How Liberal Judges are Failing Americans

Transcript:

Attorney Leahy:
Welcome back. This is our special July 4th edition of the IRS radio hour.
There’s nothing more America, American, America American
Jim Leahy:
Plural?
Attorney Leahy:
Then the IRS , the Internal Revenue Service
Jim Leahy:
Which is sad to say
Attorney Leahy:
It is sad to say. But it’s true.
And, But What segment we are now Jim
Jim Leahy:
It’s the Blog segment
It’s the Blog segment; The Blog, The Blog
Attorney Leahy:
Now I’m gonna have to tell you that your sister Jessica..
Jim Leahy:
Yes.
Attorney Leahy:
Redid the beginning of the blog segment on our videos and it’s actually really good. You have to see it. I will show it to you.
Jim Leahy:
Really?
Attorney Leahy:
Yeah. So yeah
Jim Leahy:
Why are telling me this now?
Attorney Leahy:
You listeners, go, we’re gonna put it on and you’ll see on any of the blog segments
Jim Leahy:
I have to go to ChicagoTaxTeam.com
Attorney Leahy:
ChicagoTaxTeam.com. And you will see the Blog segment. Again, she did a really nice beginning for the Blog Segment. Blog Segment, Blog Segment.
Jim Leahy:
Hey, you need a any videos edited whatsoever, I mean this isn’t… Hey Jessica Leahy is the best in the business.
Attorney Leahy:
That’s true and I think she does a great job for us. But I wanted to point out that she just did I just
Saw it the other day. So really good.
This segment, we’re going to talk, I had written a blog segment to describe my most common clients and what goes into solving IRS problems, but I’m going to save that for another day
Jim Leahy:
For a rainy day
Attorney Leahy:
Well it doesn’t have to rain. But I’m saving it for another day, because it’s the fourth of July and because Jimmy and I, on the way here had a very nice discussion about the justices and what’s going on. So there’s two instances that really brought this matter up. One is this new
Supreme Court decision in which Anthony Kennedy went with the liberal justices and they’ve got a 5 to 3 decision – because there’s only eight of them now.
Jim Leahy:
Ok.
Attorney Leahy:
So, he want with it the more liberal wing of the of the court and decided that that Texas that required their abortion clinics to have the doctors at abortion clinics have access to, or admission access to hospitals close by so if there’s an emergency they could, the women could get emergency healthcare. The Court said nah…you can’t do that. That’s an imposition. That might require some women to travel further to get an abortion, and we can’t have that. That’s an imposition of their rights.
Jim Leahy:
that’s just…that doesn’t seem correct
Attorney Leahy:
Doesn’t make any sense to me. You know it seems, kind of opposite. There’s so much about everything that happens in America now seems to be more control more more more we want more safety. Cars are you can’t have a car that doesn’t have every safety feature in the world on it because
Jim Leahy:
That would cost more
Attorney Leahy:
Which costs more money. And the government, all this stuff. They don’t want to have sugar, they don’t want to us to have. You know they’re regulating everything
Jim Leahy:
Which costs more.
Attorney Leahy:
They’re regulating everything. But..
Jim Leahy:
I mean we grow tobacco in this in the country, and it is it’s $11 a pack. I don’t smoke anymore.
Attorney Leahy:
No? Well good for you.
Jim Leahy:
I’m not. I’m not a smoker. I’m just saying. I don’t think it should be $11 pack.
Attorney Leahy:
But it seems like opposite of what’s going on. Same thing with immigration. You know, we let, you know, it’s like we bend over backwards and don’t apply the law and so many areas. And here, it seems, like they want safety measures, and they say “No No, You can’t have any
safety measures. you can’t do that. That’s ridiculous.
So, then the second one was there is a Justice here, I shouldn’t call him a Justice, a judge here in the seventh circuit and we’re in the seventh circuit here in Chicago and the court is downtown. And Judge Posner is a judge here in the US Court of Appeals Seventh Circuit and of Judge that I admired. I read a lot of his opinions when I was in law school. He’s been around forever. He was appointed by Ronald Reagan, and he’s been around forever. And I read a lot of his opinions, and I admired him. And I thought he was a very well thought out, conservative jurist. But this is what he said:
“And on another note about academia and practical law, I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, day, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution, the history of its enactment, its amendments, and the implication across the centuries. Well just a little more than two centuries, and of course less for many of
the amendments. 18th century guys, however smart, could not foresee the culture technology etc of the 21st century which means that the original Constitution the Bill of Rights the post-civil war the amendments including the 14th, do not speak to today.
David Strauss is Right. The Supreme Court treats the Constitution like it is authorizing the court to create a common law of constitutional law based on current concerns, not what those 18th century guys were worrying about. In short, let’s not let the dead bury the living.”
