Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Michael. This is max up in freedom to Hampshire. So
I went to the Walmarts this weekend to get my
kids since St. Patrick's Day stuff, you know, be festive
and all. What a disappointment. Not a single sombrero Ropennata's
only one lousy case of corona. Sir Basis. I know
we're a border state, but maybe Trump's taking this too far.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
FJP I haven't heard FJB in quite a while. It's
been a minute, It's been what almost two months?
Speaker 3 (00:31):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, we're you're right, we're coming up in
two months, two months and people are people's minds.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
You're just being blown away.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
It's it's hilarious, except I also know that for not
just me, but for you too, it's difficult because you
spend so much time talking people off the ledge. All right, now,
I got to finish this deportation of Trenda Ragua and
(01:02):
how it's being done under the Alien Enemies Act. Enemy
Aliens Act, I'm dyslexic. Today, the the court has been
clear that the power to do this is simply within
(01:22):
the President of the United States. In the Ledeki case
from nineteen forty eight, this German had been that was
being detained and removed. Was a German writer. He had
legally with a visa, resided in this country for more
than a decade. He had no history of violence, He
(01:46):
had no direct ties to any German military or even
any paramilitary unit. And this is years after the war
with Germany was over. And in that case, the Supreme
Court said, the presidents of the already under the law
and the constitution was absolute.
Speaker 2 (02:03):
As I've said.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
Now at least three times, you cannot even review.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
It, let alone block it, let alone reverse it.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
This is where Congress has constitutionally upheld by the Supreme
Court constitutionally given the power to the president to deport
people that they deem a threat to this country. Now
you can't do that to me. I'm an American citizen.
I have all the peneloply of rights under the US Constitution.
(02:36):
You would have to take me. You would have to start, well,
I guess you would start with a criminal case. I
led some crime that I've committed, treason, or I've committed
some you know, violation of some law that prohibits, you know,
comforting the enemy, whatever it may be. But I would
be entitled to a trial by my peers which would
(03:01):
be hard to find because you know, I'm so wonderful.
And then upon conviction, I'm entitled to an appeal, and
I could probably put off being deported because I need
to take this case up, and I can't perfect my appeal.
I can't really engage with my lawyers if you deported
(03:23):
me to Caracas, but here you had a German. It
is simply impossible, I think, to look at the law
and the facts in this case and somehow conclude that
a single inferior unelected judge who has a long history
of conspiring against this president and the United States for
(03:47):
that matter, because somehow he has the authority to personally
direct the elected commander in chief on how he is
to prosecute a war to protect our sovereignty from a
violent invading force. The Supreme Court has ruled that no
judge has the authority to do that, which again is
why I emphasized that at some point Justice Roberts, Chief
(04:10):
Justice Roberts, and listen name he called me, Barrett. You're
going to step up to the plate too. And I
would say to the three liberal judges, this is a
situation where national sovereignty is at stake, and we have
and I can't think again. I go back to Brown v.
Board of Education. Yes, there was a time in this
(04:32):
country room we thought separate but equal was the law.
But times changed and we realized, wait a minute, we're
still engaged in segregation, even though we ostensibly say we're
providing the same education to black children that were providing
the right children to white children.
Speaker 2 (04:51):
We knew that we weren't doing that.
Speaker 3 (04:54):
But setting aside whether it was equal education or not,
it was segregation. It was discrimination, and it violated the Constitution. Here,
the unassailable fact is that someone who comes here as
a guest has no right to stay here and has
(05:19):
no protection from being deported. And under this law, the
Commander in chief can deemed that you are a threat
to this nation's sovereignty. And have you deported.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
Yet?
Speaker 3 (05:34):
James Bosberg, this federal District court trial judge, the corrupt
federal judge who also personally made sure that a key
Rush Agate hoaxer and felon whose own fabrications he oversaw
never spent one day in prison, is now trying to
extort the Commander in Chief, Donald Trump, into preemptively submitting
(05:57):
all presidential decisions, including individual flight plans for him to review.
Stop and think about how that impunes the power of
the executive. The executive power of the United States shall
reside in the President of the United States. Article two.
(06:19):
It's the first paragraph. It's virtually the first sentence. I
think I'll have to go look it up. The point
this is just not a constitutional abomination. This is really
an attempt by inferior and unelected judges to somehow seize
the powers of the presidency from the commander in chief
on behalf of trendo ragua of someone who is here
(06:48):
who is violating not just our laws. You know, forget
for a moment that mak Mud Khalil, the Hamas supporter
from Columbia University, the green cardholder, Forget that he actually
violated New York and federal law. Right, Just forget that instead,
(07:10):
just pretend for a moment that all he did was
he talked about you know, he expressed his opinion that
Hamas is right that we ought to exterminate Israel from
the face of the earth. We ought to exterminate all
Jews from the face of the earth. That's in violation
of our foreign policy. That alone, in my opinion, is
(07:34):
outside the First Amendment, even though he's on American soil,
because you have another statute that says under the Alien
Enemies Act that you are acting in a way that's
an anathema to our foreign policy. You are materially supporting
(07:56):
our enemies. Hamos is an enemy of the United States.
Let me phrase it. What if he were here advocating
a material support for the Chinese Communist Party, or he
was here materially supporting Trenda or Ragua, he was here
supporting the cartels, he was here supporting Russia, supporting our
(08:20):
enemies around the world. The houthis, Oh, the Hoothies are
in the news. He's supporting the houthis. He's encouraging people
on the campus at Columbia University, or I don't know,
fifth Avenue of Midtown Manhattan. He is supporting that. He's
going up and trying to collect money or giving people
and incentive to send money to the houthis. Because all
(08:42):
we're doing, we're just bombing the crap out of them.
