CGR WEDNESDAY 070523 David Shestokas

Hi, this is Pastor Greg and you're listening to Chosen Generation Radio. Get more at chosengenerationradio.com.

That's Chosen Generation Radio, where no topic is off limits and everything filtered through biblical glasses. My passion is the fight for freedom. My father fought for a World War II defending our country. Today we are no longer fighting with guns. Instead, we are fighting an ideological battle for control of our country by contributing to causes that support your constitutional rights.

I am Patriot Mobile. I thank and praise God for this borewell that God has enabled us to put in this village with the prayer and support of Pastor Greg Young and Chosen Generation Radio Ministry. By the prayer and support of Pastor Greg Young and Chosen Generation Ministry, we could put the borewell in this village for the community.

Before this community was drinking dirty water and that was really causing a lot of sickness. But now they are getting pure and fresh water and all the community is so thankful for Pastor Greg Young and Chosen Generation Ministry and all the supporters. And we pray for all of you that God would bless you and God would use you so that we can put more and more borewells in a poor and needy community, those who are really having a problem of the water. This borewell we have put and pure and fresh water is coming and we are so thankful for all of you that we thank Pastor Greg Young and Chosen Generation Ministry that help us to put the borewell in this village. Thank you and God bless you. Thank you, Pastor Greg Young and Chosen Generation Ministry and all of you that help us to put more and more borewells in this village so that we can put more and more borewells in this village.

And now, Chosen Generation, where no topic is off-limits and everything is filtered through biblical glasses. And now, here's your host, Pastor Greg. And welcome to the program. Great to have you with me.

Thanks so much for being here. I am very pleased to welcome you on this Wednesday morning. It is the day after Happy Independence Day. I hope that you had a good Independence Day.

I hope you enjoyed your time. And I hope that you reflected on the true meaning of Independence Day and the Declaration of Independence and what that means and really how important that document is to our freedoms. Let me see here. There it is.

Yeah, there we go. The unanimous declaration of the 13 United States of America. When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them to another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and nature's God entitle them. A decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it and to institute new government laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness. Prudence indeed will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes.

And accordingly, all experience has shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty. And what is this despotism? It's the exercise of absolute power, especially in a cruel and oppressive way.

You got to wonder right now, are we seeing that despotism? It is their right, it is their duty to throw off that there are those and I'll have a guest on today, john pierce will be joining me at the bottom of our number three, to talk about what's happening to the January six to the J six POWs. And I and I do call them POWs. Because war has been declared on on Christian biblical values here in the United States of America. And it's it's crazy to me, trying to have conversations with people, as an example, related to pornographic materials being brought forward in, in, in schools, I mean, folks, you know, it really is nuts. Think about this for a minute.

These parents, you have an 11 year old child, who is going forward and and read in front of the school board from a book that they picked up in their in their library. We've seen the videos of of of these sick and demented and perverted individuals dressed up in drag, going into children's classrooms and gyrating around half naked. And and yet, when you point these things out, the response is, well, yeah, but you know, look at look around us. Okay, look at the society we're living in.

Okay. As as if the justification for deviant behavior, mutilating children chopping up 13 year olds, passing out hormone changing and and and pills that they use for rapists in prisons, parading, taking children to parades and and having naked men running around and parading out in public, that because those things are happening in the public, somehow we shouldn't have a concern about them happening in school. Well, we should have a concern about them happening in public. We should have a concern about a morality taking hold of our of public life in general. And we should have a concern about what is happening to our children. And yet the argument I've had this argument on on on several back and forth in in comment section, that well, you know, you're you're just not paying attention to I mean, this is this is normal now.

Well, guess what? You know, if if rape becomes normal in culture, it will never be right. If murder, you could say that murder has become normal violent crime you in in cities where they've changed the laws, stealing has become normalized. But it'll never be right. All right, I believe my next guest is here to join us. He is a a a law and order kind of guy.

