June 23, 2023 • 45 mins
How can we approach difficult conversations about police and social issues with a desire for resolution? Join Antowan and I as we discuss the importance of humility in these discussions, and challenge ourselves to find new approaches to address these problems. Our goal is to use this podcast as a way to soften hearts and bring lasting change.
We also examine the concept of Lady Justice and her blindfold, representing the need for unbiased decisions in the court system. Together, we explore the systemic racism and inequality that exists in many courtrooms and how it affects people of color, such as Antowan's uncle. Discover the importance of being aware of local politics and the implications of electing judges, as our choices can directly affect the justice system.
Lastly, we discuss the experience of standing mute when faced with criminal charges and the implications of such a plea. We reflect on the misuse of authority, the importance of giving second chances, and the politics in judicial appointments. Listen in as we consider how our choices, especially when voting, can work towards a fairer society.
Thanks for listening. Please check out our website at www.forsauk.com to hear great conversations on topics that need to be talked about. In these times of intense polarization we all need to find time to expand our Frame of Reference.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Testing one, two.
Yeah, that's working, and thisrecording has started.
So we're good there And here wego, ready.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
All right.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
Let's have it.
Do that again, because I thinkI was talking over you.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
Let's have it.
Speaker 1 (00:16):
Oh, let's have what my friend Antoine, what's have
what I know, let's have anepisode of coming together.
Shall we frame of reference.
Coming together, absolutely.
I folks, i'm raw, i'm raw, thebrush, and a guy sitting across
from me in the screen up in likeGreen Bay or something, aren't
you?
I mean, you're a ways away,Green Bay, Wisconsin.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
Antoine Hoffman senior.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
Isn't that a great thing, to that we can be.
Here I am in little old sockprairie, wisconsin, and there
you are in little old Green Bay,wisconsin, and we can have a
face to face these days, youknow yeah, i know it's amazing
how the technical technologyadvances have happened even in
the last 10, 15 years.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
My goodness man.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Yeah, yeah, in the IT industry, i know when COVID hit
the, they say the ITinfrastructure grew 10 years
worth of growth in about threemonths.
So they knew this was coming,but you know we didn't know it
was going to happen quite asquickly as it had to happen.
So, but anyways.
So if you've listened to theshow before folks, you know that
(01:18):
Antoine and I try to takeissues as fun as clothing and
music and and also talk aboutthings that are very, to some
extent, difficult to talk about,like a couple weeks ago when we
talked about police and how.
You know as much respect andyou know overall just
(01:42):
appreciation that all of us needto have, should have, for
police and the work that they doand how necessary they are for
the functioning of our citiesand you know just our different
communities.
At the same point there areproblems.
You know, there are things thatwe need to deal with, And you
(02:02):
know.
So that's kind of the justright, antoine.
We're just trying to discusssome things that need to be
discussed.
Speaker 2 (02:09):
Yeah, so discussing these things and, in far as our
one sense is concerned, sometype of resolution or path to
resolution or just something toleave on a positive note, but
yes, it's like a definitely we,as we were discussing last week,
we just, you know, wedefinitely have great respect
for the police and what they doand the mentality and the work
(02:32):
involved, and we also discussedthat, hey, we can't allow a few
bad apples to spoil the wholebunch, so to speak, or even kind
of taint our way of thinkingabout the police as a whole.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
Yeah, you know, i'm just thinking that you're
talking about that too.
We have a tendency to think ofa lot of these issues as us
against them.
You know, there's theotherization process, and what
we don't seem to get, i think,is that it really is us against
us.
You know, we are our own worstenemies in terms of working
(03:04):
problems out, because there is,there has never been a situation
that I'm aware of, where, whenpeople sit down and are willing
to talk through the problem,willing to really be transparent
about what they see and wherethe stumbling blocks are for
them, that things don't somehowget worked out.
You know, everybody doesn't geteverything that they want.
(03:26):
It ends up having somecompromise involved in it, but
it's.
There are no problems that wehave not as people, as humans,
been able to overcome.
As long as we approach thetable with the understanding of
we have to come to a solution,we have to.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
And you exactly right about that.
And it's like, you know, thefirst thing is it has to be a
desire for resolution or sometype of a conclusion or some
type of a remedy.
It has to be a desire for itfirst.
And in some instances you knowwe talked about this before that
just, there's a certain groupsof people that just don't want
that.
(04:02):
You know it's a, it's a have tohave nots, right, you know the
people that have want to keep itand have nots wanted, and so it
is just you keep that your footon the top of a person's head
and then, of course, it createsa culture, it creates an
environment, an atmosphere, abehavior, and things escalate,
(04:23):
they change, you know, then themarginalization, and just it
goes on and on.
And but yeah, just, we desirechange.
I don't know about you, i know,i'm gonna guess that you are.
You feel the same way I do, andit's just like we desire change
.
Where's the humility?
(04:44):
That's the biggest thing, youknow it.
Just, i just can't fathomlooking at another person and
looking at them as subhuman,regardless of their class,
status or race or whatever thecase may be, and it just, it's
just hard to view someone thatway.
But yet we know that thathappens, and so, through God's
(05:08):
grace and this podcast, we justhoping to soften hearts and just
at least hopefully the scaleswill fall off her eye.
A heart will be a no softened alittle bit.
Speaker 1 (05:19):
Well, just think about it.
Just, you know, that's, i think, ultimately right.
We've said we just want peopleto think about Is it working?
Is what we're doing right nowworking?
You know, if, if we continue toshake the soda can and shake it
, and shake it, and shake it,and shake it until either the
top blows off or we realize,well, i want to drink the soda
(05:42):
now, and it spews out, and thenwe go, oh my, why did that spew
out?
I don't understand.
Well, you know, and we are,that's what we're doing with
we're allowing our media to do,that's we're allowing our
leaders to do, to a large extent, is to shake the can.
And you know the can is is ouremotions, the can is our fears,
(06:06):
our irrationalities, ourstubbornness.
You know our resistance to.
I mean, we're like little kids.
You know you got to take thismedicine.
You know I don't even aT-Swerve ball.
Well, you know, yeah, but ifyou take the medicine it's gonna
help make you better.
I don't want to feel better.
Well, you know, come on.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
That's what we were talking about last week.
We were going like again, thepros and it's kind of like a
pros and cons of being thepolice officer, respecting the
police, and yes, there'sbehaviors and attitudes and
things like that that go withpolicing good and bad.
And then, of course, thoseinstitutions that govern us.
Those behaviors exist withinthe institutions And, like we're
(06:50):
talking about, like we're gonnabe talking about here shortly,
the courts.
You know, you got the cops, yougot the courts and you got the
corrections right.
And so when we talk about thecourts, you know these and I
guess, as I again I canshamelessly say that I'm
continuously learning as I getolder.
You know, of course.
(07:10):
Well, you know, i would likeyou think about the law, the
laws of the land.
You think they are etched instone, but then the more you
read and look at the law is tobe interpreted And it's like,
okay, so depending on who'sinterpreting it right, that's
what you're gonna get Right.
And then, but no course, we'lltalk about the courts.
You know, just, we've seen thecourts do some good things,
(07:32):
we've seen some bad things.
We see what's happening incourt today.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
Right, well, how?
many people to don't, don'ttrust the courts.
You know it's, you know, amatter of you know you get a
system that allows the kind ofshifting they try to make it,
you know, i think, fair andequitable.
the point of you know case getsput out there and there's a
rotation of you know judges thatare available that can try
(07:59):
certain cases and just dependingon who is in the rotation,
that's who you end up with as ajudge.
And yet I don't know that mostpeople to trust that that's
really how it works, that therearen't people that are able to
get the judge they want, get thejudge that's most likely to
give them the decision that theywant.
You know, i don't know.
(08:20):
I don't know that that happens,but I also don't know that it
doesn't happen And the fact thatpeople think that it does tells
you something about the decayof the integrity of the court
system, or it tells yousomething about the media and
its representation of the courtsystem, right?
Speaker 2 (08:35):
So there's a, it could be both.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
Yeah, you know, yeah, and it's.
I mean, it's interesting.
Maybe you know Lady Justice isblindfolded, right, lady Justice
has the scales of justice, youknow.
Are they, you know, innocent orguilty?
I thought it was interestingthat she's blind.
You know that she, she is.
Why is there blind justice?
(08:58):
I should have looked that up tofind out what the symbolism is
of that.
If it's just so that they, theycan, they have to hear the case
They have to, i don't know.
Maybe somebody out therelistening knows the the roots of
that, why she's blindfolded.
You know she's not supposed tosee.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
Well, I guess, like, uh, one's wealth, one's race,
one's Race, color, creed is notsupposed to matter.
Yeah, just the scales.
You know it should be balancedscales.
Yeah, and that's just my, myinterpretation of what makes
sense.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
You know you don't want to have anything that's
gonna, you know, increase yourbias.
So justice should be determinedpurely on right or wrong, you
know, guilty or not guilty, andthat that decision Should be as
unbiased as possible.
And that's therein lies the rubof what we're talking about
(09:57):
today.
I think, is that sense of isjustice.
Is the court system fair forall?
are the same scales used Forwhite people versus black people
?
you know, is it?
do you start from an equalplaying field or is the deck
stacked against you By a basisof your color, of your skin?
(10:20):
you know, and certainly thereare historical examples of that
being a king, they're beingkangaroo courts all over the
place.
You know you wander into thewrong person's town, you know,
and you know, get stopped for aspeeding ticket.
It may be a whole lot differentstory If you're black versus
white.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
Well, remember Wisconsin.
