The Great America Show - June 30, 2022


2022 IS A REALLY GREAT YEAR FOR THE RULE OF LAW AT THE SUPREME COURT

Topics
Second Amendment and concealed carry rights
Hosted by
Lou Dobbs John Fawcett
Mentioned
Clarence Thomas John Roberts Carrie Campbell Severino Biden Gary Campbell Severino Molly Hibbingway Barrett Kennedy Alito Casey Compass North David Centendry Robert Bork Mark Simone Jim Eagle Heller Scalia Obama Elias
AMERICA IS A BETTER PLACE BECAUSE OF HOW 5 JUSTICES RULED IN THE DOBBS CASE SAYS AG PAXTON CAN A DEMOCRACY SURVIVE WITHOUT AN HONEST WORKING NEWS MEDIA？

Episode Stats


Length

32 minutes

Words per minute

165.84

Word count

5,469

Sentence count

292

Harmful content

Misogyny

1

sentences flagged

Hate speech

1

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Carrie Campbell Severino is President of the Judicial Crisis Network and a contributor to The Federalist and the Federalist Society. She served as a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and served as the Chief White House Strategist for President George W. Bush. She has been a legal analyst and activist, and is a frequent witness before Congress on constitutional law and judicial nominations.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
Topics generated with Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct.
Hosts, guests, and mentioned names generated with spaCy (en_core_web_sm), reconciled against Wikidata.
00:00:00.000 Hello, everybody. I'm Lou Dobbs, and this is the Great America Show. Welcome to the show, Truth, Justice, and the American Way, on display right here every day.
00:00:11.040 And here we go. Today, all about the historic decisions handed down by five brave justices who secured the Constitution, supported the First and Second Amendments,
00:00:22.060 and the right to life for the unborn, sending the issue of abortion back to the states as they reversed Roe v. Wade.
00:00:30.800 They did all that while under threat from the Marxist left and the radical Dems.
00:00:35.840 The Marxist left, who lead the Democrat Party, tried to intimidate these fearless five conservative justices
00:00:43.120 who stood up for the Constitution and the Republic, for your rights and mine. God bless this Supreme Court.
00:00:50.980 Five justices made all the difference and made history. Justices Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett.
00:01:01.580 Our guest today is one of the leading legal analysts and activists in the country.
00:01:06.560 Our guest is Carrie Campbell Severino. She is president of the Judicial Crisis Network.
00:01:12.840 She testifies frequently before Congress on constitutional law and briefing senators on judicial nominations.
00:01:19.500 Carrie clerk for D.C. Court of Appeals Judge David Sintel and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
00:01:27.920 Carrie earned her law degree from Harvard Law School, a B.A. in biology from Duke, and master's in linguistics from Michigan State.
00:01:36.840 She's also a contributor to the Federalist and a member of the Federalist Society.
00:01:41.600 Carrie, great to have you here. Welcome to the Great America Show.
00:01:44.820 And let's start with the Supreme Court's decisions, overturning Roe v. Wade, ruling a football coach can't be fired for praying at the 50-yard line after a game,
00:01:55.640 and overturning a New York state law restricting concealed carry of a firearm.
00:02:02.580 Your reaction?
00:02:03.320 Yeah, I mean, that's the trifecta right there, although what's amazing is we still have a few more cases left,
00:02:09.980 and I'm actually expecting a couple more wins coming out of the court in one challenge to Obama's clean power plan
00:02:17.660 and to Biden trying to cancel the Remain in Mexico policy.
00:02:21.640 So it's just a really great year at the Supreme Court for the rule of law.
00:02:25.160 It truly is.
00:02:27.320 And let's start with, I'd like to start with the Second Amendment and the court striking down the New York concealed carry restrictions.
00:02:39.320 Yeah, that is a really important case, in part because while the Supreme Court, you know,
00:02:45.880 when I clerked there for Justice Thomas back in 2007, 2008, and that was the term that the Heller case was decided,
00:02:52.500 which really took the Second Amendment out of being sort of the ugly stepchild of the Bill of Rights,
00:02:57.520 where no one was really enforcing it, to recognizing that it does confer an individual right to bear arms.
