So as the Colorado State Supreme Court gets smacked down by the US Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court today ruled nine to nothing. No, Colorado can't just on its own disqualify Trump from the ballot. They can't. Unilaterally. Individual states cannot enforce section three of the Fourteenth Amendment to disqualify someone for running for president on the grounds of on the grounds that that person has engaged in an insurrection. So the court doesn't address all of the issues, but it
says, listen, individual states cannot do this. So sorry, Colorado, Sorry, Maine, Sorry all these states where Democrats were trying to gear up their law states all over the country where Democrats were going to try to gear up their lawyers to file challenges to Donald Trump's ability to be on the ballot on the grounds that he is an insurrectionist, and the Fourteenth Amendment says that someone who engaged in insurrection is ineligible for office. Sorry, no can do
Individual states cannot enforce this. This is not the only place where and I've been comparing this to du sex machina, the idea that something from above will descend upon the drama of the day to resolve the Democrats' terrible issue of donaldal Trump, of Donald Trump. The problem is that every method Democrats have tried for the last eight years has not really worked. And now they're starting to get panicked because more and more polling is coming out showing that Donald Trump is
beating Joe Biden. And this is the thing about polls. A lot of Americans, a lot of people on the right especially, have this built in suspicion for polls. And sometimes polls are wrong. Sometimes they are wrong. Donald Trump was predicted by every pollster in twenty sixteen that he was going to lose the twenty sixteen election. It turned out he won. Now, he
still lost the popular vote. So a lot of the polls that showed Hillary Clinton beating him in the popular vote, those were right, but they showed Hillary beating him by a much bigger margin than she actually did. It was much closer than the polls indicated. The polls were also a bit off. In twenty twenty, the polls showed Joe Biden winning by a much larger margin than he actually did win by. Biden actually won the twenty twenty election by
really very narrow majority, By a very narrow amount. He won the popular vote, yes, but as far as the electoral college, if you shift about fifty thousand votes over you know, three states, donald Trump wins. So it was razor close in both twenty sixteen and twenty twenty, and the polls beforehand it indicated Trump winning by a big amount. So polls have been
wrong. But here's the thing, sometimes the polls are right. Let me go back in ancient history for all of you to the twenty twelve presidential election. It's presidential election we all kind of forget about. But those of you we are listening to talk radio. Basically the whole summer and fall of twenty twelve, we were being told confidently by conservative talk radio folks, no, no, no, no, no, the polls are skewed. Romney's doing
better than these polls are saying. They're under sampling Republicans. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, Romney's actually doing This is a closer election than you'd think. Romney's got a chance. And they had all of us believing, they had all of us believing, no, no, no, there's like a three or four point Republican under representation here. Romney's doing great. And what happens, well, the twenty twelve election
went exactly as the polls indicated they would. Obama won fairly handly. It wasn't as dominant a performance as his two thousand and eight victory, but he still won. He's still won pretty easily without much of a sweat. Sometimes the polls are actually right. And I mean even in twenty twenty. I mean, Joe Biden wins the twenty twenty election, Biden was winning in all the polls leading up to it. They were off a bit, but the end result was the end result. Now Trump is win in all the polls
right now. Okay, And I think the approach to polling, you have to take it. It is. It is a factor. Unpredictable things can happen. Uh, you know, polls can be in. Polling is an imperfect science. And maybe you're over representing one kind of part of the electorate or underrepresenting this, and you know, blah blah blah blah blah. But and maybe some people are more coy about their support of a candidate like Donald Trump. Trump gets demonized so much in the media that maybe people are hesitant
and reluctant to say, yes, I'm voting for Donald Trump. When they talk to a polster, but in the privacy of the booth, of the voting booth, they'll say, Okay, yeah, I'll vote for Donald Trump, which has seemed in both twenty twenty and twenty sixteen to be the way that people acted. They were less supportive of Trump and polls and more supportive of him in the actual voting box. Trump is winning right now, even if that affects going on. Trump is kicking Biden's butt, and not just
like he's winning just popular vote wise, he's winning in battleground states. He's winning, and all the polling comes out saying Joe Biden is too old to be an effective president. You've got Democrats admitting that the economy was pretty darn good under Trump. And that's why I think there's greater desperation for these court cases against Donald Trump, at least one of them, to get to trial and get to a verdict before the election. That's why there was desperation around
