Attention. You're listening to the Todd Huff Radio Show, America's home for conservative not bitter talk radio. Be advised. The content of this program has been documented to prevents and even cure liberalism, and listening may cause you to lean to the right. Here's your conservative but not Bitter host, Todd Huff bringings my friends, and welcome to today's episode of The Todd Huff Show. It is a pleasure to be here. Email Todd at tod huffshow dot com.
Text three one seven two one zero twenty eight thirty. You know the routine. For those of you that have been around for a while, and for those of you that haven't, shame on you. I'm just kidding, but that's where we send our thoughts, question opinions, feedback, anything like that. Always include the adoration and praise. I can't I can't just let that go. That's got to be in there. And it's a pleasure to be
here today. A couple of things that I want to share here off off the top this weekend, this past weekend, actually yesterday was Constitution Day, and you know, we try to hit some of the well the important days I think on the calendar. I think that that's an important thing to do. We always talk about Easter, we talk about Christmas. We've got Thanksgiving coming up here in a couple of months. We talk about all those all those days, Independence Day, Memorial Day, Veterans Day, and I you
know, they're all there for a reason. They're all those are holidays that well that means a lot for a variety of reasons to the average American, to individual families and folks scattered all across this fruited plane. And one of those days that doesn't get enough attention is Constitution Day, right, the ratification of the Constitution of the United States of America. I know that you know
this. I know that you know this, but that document is the single most important secular, i'll say secular document, governing document that's ever been created. That in the Declaration of Independence of my friends, and those are full of important concepts and ideas, things that frame the foundation of this country. And yesterday we celebrated that. Now, I want to say this, I don't want to get too much into this today because I want to get into
other things. But I find it ironic to say the least that over the Constitution Day weekend headline here Western Journal dot com. This as always, my friends, we pause. For those of you who maybe knew listeners to the program, we have a list of the articles I guess you would say that we may or may not be referencing throughout the program. It's called the Stack of Stuff. And for those of you that listened to the late great Rush Limball, you will know that that that is a hat tip to him.
I spent a lot of time as a younger man listening to Rush, and he had what he called the stack of stuff. It was articles back in the day it was printed. It was newspaper clippings of things that he wanted to get to as things that he eventually printed off on his computer. We keep those digitally on our website, the articles of things that we have looked
at, read that are I guess in the background. We may not directly mention these things during the program, but what we sometimes we do sometimes we do, but it at least gives you information even of things that we don't have time to get to, and you can check it out. It's on the website Todd Huffshow dot com. Just go to the Stack of Stuff. But there's an article in there today Western Journal dot Com headline Governor Gavin Newsom.
Yes, Governor Gavin Newsom, the governor of the People's Republic of California. Now, Governor Newsome still, I think is holding out some degree of hope that Biden will not be the Democrat Party nominee, that they will be calling upon him to come in and swoop in and save the Democrat at parties hopes here in twenty twenty four, I'm still not seeing that as a likely
thing, but I think he's hopeful for that. But even if it's not twenty twenty four, Gavin Newsom is a name that Americans and people who care about the Constitution are going to have to be on the lookout for in the years to come. And he's a dangerous politician. I mean the sad reality. Well, first, most politicians are potentially dangerous politicians, but especially politicians coming from the People's Republic of California. So the headline here says Governor Gavin
Newsom officially calls for convention to change the US Constitution. Now what is he wanting to do? Now? You will know, for those of you that have followed politics and just different things happening in this great nation. There's been a move a movement towards having a Convention of the States to ratify amendments to the Constitution. That's been something that has been talked about in the past.