They always used to say back inus the early mid 80s, you come
to Wisconsin on vacation, youleave on probation.
Speaker 1 (10:51):
Really that was.
I didn't, i didn't know.
I shouldn't laugh.
That's pretty sad, but well,they were also, you know,
sundown towns, right where Youknow you.
You just knew, what was it?
the green book, was that the?
the book that had beenpublished up until the 60s?
even that that warned Blackpeople, you know, stay away from
(11:12):
these towns.
Or, you know, gave the thebackground on which hotels would
Would service black folks andwhich would not.
You know, the court system in asundown town was definitely
going to be different than thecourt system in a non sundown
town.
It had to be, i mean it.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Yeah, and We, we like to say that things are better
today, but they are somewhatbetter, but they are almost as
just as they are better.
They are the same.
You know, you can still likeagain.
You know, when we talk aboutthings like race and classism
and all these different things,they are a part of society.
(11:52):
So who, who are the judges?
who are the police officers?
who are the lawyers?
They are parts of society.
So, yes, these Good things insociety and the bad things of
society are going to be Withinthe institution.
And so, yeah, and of course,like you said, we've seen this
thing lived out member back inFerguson, when that big Ferguson
(12:15):
, missouri, and of course.
So all that was about isbecause, like, people will go to
, and if a person couldn't pay ahundred dollar Fine, hundred
dollar traffic ticket orwhatever, they end up that the
fine is getting doubled andquadrupled.
They end up in months in jailFor a hundred books that they
couldn't pay.
People lost their jobs becausethey couldn't pay a hundred
(12:36):
dollars or two hundred dollars.
And and Again, of course, whenthe feds did what they did, feds
did their type that they saythere was some instances of
wrongdoing, but of course, noone's ever gonna Admit that, but
there were some instances ofwrongdoing, but these things
they do still exist.
You know, in the course, whenwe're talking about the courts,
(12:57):
you know no, when, when you goto court, depending on who you
are, they'll scare you so bad.
You know, hey, if you don'tplead guilty, you're.
You're looking at 10, 15, 20years and of course we've seen
in this is where people haveplayed Guilty to things they had
.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
They didn't even do are you aware Personally, i mean
, antoine, are there folks inyour You know, along your
relatives, that have had courtsituations where it was just
like Just crazy, like you know,that kind of thing where you're
like, seriously, this ishappening in America?
Speaker 2 (13:34):
Well, I remember my uncle got shot in the face by a
grocery store owner and hewanted.
He got shot in the face and heended up in jail.
Seriously so go figure.
So go figure, all because ofthe store owner, say he felt
threatened because my uncle.
He said, hey, you didn't giveme all my change back and it
(13:55):
wouldn't escalated.
Just give me my change back AndI'll give you.
Gave you a change, and beforeyou know what, the store owner
pulls a gun, shoots him in theface and then, before then of
course, my uncle is Chained to ahospital bed, you know, getting
his face, you know, fixed, andthen, of course, from there he
goes to jail and And again, it'sjust.
(14:16):
Those are Instances like that,they happen, and but the thing
is, it's just.
It goes back to a one of theearlier Podcasts we've done
about voting, being aware of,yeah, local, municipality
politics, so to speak, you know,being aware of what's going on
in that city, state or town,yeah, well and you think about
(14:38):
to be a judge.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
You know, even even biblically, you know the book of
judges.
You know, in that whole seriesof of stories of the judges and
the righteousness of some andthe non righteousness of others
I mean, it's been going onforever And the quality of the
judge.
You know, i don't know that we.
(15:01):
How do you have justice with ajudge that isn't Qualified?
how do you have justice with ajudge that you know it has
proven to have biases?
And you know I don't.
What are the criteria for ajudge appointment?
I don't even know.
Honestly, it seems like they'reusually political appointments
(15:21):
more than anything.
Yeah, you know, and if you'regonna be a Supreme Court justice
, you should have a certainamount of Qualifications.
But there are documented casesof people having been appointed
to The Supreme Court that youknow you could make a strong
case for them not beingqualified.
So what does that say?
(15:42):
you know?
for if we don't have somethingmore sophisticated than some
politician saying, yeah, you getto be a judge?
Speaker 2 (15:50):
And these are life in the federal course.
These are lifelong appointments, right, right, right.
And so that's why it again, ittook some reading and
understanding to get that wow,why they are doing this.
You know, courses like why are,depending on who's in office,
they're trying to stack thecourse with their judges, you
know Red or blue or whatever.
(16:11):
And I and I guess I had to readup on it and it just is like.
I guess, like these federal,these District, these us, these
circuit and district courtjudges, they have the ability to
stay certain Beals and laws andlike, say of, depending on what
the situation is, if I guess,if they don't like this thing
That's coming from Congress,they have the ability to put it
(16:34):
on hold, you know right?
Speaker 1 (16:36):
Well, they don't, and they don't make the laws, but
they interpret them right, i'lladd a student loan debt relief
court.
Speaker 2 (16:43):
What judge actually said?
Speaker 1 (16:45):
no, Yeah, no whole yeah, but yeah and.
Right, how do these guys, howdo these people get selected for
?
Well, how are we gonna havejustice when we can't trust the
justice of the justices?
Speaker 2 (17:02):
you know, and that's where, like remember, come on,
like the whole the was oldWisconsin model, come on
probation, leave, come onvacation, leave on probation.
You know, they made a point,they, they were making.
They were making a point.
They, at a certain point Theydidn't want certain people here
or they didn't know.
They just not to say that therewas a law broken, whether it
(17:24):
was or was not, but either, orit just.
When a coach, when multiplepeople do the same thing, that's
a culture right, and it ain't.
Let's just take cops and courtsout of it, but just if people
as a whole are acting and doinga certain thing, that's a
culture created and that's aculture that they're trying to
(17:44):
maintain and they're gonnaexclude you at all costs.
They ain't gonna, the course,they can't just tell you how
they feel, but they'll make youuncomfortable as possible.
I And we see that in the courtshave so much power.
I mean, how many lives havebeen changed, ruined, because of
a bias on the bench?
Speaker 1 (18:05):
Yeah, and how do you check that?
How do you as if you're a judge?
I'd love it if a judgelistening would explain this
more.
But what are the regulatory orself-regulation techniques that
a judge uses to make sure thatthey're really being blind and
(18:31):
not making an evaluation basedon anything other than is this
person following the rule of thelaw?
Is there just cause Andobviously a jury plays a part in
that as well that the judge hasto take the jury's verdict and
then decide what theconsequences of that should be?
but not all cases are jurytrials either.
(18:54):
So we have a person here thatwe're entrusting to make just
decisions, and it's worrisome tome because you know that if
people can stand up and say I'mnot guilty when it's obvious
that they are guilty, so you'reallowing people to enter a plea
of not guilty, well, yeah, youare not guilty until proven
(19:17):
beyond within reasonableaccommodations, that you are
guilty.
So we'll decide that for you.
But then we can stack the juryright.
We can put people on that aremore favorable to us personally
and professionally, whatever,and are likely to see oh yeah,
no, it was really, there wereextenuating circumstances.
(19:38):
And if that isn't another thing, you have a judge that says,
okay, well, they said you'reguilty, but gosh, i really don't
want to throw the book at youbecause this is whatever.
Speaker 2 (19:48):
There's so many things that can go wrong because
of who human beings areAbsolutely, and my understanding
with that one thing you justmentioned, raoul, where's the
accountability with the judges?
and it is almost like what I waslistening to a couple of days
ago.
It was almost like a self.
It's kind of like a peer checksystem, you know.
(20:09):
It's like a judge sitting on abench makes a ruling And if, of
course, their ruling is going tobe scrutinized by their peers
and they're going to be likeeither that was dumb, stupid,
silly, whatever, it didn't makesense, kind of like what
happened with this judge that'sprobably going to be hearing
about in the next couple ofweeks here.
But my understanding is likeit'll be scrutinized, but also,
(20:33):
if that ruling is seemed notfair or if there's some kind of
a federal accountability to it,it goes to the appellant court,
where that judge's decision isgoing to go before three of the
district court or the appellantcourt, which is three judges,
and they can overturn thatjudge's decision.
(20:55):
So then that way I think theaccountability, or that part is,
is like them constantly havingtheir judgments overruled or
changed is attained on theirreputation.
So if that's, some people don'tcare about their reputation.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
So Well, and they're still going to.
You know how many of thosecases actually do get overturned
right.
I mean, you can play the odds,i suppose, and say, well, most
times there's not going to be,you know, an appeal, or most
times, even if there is anappeal, i'm still standing on
some sound principles here bymaking this decision.
So, yeah, i mean you'redepending on parts of a parts of
(21:37):
a system to involve integrity,or you know that it depends upon
there being individuals inthose roles that have integrity.
And yet if there's one thing weprove fairly regularly is there
are very few people withintegrity and yet they continue
(21:58):
to be judges, they're continueto be lawyers that are, you know
, caught in all kinds of thingsbecause they didn't have any
integrity.
You know, i sometimes wonder isit a system of justice or is it
a system of maintaining a powerbalance?
Speaker 2 (22:20):
I believe it's the latter.
And, of course, it's like whenwe're talking about the law,
it's not what you know, but it'swho you know.
because, like again, like withthese appointments of these
judges, left and right, it'sjust like Where did they come
from?
What's the history, what's thestory?
You know?
what are they?
How did they come up?
You know, you want to get somekind of background.
Just oh, this person was justappointed to this circuit or
(22:44):
this district, you know, and itjust that's all you hear.
