Constitution_Radio_08_16_25

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
And welcome Constitution Radio, Douglas V. Gibbs, Allen and Dennis.
If we get DNNISAU with us. He hasn't appeared yet
out of the shadows of wherever he's at. Welcome to
the program. K MET fourteen ninety am. You know first
of September, new contract. I do quarterly contracts.

Speaker 2 (00:26):
Here.

Speaker 1 (00:27):
It's funded. We're gonna stay for the one hour. Second hour. Well,
if you want me to get the second hour back,
you're gonna have to help me out here. We've got sponsors,
we've got advertisers. We don't have enough listener funding coming
in if to add that second hour back, you want
the second hour, help me out here. If you want
to be a sponsor or an advertiser, contact me at

(00:47):
constitution Speaker at yahoo dot com. Constitution Speaker at yahoo
dot com. Put something in the subject line that I
will recognize. I get a lot of emails. I may
accidentally miss it. Please it's something like, hey, I want
to give you some money, or hey I want to
be an advertiser or something, or you could just donate.
Go to Douglas V. Gibbs dot com Douglas V. Gibbs

(01:09):
dot com and hit the donate link at the bottom.
Sure for that matter, you can just go to PayPal.
I have, I do use PayPal still. For those of
you who hate PayPal, don't hate me. Hey, it's it's
a tool, man, it's a tool. PayPal dot com slash
PayPal me, slash Douglas v. Gibbs, PayPal dot com slash

(01:31):
p A y P A l M E, PayPal me
slash Douglas v as a Victory Gibbs. Or just become
a nine dollar a month a patron member at the
website Douglas v. Gibbs dot com Douglas v. Gibbs dot com.
Hit the join link on the upper right hand side.
It's an all caps, got a star right in front
of it. Click that. Then the option for the nine

(01:54):
dollars a month patron member comes up. Choose that one,
fill out all the blanks yes, and it will untamly
go each month until you cancel it. Or there's another
way you can help to purchase my books. God in
the Constitution is on sale now you don't have it
God in the Constitution, go to Amazon by God in
the Constitution or in need of my other books. Repeal

(02:15):
Democracy would be a good one, especially now with what's
going on, and we are here just about every week.
We're getting ready to go into football season, so there's
gonna be some Saturdays you're gonna tune in, You're gonna
be like, hey, where's Constitution Radio football game? It will
happen occasionally, so we're getting into that season, So just
be aware. Being preempted by football is on the horizon.

(02:38):
But otherwise, we're here pretty much every Saturday, one pm Pacific,
Kmet fourteen ninety AM, Doug Allen Dennis Kmet fourteen ninety
am dot com. And of course, when we're live and
you're not listening to the podcast cast page, podcast page
on SoundCloud or other locations, or you're watching the video
on Vimeo, you can call it nine five one nine

(03:03):
two two three five three two nine five one nine
two two three five three two. And today's topics. There's
a bunch of them. And I'm gonna start with what
I didn't even less because it's kind of the elephant
in the room. I'm gonna only talk about it briefly.
Then I'm gonna get into what I want to talk about.

(03:23):
Because Trump, President Trump and Russian President Putin has met
when I when I got into the studio today and
the engineer says, hey, would you think about that betubemb
er flying, you know, stealth bomber flying overhead right there
while they're on the tarmac. That was awesome. Talk about
sending a message, Hey, remember that plane that hit your

(03:44):
ally Iran and destroyed their ability to have a new
program for now. That's what that is, just saying come on,
let's go talk. Awesome. Loved it. I think no no president,
no leader, no anybody would have been capable of bringing

(04:06):
about this meeting and handling it the way it was
and getting putin not only willing to talk, but willing
to even admit Yeah, if you're a president, this war
probably wouldn't have started. Other than Trump. He is the man,
is the master negotiator. I think he is the greatest president,
one of the greatest presidents we've had, definitely the greatest
president in the last hundred years. The only ones I

(04:30):
think that even come close or he comes close to,
depending on how you look at it, would be Calvin Coolidge,
John Tyler, Thomas Jefferson himself, James Madison, maybe James Monroe,
and definitely George Washington. These are the top tier presidents.
This is a guy that understands how to be a leader,

(04:52):
yet to do it in a manner that stays within
the limitations offered. And you know, I beget some criticisms
from rough Jesus. I thought you were all about, you know,
the federal gunma being limited. Now you're all about them
getting in our face. What's up with that, mister Constitution,
let's talk about that today. And that kind of moves
into our first story day law and order and the constitution.

(05:16):
Why Trump's DC move is not just legal necessary, it's constitutional,
And as usual, the left is freaking out. You know,
Trump's gonna be a little firm as he normally is.
This is the way the man operates, and they're all
freaking out because they hate him. Their hatred for him

(05:36):
is more.

Speaker 3 (05:36):
You know.

Speaker 1 (05:37):
It reminds me of a comment made by gold in
my ear, who is the Prime Minister of Israel back
in the seventies. So she says says, when the when
the Muslims love their children more than they hate us,
things will change. And that's kind of how I feel
here when it comes to Trump. When the Democrats realize

(06:00):
America is more important and they love America more than
they hate Trump, then we may see it's not gonna happen,
though I don't see it happening with these people. And
it's and it's interesting because they're freaking out over movies taken,
even if it means operating in a manner that seeks
to restore order, law and order, stop violence in our cities.

(06:24):
And they are hyperventilating over all of this, and it
is an amazing thing to watch. You don't want law
and order on the on the streets of the capital
much less than where else the United States. Trump is

(06:45):
doing something that the Constitution also empowers him to do,
restore order in a city that's spiraling into chaos. Washington,
d C. Is a federal city, country's capital. It's not
a sovereign state. It's not a state inside a sovereign state.
It is a federal property. Remember when we were talking
about UH, the president, you know, going into cities to

(07:06):
when there's violence and the federal government, the president has
every authority to put National guardsmen UH, federal personnel, agency
personnel around federal buildings to protect the federal buildings even
though chaos is going on elsewhere in the city, and
and and the idiot leaders don't want help from him.
It's federal property. The federal government has the authority to

(07:28):
protect federal property. Period. This idea that he has no
business doing anything with federal Washington. Washington, d c. Is
a federal city. It's federal property. It only has any
kind of home rule, any kind of mayor and council
and owned police and not because Congress allows.

Speaker 2 (07:51):
It to.

Speaker 1 (07:54):
And and this is and this place, this country. That
city is not supposed to be a playground for progressive
experiments in lawlessness. Our president is constitutionally, legally under the
authority of Congress, under the authority of law, the President

(08:16):
United States is executing the laws established by Congress. Founding
fathers weren't naive about this. They foresaw dangers of domestic
violence and insurrection. They dealt with it. One wonders if
the Ruffians of Boston back then were part of that understanding.
That's why Article four, Section four the Constitution guarantees that

(08:37):
the federal government shall protect the States against domestic violence
when requested by the legislature or governor when the legislature
cannot convene if it's a state. Article one, section eight
gives Congress the power to call forth the militia to
execute the laws of the Union. They don't have to
get permission from the state for that. Violence in the countryside,

(08:59):
in a part of the country, especially in Washington, d C,
is definitely the business of the President the United States.
George Washington himself used this authority to crush the Whiskey rebellion.
This isn't new, it's foundational. Washington, d C. Is not
a state. It's a federal district and a federal city,
the seat of government created by the Constitution. The DC

(09:21):
Federal District and the surrounding federal City of Washington was
created by the Organic Act of eighteen seventy one, and
it's governed by Congress. The District of Columbia Home Rule
Act of nineteen seventy three gave DC limited self governance,
but Congress retained ultimate authority. Section seven forty of that
Act allows the President to take emergency control of the

(09:44):
Metropolitan Police Department for thirty days if he feels it
is necessary. That's exactly what President Trump is doing legally, constitutionally,
and decisively. And then you've got these lefty judges now
and the lefty politician, and the lefty leadership and the
lefty protesters, you know, the ones being paid by Soros
and other leftist groups to be there. Because there's nothing

(10:07):
organic or homegrown about any of the protests. Say no, no, no,
you can't do that, none of your business. Get out
and wash it. First of all, judges apply the law,
they don't write it. They don't have the constitutional authority
to micromanage executive authority. So the judicial activism masquerading his

(10:28):
oversight no bueno. And the Democrats, they're not opposing Trump
because of the policy. They're opposing him because of a man.
If a Democratic president took the same action, they'd be
cheering from the rooftops. But because it's Trump, they'd rather
see crime faster than admit he's right. And this isn't

(10:51):
about Washington, d C. This is about the rule of law.
It's about whether we still believe in the Constitution or
whether we've surrounded or surrendered, should I say, to mob
rule and media manipulation. The Democrats have even launched Hr.
Two to fourteen, the District of Columbia Legislative Home Rule Act.
This was back at the beginning of Trump's presidency, when

(11:12):
they did this seek to eliminate Congress's authority to nullify
DC laws. They saw this coming way back. He said
he was going to get law and order peace in
the capital. And their move to try to give Washington,
d C more home rule power Congress not be allowed

(11:33):
to have any say whatsoever Washington, d C. Is not
only ridiculous, it's constitutionally dubious. Congress has authority over Washington,
DC for a reason. What the Democrats are doing is
not about anything other than political theater and hatred for
anyone who opposes them, especially if that person is named

(11:54):
Donald J. Trump. And now they're screaming, oh, he's an authoritarian.
This is what happens when a dictator comes a city
near you. See how he's using the Trump understands the constitution.
That's why during the first term of his presidency back
from twenty seventeen until twenty one, he only sent personnel

(12:15):
to protect federal buildings of Portland and Seattle. Remember that,
because he was never given permission by those lefty legislatures
to come in to generally quell the violence. The condition
of getting permission does not apply, by the way, if
it is for the purpose of ensuring that federal laws
being executed has provided an Article one, section eight of

(12:36):
the Constitution, which is why President Trump has been legally
able to use the National Guard to assist Ice and
the Border Patrol in their duties of carrying out federal
law as it pertains to immigration and the deportation of
those who have broken immigration law. That said, America's cities
under Democratic party rule have become festering pools of crime

(12:57):
and violence, and the Democrats like it that way. It
creates chaos and a need for dependency on government programs.
When crime and violence is rampant, people have more difficulty
taking care of themselves and are more dependent upon government intervention.
In short, they promote the problems in order to maintain
their power. Should Trump's techniques for getting the crime and

(13:22):
violence in cities be used around the country as he's
doing Washington, DC very successfully. Absolutely, but constitutionally, the federal
government via executive action may only do so in cities
that are not under federal authority if the state legislature
invites federal intervention. The deep blue states, don't hold your breath.

