Off The Cuff Declassified： Police response justified, Illegal immigration, Peter Fonda
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
171.5914
Summary
17-year-old Antoine Rose was shot and killed by a police officer in the back in East Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, but was it justified? Law enforcement expert Ben Manish joins me to discuss the circumstances surrounding the shooting, the fact-pattern of the case, and whether or not the shooting was justified.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Today on Up the Cuff Declassified, a controversial police shooting in East Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
00:00:05.440
Police shot a young black man in the back, but might it have been justified?
00:00:09.180
Law enforcement expert Ben Manish joins me to discuss the detention and arrest process
00:00:13.860
for illegal aliens. We're going to debunk a lot of bad information. President Trump signs an
00:00:18.700
executive order eliminating those child-parent separations at the border, or did he? And Peter
00:00:28.060
Fonda gets a pass for disgraceful tweets that I believe would have gotten any conservative
00:00:41.900
Protests in East Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania after the police shot and killed 17-year-old Antoine
00:00:49.700
Rose. Now, at first glance, if you don't dig into the fact pattern of this case, it looks bad. You've
00:00:55.560
got a 17-year-old fleeing a car stop, fleeing a car stop, and a police officer, worn into
00:01:04.520
duty only hours before, irresponsibly, draws his firearm, shooting and killing this innocent
00:01:14.000
17-year-old kid. Shot him in the back, slaughtered him in the street, presumably for no other reason
00:01:21.200
then he was driving while black and so terrified of the police that he was running away. But that's
00:01:28.140
not the fact pattern of the case. That's the media's fact pattern of the case, but it's not the real
00:01:35.560
fact pattern of the case. Now, the usual suspects are out there. The Black Lives Matter crew, the
00:01:41.760
National Action Network, Al Sharpton's people, they're all screaming and yelling and making noise.
00:01:45.140
We expect this after a police-involved shooting. We expect it. There are people saying,
00:01:52.960
he murdered him in front of my face as demonstrations began outside of the police station in East
00:01:58.620
Pittsburgh. Signs, end police violence now, and people said they had videos of the incident. But
00:02:03.840
here's the problem. Here's the problem. They're not giving you the fact pattern. Now, the family
00:02:14.700
attorney, a guy named D. Lee Merritt, the Rose family attorney, said, quote, from all accounts,
00:02:19.020
he was a generous, hardworking, and highly promising student. Affirmations of his generosity of spirit
00:02:26.000
and genuine good-heartedness have begun pouring in from all corners of the East Pittsburgh community
00:02:32.100
where he lives. Now, I'm not going to besmirch the dead, but the fact pattern of the case
00:02:40.140
betrays the honor student narrative that, of course, is starting. But what is the fact pattern
00:02:47.380
of the case? Well, let me read this. This is from Fox News. There's a lot of local news.
00:02:53.340
Here's where the rubber meets the road, okay? Investigators said Wednesday that the car stopped
00:02:59.120
in East Pittsburgh matched the description of a vehicle being sought in a non-fatal shooting
00:03:05.500
in a town a few miles away. An East Pittsburgh officer, who has not been identified, was taking
00:03:12.420
the driver into custody when two passengers, including 17-year-old Antoine Rose, ran off.
00:03:21.740
Investigators have said Rose was shot three times. They said nobody fired a weapon, a weapon at the
00:03:27.260
officer during the stop, and the team did not have a weapon on him. However, however, Allegheny Police
00:03:35.480
Department Superintendent Coleman McDonough said, quote, an investigation revealed that the shooter
00:03:42.160
in the original non-fatal shoot fired nine .40 caliber rounds at the victim from a passing vehicle.
00:03:49.440
The victim also returned fire. Two firearms were recovered from the vehicle from which Antoine
00:03:59.260
Rose fled. The vehicle that Antoine Rose was sitting in had bullet holes in it. Now, now, anything
00:04:09.800
is possible. But the likelihood in East Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, of two vehicles of identical make,
00:04:18.580
model, year, and color, and color, having occupants that match the description of those who shot someone
00:04:26.460
from a vehicle of that make, model, year, and color. And that vehicle also has bullet holes in it from the
00:04:34.040
return fire of the victim of the first shooting. The likelihood of there being two cars like that
00:04:40.480
driving around each Pittsburgh are pretty slim. So, the police officer had probable cause. He pulls the vehicle
00:04:47.800
over. He goes to arrest the driver. Two others in the vehicle flee. Two others suspected of trying to kill
00:04:57.060
someone. Doesn't matter that the shooting was non-fatal. Does not matter. Now, Merritt, the victim's
00:05:04.840
family, the alleged shooter shot by the police's family's attorney, wrote, he said, quote, we know very
00:05:12.060
little about the circumstances surrounding his death at this early stage. We must emphasize that rumors
00:05:18.000
of him being involved in a separate shooting are unsubstantiated, not untrue, unsubstantiated.
00:05:26.020
We know that he was not armed at the time he was shot down, that he posed no immediate threat to anyone.
00:05:30.700
That isn't necessarily legally true. And I'm going to read you the Supreme Court decision,
00:05:36.300
which most likely justifies the officer's action in just a moment. We know that he was not armed at
00:05:43.500
the time he was shot down. Also doesn't matter, according to the United States Supreme Court.
00:05:48.100
That he posed no immediate threat to anyone. Could analyze all that. And that, significantly,
00:05:54.020
the driver of the vehicle he occupied was released from police custody. The officer involved in this
00:05:59.920
shooting had just been sworn into the Pittsburgh PD roughly three hours before this encounter.