Just a, this administrationappointed 80 judges.
This administration appointed100 judges.
That's all you hear.
But you don't hear thebackground of these judges and
right, you know, and it's likethe fairness thereof, or Their
love of the law and theirfairness in the law.
Speaker 1 (23:04):
Well, i, you know I can only speak to my personal
experience, and I'm sure that Ihave.
I don't know that I've sharedthis now It's gonna be out there
in podcast land, but years agoI was arrested for Just
disorderly conduct, okay, whichis a misdemeanor at least it was
at the time but I still, youknow, i had to be arraigned for
(23:27):
it And the guy that representedme was actually a friend of mine
, so it he did it pro bono, justto assist me through that
process.
And You know, when I stoodbefore the judge for the
arraignment, you know I had toenter a plea and in my mind I'm
thinking well, you know, i don't, i don't want to be punished
for this, because I Actually hadgood cause.
(23:50):
There was more to thecircumstance of what, what
brought me to the case where Ibehaved disorderly, which I
understood.
I had behaved disorderly, i wasresponsible for making the
decision to do that, but Ithought, you know, most rational
people would have given mysituation, and You know, there
was just cause.
That's that was I rememberthinking that there was just
(24:12):
cause for me to be disobedient,civilly disobedient.
So, instead of choosing to sayguilty or not guilty, there's a
thing you can do where you say I, i stand mute before the
charges.
So I figured that way.
I didn't have to lie and say Ididn't do them or you know, and
try to plead, i was not guilty.
Nor did I have to say you knowanything about?
(24:33):
well, yeah, i did do it and youknow, throw the book at me So.
But it gets entered as a pleaof guilty.
Speaker 2 (24:38):
You know when you know, is that the same as a no
contest?
Speaker 1 (24:41):
Essentially, i mean no contest is more of a ruling.
This is more of a standing thata, a criminal or you know
someone who's charged withwrongdoing, can take.
So I, i stood, i stood mute,which ends up being, you know,
guilty.
You, you don't have to, there'sno trial, they're just at that
point.
Then they passed judgment ofwhat, what needs to happen and I
(25:04):
was sentenced to Take some mananger management.
Of course, you know, go througha I forget how many weeks it was
, but it was, it was significant.
You know that I had to go tothis class for multiple times
And then I had probation.
You know where I had to see aprobation officer, if it was
once a month or whatnot, but youknow.
So I went through that wholeprocess and I look back at it
(25:28):
now and think, you know,actually, that was that was
really good for me, to have thatdirect exposure.
You know direct.
You know impact of my, theconsequences of my actions.
You know I, i can now say thatI I've had handcuffs on me and
been escorted into the back of apolice car And felt like, oh my
(25:50):
god, are they neighborswatching me?
You know, and you know,thankfully I didn't have to go
to jail.
You know that was.
That was good Because it wasright before they started really
cracking down on that.
So instead I just didn't gohome.
You know, that night I, youknow I had to go spend time with
a friend or something andforget all that all worked, but
(26:11):
anyways, it was good in that notonly did I get that experience,
but then I doing the angermanagement class was actually a
really good thing for me And thesame other guys that were in
that class of me.
One was a PhD, you know, workingon a Gene gun that he called it
.
You know that would help with,you know, developing new kinds
(26:33):
of mutated plants in his case.
Another one was a 911 operator,you know, dispatcher for Dean
County, you know.
So here were these people thatwere in very professional, you
know Positions and they were inthe same disorderly conduct.
You know both that I was inhaving to take this anger
(26:54):
management class and so that was, you know I recognized the
Pervasiveness of the problem.
You know that there were.
It wasn't just, you know, iwasn't.
I couldn't call it low life,you know, the whole life there.
And criminal justice system No,it's people all over the place
and we all were guilty and weadmitted our guilt and then.
(27:17):
But then to be on probation Youdon't have to report, you know,
monthly, or I don't I wish Icould remember, was it monthly,
you know, and have to go up anddo that.
It was all humiliating, youknow, but humiliation is a good
thing, right, yeah.
But then I look at all that andI think, how, how would that
have been different for you?
Speaker 2 (27:38):
You know what's the like situation numerous times
myself and I've been in numerouscourtrooms For numerous reasons
.
Not like I'll say I waslaughing.
I was like I've never beengiven the option to say I plead
mute to the charge.
My public defender has neversaid I could be mute.
(27:59):
He's like either you're guilty,not guilty, or no contest.
And I'm assuming that nocontest is maybe Equivalent to
mute because they should.
You're saying like I'm not, iain't admitting guilt, but I
ain't trying to sell me toanybody, just you just.
Okay that you doubt you say Idid All right, no contest.
Yeah, yeah and just to try toget the minimal.
(28:20):
But again is, in those, inthose situations, in those
systems, just you have to go,you and it's like this if you
knew, you did it.
Just you know, like that, cuz Iknow I messed up, so I ain't
gonna even yeah, i did it rightright And so it was just like
all right, but it's like stillthe soft and the blow.
You just say, okay, no contest,because basically that had been
(28:42):
the equivalent to me pleadingguilty, because the public
defender's like you don't.
You're gonna sit for four days.
Regardless of what you say, ido so so just take you.
Speaker 1 (28:51):
Take your medicine and deal with it.
Speaker 2 (28:52):
Yeah, and yet you know when you look at the court
system.
Speaker 1 (28:55):
You know they're all kinds of people that just get
away with stuff right and Butyes, and it cuz again.
Speaker 2 (29:01):
It's like how many people in the world that have a
pet they've been, they've beenmade to plead To a charge that
they didn't even do?
just say, okay, if you, if thisthing, go to trial, you're
gonna do 15 years, but if youplead guilty, you'll just do
three right.
So and it's like you, uh, andYou don't have money for a
(29:23):
lawyer.
So you're just looking at thepublic defender, who is stressed
out and overworked and he'slike you should take this deal,
and you're pounding the tablesaying I didn't do this, it
wasn't me, you know, whateverthe case may be, and And you end
up people end up taking a pleato a crime They didn't commit
and then that's on their recordforever, right?
Speaker 1 (29:44):
You plead?
guilty ever day you admittedyou were guilty.
Speaker 2 (29:48):
But you had to because you just like either I'm
gonna do 15 years or three,right, right.
But either way your life isruined because whatever you had
going at that time, you're gonnalose it, right?
you know, if you pay, check thepaycheck, you had a girl and
two kids waiting on you, rightthat was, it was a done deal.
Speaker 1 (30:09):
Well, and then you sit back and say, well, they
shouldn't have done what theydid.
Then you know well, yeah, butwe're not even sure that they
did do what you know, but that'sa And that's why it's hard to
help people in outreach.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
Now, you know, because even, like you know I
think I may have mentioned thisto you before like when it comes
to resources in the communityto get help, whether it's, you
know, for aging and disability,adult education, rehabilitative
services, anytime you think,okay, let's go to the city, the
county to get you some help,right, the person would be like,
(30:43):
nah, i'm not going into itbecause, again, even though,
like you know, in some instancesthese resources have been out,
they're no longer in the courtbuilding, but still you
associate these things withinstitution, in court, as
institution, so you don't wantto have any parts of it.
So it's like you have to reallylower the walls and explain
(31:04):
things to people saying, yes, iunderstand your fear and
understand why you feel that way, but this resource is not in
the court building or this doesnot determine, you know this,
that or the other.
You know what I mean.
You have to explain and breakthings down in order to really
get people's walls down, to getthem the help they need.
(31:26):
But you know, of course, likewhen you think about Chicago
it's funny, chicago, la, youknow, it's like these people are
getting railroaded left andright.
You know you.
Don't you guilty by association.
You know you are you justwhether you did it or not.
If you, if one just like, say,for instance, you and I were
(31:48):
standing, you and I went to astore And let's just say you
pulled a gun and decide to robthe store.
I didn't know you were going torob the store, i didn't know
you had a gun, but I'm anaccessory to armed robbery just
because I was with you.
Speaker 1 (32:03):
Yeah, yeah Is there and it was like you know, i was
thinking about this last timewhen we talked about police too.
Is there a difference in yourmind, like what was the case in?
you mentioned it There was onein New York to where there's
video of black officers beatinga black man in Memphis.
(32:25):
Yeah, was it Memphis?
I thought there was one in NewYork.
Speaker 2 (32:28):
Just recently.
Speaker 1 (32:29):
What was Memphis Okay ?
Speaker 2 (32:31):
The most recent one was Memphis.
Speaker 1 (32:33):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
A couple months ago.
Speaker 1 (32:35):
Yeah, Okay, And how does that happen?
I mean, and I'm wondering too,like this goes as far as, like
the people in January 6th, therewere, you know, black people
there that are around camera.
Like how, how is this happening?
Is that a?
Yeah, I don't know what to say.
Speaker 2 (32:52):
If you say you say you saw black people at January
6th, i don't know what they werethinking, but you know it's
like with the black police man,you know, course, like I'll use
Memphis as an example They gavethese guys the nickname Scorpion
Force or whatever, whatever itwas.
And so you know their thing wasto.
(33:13):
They were a task force, kind oflike blue blanket was in
Madison back in the 80s.
Okay, you know, in the courseof you know they are tasked with
hitting the toughestcommunities, going into certain
residential areas, that wherethere's high crime.
And so they, these guys,they're already on there,
(33:33):
they're on 100 already when theystep foot out of the car.
So it's like the littlest thingwill escalate.
