Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Only six weeks and a couple hours until Trump is inaugurated.
It was very evident this weekend at the reopening of
the Notre Dame Cathedral how respected Trump is internationally, and Biden,
of course, was hiding away with some supposed schedule conflict.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
I thought the most hilarious AI or at least some
sort of made up video of Jill Biden was sitting
in one of the rows and Notre Dame, and there
was a seat or two between her and Donald Trump
and they turned to kind of acknowledge each other and
(00:46):
then they and I watched it almost frame by frame
because at one point she initiates it. She looks at
Trump and then she leans over and tries to punch
him in the face at the two of them start
fighting right there in the middle of the cathedral. Yeah,
it was funny. I thought it was hilarious. Trump was
(01:13):
on Meet the Press, and I'm surprised there hasn't been
more backlash, not justified, but backlash by taking out a
context things that he said, Uh, let's let's let's go through.
(01:36):
Let's go through some of the stuff that he said.
It's pretty good. Let's start out with this.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
I'm going to treat you everybody as well as I
have treated the greatest and MAGA supporters has never been
anything like MAGA in the history of this country. These
people are so dedicated to making America again. It's very simple,
and I'm going to treat them just the same as
I treat MEGA. We're going to treat everybody good. We
want success for our country. We wants safety for our country.
(02:08):
You know, our country is under threat. As you know,
we have a tremendous threat militarily because of the power
of weapons and weaponry is tremendous threat. Nobody talks about it,
but it's a tremendous threat. I want to treat everybody
the same. I want to treat them well. And at
the end of this four years, I have a big
head start because I was there for four years. Fairly recently,
(02:31):
a lot of bad things were done during the four
years that I wasn't there, and mostly in what they've
done in terms of our reputation overseas. Our reputation is
so bad, so shot. I got to bring it back,
and I also have to I have to bring back
civilization to our country. Our country is a crime pot
(02:53):
and we have to get rid of crime.
Speaker 4 (02:54):
We have so many things to do.
Speaker 3 (02:56):
We have to do the prices, we have to do
all of that, but we have to get the criminals
out of our country.
Speaker 4 (03:00):
We have to bring down crime. People have to be
able to.
Speaker 3 (03:03):
Walk across the street and buy a loaf of bread
without being shot.
Speaker 4 (03:06):
And that's going to happen.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
But what I say to them is I love you,
and we're going to all work together and we're going
to bring it together.
Speaker 4 (03:14):
And you know what's going to bring it together. Success.
Speaker 3 (03:16):
I saw that just prior to COVID coming in, I
had poles that were the highest anyone McLachlin and Fabrizio said,
George Washington and Abraham Lincoln if they came back from
the dead and they ran as president and vice president,
couldn't beat you, sir. We were doing so well, and
I was getting along with the left. Let's go with
(03:37):
the left. Wiving ized, Okay, we're just going to call.
But I was getting along with people that you would
consider liberal or progressive, as they.
Speaker 4 (03:44):
Like to say, at levels that I never thought it
was possible. And you know what it was. Success.
Speaker 3 (03:49):
Success was bringing the country together.
Speaker 4 (03:51):
And that's what I want to do.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
Success will bring everybody together, to those that opposed me,
I want you to know that I love.
Speaker 5 (03:58):
You, and how am I going to do this.
Speaker 2 (04:01):
I'm going to do it because I'm going to bring
success back to the country. We're going to clean up
the crime. We're going to get our reputation back, which
I think he's already on the road to doing. He's
he's the de facto president right now. If if you
don't believe me, just watch the video of Biden at
(04:23):
the I think I think it was the tree lighting
that he was at. I mean, the guy is just
totally out of it. This was pretty good. Speaking of
by the way, speaking of the FBI agent, uh, he
asked me about Gosh Patel, and I thought he was
(04:44):
a great selection that our paths I don't really know him.
Our paths crossed occasionally, but we never really worked together.
But I've got the utmost respect for what he did
on the House investigation into the Russian collusion hoax. He
was formidable in that. And the FBI agent is kind
(05:08):
of like, well, I can say that there are a
lot of people in Hoover Building that do need to
go that headquarters that do need to go. Well, this
comes up on Meet the Press.
Speaker 6 (05:18):
He named Cash Pattel to be the next FBI director.
He has a list in his book of sixty people
that he calls members of the so called deep state.
It includes Democrats like Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton. It
includes former members of your cabinet, from Bill bar to
Christopher Ray. You campaigned on destroying the deep state. Do
you want Cash Pattel to launch investigations into people on
(05:40):
that list?
Speaker 2 (05:41):
No.
Speaker 4 (05:41):
I mean he's going to do what he thinks is right.
Speaker 7 (05:43):
Do you think that's right? Do you think that's right, sir?
Speaker 3 (05:48):
If they think that somebody was dishonest, cricket or a
corrupt politation, I think he probably has an obligation to
do it.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
I love that answer. I mean she's trying. She's kind
to frame it that she's trying to frame the narrative
in that he has a list and he's going after them.
Do you think that's right? Well, no, but if somebody's
done something wrong, illegal, then yes, you need to.
Speaker 5 (06:17):
Go after them.
Speaker 2 (06:19):
Now, some people you need to go after simply because
they're holdovers from the previous administration.
Speaker 5 (06:24):
Everybody knows that you go from one.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
Administration to even within the same party you don't think
that between Bush forty three term one and Bush forty
three term two that there weren't political appointees that were
asked to skidatle move along.
Speaker 5 (06:44):
Of course there were.
Speaker 2 (06:47):
Presidents want their team and they want the people they
want when they want them. But the point here is, yeah,
he may have a list of people that he thinks
need to go, and if they need to go because
they're political appointees, they need to go. But if you're
going to go, if many, if if by going after
(07:09):
them means you're going to try to use law there
against them, Trump makes it clear that no, that's not
what I mean. If they've done something wrong, then yes,
it is his obligation. His use of the term obligation
is so important. It's his obligation. If somebody's done something illegal,
(07:31):
they've done something wrong, it's his obligation to go after them.
Speaker 6 (07:34):
Surely, he has a list in his book of sixty
people that he calls members of the so called deep state.
It includes Democrats like Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton. It
includes former members of your cabinet, from Bill Bard to
Christopher Ray. You campaigned on destroying the deep state. Do
you want cash ptel to launch investigations into people on
that list.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
No.
Speaker 4 (07:54):
I mean he's going to do what he thinks is right.
Do you think that's right?
Speaker 7 (07:58):
Do you think that's right?
Speaker 1 (07:59):
Sir?
Speaker 3 (08:01):
If they think that somebody was dishonest, crooked or a
corrupt politician.
Speaker 4 (08:06):
I think he probably has an obligation to do it.
Speaker 7 (08:08):
But are you going to direct him today?
Speaker 4 (08:10):
No, not at all, not at all. We have two
great people that we have him and we have Pam.
Pam Bondi has been like a rocket ship.
Speaker 3 (08:17):
So he's very popular and very good and very fair
and Cash, but Tell is very fair.
Speaker 4 (08:21):
I'll tell you. I thought Cash may.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
Be difficult because he's, you know, a strong conservative voice,
and I don't know if anybody that's.
Speaker 4 (08:31):
Not singing his praises.
Speaker 3 (08:32):
The other day I was watching and Craig Goudy, who's
a moderate person and very smart and very respected in
the party. He's Cash's biggest fan. He said, this is
the most misunderstood man in politics.
Speaker 5 (08:46):
He's great.
Speaker 3 (08:46):
I guess they work together on the Russia hoax or something.
And Greg Goudy became a fang, you know, Treg Goudi.
