September 26, 2020 • 54 mins
Alan Steinberg and I do a deep dive into President Donald Trump’s remarks this week about not assuring the country that there would be a peaceful transition of power. Plus, The Atlantic report that the Trump Campaign putting together a plan to assure he wins even if he doesn’t have the votes.
We also give you a look at President Trump’s new Supreme Court Justice nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett. Plus, Alan and I close out the show with some final thoughts about the iconic Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
My partner Alan Steinberg is one of the most insightful voices in not only Republican politics but in then entire political arena. He has been involved in campaigns for most of his adult life.
He served as at the request of former President George W. Bush in the role of Regional Administrator of Region 2 EPA. The region covers New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Puerto Rico as well as six tribal nations.
He also served as a conservation advisor to the Israeli government. Also, Steinberg served as the Executive Director of the New Jersey Meadowlands Commission under former New Jersey Governor Christie Whitman.
Follow him on Twitter @ASteinberg613
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/alan.steinberg.5
So, what are you waiting for?
Start judging the truth for yourself today.
Stay in touch with us on social media.
Follow us on Twitter - @JWMediaDC
Instgram - @jimwilliamsmedia200
FaceBook –
https://www.facebook.com/jwilliamsexamin
We also give you a look at President Trump’s new Supreme Court Justice nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett. Plus, Alan and I close out the show with some final thoughts about the iconic Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
My partner Alan Steinberg is one of the most insightful voices in not only Republican politics but in then entire political arena. He has been involved in campaigns for most of his adult life.
He served as at the request of former President George W. Bush in the role of Regional Administrator of Region 2 EPA. The region covers New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Puerto Rico as well as six tribal nations.
He also served as a conservation advisor to the Israeli government. Also, Steinberg served as the Executive Director of the New Jersey Meadowlands Commission under former New Jersey Governor Christie Whitman.
Follow him on Twitter @ASteinberg613
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/alan.steinberg.5
So, what are you waiting for?
Start judging the truth for yourself today.
Stay in touch with us on social media.
Follow us on Twitter - @JWMediaDC
Instgram - @jimwilliamsmedia200
FaceBook –
https://www.facebook.com/jwilliamsexamin
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:20):
Hey, wont to Welcome to thePolitically Incorrect Podcast. I'm Jim Williams along
with my partner in crime, AlanSteinbert Allen. It's been a crazy week.
For the first time in the historyof the country, the President of
the United States want to ask asimple question, which is basically a layup,
(00:41):
you know, will he wouldn't lose, you know, Ardrawal accept the
results of the election and basically bepart of a peaceful transfer in an election.
And he said no, He said, I'd have to I'd have to
(01:02):
wait to see what finds out withthe ballots. Is like, okay,
you didn't specifically say, we're assuminghe meant the mail in ballots, because
otherwise so it's just ballots, thateverything would be gone. But this is
not normal. And it's also youknow, we've said this before, but
(01:23):
I honestly mean it. This isfrightening. You know. After I read
the Atlantic magazine article and I hadseen the Trump press conference on Wednesday where
he would not commit to a peacefultransfer of power, I couldn't sleep Wednesday
night. You I have never hadthis experience in politics before. My life
(01:46):
has been in politics now for fortyyears, and I've always been able to
basically put out of my mind whenaside for me to go to sleep the
political ups and downs of the day. But this night I couldn't go to
sleep as I felt that for thefirst time in my life, the democracy
in America is imperiled. Now there'sa deeper story here. Unless Joe Biden
(02:08):
has a meltdown in the debate onTuesday night, this election is basically over.
There's no way that Trump can winan affair and free election right now.
The polls are terrifying for him.He is behind in the Fox poll
and he used to venerate Fox,and now he hates them because of these
polls. He's behind in the Foxpole in Ohio today by five points.
(02:31):
He's running about even in Texas,and these are states that he had banked,
so he and he's short of money, so he has to spend money
on states that he had considered inhis pocket. He is really, in
terms of Biden, in a terribleelectoral college position. Biden has pretty much
(02:53):
locked two hundred and sixty nine electoralvotes. And as I said, as
long as he gets through the debate, all right, and I'm confident that
he will, this election is overunless Trump steals it. Now, how
does Trump plan to steal it?He plans to steal it in the exact
manner that Atlantic Magazine prescribed. BartonGellman wrote a classic piece in the Constitution.
(03:16):
It provides the mechanism whereby each stategets a certain amount of electoral votes
based upon the two senators plus thenumber of members in the House of Representatives.
But it doesn't say how the electorsare to be selected. It leaves
it up to the legislatures of bothstates. Now, over time it has
(03:38):
evolved it's by custom and norm,not by statute, except in some states
it's by statutes, but a numberof states it isn't. It has evolved
that the electors are elected by thepopular vote, and the candidate who gets
the majority of the vote in thestate will get the electors. But there
remains the possibility and it would belegal, although it would be the worst
(04:01):
abuse of power in our lifetime.Where if there is a state and let's
say Joe Biden has a lead,and it's a pretty firm lead, but
the Republicans come up with spurious allegationsof fraud, they can go to the
state legislature. If the state legislaturesRepublican and say, hey, you select
(04:21):
the legislatures, take this out ofthe hands of a popular vote, and
that would be a horrific thing.It could result in Trump getting the electors
and states that Biden won. That'sthe plan, and that could deprive people
in various states of democracy. Plusthat Trump is coming up with the smoke
screen that somehow vote by mail isinherently corrupt, inherently fraudulent. That is
(04:46):
not true. Vote by mail isactually more reliable than most forms of voting
because it's easily fraud is easily detectable, and it's rapidly accountable. But nevertheless,
Trump has come up with a smokescreen. And unfortunately, the Republican
Party is not the Great Party oftaff Goldwater, Eisenhower, men of principle.
(05:10):
It's a bunch of pathetic supplicants whoin this election. And this is
the thing that really is nauseating tome. Everything that comes up. They
can't point their fingers Joe Biden.So they bring Hillary Clinton into it,
and she's not even a candidate inthis race. So this is desperation time
for Trump. It's desperation time forthe Republicans because they stand for sure to
(05:35):
lose four Senate seats, which willgive the Democrats the majority, you know,
basically assuming that Biden wins the presidency, because then Kamela Harris would break
the tie. There's a few otherseats now that the Democrats may win.
They may win the Senate seat inMississippi with Mike sp I would love to
(05:56):
see that because Mike Guestby's an AfricanAmerican served in the Clinton administration. This
is shaping up as it possible Isay possible, not definite, a possible
democratic landslide in both the presidential andcenter races. So you're going to see
Trump do some crazy, desperate things. Let me ask you now again,
(06:17):
we're talking about the electoral college,where you need two hundred and seventy votes
to win the election. It's howPresident Trump won his election in twenty sixteen
because Hillary Clinton beat him by threemillion votes in the popular account. I
(06:38):
believe personally that Biden will exceed thethree million mark that Clinton did in the
popular vote. But to your point, and to the point of the Atlantic,
the concept that you're talking about comesfrom Trump because most of these ballots
(06:58):
and states, certainly in the swingstates, like Pennsylvania's like you can't begin
to count ballots after you count thethe in person voting. So it's potential
where Trump is ahead on election day, you know, when they start counting
the ballots, but because they haven'tcounted the mail in ballots, then you
(07:24):
know, in a week or solater, when these ballots are counted,
then Trump loses the state. Wellno, I'm just I'm throwing that out
there as a just a date,okay, but is it not possible that
(07:45):
Trump and his attorneys can drop in, you know, to these key battleground
states and say, at the endof the you know, election, we
need to stop and not count those. That's what they're already trying to do,
right, And that's where things getreally bizarre. And as a lawyer
(08:09):
and as someone who's followed this yourentire life and been involved in this in
your entire life, the one thingthat scares me, and this goes back
you and are sports fans. Ifyou're on offense, okay, as the
Trump camp seems to be ready tobe, you need only one thing to
(08:31):
go right for you. If you'replaying defense, you have to assume everything
but you. But playing defense sometimeshas a problem because again, they only
offense only needs one thing to goright for the play to go for a
touchdown, or a ball to behit out of a ballpark, or a
(08:52):
basket to be made. And that'swhere I think the concern is. Are
Yes, the Democrat that's a warrioringup, but this could be this could
very well be a very scary scenario. Specifically since the head of the Republican
(09:15):
House or Senate in state of Pennsylvaniawas quoted in Atlantic saying that they've already
gamed us out. Yeah that wasthe state chair. They interviewed the Pennsylvania
state chair, and yeah, itis frightening. I will say this though,
I don't think the Democrats are playingany kind of laid back game.
(09:37):
I think fortunately they're on the offensetoo, because the experience of twenty sixteen
really is a searing one for them. They are going to be scarred by
that experience for a lifetime, andso they are really covering all the contingencies
this time. I've heard the nationalchair, Tom has interviewed a number of
(10:01):
times. They are lawyered up andthey have very good lawyers and they also
will have a good operation in termsof ground game. One thing speaking of
ground game that has amazed me,which really reflects badly on trumpet reflects badly
on a Republican party. The Democratshave refrained from door to door attempts to
(10:22):
register because of the coronavirus. TheRepublicans don't give a damn. They're having
events with no social distancing, nomasks, and they're going around door to
door. And it may backfire onthem because there have been poles taking that
show that people don't want visitors attheir door while the pandemic is going on.
