In this episode, we discuss the case of Ricky Vaughn and the implications for freedom of speech on the internet, especially when it comes to the use of the term "voting" in relation to the 2016 election. In this case, the government alleges that Vaughn used a fake account called "Ricky Vaughn" to communicate with potential voters and encourage them to vote for Hillary Clinton.
00:01:36.680I've got a great stream on a topic I think is really important to everyone.
00:01:41.800It's something that I think is just, it impacts everybody in the United States when it comes
00:01:46.700to freedom of speech, especially on the internet, but it especially impacts, I think, this community.
00:01:52.260I know many of you like me started off or are still posting on Twitter often, you know, without your real face or name or anything on there.
00:02:00.380And you think to yourself, you know, the events that impact people like Ricky Vaughn could impact people like me.
00:02:07.340So I know it's a story that a lot of people like me, so I know it's a story that I know it's a story that a lot of you have been asking about.
00:02:11.200Coming on to discuss Ricky Vaughn's case is his attorney, James Lawrence.
00:02:21.900Now, James has served as an attorney with the Trump administration, and he is now defending Ricky Vaughn in this case.
00:02:29.820We're going to go through a number of different aspects of this.
00:02:32.540We're going to go in first kind of close and get the general outline of what things look like, what happened, bring people up to speed who maybe aren't familiar.
00:02:39.460But we're also then going to talk about the wider implications about what this case could mean for everyone's speech online, freedom of speech, the ability to, you know, just have political comedy, these kind of things that everyone just took for granted as part of your right as American online.
00:02:56.100We're going to be getting to all of that.
00:02:57.940But I do want people to remember that James is involved in a case that, you know, is ongoing right now.
00:03:03.420And so there are things that he may not be able to touch on.
00:03:06.740And so if we get into those areas, he'll just let us know and we'll move on from there.
00:03:11.260But with that, James, can we go ahead and start out for people who are unfamiliar, who is Ricky Vaughn and why is he in this situation in the first place?
00:03:21.980So Ricky Vaughn was a Twitter account that was in use at certain points in and around the 2016 election.
00:03:35.260The account had an avatar that was based on the character from the movie Major League played by Charlie Sheen, shown wearing kind of a cartoonish MAGA hat and other adornments to the overall kind of look and feel of the Twitter page.
00:04:01.300And this particular account tweeted a number of things throughout the 2016 election cycle that were related to politics.
00:04:13.800It's memes and satirical analyses and claims in the broader context, really, of what was happening on Twitter in 2016, which was a very much a free for all and people making statements that were.
00:04:32.980From a certain point of view objectionable or sort of outrageous, I suppose, which is consistent, I think, with the overall point of satire and comedy being a mechanism by which people can use to poke fun at the powers that be at any given time.
00:04:58.100So with respect to this particular case, Douglas Mackey is alleged by the government to be the person who owned and operated the Ricky Vaughn account.
00:05:15.720You know, that is what the complaint in the indictment was brought against my client alleges.
00:05:23.120The government, and this is all part of the public record that I'm citing from and what I'll be discussing here today, but the government, again, alleges that he owned the account and that at certain points in time in the lead up to the 2016 election, engaged in the use of deceptive memes.
00:05:48.860And one of the memes that's cited in the indictment as the government crafts its overall narrative of its case is that Mr. Mackey, again, alleged to be the owner of the Ricky Vaughn account.
00:06:06.420And the alleged person who made these tweets tweeted, allegedly, a meme regarding Draft Our Daughters in a way to kind of poke fun at the Clinton campaign.
00:06:26.940And really to criticize, I would say, the hawkish position of the Clinton campaign on issues like engagement with Russia, for example.
00:06:41.380So I believe there was an alleged meme that the government says that the Vaughn account tweeted that or on that.
00:06:52.860But as the 2016 election came closer, the government also alleges that the account tweeted memes related to the method of voting,
00:07:11.740particularly a meme which contained a picture of an individual and some commentary inviting voters, inviting potential Twitter users to vote by text.
00:07:32.980And the government alleges that a certain number of people took up that invitation and texted the number.
