America First Empire?

year of the first Trump term, back in twenty twenty. Normally, a situation like this where you have a fugitive of justice does not necessarily have all the overtones of an

international foreign policy issue. But because of the nature of this particular incident, because of the nature of how this went down this past weekend in Caracas, Venezuela, because of the involvements of the US Army Delta Force, because of the nature of the Maduro regime as a staunch ally of all the world's worst actors, from communist China to Russia to Iran to Cuba and North Korea to Hesbala

and everyone in between. Because of all that, this is not simply a legal matter, but very much a foreign policy matter as well. First, just a further coda on the law. On the Essays show, we spent a lot of time talking about the specter in some cases, perhaps many cases, the misnomer of so called international law, which is often invoked as a sword, but is rarely understood

by those who have a tendency to invoke it. Specifically, we expect at this trial, which is probably going to take years, if I had to guess, especially including the appeals that will inevitably come, Maduro's lawyers are going to invoke all sorts of so called international law defenses. They're going to appeal to his purported alleged status as the head of state, for which they are going to claim that he is entitled to absolute immunity to being prosecuted

in foreign courts of law. The problem is multifault. On the one hand, this has been tried before. We mentioned yesterday that there have been multiple cinenses, Ronald Reagan going into the country of Grenada in the early nineteen eighties, along with perhaps even more Saliencly to the point George H. W. Bush going into Patama thirty six years to the day prior to the Caracas raid this past Saturday, and Back

in nineteen ninety, the George HW. Bush administration got the disputed illegitimate drug trafficking drug overlord, Dictator Patama Manuel Noriega, on very similar charges. Noriega's lawyers back then offered many defenses that Maduro's lawyers are going to offer now. Those defenses failed in nineteen ninety, and those defenses are going to fail today because Nicholas Maduro is not a legitimately

elected head of state. This has been the policy of three successive presidential administrations, going back to Donald Trump's first term, going into the Biden administration, which had a fifty million dollars bounty on Maduro's head, much to the apparent surprise of the dim witted former VP Kamala Harris, who over the weekend was excoriating Donald Trump and no en certain turn. And then that policy of not recognized Nicholas Madua as the head of state has continued into this MAGA two

point zero second Trump administration as well. By the way, that sentiment is not simply a sentiment of the United States of America. That legal assessment is shared by such liberal bastions as Canada and by the European Union itself. So Maduro is best understood as a fugitive justice who just happens to live in a foreign country. Now we can always got agains details as whether or not he's actually going to be convicted by a jury in New

York City. This is the same location, New York City that found Donald Trump to be guilty on those outrageous, ludicrous Stormy Daniels corporate bookkeeping nonsense Alvin Bragg Stalinist prosecution hoax back in two thousand and twenty four. So we can kind of get into the juror debate and the betty markets Polymarket and the other online betting markets. We're

having a lot of fun with that. Yesterday talking about whether or not he's actually going to be convicted ron the Santas of Florida and the governor having a little fun with that. He quote tweeted the Polymarket guessing game and basically said, you know what, I bet this guy would probably convicted if he were in Florida and as

at Florida, and I think that our governor is absolutely right. Frankly, I would love to see Madureau try by a jury of his peers in Dural, Florida, which is one of the homes of the Venezuela and expats community, those who have fled communism there in Venezuela, very much located here in South Florida. So I do not expect Maduro's legal defenses to go well. Much that has been tried and rejected before. Having said that, when you get to a

jury trial, sometimes you just don't know. And this kind of gets into the overarching debate when it comes to the jurors system, whether it has outlied its usefulness. We're going to table that discussion for now. Perhaps we will revisit it at an opportune time sometime down the road. Now, there's, as as mentioned, there are all sorts of foreign policy and domestic political overtones to the Maduro capture, And yes it is a capture. First of all. When it comes

to the left, what exactly is are to say? That has not been settled ready, but we're going to say it anyway. There how many freaking absurd dictators, tyrannical jack booted thugs overseas. Will these people just leap leap to defense? And when I say leap in some cases, I mean

literally leap Over the weekend on Saturday. What it took a few hours, a few hours for these these leftists, many of whom are these professional paid protesters, paid by the Soros Foundation and the Ties Foundation, all these various left wing NGOs undoubtedly paid the same thing that that the pro Hamas Jihadis on Canvas are paid. In the aftermath of the horrific October seven, twenty twenty three pro

