All Episodes
Previous Next
July 2, 2024 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
29:21
Democrat Fever Dreams Over Supremes' Immunity Ruling

The Democrat panic over their repeated lawfare own-goals has descended into the realm of madness, as they line up to suggest Biden can, in response, "take out" the entire Supreme Court. What's wrong with these people? Also today...US bases on "high alert" a week after US missiles kill sunbathing kids in Crimea. Who's the victim?

|

Time Text
Dr. Paul On Impeachment 00:15:09
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you this morning.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
Good.
Digesting the news.
You know, the Supreme Court's been busy.
They didn't have anything else to do, so they thought they'd tinker around elections and all these important things.
But you know what?
If the Supreme Court took upon themselves to rule on everything done that is controversial and whether or not it's proper under the Constitution, wouldn't that be a job?
But that doesn't happen, but every once in a while they do something important.
The marketplace and the politicians and others are very interested in the recent rulings, and we talked about that, and that's been big in the news.
But things are lingering as a consequence of this and the interpretation.
And, you know, we talked about the interpretation, and we didn't challenge that it was unclear.
I mean, you had to try to understand and look to other more expert people to help us understand it.
But there is now a new effort to try to understand it.
But I think the confusion comes from the fact that now it's the politics that's going to interpret it.
And one of the articles we looked at today came from Zero Hedge.
And the title is Democrats Hint at Assassination.
Assassination.
At Assassination in Response to Supreme Court immunity decision.
That means they're interpreting what we read about and talked about and experts read about that it gave the president right to kill people.
Yeah, that they didn't care.
It's bad enough that they kill Americans overseas, you know, and they justify that.
That happens to be a Democrat.
So these are the Democrats responding now.
But, you know, so often what they never talk about is the consequence of policy that kills people.
You know, domestic policy, monetary policy, unemployment, all the mischief they do, and then the wars they start unconstitutional.
But they're not talking about that.
But right now, they're playing games, but saying that the Republicans won.
Trump now has immunity to do anything he wants.
Now, it's probably an imperfect ruling.
There's other ways to go.
I don't want to deal with that because I'm not the expert on that.
But I think this whole idea that it's authorizing the president to commit murder because Trump has immunity, I don't think you have tried to convince me that immunity they're talking about has anything to do with permitting people to commit murder.
Yeah.
Well, these are the same people who called a protest on January 6th an insurrection.
Yeah, that's a good point.
It's the same thing.
And all they have is hysteria and hyperbole.
And that's what the whole thing is about.
I mean, when we did the show yesterday, in the morning, the ruling was just sort of percolating.
It hadn't really hit.
After we did the show, we saw this massive freak out of all the gems in unison.
And it was like, okay, what's going on?
What's wrong with you guys?
Are you okay?
Put on the first one.
This is what Dr. Paul was talking about.
Democrats hint at assassination in response to Supreme Court decision.
Nobody likes to lose, says zero hedge, but leftists take indignant defeat to a whole new level.
Though they claim to defend democracy in their spare time, Democrats also have a tendency to abandon the democratic process when the process interferes with their intentions to remain in power.
Well put, zero hedge.
Go to the next one from the same article.
Now, this is essentially what the point they were making in the Supreme Court decision was, and I have underlined it.
This is what the Supreme Court said.
The tools for legally punishing presidents already exist, including impeachment and charges of treason.
And keep in mind, if Trump does not have immunity for previous actions as president, this is the important part, then neither does any other president.
How many skeletons are in the closets of men like Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, or Barack Obama?
And of course, you hinted at that with your mention of his assassination of Americans.
So it's one of those cases, Dr. Paul, be careful what you wish for, because if he is liable for everything he did in office, then all of them are as well.
And they're all going to be in jail together.
I mean, it's not a bad idea.
But lies are flexible.
They quit saying the lies they get caught in, and they just develop a new one.
But, you know, there were a couple people, famous people, people that could speak for the Democratic Party, came out in unison of saying, you know, this immunity is giving the president the right to do things.
But they would never want to compare, you know, who's the champion of violating, you know, what they can do or can't do or following the rules that you can't make charges unless under certain rules and you just read what the rules are.
It's not like they do away with it.
It never hints of the killing, yet the killing has already occurred when you think the Obama administration.
And it's been, you know, in a way, I think I keep thinking back to the assassinations.
