1
00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:03,520
Speaker 1: It's the case everybody's watching and everybody's talking about. This week,

2
00:00:03,760 --> 00:00:06,960
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court is hearing arguments as to whether children

3
00:00:07,120 --> 00:00:10,559
Speaker 1: born to foreign nationals on American soil. I'm talking about

4
00:00:10,560 --> 00:00:14,560
Speaker 1: millions of children, whether they're American citizens or not. It's

5
00:00:14,560 --> 00:00:17,520
Speaker 1: happening this week. And the man who wrote the constitutional

6
00:00:17,640 --> 00:00:20,400
Speaker 1: argument that started all of this is sitting right here.

7
00:00:20,440 --> 00:00:23,480
Speaker 1: I've got him. John Eastman was disbarred for fighting this battle.

8
00:00:23,640 --> 00:00:26,520
Speaker 1: Then President Trump pardoned him. And what he just told

9
00:00:26,520 --> 00:00:28,639
Speaker 1: me about China and what it's doing in the United

10
00:00:28,680 --> 00:00:32,240
Speaker 1: States in our borders right now should terrify every single

11
00:00:32,280 --> 00:00:35,479
Speaker 1: person watching. I know. The fourteenth Amendment was added to

12
00:00:35,520 --> 00:00:39,080
Speaker 1: make sure that slaves and their children and everybody down

13
00:00:39,120 --> 00:00:42,280
Speaker 1: the line were not grandfathered out. They got full citizenship

14
00:00:42,360 --> 00:00:45,280
Speaker 1: rights and everything else subject to the jurisdiction thereof. Was

15
00:00:45,280 --> 00:00:47,840
Speaker 1: added by Senator Howard, as you know. And there's one

16
00:00:47,880 --> 00:00:50,040
Speaker 1: reason to add that that says, if you get an

17
00:00:50,040 --> 00:00:52,919
Speaker 1: allegiance to a foreign country, you and your children are

18
00:00:52,960 --> 00:00:55,720
Speaker 1: not citizens simply because somebody was born here. Why we

19
00:00:55,800 --> 00:00:57,360
Speaker 1: confuse this for one hundred plus.

20
00:00:57,280 --> 00:01:01,080
Speaker 2: Years, well we didn't. It was the first fifty years.

21
00:01:01,080 --> 00:01:03,080
Speaker 2: We didn't confuse it at all. It's only been for

22
00:01:03,120 --> 00:01:05,759
Speaker 2: the last fifty years or so that we've backed into

23
00:01:05,760 --> 00:01:09,000
Speaker 2: this confused notion that anybody born here, no matter what,

24
00:01:09,280 --> 00:01:13,600
Speaker 2: is a citizen. The clause was changed from the eighteen

25
00:01:13,720 --> 00:01:17,119
Speaker 2: sixty six Civil Rights Act, which very clearly said all

26
00:01:17,160 --> 00:01:20,120
Speaker 2: persons born in the United States and not subject to

27
00:01:20,200 --> 00:01:25,200
Speaker 2: any foreign power, excluding Indians, not taxed, are citizens. And

28
00:01:25,400 --> 00:01:27,720
Speaker 2: they realized that was a bit of a problem because

29
00:01:27,760 --> 00:01:31,640
Speaker 2: the Indian tribes were domestic powers, not foreign powers. And

30
00:01:31,760 --> 00:01:33,720
Speaker 2: if they paid a sales tax when they went and

31
00:01:33,720 --> 00:01:36,240
Speaker 2: bought a beer, did that meant that they were citizens

32
00:01:36,240 --> 00:01:40,480
Speaker 2: instead of non citizens? And so they changed the language

33
00:01:40,480 --> 00:01:44,280
Speaker 2: to not subject the jurisdiction thereof, and everybody agreed it

34
00:01:44,319 --> 00:01:47,200
Speaker 2: meant the same thing. And in fact, Cecilia Wang this

35
00:01:47,280 --> 00:01:49,960
Speaker 2: morning in the oral argument, who was arguing on behalf

36
00:01:50,000 --> 00:01:53,280
Speaker 2: of the ACLU, admitted that they meant the same thing.

37
00:01:53,480 --> 00:01:56,200
Speaker 2: She just said, not subject to any foreign power only

38
00:01:56,240 --> 00:01:59,560
Speaker 2: meant ambassadors. I think it was the major mistake she

39
00:01:59,640 --> 00:02:03,040
Speaker 2: made her whole argument. They clearly didn't mean just ambassador

40
00:02:03,160 --> 00:02:06,800
Speaker 2: is it meant to anybody here temporarily was still subject

41
00:02:06,800 --> 00:02:09,320
Speaker 2: to their foreign power home country, and they were not

42
00:02:09,360 --> 00:02:12,639
Speaker 2: going to get citizenship under either the sixty six Civil

43
00:02:12,680 --> 00:02:16,079
Speaker 2: Rights Act or the Fourteenth Amendment citizenship clause itself.

44
00:02:16,440 --> 00:02:19,040
Speaker 1: It is a John Eastpin, he's a great attorney. Let

45
00:02:19,080 --> 00:02:22,760
Speaker 1: me ask you about Katanji Brown Jackson's assertion today. And

46
00:02:22,800 --> 00:02:24,720
Speaker 1: we shouldn't take her seriously because she doesn't know what

47
00:02:24,760 --> 00:02:26,960
Speaker 1: a woman is. But she's on the court and she

48
00:02:27,040 --> 00:02:30,400
Speaker 1: makes this assertion. If I'm visiting Japan and I steal something,

49
00:02:30,720 --> 00:02:33,160
Speaker 1: am I not subject to that? To that country's laws?

50
00:02:33,200 --> 00:02:34,880
Speaker 1: And then she said, and if somebody's still something from me,

51
00:02:35,720 --> 00:02:38,040
Speaker 1: she tried to make some example that way. This isn't

52
00:02:38,080 --> 00:02:41,160
Speaker 1: about having to follow the speed limits. This isn't about

53
00:02:41,200 --> 00:02:43,680
Speaker 1: not stealing or robbing from a bank because you're here illegally.

54
00:02:44,080 --> 00:02:47,080
Speaker 1: This is about you having an allegiance, as you said,

55
00:02:47,120 --> 00:02:49,480
Speaker 1: to a foreign country. So I think a simple question

56
00:02:49,520 --> 00:02:51,280
Speaker 1: would have to be this, Why did they write it

57
00:02:51,280 --> 00:02:53,880
Speaker 1: in such a strange way subject to the jurisdiction thereof

58
00:02:54,160 --> 00:02:56,799
Speaker 1: saying that I think leaves it to so much open interpretation.

59
00:02:57,240 --> 00:02:59,600
Speaker 1: Why didn't they just say, if you're a subject of

60
00:02:59,600 --> 00:03:01,639
Speaker 1: a different country and you have a baby here, your

61
00:03:01,639 --> 00:03:03,560
Speaker 1: baby's not a citizen. That would have been simpler.

62
00:03:03,560 --> 00:03:07,880
Speaker 2: No, Well, it would have, but you had the issue

63
00:03:07,919 --> 00:03:10,840
Speaker 2: about people who were coming here and taking up a lawful,

64
00:03:10,880 --> 00:03:15,560
Speaker 2: permanent domicile that were no longer temporary visitors, and that

65
00:03:15,720 --> 00:03:19,280
Speaker 2: until they become citizens, they still have some distant connection

66
00:03:19,400 --> 00:03:22,440
Speaker 2: to their home country. Right, but not in the same way. Uh,

67
00:03:22,560 --> 00:03:26,679
Speaker 2: I think what what justice brown Jackson's commentment, and uh

68
00:03:26,720 --> 00:03:30,519
Speaker 2: and sodamo Ores and Kagan's uh and and and and

69
00:03:30,520 --> 00:03:32,960
Speaker 2: and made most of the briefs that were filed on

70
00:03:33,000 --> 00:03:37,360
Speaker 2: that side in the case confuse, subject to the jurisdiction

71
00:03:37,520 --> 00:03:40,520
Speaker 2: was subject to the laws if they wanted the broader rule,

72
00:03:41,000 --> 00:03:43,000
Speaker 2: And why didn't they say, if you're born here and

73
00:03:43,080 --> 00:03:46,080
Speaker 2: subject to our laws, then you're a citizen. That would

74
00:03:46,080 --> 00:03:50,640
Speaker 2: have excluded the ambassadors unambiguously and nobody else. The example

75
00:03:50,720 --> 00:03:54,080
Speaker 2: I like to give is subject to the jurisdiction had

76
00:03:54,120 --> 00:03:57,600
Speaker 2: two different meanings at the time. Subject to what they

77
00:03:57,600 --> 00:04:01,640
Speaker 2: call partial or territorial jurisdiction, you were subject to our

78
00:04:01,720 --> 00:04:05,120
Speaker 2: laws while you were here on our soil, within our borders,

79
00:04:05,320 --> 00:04:09,760
Speaker 2: with the sole exception of ambassadors. But you did know allegiance.