And and and I think he'll agree with me that that just because district attorneys won't do their jobs and and and government officials have decided to let criminals run free, doesn't doesn't make what they're doing. Right. David, welcome. Good to have you.

Thank you so much, Greg. And after that kind of flying start, you're absolutely correct. Just because somebody declines to do something doesn't mean that that that makes what they're what they're doing proper or correct. It's it doesn't change because somebody has been elected to to a position where supposedly they're supposed to enforce the law and they failed to do so. That doesn't change the law. You know, that changes that changes how they conduct themselves and their responsibilities and whatnot.

But this is a no. This is a horrible, horrible circumstance where they're not where they're failing to force them enforce the law. And as you know, I was watching watching some fireworks show last night in the actually on television.

I was watching it for four of the July that they're broadcasting from. From Washington, D.C., I'm thinking I was actually almost kind of sad watching these people have some idea of what they're supposed to they're celebrating, but they understand that what they're celebrating doesn't exist. You know, the things that they're they're they're pretending that continue to exist. They're showing the White House and they're showing a White House that is being occupied by somebody that's failing to live up to the principles that the country was founded upon.

They're they're they're standing in front of these government buildings where there's people who are not executing, not executing the visions of the founders or the or in fact following the principles of the things that are in the declaration of the Constitution. It was I don't know, I had mixed emotions where people are cheering and they're playing martial music and they're playing some of the traditional kind of American songs and doing the fireworks and waving flags. And I go, do they is there any concept of what has been lost while they're still going through the motions of what the traditions are? You know, this was this was the sense that I was having last night. I was very melancholy watching the celebration, you know, because there's a lot of happy people and happy children. And I'm going, these kids have no idea what what's what's not there.

Right. What doesn't exist while they're having this these parties with the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Monument is a backdrop. And I said, did these folks even know George Washington was, you know, do they have some sort of concept? Do they know that Abraham Lincoln was the best scholar of the Declaration of Independence? That has anybody that's in this crowd of thousands have they read the declaration? I did a show the other day.

I did. I did a lot of shows this last week because, of course, they got the books about the Constitution and things like that. And I was doing a show the other day and somebody said, asked me what, you know, what kind of things was Thomas Jefferson considering? I said, well, let's start with the Magna Carta. And the question and what I got was, what's the Magna Carta? You know, and I'm going, oh, my goodness, you know, that even though that's an eight hundred year old document, that's that's something that I trace to how that's the source of due process of law and the rule of law and the grand jury system and the kinds of things that are there to protect our freedoms. And people don't know these kinds of things.

And I was I was half sad watching these watching this celebration going, oh, my goodness, these people don't know what they're doing, what's going on. Anyway, that's No, no, no. Well, let me I just got this from from from one of our folks that I want to this is audio from the police finding cocaine at the White House. Just as an example, right? I don't know if you were aware of this or not, but let me see if we can get this.

All right, let me see if I can get it to play now. Demonized results are a new match found with a red bar, a new match found in the library. Go ahead and come on out. The rest of the record has that we have a result on the demo. We have a yellow bar stating cocaine, hydrochloride, cap number 53, that's two ones, that's four. To repeat, I didn't copy results on the Gemini. Gemini's results are a new match found with a red bar, a new match found in the library.

Go ahead and come on out. The rest of the record has that we have a result on the demo. We have a yellow bar stating cocaine, hydrochloride, cap number 53, that's two ones, that's four. So what they're saying is they found cocaine in the library at the White House. Should it surprise us?

I'm sorry to say no. I mean, based on the Hunter Biden laptop and the relationship with Hunter Biden and his dad, I mean, I don't know if the president's doing Coke in the White House or not, but I would be willing to bet, predicated on what we already know and what he's written in his book, that Hunter Biden is probably doing Coke in the White House. I would be real surprised if he isn't.

Given the history of involvement there, given how they kicked him out of the Navy for that, he certainly didn't show any respect for the Navy, and certainly there's no real belief that he would show any respect for the institutions of the United States, because actually it's pretty evident that they've been selling the United States to other people, to other countries, and that the folks that are in the White House are now compromised from that. Like I said, I was just watching these things yesterday. That was my point.

