The following is a transcript from the Pro America Report.
Welcome, Welcome, welcome. It’s Ed Martin here on the Pro America Report. Great to be together. Please join me by going over to a proamericareport.com. You will see a pop up box that will allow you to sign up for the daily e-mail. The daily WYNK which we send out at 8:00 AM East Coast, 5:00 AM Pacific. And every hour In between with a few key links, a few key thoughts. And often this segment. Which is What You Need to Know. The WYNK. And today the WYNK is very important one. One that may seem a little dry when I start in on it, but it is very, very important.
OK, so I I think you’ve heard me railing a bit about the focus on Justice Clarence Thomas and his life, they. The left wing hates the guy has for a long time. I often hear it characterized that they hate him in large part because he is everything that they don’t want to believe should happen, which is a conservative black man who came from nothing. Not a liberal black man who came from Harvard. He came from nothing. And and George, I happen to have a bit of a personal connection to him in the sense that the man who ran my college, a an old-fashioned Jesuit named Father Brooks – Father Brooks ran Holy Cross, where I went and was a wonderful man. He was an old fashioned priest. I have a ton of respect and love for him. He’s passed away. Well, he did what a lot of good priests did. He didn’t. He didn’t hold press conferences about it. He he went and he saw smart kids and he gave him scholarships to go to college. Sometimes they were smart Italian kids. Sometimes they were smart Jewish kids. Sometimes they were smart black kids from Georgia. He just wanted smart kids to have a chance. And he did that for Clarence Thomas and it it transformed his life. He’s often talked about it, written about it. Clarence Thomas has in his extraordinary in the Clarence Thomas the recent documentary that really was a wonderfully done it was, it was, it was designed. I think it was initially Interviews. It was Lengthy interviews with the Clarence Thomas and ended up become a document become a document. Excuse me, becoming a documentary and a book called Created Equal, Created Equal: Clarence Thomas In His Own Words. Very, very cool. And anyway, so this is an amazing guy.
And I’ve been upset watching the media, especially in the left pick on Clarence Thomas and saying something like he’s somehow compromised because he’s gone on vacations with a friend of his who’s rich, who pays for the vacations, he’s gone on some trips. It’s such a lie. In in, in, in a place where influence peddling is so obvious, which is to say the swamp. When you have a President, United States whose son is making hundreds of millions of, deals for hundreds of millions of dollars. You have the President of the United States, his son is making paintings as a side light. I mean, maybe he’s the most talented guy in the history of the world. I doubt it. But he decides to start painting and he’s selling them for hundreds of thousands of dollars. You’re going to complain about Clarence Thomas going on vacation? You’re going to complain about a real estate deal where Clarence Thomas, there’s some property where Clarence Thomas grew up and the same really rich guy. Billionaire, bought the property to set up the Clarence Thomas Museum for 100 grand. And you’re gonna complain about that when Hunter Biden’s got a billion dollar, billion with a B dollar deal with China. And there’s a list of of of of politicians who influence pedal all over the place. It makes me sick.
And they’re now threatening to have hearings, that the Democrats in the Senate are considering hearings, there’s complaints, and the media covers it breathlessly. It’s such hypocrisy, but here’s why. Here’s why.
On the front page of Politico. On the front page of Politico, they say they there’s a question, column, America’s Looming Conflict: Red Judges versus Blue Governors. What’s the problem here?
What’s the problem is for 30 years from the late 1970s into the Trump administration, more than that, I guess it was almost 40 years. 40 plus years maybe say it was at 40 plus years. The American scene was dominated by judges making decisions on abortion in the ’70s and then a series of decisions marching forward and dominating our lives, culminating at the low point in my mind. Roe v. Wade was the worst, but culminating with the decisions. About marriage, where they just made it up, but lots of other examples. Lots of other examples. When the courts were left leaning we were all supposed to say how valuable it is to have a Supreme Court and to have the Supreme Court be so serious and high minded, and that justice must be respected.
