The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program | Guest: Andrew McCarthy | 3/25/24

Episode Date: March 25, 2024

Hours after Congress passed a $1 trillion spending bill, a new governmental program was announced, creating a civil process allowing citizens to petition the court to keep certain people from purchasing or owning firearms. Glenn looks at all the amendments the DOJ is currently violating. National Review contributing editor Andrew McCarthy joins to discuss the possibility of Trump's assets being seized to cover his New York judgment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

60% of the vans on Amazon come a vendor independent like Sac Magic. Hello, here Camille of Sac Magic. Our compresses, show of fraud are fabriced in Quebec, and our presence on Amazon

enlarge our clientele to the world entire. Trouve of little enterprises like that other on our own.com. Hello, my name is Glenn Beck. I'm a talk show host. And this is the podcast.

First, our sponsor is Real Estate Agents I Trust. All right, you put a gun to my head, and it better not be an assault rifle or an assault weapon. Just a regular old handgun, okay, not an assault handgun. Anyway, you're like, okay, you're either getting a tooth pulled without anesthetics or dealing with a home repair contractor. And I'm like, pull all my teeth, pull all my teeth. You know, pull the trigger, quick, quick, I think someone's coming in and will stop you.

Pull the trigger. I don't really want either one of those. And when you're looking to do the repairs on your home, bringing in a contractor that maybe you don't know, not so fun, really, honestly. Here's what you need. You need somebody who's really good at their job that is overseeing your sale of your house.

If you're selling your house, you've got to get it ready for sales. You have to have somebody that you trust as the inspector to come in and say, this is what you're going to have to fix. And then you're going to have to trust the new contractor. You're going to have to trust a photographer. Really, all you need to do is trust one person, and that's the real estate agent.

That's what we do. That's my company, real estate agents. I trust.com. You go there, and we will help you find the right real estate agent in your area. Real estate agents, I trust.com. We don't charge you anything for it. Just give you the name of the person we've believed. has the best track record and the best, I don't know, the best ethics.

Can you even say that now? Is ethics even a word anymore? That will get your home sold fast, do it right, do it the easiest possible way. It's real estate agents, I trust.com. Real estate agents, I trust.com. You're listening to the best of the Glenbeck program. So after they signed the new budget deal, President Joe Biden's Department of Justice unveiled a brand new entity

that will train state and local officials on procedures to apply red flag laws to confiscate firearms from gun owners who are a threat to themselves or to others. Now, I want you to understand this is not something that has passed through Congress. These red flag laws have been going up for states, and the federal government has been offering people help and advice and lots of money if they will join. So the Department of Justice announced on Saturday the creation of the National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center. That's going to be hard to get that whole thing over the door of the building. I'm just saying it's not real catchy. the National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center.

The entity is just going to be called the center. The National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center will provide training and technical assistance to law enforcement, officials, prosecutors, attorneys, judges, clinicians, victim services, social service providers, community organizations, behavioral health professionals responsible for implementing laws designed to keep guns out of the hands of people who pose a threat to themselves or others. That's all from the website. That's what they do. They're just going to provide training, technical assistance, and money.

What was that last one? And behavioral health professionals responsible for implementing laws designed to keep guns. designed to keep guns out of the hands of people who pose a threat to themselves or other. So these are laws, not simple guidelines. These are laws. And they are being implemented by behavioral health professionals who are responsible for those laws. Oh, I don't remember. Stu, who did you vote for on your behavioral health professionals that are responsible for these laws?

Which one did you vote for? You know, I don't remember. There were so many good candidates this year. I know. We had more candidates, and yet we ended up with these losers. The DOJ said in a statement, the ERPO laws, which are modeled off domestic violence protection orders, create a civil process allowing law enforcement family members in most states and medical professionals or other groups in some states. to petition a court to temporarily prohibit someone from harming themselves or others from purchasing or possessing firearms for the duration of the order.

Now, the National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center's website declares that it will provide training and technical assistance, such as the development and dissemination of training for ERPO stakeholders. Stu, are you a stakeholder in this law? Because they didn't consult me. Or my representative. My understanding is you do not need to be consulted to be a stakeholder. You sort of just forced into that life.