We're being awful. I'm sure that cabal would run up
to him and say, oh, this poor little guy. All
he was doing is just expressing his point of view,
his point of views and violation of US foreign policy.
As I said, this is more than just a constitutional abomination.
(09:03):
This is where a judge is trying to seize the
power under Article TiO and direct the president how to
conduct foreign policy, how to conduct immigration law. Now I saw,
I have to go back and find it. Now, I
just saw it during the break. Oh, I know it
(09:24):
is because it's a story. I want to go to
a minute. But in the story they talk about how
if Trump continues to defy this judge, that he's heading
toward a constitutional crisis. Oh well, then we should just
drop everything and Trump should just stop. Have you ever
(09:45):
thought about what a constitutional crisis is? I would argue
that any time that you have a case the of
litigation that involved an interpretation of the US Constitution, is
this free speech or not free speech? Do I have
(10:06):
a right to keep him bear arms or do I not?
Take any number of the Second Amendment cases that make
their way up to the Supreme Court, I would say
all of those are constitutional crises, at least under the
verbiage that the cabal uses it, because we're taking one
interpretation of the Constitution and those who want to disarm
(10:27):
us are taking another. View of the constitution. Well, that's
a crisis in my opinion, because you're trying to take
away my rights. So don't let this screeching from the
cabal that was somehow approaching our constitutional crisis convince you
that that's exactly what's going on. No, we're the president's
(10:48):
exercising is authority, and he will continue to exercise that authority.
And let's just play it out. Let let's play it
out in the down in the weeds, they would say
in DC. So let's say that the judge again enjoins,
issues an injunction stopping the president from taking Trenda Ragua
(11:11):
or cartel members to a prison in Guatemala, and he
just keeps doing it. What's going to happen? Will the
republic fall apart? No, it's a slap, don't get me wrong.
It's a slap at this judge, and it's a slap
at the legitimacy of the third branch of government, the judiciary.
(11:35):
But it will get resolved. It will get resolved this way. Uh,
it will go to the Court of Appeals, It'll go
to the Second Circuit and they will have an argument
about it, or it will go to the Fifth Circuit
or you know, any number of court of appeals somewhere,
courts of appeal. It will go to that, to the
appellate judges, and let's say that they rule against Trump
(11:59):
and say you can't do it, and Trump keeps doing it.
It will then go to the US Supreme Court. And
the US Supreme Court is now going to have to
take it up because now the US Supreme War is
faced with a constitutional issue. Who's right here the President
of the United States, who is following all of our
(12:20):
president that we sat forth since nineteen forty eight, and
that Congress has said, this is the power of the presidency.
We grant the president the power to conduct foreign policy.
And now the Supreme Court has to face that. The
only time you would have what I would consider to
be a legitimate constitutional crisis would be if the Supreme Court,
(12:45):
let's say, nine to zero, let's make it really dramatic,
nine to zero, said that the president, under Article II
and under these statutes has no authority to deport criminal
aliens out of the country without oh, I don't know,
let's say, a trial or a hearing, or maybe they
(13:07):
just can't he can't do it at all. And Donald
Trump says basically, see this middle finger. I'm going to
do it anyway. Now you have a constitutional crisis because
the president is ignoring the Supreme Court.
Speaker 2 (13:28):
Hm.
Speaker 3 (13:31):
Seems like not so long ago we had during the
administration of the auto pen, we had the autopen presidency.
We had somebody ignoring the Supreme Court and finding another
way around the Court's ruling that you can't forgive student
(13:52):
loan indebtedness. Hmm, I'm still here. You're still there, We're
still on air. That might be considered a constitutional crisis,
and here we are, so back to where we are today.
The law is clear. Judge Bossberg is maliciously ignoring the law,
(14:18):
putting the safety and sovereignty of the entire country at risk.
He needs to be held to account for his actions,
not the president. The president's following the law. Can you
imagine a country where a single judge sitting in one
courtroom out of all the courtrooms in the federal system
(14:43):
from California to Maine, one judge telling the president elected
by a majority of the people, the majority of the
electoral college, who has control of both houses of Congress,
trying to get people who are let's just take little
Aurora Colorado and Denver, where Venezuelan gangs are extorting people,
(15:08):
which is state and a federal crime, who are illegally
in possession of weapons. I thought something that left really
cared about was, you know, illegal weapons using a crime.
Oh my god, it's the end of the world. He's
taking those people. He's reaching an agreement with the president
of Guatemala that they will imprison those criminals in their prisons.
(15:31):
So he's just transferring those criminals to Guatemala. And one
judge is going to tell the president that you cannot
do that, imagining the hootspa that it takes to do that.
I think that what everyone is missing here is the yes,
(15:56):
is the president testing the limits of executive power?
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Maybe?
Speaker 3 (16:03):
Well, I think he's really doing is he's he is
exercising the executive power that the Supreme Court has said
that he has that all other presidents going before him,
except back in nineteen forty eight with Trumn, have been
unwilling to execute and too unform. And so it's because
(16:26):
we don't understand our history. It's all new to us,
and somehow it's scary. Everybody take a deep breath.
Speaker 4 (16:32):
Michael, I'm just wondering what legal recours there is against
these activist communist judges.
Speaker 2 (16:42):
Impeachment, absolutely, impeachment. What are the likelihood of that happening? Nil? Okay,
how about that? Nil?
Speaker 3 (17:00):
Why did I have a stupid Have I been hacked?
