Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Six seven two six sixty eight sixty eight is the
number Roberta in Woolburn. Thanks for holding Roberta, and welcome.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Morning Cooner.
Speaker 1 (00:13):
Hi Roberta.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Can you hear me?
Speaker 3 (00:14):
Okay?
Speaker 1 (00:14):
I can hear you. Can you hear me?
Speaker 3 (00:17):
Yes?
Speaker 2 (00:17):
I can.
Speaker 3 (00:19):
So.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
First of all, I have two points to make. I
agree with everything that you and your wife have mentioned
this morning. I just want to add two additional points
to the whole conversation. One is, Trump is falling into
a trap if you obased this lower court judge. And
the reason I'm saying this is because I've seen this
(00:40):
movie before. This is exactly what played out in Brazil
where President Bolsonaro was effectively replaced by judicial court system
and they effectively stopped him from being able to govern
the country. Number two. My second point is that regarding
this whole aspect of the whole case of getting the
(01:04):
illegals out of the country, the Supreme Court has already
ruled on it. And there's a something called the Alien
Enemy Act, and there's a case that happened in nineteen
forty eight called Luda Kei versus Watkins, and you guys
can look it up. So basically, the Supreme Court already
ruled on it, and I quote what they said is
(01:27):
these are matters of political judgment for which judges have
neither technical competence nor official responsibility. So that's that there's
already precedents from the Supreme Court that these lower court
judges do not have the right to stop any of
this or to impose anything on the executive leader. So
(01:47):
that these are my two points.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
Thank you, ROBERTA, if you don't mind me asking, this
is what I find truly mind boggling. I can't wrap
my mind around it because you're completely right on both
your points. And if I said it this way, I
think it would strike people a little bit more because
it's trend dur Aragua. It's MS thirteen and you know,
(02:10):
and the trend or Aragua has now been designated a
foreign terrorist organization. But they look at them more as
criminals than terrorists. So let's make it as simple and
clear as possible. If President Trump and the DOJ rounded up,
along with the FBI two hundred and fifty isis terrorists
(02:31):
convicted of you know, terrorism, of murder, of rape, of
a weapons, trafficking, drug trafficking, and he said they're criminals,
der illegals. They're in our country illegally. I'm kicking them
back wherever whatever. I don't care, Assyria, Iraq, wherever they're from, Afghanistan.
(02:53):
I'm going to deport them. And if a judge that
no one had ever heard of before comes in and says, Nope,
you're not going to do that. No, No, you don't
have the authority to do it. I have to give
my stamp of approval. You can't send them anywhere until
I say it's kosher, and you may not even be
allowed to send them because I think sending people back
(03:14):
to their home countries is inhumane. The attitude of the
American public would be immediately, who the hell does this
judge think he is or she is who died and
made them president? They would say it's blatantly unconstitutional, blatant overreach,
(03:35):
blatantly illegal. And if the President wanted to just ignore him,
they would say, bravo, ignore him. Let the judge take
it to the Supreme Court. Go Donald, the port isis
yet the moment you mention migrants or illegal or undocumented
(03:56):
immigrant or whatever, the moment that has anything to do
the border, all of a sudden, it's like booh, it's
like what, Oh, no, a judge stopped me. Oh a
judge's issued or ruling. Oh, then everything has to grow
into a halt, am I wrong, ROBERTA.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
That's exactly the perception that the media wants to put
out there for the people.
Speaker 4 (04:19):
Right.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
They want to say that illegal, these illegal aliens coming in,
that they're you know, they're not necessarily that there's no
invasion taking place, that there's no bigger plan that wants
to replace the people of this country and replace the
culture in this country. So the media wants to make
everybody believe that this is okay, and it's not. It's illegal,
(04:42):
it's unconstitutional. So Trump cannot fall into this trap. It's
not just because it's illegal and in constitutional, but also
because if it falls into the strap, and if he
accepts the order of a lower court judge, that will
not stop. Other judges are going to come out of
the woodwork every single day with all kinds of crazy
(05:04):
rulings to stop him from moving and making any decisions
into any aspect of his government, and they are going
to effectively nullify his entire government. So he needs to
stop this now before this gets out of hand.
Speaker 1 (05:20):
Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, Roberta, thank you very much for that call.
She's a thousand, not one hundred, a thousand percent correct.
This is going to effectively paralyze Trump and his entire presidency.
And that's the intent. That's literally the goal. George in Somerville.
(05:41):
Thanks for holding, George, and welcome. All right, Hi, good morning,
Hi George.
