Share This Episode
The Charlie Kirk Show Charlie Kirk Logo

The Process is the Penalty with John Eastman and Rep. Andrew Clyde

The Charlie Kirk Show / Charlie Kirk
The Truth Network Radio
September 11, 2023 7:00 pm

The Process is the Penalty with John Eastman and Rep. Andrew Clyde

The Charlie Kirk Show / Charlie Kirk

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 517 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


September 11, 2023 7:00 pm

The targeted prosecution of Donald Trump and all his close associates will be a success even if not a single person is convicted. That's because the process itself is the punishment. Trump White House adviser John Eastman talks about how the coordinated attack on his personal freedom and livelihood isn't just about him, but also about intimidating all lawyers from ever working with Republicans. Also, Rep. Andrew Clyde talks about the prospects for using an approaching government shutdown to force out concessions on Jack Smith's prosecution. Plus, Charlie gives a rare bit of good news from a blue state, courtesy of Glenn Youngkin in Virginia.

Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/support

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

Hey, feeling unsure about your finances these days?

You're not alone. That's why Noble Gold Investments is here to help. Just hear it straight from the people who they've helped. The Noble crew walked me through everything with no stress.

With their help, I could finally sleep easy at night. And now this month, Noble Gold Investments is handing out a free 5-ounce silver America the Beautiful coin if you qualify for an IRA. Invest in gold and silver with Noble Gold Investments. Go to noblegoldinvestments.com right now.

That is noblegoldinvestments.com right now. Hey, everybody. It's time for The Charlie Kirk Show. Andrew Clyde joins us to talk about trying to defund Jack Smith and John Eastman.

A victim, a target of the out-of-control regime joins us to continue to discuss. As always, you can email me directly, freedom at charliekirk.com. Subscribe to our podcast by opening up your podcast application and type in Charlie Kirk Show. That's Charlie Kirk Show. As you get involved with Turning Point, USA, it's the most important student movement in the country. So go to tpusa.com.

That is tpusa.com. Buckle up, everybody. Here we go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus. I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks. I want to thank Charlie. He's an incredible guy. His spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point, USA. We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here.

Brought to you by the loan experts I trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at andrewandtodd.com. Joining us now is Representative Andrew Clyde. Congressman, thank you for joining us. He tweeted out, the American people gets to decide who wins the White House, not the deep state. We must defund the left, sham prosecutions against Donald Trump. Republican lawmaker unveils push to block funding for Trump prosecutions, obviously, but this was met with opposition by 16 Republicans. Inexplicably, we will name their names shortly. Actually, we'll get to that second. Congressman, thank you for joining us and tell us about it. Well, thank you, Charlie.

It's great to be with you. Well, I think it's important that, as you said, the American people decide who our next president is going to be and not the deep state, not the weaponized government. And we are seeing time after time where the federal government is being used to prosecute a political candidate.

That doesn't happen in America. That's kind of the conduct that you see in banana republics, where those in power use their power to prosecute and try and throw in jail their political opponent. So these two amendments, one would defund from the federal level any funds going to the prosecution of a presidential candidate between now and the November 24 elections. And then the other amendment would do the same thing. It would deny federal funding to any state entity that does the same thing, that prosecutes a presidential candidate. You know, it's very even handed, both Republican or Democrat.

So what I'm trying to do is prevent the process from becoming the penalty here, because that's exactly what the left, the weaponized left is trying to do is you can't recover from the process. So how is this being met by and I was talking about actually when you tried to defund the FBI headquarters, we'll get that in a second. How is this being met by your more moderate Republican colleagues? Well, so far, for those that I have spoken to on the Appropriations Committee and in leadership, it's being met very positively.

I think it's the right thing to do. There's still some work to be done. So I'm calling on all of my Republican colleagues to support these amendments. It's going to have to go into the Commerce Justice Science appropriation, which has not yet been marked up in our Appropriations Committee. I'm on that committee.

And so I'll be offering both of those amendments and I expect that they will be approved and go into the base text of the bill. But then if we do a C.R. as well, you know, there's some qualifications for any C.R. to go forward, in my opinion, then it would have to be part of the C.R.

as well. So I think it's very, very important that all the Republicans get on board and support these amendments. So there was also a question about blocking the FBI's new headquarters. And is it true that 16 Republicans got in the way of that, Congressman, when you were attempting to do that?

