December 5, 2025 • 34 mins
Ken Rosato fills in for Mark Simone. Zohran Mamdani wants to halt the clearing of homeless encampments when he takes office in January 2026. Ken also updates you on the latest developments in the United Healthcare CEO Luigi Mangione’s case: Mangione was scheduled for a fourth day in court for an evidence suppression hearing, but proceedings were postponed due to his illness. Ken takes your calls! Ken interviews Fox News Legal Analyst Gregg Jarrett. Together, they discuss concerns about United States circuit court judges stepping beyond their roles - making decisions based on politics rather than the law. Jarrett and Rosato analyze the implications of judicial activism and its impact on the legal system.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Now the Mark Simone Show on seven ten woor filling
in for Mark.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Here's Ken Rosato. That's a nice to be here. Happy Friday,
the end of the week here and Mark taking a
nice long weekend. This is Ken Rosotta, former New York
City TV news anchor on duty and proud to be here.
Thank you Mark, Thank you Wor for letting me sit
in the seat. Do you'd probably best remember me from
twenty years I spent anchoring the morning show at Channel seven,
(00:28):
and nowadays I host a daily show over on a
New Jersey based channel. You could see it everywhere though
it's called on New Jersey. You could stream it ATNNJ
dot com. And I also have a food website called
The Food Dude. You could catch that at Thefooddude dot us.
Thefooddude dot us absolutely free. Check out some holiday recipes.
(00:49):
Good to be with you. A lot to talk about today,
Give us a call take part one eight hundred three
two one zero seven ten one eight hundred three two
one zero s and ten. Well, it is certainly holiday
season in the city. You feel it everywhere just walking
down the street. Here today, coming into the studio to
do the work here, you got everything you got the
(01:11):
jingling in the air, and you got the decorations up everywhere.
It really does feel festive. Did you catch that Rockefeller
Center tree lighting the other night? Ten o'clock at night? Gosh,
I go to bed at like seven, so at ten
o'clock I had like one. I always saying, well, you
light the damn tree. For guys' say, just light it.
At least they call it a Christmas tree. Though I
give them credit for that. They call it a Christmas tree,
(01:33):
unlike what they did. Was it Minneapolis, the Minneapolis tree.
They just called the Minneapolis tree, the tree, the tree.
It's like, that's real, really into the spirit of the season, folks.
The tree is God forbid we offend anyone. Well, the
whole point of the tree came out of the season.
Oh right away, we're gonna have the people say, can
(01:55):
you know that's a pagan thing, the tree? Well, yes
and no, yes and no. There's a lot there's a
lot of symbolism behind the tree. Yes, it was not
a direct Christian thing. We could do a whole show
on the origins of the tree. But nonetheless it has
been adapted and adopted into the holiday. So it is
part of the holiday as part of tradition. So it's
(02:15):
okay we call it a Christmas tree. You don't have
to be an apologist for it. It's okay. You're not
calling it a Christmas tree to offend people who don't
celebrate Christmas. You're calling it a Christmas tree because guess what,
it's a Christmas tree. That's it. And honor and revere
and help celebrate everybody else's religion too. You're entitled to
whatever you have in your faith, and I applaud you,
(02:36):
and I would respect anything that you have in your
respective religion, just like we asked that you respect that
we have a Christmas tree. Done enough said on that. Okay, Hey,
it's seven ten wo r the Voice of New York.
Did you hear that the incoming mayor Mum Dunny says
now that he will stop all homeless encampment sweeps. Did
(03:00):
you realize what that means? That means that this time
next year you will be crawling over homeless people at
every intersection, because somehow he thinks that everybody has a
right to every inch of sidewalk in Manhattan. Oh, unless,
of course you're trying to be a capitalist. I'm sure
if you tried to sell something. Oh, no, he'll lock
you up for that. He'll give you fines. Because no,
(03:21):
we don't like capitalism. The city and the whole country
was built on it. No, but we don't like that.
But if you want to do drugs, drink, urinate on
your pants and your pants rather than do whatever else
to be disgusting in the city. And know the ninety
nine point nine percent of the homeless are not just
people who were working yesterday and today it can get
(03:41):
a check. There are some, of course, who are down
in their luck, and that does happen. But if you
ask anybody who deals with homeless on a regular basis,
the vast majority of people who are homeless have either
mental psychological problems and need help. And that's what we
should be doing, is helping that, okay, or they have
(04:01):
drug or alcohol addiction. Period. Very very tiny fraction of
a percent actually are homeless because mom and dad both
lost their jobs, They have the three kids, and they're
now living on the street. That does happen. Again, like
I said, but it's very very rare. But now under
incoming mayor Mom Donnie A note that I can pronounce
his name properly that he will stop all homeless encampment sweeps.
(04:26):
So naturally he doesn't have an answer for what's going
to happen. What are you gonna do when you're crawling
over homeless people? Is that the better thing? Is that
the more respectful thing to do for a human being
to let them wallow in their feces in the street
and step over them. I guess that's the better thing
that's in the minds of a socialist. That's the better
(04:46):
thing than to try to help them up and get
them some help. Seven ten w R the Voice of
New York. We want to hear from you. So that
number again is eight hundred three two one zero seven ten.
How about Maurice Dubois over CBS Evening News. I've met
Maurice probably a dozen times. Just a total gentleman, handsome
(05:07):
as all heck. As handsome as he looks on TV,
he's even more handsome in person, nice gentleman, and he
is just that a gentleman. I don't care about the
politics whatever. I don't even know what his politics are,
quite frankly, I can't really tell everyone. So Kenny's going
to be a Democrat. He's an anchor. Well, I was
an anchor. You all thought I was a liberal. You
had to see the stuff that I would get.
Speaker 3 (05:25):
You a liberal? Are you lefty?
Speaker 2 (05:27):
If they only knew, I would just sit there and
laugh when I get that stuff. I don't know where
Maurice stands politically, and that's the way it should be.
What I do know is he's a fantastic anchor, and
he is a fantastic person, and he is exiting CBS
and that leaves the CBS Evening News without anchors. They
were the only ones with an anchor team, and now
(05:49):
they're the only ones. And by the way, when I'm
talking about the CBS Evening News, I'm not talking about
Channel too Local. I'm talking about the network news that
goes on from six thirty to seven pm week nights.
That's the CBS Evening News. A lot of people confuse
Channel to Local with CBS Network co owned by the
same parent company, but run as two different entities. One
is national and one is just I say, just New
(06:11):
York nine percent of the population just New York. But nonetheless,
that will leave them from two anchors down to none.
Because John Dickerson announced that he was leaving at the
end of December sent CBS a few weeks ago had
two anchors. Now they will have none, literally in a
(06:31):
matter of weeks, so they better act fast. And no,
I'm not available for the record. I got stuff going
on in my life.
Speaker 4 (06:37):
Now.
Speaker 2 (06:37):
You could have called me a couple of years ago.
I had some free free time. Seven t w R
The Voice of New York. What do you think about
this pipe bomber arrest? Well, if you haven't heard a
suspect has been arrested in connection with the planting of
the pipe bombs, if you haven't checked news out for days.
The bombs were planted outside both the Democratic and Republican
(07:00):
National Committees back on the eve of the January sixth,
twenty twenty one Capitol riot. Now, mainstream legacy left wing
media has tried and tried and tried to paint the
guy who was arrested as either a right wing extremist
or a centrist because he planted bombs in front of
both locations, the Republican and Democrat National Committees. But it
(07:23):
turns out he's not a centrist and he certainly is
not a MAGA right winger. The suspect is a thirty
year old man who lived in his mommy and daddy's
basement in a beautiful suburb of d C. His name,
according to authorities, is Brian J. Cole Junior. He lived
with his parents in a lovely suburb of DC called Woodbridge, Virginia.