00:03:03.560 We do need to be enforcing it.
00:03:04.660 But then the court, you know, it had one other case right after that, and then it just didn't talk about it for a decade.
00:03:11.220 And finally, finally they had a case that clarified, because there were so many lower courts doing all sorts of goofy stuff with it,
00:03:17.480 and in this case, they said that New York was saying basically, okay, fine, you have a right to bear arms,
00:03:22.660 you can have your gun in your house, but when you go out, you know, first of all, you can't open carry,
00:03:27.160 and second of all, you can only conceal carry if you have some specific threat against you.
00:03:32.060 So we won't give you a permit.
00:03:33.680 It's not enough to, you know, meet all the safety requirements and meet all the background checks
00:03:37.400 and show that you are skilled weapons.
00:03:39.000 You have to show that you have, like, a stalker or someone who has threatened you or something,
00:03:43.380 just living in a dangerous neighborhood, being concerned for your safety, et cetera, that's not enough.
00:03:48.180 And the court said, no, it says that the people should have to bear arms, not certain elite people,
00:03:53.340 not people who, you know, have enough, you know, scary things happening to them
00:03:56.980 or a high enough profile that they count, but everyone has a right not just to keep arms, but to keep and bear arms.
00:04:03.020 And I think that's a huge victory.
00:04:04.920 It is a tremendous victory for the Second Amendment.
00:04:07.860 And I'm one of those people, I believe in an absolute Second Amendment right,
00:04:14.740 in part because, first of all, it is a constitutional right without qualification.
00:04:20.760 And secondly, I also have the feeling that there is genuine, universal respect for one another
00:04:28.760 when you know the other person is carrying a weapon on his or her person.
00:04:34.640 But do you agree with that view of human nature?
00:04:40.180 Well, it's certainly, I mean, people have talked for a long time about how important it is just to know
00:04:45.660 that you don't have to rely on someone else.
00:04:48.220 You don't have to rely on the police who might not be there, who might not come quickly.
00:04:51.500 You know, you can protect yourself.
00:04:54.600 And we've seen in many cases where individuals have stood up and used that right to protect themselves
00:05:00.320 and just protect others.
00:05:01.540 And I think that's, you know, that's really foundational and was certainly deemed foundational to our founders
00:05:08.640 who were living under a tyrannical government at the time.
00:05:11.800 They recognized how important it was to be able to defend themselves, to protect their own freedom.
00:05:16.100 Yep.
00:05:16.400 Make it number two on the Bill of Rights is a pretty important position for it,
00:05:22.360 inextricably intertwined, I believe, with the First Amendment.
00:05:26.080 And I know one thing, that the idea that you can have a gun in your home,
00:05:31.820 but you can't have it in your car or on your person, it's okay to defend yourself if you're at home,
00:05:37.940 but you can't defend yourself if you're, you know, at the shopping mall.
00:05:43.320 It is a preposterous position for any court, I think, to take.
00:05:48.400 But there it is.
00:05:49.520 I'll take what we've got, and another win it is for the Second Amendment.
00:05:53.100 Let's turn to Coach Kennedy and that judgment on the right of a coach to kneel at the 50-yard line and pray.
00:06:04.760 Your reaction to the case, did you expect a victory?
00:06:09.280 You know, I thought after the oral arguments, I was pretty confident in this case,
00:06:13.820 but also just knowing this court, this is about a decade of an unbroken string of victories
00:06:18.540 for religious liberty at the Supreme Court.
00:06:20.840 And that is, so I know this is an area the court has been very strong on,
00:06:25.320 and so I was optimistic, and now that's been vindicated,
00:06:29.000 that Coach Kennedy would be shown that he does have the right to have just individual religious expression.
00:06:37.040 That's what was so amazing here.
00:06:38.140 He was not saying, hey, I want to make the team all come and pray with me or, you know, anything like that.
00:06:42.880 He said, I just want to go and be able to pray myself.
