New York’s One Law: “Get Trump” with Alan Dershowitz and Rep. Thomas Massie

We get it. You're busy. You don't have time to waste on the mainstream media. That's why Salem News Channel is here. We have hosts worth watching, actually discussing the topics that matter.

Andrew Wilkow, Dinesh D'Souza, Brandon Tatum, and more. Open debate and free speech you won't find anywhere else. We're not like the other guys. We're Salem News Channel. Watch any time on any screen for free 24 seven at snc.tv and on local now channel 525. Hey everybody today the Charlie Kirk show Thomas Massey and Alan Dershowitz on an action packed episode. We talk about New York trial with Donald Trump, the civil trial, and then also we discuss the Thomas Massey speaker debate.

You'll love it. Email us as always freedom at charliekirk.com. That is freedom at charliekirk.com.

Subscribe to our podcast, open up your podcast app and type in charliekirkshow and become a member charliekirk.com and click on the members tab. Get involved with the most important organization in America. That is tpusa.com. That is tpusa.com. Start a high school or college chapter today at tpusa.com. Buckle up everybody. Here we go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campuses. 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. Momentarily, we're going to welcome Professor Alan Dershowitz to the program on this unbelievable story out of New York. You know, I'm not far from Palm Beach here and I know the Palm Beach landscape pretty well. And a friend of mine who's been a donor to Turning Point USA has a five-bedroom, five-bath home that is selling and has offers in for 70 million dollars. 70 million dollars. In Palm Beach, you could have a shack and it's worth like 12 million bucks. Leticia James has a tweet out where she says that Mar-a-Lago is worth 28 million dollars. Mar-a-Lago, which is easily 35 to 40 bedrooms. Oceanfront property.

It bisects Ocean Boulevard, if you know Palm Beach, and many of you I'm sure have driven by just to see the beautiful Mar-a-Lago. Plush gardens. Not just a pool, but a hotel-style pool. It's a mansion beyond a mansion. It has a world-class event center, which we've done events at before. It has 58 bedrooms. Thank you, Ryan. 33 bathrooms.

A 29-foot Pietra Dura marble top dining table and 12 fireplaces. That's just one element of the outrage here. Joining us now is the legendary Professor Alan Dershowitz.

Professor, thank you for joining the program. Professor, you always say we're at three bananas, four bananas, six bananas. How many bananas are we at now considering the Trump fraud trial and how that's going?

We're at six, but we're getting to seven with Letitia James. I mean, her outrageous charges. First of all, there were no complainants. There were no victims. He didn't try to defraud the banks. He could have gotten his loans. He got loans in Atlantic City.

Nobody else got loans in Atlantic City. All he had to do was sign his name and he was going to get the loan. If he puffed the value of his properties, it wasn't to defraud the bank. It was to get into the Forbes, you know, 100.

It was to, you know, just puff a little, be a big shot and be the strongest guy, the biggest guy in town. This is an absurd, absurd case. And if Letitia James wants to arrange for me to buy Mar-a-Lago at $27 billion, I'll buy it tomorrow and sell it to 20 times that amount. Yeah, that's right. So, Professor, walk us through some of the technical details here. This was a judge trial, not a jury trial. This is a civil case. I mean, you are the legal expert here. I'm simply a layman.

It's an unusual thing. And then the judge came forward with the judgment and then Trump showed up. Can you just walk through the details here?

Because even I'm a little confused. Yeah, even if the Trump people had demanded a jury trial, the judge would have taken it away from them because the summary judgment basically says the evidence is so clear and overwhelming that you don't need a jury. I, the judge, can make the decision about how much everything is worth. And of course, he got everything wrong, which shows the need for a jury trial. But he took away the jury trial even from the initial part. Now we have a second part of the case, the remedies. Not clear whether Trump is entitled to a jury trial on that and not clear whether his own lawyers may have waived the jury trial on that.

But look, it's not going to get a fair jury in New York. And so help me understand, Professor, how you can try a fraud trial when there are no victims, when the banks made a hundred million dollars on interest. Help me understand that. Well, there's no way of understanding it.