(10:46):
But this is an ugly election.It's the ugliest election of my lifetime.
Let's talk a little bit about whyPresident Trump. President Trump would be
the first president elected to a secondterm again who lost the popular vote.
(11:11):
Let's talk a little bit about now. Marco Rubio, to his credit,
has introduced a bill saying that theelectors, which you spoke about very eloquently
earlier on December the twelfth, tomake to do just as you said,
(11:31):
to elect the president via the ElectorialCollege. The bill that Rubio is putting
out there would extend that date toJanuary fourth, in an attempt to make
certain that every ballot count be countedand that all of the supervisor of elections
(11:54):
on state levels can ratify the vote. Because of the pandemic, obviously we're
going to have a record number ofmail in ballots. So I think the
Rubio bill would be fantastic if theycan get it by But I'm not even
surely can get it passed. I'mnot sure they'll get it passed either.
I do think this, although Icould be wrong. Vote by the accounts
(12:18):
of vote by mail always goes quickerthan people think. I know this from
my New Jersey experience in the primaryelection this year, I voted by mail
and it went fairly quickly. I'mworried about one thing. In Pennsylvania,
they have a problem with what theydescribe as one hundred thousand naked ballots that
(12:39):
could be thrown out. That's alot of ballots, and the reason they
could be thrown out is in Pennsylvania. And it's the same thing in New
Jersey, except that then become aproblem here. When the voter receives in
the mail his or her ballot,it has the outer or envelope, which
is the way the ballot gets tothe home. It's got and it's got
(13:01):
a return envelope which is uh,you know, basically, which is uh
stamped right, you know, sothat you can send it to the polling
place or the place where I shouldn'tsay point place to place where the ballots
are to be mailed. And thereis another envelope which are which you must
(13:24):
place the ballot in, and that'scalled the secrecy envelope that keeps your ballot
secret. And it's not opened untilthe count starts, and the person knowing
it will not know the identity ofthe person who sent it. But a
number of people in Pennsylvania, thisdidn't happen in New Jersey, but a
(13:46):
number of people in uh Pennsylvania.In Pennsylvania just put it in the outer
or in the envelope, just putthe ballot in the envelope that sent it
to the place where the ballots wereto be received, and they didn't put
it in a secrecy envelope. Andfor that reason a number of ballots were
thrown out. New Jersey did amuch better job than other states. I
(14:09):
hope, for the sake of Bidenthat there are not too many of these
ballots rowing out, because I assumethat most of those naked ballots were Democrat
votes. Yeah. In the ironiccat story. Yesterday, President Trump tweeted
(14:31):
that the ballots are going out theteat the absentee ballots are going out in
the state of Florida. Be sureto get your ballot and vote. Um,
you know, be a male inthe state of Florida. So that
issue, it's ridiculous. I justthought it was kind of ironic that,
(14:54):
you know, on the same dayhe's downplaying that, you know, this
is nothing but corrupt, He's he'spromoting in his own in the state where
he now lives that, Oh it'scool, don't worry, you know,
get out there and do it.So one hundred percent bizarre. But I
think that what people have to understandis, from immedia standpoint, it's gonna
(15:18):
take a few days at least toget this stuff done. Now, just
because you don't know, within youknow, twenty four hours, who the
next president United States is doesn't meanthat any hanky panky has gone on.
It just means it's taken a whileto count. So people shouldn't freak out
(15:41):
if that, you know that,because that's gonna happen. So do you
just have to hold your breath andhold your your state legislatures accountable, because
that's where it's gonna come down.It's gonna come down to your supervisors of
elections and the trust you have inthem getting it right now as you calling.
(16:07):
Twenty seventeen, because President Trump madethe allegation that there was as many
as three million votes that were invalid, he opened an investigation, and there
was a congressional investigation on this intwenty seventeen. The upshot of that twenty
seventeen investigation proved that there was lessthan five less than a half percent of
(16:37):
the ballots in the United States castin twenty sixteen were you know, we're
illegitimate. So there's no I mean, there's no voter fraud. There wasn't
any And this is and Christopher Raytestified, the head of the testified that
voter fraud is minimal in this countryand once a national election by voter fraud
(17:03):
would be a monumental challenge. Theseare my words coming up, not his.
I don't think the mafia could pullthis off. I mean it would
really be a monumental challenge, eventhe Russians. One the one worry I
have about in the future is thatI think the most efficient way of voting
would be if we could have nationwideonline voting. But that's something that foreign
(17:26):
powers could hack and interfere with.That's the problem there. Yeahday someday that's
going to happen, but it's problematic. So yeah, at the moment for
sure. The the other thing withregard to balance, and we've said this
as a public service announcement, pleaseread everything so you know what you're doing,
(17:49):
just as you had illustrated, youknow how it costs one hundred thousand
people their representation in Pennsylvania in thetwenty eighteen Now let's talk about We're going
to get to our conversation about RuthBader Ginsburg in a minute, but let's
(18:11):
talk about the two women who arelikely tomorrow. One of the two of
them is likely tomorrow to be namedPresident Trump's replacement. That would be Judge
Amy Corney Barrett, who is fortysix and she is in charge of the
(18:32):
US Court of Appeals for the SeventhCircuit, which is out in the Midwest
and in Indiana and Illinois. Andthe other one is Judge Barbara Lagoa from
Steve, Florida. She's a CubanAmerican and she was part of the Florida
(18:52):
Supreme Court appointed by Governor DeSantis.So both of these women have had very
little experience on the bench on anylevel. Well, I wouldn't say that
(19:14):
they have an inadequate amount of experience. Their experience in terms of length and
breadth, it's been comparable to anumber of Supreme Court justices. I think.
Let me put it this way,I think they are both qualified.
That isn't the problem. There aretwo problems. Number one is that there
(19:37):
is a strong possibility, at leastin a case of Barrack, that she
could be the fifth vote to overrideRoe v. Wade. Now, the
funny thing from my point of viewis that I never liked the decision,
not because of any pro choice orpro life view that I have, but
the Constitution is silent on the issueof abortion. What the judges at that
(19:59):
time, back in nineteen seventy threefound was that you could prohibit any state
from you could prevent any state fromprohibiting abortion based on the fact that they
are certain what they called the numberof privacy in the Constitution that would give
women that right based upon their rightof privacy. I always had a question
(20:22):
about that However, Rob Wade hasbeen around now for almost fifty years.
It really has become settled law.I would not like to see it overturned
people who come to depend on thedecision. It would lead to a lot
of civil unrest in this country becausewhat would happen is the decision to prohibit
(20:44):
abortion or to permit abortion would thenbe left up to each of the fifty
states. And if there's a statethat, let's say is a real Bible
Belt state, and they vote toprohibit abortion, you would have women traveling
from that state to another where it'spermitted. It would be a really awkward
and messy situation. But Barrett,it's quite possible that, given her personal
(21:08):
orientation, that she might vote tooverturn it. So that is a big
problem. She has voted on roevweightissues in the past in a way to
really restrict women's abortion options. Lagoadoes not have much of a record on
that. She doesn't have any realdecisions on that now in terms of Parish.
(21:30):
The thought of me being an advisorto Donald Trump, but if I
was a political advisor of his,I would tell him to pick Lagoa because
of the fact that she has avery close relationship with the Cubans in Florida.
She was involved as a pro bonoattorney for relatives of Elian Gonzalez back
in two thousand and that's the coinof the realm in the Cuban community in
(21:55):
Florida. That would help Trump inwhat could be a very close race.
But on the other hand, theway it works out right now, Amy
Coney Barrett is being pushed very stronglyby the Federalist Society and also by anti
abortion forces. And when Donald Trumpran for president, he made an implicit
(22:17):
Faucian deal with these forces that ifthey supported him, he would support the
appointment of pro life judges. Andgiven the fact that this may be his
last chance to do it, he'sunder a lot of pressure to go with
Barrett because Legois, since she doesn'thave much of a record on this,
both the Federalist Society and the prolife forces feel that she's not a dependable
(22:41):
vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. So which way he's going to go?
If I had to guess, Iwould guess that he would appoint Barrett,
But I'm not sure. I wouldn'tbet on it. If his choices
to go myself. I think thatmy personal problem with it is and please
(23:04):
understand, folks, what we're aboutto say. I consider myself a person
of faith. I know Alan isone hundred a person of faith, but
when it comes to government, Ido not want anybody's anybody's religion to dictate
(23:27):
what happens. And I'm very concernedabout Amy Colony Barrett because of her deeply
rooted commitment to her faith. Andthat may sound, you know, stupid
and terrible, but part of theproblem is that there is no one religion
(23:55):
in this country. So when youput in someone who is so very much
tied to their faith, I don'tthink that's a good thing because you can't
that person tends not to look atother faiths or other sides to issues,
and one year a Supreme Court justice, you need to be able to call
(24:18):
balls and strikes. I don't thinkshe can do that. Well, there
is a way she could have handledthat, and it was the way that
Mario Cuomo handled it. Mario Cuomowas a deeply committed Catholic. He was
an observer of Mass, he wasin a regular church, participants, but
(24:40):
he came out with a statement veryearly in his career right about the time
he was elected govern New York thatCatholics who were judicial appointees had to pledge
that they would not let their faithinfluence their decisions. And he was a
man who in his public life wasable to do that. And I think
the same one hold true for OrthodoxJews, for Evangelicals, as long as
(25:03):
they were willing to make a pledgelike that, I don't see what their
private life observance would be a problem. But the problem is that Amy Coney
Barrett has never taken such a pledge. If she had, it wouldn't be
a difficulty. But I would cautionthe Democrats as the one thing. I
don't know if Diane Feinstein is goingto be participating in these hearings. She's
(25:27):
not a well woman, but shereally went after Amy Cony Barrett when Amy
was up for confirmation as an Appellojudge. That would be terrible if she
or Dick Durban did that this time, because it would cause a backlash against
the Democrats in the Catholic community.I would lay off that completely. If
(25:49):
not a Catholic, I know you'renot. I'm not talking about you,
no, I know. I'm justsaying I report you for US, Senator,
but you know you're not running,right, not that I know of.
