➡ The article discusses an interview with Sheriff Mack on the Top of Mind podcast, where the topic of authority in the United States was discussed. The article criticizes the interviewer, Julie, for not delving deeper into the details of Sheriff Mack’s Supreme Court case and for allowing the term “democracy” to be used repeatedly. The article argues that the U.S. is not a democracy, but a constitutional republic, and emphasizes the importance of understanding this distinction. It also discusses the role of sheriffs in upholding the Constitution and their right to choose whether or not to assist federal authorities.
➡ The article criticizes college students for avoiding difficult topics and suggests they need to mature. It also discusses a deal between Trump’s son-in-law and Sinclair, a media company, for positive coverage during the 2016 campaign. The article ends by highlighting the irony of Sinclair condemning biased news while forcing its affiliates to republish biased news without fact-checking. It also points out that a small number of companies control most of the world’s mainstream media.

Before we run out of time, Jack, I’d like to mention this interview that Sheriff Mack did. He does dozens of interviews every week, as everybody knows, but this one was riveting especially. She says, hey there, it’s Julie and this is Top of Mind. Top of Mind is a podcast put out by Brigham Young University and she says where we tackle tough topics with nuanced and an open mind. We’re out to become better citizens, kinder neighbors, and more effective advocates in the United States of America. Who’s the highest authority? Is it the President? Congress? The Supreme Court? President Trump is flexing the power of his office.

Anyway, she interviews two professors and Sheriff Mack, and the biggest complaint we have about Julie is that she doesn’t drill into the details of Sheriff Richard Mack’s case enough, and that’s the problem with most media is they won’t drill into the details of the case. Either they’re scared to because they may not have the knowledge to deal with a complicated subject matter, or they don’t do it because they don’t want people to really realize how valuable and case setting, if you will, it’s the greatest 10th Amendment decision ever rendered, and so the only criticism of Julie, she was a nice person.

We think she means well, but she didn’t dig in because it isn’t about Richard Mack or what Richard Mack thinks. It’s about the Supreme Court case win, and the only reason we know Mack’s name is because he was right on the Constitution, and the Supreme Court doubled down and agreed with him. So anyway, the incredible, whatever you want to call it, does America have a balance of power problem? And so Julie does a pretty good job. She’s a nice lady. I’m not here to attack her, but she should have dug into the case more.

She also allowed and let these two professors use the term our democracy, democracy, democracy. Why? Why? Why? We’re not a democracy people, okay? And these two professors, if anybody should know it, it should be them. So Richard had a concern about that. The professors were right and did a lot of, you know, good things there too, and Sheriff Mack had about a 12-minute interview. They only took, you know, when they do a video, they cut it all down. He was only on there for about 11, 12 minutes, and Sheriff Mack made some great points and articulated who he is and explained how constitutional roadblocks could work or checkpoints could work, and you know, but Julie at the end just seems still unconvinced that, oh man, you know, you think that, so she criticized Richard Mack for having a very strict interpretation of the Constitution, and Sheriff Mack simply responded and said, well, how would you have me interpret it? You know? So that’s kind of what the problem is.

Society is so brainwashed that the problem is, you know, you think we’re a democracy. You think the president or the, you know, sheriffs have no authority. My response is really clear. If the sheriffs swear an oath to the Constitution, in other words, they’ll uphold and defend and protect us using the Constitution, protect us from enemies, foreign and domestic. If that’s true, how can a sheriff do that if he has to wait with the Supreme Court? Sheriff Mack started this battle in 93, ended up 97, with a court win. What would he have done all those four years if he didn’t uphold the Constitution? So if all these people aren’t really required to make your constitutional decisions about when they believe it’s violated or not, if they can’t make those decisions on their own, then why would they even swear the oath? I mean, what for? See? And so, nobody asks these journalists and these mainstream media people, these questions, Richard Mack was kind of asking those kind of questions going, hey, you know, who’s in charge? If you say the sheriff doesn’t have discretion in these cases, so then they talk about California and the immigration.

Some sheriffs are helping Donald Trump and the administration. Look at Florida. In California, they’re, you know, not helping. Both of those are correct. Sheriff Mack says, you have the right to help or not help. What they don’t have the right to do is force you to help. And that’s where they tried to force Richard Mack on the Brady bill. That’s where they’re trying to force these Colorado sheriffs. That’s where, you know, hey, there’s no authority or jurisdictional delegation, responsibility to, to force them. So if a sheriff decides he doesn’t want to help, or if he decides he will help, that’s his choice.