80
00:04:09,760 --> 00:04:13,240
Speaker 2: You weren't subject to the more complete jurisdiction. And when

81
00:04:13,280 --> 00:04:16,359
Speaker 2: Senator Howard, the author of that language, was asked that

82
00:04:16,480 --> 00:04:21,520
Speaker 2: question directly. He said, it means complete jurisdiction, such as

83
00:04:21,600 --> 00:04:25,720
Speaker 2: you requires allegiance, not any of this partial jurisdiction, such

84
00:04:25,760 --> 00:04:28,480
Speaker 2: as anybody's here asked to comply with our laws. He

85
00:04:28,680 --> 00:04:31,479
Speaker 2: was very clear about that that we didn't have illegal

86
00:04:31,520 --> 00:04:35,000
Speaker 2: immigrants at the time because there weren't any restrictions on immigration,

87
00:04:35,560 --> 00:04:39,160
Speaker 2: but we did have temporary visitors, and they were specifically

88
00:04:39,200 --> 00:04:42,680
Speaker 2: asked about it. What about the Chinese and Gypsies, Senator

89
00:04:42,720 --> 00:04:47,160
Speaker 2: Cohen from Pennsylvania asks, and Senator Kannas responds, yes, they'll

90
00:04:47,160 --> 00:04:50,599
Speaker 2: get citizenship. But Senator Cohen had asked further, are they

91
00:04:50,640 --> 00:04:54,800
Speaker 2: to have more rights than sojourners? What does that mean?

92
00:04:55,040 --> 00:04:57,680
Speaker 2: That means they all agreed that sojourners were not going

93
00:04:57,720 --> 00:05:00,440
Speaker 2: to have the right the entitlement to automatic and ship

94
00:05:00,480 --> 00:05:03,120
Speaker 2: for their kids. Are the Chinese and Gypsy's going to

95
00:05:03,160 --> 00:05:06,480
Speaker 2: have more rights? Well, yes, if they're not temporary visitors,

96
00:05:06,520 --> 00:05:10,000
Speaker 2: but if they're lawfully and permanently domiciled here. That was

97
00:05:10,040 --> 00:05:13,240
Speaker 2: the issue. Everybody agreed about it, and they agreed about

98
00:05:13,279 --> 00:05:16,080
Speaker 2: it for nearly one hundred years after the amendment was adopted.

99
00:05:16,640 --> 00:05:19,599
Speaker 1: I think the domicile issue is a huge one because

100
00:05:19,640 --> 00:05:21,800
Speaker 1: these people, as I said, this is not an example

101
00:05:21,800 --> 00:05:24,120
Speaker 1: of making up. Women come across the border in Laredo

102
00:05:24,240 --> 00:05:26,800
Speaker 1: or in del Rio, wherever they want to. I'm here

103
00:05:26,800 --> 00:05:29,240
Speaker 1: in Texas. They come across the border every day, have

104
00:05:29,320 --> 00:05:31,520
Speaker 1: a baby. The baby's a citizen, and they have no

105
00:05:31,640 --> 00:05:34,240
Speaker 1: domicile here. They have no permanent residency there, they have

106
00:05:34,360 --> 00:05:37,200
Speaker 1: no established residency here. Even if they're here illegally, they

107
00:05:37,200 --> 00:05:39,320
Speaker 1: don't even have an apartment in their name. So how

108
00:05:39,400 --> 00:05:41,839
Speaker 1: is it that that baby would ever be considered a citizen?

109
00:05:42,120 --> 00:05:44,159
Speaker 1: And John, can you tell my audience and me when

110
00:05:44,200 --> 00:05:46,640
Speaker 1: this started going rogue like this? Was it in the

111
00:05:46,680 --> 00:05:49,200
Speaker 1: past fifty years, in the past seventy years, when did

112
00:05:49,200 --> 00:05:49,919
Speaker 1: this start happening?

113
00:05:50,040 --> 00:05:53,039
Speaker 2: Well, well, some people are trying to say that it

114
00:05:53,120 --> 00:05:55,800
Speaker 2: was the Supreme Court's decision in eighteen ninety eight in

115
00:05:55,839 --> 00:05:58,600
Speaker 2: a case the Loong case. Remark, yeah, yeah, the Wang

116
00:05:58,680 --> 00:06:02,680
Speaker 2: Kim Ark case. Here was a Chinese baby born to

117
00:06:02,760 --> 00:06:05,640
Speaker 2: Chinese parents who were here at the court twenty eight

118
00:06:05,640 --> 00:06:08,400
Speaker 2: different times, and the majority and dissenting opinions the court

119
00:06:08,440 --> 00:06:11,279
Speaker 2: refers to the fact that they were domiciled here. The

120
00:06:11,360 --> 00:06:14,880
Speaker 2: question presented was, are the children of somebody born to

121
00:06:15,040 --> 00:06:18,919
Speaker 2: parents who are lawfully and permanently domiciled here a citizen.

122
00:06:19,240 --> 00:06:23,240
Speaker 2: It's critically important to wankim Ark and most legal scholars

123
00:06:23,480 --> 00:06:25,800
Speaker 2: all the way up until President Trump started hitting this

124
00:06:25,880 --> 00:06:29,159
Speaker 2: issue in twenty fifteen. Most legal scholars agreed with me

125
00:06:29,520 --> 00:06:32,400
Speaker 2: that wan kim Ark didn't settle the question with respect

126
00:06:32,440 --> 00:06:35,880
Speaker 2: to temporary visitors or the illegal aliens. But now all

127
00:06:35,920 --> 00:06:37,680
Speaker 2: of a sudden, they're all saying, no, it was very

128
00:06:37,680 --> 00:06:39,800
Speaker 2: clearly settled one hundred and fifty one hundred and twenty

129
00:06:39,839 --> 00:06:43,799
Speaker 2: five years ago. Nonsense. If it was settled that anybody

130
00:06:43,800 --> 00:06:47,200
Speaker 2: born on US soil as a citizen in eighteen ninety

131
00:06:47,200 --> 00:06:49,839
Speaker 2: eight in the wankim Art case, then why did Congress

132
00:06:49,880 --> 00:06:53,719
Speaker 2: need to offer Indian citizenship in nineteen twenty four. Why

133
00:06:53,760 --> 00:06:56,680
Speaker 2: did the Mexican workers in the nineteen twenties who were

134
00:06:57,160 --> 00:07:02,040
Speaker 2: sometimes forcibly repatriated after the Great Hit, including their American

135
00:07:02,120 --> 00:07:06,320
Speaker 2: born children, why did not a single case get pressed

136
00:07:06,960 --> 00:07:11,120
Speaker 2: challenging that repatriation on the ground that the children were citizens.

137
00:07:11,360 --> 00:07:16,400
Speaker 2: Same with the nineteen fifties Persero's program. Now under the

138
00:07:16,440 --> 00:07:19,560
Speaker 2: toward the end of the Franklin Roosevelt administration. There's some

139
00:07:20,000 --> 00:07:22,920
Speaker 2: Office of Legal Council memo suggesting that wan him Mark

140
00:07:23,000 --> 00:07:25,880
Speaker 2: says anybody born on the soil is a citizen. And

141
00:07:25,920 --> 00:07:28,760
Speaker 2: so the argument is made that that by the when

142
00:07:28,800 --> 00:07:32,120
Speaker 2: Congress passed the exact same language in a statute, that

143
00:07:32,160 --> 00:07:35,440
Speaker 2: they meant anybody born here. I just think that's crazy.

144
00:07:36,360 --> 00:07:40,400
Speaker 2: And we have on the Passport Office Forum all the

145
00:07:40,400 --> 00:07:43,400
Speaker 2: way up until nineteen sixty six, if you were born

146
00:07:43,440 --> 00:07:47,000
Speaker 2: on US soil and you needed to prove citizenship to

147
00:07:47,000 --> 00:07:49,600
Speaker 2: get a passport, the fact that you were born here

148
00:07:49,600 --> 00:07:52,640
Speaker 2: should have been enough. But on the Passport Forum that

149
00:07:52,920 --> 00:07:55,560
Speaker 2: wasn't enough. You had to say where you were born,

150
00:07:55,840 --> 00:07:58,000
Speaker 2: and then you had to explain what the status of

151
00:07:58,040 --> 00:08:00,520
Speaker 2: your parents was at the time you were born in

152
00:08:00,600 --> 00:08:03,480
Speaker 2: order to be able to demonstrate citizenship. That changed in

153
00:08:03,560 --> 00:08:08,000
Speaker 2: nineteen sixty six, inexplicably, and it's kind of since then

154
00:08:08,040 --> 00:08:10,760
Speaker 2: that we started to develop as a notion that birth

155
00:08:10,800 --> 00:08:14,920
Speaker 2: on the soil, no matter what legally present, temporarily present, permanently,

156
00:08:14,960 --> 00:08:18,320
Speaker 2: president illegally doesn't matter. Anybody born here, no matter what,

157
00:08:18,520 --> 00:08:20,920
Speaker 2: is a citizen. And it's one of the reasons why

158
00:08:20,960 --> 00:08:25,040
Speaker 2: President Trump's executive order only at pribe applies forward looking,

159
00:08:25,440 --> 00:08:27,840
Speaker 2: because all of the people born in the last fifty

160
00:08:27,920 --> 00:08:33,080
Speaker 2: sixty years under this misgotten, misbegotten notion have come to

161
00:08:33,160 --> 00:08:35,760
Speaker 2: rely on the fact that we've treated them as citizens.

