The Devil's Advocate's radio show is broadcast under a time brokerage agreement between Devil
Radio and Civic Media Inc.
Some portions of this program may be pre-recorded.
Warning!
You're about to listen to the greatest radio show ever, and due to contractual obligations
and to shield our airwaves and corporate licensees from many semblance of liability, responsibility
and gullibility, we must tell you the views represented on this show are not necessarily
those of this station or its management.
This radio show contains differing points of view on current political topics, and due
to the nature of its contents, it should be heard by everyone.
Thank you for listening.
Now live from the Civic Media Studios in Madison, Wisconsin, where the political party is just
beginning, welcome to the Devil's Advocate's radio show.
Friends proving it's never personal, only politics.
And now here's your host, Dom and Crute.
Welcome to the Devil's Advocates radio show.
Dom, it's Thursday, a caucus Thursday, here in the great state of Nevada, where I'm
at currently.
It's a scotus Thursday, and it's, of course, Friday Eve, welcome to it, my little buddy.
Pretty welcome, it is a Friday Eve that certainly seems like a Friday to me.
I will be off tomorrow, but great to see you, man.
Thank you for your hard work today.
Lots of interesting sound.
Thank you for joining us.
Dom, as you well know, I'm here in Las Vegas, baby, on the, for the love of democracy
tour, wish you could join me, to bed, it's moving day for you tomorrow.
But I've been here, enjoying myself in Las Vegas, had a nice dinner last night, surf and
turf, you know how I like it.
The, for the love of democracy tour, 2024, and I would just point out, thank you to
our fine sponsor partner, Chad's design build.
But I'm not eating on Chad, I'm not drinking on Chad, I'm just arriving and being here
on Chad, you know, doing my part for the show and the nation and Chad's design build.
Thank you to them.
It's our civic duty, Cody, that we must do this.
Yes, absolutely.
And Dom, I woke up this morning in the MGM grand signature, Chad did put us up at a nice
hotel.
But I visited a less nice hotel, we'll talk about that in just a minute, Dom.
But the scotus oral arguments this morning, I basically, and I'm on Pacific times, I'm
trailing you, I've been staying up late, getting up late.
But I woke up this morning and I immediately turned on the scotus oral arguments, as soon
as they came on, I listened and Dom, I can tell you the arguments for Colorado, trying
to exclude the former president Donald Trump from the ballot.
I came away with the impression that this did not go well for Colorado and that crudey
has been absolutely right on this topic all along.
I put this one in the wind column for crudey.
Oh, okay, man, well, number one's not done yet, he can't claim being right on a discussion
point.
I don't ever remember you laying down some mods and saying this is going to happen because
if that were to happen, I would want some mods.
It's not a 50-50, it was always an uphill battle to get this through.
But I would also say morally, right, Nate, morally, this absolutely should happen, that
will, in fact, did engage in insurrection, as history will know him to be or to have
done, and he should absolutely be disqualified from the ballot.
Well, see, that's where we disagreed and that's where the Supreme Court will support my
correct belief in history moral judgment.
You think I want to be clear here, let's put this one down in stone.
You think 150 years from now, they're going to look back and say Donald Trump did not
engage in an insurrection.
That's your position right now.
That is not at all what the arguments before the court was, should he be disqualified from
the ballot of Colorado and I agree with the Supreme Court's assessment.
I think we'll soon see a ruling that agrees with me and I don't think it's going to be
5-4-dom.
Baskay scenario, this is a 7-2 supporting Donald Trump's assertion that he should be put
on the Colorado ballot and that this court should make this decision for the entire nation
and that is effectively what this ruling will do, Dom, and sadly, sadly, because I love
to see the old man excluded from the ballot, but I agree with the position and the skepticism,
the justices seem to have during their questioning, oral arguments today, Dom, we've got this
and we can bring it to the audience with a little help from Nate.
And of course, we'll take calls as well to the 8-4-4-9-672789.
Unfortunately, Crudey, the reporting seems to go your way as well, headline over at the
New York Times that Supreme Court justice is a pure skeptical of arguments to kick Trump
off-state ballots, Washington Post, Supreme Court poised to allow Trump to remain on the
Colorado ballot.
So let's hear some of the sound, Katanjee Brown-Jackson, I believe we're going to stop
with Nate.
No, early, earlier in Katanjee Brown-Jackson, I believe, questioning the Trump attorneys.