It's absurd. Fraud means that you're cheating somebody. And as I've said before, there is no way that he was trying to get loans by overstating the value of his property. The banks can give him loans anyway. He's very good at retaining the loans. He repaid them all. They made a profit. If he was puffing at all, he was puffing just for his, you know, macho reason. So there is no harm here.

Do you remember Chick Hearn, the great basketball announcer in Los Angeles? He invented the term, no harm, no foul, no harm, no crime, no fraud. Who is he defrauding? You can't just defraud up in the air. You have to be a victim. And there's no victim here.

There's no complainant. It's only a politician who ran. Remember, I wrote a book called Get Trump.

I didn't invent that title. That's Letitia James' title. She ran on the campaign pledge to get Trump. And if she fails to get Trump, she will lose reelection. So she has a stake in the outcome of the case. Professor, is it unrealistic that the state of New York could confiscate Trump Tower, could take his assets from him? Is that in the realm of possibility? It's, that would be a taking and raise a federal constitutional issue.

The state, the government can't take things from you without just compensation unless there's a very, very strong basis in law. And with no victims, no harm, no damage, the idea of punishing somebody by taking away an iconic building like that would take the case to the Supreme Court. And I think Trump would win in the Supreme Court. Remember, though, the strategy is to get him down and dirty before the election, affect the election, and then it's reversed on appeal.

Who cares? The election will be over. Look, as you know, I'm a liberal Democrat. I would like to see Trump defeated fair and square by the voters without the thumb of the weaponized criminal justice system on the scale of justice.

If that happens, hey, I'm satisfied. But I don't want to see Trump lose unfairly. I don't want to see a Democratic elected prosecutors like Bragg and James, um, unlevel the playing field of the election. Because that not only deprives Trump's of his right, it deprives you and me. You want to vote for him. I want to vote against him. And we have a right to have that election based on our votes, not on some bureaucrat deciding that he's ineligible under the 14th amendment or some elected prosecutor saying I want to rerun for office on a get Trump theory that that endangers all Americans. I want everyone to check out the book Get Trump.

You need to purchase it. It is more important now than ever. Get Trump by Professor Alan Dershowitz. Back to school, it didn't turn out to be the load off your mind that you thought it would did it. Soccer practice, science fairs, helping of homework, doing the homework.

Can it just be summer break again already? Well, the good news is that you could take one big thing off your plate by putting great meat on your plate with good ranchers. You care about what your family eats. So does good ranchers. That's why they've spent years building relationships with local farms to source the best 100 percent American beef, chicken, pork and now wild caught seafood, too.

Yes, the best of the land and sea can now be conveniently delivered to your door. You could subscribe to any box to get twenty five dollars off the box and free express shipping today. Subscribe and use my code for thirty dollars off and go to good ranchers dot com. That is good ranchers dot com. It's time to ditch the mystery meat of the grocery store. Remember, go to good ranchers dot com and use the code to claim thirty dollars off plus free express shipping on your order of one hundred percent American meat and seafood.

Good ranchers, American meat delivered. We have Massey coming up next and send me freedom at Charlie Kirk dot com. The questions you want me to ask Thomas Massey and Jim Jordan, Steve Scalise are running for speaker. Steve Scalise is a moderate.

And you might say, oh, Charlie, come on. Scalise Steve Scalise backed Liz Cheney. OK, just so we're clear, he backed Liz Cheney in Wyoming.

Jordan's a legit conservative. I'm getting all these emails this morning. We'll get to that. OK, but there's a story here I want to focus on and it's it's connected to what Professor Alan Dershowitz is talking about. And it asked begs the question, what is the plan for the twenty twenty four election? What is the regime planning to do to try to prevent our voices from being heard?

To try to hold on to political power? Merrick Garland was asked about investigations here. He was asked about whether or not there was preferential treatment.

Listen to Merrick Garland play cut 12. We do not have one rule for Republicans and another rule for Democrats. We don't have one rule for foes and another for friends. We don't have one rule for the powerful, another for the powerless, for the rich or for the poor.

This is obviously a lie. One of the reasons why you are so upset with your Republican Party is that we have not done a crumb of work to hold unelected administrative bureaucrats like Merrick Garland, not just accountable, but to check and balance him. The original structure of the U.S. Constitution was that the bureaucracies are not their own super shadow of a party.