UM. I think Lagoas is goingto be his choice. And I
think and the reason I say thatis because I think that she's They want
(26:12):
to get somebody through in a reasonablya short period of time. I think
Barrett would. I think it wouldbe more difficult to get Barrett through there
would be to get Lagoa because theywant this thing done by election day,
and to do that, they're gonnahave to have somebody that it's going to
be very difficult to to pin anythingon. And I don't think there's a
(26:37):
lot as you said earlier than Iagree, there's not a lot of terrain
that you have to go through withthe Lagoa. She's more of a wild
card, and I think under thosecircumstances less likely to cause an issue.
So I'm thinking Lagoa, although Barrett, as you say, is the dark
(27:00):
of the Federals, and every judge, the two judges that the President has
picked thus far, has been rightoff that list. So you know,
I don't know, but I'm justguessing that the easier path to get somebody
through quickly, and that's exactly whatthey want to do is to go ahead
(27:21):
and to do it that way.Now you agree with our reasoning? Yeah,
I'm sorry. I was just gonnasay you wrote a column that this
week later, a live of thisout. Why you give us some highlights
from that. Well, let mefollow it up with something I didn't get
into in the columns. I hada lot of terrain to cover. I
agree with your reasoning completely that theywant the nominee that will cause them the
(27:45):
fewest problems and that they can getthrough quickly. But there's a wild card
on this when it comes to Lagoa. Amy Coney Barrett has already been vetted
substantially before the hearing last time bythe Trump administration, so there aren't going
to be any surprises, and anyvetting is any check they do, any
(28:10):
security check, will take a veryrapid amount of time. I don't know
if Lagoa has ever been vetted beforeby this administration. She may have been
vetted previously in the Bush or Obamaadministrations, but they haven't not yet really
vetted Lagoa yet, and so theydon't really know if they if they're going
(28:32):
to come up with something. Iheard one thing which I don't think is
a problem, but it's an exampleof what I mean. She was one
of the judges involved in the JeffreyEpstein plea. I don't know the exact
circumstances, and I doubt that therewas anything on toward that she did,
but you never know once you startedinvestigating what you may find. So I
(28:56):
agree again, I agree with yourlogic, but I'm much sure, I
really on this one. I'll reservejudgment. Put it that way. We're
gonna find out tomorrow afternoon. Yeah, it's not gonna it's not gonna take
long. Both these women Lego isfifty two, Barrett's forty eight. These
women are going to be on thisbench for you know, thirty five forty
(29:21):
years. I think so, yes, So that that you know this is
gonna be a very important thing.Now, part of your column and part
of the conversation that we haven't hadis your And by the way, with
regard to to Row, I don'tthink to me, the biggest concern is
(29:45):
not the flipping a row. Thebiggest concern is the Affordable Care Act in
killing pre existing conditions that I thinkis almost a slam. I don't happening.
Um, I'm again Row. Ithink Row settled law. What they
(30:08):
call it starry gnosis is that's whatit's called an the legal business. Yeah,
so not everybody feels that way,not everyone. I agree, I
agree, But what I'm saying isthat fight on Row is not going to
be the first fight they're going tohave. And the first fight they're gonna
have is on the Affordable Care Act. And the Republicans have tried every wish
(30:32):
way, but you know that theycould to get rid of it. And
now just after the election, there'sgoing to be a potential that it goes
away, sometimes as quickly as thefirst of the year. Well that's true,
except I will say this, andneither party can afford to see pre
(30:56):
existing conditions note away with and Trumptoday there was yesterday just came out with
an executive order guaranteeing pre existing conditions. I don't want to see obviously,
I'm very I am supportive of theAffordable Care Act. I don't want to
see it set aside, but thelong range consequences would not be nearly as
(31:17):
problematic as seeing Rob Wade overturned.That's why I didn't get into that too
deeply, because if it was overturned. I think the Congress in the Senate
would act very quickly to have afull proof substitute enacted, and that could
be done. Plus that the executiveorder the Trump signed, I'm sure would
(31:37):
be renewed by Biden. But Roeis the holy grail. That's the that's
the one that really involves deep seatedvalues. There. They're plenty of pro
life people that don't want to seethe Affordable Care Act set aside, right,
you know, the movement conservatives aremuch more focused on Rob Wade,
and I think that look already instates around the country. Okay, let's
(32:01):
sake Louisiana, Missouri, Alabama.For those three states, they have limited
a woman's right to find legal abortionto the point where there's in some cases
(32:21):
one or two clinics in the entirein the entire state. A lot of
backlash has been against planned parenthood.And what I don't think people realize is
it planned parenthood in these rural areaswhere many of the offices are. That
(32:45):
planned parenthood is in these rural areasthe number one place in the state where
men actually find out that they havesome sort of prostate cancer. It's on
the women's side, breast cancer isidentified more often than by these clinics that
(33:13):
are planned pienthood than are you know, the hospitals, because they don't have
access to it because of some caseshealth care issues. So, you know,
I think that while ROW would bea terrible thing to flip, we've
already seen the erosion of row inin how states are doing incredible things to
(33:40):
make it almost impossible for poor peopleand poor women to even explore it.
And and the other part is thatthere's no real effect education. So how
you know these people? Here's thething, you know, I'll bottom line,
(34:00):
and I'm stopping this myself. I'mgetting at it myself here right now.
And that is and I would likeyour perspective on it. That is
that all of these states care moreabout the unborn than they do the board.
Because in every one of the statesthat have the most severe laws against
(34:21):
abortion, they also pay the leastout per child in the state. So
you have the child, which iswhat they want you to do, but
once you have it, they damnsure don't care about taking care of it.
Well, that is true. Andthe other thing is there's a basic
inconsistency for people who want to goto such lengths to protect the fetus,
(34:45):
which I respect. But at thesame time they may be the most pro
death penalty people in the world,you know, So life of life is
life either way. The abortion issuehas really become a cultural issue and it's
the most divisive cultural issue we havein this country right now, and it's
(35:06):
not going to go away. Evenif Roe v. Wade is overturned,
it would be followed. I believeif you have a Democrat administration, I
believe the day would expand the SupremeCourt in very short order to reinstate the
basic holdings of Roe v. Wade. So this is a cultural war issue.
It's going to exist for a longtime. Let me ask you about
(35:30):
we're gonna get We're gonna greater towrap this thing up. It's going to
be a big weekend and we'll makesure that everybody gets some time to reflect.
But at the end of the day, here Alan, what concerns me
(35:51):
is that we all have right now, we have people who are in the
streets of protesting. We have twosides where if you'll i it polls Democrats
and Republicans. The Democrats feel thatthe president is trying to steal the election.
The Republicans feel as if the onlyway President Trump can lose, as
(36:12):
if the Democrats have cheated. Now, I've been around this for about forty
I've never in my life seen suchdistrust among the two parties as I've seen
now. And what concerns me isin that period of time which we said
(36:36):
it's going to take a little while, it's not going to take a year,
but it's gonna take a little whileto decide who the elector who is
the president, that there may verywell be people taking to the streets.
I have no doubt. I haveno doubt that following this election, in
regards to the result, people aregoing to take to the sweets. Either
way, there is an ugly moodin this country. And the problem with
(36:59):
Trump is that he pours gasoline onthe wound. He could be a committed,
you know, conservative, I honestlydon't think he is that conservative.
I think it's an act. Ithink it's a faustian bargain he makes with
certain groups. Donald Trump was neverknown as he was climbing up the business
(37:20):
world to be some kind of committedfundamentalist. He was never known for that,
but he made his own deal,and it got him into the White
House. But nevertheless, it's whatgot him there. And if you know,
the if Biden wins and if theDemocrats proceed with their agenda, particularly
(37:45):
if rov Wade his overturn, andthen the Democrats vote to expand the Court,
which I think what happened, it'sgoing to be ugly. I would
rather not see the Court expanded,by the way, because I don't like
interference from either the executive or legislativebranch in the decision making process of the
Court. But I think it's inevitableif Roe v. Wade is overturned that
(38:07):
that will happen. It'll be interestingthe role that Justice Roberts played. He
will not be one of the fivewho would vote to overturn Roe v.