00:06:45.520 He purposely was even timing it for the school's sake, like say, okay, fine, I'm going to do it while they're off,
00:06:50.580 you know, singing the school fight song in the locker room.
00:06:53.260 But I feel like, as a Christian, I need to thank God for, you know, allowing me to work in this way,
00:06:58.880 allowing me to have this game and the success, and no one got hurt, et cetera.
00:07:01.480 And so he just wanted to do that himself.
00:07:05.280 And they said that even just praying individually was somehow so coercive that it violates the establishment clause,
00:07:13.840 that that is establishing a religion to just let a teacher pray by himself.
00:07:18.200 And one of the things that the opinion point out is this is, it was such an extreme position,
00:07:22.220 you could argue that public school teachers wouldn't be allowed to pray over their lunch if they're eating in the school cafeteria,
00:07:27.200 because what if some students saw them and, you know, somehow felt coerced or felt that the government now has endorsed a religion,
00:07:33.960 you know, let alone the fact that you could have a Muslim teacher and a Jewish teacher and a Christian teacher or whatever,
00:07:39.120 you know, all praying different prayers over their lunches.
00:07:43.080 Somehow the state is establishing all the religions. 0.96
00:07:44.840 I don't know.
00:07:45.500 But, you know, that's a level of extreme misconstruction of that clause that was happening.
00:07:52.060 And the court has finally, you know, tried to set that right.
00:07:55.840 It's been trying for quite a while.
00:07:58.060 And the opinion pointed this out like, gosh, we've tried to clarify this standard for you, Elias.
00:08:03.520 Some of the lower courts seem to not want to get it.
00:08:06.200 This is coming out of the Ninth Circuit, which is known for being one of the more activist and liberal courts.
00:08:10.780 So I'm glad to see them get, you know, get corrected yet again.
00:08:15.500 You know, liberal is an interesting word in 2022, isn't it?
00:08:20.200 The Ninth Circuit is liberal in the most coercive way imaginable in denying the First Amendment, denying the Second Amendment, denying the Fourth Amendment.
00:08:31.860 It is the word liberal.
00:08:34.240 I'm a product of the 60s where liberal meant free expression, free spirits and an open mind.
00:08:43.240 We have an authoritarian impulse running throughout the American left, the Marxist left that now controls the Democratic Party by, you know, it's just straightforwardly obvious and empirical.
00:08:56.540 There is no argument about it.
00:08:58.360 And to see this court stand against this historic wave within our society is, to me, an act of great courage, the likes of which I can't recall in the Supreme Court.
00:09:14.880 This is a special group of people, these five justices with the courage, the intellect, and the philosophy of original interpretation of the court, textualists, if you will.
00:09:31.200 Well, they are just a heaven-sent group of justices that are really making history.
00:09:39.200 Yeah, having a majority, and in this case, we actually even had six justices join, because Chief Justice Roberts, religious freedom is an area that he has been pretty reliably going on, so that is great.
00:09:53.040 And that we have these justices who are willing to do so, even at a time when there's so much, you know, protests and outrage and threats and intimidation against them, that they have the courage to stand up and say, yeah, but my job isn't to try to read opinion polls.
00:10:10.120 It's not to try to even, you know, do what I think is maybe going to keep myself or my family physically safe.
00:10:15.400 Because there's been, obviously not about this case, more about the abortion case, but there have been some real pressures on the court, and that we do nonetheless have a majority of justices willing to stand up and say, yeah, but I took an oath, I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, and that's what I'm going to do.
00:10:29.300 So when Justice Kavanaugh was threatened, a man trying to kill him, when there's an argument in the Congress, and Justice Roberts, his mom, on the issue of security for the justices, and the attacks on them, the intimidation, even as there is a federal law against demonstrating and trying to intimidate judges, what do you make of his silence?
