[00:00:04] Broadcasting live from atop the Rocky Mountains, the crossroads of the West, you are listening to the Liberty Roundtable Radio Talk Show.
[00:00:15] The good sheriff, Richard Mack, Tony Pellegrino, Heroic Interventions, Justice Department champions your rights, America's water systems under siege, and the sheriff defies the governor. Happy to have you along, my fellow Americans. I'm Sam Bushman. Liberty Roundtable live starts now.
[00:00:43] Sheriff Mack, welcome back, sir. Thanks, Sam. It's great to be back with you this beautiful Tuesday morning. You got a tremendous quote from your book, The Democrat Murder of America? Sure I do. I could just open the page anywhere and it would totally have a good idea. It would, it's, it's like, it's crazy how amazing this book is.
[00:01:10] Oh, it opened up page 180, a quote from President Washington in his farewell address. Yes. Political parties are likely to become potent engines by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government.
[00:01:34] That is exactly what has happened. That is exactly why we wrote the book, and we've got to wake America up to that fact. Daniel Perkins and Sheriff Mack, everybody, their new book available now, murderofamerica.com. It is the Democrat Murder of America, an intentionally provocative title to make you think, ladies and gentlemen, and then to kind of wonder why we have demagoguery in the first degree everywhere. Tony Pellegrino, welcome to the show, sir. And your thought of the title?
[00:02:05] Yeah, hello. I'm with the American Common Law Academy. We're constitutional advocates in the community, and we help pro se litigants file federal lawsuits for constitutional overreach. What do you think of Sheriff Mack's title, sir? Pardon me? What do you think of Sheriff Mack's title of his new book? Yes, awesome. Looking forward to it. Demagoguery in the first degree is kind of the issue here, folks.
[00:02:32] And really, it's not just attacking the Democratic Party. If you read the book, it's basically saying that parties are a problem. George Washington warned about it. We repeat that warning today. And more importantly, it's about the principles that the Democrats have really gone wholesale in promoting. Many Republicans are on the same page in doing so as well. So, Tony, you're based in the Coeur d'Alene area. You've been involved in constitutional issues for a long time. You're a well-known organizer of people.
[00:03:00] You're not a traditional politician. But you've been a constitutional conservative for quite some time. What got you into the movement, sir? Just basically learning, reading the Constitution for the first time. It was kind of like reading the Bible for me the first time. When I started reading the text, I started getting angry going, Why don't they follow the book? And so, yeah, I started pursuing, going to some liberty conferences and constitutional training.
[00:03:28] And I decided to go the non-regular route as far as getting an attorney. So, I assist pro se litigants to file their own lawsuits, particularly in federal court, Section 1983 lawsuits, because I just started realizing that we don't live in constitutional communities and we need to change the culture.
[00:03:50] Tony's philosophy, ladies and gentlemen, emphasizes that constitutional government depends on informed, active citizens who are willing to participate in their own communities. Sheriff, what do you say to that? Well, I think that's fantastic. You know I love that. It's absolutely wonderful. And by the way, Tony, I will be in the Coeur d'Alene area for a fundraiser on August 11th. And I'd like you to be there.
[00:04:19] It's for the Upstart. No, not Upstart. Anyway, Pastor John Padula's Drug Rehab Center, where my son just graduated about a year ago. And it's fantastic. And anyway, anybody can come and I'll get you the address and date and time and hopefully meet you there. Yeah. And speaking of Idaho, Tony, that seems to be ground zero.
[00:04:47] It's such a focal point for liberty-minded Americans. How come? Why is Idaho so pivotal? Well, we have constitutional carry-up here. Our legislators and senators and lieutenant governor, most of those people are accessible to Idaho. Idaho is very unusual. I live in Pennsylvania and California. You want to have a meeting with your legislator or your senator, it's really difficult to do.
