Type to search


The War Over The Supreme Court Has Started!


Barry Nussbaum: Hello, and welcome to ATP Radio. I'm your host, Barry Nussbaum. Before I introduce our special guest, let me give you our call-in number. You can call the number with your questions. Dial 516-595-8069 and press 1. We will answer your questions at the end when we have a few minutes. In the meantime, I want to tell you about our special guest today. He is Will Johnson. An internationally known celebrity in the world of social media. He is a conservative who has, to put it mildly, a very lengthy, full understanding of politics and America's political scene today, he has hundreds of thousands of people who, consistently, love to watch and listen to Will Johnson. Unite America First is his platform, and when he does come on in a few minutes, we will be thrilled to share our questions with you. Today we will talk about the Supreme Court vacancy that came up just last week and why it is so important. Quite frankly, as most people have now come to understand, the value of who sits in the White House is magnified by who that person, the United States president, appoints to the Supreme Court. While the term in the White House is at most four years and then with reelection could be eight, a Supreme Court nomination is a lifetime. It is virtually impossible, if not highly improbable, to remove a Supreme Court justice. In the case of the one that just vacated, sadly, we lost a great jurist in the name of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She died last week. She will be lying in repose at the Capitol. While her funeral is delayed, and she is not yet in the ground, the war has started because the Supreme Court slant's future, as it were, from liberal to moderate to conservative, is at stake. For those of you that remember four years ago, Donald Trump ran on a platform of quite literally transforming the court. Each President makes a special effort to confirm judges that reflect his, at least we have only had male presidents, his political slant. I remember being in college and being told that the Constitution is there for all to read, understand, and apply. But the keyword is the application, and the interpretation of what the Supreme Court decides becomes very personal and is interpreted through their political slant. No different than half a dozen of us hearing the same story, we will note the facts if they are not in dispute. However, our interpretation of what those facts mean transform what we decide dramatically from one side to the other.

The perfect example, quite frankly, the one that most people cite is the subject of abortion. The abortion-rights that were confirmed by the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade some decades ago changed America forever. At least up until now. That is an example of a more liberal court interpreting what the constitutional rights are or aren't of an unborn child compared to the Mother and what the Mother's interpretation of her what rights are visa vi of her unborn child. Same Constitution, same definitions of human rights, same certain inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and yet a different court comes up with a completely different interpretation as to what is life and who gets to decide. That is a perfect example of what we're going to be talking about today because the Supreme Court just lost a jurist who had been there for a very long time. Initially appointed by Bill Clinton three decades ago. She believed very strongly in a woman's right to choose what she does with her body and choose what is going on with what is inside her body. This has been reinterpreted by lower courts and legislators across the country based on the Supreme Court guidance in the case I cited Roe v. Wade to include abortion up until, in some cases, birth. So, for some of you who are listening today, that is an abomination. To other people listening today, that is a woman's right to choose. Based on the same facts, those two differences are exactly what is facing the Supreme Court today now. With an open seat, can you imagine what will happen in the future if a conservative sits in that seat that was occupied by a very liberal, if not progressive jurist in the name of Ruth Bader Ginsburg? How might that change on that subject? That is exactly why they say, and many jurists say, quite frankly, the decision is completely up to the President to nominate. It is completely up to the Senate to advise consent and vote yes or no, and that right for the President expires on the day he or she leaves office. So, in the meantime, here's one of the things that I want you all to think about today. How does a president interview a prospective jurist and find out what he or she thinks their opinion might be on specific cases without talking about the cases? If you remember the hearing a few months ago when Brett Kavanaugh was being interviewed, he refused to answer the Senate's questions on specific cases, and there's a precedence for that. The precedence is you don't discuss cases that are not settled law. You can give certain hints. So, the very liberal Democrats were pounding the hell out of him on where he would be on abortion because that's their defining agenda for the Democratic Party. They want to preserve expansive, unlimited abortion rights, and the Supreme Court is the only body in the country that can affect that. On the other hand, the conservative wing, which is most of the Republican Party, wants a jurist on the other side. The right to life starts for some of them at conception. For some of them, the first trimester, and they want restrictions on the previous decision, which is Roe v. Wade. Ironically, despite hundreds of hours of background research, interviews with the President, hearings before the Judiciary Committee, not to mention the whole floor of the Senate, you end up with a judge like the Chief Justice, John Roberts. Who has drifted left ever since he got on the bench. Appointed by George Bush, everyone thought he was going to be a conservative. He was going to lead the right-wing to the Right. To be more, a traditional interpretation of the Constitution and he has often sided with the other side, and there's nothing anybody can do about it. An independent judiciary means without oversight. All you could do if you really wanted to with somebody who just went completely crazy is impeachment, and that is not on the agenda and never happens. But in the meantime, it is getting over the hurdle of getting appointed and then confirmed. Which has gone from an automatic to something resembling a gang fight in the back streets of, say, Minneapolis, with firebombs and lasers and horrible name-calling and fires burning down the city. That's the way Kavanagh was treated. Even in the case of somebody who should have been beyond repute. Who had a stellar judicial record. Who had a stellar family record. Who had a stellar record with his church, volunteering, and all the civic things he did.