162
00:08:35,880 --> 00:08:37,719
Speaker 2: We're not going to pull the rug out from under him,

163
00:08:37,920 --> 00:08:40,240
Speaker 2: but going forward, we ought not to keep repeating the

164
00:08:40,280 --> 00:08:40,959
Speaker 2: same mistake.

165
00:08:41,240 --> 00:08:42,959
Speaker 1: That's a really important point, John, because a lot of

166
00:08:43,000 --> 00:08:44,560
Speaker 1: people on the left are lying and saying that this

167
00:08:44,600 --> 00:08:47,480
Speaker 1: would take citizenship away from anybody who's gotten it by

168
00:08:47,480 --> 00:08:49,559
Speaker 1: birthright up until now. I'm glad that you said that.

169
00:08:49,600 --> 00:08:53,840
Speaker 1: It's John Eastman. Go to John easpin Legal Defensefund dot com.

170
00:08:54,040 --> 00:08:56,640
Speaker 1: John Easpin Legal Defense Fund dot com. So let's talk

171
00:08:56,640 --> 00:08:58,520
Speaker 1: about one, Kim Mark, I want to get too into

172
00:08:58,520 --> 00:09:01,280
Speaker 1: the weeds with this, but that case I thought had

173
00:09:01,320 --> 00:09:03,800
Speaker 1: a lot to do with how racism was being used

174
00:09:03,800 --> 00:09:07,120
Speaker 1: against Chinese people that were working in places like San Francisco.

175
00:09:07,440 --> 00:09:09,959
Speaker 1: They were being brought here, treated like absolute garbage, and

176
00:09:10,000 --> 00:09:13,560
Speaker 1: then being tossed aside or repatriated, as you said, and

177
00:09:13,600 --> 00:09:15,480
Speaker 1: I almost feel like the court ruled in that case

178
00:09:15,559 --> 00:09:17,760
Speaker 1: to stop the racism against Chinese people. Am I am

179
00:09:17,800 --> 00:09:20,040
Speaker 1: I off based on that No.

180
00:09:20,280 --> 00:09:25,120
Speaker 2: I think you're right. Look, in eighteen eighty two we

181
00:09:25,240 --> 00:09:28,400
Speaker 2: start having these Chinese exclusion acts. I won't even let

182
00:09:28,440 --> 00:09:32,000
Speaker 2: the Chinese laborers come here. Of course, Wan cam Ark's

183
00:09:32,000 --> 00:09:34,600
Speaker 2: parents had come a decade and a half before that.

184
00:09:34,720 --> 00:09:38,400
Speaker 2: He was born in the eighteen seventies. But we had

185
00:09:38,440 --> 00:09:41,319
Speaker 2: a treaty with the Emperor of China that even though

186
00:09:41,360 --> 00:09:45,040
Speaker 2: the treaty says, we recognize and the Chinese Emperor recognizes

187
00:09:45,080 --> 00:09:48,199
Speaker 2: the right of expatriation, the right to throw off your

188
00:09:48,280 --> 00:09:51,040
Speaker 2: former allegiance and take up a new one if you want.

189
00:09:51,160 --> 00:09:53,880
Speaker 2: Even though the treaty said that, it also said, yeah,

190
00:09:53,920 --> 00:09:56,520
Speaker 2: but we're not going to ever let him become us citizens.

191
00:09:56,760 --> 00:09:59,320
Speaker 2: And this question was brought up by one of the

192
00:09:59,400 --> 00:10:01,920
Speaker 2: justices that argument today. I mean, for heaven's sakes, what

193
00:10:02,000 --> 00:10:05,480
Speaker 2: more could they do to demonstrate their allegiance here When

194
00:10:05,520 --> 00:10:08,080
Speaker 2: we wouldn't let them become citizens, but we let them,

195
00:10:08,280 --> 00:10:12,199
Speaker 2: with our consent, become lawfully become members of our community,

196
00:10:12,440 --> 00:10:16,600
Speaker 2: become permanent domiciles here. What more could they have done?

197
00:10:17,040 --> 00:10:19,960
Speaker 2: And that question I thought was very powerful. They couldn't,

198
00:10:19,960 --> 00:10:21,800
Speaker 2: And I think that had a lot to do with

199
00:10:21,840 --> 00:10:23,760
Speaker 2: why the Court went the direction it did. In Wan

200
00:10:23,880 --> 00:10:24,320
Speaker 2: Kim Mark.

201
00:10:24,640 --> 00:10:27,080
Speaker 1: It is John Eastman, former Trump attorney, of course a

202
00:10:27,160 --> 00:10:30,560
Speaker 1: constitutional expert. Love having you on John Eastpin Legal Defense

203
00:10:30,600 --> 00:10:33,440
Speaker 1: Fund dot com. When it comes to the whole idea

204
00:10:33,480 --> 00:10:36,320
Speaker 1: of diplomatic community, I think that makes the case, doesn't it.

205
00:10:36,679 --> 00:10:38,840
Speaker 1: If somebody is here as a diplomat and they have

206
00:10:38,920 --> 00:10:41,480
Speaker 1: a baby, it certainly is not an American citizen. So

207
00:10:41,480 --> 00:10:43,360
Speaker 1: somebody who came here legally that we accept, that we

208
00:10:43,400 --> 00:10:46,360
Speaker 1: understand as a diplomat, they know the rules, that they

209
00:10:46,360 --> 00:10:49,000
Speaker 1: have their allegiances to some other country. Why isn't that

210
00:10:49,040 --> 00:10:52,000
Speaker 1: the basis of this entire case. Why would somebody stinking

211
00:10:52,040 --> 00:10:54,920
Speaker 1: across the border to get whatever benefit they can having

212
00:10:54,920 --> 00:10:58,040
Speaker 1: a baby get all these benefits, whereas we understand somebody

213
00:10:58,080 --> 00:11:01,880
Speaker 1: who's somebody who's here diplomatically and legally doesn't have those benefits.

214
00:11:03,160 --> 00:11:05,080
Speaker 2: This is I think one of the one of the

215
00:11:05,120 --> 00:11:09,280
Speaker 2: two most important mistakes made in the briefing against the

216
00:11:09,320 --> 00:11:12,560
Speaker 2: government in the case. Keith Whitning and a prominent schollar

217
00:11:12,640 --> 00:11:15,680
Speaker 2: up at Yale now made the argument that we don't

218
00:11:15,679 --> 00:11:18,280
Speaker 2: even think that the children of diplomats are born on

219
00:11:18,440 --> 00:11:22,400
Speaker 2: US soil, that there's a bubble around them, that wherever

220
00:11:22,480 --> 00:11:25,480
Speaker 2: they go, wherever they step at that moment, it is

221
00:11:25,520 --> 00:11:28,920
Speaker 2: the sovereign soil of that ambassador's home country.

222
00:11:28,960 --> 00:11:31,280
Speaker 1: Oh, that's just dumb. That's kind of dumb, John.

223
00:11:31,520 --> 00:11:34,760
Speaker 2: No, no, no, but it's but it's the it's the

224
00:11:34,800 --> 00:11:37,920
Speaker 2: fiction of extra territoriality that is a recognized part of

225
00:11:38,200 --> 00:11:43,199
Speaker 2: international law. And Cecilia Wang made the same point just

226
00:11:43,280 --> 00:11:45,840
Speaker 2: as Barrett asked her this question. They're not even on

227
00:11:46,040 --> 00:11:48,719
Speaker 2: US soil because of this bubble that goes around them,

228
00:11:48,760 --> 00:11:52,720
Speaker 2: this fictional bubble. Neither are the children of marauding armies

229
00:11:52,720 --> 00:11:55,600
Speaker 2: that have occupied part of our territory. It's no longer

230
00:11:55,720 --> 00:11:59,920
Speaker 2: US soil while it's occupied. And neither are Indian reservation.

231
00:12:00,880 --> 00:12:03,959
Speaker 2: And Cecilia Long agreed with that, But then she said,

232
00:12:04,280 --> 00:12:08,640
Speaker 2: even Indians off reservation are not subject to the jurisdiction.

233
00:12:08,800 --> 00:12:11,760
Speaker 2: They're all treated like ambassadors as well. And that's just

234
00:12:11,880 --> 00:12:15,600
Speaker 2: utter nonsense. Maybe the tribal leader could make that claim,

235
00:12:15,960 --> 00:12:18,760
Speaker 2: but certainly not the individual tribal members. And if they're

236
00:12:18,800 --> 00:12:22,559
Speaker 2: born off the reservation, they are clearly born on US oil.

237
00:12:22,840 --> 00:12:27,200
Speaker 2: They are clearly subject to the jurisdiction in the way

238
00:12:26,920 --> 00:12:32,760
Speaker 2: that the respondents the challengers claim the subject to our laws,

239
00:12:33,200 --> 00:12:36,640
Speaker 2: and the court very clearly said and elk versus welcome

240
00:12:36,679 --> 00:12:38,960
Speaker 2: to eighteen eighty four. But because they owe their primary

241
00:12:38,960 --> 00:12:41,719
Speaker 2: allegiance to their tribe, they are not subject to the

242
00:12:41,760 --> 00:12:45,240
Speaker 2: complete jurisdiction. And there's not an iota of difference between

243
00:12:45,280 --> 00:12:49,280
Speaker 2: that and a Frenchman or somebody from Mexico or Guatemada

244
00:12:49,480 --> 00:12:54,640
Speaker 2: or Nigeria visiting here temporarily still subject to their home country.