That was my point in bringing it up, and I want to thank Russ for sending that over to me, but yeah, that was my point. That's why I wanted to play it, was here you are watching that. I didn't watch that one. I actually watched the fireworks over Houston, the Freedom Over Texas display that was on last night and took that in, and it was pretty good. That was great, but we spent all day yesterday here on the program talking about the Declaration of Independence. I had Daniel Miller on, who's the Texas Nationalist Movement talking about the independence of Texas and fighting for Texas's independence, and then I had Greg Straus on, who's doing the 1776 signing as a document online to push the real history of our country back into civics, to basically restart civics in our schools again, and then Scott Powell was on, who wrote a book called Rediscovering America, where he talks about the founding and the influence of the founding on each of our holidays and how God is the foundation and why we celebrate the holidays that we celebrate. Well, God bless you for doing that work and to bring those things back to people, to bring them to the forefront, and it needs to be done.

There's an ongoing educational problem situation. As I said, during the course of last year, I did seven different shows last week discussing the Declaration of Independence, how when they proposed independence, all these guys knew a fellow by the name of Dr. Joseph Warren, who in fact had had his head cut off by the British, and so that's how dangerous it was, and they knew the danger when they were doing that, and we're in dangerous times now, and I think that's maybe what I was thinking about when I was watching this celebration on PBS, and you know what? There was some incredible talent. Chicago was there.

The band Chicago playing songs from 50, 60 years ago. It was incredible. The majesty of the monuments with the fireworks was all incredible, but nobody said, I'm just going, do you have some understanding that what you guys are celebrating isn't there?

It's not there. The substance. The issue lies to the substance. I want to shift gears for a minute and talk about, we had, and so we'll take a quick break. When we come back, we're going to talk about some good news out of the Supreme Court.

Good week last week. Yeah, we had a phenomenal week on that, and I also want to talk a little bit about President Trump's legal situation. I had an attorney on John O'Connor last week, and his review of that, the AG case in New York, he said that's garbage. It should just be thrown out. 31 of the 37 counts in Florida are garbage and they should be tossed, but his analysis of the last six counts is what's concerning to him, and that has to do with the obstruction of justice, not whether or not they're classified or not classified, but that there's clear evidence that there were 50 boxes on the 23rd of May. There was an agreement for them to come back on the 2nd of June to pick up those 50 boxes, and 34 of the boxes were missing when they went back to that closet.

The evidence is that President Trump told his staff to remove those boxes. Of course, that evidence, well, we'll talk about it when we get back. Yeah. Yeah. We'll get into that. We'll see what that looks like. Yeah, and then there's one other thing, too, that was on my mind, but I'll think about it in the break.

All right. David Shostakis is our guest. Shostakis.com, our constitutional originalist, and I do want to encourage you to get over to David's site where you can pick up his book on the Declaration of Independence. So important to understand that document, and really the connectivity between the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution cannot be broken, and you can't understand one without fully understanding the other. And what you said about their understanding that they were putting their lives on the line, I think that just speaks even more so to my contention that they didn't see life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as something that God was handing them, but rather as something that God had endowed in them.

It was who they were. So you're saying, you know, look, if I pledge this, I'm pledging it because I understand that what I've written in this document is about me. God gave me, God put in me life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, these rights.

God put them in me. And the only way you're going to extinguish those rights is to extinguish me and you have been doing it. And here are the counts against you relative to how you have been attempting to extinguish my life. And I will not allow it any longer.

We'll be back with more Children's Generation Radio coming up right after this brief break. So up next, we have Clean Slate. When you have different things like cancer and different diseases that are autoimmune related, it can really help with inflammation because you're helping clean the body.

Clean Slate is a formula that's made from a natural orthosolic acid that basically is put into a formulation that's naturally occurring that uses different processes from polarization to heating to cooling to different types of catalysts, which will go in the body and really help communicate to get rid of those things that don't need to be there. People don't understand why there's so many autoimmune disorders, but our environment's toxic. The land, air and water have changed. We've been exposed to nuclear war.

