Every Wednesday morning at 9am on Instagram, I go live and discuss California Politics over coffee.
On this episode we discuss why Newsom vetoed SB 57 which would have allowed cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles to set up "safe drug use" sites for those battling with drug addiction. We also discuss three court wins in California for businesses and churches affected by 2020 lockdowns.
*The California Underground Podcast is dedicated to discussing California politics from a place of sanity and rationality.*
Links Mentioned in the Show
https://californiaglobe.com/articles/three-courts-rule-against-gov-newsom-state-govt-in-covid-business-lockdown-orders/
https://californiaglobe.com/articles/gov-newsom-vetoes-bill-proposing-to-allow-open-drug-dens/
Support California Underground on Patreon at www.patreon.com/CaliforniaUnderground
Follow California Underground on Social Media
Instagram: www.instagram.com/californiaunderground
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCj8SabIcF4AKqEVFsLmo1jA
Substack: https://substack.com/profile/72986149-ca_underground
Shop California Underground Merchandise: https://california-underground.creator-spring.com
Phil is a San Diego based attorney who specializes in criminal defense and constitutional law both under the US and California Constitution. Review the Anchor.Fm Privacy Policy: Anchor - The easiest way to make a podcast
00:00:06
If you're a California, conservative a Libertarian, a
00:00:09
moderate Democrat. Believe in common sense or just
00:00:12
the same person. This is the political podcast
00:00:14
for you. It's the California underground
00:00:17
podcast. What's going on?
00:00:21
Good morning everybody. Thanks for tuning in to another
00:00:24
episode of coffee and California Politics.
00:00:27
As always, we talk about it over coffee.
00:00:33
Lots to discuss today. Today is more of a news.
00:00:36
Roundup is a couple stories. I want to get to and then
00:00:40
obviously get to your questions and your comments and stuff like
00:00:43
that and whatever you want to talk about.
00:00:45
Because that's the point of coffee in California politics,
00:00:47
is that we sit and we chat. We talk about California
00:00:50
politics over Listen, if you have any questions or comments,
00:00:53
usually take that. If your first time tuning in, I
00:00:56
usually take them later in the show.
00:00:58
And yeah. So we kind of go over the top
00:01:01
topic and then we discuss later on, in the show, coffee today is
00:01:07
coffee or die by Black Rifle coffee.
00:01:11
Add a little heavy cream today, sometimes heavy cream changes
00:01:15
the flavor. It kind of enhances in my mind,
00:01:18
just a little touch of heavy cream.
00:01:20
Something about the fats and all that can actually help enhance
00:01:22
the flavor of coffee a little bit.
00:01:25
What's up? Hola buenos días.
00:01:27
Everybody the two things we're going to talk about today we're
00:01:30
going to talk about one that noodles vetoed SB 57, which was
00:01:35
the open drug? Or the drug use site.
00:01:38
And why I think I was correct in calling that the way it was
00:01:41
going to happen, Also, I want to talk about some court cases that
00:01:45
I think, vindicate, and hopefully set the Precedence
00:01:47
from here on out, especially here in California.
00:01:50
This is not like Federal. This is California, Superior
00:01:53
Courts have come down with these decisions, which is really,
00:01:56
really good news for businesses in California, who suffered
00:01:59
under all the covid, lockdowns and all that stuff.
00:02:01
So this is a lot of stuff to cover a lot of news to get to
00:02:06
some other things I want to talk about where my get to talk about
00:02:09
know. No weekly podcast this week,
00:02:12
still work on the technical stuff.
00:02:14
We're kind of in the middle of upgrading and all that stuff,
00:02:16
getting the technical stuff because I want to bring the best
00:02:19
possible. You know, podcast experience to
00:02:24
all of you also working on stuff that would help increase more
00:02:27
like YouTube videos and stuff like that.
00:02:29
So we can create some more content and all that.
00:02:31
So technical upgrades and stuff like that that we're working on
00:02:34
but we can still do coughing, California politics and we still
00:02:37
sit here and chat on Instagram as always.
00:02:41
So Let's get started with our first story right off the bat.
00:02:45
It's not this story. I was looking at this story that
00:02:48
Newsome leads, Brian Dolly by a fifty to twenty five percent
00:02:52
gubernatorial race and UC Berkeley pull.
00:02:55
That wasn't shocking. That was something I was reading
00:02:57
before but this is the really big story that I want to talk
00:03:01
about. And I think it definitely it
00:03:04
fell down the way that I was exactly expecting it was going
00:03:08
to go down if, you know, if you remember not too long ago I
00:03:11
think. Was a week or two ago ago I had
00:03:13
talked about this bill SB 57. And I talked about how in my
00:03:17
prediction noodles was likely going to veto it because it had
00:03:21
been sitting on his desk for a while.
00:03:24
He hadn't made him really decision on it.
00:03:26
Senator Scott wiener, who's the author of the bill?
00:03:28
We all know, Senator Scott wiener.
00:03:30
He's the one with all the crazy bills.
00:03:31
He's the one who was promoting their own going to Door alley
00:03:34
when there was a monkey pox scare monkeypox, pandemic going
00:03:37
on, but he was one who promoted this bill and what it would
00:03:41
have. Done whatever loud places, like
00:03:43
San Francisco and l.a. to open the safe drug, use sites.
00:03:49
And I believed when I read this and it kind of set on noodles
00:03:53
desk for a little bit, I knew that there was going to be a
00:03:56
problem and I knew that well, not a problem for us, it's good
00:03:59
for us. I knew that it was going to be a
00:04:01
problem for him because I think we all know, there's noodles is
00:04:04
getting ready for a presidential run, whether it be coming up in
00:04:08
2024 or 2028, I think he A new, he's a shrewd politician, give
00:04:13
him credit, where credit is due, he's a shrewd politician, the
00:04:16
fact that he knew if he did this, it would give his
00:04:19
political opponents, a lot to kind of run with.
00:04:22
I mean, that would just be the attack ad on 24/7.
00:04:25
It would just show video of this and it would just show people
00:04:29
saying, hey, this is what they allow in California.
00:04:31
Is this what you want in your state and swing States, like,
00:04:34
Arizona, Georgia? Although states in the middle,
00:04:38
you know, Ohio, even Florida, which I think is In training,
00:04:42
more red. Now, I think Florida is almost
00:04:44
like a safer, lean Red State, Ohio used to be a swing state,
00:04:48
but now it's more of a lean red. But there's those big States
00:04:51
like Arizona, which would not look at this favorably and say,
00:04:56
I'm definitely not voting for a guy who allows for addicts to
00:05:00
basically continue to shoot up and the government provides for
00:05:03
that. I don't think that's what people
00:05:05
wanted. So, this is from California
00:05:07
Globe. SB 57 would have allowed for the
00:05:10
open operation of Ugh dens in Los Angeles and San Francisco
00:05:13
counties. Ironically Democrats refer to
00:05:15
the bill as the quote overdose prevention program and quote in
00:05:20
his veto message. Governor Gavin Newsom said, he
00:05:22
has long supported The Cutting Edge of harm reduction,
00:05:26
strategies and quote, but expressed concern about the
00:05:29
number of drug injection sites. The bill would allow without
00:05:33
strong engage local leadership and well-documented invented
00:05:36
thoughtful operational sustainability plans.
00:05:39
There's also speculation that with Governor Newsom of leaning
00:05:42
towards a 2024 presidential run. This was a bill too far for the
00:05:45
rest of the country to ingest. It would have provided a cudgel
00:05:48
for opponents to use against him as the globe.
00:05:51
Note, in the August 9th article quote, this legislation appears
00:05:54
to go hand-in-hand with Democrats policies on
00:05:56
homelessness or the lack thereof policies.
00:05:58
California is predominantly, Democrat state and local
00:06:01
politicians have allowed the homeless drug addicts and
00:06:03
mentally ill to live on city and county streets along rivers in
00:06:07
public parks and golf courses without Even the low barrier
00:06:11
homeless shelters. Democrat support like
00:06:12
restrictions allowing for open drug use and Drug deals, rape,
00:06:15
physical abuses and other crimes.
00:06:18
Why would anyone think open drug dens in LA and San Francisco
00:06:21
would be any different. Notably there is no Pathway to
00:06:24
treatment and SB 57. Just as with Democrats solutions
00:06:28
to homelessness. There is no Pathway to any
00:06:29
treatment. So a Republican Senate,
00:06:32
Republican, leader Scott woke believes that this was a win and
00:06:36
that the people really kind of push back and I believe people
00:06:38
did push back on. This.
00:06:41
And I believe there's definitely people who dated call in and
00:06:44
write to their people and say like, look, we're not going to
00:06:46
we don't support this as one of those more controversial bills.
00:06:50
But in the end, I think it was noodles, own greedy Ambitions to
00:06:54
become president someday that he knew that.
00:06:56
If he signed this bill, he would most likely you have this used
00:07:01
against them. I most definitely most
00:07:03
definitely have this be used against them because it again,
00:07:07
this is one of those issues. That on the surface of it, even
00:07:11
if you could sit there and try and make a rational argument,
00:07:14
which people have tried to do it, and I still don't
00:07:16
understand, I try and figure out what the rational argument for
00:07:19
this is, I believe that the rational argument should be, how
00:07:22
do we help these people? How do we get them into
00:07:25
facilities, where they get off drugs, and how do we get them to
00:07:28
not continue to do this again at the analogy?