Tell us about it. Well, that was in the markup for the financial services and general government appropriation. And there is about 670 million dollars that was set aside for the FBI's new building. It's about a little over half the amount that currently exists. The whole project is like four billion.

It's going to be greater, bigger than the Pentagon in size, which is absolutely ridiculous. The FBI does not need it by introducing an amendment to defund that 670 million and to apply that to our national debt, to pay off that portion of our national debt. And it did not pass in the in the appropriations process. We had 16 Republicans that voted against it. Now, I'll tell you that after that vote, there were some that came to me and said, hey, I think I made the wrong vote and we're going to give them another opportunity. When that actual appropriation comes to the House floor, I'm going to introduce the same amendment again.

And I think there will be some change of heart, I believe, when it comes to their vote on that amendment on the House floor. So, yeah, there was a list of 16 Republicans that resisted it. Is that correct? That is correct. OK, so I want to name them. And if I have the wrong list, correct me.

But it looks as if it's Steve Womack, David Valadeo, Mike Simpson, Hal Rogers, Daniel Newhouse, Julia Latao, David Joyce, Ashley Henson, Kay Granger, Scott Franklin, Jake Elsie, Mario Diaz-Balart, Juan Siscamani, Jerry Carl, Ken Calvert, Mark Amati and Robert Alderhalt. What possible reason could they give you for opposing that? Well, not a lot of them gave me a reason at all. But, you know, mind you, some of them came to me after the fact and said, hey, you know, I think I made the wrong choice.

Why? Because they were hearing from their constituents. The FBI does not need a new building.

I mean, they've got $1.2 billion set aside, $670 or so million in financial services, general government appropriation and another $500 and some million in the Commerce Justice Science appropriation. So I think these folks will probably take a strong second look when the amendment comes onto the House floor for the FBI bill. And I believe that there will be some change of votes.

I really do. And I hope so, because that's the right thing to do. The FBI has been so weaponized as of, you know, in the last couple of years under this current administration. There is truly a two tiered system of justice here.

We are seeing it time and time again when you have the treatment of Hunter Biden and then you have the treatment of President Trump and all of those who support the conservative voices that are crying out. So I think we're going to see some different votes here. So let's now focus on September 30th. This looks to be the big day, right? So a previous Congress punted it to really, really neuter you guys.

So this date has been on the calendar for quite some time. So you're inheriting a previous Congress's funding deadline, September 30th. What are you guys willing to do? Our position on this program, no short term funding bills, line in the sand. We need a fight.

We gave you guys a majority for a reason. Where's your head at? What are the asks? What are you willing? How close to the line are you guys willing to get?

Walk us through it. Well, I'll tell you, first off, you know, we've known the September 30th deadline has been here for a long time. And we promised as Republicans that we would bring 12 appropriation bills out of committee onto the House floor. And I expect us to do that.

I expect us to keep our word. I'm on the Appropriations Committee. I'm certainly willing to be there from from today until the very end of September so that we can get all these the rest of the appropriation bills across the finish line. Ten of them have come out of committee already. We've got two left to deal with in committee, both the Labor Health Human Services Education Appropriation and the Commerce Justice Science Appropriation. Those are the two we have left in committee. But we've got 10 that are available to go to the House floor. Actually, one already has the Millcon VA passed in July. So we've got nine that can go immediately to the House floor and get a vote. We need to be doing that to keep our word.

Any short term continuing resolution, though, cannot be an unqualified or blind or what they call clean CR. Otherwise, we are simply promoting the policies of the policies and the spending levels of Nancy Pelosi. And that's wrong.

I will never support that. And I'll tell you, a significant number of Republicans will not support that either. So that message needs to be heard loud and clear by the leadership. So just really quick, Congressman, and I just I'm hearing different things and I've always gotten along with Speaker McCarthy and I still do. But there's whispers that there might be a vote to vacate.

Are you hearing that from other members? Well, I will tell you that a clean CR or an unqualified CR, it will risk our majority and therefore it will risk the speakership. I think what you're seeing is is the country gave us the majority to change the direction, change the course of Congress. We had the speakers fight in January, which I think fundamentally changed the way Congress operates. And I think that has to continue or we will truly jeopardize our majority and we will jeopardize Kevin McCarthy, a speaker. There has to be some qualifications to any CR like HR2 that we all voted for should be attached to it. We've got to stop the weaponization of our families and the weaponization of our federal government on the Department of Justice.

And there can be, in my opinion, no new money for Ukraine, none whatsoever. That's right. Absolutely.

