Hunter’s Team Vowed to Put Pres. Biden on the Stand?!

Today on Sekulow, Hunter's team vowed to put President Biden on the stand. New shocking details emerge. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow.

We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Hey, welcome to Sekulow. We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. As you heard just in the tease of the broadcast, we're getting new information that Hunter Biden's legal team once vowed the prosecutors to the DOJ that they would have President Biden take the stand to testify as a fact witness for the defense if his son faced criminal charges. This comes in light of other news that we heard about the now special counsel Weiss, who was the U.S. attorney investigating this, that until whistleblowers from the IRS started coming forward to Congress, not only were they going to do a plea deal, they were going to do no charges. They were going to suggest to the Department of Justice on the way up that he would make that call as U.S. attorney, that there would be no charges filed against Hunter Biden.

Then the IRS whistleblowers step in. Suddenly they try to come up with some charges for him to plead to, so he has to plead guilty to something. And now that's fallen apart, and we're learning more and more about the defense's plan to put Joe Biden, the President of the United States, on the witness stand. Well, basically what you had, this was that the now special counsel, Weiss, said that he was prepared to go to the Department of Justice with an exoneration. So this wasn't even part of a plea deal at this point.

They were saying no charges. And the only reason there was even a plea deal of any sort was because of the whistleblowers. Now, we've talked a lot about whistleblowers over the last couple of weeks on the broadcast because we're working closely with Empowerment Oversight on whistleblower issues. We are representing two FBI whistleblowers. We're in discussions with U.S.

Marshals. We're providing assistance to other whistleblowers, including IRS whistleblowers, who are brought up on charges now that they went forward here. So the reaction of the Biden legal team's whole plan was put in jeopardy, if you will, because of the whistleblowers, which was a good thing. But the irony of this is that the Department of Justice then appoints Weiss the same lawyer that was going to bring no charges as the special counsel. And now, of course, they're saying the plea's off the table.

Who knows what we're going to end up with. But without the courageous actions of these whistleblowers, let me tell you something. These whistleblowers are making a game change as it relates to the IRS, it relates to the Department of Justice, as it relates to the targeting of pro-life groups, as it relates to the targeting of parents. These whistleblowers are saving the day. And now it's our honor at the ACLJ to be standing beside them and representing them legally because they are literally reshaping everything that's going on right now.

And to that, we're very, very grateful to be able to do that. Yeah, you know, we're more than halfway through our life and liberty drive, and the need to defend British liberty is now clear more than ever. As you may have heard last week on the broadcast, we represent a Christian seventh grader who was just suspended for three days for talking about Jesus. Officials told his parents that discussing his faith in school was illegal harassment.

It's appalling, but this wasn't an isolated incident. Our religious freedoms are under attack. It's how totalitarian regimes are born. They start attacking free speech and faith.

And certainly we've seen the attack on free speech by corporate America, by social media platforms, and even the encouragement of the attack on free speech by the U.S. government. We're fighting the Biden administration's war on faith in courtrooms all across the country to make sure we don't become one of those totalitarian nations. We need you in this fight. Right now, every gift will be doubled through our life and liberty drive to beat back these attacks on faith and defend your religious liberty. We also want to take your phone calls today at 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. Can you believe, on the one hand, after all those years of investigation, the idea from David Weiss was, let's bring no charges. And then all those whistleblowers showed up from the IRS, and I guess I got to come up with some charges for him to plea to. No jail time, of course.

No real penalties. Since he already paid back, through third parties, what he owed to the IRS. 1-800-684-3110 is to jump in on the broadcast. And this is, it really is a time to participate in our life and liberty drive. And as we said, we need you in this fight. Right now, every gift will be doubled through the life and liberty drive to beat back these attacks on faith to defend our religious liberty. Defend these whistleblowers. ACLJ.org. Back with more in a moment. Welcome back to Second. We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. And it was an extensive piece by the New York Times on the collapse of Hunter Biden's plea deal. And it all started with the fact that there wasn't supposed to be a plea deal at all.

There wasn't going to be any charges filed. That is the report from the New York Times that now special counsel-wise, he wasn't even a special counsel at the time, U.S. attorney. He got all that bizarre information. He told his team he didn't have authority to bring cases anywhere else. He couldn't even really go to other jurisdictions, even though we were told by the Department of Justice he had free reign to do that. Now he's got the special counsel status. He could do that.

Has that power. But we heard from whistleblowers who said, listen, this guy is telling us one thing. Department of Justice is saying another thing. And now we know he wasn't even going to bring a single charge against Hunter Biden.