00:10:56.960 You know, I'm not, the Chief Justice doesn't make a lot of statements, and I actually do think he has been strong enough in terms of rejecting things, you know, like the actual assassination attempt of one of his colleagues.
00:11:11.720 What concerns me more, you know, in terms of people not speaking, is the President himself, who not only has not rejected the idea of people protesting in front of the justices' homes.
00:11:21.120 Like, we all recognize, you can protest in front of the court, obviously keep it peaceful, and thankfully some of the threats that there's going to be a night of rage did not pan out, so that's good.
00:11:30.040 But the President has really just kind of encouraged these people who are going to the private homes of these judges, including those who have children still living at home.
00:11:40.900 I mean, that's really outrageous.
00:11:42.100 In terms of Chief Justice Roberts, the thing that makes me most frustrated, the thing that he has the most power to address is finding the leaker.
00:11:51.240 However, this leak of the draft opinion of Dobbs is just an outrageous violation of the institution of the court.
00:12:01.840 It's a violation of their privacy and their confidentiality to someone at the court, presumably a clerk for one of the liberal justices, but we still don't know.
00:12:09.880 You know, over two, about two months ago now, has leaked this opinion.
00:12:14.940 We've never had that happen in American history before, and the chief, I mean, we had reports that he's doing investigations, but how hard can it be?
00:12:23.780 You've got really a few dozen people who all work in the court building.
00:12:28.740 I just don't understand how hard it could be to figure out which one of these people leaked it, because if you don't, this term, we were horrified and shocked,
00:12:38.900 and we saw all sorts of negative consequences from this one leak of one decision.
00:12:42.380 What's going to happen next term, five decisions, ten decisions?
00:12:45.580 Because as long as it's perceived as, hey, they'll never catch us anyway.
00:12:48.860 There'll be no negative consequences.
00:12:51.040 I just don't see how this is going to not completely undermine the court as an institution.
00:12:58.080 And these clerks are leaving starting next week.
00:13:01.160 I mean, they're done.
00:13:02.600 They're going to go off and start working for a big law firm and pull in what's now up to a $400,000 bonus.
00:13:09.180 And so one of these clerks is going to be getting nearly half a million dollar bonus for, you know, building his or her resume on an institution that they're helping to destroy.
00:13:22.280 I just, it doesn't make any sense to me.
00:13:24.640 I don't understand it because I, when I clerked there, the chief justice was very concerned about confidentiality and maintaining your obligations to the court in that way.
00:13:33.880 So I don't understand why he has not taken stronger action on that, but I think it's going to have some very serious consequences undermining the court itself.
00:13:43.180 His words, I don't even recall his words, Carrie.
00:13:46.100 You mentioned you weren't so concerned about his statements that you felt were strong enough.
00:13:51.500 I honestly can't remember a single word this man said about the security for the justices or enforcing the law against intimidation of Supreme Court justices.
00:14:03.600 Can you refresh my memory?
00:14:06.700 You know, I guess it's that I'm not as concerned about that because I don't maybe expect him as much as a, the judges don't normally make comments.
00:14:15.900 But I think you're, you're, you're probably right.
00:14:18.100 I am not.
00:14:18.840 Now, maybe he has made a statement on it that I don't know of, but I, I, I just view that as not as much his job as finding the leaker, him or herself.
00:14:29.780 And, and the fact that the White House has basically endorsed these protests just really makes my blood boil.
00:14:36.760 So, but yeah, I, I, I, so I'm not, I'm not even sure what the chief justice has said on that.
00:14:42.360 But I, again, I think that his, what he, what he clearly has the authority to do to help stop this kind of thing from happening again, he has not done.
00:14:52.400 Yeah.
00:14:52.820 I think that we're ending up here in agreement.
00:14:55.100 But, and I, I would say that there is such a thing, I'm inventing this expression right now, but there is such a thing as the critical judgment of low expectations.
00:15:04.980 And it seems, it seems to me that you and I have different expectations of the chief justice.
