Oh man, but he But the science side comes
from Tamer's dad's side because he was the doctor, and
that's where all the science comes from. Smart the science side,
the smarts my side. The lawyer's side is smart too.
Just back off there. The lawyer and the doctor there,
both professionals, but that the son got those genes, the
(20:05):
daughter got my genes, and we've all got Sidney Sweeney
jeans or we wish sure, let's go with that, let's
go with that. I almost said something, Yeah, let's just
let's let's just. I don't know where I was going
to go with that. Maybe I should. That's right forever
in blue jeans, Neil Diamond, right forever in blue jeans. Yeah,
(20:29):
that's right. October this year, the judicial misconduct complaints against
Judge Wynn and those other two judges got dismissed. The
Chief Judge, Debrah Livingston wrote the opinion in every single case,
and she found that there is no genuine issue of fact.
And then she added that whether quote the judge considered
(20:50):
the outcome of the election as one factor influencing his
decision to withdraw the January five letter, was a factual
issue you I need not resolve now. Had this judge
who was hearing this case simply asked judge when why
he rescinded his senior status, the judge could have defended
(21:14):
himself with some legitimate reason, but he never offered her reason,
and she never asked for a reason, because there is,
in my opinion, no plausible, legitimate reason he withdrew his
senior status simply because Donald Trump was going to be
the president and I want to be there because I
want to fight him every opportunity I get. Regrettably, this
(21:38):
is a brazen double standard for brazenly partisan federal judges.
The federal courts are always scrutinizing Trump's motivations for improper purposes,
but when it comes to rooting out judicial misconduct, they
hide behind a veil of ignorance. And this judge, in particular, judge,
(21:59):
when I think, has opened himself up to special criticism.
During the first Trump administration, the Fourth Circuit Court of
Appeals heard challenges to Donald Trump's travel bands, remember the
travel bans. A constant theme in that litigation was an
attempt to try the cycle analyze Donald Trump. The travel
ban policy, on its face was neutral and it was
(22:22):
based on very specific legal findings that aliens from certain
countries posed a national security risk. But judges looked beyond
the written policy to try to figure out what was Trump,
what was he thinking, what was he intending? What was
in his heart? What was in his mind? And then
one of their favorite pastimes was going over and reading
(22:45):
Donald Trump's posts on Twitter, his tweets, and then the
judges used the tweets to impute an impermissible animus to
Trump's policy. And that is pre basically what Judge Wynn did.
In December twenty seventeen, the Fourth Circuit had an on
(23:08):
bunk oral argument for the travel ban case. Judge Wynn
asked the lawyer for the Department of Justice about the
relevance of the president's tweets. The judge asked, what do
we do with those? Referring to the tweets? Do we
just ignore reality and look at the legality to determine
how to handle this case? Now, I know that most
(23:29):
of the people in this audience are not lawyers, but
I want you to think about this question. What do
we do with that those tweets? Do we just ignore
reality and look at the legality to determine how to
handle this case? What should be the answer to that?
You know, yes, the tweets are irrelevant. You look at
(23:53):
the policy. If you look at the four corners of
the policy, imagine the policy was written on an eight
and a half eleven eight and a half by eleven
sheet of paper. That's what you look at. What Trump
said about it, what he tweeted about it, how he
answered a question if press it doesn't make any difference.
The policy is the policy. In other words, this judge
(24:20):
was not going to get bogged down with the legalities
because that might force him to ignore what he saw
as the reality. Because at the top should what should
a judge do if the law cuts one way but
reality cuts the other way? And he was all too
happy to subject the leader of a coordinate branch of government,
(24:43):
an equal branch of government, to a now super strict scrutiny.
But he refused to engage in even the slightest bit
of self introspection himself. He declined offer any explanation for
his action. And so the chief judge who was overseeing
this judicial complaint should have posed the same question to
(25:04):
judge when the Judge Wynn posed to Donald Trump, do
we just ignore this reality and look at the legality
to determine handle how to handle your case? Maybe Judge
Wynn would have had an actual response to the complaint
filed against him, but I kind of doubt it. Judge
Win was all too eager to inquire into the president's
(25:27):
subjective motivations, yet implores you and me to ignore his
own subjective motivations in the emoluments clause litigation about you know,
whether Trump was you know, enriching himself when joined the
majority opinion that ruled against Trump. There's a shocker, right.
