Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Only the other sleep.
Got distracted on the way tograndmother's house.
Oh, and that golden king whomight have changed the ways.
And now she's turned out.
Peace, peace.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
Peace and welcome back Freedman's Affairs Radio
Freedman's Affairs RadioFreedman's Network Out the gate.
We want to thank you fortapping back in again this week
for a short visit and a nicelittle sit down and the music
(01:01):
you hear, that you hear playingin the background is that of the
Whispers and as you know, asyou know, a few days ago we lost
one of the twins who one of thefounders of the Whispers, and
(01:22):
that was Walter Scott of theWhisperers.
And that was Walter Scott andhe has passed away due to
stomach cancer and some otherailments.
Brother was 81 years old andwe're going to miss him dearly
and we don't have any statementsfrom the family as yet.
(01:45):
I'm not sure when the memorial.
I don't have any statementsfrom the family as yet.
I'm not sure when the memorialwill be.
I don't know if they alreadydid a memorial for him or not.
I don't have that information.
But nonetheless our brother'sgone and we dedicate this
program this morning up here foryou, our beloved brother Walter
(02:06):
Scott.
Oh man, beautiful music,beautiful.
This was a beautiful song.
It was about a young girl.
I think she was out there inthat life and to listen, close
(02:35):
they're calling you Olivia.
Oh man, great music, great music.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
Lost and turned out.
Olivia, where's your wind?
She's lost and turned out.
Don't buy that guy.
No, it's a lie.
Lost and turned out.
Olivia the slave.
(03:17):
Lost and turned out.
Don't let him drive you to yourgrave.
Lost and turned.
Olivia, where's your mind?
Lost and turned, he pulls youdown all the time.
Lost and turned.
Olivia, stop and think.
(03:41):
Lost and turned, he's takingyou to his grave.
Lost and turned.
Speaker 2 (03:55):
Oh man, I can never get enough of that.
I can never get enough.
One of my favorite tunes fromthe Whispers and that was some
of their earlier works Olivia,that was the name of that that
song lost and turned out and um,yeah, so we dedicating this,
this, this morning's program, toour brother, walter scott.
(04:16):
Um, I think he passed on june25th.
Let me see, let let's get theskinny on our brother.
Let's get the skinny.
Hold on, let me get the details.
Hold on, let's see, can I.
Okay, here it is yeah, yeah,yeah.
Okay, here it is All right.
Let's see, can we get.
(04:36):
What are they saying here?
Okay, I don't want to play anyvideos or any statements.
I don't want to play any videosor any statements.
It's yeah, okay.
Walter Scott of the R&B groupthe Whispers has died at age 81.
People can conform.
The musician died six monthsafter being diagnosed with
cancer, according to the LosAngeles Sentimental.
(05:02):
The R&B group is known for hitslike and the Beat Goes On and
Rock Study.
Oh yeah, oh yeah.
He died in.
He was born in Fort Worth,texas, in 1943, september 23rd,
and he passed away at 81 yearsold.
Northridge, los Angeles,california.
And the music group Whisperswas founded in 1963.
(05:26):
And they've been going strongever since.
I believe they was touring upuntil recently.
But, yeah, that's it with ourbrother.
Man, that's it with our brotherand, once again, family, thank
you for coming back and tappingback in with us.
Coming back and tapping back inwith us and we're glad to
(05:52):
announce that we are now in 34cities, no, 34 countries, 34
countries globally and 310cities.
So, thank you everyone, thankyou all of you.
All of you, united states, allfrom all around the globe
colorado, our family up there ingreeley, colorado, and and um,
the british indian oceanterritory.
(06:14):
United kingdom, um, theylistening to us in the
philippines, uh, every, any.
Bangladesh, I seen peoplelistening in bangladesh.
So, yeah, yeah, we, weappreciate all of you, we
appreciate, we love all of you.
Keep coming back, keep comingback, and we're going to always
try to make things real specialfor you up here.
(06:36):
And you know, before we, we'regoing to take a short time out
and go to some of the sponsors.
We're going to take a shorttime out and go to some of the
sponsors and before we do that,before we do that, we want to
give you the knowledge, the mathfor today, and that is.
That is what is going on.
(06:58):
What is going on?
Okay, yeah, all right, yeah,the knowledge.
The math for the day on todayis the uh 70 first day of july
of 2025, and the math for todayis knowledge the the first day
of of the month of july in 2025.
The math is knowledge and, uh,most people.
(07:22):
When you ask them what isknowledge, what does it mean,
what does that word mean, theywill tell you well, knowledge is
information.
You know, we have an old sayingand how we used to say
knowledge is power.
Knowledge is power to a degree,to a degree, but knowledge is
not information.
Information is data.
Knowledge can, can put you on atrack to understanding
(07:42):
information, but knowledge isnot information.
Information is data on a trackto understanding information,
but knowledge is not information.
Information is data.
What knowledge?
Knowledge is synonymous withthings like fact or the
condition of knowing something,with familiarity gained through
(08:03):
experience, or or association,acquaintance with, with, with,
with something, or anunderstanding of a science, art
or a technique, the, the fact orcondition of being aware, a
conscious awareness,consciousness, um, the range of
(08:24):
one's understanding of something, the circumstance of your
apprehension of something, ortruth or fact through reasoning,
cognition.
These are what are synonymouswith knowledge.
So let us keep that in mind aswe go forward for the day.
Let us keep that in mind and goforward for the day.
(08:45):
Let us keep that in mind, andwe're going to go hear from the
sponsors real quick and then wecan come back and we're going to
have a little talk.
We're going to have some littletalks, but right now we're
going to go and hear from thesponsors Before we get started.
We'll be right back.
We get started.
(09:10):
We'll be right back because wecan't.
Focus is to cultivate anenvironment of ease and comfort
for respect to individualculture and style and to bring
about a mastery of your passionsand effect, developing a
connoisseur's lifestyle.
Speaker 3 (09:22):
since the connoisseur's lifestyle, since
the connoisseur's lifestyle isone of refinement, distinction
and class with the ability tobridge the gap of race creed or
status we at Cosby canincorporate and instill this
ideology while maintaining asense of sophistication.
We are dedicated to networkingnew ideas about business,
(09:43):
drinking, partying, fashion andliving life, Because we can't
wait.
Speaker 4 (09:58):
Empress Hair Salon.
Come down to Empress Hair Salonwhere the hairstyles will have
you looking like royalty.
We specialize in Afro-Americanhairstyles that turn heads and
set trends.
Services include relaxers,washing sets, lock maintenance,
quick weaves, sew-ins, lacefront and glueless wig installs
and lashes.
Grand opening special startingMay 5th 2025.
(10:20):
Get 20% off all services.
Just share your Empressexperience on any of our social
media platforms to claim yourglam discount.
Location Barker, cypress andMorton, right off the Katy
Freeway.
Call the Empress 832-267-2887.
Step into Empress Hair Salonand step out looking like
royalty, because your hairdeserves the crown.
Speaker 1 (11:08):
You got it, you got it, you got it, you got it.
Your hair deserves the crown.
If you didn't want to be inhere, I know you got gold.
If you didn't want to shakethat thing, hit me with the beat
.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Hey, cause it makes me sing.
I know you got gold.
Hey, if you didn't want to bein here, I know you got.
Hey, if you didn't want to bein here.
I know you got the feeling theway you move over there.
(11:40):
Yeah, we back family back inand, once again, thank you for
tapping back in today and we'rejust going to.
We're not going to stay long,just going to have a brief
little talk about a few things.
Get a bed up in here.
(12:00):
Where do we start first?
I got a couple of things totalk about.
You know, it's been a very big,very big month for President
Donald Trump.
Right, he's got some major,major wins in the Supreme Court
(12:21):
I think they were at the end ofthis section session and court,
uh, I think they were at the endof their section session and,
um, he, he got the um, the thingdone with the birthright
citizenship.
They, they crushed that and um,now I want you to understand
something this is not.
This is executive order.
(12:42):
I think it goes back up to theSupreme Court in October for to
for them to decide whether thisis going to be codified into law
or into legislation.
I should say so.
It's not legislation as as wespeak now, but but the executive
order goes into an effect in 30days from now and about, well,
(13:05):
about 29, 28 days from now,because I think it was, um, as
of friday, it was 30 days.
So now, uh, you know he's beentalking about how the the 14th
amendment has been, wassomething that was created for
(13:27):
the babies of slaves, or theenslaved, I should say, and the
descendants.
Now you got some legal peopleout here.
I think they're left-leaningand they're trying to say, well,
this is, this opens up the doorfor for American citizens,
(13:48):
black American citizens, fba,the freedmen, for some of us to
be deported, and I think I thinkthere may be some language that
that that can be interpretedthat way if you play with the
language, but that's not what Idon't.
I don't think that's the intentfor this play with the language
, but that's not what I don't.
I don't think that's the intentfor this and I think that's a a
fear-mongering tactic that someof the people that that are
(14:10):
anti-Trump are trying to uh pushthat narrative.
Um, I'm trying to see if I canfind something where he was
talking about that.
Oh, that was no, that was toolong ago.
Okay, um, you know, he pushingthat mega bill, that big,
(14:32):
beautiful bill they've beentalking about.
And let me see, I can't findany.
Now that I'm I'm in the show andI'm trying to find clips for it
.
I can't.
Let's see.
Let's see here, what do we gothere?
No, that's not it.
Birthright citizenship I can't,it seems like I can't find
(14:53):
anything.
A quick clip, because I don'twant to go into a whole, a whole
drawn out, you know, for him tobe be doing a long speech on it
.
Shakespeare, that's not it.
No, no, no, no, because thoseare left-wing.
See, because I'm trying to findsomething that's not left-wing
(15:18):
friendly, I should say I shouldjust go to ground news.
That's not it.
What was recently come on?
No, I'm, I'll tell you what Ido, but anyway, um, to make a
long story short, this is whatthe ruling has been and it is
(15:38):
took in the way the power of thelower courts to, to, to put on
on injunctions to block thingsthat he's trying to do in regard
to the birthright citizenshipRight.
That's, that's what.
That's what this ruling wasabout with the Supreme court,
and I think, I think, all ofthem ruled on it, except for
(16:01):
like three of them, and judge,katarji Brown, wrote a
dissension on it.
She wrote a dissension and her,if I'm not mistaking her
dissension, stated that ifparents no, no, that was for
(16:22):
something else, that was forsomething else.
I'll cover that right afterthere was another Supreme Court
ruling she wrote the dissensionon.
But as far as the birthrightcitizenship, I'm trying to find
something that will give us aquick little rundown of that.
(16:42):
Okay, let me see, it's not.
Um, okay, here it is, here, itis all right, let's go to this.
And the left, the democraticleft, uh, they're pulling their
(17:03):
hairs out about this.
Hold on, let me see.
This is from ABC.
I didn't want to use them, butyou know, what can you do?
What can you do?
I'm trying to get this done foryou guys so we can get you out
of here.
Hold on, give me one second,it'll be right up.
Speaker 7 (17:29):
This is an ABC News special report.
Good morning, I'm Wade Johnsonin New York.
We're coming on the air becausethe Supreme Court has just
released a potential landmarkdecision impacting the future of
birthright citizenship in theUS.
The justices were asked to rollback nationwide injunctions
against the president's attemptto redefine the 14th Amendment,
(17:50):
which states that anyone born inthe US is automatically a US
citizen, regardless of theirparent's citizenship status.
It's been in place for morethan 150 years, but now, in a
6-3 split, the conservativemajority ruled that President
Trump can move forward withimplementing his birthright
citizenship change, except forthose who brought the case the
(18:12):
22 states and a group ofpregnant immigrant women who
brought that case.
So it's not directly getting atthe 14th Amendment here, but
this will have a nationwideimpact.
Let's go ahead and bring in ourDevin Dwyer, abc's senior
Washington reporter, who's beenfollowing the Supreme Court on
this Devin.
It's not as straightforward asI think a lot of people were
perhaps expecting or hoping tohear, so break down what this
(18:34):
actually means.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
Well, this was a big surprise, whit, and this is
coming from the youngestconservative justice on the
Supreme Court, justice Amy ConeyBarrett.
Six to three, as you said, in abig win for Donald Trump,
saying he can move forward withthat executive order that he
issued on day one changing thedefinition of citizenship in
this country.
Practically speaking, it meansthe president can, in the next
(18:58):
30 days, begin to developguidelines for how he would
implement that.
It does not mean, however, thatthis executive order is free
from future legal challenge.
Legal cases in three differentdistricts will continue.
On the merits, the Supreme Court, in oral argument in this
matter, did signal that it wasskeptical that it could stand up
(19:18):
to legal muster.
But at this point the court isreally weighing in on the
ability of individual judges indistricts around the country to
block a president's actionnationwide.
And what Justice Barrett saidtoday is that an individual
federal court judge does nothave that authority to broadly
block a president, the judge.
(19:38):
He or she can block anindividual while a case is being
litigated and in this case thatwas upheld.
So you know, this order, asit's implemented, cannot apply
to those 22 states.
It's going to be messy.
It cannot apply to thoseparticular pregnant women that
are challenging this.