00:15:10.840 And perhaps you know him better than me, perhaps not.
00:15:13.840 But I, I swear to you, the man has, has found so many ways to disappoint that I no longer have much of a expectation, either of him.
00:15:25.400 That's a shame.
00:15:26.720 Let's turn to where really he failed, I think again, and that was on the overturning of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
00:15:38.460 This 5-4 decision is miraculous, it is wonderful, it is historic, it is powerful, and it is giving an entire nation an opportunity to bow their heads and seek forgiveness and to do far better.
00:15:58.100 Whether you are religious or not, this is a historic opportunity for the nation, and it sets right the Constitution.
00:16:06.540 Your thoughts on the case, the Dobbs case, and their rulings, and the overturning of both Casey and Roe?
00:16:21.160 Yeah, I mean, as I was saying before, the amount of courage it took to decide this case well can't be overstated.
00:16:29.540 Overstated, because, and we've seen so many times just, justices walk up to doing so and, and blink.
00:16:37.400 And that's what happened in 1991.
00:16:39.020 So we've been 30 years waiting, or 1992 I guess the case has decided, 30 years we've been still operating under this regime because the court was ready to overturn it back then.
00:16:49.600 And even though their opinion basically still couldn't make sense of how the right to abortion is actually in the Constitution, they just said, well, we don't want to, we don't want to rock the apple cart here.
00:17:01.560 We don't want to, we don't want to upset things.
00:17:03.280 This court has said, you know what, sometimes a decision is so egregiously wrong that you have to overturn prior precedent.
00:17:10.140 And that, they talked, which I think was a great analogy about Brown versus Board of Education, where for more than this 50 years, the precedent was set that separate but equal is fine.
00:17:21.160 And we had, the South had a whole, you know, legal system based upon that notion.
00:17:26.220 Oh yeah, sure, you can have segregation, you can have separate but equal.
00:17:29.740 And then finally the court found the courage to say, actually, no, that was wrong.
00:17:34.720 We were wrong.
00:17:35.840 We acknowledge that.
00:17:36.860 And we need to go back and start over.
00:17:38.100 And it was not easy, and I don't think it's going to be necessarily easy in this case either, although in many cases I think it will be more so, because this case, it's not overriding any state laws.
00:17:47.400 It's really just letting the states do what they either were doing before or what they've decided to do since.
00:17:53.620 So in many states, it's not going to even affect what their abortion laws are. 0.65
00:17:59.720 And now, it really gives the American people the opportunity to discuss and decide how to address this issue.
00:18:08.120 But to have something read into the Constitution, like happened in Roe versus Wade, a right that had never existed in America, suddenly declared out of the blue to be not just a right, but like a primordial right.
00:18:25.020 It was like, this is one of the highest rights in the Constitution.
00:18:28.640 That was crazy.
00:18:29.640 That is kind of the definition of judicial activism.
00:18:33.000 So I think taking that out of our legal jurisprudence is a huge step forward in recognizing that our Constitution says what it means, means what it says, and the judges aren't the ones who get to make things up to invent constitutional law out of full cloth.
00:18:51.660 These five justices that I mentioned, obviously, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, these are, and John Roberts, necessarily, as the chief justice.
00:19:11.340 Their chief justice is adrift.
00:19:14.340 He is a man that you cannot, you know, he can't find Compass North.
00:19:19.520 He's just in a fog, and he doesn't seem to be able to escape.
00:19:25.420 He voted with the liberals.
00:19:27.060 He voted with the conservatives.
00:19:29.320 He is supposed to be a constitutionalist, is he not?
00:19:32.620 And how does he get so far off tacking as he tries to wind his way through the law and the Constitution?
00:19:40.660 Well, you know, yeah, I love that you referenced his ability to find his way north, because I saw a great quote by Justice Thomas, who was funny, earlier this year, someone inadvertently called him Chief Justice Thomas at one of the arguments.
