Speaker 1: Hey, folks, it is Friday, November twenty first, and we
Speaker 1: have several members of Congress who have had to have
Speaker 1: their security stepped up. Even their families are being checked on,
Speaker 1: all because of a threat that's come their way. The
Speaker 1: threat came from President Trump, and with that, Welcome to
Speaker 1: this episode of Amy and TJ. Robes. I took some
Speaker 1: liberties in the introduction before the most part. What I
Speaker 1: said is exactly what people are saying has taking place.
Speaker 1: The President of the United States called for the death
Speaker 1: of certain members of Congress.
Speaker 2: Yes, there's no other way to say it. He suggested
Speaker 2: that certain members of Congress be tried and potentially executed.
Speaker 2: Even there was a suggestion a retweeting of being hanged
Speaker 2: for sedition because of a video that six lawmakers put
Speaker 2: out on social media.
Speaker 1: Yeah. The President's also he didn't like to He didn't
Speaker 1: like so he reacts, which he often does. Want to
Speaker 1: say here off the top, I don't want to wait
Speaker 1: until we get to the bottom of this of this episode,
Speaker 1: but when you're talking about something in this series. This
Speaker 1: went on for the most part of the day yesterday.
Speaker 1: There's back and forth in DC. The President's spokesperson did
Speaker 1: come out later was asked directly, and she said no,
Speaker 1: that was the answer. She didn't go farther and explain
Speaker 1: when she was asked, does the president want any members
Speaker 1: of Congress? Actually killed no, and then she went on
Speaker 1: to something else. So what's happened now is that he
Speaker 1: amplified this thing with his messages. How many people are
Speaker 1: going to pay attention? That wasn't a forceful response, it
Speaker 1: was just no.
Speaker 2: There was no explanation, there was no impact. She turned
Speaker 2: the tables, as she often does. We're talking about Carolyn Levitt,
Speaker 2: the White House Press secretary, back towards the media that
Speaker 2: you weren't getting what actually the story is, and it's
Speaker 2: about this video. It's not about what the president said.
Speaker 2: But what the president said was extraordinary and deeply concerning,
Speaker 2: and in this era of the President and Republicans saying
Speaker 2: that words matter, that words incite violence, and they point
Speaker 2: to Charlie Kirk's asassination as example or exhibit a, what
Speaker 2: in the hell is the president doing?
Speaker 1: So we'll tell you exactly what he said. We've said
Speaker 1: this before. He was kind of on one last night,
Speaker 1: or at least when he was starting to put these together.
Speaker 1: If you ever go to his truth Social page. You
Speaker 1: can tell kind of what was going on with him
Speaker 1: for the day. Some of them are just sometimes it's
Speaker 1: so many in a row that it's hard to keep
Speaker 1: up with, and it's hard to understand how he has
Speaker 1: this much time to post all of these things. But
Speaker 1: this was kind of a you tried to piece together,
Speaker 1: kind of an unhinged rapid fire messages that, frankly, some
Speaker 1: of them wrote, He's used to explaining a lot in
Speaker 1: his messages. It seemed like some of these he was
Speaker 1: just firing off right quick.
Speaker 2: Yes, and we can start with some of what he
Speaker 2: wrote on True Social. The president wrote, it's called seditious
Speaker 2: behavior at the highest level.
Speaker 3: That was in all caps.
Speaker 2: Each one of these traders to our country should be
Speaker 2: arrested and put on trial. Their words cannot be allowed
Speaker 2: to stand. We won't have a country anymore. An example
Speaker 2: must be set.
Speaker 1: Their words he's talking about there. Their words cannot be
Speaker 1: allowed to stand. He didn't like that these members of Congress,
Speaker 1: all Democrats. I think all of them had military backgrounds.
Speaker 3: They all had military service, but they came.
Speaker 1: Out and put this video together, put out on social media,
Speaker 1: essentially bringing attention to something and also, I would say
Speaker 1: urging members of the military and the intelligence community, you
Speaker 1: have the right, you do not have to follow unlawful orders.
Speaker 1: That's the message they were getting out, and that's what
Speaker 1: upset the president.
Speaker 2: Correct, And so the President went on to say this
Speaker 2: is really bad and dangerous to our country. Their words again,
Speaker 2: cannot be allowed to stand. Seditious behavior from traders three
Speaker 2: exclamation points, lock them up, question mark, question mark, question
Speaker 2: mark got me.