The opposition demonstrated in front of the Supreme Court absolutely 'No,' to blank even before Kavanaugh was nominated. Why? Because the nomination was coming from Trump. Ironically, on the other side, every single jurist nominated by a very, very liberal, progressive Democratic president in the name of Barack Obama sailed through. There was virtually no dissent, virtually no attacks, nothing personal, nothing sexual, nothing about crimes committed like assault and rape, and so on.

Literally, by the end, how Brett Kavanaugh could sit in those hearings with his wife and children behind him and not be breaking down in tears is admirable. Ironically, the ones before him that were nominated by Obama, very liberal justices. Justice Kagan, Justice Sotomayor, very left-wing, very progressive, with very specific agendas from the other side of the political spectrum, and they sailed right through. Why? Because the tradition in American politics has always been the President, once elected, has an agenda. His agenda was approved by the voters that put him in the Oval Office to sit behind the resolute desk. When the President makes a decision, I want this guy to be my Secretary of State. I want this gal to be my UN Ambassador, and I want this guy or this gal to be on the Supreme Court. The Senate has almost always, with very few exceptions, like Robert Bork some years ago, confirmed the nominations. Sometimes, there's a controversy, but 90 percent or 95 percent of the time, people sail through. Once it became Trump as President, his two nominees Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, faced so much abuse, and the abuse literally started before they were named because if it has Trump attached to it, he goes back to the slogan 'Orange Man.' Therefore, everything he does is bad. A perfect example of a corollary is the outpouring of support from the Nobel Peace Prize committee in Sweden. Trump now has two major nominations from delegates for the Peace Prize, and in the United States, he's looked at as the enemy of the people and gets no credit for the first person to create peace in the Middle East in 30 years. Do we have Will Johnson? Is Will here now?

Will Johnson: I am here.

Barry Nussbaum: Welcome aboard, Will. I've been talking about the Supreme Court, and I am dying to get your take on it. I'll just give a brief, quick reintroduction. At the beginning of the show, I introduced you as literally one of my favorite posts on social media from the conservative side. You have a tremendous following. You are listened to and watched by hundreds of thousands of people a week, and I'm dying to get your take on Ruth Bader Ginsburg and what's going to happen. So, to catch you up to date, since we've been chatting online here for a few minutes without you, Ruth Bader Ginsburg just passed last week. She was an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court from' 93 until her passing on the 18th of September. She was put on the court by Bill Clinton. She was viewed, in the beginning, as a liberal judge who eventually became a hero of the Left and the far Left. Within hours of her death being announced, a brawl has broken out in the United States as to who should sit in that empty seat on the court. Now there are eight, and it needs to go back to nine to be full. More importantly, who should get to nominate the person to fill that seat, and when should it happen? So, let's start with the first question for Will Johnson. Why is who sits in that ninth seat on the Supreme Court so important to Americans today, and should it be this important or even more important?

Will Johnson: Thank you for having me on with you, Barry really an awesome honor. You know, I think it's extremely important that President Trump fills this seat. Let me put it this way. The Democrats planned on using the court system. They have planned and used the court system to change many laws and rulings that they couldn't pass in Congress so they would get it to push through to the court system, and because they had Ginsburg there, they could get a lot of things that they wanted to be passed. Prime example, during the Obama administration, where same-sex marriage came into play, they knew they couldn't get it passed through Congress. So, what did they do? They push it to the Supreme Court, and because they have people like Ginsburg there, they were able to pass it. Now that she's gone, the tables have basically turned, and the Democrats believe that they're about to lose so much more of all of the stuff that they were able to do. They're losing so much power and as far as how important it is. It's so important that President Trump fills this seat with a conservative Christian, in my opinion. Just a conservative, a hardcore conservative, because this country will have the direction of positivity from here and for years to come. That's how important it is, and the Democrats know this.

