Two-Tiered Justice System at Play

➡ The text discusses a controversial trial where the judge’s impartiality is questioned due to seemingly biased comments made against the former president and his lawyers. Meanwhile, the host introduces guest Judge Napolitano, who focuses on the legality of the situation and shares a personal anecdote about a discussion on the JFK assassination files with President Trump.

All right, so, day three of this fraudulent fraud trial, the President next to his attorneys, mr. KICE and Alina Haba. I’m getting reports that these two are awesome in the courtroom. The whole thing is a joke. The judge, he should be ashamed of himself. This is my opinion. But there he is. I can tell he’s a ham. He likes all this. Well, we the people do not. However, I don’t want to assign any opinions to my next guest.

He is the great judge. Andrew Napolitano, former New Jersey superior court judge, famous for his independence. Oh. He’s also the host of Judging Freedom, a great podcast. Judge, welcome back. You heard what I think. What do you think? Well, Greg, no matter what we talk about, it’s a pleasure to be with you. I mean, Judge Engaron has a substantial trial on his hands, and he’s making no bones about his own opinions of the credibility of witnesses and even the human worth of the principal defendant.

Judges sometimes have a tendency to do this when there’s no jury in the case. But if the comments that he has made in the courtroom were made in the presence of a jury, that would be a basis for reversible error. But judges, when they are both the jury and the judge, and we can talk about how that happened if you want, in a moment, tend to let their guard down because of their so called judicial independence.

Oh, don’t worry that I made those comments. It’s not going to affect the way I think. That’s probably the attitude that he takes. He got into some arguments with the lawyers for the former president today. He felt their cross examinations were tedious. He called them frivolous. That happens again, this wouldn’t happen in front of a jury. It would happen at sidebar, or you would send the jury out of the room.

The president is of the view that he’s already lost the case because the judge has made up his mind against him. And I don’t blame the president for thinking that way. I’m still old fashioned enough to think that this case is going to be decided on the law and the facts. But for a non lawyer like the former president to say, this guy hates me, and he’s already decided to rule against me, I can understand how President Trump has come to that conclusion.

I’m sorry. You can’t what? That he came to that you can understand. President has come to that conclusion because the comportment of the judge and again, there’s no jury there, but the comportment of the judge is obviously in favor of the state and against the Trump defendants. Well, maybe I think you know what? Go for it. Why not give it a shot, call it out for what it is.

And the judge also said this. This was uncovered comments he made early last year. I think we have it. Let’s put it up on the screen where he said that Trump is a bad guy. He said it out loud. Here’s the exact quote. If Miss James has a thing against him, okay, he’s just a bad guy she should go after as the chief law enforcement officer of the state.

Now, I’ve heard people say, well, he was talking in a I don’t see how this is hypothetical, but even if there’s the chance that he harbors these feelings, it seems like it would make him completely ineligible. There seems to be no way out because this is a corrupt deal, and they’re trying to get him look, let’s put that aside for a moment. We both know what it is.

I know what it is, and I respect your opinion very much. Can you tell us about the JFK assassination conversation you had with President Trump while he was president? This is amazing stuff. Are you serious? I’ll be happy to explain. I am totally serious. Look, I’m obsessed with the JFK assassination. The president called me about two weeks before the end of his term in January of 2021, and he went through a list of pardons and prison commutations.

He wanted my opinions on them. Some of these people are very well known. I don’t want to mention their names. He pretty much agreed with the opinion I’d expressed. I said, how you doing? Not too good. How are you doing? I said, I’m fine. I said, but, you know, there’s one more thing you need to do. You promised the public, and you promised me personally, in private, many times that you would release the JFK assassination file.

He said to me, Judge, I did make that promise, but if you saw what they showed me, you wouldn’t release the file anyway, either. And someday, when we don’t have and then he raised the volume of his voice. 15 people listening to this phone call. The next time I see you after I leave office, I will tell you what they showed me. End of the conversation. I haven’t spoken to him since, but we have exchanged messages to each other, but cryptically, and not about this subject.

Well, Judge, when you finally do have that conversation, I would love to be there. We can hope and pray. You have my word, when I have that conversation, I’m coming to you first. Well, that’s very generous of you. We’ll see if the president is okay with that. Of course. But Judge Napolitano so enjoy talking to you. To be continued, sir. That is a fascinating absolutely. I’m monitoring this trial for you, Greg.

Nothing we can do about his comportment except expose it. The judges. Indeed. Thank you, sir. And we’ll be right back. Sure. .