That's the key. By late 2022, so late last year, now special counsel-wise, then just U.S. attorney-wise, who relied on the work of the IRS investigators, the FBI, and lawyers in the Justice Department's tax division, had found some evidence but determined that he did not have sufficient grounds to even indict Mr. Biden, Hunter here, for major felonies, according to people familiar with the situation. Mr. Weiss told an associate that he preferred not to bring any charges, even misdemeanors against Mr. Biden, because the average American would not be prosecuted for similar offenses. And then all of a sudden you get into this plea bargain, and this also shows, as Jordan said, what was happening with the whistleblowers. The only reason this gets resurrected into a case is because people like Gary Shapley, the IRS whistleblower, listen to what he had to say. In this country we believe in the rule of law, and that applies to everyone. There should not be a two-track justice system depending on who you are and who you're connected to.

Yet, in this case, there was. Based on my experience, I'm here to tell you that the Delaware U.S. Attorney's Office and Department of Justice handling the Hunter Biden tax investigation was very different from any other case in my 14 years at the IRS. He actually said, testified also, that when investigators went to interview Mr. Biden, they were told they couldn't approach the House. An attempt to serve a search warrant on Joseph R. Biden Jr.'s guest house was denied.

The request to search a storage unit belonging to Hunter Biden was also derailed and denied. Finally, he reached out to Mark Little, a former federal prosecutor, and the men eventually connected with former Republican staff members who had worked for Senator Charles Grassley, that's our friends at Empower Our Oversight, and had knowledge of the federal whistleblower protections. That's when they said they needed whistleblower protections because they saw exactly what was happening here. This was not going to be some sweetheart plea deal. This was going to be no criminal charges.

Let me say that again. There wasn't going to be a sweetheart deal here. There was going to be no criminal charges. Yeah, I mean, I think that is, again, what we have to just reiterate is that people were looking like, well, the plea deal looks like nothing. To David Wise, he didn't want to bring anything, and then these whistleblowers came up and said, we provided you with a list and a litany of federal crimes that have been committed here. And we should have an equal justice. I want to play, this is the IRS whistleblower, this is Gary Shapley, testifying before Congress by 2016. We already played that one.

Let's play the next one. As the special agent on this case, I thought the felony charges were well supported. When considering the elements of felony tax case, under the criminal code, there are two key considerations. Willfulness and tax due and owing.

In the criminal context, willfulness is defined as voluntary, intentional violation of a known legal duty. The tax loss is the monetary loss to the government. Well, there's more than a monetary loss to the government, and Ziegler's right, but there is also the criminal enforcement of the laws. There is a two-tier system of justice, and you look at four indictments going against the former President of the United States, and the kid-glove treatment that's going on here, the irony is unreal.

And I will tell you, it shows how deep this hatred is of what's going on politically. You realize now that the plea deal was what the prosecutors thought would get these whistleblowers off their back. At least we'll bring some kind of charges against him, and he has to plead guilty.

He's not going to get any real fines, not going to spend any time in jail, but we'll at least slap him on the wrist, and maybe these whistleblowers will shut up. And they did. They decided to come forward and say, that was in the midst of all of that, and then suddenly, the judge read the plea deal and said, this is not a plea deal we can agree to. And that was because they had the judge in the role of determining plea violations, not adjudicating them, initiating them, and that's not the way it's supposed to be. Full of unity for life?

Yeah, and that was because they were afraid that another administration would come in and say, this is absurd, we're not going to do it. Let's go ahead and take a phone call. Sure. We go to Steven in New Jersey on Line 1. Hey, Steven.

Hi, Jordan. I'd like to ask you or Jay, I haven't heard anybody speak about it, what the procedure is for selecting a judge. In other words, you know, Mr. Trump got the most radical leftist judge in Washington, and I was wondering how that happened. I don't believe in coincidences. Yeah, but he also got a Trump appointee in Florida.

It's the spin of a wheel. And in Fulton County, the only Republican. And in Fulton County, apparently, he's got one of two Fulton County judges that are appointed by a Republican.

So, no, it's not some sinister plot. Each system does it differently. They call it the wheel in the federal system. It's just whoever judges next up.

It's the luck of the draw system. Same thing in Fulton County. So he ends up with – I mean, I think the great debate for the lawyers right now is they're all moving to federal court. The judge overseeing it in federal court so far based on Mark Meadows' filing is an Obama appointee. And then you've got in the state court system, you've got a Kemp appointee who's very conservative. It wasn't very young.

It has not done much yet. Thirty-four cases. But, look, younger judges, we've had Presidents that have been that age. So – or close to it. So we have – you know, you've got to realize that it's a bit of a luck of the draw.

Yeah. And in both of these cases, really, I mean, the judges play a very important role early on. But, ultimately, if it goes to trial, it's the jury. It's the jury. But these judges aren't making the final call.

No. They're making calls on important decisions, evidence, all the pretrial motions, what can and can't be done in court. Right. But, ultimately, it's the jury of your peers that finds you guilty or not guilty.

That's exactly correct. We're going to take more calls at 1-800-684-3110, 800-684-3110. Coming up on the next segment of the broadcast, we're going to get into this rather complicated case that we have won. We filed a MECUS brief and our position carried the day. But now it's being stayed. It's involving the Biden abortion decision. We'll get – CeCe Howell is going to join us for that.

