➡ This summary is about a weekly webinar hosted by CSBOA.org where they discuss their activities and success stories. They also mention a discount code for a certification course on their website. The course, which is about understanding the Constitution, is recommended for everyone. The webinar also includes a discussion about the importance of sheriffs obeying the Constitution and the role of the CSPOA in supporting them.
➡ A disagreement has arisen between the Las Vegas Justice Court and Sheriff McMahill over the release of Sanchez Lopez, who is considered a public safety risk. Despite the court ordering his release to a pretrial program, the sheriff refuses to comply, arguing that Lopez’s past actions, including evading officers and being pictured with a gun, make him too dangerous. This situation has sparked a broader discussion about bail and release procedures in southern Nevada. The case may potentially reach the state supreme court, raising concerns about the number of dangerous individuals who may have been released in the past.
➡ The text discusses concerns about a criminal, possibly named Josue or Joshua, who despite having a long criminal record and gang affiliations, is repeatedly released on bail. The speakers question the judge’s decisions, suggesting that such actions could be seen as aiding and abetting the criminal. They also discuss the roles of elected officials like judges and sheriffs, emphasizing the need for them to prioritize public safety and uphold the law. They suggest that if judges fail in their duties, they should be voted out of office.
➡ The text discusses concerns about a judge who repeatedly releases a potentially dangerous individual, questioning the judge’s competence and possible corruption. It also touches on the role of the sheriff in protecting the community and the power dynamics between the sheriff, the judge, and the people. The text further explores a Supreme Court case related to local authority and jurisdiction, emphasizing the sheriff’s responsibility to act when public safety is at risk. Lastly, it highlights the people’s ultimate authority in delegating power to their elected officials.
➡ The text discusses the role of county sheriffs in the United States, focusing on their constitutional authority and their ability to uphold the law. It highlights the actions of Sheriff Bob Songer, who has been cooperating with ICE, despite living in a state where this is not typically allowed. The text also discusses the idea of sheriffs standing up to laws they believe are unconstitutional, and the potential impact if more sheriffs across the country took similar actions. The text concludes with a call for a national meeting of sheriffs to unite and discuss these issues, emphasizing the importance of face-to-face interaction over virtual meetings.
➡ The discussion revolves around concerns over proposed gun laws in various states, including Illinois and Virginia, which could heavily tax gun manufacturers and individuals, potentially infringing on Second Amendment rights. The speakers also express worry about election fraud and the influence of non-native officials in high positions. They emphasize the need for American citizens to vote out officials who don’t respect constitutional rights and to support those who do. They also stress the importance of turning to God and maintaining morality among the people.

All right. Hello everyone, and welcome again to another edition of the weekly Wednesday webinar. It’s the CSBOA.org’s posse webinar where we get together on a Wednesday afternoon and enjoy our community, our company, and talk about the various activities of the CSB Way, their success stories. And we have plenty of those today. And we let you know that it is a completely funded by you operation. And I’m not going to spend much time on that. But again, we, we appreciate your business any way that you can give it to us. We also have on the website right now on the front page the active certification discount code and, and so that you can take the certification course and get $45 off.

So if you go to the homepage csbua.org you’ll find that we have that save $45 off CSBUA certification course right now up there with the, with the code that you have to put in at checkout 26 certified me. And that’ll get you that course. And I know that it’s important for all of us to understand the Constitution and since we’re part of this organization, even more so. Once you take this course, you’ll be qualified as basically an expert. It’s a detailed course. It gets, you know, it’s soup to nuts, but at the same time, it’s relatively easy to take.

I recommend it and I think it’s good for everyone. So get it right now watch. That’s because the Constitution is designed for the average farmer back in the day. It wasn’t designed for rocket scientists or anybody else. And so it’s really important to understand that you can understand this stuff, too. And that’s just the way the founders intended it. Absolutely. So get yours now. Why it’s 45 off. And for the rest of the site, plenty of things to buy in there as well as just plain old donate@csbway.org donate Sheriff Mac has made it into the building and we’re all here today.

Welcome, welcome, Sheriff. Hi, Sam. Good to see you again. Good to see you, Jack. Thanks for getting things going here. You’re welcome. I’m going to switch somebody’s name here. I don’t know which one you are, so I’ll take a shot at it unless you can see it. All right, I see. I see me as Sam Bushman and I see Sam as Sam Bushman. Yeah. So we’ll see if. Hey. Well, Sam Bushman’s really popular. I’m always in Sam’s shadow, so that’s fine. You know, what though? We had an incredible show on Tuesday talking about this though, and we’re going to have that video out to you, Jack, to put up on the website.

It was a great interview with Sheriff Mack about the incredible things in Clark County. I mean, I’m telling you right now, Sheriff Mack rocked that interview. He really laid out some fundamental, important things related to the sheriff’s great stand. We have it up. It’s up now. It’s already there. Yeah. Yep, yep, we’re up. And beautiful. I’ll bring it up and let everybody see it while you’re talking here. But yes, and there’s also a video. Well, there’s a, an explanation of this thing and a place to read the original article that it came from on the site as well.

Vegas Sheriff Refuses Judge order to free 35 arrest repeat offender Court Clash Heads to top. And that’s their title, not mine. Anyway, you’ll find these in the news section on cspoa. And in the meantime, let’s bring up this one that Sam and Sheriff Mac made. I’m slow with the keyboard here today. Sorry. There we go. There you go. When politicians hesitate, the sheriff acts. We could play some of that if you guys wanted. Well, that’s you, Sheriff Mac. We can play it, talk about it, whatever you think we need to do. But I think this is one of the greatest pieces of news for the CSPOA in probably the last couple of years.