Wad. Roberts came to the Court, he's very much like William Renquist,
who ended up being a great ChiefJustice. He came to the Court as
a pragmatic conservative. But what hehas become over time, and this is
(38:28):
a very good thing. He's becomean institutionalist, one who believes in the
good in the state of the judiciary, that decisions should be made with that
in mind. That divided decisions shouldbe avoided. Bill Renquist. When he
came to the Supreme Court first asan associate justice, he was considered to
(38:49):
be a real right wing red hot, but he changed over the years and
became an institutionalist so much that whena case came to him about setting aside
the Miranda decision, which he hadalways been he'd always been anti Miranda,
he voted against the statute that setit aside. He said, Look,
Miranda has become a constitutional provision overthe years. You can't just set it
(39:13):
aside with a statue. So Ithink that we don't know exactly how these
judges are going to roll. Wemay be surprised. We may be surprised
by Justice cabin Off. For example, he said at his hearing that roebe
Wade was seviled law. He maynot vote to overturn it. We just
have to wait and see. ButI would think that when these judges get
(39:37):
into their deliberations on a robe Waytype situation, I think Roberts would give
them a stern warning as to theconsequences of overturning roeb Wade. And I
think he may get one or twojudges to go along with him. Well,
if you recall, and I'm aI'm actually a fan of roberts because
(39:57):
I feel it he is a fairman. May not agree with all of
his rulings, but I can considera person who was a very fair person.
If you recall, not that longago, the Republicans and the President
was mad because for all intensive purposes, in the first kick at the can,
(40:19):
it was Justice roberts who sided withthe more liberal side of the court
to protect the Affordable Care Act,and he basically, in his an intimation,
wrote that you know, and youcan you're I'm reading between the lines
here. It didn't specifically say this, but basically it was like, I'm
(40:40):
not doing your job, Congress.You know you figured this out. You
know, don't send this crap tome because I'm not gonna take I'm not
going to side one side or theother. You guys figured this out and
send it back to me. Soyou know, I remember because Stalia had
a tremendously tremendous response in his writingfor the Dissent, where he basically said
(41:06):
Robertson was made law up to justifyhis decision, which I thought at the
time it was one of the lastopportunities that the late Justice Scalia had to
to write his kind of pippy dissensions. And even if you don't like it,
didn't like Scalia, it was alwaysentertaining just to read his dissensions.
(41:30):
But we'll see, I mean,we will definitely see how that, how
that plays out, it'll be veryinteresting. Well, that's why Scalia was
an originalist in a very good way. He believed that constitutional provisions and statutes
should be interpreted in accordance with theintent of the framer. And that's a
(41:52):
very defrinciple philosophy, and he wasentertaining. That's why I and Justice Ruth
Bader Ginsburg were such good friends.They traveled together, they went to the
opera together. And civility and politicsand judicial decision making is a wonderful thing.
And I'm sorry that civility has goneout the window in the era of
(42:13):
Donald Trump. Okay, just beforewe get to Ginsburg real quick, and
you just brought it up. Thisweek, I put together a column and
it basically was about civility is dead? Is it dead forever? And I
think it's going to take at leasta decade to get out of this mess
(42:36):
that we're in right now. Ijust don't. You can't wave wand it's
gonna go away. People are notgoing to fall back into you know what
happened prior to Donald Trump, becausethis was building before Donald Trump. He
didn't help it, but this wasdefinitely building. So I don't know about
you, but I think civility isnow. We're right now. Our position
(42:58):
of power graph forgets civilities. We'remore in a Macavellian time than we are
in a stability time. Well,I tend to agree with your analysis,
but I do believe that there aremen and women of good will who will
make an effort to restore stability,and I'm hopeful that it will take place
over time. How much time,I don't know. I'm with you on
(43:22):
that. I mean, there arepeople, and you know, the better
souls out there. Hopefully my jadedconcept of this is bad and maybe it'll
be. Maybe I'll be proven wrongwhen you meet the first time. I'd
be proven wrong and won't be theless. Okay, we wrap things up.
Let's have some final thoughts. Thefirst Jewish woman, I mean,
(43:44):
the first jew is a matter offact to ever lay in state in the
capital, which is going on todaythe notorious RBG. Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
What an incredible, incredible woman,regardless so whether you're a Democratic Republican,
this lady helped many women and menin her worked first as a trailblazing attorney
(44:12):
and then as a judge in theDistrict Court in the District of Columbian,
finally a judge and in the SupremeCourt. Your thoughts on Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
She was a remarkable woman who achieveda great deal under challenging circumstances.
By the way, her husband formany years was dealt with cancer, she
(44:36):
helped him survive and thrive. Shewas a remarkable mother. She had to
transfer law schools. She started offI believe at Harvard and had the transfer
to Columbia due to his illness.And when she first applied for a job
with New York law firms, theywould not hire a woman, especially one
who was a mother. But sheovercame all that. She always would represent
(45:00):
cases and causes that nobody else would. She had excellent relationships with judges on
the Supreme Court who had vastly differentphilosophies. When you talk about stability,
she was it. She formed friendshipsfor example, with a person like Justice
Clarence Thomas, who had philosophy verygreat variance with Ruth Bader Ginsberg, and
(45:25):
as I mentioned before, a strongalmost kinship with Anton and Scalia. So
there's so much to be said forthat. I think that in view of
all the turmoil and division that isgoing on in the nation now, it
was a wonderful thing to see peoplecome together and go and pay tribute to
(45:45):
her. I think it was avery honorable thing. Absolutely. One real
quick Ruth Bader Ginsburg story that Ican relate. I have a couple,
but I'll do one, and thatis I went to Nationals Park a number
of years ago to cover a sportingevent. There a game, baseball game,
(46:09):
and as I had come around thecorner and was on the field,
there was three Nationals players with theirbacks, you know, to me,
talking and I could see that theywere talking to someone, but I couldn't
(46:30):
see who they were talking to.So as I got closer, I realized
that there was a small woman standingthere. It was Justice Skinsburg and she
was such an amazing big time Sheand Scalia used to attend Nationals games together.
Scalia was a big Yankee fan,Ginsburg more of a Dodger fan,
(46:53):
although she became a Nationals fan.And she was just basically talking baseball with
these guys and they were asking herabout the Supreme Court. And here I
am sitting there, going, youknow, this is amazing. Here's a
justice of the Supreme Court who lovesbaseball so much. She's asking these players
about, you know, specific situations, and they're turning around and talking to
(47:16):
her about you know, what's itlike to be a member of the Supreme
Court, and all it was justit was just a very tender, warm
moment where you're just going, youknow, this is just what America is
all about. You know, peoplehaving a conversation, and in this case,
professional supports athletes having conversations. Butthey were so engaged with this woman.
(47:43):
She had that kind of personality thatjust transcended generations. Now I agree
one hundred percent. That's a wonderfulstory, Jim, and it's one that's
hopeful that people can relate to eachother in a way like that that transcends
differences in society and differences in culture. Well, I promise to get you
(48:07):
out of here, and I'm goingto allen your social media, but first
before that, real quick, thisis a very important next few days in
the Jewish faith, Junky poor,and I just want to say to anyone
out there, if I have offendedyou or upset you, I hope that
(48:27):
you will get it into your heartto be able to forgive me. The
same to Allen. If I've doneanything or upset to you with anyway,
I apologize, my friend. Iwish you nothing but the best. I
have a very sweet and a veryeasy fast. And it's a very important
time and in the Jewish faith,and it turns out it's a very important
time to the country as well.Same beauty, Jim. I ask your
(48:52):
forgiveness or anything I've done wrong,and same to all the listeners out there.
If I was to beg for forgivenessfor all those I may have done
wrong, I would be on theshow till about two in the morning.
So I do ask everyone's forgiveness,and maybe we all have a good sweet
here. I'm with you on that. We'll be back with more right after
(49:15):
this. At BMW. We knowleaving the road wasn't easy, but anticipating
our return taught us to appreciate everydrive, the exhilaration of the ultimate adventure
moments, spending of your favorite copilots, and the freedom to explore just because
(49:38):
our time to rejoin the road isfinally here. Hey everyone, welcome back
to our little podcast you Now,if you're not one of you or thirty
five thousand people for taking the timeto subscribe to the podcast, well then,
first of all, shame on you. Second of all, we are
(49:59):
accessible world. Why didn't I know? We have people all over the world
who listen to us. You canfind us at the Apple podcast Store,
saying at the Google play store.You'll find us at spreakers, Stitcher,
Spotify, as well as of coursetune in Radio, iHeartRadio, and YouTube
to name a few. If youhappen to have an assistant to Vicelight Alexa
(50:19):
or Google or Siri, I haveto do and say, hey, Alexa,
please play the latest edition of thePolitically Incorrect Podcast with Jim Williams,
and it will play it for you. Okay. One last thing I'd like
to say before we move on,and that is we're very happy to be
now part of the Amazon Music andpodcast family. We were invited to do
(50:42):
that and happy that they were morethan gracious to have us as part of
their family. So we just joinedthat group too, So yet another place
you can find the podcast. Okay, now we are about forty days out
from the election. I received mymailing ballot yesterday. There is a number
(51:12):
of things and Alan went through itfor you earlier with regard to what you
need to pay attention to make certainthat your vote counts. Really boils down
to this. Read every line whenyou reply when you hope to get a
mailing ballot of any sort vita,just a straight up mailing ballot or a
(51:37):
absentee ballot. Okay, read everythingthat your state requires of you to fill
the ballot out properly. As longas you do that, as long as
you mail it before November third,then everything should be fine and that vote
will be counted. Okay. Wedo not want a situation and where your
(52:00):
vote is tossed because of some minormistake that you forgot to do. Okay,
al right, so it's very safeto vote. I've been doing it
for as I said before, sincenineteen eighty I've voted absentee because frankly I
work on that day, so I'vebeen able to get out to vote.