Everybody respects him and you know, just like him. Others also,
I don't know if one negative. I don't think he's
going to have any negative mode.
Speaker 6 (09:02):
Is it your expectation, though, that cash Fetel will pursue
investigations against your political enemies.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
No, I don't think so.
Speaker 7 (09:09):
Do you want to see that happen?
Speaker 3 (09:11):
If they were crooked, if they did something wrong, if
they have broken the law, probably they weren't after me.
You know, they weren't after me and I did nothing wrong.
Speaker 7 (09:19):
Well, let me ask you this.
Speaker 6 (09:20):
You said, President Biden quote that you're going to appoint
a real special prosecutor to go after Joe Biden. You
said that the campaign, You said that on Truth Social
June twelfth.
Speaker 7 (09:31):
Twenty twenty three.
Speaker 6 (09:32):
I will appoint a real special prosecutor to go after
the most corrupt president in the history of the United States,
Joe Biden in the entire world.
Speaker 7 (09:38):
That part is crime family. Are you going to do that?
Are you going to go after Joe Biden?
Speaker 3 (09:43):
I'm really looking to make our country successful. I'm not
looking to go back into the past. I'm looking to
make our country successful. Retribution will be through success. If
we can make our success, is this country successful? That
would be my greatest that would be such a goo
if she's been bring it back.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
Brilliant answer, Utterly brilliant answer when it came when it
comes to uh, I don't do that one. Yet when
it comes to dealing with the reporters, I think he's
again matured, gotten better, whatever it is, whatever agitive you
(10:25):
want to use, he's just gotten smarter about it.
Speaker 5 (10:31):
No, I don't.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
I'm not going to direct it. First of all, he's
the FBI director. I'm not going to go direct him
to do anything. But it is his obligation. If somebody
has committed wrongdoing or done something illegal, then it's his
obligation to go do that.
Speaker 5 (10:49):
This one.
Speaker 3 (10:50):
The Dreamers are going to come later, and we have
to do something about the dreamers because these are people
that have been brought here at a very young age,
and many of these are middle aged people now they
don't even speak the language of their country.
Speaker 4 (11:03):
And yes, we're going to do something about the means,
what are you going to do?
Speaker 3 (11:06):
I will work with the Democrats on a plan and
if we can come up with a plan, but the
Democrats have made it very very difficult to do anything.
Republicans are very open to the Dreamers. The dreamers. We're
talking many years ago. They were brought into this country
many years ago. Some of them are no longer young people,
and in many cases they become successful.
Speaker 4 (11:27):
They have great jobs. In some cases they have small businesses.
Some cases they might have large businesses. And we're going
to have to do something with them.
Speaker 7 (11:35):
And you want them to be able to stay, That's
what you're saying.
Speaker 4 (11:38):
I do. I want to be able to work something out.
Speaker 5 (11:42):
What's wrong with that?
Speaker 1 (11:44):
You know?
Speaker 2 (11:44):
I was asking over the weekend in a text message
talking about these pree empty pardons that Biden is rumored
to be considering pardoning Liz Cheney and Adam Shift to
Shift and Adaminger and the others on the January sixth
Committee pardoning Christopher Ray and others.
Speaker 5 (12:06):
Whether or not.
Speaker 2 (12:07):
Trump or whether not Biden could preemptively or blanket pardon
illegal aliens, Yes, he can. However, you come across the
border illegally, you can pardon them for that crime, but
(12:32):
that does not grant them citizenship. And the President doesn't
have the power to grant citizenship. So the crime that
he could pardon them for is coming across the border illegally.
He can't grant them citizenship. He can only forgive them
(12:55):
for that crime. Pardon them for that crime. Then the
next question I got it was a little more interesting,
because you've been pardoned for crossing the border illegally, and
so now you can no longer be tried for that.
Double jeopardy attaches. You've been pardoned, you can't be prosecuted
for crossing the border illegally. Well that got me to thinking,
(13:17):
but you can't get them citizenship. So now they don't
have a visa, green car, anything. So now they're in
the country illegally, which is a crime. So Biden would
not only have to pardon them for crossing the border illegally,
(13:37):
but then he would have to pardon them for remaining
in the country illegally, another crime. He'll never do it,
and there is reason he won't do it is that
is in effect. I don't know how you do a
carve out. Unless he did a carve out, I don't
(14:01):
know how you had word of, but something along the
lines of if you're in the country illegally, I'm pardoning
you for that specifically, and if you remain in the
country illegally, I'm pardoning you for that, which then allows
them to stay here, but still doesn't give them citizenship.
But then you're going to have to word it such
(14:21):
that for those who committed crimes. Now, there are a
lot of illegal aliens who've committed crimes who have not
yet been caught, who have not yet been tried, prosecuted,
or anything. Some of them are drug dealers, try child traffickers,
human trafficker, sex traffickers. Does Joe Biden really want to
(14:42):
sully his reputation so badly that he would do the
equivalent of granting a mass amnesty to every single illegal alien,
regardless irrespective of whether they've committed other crimes or not,
because he cannot just pardon everybody.
Speaker 5 (14:58):
How would you.
Speaker 2 (14:59):
Distinguish between someone who crossed the border illegally, is in
the country illegally, and is also engaged in other crimes murder, rape, robbery,
child sex, human trafficking. Does he really want to go
that far as diminuted as the old fart is. I
don't think he really wants to do that, which would
(15:19):
in essence be a blanket amnesty for anybody in the country,
however they got here, whatever laws they broke, and whatever
laws they have broken since they came here. Illegally, Oh
my god, there would be a revolution, The Democrats would
be dead forever, the Democrat Party would be over. So yeah,
(15:42):
he could if he wanted to pardon those four coming
across the border illegally. But to take the next step,
I think he needs to be very very careful about
that because you're basically you would be basically saying I'm
granting you amnesty, and I think Republicans and Democrats alike
(16:10):
would find that unacceptable. Could he be impeached? That Congress
isn't in session. Congress I supposed to come back into
a special session and impeach him, But what good does
that do. He's out of office in forty some days anyway,
six well, six weeks in a few hours.
Speaker 5 (16:29):
So no, he could.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
Partially, he won't because of the huge implications of doing so.
Speaker 5 (16:40):
But get the focus back on Trump for a moment.
Speaker 2 (16:45):
I think Trump's pointing out that he's going to have
his team if they if Christopher Ray violated Defies Act
in getting illegal search warrants, or James Comy, or if
(17:05):
any of the Jay sixers, if they violated the law,
for example, Liz Cheney, if she manipulated witnesses, if she
and Benny Thompson destroyed documents, then yeah, if you want
to prosecute them, prosecute them. I don't have a problem
with that. That's not lawfare. That's going after people for
having committed actual crimes. But Trump's not going to make
(17:28):
that decision himself. He's leaving that up to Cash Betel
and James James and Pam Bondy for them to make
that decision about how much resources, time and energy they
want to do dealing with that. Tariffs came up yesterday.
Speaker 6 (17:47):
So your previous tariffs during your first administration cost Americans
some eighty billion dollars, and now you have major companies
from Walmart, Blackendecker, AutoZone saying that any tariffs are going
to force them to drive up prices for their consumers.
Speaker 1 (18:04):
How do you.
Speaker 6 (18:05):
Make sure that these CEOs that these companies don't in
fact pass on the cost of tariffs to their consumers.
Speaker 4 (18:12):
Becaust Americans nothing. They made a great economy for us.
Speaker 3 (18:17):
They also solve another problem if we were going to
have problems having to do with wars and having to
do with other.