(07:45):
It's not too far outside of DC. You can make
it there in about half an hour. It's about twenty
miles out of Washington. Now, normally I wouldn't mention somebody's
race and connection with an arrest. We had a rule
when I was a Channel seven, Channel five, and anyway,
it's kind of standard. The only time you have to
you'd say somebody is black, Asian, white, is if it
is in connection with other identifying features. So if the
(08:08):
person had a scar under his left eye, brown eyes,
brown hair, six foot four, had a limp, and is black,
that's okay, because now that gives you somebody to look
for to say it's a black male. Now you're identifying
somebody as one of maybe a million people. So that's
not fair. And that's the way we had that as
a rule. Okay, Well, apparently CNN has has different rules.
(08:30):
Jacob Tapper and I say Jacob because that's what former
President obamb music call him Jacob Copper.
Speaker 5 (08:36):
Jacob Jacob.
Speaker 2 (08:38):
Jacob Tapper decided to describe the person as if he
were still on the loose when he was already under arrest,
and yesterday, Jacob Tapper at CNN breathlessly identified this January
sixth pipe bombing suspect as a thirty year old white man.
Speaker 6 (08:56):
Listen to this, Brian Cole Junior, a thirty year old
white man from the DC suburbs is charted with transporting
and explosive device in interstate commerce and with malicious destruction
by means of explosions. Seeing an observed local and federal
law enforcement outside his home in Woodbridge, Virginia this morning.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
Now, Okay, I don't care, white, black, green, Asian, doesn't
matter to me. The fact. The fact is this guy
is a suspect for planning pipe bomps. That's what he
suspected of doing. And you're innocent, un less proven guilty.
So I just want to make that clear here. Bottom
line is literally who was his producer? On the TV screen?
(09:35):
There is an image of the man who is clearly
African American, and you have Jacob Tapper voicing the story
as a thirty year old white man. It's like, who
are you going to believe me or your own lying eyes?
So right away you're thinking, either they're showing the wrong
video or whoever wrote Jacob Tapper's script is going to
have a meeting because that was wrong. But what's worse
(09:57):
is I didn't hear any correction later. Can you imagine
for a second if the reverse were true. Can you
imagine if the suspect arrested in an offense were white,
and that suspect were identified on the air as a
black man, then all you would hear is, oh, you're
(10:18):
trying to identify black with criminality. Right away, that's what
you'd hear. And you know what, they would be right.
They would be right, because it's wrong. If you're going
to mention somebody's race, you damn well better get it
right or else don't indict a whole race of people,
whether you're talking about black people, white people, or Asian
people or anyone else. But it seems that for CNN
(10:41):
and many in mainstream media, if you're indicting white people,
it's okay because Whites and Christians throw them under the bus.
You know, they got away with so much over the years.
Who really cares well, it turns out that thirty year
old so called white man is a thirty year old
black man. The color has no consequence. He comes from
(11:03):
a very nice background. He comes from a wealthy suburb,
wealthy parents. His dad owns a bail bond's business. He
deals with a lot of money. His mom is also professional,
but he still hasn't launched at thirty. He's living with
his folks, although he worked for his dad. His picture
was released to the press when Jake Tapper was doing
(11:24):
the story, which makes you scratch your head and wonder
who wrote this story and why and how do they
get it so wrong? It's crazy anyway. Brian Cole Junior
is considered not a right wing maga guy, but an
activist for the left. He is a radical anti Trump warrior.
He has sued Trump, Ice, and the Department of Homeland
(11:44):
Security for quote racial injustice. He generally has been known
to support BLM style causes. He's also the bail bond
business that his father runs is specifically there to help
bail out illegal aliens. That's what they do. So they
are very much anti Ice, anti Homeland Security in many ways, etc.
(12:07):
These are far leftist people. They are not moderates. They're
not in the middle of the road. They're not Republicans.
These are leftists. So you wonder why the Biden FBI
for four years, who had the information about this guy,
they knew that he was out there, they never bothered
to investigate. No, for the Biden FBI, it was more
(12:28):
important to hunt down parents who show up at school
board meetings complaining that their little girls have to get
naked in the shower next to a biological male who
thinks that day that they're a woman. Those are the
parents that need to be identified by the FBI and investigated.
Little old ladies on their knees four blocks away from
an abortion clinic praying the Rosary and begging God that
(12:51):
somebody changes their mind about having an abortion, Those are
the people that the FBI needed to investigate because they
pose a threat to humanity. Roman Catholics who like the
true Latin Mass and prey in Latin because the Church
has done that for two thousand fricking years, those are
the people will have to be investigated. But yet a
guy who has all these ties to radical causes, etc.
(13:14):
And whose family actually bails out illegal aliens. Now the
FBI says, leave them alone. We're not going to investigate them,
even though even though they had evidence they had pings
from the guy's cell phone. They claim the FBI they
had pings putting him in the location of both the
Republican National Committee and the Democrat National Committee at the
(13:36):
time the pipe bombs were planted. So that should have
been something that at least should have been looked into
by the FBI. But amazingly, either they didn't do it,
or they did it and it didn't fit the narrative,
so they chose not to do anything about it. Well,
believe me, this will be looked into now because this
guy was floating out there potentially posing a threat for
(13:57):
four years and it didn't have to be that way.
Eight hundred three two one zero seven ten, eight hundred
three to two to one zero seven ten. Give us
a call, let us know what you're thinking. Luigi man
Joni's High Stay court hearing resumed yesterday, but we just
find out now that he will not be in court today.
Apparently he's a little under the weather. Either his eyebrows
(14:17):
needed trimming or something, but he wasn't feeling well. Poor Luigi. Yeah,
it was okay, he was feeling well enough a year
ago allegedly to allegedly shoot somebody dead, a father and
a husband. He was feeling well enough then, but he
has Tommy Acre or something. Should we have to let
poor Luigi rest up today? Yeah, it was already a
year this week that he allegedly murdered United Healthcare CEO
(14:40):
Brian Thompson literally blocks from where I'm sitting here in
midtown Manhattan. So now the big theory here now. And
we heard about this on MENTI in the morning too.
It's amazing that the defense is trying to get the
case thrown out on technicalities about the reading of the
Miranda laws and when you have We're going to talk
(15:01):
with Greg Jarrett, who's the legal and political consultant over
it the Fox News Channel. You've seen Greg on the
air a million times, I'm sure, and Greg is an attorney.
He's going to talk about when you have to and
when you don't have to read Miranda rights to somebody.
If somebody volunteers information or in the process of an arrest,
say they have a backpack and something evidence falls out
(15:23):
and it happens accidentally but not and you hadn't yet
read the Miranda Rights. A lawyer will tell you the
details there. At that point, it's okay. It's most lawyers
will tell you that's admissible evidence at that point. If, however,
you stop somebody randomly on the street without reading Miranda Rights,
and you haven't announced their arrest and you start rifling
through their stuff and you find something illegal, that's a
(15:45):
whole different story. That's sort of the way the defense
is trying to paint this right now. So we'll see
what happens. We'll talk to the expert, Greg Jarrett about
that in just a little bit. Seven ten wore the
Voice of New York. It is cold. As every free
analogy I have I can't say on the radio. Let's
just suffice to say it's very very cold out there.