But, you know, I don't think the assassinations quite fit in there because that was slick.
That was the deep, deep, deep state that pulled that off.
And although much is known about it, nobody knows that the guy that pulled the trigger, nobody knows exactly who pulled the triggers, but that was a little bit different.
But this is talking about accusing the Supreme Court.
Now they're even hitting, well, this doesn't work.
We might as well fall back on the usual thing we do.
We'll impeach the Supreme Court.
Who's going to rule on that?
Oh, the Supreme Court.
Exactly.
It's a clown show.
But, you know, the Supreme Court ruling was that the president enjoys immunity in the exclusive sphere of his constitutional authority as president.
That's it, right?
And so put that one on that I just had up again because with that ruling in mind, the point that Hedge makes, and I think it's well done, is that beyond this, the assassination of a political opponent or the conservative members of the Supreme Court is not recognized as the official duty of the presidency.
Duh.
You know, I mean, it's just incredible.
But nevertheless, you've got prominent Democrats claiming that Biden should start assassinating people because why not?
And let's actually put up Zoe Lofgren, who was in the article.
She did a tweet.
She did a little video.
You might want to get your earpiece in, Dr. Paul, because it's a quick 14 seconds of her saying the most insane things.
I'm just surprised that any adult could listen to this and think she's making a good point.
I guess, you know, theoretically, President Biden, acting within the scope of his official duties, could dispatch the military to take out the conservative justices on the court, and he'd be immune.
I guess.
I think the dementia that Biden is suffering is spreading throughout D.C.
Yeah, well, you wouldn't want that to happen because if they don't fix this up, they'll threaten democracy.
The democracy, they don't even understand that either.
No, that is, you know, revealing just the scope of thinking they do that because either they don't know what they're talking about or they're doing it and figuring out that every single American that's not an attorney, they don't know what's going in, and we can pull the wool over their eyes.
But I tend to lean on the side of whatever is necessary politically.
It doesn't fall into the category of purposely misleading or lying.
What they're doing is just using tools, the political tools, a little bit of shrewdness isn't involved.
So they don't live with it, but it's part of the acceptance of lying as part of a whole system.
And we're living with an expanding attitude about that because lying has always been wrong, and there's always been some from my earliest days, the dishonesty.
But I think it's epidemic now.
I think it's honored almost like a religion.
If you can do this, and then it's like behind the scenes, they probably have cheering.
Boy, you pulled a good one off.
Yeah, no kidding.
Look at what we did.
But right now, there's not so much cheering on the people who figure they can get away with lying.
And this is difficult.
And I often think about what the founders said, several of them mentioned.
And, you know, this Constitution, we think it's pretty good.
But we want a republic for you.
But it depends on the morality of the people who are engaged in following it.
It makes the difference.
And I think if one follows that argument, it's probably a greater moral crisis than it is just a Federal Reserve crisis.
But they go together too.
Well, let's look at a couple more of these freakouts.
I had to spend a few minutes looking at the weirdest ones.
There's plenty of them out there.
There's a guy, I never heard of him before.
I guess he's some big young Democrat influencer guy, Harry Sisson.
But he is, I put him out because he's basically indicative of the mindset of these people who flipped out.
He said, according to the Supreme Court, Biden could now send in SEAL Team 6 to take all of them out.
He could send in the military to take out Trump.
He has immunity for official acts now.
Shows you that our influences, Dr. Paul, are not as smart.
But guess what?
He's not alone.
Put on the next one.
Here's AOC, never been known for a big brain.
She said, the Supreme Court has been consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control.
Today's ruling represents an assault on our American democracy.
As you said a second ago, Dr. Paul, it's up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture.
I intend on filing articles of impeachment upon our return.
She's going to send a very harshly worded letter to the Supreme Court.
Really, the hysteria is through the roof.
This is a serious problem.
And the reaction is sort of what you're talking about now.
You know, just sort of make fun of it and say, you know, you're not serious, are you?
But it is an important problem.
We don't want to make light of it because we want to make seriousness of it.
But making it sound silly is trying to give a hint to people that all these lies they tell and they just go on and on.
And some don't care and some will say, well, it doesn't bother me.
But there was one, you might want to make a comment about Soda Meyer.
She came out strongly saying, boy, orders, that's the one that said about the Navy SEALs thing, assassinate a political rival.