00:07:31
I like to use, is, if you knew someone was an alcoholic, you
00:07:35
wouldn't necessarily hand them a bottle of Jack Daniels and say,
00:07:37
well, I know you're an alcoholic but I I want you to continue
00:07:40
using and drinking alcohol. Therefore, I think that will
00:07:45
somehow help you because at least, if I'm watching you drink
00:07:47
alcohol, I'll be better once I, what do you think?
00:07:50
Are his chances to even pass the primary?
00:07:53
It would be tough. I would say for him to pass the
00:07:55
primary, which again, and it kind of leads into my point as
00:07:58
to, he's moving more moderate, which in a way is a silver
00:08:05
lining for us in California. Because as we talked about With
00:08:09
the water and with the electricity, he has to show he
00:08:12
can get stuff done and you can't go into a presidential primary
00:08:17
where you have a state that can't turn on the electricity,
00:08:21
can turn on a light, you can't turn on the faucet and get
00:08:23
water. Those are two big issues and if
00:08:26
you're going to try and run for president and those are really
00:08:29
big things that are plaguing, California, your opponent are
00:08:32
going to look at you and go yet. You can't even keep the lights
00:08:35
on and people can't even get water in California.
00:08:37
So what makes you think you want to be president?
00:08:39
The United States. And I think this would have been
00:08:42
another one of those marks against him where they would
00:08:46
have said, this is what you supported, you sign this into
00:08:50
law, to allow for addicts, to continue to use, instead of
00:08:53
getting them off, some sort of off this addiction and into some
00:08:57
sort of treatment, you've just decided that you're going to
00:09:00
allow them to keep doing this. So, I think, in a way, we're
00:09:06
going to benefit from noodles. Ambitions to run for president
00:09:11
because he will be forced to move more towards the middle,
00:09:16
and it will force him to actually get stuff done.
00:09:20
And I think that if he has those aspirations, if he has to go to
00:09:24
Iowa, I mean, think about this way.
00:09:27
The primary usually runs through Iowa and then through New
00:09:31
Hampshire stage that are not necessarily Uber Progressive,
00:09:36
you know, you look at Iowa, they always say.
00:09:39
Well, why does it start with Iowa?
00:09:40
Just kind of that's how it falls like you can change updates and
00:09:43
stuff like that. The store tradition is that
00:09:45
Iowa's? Sort of the first one but if
00:09:48
you're going to win over voters in Iowa and you're going to win
00:09:51
over voters in New Hampshire and then North Carolina, it kind of
00:09:56
goes, does this like little wrap around?
00:09:59
Those are usually the states. You have to win to set yourself
00:10:02
up for success and if you saw the past couple Democratic
00:10:06
primaries, you saw people like Bernie Sanders.
00:10:09
Is jumped out ahead really quickly in this first.
00:10:12
This last one in 2020, Pete Buddha judge jumped out and won
00:10:16
Iowa. Somehow is kind of like
00:10:18
contested how we won, but he won in Iowa because I guess people
00:10:22
thought he was the most moderate out of everybody which really
00:10:26
says something. If beat Buddha judge is used as
00:10:28
the most moderate out of everybody and then you kind of
00:10:31
have to move along and if you go to Iowa, I doubt there's a lot
00:10:36
of people in Iowa who are going to look at San Francisco and La
00:10:39
as what they want to happen there.
00:10:41
And he knows that look. He's got 24 million dollars in
00:10:45
the war chest right now, which he doesn't really have to spend
00:10:49
any of it on running. For governor.
00:10:51
I already cited to you. The polls showing that it's more
00:10:54
than a double, he had more than double support than Brian Dolly
00:10:58
does 52. 25% of people who are planning on voting for one of
00:11:02
the other so it basically doesn't have to do anything.
00:11:05
He does have to spend that much money in all actuality and he
00:11:08
can You need to raise a crap ton of money so he's sitting on 24
00:11:13
million dollars already which he can then transfer to a
00:11:16
presidential campaign, meaning that he's already going to have
00:11:19
an enormous War chest going into these primaries.
00:11:22
But again, his opponents are likely going to press them on
00:11:26
these things. And even if he does get through
00:11:28
the primary, let's say Gavin Newsom, somehow gets through the
00:11:31
primary of the Democratic primary system.
00:11:35
Somehow he gets through because he's, I don't know.
00:11:38
People think he's the A most Charming most handsome.
00:11:40
I know I'm sorry, if all of you just had breakfast and you're
00:11:43
throwing up in your mouth a little bit right now.
00:11:45
But let's just say he's the most young charismatic guy.
00:11:49
He goes out there and people vote for him and they support
00:11:52
him. I mean look they've supported
00:11:53
Bernie Sanders who was Uber Progressive because they want
00:11:56
something different. He could present himself as the
00:12:00
Uber part, not the, you know the Practical Progressive and he
00:12:04
wins he gets through the primary now he's got a face off against
00:12:07
someone like a Ron DeSantis Rhonda Santa's and him have been
00:12:12
going back and forth a lot. The proof is in the pudding in
00:12:15
terms of their states. In general someone says no
00:12:19
breakfast. Just dry heaving.
00:12:21
Yeah. It's kind of, it's tough to say
00:12:23
that stuff like that. But if he has, to face off
00:12:27
against Republican opponent, you know, the Republican opponent is
00:12:30
absolutely going to shred him to pieces on a lot of these far
00:12:34
left, California policies and they're just going to run that
00:12:38
over and over and over and over. Over again to the point where
00:12:42
nobody is really going to want that in their state and I mean
00:12:46
it's the common phrase you hear. Don't California my taxes, don't
00:12:50
California, my Florida. Don't California.
00:12:52
My country and Gavin Newsom is that he may get a good amount of
00:12:56
support because with Democrats because he is much younger and
00:13:01
more energetic than President Biden is.
00:13:03
I mean, then again, I mean like, you know, a Jack Russell is more
00:13:08
energetic and lively than President Biden is But let's
00:13:12
just say that's how it ends up. They don't have a deep bench,
00:13:15
the Democrats. That's the thing, the Democrats
00:13:17
don't really have as deep of a bench, I would say is
00:13:20
Republicans, do when it comes to presidential candidates.
00:13:24
One reason why I think it may be a good idea to move on from
00:13:27
Trump is because there is a deep bench for Republican candidates.
00:13:31
You know you have a DeSantis people say well we want to
00:13:34
Santa's for four more years and we don't want him to go run for
00:13:37
president. Sometimes those things just
00:13:39
don't. I mean If we could all sit here
00:13:41
and pick and this isn't like baseball where you're calling up
00:13:45
people from the miners things happen.
00:13:47
Society changes, people jump into races and people win.
00:13:52
Nobody thought that a junior senator, who had barely spent
00:13:56
even half of his first term. I mean, only like two years as a
00:14:01
junior senator from the state of Illinois would all of a sudden
00:14:05
become the biggest phenomenon in politics in like 20 years.
00:14:10
All of them. Rise to become president.
00:14:12
Sometimes it's just that's the moment and sometimes these
00:14:16
politicians have to seize their moment.
00:14:18
So again, I'm kind of getting off track about really about
00:14:21
this. But the point being, if you have
00:14:23
a Ron DeSantis version versus a governor Newsom when it comes to
00:14:26
the presidential election issues like this or stuff, you don't
00:14:30
want to feed your enemy. You certainly don't want to give
00:14:33
him anything on a silver platter that he can run with and say,
00:14:38
look this is what they're doing. California.
00:14:41
You don't want that to come here to Florida.
00:14:45
You don't want that to come to here in Texas and stuff like
00:14:48
that. Not to mention.
00:14:50
I mean, there's still plenty of stuff that is already out there
00:14:54
that he signing, which is still bad news for him.
00:14:56
SB 9 18, which is basically outlawing carrying concealed
00:15:01
here in the state of California. I still think it's going to most
00:15:04
likely fail in any court that can read.
00:15:06
The Bruin decision will look at and go.
00:15:08
Yeah, this is, you know, Institutionally can't do this.
00:15:12
But regardless there are still a lot of Second Amendment
00:15:15
Democrats. They're still alive Second
00:15:16
Amendment Independence. There's still a lot of people in
00:15:18
like those swing states where Second Amendment people Arizona.
00:15:22
There's a big Second Amendment group of Voters.
00:15:24
They're very big in the second amendment in Arizona stuff like
00:15:27
that. Does not bode well for a
00:15:29
Democrat who's running a general election.
00:15:31
So with that said, I do think in Ace weird, Silver Lining, sort
00:15:37
of way we might get a more moderate Gavin.
00:15:39
Newsom if not for the Two years we might get from the next six
00:15:42
years of someone who's trying to position themselves and you can
00:15:45
already hear, then the crying and the gnashing of teeth from
00:15:49
the far left, who say, you know, he's not being Progressive
00:15:53
enough and he's not supporting all these things.
00:15:55
Well, yeah, because he wants to run for president.
00:15:57
He wants to be more moderate and he's moving towards the middle.
00:16:00
And the funny thing is he has to move towards the middle in his
00:16:03
own Democratic party. Otherwise he doesn't stand a
00:16:06
chance, because if he's way too far left and he's to California,
00:16:09
he might actually lose. Lose because I don't think
00:16:11
Bernie Sanders is going to run again.