gone on Saturday, they what these folks. They leap out of bed in the morning as if they have nothing better to do on honest Saturday, and they're in the streets seemingly within minutes, within hours, the most of the news actually breaking the American airwaves that Maduro has indeed been captured by US Delta Force. As it turns out, we now know that a lot of this active of the was organized and funded buy a group known as the People's Forum, which has very very close ties to yes,

you guessed have the Chinese Communist Party. In fact, that People's Forum, which is behind we know this for a fat The New York Post, among others are Portium. They are behind a lot, probably not at all, but a lot of the coordinate activity when it comes to the pro Maduro raties this past week, and there the People's Forum, taking in at least one instance, twenty million dollars in donation from a very very closely tied Chinese Communist Party

activist by the name of Nebell Singham. Not a very Chinese signing name, but I guess he is a Chinese propagandist, and he actually lives in Shanghai, so virtually none of this is organic. But you know, it's kind of funny.

Today is the five year anniversary of January six, twenty twenty one, a day that will live in infamy, right, And I didn't really necessarily want to talk about January sixth on say show, because frankly, I kind of forgot that it was January six, because five years later it's it's literally that much of a forgot nothing burger to me. But we should at least say the following, which is the folks who are out there, and from a quick scan of social media and so forth, they are clearly

out there. The folks who are still lamenting into crying, who are still lambasting Donald Trump as being an opponent of American democracy, for being complicit in the day that democracy almost died in twenty twenty one, five years ago. To the day. Many of these folks are the same folks who are out there industrys protesting in vociferous, clamorous fashion this past weekend on behalf on behalf of the

Maduro regime. Try to square that circle for me. I'm sorry, Donald Trump is a threat to democracy for doing what, literally for doing what for cleaning up your streets via the National Guard. He's a threat to democracy by trying to make sure that the unelected, undemocratic administrative states does not wield disapportionate power. So he wants to say that

Donald Trump is a threat to democracy. But e Colis Maduro, the guy who banned opposition newspapers, guy who murdered countless of his own citizens, the guy who was literally running a transnational drug trafficking ring called the Cartel Dilla, souls that that guy is not a threat to democracy. What is wrong with you? Like, actually, what is wrong with you? I mean numerous elected officials from the democratic class, not just the lefting activists, many elect officials completely and utterly

declining themselves on this question. Maggie Goodlander is a congresswoman from the granted state of the state of New Hampshire. You man have heard of her. You might have not heard of her. She refused to answer a question as to whether arresting Maderda was a good thing. Here is representative Goodlander on CNN.

who most people probably never get her. She's exactly the kind of person who I guarantee you in her various press releases and her social media feed her this or that is engaging in hysterical, hysterical melo drama and histrionics. When it comes to the five year anniversary over the day that democracy almost die January sixth, twenty twenty one. Some other Democrats, by the way, are playing the war powers game. They're saying, oh, man, Congress is not consulted

when it comes to the Maduro ray. For instance, here was Congressman Glenn Ivy of Maryland, who is big time mad big time I med that Congress wasn't briefed here as Congressman Glenn Ivy on WSA nine in Washington, DC.

of Venezuela. In twenty nineteen, you had Juan Waido, who according to many won the election in twenty eighteen, then the protests nearly twenty nineteen. At minimum, in twenty twenty four you had and Mundo Gonzalez, who won the election most international observers, including the Eurocrats and Brussels recognized. So he's not the legitimate head of states, and this was trying to extract someone to face justice on an indictment.

If Madua had been in the United States, there would have been no reason for the US military to be involved. You would have had the US marshals or the FBI or SWAT teams go ahead and do it there. So this is not a war powers question. There is no declare war operation going on. There are plenty of big questions as to what happens to Venezuela, and among those questions are what we're going to be dealing with on the rest of our show. I'm probably dealing with that,

frankly for months and months and months now. But this notion of war powers is totally ludicrous there, and this congressman has no idea what we saw him about it. I'm Joshamer will be right back, welcome back to the show. So the foreign policy raifications are indeed dress. This was primarily a law enforcement operation. There naturally are major foreign policy overtones too much of what is going on there.