00:07:43.380However, they do not allege in the indictment or the complainer in any of the pleadings that have been put forth so far in this case that any one voter actually didn't vote as a result of the meme,
00:07:58.660but that that that that that the meme was part of a conspiracy to interfere with the constitutional right to vote and the statute that's an issue.
00:08:15.280And I want to read from the statute that's an issue that the operative language is from.
00:08:24.960Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 241, and that.
00:08:33.120Criminalizes conspiracies to, quote unquote, injure, oppress, threaten or intimidate any person with respect to the their exercise of their constitutional rights.
00:08:43.560In this case, in this case, the government's allegation is the right to to vote.
00:08:48.600And so citing this meme, the government arrested Mr. Mackey shortly after President Biden took office in January of 2021 under 18 U.S.
00:09:08.080C. 241, which, again, he's charged with conspiring to violate civil constitutional rights.
00:09:20.980And and so that's that's that's that's the the background of kind of how how we got here.
00:09:27.600Now, now the statute itself, I'll just note, was a reconstruction era statute that was passed after the Civil War
00:09:36.640with the goal of of really securing the rights of newly freed slaves to engage in civil life in the post-Civil War.
00:09:46.060So and what we're seeing here from the defense's standpoint is a is is an expansion of that statute in a way that it was never originally intended to be expanded,
00:09:59.960that even though Congress, by the way, and we have argued this in the pleadings, has considered taking action to regulate election misinformation and disinformation.
00:10:15.520Multiple times multiple bills have been put out to consider doing that, and they've never passed.
00:10:22.420And yet, again, from from our vantage point here, the government is trying to use the statute to accomplish what could not be accomplished otherwise through the legislative process.
00:10:34.760That's that's, again, separate and apart from the very troubling First Amendment free speech questions that the prosecution raises.
00:10:43.100Absolutely. And we're definitely going to get into those.
00:10:45.560But I want to break down some of the information you just gave everybody, because I think it's really important.
00:10:49.880So the first thing here is, of course, that Ricky Vaughn, for people who don't know, weren't aware of kind of like online, especially like right wing culture in around the 2016 election.
00:11:01.020It is, you know, pretty different. You get that. This is where the phrase me mad magic came from. Right.
00:11:06.240And so there was a lot of people out there, you know, sharing wild and crazy stuff, having a lot of fun, making jokes, a lot of satirical humor, a lot of stuff that's over the top, a lot of gonzo type stuff.
00:11:18.820And so this is very much the the context in which this happens, which I think is very important, because for people who don't really know what that was like, they don't really understand that this is very much kind of the subculture that existed at the time.
00:11:33.040And of course, memes were a key part of that. So comedy is a really essential part of this.
00:11:38.640And so many times people would speak on these political topics, but they're laying on like heavy amounts of irony, different layers of inside jokes.
00:11:48.660You need to be seven, eight, nine layers deep on some of this stuff to really understand some of the jokes that were being made.
00:11:55.820And so when people just look at these memes or just look at what's going on, they may not get that context.
00:12:01.080But it's really essential to know that this is the stuff that allegedly Ricky Vaughn was was kind of posting in to in this environment.
00:12:08.920Now, the meme, the first one that you cited is kind of hilarious because the draft our daughter's meme, I think, as you pointed out, is poking fun at the fact that the left is not only very hawkish and pro war.
00:12:22.180Now we can see that very clearly when it comes to the Ukraine, the conflict in Ukraine and everything that's happened since, but also very that the left is comically egalitarian to the point where it would subject women in the United States to compulsory military service under the guise of equality.
00:12:42.740And so this this is, of course, a joke at the time. This was on nobody's radar.
00:12:47.000Everyone say, oh, this is ridiculous. But that actually came true. Right.
00:12:50.940Like we've actually now had proposals. We've actually had the left making proposals that this actually be an action.
00:12:58.620So the so so so ironically, Ricky Vaughn there, they're citing something that was prophetic in its comedy, which is even more chilling, because that means that people can't make jokes that that reveal truths that might become something that actually manifests in the real world later on for fear of the government attacking them legally.
00:13:19.320Well, and just to be clear, I mean, the that that that meme is part of the overall context that I think the government's allegations are setting the interference issue is with respect to the the vote by text.