So it's important to vote if youwish, And there are many states that
(52:23):
aren't having early voting where you canget out to the polls. If you
can do that and you feel comfortable, and you could be social distance and
wear your mask by all means,go out and do that as well.
And I know some of you preferto go on you know, November third.
It's what you like to do.You've been doing it all your life.
(52:43):
It's a different time with COVID nineteen. But if you feel comfortable and
you wear your mask and you tryto social distance especially can then that's cool
too. But if you're going todo a mail in ballot, like I
said, the most important thing youcan do and should do, is pay
attention to every line so that thatballot doesn't get tossed. Okay, all
(53:05):
right, thanks so very much forthat. All right. For Alan Steinberg,
I'm Jim Williams. All of theinformation on how to get in touch
with us via our social media andemail, Facebook and all kinds of great
stuff is in the showbox. Willbe sure to check it out, all
right, So until next time,I'm Jim Williams for Alan Steinberg, for
the entire team here at D PoliticallyIncorrect podcasts. I just want to wish
(53:30):
you were very safe, very happy, very sweet New Year. We'll catch
you next week. Take care,and by all means, be well.
Hey, wont to Welcome to thePolitically Incorrect Podcast. I'm Jim Williams along
with my partner in crime, AlanSteinbert Allen. It's been a crazy week.
For the first time in the historyof the country, the President of
the United States want to ask asimple question, which is basically a layup,
(00:41):
you know, will he wouldn't lose, you know, Ardrawal accept the
results of the election and basically bepart of a peaceful transfer in an election.
And he said no, He said, I'd have to I'd have to
(01:02):
wait to see what finds out withthe ballots. Is like, okay,
you didn't specifically say, we're assuminghe meant the mail in ballots, because
otherwise so it's just ballots, thateverything would be gone. But this is
not normal. And it's also youknow, we've said this before, but
(01:23):
I honestly mean it. This isfrightening. You know. After I read
the Atlantic magazine article and I hadseen the Trump press conference on Wednesday where
he would not commit to a peacefultransfer of power, I couldn't sleep Wednesday
night. You I have never hadthis experience in politics before. My life
(01:46):
has been in politics now for fortyyears, and I've always been able to
basically put out of my mind whenaside for me to go to sleep the
political ups and downs of the day. But this night I couldn't go to
sleep as I felt that for thefirst time in my life, the democracy
in America is imperiled. Now there'sa deeper story here. Unless Joe Biden
(02:08):
has a meltdown in the debate onTuesday night, this election is basically over.
There's no way that Trump can winan affair and free election right now.
The polls are terrifying for him.He is behind in the Fox poll
and he used to venerate Fox,and now he hates them because of these
polls. He's behind in the Foxpole in Ohio today by five points.
(02:31):
He's running about even in Texas,and these are states that he had banked,
so he and he's short of money, so he has to spend money
on states that he had considered inhis pocket. He is really, in
terms of Biden, in a terribleelectoral college position. Biden has pretty much
(02:53):
locked two hundred and sixty nine electoralvotes. And as I said, as
long as he gets through the debate, all right, and I'm confident that
he will, this election is overunless Trump steals it. Now, how
does Trump plan to steal it?He plans to steal it in the exact
manner that Atlantic Magazine prescribed. BartonGellman wrote a classic piece in the Constitution.
(03:16):
It provides the mechanism whereby each stategets a certain amount of electoral votes
based upon the two senators plus thenumber of members in the House of Representatives.
But it doesn't say how the electorsare to be selected. It leaves
it up to the legislatures of bothstates. Now, over time it has
(03:38):
evolved it's by custom and norm,not by statute, except in some states
it's by statutes, but a numberof states it isn't. It has evolved
that the electors are elected by thepopular vote, and the candidate who gets
the majority of the vote in thestate will get the electors. But there
remains the possibility and it would belegal, although it would be the worst
(04:01):
abuse of power in our lifetime.Where if there is a state and let's
say Joe Biden has a lead,and it's a pretty firm lead, but
the Republicans come up with spurious allegationsof fraud, they can go to the
state legislature. If the state legislaturesRepublican and say, hey, you select
(04:21):
the legislatures, take this out ofthe hands of a popular vote, and
that would be a horrific thing.It could result in Trump getting the electors
and states that Biden won. That'sthe plan, and that could deprive people
in various states of democracy. Plusthat Trump is coming up with the smoke
screen that somehow vote by mail isinherently corrupt, inherently fraudulent. That is
(04:46):
not true. Vote by mail isactually more reliable than most forms of voting
because it's easily fraud is easily detectable, and it's rapidly accountable. But nevertheless,
Trump has come up with a smokescreen. And unfortunately, the Republican
Party is not the Great Party oftaff Goldwater, Eisenhower, men of principle.
(05:10):
It's a bunch of pathetic supplicants whoin this election. And this is
the thing that really is nauseating tome. Everything that comes up. They
can't point their fingers Joe Biden.So they bring Hillary Clinton into it,
and she's not even a candidate inthis race. So this is desperation time
for Trump. It's desperation time forthe Republicans because they stand for sure to
(05:35):
lose four Senate seats, which willgive the Democrats the majority, you know,
basically assuming that Biden wins the presidency, because then Kamela Harris would break
the tie. There's a few otherseats now that the Democrats may win.
They may win the Senate seat inMississippi with Mike sp I would love to
(05:56):
see that because Mike Guestby's an AfricanAmerican served in the Clinton administration. This
is shaping up as it possible Isay possible, not definite, a possible
democratic landslide in both the presidential andcenter races. So you're going to see
Trump do some crazy, desperate things. Let me ask you now again,
(06:17):
we're talking about the electoral college,where you need two hundred and seventy votes
to win the election. It's howPresident Trump won his election in twenty sixteen
because Hillary Clinton beat him by threemillion votes in the popular account. I
(06:38):
believe personally that Biden will exceed thethree million mark that Clinton did in the
popular vote. But to your point, and to the point of the Atlantic,
the concept that you're talking about comesfrom Trump because most of these ballots
(06:58):
and states, certainly in the swingstates, like Pennsylvania's like you can't begin
to count ballots after you count thethe in person voting. So it's potential
where Trump is ahead on election day, you know, when they start counting
the ballots, but because they haven'tcounted the mail in ballots, then you
(07:24):
know, in a week or solater, when these ballots are counted,
then Trump loses the state. Wellno, I'm just I'm throwing that out
there as a just a date,okay, but is it not possible that
(07:45):
Trump and his attorneys can drop in, you know, to these key battleground
states and say, at the endof the you know, election, we
need to stop and not count those. That's what they're already trying to do,
right, And that's where things getreally bizarre. And as a lawyer
(08:09):
and as someone who's followed this yourentire life and been involved in this in
your entire life, the one thingthat scares me, and this goes back
you and are sports fans. Ifyou're on offense, okay, as the
Trump camp seems to be ready tobe, you need only one thing to
(08:31):
go right for you. If you'replaying defense, you have to assume everything
but you. But playing defense sometimeshas a problem because again, they only
offense only needs one thing to goright for the play to go for a
touchdown, or a ball to behit out of a ballpark, or a
(08:52):
basket to be made. And that'swhere I think the concern is. Are
Yes, the Democrat that's a warrioringup, but this could be this could
very well be a very scary scenario. Specifically since the head of the Republican
(09:15):
House or Senate in state of Pennsylvaniawas quoted in Atlantic saying that they've already
gamed us out. Yeah that wasthe state chair. They interviewed the Pennsylvania
state chair, and yeah, itis frightening. I will say this though,
I don't think the Democrats are playingany kind of laid back game.
(09:37):
I think fortunately they're on the offensetoo, because the experience of twenty sixteen
really is a searing one for them. They are going to be scarred by
that experience for a lifetime, andso they are really covering all the contingencies
this time. I've heard the nationalchair, Tom has interviewed a number of
(10:01):
times. They are lawyered up andthey have very good lawyers and they also
will have a good operation in termsof ground game. One thing speaking of
ground game that has amazed me,which really reflects badly on trumpet reflects badly
on a Republican party. The Democratshave refrained from door to door attempts to
(10:22):
register because of the coronavirus. TheRepublicans don't give a damn. They're having
events with no social distancing, nomasks, and they're going around door to
door. And it may backfire onthem because there have been poles taking that
show that people don't want visitors attheir door while the pandemic is going on.
(10:46):
But this is an ugly election.It's the ugliest election of my lifetime.
Let's talk a little bit about whyPresident Trump. President Trump would be
the first president elected to a secondterm again who lost the popular vote.
(11:11):
Let's talk a little bit about now. Marco Rubio, to his credit,
has introduced a bill saying that theelectors, which you spoke about very eloquently
earlier on December the twelfth, tomake to do just as you said,
(11:31):
to elect the president via the ElectorialCollege. The bill that Rubio is putting
out there would extend that date toJanuary fourth, in an attempt to make
certain that every ballot count be countedand that all of the supervisor of elections
(11:54):
on state levels can ratify the vote. Because of the pandemic, obviously we're
going to have a record number ofmail in ballots. So I think the
Rubio bill would be fantastic if theycan get it by But I'm not even
surely can get it passed. I'mnot sure they'll get it passed either.