And the issue is if there's a nuclear bomb or there's pollution or there's war in one country, it actually affects everything up to the stratosphere. So we're all connected and we've really got to clean things out. You can pick up your Clean Slate today at cgr4life.com that's cgr4life.com pick up your Clean Slate today. Hello, I'm Mike Lindell, CEO of MyPillow. Retailers shopping channels and now even banks have tried to cancel myself and MyPillow. Well during these times your support has meant everything to us. So my employees and I want to personally thank each and every one of you by passing this savings directly on to you. We're selling the best products ever for the best prices ever. For example, we have my standard size MyPillow regularly $69.98, now only $19.98 with your promo code. Or you can get custom fit with my premium queen size MyPillows regularly $79.98, now just $29.98. Or my king size regular $89.98, now just $34.98. So go to MyPillow.com now and use the promo code on your screen or call the 1-800 number below to receive this exclusive offer.

If you do it right now, I'm going to include a free gift with your purchase. Thank you and God bless. Hi, I'm Tim Scheff, a certified natural health practitioner of over 40 years. I went under use to a product that changed my life. The product is called Vibe, available at cgrwellness.com. I thought I was on a good nutritional program before I discovered Vibe.

I was taking the traditional vitamin mineral tablets, wasn't really feeling any different. So I tried Vibe. Vibe is an all-in-one vitamin mineral supplement. It's a liquid multivitamin. It's cold pressed, whole food sourced, non-radiated, gluten free, and has no pasteurization. Vibe is like fresh juicing without all the work.

It supports four areas of the body, cardiovascular health, immune health, anti-aging, and healthy cell replication. Vibe is available in a 32 ounce bottle for home use or a very handy one ounce travel packet for life on the go. The first time I tried Vibe, I had more energy at about 20 minutes.

I started thinking clear, even believe I slept better. Get yours today at cgrwellness.com. Coupon code chosen gen radio at checkout and receive $20 off your first order of $50 or more. That's cgrwellness.com coupon code chosen gen radio.

Get yours today. These statements have not been evaluated by the US Food and Drug Administration. Neither products do not treat, reduce, cure, or prevent disease. My passion is the fight for freedom. My father fought for a World War II defending our country. Today, we are no longer fighting with guns.

Instead, we are fighting an ideological battle for control of our country by contributing to causes that support your constitutional rights. I am Patriot Mobile. You can support Chosen Generation and make a tax deductible donation by visiting www.chosengenerationradio.com. And now, back to Chosen Generation with Pastor Greg.

And welcome back to Chosen Generation Radio, where no topic is off limits and everything filtered through biblical glasses. By the way, there is a text petition that we talked about yesterday, and if you believe that you would like to see Texas become an independent nation once again to exert its independence, especially in light of what's going on in Washington to secure our border and things of that nature, then consider getting it put on the ballot, even if you're not in favor of it, but you would just simply like to see Texans have the opportunity to vote on it. Sign the petition and let's get a vote.

Let's see where Texans stand on whether or not they are interested in seeing our state move forward in that direction. So, there you go. All right. Well, and that's part of the process, right, David? I mean, that's... Absolutely. Absolutely. And we'll continue to go back to the Declaration of Independence because after the phrase where it says consent to the governed, the next two paragraphs are devoted to the right of revolution. And the next two paragraphs are devoted to explaining when the government fails to provide protections for the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Hi, I'm Daniel Miller, president of the Texas Nationalist Movement, and I'm required by... Yeah. Sorry about that.

It automatically started. Yeah. Yeah, go ahead. So, that approach is consistent with the Declaration to say the government is not doing what it needs to do to protect the rights outlined, the unalienable rights of all of the people. And so, the declaration indicates that it's the right of the people, in fact, the duty of the people to alter or abolish the government and reestablish government in a fashion that does in fact meet the needs, meet the needs of protecting those rights.