00:13:36.380Right. Sure. But yeah, I mean, the larger implications of this prosecution are if.
00:13:45.220If again, if if if if what the Ricky Vaughn account allegedly tweeted out is actionable from a matter from the perspective of the criminal law in this country.
00:14:01.080In terms of providing instructions, false instructions, allegedly, as the government asserts in its theory of the case about the method and manner of voting.
00:14:15.220It's it's not a far attenuated leap to go to policing misinformation, disinformation about candidates themselves and their positions. Right.
00:14:28.960And the Supreme Court has said in the Alvarez case for justices and an opinion, plurality opinion, six, three decision on the Stolen Valor Act, which criminalized.
00:14:42.340It's. Individuals falsely claiming that they had served in the military, right, that was a six, three decision by the Supreme Court, who said that could not that wasn't acceptable under the First Amendment and for justices in that case,
00:14:57.900including Justice Kennedy, which was joined by Justice Ginsburg and Justice Sotomayor was that we don't have a ministry of truth in this country.
00:15:14.460Right. This is and they, in fact, cited in the plurality opinion to George Orwell's 1984, we don't have a ministry of truth in this country.
00:15:24.660That that is something that I believe the court wrote something to the effect of it.
00:15:28.520That's that's that's at odds with our constitutional tradition and the the the Pandora's box, really, that this prosecution represents and the door that we on the defense side of this equation are trying to close is the possibility that this case,
00:15:48.520again, again, sets a precedent that the government will use to push the boundary further in in in in all kinds of ways that relate to the the the voting process and and and is that and we submit that's not that's not the proper role of the federal government
00:16:12.720to be involved in to be involved in that kind of activity or really any government under the First Amendment, state, local or federal.
00:16:19.440And those are the stakes that this case.
00:16:22.800Raises and and that's why it's important, that's why it matters to anyone, really, regardless of political ideology, left, right, center.
00:16:34.440It's it's a it's a huge issue that that everyone, all Americans should care about.
00:16:42.720Yeah. In the case you're citing, I believe the Congress had to rewrite the law in question so that it could only ban the fraud.
00:16:49.500It couldn't actually ban the claim because, like you said, there's no ministry of truth in the United States, though, again, ironically, actually, they sure did try under the banner of misinformation.
00:16:59.160Right. They they appointed a a misinformation czar and then disappeared her almost immediately as she continually embarrassed the Biden administration.
00:17:08.720Right. Well, and that's and that's part of this overall, this overall world that we're living in.
00:17:15.180Right. About myths and disinformation.
00:17:17.700And unfortunately, and I come at it from somebody, as we talked about having litigated against Twitter on behalf of Alex Berenson and Berenson versus Twitter, arguing about Twitter's COVID misinformation policy, misleading information policy and the efforts that were made at various points in time in the pandemic to try to control the spread of misinformation and disinformation.
00:17:45.480And let's remember that at certain times, Twitter was policing claims that the COVID-19 vaccines did not stop the stop infection or transmission of the disease itself of COVID-19.
00:18:05.040So, you know, these these are all issues, misinformation, misinformation, these are all very issues that cut across ideology, I would argue, they cut across ideological, the ideological spectrum and really across subject matter, particularly when you think about what happened and what went on with COVID-19 and needing to debate.
00:18:35.040So the lockdown measures or the lockdown measures or the lockdown measures or masking or vaccine mandates or whatever the the standard position of the government was at the time.
00:18:48.260Yeah. And YouTube is still policing that. So we may or may not find out if they approve of our current discussion, but you can always catch it on Blaze TV if they take it down, guys.
00:18:57.180So what's better than a well-marbled ribeye sizzling on the barbecue, a well-marbled ribeye sizzling on the barbecue that was carefully selected by an Instacart shopper and delivered to your door, a well-marbled ribeye you ordered without even leaving the kiddie pool.
00:19:13.420Whatever groceries your summer calls for, Instacart has you covered. Download the Instacart app and enjoy $0 delivery fees on your first three orders.
00:19:23.100Service fees, exclusions and terms apply. Instacart, groceries that overdeliver.
