Search Posts

That was a very contentious election, and we all know it. January 6th, this past cycle for the president said to be an insurrection. And President Trump was said to be guilty of seditious conspiracy. We had a whole January 6th commission set up by Nancy Pelosi. She picked the Democrats and the Republicans. She rejected the Republicans that Leader McCarthy had chosen. It's never been done before in American history. And they do all this one-sided public stuff, and they turn it over to a prosecutor. The funny thing about the prosecution is, here it is. There is a criminal act, rebellion or insurrection, passed during the Civil War period. It appears nowhere in the charges against Donald Trump. Donald Trump is not guilty of rebellion or insurrection, he's not even charged with it. Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the US or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or in prison not more than 10 years or both, and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. That's not in here. Well, what about seditious conspiracy? I remember legal analysts all over cable TV, some here, CNN for sure, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington, but seditious conspiracy, they have Trump dead to rights. But it's not in the charges. If two or more persons in any state or territory in any place subject to the jurisdiction in the United States, conspired to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to cease, take or possess any property of the United States, contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or in prison not more than 20 years or both. So why? Why didn't this out of control rogue, Eric Holder, Obama, Biden, prosecutor, Garland's man, Smith, bring these charges because he had no evidence. Rebellion or insurrection, all the testimony, the January 6th committee, all the testimony, all the witnesses, all the documents, not a centilla of evidence that Donald Trump led any kind of rebellion or insurrection. What about seditious conspiracy? There was no seditious conspiracy. Donald Trump is the man who said if they want 10,000 armed army soldiers to protect them on January 6th, please let me know while nobody's leading an insurrection if they're offering armed federal troops to protect the Capitol building. And we heard what Donald Trump said about peacefully lobbying Congress. So it doesn't work. So what happened? So Jack and the boys go back and they say, you know what, we can't let this go anyway. So they go back to the Civil War, post Civil War period, a law that was passed in 1871. It was called the Ku Klux Klan Act at the time to try and defeat the Klan. That's one of the counts here, 18 U.S.C. 241 conspiracy against rights. It is a disgusting and preposterous overreach. Then we have two counts under 18 U.S.C. 1512. Now these laws were passed in 2002 to address gaps that they felt existed in the Enron scandal investigation. If you consider the Enron statutes, they have nothing to do with January 6th protests, even though this has been used, so-called obstruction, this has been used against one protester after another by the same prosecutors from January 6th. This has not yet gone to the Supreme Court. It will be tested by the Supreme Court. And I believe the Supreme Court will say no, this was never intended to be used that way. Then we have count one, 18 U.S.C. 371. Now that count is a garden variety statute that the federal government uses against federal contractors, people who cheat the government out of money and so forth. And that has been expanded to include, you know, challenging the legitimate activity of the government. Again, stretched completely out of control. Those are the four charges. This is a disgusting attack on our electoral system. And as I've said before, the electoral system in America is now dead unless all of this is reversed. We cannot have, after all these years, more than two centuries, a Department of Justice and U.S. attorneys with 20/20 hindsight delving into what a president or a candidate thinks. Now that 1876 election, I told you that that state sent in two groups of electors. You're free to do that. Congress decides all this stuff. They're not criminal activities. So but now what are the rules for running, challenging and disputing elections today? We don't know. Who decides? Apparently prosecutors. What can a candidate or when can a candidate rely on legal advice since President Trump's lawyers are being indicted for giving legal advice? Is a president not free to discuss decisions about elections with his vice president and strongly urge him to take one position or another? Of course he's free to do that. Is a president free to publicly dispute election results? They all do when they lose, including people like Hillary Clinton and Al Gore. The electoral process is now not purely political and constitutional as it was intended. But now it is the control of prosecutors, Department of Justice, and in the hands of these people, the Biden administration, it is a disaster. The judge who's going to hear this case is the most radical partisan activist Obama appointee in the entire federal judiciary. Gee, I wonder how she got chosen. We'll be right back.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.