Yes. Congressman Clyde, thank you for taking the time. We'll be watching very closely. We believe there's been one hundred and ten year war where the administrative state has been able to go unchecked and September 30th is the first time that we see the mandate from the voters, the majority defang the beast. So we're with you.

One hundred percent red line as red as a line can get. Congressman, we're with you. Thanks so much. Thank you very much, Charlie.

Great to be with you. This summer, you could spend thousands of dollars on planes, hotels and tourist traps, or you could spend less money on a beautiful garden that will give you years of pleasure with fast growing trees dot com. Fast growing trees dot com is thousands of easy to grow plant shrub and tree varieties expertly curated for your unique climate needs from Meyer lemons to evergreens to shade trees and everything in between. No more waiting in lines and hauling heavy plants around with fast growing trees dot com. You order online and your plants arrive at your door in just a few days. You've got to check it out. I love fast growing trees dot com because I found the amazing trees I was looking for and their plant experts help me keep it thriving.

They can help you, too. And with fast growing trees, a 30 day alive and thrive guarantee, you know, everything will look great. Fresh out of the box. Fifteen percent off at fast growing trees dot com slash Kirk. Join almost two million happy fast growing trees customers. Go to fast growing trees dot com slash Kirk right now to get 15 percent off your entire order.

Fifteen percent off at fast growing trees dot com slash Kirk. Do you remember the story about a young lady who was sexually assaulted by a transgender student in the restroom? This story was covered up by the Loudoun County School District. This story was so egregious, so terrible that it very well might have triggered Glenn Youngkin to become governor of Virginia. And I do not want Glenn Youngkin to run for the presidency. He's a little too moderate for my liking on certain issues, but he's a very successful governor in a traditionally what's become a blue state. And he has my respect for that. So he also has my respect over what he did a couple days ago, kind of bucking a more normie trend of what some Republican governors would do.

He went all in and did the right thing here. So a father, Scott Thomas Smith, shows up at the school board and was trying to get the school board's attention that his daughter was raped and or sexually assaulted. We don't know the details, but raped is not incorrect by a trans student. And the school board covered it up because of course the major institutions of power in this country will go to great lengths to pander to the trans lobby, the alphabet mafia, and the purple haired jihadis. The NCAA did this against Riley Gaines. They'll do whatever, anything they have to do to pander to the trans.

They'll do that. So this trans person who raped his daughter, he was trying to get the school board's attention. Hey, these bathroom policies resulted in my daughter being raped. He was confronted by a agitator and a massive verbal confrontation ensued. He got upset and he should got upset. His daughter was raped, but instead he was charged with obstruction of justice and disorderly conduct.

The father was charged with obstruction of justice. Let's get this picture here. And here is a father who is just in a state of primal rage. And boy, would I be in a state of primal rage. And you, if you wouldn't be in a state of primal rage, I doubt your love of your daughter.

I'll be honest. And of course, as the Democrats, that's him right there, begging for somebody to listen. My daughter was raped by a trans person in a restroom. My daughter was raped by a trans person in a restroom.

No one would listen. Instead, the trans activists called him a domestic terrorist and the trans people get what they want. He got indicted. Not to mention the school board covered it up. They sent the trans rapist to another school where I believe the trans rapist raped again.

If I'm not mistaken, if my memory serves me correctly, they just sent him to another school and they covered it up, criminally covered it up. So now this man, Scott Smith, was facing criminal charges and was convicted. Governor Glenn Youngkin, to his great credit yesterday, issued a full and complete and absolute pardon for Scott Smith. This is the right move, Glenn Youngkin.

That's exactly right. And Glenn Youngkin in his interviews has been unwavering, by the way, in his reason. He didn't do this kind of like, well, you know, there's facts on both sides. He leaned in. I don't know if we have the tape or not. It's fine. He said he did what any father would have done.

It's the right answer, Glenn Youngkin. The 15 year old attacker, the rapist, was found guilty of sexually assaulting his daughter and then did it again at a different school. But of course, if you're trans, you get all the privileges. The whole society will reconfigure itself because of your mental delusion and your mental illness, even though his daughter was raped. This is the same state where a girl was basically transitioning by her, transitioned by her school while keeping it secret from her parents. And this led to her getting sex trafficked. Virginia schools are largely demented right now.

This is the right move by Youngkin. This crisis is not going to fix itself overnight. One of the reasons why Virginia schools are demented is because they're the richest counties in America.