00:06:04.740
Now, a lot of falsehoods in that statement. He was an East Pittsburgh police officer,
00:06:11.160
not a Pittsburgh police officer. And yes, he had taken employment with the East Pittsburgh PD
00:06:15.940
recently and was sworn into that department. But he had been a police officer in neighboring
00:06:21.540
departments since 2011. The cop had seven years on the street. Not a cop with a few hours on the
00:06:26.680
street. But the media is not telling you that. These facts, without more, simply leave very little room
00:06:33.340
to justify the use of deadly force by this officer. Additional information concerning the background of
00:06:39.380
the offending officer and the facts available to him at the time of the shooting is needed as we
00:06:42.860
determine the appropriate action in this matter. Now, I will say this. Typically, typically,
00:06:48.520
these attorneys are screaming for the officer's head on a pike and the officer to be impaled on a
00:06:53.560
stick in front of their police station. This attorney is actually being pretty professional.
00:06:58.620
I got to give credit where he did. Look, he's hired by the family to represent their interests.
00:07:02.460
But I think in that context is a very fair statement. He's not vilifying the cop. He's
00:07:08.860
simply saying right now it doesn't look good. He reports of my client's son or nephew, whatever
00:07:16.420
this kid is, being involved in the shooting are unsubstantiated. He's not saying he's the greatest
00:07:21.060
kid in the world. He's not. He's just saying, look, we don't know enough. Right. And it looks
00:07:24.840
really bad and we're going to take some kind of action. We don't know enough. So in the grand
00:07:29.080
scheme of attorneys that do this kind of thing, I got to give this guy merit some credit. He's not
00:07:33.300
he's not out there. You know, trying to create riots, but they're starting to happen. And you can
00:07:39.780
see this predominantly African-American by crime. Now, here's the problem for those saying the police
00:07:46.640
tried to randomly kill or the police randomly kill this child for no reason. The pesky Supreme Court
00:07:54.080
case decided in 1985, argued in 1984 of Tennessee v. Garner, considered a 1985 case. Now, let me read
00:08:03.240
you Tennessee v. Garner's summary. A Tennessee statute provides that if after a police officer has given
00:08:12.880
notice of an intent to arrest a criminal suspect, the suspect flees or forcibly resists, the officer may
00:08:20.700
use all necessary means to effect the arrest. Acting under authority of the statute, a Memphis police
00:08:26.640
officer shot and killed a Pelly respondent, Garner's son, as after being told to halt, the son fled over
00:08:32.140
a fence at night in the backyard of a house he was suspected of burglarizing. The officer used deadly
00:08:38.360
force despite being reasonably sure the suspect was unarmed and thinking that he was 17 or 18 years old
00:08:44.020
and of slight build. The father subsequently brought an action in federal district court
00:08:48.640
seeking damages under 42 U.S. Code 1983 for asserted violations of his son's constitutional rights.
00:08:57.460
The district court held that the Tennessee statute and the officer's action were constitutional,
00:09:02.960
but a court of appeals reversed, and it went to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court ruled.
00:09:12.080
The Supreme Court ruled, and this is the decision of the opinion of the court.
00:09:18.020
The case requires us to determine the constitutionality of the use of deadly force
00:09:23.340
to prevent the escape of an apparently unarmed suspected felon. We conclude that such force may not
00:09:31.800
be used unless it is necessary to prevent the escape, and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect
00:09:41.480
poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.
00:09:51.560
And that is the crux of this case in East Pittsburgh because Antoine Rose was suspected in a shooting.
00:10:04.140
It doesn't matter how it looks after the fact. It doesn't matter how you feel about it, how I feel about it,
00:10:08.740
how the Rose family feels about it, how the residents of East Pittsburgh feel about it.
00:10:13.720
All that matters is that the split second, the exact moment that that officer pulled that trigger,
00:10:23.000
all that matters is whether or not in that split second, that fraction of a millisecond,
00:10:30.040
that officer believed that the person fleeing posed a threat to the public.
00:10:36.680
And it is reasonable, reasonable to believe that a person sitting in a vehicle that just,
00:10:46.440
that was suspected, the vehicle used in a crime, a shooting, and the person in the vehicle was one
00:10:51.000
of the suspects in that shooting. It is beyond reasonable for a police officer to think that
00:10:56.560
person poses a threat to the police officer or to other innocents. And that's why, according to the law,
00:11:05.620
forgetting the optics, depending on how it looks, that this shooting appears to be justified.
00:11:11.660
Now, the court went on and they wrote a lot in this case because it really, this case is a very important
00:11:17.620
case. It gives the government the right to basically kill you if you're fleeing in unarmed.
00:11:21.920
And so they wrote other things. Let me find you some other relevant points here. The court wrote back in
00:11:28.000
1995, the use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances,
00:11:33.620
is constitutionally unreasonable. It is not better that all felony suspects die than they escape.
00:11:39.660
Where the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting
00:11:44.000
from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. It is no doubt
00:11:50.320
unfortunate when a suspect who is inside escapes, but the fact that the police arrive a little late
00:11:54.920
or a little slower afoot does not always justify killing the suspect. A police officer may not see as
00:12:00.800
an unarmed, non-dangerous suspect by shooting him dead. The Tennessee statute is inconstitutional insofar
00:12:06.880
as it authorizes the use of deadly force against such fleeing suspects. It is not, however,
00:12:15.220
unconstitutional on its face. The court is saying that the Tennessee statute that was the
00:12:20.760
statute in question in this case has elements that are unconstitutional. And this is the very
00:12:27.280
important part. It is not, however, unconstitutional on its face. Where the officer has probable cause
00:12:35.000
to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to
00:12:42.680
others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force. Now, remember,
00:12:52.100
Antoine Rose and his buddies are in this car, shoot at a guy, the guy shoots back. The officer
00:12:59.820
had no way of knowing if Rose and the other guy fleeing were going to finish that guy off.