00:19:28.280One of the things that I also wanted to talk about was the nature of the statute that's being exploited in this case, because as you pointed out, this is originally a statute meant to prevent, I think, most directly like violent action or other action actively taken to stop newly freed slaves from voting.
00:19:50.020So what we're seeing here is a theme that I think we've seen quite often and probably will continue to see in the United States, which is the exploitation of civil rights based law as a way to punish political opponents.
00:20:03.120And so it seems very clear to me, and of course, you're a lawyer in this case, so I don't know how much you can, but I can say the opinion, so I'll go ahead and air it.
00:20:11.460It seems very clear that this law is being expanded and directed with the intent of punishing someone who embarrassed Hillary Clinton, a very powerful person, a very well-connected person, whose friends are now most likely involved in operating the Biden administration on it, you know, on behalf of an Alzheimer's patient.
00:20:32.020And so, you know, that's very likely why this was extended and the implications are very dire because these laws can be wildly exploited as we're seeing now to go after people in ways that were never imaginable.
00:20:48.860Of course, this law was written entirely without the internet, the concept of memes, that there would ever be satire around this stuff, that this could be mass communicated.
00:20:58.140That was obviously nothing that came to mind when this law was drafted.
00:21:02.540They can't, as you pointed out, get the law passed that would do this.
00:21:07.800The language has been drafted at some point or another, but they cannot actually solidify this.
00:21:13.980And so because they don't have the law on the books they need, they can find a way to go out and exploit an old civil rights law that has nothing to do with the case that's currently being leveled at your client.
00:21:26.320And they're going to continue to use that to prosecute someone just because they don't like the fact that he humiliated them allegedly online.
00:21:34.740Well, we, we, we, we have argued the, the, in, in the, and again, I can, I can speak to what's in the public record.
00:21:43.480We have argued on the defense side that this, this prosecution is, is unprecedented under 18 USE 241 because it's, it's been, it's been directed at physical activities.
00:22:02.460So for example, interfering with people's right to vote in the context of cutting phone lines or, or otherwise preventing people from getting into the, getting to the polls physically to cast their ballot, not with respect to simply pure, pure, pure speech.
00:22:26.600Um, so, you know, again, I mean, the, the, the, the law, the law, uh, our, our position is that the law is, is being, you know, is being expanded through the process of, of, of the prosecution.
00:22:42.220And that there are, there are, there are a number of, of rules that, uh, would counsel against this application in this case.
00:22:52.180Obviously we've talked about the first amendment being one of them, but another is the, the rule of lenity, which every first year law student learns about in their introductory criminal law class,
00:23:03.900which is the, to the extent there's any ambiguity in a statute, it's construed against, uh, the government and not in, in favor of, uh, or, um, against, uh, a defendant.
00:23:17.500So, um, you know, you're, you're, you're, our, our, our, our, our position again, which has been outlined in the briefing in the case is that Congress tried to expand the scope of what is actionable from a, uh, criminal law perspective with respect to misinformation, disinformation.
00:23:40.160Those proposals, uh, did not go anywhere.
00:23:43.060And yet here we are, um, the reasons why we're here would be speculative.
00:23:51.480Mackie, uh, all, all have deep respect for the legal system and for the process that, uh, is, is before us and are grateful for the guarantees and the constitution with, uh, for, for trial by jury.
00:24:08.660Um, which, which, which, you know, again, Mr.
00:24:35.400But the government's, uh, the government's view and theory of the case is that they don't have to prove that they, they only have to prove the conspiracy to interfere with the right to vote, regardless of whether or not one actually, uh, voted or not.
00:24:54.440And again, one can just see how, um, taking, drawing out the implications of that are very troubling and chilling for purposes of freedom of speech.
00:25:34.580Uh, it's, it's why, um, it's why I'm here with you today is because.
00:25:40.360You know, I, I, I, I, I certainly see, I see the stakes that are, that are at play.
00:25:45.900And, and I would just say, you know, for your, for your viewers that are there to listen to us right now, if you're interested in, in, in being, um, in assisting with, with the defense, uh, Mr. Mackey has established a defense fund.
