Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Federal judge said earlier today he's found probable cause to
hold the Trump administration in contempt for failing to return
to planes deporting migrants to El Salvador last month. And
it was a forty eight page order that Judge James
(00:20):
Bozoberg said that the court had determined that the Trump
administration had demonstrated a wilful disregard for his emergency order. Now,
the wilful disregard is for you trying to bring criminals
back into this country. You more on, Judge, I don't understand.
It is clown world that we live in right now.
(00:40):
He's hosted for the defense and he's defense attorney. His
name is Brad Kopfel. So, yeah, you told me you
were like, look, I'm going to actually read. I guess
what that forty eight page order, correct? Is the thing
that you were Yeah.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
I've been following this, and you know, I've been familiar
with Judge Boseburg because let me give you guys, Let's
just give you the context. And these are facts. These
are nonpartisan, apolitical facts. But immigration, stifling the invasion at
the southern border was Trump's signature issue, and he invoked
(01:17):
the alien Enemies Act to get these folks out of here.
Speaker 3 (01:25):
That's the seventeen ninety eight wartime immigration law.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
Okay, but it's even more contemporary than that. That Act
actually is codified in federal laws. It's actually it's not
just some relic that a really smart lawyer in the
White House found. It's at the federal law and it
grants the president broad powers to detain, let make sure
(01:49):
you get my words right, relocate, or deport non citizens
from the nation deemed hostile during times of war specific threats.
The specific threats here would be called a predatory incursion.
That's the phrase of the operative phrase in this. So
(02:13):
we got this law in seventeen ninety eight because the
young Republic was still very vulnerable and President Adams and
many others, especially the Federalists, were very worried that political
folks would come in and try to turn us more
(02:33):
into a French colony. We were still very young, we
were building our military, and the French were putting a
a lot of people here and trying to get us
to be more French like. We invoked the Act then,
and then fourteen years later another president did it in
(02:56):
the War of eighteen twelve because the British were back.
They were trying to take over our country. And then
in World War One President Wilson invoked this act and
rounded up six thousand Germans and Hungarians and Austrian nationals.
And in World War Two, of course President FDR did
(03:19):
this with Germans, Italians and Japanese. These powers are almost original,
they go back to seventeen ninety eight. The goal here
is to put Tom Homan, Christy Numb or President Trump
in jail for criminal contempt of court. That sounds like
(03:41):
far fetch fantasy, it's actually what Bozburg's trying to do.
Here's what happened. Trump signs this executive warder on March fourteen.
It was enacted on March fifteen. The ACLU files a
lawsuit against Trump trying to get it and joined or
(04:02):
frozen or held off. They filed their lawsuit in the
middle of the night Friday night to Saturday morning in
District Court, DC District Court, the local rules and DC
District Court. For emergency filings like this, that goes to
an emergency judge who's on notation. Every Franklin county has it.
(04:25):
They're called duty judges. There's always a judge takes a
turn to handle these emergency matters. The local rules specifically
preclude the chief judge from being on emergency orders. Guess
who the chief judge is, Boseburg. Guess where Boseburg was
when this acl lawsuit was filed. He was vacationing. He
(04:50):
appeared virtually on a video conference and by his own
admission on the record, was at a beach.
Speaker 4 (04:58):
Hmm.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Senator Eric Schmidt just last week said told us that
Judge Bosberg was aware of this lawsuit was going to
be filed. Senator Schmidt also said that it's his understanding
that Judge Bosberg alerted the Clerk of Courts, Angela Caesar
(05:21):
with constructions that the case be routed to him are
skirting the rules. Also, we now know that Judge Bosberg's daughter,
Catherine Boseberg, is employed by Partners for Justice. This is
one of these nonprofits that's funded by USAID that is
(05:44):
getting these illegals here.
Speaker 3 (05:48):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (05:49):
Now, the founder of this nonprofit has publicly opposed legislation
such as the Lake and Riley Act. So let's make
sure you understand what's going on here. This judge's daughter
works for a nonprofit that works specifically to get these
(06:10):
illegals here, these human beings here, and the founder of
this nonprofit has vocally opposed the Lincoln Riley Act. And
the judge who's now holding Trump in contempt civil criminal
contemptive court is this woman's that it gets worse. This
(06:33):
was the presiding judge of the PHIAAC wort from twenty
fourteen to twenty twenty one. Okay, it gets even it
gets even worse. So Bozburg holds this hearing and he
tells the lawyers for Trump's administration Justice Department, he said,
(06:54):
get these planes turned around. I don't care where they are.