The former Maduro vice president, who was sworn in pretty much immediately after the extraction Maduro as the nation's acting president, is a one by the name of Delci Rodriguez. Delcea Rodriguez is a lunatic. She's an absolute lunatic by all accounts. She gets someone who is just as far left it, frankly, not even further to the left then Nicholas Maduro himself. Among other things that Dela Rodriguez did in the immediate aftermath of being sworn in by the Venezuelan and Supreme

Court as the current acting President. Among the things that Delsea Rodriguez did was she proceeded to blame the Maduro extraction on Oh, yeah, you guessed it, the Jews. No doubt, she's been watching many episodes of the Tucker Carlson Show. So Rodriguez there talking about how this is a foreign orchestrated plot generally has just been sounding like a crazy person.

After she was scorn in, she immediately went to the diplomats, the emissaries of hostile American of regimes hostiles to American interests such as Russia in China, the very same notional nominal Venezuela and quote unquote allies that did absolutely nothing

to prevent this extraction in the first place. There So Rodriguez walks over to the representative of the Chinese Communist government, to the representative of the Russian Federation, proceeds to thank them and glad hand them and smile at ear to air.

So it seems, on the one hand that it is very much more of the same, which again raises this question as to what exactly is the trum administration doing here when it comes to trying to make this work with Delsa Rodriguez if we were actually going to quote unquote run Venezuela, which is a very open question, and it's what Donald Trump has been saying that's been being encountered a little bit by Marco Rubio, who seems to be downplaying the notion of America quote unquote running Venezuela.

But if we're actually going to do this, then why in the world are we doing this with someone who is just as crazy a pink o kami as Maduro himself. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to do it with basically the diet coke vanilla version of Maduro Delsa Rodriguez.

truth in that. If you're going to go in and you're going to extract someone who maybe he's not the legitimate head of state, but he at least had the entrapments, He at least had the accouterments, the quasi public impromatore of presidential status quasi because there are many folks who disputed that correctly and rightfully disputed that, but he still

was viewed by many as the president. If you're going to do that, does it make sense to then just go guns fully blazing, proverbally or literally speaking, and just try to go in and install a pro American puppet. Well, that hasn't necessarily always worked out for the best case scenario for the United States when it comes to a lot of failed Latin American interventions in decades past. The point that betrays making in this interview, and it resonates a little bit with me, is that you should try

to do the incrementalist thing. Right Now, Maduro was a fugitive, You had a fifty million dollars bound his head. We got them. Now, let's see if there's a way that the United States can use its overwhelming diplomatic and economic leverage to try to make do with the logical successor if Rodriguez ends up not being interested in playing ball. Okay,

maybe that is another conversation. This does, though, raise the broader conversation, which is what the heck is going on when it comes to American foreign policy at this moment? Is America actually emerging now as something of a twenty first empire? And that's quite a paradox, isn't it. It's quite ironic, and I think some would suggest that Donald Trump, who campaigns at least to some extent, as being a

much more humble, modest figure on the world stage. I think back to the twenty sixteen Republican president as a premier, with Donald Trump excoriated Jeb Bush to his face for his brother George W. Bush's adventurism, his adventurism abroad in Iraqi and Afghanistan. It is definitely something of an irony that Donald Trump is now here talking and in many ways not just talking, but acting as something of a

foreign interventionist himself. And the question that is being bad around I think a lot of folks all across politist past Marto asking there is what exactly is this administration doing when it comes to foreign policy. Let me throw in two additional wrinkles into the conversation. Then we will revisit this broader topic momentarily. Those two additional wrinkles are Iron and Greenland. Let's go ahead and take those situations one by one. Iran has now been facing a week

and a half of protests. They started a few days after Christmas, and at this point there are Iranian protesters who are out on the streets and they are now all throughout the country of Iran. They are now in all of the twenty plus provinces of Iran. Based on what we are seeing across social media, it seems that there are protesters who have now taken actually they've actually taken over parts of Islamic Revolutionary Guard core military basis.

