Media Malpractice and Washington’s Crisis of Accountability | Ep 80

Former Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke offers a blunt critique of recent political events and media narratives in this provocative episode of the Straight Talk Podcast. Sheriff Clarke begins by dissecting the Democrat National Convention, highlighting what he perceives as widespread misinformation and lies.

This episode explores a number of controversial topics, including:

1. The fallout from PBS broadcaster Judy Woodruff's false claims about Trump and Netanyahu, raising questions about media credibility and accountability.

2. An in-depth look at the Secret Service's handling of a recent assassination attempt on former President Trump, examining the implications for security protocols and transparency.

3. A critical analysis of the Bureau of Labor Statistics' revised job report, revealing alarming inaccuracies in government data and their potential impact on economic perceptions.

4. An examination of the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict, challenging the narrative surrounding ceasefire negotiations and questioning the Biden administration's approach.

Sheriff Clarke also applauds a recent Kansas court decision in which a judge dismissed machine gun possession charges based on the Second Amendment. This leads to a broader discussion on gun rights and the implications for firearm ownership in America.

Throughout the episode, Sheriff Clarke emphasizes themes of media responsibility, government accountability, and the protection of individual constitutional rights. His straight-talking approach offers listeners a provocative perspective on current events, encouraging critical thinking about the information presented by mainstream sources.

SUPPORT THE PODCAST:

Straight Talk With America's Sheriff, David Clarke | Podcast | Patreon

https://www.patreon.com/straighttalkwithamericassheriffdavidclarke/membership?fan_landing=true

------------------------------------------

SPONSORS:

mypillow.com Promo Code: CLARKE

------------------------------------------

Purchase COP Under Fire Book by Sheriff David Clarke

Amazon:   https://a.co/d/2jPJXV0

JOIN OUR STRAIGHT SHOOTER'S VIP CLUB:

 Receive special gift and invitations to Private Podcast Events

 Straight Talk With America's Sheriff David Clarke | podcast | Patreon

-------------------------------------------------------

For Podcast Sponsorship, Partnership, And Endorsement Opportunities, Please Submit The Following Form: 

https://form.123formbuilder.com/6370448/podcast-sponsor-form

----------------------------------------------

The Ryan Samuels Show
Modern-day politics discussion and analysis. Conservative Political Commentator Ryan...

Listen on: Apple Podcasts   Spotify

Chapters

• 1:37 Critique of the Democrat National Convention
• 3:56 Media Lies and Accountability
• 12:34 Secret Service and Government Accountability
• 18:39 [Ad] The Ryan Samuels Show
• 19:26 (Cont.) Secret Service and Government Accountability
• 19:55 Labor Statistics and Economic Misrepresentation
• 29:10 Missing Migrant Children and Government Negligence
• 33:09 Middle East Ceasefire and Political Deception
• 37:00 Second Amendment Rights and Legal Battles
• 46:23 Conclusion and Final Thoughts

