take the clicker. see this right here . y okay, i have no idea how to do it here . just making this up as we go along then you hit record and then ask you a question. all right. one time only or que every epis. all right. every episode of the angry man o go oh god. okay, yeah. . i hear your producers laughing in the background all laughing because it s easy. they re laughing at youy and e because we re hilarious.me all right. we love your show. we love you. we ll see you tomorrow. all right. i m laura ingraham. this is ingraham angle from washington tonight . writes for all that s the focus of tonight s angle now it wasn t until about 1992 when i began my clerkship for justice clarence thomas for thai really began to pay attention to how the media writes about the supreme court s. so i m talking about the new york times and the washingtonew post y time magazine, newsweek, et cetera. television reporters 90% of them believe that the court rulings were radical and outside the
and listed the well known mass shootingsde in america like you ve all day buffalo, orlando ,newton, dayton and of courselo talked about all the horrors of that . well, alito justice hth alito, who is in the majority wrote separately in a concurrence he slapped back atg justice breyer saying, you know, why does the dissent think it s relevant to recountth the mass shootings that have occurred in recent years? doesave the dissent think that laws like new york s prevent or deter such atrocities? well, the person bent on carrying out a mass shootingg be stopped if he knows that it is illegal to carry a handgun outside the home and happens to just then account foror the fact that one of the mass shootings near the top of its list took place in buffalo. the new york law at issue in this case obviously did not s stop that perpetrator. i don t know. that s a heck of a retirement sendoff for breyer, isn t it? now another obvious reason the court got it righton reactions from some of the most
unhinged personalities out there like former sports guy keith olbermann who tweeted that the rulinguy shows that the court should be dissolved and advises that states just ignore the ruling. now that s a neat trick. just ignore the court. remember, these are the same people who are called to early warning about how under republicans democracy is atis risk, democracy is in peril. call me crazy. c i think that olbermann should just memorabilia collectingor because he s actually really good atab that . of course, this is how it always works out with these people when they don t get their way, they want to tear down the entire system. in other words, abolish the electoral college burn city block, tear down statues, statues and pack the court. now forget packing the court. just dissolve it altogether.
were authorized to carry a weapon concealed in the city. now john schuyler chambers, a lawyer who helped s a lot of new yorkers get these gun permits for more than twomi decades now said that they can get their own security. but with the internet, it s much easier to find peoplee they don t want to find someone on their lawn at 5:00 in the morning. okay,he from just that comment. we see the absurdity in this new york law. democrats as usual, kater to the elites because they re the only ones who have a legitimatehe o concern about n intruder showing up at their homes or threatening them in public when another reason you know,c the security court was right is by the silliness of the dissent. and justice breyer, of course, is retiring rathers than addressing the plain language and the historical circumstancea that inform the words of the second amendment. he discussed tor gun suicides
unless those rulings affirmedme whatever the new york times and harvard law school believed wasever the right outcome. understand so from the death penalty to abortion to criminal justice matters, liberal journalisml politicos insisted that the supreme court act as ar rubber stamp for their views. so in cases where justices merely apply the facts of the case to the law, well, forget it. of course, that s not the proper understanding of the court s role. the court court s properly unded is a check on both the legislative and the executive branches and on the states were constitutional issues are involved. so when the court today issued its six three ruling striking down new york s verytr restrictive concealed carrym law, the reaction fromas the press and the assorted democratsso, it was textbook s the supreme court decision is going to call into question pretty much every piece of gun restriction across the country .