Judging Freedom - Betsy McCaughey on Insider Trading, & the dangers of looking the other way regarding Petty Crime

Episode Date: February 2, 2022

Betsy McCaughey on - Political Insider Trading - The dangers of looking the other way regarding Petty Crime - Covid - do we really have vaccines? #Crime #VaccinesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hello there, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here with Judging Freedom. Today is Wednesday, January 26, 2022. I have a very special guest who's knowledgeable in a great many areas, but particularly on COVID and the vaccines and the government forcing us and private industry forcing us to do what is not in our best interest. Betsy McCoy is a former lieutenant governor of the state of New York. What many of you may not know is she is also a scholar of the United States Constitution with a PhD in constitutional history. And even though she's not a physician, she knows more about medicine than anybody I know that doesn't have MD after their name. We were colleagues and friends at

Fox. Neither of us is there any longer. We remain colleagues and friends. Lieutenant Governor Betsy, welcome to Judging Freedom. Oh, it's a pleasure to join you. It's so good to reconnect after too long. Yes, yes, you're right. And thank you. It's nice to hear you say that. Let's start with a little bit of a brouhaha raised by Mrs. Pelosi recently, which and selling stocks on the basis of information known to them, either votes that will be taken or other inside information that only the government has. If you or I did that, the feds would prosecute us. Why do members of Congress get a pass? Well, technically, it's not considered under the law insider information because it's not insider corporate information known only to the corporate executives, for example, of the company. But it clearly is insider information in the sense that members of Congress have an edge over the rest of us.

They can anticipate changes in the regulatory environment that will have a big impact on these companies. And yet they're buying and selling individual stocks. Not all of them are doing well, but Nancy Pelosi and her husband, for example, outperformed the S&P by 15% in 2020. That's a big number because very few of even the wizards on Wall Street beat the S&P. All right, so let me get this straight. And I don't want to pick on her, but I will. If Mrs. Pelosi knows that the FDA is going to come out tomorrow approving a new drug by Pfizer BioNTech to cure COVID. Can she buy their stock today, knowing that it's going to go through the roof tomorrow? She makes the point of saying her husband is buying the stock, but let's face it. Just imagine the Pelosi pillow talk. Oh, honey, I love your puts and calls.

I love your stock options. The fact is, as a couple, they are making millions and millions of dollars a year trading stocks. And it's evident that Mrs. Pelosi has a much keener sense of the regulatory environment, approvals and other changes than the rest of us do. And by the way, as you pointed out very fairly, it's not just Mrs. Pelosi. Many members of Congress do this. And just to keep everyone updated, three high-ranking members of the Federal Reserve have resigned recently because it was disclosed

that they were trading not only equities but mortgage-backed securities at the very same time that the Fed was making policies that have a big impact on those types of securities. And even worse, the Wall Street Journal completed a investigation this fall that found that federal judges are trading stocks while companies are litigating in their courtroom. 62 federal judges were identified as actually buying and selling the stock while they're hearing the case.

I'm shaking my head, not because I disagree with you. I agree with you. I'm shaking my head because this tarnishes the entire judicial system. I was a state judge, but I can remember the information that we had to provide litigants about what we owned and what we didn't own and what we had an interest in. You can't go near a case where it is even perceived that you have an interest in the outcome.

That's an easy one to resolve. That is, but getting back to Congress, getting back to Congress, members of Congress are already required to report their trades, but many, many weeks after they're made, and even then, a large number of members of Congress don't comply with that reporting requirement, and what do they get? A slap on the wrist, believe it or not, Judge, a $200 fine. Can you imagine? $200. So more needs to be done. And there's a second reason more needs to be done. You and I know, everyone watching knows, that we no longer enjoy freedom of expression because the new public square is really controlled by big tech, the media. It's Facebook and Google and YouTube and all of these high-tech ways of communicating worldwide. It's a worldwide public square. Now, unfortunately, members of Congress trade in those big tech stocks, Democrats more

than Republicans. About half of the holdings of Democratic members of Congress are in the big tech stocks. And by the way, that's where Nancy Pelosi and her husband have earned most of their really big profits. Republicans, though, also do it. 14% of Republican Congress's holdings are in big tech. And what is that doing? It's preventing Congress from regulating big tech the way it should be regulated as public utilities or common carriers required to serve all customers with an even hand. And that means posting the political views of all. Why doesn't Congress enact legislation that requires them to put their assets in a blind trust for their time in Congress and let some neutral, smart financial entity manage it for all of them? That's what should happen. By the way, Nancy Pelosi, as Speaker, has the power to derail legislation of that sort. And that's exactly what she did earlier in the year when an amendment to another bill included that provision, and she kept it from ever getting

to the floor for a vote. You and I are old enough, or certainly I am, to remember the contract with America. Oh, yes. When the Republicans controlled Congress and Bill Clinton was a brand new president of the United States. One of those promises in the contract was that all laws that regulate everybody else would also regulate the Congress. Do you remember that promise? I'm not blaming you. I do. And by the way, that goes all the way back to James Madison. That was one of his fundamental principles in the federalist papers. So obviously that didn't, and again, I'm not blaming Gingrich personally. Obviously that didn't succeed if Pelosi can influence legislation in accordance with her financial position. Well, that's right. And I was very disappointed to hear that she's running again.