Not their own super shadow government. We called this the one hundred and ten year war. It was launched by Woodrow Wilson and it was a siege on the American Constitution. The bones of the Constitution have been eroded over the last century. Woodrow Wilson famously said he wanted the American government to be immune from the pressures of politics. That is code for he didn't want the people to be able to influence the science of politics. This is where we actually get political science from.

Rule by the experts. Woodrow Wilson was the first president to say that the founding fathers got it wrong and it set us on a different path. So Merrick Garland is able to lie with impunity because Merrick Garland and his technocracy technocrats, they philosophically believe that they are above the representatives of the people. This is exactly how we get a security state, otherwise known as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, that goes after the entire right wing part of the country. We're going to dedicate a whole hour to that next hour.

And the smugness, the pomposity. But what's really going on here with the speaker election or the new speaker election is can we recommit ourselves to the form that the founders put forward in the United States Constitution? If you were to get moderate Republicans and the entire Democrat party in the room, they might disagree on abortion or marriage or some other stuff like that. But do you know where they will agree? They think that the system of checks and balances, independent judiciary, and consent to the governed is outdated.

They think now that we have Twitter and Facebook and cross-country flights and the internet, we need a government that is structured in a modern way. And that's what's really at stake here. Do we recommit ourselves to the roots of the greatest political document ever written?

And this is the theme here. It's not right versus left. It's liberty versus fascism. It's elitism versus populism. It's the will of the people or the will of the experts. And we saw this play out in such high stakes with Anthony Fauci. And Fauci was never held accountable because Fauci was part of that fourth branch of government, unelected, unknown amounts of power, and unchecked. And the speaker battle was just another iteration of the Republican base trying to say, why can't we have a constitutional reset, not have this administrative philosopher king community that can reign terror over the sovereign?

And that is a perfect pretext to our conversation about to have with Congressman Thomas Massie. How's your life been lately? If it feels like mine, it's a never ending hustle. The constant juggling of responsibilities, the endless to do list. And now I'm not even talking about how it affects overall wellbeing, sleep, productivity, and immune system. Stress slowly infiltrates your life, silently robbing you of magnesium, a vital mineral your body depends on. The vicious stress magnesium deficiency cycle.

Have you heard about it? In terms of stress spikes, your body loses magnesium, sleep becomes elusive, energy and productivity plummet, and stress levels skyrocket. More magnesium escapes your body.

So how do you break the cycle? Listen up. I found a game changer. Magnesium breakthrough from bioptimizers. Magnesium breakthrough contains all seven forms of magnesium, which might support stress management by promoting muscle relaxation, regulating the nervous system, controlling stress hormones, enhancing brain function, boosting energy, and most importantly, improving sleep. I take it two capsules for bedtime.

It's amazing. Bioptimizers are so confident in their products that they offer you a risk free 365 day money back guarantee. If you don't see results, simply claim a refund. No questions asked.

It's a win win. Visit mag breakthrough.com slash Kirk and use enter code Kirk 10 for 10% off any order for a limited time only receive special gifts with purchase. This offer is only available at mag breakthrough.com slash Kirk.

Do not miss an opportunity to improve your wellbeing in life. That is mag breakthrough.com slash Kirk. Joining us now is Congressman Thomas Massey. Congressman, thank you for joining the program. Give us kind of a little bit of a summary of the last week. Probably one of the more wild weeks you've ever had in Congress. Tell us from your perspective. Walk us through it.

Oh, wow. Well, I guess it started Friday of last week when we did our last ditch effort. We had a CR that funded the government at 92%. We had border security on that bill. We had a debt commission and 21 Republicans took that one down, voted against it. Of course, every Democrat voted against it.

And at that point it felt like we were out of steam. We couldn't get a bill to the floor because there were rebels who would take down the rule. And so the Senate was going to jam us with a CR that had Ukraine on it. And Kevin made a play call, decided to jam the Senate. That's when the fire alarm went off, by the way, because the Democrats wanted to buy more time. So they made a motion to adjourn and voted with their paper voting cards instead of their electronic voting cards, because they didn't expect Kevin McCarthy to pass a CR that didn't have Ukraine on it before the Senate could get one that did have Ukraine. Now, a lot of us didn't vote for that particular CR, but it was far better than what the Senate was going to do to us. And really, Kevin had no other options. He couldn't get bills through the rules committee, which is a committee that I serve on, because people would take down the rule on the floor. In other words, conservatives would vote against it.