Sheriff? Yeah, yeah, I was going to say since we’ve been here, but maybe not because there’s been some other things like Sheriff Rogers and Sheriff Bob Songer and, and a few sheriffs who have done tremendous things. But this has, this has some far reaching implications because of this. One, the size of the department and, and two, that Las Vegas Metro Police Department is under the Clark County Sheriff’s office. And, and that’s really something that we should have been talking about a lot more on this show because that’s where it should be. Every police department should be under the county Sheriff.

And, and I don’t know why that ever got changed and why it didn’t do it, but Clark County, Las Vegas is actually setting the example in more ways than one. And here Sheriff McMahill is setting the example for the entire country. And now it’s not just dumb old Sheriff Mack and oh, the crazy guy Songer out in Washington and the little guy, Brad Rogers, Sheriff Rogers in Elkhart County. Yeah, of course they’re going to do it. But now we have really an outsider who has been, has very little to do with cspoa. And yes, I’ve met with him in person in his office at his request.

He wanted to know about the case. And. And he was humble enough to ask that and say, hey, I want to see this. And I said, here’s a copy. Will you read it? Yes, absolutely. I’ll read it. And he did, you know, so here we go. I don’t know. Well, and when you say an outsider sheriff, he’s not been really involved in the cspoa, but he’s been friendly. And the important thing to know is this Constitutional. Sheriffs don’t have to be involved with the CSPOA to be a. Exactly. What they have to do is obey the Constitution, for crying out loud.

Which is all we’ve ever been after. And then this guy brings all that home for us. We’re not asking a sheriff to be a member. We’re not asking a sheriff for dues. We’re asking all of you for dues. We’re asking you, all the people. We. The people. We’re asking you for donations. We’re. This is. This is like, so crazy, folks. People don’t get this. All we’ve ever wanted was sheriffs just to keep their oath of office. That’s it. So. And our whole point of the CSPOA is to help sheriffs learn to do that, to know that we’ve got their back to.

To help them understand, you know, if they went to government school, they have to unlearn a lot so they can learn the Constitution. I mean, there’s some support there. We want to provide. That’s what the funding you give us helps us do. But really, it’s all about supporting the sheriffs and helping them understand their oaths and due process. And, hey, releasing these, you know, 30 or 11 people, I guess this first one, that was kind of the battle cry. This guy’s got 35 arrests for criminal activity, including involuntary manslaughter, and they want this guy to run around on the streets? Yeah.

Can we play. We got a TV newscast from Las Vegas. Sure, if you want to play that. Sheriff Mac and Sam. Yep. Let’s see that one. Let’s see what that one does. Yeah. Because Sam and I could duplicate. I mean, we’re here live. We can duplicate the interview we did Tuesday, but. Yeah, let’s see this one. I want to. I haven’t seen this one yet. For tonight at 6. Can the sheriff determine whether or not a person is too dangerous to be out of jail or is that a judge’s call? That’s the Debate happening right now between Metro and the Las Vegas Justice Court and one that could affect your safety.

Good evening. I’m Denise Valdez. And I’m Brian Loftus. A News now investigator David Charnes with how that question is now making its way to the state’s highest court. David? Brian, Denise, we report on crime, of course, every day, and a lot of times you hear us say a person is out of jail wearing an ankle monitor. Metro oversees hundreds of these defendants, but recently the department said one man was just too dangerous. A judge ordered his release. We have to take a look at that and say, is this somebody who our electronic supervision program can monitor safely in the community? This is an issue of public safety, David.

It’s an issue of public safety that has two institutions of public safety coming to a head at the Nevada Supreme Court. Is it a judge or the sheriff who has the final say about a person’s release back into our community amid pending criminal charges? There’s absolutely competing narratives about public safety occurring within our community, and there’s different approaches, too. Assistant general counsel for Metro, Mike Dickerson, is on one side of that approach. After Metro denied this man, Joshua Sanchez Lopez, a spot in the department’s Alternatives to Incarceration program, Metro says Sanchez Lopez has a criminal history, including 35 arrests and visits to prison.

After his most recent arrest earlier this year involving a stolen vehicle, Sanchez Lopez was back in Las Vegas Justice Court Court where a judge set bail at $25,000, adding, if Sanchez Lopez posted bond, he could get out of jail and essentially a way trial on house arrest. But in the days afterward, Metro sent the court this letter saying Sanchez Lopez poses an unreasonable risk to public safety and will not be released. That risk, according to Metro, includes a past incident of evading officers. They point to these snapshots of him with a gun where he said he got, quote, chased.

Again, the safety of our officers is paramount. The safety of the public is key. And the key Here is Sheriff McMahill will not violate the law to appease the Las Vegas Justice Court in letting out people that he deems to be dangerous, but not dangerous enough for Judge Eric Goodman to order Sanchez Lopez’s release to the program anyway, saying failure for the sheriff and Metro to do so could result in sanctions for contempt. When Metro said no, the court put him on their own pretrial release program. Today is not the day. Today was supposed to be the day.

Goodman heard arguments from Sanchez Lopez’s public defenders and Metro lawyers about the release, though he continued the hearing. The issue bringing to head Ongoing dialogue about bail and release in southern Nevada, years in the making. We have a system that’s set up so that people can get out of jail quickly. And sometimes there just needs to be a little bit more thought given to it because lives are on the line. Sanchez Lopez’s public defender provided us this statement saying, quote, metro’s argument is flat wrong. It is the job of the elected judge to decide whether someone charged with a crime should be released and under what conditions.