Barry Nussbaum: Will you make a very astute point, which I want to follow up on there is a traditionalist opinion of the Supreme Court. Which was made quite popular through the writings and speeches of the late Judge Scalia. Who passed some years ago. Gorsuch actually replaced him at the beginning of Trump's term. The concept that Judge Scalia pushed was an originalist. Meaning you don't take the Constitution and make a law with it. That is an activist judge. Which Scalia felt was constitutionally not just wrong, but legally improper. He believed very strongly in the founders' words: you don't get to rewrite the Constitution. That's the legislature, and if the legislature can't figure it out, all the court is allowed to do is interpret the law before them with a strict analysis, word for word from the Constitution. In other words, you don't get to make law because you disagree with the law that's before you. That is an excellent point, and Trump wants the court to revert back to the way it was. Strictly interpreting the Constitution, not making laws based on your own preference. You should be a judge, not a legislator, if you're sitting on the Supreme Court. Is that your point?

Will Johnson: Yes, exactly, but see, that's what the Democrats have done, or the far Left. All the Lefties, they've used the court system to make laws, and they're not supposed to be making laws but for some reason, somehow, because the Democrats, they twisted so much stuff, they figured out how to do it, and that's where we are today. I'm really looking forward to President Trump finding a hardcore conservative and possibly Christian. I mean, my personal preference would be a hardcore conservative Christian that loves this country. That wants to follow the law and go with the Constitution and not someone who's just going off their feelings.

Barry Nussbaum: I'll tell you something. I would disagree with you on the religious background. Simply because, not that I don't believe in God or religion, but in this country, the Constitution is such a brilliant document if we could get another jurist who applies the Constitution's principles, Will, everything you want is there. Those people were very religious men who wrote that document. They all believed in it, and they believed very strongly that without a belief in God, the United States wouldn't work. That is not to say we have a state religion. We have a separation of church and state, but they believe the ethical and moral impetus came from above. Not from what you see with the trees, the bushes, the lakes, the streams, and so on. So, moving on. The big fight now is should the President wait until after the election to nominate a potential replacement? Let me give you some background. When Obama was in his last year, he promoted a judge to be nominated to the Supreme Court named Merrick Garland. The Senate, which was not his party, was controlled by the Republicans. Obviously, Obama, a very liberal Democrat, put up somebody that the Senate didn't want to consider, which is their prerogative. They would have voted him down had they voted because Obama had nowhere near the votes to do so now they're throwing that back in the face of Trump. Saying this is an election year. You shouldn't get to nominate someone. Well, I looked this up. Are you ready for some facts?

Will Johnson: Sure.

Barry Nussbaum: In the history of the United States, 19 judges have been nominated to the Supreme Court in an election year the Presidency and the Senate, the Senate is the only one that gets to vote on this, were from the same party. Nineteen times, it's happened. Seventeen times in American history, the nominees have made it to the Supreme Court, all 17 were confirmed. That's 90 percent. Why do the Democrats want to fight this 90 percent tradition and say it's an abomination? It's the destruction of the country if Trump gets the nominee.

Will Johnson: If you don't mind, I'd like to go back just really quick, briefly. The reason why I brought up the Christian conservative is that I believe that that person will reverse Roe versus Wade to save lives. That's the only reason I'm bringing it in, but for the most part, I completely agree with you. If we can get someone just to follow the law and go with the law, I mean, I really wouldn't care. But that's the reason why I bring that up.

Barry Nussbaum: Okay, fair enough.

Will Johnson: So, I'm kind of curious. I'm curious out of that 90 percent, how many of those confirmed during the election year, was it a Democratic Senate and a Democratic President? I'm kind of curious because I mean it would be something if the majority of those were Democratic nominees. But anyway, regardless of all of that. Even Ginsburg mentioned this in 2016 if I'm not mistaken. That the President is the President for four years, not three years, so if during an election year and the President wants to nominate someone for the Supreme Court, he should be able to do that. He is not President for three years. He is President for four years. So, the Democrats are just playing politics here.

Barry Nussbaum: Yeah.

Will Johnson: The Democrats know very well that President Trump has every right based on the Constitution to do it. Mitch McConnell, not approving Obama's nominee in 2016, was also based on the Constitution, and they had every right to do that as well. So, they get to have their say so in it. See, the Democrats believe that they should have a say-so in everything and everyone else has nothing to say about it unless they tell you that you can.

Barry Nussbaum: Very astute commentary on Ruth Bader Ginsburg, because I have that quote that I was going to ask you about next. In 2016, she said, "He's the President. That's his job until the day he leaves office."

Will Johnson: Yep.