You know, she's not just an average person trying to demagogue.
I mean, she's professional at it.
Yeah, she is.
She's probably been doing it for years.
Yeah.
The hyperbole is just insane.
Well, the other thing, hyperbole and hypocrisy are probably the two things.
Now, I have another clip someone put together.
I don't know who it was, but if we can put on that next tweet, and don't start playing it right away, I want to go ahead and read the title if we can.
That second.
Yeah, it's hard to see.
So anyway, so here's Biden then and Biden now.
So Joe Biden a month ago, the justice system should be respected and we should never allow fear Biden yesterday.
The Supreme Court and its decisions are undermining the rule of law.
Let's full screen this and listen to the one on the left is Biden a month ago.
The one on the right is Biden yesterday.
You might want to put your earpiece in, Dr. Paul, before we start to listen.
The two Bidens one month apart about the courts.
That's how the American system of justice works.
And it's reckless.
It's dangerous.
It's irresponsible for anyone to say this was rigged just because they don't like the verdict.
Our justice system has endured for nearly 250 years.
And it literally is the cornerstone of America, our justice system.
The justice system should be respected.
And we should never allow anyone to tear it down.
This decision today has continued the court's attack in recent years on a wide range of long-established legal principles in our nation.
From gutting voting rights and civil rights to taking away a woman's right to choose to today's decision that undermines the rule of law of this nation.
Biden versus Biden.
Respect the courts.
No, don't respect the courts.
Oh, you know.
No wonder the people get a little bit frustrated with the politicians.
But that's okay because the politicians are doing something they shouldn't be doing and people need to get frustrated and they need to recognize the purpose of the activity of a human being, from my viewpoint, is to seek out truth and to find out who's lying.
And that's a job, you know, because politicians are rewarded and have been for a long time.
One of the best things of getting a document out with trying to avoid that type of an argument probably was the founding of the country and the Constitution, but even they were not overconfident.
Oh, we have a wonderful document.
The document is good and it can be a guide, but it has nothing to do with the durability of the document.
The people have to do this.
And how do you do that?
You control people's minds.
You start when they're three years old, you know.
And we teach them, if they don't obey, we'll scare them to death and say, if you don't get inoculated when you're 12 months old, you're going to all die.
That's right.
That's right.
Controlling Minds From Three 00:03:17
Well, you know, I often turn to Michael Tracy, who's actually been in our studio before.
Now, he is someone who does not like Trump full stop.
If you follow him on Twitter, and I encourage it because he's very astute.
He does not, he is not a fanboy in any way, shape, or form.
Nevertheless, Dr. Paul, I think you probably have everything that I read this morning.
I think he does the best job of explaining why the Supreme Court had to decide the way it did.
Now, if you can put up that next tweet, I'll read a little bit of what Michael said.
He said, presidents enjoyed functional immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts between 1789 and 2023.
Now the Supreme Court has codified that immunity.
And I underline this part.
This is largely thanks to the special counsel purporting to criminalize a massive array of official actions undertaken by Trump, such as conferring with Justice Department officials, conferring with the vice president, and even tweeting under a cockamame and newly concocted theory designed to specifically prosecute Trump.
Given the clear excesses of this literal conspiracy theory proposed by Jack Smith, the court, and that's the special counsel, the court has accordingly formalized a wide-ranging immunity for all presidents, even for future official acts, which might be more narrow and concrete and related to more straightforwardly unlawful contact.
Now here's the kicker in what Michael wrote.
So, if the president has now been accorded king-like immunities for his core constitutional acts, as well as far-reaching presumptive immunity for his official acts, the reason for this new monarchical standard ultimately stems from the heedless crusade of Jack Smith and the Department of Justice.
He's saying it's all their fault.
They're the ones that keep coming after him for doing normal things like tweeting and talking to a staff.
Well, if that's the case, then this is the result.
And he does a mentioning in there.
The one that I would add would be conferring with judicial people on are the votes being counted?
Is it proper?
Are there private sources involved?
And what is the evidence?
And I'll tell you what, I have a reference to understanding a little bit about accounting because living in Texas, we remember in 1948, a president was declared, and somebody that doesn't have a very good record right now, now is LBJ.
Everybody agrees that it was a stolen election.
And my first election, which is of minimal importance, but personally, it was one that was very, very close.
And you can't believe the legal things that they did.