And but yeah, again, just justlike with a white cop beating a
black cop, a black cop beating ablack, a white cop beating a
black guy in a black cop beatinga black guy, poor judgment,
(33:55):
misuse of authority, all thesame applies.
Speaker 1 (33:59):
Right?
Well, because I rememberthinking, you know, when we
started to see black policeofficers, you know, and they
would be involved in situations,that they would that there
would be more fairness on thestreets.
You know that that would, thatwould somehow equalize things,
and I took that as a sign thatthings were getting better.
(34:21):
And yet it doesn't seem thatreally is the case.
I'm just thinking that thereare black justices would make
things better, you know, in thecourt system, and I don't know
that that's the case.
So, and I think racist peoplehave a tendency to point to that
and see there is no racism, seewe have black justices, we have
(34:42):
black police officers.
That's problems taken care of.
Speaker 2 (34:45):
And yet this stuff happens, you know I yeah, you
know, it depends on the heart ofthe person, Again, whether
they're white or black, because,again, if you put a token on a
board, right, what happens ofthe authoritarianism can come
out of them, whatever the casemay be.
But you know, the thing is isjust, the misuse of authority is
(35:08):
not good And what it is like,regardless of the race that is
doing it to whatever other race,is not good And it should not
be.
And, again, if we are, if wereally uphold the law of the
land, you know these things theyshouldn't be, I mean.
But I think it goes back towhen we're talking about people
(35:29):
in these positions.
They need to be some strongervetting procedures.
You know, of course, rememberhow the white supremacist said
hey, we were told to go join thepolice force, We were told to
go join the military.
That's what we were told to do,And you know.
(35:49):
And then, of course, like, whenthose guys tried to kill the
governor of Michigan, thesheriff defended them, You know.
And it's like, well, they,those guys, they weren't gonna,
they were just trying to likewhat?
Yeah, But, yeah, you know.
But the thing is is just likeit needs to be.
Again, it goes back to usvoting and being aware of what's
(36:13):
going on in our local, localmunicipality governments and so
on and so forth.
Just really being aware, havinga ear to the street, having a
the pulse of the community,really feeling what's going on
and knowing who was who you knowwell, the record should, should
(36:33):
stand for something You know.
Speaker 1 (36:36):
I would think that a person's a person's past
judgments, if you will, areprobably the best indicator of
what their future judgments aregoing to be, you know it's In
some instances that is true.
Speaker 2 (36:50):
Yes, you know, because I do believe in giving
people second chances.
I do believe that people cancorrect.
Speaker 1 (36:56):
Oh yeah.
Speaker 2 (36:58):
Yeah, yeah, it's just , but.
Yeah, but yes, it's likedepending on the state of mind
of that person.
Yeah, you're right.
Speaker 1 (37:07):
Well, I'm thinking of like judges themselves.
You know, if we're going toappoint people as judges, that
we ought to be able to Look attheir track record.
I mean, that's what they dowith Supreme Court justices all
the time and appellate court.
You know federal judges ingeneral is they look at.
They look for people that havea record that Goes the way that
whatever political party happensto be, you know, directing
(37:29):
those people through the, theDemocrats look for a different,
you know, type of judge andjudgments than the Republicans
tend to look for.
That's just you know.
Speaker 2 (37:37):
What was the Supreme Court judge guy?
Oh, my goodness, i can't thinkof his name.
I just saw his picture on TVthe other day, but the one that
was crying He was basically likeI like beer Kavanaugh.
Speaker 1 (37:49):
Kavanaugh okay.
Speaker 2 (37:50):
Well, you know, and then he was accused of a Assault
.
Speaker 1 (37:54):
Yes, when I remember, you know back in the day when
Clarence Thomas was firstappointed, or you know when he's
going through the Senate trialConfirmation trials and you know
here's, here's a guy that youknow That was so well crafted in
that, you know you have a blackjustice being appointed to the
Supreme Court and the You knowso, to come out against him Was,
(38:19):
you know, gonna raise the ireof people.
And yet the people that wereputting in for because I think
that was a Republican Nominationto get him on to the Supreme
Court, you know they had to knowfull well what kind of baggage
he brought with him.
Um, absolutely, you know sothey're.
They're putting him up toappear like, well, we're doing
this really.
You know the thing thatDemocrats now are fighting this.
(38:42):
You know black man becoming ajudge.
You know thinking about.
They know full well He's notanother third good mark.
You know thorough good.
Yeah, they're good.
Marshall, yeah, he wasn'tanywhere near that kind of you
know justice.
So let's not make that mistakeagain.
Right, but at the same point,you know they're just
capitalizing essentially.
(39:02):
You know how and how many ofthose appointments are that way.
You know where.
It's a strategic Mediaappointment, not a you're
qualified to be this person inthis role.
Appointment.
Speaker 2 (39:16):
That's why you're more than anything.
Speaker 1 (39:17):
How can you ever have justice if you don't have that
as your primary Criterion?
and I'm not saying it never, isthat that?
that's not the point of it,it's just.
Speaker 2 (39:25):
It should always be that and it is well, you know,
in those, uh, in those higherlevels of government like that
on the Supreme Court, they, likeyou said, they knew who he was
and what he by G had.
They knew who Anita here wasbefore we even knew who she.
Well, they knew who she wasright and they were like we can
get you, we can beat that foryou, we got you right, don't
worry about it.
Speaker 1 (39:46):
Well, I know, you, know You know, it's a prize,
he's under all kinds of scrutiny.
For, you know, some of thefinancial dealings that have
been going on and like, okay,isn't that interesting that he,
he was good enough to a point.
But you know, there were ampleindications that this is the
kind of man He was.
Forget about the color of hisskin, this is the kind of man He
was.
So, you know, again, there's apolitical motivation there.
(40:08):
It has to be, you know, he's,he's targeted, i think.
Ultimately, that's not to saypoor Clarence Thomas, that's
just to say you know, lookbehind the curtains everybody.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
You know what Who's whose money is involved in this,
this exploration that's whyit's almost like you can't
really trust you, because, likewhen you see something Really
loud going on in the news, iasked myself okay, what am I not
seeing?
Speaker 1 (40:35):
right.
Speaker 2 (40:35):
That's because this is this what I'm seeing, what
you want me to see, right, butwhat else is going on?
And so that's where my thinkingstart to become because, like,
usually, like, laws and billsare being passed and going forth
And it's like we don't evenknow right, and it's like
because we got smoke screened bythis thing, you know, and well,
like you're talking about the,the guys in Memphis police
(40:57):
officers there I I had no ideathey were referred to as a
scorpion for you know, and what?
the scorpion for whatever taskforce.
Yeah, they were a part of.
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (41:07):
I don't remember that being explored in the media at
all.
So you know, was that?
Speaker 2 (41:12):
Yeah, it was on the news and I like I think I don't
know if I mentioned it to you,but it was like it was the four
black ones and then, of course,those guys were made known right
away.
The Fifth white guy, he wasn'tmade known till days later.
But, however, yeah, like kindof like I was saying, like
Madison, wisconsin, blue blanket, same thing.
(41:32):
You know, just you go into anarea and you just arrest
whoever's standing outside,regardless of what is going on,
you just putting people inhandcuffs and then patty wagons
and then you're sorting it allout at the station And then,
before you know it, you'regetting booked and bagged and
tagged and you know andfingerprint it and You just hey,
(41:52):
it's Friday night, this is whatit is.
Live outside, it's summertime,it's outside, everybody outside.
But you get up in a streetsuite and there you go, right.
Speaker 1 (42:04):
Why we're at man, here we are again at the end of
another time, right And it's, idon't know we have any solutions
.
One thing I I will leave uswith and I'm thinking about is
The courts.
Really are all of us, when itcomes down to it, the real court
, the real way that Lady Justiceis gonna balance Right and
(42:26):
wrong, is by all of us andyou've talked about it multiple
times, you know by all of usrecognizing our Responsibility
to vote for what's right and todiscern what is right in a
situation.
You know, is it right for thisto keep happening the way it's
happening?
and it's really easy to justabdicate Responsibility and say,
(42:48):
oh, i can't do anything aboutit.
No, you can And you have to,and it's all of our
responsibilities to do what wecan do and that's vote.
And don't just vote on you'vesaid it to you know don't vote
on one issue.
Vote on the overall, theOver-arching issue, which is we
want to see, you know, we wantAmerica to be great again, but
(43:12):
you know who's defining whatgreat looks like?
I think great looks like, youknow, a lot different thing than
other folks seem to.
I want a great country thatReally practices things like
equity and practices, thingslike tolerance and compassion
and kindness, and you knowgenerosity.
You know that that's thecountry I want, not one that you
(43:34):
know focuses on hating peopleBecause they didn't vote the way
I wanted to, or listening topeople that are, you know, have
their own agenda instead of Mostpeople's.
You know caring for the thegreater good, if you will so I'd
like to see America survive.
Speaker 2 (43:52):
Yeah, yeah, you know we're fighting all this,
fighting from within.
I'm Just as concerned as I amwith the internal issues in this
country, becoming even moreMore Aware and even more
concerned about what's happeningexternally, you know, with how,
(44:12):
how the country is being seen.
You know, because people are,they're watching and they're
looking for weak points.
They're looking for weak pointson how they can break this
thing down Right and we have tocome together to fix and heal in
order for us to protect right.
Speaker 1 (44:30):
Yeah, i wouldn't be surprised if these guys that are
out there like stirring the potregularly aren't on.
You know, like some Chinesecompanies payroll.
You know, if you trace themoney back, you know, sad to
think, you know, because theyhave the most.