this. You know, the Colorados, this idea to disqualify Trump from the ballot by saying he's an insurrectionist and therefore the constitution disqualifies him for office. The Democrats are in really bad shape. Because Biden is not gonna get any younger or more lucid, and they don't have any really great options for how to replace him. I want to talk about something with the Trump and Biden indictment slash non indictment decisions over their retention of classified documents and why I think
Trump has a major good point about selective prosecution. That's next on the John Girardi Show. So as the Colorado State Supreme Court gets smacked down by the US Supreme Court, the US Supreme Court today ruled nine to nothing. No, Colorado can't just on its own disqualify Trump from the ballot. They can't. Unilaterally. Individual states cannot enforce Section three of the fourteenth Amendment to disqualify someone for running for president on the grounds of on the grounds that that person
has engaged in an insurrection. So the court doesn't address all of the issues, but it says, listen, individual states cannot do this. So sorry, Colorado, Sorry, Maine. Sorry all these states where Democrats were trying to gear up their lawyer. States all over the country where Democrats were going to try to gear up their lawyers to file challenges to Donald Trump's ability to be on the ballot on the grounds that he is an insurrectionist, and the
fourteenth Amendment says that someone who engaged in insurrection is ineligible for office. Sorry, no can do. Individual states cannot enforce this. This is not the only place where and I've been comparing this to du Sex Machima, the idea that something from above will descend upon the drama of the day to resolve the Democrats' terrible issue of Donald Trump. Of Donald Trump. The problem is that every method Democrats have tried for the last eight years has not really worked.
And now they're starting to get panicked because more and more polling is coming out showing that Donald Trump is beating Joe Biden. And this is the thing about polls. A lot of Americans, a lot of people on the right especially, have this built in suspicion for polls. And sometimes polls are wrong. Sometimes they are wrong. Donald Trump was predicted by every polster in twenty sixteen that he was going to lose the twenty sixteen election. It turned out he
won. Now, he still lost the popular vote. So a lot of the polls that showed Hillary clay And beating him in the popular vote, those were right, but they showed Hillary beating him by a much bigger margin than she actually did. It was much closer than the polls indicated. The polls were also a bit off in twenty twenty, the polls showed Joe Biden winning
by a much larger margin than he actually did win by. Biden actually won the twenty twenty election by really a very narrow majority, by a very narrow amount. He won the popular vote, yes, but as far as the electoral college, if you shift about fifty thousand votes over three states, donald Trump wins. So it was razor close in both twenty sixteen and twenty twenty, and the polls beforehand it indicated Trump winning by a big amount. So
polls have been wrong. But here's the thing, sometimes the polls are right. Let me go back in ancient history for all of you to the twenty twelve presidential election. It's presidential election we all kind of forget about. But those of you were listening to talk radio basically the whole summer and fall of twenty twelve, we were being told confidently by conservative talk radio folks, no, no, no, no, no, the polls are skewed. Romney's
doing better than these polls are saying they're under sampling Republicans. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, Romney's actually doing This is a closer election than you'd think. Romney's got a chance. And they had all of us believing, they had all of us believing. No, no, no, there's like a three or four point Republican under representation here. Romney's doing great. And what happens, Well, the twenty twelve election
went exactly as the polls indicated they would. Obama won fairly handly. It wasn't as dominant a performance as a two thousand and eight victory, but he's still won. He's still won pretty easily, without much of a sweat. Sometimes the polls are actually right. And I mean even in twenty twenty. I mean, Joe Biden wins the twenty twenty election, Biden was winning in all the polls leading up to it. They were off a bit, but
the end result was the end result. Now Trump is winning in all the polls right now, Okay, And I think the approach to polling, you have to take it. It is. It is a factor. Unpredictable things can happen, you know, polls can be in. Polling is an imperfect science, and maybe you're over representing one kind of part of the electorate or underrepresenting this, and you know, blah blah blah blah blah. But and maybe some people are more coy about their support of a candidate like Donald Trump.