But most of the time, most of the times, the folks that are calling for a constitutional or a convention of states to ratify the constitution, to change the constitution, meaning typically to add amendments to the Constitution. Some of these amendments, of course, can strike or change previously stated amendments to the Constitution and so forth, or just other articles of the Constitution anyway, things that we want to add to the Constitution. But typically those are things that
are led by people who want to reign in our government. But that's of course not the case with the radical leftist governor from the People's Republic of California, Gavin Newsom. According to this article, the States led to Slature on Thursday of last week approved a resolution and support of Newsom's call for a twenty eighth constitutional amendment. Now this is according to the Los Angeles Times, but
every once in a while they actually do report something that's factually happened. This has, by the way, so there's currently twenty seven amendments of the US Constitution, so this would be the twenty eighth. This would be the twenty eighth amendment to the Constitution. Now, this absolutely, unequivocally should not happen. But let me just tell you what this is. This is, according to the article here. You may or may not have heard this, the
proposed right to safety amendment. That sounds nice, the right to safety that we're gonna spend a moment to talk about. Let's talk about rights here in in a minute. But this is essentially what the quote right to safety amendment is. It would limit legal gun ownership to adults twenty one and older. It would enact universal federal background X on gun sales. It would create a mandatory quote reasonable waiting period for gun purchases, and ban the purchase of many
forms of semi automatic rifles. Now, what is a right? By the way, it's interesting to me I had this. Actually I wrote about this in last week's Conservative Not Bitter column, which you can get for free by email Tanushow dot com. But I wrote about this last week. Most Americans still accept the idea, accept the idea that that our rights come not from government, but those rights come from our creator. Now, there are of
course, varying opinions on what creature means. Someone like myself would say that Creator refers to the God of the Bible, that is exactly who I believe created mankind. There are other opinions and beliefs. By the way, we can't all be right, but nonetheless there's different beliefs, and this idea says,
and it's an important idea. You know what, Even for people who are atheistic, I think it's important for them to know or have the belief that this idea of rights, even though this would fall apart someplace logically, actually, any standard of morality falls apart for the atheist at some point, actually pretty quickly, because what standard are they measuring morality against. If there's no moral law giver, there can be no moral law. But anyway,
that's another discussion for another day. But the point is, it's still better to think that our rights come from something outside of government, the creative force, whatever you want to call it, even if you don't want to call that creative force God, which I clearly think it is to be. To be very to be very concise here, I believe that But even if you
don't. It's better to believe that the rights that you have are inherent to your being a human being than to allow your rights to be dictated by people who are in control politically at any given moment. Or to the democracy, to the majority rule says one of the important reasons why America is not a democracy. A democracy says majority rule. A constitutional republic says, absolutely, we want the will of the people to decide important political matters. But there's
an important distinction. The constitutional republic says that we're going to have a document and we're going to have this type of government that says that individual human beings the smallest minority right, the minority of one, the minority of the individual, not the minority of someone's race or ethnicity, or gender or anything else. The minority of one, the smallest minority we can have. The individual
has certain rights. And if every other person in the United States of America, in their exercise of democracies, say you cannot have that right, our founders said, that's not true, because those rights were given to you by your creator, by God himself. And I had someone actually laugh at that idea. It's crazy to me that someone would laugh at the idea that our
rights come from something outside of government. If our rights, my friends, come from government, our rights are not really rights at all, because they can change, like the shifting winds, like the sinking saying, there is no bedrock upon which we can build our lives. They are at the well. The rights are determined by the will of the of the political class at the moment, and that is not the way that a right should be interpreted. And so rights are things that we have that are that are inherent.
Rights effectively are the things that we are free to choose. For example, in the First Amendment, we are free to choose if and how we will worship God. We are not dictated by the state how we will do so. We are given the freedom or we recognize that we have the freedom to say those things that we believe to communicate the ideas that we want to communicate freely without government telling us to shut up or that we can't say it.
We're free to assemble with people that we choose to assemble with. We're free to tell our government, Hey, we don't like what you're doing. We think this is a problem. We can protest, we can talk about our political leaders that's what we do on I don't like the term leaders, but you know, all the politicians, the people who have political authority in this country, we talk about those things, and you should be able to do
so without fear of repercussion. We have to be able to have robust exchange of ideas, debates and so forth. Those are all freedoms that we have, not because the government has given those to us, but because we have that right given to us by simply by virtue of being a human being, by being created in the image of God. We have these rights. I don't mean that in some sort of a I think some people mean it in
some selfish way. This is just to live our lives. This isn't to like say, well, I'm not gonna do this, because I have the right to say no, so therefore I'm gonna say no. There's a certain amount of truth there, but really it's about the opportunity to live our lives
in accordance with our conscience. And I would add the Second Amendment just as an example to the right to choose to protect ourselves up to it, including the use of a firearm in order to provide protection, whether that be protection from a common criminal, someone trying to break into our home, or someone who is trying to force us to comply with tyranny, whatever shape that takes.
