President Biden’s Department of Justice has launched a new office to train state and local authorities on how to use red flag laws to confiscate guns from people who could pose a “threat.” But what does it consider to be a threat? People have already accused this "National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center" of violating the Second Amendment. But Glenn believes it may violate a handful more of the Bill of Rights. Glenn reviews how the Department of Justice has sidestepped Amendments 1-6 of the Constitution with this order, along with others.
TranscriptBelow is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: So, you know, I thought we would look at the Constitution. A caller last hour was right on the money. When he said, you know, this center, that can take your gun away, without due process. Yeah. That's -- that's a big one. That's a big one. That's a violation of the Second Amendment. But it's also a violation of many other amendments. I want to go through the -- the -- you know, just the first ten amendments.
Okay?
First of all, do you know how the Bill of Rights came about?
Listen to what they wrote.
This is at the top of the page. Resolved. Resolved by the Senate and the House of representatives of the United States of America. In Congress, assembled. Two-thirds of both houses concurring. That the following articles be proposed to the legislatures of several states, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States. So here's a group of people. Imagine this. Two-thirds, say, we believe these things should be done. But we have to send them to all of the states to ratify, and they need two-thirds to be able to pass it in their states. And then we will need two-thirds of all the states to agree. Okay?
Wow. What a process! And what are they trying to do, get themselves a raise? Give themselves more power? No.
The exact opposite. Here's what they say. The amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all or any of which articles when ratified by three-fourths of the legislatures to be valid in all intents and purposes, as part of said Constitution.
Articles, in addition to, and amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, ratified by the legislature of several states.
They're saying here, that the -- after the convention, a number of states, having at the time, adopted the Constitution.
This is in the little preamble here. Expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse its power.
So the guys in the government said, I am afraid people will abuse the power and misunderstand the Constitution.
So, quote, further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added. And as extending the ground of public confidence, in the government. Will best ensure the -- the benefit ends of the institution.
So they're saying, look, nobody trusts the government right now.
Does that sound familiar. Nobody trusts the government right now.
So we want to pass several amendments right here, that will protect the rights. And make sure that the hands are tied of the federal government.
They're saying, these are restrictive clauses. And by telling the people, we will never do these things.
Confidence will be gained. I contend, our -- our problem is, we're no longer unified on these ten articles. We no longer care about them. We no longer learn them. Teach them. Know them.
So here's article one. Amendment number one. Congress shall make no law, respecting an establishment of religion.
I contend, we are violating that right now. Because what we are celebrating is a religion.
It has a cult following. It has nothing to do with science.
Or even common sense. It has a tribunal. That will excommunicate you from society. If you don't get involved. It has rituals. It has laws, that you just must accept on faith. I know that's pushing it. But I think they're doing that. They are also breaking the second part of the First Amendment. Prohibiting the free exercise of religion. They did that during COVID. Abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. And the right of the people to peacefully assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. They don't want you standing up. They don't want you standing up. They will do everything they can to make sure you are sitting down. Enough of this Christian nationalist stuff. Enough that. Don't dismiss it. It's real. It's very, very small. But it's real.
So don't call yourself a Christian nationalist. Don't allow yourself to fall into that trap. You might be a Christian. But you are also a constitutionalist. You believe in the Constitution of the United States, and the articles of the Constitution of the Bill of Rights. You believe in all of that stuff. That's all you want.
Article II, a well-regulated militia being necessary to a free state. The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
That's the one that everyone should look to, on this particular new center from the Department of Justice. They -- well-regulated militia. Would that make sense? Would it make sense, that the people couldn't have guns? And the federal government would have a huge army? No. In fact, we never had a standing army. We were the soldiers. We would be called up to arms. So you would have your own arms. And then when there was war, you would be called up in a militia. Okay? But you had the right to protect yourself with a gun as well. No. That was for fishing or hunting. Or one of those things. No. It wasn't. No, it wasn't. Article three. I think we can skip over. Well, no. Actually, not. No soldier shall in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war. But in a manor to be prescribed by law. So article three, I think you could make the case. I don't think you would win. But you could make the case, that our government is quartered. Soldiers are quartered in our house. Because they are in a public/private partnership. With Amazon. And everybody else.
They are -- they are gaining access to our papers. To our letters. To our emails. To our phone calls.
That's what the government was doing, that made this article important.
The king would say. You know what, find out what those guys are doing over there.
And, you know what, just go into their house. You live there. I will quarter you into their house. So you can spy on them.
Well, it's just in a different way. But that's what's happening. Fourth Amendment. The right of people to be secure in their persons. Do you feel secure in your person?
Houses. Paper. Effects. Against all unreasonable search and seizures. Shall not be violated. It's violated all the time.
We've talked about this many times. How many people have been driving down the street. And they have money in their car. And they were going to buy another car. They will buy it in cash. And they're stopped. Their cash is taken. No due process. I think you're a drug lord. Wait. What?
No warrants shall issue. But upon probable cause. This is a general warrant. This is why they -- this is why this is in here. In article four. No warrants shall be -- no warrants shall issue. But upon probable cause. General warrants, used to be, you know, there's something going on with that guy. Go find out.
And they could search for anything. Anywhere. No. No general warrants.
You have to know, and tell the judge, I'm going in, for this document, or this particular item. And I believe it's here!
Great. So the judge will say, you can go there, in their house. And look for it. But no general warrants. You can't occasion you can't go in and just try to find something. No person shall be held to answer for capital. Otherwise, infamous crime, unless the presentment or indictment of a grand jury. Except in cases, arriving in the land or Naval forces, or in the militia when in actual service in time of war, or public danger. Nor shall any person be subject to the same offense twice, to be put in jeopardy of life or limb.
Nor shall he be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. Nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property. Without due process of law.
Nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
Those are being violated, but in particular, with this new center, where they can take -- come into your house, and take your guns without due process.
Clear violation of the Bill of Rights. Clear. So you have three of them now. That have been broken just for this one law. Don't tell me I love democracy. Don't tell me you love freedom. Don't tell me you're trying to save the republic, and you love the Constitution if you're violating this many. And we're only halfway through. You're in direct violation of the Bill of Rights.
Article six, in all criminal prosecution. The accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial. Has that happened with those who are still waiting for trial for January 6th?
How is it they can -- they have to wait so long?
But Donald Trump has to be done by this summer?
Why is that? Are all men created equal?
Are we -- are we -- are we looking at the people of January 6th?
With the same blind justice eyes, as Donald Trump? No. Of course, we're not.
Violation of the Constitution by an impartial jury of the state and district, wherein the crime shall have been committed.
In partial jury. If you can't get an impartial jury. What do you do?
You can't get an impartial jury, you ask for a change of venue, where you can get an impartial jury. You don't have an impartial jury pool in Washington, DC. You don't. And to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. To be confronted with the witnesses against him. To have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor and have the assistance of council for his defense.
In this new center that they have announced, you don't get the due process.
You don't get to face the witness. You don't know the cause of accusation.
You have nothing.
On your side.