But elsewhere in the country,and at the very least in the
planning stages, the presidentcan move forward, and that is a
(20:00):
significant and surprising winfor him.
Speaker 7 (20:03):
It sure is, devin Dwyer, thank you.
Please stand by for a momentbecause I think it's worth going
back to the language here inthe 14th Amendment, again
ratified after the Civil War,which states that all persons
born or naturalized in theUnited States and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof arecitizens of the United States
and of the state wherein theyreside.
Of course, the Trumpadministration trying to make
(20:24):
changes to that, that's whattriggered these series of
lawsuits and then ended back atthe Supreme Court.
Let's bring in our ABC Newslegal contributor, sarah Isger,
because, sarah, many are goingto be asking now where does the
process go from here?
And getting back to the root ofthat question in the 14th
Amendment, Right.
Speaker 8 (20:41):
This was only about whether the district judge could
enjoin the enforcement of thatnationwide.
What we'll now see is theactual question of what the 14th
Amendment means whether apresident acting alone, without
Congress, without an amendmentto the Constitution, can change
our understanding of how we'veimplemented that for the last
150 years.
That question will go back tothe Supreme Court.
(21:04):
Amy Coney Barrett, in hermajority opinion, making clear
this decision has nothing to dowith the merits of that legal
question.
The Supreme Court can preventenforcement of that executive
order nationwide.
I expect we'll hear more aboutthe merits of that question in
the fall as you read it.
The real legal question is onwhat subject to the jurisdiction
(21:25):
thereof means Is someone who isin the country unlawfully
subject to the laws of ourcountry?
Like a diplomat would not besubject to the laws at the time
of the 14th Amendment, Someonewho belonged on tribal lands did
not was not subject to our laws.
So that's the question that thejustices will now have to look
(21:46):
at in the fall.
Speaker 7 (21:48):
Sarah, thank you, I want to go back to that.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Oh man, this thing is going to be something, is going
to be some kind of battle.
It's going because you got tolook at the language.
See, a lot of the language hasbeen left up to interpretation
up until this point.
All persons see they're goingto.
I don't know if they're goingto change those amendments or
whatnot, but let's hearsomething.
(22:11):
Let's hear from my sister,Sabby Sab.
Hold on.
Speaker 6 (22:15):
Has made a ruling that could lead the way for
Donald Trump to changebirthright citizenship.
This has a lot of peopleconcerned.
We're going to talk about bothsides of this and also the
bigger picture.
Let's go ahead and get intothis clip here.
Speaker 7 (22:33):
Good morning.
I'm with Johnson in New York.
We're coming on the air becausethe Supreme Court has just
released a potential landmarkdecision impacting the future of
birthright citizenship in theUS.
The justices were asked to rollback nationwide injunctions
against the president's attemptto redefine the 14th Amendment,
which states that anyone born inthe US is automatically a US
(22:55):
citizen, regardless of theirparent's citizenship status.
We already heard this.
I'm going to fast forward it.
Speaker 2 (23:01):
We already heard that , so I'm going to fast forward
it.
Give me just a second.
I'm going to fast forward.
We already heard that, so I'mgoing to fast forward.
Give me just a second, I'mgoing to fast forward.
Hold on, because I want to getback to Sabrina.
Hold on.
Speaker 6 (23:08):
Some people are going to try to fight back doing this
.
It has been suggested, orrecommended, that people do a
class action lawsuit.
I just want to explain topeople that class action
lawsuits don't happen overnight.
Those things take time, and sojust prepare yourself for that.
Also, this raises the questionas who is this going to apply to
(23:32):
?
Because I'm going to show yousomeone in particular that this
new ruling would apply to, butI'm sure they're probably going
to get a pass because of whothey are.
Also, we need to ask anotherquestion.
Donald Trump has continued tosay that the border is closed.
If the border is closed, thenyou shouldn't have to worry
(23:52):
about this issue.
Right, if the border is closed,you shouldn't have to worry
about people that are hereillegally having babies here.
Right, come on, guys, we got tostart thinking, you got to
start opening up our minds herea little bit.
But this would really changethings, and I'm going to get
(24:12):
into what the 14th Amendmentactually says in just a second.
Speaker 7 (24:16):
A Washington reporter who's been following the
Supreme Court on this Devin,it's not as straightforward that
a federal judge cannot blockthe president of the United
States.
Speaker 6 (24:27):
This can apply to other rulings as well.
So I want people to really getthe big picture here.
So this isn't just aboutbirthright citizenship, and
that's what I want everybody tounderstand, because, let's
remember, the reason why MahmoudKhalil was able to be freed
from the detention center inLouisiana is because a judge,
they came in and they said no.
(24:48):
So if this is the case now,that a federal judge cannot come
in and block these decisions,that can apply to anything that
can apply to free speech.
You know they're cutting,they're pushing back heavily on
pro-Palestinian speech.
Whatever anything they'resaying, a federal judge cannot
(25:10):
come in and block it.
So I see a lot of people whenthey're talking about this on
social media, they're focusingjust on the birthright
citizenship issue, but they'renot looking at the big picture.
Basically, that means that thepresident, in no way, shape or
form, can be stopped from makingsaid decisions.
So people need to be careful.
What you ask for.
(25:30):
I will say that let's go on tothis clip here.
Speaker 10 (25:35):
He issued over 20 executive orders, including one
that sought to deny birthrightcitizenship to children born in
the US to people here illegally.
A federal judge in Washingtonstate issued a nationwide
injunction blocking thepresident's order.
Speaker 9 (25:49):
In practice, this meant that if any one of the
nearly 700 federal judgesdisagreed with the policy of a
duly elected president of theUnited States, he or she could
block that policy from goinginto effect or at least delay it
for many years, tie it up inthe court system.
This was a colossal abuse ofpower.
Speaker 5 (26:09):
There are 94 judicial districts across the country
and 35 out of the 40 opinionswith nationwide injunctions came
from five liberal districts inthis country.
These injunctions have blockedour policies, from tariffs to
military readiness, toimmigration, to foreign affairs,
fraud, abuse and many otherissues.
(26:30):
Americans are finally gettingwhat they voted for.
No longer will we have roguejudges striking down President
Trump's policies across theentire nation.
Speaker 6 (26:42):
So nationwide.
That's the important part.
That being said, this doesn'tjust apply to President Trump.
This applies to any presidentgoing forward, unless the next
president were to try to reversethis, but this applies to any
president going forward.
So keep that in mind, folks,because there are things that
Republican presidents try topush forward through executive
(27:05):
order that you may be against,and there are things Democrat
presidents try to push throughvia executive order that you may
be against.
So I want to be very clearabout this.
This is not just about DonaldTrump.
This applies to any presidentof the United States.
Now check this out, as you'llsee.
This has been done before withDemocrat presidents as well.
Federal judges coming in toblock or delay.
(27:27):
Obama had six excuse me, bushhad six, obama had 12, trump had
64, biden had 14, and thenTrump again, so far, 15.
Speaker 10 (27:38):
Nationwide injunctions have become a
problem for Republican andDemocratic presidents, but Trump
has received the most by far.
A Harvard Law Review from 2024found that 93.6% of nationwide
injunctions issued duringTrump's first term and during
the Biden administration wereissued by judges appointed by a
president of the opposingpolitical party.
Speaker 9 (28:00):
We can now promptly file to proceed with numerous
policies that have been wronglyenjoined on a nationwide basis.
Speaker 10 (28:07):
Some of those policies include dismantling the
Department of Education and theUS Agency for International
Development, freezing federalfunding to sanctuary cities,
suspending refugee resettlementin the US and restricting
taxpayer funding of genderaffirming care fair funding of
(28:28):
gender affirming care.
Speaker 6 (28:28):
So just something to pay attention to.
Now I'm going to give you theother side of this as well,
because, again, on the show wetry to give, I try to do my best
at giving both perspectives,right?
Who is this going to apply to?
Would it apply to people thatwould fall under this new
qualification for citizenshipwho are, I don't know, public
figures?
(28:49):
What about people who arepoliticians?
And the reason why I ask thatquestion is we can name quite a
few, right, we can name quite afew.
It very clear he didn't comehere legally.
He didn't come here legally.
Are they going to apply this tohim?
Probably not, but someone whoqualified under birthright
(29:10):
citizenship was Vivek Ramaswamy.
Vivek Ramaswamy was justrunning for president.
Speaker 2 (29:16):
He was supposed to be a part of Doge, but he came to
the curb.
Speaker 6 (29:19):
There was some disagreements there between him
and Elon and things just gotcrazy right.
But I just want to remind you,vivek Ramaswamy would also fit
under this new category.
He would fit under this.
If this goes forward, hetechnically Would not be able to
stay here.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
And that is good.
Get him out of here.
I can't stand him, can't standhim.
He was a bootlicking for theTrump.
He was man, he had his nose allthe way up the crack of Trump's
behind, right, and look whathappened, what I try to explain
(30:02):
to the so-called blackconservatives and the and the,
the Trump lovers and the blackmaggots, you know, the, the
bootleg brigade, right?
The Sambo society and the Kuhnclan.
So what are you, what are wetrying to explain to them?
You know when, when they do onall that, that boot licking, for
(30:24):
, for, for butter, biscuits andbacon bits, right, I'm trying to
explain to them, man, there isno solid future in Kooning and
bootlicking.
But you can't tell them thatthey're running around here with
MAGA hats on.
They're doing all this stuff.
But let's go back to Sabrina.
(30:44):
I don't want to stay too longwith this because we got a
couple other things we got totalk about up here.
But let's go back to it, comeon.
Speaker 6 (30:51):
But I don't think they're going to apply this to
him.
This is where I'm coming from.
Folks Listen to this.
Speaker 3 (30:57):
I believe in being consistent about my policies
where so your father is not acitizen of the United States.
Speaker 8 (31:02):
He's not OK.
And your mother?
When did your mom take thecitizenship test?
Was it before or after you wereborn?
After I was born Well, well,well.
Speaker 6 (31:18):
People forget after he was born.
So that means that VivekRamaswamy also benefited from
birth right citizenship.
Remember, vivek's parents werehere studying as college
students, and that brings upanother question what about
those who are here as collegestudents that are part of a PhD
program?
Phd programs in the US can takefrom five to seven years.
(31:39):
A lot of times, some of thesePhD students are married.
What happens if they have ababy, which these things have
happened.
That's why I'm bringing this up.
They have a baby, just likeVivek Ramaswamy's parents did.
That means that their, theirchild, would not automatically
get citizenship in this country.
So, to my point, how wouldVivek Ramaswamy be allowed to
(32:03):
stay?
And the only thing that I canthink of is that they would say
well, we're not going back, it'snot going to be retroactive, so
if you're already here, thenyou're grandfathered in, and I
think that's what they said.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
I believe that's what they said.
The grandfather didn't nothingto worry about.
Speaker 6 (32:23):
According to Donald Trump, who would this apply to?
And then there's also the caseof the future administration.
The next administration 2028,let's say, if the Democrats won
in 2028, they're probably goingto try to roll this back.
And then now you have thischaos.
This is what we've been doingthe past couple of years
Presidents implement something,the next president takes it away
(32:46):
, then they bring it back andthey take it away, and they
bring it back and take away, andit creates a chaotic situation.
So I want people to think aboutthis from the bigger picture,
like, don't just look at thisand say, oh, it's just
birthright citizenship.
Think about who this is reallygoing to be applied to, because
I got a feeling, remember, he'srunning for governor.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
So think about that for a second After that said,
we're going to, we're going tostop on that.
That's enough of that, becauseI don't want to step on her
stuff too much.
I like Sabrina she's.
Don't want to step on her stufftoo much.
I like, uh, sabrina, she'sgreat, she's great, she's.
You know, she's great, uh,she's.
Uh.
I think she was for stompingfor bernie sanders at one
particular point in time,because she's down the middle
with it.
(33:22):
I think she's independent orsomething.
I'm not sure what her politicalstance is, but yeah, yeah.
The other thing with the supremecourt let me get a bed back up
in here and the other thing withthe supreme court family was um
, in marathon in the state ofmaryland, in some county I
(33:43):
forget the county, but thesupreme court ruled on a case
that some uh parents of someschool children there in
Maryland that brought a suit, acase in the Supreme Court,
against the public school systemthere.
Right, check it out, check thisout and this.
(34:10):
Because what the states weredoing, what these Democratic
states were doing, was they,they, they wanted to take away
the parents right to opt theirchildren out of certain
curriculums that were beingtaught in school, namely the
LGBT curriculum, the, theliterature in the books and
(34:34):
stuff.
Some parents didn't want theirchildren learning that
particular curriculum.
Right, and the school system ofthese districts took away that
right from the parents.
Because how did they do it?
(34:55):
They, they circumvented it in away that they said, well, we're
not going to tell the parentsthat we, the parents, just won't
, we put on notice about thecurriculum and that takes away
their right or if they havecertain religious beliefs, to to
opt their children out of thatparticular lesson or out of that
(35:17):
class.
So the other day the Supremecourt ruled that down.