You know they really do.
Mm-hmm.
All right, man, so it we again.
Nothing solved, but at leastthe discussion started right.
Speaker 2 (44:54):
So yep, i just said look at the courts.
Speaker 1 (44:57):
Yeah, look at the courts and judge for yourself.
Ah, judge for yourself.
So, all right, man, take care,bro, talk to you next week.
Speaker 2 (45:06):
I see you.
Speaker 1 (45:07):
Thanks for listening to us folks.
Here I'm framework referencecoming together.
Testing one, two.
Yeah, that's working, and thisrecording has started.
So we're good there And here wego, ready.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
All right.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
Let's have it.
Do that again, because I thinkI was talking over you.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
Let's have it.
Speaker 1 (00:16):
Oh, let's have what my friend Antoine, what's have
what I know, let's have anepisode of coming together.
Shall we frame of reference.
Coming together, absolutely.
I folks, i'm raw, i'm raw, thebrush, and a guy sitting across
from me in the screen up in likeGreen Bay or something, aren't
you?
I mean, you're a ways away,Green Bay, Wisconsin.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
Antoine Hoffman senior.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
Isn't that a great thing, to that we can be.
Here I am in little old sockprairie, wisconsin, and there
you are in little old Green Bay,wisconsin, and we can have a
face to face these days, youknow yeah, i know it's amazing
how the technical technologyadvances have happened even in
the last 10, 15 years.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
My goodness man.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Yeah, yeah, in the IT industry, i know when COVID hit
the, they say the ITinfrastructure grew 10 years
worth of growth in about threemonths.
So they knew this was coming,but you know we didn't know it
was going to happen quite asquickly as it had to happen.
So, but anyways.
So if you've listened to theshow before folks, you know that
(01:18):
Antoine and I try to takeissues as fun as clothing and
music and and also talk aboutthings that are very, to some
extent, difficult to talk about,like a couple weeks ago when we
talked about police and how.
You know as much respect andyou know overall just
(01:42):
appreciation that all of us needto have, should have, for
police and the work that they doand how necessary they are for
the functioning of our citiesand you know just our different
communities.
At the same point there areproblems.
You know, there are things thatwe need to deal with, And you
(02:02):
know.
So that's kind of the justright, antoine.
We're just trying to discusssome things that need to be
discussed.
Speaker 2 (02:09):
Yeah, so discussing these things and, in far as our
one sense is concerned, sometype of resolution or path to
resolution or just something toleave on a positive note, but
yes, it's like a definitely we,as we were discussing last week,
we just, you know, wedefinitely have great respect
for the police and what they doand the mentality and the work
(02:32):
involved, and we also discussedthat, hey, we can't allow a few
bad apples to spoil the wholebunch, so to speak, or even kind
of taint our way of thinkingabout the police as a whole.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
Yeah, you know, i'm just thinking that you're
talking about that too.
We have a tendency to think ofa lot of these issues as us
against them.
You know, there's theotherization process, and what
we don't seem to get, i think,is that it really is us against
us.
You know, we are our own worstenemies in terms of working
(03:04):
problems out, because there is,there has never been a situation
that I'm aware of, where, whenpeople sit down and are willing
to talk through the problem,willing to really be transparent
about what they see and wherethe stumbling blocks are for
them, that things don't somehowget worked out.
You know, everybody doesn't geteverything that they want.
(03:26):
It ends up having somecompromise involved in it, but
it's.
There are no problems that wehave not as people, as humans,
been able to overcome.
As long as we approach thetable with the understanding of
we have to come to a solution,we have to.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
And you exactly right about that.
And it's like, you know, thefirst thing is it has to be a
desire for resolution or sometype of a conclusion or some
type of a remedy.
It has to be a desire for itfirst.
And in some instances you knowwe talked about this before that
just, there's a certain groupsof people that just don't want
that.
(04:02):
You know it's a, it's a have tohave nots, right, you know the
people that have want to keep itand have nots wanted, and so it
is just you keep that your footon the top of a person's head
and then, of course, it createsa culture, it creates an
environment, an atmosphere, abehavior, and things escalate,
(04:23):
they change, you know, then themarginalization, and just it
goes on and on.
And but yeah, just, we desirechange.
I don't know about you, i know,i'm gonna guess that you are.
You feel the same way I do, andit's just like we desire change
.
Where's the humility?
(04:44):
That's the biggest thing, youknow it.
Just, i just can't fathomlooking at another person and
looking at them as subhuman,regardless of their class,
status or race or whatever thecase may be, and it just, it's
just hard to view someone thatway.
But yet we know that thathappens, and so, through God's
(05:08):
grace and this podcast, we justhoping to soften hearts and just
at least hopefully the scaleswill fall off her eye.
A heart will be a no softened alittle bit.
Speaker 1 (05:19):
Well, just think about it.
Just, you know, that's, i think, ultimately right.
We've said we just want peopleto think about Is it working?
Is what we're doing right nowworking?
You know, if, if we continue toshake the soda can and shake it
, and shake it, and shake it,and shake it until either the
top blows off or we realize,well, i want to drink the soda
(05:42):
now, and it spews out, and thenwe go, oh my, why did that spew
out?
I don't understand.
Well, you know, and we are,that's what we're doing with
we're allowing our media to do,that's we're allowing our
leaders to do, to a large extent, is to shake the can.
And you know the can is is ouremotions, the can is our fears,
(06:06):
our irrationalities, ourstubbornness.
You know our resistance to.
I mean, we're like little kids.
You know you got to take thismedicine.
You know I don't even aT-Swerve ball.
Well, you know, yeah, but ifyou take the medicine it's gonna
help make you better.
I don't want to feel better.
Well, you know, come on.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
That's what we were talking about last week.
We were going like again, thepros and it's kind of like a
pros and cons of being thepolice officer, respecting the
police, and yes, there'sbehaviors and attitudes and
things like that that go withpolicing good and bad.
And then, of course, thoseinstitutions that govern us.
Those behaviors exist withinthe institutions And, like we're
(06:50):
talking about, like we're gonnabe talking about here shortly,
the courts.
You know, you got the cops, yougot the courts and you got the
corrections right.
And so when we talk about thecourts, you know these and I
guess, as I again I canshamelessly say that I'm
continuously learning as I getolder.
You know, of course.
(07:10):
Well, you know, i would likeyou think about the law, the
laws of the land.
You think they are etched instone, but then the more you
read and look at the law is tobe interpreted And it's like,
okay, so depending on who'sinterpreting it right, that's
what you're gonna get Right.
And then, but no course, we'lltalk about the courts.
You know, just, we've seen thecourts do some good things,
(07:32):
we've seen some bad things.
We see what's happening incourt today.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
Right, well, how?
many people to don't, don'ttrust the courts.
You know it's, you know, amatter of you know you get a
system that allows the kind ofshifting they try to make it,
you know, i think, fair andequitable.
the point of you know case getsput out there and there's a
rotation of you know judges thatare available that can try
(07:59):
certain cases and just dependingon who is in the rotation,
that's who you end up with as ajudge.
And yet I don't know that mostpeople to trust that that's
really how it works, that therearen't people that are able to
get the judge they want, get thejudge that's most likely to
give them the decision that theywant.
You know, i don't know.
(08:20):
I don't know that that happens,but I also don't know that it
doesn't happen And the fact thatpeople think that it does tells
you something about the decayof the integrity of the court
system, or it tells yousomething about the media and
its representation of the courtsystem, right?
Speaker 2 (08:35):
So there's a, it could be both.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
Yeah, you know, yeah, and it's.
I mean, it's interesting.
Maybe you know Lady Justice isblindfolded, right, lady Justice
has the scales of justice, youknow.
Are they, you know, innocent orguilty?
I thought it was interestingthat she's blind.
You know that she, she is.
Why is there blind justice?
(08:58):
I should have looked that up tofind out what the symbolism is
of that.
If it's just so that they, theycan, they have to hear the case
They have to, i don't know.
Maybe somebody out therelistening knows the the roots of
that, why she's blindfolded.
You know she's not supposed tosee.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
Well, I guess, like, uh, one's wealth, one's race,
one's Race, color, creed is notsupposed to matter.
Yeah, just the scales.
You know it should be balancedscales.
Yeah, and that's just my, myinterpretation of what makes
sense.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
You know you don't want to have anything that's
gonna, you know, increase yourbias.
So justice should be determinedpurely on right or wrong, you
know, guilty or not guilty, andthat that decision Should be as
unbiased as possible.
And that's therein lies the rubof what we're talking about
(09:57):
today.
I think, is that sense of isjustice.
Is the court system fair forall?
are the same scales used Forwhite people versus black people
?
you know, is it?
do you start from an equalplaying field or is the deck
stacked against you By a basisof your color, of your skin?
(10:20):
you know, and certainly thereare historical examples of that
being a king, they're beingkangaroo courts all over the
place.
You know you wander into thewrong person's town, you know,
and you know, get stopped for aspeeding ticket.
It may be a whole lot differentstory If you're black versus
white.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
Well, remember Wisconsin.
They always used to say back inus the early mid 80s, you come
to Wisconsin on vacation, youleave on probation.
Speaker 1 (10:51):
Really that was.
I didn't, i didn't know.
I shouldn't laugh.
That's pretty sad, but well,they were also, you know,
sundown towns, right where Youknow you.
You just knew, what was it?
the green book, was that the?
the book that had beenpublished up until the 60s?
even that that warned Blackpeople, you know, stay away from
(11:12):
these towns.
Or, you know, gave the thebackground on which hotels would
Would service black folks andwhich would not.