Get them turned around where I'm holding you in contempt. Well,
we all know lawyers know that court speak through their entries,
so it has to be reduced to writing and filed
with the clerk court. Those instructions never made it to
the written entry. But just Judge Bosberg is still holding
(07:18):
Trump's lawyers to his verbal orders even though it's not
in the actual entry.
Speaker 3 (07:24):
So that's not binding then, right, correct, Okay.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
But it gets worse. The Supreme Court that just Trump
administration appeals this emergency basis to the Supreme Court, arguing
this is filed in the wrong Court. There's no standing
to file this in DC. None of these people are
in d C. And the Supreme Court said you're right
(07:48):
and said, this case doesn't belong in DC court. It's
a different type of action called a habeas corpus and
it needs to be filed in Texas.
Speaker 3 (07:58):
And that was Roberts who did that, right, correct? Yeah,
Chief Justice, and okay.
Speaker 2 (08:02):
And so the Supreme Court just two weeks ago said,
forget about this Boseburg guy. He does he shouldn't even
be on the this case shouldn't even be in front
of him.
Speaker 3 (08:14):
So why is this starting again? Then?
Speaker 2 (08:16):
So Boseburg puts an order on to the ACOU saying, hey,
let me know by April sixteen if you have any
other ideas on how I can keep this case. That's today,
And in today's hearing he issues this decision saying you're
in contempt of my order, my verbal order to turn
(08:37):
these plans around.
Speaker 4 (08:40):
This is all kinds of not legit and how I
mean this is contempt of the Supreme Court. Justice Roberts's
opinion already stated you've gotten no place in this process,
and yet you continue to promote yourself within the process.
You are in contempt of the United States Supreme Court,
isn't you?
Speaker 3 (08:55):
Is that the way that you see it, Brad, what Chuckter.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
Said, right, decision Now, just as said of my war,
actually had the temerity to say that there's no ongoing war,
there's no declaration of work. That's true. But that's only
one prong of this act, this federal law. The other
is if there's been if there's been this incursion into
(09:24):
a predatory incursion into the United States, well, who gets
to define whether or not it's a predatory incursion? The
President of the United States. Article two, it's an Article
two our power, it's.
Speaker 3 (09:35):
An invasion power. Yeah, we're having an invasion.
Speaker 2 (09:38):
Right, I don't know what else you call ten to
fifteen to twenty million people entering the United States. And
by these we by the way, these aren't just the
housekeepers taking care of the judge's home in Georgetown, right, Okay,
these are bad people, right, even the president of El
Salvadore or Colombia, Venezuel Tayler. Yes, these guys, we don't
(10:02):
want them here. We don't want them back. And the
guys on the plane, they don't want to go back
to their home countries because they'll be killed, right?
Speaker 4 (10:09):
Does let me I gotta ask it? Doesn't it follow
here that if if this goes their way, then Donald
Trump is responsible, can be held liable if it does
not go their way? Though? Doesn't it follow then that
the Biden administration and everyone working under that president are
responsible for the encourage and the invasion that this president.
Shouldn't they be prosecuted at that point? Aren't you setting
(10:31):
that president in advance?
Speaker 2 (10:32):
I think what you do is you're going to have
to reverse engineer this. There are calls to impeach Bosberg.
Don't I've heard good arguments pro and con. I think
what's better is don't impeach them. Bring him into the Congress.
You can bring federal judges in for a little talking
to you swear them in, you can ask them questions.
(10:53):
But the American people, Congress on behalf of the American people.
We demand to know. Judge Boseburg, why do you have
this case? There's appearance of conflict of interest, appearance of partiality.
Your daughter works for the nonprofit.
Speaker 1 (11:12):
I'd say it's nonprofit, Brad, I'd say it's evidence, not
even appearance of.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
That right, and so you shouldn't even be on here,
and then the Supreme Court told you it's filed on
the wrong court, the case should be dismissed. But instead
of dismissing it, you invite the ACLU to come up
with some more arguments. And you were presided over the
Pisa Court from twenty fourteen to twenty twenty one. You
were behind crossfire, Hurricane. It goes on and on.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
The predatory incursion.
Speaker 1 (11:41):
Is now the definition of that going to be left
to Scotus or is that something that's already defined or
because it's almost like you kind of alluded to that
while you're or is that already that's not really any
kind of.
Speaker 3 (11:54):
A focus here.
