August 15, 2025 • 58 mins
In today’s episode we will be doing some legal speak, talking about statutes of limitations and how politicians use it to their advantage.
Email, Website & Other Links
hoho@thehohoshow.com
https://WSPRadio.com
https://TheHohOShow.com
https://link.thehohoshow.com/Rumble
https://link.thehohoshow.com/WSPChronicles
https://StinkPikle.com
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-hoho-show--2639419/support.
Email, Website & Other Links
hoho@thehohoshow.com
https://WSPRadio.com
https://TheHohOShow.com
https://link.thehohoshow.com/Rumble
https://link.thehohoshow.com/WSPChronicles
https://StinkPikle.com
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-hoho-show--2639419/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Yes, welcome to the Grated, the number one most listened
to podcast on Fluida. So join us now as we
discuss news, politics, current events, and so much more, but
through the airwaves and strapped in as we do.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
The constitution because.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
Burroadcasting Live for Weabini Saft Production Studio B.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Welcome to the Ho Host.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
Show and as always I'm your host, Ho Ho. So hey,
y'all's doing I hope you're doing good? I really do,
because today I'm not really covering a lot of topics.
I'm basically doing one topic, but there's several stories that
I'm wanting to bring up to kind of illustrate my point.
Today we're doing a little bit of legal speak legalese.
(01:03):
I thought about throwing legalese as the title, but I'm like,
I don't even know how to spell that, so let's
just do legal speak that is way easier to spell.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
So that's what I went ahead and throwing on here.
Speaker 1 (01:13):
So I want to start with this because yells know
how I like to start the show. I like to
throw in a little bit of humor, a little bit
of ha ha, a little bit of sattire, and of
course my go to sources Babylon best satire with the purpose. Now,
this is actually kind of a throwback to what I
talked about Wednesday, but it's still important because the Left
(01:39):
is just extremely full of crap whenever it comes to
these type of statistics.
Speaker 2 (01:44):
And even though it is.
Speaker 1 (01:45):
Satire, it's actually true because it's basically what the left
has done. Anyway, headline let me go. I had to
pull it up.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
For those of you that are watching over on Rumble.
Speaker 1 (02:03):
Democrat mayors report violent crime down for since they redefined
violent and crime. Yeah, this is satire obviously, but isn't
this what the left actually does. They redefine it, they
(02:29):
just stop reporting it.
Speaker 2 (02:32):
They will take whatever crime.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
Was actually committed and instead of actually charging him with
that crime, they'll lessen the crime to make the numbers
look better.
Speaker 2 (02:44):
I mean, this is exactly the playbook that.
Speaker 1 (02:47):
The left has been doing for quite a while, especially
in Democrat cities.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
That's what they do.
Speaker 1 (02:56):
I mean, that's their playbook. That's what they do. We
shouldn't be but that's what they do. And again, this
was an article that is kind of a throwback to
Wednesday show where I was talking about big balls.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
I just like throwing that name in there. It cracks
me up.
Speaker 1 (03:12):
Edward, I believe, is what his actual name is, but
everybody lovingly knows him as big Balls. All right, let's
go ahead and continue. So, like I said, we are
talking some legal speak. That's what we're getting into. And
even though, like I said earlier, there's not a whole
heck of a lot of you know there, it's more
or less a single topic thing. But I've got several
(03:35):
different articles to kind of illustrate my point of what
I'm wanting to talk about at the end of the show.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
But I got to build on it first. I gotta
build on it.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
Very much so, And of course you can find all
the articles that I will be using in the show
by heading on over to the Hoo hooshow dot com
and then just click on that news feed tad and
there you'll see the magazine over on flipboard, which is
my go to hub for everything news. And the best
way is to go ahead and subscribe to it. This
(04:08):
way you can see all the magazines, and there are
a lot of magazines that I have put together for
different shows.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
I have been using it for quite some time, so
the library is huge. It is very big.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
Anyway, let's go ahead and get into it. This first
article that I'm wanting to talk about, well before I
get into that, No, No, I'm gonna skip that. Yeah,
I want to skip that anyway. This headline from just
a News, let's talk about this one. Shut it down, bombshell.
(04:44):
FBI timeline exposes political interference in Clinton corruption probe. Now
we all know the story, right this is nothing new.
Speaker 2 (04:57):
We all know the story.
Speaker 1 (04:58):
This is evolving around Russia Gate, Okay, something that they
are actually investigating into right.
Speaker 2 (05:06):
Now, but we all know a lot.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
Of the dirty little secrets of what's going on. We
all know that the whole thing was a fake distraction
trying to smear smear Trump and get it to where
Hillary Clinton can win the twenty sixteen election. We all
(05:30):
know this. This is not news. This is nothing new.
We are all aware of what happened. But having a
regime change at the top and people getting appointed to
various positions that have the same love.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
Of the law that we all have. Now we're getting
these like you know, not just whistleblowers, not just people
speaking out.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
But what we are beginning to get and this is
what's new in all of this. But what we are
beginning to get is the cold hard facts, the actual
data that supports all of the whistleblower claims and everything
that we have known for years. That's what we're actually
seeing taking place right now. Is not necessarily any new
(06:32):
data or I'm sorry, any new information per se, because that's.
Speaker 2 (06:36):
Not really what we're getting. But what we are getting.
Speaker 1 (06:40):
Is the cold hard facts. It's like, look, you can't
deny the claim anymore. You know, the Clintons, numerous others,
and we'll talk about some.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
Of them coming up real soon. They can't just flat
out deny it anymore. You know.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
It's it's more than just eyewitness testimony where they could
have been lying. It's more than just you know, people
taking all of the facts that we know, putting it
together and saying, huh so this is what's been going
on all along.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
Now, it's more than that. Because of the you know,
having the right.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
People in these various positions, we are beginning to really
see a clear picture based off of based off of
the facts, based off of the declassified information.
Speaker 2 (07:38):
Basically, we're getting stuff right out of the horse's mouth.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
That's what it amounts to, Oh, you did this, you
declassified that you ordered this person to do this.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
It's not hearsay anymore. We're getting this information right from
the horse's mouth.
Speaker 1 (07:59):
That's what was going on. Not necessarily stuff that we
didn't know. It's all information that we did know.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
We've had a buttload of testimony.
Speaker 1 (08:15):
We've had a lot of you know, let's draw the
dots ourselves. We see this big collage, or we see
all these pictures, all these players, we see all this
stuff going on.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
We've been able to put it together.
Speaker 1 (08:28):
But now we're getting it right from the horse's mouth.
Declassified information. That's what it amounts to. Moving on, now
we're getting into something else, because nope, that's the wrong one.
Oh I brought that article up twice. Well, no, wonder
(08:50):
why it looks ridiculous.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
Apologize.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
Let me go ahead and get the right one. Yeah,
that's it, Yep, that's it. Okay, all right, So let's
go to this article from You know, sometimes I hate
using numerous articles from the same source.
Speaker 2 (09:17):
I really do.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
And yes, I am using right leaning news articles just
because they're ahead of the game, you know, and I
don't have to worry as much. Not like I don't
have to worry about it, but I don't have to
worry as much about Oh, this is just political speak
they're giving. You know, they're the actual news is something
(09:40):
different than what the headline says. I don't really have
to worry about that whenever I go to just thenews
dot com, and I definitely recommend heading on over there,
checking them guys out, giving them a follow. But anyway,
this article from just a news dot com headline, how's
Judiciary Chair Jordan Blast x FBI director Ray for keeping
(10:02):
shift intel leak from Congress? Now, this is an aspect
where I'm kind of wondering, okay, because we have had
over the years that numerous investigations, we have had, you know,
numerous hearings in Congress where questions have been asked, responses
(10:26):
has been given.
Speaker 3 (10:31):
So was.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
You know, was this information that they were specifically asked
about and did they lie about it.
Speaker 3 (10:49):
True?
Speaker 1 (10:49):
That's that's the question, right, Were they asked about this
and was the answer that they gave truthful or did
they just lie their ass off? Now, I mean one
of the things that we see happen a lot.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
Now, look, I am a fan of Harry Dresden and
the Dresden Files. Absolutely, I am all right, I have
you know I have Oh I can't say i've read.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
I have heard using audio books because I'm a truck driver.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
I got all kinds of all kinds of time to
listen to a book, not necessarily.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
All kinds of time to read one.
Speaker 1 (11:24):
But I have gone through those books listen to them,
like every one of the books at least three times.
And there's like seventeen eighteen Dresden files books.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
That's a lot of books, people, that's a lot of books.
I've gone through each and every one of them and
listened to them at.
Speaker 1 (11:44):
Least three times. I'm actually doing number four right now.
I like the series that much. And in that series
there is a type of being fairies, not necessarily what
you think, not tinker Bell fairies, but you know, there's
just a broader type of a termin One of the
(12:06):
things about fairies is they you know, whatever answer they
give you, it has to be the truth.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
They can't lie to you.
Speaker 1 (12:17):
And one of the things that Dresden brought up one
time was that just because they can't lie, it has
never weakened their.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
Ability to deceive.