If you listen closely, you are starting to hear the drum beat. And the drum beat, What you need to know about the drum beat, is a drum beat towards lawlessness towards, you have people that say ohh the the, a federal judge has a put a pause on the FDA’s distribution of abortion causing drugs because of how they did it because they rushed it through because they didn’t obey their own rules. That’s what the federal judge said. And not, we’ll appeal that and we’ll argue that or we’ll pass legislation to change that. No, you have elected officials and leaders and public leaders, thought leaders, saying we’ll just nullify the law. We will not pay attention to that judge’s ruling. We don’t care. We’re going, we’re bigger than that. You have the attorneys general of states like Michigan. There was a ban on abortion. It was overturned by the vote of the people last month or three, last fall. Well, but before it was overturned, the Attorney General of the State of Michigan said I will not obey that law. You have elected prosecutors in cities who say they will not enforce that law, as to drugs, as to violence, whatever. And now you have people saying ohh we can’t. The the US Supreme Court and other courts are too conservative. We should not and cannot abide by them. Lawlessness is the goal. When they don’t have power. In other words, when the system. When the system was left-leaning, when the Supreme Court was being dominated by the moderate middle, you know, Justice Kennedy deciding that you know one’s understanding of themself was the definition of of who they were and that that should not be intruded upon, et cetera, et cetera. Well, when the court gets conservative. It has people that have a certain set of values. By the way, they happen to be the values of our nation, our nation’s founding, at least. Now we have to object. Now we have to be lawless.
And some of them are intellectually honest, meaning they are just now adjusting their worldview because they want the power. But some of them truly are communists who want to destroy the country. And by undermining the rule of law and undermining how we function. They undermine the country. Some of the people who are.
So my point here is I can’t read people’s minds and I don’t. I don’t wanna bother. I don’t wanna bother to try to tell if someone is bad intentions or not, but if you’re someone who is willing to say, not. By the way, let me be clear, not that you’re a conscientious objector. A conscientious objector says that is the law. I can’t abide by it because of my conscience. That’s different than saying that is the law. I won’t abide by it ’cause I don’t like it. That’s a very different thing. Conscientious objectors. The classic example was people in in Vietnam era who said I won’t go to war. I’m I’m a passivist. I don’t believe in the war. They didn’t say. I don’t believe that there’s war. I don’t believe that there’s a law that says I can be drafted. They didn’t say that. Some of them did, maybe. But mostly they were saying I can’t be a part of that.
And you will have people that say I am, I will conscientiously object from certain requirements under the law, but I will acknowledge that there is supposed to be a law that we’re under. Not, I’m elected prosecutor of St. Louis City. Therefore, I’ll decide what laws I want to have enforced or and not. And again, prosecutorial discretion. Is using your judgment to say this set of facts doesn’t rise to that level of that crime. Not, I don’t like that crime. Therefore I won’t apply the facts.
It’s a very important difference and we’re watching. We’re watching the again, the narrative machine. Big government. Big media and big Tech putting out a narrative that somehow it’s acceptable to have a preference on the law and therefore to act. That you you know, if you don’t think it’s OK if you if if you don’t if if. Stealing is is the law. You’re not supposed to steal. It’s forbidden, but you know you’re in San Francisco and you just wanna kick in the window and take something. Well, we’re gonna charge you for that. We’re we’re gonna we’re. Gonna say the law is not really a fitting or in Chicago when they’re, when the people are Wilding that that that over the weekend and the Mayor says you know we we need to. OK. I can I. They shouldn’t be violent. But you know, if they are, we gotta understand that they’re coming from a hard place, and we should. What?! You’ve gotta have the laws. And you’ve got to have the respect for the institutions. And again, what you need to know is it’s a systematic effort to try to undermine the institutions and try to damage the people, whether you’re damaging Clarence Thomas, whether you’re damaging the Supreme Court more broadly, whatever the way you want to see it. Creating a nation where there is no rule of law, there is no shared sense that we’re under the law. That’s that’s a major problem. It’s very difficult to see how you operate in that environment. That’s what you need to know.
All right, we’ll take a break. We’ll be right back. Ed Martin here on the Pro America Report. Back in a minute.