Speaker 4 (18:23):
Things, tariffs. I have stopped wars with tariffs.
Speaker 2 (18:27):
Let me ask you this because I would put it
in a more layman's terms. If Black and Decker increases
the cost of a power tool by twenty percent, but
your wages have gone up forty or fifty percent, do
you really care what the cost of that power tool is?
(18:50):
Because when you bring back a growing, strong economy with
rising wages, job growth, job demand.
Speaker 5 (19:02):
Who cares? It's the growing economy that he wants to
focus on. Good morning from South Dakota.
Speaker 3 (19:18):
I heard Biden didn't go to the grand opening of
Notre Dame because he's not really into football.
Speaker 4 (19:25):
Everyone have a great day.
Speaker 8 (19:29):
That's funny.
Speaker 2 (19:30):
That was pretty good. It was pretty darn good. I
didn't really listen to it until the weekend. But last
week I forget what day it was, Thursday or Friday.
Obama spoke at his Obama Foundation's Democracy form in of
all places, Chicago, and during during the speech, do what.
Speaker 5 (19:57):
Holy crap? Well, how will you praise the Lord?
Speaker 8 (20:03):
I was worried.
Speaker 2 (20:05):
Daniel Penny found not guilty of negligent homicide. Well, let
me throw out Barack Obama for a moment, because now
I got to talk about this dragon. And asked me
earlier if I was gonna talk about it, and I
said no because I really didn't expect a verdict today.
Speaker 5 (20:19):
So let's back up.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
First, congratulations to Daniel Penny and the legal team for
getting him acquitted on these stupid charges, which had never
been brought in the first place.
Speaker 5 (20:30):
But let's talk.
Speaker 8 (20:31):
About Williams that I've been talking about for months.
Speaker 2 (20:33):
What's that name again, Jordan william Jordan Williams. And it
seems to me like he had a knife and he
actually stabbed somebody yep, yeah, and on a subway train.
Speaker 8 (20:48):
One month after No, it was after before. I can't recall.
These two incidences were within a month of each other,
and he was not charged, correct.
Speaker 5 (20:58):
Huh.
Speaker 8 (20:59):
He was a black male who killed a black male.
Speaker 2 (21:03):
So I guess black males are just allowed to carry
and stab people. But you're a white guy that's trying
to protect yourself and others with nothing more than your
arms and your body, Well, you get tried by Alvin Bragg.
By the way, have you ever seen a picture of
the assistant district attorney that was trying Daniel Penny?
Speaker 4 (21:23):
Oh?
Speaker 8 (21:23):
Is it the woman?
Speaker 5 (21:24):
The woman? Oh?
Speaker 8 (21:25):
Yeah, she was ally man.
Speaker 5 (21:29):
That is that's the crime that ought to be prosecuted.
Speaker 8 (21:34):
That woman is arguably neither of us, are you know,
fairly good looking?
Speaker 2 (21:38):
But you and I may be the two ugliest bastards
of the entire well the entire tech center. But compared
to her, we're like roddy builders. We're like, we're like, uh,
George Clooney, We've got we got everything, we got it all. Dragon.
Speaker 8 (21:55):
Now that Kiron says protests erupt go good.
Speaker 5 (21:58):
So now we need to mostly peaceful protest. Oh boy,
So let's go.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
Back to last week. The jury sends a note to
the judge that we're deadlock. There are two charges. Maybe
I should explain the two charges. First, he's charged with
manslaughter in the second manslaughter. Let's ti material manslaughter in
the second or fourth degree? I mean it makes a
(22:24):
difference to me, but to you, Sue, it won't make
a difference. He's charged with manslaughter, which means that with
a reckless disregard for life, you cause the death of another.
So it's you have to be a it's a. It's
just slightly below murder. It's a reckless disregard for life.
(22:46):
He carries up I think whether it was second or
fourth or first regard. He carries up to a fifteen
year prison sentence. Now reckless disregard. Now, remember we had
we had testimony from an expert who was a corner
of medical examiner that Neely did not die from a chokehold,
(23:10):
that the cause of death was the psychotic episode he
was having with the comorbidities that he had. He was overweight,
he had sickle cell anemia, he had fentanyl and some
other drugs in his body, and so he's having this
psychotic episode and that was the proximate cause of his death. So,
first of all, you cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt
(23:33):
that Daniel Penny caused the death when you have conflicting testimony.
And so the state's testimony has to be so overwhelming,
but it wasn't because the jury kept coming back. This
also tells me the jury was deadlocked in favor of
an acquittal on the manslaughter charge. And I'll tell you
why I believe that.
Speaker 4 (23:54):
In the second.
Speaker 2 (23:56):
So he's charged with manslaughter, but the dish turned. Now,
in many jurisdictions you cannot do this, but in New
York you can. He was also charged with a lesser
included offense called negligent homicide. Negligent homicide is where you
just accidentally caused the death of another. You were negligent,
(24:17):
and what you did you were you were drunk driving
is not a good example. You were, uh, you were
walking out. You were walking through the door of this building,
and you slammed it shut behind you, not realizing that
there was somebody behind you, and you caught their head
in the door and it caused them to have a
brain aneurysm and they died. I mean, it's such a
(24:41):
catch all charge that you could be found guilty for
almost anything under negligent homicide statute in New York. So
the jury sends out a note that they're deadlocked. They
cannot reach an agreement on the manslaughter charge. The defense
moved for a mistrial, which actually the defense first moved
(25:05):
for a dismissal of the charges. And the reason for
that is because if you get the charge dismissed, that's
the equivalent of the not guilty finding and double jeopardy attaches.
It's dismissed with prejudice, they can't charge him again with manslaughter.
So judge won't do that. But the judge won't do
(25:29):
a mistrial either, so they do what's called an Allen charge,
and Alan charge comes out of this old Supreme Court case,
and it basically is, before you declare a mistrial or
dismiss the charges, you have to try one more time
to convince the jury to go back. Now, most of
the time, I've got a problem with an Allen charge,
(25:50):
particularly where there's a lesser included offense, because what you're
kind of saying to the jury is the Allen charge
says something like this, you should go back and deliberate further.
You should take into consideration the feelings and the beliefs
and the arguments of your cojurors. That's almost saying, come on,
(26:11):
you ought to reach a compromise. If it's eleven to one,
Come on number one, that one hold out, yeah, you know,
come on, go ahead and convict. Or If it's eleven
to one and the holdout is to a quit the
other eleven, you know what, you should just pound that
guy in the head until he gives up. So I've
got a little bit of a problem with Allen charges.
(26:32):
If a jury tells you they cannot reach an agreement,
you can if you want to tell them to go
back and just try again. Just you know, look, go
try for another four hours. Just go try again, don't
get even give them a timeline, and if they come
back again, then dismiss the charges you've got. You've got
a hung jury. But he issued the Allen charge. And
(26:53):
the problem I have with the Allen charge in the
Daniel Penny case is if you're trying to if you
say to them, look, try again, you still can't reach it.
So now I'm going to dismiss the manslaughter charge. Well,
they've already been instructed. Come on, take into consideration the
feelings of your other jurors. Think about how they think
(27:16):
about the case. Now you're actually arguing for a compromise verdict,
and by having a lesser included charge of negligent homicide,
you're saying to the jury, well, if you couldn't agree
on manslaughter, surely you agree on negligent homicide, because that's
no big deal. So I've given you an out. I've
(27:37):
given you a way to go ahead and convict him,
even though some of you are holding out to acquit him.