And so, such a movement is obviously consistent with the declaration. You might have people go, well, that's treason, you can't get out. If the government is not living up... You mentioned the declaration and all the things about King George possibly interfering with somebody's rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. The declaration actually outlines what it is, how to measure when a government has failed.

And there's a checklist, 27, 28 points of the checklist that says, if the government is not doing this, they're failing the people and the people do in fact have the opportunity to do the right to change it. So, there's nothing wrong with this. Well, and that is precisely what I read right before you would come on, which is, but when a long train of abuses and usurpations pursuing invariably... Let me bring it over here. Pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism.

And then I read the definition for despotism, which is the exercise of absolute power, especially in a cruel and oppressive way. And we certainly see that there are examples of that exact behavior. Look at what's happening to children in our schools. Look at the mandates that this administration has put just in that arena by itself. Look at the mandates that they've put in with regards to the lawlessness that's taking place across our country. The release of criminals.

I mean, there's so many things. Their attempt to obstruct social media, which by the way, is another one of those cases where they were just recently reprimanded by a federal judge yesterday and told, stop trying to influence social media. Did you see that? I did not.

I did not. But people should never... Even though it's over, it's funny, the short-term memory people have, the lockdowns are not in the rear view mirror. The lockdowns were the ultimate in oppression. Epic Times has an article on it, but a federal judge has made a historic ruling by partially granting an injunction that blocks various Biden administration officials and government agencies such as the Justice Department and the FBI from working with big tech firms to censor posts on social media. Isn't it horrible that we need a judge to do this, to enter such a thing, that that's not part and parcel of just the internal understanding of what government is not supposed to do and that it should be self-limiting, but rather... And thank goodness, there's still a judge that will in fact stand up and take such action, but it is just so sad that that needs to be done.

And the things that they're censuring or attempting to censure are moral statements such as, there are two sexes, male and female, such as stop mutilating children, stop handing boys hormone drugs that castrate them, stop cutting up little girls' bodies. Oh, wait, we've got to censor that. We can't allow that. We don't want that message to go out there. Excuse me?

Yeah. You know, one nation under God, strike God. Well, the messages that they're choosing to be involved with, as you say, are terrible. But the fact is, is it doesn't matter. They shouldn't be involved in any of it. You know, whatever it is, they shouldn't be involved in censoring, oh, I don't know, medical discussions on either in either direction. You know, that's not their job. In fact, the job of the First Amendment is to allow discussions and to allow discussions of things that you disagree with, you know, is what the First Amendment is about.

And the government has no place in being involved in guiding that discussion. All right. So kind of the hit parade with regards to the Supreme Court and their decisions, the 303 Creative. Yes. And let's see, let's go through some of these because people always trying to characterize them according to issues that they want to characterize them about. Right.

The issue, the issue has nothing to do with LGB alphabet soup of things. It all has to do with government's inability or government's government should not be compelling speech. You know, the First Amendment has kind of two components. One is, of course, you're supposed to be allowed to say what it is that you want to say. The other flip side of that is the government can't make you say things that you don't want to say. Right.

And that's what the 303 Creative case is about. It's not about LGB folks. It would equally apply to an atheist who, a web designer that will not design, will not design a website for a church. You know, he says, no, you guys are promoting something I don't believe in in terms of God and Christianity or whatever.

I don't, I'm not going to design your website. It's the same. It's the flip side of that. The government can't compel you to speak.

And it would be so much better if the coverage and if people would have an explanation of what the actual issues are. Well, that would be the same thing as someone who does avow to be LGBTQ that creates websites being told you have to create a website that says the marriage is only between a man and a woman. Exactly.

That would be the exact flip side. And so it's not about what the issue is. It's about government compelling speech, making somebody say something that they disagree with. It was an affirmation of freedom for everybody. It was an attack on the LGB folks. It was an affirmation of freedom for everybody to be able to exercise their conscience according to their beliefs. And it was the ultimate defense of freedom.