00:25:59.520It's at, um, memedefensefund.com again, memedefensefund.com and you can, you can log on there and learn more.
00:26:10.080Absolutely. And I know that many people actually were asking me about, you know, being able to help, uh, Mr. Mackey and his defense.
00:26:18.160I know a lot of people lamented the fact that really there wasn't the, you know, the type of support system necessary in, in place beforehand.
00:26:27.880Uh, like, like this stuff has kind of grown up a little more now.
00:26:31.000I think people are more aware of the fact that, you know, you need a support system for people when they run into these kinds of legal challenges, this kind of stuff,
00:26:39.300because if you don't have that for people, then it makes it much harder for them to fight the necessary battles.
00:26:44.280So if you guys are interested in that, please go ahead and check out what James just told you about to help out Ricky Vaughn.
00:26:52.880But, uh, I want to go now into the wider, uh, implications here, right?
00:26:59.240So as you said, this can have a very chilling effect, especially when it comes to particular types of comedy, right?
00:27:06.860Like we all are pretty sure, uh, um, you know, again, I'm, I'm, I can speak on this more than you can, but, but we obviously are very sure that the average late night host,
00:27:16.920the average kind of, uh, you know, uh, liberal who's just going to get up there and spat regime talking points,
00:27:22.800they can make all the jokes they want about political candidates.
00:27:25.740They can make all the jokes they want about voting.
00:27:27.720They can do skits that satirize the process, even if they might mislead on someone and the, you know, the government is never going to come after them.
00:27:35.960This is very clearly, I believe, uh, targeted, uh, prosecution.
00:27:40.740And it's done to, with a specific effort to chill, uh, a very effective form of speech was, which are memes.
00:27:48.660Memes are designed specifically to be very vague, to be very open, to be very, uh, interpretable by their audience.
00:27:56.200That's kind of what makes the magical.
00:27:58.220That's what makes the me magic happen that they can spread like wildfire because they contain a core idea, but they aren't, you know, necessarily something that, uh, you know, directs people in a specific way.
00:28:10.220And so I think that this, the broadness with which they could apply this law will really lock down on a lot of things, but meme comedy in particular, because you can really attach it to almost any aspect of a general meme saying that it could mislead.
00:28:25.780It could bring some kind of doubt into a fact that has now been deemed unquestionable or misrepresent a position of a candidate or something like you had mentioned.
00:28:34.760And all of a sudden the meme maker is a criminal who could go to jail or face serious fines.
00:28:40.220Yeah, I, I, you know, again, uh, is it, is it the kind of political power that anyone wants the federal government to wield?
00:28:51.380And the Supreme court has said, again, I'll, I'll cite the Alvarez case for justices, very powerfully citing to George Orwell's 1984, that our constitutional tradition stands against the concept of a ministry of protest.
00:29:11.220And, you know, yeah, I mean, comedy, satire, all of these, these tools have typically been used by the, the, the, the less powerful to speak out on, uh, speak out on behalf of, uh, speak out to speak on behalf of the less powerful against the powers that be in any given society.
00:29:47.220And, and, and, uh, to, uh, other, other, other classic pieces of literature where, uh, satire, meme type literature, right?
00:30:00.220Memes are, are certainly, uh, they're an internet phenomenon, but not entirely without historical precedent, but, but again, it's, it's, it's a, it's a mechanism and it's a way for less powerful people to speak truth to more powerful people.
00:30:17.220And our constitution protects that, you know, our first amendment is, uh, designed at its core, right.
00:30:30.220The, the first amendment isn't, isn't, you know, there to protect, you know, and, and again, this might be a little bit far, far afield, but, you know, new dancing, for example, right.
00:30:45.220I mean, the, the, the core of it is to be able to engage in conversations about the big issues of the day.
00:30:56.220And yes, if, if, if this Pandora's box is opened, then the, the, the chilling effect from, from our vantage point in our view is, is significant.
00:31:11.220And again, it's, it, it, it, it, it's not an ideological issue.
00:31:17.220It's something that cuts across ideological lines and should be of concern to each and every American.
00:31:25.220And I think it also touches again on something that's near and dear to my audience, which is internet anonymity.