(16:06):
And if you haven't got out yet, make sure you
bundle up because you're gonna need to. And it's gonna
be that way through the day today. Some sun this morning,
it's gonna lead to some clouds later on in the day,
highs only in the upper twenties, then more clouds than
sun tomorrow and Sunday, highs both days only in the
upper thirties. And no, it's not yet even officially winter,
(16:29):
so once again, in just a bit, we'll talk to
Fox News legal analyst Greg Jarrett. The time now is
ten twenty one WR. We're coming right back.
Speaker 1 (16:36):
This is the Mark Simone Show on seven to ten WR.
Ken from Mark Today, here's Ken Rosato.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
And we'll go straight to our busy phone Steve in Manhattan.
You're live on the air Friday morning.
Speaker 4 (16:49):
Good morning to you, right, Ken, and it's great to
have you. When you fill it from off, it's really good.
The thing is about Luigi Mangioni. I know this. They
love using his name, but people just don't want to
use the names. Like the guy who shot the two
godsmen last week and murdered one of them, Lockingwall is
(17:09):
his name. They never hear them use his name. His
name is out of the cycle. There's also a lunatic
back in June, people forgetting both the Colorado he fired
bombed a bunch of old ladies that was mohammed Soilman
and even murdering one of the old ladies with a
fire bomb. You never hear his name repeated out. It
just seems to be a frenzy with this guy Luigi's
name going on, and even with the guys who shot
(17:32):
shot at Trump, Matthew Crooks. They don't say his name really.
Even with the Bomba, they called him the Bomba or
the you know, the alleged bomber and stuff. They won't
use his name. I find that to be not weird,
but I find it to be something in society that
I know a lot of Italian Americans, an anti Italian
American thing, were they get into a frenzy. You say
(17:53):
this guy's name, but the guy who shot the godsmen
don't even know the guy's name.
Speaker 2 (17:58):
Remember, I gotta pause only because we only have about
thirty seconds left to break to the bottom of the
hour here. But just to let you know, part of
it is, I think, is the fact that it's Luigi
Mangoni and he looks like the character from Luigi Brothers
and whatnot. And I think they've made fun of that.
Not that we're talking about a guy who's attempted or
(18:19):
i'm sorry, an alleged murderer here, but you know, just
that's part of it. I think you're not wrong. I
get it. It's like if if somebody is in a
large group of people, they're easier to poke fun at,
and so We've had a lot of people poke fun
at Italian Americans, and yet Italian Americans don't push back
as much. I get it. I see what you're saying,
and you're not wrong there. But I will say I
(18:40):
have been mentioning those other names myself. It all depends
on the individual. I think it's easier to say Luigi
Mangoni than it is to say some of the other names.
For a lot of the announcers, it's lazy, but I
think that may be the simple answer as to why
the other names don't get mentioned as much. We go
over to Frank in Manhattan.
Speaker 5 (18:59):
Good morning, Yeah, good morning. I'm with into Borrow h
for a outreach organization, no profit, and we did a
survey of Bronx Manhattan, Brooklyn of an average of eight
hundred plus people who appear homeless, and we did it
on tape and we did it written down, and out
(19:20):
of it we realized one critical thing that at least
ten to fifteen percent of them are homeless for two reasons.
First of all, they have very very low incomes, they're
not employable because of age of disability, and some are
vets and the number of apartments available if you have
an apartment. Good luck if you don't. But your characterization
that it's a very rare thing that people are homeless
(19:41):
for lack of money or whatever, other parents died or whatever,
that's very inaccurate. And there's no coach drives by the
way for the homeless. They stopped that this year.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
I don't know what, but frank here, with all due respect,
I could cite about six different surveys that show just
the opposite. And we've done this. I worked at Channel
seven twenty years. We used to have these study year
after year after year, you know, and with all due respect,
I mean, anyone could call and say, we did a survey,
we have it on tape. Well, let's see the tape.
You know, when you see people wallowing in urine in
(20:11):
the street, and by the way, you could very well have, sadly,
a veteran who is also you know, you could put
the two together. You could have a veteran who is
a drug addict who is on the street. So just
because I'm saying they are a drug addict, they could
be a veteran who is a drug addict. And that
is a shame that a society we have let this happen.
But to say that we have just the average mom,
(20:32):
dad's son. You know what, I've lived in and around Manhattan.
I'm fifty eight years old. I don't see the nice,
neat little family on the street that you're trying to
talk about and trying to paint the picture of Sorry,
just doesn't exist, or at least not in the numbers
you're talking about. Robin Franklin Square, good morning.
Speaker 7 (20:47):
Hey, good morning. I'm sorry. You know, I'm a retired
try police officer and tried the police officer, and I
just I kind of disagree with you a little bit. Invariably,
when the perpetrator commits a crime, if the perpetrate, they'll
(21:08):
put a description over the air like say five ten,
one hundred eighty pounds and local news channel seven to
and four, sometimes the network a lot of times in
the paper like NEWSDAYA. I get if they don't put
the if you put just put up a descriptions like that,
that's three hundred and fifty million people. Now, you said,
if you say if the person is black, you're categorizing
(21:31):
them as it like one in a million people. But
a description like that is kind of useless, right, If
you're putting the description over the air.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
I got to put the rob I gotta cutch you
because it's ten thirty three, it's time for news. But
I'm just to clarify. I'm not saying you're wrong there.
What I'm saying is if you only have a description
in years ago. I remember when I started in TV
news in the market, if sometimes you would have we're
looking for twenty four year old African American men. That
is not fair because there could be one hundred twenty
(22:01):
four year old African American men. Every one of them
is going to get stopped. But if you say you
have a twenty four year old African American man with
a scar underneath his left eye, he has hazel eyes,
and he has dreads and he's about five 't ten
and wearing brown pants, that is a description to look for, Okay,
And that's where you're talking about, you know, clarification. I'm
(22:22):
not trying to go down that path. All I'm saying
is it was unusual to me that CNN simply had
the description that was read was a white guy who's thirty,
you know, but we already had his picture on and
he wasn't a white guy and didn't even look thirty
by the way, but we're showing his picture and saying
the wrong thing. Clearly somebody got it wrong at CNN,
(22:44):
and I'm just saying I didn't get an apology or
didn't hear an apology from them, and I think they
should clarify. Seven ten WR at the time now is
ten thirty three, and coming up next, we're going to
speak with Fox News legal analyst Greg Jarrett.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
Now more of the marximone Show on seven in woor
Filling in from Mark here again is Ken Rosado.
Speaker 2 (23:05):
And good to be with you on your Friday. He
is a news commentator, author at attorney who serves as
a legal and political analyst on Fox News Channel. He
spent many years himself as an anchor and a trial lawyer.
Busy man, we say good morning to you, Greg Jarretty.
Speaker 3 (23:20):
Cam good to be with you. Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (23:22):
Yeah, I've been a huge fan, by the way, forever
I've been you know, I was on Channel seven for
twenty years, but I always watched you guys over at
Fox News Channel and I'm a huge, huge fan. So
I'm a little star. Start forgive me, forgive me little
shaken here, Greg, First off, how serious is it. Let's
talk about the Jack Smith subpoena. How serious is the
Jack Smith subpoena for all? Is it all for show?
(23:43):
Do you think you think there's a shot that we're
actually going to see a conviction and jail time.