Trump gets demonized so much in the media that maybe people are hesitant and reluctant to say, yes, I'm voting for Donald Trump when they talk to a polster. But in the privacy of the booth, of the voting booth, they'll say, Okay, yeah, I'll vote for Donald Trump, which has seemed in both twenty twenty and twenty sixteen to be the way that people acted. They were less supportive of Trump and polls and more supportive of him in the actual voting box. Trump is winning right now, even if that
effects going on. Trump is kicking Biden's butt, and not just like he's winning just popular vote wise, he's winning in battleground states. He's winning, and all the polling comes out saying Joe Biden is too old to be an effective president. You've got Democrats admitting that the economy was pretty darn good under Trump, and that's why I think there's greater desperation for these court cases against Donald Trump, at least one of them to get to trial and get to
a verdict before the election. That's why there was desperation around this, you know, the Colorados this idea to disqualify Trump from the ballot by saying he's an insurrectionist and therefore the constitution disqualifies him for office. The Democrats are in really bad shape because Biden is not going to get any younger or more lucid, and they don't have any really great options for how to replace him.
I want to talk about something with the Trump and Biden indictment slash non indictment decisions over their retention of classified documents and why I think Trump has a major good point about selective prosecution. That's next on the John Girardi Show. I haven't talked about it much in last week or so, but there's an interesting point that Andy McCarthy, who's one of my favorite writers at now Review. He check him out, by the way, look up Andy McCarthy National Review
and try to read his stuff at National Review. He sometimes he's got op eds in the New York Post and other places. Really sharp lawyer. He was a former federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York under Rudy Giuliani and really really sharp guy, really sharp legal commentator. And he's done a lot of stuff for National Review, kind of covering issues with all the stuff basically from the Muller investigation onward, and I think it has been really required
reading during the last eight or so years of politics. Now he's talking about basically the decision by two different special counsels, one to prosecute Donald Trump for unlawful retention of classified national security documents at his house, and the decision by another special counsel, Robert Hurr, not to prosecute Joe Biden for unauthorized retention
of classified national security documents at his house. Both men brought documents to their house after they had left office and were no longer authorized to have those documents. One of them is getting prosecuted for it, the other one is not. Why now the ration Now, Trump and his legal team noticed this discrepancy, and they raised emotion that this is selective prosecution, that this does not make sense. Why would you prosecute one person and not the other person.
Both persons are actually pretty similarly situated. Joe Biden was retaining these documents when he was a former vice president, and really the focuses on Biden had these documents when he was not in office. Okay, he had these documents from twenty seventeen to twenty twenty one when he was just a private citizen and he
was not authorized to have these documents. He was allowed to have them in his home when he was vice president, he was allowed to have them in his home when he was president, but there was a four year gap when he was neither. Also, let's remember that the durect Now, let me actually just get into the piece. Okay. Biden Justice Department Special counsel Jack Smith responded to former President Donald Trump's selective prosecution motion to dismiss the mar A
Lago documents indictment by repeating yet again, this Biden administration mantra. Trump and Biden are not similarly situated because Biden cooperated with investigators while Trump obstructed them. Right, So that's the argument for why Trump should be prosecuted, and by I didn't shouldn't because Trump didn't really cooperate with investigators, but Biden did. Let's dig into that. It is true that Trump was not very cooperative with
investigators. At one point, he had a special he had a grand jury issue a subpoena for all the stuff in his house. He gave them the stuff there was. There was suspicion that he hadn't given them all his stuff, and the FBI rated mar A Lago and found a whole bunch more stuff. And there was also a decent amount of evidence seemingly I need to hear both sides of it, but there was a decent amount of evidence that Trump
knew he wasn't giving them all the stuff. So it's true. Trump was probably not as was certainly not as cooperative with investigators as I think he keeps claiming he was. He was pretty devious about it. He was kind of deceptive towards his own lawyers about it. And that's the thing with Trump is that frustrates me sometimes is that I think he's his own worst enemy, Like
this is a total this whole thing was totally avoidable. Now, the thing is, though, the fact that Trump was more cooperative, that doesn't change the underlying reality of what he did and what Biden did. And let's also remember this, as bad as Trump's conduct was, in some ways Biden's was worse. Let me explain why. Right, both men retained documents they weren't allowed to retain in their personal homes while they were out of office. Fair
Enough, Biden was doing this for decades. Trump only did it for like a year or two. Biden had documents in his home that he had squirreled away back when he was in the Senate. Okay, and that's a really important distinction. Okay, if you're a senator or remember the House, you don't get to take classified documents home with you. You just don't. Here's how you view classified documents when you're in the House or you're in the Senate.