Now parents have the right toopt their children out of that
particular lesson or that classor whatever that, that
particular curriculum about LGBT, because some of those, some of
(35:38):
those books are very graphicand you know you're talking
about elementary school children.
You know grade school, uh,children, you know.
You know I should have a say inwhat my children are ingesting
in school, because this is whyyou pay taxes.
You know in certain districtsyou're paying all these high
taxes.
You got a home and you'retrying to raise your family and
whatever you should have.
(35:59):
Parents should have some say soin the what's going on in these
classrooms with the educationof their children.
This is why I don't mind themdismantling the Board of
Education, because look whatthey're doing.
Look what these people havedone and what they continue to
try to push Right now.
(36:23):
Like I said earlier, judgeKatonji Brown-Jackson wrote a
dissension in this and and herstance?
Her stance check this outfamily.
Her stance was if parents don'twant their children learning
certain things in in aparticular public school
(36:43):
curriculum, they should taketheir children out of that
school and put them in a, in aprivate school or or what have
you right?
No, no, absolutely not.
If you people who are pushingthis agenda, the LGBT thing, now
, I don't have any qualms aboutwhat people do in their personal
(37:06):
life.
If you're an adult, you're oldenough to make those decisions.
My thing always been, and Iused to tell saint laurence this
leave the children alone, handsoff.
Now, once you become an adultand you're a young adult and you
want to make certain decisionsabout your sexuality or whatever
you know, whatever alternativelifestyle you want to live, or
(37:31):
whatever the case might be, thatis your right to do so.
That is your business.
I don't care what you do inyour bedroom or who you choose
to to to um love or whatever thecase might be right.
That's not, that's never beenan issue.
But when it comes to thechildren, hands off, let them.
(37:51):
They only have a few years tobe children.
Allow them that, that, that,that liberty to be children.
Allow them that god-givenfreedom to be children.
Don't pump your agendas inthese young children.
And can they?
They they already have enoughtrying to learn themselves and
(38:16):
learn certain lessons in lifeand, because of the formative
years, let them have the freedomto do that Instead of you
ramming this down them.
You know constant pushing this,pushing this, pushing this,
this down, and you know constantpushing this, pushing this,
pushing this.
And you know you're confusingthem.
(38:37):
Because in the district that theSupreme Court made this ruling
in, I think it was somethinglike 90% of the parents did not
want and, mind you, this is,this is a was a very wealthy
district in the state ofMaryland, right, and they 90, I
think it was not, if I'm notmistaken.
I could be wrong, but it was avery high number 90 of the
(39:01):
parents in this, in this uhlitigation in this district, uh,
voted in favor, wasn't notvoted, but were in favor of the
opt-out option 90%, maybe alittle less.
I'm not quoting an actualnumber, but it was a very high
(39:24):
percentage.
So that's telling you thepeople don't want this.
Why are you trying to push this?
Now, what I was about to say wasthis you telling people to take
their children out of thepublic school system and put
them in private school.
No, if you want that agenda atransgender uh type of thing
(39:47):
then you, you open a charter forthat.
You start up a privateinstitution for transgender
people, an educationalinstitution for transgender
people, and if there are parentsthat want their children to be
involved, to participate inthose curriculums, they are free
(40:09):
to allow their children toattend that school.
But you don't put this on thepublic like that.
The same way I see it as thetransgender men in women's
sports.
If you want a transgendersports league, create that.
And if women want to want toparticipate in that league and
(40:34):
you don't have a problem withthat they're allowed to do that.
But don't, don't, don't come andpush transgender men in women's
sports, and why?
Why, you don't want to go tothe men's sports and box men.
You see how that guy you knowthat transgender beat up that
little girl, that little I thinkshe was an Asian girl.
(40:56):
He beat up on that little.
That girl couldn't stand achance.
It was, I think it was likeOlympic boxing or something like
that.
But why are you not boxing inthe men's divisions?
That's the whole thing.
Because you can't.
You can't compete with the men.
So you want to go to the women'ssports, the perceived weaker
(41:18):
gender, and you want to uh getin there and and these, a lot of
these girls don't stand achance against these guys, or
these, these people I should sayI shouldn't call them guys
because they reserve the rightto be referred to as they would
have it.
So I'll say people, transgenderpeople.
So you want that create aleague and that's the
(41:41):
transgender boxing associationor the transgender wrestling or
the transgender swimming team,whatever the case might be,
whatever the case might be, gocompete and make the, the, those
institutions, just like youcould do a private, uh,
education institution, right,and we're gonna, we're gonna
(42:02):
leave that there.
But those were too big.
There was a bunch of otherstuff.
I don't, I can't get in, wedon't have enough time because
we're about to roll out of here.
But those were two big things.
He had a big week last week.
He had a big month period, butthe things going over there
(42:23):
between Israel and Iran, thatwas big, that was a big thing
for him and you've seen howupset he was with that.
But I won't get off into that.
But now the last thing, thelast thing we're gonna, we're
gonna get on here, is um, uh,the, the uh, you know the.
(42:50):
The case with with sean Combshas gone.
They're in deliberations rightnow.
I think it was as of yesterday,I think Friday they sent it up
and I think yesterday the jurorsgot it and they're deliberating
and maybe they'll come backwith something today.
Who knows, by the time thecourts open up it's still early
(43:11):
now, but maybe by the time thecourts open up it will be
something.
Who knows, by the time thecourts open up it's still early
now, but maybe by the time thecourts open up it will be
something.
Who knows, hold on, let me tryto get the story in here.
Ok, hold on.
And they're having problemswith the jury.
Some of the I think Jura 25 ishaving problems with the judge's
(43:35):
instructions.
But let's take a gander at that.
Let's take a look at that, comeon.
Speaker 11 (43:41):
Hi everyone.
Thanks for sticking with us.
I'm your host, sierra Gillespie, bringing you Law and Crime
coverage of the P Diddy trial.
You guys, we are in the finalcountdown.
We could have a verdict asearly as today, that's right.
We're already in deliberations.
And, by the way, thank youeveryone who's been watching our
live stream so far.
I know we have people from allover the world.
(44:03):
You guys have been following allday, so you of course know that
there recently was a questionfrom jurors.
We're not even quite two hoursinto deliberations and they
already had a question.
So Jesse Weber kind of left youon a cliffhanger and I'm going
to tell you what it's all about.
Here's an update from thecourthouse right behind me
because, by the way, I'm live inthe Southern District of New
York.
So here's what happens Now.
The judge says we have receiveda note from the jury that we
(44:26):
have a juror specifically juror25, who we believe cannot follow
your instructions.
I would like to meet with thecourt about it.
So the judge says I suggestasking for more information.
So that's kind of crazy, youguys.
I mean this morning we reportedabout jury instructions right,
this is so important going intodeliberations almost two hours
(44:48):
in and it sounds like one ofthese jurors jury number 25,
says they might not be able tofollow the instructions, which
is the most important thing wehave here.
I got a lot of questions and Iwant to break down the jury, so
let's do that quick before weget to our all star panel of
guests who, by the way, I'mgoing to have a lot of good
questions for them, and if youguys have, questions, just throw
(45:08):
them into our chat.
Speaker 2 (45:09):
I think this is going to be a mistrial.
I think it's headed for mistrial.
If not, he should walk.
He should walk.
Now some law legal beagles aresaying that he's going to go to
prison.
I don't see it because, well,it's very, very strange.
It's very strange, hold on.
(45:30):
It's kind of weird because hewas charged on a RICO status,
right, charged on a RICO status.
Now, he's one person.
Now, rico is usually a group ofpeople, a criminal enterprise,
right, and he was the only onecharged in this thing, right.
(45:53):
But here's what I thinkhappened All of those, those
witnesses that they called thegovernment, called because the
prosecutor I mean the defensecalled no witnesses.
Not one witness did the defensecall.
It was all the prosecutor, thegovernment or the government,
and I think those people theycalled would have been indicted
(46:15):
in the RICO had they agreed totestify on behalf of the
government.
So that's one thing we got topay attention to.
But from what I've seen so farand I haven't really covered the
case tight like that I've beencovering it about as much as
would be expected, but I haven'tcovered it as as intensely as
(46:38):
most have I, because I didn'tlike the fact how they, how they
did it.
Um, I think he had some some,some very high profile people
under some pressure with thosewith those tapes and videos and
audio and video and stuff, andthis is why Homeland Security
(46:59):
went and raided his propertiesto get possession of those those
, those that material that couldhave harmed some, some folks in
some very high places.
That's my analogy of it.
I'm not saying I'm right folksin some very high places.
That's my analogy of it, I'mnot saying I'm right.
However, I think because reasonwhy I'm saying I'm doubting all
(47:24):
of this is because, from whatI've seen thus far, they have
not proven their case of guilt.
Now, all you need is one.
Now, here it is Already, onejuror can't follow the
instructions Right and all youneed is one.
So I think this is headed for amistrial.
If not, I think he should walk,and not that I'm here putting a
(47:49):
cape on for Puff or for BrotherLove, whatever you call him you
want to call him.
But I'm here putting a cape onfor Puff or for Brother Love,
whatever you call him you wantto call him, but I'm not putting
a cape on for him.
But I don't like the dirty playof how they went about
prosecuting him.
You know, is he some kind ofsexual deviant or whatever, with
(48:13):
the baby, all thing and thefreak off stuff?
Speaker 4 (48:16):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (48:17):
Yeah, of course he is .
I don't care nothing about hissexuality, whether he's half gay
or what I don't know, and Idon't really care about that.
What I care about is thelegality of the case and how
they and how they trying to use,uh, certain statutes to to box
(48:37):
him in.
Now, if you're charging him for, if he was being charged for
domestic violence we saw thevideo he beat the brakes off of
that girl.
He beat in that video in thehotel.
He beat the brakes off of her.
So if that's what y'allcharging with, he's guilty.
The other stuff, uh, the baby,all the naysays sensationalized
(48:57):
it and all of this and all ofthat, and the drugs and the
transporting across state linesand this and that and that and
this, none of this stuff was,was proven.
And then, uh, last week, latelast week, the, the prosecutors
had to drop some of those thingsbecause they, they had, they
made no, uh, no lead way in anyof those charges.
(49:22):
So, in other words, they, they,they fluffed it up.
They fluffed these things upall the way up to the top and
couldn't deliver.
Now some of the legal expertsare saying that he's going to,
they're going to convict him onsomething, because all they need
is maybe because I think it'swhat a total of five charges in
(49:44):
the top charges, a total of fivecomplaints, and all they need
is, I think it's two or moreincidents, two incidents of
whatever the complaint is, andthen they can probably get the
case prosecuted and get a guiltyverdict, depending on the
(50:04):
jurors.
So this is something we'regoing to be watching and maybe
they'll have a verdict by todayor they'll come and the judge
will come back with some moreinstructions.
We don't know.
And that'll bring me to thelast and final thing.
And oh, wow, we got to get outof here this Carmelo Anthony
thing out there in Texas overthe Austin Metcalf homicide, the
(50:28):
unaliving Now that family.
They got to get that DominiqueAlexander out of here.
They got to get away from thatguy.
Get and and get somebody else,because that camp is
hemorrhaging right now.
That now you'll hear I was on apanel on on on the righteous
(50:49):
perspective the other day withwise and salute my man.
Wise, good brother, good brother, he just he's, um, I don't the
wise, I don't, I don't say wiseis a bootlicker or a coon.
I don't, I don't, I don'tbelieve that, I just believe he,
he believes in, he has areverence for the, the right,
(51:11):
for the republicans, he has areverence for that and he's one
of the people that don't believethere's racism, and you know
stuff like that and most blackpeople.
All we do is complain aboutracism and you know we pull a
race card all the time and he'sone of the people he don't
believe in that.
(51:32):
He just he doesn't believe inblack against white.
You know they're christianpeople over there so they don't
see things.
Uh, they don't see reality theway some of us see it.
They see their reality in theirin, in, you know, in in the
light of, you know, biblicalperspective.
I should say right, but anyway,now here's the problem.
(51:56):
Right now you got a bunch ofgoofy people that get online.
They're getting these chats andstuff in there.
Oh, the family done spent moneyon a new house and cars and all
of that's not what happened.
The car they, when this casehappened, they, the family,
moved to another home.
(52:17):
Rental was I think it was ninethousand, nine hundred thousand
rent, dollar rental, annualrental or whatever they had,
because they were getting deaththreats and this, the gifts and
gold money wasn't even touchedyet it wasn't available to them.
So all you, you bozos and andgoofballs out there, they're
saying that they spent the moneyon that and the car.
(52:38):
The father had already broughtthe car before the money was
available from the, from the um,the fundraiser, to give sin go
right now.
You did.
They did raise, I think it was5, thirty or something thousand
dollars.
They raised in this Gibson Goldcampaign.
Now the boy filed anapplication for a court
(53:02):
appointed attorney.
How, where is the money?
And this is see, now, you can'tplay with black folks.
A lot of people donated to thatgibson go.
I donate money to it, to itbecause I want, I, I, I see the
play.
I see the play.
This white kid was, was, waskilled in this incident and and
(53:25):
boy, you y'all better know.
No, we got to get him.
He has to go, he has to go.