So that's that one. The affirmative action situation and the college situations with Harvard and University of North Carolina. Again, it wasn't about saying that, no, you can't discriminate. You can't discriminate based on race. Just regardless, whatever your good intentions may be. No, because when you discriminate in favor of somebody, you discriminate against it's automatic. It's a zero sum game. You discriminate against somebody else. And again, it was a protection of freedom for everybody. Not a not a finding against any minorities, but rather saying, no, America should be and has been a meritocracy where we should all be treated equally under the law.

And that's what's so horrible about the coverage these days on so many subjects is that they get twisted into the message of the messenger rather than the actual subject matter that's in front of them. That's the three or three creative situation. That's the three. That's the University of North Carolina and Harvard case. And of course, we have the situation where Joe Biden tried to just make up law with the with the student loan circumstances.

It doesn't exist. It wasn't against. It had nothing to do.

It had nothing to do with student loan debt. It had to do with whether what the limits on the power of the presidents are, you know, whether the president can act unilaterally. He can't.

We don't have dictators news, you know, you know, so he can't. And so that's that's the real issue. That's the real issue there. And the flip side turns out to be, of course, we have one more important, important matter, and that was the United States Postal Service worker. And again, they changed. They changed the rules on him.

You know, right. Those agreements originally when he started, he let them know when he worked, when he was hired. That was that was the deal that he needed that they needed the Sabbath off. Yeah, they changed the rules on him.

Yeah, he didn't he didn't change his he didn't he didn't change anything about him. He came into the relationship saying, I this is my Sabbath and I need this day off. And I just need to make sure that it's clear that I have this day off. And he was told that's fine, not a problem. We'll all we will we will find someone else to work that day if it becomes a problem or whatever.

But you'll always have that day off. We understand that. And then they and then they decided no. Yeah, well, then, then of course, the Postal Service made a deal with Amazon. And so they started dealing with Jeff Bezos.

And so they're going to deal, you know, deliver Jeff stuff on Sundays. And so, so they they changed the rules, and now they wanted him to change because they changed the rules. And so it was, that's a protection for everybody.

Supreme Court was incredible last week, by protecting freedom for everyone, right? The USPS thing wasn't really about religion. It was about Oh, no, it was about keeping your word. It was about the it was about the deal that was made when the guy when the guy was hired. The race said it wasn't the discrimination stuff affirmative action wasn't about discriminating against black and brown people in favor of Asians and Asians and white folks. It was about saying no, you can't discriminate for somebody or against anybody.

You know, I'd say that's not it. And that's the best way to sum up all those cases. There's a common thread. And everything that happened in the Supreme Court, everybody.

So much commentary went out about trying to put it in a box relative to a policy or a or an issue that they're concerned with. Right. And yet the real result of that was a maximized freedom for everybody across the board by treating them all equal under the law. No compelled speech, no racial discrimination, no change in it, no change in the deals with your with your employee. And no, no saying that you can't, that you have that you have to do something. I'm trying to figure the fourth case.

I've lost it now. But in any event, it was no compelled. Well, no, the idea of no compelled speech.

Yes, the last one the the the idea that there that there that there should be no compelled speech. We still have a chevron doctrine case that is that is there. And we have a I believe some legislation that that was proposed to overturn that as well. But there still is the chevron doctrine case. And I guess that's not going to come up until this coming fall. Right? Yeah, it was said, it was argued, but they did not issue a decision.

Right. On the related case that but they, I think they chipped away at it earlier with that with an EPA case. And for those that you mentioned, everyone, Chevron is a is a doctrine that basically says that the administrative agencies can interpret their own law. The Federal Court has to defer to an interpretation of an administrative agency, which, again, is in insanity when it comes to a constitution, because, of course, Article three judges, their duty ever since Marbury versus Madison in 1803, their duty is to say what the law is. And it's not the duty of an administrative agency and a bunch of bureaucrats who were not elected to begin with. And so so there's hope that they're going to make these bureaucrats comply with them with the law where they can't be judged and jury. That's that's the whole scheme of agencies where agencies get to essentially issue regulations that are that are, in fact, as the full force and effect of law, that they get to issue citations based on the regulations that they that they put together and that they then get to be the interpreters of the law that they put together. That means they get to be judge, jury and executioner.