Transcript

1:22

Hello, everybody. Welcome to another edition of Broadcast Excellence. You're listening to the Straight Talk Podcast with your host, former Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. Let's get right into it. A few comments on the Democrat National Convention that was held last week. I didn't watch it. I couldn't watch it. There were a couple days I started and about five minutes into the first speaker, I had to turn it off. It was nauseating. And I thought, why should I waste my time? Listening to these liars get up there one after another, look straight into the camera, and lie to millions of viewers. I already know what they're going to say. I don't need to listen to it. I could have wrote the speech for every one of those speakers. They hate Donald Trump. He's an existential threat. He's Hitler. My time is valuable, ladies and gentlemen. You know, time, and you've heard me say this before, time is a commodity. And it has value. And there's only 24 hours in a day. And you are in charge. You get to decide how you're going to spend that time. And I wasn't going to let the Democrat National Committee spend my time listening to their garbage. Complete garbage. Now I don't like to tell people what to do with their lives, so I'm not going to sit up here and tell you What you shouldn't have done, and tell you what to watch, and there's some things I'm gonna tell you to read. But in the end, that's really up to you. But I don't know why you would have wasted your time if you watched it, and you came away upset. And then the next day, on all the, the, the conservative radio that I listen to, they rehashed the, the night before, so why'd I need to watch it? Lies and lies and lies. And speaking of lies, here's an example. PBS broadcaster forced to apologize after falsely claiming Trump urged Netanyahu to abandon the hostage deal. So this, this anchor here, Judy Woodruff, apologized on Wednesday after reporting a particular story about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former President Donald Trump. A report that both men have vehemently denied in a stubborn apology on X. Woodruff insinuated she had falsely acclaimed, insinuated, that in an attempt to further his political campaign, Trump advised Netanyahu to pull off an agreement between Israel and Hamas regarding the Israeli hostages until after the 2024 presidential election. So then she turns around and she blames this. On two other news outlets that put this BS out, Axios and Reuters, so she blamed them for her own dissemination of this false information. This was a mistake, quote from her, and I apologize, I apologize for it, Woodruff stated. And see, that's all Democrats have to do, is apologize, and they're allowed to move on. Her credibility is shot. And it's the same PBS that receives federal funding, why? You can blame the Democrats if you want, I blame the Republicans. First of all, they control the house, the spending, all the purse strings. Between this and Planned Parenthood, they continue to receive federal funding, why? They should all have to go out and get sponsors, like I have to, and like everybody else has to. You gotta raise your own money, fundraise. I wish I could rely on federal, the federal government, to pay for everything that I do politically. Everything, my travel, my time, my equipment, I gotta find my own money. And this PBS and Planned Parenthood have been dipping their beak into the federal coffers for a very long time. So the damage between her, Axios, and Reuters, the damage they did to Trump's reputation with this claim. This is serious, claiming that Trump told Netanyahu, when they met at Mar a Lago, when he was here, to, to address the joint session of Congress. You know, the, the damage was done. I mean, this spread like wildfire. And so she comes along later and, oh, I apologize, I, uh, you know, I got it from Axios and Reuters. Her job is to vet this crap before she goes forward with it. That's her job. She's an anchor. She's a news anchor. She's going off some other Lefty source and didn't take the time. See, these people, they don't take the time because they're more interested in doing damage to Donald Trump than they are about getting to the truth. You know, Hulk, Hulk originally came up with this. They would have to have been in the, in the room with Netanyahu and Donald Trump. They don't claim where they got it from. They just put it out there. So now she apologizes. Well, you know what? I don't know. This lie will continue to be peddled through November. The Democrats will probably run ads with it, third party ads. And very few people will hear about that this was false, as many has heard that it happened. You can't pull this back. It's like, how do you put the toothpaste back in the tube? That's what this is. Lies. These people are so hell bent on destroying Donald Trump, they will leave no stone unturned to get it done. Lies, inaccuracies. They're the ones that are always talking about misinformation. That's what this was. Diss and misinformation. It didn't happen. Netanyahu said it didn't happen. Trump says it didn't happen. And the fact that she apologized lets you know it did not happen. And they all get to just Move on. They're allowed to move on. And of course PBS will have the, the, the integrity to pull her off the air, at least for a period of time. I mean, remember when Dan Rather lied about George W. Bush's military service in the National Guard? It cost him his job. Dan Rather, you think that's gonna happen at PBS? So it says here, as a seasoned industrial profesh industry professional, Woodruff has covered politics and other news for more than three decades on CNN, NBC, and PBS, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. Lefty sites! She's a stone cold lefty! And then it goes on to say here, I'm reading from, uh, OANN. com, is the site, during a Monday segment of the network's news program, Woodruff said, said. Quote, the reporting is that former President Trump is on the phone with the President, I'm sorry, with the Prime Minister of Israel, urging him not to cut a deal right now because he believed it would help the Harris campaign. However, the day after Woodrow's reporting was condemned by Israeli Prime Minister's office, Netanyahu representatives told the Jerusalem Post outlet last week that the anchor promoted a complete Lie. This wasn't a mistake. This wasn't a misunderstanding or a misinterpretation or taken out of context. It was an outright lie, just like was spewed person after person at the Democrat National Convention. Lie after lie after lie. I wrote in a column that I penned. You can look it up. Wanted. New conservative fighters. It appeared at town hall, townhall. com. Just look it up. And I, one of the sentences I put in there, the Democrats have turned politics into the art of lying. That's what they do. It's who they are. You can't believe a word they say. Like, like, I always say, how do you know they're lying? Their lips are moving. That's all they do is lie. Here's another story. Follow up story. On the Trump assassination attempt and the investigation by the Secret Service. At least five Secret Service officials placed on leave nearly six weeks after Trump assassination attempt. At least five members of the Secret Service Pittsburgh field office have been reportedly placed on administrative leave following the July 13th assassination attempt against former President Donald Trump. Let me stop right there. What does that mean? That's code language. Placed on leave. Exactly what does it mean? Have they been suspended? You know this is the federal government. They never taught plain language because it allows them wiggle room to fool people because most people don't read critically. They don't drill down, pull the layers back. I did when I saw this, I said, what does that mean placed on leave? Have they been suspended? And if they have, why don't they just say suspended? What's this placed on leave crap? I mean, if somebody takes family medical leave, they're on leave. But that's family medical leave. We know what that is. This is a disciplinary investigation. What do you mean placed on leave? Is it paid or is it unpaid? And you know what they're trying to do? Don't kid yourself. They're stalling for time. In the end, you know what's going to happen with these guys? Pick one of them's a woman. They'll be sent for retrain. That's all that's going to happen here. So placing them on leave gives them time to run out the clock. The public will forget about this and they won't have any interest in it. So it says here, The Chief of Communications of the United States Secret Service told Fox News Digital in a statement that the agency's personnel are held to the Here we go again with the spin and the bullcrap. Agency's personnel are held to the highest professional standards and any identified in substantiated violations of policy will be investigated by the Office of Professional Responsibility for potential disciplinary action. These guys aren't going to be fired. I'll bet you right now. Write it down. So you can rub my nose in it if they get fired down the road. You can bring it back to me. And I'll say, you know what, I was wrong. But I know I'm not gonna be wrong. Nobody's ever fired in a federal government. The United States Secret Service did not directly announce the names or identities of the employees placed on leave. Why not? These are public servants. Why do they get to operate in anonymity? If this, if local cops don't get this, as soon as a cop's involved in something, Whether justified or not, they named them right away. Officer John Smith of the, you know, whatever, Middleton Police Department is being investigated for XYZ. They named them. This, this stuff about, we're not gonna name them. So it says here, according to this spokesperson for the United States Secret Service, she added that given the personal nature of the matter, personal, not personnel, personal, not personnel at all. Nature of the matter, the agency is not in a position to comment further. So, again, federal government. Federal government always happens. Anonymity. No accountability. Now I understand that there's a process. And unfortunately, I don't know the case off the top of my head when the United States Supreme Court ruled that a government job is a property right. And so they're entitled to due process. Okay, if that's what they say, I'm okay with that. There's a process, but the standard is so high to meet the process. It's impossible to get rid of these people for incompetence, for malfeasance. You've probably heard that before, how hard it is. Ask any, including at the state level, at the local level, ask any supervisor, how hard is it to get rid of an underperforming employee? I'll tell you, it's very difficult. It's almost impossible. Because of the due process requirement, which it should be for due process, They didn't do this with the Minneapolis police officers. They didn't get due process. The ones involved with George Floyd, they were denied due process. The January 6th people were denied due process, but now all of a sudden with the secret service and these government employees, Oh, we got to make sure that they, you know, are strictly receiving their due process and I'm okay with that. But it only works for government employees, like those at the federal level, the FBI involved in that. Steel dossier. Nobody was disciplined. One guy was, was it McCabe? No, Peter Strzok, but then he appealed it and got his job back and then sued for damages and got millions of dollars. Only in the federal government. Let's stay with Washington. I'm sure you've heard of this one. If you listen to this podcast, it means you pay attention to what goes on