They've taken over parts of Tehran City, municipal infrastructure, parts of markets. There. There have now been at least a dozen and a half two dozen protesters who've been visually killed by this most tyrannical of Islamus theocratic regimes. And there's been fascinating reporting coming from the Times of London, a pretty prestigious, well known British newspaper that the Ayatola himself Kaimeni, who is the quote unquote supreme leader. He's

the real leader of this horrific Islamist theocracy. According to The Times London, Kaimni actually has a planning part if the IRGC stops fighting, if the regime looks like it's about the collapse, then it looks like Comedy is basically going to hit the road. He's gonna hit the panic, butt him and make a bee line straight for Lamar

Putin's welcoming warm bosom in Moscow. He'll basically in that case, Comedy will basically be trying to do the same thing that Bascher al Asad did after he was toppled in Damascus, Syria, just over a year ago. Very hard to know exactly how accurate this reporting is, but it does seem pretty clear that this is the most serious uprising against the Irani regime at least since the Green Revolution of two thousand and nine, during the very early years of the

Obam presidency. It's true that other there have been protests against the running regime for many, many years. There are a lot of women who are protesting the he job as recently as a few years ago in twenty twenty two. This happens on a fairly regular basis because the regime was just frankly that evil. But this is going on for a while and they have good reason to be upset. The currency, the real has dropped forty percent, inflation is

through the roof, the economy is in the toilet. The entire country is heavily sanctioned due to their financing of terrorist activity. There's been a terrible drought and the country has as deeply struggled to provide wa are the most basic of baar necessities to their people there. So is the regime going to fall? Well, look, he never acount

your chickens before their hatch. Donald Trump, for what it's worth, kind of now playing this second term more moralistic, more interventionist person, Donald Trump saying that if the regime starts killing in mass some of their own distance, some of their own protests, the United States is going to get involved, which is yet another another threat of humanitarian or humanitarian adjacent intervention, playing off of his intervention on Christmas Day

in Nigeria where he attacked ISIS related Islamis cells in order to save the persecuted besieged Christians of Nigeria. Now it's only humanitarian adjacent in the case of Iran, because Iran is also a horrific national security threat, and removing that regime would almost assuredly definitely be a net positive for the United States, for the West, frankly, for all of humanity there. But we're not going to get involved

necessarily militarily with Iran. But it does seem entirely possible that you could see the United States engage, not just in moral or rhetorical supports, it seemed entirely possible that the administration might start getting involved when it comes to trying to vet individuals may provide weapons there at a bare minimum, this administration that is deeply morally and rhetorically supportive of the Iranian people. In fact, some of the protesters in Tehran just over the past couple of days,

this is an amazing anecdote. They actually took a street and they renamed the street. The street was actually renamed over a former Islamist in the theocratic regime, and they renamed it after Donald Trump because Donald Trump is known as a champion of the Iranian people. Look in many ways, folks, I have some of the exact same horrific memories of

the regime change boon doggles that you probably do. The Iraq War was a disaster, and frankly, the winner of the Iraq War was actually this regime, the Irani regime, who profited immensely off of the two trillion dollars that were wasted wasted by the United States of America. But it's important also to not overread the lessons of the

failed moralistic boon doggles of yesteryear. Is simply the case of the United States has regimes on the world stage, some of which are friendly to us, some of which are hostile to us. The amount of American blood on the hands of the Irani regime is impossible to even quantify. It is a horrific regime. And when it comes to the barest of bare minimums of providing rhetorical sooker and support for these protesters, Donald Trump is doing the exact right thing. It is an active courage to do what

he's doing there. He deserves tremendous credit for it. God speed to the running protesters. We'll be right back.

sort of action in Iran. And by the way, just a quick addendum to our comments on Iran, Donald Trump has indeed now all but said that if Iran starts rebuilding their nuclear capacity and their blisted mist capacity at a greater scale than they currently already are, then the United States will likely go in with some sort of additional military action, possibly done in coordination with Israel, possibly

just done solo. Numerous Republican centers such as Center ricuson Nebraska nodding along vociferously when asked by that, and it seemed to that is a credible threat. Up There's also the issue of Greenland. Now, Greenland is a fascinating territory of Greenland is the largest island in the world unless you count to Australia, which you can't because of Australia is a continent. So Greenland is a massive, massive island which only has about fifty thousand people, sitting basically right

in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. If you look on a map, it actually is closer to the eastern seaboard of the United States than it is to Denmark, which it is technically a part of and has been a part of that for a long time now, there have been Republicans who have been chomping at the bit to try to bring Greenland into the American fold for

a long time. I think back to this OpEd that Tom Cotton wrote for The New York Times probably twenty nineteen, twenty twenty, towards the end of the first Trump term, basically calling for the United States we find a way to annex Greenland. And ever since he came back in office about a year ago last January, Donald Trump has been talking to talk quite aggressively when it comes to

the issue of Greenland. He correctly correctly sees that the Arctic, the Arctic region is a very very crucial region when it comes to mintal resources, when it comes to military defense. Think about it, it's the literal top of the world. When you are flying from Russia to Alaska to Canada, the Greenland there. The nature of the physical global mass entity is such a these are quicker lights up there, or these are these are these are quicker ships on

the icebreaker ships that go through the Arctic Ocean. You can cut off a lot of time. And because of that, and because it is where a lot of countries and land masses meets, whether it's Russia, whether it's Canada, Greenlands and so forth, it is a it is considered a crucial, crucial,

crucial part of the world. And what Donald Trump has been saying is that Denmark and the European Union are not doing a particularly great job of safeguarding the the very real ravications of Greenland, especially when it comes to trying to ward off Chinese and Russian aggression. China, for what it's worth, has been investing a ton of resources when it comes to its own military, the People's Liberation Army,

they are in the Arctic. And a fascinating joint statement that came out or to Stay a statement signed by President's Manuel macrona France chancellor mergers with Germany Prime Minister Georgia Maloney of Italy, Donald Tuska, Poland, and on and on and on. This joint statement says Arctic security remains a key priority for Europe and is crucial for international and transland security. But Denmark is a NATO country, Greenland's

part of NATO. And if you do this, mister President you're basically going to blow up the NATO alliance Woodsworth. John Bolton, Yes, that John Bolton was on CNN and saying much the exact same thing. Here is John Bolton.

accomplished three and a half decades ago. So if you want to have some sort of international coalition of first world powers and the G seven is not enough for you, or the G twenty, if you want to do that, I'm open to it, but the mission surely should change. What exactly is the mission of NATO at this point?

He's been a very frequently Trump presidential campaign hand. He's been in and out of government as well. Jason Miller was on gb News of the UK to say that Greenland should be a territorial area that's controlled by the US. But no, there's not going to be invasion of Greenland. That's just a silly distraction to me. That seems totally right. Look, there is preston tier in American foreign policy when it comes to engaging in what Trump calls the art of

the deal. Think back to the purchase of Alaska, William Sewer's purchase of Alaska in the eighteen sixties from Russia. From Czarist to Russia. We purchased Alaska, the Louisiana purchase. Hello, have you ever read a history book, you get people. The Louisiana purchase was purchase as the name would apply from King Louis and the French Thomas Jarreson double the size of the United States. How about the Gadsden purchase in southwestern United States? To this narrow sliver at the

southern end of Arizona, New Mexico. We've done this any number of times before, where you make an offer to a foreign power if you try to purchase a land. Is it really that crazy that the pre the United States is talking about possibly trying to purchase Greenland. There's not any boots on the ground. For God's sake, what are these history honus? I mean, John Bolton, what are you smoking?

really freaking stupid. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Donald Trump, like the vast majority of Americans, lies somewhere in the middle.

His foreign policies is simple. He assesses every single area, every hot spot around the world and says, what is the American national interest in this spot and what can and should the United States do when it comes to trying to improve, augment, bolsters and secure our interests In this particular response, when it comes to Greenland, the President correctly deduces that our interests would be furthered by actually controlling it ourselves and having US military bases there in

this crucial part of the world in the Arctic. To better word off Russian and Chinese gemony, among others. When it comes to Venezuela, a Donald Trump called the Donro doctrine instead the Monroe doctrine. Dontum correctly recognizes that not having this Hezbollah run Russia, China Cuba tied illegitimate dictator and power is a win for the United States. What happens next, we'll have to find out, but it's a

win for the United States. And oh, by the way, he's the head of an international cartel ring, the Cartel de la Souls, and was indicted with a fifty million dollar bounty on his head. So it's this case by case assessments. There are a lot of folks out there who are now scratching their head and saying, eh, I didn't vote for this. I didn't really vote for this.