I do think this, although Icould be wrong. Vote by the accounts
(12:18):
of vote by mail always goes quickerthan people think. I know this from
my New Jersey experience in the primaryelection this year, I voted by mail
and it went fairly quickly. I'mworried about one thing. In Pennsylvania,
they have a problem with what theydescribe as one hundred thousand naked ballots that
(12:39):
could be thrown out. That's alot of ballots, and the reason they
could be thrown out is in Pennsylvania. And it's the same thing in New
Jersey, except that then become aproblem here. When the voter receives in
the mail his or her ballot,it has the outer or envelope, which
is the way the ballot gets tothe home. It's got and it's got
(13:01):
a return envelope which is uh,you know, basically, which is uh
stamped right, you know, sothat you can send it to the polling
place or the place where I shouldn'tsay point place to place where the ballots
are to be mailed. And thereis another envelope which are which you must
(13:24):
place the ballot in, and that'scalled the secrecy envelope that keeps your ballot
secret. And it's not opened untilthe count starts, and the person knowing
it will not know the identity ofthe person who sent it. But a
number of people in Pennsylvania, thisdidn't happen in New Jersey, but a
(13:46):
number of people in uh Pennsylvania.In Pennsylvania just put it in the outer
or in the envelope, just putthe ballot in the envelope that sent it
to the place where the ballots wereto be received, and they didn't put
it in a secrecy envelope. Andfor that reason a number of ballots were
thrown out. New Jersey did amuch better job than other states. I
(14:09):
hope, for the sake of Bidenthat there are not too many of these
ballots rowing out, because I assumethat most of those naked ballots were Democrat
votes. Yeah. In the ironiccat story. Yesterday, President Trump tweeted
(14:31):
that the ballots are going out theteat the absentee ballots are going out in
the state of Florida. Be sureto get your ballot and vote. Um,
you know, be a male inthe state of Florida. So that
issue, it's ridiculous. I justthought it was kind of ironic that,
(14:54):
you know, on the same dayhe's downplaying that, you know, this
is nothing but corrupt, He's he'spromoting in his own in the state where
he now lives that, Oh it'scool, don't worry, you know,
get out there and do it.So one hundred percent bizarre. But I
think that what people have to understandis, from immedia standpoint, it's gonna
(15:18):
take a few days at least toget this stuff done. Now, just
because you don't know, within youknow, twenty four hours, who the
next president United States is doesn't meanthat any hanky panky has gone on.
It just means it's taken a whileto count. So people shouldn't freak out
(15:41):
if that, you know that,because that's gonna happen. So do you
just have to hold your breath andhold your your state legislatures accountable, because
that's where it's gonna come down.It's gonna come down to your supervisors of
elections and the trust you have inthem getting it right now as you calling.
(16:07):
Twenty seventeen, because President Trump madethe allegation that there was as many
as three million votes that were invalid, he opened an investigation, and there
was a congressional investigation on this intwenty seventeen. The upshot of that twenty
seventeen investigation proved that there was lessthan five less than a half percent of
(16:37):
the ballots in the United States castin twenty sixteen were you know, we're
illegitimate. So there's no I mean, there's no voter fraud. There wasn't
any And this is and Christopher Raytestified, the head of the testified that
voter fraud is minimal in this countryand once a national election by voter fraud
(17:03):
would be a monumental challenge. Theseare my words coming up, not his.
I don't think the mafia could pullthis off. I mean it would
really be a monumental challenge, eventhe Russians. One the one worry I
have about in the future is thatI think the most efficient way of voting
would be if we could have nationwideonline voting. But that's something that foreign
(17:26):
powers could hack and interfere with.That's the problem there. Yeahday someday that's
going to happen, but it's problematic. So yeah, at the moment for
sure. The the other thing withregard to balance, and we've said this
as a public service announcement, pleaseread everything so you know what you're doing,
(17:49):
just as you had illustrated, youknow how it costs one hundred thousand
people their representation in Pennsylvania in thetwenty eighteen Now let's talk about We're going
to get to our conversation about RuthBader Ginsburg in a minute, but let's
(18:11):
talk about the two women who arelikely tomorrow. One of the two of
them is likely tomorrow to be namedPresident Trump's replacement. That would be Judge
Amy Corney Barrett, who is fortysix and she is in charge of the
(18:32):
US Court of Appeals for the SeventhCircuit, which is out in the Midwest
and in Indiana and Illinois. Andthe other one is Judge Barbara Lagoa from
Steve, Florida. She's a CubanAmerican and she was part of the Florida
(18:52):
Supreme Court appointed by Governor DeSantis.So both of these women have had very
little experience on the bench on anylevel. Well, I wouldn't say that
(19:14):
they have an inadequate amount of experience. Their experience in terms of length and
breadth, it's been comparable to anumber of Supreme Court justices. I think.
Let me put it this way,I think they are both qualified.
That isn't the problem. There aretwo problems. Number one is that there
(19:37):
is a strong possibility, at leastin a case of Barrack, that she
could be the fifth vote to overrideRoe v. Wade. Now, the
funny thing from my point of viewis that I never liked the decision,
not because of any pro choice orpro life view that I have, but
the Constitution is silent on the issueof abortion. What the judges at that
(19:59):
time, back in nineteen seventy threefound was that you could prohibit any state
from you could prevent any state fromprohibiting abortion based on the fact that they
are certain what they called the numberof privacy in the Constitution that would give
women that right based upon their rightof privacy. I always had a question
(20:22):
about that However, Rob Wade hasbeen around now for almost fifty years.
It really has become settled law.I would not like to see it overturned
people who come to depend on thedecision. It would lead to a lot
of civil unrest in this country becausewhat would happen is the decision to prohibit
(20:44):
abortion or to permit abortion would thenbe left up to each of the fifty
states. And if there's a statethat, let's say is a real Bible
Belt state, and they vote toprohibit abortion, you would have women traveling
from that state to another where it'spermitted. It would be a really awkward
and messy situation. But Barrett,it's quite possible that, given her personal
(21:08):
orientation, that she might vote tooverturn it. So that is a big
problem. She has voted on roevweightissues in the past in a way to
really restrict women's abortion options. Lagoadoes not have much of a record on
that. She doesn't have any realdecisions on that now in terms of Parish.
(21:30):
The thought of me being an advisorto Donald Trump, but if I
was a political advisor of his,I would tell him to pick Lagoa because
of the fact that she has avery close relationship with the Cubans in Florida.
She was involved as a pro bonoattorney for relatives of Elian Gonzalez back
in two thousand and that's the coinof the realm in the Cuban community in
(21:55):
Florida. That would help Trump inwhat could be a very close race.
But on the other hand, theway it works out right now, Amy
Coney Barrett is being pushed very stronglyby the Federalist Society and also by anti
abortion forces. And when Donald Trumpran for president, he made an implicit
(22:17):
Faucian deal with these forces that ifthey supported him, he would support the
appointment of pro life judges. Andgiven the fact that this may be his
last chance to do it, he'sunder a lot of pressure to go with
Barrett because Legois, since she doesn'thave much of a record on this,
both the Federalist Society and the prolife forces feel that she's not a dependable
(22:41):
vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. So which way he's going to go?
If I had to guess, Iwould guess that he would appoint Barrett,
But I'm not sure. I wouldn'tbet on it. If his choices
to go myself. I think thatmy personal problem with it is and please
(23:04):
understand, folks, what we're aboutto say. I consider myself a person
of faith. I know Alan isone hundred a person of faith, but
when it comes to government, Ido not want anybody's anybody's religion to dictate
(23:27):
what happens. And I'm very concernedabout Amy Colony Barrett because of her deeply
rooted commitment to her faith. Andthat may sound, you know, stupid
and terrible, but part of theproblem is that there is no one religion
(23:55):
in this country. So when youput in someone who is so very much
tied to their faith, I don'tthink that's a good thing because you can't
that person tends not to look atother faiths or other sides to issues,
and one year a Supreme Court justice, you need to be able to call
(24:18):
balls and strikes. I don't thinkshe can do that. Well, there
is a way she could have handledthat, and it was the way that
Mario Cuomo handled it. Mario Cuomowas a deeply committed Catholic. He was
an observer of Mass, he wasin a regular church, participants, but
(24:40):
he came out with a statement veryearly in his career right about the time
he was elected govern New York thatCatholics who were judicial appointees had to pledge
that they would not let their faithinfluence their decisions. And he was a
man who in his public life wasable to do that. And I think
the same one hold true for OrthodoxJews, for Evangelicals, as long as
(25:03):
they were willing to make a pledgelike that, I don't see what their
private life observance would be a problem. But the problem is that Amy Coney
Barrett has never taken such a pledge. If she had, it wouldn't be
a difficulty. But I would cautionthe Democrats as the one thing. I
don't know if Diane Feinstein is goingto be participating in these hearings. She's
(25:27):
not a well woman, but shereally went after Amy Cony Barrett when Amy
was up for confirmation as an Appellojudge. That would be terrible if she
or Dick Durban did that this time, because it would cause a backlash against
the Democrats in the Catholic community.I would lay off that completely. If
(25:49):
not a Catholic, I know you'renot. I'm not talking about you,
no, I know. I'm justsaying I report you for US, Senator,
but you know you're not running,right, not that I know of.
UM. I think Lagoas is goingto be his choice. And I
think and the reason I say thatis because I think that she's They want
(26:12):
to get somebody through in a reasonablya short period of time. I think
Barrett would. I think it wouldbe more difficult to get Barrett through there
would be to get Lagoa because theywant this thing done by election day,
and to do that, they're gonnahave to have somebody that it's going to
be very difficult to to pin anythingon. And I don't think there's a
(26:37):
lot as you said earlier than Iagree, there's not a lot of terrain
that you have to go through withthe Lagoa. She's more of a wild
card, and I think under thosecircumstances less likely to cause an issue.
