All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 12, 2025 - The David Knight Show
12:23
Judicial Overreach IS the “Constitutional Crisis”
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
You've got Musk saying, "Impeach that judge." You've got J.D. Vance saying, we've got executive authority here.
And these judges don't have any authority in this area.
More on that in just a moment.
The Washington Post saying it's a constitutional crisis.
And saying that Trump has potentially broken laws, steamrolled Congress, and has a billionaire donor trying to dismantle the U.S. government.
As his administration taunts the authority of the courts to stop them in what appears to be a pursuit of some of the most expansive and aggressive presidential power in American history.
Well, that brings up a question.
All of government, the power of the purse resides with Congress, and they are the ones who initiate and approve all the spending bills.
And so the president isn't spending any new money, so he's not usurping that power of the Congress.
Which is to spend the money.
And so that brings up the question, since the executive is a manager, is he obliged to spend all of the money that has been budgeted for these things?
I would say no.
He's not making new money.
I think we've had some of that with Biden and his largesse for Ukraine.
But does he have to spend all the money that the Congress has allocated to these various bureaucracies?
Or can he say, well, we're not going to do that.
We're going to cut it back.
Can he do that?
I mean, so far he's not gotten rid of any agencies.
He's just reducing the amount of money that they've been spending, that has been allocated to them.
Seems to me like that's a legitimate constitutional thing to do.
The Congress allocates the money, but...
The executive doesn't have to spend the money that's been allocated to it.
So the New York Times says, although there's no universally accepted definition of a constitutional crisis, Trump has created a constitutional crisis.
Well, how do you know that if you have a definition for it?
I don't know what a constitutional crisis is, but I'll know it when I can't define it, but I'll know it when I see it, just like pornography, right?
The judge said about that.
Pro publicos.
It says, Trump's purge is a crisis that has tested the limits of the presidency.
So on CNN, they do have one conservative that they've got there, Scott Jennings.
And he said, we do have a constitutional crisis.
And the constitutional crisis is being caused by these judges.
That's right.
J.D. Vance is pushing back on this.
He's talked about...
Andrew Jackson.
And then he said this.
He wrote this on Sunday.
He says, He's doing a lot of work here.
But we do know that judges do get to say whether the executive is complying with the law or not.
That's been the case for decades, hundreds of years.
But still, the judiciary is micromanaging things.
That's the point that J.D. Vance is making, and he's absolutely right about that.
And he was very well stated, a very articulate argument here.
He says there's a difference between saying whether you're complying with the law, And then you have these individual district court judges setting, effectively setting, broad federal policy that is specifically reserved for the President of the United States.
I think we do have a constitutional crisis, and it's being caused by these judges.
They're not here to tell us how to spend the money.
They're not here to set broad federal policy, he said.
That's Scott Jennings at CNN. Referring to the tweet that was put out by J.D. Vance.
Judges don't get to tell a general how to conduct a military operation.
They don't get to tell the attorney general how to use her powers as a prosecutor.
And they don't have the ability to tell the executive how to be an executive.
And I don't think that they have the ability to command that money that has been allocated by the Congress be spent.
You don't have to spend all that money.
I mean, every year you look at these, you know, you look at schools and stuff, they got their, we're at the end of the year.
You know, so we got money left over.
Spend it all.
Because if you don't spend it, they're going to reduce our budget next year.
They're going to say, hey, you didn't need all that money.
We're not going to allocate it to you.
So spend all the money that you still got left over.
That kind of nonsense.
These judges are supposed to be setting discrete, settling, discrete and specific matters, not setting policy, he said.
I think Vance is right.
And so I hope that Trump will fight it this time.
He didn't do it last time.
It looks like Vance is up for it.
It looks like Musk is up for it.
And I think that would be a very good precedent.
He'd be setting a precedent, and it'd be a good one for a change.
He set a lot of really bad precedents.
And so we look at these judicial orders.
We've got judges ordering that the CDC, the FDA, and other agencies have to restore these DEI pages.
Now, that's the kind of micromanagement, the kind of detail management that they don't have any authority to do, but it's being done by district court judges, setting policy for the entire country.
A federal judge on Tuesday yesterday ordered U.S. health agencies, such as the CDC and the FDA, to restore data and web pages that were taken down in recent days.
He ordered them to comply with a Trump administration order on gender ideology and diversity rules.
So, they said, take down your DEI pages.
And they took them down.
But then they went to a judge, and the judge said, no, you've got to put them back up.
Who are you?
Who are you?
This is not your purview.