I want to get back to where we go. All
of a sudden, my page I had up, my document
dis disappeared. I can go on and on about the
Alien Act and what's it called, the Columbia University, apartheid,
(17:25):
divest organization, and everything that they're trying to do, but
let's take a break from it for a while, because well,
quite honestly, I'm just tired of it. Let's talk from
me about dismantling the Department of Education, because again, this
is one of those situations where I think that Trump's
(17:47):
doing the right thing, and the media is portraying it
as if it's the end of civilization, because oh my gosh,
if we get rid of the Department of Education, then
who's going to teach the rug rat? Well, just about
anybody's gonna teach the rug rats.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
It is. It's interesting to me.
Speaker 3 (18:12):
That everyone that has claimed that they want to get
rid of the Department of Education is now upset because
Trump's started the process by which to get rid of
the Department of Education. Well education so called executives like
Randy Weingarten make hundreds of thousands more than teachers, eight
(18:33):
eight times in fact, more than teachers. She takes home
almost six hundred thousand dollars a year, and yet they
don't teach a single child, nor do they even teach
the teachers.
Speaker 2 (18:44):
They're just leeches on the system.
Speaker 3 (18:47):
She was on MSN, Randy Weingarten, the president of the
American Teachers.
Speaker 5 (18:52):
It's like visceration by one thousand cuts.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
So do you want to do this?
Speaker 2 (18:57):
That's the fight with.
Speaker 5 (18:58):
Us in Congress.
Speaker 4 (19:00):
Let's make sure we.
Speaker 5 (19:01):
Get the issues out there.
Speaker 2 (19:03):
I'm so mad.
Speaker 5 (19:04):
I'm spitting mad about this because it's hurting the people
who can't vote. Children don't vote. Let's not take away
their opportunity.
Speaker 3 (19:13):
And when they let's not take away their opportunities. Their
opportunities for what Wait a minute, I thought she was
all about that.
Speaker 5 (19:23):
I think about what happens in Texas, in particular, all
those rural schools, schools they don't have the choice, they
don't have like a private school or charter school down
the street.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
So it just basically defunds them. Yeah, it's exactly.
Speaker 3 (19:41):
Oh what she says, school choice will defund rural schools
in Texas because they don't have like a private school
or charter school down the street. Well, wait, which one
isn't If there really aren't any other options, then the
rural public.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
School aren't going to lose any money?
Speaker 3 (19:59):
Was that all of that hypocrisy, in that insanity aside?
What Trump's doing here is recognizing that we have spent billions,
billions of dollars on the Department of Education since it
was implemented by Jimmy Carter, and what do we have
to show for it? All test scores are down reading, math, science,
(20:25):
All these test scores are just plummeting. So you would
think that when we spend more per pupil than almost
any of the other country in the world, and yet
we're near the bottom when it comes to ranking in
terms of education progress and education of students, then that
(20:46):
bureaucracy is not doing anything.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
What is it? Well, once again he goes back to
the grift.
Speaker 3 (20:53):
Now, let's think though about what that means to not you,
but say your friend or your spouse who is a
teacher or people who really you know, unlike me, I'm well,
I don't disbelieve in public education. I think public education
has become more of an indoctrination facility than anything else,
(21:15):
and I think we ought to completely blow it up
and start over. I think we ought to really consider
privatizing education. I really do believe that public education has
come has has utterly failed this nation. And I know
I'm an outlier on that, but that's fine. If I
can take that position and get you know, significant changes made,
(21:36):
then you know, mission accomplished. But what's Trent? If we're
not getting our money's worth, then what's going on here?
Go back to this thing that I learned about early
this morning that apparently, and maybe it's more than just
the Adams County schools, but they're not having school on Thursday,
(21:59):
even though this week of spring break for many schools
it's not for them. But they're not having school on
Thursday because they have a labor shortage, because teachers are
going to.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
March on the capital.
Speaker 3 (22:14):
They're marching on the capitol because Polish wants to change
the way the daily attendance has counted or something, the
per pupil count is done, and that they claim that
education in Colorado is underfunded by four billion dollars, that
whatever change is that police.
Speaker 2 (22:31):
Is making is going to cost schools.
Speaker 3 (22:34):
Schools in Colorado, you know, a couple of million dollars
or whatever. The numbers are immterial. So here you have
teachers taking off work in schools where they're not on
spring break so they can go march on the capital
to lobby the teachers that make up a lot of
(22:56):
the legislators at the Poloit Bureau for more money for
a failing system. And all that's being done by unions
who are telling teachers to take personal leave so they
can take the time off so your kid won't learn
for a day so they can go beg for more money.
(23:16):
You want to see my property tax bill, and you
want to see how much of that goes to Douglas
County schools.
Speaker 2 (23:23):
I don't have a lot.
Speaker 3 (23:24):
Of beef with Douglas County schools, except they flip flop
back and forth all the time on the school boards.
One time, you know, for a year or two, it
might be conservative, in a year or two it's liberal.
And they get into a fight and they go back
and forth. They can't seem to make up their minds
what they really want to be and I think that
hurts children, which is why I think this whole system
of this top down management from the Department of Ed
(23:46):
is is just wrong. So how do you dismantle the
Department of Education? Well, Linda McMahon says, first of all,
they're going to start getting rid of programs that are,
you know, involved in waste, fraud and abuse. They might
find that that takes care of a lot of the problems,
but it will take congressional approval to literally abolish the
(24:09):
Department of Ed.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
So how do you make that happen?
Speaker 3 (24:14):
Well, I think that whether this is on purpose or not,
when you start showing the waste, fraud and abuse, and
you can tie that to individual taxpayers. For example, how
much are we funding to the Department of Ed. And
if you could go through my formula about a tax dollar,
(24:35):
one dollar that gets collected by the Internal Revenue Service,
that then gets appropriated by Congress, that then finally gets
to OMB that finally disperses it out to the Department
of Education, that one dollar is no longer a dollar.