So he made the best of a bad situation. We got that. The CR went over the Senate. They passed it. It gives us 45 days. Of course, now we're back under 40 days because on Sunday, you know, one of my colleagues who I have a lot of respect for, but don't really agree with what he did, went on Sunday shows that he's going to vacate the speaker. We come back Monday, boom, he calls the motion. And then Tuesday we had the vote. Thankfully they didn't drag it out.

Kevin brought it right to the floor. He could have kept it out there for a couple of days. And eight people voted for the motion to vacate. They only needed six.

So there was there was a margin there that showed it was pretty conclusive. And now we don't have a speaker and there's a scramble for power in the House. So there's there's a lot to to unpack here, Congressman. But our audience is largely in favor of what happened with the motion to vacate.

I want to just spend a little bit of time on here. I know it's a little bit in the rear view mirror, but I think it's necessary. What do you have to say about this idea that it's just one to one CR too many, that we should have just 12 appropriation bills, that we have a crisis of debt, a crisis of deficit, the border, and that the CR was just a broken promise? How would you respond to that, Congressman? Well, that's absolutely false. And that's the big tragedy here is that the people who immediately got religion and were against any kind of CR, even a CR that cut government at 8%, they forget that the January deal with Kevin, which I helped negotiate, I was in the room, and this was actually my contribution to the deal, was a guarantee that if we didn't get the 12 bills done, if the Senate didn't take up our 12 bills, that we would put on the floor a CR that funded government at 98%. That was the conservative position.

That was the rebel position in January, was that our fallback was going to be a CR at 98%. And they totally moved the goalposts because then they got a religious objection to CRs and said they wouldn't even do one at 92% with a border security bill on it. That part, people have either forgotten what the January deal was, I think that's probably it. I don't think they're being disingenuous, but if they do remember what the January deal was, they are being disingenuous.

And you could ask any of the people who were in the room, Chip Roy, Byron Dolls, Scott Perry, they were in the room negotiating that deal with Kevin in January with me. So, Congressman, now, given who's running for speaker, it seems like it's going to be Jordan v. Scalise. Who are you going to voice support for? Who do you think is able to win the votes necessary on a floor vote and also unite the conference so that we can get back to fiscal discipline, reigning in Jack Smith?

All the things that I know you believe in, who are you going to support? I am squarely 100% behind Jim Jordan. He would be, you know, the speaker that I've dreamed of having. He's been really excellent on the Judiciary Committee. And he used to chair the Oversight Committee and I served on the Oversight Committee with him.

Now I serve on the Judiciary Committee with him. His skills as a coach in the past have carried over. He's really good at rallying people. He's a fighter. He tells it like it is. He's a great communicator.

And I just really don't think he could be easily vacated by anybody because he's a strong personality as well and unites the group of the conference. So eventually there is this debate that's going to happen between Jordan and Scalise on Monday. Can you just fill us in a little bit of the anger that the caucus has been feeling? We talk about how it's going to come to blows or it almost came to blows. How visceral or real is it? Walk us through that. Well, I've witnessed people dropping F bombs and calling each other names in our GOP conference.

Now that's behind closed doors and probably a good thing. But usually people calm down and come back the next day and apologize if they pop off like that. The tempers have been high. I just stay calm.

It doesn't do any good to get mad at anybody. And everybody's trying to achieve the same thing. We just may have different tactics and strategies.

Some people don't have strategies at times. But I think what's going to be important, personally, is the speaker, each speaker candidate needs to bring with them not just the platitudes of apple pie and puppy dogs and baseball and whatever, American themes. They need to bring with them a concrete plan for funding the government in a conservative way in the next 90 days. Because the last thing I want is the Schumer McConnell special that we typically get in December. And, you know, after we've delayed twice, that cannot happen. If somebody is a speaker and they and that is the outcome, then even if it's my favorite candidate, Jim Jordan, then that would be a failure. But Jim Jordan has a plan to just pass that. Yes. So so part of the audience is saying, you know, we've seen they were disappointed in the in the at the debt ceiling and that the C.R.

was not exactly what we wanted. What do you think Jim Jordan's strategy will be to ensure that we don't have the Christmas multi trillion dollar boondoggle? Right. Where it's December 20, 22nd, we have to get our people home.