00:16:12
He might run again. Who knows?
00:16:14
Bernie Sanders is crazy. Old guy.
00:16:15
He might run again. This next story which I read is
00:16:20
actually very interesting. I think this is really good news
00:16:23
and I think if you read this and you figure that this is really
00:16:27
big news especially here in California, this was not federal
00:16:30
this was state courts, so state courts came down with these
00:16:34
decisions. There were three court rulings
00:16:37
that came out that were enormous for a lot of Covid, lockdowns.
00:16:41
Now a lot of people like myself, and like other commentators were
00:16:45
saying, throughout all of covid, that shutdowns were illegal.
00:16:48
You can't do, this is unconstitutional.
00:16:51
I had always advocated that any sort of government shutdown
00:16:55
where they tell you, hey, your business is going to be shut
00:16:59
down and we're going to tell you, you have to shut down your
00:17:01
business because it's going to help stop.
00:17:04
The pandemic could be a Fifth Amendment violation.
00:17:07
According to this, there was an issue with commandeering under
00:17:10
the amendment. So there are a lot of issues of
00:17:12
these government's telling businesses to shut down to help
00:17:17
them fight the pandemic, which is basically what commandeering
00:17:22
is. So let me read a little bit of
00:17:24
this article. It's very interesting talks a
00:17:27
lot about Mark browser. Who was on the program before
00:17:29
he's running for US Senate he's the Republican candidate running
00:17:33
for US Senate and here in California I'd like to have them
00:17:36
on again. I think this is really
00:17:37
interesting. I like to get his take on this
00:17:39
stuff. But it says, and this is also
00:17:42
from California Globe. The third California court in a
00:17:45
week has ruled in favor of the people of California and the
00:17:48
United States Constitution against the government over
00:17:51
State, ordered covid, lockdowns, California courts are ruling.
00:17:55
That the government may have overstepped may have, I would
00:17:58
say definitely did overstepped its Authority when they followed
00:18:01
Gavin. Newsom, shut down orders.
00:18:02
According to constitutional attorney and US Senate can't
00:18:04
Mark. Mauser, the cases can move
00:18:07
forward and begin Discovery. So it sounds like, Like what has
00:18:11
happened? What is happening in these
00:18:13
lawsuits? Is they filed, a complaint,
00:18:15
usually the other side, the government will file, a demur
00:18:19
meaning, a Demers, a fancy term, for a motion.
00:18:21
To dismiss, basically saying look, you don't have a case, you
00:18:25
don't, the law is not on your side.
00:18:27
There's no case here. It's a way to kind of circumvent
00:18:30
litigation so that if you bring up a really crazy lawsuit,
00:18:33
somebody can file a demurrer and say you don't have any facts to
00:18:36
State your claim, you don't have enough therefore Going to get
00:18:40
rid of this case because even if we were to continue on this path
00:18:44
and go down this a little bit more, it's not going to go
00:18:48
anywhere because you can't base it on anything and you're not
00:18:51
likely going to win. There's a lot of ways that
00:18:54
litigation can be short-circuited if if people
00:18:58
aren't if they bring a lot of litigious lawsuits and they
00:19:00
don't really make any sense, that's why you don't see a lot
00:19:03
of these crazy lawsuits. Really making it to trial
00:19:05
because you can Demir them and get them out of court.
00:19:09
So, what happened was They file these complaints, likely the
00:19:12
government said, look, this is ridiculous.
00:19:15
We have this Authority. We can do these things.
00:19:17
Therefore, we should just get rid of these cases, but what it
00:19:20
now sounds like it's these courts have said, no.
00:19:23
Actually, there is a good legitimate claim here.
00:19:26
And we as a court want to investigate this more, it
00:19:29
doesn't necessarily mean that the court is going to rule this
00:19:33
way. It just means that they've moved
00:19:35
forward with it saying that hey yeah, maybe there is an issue
00:19:38
here. Buzzer said, in those San San
00:19:41
Jose, Calvary Chapel case. The first Court ruled that
00:19:44
courts can't sanction a church for refusing to shut down.
00:19:47
Since it was. Later determined, that Newsome
00:19:49
overstepped. His constitutional Authority and
00:19:50
shutting down churches. Mauser said the governor and
00:19:53
state government never had the authority shut down churches.
00:19:59
Yeah, I mean, it was later determined by the Supreme Court
00:20:04
that you can't shut down. Churches.
00:20:06
You can't you can't delineate churches from businesses.
00:20:11
And now there is a permanent injunction in place.
00:20:14
Thanks to the Supreme Court saying if you as in the state of
00:20:17
California or anywhere, basically, if you try and shut
00:20:20
down businesses again and you say, oh well, liquor stores can
00:20:23
be open, then, guess what? Churches have to be open as
00:20:26
well. You can't pick and choose and
00:20:28
you can't shut down churches. So this case was specifically
00:20:32
because this San Jose, Calvary Chapel, they refused to shut
00:20:36
down. So the government came down on,
00:20:38
start to find them and give them all these sanctions.
00:20:40
And now there's And well, you can't really sanction.
00:20:43
Someone for exercising their constitutional right?
00:20:46
The Orange County nail salon case, the second Court ruled
00:20:48
that since Newsom picked which businesses were allowed to
00:20:51
remain open in order to quote, flatten the curve.
00:20:55
The government may be liable for damages.
00:20:57
Those businesses suffered as a result of following the
00:20:59
governor's orders, Mauser said the nail salons lawsuit used the
00:21:04
quote commandeering law to address when the government
00:21:07
seizes a business. If the government made the
00:21:09
decision to use, Your property and fight the emergency, the
00:21:12
government has to pay fair market value for it.
00:21:14
When Governor Newsom decide which businesses would be locked
00:21:17
down which were not, that was common during the lockdown
00:21:19
business. So let's talk a little bit about
00:21:22
what commandeering is now, commandeering comes out of the
00:21:25
Tenth Amendment and comes out of constitutional concerns.
00:21:29
That if the federal government, most people think of the federal
00:21:33
government tells the states to do something.
00:21:37
Basically, if they say like jump, the states will have to
00:21:40
How high that's not the case entirely.
00:21:44
And this is one way that they created federalism because
00:21:46
they're worried. What's the point of having
00:21:49
States? If the federal government can
00:21:52
basically just do whatever they want and we have to listen to
00:21:54
federal government and it's definitely more murky than a lot
00:21:58
of people think. A lot of people think it's the
00:22:01
supremacy clause. They think it has to do.
00:22:04
If you just have, if there's a law that goes in the books, then
00:22:07
obviously federal court overrules, everything, that's
00:22:10
not Necessarily the case, the supremacy clause is something
00:22:13
different. We don't really want to go down
00:22:15
that route. I will really want just want to
00:22:16
focus on what they meant by commandeering James.
00:22:20
Madison answered this question. If Federalist number 46 and it
00:22:25
said, should an unwarrantable measure of the federal
00:22:28
government be unpopular in particular stage, which would
00:22:31
seldom fail to be the case or even a warrant will measure to
00:22:33
be. So, which may sometimes be the
00:22:36
case, I think it's funny that he says it should sell them fail.
00:22:40
Be the case that it should be unpopular.
00:22:43
The means of opposition to it are powerful.
00:22:45
And at hand, the disquietude of the people, the repugnance and
00:22:49
perhaps refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union, the
00:22:54
frowns of the executive Majesty of the state.
00:22:56
The embarrassment created by legislative devices, which would
00:22:59
often be added on such occasions would oppose in any state.
00:23:03
Very serious impediments and where the sentiments of several
00:23:07
adjoining States happen to be in Union would present Auctions,
00:23:10
which the federal government would hardly be willing to
00:23:13
encounter. Let me break that down for you.
00:23:17
So anti come and commandeering means the federal government
00:23:20
cannot take a law and they can't say, I'm going to therefore use
00:23:28
your state resources in your state Personnel, to execute
00:23:31
federal law, you can't, as a federal government require the
00:23:36
states to use their people to do and enact your law, otherwise,
00:23:42
you would be commandeering the states.
00:23:44
Therefore there would really be no difference between the states
00:23:46
and the federal government. Basically they're saying look
00:23:50
you want to come up with these laws and you want to enact this
00:23:52
stuff you kind of have to do it on your own as a federal
00:23:55
government. You can't really make the states
00:23:57
do it. So how does this relate to the
00:24:00
restaurants? Is because what had happened is
00:24:03
the state of California had come along and say, look, we need to
00:24:08
fight this pandemic. And most business owners are
00:24:12
could go, okay. You have to fight the pandemic.
00:24:16
What does that have to do with me and die minutiae and noodles
00:24:21
could say? Well we're going to ask you to
00:24:23
shut down, we're going to require you to shut down because
00:24:26
we need to fight this pandemic. Well, you're commandeering my
00:24:32
business, you're taking it over because you have to fight the
00:24:36
pandemic not necessarily. That's not really my problem.
00:24:40
Bloom you as a state government, have to fight this pandemic, not
00:24:44
me as a private business owner, it's not my job to fight the
00:24:47
pandemic, that's what we pay taxes for.
00:24:49
That's why we had Department of Health.
00:24:50
That's why we have all these things because you're supposed
00:24:53
to fight the pandemic, not me and you're basically
00:24:56
conscripting, someone or you're drafting them into this fight
00:24:59
for covid and the pandemic when they don't really want to do it.