The idea that a Metro employee can overrule a judge’s release order and keep someone locked up should worry anyone who believes in the constitution and the rule of law. The Metro says so far, far this year, the department has denied 14 people from this electronic monitoring program. No hearing date yet for when the state supreme court could hear about this. I’m David Charnes, 8 News. Now the Las Vegas Justice Court Judge Goodman or the Clark County District Attorney’s office responded to our request for comment. A 2020 state Supreme Court decision requires judges to determine the so called reasonable bail and requires court hold prompt custody hearings for tonight at six.

Can the sheriff. There you have it, Sheriff Mack. What do you say, sir? Well, you know, you would think after 35 arrests that the judge would be a little bit more prudent in his releasing of prisoners. But let me tell everyone right now, uh, there is, there is no constitutional provision for putting an ankle monitor on anybody. That’s, that’s just a, a get out of jail free card. And that, that ankle monitor does not stop anyone from committing a crime. And this man has been on it before. So that’s what’s absolutely crazy about all of this.

And the sheriff is just, as Ian said a little while ago on his chat, the sheriff is the chief law enforcement officer for the, for the county, and he is the one responsible for public safety. He is the conservator of the peace and he is the executor of the law. Then you get these liberal judges and you take them right back in there and they’re right back out the next day. And what is that judge going to say if this guy commits another crime tomorrow with that break that anklet on? You know, what’s he gonna say? Oh, I, I guess, I guess the sheriff was right.

You know, then it’s going to be a little bit too late for another victim in Clark County. But I’ve got some questions. Sheriff. Do we even know if this guy, this, this Josue, whatever his name, is illegal? Is he illegal or do we even know? I haven’t Heard that come up yet? I don’t think he is. He’s been around a long time, so. Of a lot of illegals, by the way. Well, then the next question though is when you have 35 arrests though, I mean, and, and we’re talking about evading cops, we’re talking about with a gun, we’re talking about violent things.

How can the judge say this guy’s not a flight risk? Or how can the judge say this guy’s not a violent concern to the society at large? I don’t understand it. No, you. How do you get in the mind of these woke activist judges, Sam? We’ve been trying to do that for, you know, how long now, but it’s. I mean, you would think on a rest 5 or maybe a rest 10 or maybe a rest 15 or maybe arrest 20 or maybe arrest 25, at some point somebody would go, hey, hold on. Yeah, you know what? What we’re doing is not working.

Is that a logical thought or. Well, somebody is saying, hold on. And it was Sheriff McMah. Yeah, good for McMahon. Yeah. God bless Sheriff McMahill. That’s all I can say. So what do you think’s going to happen with this case, Sheriff? Is it going to go to the Supreme Court of, of Nevada? Is. Do you know what’s going to happen here? Any, any Nevada Supreme Court worries me. They need to just hurry up and get it to the US Supreme Court, you know. Yeah. Because how, how many more woke judges are going to be on the Nevada Supreme Court? Come on.

Amen. And the next question that I have is this. If they’re fighting over this one and if the sheriff there has already basically said there’s several people that we’re not releasing because they’re too dangerous. How many people that are dangerous? This is what the American people should be asking. How many people have they released that are incredibly dangerous already over the last. How many ever years? Many. Many. Isn’t that a fair question? How many have already been released that are very dangerous to society running around Nevada? I don’t even dare go to Vegas anymore. Yeah, I mean, and we’ve had lots of conferences there.

Lots of them. So what’d you have, Jack? Nothing. Just agreeing with you guys. I’m reading this article here from the original Las Vegas Fox News Post to see if this. I read that one too. CP was illegal or not. I don’t see anything. Never mentioned it. That’s what makes me wonder if he is or not. Because you would think they would say, hey, this is a citizen. He does have, you know, full rights or whatever. You know, I’m just saying the fact that they’ve left it out makes me wonder. I’m not saying that I know or that it, you know, he is.

I just, it’s weird that it’s not part of the story though. It looks like he’s part of Ms. 13. He is Ms. 13. Yeah, he, I mean, there’s a link here to another article that he’s in said Nevada judge freeze convicted Ms. 13 killer despite government warnings about public safety. And so anyway, I don’t know, I’m going to try to find his article in here, but he does have that appearance. So this judge, this judge has got to be out of his ever loving mind. This is ridiculous. I hear that again, how many people across the country are we dealing with that are in our society that they now have updated reports saying 19 million illegals are in the country? I certainly believe the numbers north of that.

But when you think about, hey, President Trump explaining that he’s talked to some of these other leaders and around the world and they basically emptied their prisons and, and their mental institutions of all the ne do wells that they want to get rid of and they brought them to America. I mean, how many of these creeps do we have running around in the streets with our judges literally aiding and abetting these illegals and their activities? Enormous numbers. But, but let’s, let’s get to the, let’s get to the root of the deal then. Does a judge say whether or not a, an arrestee has to post bail? Yes, he does.

Does the sheriff do that? No, he does not. I never did that in my entire life. However, there I did have input on a few. Not, not this bad, but I did have input, input on a few. However, the sheriff does run the jail though, right? He runs the jail. And, and for, for the ultimate goal. What’s the ultimate goal of all government? Protecting life and liberty and property. And so he goes to the judge and he says, you know what, this is, this is really out of line what you’re doing here with this man. And I’m not releasing him because, you know, I had a similar thing when a, a, a newspaper actually called me and they said, we want the name of every person who calls into the sheriff’s office and reports a crime.