Speaker 1: He seemed like he was fishing for it, like, give
Speaker 1: me your response, what do you think?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 2: Does anyone else agree that this should happen? And then
Speaker 2: in a third post, this is among the scariest seditious
Speaker 2: behavior punishable by death, and he has death in all
Speaker 2: caps with an exclamation point. And then he reposted some
Speaker 2: posts that other truth social users were putting out there
Speaker 2: after his initial string of posts, including one that said
Speaker 2: hang them George Washington, would.
Speaker 1: We keep talking about temperature going up and down? I
Speaker 1: don't know how you defend I don't know how you
Speaker 1: defend this and say it's not contributing to what is
Speaker 1: an awful time of political discourse in this country that
Speaker 1: has led to death, that has led to violence. He
Speaker 1: didn't just say investigate them. He could have said that
Speaker 1: we need to look into this language, or this is
Speaker 1: flat out rove. This is terrifying because someone sees this
Speaker 1: as marching orders. Someone sees this as well, he's given
Speaker 1: me permission. Will someone also see this and go, well,
Speaker 1: my guys in the White House I do this for him,
Speaker 1: like he said, maybe he'll pardon me, Like what is
Speaker 1: the message here? Is clear? Like it's almost it feels
Speaker 1: like marching orders. And look they came back and they said, no,
Speaker 1: he doesn't actually want them, but man words, you cannot
Speaker 1: take this back and these get amplified. Nobody's amplifying her answer, no,
Speaker 1: because that's all she said.
Speaker 3: She said, so yes, she's just said Carolyn love it.
Speaker 2: And I actually wanted to read what she went on
Speaker 2: to say afterwards, because she did not bring the temperature
Speaker 2: down period with her no. And then she went on
Speaker 2: to say, many in this room want to talk about
Speaker 2: the president's response, but not what brought the president to
Speaker 2: responding in this way. You have sitting members of the
Speaker 2: United States Congress who conspired together to orchestrate a bit
Speaker 2: you a message to members of the United States military,
Speaker 2: to active duty service members, to members of national security apparatus,
Speaker 2: encouraging them to defy the president's lawful orders. That is
Speaker 2: not true. If you read the video, they specifically say
Speaker 2: to defy illegal orders.
Speaker 1: Yes, that's all they're talking about, obviously, clearly, plainly, it's
Speaker 1: exactly what they're talking about here. And it's difficult to
Speaker 1: she justified him calling for the death possibly of members
Speaker 1: of Congress. It's justified because what you should be talking
Speaker 1: about is that video that caused him to react this way.
Speaker 1: If it's really difficult in you, look, we do not
Speaker 1: do politics here. We do not go back and forth
Speaker 1: with political with issues and take a stance. We don't
Speaker 1: do that. But at some point we all have to
Speaker 1: look at the same thing and agree that the President
Speaker 1: of the United States should not be calling for the
Speaker 1: death of members of Congress. If you want to say, well,
Speaker 1: he didn't really mean it, you can if you want to, fine,
Speaker 1: But you still cannot argue that this is not helpful
Speaker 1: and where.
Speaker 2: We are and we are not ad living or inferring
Speaker 2: from or assuming what he meant.
Speaker 3: By no, we are reading exactly what he said.
Speaker 2: And I do appreciate, Babe, that you pointed out this
Speaker 2: is not about politics. This is not about Republicans and
Speaker 2: Democrats and where we stand politically. This is about what's
Speaker 2: right and what's wrong, and how can anyone defend that language.
Speaker 3: And I will say this again.
Speaker 2: Having Carolyn Levitt put out in that press briefing room
Speaker 2: misinformation that these lawmakers were calling for members of the
Speaker 2: US military to defy the president's lawful orders is just
Speaker 2: a boldfaced lie.
Speaker 1: Their argument, I guess she would say, is that they
Speaker 1: believe every order the president has given is lawful. I
Speaker 1: think that is what they would say. Now, plenty of
Speaker 1: judges at this point courts have said no, that is
Speaker 1: not lawful. Deployment of National Guard in this city on
Speaker 1: that street up. Yes, he's lost some of these, but
Speaker 1: in his mind it's lawful. I'm just saying in a
Speaker 1: technical case, she's probably believed everywhere. Came out of her mouth.
Speaker 1: That's true.
Speaker 2: I believe she believed what she was saying, she went
Speaker 2: on to say. Levitt went on to say that the
Speaker 2: video perhaps is punishable by law, so she agreed with
Speaker 2: the President on that, and then she added, I'm not
Speaker 2: a lawyer. I'll leave that to the Department of Justice
Speaker 2: and the Department of War to decide.
