Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
The Channel nine first one to other hole cast today
mostly excited to be windy though seven pm and after
looking for some spotty showers, today's ygh forty two. That
spotty shower turn into a wintery mix overnight. It's now
possible it's going down to eighteen degrees Tomorrow's high twenty
six because it's going to be greezy under sunny skys.
It's going to feel more like fifteen overnight. Another cold
night sixteen degrees, clear skies, sunny on Friday with aya
(00:27):
thirty four twenty seven degrees. Right now, it's about PERCD
talk station Chuck Ingram Tier traffor.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
I'm the u S Help Traffic Center you see help
Weight Boss center offers comprehensive OBECD care and advanced surgical
expertise called five to one three nine three nine two
two sixty three. That's nine three nine twenty two sixty three.
Cruise continue to work with the wreck East found two
seventy five at seventy five in Earlwaninger left plane's blocked
off traffic back some Miniova Pike, then northbound seventy five
(00:55):
slows from there into the cut. Southbound seventy five continues
slow in and out of Lachlan in South seventy one.
You're offing on the brakes from two seventy five down
to Red Bank. This is Santa's list Day. That is
the day where everyone finds out if they're on the
naddy or the nice list. A guest coming up next,
(01:16):
I'm pretty sure he's on the nice list. The Judge's next,
Chuck Ingram on fifty five krc DE talk station.
Speaker 1 (01:26):
Now, who can argue with that? Eight thirty and a
very happy Wednesday reminder, since I know so many people
are tuned in right now because it's the appointment listening
with Judge enital Polatano. It's listener lunch day, last day
or last lunch of the year. We'll be at price
deal Chili. Judge of Politano will not he is. I'm
looking at him right now on zoom call. Welcome back here, Honor.
(01:46):
You know how much I look forward to this. It
looks like you're at a different venue today.
Speaker 3 (01:50):
I am. I am. I'm in my office in New
York City, where I will be for the next I
don't know how long, slightly different schedules. You see me
instead of follow shirt and unshaven with a coat and
tie and clean shaven.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
Look, you're looking great. I'm sure you've got a whole
lot on your plate, as you typically do. And we'll
find out what's going on with judging freedom coming up
at the end of the segment, as we always do.
But this one, I've been calling all morning an upcoming
constitutional law lesson. We're going to be We're going to
be engaged in a deeper die because when I read
(02:28):
the topic, or when I read your columns heading, you
captured the column three cheers for Hunter's pardon, and I
started worrying, because you know, every once in a while
my listener's perspectives on politics and life will come into
a measure of disagreement with the judge, like I can't
believe he said that. And I'll defend you all day long.
(02:48):
I'll defend your position even if I disagree with it,
because we engage in a thoughtful conversation. And I wasn't
expecting you to back up to where you went when
I was starting to read the column, and the point
being fundamentally the original point that you make regularly one
that the foundation, the highest law of the land in
(03:11):
our country is the Constitution, and it limits the size
and scope of government, so much so that Hunter Biden
shouldn't even have been charged into these because they don't
have the authority for the various charges like, for example,
the Second Amendment. You shouldn't have to fill out a
form to have your exercise your Second Amendment. So go ahead,
I mean you please.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
So there's two charges here, I mean, first of all,
and no one can really analyze what's going on in
Joe Biden's brain. I don't know if he knows what's
going on fair enough in his brain. This is obviously
Joe Biden, the father over Joe Biden, the institutionalist who
were railed against the concept of pardons, who railed against
Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon. There are, of course,
(03:53):
just by way of background, two classes of pardons, one
for a specific crime, and one a broad form for
all crimes that you might have committed, whether charged or uncharged,
whether known or unknown. That's the pardon that Ford gave
to Nixon, That's the pardon that Joe gave to Hunter.