00:19:55.020 And I think a lot of people thought, I'll go with that.
00:19:57.720 I would love to have a Chief Justice Thomas.
00:19:59.620 Let's just, because for all of his attempts to kind of do what he maybe thinks is helping the institution of the court, Chief Justice Roberts has not been a leader on that court.
00:20:13.500 He is one that seems to be vacillating.
00:20:15.320 He's one that seems to be following the trends rather than standing up and saying, this is what's right.
00:20:20.360 Whereas Chief Justice Thomas, or not Chief Justice, Justice Thomas has really filled that role.
00:20:25.640 And there was a great video clip that I just saw on Twitter today, I hadn't seen it before, where he was saying, you know what, the challenge is if you're in a hurricane, north is still north.
00:20:38.840 If you can't see which way you're going, north is still north.
00:20:41.300 If you're being tossed around in the seas, north is still north.
00:20:44.720 And you have to be able to set your compass and just follow that, regardless of the crazy stuff going on around you.
00:20:50.760 Is it a calm day?
00:20:51.840 Is it a foggy day?
00:20:53.020 It doesn't matter.
00:20:54.000 You still keep your compass pointed dead north.
00:20:57.580 And that is something that's really characterized his 30 years in the court.
00:21:01.200 And I think that's what made him the real intellectual leader of the conservative bench.
00:21:05.260 When he started, he was almost alone.
00:21:07.900 It was him and Justice Scalia, basically.
00:21:09.620 And now to finally beat the point where you have a majority of the justices who adhere to those type of principles of, you know what, we have to go north, you know, come hell or high water, this is the direction we're supposed to go.
00:21:24.760 That's wonderful.
00:21:25.500 And, you know, I wish the chief adhered to that as well.
00:21:30.420 But I'm glad we at least have leadership, even if it's not technically sitting in the chief's chair.
00:21:34.180 Yeah, I admire your tolerance, and you are a much better person than I am.
00:21:41.960 I expect so much more of a chief justice that I struggle with John Roberts and have a hard time forgiving him his past sins.
00:21:51.560 But I will overcome that and deal with what is rather than what might be.
00:21:59.140 But what might be is even more splendid than what we've got.
00:22:02.680 But I'll take the miracle that we have.
00:22:05.420 How's that?
00:22:06.720 The idea that the court right now has five solid constitutionalists on it, the issues that we're looking at, speaking of past sins, this is also the same court that did not take up two opportunities to intervene in the election of 2020,
00:22:25.960 despite, I think, despite, I think, very clear cause, particularly with the lawsuit from the states seeking redress, which is the Supreme Court's responsibility.
00:22:38.620 They denied it.
00:22:39.780 It was a ruling of convenience, in my opinion.
00:22:43.180 Going forward here, we're going to have, it appears, another round of great, unsettled, and disturbing events in our election of 2020.
00:22:58.160 Because the Republicans have done nothing to shore up the integrity of the election.
00:23:03.120 We're hearing reports with your co-author, Molly Hibbingway, reporting about the Biden administration's, at least the fear that the Biden administration is federalizing in some ways this election,
00:23:18.420 and making moves that are completely unavailable to the prying eyes of the national media or to the American people.
00:23:28.820 It looks very bad.
00:23:30.840 It looks like this administration is preparing something for the election.
00:23:35.820 Even FOIA requests, according to Molly's reporting, are not being honored, and we know that they're up to something.
00:23:46.260 Give us a sense, if you will, your sense of what is going on with this White House and the election of 2022.
00:23:53.700 Well, you know, we've seen that just like they were trying to do in 2020, they're trying to change the legal system to open the door to just easy ways to boost Democrat voting group
00:24:16.200 and to undermine the ability to ensure election integrity, and that's what's so discouraging.
00:24:21.700 I think it's been good to see some places, you know, like Georgia with their Jim Eagle or whatever Biden was calling it, Jim Crow 2.0 law.
00:24:31.620 I mean, just standing up for common sense things.
00:24:34.960 And what's so funny is, you know, this is another issue that came up when I was clerking.
00:24:40.700 Now, 15 years ago, there was a question, is requiring voter ID constitutional?
00:24:45.460 And the answer was yes, absolutely constitutional.
00:24:48.660 And yet you still have people all these years later saying, oh, we can't do that.
00:24:52.700 That would be, you know, they have all sorts of arguments.
00:24:55.420 And it's like, no, no, no, this has already been decided.
00:24:57.980 It is not.
00:24:58.800 It's not that hard.
00:24:59.700 And it's something that most Americans, including Democrats, recognize.
00:25:04.600 We actually want to have people to have confidence in our elections.
00:25:08.460 And it's really just the Democrat legislators we've seen are more interested in figuring out how to gain the system than in actually maintaining that election integrity.
00:25:20.480 So I think, like so many of the issues, they're overreaching on this in a way that's beyond even where their base is.
00:25:28.220 Maybe not the radicals.
00:25:29.140 The radicals just want, you know, all sorts of crazy stuff.
00:25:31.200 But I think the most of the base recognizes the importance of election integrity in both parties, amazingly.
00:25:37.300 What is the principle that you think, again, so everyone is clear, the principle that you think the left and the right agree on in terms of election integrity?
00:25:48.840 Because we just didn't see a sign of it in 2020.
00:25:51.780 No, no, no, I'm not saying that the Democrat leaders and the loud voices in the Democrat Party are standing for these principles.
00:26:00.480 But I'm saying when you look at surveys of actual Americans, even across the board, the Democrats are recognizing that, you know, you ask, they say that this is somehow racist.
00:26:10.460 But you survey and black Americans recognize that they want to have voter ID, too.
00:26:14.280 So this is something that I think that is one of these many issues that because they're listening to the loudest, most radical voices, the deep pockets, really, because I think that's what's driving a lot of the left wants to go where where the money is.
00:26:28.640 And those people are pushing some of the most radical policies that I think is not just to the left of common sense, but it's the left of most America, including many Democrat voters who are like, guys, you know, this is this is beyond just just like we were talking about.
00:26:44.020 You know what it means to be a good old fashioned liberal where you can have a debate about different ideas and hash that out.
00:26:53.680 That used to be a liberal idea. Now it's somehow a conservative idea because the left has moved so far left that the center has shifted.
00:27:00.520 Just the idea of, you know, they're taking things so far to the left that I think they're leaving a lot of a lot of Americans behind.
00:27:08.000 I think they're doing that on voter ID and a lot of these voting measures as well.
00:27:12.160 I think that the challenge is you've got such lockstep amongst the Democrat politicians that they're they're full steam ahead regardless.
00:27:19.540 And that's really scary.
00:27:21.940 I think that we all have to recognize in this country, whether you're liberal, conservative, Democrat, Republican or independent.
00:27:31.020 The Democrats are now driven by Marxist Dems.
00:27:34.500 There's no question about that.
00:27:37.080 They are not only they're not only carrying impulses of authoritarianism.
00:27:42.520 Much of the party has moved straight forward to totalitarianism.
00:27:47.240 It's the expression is found in the J6 in two impeachments of a president who was found.
00:27:54.040 Absolutely.
00:27:54.680 It was absolutely exonerated.
00:27:56.900 Three years of an FBI investigation.
00:27:58.900 That was an attempt to not only intimidate a president, but to overthrow a president and to do so with every weaponized element available to the Marxist Dems.
00:28:11.880 That is the Democratic Party, the legal system, the court system, the Department of Justice, the FBI, the national media.
00:28:21.040 There was no no element that was not weaponized in federal government against the president, against the Republicans and against the American voter in order to achieve what they gained in 2020,
00:28:37.360 which was the election of a man who the attorney general of the United States understood had lied in front of the American people.