(25:48):
The judge was appalled that a dissenting judge alleged that
the majority of the you know, there were three judges
one descendant, and said, I think the two have partisan motivations,
insinuating that there was quote something other than the law
is afoot here? Should the public not see partisan motives
(26:13):
behind this judge's decision? Uh, you know, kind of like
the Wizard of Oz pay no attention to the man
under the robe. No, there just seems to be this
never ending stream of full outrage about judicial ethics. But
these self professed experts ignore actual problems when judges engage
(26:37):
in partisanship. You know, in fact, I may take a
break here, but let me just tell you be thinking
about oh, the icon of the left, think about justice.
Ruth Vader Ginsburg.
Speaker 2 (26:51):
Michael, the bare minimum you could do is work a
full week after I paid for the entire package. Just
to hear you, you and your show and dragon. But
he bailed A Rod's fine too, Jiminy Christmas. This is ridiculous, iHeart,
what are you doing with this guy?
Speaker 1 (27:11):
You know, just because you, as a member of the
United States Military, never do a full day's work anyway.
What you know, he's a jag officer, a rod. And
so what's he doing right now? He's on a cruise
out somewhere in the middle of the Pacific and he
wants me to adjust my schedule to his vacation schedule.
(27:34):
He's on a cruise. He's on a cruise.
Speaker 4 (27:36):
What is he doing?
Speaker 1 (27:37):
I don't know. He's certainly not doing any military work.
He's not you know, he's not a he's not doing
any court martials. He's not providing any legal advice. He's
he's listening to this program. We're about the state of
the the readiness of our military. There's the example right there.
Speaker 4 (27:54):
I go chriss all the time.
Speaker 3 (27:55):
And now I understand when he says he paid for
the package, those are not cheap. Why my package is
per ricey depending on the cruise line. He is a
dedicated he is He's also why are you listening right now?
Speaker 1 (28:07):
He is a p one and he actually used to
intern in this very studio. Really yeah, yeah, he interned
for Rosen Back. I mean he's an old part too.
He he in turn for rosen Back when Rosen was
ninety five years old.
Speaker 3 (28:21):
He could be paying a lot of money to listen
to you right now, a lot of them.
Speaker 1 (28:25):
I'm trying to give him a little airtime, you know,
you know, And that's that's the father of the little girl,
this says Michael says, go here, that's who that is. Yeah,
I should just get out his cell phone number right
now and just tell everybody to calling. But maybe he's
got his roaming on. Please, for the love do it.
(28:45):
I would accept he's being paid by the military, so
he's not I know, he's not making squats, so you know,
I can't do that. And we know, or maybe maybe
he told us he's on a cruise and he's really
on some super secret mission somewhere. Now Rodney's actually down
in Caracas getting even to invade Venezuela. I don't know
what he's doing. We never know what he's doing. Yeah,
(29:06):
that's right, as as you should. As you should. In
twenty sixteen, before the election, Justice Ginsburg called Trump a faker,
and she just like Rosie O'Donnell except miss going to Ireland.
Justice Ginsburg said, I'm going to move to New Zealand
if he wins. And today, after the election, Justice Ginsburg
(29:29):
wrote her dissent to the court. She was clearly protesting
Trump's election. Yet Ginsburg didn't leave the country because I
would have given Trump the power to appoint her replacement.
And then when she actually died on her deathbed, her
last words were, my most fervent wish is that I
(29:50):
will not be replaced until a new president is installed. Now,
is this a gigantic generalization and indictment the federal judiciary? Yeah,
it probably is. But I know there are some good
judges out there. But if you ever thought about why
we're having such a horrible time with things like national
(30:12):
injunctions and every ruling against going against Donald Trump or
the administration, Yes, judges are human and therefore they're partisan too.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Brothers Ortiz
The Brothers Ortiz is the story of two brothers–both successful, but in very different ways. Gabe Ortiz becomes a third-highest ranking officer in all of Texas while his younger brother Larry climbs the ranks in Puro Tango Blast, a notorious Texas Prison gang. Gabe doesn’t know all the details of his brother’s nefarious dealings, and he’s made a point not to ask, to protect their relationship. But when Larry is murdered during a home invasion in a rented beach house, Gabe has no choice but to look into what happened that night. To solve Larry’s murder, Gabe, and the whole Ortiz family, must ask each other tough questions.