Speaker 1 (12:30):
Because a lot of the times, instead of answering a
question with an answer, they'll answer with a question or
some type of a response to lead you in the
direction they want you to go. Extremely extremely deceptive right now,
(12:54):
know about you. But whenever I was younger, my parents
had the frame of mind to where, if.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
You know, let's say I do something.
Speaker 1 (13:09):
You know, I did something that I wasn't supposed to do,
and I was basically caught red handed, right, and they
asked me a question, and I only give them a
partial answer in hopes that they didn't know any better
and I would be able to get away with it
instead of giving them the actual answer that I knew
(13:32):
there was looking for. Right, I would get in trouble
with a harsher punishment than if I just would it
came out and told them the truth. My parents considered
lying by omission as still lying. Did I lie, No,
(13:55):
but I purposefully misled lied by omission. It's the same thing.
Speaker 2 (14:06):
With these little lawyers per se.
Speaker 1 (14:10):
Sometimes they get away with doing that kind of stuff
because you know, of how they classify things, because of
how they do things, sometimes because of how they disseminate information.
Speaker 2 (14:29):
In a matter of speaking.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
They're able to get away with this kind of crap.
Pull the wool over the eyes of the American people,
and no justice is ever served.
Speaker 2 (14:41):
And that's what the issue is, right, isn't it justice.
It's about accountability.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
It's about do your damn job, do what you know
you're supposed to be doing, represent the American people, and
maybe we'll be able.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
To save the country. Right, But that's not what we see.
Speaker 1 (15:04):
What we see happen far too often is the lie
of omission answering honestly, but doing their very best to deceive,
to hide the truth, so that this way we don't
know what's going on. I mean, I don't know if
(15:25):
you've read the Constitution. I truly hope that you have. Obviously.
I mean, you can pick up a handheld copy, you know,
not even one that is on a mobile some type
of mobile device, a handheld device, whether it be a phone,
a tablet, what have you. You can pick up one
for like a buck. They're really pretty cheap, right, you
(15:47):
can pick it up for a buck. The government belongs
to the people. That's why the first three words of
the Constitution dates of America is we the people. It's
not we the aristocrats. It's not we the politicians. It's
(16:10):
not we the delegates.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
It's not. It's we the people.
Speaker 1 (16:19):
We have a right to know what is going on
in government because it's our government. We pay for it.
It's supposed to represent us, not.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
Them, Us, we the people. That's why it's there.
Speaker 1 (16:40):
A lie by omission is still a deceptive practice.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
Let's move on this headline again from justinews dot com.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
Former FBI agent Slam's ex director Komi full role in
Russia Gates says that it wasn't surprising.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
And of course it wasn't surprising.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
I mean, we knew what was going on, right, I mean,
we knew what they were going to do. We knew
what was going on. We seen the attacks on President Trump.
We we seen them, not just Trump, but a lot
of his administration.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
We've seen this.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
I wasn't surprised. It's what a former XBI FBI agent
said about comy And yes, I'm talking about you know,
Kobe's role in Russia Gate. You know, of course, there
(17:44):
was also information about the Shift intell leak, and that's
what I was talking about with the House Judiciary Chair
for keeping the leak intel from Congress.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
And we've all heard the information, you know.
Speaker 1 (18:06):
And while we're talking about Shift, there's something that I
didn't actually bring up in a Wednesday show.
Speaker 2 (18:14):
And this is something that you know, it one of
the things that I find entertaining. I mean, it's appalling.
Speaker 1 (18:23):
Yeah, it's it's a travesty, absolutely, and it is something
that really shouldn't be tolerated, even though it has been
going on to a point that it's commonplace.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
I mean, and obviously we're not surprised, right, And this
is something that they actually went after Trump about several
different it several different people have been caught doing the
same thing. And yeah, they did.
Speaker 1 (18:58):
They went after Trump for this, and I'm talking about
Adam shift something that he had done. Okay, Now, Adam Schiff,
for those of you that don't know, he is a
representative in California. Now here's the thing about being a
representative in any state. You have to live within the
(19:20):
state and the district that you represent, right.
Speaker 2 (19:25):
I mean, that seems like a no brainer. You know,
you have to be.
Speaker 1 (19:30):
A naturalized citizen to be president of the United States
of America. If you are going to represent District thirteen
in Illinois, then you have to live in District thirteen
of Illinois. You can't live in District seventeen. And represent
District thirteen because your constituents.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Are in a different district.
Speaker 1 (19:51):
You can't represent thirteen if you don't live in thirteen.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
It's common place. I mean, every.
Speaker 1 (19:58):
Single state is the same way. In California is this
way as well. You have to live in the state
you represent. You have to live in the district that
you are representing, you know, I mean, it's kind of
the same thing. You can't go I mean, if you
live in District thirteen, you can't go to District seventeen
and vote. It don't work like that. You can't do that.
(20:20):
That is fraud.
Speaker 2 (20:24):
That's fraud. So what did Adam Shift do Well, Adam
Shift in I are as paperwork.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
Claimed that the house that he had and was paying
a mortgage on in Maryland was his primary residence.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
And if I'm remembering correctly, this.
Speaker 1 (20:59):
Was dated back to like twenty I'm wanting to say,
twenty fifteen is when this you know, when this this
document was signed and when Adam Schiff, representative from California
claimed that his Maryland house was his primary residency. Now, obviously,
(21:20):
this is a game that a lot of people play,
especially the richer they are, the more they play these
type of games. They claim their residency regardless of where
they may actually spend the majority of their time in
a house in a state, in a district, in a
city that has the lower, lowest tax rate. That's what
(21:41):
they all do. It's a game that they play. Everybody
knows that they play it, and for the most part,
it's it's kind of allowed.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
It just is you know.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
I mean, it's kind of like going five mile an
hour with a speed limit. Are you breaking the law?
Speaker 2 (21:56):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (21:57):
Is it something that they're actually going to punish you for,
not necessarily unless the cop is a dick, right.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
I mean, we've all done it, We've all played the game.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
I know I have five mile an hour over the
speed limit. I don't always cross the street in a crosswalk.
That's jaywalking. It's against the law. But this goes deeper
than that. We're not talking about speeding, We're not talking
about jaywalking. We're talking about being a US congressman who
(22:30):
is supposed to be living in the state, I mean
a very minimum, the state that he's representing, and yet.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
On a federal.
Speaker 1 (22:43):
Legal tax form, he is declaring that his house in
Maryland is his primary residence and has been claiming that
since twenty fifteen.
Speaker 2 (23:03):
There's a problem with that.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
Because according to his own words, which you know, this
is a document, but both him and his wife signed it.
By his own words, he is ineligible to run for
a public office in California. Yet he's been doing it
for ten years. They're talking about kicking him out of
(23:29):
the Senate. They're talking about charging him with a crime,
with a felony, that's what he committed.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
Tax fraud.
Speaker 1 (23:48):
I mean, being a representative of one state while you're
claiming primary residency in another one. Is anything going to happen?
That's the question, right, Is anything actually going to happen?
Are we going to see.
Speaker 2 (24:01):
People being held accountable?
Speaker 1 (24:07):
Because you know, if I've said at once, I've said
it a million times, that's the thing that I want
to see.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
I want to see these people being held accountable.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
They've went after Donald Trump, They've went after Michael Flynn,
They've went after all kinds of people in the Trump administration.
Trump one point, Oh, they went after all kinds of people.
They went after him quick. They didn't waste any time
(24:39):
by by fabricating evidence, because that's that's again, you know,
that's that's one of these things too, And talking back
to this article from Just the News for keeping shifts
intel leak from Congress because Adam Schiff, we've got the information.
We have the intel, not just whistleblower in information, but
(25:00):
we have the cold hard documents that prove it that
he was pivotal. He okayed the leak of classified information. Now,
it doesn't matter that this classified information was completely false,
fabricated to allow Hillary Clinton to win the election of
(25:24):
twenty sixteen. That doesn't matter. It's still information that was
mark classified. It doesn't matter that you know. And we've
been finding so much more information out about Hillary Clinton
and the email scandal. It ain't even funny finding more
information that was put in a hidden room off the
(25:45):
beaten path, hopefully that nobody would be able to see it.
About all of this stuff, information that was never made public,
and even though it paints a very clear picture as
to Hillary Clinton's involvement and exactly what she did. Again,
more information that we already knew. And it's not the
(26:05):
information that's new. It's not the knowledge that is new,
but it's the cold hard facts, the actual evidence. They
can't run away from it anymore. They can't run away
from it. Let me go ahead and see what I
(26:27):
have for different articles. Here's another one. Now I'll do
that one last, here's another one. Oh wow, again just
anews dot com son of the bitch. It's the entire
show about justinnews dot com articles. Maybe here we go
(26:49):
with another one. Gabbert declassifies email between James Clapper and
Mike Rogers regarding Russia Gate.
Speaker 2 (26:59):
And the last.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
One, FBI classified leak inquiries into false Russia Gate stories
failed to hold anyone accountable.
Speaker 2 (27:11):
And that is where the rubber meets the road.
Speaker 1 (27:18):
That right there is the issue that most Republicans, all
conservatives and libertarians have. That's the problem with it, because
they've been caught.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
We have the information, we have the data.