And they say, what do you mean? Wealth, secular wealth, merges seamlessly with academic wokeism. Secular wealth and wokeism, it's like a marriage made in heaven.

It's a match made in heaven. Because you have white liberals that, the wine moms, if you will, with these massive existential voids, and they try to fill it with something and they fill it with 1619 project, queer theory, and their kids become basically, it's a petri dish for wokeism. Very similar, by the way, to the Highland Park, Illinois Country Club story of the poverty simulation. And a story where we get almost nothing but negative news in this news cycle. This is a shining light. Glenn Youngkin did the right thing here. He should be praised. And I hope more Republican office holders and leaders use their political power to defend parents.

Hey everybody, Charlie Kirk here. I'll tell you who the unsung heroes of COVID are. Of course, the frontline workers. But what about those business owners who hung in there and paid their employees? If you stayed open and paid your people, you could be eligible for up to $26,000 per employee at covidtaxrelief.org. $26,000 per employee, this is not a loan. There are government funds you don't have to pay back. All types of businesses, including nonprofits and churches, can be eligible, but you need to apply now because Congress may pull back these funds.

Go to covidtaxrelief.org. It has helped tens of thousands of businesses just like yours secure over $500 million. Unlike the others, they charge nothing.

Zero up front. They do all the work and share a percentage of the cash that they get you. You did the tough thing for your employees. Let covidtaxrelief.org help you get up to $26,000 per employee. Go to covidtaxrelief.org. That is covidtaxrelief.org. covidtaxrelief.org help you get up to $26,000 per employee. You pay nothing up front.

They do all the work and you share a percentage of the cash they get you. covidtaxrelief.org. Joining us now is John Eastman, who is under attack in basically every possible and conceivable direction. You guys can support him at givesendgo.com slash Eastman. John, thank you so much for taking the time. John, give us the update, not just the indictments of what's happening in Georgia, but there's this disbarment saga that's playing out.

Tell us about it. Multi-front war against John Eastman. Well, the disbarment proceedings have been going on since June. We had to stop for a bit over the summer due to conflicts in lawyer schedules, but we're now entering week five, and there will be at least another week, six weeks of full trial addressing claims against me that were initiated by this radical left-wing group called States United Democracy Center. And this is part of the overall effort to disbar every attorney that had any involvement with the Trump legal challenges in 2020. But more importantly, as its sister-in-arms cohort, the 65 Project founders said, our goal is not just to disbar these attorneys, but to make them so toxic in their firms and in their communities that right-wing legal talent will never want to take on these election challenges again. In other words, they want to destroy our adversarial system of justice in the election context, and quite frankly, elsewhere as well, whether it's any conservative cause, whether it's vaccine issues, whether it's transgender men in your daughter's locker rooms or competing against them in the swim meets or what have you, they want to scare conservative lawyers away from taking on those representations. And the costs they're trying to impose on me and my family, millions of dollars in legal fees, it's having its effect. People are scared to stand up.

Well, I wish maybe I was more scared, but I'm taking it on and fighting it with everything we got because our ability to be a free people is at stake here, in my view. Yeah, it's the entire constitutional republic that's at stake. John, I read the indictment. It seems as if they're criminalizing, first and foremost, being a lawyer. This is the buried lead here, is that you're allowed to have private consultations with your clients. This is extraordinary, John, where they are trying to go after the practice of representing clients that the regime doesn't like.

No, that's right. And their tenuous hook on that is, well, lawyers aren't allowed to work with clients to commit crimes. And the crime supposedly is that we continue to challenge the results of the election after some government officials said there wasn't anything to see here. Bill Barr famously said, without having ever done any investigations of substance, that, well, I find no evidence of significant enough fraud to have altered the election. Well, he didn't talk about the illegality, which is acknowledged. He didn't talk about the fact that he didn't really do any investigations.

He didn't talk about the fact that when the investigations were getting started, he personally called to shut them down. And we're just supposed to bend our knee because somebody in the establishment wing of the Republican Party or leading Democrats in state offices have said there's nothing to see here, move on, be good little sheep. And that's what's at issue. And it's not a crime to challenge illegality in the election. In fact, it's our birthright. It's called free speech.

It's called the right to petition our government for redress of grievances. And if they succeed in criminalizing that with creative and expansive, clever interpretations of federal or state criminal law, we're done. And that's why I'm fighting with everything I got. And I know President Trump is, and I know the others on that Georgia indictment list are, and I know the unindicted co-conspirators in the federal action are as well. I mean, there is a lot at stake here.