00:25:03
So that's where this argument is going.
00:25:05
And it looks like the court accepts, that that's a valid
00:25:08
argument that you can say. Say the state commandeered my
00:25:11
business. I think that and Mauser brings
00:25:15
us up as well. And the article, when it comes
00:25:17
to the Fifth Amendment, if somebody uses your probably, if
00:25:20
the government uses your property to the point where
00:25:23
you've lost all economic value in it.
00:25:25
And that's basically the case with a lot of private businesses
00:25:28
during covid. If you've lost all economic
00:25:31
value, that's a Fifth Amendment violation under the takings
00:25:34
Clause. You governments can't take
00:25:37
private property without any Fair.
00:25:40
Just compensation. And we know these businesses
00:25:43
were not justly and fairly compensated, we know that they
00:25:46
weren't paid back what they were making.
00:25:48
We know that businesses went under we know businesses barely
00:25:52
hung on for as long as possible. Sure the Federal Government
00:25:55
tried to bail a lot of these businesses out but if you know,
00:25:58
you can go around and after the dust settled from covid, you
00:26:04
could see. And it's sad.
00:26:05
You would drive around your neighborhood.
00:26:06
So, well there's one, there's another one that bit the Dust.
00:26:10
Because of covid. You know, there's another covid
00:26:12
casualty and that's what they're arguing and it looks like the
00:26:17
court here is accepting that argument and saying you can't do
00:26:21
this in the future. Possibly.
00:26:23
I'm saying possibly because there isn't been a ruling yet,
00:26:26
but the fact that the court is open, to this argument means
00:26:29
that hey were, they can go in a discovery, they can get more
00:26:32
evidence, and that the court hasn't just thrown it out on its
00:26:35
face, which a lot of these cases usually do sadly.
00:26:39
A lot of these cases do. Just get thrown out on their
00:26:41
face because courts don't agree with them and especially in
00:26:45
2020. And 2021.
00:26:48
You saw a lot of Judges who were not particularly crazy about
00:26:52
sticking their neck out for a lot of this, which is the shame.
00:26:57
But, you know, there are people too and they have homes and
00:26:59
their families doesn't change. The fact that I'm a think they
00:27:03
made bad decisions. A lot of these judges just
00:27:06
basically punted and said, look, we don't know what's going on.
00:27:09
And therefore It's not really our place to do that, but now
00:27:13
we're looking back and I think it's important, we look back and
00:27:16
stole so it's still important that we hold a lot of the
00:27:19
government accountable for this and that these lawsuits are
00:27:22
enacted, and that these lawsuits keep going.
00:27:25
Because this precedent has to be set for the future.
00:27:28
We can't have precedent where there's no press, and they can
00:27:31
just do this over and over again.
00:27:32
But if you have precedent, we're from here, on out.
00:27:37
The government knows that courts have ruled.
00:27:40
I'm saying you can't comment your business and you can't take
00:27:42
them over. That's a big deal that's safety
00:27:45
and comfort to those businesses knowing if this ever happens
00:27:48
again, there won't be any more lockdowns and I won't be forced
00:27:51
to close over pandemics because it's not really my job to fight
00:27:55
the pandemic. It's the state, government's job
00:27:57
to fight the pandemic a little bit more on this issue and then
00:28:01
I want to open it up for well we got some more time in the Los
00:28:06
Angeles tinhorn Flats Restaurant case a third quarter.
00:28:10
Ruled that businesses are allowed to sue the government
00:28:13
for targeting them because they were vocal in opposing Newsom,
00:28:16
shut down orders. Mauser said, this restaurant,
00:28:18
targeted by government for daring, to question the
00:28:21
constitutionality of the lockdown orders and to find them
00:28:24
the government cut off their power and built walls around the
00:28:26
outside of the business, to keep them closed and send messages to
00:28:29
other businesses, government must enforce the law equally.
00:28:32
They cannot Target those who exercise their first amendment
00:28:34
rights. The restaurant said, they were
00:28:36
targeted and no one else was by the government which violated
00:28:39
the It's my right to assemble the Los Angeles.
00:28:43
Superior Court is allowing the tinhorn flats covid-19 case
00:28:47
against the government to continue the court.
00:28:49
Refuses to dismiss tinhorn Flats case, that Burbank Target it
00:28:52
because it expressed its opposition to new some shutdown.
00:28:55
Odors and this is another step forward in the First Amendment
00:28:58
cause of action. And this was a breakdown from
00:29:02
our Mark Mauser about, you know, in 2020 and March 11th, 2020.
00:29:07
This is what he said back then. Then in an article on March 11,
00:29:13
2020, Governor newsom's office published, the fact that it was
00:29:15
the California Department of Public Health policy, preventing
00:29:19
Gatherings of groups larger than 250 people should be postponed.
00:29:23
This was not an executive order by the governor.
00:29:25
Instead, it was a California Department Public Health policy.
00:29:27
This policy does not cite a single law that the, that gives
00:29:30
the California Department of Public Health Authority is
00:29:32
shutdownevents of 250 people or require social distancing of
00:29:36
more than six feet. While these may be good
00:29:38
guidelines to follow their Policies that are they are not
00:29:41
law. Notice the language, sorry.
00:29:45
Jump back to emphasize that this was just policy and not a law.
00:29:49
March 2012, 20 20 new some issues is next executive order.
00:29:53
This executive order states that all residents are to heat any
00:29:56
orders and guidance of state and local public health officials
00:29:59
including but not limited to the imposition of social distancing
00:30:02
measures to control the spread of covid-19.
00:30:04
Notice the language of this order, all residents are to heed
00:30:09
any orders and Guy. Guidance, if you look up the
00:30:11
word, he'd in the dictionary, you will discover that.
00:30:13
It means to give considerate consideration attention to it.
00:30:17
Does not say, you must obey. Gavin.
00:30:20
Newsom is executive. Order?
00:30:21
Utilizing, its powers granted him after declaring a state of
00:30:23
emergency told. This is the California.
00:30:25
That Californians should take the advice given by the
00:30:28
California Department, Public Health into consideration when
00:30:31
making decisions. So anyway, who need to take a
00:30:36
sip of coffee right now. So there's a lot of stuff in a
00:30:42
lot of these things. It's great to see that these
00:30:45
lawsuits are proceeding. Now again, when there's hasn't
00:30:48
been a ruling on any of these cases, now you can get through
00:30:52
this entire process and the judge May disagree and say,
00:30:56
okay, well I don't agree in part, I don't agree in on
00:31:00
everything but the fact that they are proceeding shows at
00:31:05
least a sliver of Hope for here in California.
00:31:09
Because it does show that there are Judges who are willing to
00:31:11
listen to these cases. There are Judges, were not going
00:31:14
to dismiss these cases just on their face that they want to
00:31:18
hear these questions. Sort of examined and for all of
00:31:23
the lawsuits that were filed, they were probably hundreds and
00:31:26
hundreds of lawsuits that were filed.
00:31:28
There's only going to be a fraction of them that really do
00:31:31
get through and that means that. But some of these do get through
00:31:36
and that's the point is you kind of have to To scatter shot.
00:31:41
A lot of these lawsuits and see which sticks because we're going
00:31:44
to bring it under one complaint. You may say a cause of action
00:31:47
under this. If you want to bring it under
00:31:50
another complaint, you may have a different cause of action.
00:31:55
You know, someone may say well I'm going to bring this against
00:31:57
the government for breach of contract and then they say, well
00:32:00
there's no reason for breach of contract, okay, that's
00:32:02
dismissed, I'm going to bring this for emotional damage.
00:32:05
They say no emotional damage. It's dismissed.
00:32:08
But in this case they're saying look you brought it under
00:32:11
commandeering, you brought it under what's on the First
00:32:16
Amendment, you brought this under the issue that they didn't
00:32:19
have the authority to do so that's where that's where you
00:32:24
have to keep trying. That's where you have to keep
00:32:26
trying with these lawsuits and figure out which one works.
00:32:28
Because once you get one and once you get one good argument,
00:32:32
that works in court, you can therefore go ahead and use that
00:32:36
case again and again and again, sort of like, Brody Do it like,
00:32:38
you know, brewing with the carrying concealed now that we
00:32:41
have one Supreme Court case that says, you have a right to carry
00:32:44
and conceal. And we have to abide by the
00:32:45
Second Amendment as it's written in, plain text, and by the
00:32:48
history and tradition of the United States of America.
00:32:51
That's a big deal. Now, you can go with that one
00:32:53
case and start to see the ramifications of more cases
00:32:56
being litigated and more of it, being argued and more of it
00:32:58
being upheld based on this case, law, and that's really what we
00:33:02
want to see. So best of luck to these
00:33:04
lawsuits. I hope they really do work out
00:33:07
in the end because It's really, it's really important that we
00:33:11
get the case. President ahead of us now so
00:33:15
that this can never happen again.
00:33:18
It's crazy. We're still in a state of
00:33:19
emergency. Legislature does not want to
00:33:24
does not want to remove Gavin newsom's state of emergency,
00:33:29
Powers were still in a state of emergency.
00:33:31
They declared its separate state of emergency for monkeypox
00:33:34
conveniently, right after door. A lie.
00:33:36
That's a whole different thing. We did a whole episode on that.