Speaker 1: Okay, I'm just discouraged. I'm really really well. Just the
Speaker 1: temperature this is now.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: We talked about this, go back to January sixth, even
Speaker 1: right well, people were arguing, is was he inciting an
Speaker 1: insurrection in that moment in that speech, And people will
Speaker 1: tell you yes, it sounds like he was giving marching
Speaker 1: orders to go up there and fight like hell and
Speaker 1: all these things. So how how can anyone here or
Speaker 1: listen a follower, a fringe follower, someone who's not quite right?
Speaker 1: This is my god. The president just said their words
Speaker 1: can't be allowed to stand. He didn't just say trial,
Speaker 1: he didn't say investigation.
Speaker 2: Punishable by death. I just reposted someone suggesting that they
Speaker 2: should be hanged. That is not That is not something
Speaker 2: to be taken lightly. It's not in ingest. It's not funny,
Speaker 2: it's not it's not cute, koy. This is serious. And
Speaker 2: six democratic lawmakers again who have military service, who served
Speaker 2: our country, are now fearing for their life and their
Speaker 2: famili's safety.
Speaker 1: There are a lot of times and you know what,
Speaker 1: even the piggy thing, even when that happened, he called
Speaker 1: a reporter a piggy. It's whatever degree he has a
Speaker 1: different standard that we hold him to. And we heard
Speaker 1: that even in one day, Yeah Trump and went about
Speaker 1: our business. It's rare for him to shock the hell
Speaker 1: out of you. This one's I'm this is this is
Speaker 1: something else, just given the times we are, and good
Speaker 1: Lord Charlie Kirk, after we saw this man gunned down
Speaker 1: over words, over politics, over somebody saying his words can't
Speaker 1: be allowed to stand. He can't continue to eat you
Speaker 1: shut somebody up.
Speaker 2: Teachers are fired, people are losing their jobs because they
Speaker 2: suggested something or they made light of a death. And
Speaker 2: yet the president says what he says, and Carolyn Levitt
Speaker 2: tells us that we're focused on the wrong thing.
Speaker 1: Well, aren't there people out there, including maybe many of
Speaker 1: his supporters, who will see or who will take this
Speaker 1: and go yeah, I agree, who are following his direction
Speaker 1: and following his policies. They're following his mindset, They're following
Speaker 1: the way he sees things. I'm trying, I'm really really
Speaker 1: trying to be on that side, to look at it
Speaker 1: from that angle and go, wow, these members of Congress
Speaker 1: did something so egregious that they should be looked into
Speaker 1: as treasonous as seditious. It does it right. I'm trying
Speaker 1: to see the other side and to where you would
Speaker 1: use this type of language, to where you would make
Speaker 1: this type of suggestion over what they said. I just
Speaker 1: can't get there.
Speaker 2: I would like to read what they said because I
Speaker 2: have it here. So, folks who are listening, if you
Speaker 2: haven't watched the video, certainly you should. It's on Senator
Speaker 2: Alissa Slotkin's social media pages that the whole video is
Speaker 2: up there, and certainly it's been running on all the
Speaker 2: news shows today. But this is what the lawmaker said.
Speaker 2: We know you are under enormous stress and pressure right now.
Speaker 2: Americans trust their military, but that trust is at risk.
Speaker 2: The administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community
Speaker 2: professionals against American citizens like us. You all swore an
Speaker 2: oath to protect and defend this constitution. Right now, the
Speaker 2: threats to our constitution aren't just coming from abroad, but
Speaker 2: from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You
Speaker 2: can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No
Speaker 2: one has to carry out orders that violate the law
Speaker 2: of our constitution. Now, these lawmakers did not call for
Speaker 2: any opposition to a specific policy or to a specific order,
Speaker 2: but They're just saying, you actually have a duty as
Speaker 2: a member of the US military to uphold the constitution
Speaker 2: and to reject any illegal order.
Speaker 3: They say they made this.
Speaker 2: Video because they've been hearing from rank and file members,
Speaker 2: from their contacts that people are concerned about being forced
Speaker 2: to do something that they believe is illegal.
Speaker 1: They stated facts, and they stated law, and they stated
Speaker 1: do they not as this is understood, all of us
Speaker 1: have some kind of knowledge of that tangentially or whatever
Speaker 1: that that exists, that you're not permitted and you're okay
Speaker 1: to refuse somebody just tells you, hey, go in there
Speaker 1: and attack that Walmart. For me, you're not going to
Speaker 1: follow that order because it's illegal, right, It's very simple stuff.
Speaker 1: How does that rise to the level of you, all
Speaker 1: the traders who need to die?
Speaker 3: You got me?