Speaker 5 (05:47):
So so I'm talking about him saying on TV is
not defied. The thing is, look at the history. When
I was in school, Andrew Jackson, I think something about
the Supreme Court.
Speaker 6 (06:02):
When they ruled against them.
Speaker 5 (06:03):
He said they got the decision to let them enforce it. Yes,
And the thing is that never enforced it, that they
can't force it. Andrew Jackson, as the president, he has
the authority to enforce with his administration, just like President
President Trump. And Laura Ingram kind of made a mistake there.
(06:24):
She was saying defy, defy, No, she shouldst ignore.
Speaker 6 (06:28):
The president has.
Speaker 5 (06:28):
The authority due he wants when it comes to deportation
and the administration of the executive branch. One idea I.
Speaker 6 (06:37):
Have is.
Speaker 3 (06:40):
The diiser courts in the field.
Speaker 5 (06:42):
Courts are all Article one. The courts The only thing
Conn has to do is pass a law. Supreme Court
has original jurisdiction of anything to do with the executive branch,
and that nullifies everything.
Speaker 6 (06:56):
Supreme Court doesn't doesn't have to take any cases. So
these idiots, I want to sall cases. He's a president
gets a Spreme Court. They say, when i'd have taken
the case, Big guys, it's over.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
That's a great idea, George, I love it. Look in
other words, Congress is going to have to act like
there's no getting around it. In fact, there's a very
prominent constitutionalist lawyer who's a really good ally of President Trump.
He's a very smart guy. His name is Mike Davis,
and he pretty much said you know what I had
said just before Grace called, where he said, look, the
(07:31):
Supreme Court can either police the judiciary or have Congress
step in. If Roberts won't police the judiciary, then let
Congress police the judiciary. In other words, if Roberts won't,
the Congress needs to act. And you're completely right, Congress
can stop this in a second. In a second. So George,
(07:55):
thank you very much for that call. Okay, Roberta's call
Roberta in Wooburn triggered a massive response on the text line.
And by the way, everyone is confirming Kooner Country is saying,
you know what, we want to double check what Roberta
was saying, and they're saying she's completely correct. So listen
(08:15):
now to this. This is from again. You can text
us seven zero four seven zero seven zero four seven
zero six one seven, Jeff, Roberta is completely right. The
Alien Enemies Act cannot be reviewed or regulated by any court.
(08:36):
In fact, Megan Kelly on her podcast quoted a specific
court ruling on this matter right after World War Two. Therefore,
Trump can and will and should ignore all court orders
about illegals being deported. Bingo, bingo, okay six one seven, Jeff,
(09:06):
breaking news. A federal judge, just to prove Roberta's point,
has just ruled that Elon Musk has violated the Constitution
for dismantling usaid and ordered that all employees be restored,
that their jobs forgive me, that their jobs and access
(09:28):
be restored immediately. And remember what Roberta said, That's exactly
the playbook that you saw in Brazil against Bolsonaro, who
was really the Trump of Brazil. They just bled them
and bled them and bled them with one court order
after another and then one more. So you see, now
(09:52):
you can't even get rid of USAID. You see, I'm
telling you they're gonna undo everything if they get away
with it. And to show you how outrageous these judges are, again,
they're just making stuff up. Final one five oh eight.
Jeff the judge who ruled that disbanding USAID was unconstitutional,
(10:15):
wrote in the order that USAID was created by Congress.
It was not. It was created by executive order by
John F. Kennedy. Six one seven two six six sixty
eight sixty eight is the number. So literally, they're just
(10:38):
making stuff up there. So USAID created by a president
through executive order, and now a judge comes along and says,
you can't fire anybody, you can't touch USAID, no matter
how fraudulent and corrupt all of the spending that's been exposed.
(10:58):
Congress created it, nol. It was created by Kennedy or
by executive order. So if it's created by executive order,
it can be dismantled by executive order. But again not
with this out of control judiciary six one seven two
six six sixty eight sixty eight. David in Boston. Thanks
(11:21):
for holding, David, and welcome.
Speaker 7 (11:28):
I have a question now for you and Kona Country. Yes, David,
what what do lease anti Trump district courts having common
with tennis courts? What do lease anti Trump district courts
have in common with tennis courts where they play tennis?
Speaker 1 (11:47):
Uh?
Speaker 3 (11:49):
I don't know, David, rack rackets rackets.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
David, if you were that's funny, David, if you were
advising Trump, what would you tell him to do right now?