I want to finish up the conversation here on our matching challenge. And because we've done something very different this month, we've never done this before. We've never done a life in liberty drive where we are focusing on the issues that you have told us are really the two most important issues to you. And that is the issue of life and then liberty generally.

And liberty generally includes the case that we're talking about now. We've got a Christian seventh grader who was just suspended for three days for talking about Jesus. Students asked him questions.

He simply answered the questions. Officials at the school told his parents that, quote, discussing his faith in school, period, was illegal and constitutes harassment. Frankly, this whole thing is appalling. Now, we're getting additional facts now. We're looking at potential litigation. I wish I could tell you it was an isolated incident. This barely happens.

But that's not the case. Religious freedoms are under attack. Remember last month? This was – or the end of school last year, so it was May. We had a student that was wearing a cross. And the teacher said you possibly could not own that cross, took the cross off his neck, said you had to steal that cross because you couldn't afford that cross. It was given to him by an afterschool Bible program from a school board member. And then there was videotape of the student.

And of course he wasn't slinging around the cross. And the teacher removed it. And she thought she should remove it. That's the problem with all this.

They think that is the attack approach. Get rid of the cross. Confiscate the Bible.

Tell the student they can't talk about their faith on campus. We say it is appalling. Again, not an isolated incident. Our religious freedoms are under attack in a very significant and big way. And frankly, this is how totalitarian regimes are born. They start by attacking free speech, liberty, and life.

That's really what happens. So we're fighting Biden's war on faith. We're doing it in the courtrooms across the country. We're also doing it in the halls of Congress and in state legislatures as well to make sure we don't become one of these regimes or one of these countries. So we need you in this fight.

This fight does not happen without you. And right now every gift will be doubled in our Life and Liberty campaign. We're reading each and every comment that comes in on our live feeds. Now we've got thousands of you watching on Facebook.

We've got thousands of you actually on Rumble, almost a thousand on Facebook, over a thousand on YouTube, and tens of thousands of you listening on radio and Sirius XM and our podcast. So if everybody listening to us would participate and say, hey, I'm going to donate $10 to this Life and Liberty drive and become part of this team, that can have a dramatic impact on our work. And we want to encourage you to do that today because, folks, there are only 10 days left for this campaign. And then we don't do another campaign for months. Now the band's going to perform at the end of the month. In fact, we're rehearsing tonight for a live concert. Jordan and I are going to be hosting Hannity live on the very last day of our matching challenge.

So that's going to be exciting for his entire radio broadcast. So this is a great time to stand with us. That's right. And you can do that by going to ACLJ.org and being part of the Life and Liberty drive. Your donation will be doubled.

Your support will be doubled. And still, we want you to also share that with your friends and family. We believe, again, it's such a critical moment to get in the fight. And you think about the importance these whistleblowers have played just in impacting the Hunter Biden situation. I mean, the fact is he was going to walk away with no charges.

Then it was going to be a slap on the wrist. And now it's all on the table again because there are whistleblowers brave enough to speak out. We represent them. We want to represent more. We can do that with more resources. Support the ACLJ today and our Life and Liberty drive ACLJ.org.

Welcome back to Secula. We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110. During our Life and Liberty drive, we've been talking about liberty and also the issue of life and the pro-life battles that continue across the country. One of those is on the abortion pill. You might remember that under the COVID crisis, the FDA made this a medication you could just get by mail order. This is a medication that has a lot of side effects. It could cause death even to the woman taking it. And so even the protections there of the mother or the woman who wants to induce an abortion, very dangerous. When you go back to how this used to be administered, it was administered under doctor's care because of the serious issues that could surround it. The Biden administration made it, again, something you could just mail in by order.

Not going through the normal process, by the way, to make those changes. Well, that got taken to court and it's gone all the way to the Supreme Court on issues on appeal. But the Fifth Circuit currently and right now, CeCe Howell, update everybody about where it stands.

Sure. So it started out at the district court, which we actually got a good opinion there. The district court said, you know, the FDA was wrong in its approval of this Mifepristone, the abortion pill, in 2000. Then that, of course, immediately got appealed by the pro-abortion side and they appealed it to the Fifth Circuit and then to the Supreme Court. So when the Supreme Court got it, they passed it back down to the Fifth Circuit saying, but in the meantime, everything stayed until the Fifth Circuit rules and then ultimately the Supreme Court rules. So the Fifth Circuit did rule and they agreed partially with the district court that especially the 2016 and the 2021 changes that the FDA made to Mifepristone, basically taking away the protections for women's health in both of those changes, those were done incorrectly. And so they put an injunction on those. So it was a win at the Fifth Circuit, but like I said, there's a stay, everything's on hold until the Supreme Court ultimately rules. So it's as if the district court's opinion stays in place.

Is that correct? Nothing is in place. Nothing. So it's the law as it is. So the pill is being dispensed. So the dispensing of the medication goes forward. So nothing's happened, even though there's been three intervening court proceedings, multiple briefs.