And you know, at one point I saw some reporting earlier today, early in the testimony because
anyone could have listened to this live and people are like, well, Justice Alitos bailing
out the Trump attorneys and Katanjee Brown-Jackson, Justice, Brown-Jackson's great
freedom.
Let's play that.
Let's go, insurrection or no insurrection cut one.
Final question.
The Colorado Supreme Court concluded that the violent attempts of the petitioner's supporters
in this case to halt the count on January 6 qualified as an insurrection, as defined
by Section 3.
And I read your opening brief to accept that those events counted as an insurrection.
But then your reply seemed to suggest that they were not.
So what is your position?
We never accepted or conceded an opening brief that this was an insurrection.
What we said in an opening brief was President Trump did not engage in any act that can
plausibly be characterised as an insurrection.
All right.
So why would this not be an insur...
What is your argument that it's not your reply brief says that it wasn't because I think
you say it did not involve an organised attempt to overthrow the government.
So that's one of many reasons.
But for an insurrection there needs to be an organised, concerted effort to overthrow
the government of the United States through violence.
And this is...
And so the point is that a chaotic effort to overthrow the government is not an insurrection?
We didn't concede that it's an effort to overthrow the government either, Justice Jackson,
right?
None of these criteria were met.
This was a riot.
It was not an insurrection.
The events were shameful, criminal, violent, all those things.
It did not qualify as insurrection as that term is used in Section 3.
You know, and that would be a distinction I would draw.
It's not just what happened at the Capitol that day.
It is the ongoing criminal conspiracy leading up to, and through the January 6th on, that
organised...
Could be characterised as an insurrection as well.
Of course, and in any sense of the matter, any logical, you know, regular interpretation
of the words, an organised concerted effort through violence.
Well, that's exactly what it was.
They met, they planned, right?
This was an effort to get people.
Be there, will be wild.
They had meetings at the hotel.
I mean, there's documentation.
Help!
Come on, man.
Together, if we have people following Roger Stone around with video cameras.
Of course, this was an organised concerted, violent, ultimately, effort to what to overthrow
the government.
Come on.
I don't know how you can read this any other way, but as that.
The question of whether or not Donald Trump should be excluded from the ballot via the
14th Amendment Section 3, and specifically through the actions of the State of Colorado,
well, we soon found during the oral arguments down the...
Even the, let's call them the Liberal Justices, Elena Kagan.
She seemed quite skeptical.
Let's go with her next.
If you would, play it for the people.
Just as Kagan.
I think that the question that you have to confront is why a single stage should decide
who gets to be president of the United States.
In other words, you know, this question of whether a former president is disqualified
for insurrection to be president again is, you know, just say it.
It sounds awfully national to me.
So whatever means there are to enforce it would suggest that they have to be federal
national means.
Why does, you know, if you weren't from Colorado and you were from Wisconsin or you were
from Michigan?
And it really, you know, what the Michigan Secretary of State did is going to make the
difference between, you know, whether candidate A is elected or candidate B is elected,
may that seems quite extraordinary, doesn't it?
No, your honor, because ultimately it's this color that's going to decide that question
of federal...
And some said he didn't represent very well, but I think there was just a strong skepticism
from a lot of the justices the question.
Now, some were all in pink, some were Thomas in the tank, you know, I get it.
Well, let's play Justice Roberts, and I had expressed, at least on behalf of conservatives,
playing Devils Afkets on this show, I had expressed these arguments that Roberts makes,
but playing for the people.
But what do you do with the, what I would seem to me to be playing consequences of your
position?
If Colorado's position is upheld, surely there will be disqualification proceedings on
the other side, and some of those will succeed.
Some of them will have different standards approved, some of them will have different
rules about evidence, maybe the Senate report won't be accepted in others because it's
hearsay, maybe it's beyond a reasonable doubt, whatever.
In very quick order, I would expect, although my predictions have never been correct, I would
expect that a goodly number of states will say whoever the Democratic candidate is, you're
off the ballot and others for the Republican candidate, you're off the ballot, and it'll
come down to just a handful of states that are going to decide the presidential election.
That's a pretty daunting consequence.
The Pandora's Box Consequence.
You know what, but this is also so very disingenuous and I'm going to lay it out for you.
Why, crudey?
Roberts talks about what, the other side, they'll do it to you.
They'll have what, they'll have different standards of proof, well proof of what, right?
Proof of what, are you assuming the same exact set of circumstances applied to the next
president or whoever it may be?