245
00:12:54,840 --> 00:12:58,160
Speaker 2: So the Indian case off reservation, I think is compelling

246
00:12:58,240 --> 00:12:59,559
Speaker 2: and should decide the case.

247
00:13:00,000 --> 00:13:01,320
Speaker 1: I just want to make sure I understand. If somebody

248
00:13:01,360 --> 00:13:03,920
Speaker 1: goes to Joe's restaurant, sits down with his family and

249
00:13:03,920 --> 00:13:05,599
Speaker 1: he's a foreign diplomat, he could just not pay the

250
00:13:05,640 --> 00:13:08,520
Speaker 1: bill and say, listen, this is Iranian territory right now,

251
00:13:08,559 --> 00:13:09,960
Speaker 1: I don't have to pay the bill here, and I'm

252
00:13:10,000 --> 00:13:12,000
Speaker 1: not subject to your laws. That doesn't make any sense

253
00:13:12,240 --> 00:13:14,120
Speaker 1: that argument, actually, And I'm not a lawyer. My mom

254
00:13:14,120 --> 00:13:16,280
Speaker 1: says it'd be a great lawyer. Alan Dershwitz says, that'd

255
00:13:16,320 --> 00:13:19,960
Speaker 1: be a greatlawyer. By the way, the idea that suddenly

256
00:13:20,000 --> 00:13:23,000
Speaker 1: wherever you happen to be is your homeland is just

257
00:13:23,080 --> 00:13:26,400
Speaker 1: silly to me. It doesn't make any sense. And was

258
00:13:26,440 --> 00:13:28,960
Speaker 1: that argument completely blown out of the water today or

259
00:13:29,000 --> 00:13:30,160
Speaker 1: is that actually being listened to.

260
00:13:31,400 --> 00:13:33,920
Speaker 2: No, it's being listened to because it actually is. They

261
00:13:33,960 --> 00:13:37,120
Speaker 2: call it the fiction of extra territoriality. It's a component

262
00:13:37,160 --> 00:13:37,600
Speaker 2: of Internet.

263
00:13:37,600 --> 00:13:39,400
Speaker 1: And that's really the way it is, Johnny. And honestly,

264
00:13:39,440 --> 00:13:41,319
Speaker 1: wherever they happen to be is their territory.

265
00:13:42,280 --> 00:13:45,439
Speaker 2: It's treated as their territory. The person of the ambassador

266
00:13:45,520 --> 00:13:47,640
Speaker 2: is treated as the person of the sovereign. This is

267
00:13:47,679 --> 00:13:50,240
Speaker 2: why you get you get these ambassadors at the UN

268
00:13:50,559 --> 00:13:53,200
Speaker 2: racking up millions of dollars in parking kickens in New

269
00:13:53,280 --> 00:13:56,439
Speaker 2: York City. They do nothing to pay because right they

270
00:13:56,480 --> 00:13:57,000
Speaker 2: do nothing.

271
00:13:57,160 --> 00:14:00,880
Speaker 1: Yeah, wow, it is johnn. Eastman, go to Johnny's been

272
00:14:00,920 --> 00:14:03,600
Speaker 1: Legal Defense fund dot com. Johnny's been legal Legal Defense

273
00:14:03,720 --> 00:14:06,760
Speaker 1: fund dot com. Well, the fact that there are five

274
00:14:06,880 --> 00:14:12,600
Speaker 1: hundred different organizations in China literally sending Chinese nationals here

275
00:14:12,640 --> 00:14:15,840
Speaker 1: to have babies, so they have American citizen Chinese national babies,

276
00:14:16,720 --> 00:14:18,120
Speaker 1: is that fact going to be brought up at all?

277
00:14:18,120 --> 00:14:20,280
Speaker 1: I didn't. I didn't watch everything today. I hope that

278
00:14:20,320 --> 00:14:21,840
Speaker 1: it's going to be brought up because that is a

279
00:14:21,960 --> 00:14:25,120
Speaker 1: major problem going forward in the United States of America

280
00:14:25,160 --> 00:14:28,720
Speaker 1: for our sovereignty, and there's there's an enemy actor, an

281
00:14:28,840 --> 00:14:32,080
Speaker 1: entire nation state that would love to make this country

282
00:14:32,160 --> 00:14:34,480
Speaker 1: China doing this. Is that going to be brought up?

283
00:14:35,760 --> 00:14:38,680
Speaker 2: It actually was brought up, so listener General John Sower

284
00:14:38,760 --> 00:14:41,840
Speaker 2: brought brought it up during the oral argument, and several

285
00:14:41,840 --> 00:14:45,560
Speaker 2: of the justices seemed to recognize the importance of that.

286
00:14:45,840 --> 00:14:49,520
Speaker 2: And it's not just that they're having birth tourism babies here.

287
00:14:50,160 --> 00:14:52,600
Speaker 2: They'll have those babies and then they'll they'll be sent

288
00:14:52,720 --> 00:14:55,800
Speaker 2: back to China, they'll be raised by the Communist Party

289
00:14:55,800 --> 00:14:58,120
Speaker 2: to be enemies of the United States, and then they

290
00:14:58,160 --> 00:15:01,120
Speaker 2: will come back here claiming to be US citizens, and

291
00:15:01,120 --> 00:15:03,160
Speaker 2: we can't do anything about it. I saw a news

292
00:15:03,240 --> 00:15:05,880
Speaker 2: report about a week ago that said there are two

293
00:15:05,960 --> 00:15:10,440
Speaker 2: hundred thousand Chinese men of military age who are in

294
00:15:10,480 --> 00:15:14,480
Speaker 2: this country who are the products of long standing birth tourism.

295
00:15:14,760 --> 00:15:18,880
Speaker 2: While a policy of China two hundred thousand, that's an

296
00:15:19,040 --> 00:15:23,800
Speaker 2: army already embedded on our shores because of this misbegotten

297
00:15:23,800 --> 00:15:27,080
Speaker 2: notion of birthright tourism citizenship that has led to birth

298
00:15:27,120 --> 00:15:30,640
Speaker 2: tourism and our major enemy on the world stage taking

299
00:15:30,680 --> 00:15:32,280
Speaker 2: advantage of our own idiocy.

300
00:15:32,920 --> 00:15:36,000
Speaker 1: Incredible Attorney John Eastman going and check out Johnny's been

301
00:15:36,040 --> 00:15:38,960
Speaker 1: a legal defense fund dot com. How's this likely to

302
00:15:39,000 --> 00:15:41,240
Speaker 1: come out? I feel as though since John Roberts has

303
00:15:41,240 --> 00:15:44,200
Speaker 1: been the Chief Justice, just my opinion that it's a

304
00:15:44,240 --> 00:15:46,480
Speaker 1: weak court in that they don't want to take a stand.

305
00:15:46,520 --> 00:15:49,040
Speaker 1: He didn't allegedly, well, he didn't take a stand in Obamacare,

306
00:15:49,040 --> 00:15:50,560
Speaker 1: and he changed a fee to a tax or attack

307
00:15:50,640 --> 00:15:52,720
Speaker 1: to a fee, and decided to change the legislation to

308
00:15:52,800 --> 00:15:55,680
Speaker 1: let it go through. And Cony Barrett seems to be

309
00:15:55,800 --> 00:15:59,120
Speaker 1: somebody who teeters on conservatism or not. Roberts doesn't really

310
00:15:59,120 --> 00:16:01,640
Speaker 1: want to have rioting the street. So I get the feeling,

311
00:16:01,720 --> 00:16:04,280
Speaker 1: my opinion only that he's afraid to make really really

312
00:16:04,360 --> 00:16:07,000
Speaker 1: important decisions. What's likely to happen here? Do you think?

313
00:16:08,360 --> 00:16:11,760
Speaker 2: Well? I think there are clearly three strong votes against

314
00:16:11,840 --> 00:16:16,920
Speaker 2: the president's executive order, the three same justices that disagreed

315
00:16:16,960 --> 00:16:21,080
Speaker 2: with the nationwide injunction order last June in the Kaza case.

316
00:16:21,720 --> 00:16:27,080
Speaker 2: That's Kagan and Sodomayoor and Brown Jackson. I think Justice Alito,

317
00:16:27,240 --> 00:16:32,400
Speaker 2: Thomas and probably Gorsiz are pretty strongly supporting the government's position.