Should he comply with these court orders? Or should he
pull on Andrew Jackson? You made your ruling, you go
and force it.
Speaker 3 (12:16):
Uh.
Speaker 7 (12:17):
I think his policy should be. Uh, what we've made
up our mind about force uh vack assassinations, these forced
vack assassinations. Don't comply, don't comply, don't comply, full steam forward.
Just I'm telling you.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
Uh.
Speaker 7 (12:33):
We're supposed to be a nation government of the people,
by the people and father people. But we've lost that.
Now we're a government by the lawyer judges, father law
of the lawyer judges, father lawyer judges, by the lawyer judgers.
We've uh, we've lost the people have lost self government governance,
(12:54):
which now even though we've lost it. It doesn't mean
we can't get it back. But let's face reality, have
lost health government just as anything.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
But David, you nailed it. That's a nice way of
saying judicial tyranny. But you're right. You know it's supposed
to be of the people, by the people, for the people.
Now it's you know, of rogue judges by rogue judges
for rogue judges, or of judicial activists by judicial activists
(13:23):
for judicial activists. In other words, judicial tyranny. And so
this is a question of Trump's presidency. It's it's really
it's as fundamental as you can get. Who rules, who
ultimately runs our country, who governs unelected, unaccountable judges and bureaucrats,
(13:43):
either through judicial tyranny or the administrative state, the deep state,
or we the people through our elected representatives. And the
most one, the biggest one, is obviously the president, Donald Trump,
who rules jen in Bill Ricca, thanks for holding Jen,
and welcome.
Speaker 8 (14:06):
Hi Jeff, thank you.
Speaker 4 (14:07):
I'll make this quick.
Speaker 8 (14:08):
I think that the judge's decisions.
Speaker 4 (14:10):
Are reckless because they may not have all the facts.
They don't have clearance to receive all the information that
the president does. So I would just label these decisions
as reckless and unqualified. And the last thing is I
really trust in Trump two point zero?
Speaker 8 (14:27):
I think actions speak.
Speaker 4 (14:28):
Loud of the words, And you know what, maybe he's
always two steps ahead of me. So right now the
news is not talking about Trump defying orders and all
this other stuff right now. I mean, he's got them
thinking he's complicit, but he's not going to be complicit.
Speaker 1 (14:45):
Jen if they force Trump to stop these deportations of
you know, trendor a ragua of MS thirteen of these
other really vile, barbaric, brutal, brutal, murderous gang bangers, and
some of them are released back into the streets and
(15:06):
there's another Lake and Riley or there's another God forbid
Joycelyn angare where a young eleven twelve year old girl
is gang raped and then brutally murdered and her body
is cut into pieces, mutilated. Uh is is should these
judges be to blame? Should they literally should they be
(15:28):
held criminally responsible? If they're going to keep these people
here and prevent the president from keeping us safe? Then
should they be held accountable for their own decisions and
for their own actions?
Speaker 8 (15:45):
Oh but let's put it on them I've yet to
see them take action and stop him. So it's now
I think Trump Trump's president, and I really think he's
that the authority and the power that term to have
his achievements that he wants, and I don't think they
(16:05):
have it in them to stop him. I would like
to see them try, and I think a lot of
America would.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
Jen. Thank you very much for that call. In other words,
just yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, sure, of course, of course
I'm complying. Of course I'm gonna comply, and you just
keep going. Just keep going, Donald, keep going. Dan in
needam thanks for holding Dan, and welcome.
Speaker 3 (16:34):
Just can you hear me?
Speaker 1 (16:34):
I can hear you, Dan, can you hear me?
Speaker 3 (16:37):
Yeah, It's just I'm probably the last color for a
little while. I don't I don't recall the amount of
disrespect to the president when Biden was the president. There
seems to be this weird. I really, I just don't
(16:58):
understand how you guys can put all your faith and
this one guy who's hired.
Speaker 1 (17:01):
This Dan, I'm up against the break. Please, I'd like
to continue with you. Dan. You were making the point
that you didn't see this kind of opposition from the
judiciary when Biden was in office and then we got
cut off, So please pick up where you left off.
Speaker 3 (17:21):
No, it wasn't that. It wasn't that he didn't get
pushed back. He clearly got pushback. For instance, I mean,
this is just one case where the Supreme Court ruled
against him as far as eliminating student loan debt, and
in many cases that in most cases, you know, a
(17:41):
president understands that the checks and balances mean that he
or she abides by the rulings of the judiciary. This
doesn't seem to be the case with supporters of Trump.