Yeah, okay. Because your representative is supposed to represent you. This is the way stakeholder. We're not making this up. This is the way the stakeholder system works. You have your vote. That's it. You have your vote. Now you voted for a representative and sorry, but this one didn't even go through Congress, so you know.

This just went through the Department of Justice. Okay, so the development and dissemination of trainings for ERPO stakeholders, support for states and local jurisdictions to implement ERPO programs, facilitation of peer-to-peer engagement with model ERPO learning sites, delivery of presentations and webinars to advance states and localities knowledge on key ERPO topics. Now, the red flag laws allow the government to confiscate firearms from legal gun owners without due process. Wait a minute. Hang on just a second. I just saw something up here. ERPO laws, which are modeled after domestic create a civil process allowing law enforcement, family members, and medical professions and states to petition a court to temporarily prohibit someone risking harm to themselves. So wouldn't that be, because I've got to go to court, I guess they're not modeling after that, right?

I don't have to face my accuser. Oh, that's an interesting piece of democracy I don't recall ever seeing before. So I don't get to go to court. My accuser and the ERPO people are just going to come to my house and take my gun because somebody has said I am a danger to myself or to the community. And I have no due process. Huh, that's interesting. The DOJ press release said 21 states and the District of Columbia,

so shockingly, have enacted ERPO laws. The White House noted that only six of the states that implemented ERPO laws have utilized federal funds from the bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which offers $750 million for red flag programs, medical health courts, love those medical health courts, drug courts, and even veteran treatment courts. Veteran treatment courts. Man, do you remember when the government was pushing that you would get out and you'd get more money from the VA? You'd get special treatment from the VA.

If you would just say that you had some PSD, PTSD, remember that? if you claimed PTSD, you'd get extra benefits. So a lot of guys were like, yeah, I'm going to do that. And I remember saying on the air, don't do that because now you're marking yourself as unstable. And if you're unstable, all the government has to do is say anybody who, you know, claim to have PTSD, well, gosh darn it, they can't have their guns because they might harm themselves or others. Oh, my gosh. Now, the National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center is a collaboration. It is a public-private partnership between Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions

and the U.S. Department of Justice and the Bureau of Justice Assistance. I don't even know what justice assistance is, but I'm sure that, you know, it's all great and full of great people. The Attorney General told us over the weekend the launch of the National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center will provide our partners across the country with valuable resources to keep firearms out of the hands of individuals who pose a threat to themselves and others. The establishment of the center is the latest example of the Justice Department's work to use every tool provided by the landmark bipartisan Safer Communities Act to protect communities from gun. violence. Now, I don't know about you, but when that Safer Communities Act was passed, I remember a lot of talk about, hey, that's going to lead to a giant new organization that is going to be working with a hospital. By the way, the very first German progressive hospital, it's John

Hopkins that started at all, kids. So they're working with John Hopkins. to define what people should be looking for, and that way they can just take your gun away without any kind of due process. I think this is good. I think this is good. Now, the story does say that conservatives have been bashing the center as a new version of government overreach that attempts to infringe on the Second Amendment rights. Stu, how could these people think, these conservatives think that this is, this is,

government overreach attempting to a fringe on the Second Amendment rights. You know these conspiracy theorists. This is what they do every time, you know. And you would know. Wait, what do you mean? Your Honor, it was Stu. It wasn't me. I don't know what you're talking about.

He's the real danger. He's the puppet master. Let's see. David Harsani said, defending democracy by stripping Americans of their due process and Second Amendment rights is using unilateral federal decree. That's what this is. Timing of this is intentional. This is an unauthorized attack on our Second Amendment.