Barry Nussbaum: To prove it to you, on the last day that Obama was President of the United States, he didn't have his feet up on the desk. He was pardoning like a maniac. He was signing so many pardons coming into his office, thanking everyone that donated money, taking people out of prison who had committed felonies, and on and on. Bill Clinton did the same thing. You know, the person who's pardoned fewer people thus far in his presidency in the last 30 or 40 years is Donald Trump. So, on the last day of Obama's presidency, he wasn't cruising; he was working.

Will Johnson: Yeah.

Barry Nussbaum: I heard a funny story last night on the news saying that the President should stop doing his job at three-quarters of his term being over. He is in his fourth year now. It's like saying in the basketball game that the NBA finals team sits down and refuses to play in the fourth quarter because they want to know who their coach will be next year. That's the same thing, finish the game.

Will Johnson: Exactly.

Barry Nussbaum: You're getting paid for four quarters boys, go back out there, and make some baskets.

Will Johnson: Exactly.

Barry Nussbaum: I want to talk a little bit about some of the people who have come out with the most God awful, and I mean that literally. The most God-awful quotes about Trump doing his job. This is what your "girlfriend," and I am saying that in a funny "quote," Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez said the other night. She was at a press conference with the Democratic leader in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, and she said, "Democrats should buy time. Just stall a nomination from Trump". How should they do that? Impeach him. Keep in mind, as we learned from the last impeachment a few months ago. Impeachment is for high crimes and misdemeanors. Well, what this "genius," and that's in quotes, and everybody knows I'm being facetious, Ocasio-Cortez says is a high crime and misdemeanor is following the dictates of the Constitution in Article II. Which is the President nominating, and the Senate advises and consents. In other words, that's his job. There's a vacancy. He's obligated to make a nomination and then hopes the Senate says, "Yes." Ocasio-Cortez on stage with Chuck Schumer says, "Well if we impeach him, that will stall until after the election because he's going to lose." What do you make of that?

Will Johnson: You know, I saw part of that press conference with AOC, and she also said that we need to mobilize like never before in the streets. That tells me that they want to go out and be more violent. Burn up more car lots, burn up more buildings, attack more federal buildings, et cetera, et cetera, and you know what you said was 100 percent correct. Impeachment is for high crimes and misdemeanors. That is what is supposed to be for, but the Democrats threw all of that out the window. They impeached President Trump based on hearsay information and 100 percent fraudulent information. They were able to impeach him in the House because they had the majority in the House. They had the votes.

That's all it took. They had the votes. So, they didn't impeach him for anything actual or factual. Now they are wanting to impeach President Trump because he's going along with the US Constitution. This should be extremely disturbing to every person in this country that the Left wants to impeach the sitting President because he is doing his job. It is his duty to fill this seat based on the US Constitution. The reason why I say everyone should be very, very, very concerned because the Democrats if they get a Kamala Harris and Joe Biden ticket to get in the White House, they're going to do away with the US Constitution. They're making it very clear that's what they want to do.

Barry Nussbaum: Oh, yes, that is terrifying. Our country is still here, Will, because of the Constitution. It's not some antiquated document stuck in the drawer. It's what has kept this country together through the civil war, through world wars, through depressions, through horrible prejudices, and we know the history. But the Constitution was always there. It was surrounded by concrete, in a safe, and now they want to open the safe up as if the Constitution isn't needed anymore.

Will Johnson: Yeah.

Barry Nussbaum: Let's talk about who else thinks that Trump nominating someone now is terrible, the CBS Evening News. When I grew up, the CBS Evening News was Walter Cronkite. My father and I and mom used to watch the news, and this guy spits out the facts, and you felt like at the end of the news, you knew what had happened. The anchor now is a lady named Norah O'Donnell. As she was kicking off the news, she talked about Ruth Bader Ginsburg dying and how tributes are pouring in for this liberal icon and how the President says he wants his pick confirmed before Election Day on November 3rd. Then she said, "Tonight, the two women that are front runners, how, if confirmed, they would cement conservative control for the nation's highest court for a generation." She sounded the alarm. That, that would somehow be a bad thing? Well, from my perspective, a conservative interprets the Constitution religiously.

Will Johnson: Yep.

Barry Nussbaum: They don't change it.

Will Johnson: Exactly.

Barry Nussbaum: They don't make laws. What do you think of the CBS Evening News warning people, Will? Somehow, for generations, this would be an abomination?