politically. The jobs report. has been revised and it shows that, this is from the USA Today, the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics on Wednesday revised down its estimate of total employment in March of 2024 by 818, 000, the largest such downgrade in 15 years. That effectively means there were 818, 000 fewer jobs gained. Then first believe from April 23rd to March 24th, March of 2024. Oh, a slight little recording error. Not 818 jobs. Not 8, 010 jobs. Not even 18, 000 jobs. Eight hundred eighteen jobs. 818, 000 jobs that the Labor Department claims were created in a year from April 23 to March 24. And it wasn't true. It simply wasn't true. And so now they come out with, with these, these, these figures, these adjustments. And you know, we just, again, you know, we just move on. 818, 000 jobs that the Labor Department claims were created that were not created. And you had Biden and Harris and everybody else. The liberal media running around, talking about Bidenomics is working, talking about the economy is strong, hiring is strong. I mean, anytime you, you know, you, you, you do record keeping and you, you, you do audits, you're gonna find some minor stuff that, oh, hey, this should, should have been 50, not, you know, um, 150, 800, 18,000. This was done intentionally and I wanna know why there's been no call on Capitol Hill. For a forensic audit of the labor statistics. What a forensic, what does a forensic audit do? It looks for possible criminality, evidence of a crime, 818, 000. It's inexcusable. You can't even explain it. This is not a recording error. Major decisions were made off of these labor reports between April of 2023 and March of 2024. I believe, ladies and gentlemen, this is criminal. Negligence. An investigation should be called for. I mean, where's the Security Exchange Commission? It says here in this story, the largest downward revision was in professional and business services with estimated payrolls lowered by 358, 000 followed by a 150, 000 downgrade in leisure and hospitality and 115, 000 in manufacturing. Ladies and gentlemen, stocks are traded off of this crap. People are investing money. Oh, look, the manufacturing sector is up. Let me go find some manufacturing stocks and invest in them. The same with leisure and hospitality and the same with business services, professional and business services. People make investment decisions. They invest their money off of this stuff. That's why I mentioned the security exchange commission. Where are they? That's why I said a forensic audit should be called for. That's why I said. I believe the Labor Department and its officials should be investigated for criminal negligence. Now that, you know, the Security and Exchange Commission is one of those agencies, you know, we hear about and not many people really Because it's not real sexy, right? Security is an exchange commission. It is boring stuff. But let me read from their mission statement, which is why I said, where are they? Why aren't they tripping up here, calling for an investigation. Here's the mission of the SEC. At the Security and Exchange Commission. We work together to make a positive impact on the US economy, our capital markets, and people's lives. Since our founding in 1934 at the height of the Great Depression, we have stayed true to our mission of protecting investors. Maintaining fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitating capital formation. How can you when the math is off, and not by just a little bit? So it goes on to say here, what is part of their mission, The federal securities laws we oversee are based on a simple and straightforward concept. Everyone should be treated fairly and have access to certain facts about investments and those who sell them. How can you? Where the numbers are off, this, this is staggering. And of course, it was talked about a little bit in the news, but you know, the DNC was going on. What a perfect time to do this, right? Yeah, you heard about it, and then, you know, a couple people tried, Oh yeah, this is terrible. Oh God, spare me. So, were the calls on Capitol Hill by the Republicans in the House to call people on the carpet from the Labor Department, say, how do you make a projection that's off by almost a million jobs? And then during that time, don't forget, month to month, the labor reports, but oh, hiring's up. Oh, it's, it's, it's proof that the economy is, is on its way. Bidenomics is working. Harris was saying it. Biden was saying it. All during that time. Oh, soft landing on inflation. Job creation. We created, I don't know, they claimed 10 million jobs. No, they didn't. They lied, like they always do, about everything. They're never to be trusted, their word. It means nothing, it doesn't to me. If you want to believe them, you go ahead. I'm not that gullible. You know, we sit up here and we watch the news and the stuff that, you know, breaking news and this, that, and the other. I mean, Fox Business News. First of all, you should be watching Newsmax. Plug for them. I'm a contributor at Newsmax TV. Box Business should have been all over this, and I don't mean, and you know they covered it. But not the way it should have been covered. This is like for a day or two. Imagine the reaction if the Trump administration had been involved in this. Fixing, cooking the books, that's what this is, that's why I said a forensic audit is necessary to look for evidence of a crime. And that this, I'm saying this is criminal. Negligent! You can't be off by this much! I mean, if a doctor did this, told you some information that wasn't true and was saying, oh, you need, you need to have surgery right away, and it turns out you didn't, what would be your reaction? Well, um, yeah, you know, I, I, yeah, you know, now that I look back at, yeah, we, we amputated your knee, your leg, and we really didn't need to. Oh, gee, thanks, doc. I understand. Only the government gets away with this crap. So, I don't expect that anything I'm saying here is going to happen, but I'm suggesting what needs to happen in light of all this other stuff going on in Washington, D. C. that the, the, the GOP house, the hearings they're holding, it's kind of like the story about 300, 000 children are unaccounted for by ICE. 300, 000. Again, we're talking numbers that are staggering. Not 30, not 300. Not 3, 000. 