So I'm thinking Lagoa, although Barrett, as you say, is the dark
(27:00):
of the Federals, and every judge, the two judges that the President has
picked thus far, has been rightoff that list. So you know,
I don't know, but I'm justguessing that the easier path to get somebody
through quickly, and that's exactly whatthey want to do is to go ahead
(27:21):
and to do it that way.Now you agree with our reasoning? Yeah,
I'm sorry. I was just gonnasay you wrote a column that this
week later, a live of thisout. Why you give us some highlights
from that. Well, let mefollow it up with something I didn't get
into in the columns. I hada lot of terrain to cover. I
agree with your reasoning completely that theywant the nominee that will cause them the
(27:45):
fewest problems and that they can getthrough quickly. But there's a wild card
on this when it comes to Lagoa. Amy Coney Barrett has already been vetted
substantially before the hearing last time bythe Trump administration, so there aren't going
to be any surprises, and anyvetting is any check they do, any
(28:10):
security check, will take a veryrapid amount of time. I don't know
if Lagoa has ever been vetted beforeby this administration. She may have been
vetted previously in the Bush or Obamaadministrations, but they haven't not yet really
vetted Lagoa yet, and so theydon't really know if they if they're going
(28:32):
to come up with something. Iheard one thing which I don't think is
a problem, but it's an exampleof what I mean. She was one
of the judges involved in the JeffreyEpstein plea. I don't know the exact
circumstances, and I doubt that therewas anything on toward that she did,
but you never know once you startedinvestigating what you may find. So I
(28:56):
agree again, I agree with yourlogic, but I'm much sure, I
really on this one. I'll reservejudgment. Put it that way. We're
gonna find out tomorrow afternoon. Yeah, it's not gonna it's not gonna take
long. Both these women Lego isfifty two, Barrett's forty eight. These
women are going to be on thisbench for you know, thirty five forty
(29:21):
years. I think so, yes, So that that you know this is
gonna be a very important thing.Now, part of your column and part
of the conversation that we haven't hadis your And by the way, with
regard to to Row, I don'tthink to me, the biggest concern is
(29:45):
not the flipping a row. Thebiggest concern is the Affordable Care Act in
killing pre existing conditions that I thinkis almost a slam. I don't happening.
Um, I'm again Row. Ithink Row settled law. What they
(30:08):
call it starry gnosis is that's whatit's called an the legal business. Yeah,
so not everybody feels that way,not everyone. I agree, I
agree, But what I'm saying isthat fight on Row is not going to
be the first fight they're going tohave. And the first fight they're gonna
have is on the Affordable Care Act. And the Republicans have tried every wish
(30:32):
way, but you know that theycould to get rid of it. And
now just after the election, there'sgoing to be a potential that it goes
away, sometimes as quickly as thefirst of the year. Well that's true,
except I will say this, andneither party can afford to see pre
(30:56):
existing conditions note away with and Trumptoday there was yesterday just came out with
an executive order guaranteeing pre existing conditions. I don't want to see obviously,
I'm very I am supportive of theAffordable Care Act. I don't want to
see it set aside, but thelong range consequences would not be nearly as
(31:17):
problematic as seeing Rob Wade overturned.That's why I didn't get into that too
deeply, because if it was overturned. I think the Congress in the Senate
would act very quickly to have afull proof substitute enacted, and that could
be done. Plus that the executiveorder the Trump signed, I'm sure would
(31:37):
be renewed by Biden. But Roeis the holy grail. That's the that's
the one that really involves deep seatedvalues. There. They're plenty of pro
life people that don't want to seethe Affordable Care Act set aside, right,
you know, the movement conservatives aremuch more focused on Rob Wade,
and I think that look already instates around the country. Okay, let's
(32:01):
sake Louisiana, Missouri, Alabama.For those three states, they have limited
a woman's right to find legal abortionto the point where there's in some cases
(32:21):
one or two clinics in the entirein the entire state. A lot of
backlash has been against planned parenthood.And what I don't think people realize is
it planned parenthood in these rural areaswhere many of the offices are. That
(32:45):
planned parenthood is in these rural areasthe number one place in the state where
men actually find out that they havesome sort of prostate cancer. It's on
the women's side, breast cancer isidentified more often than by these clinics that
(33:13):
are planned pienthood than are you know, the hospitals, because they don't have
access to it because of some caseshealth care issues. So, you know,
I think that while ROW would bea terrible thing to flip, we've
already seen the erosion of row inin how states are doing incredible things to
(33:40):
make it almost impossible for poor peopleand poor women to even explore it.
And and the other part is thatthere's no real effect education. So how
you know these people? Here's thething, you know, I'll bottom line,
(34:00):
and I'm stopping this myself. I'mgetting at it myself here right now.
And that is and I would likeyour perspective on it. That is
that all of these states care moreabout the unborn than they do the board.
Because in every one of the statesthat have the most severe laws against
(34:21):
abortion, they also pay the leastout per child in the state. So
you have the child, which iswhat they want you to do, but
once you have it, they damnsure don't care about taking care of it.
Well, that is true. Andthe other thing is there's a basic
inconsistency for people who want to goto such lengths to protect the fetus,
(34:45):
which I respect. But at thesame time they may be the most pro
death penalty people in the world,you know, So life of life is
life either way. The abortion issuehas really become a cultural issue and it's
the most divisive cultural issue we havein this country right now, and it's
(35:06):
not going to go away. Evenif Roe v. Wade is overturned,
it would be followed. I believeif you have a Democrat administration, I
believe the day would expand the SupremeCourt in very short order to reinstate the
basic holdings of Roe v. Wade. So this is a cultural war issue.
It's going to exist for a longtime. Let me ask you about
(35:30):
we're gonna get We're gonna greater towrap this thing up. It's going to
be a big weekend and we'll makesure that everybody gets some time to reflect.
But at the end of the day, here Alan, what concerns me
(35:51):
is that we all have right now, we have people who are in the
streets of protesting. We have twosides where if you'll i it polls Democrats
and Republicans. The Democrats feel thatthe president is trying to steal the election.
The Republicans feel as if the onlyway President Trump can lose, as
(36:12):
if the Democrats have cheated. Now, I've been around this for about forty
I've never in my life seen suchdistrust among the two parties as I've seen
now. And what concerns me isin that period of time which we said
(36:36):
it's going to take a little while, it's not going to take a year,
but it's gonna take a little whileto decide who the elector who is
the president, that there may verywell be people taking to the streets.
I have no doubt. I haveno doubt that following this election, in
regards to the result, people aregoing to take to the sweets. Either
way, there is an ugly moodin this country. And the problem with
(36:59):
Trump is that he pours gasoline onthe wound. He could be a committed,
you know, conservative, I honestlydon't think he is that conservative.
I think it's an act. Ithink it's a faustian bargain he makes with
certain groups. Donald Trump was neverknown as he was climbing up the business
(37:20):
world to be some kind of committedfundamentalist. He was never known for that,
but he made his own deal,and it got him into the White
House. But nevertheless, it's whatgot him there. And if you know,
the if Biden wins and if theDemocrats proceed with their agenda, particularly
(37:45):
if rov Wade his overturn, andthen the Democrats vote to expand the Court,
which I think what happened, it'sgoing to be ugly. I would
rather not see the Court expanded,by the way, because I don't like
interference from either the executive or legislativebranch in the decision making process of the
Court. But I think it's inevitableif Roe v. Wade is overturned that
(38:07):
that will happen. It'll be interestingthe role that Justice Roberts played. He
will not be one of the fivewho would vote to overturn Roe v.
Wad. Roberts came to the Court, he's very much like William Renquist,
who ended up being a great ChiefJustice. He came to the Court as
a pragmatic conservative. But what hehas become over time, and this is
(38:28):
a very good thing. He's becomean institutionalist, one who believes in the
good in the state of the judiciary, that decisions should be made with that
in mind. That divided decisions shouldbe avoided. Bill Renquist. When he
came to the Supreme Court first asan associate justice, he was considered to
(38:49):
be a real right wing red hot, but he changed over the years and
became an institutionalist so much that whena case came to him about setting aside
the Miranda decision, which he hadalways been he'd always been anti Miranda,
he voted against the statute that setit aside. He said, Look,
Miranda has become a constitutional provision overthe years. You can't just set it
(39:13):
aside with a statue. So Ithink that we don't know exactly how these
judges are going to roll. Wemay be surprised. We may be surprised
by Justice cabin Off. For example, he said at his hearing that roebe
Wade was seviled law. He maynot vote to overturn it. We just
have to wait and see. ButI would think that when these judges get
(39:37):
into their deliberations on a robe Waytype situation, I think Roberts would give
them a stern warning as to theconsequences of overturning roeb Wade. And I
think he may get one or twojudges to go along with him. Well,
if you recall, and I'm aI'm actually a fan of roberts because
(39:57):
I feel it he is a fairman. May not agree with all of
his rulings, but I can considera person who was a very fair person.
If you recall, not that longago, the Republicans and the President
was mad because for all intensive purposes, in the first kick at the can,
(40:19):
it was Justice roberts who sided withthe more liberal side of the court
to protect the Affordable Care Act,and he basically, in his an intimation,
wrote that you know, and youcan you're I'm reading between the lines
here. It didn't specifically say this, but basically it was like, I'm
(40:40):
not doing your job, Congress.You know you figured this out. You
know, don't send this crap tome because I'm not gonna take I'm not
going to side one side or theother. You guys figured this out and
send it back to me. Soyou know, I remember because Stalia had
a tremendously tremendous response in his writingfor the Dissent, where he basically said
(41:06):
Robertson was made law up to justifyhis decision, which I thought at the
time it was one of the lastopportunities that the late Justice Scalia had to
to write his kind of pippy dissensions. And even if you don't like it,
didn't like Scalia, it was alwaysentertaining just to read his dissensions.
(41:30):
But we'll see, I mean,we will definitely see how that, how
that plays out, it'll be veryinteresting. Well, that's why Scalia was
an originalist in a very good way. He believed that constitutional provisions and statutes
should be interpreted in accordance with theintent of the framer. And that's a
(41:52):
very defrinciple philosophy, and he wasentertaining. That's why I and Justice Ruth
Bader Ginsburg were such good friends.They traveled together, they went to the
opera together. And civility and politicsand judicial decision making is a wonderful thing.
And I'm sorry that civility has goneout the window in the era of
(42:13):
Donald Trump. Okay, just beforewe get to Ginsburg real quick, and
you just brought it up. Thisweek, I put together a column and
it basically was about civility is dead? Is it dead forever? And I
think it's going to take at leasta decade to get out of this mess
(42:36):
that we're in right now. Ijust don't. You can't wave wand it's
gonna go away. People are notgoing to fall back into you know what
happened prior to Donald Trump, becausethis was building before Donald Trump. He
didn't help it, but this wasdefinitely building. So I don't know about
you, but I think civility isnow. We're right now. Our position
(42:58):
of power graph forgets civilities. We'remore in a Macavellian time than we are
in a stability time. Well,I tend to agree with your analysis,
but I do believe that there aremen and women of good will who will
make an effort to restore stability,and I'm hopeful that it will take place
over time. How much time,I don't know. I'm with you on
(43:22):
that. I mean, there arepeople, and you know, the better
souls out there. Hopefully my jadedconcept of this is bad and maybe it'll
be. Maybe I'll be proven wrongwhen you meet the first time. I'd
be proven wrong and won't be theless. Okay, we wrap things up.
Let's have some final thoughts. Thefirst Jewish woman, I mean,
(43:44):
the first jew is a matter offact to ever lay in state in the
capital, which is going on todaythe notorious RBG. Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
What an incredible, incredible woman,regardless so whether you're a Democratic Republican,
this lady helped many women and menin her worked first as a trailblazing attorney
(44:12):
and then as a judge in theDistrict Court in the District of Columbian,
finally a judge and in the SupremeCourt. Your thoughts on Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
She was a remarkable woman who achieveda great deal under challenging circumstances.
By the way, her husband formany years was dealt with cancer, she
(44:36):
helped him survive and thrive. Shewas a remarkable mother. She had to
transfer law schools. She started offI believe at Harvard and had the transfer
to Columbia due to his illness.And when she first applied for a job
with New York law firms, theywould not hire a woman, especially one
who was a mother. But sheovercame all that. She always would represent
(45:00):
cases and causes that nobody else would. She had excellent relationships with judges on
the Supreme Court who had vastly differentphilosophies. When you talk about stability,
she was it. She formed friendshipsfor example, with a person like Justice
Clarence Thomas, who had philosophy verygreat variance with Ruth Bader Ginsberg, and
(45:25):
as I mentioned before, a strongalmost kinship with Anton and Scalia. So
there's so much to be said forthat. I think that in view of
all the turmoil and division that isgoing on in the nation now, it
was a wonderful thing to see peoplecome together and go and pay tribute to
(45:45):
her. I think it was avery honorable thing. Absolutely. One real
quick Ruth Bader Ginsburg story that Ican relate. I have a couple,
but I'll do one, and thatis I went to Nationals Park a number
of years ago to cover a sportingevent. There a game, baseball game,
(46:09):
and as I had come around thecorner and was on the field,
there was three Nationals players with theirbacks, you know, to me,
talking and I could see that theywere talking to someone, but I couldn't
(46:30):
see who they were talking to.So as I got closer, I realized
that there was a small woman standingthere. It was Justice Skinsburg and she
was such an amazing big time Sheand Scalia used to attend Nationals games together.
Scalia was a big Yankee fan,Ginsburg more of a Dodger fan,
(46:53):
although she became a Nationals fan.And she was just basically talking baseball with
these guys and they were asking herabout the Supreme Court. And here I
am sitting there, going, youknow, this is amazing. Here's a
justice of the Supreme Court who lovesbaseball so much. She's asking these players
about, you know, specific situations, and they're turning around and talking to
(47:16):
her about you know, what's itlike to be a member of the Supreme
Court, and all it was justit was just a very tender, warm
moment where you're just going, youknow, this is just what America is
all about. You know, peoplehaving a conversation, and in this case,
professional supports athletes having conversations. Butthey were so engaged with this woman.
(47:43):
She had that kind of personality thatjust transcended generations. Now I agree
one hundred percent. That's a wonderfulstory, Jim, and it's one that's
hopeful that people can relate to eachother in a way like that that transcends
differences in society and differences in culture. Well, I promise to get you
(48:07):
out of here, and I'm goingto allen your social media, but first
before that, real quick, thisis a very important next few days in
the Jewish faith, Junky poor,and I just want to say to anyone
out there, if I have offendedyou or upset you, I hope that
(48:27):
you will get it into your heartto be able to forgive me. The
same to Allen. If I've doneanything or upset to you with anyway,
I apologize, my friend. Iwish you nothing but the best. I
have a very sweet and a veryeasy fast. And it's a very important
time and in the Jewish faith,and it turns out it's a very important
time to the country as well.Same beauty, Jim. I ask your
(48:52):
forgiveness or anything I've done wrong,and same to all the listeners out there.
If I was to beg for forgivenessfor all those I may have done
wrong, I would be on theshow till about two in the morning.
So I do ask everyone's forgiveness,and maybe we all have a good sweet
here. I'm with you on that. We'll be back with more right after
(49:15):
this. At BMW. We knowleaving the road wasn't easy, but anticipating
our return taught us to appreciate everydrive, the exhilaration of the ultimate adventure
moments, spending of your favorite copilots, and the freedom to explore just because
(49:38):
our time to rejoin the road isfinally here. Hey everyone, welcome back
to our little podcast you Now,if you're not one of you or thirty
five thousand people for taking the timeto subscribe to the podcast, well then,
first of all, shame on you. Second of all, we are
(49:59):
accessible world. Why didn't I know? We have people all over the world
who listen to us. You canfind us at the Apple podcast Store,
saying at the Google play store.You'll find us at spreakers, Stitcher,
Spotify, as well as of coursetune in Radio, iHeartRadio, and YouTube
to name a few. If youhappen to have an assistant to Vicelight Alexa
(50:19):
or Google or Siri, I haveto do and say, hey, Alexa,
please play the latest edition of thePolitically Incorrect Podcast with Jim Williams,
and it will play it for you. Okay. One last thing I'd like
to say before we move on,and that is we're very happy to be
now part of the Amazon Music andpodcast family. We were invited to do
(50:42):
that and happy that they were morethan gracious to have us as part of
their family. So we just joinedthat group too, So yet another place
you can find the podcast. Okay, now we are about forty days out
from the election. I received mymailing ballot yesterday. There is a number
(51:12):
of things and Alan went through itfor you earlier with regard to what you
need to pay attention to make certainthat your vote counts. Really boils down
to this. Read every line whenyou reply when you hope to get a
mailing ballot of any sort vita,just a straight up mailing ballot or a
(51:37):
absentee ballot. Okay, read everythingthat your state requires of you to fill
the ballot out properly. As longas you do that, as long as
you mail it before November third,then everything should be fine and that vote
will be counted. Okay. Wedo not want a situation and where your
(52:00):
vote is tossed because of some minormistake that you forgot to do. Okay,
al right, so it's very safeto vote. I've been doing it
for as I said before, sincenineteen eighty I've voted absentee because frankly I
work on that day, so I'vebeen able to get out to vote.
So it's important to vote if youwish, And there are many states that
(52:23):
aren't having early voting where you canget out to the polls. If you
can do that and you feel comfortable, and you could be social distance and
wear your mask by all means,go out and do that as well.
And I know some of you preferto go on you know, November third.
It's what you like to do.You've been doing it all your life.
(52:43):
It's a different time with COVID nineteen. But if you feel comfortable and
you wear your mask and you tryto social distance especially can then that's cool
too. But if you're going todo a mail in ballot, like I
said, the most important thing youcan do and should do, is pay
attention to every line so that thatballot doesn't get tossed. Okay, all
(53:05):
right, thanks so very much forthat. All right. For Alan Steinberg,
I'm Jim Williams. All of theinformation on how to get in touch
with us via our social media andemail, Facebook and all kinds of great
stuff is in the showbox. Willbe sure to check it out, all
right, So until next time,I'm Jim Williams for Alan Steinberg, for
the entire team here at D PoliticallyIncorrect podcasts. I just want to wish
(53:30):
you were very safe, very happy, very sweet New Year. We'll catch
you next week. Take care,and by all means, be well.
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.