That's utterly incompatible with the separation of powers that the United States was established upon. And so there's good hope that that's going to be overruled. Did we talk about student loans? I died briefly. I went I went through that. Oh, yeah, I did.

That's the fourth one that I didn't mention. OK, well, there's the president is not a dictator. You know, it wasn't about student loans. Again, it was about the limits on presidential power, you know, but people talk about it being policy and against it and somehow or other having something to do with whether it's a good idea or a bad idea to get rid of student debt. The fact is, is that it's not it's not that's not relevant. What's relevant is, does the president have the authority to do what Biden tried to do?

The answer to the question is an emphatic no. And there's a corollary there between that and and and the federal judge that I opened this segment up with saying, hey, you can't meddle in in social media and determine what can and cannot be shared in social media. You're not supposed to be going in and limiting and but that is a free speech issue, is it not?

Oh, that one. It's a First Amendment issue where the where it says Congress shall make no law, you know, abridging the freedom of speech. And while while, of course, the First Amendment says Congress, it's been interpreted to apply to all aspects of the government. So in terms of the government, that is executive agencies meddling in the censorship of speech.

They're in violation of the First Amendment. Okay, um, let's, let's talk a little bit about this. This indictment of President Trump, I mentioned to you I had, I had John O'Connor on last week, and we talked a bit about, you know, the different cases and and his analysis being that the New York Attorney General case should should pretty much just go away, because there's nothing there. And that the first 31 counts in the Florida case should also go away. But that where where you run into a problem is in the case, the the counts that specifically address obstruction of justice, because you had a you had an agreement, whereby boxes were supposed to be picked up. And when they came back to pick up the boxes, there were boxes that were missing. And and they were being withheld under under the direction of President Trump. Your thoughts on that? Well, there's a there's a number of issues.

Of course, if you if you say the first 31 counts are not any good. When you talk about obstruction of justice, you have to be obstructing some something right there has to be an obstruction of something. And if in fact, he has the authority to do the essentially possess the first 31, the materials that's involved in the first 31, then if he doesn't produce the boxes for people, then he's not obstructing anything because there's no crime to begin with.

That's that that's an interesting thing. And reneging out an agreement, that's that's a different subject. But of course, that all, unfortunately, is hinging upon. Information from President Trump's advisers and the most disturbing portion of the indictments are the quotes from three or four of his lawyers. That is, they violated attorney client privilege. And the the in this case is built upon the violation of attorney client privilege, including all the other accounts. It's that the house of cards is all built upon the violation of some very, very important principles. Our problem, our problem, I was I was listening to Seb Gorka yesterday and he actually pointed out something interesting. And that is the problem is, is we try and debate these people on actual, real, true legal principles when they don't care. They don't care.

Again, the whole situation is everything surrounding this issue of these documents and President Trump actually is governed by something called the Presidential Records Act, which is a which is a civil situation which deprives the National Archives and Records Administration the authority to demand anything of the president. And so and it was NARA that went to the grand jury that asked for the subpoenas that he was to supposedly resist it. So they they pretend the law is something and then we try and debate them on what their actual law is. This is a is such an Alice in Wonderland problem. So here's it. Here's a question because I was thinking about what you actually it's funny, I actually was had been thinking about before you had said it, I was thinking about the obstruction of justice is simply predicated on there.

There's an investigation. And he he hands the material over. And they look at it and they say, Yep, you you had a right to have this and then they hand it right back to him.

I mean, it would have been that simple, honestly. The but but because he decided that he was going to ignore the request, or or, you know, interfere with the process. That becomes the obstruction. Except the request is not lawful to begin with.