They set up a secure room in one of the House or Senate office buildings. It's a secure contained room where basically they have the documents there for you to review. You go into the room at a set time. There are people guarding the facility that it's very secure. Only authorized people are allowed to go in. You go into the facility, you review the documents,
you leave without the documents. You leave the documents there. There's no way Biden could have those documents in his house, which he did, without someone having done something illegal. Someone had to have squirreled away those documents for him. He got them knowing presumably that they were classified, and he retained them for years and years and years and years and years. Okay, he stopped
being in the Senate in January of two thousand and nine. They're still in his house in twenty twenty three, so presumably for over a decade he had for over a decade he had retained these documents that he had gotten through some ill gotten method. So on one level, Biden's conduct is actually worse than Trump. Maybe a little apples to oranges. I think both of their conduct was bad. But the idea that Biden is this, oh, my stuff put stuff in the wrong box. Bull. No, it's also true.
And by the way, just this about Biden, because Biden keeps throwing out this long oh my staff puts stuff in the wrong box. Okay, the stuff Biden was squirreling away. And I had this conversation actually with my dad the other day where my dad was like, I don't know, maybe it's just maybe he's on Biden's behalf. My dad was sort of saying, I don't know, like maybe Biden, you know, you're your president or your vice president. You've got a lot of boxes of stuff. Maybe stuff gets
put in the wrong place. Maybe maybe his staff did put the stuff in the wrong place. And I sort of retorted to my dad with, well, I can understand that, but I don't think it's the case with Biden.
Here's why. The stuff that was in Biden's house, a lot of it had to do with Afghanistan. In fact, they were able to identify some of it as Biden's classified Afghanistan papers because so when, by the way, when the president or the vice president is briefed on something top secret and the president or the vice president takes notes on a legal pad about it, the stuff on the legal pad is now classified material. Okay, that's now subject to law. You can't just take that home. You just can't.
Can't retain that or scroll that away. Willy nilly, Okay, that stuff is now also classified top secret. They were able to identify some of that stuff because Biden had it in his house, and they could see that it was Biden's notes because of the way, the characteristic way that Biden would always
misspell the word Afghanistan. He would always leave out the H after the g afgh a n I S T A N. So Biden was squirreling away a lot of stuff relating to Afghanistan. Why when Biden was running for president in two thousand and eight and during his first year as vice president, he was not supportive of a troop surge in Afghanistan, and within the Biden administration he was like the leading voice opposed to it. Well within the Obama administration,
rather, he was the leading voice opposed to it. Obama did not follow his advice, ignored him, and did a troop surge in Afghanistan in two thousand and nine into twenty ten. Like one of the things retained was this like memo, this like last ditch memo Biden wrote to Obama over Thanksgiving two thousand and nine urging him not to do the troop surge. And it's clear
that he talked about this with his biographer. Biden did in twenty seventeen after he's done as vice president, and they've got audio tape of him saying, I got the Afghanistan stuff down in the in the Biden was wanting to develop this historical record and this historical narrative that he was the one guy who was right about Afghanistan. He was the one who said this is going to be a quagmire like Vietnam, because Biden's not that smart and he can only compare
things to other historical examples he has in his head. So he kept going on with this Vietnam comparison, apparently, and it seems like that's why he was retaining this stuff. That it wasn't just a random box of stuff. No, it was stuff that he specifically wanted to develop a narrative around himself that he was right about X, Y, and Z. So it wasn't just random stuff. Now when we return, why I think the fact that
Trump cooperated Excuse me, why why? I think the fact that Biden cooperated with investigators and Trump didn't cooperate with investigators should not matter to the prosecution. Question that's next on the John Girardi Show. What was the basis for charging Trump but not charging Biden with the retention of documents? Apparently it's because Biden
cooperated with investigators Trump didn't. This is silly. If Trump didn't cooperate with investigators but Biden did, that might be a rationale for charging Donald Trump with obstruction of justice. It's not a rationale for not charging Biden with unlawfully retaining classified documents. And that's the rub. It's completely unfair that Biden gets to skate on this but Trump doesn't. They both did effectively the exact same thing.
They brought a bunch of classified documents to their private houses when they weren't in office anymore, and they weren't allowed to have them. End of story. Like the idea that well, Biden cooperated with investigators, well, all criminal defendants are expected to cooperate with investigators. If they don't cooperate, then you also charge them with obstruction. It doesn't mean that they get to skate on the crime. Furthermore, what you have to show is just what the
prosecutor has to show. The mental state of the defendant that the prosecutor has to show is gross negligence. It's clear that Biden was kind of strategic about the things that he was squirreling away. He wanted to squirrel away all this stuff about Afghanistan to show that he was right and Obama was wrong about the Afghanistan troop surge in two thousand and nine. He was specifically squirreling away that kind of stuff and the argument that because his memory is so bad that therefore,
well, he couldn't have been wilful in deciding that's it. No, no, no, that's not even the legal standard his wilfulness. And furthermore, just the fact that his memory is bad doesn't mean at the time he didn't he didn't intentionally do the thing he was trying to do. I just find the whole thing it's kind of blindingly unfair, or at least a blinding double standard anyway, that one guy's getting prosecuted for this and the other guy
completely is not. One guy has to deal with this prosecution in the middle of a presidential campaign. The other guy does not have to deal with it. It's a complete double standard, this idea that liberals keep crowing about in reference Trump, Well, no one should be above the law. No one should be above the law. I agree. The Marlago documents thing is the
one Trump charge that I actually think. You know, I've tried to call balls and strikes with Donald Trump the whole time, through all these legal woes that he's been subjected to in the last year. I think most of the cases against him have been bunk. I think the New York District attorney's case has been ridiculous. I think the Georgia District, the Fulton County District attorney's
case was ridiculous to charge him with a ricoast with a rico violation. I think all the January sixth prosecutions against Donald Trump, I think were big stretches. The one thing that I actually agree he probably did something illegal and it wouldn't necessarily be unfair if he was convicted of it is the mar A Lago documents retention thing, and it's the exact same thing that Hillary didn't. It's the exact same thing that Biden did. You either let them all off the
hook, or you got to prosecute them all. If not, we basically live in a Banana republic. We basically have the Justice Department deciding. It seems as though the Justice Department had the fix in from the beginning that Biden was going to skate on this and Trump was going down and you know the idea that well, it was a special council decided it wasn't the Trump administration.
No, the special council still answers to the Attorney General. The Attorney General clearly picked Jack Smith, a super who is super aggressive and so obviously ideologically so fiercely anti Trumps. There's no way that this is just some random pick. Of course Trump is going down that that's the point of all this, and I think it's banana. You either charge both of them or you charge neither of them to decide. Yeah, oh Trump, who did basically
the same darn thing Biden did. He needs to be prosecuted, but not Biden is ridiculous. That'll do what for John Jardy Show, See you guys next time on Power Talk