Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Announcer: The David Pakman Show at www.DavidPakman.com.
David Pakman: So Louis, last Monday we talked about this story which many of our audience
members emailed me about and said they found completely infuriating, and this is the story
about Fox News using Republican talking points as a point of fact to talk about health care
on hard news, supposed hard news. You remember this story.
Louis Motamedi: Of course.
David: Well, I'm going to warn our audience, if you found that story infuriating, the one
I'm about to tell you, which has nothing to do with Fox News, not on purpose anyway, it
could pop up at any time, is probably going to make you much more upset than that story.
Do you agree, Louis?
Louis: Probably.
David: Remember when Judge Vaughn Walker found Proposition 8 in California, which resulted
in preventing gay marriages, was unconstitutional, and people said well, he's an activist judge
because he's gay. You remember when we talked about that. And we made the argument that
OK, well, whether you're gay or straight, you presumably could have bias, could you
not? It's a silly argument. Would it be unfair for Clarence Thomas to judge any court cases
that have to do with race? Nobody's going to really make that argument.
Now, here's the thing. Obviously that was bogus. Our audience knew it, we knew it, Louis
knew it, everybody here involved with the show certainly knew it. We may actually now
have a real actvist judge with conflicts of interest, and this is of course referring
to the Virginia judge, Henry Hudson, it's really his name, who found just a few days
ago that the recently passed health care law is unconstitutional. We talked about this
ad nauseum, did we not, Louis? The mandate that is there, legal, illegal. Massachusetts
has had it for some time.
Now, the mandate itself is, let me mention first of all, is the center of the unconstitutionality
argument that Judge Henry Hudson made when he said the Obama health care law is unconstitutional
in Virginia. Now, I'll tell you up front, all of the other judges in all of the other
states that have been asked to take this up have said, 'No, I'm not going to get involved.'
Henry Hudson decided to get involved. And here's his quote: "At its core, this dispute
is not simply about regulating the business of insurance, it's about an individual's right
to participate." OK.
His name, again, Judge Henry Hudson, U.S. District Judge. He was appointed to the bench
by President George W. Bush in 2002. He backed arguments by the state of Virginia that Congress
has exceeded its authority by requiring that individuals buy health insurance or face a
fine. So far we understand what's going on, right, Louis?
Louis: Right.
David: Any questions yet that I can answer for you?
Louis: I think I'm good.
David: OK. Let's look at the judge. Who is this guy, right? I said let's do some research
and figure out, well, what's in his background? When we looked at Vaughn Walker's background,
who was accused of being an activist judge for his ruling on Prop 8, his background,
his professional background and his ties, his political ties and business ties, did
not indicate any kind of conflicts of interest, didn't indicate any kind of bias. He's gay,
though, so some people said he couldn't possibly rule in an unbiased way, he is clearly an
activist judge.
So let's look at Henry Hudson's legal career. It has its roots in the Republican Party.
He became Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney in Arlington County, Virginia in the 70s.
He then served as Assistant U.S. Attorney for Eastern District of Virginia. He had a
year in private practice, and he was elected Commonwealth's Attorney for Arlington County
as a Republican.
Here's a quote to give you an idea of Henry Hudson's political philosophy. "I live to
put people in jail." I live to put people in jail. Henry Hudson. OK, again, not an indicator
by itself that he was in any way biased in this decision, but let's continue.
In what Hudson described as a career-defining case, he prosecuted a man named David Vasquez.
David Vasquez is a mentally retarded Arlington resident, and he was prosecuted for a 1984
*** and ***. Now, Hudson's prosecution was based on a confession given by Vasquez
after repeated interrogations despite the fact that DNA evidence found at the crime
scene didn't match Vasquez, and again, despite the fact that, according to many, this is
not a man who was fit to stand trial. He was mentally retarded, OK? Hudson insists on prosecuting
him. He gets a conviction, sends him to jail. Five years later, turns out the guy's innocent.
They found the right guy. Vasquez had already spent five years in jail. Again, by itself,
not evidence of any wrongdoing in this case, just giving you the background.
Hudson also led a campaign to rid Arlington County of adult bookstores, massage parlors,
and other venues linked to the sale of ***. As a result of his efforts, he was named by
the Reagan administration to lead the Commission on ***. The Commission controversially
claimed that *** caused sex crimes despite the contention to the contrary of
social scientists. As we know, not true at all. OK. But remember, Louis, Vaughn Walker
is gay, so he was an activist when he ruled on Proposition 8.
All right, let's continue on this. His leadership of the Marshals Service included early decisions
in an attempt to arrest Randy Weaver at Ruby Ridge, the greatest disaster in the history
of federal law enforcement, which led to a grand jury investigation and misconduct charges
against 12 federal agents. So that rounds out kind of Henry Hudson's background.
Let's get into why I believe he is an activist judge who should've recused himself from this
trial about the constitutionality of health care in Virginia. Are you ready for this,
Louis?
Louis: Let's hear it.
David: OK. Henry Hudson is a shareholder of Campaign Solutions, Inc. What is Campaign
Solutions? It's a Republican consulting firm. In 2008, Hudson reported between $5000 and
$15,000 of income from the firm. In December, this December, just a few days ago, the company
released a statement that, quote, "Judge Hudson has owned stock in Campaign Solutions going
back 13 years to the founding of the company, or well before he became a federal judge.
He has fully disclosed his stock ownership, he is a passive investor only, he has never
discussed the business with officials of the company." Other reports say his recent income
is $15,000 to $50,000.