Speaker 3 (23:48):
Out of all this, Well, it's too early to make
that prediction, but I will say that there is a
grand jury convenient Florida. Some thirty subpoenas apparently have go
on out among them Jack Smith as special Council, and
they're looking into an ongoing criminal conspiracy how government officials
(24:12):
weaponized the law classic sort of lawfare against Trump or
anybody in his orbit. And with respect to Jack Smith,
they're looking into the two federal criminal cases he brought
against Trump in both Florida and Washington, d C. Those
were dismissed. But this Arctic Frost investigation that included, you know,
(24:39):
secretly surreptitiously obtaining phone records of members of Congress, including
United States senators, and then seeking a court order from
Judge James Bosberg in Washington to defy the law and
not notify the members of Congress that their records were
(25:01):
being seized and studied. You know, there's a provision in
the federal statutes that if you're going to do that,
you have to give those people notice. And they didn't
do that, and Bozforg signed off on it, so you
know there this is an investigation into Jack Smith's conduct
(25:23):
and whether it crossed the line into criminality.
Speaker 2 (25:27):
Seven to ten, wo are the Voice of New York.
This is the Marx Simone Show. Ken Rossano went from
Mark on a Friday along with Greg Jarrett from Fox
News Channel. Look, it is amazing how much arrogance we
see from Judge Boseburg. And the question is do you
have the authority of the judicial branch running a muck
(25:50):
right now? Because to see every little US district judge
imparting their opinion where it's going to end up getting overturned.
It seems almost every case it gets overturned by the
Supreme Court. Who has authority over them? Is it the
Justice Department? Is it the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court?
Or does Congress have to step in? We have three
(26:12):
co equal branches, so I guess that gets a little
harry there, But at some point we have to say enough,
we have an executive in charge right now, who is elected,
who's doing the constitutional job that he has. Why do
these US district judges get in the way every step
of the way.
Speaker 3 (26:29):
Well, I think because they have, in the age of Trump,
politicized their positions, and you know, they are no longer
many of them making rulings based on the law rather
on politics. And you know, both Brigant particular has been
slapped down repeatedly by the Supreme Court. In one notable case,
(26:54):
he's surped the power of Texas jurisdiction by issuing immigration
deportation ruling that he had no power to make, and
you know, the Spring Court told him so. Both were
nevertheless persists. But I think the most important authority is
(27:17):
indeed the Supreme Court and the seminal ruling they issued
Long Overdue several months ago, when the High Court finally said,
you know, district court judges are not empowered to issue
nationwide injunctions. They have authority over their small districts and
(27:39):
that's it. And so I think that, as I say,
Long Overdue is helping to rein in all of these
injunctions that have been issued. You know, why should a
judge in say San Jose, California, be able to issue
an injunction that affects the entire nation. The Supreme Court
(28:02):
said you can't. You're exceeding your authority, and they should
have done it a long time ago.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
Greg. I think in many cases, so many of these
judges know that they're going to be overturned, but yet
they go ahead and make their order. It's like they're
trying to throw an impediment just to slow things down.
Why can't they get slapped for that? If it can
be proven that the judge is clearly acting above and
beyond their jurisdiction, then is there any kind of consequence
(28:30):
for the judge? Will there be any kind of punishment?
I mean, two three strikes, you're out. You do that
two or three times, we're going to have you remove
from the bench at some point. I think if that
happens to one judge, then they won't be issuing these silly,
frivolous rulings.
Speaker 3 (28:47):
The only way to remove a federal judge constitutionally is
through impeachment, and it's the same standards that apply to
other top federal officials, including the President of the United States.
Trees and bribery, high crimes, and misdemeanors. And the last
section is sort of fungible. What does that really mean?
(29:08):
It can mean anything. And in fact, in the past,
over the last two or fifty years, you know, there
have been federal judges who have been impeached for deliberately
abusing and misusing the law. But you know, it's a
very difficult thing to do. You know, it used to
(29:32):
be that federal district court judges would make decisions not
only based on the law, but with an eye to
getting overturned, and nobody wanted to get overturned, so they
were cautious in their ruling. So all of that is
now gone. And you know, I think people like Bozburg
know they're going to get overturned, but they do it
anyway because you know, they're stricken with a severe psychopathology
(29:59):
called Trump Arrangement syndrome PDSs, and you know, and they
just can't help themselves.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
Yeah, clearly. And it's just so infuriating because you would
think that if you're in that position, you understand the
law better than others, and instead it feels like he
is playing us with the law more than others. With
just about a minute left, and I know that should
we should be giving you more time on this, but
in the Luigi Mangoni murder trial. I've had heard so
(30:25):
many bad arguments on behalf of Mangoni regarding when when
he was read as Miranda, riots, etc. In this case, though,
the argument is that some of this evidence could be
thrown out by the judge. What is your opinion on
what you're hearing?
Speaker 3 (30:38):
Well, I doubt it will happen.
Speaker 5 (30:40):
You know.
Speaker 3 (30:40):
Look, it's a standard move by defense attorneys and I
used to do it as a trial attorney myself. Is
you challenge the seizure of evidence that's incriminating and try
to get it tossed out under the Fourth Amendment unreasonable
search and seizure. Most of the time it doesn't succeed.
And here for example, you know the arresting officers, you
(31:04):
know looked into the bag. Well, they they have to.
You know, the gun, the manifesto was in the bag,
highly incriminating. They had to do that. When you take
somebody into custody, you know, you pap them down to
make sure they don't have a weapon. And you know,
in this particular case, looking inside his backpack was merited.
You know, you don't know if he's got a weapon
(31:25):
or a bumb In fact, he did have a weapon
in that bag, so I think that'll survive scrutiny and
in the end be admissible evidence.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
There you go, all right. Fox News Channel legal and
political analyst Greg Jarrett, thank you so much for coming
on this morning. Happy holidays.
Speaker 3 (31:41):
Do you thank you same to you can't thanks appreciate it.
Speaker 2 (31:45):
Seven ten wore the Voice of New York. Our number
is eight hundred three to two one zero seven ten.
Eight hundred three to two one zero seven ten. We're
going to take your calls next year. Seven ten wo R.
This is the Mark Simone Show on seven ten. Ken
from today, Here's Ken Rosado and good to be with
you on your Friday. The phone lines are open. We
(32:06):
have a couple of minutes left here for the hour.
Eight hundred three to two one zero seven ten, eight
hundred three to two one zero seven ten. Did you
hear Stephen A. Smith yesterday who was on the on
the View? Uh and uh listen listen to what he
had to say. Just listen to the energy too. And
he had a back and forth with Sonny hoston. I
think he put her in her place. Listen up.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
I'd love to give you the opportunity to perhaps change
your position on what you say.
Speaker 4 (32:31):
I'm not changing the thing you want.
Speaker 2 (32:33):
To say loud and wrong.
Speaker 4 (32:35):
Well you could call it loud and wrong all you
want it. You're entitled to your opinion.
Speaker 2 (32:37):
I'm entitled to mott yes. And so this is Stephen A. Smith.
First of all, Sonny Hosten was quite a bit I
think obnoxious to him, the attitude that what Steven A.
Smith has an opinion that differs from you, So you're
telling him he's wrong and he has the opportunity now
to correct himself. Come on, Sonny, that's unfair. I mean,
Steven A. Smith has about five hundred times your audience
(32:58):
for a reason because he he's a smart man. He
knows what he's talking about. But it's just there's a
certain arrogance. I still I don't understand why anybody would
agree to go on The View today. God bless anybody
who can put up with the cackling for an hour.
But it's it's just it's amazing to me that somebody
would be that arrogant. Can you imagine for a second
(33:19):
if there were a mail who were sitting on that
set as an anchor, and Sonny Hostin were the guest,
and Sunny hostin were told by that mail anchor, let
me give you the opportunity to correct yourself, that man
would immediately be accused of mansplaining immediately, total double standard.