This is not what I had in mind there. This is This is empire, not humble American Republicanism, to which I say, were you paying attention during the first Trump administration? Did Donald Trump give you any indication during the first

term that he was a Ron Pohl style isolationist? The guy who likes to take credit for bombing isis out of effective existence in Iraq and Syria for things like the assassination of the Iranian arch terrorists Kasai Sulimani at the baged at a Rock airport in January of twenty twenty. Was this the act of an isolationist? The guy who bolstered anti Russian missile defense in Central and Eastern Europe repeatedly delivered a positively reaganized speech in Warsaw, Poland in

the first year as presidency. In twenty seventeen, facing eastward, looking directly into the offing at vamer Putin and the Kremlin. Is that the guy that is going to just duck and hide. Who's going to just let in this case Maduro Love the American homeland with drugs. Who's going to allow Russian and China to make ever more aggressive encroachments

in our hemisphere when it comes to things like Greenland. No, dald Trump is America first, and he understands America first to mean that he's going to put his country's interest first. How that plays out is going to differ on the situation. But America first is not the same as do nothing. Sometimes, in order to put your country first, you have to actually act on it. Donald Trump is a man of action.

He demonstrates that time and time again. So the Prime Minister of Denmark, I would say, be careful and be on the lookout for an offer coming your way. Probably fairly soon, we'll be right back to be America first. Dald Trump makes clear means sometimes to actually simply focus from seed deshining sea here on the American confidence. Oftentimes

that is the case. Oftentimes it means trying to to secure the southern border or trying to stop crime in America's crime ridden cities like Memphis, Saint Louis, Kansas City, and on and on and on. Oftentimes it means focusing on the economy and things like that. But sometimes being America first does mean to care beyond your country, to care beyond your borders, and to care beyond your shores.

If America were a country like Lithuania or Kosovo, or Ghana, Botswana, whatever, maybe maybe, maybe maybe you can actually be Botswana first and just care about domestic Botswana issues. But the United States is not Botswana. We are a superpower, the greatest superpower in the history of Western civilization, at least as

far back as the Roman Empire itself. We demonstrably and self evidently have interests around the world, and above all, when it comes to our own backyard, to our own hemisphere. Donald Trump is on more more than firm footing for doing what he did in Venezuela. He is on more than firm footing for talking about the possibility of acquiring Greenland. Will not be boots on the ground. Perhaps it will be an offer. I personally would very much like to

see that offer, because from Venezuela to Greenland. This administration that cares about our interests around the world, and above all, it seems really cares first and foremost about America's clear interests here in the West hemisphere. That is good and as it should be. We mentioned yesterday show as well the saga of Tim Walls in in Minnesota, tim Walls announcing that he is not going to seek a third term and he's not seeing a third term basically because

he's bad. Because Tim Walls is a loser. Because Tim Walls is someone who has epically failed due to his grotesque incurio, his lack of curiosity, his lack of ability to root out one of the largest fraud scandals in the history of United States that happened under his negligent watch.

There is a big time lesson here. We discussed on yesterday show a little bit one of the lessons, which is that independent podcasters and YouTubers like Nick Shirley are doing a lot of the work that the corporate media some people will not do. Another key lesson is this do not go all in for the left wing intersectional agenda.

The number one reason that Tim Walls repeatedly, over and over again said that he was not going to do anything that he His justification for not doing anything on this issue was he said, he said, you guys are racist. You're a bunch of racists for raising this issue. Or Republicans are racists. They don't. They don't like brown people, they don't like Samalies, they don't like Islam. Maybe we actually have a real question about Islam. But hold that aside.

The point is there was asked Themali fraud and you just called everyone a racist, and you let your taxpayers because someone's federal All taxpayers get built to the tune of billions of dollars because of that. So the political lesson is, do not indulge the far left craziness. Don't do it is a recipe for political extinction, and political extinction is what Tim Walls now finds himself now that he is not seeking a third term. It really is

a tremendous scalp. So huge kudos not just to Nick Shirley, in many ways, huge kodos kudos to Chris Rufo, the amazing investigative journalists and activists who first really got this story going, and Donald Trump blew it up. Then Nick Sureley blew it up. There and ultimately Chris Rufo and others got their scalp, and their scalp came in the form of Tim Walls announced that he's not running for

reelection again. It's just an incredible change from Tim Walls nearly being a Vice president of the United States and what a sad, sad talent is. Democrats, I feel expect will not actually learn any of these lessons, but frankly, if they had any wits about them, they really really should.