How much graft can we fit into a 3000 page bill in six hours or less? And we know that's where we're barreling towards that. Right. That this 45 day C.R.

that was passed last weekend, I don't think should be celebrated because it only increases the likelihood of a holiday out, which I've seen for over a decade. So what strategically do you think that Congressman Jordan can present if he's speaker of the House or whoever becomes speaker of the House to use leverage so that we do not have that and we can actually cut spending and trim our deficit? Well, there's a dynamic in our conference that if you're on Twitter, if you're watching Fox News, you just can't conceive of because there are two hundred and twenty two Republicans. Most of your listeners would be hard pressed to name more than 40 of them.

And so they're about 180 you never see. And they're they're conservatives, but they're not on TV. And then there are some moderates. And what you have to do is keep the whole conference together when you get to these impasses like an impending shutdown. And we have probably a dozen members who will not do a shutdown under any situation. They will join with the Democrats and and do a discharge petition.

So you've got to keep those people on board. I think this what I would do, I can't speak for Jim Jordan, but there's a provision in that debt limit deal that I got inserted in there whereby there's a one percent sequester, an automatic cut that's triggered in January. It takes effect in the spring, but applies retroactively from October 1st forward. All of government gets one cut one percent if we don't get the 12 bills done. And that was a provision that I got in the debt limit deal. Kevin's gone, but that provision is still in there because Joe Biden signed it into law. And I think the smart play would be instead of setting ourselves up for another shutdown debacle where so many of our conference both and and I have sympathy for them.

They're in a lot tougher districts to win than I'm in. We got to figure out how to keep them together. So instead of having a shutdown cliff, we should have a sequester cliff. So instead of shutting down all the government, you carve it back one percent.

And you could do that as many times as you want. But there's one of those already signed into law that triggers in January. And that would be motivation for people to come to the table and do the 12 bills without doing unnatural things because they're panicked due to a shutdown. Really quick, is that one percent in the growth cut in the growth of spending or is that an actual one percent structural cut in spending? So is that is that like a cut in the rate of growth or an actual cut, actual cut to the to the actual number last year? If you want to use swamp math, it's probably like a six percent cut. But if you use Charlie Kirk, Thomas Massey math, it's one percent.

It's an honest to goodness one. I think I think that's what's important is that the budget automatically increases at the rate of inflation, which now is six to seven percent based on normal numbers. So if you, quote unquote, cut, sometimes they call it a cut. This is baseline budgeting, but you're not even cutting. You're cutting the rate of growth.

We need actual and serious cuts. Hey, Charlie Kirk here. If you guys love this program and you want to support this program, if we have impacted or blessed your life in any way, I want to tell you about a new thing that we are starting it up. First of all, if you have supported us at Charlie Kirk dotcom support, nothing to worry about. You guys are going to be moved on over. If you want to support us even more and say, hey, I want exclusive content, I want to talk to Charlie directly.

We are standing up this amazing infrastructure. Teams and working so hard at members dot Charlie Kirk dotcom. Not only is it a way to support us directly outside of all of the other channels, but get this live Q&A.

I mean, the team articles exclusively written by me that you won't find anywhere else pre show prep calls and more. Sign up today at members dot Charlie Kirk dotcom. We love bringing our show every day and we can't wait to bring you even more content that is just for you at the Charlie Kirk exclusive. That's members dot Charlie Kirk dotcom. Head to members dot Charlie Kirk dotcom today.

Yes, there's gonna be a lot of goodies, a lot of engagement, a lot of fun stuff. But even more than that, if you feel moved and compelled that our show is impacting you and impacting the world, it would mean a lot if you became a member at members dot Charlie Kirk dotcom. Congressman, some of your colleagues are calling for the expulsion of Matt Gaetz from the Republican conference. In fact, some people are saying we need to kick him out of Congress. Where do you stand on that? Would you be in support of kicking Matt Gaetz out of the Republican conference?

No, I think it's a terrible idea. And kicking him out of Congress would take our majority down by one as well. I would not kick him out. I wouldn't even kick him off his committees, but that's just me.

And if there's a vote, I'll vote to keep Matt Gaetz where he's at. So the second question is now that the new deal is basically being put forward and we're kind of redoing January, do you think it's time to get rid of the one vote motion to vacate? If Jim Jordan becomes speaker, Congresswoman Lauren Boebert has said, I'm willing to concede on one vote motion to vacate, get rid of that, because she trusts Jim Jordan.

Is it maybe that Hey, Jim Jordan, we trust you. So we're going to make it three or maybe five not get rid of motion to vacate, but increase it away from one. Congressman Massey is someone who led the charge to try to vacate and remove john Boehner.

Walk us through this. Yeah, you know, when I actually co wrote the motion to vacate john Boehner with Mark Meadows, I printed it on my laser printer and took it to the House floor for him that day. And I took one with my name on it in case he didn't do it.

So that's how close I was to that program. We actually got five co sponsors on that you can go back and look in 114 Congress, it's H res 385. And I think five is a reasonable number.

If you don't have five people, then you know, one person shouldn't be able to start throwing everything into a tizzy. We should not be like Pelosi did it where you had to care like chairman of committees and stuff. I think, you know, when our founders put that in there, and it's in Jefferson's manual, they really didn't anticipate the sort of bifurcation, the party system, and that you would have to get every vote from your party in order to remain speaker. They I think when they were drawing it all up, they sort of thought they would be multiple parties or maybe one group of people that all got along and it seemed reasonable that you should have to at all times have support of at least half of the conference in order to remain speaker, but now times have changed and you automatically lose the support of the other party.

Because the speakers evolved the job isn't what it used to be. The unfortunate part is the speaker's job right now is fundraiser in chief for the majority party. I would love to see that decoupled because that's why the democrats piled on against Kevin. Of course, he didn't make any deal.

But you might have thought it might have been in their interest to keep Kevin but ultimately because he was our biggest fundraiser, they decided now we'll take him out. So just kind of in closing here, it seems that this could go on for a long period of time. Congressman, do you think this will be settled a week from today on October 13? Do you think there will be a speaker of the house? Whoa, that's a crystal ball I don't have. I don't think I don't think it's going to pass on the first round. I think people are going to want to get it out of their system. I think there'll be some discontent with whoever the conference choice is. But hopefully we converge quickly. And I think people have a desire to get together and move on. And I think the eight who vacated speaker McCarthy are in front of their skis and they really don't have much latitude to turn down the next speaker because they said anything's better than Kevin McCarthy when they vacated him.

So now we'll test that if they really believe it. Congressman Massey, thank you for your time today. Appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you, Charlie. Coming up on Tuesday, I'll be at University of Central Florida, Candace Owens at Georgia Tech, and then I will be going to University of Texas, San Antonio, and then I will be going to Springfield, Missouri. So that's tpusa.com. Check it out, tpusa.com slash tours. To be even more specific, our campus tours have been sold out.

So make sure if you are in the local area, come on by, ask a question, say hello, and bring a young person, bring a high schooler, bring a great school. They are a lot of fun. Turning Point USA is doing some terrific work. We are working our tail off.

We have so many different projects going on at once. And it's really, really inspiring. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us as always, freedom at charliekirk.com. Thanks so much for listening.

God bless. For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.com. The United States Constitution guarantees every American fundamental rights and protection of life, liberty, and property. Salem is celebrating our founding document with a special offer, a 1953 Omen US Constitution lithograph. Understand the value of these lithographs as we know the story. A master lithographer immigrant named Theodore Omen came to this country to find the American dream. 70 years ago in 1953, Omen printed a limited number of these exceptional Constitution lithographs.

Go to salemeventstore.com to read Omen's entire story. America's most important document stands as a testament to all Americans to maintain their liberties, freedoms, and inalienable rights. Buy it and display it proudly. Buy a gift for your family and friends, for all the teachers in your communities. There's a limited number, so act today. Go to salemeventstore.com to get your exclusive 1953 Omen US Constitution lithograph.

Buy it and display it proudly. While limited supplies last, there's a limited time, so act today. SalemEventStore.com. SalemEventStore.com.