This is the sentiment, right,how dare he defend himself, how
dare he, the little black thug.
(53:46):
This is the talk.
And that talk is not comingfrom white people, it's coming
from black people who did that,like I said, the boot lick
brigade, right, the sambosociety and the coon clan.
(54:06):
That's where this talk iscoming from.
Now you have, when you justlike when I'm on wise's's
YouTube channel when we're doingthe panels.
Sometimes he invites me up tosit in the panel with them or
whatever, and I go up there, butthen in the comments now I'm
the only one that disagrees,because most it's a Christian
group and they are Christianpeople and I'm the only one up
(54:30):
there that has a difference ofopinion, except for that,
brother Jason.
Salute to him.
He kept it real the other dayand he disagrees with me a lot
sometimes, but when it's realhe'll tip his hat to where
realness is.
The rest of them just racismdoesn't exist.
(54:51):
Black people are thugs, theculture, they hate the culture.
And you know the talking points.
We have victims, perpetualvictims, um, with no zero
accountability, and blah, blah,blah, blah, blah, blah.
It's all of that white talkingpoints.
But then when you go into thechat and see the comments, and
(55:12):
then some of the comments are sovicious now, these supposed to
be christian people, right, butthe comments be so venomous,
right.
I press on the ceo.
Why are they coming?
They tell me I'm full of hate,I'm a racist and this and that
because I want to see this youngman be treated fairly.
(55:36):
So I'm a racist because of that.
This is the trope.
I'm white and I say so.
This was a disaster.
He's a murderer, he should bejailed, he should get the death
penalty.
How dare he kill Austin likethat?
This is the talk.
(55:57):
They talk and it's all in thechat, right.
And then you press on some ofthese people's profile and you
go to their, to their on youtubechannels.
Some of them have channels andpages and different things and
profiles and they, they, theyare straight up white
supremacist.
Spoke under the guise ofchristianity.
(56:17):
Now, I'm not knocking outChristian brothers and sisters,
but these supposed to beChristian people and they
straight up racist, nationalist,white supremacist.
But now what reason why theylike channels, like like my
brother, is because they get thethings can be said from them
(56:37):
that they don't have the courageto say I don't, instead of them
coming out and say look, I'mblack.
People ain't supposed to havenothing, we ain't supposed to
stand up for nothing.
We supposed to take abusewhenever, and you know, our
lives don't matter.
Kill us when you get good andready, and that's that, we're
white.
And we say so, see, that's that.
(56:58):
But they can't.
They.
I don't know if they feelguilty about it, because some
people don't really feel guilt,because, just like with this guy
who wrote this book aboutempathy being a form of sin I
forget his name uh, that there'sa book.
Uh, he wrote empathy is a sin.
This is elon musk.
Even has said, had made thatstatement that empathy is a is a
(57:21):
form, is a sinful thing to have.
Empathy is a sinful thing,right?
This is why I tell you, man,y'all gotta really check with
y'all back in, but anyway, right.
So the the thing is, you spentthis money.
Why are you filing for publicdefender for a court-appointed
(57:43):
attorney?
That money was supposed to befor his defense.
Now you got this dude, dominicAlexander, who's hanging around
him, who's a Timo version of AlSharpton, and that's the ass
network.
We're going to be down theremarching, going down there
Sunday morning at the church.
We're gonna be down theremarching, going out that sunday
morning at the church.
Let out, we're gonna bemarching.
Now he's he don't talk likethat, but he's he's like a team
(58:07):
version of al sharp.
He's supposed to be some kindof activist.
This dude was convicted of um,some kind of child abuse, I
think it was, and he did sometime, which I don't hold that
against him, but he is not goodfor that family.
Get him out of there, becauseI'm not sending another dime to
(58:28):
them until they get that dudeaway from them.
He's going to hurt them.
This dude, now, the way I seeit and I've been paying close
attention to this lately there'ssome people, some legal people,
who've been holding panels indifferent this lately.
There's some people, some legalpeople, who've been holding
panels in different X spaces andtalking about this thing and
the way Wiser and them talkabout it like this is a slam
(58:48):
shot man.
This is a slam shot case man.
He's going to jail.
You know he did the murder andyou know he had no business.
He was there illegally.
And then this and that Come tofind out.
None of that's true.
None of that's true.
Now, this kid was up under thattent at a at a school sanction
track, meet right, he had everyright to be there.
(59:08):
Now, now, the the on themisinformed amongst us will say
that, uh, let me get a bed inhere.
The misinformed amongst us willsay that he shouldn't have been
under that tent.
But here's the thing, thelegality of it.
He had every right to be underthat tent, every right, even
(59:29):
though it was the opposing team.
He wasn't a part of that team.
He had every right to be underthat tent because it's a public
space and they didn't have theright to discriminate and tell
him he couldn't be up underthere.
Now, first of all, it wasraining and it started raining.
(59:50):
He went up under there to forshelter from the rain.
What happened to thesportsmanship?
All right, man, it's raining,you know, you from the other
team, but come on in, man, whathappened to the sportsmanship?
Now you hear some of thesemisinformed people.
Oh, he wasn't even supposed tobe there because he's on the
football team.
No, you, moron, he's on thetrack team.
(01:00:14):
He was the captain of his trackteam.
Those two twins were notcompeting in the competition
that day, so he had more of aright, technically, to be there
than them.
What were they doing there?
They were there, like a lot ofpeople have said that know them.
(01:00:35):
They were there being bulliesand this is why they stepped at
a kid in the first place wasthey had no right to.
They shouldn't have saidanything to him and if they felt
that he was not supposed to be,they were supposed to go get an
authority or someone fromfaculty or staff or whatever to
remove him.
But that wasn't the casebecause he had every right to be
(01:00:57):
under that tent.
Thank you, the bootlick brigade, sambo society and the coon
clan.
You study on these YouTubechannels and you buck dancing
for butter, biscuits and baconbits, but you don't have all of
(01:01:21):
the legal facts of the matter.
Now they're saying, well, heconfessed to.
No, he did not confess.
It's to me, it's a clear caseof self-defense.
Now the judge, the prosecutor,has, has set a trap.
Let me tell you what they'redoing, family and and we're
supposed to be out here, but Igot to say this, I got to get
(01:01:42):
this out and I'm going to letyou go.
The prosecution has set a trap.
They went for murder one, topcharge murder one, that's it.
So now the jury has no reallywiggle room because they know
this is not a murder one.
There was no intent orpremeditation for him to do this
(01:02:03):
.
He didn't go there with theintent of killing someone.
He didn't even know it wasgoing to rain.
So how can you say it was anintent?
Now, some of the witnessesthere I was listening to the
panel the other night Some ofthe witnesses at this thing that
were there said there was likefour or five guys that ready to
jump on him that actually chasedhim out of the tent.
(01:02:23):
So this will apparently it willcome out in the trial because
the family is saying they'regoing to trial but in order for
me to send another dime to them,they got to get this dude out
of there.
This Alexander dude.
He's no good for it and know Iwas on wise channel the other
(01:02:44):
day.
I was on his channel the otherday and I'm gonna, I'm gonna
give wise a call and and speakto him.
Maybe tomorrow he had peoplethey're talking about?
Oh, the father.
You know he got to take somecontrition and he hasn't shown
any responsibility andcontrition.
The father went to the pressconference to try to pray with
them.
Oh, get, move your ass around,man.
(01:03:07):
Don't come in here trying topray with us.
You should have prayed withyour son.
You should have prayed withyour son.
Maybe your son would still behere if he was an abiding
Christian.
Pray with your son.
Don't come here to this pressconference trying to pray with
us.
And then you did it in public.
But let me show you hypocrisyin it.
(01:03:27):
Let me show you hypocrisyBecause you had to put the back
to the boot the bootleg brigade,the Kuhn clan and the Sambo
society.
Oh, that good man tried to comeand pray with them and look how
they act.
Oh, that good man tried to comeand pray with them and look how
they act.
Oh, really, oh really, really.
Come to find out.
(01:03:48):
This man has been tweeting on X,sending tweets to Camillo
Anthony's father, that AustinMetcalf father, that Jeff
Metcalf.
He's been sending tweets.
Oh, how's it?
Yeah, you raised a murderer.
Wait a minute.
I thought you forgave himbecause that's what you were
saying when this thing started.
I forgive him.
I just want to pray with thefamily now.
(01:04:09):
All of a sudden, you raised amurderer and all Camelo
Anthony's father tweeted back.
I saw the tweets.
His father tweeted back.
Listen, man, leave us alone,please leave us alone, and we'll
see you in court and and andyou know.
(01:04:30):
But what happened to all this,this Christian stuff, though,
see, all of that was?
It was a bunch of cap from thisfrom the start.
I don't never fall for thatstuff.
You coming to pray, you comingto pray with me, for go pray
with your son now.
And let me tell you somethingelse too that other son, the
hunter, he should be charged thesame way.
Uh Camillo was charged.
(01:04:51):
He should be charged withmurder one.
Now they got to push for that.
They got to push for it and Ibet you this that will change
the landscape of this thing pushfor that because he should,
because he was, uh, a aparticipant in in this murder
that was done in an act of afelony.
Now y'all want to talk aboutlegal, legal legalese.
(01:05:15):
Let's get to that like, like myman, uh, uh, what's what's my
man name?
Uh, um, zip, zip, zip with thedrip on his youtube channel.
Zip with the drip funny thingabout that is man.
Salute to that brother man, youknow, I don't know him.
Um, they were children, but Igrew up with his uncles and I
knew his father and them, uh, uh, michael and daryl.
(01:05:38):
I knew his, his father, and Iknow their mother.
Salute, salute their mother.
I'm not going to say her nameup here, their grandmother, miss
Eva, she's gone, she's passedon.
I knew their grandmother, Iknow their uncles Scrooge and
them man shout out salute,that's my man, him and Kenny.
Those are my mans, those are myfolks.
(01:06:00):
I don't know zip and his brother.
I don't know them.
They were children.
Uh, I know of them.
I don't I'm.
You know how are they?
They some, they some wild cats,man, but I don't know them.
But yeah, he has a verysuccessful, uh, youtube channel.
He's doing good with that and,um, you know, salute to the
brother, salute to them.
(01:06:20):
But I, I know the family.
Well, I knew that.
I know the family, good folks,good, solid folks and, uh, yeah,
family.
So so back to it.
Uh, you know this thing wise,this thing ain't ain't, ain't
open and shut, the way y'allperceiving it to be, that that
brother has a very, very goodcase for self-defense.
(01:06:45):
Stand your ground in a standyour ground state.
Now we I don't have time to goin and break it down here
because we're gonna get out ofhere.
I don't kept y'all too longalready, um but the prosecutor
has set a trap now I I think ifhe goes to trial, unless he gets
a good paid attorney and theyable to push this thing and get
(01:07:08):
that brother arrested, I thinkthey're going to convict him and
they're going to throw the bookat him because of the state.
Now he would have a greatappeal at that point.
He would have an outstandingappeal.
But you know he's very youngand and you know it would break
that family.
(01:07:28):
So I this, this is the trap thatthe prosecutor set.
He set the bar so high withmurder one.
So if the jury, even if theyknow it's not a murder one,
there's nothing else they can doother than come back guilty or
not guilty.
Either they either they convicthim or they let him go.
And I don't think in in um,that county, where that it is,
(01:07:52):
is 70 percent white.
So that's not going to happen.
That's not they.
They're going, they're gonnaconvict him unless he can get a
good, nice team of lawyers in itand and fight this thing.
That's the only way.
That's the only way and then,and then it's up to the jury and
, like I said, they might luckup and get one black person in
(01:08:14):
there, even if that, if you know, if that person is a, is a, is
a, got some bootlickish waysabout them and they hate black
coaching and all that.
You can forget it.
You can forget it.
But, yeah, family.
So that that's what it is.
That's what it is up here andwe're going to get ready to go.
We're going to get ready to go.
Family, as always, respect life, love justice, cherish freedom
(01:08:52):
and treasure peace.
Vaughn Black, y'all come backand see us.
Y'all come back next week andwe're gonna try to do it again.
Hopefully, malik will be uphere with us.
Speaker 1 (01:09:41):
Peace out, take care, thank you.
Just like my love, everlastingas it goes on, still moving
strong.
All in all, do you ever wonder?
Got to win?
Somebody's got to lose?
I might as well get over it,just like fishing in the ocean,
(01:10:05):
there'll always be someone new.
You did me wrong, but I've beenthrough stormy weather.
I'm going to be frozen, justlike my love.
Everlasting Time to be good.
(01:10:25):
Son Gonna believe it.
Still moving strong, on and on.
Don't stop for nobody.
This time I keep my feet onsolid ground.
Now I understand myself.
Without Like the sweet sound ofhit music, There'll always be
(01:10:48):
something new To keep the tablesturning.
Hey, it's a song, but there'llnever be an ending.
It goes on.
Hey, yeah, just like my loverLasting.
There'll never be an ending.
The beat goes on.
Just like my lover Lasting, andthe beat goes on, still moving
(01:11:13):
strong, on and on.
The beat goes on.
The beat goes on.