It's a compromise, and compromised verdicts are generally speaking, compromise
verdicts are illegal. Most states prohibit compromise juries. You got
to you have to. You know, jurors are instructed to
stick to your beliefs. You've got to come to an agreement,
(27:58):
and if you can't come to an agreement, then you
got to tell the judge. So when when they did
the Allen charge, I was fearful because you don't know
how they were on the original charge. You don't know
how they were split eleven to acquit, one to to convict,
or one to acquit and eleven to uh or one
(28:19):
to let me back up. It could have been eleven
to acquit, one to convict, or the reverse one to acquit,
eleven to convict, and there are all holdouts. Now you've
kind of given them an out. Well, we can just
do this luster charge and go home and have dinner.
We can get we can get done for the weekend.
I really had a problem with that because this is
(28:41):
a da Alvin Bragg who doesn't care about justice. He
only cares about can he get another notch on his
on his saddle, And no, that's not how we do
justice in this country. So I was fearful, which is
why I didn't want to talk about this earlier, is
that they would reach a compromise verdict they'd be like, Okay,
I give up, let's just do the lesser included defense.
(29:04):
Let's just do the negligent homicide and let's go home. Well,
now that they've come out and they have found him
not guilty on the lesser included charge, that convinces me
that they were hung and there were just a couple
of holdouts on the couple of holdouts to convict, and
the majority of the jury wanted to acquit. So when
they went back in and started deliberations again this morning,
(29:27):
those who wanted to convict were like, well, he wasn't
guilty of manslaughter, I can't convict him on this, or
while I thought he was guilty of manslaughter discharge, No,
he wasn't negligent. He knew precisely what he was doing.
In fact, the testimony is that he knows how to
do a choke hold. He's a marine. He knows how
(29:48):
to kill you with his with his with his arms,
but he didn't do it. In fact, his own testimony
in that interview was that, you know, no, I was
just trying to stop him from hurting anybody, including myself health.
So this renews my belief that even in New York
even with a judge and a prosecutor that are hell
(30:10):
bent on getting a conviction, that you can, in this
case defend yourself and defend others on a train. Because
my fear was if he's convicted, which is not men
he's been acquitted. If he's convicted, that sends a signal
to everybody in New York. Then if you ever have
to defend yourself, don't do it. If you see somebody
(30:33):
that's being threatened on the street, just turn your camera
on or just turn away and walk away, because you
don't want to run the risk that Alvin Bray is
going to come after you for defending yourself or defending
some elderly woman that was getting mugged. So Hallelujah, Praise
the Lord. Daniel Penny's been acquitted. Now does it say
(30:53):
who the threat who's voicing the threats? Not that I
have seen protests shout no justice.
Speaker 5 (30:59):
No oh.
Speaker 2 (31:00):
By the way, I don't know who. Some family member
came out on over the weekend and talked about this
case was about racism, and the way I listened to
the family member talk about racism.
Speaker 5 (31:13):
I took it personally like this shows that.
Speaker 2 (31:17):
White people don't like black people and the white people
are just more than willing to kill black people.
Speaker 5 (31:22):
Just on a whim.
Speaker 2 (31:23):
And I thought usob no, this was a case where
your family member was a nutjob and on drugs and
threatening other people, and Daniel Penny didn't care what the
skin color was. He as a marine, was going to
protect himself and protect the other people on that train
until they could get.
Speaker 8 (31:41):
Off hawk Newsome after the verdict. It's a small world, buddy.
I don't know who hawk Newsom was.
Speaker 5 (31:48):
I was just saying, who the hell is hawk Nussom?
Speaker 8 (31:49):
Right, But that's what they're they're chiren showing right now.
Speaker 2 (31:52):
Oh my god, Well is he was he? Does he
live in New York? Or was he just in New York?
I don't know. But that kind of threat. If they
know the name of that guy, go prosecuting, Alvin Bragg,
go prosecuting. He just made a threat that, hey, Daniel Penny,
(32:18):
we're looking for you and we're gonna get retribution. We're
gonna kill you now you killed our brother, uncle, cousin whatever, Yeah,
we'll kill you.
Speaker 8 (32:27):
According to Wikipedia, here it says hawk Newsom is an
American law school graduate who co founded Black Lives matter
of Greater New York.
Speaker 5 (32:36):
Well in that special, Now, who's the racist.
Speaker 2 (32:41):
M Daniel Penny or Hawk Newsom to e Newsome?
Speaker 9 (32:48):
Hey, Mike, what do you think about the family member
in the Daniel Penny case who is trying to bring
the civil suit against Daniel Penny because they cared so
much about their family member that he was homeless and
not living with them. Yeah, they should be.
Speaker 8 (33:06):
Entitled a compensation.
Speaker 2 (33:10):
So the wrongful death suit by the family against Penny
will probably continue, although it's going to be a little
more difficult. I mean, it's one thing like in the
OJ case, when you know you're found not guilty, but
everybody kind of knows you did it. Where here it
to a rational person, it was pretty clear this is
(33:33):
a case of self defense. And now they's been acquitted
by a jury. It's going to be kind of an
uphill climb for that family. But you raise an you
raise a great point, and then I don't whether go down.
Speaker 5 (33:46):
This rabbit hole or not.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
But you know what the breaking news is now it
started during the break Man matching description of gunman and
United CEO killing taking into custody and Sylvania. Now Dragon
dri have a tinfoil hat, on.
Speaker 8 (34:06):
Uh not currently?
Speaker 5 (34:07):
Do I even have like a net cap on?
Speaker 8 (34:09):
Nope, sure don't.
Speaker 5 (34:10):
Do I have a baseball cap on?
Speaker 8 (34:11):
Oph just your fantastic hair from advanced hair exactly.
Speaker 5 (34:15):
I don't have any electrodes on my skull or anything.
Speaker 8 (34:20):
What timing? Huh?
Speaker 2 (34:22):
Well in that kind of fascinating that the case that's
gripped the nation about. You know, this racist white guy
murdering a black guy on a subway train who was
just who just needed some loving care which his family
could have done but apparently didn't do, suddenly gets wiped
(34:42):
off the news and now it's all about, oh oh
now we got somebody talking about Penny out in front.
I bet that's going well.
Speaker 8 (34:52):
I think that's hawk?
Speaker 5 (34:53):
Was that hawk?
Speaker 8 (34:54):
I think? Oh it looked the matches the description just
a little bit from the Wikipedia article article.
Speaker 2 (35:00):
Well, you know, for all the money the Black Lives
Matter has raked in over the years and stolen and
used for themselves, he's not dressed very well for uh,
a guy that I'll be raking in millions of mini's.
Speaker 5 (35:14):
That's what I assume.
Speaker 2 (35:15):
He's the guy in the suite that's a that's a
cheap suit. But I mean I can tell from him
it's a cheap suit.
Speaker 8 (35:21):
I couldn't even tell you last time I wore a suit.
Speaker 5 (35:23):
But you know I'm not asking you for fashions, body,
so I've got here. Do you think I'm asking you?
I'm asking you about whether that's a cheap suit or
not doing you?
Speaker 4 (35:35):
Uh?
Speaker 5 (35:35):
Is that a family member next to him?
Speaker 9 (35:37):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (35:38):
The guy I saw talking over the weekend is the
big black guy behind him. That's the one that accused
all of us as being of being racist. So they'll
cover this a little bit. But oh wait till we
find out whether or not we got the CEO killer
or not. Who yem?
Speaker 5 (35:54):
No coincidences in the news either, is there?
Speaker 2 (35:57):
Just move on to the next story, Daniel, let's don't
talk about self defense.
Speaker 5 (36:02):
No, nope, nope, nope
Speaker 3 (36:03):
No, mm hmm.