I kept thinking, well, maybe when she leaves. So this makes it even more important that the Republicans take the House next November, because otherwise there is no chance that this new regulation will go through, new law will go through, and even more importantly, that it will enable Congress to properly regulate big tech and restore our First Amendment liberties. Alvin Bragg is the district attorney of Manhattan. He's also a former federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York. And nothing to brag about. Well, you know, it's a play on words, but you're right, because none of us had ever heard of him as a federal prosecutor until he won by a narrow, very narrow margin, the Democratic nomination to be Manhattan DA. The history of Manhattan DAs is that once they get that job, they stay there forever. I don't know if that's going to happen. I don't know if that's going to happen Manhattan DA. The history of Manhattan DAs is that once they get that job, they stay there

forever. I don't know if that's going to happen with him. But the first day in office, or certainly the first week in office, he sends a memo to his entire staff, which is hundreds of prosecutors, saying, here's the category of crimes that we're no longer going to prosecute. How about advertising to the criminal class that they can break the window of a drug store and while the people that work there are cleaning up the glass, you can empty the shelves into your book bag or your knapsack and you won't be prosecuted. Well, that's right. And this is happening, Judge, all over the country, not just in New York. Petty crime is never petty. Once you ignore it, the social order just disintegrates. And that's what we see happening in city after city where shoplifters go into a place like Walgreens, clean out the shelves, no one stops them, right? Or I've seen people walk into

Starbucks right past the line of law abiding customers who are waiting to pay. They pick up their sandwich and they leave again. No one says a word. And in a city like New York with subways, the turnstile jumpers just walk right by under the noses of the cops and get on the subway without paying, which makes the rest of us feel like real patsies. Right. It makes us feel like jerks. The example with respect to Walgreens, I mean, this is going to have an effect that will harm the poor because Walgreens, if it wants to stay in business and the police won't protect it, what are they going to do? They're going to hire their own security and that's going to raise the price of everything that they sell, which will make it difficult for the poor to buy everything

from toothpaste to aspirins. Well, that's right. In fact, they're closing up stores in many parts of the inner city. Five in San Francisco, for example, I went into a Duane Reade in Manhattan the other day and asked one of the employees about the locked up toothpaste, the locked up deodorant. And she said they come in daily. The shoplifters come in daily and fill a big bag with whatever isn't locked up. The employees are instructed not to stop them, right. And it is very demoralizing and just fills people with anger to walk into a drugstore and see things like locked up like that. It's like going shopping in the commissary of a penitentiary. It's not what we expect. And we are paying the price for this lawlessness. So Alvin Bragg would probably say

that he enjoys something called prosecutorial discretion, which allows him to allocate the resources, both financial and human resources of his office. But take me inside the heads of these people, Betsy, because you have the district attorney in Philadelphia, in San Francisco, in Los Angeles, the mayor of Chicago, the DA in New York. What is their real goal? What are they really trying to accomplish by telling the world, here's a category of crimes that we won't prosecute, so have at it. Well, let's be clear. Many of these people were handpicked by philanthropist George Soros, who poured millions of dollars into their campaigns. That's true about the Philadelphia DA. It's true about Alvin Bragg. It's true about Kim Foxx in Chicago. And it's true about the

far left DAs in San Francisco and LA, two of whom are being what they're trying to recall them right now. And but I can say this. It is a defiance when you go into a drugstore with a weapon like a knife and intimidate people, scare them and take the goods, it shouldn't be a misdemeanor. It should be first degree armed robbery. But Bragg says, well, if you didn't actually stab the shopkeeper, you're going to be charged with a misdemeanor. Why do you think these lawyers are doing this? Do they really think this enhances the ideology of the left? Is the left in favor of businesses being raided by armed robbers? These woke people believe that the prisons should be emptied. Listen to them.

They are so convinced that our society is unjust that they want all these people out on the street. They don't think there's something wrong with them cleaning off urinate on the street, spread disease on the street. It's the same way of thinking. It is counter to the values most of us have that we owe something to society and that we want to live in an orderly society. But back when I was a trial judge here in New Jersey, I remember trying a murder case. The victim was a baby, maybe two and a half, three years old. The mother of the baby was given immunity to testify against the father. The mother testified against the father and the father was found not guilty. In my opinion, the mother had committed perjury by lying under oath in order to blame the father when in fact she was the

killer of the baby. The government couldn't prosecute her for murder because they'd given her immunity. So I ordered the government to prosecute her for perjury. Her lawyers appealed that decision to the appellate courts, which reversed me and said, basically, hey, Judge Napolitano, you're a judge. You're not the prosecutor. You can't tell the prosecutor. That's the other branch. That's the executive branch of the government. You can't tell the prosecutor what the prosecutor and whatnot. That case keeps coming back to me as I read about and discuss with colleagues like you the horrors of these prosecutors in the largest cities in the country deciding not to prosecute a class of crimes and announcing it as if to say, come and get us.