We have the God given right to protect our selves. You can choose to not exercise that right, but you can choose also to exercise it. If you so choose, you are not basically to say otherwise would mean that someone else, someone else automatically their life has more value if they decide that they're going to harm your life or in the worst case scenario, try to
take your life. You ought to be able. If you can't do anything about that, then we're by default saying that someone else has more intrinsic value than we have. And that's not of course, it's of course not true as well. So these these rights are things that are given to us by God. And something else that's important to understand about it. Right or right
is something that we have within us. The freedom to choose something a right is not a right, is not trying to force someone else to provide something to us. That's why I would say, for example, some are going to disagree with this, I encourage you to listen to this and think this through, because this is correct By the way, I'm just going to say that we don't have a right, so to speak, a right in the constitutional sense, or right in what I'm saying to healthcare. Of course we
should, that's something we should strive for. We should strive to create the environment where all Americans have access to it. But to say that you have a right to something that someone else has to provide you is a fundamental misunderstanding of what a right is or right is your ability, my ability to live our life and to make choices that we want to make in order to fulfill or whatever our dreams, ambitions, priorities, how we want to live this
side of heaven. Now, this twenty eighth amendment that's proposed here by Gavin Newsome has a lot more tucked away in this it's I mean, it's it's got specific rules. This is not if you read the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights are the first ten amendments. These amendments are concepts that apply to the way that we should live as a free people. It doesn't
go into detail like this stupid amendment here does. Talking about the age and you know, the requirements for being able to have a firearm and that sort of thing. But this sort of stuff is always going on. He has announced it that he is in support of this. He's out there sitting in the wings, waiting for his opportunity to be a candidate for president of the United States. I have no doubt that at some point you're going to see
his name thrown into the hat. Probably at this point will not be twenty twenty four, but who knows. And it's gonna be hard because California Democrats are so radical. There's gonna be a lot of middle of the road folks who're gonna have a hard time moving to Newsome. But he's out there. He's a threat, he is dangerous. This amendment is of course at odds with the Second Amendment. You can tell just from the things that I've shared
with you about that. But I wanted to share that with you today since yesterday was Constitution Day. Quick time out is in order, my friends. You're listening here to conservative not bitter talk. I'm your host to Hugh back in a minute. Welcome back, my friends. So, one of the things that happened last week but we did not talk about, was this, well, were these Hunter Biden indictments, These Hunter Biden indictments here because I'm trying to get back to my stack of stuff. Here we go, here
we go. So we didn't talk about this late last week because of the timing and everything. We didn't just have the timing was off for when I would have been able to talk about it. But the Hunter Biden indictments, it's an interesting thing, right because we've gone a long time. We've gone a long time. You look back at the timeline of the Hunter Biden report
and everything. I mean, these things happened. These things happened well before, well before the so called insurrection on January sixth, and there were, of course, there was the deal. Remember there was the deal that was struck between Hunter Biden and so forth, and there were obviously questions about this. Then the deal fell through. Then you know, none of these things
can be seen in a vacuum. You've got you have the criminal indictments of Hunter Biden, the first kind of negotiated agreement, the sweetheart deal that he was given. The media, of course, wanted you to think if he was not named Hunter Biden, nothing would have even happened in this scenario, which I find incredibly peculiar because this is the same crowd. Remember last segment, we talked about this constitutional amendment that Gavin Newsom wants to see implement,
and that's really antithetical in many ways to the Second Amendment. And these are the same folks the left, the Bidens, the Neosoms of the world, the pelo Sees, the Schumers and so forth. These are the folks that tell us constantly, if we just have another law on the books about gun control, about some rule, about some background this, or waiting list that, or red flag law for something, you know, all these things. They just think, if we just do more right. It's the reason that
this radical governor in New Mexico has taken the steps she's taken. She's even said someone's got to do something, which to someone who cares about the Constitution, to someone who cares about freedom, to someone who cares about logic and understands cause and effect, someone has to do something is one of the most annoying things to hear. Why at first, who should be acting, meaning it's not just someone and something. What are they doing and why are they
doing it? Those things, those things actually actually matter. So if if the left cares about these gun laws, and if they constantly want to introduce a new gun law. Why then, why then are they so quick to want to excuse Hunter Biden for breaking a federal gun law. Federal gun law says that if you are when he was applying for the purchase of that gun, he said that he was not under not taking illicit drugs or whatever the question is, and by evidence on his own laptop, it's clear that he
was a clear violation of federal law. Actually, there's a ton of evidence on that laptop about I should say, a decent amount of evidence about that, about the gun charges. But the Left doesn't seem to be concerned about that, right, It's like they're again, it's remarkable to me how they're quick to excuse specific the specific incident all the time. You've heard me say
this before. The radical left teaches something that is sub but that is damaging, is all get out, and they teach this it's the exact opposite of reality. They teach that everyone is collectively responsible for the actions of everyone else, but no one is directly responsible for the actions he takes himself. Let me say that again, because it is absolutely true. You can write this down in stone. The left teaches the lie that no one, no one.
Well, let me say it the other way, that everyone is responsible for the actions of everyone else. This is why things like climate change the way that they want everybody to have like this, I don't know this us. It's not a very rational approach. And I'm gonna do my part, right, I'm gonna do my part. I'm not gonna eat beef, and my carbon footprint is going to be less because I'm not eating beef that needs to when it's alive as a cow to be passing gas out there adding to
the greenhouse gases. Right, this is literally a thing, by the way, or I'm not going to have children. People say this, by the way, I've got a story, a story personal, really quick story to tell you about one of my kiddos who I'm proud about here that happened over the weekend. But some people literally have said they've put off having children, or they have had their decisions to have children impacted by the idea that children
are polluters. They're putting off carbon. Oh yes, so we're all doing our part now individually we know that this is complete absurdity. Even if you buy into the madness over carbon in the atmosphere, whether or not you choose to have a Hamburger once a week or not is not It's beyond laughable to me. Now you can say, well, Todd, collectively, it's a
big deal. But when you understand the amount of carbon in the atmosphere and how much carbon each country or each individual is potentially responsible for, I mean, it's truly insane to think that this is something that we have massive direct responsibility for. But that's the idea, is to make us feel all collectively responsible for everything, but then individually, right, and Hunter Biden can break
all the gun laws he wants, and he gets a pass. But but if someone creates or acts in some horrific way with a firearm in another state, in another part of the country, in a city, we don't even know their motivations, how they got the firearm within five seconds, we're blamed. If you believe in freedom and you believe in the Second Amendment, And they then want to say you're at fault for that, that I'm at fault for that, And so they don't assign any of the responsibility to the individual.