But the crimes for which he was prosecuted, you and
(04:16):
I would not have been prosecuted for them. The tax
crime he actually paid the taxes with interest and with penalty,
and they still prosecuted him because of pressure the Republicans
put on the Justice Department the gun crime. Under the
Supreme Court's ruling, the current gun laws are supposed to
(04:38):
reflect what they were in seventeen ninety one when the
Second Amendment was adopted. In seventeen ninety one, you could
smoke all the hemp you wanted and still carry a
sidearm proof George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were millionaires by
selling hemp.
Speaker 1 (04:54):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (04:56):
Yeah, I think he can't make this upright.
Speaker 1 (04:59):
No, and at some point and maybe we can just
look at that one specific issue, the FFL form you
have to fill out, and also the barrel length restriction rules.
You know, you have to have a special license for
short barreled rifles and all these layers of laws. I
am wondering whether now we have with the current you know,
(05:21):
the Brewin decision and the others, if we have this
opportunity now for someone, for example, Hunter of Biden could
have defended himself and said, no, this FFL nonsense, even
though I was stoned out of my mind and I
lied on the form. This FFL nonsense is unconstitutional on
its face because none of it existed at the time
the Second Amendment was acknowledged by the Bill of Rights,
(05:44):
and ergo, you can't put that kind of impediment in
front of me when I'm trying to exercise my Second
Amendment rights.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
So the standard definitions of crime, you know this, I
know this, many of your listeners probably do, has three requirements.
One that the crime is promulgated by a legitimate authority
that has the authority to make the event a crime.
Two that there was harm. Three that there was a victim.
(06:12):
There was no harm here. The gun that he bought,
he had his girlfriend throw away in a dumpster before
it was ever even fired. There was no victim here.
I suppose the government would claim it was a victim
because he lied to the government, But the government can't
show that it was harmed by its victimhood. And then
we get back to where we started, Brian, does the
(06:35):
Congress have the authority to make these things a crime?
This will scandalize the public. What I'm about to say.
You know this, and lawyers know this, and students of
the Constitution know this. The Constitution authorizes just two crimes,
debasing the money supply, you know, putting out a coin
(06:55):
that's half gold and half pewter and claiming it's all
gold and getting the full face value for it, debasing
the money supply, and then that coin is out in
the money supply. And treason, which is defined in the
Constitution as giving aid and comfort to the country's enemies
or waging war against against the States. How many crimes
(07:19):
has Congress created five thousand, one and ninety nine and
only two of them are authorized by the Constitution.
Speaker 1 (07:27):
And that's why I said we were going to law
school today, because you know, a lot of people said, well, listen,
anybody else on the planet, we would be prosecuted if
we had that many suspicious activity reports on our multiple
bank accounts with money flowing three the inflowing from from
foreign governments into our own personal hands. They would have
investigated us had we done something like that. They wouldn't
(07:48):
have slow walked the IRS investigation to the point where
they let the Statute of limitations run. They'd have been
all over us like white on rises. My dad used
to say, but to your point, there are five ninety
nine federal crimes on the books now, only two of
which really are legitimate under the limitations of the Constitution,
the balance are in the hands of the states. The states,
(08:10):
as you acknowledge in point out in your historical review,
the in the column, would be responsible for prosecuting anyone
who violated the law.
Speaker 3 (08:19):
Correct like the Whiskey Rebellion, where a bunch of farmers
in western Pennsylvania in seventeen ninety one to two three
and four refused to pay an exercise tax on whiskey
because they needed to sell the whiskey to stay alive
and operate their farms, and they resisted the tax collector
with violence. They were prosecuted in a Pennsylvania state court.
(08:42):
Two of them were prosecuted for treason. How can failure
to pay a tax be treason? Well, they persuaded a
federal judge that using violence against the federal tax collector
was the moral equivalent of treason. They were convicted and
George Washington pardoned them in the first pardons presidential pardons
(09:03):
in American history. Now there was a downside to this
to Joe not to Hunter. Last week. If Hunter was
dragged before the House Oversight Committee and sworn to tell
the truth and said, and they asked him, did you
funnel money to your father from Barisma when he was
Vice president of the United States. Answer. I refusually declined
(09:27):
to answer on the grounds to the Fifth Amendment right.