00:33:39
But you know one you got to take your wins as you can get them
00:33:43
here in the state of California and this is really good news and
00:33:45
I hope you take this and go, hey there are people out there,
00:33:48
there are lawyers out there fighting and there are Judges,
00:33:51
who are listening to these lawsuits, and hopefully we get
00:33:53
good news on them. So, with that said, I'm going to
00:33:57
open it up to questions and comments, as always open it up
00:34:00
to the chat. While I take another sip of
00:34:02
coffee, My throat has been scratchy Pro.
00:34:12
When you start using air conditioning in the summer,
00:34:14
would be you know, dries everything out.
00:34:15
So all of a sudden you get this really your throat gets a lot
00:34:20
more. Was that a lot more dry?
00:34:24
So let me see, what your questions comments are?
00:34:29
I can go back as well. Let me see what.
00:34:32
We need accountability where damages award by the court
00:34:35
payouts come out of those politicians, personal wealth.
00:34:37
Not the taxpayers. I wish I wish that was, I wish
00:34:43
that was the case. You know, I wish that was the
00:34:46
case. Where like if a politician does
00:34:49
do something like this, they should be punished, I think
00:34:52
there should be a little bit more accountability where
00:34:55
politicians if they know they're doing something that's
00:34:57
flagrantly anti-constitutional. Whether it's California
00:35:01
Constitution or, you know, States constitutional and they
00:35:04
lose in court. I think there should be some
00:35:06
sort of sanction on that politician whether they get
00:35:10
removed from office or something like that.
00:35:12
Like, because a lot of these politicians and even President
00:35:16
Biden himself has said, look, we'll just make these decisions
00:35:19
and by the time the courts catch up to us wolves.
00:35:22
Already gotten past, what we want to do, and they do it
00:35:25
anyway like they openly admit like we're going to do this
00:35:27
because we know that it's anti-constitutional but by The
00:35:32
time the courts catch up, its it does really make a difference to
00:35:34
us and it doesn't hurt us. In fact, the only way it hurts
00:35:38
the people, he's our tax dollars then go to pay counsel or there.
00:35:44
It's the Attorney General's office, or county, councils or
00:35:46
city, councilor stuff like that. Who that have to go fight these
00:35:49
cases and waste taxpayer dollars on stuff like that when they
00:35:54
could be doing other things. So I think there should be
00:35:58
absolutely, some sort of accountability where they if
00:36:01
they Do the if they pass these laws, they proposed these laws.
00:36:06
If you're the author of a law I think of your the author of the
00:36:08
law and you put your name on a bill and then it's later
00:36:12
determined that it was unconstitutional.
00:36:15
Sorry. Then you should be held
00:36:17
accountable because you're violating people's rights and
00:36:19
it's problem politicians that get away with it all the time.
00:36:22
Like so it would definitely give a lot of these crazy
00:36:25
politicians, not only in California, but in the rest of
00:36:28
the country kind of paused to go.
00:36:31
Maybe this isn't a great idea. Maybe I might get sanctioned for
00:36:35
this, if I pass some sort of unconstitutional law because
00:36:38
really they should be beholden to us.
00:36:40
Does the State of Emergency change how the laws are
00:36:44
interpreted, not necessarily a little bit.
00:36:49
The State of Emergency, the law itself allows for the Department
00:36:53
of Health, to issue, guidance and issue some sort of not
00:36:59
necessarily orders, but the Department of Public Health is
00:37:02
allowed to issue orders. Give a little bit more guidance
00:37:05
on what they're supposed to do. But again, they're not
00:37:07
legislative body soap to issue a lot of these orders are buying
00:37:10
To make people do. Things does change.
00:37:16
Does change things a little bit but it doesn't, it shouldn't in
00:37:19
this case, if you look at how they rolled it out, where they
00:37:23
said we are requiring or we want people to pay heed to the
00:37:26
Department of Public Health guidance and information, okay?
00:37:30
Pay heat is fine. It's like, when they say, oh, we
00:37:33
recommend people should wear a mask here in California, but as
00:37:37
soon as they went to like a strong recommendation, like your
00:37:39
son nobody was really wearing masks anymore.
00:37:41
I mean you see people wearing match but like the large
00:37:43
majority of people aren't wearing masks anymore even
00:37:45
though they I mean, if you look it up, I'm sure they still
00:37:48
recommend that you have to wear a mask but they're not requiring
00:37:52
people to wear masks anymore. So let's see.
00:37:56
But be deep. Doo-doo dee-dee-dee-dee.
00:38:01
If these cases are found in favor of the businesses and not
00:38:04
Newsome state will that reflect bad on him for a presidential?
00:38:07
Oh absolutely. I think this is another case.
00:38:09
Well there's already cases that came out of covid.
00:38:13
There was the case of right down here, the South Bay, I think the
00:38:18
South Bay Pentecostal Church which is the one that went up to
00:38:21
the Supreme Court and just as Gorsuch.
00:38:24
Absolutely. Eviscerated the state of
00:38:26
California and Gavin, Newsom basically saying you can't
00:38:28
infringe on people's right to exercise.
00:38:31
Religion and it's a constitutionally protected,
00:38:34
right? Because what's the point?
00:38:37
I remember Gorsuch saying, what's the point of having a
00:38:39
constitution? If every time we declare a state
00:38:41
of emergency, we can just throw the whole thing out and he's
00:38:44
absolutely right. What is the point of having a
00:38:47
constitution? If we just declare a state of
00:38:48
emergency and throw everything out because we've figured out
00:38:52
these politicians love to declare state of emergencies.
00:38:54
You know any little thing, any little inconvenience, all of
00:38:57
science, a state of emergency, we got to, you know,
00:39:01
Everything's got change, and we got bypass the legislature and
00:39:03
we got to, you know, we got a rule by Fiat.
00:39:06
So there is that issue of the Constitution still exist.
00:39:10
These inalienable natural rights still do exist, for all of us
00:39:15
and the Constitution does not grant us those rights.
00:39:19
The Constitution, recognizes those rights saying that these
00:39:22
are inherent rights, they are inalienable rights from our
00:39:25
creator and therefore we have to protect them or we have to make
00:39:30
sure the government doesn't infringe Japan them in the
00:39:33
constitution does not grant them, we always have them.
00:39:35
So if the if America were to go away tomorrow, we would still
00:39:39
have those rights. Those are inalienable rights.
00:39:42
So there are cases like that. He already lost a big one
00:39:46
because of that for freedom of religion and the exercise of
00:39:49
religion, so that stuff will reflect badly on him.
00:39:53
So if he does make it all the way through and get to actually
00:39:57
run for president as the Democratic nominee.
00:40:00
A lot of these All swing states, which a lot of people are very
00:40:03
religious. They'll show, not only what
00:40:06
happened in California, they'll show, churches, being closed,
00:40:09
and people not being allowed to go into worship and that makes a
00:40:13
big difference. When you talk about these swing
00:40:15
states that are purple, so that definitely does reflect badly on
00:40:19
him. If Trump were convicted of
00:40:22
whatever, hypothetically would the same press in apply to
00:40:24
activist groups, going after noodles, you may like inciting
00:40:30
Insurrection or something like that.
00:40:32
I don't really understand why. If he was convicted, they're
00:40:36
trying to convict him on anything that they can possibly
00:40:39
get their hands on. And they're trying to do that as
00:40:41
fast as possible because they know there's likely a
00:40:44
possibility that he either announces before the midterms or
00:40:47
immediately after the midterms, if the Take back the Senate and
00:40:50
the house that he'll likely announce he's running for
00:40:53
president pretty soon. Afterwards and once you announce
00:40:57
as a political candidate, then it makes a little bit harder and
00:41:01
a little bit more trickier. Because if Biden's FBI and is
00:41:05
Department of Justice is going after a political candidate,
00:41:09
then you're sort of fueling the fire that they're going after
00:41:13
him because he's a political opponent and that just
00:41:16
galvanizes more people to get behind them.
00:41:19
Also, there's a lot of Legal precedents of presidents using
00:41:23
their executive branch to go after a political opponent.
00:41:25
I mean, that's stuff. You see, like, in Latin America,
00:41:28
with dictatorships is people going after a political enemies
00:41:31
using the power of the state, but I'm not really sure how it
00:41:35
would apply to activist groups going after noodles.
00:41:43
Maybe specifically groups that oppose noodles they would say
00:41:45
like inciting interaction are violent but they're trying to do
00:41:48
that anyway. They're basically trying to this
00:41:51
was two weeks ago, I believe on coughing California politics.
00:41:53
We talked about how the lines are drawn where they've been,
00:41:59
they made it known. If your conservative or you lean
00:42:01
right of Center that you're basically got a Target on your
00:42:05
back. That they don't believe that
00:42:07
you're a legitimate citizen. They believe you're a terrorist
00:42:10
they believe. Your domestic terrorist.
00:42:12
They believe that if you fly the Gadsden flag, the don't tread on
00:42:16
me flag, you're a terrorist. They believe if you fly the
00:42:18
Betsy, Ross flag, you're a terrorist.
00:42:20
I mean, these are crazy Notions in our United States that just
00:42:24
acknowledging the Revolutionary War is good enough for the FBI
00:42:27
to look at you and go, you're a domestic terrorist and that's
00:42:31
terrifying in its own, right? So, I mean, they're already
00:42:35
going that way. They're already going that way
00:42:37
where the state is basically saying, we have to get rid of
00:42:39
all these people who don't agree with us.