They kicked out, I won all the way up to the Supreme Court of the state.
And then that night, in the darkness of night, they kicked him out by some miraculous legal matter.
They put a new Supreme Court justice on.
They had another vote, and they reversed the vote, which I had won.
And back then, you know, I was sort of stoic about the whole thing.
I didn't know what was going on.
Retaliation Risks 00:05:32
Oh, that's too bad.
But as time goes on and I read this, cheating has been around too long.
And that's why the issue of cheating and lying and stealing is a pretty important function.
You can't achieve a whole lot.
It's amazing what we do have.
But you know what?
The way I'm talking, it sounds like every single person out there is a bad person and lying.
But no, they gravitate to the government.
They're rewarded.
The people who want to tell the truth generally are more mellow and confident and they're not looking for a fight and they're not willing to join in the lying game.
So that to me is a real tragedy.
It is.
It is indeed.
Well, we'll watch.
I mean, it's almost getting too easy to refute this hyperbolic hysteria because, you know, before it was a little tougher.
Now they've gone so far off the deep end, it's almost laughable.
But I guess we'll move on to the second thing we've been looking at today.
And we're going to skip that one turly thing.
We already, I think, satisfied this topic.
Go to the next one.
This is from anti-war.com from Dave DeCamp.
U.S. military raises their alert level in Europe and Europe bases amid Russia tensions.
Russia has warned of retaliatory measures in response to Ukraine killing civilians in Crimea with U.S.-provided cluster bombs.
So they have put up, I think the level is called Charlie, which is one level below the most extreme level of threat at the bases in Europe, apparently because tensions are soaring with Russia.
So what do you think?
Well, I think it's a mess.
I think our foreign policy is a disaster.
I think it's bipartisan.
It spends too much money.
It causes so many economic problems.
And then we get aggressive because we have been the most powerful and the richest nation.
And that's changing.
We're in the midst of an early huge change in what's going to happen.
We're going to get weaker.
The currency is not going to continue to work.
We're going to lose the control of the reserve currency of the world.
But we have an attitude that we can tell people what to do.
And if they don't, we use force against them.
So this has been smoldering for years.
And they had to be quiet because they didn't want bombed and they didn't want more sanctions and all this.
So this has, in a way, though, the resistance and the building up of this has made us much weaker.
People know this.
And then what does that weakness lead to?
Nobody should be surprised of the chaos that's going on in Washington and these arguments and fighting.
They're there right now.
And I think what we're seeing now is not only Russia and China not liking to be kicked around, but there's more like every once in a while you see 40 countries would like to join BRICS.
You know, this idea.
And they're picking up.
So what else could they do?
You know, sort of a terrorist type of approach.
Maybe they'll just make a point.
Maybe we can't and don't want to start World War III, but we need to teach America a lesson.
So I'm afraid the lessons are coming.
And unfortunately, we hear too much in a bipartisan language.
Boy, don't try that on me, or we'll show them.
Our power is still there, and we will use it.
And that scares me because they probably will, and we still have, have power that we depend on, rather than the common sense that comes with a free society and the prosperity that comes with a free society.
Now, they don't talk about that.
They talk about our might.
Don't mess with us, even if we have contributed to our own problems.
Yeah, that's exactly it.
And let's look at this from the clip.
This is what it's all about.
U.S. and Western officials told the New York Times that the alert levels were raised in response to vague threats from Russian officials.
Okay, what were those?
Russia warned last week that it would retaliate against the U.S. in response to a Ukrainian attack on Crimea using a cluster bomb variant of U.S.-provided ATACOM missiles that killed five civilians, including two children, on the beach near Sevastopol in Crimea.
Now, what the Russians pointed out, which is pretty well known in the defense community, is that the targeting, well, the intel that tells you where to shoot, the targeting of the actual missiles itself, all of these attacks are performed by NATO personnel.
They're not done by Ukrainians.
So it's very clear that the U.S. entered in the coordinates for this attack, which killed several children on the beach in Crimea.
And so Russia says we will retaliate, as the U.S. would do.
And in fact, we would be disappointed if we didn't retaliate for being attacked.
That's just how it goes.
So what do they do?
They ramp up the tension by participating in an attack on civilians.
And then they shriek back and play the victim.
Oh, we've got to put our bases on alarm.
Oh, the Russians are so mean, they're going to attack us.