And I know you know this, Charlie. And, you know, people are waking up to it on our side of the aisle. Not enough yet. We need to expose what's going on and be very clear, crystal clear. This is a moment of clarity for the country. And we've got too many people sitting on the sidelines at the moment. But these really are what Thomas Paine, you know, remember 200 years, Thomas Paine said, these are the times that try men's souls.

And what we need are true patriots, not summer soldiers or sunshine patriots, people that are only patriotic when the times are good. That's right. And so, John, if you watch MSNBC, they've kind of turned you into the poster child for overturning democracy. What is your response to that? Well, you know, they've got not a shred of evidence to support that. Their claim is that I was trying to investigate to get the actual winner of the election certified, whoever that was, that would be in favor of democracy, not overturning it.

They have to begin with the premise that the election was free and fair and that Biden clearly won in order to make that kind of charge. And that's the very thing that is so hotly in dispute. It was at the time.

It remains so because our efforts to investigate were thwarted at every turn. Yeah. And so then you have this idea of co-conspirators.

Do you have any idea of timeline? And it just seems as if, I mean, this Fulton County district attorney, they're not serious people. This is not well thought through.

It's legally full of holes. But now you're going to have to mount a very serious defense against this aggressive Fulton County DA. By the way, there's typos in there indictment and they send out grand jury reports. I mean, this is not exactly the all-star squad of, you know, prosecutors.

So John, walk us through the coming timeline. Sure, but they are getting, I think, a lot of help from all-star squads behind the scenes. We've seen some evidence of that. Look, the fact that they published the indictment on the court's website before the grand jury even met to hand down the indictment raises serious constitutional questions on whether a grand jury comprised of citizens rather than the prosecutor herself is the one that brought this indictment. Two of the co-defendants, Ken Shesbro and Sidney Powell, filed notices of speedy trial as is their constitutional right. And the judge has ordered that those trials proceed beginning October 23rd. The rest of the co-defendants, I think all the other 17, myself included, President Trump included, Rudy Giuliani included, among others, have filed a notice motion to sever from that speedy trial because they're going to hand over next Friday two terabytes of discovery materials and expect us to go through all that in a couple of weeks. In preparation of trial, it's absurd.

And so I think the judge has already indicated he's going to allow the severance and allow trial on a more timely timeframe. But Fannie Willis is running for attorney general of the state of Georgia. She's made very clear that this is her campaign pitch. She's raising money off of it.

All of this is untoward. And she's doing it using creative interpretations to put the most neutral gloss on it one can of Georgia racketeering law, that somehow the political campaign itself was a racketeering enterprise. She's got a charge against me for soliciting elected officials to violate their oath of office because I testified before the Georgia legislature was called to testify at their request about the legal authority the legislature had if it determined the election had been conducted illegally.

There's nothing wrong about that. And it's certainly not soliciting them to violate their oath of office. It's soliciting them, petitioning them to do the investigation that is necessary to determine what, if anything, they needed to do in order to uphold their oath of office. So all of this is distorted.

And yet it's scoring political points with the hallelujah chorus and the mainstream media that supports every chink that can be brought against President Trump. Here's Cut 25. It's Newt Gingrich playing into this idea that Fulton County is a proxy of the wishes and wants of Washington, D.C.

Play Cut 25. That I am told, this is here say, but I am told by a reliable source that Friday evening, somebody from Washington called the District Attorney in Atlanta and said, you have to indict on Monday. We have to cover up all of the mistakes we just made with Weiss. And she said, apparently, my jurors aren't coming back till Tuesday. And they said, you didn't hear me.

You have to indict on Monday. And she said, we're not going to get here before noon. They said, that doesn't matter. She said, this means it's going to be eight or nine or 10 o'clock at night.

Said, it doesn't matter. We need the news media shifting. Who made that phone call?

We don't know. And I'm telling you up front, this is hearsay, but it's from a person who has remarkably good sources. I totally believe it, though, because that would explain why they leaked and they messed up on the clerk document, why she was exhausted and why they had the 11 p.m. press conference, Mr. Speaker. John, your reaction?

Well, I saw that, Charlie, when it came out, and it's explosive. I hope eventually we get to the bottom of that because it shows not just a corruption in the abuse of the Georgia criminal statutes, but a corruption in the very notion of the grand jury process. Grand juries are there to serve as a check against political prosecutions.