Libertarian activist Spike Cohen said this is federal red flag. Dana Lash said this won't apply to Hunter Biden illegal aliens or cartel members that Dems fight to arm. This is an attack on due process, ignores existing laws, and provides a way to adjudicate someone ineligible. All previous tragedies were preventable without removal of due process. Jay Michael Waller said, They will build the political police by whatever means necessary and the official count for the Libertarian Party. We will resist until the end of time. The right to keep and bear arms is non-negotiable.

red flag schemes will fail. Now I'd like to comment more on this, but my attorney is telling me now, you sure, that anything I say can and will be used against me in a court of law, if I ever get to see a court of law because of the red flag laws and the Department of Justice's national Extreme Risk Protection Order Re... What a dumb name. National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center. Thank you, Joe Biden.

Thank you. I see who's fighting for the American way of law and the American way of life and the Constitution and our Bill of Rights. I salute you, Mr. President. Let me tell you about Patriot Mobile. Time is running out to save big on your mobile service until March 31st. You can save right now a free month of service when you make the switch to Patriot Mobile.

All you have to do is go to patriotmobile.com slashback. That's Patriotmobile.com slashback. Use the offer code spring 24 and you get a free month of service. Patriot Mobile. On top of having everything that you could possibly want in a mobile phone plan on one of the three major networks, Patriot Mobile doesn't send your hard-earned money to aid into the destruction of America. You know, I don't know why these other mobile phone companies are doing it. I mean, the federal government's doing it well enough on their own.

I don't think they need help anymore. They have affordable plans for your budget. They are not sending money to things to destroy America. In fact, they're trying to shore up the things that are fighting against the destruction of our country. if you have a cell phone, if you need mobile service, please, this is a low, low, low bar to get into the fight to save your country. Visit patriotmobile.com slash Beck and switch 972 Patriot, 972 Patriot. Get a free month of service when you use the offer code spring 24. That's spring 24. Patriotmobile.com slash Beck 972 Patriot. Now back to the podcast. this is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hey. So, you know, I thought we'd look at the Constitution. A caller last hour was right on the money. When he said, you know, this center that can take your gun away without due process. Yeah, that's a big one. That's a, you know, violation of the Second Amendment. But it's also a violation of many other amendments. I want to go through the, you know, just the first ten amendments, okay?

First of all, do you know how the Bill of Rights came about? Listen to what they wrote. This is at the top of the page, resolved. Resolved by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. two-thirds of both houses concurring that the following articles be proposed to the legislatures of several states as amendments to the Constitution of the United States. So here's a group of people. Imagine this. Two-thirds say, we believe these things should be done, but we have to send them to all of the states to ratify, and they need two-thirds to be able to pass it in their state. state and then we will need two thirds of all the states to agree.

Okay? Wow, what a process. And what are they trying to do? Get themselves a raise? No, give themselves more power? No, the exact opposite. Here's what they say. The amendments to the Constitution of the United States,

all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the legislatures, to be valid in all intents and purposes as, part of said constitution. Articles in addition to and amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America proposed by Congress and ratified by the legislature of several states. They're saying here that the after the convention, a number of states having at the time adopted the constitution, this is in the little preamble here, expressed a desire in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its power.

So the guys in the government said, I'm afraid people are going to abuse the power and misunderstand the Constitution. So, quote, further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added. And as extending the ground of public confidence in the government will best ensure the the benefit ends of the institution. So they're saying, look, nobody trusts the government right now. Does that sound familiar? Nobody trusts the government right now.

So we want to pass several amendments here that will protect the rights and make sure that the hands are tied of the federal government. They're saying these are restrictive clauses. And by telling the people, we will never do these things. things, confidence will be gained. I contend our problem is we're no longer unified on these 10 articles. We no longer care about them. We no longer learn them, teach them, know them. So here's Article 1. Amendment number one, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. I contend we are violating that right now because what we are celebrating is a religion. It has a cult following.

It has nothing to do with science or even common sense. It has a tribunal that will excommunicate you from society if you don't get involved. It has rituals. It has laws that you just must accept. on faith. I know that's pushing it, but I think they're doing that. They are also breaking the second part of the First Amendment, prohibiting the free exercise of religion. They did that during COVID, abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, and the right of the people to peacefully assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. They don't want you standing up.