Only six weeks and a couple hours until Trump is inaugurated.
It was very evident this weekend at the reopening of
the Notre Dame Cathedral how respected Trump is internationally, and Biden,
of course, was hiding away with some supposed schedule conflict.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
I thought the most hilarious AI or at least some
sort of made up video of Jill Biden was sitting
in one of the rows and Notre Dame, and there
was a seat or two between her and Donald Trump
and they turned to kind of acknowledge each other and
(00:46):
then they and I watched it almost frame by frame
because at one point she initiates it. She looks at
Trump and then she leans over and tries to punch
him in the face at the two of them start
fighting right there in the middle of the cathedral. Yeah,
it was funny. I thought it was hilarious. Trump was
(01:13):
on Meet the Press, and I'm surprised there hasn't been
more backlash, not justified, but backlash by taking out a
context things that he said, Uh, let's let's let's go through.
(01:36):
Let's go through some of the stuff that he said.
It's pretty good. Let's start out with this.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
I'm going to treat you everybody as well as I
have treated the greatest and MAGA supporters has never been
anything like MAGA in the history of this country. These
people are so dedicated to making America again. It's very simple,
and I'm going to treat them just the same as
I treat MEGA. We're going to treat everybody good. We
want success for our country. We wants safety for our country.
(02:08):
You know, our country is under threat. As you know,
we have a tremendous threat militarily because of the power
of weapons and weaponry is tremendous threat. Nobody talks about it,
but it's a tremendous threat. I want to treat everybody
the same. I want to treat them well. And at
the end of this four years, I have a big
head start because I was there for four years. Fairly recently,
(02:31):
a lot of bad things were done during the four
years that I wasn't there, and mostly in what they've
done in terms of our reputation overseas. Our reputation is
so bad, so shot. I got to bring it back,
and I also have to I have to bring back
civilization to our country. Our country is a crime pot
(02:53):
and we have to get rid of crime.
Speaker 4 (02:54):
We have so many things to do.
Speaker 3 (02:56):
We have to do the prices, we have to do
all of that, but we have to get the criminals
out of our country.
Speaker 4 (03:00):
We have to bring down crime. People have to be
able to.
Speaker 3 (03:03):
Walk across the street and buy a loaf of bread
without being shot.
Speaker 4 (03:06):
And that's going to happen.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
But what I say to them is I love you,
and we're going to all work together and we're going
to bring it together.
Speaker 4 (03:14):
And you know what's going to bring it together. Success.
Speaker 3 (03:16):
I saw that just prior to COVID coming in, I
had poles that were the highest anyone McLachlin and Fabrizio said,
George Washington and Abraham Lincoln if they came back from
the dead and they ran as president and vice president,
couldn't beat you, sir. We were doing so well, and
I was getting along with the left. Let's go with
(03:37):
the left. Wiving ized, Okay, we're just going to call.
But I was getting along with people that you would
consider liberal or progressive, as they.
Speaker 4 (03:44):
Like to say, at levels that I never thought it
was possible. And you know what it was. Success.
Speaker 3 (03:49):
Success was bringing the country together.
Speaker 4 (03:51):
And that's what I want to do.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
Success will bring everybody together, to those that opposed me,
I want you to know that I love.
Speaker 5 (03:58):
You, and how am I going to do this.
Speaker 2 (04:01):
I'm going to do it because I'm going to bring
success back to the country. We're going to clean up
the crime. We're going to get our reputation back, which
I think he's already on the road to doing. He's
he's the de facto president right now. If if you
don't believe me, just watch the video of Biden at
(04:23):
the I think I think it was the tree lighting
that he was at. I mean, the guy is just
totally out of it. This was pretty good. Speaking of
by the way, speaking of the FBI agent, uh, he
asked me about Gosh Patel, and I thought he was
(04:44):
a great selection that our paths I don't really know him.
Our paths crossed occasionally, but we never really worked together.
But I've got the utmost respect for what he did
on the House investigation into the Russian collusion hoax. He
was formidable in that. And the FBI agent is kind
(05:08):
of like, well, I can say that there are a
lot of people in Hoover Building that do need to
go that headquarters that do need to go. Well, this
comes up on Meet the Press.
Speaker 6 (05:18):
He named Cash Pattel to be the next FBI director.
He has a list in his book of sixty people
that he calls members of the so called deep state.
It includes Democrats like Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton. It
includes former members of your cabinet, from Bill bar to
Christopher Ray. You campaigned on destroying the deep state. Do
you want Cash Pattel to launch investigations into people on
(05:40):
that list?
Speaker 2 (05:41):
No.
Speaker 4 (05:41):
I mean he's going to do what he thinks is right.
Speaker 7 (05:43):
Do you think that's right? Do you think that's right, sir?
Speaker 3 (05:48):
If they think that somebody was dishonest, cricket or a
corrupt politation, I think he probably has an obligation to
do it.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
I love that answer. I mean she's trying. She's kind
to frame it that she's trying to frame the narrative
in that he has a list and he's going after them.
Do you think that's right? Well, no, but if somebody's
done something wrong, illegal, then yes, you need to.
Speaker 5 (06:17):
Go after them.
Speaker 2 (06:19):
Now, some people you need to go after simply because
they're holdovers from the previous administration.
Speaker 5 (06:24):
Everybody knows that you go from one.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
Administration to even within the same party you don't think
that between Bush forty three term one and Bush forty
three term two that there weren't political appointees that were
asked to skidatle move along.
Speaker 5 (06:44):
Of course there were.
Speaker 2 (06:47):
Presidents want their team and they want the people they
want when they want them. But the point here is, yeah,
he may have a list of people that he thinks
need to go, and if they need to go because
they're political appointees, they need to go. But if you're
going to go, if many, if if by going after
(07:09):
them means you're going to try to use law there
against them, Trump makes it clear that no, that's not
what I mean. If they've done something wrong, then yes,
it is his obligation. His use of the term obligation
is so important. It's his obligation. If somebody's done something illegal,
(07:31):
they've done something wrong, it's his obligation to go after them.
Speaker 6 (07:34):
Surely, he has a list in his book of sixty
people that he calls members of the so called deep state.
It includes Democrats like Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton. It
includes former members of your cabinet, from Bill Bard to
Christopher Ray. You campaigned on destroying the deep state. Do
you want cash ptel to launch investigations into people on
that list.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
No.
Speaker 4 (07:54):
I mean he's going to do what he thinks is right.
Do you think that's right?
Speaker 7 (07:58):
Do you think that's right?
Speaker 1 (07:59):
Sir?
Speaker 3 (08:01):
If they think that somebody was dishonest, crooked or a
corrupt politician.
Speaker 4 (08:06):
I think he probably has an obligation to do it.
Speaker 7 (08:08):
But are you going to direct him today?
Speaker 4 (08:10):
No, not at all, not at all. We have two
great people that we have him and we have Pam.
Pam Bondi has been like a rocket ship.
Speaker 3 (08:17):
So he's very popular and very good and very fair
and Cash, but Tell is very fair.
Speaker 4 (08:21):
I'll tell you. I thought Cash may.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
Be difficult because he's, you know, a strong conservative voice,
and I don't know if anybody that's.
Speaker 4 (08:31):
Not singing his praises.
Speaker 3 (08:32):
The other day I was watching and Craig Goudy, who's
a moderate person and very smart and very respected in
the party. He's Cash's biggest fan. He said, this is
the most misunderstood man in politics.
Speaker 5 (08:46):
He's great.
Speaker 3 (08:46):
I guess they work together on the Russia hoax or something.
And Greg Goudy became a fang, you know, Treg Goudi.