Now, here's the kicker: What exactly, Louis, did Campaign Solutions work on? What issue
did they work on? I know you can just guess and you'll be right.
Louis: What issue regarding the story we're talking about?
David: Right.
Louis: Health care.
David: That's exactly right. Campaign Solutions worked against health care reform, the same
health care reform that Judge Henry Hudson has now found, lo and behold, unconstitutional.
John Boehner, Michele Bachmann, John McCain, a bunch of GOP candidates who have placed
this idea of unconstitutionality of health care reform at the center of their political
platforms, in many cases, were involved with this organization. Since 2003, Hudson has
earned between $32,000 and $108,000 in dividends, another record indicates.
And it continues. This alone, Louis, should be enough for us to say he should not really
have been ruling on this trial, do you agree?
Louis: Agreed.
David: It goes on. Campaign Solutions was instrumental in launching Sarah Palin's political
action committee. And, here's where it's just absolutely infuriating, Ken Cuccinelli, the
Virginia attorney general who filed the lawsuit that Hudson ruled in favor of regarding health
care, is a former client of Campaign Solutions. He paid $9000 in 2009 and 2010 for services
rendered. Let me repeat that, OK, because I know that people like to mince words, some
people say I'm not always clear. I'm going to say it as clearly as I can. The attorney
who filed the lawsuit that Hudson ruled on paid a company the judge owns a stake in money
for services rendered. You see where I'm going, Louis?
Louis: I see it, yes.
David: Is this making sense to you?
Louis: It makes sense to me.
David: Let me say it another way. Judge Henry Hudson ruled that components of the recently
passed health care reform bill are unconstitutional, which is the exact same thing that the consulting
firm he rendered dividends from and owns a stake in was being paid to argue in the public.
What on Earth is going on here, ladies and gentlemen?
Louis: I mean, it's really no surprise.
David: Here's the thing, though. Here's why now progressives are at a disadvantage on
this. Because you know what conservatives will say, they will say hold on a second,
when we said Vaughn Walker was an activist judge in his ruling on Prop 9, he ruled against
the will of the people, all of the liberals said hold on a second, activist judge? Come
on! He can separate what he's doing from... his personal life from how he rules. And now
you guys are saying you don't like this ruling and this now is an activist judge? Of course,
there is a difference, is there not?
Louis: Well, here, there's money involved.
David: There's money involved. This guy, Henry Hudson, I almost can't say it...
Louis: There's paper involved. There's signatures involved.
David: That's exactly right. He was on... You know we're going to hear that from conservatives.
Louis: Right.
David: So it's a disadvantage right away. And by the way, some people asking a good
question in emails I got, how come it's OK for the government to force emergency rooms
to treat you at taxpayer expense, but they can't force you to carry health insurance?
Louis: That's a good point.
David: I don't know. I don't know. It's a question. Now, so again, I'm not calling for
this judge to resign. There is evidence that he should, but I'm not calling for that. What
I am saying is that he should've recused himself from this specific trial. I assume there is
going to be an appeal, this is far from over, and I assume it is going to be overturned
before it gets to the top of the ladder. Do you agree?
Louis: Probably.
David: Now, the question here, and some are actually saying this decision could help the
cause for national health care. But to believe that, for that to happen, Democrats really
would have to start putting together actual PR campaigns the way the Republicans are so
effective at doing. We talk about how progressives and liberals and Democrats regularly lose
the messaging and framing war, do we not?
Louis: Right.
David: The war of the words. We've talked about pro-life, pro-abortion, tax relief,
we've gone over it time and time again.
Louis: Government plan.
David: Got the government plan, exactly, as Fox News. This is an opportunity, right, for
those in favor of single payer to mount a PR campaign right now on this. This kind of
problem, where we have activist judges ruling the same way on trials that the political
consulting firms they derive revenue from are trying to get the American people to side
with in lawsuits, would not be a problem if we had national health care, just would not
be an issue, plain and simple. And that is the campaign that progressives in favor of
national health care need to mount.
Let's get out there and build the message machine around let's take politically motivated
lawsuits and activist judges like Henry Hudson out of the equation of people's life and death.
It's time for national health care. Any chance Democrats, Progressives will get together
and build that campaign around this?
Louis: I doubt it.
David: You don't think so?
Louis: No. But-- I mean, national health care... a national plan, a public option, is the only
thing that's going to solve the financial problems with the health care system.
David: Well, you mention-- you bring that up, we can't get... we can get much of the
funding from recovering about $400 billion that right now is being squandered on private
insurance-generated administrative waste. Boom, $400 billion right there, Louis. Come
on, progressives, please. This is an opportunity. This is, it's horrible corruption and conflict
of interest at the highest level, talking about people's life and death here. I get
that. But it's an opportunity to build a real message machine around hey, this problem goes
away if we have national health care.
Louis: This should've been Obama's primary focus from the beginning.
David: Well...
Louis: OK, there was too much opposition, he passed something that was OK, a step in
the right direction, but nothing really great, but then it kind of just fell off the map.
David: Well, we know what happened.
Louis: Yeah.
David: We could do a whole show on what happened with Barack Obama on this. Dr. Don McCanne,
a senior health policy fellow for Physicians for a National Health Program, says, "Nobody's
going to argue that medicare is unconstitutional. We should fix it so it works better and provide
it to everyone." This is the expanding Medicare idea, which could also be part of this campaign
that is just ripe for getting going.
Transcript provided by Alex Wickersham. For transcription, translation, captions, and
subtitles, contact Alex at directtranslation@gmail.com.