Only the other sleep.
Got distracted on the way tograndmother's house.
Oh, and that golden king whomight have changed the ways.
And now she's turned out.
Peace, peace.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
Peace and welcome back Freedman's Affairs Radio
Freedman's Affairs RadioFreedman's Network Out the gate.
We want to thank you fortapping back in again this week
for a short visit and a nicelittle sit down and the music
(01:01):
you hear, that you hear playingin the background is that of the
Whispers and as you know, asyou know, a few days ago we lost
one of the twins who one of thefounders of the Whispers, and
(01:22):
that was Walter Scott of theWhisperers.
And that was Walter Scott andhe has passed away due to
stomach cancer and some otherailments.
Brother was 81 years old andwe're going to miss him dearly
and we don't have any statementsfrom the family as yet.
(01:45):
I'm not sure when the memorial.
I don't have any statementsfrom the family as yet.
I'm not sure when the memorialwill be.
I don't know if they alreadydid a memorial for him or not.
I don't have that information.
But nonetheless our brother'sgone and we dedicate this
program this morning up here foryou, our beloved brother Walter
(02:06):
Scott.
Oh man, beautiful music,beautiful.
This was a beautiful song.
It was about a young girl.
I think she was out there inthat life and to listen, close
(02:35):
they're calling you Olivia.
Oh man, great music, great music.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
Lost and turned out.
Olivia, where's your wind?
She's lost and turned out.
Don't buy that guy.
No, it's a lie.
Lost and turned out.
Olivia the slave.
(03:17):
Lost and turned out.
Don't let him drive you to yourgrave.
Lost and turned.
Olivia, where's your mind?
Lost and turned, he pulls youdown all the time.
Lost and turned.
Olivia, stop and think.
(03:41):
Lost and turned, he's takingyou to his grave.
Lost and turned.
Speaker 2 (03:55):
Oh man, I can never get enough of that.
I can never get enough.
One of my favorite tunes fromthe Whispers and that was some
of their earlier works Olivia,that was the name of that that
song lost and turned out and um,yeah, so we dedicating this,
this, this morning's program, toour brother, walter scott.
(04:16):
Um, I think he passed on june25th.
Let me see, let let's get theskinny on our brother.
Let's get the skinny.
Hold on, let me get the details.
Hold on, let's see, can I.
Okay, here it is yeah, yeah,yeah.
Okay, here it is All right.
Let's see, can we get.
(04:36):
What are they saying here?
Okay, I don't want to play anyvideos or any statements.
I don't want to play any videosor any statements.
It's yeah, okay.
Walter Scott of the R&B groupthe Whispers has died at age 81.
People can conform.
The musician died six monthsafter being diagnosed with
cancer, according to the LosAngeles Sentimental.
(05:02):
The R&B group is known for hitslike and the Beat Goes On and
Rock Study.
Oh yeah, oh yeah.
He died in.
He was born in Fort Worth,texas, in 1943, september 23rd,
and he passed away at 81 yearsold.
Northridge, los Angeles,california.
And the music group Whisperswas founded in 1963.
(05:26):
And they've been going strongever since.
I believe they was touring upuntil recently.
But, yeah, that's it with ourbrother.
Man, that's it with our brotherand, once again, family, thank
you for coming back and tappingback in with us.
Coming back and tapping back inwith us and we're glad to
(05:52):
announce that we are now in 34cities, no, 34 countries, 34
countries globally and 310cities.
So, thank you everyone, thankyou all of you.
All of you, united states, allfrom all around the globe
colorado, our family up there ingreeley, colorado, and and um,
the british indian oceanterritory.
(06:14):
United kingdom, um, theylistening to us in the
philippines, uh, every, any.
Bangladesh, I seen peoplelistening in bangladesh.
So, yeah, yeah, we, weappreciate all of you, we
appreciate, we love all of you.
Keep coming back, keep comingback, and we're going to always
try to make things real specialfor you up here.
(06:36):
And you know, before we, we'regoing to take a short time out
and go to some of the sponsors.
We're going to take a shorttime out and go to some of the
sponsors and before we do that,before we do that, we want to
give you the knowledge, the mathfor today, and that is.
That is what is going on.
(06:58):
What is going on?
Okay, yeah, all right, yeah,the knowledge.
The math for the day on todayis the uh 70 first day of july
of 2025, and the math for todayis knowledge the the first day
of of the month of july in 2025.
The math is knowledge and, uh,most people.
(07:22):
When you ask them what isknowledge, what does it mean,
what does that word mean, theywill tell you well, knowledge is
information.
You know, we have an old sayingand how we used to say
knowledge is power.
Knowledge is power to a degree,to a degree, but knowledge is
not information.
Information is data.
Knowledge can, can put you on atrack to understanding
(07:42):
information, but knowledge isnot information.
Information is data on a trackto understanding information,
but knowledge is not information.
Information is data.
What knowledge?
Knowledge is synonymous withthings like fact or the
condition of knowing something,with familiarity gained through
(08:03):
experience, or or association,acquaintance with, with, with,
with something, or anunderstanding of a science, art
or a technique, the, the fact orcondition of being aware, a
conscious awareness,consciousness, um, the range of
(08:24):
one's understanding of something, the circumstance of your
apprehension of something, ortruth or fact through reasoning,
cognition.
These are what are synonymouswith knowledge.
So let us keep that in mind aswe go forward for the day.
Let us keep that in mind and goforward for the day.
(08:45):
Let us keep that in mind, andwe're going to go hear from the
sponsors real quick and then wecan come back and we're going to
have a little talk.
We're going to have some littletalks, but right now we're
going to go and hear from thesponsors Before we get started.
We'll be right back.
We get started.
(09:10):
We'll be right back because wecan't.
Focus is to cultivate anenvironment of ease and comfort
for respect to individualculture and style and to bring
about a mastery of your passionsand effect, developing a
connoisseur's lifestyle.
Speaker 3 (09:22):
since the connoisseur's lifestyle, since
the connoisseur's lifestyle isone of refinement, distinction
and class with the ability tobridge the gap of race creed or
status we at Cosby canincorporate and instill this
ideology while maintaining asense of sophistication.
We are dedicated to networkingnew ideas about business,
(09:43):
drinking, partying, fashion andliving life, Because we can't
wait.
Speaker 4 (09:58):
Empress Hair Salon.
Come down to Empress Hair Salonwhere the hairstyles will have
you looking like royalty.
We specialize in Afro-Americanhairstyles that turn heads and
set trends.
Services include relaxers,washing sets, lock maintenance,
quick weaves, sew-ins, lacefront and glueless wig installs
and lashes.
Grand opening special startingMay 5th 2025.
(10:20):
Get 20% off all services.
Just share your Empressexperience on any of our social
media platforms to claim yourglam discount.
Location Barker, cypress andMorton, right off the Katy
Freeway.
Call the Empress 832-267-2887.
Step into Empress Hair Salonand step out looking like
royalty, because your hairdeserves the crown.
Speaker 1 (11:08):
You got it, you got it, you got it, you got it.
Your hair deserves the crown.
If you didn't want to be inhere, I know you got gold.
If you didn't want to shakethat thing, hit me with the beat
.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Hey, cause it makes me sing.
I know you got gold.
Hey, if you didn't want to bein here, I know you got.
Hey, if you didn't want to bein here.
I know you got the feeling theway you move over there.
(11:40):
Yeah, we back family back inand, once again, thank you for
tapping back in today and we'rejust going to.
We're not going to stay long,just going to have a brief
little talk about a few things.
Get a bed up in here.
(12:00):
Where do we start first?
I got a couple of things totalk about.
You know, it's been a very big,very big month for President
Donald Trump.
Right, he's got some major,major wins in the Supreme Court
(12:21):
I think they were at the end ofthis section session and court,
uh, I think they were at the endof their section session and,
um, he, he got the um, the thingdone with the birthright
citizenship.
They, they crushed that and um,now I want you to understand
something this is not.
This is executive order.
(12:42):
I think it goes back up to theSupreme Court in October for to
for them to decide whether thisis going to be codified into law
or into legislation.
I should say so.
It's not legislation as as wespeak now, but but the executive
order goes into an effect in 30days from now and about, well,
(13:05):
about 29, 28 days from now,because I think it was, um, as
of friday, it was 30 days.
So now, uh, you know he's beentalking about how the the 14th
amendment has been, wassomething that was created for
(13:27):
the babies of slaves, or theenslaved, I should say, and the
descendants.
Now you got some legal peopleout here.
I think they're left-leaningand they're trying to say, well,
this is, this opens up the doorfor for American citizens,
(13:48):
black American citizens, fba,the freedmen, for some of us to
be deported, and I think I thinkthere may be some language that
that that can be interpretedthat way if you play with the
language, but that's not what Idon't.
I don't think that's the intentfor this play with the language
, but that's not what I don't.
I don't think that's the intentfor this and I think that's a a
fear-mongering tactic that someof the people that that are
(14:10):
anti-Trump are trying to uh pushthat narrative.
Um, I'm trying to see if I canfind something where he was
talking about that.
Oh, that was no, that was toolong ago.
Okay, um, you know, he pushingthat mega bill, that big,
(14:32):
beautiful bill they've beentalking about.
And let me see, I can't findany.
Now that I'm I'm in the show andI'm trying to find clips for it
.
I can't.
Let's see.
Let's see here, what do we gothere?
No, that's not it.
Birthright citizenship I can't,it seems like I can't find
(14:53):
anything.
A quick clip, because I don'twant to go into a whole, a whole
drawn out, you know, for him tobe be doing a long speech on it
.
Shakespeare, that's not it.
No, no, no, no, because thoseare left-wing.
See, because I'm trying to findsomething that's not left-wing
(15:18):
friendly, I should say I shouldjust go to ground news.
That's not it.
What was recently come on?
No, I'm, I'll tell you what Ido, but anyway, um, to make a
long story short, this is whatthe ruling has been and it is
(15:38):
took in the way the power of thelower courts to, to, to put on
on injunctions to block thingsthat he's trying to do in regard
to the birthright citizenshipRight.
That's, that's what.
That's what this ruling wasabout with the Supreme court,
and I think, I think, all ofthem ruled on it, except for
(16:01):
like three of them, and judge,katarji Brown, wrote a
dissension on it.
She wrote a dissension and her,if I'm not mistaking her
dissension, stated that ifparents no, no, that was for
(16:22):
something else, that was forsomething else.
I'll cover that right afterthere was another Supreme Court
ruling she wrote the dissensionon.
But as far as the birthrightcitizenship, I'm trying to find
something that will give us aquick little rundown of that.
(16:42):
Okay, let me see, it's not.
Um, okay, here it is, here, itis all right, let's go to this.
And the left, the democraticleft, uh, they're pulling their
(17:03):
hairs out about this.
Hold on, let me see.
This is from ABC.
I didn't want to use them, butyou know, what can you do?
What can you do?
I'm trying to get this done foryou guys so we can get you out
of here.
Hold on, give me one second,it'll be right up.
Speaker 7 (17:29):
This is an ABC News special report.
Good morning, I'm Wade Johnsonin New York.
We're coming on the air becausethe Supreme Court has just
released a potential landmarkdecision impacting the future of
birthright citizenship in theUS.
The justices were asked to rollback nationwide injunctions
against the president's attemptto redefine the 14th Amendment,
(17:50):
which states that anyone born inthe US is automatically a US
citizen, regardless of theirparent's citizenship status.
It's been in place for morethan 150 years, but now, in a
6-3 split, the conservativemajority ruled that President
Trump can move forward withimplementing his birthright
citizenship change, except forthose who brought the case the
(18:12):
22 states and a group ofpregnant immigrant women who
brought that case.
So it's not directly getting atthe 14th Amendment here, but
this will have a nationwideimpact.
Let's go ahead and bring in ourDevin Dwyer, abc's senior
Washington reporter, who's beenfollowing the Supreme Court on
this Devin.
It's not as straightforward asI think a lot of people were
perhaps expecting or hoping tohear, so break down what this
(18:34):
actually means.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
Well, this was a big surprise, whit, and this is
coming from the youngestconservative justice on the
Supreme Court, justice Amy ConeyBarrett.
Six to three, as you said, in abig win for Donald Trump,
saying he can move forward withthat executive order that he
issued on day one changing thedefinition of citizenship in
this country.
Practically speaking, it meansthe president can, in the next
(18:58):
30 days, begin to developguidelines for how he would
implement that.
It does not mean, however, thatthis executive order is free
from future legal challenge.
Legal cases in three differentdistricts will continue.
On the merits, the Supreme Court, in oral argument in this
matter, did signal that it wasskeptical that it could stand up
(19:18):
to legal muster.
But at this point the court isreally weighing in on the
ability of individual judges indistricts around the country to
block a president's actionnationwide.
And what Justice Barrett saidtoday is that an individual
federal court judge does nothave that authority to broadly
block a president, the judge.
(19:38):
He or she can block anindividual while a case is being
litigated and in this case thatwas upheld.
So you know, this order, asit's implemented, cannot apply
to those 22 states.
It's going to be messy.
It cannot apply to thoseparticular pregnant women that
are challenging this.