Speaker 2 (24:50):
We're lucky if.
Speaker 3 (24:50):
It's fifty cents, and then that fifty cents then gets
distributed out to fifty states. So at what every state
now gets a penny and then that penny then gets
distributed among districts or among Yeah, we then get to
(25:10):
the different school boards in the states. I lost where
I was on the levels. Well, by the time you
get that, you're talking about fractions of pennies. Why not
eliminate that all together and just say one, We're not
going to spend that money anymore. I'd be totally fine
(25:31):
if because let me, let me back up what I
pay in property taxes. I don't know what percentage it
is of the total funding of Douglas County schools, but
it's not eighty or ninety percent. I'm lucky if it's
fifty percent, because then my income taxes are going to
(25:55):
the FEDS, and that's being you know, sifted down to
pay for all the administration state and deep state to
finally get to a local school board. So the local
school board is getting money from me from both pockets,
from my property taxes and from my income taxes. Well,
I'd rather you just tell me the truth about what
it really costs to fund Douglas County schools at what level?
(26:20):
Where I can see that kids are actually getting an education,
and whether that's through test scores or whatever it might be.
But give me some metric that shows me that you're
actually teaching kids and it's having an effect a result.
Show me the metrics, and then if that means that
my income taxes can be reduced, but my property taxes
(26:43):
might go.
Speaker 2 (26:44):
Up a little bit. As much as I don't want
my property taxes to go.
Speaker 3 (26:47):
Up, as much as I believe in education, if you
can show me that I'm getting value for my dollar,
I might consider it. But you can't show me I'm
getting any value for my dollar. Now, I'm not convinced
the Congress, even Republicans, would ever vote to dismantle the
Department of Ed. You know why, because the cabal is
(27:11):
going to scream, just like Randy Weingarten screams. They're going
to scream about how that's not going to do anything
to help educate kids. They can't do it. This effort
by Doge Forget Elon Musk. I'm so tired of Elon Musk. Actually,
(27:35):
I feel sorry for him because he's getting the brunt
of doing something that is really good. He's exposing the
waste the fraud, the abuse, he's exposing the grift that
all of these people Republicans and Democrats are like, are
engaged in. Now do we have the political will to
(27:57):
change it? That's where I start getting a little cynical,
a little depressed that we don't, because the cabal is
beginning to step in and say, oh, if you get
rid of the Department of Education, we're going to have
an entire generation of numbskulls. Well, I look around right now,
(28:18):
I'm thinking we've already got a generation of numbskulls. So
it can't get worse, it can only get better. So
why not think about completely changing the paradigm of how
we do education? And once we do that, show me
a metric. And I think people would be willing to
pay if they knew they were getting their money's worth,
(28:40):
which were not.
Speaker 4 (28:41):
A nine o'clock news hour reported that Trump is investigating
BEMA funds sent to Denver. Did the Commie Bureau suffer
a natural disaster.
Speaker 2 (28:56):
From all their hot air and they.
Speaker 4 (28:59):
Applied for funds?
Speaker 3 (29:01):
I just happened to have that letter in front of
me in State of March eleven, twenty twenty five. It
goes to Dan fector at the Denver City and County Building.
It cites three different grants from September of twenty twenty
five than another grant performance I'm sorry from March and
twenty three to September twenty twenty five, one from October
(29:22):
twenty three to September twenty twenty six, one from October one,
twenty twenty three to September thirty, twenty twenty six, and
it says the purpose of the letters to notify you
that we're withholding payments pursuit to particular rule because they
have significant concerns that this funding is going to entities
(29:45):
that are engaged in or facilitating illegal activities. The letter
says this the Department is concerned that entities receiving payment
under this program may be guilty of encouraging or inducing
alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United
States in violation of Title certain sections, or of transporting
(30:09):
or moving illegal aliens again citing Title aid another section,
or of harboring, concealing, or shielding from detection illegal aliens
again Title eight certain sections, or applicable conspiracy, aiding or abetting,
or attempt liability respecting these statutes, and it points out
that DHS FEMA is required to make sure that the
(30:32):
grant awards comply with federal statute. Now let's stop for
a moment and back up, because this funding is for
emergency housing and emergency support, including things like meals or
clothing or healthcare. Now, generally speaking, this is for FEMA
(30:58):
funds go for under the disaster. Under the Stafford Act,
FEMA funds go to natural or man made disasters. If
you try to argue that these illegal aliens here is
a man made disaster, then you're ignoring the plain language
of the Stafford Act, which would define a man made
(31:18):
disaster as something like, oh, I don't know, like nine
to eleven, which indeed was a terrorist act, but it
was a man made disaster. Or it could be something like, oh,
I don't know, an eighteen weel are going into a
substation and knocking power out and it's going to take
weeks and weeks to solve it. And you've got elderly
(31:39):
or other people that don't have any means, there's no
ability for the city in County of Denver to care
for them. So you might provide some temporary housing for
those American citizens illegals who are enticed by the autopen
presidency and all before it to come. This country is
(32:00):
not a man made disaster. So what you're doing is
you are indeed what that you are encouraging or inducing
an alien to come to this country because you will
get clothing, housing, transportation, and healthcare, all of which are
(32:20):
funded under these grants from FEMA. Now I can tell
you I'm not trying to beat my chest here, but
if Bush had come to me and said, hey, send
Denver a grant for you know, to see it's nine nineteen,
it's some thirty one million dollars to house illegal aliens,
(32:42):
I would resign.
Speaker 2 (32:43):
That's a misuse of federal dollars.