So, we don’t have to.. Now, this gentleman and when you take over the judiciary, when you get sworn in,
Jim Leahy:
Yes.
Attorney Leahy:
You take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, and if the Constitution doesn’t apply, well then, there are ways in the Constitution to change it, to make it apply. First off, I think it applies because it’s about human nature not about technology, not about what kind or mode of transportation they have.
Jim Leahy:
And that’s a failure that a lot of people have. They go, well, for example, this is such a largely talked about amendment, the Second Amendment, you know it was meant for muskets not semi-automatic fire. And the argument goes, it’s basic human nature that this Constitution applies to. I have argued with people, especially people who are in psychology, I’m not offending anyone, I’m just trying to say…hey I didn’t graduate college…so I’m just saying that you know if you graduate college whatever made you, god bless you, you did something I couldn’t do… and I’m not saying I can’t…
Attorney Leahy:
OK, OK, let’s move on for that because I think that, I think
Jim Leahy:
Let me, let me say my piece.
Attorney Leahy:
Got it.
Jim Leahy:
Well thanks for that Steven, what was I trying to say?
Attorney Leahy:
I don’t know.
Jim Leahy:
Oh, they were arguing that you know we people are you basic human nature and this and that but that’s what the Constitution is meant for. Tat’s what the Constitution is implemented for if they followed their history.
Attorney Leahy:
In my mind, if these men were making the Constitution today, they would still have the Second Amendment. They still have the First Amendment. They wouldn’t say “Oh, we don’t need the Second Amendment because we have dangerous guns.” No. They would still have the Second Amendment. What we were talking about is – Why is it that these conservative justices, that go on these courts, later become more liberal. But never the liberal judges become more conservative. Why is that? And then Jim would say “Well maybe we’re on the wrong side.”
Jim Leahy:
That’s what I asked, “is conservatism, and actually constitutionalism, on the wrong side?” I mean, do they know something that I don’t know? I mean they are in a position of power. That, I mean, they are trusted with our laws and I…
Attorney Leahy:
And my response to that is exactly what you just said, they are men in positions of power, and that power gives them the authority to do whatever they want. And when you’re conservative, you can’t exercise that power. You have to follow others who put a constitution and limits on your power. And so what they’re saying is “I don’t need them to limit my power. I’m smarter than them. I know what has to be done and I’m going to do it the way I see fit. Not…regardless of what the Constitution says.” And I think that’s why conservative judges & justices become liberal, because they start putting their own ideas in place of everybody else’s ideas and somehow think they’re better than everybody else and they don’t need the Constitution to limit the effect they have on mankind.
Jim Leahy:
Yeah
Attorney Leahy:
And that’s exactly why we need the Constitution! Because judge people like Posner, and people like a Kennedy should follow the law, and not make it up as they go along.
Jim Leahy:
That is that is what that is for. And that is what that document is for, is to limit those kind of people that are the “outside the box” thinkers.
Attorney Leahy:
The liberal thinkers, they don’t care about what the Constitution says. They are more outcome-based. They figure the way, what the outcome should be, and then figure a way around it. Instead of following it.
Kokinen Clip:
“Where ever we can, we follow the law.”
Attorney Leahy:
Exactly. And they don’t always follow the law, because they don’t want to. Because it doesn’t do with, it doesn’t reach them to the conclusion they want to be at. And that’s why we have liberal justices.
Jim Leahy:
People are taking a look at the government is such a wrong in such a wrong way. It’s we the people, not they the enthroned, they the privileged.
Attorney Leahy:
At least it use to be. And I think, the only thing that gives me hope, and this
Jim Leahy:
Brexit
Attorney Leahy:
Brexit, what ever it’s called. Whatever it is. It gives me hope. Why? Because nobody wanted that. The elites didn’t want it. The media, the media didn’t want it. Those in charge didn’t want it. And we still going to have to fight it because, I tell you, just because they voted in doesn’t mean these people are going to do what they said they’re supposed to do, They’re not going to. And we have people like Kerry, Secretary of State telling us how finding ways to get around their vote. So, that, to me is ridiculous and, and, and he should, that right there, he should be removed just for that opinion. My own opinion.
Jim Leahy:
Well, if the IRS is coming after you and they don’t like your opinion on them, remember ladies and gentleman there s only one person to call, one law firm to call, which is Opem Tax Resolutions at 312-664-6649 or visit ChicagoTaxTeam.com. Now, stay tuned because after the commercial break more Fourth of July special here on the IRS Radio Hour, is comin at you, here on AM 560
Attorney Leahy & Jim Leahy:
The Answer