00:42:40
So as fast as possible, we have 2D platformer them, we have to
00:42:44
censor them, we have to get them off social media.
00:42:46
We have to come up with any phony-baloney fakakta sort of
00:42:49
rule so that we can get them off social media, and D platform.
00:42:52
And so their voice can't get out because God forbid people are
00:42:55
starting to listen to him and starting to believe in them and
00:42:57
that's, that's a horrible thing. So do you dude.
00:43:01
Let's see. Next question.
00:43:04
I remember they set out the health department has shut down
00:43:06
restaurants for health violations.
00:43:07
Such as masking or outdoor dines.
00:43:09
Did they have that Authority? Do so, I mean, I guess I know
00:43:12
this they don't really have the authority because what are they,
00:43:15
where was their authority to do? So did the legislature vote to
00:43:19
give them Authority, who gave them the authority to do?
00:43:21
So, I mean, they could say where did they get the authority to
00:43:27
find them? Where do they get the authority
00:43:29
to shut them down? And I guess that sort of goes in
00:43:33
hand in hand, with a lot of these businesses, that are
00:43:36
suing. Well, lawsuits, we just talked
00:43:38
about where They say you damaged us because you forced us to shut
00:43:44
down. They can go back and say you
00:43:46
have the authority to shut down so it will be interesting to see
00:43:49
where their argument goes from there.
00:43:52
If the public health department didn't have the authority to
00:43:54
shut them down, they certainly didn't have the authority to
00:43:56
send employees to go shut down businesses, or find them or
00:43:59
anything like that. And same thing with tin tin horn
00:44:02
Flats which is one that stood up for itself.
00:44:05
It got fine for being open and I think they can.
00:44:08
There was another place that One and they were not required to
00:44:14
pay all the fees and sanctions, which was another good good
00:44:17
news. Could this cape case help
00:44:21
business owners go after the San Diego board.
00:44:23
Supervisor Force businesses to close during the pandemic.
00:44:26
Sure. Yeah.
00:44:27
If this case comes down and it comes down to the point where
00:44:31
they do rule in favor, hold on to your butts because there's
00:44:35
gonna be a lot of businesses were going to come forward and
00:44:37
say, they're going to be suing the hell out of the government.
00:44:40
Saying we've been damaged. We can show you damages.
00:44:43
And we could prove damages therefore, were, you know, the
00:44:46
government might be in a world of hurt.
00:44:49
That's the case. And then there might be a flurry
00:44:51
of these lawsuits coming down the pike, where businesses can
00:44:54
sue, you know, whether it's the state.
00:44:58
See, the thing was that it went from county-by-county right in
00:45:02
the beginning. So a lot of the board
00:45:03
supervisors. You could probably sue them for
00:45:06
the time that they were in charge, but once noodles took
00:45:11
over and basically made it one-man Rule and he was going to
00:45:14
set everything all up all by himself, then you Would go after
00:45:19
the state of California because he took it on himself.
00:45:22
So, you know, a they're sitting on a hundred billion dollar
00:45:24
Surplus. It may be time to start paying
00:45:26
out. A lot of these businesses that
00:45:27
were incorrectly closed. I'm surprised you didn't talk
00:45:33
about fauci fauci. Oh my God, I'm disowning ants,
00:45:38
the science is retiring. I don't know what the world is
00:45:44
going to do without dr. Fauci and the News rang out and
00:45:50
you heard the screams of millions of Mast up people
00:45:55
screaming in horror, there was a great disturbance in the force
00:46:00
because dr. Fauci is no longer going to be
00:46:03
dictating what people can do or what they cannot do.
00:46:06
And good writtens to dr. Fauci.
00:46:10
A lifelong A bureaucrat who did really nothing in the world of
00:46:17
medicine except tell people what to do.
00:46:19
He blundered the AIDS, pandemic. Incredibly you can go.
00:46:25
I forget what the book is. There's a really good book that
00:46:29
details, everything fauci got wrong during the AIDS pandemic.
00:46:33
Someone, if, you know, in the chat.
00:46:35
Oh God. I know I'm going to look this up
00:46:37
right now because this is really going to bother me if you're
00:46:40
interested. There's a, there's a book that
00:46:41
came out. Out book about AIDS, pandemic,
00:46:47
dr. Fauci.
00:46:51
It was a really, it was kind of a revolutionary book at the
00:46:54
time. Hold, please.
00:46:57
It did it. Do, of course, they're, of
00:47:01
course, they're not going to like show you it.
00:47:03
What it was? Geez.
00:47:07
Of course, everything is like when you look at the search is
00:47:10
dr. Fauci did this dr.
00:47:11
Fauci. Did that book about AIDS?
00:47:15
Pandemic? I think I might just be about
00:47:19
the AIDS pandemic. Yeah, it's pandemic.
00:47:23
A spanner. I'll find it and I'll figure it
00:47:25
out but it's not like the beat goes on or something like that.
00:47:30
It's a weird title and it basically goes into talking
00:47:33
about dr. Fauci and everything.
00:47:35
He got wrong during the Age panting, but there's a guy who's
00:47:38
got a lot wrong in his life. There's a lot of questions.
00:47:42
It's very likely that, I mean, it's not coincidental that What
00:47:47
happens in December? Okay, a lot of these
00:47:49
politicians. If the Republicans take back
00:47:52
Congress, what happens in December.
00:47:55
A lot of the politicians now, who are on his side, might be
00:47:58
voted out of office. Therefore by January, when they
00:48:03
get all the Republicans and office and they want to do some
00:48:05
hearings, he'll be out of office and he'll just be a private
00:48:08
citizen. He'll get the say, oh, I'm just
00:48:10
a private citizen. They're still going to call them
00:48:12
in front of hearings and stuff like that, but just Incredible
00:48:17
amount of narcissism from him to say, he was the science and that
00:48:20
he was never wrong, and he never got anything wrong and then when
00:48:23
he did get stuff wrong, he would go back and be like well I
00:48:26
didn't necessarily say that I didn't say like, you know, I
00:48:30
didn't that wasn't exactly what I said.
00:48:35
So it is interesting that he is leaving all of a sudden out of
00:48:39
nowhere. He just he's leaving but he's
00:48:41
gonna make a crap ton of money. Probably in the private sector
00:48:43
will be on the board of some crazy.
00:48:46
A suitable company or something like that.
00:48:47
Making, even more money than he did.
00:48:50
The man single-handedly destroyed.
00:48:54
Millions of lives. You know, he destroyed millions
00:48:57
of lives with his policies. Oh, that was the thing.
00:49:00
He said, he said, oh, I never, I never suggested lockdowns.
00:49:03
I never suggested shutting everything down.
00:49:07
He was like that was the CDC. Even though he was on new
00:49:12
saying, like we can't go back to normal for how long because of
00:49:15
all this So good right into the dr.
00:49:19
Fauci, I'm worried. They'll you know, Biden will put
00:49:21
somebody else in as well. The good news is that if a
00:49:25
republican wins in 2024, it's a lot easier to remove someone
00:49:30
who's only been there for two years rather than someone like a
00:49:32
dr. Fauci who's been there for, you
00:49:34
know, freaking half a century like 50 years at this point
00:49:38
because it looks more political. If you remove someone who's been
00:49:41
there for 50 years and served under all these administration's
00:49:44
and if someone's there only been there for two years and they
00:49:46
only I served under President Biden.
00:49:48
It's a lot easier for them to go, okay?
00:49:49
We're going to replace you with somebody that we actually
00:49:51
believe with like a doctor Atlas or something like that.
00:49:53
So goodbye dr. Fauci, thank you for the
00:49:57
Memories. What do you think about?
00:50:00
You will go next? Yeah, I think I'll go to a think
00:50:03
tank. Will probably be on the board of
00:50:04
something. We'll just make a lot of money.
00:50:06
My and friend were who both have restaurants were threatened by
00:50:08
the health department that they would shut them down.
00:50:11
Yeah, yeah, it's not sure that they actually have, it's not
00:50:18
sure that they had the authority.
00:50:19
I will miss Tim pool saying droplets that droplets.
00:50:24
Yeah, I will miss Freedom, Tunes doing videos.
00:50:27
I'm sure they'll do one more. Video about dr.
00:50:30
Fauci. Like I said, I just don't hope.
00:50:33
They don't replace him with someone worse.
00:50:35
They could replace him with someone worse.
00:50:37
But again if a republican wins in 2024 they'll just they can
00:50:42
just remove that guy and put someone else in.
00:50:44
So, you know, but then I also know that I'm sure I can predict
00:50:48
it right now. They'll put someone in place
00:50:52
that usually checks all of the, you know, boxes of like they're
00:50:58
a minority their LGBT, their Is there pop, apply.
00:51:03
And then, if a republican comes in wants to get rid of them, the
00:51:06
first color will, you are a racist?
00:51:07
You're a bigot, you're a homophobe up.
00:51:10
Ah, now you're politicizing something as straightforward as
00:51:14
science. I mean, it's so predictable.
00:51:16
At this point, you can hear their line of reasoning and
00:51:18
their argument right now. So it'll be interesting the real
00:51:25
dr. Fauci.