They don't want you standing up. They'll do everything they can to make sure you sit down. If you're a constitutionalist, enough of this national Christian nationalist stuff. Enough of that. Don't dismiss it. It's real. It's very, very small, but it's real. So don't call yourself a Christian nationalist.

Don't allow yourself to fall into that trap. No, you're not. You might be a Christian, but you are also a constitutionalist. you believe in the Constitution of the United States and the articles of the Constitution of the Bill of Rights. You believe in all of that stuff. That's all you want. Article 2, a well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. That's the one that everybody will look to on this particular new center from the Department of Justice.

They, well-regulated militia. Would that make sense, would it make sense that the people couldn't have guns and the federal government would have a huge army? No. In fact, we never had a standing army. We were the soldiers. We would be called up to arms. So you'd have your own arms. and then when there was war, you'd be called up in a militia. But you had the right to protect yourself with a gun as well. Not hours for fishing or hunting or one of those things. No, it wasn't. No, it wasn't. Article 3, I think we can skip over. Well, no, no actually not.

No soldier shall in time of peace be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. So Article 3, I think you could make the case, I don't think you'd win, but you could make the case that our government is quartered. Soldiers are quartered in our house because they are in a public-private partnership with Amazon and everybody else. They are gaining access to our papers, to our letters, to our emails, to our phone calls. That's what the government was doing.

doing that made this article important. The king would say, you know what, find out what those guys are doing over there. And you know what? Just go into their house. You live there. I'm going to quarter you in their house so you can spy on them. Well, it's just in a different way, but that's what's happening. Fourth Amendment, the right of people to be secure in their persons.

Do you feel secure in your person? Houses, paper, effects against all. All unreasonable search and seizures shall not be violated. It's violated all the time. We've talked about this many times. How many people have been driving down the street and they had money in their car and they were going to go buy another car and they were going to buy it in cash and they're stopped. Their cash is taken.

No due process. I think you're a drug lord. Wait, what? No warrants shall issue but upon probable cause. This is a general warrant. This is why this is in here in Article 4. No warrants shall be, no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause. General warrants used to be, you know, there's something going on with that guy.

Go find out. And they could search for anything. Anywhere. No, no general warrants. You have to know. and tell the judge, I'm going in for this document or this particular item, and I believe it's here. Great. So the judge will say, you can go there in their house and look for it. But no general warrants. You can't go in and just try to find something.

No person shall be held to answer for capital otherwise infamous crime unless the presentment or indictment of a grand jury. except in cases arriving in the land or naval forces or in the militia when in actual service in time of war or public danger. Nor shall any person be subject to the same offense twice to be put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall he be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation. Those are being violated, but in particular with this new center where they can take, come into your house and take your guns without due process. Clear violation of the Bill of Rights, clear.

So you've got three of them now that have been broken just for this one law. Don't tell me you love democracy. Don't tell me you love freedom. Don't tell me you're trying to save the Republican. You love the Constitution. If you're violating this many, and we're only halfway through, you're in direct violation of the Bill of Rights. Article 6, in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial. Has that happened with those who are still waiting for trial for January 6? by a how is it they can they have to wait so long but donald trump has to be done by this summer why is that are all men create equal are we are we looking at the people of january six with the same blind justice eyes as donald trump no of course we're not violation of the constitution by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed. Inpartial jury.

If you can't get an impartial jury, what do you do? You can't get an impartial jury. You ask for a change of venue where you can get an impartial jury. You don't have an impartial jury pool in Washington, D.C. You don't. And to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, to be confronted with the witnesses against him, to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

In this new center that they announced, you don't get the due process, you don't get to face the witness, you don't know the cause of accusation, you have nothing on your side. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program. From the National Review, Senior Fellow at National Review Institute, contributing editor and author of The Ball of Collusion, the Plot to Riggin Election and Destroy a Presidency. He served as assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. His name is Andy McCarthy. Andy, how are you? Glenn, I'm doing great. How are you? Very good. Seems like we've been doing this for a long time, Andy. My gosh. So now we're dealing with a couple of things that I never thought we'd have to deal with,

and that is all hands on deck, everything we can do to destroy a candidate or a president, they're doing. And today they can take the assets away from Donald Trump, at least that's what they're going to try to do. Are they going to seize the assets of Donald Trump? No, I don't think they're close to doing that yet, Glenn. Today is the day that Letitia James, who's the Attorney General in New York, that she would start the process of trying to seize assets in connection with this preposterous $454 million judgment. I should say $454 million in counting because the interest is accruing at $112,000 a day.

