The United States Has So Many Laws, It’s Impossible Not To Break Them

Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – John, when the law becomes so voluminous that it cannot be known, it cannot be enforced, by definition.  Federalist Paper No. 61 written by James Madison, live it, love it, learn it.  You’ll read all about Madison saying why the Necessary and Proper Clause must be used very cautiously and judiciously because you don’t want the creation of such a labyrinth of laws that no one can possibly know what it is, and therefore no one could possibly enforce it, or no one could be expected to abide or live under it.  Check out today’s transcript for the rest…

 

Begin Mike Church Show Transcript

Mike:  Let’s go back to the telephones.  John is in New York.  John, you’re next on The Mike Church Show.  How you doing?

Caller John:  Hey, Mike, how are you?

Mike:  Well, thank you.

Caller John:  I wanted to just briefly make a couple comments and ask you one question.  The comments are, when you spoke earlier about journalism versus editorials, conservative versus other, I think it’s more like classifying it as mainstream media versus an entity like either Sirius XM Patriot or Fox.  I also wanted to comment briefly about what was discussed earlier, the differences between let’s say you and Glenn Beck.  I think you both love America.  You both care about the troops.  You both care about the Constitution as law.

That leads me to my question.  In today’s violation, with Obama and his administration violating law after law, don’t we have something called impeachment, especially when actions are done that are to the detriment of America such as releasing detainees that have been arrested and convicted by a judge and can only be released by a judge?  I think we’re so out of control it’s frightening.  I appreciate your time.

Mike:  I don’t know where to start with that.  What detainees were ordered held by a judge and then released?

Caller John:  Based on the sequester phobia that is really a nonsense issue, ICE released upwards of 1,000 detainees that can only have been detained by order of a federal judge, to my understanding.  They consequently released, over the last day or two —

Mike:  They’ve been released because —

Caller John:  Because of suspected potential budget cuts.

Mike:  John, the laundry list of complaints that you have, sir, would take up the next 16 days.  To answer your question, come on, man.  You know the impeachment clause is in there.  You know the answer to that question.  Of course the answer is yes.  You know the why.  Impeachment has only been used twice in the last century.  Before then — this is another one of these — you asked me a question so let me answer it.  I talked about this yesterday.  The founders screwed up.  They blew it.  The framers of the Constitution blew it.  They thought that the impeachment clause would protect against corruption and that Congress would judiciously and frequently resort to it.  They were wrong.  Members of august bodies do not fancy expelling their own members because they believe the body to be damaged if they do so.  They don’t want to do it.

Here’s the way you can fix this: by amendment, you can fix the impeachment clause in the Constitution.  You can make the federal officers impeachable by a tribunal or council convened annually or as needs may dictate, a meeting of the state legislatures.  The states can say: We’re all in session this year and there are some egregious things that we believe weren’t dealt with in a legal manner.  These particular individuals, we think, Congress should hold impeachment hearings on and should expel from their midst.  Since the Congress won’t do it, we’re going to meet and exercise our power and do it.  Congress would retain its power to do so but it wouldn’t be exclusive.  It could be a concurrent power.  I guarantee you, if the states started threatening to impeach Kathleen Sebelius, Congress would get off its duff and impeach Ms. Sebelius for not wanting to be upstaged by the pipsqueaks in the state legislatures.  The impeachment clause is not being used and is never going to be used for the reasons I stated.  So that’s number one.

As far as the releasing of the ICE detainees, I haven’t spent an awful lot of time studying that and reading about the judge’s opinion and under what circumstances they were released.  Again, the attorney general of the United States is supposed to enforce the law.

Caller John:  That’s like the fox watching the hen house, though.

Mike:  No, he’s the attorney general of the United States.  He’s supposed to enforce the United States’ laws.  He should have the ability to prosecute those that are in violation of those laws under what is provided by the act of Congress.  If someone is releasing detainees that aren’t supposed to be released in contravention of a judge’s order, of an order of another branch, the attorney general — he does work for the executive branch — needs to step in and say: Look, if you don’t stop that, I’m going to impeach you or prosecute you under the statute.

Caller John:  Mike, none of that is happening because the attorney general — if you want to look at the impeachable offense of Richard Nixon with Watergate, what’s going on today with gun running and the blatant violation of the Constitution, plus anything that’s a violation that can harm America is clearly defined as impeachable.  There’s no enforcement of any law.  The 530 people enforcing the laws and making the laws for the 300 million people are not doing their job, I don’t care what party they’re in.  There are very few people that are standing up and protecting you and me.

Mike:  John, when the law becomes so voluminous that it cannot be known, it cannot be enforced, by definition.  Federalist Paper No. 61 written by James Madison, live it, love it, learn it.  You’ll read all about Madison saying why the Necessary and Proper Clause must be used very cautiously and judiciously because you don’t want the creation of such a labyrinth of laws that no one can possibly know what it is, and therefore no one could possibly enforce it, or no one could be expected to abide or live under it.  I guarantee you right now, you talking to me on a cellular device is a violation of a law.  I guarantee you me smoking indoors in this studio is a violation of a law.  I guarantee you it is.  I don’t know what statute it is, but I guarantee you that I am violating some federal edict right now.  I guarantee you I poured my water incorrectly today or illegally and I am in violation of a federal law.  The answer to your question is that we are so far out of scale that your question does not merit an answer in consideration of there is no answer and there can be no answer because of the scale of the operation.  I wish I could help you, brother.  I can’t give you any hope for the future that any of this is going to be judiciously repaired anytime soon until the scale issue is resolved.

You’re in New York.  Did you know that at the time the Articles of Confederation were in effect, there were appeals to the Confederation Congress that the Confederation Congress should ask the State of New York to divide itself?  It was too big to be governed as one state.  It had to be split up.  This is in 1783 or 1784, I just read it the other day.  There were people that thought then — this is over 200 years ago — that the State of New York was too large to be governed by one government.  Can you imagine what that gentleman would say today?

End Mike Church Show Transcript