[00:05:14] And they're great Second Amendment advocates up here. So it's horrible about that shooting that happened up here. A friend of mine's cousin got shot in the arm as he was riding the motorcycle by that in and out area up there. But a citizen was able to jump in. So I love Idaho. Ladies and gentlemen, that's the issue. There was a shooting that took place last weekend. It was at an In-N-Out Burger. And we're calling this one Heroic Intervention.
[00:05:42] An armed citizen and an off-duty trooper. Basically, a shot back at the gunman, drove him away from the crowd, and Sheriff Mack saved dozens of lives. Yeah, I believe he did. Really, Sam, when we see a citizen exercising his right to keep and bear arms, protected the entire community. There should have been dozens of people with that. But off-duty cop had his gun with him.
[00:06:12] And an armed citizen saved countless lives. I mean, dozens at least. And, I mean, he would have just had free reign to do whatever he wanted until the cops, you know, four or five minutes later, after dozens are killed, finally show up. This is the statistic.
[00:06:30] Every time some coward does a mass shooting attempt like this, when somebody shows up with a gun, when somebody starts shooting back, they'll either run away, shoot themselves, or give up. And this guy chose to shoot himself. And more often than not, they choose to do that as well. And I don't know, you know, how come that is, if they just choose to do that, or if we're just told that's the case. They're cowards, that's why.
[00:06:59] Sometimes I don't know about that, though. They're sick. And, yeah, you're going to keep shooting until somebody confronts them with a gun. Thank goodness there was a citizen and off-duty cop to do so. All right. Well, the cool part to me about this is that you have a different scenario. This was not a gun-free zone. Thank the heavens. And that's why this good citizen and this wonderful off-duty guy could basically shoot back and drive the shooter away from the crowd and save lives.
[00:07:29] Here's what's interesting. Whenever we have a shooting, the gun, you know, prevention folks come out, the anti-gunners, and they literally say, this is why we need gun control, da-da-da. And, you know, why don't the true gun advocates or the Second Amendment advocates stand up right now with this story, Sheriff Mack, and say, hey, you know what? This proves why Donald Trump should have got rid of gun-free zones the first day like he said he would. Donald, you can do it before the midterms, buddy.
[00:07:55] It would be a huge opportunity for you to show the Republicans who we really are as people that we support the Second Amendment. This is an opportunity for Trump to get rid of gun-free zones. But why isn't everybody touting this story everywhere saying, look, this is the proof in the pudding. Good guys with guns, you call them a rape-me-not, you call them a kill-me-not, you call me, you know, whatever you want to call these things. I'm going to decide that we're going to have to create a new name for guns for this one, right? And the new name ought to be Heroic Interventions.
[00:08:25] That's the new name for guns. What do you think of that, Sheriff? Yeah, that'd be great. I got out my heroic intervention and stopped these thugs. We all know that gun-free zones are a joke. They're stupid. They provide no safety for anyone. They provide no benefit. And so, yeah, I would love to see Trump get rid of those. But at the same time, I'd like to see the American people raise up and get rid of them. The story has been covered a little bit, but certainly not in the mainstream media.
[00:08:55] Where's Gunners of America? Where's the, you know, where's all the gun rights groups still standing up and challenging the mainstream press going, you clowns always, you know, go for the guns. And, you know, most of the time these things happen in gun-free zones so people can't fight back. But look at the church where they fought back from those. The guy that tried to attack the church and said the Southern Poverty Law Center, you know, kind of gave him the inspiration to do it. And that was a gun, a guard that had a gun that fought back in a non-gun-free zone.
[00:09:25] And then this is the same. And, you know, you see it over and over. We need to stand up and make this clear. Well, Sam, there's an issue, and I know we're getting close to a break, but there's an issue in my Supreme Court case that bears this out. Hold on. I want them to skip the break. Go ahead and skip the break. Go ahead, Sheriff. Let's just do this. This is great. You'll remember when I was suing the Clinton administration to stop the gun control associated with the Brady Bill and to save the office of the sheriff from the overreach of the government.
[00:09:53] Now, the only time that any of the seven of us that filed the lawsuit, the seven sheriffs out of 3086 that did this, I was in the courtroom of District Judge John Roll, and he was later killed by a gun. But I mean by a crazed lunatic. But this is the point.
[00:10:19] When I was in his courtroom, the attorney for the federal government stopped cross-examining me and turned to the judge and started giving evidence about how successful the Brady Bill had been in the first four months of its implementation, and that she lied and said they denied 250,000 felons access to guns. But the crime rate went up during that time. But anyway, it was a pack of lies. But he said something that all gun owners in this country need to remember.
[00:10:49] He said this. Madam Counselor, do not pretend in this courtroom that your statistical analysis somehow equates to constitutionality. And all of the gun owners in this country need to remember that. We're not arguing statistics. We're not arguing the efficacy of gun control creating gun-free zones or creating less crime. That's bogus.
[00:11:19] It doesn't change the fact that gun control in the United States is against the law. That's it. Amen. Tony, you want to respond to that one? Yeah. I recently, a couple years ago, one of my students sued Rob Bonta over there, the attorney general of California. Basically, they sent the DOJ of California over there to confiscate this individual's guns. And he was working at a gun store.
[00:11:49] And all of a sudden, you know, they told him, hey, we got to let you go. And then a couple days later, you know, the state California Nazis came over and confiscated his guns. And he called me up and says, can you give me a hand with this? And so he filed a federal lawsuit against the attorney general in the Eastern District. His name was Wineapple versus Bonta. And we got railroaded by the judiciary over there. And he didn't want to go through the Ninth Circuit.
[00:12:14] But interesting, and Sheriff will love this, the Ninth Circuit ruled in a case called United States versus Duarte. Duarte, in the Ninth Circuit, in the text, in the opinion, it says Duarte is an American citizen, thus one of the people whom the Second Amendment protects. And this is the same statute, 922G, the federal statute that says that if you have a felony, you can't keep and bear arms.
[00:12:41] But this was a, Duarte had like a administrative felony. I think it was taxes. And so when we read the Second Amendment, it says the right of the people, okay, to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. So when you look at the language like in Bruin, and then you look at this case right here, they're calling him an American citizen, not a U.S. citizen. Thus one of the people. Okay, when you look at the 14th Amendment, it says all persons.
[00:13:07] And so when you start putting together this insight that I'm talking about, you know, the 14th Amendment says all persons. Nowhere in the Constitution does it says the right of U.S. citizens to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. In Hill versus Hinkle, it talks about this just real quick. You know, it's funny how Hill versus Hinkle says, excuse me, I'm having these pop-ups here. Okay.
[00:13:37] It talks about the difference between the individual and the corporation. There is a clear distinction between the individual and the corporation, the latter being a creation of the state. The United States citizen is called a person. And the Second Amendment says the right of the people to keep and bear arms. And when you're looking at the new language at the Ninth Circuit and at the Supreme Court, they're talking that we the people. We've got to quit acting as persons because all inherent power resides in the people.
[00:14:07] And the people were not using that inherent power. So what do you think of that insight, Sam? I mean, what other reason are they able to execute these red flag laws against people who don't know who they are? If you're going to claim U.S. citizen status, that's not the same as being one of the people in law. Just saying.
[00:14:27] That's why his work, ladies and gentlemen, focuses on encouraging citizens to become more involved in county government, school boards, elections, and other local institutions for lasting change. Sheriff, you know, he brings up some legalese that really matter. It's important to understand differences in words and in terms and in the way they try to marginalize us.
[00:14:52] It really brings up, Tony, what role should sheriffs play in protecting constitutional rights? Well, you know, I've been asking a question. Who lives in the most constitutional county in America, Sam? We should have a contest for someone to make the case that they live in a constitutional county. And like with all these flawed cameras, a government overreach with a fourth and fifth amendment. It's just crazy that, you know, the people need to speak up.