I'm not sure why. One of the reasons might be
that what sixty out of sixty two cases that he
brought for the election in twenty twenty were completely thrown out.
(18:04):
That might be something, But really, the problem that I
think your listeners, who are working people like me should
watch out for is that his hired henchman, mister Musk,
is going after Social Security and Medicaid. I've been working
for forty years in the construction trades. I need my
little Social Security not and he's on the verge of
(18:25):
privatizing it or just getting rid of it as a
Ponzi schemes while President Trump's pooling around with tariffs and
threatening everybody he can is destroying my four oh one K. So,
like a lot of working people, we're not real thrilled
with this guy who wants to have power over the judiciary,
power over the half of Congress that didn't vote for him,
(18:47):
and the idea that all of the people who are
who disagree with his policies are summed up as I think,
you know, you call the Marxist leftist moon bats, blah
blah blah. It's not a common just a lot of
invective with no thinking involved. And I hope the people
who listen to you can get around that and remember
that the people who are getting attacked are working people
(19:09):
like me.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
So well, Dan, no, no, no, no, don't come on,
don't be a coward, don't don't don't come in with
smears and cheap shots and lies and then say you're
going to hang up Number one. It's you democrats, let's
be clear, led by Kamala Harris and Joe Biden who
called Trump supporters Nazis and white supremacists and racists and fascists.
(19:33):
So let's not with this, with this invective. You're the
ones who started it on the most grotesque level. Number two,
Joe Biden completely ignored the Supreme Court ruling on student
loan forgiveness. He blatantly, brazenly ignored and violated the Supreme Court.
So don't talk to me about respect for an independent judiciary.
(19:54):
As for Elon Musk, you're lying. Either you're lying or
you're being fed propaganda and misinformation and you're just mindlessly
regurgitating it. He's not gonna cut social security. Number one,
he doesn't have the authority to cut social Security. He's
talking about the federal bureaucracy, which is very different from
(20:15):
social Security. There are no cuts to social Security, no
cuts to Medicare, no cuts to Medicaid. In fact, let
me ask you, point blank, show me the evidence. Where
are they going to cut social security? Show me the legislation,
Show me the bill. Where are they going to cut
Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid? Or are you just making
(20:38):
stuff up?
Speaker 3 (20:41):
Well, the Republican budget calls for eight hundred and eighty
billion dollars in cuts that can come from nowhere.
Speaker 1 (20:46):
That's a lie. That's a lie. That's a lie. The
Continuing Resolution raises stuff defense spending by six billion, and
it cuts the domestic spending by thirteen billion, and social
Security is not touched. Neither is Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps,
or any entitlement program. So that's a lie. You're lying,
(21:10):
you're literally making it up. That's number one. Number two.
Trump made it a central campaign promise that he will
not touch social Security. In fact, he's the one that's
going to cut taxes, get rid of taxes on Social
Security benefits, something Joe Biden the Democrats never did and
never will do. And as for being a working guy
(21:33):
who's being done in by Trump, right, Trump won the
overwhelming majority of working people in this country, white, black, Latino.
He's put together a multi racial working class coalition. So
my question to you is very simple. The issue now
(21:54):
is a judge, a clear moonbat judge, a radical leftist.
You look at his record, you look at his policies,
you look at his daughter, you look at his pedigree.
If this guy's not radical left, then no one's radical left.
Now says Trump doesn't have the right to deport trend
Or Ragua gangbangers, convicted murderers and rapists who are in
(22:19):
our country illegally. So let me ask you, does Trump
have the authority to deport them? Yes or no?
Speaker 3 (22:29):
Because he says, because he says they should go, and
he uh.
Speaker 1 (22:33):
Not, because he says, because they're in our country illegally
and they're criminal. Illegal aliens who have committed heinous crimes.
Speaker 3 (22:42):
Fluted to El Salvador were tried a many Jeff.
Speaker 1 (22:47):
They were already convicted.
Speaker 3 (22:50):
Oh is that right, Jess.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
Yes, if you would read, you would know this. In fact,
many of them just pull their records. Many of them
were released from jail's Inventezuela by Maduro. I mean literally,
are you that ignorant?
Speaker 3 (23:07):
Well, Jeff, Jeff, you're putting a lot of faith in
a guy hired by Trump or or put in place
by Trump. Remember, Musk said that ninety percent of the
population who want to use their social right.
Speaker 1 (23:25):
Listen, whatever he said is irrelevant.
Six seven two six sixty eight sixty eight is the
number Roberta in Woolburn. Thanks for holding Roberta, and welcome.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Morning Cooner.