Speaker 1 (27:37):
It will it will stand up in court absolutely, And
if it is a jury that is actually focused on
right and wrong, and if they are actually focused on
the law, I see no reason why any jury wouldn't
find these people guilty as charged. It's as plain as
(27:58):
the nose on my face. It's as clear as the
sun on a bright stinking day.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
It's a no brainer. It's about accountability, and.
Speaker 1 (28:17):
In a lot of these cases, one of the things
that is holding them back from actually going after these
people and making them accountable. Isn't necessarily that they did
anything wrong and they.
Speaker 2 (28:33):
Already got caught. That's not the problem.
Speaker 1 (28:37):
It's not even an issue as to whether they think
they have the goods, because they clearly do. That's not
where the discussion is. The discussion is about something else.
The discussion is about crap statute the limitations.
Speaker 2 (29:03):
That's where the question is. Because there's a lot of
these crimes.
Speaker 1 (29:09):
That date back a decade and more, and the Statute
of Limitations has already run up on a lot of
these things. It makes it very hard to prosecute it.
And now, I mean, look, I'm all about going after
these people, but I want it done right. But at
the same time, I don't want the Statute of limitations.
Speaker 2 (29:29):
To run out on this stuff. I mean, that was
one of the problems that we had whenever the IRS
went after Hunter Biden, because they purposefully waited to prosecute
until after the Statute of limitations, limiting what it was
they were.
Speaker 1 (29:47):
Able to do in the amount of jail time that
Hunter Biden was going to have, even though he didn't
have any.
Speaker 2 (29:53):
But that's beside the point that was a problem. They
purposefully play the game.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
And waited until the statue of the limitations was up
before they even tried to do anything. But that's what
I want to talk about, statute of limitations, and I'll
do that right after this, just a few minutes.
Speaker 2 (30:19):
Don't go anywhere.
Speaker 4 (30:25):
I woke up this morning putting my foods on tight
reached for my jeans.
Speaker 2 (30:32):
They were faded just right.
Speaker 5 (30:34):
But when I bent down to grab my fishing pole,
I noticed something about my favorite pair with a whole
holes in my underbreeches, freezy and torn, worn out in
places where the fabrics are worn, but they made me
feel freezing.
Speaker 4 (30:55):
Like a country's song.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
Holdsing my underbreeches.
Speaker 2 (31:04):
I'm wearing them strong.
Speaker 4 (31:14):
Saddurday night out at the County Fair, dancing with Sally
without a single care.
Speaker 5 (31:23):
But when she spawned me in the moonlight.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
Showed what she laughed and whispered. That's a mighty.
Speaker 5 (31:31):
Big holes in line underbreeches, freezing.
Speaker 2 (31:35):
And torn, worn out.
Speaker 5 (31:37):
In places where the fabrics worn, but they made me feel.
Speaker 2 (31:42):
Free like a country's song.
Speaker 5 (31:49):
Holding my underbreeches, I'm wearing them strong.
Speaker 4 (32:03):
Sunday morning, heading off to church, Mama loved at me,
left me alert.
Speaker 5 (32:12):
She said, boy, you need some new breeches to wear.
But I just smile and said, Mama, I don't care.
Grandpa always told me where them win five?
Speaker 3 (32:27):
Every tears, rip of memorye.
Speaker 5 (32:31):
Inside a life? Well little, the stories to tell holding
my underbreeches all they serve me.
Speaker 3 (32:41):
Well, have you ever been so full of it?
Speaker 1 (33:39):
Your eyes are brown? Have you ever sat on the
toilet but nothing comes out? Is a box of frosted
treaded wheat? Just not doing the trick?
Speaker 5 (33:45):
Well?
Speaker 1 (33:45):
Have I got the ultimates solution for you? Tide pod
bran colon cleans see tight pod brain colon cleans is
that particular product that will break through the sphincter like
the kool Aid man through a brick wall. Oh yeah,
no more irregularity, no more cram, just good old nice flow.
Speaker 3 (34:02):
That's right, type id brain coola Clinton.
Speaker 2 (34:05):
Please use responsibly and used at home.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
This is a fast actor product now available in Tropical Punch.
All right, and we are back, so statute of limitations. Now,
I have an opinion on this, and in all honesty
it might be a unpopular opinion, but it's my opinion
and I will defend my position on this with logic
(34:29):
and reason. Okay, Currently there is only one crime as
far as I know that there is no statute of limitations,
and that is murder. Murder one, maybe murder two, but
murder the only offense, the only crime that does not
have a statute of limitations on it.
Speaker 2 (34:51):
Everything else there's a statute of limitations.
Speaker 1 (34:55):
So if you commit a crime robbery, rape, assault, a
myriad of other crimes, carjacking, grand theft, auto, you know,
if you are cunning, if you are smart, if you
are intelligent, if you are able to evade capture in time,
(35:19):
you can write a book. After that fact, you can
come out of hiding and you can write a tell
all and there's not a damn thing the law can
do about it.
Speaker 2 (35:30):
Nothing.
Speaker 1 (35:33):
And if I'm perfectly honest with you, I'm against that.
In most cases, I am completely against the statute of
limitation because in essence is what we are doing is
we are rewarding criminals for being cunning, for being smart, for.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
Being able to evade police, evade capture, evade justice. It's rewarded.
Speaker 1 (36:06):
And like I said, in most cases, I'm completely against it.
Now in some cases it's like, Okay, whatever, if it
is a what could be considered a victimless crime. You know,
let's say you rob a bank, an FDI backed bank,
(36:28):
a federal government backed bank. Yes, every single American has
to you know, pay that because it's backed by the
federal government. But in essence, it's a victimless crime something
like that. Okay, But if you're talking about a crime
where there is a victim, rape, assault, theft of any kind,
(36:54):
I don't even care about the dollar amount in all honesty.
Speaker 2 (36:58):
But if you're.
Speaker 1 (36:58):
Talking about a crime that has a an actual victim,
then I don't think those type of crimes, especially rape assaults,
those type of things.
Speaker 2 (37:10):
None of those should have a statute of limitations on them.
Speaker 1 (37:20):
Let's go with the very ugly one rape. There should
be no statute of limitations on that crime, none, because
the victim will have to live with that for the
rest of their lives. Some of the victims go, so
(37:44):
I mean like that, they're never the same, right, I mean,
I couldn't imagine, honestly, I could not imagine having something
like that happened to me, and I don't see how
it wouldn't change somebody. I mean, that's something that will
(38:04):
follow the victim for the rest of their life. And
yet you're going to reward a criminal with the statute
of limitations to where after enough time has passed, the
law can do nothing.
Speaker 2 (38:24):
To bring justice to that victim.
Speaker 1 (38:29):
In my humble opinion, that's complete and utter bullshit period.
Speaker 2 (38:35):
It is. It should not be. And let's move on
to what is going on in politics, because that right
now is a huge thing.
Speaker 1 (38:52):
I mean a lot of these crimes of what's going
on by themselves, the statute of limitations has gone by
the wayside. It's you know, so what if we find
out what's going on, statute of limitations is up. These
sons of bitches are going to get away with the
crimes that they committed. If you're talking about somebody whom
(39:13):
is a civil servant, I am completely against having statute limitations.
Speaker 2 (39:19):
This should not be.
Speaker 4 (39:22):
So.
Speaker 1 (39:22):
These crimes that Hillary Clinton has committed, these crimes, at
Obama has committed, these crimes that Biden, any of these people,
zero statute of limitations, because the American people are the victims.
Think about what could have happened, what could have been?
(39:43):
I mean, think about this, what could have been if
they didn't do what they did? If the Obama administration,
Hillary Clinton, call me, if all these people didn't from
day one, before day one work to undermine the Trump presidency,
(40:09):
what could have happened. I don't even dare to think
about it because it changes so much.
Speaker 2 (40:24):
It really does. If the and I've said this before,
but if you don't actually punish the criminals for the
crimes they've committed, all you're going to get is more crime.
What do you see going.
Speaker 1 (40:41):
On in these in these big cities that are controlled
by democrats. You know, you're not seeing people actually being
held accountable for the crimes they are committing, and you're just.
Speaker 2 (40:51):
Seeing more crime. That's what you get.
Speaker 1 (40:55):
That's what happens. Why are we surprised about this? And
until we actually hold people accountable, to hell with the
statute of limitations.
Speaker 2 (41:07):
Especially.
Speaker 1 (41:10):
For a public servant, because that's what they are. They're
glorified butlers. We should start calling each and every one
of them Alfred and Jeffrey. These people are public servants.
They work for us, and yet they're going to get
away just because of a statute of limitations.
Speaker 2 (41:32):
Really, no, there's bullshit.
Speaker 1 (41:43):
I mean that type of thing, in all honesty, absolutely
infuriates me, and I hope it makes you as mad
as it does me. I don't like statute of limitations anyway,
I really don't, you know, for most cases, I mean,
if I actually went through the law, most cases, like
(42:07):
what ninety eight ninety seven percent of the time, there
shouldn't be a statute of limitations for a victimless crime,
you know, vehicular manslaughter.
Speaker 2 (42:21):
Yeah, no statute of limitations.
Speaker 1 (42:25):
If you're drinking, you cause an accident and you know
the person driving the other vehicle is now quadriplegic, or
even hey, it caused a wreck and now they had
to get a new car. And or maybe it's a
hit and run and you fled the scene. Somebody had
(42:47):
to pay for that.
Speaker 2 (42:50):
It should be you.
Speaker 1 (42:50):
I don't give a damn how smart you are. I
don't care how cunning you are. I don't care about
your ability to actually, you know, get away from punishment.
Speaker 2 (42:59):
No, screw that.
Speaker 1 (43:04):
Especially whenever we are living in a world where science
and technology is growing at an exponential rate, where we
are learning so much with new technologies, science, everything else
(43:29):
where we can more accurately say, yes, this person did it,
here's the information that supports that.
Speaker 2 (43:42):
Why do we even have a statute of limitations.
Speaker 1 (43:46):
I disagree completely wholeheartedly, but especially whenever you're talking about
a public servant. It's complete because here's the thing.
Speaker 2 (43:58):
Here, here's the thing. All right. You had.
Speaker 1 (44:09):
Eight years of Obama, then you had four years of Trump,
four years of Biden, and now we are one year
in to Donald Trump's second term. It's twenty twenty five,
and these crimes date back to twenty twenty. Well, yeah,
(44:37):
twenty sixteen, twenty fifteen, some of them, you know, I'm sure.
Speaker 2 (44:44):
That's a long time.
Speaker 1 (44:45):
Whenever you're talking a political landscape that by design moves slowly,
when going from one administration to the next administration goes
by so slowly, by the time you are put into
a position with people in positions.
Speaker 2 (45:02):
Of power to where you can go after.
Speaker 1 (45:05):
These criminals and hold them accountable, when so much time
has passed us to elapse the statute of limitations, it's
complete and utter bullshit, because again, what we have happening.
Speaker 2 (45:18):
Isn't justice, it's not accountability.
Speaker 1 (45:23):
We are rewarding people whom are on the inside, are
able to evade capture, getting caught, escaping jail and fines.
Speaker 2 (45:37):
All because.
Speaker 1 (45:41):
The right people was in office and they were able
to get away with it. Statute of limitations for what
Hillary Clinton did, no unacceptable. Statute of limitations for what
Obama did, no unacceptable. These people are public servants. They
(46:04):
took an oath. Each and every one of them took
an oath. Ask a marine about an oath. Ask an
Air Force pilot, Ask somebody in the army. They don't
take these things lightly.
Speaker 2 (46:27):
I mean, hell, you know you want to get bitched at.
Speaker 1 (46:32):
Call somebody an ex marine. Now, once a marine, always
a marine. These oaths don't have expiration dates. Neither should
their crimes and the ability for the people to seek justice. Now,
(46:58):
at least the good news is I mean the silver
lining if you can even call it this again, you know,
it goes back to this, uh, this article from just
the News with the you know, nobody's been held accountable yet,
which again is bullshit. I mean, the clock's running out.
But there is there is at least a workaround and
something that the administration isn't utilizing, and we are seeing
(47:23):
this taking place, and I'll tell you what, I am
excited about it. But the workaround so far has been conspiracy.
Because when you're talking conspiracy, crimes to commit, and that's
(47:43):
one of the things that they can use. But like
you know, with with conspiracy, even you know, let's say
you had a group of people and I know there's
a you know, a legal number, you know, five or
more people participating in the in the same crime, the
same series of crimes in order to get a result.
You know, I mean, I know that there are legal
(48:07):
legal definitions about this, so many people surrounding you know,
a particular instance person, what have you a certain amount
of time, you know, I mean, I know that there's
legal stuff in here, restrictions, legal definitions. But if it
(48:29):
is a conspiracy, let's just say, for the sake of argument,
that Obama did something that he shouldn't have done on
his way out the door in order to cripple Trump's presidency,
that he authorized, he allowed whatever bad actors to do,
(48:50):
whatever bad thing directed his FBI in order to do it.
Speaker 2 (48:54):
All this other kind of stuff that.
Speaker 1 (48:55):
We we see evidence point to that fact. So that
happened back in twenty sixteen. The statute of limitations on
(49:16):
a lot of that kind of thing is five years.
But every time they publicly talk about it, lie about it,
perpetuating a lie that restarts the clock. So he did
(49:37):
the crime. Let's say after you know, a couple of years,
they do something else in perpetuation of that crime that
changes the clock, bumps it down the road five more years,
and then four more years they do something else. Four
more years, they do something else. Four more years, they
(49:58):
do something else. They make and appearance on a talk show,
they answer a public interview question from a news broadcaster
that resets the clock for another five years. It wasn't
that long ago. The Obama, during an interview, was asked
(50:20):
about his involvement in Russia Gate, and I had nothing
to do with it. I didn't do anything. I'm completely innocent.
This is fabricated information. He lied to perpetuate the crime
that rolls back the clock. Now we have until twenty
(50:47):
thirty that we can go after these people. The statute
of limitations doesn't run out until twenty thirty, assuming they
don't make any more appearances, and then they're never asked
in a public or legal setting, because even a public setting,
even if they were to go on on, you know,
(51:08):
make a YouTube video perpetuating the lie that changes the clock.
The legal workaround that they are going to use in
order to go after these people and hold them accountable
as they should. You're damn right they should. I'm completely
(51:34):
against ninety seven percent of the time statute of limitations
because we are rewarding criminals for being cunning and smart
or just simply being able to play hide and go
(51:54):
seek more epically than anybody else. And I don't think
that's right. I don't see how that serves justice. A
quote from Adam Smith, mercy to the guilty is cruelty
(52:20):
to the innocent. And it is cruel if it's a
victimless crime. Whatever. You know, you get drunk behind the wheel,
you hit a tree, whatever, it's a victimless crime. It
(52:41):
could have been more. But if you get away with
it for the statute of limitations, okay, okay, I'm at
least okay. You hit somebody else and they're never going
to walk again, that's not a victimless crime. There shouldn't
(53:03):
be a statute of limitations on that. I don't give
a shit. I don't give a shit. If there's still life,
it doesn't matter. They are a victim. That is something
that they are going to have to live with for
the rest of their life. And you should not be
able to escape scot free, just because you were cunning,
(53:23):
just because you evaded, and just because you refuse to
turn yourself in, and especially considering if you are a
public servant and you break the law, no statute of limitations.
Speaker 2 (53:41):
I don't care what it is. I don't care.
Speaker 1 (53:46):
You chose that position, you chose to run, you chose
to put yourself out there, you chose the path. No
statute of limitation.
Speaker 2 (54:05):
You know.
Speaker 1 (54:05):
One of the things that they're arguing on behalf of
Obama is, oh, it's it's official presidential actions. Bullshit, It's bogus.
You mean to tell me it's an official act of
the president to try to overthrow the incoming administration. Since
(54:30):
when is that how American politics worked? I mean, that's
something you find in a Banana Republic. That's something that
Castro would do.
Speaker 2 (54:38):
Are you kidding me? That's your defense.
Speaker 1 (54:45):
It's ridiculous people, and it's time we call them out
for it. It's time we rethink some of these things,
and it's it's it's high time we quit allowing criminals
to be victims and criminalize. It's time we stop turning
(55:14):
criminals into victims and victims in the criminals. Wow, I
had a brain fought right there. Holy crap, that was ridiculous.
But it's high time we quit doing that. That is
something that is fundamentally wrong in how this country has
been operating for quite some time. I mean, come on,
(55:39):
and with all these lawyers, with all this you know,
these you know, just being lawsuit happy, It's like it's like, really,
we're rewarding stupid people. I mean, you have to put
a warning label on baby clothes, take them off to
(56:00):
child before you throw them in the washing machine. Really, whatever,
I want to know what you think about statute of limitations?
Do you agree with me or not? And give me
your reasoning. I don't want just a simple yes or no,
(56:21):
but I am curious. How do you feel about the
statute of limitations? Do you think that's something that should
continue or do you think it should be eliminated in
most cases? Give me your reasoning. Let me know down
in the comments. If you are watching over there on Rumble,
or if you are listening over on spreak, or if
you are anywhere else, send me an email ho Ho
(56:42):
at the ho Ho show dot com. I really am
curious and I'd like to know your answer. Maybe I
can be swayed, but give me an example. Please, A
yes and a no just asn't enough for me. If
we're going to have a debate on it, let's debate.
Give me your position and tell me why. Anyway, That's
(57:04):
all I got for y'all today.
Speaker 2 (57:05):
That is it.
Speaker 1 (57:06):
Do me a great, big favorite and head on over
to Stinkpickle dot com. That is s t I n
K P I k l E Stinkpickle dot com. I
do have some merch over there, several different things. I'm
working on arranging it a lot better and trying to
figure out how I can do it some way else.
Speaker 2 (57:24):
But the store is up and going. There are products
in there.
Speaker 1 (57:28):
And if you have any design that you like that
isn't on a product that you're wanting, you know, Let's say,
if you're wanting a you know, a women's sure women's
tank top with some design that is on there, send
me an email ho at the Hoh Show dot com.
Let me know and I can make that happen.
Speaker 2 (57:46):
Anyway.
Speaker 1 (57:46):
That's all I got. You always have yourself a great one,
and I will see you. I hit the wrong button,
I apologize.