00:31:31.220Now, obviously that's not the core part of this case, but I think a lot of people relate to it because Ricky Vaughn is just an average guy.
00:31:39.220I believe Ricky or I believe Douglas Mackey was like a local journalist or something before, before all this is just a, just, just an average person, you know, allegedly posting online under this account.
00:31:54.220And, you know, we just had a guy like Jordan Peterson today on Twitter, ranting against internet anonymity, how important it is to, to get rid of internet anonymity, how, you know, dangerous it is to have people speaking their minds in public.
00:32:09.220You know, and I think it's really critical.
00:32:12.220I think it's really important for people in positions of power, especially on the right to acknowledge the importance of having voices out there that have the ability to make these controversial statements that have the ability to make this satire, to make this comedy, to craft the memes that break this conditioning, that break this censorship.
00:32:33.220Because so much of the Trump campaign was about Trump saying things that other people wouldn't say.
00:32:40.220And so much about the accounts like Ricky Vaughn are their abilities to post things that otherwise maybe wouldn't get said.
00:32:48.220And the fact that internet anonymity allows that.
00:32:52.220And we see the government specifically going after people like this.
00:32:55.220I mean, you know, there was that one guy who did the Trump beating up CNN meme and the CNN like completely doxed and destroyed this guy's life.
00:33:03.220Now, this is, you know, with Ricky Vaughn, this is a whole nother level with the government is actually taking criminal action, not just doxing, but trying to completely destroy someone in a way that, like you said, will absolutely chill this ability of internet anons to speak out and do so from a position that allows them to say true things that no one else would really express.
00:33:23.220Well, to your point about anonymity, right, let's, let's just think about that for a second.
00:33:33.220You know, and again, just setting to the side, the government's allegation is that Mr. Mackey owned and operated and tweeted under Ricky Vaughn, and that is just an allegation.
00:33:48.220But with respect to anonymity, when you think about the architects of our Constitution, right, the Federalist papers were written under, right, they were written anonymously under, under pen names.
00:34:06.400Right, right, or, right, or, you know, the, the anti-Federalist papers, when you think about people like Brutus and Federal Farmer and the rest of them.
00:34:15.760I mean, so, so there's a great history and tradition in this country of people using anonymity to, to, as a shield to be able to air views that they otherwise wouldn't be able to air without fear of reprisal, whether that's governmental or, or, you know, or private.
00:34:38.760And, and, and, and it's, it's, it's an important thing, right?
00:34:41.940You know, not everybody has the, the wherewithal and the ability to, to enter into the public arena.
00:34:48.320You and I, you and I are blessed to be able to have the conversation that we're having right now.
00:34:53.900And I'm showing my face as James Lawrence, right?
00:35:05.140You can have the show that you're having, but a lot of people don't have that, that ability without putting themselves unduly in a, in a, in a, in a bad, in a bad position.
00:35:17.080So, you know, anonymity, and this is just more of, you know, a general comment, more than anything else is a very, it's a very important thing.
00:35:26.080And it goes right back to the very foundations of this country and the constitution and, and, and the pay and the very papers that the Supreme Court routinely cites as they're explicating what these guarantees mean to us now in 2023.
00:35:45.640Absolutely. Yeah. I think that's so important is, is just, just the very papers that we're, we're talking about, the very concepts, the very legal protections, the very philosophical grounding on which we're basing our arguments were often first argued by newspaper anons, right?
00:36:02.520I believe Thomas Paine originally published Common Sense under Un-Englishman, you know?
00:36:08.140So this is deeply in the core, in the history and tradition of the United States, in its founding documents, in its belief, in the ability to speak and the belief of people to shield themselves, not just from government reprisal, as you point out, but very importantly, personal and private reprisal.
00:36:23.840Because increasingly, these corporations, as we find out, and, you know, I think you have some experience with, with the Alex and Berenson case, these, these private institutions are, in effect, arms of the government.
00:36:36.300They do censor on its behalf. We know this from the Twitter files. We know this explicitly, you don't have to guess about it at this point.