If that were to be the case, then how is the answer not?
Yes, of course, that's fine.
But the next guy gets in there and it's a Democrat and they pull the same thing with
fourth thought, right?
If they organized and had a concerted effort and ultimately through violence tried to stay
in power, I would absolutely expect that.
But that's not the engagement and insurrection should be disqualified from the ballot.
But that's not the argument and the question that Roberts is ultimately asking.
He's saying different secretaries of state and I had the benefit of hearing the broader
context here, Dom, but different secretaries of state or partisans would use this as a
partisan tool.
And you could say, but of course they would be adjudicated and they'd have their, their,
their, uh, they in court, right?
That would be the, the thought, but of course they pointed towards the main secretary of state
as Fox News would describe an unelected state official making a decision.
In Maine, they had a secretary of state making a unilateral decision.
Three fours down.
Dom, we'll come back to our tomorrow.
It's not, I get it, but that's not what happened in Colorado.
Okay, but this ruling is to set the table for the entire nation.
And that was mentioned, the secretary of state, reference to Maine, Kagan was.
Dom, this song, I'm referencing the crappy treasure island casino down the strip here.
I was there for about two, two and a half hours today, awaiting my Trump credentials.
And there had been some question of late, whether or not I was an enemy of the people, come
back and I'll tell you if I am the big and tall of political talk, the devil's advocates.
Thank you so much for listening to the devil's advocates radio show.
We love it.
We knew participate with us.
You can do it through the civic media app, download it from your favorite app store, get
the buttons you can call us at 844-967-2789.
I know we have some callers would get to be patient.
Dom, I'm taking a political field trip for the love of democracy to our 2024 in Las Vegas
to bad at this week.
Why?
Tuesday was a primary, and today is the rigged GOP caucus for the benefit of Donald Trump.
And we talked about these scotas earlier today, Dom.
And I feel like there was a nump skepticism that it seemed quite obvious.
This was not going to be a successful effort on behalf of Colorado, at least that's my
opinion.
And I think even Donald Trump felt that way.
I heard Trump speaking from Marilago.
That was the second thing I did today, I listened to the former president, I got to tell
you, he seemed as calm and relaxed as I've seen the guy in forever.
I think he was somehow calm, I think he felt like I might be winning this one for a change.
And after he made his statements, Dom, he's flying out here to Vegas to declare victory
tonight in a caucus where he's the only participant.
So it's going to be a glorious win for Trump and Nevada tonight.
But here, let me point out.
He is doing this event and this was supposed to be the caucus victory party, I've known
about this for a couple of weeks.
But wasn't clear whether or not Donald Trump would actually attend his own victory in
Nevada caucus party.
A couple days ago, he made the announcement, he's coming.
You know, despite the fact we got the Super Bowl and nobody's carrying a lot about the
politics here, except for being, you know, like a hundred thousand de vattens that voted
for Joe Biden the other night, ish, just under a hundred thousand.
But anyways, here's the point.
I've been concerned, Dom, that our status as the greatest radio show ever has not been
acknowledged by the Trump campaign of late.
I had recently been denied credentials at a Newton Iowa event and I looked it up and
said a community college, small venue, you know, you could rent that room for 1,500
bucks.
If you could rent the room for a wedding for 1,500 bucks, it's not a big room, right?
And, you know, I didn't feel terribly, terribly victimized being denied credentials to what
was clearly a small venue.
But then I also sought while I was in De Boine, part of the earlier for the love of democracy
tour event, Dom, and also been denied a Trump event where Trump wasn't going, but Ben
Stabby, McStabberson, Carson was going to be there at a church in Iowa.
And I was also denied credentials to that fine event.
But I'm here in Vegas, Dom, and I asked weeks ago, and I had not gotten any clear response
from the Trump campaign.
And at least since I've been here, I've been looking every day, right?
And there's only one real thing that mattered.
When I show up, will they let me in?
Because it doesn't matter if they tell you you're in or not, either they're going to let
you in at the gate or they're not.
So I ventured over to the treasure island, took a cab on the company today, Dom, and went
to 1.6 miles.
That seemed beyond walking.
I've been getting my steps, but not in this case, not in this case, but I'm going to get
back to the radio.
Oh, man.
Well, that was the other point.
I didn't want to have to haul.
I asked 1.6 miles down the strip where, you know, there's a lot of super bowl activity
in hustle and bustle.
Let's just say going on.
So anyways, took a cab there, got there like two hours before first media entry.