Speaker 2 (58:00):
That's all I got. You also have a great one.
I'll see in the next one. Good. This has been
the Ho Ho Show.
Speaker 1 (58:06):
For more information, you can head to the Ho Ho
Show dot com and for the merchandise store, you can
head on over to stink pickle dot com.
Speaker 2 (58:13):
That is s t I n K p I k
l e dot com. Until next time,
Yes, welcome to the Grated, the number one most listened
to podcast on Fluida. So join us now as we
discuss news, politics, current events, and so much more, but
through the airwaves and strapped in as we do.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
The constitution because.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
Burroadcasting Live for Weabini Saft Production Studio B.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Welcome to the Ho Host.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
Show and as always I'm your host, Ho Ho. So hey,
y'all's doing I hope you're doing good? I really do,
because today I'm not really covering a lot of topics.
I'm basically doing one topic, but there's several stories that
I'm wanting to bring up to kind of illustrate my point.
Today we're doing a little bit of legal speak legalese.
(01:03):
I thought about throwing legalese as the title, but I'm like,
I don't even know how to spell that, so let's
just do legal speak that is way easier to spell.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
So that's what I went ahead and throwing on here.
Speaker 1 (01:13):
So I want to start with this because yells know
how I like to start the show. I like to
throw in a little bit of humor, a little bit
of ha ha, a little bit of sattire, and of
course my go to sources Babylon best satire with the purpose. Now,
this is actually kind of a throwback to what I
talked about Wednesday, but it's still important because the Left
(01:39):
is just extremely full of crap whenever it comes to
these type of statistics.
Speaker 2 (01:44):
And even though it is.
Speaker 1 (01:45):
Satire, it's actually true because it's basically what the left
has done. Anyway, headline let me go. I had to
pull it up.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
For those of you that are watching over on Rumble.
Speaker 1 (02:03):
Democrat mayors report violent crime down for since they redefined
violent and crime. Yeah, this is satire obviously, but isn't
this what the left actually does. They redefine it, they
(02:29):
just stop reporting it.
Speaker 2 (02:32):
They will take whatever crime.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
Was actually committed and instead of actually charging him with
that crime, they'll lessen the crime to make the numbers
look better.
Speaker 2 (02:44):
I mean, this is exactly the playbook that.
Speaker 1 (02:47):
The left has been doing for quite a while, especially
in Democrat cities.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
That's what they do.
Speaker 1 (02:56):
I mean, that's their playbook. That's what they do. We
shouldn't be but that's what they do. And again, this
was an article that is kind of a throwback to
Wednesday show where I was talking about big balls.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
I just like throwing that name in there. It cracks
me up.
Speaker 1 (03:12):
Edward, I believe, is what his actual name is, but
everybody lovingly knows him as big Balls. All right, let's
go ahead and continue. So, like I said, we are
talking some legal speak. That's what we're getting into. And
even though, like I said earlier, there's not a whole
heck of a lot of you know there, it's more
or less a single topic thing. But I've got several
(03:35):
different articles to kind of illustrate my point of what
I'm wanting to talk about at the end of the show.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
But I got to build on it first. I gotta
build on it.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
Very much so, And of course you can find all
the articles that I will be using in the show
by heading on over to the Hoo hooshow dot com
and then just click on that news feed tad and
there you'll see the magazine over on flipboard, which is
my go to hub for everything news. And the best
way is to go ahead and subscribe to it. This
(04:08):
way you can see all the magazines, and there are
a lot of magazines that I have put together for
different shows.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
I have been using it for quite some time, so
the library is huge. It is very big.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
Anyway, let's go ahead and get into it. This first
article that I'm wanting to talk about, well before I
get into that, No, No, I'm gonna skip that. Yeah,
I want to skip that anyway. This headline from just
a News, let's talk about this one. Shut it down, bombshell.
(04:44):
FBI timeline exposes political interference in Clinton corruption probe. Now
we all know the story, right this is nothing new.
Speaker 2 (04:57):
We all know the story.
Speaker 1 (04:58):
This is evolving around Russia Gate, Okay, something that they
are actually investigating into right.
Speaker 2 (05:06):
Now, but we all know a lot.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
Of the dirty little secrets of what's going on. We
all know that the whole thing was a fake distraction
trying to smear smear Trump and get it to where
Hillary Clinton can win the twenty sixteen election. We all
(05:30):
know this. This is not news. This is nothing new.
We are all aware of what happened. But having a
regime change at the top and people getting appointed to
various positions that have the same love.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
Of the law that we all have. Now we're getting
these like you know, not just whistleblowers, not just people
speaking out.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
But what we are beginning to get and this is
what's new in all of this. But what we are
beginning to get is the cold hard facts, the actual
data that supports all of the whistleblower claims and everything
that we have known for years. That's what we're actually
seeing taking place right now. Is not necessarily any new
(06:32):
data or I'm sorry, any new information per se, because that's.
Speaker 2 (06:36):
Not really what we're getting. But what we are getting.
Speaker 1 (06:40):
Is the cold hard facts. It's like, look, you can't
deny the claim anymore. You know, the Clintons, numerous others,
and we'll talk about some.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
Of them coming up real soon. They can't just flat
out deny it anymore. You know.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
It's it's more than just eyewitness testimony where they could
have been lying. It's more than just you know, people
taking all of the facts that we know, putting it
together and saying, huh so this is what's been going
on all along.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
Now, it's more than that. Because of the you know,
having the right.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
People in these various positions, we are beginning to really
see a clear picture based off of based off of
the facts, based off of the declassified information.
Speaker 2 (07:38):
Basically, we're getting stuff right out of the horse's mouth.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
That's what it amounts to, Oh, you did this, you
declassified that you ordered this person to do this.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
It's not hearsay anymore. We're getting this information right from
the horse's mouth.
Speaker 1 (07:59):
That's what was going on. Not necessarily stuff that we
didn't know. It's all information that we did know.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
We've had a buttload of testimony.
Speaker 1 (08:15):
We've had a lot of you know, let's draw the
dots ourselves. We see this big collage, or we see
all these pictures, all these players, we see all this
stuff going on.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
We've been able to put it together.
Speaker 1 (08:28):
But now we're getting it right from the horse's mouth.
Declassified information. That's what it amounts to. Moving on, now
we're getting into something else, because nope, that's the wrong one.
Oh I brought that article up twice. Well, no, wonder
(08:50):
why it looks ridiculous.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
Apologize.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
Let me go ahead and get the right one. Yeah,
that's it, Yep, that's it. Okay, all right, So let's
go to this article from You know, sometimes I hate
using numerous articles from the same source.
Speaker 2 (09:17):
I really do.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
And yes, I am using right leaning news articles just
because they're ahead of the game, you know, and I
don't have to worry as much. Not like I don't
have to worry about it, but I don't have to
worry as much about Oh, this is just political speak
they're giving. You know, they're the actual news is something
(09:40):
different than what the headline says. I don't really have
to worry about that whenever I go to just thenews
dot com, and I definitely recommend heading on over there,
checking them guys out, giving them a follow. But anyway,
this article from just a news dot com headline, how's
Judiciary Chair Jordan Blast x FBI director Ray for keeping
(10:02):
shift intel leak from Congress? Now, this is an aspect
where I'm kind of wondering, okay, because we have had
over the years that numerous investigations, we have had, you know,
numerous hearings in Congress where questions have been asked, responses
(10:26):
has been given.
Speaker 3 (10:31):
So was.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
You know, was this information that they were specifically asked
about and did they lie about it.
Speaker 3 (10:49):
True?
Speaker 1 (10:49):
That's that's the question, right, Were they asked about this
and was the answer that they gave truthful or did
they just lie their ass off? Now, I mean one
of the things that we see happen a lot.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
Now, look, I am a fan of Harry Dresden and
the Dresden Files. Absolutely, I am all right, I have
you know I have Oh I can't say i've read.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
I have heard using audio books because I'm a truck driver.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
I got all kinds of all kinds of time to
listen to a book, not necessarily.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
All kinds of time to read one.
Speaker 1 (11:24):
But I have gone through those books listen to them,
like every one of the books at least three times.
And there's like seventeen eighteen Dresden files books.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
That's a lot of books, people, that's a lot of books.
I've gone through each and every one of them and
listened to them at.
Speaker 1 (11:44):
Least three times. I'm actually doing number four right now.
I like the series that much. And in that series
there is a type of being fairies, not necessarily what
you think, not tinker Bell fairies, but you know, there's
just a broader type of a termin One of the
(12:06):
things about fairies is they you know, whatever answer they
give you, it has to be the truth.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
They can't lie to you.
Speaker 1 (12:17):
And one of the things that Dresden brought up one
time was that just because they can't lie, it has
never weakened their.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
Ability to deceive.
Speaker 1 (12:30):
Because a lot of the times, instead of answering a
question with an answer, they'll answer with a question or
some type of a response to lead you in the
direction they want you to go. Extremely extremely deceptive right now,
(12:54):
know about you. But whenever I was younger, my parents
had the frame of mind to where, if.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
You know, let's say I do something.