Oh, my gosh. So, Andy, didn't she file something over the weekend about his Westchester golf course? Yeah, well, she is taking preparatory steps, Glenn, that you would have to take if you were about to try to attach people's property in pursuance of a judgment. But I don't think she's going to jump yet because they went to the Trump people went to the appellant. division, which is in the New York court system, the nomenclature is ridiculous. But the appellate division is like the federal court equivalent of the circuit courts. It's like the intermediate appellate court. And he's asked them to stay the enforcement of the judgment while he's appealing and ask them to take a modest-sized bond or no bond at all rather than the usual practice,

which is supposed to bond for the full amount of the judgment, because that bond would be ruinously expensive to try to arrange. We haven't heard yet from the appellate division. So I think it would be very presumptuous and from her standpoint, bad for James to try to do anything before the court has acted. Does he have a shot at a fair hearing at the appellate court? Yeah, I think so. you know, at the beginning of the civil trial, the appellate court knocked out of a lot of a number of

things that Judge Engeran wanted to do to Trump, including taking away his business certificates and seizing things that weren't even, or paralyzing components of Trump's conglomerate that weren't even in the case. So they gave him a pretty fair hearing at the beginning. And even though they didn't so far give him the stay he's asking for, They did throw out, at least temporarily, Engaron's penalties that included putting Trump out of business in New York and denying him the ability to work with financial institutions to get loans. So I think he's going to get a fair – this is a low bar,

but I think he's going to get a fair hearing from the appellate division that he got from Engron. If this actually goes through, how is New York going to survive just the – business people who say, I don't want to be on the wrong side of New York State. You know, they couldn't change the rules or work it any way they want. I got to get my money out of here. Yeah, I couldn't agree with that more.

And when I've made that point, Glenn, what people push back on is this kind of thing, which even by itself, if you just took it at face value, is disturbing, which is that this is like that Trump is sui generis. that this is only law for Trump and it doesn't apply. Correct. Now, first of all, that would be, if that's true, that in and of itself is a scandalous measure of not only what's happened to the law or what's happened to the culture.

But I think the thing with the left, in my experience, is once they achieved something that was, you know, theretofore, not done before, then nothing is really generous anymore. And if they could do it to Trump, Trump, you know, Trump's not the only enemy that the left has. They don't like fossil fuel companies. They don't like gun companies. You know, they don't like companies in general, right? So once they do it to him and they've set the precedent, the thought that this won't be applied to anyone else is crazy. And that's why I think every big dollar business in New York is asking itself, do we really need to be in New York? That is so going to hurt New York. And I just don't, I don't, I don't, I can't figure out their end game. I really, you know, when you look at their endgame, anything sane is off the table. I mean, I just don't know how this one ends.

Yeah, I think New York is kind of a microcosm of what's happened to the Democratic Party in general. I don't think most rank and file Democrats across the country, like ordinary people who identify as Democrats. I don't think they're on board with a lot of the stuff that Biden has done and a lot of the woke stuff, but I think the people who are on board with that are the most flush with money, the loudest, the most obnoxious, and the ones that the decision makers fear. So what's happened in New York is, like, for example, Tish James, in a very kind of Soviet-style campaign, actually said, elect me, I will use the power of my office to go after Trump.

Right. She won in a landslide. In the 1990s, when I was a young lawyer in New York, if a person wanted to get elected to a state legal position and campaign like that, that would be disqualifying. But today, she wins in a landslide. So I think that says a lot more about what's happened to New York than what's happened to the law. So tell me your thoughts on the new DOJ's arm, the National Extreme,

protection order resource center. This is terrifying. And how did they get it all on a door? That's what I want to know. I know. Well, they're calling it in the spookiest thing, weren't the Russians when they were doing spy operations? Wasn't it called the center that gave all the instructions?