But elsewhere in the country,and at the very least in the
planning stages, the presidentcan move forward, and that is a
(20:00):
significant and surprising winfor him.
Speaker 7 (20:03):
It sure is, devin Dwyer, thank you.
Please stand by for a momentbecause I think it's worth going
back to the language here inthe 14th Amendment, again
ratified after the Civil War,which states that all persons
born or naturalized in theUnited States and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof arecitizens of the United States
and of the state wherein theyreside.
Of course, the Trumpadministration trying to make
(20:24):
changes to that, that's whattriggered these series of
lawsuits and then ended back atthe Supreme Court.
Let's bring in our ABC Newslegal contributor, sarah Isger,
because, sarah, many are goingto be asking now where does the
process go from here?
And getting back to the root ofthat question in the 14th
Amendment, Right.
Speaker 8 (20:41):
This was only about whether the district judge could
enjoin the enforcement of thatnationwide.
What we'll now see is theactual question of what the 14th
Amendment means whether apresident acting alone, without
Congress, without an amendmentto the Constitution, can change
our understanding of how we'veimplemented that for the last
150 years.
That question will go back tothe Supreme Court.
(21:04):
Amy Coney Barrett, in hermajority opinion, making clear
this decision has nothing to dowith the merits of that legal
question.
The Supreme Court can preventenforcement of that executive
order nationwide.
I expect we'll hear more aboutthe merits of that question in
the fall as you read it.
The real legal question is onwhat subject to the jurisdiction
(21:25):
thereof means Is someone who isin the country unlawfully
subject to the laws of ourcountry?
Like a diplomat would not besubject to the laws at the time
of the 14th Amendment, Someonewho belonged on tribal lands did
not was not subject to our laws.
So that's the question that thejustices will now have to look
(21:46):
at in the fall.
Speaker 7 (21:48):
Sarah, thank you, I want to go back to that.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Oh man, this thing is going to be something, is going
to be some kind of battle.
It's going because you got tolook at the language.
See, a lot of the language hasbeen left up to interpretation
up until this point.
All persons see they're goingto.
I don't know if they're goingto change those amendments or
whatnot, but let's hearsomething.
(22:11):
Let's hear from my sister,Sabby Sab.
Hold on.
Speaker 6 (22:15):
Has made a ruling that could lead the way for
Donald Trump to changebirthright citizenship.
This has a lot of peopleconcerned.
We're going to talk about bothsides of this and also the
bigger picture.
Let's go ahead and get intothis clip here.
Speaker 7 (22:33):
Good morning.
I'm with Johnson in New York.
We're coming on the air becausethe Supreme Court has just
released a potential landmarkdecision impacting the future of
birthright citizenship in theUS.
The justices were asked to rollback nationwide injunctions
against the president's attemptto redefine the 14th Amendment,
which states that anyone born inthe US is automatically a US
(22:55):
citizen, regardless of theirparent's citizenship status.
We already heard this.
I'm going to fast forward it.
Speaker 2 (23:01):
We already heard that , so I'm going to fast forward
it.
Give me just a second.
I'm going to fast forward.
We already heard that, so I'mgoing to fast forward.
Give me just a second, I'mgoing to fast forward.
Hold on, because I want to getback to Sabrina.
Hold on.
Speaker 6 (23:08):
Some people are going to try to fight back doing this
.
It has been suggested, orrecommended, that people do a
class action lawsuit.
I just want to explain topeople that class action
lawsuits don't happen overnight.
Those things take time, and sojust prepare yourself for that.
Also, this raises the questionas who is this going to apply to
(23:32):
?
Because I'm going to show yousomeone in particular that this
new ruling would apply to, butI'm sure they're probably going
to get a pass because of whothey are.
Also, we need to ask anotherquestion.
Donald Trump has continued tosay that the border is closed.
If the border is closed, thenyou shouldn't have to worry
(23:52):
about this issue.
Right, if the border is closed,you shouldn't have to worry
about people that are hereillegally having babies here.
Right, come on, guys, we got tostart thinking, you got to
start opening up our minds herea little bit.
But this would really changethings, and I'm going to get
(24:12):
into what the 14th Amendmentactually says in just a second.
Speaker 7 (24:16):
A Washington reporter who's been following the
Supreme Court on this Devin,it's not as straightforward that
a federal judge cannot blockthe president of the United
States.
Speaker 6 (24:27):
This can apply to other rulings as well.
So I want people to really getthe big picture here.
So this isn't just aboutbirthright citizenship, and
that's what I want everybody tounderstand, because, let's
remember, the reason why MahmoudKhalil was able to be freed
from the detention center inLouisiana is because a judge,
they came in and they said no.
(24:48):
So if this is the case now,that a federal judge cannot come
in and block these decisions,that can apply to anything that
can apply to free speech.
You know they're cutting,they're pushing back heavily on
pro-Palestinian speech.
Whatever anything they'resaying, a federal judge cannot
(25:10):
come in and block it.
So I see a lot of people whenthey're talking about this on
social media, they're focusingjust on the birthright
citizenship issue, but they'renot looking at the big picture.
Basically, that means that thepresident, in no way, shape or
form, can be stopped from makingsaid decisions.
So people need to be careful.
What you ask for.
(25:30):
I will say that let's go on tothis clip here.
Speaker 10 (25:35):
He issued over 20 executive orders, including one
that sought to deny birthrightcitizenship to children born in
the US to people here illegally.
A federal judge in Washingtonstate issued a nationwide
injunction blocking thepresident's order.
Speaker 9 (25:49):
In practice, this meant that if any one of the
nearly 700 federal judgesdisagreed with the policy of a
duly elected president of theUnited States, he or she could
block that policy from goinginto effect or at least delay it
for many years, tie it up inthe court system.
This was a colossal abuse ofpower.
Speaker 5 (26:09):
There are 94 judicial districts across the country
and 35 out of the 40 opinionswith nationwide injunctions came
from five liberal districts inthis country.
These injunctions have blockedour policies, from tariffs to
military readiness, toimmigration, to foreign affairs,
fraud, abuse and many otherissues.
(26:30):
Americans are finally gettingwhat they voted for.
No longer will we have roguejudges striking down President
Trump's policies across theentire nation.
Speaker 6 (26:42):
So nationwide.
That's the important part.
That being said, this doesn'tjust apply to President Trump.
This applies to any presidentgoing forward, unless the next
president were to try to reversethis, but this applies to any
president going forward.
So keep that in mind, folks,because there are things that
Republican presidents try topush forward through executive
(27:05):
order that you may be against,and there are things Democrat
presidents try to push throughvia executive order that you may
be against.
So I want to be very clearabout this.
This is not just about DonaldTrump.
This applies to any presidentof the United States.
Now check this out, as you'llsee.
This has been done before withDemocrat presidents as well.
Federal judges coming in toblock or delay.
(27:27):
Obama had six excuse me, bushhad six, obama had 12, trump had
64, biden had 14, and thenTrump again, so far, 15.
Speaker 10 (27:38):
Nationwide injunctions have become a
problem for Republican andDemocratic presidents, but Trump
has received the most by far.
A Harvard Law Review from 2024found that 93.6% of nationwide
injunctions issued duringTrump's first term and during
the Biden administration wereissued by judges appointed by a
president of the opposingpolitical party.
Speaker 9 (28:00):
We can now promptly file to proceed with numerous
policies that have been wronglyenjoined on a nationwide basis.
Speaker 10 (28:07):
Some of those policies include dismantling the
Department of Education and theUS Agency for International
Development, freezing federalfunding to sanctuary cities,
suspending refugee resettlementin the US and restricting
taxpayer funding of genderaffirming care fair funding of
(28:28):
gender affirming care.
Speaker 6 (28:28):
So just something to pay attention to.
Now I'm going to give you theother side of this as well,
because, again, on the show wetry to give, I try to do my best
at giving both perspectives,right?
Who is this going to apply to?
Would it apply to people thatwould fall under this new
qualification for citizenshipwho are, I don't know, public
figures?
(28:49):
What about people who arepoliticians?
And the reason why I ask thatquestion is we can name quite a
few, right, we can name quite afew.
It very clear he didn't comehere legally.
He didn't come here legally.
Are they going to apply this tohim?
Probably not, but someone whoqualified under birthright
(29:10):
citizenship was Vivek Ramaswamy.
Vivek Ramaswamy was justrunning for president.
Speaker 2 (29:16):
He was supposed to be a part of Doge, but he came to
the curb.
Speaker 6 (29:19):
There was some disagreements there between him
and Elon and things just gotcrazy right.
But I just want to remind you,vivek Ramaswamy would also fit
under this new category.
He would fit under this.
If this goes forward, hetechnically Would not be able to
stay here.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
And that is good.
Get him out of here.
I can't stand him, can't standhim.
He was a bootlicking for theTrump.
He was man, he had his nose allthe way up the crack of Trump's
behind, right, and look whathappened, what I try to explain
(30:02):
to the so-called blackconservatives and the and the,
the Trump lovers and the blackmaggots, you know, the, the
bootleg brigade, right?
The Sambo society and the Kuhnclan.
So what are you, what are wetrying to explain to them?
You know when, when they do onall that, that boot licking, for
(30:24):
, for, for butter, biscuits andbacon bits, right, I'm trying to
explain to them, man, there isno solid future in Kooning and
bootlicking.
But you can't tell them thatthey're running around here with
MAGA hats on.
They're doing all this stuff.
But let's go back to Sabrina.
(30:44):
I don't want to stay too longwith this because we got a
couple other things we got totalk about up here.
But let's go back to it, comeon.
Speaker 6 (30:51):
But I don't think they're going to apply this to
him.
This is where I'm coming from.
Folks Listen to this.
Speaker 3 (30:57):
I believe in being consistent about my policies
where so your father is not acitizen of the United States.
Speaker 8 (31:02):
He's not OK.
And your mother?
When did your mom take thecitizenship test?
Was it before or after you wereborn?
After I was born Well, well,well.
Speaker 6 (31:18):
People forget after he was born.
So that means that VivekRamaswamy also benefited from
birth right citizenship.
Remember, vivek's parents werehere studying as college
students, and that brings upanother question what about
those who are here as collegestudents that are part of a PhD
program?
Phd programs in the US can takefrom five to seven years.
(31:39):
A lot of times, some of thesePhD students are married.
What happens if they have ababy, which these things have
happened.
That's why I'm bringing this up.
They have a baby, just likeVivek Ramaswamy's parents did.
That means that their, theirchild, would not automatically
get citizenship in this country.
So, to my point, how wouldVivek Ramaswamy be allowed to
(32:03):
stay?
And the only thing that I canthink of is that they would say
well, we're not going back, it'snot going to be retroactive, so
if you're already here, thenyou're grandfathered in, and I
think that's what they said.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
I believe that's what they said.
The grandfather didn't nothingto worry about.
Speaker 6 (32:23):
According to Donald Trump, who would this apply to?
And then there's also the caseof the future administration.
The next administration 2028,let's say, if the Democrats won
in 2028, they're probably goingto try to roll this back.
And then now you have thischaos.
This is what we've been doingthe past couple of years
Presidents implement something,the next president takes it away
(32:46):
, then they bring it back andthey take it away, and they
bring it back and take away, andit creates a chaotic situation.
So I want people to think aboutthis from the bigger picture,
like, don't just look at thisand say, oh, it's just
birthright citizenship.
Think about who this is reallygoing to be applied to, because
I got a feeling, remember, he'srunning for governor.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
So think about that for a second After that said,
we're going to, we're going tostop on that.
That's enough of that, becauseI don't want to step on her
stuff too much.
I like Sabrina she's.
Don't want to step on her stufftoo much.
I like, uh, sabrina, she'sgreat, she's great, she's.
You know, she's great, uh,she's.
Uh.
I think she was for stompingfor bernie sanders at one
particular point in time,because she's down the middle
with it.
(33:22):
I think she's independent orsomething.
I'm not sure what her politicalstance is, but yeah, yeah.
The other thing with the supremecourt let me get a bed back up
in here and the other thing withthe supreme court family was um
, in marathon in the state ofmaryland, in some county I
(33:43):
forget the county, but thesupreme court ruled on a case
that some uh parents of someschool children there in
Maryland that brought a suit, acase in the Supreme Court,
against the public school systemthere.
Right, check it out, check thisout and this.
(34:10):
Because what the states weredoing, what these Democratic
states were doing, was they,they, they wanted to take away
the parents right to opt theirchildren out of certain
curriculums that were beingtaught in school, namely the
LGBT curriculum, the, theliterature in the books and
(34:34):
stuff.
Some parents didn't want theirchildren learning that
particular curriculum.
Right, and the school system ofthese districts took away that
right from the parents.
Because how did they do it?
(34:55):
They, they circumvented it in away that they said, well, we're
not going to tell the parentsthat we, the parents, just won't
, we put on notice about thecurriculum and that takes away
their right or if they havecertain religious beliefs, to to
opt their children out of thatparticular lesson or out of that
(35:17):
class.
So the other day the Supremecourt ruled that down.