00:51:26
The real dr. Fauci is written by Robert
00:51:29
Kennedy. That's a different book, the
00:51:31
book. I'm talking about was written
00:51:32
back in the 80s or late 80s 90s as they were coming out of the
00:51:37
AIDS pandemic. They learned more about what was
00:51:39
going on with the AIDS pandemic. I gotta, I'll have to find it
00:51:43
the real dr. Fauci came out recently.
00:51:45
This book is like 30 years old. It's not the beat goes on.
00:51:50
This is really going to bug me now.
00:51:55
Did did it do? Yeah.
00:51:59
Oh and the band played on, that's what it's called.
00:52:03
Randy stilts in the band played on politics people and the AIDS,
00:52:08
pandemic the band, but I knew it was something like the be played
00:52:10
on or the beat went on or something like that, and the
00:52:12
band played on, that's the name of the book and the band played
00:52:15
on and that was an older book that called out, dr.
00:52:19
Fauci and called out everything. He did wrong way back in the
00:52:21
day, so they knew dr. Fauci was sort of a fraud way
00:52:25
back in the day. Dr. Fauci as I like to call him
00:52:28
fa 0, x y to do. Yeah, he's giving out with a 350
00:52:37
dollar. Three hundred fifty thousand
00:52:39
dollar pension Do you think Rand Paul really go after them.
00:52:43
I'll God. I hope so.
00:52:44
I hope Rand Paul goes after him because Rand Paul has been
00:52:48
building. He's not a lawyer Rand Paul but
00:52:51
he's kind of in a way building a case where he can kind of get,
00:52:55
he keeps getting fauci like to say stuff and then like he's
00:52:59
just building a case of what fauci said under under oath.
00:53:04
And now that things are changing.
00:53:07
He could probably get more like the longer you get fauci to talk
00:53:10
under oath in the On it. The more likely he's going to
00:53:13
screw something up. Now, the question is, will they
00:53:16
actually do anything about it? I don't know.
00:53:18
We'll see. Did you do?
00:53:23
Doodoo. So full of himself and people
00:53:27
wearing t-shirts with this phase.
00:53:28
Yeah, dr. Fauci, the rst fauci fascism.
00:53:33
As I made a post once with his face on a candle which was not
00:53:38
photoshopped. I actually found that on Etsy.
00:53:40
I found that actual candle on Etsy with him on, like a saint,
00:53:45
you know, which as a Catholic is kind of sacrilegious to me that
00:53:48
they put him on a saint candle. And they, it's basically, the
00:53:52
religion of fascism where you believe.
00:53:55
Everything he says and nothing. He says it's infallible and
00:53:57
whatever he recommends is exactly.
00:53:59
The 100% truth is the gospel truth and you should just
00:54:03
believe him and not question him at all.
00:54:10
If they went after Trump as a private citizen, couldn't they
00:54:11
go after fauci as a private citizen?
00:54:13
Sure. Yeah, they could, I mean, they
00:54:14
could go after anybody. It's the question of how their
00:54:18
lawyers are going to weasel out of it.
00:54:21
My biggest pet peeve is how De Moto demotivated the Republican
00:54:24
base in California's to vote? They don't even try.
00:54:26
Yeah. And that's something I posted on
00:54:29
my story a while back. A lot of people had said, what
00:54:34
their takes were why they believed.
00:54:35
It was one way or the other, a lot of people say, well, it's
00:54:39
because Republicans laughter. Yeah I mean sure there's a good
00:54:42
chance Republicans. I hope there's a good chance
00:54:43
Democrats left to like Democrats you know as funny as it is
00:54:48
Democrats. Don't like a lot of these
00:54:50
policies that they voted for because it hurts their
00:54:53
pocketbook and it makes it harder for them to live, so they
00:54:56
go and they just go to other states and then they destroy
00:54:58
those States. So I don't think it's
00:55:01
necessarily like I don't think it was that big of a drop off
00:55:05
from one year to another where You saw you know double-digit
00:55:11
drop off from one to another amongst Republicans?
00:55:15
I don't think it happened that fast.
00:55:17
I really think it's apathy and I really think it's really is
00:55:22
everything. I really think it's a lot of
00:55:24
people just kind of spreading this idea of like well it
00:55:28
doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if you voted
00:55:30
the, you know, the noodles will win no matter what and that's
00:55:34
it. So why vote?
00:55:36
and of course, I always say like look, Yeah.
00:55:40
Noodles is going to win. Not because he cheats but
00:55:42
because he has the numbers and because it doesn't have to do
00:55:44
anything. I mean look at his opponents
00:55:45
Brian Dolly, no one. Even knows who Brian Dolly
00:55:48
usually is. I mean, if you walked around any
00:55:50
neighborhood and said, oh do you support Brian Dolly?
00:55:52
They'll be like, who the hell is Brian Dolly?
00:55:55
But I always tell people like, it still matters to vote like,
00:55:59
just because these big elections, like Governor don't
00:56:03
go your way. Doesn't mean oh, I'm just going
00:56:05
to give up because it doesn't it doesn't go down that way.
00:56:08
You could still make a huge impact.
00:56:09
Act on a lot of local elections and a lot of local races and you
00:56:13
can still go in and you can still vote for school board and
00:56:15
you can still vote for city council.
00:56:17
You still vote for County supervisor, and those are
00:56:19
probably more important than whoever the governor is.
00:56:22
So, I know it's frustrating because you keep looking at sort
00:56:24
of this figurehead of who's governor.
00:56:27
And yeah, we all want someone like a Rhonda Santos to run
00:56:30
California. When in reality we need a lot of
00:56:34
good people running local offices as well because that has
00:56:37
a much more cumulative effect of A lot of good people are running
00:56:40
local offices over the state and you know even the state
00:56:44
legislature stuff like that. You still have a big impact on
00:56:46
those races. So don't just give up and be
00:56:48
like, oh because noodles 1 by so much he must have cheated.
00:56:51
It must be mail-in voting and stuff like that.
00:56:53
Okay. Is that the only part you?
00:56:56
You do, you legitimately just get your ballot and just vote
00:56:59
for governor and then throw the rest away.
00:57:00
Like know, we, you know, we've gone over this before and we've
00:57:03
talked about it and I've gone over the ballots and stuff like
00:57:05
that, but you have to do your research.
00:57:09
Research and figure out who's running for local elections and
00:57:12
you have to support those people.
00:57:14
And you have to get out and vote for those people because many of
00:57:18
these races are actually decided by hundreds of votes, you know,
00:57:23
100 votes here, a hundred votes, there could make the difference
00:57:26
between a lot of these local elections, so, just throwing
00:57:29
that out there. Did you do?
00:57:36
Do you think that's why Trump didn't get rid of fauci?
00:57:38
It would have been too political.
00:57:39
Yeah, I think that's absolutely why he didn't get rid of fauci,
00:57:42
I think, I think if he had got rid of fauci, a guy who'd been
00:57:47
around for 50 years he says, oh, you know, a lot of people are,
00:57:51
like, look, he's been trusted by Republican and Democrat
00:57:55
administrations, so obviously he's very nonpartisan.
00:57:59
So why would you get rid of someone?
00:58:00
He tried to bring in like dr. Atlas towards the end of 2020,
00:58:04
right before the election. I think you should have brought
00:58:07
in some like dr. Atlas a lot sooner than what he
00:58:11
did, but I think that's exactly why.
00:58:15
Dr. Fauci stuck around so long is because of the fact that he
00:58:19
been around for 50 years and people were like, if you get rid
00:58:21
of him, then obviously Trump's just being a political hack.
00:58:26
So even though fauci himself is sort of a political hack because
00:58:30
he revealed later on that he didn't like working for Trump
00:58:32
and that he probably told him the wrong things to get him to
00:58:36
lose. So but now because someone will
00:58:39
be there appointed by buy it in, they can easily get rid of that
00:58:43
person because they can be like well we don't like this person.
00:58:46
We're going to fire him and get rid of them.
00:58:47
I wouldn't put it past. They like if Trump won or
00:58:49
DeSantis one and they had some person at the head of the
00:58:52
Infectious Disease Control or whatever.
00:58:54
Dr. Fauci Was that they wouldn't turn around go.
00:58:58
Okay, we're going to put our own person at now and maybe it goes
00:59:00
back and forth that way for the rest of, you know, maybe that's
00:59:05
it for the rest of time. So we go back and forth with
00:59:08
infectious disease doctors. But you know what are you gonna
00:59:13
do covid-19? So, you know, and you can thank
00:59:28
that's one of going to be dr. Fauci.
00:59:29
His legacy as that? He politicized, how this all
00:59:33
went down and what happened. Because you know, he wanted to
00:59:39
be at the front of every camera and he wants to make his voice.
00:59:41
Noni want to talk down to people who disagreed with them.
00:59:44
So he politicized it and now he's politicized, the position,
00:59:47
it will likely be politicized forever as opposed to just being
00:59:50
a nonpartisan position. So Thank you, dr.
00:59:53
Powell cheese. Doo-doo-doo-doo.
00:59:57
Didn't Trump need Congressional approval to remove fauci?
01:00:00
I don't think so because it's an executive branch.
01:00:05
The center for is the Infectious Center for to infectious disease
01:00:09
or whatever. I think that's executive thing.
01:00:12
So he could He could get rid of him and the band played on.
01:00:16
Yep. Deep deep boot.
01:00:23
Yeah. Look it up.
