top of page

Immunity Ruling Highlights Politicization of Justice System: WKIM (Memphis, TN) Fox News Interview

Off the heels of his latest speech with grassroots activists and his featured leadership at the national Faith and Freedom conference, President John Pudner returned as Fox News Radio’s featured guest, starting out his latest tour in Memphis, Tennessee to analyze the Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. United States, a landmark case on the pivotal issue of presidential immunity, in which the Court stated a former president is entitled to absolute immunity for actions within their constitutional authority and presumptive immunity for all official acts.

While this particular event is based on Special Prosecutor Jack Smith's indictments against former President Trump, it's merely a part of a wider hyper-politicization of the Justice Department under President Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland. The department was already under strict scrutiny after the Obama era and then-AG Eric Holder's scandals, ranging from their scheme to arm Mexican drug cartels in what was dubbed "Operation Fast and Furious" to, in coordination with the IRS, their targeting of conservative organizations to defraud them of their tax-except status. However, things have only become more blatant and divisive in the Biden era, with the Department's targeting of concerned parents at school board meetings under the guise of counterterrorism, charging of over 25 pro-life activists in 2022 alone, and coordination with the FBI and other arms of the government to target Catholics as potential domestic terrorists.

One doesn't need to go further to prove this politicization than the appointment of Jack Smith, much less the unchecked power of Justice Dept. appointments itself, much less the investigation itself. Despite a storied history of failed, blatantly partisan prosecutions, including an eerily similar case against former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, the Biden Justice Department under AG Garland, once a Supreme Court nominee himself, appointed Jack Smith to lead the case against former President Trump. However, as Pudner notes, this seems to be a purposeful decision to get a pre-determined result – to bankrupt, imprison, and/or get him off the ballot. 

While the Court’s ruling has set back Smith’s prosecution by months, all but ensuring no movement prior to the Presidential Election, the Special Prosecutor plans to continue his case even after Election Day this fall, not only likely leading to increased uncertainty, division, and chaos should former President Trump win, but as Punder and hosts Tim Van Horn and Ditch explain, continue a dangerous precedent for our Republic - the troubling and continued politicization of our justice system.

To learn more about TBOR Action's efforts on topics including election integrity, please click here.

The following transcript from this interview is presented in its entirety with minor edits:


Trump, Supreme Court, immunity, prosecution, democracy, election, constitution


Tim Van Horn, Ditch, and TBOR Action President John Pudner


Tim Van Horn  00:00

John Pudner joins us this morning. Thank you for joining us in Memphis. How are you doing?


John Pudner  00:10

Good, thanks for having me!


Tim Van Horn  00:11

Huge, huge day. Supreme Court wrapping things up yesterday, and of course last week, several big decisions, but I mean, let's be honest, all eyes were on the the decision regarding presidential immunity.


John Pudner  00:26

Yes, and for the left, you want to say this is just an out of the blue new preceden, I think the Supreme Court typically rules when something that seemed obvious is challenged. If you'd had a prosecutor like Jack Smith, focused on trying to bankrupt, inprison, and throw political opponents off the ballot, 100 years ago, you probably would have the same Supreme Court decision 100 years ago.


Ditch  00:50

They brought this on themselves.


John Pudner  00:54

They did. This has been the basis of their campaign, went through prosecution, and now what are they left with?


Ditch  01:04

It's aggravating, it's complete transparency now to watch them meltdown, because they did bring it on themselves, with all of these ridiculous prosecutions of a man. We keep seeing in the headlines saying it's the Trump immunity case from the Supreme Court, but it's I've been saying all morning, John, and you maybe agree with me or not, but it's sort of been the unspoken rule all along. It just took the Jack Smith's of the world to push this to a point where the Supreme Court finally had to say they're gonna have to put this in writing.


John Pudner  01:45

You nailed it exactly. If this weren't the case, presidents would be prosecuted for people who died in wars that they authorized over the years, and you have to be able to act as a president. As Roberts said in the decision, you have to be able to make your judgment in what's in the public interest, and not what might I be prosecuted for if the other party is in power after I leave office.


Tim Van Horn  02:10

Well, and also, the hesitation that could come on something that might need to be a spur of the moment decision for better or for worse. When you have to armchair quarterback when time is at a premium, that could be a problem in the here and now for sure, so John, with this, what's the fallout? Here we are the day after, what are the consequences here? We hear and see the gnashing of teeth on national media, but what does this really mean as Trump heads back to the courtroom on multiple cases? I think what it means is we're actually going to have to choose a president based on who people vote for in an election.


Ditch  02:53

What! That's crazy!


John Pudner  03:03

And do note, they did not throw the indictment out. What Trump wanted was a dismissal of the indictment, but they can still pursue this, and we'll see how interested they are in pursuing it after the election. If Biden somehow came back and won, you know, would there even really be the interest in this?


Ditch  03:23

Here's the thing, John. Just because the constitution prevailed yesterday, and all Americans should actually be excited about the fact that our system still works, and, had this been different, the argument is they say the Constitution works when it's in your favor. It's in everyone's favor. The analogies coming from some people, these hyperbolic analogies, how the President wants to go hire a SEAL Team Six to kill somebody, and he can do it. Those are just so over the top, hyperbolic, ridiculous scenarios that don't play into reality, they do no good when they when they use those kinds of analogies, and you got people like AOC now saying she's going to...


Tim Van Horn  04:20

File articles of impeachment against unnamed Supreme Court justices. Gee, I wonder which ones, John?


John Pudner  04:29

Well, it could be you know, Jackson, the most liberal one, since she sided with the J6 protester in the other decision. I think that was the most fascinating vote this last week, because she said, walking into the Capitol for four minutes and leaving shouldn't have you thrown in prison. They even lost the very liberal vote on that, but obviously, they've been focused on intimidating Supreme Court Justice, keeping them off the court, from Bourke to Kavanaugh, that's their focus- to win through threats and prosecutions. That's not how the democracy, or the courts, were set up.


Ditch  05:05

And isn't it awesome how, while it's frustrating as it's happening, and I'm talking about the intimidation, and these ridiculous threats, but when it's all said and done, it works? The system is working based on our Constitution, and a rule of law that we all abide by. Well, not all of us, because let's not forget what he said last night...


President Biden  05:30

"I know I will respect the limits of the presidential powers I have for three and a half years. The Supreme Court blocked me from relieving student debt, but they didn't stop me!"


Ditch  05:44

They just don't get it. It's all emotional. That's what we've established here in Memphis Morning News - you have logic, and you have emotion, and they are absolutely furiously operating on emotions, and they can't see through the fog of their emotions.


John Pudner  06:02

Absolutely, I think the closing thing here is a poll, that was very interesting...Democrats have spent four years campaigning on protecting democracy, and that Republicans and Trump the threat, that's been their theme. Now, for the first time, Americans are evenly split on who's the bigger threat to democracy. 47% say that democracy is safe if Trump wins , 48% if Biden wins. This would be like if you suddenly said half the people think Biden is better on the border than Trump. For them to only be even on what they've made their lead issue, and one they had a huge edge in coming out of the in January 6th and three years of talking about that. Two years ago, the Democrats had a huge edge on people who thought would protect democracy, but it's 50/50 now because of the way they've gone about bankrupting your opponent, throw them in prison, and keep them off the ballot. I mean, that's the threat to democracy right now.


Tim Van Horn  07:05

It's hard to believe we're in July, which means we are now almost just four months away from Election Day, so I'm guessing the shenanigans will only ramp up even more, especially if there's an air of desperation on whether or not Joe Biden will or won't dig his heels in and move toward running for the second term on Election Day, although it seems like so far he will do just that. John, we're going to leave it at that. John Pudner, thank you so much for joining us here.


bottom of page