Speaker 1 (00:13):
Hi Roberta.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Can you hear me?
Speaker 3 (00:14):
Okay?
Speaker 1 (00:14):
I can hear you. Can you hear me?
Speaker 3 (00:17):
Yes?
Speaker 2 (00:17):
I can.
Speaker 3 (00:19):
So.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
First of all, I have two points to make. I
agree with everything that you and your wife have mentioned
this morning. I just want to add two additional points
to the whole conversation. One is, Trump is falling into
a trap if you obased this lower court judge. And
the reason I'm saying this is because I've seen this
(00:40):
movie before. This is exactly what played out in Brazil
where President Bolsonaro was effectively replaced by judicial court system
and they effectively stopped him from being able to govern
the country. Number two. My second point is that regarding
this whole aspect of the whole case of getting the
(01:04):
illegals out of the country, the Supreme Court has already
ruled on it. And there's a something called the Alien
Enemy Act, and there's a case that happened in nineteen
forty eight called Luda Kei versus Watkins, and you guys
can look it up. So basically, the Supreme Court already
ruled on it, and I quote what they said is
(01:27):
these are matters of political judgment for which judges have
neither technical competence nor official responsibility. So that's that there's
already precedents from the Supreme Court that these lower court
judges do not have the right to stop any of
this or to impose anything on the executive leader. So
(01:47):
that these are my two points.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
Thank you, ROBERTA, if you don't mind me asking, this
is what I find truly mind boggling. I can't wrap
my mind around it because you're completely right on both
your points. And if I said it this way, I
think it would strike people a little bit more because
it's trend dur Aragua. It's MS thirteen and you know,
(02:10):
and the trend or Aragua has now been designated a
foreign terrorist organization. But they look at them more as
criminals than terrorists. So let's make it as simple and
clear as possible. If President Trump and the DOJ rounded up,
along with the FBI two hundred and fifty isis terrorists
(02:31):
convicted of you know, terrorism, of murder, of rape, of
a weapons, trafficking, drug trafficking, and he said they're criminals,
der illegals. They're in our country illegally. I'm kicking them
back wherever whatever. I don't care, Assyria, Iraq, wherever they're from, Afghanistan.
(02:53):
I'm going to deport them. And if a judge that
no one had ever heard of before comes in and says, Nope,
you're not going to do that. No, No, you don't
have the authority to do it. I have to give
my stamp of approval. You can't send them anywhere until
I say it's kosher, and you may not even be
allowed to send them because I think sending people back
(03:14):
to their home countries is inhumane. The attitude of the
American public would be immediately, who the hell does this
judge think he is or she is who died and
made them president? They would say it's blatantly unconstitutional, blatant overreach,
(03:35):
blatantly illegal. And if the President wanted to just ignore him,
they would say, bravo, ignore him. Let the judge take
it to the Supreme Court. Go Donald, the port isis
yet the moment you mention migrants or illegal or undocumented
(03:56):
immigrant or whatever, the moment that has anything to do
the border, all of a sudden, it's like booh, it's
like what, Oh, no, a judge stopped me. Oh a
judge's issued or ruling. Oh, then everything has to grow
into a halt, am I wrong, ROBERTA.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
That's exactly the perception that the media wants to put
out there for the people.
Speaker 4 (04:19):
Right.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
They want to say that illegal, these illegal aliens coming in,
that they're you know, they're not necessarily that there's no
invasion taking place, that there's no bigger plan that wants
to replace the people of this country and replace the
culture in this country. So the media wants to make
everybody believe that this is okay, and it's not. It's illegal,
(04:42):
it's unconstitutional. So Trump cannot fall into this trap. It's
not just because it's illegal and in constitutional, but also
because if it falls into the strap, and if he
accepts the order of a lower court judge, that will
not stop. Other judges are going to come out of
the woodwork every single day with all kinds of crazy
(05:04):
rulings to stop him from moving and making any decisions
into any aspect of his government, and they are going
to effectively nullify his entire government. So he needs to
stop this now before this gets out of hand.
Speaker 1 (05:20):
Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, Roberta, thank you very much for that call.
She's a thousand, not one hundred, a thousand percent correct.
This is going to effectively paralyze Trump and his entire presidency.
And that's the intent. That's literally the goal. George in Somerville.
(05:41):
Thanks for holding, George, and welcome. All right, Hi, good morning,
Hi George.
Speaker 5 (05:47):
So so I'm talking about him saying on TV is
not defied. The thing is, look at the history. When
I was in school, Andrew Jackson, I think something about
the Supreme Court.
Speaker 6 (06:02):
When they ruled against them.
Speaker 5 (06:03):
He said they got the decision to let them enforce it. Yes,
And the thing is that never enforced it, that they
can't force it. Andrew Jackson, as the president, he has
the authority to enforce with his administration, just like President
President Trump. And Laura Ingram kind of made a mistake there.
(06:24):
She was saying defy, defy, No, she shouldst ignore.
Speaker 6 (06:28):
The president has.
Speaker 5 (06:28):
The authority due he wants when it comes to deportation
and the administration of the executive branch. One idea I.
Speaker 6 (06:37):
Have is.
Speaker 3 (06:40):
The diiser courts in the field.
Speaker 5 (06:42):
Courts are all Article one. The courts The only thing
Conn has to do is pass a law. Supreme Court
has original jurisdiction of anything to do with the executive branch,
and that nullifies everything.
Speaker 6 (06:56):
Supreme Court doesn't doesn't have to take any cases. So
these idiots, I want to sall cases. He's a president
gets a Spreme Court. They say, when i'd have taken
the case, Big guys, it's over.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
That's a great idea, George, I love it. Look in
other words, Congress is going to have to act like
there's no getting around it. In fact, there's a very
prominent constitutionalist lawyer who's a really good ally of President Trump.
He's a very smart guy. His name is Mike Davis,
and he pretty much said you know what I had
said just before Grace called, where he said, look, the
(07:31):
Supreme Court can either police the judiciary or have Congress
step in. If Roberts won't police the judiciary, then let
Congress police the judiciary. In other words, if Roberts won't,
the Congress needs to act. And you're completely right, Congress
can stop this in a second. In a second. So George,
(07:55):
thank you very much for that call. Okay, Roberta's call
Roberta in Wooburn triggered a massive response on the text line.
And by the way, everyone is confirming Kooner Country is saying,
you know what, we want to double check what Roberta
was saying, and they're saying she's completely correct. So listen
(08:15):
now to this. This is from again. You can text
us seven zero four seven zero seven zero four seven
zero six one seven, Jeff, Roberta is completely right. The
Alien Enemies Act cannot be reviewed or regulated by any court.
(08:36):
In fact, Megan Kelly on her podcast quoted a specific
court ruling on this matter right after World War Two. Therefore,
Trump can and will and should ignore all court orders
about illegals being deported. Bingo, bingo, okay six one seven, Jeff,
(09:06):
breaking news. A federal judge, just to prove Roberta's point,
has just ruled that Elon Musk has violated the Constitution
for dismantling usaid and ordered that all employees be restored,
that their jobs forgive me, that their jobs and access
(09:28):
be restored immediately. And remember what Roberta said, That's exactly
the playbook that you saw in Brazil against Bolsonaro, who
was really the Trump of Brazil. They just bled them
and bled them and bled them with one court order
after another and then one more. So you see, now
(09:52):
you can't even get rid of USAID. You see, I'm
telling you they're gonna undo everything if they get away
with it. And to show you how outrageous these judges are, again,
they're just making stuff up. Final one five oh eight.
Jeff the judge who ruled that disbanding USAID was unconstitutional,
(10:15):
wrote in the order that USAID was created by Congress.
It was not. It was created by executive order by
John F. Kennedy. Six one seven two six six sixty
eight sixty eight is the number. So literally, they're just
(10:38):
making stuff up there. So USAID created by a president
through executive order, and now a judge comes along and says,
you can't fire anybody, you can't touch USAID, no matter
how fraudulent and corrupt all of the spending that's been exposed.
(10:58):
Congress created it, nol. It was created by Kennedy or
by executive order. So if it's created by executive order,
it can be dismantled by executive order. But again not
with this out of control judiciary six one seven two
six six sixty eight sixty eight. David in Boston. Thanks
(11:21):
for holding, David, and welcome.
Speaker 7 (11:28):
I have a question now for you and Kona Country. Yes, David,
what what do lease anti Trump district courts having common
with tennis courts? What do lease anti Trump district courts
have in common with tennis courts where they play tennis?
Speaker 1 (11:47):
Uh?
Speaker 3 (11:49):
I don't know, David, rack rackets rackets.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
David, if you were that's funny, David, if you were
advising Trump, what would you tell him to do right now?
Should he comply with these court orders? Or should he
pull on Andrew Jackson? You made your ruling, you go
and force it.
Speaker 3 (12:16):
Uh.