Speaker 1: I'm trying, I'm trying to find I'm always trying to
Speaker 1: look at both sides and not just go after and criticize.
Speaker 1: But this is just dangerous stuff. How many of these
Speaker 1: episodes have we done talking about violence, talking about Charlie Kirk,
Speaker 1: talking about everything that came after that rose. Oh we
Speaker 1: could what the lawmakers were killed up in? Was it Michigan. Yes,
Speaker 1: this year Pennsylvania governor house set on fire.
Speaker 3: Yes, this is Nancy Pelosi's husband attacked. I mean, you
Speaker 3: can keep going on and on.
Speaker 2: It's been happening in greater numbers over the years, and
Speaker 2: this is the exact opposite of what we need in
Speaker 2: this country of bringing.
Speaker 1: The temperature down with folks. We don't just take our
Speaker 1: word for it. We certainly got us thinking. A lot
Speaker 1: of people are talking about treason versus sedition, versus insurrection.
Speaker 1: Those have been thrown around. We'll get some clarity on that.
Speaker 1: We do have the law here in front of us.
Speaker 1: Also some famous cases. Maybe you know about the cases
Speaker 1: of treason, but maybe not the ones having to do
Speaker 1: with seditions. Stay with us here, we're right back, all right.
Speaker 1: We continue now on this episode of Amy and TJ
Speaker 1: talking about sedition. The president's tweets in which he said
Speaker 1: that certain members of Congress who did something he didn't
Speaker 1: like should possibly be charged with sedition, which is punishable
Speaker 1: by death. One of my you know, one of my
Speaker 1: favorite favorite favorite movies, Michael Douglas, American President. You remember
Speaker 1: that movie. Yes, there's a great scene with a net
Speaker 1: Benning when he first meets her in the White House.
Speaker 1: She was showing off talking about him in some meeting.
Speaker 1: He sneaks in, They turn around, they see him there,
Speaker 1: and he, with a great smile, says, let's take him
Speaker 1: out back and shoot him. And he gets this laugh
Speaker 1: out of it because it was just this cool moment
Speaker 1: and it scared everybody in the room. The President's here,
Speaker 1: we're talking about him, and and he made this joke.
Speaker 1: And I always love that scene in that line because
Speaker 1: it was delivered perfectly, and it gave you an idea
Speaker 1: of I guess the energy in the room and why
Speaker 1: something like that sounds so ridiculous. That obviously is.
Speaker 2: Jogi right coming from the President of the United States.
Speaker 2: Clearly he would never call for the death of someone.
Speaker 1: Take him out back and shoot is what he said
Speaker 1: in front of them. And here we are. That was funny,
Speaker 1: and it's so ridiculous that it you'd have to laugh.
Speaker 2: You knew it was a joke. Yes, immediately today not
Speaker 2: so much.
Speaker 1: We have to take everything he says. Seriously.
Speaker 2: Wow, it's frightening. So we went and looked up what
Speaker 2: sedition actually is, and so the US Code defines sedition
Speaker 2: as this a crime involving two or more people in
Speaker 2: the United States for any of the following purposes. To
Speaker 2: conspire to overthrow or destroy by force, the government of
Speaker 2: the United States, or to wage war against it, To
Speaker 2: oppose by force the authority of the United States Government,
Speaker 2: to prevent, hinder, or delay by force, the execution of
Speaker 2: any law of the United States. Or to take, sees
Speaker 2: or possessed by force any property of the United States.
Speaker 1: This is the way it has to This involves conspiracy, right.
Speaker 2: At least two people, two or more people in the
Speaker 2: United States.
Speaker 1: Okay, this is why it jumped out to me when
Speaker 1: you were talking about this early. I'm looking back at
Speaker 1: Carolyn Levitt's she used some language that seemed to try
Speaker 1: to set up there. It is you have sitting members
Speaker 1: of the United States Congress who conspired together to orchestrate
Speaker 1: like it was specific language.
Speaker 2: But this is the caveat here that really got me
Speaker 2: to get a conviction for seditious conspiracy. The government has
Speaker 2: to prove that the defendants conspired to use force. Simply
Speaker 2: advocating for the use of force is not the same thing.
Speaker 1: By that definition. This is a non sense.
Speaker 3: It's a moot point, yes.
Speaker 1: But has impact who knows what kind. Yes, they're not
Speaker 1: going to trial, They're not going to get hauled into
Speaker 1: court over this.