Oh, sorry.
Sorry.
We're sweeping the room.
We're going to kill some time.
Come back at 12.30.
Damn it.
So, you know, I'm in a casino, Dom, you know how I killed the time.
Played a little video poker, made 20 bucks last almost an hour, and had some rituals
at one of the overpriced, you know, places in the lobby there, the treasure island.
You know, if I lost more money at the tables, maybe I could have been copped the stake
at eggs, you know, because I'm in Vegas, then who cares about cholesterol?
And then finally, I get up there and they're letting in the Trump people, lots of mega hats
and, you know, strange looking older women with like white campaign captain hats, similar
to what we said.
You know, they must be, you know, the white hats with the gold, like you're a young
girl or something, very, very Trumpian with a very Trumpian.
But here, let me, let me describe the scene as I arrive at it, Dom.
The treasure island casino is, is not one of the new shiny ones anymore, it's kind of
old.
I would, I would call it run down.
In fact, I looked for a room today just now, and you could get a room at the treasure island
for 72 bucks, and it's Super Bowl week.
Nice.
That's sorry, but hey, twice as expensive as circus circus, don't.
Well, I wasn't Super Bowl week, but I'm not sure if that's today's rate or just
to go on a rate, but 72 bucks a night, that's, that's cheap stays, if you know what I'm
saying.
And I got in the elevator up to the second floor convention slash wedding chapel space.
And that's the button, it's like wedding chapel convention.
You push a fat button on the brassy elevator.
I took a selfie on the elevator, but not the traditional, hold the phone out, just reflecting
myself off the brass.
So I get up to floor number two, Dom, and you know, I get up to the front of the line,
finally, and seeking my press credentials.
And they said, well, you know, where would we look for these?
I said, try civic media, because the last couple of times I put in under like devil's
advocates, I thought maybe that's the problem.
So I'll go with the more generic vanilla, you know, here's the network we play on, the
civic media network.
I tried that way.
And no, don't find you here on the network list is civic media, I said, devil's advocates.
And he checked that as well, and you know, nice, well dressed young man, blonde, very
Aryan looking.
And anyways, the very polite young man said, no, I don't find you on the list here.
And I said, yeah, here I am looking for entry.
So why don't you see if you can, you know, get clarity for me of this, this question.
Do you not receive my credential request, or have you denied my, my credential request,
because it will greatly affect how I report that today to my audience.
And he said, let me get back to you.
And he did.
And in fact, he called me back, come back.
He said, I feel quite confident.
It's the, it's the small venues space, we are full.
We are full of press.
And yeah, I would, I would just love, I would love to bend over backwards in the comedy.
But sorry, parks closed, boost up, front should told you.
So anyways, I'm like, okay, maybe, maybe, maybe they think we're enemies of the people.
But I look behind me in this guy's wearing his mega hat.
And he's not one of the faithful going in.
I'm like, you press dude.
Oh yeah, I'm a tick tock streamer.
He tells me, aren't we all, wait, we're not tick tock streamers are I don't believe
we are, but he says, I'm a tick tock streamer.
And so anyways, as I'm looking to the left at the wedding chapel, literally, they're having
this rally on the second floor conference room, wedding chapel, wing at Treasure Island,
which is not one of your finer casinos here.
Get a room tonight for 72 bucks.
And here's the, here's the answer, I won't be at the Trump rally tonight.
And you know, I'm probably okay with that because you go in that old casino and they just
can't stay ahead of the smoke.
What do you say?
It's like a ghost.
It's always going to be there.
Well, that's what the Treasure Island, it's, it smells like, it, it smells like desperation
and I figure that is Trump's kind of place.
And ironically, from the Treasure Island, you could see the Trump casino.
Why wouldn't they go to the Trump casino?
Just asking, inquiring minds want to know, your calls could be next, 844-96 party.
Look back to the devils, Advocate's radio showed the Thursday edition, crudey on the
road in Las Vegas, Nevada caucus is later this evening.
And Dom, the scotus hearing oral arguments, the phone lines lit up, we'll go there next,
844-967-2789, your hot tics coming right now, Dom, who's first?
Let's go with Susan Ed in McFarland, welcome Susan Woody-Hatworth.
He's Susan.
Oh, hi guys.
And you know, crudey or normal here for me today because I do agree with you about the
Trumpster.
Actually, I wish he couldn't be on the ballot, but I guess I look at it as well.
We're going to be kind of like damned if you do, damned if you don't, because if something,
if he doesn't win, they're going to call a foul and if he learns on the ballot, people
will call foul.
I think it caused more upset, although from when I hear from my sister in the bat and Utah,
that people are preparing, so for the worst, so, well, always prepare for the worst with
Donald Trump.
Oh, by the way, Susan, let me, but here's the thing though, and they're going to do it no
matter what.
You know what I'm saying?
If you can't do something that's, you know, quote unquote right or be righteous about
it.
And then change your mind or not act for fear that, well, the other people that are doing
bad things are going to do bad things.
I mean, of course, they're going to, they're going to do that no matter what, Susan.
So we got to be, if it's not, that's not why this will be the ruling of the court.
It's not their fear of the mega bad things to come.
It's because it would create a patchwork.
There'd be incongruity between how the state's made determination.
There were a lot of reasons and skepticism expressed by even the liberal justices about
why Trump should not be excluded from the ballot, starting with Colorado, but really
it would be a free for all state by state.
And whether or not you give any way to the Robert's argument that, well, it opens Pandora's
box and then ruthless Republican partisan secretaries of state or elections officials
would try to take a similar tech, but Joe Biden, well, that seems a bridge too far to
me.
But, you know, that's not the reason they're going to say no.
But I say, you know, because I have heard that, I have heard that that in one state,
their secretary of state, well, I said I'm going to take Joe Biden off.
I think there has to be a definite way to frame this because, yes, wouldn't it be nice
if he weren't on the ballot, but it's not going to be, I don't think it's going to be that
way.
So I guess I look at it if we're going to save our democracy, we're all going to have
to go to the other thing is to really make sure that we have, you know, I itemize
reasons why, why people should be on the ballot.
Maybe is there a way to change what, I mean, veterans can't, can't be on the ballot.
Right.
Right.
Nor can people that engage in insurrection, excuse me, nor people that are not citizens
of this current, weren't born in this country.
Those all sorts of reasons, Donald Trump just qualified himself for being on the ballot,
for engaging in the insurrection.
And what is it about the state by state thing that has everyone so scared?
We have a lot of state by state laws, you know what I'm saying?
It's not the same ballot.
Your ballot requirements are not the same in every single state, right?
Hell, even the state of Wisconsin, but if someone is to continue, even the state of Wisconsin,
we had Phillips not on the ballot because the Dems decided they'd want them on the ballot.
And then the state court, the Supreme Court said, you got to put them on the ballot.
So we already don't have consistencies for ballot qualifications, state by state.
What is it about this one enforcing this insurrection ban that was scary?
So much.
You want, you want an answer?
Can you handle the truth, Tom?
Because the answer is this, to exclude the nominee of one of the national parties and
let this be a state by state process, if they would choose to do so, when the U.S. Supreme
Court has been asked to create a uniform decision that would affect all the states equally.
Well, for the same reasons in part, because it is a different process in every state, this
gives too much balance.
We're not a popular vote electoral outcome.
It's an electoral college system.
And if partisan secretaries of state, and I know that's not what's happening in Colorado,
but that is the question in the state of Maine and certainly in other states, I mean,
hell, you got a brewmister bringing lawsuits in the state of Wisconsin trying to exclude
Trump from the ballot.
What about a patchwork workout?
Well, here's the final answer.
Trump should not be excluded from the ballot as a nationalized issue.
That's giving too much power to any individual state on behalf of the whole nation.
So how do you apply that logic to the determination of Wisconsin Democratic Party to not put
Phillips on the ballot?
Well, that's also, I would say, and you know I was on the side of putting Phillips
for the same reason, Contangy Brown, Jackson said today, anything that takes someone off
the ballot is restricting democracy.
So my argument all the time has been more ballot access, put Trump on the ballot, put
deem tapes on the ballot.
I have been uniform in my argument cannot be on the presidential ballot, right?
Those that are on all sports and eager cannot be on the presidential ballot.
We have certain requirements.
You cannot be 20 years old to get on the presidential ballot.
There are restrictions.
And one of those restrictions is engaging or an insurrection or providing, based on what
criteria I'm sorry, are you going to nationalize that criterion?
That was asked of the court today as well.
Okay, what is the standard for insurrection is to just state by state standard, determined
by partisans.
I'll rattle.
They had a five day trial where Donald Trump had his attorneys and he was found to be engaged
in insurrection.
They had a trial.
That was brought up at that.
That was brought up today as well, certainly, Don, but it was a different outcome in Maine
with no with no prior, seemingly with with no prior due process extended to the Trump
campaign.
He was just excluded.
So again, one size does not fit all and if you cannot find a uniform insurrection policy
and I get it, 14th Amendment Section 3, but they do not seem to think this court, including
the liberals, they're not seeing it your way, man.
So you can argue your you're no more effective than the guy from Colorado was listening.
If you go to court and you're found to be guilty of an insurrection by a jury, right?
When's that happened to Trump and five day and he had five days of testimony, I guess
one clear, if it was jury or judge, I believe it was judges, but that was that was due process.
That was due process, man.
How was that?
And they said that if you're in the state of Wisconsin and you engaged in an insurrection
and then tried and again, the same set of facts and the same exact circumstance, you
can argue to your blue and the face that the judges are scum to call up your logic or
guilty under by a court, you could be just qualified for the insurrection, man.
I know that the ruling of the lower court and the Supreme Court in Colorado, both courts
found the Trump was insurrectionist for his actions and the US Supreme Court is not
having that as an argument time.
So you can argue with, but the outcome is not going to favor what you're saying.
The outcome is going to be, uh, uh, I understand that was on the ballot.
I'm not convinced as to why that would be.
We have a judicial process in this country.
If you're brought to trial and charged and convicted of, I don't know, engaging an insurrection.
When he's charged and convicted on a federal basis, when that happens, when there is
a conviction, not some state court created due process of their own device, if he goes
to the federal courts, if he goes to the J6, the Chutkin courtroom, which is, you know,
the most important one, Dom, in my opinion, if and when he goes through that process and
he's convicted and he's not even charged with insurrection, just for clarity, sake.
But I think there'd be a much better case to make that this guy is disqualified himself
because he's been convicted, but to say due process is the same as a criminal conviction
is not true.
And the courts don't believe you.
They are not sympathetic to the arguments you're making.
That's true.
They are not eight, four, four, nine, six, seven, two, seven, eight, nine, David from
Mekwan.
You're up.
Welcome, David.
What do you got for us?
Hey, guys.
Wow.
That all right.
Roy L here going in really quickly.
I think in regards with all this, this is what I think when it's all sudden done, there's
going to be a problem in eight to one ruling.
I agree with Crudey that if you got liberals that are agreeing with conservatives, they'll
probably be one dissent here, but that's about it.
At the end of the day, there's a lot of people.
I think there's only been one or maybe three people are even charged with anything that
was close to an insurrection.
Everybody else was charged with trust passing and other miscellaneous things.
So there's been some issues, conspiracy charges, especially against the problem of ways.
And there are a number of unindicted co-conspirators along with Donald Trump in the federal trials.
I think they're worried about the biggest fish at this point, but they're, you know, the
Mark Matto's of the world, man, there are so many co-conspirators in this effort that
will be either charged or pled guilty or give some sort of state's evidence against the
bigger fish, which is Donald Trump.
But I would greatly suggest that Mark Matto's participated actively in a criminal conspiracy
that you could describe as an insurrection as did Donald Trump, buddy.
Yeah, but you know, at the end of the day, guys, this is the way I look at it is that let's
say hypothetically, let's say Dom was able to kick Donald Trump off the ballot without
being charged or without any conviction, like you were bringing up crudey.
We would have a civil war, no guarantee it would just be behind awful if that were to
happen.
If he were just kicked off the ballot without anything as far as raising, I mean, is there
a reason?
Yeah, I mean, because you just, I was going to mention really quickly, you saw the other
big outcome today with the attorney general with the, with Biden with the special counsel.
Yeah, we'll get to that issue.
There's free court to Congress.
Now, appreciate it.
No charges against Biden today and some, some hits, perhaps second hour, David, thanks
for the call, man.
We'll get to it right now.
It's about the courts.
It's about Colorado.
It's about this ballot access for Donald Trump 844 967 2789 cam from Nina, Wisconsin
Europe.
Cam, welcome.
What do you got for us?
Hey, Cam.
Hey.
Hey.
So, okay.
It's really frustrating that we had a situation with Bush versus Gore and Bush probably
was going to win anyways after they had finished tallying up the count, but they still made
a decision on who the winner was preemptively as if it wasn't really a problem.
But then because there's I think four of those judges that were around then are a part
of the three of those justices participated as Bush campaign attorneys.