And if the grand jury was kind of an afterthought in this, that the indictment had already been drafted, that they were not really the ones that made the indictment decisions, then that's a huge constitutional problem. And I suspect during the course of the trial and the discovery back and forth, we will get to the bottom of it because that's a huge expose. Can you say the link again, John, how people can support you?

Replug that, please. GiveSendGo.com slash Eastman. It's a terrific site. We use it for updates. We use it for people to send us financial support because we need it. It's millions of dollars that we're dealing with. And we also use it.

People are able to send prayers, which my wife and I read and they're heartwarming and they help in our darker moments. John, walk us through the legal technicalities of appealing to have this in federal court versus state court. I'm still just shocked that we're putting up with a local DA, indicting a former president for activities he did while as president, then indicting his lawyers for advice he gave the president while president.

John Eastman. And indicting other federal officials like Jeff Clark, who was assistant attorney general at the Department of Justice, and electors who are federal officials as well. So there's a federal statute that says if you've got a criminal charge brought against federal officers for work they did while they were federal officials within the scope of their federal duties, that they can remove that to federal court. This is a function of the supremacy clause of the Constitution. I mean, think about every county, every local DA, if they could prosecute federal officials, it would shut the federal government down for anything the states didn't want the federal government doing and the valid exercise of its powers. So that statute's there.

Mark Meadows brought the first one of those. His hearing was held last week, and unfortunately, the judge denied his request for removal, but that was immediately appealed to the 11th federal US Circuit Court. Several others, the electors, Jeff Clark, and I think President Trump likely are filing motions to remove as well. And then the big question is, if any one of those gets granted, does it take the whole case with them? As some case law suggests, it must.

So stay tuned on that. We may not be in the Fulton County State courtroom. We may be in the federal US District Court in Northern District of Georgia.

Yeah, the jurisdiction issues are remarkable. And so have they notified you whether or not you're going to be tried with another defendant? Because they're trying to do that with some of the other people they've indicted. So all we know so far is that Sidney Powell and Ken Cheesbrough will be tried together on a speedy trial, very quick timeframe, beginning October 23rd. The judge has not ruled on whether all other co-defendants will be tried at the same time, but he sent a very strong signal last week that that was not going to be the case.

We expect to learn more today or tomorrow on that. Miss Willis is, of course, pushing hard to have this thing tried early in the spring, right in the middle of the primary season for the election for president. Just like the judge up in DC has scheduled the trial to begin the day before Super Tuesday on the Washington DC charges against President Trump. Anybody that doesn't think that this is political should watch that timeline because it's overtly political and they're stretching the law in order to interfere with the presidential election.

I mean, there's no two ways about it. It is a direct and total interference and destruction of a presidential election. They're trying to abolish the election. They're destroying it. They don't want elections.

They don't want the will of the people to remain. And so and then now that enters all these other issues of Jack Smith and how that relates with with Fannie Willis. And the judge, is there any indication of this judge in Georgia from any pre-trial motions that's willing to push back on Fannie Willis? Or is this is this kind of a corrupt deal as they've set it up so far? So what we've seen so far of this judge is encouraging. He's a relatively new judge.

He's in his mid-30s. But the hearings he's conducted so far has been by the book. Fannie Willis was obviously trying, okay, if we're going to do speedy trial, we're going to do all 19 of them at the same time. And he hasn't issued a ruling on that yet, but strongly came down and says that's just it's just not going to be possible. I mean, one, even on a on a regular time frame on a trial of this size, you're not going to be able to try 19 people at the same time. When you've got competing motions, you're going to have you don't have a courtroom big enough to handle all the 19 teams of lawyers that are going to be involved or the 19 defendants. So this judge, though new, seems to understand the terrible impracticalities of doing what DA Fannie Willis has requested.

We don't know yet what the order's going to come down, but so far he looked like he was a very strong judge and kind of knew the dynamics at play here. John Eastman, excellent commentary. We are behind you 100%.

It's GiveSendGo.com slash Eastman. Please join again soon. Thank you. Thank you, Charlie. Take care. Thank you. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us your thoughts. There's always freedom at CharlieKirk.com. Thank you so much for listening and God bless. Thank you. to grow up and get back to work. Introducing the number one woke free job board in America, red balloon dot work.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-09-27 20:06:25 / 2023-09-27 20:19:49 / 13

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime