SCOTUS Rejects Texas Lawsuit | December 14, 2020 | Hour One

Here's your conservative, not bitter host, Todd Huff. All right, we are often running with a very busy, busy week yet again here. You know, normally We're marching toward you still our guests marching towards the Christmas holiday, marching towards the New Year marching towards a point in time when things maybe even slow down a little bit. But that is not the case here as we're still working ourselves through all of this fallout of election turmoil and so forth. And I want to get to some things today on Friday. By the way, email Tom, The Todd Huff slash The Todd Huff Show for those that want to watch the program live on demand, Todd of as well, that's the best place to watch the program. If you're dying to check out a guy with a face for radio, but I'm telling you that this is the one place I can always promise you, it's going to be up and running is on our on our website, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, who knows what those jokers will do. But anyway, Friday night, Friday evening decision came down from the Supreme Court of the United States of America that they would not be hearing the Texas case. They would not be hearing the Texas case regarding this election. And of course, there's some some things to talk about with that in particular and I want to start I'm going to start with Alan Dershowitz. Alan Dershowitz, of course, attorney. I'm someone who, I mean, he's a liberal. But he's, he's one of these individuals that actually I think, I think goes about trying to apply the law fairly instead of saying, okay, who were the people that we're talking about? If you're talking about people who agree with me, I'm going to interpret the law one way for talking about people who disagree with me, I'm going to, I'm going to interpret it another I don't I do not believe Alan Dershowitz falls into that category, which candidly makes him unique because because typically, typically, as I've said, as I've said on this program before, if something happens, or when something happens in our culture today, the first thing we say what is the first thing the media says is what is the political affiliation of the person who is accused of the offense? Is it Donald Trump, that he's guilty, he deserves to be impeached, he deserves to go to prison, he deserves to lose his fortune. He deserves whatever this whatever we can pull off whatever we can actually get away with. That is what the guy deserves, if it's one of our folks, if it's Joe Biden, if it's Kamala Harris, Hunter Biden, you know, someone from the deep state, and we have technicalities, then we have, you know, misinterpretation and misapplication of the law of the law. We have a complete lack of interest in justice Hillary Clinton, we could throw in there as well. This is how this is typically done. I don't think Dershowitz falls into that category is, is my point. So he's being interviewed. Newsmax Stinchfield is asking him to kind of summarize his thoughts on the Supreme Court's decision not to hear the Texas case, again, the Texas case, just to give you a frame of reference, the Texas case was brought by the state of Texas against four states, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia, I believe. And the case said essentially, that these states violated the electors clause of the Constitution, because they were we're basically not playing by the rules. The point being that we all have this framework that we've signed on to this constitution. It is the the glue, it is the contract. The greement for those states that are in this union, and so they say we've all agreed to elect a president a certain way, we've all said our state legislators will set the rules pretending to our individual states elections, but that's how we're going to do it. We're not going to have some bureaucrat, some elections officials, some governor, some governor like Andrew Cuomo, who by the way, while he's busy shutting down your business in New York City, telling you you can eat inside yet again, even though by their own data, what is it something like 1% one point something percent of all COVID cases according to according to research that they've released, pertaining to contract contact tracing 1.4 or some person, I don't have it in front of me. percent of all COVID cases can be traced back to indoor dining or restaurant dining. Andrew Cuomo, Governor, the state of New York says we're gonna we're gonna shut it down again. Meanwhile, he's on having a birthday bash and Hollywood. Happy birthday to Governor Andrew Cuomo, who apparently reportedly is on the shortlist, maybe even actually be the reported Attorney General. Should there ever be a Biden administration? Anybody that's out there percolating in the background. But but the elect the state of Texas says, look, we're not waiting. The Constitution is clear. legislature set set the rules for how their electors are chosen not bureaucrats, not governors, not courts. It's the law. It's the legislature's job, and they didn't do it. It's clear that they didn't do it. There is no doubt at all, there is literally no doubt that the legislators did not set in place these rules that Texas and and other states who signed on to this are objecting to. There is no doubt about this. This is in disputable Supreme Court says after some deliberations as to whether or not they're going to take the case, they decided we're not going to move forward with this case, because the plaintiffs, the state of Texas and others do not have standing. Standing is basically a legal term that means, you know, for example, I can't if if I see my neighbor, this is a very simple way of looking at standing, I suppose if I see my neighbor, be victimized by someone. I can't file a claim i can't i wasn't the party that was harmed. I saw someone get, you know, say I saw my neighbor get assaulted criminal cases at some point take on a life of their own. But I'm just for the sake of understanding I see something happened that didn't directly impact me. I tried to get something done about that. They say sir, you don't have standing This doesn't. You didn't actually experience any harm. So they've said that to the state of Texas. And meanwhile, well meaning individuals have said what do you mean Texas doesn't have standing, this is an election. For the President of the United States. It's an you know, a position a a an office that all the states it impact, it impacts all of us. It's not just the state election where they've elected their governor a certain way. It's not some state house. election in the state of Michigan, wherever one of these four states. This is an this is how they have agreed. they've signed on to the idea that lead that electors are appointed by rules that are set by the legislature of their respective states. And they didn't do this. They extended deadlines. They did away with requirements. They mass mailed ballots, in some cases, that wasn't the way that you're supposed to be able to vote. I mean, some of these are so such clear violation. It's not even an argument you can't argue. You know, for example, I think it's a Wisconsin where there's two either voted in person or you get an absentee ballot, but you have to demonstrate that you are and that you must you just cannot vote on election day in person. So then you get a ballot mailed to you, but you have to demonstrate that so that means you just can't drop them in the mail. I mean, it's it's pretty straightforward and simple, but we don't ever get to that point of the argument because there's these technicalities. Now, the left's out they're basically saying, look, the Supreme Court like all these other courts that have shot you down for whatever reason have looked at the evidence that that that but that's not what happened. They didn't look at the merits. They looked at the technical And they said that you do not have standing standing, of course is important. But to say that there's no standing here, I think a stretch, it doesn't matter so much what I think it matters more what the legal experts like Alan Dershowitz think and that's what I want to get to here. Dershowitz on Stinchfield is asked to summarize his opinion in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision not to take on the Texas case. And here is how he responds. Well, this was the strongest case that I think the Trump team had. And I think there are two interpretations. One, the technical legal interpretation, and I think Alito, and Thomas gets better at the argument that probably Texas does have standing, if you had an extreme case where one state may have impacted the election against the interests of another state, the Supreme Court would have standing. But the other point is the job of the lawyers to predict what the courts will do, in fact, and I think this Supreme Court decision sends a message, the majority included the three justices appointed by President Trump, and they all said, No, we're not going to hear the Texas case. We're not going to get involved in this election. I think this sends a message. It's not a legal message. But it's a practical message that the Supreme Court has added this game, they may conceivably take the Pennsylvania case, but the Pennsylvania case may not involve enough votes to turn around even Pennsylvania. But even if Pennsylvania would turn around, you'd need at least three other states to turn around the election. So I I've always said from the beginning, you need a perfect storm to turn around this election. The judiciary, you don't have it. The legislature is so far you don't have it. The numbers, they might be there, but the evidence isn't there. And then most important, the clock, we're down to the Two Minute Warning, there are no timeouts. And I don't know how this can be brought about by Monday, which is when the electors vote, I think that's what the Supreme Court was saying. And so I do think that this marks the practical end of this effort, but I want to congratulate the lawyers, I think they've done a great job creatively bringing this to the attention of the courts and the American public, that was an important function to perform. Okay, so that's what Dershowitz has to say this was on a Friday course today. Today's the day that the electors are supposed to be voting, I say, supposed to be scheduled to vote here in the various states at their state houses around the country at different times today. Trump's team says that is again, there's only one date that matters. And that is, man two dates January 23, January 6, when Congress has to basically vote to approve or not approve these electors. And then January 20, noon, when the new administration will be sworn in, or inauguration day for whoever is actually elected via the electoral college on that day. So those are the dates that that matters to the Trump legal team, but electoral wars or our our casting ballots today in the various states, and the District of Columbia in this great nation. So but I want to talk about what Dershowitz is saying here, because I think he's onto something. I think it's something I've I've thought myself, which is the courts don't want anything to do with this. The courts don't want to get involved in anything. That's political for several reasons. The court says that the Supreme Court in particular, really, they want to leave these political issues up to you know, the political process the problem. The problem is, the problem is, what do you do? What do you do? Do courts not intervene? When there is such fraud and mismanagement? I mean, levels at which are incomprehensible. It's where I don't agree with Dershowitz, by the way, saying that there's not they haven't presented quite enough evidence or whatever, they don't have enough votes that they can show were affected by fraud. Or maybe they do maybe they don't sort of thing I I just for those that have followed this closely. It is overwhelming. God, I can just compare this to when I was on a jury trial. I wasn't on trial. I should mention I was a juror. And I just I remember sitting there and getting information as you sit on that jury. And I am just thinking of how this would be presented in court. How long this would take to hear all the evidence the statisticians Those who are, you know, hopefully conceivably one day going to actually be able to audit. That's something else I want to get to today, the Antrim County, Michigan voting machines have been audited by a judge there. His blocking has not allowed those results to be released yet, which is quite quite puzzling given that this is supposedly the most transparent, and the safest election America has ever had. So I'm going to talk about those things on the other side of this break, quick timeout is in order, sit tight, you're listening to conservative, not bitter talk. I'm your host, Todd Huff back here in just a minute.

Welcome back, I should mention, I know many of you have. Have an interest. Some of you have gone to the website. Some of you have not taken the time to do that yet to get busy, distracted, but This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. This is our partnership with Shepherd Community Center, east side of Indianapolis, this is something that they do to help. They're those that they serve. Again, on the Near East Side of Indianapolis, they provide Christmas for families in need. And again, as I've said before, Shepherd is not simply just interested in meeting the need of you know, giving, helping folks give Christmas gifts to their kids, which is important, right? This is a good thing, but they actually address the root causes of poverty. And they try to help folks escape and break that cycle. It's a great organization. I love what Jay, the executive director Jay Hyde and his team are doing. I think if more conservatives understood this, more conservatives would be on board with helping and here's your chance to do that. This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. you can go you can shop you can have your gifts sent. You don't have to leave your home, you can do it all online. Or if you prefer, if you prefer, you can actually purchase toys and take them to one of our three drop off locations. Freedom 95 Studios and Franklin just off of 31. Mr. Quick Home Services 86. And I think it's Georgetown on the north west side of Indianapolis, or our studio, none our studios, our offices, The Todd Huff Show offices, you can meet the team. You can meet pause and bubbles. Maybe I'll be there as well. That's in Morrisville. Caring at Christmas calm is the site. This is the last week they're going to be giving these gifts out or opening up their store, I guess is what they do. And they'll be doing that early, maybe this weekend or early next week. So we've got to wrap this up by Friday. That's it Friday, folks. This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. check it out. And I appreciate those that have helped already. And for those that are considering it, now's a great time to look. So let's get back into just this whole issue of the courts as I've thought for a while. And Dershowitz is, I guess reinforce this belief that I have. I thought for a while that this is if we're going to see something change, and I'm not predicting that it's going to happen. As far as this election how this goes especially today where we have electors voting today, Sidney Powell and her team says look, we still Ruby out there, Judy Giuliani's saying there's there's still time, because they haven't accepted this and so forth. That's technically true. It gets it gets tighter and tighter. The way that this progresses, it gets more difficult the further down this path that that we go. But if we want to see actual changes take place. We have to see this happen on the level of the state legislatures, which interestingly enough, if you think about the the Texas case, ultimately, it was really just asking I say just because it's a big deal, but for the court to recognize that the states in question the states who have had their election laws, just completely ignored or broken or violated. All a mixture of all those things. The states, they were basically asking the court to recognize that, hey, you have a remedy here and that is for the state legislature to take back. To take back the electors, the right of choosing the electors, which they have, as the Trump legal team is sudden many times they have that Plenary Power. They had that fundamental right as, as a state legislature, all 50 state legislators can actually say, look, we know and the majority of cases, what is it 33 states plus, the District of Columbia, their electors, by state statute, are supposed to be assigned based upon the outcome of the popular vote in their particular state. And so that is, seems to be okay. Well, this is the the election that the numbers that have been certified by the states. So then this is the official election results. So these are how the electors are going to be chosen. The problem is, as an independent observer who watches this stuff go down, if you're watching this and listening to this, and you see the evidence, and you see courts, really, in a lot of ways play games, because they don't want to take this they haven't taken the case and then sat there and listened to the evidence. And they've they've actually said that's, that is, you know, there's not enough there to change the selection, said, this has been more technicality. In fact, as you've heard the Trump legal team say that the common theme is that they don't want to even hear the evidence they want to they want to talk about the case in some sort of a fundamental way. Should we even be listening to this? They're throwing these court cases out, I remember listening to to Sidney Powell, a couple of weeks ago, make her case before a an appellate court in Georgia, basically, never even getting to the meat of this throwing this out on technicalities and so forth. But anyway, that is kind of where we are. And so, to me, the only way, the only way that this gets addressed at this late hour, which again, I'm not predicting I'm not. This is I mean, look, this is we're in some some difficult times now. We've got this election, this special election in Georgia, some people are saying why would I even vote in this? We know what they did last time, they're just going to do it again. Then again, you can't just allow the democrats to take control of the Senate as well. This would be this would be if that happened, if they kept the house if they I say keep the house, because there's some 70 pounds out there saying that they've had house seats stolen as well, not just the presidency. But if they take the house, if they the democrats take the house, they take the presidency, they take the Senate, that's a recipe for disaster for this great nation, for the economy. For small business, when you look at what we're gonna do with COVID, COVID shut downs. And I mean, you know, where this is this is headed. If we, if we see these folks in power, there's released, there's leaks of notes from a conference called Biden head with some powerbrokers in the Democrat Party promising to to move further left on some issues, all that stuff out there percolating. Right, you got you got the talk about defending the police. I think that was one of the issues on the call. I mean, there's all these things that are out there. All these things that are out there, while the democrat governors and powerbrokers, party bosses are out there living it up, living it up having lavish parties as Governor Andrew Cuomo did as he's not allowing New York City businesses to effectively operate anymore. This will be on a Magnus this will be on a great magnitude across this country. If you're in a state right now, where you're your governor has not put his or her boot on the throat of some of the throat of small businesses yet Get ready. Get ready for potentially what's going to be coming here for they have complete unchecked power the democrats do in Washington, DC and DC. That's a terrible, terrible thing. So these things hang in the balance. state legislatures are the last line of defense. Again, I tend to agree with Dershowitz. These are not the courts are not going to make any meaningful decision whereby the outcome of this election is is actually changed, as Dershowitz points out, even the Pennsylvania case before the Supreme Court, if they if they hear that and if they rule in the plaintiffs favor, there may not be enough votes in that particular case to turn this they're gonna have to relate Lisa McCracken, as Sidney Powell said, and release it quickly, and get in front of these legislators. And that's and that's where you, I think come in, that's where you come in. This is where pressure can be applied from citizens demanding. Look, folks, we just want justice in truth here. That's all we want. We want every legal vote counted, and every fantasy made up fraudulent vote not to count. And if someone doesn't agree with that, if someone cannot get on board with that basic concept, folks, they are an enemy of this process. They are I don't care if they're a friend or a state legislature. Right, these these are folks that that is a such an obvious thing that we should all be in agreement with. We don't want to not count any of the legal ballots of Trump loss at the bad thing for America. But that's just the way that it goes that his elections have consequences. Right. I mean, that's just that's just the truth. That's the that's the cold, hard truth and reality. However, if these allegations are true, and if this if the evidence that we see holds up to be true, it is absolutely positively overwhelming. And it cannot it cannot allow be allowed to stand it simply cannot. And that's why we've got to put pressure on these legislators, individual state legislators because folks, they they are the last line of defense. And that's why it aggravates me when I hear or I don't hear even for those that don't look i know i know state senators, US senators don't have any direct role here but when I see states that are US senators like Todd young sit on his on his backside and do nothing and hide talk about a bunch of things that you know it's like Whistling past the graveyard right now for me it's maddening to watch this happen we can't allow we cannot have senators like this and then not just senators any other elected position. Anyone else who's Whistling past the graveyard acting like this is normal acting like this is just you know, we've got to deal with this and accept reality when there's all this evidence of fraud and corruption right before our eyes and no interest no interest whatsoever. Long in this segment got to take a break want to shift gears a tiny bit when we get back? democrats are now actually going on offense about this remarkable thing wanting to basically call people who are standing up against this us congressmen republicans who've basically signed on with the state of need with the state of Texas in that Supreme Court lawsuit they want to say look you are you're acting in a seditious way you're basically guilty of treason talk of even having some of these folks not having Pelosi not seat them as as members of Congress and so forth. So this is what they do buckle up for this the political party of retribution is about to be in full swing here if they get away with this so sit tight be back here in just a minute.

welcome back I'm gonna take you on a walk on the wild side here this morning. I'm gonna take you into the well into msnbc I don't know how else to tell you this. We're gonna we're gonna venture in to the belly of the beast msnbc there's a guy on here you may have heard him before his name is chris hayes this program is called all in I think it's called all in with chris hayes is more like all insane with Chris Hayes. So he's got Adam Schiff on I don't know when this is from this is from last week I believe December 11. So that would be what Friday Adam Schiff the same Adam Schiff By the way, I just just to frame this you remember this the house he's the one that was leading the whole impeachment nonsense the shenanigans the hearings, they march I never forget this as long as I love the the march It was almost like remember when they took the the Articles of Impeachment and they marched them across from the House chamber to the Senate. And they all had sad looks upon their faces. You could tell they they talked about the walk what it would look like long faces almost like they were in as they as they were carrying these articles of impeachment. It was almost to feel like they were carrying carrying a casket. And inside that casket was the United States Constitution and they were so solid These drama Kratz and so sad as they carried carry this across, it's just a total farce and just a joke. I mean, it makes for great satire because these folks cannot be taken seriously. Adam Schiff, Adam Schiff cannot be taken seriously. Unfortunately, he has the power to where to where we better darn well taking seriously because he's not afraid to use it. So I want to play really quickly here, actually. You're going to sit tight. There's a couple minutes of this and I want to play, I want to play as much as I can stomach. It's a couple minutes long, I don't think I can stomach the whole thing as I was listening into it. During the break, I realized I can't stomach this whole thing. We'll probably get about a minute and a half or so into this before I have to say stop it. I can't take it anymore. It is so ridiculous and so patronizing. And so much living in an alternate universe. I don't even know what to what to say about it. Well, I do know what I want to say about it, but I just I can't stump very much of it. So we'll do that on the other side of the break to keep on the program. format here as much as we can today. So sit tight. Be back here in just a minute.