Now folks, did you, did you just hear what I said? They want, the newspaper wants to publish every single person. That means an old lady who calls in about prowlers, who calls in about threats that we put her name and, and phone number in his newspaper so that every suspect that has gone after her can now go after her and, and to. To diminish the confidence that people have in calling the sheriff’s office to report crimes that would hurt exponentially. And I said you don’t really have a legitimate press interest and in reporting that. And I refused to give it to him.

I said you need to cooperate with us on this. If there’s a crime, you can get it, you can have it, it’ll be all yours. However, when it comes to somebody reporting a crime and some old lady is already afraid to call because she’s going to get her name in the paper, I’m not going to leave her exposed to a crime because she’s worried about you exposing her in the newspaper for reporting a crime. And I didn’t goal is just to dox everybody and create fear in society. Ian in the chat brought up how does this person post bail without collateral? That’s another good question I’d like to ask about this case.

Where is this Josue, you know, whatever Lopez, whatever guy? Joshua. So I don’t know if he goes by Josue or Joshua the newspaper, but Joshua, but Spanish for Josh. Yeah, I’m just saying, you know, I don’t know what his name is. I’d like to see what is. You know, it says real name is and who he really is and all this stuff. But where’s it getting collateral? Where’s he getting the money for this? Does this guy work with 35 plus arrests and criminal activity and everything else? How does this guy work and get money and stuff? He robs people, no doubt.

I mean, and he’s been associated with Ms. 13 in 2018 and arrested with other people that were charged with 10 murders. His Joshua Sanchez Lopez, Ms. 13 is available in the, you know, lots of searches. So it would have to be this guy. He was arrested in 2009 for racketeering charges related to group homies unandos which opposes Ms. 13. So you know, this guy’s got a lot of time just being in jail. I suppose he would steal everything that he is is living on. He’s got a charge of grand larceny of a motor vehicle. Yeah, but, but I wanna.

Somebody should track the money though. Where’s the money coming from the post bail anyway? Well, he. First of all you can get a bail bond and you only need to put up 10. So any of his buddies could post 2500 for him and he gets the 25 000. 25000 for this kind of criminal, habitual criminals, way low. Sure. And. And the judge. The judge just has got to. They. I’m sorry, he’s got to pull his head out. You know, this is just absurd. He really does. There’s no doubt. But see, this is happening all over the country.

And because there’s not enough. Exactly. Stand up. We don’t know about it. All right? Yeah, exactly. But we’ve seen it in New York. We’ve seen it in Chicago. We’ve seen it some other places. Probably Portland and Los Angeles. We’ve seen it all over the country. This happened. The worst one was when the cops got beat up by a bunch of gang bangers and the guy went in and walked right back out and then flipped everybody off, you know, all the media and all the cops. And so this is the same thing, folks. And, and look, I.

I read all the time that government’s primary purpose is to keep us safe. I’m going to say, I’m going to one up that the primary purpose of all government is to keep us free, is to protect our liberty, and liberty protects our safety to a great extent as well. But yes, keeping us safe and keeping us free is the purpose of all government. And, and quite honestly, there’s quotes in my Supreme Court case that totally back this up. And let’s remember Judge John M. Roll in in my district court case, and he said, page two of the booklet, everybody and everybody on this program right now should have this in your pocket.

So get these ordered and get these handed out to people. Make sure that Eric Goodman, Judge Eric Goodman gets a copy of this case. He obviously knows nothing about it, so let’s try to get some to him. But look at this quote. I’m in the district court of Judge John m. Roll In 1994, about May of 1994, I’m in the courtroom and, and in. In his decision, the victory for Sheriff Mack v. The United States, he says this Mac is thus forced to choose between keeping his oath or obeying the act. And let’s, let’s replace act with order or obey the judge’s order.

Subjected himself to possible sanctions. Yeah, and Sheriff McMahell has subjected himself to possible sanctions from the judge, which is contempt of court. And so the same thing here, it’s almost exactly 100. The same. Not always. Not all the way out to 100, but it’s close. So, folks, what does a sheriff do when he’s forced to choose between keeping his people safe and his community, our families, or obeying a stupid judge, which Darn does he do. Thank you, Stephanie, for that link. There’s the link to the pamphlet Sheriff Mack was talking about in the chat. If anybody needs that, by all means, order them by the caseload.

Spread the word to everyone. But the other question that I have is this. The news story made a big point, Jack, of saying, hey, the elected judge. People around the country, when you have these clown judges, you have got to remove them from office while you’ve got the opportunities. These people are activists from the bench. They don’t believe they have to interpret the law. They believe they are the law and they can make up the law as they see fit. And this is where we need to stop them. We the people can stop them if we just vote them out of office.

Jack, I think this is critical to think about. No doubt, you know, it’s there. That’s the. What you just. The point you just made there is what they try to make against the sheriffs, you know, that they make up the law when a sheriff is in charge of enforcing the law and, and enforcing the law of the land, whereas a judge is sitting politically in a position where he can just manufacture new law on the. On the run. And. Well, but let’s not forget, Jack, the judge isn’t the only one elected here. So is the sheriff.

And, and one elected official trying to boss the other elected official. You know, and, and I’m. And I’m telling you Sheriff McMahill has done the right thing. Let’s read Mac Vus again. Mac. Prince Vus again. Okay, we’ve read this on this show a lot, but we’re going to do it again. Hence, a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other at the same time that each will be controlled by itself. It’s obvious that judge Goodman cannot control himself here, and it’s going to take someone else. And, and Sam has talked about this too.