318
00:16:32,960 --> 00:16:37,440
Speaker 2: I got the sense that Justices Barrett and Kavanaugh were

319
00:16:37,520 --> 00:16:42,000
Speaker 2: leaning that direction. Chief Justice Roberts kept it a little

320
00:16:42,040 --> 00:16:45,720
Speaker 2: closer to the vest than those two did. I will

321
00:16:45,760 --> 00:16:48,000
Speaker 2: say this, the media reports out that I've seen this

322
00:16:48,080 --> 00:16:51,040
Speaker 2: afternoon that Chief Justice Roberts as, you can't do this,

323
00:16:51,200 --> 00:16:55,600
Speaker 2: it's mandated by the Constitution. That's complete distortion of what

324
00:16:55,800 --> 00:16:58,800
Speaker 2: he said and taken out of context that phrase. So

325
00:16:59,040 --> 00:17:02,560
Speaker 2: he didn't say anything of the sort. The question was

326
00:17:02,600 --> 00:17:05,480
Speaker 2: whether whether Congress could alter the meaning of subject to

327
00:17:05,520 --> 00:17:09,119
Speaker 2: the jurisdiction, and he said, if it's mandated by the Constitution,

328
00:17:09,240 --> 00:17:12,840
Speaker 2: then no, they can't. That's that's basic constitutional law. One

329
00:17:12,840 --> 00:17:16,439
Speaker 2: oh one. So so you know, I don't think we

330
00:17:16,520 --> 00:17:18,439
Speaker 2: have a read on him. I do agree with you

331
00:17:18,480 --> 00:17:20,560
Speaker 2: he tries to find a way to avoid this, and

332
00:17:20,640 --> 00:17:24,400
Speaker 2: I think he was trying to explore whether Congress, under

333
00:17:24,440 --> 00:17:27,960
Speaker 2: its Section five powers under the fourteenth Amendment, could could

334
00:17:28,800 --> 00:17:33,199
Speaker 2: adjust the meaning of what subject to the jurisdiction in

335
00:17:33,240 --> 00:17:36,560
Speaker 2: a way that would impact this, and both Solicitor General

336
00:17:36,600 --> 00:17:39,840
Speaker 2: Souer and Cecilia Wang, arguing on the other side, said no.

337
00:17:40,400 --> 00:17:42,919
Speaker 2: And so if he tries to split the baby in

338
00:17:42,960 --> 00:17:47,239
Speaker 2: that direction, I don't think you know, those those, you know,

339
00:17:47,640 --> 00:17:50,720
Speaker 2: flat out rejections of that argument by both sides will

340
00:17:50,720 --> 00:17:52,000
Speaker 2: make it very difficult to do.

341
00:17:52,520 --> 00:17:54,920
Speaker 1: It's hi, Johnny Easman. So so what is the Let's

342
00:17:54,920 --> 00:17:57,360
Speaker 1: say the Supreme Court says the executive order is no good,

343
00:17:57,600 --> 00:17:59,000
Speaker 1: He's just going to stay the way it is, and

344
00:17:59,040 --> 00:18:02,040
Speaker 1: the birthright policy remains. You've got a majority in the

345
00:18:02,040 --> 00:18:04,639
Speaker 1: House of the Senate. Do they pass legislation? Do they

346
00:18:04,680 --> 00:18:08,200
Speaker 1: pass an act that somehow updates or amends the amendment?

347
00:18:08,400 --> 00:18:10,840
Speaker 1: Do you have to make an amendment through a constitutional conference?

348
00:18:11,160 --> 00:18:14,639
Speaker 1: What happens because subject of the jurisdiction thereof is problematic.

349
00:18:14,720 --> 00:18:16,800
Speaker 1: In my opinion, if you rewrite it to make it

350
00:18:16,880 --> 00:18:19,960
Speaker 1: more clear if you're a subject of a foreign entity

351
00:18:20,000 --> 00:18:23,120
Speaker 1: your child is not a citizen, that would be much easier.

352
00:18:23,359 --> 00:18:26,119
Speaker 1: But can you alter a current amendment or do you

353
00:18:26,160 --> 00:18:27,679
Speaker 1: have to do something different to amend it?

354
00:18:29,359 --> 00:18:31,680
Speaker 2: I think you'd have to amend the constitution. Supreme Court

355
00:18:31,720 --> 00:18:36,199
Speaker 2: comes down and says, the Constitution doesn't allow you to

356
00:18:36,320 --> 00:18:40,520
Speaker 2: not give citizenship to temporary visitors or illegally immigrants. Congress

357
00:18:40,520 --> 00:18:43,680
Speaker 2: couldn't alter that either. It has no more power to

358
00:18:43,720 --> 00:18:48,200
Speaker 2: adjust the meaning of the Constitution than the President does.

359
00:18:48,200 --> 00:18:51,400
Speaker 2: By executive order. What the president's executive order is trying

360
00:18:51,400 --> 00:18:54,800
Speaker 2: to do is define what the Constitution means, not alter

361
00:18:54,920 --> 00:18:58,159
Speaker 2: what it means. And so if the Court says, oh,

362
00:18:58,320 --> 00:19:01,800
Speaker 2: constitution means acts, you're wrong, mister President. Then the only

363
00:19:01,840 --> 00:19:04,280
Speaker 2: way to fix that, I think would be a constitutional amendment.

364
00:19:04,640 --> 00:19:07,320
Speaker 2: But the American people are now so awakened to the

365
00:19:07,400 --> 00:19:10,800
Speaker 2: problem with this issue and this misunderstanding of the Constitution

366
00:19:11,320 --> 00:19:14,639
Speaker 2: that I think we might have the most successful prospect

367
00:19:14,680 --> 00:19:17,920
Speaker 2: of a constitutional amendment in relatively short order that I've

368
00:19:17,920 --> 00:19:21,720
Speaker 2: seen in our lifetime. If there are politicians willing to

369
00:19:21,760 --> 00:19:23,960
Speaker 2: do it now. I don't think it would come out

370
00:19:23,960 --> 00:19:26,040
Speaker 2: of Congress because you got to have two thirds vote

371
00:19:26,280 --> 00:19:28,800
Speaker 2: in each House of Congress to get a constitutional amendment,

372
00:19:28,840 --> 00:19:31,080
Speaker 2: and the Democrats would never do this. So you'd have

373
00:19:31,160 --> 00:19:34,440
Speaker 2: to have a constitutional convention limited to this single issue

374
00:19:35,040 --> 00:19:38,800
Speaker 2: and thirty four states to call that constitutional convention of

375
00:19:38,880 --> 00:19:41,119
Speaker 2: state legislatures, and I think you could get that, and

376
00:19:41,119 --> 00:19:45,159
Speaker 2: then they then propose then they propose an amendment that

377
00:19:45,200 --> 00:19:48,480
Speaker 2: would fix the Supreme Court's wrong decision. In my view,

378
00:19:49,359 --> 00:19:53,000
Speaker 2: then you need thirty eight states to ratify that amendment,

379
00:19:53,000 --> 00:19:54,520
Speaker 2: and I think they would get that as well.

380
00:19:54,760 --> 00:19:56,600
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, I agree with you. There are many more

381
00:19:56,640 --> 00:19:58,679
Speaker 1: red states than blue states. Right now. It's John Eastpan,

382
00:19:58,720 --> 00:20:00,760
Speaker 1: former Trump attorney. He is a guy who is in

383
00:20:00,840 --> 00:20:05,240
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court today checking out the verbal arguments. How

384
00:20:05,320 --> 00:20:06,399
Speaker 1: long do you think it will take for us to

385
00:20:06,400 --> 00:20:07,320
Speaker 1: get a result here?

386
00:20:08,800 --> 00:20:11,480
Speaker 2: End of June, last day of the term. I don't

387
00:20:11,480 --> 00:20:13,480
Speaker 2: think there's any way they come out with it earlier

388
00:20:13,520 --> 00:20:17,360
Speaker 2: than that. Maybe earlier that last week, but I think

389
00:20:17,359 --> 00:20:19,800
Speaker 2: this is a last day type of case that comes out.

390
00:20:20,040 --> 00:20:23,320
Speaker 1: John easpin Legal Defensefund dot com. It's John Eastpin. I'd

391
00:20:23,359 --> 00:20:25,159
Speaker 1: be remiss to not talk to you about twenty twenty.

392
00:20:25,920 --> 00:20:28,480
Speaker 1: The way I see it, John, is that the vice

393
00:20:28,520 --> 00:20:32,520
Speaker 1: president had the right to not open the electors, yet

394
00:20:32,760 --> 00:20:34,600
Speaker 1: he had the right to listen with the president said

395
00:20:34,600 --> 00:20:36,720
Speaker 1: and say, let's make sure we have the right electors

396
00:20:37,000 --> 00:20:40,200
Speaker 1: before we certify anything today January sixth, and that Ryan

397
00:20:40,280 --> 00:20:43,080
Speaker 1: the Mayhem, of course, forced everybody's hands to say, yeah,

398
00:20:43,160 --> 00:20:45,800
Speaker 1: let's just certify, because God forbid we should have this happen.

399
00:20:46,160 --> 00:20:48,200
Speaker 1: But all that, let's put all that aside for a second.

400
00:20:48,280 --> 00:20:51,280
Speaker 1: Does the vice president have the right to say, I

401
00:20:51,359 --> 00:20:53,119
Speaker 1: am not in a position to open this because there

402
00:20:53,160 --> 00:20:56,200
Speaker 1: are too many questions in Pennsylvania, in Florida, not Florida,

403
00:20:56,200 --> 00:20:59,639
Speaker 1: but Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan. There are too many questions

404
00:20:59,680 --> 00:21:02,040
Speaker 1: out there about what happened in this election. We will

405
00:21:02,080 --> 00:21:04,880
Speaker 1: certify when we're sure we have the right electors. Doesn't he,

406
00:21:05,880 --> 00:21:07,840
Speaker 1: by his authority as the President of the Senate have

407
00:21:07,920 --> 00:21:08,280
Speaker 1: that right.