Now parents have the right toopt their children out of that
particular lesson or that classor whatever that, that
particular curriculum about LGBT, because some of those, some of
(35:38):
those books are very graphicand you know you're talking
about elementary school children.
You know grade school, uh,children, you know.
You know I should have a say inwhat my children are ingesting
in school, because this is whyyou pay taxes.
You know in certain districtsyou're paying all these high
taxes.
You got a home and you'retrying to raise your family and
whatever you should have.
(35:59):
Parents should have some say soin the what's going on in these
classrooms with the educationof their children.
This is why I don't mind themdismantling the Board of
Education, because look whatthey're doing.
Look what these people havedone and what they continue to
try to push Right now.
(36:23):
Like I said earlier, judgeKatonji Brown-Jackson wrote a
dissension in this and and herstance?
Her stance check this outfamily.
Her stance was if parents don'twant their children learning
certain things in in aparticular public school
(36:43):
curriculum, they should taketheir children out of that
school and put them in a, in aprivate school or or what have
you right?
No, no, absolutely not.
If you people who are pushingthis agenda, the LGBT thing, now
, I don't have any qualms aboutwhat people do in their personal
(37:06):
life.
If you're an adult, you're oldenough to make those decisions.
My thing always been, and Iused to tell saint laurence this
leave the children alone, handsoff.
Now, once you become an adultand you're a young adult and you
want to make certain decisionsabout your sexuality or whatever
you know, whatever alternativelifestyle you want to live, or
(37:31):
whatever the case might be, thatis your right to do so.
That is your business.
I don't care what you do inyour bedroom or who you choose
to to to um love or whatever thecase might be right.
That's not, that's never beenan issue.
But when it comes to thechildren, hands off, let them.
(37:51):
They only have a few years tobe children.
Allow them that, that, that,that liberty to be children.
Allow them that god-givenfreedom to be children.
Don't pump your agendas inthese young children.
And can they?
They they already have enoughtrying to learn themselves and
(38:16):
learn certain lessons in lifeand, because of the formative
years, let them have the freedomto do that Instead of you
ramming this down them.
You know constant pushing this,pushing this, pushing this,
this down, and you know constantpushing this, pushing this,
pushing this.
And you know you're confusingthem.
(38:37):
Because in the district that theSupreme Court made this ruling
in, I think it was somethinglike 90% of the parents did not
want and, mind you, this is,this is a was a very wealthy
district in the state ofMaryland, right, and they 90, I
think it was not, if I'm notmistaken.
I could be wrong, but it was avery high number 90 of the
(39:01):
parents in this, in this uhlitigation in this district, uh,
voted in favor, wasn't notvoted, but were in favor of the
opt-out option 90%, maybe alittle less.
I'm not quoting an actualnumber, but it was a very high
(39:24):
percentage.
So that's telling you thepeople don't want this.
Why are you trying to push this?
Now, what I was about to say wasthis you telling people to take
their children out of thepublic school system and put
them in private school.
No, if you want that agenda atransgender uh type of thing
(39:47):
then you, you open a charter forthat.
You start up a privateinstitution for transgender
people, an educationalinstitution for transgender
people, and if there are parentsthat want their children to be
involved, to participate inthose curriculums, they are free
(40:09):
to allow their children toattend that school.
But you don't put this on thepublic like that.
The same way I see it as thetransgender men in women's
sports.
If you want a transgendersports league, create that.
And if women want to want toparticipate in that league and
(40:34):
you don't have a problem withthat they're allowed to do that.
But don't, don't, don't come andpush transgender men in women's
sports, and why?
Why, you don't want to go tothe men's sports and box men.
You see how that guy you knowthat transgender beat up that
little girl, that little I thinkshe was an Asian girl.
(40:56):
He beat up on that little.
That girl couldn't stand achance.
It was, I think it was likeOlympic boxing or something like
that.
But why are you not boxing inthe men's divisions?
That's the whole thing.
Because you can't.
You can't compete with the men.
So you want to go to the women'ssports, the perceived weaker
(41:18):
gender, and you want to uh getin there and and these, a lot of
these girls don't stand achance against these guys, or
these, these people I should sayI shouldn't call them guys
because they reserve the rightto be referred to as they would
have it.
So I'll say people, transgenderpeople.
So you want that create aleague and that's the
(41:41):
transgender boxing associationor the transgender wrestling or
the transgender swimming team,whatever the case might be,
whatever the case might be, gocompete and make the, the, those
institutions, just like youcould do a private, uh,
education institution, right,and we're gonna, we're gonna
(42:02):
leave that there.
But those were too big.
There was a bunch of otherstuff.
I don't, I can't get in, wedon't have enough time because
we're about to roll out of here.
But those were two big things.
He had a big week last week.
He had a big month period, butthe things going over there
(42:23):
between Israel and Iran, thatwas big, that was a big thing
for him and you've seen howupset he was with that.
But I won't get off into that.
But now the last thing, thelast thing we're gonna, we're
gonna get on here, is um, uh,the, the uh, you know the.
(42:50):
The case with with sean Combshas gone.
They're in deliberations rightnow.
I think it was as of yesterday,I think Friday they sent it up
and I think yesterday the jurorsgot it and they're deliberating
and maybe they'll come backwith something today.
Who knows, by the time thecourts open up it's still early
(43:11):
now, but maybe by the time thecourts open up it will be
something.
Who knows, by the time thecourts open up it's still early
now, but maybe by the time thecourts open up it will be
something.
Who knows, hold on, let me tryto get the story in here.
Ok, hold on.
And they're having problemswith the jury.
Some of the I think Jura 25 ishaving problems with the judge's
(43:35):
instructions.
But let's take a gander at that.
Let's take a look at that, comeon.
Speaker 11 (43:41):
Hi everyone.
Thanks for sticking with us.
I'm your host, sierra Gillespie, bringing you Law and Crime
coverage of the P Diddy trial.
You guys, we are in the finalcountdown.
We could have a verdict asearly as today, that's right.
We're already in deliberations.
And, by the way, thank youeveryone who's been watching our
live stream so far.
I know we have people from allover the world.
(44:03):
You guys have been following allday, so you of course know that
there recently was a questionfrom jurors.
We're not even quite two hoursinto deliberations and they
already had a question.
So Jesse Weber kind of left youon a cliffhanger and I'm going
to tell you what it's all about.
Here's an update from thecourthouse right behind me
because, by the way, I'm live inthe Southern District of New
York.
So here's what happens Now.
The judge says we have receiveda note from the jury that we
(44:26):
have a juror specifically juror25, who we believe cannot follow
your instructions.
I would like to meet with thecourt about it.
So the judge says I suggestasking for more information.
So that's kind of crazy, youguys.
I mean this morning we reportedabout jury instructions right,
this is so important going intodeliberations almost two hours
(44:48):
in and it sounds like one ofthese jurors jury number 25,
says they might not be able tofollow the instructions, which
is the most important thing wehave here.
I got a lot of questions and Iwant to break down the jury, so
let's do that quick before weget to our all star panel of
guests who, by the way, I'mgoing to have a lot of good
questions for them, and if youguys have, questions, just throw
(45:08):
them into our chat.
Speaker 2 (45:09):
I think this is going to be a mistrial.
I think it's headed for mistrial.
If not, he should walk.
He should walk.
Now some law legal beagles aresaying that he's going to go to
prison.
I don't see it because, well,it's very, very strange.
It's very strange, hold on.
(45:30):
It's kind of weird because hewas charged on a RICO status,
right, charged on a RICO status.
Now, he's one person.
Now, rico is usually a group ofpeople, a criminal enterprise,
right, and he was the only onecharged in this thing, right.
(45:53):
But here's what I thinkhappened All of those, those
witnesses that they called thegovernment, called because the
prosecutor I mean the defensecalled no witnesses.
Not one witness did the defensecall.
It was all the prosecutor, thegovernment or the government,
and I think those people theycalled would have been indicted
(46:15):
in the RICO had they agreed totestify on behalf of the
government.
So that's one thing we got topay attention to.
But from what I've seen so farand I haven't really covered the
case tight like that I've beencovering it about as much as
would be expected, but I haven'tcovered it as as intensely as
(46:38):
most have I, because I didn'tlike the fact how they, how they
did it.
Um, I think he had some some,some very high profile people
under some pressure with thosewith those tapes and videos and
audio and video and stuff, andthis is why Homeland Security
(46:59):
went and raided his propertiesto get possession of those those
, those that material that couldhave harmed some, some folks in
some very high places.
That's my analogy of it.
I'm not saying I'm right folksin some very high places.
That's my analogy of it, I'mnot saying I'm right.
However, I think because reasonwhy I'm saying I'm doubting all
(47:24):
of this is because, from whatI've seen thus far, they have
not proven their case of guilt.
Now, all you need is one.
Now, here it is Already, onejuror can't follow the
instructions Right and all youneed is one.
So I think this is headed for amistrial.
If not, I think he should walk,and not that I'm here putting a
(47:49):
cape on for Puff or for BrotherLove, whatever you call him you
want to call him.
But I'm here putting a cape onfor Puff or for Brother Love,
whatever you call him you wantto call him, but I'm not putting
a cape on for him.
But I don't like the dirty playof how they went about
prosecuting him.
You know, is he some kind ofsexual deviant or whatever, with
(48:13):
the baby, all thing and thefreak off stuff?
Speaker 4 (48:16):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (48:17):
Yeah, of course he is .
I don't care nothing about hissexuality, whether he's half gay
or what I don't know, and Idon't really care about that.
What I care about is thelegality of the case and how
they and how they trying to use,uh, certain statutes to to box
(48:37):
him in.
Now, if you're charging him for, if he was being charged for
domestic violence we saw thevideo he beat the brakes off of
that girl.
He beat in that video in thehotel.
He beat the brakes off of her.
So if that's what y'allcharging with, he's guilty.
The other stuff, uh, the baby,all the naysays sensationalized
(48:57):
it and all of this and all ofthat, and the drugs and the
transporting across state linesand this and that and that and
this, none of this stuff was,was proven.
And then, uh, last week, latelast week, the, the prosecutors
had to drop some of those thingsbecause they, they had, they
made no, uh, no lead way in anyof those charges.
(49:22):
So, in other words, they, they,they fluffed it up.
They fluffed these things upall the way up to the top and
couldn't deliver.
Now some of the legal expertsare saying that he's going to,
they're going to convict him onsomething, because all they need
is maybe because I think it'swhat a total of five charges in
(49:44):
the top charges, a total of fivecomplaints, and all they need
is, I think it's two or moreincidents, two incidents of
whatever the complaint is, andthen they can probably get the
case prosecuted and get a guiltyverdict, depending on the
(50:04):
jurors.
So this is something we'regoing to be watching and maybe
they'll have a verdict by todayor they'll come and the judge
will come back with some moreinstructions.
We don't know.
And that'll bring me to thelast and final thing.
And oh, wow, we got to get outof here this Carmelo Anthony
thing out there in Texas overthe Austin Metcalf homicide, the
(50:28):
unaliving Now that family.
They got to get that DominiqueAlexander out of here.
They got to get away from thatguy.
Get and and get somebody else,because that camp is
hemorrhaging right now.
That now you'll hear I was on apanel on on on the righteous
(50:49):
perspective the other day withwise and salute my man.
Wise, good brother, good brother, he just he's, um, I don't the
wise, I don't, I don't say wiseis a bootlicker or a coon.
I don't, I don't, I don'tbelieve that, I just believe he,
he believes in, he has areverence for the, the right,
(51:11):
for the republicans, he has areverence for that and he's one
of the people that don't believethere's racism, and you know
stuff like that and most blackpeople.
All we do is complain aboutracism and you know we pull a
race card all the time and he'sone of the people he don't
believe in that.
(51:32):
He just he doesn't believe inblack against white.
You know they're christianpeople over there so they don't
see things.
Uh, they don't see reality theway some of us see it.
They see their reality in theirin, in, you know, in in the
light of, you know, biblicalperspective.
I should say right, but anyway,now here's the problem.
(51:56):
Right now you got a bunch ofgoofy people that get online.
They're getting these chats andstuff in there.
Oh, the family done spent moneyon a new house and cars and all
of that's not what happened.
The car they, when this casehappened, they, the family,
moved to another home.
(52:17):
Rental was I think it was ninethousand, nine hundred thousand
rent, dollar rental, annualrental or whatever they had,
because they were getting deaththreats and this, the gifts and
gold money wasn't even touchedyet it wasn't available to them.
So all you, you bozos and andgoofballs out there, they're
saying that they spent the moneyon that and the car.
(52:38):
The father had already broughtthe car before the money was
available from the, from the um,the fundraiser, to give sin go
right now.
You did.
They did raise, I think it was5, thirty or something thousand
dollars.
They raised in this Gibson Goldcampaign.
Now the boy filed anapplication for a court
(53:02):
appointed attorney.
How, where is the money?
And this is see, now, you can'tplay with black folks.
A lot of people donated to thatgibson go.
I donate money to it, to itbecause I want, I, I, I see the
play.
I see the play.
This white kid was, was, waskilled in this incident and and
(53:25):
boy, you y'all better know.
No, we got to get him.
He has to go, he has to go.