What’s not his choice is being forced into it by the feds who have no jurisdictional authority. And that’s the quintessential point. Anyway, it was a great interview. And the reason I bring it up is you can check out the link, Stephanie put in the notes, you can get the Supreme Court case, get it by the dozens and give them to everybody. They got to learn about this greatest, greatest 10th amendment decision ever rendered. But secondarily, then you want to watch this interview because a sheriff Mack did great in that interview. It’s only an audio interview.

I wish it was video too. But it’s a good interview. Jack, did you listen to it? Yeah, I did. I really like it. He’s a powerful speaker. He’s very motivational. And he makes the issues very, very clear. While you were talking, I brought up another page here. But you may remember back a couple of years ago, when the Sinclair broadcast group created this script that they pass around all their TV stations, which fortunately got noticed by some creative YouTube producers. And, you know, the bottom line that I always remember is this is going to be extremely dangerous to our democracy.

And I think that that’s an important thing for people to understand what this what this publication that Sinclair did was trying to achieve. And that is that if anyone goes out on their own and is trying to interpret their history and explain what they believe is the nature of the United States and how it came to be and what our laws are like, that they are, you know, because in that particular script, they condemn the fact that these local stations would go out on their own and, and may have a political view that is extremely dangerous to our democracy.

And unfortunately, what’s extremely dangerous to our democracy is people like the Sinclair broadcast group, attempting to make everyone feel guilty for understanding what’s going on in this world, but sure, make everyone feel like we have a democracy, though that you know, your appeal, I often enough, people believe it. And that’s the problem with, you know, you can say, well, it’s just a nuance, Sam, we’re, we’re, come on, we’ve got to, we’re a democratic republic or a democracy republic, fine. And they go on and dismiss it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter.

A democracy doesn’t have the checks and balances vertically and horizontally that the United States has a democracy doesn’t have dual sovereigns like constitutional republics have a democracy doesn’t have this representative government with all these checks and balances to make sure no one gains too much power. It’s 100%, 180 degrees from a democracy. The founders know it, we know it, but in our modern day, they continue to, to bastardize it or destroy that understanding. It’s wrong. It’s got to stop Jack. Absolutely. I have no doubt. Anyway, she found that bit that the Stephanie did the piece that Sinclair did.

I don’t know how many people have seen that. I’m going to put along is it you want to play it real quick. It’s a little over two minutes. Yeah, I go. Sure. Would love to have it. And there’s one last thing that I want to bring up real quick. And then guess we’re getting close to the end. Hang on, sir. I find this there it is. Uh huh. And I think you can see it. Hundreds of local news anchors around the country spoke in unison to defend their stations and blast the so called fake news media.

The sharing of biased and false news has all too common on the media or alarming. Some media outlets publish the same fake stories without checking facts first. But it wasn’t their choice to make those statements, which sound like they’re coming straight from the president’s Twitter feed. And the president has their back tweeting this morning. The fakers at CNN, NBC, ABC and CBS shouldn’t be worried about the quality of Sinclair’s reporting. But these are not anchors of Trump TV, at least not officially. These are all affiliates of Sinclair broadcast group. And while you likely have never heard of them, they own or operate more TV stations than any broadcaster in the U.S.

By the way, that includes NBC 10 in Providence, Rhode Island, and they could own even more if Federal Communications Commission approves their bid to buy Tribune media. That fake news diatribe was just one of the outlets. Many must read or must run commentaries and segments all Trump friendly and all mandatory for Sinclair stations. John Oliver pointed out one of these segments last summer. This is from Sinclair commentator Mark Hyman. You, the social justice warrior who winds for trigger warnings and safe spaces, not grown up enough to deal with the facts, then hunkered down in your room and snapchat the day away with other social justice warriors.

College isn’t a babysitting service. It’s time to grow up, snowflake. They’re essentially angry, unhinged Twitter rants broadcast to millions of people under the guise of local news. Not surprising, considering Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, struck a deal with Sinclair during 2016 for more favorable coverage of the then campaign in return for which the network got special access to Trump. Now Sinclair, senior vice president of news, at Scott Livingston, he issued a statement yesterday reading in part, it is ironic that we would be attacked for messages promoting our journalistic initiative for fair objective reporting.

Actually, no, what’s ironic is that in their condemnation of biased news being republished without checking facts first, Sinclair forced its affiliates to republish biased news without the opportunity to check facts first. Anyway, I didn’t expect it to have the commentary in there, but regardless, he made the correct point. We have a situation where they own all the news media, less than six companies own all the mainstream media in most of the world. And so they decide what we get to see here, etc. [tr:trw].

See more of CSPOA on their Public Channel and the MPN CSPOA channel.