Will Johnson: Yeah, well, you know what it is, right? It all ties in together. Just think about it. For the past, what, month and a half maybe, the Democrats have been pushing for mail-in ballots. Just imagine if they flood the entire system with all these mail-in ballots, and I'm still saying this many of these ballots will probably show up if you get a magnifying glass, and you read the fine print, it will say, made in China. But regardless of all that. They once they fill the entire system with all of these ballots, and then they say, well, we can't say that President Trump won because we still have all these mail-in ballots. You have social media tech giants right now saying that they're going to censor anybody who puts out there and says, look, President Trump won come November 3rd or even November 4th. What the Democrats had planned on doing, and some Democrats are acting remorseful right now, but many of Democrats are upset that RBG has passed. Why? Because after the election on November 3rd, they were going to say that we can't tell who won. We can't determine who won, who is the loser here. So, we're going to have to go to Congress. Well, Congress, because they're so divided, will be split. They're going to be arguing back and forth, and they'll say, well, you know what, we need to push this through the court system to the Supreme Court. Now that RBG is gone, they don't have the upper hand. See, and they're upset about it. So, it is in President Trump's best interest and the country's best interest for President Trump to replace her seat. I say replace it before November 3rd, because if President Trump replaces it before November 3rd, the Democrats and all of them right now, they see that they don't have a pathway on cheating the system. They are terrified because once President Trump puts another person on the Supreme Court, they cannot change this country. I think because of that, we're going to see so much more violence in the streets.

Barry Nussbaum: Well, let's talk about that because I'm going to read you two quotes that you're not going to believe. I know you know them, but I mean our audience when I say you. Everyone's very familiar with Don Lemon. He is a very radical nightly commentator on CNN. He hosts the news, but it's not really news. It's Don Lemon telling you what to think about the news, and he makes no secret that he's a communist.

Will Johnson: Yeah.

Barry Nussbaum: Here's what he said yesterday. He said he's willing to, quote, "Blow up the entire system so Democrats can retake all the levers of power in Washington, DC."

Will Johnson: Yep.

Barry Nussbaum: This guy has an audience in the millions, and he's seen on television, obviously with his producer's approval, and all the way up to the President of CNN. The fact that they left him on the air to say we have to be willing to blow up the entire system, Will Johnson, what does that mean?

Will Johnson: You know, I was actually watching him when he said that, and that tells me he's putting the signal out Antifa and BLM to go out and do what they've been doing for the past four months. Burn it all down. It goes right along, and you know what, Don Lemon is not by himself on this. He's not the only one who is thinking this way. Look at Joe Biden's slogan. That tells you right there. "In order to build back better, you have to tear it all down." You can't build back better, something that is already good. So, they want to tear it all down. When he said that, he sent out the signal to Antifa and BLM to go out to mobilize, just like AOC said, out into the streets and try to burn it all down. We're going to see a lot of violence. Now, I would love to be wrong, Barry. I mean, seriously. I would love to be wrong but based on what we've seen, you've seen it, too. We've all seen it. That they have demonstrated that they hate this country so much, they are willing to burn it down no matter what, and on top of that, in that same segment, Don Lemon said that we need to get rid of the Electoral College. What does that mean? A lot of people don't even know. If you get rid of the Electoral College, that means New York and California; the Leftists will decide who the President is from here to eternity.

Barry Nussbaum: That's 100 percent correct, which is why the Founders made it very clear we do not have a democracy, and anyone who says this is a democracy does not understand political science. We are a republic.

Will Johnson: Exactly.

Barry Nussbaum: They wanted to introduce a system where the minorities in the middle states had representation. You're right, if California, which is in Moul land at this point, and New York, which I think idolizes Karl Marx more than George Washington if those two states alone get to decide. It doesn't matter, buddy. You're in Texas. You're a flyover state now. Right?

Will Johnson: Yeah.

Barry Nussbaum: You're one of those regiments that they don't land on, and they don't look out the window.

Will Johnson: Nope.

Barry Nussbaum: Because you're one of the ones, what did Hillary call you? You're a 'deplorable,' right?

Will Johnson: Yeah.

Barry Nussbaum: You're the unwanted man.

Will Johnson: Yeah, if anything, all they'll do is they'll put more chemtrails over Texas.

Barry Nussbaum: We talked about Don Lemon at CNN. I've got and even worse quote for you. Reza Aslan, who has been on CNN for years, he's renowned as a political commentator as an Islamic scholar. Supposedly he left Islam, and he came back to Islam. I don't know what he is now, but he's still quite popular, and he's constantly on the network. Here's his tweet. I'm going to read it to you word for word. "If they even try to replace RBG, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. We burn the entire f...ing thing down". But he said the word, and it sounds like a fire truck with fewer letters. We burn the entire f...ing thing down. That tweet is still up as of right when we went on air and has been re-tweeted worldwide. So, here's a guy. A noted author, a noted commentator, a CNN hero who tweets out, we're going to burn it all down. So, you've got Don Lemon on the air saying it. You've got Reza Aslan on the air saying it. You've got AOC talking about it. I think this is organized anarchy, Will, what do you call it?