(33:40):
By the way, what we were talking about was Senator Kelly,
who may have put his foot in his mouth, by
the way, and could be in big trouble because of
allegedly leaking classifying information. We'll get into more detail in
the next hour about this, but apparently when he made
his commentary about the bombing of that Narco boat, he
allegedly let some information out that may have been classified
(34:02):
at the time. Seven ten WR the Voice of New York.
This is Ken Rozotto Win from Mark and we'll be
back after the news
Now the Mark Simone Show on seven ten woor filling
in for Mark.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Here's Ken Rosato. That's a nice to be here. Happy Friday,
the end of the week here and Mark taking a
nice long weekend. This is Ken Rosotta, former New York
City TV news anchor on duty and proud to be here.
Thank you Mark, Thank you Wor for letting me sit
in the seat. Do you'd probably best remember me from
twenty years I spent anchoring the morning show at Channel seven,
(00:28):
and nowadays I host a daily show over on a
New Jersey based channel. You could see it everywhere though
it's called on New Jersey. You could stream it ATNNJ
dot com. And I also have a food website called
The Food Dude. You could catch that at Thefooddude dot us.
Thefooddude dot us absolutely free. Check out some holiday recipes.
(00:49):
Good to be with you. A lot to talk about today,
Give us a call take part one eight hundred three
two one zero seven ten one eight hundred three two
one zero s and ten. Well, it is certainly holiday
season in the city. You feel it everywhere just walking
down the street. Here today, coming into the studio to
do the work here, you got everything you got the
(01:11):
jingling in the air, and you got the decorations up everywhere.
It really does feel festive. Did you catch that Rockefeller
Center tree lighting the other night? Ten o'clock at night? Gosh,
I go to bed at like seven, so at ten
o'clock I had like one. I always saying, well, you
light the damn tree. For guys' say, just light it.
At least they call it a Christmas tree. Though I
give them credit for that. They call it a Christmas tree,
(01:33):
unlike what they did. Was it Minneapolis, the Minneapolis tree.
They just called the Minneapolis tree, the tree, the tree.
It's like, that's real, really into the spirit of the season, folks.
The tree is God forbid we offend anyone. Well, the
whole point of the tree came out of the season.
Oh right away, we're gonna have the people say, can
(01:55):
you know that's a pagan thing, the tree? Well, yes
and no, yes and no. There's a lot there's a
lot of symbolism behind the tree. Yes, it was not
a direct Christian thing. We could do a whole show
on the origins of the tree. But nonetheless it has
been adapted and adopted into the holiday. So it is
part of the holiday as part of tradition. So it's
(02:15):
okay we call it a Christmas tree. You don't have
to be an apologist for it. It's okay. You're not
calling it a Christmas tree to offend people who don't
celebrate Christmas. You're calling it a Christmas tree because guess what,
it's a Christmas tree. That's it. And honor and revere
and help celebrate everybody else's religion too. You're entitled to
whatever you have in your faith, and I applaud you,
(02:36):
and I would respect anything that you have in your
respective religion, just like we asked that you respect that
we have a Christmas tree. Done enough said on that. Okay, Hey,
it's seven ten wo r the Voice of New York.
Did you hear that the incoming mayor Mum Dunny says
now that he will stop all homeless encampment sweeps. Did
(03:00):
you realize what that means? That means that this time
next year you will be crawling over homeless people at
every intersection, because somehow he thinks that everybody has a
right to every inch of sidewalk in Manhattan. Oh, unless,
of course you're trying to be a capitalist. I'm sure
if you tried to sell something. Oh, no, he'll lock
you up for that. He'll give you fines. Because no,
(03:21):
we don't like capitalism. The city and the whole country
was built on it. No, but we don't like that.
But if you want to do drugs, drink, urinate on
your pants and your pants rather than do whatever else
to be disgusting in the city. And know the ninety
nine point nine percent of the homeless are not just
people who were working yesterday and today it can get
(03:41):
a check. There are some, of course, who are down
in their luck, and that does happen. But if you
ask anybody who deals with homeless on a regular basis,
the vast majority of people who are homeless have either
mental psychological problems and need help. And that's what we
should be doing, is helping that, okay, or they have
(04:01):
drug or alcohol addiction. Period. Very very tiny fraction of
a percent actually are homeless because mom and dad both
lost their jobs, They have the three kids, and they're
now living on the street. That does happen. Again, like
I said, but it's very very rare. But now under
incoming mayor Mom Donnie A note that I can pronounce
his name properly that he will stop all homeless encampment sweeps.
(04:26):
So naturally he doesn't have an answer for what's going
to happen. What are you gonna do when you're crawling
over homeless people? Is that the better thing? Is that
the more respectful thing to do for a human being
to let them wallow in their feces in the street
and step over them. I guess that's the better thing
that's in the minds of a socialist. That's the better
(04:46):
thing than to try to help them up and get
them some help. Seven ten w R the Voice of
New York. We want to hear from you. So that
number again is eight hundred three two one zero seven ten.
How about Maurice Dubois over CBS Evening News. I've met
Maurice probably a dozen times. Just a total gentleman, handsome
(05:07):
as all heck. As handsome as he looks on TV,
he's even more handsome in person, nice gentleman, and he
is just that a gentleman. I don't care about the
politics whatever. I don't even know what his politics are,
quite frankly, I can't really tell everyone. So Kenny's going
to be a Democrat. He's an anchor. Well, I was
an anchor. You all thought I was a liberal. You
had to see the stuff that I would get.
Speaker 3 (05:25):
You a liberal? Are you lefty?
Speaker 2 (05:27):
If they only knew, I would just sit there and
laugh when I get that stuff. I don't know where
Maurice stands politically, and that's the way it should be.
What I do know is he's a fantastic anchor, and
he is a fantastic person, and he is exiting CBS
and that leaves the CBS Evening News without anchors. They
were the only ones with an anchor team, and now
(05:49):
they're the only ones. And by the way, when I'm
talking about the CBS Evening News, I'm not talking about
Channel too Local. I'm talking about the network news that
goes on from six thirty to seven pm week nights.
That's the CBS Evening News. A lot of people confuse
Channel to Local with CBS Network co owned by the
same parent company, but run as two different entities. One
is national and one is just I say, just New
(06:11):
York nine percent of the population just New York. But nonetheless,
that will leave them from two anchors down to none.
Because John Dickerson announced that he was leaving at the
end of December sent CBS a few weeks ago had
two anchors. Now they will have none, literally in a
(06:31):
matter of weeks, so they better act fast. And no,
I'm not available for the record. I got stuff going
on in my life.
Speaker 4 (06:37):
Now.
Speaker 2 (06:37):
You could have called me a couple of years ago.
I had some free free time. Seven t w R
The Voice of New York. What do you think about
this pipe bomber arrest? Well, if you haven't heard a
suspect has been arrested in connection with the planting of
the pipe bombs, if you haven't checked news out for days.
The bombs were planted outside both the Democratic and Republican
(07:00):
National Committees back on the eve of the January sixth,
twenty twenty one Capitol riot. Now, mainstream legacy left wing
media has tried and tried and tried to paint the
guy who was arrested as either a right wing extremist
or a centrist because he planted bombs in front of
both locations, the Republican and Democrat National Committees. But it
(07:23):
turns out he's not a centrist and he certainly is
not a MAGA right winger. The suspect is a thirty
year old man who lived in his mommy and daddy's
basement in a beautiful suburb of d C. His name,
according to authorities, is Brian J. Cole Junior. He lived
with his parents in a lovely suburb of DC called Woodbridge, Virginia.