Speaker 7 (12:17):
I think his policy should be. Uh, what we've made
up our mind about force uh vack assassinations, these forced
vack assassinations. Don't comply, don't comply, don't comply, full steam forward.
Just I'm telling you.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
Uh.
Speaker 7 (12:33):
We're supposed to be a nation government of the people,
by the people and father people. But we've lost that.
Now we're a government by the lawyer judges, father law
of the lawyer judges, father lawyer judges, by the lawyer judgers.
We've uh, we've lost the people have lost self government governance,
(12:54):
which now even though we've lost it. It doesn't mean
we can't get it back. But let's face reality, have
lost health government just as anything.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
But David, you nailed it. That's a nice way of
saying judicial tyranny. But you're right. You know it's supposed
to be of the people, by the people, for the people.
Now it's you know, of rogue judges by rogue judges
for rogue judges, or of judicial activists by judicial activists
(13:23):
for judicial activists. In other words, judicial tyranny. And so
this is a question of Trump's presidency. It's it's really
it's as fundamental as you can get. Who rules, who
ultimately runs our country, who governs unelected, unaccountable judges and bureaucrats,
(13:43):
either through judicial tyranny or the administrative state, the deep state,
or we the people through our elected representatives. And the
most one, the biggest one, is obviously the president, Donald Trump,
who rules jen in Bill Ricca, thanks for holding Jen,
and welcome.
Speaker 8 (14:06):
Hi Jeff, thank you.
Speaker 4 (14:07):
I'll make this quick.
Speaker 8 (14:08):
I think that the judge's decisions.
Speaker 4 (14:10):
Are reckless because they may not have all the facts.
They don't have clearance to receive all the information that
the president does. So I would just label these decisions
as reckless and unqualified. And the last thing is I
really trust in Trump two point zero?
Speaker 8 (14:27):
I think actions speak.
Speaker 4 (14:28):
Loud of the words, And you know what, maybe he's
always two steps ahead of me. So right now the
news is not talking about Trump defying orders and all
this other stuff right now. I mean, he's got them
thinking he's complicit, but he's not going to be complicit.
Speaker 1 (14:45):
Jen if they force Trump to stop these deportations of
you know, trendor a ragua of MS thirteen of these
other really vile, barbaric, brutal, brutal, murderous gang bangers, and
some of them are released back into the streets and
(15:06):
there's another Lake and Riley or there's another God forbid
Joycelyn angare where a young eleven twelve year old girl
is gang raped and then brutally murdered and her body
is cut into pieces, mutilated. Uh is is should these
judges be to blame? Should they literally should they be
(15:28):
held criminally responsible? If they're going to keep these people
here and prevent the president from keeping us safe? Then
should they be held accountable for their own decisions and
for their own actions?
Speaker 8 (15:45):
Oh but let's put it on them I've yet to
see them take action and stop him. So it's now
I think Trump Trump's president, and I really think he's
that the authority and the power that term to have
his achievements that he wants, and I don't think they
(16:05):
have it in them to stop him. I would like
to see them try, and I think a lot of
America would.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
Jen. Thank you very much for that call. In other words,
just yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, sure, of course, of course
I'm complying. Of course I'm gonna comply, and you just
keep going. Just keep going, Donald, keep going. Dan in
needam thanks for holding Dan, and welcome.
Speaker 3 (16:34):
Just can you hear me?
Speaker 1 (16:34):
I can hear you, Dan, can you hear me?
Speaker 3 (16:37):
Yeah, It's just I'm probably the last color for a
little while. I don't I don't recall the amount of
disrespect to the president when Biden was the president. There
seems to be this weird. I really, I just don't
(16:58):
understand how you guys can put all your faith and
this one guy who's hired.
Speaker 1 (17:01):
This Dan, I'm up against the break. Please, I'd like
to continue with you. Dan. You were making the point
that you didn't see this kind of opposition from the
judiciary when Biden was in office and then we got
cut off, So please pick up where you left off.
Speaker 3 (17:21):
No, it wasn't that. It wasn't that he didn't get
pushed back. He clearly got pushback. For instance, I mean,
this is just one case where the Supreme Court ruled
against him as far as eliminating student loan debt, and
in many cases that in most cases, you know, a
(17:41):
president understands that the checks and balances mean that he
or she abides by the rulings of the judiciary. This
doesn't seem to be the case with supporters of Trump.
I'm not sure why. One of the reasons might be
that what sixty out of sixty two cases that he
brought for the election in twenty twenty were completely thrown out.