To ask him that question tomorrow he has to answer.
He has no Fifth Amendment right. By accepting the pardon,
he gave up his Fifth Amendment rights.
Speaker 1 (09:38):
And ergo, he could be a witness in some future
prosecution related to some criminal activity on a federal level.
Because this pardon only absolves him of federal crimes state crimes,
it does not involve ergo, he could be still criminally
prosecuted in a state had he done something during this
window of time.
Speaker 3 (09:58):
I don't know. Go ahead testimony, of course, could also
be used to embarrass humiliate the father. It's too late
to prosecute the father. Let's say that Joe was bribed
just hypothetically when he was vice president. The statute of
limitations is five years, so it's too late to prosecute him.
It's not too late to impeach him even after he
(10:18):
leaves office, and of course it's never too late to
tarnish his legacy. But his own Justice Department said, he's
a dottering old man and he can't put him in
the defense.
Speaker 1 (10:30):
Chair, and given his age and his obvious health issues,
it could be that, you know, God rest his soul.
Joe Biden's not around for a long time. Hunter Biden
may very well find himself in need of money, and
Ergo could write memoirs and expose everybody and everything that's
gone on in the name of making literally millions of
dollars correct.
Speaker 3 (10:51):
Correct. Most of the people that I interact with are
furious about the pardon because they hate the father and
they hate the son, and they think that the father
it's a crook, and he helped the son get away
with being a crook. But all of that is a
legitimate opinion that is widely held. My analysis is based
upon what I suggest and argue is a prudent reading
(11:14):
of the Constitution, a Madisonian reading of the Constitution, which
says the Constitution chains down the federal government. Congress can't
give itself the power to enact laws that the Constitution
doesn't authorize it to an act.
Speaker 1 (11:29):
Well, I can only wait for the day when someone
can raise these arguments, have standing to raise them, raise
them in a federal court, and maybe make it up
to the Supreme Court, who would say, you know what,
after two hundred and fifty years, You're right, this is
gonna stop real quick. I just got to read this
line of the judge who is dismissing the uh. I
believe it's the tax case. And apparently the pardon wasn't
(11:53):
properly filed. So he made a point about the appropriate
nature of the filing. You know how courts aren't judges
are with eyes properly being dot and teas cross. So yes,
I'm going to dismiss it when it's properly filed with me.
But he had this today, had this to say, and
I thought it was rather funny something for the following discussion.
The court assumes the pardon is effective and we'll dispose
of the case. The Supreme Court long has recognized that,
(12:15):
notwithstanding it's nearly unlimited nature, the pardon power extends only
to past offenses, which to me sounded like this sort
of perception that Hunter Biden was going to go back
to criminal activity on a going forward basis.
Speaker 3 (12:31):
Right, imagine if you could pardon someone into the future.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
My god, judge edit of Politano, I always love our conversations.
Thanks for taking everybody to law school today and reminding
us that the Constitution is a limiting document. Enjoy yourself
in New York, if that's possible, and have a wonderful week,
and I'll look forward to next one day, Wednesday, and
another great conversation with you, sir.
Speaker 3 (12:57):
Right right back at you, Colonel Douglas McGregor. Yeah, on
Judging Freedom today. What's going on in South Korea? And
why is Joe Biden continuing to extend the war in
Ukraine to dump it into Donald Trump's lap.
Speaker 1 (13:11):
I think you're right on that one, sir. Can't make
heads or tail out of that debacle. We're looking forward
to checking out your podcast, Judging Freedom. Search for it
where you find your podcast, and tune in every Wednesday
at eight thirty for the Judge. Here in the fifty
five KRS Morning Show, Love you my friend.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Back at you, Brian, Thank you.