00:13:06.140
He had probable cause to believe another was in danger. I'm saying he, because they haven't even
00:13:12.580
identified the gender of the officer. I read or I glanced over it, but I'll, I'll, uh, uh, for the
00:13:19.440
officer. Okay. It is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force. Thus, if the
00:13:25.860
suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a
00:13:33.320
crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used
00:13:41.920
if necessary to prevent escape. And if where feasible, some warning has been given as applied in such
00:13:51.040
circumstances, a Tennessee statute would pass constitutional muster. And this then became the
00:13:58.300
law of the land when the Supreme court rendered its decision. So let's think about that fact pattern
00:14:04.700
again, right? In this East Pittsburgh case, there's a shooting. People call 911. This is the make model
00:14:12.780
and year of the car. This is what the occupants in the vehicle looked like. The guy shot at shot back.
00:14:20.080
There are bullet holes in the vehicle. Short time later, police officer on patrol sees a vehicle matching
00:14:26.360
the make model and description with suspects in the car, matching that description, bullet holes in the
00:14:30.220
vehicle. The felony car stop now. Remember the statute, right? Statute says, if there is probable cause to
00:14:37.740
believe that the fleeing suspect has committed a crime involving an infliction or threatened infliction
00:14:41.720
of serious physical harm to another. So now the cop is pulling over this vehicle, believing that those
00:14:49.360
within try to shoot and or shoot and kill somebody. One is in custody, not being arrested. The other two flee.
00:15:00.220
Deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape. Supreme court says it in black and white,
00:15:09.220
in black and white. And this is what the problem is going to be for the social justice warriors in
00:15:15.640
this one. A very, very big problem for the social justice warriors in this one, because this police
00:15:22.660
officer remembered his training from the police academy. He remembered procedure. He remembered
00:15:29.040
constitutional law. The law on this is clear. Cop didn't even have to know for a fact that Antoine
00:15:38.420
Rose pulled the trigger on the other guy, the guy who shot back at the vehicle. Cop didn't have to
00:15:44.920
know that. Supreme court says the cop only, the standard of suspicion, we call the levels of suspicion,
00:15:53.880
mere suspicion, reasonable suspicion, probable cause beyond a reasonable doubt. The police officer only
00:16:01.520
needed probable cause, which he had. He had that. He had a detailed description of the vehicle,
00:16:07.480
bullet holes in the vehicle, descriptions of the suspect, two gun suspects, two guns in the vehicle.
00:16:13.200
One gun apparently matching the caliber 40 caliber used in the previous shooting. And I'm assuming the
00:16:22.180
officer could tell those weapons were fired. You could smell you. You'd be able to smell that
00:16:25.440
your training and experience as a cop. You add all that up, you add all that up and the officer's
00:16:31.780
actions directly comport with Tennessee V. Garner, 1985. There's no debate about this. There's no gray area
00:16:41.940
about this. The officer's actions comport with the statute. They were entirely, entirely constitutional.
00:16:51.400
But the social justice warriors won't care about this. They'll riot. They'll burn their neighborhoods
00:16:55.680
down. And we don't know anything about the background of this Antoine Rose, the kid shot. Now,
00:17:01.020
look, it's always tragic when a 17 year old is gunned down by the police, which even more tragic
00:17:06.260
are the circumstances that kid put himself in. Why was he in a vehicle that was shooting at somebody
00:17:13.240
else? Well, people in the vehicle. Why was he in a vehicle with people that were shooting at someone
00:17:17.100
else? Or was he among those shooting at someone else? We don't know. But if he was, why? Why? And
00:17:22.680
what led, what happened in his young life that led him to be with those kinds of people in that kind of
00:17:30.820
environment? What happened? We don't know. We have no idea. But those are the questions that need to be
00:17:39.520
asked before we start with the honor student narrative. Now, people in the neighborhood are
00:17:45.660
doing what you expect. Quote, he shot that boy three times in the back while I was watching. I
00:17:49.140
already talked to the police and everything. That boy was murdered. He had no gun, nothing. My kids was
00:17:53.480
outside. I told my kids to go in the house. And I see them have the car pulled over and they shooting
00:17:58.220
the boy just running. Didn't have no. He just ran. Running is not a death sentence. That's why I'm glad
00:18:03.380
they blocked the street off in protest because that cop murdered that boy. He murdered him in front of
00:18:07.520
my face. Well, I don't fault this guy. This is a guy named John Leach, neighborhood resident, because
00:18:16.080
what he saw looked that way. I don't fault Mr. Leach for not understanding the statute of Tennessee v.
00:18:21.620
Garner. I don't fault Mr. Leach for not knowing the facts of the case, for not having information,
00:18:27.460
the police officer had at that moment, right? Police officer had more information on previous
00:18:31.540
shooting, knew the car matched the description, bullet holes, suspect match. Police officer had
00:18:35.280
the training, seven years of experience, the training in constitutional law, knowing that
00:18:40.020
Tennessee v. Garner gave him the legal authority to shoot a fleeing felon, knowing through experience
00:18:44.740
on the street that oftentimes in what looks like a gang related shooting or a personal beef related
00:18:50.120
shooting, those fleeing might be going back to finish off the other guy.
00:18:53.680
Optics only matter to a point. Oftentimes they don't matter at all. Oftentimes they don't matter
00:19:00.700
at all. And in this case, optics simply do not matter one bit. What matters, the only things that
00:19:10.000
matter, the only things are what led up to the car stop, what was in the officer's mind, what the
00:19:17.200
officer believed when pulling that vehicle over and what the officer most critically, what the officer
00:19:23.940
believed at that split millisecond, he pulled that trigger. And I truly believe, I truly believe that
00:19:29.900
officer felt that those two fleeing suspects presented a grave threat to the public. He remembered his
00:19:38.140
training, he remembered his case law, constitutional law, and he made a very, very tough, very, very tough
00:19:46.040
split millisecond decision to fire his weapon. I believe it was justified. We're going to find out
00:19:52.640
soon enough, but I believe, reading all the facts of the case, I believe the shooting was legally
00:19:58.560
justified. And you can bet your bottom dollar that shooting a 17 year old is going to haunt this cop for
00:20:04.220
the rest of his life and haunt them for the rest of his life. But I see right now, I sit here and
00:20:10.040
bring you this, this shooting to me appears to be legally, constitutionally justified.
00:20:27.440
So much going on this week in the law enforcement sphere. We've got a lot of misinformation about the
00:20:33.020
way illegal immigrants are detained or arrested, their children are separated. We've got lunatics
00:20:38.520
like Peter Fonda making threats against the son of the president of the United States, sons and
00:20:43.420
daughters of federal agents. We have White House officials being doxed, ICE agents being doxed,
00:20:49.420
their personal identity, their personal information being released on social media. Here to make sense
00:20:54.040
of it all is law enforcement expert, former federal and local law enforcement officer, my good friend,
00:20:59.220
Ben Manis. Ben, thanks for being here this morning.
00:21:01.500
Ben Manis. It's always good to see you, John. How are you?
00:21:03.240
Always great to see you, my friend. All right, let's jump right in. I want to get into
00:21:06.220
the misinformation. Now, the president signed an executive order that basically reverses this
00:21:11.420
policy of separating families at the border. But that's not going to be enough for the left. We
00:21:15.620
both know that. They're going to be crying about something else in, I don't know, about 15 and a half
00:21:20.100
minutes. So for the audience's edification, let's you and I, two guys that work the street,
00:21:25.300
talk about the process to arrest and detain somebody, whether they be an illegal going
00:21:32.800
into federal custody or an armed robber going into local custody. Cut through, Ben, for me,
00:21:39.080
because you explained it very, very nicely when we were chatting offline. Cut through the fact,
00:21:45.320
So whether or not one person agrees with the fact that, you know, what is or is not a crime
00:21:52.520
exists, if it is a crime, someone has to get arrested for it. If they do get arrested for
00:21:58.760
it, they're required to show up in court. The problem with the immigration situation right
00:22:03.640
now is for years they were doing this catch and release policy. So when people were getting
00:22:08.120
arrested, they were like basically saying, all right, show back up for your immigration hearing.
00:22:11.980
And they were sending them out into the country and they weren't showing up.
00:22:15.900
So when President Trump started his zero tolerance policy, the idea was, no, we're going to hold
00:22:21.540
them and assure that they make at least the first appearance or two in front of an immigration judge,
00:22:27.100
especially where asylum is claimed, because everyone, you know, says I have asylum issues,
00:22:33.500
which should be reserved for physical danger or religion, not economic prosperity and corruption,
00:22:39.420
which is the big problem in Latin America right now.
00:22:41.540
Right. And Ben, asylum. And I thought Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen did a very
00:22:45.220
good job at explaining that if you present yourself to a border checkpoint and seek asylum,
00:22:50.220
you're not going to be removed from your kids. Your family's not going to be separated.
00:22:54.140
That happens when you try to come across the border at night in between checkpoints, i.e.
00:23:01.180
Yeah, which is extremely dangerous for the kids involved, not to mention the fact that they
00:23:08.300
If you're in another country, like a war-torn country, like when we were in Bosnia or what
00:23:13.120
have you, you could literally walk into a U.S. embassy or consulate.
00:23:17.940
Yeah. So, you know, there are lines in your hometown. You don't have to make a 2,000-mile
00:23:23.340
strife-ridden journey in precarious situations where, you know, your kid is at risk, which ends
00:23:31.120
in, if it's in the Texas side, crossing a, you know, rapid river with your children.
00:23:40.180
So, I mean, when you think about the issue being conflated, and that's what we're really
00:23:44.100
looking at here right now, if any person, if you were caught, you know, out on A1A,
00:23:50.740
drunken driving, and you had your kid in your next seat, right?
00:23:54.000
That, you would have to be arrested. And that kid is not going into the cell with you,
00:24:01.500
because guess what? Then that kid is exposed to the dangers of a correctional environment.
00:24:06.000
So, last night, President Trump signs an executive order to keep the families together,
00:24:10.840
which is going to entail building. We have to now figure out a way to create family detention
00:24:16.620
centers. Now they have to create a jail where people are all separate so that the kids can't
00:24:23.800
get victimized, which is just ludicrous when you consider it was done to basically appease
00:24:30.980
a, you know, a media firestorm created by people who wouldn't care less. And how we know about this
00:24:38.400
is Michelle Brané, who's the director of Migrant Rights and Justice Program for the Women's Refugee
00:24:44.740
Commission, was quoted in NPR yesterday saying, you know, this executive order effectively creates
00:24:50.960
family prisons, which we already know is a threat to the well-being of the child.
00:24:54.680
Well, you knew they were never going to be happy. But you know what? Listen, let them.
00:24:58.700
Let them go there, because now the left is going to have to reveal their true colors
00:25:02.640
that they don't want any illegal detained. And I hope they go there. See, I think this was smart
00:25:07.780
politics on the part of the Trump administration. I'm going to talk about it later. You sign this
00:25:11.640
executive order that you know won't hold up in court against the 97 law that says kids can't spend
00:25:16.820
more than 20 days in detention with adults. Then a federal judge vacates the EO, and you throw it
00:25:22.340
back on Dems and say, come up with a legislative solution. This was your guy, Bill Clinton's 97 law.
00:25:27.580
I think that's the long game the Trump administration is playing here and that Homeland Security is
00:25:31.400
playing. But I guess that'll be seen once this gets in front of the federal judge.
00:25:35.100
Well, I want to point something out that is really important here, which is, you know,
00:25:40.280
he's already offered, you know, in a legal bill, not an executive order, a bill that would become
00:25:46.620
law forever. He's already offered over a million people to get amnesty.
00:25:54.460
Which is more than any of his Democratic predecessors.
00:25:57.100
Right, because he put poison pills in there knowing it was a smart move, right? They put poison
00:26:01.140
pills in there. But I think the president, I was talking about this yesterday, I think the
00:26:04.840
president could present that same bill to Democrats today. They take it or leave it. I gave you
00:26:09.480
DACA, gave you DACA. Yeah. My wall's in there. Take it or leave it. That's your best offer.
00:26:15.340
He's got to pull the Michael Corleone and Godfather II at the Senate.
00:26:17.800
Almost nowhere else in the world outside the EU would a wall be a non-starter because you have
00:26:23.740
to control your points of entry. Look, every country in the world separates families and detains
00:26:29.140
children. We're the convenient scapegoat. Canada does it. Canada does it for
00:26:34.660
months and months and years and years. But it doesn't even have to be immigration
00:26:38.920
based. If you simply take yourself out of the argument that you don't believe immigration
00:26:43.300
should be enforced, which is ludicrous in its own right, because 17 years ago when we
00:26:47.740
were worried about terrorism because of 9-11, we were locking down our borders, you know,
00:26:53.020
thinking there may be terrorists trying to get through our southern borders. But let's leave
00:26:56.940
that alone for a second and think anyone. If you had someone lock their kid in a hot car and
00:27:02.620
walk into a Walmart, right, you would want that parent arrested, right?
00:27:07.880
Anybody would. This is this is silly. This is silly what they're trying to push on us.
00:27:12.680
This is moronic. If you go into a drug house and there's one parent there and the dad lives
00:27:17.880
in another state, he said, I left the mom because she was a drug addict. I'm coming to get my
00:27:20.820
kid. The kid's still got to go to social services while the dad makes his way across the country.
00:27:25.200
That's right. You don't leave the kid at home and say, hey, kid, here's a bottle of water
00:27:28.920
and happy. That's reckless endangerment. But see, that's the point. The point I'm making is we
00:27:33.900
shouldn't, as a country, be creating laws and executive orders just to meet one political
00:27:40.900
issue at a time, because laws like you and me know from enforcing them are forever. And a good
00:27:46.760
example of that is, you know, you look at some of the state laws are coming out. New Jersey this week
00:27:52.120
passed a gun law saying they're going to have universal background checks. Well, guess what? New Jersey
00:27:58.020
already had that because there's no private sales that are legal in New Jersey. So what are we
00:28:02.800
talking about? But, you know, 17 people shot in Trenton. That never happened, right? 20.
00:28:08.640
20. At last I saw 22 injured, 17 as a result of being shot. Yeah. I mean, that's the joke. The
00:28:15.340
joke is Trenton, you know, New Jersey has some of the highest gun laws in the world. We're not
00:28:19.040
like going that far off track. But the point I'm making is Governor Phil Murphy, who is an empty
00:28:23.860
suit. He's all about left wing talking points. Well, he's John Corzine 2.0, a multimillionaire,
00:28:31.280
if not billionaire, Goldman Sachs guy, far leftist run for governor. Yeah. I saw how Corzine went down
00:28:36.480
in a blaze of glory. Yeah. We'll see. So he comes in. He says, I want universal background checks. I
00:28:41.300
want magazine bans. It's already in different laws. He's just creating new laws with the different
00:28:47.360
labels. So he wants his name on something. That's all it is. We're creating, you know, laws and
00:28:51.840
executive orders basically to say, okay, you're right. And it's, as we can see by that comment
00:28:57.400
from NPR, it's just not working. No, we need to carefully consider our laws in this country.
00:29:04.920
We need to have honest discussion. Let's switch gears. I want to talk about
00:29:08.660
this doxing that we saw. I mean, this is out of control. The left is out of control. Peter Fonda
00:29:15.480
calling for people to surround the schools where the, where the children of federal agents go to
00:29:22.420
scare the children's and families calling for Baron Trump to be ripped from his mother's arms and put
00:29:28.360
in a cage with a pedophile. Let's forget, let's forget that that was a threat against the son of
00:29:34.000
the president of the United States. Peter Fonda should have been arrested. Let's forget that.
00:29:37.820
Or at least investigated. Well, he was investigated. We do know that the office of the first lady
00:29:43.200
notified the secret service and the secret service did investigate. We know that. And they will
00:29:47.680
interview. That's without question. We know that. But he still has his social media account. He still
00:29:54.000
has his Twitter account. How about that? If you posted that, if I tweeted that, if I tweeted that,
00:29:59.260
if any other conservative tweeted that, our accounts would have been permanently banned from Twitter.
00:30:05.520
Anthony Cumia is on his fourth Twitter account. Yes, that's right. Seriously. Yep. And what has
00:30:12.220
he said that's anywhere near threatening the life of, you know, the president's son? How about this?
00:30:18.540
You know, Roseanne loses her job. We talked about it before. I'm not a big Roseanne fan,
00:30:22.900
but the next day, a woman not only calls the first daughter, uh, the C word, but insinuates incest.
00:30:30.780
Yeah. And she still has a Twitter account and a national show, but it's, it's a double standard.
00:30:36.020
So tell me about this doxing. There's this guy, Sam Levine. He's out there doxing federal agents,
00:30:41.080
putting their personal information up online, putting them and their families at risk. Give me,
00:30:45.780
give me the facts of this case. So Sam Levine is an adjunct professor at NYU. He's also a guy who's
00:30:52.620
a gamer. He creates a video games. Sam created a database. Uh, what he did was he had a program
00:30:59.860
comb LinkedIn profiles, professional profiles, and he created a database of 1500 and change,
00:31:07.040
um, ice agents, people who notified ice as an employer on their social media accounts. And I'm
00:31:13.600
not talking social, social, like Facebook, I'm talking LinkedIn professional accounts.
00:31:17.260
Right. Um, and then what he did was he, he put it on Antifa pages on, um, Reddit and other places
00:31:24.720
that were hostile toward federal agents. And, you know, I can't tell you how absolutely dangerous
00:31:31.600
that is. Um, not just for the fact that, uh, you know, these are law enforcement officers, but
00:31:38.040
Sam Levine and most of the people reporting like the, the border issue right now have no idea what ice
00:31:45.900
does. And first things first, ice is a parent agency in 2002, the agents of the immigration
00:31:53.160
naturalization service and customs merged to create ice. Now they have divisions, DRO,
00:31:59.320
which is detention and removal. Those are the guys down on the border right now.
00:32:02.840
And HSI who does everything from kiddie porn to the smuggling of nuclear weapons into this.
00:32:09.000
HSI basically has the same mandate as the FBI. HSI has a very broad investigative mandate.
00:32:14.400
It stands for Homeland Security Investigations, very broad mandate. We've got CBP customs and
00:32:19.340
border protection. We've got the border patrol. We've got immigration and customs enforcement
00:32:23.080
all fall under the department of Homeland Security. Most you're right. The ice people are the guys at
00:32:29.620
the airport. They're targeting the wrong people. Well, to make it simple, if you think of like HSI,
00:32:36.140
you think of anything being smuggled into the United States and these are by the way,
00:32:40.360
they were the old customs agents. If people remember them as US customs, that became HSI.
00:32:46.700
But when they split the detention removal agents up with the HSI agents, guess what they were doing?
00:32:52.420
Fighting human trafficking and sex worker trafficking and basically modern day slave trades.
00:32:58.240
Listen, I worked with those guys on the sex offender work I did. They are some of the most
00:33:03.260
talented investigators out there and the most knowledgeable because like you say, a lot of
00:33:07.060
stuff originates offshore. It was always their mandate. And I have two fraternity brothers
00:33:11.380
on that job. And I'll tell you something right now, John, they don't work in a uniform on a border.
00:33:19.320
These guys do undercover work on occasion. So now their name and picture is out in the world because
00:33:25.200
here's the thing. If you have a different name and an undercover identity and you're working in that
00:33:30.380
capacity, LinkedIn isn't something often screened by the people you're under with. Now they have a
00:33:38.880
Oh, yep. Yep. Now this guy put lives at risk. Will he face any repercussions for this?
00:33:44.240
It's a good question. That's something I honestly want to see. Now, first,
00:33:48.160
will he face employment repercussions from NYU?
00:33:51.180
Probably not. That's the furthest left place on the planet.
00:33:54.500
And he's an adjunct. He's probably making a sharp three to five grand a semester.
00:33:58.700
Exactly. That's not the biggest deal here. But we need to take a strong stand against this is the
00:34:04.920
same thing with Chelsea Manning. Chelsea Manning went to jail because not because she's sharing
00:34:11.000
secret information, because the secret information she was sharing was, you know, identities of foreign
00:34:18.020
operatives. That's right. Put lives at risk. They get killed. So, I mean, the first time, you know,
00:34:23.560
someone dies over this stuff, it becomes serious. But I would like it not to become that serious.
00:34:28.700
I'd like people to take it seriously enough to, you know, bring Sam Levine to justice. And it's
00:34:34.320
the same thing as what we see with all these cameras on these cops these days. When a cop is
00:34:38.760
doing their job and their face is now on national TV, that cop could never work undercover.
00:34:43.580
Never work undercover and rarely can work in those areas. It's a great way to move into what I wanted
00:34:48.660
to talk about next. You're in Philadelphia. You're in Pennsylvania. Caddy corner across the state,
00:34:53.240
many miles away, but still in your state. Great town. Over in East Pittsburgh, we had a shooting
00:34:58.460
of a 17-year-old. And I talked about this in my first segment, but I wanted to get your opinion.
00:35:03.100
Now, brief back pattern of the case. Dynam Antoine Rose, 17, is in a vehicle. Earlier,
00:35:10.160
a vehicle matching the exact make, model, year, color description of that vehicle is involved in a
00:35:15.580
shooting. Occupants of the vehicle in which Rose was in allegedly shot at another guy. That guy shot back.
00:35:20.960
When the East Pittsburgh police officer pulls over the vehicle in which Rose is in,
00:35:25.340
he sees make, model, year, color matching and bullet holes in the vehicle, as well as occupants
00:35:30.400
matching the description of the shooters. He goes to an effect. He does a felony car stop,
00:35:34.780
goes to effect an arrest on the driver. Two others flee. Rose being one. The officer fires three
00:35:40.440
times, hitting Rose in the back. He kills Rose. Uproar, riots, the usual suspects, Black Lives Matter,
00:35:46.760
Al Sharpton, New Black Panther Party, all going nuts. Streets in front of the East Pittsburgh
00:35:50.800
police station have to be closed. Then, you read, Tennessee v. Garner, 1985 by the U.S. Supreme Court.
00:35:59.400
It says, then, it is not, they talk about the Tennessee statute.
00:36:05.660
Court basically says, the Tennessee statute is unconstitutional in so far as it authorizes the
00:36:11.960
use of deadly force against such fleeing suspects. Such, in that context being, those suspects not
00:36:18.420
involved in a violent crime. Court goes on to write, it is not, however, unconstitutional on
00:36:24.800
its face where the officer is probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat
00:36:29.100
of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others. It is not constitutionally unreasonable
00:36:35.560
to prevent escape by using deadly force. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon,
00:36:41.020
or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction with
00:36:46.820
a weapon, or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the
00:36:51.240
infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary
00:36:58.160
to prevent escape. And if where feasible, some warning has been given as applied in such circumstances,
00:37:06.260
the statute would pass constitutional muster. So to me, Ben, you got three guys in a car suspected
00:37:13.240
in a prior shooting, non-fatal shooting, but a shooting. They're running. The cops said, stop.
00:37:18.680
They don't stop. He fires. I'd say his actions comport with this statute pretty much to the letter,
00:37:24.180
with this Supreme Court decision pretty much to the letter.
00:37:27.260
Yeah. So what the Allegheny County District Attorney and the Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh
00:37:31.660
Shapiro are going to take a very hard look at is did that officer who, by the way, unfortunately,
00:37:37.760
it was only his first day off of field training. No, it wasn't. I just dug into that. He's been
00:37:42.860
a cop since 2011. He was on his job. He transferred. Yeah, he was on the job for a few weeks and they
00:37:48.840
just got around to swearing him in. He was certified. He just transferred over. Guy's been on the job
00:37:52.740
since 2011. That was another false narrative. Thank you for showing that the media was wrong
00:37:57.520
on this again. Yeah. So this poor cop comes up on a scene. What the DA and the Attorney General
00:38:05.240
are going to take a hard look at is did he reasonably, did he have the reasonable belief
00:38:10.740
that there could have been weapons on those fleeing suspects? So you had the bullet holes. You had the
00:38:17.400
fitting of the description. You had the fact that it was a shooting. They were fleeing.
00:38:21.240
That's right. If you're running from something that serious. If you're running for something
00:38:29.720
that serious, you better put your hands up and say, I am not armed because that officer will have
00:38:37.480
the reasonable, you know, determination. Even if you're not armed, though, Tennessee B. Garner says
00:38:42.920
the police can shoot because they don't know if you're going to get a gun and finish off the guy
00:38:48.180
that you shot previously. No, that's absolutely right. But what I'm telling you is that split
00:38:53.340
section decision. He obviously didn't get into the car and search it yet. Right. He had three
00:38:59.080
suspected shooters. He didn't know they were armed or not. Exactly right. So so when one's going to run,
00:39:04.920
you have to treat that person like he's armed. And that's what happens when you resist arrest.
00:39:09.560
And I'll tell you, in Pennsylvania, we've had some good case law in that matter.
00:39:14.040
And Philadelphia, a year ago, we had a situation where a guy was armed. He was on an ATV.
00:39:21.020
Cop goes up to stop him because that's an illegal vehicle. He runs. He reaches for the gun.
00:39:26.920
I remember this case. Yeah. At this time, the officer, Philadelphia officer, shoots.
00:39:31.540
But the weapon misfires. When the officer takes his eyes off the target to rechamber his weapon.
00:39:39.260
The the suspect dumped the gun. He didn't see it. The body cam showed he didn't see it. And that's
00:39:44.940
why Attorney General Shapiro didn't press charges. And sure. Sure. The point I'm making is if you have
00:39:51.000
a gun and you run and you reach for it, what do you expect is going to happen? Hey, if you shoot
00:39:57.320
somebody and you run, what do you expect is going to happen? Exactly. Ridiculous. And it was even a
00:40:02.300
case where a carjacking occurred the day after a Philadelphia officer was shot. This is back in 2008.
00:40:08.480
But it made big news because the news helicopter caught a pretty vicious beating. The officers were
00:40:14.760
laying on the suspects when they finally got the car cornered. And the D.A. at the time, Lynn Abraham,
00:40:22.040
did not prosecute the officers. And the reason was these guys just committed an armed car
00:40:27.280
jacking and drive by shooting. The officers now had to stop these guys who were running and
00:40:33.020
resisting. And they were in a car with cops could have shot them. Look, I had a case like that when
00:40:38.360
we're running out of time. But I had a similar case. I was sued for excessive use of force for
00:40:43.000
wrestling with a guy knocking him through a glass table and he got caught up. The judge summarily
00:40:47.820
dismissed the claim. He goes, the guy had a gun in his hand. The judge said to the family, you're lucky
00:40:52.440
they didn't shoot and kill him in your apartment. And he dismissed the claim. He said, that was the
00:40:56.840
least of your worries that they broke your glass table and cut him up a little bit. Thank you.
00:41:01.640
Yeah, exactly. It was like, we just shut our mouths. Thank you, your honor. And we left.
00:41:05.320
Ben, ran out of time, my friend. It's always a pleasure. Really informative stuff. We'll speak
00:41:08.760
soon. Good talking to you. Good to see you again soon. Thanks, brother. Take care.
00:41:42.280
Or came across illegally and put the child in danger. And of course, it's going to cost
00:41:46.340
us some money now to put these people together, the kids and the parents. I don't have a problem
00:41:50.480
with that. But I think there's a longer game the White House is playing. There's a 1997
00:41:54.660
law, as I briefly touched on with Ben, that says that children cannot remain in adult detention
00:42:01.040
for more than 20 days. And I suspect, usually pretty good with this kind of analysis, I suspect
00:42:08.700
the Trump administration did this for a couple of reasons. Number one, they had to take the heat
00:42:12.700
off of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen. Now, we saw she was protesting in a restaurant.
00:42:17.800
We've spoken a little bit about that. These protesters went into a Mexican restaurant where
00:42:21.260
she was having dinner, disrupted her dinner, screaming things at her. We saw a congressional
00:42:26.520
intern scream expletives at the president of the United States. Well, it turns out that the person
00:42:31.480
who, one of the people from the Democratic Socialists of America who decided to insult the Homeland Security
00:42:39.000
Secretary at dinner and drive her from the restaurant, actually worked for the Department of Justice.
00:42:43.660
I'm not even going to say the woman's name. I don't want to give her any more attention.
00:42:47.860
That indicates a whole new series of problems in our DOJ. But I think that the game here with this
00:42:52.900
executive order was to restore some goodwill toward the Homeland Security Secretary, because I believe
00:42:57.780
the president likes her, thinks she's doing a good job. Optically, he had her right over his shoulder
00:43:02.420
when he signed the executive order. He turned around and he said, great job, good job, or great job.
00:43:07.300
But she's really back in the president's inner circle now. But I think the longer game here,
00:43:14.160
as I touched on with Ben earlier, is the president signs his executive order. Someone is going to
00:43:20.900
challenge it, a very conservative group is going to challenge it in court, a taxpayer organization who
00:43:26.120
doesn't want to spend money on these facilities for parents and children, is going to challenge it.
00:43:31.040
And presumably, a federal judge is going to say to the president, you can't sign an executive order
00:43:35.860
that violates an existing 1997 statute. So I'm throwing out this executive order. Trump turns around
00:43:41.840
and says, hey, I did what I could do to put these kids and their parents back together. It was a Bill
00:43:47.360
Clinton Democrat law. Hey, Democrats, this is on you. Here's my proposal. It's the same one as
00:43:52.560
before. You get DACA. I get my wall. Let's put a provision and keep the parents and kids together
00:43:58.280
and stop talking about immigration. And we start building the wall. Democrats don't do that.
00:44:05.920
They are going to be I don't think Democrats are going to win in the midterm. I think Republicans
00:44:09.360
are going to do great because people in their living rooms and at their kitchen tables and at the
00:44:13.460
water cooler at work, chatting on their cell phone with their friends in the car, talking about the
00:44:18.100
economy. Yeah, they're talking about immigration, but they're really talking about their own bottom
00:44:22.360
line, talking about the economy. And so if the Democrats don't finally realize where the minority
00:44:28.000
party we got to give on immigration here, I think that it's a disaster for Democrats in the midterms,
00:44:32.960
especially since Trump showed a willingness via executive fiat to put these families back together.
00:44:39.320
And I would I would love to see the Democrats pick this hill to die on. I want to switch gears
00:44:44.900
and talk about the disgraceful tweets by Peter Fonda. Peter Fonda is issuing an apology. Now,
00:44:52.860
we all know that this apology is bogus. We know that we know this apology is simply the result of
00:44:58.340
him being told by Sony Pictures they're releasing a film to apologize. If you haven't seen the tweet,
00:45:03.540
I he deleted them. I don't want to read them. He called for Barron Trump to be ripped from Melania
00:45:08.680
Trump's arms and thrown in a cage with a pedophile. He called for the schools where the children of
00:45:13.640
federal agents go, DHS, ICE agents, to be surrounded and the kids terrorized and the parents made to
00:45:18.920
live in fear. He's a terrible, terrible, terrible guy, Peter Fonda. I mean, you want to attack
00:45:25.000
political figures? Fine. You want to attack Donald Trump? Fine. You want to attack the Homeland Security
00:45:28.560
Secretary? Fine. You want to attack me? Fine. Attack any adult? Fine. But little children calling for
00:45:35.280
children to be put in cages with pedophiles? What kind of sick individual is this? Now, Roseanne Barr said
00:45:41.840
something far less about Valerie Jarrett. It was racist. It was reprehensible. Roseanne says she
00:45:46.500
didn't realize it was racist. I believe her, but it did come off that way. She lost her show, the top
00:45:51.280
rated show on television. Conservatives make one off color comment, one inappropriate comment on social
00:45:57.220
media. Their accounts are permanently banned. Peter Fonda calls for the son of the president of the
00:46:03.180
United States and forget that it was even the president's son. Calls for a child to be abducted,
00:46:10.420
ripped from his mother's arms, and raped by a pedophile in a cage. He then calls for the children
00:46:14.980
of federal agents to be terrorized. Eh, no big deal. He issued an apology. Let's move on. Twitter didn't
00:46:21.600
even suspend his account for five minutes. If you don't think the double standard against conservatives
00:46:25.800
is real, I would advise you to look no further than this Peter Fonda case.