You know, the court system in asundown town was definitely
going to be different than thecourt system in a non sundown
town.
It had to be, i mean it.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Yeah, and We, we like to say that things are better
today, but they are somewhatbetter, but they are almost as
just as they are better.
They are the same.
You know, you can still likeagain.
You know, when we talk aboutthings like race and classism
and all these different things,they are a part of society.
(11:52):
So who, who are the judges?
who are the police officers?
who are the lawyers?
They are parts of society.
So, yes, these Good things insociety and the bad things of
society are going to be Withinthe institution.
And so, yeah, and of course,like you said, we've seen this
thing lived out member back inFerguson, when that big Ferguson
(12:15):
, missouri, and of course.
So all that was about isbecause, like, people will go to
, and if a person couldn't pay ahundred dollar Fine, hundred
dollar traffic ticket orwhatever, they end up that the
fine is getting doubled andquadrupled.
They end up in months in jailFor a hundred books that they
couldn't pay.
People lost their jobs becausethey couldn't pay a hundred
(12:36):
dollars or two hundred dollars.
And and Again, of course, whenthe feds did what they did, feds
did their type that they saythere was some instances of
wrongdoing, but of course, noone's ever gonna Admit that, but
there were some instances ofwrongdoing, but these things
they do still exist.
You know, in the course, whenwe're talking about the courts,
(12:57):
you know no, when, when you goto court, depending on who you
are, they'll scare you so bad.
You know, hey, if you don'tplead guilty, you're.
You're looking at 10, 15, 20years and of course we've seen
in this is where people haveplayed Guilty to things they had
.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
They didn't even do are you aware Personally, i mean
, antoine, are there folks inyour You know, along your
relatives, that have had courtsituations where it was just
like Just crazy, like you know,that kind of thing where you're
like, seriously, this ishappening in America?
Speaker 2 (13:34):
Well, I remember my uncle got shot in the face by a
grocery store owner and hewanted.
He got shot in the face and heended up in jail.
Seriously so go figure.
So go figure, all because ofthe store owner, say he felt
threatened because my uncle.
He said, hey, you didn't giveme all my change back and it
(13:55):
wouldn't escalated.
Just give me my change back AndI'll give you.
Gave you a change, and beforeyou know what, the store owner
pulls a gun, shoots him in theface and then, before then of
course, my uncle is Chained to ahospital bed, you know, getting
his face, you know, fixed, andthen, of course, from there he
goes to jail and And again, it'sjust.
(14:16):
Those are Instances like that,they happen, and but the thing
is, it's just.
It goes back to a one of theearlier Podcasts we've done
about voting, being aware of,yeah, local, municipality
politics, so to speak, you know,being aware of what's going on
in that city, state or town,yeah, well and you think about
(14:38):
to be a judge.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
You know, even even biblically, you know the book of
judges.
You know, in that whole seriesof of stories of the judges and
the righteousness of some andthe non righteousness of others
I mean, it's been going onforever And the quality of the
judge.
You know, i don't know that we.
(15:01):
How do you have justice with ajudge that isn't Qualified?
how do you have justice with ajudge that you know it has
proven to have biases?
And you know I don't.
What are the criteria for ajudge appointment?
I don't even know.
Honestly, it seems like they'reusually political appointments
(15:21):
more than anything.
Yeah, you know, and if you'regonna be a Supreme Court justice
, you should have a certainamount of Qualifications.
But there are documented casesof people having been appointed
to The Supreme Court that youknow you could make a strong
case for them not beingqualified.
So what does that say?
(15:42):
you know?
for if we don't have somethingmore sophisticated than some
politician saying, yeah, you getto be a judge?
Speaker 2 (15:50):
And these are life in the federal course.
These are lifelong appointments, right, right, right.
And so that's why it again, ittook some reading and
understanding to get that wow,why they are doing this.
You know, courses like why are,depending on who's in office,
they're trying to stack thecourse with their judges, you
know Red or blue or whatever.
(16:11):
And I and I guess I had to readup on it and it just is like.
I guess, like these federal,these District, these us, these
circuit and district courtjudges, they have the ability to
stay certain Beals and laws andlike, say of, depending on what
the situation is, if I guess,if they don't like this thing
That's coming from Congress,they have the ability to put it
(16:34):
on hold, you know right?
Speaker 1 (16:36):
Well, they don't, and they don't make the laws, but
they interpret them right, i'lladd a student loan debt relief
court.
Speaker 2 (16:43):
What judge actually said?
Speaker 1 (16:45):
no, Yeah, no whole yeah, but yeah and.
Right, how do these guys, howdo these people get selected for
?
Well, how are we gonna havejustice when we can't trust the
justice of the justices?
Speaker 2 (17:02):
you know, and that's where, like remember, come on,
like the whole the was oldWisconsin model, come on
probation, leave, come onvacation, leave on probation.
You know, they made a point,they, they were making.
They were making a point.
They, at a certain point Theydidn't want certain people here
or they didn't know.
They just not to say that therewas a law broken, whether it
(17:24):
was or was not, but either, orit just.
When a coach, when multiplepeople do the same thing, that's
a culture right, and it ain't.
Let's just take cops and courtsout of it, but just if people
as a whole are acting and doinga certain thing, that's a
culture created and that's aculture that they're trying to
(17:44):
maintain and they're gonnaexclude you at all costs.
They ain't gonna, the course,they can't just tell you how
they feel, but they'll make youuncomfortable as possible.
I And we see that in the courtshave so much power.
I mean, how many lives havebeen changed, ruined, because of
a bias on the bench?
Speaker 1 (18:05):
Yeah, and how do you check that?
How do you as if you're a judge?
I'd love it if a judgelistening would explain this
more.
But what are the regulatory orself-regulation techniques that
a judge uses to make sure thatthey're really being blind and
(18:31):
not making an evaluation basedon anything other than is this
person following the rule of thelaw?
Is there just cause Andobviously a jury plays a part in
that as well that the judge hasto take the jury's verdict and
then decide what theconsequences of that should be?
but not all cases are jurytrials either.
(18:54):
So we have a person here thatwe're entrusting to make just
decisions, and it's worrisome tome because you know that if
people can stand up and say I'mnot guilty when it's obvious
that they are guilty, so you'reallowing people to enter a plea
of not guilty, well, yeah, youare not guilty until proven
(19:17):
beyond within reasonableaccommodations, that you are
guilty.
So we'll decide that for you.
But then we can stack the juryright.
We can put people on that aremore favorable to us personally
and professionally, whatever,and are likely to see oh yeah,
no, it was really, there wereextenuating circumstances.
(19:38):
And if that isn't another thing, you have a judge that says,
okay, well, they said you'reguilty, but gosh, i really don't
want to throw the book at youbecause this is whatever.
Speaker 2 (19:48):
There's so many things that can go wrong because
of who human beings areAbsolutely, and my understanding
with that one thing you justmentioned, raoul, where's the
accountability with the judges?
and it is almost like what I waslistening to a couple of days
ago.
It was almost like a self.
It's kind of like a peer checksystem, you know.
(20:09):
It's like a judge sitting on abench makes a ruling And if, of
course, their ruling is going tobe scrutinized by their peers
and they're going to be likeeither that was dumb, stupid,
silly, whatever, it didn't makesense, kind of like what
happened with this judge that'sprobably going to be hearing
about in the next couple ofweeks here.
But my understanding is likeit'll be scrutinized, but also,
(20:33):
if that ruling is seemed notfair or if there's some kind of
a federal accountability to it,it goes to the appellant court,
where that judge's decision isgoing to go before three of the
district court or the appellantcourt, which is three judges,
and they can overturn thatjudge's decision.
(20:55):
So then that way I think theaccountability, or that part is,
is like them constantly havingtheir judgments overruled or
changed is attained on theirreputation.
So if that's, some people don'tcare about their reputation.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
So Well, and they're still going to.
You know how many of thosecases actually do get overturned
right.
I mean, you can play the odds,i suppose, and say, well, most
times there's not going to be,you know, an appeal, or most
times, even if there is anappeal, i'm still standing on
some sound principles here bymaking this decision.
So, yeah, i mean you'redepending on parts of a parts of
(21:37):
a system to involve integrity,or you know that it depends upon
there being individuals inthose roles that have integrity.
And yet if there's one thing weprove fairly regularly is there
are very few people withintegrity and yet they continue
(21:58):
to be judges, they're continueto be lawyers that are, you know
, caught in all kinds of thingsbecause they didn't have any
integrity.
You know, i sometimes wonder isit a system of justice or is it
a system of maintaining a powerbalance?
Speaker 2 (22:20):
I believe it's the latter.
And, of course, it's like whenwe're talking about the law,
it's not what you know, but it'swho you know.
because, like again, like withthese appointments of these
judges, left and right, it'sjust like Where did they come
from?
What's the history, what's thestory?
You know?
what are they?
How did they come up?
You know, you want to get somekind of background.
Just oh, this person was justappointed to this circuit or
(22:44):
this district, you know, and itjust that's all you hear.
Just a, this administrationappointed 80 judges.
This administration appointed100 judges.
That's all you hear.
But you don't hear thebackground of these judges and
right, you know, and it's likethe fairness thereof, or Their
love of the law and theirfairness in the law.
Speaker 1 (23:04):
Well, i, you know I can only speak to my personal
experience, and I'm sure that Ihave.