Speaker 1 (13:09):
You know, I did something that I wasn't supposed to do,
and I was basically caught red handed, right, and they
asked me a question, and I only give them a
partial answer in hopes that they didn't know any better
and I would be able to get away with it
instead of giving them the actual answer that I knew
(13:32):
there was looking for. Right, I would get in trouble
with a harsher punishment than if I just would it
came out and told them the truth. My parents considered
lying by omission as still lying. Did I lie, No,
(13:55):
but I purposefully misled lied by omission. It's the same thing.
Speaker 2 (14:06):
With these little lawyers per se.
Speaker 1 (14:10):
Sometimes they get away with doing that kind of stuff
because you know, of how they classify things, because of
how they do things, sometimes because of how they disseminate information.
Speaker 2 (14:29):
In a matter of speaking.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
They're able to get away with this kind of crap.
Pull the wool over the eyes of the American people,
and no justice is ever served.
Speaker 2 (14:41):
And that's what the issue is, right, isn't it justice.
It's about accountability.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
It's about do your damn job, do what you know
you're supposed to be doing, represent the American people, and
maybe we'll be able.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
To save the country. Right, But that's not what we see.
Speaker 1 (15:04):
What we see happen far too often is the lie
of omission answering honestly, but doing their very best to deceive,
to hide the truth, so that this way we don't
know what's going on. I mean, I don't know if
(15:25):
you've read the Constitution. I truly hope that you have. Obviously.
I mean, you can pick up a handheld copy, you know,
not even one that is on a mobile some type
of mobile device, a handheld device, whether it be a phone,
a tablet, what have you. You can pick up one
for like a buck. They're really pretty cheap, right, you
(15:47):
can pick it up for a buck. The government belongs
to the people. That's why the first three words of
the Constitution dates of America is we the people. It's
not we the aristocrats. It's not we the politicians. It's
(16:10):
not we the delegates.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
It's not. It's we the people.
Speaker 1 (16:19):
We have a right to know what is going on
in government because it's our government. We pay for it.
It's supposed to represent us, not.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
Them, Us, we the people. That's why it's there.
Speaker 1 (16:40):
A lie by omission is still a deceptive practice.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
Let's move on this headline again from justinews dot com.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
Former FBI agent Slam's ex director Komi full role in
Russia Gates says that it wasn't surprising.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
And of course it wasn't surprising.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
I mean, we knew what was going on, right, I mean,
we knew what they were going to do. We knew
what was going on. We seen the attacks on President Trump.
We we seen them, not just Trump, but a lot
of his administration.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
We've seen this.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
I wasn't surprised. It's what a former XBI FBI agent
said about comy And yes, I'm talking about you know,
Kobe's role in Russia Gate. You know, of course, there
(17:44):
was also information about the Shift intell leak, and that's
what I was talking about with the House Judiciary Chair
for keeping the leak intel from Congress.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
And we've all heard the information, you know.
Speaker 1 (18:06):
And while we're talking about Shift, there's something that I
didn't actually bring up in a Wednesday show.
Speaker 2 (18:14):
And this is something that you know, it one of
the things that I find entertaining. I mean, it's appalling.
Speaker 1 (18:23):
Yeah, it's it's a travesty, absolutely, and it is something
that really shouldn't be tolerated, even though it has been
going on to a point that it's commonplace.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
I mean, and obviously we're not surprised, right, And this
is something that they actually went after Trump about several
different it several different people have been caught doing the
same thing. And yeah, they did.
Speaker 1 (18:58):
They went after Trump for this, and I'm talking about
Adam shift something that he had done. Okay, Now, Adam Schiff,
for those of you that don't know, he is a
representative in California. Now here's the thing about being a
representative in any state. You have to live within the
(19:20):
state and the district that you represent, right.
Speaker 2 (19:25):
I mean, that seems like a no brainer. You know,
you have to be.
Speaker 1 (19:30):
A naturalized citizen to be president of the United States
of America. If you are going to represent District thirteen
in Illinois, then you have to live in District thirteen
of Illinois. You can't live in District seventeen. And represent
District thirteen because your constituents.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Are in a different district.
Speaker 1 (19:51):
You can't represent thirteen if you don't live in thirteen.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
It's common place. I mean, every.
Speaker 1 (19:58):
Single state is the same way. In California is this
way as well. You have to live in the state
you represent. You have to live in the district that
you are representing, you know, I mean, it's kind of
the same thing. You can't go I mean, if you
live in District thirteen, you can't go to District seventeen
and vote. It don't work like that. You can't do that.
(20:20):
That is fraud.
Speaker 2 (20:24):
That's fraud. So what did Adam Shift do Well, Adam
Shift in I are as paperwork.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
Claimed that the house that he had and was paying
a mortgage on in Maryland was his primary residence.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
And if I'm remembering correctly, this.
Speaker 1 (20:59):
Was dated back to like twenty I'm wanting to say,
twenty fifteen is when this you know, when this this
document was signed and when Adam Schiff, representative from California
claimed that his Maryland house was his primary residency. Now, obviously,
(21:20):
this is a game that a lot of people play,
especially the richer they are, the more they play these
type of games. They claim their residency regardless of where
they may actually spend the majority of their time in
a house in a state, in a district, in a
city that has the lower, lowest tax rate. That's what
(21:41):
they all do. It's a game that they play. Everybody
knows that they play it, and for the most part,
it's it's kind of allowed.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
It just is you know.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
I mean, it's kind of like going five mile an
hour with a speed limit. Are you breaking the law?
Speaker 2 (21:56):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (21:57):
Is it something that they're actually going to punish you for,
not necessarily unless the cop is a dick, right.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
I mean, we've all done it, We've all played the game.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
I know I have five mile an hour over the
speed limit. I don't always cross the street in a crosswalk.
That's jaywalking. It's against the law. But this goes deeper
than that. We're not talking about speeding, We're not talking
about jaywalking. We're talking about being a US congressman who
(22:30):
is supposed to be living in the state, I mean
a very minimum, the state that he's representing, and yet.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
On a federal.
Speaker 1 (22:43):
Legal tax form, he is declaring that his house in
Maryland is his primary residence and has been claiming that
since twenty fifteen.
Speaker 2 (23:03):
There's a problem with that.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
Because according to his own words, which you know, this
is a document, but both him and his wife signed it.
By his own words, he is ineligible to run for
a public office in California. Yet he's been doing it
for ten years. They're talking about kicking him out of
(23:29):
the Senate. They're talking about charging him with a crime,
with a felony, that's what he committed.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
Tax fraud.
Speaker 1 (23:48):
I mean, being a representative of one state while you're
claiming primary residency in another one. Is anything going to happen?
That's the question, right, Is anything actually going to happen?
Are we going to see.
Speaker 2 (24:01):
People being held accountable?
Speaker 1 (24:07):
Because you know, if I've said at once, I've said
it a million times, that's the thing that I want
to see.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
I want to see these people being held accountable.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
They've went after Donald Trump, They've went after Michael Flynn,
They've went after all kinds of people in the Trump administration.
Trump one point, Oh, they went after all kinds of people.
They went after him quick. They didn't waste any time
(24:39):
by by fabricating evidence, because that's that's again, you know,
that's that's one of these things too, And talking back
to this article from Just the News for keeping shifts
intel leak from Congress because Adam Schiff, we've got the information.
We have the intel, not just whistleblower in information, but
(25:00):
we have the cold hard documents that prove it that
he was pivotal. He okayed the leak of classified information. Now,
it doesn't matter that this classified information was completely false,
fabricated to allow Hillary Clinton to win the election of
(25:24):
twenty sixteen. That doesn't matter. It's still information that was
mark classified. It doesn't matter that you know. And we've
been finding so much more information out about Hillary Clinton
and the email scandal. It ain't even funny finding more
information that was put in a hidden room off the
(25:45):
beaten path, hopefully that nobody would be able to see it.
About all of this stuff, information that was never made public,
and even though it paints a very clear picture as
to Hillary Clinton's involvement and exactly what she did. Again,
more information that we already knew. And it's not the
(26:05):
information that's new. It's not the knowledge that is new,
but it's the cold hard facts, the actual evidence. They
can't run away from it anymore. They can't run away
from it. Let me go ahead and see what I
(26:27):
have for different articles. Here's another one. Now I'll do
that one last, here's another one. Oh wow, again just
anews dot com son of the bitch. It's the entire
show about justinnews dot com articles. Maybe here we go
(26:49):
with another one. Gabbert declassifies email between James Clapper and
Mike Rogers regarding Russia Gate.
Speaker 2 (26:59):
And the last.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
One, FBI classified leak inquiries into false Russia Gate stories
failed to hold anyone accountable.
Speaker 2 (27:11):
And that is where the rubber meets the road.
Speaker 1 (27:18):
That right there is the issue that most Republicans, all
conservatives and libertarians have. That's the problem with it, because
they've been caught.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
We have the information, we have the data.
Speaker 1 (27:37):
It will it will stand up in court absolutely, And
if it is a jury that is actually focused on
right and wrong, and if they are actually focused on
the law, I see no reason why any jury wouldn't
find these people guilty as charged. It's as plain as
(27:58):
the nose on my face. It's as clear as the
sun on a bright stinking day.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
It's a no brainer. It's about accountability, and.
Speaker 1 (28:17):
In a lot of these cases, one of the things
that is holding them back from actually going after these
people and making them accountable. Isn't necessarily that they did
anything wrong and they.