The horizontal and the vertical. Vertical. Thank you. Got the B word. The horizontal and vertical powers of division of powers and the separation of powers and the protections that we get from separation of powers comes vertically and horizontally. And here it is, Sheriff McMahill, bringing in that principle. I am not going to allow you, your honor, to endanger the community when you have no valid reason for doing so. Why don’t you stay? I have a question, though. The reason. Yeah, this is kind of a redneck question. I’m just kind of Joe Blowout here, citizenry, but I gotta.

I gotta wonder this. If this guy’s got 35 arrests and convictions. And he’s behind bars now. He’s got a violent streak a mile wide. He’s been shown with guns and gang affiliations and running from cops or, you know, this kind of stuff. And if the judge, Aiden abeds this criminal, can the sheriff arrest the judge? I. First of all, he would have to ask for probably an outside investigation. Is the judge’s stupid decision, does that rise to the level of a crime? Yeah, and I don’t know that. I don’t know. I don’t. My first inclination is I don’t think so.

But when you’re letting out criminals that have harmed people that have violated the law. We’re talking 35 times here. Yeah. At some point, when do you aid in a bed criminals by doing this? When you know they’re affiliated gangs, you know they’re violent, you know they’re, you know, this guy’s a felon, but he’s still running around carrying guns and all this guy, when is enough enough? And when do you say, hold on a minute. You’re violating your oath of office, judge so and so by you’re assisting in this criminal activity, you’re part of the criminal cabal, if you will, at some point.

Right, I agree with that 100%. The reason being is that this guy’s got a record that is so long that you know for a fact he will commit another crime. That’s not something that you can, you know, imagine might happen or would be random, etc. This guy’s going back out on the street and. And do what he did every other time he’s arrested. When they say someone’s a flight risk, we. When do we admit there are threat risk and when. If the judge enables that threat risk to become a real threat to citizens. Well, I guess I don’t know the answers.

I’m just saying that’s seriously something to consider. Is there enough probable cause to believe that such a stupid decision actually has a criminal element behind it? That judge is being bought off. Then you have to question whether he’s competent to be a judge. I mean, after 35 times, and this is a short period of time, we’re looking like, you know, maybe a decade. You have to imagine this guy’s not going anywhere and just suddenly set up a church or whatever, helping old ladies across the street. He’s gonna plant churches. Yeah, that’s right. But the other question is how many other judges over these 35 times, where has he been arrested? All over the country.

Only in Clark County. You know, where is this? Where Are these other judges? Because it’s one thing to criticize this judge for letting him out. The 35th time was. What about the 30th and the 25th and the 20th and what is there just a ton of judges involved or how broad is. Let’s go over the numbers. Let’s go over those numbers. Just alone with Sheriff McMahill. Sheriff McMahill has done this 11 times against four different judges. So this isn’t the only time this man is standing and he’s done it. And I guess now Eric Goodman got a little bit ticked and said, why are you challenging the robe I wear? Why are you challenging the ring I wear? Why are you challenging my position? Because, Judge, you don’t know what your position is.

You know, and so once you violate the reason that you’re there, of course a sheriff’s going to step in to save his community. And, And I guess the irony of ironies would be, what if it was one of Eric Goodman’s, Judge Goodman’s children or grandchildren or neighbors? Uhhuh. Yeah. The other question I have is, isn’t there a bar for some of these courtroom judges and everything else to say, hey, why are these four judges just letting people off and back into society when you know there’s a hostile criminal element to these? Okay, these, this 11 times Sheriff McMahill has done this.

There’s one thing in common with all of them. What is that? Hardcore criminal activity that creates a danger to society. And at some point you go, when is the judge of the judges going to judge the judges? You know, how many times can I say judges? But you see what I mean, right? Definitely see what you mean. Nobody judges the judges. You know, Sheriff Mack, your, Your, your Supreme Court case came up in another state in a, in a, in a big situation here in the last few weeks, and it was Wyoming. And then they would, they’re, they have this, you know, new law that they were attempting to pass, and it’s got something to do the, the title of it is Second Amendment Protection act or something similar to that.

And the governor, I mean, this, this is a very interesting story, and I don’t, I know it probably doesn’t fit, but it’s important to note that your, your, your legislation or your court case is actually having some, some value. Because even though the judge did not sign off on the, on the bill, he mentioned that Wyoming law already protects against federal overreach under the Supreme Court case. Anti commandeering doctrine established in Prince versus the United States. And so in this particular case, the state was attempting to produce fines for police officers that would adhere and follow federal gun law.

And the state was very, very concerned. One of the reps said that he argued passionately in the bill reminding the body of the second Amendment’s original purpose was to ensure protection of the citizens by the citizens against an overly powerful federal government. So what I think about when I want our local enforcement to do and what I want the people that are serving protect us in the state to do, when the fed says, hey, I want you to take some guns, I don’t want them to say, okay, sure, we’d love to be part of your project.

And that was part of the bill. But the governor was upset about the fact that it punished, you know, possibly the Sheriffs and all 23 counties Sheriffs were opposed to the bill. Very interesting subject. But you did come up. Yeah, I, you know, it’s funny, the case raises its beautiful head every now and again. You know, about once a year, there’s some state that’s actually going to our case. And. Yeah, and it’s kind of funny. I was the primary litigant, but the case bears the name of Sheriff Prince. Right. And I was simply. Folks, his case was the first heard, even though he filed six weeks after I did the case in Helena, Montana.

And the schedule in Helena, Montana, federal courts wasn’t very busy, and one in Tucson, where I was, was. So Prince’s case was actually heard first. But the thing of it is, he and I were consolidated at the ninth Circuit. So just in case you’re wondering why it went to his name, it was called the Mac Prince case at the ninth Circuit. And then when, by the time it reached the Supreme Court, I guess they were tired of saying two names and they, they put it at Prince, which is fine with me. He’s a great man, a great friend.