Welcome back when I get to the soundbite from between Adam Schiff radical leftists representative from the state of California, People's Republic of California, on all insane with Chris Hayes. But I want to mention this as well. I don't I won't have time to get into this today. But there's a report that the US Treasury has been breached by hackers from either from or backed by a foreign government any guesses on who that probably is? At the top of your list? anyone say China that's my first obvious guess I don't know if that's been released yet. But I've seen this this morning. And that is what is being reported. But I want to go back to this this this conversation. And again, I'm going to share as much of this with you from loony Ville as I possibly can before I can't stomach anymore chris hayes all insane. He's got his program guest Adam Schiff on here asking him well, you can listen to the conversation yourself. I'm gonna cut this off when I can't take any more. But here it is. You know, I think one of the deepest debates, institutional democratic debates that will happen and unfold over the next few months is a question about essentially how to save and preserve and expand American democracy and whether that means fighting fire with fighter fighting fire with fire meeting procedural maximalism with procedural maximalism, or fighting fire with water meeting, meeting procedural maximalism with restraint with stewardship with not pursuing that avenue? And on that question, Bill's Pascal today, your colleague said, Look, the house controls its own membership. Nancy Pelosi should not seat the people that signed on to this, if they are calling their own election into question. that's particularly true of the 12 members of Republican caucus who are in the states that they have signed on to an amicus brief to invalidate the votes of and I wonder what you think of that? Here we go. Well, you know, to use your metaphor, I don't think when the President knighted states and some of my Republican colleagues are trying to burn the house down around us, when the President tried to burn the house down on his way out the door that we want to send a new fire. So I don't think that's the answer. You know, we had to deal with those kind of tactics during the campaign, and we fought back, but we didn't sink to their level. Of course, we fought back and we won. And now that victory has been upheld in the court and Joe Biden will be sworn in as president knighted states. So, you know, I think our strategy worked didn't so we don't want they come to them. You know, I certainly understand Bill's frustration, and I think the point that he's making is a powerful one. But I think the remedy is to make the case to the American as much as I can take What do you mean, they don't want to you don't want to become them? Adam Schiff. It is remarkable to me, these individuals, they project like none other. The projection here is off the charts. He's He's saying that Trump's burning the house that Republicans are burning the house down on their way out. We don't want to fight fire with fire. We want to fight fire with water. We want to be the voice of reason. We want to be the voice that that instills confidence in the American people after all, Trump's out there causing us to have no faith in our system of elections. Ah, it's agonizing. It's reminds me of Pelosi. Schumer. Pelosi was just so agonized whenever she, again no choice but to vote for the articles of impeachment. Oh, it keeps me up at night. I pray for my president. I hope she does, by the way. Well, I get I don't know what she prays. So let me let me preface it by saying that but I just I don't. These this is this is bad drama. And for the average person that watches this and takes these folks at their word, and sees this as anything short of a performance is is a little bit maddening to me, is a little bit maddening. To me, these folks engaged in nothing other than sideshows and drama, and made for television. Reality TV here. Of course, reality TV is more scripted than sitcoms were back in the days when I was a kid and growing up watching television. But this idea that Adam Schiff is over here saying we don't want to sink we don't want to sink to their level this. We're not going to do this. We're not going to start a fire. They're the ones that are starting the fires. You've got to be kidding me. This guy, this guy is perhaps the biggest hack in an all of Congress, Adam Schiff, over here lecturing us about not wanting to start a fire. The courts have decided the courts have ruled there's no evidence. Well, let's talk about the evidence. No, we can't do that the courts have ruled against it. Trump's trying to burn the house down every vote should count Adam Schiff Do you think every illegal vote should count is that we every vote should count. Don't want to start fires. We want to use water to fight fire not fire. Chris Hayes I'm on your program. I use your analogy. All insane. All insane indeed. just crazy stuff we're dealing with here. Adam Schiff preaching to us. It's quite remarkable feat. Thank you, but no, thank you, Congressman shift, I take a take a timeout. Feel like I need to take a shower after that sit tight back here in back here in just a minute.

I'm back. I'm up against it here. But I want to share this. I mentioned this off the top I was going to get to this Sidney Powell This is an article on the epic times. Trump can trigger 2018 executive order on foreign election interference lawyer Sidney Powell asserted that due to alleged foreign interference in the November 3 election, it's more than sufficient to trigger President Donald Trump's executive order on foreign interference issued. And 2018 this is executive order. What's the number 13 858? I think is that was that what it is? 3848 is the number executive order here. Anyway, you got some actual, you know, some influential folks that are out there saying this now. We'll see what happens. You know, I didn't have the time to play the soundbite of Trump at the Army Navy game. The cheers were incredible. By the way, some folks would point out that john Ratcliffe was on that flight as well. Who knows? Who knows? lots of talk about here in the days to come. Gotta go SDG. See tomorrow. Take care.