Aug. 28, 2021 - The Political Cesspool - James Edwards
50:38
20210828_Hour_2
|
Time
Text
You're listening to the Liberty News Radio Network, and this is the political cesspool.
The Political Cesspool, known across the South and worldwide as the South's foremost populist conservative radio program.
And here to guide you through the murky waters of the political cesspool is your host, James Edwards.
Ladies and gentlemen, something I have been looking forward to doing for a long time on this program is about to happen, and that is a one-on-one conversation with Glenn Allen.
And I look forward over the course of the next 60 minutes, informing you about the background of Glenn Allen, also his battles, and the work he is doing now going forward.
But first, a very brief and basic bio, and we'll continue to learn more about Glenn in the subsequent segments forthcoming.
But Glenn grew up in New Mexico and Colorado.
And although he isn't an American Indian, he did live on the Zuni Indian Reservation for several years.
He majored in philosophy at a very liberal college.
Almost went to grad school in philosophy, but instead he enlisted in the Army and spent four years there, two of them in Germany.
Glenn then went on to law school, did well, got a clerkship with a highly regarded judge, got a job with a large law firm, stayed there with them as a litigator for 27 years, and even had an appearance before the United States Supreme Court.
In 2016, he went to work as an attorney for the city of Baltimore's law department.
But it wasn't long after that that the Southern Poverty Law Center orchestrated his firing from that job in August of 2016.
Since then, he has been engaged in a lawsuit against the SPLC that just recently was decided.
We're going to learn about all that and so much more.
But first, Glenn Allen, welcome to the program.
It is great to have you this evening.
Well, thank you, Lawrence.
Yes, indeed.
Talking about anything that, James, you find interesting?
Well, there'll be no shortage of that with you, I can promise.
So let's just, well, I say in this debut, almost autobiographical interview, we could start really wherever you wanted because it has been a fascinating and successful life that you've led.
But should we start or shall we start with what happened in the city of Baltimore with the SPLC?
What was it about you that they didn't like, so much so that they lobbied the city to dismiss you, which unfortunately the city would go on to do?
Well, James, I did have some affiliations with the National Alliance.
May of Southern Poverty Law Center has spent a lot of ten times, I'm sure, and often almost always distorting the truth.
But in May of 2015, actually, Glenn, pardon the interruption.
There is a little bit of distortion.
I'm going to see if Jay, here's what we're going to do.
We'll do this as quickly as possible.
Glenn, if you could just get off the line very briefly, I'm going to ask Jay, our producer, to call you back and see if we can get you perhaps on another line, if we can do anything to correct that connection.
And while we're doing that, I'm going to give the audience a little more information about the breathing space for dissent and the free expression foundation.
So just hang up very quickly, Glenn, and we'll let our producer take over.
And I'll tell you, the audience, a little bit more about Glenn Allen's work.
You can read about how he stood up to the SPLC by going to breathingspace4dissent.com.
Now, there is a dash or a hyphen in between each of the words there, breathing-space-for-descent.com, breathingspacefordscent.com.
And you'll read an appeal that documents and details a little more information about the Glenn K. Allen Esquire versus Byrick Potok and SPLC lawsuit.
And are you there now, Glenn?
Yes, I am.
I apologize for that.
No, no, I think this is much better now.
So let's continue.
So let's go back to the background.
You had mentioned that there was a time in your life that you were associated with the National Alliance and William Pierce.
And this was something that I believe that the SPLC took and ran with all the way to the city of Baltimore.
And the city of Baltimore caved like a cardboard outhouse in a hailstorm, as my friend Keith Alexander might say.
Continue the story from there.
Yeah, well, it really starts to some degree in May of 2015 when the SPLC, which loved to attack the National Alliance, made money from doing that, and always in a historical sort of unfair way, published an article called Chaos in the Compound.
And information that it obtained from a certain guy named Randolph Billoway.
Dilloway had been a lot of property and hired as an employee by Mr. Will Williams, who had taken over William Pierce.
And he got the agreement, and he had access to actual information.
But he wasn't doing his job in Mr. Williams within Mr. Williams.
And then argument off.
But unknown to Mr. Williams, Dilloway had photographed and copied onto some drives a lot of confidential information that he really shouldn't have done and violated his fiduciary obligation.
And three days later, it showed up with Heidi Byrick down there in Montgomery, Alabama.
So she used that initially for this chaos at the company, and she went after Kim Columbus and Williams and many others.
All these claims that Randolph Billoway had done this because he was in fear of his life and he was trying to be a whistleblower.
None of that was true.
He wasn't in fear of his life.
He had votes to be in fear of his life.
And a whistleblower, his allegations about the National Alliance in violation of tax code were never amounted to anything.
I mean, Mr. Williams was able to take care of it.
It was all up.
And furthermore, Heidi Byrick had no proper role in advising this guy that he could violate his confidentiality agreement.
That is advice.
And she's not a lawyer.
And anyway, she's given that advice to this guy, Billoway.
So it was phase one.
But anyway, that's the means by which they got this information, confidential information.
So they were sitting on all this confidential information.
And they found out that I was working for the city of Baltimore.
And I was involved in a certain lawsuit by a black man named Burton, suing a city for $10 million.
He asserted that he was improperly corrupt.
I was involved in that case just briefly.
Successfully, actually.
She said, decided it was improper for me because she had this affirmation that I had these past affiliations with the national law for the city of Baltimore.
I know that.
Let me point out how logical it is.
The city of Baltimore had a black mayor.
It had a black city council.
So, I was doing my best to save the city of Baltimore, but that did put me back in the FLC.
He won't put out a case that would disgrace it.
The known law near an offline, which she claimed I was.
Glenn, hold on right there.
We are going to take our first break of the night.
I want to give you a website, everybody, freexpressionfoundation.org.
We're going to work in this break to improve the connection.
Just a quick recap.
Glenn Allen, a lawyer of several decades now, an impeccable career.
By dubious means, the SBLC did obtain some information that Glenn had been involved with the National Alliance.
And because of that, they argue he couldn't possibly represent a black man in behalf of his capacity as a city.
Baltimore attorney will be.
Why don't we say to the government writ large that they have to spend a little bit less?
Anybody ever had less money this year than you had last?
Anybody better have a 1% pay cut?
You deal with it.
That's what government needs, a 1% pay cut.
If you take a 1% pay cut across the board, you have more than enough money to actually pay for the disaster relief.
But nobody's going to do that because they're fiscally irresponsible.
Who are they?
Republicans.
Who are they?
Democrats.
Who are they?
Virtually the whole body is careless and reckless with your money.
So the money will not be offset by cuts anywhere.
The money will be added to the debt, and there will be a day of reckoning.
What's the day of reckoning?
The day of reckoning may well be the collapse of the stock market.
The day of reckoning may be the collapse of the dollar.
When it comes, I can't tell you exactly, but I can tell you it has happened repeatedly in history when countries ruin their currency.
You know where the solution can be found, Mr. President?
In churches, in wedding chapels, in maternity wards across the country and around the world.
More babies will mean forward-looking adults, the sort we need to tackle long-term, large-scale problems.
American babies in particular are likely going to be wealthier, better educated, and more conservation-minded than children raised in still industrializing countries.
As economist Tyler Cowan recently wrote, quote, by having more children, you're making your nation more populous, thus boosting its capacity to solve climate change.
The planet does not need for us to think globally and act locally so much as it needs us to think family and act personally.
The solution to so many of our problems at all times and in all places is to fall in love, get married, and have some kids.
The Foundation for Moral Law is a nonprofit legal foundation committed to protecting our unalienable right to publicly acknowledge God.
The Foundation for Moral Law exists to restore the knowledge of God in law and government and to acknowledge and defend the truth that man is endowed with rights not by our fellow man, but by God.
The Foundation maintains a twofold focus.
First, litigation within state and federal courts.
Second, education.
Conducting seminars to teach the necessity and importance of acknowledging God in law and government.
How can you help?
Please make a tax-deductible contribution, allowing foundation attorneys to continue the fight.
You may also purchase various foundation products as well at morallaw.org.
Located in Montgomery, Alabama, the Foundation for Moral Law is a nonprofit, tax-exempt 501c3, founded by Judge Roy Moore.
Please partner with us to achieve this important mission.
Morallaw.org To get on the show and speak with James and the gang, call us toll free at 1-866-986-6397.
And now, back to tonight's show.
Yes, yes, ladies and gentlemen, we have ears too.
We know there was distortion in the last commercial break.
We had to wait until the, or rather in the first segment, we had to wait until the first break of the hour in order to properly troubleshoot it.
But we have a crack team of engineers here at Liberty News Radio, and we are now back with Glenn Allen at full strength.
So we do apologize for the distortion in the first hour, rather than the first segment of this hour, but we look forward to having Glenn at full strength going forward.
So what we learned is that, of course, after a stellar career in the legal field, Mr. Allen was retained by the city of Baltimore, and he worked as an attorney for the law department of the city of Baltimore.
The SBLC, by dubious means, obtained some information about Glenn's political ideologies and used that as a means to get him fired, saying that, well, because he had these beliefs, he couldn't possibly perform his duties in a fair way for so-called minority clients.
Well, of course, that's just not true at all.
And in fact, Glenn did that and then some very capably, I might add.
But unfortunately, the city of Baltimore did dismiss him.
And from that point forward, Glenn, you engaged in a very arduous lawsuit against the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Let's pick it up there.
What can you tell us about that?
Yes, I did.
And I have to admit, at some point, I thought, is it really worthwhile?
But I felt that the SBLC is a loathsome organization that had attacked so many helpless people.
And I felt that as an attorney, I couldn't just turn away from it and lick my wounds and move on.
So I did file a lawsuit, and it really had two aspects to it.
One was the harm that was done to me, but the other was the harm that the SQC has done to the public benefit, the public wheel, so to speak, by its outrageous conduct.
And my complaint went into that at some length, and it described how the SBLC has exaggerated hate crimes on its hate map, how it's used close to fraud in describing hate where it doesn't exist.
And I cited many people who believe that the SBLC is basically a fraud.
And James, if you don't mind me quoting a few people, you might be a little surprised who said this.
This is a quote from, believe it or not, the Washington Post in June of 2018.
It says, the SBLC has become a caricature of itself, labeling virtually anyone who does not fall in line with its left-wing ideology as an extremist or a hate group.
And the title of it was that it's Sliming Conservatives is Big Business.
And here's from Carl Zinsmeister of Philanthropy Today, which is a highly respected organization for philanthropy.
It says, the SBLC is a cash collecting machine.
In 2015, it vacuumed up $50 million in contributions in foundation grants, a tidy addition to its $334 million.
But they've never spent more than 31% of the money they were bringing in on programs, and sometimes as little as 18%.
It goes on to talk about how they rarely use black attorneys, and they have completely contradicted their Apparent disguise as a civil rights organization.
So anyway, I decided I would go after their 501c3 status because it seemed to me that they had engaged in illegal conduct in attempting to get this Dilloway character to violate his confidentiality agreement, violate his fiduciary obligations by giving this confidential information to them, which is inconsistent with being a 501c3.
So part of my complaint was to attack their 501c3 status.
The other part was direct, was as to me.
And I did allege that they had tortuously interfered with my relationship.
They had essentially violated my privacy.
And actually there was a third aspect, and that was a defamation claim that arose independently of this.
It arose a year later when they put my face, my photograph, on a hate map right between Donald Trump and Steve Bannon with a caption that said, we have stopped neo-Nazi extremists from infiltrating city government.
And that is so ridiculous, it is hard for me to describe how unfair that was.
I had done nothing other than attempt to defend the city of Baltimore against a lawsuit, which they ultimately lost.
They ultimately lost this $20 million lawsuit.
Not that the SBLC really cared, but who knows?
I'm not saying I could have helped them win the case, but I could have done something to help the city win that.
But here they were claiming I infiltrated the city of Baltimore with neo-Nazi ideas.
And so I sued them for defamation.
The case sat around at the district court and ultimately it was dismissed and then I appealed it.
And I could, if you think it's appropriate, James, I could briefly tell you some of the legal doctrines that were involved.
But I don't know if the audience was.
By all means, this is your hour, and I regret that the first segment was a little garbled, but we want to make as best of the time we have remaining as you see fit.
So, yes, please do share with the audience your information.
Well, there are basically four stages to civil litigation.
There's the initial stage where the judge assesses the court assesses the complaint.
And it has to pass some kind of minimal standards.
In federal jurisprudence, it's called the Twombly standard.
It has to be minimally rational.
And if it passes that, then you move to the next phase where you take discovery, like you take depositions or you get documents.
And then typically there's something called a summary judgment phase where the judge is supposed to decide whether any reasonable jury could decide for one or the other parties.
And if it passes summary judgment, then you go to trial.
And then after trial, one of the parties may appeal.
So what I ran into was the district court and then later the Fourth Circuit not letting me get past stage one.
They claimed that my allegations were not even rationally minimal.
They were not plausible when I alleged that Dilloway had improperly conferred with the SBLC and probably took a bribe in order to turn over these documents.
And I can tell you that that is just not a fair.
They weren't calling balls and strikes when they said that that was minimally irrational.
I had a lot of circumstantial evidence that the SBLC was doing this.
And I think any fair-minded person would say, well, it may or may not have happened, but Mr. Allen has the right to proceed to the second phase and take the SBLC's deposition and get their communications with Mr. Dilloway and find out exactly what was going on.
But I wasn't allowed to do that.
And I really feel, I mean, everyone who loses a case feels that the court probably didn't call it right.
But I honestly believe objectively that the court was result-oriented.
It was influenced by political factors, both the trial court and the district and the Fourth Circuit.
If I'm not being too academic, I wanted to point out another issue apart from this, the court's misuse, I think, of this Twombly standard.
And that is something that we should all have an interest in.
And that's something called the Bart Nickel Doctrine.
It has to do with what media can do with information that was initially illegally obtained.
And it goes back to a case in 2001 in which a talk show host obtains, supposedly, just somebody put it in his mailbox.
He didn't know who it was, a tape that had been illegally recorded of a very hostile remarks made by some union officials, like we're going to blow their porches off if they don't agree to this union contract.
And so the union officials sued, and the Supreme Court said, well, the talk show host didn't participate in the theft, in the illegal interception of that, so we're going to give him an immunity from the lawsuit.
But it then said, if he had participated illegally, that would have been a different matter.
And that is the issue.
That is the issue that I was so disappointed that neither court addressed because I had alleged quite adequately that the SBLC had obtained, had participated illegally in the obtaining of this information from Ms. Dilawa.
So it was an important issue, and they sidestepped it by saying that there was no initial information that was illegal so they could get around the Bart Nicky, the Bart Nicky issue.
That is a perfect place to take a timeout, Glenn.
That was your experience in the courts in this lawsuit against the SBLC.
You broke it down fantastically.
We're going to see what you're doing now going forward and how you're helping others with the support of your foundational work.
Stay tuned, everybody.
Pursuing liberty, using the Constitution as our guide.
You're listening to Liberty News Radio.
USA Radio News with Dan Narocki.
President Biden warned that another terror attack is expected soon in Kabul.
In a statement Saturday, the president said another attack on Kabul's airport is highly likely in the next 24 to 36 hours, according to new intelligence.
The warning coming after an airstrike in retaliation for Thursday's attack that killed 13 U.S. service members.
Army Major General Hank Taylor says two high-profile ISIS targets were killed in that strike.
The airstrike occurred in the Nangarhar province of Afghanistan.
I can confirm as more information has come in that two high-profile ISIS targets were killed and one was wounded.
And we know of zero civilian casualties.
The U.S.'s mission to evacuate American citizens and Afghan allies is in the final days with a deadline to leave the country coming on August 31st.
You're listening to USA Radio News.
The Giza Dream Sheets are the perfect companion to a MyPillow, the best thing you'll ever put on your bed.
Call 1-800-951-8175.
Ask for the Giza Dream Sheets special.
You get, by the way, by using my promo code USA.
You can go online also to mypillow.com.
Click on the radio listener special.
You can save up to 66% on anything in the MyPillow website.
Check it out, mypillow.com, promo code USA.
At the American Veterinary Medical Association Annual Convention in Washington, D.C., I spoke with Dr. John Howe, AVMA president, about One Health.
One Health is really a collaboration between physicians and veterinarians or public health officials.
For example, in Minnesota, our state public health veterinarian deals with zoonotic diseases, rabies, for example.
Animals are sentinels for humans and humans are sentinels for some infections and animals.
There's more valuable information at AVMA.org.
Evacuees are still being flown out of Afghanistan as the deadline for the U.S. withdrawal approaches.
The State Department estimates there are about 350 Americans still remaining in the country, with at least 5,400 Americans having been evacuated from Afghanistan since the beginning of the operation.
But some lawmakers still want more time ahead of Tuesday's deadline.
Representative Rob Whitman says that the U.S. should leave Afghanistan only after all Americans are out.
The Virginia Republican tells Fox News that the Taliban should not dictate our timeline.
There are still Americans that need to be evacuated.
Secondly, is that there's still significant risk to our military members on the ground, and we are still facing a deadline that the president refuses to move.
I believe the deadline needs to be extended.
I don't think we should be at the mercy of the Taliban telling us when to get out.
This needs to be about a single purpose and a single purpose only, and that is getting every American out of Afghanistan.
And we should not have the timeline dictated to us by the Taliban.
This is USA Radio News.
It's time to jump back into the political cesspool.
To be part of the show and have your voice heard around the world, call us at 1-866-986-6397.
So we've got two more segments remaining with Glenn Allen, an attorney of three decades who has had a marvelous career, who was personally subjected to a form of quasi-terrorism, in fact, by the SPLC, dismissed by the city of Baltimore for daring to think freely and perhaps what was information obtained illegally.
A courageous battle went through the Court of Appeals, ultimately ended in defeat.
But hey, Glenn, I can relate in my LIBA lawsuit that was filed by the great Kyle Bristow and met a similar fate.
But it doesn't mean we weren't right.
I want to give you, ladies and gentlemen, some links that you need to check out.
In fact, I won't even give them to you.
I'll just direct you to our website, thepolitical cesspool.org.
If you click the promo for tonight's live broadcast, you will find Glenn Allen's name with a red hyperlink, and that will take you over to a wonderful Q ⁇ A written interview by Spencer Quinn at Counter Currents.
A nice Q ⁇ A with Glenn Allen about the case and the situation we are talking to him about now live on the radio, but also more information about the Breathing Space for Dissent, Glenn's organization, as well as the Free Expression Foundation.
We're going to talk about each of those entities in the remaining two segments.
So again, you've been listening to Glenn Allen, a champion of free speech who has paid a heavy price for having the courage to think freely.
He is now standing up for others who have been subjected to similar injustices by founding the Breathing Space for Dissent, as I just mentioned.
And its mission is to advocate for free expression with a particular but not exclusive focus on combating and ameliorating the anti-free expression effects of digital deplatforming, hate labels, lawfare, doxing, cyber vigilantism, and terrorist and quasi-terrorist intimidation tactics.
Glenn, that is a mouthful, but everything you mentioned there, I think we could have spent probably a full hour on each of the ill effects of digitally platforming hate labels, law affair doxing, cyber vigilantism, etc.
The Breathing Space for Dissent has been set up by you to help others who are suffering these similar injustices.
What more can you tell us about that?
And I don't guess we'd have to read too much in between the lines to understand why you decided to undertake such an endeavor, but tell us more.
Yes, sure.
I appreciate it, James.
And actually, the Breathing Space for Dissent I set up in order to find support for myself in my lawsuit against the SBLC, which would have been, I hoped, a predicate platform for me to expand to help more broadly.
In the course of that, though, I realized I needed to set up a 501c3, which the breathing space is not.
So with the help of others, we created the breathing space, I mean, we created the Free Expression Foundation, which is a 501c3.
And its mission is quite similar to the breathing space.
It's just that it's broader and it's not directed specifically toward me.
I'm probably going to combine those two at some point.
But I had learned from very sorry experience, and I know that you, James, I know how disappointed you rightly would be, should be for the outrageous result that you got.
But I too experienced a lot of extreme discomfort.
When the SBLC orchestrated my dismissal, Heidi Byrick, bless her heart, sent around the information all around the world.
I got phone calls from England.
I got phone calls from Los Angeles.
And of course, I got phone calls from Antiphon.
And I had Fox News people outside my front yard on my front door, you know, trying to talk to me.
And it was a difficult time, but I endured it.
But I also realized, you know, there are people out there that don't have the support that I have.
They must feel isolated.
They must feel terrified.
And they really need somebody to say, you know, you are just expressing your opinions.
You have the right to express your opinions.
You're an American.
You should not live in fear.
And we're going to be with you to the degree we can.
If we have financial means, we'll try to help you at least.
If we can help you legally, we'll do that.
If nothing else, we just want you to know that you're not alone.
And I was particularly hurt when I read, and I don't know if this is accurate, that there was somebody, a young man who went to Charlottesville and protested there.
And he was later attacked, and he later took his own life.
And I just couldn't bear that.
Somebody needed to reach out to him and say, don't let them give you the self-description that you did something wrong when you didn't.
So that's the reason we created the Free Expression Foundation.
And so far we've been fairly active.
It was created in 2018.
But I could tell you a couple things we've done that I think have been pretty substantial.
We have been involved in opposing the prosecutions of the Rise Above Movement folks in Charlottesville.
Anyone who reads the Heafey report or knows much about Charlottesville, I wasn't there, I don't know, but I have read the Heafey report, knows that this idea that the monument demonstrators were solely at fault is just absurd.
The Heafy report points out that the police were at fault and the counterprotesters were at fault and sorting that out in some of these scuffles is just really impossible.
But the powers that be decided they could sort it out, and they decided to prosecute a number of individuals, four of them from the rise above movement, who were really stalwart young men.
Maybe they got a little bit too much testosterone.
But anyway, they were prosecuted under the what is called the Anti-Riot Act of 1968, which had hardly been used in 40 years.
The government rolled it out, prosecuted these, did not prosecute anyone else, did not prosecute the Antifa who showed up with AK-47s or provoked fights.
They went specifically after this, and these young men, unfortunately, were virtually defenseless because of the constitutional defects of this statute, this anti-riot statute.
And again, I hope I'm not being too academic with you, but let me explain what was wrong with this statute.
Thank God for some, I know that it rings hollow to you and to me, James, and to others, to hear the beautiful words spoken by the Supreme Court about free expression when we have had such bad experience with it.
But at least there are beautiful words, maybe not beautiful words, but they're inspiring words about the importance of giving people space.
And even as Oliver Wendell Holmes said, the essence of it is we need to give space for the views we disagree with, that we even hate.
Those are the views that need protected.
But this statute, this anti-riot act, did not do that.
It prosecuted people for merely having the attempt to cross state lines to participate in a riot.
And participate in a riot could be an Antifa slugs you and you slug them back.
So these guys, these young men, spent two and a half years in prison merely for getting in scuffles with Antifa who were never charged.
So the Free Expression Foundation got involved as amicus to try to strike this down.
There were two prosecutions, one in California and one in Charlottesville.
We actually, and I don't mean to take all the credit because it was the defense counsel who did most of the work, but we were involved as amicus.
And just briefly, if you don't know what an amicus is, it's someone who's not representing a party, but it's trying to be a friend of the court.
And that's what we were trying to do.
And actually, in California, we succeeded in convincing a wonderful judge named Cormack Carney.
He didn't agree at all with the politics of the Rise Above movement people, but he thought it was outrageous that they should be prosecuted under this anti-riot act, which is so manifestly unconstitutional.
And he struck it down.
And they walked out of the courtroom.
They came in the courtroom in their yellow suits.
And I was told they were so surprised they didn't even have any money.
They were just suddenly let loose.
And that was a great day for me, James.
I'll tell you to know that the court had that integrity.
And they're still free.
But unfortunately, Cormac Carney's decision has been reversed by the Ninth Circuit, maybe going to the Supreme Court.
And I don't know if the government's going to prosecute them after all this time.
They probably will.
But that's something that the Free Expression Foundation has done.
We have also sent small amounts of money to worthy people.
And let me give you one example of that.
There's a man named Jacob Goodwin who was also in an altercation at Charlottesville.
And he did hit someone.
I think the circumstances indicated that that person had hit somebody else who was this counter-protester.
But Jacob got eight years in prison for that.
And it really seemed outrageous to me.
And his parents didn't have enough funds to come see him.
So the Free Expression Foundation sent them the money to come see their son and we've also tried to help Jacob with a possible habeas corpus petition to get him out from that onerous eight-year sentence for Glenn.
On behalf of any decent man or woman listening tonight or in this country at large, I want to salute you and thank you for that.
Listen, we've got one more segment with Glenn.
We're going to come back to him and we're going to plug his foundations again.
And you are learning more now about why we were high on having him on.
This is great work.
This is the work most Americans refuse to do.
He's doing it for you.
The spirit of the American West is live and well in Range Magazine, the award-winning quarterly devoted to the issues affecting the American West.
Each issue contains informative articles, breathtaking imagery, as well as the culture of cowboy spirit today, and gift ideas like the 2021 Real Buckaroo Calendar.
Order online from RangeMagazine.com.
Loving Liberty Network salutes the spirit of the American West at rangemagazine.com.
Well, my mom smokes and my dad smokes and I saw them smoking, so I tried it.
They're telling me not to smoke, but they smoke themselves.
When it comes to smoking, are you sending mixed signals?
But when you teach someone a certain way to do things and you go back on that certain way, it sends mixed signals to the person that they're trying to teach.
The parents need to be the example.
Smoking.
If you think you're old enough to start, you're smart enough to stop.
A public service message from this station and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
How do you know your child loves you?
When he calls and he says, Dad, why don't we go fishing?
Just very simple, but it really counts.
Make a song up and they come into my bedroom and say, we made a song and will you listen to me?
Our next year's daughter came to me with tears in her eyes.
She said, Daddy, I just thank you for coming home every night when we were growing up.
My son does the nicest things.
When he's playing outside, he'll come in and just give me a hug and run right back outside.
My daughter goes to the same high school that I'm the registrar at.
And I'll go into my office after the bell has rung and there's a note on my desk.
And it'll usually say, Mom, I love you.
I'm thinking about you.
And I think of my boy that we finally got him through graduation.
He came up to me and said, I made it.
Thanks.
Family, isn't it about time?
That's all he said.
And that meant everything to me.
From the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
I believe there will come a time when we are all judged on whether or not we took a stand in defense of all life from the moment of conception until our last natural breath.
As a teenager, I gave my first public speech in my church.
My hand shook, my heart pounded.
I thought to myself, I can't do this, but somehow I did.
And because I wanted to talk about things that were important, I persisted.
I chided my church as a senior in high school for not seeming to care about the not yet born, for looking the other way and for not taking a stand on life.
I will be in earnest.
I will not equivocate and I will not excuse.
I will not retreat an inch and I will be heard.
One thing I promise you, I will always take a stand for life.
Call us on James's Dime at 1-866-986-6397.
Hey, folks, I know the gremlins got in the wires that first segment this hour, but thanks to Glenn Allen for saving the day with such a great interview tonight and such an informative appearance.
And, of course, to our producer with the Liberty News Radio Network for getting that effectively troubleshot?
Is that the word?
We were troubleshooting it during that first break, that's for sure.
Well, listen, again, ladies and gentlemen, go to thepoliticalcesspool.org.
Click on the top of the blog roll there, tonight's promo, and you can read a Q ⁇ A that Countercurrents recently did with Glenn Allen.
You can also find more information about his breathing space for dissent.
Now, Glenn just explained to us that was an entity that he set up to help support his crusade for justice against the SPLC.
And now he has the Free Expression Foundation, which is a 501c3.
And as you know, and as he mentioned, there are things you can do technically with the 501c3 that you can't do with an LLC.
And even though they're overlapping in some ways and may be merged, the Free Expression Foundation is another arm of his inspiring activism.
So that's what we're going to talk about right now.
FreeExpressionFoundation.org, I'm reading straight from his website, which I am at in this studio as we broadcast live tonight.
And it reads this.
America, indeed, the Western world, is experiencing an identity crisis.
What does it mean to be an American?
What are the dominant values of Western culture?
These are profound and difficult questions.
And as we grapple with them, another inquiry emerges.
What are the rules of engagement for addressing these questions?
Is it appropriate to develop massive surveillance capabilities to monitor the identities and actions of people with whom we disagree and then seek to destroy their vocations, their reputations, and their social networks?
Or do we accept that discord is inevitable in a free society and urge that our differences be addressed through open, if robust, debate and genuine dialogue?
This is the purpose of the Free Expression Foundation, to provide legal, financial, and moral support for persons and entities that have suffered or are at risk of suffering legal, financial, and or social harm as a result of the exercise or intention to exercise their rights of free expression, including their rights under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and to support other organizations with similar purposes.
So this is it.
This is what Glenn Allen is doing, a successful, competent, elite attorney for three decades.
This is his life's work going forward.
If you are a victim of arrogant and overreaching thought police, and boy, I'm sure there's no shortage of that in this day and age, please contact the Free Expression Foundation.
That is freexpressionfoundation.org.
And Glenn, you were mentioning some of the victims, some of the true victims from Charlottesville.
And I think that has to be the next front in this war.
And we know that there are some very important case cases, defendants coming up in October.
Do you have any involvement with that in an advisory capacity or just as an interested party?
What do you think?
What do you make?
What are you doing with regards to what's coming up just over the near horizon in Charlottesville come October?
Yeah, I have tried to help as best I can, James.
I have not entered an appearance as an attorney, but I have attempted to coordinate attorneys And to provide my input about what I think is pure lawfare by these people who have somehow convinced the court that they're entitled to sue people who came to this protest, which was an approved protest.
The court had required a permit from the city of Charlottesville, who did little more than what the others, these counter-protesters had done, that they can be sued and crippled essentially.
And the cost, initial cost just of defending it is just outrageous.
And I'm sure you're familiar with the concept of lawfare, James.
Basically, it's a misuse of the law to try to destroy someone by exhausting their resources.
And I am going to try to do this as best I can.
I am not entered as an appearance.
I'm not admitted in Virginia.
But I can tell you that I'm watching it very closely, and I will do what I can, and the Free Expression Foundation will do what I can.
And I would like to add that another front that is opening up is, of course, the January 6th prosecutions, the prosecutions of the January 6th.
Good point.
And that is at least nominally not a First Amendment issue.
I guess one, I mean, I've looked at some of the indictments and the charges, and they tend to be for interference with a federal hearing or trespass or that kind of thing.
But if you or others would care to read an article I wrote about on the FEF, it's on the website, about the conditions that have been imposed on people for bail, that really does touch on the First Amendment.
Because our government has decided it's a fair consideration for them to go through some of these January 6th defendants' social media or to hire agents to talk to their relatives or something and find out if these people had views that the government regards as dangerous.
And then, on that basis, refuse to give bail.
But that essentially amounts to imprisonment.
I mean, they're being imprisoned based on their expression of their political views.
And FEF is trying to get involved.
It's a complex matter.
I mean, there are so many defendants, and they have so many.
But I can tell you that we are also monitoring that situation.
And we're trying, given our limited resources, of course, we have to be pretty frugal with our time and our resources.
But I think what is going on as to the January 6th defendants also is an instance of a real battle for our basic civil liberties.
Now, you're quite right, my friend.
I mean, to mention that these are the two fronts that are opening up right now.
Obviously, October in Charlottesville, I really enjoyed hearing the work you've done for the Goodwin family.
And in some other instances, there you're not admitted in Virginia, but you're keeping a keen eye on it and helping in the ways that you can from afar.
And, of course, January 6th, that's a whole nother can of worms.
And I've just got to tell you, I think this has been a wonderful discussion.
I think you're doing phenomenal work.
And so many people, so many people of lesser moral fiber than you would have apologized.
They would have backpedaled.
They would have taken their defeat and they would have licked their wounds and have never again tried to disrupt the system.
You fought hard for what was right, and you never apologized.
You stood on the virtue of being right from the beginning.
And now you are using your experience as a stepping stone to help others who are, again, as I said a moment ago, experiencing other rather similar injustices.
So this is encouraging to me.
Just see an example of a man who stood up, who fought for himself, who fought for his name, who fought for what was right.
And hey, hey, we know how it is in the modern-day America, in 1984, Orwell's America.
The good guy doesn't always win, but we sure as hell love when he fights.
And you've got a fighter in Glenn Allen, and he's continuing to fight, and he's not just fighting for himself, he's fighting for others.
Glenn, it's been a remarkable hour of radio with you.
I look forward to doing it again, and we will do it again with just two or three minutes remaining.
How would you like to end this discussion?
What would you like to convey to the audience that we've not yet covered?
Well, at the risk of being too academic, I would like to emphasize that the First Amendment is a very precious, but it's a very delicate, it's really kind of unique to America.
And it didn't really get going until about 1917.
It wasn't something that was much used.
It arose because brave men and women decided that they wanted to speak their minds and risk prison and other things for that.
That is probably the only way we're going to keep it.
I mean, it's not something that's going to be given to us.
So we do need to insist that the higher angels of our nature with respect to the First Amendment be respected.
And I have hope that if we do that, the First Amendment will live for our next generation.
Well, with people like you, Glenn, and others, like our mutual friend Sam Dixon, I mean, there are a lot of people out there who are very capable, who are very talented, who have paid the price, but they're standing up and they're continuing to fight.
And listen, if you just lay over and take it, ladies and gentlemen, there's just no chance.
And if we're going to go down, we're going to go down swinging.
But I don't think that the history is written yet.
I have always been a happy warrior.
A glass is half-full type of activist.
And to me, it is fuel for the soul to learn about and be able to share with you the knowledge of the work of someone like Glenn Allen and the Free Expression Foundation.
FreexpressionFoundation.org.
Glenn, we wish you every success.
We thank you for being a warrior for our people and setting a standard and example for the rest of us to follow.
And I look forward to seeing what comes next for you.
And I look forward to seeing and speaking with you in private, of course, as things go forward, but also in public as well on the airwaves.
Final word to you, Glenn.
Well, just thank you, James, for hearing me out.
And thank you so much for your eloquence and your warrior spirit.
And you're an inspiration for so many of us as well.
Well, thank you coming for you.
That is indeed a high compliment and a high honor to hear that.
And I appreciate you taking the time to spend it with me and our audience this evening.
And we wish you and your family the best.
And we will talk to you again very soon.
Take care, James.
So, ladies and gentlemen, thank you, Glenn, and Godspeed.
Godspeed.
Keep at it and keep in the fight.
And, ladies and gentlemen, you can support the work of Glenn Allen by going to the Free Expression Foundation.
Remember, the 501c3 Foundation is the Free Expression Foundation, FreeExpressionFoundation.org.
I hope you've enjoyed this interview at least half as much as I've enjoyed presenting it.
And if you did, you enjoyed it mightily.
We'll be back with the third and final hour next.
Stay tuned.
Political says, pool is in the can, but don't go away.