One final up story that I want to make sure touched on before we let it go another day without mentioning it a major secondmenment case that came out of California this past weekend that the media has barely touched on,

but I think it's actually really really important. This is a case out of California called Baird be a Banta, and it reached a two to one well a three judge panel of Use corret Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and the panel ruling in two to one fashion against against California's complete ban on openly carrying a firearm in public.

This two to one panel in a majority opinion led by Judge Lawrence Van Dyke, who is a Trump nominee, who was a fantastic judge, one of the most stalwart conservative constitutional judges there on the Ninth Circuit Judge Van Dyke saying that this is actually a very straightforward case under the Supreme Court's precedence from a few years ago.

So recall that in twenty twenty two the Court for the very first time stepped back into the gun rights segment debate since the all important Heller and McDonald's cases, which for the first time codified your individual rights steam bear arms back into the date in twenty ten. For many, many years, many years, the Court totally neglected after Heller McDonald's to get involved in the Secmendment, which led Justine Clarence Thomas to bemoan the fat that the Court was

treating the Second Amendment as a second class right. Finally, finally they got involved, and in twenty twenty two are the Court rules on this case called Bruin out of New York City. And in the Bruin case, the Court basically held that if you have a ban on carrying out to the home, it is presumed presumed to be unconstitutional unless it is well within this nation's history and traditions.

It basically establishes this history and traditions test. But Judge Van Dyke, writing for the Ninth Circuit, in this total ban on open carrying this case out of California just this past Friday, Judge Van Dyke, writing for the Ninth Circuit, quote, under Bruin is a straightforward case. California is attempting to address a general societal problem through materially different means than

we're used during either the founding or reconstruction. So he's talking here about the Second Amendments and then the fourteenth Amendment. It's this kind of Bruin history and traditions test. Look, the Court unfortunately is going to have to step back into to this Second Amendment thicket sooner rather than later. They do not want to repeat their mistake that they made after the Hell or at McDonald cases, where they

refuse to touch this thing, this lightning wrought issue. They refuse to get involved there over the repeated descents of Clarence Thomas, the same Alito who were just encouraging the colleagues, please please please, this second moment is no less important a right than the first, fourth, fifth Amendment and so forth there it is crucial that we get this right and then when we issue a ruling, that we enforce it.

How many times have we seen, just in this first year of the Trump term, how many times have we seen a judge just willfully ignored a Supreme Court order. It's happened repeatedly. A judge of Massachusetts did it in prolific fashion announced that he was doing so. So when the Court has a case that it sees is not being upheld by the lower courts, which not here but in many other times, the Bruin case has actually met

that fate, they have to step in and solidify it. Look, the segments of the Constitution reads, the right of the people to keeping bear arms shall not be infringed in relevant parts. That's the main clause. What does the term bare arms means? We know what the word keep means, and keep arms. That's the Heller case of two thousand and eight and the McDonald's case of twenty ten. You have an individual right to own a firearm for wall purposes,

self defense, it's hunting, et cetera, in your home. What does it means to bear arms? Well, it's really not much more complicated than what it means to keep arms. What it means is that for shoulder hoisted weaponry, you have the ability to carry it outside of your home, and a naked ban on carrying is not going to cut it. Now, how exactly to draw this line between

concealed carrying open carrying. There is going to be some room here for state legislation ultimately tailored to some extent to the common good, within the confines of history, traditions, and the various Brewer details there. But you can't just legislate the word bear in the bare arms clause out of the Secondmendment. You can't do it. So to this stupid revenue from democratic sacramento. You guys can't do that. You lost. Feel free to appeal this one to the

on Bang nine Circuit. The Supreme Court should get involved here if this litigation go south, because this is a crucial, crucial right. I've been conceal a carrier for the better part of a decade now, I very rarely leave my home without my firearm at my side. Why Because I'm an American and that's my constitutional right, and that's your constitutional right too, And that constution right does not matter whether you live in Florida, Texas or in New York

or California. We all have the same constitution. It's a brilliant ruling for the Ninth Circuit. Unfortunately, I fear that the en banc cord the full Court could potentially overturn this, in which case just is really have to get involved. I expect, frankly that they will at that point. I'm Joshammer and this has been the Josh Ammer Show. The Josh Amber Show is a member of the Trust Project