27

I'm Judge Andrew Napolitano and I'm happy to have landed in the Gulch. Ask Me Anything.

Posted by JudgeNap 10 years, 4 months ago to Books
284 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

I'm Judge Andrew Napolitano, Senior Judicial Analyst for Fox News Channel, and New York Times best selling author. I was the youngest life-tenured Superior Court judge in the history of the State of New Jersey and I'll be here today from 1PM to 2PM ET to take your questions and to talk about my new book "Suicide Pact" (http://suicidepactbook.com/), a book exposing the alarming history of presidential power grabs performed in the name of national security.

Today through Wednesday, when you buy "Suicide Pact", you'll be eligible to get another one of my books, "The Freedom Answer Book", for free. Find details here: http://suicidepactbook.com/bookbomb.php

Gulch Producers get a third book of mine, "Theodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom", for free as well. Find details here: http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/1a...

Alex will be helping me out with my today by reading me the questions over the phone and typing my responses. I look forward to your questions and comments. I'll be back at 1PM ET.

- - - - - - - - - -

EDIT 1: 12.08.14 1PM: The Judge is here. Here we go.

EDIT 2: 12.08.14 2PM: The Judge has left the building! Check out his farewell comment here: http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/1b...

- - - - - - - - - -

PROOF: https://twitter.com/Judgenap/status/5419...

- - - - - - - - - -

BUY THE BOOK: "Suicide Pact" http://suicidepactbook.com/

- - - - - - - - - -

FROM SCOTT: The Judge will be here at 1PM ET. Post your questions here now as comments below. If you have multiple questions, please post them individually. Try and keep the questions brief so the Judge can get through as many as possible. Also, make sure to vote on the questions (and this post) as the best will rise to the the top of the list.

After 1PM ET, refresh this page with your browser to see the Judge's replies as they come in.

- - - - - - - - - -

NOT YET A GULCH PRODUCER?
- Create a new Galt's Gulch Account: https://galtsgulchonline.appspot.com/acc...
- Upgrade an existing Galt's Gulch Account: http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/account/...

- - - - - - - - - -

All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 10.
  • Posted by $ ssilver 10 years, 4 months ago
    Judge,

    Would it be constitutional to restrict campaign donations to candidates a voter is actually eligible to vote for? This would prevent people in one state (or area within a state) from influencing local elections in another state (or area within a state). It would also eliminate union and corporate donations.

    Let the individual donate with no limits to those candidates he can actually vote for. The only requirements would be eligibility to vote for the candidate. As far as public disclosure, I am not sure. If your vote is secret, maybe your donation should also be secret.
    Sam Silver


    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by grizzld 10 years, 4 months ago
    Judge Napolitano: I always enjoy your insights on FOX news. Would you please explain if oboma's immigration order is within the law or outside of it?
    thanks
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ethrivrav 10 years, 4 months ago
    When the states ratified the constitution, was it with the knowledge that the decision was irreversible, i.e. with no possibility of any future secession? It wouldn't seem likely they would voluntarily surrender this check on federal power, but it would seem that there must be some legal basis for this belief in the roach motel theory of the constitution when listening to conventional wisdom.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by BostonTEA 10 years, 4 months ago
    The immigration issue splits Libertarians, to a certain extent - free flow of labor versus 'how can you have open borders and a wide-open social safety net.' What are your thoughts on immigration, and where do you think most libertarians fall on this issue?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ HarmonKaslow 10 years, 4 months ago
    Judge ... welcome to the Gulch. You're a hero and articulate spokesman for many of us. As you well know, many people view the story of Atlas Shrugged as prophetic ... it seems to me that Ayn Rand warned us against an expanding executive branch of government where the "Head of State" (e.g. president) issued "directives" and regulations on the most productive, among other issues. Presidents during my lifetime have expanded the federal government ... and President Obama has seem to become a specialist at avoiding the legislative process to pursue his agenda. Without crippling the US economy (e.g. not funding the government), what are the constitutional tools or legal precedence available to us to reel in this exercise (e.g. abuse) of power by the Executive Branch?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Eudaimonia 10 years, 4 months ago
    In response to President Obama's announcement of unilateral action on immigration, Senator Ted Cruz went to the Senate rostrum and gave an updated version of Cicero's speech calling out Catiline and his conspiracy.

    I have seen little coverage of this, but I take it to mean that the Tea Party coalition in Congress is not backing down (which I consider a good thing).

    Do the players on both sides of the Ruling Class coin (Democrat Marxists and Republican Cronyists) understand the gauntlet that was dropped?
    Or again, do they not care?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ dballing 10 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    There is no such provision for Texas. That's an urban legend unsupported by the annexation documentation.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 10 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hello Mr. DeSapio,
    Thank you. I will get right on it. I will try to edit it down. I apologize in advance for the inevitable duplication that may result.
    Regards,
    O.A.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mdk2608 10 years, 4 months ago
    Judge, Up here in the Midwest it is still difficult to buy ammunition for certain types of firearms. Do you believe there is a concerted effort on behalf of the federal government to implement a form of gun control through restriction of ammunition or is it simply the case where the manufacturers can not keep up with demand?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I think they realize it all too well, but they aren't concerned. They also dismiss anything that does not fit their agenda.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by JackG 10 years, 4 months ago
    With impending Republican majority in Congress, ostensibly by those elected largely on the basis of conservative values, what are the mechanisms and chances for replacement of Republican House and Senate leaders who continue to undermine the values of the voters?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Tbird7553 10 years, 4 months ago
    Which of the following 'ism's' is closest to your beliefs: Objectivism or Libertarianism?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Non_mooching_artist 10 years, 4 months ago
    What is your opinion of Eric Holder's involvement in State issues, and his connection to Fast and Furious?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by PMulvey 10 years, 4 months ago
    Checks and balances are broken. Government branches don’t balance when corrupted. Our backstop was supposedly the media establishment. Yet they too have been corrupted. The only effective way to challenge the shielded media is to make it personal. Lamenting “the main stream media” is useless. But calling out Brian Williams, Scott Pelley, or David Muir, would actually get results. Why not have it start with Judge Napolitano, giving us the straight talk we deserve. Making it personal will make it effective, but that takes courage.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Eudaimonia 10 years, 4 months ago
    The best short commentary I've read to date on the ideological schism in the US was Dr. Angelo Codevilla's piece, "America's Ruling Class and The Perils of Revolution" which appeared in the American Spectator Summer edition of 2010.
    http://spectator.org/articles/39326/amer...

    In it, Dr. Codevilla described the contempt which both sides of the political aisle (The Ruling Class) view the inconvenient taxpayers (The Country Class).
    Dr. Codevilla's assertions were spectacularly borne out with the revelation of Dr. Jonathan Gruber's now infamous (yet mostly unreported) "stupid Americans" claims.

    I often wonder if the D.C. beltway understands that its contempt for us is reciprocal and that, in many ways, they have irreparably damaged their trust with us in that stupid, stupid Country Class.
    As you have much, much more experience with the D.C. beltway players and their mindset, in your opinion,
    1) Do they realize this?
    2) If they do realize it, are they concerned or do they dismiss it?
    3) If they are concerned do they realize that they are fighting the will of the people and that history almost never remembers well the people who do so?
    4) If they dismiss it, do they realize that people like me, and I'm sure others, are already referring to D.C. as Nouveau Versailles?

    Thank you for taking the time to visit us here.
    I look forward to placing your book on my stack of stuff to read.

    Eudaimonia, (Rick)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Tbird7553 10 years, 4 months ago
    Shouldn't the new Republican Congress' first action be a balanced budget amendment?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mdk2608 10 years, 4 months ago
    Judge, When you are on television do you find you have to temper your true feelings on a given topic for public consumption?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by genevallee 10 years, 4 months ago
    Judge, I really listen to everything you tell us on television. Have you ever considered running for President? It would restore my faith in this government if you were President!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by greenhornet 10 years, 4 months ago
    Is the President the Commander and Chief without a Declaration of war? and is this why we are in a constant state of war, to give them war time powers?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by rogers13 10 years, 4 months ago
    It's always about the money. Is there a legal way to cut off the flow of our money to Washington... escrow, for instance?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by ggiavelli 10 years, 4 months ago
    Does any state have the right to succeed after Lincoln?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by gaiagal 10 years, 4 months ago
    Welcome Judge! I would like to say thank you for your public voice of sanity.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And what would be the point of creating another account? Getting around my exile? No thanks, I don't weasel.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • 15
    Posted by AmericanGreatness 10 years, 4 months ago
    Has our Republic always been as fragile as it now appears (i.e.- has The Constitution always been this easy to thwart), depending only on the honor of those in power? Or, are the powers of the other branches to control the executive branch sufficiently strong to reign in an imperialist President, but we're hamstrung by gutless leaders unwilling to use the power The Founding Fathers gave them?
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo