Judge Napolitano - Defending Massie . . . The Coming State Police

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:04):
Time for the channel light first one and weather forecast
juny mostly sunny day to day, turning partly cloudy with
a chance of storm's best opportunity for that they're saying
between one and eight pm APM is the end of
the heat advisory in effect. Ninety three are high today
with a heat index north of one hundred overnight down
to seventy four. Just a slight chancer rain pop up
afternoon storms tomorrow kind of like today. Ninety two for

(00:26):
the high, overnight muggy and seventy four and a high
of ninety four on Friday again with a chance of
afternoon storms up to eighty. Right now, time for a
traving update. Chuck Ingram from the US see health.

Speaker 2 (00:40):
You find comprehensive care that's so personal, what makes your
best tomorrow possible. That's boundless care for better outcomes, So
expect more at uc help dot com. A bit of
good news eastbound two seventy five traffic is starting to
move again between Hamilton Avenue and when it's going to
take a while to get rid of the backup. Eastbound
Reagan Highway continues heavy, yes, so looks for looking for

(01:01):
alternatives to the closure between two seventy five and seventy
five northbound. Seventy five are wrecked near Gabrith southbound an
accident near Tylersville. Look, it's really hot, so let's give
you a few tips on how to stay cool like
the Yankees. No wait, they're cold, Stay hydrated, wear light

(01:22):
colored clothes, fine shade or air conditioning, and listen to
the judge. He's next. Chuck ingramon fifty five KARS the
talk station.

Speaker 1 (01:34):
Eight fifty five airc DE talk station, A very happy Wednesday.
It's like, I hate to say it out loud for
fear of things tanking on us, but it looks like
our systems are actually working today. I can see Judge Ennapolitano.
Welcome back, sir. One of my favorite times of the
week having you on my program. It's good to hear
you back.

Speaker 3 (01:51):
Thank you, Thank you very much, Brian.

Speaker 4 (01:53):
And why why did Ingram have to mention the Yankees
at a time like this?

Speaker 1 (02:01):
Watching the game yesterday, my wife's.

Speaker 4 (02:03):
Not exactly in a hot streak, and we know who
they're playing this week. I want to thank your producer
Joe Strecker and mine Chris Leonard for fixing the issue
that caused me to kept getting bounced off last week,
But you're in good company. I was being interviewed by
the Foreign Ministry of Russia and kept getting bounced off.

Speaker 1 (02:26):
No, no, let's go.

Speaker 3 (02:28):
I'm in New York.

Speaker 4 (02:29):
There in Moscow and we had to go to my iPhone.
But all is well here.

Speaker 3 (02:34):
All is not well in Washington, d C.

Speaker 4 (02:37):
Where the President thinks he can start any war without
a congressional declaration and then drive from office one of
the few people who understands and defends the Constitution, in
this case, the premiere defender of the Constitution, Congressman Thomas Massey,
And all is not well when the president dispatches police

(02:58):
wearing masks to arrest people without search warrants or arrest
warrants and claims that somehow that is consistent with the Constitution.
Hence my piece this week, the Coming police State.

Speaker 1 (03:11):
Yes, the coming police State. We'll get to that just
a moment. On the attacks on Massy, I was similarly thought.
I found it rather preposterous and ridiculous. You know, when
you elect someone, they're not going to be one hundred
percent lockstep in line with what you believe each and
every time. But he is a staunch defender of the
supreme law of the land, a document that Donald Trump

(03:33):
and every other member of elected capacity has sworn an
oath to uphold. And I know there are different thoughts
and opinions about that, but you know, and I've had
to sort of defend Massy as well as defend Trump
and kind of do this balancing act since the bombs dropped,
and the balancing acts brought about by things that you
and I have talked about, like, for example, authorizations for

(03:54):
use of military force, as well as the War Powers
Act in nineteen seventy three, two things that fly in
the face of the delegation of powers within the Constitution,
and things of which not have been tested in court
to see if they are on constitutionally firm grounds. So
you have people arguing that he can react, he has
sixty day window where he can pretty much damme do

(04:15):
anything he wants as Commander in achieved. That's what the
War Powers were access But that's a delegation of power
that Congress holds correct.

Speaker 3 (04:23):
Right, correct.

Speaker 4 (04:23):
This is Massi's argument that the War Powers Resolution, which
was vetoed by President Nixon, not because it passed along
to the presidency too much power. But yeah, Nixon was
on the other extreme of this. Remember Nixon said it
once in his interview with David Frost after he left office.
If the president does it, that means it's not illegal. Translation,

(04:46):
the president do whatever he wants. Nixon thought the War
Powers Resolution krimped his style rather than gave to the
president the powers that the Congress has. Congressman Massey's argument
is twofold one. The War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional because
the power to declare war is a core function of Congress.

(05:07):
What is a core function one that has articulated in
the Constitution, and the Supreme Court has ruled many times
core functions cannot be transferred from one branch to the other.

Speaker 3 (05:18):
That's argument number one. Argument number two.

Speaker 4 (05:21):
Even if the War Powers Resolution it's a law, it's
an act, but its official title is the word resolution.

Speaker 1 (05:28):
Right, I don't know why.

Speaker 4 (05:29):
Even if the War Powers Resolution is constitutional, there's a
condition in there. The President can only fight these wars,
drop these bombs, attack where every once for sixty days
if there's an imminent threat.

Speaker 3 (05:44):
To American national security.

Speaker 4 (05:47):
What imminent threat did Iran pose to the national security
of the United States? When American intel says they didn't
have and weren't developing and haven't been working on a bomb.

Speaker 3 (06:00):
Since two thousand and two.

Speaker 1 (06:02):
Well, we can all ask the same thing. I mean,
I mean, obviously eras before the War Powers resolution, what
eminent threat to North Korea or Kosovo or Libya or
Vietnam or any other conflicts we've been in over the
past multiple decades, none of which represented a fifty the
American people, But we ended up in long term, embroiled
conflict with those countries and lost lots of lots of life.

Speaker 4 (06:27):
My stomach was turned yesterday and by a piece in
the Washington Post op ed because it was written by
three well respected law professors whom I know. Their argument
is an interesting one, but it's constitutional nonsense. Their argument is, Okay,
we haven't declared war since December eighth, nineteen forty one.

(06:50):
Actually there was a subsequent declaration of war a little
bit later, but it was for World War Two, and
we fought thirty six wars in the interim. Because Congress
didn't challenge those wars, it actually enabled the president constitutionally
to declare them.

Speaker 3 (07:09):
That is absolute hogwashed. But that's their argument.

Speaker 4 (07:13):
Yeah, their argument is that a regular, consistent, systematic pattern
violating the Constitution somehow magically makes that violation constitutional when
it's unchecked, unstopped, and accepted. I have read, so where
the case is that were the case, you could change
anything in the Constitution.

Speaker 1 (07:35):
It's like remember open, notorious, hostile underclaim of right. He
just declared it's yours, and you squat on it and
you keep waving it around. Finally it becomes yours. Well,
this is like they're acting in reliance on nobody's follow
through with accountability for prior acts that are unconstitutioned. Now
here's a great question.

Speaker 3 (07:53):
Though.

Speaker 1 (07:54):
They obviously were going to try to impeach Trump on this,
even though they let it slide when it came to
Reagan and Bush and Obama and Biden and everybody else
who's played fast and loose with the declarations of war
and dropped bombs and regions that represented a threat to
our nation. So this time they plan on going through
an impeachment process. Obviously that got shot down. Yes, they
were an overwhelming supported Democrats. They don't want to type

(08:18):
this with a ten foot poll.

Speaker 4 (08:19):
And impeachment in this environment is absurd. Let me point
out something else. This is how smart Congressman Thomas Massey,
who's an engineer and MI I t top of his class.

Speaker 3 (08:30):
Engineer, not a lawyer or a.

Speaker 4 (08:32):
Constitutional scholar, although he knows more about the Constitution than
these three that wrote this nonsense in the in the
Washington Post and are high paid professors at eminent law schools.
When Barack Obama bombed Libya at Missus Clinton, then his
secretary of State, at Missus Clinton's assistance, remember she said, we.

Speaker 3 (08:56):
Came, we bombed, he died. Ha ha as if that's
something laugh about.

Speaker 4 (09:01):
In order to avoid the constitutional issues, he did not
use the military. He used the CIA. They were dressed
in uniforms, they flew planes, they dropped bombs, they shot missiles,
but they were not the United States military. The War
Powers Resolution only requires reporting and eventual approval. If he

(09:22):
used the military, why because in nineteen seventy three it
was unthinkable that the CIA would have its own army.
Today it does. Barack Obama used it. He didn't give
any notification. He made an announcement from Brazil, which is
where he was while Congress was on spring break. We
just destroyed Bolbyan government never used the American military, so

(09:48):
My argument is these people, Obama, Bush, Biden, Trump, they
all took the same oath I did when I became
a judge. Excuse me, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution
as it's written, not as you want it to be.
They all find ways around it. Is that what we

(10:08):
voted for?

Speaker 1 (10:10):
Well it's not what I voted for, of course, But see,
Congress doesn't want to do its job. It does not
want the responsibility of having the heavy load of an
actual consideration of war. And it's unlikely that these that
you could hurt enough cats to get get to engage
the military, which obviously in these you know, everybody's looking
for expedients rather than actual you know, a faith in

(10:31):
the law and the Constitution. It's easier for them to
just let it go. And since we have a history
of them letting it go, it's just it's status quo,
I mean. And I wanted to get to the question
what would be the how could you hold a president
in account if everyone was in accord that this exceeded
the presidential authority? Is impeachment throughoute that you go you've

(10:52):
done something? Is that represent a high crime and misdemeanor
to deploy military forces, or inn Obama's case, the CIA,
to get the dirty work done.

Speaker 3 (10:59):
Well.

Speaker 4 (11:00):
He spent one hundred million dollars. He bombed tunnels that
were empty. He didn't set back the nuclear program at all.
The nuclear program was lawful, authorized by the IAEA and
the Non Proliferation Treaty, which the United States has signed
and Israel is not. It was inspected and improved by

(11:20):
the UN. Could you imagine if somebody did that to us,
if somebody attacked one of our nuclear reactors because they
didn't want us to have a nuclear weapon, even though
we've signed the Non Proliferation Treaty. Thomas Massey I think
the rest of the Congress is afraid of him because
he points out how they don't do their job. Because
they like Donald Trump, they will just overlook these things,

(11:42):
or because they're lazy, they will overlook these things. When
Obama bombed Libya, at that very moment, I was on
air interviewing the late Great Harlem Congressman Charles Wrangle, who
sounded like this, and I said, Congressman Wrangle, why did
the Congress look the other way? Without imitating his voice,

(12:02):
I'll say, well, it's very easy if it's a success
will applaud him.

Speaker 3 (12:07):
If it's a failure, it's his failure.

Speaker 4 (12:10):
Well, that is a rejection of your obligation under the Constitution.

Speaker 1 (12:15):
So what's the follow through? Then, going back to my question, if.

Speaker 3 (12:18):
You know there is no follow through.

Speaker 4 (12:20):
If Congressman Massey were to bring a lawsuit before a
federal judge to enjoin Trump from violating the Constitution, the
federal judge will say.

Speaker 3 (12:30):
This is a political question. Yes, this is not something
we can resolve. You have to enact more time.

Speaker 4 (12:35):
You have to elect more Thomas Massey's to the Congress,
or elect a Thomas Massey like person to the White House.
This is not a justitiable issue. So we're stuck with it.

Speaker 1 (12:45):
So one of the mechanisms, though I suppose the only ones,
sin say the power of the person will be to
cut off funding. But that would require cutting off all
funding to the American military. Otherwise you play fast and
loose with the pile of money that's handed over to
the American military to keep it running.

Speaker 4 (12:59):
Right, you can, because the president doesn't have a line
item veto, he'd have to veto the entire budget, so
you can put in there, none of these funds shall
be used for and list a bunch of things, but
be very difficult to enforce that, very very difficult. You're
talking about a budget of a trillion dollars. The Pentagon

(13:20):
hasn't passed in audit in the past twenty years, and
nobody knows where the money goes.

Speaker 1 (13:27):
Well, I suppose that for this long circuitous defense of Congress,
Fomasse and the Constitution, we find ourselves at a rather
interesting point here, Judseph Palatano, which is it sounds like
there's not a damn thing any of us can do
about it.

Speaker 4 (13:41):
Well, a lot of this will change if the Democrat
I'm not suggesting this is a good thing, because there's
a down, a tremendous downside to this. If the Democrats
take either House of Congress, that will at least keep
Donald Trump's feet to the fire. He didn't even give
war powers resolution notice to the Gang of Eight, which

(14:08):
he's required by law to do.

Speaker 3 (14:10):
The Gang of Eight is which is also in constitution
in Congress.

Speaker 4 (14:14):
Within a Congress, a constitution doesn't authorize that. But they
are the ranking the chair and the ranking members of
the two intelligence committees, and the Republican and Democrat leaders.

Speaker 3 (14:26):
In both houses.

Speaker 4 (14:27):
He didn't even give them notice, But he didn't get
constitution because when he gives them notice, he does so
under the veil of secrecy. So they can't tell anybody.
They can't tell their spouses, they can't tell the press,
they can't tell other members of Congress, they can't tell
their constituents.

Speaker 3 (14:41):
What the hell kind of a democracy is that?

Speaker 1 (14:43):
Well, I guess it was widely reported that you give
the notice to Congress after the bombing, which is within
forty eight hours under the War Powers Resolution. So I
was I had read pretty much everywhere that that actually
that he followed through on that, unlike some prior presidents
who didn't even bother along those lines, consider Secretary State
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama with the CIA. So anyhow, again,

(15:08):
I think we just found ourselves sort of reaching this
conclusion that he is free to do what the hell
he wants, just like all the other presidents before him
have done.

Speaker 4 (15:17):
And then watch for him to start warning about Iranian
and Mexican sleeper cells and about the need for the
FEDS to know everything we're thinking and saying in order
to root out the sleeper cells.

Speaker 1 (15:31):
Going back to your depression.

Speaker 4 (15:32):
Of civil liberties, keep us safe. Absolutely not. Who will
keep us safe from the people doing the suppressing?

Speaker 1 (15:40):
Yeah? Well, and one might argue that nobody knows that
better than Donald Trump considered he was the focus of
many lettered agencies nefarious activities under his first term. Oh,
judgment Napolitano. Always a pleasure going through these fun topics
with you.

Speaker 3 (15:54):
It's nice we get to see each other this week.

Speaker 1 (15:56):
Yeah, yeah, that makes it great. Well, who you talking
to today judging freedom?

Speaker 4 (16:04):
I have the great Max Bloomenthal. I have Professor Glenn Deeson.
I have Ambassador Craig Murray. I have Phil Giraldi, the
CIA agent who told George Bush Saddam Hussein does not
have weapons of mass destruction. Bush threw him out of
the Oval office, announced to the country that Saddam Hussein
did have them, and GERALDI resigned. And a Bright a

(16:25):
bright intellectual PhD and political philosophy and retired Lieutenant Colonel
Karen Kwadkowski who writes great things for Judge napp dot com.
So I have a busy day coming up. On Sunday,
I had Scott Ritter on on a special show because
of the bombing that occurred on Saturday night. So far

(16:47):
seven hundred and seventy five thousand views.

Speaker 1 (16:51):
That's great and the numbers keep going up.

Speaker 3 (16:53):
In my world, those are over the top numbers.

Speaker 1 (16:56):
Well way over the top of mine. I have no idea,
but I did find out you yesterday that I have
listeners in Nigeria, believe it or not, and that just
tickled me to death. Judge Jennena Polatana, every Wednesday here
we have the blessing at eight thirty to talk with him,
get his insights, thoughts and opinions. I appreciate your time
and this time. You spoke my listeners each and every
week and I hope you have a wonderful week and
until next month when.

Speaker 4 (17:16):
Joe Strecker, thank you for your helping getting us set
up today. And remember I want to be on with
Congressman Massey one of these days soon.

Speaker 1 (17:22):
You got it, man. All we need to do is
work out the logistics, but that can be done. Take
care of my friends, guys. Thank you to you. Eight
forty four to fifty five KRC DE Talk Station fifty
five KRC