Will Johnson: It is 100 percent anarchy. I mean, this is actually what it is, and they're pushing people to be that. They're encouraging people to go out and do this, and you know, what's really amazing, Barry? Is that after they incite the violence. After they push people, convince people to go out and be violent. They then turn around and blame President Trump because President Trump wants to stop the violence. President Trump is the law and order President, and they know this. When these people, I call them little children, tyrants. They're out there acting like little children, tyrants, and throwing rocks, and they have conflicts with police officers, well, the police officers have to do their jobs. Then they start doing the pepper spray and everything else, and they go, "Oh, my goodness, look at this the bad police officers, they're using tear gas on peaceful protesters." As buildings are burning, vehicles are burning, but they're calling them 'peaceful protesters'. You know what, Barry?

We are living in a spiritual battle. We see the spiritual battle because there was only one explanation for people to see the actual truth and then turn around and believe the lie. This is now. People have always believed lies in the past. We all get that but to this extent. At what point do people realize, you know what? This is a bit too much? Because, and I know it's a little off-topic, but to give a prime example, Rayshard Brooks in Atlanta. He took the taser from the police officer, and you can all see it on the video. He turned around and tried to shoot the police officer. The police officer did his job, which everyone would know if Rayshard Brooks was a white male. Everyone said, "Well, you know, he shouldn't try to shoot him with the taser." But because he's black, they used it, and they twisted it. Everyone sees the truth, but then they say it was racially related. It has nothing to do with it. It's because people's minds are being manipulated and for him to go and put that tweet out there and for Twitter not to remove it, Twitter, Facebook, Google, all of them hate President Trump. They want the violence to take place because if the violence is taking place, they can flip it around and try to say it's all because of President Trump, and this is why you need Joe Biden. I'm sorry, this is why you need Kamala Harris/Biden ticket.

Barry Nussbaum: As she made her mistake the other day and called it the Harris ticket.

Will Johnson: Well, you know what? Joe Biden did the same thing. So, is it actually a mistake?

Barry Nussbaum: He is not going to finish four years, according to sixty-one percent of Americans polled two weeks ago. Everyone can see he's in cognitive decline.

Will Johnson: Yeah.

Barry Nussbaum: He can't even read the prompter without stumbling over his words. Yesterday, he couldn't say the Pledge of Allegiance. My goodness, my kids when they were in kindergarten, knew the Pledge of Allegiance. So did I. In my day, you didn't start school until you stood up, saluted the flag, and the biggest honor was: Barry, would you like to come to the front of the class and lead the Pledge of Allegiance? Oh, my God. I thought I'd been elected, you know, king of the classroom. By the way, before we go to questions, I just want to point out before someone calls Will Johnson a racist for what he said about Rayshard Brooks. Will is a black man in America who is proud of his black heritage but is so truthful he can call it the way it is rather than everything being about race. So well done. Very well done, Will Johnson.

Will Johnson: Thank You.

Barry Nussbaum: Let's go to some questions. We've got a zillion of them. We're not going to get to most of these. But here's an important one, and I'm really interested in your take. Is McConnell wrong to support Trump's nominee without even knowing who it might be?

Will Johnson: No, not at all, because the past two were Kavanaugh and Gorsuch, is the right?

Barry Nussbaum: Yeah, Gorsuch.

Will Johnson: Both of them?

Barry Nussbaum: Yeah Gorsuch & Kavanaugh.

Will Johnson: Yeah. Both of them have been, for the most part, are good picks for President Trump. So, I think Mitch McConnell can trust President Trump's judgment and go along with him.

Barry Nussbaum: Yeah, I agree with you. I think that Trump has made it very clear by putting out the list he put out a couple of weeks ago that these are all conservatives. These are strict constitutionalists. They're going to interpret the Constitution. They're not going to write laws from the bench. They're not going to be activist judges. They're going to be originalists, and the list that I looked at, they were all fantastic scholars. So, anybody on that list will be fine and then when Trump said the other day, Will, it's going to be a woman that narrowed it down to three from that list. It doesn't take you long to do background research on the three of them, and they're all fantastic jurists. So, I agree with you. McConnell should be right to say whoever it is would be great. Let's talk about another question here, and then we can move on because there's are a zillion questions. How do you feel about this one? How is it socially healthy to turn a Supreme Court judge into a cultural and political icon as the notorious RBG will always be? In other words, she's bigger than a Supreme Court justice. Now she's part of our social fabric. What do you make of that?