00:36:42.100And so the fact that, that, that, you know, it's just a private company that silences you or fires you, or keeps you from doing banking, you know, these are all things that don't matter, because they are doing so in many ways, you know, directly on the behest of the government or in, or in league with the government.
00:37:00.020And so this distinction is pretty ridiculous. And I think it's really important for everybody who has any kind of voice, any kind of leadership, to support internet anonymity, because like you said, it does go right back to the founding of the country and the core of the documents that they're talking about defending in the first place.
00:37:15.560Well, I mean, and to, and to your point about private reprisals, and again, I would acknowledge this is a difficult issue for people on the right to, to grapple with, because the right, certainly conservative movement, having been a veteran of it myself, and kind of growing up in it, is, is you want to be able to vindicate the rights of business owners and private property owners, and property is so important.
00:37:45.560And so, so, so there's, there's tension, where you're, you're wanting to use power of the state, power of the government to, to police private reactions to speech, right?
00:38:02.120So, you know, there, there, there, there is a tension there. But, you know, it's interesting. I think of the meme on the issue that you just raised of the, of the foot.
00:38:15.560The, the, the, that's Trump trampling down on the, on the, you know, the, the don't tread on me snake with different corporate logos emblazoned on the, on the ankle. I don't know if you've seen the meme that I'm talking about.
00:38:28.520But it, it, it goes to the point that, you know, it, the conservative reaction or the rights reaction to that kind of activity is, is sometimes leaves, leaves some to somewhat to be, something to be desired, I suppose.
00:38:46.580Absolutely. All right, guys. Well, I think we've talked about most of the core issues around the case. If you have any questions, of course, James Lawrence can only speak on certain things.
00:38:57.340He is, he does have to, you know, make sure that he's kind of in accordance with everything with the law and whatnot. So, you know, we're happy to answer as much as we can, but there might be certain things that we can't touch on.
00:39:10.600But just as we are wrapping up, James, could you, for people again, just give that place, if they want to support, you know, Douglas Mackey in his defense, how can they do that?
00:39:21.360Yes. Happy to do that, Aron. So again, to learn more about the defense fund, you can log on to memedefensefund.com. Again, memedefensefund.com.
00:39:34.540And there's an opportunity for you to donate there if you're so inclined. In terms of other things that people can do to support, I've said this previously, and I'll say it again and reiterate, I do believe that James chapter 15, or excuse me, James chapter 5, verse 16 is true, that the prayers of the righteous availeth much.
00:39:59.060And so I would ask for anyone that's concerned about this case or interested in this case to pray about it, to pray for Doug, to pray for the defense team, to pray really that justice will be done.
00:40:16.160In this case, it's probably the most important thing, I would argue, that one can do. And certainly, you know, as for Doug, he has, he has faith in God, he has faith in the jury system that our founders secured for us and the Bill of Rights.
00:40:35.280And I will just say that from my vantage point, it's a privilege to stand and fight on his behalf and be a part of this defense team.
00:40:49.000Absolutely. I'm glad it's getting done. Like I said, it's a critical case. It's something that shouldn't, people shouldn't just let this go by the wayside. This is such an, you know, again, this is me saying this, not James, but this is such a horrific abuse of government power.
00:41:04.000This is so obviously politically motivated. This is obviously so petty. This is such a manipulation of legal code in an attempt to silence and destroy and chill free speech in the United States.
00:41:17.180The fact that this case even exists is a absolute travesty. It should shock the conscience of the United States and the government officials involved. And absolutely, please pray for Douglas Mackey's defense, because he should absolutely be exonerated. This is just insanely ridiculous.
00:41:34.760Now, I did want to ask one more thing before we go. And I don't know how much you can talk about it. So feel free to just tell me you can't, if there's certain aspects you can't. But I have heard that it has been reported that the judge in this case has said that they want a fully vaccinated jury. Is there any word on the truth of that?
00:42:31.840There's also a categorical bar on unvaccinated jurors could have a disparate impact on the basis of race and religious affiliation. But in any event, the court ordered today clarified that the court will not require a fully vaccinated jury to be infaneled.
00:42:50.920Uh, and, and so, um, unvaccinated individuals, uh, could, could potentially be part of that,