408
00:21:09,800 --> 00:21:12,080
Speaker 2: I believe he does, although that's one of the reasons

409
00:21:12,080 --> 00:21:15,239
Speaker 2: I've been criminally prosecuted in Georgia and Arizona because I

410
00:21:15,280 --> 00:21:18,960
Speaker 2: had advocated for that position, and it's one of the

411
00:21:19,040 --> 00:21:23,240
Speaker 2: reasons the California bar is trying to disbarm me. I

412
00:21:23,280 --> 00:21:25,359
Speaker 2: think he has that order, and the language of the

413
00:21:25,920 --> 00:21:28,639
Speaker 2: relevant language of the Constitution says the Vice President shall

414
00:21:28,720 --> 00:21:31,760
Speaker 2: open all the ballots in the presence of the House

415
00:21:31,800 --> 00:21:34,240
Speaker 2: and Senate, and then they shall be counted. And in

416
00:21:34,359 --> 00:21:36,720
Speaker 2: the presence of the House and Senate pretty clearly means

417
00:21:36,720 --> 00:21:39,520
Speaker 2: there to be there to be observers that the check

418
00:21:39,600 --> 00:21:43,479
Speaker 2: on the vice president abusing his power to open and

419
00:21:43,640 --> 00:21:50,119
Speaker 2: count and necessarily to make decisions about contested and potentially

420
00:21:50,160 --> 00:21:53,960
Speaker 2: illegal cast votes. They were just to be present to

421
00:21:54,080 --> 00:21:57,359
Speaker 2: observe so that the power wouldn't be abused. But you

422
00:21:57,440 --> 00:22:00,400
Speaker 2: had hundreds of state legislators, including the President pro tem

423
00:22:00,480 --> 00:22:04,720
Speaker 2: of the Pennsylvania Senate, not a big advocate of President Trump,

424
00:22:04,720 --> 00:22:09,360
Speaker 2: he was kind of anti Trump, not as violently as

425
00:22:09,359 --> 00:22:11,920
Speaker 2: some others, but had been and he sent a letter

426
00:22:11,960 --> 00:22:14,800
Speaker 2: to pens and said, signed by almost every Republican in

427
00:22:14,840 --> 00:22:18,240
Speaker 2: the state Senate, said there were so many illegalities in

428
00:22:18,280 --> 00:22:22,359
Speaker 2: our election, in violation of our constitutional authority as a

429
00:22:22,440 --> 00:22:25,879
Speaker 2: legislator to set the rules, that this election should not

430
00:22:25,960 --> 00:22:29,040
Speaker 2: have been certified, and we need some time to assess

431
00:22:29,080 --> 00:22:32,760
Speaker 2: the impact of that illegality. There were letters like that

432
00:22:32,840 --> 00:22:36,960
Speaker 2: from Georgia, from Arizona, from Michigan and Wisconsin saying exactly

433
00:22:37,000 --> 00:22:41,120
Speaker 2: the same thing, and everybody saw it. Everybody saw the illegality,

434
00:22:41,160 --> 00:22:44,040
Speaker 2: the playing games, the fact that there were more ballots

435
00:22:44,040 --> 00:22:47,320
Speaker 2: in Pennsylvania cast and counted than there are voters as

436
00:22:47,359 --> 00:22:49,920
Speaker 2: recording as have voted, that there were three hundred and

437
00:22:49,920 --> 00:22:52,399
Speaker 2: fifty thousand ballots down in Georgia. They don't have a

438
00:22:52,440 --> 00:22:56,200
Speaker 2: chain of custody. That the recount came in Fulton County,

439
00:22:56,240 --> 00:22:59,720
Speaker 2: came up seventeen thousand, eight hundred something short, and they

440
00:22:59,800 --> 00:23:03,960
Speaker 2: just automatic overnight in a closet found eighteen one thousand

441
00:23:04,000 --> 00:23:06,800
Speaker 2: missing ballots. I mean, give me a freaking break. Yeah,

442
00:23:06,800 --> 00:23:09,480
Speaker 2: and so it should have been investigated no matter what

443
00:23:09,600 --> 00:23:12,439
Speaker 2: the ultimate outcome was. So the American people had some

444
00:23:12,720 --> 00:23:17,119
Speaker 2: confidence that the election actually produced the true renter. However,

445
00:23:17,160 --> 00:23:20,600
Speaker 2: the chips fell. We never got that, and now so

446
00:23:20,680 --> 00:23:23,560
Speaker 2: many half the country still thinks that the election was stolen.

447
00:23:24,119 --> 00:23:26,920
Speaker 1: You know, it's amazing because every single time some leftists

448
00:23:26,920 --> 00:23:28,800
Speaker 1: gets somebody in front of them in a hearing in

449
00:23:28,840 --> 00:23:31,679
Speaker 1: the senator of the House, they first say, do you

450
00:23:31,760 --> 00:23:35,000
Speaker 1: believe that Joe Biden won the twenty twenty election? And

451
00:23:35,040 --> 00:23:36,800
Speaker 1: the answer by the person, if there's somebody who is

452
00:23:36,800 --> 00:23:39,720
Speaker 1: supportive of actually being able to question an election, we'll

453
00:23:39,800 --> 00:23:42,960
Speaker 1: say Joe Biden was inaugurated and he took office as

454
00:23:43,000 --> 00:23:45,200
Speaker 1: the president, so he was the president. But they want

455
00:23:45,280 --> 00:23:47,280
Speaker 1: them to say I don't think he won, as if

456
00:23:47,280 --> 00:23:50,480
Speaker 1: they got him somehow. John, the fact is constitutionally and

457
00:23:50,480 --> 00:23:53,359
Speaker 1: correct me if I'm wrong, you're the expert. I'm not. Constitutionally,

458
00:23:53,400 --> 00:23:55,040
Speaker 1: I have the right as an American to question the

459
00:23:55,080 --> 00:23:57,360
Speaker 1: outcome of an election, period, end of story. You don't

460
00:23:57,359 --> 00:24:00,000
Speaker 1: get to squelched me on censor me on social media.

461
00:24:00,080 --> 00:24:02,280
Speaker 1: You don't get to arrest me and indict me. I'm

462
00:24:02,280 --> 00:24:04,760
Speaker 1: allowed to say I'm not so sure that election result

463
00:24:05,119 --> 00:24:08,480
Speaker 1: was the right result. I'm allowed to say that. And also, constitutionally,

464
00:24:08,520 --> 00:24:11,360
Speaker 1: the states that you mentioned, all of them cheated and

465
00:24:11,440 --> 00:24:15,440
Speaker 1: lied because in the constitution, state legislatures that's the only

466
00:24:15,520 --> 00:24:18,119
Speaker 1: body that is able to change how a general election

467
00:24:18,200 --> 00:24:21,480
Speaker 1: is prosecuted in that state. Attorney's general can't do it.

468
00:24:21,520 --> 00:24:24,000
Speaker 1: Lieutenant governors can't do it. Governors can't do it, Secretaries

469
00:24:24,000 --> 00:24:26,159
Speaker 1: of state can't do it. And in all those cases

470
00:24:26,160 --> 00:24:29,159
Speaker 1: that you mentioned, those rules were changed by entities. They

471
00:24:29,160 --> 00:24:31,080
Speaker 1: didn't have the right to change it. So what's the

472
00:24:31,119 --> 00:24:33,720
Speaker 1: problem with you with you challenging that? And how dare

473
00:24:33,760 --> 00:24:36,000
Speaker 1: they indict you and Rudy and the president and everybody

474
00:24:36,040 --> 00:24:38,840
Speaker 1: else when you just did constitutionally what you were allowed

475
00:24:38,880 --> 00:24:39,120
Speaker 1: to do.

476
00:24:40,640 --> 00:24:43,119
Speaker 2: Well, it's called the right to petition the government for

477
00:24:43,160 --> 00:24:46,320
Speaker 2: redress of grievances. That's one of the central issues in

478
00:24:46,480 --> 00:24:49,480
Speaker 2: on appeal in my California bar case. And if the

479
00:24:49,520 --> 00:24:54,400
Speaker 2: California Supreme Court rules against me and adopts the recommendation

480
00:24:54,480 --> 00:24:57,280
Speaker 2: of disbarment, we will be taking that issue to the

481
00:24:57,359 --> 00:24:59,760
Speaker 2: US Supreme Court because I think it is a fundamental

482
00:25:00,000 --> 00:25:03,880
Speaker 2: constitutional right that is being infringed here. And you know,

483
00:25:03,960 --> 00:25:07,480
Speaker 2: and what they're doing is not only criminally indicting people

484
00:25:07,520 --> 00:25:11,439
Speaker 2: for exercising that constitutional right, but threatening their livelihoods by

485
00:25:11,520 --> 00:25:16,240
Speaker 2: loss of license. Imagine if the Federal Communications Commission decided

486
00:25:16,280 --> 00:25:19,800
Speaker 2: to revoke your broadcast license because you continue to raise

487
00:25:19,880 --> 00:25:23,560
Speaker 2: questions about the twenty twenty election. But there's another problem here,

488
00:25:23,560 --> 00:25:26,560
Speaker 2: and that is it's one sided. I mean, Hillary Clinton

