I

was asked, what is a majority? Congressman Al Green with courage.

This event evokes July 4th, 1776.

56 signatories to the Declaration of Independence signed their death warrants to secure the unalienable rights that we enjoy today with the fortitude of Congressman Al Green.

We're very fortunate that Al Green still is able to follow and be inspired by that example.

It is unfortunate that he is alone, but every great change begins with a single voice.

Now, the particular impeachment resolution that Congressman Greene has introduced today and called for an immediate floor vote exposes the transformation of immigration, customs enforcement, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection at the direction of President Donald Trump into a xenophobic Gestapo.

We must invoke the impeachment clause.

Tell us about it.

Well, it's a clear incitement, aiding and abetting, encouraging of fraud at the ballot box, a violation of both federal and state law.

50 states, one federal statute.

And I'm thinking, first, I knew Mr. Trump would not prosecute himself.

You know, he has a poodle who's the attorney general.

But you have 50 state attorneys general, or the local district attorneys, who should be already under investigation to determine whether or not really they need any further proof in order to prosecute him under state law for the crime of inciting, aiding criminal fraud at the ballot box.

It doesn't have to already have occurred, but he was asking and urging everyone to make a pledge, trying to make a moral commitment.

First up, Ralph and Bruce Fein talk about the possibility that Donald Trump will use the Insurrection Act to disrupt the midterm elections.

Could you explain to our listeners what happened?

Yes, there are resolutions that very few that are called privilege resolutions.

Privilege resolution means that neither the House speaker nor any other committee can block a vote on it in more than what they say, 48 legislative hours.

And Al Green invoked Rule 9 because impeachment resolutions are privileged.

and he started the clock running a little before noon on Monday.

48 hours is the maximum time to wait.

The resolution came to a vote.

What role did state attorney generals have here?

And so a president has to have certain Caesar right if there is a national emergency, but only

if it's— But they're in there.

At the Constitutional Convention, you remember they said, no, in cases of actual or imminent attack, the president does not need to wait, because we've already broken the peace.

He already has them in the Constitution.

He doesn't need to keep it secret unless it's needed, because otherwise the enemy could circumvent what he was expecting.

But otherwise, Congress is the one.

Congress needs to decide whether there's a national emergency or not.

Bruce?

Bruce?

Yeah, Omer, let me first congratulate you.

I think your response has been brilliant and insightful.

And thanks for making time here.

I wanted to make the observation that many of the things that you describe in Israel apply in spades in the United States.

We also have an administration.

that says we're being invaded militarily by Venezuela gangs.

Plus, David asks a question.

All right, so am I reading this wrong, uh, that, uh, the Trump administration probably will win this in, uh, the Supreme Court?

Uh, I think, uh, right now the jury is out, but let me add a couple of footnotes to your opening observations.

Uh, the power to utilize the military to enforce the law, uh, is not in the Constitution.

Uh, it's in congressional statutes.

Shays' Rebellion actually occurred before the Constitution in 1786, but those are, are small things.

Um, at present, we do know that there's a statute, at least, uh, now-President, uh, Trump has refrained from invoking.

It's called the Insurrection Act of 1807.

They're gonna have to.

All right, so am I reading this wrong that, uh, the Trump administration probably will win this in, uh, the Supreme Court?

Uh, I think, uh, right now the jury is out, but let me add a couple of footnotes to your opening observations.

Uh, the power to utilize the military to enforce the law, uh, is not in the Constitution.

Uh, it's in congressional statutes.

Shays' Rebellion actually occurred before the Constitution in 1786, but those are, are small things.

Um, at present, we do know that there's a statute, at least, uh, now President, uh, Trump has refrained from invoking, it's called the Insurrection Act of 1807.

Uh, it was urged, uh, by some to be utilized with regard to many of the protests that surfaced after George Floyd killing, but President Trump, I think he was concerned that military wasn't completely supportive of invoking the Insurrection Act that says, you know, in times when, uh, there's sufficient, uh, chaos and disruption that the enforcement of federal laws is severely compromised, he can utilize the military.

They're gonna have to.

Why don't you go through these pardons with us? Talk about the Virginia sheriff, talk about the reality TV couple, uh, what they were imprisoned for, and what it means that they've been freed, not to mention fines worth millions of dollars, uh, being forgiven.

Well, in the two cases you mentioned, the sheriff was convicted of basically using his office to raise money through bribes, $75,000 to give favors to friends.

The other case concerned tax evasion and fraud, uh, the kinds of crimes that Mr. Trump himself has been under attack for.

I think that, uh, if you look in the broader sense, Mr. Trump is trying to create an aura of incredulity about the legitimacy of the criminal justice system, uh, at least with regard to the pardons of these slew of white-collar offenses and sometimes their political allies as well.

We just learned today in the newspapers, a former congressman, former governor of Connecticut also pardoned, and I think that Mr. Trump recognizes that he's losing overwhelmingly in the courts now, uh, and that's why he's even turning on the Federalist Society and Leonard Leo because he believes when he loses in the United States Supreme Court, he's going to need a political reason for why he's losing, uh, and he's trying to cast aspersion, I believe, on the legitimacy of the entire justice system.

That's why these pardons are not indiscriminate, because they're targeted to help people who are politically... his, uh, his supporters raise money for him or otherwise, uh, which is very dangerous.

I want to add this: uh, the Framers understood the possibility that the pardon power would be abused.

The significance of this, Bruce?