(13:44):
Their leaders would rather virtue signal than protect their citizens.
And I'm not one that gets excited when the federal
government is operating inside a state. In fact, typically it
really ticks me off. But I'm watching what's going on here,
and President Trump is not over He's fulfilling his constitutional duty.
The left hysteria isn't about legality, it's about ideology. Article

(14:10):
for section four. It was so understood that they needed
to protect against domestic violence that it's in there. They
hate Trump more than they are willing to defend or
promote law and order. But the Constitution doesn't bend on
political whims. It stands firm the federal government, in a

(14:32):
federal city especially, is authorized to quell domestic violence, and
Trump is standing firm on that idea, and so should we.
President Trump should tell the DC federal judges to take
a flying leap. They have no authority to stop him,
and Congress has every authority to pass last ripping local

(14:54):
leadership of their positions in DC if necessary. And like
I said, it's a federal city constitutionally falls on a
federal authority. If they wanted, they could repeal the Organic
Act of eighteen seventy one. At DC would be completely
under Congressional control. All of those local leaders would be
kicked out on their high knees. And then what are

(15:18):
they going to say? It's a federal property, and the
president has every authority to quell domestic violence, crime filth
at the nation's capital. Why should he do such a thing, Because,

(15:39):
as he's indicated, it is the first impression. It is
the entry point of officials and ambassadors and regents and
other leaders from around the world. And he used this
in one of a species. He says, my dad told
me this. He said, if you go to a restaurant

(16:01):
and the door is dirty, the kitchen is probably dirty. Also,
don't go in if you can't take care of these
small things like your own capital city. What's going on
in the rest of the country. What's happening to the
rest of the country. And understand something, This is beyond
just politics. This is culture. The country follows the culture.

(16:23):
And if the culture is disgusting and violent and chaotic,
then so will the politics and the cities. But if
we're getting our culture under control with the president taking
the lead here, the other cities will fall into the line.
Not because Trump did something about it, but because the
culture began to change. The culture is what it's all about.

(16:47):
Are we going to settle for the woke culture, the leftist,
anti American pro communist culture. Are we going to go
back to the basics, back to the foundation. And I
used to play baseball, and when you start having problems,
you got to go back to the basics, back to
the fundamentals. When I go out and golfing at the
moment I start messing things up, back to the fundamentals.

(17:11):
How am I supposed to swing my clubs? Where are
my eyes supposed to be? How is my arm supposed
to be? My stance? How am I bringing my hips around?
Back to the basics? And the basics are the US Constitution,
the Holy Bible, liberty, and a virtuous society. And when

(17:33):
that happens, everything else falls into place. And I think
we have a president that understands that. I know it's
gonna make you sad, Alan, I really want you to
go first on this. Don't argue, don't fight, You're going first.
What do you think?

Speaker 4 (17:49):
Why are you picking on me? The show just started. Well,
I think you covered it. There's a couple of things
that came up to what.

Speaker 1 (18:00):
I'm saying is what he said, Yeah, yeah, you whatever,
go ahead, go ahead.

Speaker 4 (18:08):
A couple of important points not to reiterate too much,
and that is and you can get this, and this
is what I was looking for. So I was hoping
Dennis would go first. What I was looking for is
in the because you and I have covered this thoroughly,
their Organic Act of eighteen seventy one, and because the

(18:31):
word corporation's in there, people want to take the position.

Speaker 2 (18:35):
Oh, we're a corporation. No we're not.

Speaker 4 (18:39):
And one of the interesting.

Speaker 1 (18:40):
The term corporation as we look at it today didn't
even really rise up until you still became corporation, I
believe in nineteen oh three. Well this was that's long
after the Organic Act.

Speaker 2 (18:51):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (18:52):
The thing is is that here's here's a couple of
things from the Organic Act of a teen seventy one.
And as far as I know, this has not been
repealed and has not been amended. Okay, the Legislative Assembly

(19:14):
shall have power to create, by general law, modify repealer
men within said district various corporate entity entities, and define
their power and liber libil is provided that the powers
of the corporation so created shall be limited to the
District of Columbia. Okay, so this is you know, they're

(19:35):
telling you what this is.

Speaker 1 (19:38):
Well, and they're saying that Congress can create leadership. They
appointed governors at the beginning, later on with that home relative,
you know, created a mayor and stuff like that, and
that's basically saying Congress can do that.

Speaker 4 (19:50):
See there's another one, and I won't I'll have to
find it later. But I remember one of these sections
saying that, you know, the is whatever you would call
the political association within DC, who did it report to

(20:13):
reported to Congress. That makes it very much so subject
to the federal.

Speaker 1 (20:24):
Government, right, and the Congress is the legislative part, and
the President is the action part. The exactly takes action
on behalf of Congress.

Speaker 4 (20:33):
Then there's another section. I don't know, are you familiar
with the Constitution very much?

Speaker 2 (20:38):
A little bit? Okay?

Speaker 4 (20:40):
Oracle one, Section eight, Yeah, maybe Clause seventeen. One of
my favorites to exercise. Remember, this is what the federal
government is being told and given in Oracle one, Section eight.
The enumerated powers to exercise, exclusive of the legislation, in

(21:01):
all cases whatsoever, over such district not exceeding ten miles square,
as may by secession of particular states, and the acceptance
of Congress become the seat of the government of the
United States.

Speaker 1 (21:17):
Now that's the square part, that's the seat of government.
The city around it was created by the Organic Act
of eighteen seventy one. But the way they wrote the
Organic Act, that clause extends to that city.

Speaker 4 (21:30):
Right, because they never My understanding is the whole idea
was to have a seat of government, right, a federal government.
It was not to be part of any state. That way,
no state would have privilege, right, and that the only

(21:51):
way you got the land for DC was at least
two states had to give up land, and they.

Speaker 1 (22:00):
Did, which they were willing to do. And there was
also a couple of towns they gave up their charters,
the town of Washington and Georgetown, which gave up their
charters and were absorbed into this new city of Washington.

Speaker 4 (22:12):
So the point is that DC, as you said, is
a federal property, and federal government is responsible for its
federal property. The fact that you've got a lot of
people living there, I don't believe that was the original

(22:32):
intent the original town.

Speaker 1 (22:36):
Are you familiar with the Hague in Europe?

Speaker 2 (22:40):
Yes?

Speaker 1 (22:41):
Yeah, the Hague is you know, a seat of government.
There is no residencies and it's all government buildings. That
was the tendency at the time when when they said
seed of government, they met for Washington C. To be
like the Hague government buildings, maybe some uh maybe some
commercial centers, but no residents. But in eighteen sixty two,

(23:03):
after Washington d c. Outlawed slavery, you know, a year
after the war that we're being told was all about slavery. Uh,
then you had escaped slaves starting to pour into Washingt
d C. Because Washingt d C. Is surrounded by slave states.
You know, Virginia was a slave state in the Confederacy.
Maryland was a slave state in the Union.

Speaker 4 (23:23):
And if you could get across, you you get across
the border, you're in you're in an area that says
there is no slavery.

Speaker 2 (23:32):
You're free.

Speaker 1 (23:33):
Yeah, it's a safe zone.

Speaker 4 (23:34):
And when you know, if if you go back into
that time period and you are a slave and you
learn of this possibility, Now did Frederick Douglas take advantage
of this?

Speaker 1 (23:51):
He was already he had already become a pre slave
before the war started. Okay, by first of all, he
had escaped.

Speaker 2 (23:58):
Yeah, that was the North.

Speaker 1 (23:59):
Then when in Massachusetts and then wrote, you know, this
is brilliant. So I'm an escape slave. I need to
stay under the radar. So hey, let's write a book.
And then just promoted like crazy and travel all over
the place and well man, and ultimately what he wounded
up doing is he got invited to Britain to talk

(24:19):
about his book. And while he was there two well
British women were so taken by him that they sent
money to his owner that he had escaped from. And
I can't remember what I want to say, it was
North Carolina and he bought us freedom. So he came
back to America.

Speaker 4 (24:36):
Freeman quite an amazing Yeah.

Speaker 3 (24:41):
And.

Speaker 1 (24:43):
He was he was an abolitionist, but he took the
founding father's point of view quite a bit.

Speaker 2 (24:49):
Yes.

Speaker 4 (24:50):
And he last thing, and he has an interesting book
about independence, Decoration of Independence. It's and I don't have
it in front of me. I'll find it. But anyway,
the point is that d C is federal. It is
not state, and it is not national.

Speaker 2 (25:13):
It is federal.

Speaker 1 (25:15):
Right, How's that sounds good to me? All right, all righty, Dennis,
We've got Washington, d C. Getting cleaned up by the
guy who's allowed to do it. According to law, and
the left is freaking out like he's gone into one
of their sacred You know, it's funny too that they

(25:35):
hate sovereignty until they think it's a good argument against Trump,
and then they picked the wrong thing to say. Sovereignty
counts in.

Speaker 3 (25:47):
Yeah, they're interesting. When the Democrats control the White House,
federal government, Trump's state government. When the Democrats do not
control the White House, all of a sudden, state sovereignty,
sanctuary cities, all that stuff, you know, can.

Speaker 2 (26:08):
Fight against the federal government.

Speaker 3 (26:12):
And as we're talking about this, something happened on January
sixth a couple of years ago, and.

Speaker 2 (26:23):
Trump tried to.

Speaker 3 (26:26):
Get about ten thousand, I believe it was the number
four thousand, whatever the number was, but he wanted National
Guard in there to make sure that everything went well.

Speaker 2 (26:41):
Who turned him down?

Speaker 1 (26:43):
Pelosi and the Democrats and House representatives.

Speaker 2 (26:48):
Why was it not Mayor Bowser that turned him down?

Speaker 1 (26:53):
Because Congress has the authority.

Speaker 3 (26:56):
So Pelosi understood that she had a authority, But why
would she have the decision over the National Guard if
the president is the executive over DC, but yet Congress
can vote over DC. Now you've got the situation in

(27:19):
the National Guard, and the President was second to the
speaker relative to what happened in the Capitol.

Speaker 1 (27:33):
Well, according to our one section eight, the militia and
the National Guard falls under militia according to the Militia Act,
which is part of the Dick Act back in nineteen
two or something like that, two or three one, right
around there, And it is the job of the Congress
to call forth the militia, call them into the federal service,
and then it is the job of the President to

(27:56):
deploy those forces. They did get called up by Congress
in this case, and they are being deployed. Well, I
just Congress, not just the House.

Speaker 2 (28:11):
Well, it just seems to me that depending upon.

Speaker 3 (28:14):
What day it is, uh, in which way the wind
is blowing, you need to find out uh that stuff
before you can figure out what the Democrats uh are
doing in regard to d C. You know, now they've
got a bill they're trying to get through you alluded
to you already that basically is unconstitutional in his face,

(28:37):
because they're trying to empower d C more like an
independent city. Of course, there's discussion about trying to make
it a state, which you know, Trump the said is ridiculous.

Speaker 1 (28:50):
Uh, you know, give them wouldn't be a part of
that state. It would have to be the city around it.

Speaker 2 (28:55):
But go ahead. Yeah, So.

Speaker 3 (29:00):
With all the tds going on, they are against Trump
in regard to supporting with the National Guard in January sixth.
Of course they were in power at the time. And now,
of course Congress has voted the request from the National
Guard to come in, which is what he, as the

(29:23):
executive guy, is now doing. I think that the lines
here are pretty clear. There's just certain things that need
to be done. But consistently, as you look at this thing,
DC is not a unit under itself. It can't be

(29:44):
complaining about federal overreach when everything about it is federal.
You know, there is no other sovereignty or ownership or
outclause that the government limited DC oriented government of mayors

(30:06):
and city council. They only exist because Congress lets them exist.

Speaker 2 (30:12):
But now you want the tail wagon the dog.

Speaker 3 (30:18):
I know things flip around a lot, you know, especially
in the courts, but I think this to me is
pretty straightforward.

Speaker 1 (30:29):
And like I said, federal property. That's all you need
to know. Yeah, you know, and you know all presidents
you know, when there's violence of cities and are riots. If
there's federal buildings in those areas, they do put personnel
to federal buildings to protect those federal properties. That's just
common sense. Federal government can do that. Now, whether or
not they get involved the rest of stuff, that's up

(30:49):
to the state and whether not can invite them in.
But a federal property that belongs it's like saying it's
like saying that the federal government cannot send security personnel
to the Naval Air Naval base there in San Diego
because it's in California. It's federal property, it's their base.

Speaker 3 (31:09):
It's well, if you're a guy that's breaking the law,
and you've got molotov cocktails, you've got tortues, you've got
whatever you want, and you're running up to the courthouses
spraying gasoline trying to burn the place down. If a
federal guy who's been brought in to protect a federal

(31:31):
building happens to use a federal gun to shoot a
federal bullet into that guy as he's trying to burn
down the building, what law is being violated the federal government.

Speaker 1 (31:48):
Well, technically, the federal government cannot operate unless it's for
the preservation of federal properties, or the state legislature has
invited them in. That said, the idea you're using is
sort of like what I've used when it comes to
like a bank robbery, Do the police wait until the
FBI shows up before going after the bank robbers because

(32:10):
it's a federal crime. So I get your point.

Speaker 2 (32:17):
Well, I'm simply saying that.

Speaker 3 (32:18):
You know, if I've got a tape out there ten
feet in front of the building, between the sidewalk and
the front door of the court and it's a do
not cross deal, and.

Speaker 2 (32:31):
You've got guys there and they got their.

Speaker 3 (32:36):
All their protective gear on their helmets, they got their batons,
they've got everything, as well as their stun guns, their
guns and you know, their rifles. You know, if they
if they're sitting there saying no, you won't cross the line,
and you violate the line and you start throwing subway
sandwiches or worse, you know, at the federal officers and

(32:58):
you're trying to take them out like that lady they
got arrested. We couldgo, you know, the one who ran
into the the ice agent and they.

Speaker 2 (33:09):
Took her in right away. You know, you break the law.

Speaker 3 (33:14):
There's consequences up to including you could get shot.

Speaker 2 (33:18):
I mean, it just depends, you know. And I am
not I'm not.

Speaker 3 (33:23):
Saying I'm advocating that the federal people ought to be
there and if Fatifa crosses the line, they'll all be
mowed down, you know, like they were sitting there and uh,
you know the pretind Forest, you know.

Speaker 2 (33:37):
World War two. I'm not saying that at all. I'm
just simply saying that.

Speaker 3 (33:42):
You know, law enforcement is there, they're there legally, and
if you break the law, then.

Speaker 2 (33:48):
You're subject to whatever they do to you. Well, but the.

Speaker 1 (33:51):
Reason why Trump is actually is so good because see
he believes it's something that death doesn't consequences, and he's saying, hey,
there's going to be consequent instance you cross the line,
you do this, you do that, there's gonna be consequences,
and we are gonna come for you, and we'll find
a way. If you decide to hire it in one
of those cubby holes that you think is outside federal
reach or is outside my reach, there's gonna be consequences.

(34:14):
And that's the reason why his negotiations with people like
Putin and Iran and the UAE and all that works
also because he uses the fact that we have strength
and there's consequences. You want the consequences, go ahead, do it.
There'll be consequences. You're gonna take responsibility for your actions.

(34:36):
And that includes the subway sandwich throwers.

Speaker 3 (34:41):
Well, they actually need to get a little higher up
the food chain. And I know the next subject matter
that's coming up is about Texas. But I saw a
thing the other day about the number of people that
have been arrested over January sixth, zero. The number of
people will be arrested over Russia RuSHA Russia zero. They

(35:03):
had like eight categories the numbers that were arrested, and
eight times in a row was zero. You know, the
one guy who's arrested the subway sandwich store. You know,
So all these other guys are doing all this trees
and this stuff, overturning elections and doing all the rest,
and they haven't got anybody yet.

Speaker 1 (35:21):
So I've got an article bookmarked. I haven't read it yet,
but the headline is when is somebody going to go
to jail? That's the time of the article, and so
I'm going to be reading that real soon. But and
that is a good question. That's exactly what you're asking.

Speaker 3 (35:35):
Well, and and that's what needs to happen. You know,
Texas said they were going to arrest these guys. They
haven't arrested them yet. They're still talking to them, you know.

Speaker 1 (35:45):
They let me let me touch on that real quick.
Part of the problem with the people we want believes
should be in jail is that the left has had
a hold of everything for so long that they have dirtied,
they have poisoned the pool of evidence. We're not sure
what is a fact and what isn't. It's like I've

(36:07):
explained about the Epstein files, what they thought was in
there wasn't and THO was a bunch of stuff they
didn't knew nothing about. Was what's this the deception that
let's understand how deceptive, how deceitful the opponents are, and
they had control of all this stuff for so long,
so it's gonna take time to Steff go it and

(36:29):
find the actual evidence. I feel like the Republicans right
now are like Sherlock Holmes, trying to find clues, and
the Democrats figure they'll be back in power before they
finally figure it out, so they're not worried and in
they're arrogance. They think they're untouchable, just like the guy
throwing the subway sandwich. And I think they are really

(36:50):
starting to figure it out. But it's gonna take time
to build that case. But I did say something the
other day. I want to say this real quick. And
what they're doing is a lot of these are going
through rational investigation first rather than the d o J.
And that's important because see, the d o J has
to subpoena those files. A congressional investigation doesn't have to.

(37:12):
It's their files.

Speaker 3 (37:14):
Well, your article that you wrote concerning the Texas thing,
this is not something where there's been a lot of
uh polluting of the evidence. You know, they they left,
they left the city. Yeah, you know, they left the state.
They did what they did. They're in violation.

Speaker 2 (37:32):
You know.

Speaker 3 (37:32):
If they're going to terminate them and have new elections
or or appoint you know, replacement people for these you
know missing Democrats, you know, they could do that, and
I thought by now they would have been doing it.
But they're still talking to these guys, you know, And
uh that's where I get.

Speaker 2 (37:52):
I get frustrated because you know, they.

Speaker 1 (37:54):
And I agree, because this is cutting dry. That said,
the wheels of justice still do move a little bit
floorer than I would like. I'm figuring in the in
the near future, all of these guys are going to
be without a progression or a legislative job in Texas,
I think. But we'll see what happens at best, at

(38:15):
worst or at worst, should I say at best, they'll
they'll also be behind bars for bribery.

Speaker 3 (38:22):
Well, and I think that there's an opening to discuss.
And I'm not trying to meander here, but the stuff
here in California that they're trying to do to undo
what's going on in Texas, you know, where they want
to knock another two or three Republican seats out and
they're trying to get this on the ballot.

Speaker 2 (38:44):
You know. Then I think of what they're doing to Jerrymander.

Speaker 3 (38:47):
There were people that vote the state votes forty Republican,
but yet the state only has ten percent Republican representation
due to the jurymandering and all this stuff. And like
New York, you know, in Maryland, I mean there's other
states as you know that they're one hun just about

(39:11):
uh a Democrat.

Speaker 2 (39:13):
And you know that there's people.

Speaker 1 (39:14):
In Massachusetts Massachusetts, right, Okay, of the population voter for Trump,
yet they don't have a single Republican in the House.

Speaker 2 (39:22):
Okay, So.

Speaker 3 (39:25):
The Constitution gives the federal government the responsibility to guarantee
every state has a Republican fair you know, election.

Speaker 2 (39:37):
I don't know if they can use it.

Speaker 1 (39:38):
It goes deeper than that. So we're talking federal elections,
we're talking to the House. We're talking the Senate and
specifically the House in this case. Yeah, and and and
what's Galvin Newsom said, Well, we're just going to do
whatever we want. We're going to just do whatever we
want regarding these elections our redistrict team. Article one, Section four,
Article one, Section four of the United States Constitution, The times,

(39:59):
places of men of holding elections for senators and representatives
shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof
it's up to the state legislators. But the Congress may,
and I've talked about this before, at any time by
law make or alter any or I'm saying alter such regulations,
except as to the place of choosing sinators, which is

(40:20):
a different topic that last part. So if so, if
they don't play this game, if we're able to pull
it off with Congress before the election, it'll be a
moot point number one, number two, go ahead and Gary Mander.
First of all, how do you further Gary Mander California.

Speaker 2 (40:41):
It's pretty hard to do.

Speaker 1 (40:43):
Mattered about as far as it can get Gary mandered anyway,
first of all. Second of all, one of the things
that Trump's working on, that that Trump's administration is working on,
is cleaning up the voter rolls, voter id having personnel
involved at the elections, making sure no shenanigans is going on.

(41:07):
And the big one is the sense is what they
want to do with the census, and that was when
I was gonna bring We're gonna lose more seats than
they think they can gain for the Democrats over and
lose more overall seats if they if we stop counting
illegal aliens in the census for apportionment, and that's constitutional
in two places in the Constitution when it talks about apportionment,

(41:29):
it says excluding Indians not taxed. What does that mean?
It's an Indian who was born on American soul but
is not a citizen because they're still part of their tribe.
And you want to interpret it's very important to recognize
it would that not also mean illegal aliens who are
in the country but not citizens.

Speaker 3 (41:49):
Well, when you look at the Sanchez sisters from years ago,
you know, the congressional sisters down here in California, and
you take a look at the election, and you look
at Newport Beach and you look at the traditional Republican strongholds,
and then you look at La the traditional Democratic strongholds,
and you see the number of people that voted, you know,

(42:12):
before all of the illegal people started voting. And then
you look at the total votes cast in Santa Anna.
You know, Santa Anna is electing a congressional person with
about maybe two thirds of the total turnout of all
the other surrounding areas. Why because so many of them

(42:35):
are illegal. You know, they got credit for the population,
but they didn't get to vote.

Speaker 2 (42:40):
Yet. Now the problem is they're voting. You know. So
if Trump cleans up.

Speaker 3 (42:47):
The census and then and then uses the cleaned up
census as a new benchmark to correct you know, all
the screwed up stuff that's been going on for the
last couple of decades. Yeah, I mean, you're you're not
gonna have uh as many people in Congress, you know, I.

Speaker 1 (43:11):
Mean anyway, and and and also like I said, and
that and the census of course is down the road
once it takes effect. But right now, the voter rolls,
and you know, the election integrity, that's also gonna knock
out a lot of votes. Even if it doesn't, even
if they don't lose seats, I'm gonna tell you right now,
there'll be a lot of blue areas if the voting

(43:34):
is honest, if voting integrity is in place, and the
Trump administration has people in play to make sure of that,
in the next election, there's gonna be a enoughful lot
of blue areas. Traditionally blue areas in California voting a
Republican into into uh the House, because they have been
not only Gary mannering, but stealing just based on voter

(43:57):
rolls and manipulations. Hey, like the old joke goes, you know,
my my grandfather, you know, voted Republican all his wife
until he died. Then he started voting Democrat. Yeah, that
will be eliminated if they If they are, if the
dj is successful with what they're doing regarding the voter
rolls and cleaning up the voter roles and all that.
So you know that alone could also make a big shift.

Speaker 3 (44:21):
Well, and one other thing which is off topic, and
they'll shut up and you can get back to what
you wanted to do. But you know, with all the
stuff that's going on with the economy, better people getting
more income. Uh, no taxes on tips. You know, I
just read the other day that the Union is now

(44:41):
getting closer and closer to you know, wanting to do
stuff with Trump because he can they can see you
know what's happening.

Speaker 2 (44:49):
You talked about.

Speaker 3 (44:51):
The automotive industry so far this year. You know that's
all union stuff, right, you know, So if going back
to twenty twenty election, how when Trump got a higher
turnout for Blacks, a higher turnout for Hispanics, a higher
turnout for younger people, how did he get all of

(45:13):
these extra people voting for him and him get the
highest number he ever had? Those people came from Biden's side, right,
But Biden didn't Biden didn't lose any votes. He got
more than Obama, he got more than Hillary, but Trump
took Where did those votes come from? Others looking for

(45:35):
those same numbers to show up in the election last
year and they didn't show up.

Speaker 2 (45:39):
They went back to kind of normal numbers and guests
who got their butt kicked.

Speaker 3 (45:43):
So you know, if they can do that in the
census and all the rest of this, then you know
how they is, how the existing party, how the Republicans
don't get more both in the Senate and in the House.

Speaker 1 (46:04):
You know, doing that's the key. You got a good president.
But the president can only do so much. He's got
to have congressional support. And right now it's such a
tight number in both houses. It's a fight. And and
they're definitely not gonna be impeaching into these justices or
at acting in a manner that's basically maladministration of their office.

(46:24):
But if if these things we're talking about take place,
we're gonna have a big enough majority. I think that
the second half of Trump's term will be even more
incredible than this first six months. This first six months
is incredible. And then with all of that prosperity, what's
gonna happen. Jd Vance will move in the House, and

(46:46):
the Senate will get even more solidified under GOP control,
and and the Democrats will even be more so on
their on their heels. Now that's sin I'm excited. If
the right people in the right party are have power,
but to be careful we don't become them and once
there's power, we abuse it.

Speaker 3 (47:06):
Well, what we need to have happened before the next
mid term election is you're talking about the dissipation of
the Democratic Party. Is they need to do the indictments
on Brendan, on Komi. They need to go after Obama
and Biden. They need to go after Epstein's deal with Bill,

(47:27):
and they need to find out what went on with
Hillary and their email and deal. If they go after
all these people that were the leaders of the party,
you know, the Obama administration, and they're proven to be traitors.
Sobs At stole elections and created lies and dissension and

(47:47):
impeached him over it, and you know, greatly affected his
first presidency and stole the second one. You know, if
they they indict these guys and in send them to jail,
well then there's not going to be much happening in
twenty twenty six.

Speaker 1 (48:05):
Well that said, though, the prosecution, the evidence, all that's
fine and dandy, but also the location where it's being tried,
and that I think is where all the strategy is
going in right now. I think they're doing what they
can to show enough evidence to show that it's all
a part of the same large conspiracy. And if all
of it is a part of the same large conspiracy,

(48:27):
and that conspiracy is not just in Washington, DC, it's
in other places. The raid on Mara a Lago is
a part of that conspiracy, then they don't have to
settle for the case being settled in front of a
judge in a district where it's ninety percent Democrat, and
they can go to some place like Florida or something
like that. I well, judge shop, they've been doing it

(48:47):
to us, But I don't care how much evidence we
have and how obvious it is. If it's tried in DC,
it goes nowhere and there will be no handcuffs, there
will be no orange shump seats.

Speaker 3 (48:58):
Well that's what they have. Change the venue if you
know you can't get a fair trial, and.

Speaker 1 (49:04):
Really, well, for the January sixth guys, when they requested that,
didn't it.

Speaker 3 (49:07):
Yeah, I know that's because the other guys were in charge.

Speaker 1 (49:11):
So there's a lot more going on, and I think
a large part of it is I think they're trying
to gather not only the right evidence, because there's so
much deceitful, deceptive evidence in there that's not real. Remember
who we're up against. But also, like I said, they've
got to be able to prove it's all a part
of it's all a part of the same overall conspiracy.

(49:33):
And if it is, that opens up where it can
be held and there can be a change of venue
much easier, it can be more reasonable because those other
locations are also a part of the conspiracy. All right,
So now we've already touched on the text democrats a
little bit as necessary, folks, you can go check out

(49:55):
my articles on it. But what we've talked about was
important is we went way beyond and that's good. Thank
you for the conversation, Dennis. But now I want Alan
because I'm sure he was taking notes. I know Alan
well enough. He's been taking notes on what we've been saying,
or at least I think he has, And so I'm
gonna give him the final word based on what we
just talked about. I mean, this goes beyond Texas, This

(50:15):
goes beyond elections, This goes way beyond Gary Mandarin in
law and order. This is a battle for the soul
of the country. And the twenty twenty six mid term
and making sure that the Democrats don't pull some type
of deceptive of you know, monkey wrench into the whole
works of everything. So what's your thoughts there, Allan on

(50:38):
all that.

Speaker 4 (50:39):
Well, I think you all covered it quite stansive.

Speaker 1 (50:43):
There he goes again what he said, Yeah.

Speaker 2 (50:49):
But he's got something that he's going to bring up
his Allan factor here.

Speaker 1 (50:52):
Now, well, I guarantee you the next words are. But
now let's take a different look at this or different angle.
Go ahead, say it is it my turn? Now?

Speaker 4 (51:02):
Okay, I didn't know there is something that's missing in
all of this.

Speaker 2 (51:10):
Okay that.

Speaker 4 (51:13):
It sometimes if if you've got problems, or you think
you have problems, and there's no specific call to action,
there's no specific what to do, then it's missing and
there is something very simple for me. And it doesn't

(51:33):
matter whether it's a city level, county level, state level,
or the federal level. People in office, if you are
going to propose some this is just the beginning of
an example. If you're going to propose a new law,
and let's say it's coming out of Congress, House, your Senate,
before you tell me about what you're going to do.

(51:58):
I want you to tell me why what you're proposing
is constitutional. Make the argument that it is before you
get it done. Don't tell me you've passed the law
and now you're going to try to convince me why
it is constitutional, because we need to have these conversations

(52:20):
up front. Is this according to the contract? Is this allowable?
Is this our area? And if it's not, then why
are you wasting your time doing this? Then once these
kind of conversations begin, I think what's possible is that

(52:43):
people will start asking, is there anything on the books
right now that's not constitutional? Let's take a look at
this right because we're there's a bigger story to be
dealt with, and there is a lot on the books
that is not constitutional, but we're not looking there. So

(53:07):
the way to begin this is to begin with what
are you doing today? And is it according to the contract?
And this way everybody gets involved in the conversation. Does
that make sense?

Speaker 1 (53:24):
It makes all of sense in the world.

Speaker 2 (53:26):
Oh, I apologize how.

Speaker 1 (53:27):
These fathers kind of knew what they were doing, didn't they. Now,
like you said, wasn't perfect, It was just there wouldn't
have been twelve amendments right out the gate.

Speaker 4 (53:36):
But I think the thing is we're.

Speaker 1 (53:37):
On good job. They created a system that is based
on some pretty firm principles.

Speaker 4 (53:44):
The thing is with the constitution founding we have. I
think it's important to understand what the environment was like
when they did this. Okay, this was a world of vampires,
did not respect boundaries, right, okay, And these people were

(54:06):
very independent minded, but they understood that the Oracles Confederation
wasn't strong enough for them.

Speaker 3 (54:14):
How many citizens were there around the world at the
time of all these.

Speaker 4 (54:18):
Empires, nothing is today, Yeah, but the and the states
of the highest populations were what in the tens of thousands,
maybe over one hundred thousand. But either way, they they
came together, they put it together.

Speaker 1 (54:32):
They one minute left.

Speaker 4 (54:33):
They're very knowledgeable of what they're doing. Yet they made
sure that this contract could be amended. That all right, bro,
vir sue their humility.

Speaker 1 (54:48):
Thank you, Douglas V. Gibbs dot com. If you will
find me, hey, I don't where do they find you?
Tell them a little bit about yourselff before we're gone.

Speaker 4 (54:57):
If E d ed dot us And on Sunday Patriot
Soapbox five to seven pm.

Speaker 1 (55:02):
And I won't be there tomorrow night because two days
from now is my forty first wedding anniversary. My wife
and I are going to head out to you, symbody.
It's gonna be a nice, cool one hundred and six
out there here in the day, but we're going anyway,
and we're gonna enjoy our anniversary. I'll see you here
next week, though, we will be back by Friday, so

(55:23):
k E T. I'll be here for you. You now do
we stand combined with kick? But God bless me, my friends,
God bless you. Thanks for spending the time. Douglas V.
Gibbs dot com, Douglas V. Gibbs dot com, and I'm
on the air on other places to take a look
mister Constitution Hower by Douglas V. Gibbs on the on
the platforms that are for podcasting, and tonight at eight

(55:46):
pm Pacific at KCBQ dot com at kPr Z dot com.
See you next time right here on KMT on