Speaker 1 (13:27):
It's a forty two here fifty five KRC, the talk
stations stick around, got a little more talk about right back.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
Fifty five KRC dot com. Hey, it's the snee And
for the
The Channel nine first one to other hole cast today
mostly excited to be windy though seven pm and after
looking for some spotty showers, today's ygh forty two. That
spotty shower turn into a wintery mix overnight. It's now
possible it's going down to eighteen degrees Tomorrow's high twenty
six because it's going to be greezy under sunny skys.
It's going to feel more like fifteen overnight. Another cold
night sixteen degrees, clear skies, sunny on Friday with aya
(00:27):
thirty four twenty seven degrees. Right now, it's about PERCD
talk station Chuck Ingram Tier traffor.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
I'm the u S Help Traffic Center you see help
Weight Boss center offers comprehensive OBECD care and advanced surgical
expertise called five to one three nine three nine two
two sixty three. That's nine three nine twenty two sixty three.
Cruise continue to work with the wreck East found two
seventy five at seventy five in Earlwaninger left plane's blocked
off traffic back some Miniova Pike, then northbound seventy five
(00:55):
slows from there into the cut. Southbound seventy five continues
slow in and out of Lachlan in South seventy one.
You're offing on the brakes from two seventy five down
to Red Bank. This is Santa's list Day. That is
the day where everyone finds out if they're on the
naddy or the nice list. A guest coming up next,
(01:16):
I'm pretty sure he's on the nice list. The Judge's next,
Chuck Ingram on fifty five krc DE talk station.
Speaker 1 (01:26):
Now, who can argue with that? Eight thirty and a
very happy Wednesday reminder, since I know so many people
are tuned in right now because it's the appointment listening
with Judge enital Polatano. It's listener lunch day, last day
or last lunch of the year. We'll be at price
deal Chili. Judge of Politano will not he is. I'm
looking at him right now on zoom call. Welcome back here, Honor.
(01:46):
You know how much I look forward to this. It
looks like you're at a different venue today.
Speaker 3 (01:50):
I am. I am. I'm in my office in New
York City, where I will be for the next I
don't know how long, slightly different schedules. You see me
instead of follow shirt and unshaven with a coat and
tie and clean shaven.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
Look, you're looking great. I'm sure you've got a whole
lot on your plate, as you typically do. And we'll
find out what's going on with judging freedom coming up
at the end of the segment, as we always do.
But this one, I've been calling all morning an upcoming
constitutional law lesson. We're going to be We're going to
be engaged in a deeper die because when I read
(02:28):
the topic, or when I read your columns heading, you
captured the column three cheers for Hunter's pardon, and I
started worrying, because you know, every once in a while
my listener's perspectives on politics and life will come into
a measure of disagreement with the judge, like I can't
believe he said that. And I'll defend you all day long.
(02:48):
I'll defend your position even if I disagree with it,
because we engage in a thoughtful conversation. And I wasn't
expecting you to back up to where you went when
I was starting to read the column, and the point
being fundamentally the original point that you make regularly one
that the foundation, the highest law of the land in
(03:11):
our country is the Constitution, and it limits the size
and scope of government, so much so that Hunter Biden
shouldn't even have been charged into these because they don't
have the authority for the various charges like, for example,
the Second Amendment. You shouldn't have to fill out a
form to have your exercise your Second Amendment. So go ahead,
I mean you please.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
So there's two charges here, I mean, first of all,
and no one can really analyze what's going on in
Joe Biden's brain. I don't know if he knows what's
going on fair enough in his brain. This is obviously
Joe Biden, the father over Joe Biden, the institutionalist who
were railed against the concept of pardons, who railed against
Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon. There are, of course,
(03:53):
just by way of background, two classes of pardons, one
for a specific crime, and one a broad form for
all crimes that you might have committed, whether charged or uncharged,
whether known or unknown. That's the pardon that Ford gave
to Nixon, That's the pardon that Joe gave to Hunter.