Michael. This is max up in freedom to Hampshire. So
I went to the Walmarts this weekend to get my
kids since St. Patrick's Day stuff, you know, be festive
and all. What a disappointment. Not a single sombrero Ropennata's
only one lousy case of corona. Sir Basis. I know
we're a border state, but maybe Trump's taking this too far.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
FJP I haven't heard FJB in quite a while. It's
been a minute, It's been what almost two months?
Speaker 3 (00:31):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, we're you're right, we're coming up in
two months, two months and people are people's minds.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
You're just being blown away.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
It's it's hilarious, except I also know that for not
just me, but for you too, it's difficult because you
spend so much time talking people off the ledge. All right, now,
I got to finish this deportation of Trenda Ragua and
(01:02):
how it's being done under the Alien Enemies Act. Enemy
Aliens Act, I'm dyslexic. Today, the the court has been
clear that the power to do this is simply within
(01:22):
the President of the United States. In the Ledeki case
from nineteen forty eight, this German had been that was
being detained and removed. Was a German writer. He had
legally with a visa, resided in this country for more
than a decade. He had no history of violence, He
(01:46):
had no direct ties to any German military or even
any paramilitary unit. And this is years after the war
with Germany was over. And in that case, the Supreme
Court said, the presidents of the already under the law
and the constitution was absolute.
Speaker 2 (02:03):
As I've said.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
Now at least three times, you cannot even review.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
It, let alone block it, let alone reverse it.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
This is where Congress has constitutionally upheld by the Supreme
Court constitutionally given the power to the president to deport
people that they deem a threat to this country. Now
you can't do that to me. I'm an American citizen.
I have all the peneloply of rights under the US Constitution.
(02:36):
You would have to take me. You would have to start, well,
I guess you would start with a criminal case. I
led some crime that I've committed, treason, or I've committed
some you know, violation of some law that prohibits, you know,
comforting the enemy, whatever it may be. But I would
be entitled to a trial by my peers which would
(03:01):
be hard to find because you know, I'm so wonderful.
And then upon conviction, I'm entitled to an appeal, and
I could probably put off being deported because I need
to take this case up, and I can't perfect my appeal.
I can't really engage with my lawyers if you deported
(03:23):
me to Caracas, but here you had a German. It
is simply impossible, I think, to look at the law
and the facts in this case and somehow conclude that
a single inferior unelected judge who has a long history
of conspiring against this president and the United States for
(03:47):
that matter, because somehow he has the authority to personally
direct the elected commander in chief on how he is
to prosecute a war to protect our sovereignty from a
violent invading force. The Supreme Court has ruled that no
judge has the authority to do that, which again is
why I emphasized that at some point Justice Roberts, Chief
(04:10):
Justice Roberts, and listen name he called me, Barrett. You're
going to step up to the plate too. And I
would say to the three liberal judges, this is a
situation where national sovereignty is at stake, and we have
and I can't think again. I go back to Brown v.
Board of Education. Yes, there was a time in this
(04:32):
country room we thought separate but equal was the law.
But times changed and we realized, wait a minute, we're
still engaged in segregation, even though we ostensibly say we're
providing the same education to black children that were providing
the right children to white children.
Speaker 2 (04:51):
We knew that we weren't doing that.
Speaker 3 (04:54):
But setting aside whether it was equal education or not,
it was segregation. It was discrimination, and it violated the Constitution. Here,
the unassailable fact is that someone who comes here as
a guest has no right to stay here and has
(05:19):
no protection from being deported. And under this law, the
Commander in chief can deemed that you are a threat
to this nation's sovereignty. And have you deported.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
Yet?
Speaker 3 (05:34):
James Bosberg, this federal District court trial judge, the corrupt
federal judge who also personally made sure that a key
Rush Agate hoaxer and felon whose own fabrications he oversaw
never spent one day in prison, is now trying to
extort the Commander in Chief, Donald Trump, into preemptively submitting
(05:57):
all presidential decisions, including individual flight plans for him to review.
Stop and think about how that impunes the power of
the executive. The executive power of the United States shall
reside in the President of the United States. Article two.
(06:19):
It's the first paragraph. It's virtually the first sentence. I
think I'll have to go look it up. The point
this is just not a constitutional abomination. This is really
an attempt by inferior and unelected judges to somehow seize
the powers of the presidency from the commander in chief
on behalf of trendo ragua of someone who is here
(06:48):
who is violating not just our laws. You know, forget
for a moment that mak Mud Khalil, the Hamas supporter
from Columbia University, the green cardholder, Forget that he actually
violated New York and federal law. Right, Just forget that instead,
(07:10):
just pretend for a moment that all he did was
he talked about you know, he expressed his opinion that
Hamas is right that we ought to exterminate Israel from
the face of the earth. We ought to exterminate all
Jews from the face of the earth. That's in violation
of our foreign policy. That alone, in my opinion, is
(07:34):
outside the First Amendment, even though he's on American soil,
because you have another statute that says under the Alien
Enemies Act that you are acting in a way that's
an anathema to our foreign policy. You are materially supporting
(07:56):
our enemies. Hamos is an enemy of the United States.
Let me phrase it. What if he were here advocating
a material support for the Chinese Communist Party, or he
was here materially supporting Trenda or Ragua, he was here
supporting the cartels, he was here supporting Russia, supporting our
(08:20):
enemies around the world. The houthis, Oh, the Hoothies are
in the news. He's supporting the houthis. He's encouraging people
on the campus at Columbia University, or I don't know,
fifth Avenue of Midtown Manhattan. He is supporting that. He's
going up and trying to collect money or giving people
and incentive to send money to the houthis. Because all
(08:42):
we're doing, we're just bombing the crap out of them.
