LOADING

Type to search

U.S. Politics Videos

Graham Ledger Explains Trump’s Manifest Destiny

Share

Barry Nussbaum: Hello. Welcome to ATP Report. I'm Barry Nussbaum. Our very special guest and longtime friend of the American Truth Project is Graham Ledger. You probably know him as a longtime national news broadcaster. He's an Emmy Award winner and a scholar in politics and how it relates in America to the Constitution. Welcome, Graham.

Graham Ledger: And all-around lousy golfer.

Barry Nussbaum: We won't talk about your handicap. There's an incredible threat that I've now heard two or three times. Ocasio-Cortez said it. Nancy Pelosi said it. Chuck Schumer has hinted at it. That they may, I know this sounds astounding, they may throw an impeachment at Trump just to derail the discussion about the Senate doing its job long enough to get past the election into next year. What do you make of that?

Graham Ledger: Well, I believe that it probably wouldn't transpire between now and November 3rd. I think what Nancy Pelosi is talking about here is if Donald Trump wins the re-election, she wants to label him as the only President of the United States that has been impeached twice.

That's her goal before she retires off to her great vineyard in Napa, somewhere with her double sub-zero refrigerators that we got to see during the COVID nonsense. Let's back up a little bit here, first, Barry. Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution says very clearly that I think it uses these words, 'Advise and Consent' of the Senate.

It doesn't say anything about, hey, you know what, hold off until after the election. It doesn't say anything about a timeline. It says this is what the President shall do. He shall select nominees to the Supreme Court, and with the advice and consent of the Senate, they shall assume positions, or not, on the Supreme Court. That is the process. It says nothing about an election year. It's interesting. Mitch McConnell's response to all this, I think, was fascinating.

I don't agree with Mitch McConnell most of the time, but on this one, it actually makes sense. I'm sure it doesn't make sense to the radical Left. But he said in 2016, the Senate, of course, was in the majority, Republican. He was the leader back then, and they blocked his nominee, and his rationale was that the people elected a majority in the United States Senate to hold off Barack Obama. Well, it's reversed here, right?

The people elected a Republican President to do his job Article II, Section 2, and they have a Republican Senate to do their job. So, they're just functioning as normal. I believe Barry; this is the Trump presidency's manifest destiny. This is what we're talking about here because if we back up and we look at 2016, remember how important it was right around this time? It was sometime in the summer of 2016, if I remember right, where Donald Trump was being pinned down about who he would nominate to the United States Supreme Court.

Many of the people who wanted him to come forward with his list were evangelists and orthodox members of certain religions because they wanted to know where Donald Trump would come down on issues, such as abortion. Let's face it; we have many cases in the lower federal courts right now headed toward the Supreme Court. There's a case out of, I believe, Alabama. There's one out of Louisiana.

They may be headed to the United States Supreme Court and may determine the future of Roe versus Wade. May mitigate, if you will, Roe versus Wade and change the entire course of, "legal abortion" in this country. But it was in 2016 that millions and millions of Americans waited, Barry, and you and I may have been one of them.

Waited with bated breath to hear what Donald Trump was going to come up with in terms of his list of nominees, not only on the Supreme Court but the lower court as well. It turned out, what do you know, most of these jurists, we're constructionists. Most of them were constitutionalists, and I think this is what put Donald Trump over the top in November of 2016, beating Hillary Clinton.

It was the evangelical and the orthodox vote that put Donald Trump over the top. So, this is his destiny. This is why he was brought to America here at this moment in time. To fill this portion of his manifest destiny, it is to fill as many positions on the United States Supreme Court as possible with people who adhere to the United States Constitution.

Barry Nussbaum: So, I agree with you, constitutionally, Graham, that the job of the President is to fill vacancies. The job of the Senate is to advise and consent. It's not only just their right; it's their requirement. It's part of the job description.

In fact, the people agree with the President wanting to make the nomination including the late Justice Ginsburg, who said, in 2016, "The President doesn't serve for three years and take off the fourth year. If there's a vacancy in the fourth year, it's the President's job to appoint someone."

Now, somebody witnessed her changing her mind on her deathbed, which may or may not have happened. But the press has picked this up to the point where they seem to think that anarchy will result and should result if, God forbid, the President does his job, and the Senate does their job.

Why is the press so fervently anti-appointment right now and beating the drums? I don't just mean MSNBC and CNN. Norah O'Donnell at CBS News talked about the fact that either of the women that Trump is now considering will change the court forever as if they're all going to have leprosy.

Graham Ledger: So, the question is, why is the media doing what the media does? I made a mistake the other day, Barry. I actually watch the CBS Evening News. I hadn't watched it literally in years. It's probably been a decade. I sat down, and I watched 22 minutes of their content. That's how long a newscast goes when you remove the commercials, 22 minutes. It was a 22-minute propaganda reel on behalf of the modern Democrat Party and Joe Biden.

If you're Joe Blow sitting at home and you're getting your news from CBS, NBC, ABC, and we're not going to bring in the other ones. Just the main networks the big three we used to call them. If you're getting your news from them, you're going to think that Joe Biden is completely lucid, that he is some sort of great orator, and did wonderful things in Washington, D.C. That he is not hiding in his library, and you would think that Donald Trump is the Antichrist. That he is evil and that everything he does is wrong.

So, this is what the modern mainstream media does. It's unfortunate because millions of Americans watch the mainstream media. As you mentioned, who watch Norah O'Donnell, they are actually thinking they are getting unbiased reporting. It is the worst, most biased reporting I have ever seen. It was as bad as during the Dan Rather days because as a "journalist," as a media member, I can pick apart a report maybe better than anybody else can. Watching this recent reporting, whether on Donald Trump or the potential nominee, does not surprise me.

It saddens me. It's one of the reasons why I believe your program, Barry, is so important. You have an alternative voice out there that other people can listen to and realize that there's so much propaganda out there. So, the answer to your question, why they are attacking the nominee and the process here, the very constitutional process, is because it fits into their agenda. Attack Donald Trump, harm Donald Trump as much as possible, try and make sure he is not re-elected, and harm the process.

Because if they harm the process, the constitutional process, this makes it easier to burn down the rest of the country. That's what this is all about. To impose their Marxist socialist agenda on this republic, every institution, every bit of our foundation must be blown apart. Unfortunately, the mainstream media is part of that effort.

Barry Nussbaum: Let me tell you what the American people feel. This poll, ironically, was conducted just the week before Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away. Americans were polled across the country. If there is a vacancy before the election should the President be allowed to nominate a replacement, and should the Senate hold hearings?

Get this, 67 percent of Americans across all parties and affiliations said, "Yes, they should have hearings, and there should be a new nomination." So, my question to you, before Ginsburg and before the propaganda tidal wave was released, do you think if Trump comes through this weekend and nominates somebody, as he says he will, will the Senate get that nomination through before the election? What's your opinion?

Graham Ledger: I believe they will. I think Mitch McConnell has signaled that he will. I believe Rush Limbaugh pointed out the obvious, and that is, they don't even need to hold hearings. If they want to have an up or down vote in committee, fine.

Again, Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution says nothing about Lindsey Graham and a gavel. Having these committees decide where the nominee goes, it's part of the rules of the Senate. It's part of the process of the Senate established post-1787, which is fine. I think Mitch McConnell has signaled that he's going to do that. But there's another element here, Barry.

On social media, I have not been afraid to say that I think Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the people who are putting these RIPs out there; I haven't been doing that; I think she was a blight on America. I think she did a lot of damage. I believe that she is complicit in the deaths of millions and millions of unborn babies. But the reason I bring this up is that I firmly believe that the framers of the Constitution had no intention of Ruth Bader Ginsburg hanging in there as long as she did and being barely lucid.

I'm one of these people who believe we ought to have term limits for the United States Supreme Court. I know we could look at Clarence Thomas, who I think is about as great a jurist as you can get on the Supreme Court, he could be term-limited out. I know that. But I also believe there are other Clarence Thomas' is out there.

I think if you ask Clarence Thomas that he would say so himself. But let's look at the current makeup of the court. This is why Donald Trump's re-election is so crucial and why his manifest destiny originated in 2016 should continue through 2020 and that election cycle. Breyer is 82 years old. Clarence Thomas himself is 72 years old, and Justice Alito is 70 years old. We don't know what God has in store for these people. We've heard Clarence Thomas indicate that maybe he's thinking about hanging up the gavel.

Of course, that would be a tragedy. But if Clarence Thomas were to hang up the gavel, let it happen during a Trump administration, part two. So, we have some jurists on the Supreme Court who may be getting up there in age where they may be considering some sort of retirement. So, this is very, very important when you look down the road, and again, when you consider who you are choosing for President of the United States it is crucial.

Barry Nussbaum: Graham, thanks so much for joining us today. Tell our viewers across America where they can get your opinions and where they can follow you.

Graham Ledger: Well, you can go to Grahamledger.com. That's Graham Ledger.com. You can see some of my videos there, and you can also subscribe to my podcast, which is called The Ledger Report. All you have to do is hit subscribe; it's for free. There is no charge. Just put in your email, and you can get my podcast delivered to you a couple, three times a week, right in your email box. Barry, if you haven't signed up, then please sign up.

Barry Nussbaum: I will make sure to do it again; I haven't seen it. I probably did it wrong; you know me, I'm not the most technical guy. For those who haven't subscribed to ATP Report, take out your cell phones, text the word TRUTH, and send it to 88202. For ATP Report, I'm Barry Nussbaum.

Leave a Comment