(07:45):
It's not too far outside of DC. You can make
it there in about half an hour. It's about twenty
miles out of Washington. Now, normally I wouldn't mention somebody's
race and connection with an arrest. We had a rule
when I was a Channel seven, Channel five, and anyway,
it's kind of standard. The only time you have to
you'd say somebody is black, Asian, white, is if it
is in connection with other identifying features. So if the
(08:08):
person had a scar under his left eye, brown eyes,
brown hair, six foot four, had a limp, and is black,
that's okay, because now that gives you somebody to look
for to say it's a black male. Now you're identifying
somebody as one of maybe a million people. So that's
not fair. And that's the way we had that as
a rule. Okay, Well, apparently CNN has has different rules.
(08:30):
Jacob Tapper and I say Jacob because that's what former
President obamb music call him Jacob Copper.
Speaker 5 (08:36):
Jacob Jacob.
Speaker 2 (08:38):
Jacob Tapper decided to describe the person as if he
were still on the loose when he was already under arrest,
and yesterday, Jacob Tapper at CNN breathlessly identified this January
sixth pipe bombing suspect as a thirty year old white man.
Speaker 6 (08:56):
Listen to this, Brian Cole Junior, a thirty year old
white man from the DC suburbs is charted with transporting
and explosive device in interstate commerce and with malicious destruction
by means of explosions. Seeing an observed local and federal
law enforcement outside his home in Woodbridge, Virginia this morning.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
Now, Okay, I don't care, white, black, green, Asian, doesn't
matter to me. The fact. The fact is this guy
is a suspect for planning pipe bomps. That's what he
suspected of doing. And you're innocent, un less proven guilty.
So I just want to make that clear here. Bottom
line is literally who was his producer? On the TV screen?
(09:35):
There is an image of the man who is clearly
African American, and you have Jacob Tapper voicing the story
as a thirty year old white man. It's like, who
are you going to believe me or your own lying eyes?
So right away you're thinking, either they're showing the wrong
video or whoever wrote Jacob Tapper's script is going to
have a meeting because that was wrong. But what's worse
(09:57):
is I didn't hear any correction later. Can you imagine
for a second if the reverse were true. Can you
imagine if the suspect arrested in an offense were white,
and that suspect were identified on the air as a
black man, then all you would hear is, oh, you're
(10:18):
trying to identify black with criminality. Right away, that's what
you'd hear. And you know what, they would be right.
They would be right, because it's wrong. If you're going
to mention somebody's race, you damn well better get it
right or else don't indict a whole race of people,
whether you're talking about black people, white people, or Asian
people or anyone else. But it seems that for CNN
(10:41):
and many in mainstream media, if you're indicting white people,
it's okay because Whites and Christians throw them under the bus.
You know, they got away with so much over the years.
Who really cares well, it turns out that thirty year
old so called white man is a thirty year old
black man. The color has no consequence. He comes from
(11:03):
a very nice background. He comes from a wealthy suburb,
wealthy parents. His dad owns a bail bond's business. He
deals with a lot of money. His mom is also professional,
but he still hasn't launched at thirty. He's living with
his folks, although he worked for his dad. His picture
was released to the press when Jake Tapper was doing
(11:24):
the story, which makes you scratch your head and wonder
who wrote this story and why and how do they
get it so wrong? It's crazy anyway. Brian Cole Junior
is considered not a right wing maga guy, but an
activist for the left. He is a radical anti Trump warrior.
He has sued Trump, Ice, and the Department of Homeland
(11:44):
Security for quote racial injustice. He generally has been known
to support BLM style causes. He's also the bail bond
business that his father runs is specifically there to help
bail out illegal aliens. That's what they do. So they
are very much anti Ice, anti Homeland Security in many ways, etc.
(12:07):
These are far leftist people. They are not moderates. They're
not in the middle of the road. They're not Republicans.
These are leftists. So you wonder why the Biden FBI
for four years, who had the information about this guy,
they knew that he was out there, they never bothered
to investigate. No, for the Biden FBI, it was more
(12:28):
important to hunt down parents who show up at school
board meetings complaining that their little girls have to get
naked in the shower next to a biological male who
thinks that day that they're a woman. Those are the
parents that need to be identified by the FBI and investigated.
Little old ladies on their knees four blocks away from
an abortion clinic praying the Rosary and begging God that
(12:51):
somebody changes their mind about having an abortion, Those are
the people that the FBI needed to investigate because they
pose a threat to humanity. Roman Catholics who like the
true Latin Mass and prey in Latin because the Church
has done that for two thousand fricking years, those are
the people will have to be investigated. But yet a
guy who has all these ties to radical causes, etc.
(13:14):
And whose family actually bails out illegal aliens. Now the
FBI says, leave them alone. We're not going to investigate them,
even though even though they had evidence they had pings
from the guy's cell phone. They claim the FBI they
had pings putting him in the location of both the
Republican National Committee and the Democrat National Committee at the
(13:36):
time the pipe bombs were planted. So that should have
been something that at least should have been looked into
by the FBI. But amazingly, either they didn't do it,
or they did it and it didn't fit the narrative,
so they chose not to do anything about it. Well,
believe me, this will be looked into now because this
guy was floating out there potentially posing a threat for
(13:57):
four years and it didn't have to be that way.
Eight hundred three two one zero seven ten, eight hundred
three to two to one zero seven ten. Give us
a call, let us know what you're thinking. Luigi man
Joni's High Stay court hearing resumed yesterday, but we just
find out now that he will not be in court today.
Apparently he's a little under the weather. Either his eyebrows
(14:17):
needed trimming or something, but he wasn't feeling well. Poor Luigi. Yeah,
it was okay, he was feeling well enough a year
ago allegedly to allegedly shoot somebody dead, a father and
a husband. He was feeling well enough then, but he
has Tommy Acre or something. Should we have to let
poor Luigi rest up today? Yeah, it was already a
year this week that he allegedly murdered United Healthcare CEO
(14:40):
Brian Thompson literally blocks from where I'm sitting here in
midtown Manhattan. So now the big theory here now. And
we heard about this on MENTI in the morning too.
It's amazing that the defense is trying to get the
case thrown out on technicalities about the reading of the
Miranda laws and when you have We're going to talk
(15:01):
with Greg Jarrett, who's the legal and political consultant over
it the Fox News Channel. You've seen Greg on the
air a million times, I'm sure, and Greg is an attorney.
He's going to talk about when you have to and
when you don't have to read Miranda rights to somebody.
If somebody volunteers information or in the process of an arrest,
say they have a backpack and something evidence falls out
(15:23):
and it happens accidentally but not and you hadn't yet
read the Miranda Rights. A lawyer will tell you the
details there. At that point, it's okay. It's most lawyers
will tell you that's admissible evidence at that point. If, however,
you stop somebody randomly on the street without reading Miranda Rights,
and you haven't announced their arrest and you start rifling
through their stuff and you find something illegal, that's a
(15:45):
whole different story. That's sort of the way the defense
is trying to paint this right now. So we'll see
what happens. We'll talk to the expert, Greg Jarrett about
that in just a little bit. Seven ten wore the
Voice of New York. It is cold. As every free
analogy I have I can't say on the radio. Let's
just suffice to say it's very very cold out there.
(16:06):
And if you haven't got out yet, make sure you
bundle up because you're gonna need to. And it's gonna
be that way through the day today. Some sun this morning,
it's gonna lead to some clouds later on in the day,
highs only in the upper twenties, then more clouds than
sun tomorrow and Sunday, highs both days only in the
upper thirties. And no, it's not yet even officially winter,
(16:29):
so once again, in just a bit, we'll talk to
Fox News legal analyst Greg Jarrett. The time now is
ten twenty one WR. We're coming right back.
Speaker 1 (16:36):
This is the Mark Simone Show on seven to ten WR.
Ken from Mark Today, here's Ken Rosato.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
And we'll go straight to our busy phone Steve in Manhattan.
You're live on the air Friday morning.
Speaker 4 (16:49):
Good morning to you, right, Ken, and it's great to
have you. When you fill it from off, it's really good.
The thing is about Luigi Mangioni. I know this. They
love using his name, but people just don't want to
use the names. Like the guy who shot the two
godsmen last week and murdered one of them, Lockingwall is
(17:09):
his name. They never hear them use his name. His
name is out of the cycle. There's also a lunatic
back in June, people forgetting both the Colorado he fired
bombed a bunch of old ladies that was mohammed Soilman
and even murdering one of the old ladies with a
fire bomb. You never hear his name repeated out. It
just seems to be a frenzy with this guy Luigi's
name going on, and even with the guys who shot
(17:32):
shot at Trump, Matthew Crooks. They don't say his name really.
Even with the Bomba, they called him the Bomba or
the you know, the alleged bomber and stuff. They won't
use his name. I find that to be not weird,
but I find it to be something in society that
I know a lot of Italian Americans, an anti Italian
American thing, were they get into a frenzy. You say
(17:53):
this guy's name, but the guy who shot the godsmen
don't even know the guy's name.
Speaker 2 (17:58):
Remember, I gotta pause only because we only have about
thirty seconds left to break to the bottom of the
hour here. But just to let you know, part of
it is, I think, is the fact that it's Luigi
Mangoni and he looks like the character from Luigi Brothers
and whatnot. And I think they've made fun of that.
Not that we're talking about a guy who's attempted or
(18:19):
i'm sorry, an alleged murderer here, but you know, just
that's part of it. I think you're not wrong. I
get it. It's like if if somebody is in a
large group of people, they're easier to poke fun at,
and so We've had a lot of people poke fun
at Italian Americans, and yet Italian Americans don't push back
as much. I get it. I see what you're saying,
and you're not wrong there. But I will say I
(18:40):
have been mentioning those other names myself. It all depends
on the individual. I think it's easier to say Luigi
Mangoni than it is to say some of the other names.
For a lot of the announcers, it's lazy, but I
think that may be the simple answer as to why
the other names don't get mentioned as much. We go
over to Frank in Manhattan.
Speaker 5 (18:59):
Good morning, Yeah, good morning. I'm with into Borrow h
for a outreach organization, no profit, and we did a
survey of Bronx Manhattan, Brooklyn of an average of eight
hundred plus people who appear homeless, and we did it
on tape and we did it written down, and out
(19:20):
of it we realized one critical thing that at least
ten to fifteen percent of them are homeless for two reasons.
First of all, they have very very low incomes, they're
not employable because of age of disability, and some are
vets and the number of apartments available if you have
an apartment. Good luck if you don't. But your characterization
that it's a very rare thing that people are homeless
(19:41):
for lack of money or whatever, other parents died or whatever,
that's very inaccurate. And there's no coach drives by the
way for the homeless. They stopped that this year.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
I don't know what, but frank here, with all due respect,
I could cite about six different surveys that show just
the opposite. And we've done this. I worked at Channel
seven twenty years. We used to have these study year
after year after year, you know, and with all due respect,
I mean, anyone could call and say, we did a survey,
we have it on tape. Well, let's see the tape.
You know, when you see people wallowing in urine in
(20:11):
the street, and by the way, you could very well have, sadly,
a veteran who is also you know, you could put
the two together. You could have a veteran who is
a drug addict who is on the street. So just
because I'm saying they are a drug addict, they could
be a veteran who is a drug addict. And that
is a shame that a society we have let this happen.
But to say that we have just the average mom,
(20:32):
dad's son. You know what, I've lived in and around Manhattan.
I'm fifty eight years old. I don't see the nice,
neat little family on the street that you're trying to
talk about and trying to paint the picture of Sorry,
just doesn't exist, or at least not in the numbers
you're talking about. Robin Franklin Square, good morning.
Speaker 7 (20:47):
Hey, good morning. I'm sorry. You know, I'm a retired
try police officer and tried the police officer, and I
just I kind of disagree with you a little bit. Invariably,
when the perpetrator commits a crime, if the perpetrate, they'll
(21:08):
put a description over the air like say five ten,
one hundred eighty pounds and local news channel seven to
and four, sometimes the network a lot of times in
the paper like NEWSDAYA. I get if they don't put
the if you put just put up a descriptions like that,
that's three hundred and fifty million people. Now, you said,
if you say if the person is black, you're categorizing
(21:31):
them as it like one in a million people. But
a description like that is kind of useless, right, If
you're putting the description over the air.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
I got to put the rob I gotta cutch you
because it's ten thirty three, it's time for news. But
I'm just to clarify. I'm not saying you're wrong there.
What I'm saying is if you only have a description
in years ago. I remember when I started in TV
news in the market, if sometimes you would have we're
looking for twenty four year old African American men. That
is not fair because there could be one hundred twenty
(22:01):
four year old African American men. Every one of them
is going to get stopped. But if you say you
have a twenty four year old African American man with
a scar underneath his left eye, he has hazel eyes,
and he has dreads and he's about five 't ten
and wearing brown pants, that is a description to look for, Okay,
And that's where you're talking about, you know, clarification. I'm
(22:22):
not trying to go down that path. All I'm saying
is it was unusual to me that CNN simply had
the description that was read was a white guy who's thirty,
you know, but we already had his picture on and
he wasn't a white guy and didn't even look thirty
by the way, but we're showing his picture and saying
the wrong thing. Clearly somebody got it wrong at CNN,
(22:44):
and I'm just saying I didn't get an apology or
didn't hear an apology from them, and I think they
should clarify. Seven ten WR at the time now is
ten thirty three, and coming up next, we're going to
speak with Fox News legal analyst Greg Jarrett.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
Now more of the marximone Show on seven in woor
Filling in from Mark here again is Ken Rosado.
Speaker 2 (23:05):
And good to be with you on your Friday. He
is a news commentator, author at attorney who serves as
a legal and political analyst on Fox News Channel. He
spent many years himself as an anchor and a trial lawyer.
Busy man, we say good morning to you, Greg Jarretty.
Speaker 3 (23:20):
Cam good to be with you. Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (23:22):
Yeah, I've been a huge fan, by the way, forever
I've been you know, I was on Channel seven for
twenty years, but I always watched you guys over at
Fox News Channel and I'm a huge, huge fan. So
I'm a little star. Start forgive me, forgive me little
shaken here, Greg, First off, how serious is it. Let's
talk about the Jack Smith subpoena. How serious is the
Jack Smith subpoena for all? Is it all for show?
(23:43):
Do you think you think there's a shot that we're
actually going to see a conviction and jail time.
Speaker 3 (23:48):
Out of all this, Well, it's too early to make
that prediction, but I will say that there is a
grand jury convenient Florida. Some thirty subpoenas apparently have go
on out among them Jack Smith as special Council, and
they're looking into an ongoing criminal conspiracy how government officials
(24:12):
weaponized the law classic sort of lawfare against Trump or
anybody in his orbit. And with respect to Jack Smith,
they're looking into the two federal criminal cases he brought
against Trump in both Florida and Washington, d C. Those
were dismissed. But this Arctic Frost investigation that included, you know,
(24:39):
secretly surreptitiously obtaining phone records of members of Congress, including
United States senators, and then seeking a court order from
Judge James Bosberg in Washington to defy the law and
not notify the members of Congress that their records were
(25:01):
being seized and studied. You know, there's a provision in
the federal statutes that if you're going to do that,
you have to give those people notice. And they didn't
do that, and Bozforg signed off on it, so you
know there this is an investigation into Jack Smith's conduct
(25:23):
and whether it crossed the line into criminality.
Speaker 2 (25:27):
Seven to ten, wo are the Voice of New York.
This is the Marx Simone Show. Ken Rossano went from
Mark on a Friday along with Greg Jarrett from Fox
News Channel. Look, it is amazing how much arrogance we
see from Judge Boseburg. And the question is do you
have the authority of the judicial branch running a muck
(25:50):
right now? Because to see every little US district judge
imparting their opinion where it's going to end up getting overturned.
It seems almost every case it gets overturned by the
Supreme Court. Who has authority over them? Is it the
Justice Department? Is it the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court?
Or does Congress have to step in? We have three
(26:12):
co equal branches, so I guess that gets a little
harry there, But at some point we have to say enough,
we have an executive in charge right now, who is elected,
who's doing the constitutional job that he has. Why do
these US district judges get in the way every step
of the way.
Speaker 3 (26:29):
Well, I think because they have, in the age of Trump,
politicized their positions, and you know, they are no longer
many of them making rulings based on the law rather
on politics. And you know, both Brigant particular has been
slapped down repeatedly by the Supreme Court. In one notable case,
(26:54):
he's surped the power of Texas jurisdiction by issuing immigration
deportation ruling that he had no power to make, and
you know, the Spring Court told him so. Both were
nevertheless persists. But I think the most important authority is
(27:17):
indeed the Supreme Court and the seminal ruling they issued
Long Overdue several months ago, when the High Court finally said,
you know, district court judges are not empowered to issue
nationwide injunctions. They have authority over their small districts and
(27:39):
that's it. And so I think that, as I say,
Long Overdue is helping to rein in all of these
injunctions that have been issued. You know, why should a
judge in say San Jose, California, be able to issue
an injunction that affects the entire nation. The Supreme Court
(28:02):
said you can't. You're exceeding your authority, and they should
have done it a long time ago.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
Greg. I think in many cases, so many of these
judges know that they're going to be overturned, but yet
they go ahead and make their order. It's like they're
trying to throw an impediment just to slow things down.
Why can't they get slapped for that? If it can
be proven that the judge is clearly acting above and
beyond their jurisdiction, then is there any kind of consequence
(28:30):
for the judge? Will there be any kind of punishment?
I mean, two three strikes, you're out. You do that
two or three times, we're going to have you remove
from the bench at some point. I think if that
happens to one judge, then they won't be issuing these silly,
frivolous rulings.
Speaker 3 (28:47):
The only way to remove a federal judge constitutionally is
through impeachment, and it's the same standards that apply to
other top federal officials, including the President of the United States.
Trees and bribery, high crimes, and misdemeanors. And the last
section is sort of fungible. What does that really mean?
(29:08):
It can mean anything. And in fact, in the past,
over the last two or fifty years, you know, there
have been federal judges who have been impeached for deliberately
abusing and misusing the law. But you know, it's a
very difficult thing to do. You know, it used to
(29:32):
be that federal district court judges would make decisions not
only based on the law, but with an eye to
getting overturned, and nobody wanted to get overturned, so they
were cautious in their ruling. So all of that is
now gone. And you know, I think people like Bozburg
know they're going to get overturned, but they do it
anyway because you know, they're stricken with a severe psychopathology
(29:59):
called Trump Arrangement syndrome PDSs, and you know, and they
just can't help themselves.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
Yeah, clearly. And it's just so infuriating because you would
think that if you're in that position, you understand the
law better than others, and instead it feels like he
is playing us with the law more than others. With
just about a minute left, and I know that should
we should be giving you more time on this, but
in the Luigi Mangoni murder trial. I've had heard so
(30:25):
many bad arguments on behalf of Mangoni regarding when when
he was read as Miranda, riots, etc. In this case, though,
the argument is that some of this evidence could be
thrown out by the judge. What is your opinion on
what you're hearing?
Speaker 3 (30:38):
Well, I doubt it will happen.
Speaker 5 (30:40):
You know.
Speaker 3 (30:40):
Look, it's a standard move by defense attorneys and I
used to do it as a trial attorney myself. Is
you challenge the seizure of evidence that's incriminating and try
to get it tossed out under the Fourth Amendment unreasonable
search and seizure. Most of the time it doesn't succeed.
And here for example, you know the arresting officers, you
(31:04):
know looked into the bag. Well, they they have to.
You know, the gun, the manifesto was in the bag,
highly incriminating. They had to do that. When you take
somebody into custody, you know, you pap them down to
make sure they don't have a weapon. And you know,
in this particular case, looking inside his backpack was merited.
You know, you don't know if he's got a weapon
(31:25):
or a bumb In fact, he did have a weapon
in that bag, so I think that'll survive scrutiny and
in the end be admissible evidence.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
There you go, all right. Fox News Channel legal and
political analyst Greg Jarrett, thank you so much for coming
on this morning. Happy holidays.
Speaker 3 (31:41):
Do you thank you same to you can't thanks appreciate it.
Speaker 2 (31:45):
Seven ten wore the Voice of New York. Our number
is eight hundred three to two one zero seven ten.
Eight hundred three to two one zero seven ten. We're
going to take your calls next year. Seven ten wo R.
This is the Mark Simone Show on seven ten. Ken
from today, Here's Ken Rosado and good to be with
you on your Friday. The phone lines are open. We
(32:06):
have a couple of minutes left here for the hour.
Eight hundred three to two one zero seven ten, eight
hundred three to two one zero seven ten. Did you
hear Stephen A. Smith yesterday who was on the on
the View? Uh and uh listen listen to what he
had to say. Just listen to the energy too. And
he had a back and forth with Sonny hoston. I
think he put her in her place. Listen up.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
I'd love to give you the opportunity to perhaps change
your position on what you say.
Speaker 4 (32:31):
I'm not changing the thing you want.
Speaker 2 (32:33):
To say loud and wrong.
Speaker 4 (32:35):
Well you could call it loud and wrong all you
want it. You're entitled to your opinion.
Speaker 2 (32:37):
I'm entitled to mott yes. And so this is Stephen A. Smith.
First of all, Sonny Hosten was quite a bit I
think obnoxious to him, the attitude that what Steven A.
Smith has an opinion that differs from you, So you're
telling him he's wrong and he has the opportunity now
to correct himself. Come on, Sonny, that's unfair. I mean,
Steven A. Smith has about five hundred times your audience
(32:58):
for a reason because he he's a smart man. He
knows what he's talking about. But it's just there's a
certain arrogance. I still I don't understand why anybody would
agree to go on The View today. God bless anybody
who can put up with the cackling for an hour.
But it's it's just it's amazing to me that somebody
would be that arrogant. Can you imagine for a second
(33:19):
if there were a mail who were sitting on that
set as an anchor, and Sonny Hostin were the guest,
and Sunny hostin were told by that mail anchor, let
me give you the opportunity to correct yourself, that man
would immediately be accused of mansplaining immediately, total double standard.
(33:40):
By the way, what we were talking about was Senator Kelly,
who may have put his foot in his mouth, by
the way, and could be in big trouble because of
allegedly leaking classifying information. We'll get into more detail in
the next hour about this, but apparently when he made
his commentary about the bombing of that Narco boat, he
allegedly let some information out that may have been classified
(34:02):
at the time. Seven ten WR the Voice of New York.
This is Ken Rozotto Win from Mark and we'll be
back after the news
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
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
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.