They assign it collectively to the entirety of this nation. And it makes people feel guilty, And it's crazy to me because I'm from the school that lives in reality, that says I'm responsible for me. I'm responsible for the choices I make, the way I respond, the way I react, what I do, how I live my life. I'm not responsible for someone else who uses their God given freedom for horrific things. Now, I think they should face consequences. I think that there should be actions taken for justice to
be enforced, or that we should seek justice in those circumstances. But I absolutely, I absolutely take no responsibility for someone exercising their rights to do to do evil. I think we overcome evil with good, and that's one of the things this nation. You know, there are evils that are being used upon us from all corners of our culture right now. Seven pillars of propaganda, as I call them. It's all over the place. We're pumping in
evil. And then we wonder why evil is what we manifest, what this culture is manifesting. It's because we're pumping it in, right, I mean we are what we continually think about at some point. I mean that is that these are not complicated concepts anyway. So time out here Oz is pointing out I am a little bit long, a little bit long in this segment, but I want to take a time out pick up on the other side
of the break where we left off here. But that is that's one of the battles that we are we're facing here in this nation, in this nation today. So let's pause that. Let's pick back up with Hunter after the break. My friends, you're listening here to conservative not bitter talk. I'm your host, Todd Huff back here in just a minute, coom back of
my friends. So Hunter was indicted again late last week, and that's why we got back into the gun discussion again with Gavin Newsom's proposed amendment and all that stuff. This is a real thing. By the way, New York, the state of New York, has now passed legislation has now passed legislation that include background checks and purchase fees in order to buy ammunition. If you want to see that again. That's in the stack of stuff. So I
don't want to make this whole episode. These things matter. There's so many there's so many tentacles that have infringed upon the liberties of Americans. You know, we we could take a deep dive into any any one of these. And I don't want to get too far down this today because I do want to talk about or into the areas of guns, which is still very important. I'm just saying I want to stay on Hunter Biden. I want to talk about what Jim Jordan has said about this. But this is important to
understand. So you had the indictments on Hunter, well, the initial Sweetheart deal that fell through. Now suddenly seemingly out of the blue, out of the blue, totally coincidental with all this stuff going on. Now we got a Hunter Biden indictment again at the end of last week. Now you might say wow, That's one response is wow, it's good to see that the Department of Justice is trying to actually be impartial again. I think that that's
a crazy, crazy way of looking at it right now. I don't think we're dealing with a Department of Justice under the leadership of Merrick Garland that is worth trusting whatsoever. I think the correct way of looking at it is seeing it again, not within a vacuum, but also what's going on in other parts of the narrative, other things that are happening and so forth. And one of those areas of course, is the impeachment inquiry into Hunter Biden.
Now these things intersect very very deeply, very very deeply. In fact, Politico has a piece out late last week or over the weekend. They argue that the only evidence, the only evidence against Joe Biden. It's crazy. By the way, this is a quote. The only evidence against Joe Biden and this impeachment inquiry, why he should have this inquiry into possible impeachment is quote and I'm reading a quote here some text messages that Hunter sent while he
was addicted to crack cocaine. So, in other words, the only evidence are some messages he got from his son who has a drug problem. I don't even know if if these messages were real legit, right, And so the defense is on and I've got some words to say about that as well. The narrative here, the stages of the way that they're going to try to defend this, in fact, the way that they've already tried to defend this, or to change the narrative or whatever. But you can't see the
Hunter indictments on its own. You have to look at it and understand that
it's happening. At the same time, this impeachment stuff is, and so I think it's clear the Department of Justice wants to stay in front of this, and they know that as the House of Representatives begins to make things public, as they have their hearings and so forth in the impeachment inquiry, I think that they know that if the American people see all of the incriminating things on Hunter Biden's laptop, if they see all of those things, if they
if they're forced to report on them, because all of this is taking is happening under this impeachment inquiry, and there's only I mean, they're going to try to do a lot of things here, but I don't think they can get away with completely ignoring this. I think that now it's reached a level that they're going to have to address it, and they know they know it's going to be so damning in spite of what they're saying. In spite of what they're saying, they know that it's going to be so damning, at
least for Hunter. It's almost like this indictment says, we have to understand that our job is still this is I tell you how they think about it, because Biden still wants them to protect his son and so forth as well. They're they're not throwing in the towel on Hunter just yet, but they are setting it up to where they say, we're going to try to defend him. We're going to try to make him out to be the victim or whatever it is here that they're going to do. There's several avenues that they're
looking at taking here. But they also know that they are about to be exposed for overlooking a whole lot of potentially criminal, allegedly criminal felonious activity, and so they have to get out in front of this. In fact, that's what Jim Jordan basically alluded to. I got that article in the stack of stuff as well. Jim Jordan, the Republican from the Great State of Ohio, says, the DOJ's indictment of Hunter Biden is a face saving exercise.
It is a face saving exercise. And it's not just to save the face of the DOJ. It's to save the face of the administration. Is to try to make people say, because people just read headlines, wow, the DOJ decided to do something. You know, Biden's DOJ Bidendoj's fair. They're going after his child, his son. So therefore the attempts that they've taken to go after Trump cannot be political because they're shown to be very unbiased.