[00:15:21] If all inherent power is in the people, that doesn't mean it's in an attorney. It doesn't mean it's in a legislator. All inherent power is in we, the people. And so we're not doing our job of stepping up. You're right about that fact. So, Sheriff, what do you think about a contest to see who lives in the most constitutional county? And how do we put together a framework to really, you know, make sure there's equal footing for discussion? I think it would be a cool contest. Well, it would. And I started immediately thinking.
[00:15:49] And, Sam, what went through my mind is the counties where they have the most constitutional sheriff. And we could just go. So I would probably start with Berry County, Michigan. Because they have probably the most constitutional sheriff in the country. And he's not going to let the federal government or the state government come into his county and destroy rights or take away guns or do anything else that's contrary to the Constitution inside his county. Bob Songer has done that.
[00:16:20] Bob's health is not doing very well in Klickitat County, Washington. But where the sheriffs have stood, and this New York sheriff now is standing against the governor saying, oh, you made it against the law for any sheriff or a law enforcement officer to assist ICE? Guess what, governor? I'm going to do it anyway. You're not my boss. The people of my county are my boss. And you can't tell me what to do.
[00:16:46] And the president of the United States cannot tell him what to do because he is the chief law enforcement officer in his county. He is the CLEO, just like my Supreme Court. You're right about that for sure. Tony, I think it's a great contest, but I think we need to put together criteria to determine it. So I think that Richard has pointed out, Sheriff Mack has pointed out some serious realities about the value of a county sheriff, a constitutional one.
[00:17:13] But I also think you've got to be in a state that supports constitutionality to some degree as well, just because if you go to a county that's more constitutional but you have a hostile state, at some point, the more you push for constitutional principles, they'll try to create a showdown with the state. So anyway, it seems to me that we need to get together kind of a criteria by which we determine this. What do you say? Yeah, I think, first of all, I want to know who wants to, you know, honor the Fifth Amendment.
[00:17:41] You know, we have these prosecutorial misconduct. You know, a lot of these prostitutors, I mean prosecutors, they have a discretion on these cases that they want to bring across, you know, against their political enemies. And, you know, the Fifth Amendment says that in order to convict someone of a crime, you have to have a grand jury indictment.
[00:18:01] And we saw with Trump how this prosecutorial abuse was taking place where we need to go back to the foundational principles of the Fifth Amendment, where you have an independent grand jury that isn't on a puppet strings of a prosecutor that's going to leave out a lot of the facts. They don't let these grand juries operate independently. I think that's an important point. I also think one of the things that we need to do is, you know, if we're going to have a constitutional county, a county sheriff is important.
[00:18:31] No question that's constitutional. Having a constitutional DA, having a constitutional county commission or county advisors, whatever you call them in your area. And then this one I think is critical too, Tony. How do you recruit and train ordinary citizens to become effective constitutional leaders? So I would submit that the constitutional leadership of people on the ground that will back a constitutional sheriff is just as critical as having a constitutional sheriff.
[00:18:59] Yes, and I believe that, you know, law enforcement needs educated, you know, on constitutional matters. If you see a lot of these First Amendment auditors, a lot of them are agitators, but they're exercising their rights. And I've noticed a lot of law enforcement showing up, you know, with these First Amendment auditors that don't know the First Amendment. And people are getting arrested for exercising their rights. I had a guy out here, Robert Jones, and over here in the Boise area, he was protesting on a sidewalk.
[00:19:27] And, you know, his attorney was a marshmallow. And now he went to jail for exercising constitutional protected conduct. This happens in a lot of communities, and it's just very sad. Anyway, we've got to put together criteria, though. I think Tony's on to something. We ought to have a contest and see where the most constitutional county and the most constitutional states are, ladies and gentlemen. And then patriots need to move, too, and strengthen those areas. That's for sure. So, Sheriff Mack, you ask everybody that comes on as a guest a couple of questions. Let's do it. Okay.
[00:19:57] Yeah. Tony, two things. Number one, what is the absolute worst thing happening to America today? What's the number one thing we the people, you, me, Sam, all of us should be focused on fixing in America to get us back on track? Family court. Hands down. Family court. They are a nightmare. They do not follow due process.
[00:20:26] There's people that can't see their own children because of allegations, and they haven't been convicted of any crime. And so you need a governmental compelled interest for them to be able to step in under strict scrutiny that somebody that these kids are in danger. And family court is a nightmare. That is an excellent one. That's the first time anybody said that. I've always said corruption in government, and that kind of covers that. But you're right.
[00:20:52] CPS and family courts taking children away from usually fathers, and fathers the same. And it's happened in my family. And I'll tell you what. We've been fighting it for 15 years, and it's just absolutely a horrible, horrible nightmare. They drain you financially. They send you to bankruptcy, and they just keep going.
[00:21:17] And do you know that there's no state that actually goes after women who intentionally make false accusations against the boyfriend or husband? No state protects the rights of the husband. I tried to stay out of this battle for years because, you know, kids are involved, and each parent's have their arguments.
[00:21:38] But I ended up getting drug in by a friend of mine who filed a constitutional challenge of the best interest of the child applied to his case. And this constitutional challenge is on the desk of Judge Jeanine Pirro over there. She's the attorney general now of the District of Columbia, and we're suing the District of Columbia over that very statute. See, that's color of law. That's not the law. And I think she's an egotistical idiot.
[00:22:06] Well, we're going to see if she, you know, does our constitutional challenge. It's been sitting on her desk for four months. And like I said, we're doing the District of Columbia over this because the Title IV funding gives them motivation to separate the children, and so they get federal funding. And the thing about the federal funding is it's a grant, and when you receive a grant, you have to honor the conditions. In order to get a federal award like they did in COVID, you have to make sure you don't use that money prejudicially.
[00:22:34] You can't violate federal statutes, and you can't violate the Constitution. I mean, emoluments violations all over the place. Well, after the break, that's what I want to talk to you about. I want to talk to you about helping me file a lawsuit against the federal government. Yeah. I'm serious. All I can tell you, ladies and gentlemen, is Donald Trump is mad at Jeanine Shapiro as well because she didn't go ahead and prosecute the folks with regards. To the, I don't know, the viewing pool. What's that thing called? The pond. The pond in the mall.
[00:23:05] Yeah, but the something pool. What's it called? Reflective pool or whatever, reflection pool. Yeah. Anyway, and so, you know, he says there's vandalism there, and she basically threw out the case. And, you know, I don't really know the circumstances of that. I'd like to hear her side of the story, but Donald Trump says she folded like an umbrella, and he's pretty mad at her and stuff like that. And she did something else just recently, a couple of months ago, that we were really concerned about. Sheriff, what was it? Do you remember? Yeah, the gun control.
[00:23:30] She told anybody bringing a gun into Washington, D.C., better be ready to have it confiscated and go to jail. My response is she absolutely should be impeached over that because, you know what? That's against the law. She can't be saying that kind of stuff. That's when Trump should have fired her. That's when he really should have gotten mad, you know, but he didn't. Yeah, but Trump doesn't fire. He just talks bad about it. He'll just say she's got an ugly nose or something, you know. He won't really do anything serious. He'll just talk. Oh, she's ugly. She's this. She folded like an umbrella.
[00:24:00] It's a cool, you know, teaser for the audience, but it's not really an action. Why don't we impeach her for her crimes? That's my humble opinion. Take it for what it's worth. Ladies and gentlemen, you've got Tony Pellegrino with us. Do you have a website for your academy, Tony? That's the American Common Law Academy. You can catch us on the Internet with our website at aclalaw.net. aclalaw.net, ladies and gentlemen.
[00:24:28] For Sheriff Richard Mack, cspway.org. For Tony Pellegrino, I'm Sam Bushman. God save our constitutional republic. It's worth it when you try.