And we, we actually, the two of us have actually been on Sam’s show before for the 25, 25th, or I think it was the 26th anniversary of the case. So on June 27th of 2026, I think we’re on. No, it wasn’t 26. This is 26. I think it was 24 that we did the. The anniversary of the case. But anyway, he’s a great man. He’s. His health hasn’t been that great lately, but. Well, either is mine. But I, I so love the miracle that this case provided. And so let’s do. Let’s do one other part of the case that really applies here.

As Madison expressed it, the local or municipal Authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy. No more subject within their respective spheres to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them. Folks, it’s a matter of jurisdictional authority and the sphere of authority. The sphere of authority over protecting the people of Clark county belongs to whom? Of course it is the sheriff, when he sees another public official getting in the way, ladies and gentlemen. Wait, say that again. I just want to make sure people understand. Yes, it’s the sheriff, but understand it’s because he’s the chief executive officer, the Cleo.

Right, he’s the Cleo. And, and let’s, let’s go over that again. In the Supreme Court decision, Justice Scalia is saying, because there is no constitutional text speaking to the precise question, the answer to the Cleo’s challenge. And he called Sheriff Mack and Sheriff Prince the cleos in this case, which is the chief law enforcement officer. And so if the chief law enforcement officer who is elected by, for and of the people in Clark county sees that there’s a danger being posed to the people of that county, he must take action. And he did. So I have another redneck question for you, Sheriff.

If somebody can override the chief law enforcement officer of a county, wouldn’t they become the chief? Well, there’s one, there’s one group that can, or there’s one person that can, however you want to put it, his boss, and that’s we the people. He has one boss and it’s not the job. We’re the chief. Is that what you’re saying? We’ve appointed him in our stead as the chief enforcement officer of a given county or jurisdiction that we the people control. Yes, sir, I agree. Yeah. And only the people. The people can only delegate the powers that they hold.

So if they delegated it to him, if they made him the chief law enforcement officer, unitedly the people are the chief law enforcement officer. And do they make the judge the chief? No. Heck no. No. Come on. No, that. I’m saying that on purpose so people clearly get it. We can debate that who’s got the authority or who should be doing what, like the news did. But if you’ve got a chief law enforcement officer that’s elected, he’s the chief. Right, of course. That’s the, the point that I want to make sure people understand a judge has been appointed to be a judge and interpret the law.

But if the chief says we’re not letting this guy out because it’s too dangerous for society and somebody has authority over the chief, not counting the. Obviously the people. Then who’s the chief? It would be the person who’s the chief answers to, right? Exactly. The chief answers to us. Everybody else answers to the chief. So folks, we, we all. This is just the proper role of government here. We’re just talking about the proper role of government. And again, who’s the chief law enforcement officer? Who’s the. The chief executive or the chief executor of the law? And Thomas Jefferson called that the sheriff.

He said the. The chief executive. The top executive for every county is the county sheriff. And county sheriffs preceded our own Declaration of Independence and Constitution by decades. There were already sheriffs here. And so, folks, we have an assignment now, don’t we, everybody? Huh? Call your local sheriff and ask him and make sure that. And ask him if he knows about this story about the Las Vegas sheriff who stood up to judges. Boy, do we need to have this, these phone calls happening right now to our sheriffs nationwide. How about calling the sheriffs in Minnesota? How about calling the sheriffs in Ohio and Illinois and Los Angeles and the state of Washington? And the entire state of Washington.

Yeah. Speaking of that, our hero, Sheriff Bob Songer, there’s news about him too, right, Jack? Yeah, he’s been creating some problems over there. Yeah, I got like three different articles here where he has decided that he’s going to help and continue to help ice. Right. And obviously he’s living in a state where that’s not something you’re allowed to do, and he’s doing it anyway. So we’ve got an article here from the US Congressman about the sheriff and whether he is actually a constitutional officer and he makes the point. And this is based on Bob Songer. So all of these things are coming out right now.

Bob says, I’ve made it clear that I will work with ice. He sends jail roster to ICE in violation of Keep Washington Work Act. And as a result of that, then, you know, a lot of people began to complain and the state congressman said that, you know, the. The sheriff is definitely constitutional in the sense that he’s elected, but then that’s. That’s where he parts. When counties or sheriffs describe the sheriff as constitutional officer, the most commonly mean elected status and the public accountability that comes from a ballot election, not a separate source of legal authority that overrides the statue or the court orders, etc.

So, you know, basically he’s toeing the line of the state here, but Bob’s actually creating a little bit of a problem for, you know, the people to deal with. Because, you know, in the sense that he’s acting, what some people say, illegally, working with ice. No, he’s. He’s doing it all legal and proper. First of all, they have to examine the oath of office. So the legislature is telling the sheriffs in Washington state that they have no authority to keep their oath of office because they have to follow vapid and pretended legislation from the legislative body of Washington state.

Well, this goes back to the point you made about your case about Sheriff Mack was forced to choose between his oath and what. Yeah, yeah, exactly. But. But it could go even further than that, because the legislation of those legislatures or the legislators there in Washington state was against the law in the first place. Because he said. They’re saying that we made Washington state a sanctuary state for criminals, for people who come into our state illegally. We’re a sanctuary for those people. So the legislature cannot pass a law that allows them to violate another law, and that’s what they’re forced the sheriff to break his oath to obey that law.