Remember, their hand was forced here in this situation with Hunter Biden, so that's important to understand. That's what I think is going on here. They're trying to save face, but they're still going to try to defend Joe Biden and the administration. Of course, that's the a number one priority. They still want to defend Hunter as well. These folks are all part of this small elite network. They're going to try to defend each other at all
costs. But ultimately, if there's nothing they can do to save Hunter, I mean, they're they're going to abandon him. I mean there will be a scapegoat, there will be a fall guy if that gets to that point. But they've got several several attempts, are several different tactics they could take to try to protect this guy here as things begin to unfolding the impeachment inquiry. But Odds is right, it's time to take a time out. My friends sit tight back in a minute. Welcome back to my friends. So
let's really quickly here look at the defense strategy, if you will. The mean it's not just the defense in the House of Representatives if this, of course goes to impeachment, this situation with President bribery, but it's the whole approach to the way that they're going to be defending this in the public sphere, which is ultimately what they care the most about, especially in an election
year. They're superficial to begin with. They care about how things look because if they can manipulate it to look a certain way, that's a lot easier their minds and actually have the character to be the things that people really desire deep down to be a character in the character of their leaders. So let's look at the state. And I don't even know if I want to call these stages of the defense, because it's not a linear thing. These things
can be happening simultaneously. But here's a series of things that are going to happen that are some have already happened. First, they're going to act as though Biden had zero percent, or I should say that the Hunter situation, his business dealings, and all the stuff on the laptop. They're going to try to convince they've already tried to do this try to convince the American people that that has nothing to do, zero percent to do with President bribery.
They want the people, they want people to believe that this is an attack on the president's son, because he's the president's son. They want you to believe that this is a act of political retribution for what happened to Donald J. Trump. They want you to believe that Hunter Biden, and they'll do this to weaken you know, some people just they'll they'll back off when this is when some of these tactics are used. They want you to believe that
Hunter Biden got into drugs. It's something that's a personal battle. It's a sad situation. Why are they They want the American people to think, why are they going after this poor guy. He's struggling. He lost his brother, you know, he and his father were just trying to and the whole family was trying to cope. Hunter got into some bad things. Why can't they just leave the guy alone. They're going to try that sort of thing.
They've already done that as well. They'll outright deny that there's any evidence and they'll laugh it off. And that's what the fashion icon. Senator John Futterman did last week. Didn't pull it off very well. That was so bizarre. I played that clip last I don't know, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, something like that. If they're forced to acknowledge that evidence exists, they're gonna say it's nothing serious. In fact, that's what they're out there
saying today. And I've got something in the stack of stuff. I don't have time to play it, but PBS has a couple of folks on there who are based on One of them was saying this is basically I forget the word he used, and it was I think it was David Brooks basically saying is this is really weakening the true intent of what impeachment should be. You know, Yeah, there's some stuff that's on there that maybe shouldn't have been done, but doesn't have a lot to do with Biden. It's not serious.
This weakens the whole concept of what impeachment should be about. If there's more evidence, they will start throwing people under the bus. They're gonna tell us that this is just how politics works. Like it or leave it. They're gonna say that this is not worthy of an impeachment. They're gonna acknowledge Hey, this is problematic, but impeachment would only further drive the division between
this country. And of course, if they have to, they're going to claim that what we're experiencing with President bribery is nothing in comparison with Donald J. Trump. Quick time out, my friends, is out of time in this segment. Back in a minute. Welcome back, my friends. Did you know that switching your banking relationship to America's Christian Credit Union let you join fellow believers in supporting one another ministry and your values, all while earning competitive
returns on your deposits and enjoying some bonuses when you join. And you can get some bonuses right now by checking out and becoming a member of America's Christian Credit Union. You can visit their website America's CHRISTIANCU dot com slash Radio. Again, that's America's CHRISTIANCU dot com slash radio. Check it out. See what specials exist there for you. I've got to go, my friends. Thanks for listening today. STG.