Will Johnson: You know, I saw that, and I think it was completely wrong because we're talking about the same person that was going to leave the country if President Trump won in 2016. So for them to do that and make her a celebrity when she should just be going, you know, ruling based on the law, they had a different agenda, and that's why. I don't wish ill will on her, but I'm glad she's no longer there. I'm really excited that President Trump has the opportunity to put someone in this position that's going to put America first. Who will put, and I'm still hoping for it, will put the unborn, the most innocent of us all, first.

Barry Nussbaum: You know, I should comment on the quote that she's going to leave. She said later it was a joke. She said something like; now it's time to move to New Zealand.

Will Johnson: Yeah.

Barry Nussbaum: She did come out and say it was a joke.

Will Johnson: Of course, she did, all these Hollywood stars did the same thing. Oh, I'm leaving. I'm leaving, and none of them left.

Barry Nussbaum: Yeah, well, what upset me is not that she wanted to move to New Zealand. It's that the Supreme Court always sits in the front row for every Presidential Address at the State of the Union.

Will Johnson: Uh-huh.

Barry Nussbaum: They don't stand up, and they don't show partisanship. They're supposed to keep neutral.

Will Johnson: They don't clap or any of that.

Barry Nussbaum: Exactly.

Will Johnson: Right.

Barry Nussbaum: Why? They're in their robes. They're very solemn. They're very serious, and they cast the image of we are above politics. We are the blind justice.

Will Johnson: Yep.

Barry Nussbaum: We just decide what's right and wrong. That's the problem I have with a Supreme Court justice saying anything that can be interpreted as political. You know why? Because that shows bias, and don't you get worried then?

Will Johnson: Yeah, you're absolutely right.

Barry Nussbaum: If a judge like that is going to decide your future, that bothers me.

Will Johnson: Yeah, no. I'm entirely with you, but the Democrats have been very good at sneaking it in there. On deceiving the masses and making the political system roll right into the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is one of the three branches.

Barry Nussbaum: Right, and they are all supposed to be equal.

Will Johnson: See the Democrats wanted to take over that branch.

Barry Nussbaum: Well, let me ask you this. You've heard this story that's zooming around. That supposedly, the dying words of RBG were don't appoint my successor until after the election. Two questions for you. One, do you believe she actually said it? Now, this is a very religious old lady going to meet her maker. She knows she has terminal cancer. She knows she's about to die. Do you really think that happened? That is question one for you. Number two, if those were really her words, don't you think those words were inappropriate because those were a political statement? She literally told the world that the United States President should not follow his job and ignore his constitutional obligation. She became a politician and ceased being a judge. What do you think?

Will Johnson: You know, I don't know if she actually said it or not, and the reason why I wouldn't be surprised if she did say it is because of the statement that she made in 2016 saying that she's going to leave the country. Why even make that statement at all just to turn around and say it was a joke? So why even say it at all? Her saying this, possibly saying that she wants the next President to decide or select and because it was her last dying wish, so what? I'm not being insensitive to the person, but so what? The US Constitution does not say that we're going to grant your last dying wish, no. President Trump, it is his duty to select somebody. We need to go with that, and that is what President Trump should do.

Barry Nussbaum: Well, let's talk about that. You know, there was a poll taken the week before she died. Talk about a coincidence, and the overwhelming majority of Americans 67 percent of Americans said if there's a vacancy on the Supreme Court, the President should nominate, and the Senate should hold hearings before the election, 67 percent. On top of that, just an FYI, in 2016, Justice Ginsburg said, "Absolutely, the President should nominate, and the Senate should consider a nominee because the President serves four years, and he is president until his last day." Now everybody on the other side has changed their mind. Haven't you noticed?

Will Johnson: Not only have they changed their mind, Barry, but they're losing their minds right now. Absolutely. But, yeah, President Trump, it is his duty. It's his job. I would be upset if he did not fulfill his duty as the President of the United States and did what the Constitution says that he should do, and that is to fill that position. As Republicans in this country, we know what the Democrats are trying to do. Everyone sees it. Like I mentioned earlier, with the mail-in ballots. The way they're trying to do it, the way they do the ballot harvesting. The way they're trying to cheat the entire system. They are trying to force all of us not to go vote, and they say, but we need to do it by mail. A lot of people are receiving these ballots in the mail without even requesting them. So, it is essential for our sovereignty and our freedoms in this country that President Trump completes that. As for her making a statement before her death and saying that it's not constitutional. So they just have to get over it.