Everybody respects him and you know, just like him. Others also,
I don't know if one negative. I don't think he's
going to have any negative mode.
Speaker 6 (09:02):
Is it your expectation, though, that cash Fetel will pursue
investigations against your political enemies.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
No, I don't think so.
Speaker 7 (09:09):
Do you want to see that happen?
Speaker 3 (09:11):
If they were crooked, if they did something wrong, if
they have broken the law, probably they weren't after me.
You know, they weren't after me and I did nothing wrong.
Speaker 7 (09:19):
Well, let me ask you this.
Speaker 6 (09:20):
You said, President Biden quote that you're going to appoint
a real special prosecutor to go after Joe Biden. You
said that the campaign, You said that on Truth Social
June twelfth.
Speaker 7 (09:31):
Twenty twenty three.
Speaker 6 (09:32):
I will appoint a real special prosecutor to go after
the most corrupt president in the history of the United States,
Joe Biden in the entire world.
Speaker 7 (09:38):
That part is crime family. Are you going to do that?
Are you going to go after Joe Biden?
Speaker 3 (09:43):
I'm really looking to make our country successful. I'm not
looking to go back into the past. I'm looking to
make our country successful. Retribution will be through success. If
we can make our success, is this country successful? That
would be my greatest that would be such a goo
if she's been bring it back.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
Brilliant answer, Utterly brilliant answer when it came when it
comes to uh, I don't do that one. Yet when
it comes to dealing with the reporters, I think he's
again matured, gotten better, whatever it is, whatever agitive you
(10:25):
want to use, he's just gotten smarter about it.
Speaker 5 (10:31):
No, I don't.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
I'm not going to direct it. First of all, he's
the FBI director. I'm not going to go direct him
to do anything. But it is his obligation. If somebody
has committed wrongdoing or done something illegal, then it's his
obligation to go do that.
Speaker 5 (10:49):
This one.
Speaker 3 (10:50):
The Dreamers are going to come later, and we have
to do something about the dreamers because these are people
that have been brought here at a very young age,
and many of these are middle aged people now they
don't even speak the language of their country.
Speaker 4 (11:03):
And yes, we're going to do something about the means,
what are you going to do?
Speaker 3 (11:06):
I will work with the Democrats on a plan and
if we can come up with a plan, but the
Democrats have made it very very difficult to do anything.
Republicans are very open to the Dreamers. The dreamers. We're
talking many years ago. They were brought into this country
many years ago. Some of them are no longer young people,
and in many cases they become successful.
Speaker 4 (11:27):
They have great jobs. In some cases they have small businesses.
Some cases they might have large businesses. And we're going
to have to do something with them.
Speaker 7 (11:35):
And you want them to be able to stay, That's
what you're saying.
Speaker 4 (11:38):
I do. I want to be able to work something out.
Speaker 5 (11:42):
What's wrong with that?
Speaker 1 (11:44):
You know?
Speaker 2 (11:44):
I was asking over the weekend in a text message
talking about these pree empty pardons that Biden is rumored
to be considering pardoning Liz Cheney and Adam Shift to
Shift and Adaminger and the others on the January sixth
Committee pardoning Christopher Ray and others.
Speaker 5 (12:06):
Whether or not.
Speaker 2 (12:07):
Trump or whether not Biden could preemptively or blanket pardon
illegal aliens, Yes, he can. However, you come across the
border illegally, you can pardon them for that crime, but
(12:32):
that does not grant them citizenship. And the President doesn't
have the power to grant citizenship. So the crime that
he could pardon them for is coming across the border illegally.
He can't grant them citizenship. He can only forgive them
(12:55):
for that crime. Pardon them for that crime. Then the
next question I got it was a little more interesting,
because you've been pardoned for crossing the border illegally, and
so now you can no longer be tried for that.
Double jeopardy attaches. You've been pardoned, you can't be prosecuted
for crossing the border illegally. Well that got me to thinking,
(13:17):
but you can't get them citizenship. So now they don't
have a visa, green car, anything. So now they're in
the country illegally, which is a crime. So Biden would
not only have to pardon them for crossing the border illegally,
(13:37):
but then he would have to pardon them for remaining
in the country illegally, another crime. He'll never do it,
and there is reason he won't do it is that
is in effect. I don't know how you do a
carve out. Unless he did a carve out, I don't
(14:01):
know how you had word of, but something along the
lines of if you're in the country illegally, I'm pardoning
you for that specifically, and if you remain in the
country illegally, I'm pardoning you for that, which then allows
them to stay here, but still doesn't give them citizenship.
But then you're going to have to word it such
(14:21):
that for those who committed crimes. Now, there are a
lot of illegal aliens who've committed crimes who have not
yet been caught, who have not yet been tried, prosecuted,
or anything. Some of them are drug dealers, try child traffickers,
human trafficker, sex traffickers. Does Joe Biden really want to
(14:42):
sully his reputation so badly that he would do the
equivalent of granting a mass amnesty to every single illegal alien,
regardless irrespective of whether they've committed other crimes or not,
because he cannot just pardon everybody.
Speaker 5 (14:58):
How would you.
Speaker 2 (14:59):
Distinguish between someone who crossed the border illegally, is in
the country illegally, and is also engaged in other crimes murder, rape, robbery,
child sex, human trafficking. Does he really want to go
that far as diminuted as the old fart is. I
don't think he really wants to do that, which would
(15:19):
in essence be a blanket amnesty for anybody in the country,
however they got here, whatever laws they broke, and whatever
laws they have broken since they came here. Illegally, Oh
my god, there would be a revolution, The Democrats would
be dead forever, the Democrat Party would be over. So yeah,
(15:42):
he could if he wanted to pardon those four coming
across the border illegally. But to take the next step,
I think he needs to be very very careful about
that because you're basically you would be basically saying I'm
granting you amnesty, and I think Republicans and Democrats alike
(16:10):
would find that unacceptable. Could he be impeached? That Congress
isn't in session. Congress I supposed to come back into
a special session and impeach him, But what good does
that do. He's out of office in forty some days anyway,
six well, six weeks in a few hours.
Speaker 5 (16:29):
So no, he could.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
Partially, he won't because of the huge implications of doing so.
Speaker 5 (16:40):
But get the focus back on Trump for a moment.
Speaker 2 (16:45):
I think Trump's pointing out that he's going to have
his team if they if Christopher Ray violated Defies Act
in getting illegal search warrants, or James Comy, or if
(17:05):
any of the Jay sixers, if they violated the law,
for example, Liz Cheney, if she manipulated witnesses, if she
and Benny Thompson destroyed documents, then yeah, if you want
to prosecute them, prosecute them. I don't have a problem
with that. That's not lawfare. That's going after people for
having committed actual crimes. But Trump's not going to make
(17:28):
that decision himself. He's leaving that up to Cash Betel
and James James and Pam Bondy for them to make
that decision about how much resources, time and energy they
want to do dealing with that. Tariffs came up yesterday.
Speaker 6 (17:47):
So your previous tariffs during your first administration cost Americans
some eighty billion dollars, and now you have major companies
from Walmart, Blackendecker, AutoZone saying that any tariffs are going
to force them to drive up prices for their consumers.
Speaker 1 (18:04):
How do you.
Speaker 6 (18:05):
Make sure that these CEOs that these companies don't in
fact pass on the cost of tariffs to their consumers.
Speaker 4 (18:12):
Becaust Americans nothing. They made a great economy for us.
Speaker 3 (18:17):
They also solve another problem if we were going to
have problems having to do with wars and having to
do with other.