But the crimes for which he was prosecuted, you and
(04:16):
I would not have been prosecuted for them. The tax
crime he actually paid the taxes with interest and with penalty,
and they still prosecuted him because of pressure the Republicans
put on the Justice Department the gun crime. Under the
Supreme Court's ruling, the current gun laws are supposed to
(04:38):
reflect what they were in seventeen ninety one when the
Second Amendment was adopted. In seventeen ninety one, you could
smoke all the hemp you wanted and still carry a
sidearm proof George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were millionaires by
selling hemp.
Speaker 1 (04:54):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (04:56):
Yeah, I think he can't make this upright.
Speaker 1 (04:59):
No, and at some point and maybe we can just
look at that one specific issue, the FFL form you
have to fill out, and also the barrel length restriction rules.
You know, you have to have a special license for
short barreled rifles and all these layers of laws. I
am wondering whether now we have with the current you know,
(05:21):
the Brewin decision and the others, if we have this
opportunity now for someone, for example, Hunter of Biden could
have defended himself and said, no, this FFL nonsense, even
though I was stoned out of my mind and I
lied on the form. This FFL nonsense is unconstitutional on
its face because none of it existed at the time
the Second Amendment was acknowledged by the Bill of Rights,
(05:44):
and ergo, you can't put that kind of impediment in
front of me when I'm trying to exercise my Second
Amendment rights.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
So the standard definitions of crime, you know this, I
know this, many of your listeners probably do, has three requirements.
One that the crime is promulgated by a legitimate authority
that has the authority to make the event a crime.
Two that there was harm. Three that there was a victim.
(06:12):
There was no harm here. The gun that he bought,
he had his girlfriend throw away in a dumpster before
it was ever even fired. There was no victim here.
I suppose the government would claim it was a victim
because he lied to the government, But the government can't
show that it was harmed by its victimhood. And then
we get back to where we started, Brian, does the
(06:35):
Congress have the authority to make these things a crime?
This will scandalize the public. What I'm about to say.
You know this, and lawyers know this, and students of
the Constitution know this. The Constitution authorizes just two crimes,
debasing the money supply, you know, putting out a coin
(06:55):
that's half gold and half pewter and claiming it's all
gold and getting the full face value for it, debasing
the money supply, and then that coin is out in
the money supply. And treason, which is defined in the
Constitution as giving aid and comfort to the country's enemies
or waging war against against the States. How many crimes
(07:19):
has Congress created five thousand, one and ninety nine and
only two of them are authorized by the Constitution.
Speaker 1 (07:27):
And that's why I said we were going to law
school today, because you know, a lot of people said, well, listen,
anybody else on the planet, we would be prosecuted if
we had that many suspicious activity reports on our multiple
bank accounts with money flowing three the inflowing from from
foreign governments into our own personal hands. They would have
investigated us had we done something like that. They wouldn't
(07:48):
have slow walked the IRS investigation to the point where
they let the Statute of limitations run. They'd have been
all over us like white on rises. My dad used
to say, but to your point, there are five ninety
nine federal crimes on the books now, only two of
which really are legitimate under the limitations of the Constitution,
the balance are in the hands of the states. The states,
(08:10):
as you acknowledge in point out in your historical review,
the in the column, would be responsible for prosecuting anyone
who violated the law.
Speaker 3 (08:19):
Correct like the Whiskey Rebellion, where a bunch of farmers
in western Pennsylvania in seventeen ninety one to two three
and four refused to pay an exercise tax on whiskey
because they needed to sell the whiskey to stay alive
and operate their farms, and they resisted the tax collector
with violence. They were prosecuted in a Pennsylvania state court.
(08:42):
Two of them were prosecuted for treason. How can failure
to pay a tax be treason? Well, they persuaded a
federal judge that using violence against the federal tax collector
was the moral equivalent of treason. They were convicted and
George Washington pardoned them in the first pardons presidential pardons
(09:03):
in American history. Now there was a downside to this
to Joe not to Hunter. Last week. If Hunter was
dragged before the House Oversight Committee and sworn to tell
the truth and said, and they asked him, did you
funnel money to your father from Barisma when he was
Vice president of the United States. Answer. I refusually declined
(09:27):
to answer on the grounds to the Fifth Amendment right.