Barry Nussbaum: I'm very bothered personally, as someone who has been involved in this field for 40 years or so. I think it's disgusting when the, what's the right word, the impartial judges become political hacks and get involved.

Will Johnson: Yeah.

Barry Nussbaum: They shouldn't. They never should. It's not okay. Let me ask you a question here from one of our viewers. How much credibility do the polls have right now? Almost universally, Trump is losing in every single, and I mean this literally, every single state.

Will Johnson: Who, I mean, think about it, who actually believes the polls? Does this not remind you of the polls in 2016? Do you remember that? Some polls had Hillary Clinton 95 percent chance win. Joe Biden, he can't even walk to the podium without running out of breath. Joe Biden can't even remember half the stuff he's talking about; he can't remember where he is half the time. So, we’re supposed to go with Joe Biden? Because he can't even come out the basement over President Trump, who's going all across the country showing how much stamina he has. Showing how much he's fighting for the country and Joe Biden, low energy, Joe Biden, Sleepy Joe, I mean, do they really think that we're so dumb that we're just going to vote for Biden? You know what it is, Barry? They say vote blue no matter who, as long as it's not Trump. You know, it's crazy.

Barry Nussbaum: Well, yeah, sure. Well, that's the 'Orange Man Bad' theory, and you're right, it's horrible, and it's true. They could have put up SpongeBob SquarePants on the Democrat ticket. Who was the hero of my children, full disclosure. SpongeBob would have carried the Democrat convention in a landslide. He doesn't have to think. No different than Biden doesn't have to think.

Will Johnson: Absolutely.

Barry Nussbaum: They could have somebody reading the prompter for him, you know, in large type. Just like they're having Biden sort of reading the teleprompter. The difference is, he wouldn't doze off, and he wouldn't say dumb stuff. In the couple minutes we have left, I should mention the court's leading contender is Amy Coney Barrett. Who is a religious lady, as you've requested. Who is a conservative. Who has a gaggle of children, including a special needs child. Everyone that knows her talks about her in saintly terms and talks about her as a constitutional scholar. When it is not the crazy train politics of today, that type of nominee will sail right through a nomination process in days, if not a couple of weeks.

Will Johnson: Yeah.

Barry Nussbaum: Any guess on how long it took them to confirm Ginsburg, a very, very left-wing?

Will Johnson: Forty-three days,

Barry Nussbaum: Forty-two days.

Will Johnson: Yeah, forty-two days.

Barry Nussbaum: Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman. For some reason, nobody remembers 33 days. John Paul Stevens, 19 days in 1975, so all this stuff they said it's going to take months and months and months.

Will Johnson: Yeah, absolutely, you know what, President Trump, he said he's going to select someone, or he's going to make the announcement this Friday or Saturday. I would love to see Mitch McConnell and the Republicans Monday morning go ahead and confirm it and then Tuesday, take the vote and be through with it and move on. Seriously.

Barry Nussbaum: Yep, I agree.

Will Johnson: They should fast track this seat because the Democrats fast-tracked President Trump's impeachment. Like it was the first time in history over fraudulent information, and they fast-tracked it through the House to get it to the Senate. On top of that, they're supposed recess here soon, about two weeks from now right before the election, because all of them will go home to their states and do the last campaigning and stuff. So, they're going to take a recess, which means they need to do this within the next two weeks. It needs to happen.

Barry Nussbaum: I agree. Will, I wish we had another hour. We don't. Tell people your website.

Will Johnson: You can find me at you, uniteamericafirst.com. Unite, because we have to unite this country first, uniteamericafirst.com.

Barry Nussbaum: Thank you so much for joining us on American Truth Project Radio. I want everyone that hasn't, please text the word TRUTH on your cell phone to 88202, 88202. You will be subscribed to all of our shows. You'll get everything from Will Johnson when he's with us and all of our other special guests on radio and video. You'll get everything, and it's always for free. We don't charge for any of our content. I want to thank everybody for joining us on ATP Report Radio today. Again, if you enjoyed it, subscribe to our website, AmericanTruthProject.org, or subscribe through our mobile text messaging service by sending the word TRUTH to 88202. For American Truth Project, I'm Barry Nussbaum. Thank you for being with us today.

Announcer: You were listening to ATP radio, make sure to text the word TRUTH, T-R-U-T-H to 88202 to be notified of our future radio shows.

Leave a Comment