Speaker 2 (11:54):
Well, the only time that that at the only time
that this hasn't I don't believe this has been litigated.
The closest thing was the bender FDR and the internment
of Japanese citizens, But the internment of one hundred and
twenty thousand Japanese citizens was not under this act. It
(12:16):
was under another Code section. So this Act has never
been declared non constitutional. But aside, the American people voted
for Donald Trump and his policies and his signature policy
was close the border, get the dangerous illegals out of
here first. Yet we have another we now haven't exposed,
(12:41):
my opinion, an exposed deep stater who is anti Trump,
anti MAGA, and is not doing anything to facilitate the
will of the voting public, and is doing really can
to get these cases. This is at least his fourth
(13:03):
case that's been randomly assigned to him. And I have
for anyone if you get into an argument with one
of your friends on this thing, when coincidence becomes regularity,
suspicion becomes reason. Exactly are we are reasonably suspicious because
(13:26):
of these regular coincidences involving Bozburg and everywhere we look
around USAID is behind this stuff and Soros is behind
this stuff. I believe this is why we had the
Act and acted in seventeen ninety eight. First it was
the French, then it was the British, Then it was
the Austrian, Hungarians, the Germans, the Japanese, the Italians, and
(13:49):
now it's the Central Americans who are bringing their gang
rape and torture to our country.
Speaker 1 (13:59):
Defense attorney, co host of for the Defense, Brad, this
is fascinating, man.
Speaker 3 (14:04):
We are out of time. Absolutely.
Speaker 1 (14:06):
I'm so so happy you could jump on and give
me some time today over this whole situation. This is
fascinating and clearly not even close to over, but this
is amazing.
Speaker 2 (14:21):
We're gonna we're gonna camp out on this one on
our show's weekend.
Speaker 1 (14:24):
Yeah for good, for sure man, absolutely, Brad, Thanks so much, man,
and uh yeah, we'll talk to you soon.
Speaker 3 (14:30):
Thanks brother. All right, see yeah, all right, oh my
contents
Federal judge said earlier today he's found probable cause to
hold the Trump administration in contempt for failing to return
to planes deporting migrants to El Salvador last month. And
it was a forty eight page order that Judge James
(00:20):
Bozoberg said that the court had determined that the Trump
administration had demonstrated a wilful disregard for his emergency order. Now,
the wilful disregard is for you trying to bring criminals
back into this country. You more on, Judge, I don't understand.
It is clown world that we live in right now.
(00:40):
He's hosted for the defense and he's defense attorney. His
name is Brad Kopfel. So, yeah, you told me you
were like, look, I'm going to actually read. I guess
what that forty eight page order, correct? Is the thing
that you were Yeah.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
I've been following this, and you know, I've been familiar
with Judge Boseburg because let me give you guys, Let's
just give you the context. And these are facts. These
are nonpartisan, apolitical facts. But immigration, stifling the invasion at
the southern border was Trump's signature issue, and he invoked
(01:17):
the alien Enemies Act to get these folks out of here.
Speaker 3 (01:25):
That's the seventeen ninety eight wartime immigration law.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
Okay, but it's even more contemporary than that. That Act
actually is codified in federal laws. It's actually it's not
just some relic that a really smart lawyer in the
White House found. It's at the federal law and it
grants the president broad powers to detain, let make sure
(01:49):
you get my words right, relocate, or deport non citizens
from the nation deemed hostile during times of war specific threats.
The specific threats here would be called a predatory incursion.
That's the phrase of the operative phrase in this. So
(02:13):
we got this law in seventeen ninety eight because the
young Republic was still very vulnerable and President Adams and
many others, especially the Federalists, were very worried that political
folks would come in and try to turn us more
(02:33):
into a French colony. We were still very young, we
were building our military, and the French were putting a
a lot of people here and trying to get us
to be more French like. We invoked the Act then,
and then fourteen years later another president did it in
(02:56):
the War of eighteen twelve because the British were back.
They were trying to take over our country. And then
in World War One President Wilson invoked this act and
rounded up six thousand Germans and Hungarians and Austrian nationals.
And in World War Two, of course President FDR did
(03:19):
this with Germans, Italians and Japanese. These powers are almost original,
they go back to seventeen ninety eight. The goal here
is to put Tom Homan, Christy Numb or President Trump
in jail for criminal contempt of court. That sounds like
(03:41):
far fetch fantasy, it's actually what Bozburg's trying to do.
Here's what happened. Trump signs this executive warder on March fourteen.
It was enacted on March fifteen. The ACLU files a
lawsuit against Trump trying to get it and joined or
(04:02):
frozen or held off. They filed their lawsuit in the
middle of the night Friday night to Saturday morning in
District Court, DC District Court, the local rules and DC
District Court. For emergency filings like this, that goes to
an emergency judge who's on notation. Every Franklin county has it.
(04:25):
They're called duty judges. There's always a judge takes a
turn to handle these emergency matters. The local rules specifically
preclude the chief judge from being on emergency orders. Guess
who the chief judge is, Boseburg. Guess where Boseburg was
when this acl lawsuit was filed. He was vacationing. He
(04:50):
appeared virtually on a video conference and by his own
admission on the record, was at a beach.
Speaker 4 (04:58):
Hmm.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Senator Eric Schmidt just last week said told us that
Judge Bosberg was aware of this lawsuit was going to
be filed. Senator Schmidt also said that it's his understanding
that Judge Bosberg alerted the Clerk of Courts, Angela Caesar
(05:21):
with constructions that the case be routed to him are
skirting the rules. Also, we now know that Judge Bosberg's daughter,
Catherine Boseberg, is employed by Partners for Justice. This is
one of these nonprofits that's funded by USAID that is
(05:44):
getting these illegals here.
Speaker 3 (05:48):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (05:49):
Now, the founder of this nonprofit has publicly opposed legislation
such as the Lake and Riley Act. So let's make
sure you understand what's going on here. This judge's daughter
works for a nonprofit that works specifically to get these
(06:10):
illegals here, these human beings here, and the founder of
this nonprofit has vocally opposed the Lincoln Riley Act. And
the judge who's now holding Trump in contempt civil criminal
contemptive court is this woman's that it gets worse. This
(06:33):
was the presiding judge of the PHIAAC wort from twenty
fourteen to twenty twenty one. Okay, it gets even it
gets even worse. So Bozburg holds this hearing and he
tells the lawyers for Trump's administration Justice Department, he said,
(06:54):
get these planes turned around. I don't care where they are.
Get them turned around where I'm holding you in contempt. Well,
we all know lawyers know that court speak through their entries,
so it has to be reduced to writing and filed
with the clerk court. Those instructions never made it to
the written entry. But just Judge Bosberg is still holding
(07:18):
Trump's lawyers to his verbal orders even though it's not
in the actual entry.
Speaker 3 (07:24):
So that's not binding then, right, correct, Okay.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
But it gets worse. The Supreme Court that just Trump
administration appeals this emergency basis to the Supreme Court, arguing
this is filed in the wrong Court. There's no standing
to file this in DC. None of these people are
in d C. And the Supreme Court said you're right
(07:48):
and said, this case doesn't belong in DC court. It's
a different type of action called a habeas corpus and
it needs to be filed in Texas.
Speaker 3 (07:58):
And that was Roberts who did that, right, correct? Yeah,
Chief Justice, and okay.
Speaker 2 (08:02):
And so the Supreme Court just two weeks ago said,
forget about this Boseburg guy. He does he shouldn't even
be on the this case shouldn't even be in front
of him.
Speaker 3 (08:14):
So why is this starting again? Then?
Speaker 2 (08:16):
So Boseburg puts an order on to the ACOU saying, hey,
let me know by April sixteen if you have any
other ideas on how I can keep this case. That's today,
And in today's hearing he issues this decision saying you're
in contempt of my order, my verbal order to turn
(08:37):
these plans around.
Speaker 4 (08:40):
This is all kinds of not legit and how I
mean this is contempt of the Supreme Court. Justice Roberts's
opinion already stated you've gotten no place in this process,
and yet you continue to promote yourself within the process.
You are in contempt of the United States Supreme Court,
isn't you?
Speaker 3 (08:55):
Is that the way that you see it, Brad, what Chuckter.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
Said, right, decision Now, just as said of my war,
actually had the temerity to say that there's no ongoing war,
there's no declaration of work. That's true. But that's only
one prong of this act, this federal law. The other
is if there's been if there's been this incursion into
(09:24):
a predatory incursion into the United States, well, who gets
to define whether or not it's a predatory incursion? The
President of the United States. Article two, it's an Article
two our power, it's.
Speaker 3 (09:35):
An invasion power. Yeah, we're having an invasion.
Speaker 2 (09:38):
Right, I don't know what else you call ten to
fifteen to twenty million people entering the United States. And
by these we by the way, these aren't just the
housekeepers taking care of the judge's home in Georgetown, right, Okay,
these are bad people, right, even the president of El
Salvadore or Colombia, Venezuel Tayler. Yes, these guys, we don't
(10:02):
want them here. We don't want them back. And the
guys on the plane, they don't want to go back
to their home countries because they'll be killed, right?
Speaker 4 (10:09):
Does let me I gotta ask it? Doesn't it follow
here that if if this goes their way, then Donald
Trump is responsible, can be held liable if it does
not go their way? Though? Doesn't it follow then that
the Biden administration and everyone working under that president are
responsible for the encourage and the invasion that this president.
Shouldn't they be prosecuted at that point? Aren't you setting
(10:31):
that president in advance?
Speaker 2 (10:32):
I think what you do is you're going to have
to reverse engineer this. There are calls to impeach Bosberg.
Don't I've heard good arguments pro and con. I think
what's better is don't impeach them. Bring him into the Congress.
You can bring federal judges in for a little talking
to you swear them in, you can ask them questions.
(10:53):
But the American people, Congress on behalf of the American people.
We demand to know. Judge Boseburg, why do you have
this case? There's appearance of conflict of interest, appearance of partiality.
Your daughter works for the nonprofit.
Speaker 1 (11:12):
I'd say it's nonprofit, Brad, I'd say it's evidence, not
even appearance of.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
That right, and so you shouldn't even be on here,
and then the Supreme Court told you it's filed on
the wrong court, the case should be dismissed. But instead
of dismissing it, you invite the ACLU to come up
with some more arguments. And you were presided over the
Pisa Court from twenty fourteen to twenty twenty one. You
were behind crossfire, Hurricane. It goes on and on.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
The predatory incursion.
Speaker 1 (11:41):
Is now the definition of that going to be left
to Scotus or is that something that's already defined or
because it's almost like you kind of alluded to that
while you're or is that already that's not really any
kind of.
Speaker 3 (11:54):
A focus here.
Speaker 2 (11:54):
Well, the only time that that at the only time
that this hasn't I don't believe this has been litigated.
The closest thing was the bender FDR and the internment
of Japanese citizens, But the internment of one hundred and
twenty thousand Japanese citizens was not under this act. It
(12:16):
was under another Code section. So this Act has never
been declared non constitutional. But aside, the American people voted
for Donald Trump and his policies and his signature policy
was close the border, get the dangerous illegals out of
here first. Yet we have another we now haven't exposed,
(12:41):
my opinion, an exposed deep stater who is anti Trump,
anti MAGA, and is not doing anything to facilitate the
will of the voting public, and is doing really can
to get these cases. This is at least his fourth
(13:03):
case that's been randomly assigned to him. And I have
for anyone if you get into an argument with one
of your friends on this thing, when coincidence becomes regularity,
suspicion becomes reason. Exactly are we are reasonably suspicious because
(13:26):
of these regular coincidences involving Bozburg and everywhere we look
around USAID is behind this stuff and Soros is behind
this stuff. I believe this is why we had the
Act and acted in seventeen ninety eight. First it was
the French, then it was the British, Then it was
the Austrian, Hungarians, the Germans, the Japanese, the Italians, and
(13:49):
now it's the Central Americans who are bringing their gang
rape and torture to our country.
Speaker 1 (13:59):
Defense attorney, co host of for the Defense, Brad, this
is fascinating, man.
Speaker 3 (14:04):
We are out of time. Absolutely.
Speaker 1 (14:06):
I'm so so happy you could jump on and give
me some time today over this whole situation. This is
fascinating and clearly not even close to over, but this
is amazing.
Speaker 2 (14:21):
We're gonna we're gonna camp out on this one on
our show's weekend.
Speaker 1 (14:24):
Yeah for good, for sure man, absolutely, Brad, Thanks so much, man,
and uh yeah, we'll talk to you soon.
Speaker 3 (14:30):
Thanks brother. All right, see yeah, all right, oh my
contents
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
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.
Intentionally Disturbing
Join me on this podcast as I navigate the murky waters of human behavior, current events, and personal anecdotes through in-depth interviews with incredible people—all served with a generous helping of sarcasm and satire. After years as a forensic and clinical psychologist, I offer a unique interview style and a low tolerance for bullshit, quickly steering conversations toward depth and darkness. I honor the seriousness while also appreciating wit. I’m your guide through the twisted labyrinth of the human psyche, armed with dark humor and biting wit.