We're being awful. I'm sure that cabal would run up
to him and say, oh, this poor little guy. All
he was doing is just expressing his point of view,
his point of views and violation of US foreign policy.
As I said, this is more than just a constitutional abomination.
(09:03):
This is where a judge is trying to seize the
power under Article TiO and direct the president how to
conduct foreign policy, how to conduct immigration law. Now I saw,
I have to go back and find it. Now, I
just saw it during the break. Oh, I know it
(09:24):
is because it's a story. I want to go to
a minute. But in the story they talk about how
if Trump continues to defy this judge, that he's heading
toward a constitutional crisis. Oh well, then we should just
drop everything and Trump should just stop. Have you ever
(09:45):
thought about what a constitutional crisis is? I would argue
that any time that you have a case the of
litigation that involved an interpretation of the US Constitution, is
this free speech or not free speech? Do I have
(10:06):
a right to keep him bear arms or do I not?
Take any number of the Second Amendment cases that make
their way up to the Supreme Court, I would say
all of those are constitutional crises, at least under the
verbiage that the cabal uses it, because we're taking one
interpretation of the Constitution and those who want to disarm
(10:27):
us are taking another. View of the constitution. Well, that's
a crisis in my opinion, because you're trying to take
away my rights. So don't let this screeching from the
cabal that was somehow approaching our constitutional crisis convince you
that that's exactly what's going on. No, we're the president's
(10:48):
exercising is authority, and he will continue to exercise that authority.
And let's just play it out. Let let's play it
out in the down in the weeds, they would say
in DC. So let's say that the judge again enjoins,
issues an injunction stopping the president from taking Trenda Ragua
(11:11):
or cartel members to a prison in Guatemala, and he
just keeps doing it. What's going to happen? Will the
republic fall apart? No, it's a slap, don't get me wrong.
It's a slap at this judge, and it's a slap
at the legitimacy of the third branch of government, the judiciary.
(11:35):
But it will get resolved. It will get resolved this way. Uh,
it will go to the Court of Appeals, It'll go
to the Second Circuit and they will have an argument
about it, or it will go to the Fifth Circuit
or you know, any number of court of appeals somewhere,
courts of appeal. It will go to that, to the
appellate judges, and let's say that they rule against Trump
(11:59):
and say you can't do it, and Trump keeps doing it.
It will then go to the US Supreme Court. And
the US Supreme Court is now going to have to
take it up because now the US Supreme War is
faced with a constitutional issue. Who's right here the President
of the United States, who is following all of our
(12:20):
president that we sat forth since nineteen forty eight, and
that Congress has said, this is the power of the presidency.
We grant the president the power to conduct foreign policy.
And now the Supreme Court has to face that. The
only time you would have what I would consider to
be a legitimate constitutional crisis would be if the Supreme Court,
(12:45):
let's say, nine to zero, let's make it really dramatic,
nine to zero, said that the president, under Article II
and under these statutes has no authority to deport criminal
aliens out of the country without oh, I don't know,
let's say, a trial or a hearing, or maybe they
(13:07):
just can't he can't do it at all. And Donald
Trump says basically, see this middle finger. I'm going to
do it anyway. Now you have a constitutional crisis because
the president is ignoring the Supreme Court.
Speaker 2 (13:28):
Hm.
Speaker 3 (13:31):
Seems like not so long ago we had during the
administration of the auto pen, we had the autopen presidency.
We had somebody ignoring the Supreme Court and finding another
way around the Court's ruling that you can't forgive student
(13:52):
loan indebtedness. Hmm, I'm still here. You're still there, We're
still on air. That might be considered a constitutional crisis,
and here we are, so back to where we are today.
The law is clear. Judge Bossberg is maliciously ignoring the law,
(14:18):
putting the safety and sovereignty of the entire country at risk.
He needs to be held to account for his actions,
not the president. The president's following the law. Can you
imagine a country where a single judge sitting in one
courtroom out of all the courtrooms in the federal system
(14:43):
from California to Maine, one judge telling the president elected
by a majority of the people, the majority of the
electoral college, who has control of both houses of Congress,
trying to get people who are let's just take little
Aurora Colorado and Denver, where Venezuelan gangs are extorting people,
(15:08):
which is state and a federal crime, who are illegally
in possession of weapons. I thought something that left really
cared about was, you know, illegal weapons using a crime.
Oh my god, it's the end of the world. He's
taking those people. He's reaching an agreement with the president
of Guatemala that they will imprison those criminals in their prisons.
(15:31):
So he's just transferring those criminals to Guatemala. And one
judge is going to tell the president that you cannot
do that, imagining the hootspa that it takes to do that.
I think that what everyone is missing here is the yes,
(15:56):
is the president testing the limits of executive power?
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Maybe?
Speaker 3 (16:03):
Well, I think he's really doing is he's he is
exercising the executive power that the Supreme Court has said
that he has that all other presidents going before him,
except back in nineteen forty eight with Trumn, have been
unwilling to execute and too unform. And so it's because
(16:26):
we don't understand our history. It's all new to us,
and somehow it's scary. Everybody take a deep breath.
Speaker 4 (16:32):
Michael, I'm just wondering what legal recours there is against
these activist communist judges.
Speaker 2 (16:42):
Impeachment, absolutely, impeachment. What are the likelihood of that happening? Nil? Okay,
how about that? Nil?
Speaker 3 (17:00):
Why did I have a stupid Have I been hacked?