Oh, you may be right about that. I don't know that history. And that's what they're calling this. They're calling it the center. Yeah, well, you know, look, at the Justice Department, speaking of microcosms, you know, the Justice Department is like the microcosm of the Biden administration in the sense that, you know, it's run by this elderly, seemingly well-meaning guy in Merrick Garland, who was kind of advertised as the moderate who was going to keep the crazies at bay. Right, right. But he's a weak person, and the crazies have been running the Justice Department since he took over. And they have some really radical people.

Glenn, this is like our constant conversation for 20 years, right? But they have really radical people running the Justice Department in very high-ranking positions in the civil rights division and in anything that they have to do on the national security side. So, you know, and right now Congress is very dysfunction. And that's worth noting because we've seen time and again that the courts are simply not capable, including the FISA court, of monitoring stuff that the Justice Department brings them. So if Congress doesn't do a good job of oversight, then you've got the lunatics running the place. Yeah, there is no oversight. Andy, do you see any of this changing internally?

Do you hear from FBI agents or people at the DOJ or? anybody starting to say, okay, okay, this just, I got to stand up here pretty soon. No, I don't, you know, I was kind of hopeful when we had those whistleblowers come forward in the Biden investigation that maybe we would shake some loose in the FBI as well. But it really hasn't happened. And I think, you know, a lot of people are getting out. A lot of people are just trying to keep their head down and hope that like a new regime comes in in November and some of these guys are washed out.

But, you know, it just seems to me that, you know, most of the Biden Justice Department is just the Obama Justice Department four years down the road. So these people are just more senior and more powerful and more network. And I think unless Congress comes in and completely restructures the FBI and actually start slashing their budget so that they can't. The only language they understand is slashing their budget. And no one, you know, I think, I think when Trump started, you know, Trump wasn't crazy about the FBI, right? I think when he started their budget was something like in the low 30 billions.

And I read something recently that it's now over 40 billion. So it just gets bigger. You know, everybody complains about them, but they just give them more resources to do more of this stuff. Yeah. Andy, thank you so much for filling us in and giving us some perspective on Donald Trump. Just a guess as a human being, if they start taking away his stuff, I think that helps him at the polls. I do. I think it's, yeah, I've always thought that, you know, if you're talking about accusations and what's in a complaint and what's in an indictment and all that stuff, I think a lot of that washes over people and becomes kind of abstract.

But when you start to, like, actually take his stuff, that's going to hit people in a different way than just, like, the thrum of conversation about, well, he overvalued this and, you know, they got a favorable interest rate on. This is like when she shows up with a chain and puts a lock on Trump Tower, that's a thing now. That's like, that's going to hit people in a much different way. I would have thought that, though, of what's her name down in Georgia when she purges it? herself so, I mean, she wanted to answer those questions and answer them with lies. And she didn't seem to pay any penalty and nobody seems to care. I don't know how we trust, you know, an AG when or a prosecutor when they can lie to two different courts and get away with it.

Yeah, but, you know, the legal system's kind of a lagging indicator that way. I mean, I hear people say what you just said, I've always heard said about Hillary Clinton. Like, she never gets held accountable. Nothing ever happens. And my reaction to that is always, do you remember the Hillary Clinton presidency? There wasn't one, right? And it's because I think the public, you know, where the public is on this stuff is very different from what you see from, like, the elites who run the, you know, the legal profession. I actually think Fannie, Fannie Willis is badly wounded.

by that judge's opinion and that the appellate court down there when they get their hands on it may actually boot her off the case. For me, just as a legal matter, if I was running Trump's defense, the one expenditure I would make is I would make sure there was a limo at Fannie's house every day to make sure she gets to work because I think she's the best thing he's got going for it. I do too. I do too. I do too. Andy, thank you so much, man. Talk to you later. Thanks, Glenn.