Speaker 4 (18:23):
Things, tariffs. I have stopped wars with tariffs.
Speaker 2 (18:27):
Let me ask you this because I would put it
in a more layman's terms. If Black and Decker increases
the cost of a power tool by twenty percent, but
your wages have gone up forty or fifty percent, do
you really care what the cost of that power tool is?
(18:50):
Because when you bring back a growing, strong economy with
rising wages, job growth, job demand.
Speaker 5 (19:02):
Who cares? It's the growing economy that he wants to
focus on. Good morning from South Dakota.
Speaker 3 (19:18):
I heard Biden didn't go to the grand opening of
Notre Dame because he's not really into football.
Speaker 4 (19:25):
Everyone have a great day.
Speaker 8 (19:29):
That's funny.
Speaker 2 (19:30):
That was pretty good. It was pretty darn good. I
didn't really listen to it until the weekend. But last
week I forget what day it was, Thursday or Friday.
Obama spoke at his Obama Foundation's Democracy form in of
all places, Chicago, and during during the speech, do what.
Speaker 5 (19:57):
Holy crap? Well, how will you praise the Lord?
Speaker 8 (20:03):
I was worried.
Speaker 2 (20:05):
Daniel Penny found not guilty of negligent homicide. Well, let
me throw out Barack Obama for a moment, because now
I got to talk about this dragon. And asked me
earlier if I was gonna talk about it, and I
said no because I really didn't expect a verdict today.
Speaker 5 (20:19):
So let's back up.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
First, congratulations to Daniel Penny and the legal team for
getting him acquitted on these stupid charges, which had never
been brought in the first place.
Speaker 5 (20:30):
But let's talk.
Speaker 8 (20:31):
About Williams that I've been talking about for months.
Speaker 2 (20:33):
What's that name again, Jordan william Jordan Williams. And it
seems to me like he had a knife and he
actually stabbed somebody yep, yeah, and on a subway train.
Speaker 8 (20:48):
One month after No, it was after before. I can't recall.
These two incidences were within a month of each other,
and he was not charged, correct.
Speaker 5 (20:58):
Huh.
Speaker 8 (20:59):
He was a black male who killed a black male.
Speaker 2 (21:03):
So I guess black males are just allowed to carry
and stab people. But you're a white guy that's trying
to protect yourself and others with nothing more than your
arms and your body, Well, you get tried by Alvin Bragg.
By the way, have you ever seen a picture of
the assistant district attorney that was trying Daniel Penny?
Speaker 4 (21:23):
Oh?
Speaker 8 (21:23):
Is it the woman?
Speaker 5 (21:24):
The woman? Oh?
Speaker 8 (21:25):
Yeah, she was ally man.
Speaker 5 (21:29):
That is that's the crime that ought to be prosecuted.
Speaker 8 (21:34):
That woman is arguably neither of us, are you know,
fairly good looking?
Speaker 2 (21:38):
But you and I may be the two ugliest bastards
of the entire well the entire tech center. But compared
to her, we're like roddy builders. We're like, we're like, uh,
George Clooney, We've got we got everything, we got it all. Dragon.
Speaker 8 (21:55):
Now that Kiron says protests erupt go good.
Speaker 5 (21:58):
So now we need to mostly peaceful protest. Oh boy,
So let's go.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
Back to last week. The jury sends a note to
the judge that we're deadlock. There are two charges. Maybe
I should explain the two charges. First, he's charged with
manslaughter in the second manslaughter. Let's ti material manslaughter in
the second or fourth degree? I mean it makes a
(22:24):
difference to me, but to you, Sue, it won't make
a difference. He's charged with manslaughter, which means that with
a reckless disregard for life, you cause the death of another.
So it's you have to be a it's a. It's
just slightly below murder. It's a reckless disregard for life.
(22:46):
He carries up I think whether it was second or
fourth or first regard. He carries up to a fifteen
year prison sentence. Now reckless disregard. Now, remember we had
we had testimony from an expert who was a corner
of medical examiner that Neely did not die from a chokehold,
(23:10):
that the cause of death was the psychotic episode he
was having with the comorbidities that he had. He was overweight,
he had sickle cell anemia, he had fentanyl and some
other drugs in his body, and so he's having this
psychotic episode and that was the proximate cause of his death. So,
first of all, you cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt
(23:33):
that Daniel Penny caused the death when you have conflicting testimony.
And so the state's testimony has to be so overwhelming,
but it wasn't because the jury kept coming back. This
also tells me the jury was deadlocked in favor of
an acquittal on the manslaughter charge. And I'll tell you
why I believe that.
Speaker 4 (23:54):
In the second.
Speaker 2 (23:56):
So he's charged with manslaughter, but the dish turned. Now,
in many jurisdictions you cannot do this, but in New
York you can. He was also charged with a lesser
included offense called negligent homicide. Negligent homicide is where you
just accidentally caused the death of another. You were negligent,
(24:17):
and what you did you were you were drunk driving
is not a good example. You were, uh, you were
walking out. You were walking through the door of this building,
and you slammed it shut behind you, not realizing that
there was somebody behind you, and you caught their head
in the door and it caused them to have a
brain aneurysm and they died. I mean, it's such a
(24:41):
catch all charge that you could be found guilty for
almost anything under negligent homicide statute in New York. So
the jury sends out a note that they're deadlocked. They
cannot reach an agreement on the manslaughter charge. The defense
moved for a mistrial, which actually the defense first moved
(25:05):
for a dismissal of the charges. And the reason for
that is because if you get the charge dismissed, that's
the equivalent of the not guilty finding and double jeopardy attaches.
It's dismissed with prejudice, they can't charge him again with manslaughter.
So judge won't do that. But the judge won't do
(25:29):
a mistrial either, so they do what's called an Allen charge,
and Alan charge comes out of this old Supreme Court case,
and it basically is, before you declare a mistrial or
dismiss the charges, you have to try one more time
to convince the jury to go back. Now, most of
the time, I've got a problem with an Allen charge,
(25:50):
particularly where there's a lesser included offense, because what you're
kind of saying to the jury is the Allen charge
says something like this, you should go back and deliberate further.
You should take into consideration the feelings and the beliefs
and the arguments of your cojurors. That's almost saying, come on,
(26:11):
you ought to reach a compromise. If it's eleven to one,
Come on number one, that one hold out, yeah, you know,
come on, go ahead and convict. Or If it's eleven
to one and the holdout is to a quit the
other eleven, you know what, you should just pound that
guy in the head until he gives up. So I've
got a little bit of a problem with Allen charges.
(26:32):
If a jury tells you they cannot reach an agreement,
you can if you want to tell them to go
back and just try again. Just you know, look, go
try for another four hours. Just go try again, don't
get even give them a timeline, and if they come
back again, then dismiss the charges you've got. You've got
a hung jury. But he issued the Allen charge. And
(26:53):
the problem I have with the Allen charge in the
Daniel Penny case is if you're trying to if you
say to them, look, try again, you still can't reach it.
So now I'm going to dismiss the manslaughter charge. Well,
they've already been instructed. Come on, take into consideration the
feelings of your other jurors. Think about how they think
(27:16):
about the case. Now you're actually arguing for a compromise verdict,
and by having a lesser included charge of negligent homicide,
you're saying to the jury, well, if you couldn't agree
on manslaughter, surely you agree on negligent homicide, because that's
no big deal. So I've given you an out. I've
(27:37):
given you a way to go ahead and convict him,
even though some of you are holding out to acquit him.
It's a compromise, and compromised verdicts are generally speaking, compromise
verdicts are illegal. Most states prohibit compromise juries. You got
to you have to. You know, jurors are instructed to
stick to your beliefs. You've got to come to an agreement,
(27:58):
and if you can't come to an agreement, then you
got to tell the judge. So when when they did
the Allen charge, I was fearful because you don't know
how they were on the original charge. You don't know
how they were split eleven to acquit, one to to convict,
or one to acquit and eleven to uh or one
(28:19):
to let me back up. It could have been eleven
to acquit, one to convict, or the reverse one to acquit,
eleven to convict, and there are all holdouts. Now you've
kind of given them an out. Well, we can just
do this luster charge and go home and have dinner.
We can get we can get done for the weekend.
I really had a problem with that because this is
(28:41):
a da Alvin Bragg who doesn't care about justice. He
only cares about can he get another notch on his
on his saddle, And no, that's not how we do
justice in this country. So I was fearful, which is
why I didn't want to talk about this earlier, is
that they would reach a compromise verdict they'd be like, Okay,
I give up, let's just do the lesser included defense.
(29:04):
Let's just do the negligent homicide and let's go home. Well,
now that they've come out and they have found him
not guilty on the lesser included charge, that convinces me
that they were hung and there were just a couple
of holdouts on the couple of holdouts to convict, and
the majority of the jury wanted to acquit. So when
they went back in and started deliberations again this morning,
(29:27):
those who wanted to convict were like, well, he wasn't
guilty of manslaughter, I can't convict him on this, or
while I thought he was guilty of manslaughter discharge, No,
he wasn't negligent. He knew precisely what he was doing.
In fact, the testimony is that he knows how to
do a choke hold. He's a marine. He knows how
(29:48):
to kill you with his with his with his arms,
but he didn't do it. In fact, his own testimony
in that interview was that, you know, no, I was
just trying to stop him from hurting anybody, including myself health.
So this renews my belief that even in New York
even with a judge and a prosecutor that are hell
(30:10):
bent on getting a conviction, that you can, in this
case defend yourself and defend others on a train. Because
my fear was if he's convicted, which is not men
he's been acquitted. If he's convicted, that sends a signal
to everybody in New York. Then if you ever have
to defend yourself, don't do it. If you see somebody
(30:33):
that's being threatened on the street, just turn your camera
on or just turn away and walk away, because you
don't want to run the risk that Alvin Bray is
going to come after you for defending yourself or defending
some elderly woman that was getting mugged. So Hallelujah, Praise
the Lord. Daniel Penny's been acquitted. Now does it say
(30:53):
who the threat who's voicing the threats? Not that I
have seen protests shout no justice.
Speaker 5 (30:59):
No oh.
Speaker 2 (31:00):
By the way, I don't know who. Some family member
came out on over the weekend and talked about this
case was about racism, and the way I listened to
the family member talk about racism.
Speaker 5 (31:13):
I took it personally like this shows that.
Speaker 2 (31:17):
White people don't like black people and the white people
are just more than willing to kill black people.
Speaker 5 (31:22):
Just on a whim.
Speaker 2 (31:23):
And I thought usob no, this was a case where
your family member was a nutjob and on drugs and
threatening other people, and Daniel Penny didn't care what the
skin color was. He as a marine, was going to
protect himself and protect the other people on that train
until they could get.
Speaker 8 (31:41):
Off hawk Newsome after the verdict. It's a small world, buddy.
I don't know who hawk Newsom was.
Speaker 5 (31:48):
I was just saying, who the hell is hawk Nussom?
Speaker 8 (31:49):
Right, But that's what they're they're chiren showing right now.
Speaker 2 (31:52):
Oh my god, Well is he was he? Does he
live in New York? Or was he just in New York?
I don't know. But that kind of threat. If they
know the name of that guy, go prosecuting, Alvin Bragg,
go prosecuting. He just made a threat that, hey, Daniel Penny,
(32:18):
we're looking for you and we're gonna get retribution. We're
gonna kill you now you killed our brother, uncle, cousin whatever, Yeah,
we'll kill you.
Speaker 8 (32:27):
According to Wikipedia, here it says hawk Newsom is an
American law school graduate who co founded Black Lives matter
of Greater New York.
Speaker 5 (32:36):
Well in that special, Now, who's the racist.
Speaker 2 (32:41):
M Daniel Penny or Hawk Newsom to e Newsome?
Speaker 9 (32:48):
Hey, Mike, what do you think about the family member
in the Daniel Penny case who is trying to bring
the civil suit against Daniel Penny because they cared so
much about their family member that he was homeless and
not living with them. Yeah, they should be.
Speaker 8 (33:06):
Entitled a compensation.
Speaker 2 (33:10):
So the wrongful death suit by the family against Penny
will probably continue, although it's going to be a little
more difficult. I mean, it's one thing like in the
OJ case, when you know you're found not guilty, but
everybody kind of knows you did it. Where here it
to a rational person, it was pretty clear this is
(33:33):
a case of self defense. And now they's been acquitted
by a jury. It's going to be kind of an
uphill climb for that family. But you raise an you
raise a great point, and then I don't whether go down.
Speaker 5 (33:46):
This rabbit hole or not.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
But you know what the breaking news is now it
started during the break Man matching description of gunman and
United CEO killing taking into custody and Sylvania. Now Dragon
dri have a tinfoil hat, on.
Speaker 8 (34:06):
Uh not currently?
Speaker 5 (34:07):
Do I even have like a net cap on?
Speaker 8 (34:09):
Nope, sure don't.
Speaker 5 (34:10):
Do I have a baseball cap on?
Speaker 8 (34:11):
Oph just your fantastic hair from advanced hair exactly.
Speaker 5 (34:15):
I don't have any electrodes on my skull or anything.
Speaker 8 (34:20):
What timing? Huh?
Speaker 2 (34:22):
Well in that kind of fascinating that the case that's
gripped the nation about. You know, this racist white guy
murdering a black guy on a subway train who was
just who just needed some loving care which his family
could have done but apparently didn't do, suddenly gets wiped
(34:42):
off the news and now it's all about, oh oh
now we got somebody talking about Penny out in front.
I bet that's going well.
Speaker 8 (34:52):
I think that's hawk?
Speaker 5 (34:53):
Was that hawk?
Speaker 8 (34:54):
I think? Oh it looked the matches the description just
a little bit from the Wikipedia article article.
Speaker 2 (35:00):
Well, you know, for all the money the Black Lives
Matter has raked in over the years and stolen and
used for themselves, he's not dressed very well for uh,
a guy that I'll be raking in millions of mini's.
Speaker 5 (35:14):
That's what I assume.
Speaker 2 (35:15):
He's the guy in the suite that's a that's a
cheap suit. But I mean I can tell from him
it's a cheap suit.
Speaker 8 (35:21):
I couldn't even tell you last time I wore a suit.
Speaker 5 (35:23):
But you know I'm not asking you for fashions, body,
so I've got here. Do you think I'm asking you?
I'm asking you about whether that's a cheap suit or
not doing you?
Speaker 4 (35:35):
Uh?
Speaker 5 (35:35):
Is that a family member next to him?
Speaker 9 (35:37):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (35:38):
The guy I saw talking over the weekend is the
big black guy behind him. That's the one that accused
all of us as being of being racist. So they'll
cover this a little bit. But oh wait till we
find out whether or not we got the CEO killer
or not. Who yem?
Speaker 5 (35:54):
No coincidences in the news either, is there?
Speaker 2 (35:57):
Just move on to the next story, Daniel, let's don't
talk about self defense.
Speaker 5 (36:02):
No, nope, nope, nope
Speaker 3 (36:03):
No, mm hmm.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!