I don't know that I've sharedthis now It's gonna be out there
in podcast land, but years agoI was arrested for Just
disorderly conduct, okay, whichis a misdemeanor at least it was
at the time but I still, youknow, i had to be arraigned for
(23:27):
it And the guy that representedme was actually a friend of mine
, so it he did it pro bono, justto assist me through that
process.
And You know, when I stoodbefore the judge for the
arraignment, you know I had toenter a plea and in my mind I'm
thinking well, you know, i don't, i don't want to be punished
for this, because I Actually hadgood cause.
(23:50):
There was more to thecircumstance of what, what
brought me to the case where Ibehaved disorderly, which I
understood.
I had behaved disorderly, i wasresponsible for making the
decision to do that, but Ithought, you know, most rational
people would have given mysituation, and You know, there
was just cause.
That's that was I rememberthinking that there was just
(24:12):
cause for me to be disobedient,civilly disobedient.
So, instead of choosing to sayguilty or not guilty, there's a
thing you can do where you say I, i stand mute before the
charges.
So I figured that way.
I didn't have to lie and say Ididn't do them or you know, and
try to plead, i was not guilty.
Nor did I have to say you knowanything about?
(24:33):
well, yeah, i did do it and youknow, throw the book at me So.
But it gets entered as a pleaof guilty.
Speaker 2 (24:38):
You know when you know, is that the same as a no
contest?
Speaker 1 (24:41):
Essentially, i mean no contest is more of a ruling.
This is more of a standing thata, a criminal or you know
someone who's charged withwrongdoing, can take.
So I, i stood, i stood mute,which ends up being, you know,
guilty.
You, you don't have to, there'sno trial, they're just at that
point.
Then they passed judgment ofwhat, what needs to happen and I
(25:04):
was sentenced to Take some mananger management.
Of course, you know, go througha I forget how many weeks it was
, but it was, it was significant.
You know that I had to go tothis class for multiple times
And then I had probation.
You know where I had to see aprobation officer, if it was
once a month or whatnot, but youknow.
So I went through that wholeprocess and I look back at it
(25:28):
now and think, you know,actually, that was that was
really good for me, to have thatdirect exposure.
You know direct.
You know impact of my, theconsequences of my actions.
You know I, i can now say thatI I've had handcuffs on me and
been escorted into the back of apolice car And felt like, oh my
(25:50):
god, are they neighborswatching me?
You know, and you know,thankfully I didn't have to go
to jail.
You know that was.
That was good Because it wasright before they started really
cracking down on that.
So instead I just didn't gohome.
You know, that night I, youknow I had to go spend time with
a friend or something andforget all that all worked, but
(26:11):
anyways, it was good in that notonly did I get that experience,
but then I doing the angermanagement class was actually a
really good thing for me And thesame other guys that were in
that class of me.
One was a PhD, you know, workingon a Gene gun that he called it
.
You know that would help with,you know, developing new kinds
(26:33):
of mutated plants in his case.
Another one was a 911 operator,you know, dispatcher for Dean
County, you know.
So here were these people thatwere in very professional, you
know Positions and they were inthe same disorderly conduct.
You know both that I was inhaving to take this anger
(26:54):
management class and so that was, you know I recognized the
Pervasiveness of the problem.
You know that there were.
It wasn't just, you know, iwasn't.
I couldn't call it low life,you know, the whole life there.
And criminal justice system No,it's people all over the place
and we all were guilty and weadmitted our guilt and then.
(27:17):
But then to be on probation Youdon't have to report, you know,
monthly, or I don't I wish Icould remember, was it monthly,
you know, and have to go up anddo that.
It was all humiliating, youknow, but humiliation is a good
thing, right, yeah.
But then I look at all that andI think, how, how would that
have been different for you?
Speaker 2 (27:38):
You know what's the like situation numerous times
myself and I've been in numerouscourtrooms For numerous reasons
.
Not like I'll say I waslaughing.
I was like I've never beengiven the option to say I plead
mute to the charge.
My public defender has neversaid I could be mute.
(27:59):
He's like either you're guilty,not guilty, or no contest.
And I'm assuming that nocontest is maybe Equivalent to
mute because they should.
You're saying like I'm not, iain't admitting guilt, but I
ain't trying to sell me toanybody, just you just.
Okay that you doubt you say Idid All right, no contest.
Yeah, yeah and just to try toget the minimal.
(28:20):
But again is, in those, inthose situations, in those
systems, just you have to go,you and it's like this if you
knew, you did it.
Just you know, like that, cuz Iknow I messed up, so I ain't
gonna even yeah, i did it rightright And so it was just like
all right, but it's like stillthe soft and the blow.
You just say, okay, no contest,because basically that had been
(28:42):
the equivalent to me pleadingguilty, because the public
defender's like you don't.
You're gonna sit for four days.
Regardless of what you say, ido so so just take you.
Speaker 1 (28:51):
Take your medicine and deal with it.
Speaker 2 (28:52):
Yeah, and yet you know when you look at the court
system.
Speaker 1 (28:55):
You know they're all kinds of people that just get
away with stuff right and Butyes, and it cuz again.
Speaker 2 (29:01):
It's like how many people in the world that have a
pet they've been, they've beenmade to plead To a charge that
they didn't even do?
just say, okay, if you, if thisthing, go to trial, you're
gonna do 15 years, but if youplead guilty, you'll just do
three right.
So and it's like you, uh, andYou don't have money for a
(29:23):
lawyer.
So you're just looking at thepublic defender, who is stressed
out and overworked and he'slike you should take this deal,
and you're pounding the tablesaying I didn't do this, it
wasn't me, you know, whateverthe case may be, and And you end
up people end up taking a pleato a crime They didn't commit
and then that's on their recordforever, right?
Speaker 1 (29:44):
You plead?
guilty ever day you admittedyou were guilty.
Speaker 2 (29:48):
But you had to because you just like either I'm
gonna do 15 years or three,right, right.
But either way your life isruined because whatever you had
going at that time, you're gonnalose it, right?
you know, if you pay, check thepaycheck, you had a girl and
two kids waiting on you, rightthat was, it was a done deal.
Speaker 1 (30:09):
Well, and then you sit back and say, well, they
shouldn't have done what theydid.
Then you know well, yeah, butwe're not even sure that they
did do what you know, but that'sa And that's why it's hard to
help people in outreach.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
Now, you know, because even, like you know I
think I may have mentioned thisto you before like when it comes
to resources in the communityto get help, whether it's, you
know, for aging and disability,adult education, rehabilitative
services, anytime you think,okay, let's go to the city, the
county to get you some help,right, the person would be like,
(30:43):
nah, i'm not going into itbecause, again, even though,
like you know, in some instancesthese resources have been out,
they're no longer in the courtbuilding, but still you
associate these things withinstitution, in court, as
institution, so you don't wantto have any parts of it.
So it's like you have to reallylower the walls and explain
(31:04):
things to people saying, yes, iunderstand your fear and
understand why you feel that way, but this resource is not in
the court building or this doesnot determine, you know this,
that or the other.
You know what I mean.
You have to explain and breakthings down in order to really
get people's walls down, to getthem the help they need.
(31:26):
But you know, of course, likewhen you think about Chicago
it's funny, chicago, la, youknow, it's like these people are
getting railroaded left andright.
You know you.
Don't you guilty by association.
You know you are you justwhether you did it or not.
If you, if one just like, say,for instance, you and I were
(31:48):
standing, you and I went to astore And let's just say you
pulled a gun and decide to robthe store.
I didn't know you were going torob the store, i didn't know
you had a gun, but I'm anaccessory to armed robbery just
because I was with you.
Speaker 1 (32:03):
Yeah, yeah Is there and it was like you know, i was
thinking about this last timewhen we talked about police too.
Is there a difference in yourmind, like what was the case in?
you mentioned it There was onein New York to where there's
video of black officers beatinga black man in Memphis.
(32:25):
Yeah, was it Memphis?
I thought there was one in NewYork.
Speaker 2 (32:28):
Just recently.
Speaker 1 (32:29):
What was Memphis Okay ?
Speaker 2 (32:31):
The most recent one was Memphis.
Speaker 1 (32:33):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
A couple months ago.
Speaker 1 (32:35):
Yeah, Okay, And how does that happen?
I mean, and I'm wondering too,like this goes as far as, like
the people in January 6th, therewere, you know, black people
there that are around camera.
Like how, how is this happening?
Is that a?
Yeah, I don't know what to say.
Speaker 2 (32:52):
If you say you say you saw black people at January
6th, i don't know what they werethinking, but you know it's
like with the black police man,you know, course, like I'll use
Memphis as an example They gavethese guys the nickname Scorpion
Force or whatever, whatever itwas.
And so you know their thing wasto.
(33:13):
They were a task force, kind oflike blue blanket was in
Madison back in the 80s.
Okay, you know, in the courseof you know they are tasked with
hitting the toughestcommunities, going into certain
residential areas, that wherethere's high crime.
And so they, these guys,they're already on there,
(33:33):
they're on 100 already when theystep foot out of the car.
So it's like the littlest thingwill escalate.
And but yeah, again, just justlike with a white cop beating a
black cop, a black cop beating ablack, a white cop beating a
black guy in a black cop beatinga black guy, poor judgment,
(33:55):
misuse of authority, all thesame applies.
Speaker 1 (33:59):
Right?
Well, because I rememberthinking, you know, when we
started to see black policeofficers, you know, and they
would be involved in situations,that they would that there
would be more fairness on thestreets.
You know that that would, thatwould somehow equalize things,
and I took that as a sign thatthings were getting better.
(34:21):
And yet it doesn't seem thatreally is the case.
