Welcome to the Dirt Show. You're watching me live, but for those of you who miss me, you

can't watch me live at 5.30 on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. You can watch me record it

anytime, just go on Rumble and press the Dirt Show and you'll see the whole show. I

obviously I love it when you're live and I'm live and we're really talking to each other.

Yesterday, as you remember, I spent most of the show on the issue of whether the president

should, could, constitutionally announce in advance that he was going to appoint to

the Supreme Court nominate, because it has to be confirmed, obviously, only a black

woman. And I made a strong argument. I thought that, no, no, that wouldn't be proper, but

a number of people have responded in one guy, in particular, a lawyer from Florida wrote

a long, long argument saying the president can appoint anybody he wants, anybody, the Senate

may not confirm a person or require that he take a religious test, but according to

this guy, and according to some others that have written to me, the president can announce

in advance, I'm only going to appoint a Christian or I'm only going to appoint a Jew or I'm

only going to appoint a Muslim, or more realistically, he could say, and I think, as some have said,

I will never appoint an atheist to this Supreme Court. You can't say that, because the

constitution itself, and you're going to read you from Article 6 of the Constitution,

no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification for any office or public trust

under the United States. Obviously, a position on the Supreme Court is an office of public

trust in the United States. And obviously, if a president says that no one is qualified

for that office, who's not a Christian, who's not a believer, who's not a Jew, who's

not a Muslim, that person would be violating the Constitution. The same Article 6 also

says that all executive officers of the government, which obviously means the president shall

...