00:28:46.320 And through that lie in the second and final debate of 2020, won the election using Russian disinformation as a shield.
00:28:54.060 And the sword was already the Zuckerberg half trillion ballot trafficking and unwatched drop boxes across the country.
00:29:07.500 We always give our guests the last word.
00:29:11.040 And, Carrie, that is your opportunity.
00:29:13.560 We thank you for being with us.
00:29:15.200 Your concluding thoughts on all of this.
00:29:17.180 Yeah, you know, I think this term is just really an illustration of how important keeping an eye on the the main issues and just continuing to work despite setbacks.
00:29:32.660 It has been this this court is not something that happened overnight.
00:29:36.140 It's not even said that it just happened in the last presidency, although that certainly, you know, was the was the crowning achievement of it.
00:29:44.480 We got these last three justices who really put us over the edge.
00:29:47.220 But this has been something that has been in the works since the 80s, you know, since Robert Bork was attacked.
00:29:54.640 And then Republicans, you know, it took them a few generations to kind of learn to fight back.
00:29:58.980 I feel like we're always a little generation behind or so on catching up with the techniques.
00:30:02.860 But we have we have learned we have built a court and built really a movement of lawyers who understand how to how to interpret the Constitution, how to be faithful to that.
00:30:15.540 And I think we have the American people now recognize this, how important that is.
00:30:18.680 And we're bearing that's bearing fruit and we're starting to see the Constitution enforced as it's written, not erasing rights that are in there, like the Second Amendment, not inventing rights that aren't in there, like like the right to abortion.
00:30:28.680 And I think that that's something to really celebrate.
00:30:31.380 But it's something that could be gone in a heartbeat if the left got the opportunity.
00:30:36.000 So we have to definitely continue to make sure we hold our our our politicians to high standards and appoint to the kind of judges who are going to keep our Constitution faithfully.
00:30:49.300 Let me ask you just one last question based on your concluding comments.
00:30:54.840 Does this all lead you to believe that if there are irregularities, if there is widespread anomalies and questions about the election in 2022, which seems to me right now to be all but assured,
00:31:10.020 do you believe the courts will now take up the issue of current fraud, suspicions of fraud or irregularities or improprieties with also the presence of some illegality?
00:31:29.900 Do you think they will actually have the courage this time to take it up?
00:31:32.920 I wish I knew the answer to that question.
00:31:37.860 I like to think that they would.
00:31:40.500 I think I'm hopeful that, you know, there there hasn't been nothing that's been done in the meantime.
00:31:46.060 But I think we need to make sure that our laws are the laws that are on the books, stay on the books and don't get kind of changed at the last minute.
00:31:54.540 Like what's happening, I was disappointed the court didn't didn't take up some of those last minute shenanigans and changes to the state laws.
00:32:00.500 But I'm optimistic that at this point, they kind of have seen what happens when you just let things go and have learned the lesson of, you know what, sometimes you just need to give them, give people an answer and step up and do the hard, hard thing.
00:32:14.460 So I'm optimistic that we'll be able to have a process this this election.
00:32:21.280 Look, there's always going to be issues, but I think we're moving in the right direction.
00:32:25.520 Gary, we thank you very much for being with us.
00:32:28.260 We appreciate your judgment and your insight and your knowledge.
00:32:32.960 And thank you so much.
00:32:34.380 Come back soon, would you please?
00:32:36.300 All right.
00:32:36.860 Have a great day.
00:32:38.540 Gary Campbell Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network.
00:32:43.680 Tomorrow here on The Great America Show will be our friend and great patriot, Mark Simone, on all that's happening as we enter the Independence Day weekend.
00:32:53.000 Please join us here tomorrow.
00:32:54.720 Till then, God bless you.
00:32:56.780 And God bless America.
00:32:58.680 And God bless America.