I want to get back to where we go. All
of a sudden, my page I had up, my document
dis disappeared. I can go on and on about the
Alien Act and what's it called, the Columbia University, apartheid,
(17:25):
divest organization, and everything that they're trying to do, but
let's take a break from it for a while, because well,
quite honestly, I'm just tired of it. Let's talk from
me about dismantling the Department of Education, because again, this
is one of those situations where I think that Trump's
(17:47):
doing the right thing, and the media is portraying it
as if it's the end of civilization, because oh my gosh,
if we get rid of the Department of Education, then
who's going to teach the rug rat? Well, just about
anybody's gonna teach the rug rats.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
It is. It's interesting to me.
Speaker 3 (18:12):
That everyone that has claimed that they want to get
rid of the Department of Education is now upset because
Trump's started the process by which to get rid of
the Department of Education. Well education so called executives like
Randy Weingarten make hundreds of thousands more than teachers, eight
(18:33):
eight times in fact, more than teachers. She takes home
almost six hundred thousand dollars a year, and yet they
don't teach a single child, nor do they even teach
the teachers.
Speaker 2 (18:44):
They're just leeches on the system.
Speaker 3 (18:47):
She was on MSN, Randy Weingarten, the president of the
American Teachers.
Speaker 5 (18:52):
It's like visceration by one thousand cuts.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
So do you want to do this?
Speaker 2 (18:57):
That's the fight with.
Speaker 5 (18:58):
Us in Congress.
Speaker 4 (19:00):
Let's make sure we.
Speaker 5 (19:01):
Get the issues out there.
Speaker 2 (19:03):
I'm so mad.
Speaker 5 (19:04):
I'm spitting mad about this because it's hurting the people
who can't vote. Children don't vote. Let's not take away
their opportunity.
Speaker 3 (19:13):
And when they let's not take away their opportunities. Their
opportunities for what Wait a minute, I thought she was
all about that.
Speaker 5 (19:23):
I think about what happens in Texas, in particular, all
those rural schools, schools they don't have the choice, they
don't have like a private school or charter school down
the street.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
So it just basically defunds them. Yeah, it's exactly.
Speaker 3 (19:41):
Oh what she says, school choice will defund rural schools
in Texas because they don't have like a private school
or charter school down the street. Well, wait, which one
isn't If there really aren't any other options, then the
rural public.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
School aren't going to lose any money?
Speaker 3 (19:59):
Was that all of that hypocrisy, in that insanity aside?
What Trump's doing here is recognizing that we have spent billions,
billions of dollars on the Department of Education since it
was implemented by Jimmy Carter, and what do we have
to show for it? All test scores are down reading, math, science,
(20:25):
All these test scores are just plummeting. So you would
think that when we spend more per pupil than almost
any of the other country in the world, and yet
we're near the bottom when it comes to ranking in
terms of education progress and education of students, then that
(20:46):
bureaucracy is not doing anything.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
What is it? Well, once again he goes back to
the grift.
Speaker 3 (20:53):
Now, let's think though about what that means to not you,
but say your friend or your spouse who is a
teacher or people who really you know, unlike me, I'm well,
I don't disbelieve in public education. I think public education
has become more of an indoctrination facility than anything else,
(21:15):
and I think we ought to completely blow it up
and start over. I think we ought to really consider
privatizing education. I really do believe that public education has
come has has utterly failed this nation. And I know
I'm an outlier on that, but that's fine. If I
can take that position and get you know, significant changes made,
(21:36):
then you know, mission accomplished. But what's Trent? If we're
not getting our money's worth, then what's going on here?
Go back to this thing that I learned about early
this morning that apparently, and maybe it's more than just
the Adams County schools, but they're not having school on Thursday,
(21:59):
even though this week of spring break for many schools
it's not for them. But they're not having school on
Thursday because they have a labor shortage, because teachers are
going to.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
March on the capital.
Speaker 3 (22:14):
They're marching on the capitol because Polish wants to change
the way the daily attendance has counted or something, the
per pupil count is done, and that they claim that
education in Colorado is underfunded by four billion dollars, that
whatever change is that police.
Speaker 2 (22:31):
Is making is going to cost schools.
Speaker 3 (22:34):
Schools in Colorado, you know, a couple of million dollars
or whatever. The numbers are immterial. So here you have
teachers taking off work in schools where they're not on
spring break so they can go march on the capital
to lobby the teachers that make up a lot of
(22:56):
the legislators at the Poloit Bureau for more money for
a failing system. And all that's being done by unions
who are telling teachers to take personal leave so they
can take the time off so your kid won't learn
for a day so they can go beg for more money.
(23:16):
You want to see my property tax bill, and you
want to see how much of that goes to Douglas
County schools.
Speaker 2 (23:23):
I don't have a lot.
Speaker 3 (23:24):
Of beef with Douglas County schools, except they flip flop
back and forth all the time on the school boards.
One time, you know, for a year or two, it
might be conservative, in a year or two it's liberal.
And they get into a fight and they go back
and forth. They can't seem to make up their minds
what they really want to be and I think that
hurts children, which is why I think this whole system
of this top down management from the Department of Ed
(23:46):
is is just wrong. So how do you dismantle the
Department of Education? Well, Linda McMahon says, first of all,
they're going to start getting rid of programs that are,
you know, involved in waste, fraud and abuse. They might
find that that takes care of a lot of the problems,
but it will take congressional approval to literally abolish the
(24:09):
Department of Ed.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
So how do you make that happen?
Speaker 3 (24:14):
Well, I think that whether this is on purpose or not,
when you start showing the waste, fraud and abuse, and
you can tie that to individual taxpayers. For example, how
much are we funding to the Department of Ed. And
if you could go through my formula about a tax dollar,
(24:35):
one dollar that gets collected by the Internal Revenue Service,
that then gets appropriated by Congress, that then finally gets
to OMB that finally disperses it out to the Department
of Education, that one dollar is no longer a dollar.