Speaker 2 (28:33):
Already got caught. That's not the problem.
Speaker 1 (28:37):
It's not even an issue as to whether they think
they have the goods, because they clearly do. That's not
where the discussion is. The discussion is about something else.
The discussion is about crap statute the limitations.
Speaker 2 (29:03):
That's where the question is. Because there's a lot of
these crimes.
Speaker 1 (29:09):
That date back a decade and more, and the Statute
of Limitations has already run up on a lot of
these things. It makes it very hard to prosecute it.
And now, I mean, look, I'm all about going after
these people, but I want it done right. But at
the same time, I don't want the Statute of limitations.
Speaker 2 (29:29):
To run out on this stuff. I mean, that was
one of the problems that we had whenever the IRS
went after Hunter Biden, because they purposefully waited to prosecute
until after the Statute of limitations, limiting what it was
they were.
Speaker 1 (29:47):
Able to do in the amount of jail time that
Hunter Biden was going to have, even though he didn't
have any.
Speaker 2 (29:53):
But that's beside the point that was a problem. They
purposefully play the game.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
And waited until the statue of the limitations was up
before they even tried to do anything. But that's what
I want to talk about, statute of limitations, and I'll
do that right after this, just a few minutes.
Speaker 2 (30:19):
Don't go anywhere.
Speaker 4 (30:25):
I woke up this morning putting my foods on tight
reached for my jeans.
Speaker 2 (30:32):
They were faded just right.
Speaker 5 (30:34):
But when I bent down to grab my fishing pole,
I noticed something about my favorite pair with a whole
holes in my underbreeches, freezy and torn, worn out in
places where the fabrics are worn, but they made me
feel freezing.
Speaker 4 (30:55):
Like a country's song.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
Holdsing my underbreeches.
Speaker 2 (31:04):
I'm wearing them strong.
Speaker 4 (31:14):
Saddurday night out at the County Fair, dancing with Sally
without a single care.
Speaker 5 (31:23):
But when she spawned me in the moonlight.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
Showed what she laughed and whispered. That's a mighty.
Speaker 5 (31:31):
Big holes in line underbreeches, freezing.
Speaker 2 (31:35):
And torn, worn out.
Speaker 5 (31:37):
In places where the fabrics worn, but they made me feel.
Speaker 2 (31:42):
Free like a country's song.
Speaker 5 (31:49):
Holding my underbreeches, I'm wearing them strong.
Speaker 4 (32:03):
Sunday morning, heading off to church, Mama loved at me,
left me alert.
Speaker 5 (32:12):
She said, boy, you need some new breeches to wear.
But I just smile and said, Mama, I don't care.
Grandpa always told me where them win five?
Speaker 3 (32:27):
Every tears, rip of memorye.
Speaker 5 (32:31):
Inside a life? Well little, the stories to tell holding
my underbreeches all they serve me.
Speaker 3 (32:41):
Well, have you ever been so full of it?
Speaker 1 (33:39):
Your eyes are brown? Have you ever sat on the
toilet but nothing comes out? Is a box of frosted
treaded wheat? Just not doing the trick?
Speaker 5 (33:45):
Well?
Speaker 1 (33:45):
Have I got the ultimates solution for you? Tide pod
bran colon cleans see tight pod brain colon cleans is
that particular product that will break through the sphincter like
the kool Aid man through a brick wall. Oh yeah,
no more irregularity, no more cram, just good old nice flow.
Speaker 3 (34:02):
That's right, type id brain coola Clinton.
Speaker 2 (34:05):
Please use responsibly and used at home.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
This is a fast actor product now available in Tropical Punch.
All right, and we are back, so statute of limitations. Now,
I have an opinion on this, and in all honesty
it might be a unpopular opinion, but it's my opinion
and I will defend my position on this with logic
(34:29):
and reason. Okay, Currently there is only one crime as
far as I know that there is no statute of limitations,
and that is murder. Murder one, maybe murder two, but
murder the only offense, the only crime that does not
have a statute of limitations on it.
Speaker 2 (34:51):
Everything else there's a statute of limitations.
Speaker 1 (34:55):
So if you commit a crime robbery, rape, assault, a
myriad of other crimes, carjacking, grand theft, auto, you know,
if you are cunning, if you are smart, if you
are intelligent, if you are able to evade capture in time,
(35:19):
you can write a book. After that fact, you can
come out of hiding and you can write a tell
all and there's not a damn thing the law can
do about it.
Speaker 2 (35:30):
Nothing.
Speaker 1 (35:33):
And if I'm perfectly honest with you, I'm against that.
In most cases, I am completely against the statute of
limitation because in essence is what we are doing is
we are rewarding criminals for being cunning, for being smart, for.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
Being able to evade police, evade capture, evade justice. It's rewarded.
Speaker 1 (36:06):
And like I said, in most cases, I'm completely against it.
Now in some cases it's like, Okay, whatever, if it
is a what could be considered a victimless crime. You know,
let's say you rob a bank, an FDI backed bank,
(36:28):
a federal government backed bank. Yes, every single American has
to you know, pay that because it's backed by the
federal government. But in essence, it's a victimless crime something
like that. Okay, But if you're talking about a crime
where there is a victim, rape, assault, theft of any kind,
(36:54):
I don't even care about the dollar amount in all honesty.
Speaker 2 (36:58):
But if you're.
Speaker 1 (36:58):
Talking about a crime that has a an actual victim,
then I don't think those type of crimes, especially rape assaults,
those type of things.
Speaker 2 (37:10):
None of those should have a statute of limitations on them.
Speaker 1 (37:20):
Let's go with the very ugly one rape. There should
be no statute of limitations on that crime, none, because
the victim will have to live with that for the
rest of their lives. Some of the victims go, so
(37:44):
I mean like that, they're never the same, right, I mean,
I couldn't imagine, honestly, I could not imagine having something
like that happened to me, and I don't see how
it wouldn't change somebody. I mean, that's something that will
(38:04):
follow the victim for the rest of their life. And
yet you're going to reward a criminal with the statute
of limitations to where after enough time has passed, the
law can do nothing.
Speaker 2 (38:24):
To bring justice to that victim.
Speaker 1 (38:29):
In my humble opinion, that's complete and utter bullshit period.
Speaker 2 (38:35):
It is. It should not be. And let's move on
to what is going on in politics, because that right
now is a huge thing.
Speaker 1 (38:52):
I mean a lot of these crimes of what's going
on by themselves, the statute of limitations has gone by
the wayside. It's you know, so what if we find
out what's going on, statute of limitations is up. These
sons of bitches are going to get away with the
crimes that they committed. If you're talking about somebody whom
(39:13):
is a civil servant, I am completely against having statute limitations.
Speaker 2 (39:19):
This should not be.
Speaker 4 (39:22):
So.
Speaker 1 (39:22):
These crimes that Hillary Clinton has committed, these crimes, at
Obama has committed, these crimes that Biden, any of these people,
zero statute of limitations, because the American people are the victims.
Think about what could have happened, what could have been?
(39:43):
I mean, think about this, what could have been if
they didn't do what they did? If the Obama administration,
Hillary Clinton, call me, if all these people didn't from
day one, before day one work to undermine the Trump presidency,
(40:09):
what could have happened. I don't even dare to think
about it because it changes so much.
Speaker 2 (40:24):
It really does. If the and I've said this before,
but if you don't actually punish the criminals for the
crimes they've committed, all you're going to get is more crime.
What do you see going.
Speaker 1 (40:41):
On in these in these big cities that are controlled
by democrats. You know, you're not seeing people actually being
held accountable for the crimes they are committing, and you're just.
Speaker 2 (40:51):
Seeing more crime. That's what you get.
Speaker 1 (40:55):
That's what happens. Why are we surprised about this? And
until we actually hold people accountable, to hell with the
statute of limitations.
Speaker 2 (41:07):
Especially.
Speaker 1 (41:10):
For a public servant, because that's what they are. They're
glorified butlers. We should start calling each and every one
of them Alfred and Jeffrey. These people are public servants.
They work for us, and yet they're going to get
away just because of a statute of limitations.
Speaker 2 (41:32):
Really, no, there's bullshit.
Speaker 1 (41:43):
I mean that type of thing, in all honesty, absolutely
infuriates me, and I hope it makes you as mad
as it does me. I don't like statute of limitations anyway,
I really don't, you know, for most cases, I mean,
if I actually went through the law, most cases, like
(42:07):
what ninety eight ninety seven percent of the time, there
shouldn't be a statute of limitations for a victimless crime,
you know, vehicular manslaughter.
Speaker 2 (42:21):
Yeah, no statute of limitations.
Speaker 1 (42:25):
If you're drinking, you cause an accident and you know
the person driving the other vehicle is now quadriplegic, or
even hey, it caused a wreck and now they had
to get a new car. And or maybe it's a
hit and run and you fled the scene. Somebody had
(42:47):
to pay for that.
Speaker 2 (42:50):
It should be you.
Speaker 1 (42:50):
I don't give a damn how smart you are. I
don't care how cunning you are. I don't care about
your ability to actually, you know, get away from punishment.
Speaker 2 (42:59):
No, screw that.