Speaker 2: No. Yes. And the interesting thing is, if you are
Speaker 2: just a US citizen and you're convicted of sedition, you
Speaker 2: can face up to twenty years in prison. But if
Speaker 2: you are a member of the military, if you are
Speaker 2: a military or you can face the death penalty under
Speaker 2: the Uniform Code of Military Justice. And these members of
Speaker 2: Congress were members of the military, So by that connection
Speaker 2: you would say it's possible that they could get a
Speaker 2: death sentence if they were to be convicted of sedition.
Speaker 1: And we tried to find there are not a lot
Speaker 1: of cases historically having to do with sedition. We thought
Speaker 1: that might be a bunch of famous cases. It's actually
Speaker 1: really not, not names you would know, but there was
Speaker 1: what was the best two years, I guess this was
Speaker 1: pretty high profile members of the Oath keeper Low. Yes.
Speaker 2: Yes, yes, those who were charged January sixth, Yes, there
Speaker 2: were some sedition charges in a few of those cases.
Speaker 3: But this is really really rare.
Speaker 2: I went and looked the AP says that in the
Speaker 2: history of the United States, only twelve people have been
Speaker 2: convicted either through treeson or s edition, and we're talking
Speaker 2: Aaron Burr, we're talking Tokyo Rose, We're talking very different cases.
Speaker 1: Completely, it was Benedict Arnold. We go back to that.
Speaker 1: He wasn't. Actually we consider him a traitor, but he
Speaker 1: was never formally.
Speaker 3: He's not on this list.
Speaker 1: The point is you have to go back a ways.
Speaker 2: Correct.
Speaker 1: This isn't used a lot.
Speaker 2: Correct, and so this is just I mean, I would
Speaker 2: say the only good thing that has come out of
Speaker 2: the story is that maybe we as Americans are learning
Speaker 2: more about our laws more.
Speaker 3: I'm serious.
Speaker 2: I looked up and learned things I did not know
Speaker 2: that I wouldn't have looked out or looked at either way.
Speaker 3: And also looking at the Uniformed Code of Military.
Speaker 2: Justice, which is basically what the military is allowed to
Speaker 2: do when it comes to lawful orders. And I actually
Speaker 2: looked at all of this too, and it was really interesting.
Speaker 2: So basically, any person subject to this chapter who willing
Speaker 2: willfully disobeys a lawful command shall be punished, Okay, so
Speaker 2: that could be punished by death. So if you disobey
Speaker 2: a lawful command, that could be punished by death, just
Speaker 2: by the way, and.
Speaker 3: Then if the offense is committed.
Speaker 2: You end up outside of a war time, you can
Speaker 2: be court martialed and again serious significant punishments.
Speaker 3: But I thought this was interesting.
Speaker 2: An order is considered lawful, and this is where I
Speaker 2: think the question is between what the lawmakers are saying
Speaker 2: and what the president is saying. A military order is
Speaker 2: lawful unless it is contrary to the Constitution, the laws
Speaker 2: of the United States, or lawful superior orders, or for
Speaker 2: some other reason beyond the authority of the official issuing.
Speaker 2: So it is a little confusing.
Speaker 1: Well, who gets to say whether or not this order
Speaker 1: is lawful or not? Especially a lot of this stuff
Speaker 1: is tied up in a court, correct, So is it
Speaker 1: an illegal order to tell me to go patrol this
Speaker 1: street because a judge just said this is an illegal deployment.
Speaker 2: It is a gray area and very confusing, especially in
Speaker 2: these times when President Trump is ordering, yes, members of
Speaker 2: the military to go in to cities and then you
Speaker 2: have judges saying you're not allowed to go into said cities.
Speaker 2: So where whose orders are the lawful ones? It is confusing.
Speaker 2: It's an interesting conversation. It just doesn't need to be
Speaker 2: fueled with all this horrific rhetoric.
Speaker 1: That's a good point, we could still be having the
Speaker 1: same debate without this part being in it. But folk,
Speaker 1: we just if you listen to us a little bit
Speaker 1: at all and our pat you know, we always are
Speaker 1: on trying to just bring the rhetoric down and words
Speaker 1: matter and careful of what you say. So we encourage
Speaker 1: you all to being careful in what you're saying today
Speaker 1: and just remember always that words matter. And please be
Speaker 1: a part of bringing the temperature down in this country
Speaker 1: if you can. If that's even with a conversation on
Speaker 1: the subway, at the grocery store, just please, we gotta
Speaker 1: be better.
Speaker 2: Or around the Thanksgiving Thanksgiving dinner this coming week.
Speaker 3: There's a lot to talk about here. Thank you for listening, everybody.
Speaker 3: We always appreciate you. I may be Robock alongside TJ. Holmes.
Speaker 3: We will talk to you soon.