This is the sentiment, right,how dare he defend himself, how
dare he, the little black thug.
(53:46):
This is the talk.
And that talk is not comingfrom white people, it's coming
from black people who did that,like I said, the boot lick
brigade, right, the sambosociety and the coon clan.
(54:06):
That's where this talk iscoming from.
Now you have, when you justlike when I'm on wise's's
YouTube channel when we're doingthe panels.
Sometimes he invites me up tosit in the panel with them or
whatever, and I go up there, butthen in the comments now I'm
the only one that disagrees,because most it's a Christian
group and they are Christianpeople and I'm the only one up
(54:30):
there that has a difference ofopinion, except for that,
brother Jason.
Salute to him.
He kept it real the other dayand he disagrees with me a lot
sometimes, but when it's realhe'll tip his hat to where
realness is.
The rest of them just racismdoesn't exist.
(54:51):
Black people are thugs, theculture, they hate the culture.
And you know the talking points.
We have victims, perpetualvictims, um, with no zero
accountability, and blah, blah,blah, blah, blah, blah.
It's all of that white talkingpoints.
But then when you go into thechat and see the comments, and
(55:12):
then some of the comments are sovicious now, these supposed to
be christian people, right, butthe comments be so venomous,
right.
I press on the ceo.
Why are they coming?
They tell me I'm full of hate,I'm a racist and this and that
because I want to see this youngman be treated fairly.
(55:36):
So I'm a racist because of that.
This is the trope.
I'm white and I say so.
This was a disaster.
He's a murderer, he should bejailed, he should get the death
penalty.
How dare he kill Austin likethat?
This is the talk.
(55:57):
They talk and it's all in thechat, right.
And then you press on some ofthese people's profile and you
go to their, to their on youtubechannels.
Some of them have channels andpages and different things and
profiles and they, they, theyare straight up white
supremacist.
Spoke under the guise ofchristianity.
(56:17):
Now, I'm not knocking outChristian brothers and sisters,
but these supposed to beChristian people and they
straight up racist, nationalist,white supremacist.
But now what reason why theylike channels, like like my
brother, is because they get thethings can be said from them
(56:37):
that they don't have the courageto say I don't, instead of them
coming out and say look, I'mblack.
People ain't supposed to havenothing, we ain't supposed to
stand up for nothing.
We supposed to take abusewhenever, and you know, our
lives don't matter.
Kill us when you get good andready, and that's that, we're
white.
And we say so, see, that's that.
(56:58):
But they can't.
They.
I don't know if they feelguilty about it, because some
people don't really feel guilt,because, just like with this guy
who wrote this book aboutempathy being a form of sin I
forget his name uh, that there'sa book.
Uh, he wrote empathy is a sin.
This is elon musk.
Even has said, had made thatstatement that empathy is a is a
(57:21):
form, is a sinful thing to have.
Empathy is a sinful thing,right?
This is why I tell you, man,y'all gotta really check with
y'all back in, but anyway, right.
So the the thing is, you spentthis money.
Why are you filing for publicdefender for a court-appointed
(57:43):
attorney?
That money was supposed to befor his defense.
Now you got this dude, dominicAlexander, who's hanging around
him, who's a Timo version of AlSharpton, and that's the ass
network.
We're going to be down theremarching, going down there
Sunday morning at the church.
We're gonna be down theremarching, going out that sunday
morning at the church.
Let out, we're gonna bemarching.
Now he's he don't talk likethat, but he's he's like a team
(58:07):
version of al sharp.
He's supposed to be some kindof activist.
This dude was convicted of um,some kind of child abuse, I
think it was, and he did sometime, which I don't hold that
against him, but he is not goodfor that family.
Get him out of there, becauseI'm not sending another dime to
(58:28):
them until they get that dudeaway from them.
He's going to hurt them.
This dude, now, the way I seeit and I've been paying close
attention to this lately there'ssome people, some legal people,
who've been holding panels indifferent this lately.
There's some people, some legalpeople, who've been holding
panels in different X spaces andtalking about this thing and
the way Wiser and them talkabout it like this is a slam
(58:48):
shot man.
This is a slam shot case man.
He's going to jail.
You know he did the murder andyou know he had no business.
He was there illegally.
And then this and that Come tofind out.
None of that's true.
None of that's true.
Now, this kid was up under thattent at a at a school sanction
track, meet right, he had everyright to be there.
(59:08):
Now, now, the the on themisinformed amongst us will say
that, uh, let me get a bed inhere.
The misinformed amongst us willsay that he shouldn't have been
under that tent.
But here's the thing, thelegality of it.
He had every right to be underthat tent, every right, even
(59:29):
though it was the opposing team.
He wasn't a part of that team.
He had every right to be underthat tent because it's a public
space and they didn't have theright to discriminate and tell
him he couldn't be up underthere.
Now, first of all, it wasraining and it started raining.
(59:50):
He went up under there to forshelter from the rain.
What happened to thesportsmanship?
All right, man, it's raining,you know, you from the other
team, but come on in, man, whathappened to the sportsmanship?
Now you hear some of thesemisinformed people.
Oh, he wasn't even supposed tobe there because he's on the
football team.
No, you, moron, he's on thetrack team.
(01:00:14):
He was the captain of his trackteam.
Those two twins were notcompeting in the competition
that day, so he had more of aright, technically, to be there
than them.
What were they doing there?
They were there, like a lot ofpeople have said that know them.
(01:00:35):
They were there being bulliesand this is why they stepped at
a kid in the first place wasthey had no right to.
They shouldn't have saidanything to him and if they felt
that he was not supposed to be,they were supposed to go get an
authority or someone fromfaculty or staff or whatever to
remove him.
But that wasn't the casebecause he had every right to be
(01:00:57):
under that tent.
Thank you, the bootlick brigade, sambo society and the coon
clan.
You study on these YouTubechannels and you buck dancing
for butter, biscuits and baconbits, but you don't have all of
(01:01:21):
the legal facts of the matter.
Now they're saying, well, heconfessed to.
No, he did not confess.
It's to me, it's a clear caseof self-defense.
Now the judge, the prosecutor,has, has set a trap.
Let me tell you what they'redoing, family and and we're
supposed to be out here, but Igot to say this, I got to get
(01:01:42):
this out and I'm going to letyou go.
The prosecution has set a trap.
They went for murder one, topcharge murder one, that's it.
So now the jury has no reallywiggle room because they know
this is not a murder one.
There was no intent orpremeditation for him to do this
(01:02:03):
.
He didn't go there with theintent of killing someone.
He didn't even know it wasgoing to rain.
So how can you say it was anintent?
Now, some of the witnessesthere I was listening to the
panel the other night Some ofthe witnesses at this thing that
were there said there was likefour or five guys that ready to
jump on him that actually chasedhim out of the tent.
(01:02:23):
So this will apparently it willcome out in the trial because
the family is saying they'regoing to trial but in order for
me to send another dime to them,they got to get this dude out
of there.
This Alexander dude.
He's no good for it and know Iwas on wise channel the other
(01:02:44):
day.
I was on his channel the otherday and I'm gonna, I'm gonna
give wise a call and and speakto him.
Maybe tomorrow he had peoplethey're talking about?
Oh, the father.
You know he got to take somecontrition and he hasn't shown
any responsibility andcontrition.
The father went to the pressconference to try to pray with
them.
Oh, get, move your ass around,man.
(01:03:07):
Don't come in here trying topray with us.
You should have prayed withyour son.
You should have prayed withyour son.
Maybe your son would still behere if he was an abiding
Christian.
Pray with your son.
Don't come here to this pressconference trying to pray with
us.
And then you did it in public.
But let me show you hypocrisyin it.
(01:03:27):
Let me show you hypocrisyBecause you had to put the back
to the boot the bootleg brigade,the Kuhn clan and the Sambo
society.
Oh, that good man tried to comeand pray with them and look how
they act.
Oh, that good man tried to comeand pray with them and look how
they act.
Oh, really, oh really, really.
Come to find out.
(01:03:48):
This man has been tweeting on X,sending tweets to Camillo
Anthony's father, that AustinMetcalf father, that Jeff
Metcalf.
He's been sending tweets.
Oh, how's it?
Yeah, you raised a murderer.
Wait a minute.
I thought you forgave himbecause that's what you were
saying when this thing started.
I forgive him.
I just want to pray with thefamily now.
(01:04:09):
All of a sudden, you raised amurderer and all Camelo
Anthony's father tweeted back.
I saw the tweets.
His father tweeted back.
Listen, man, leave us alone,please leave us alone, and we'll
see you in court and and andyou know.
(01:04:30):
But what happened to all this,this Christian stuff, though,
see, all of that was?
It was a bunch of cap from thisfrom the start.
I don't never fall for thatstuff.
You coming to pray, you comingto pray with me, for go pray
with your son now.
And let me tell you somethingelse too that other son, the
hunter, he should be charged thesame way.
Uh Camillo was charged.
(01:04:51):
He should be charged withmurder one.
Now they got to push for that.
They got to push for it and Ibet you this that will change
the landscape of this thing pushfor that because he should,
because he was, uh, a aparticipant in in this murder
that was done in an act of afelony.
Now y'all want to talk aboutlegal, legal legalese.
(01:05:15):
Let's get to that like, like myman, uh, uh, what's what's my
man name?
Uh, um, zip, zip, zip with thedrip on his youtube channel.
Zip with the drip funny thingabout that is man.
Salute to that brother man, youknow, I don't know him.
Um, they were children, but Igrew up with his uncles and I
knew his father and them, uh, uh, michael and daryl.
(01:05:38):
I knew his, his father, and Iknow their mother.
Salute, salute their mother.
I'm not going to say her nameup here, their grandmother, miss
Eva, she's gone, she's passedon.
I knew their grandmother, Iknow their uncles Scrooge and
them man shout out salute,that's my man, him and Kenny.
Those are my mans, those are myfolks.
(01:06:00):
I don't know zip and his brother.
I don't know them.
They were children.
Uh, I know of them.
I don't I'm.
You know how are they?
They some, they some wild cats,man, but I don't know them.
But yeah, he has a verysuccessful, uh, youtube channel.
He's doing good with that and,um, you know, salute to the
brother, salute to them.
(01:06:20):
But I, I know the family.
Well, I knew that.
I know the family, good folks,good, solid folks and, uh, yeah,
family.
So so back to it.
Uh, you know this thing wise,this thing ain't ain't, ain't
open and shut, the way y'allperceiving it to be, that that
brother has a very, very goodcase for self-defense.
(01:06:45):
Stand your ground in a standyour ground state.
Now we I don't have time to goin and break it down here
because we're gonna get out ofhere.
I don't kept y'all too longalready, um but the prosecutor
has set a trap now I I think ifhe goes to trial, unless he gets
a good paid attorney and theyable to push this thing and get
(01:07:08):
that brother arrested, I thinkthey're going to convict him and
they're going to throw the bookat him because of the state.
Now he would have a greatappeal at that point.
He would have an outstandingappeal.
But you know he's very youngand and you know it would break
that family.
(01:07:28):
So I this, this is the trap thatthe prosecutor set.
He set the bar so high withmurder one.
So if the jury, even if theyknow it's not a murder one,
there's nothing else they can doother than come back guilty or
not guilty.
Either they either they convicthim or they let him go.
And I don't think in in um,that county, where that it is,
(01:07:52):
is 70 percent white.
So that's not going to happen.
That's not they.
They're going, they're gonnaconvict him unless he can get a
good, nice team of lawyers in itand and fight this thing.
That's the only way.
That's the only way and then,and then it's up to the jury and
, like I said, they might luckup and get one black person in
(01:08:14):
there, even if that, if you know, if that person is a, is a, is
a, got some bootlickish waysabout them and they hate black
coaching and all that.
You can forget it.
You can forget it.
But, yeah, family.
So that that's what it is.
That's what it is up here andwe're going to get ready to go.
We're going to get ready to go.
Family, as always, respect life, love justice, cherish freedom
(01:08:52):
and treasure peace.
Vaughn Black, y'all come backand see us.
Y'all come back next week andwe're gonna try to do it again.
Hopefully, malik will be uphere with us.
Speaker 1 (01:09:41):
Peace out, take care, thank you.
Just like my love, everlastingas it goes on, still moving
strong.
All in all, do you ever wonder?
Got to win?
Somebody's got to lose?
I might as well get over it,just like fishing in the ocean,
(01:10:05):
there'll always be someone new.
You did me wrong, but I've beenthrough stormy weather.
I'm going to be frozen, justlike my love.
Everlasting Time to be good.
(01:10:25):
Son Gonna believe it.
Still moving strong, on and on.
Don't stop for nobody.
This time I keep my feet onsolid ground.
Now I understand myself.
Without Like the sweet sound ofhit music, There'll always be
(01:10:48):
something new To keep the tablesturning.
Hey, it's a song, but there'llnever be an ending.
It goes on.
Hey, yeah, just like my loverLasting.
There'll never be an ending.
The beat goes on.
Just like my lover Lasting, andthe beat goes on, still moving
(01:11:13):
strong, on and on.
The beat goes on.
The beat goes on.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.