Speaker 1 (43:04):
Especially whenever we are living in a world where science
and technology is growing at an exponential rate, where we
are learning so much with new technologies, science, everything else
(43:29):
where we can more accurately say, yes, this person did it,
here's the information that supports that.
Speaker 2 (43:42):
Why do we even have a statute of limitations.
Speaker 1 (43:46):
I disagree completely wholeheartedly, but especially whenever you're talking about
a public servant. It's complete because here's the thing.
Speaker 2 (43:58):
Here, here's the thing. All right. You had.
Speaker 1 (44:09):
Eight years of Obama, then you had four years of Trump,
four years of Biden, and now we are one year
in to Donald Trump's second term. It's twenty twenty five,
and these crimes date back to twenty twenty. Well, yeah,
(44:37):
twenty sixteen, twenty fifteen, some of them, you know, I'm sure.
Speaker 2 (44:44):
That's a long time.
Speaker 1 (44:45):
Whenever you're talking a political landscape that by design moves slowly,
when going from one administration to the next administration goes
by so slowly, by the time you are put into
a position with people in positions.
Speaker 2 (45:02):
Of power to where you can go after.
Speaker 1 (45:05):
These criminals and hold them accountable, when so much time
has passed us to elapse the statute of limitations, it's
complete and utter bullshit, because again, what we have happening.
Speaker 2 (45:18):
Isn't justice, it's not accountability.
Speaker 1 (45:23):
We are rewarding people whom are on the inside, are
able to evade capture, getting caught, escaping jail and fines.
Speaker 2 (45:37):
All because.
Speaker 1 (45:41):
The right people was in office and they were able
to get away with it. Statute of limitations for what
Hillary Clinton did, no unacceptable. Statute of limitations for what
Obama did, no unacceptable. These people are public servants. They
(46:04):
took an oath. Each and every one of them took
an oath. Ask a marine about an oath. Ask an
Air Force pilot, Ask somebody in the army. They don't
take these things lightly.
Speaker 2 (46:27):
I mean, hell, you know you want to get bitched at.
Speaker 1 (46:32):
Call somebody an ex marine. Now, once a marine, always
a marine. These oaths don't have expiration dates. Neither should
their crimes and the ability for the people to seek justice. Now,
(46:58):
at least the good news is I mean the silver
lining if you can even call it this again, you know,
it goes back to this, uh, this article from just
the News with the you know, nobody's been held accountable yet,
which again is bullshit. I mean, the clock's running out.
But there is there is at least a workaround and
something that the administration isn't utilizing, and we are seeing
(47:23):
this taking place, and I'll tell you what, I am
excited about it. But the workaround so far has been conspiracy.
Because when you're talking conspiracy, crimes to commit, and that's
(47:43):
one of the things that they can use. But like
you know, with with conspiracy, even you know, let's say
you had a group of people and I know there's
a you know, a legal number, you know, five or
more people participating in the in the same crime, the
same series of crimes in order to get a result.
You know, I mean, I know that there are legal
(48:07):
legal definitions about this, so many people surrounding you know,
a particular instance person, what have you a certain amount
of time, you know, I mean, I know that there's
legal stuff in here, restrictions, legal definitions. But if it
(48:29):
is a conspiracy, let's just say, for the sake of argument,
that Obama did something that he shouldn't have done on
his way out the door in order to cripple Trump's presidency,
that he authorized, he allowed whatever bad actors to do,
(48:50):
whatever bad thing directed his FBI in order to do it.
Speaker 2 (48:54):
All this other kind of stuff that.
Speaker 1 (48:55):
We we see evidence point to that fact. So that
happened back in twenty sixteen. The statute of limitations on
(49:16):
a lot of that kind of thing is five years.
But every time they publicly talk about it, lie about it,
perpetuating a lie that restarts the clock. So he did
(49:37):
the crime. Let's say after you know, a couple of years,
they do something else in perpetuation of that crime that
changes the clock, bumps it down the road five more years,
and then four more years they do something else. Four
more years, they do something else. Four more years, they
(49:58):
do something else. They make and appearance on a talk show,
they answer a public interview question from a news broadcaster
that resets the clock for another five years. It wasn't
that long ago. The Obama, during an interview, was asked
(50:20):
about his involvement in Russia Gate, and I had nothing
to do with it. I didn't do anything. I'm completely innocent.
This is fabricated information. He lied to perpetuate the crime
that rolls back the clock. Now we have until twenty
(50:47):
thirty that we can go after these people. The statute
of limitations doesn't run out until twenty thirty, assuming they
don't make any more appearances, and then they're never asked
in a public or legal setting, because even a public setting,
even if they were to go on on, you know,
(51:08):
make a YouTube video perpetuating the lie that changes the clock.
The legal workaround that they are going to use in
order to go after these people and hold them accountable
as they should. You're damn right they should. I'm completely
(51:34):
against ninety seven percent of the time statute of limitations
because we are rewarding criminals for being cunning and smart
or just simply being able to play hide and go
(51:54):
seek more epically than anybody else. And I don't think
that's right. I don't see how that serves justice. A
quote from Adam Smith, mercy to the guilty is cruelty
(52:20):
to the innocent. And it is cruel if it's a
victimless crime. Whatever. You know, you get drunk behind the wheel,
you hit a tree, whatever, it's a victimless crime. It
(52:41):
could have been more. But if you get away with
it for the statute of limitations, okay, okay, I'm at
least okay. You hit somebody else and they're never going
to walk again, that's not a victimless crime. There shouldn't
(53:03):
be a statute of limitations on that. I don't give
a shit. I don't give a shit. If there's still life,
it doesn't matter. They are a victim. That is something
that they are going to have to live with for
the rest of their life. And you should not be
able to escape scot free, just because you were cunning,
(53:23):
just because you evaded, and just because you refuse to
turn yourself in, and especially considering if you are a
public servant and you break the law, no statute of limitations.
Speaker 2 (53:41):
I don't care what it is. I don't care.
Speaker 1 (53:46):
You chose that position, you chose to run, you chose
to put yourself out there, you chose the path. No
statute of limitation.
Speaker 2 (54:05):
You know.
Speaker 1 (54:05):
One of the things that they're arguing on behalf of
Obama is, oh, it's it's official presidential actions. Bullshit, It's bogus.
You mean to tell me it's an official act of
the president to try to overthrow the incoming administration. Since
(54:30):
when is that how American politics worked? I mean, that's
something you find in a Banana Republic. That's something that
Castro would do.
Speaker 2 (54:38):
Are you kidding me? That's your defense.
Speaker 1 (54:45):
It's ridiculous people, and it's time we call them out
for it. It's time we rethink some of these things,
and it's it's it's high time we quit allowing criminals
to be victims and criminalize. It's time we stop turning
(55:14):
criminals into victims and victims in the criminals. Wow, I
had a brain fought right there. Holy crap, that was ridiculous.
But it's high time we quit doing that. That is
something that is fundamentally wrong in how this country has
been operating for quite some time. I mean, come on,
(55:39):
and with all these lawyers, with all this you know,
these you know, just being lawsuit happy, It's like it's like, really,
we're rewarding stupid people. I mean, you have to put
a warning label on baby clothes, take them off to
(56:00):
child before you throw them in the washing machine. Really, whatever,
I want to know what you think about statute of limitations?
Do you agree with me or not? And give me
your reasoning. I don't want just a simple yes or no,
(56:21):
but I am curious. How do you feel about the
statute of limitations? Do you think that's something that should
continue or do you think it should be eliminated in
most cases? Give me your reasoning. Let me know down
in the comments. If you are watching over there on Rumble,
or if you are listening over on spreak, or if
you are anywhere else, send me an email ho Ho
(56:42):
at the ho Ho show dot com. I really am
curious and I'd like to know your answer. Maybe I
can be swayed, but give me an example. Please, A
yes and a no just asn't enough for me. If
we're going to have a debate on it, let's debate.
Give me your position and tell me why. Anyway, That's
(57:04):
all I got for y'all today.
Speaker 2 (57:05):
That is it.
Speaker 1 (57:06):
Do me a great, big favorite and head on over
to Stinkpickle dot com. That is s t I n
K P I k l E Stinkpickle dot com. I
do have some merch over there, several different things. I'm
working on arranging it a lot better and trying to
figure out how I can do it some way else.
Speaker 2 (57:24):
But the store is up and going. There are products
in there.
Speaker 1 (57:28):
And if you have any design that you like that
isn't on a product that you're wanting, you know, Let's say,
if you're wanting a you know, a women's sure women's
tank top with some design that is on there, send
me an email ho at the Hoh Show dot com.
Let me know and I can make that happen.
Speaker 2 (57:46):
Anyway.
Speaker 1 (57:46):
That's all I got. You always have yourself a great one,
and I will see you. I hit the wrong button,
I apologize.
Speaker 2 (58:00):
That's all I got. You also have a great one.
I'll see in the next one. Good. This has been
the Ho Ho Show.
Speaker 1 (58:06):
For more information, you can head to the Ho Ho
Show dot com and for the merchandise store, you can
head on over to stink pickle dot com.
Speaker 2 (58:13):
That is s t I n K p I k
l e dot com. Until next time,
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.