I'm holding one of the briefs in our hand. We'll put it up on the screen. This was the brief we filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, but now it's back at the Fifth Circuit. We'll see what they do. It goes to the Supreme Court. It's going to be a real challenge, folks.

I'm going to tell you this. This is a challenge because I'm concerned that in the post-Dobb world, we had this huge win in Dobbs that things seem to be, if you look at it, kind of trendline. The trendline doesn't look so great. Yeah, and I think it's because, just like we said, this battle's going to go to the states. It does go to the states. And what the states are concerned about, a lot of the states that have bans on abortion, they're concerned how this abortion pill affects their bans. Because you, especially under the Biden administration, now that these things can be shipped and just mailed out without doctors' visits and all the, you know, requirements before that, they're worried about how that affects their bans. So it is, again, playing out in the states.

Jordan, you know, you coupled that one. So we got this kind of, you know, unusual ruling where the Supreme Court says, we're going to go back to the beginning and kind of let everything, the laws on the books, we're leaving it on the books until there was one dissent, Alito. I wish there was more. That would have been a better indication. Well, we'll see what happens when it goes up. Then you had the Ohio situation last week, which was disappointing.

Not shocking, but disappointing. You've had it in South Carolina. You've had it in Nebraska, Kansas.

Kentucky. I mean, the list goes on. And in states that are even in red states.

What do we need to be doing? I think there was a rush without education. One thing that we have to remember is that though we beat the abortion industry at the highest court in the land by the overturning of Roe vs. Wade and Dobbs, they are still an industry with billions of dollars. I mean, just Planned Parenthood's got a billion dollars to play around with. That does not include all of the subsidiary groups, all of the other organizations, all of the other businesses, the abortionists who make money. It's a money-making part, a procedure that they want to make money off of, whether it's distributing the drugs or performing the abortion themselves. So they said, okay, if we have this overturned, we're going to, as we said, have this battle go to the states. And they've outspent, usually it's four and five to one, the pro-life side.

So they go up with ads. They don't really talk about abortion. They say how this could affect other rights. And they take the broadest possible reading of a new law or restriction and they say, well, this is not going to just impact a woman seeking abortion. This is going to impact IVF or this is going to impact, if you had a miscarriage, you might be a criminal.

All of these things that are, again, misleading, misinformation. But when you've got five times more of the ads on TV, you're going to reach five times more people and it's going to be that much tougher. So I think what we have to do in the pro-life community is not just put together potentially good laws and at the legislative level, but if we're going to send it back to voters in the states, you have to realize we are going uphill, even in the deepest red states, because we're going to be outspent five and six to one by the abortion industry. So if we can do it by legislative action, go forward, because that's different. Those are your elected legislators. They can challenge them in court.

They're going to lose in court because of Dobbs. But when you put it back on ballot initiatives or amendments and issues like that, it's always an uphill battle to win those amendments. So if you've got to get a yes vote, it's tough. People don't want to expand the laws or expand the Constitution.

They just don't understand. And so I think we should spend maybe a year or two before even putting these measures forward, just educating the public on why the measures are necessary in light of the overturning of Roe vs. Wade. Because a lot of people think, including the states, this has already been won. So why are you asking me to vote on it again?

That's right. And I think that adds to the confusion. When you put it to the voters, they don't understand exactly what's going on. And then you have the money that you just explained on the other side, on the pro-abortion side, and they love to spin it. You know, they go after all these crisis pregnancy centers and pregnancy resource centers saying misinformation and, you know, trying to deceive people.

But they're the professionals at it. They know how to spin and deceive and confuse voters so they don't know what they're voting on. So you're exactly right. It should be legislatively done through the state legislatures. And then when you have cases, we will win them because of the precedent. And we're representing how many CPCs right now? I think it's only a dozen. There's like a lot of states. We have in three different states, especially the states that are going after them specifically.

Yes, we do. They're being targeted by like the California state AG, I think in New York as well. New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont.

Pennsylvania. Yeah. And we're involved in all those. So when you're standing with us, you're standing with them. And we make this statement that, you know, they need us and we need you.

And that's really what's going on right now. They need us. They need the ACLJ.

Listen to what Garrett O'Boyle said about the ACLJ coming to his aid and the difference it makes. I even told them that ACLJ is taking me on as a client. And I said, the time is now. You guys can all start coming forward. We have the legal capability. We have the connections to Congress.

Like everybody needs to be whistleblowing about the things they're seeing because I'm sure what me and others have done, we're just scratching the surface. And they're saying the fact that the ACLJ is there is giving them more boldness because they're going to be protected, which they are. We've got a team. We brought in an experienced legal team to help them. Lawyers that are already on our staff, some additional lawyers that we brought in, a special counsel to the ACLJ. Well-regarded, Presidential-caliber lawyers representing these people.

And that's because of you. Whether it's a student, whether it's an FBI whistleblower, whether it's the Supreme Court of the United States or your local city council, ACLJ is there with our Life and Liberty Drive. Jordan's going to let you know how to participate. Folks, we've got 10 days left. We need this momentum to continue.

Yeah, that's right. Go to ACLJ.org. Be part of our Life and Liberty Drive. You'll see it right on the home page there. Your donation will be doubled. Your gift will be doubled. Share it with your friends and family as well as you share the broadcast. Be part of our Life and Liberty Drive.

Let's expand this work on behalf of the American people at ACLJ.org. Be part of it today. We'll be right back. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Welcome back to Sekulow. We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110 to be part of the show. Yeah, I've got to tell you something. You know, we've got the school board case with these students. As you know, Jordan, since you were a kid, I have represented students throughout the country. Metropolis, Illinois.

I mean, towns you never heard of. You know, Padre Island, Texas. Bridgette Murgans in Westside Community Schools in Omaha, Nebraska. And we had the most recent one with the kid with the cross. Now we've got a kid talking about Jesus. And the school board has the nerve to send a letter to us saying, hey, you're making it dangerous for our school. And so is the other media.

Because they're telling the truth. Well, why don't you just get out and say is that the kid has the First Amendment right to religious freedom, to freedom of speech, to the free exercise of religion. And if you could establish that it was disruptive to the school environment and it has to be substantially disruptive.

Not a student asked me a question and I responded with a comment. That's why I think that all this negotiating sometimes – remember I used to have the view, Jordan, I don't know if you remember, this was a long time ago. Just go to court. Just duke it out in court when you've got a judge and a court and you can marshal the facts and go forward. So we're going to look at all of that. And I suspect this one now is going to court. And that's where you come in again on our Life and Liberty drive.

As we talk about threats to student religious liberty as part of it, go to ACLJ.org. By the way, in the end of the month, just 10 days, Jordan and I have got the whole three hours of Hannity. Sekulow takes over the Hannity broadcasts for a day. And our band, we're rehearsing tonight, will be performing the last day of the month as well as we celebrate this Life and Liberty drive.

We're very excited about it. Let's go ahead and take some phone calls. 800-684-3110 if you want to talk to us.

Yep, 1-800-684-3110. This is Joanne in Ohio on Line 5. Hey, Joanne. Hi, guys. I'll be very honest. I'm living in a world I don't understand, but that's not what I call to say. My thing is, given the absurdity of all this, of Weiss being the prosecutor in Delaware and now he's the special prosecutor and the blatantness, the absurdity of it all, what's to say that Weiss doesn't go to California or D.C. and try to get Hunter's plea deals through?

Is that a possibility? I mean, let's face it. I mean, they've been doing this right in front of our faces. Yeah, I mean, listen, I think everything is on the table when you're talking about this Hunter Biden situation. I mean, it's a bizarre case. At first, the U.S. attorney was given all these broad powers but told his investigators he didn't have any of the powers. That's what the IRS whistleblower said. Then he brings charges. Initially, now we're told he didn't want to bring any charges. Then when the whistleblowers came out, he came up with some charges. That plea deal has now fallen apart, and since then, he's become a special counsel. I mean, so he can bring charges anywhere now. He was the one that was recommending that they bring no charges.

So it seems like a game that they made him a special counsel. This is why we have to represent the whistleblowers. By the way, we're talking to U.S. martial whistleblowers right now. We've got the two IRS whistleblowers we're representing.

We may get more. I'm hopeful that on our Hannity broadcast, when we're able to host the program for Sean, we're going to have both O'Boyle and the IRS whistleblowers as well. I hope we can also get our colleagues over at Empower Oversight to talk about this.

We're going to really get into this and what you could do as part of this. But again, this is the reason why you support our work at the ACLJ and our Life and Liberty Drive. If these whistleblowers didn't come forward, you realize there wasn't going to be a plea agreement. There were going to be no charges. Let me say that again. If the whistleblowers did not come forward, there were going to be no charges.

Period. The whistleblowers got a plea deal put in place. The judges rejected that. Now it's back to the drawing board. I'm still not convinced, by the way, much happens because I don't know what David Weiss is going to do.

Probably nothing. It seems like a special counsel name so you can write a report. Yeah, they write a report. A report exonerating Hunter Binder, why they couldn't really get the charges brought. I mean, they couldn't even figure out a plea deal that they all agreed upon.

I mean, they tried to put all the pressure on the judge instead of the Department of Justice. 1-800-684-3110 to talk to us on air. That's 1-800-684-3110. And also, I encourage you to check out ACLJ.org during our Life and Liberty Drive. New information, new cases that we are working on each and every day. So share that. Share this show.

Share the information with your friends and family at ACLJ.org. Your donations will be doubled. We'll be right back on Sekulow. Welcome back to Sekulow. We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. Rick Arnell is part of our team at the ACLJ, former acting director of national intelligence. Rick, we see a new report that an Iranian military delegation has arrived in Moscow to discuss cooperation between Iran and Russian ground forces. I want to get into this because I think it feels like it takes it to the next level with Iran, with all the sanctions that are imposed on it, all the economic troubles it's had and the difficulties. And we always see that threat of the nuclear issue, but now the fact that they would get involved with Russian ground troops potentially and what would usually be a major risk for Iran, pretty bold move. You're looking, we've seen the Iranians supply drones for the Ukrainian war, and what's really troubling is this cycle in Washington, D.C. where the Biden administration has now given $120 billion of U.S. taxpayer money to Ukraine, will now offer $6 billion of returned money to the Iranians. So the Biden team is allowing the Iranians to get $6 billion. When we know that the Iranians are working with the Russians, it's literally us funding both sides of the conflict. And this only happens in Washington, D.C. People go through fits to try to pretend like this is somehow consistent. But I just don't think that it's very consistent to give the Iranian regime money right now. I don't care how you try to justify it. And the current justification is, well, it's their money and it was been sitting in Asia and we're just going to release it. Well, the money was not being released under the Trump administration and the Biden team is allowing this money to go to Iran.

This is faster. You're funding terrorism. You know, Rick, I'm holding in my hand. This is a book I did like six years ago. It was called Unholy Alliance. And on the cover of it, you have a picture of one of the Ayatollahs and Putin. And the subtitle of the book is The Agenda Iran, Russia and Jihadist Share for Conquering the World.

Now, here's the problem. And you just said it. Every time you release billions of dollars to the Iranian regime, it's used one of three ways.

Against Israel, which is an easy target, against money that then goes to the Russians, maybe against the Ukrainians, or harming the United States or destabilizing the region. And when we called it an unholy alliance in the book, which was a New York Times bestseller, still available wherever you buy your books. And this was, I said, six years ago.

I mean, I feel like, you know, I'm no prophet, but I feel like a prophet that I said this was what was coming and it's going to be cause of American weakness. Now, during the Trump administration, they couldn't pull this off. You couldn't have the alliance that way.

But now you can. Look, I would add one more problem to your list, which is terrorism in Europe. When I was ambassador to Germany, we saw firsthand the Iranians develop a scheme to bomb a conference in Paris.

It was the Germans who had to be pushed to figure out this scheme. We worked very hard and they ultimately arrested this phony diplomat in Iran who was building a program to bomb Westerners in Paris. Now, when you give the Iranians six billion dollars, you are creating more programs of terrorism in Europe, terrorism against America.

I think that our European allies should stand up against the Biden administration and call this out. The Biden team should listen to the critics previously who have said when you release money, when the Obama Biden team released money, then suddenly the Iranians have enough money for not only terrorism programs, but nuclear weapons programs, which is what this whole release of money is supposed to design is designed to do. They're claiming that somehow it's going to help their weapons program by trusting them. You cannot trust the Iranian regime.

They will prove you over and over every single time that they know how to lie, cheat and steal. Rick, on the humanitarian side, every time this regime gets these billions of dollars, it's a bailout where they can use to oppress their own people. It gives them that many more years in power, that many more resources, not just to go abroad and terrorize the world or threaten the world, but to terrorize their own people and continue their hold on power inside Iran. Look, you bring up a very good point, Jordan, because I think that if you put the $6 billion refund to a vote of the Iranian people, they would say no. They would say, do not give our government this money because they know it just stays with the government or develops all of these terrorism and nuclear programs, which make the Iranian people suffer. The Iranian people are suffering.

They've tried to take to the streets. We have to do a better job at America of separating the Iranian regime from the Iranian people. They are not the same and the Iranian people are on our side. It's weird to me, Rick, that Kirby, he gets up there and claims this money will only be used for humanitarian purposes. Once the money is unfrozen or given back, we don't have any accountants in Iran. The U.S. has some accounting company in Iran and the IRS is going to be watching how the Iranians spend their money and it's only going to be to take care of their own people and provide humanitarian relief. That is gaslighting the American people.

It's gaslighting. It's crazy. It's U.N. accounting 101, right? It's, oh, if you give it here, I promise it's only going to go to one place, but then it frees up all the money that they were spending on these programs to go fund the bad stuff. I mean, we should be smarter than this. Money is fungible. Money that you take in suddenly frees up other money.

That's just basic principles. It's a stupid accounting idea and shame on the Biden administration for trying to tell the American people that somehow they're going to be able to control spending inside of Iran. Rick, I want to switch gears a little bit and go, because we're in the next segment of the broadcast, we're going to talk about kind of where things are politically. And I want to play Joey's call or have Joey on the air from Texas, because he's asking a question that a lot of people are talking about. I think it'd be good, especially with you, me and Jordan, since we've all worked with the former President to talk about this. And I get it. Joey, go ahead.

Hi, thanks for taking my call. I just wanted to state as a conservative that I am a little bit flabbergasted by the number of conservatives who still really back Trump after everything we've seen. Granted, he's innocent until proven guilty on the indictments, but there's been facts and evidence coming through for a long time. And furthermore, you know, as a family show, I mean, I listened to part of his Pennsylvania rally a few weeks ago or two weeks ago, however long it's been. And there was a lot of bad language.

You know, I just feel like, what is it about him that it's just so interesting that people continue to support him? Well, part of it is, I mean, let me discuss the language. I'm not supporting the language, but I'm going to just tell you the reality.

As a guy that grew up in New York myself, it's a different culture. So language is the utilization that in the South, let's say, you'd be highly offended by is normal speak. Unless you're behind closed doors with these politicians and you would hear the exact same words. Go ahead. He just says it like it is.

He tells you like he heard it behind closed doors instead of he doesn't hide it. So on the language, you know, you could go through the character flaws, all of which every one of us that are on this broadcast and everyone that's listening has many. Okay.

So we're all human beings. I tend to go, Joey, to the policies. And let me tell you what the policies that, let me rattle these off quickly. What he did in the Middle East, and Rick was a big part of this as director of national intelligence, and of course, as ambassador to Germany. As someone who's been involved in Israel defense for 40 years, no President in U.S. history has done what he's done. And that Abraham Accords was brilliant. It was a multi-team effort. And Rick played a major part. We played a part. Jared Kushner, of course. Mike Pompeo.

People we work with on this broadcast played a major role in that. That's one. Two, you weren't worried about the economy. Three, your interest rates for your home, especially first-time home buyers, 2.4%. And sometimes it was 2.1%. One time it was 1.89%.

So gas was $2 a gallon. So I tend to now, I get the flaws. But, you know, none of these candidates, they're all human beings and we're all flawed. But having said that, something is going on politically, Rick, when you look at Trump right now and how far ahead he is in the polls. If you put everybody else together, they don't equal him. At this point. Now that could change.

Yeah. Look, I want to speak directly to Joey because I think I hear this a lot. I live in California and I hear some people who don't like the tactics or the style. And look, this is just my opinion after knowing President Trump. He's an incredibly good man who thinks about people, not about big systems, not about, you know, institutions. But he wants to change Washington, D.C. And as somebody who's worked in Washington, D.C. for 25 years, we have to start sending people to Washington who are very clear eyed that the people of Washington are not going to change. Why are we asking reporters and bureaucrats to make their city less powerful, to make their budgets smaller? They are never, ever going to do that. So once you understand what you're dealing with in Washington, this entrenched bureaucracy who is not rational, they are never going to say, hey, let's be smaller. Let's give more power to the people. They are gobbling up power as fast as they can. We have to stop asking them to give up power.

People don't do that. And we have to start sending in bulls in the china shop. I get that. Hey, Rick, let me do this. We're going on a hard break.

Can we keep you for the next segment? And I want to open up our phone lines for questions from people, because I think this is helpful if we can answer these questions from folks. If you can stay with us, 1-800-684-3110, 800-684-3110. Talk to us about your politics and your concerns. We're here. We've got Rick Grinnell staying with us, 800-684-3110. Our phone lines are jamming up, which is what we want to do. So we're going to get to those as soon as we can. There are a couple lines open, 800-684-3110. We'll also take comments in by Rumble and Facebook and YouTube.

Rick, we had an interesting thing happen. Last week, a Trump-appointed judge in Illinois put an injunction on a state law that went after crisis pregnancy centers, which right now in some of these really pro-abortion states, they're the ones on the front lines. I mean, of the CPCs. You get rid of the CPCs in California and New York, you know, you got no defense. You're not going to be anything legislatively, but they're trying to put them out of business.

This judge said, no, the laws were inappropriate. They were targeted. I think we've got to be able to talk to people about taking personality out a little bit. And some of that personality may be rough for people, and sometimes it helps politically. But talking about policy, you've been in this your entire professional career. It is policy at the end of the day that is critical here. But this was my point before we went to commercial break, Jay, is that I actually believe that if you understand what you're dealing with in Washington, D.C., the media, the lobbyists, the politicians, they love that city. The city is getting bigger.

During covid, it was even growing even more. The budget is way bigger. Look at the thirty three trillion dollar national debt. We have to stop asking the people that live, work, go to school and go to church in Washington, D.C. to make their city less powerful.

They're never going to. We have to send in the bull. We have to send in somebody who's going to knock down the system. And the rest of America has to get comfortable with the fact that the Washington, D.C. establishment is going to do everything they can. Ninety one charges against him, getting him off Twitter, silencing him, using their power, using the power that they have in Washington, D.C. to make sure he doesn't come back. I'm just telling Republicans and conservatives, you are completely living in a dream world if you think that the person who comes after Donald Trump is not going to get the same treatment from this entity, Washington, D.C..

Wise up. Not on this big of a scale, but they were getting it before. And most of them could handle it, I don't think. And they could handle it.

I would say most people. Could not handle it. Could not handle four criminal cases against them. Not based on. And pushing for. Conversations we've had with them. And being able to stay focused on your campaign, focused on anything. I mean, most of us could.

It's a very unique, unique ability. Rick, let's go ahead and take. Go ahead. Go ahead.

I'm sorry. In summary, I keep hearing people say, oh, I don't like the bull. He's got to be nicer. We need the bull. We need the bull in the china shop. And if you recognize what Washington, D.C. is, you will say the tactics, the presence, exactly who Donald Trump is exactly what we need to change Washington.

You're smoking something if you think nice is going to work. Susan and Marilyn, you're on line two. Hi, Susan.

Hi. My question regarding the whistleblowers with evidence that have yet to come forward with their evidence, is there a time limit allocated for them? How much time do they have before they can be motivated to come forward with their evidence? Motivation. Let me say the motivation for a second. Their motivation is there. It's their need of protection. That is the reason we are partnering with Empower Oversight to provide legal protection for them.

We brought in our colleague, Jane Raskin, of course, me, Jordan, Andy Cahn, and others, lawyers that have represented at the highest level, including Presidents. That's the kind of protection these whistleblowers need. There's obviously a statute of limitations if you're talking about what their information could lead to. I think what a lot of these potential whistleblowers are looking at, Susan, is how will I be treated? Will I lose my career? Will I lose my ability to get a future job outside of the government? Will I be put on this, you know, leave without pay, but you can't take another job because we'll strip your security clearance so you can't get that next position? So how these whistleblowers that we represent right now ultimately are treated, ultimately how their cases come down, I think will impact if we still have robust whistleblowers in the United States who are willing to take on the machine, who are willing to take on the leadership inside some of these agencies.

1-800-684-3110. Rick, one of the things I thought was interesting today was out of Iowa. Both of us have worked on campaigns before the Iowa caucuses. There is actually a poll that came out today. Polls are not everything, but they are pretty important this early in races before people vote.

It gives you a good idea where people are. No one has been at the point where Donald Trump is in Iowa since George W. Bush was running against John McCain in the 2000 election where ultimately McCain made a controversial decision, but it would actually make sense if you look further into the campaign. He just pulled out of Iowa. Donald Trump is at the position now where the rest of the candidates against him are the same place as John McCain or worse where it may not even be worth competing. Look, I think this race is over.

I think it's going to be Trump versus Biden, and everybody should act accordingly. But the reality is that Donald Trump is winning independents. I think independents are looking at the situation, and they're seeing their 401K be a 101. They're seeing a war in Ukraine that is out of control. Their money is being spent like crazy. And so I think that the reality is that we have to be able to support the Republican candidate, the conservative candidate.

It's obvious to me that it's Donald Trump, and we should all be spending, raising, and acting accordingly. Let's continue winning the independents. All right, let's go to Megan's calling from North Carolina on Line 4. Hi, Megan.

Thanks for taking my call. My question is, can former President Trump sue the state of Georgia, maybe the federal government, for election interference? Well, here's an interesting dynamic. I think you're going to see a shift of strategy over the next 30 to 60 days because Mark Meadows has already filed a motion to move the case into federal court. Now, there's the law in Georgia, and the 11th Circuit looks like if one goes to federal court, the whole case goes to federal court. You could see, I don't know if you're going to see an outright lawsuit, Trump versus Georgia, but I think you're going to see defensive actions taken that are going to put the entire prosecution into the crosshairs. And I say that in the context of, if I'm the lawyer handling the case, my motion to dismiss is going to be based on what I argue to the Supreme Court for President Trump. These were federal official acts as his job as President, and 2,300 state prosecutors, if we have that soundbite, can't do that. I mean, that is what we argue to the Supreme Court.

Let me quickly play that again. This was to the Supreme Court of the United States two and a half years ago. The Second Circuit is wrong. It should be reversed. If not reversed, the decision weaponizes 2,300 local DAs. An overwhelming number of them are elected to office and are thereby accountable to their local constituencies. The decision would allow any DA to harass, distract, and interfere with a sitting President, subject the President to local prejudice that can influence prosecutorial decisions, and to state grand juries who can then be utilized to issue compulsory criminal process in the form of subpoenas targeting the President. This is not mere speculation. It is precisely what has taken place in this case.

This is exactly, Rick, we only got 40 seconds left. Exactly what I said to the Supreme Court is exactly what has happened. Yeah, look, you know, I'm just struck, Jay, by the fact that if you're listening to us, you have to be able to support the ACLJ. We're doing incredible work. We're helping whistleblowers feel confident to come forward. We're fighting in the court of public opinion.

We're fighting in the courts. This is the type of organization that's actually not just talking, but doing, and I hope people will support it. All right, folks, you go to ACLJ.org to be part of the Life and Liberty Drive.

That is at ACLJ.org. Your gifts will be doubled. I hope you'll share with your friends and family this broadcast with your friends and family as well.

Double the power of your gift. Be part of our Life and Liberty Drive at ACLJ.org. Share it with your friends and family. Talk about it with your friends and family. It's so important. It's how we expand the work that we do. Take on more clients. ACLJ.org.