489
00:25:26,600 --> 00:25:29,640
Speaker 2: to this day continues to say Trump was illegally elected

490
00:25:29,920 --> 00:25:33,919
Speaker 2: in twenty sixteen. You know, Al Gore and most of

491
00:25:33,960 --> 00:25:39,000
Speaker 2: the left continue to say that George Bush was selected,

492
00:25:39,080 --> 00:25:43,440
Speaker 2: not elected in two thousand. You know, they all continue

493
00:25:43,440 --> 00:25:46,840
Speaker 2: to challenge the election. They say that, and there's you know,

494
00:25:46,920 --> 00:25:50,320
Speaker 2: there was a challenge in two thousand and four, completely

495
00:25:50,359 --> 00:25:54,960
Speaker 2: frivolous lawsuit filed in Ohio because Ohio was enough electoral

496
00:25:55,040 --> 00:25:57,320
Speaker 2: votes that they could have turned the election. So they

497
00:25:57,359 --> 00:26:00,560
Speaker 2: just threw everything they could. It was frivolous. But instead

498
00:26:00,560 --> 00:26:03,040
Speaker 2: of sanctioning the lawyers that brought that for this thing,

499
00:26:03,280 --> 00:26:06,520
Speaker 2: the court said, look, you know, election challenges are are

500
00:26:07,080 --> 00:26:10,760
Speaker 2: you know, intensely emotional. Their short term we're not going

501
00:26:10,840 --> 00:26:13,639
Speaker 2: to sanction lawyers for trying to bring a case to

502
00:26:13,720 --> 00:26:17,000
Speaker 2: defend their clients. And yet when the shoes on the

503
00:26:17,040 --> 00:26:19,400
Speaker 2: other foot, like it has been after twenty twenty, they

504
00:26:19,400 --> 00:26:22,679
Speaker 2: throw everything they've got at us. It's a weaponization the

505
00:26:22,760 --> 00:26:25,359
Speaker 2: likes of which we've never seen before. There's a whole

506
00:26:25,400 --> 00:26:27,560
Speaker 2: movie about it, if people want to watch it, called

507
00:26:28,000 --> 00:26:31,720
Speaker 2: The Eastman Dilemma, Lawfare or Justice. It is still available

508
00:26:31,760 --> 00:26:36,200
Speaker 2: for free streaming at Madisonmediafund dot org. I invite people

509
00:26:36,200 --> 00:26:37,760
Speaker 2: to watch it, and if they've got a big group

510
00:26:37,800 --> 00:26:40,560
Speaker 2: they want to show it, to contact me and I'll

511
00:26:40,640 --> 00:26:42,800
Speaker 2: zoom in on a zoom call and take questions and

512
00:26:42,840 --> 00:26:43,679
Speaker 2: answers after it.

513
00:26:44,000 --> 00:26:46,880
Speaker 1: Now, that would be amazing. Madison Mediafund dot org.

514
00:26:48,640 --> 00:26:51,400
Speaker 2: Madisonmediafund dot org. I think it's dot org. It might

515
00:26:51,440 --> 00:26:51,879
Speaker 2: be dot com.

516
00:26:52,119 --> 00:26:53,760
Speaker 1: Well we'll check it out or yeah, we'll make sure

517
00:26:53,760 --> 00:26:55,800
Speaker 1: we get the right one. Also go to Johnny'spenlegal Defense

518
00:26:55,880 --> 00:27:00,080
Speaker 1: Fund dot com. A couple of things on twenty twenty.

519
00:27:00,119 --> 00:27:02,399
Speaker 1: The way Hillary Clinton to this day thinks that she

520
00:27:02,520 --> 00:27:04,879
Speaker 1: really won the election and they lied about Russia collusion

521
00:27:04,920 --> 00:27:07,239
Speaker 1: and everything else. And you're allowed to say that if

522
00:27:07,240 --> 00:27:08,800
Speaker 1: you're on the left. In fact, John, and I love

523
00:27:08,800 --> 00:27:12,480
Speaker 1: your comment on this. Already months before the November election,

524
00:27:12,680 --> 00:27:14,760
Speaker 1: you've got people on the left, the progressive left, who

525
00:27:14,760 --> 00:27:17,240
Speaker 1: are lining up to any microphone and any camera they

526
00:27:17,280 --> 00:27:20,320
Speaker 1: can find to say Donald Trump, through the Save America Act,

527
00:27:20,400 --> 00:27:22,919
Speaker 1: is trying to steal the midterm elections. You what are

528
00:27:22,920 --> 00:27:24,720
Speaker 1: your thoughts on that. I guess you could say it preemptively,

529
00:27:24,920 --> 00:27:26,280
Speaker 1: but you can't say it after the election.

530
00:27:28,080 --> 00:27:33,680
Speaker 2: Well, they're saying that because of this false narrative that

531
00:27:33,720 --> 00:27:36,600
Speaker 2: the Save America Act will suppress the votes of anti

532
00:27:36,640 --> 00:27:40,119
Speaker 2: Trump voters. What it will do is suppress the vote

533
00:27:40,160 --> 00:27:43,800
Speaker 2: of illegal anti Trump voters. If you've got to prove

534
00:27:43,840 --> 00:27:48,200
Speaker 2: citizenship and you're not saying I think Chuck Schumer said

535
00:27:48,200 --> 00:27:50,919
Speaker 2: this is going to disenfranchise tens of millions of people.

536
00:27:51,119 --> 00:27:53,720
Speaker 2: Are you reading tens of millions of people? Aren't citizens

537
00:27:53,720 --> 00:27:57,159
Speaker 2: that are already voting? You know, why would you be

538
00:27:57,280 --> 00:27:59,480
Speaker 2: so afraid that you got to show ID to make

539
00:27:59,520 --> 00:28:02,359
Speaker 2: sure you are who you say you are. You know,

540
00:28:02,440 --> 00:28:04,359
Speaker 2: almost all the rest of the countries in the world

541
00:28:04,359 --> 00:28:06,719
Speaker 2: that have elections, you got to show your vote, your

542
00:28:06,720 --> 00:28:09,439
Speaker 2: photo ID to say that you know whoever's showing up

543
00:28:09,440 --> 00:28:11,439
Speaker 2: to vote is who they say they are. And the

544
00:28:11,560 --> 00:28:15,040
Speaker 2: notion that that's that that's somehow an imposition, or that

545
00:28:15,119 --> 00:28:18,280
Speaker 2: women who get married and change their name can't figure

546
00:28:18,280 --> 00:28:20,240
Speaker 2: out how to get an ID with their right name

547
00:28:20,280 --> 00:28:22,200
Speaker 2: on it, I mean, give me a break. I mean,

548
00:28:22,960 --> 00:28:25,840
Speaker 2: you know, women, every woman that changes their name when

549
00:28:25,840 --> 00:28:28,520
Speaker 2: they get married has already figured out how to handle this.

550
00:28:28,680 --> 00:28:31,080
Speaker 2: It's not a problem. It takes a little bit of effort,

551
00:28:31,240 --> 00:28:33,600
Speaker 2: but only a little bit. And the notion that women

552
00:28:33,640 --> 00:28:36,760
Speaker 2: are too stupid to figure that out is quite frankly offensive.

553
00:28:37,200 --> 00:28:38,960
Speaker 1: It is. I've got five daughters and a wife, and

554
00:28:39,000 --> 00:28:41,360
Speaker 1: a mother and three sisters, so I mean it is offensive.

555
00:28:41,480 --> 00:28:43,640
Speaker 1: It's Johnny's been go to Johnny's Been Legal Defense Fund

556
00:28:43,760 --> 00:28:45,840
Speaker 1: dot com. Why do you think that they're on the

557
00:28:45,840 --> 00:28:49,200
Speaker 1: wrong side of this eighty five fifteen story John Nutt.

558
00:28:49,200 --> 00:28:51,520
Speaker 1: When it came to men playing in women's sports, that

559
00:28:51,600 --> 00:28:53,640
Speaker 1: was also eighty twenty, and the left came up all

560
00:28:53,680 --> 00:28:56,120
Speaker 1: wet on that, and thankfully the rules are changing to

561
00:28:56,120 --> 00:28:59,400
Speaker 1: where men cannot infiltrate women's sports or women's spaces. But

562
00:28:59,440 --> 00:29:01,480
Speaker 1: when it comes to this one, what is what is

563
00:29:01,520 --> 00:29:06,080
Speaker 1: the as a good lawyer and I as a debater.

564
00:29:06,280 --> 00:29:08,480
Speaker 1: You have to know the other side very well. What

565
00:29:08,640 --> 00:29:11,440
Speaker 1: is their point? They can't really think women, Latinos and

566
00:29:11,480 --> 00:29:14,360
Speaker 1: blacks are stupid. What is their point? They're desperate to

567
00:29:14,400 --> 00:29:15,440
Speaker 1: keep the illegals voting.