It's an invitation. Gavin Newsom stood in the rail yards in Los Angeles the other day amid ransacked packages, right? There are a tremendous amount of looting of freight in Los Angeles. And you know what he said? I don't think anybody cares who's to blame. Wrong, Governor. We do care and we want to punish them. Wow. wrong governor we do care and we want to punish them wow i want to now go to our last topic which is something that you have a form of expertise in even though you're not a physician

and that is the efficacy of these vaccines are they in fact vaccines Is there a group out there doing the right thing medically in order to reduce infections? I'll let you run with the ball, Lieutenant Governor. Well, first on the issue of vaccines, I'll tell you, I am quadruple jabbed. I've done it for my own protection. I don't know anybody that's had four. You've had four? Yes, I've had, well, the booster is a half dose in the case of Moderna. But here's the point. These vaccines, we know, this is not opinion. This is fact. In the Lancet, October 26th issue, very prestigious medical journal. British medical. These vaccines, however, these mRNA vaccines, however, they were intended to be at the outset. Now, do not stop infection. And they do not stop someone who's infected from transmitting it to others.

They are disease tamers. They reduce the likelihood that if you catch COVID, right, you will have serious illness, hospitalization, or even death. And that's how they should be regarded now, as disease tamers that benefit the person who gets the jab, but really has no impact on those around them. All right, correct me if I'm wrong. The traditional and even universally accepted definition of a vaccine is the administration of a very tiny but safe dose of the disease to give you a small case of it so that you develop antibodies. This is what we all had. This is what you and I and everybody watching and listening to us had with polio, with smallpox, with measles, etc.

That definition does not fit even remotely what the government is trying to force on us today. No, it does not. I mean, I thought Operation Warp Speed was terrific. It came out with the vaccine that at the beginning, even though it did not contain any live virus did work to reduce transmission. But as the virus itself morphed into the Delta variant, now we have the Omicron variant, that changed and those vaccines no longer prevent spread. All they do is protect the vaccinated from more serious illness and that's how to look at them so it's up to you if you want it but if i work if i worked for a company that forced me to get vaccinated and i got vaccinated by the way i've had uh three vaccines because i chose to yes because i'm in a risk group because i'm over 70 and because my my physician has's been my physician for 25 years, said I want

you to get all three. But that doesn't prevent me, correct me if I'm wrong, from passing the infection on that I don't have to somebody else. Well, what you're saying really is it doesn't prevent you from getting a mild case of the infection, even asymptomatic, and then transmitting it, especially the new Omicron variant, which is lodged more in the upper nasal passages than in the chest. So it's more transmissible. You could just sneeze and infect a lot of other people. And those vaccines don't prevent that. But you know, it's interesting,

the reason I have four is I started out at the very beginning with the healthcare workers, because I spend so much time in hospitals. And so I started earlier, and that's why it was time for number four. And really, it's so important that we understand the positive sides of these vaccines and the role of the individual in making the decision, not the state. The Supreme Court has ruled in, of all cases, Roe versus Wade. There's actually a small part of Roe versus Wade, which is good law, in my opinion. You and I are both pro-life. I condemn abortion in all of its forms and for any reason. However, there is a part of Roe versus Wade which articulates

the decision to treat the body belongs to the person and the person's physician, and not to the state, not to a state, and not to the federal government. I mean, that's the law of the land. And yet we have mayors and governors visiting horrific penalties on people who refuse to be vaccinated. And we have publicly traded corporations that are threatening to fire people that won't be vaccinated. You know, we will look back, big picture judge, we're going to look back on the last three years with extreme embarrassment at what our governments did, how so many people behaved like sheep and allowed it. When I look at the fact that in virtually every state, the legislature ceded all its authority to the governor in an emergency capacity, not for a day or a week, but for years. And you know from your study of the Constitution

that if the legislature lets the governor write laws, that violates the separation of powers, which violates the guarantee clause of the Constitution. You bet. We guarantee you straight up. It guarantees a Republican lowercase r form of government right all right betsy there's so much more we could talk about but our our time has come and gone it went by very quickly it's great to have you on it's great to chat with you i hope

you'll come back i will be so overjoyed to do that it's's wonderful to reconnect with you. You're one of my favorites. Thank you. Betsy McCoy, the former lieutenant governor of the state of New York and a regarded legal scholar on the Constitution. Judge Napolitano, judging freedom. Resolve to earn your degree in the new year in the Bay with WGU. WGU is an online accredited university that specializes in personalized learning. With courses available 24-7 and monthly start dates, you can earn your degree on your schedule. You may even be able to graduate sooner than you think by demonstrating mastery of the material you know.

Make 2025 the year you focus on your future. Learn more at wgu.edu.