Ju Jin-woo slams Lee's constitutional push as a “scheme to hold on to power”

He said the lyrics are adult in tone, but he deliberately made it as a children's song so the criticism would hit harder. The song was produced to raise concerns about specific conduct by the Commission.

Ju previewed that the main topic of the broadcast is his criticism of Lee Jae-myung's constitutional revision. He said he had originally chosen the live-stream topic to mock Lee's amendment push, but while preparing, a news report on the special counsel nomination changed his priorities. He indicated the special counsel discussion would be postponed to a later time.

He also expressed a critical view that the reporter at the event did not ask Choi an appropriate question.

He saw Song's criticism of Jung's past remarks as revealing broader problems in the party. He questioned whether the party has a proper memory and understanding of important issues, particularly in light of the use of the phrase "goldfish IQ" when lawmakers criticize one another.

Ju analyzed that Democratic lawmakers tend to change their stance easily or forget people and policies they once defended. He argued this stems not from individual failings but from the party's inconsistent application of important values and principles. He criticized the party for failing to reflect on past mistakes and repeating them.

Ju warned that if investigative authority is monopolized by the police, it could enable protection of relatives. He was concerned that Korea's Confucian values are embedded in its legal reasoning, which could lead to lenient punishment of relatives. If investigative power is monopolized, he argued, such provisions should be removed, and police should instead face enhanced punishment when the suspect is a relative.

He explained that his consent together with the party's use of its veto will be the key variables in the appointment process. He stressed the importance of finding a reasonable alternative under these circumstances.

He assessed that Professor Cha has excellent legal and constitutional expertise, is capable of leading the country, and holds firm free-right convictions. He expected such figures to play an important role in selecting the special counsel.

Ju particularly argued that beyond political leanings, the academic depth and principled attitude of such figures can help secure the fairness and independence of the special counsel. He said they have the ability to judge according to law and principle without bowing to political pressure.

He further analyzed that the participation of such figures would increase transparency in the selection process and create a basis for discussion among people across the political spectrum. He stressed that the role of figures not biased toward any camp is essential to the credibility of the special counsel.

He stressed that this does not mean entrusting everything to the two special counsels and relaxing, and that continuous oversight is necessary. The point, he said, is that their activities must be closely watched.

He viewed the exclusion of figures who could undermine the special counsel for political purposes as a meaningful outcome. But he said this is not a complete solution, and efforts to secure the special counsel's independence and fairness will continue.

On next steps, he indicated that public attention would be maintained throughout the special counsel's work, and that any unfair or inappropriate moves would be challenged immediately. He shared the view that the special counsel's success will significantly affect the realization of justice in Korean society.

He added that while serving on the parliamentary investigation committee, he continues to request materials from the NEC, and tips related to election irregularities keep coming in. He stressed that these efforts will continue.

Ju explained why he pressed the Democratic Party to expand the size of the special counsel team. He said, "Statistically there are quite a lot of people, and a hero is bound to be among them," arguing that the more members there are, the higher the chance a "hero" who will realize justice emerges. He suggested this was a strategic judgment to raise the chances of success beyond mere numbers.

He said cross-party exchanges are normally possible, but now that the free Republic of Korea is under threat, even personal connections should not be pursued. He stressed that given the gravity of the current political situation, unnecessary contact could cause public misunderstanding.

Ju argued that Lee Jae-myung's repeated attempts at constitutional revision are being carried out even though the current constitutional provisions are very clear, and that the push is taking place in an atmosphere where unrest could erupt if it continues. He interpreted that Lee is pursuing it because he believes he will go to prison the moment he gives up power. Ju added that seeing this situation made him think Lee himself is aware he would end up in prison.

He argued this reflects Lee's intent not to let go of power, and to rely on other power bases or use another trick to stay in charge.

Ju analyzed that unlike "re-election," the term "two-term" leaves open the possibility of stepping aside for a term and then running again, hiding a strategic intent for Lee to return to the center of power after his term ends. He criticized the amendment argument as a means to extend a particular politician's political life rather than serving the public.

He also saw Lee's legal risks as a major factor behind the party's stance. The perception that he cannot escape judicial judgment once he loses power, he explained, is the motive for trying to hold on to power through constitutional change.

He diagnosed that under the Lee government's real estate policy, tax increases, and similar moves, approval ratings are plummeting and the country was nearly ruined. He said the next general election should be a referendum on Lee, but if constitutional revision comes to the fore, the essence of the vote could be obscured.

He explained that voters who favor amendment could mechanically side with those leading the revision, namely the opposition, and cast votes together with them. He raised concern that even though a one-point constitutional amendment was pushed in the recent local elections as a referendum, people busy with their livelihoods cannot study the constitution, and votes for amendment could work against the ruling party. He said this could lead to blind voting for a particular camp, like bloc voting.

Ju stressed that if people vote according to positions set by a particular faction without fully understanding the content and meaning of the amendment, the essence of democracy could be undermined. He pointed out that although the general election should essentially be a judgment on the sitting government and ruling bloc, a grand debate like constitutional revision could overshadow it.

In conclusion, he criticized Lee's amendment push as a strategy based on political calculation, a dangerous idea that could hinder citizens' proper choices and produce results favorable only to certain forces.

He cited a case where someone saves 120 million won in taxes and argued that such policies place excessive burdens on ordinary people. He said people need room to breathe and voiced frustration with excessive tax policy.

He argued that the tax policy Lee's camp promotes is not actually aimed at catching speculators but excessively intervenes even in the asset disposal of ordinary people, making property rights hard to exercise. He pointed to the limits and side effects of populist policy by noting this gap between purpose and effect.

Ju in particular argued that tax policy should fully account for its effects on citizens' economic activity. Rather than blanket tax increases, he said, policy flexibility is needed to revitalize the economy.

He said it is hard to understand why one-home owners and genuine home buyers are being harassed when the goal is simply to filter out those speculating on multiple homes. He argued that the government's real estate policy fails to reflect reality and indiscriminately regulates, harming law-abiding citizens.

He said he would set up a booth himself to collect signatures, and that he would keep at it until the count, now just under 60,000, reaches 70,000 or 80,000. The aim is to gather public opinion on the issue and raise its voice.

Ju stressed that speed is important for the special counsel's success. He pointed out that re-selecting a special counsel would sap momentum, and there is no guarantee a newcomer would be better. Since no special counsel can be fully satisfactory, he argued that apart from the three worst candidates already excluded, investigations should proceed quickly and make the most of the opportunity at hand.