(18:04):
That might be something, But really, the problem that I
think your listeners, who are working people like me should
watch out for is that his hired henchman, mister Musk,
is going after Social Security and Medicaid. I've been working
for forty years in the construction trades. I need my
little Social Security not and he's on the verge of
(18:25):
privatizing it or just getting rid of it as a
Ponzi schemes while President Trump's pooling around with tariffs and
threatening everybody he can is destroying my four oh one K. So,
like a lot of working people, we're not real thrilled
with this guy who wants to have power over the judiciary,
power over the half of Congress that didn't vote for him,
(18:47):
and the idea that all of the people who are
who disagree with his policies are summed up as I think,
you know, you call the Marxist leftist moon bats, blah
blah blah. It's not a common just a lot of
invective with no thinking involved. And I hope the people
who listen to you can get around that and remember
that the people who are getting attacked are working people
(19:09):
like me.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
So well, Dan, no, no, no, no, don't come on,
don't be a coward, don't don't don't come in with
smears and cheap shots and lies and then say you're
going to hang up Number one. It's you democrats, let's
be clear, led by Kamala Harris and Joe Biden who
called Trump supporters Nazis and white supremacists and racists and fascists.
(19:33):
So let's not with this, with this invective. You're the
ones who started it on the most grotesque level. Number two,
Joe Biden completely ignored the Supreme Court ruling on student
loan forgiveness. He blatantly, brazenly ignored and violated the Supreme Court.
So don't talk to me about respect for an independent judiciary.
(19:54):
As for Elon Musk, you're lying. Either you're lying or
you're being fed propaganda and misinformation and you're just mindlessly
regurgitating it. He's not gonna cut social security. Number one,
he doesn't have the authority to cut social Security. He's
talking about the federal bureaucracy, which is very different from
(20:15):
social Security. There are no cuts to social Security, no
cuts to Medicare, no cuts to Medicaid. In fact, let
me ask you, point blank, show me the evidence. Where
are they going to cut social security? Show me the legislation,
Show me the bill. Where are they going to cut
Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid? Or are you just making
(20:38):
stuff up?
Speaker 3 (20:41):
Well, the Republican budget calls for eight hundred and eighty
billion dollars in cuts that can come from nowhere.
Speaker 1 (20:46):
That's a lie. That's a lie. That's a lie. The
Continuing Resolution raises stuff defense spending by six billion, and
it cuts the domestic spending by thirteen billion, and social
Security is not touched. Neither is Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps,
or any entitlement program. So that's a lie. You're lying,
(21:10):
you're literally making it up. That's number one. Number two.
Trump made it a central campaign promise that he will
not touch social Security. In fact, he's the one that's
going to cut taxes, get rid of taxes on Social
Security benefits, something Joe Biden the Democrats never did and
never will do. And as for being a working guy
(21:33):
who's being done in by Trump, right, Trump won the
overwhelming majority of working people in this country, white, black, Latino.
He's put together a multi racial working class coalition. So
my question to you is very simple. The issue now
(21:54):
is a judge, a clear moonbat judge, a radical leftist.
You look at his record, you look at his policies,
you look at his daughter, you look at his pedigree.
If this guy's not radical left, then no one's radical left.
Now says Trump doesn't have the right to deport trend
Or Ragua gangbangers, convicted murderers and rapists who are in
(22:19):
our country illegally. So let me ask you, does Trump
have the authority to deport them? Yes or no?
Speaker 3 (22:29):
Because he says, because he says they should go, and
he uh.
Speaker 1 (22:33):
Not, because he says, because they're in our country illegally
and they're criminal. Illegal aliens who have committed heinous crimes.
Speaker 3 (22:42):
Fluted to El Salvador were tried a many Jeff.
Speaker 1 (22:47):
They were already convicted.
Speaker 3 (22:50):
Oh is that right, Jess.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
Yes, if you would read, you would know this. In fact,
many of them just pull their records. Many of them
were released from jail's Inventezuela by Maduro. I mean literally,
are you that ignorant?
Speaker 3 (23:07):
Well, Jeff, Jeff, you're putting a lot of faith in
a guy hired by Trump or or put in place
by Trump. Remember, Musk said that ninety percent of the
population who want to use their social right.
Speaker 1 (23:25):
Listen, whatever he said is irrelevant.
Popular Podcasts
40s and Free Agents: NFL Draft Season
Daniel Jeremiah of Move the Sticks and Gregg Rosenthal of NFL Daily join forces to break down every team's needs this offseason.
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
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.