Speaker 2 (24:50):
We're lucky if.
Speaker 3 (24:50):
It's fifty cents, and then that fifty cents then gets
distributed out to fifty states. So at what every state
now gets a penny and then that penny then gets
distributed among districts or among Yeah, we then get to
(25:10):
the different school boards in the states. I lost where
I was on the levels. Well, by the time you
get that, you're talking about fractions of pennies. Why not
eliminate that all together and just say one, We're not
going to spend that money anymore. I'd be totally fine
(25:31):
if because let me, let me back up what I
pay in property taxes. I don't know what percentage it
is of the total funding of Douglas County schools, but
it's not eighty or ninety percent. I'm lucky if it's
fifty percent, because then my income taxes are going to
(25:55):
the FEDS, and that's being you know, sifted down to
pay for all the administration state and deep state to
finally get to a local school board. So the local
school board is getting money from me from both pockets,
from my property taxes and from my income taxes. Well,
I'd rather you just tell me the truth about what
it really costs to fund Douglas County schools at what level?
(26:20):
Where I can see that kids are actually getting an education,
and whether that's through test scores or whatever it might be.
But give me some metric that shows me that you're
actually teaching kids and it's having an effect a result.
Show me the metrics, and then if that means that
my income taxes can be reduced, but my property taxes
(26:43):
might go.
Speaker 2 (26:44):
Up a little bit. As much as I don't want
my property taxes to go.
Speaker 3 (26:47):
Up, as much as I believe in education, if you
can show me that I'm getting value for my dollar,
I might consider it. But you can't show me I'm
getting any value for my dollar. Now, I'm not convinced
the Congress, even Republicans, would ever vote to dismantle the
Department of Ed. You know why, because the cabal is
(27:11):
going to scream, just like Randy Weingarten screams. They're going
to scream about how that's not going to do anything
to help educate kids. They can't do it. This effort
by Doge Forget Elon Musk. I'm so tired of Elon Musk. Actually,
(27:35):
I feel sorry for him because he's getting the brunt
of doing something that is really good. He's exposing the
waste the fraud, the abuse, he's exposing the grift that
all of these people Republicans and Democrats are like, are
engaged in. Now do we have the political will to
(27:57):
change it? That's where I start getting a little cynical,
a little depressed that we don't, because the cabal is
beginning to step in and say, oh, if you get
rid of the Department of Education, we're going to have
an entire generation of numbskulls. Well, I look around right now,
(28:18):
I'm thinking we've already got a generation of numbskulls. So
it can't get worse, it can only get better. So
why not think about completely changing the paradigm of how
we do education? And once we do that, show me
a metric. And I think people would be willing to
pay if they knew they were getting their money's worth,
(28:40):
which were not.
Speaker 4 (28:41):
A nine o'clock news hour reported that Trump is investigating
BEMA funds sent to Denver. Did the Commie Bureau suffer
a natural disaster.
Speaker 2 (28:56):
From all their hot air and they.
Speaker 4 (28:59):
Applied for funds?
Speaker 3 (29:01):
I just happened to have that letter in front of
me in State of March eleven, twenty twenty five. It
goes to Dan fector at the Denver City and County Building.
It cites three different grants from September of twenty twenty
five than another grant performance I'm sorry from March and
twenty three to September twenty twenty five, one from October
(29:22):
twenty three to September twenty twenty six, one from October one,
twenty twenty three to September thirty, twenty twenty six, and
it says the purpose of the letters to notify you
that we're withholding payments pursuit to particular rule because they
have significant concerns that this funding is going to entities
(29:45):
that are engaged in or facilitating illegal activities. The letter
says this the Department is concerned that entities receiving payment
under this program may be guilty of encouraging or inducing
alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United
States in violation of Title certain sections, or of transporting
(30:09):
or moving illegal aliens again citing Title aid another section,
or of harboring, concealing, or shielding from detection illegal aliens
again Title eight certain sections, or applicable conspiracy, aiding or abetting,
or attempt liability respecting these statutes, and it points out
that DHS FEMA is required to make sure that the
(30:32):
grant awards comply with federal statute. Now let's stop for
a moment and back up, because this funding is for
emergency housing and emergency support, including things like meals or
clothing or healthcare. Now, generally speaking, this is for FEMA
(30:58):
funds go for under the disaster. Under the Stafford Act,
FEMA funds go to natural or man made disasters. If
you try to argue that these illegal aliens here is
a man made disaster, then you're ignoring the plain language
of the Stafford Act, which would define a man made
(31:18):
disaster as something like, oh, I don't know, like nine
to eleven, which indeed was a terrorist act, but it
was a man made disaster. Or it could be something like, oh,
I don't know, an eighteen weel are going into a
substation and knocking power out and it's going to take
weeks and weeks to solve it. And you've got elderly
(31:39):
or other people that don't have any means, there's no
ability for the city in County of Denver to care
for them. So you might provide some temporary housing for
those American citizens illegals who are enticed by the autopen
presidency and all before it to come. This country is
(32:00):
not a man made disaster. So what you're doing is
you are indeed what that you are encouraging or inducing
an alien to come to this country because you will
get clothing, housing, transportation, and healthcare, all of which are
(32:20):
funded under these grants from FEMA. Now I can tell
you I'm not trying to beat my chest here, but
if Bush had come to me and said, hey, send
Denver a grant for you know, to see it's nine nineteen,
it's some thirty one million dollars to house illegal aliens,
(32:42):
I would resign.
Speaker 2 (32:43):
That's a misuse of federal dollars.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
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.