U.S. District Judge John Bate.
A lot of these pages.
HIV, HIV, HIV. The CDC page that had the title, Safer Food Choices for Pregnant People, was renamed Safer Food Choices for Pregnant Women.
Judge doesn't like that either.
When the previous version of the CDC page is accessed, it displays a message saying that it's moved to the one referencing women, because only women can get pregnant.
This is a judge that has inserted himself into this.
The CDC displays a message on all of its webpages now that reads, CDC's website is being modified to comply with President Trump's executive order.
So now I guess maybe what they'll do is modify their website to say that CDC's website is now being modified to comply with the judicial orders of a U.S. district judge.
Because that's now what is really happening.
He's put himself, that's why I talk about judicial supremacy.
And it must be destroyed.
Hopefully this clash will destroy it.
We'll see.
But again, these people, the CDC, the FDA, all these other people, these health organizations, they had no problem at all with Trump's executive order of March the 13th, 2020. They were fine with that.
They don't like his executive order taking off all the tranny stuff.
But it's going to come down to a fight with the courts.
Appeals court rejects Trump's administration bid to immediately reinstate a funding freeze.
Who are they?
GOP Representative Crane has now drafted an impeachment article on the judge who blocked Doge from accessing the Treasury information and, as I said before, even blocked the Treasury Secretary.
That's the arrogance of these judges, and so I'm glad to see it.
Eli Crane.
Called Judge Engelmayer's actions judicial overreach.
And he does need to be impeached.
I hope they do.
Meanwhile, we've got Elizabeth Warren.
Lion Liz.
Who says, only Congress can shut agencies down.
Not Trump or Musk.
She's worried about her Frankenstein child, the Consumer Financial Protection Board, CFPB. And she says, she went on with Rachel Maddow.
And she said, Warren said.
Only Congress, not Donald Trump, not Elon Musk, not some 22-year-old programmer.
Eat your heart out, Liz.
He's a lot smarter than you are.
Only Congress can shut this agency down.
But here's the trick on that one.
You notice none of the Republicans are, oh yeah, they know, you know, beat on their chests and their big manly guys.
Yeah, it's about men versus women, isn't it, Liz?
Yeah.
And they keep putting...
End these bills to say, let's shut down the consumer agency, but they don't actually want a real vote on that?
Now, let's stop and talk about this agency that was created by Elizabeth Warren, and I think Barney Frank had something to do with it, but it's her child, her baby.
She's upset about this.
I played the clip for you yesterday, which is, you know, they've uncovered...
Fraudulent claims and stuff like that.
Well, you know, we always had courts where people could sue things, but, you know, they're for the consumer.
Well, no, they shut down over a period of about four or five years.
It was about 150 banks a year were going under because of the new regulations, and they were the small and medium-sized banks.
The big banks could handle it.
You know, it's government regulations, as one person says, kind of like a spider's web.
It catches the small gnats and flies, but the big bumblebees go straight through it.
Well, that's the way it was with the big banks and her Consumer Financial Protection Board.
The regulations were just blown right through with these other guys, but it trapped and killed all the small and medium-sized companies.
But let's talk about this idea that only Congress can shut this stuff down.
When Elizabeth Warren created this thing with her legislation, They specifically put the Consumer Financial Protection Board out of the reach of Congress.
They made them funded by the Federal Reserve instead of funded by Congress because that's how Congress exercises control.
Congress could defund, Congress could kill any of these agencies by defunding them.
Instead what they did was they gave the IRS Seven times with the Republicans in charge.
Mike Johnson gave them seven times what their current budget is.
Groove them by 700% or whatever.
That's just inexcusable.
But the Congress could go the other way, right?
They could cut the budget of one of these things because they are the ones who control the purse strings.
So that's how congressional control is exercised.
Elizabeth Warren is saying, well, Congress needs to control this.
Well, that's through the money that is allocated.
But she short-circuited congressional control, and she did it deliberately because she knew how this was going to be used.
And so what she did was she funded it from the Federal Reserve, not even from the Treasury Department.
She funded it from the Federal Reserve to get it out of the control of Congress.
She designed this thing.
To short-circuit the control of Congress.
And now she's whining that Trump and Musk are shutting it down.
That's right, boys and girls.
There's a post-election sale on silver and gold.
Trump's euphoria has caused a dip in silver and gold.
It's time to buy some medals with fiat dollars before they come to their sense.
Go to davidknight.gold to get in touch with the wise wolf himself.
Tony Arterburn!
▲
Export Selection