Well, maybe it has something to do with targeting the beaches and the kids in Crimea.
Yeah, putting that together should not be a difficult thing.
But it happens.
And it will cause more dissension in this country on how to do it and what we should do and how we should retaliate.
And they will try, and they talk about it superficially, but they won't talk about the real war, and that is on the amount of spending we do for whatever problem pops up.
Money and Welfare State 00:03:28
You know, whether it's a medical problem or educational problem or a war problem, the money is going to be spent.
Now, you know, oh, well, we missed the target this year.
I think it's going to be $1.9 trillion deficit.
And nobody seems to understand what that means.
And it's drifting along because it shows how bad everybody else is.
Why are so many people wanting, probably honestly wanting to have a better life?
There's a lot of others coming to this country for other reasons, but they want a better life.
So there's a lot of countries not following free market principles that are in a disaster because we pretended we were the leaders in the economic system, but we did not have free markets.
We had a form of state capitalism and corporate capitalism.
It doesn't work.
It leads to this mess.
Yeah, and I didn't put it in our clips, but I just read before I came here that the Pentagon, on the eve of the NATO summit coming up soon, NATO summit in D.C., I think, the U.S. Defense Secretary announced another, I forget how many hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid for Ukraine.
So more spending on a failed war, as you point out, that's the key to the whole thing.
$200 billion and counting.
But I rested sure because I read something that Zelensky is not giving up on his fibbing a little bit on what will happen if he doesn't get this money.
He's something else.
But he isn't the one that does it.
I think the big guys, the establishment, the deep state, pay and pick some of these guys.
They have a natural tendency to know how to pick them.
And even if we have individuals that go into Congress or any place and they have a better hold on the information, but then when they get a hold of power, I think, and the power comes from the dependency of the special interest.
In this country, it's the money and the welfare state and the lobbyists.
And that's how they stay in office until you go broke.
And I think we're getting close to that.
I think I'm going to hire Zelensky to be our fundraiser for a Ron Paul Institute.
I think we wouldn't have any more money problems.
But we would be telling the truth, so they wouldn't believe it.
Yeah, that's true.
We'll be telling them, you know, if you don't do this, follow us, we're going to have a mess here.
But of course, free market people and libertarians have been saying that for a long time.
And the founders have left a pretty good document.
And that's almost considered heresy to quote the founders sometime ago.
You know, in colleges, young people have gotten into trouble by asking questions related.
But, you know, I found out that some people who have gotten into trouble, maybe as they move in through high school and college, that ask these questions, they get them into trouble.
They've been homeschooled.
Yeah, that's true.
That's true.
That's true.
Well, I'm going to go ahead and if you can skip to the very last one, and I'm going to make my comment today on the fact that you should get your tickets to the Ron Paul Institute Conference.
Put up that last clip if you can.
We're really thrilled that John Mearsheimer is going to join us.
First time he's been to a Ron Paul Institute conference.
John Mearsheimer's Announcement 00:01:40
You'll see him he's around everywhere.
He's more prominent than he was 10, 15 years ago when he wrote the book, The Israel Lobby.
So here's a great quote, and I read it before.
As far as I'm concerned, Republicans, Democrats on foreign policy are like Tweedledum and Tweedledee.
There's just no difference between them.
Well, he's going to explain what our foreign policy should be like.
The links are already available to get your tickets for this and to apply to the Ron Paul Scholars Seminar, which takes place the day before the conference.
If you're an upper division undergrad or grad student or you know someone who would be interested, the scholarships are there for you to take advantage of this terrific program.
The day before the conference, Judge Andrew Napolitano will be giving the keynote luncheon speech to the students, a masterclass in the Constitution and National Rights.
What's not to like.
Very good.
And I like your announcement about who's coming, John Speersheimer.
And he is very, very important, very, very brilliant.
And guess what?
He agrees almost with everything we say about foreign policy, or we agree with him, you know, one or the other.
But just him being there is worth an extra effort to come.
But there was going to be a lot of other good people there.
And besides, I want to meet as many people as I can because that's where I get my energy.
And I realize that we're not alone.
And that's why this program, although it's not gigantic, it gives us the incentive to keep the message out because we know so many of you spread this message.
And if you can spread it where they'll tune in more to our station, the better off we'll all be.
But I want to thank all of you for tuning in on a regular basis.
Export Selection