Correct? Yeah. So the local newspaper there, the Colombian in Washington, said that there should be appalling to all American sheriffs. I’m sorry, this. This should be appalling to Americans that sheriffs do not. That sheriffs do not determine what is constitutional. And so then why did they take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, that if. If we don’t do that, Jack. And that just makes the legislature king and queen over the entire state. And that all other elected officials only can keep their oath if they get permission from the legislature first. Right. And then they’re going to say, oh, and also the judges.

Yep. Now people are going to ask the fair question, then how do you know which jurisdiction to obey? And I would submit to you that it’s very easy. You look at the supreme law of the land and you say, what is the president or the chief executive have authority to do? What does the legislative body have authority to do? What does the court or the judiciary have authority to do? And then you can bring that right back to your local level. There might be some slight constitutional differences if you’ve got a state constitution to consider, but when you look at that, the same reality applies.

And if there’s laws that are made against the supreme law, where jurisdiction is given to the feds, the states can’t violate it. If it’s a state issue, then the feds can’t violate it. These jurisdictional checks, balances are critical to understand. And all you got to do is look to where the authority was granted by we the people or delegated by we the people and start there. I mean, I’m not very smart guys, but that’s how you do it. I’ll give that a big amen. Songer says when asked whether he’s concerned about consequences for violating the sanctuary law, he responded, oh, no, I’m defying an unconstitutional law.

Just because the state has a law doesn’t mean it’s constitutional. So. And that is the quintessential point. That is the primary point. So, you know, which law do we obey? We. We obey the constitutional laws, and generally they don’t conflict with each other. I guess I need to pose another question here to everybody on the CSP WA Posse and on our webinar today. All of you that are here right now and that will be listening to this program later today or tomorrow. Are you seeing a trend here? Are you seeing Sheriff McMahill? Are you seeing what he’s doing for America, what he’s doing to stand up for what’s right? Are you seeing a trend here with Sheriff Bob Songer from Klick Attack County, Washington? Are you seeing a trend here, folks? What if we multiplied this by a thousand? What if we had 1200 shares, 1500 sheriffs in this country doing all of that in a united manner? Folks, I just want to.

I just want to be incredible, sir. Well, that’s why. That’s why I want to reiterate this, folks. If we had the money to do a national meeting and bring 1200 sheriffs together and get united and have Sheriff McMahon give his speech, have Sheriff Saunger give his speech, have Sheriff Leaf give his speech, have us talk about our Supreme Court case. There’s no single person in that room that would leave the same. And then now all of those sheriffs are talking together and saying, let’s do this. We can do this. We can save America, folks. That’s how close we are to all of this.

And the only thing we lack is the funding to make that happen. Where. Where is the funding? And what would three and a half million be when we’re talking about saving our country and doing this nationwide? 1% of America would need to put in a dollar each. Yeah, right. Pretty small change. So why don’t we put together a big Zoom conference, Sheriff Mack? We get them all on at the same time, roughly. All those Sheriffs together on one Zoom. Yep. Yep. We can put 2,000 people asked that before, and I’ve turned it down. It’s not the same.

You don’t get the energy. It’s not the same. And the reason why is when you look in the eyes of Sheriff Richard Mack and shake his hand, you begin to understand this is not just a political grandstand. This is not just a. A quest for fame or fortune. You begin to understand this is for real. It’s in his heart. And you begin to meet some of these other sheriffs, such as a Bob Songer, and you start to understand these people are heroes. They’re standing up boldly at great risk to themselves and their careers and everything else for the sacred cause of liberty.

When you look into the eyes of a Bob Songer, a Dar Leaf, a Sheriff Mack, I can keep going on. You begin to understand something in your mind changes. There’s a subtle change where you go, this fights for reals. These are modern day American patriots, Jack. And the other thing too, real quick. I know we got to leave. The only other thing logistically on having that meeting is you don’t know what the people are doing. 1200 people. How are you going to know they’re even paying attention? They’re going to be texting on their phone, they’re going to be taking phone calls.

They’re going to be asking their wife what’s for dinner. You know, it’s. No, you’ve got to be. If. If their butts in the chair in that room, it will work. They will not leave the same. But going to a meeting on Zoom. Okay, yeah, all right. No, not going to work. And I want them to hear from Sheriff Brad Rogers and Sheriff Dar Leaf and Sheriff Bob Songer and Sheriff Swank in Washington as well. And, and then Sheriff Kevin McMahill and others. We got some great sheriffs in Florida. We want about 30 sheriffs speaking. And then we want to reinforce that meeting with the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and Mac Prince Vus.

I can’t wait for that meeting. I pray for that meeting and I’m telling you right now, I pray for the funding for that meeting. Agreed. And you mentioned leaving. We got started a little late. I wanted to bring up one more quick thing for you here. Do you see this, sir? This new law in that they’re trying to get passed in Illinois? It is House Bill 3320 that is planning to tax manufacturers and individuals, you know, enormous amounts of money. $850 million for the manufacturers, $2,000 tax, I guess on individuals is what this thing says. It’s all over X right now.

People talking about this is the end of the second Amendment. And in Illinois, because people won’t be able to afford the Guns and the gun manufacturers won’t be able to continue to want to sell them. Well Jack, just real quick interruption there. The, the point is that was exactly what was going to happen anyway in Brady Bill 3. They were going to tax FFLs and guns and, and gun businesses out of existence. Yep. So this isn’t new and I think anybody who attempts to do that should be arrested personally. Yeah. What part of it thou shalt not be infringed do they not understand? Yeah, right.