568
00:29:17,120 --> 00:29:19,560
Speaker 2: Well, I think that's right there. I think there are

569
00:29:19,600 --> 00:29:23,600
Speaker 2: two issues. One, they know that the that people not

570
00:29:24,200 --> 00:29:26,760
Speaker 2: legally allowed to vote have been voting. That's why they

571
00:29:26,760 --> 00:29:29,360
Speaker 2: refuse to clean up their voter roles. You've got a

572
00:29:29,400 --> 00:29:34,080
Speaker 2: cash of dead people or moved people or illegal people

573
00:29:34,480 --> 00:29:38,520
Speaker 2: on the voter rolls that that fraudsters could then use

574
00:29:38,560 --> 00:29:41,040
Speaker 2: and say I'm I'm that name, and I can vote,

575
00:29:41,120 --> 00:29:42,800
Speaker 2: and if I don't have to have a photo, I

576
00:29:42,880 --> 00:29:45,560
Speaker 2: d I'm able to use John Smith even though I'm

577
00:29:45,560 --> 00:29:48,040
Speaker 2: not John Smith because he's on the voter rolls and

578
00:29:48,080 --> 00:29:50,520
Speaker 2: we know he's not voting because he's long dead. So

579
00:29:50,560 --> 00:29:53,160
Speaker 2: I don't have any risk of being caught with this thing.

580
00:29:53,400 --> 00:29:57,720
Speaker 2: So that's one. The second thing is their radical Marxist left,

581
00:29:57,840 --> 00:30:01,360
Speaker 2: his base demands it, and and none of them, none

582
00:30:01,360 --> 00:30:05,760
Speaker 2: of them have enough spine to stand up to that radical,

583
00:30:06,560 --> 00:30:09,520
Speaker 2: idiotic base. And so the base is demanding it and

584
00:30:09,600 --> 00:30:11,800
Speaker 2: they and they fall in line like a bunch of sheep.

585
00:30:12,080 --> 00:30:14,840
Speaker 2: So it's a combination of protecting the fraud that they

586
00:30:14,880 --> 00:30:17,360
Speaker 2: know is going on and not wanting to stand up

587
00:30:17,400 --> 00:30:18,920
Speaker 2: to their radical Marxist bace.

588
00:30:19,440 --> 00:30:21,720
Speaker 1: It is h John Eyaspin go to Johnnyspin Legal Defense

589
00:30:21,760 --> 00:30:24,360
Speaker 1: Fund dot com. Last question, John, and I appreciate the time.

590
00:30:24,560 --> 00:30:26,680
Speaker 1: Hopefully you'll come back on and do this again with

591
00:30:26,720 --> 00:30:29,240
Speaker 1: me when it comes to your case specifically. Clearly, you

592
00:30:29,280 --> 00:30:32,360
Speaker 1: and I just talked about why constitutionally it is righteous

593
00:30:32,440 --> 00:30:35,520
Speaker 1: to challenge the government, bring redress, to challenge an election.

594
00:30:35,680 --> 00:30:38,400
Speaker 1: It's righteous to say these states all change their election

595
00:30:38,880 --> 00:30:42,280
Speaker 1: rules illegally. Sixty one cases you guys tried to bring

596
00:30:42,560 --> 00:30:44,400
Speaker 1: and no judge would even take the case. There are

597
00:30:44,520 --> 00:30:46,760
Speaker 1: liars on the left saying you lost every case. Now

598
00:30:46,760 --> 00:30:49,880
Speaker 1: they were just never heard, which is ridiculous. What is

599
00:30:49,920 --> 00:30:53,800
Speaker 1: the final disposition dispensation going to be on your case

600
00:30:54,120 --> 00:30:56,360
Speaker 1: as far as you being disbarred and kicked out of

601
00:30:56,360 --> 00:30:58,840
Speaker 1: a you know, a Chaptman university and everything else. I

602
00:30:58,880 --> 00:31:01,280
Speaker 1: hope that you come out on top up. Where are

603
00:31:01,280 --> 00:31:04,520
Speaker 1: those cases and when will we find out the result?

604
00:31:05,440 --> 00:31:11,440
Speaker 2: So I've been in nineteen different cases now from Rhode

605
00:31:11,440 --> 00:31:16,760
Speaker 2: Island to Arizona to California. We're down to the last two.

606
00:31:17,600 --> 00:31:22,400
Speaker 2: The Georgia criminal charges were dismissed. The unindicted co conspirator

607
00:31:22,480 --> 00:31:25,400
Speaker 2: charges in the case Jack Smith brought against President Trump

608
00:31:25,400 --> 00:31:29,360
Speaker 2: and DC was dismissed. We're likely to get attorney's fees

609
00:31:29,400 --> 00:31:31,720
Speaker 2: out of Georgia because of a new statue down there.

610
00:31:32,040 --> 00:31:34,680
Speaker 2: Arizona is still pending, but it's on life support. The

611
00:31:34,720 --> 00:31:38,240
Speaker 2: Attorney General is likely to lose her current appeal to

612
00:31:38,280 --> 00:31:41,320
Speaker 2: the Arizona Supreme Court, and hopefully that case goes away.

613
00:31:41,720 --> 00:31:44,120
Speaker 2: And then we're pending before the California Supreme Court on

614
00:31:44,200 --> 00:31:47,880
Speaker 2: the California bar matter and whether they rule in my favor.

615
00:31:47,920 --> 00:31:49,920
Speaker 2: If they rule in my favor, I think that ends it.

616
00:31:50,160 --> 00:31:52,000
Speaker 2: If they rule against me, we go to the US

617
00:31:52,040 --> 00:31:54,520
Speaker 2: Supreme Court, and I think I've got a fair shot

618
00:31:54,760 --> 00:31:56,719
Speaker 2: at getting the US Supreme Court to take this up

619
00:31:56,720 --> 00:31:59,800
Speaker 2: because of the significant First Amendment issues involved. But those

620
00:31:59,800 --> 00:32:01,880
Speaker 2: are the last two. I've already spent more than two

621
00:32:01,880 --> 00:32:05,960
Speaker 2: million dollars dealing with this. But that's part of the goal.

622
00:32:06,040 --> 00:32:09,320
Speaker 2: The process is the punishment. And they've actually said, the

623
00:32:09,360 --> 00:32:11,520
Speaker 2: groups on the left have actually said, our goal is

624
00:32:11,560 --> 00:32:14,000
Speaker 2: not just to get him dismarred, but to make him

625
00:32:14,040 --> 00:32:17,160
Speaker 2: so toxic that other lawyers won't ever take on these

626
00:32:17,240 --> 00:32:21,320
Speaker 2: kind of challenges again. They're trying to threaten lawyer's livelihoods

627
00:32:21,320 --> 00:32:24,240
Speaker 2: for daring to stand up to the left's narratives, even

628
00:32:24,240 --> 00:32:27,480
Speaker 2: though the narratives are patently false, because if you don't

629
00:32:27,480 --> 00:32:29,760
Speaker 2: stand up to it, those narratives start to take on

630
00:32:29,800 --> 00:32:32,000
Speaker 2: the patent of truth. It's the big lie. If they

631
00:32:32,040 --> 00:32:35,200
Speaker 2: repeat it often enough, this false narrative that the election

632
00:32:35,360 --> 00:32:37,480
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty was the most secure in our inn

633
00:32:37,480 --> 00:32:40,840
Speaker 2: Asian's history. I mean, that's just laughably false. But if

634
00:32:40,840 --> 00:32:42,960
Speaker 2: they repeat it often enough and they scare the but

635
00:32:43,080 --> 00:32:45,760
Speaker 2: Jesus of everybody out who dares to say that the

636
00:32:45,840 --> 00:32:48,440
Speaker 2: king has no clothes or the emperor has no clothes,

637
00:32:48,800 --> 00:32:52,000
Speaker 2: then everybody will stop challenging it, and then it'll become true,

638
00:32:52,200 --> 00:32:54,680
Speaker 2: or at least it'll look like it's become true. And

639
00:32:54,720 --> 00:32:57,720
Speaker 2: that's why I stand up despite all the crap that's

640
00:32:57,720 --> 00:32:58,560
Speaker 2: being thrown at me.

641
00:32:58,680 --> 00:33:00,360
Speaker 1: I love you, I love your back vote. I love

642
00:33:00,400 --> 00:33:02,200
Speaker 1: that you're going to stick to this, and I hope

643
00:33:02,200 --> 00:33:04,920
Speaker 1: that you get the right result because going forward, as

644
00:33:04,920 --> 00:33:06,800
Speaker 1: you said, they tried to bleed you dry, and hopefully

645
00:33:06,800 --> 00:33:09,280
Speaker 1: people will go to John He'spenlegal Defense Fund dot com

646
00:33:09,320 --> 00:33:11,200
Speaker 1: and help out there. But they also try to stop

647
00:33:11,240 --> 00:33:14,200
Speaker 1: anybody else after you from ever taking these cases on,

648
00:33:14,240 --> 00:33:16,720
Speaker 1: and these cases are important. John, THANKSI Milion for coming on.

649
00:33:16,760 --> 00:33:18,000
Speaker 1: Hopefully we can do it again soon.

650
00:33:19,560 --> 00:33:21,080
Speaker 2: Thank you very much, Joe, my pleasure.

651
00:33:21,160 --> 00:33:22,959
Speaker 1: Really appreciate it. All right, that's it for this one.

652
00:33:23,000 --> 00:33:25,560
Speaker 1: We're back with another, Unshaken and Unafraid with Joe PAGs

653
00:33:25,800 --> 00:33:27,360
Speaker 1: very soon. Make sure you subscribe