I'm just thinking that thereare black justices would make
things better, you know, in thecourt system, and I don't know
that that's the case.
So, and I think racist peoplehave a tendency to point to that
and see there is no racism, seewe have black justices, we have
(34:42):
black police officers.
That's problems taken care of.
Speaker 2 (34:45):
And yet this stuff happens, you know I yeah, you
know, it depends on the heart ofthe person, Again, whether
they're white or black, because,again, if you put a token on a
board, right, what happens ofthe authoritarianism can come
out of them, whatever the casemay be.
But you know, the thing is isjust, the misuse of authority is
(35:08):
not good And what it is like,regardless of the race that is
doing it to whatever other race,is not good And it should not
be.
And, again, if we are, if wereally uphold the law of the
land, you know these things theyshouldn't be, I mean.
But I think it goes back towhen we're talking about people
(35:29):
in these positions.
They need to be some strongervetting procedures.
You know, of course, rememberhow the white supremacist said
hey, we were told to go join thepolice force, We were told to
go join the military.
That's what we were told to do,And you know.
(35:49):
And then, of course, like, whenthose guys tried to kill the
governor of Michigan, thesheriff defended them, You know.
And it's like, well, they,those guys, they weren't gonna,
they were just trying to likewhat?
Yeah, But, yeah, you know.
But the thing is is just likeit needs to be.
Again, it goes back to usvoting and being aware of what's
(36:13):
going on in our local, localmunicipality governments and so
on and so forth.
Just really being aware, havinga ear to the street, having a
the pulse of the community,really feeling what's going on
and knowing who was who you knowwell, the record should, should
(36:33):
stand for something You know.
Speaker 1 (36:36):
I would think that a person's a person's past
judgments, if you will, areprobably the best indicator of
what their future judgments aregoing to be, you know it's In
some instances that is true.
Speaker 2 (36:50):
Yes, you know, because I do believe in giving
people second chances.
I do believe that people cancorrect.
Speaker 1 (36:56):
Oh yeah.
Speaker 2 (36:58):
Yeah, yeah, it's just , but.
Yeah, but yes, it's likedepending on the state of mind
of that person.
Yeah, you're right.
Speaker 1 (37:07):
Well, I'm thinking of like judges themselves.
You know, if we're going toappoint people as judges, that
we ought to be able to Look attheir track record.
I mean, that's what they dowith Supreme Court justices all
the time and appellate court.
You know federal judges ingeneral is they look at.
They look for people that havea record that Goes the way that
whatever political party happensto be, you know, directing
(37:29):
those people through the, theDemocrats look for a different,
you know, type of judge andjudgments than the Republicans
tend to look for.
That's just you know.
Speaker 2 (37:37):
What was the Supreme Court judge guy?
Oh, my goodness, i can't thinkof his name.
I just saw his picture on TVthe other day, but the one that
was crying He was basically likeI like beer Kavanaugh.
Speaker 1 (37:49):
Kavanaugh okay.
Speaker 2 (37:50):
Well, you know, and then he was accused of a Assault
.
Speaker 1 (37:54):
Yes, when I remember, you know back in the day when
Clarence Thomas was firstappointed, or you know when he's
going through the Senate trialConfirmation trials and you know
here's, here's a guy that youknow That was so well crafted in
that, you know you have a blackjustice being appointed to the
Supreme Court and the You knowso, to come out against him Was,
(38:19):
you know, gonna raise the ireof people.
And yet the people that wereputting in for because I think
that was a Republican Nominationto get him on to the Supreme
Court, you know they had to knowfull well what kind of baggage
he brought with him.
Um, absolutely, you know sothey're.
They're putting him up toappear like, well, we're doing
this really.
You know the thing thatDemocrats now are fighting this.
(38:42):
You know black man becoming ajudge.
You know thinking about.
They know full well He's notanother third good mark.
You know thorough good.
Yeah, they're good.
Marshall, yeah, he wasn'tanywhere near that kind of you
know justice.
So let's not make that mistakeagain.
Right, but at the same point,you know they're just
capitalizing essentially.
(39:02):
You know how and how many ofthose appointments are that way.
You know where.
It's a strategic Mediaappointment, not a you're
qualified to be this person inthis role.
Appointment.
Speaker 2 (39:16):
That's why you're more than anything.
Speaker 1 (39:17):
How can you ever have justice if you don't have that
as your primary Criterion?
and I'm not saying it never, isthat that?
that's not the point of it,it's just.
Speaker 2 (39:25):
It should always be that and it is well, you know,
in those, uh, in those higherlevels of government like that
on the Supreme Court, they, likeyou said, they knew who he was
and what he by G had.
They knew who Anita here wasbefore we even knew who she.
Well, they knew who she wasright and they were like we can
get you, we can beat that foryou, we got you right, don't
worry about it.
Speaker 1 (39:46):
Well, I know, you, know You know, it's a prize,
he's under all kinds of scrutiny.
For, you know, some of thefinancial dealings that have
been going on and like, okay,isn't that interesting that he,
he was good enough to a point.
But you know, there were ampleindications that this is the
kind of man He was.
Forget about the color of hisskin, this is the kind of man He
was.
So, you know, again, there's apolitical motivation there.
(40:08):
It has to be, you know, he's,he's targeted, i think.
Ultimately, that's not to saypoor Clarence Thomas, that's
just to say you know, lookbehind the curtains everybody.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
You know what Who's whose money is involved in this,
this exploration that's whyit's almost like you can't
really trust you, because, likewhen you see something Really
loud going on in the news, iasked myself okay, what am I not
seeing?
Speaker 1 (40:35):
right.
Speaker 2 (40:35):
That's because this is this what I'm seeing, what
you want me to see, right, butwhat else is going on?
And so that's where my thinkingstart to become because, like,
usually, like, laws and billsare being passed and going forth
And it's like we don't evenknow right, and it's like
because we got smoke screened bythis thing, you know, and well,
like you're talking about the,the guys in Memphis police
(40:57):
officers there I I had no ideathey were referred to as a
scorpion for you know, and what?
the scorpion for whatever taskforce.
Yeah, they were a part of.
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (41:07):
I don't remember that being explored in the media at
all.
So you know, was that?
Speaker 2 (41:12):
Yeah, it was on the news and I like I think I don't
know if I mentioned it to you,but it was like it was the four
black ones and then, of course,those guys were made known right
away.
The Fifth white guy, he wasn'tmade known till days later.
But, however, yeah, like kindof like I was saying, like
Madison, wisconsin, blue blanket, same thing.
(41:32):
You know, just you go into anarea and you just arrest
whoever's standing outside,regardless of what is going on,
you just putting people inhandcuffs and then patty wagons
and then you're sorting it allout at the station And then,
before you know it, you'regetting booked and bagged and
tagged and you know andfingerprint it and You just hey,
(41:52):
it's Friday night, this is whatit is.
Live outside, it's summertime,it's outside, everybody outside.
But you get up in a streetsuite and there you go, right.
Speaker 1 (42:04):
Why we're at man, here we are again at the end of
another time, right And it's, idon't know we have any solutions
.
One thing I I will leave uswith and I'm thinking about is
The courts.
Really are all of us, when itcomes down to it, the real court
, the real way that Lady Justiceis gonna balance Right and
(42:26):
wrong, is by all of us andyou've talked about it multiple
times, you know by all of usrecognizing our Responsibility
to vote for what's right and todiscern what is right in a
situation.
You know, is it right for thisto keep happening the way it's
happening?
and it's really easy to justabdicate Responsibility and say,
(42:48):
oh, i can't do anything aboutit.
No, you can And you have to,and it's all of our
responsibilities to do what wecan do and that's vote.
And don't just vote on you'vesaid it to you know don't vote
on one issue.
Vote on the overall, theOver-arching issue, which is we
want to see, you know, we wantAmerica to be great again, but
(43:12):
you know who's defining whatgreat looks like?
I think great looks like, youknow, a lot different thing than
other folks seem to.
I want a great country thatReally practices things like
equity and practices, thingslike tolerance and compassion
and kindness, and you knowgenerosity.
You know that that's thecountry I want, not one that you
(43:34):
know focuses on hating peopleBecause they didn't vote the way
I wanted to, or listening topeople that are, you know, have
their own agenda instead of Mostpeople's.
You know caring for the thegreater good, if you will so I'd
like to see America survive.
Speaker 2 (43:52):
Yeah, yeah, you know we're fighting all this,
fighting from within.
I'm Just as concerned as I amwith the internal issues in this
country, becoming even moreMore Aware and even more
concerned about what's happeningexternally, you know, with how,
(44:12):
how the country is being seen.
You know, because people are,they're watching and they're
looking for weak points.
They're looking for weak pointson how they can break this
thing down Right and we have tocome together to fix and heal in
order for us to protect right.
Speaker 1 (44:30):
Yeah, i wouldn't be surprised if these guys that are
out there like stirring the potregularly aren't on.
You know, like some Chinesecompanies payroll.
You know, if you trace themoney back, you know, sad to
think, you know, because theyhave the most.
You know they really do.
Mm-hmm.
All right, man, so it we again.
Nothing solved, but at leastthe discussion started right.
Speaker 2 (44:54):
So yep, i just said look at the courts.
Speaker 1 (44:57):
Yeah, look at the courts and judge for yourself.
Ah, judge for yourself.
So, all right, man, take care,bro, talk to you next week.
Speaker 2 (45:06):
I see you.
Speaker 1 (45:07):
Thanks for listening to us folks.
Here I'm framework referencecoming together.
Popular Podcasts
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
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.