To ask him that question tomorrow he has to answer.
He has no Fifth Amendment right. By accepting the pardon,
he gave up his Fifth Amendment rights.
Speaker 1 (09:38):
And ergo, he could be a witness in some future
prosecution related to some criminal activity on a federal level.
Because this pardon only absolves him of federal crimes state crimes,
it does not involve ergo, he could be still criminally
prosecuted in a state had he done something during this
window of time.
Speaker 3 (09:58):
I don't know. Go ahead testimony, of course, could also
be used to embarrass humiliate the father. It's too late
to prosecute the father. Let's say that Joe was bribed
just hypothetically when he was vice president. The statute of
limitations is five years, so it's too late to prosecute him.
It's not too late to impeach him even after he
(10:18):
leaves office, and of course it's never too late to
tarnish his legacy. But his own Justice Department said, he's
a dottering old man and he can't put him in
the defense.
Speaker 1 (10:30):
Chair, and given his age and his obvious health issues,
it could be that, you know, God rest his soul.
Joe Biden's not around for a long time. Hunter Biden
may very well find himself in need of money, and
Ergo could write memoirs and expose everybody and everything that's
gone on in the name of making literally millions of
dollars correct.
Speaker 3 (10:51):
Correct. Most of the people that I interact with are
furious about the pardon because they hate the father and
they hate the son, and they think that the father
it's a crook, and he helped the son get away
with being a crook. But all of that is a
legitimate opinion that is widely held. My analysis is based
upon what I suggest and argue is a prudent reading
(11:14):
of the Constitution, a Madisonian reading of the Constitution, which
says the Constitution chains down the federal government. Congress can't
give itself the power to enact laws that the Constitution
doesn't authorize it to an act.
Speaker 1 (11:29):
Well, I can only wait for the day when someone
can raise these arguments, have standing to raise them, raise
them in a federal court, and maybe make it up
to the Supreme Court, who would say, you know what,
after two hundred and fifty years, You're right, this is
gonna stop real quick. I just got to read this
line of the judge who is dismissing the uh. I
believe it's the tax case. And apparently the pardon wasn't
(11:53):
properly filed. So he made a point about the appropriate
nature of the filing. You know how courts aren't judges
are with eyes properly being dot and teas cross. So yes,
I'm going to dismiss it when it's properly filed with me.
But he had this today, had this to say, and
I thought it was rather funny something for the following discussion.
The court assumes the pardon is effective and we'll dispose
of the case. The Supreme Court long has recognized that,
(12:15):
notwithstanding it's nearly unlimited nature, the pardon power extends only
to past offenses, which to me sounded like this sort
of perception that Hunter Biden was going to go back
to criminal activity on a going forward basis.
Speaker 3 (12:31):
Right, imagine if you could pardon someone into the future.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
My god, judge edit of Politano, I always love our conversations.
Thanks for taking everybody to law school today and reminding
us that the Constitution is a limiting document. Enjoy yourself
in New York, if that's possible, and have a wonderful week,
and I'll look forward to next one day, Wednesday, and
another great conversation with you, sir.
Speaker 3 (12:57):
Right right back at you, Colonel Douglas McGregor. Yeah, on
Judging Freedom today. What's going on in South Korea? And
why is Joe Biden continuing to extend the war in
Ukraine to dump it into Donald Trump's lap.
Speaker 1 (13:11):
I think you're right on that one, sir. Can't make
heads or tail out of that debacle. We're looking forward
to checking out your podcast, Judging Freedom. Search for it
where you find your podcast, and tune in every Wednesday
at eight thirty for the Judge. Here in the fifty
five KRS Morning Show, Love you my friend.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Back at you, Brian, Thank you.
Speaker 1 (13:27):
It's a forty two here fifty five KRC, the talk
stations stick around, got a little more talk about right back.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
Fifty five KRC dot com. Hey, it's the snee And
for the
Brian Thomas News
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. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!