Joan McCarthy- Lasonde For Congress

By Steven A Leahy

The general election is right around the corner! We each must take a stand to move our Country forward. To that end, I am endorsing Joan McCathy-Lasonde for Congress in Illinois’ 9th Congressional District. To put my cards on the table, my Son, Jake, volunteers for Mrs. Lasonde’s campaign. He is 17 years old and knows enough about politics to know we need citizens like Joan McCarthy-Lasonde to take an active role in our government.

Candidate Lasonde was born, grew up and currently resides in Illinois’ 9th Congressional District. Originally from Rodgers Park, she grew up in Skokie, and now lives in Wilmette. She is a working mother of 3 (including a foster Child) with 25 years of professional experience. She has always been involved in her community: one of the founding members of the Policy Circle, a women-run non-profit organization focused on educating everyday Americans on state and federal policy issues including education, healthcare, taxes, pensions, and unfunded liabilities. She has worked on numerous political campaigns, and was an officer at the New Trier Republican Organization.

Joan is a member of the board of directors of the Illinois State Crime Commission, focused on human trafficking and the heroin epidemic. In Wilmette, where she now lives, she volunteers at her daughters’ schools, including being a Girl Scout Troop leader and a PREP teacher at Saint Francis Xavier school. Joan was on the Board at Evanston School Children’s Clothing Association and the League of Women Voters.

Joan McCathery-Lasonde is running for Congress because she wants to turn America’s national priorities towards the following:

• Economic growth and opportunity — a tax code and that promotes employment and expansion, and a regulatory system that makes cost/benefit sense.
• Security — enforcing our borders and executing a strong, coherent strategy for national security and homeland safety.
• Restoring a friendly relationship with Israel and unequivocal commitment to its safety.

Limited government — measuring the success of social programs by how many are lifted out, not added in.

I think Joan is a GREAT candidate. But, to be fair, her opponent necessitates my position. Joan McCarthy-Lasonde is running against Jan Schakowsky, the long entrenched Democratic party place holder. Ms. Schakowsky has held office since 1999. She was handed the office after Sidney Yates, the Democrat Congressman of the district for nearly 50 years, stepped aside at the age of 89. Ms. Schakowsky is one of the most “PROGRESSIVE” members of Congress and is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Reason enough to oppose her re-election.

You may remember Ms. Schakowsky’s husband, Robert Creamer. Yes, that Robert Creamer. The political lobbyist accused of tax violations and $2.3 million in bank fraud. Who was found guilty of 2 felony counts and did time in a Federal Penitentiary. This all happened while Ms. Schakosky was in Congress. But Ms. Schakosky knew nothing about these crimes.

Because the 9th Congressional District has been dominated by liberal Democrats since at least 1944, election of Joan McCarthy-Lasonde is an up hill battle. But a battle well fought. The polls show an surprisingly close race. Get out and Vote for Joan McCarthy Lasonde for US Congress in the 9th Congressional District.

Joan McCarthy-Lasonde will be our very special guest on the IRS Radio Hour this Sunday June 26, 2016. Tune in to learn more about this candidate. And, remember, if you have IRS Problems, or any other financial issues, give Opem Tax Resolutions and the Law Office of Steven A. Leahy, PC a call at 312-664-6649.