Yeah, we’ll see. They’re thinking that they didn’t get this in from the back end because that doesn’t address whether you can tax it or not according to all the liberals. But it is, I call it a tax and infringement by the way. Yes, it is an impediment. So it prevents you from exercising a right that you’re lawfully allowed to exercise. But anyways, you know you could expect this from the state of Illinois, but there’s some other gun news. You know Virginia has on the table right now the anti gun bill that’s identifies all semiautomatic weapons as, as you know, something that can’t be purchased and transferred any further than if you want it you can keep them, otherwise you can’t get them.

Michigan has a new red flag law on the books or coming soon. However, Washington D.C. ‘s magazine ban was invalidated by the highest court there. So I guess that’s a little bit of good news. But anyway they’re still coming after our guns all over the United States while we’re busy worrying about every other thing wars, Epstein files, you name it. The minions are still in the background chewing away at our, at our constitutional rights. Anyway, that’s what I wanted to see what you thought about and I don’t know how the state. What do you do when that happens? I guess we’d have to get a U.S.

supreme Court case to invalidate it. Or the American people could just simply vote those thugs out of office who believe they can infringe on your God given second Amendment rights, Sheriff. Boy, I’d love to see that. The, the American people, we, we all must stand and stand with public officials who have the courage to do what’s right and vote the rest of these feckless worthless pieces of human excrement. Vote them out of office. And if we, the American people don’t wake up and start doing that, obviously we have to get rid of election fraud to make sure that that’s, that the power of the people is being restored.

We choose our elected officials so far it appears that our enemies are choosing our elected officials through the manipulation of immigration and through the manipulation of computers. Agreed. And there’s no way now to have any idea if an election is real or not. And when you see the kind of people that are getting voted just like this crew in Virginia right now, it’s unbelievable. I mean, they have people occupying the positions of power, like Attorney General, that weren’t even born in the US From Bangladesh. And every one of these people don’t have any sense of being an American.

No full understanding of our culture. That helps us understand what the founding Fathers were about, why it was so amazing. They have no understanding of even property rights, because there’s very few nations on the earth that have a similar set of sacred rules for property and the existence of ownership. And so how can you have people come from these other nations and take these high positions and then allow them to make decisions, you know, as though they’re an American citizen? It’s nice and all, you know, people think, you know, well, I’m being mean or whatever. I’m not being mean.

I just want America run by Americans. It’s simple. You come here and live whatever, but if you’re not born here and can’t understand it, that maybe you shouldn’t be able to be allowed to hold these high offices. How about not allowed to vote? Yeah. And not even allowed to vote. Exactly. Yeah. 100% behind that. Again, I. I want to just appeal to the morality of the people, though, folks. I know we want to solve this in a political realm. We want to solve this at the ballot box, and I think there’s value there. But I really think the morality of the people and turning to God is our only real solution.

Amen. Well, we. We knew we need to pray like everything depends on God and work like everything depends on us. Amen to that. Well, you gentlemen are fantastic people. And we’re in. In the present presence of greatness. This is a. A historical time period. There’s no doubt about it. We know that this is a temporary period. We know that we’re kind of in a lull right here between big events, and we know the next one’s coming. And we understand that if we can’t energize and mobilize the American in. In our country, not the ones that aren’t American, we’re talking about.

You know what I’m talking about. If we can’t mobilize them to do what’s right and get behind the right people and even be able to identify the Right, people? Then we can’t save this. This country. And I think Sheriff Mack is right. We do have a way now and it’s working and one county at a time, it can be done. So thank you, Sheriff Mack, for everything you do. It’s amazing. I really, I’m happy to know you and I think everyone here is proud to be part of this organization. Folks, please tell your friends and neighbors that we need posse members and should be your mission and as well as the other things you needed to do.

Speak with your sheriff and carry around pamphlets and bi billboards and maybe even a van truck with big signs on the side. But in. In addition to that, you need to get some people involved with the posse and. And this organization. Any other closing comments, gentlemen? I’m good. Thank you, Sam, for being here today. This was a great meeting and I think we. We accomplished so much today. And in reviewing what CSP is all about and what constitutional sheriffs are all about, this is now we need to ship this meeting, the copy of this meeting to every sheriff and every citizen in the country.

So, folks. And I would say this. Stephanie, just put the link out, ladies and gentlemen, to donate, I would say start with a positive number and add zeros. Would you please? Absolutely. Absolutely. Folks, donate what you can. Please do it. And let’s start this. Let’s start this fundraising for this national meeting. Thank you. And let’s get it done. Let’s make this happen. Sam, how many years have we been trying to have a national meeting? Since 2011, officially, but probably since 96. That’s correct. Yep. Long time. So what we’ll do is we’ll make this whole webinar available to be downloaded and shared, and everyone can take it then and send it to anybody they feel is important enough to.

To get it again. If three and a half million people, one percent of America, ladies and gentlemen, put in a dollar, we’ve got it. Absolutely. It’s very easy. I’ll put mine in tonight. I mean, thanks, everybody. All right. Thank you, Sam. Thank you, guys. Thanks, everybody. We love you. Thank you so much for being a part of this. Thank you. Thank you, Sheriff Beck. We’ll see you all next week. Everyone else, thank you for coming today. CSBA.org you can go into the store, you can check out their storable foods, buy gold and silver there. That’s. I mean, I can’t tell you over and over and over how important it is to get some of your wealth out of the dollar.

It’s not a matter of when. It’s going to happen, but it’s a matter of that. It will happen and it’s coming soon. I just can’t say when, and neither can you. But you can buy it there@csba.org you can get other things there as well. And you can donate@csboa.org donate. See you all next week. Bye now.
[tr:tra].

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