01:00:24
It's I'm sure you could go find. I'm sure you can go find, excuse
01:00:30
me. I'm sure you could go find it at
01:00:32
a library and the band played on if you want to read about it.
01:00:36
So think about it it's an interesting.
01:00:39
Look at like what dr. Fauci did far removed from covid
01:00:44
politics and all that stuff. So you can really get an idea of
01:00:46
like look I looked I read this book in the band played on you,
01:00:49
look how bad he was back in the 80s and they killed him.
01:00:52
I mean there People who were protesting outside of his office
01:00:56
and like he was, he was doing a really bad job.
01:01:04
But they do see noodles is winning because he has better
01:01:10
marketing and branding. Well, that's why Democrats are
01:01:12
winning in California in generals because I better
01:01:14
marketing branding, but he has the numbers.
01:01:17
Like, he doesn't really have to try that hard when 49 percent of
01:01:23
registered voters in the state of California are Democrats. and
01:01:27
your opponent is, A no-name from Northern California.
01:01:32
It's not really that going to be that big of a deal.
01:01:35
I think like ever Larry Elder ran would be interesting to see
01:01:38
if Larry Elder. Actually ran a campaign against
01:01:40
Kaiba Newsome and raised money. It would have been interesting
01:01:44
to see what would have happened. If it was a Larry Elder versus a
01:01:47
Gavin. Newsom not Larry Elder, kind of
01:01:50
crunched into a month before the election.
01:01:54
But like an actual, you know, campaign of like a year or so.
01:02:00
Larry Elder and him going at it so he has no competition.
01:02:04
Right there is absolutely no, that's the issue is he has no
01:02:08
competition, there's no opposition party. but, but I get
01:02:16
tired of this. Who keep playing that things are
01:02:18
but going never actually a vote to make a difference.
01:02:20
I hear you brother, yep. You can change a lot of things
01:02:24
with local votes, so yeah. Doodoo.
01:02:33
There's a movie version of the band played on from 1993.
01:02:37
Yeah. Okay.
01:02:40
I never heard why Larry older didn't want to run again.
01:02:42
Do you know? I guess.
01:02:48
I don't know, I guess he didn't really want to run a full
01:02:52
campaign. I've heard rumors that maybe he
01:02:54
might be running for president. Yeah, he might be like an issue
01:03:01
candidate. That's one thing I've heard is
01:03:03
that he might be doing an issue, sort of thing, not that he's
01:03:09
going to win, I think, you know, their candidates who bring up
01:03:12
issues and they just run because they want a platform to bring up
01:03:15
issues. And then the person who wins the
01:03:17
primary ends up taking that issue because they've see that's
01:03:20
a winning issue. So we'll see.
01:03:25
Surprisingly, we he didn't. I mean, he could have just went
01:03:28
with Is momentum from the recall and the guy got wet, almost five
01:03:33
million votes is a pretty good amount of votes for a guy who
01:03:36
jumped into a race less than two months before the recall.
01:03:39
I kind of jumped in, it was like, okay here I am.
01:03:41
And then you got five million of the votes, he really clobbered
01:03:43
him so he could have, definitely, I think giving Gavin
01:03:47
Newsom a run for his money and I think that's one issue that You
01:03:51
know, it's sad, we don't have more people who are willing to
01:03:53
do that where they just fight, just because you never know how
01:03:56
many more people are just going to wake up to.
01:03:58
Oh God, I said, I said wake up to what you're saying, what
01:04:03
you're talking about? Like right now, there's
01:04:05
literally no opposition from Brian Dolly.
01:04:07
I haven't seen one commercial from him.
01:04:09
I haven't seen him sort of pressing.
01:04:10
Gavin Newsom on anything, so, you know, he's gonna run away
01:04:16
with it. So covering use, this are
01:04:19
getting Republicans in the Congress and And local level.
01:04:21
Before we can win Governor, I would if you mean by like our
01:04:27
state legislature, I completely agree.
01:04:29
We need to get more people in there more than anything,
01:04:33
because I think that that's really where it's at.
01:04:38
I think we need to worry about evening out the state
01:04:40
legislature, making it so they can't.
01:04:45
So they can actually Ram these bills through these crazy bills
01:04:50
and it that would help a lot. If you could even out the state
01:04:52
legislature, you know, things would change dramatically here
01:04:55
in the state of California. If you had a 50-50 split of
01:04:59
Republicans and Democrats or just Democrats.
01:05:01
And I always say Republicans, look, I always say Republicans,
01:05:04
as, like the general opposition because of the second biggest
01:05:07
party or the, the biggest party. But I'm saying anybody who's
01:05:11
Democrats and anti Democrats meaning, there could be
01:05:13
Republicans Libertarians Independence, anything like
01:05:15
that, just to oppose the Democrats at this point.
01:05:18
It's kind of, like, we're all in this together.
01:05:20
We're All in This Together. Just like they told us two years
01:05:23
ago. I sent you.
01:05:24
A Brian Dolly, add a few weeks ago.
01:05:26
He must have been so memorable. I forgot all about it.
01:05:31
Thank you for sending me the ad. I guess it wasn't as in.
01:05:33
Stick out in my mind, yet, we gotta break the supermajority
01:05:38
vote gold, baby. People don't know.
01:05:40
Gold is the color of They're their color of the libertarian
01:05:46
party, so that's what vocal means.
01:05:49
Yeah. So with that.
01:05:53
Thanks everyone for tuning in. I like I said, no weekly podcast
01:05:56
this week we're doing a lot of technical updates and stuff like
01:05:58
that so we can provide a better podcast experience.
01:06:02
We got a lot of guests lined up, people who are asking to come on
01:06:04
and stuff like that. We got a lot of shows that I
01:06:06
want to do. We're going to be heading into
01:06:08
the election season now that summer is winding down and next
01:06:12
weekend is Labor Day weekend Kind of like here we go.
01:06:16
Summers really over schools back in session.
01:06:20
One thing I still can't really understand.
01:06:22
I can't get over as a East coaster.
01:06:24
Is that people in California? Go back to school, really early,
01:06:26
like, the middle of August. I don't remember going back to
01:06:29
school that early. I always thought it was like,
01:06:30
end of August September. But anyway, thanks everyone for
01:06:35
tuning in. We do this every Wednesday at 9
01:06:37
a.m. on Instagram. Also, there's always an audio
01:06:41
version on Apple Spotify, Google stuff like that.
01:06:46
If you enjoy the podcast like that on audio, you can go ahead
01:06:50
and subscribe like and review all that stuff helps grow the
01:06:53
the podcast and what cancer schedule for their podcast.
01:06:57
I we have a couple up in the air so we're just going to nail them
01:07:00
down. So what was I going to say?
01:07:04
Oh yeah, if you like subscribe like share of you all that
01:07:07
stuff. Thanks for tuning in.
01:07:10
Thanks for sharing this and all that the do.
01:07:13
The bugs shirt, which is there's a tank top, there's a t-shirt,
01:07:17
there's a woman's tea, and there's a hoodie, a crop hoodie.
01:07:22
I'm told they're very popular. So, yeah, go check out the
01:07:26
store. It looks great, my good friend
01:07:29
is all don't not as vlado. He pointed that out and said,
01:07:33
I'm not Russian. I said, I'm sorry, that must
01:07:35
have been autocorrect showed me the other day.
01:07:38
It looks great shirt. Looks amazing.
01:07:40
Looks like it came out really well.
01:07:41
Don't eat the bugs. And for all those people who
01:07:43
were like, I don't get the, don't eat the bugs, you're going
01:07:45
to see more of it. They're going to talk about
01:07:47
eating bugs, more, and more and more.
01:07:49
So don't eat the bugs. Go eat steak, go eat beef, go
01:07:52
eat stuff like that. I got invited to a barbecue.
01:07:54
This, this Friday in the person hosting said, oh I'm going to
01:07:58
make sure I get a lot of those impossible meatless burgers and
01:08:02
gluten-free buns. And I wanted to respond, you're
01:08:07
going to have healthy options as well to write like actual beef
01:08:11
burgers because Impossible, burgers are not very healthy for
01:08:16
you. Look at the ingredients and see
01:08:18
all the stuff that's an impossible Burgers.
01:08:20
But anyway, that's a whole different show.
01:08:21
We don't need to talk about what's going on in impossible,
01:08:24
beef, burgers and all like that. Just eat me.
01:08:27
Eat me eat stuff that God put out there for us to eat and all
01:08:30
that. So yeah I'm pretty Petty like
01:08:34
that. I think it's just funny because
01:08:35
people try to pretend like meatless burgers or impossible
01:08:38
burgers or way healthier than beef burgers.
01:08:40
And I'm like they're not like just eat good A grass-fed beef.
01:08:45
You know, you'll feel a lot better.
01:08:47
So yeah. With that said, thanks for
01:08:49
tuning in, everybody. Check out the shirts and all the
01:08:51
merchandise working on the noodle.
01:08:53
Sure, I showed you the the logo last week, I showed you the
01:08:57
canoodle. So we're working on the king
01:08:58
noodles shirt as well, and that should be coming out soon.
01:09:03
And basically, thanks for tuning in.
01:09:06
Everybody have a great day later.
01:09:35
Thank you for listening to another episode of California
01:09:37
underground. If you like what you heard,
01:09:39
remember to subscribe? Like and review it and follow
01:09:42
California Underground on social media for updates as to when new
01:09:45
episodes are available.