I saw Kavanaugh on CNN tape from 22,000.
I believe justice Roberts.
And I believe maybe Gorsuch, although I don't want to be a crystal clear on the third,
but three of them were involved in the Bush partisan defense in the Bush v. Gore in
Florida.
We're a turties on the scene.
And then Roberts.
Roberts, to say, and quote, and I'll let you know where I skip, in very quick order, I
would expect, skip, that a goodly number of states will say, whoever the democratic
candidate is, you're off the ballot, he said.
And it will come down to a handful of states that will determine the presidential election.
I don't know if he knows what the electoral college is.
Hello, can you still there?
Yep.
Oh, I think he has dropped the mic down.
He's waiting for your capable response.
Well, I'll be you're going to respond.
I mean, yes, I don't know if he's taking the math into that consideration when he says
that, thanks for calling me a good point, eight, four, four, nine, six, seven, two, seven,
eight, nine, Dick, for Madison, you're up.
Welcome.
What do you got for us?
Well, thank you.
Now, the day crude.
I can't believe that Tom Baudet didn't keep the light on for you there at one of the
first.
Well, it's all six.
I am not allowed in the wedding chapel, a joining ballroom for a glorious Donald Trump victory
in the caucus, where he's the only he's the only participant here in the state of Nevada
tonight.
And they're going to the brass filled with smoke and desperation, treasurer, a casino,
second floor.
And you know, there were employees in the casino that didn't know Trump was coming.
The other big news of the day, you there?
Yeah.
Go ahead.
Is the fact that the spinks finally spoke.
He rarely speaks or does anything.
I'm talking about clearance.
Thomas.
I mean, he actually spoke well, very much like a partisan hack to my opinion, Dick, very
partisan hack.
Hey, dumb interesting note.
I think I mentioned a few times.
I can see the sphere right out my window here.
Anti-abortion spider man climb that thing yesterday.
I wish I didn't know and I could have watched maybe shot spitballs from the balcony.
I mean, it's pretty close.
Maybe not spitball close, but that's crazy.
I would not do that.
Don't climb the sphere.
More doubles, advocates, eight for four, nine, six, seven, two, seven, eight, nine,
do call us.
Do we also have Trump's response?
I'm going to have to get some of that out.
Let's put a couple of those out and then take a few more callers.
There's only one sort of long Trump one and then the rest of them are pretty short, so
or shorter.
Here we go.
Charged, never convicted, the devil's advocates.
And thank you for listening to the devil's advocates radio show join us on the lines
eight for four, nine, six, seven, two, seven, eight, nine,
fruity.
Can't get into treasure island tonight, but you are always welcome on Thunder Island.
Oh, we have some president, former president, Trump.
He's got a response to his president's immunity.
He's got some response on the Supreme Court.
So let's get to that and then callers, we will get to you as well, please, as always
be patient.
This was earlier today when he was in West Palm Beach at the Marilago, right?
I know.
And in fact, it was quite loud.
It's like Marilago must be in the flight path because it, this sound is not all excellent,
but let's do.
Oh, I messed up.
Trump always did.
He talked about the helicopter.
He was just terrible.
Yeah, but he's on the front porch.
Marilago, and you can hear playing flying by every three seconds, man.
That's a loud neighborhood.
I'm just saying.
It's like here by the F-35s in Madison on the presidential immunity comments.
Cut it, please.
Well, I can say presidential immunity, which we'll be talking about because that will
be upcoming.
It's very, very important for president.
If a president doesn't have immunity, he really doesn't have a presidency.
He can be told to do things that he would never do.
He can do really bad things for our country.
Presidential immunity is impaired.
It's going to be very, very important.
And I'd rather talk about that next week, but there is nothing more important to a presidency
than immunity.
Because they have to be free to make decisions without saying, oh, if I do this, or if I do
that, as soon as I get out of office, we're going to be indicted.
We're going to have trouble.
And the other party will do that.
I think we've seen that.
They've done that.
There's some very bad people.
And you have an opposition party, and they will do things that are very bad.
If you don't have immunity, you can be black, man.
You can be as a president.
If you don't do this, this or this, we're going to indict you as soon as you leave
office.
You cannot allow a president to be out there without immunity.
They don't have immunity.
You don't have a president seat.
You lose all, excuse me, you lose all, you lose all form of, of free thought and good thought.
And you probably weaken the presidency to a point that it was never supposed to be
weakened.
It would be a very bad thing for our country.