No, let's put it this way. The request is lawful. OK, and is unlawful. OK, they're under the Presidential Records Act. They they have the authority to actually ask the president. But there's there's a Supreme Court case or excuse me, a District of Columbia case that indicates that the president's authority to decide what to hand over or not to hand over is pretty darn absolute. So if so, if they're investigating whether there's anything in there that that really doesn't belong to President Trump, that that is more evergreen, that that that is something that that the current president needs to have in documentation in order to be able to continue the continuity of the office of president.

And they just need to look in the boxes to make sure there isn't anything evergreen that's in there that that he needs. The state of the Presidential Records Act is that the president is the president, even the ex-president, has the authority to tell the records. And he didn't get a request from the White House. OK, he didn't get a request from the I mean, you're painting a scenario that there would be a request. I'm asking I'm not painting a scenario. I'm just asking.

I'm asking. I'm only asking if you're talking about some some possible material that may be of value to the current administration. You know, I would assume that such a request would come from the White House. This all started with a request from the National Archives and Records Administration. That was that was the predicate of everything that happened ever since.

Gotcha. And the National Archives and Records Administration has authority to ask the former president for materials. They in fact, there was such a request that based on a FOIA filing by Judicial Watch a long time ago against the President Clinton, and it was litigated. And the and the judge in that case said, you know what? They can ask, but it's ultimately the decision of the president, i.e. or the former president.

And Bill Clinton turned down the request and they said he turned it down. So that's it. It's over. You know, and that's it.

It's pretty blanket. Black letter law that the predicate for this. And then when the National Archives and Records Administration didn't get what they wanted from President Trump, they went to the Justice Department, the Justice Department to a grand jury. They got a subpoena.

There was no none of this. Again, all these people were pretending pretending the law can do what they wanted to do. Right. They don't they don't care. And that's what's so difficult about the debate is we try and debate on the terms of thinking, you know, if we have actual legitimate argument, we have a legitimate law and we have we should win the argument based on facts, logic and actual existing law. It doesn't matter because they don't care.

They don't care about facts, logic and existing law. So they reel us into this trap of getting into this debate where they go, yeah, well, that's interesting, but we don't care. I understand.

Believe me. No, I was I was talking about that before you came on relative to, you know, the the arguments about, you know, kid pornography being put in our in our children's school. And and and the argument that I got back was as well, but that's the normative now in in society. And so, you know, wake up what you know, why are you Why are you having an issue with with it with it being presented to children? Don't you know that kids are seeing porn all over the place now?

And I'm and and I mean, I it's for me, it's like, that's not even an argument. Okay. They shouldn't be seeing it outside of school or inside of school. Children don't need to be being exposed to that, period.

And so just, yeah, justifying it being exposed to them in school by suggesting that well, but they get it exposed to them out of school at home on the on the this and here and there and whatnot. That doesn't make it right. Two wrongs, right? The old adage two wrongs don't make a right. Anyway, yeah, the the illogical amoral behavior of the left and folks, this is this is the issue that we're that we're up against right now. We are we are battling an amoral culture that has absolutely a significant group. Some would estimate that number to be, you know, 40 to 45% of our population has no moral barometer whatsoever, and doesn't and doesn't think that there should be one and and when it comes to the issue of absolutes, that number climbs up over 60% of the population doesn't believe there's any such thing as an absolute.

I mean, and the irony of that, and I got to close with this, but the irony of that David is this. When you say I absolutely don't believe there's absolutes. Hello, you just made an absolute declaration. That is incomplete contradiction to what you just said you don't believe. Oh my goodness.

Are we in the dark? All right. Hey, thank you for being here today. I greatly appreciate it, sir. Thanks so much. I hope everybody did have a fine independence holiday.

I also hope that they continuing going forward take some time to spend some time with the Declaration of Independence here here. All right, we'll be back with more Children's Generation Radio coming up hour two straight ahead. This is Adam Mundell with state air. We need people on radio willing to speak about the Bible, the Constitution and putting God back in our nation again. So join me in sponsoring chosen generation and Pastor Greg. Call him today at 830-446-3624. That's 830-446-3624. This has blessed my business and it will bless yours. Thank you.