300, 000 migrant children are unaccounted for. How can that happen? And then you have the, you know, reaction from the White House, from Biden and the border czar, Harris, kind of like, you know, the reaction you have when you misplace or lose your car keys. Oh, where are my car keys? I thought I had them. You start reaching in your pockets, right? Going through all your clothes to, you know, going to the car, look between the seats. I know I had those keys yesterday. And then, you know, you look for a little while and you go, Oh, well, they're here somewhere and you go get a spare key, right? They have that reaction losing 300, 000 kids. Children. One of the first questions I asked was, well, what are their ages? Because when you say children, I bet many of these were people in their teens and you know, they're being used in the sex Uh, trafficking area. You know they are. And that's why this shoulder shrug by Harris and Biden, and of course Harris is in hiding, she's a border czar. She needs to be asked. Maybe it'll come up in the debates, but I doubt it. Because ABC and CBS, I think those are the two having the debates, they're not interested in damaging Harris chance of becoming president. They're not going to answer about it, so it's going to take Trump to bring it up, to remind people. Yeah, she's the board of, uh, they lost 300, uh, thousand kids. Um, maybe the vice president will tell us what she knows about that tonight. And she won't, because we don't have a responsible or a media with any integrity. 300, 000 kids, unaccounted for. Can you imagine the reaction if daycare centers across the United States were losing 300, 000, track of 300, 000 kids? Even if it was 10 years, can you imagine that? And here it's kind of like, yeah, you know, my keys will eventually turn up. Well, these kids will eventually turn up. That's their, their smug attitude. I'll eventually, I just want to use the car key analogy. Oh, they'll turn up. I got a spare key. I'll get this side, you know, they'll turn, it'll pop up. And look at the reaction when Trump was president. They tried to blame him for kids in cages when that was an Obama program. I'm surprised they haven't somehow. Tried to spin this into these 300, 000 missing children are Trump's fault. Staying in Washington, but basically the Middle East. Follow up, the ceasefire. First of all, Blinken, Blinken is garbage. He sat up there during the DNC, and the same with Biden. Remember what Biden said during the DNC, before it started? We're as close to a ceasefire between Hamas and ISIS. And Israel as we've ever been and he said, excuse me, he said, I don't want to jinx it, but this is as close as we've ever been. They are so far away from an agreement, you can't even see it. It's not close. They did that hoping that those pro Hamas, Jew hating disruptors would believe that the Biden administration is working on a ceasefire because that's what they're calling for, right? That's The ceasefire, the, the pro amas Americans, they're not anywhere close to an agreement. And I knew as soon as Biden said that and Blinken, you know, he's going back and forth, subtle diplomacy, back and forth and, and you know, a lot of fury, a lot of activity. They weren't close. And I don't think there should be a ceasefire anyway. As far as Israel has gotten, Netanyahu, the IDF, victory is within sight. What people should be calling for, and you've heard me say this before. It's an unconditional surrender by Hamas ceasefire. You trust Hamas, a terrorist organization, to stick to a ceasefire? I mean, come on. Who are we trying to kid here? So anyway, I found this article and I was looking at the, what's involved here, what's on the table. There's a lot here, it's supposed to happen in three phases, this is a proposal. So, anyway, it says here, 1. Egyptian official, Egypt's involved in this because they're part of it with it. They border Gaza and there's this route for humanitarian aid that could be used here. It says, A second Egyptian official briefed on the latest developments in negotiations said there were few chances for a breakthrough. Few chances. And in the rest of this article, and I'm not going to go through the whole thing, but it says here Mr. Blinken also said that because Israel accepted the proposal the focus turns on Israel. To do everything possible to get Hamas on board. Egypt's state run Al Haram Daily reported that Mr. Blinken received a clear Egyptian demand for the U. S. to work toward a well framed deal with clear deadlines and clear objectives to encourage Hamas to side. Hamas has already said they're not sided. What did Biden mean we're as close as we've ever been to a ceasefire agreement? They're not. Again, more lies from the Biden administration or from Democrats. Finally, I want to end with this. This one did put a smile on my face. Yeah, I do smile once in a while. If they always say you gotta give me something to smile about, I don't just walk around with a smile on my face. Anyway, this is in the area of gun rights, the Second Amendment. And I'm encouraged that the United States Supreme Court is issuing rulings over the last couple of years, some major decisions on gun rights issues, that we bend this curve back toward The original intent and context, or text I should say, of the Second Amendment. So we got a case out of the Kansas City District, I don't know what number district that is, Federal Court. It says a Kansas City judge dismisses machine gun and glock switch charges citing the Second Amendment. A Kansas City judge, Kansas judge, I'm sorry, has dismissed federal machine gun possession charges. Included for having a Glock switch citing the Second Amendment and recent United States Supreme Court rulings in gun right cases. U. S. District Judge John Brooms on Wednesday dismissed two counts of unlawful possession of a siege machine gun against Tamori Morgan. Morgan had been indicted by a federal grand jury in April 23rd in U. S. District Court in Wichita. Brooms wrote that the prosecution failed to meet its burden to demonstrate that possession of these types of weapons had issues. In this case, are lawfully prohibited under the Second Amendment. So, it goes on to say here, and this is from CJOnline. com, talks about a Glock switch, you may have heard of those, it's a little device that allows a semi automatic Glock pistol to function as a fully automatic firearm and it's classified as a machine gun under federal law according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. And I talked about this with the ATF said, yeah, this is a violation that we're putting this little device out of the machine gun act. Congress didn't approve that ATF can't make law. They were allowed to get away with it. It's been challenged. It's been struck down that the ATF doesn't have the authority to do this. So anyway, the charges that they had on this guy were under 18 U. S. C. and the Federal Code. The Federal Code prohibiting possession of machine gun except by the government and for individuals who under a grandfather clause Have a machine gun that was lawfully possessed prior to the law going into effect in 1986. So the public defender filed a motion to dismiss last November And this, uh, public defender, a public defender, this defendant was using a public defender who beat the government. So the public defender wrote that the machine gun ban offends the history and tradition of the Second Amendment. He questioned whether stripping someone of their rights to possess a machine gun without exception is consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearms regulation. So he questions that. So the prosecutor, of course, responded that the country has a historical tradition of reg relegate regulating dangerous and unusual firearms. He also argued that the plain text of the Second Amendment does not cover the possession of machine guns. So, in other words, in other it says here, To summarize this case, the government has not met its burdens, by the judge, under Bruin and Rahimi, to demonstrate, through historical analogies, The regulation of the weapons at issue in this case are consistent with the nation's history of firearms regulations, wrote the judge, referring to U. S. Supreme Court gun rights decisions in 2022 and 2024. Remember, I said the Supreme Court is starting to bend this back in favor of our Second Amendment rights. So it says here, the judge ruled in his finding that he interpreted the Supreme Court's July decision in a Tenth Circuit U. S. Court of Appeals gun rights case as indicating that the Supreme Court means what it says. The constitutionality of laws regulating the possession of firearms under the Second Amendment must be evaluated under the Bruin Framework. Now, what is the Bruin Framework, right? In 2022, in a 6 3 opinion, the decision ruled that gun regulations must be consistent with this nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation to survive court challenges. Courts should look into historical analogues. The historical tradition of firearms in this country is very clear under the second amendment. And you know, it's just, it's just interesting. Let me get my little pocket constitution out that I always keep nearby. I happen to have it with me today because I have them all over the place. Amendment two, amendments to the constitution of the United States of America, 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. It's that simple. We've allowed courts, over time, to whittle away at this. I'm trying to explain what I meant. It's pretty clear. I mean, it's one of the shortest amendments that we have in the Constitution. And so when people say, and I'm tired of this weapons of war crap, Ah, machine guns, glock devices, weapons of war. These are weapons of self defense, is what they are. And it's our choice. It's funny that the Democrats are always talking about choice. They're running around during that damn convention talking about, you know, stay out of our lives. Yeah, well, that's what I say about the Second Amendment. Stay out of my rights. Every town in USA in this group. Every town for gun safety. Of course, they call the decision reckless. And they claim that the judge put the deadly agenda of the gun lobby over the safety of Kansas. No he didn't. That's just inflammatory rhetoric. And I'm tired of the left trying to decide for me what guns I should be able to own and what guns I shouldn't be able to own. It's for me to decide. And so the next time someone says to you, you know, Why does somebody need a high powered rifle with a magazine that holds 30 rounds? You know what my answer is? They want to. We don't live in a country where we have to explain why we want to exercise our constitutional freedoms, our constitutional rights. We don't have to explain why they're natural rights to God-given they're there. And the next time you hear some smart ass on the left say, well, should people be able to, should the average citizen be able to possess a, possess a grenade launcher? Yeah. Mm-Hmm. Yeah, under the Second Amendment. Yeah. Then what's their reaction? You know, they'll go running off like their hair's on fire. Ah Clarke said common citizens should be able to possess XYZ. Yep. Because that's what the Constitution says. That's why. Thanks for listening.