We'll be talking about immunity in the coming week.
We get the point, Nate.
In the spot that down, it's enough of him.
Presidential immunity.
Let's hear his ramblings on the Supreme Court.
Cut number nine, please.
Well, I'm a believer in our country, and I'm a believer in the Supreme Court.
I listened today, and I thought our arguments were very, very strong.
An argument that is very important is the fact that you're leading in every race, you're
leading in every state, you're leading in the country against both Republican and Democrat.
And Biden, you're leading in the country by a lot.
And can you take the person that's leading everywhere and say, hey, we're not going to
let you run?
You know, I think that's pretty tough to do, but I'm leaving it up to the Supreme Court.
Thank you all very much.
Oh, he's got one more in the Supreme Court, let's hear that, cut 10 points.
In watching the Supreme Court today, I thought it was very, it's a very beautiful process.
I hope that democracy in this country will continue.
There's right now we have a very, very tough situation with all of the radical left
ideas with the weaponization of politics, they weaponized it like it's never been
weaponized before.
It's totally illegal, but they do it anyway.
Where are their guns?
Does this, I think it's referring to guns at the January 6th insurrection, cut number
11.
Oh, go ahead, pretty.
Well, there, there is one quote that was not captured because of the jet plane sound,
but if we have more sound, but I got the coup d'egra from, from Trump, very important.
Let's do one, let's do one more, cut 11, please.
This was an insurrection, if it wasn't insurrection, which there were no guns, there were no
anything except for the fact that they shot Ashley Babbin, somebody from, at least for
a shot Ashley Babbin, so unnecessary, so sad, so horrible.
There were no guns, there were no anything, so wrong, there were guns, people were convicted
of having guns and we'll never know how many because a lot of those folks got to go home,
they stashed guns, we know that, there were absolutely guns, so why would they get
and turn away at the machines, Trump, but anyway, Trump, uh, Crudy, you go.
Well, according to the Daily Beast, and I did see some of this on the Twitter account
of the Lincoln project, Trump didn't elaborate on how the January 6th riot, which was carried
out by thousands of self-proclaimed Trump supporters, could possibly be tied to rep Nancy
Pelosi.
Instead, he wrongly claimed that he made only very beautiful, very heartwarming statements
on the day of the attack, suggesting he was the person who incited the violence.
I heard, and I watched, and the one thing I'll see is they kept saying about what I said
right after the insurrection, so that's a key point to him.
Trump acknowledges, in his verbiage today, they kept saying about what I said right after
the insurrection, it would seem by his own words, he's acknowledging the fact that it was
an insurrection, more from his statement, which I think was an insurrection caused by Nancy
Pelosi.
Again, referring to the actions of that day as an insurrection, of course, not taking personal
culpability for it, but peacefully, and patriotically, take a look at the statements
I've made before and after, and you'll see a whole different dialogue.
But, damn, the important point is, Trump threw his own language twice in the same sentence,
acknowledged it was an insurrection, it was just Nancy Pelosi's fault.
844-967-279, time to sneak one or two in here, Don.
Jake, you're up.
What do you got for us?
Jake.
Uh, this, hey, this is where Don is like a 250% right, and who you're completely utterly wrong.
Pagmatism is not workable in this case, is because it's a constitutional matter, and
that state has the right to deny women the right to an abortion, if it wants, right?
And it has the right to set its own terms for voting and what it can vote, who can vote.
It can make injury manner districts like we can, actually, the Supreme Court can go
back and tell high Supreme Court that they're not right, and they can force us to have
majorities of Republicans for 10 years.
No, it's all over the board.
This is all about them doing what they want, because they got power, right?
So it doesn't matter to me if they use their forking amendment, right?
Because that's their right, because he is a criminal.
Okay, well, that is not what was being tried before the court today, and the question
is whether a singular state be a Colorado or Maine or any of the other numerous states
that asked the US Supreme Court to rule on this, this is not just blind partisanship on behalf
of the SCOTUS.
I mean, there are times, and we'll see what they do about the immunity pleadings of Donald
Trump, whether they help him delay, whether they through their own actions and, in fact,
give him immunity.
But on this case, I mean, you're probably going to get 8190 ruling.
This was liberals.
This was Republicans.
You may not like the logic, the pragmatism of the courts.
I was actually encouraged by the uniformity of thought amongst the courts.
Come back with us Joe Biden!
No charges!
He got off SCOT free.
We'll talk about it in our two.