EXPOSED: The Most Dangerous 8 Months for President Trump

This is Jay Sekulow. The most dangerous eight months are ahead as the left is becoming more desperate. 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, Jay Sekulow. All right, I know I say this every four years, and I do say this every four years, but once Super Tuesday is done, which it is, you then enter what I call the most dangerous eight months of political time in the United States of America. I'm not talking about upheaval. I'm not talking about unrest. I'm talking about watch out for what they're doing because there's gonna be a whole host of things that are coming. We've already seen some of it with the, we'll get into this in a little bit more, the 14th Amendment scheme, keep Trump off the ballot. You've got this disaster in Georgia that's going, I call it the fiasco in Fulton County, which by the way, has just gotten more complicated in the last week.

We'll get into that as well. Then you've got just the general political situation as it is. I mean, it's pretty clear at this point that it's gonna be Donald Trump versus Joe Biden. It's a repeat and not shocking to me.

I don't think it's probably shocking to anybody, but that's the, it's gonna be a repeat. The question is gonna be, what will those forces do to try to engage, I'll call it engage the election? I don't want to get into conspiracy theories because I think we need to talk about real things.

And there are some real things you've got to be concerned about. And if you start back with our recent win at the Supreme Court of the United States, where all nine justices agreed, we were correct by the way, that Colorado did not have the authority to remove a Presidential candidate from a ballot because they decided he's guilty of an insurrection and all nine justices agreed. Well, the end result of that was you think the left just rested on that? No, they were hysterical. In fact, do we have that super cut?

I want to play that. Folks, this was from last week, the reaction from the left. And by the way, I'm not going to just say the left, I'm going to say Republicans that were judges on courts of appeals, including Mike Ludig, who I have a lot of respect for it, but totally think he was way off base here. I mean, when Ellie Honig from CNN's got it right.

And Mike Ludig's got it wrong. That tells me there's something, something in the water, okay, that's going on. But listen to the reaction from these news commentators after the decision comes out. We've learned that it was a nine to nothing decision ruling that Donald Trump can be on the ballot in Colorado and other states. I'm not confident that that will produce a result that's good for American democracy.

This is actually what I had been concerned about. I had been concerned that it shouldn't go to the Supreme Court. They would rule this way.

I'd laugh if it weren't so sad. My next guest says Donald Trump is still an oath breaking insurrectionist. Do you have confidence in the Supreme Court? Do you think this court is partisan? The court itself may have overstepped. The court went way further than it needed to go. Our colleague Melissa Murray has called this Supreme Court the Yolo Court. The criticism of the court is that they're playing interference.

Not since Bush v. Gore, but we've seen a court that has had this many opportunities to interfere in the election. The headline here is this, that this is a unanimous ruling, but if you scratch the surface just a little. This is a five to four ruling. I'm part of it. This is actually a five to four decision.

It's five to four. Trump will take this, spin it, spread the misinformation, disinformation on it. So it's a win for them. He's on the ballot and voters will vote. And he looks like he's headed to become the Republican nominee for President. You can't save a people from themselves.

If they're determined to reelect him after he organized that insurrection, then there's nothing to stop the people from doing that. All right, so let me tell you what's going to happen. You heard it there. First of all, the case was, let me, let me be clear. It was nine to zero. Andy was unanimous.

I'm tired of hearing this five to four business. I don't know where they come up with that, but they come up with these fabricated numbers. The decision of the Supreme Court of the United States was a unanimous decision, nine to zero, concurring all justices in the judgment. None of it would have happened by the way, without the support that you've given to the American Center for Law and Justice. We're in our life and Liberty Drive right now, which means any amount you donate to the ACLJ, we're going to get a matching gift.

It's going to be doubled. So I want to encourage you to go to ACLJ.org. We've talked about the whistleblower cases last week. We talked about the immunity cases that we're dealing with at the Supreme Court right now, and on and on it goes.

Major issue developing on the Israel front that we're going to get into. You donate today. Become a champion at the ACLJ if you can donate monthly, but any amount you donate, your donation will be doubled at ACLJ.org. That's ACLJ.org. We encourage you to do that.

Again, support the work, ACLJ.org. Hey everybody, welcome back to the broadcast. I'm calling this the desperate time. This is the eight months between Super Tuesday, now that that's over, and the election that are the most dangerous. And again, I'm not talking about upheaval and unrest. I'm talking about, watch out what happens politically, legislatively, legally, on and on it goes. I've got Harry, Cece, and Andy are in the studio with me today. I want to get everybody's impression here.

Harry, I call this, and I've said this for, this is not the first time I've said this. I consider this the kind of the most dangerous time in the sense that there is a sense of desperation. We heard in the last segment, we played that montage of sound after the Supreme Court, including the most liberal justices, said Colorado didn't have the authority to take the former President off the ballot. You would think the world is coming to an end and the constitutional republic we know is about to end.

Absolutely. So what the left has done in the United States is that they continue to demonstrate without question that they have become more and more desperate, that they have succumbed to the Trump derangement syndrome. So if you look at the dozens of charges, legal charges, that have been leveled at Donald Trump, including the recent efforts to disqualify him in Colorado, Michigan, Wyoming, West Virginia, and Oklahoma, and a more recent effort in Illinois, it's clear beyond question that the American people, I think, face perhaps the most dangerous eight-month period in U.S. history, at least since the Civil War. And as the left becomes more and more desperate, they are prepared to label the United States Supreme Court, including the liberal justices, basically enemies of democracy. And so if you think about what has gone on since 2016 in the United States, first the attempt to label Trump a Russian asset, then the successful effort to claim that the Hunter Biden laptop in 2020 was Russian disinformation.

Now the left is beginning to talk about the fact that Putin has put his thumb on the scale. The FBI is going after pro-life voters and pro-life Catholics. Commentators on CNN and MSNBC, they're claiming that white rural voters are the quintessential threat to the United States. Meanwhile, the border is not secure. Meanwhile, it looks like the United States government under the Biden administration is prepared, increasingly prepared to reduce its support of Israel. So I think going forward, we have entered into a very dangerous period.

I look at it also in kind of the cases that we're handling. We could talk about the Middle East right now, what a powder keg disaster that is right now on so many levels. And you've got UN agencies that are funding terrorists. We're going after those too. But Cece, you've been handling a lot of this. We've been dealing with hostage families. I mean, it's heartbreaking, it's a mess, it's failed policy, but this is when dangerous things happen.

Yeah. And I think we see, uh, just like Harry said, the spin is ridiculous. You know, we have a good constitutionally sound ruling from all nine justices on the 14th amendment case, but it comes, it comes down to they hate Trump. So they're going to come against it. And it's the same thing when we talk about Israel, the left hates Israel as well.

And even though they are justified in their actions to defend themselves against Hamas terrorism, uh, you know, they just, they, the spin comes and we condemn Israel. So it's calling, you know, good evil and evil good. That's where we are.

Yeah. And what we're doing at the ACLJ is fighting back. So we've got a team working on right now, a major lawsuit against the United Nations relief agency, because they're the, they're the worst at this.

And it's their five Oh one C three. And we'll get more into that in the weeks. Adam, just telling you, we've got a team working on Andy, you know, the hysteria that's coming from members of Congress after the Supreme court ruling is also pretty breathtaking. Let's listen to what Jamie Raskin had to say, uh, just last week. I am working with a number of my colleagues, including, uh, Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Eric Swalwell to revive legislation that we had to set up a process by which we could determine that someone who committed insurrection is disqualified by section three, the 14th amendment and the house of representatives already impeached Donald Trump for participating in insurrection, uh, by inciting it. So the house has already pronounced upon that. But you know, what's interesting, Jack Smith never charged Donald Trump with insurrection. No, he never did. Uh, the special counsel did not do that. He has never been charged with insurrection under the statutes of the United States. He's never been convicted of insurrection. He has never been convicted of starting a riot or trying to overthrow the constitutionally, uh, enacted Republican, the United States.

He has never made statements that are insurrection of statements. And yet Raskin, who is a despicable person in my opinion, is making these allegations, uh, that the Democrats are now because they're confronted with a Supreme court decision that they can't stand. And with three liberal justices that they think they bought and paid for turning against them, that now he wants to revise. He says revive legislation that we had to set up. What does it mean by revive legislation?

And there is an insurrection act by the way, on the books here. I want to go back to this attack though, on the justice as we saw last week, including the liberal members of the court being attacked by liberal members of Congress, liberal members of the talking class. It was pretty breathtaking in scope for a decision that was really not controversial. And then people were being honest, of course, Colorado or a state cannot take a candidate off of a ballot. Well, I think if you actually look at the legal merits of the claim that Donald Trump should be disqualified, uh, that particular tank claim was breathtaking in its overreach. Now, however, the left is claiming that the Supreme court's decision-making is breathtaking in its overreach when the Supreme court simply read the provisions of the 14th amendment.

If you read those provisions, it is clear beyond question that Donald Trump should not be disqualified. And it is clear that he did not engage in an act of insurrection. What did we have on January the 6th? We had a political riot.

Yeah. So here's the other question though. Remember all the talk about packing the court. So the left wanted to pack, add more justices to the court. So they get, you got three liberal members of the court right now that in their view turned on them. So did they use the, I mean, you wonder about this.

Did they say, oh, now we're going to, this is the things you look out for. Are they going to try to bring, because listen, increasing the size of the court doesn't take a constitutional amendment. It's an act of Congress. Well, they're trying to just now say, let's get rid of the court. We don't need the Supreme court. That was one of the statements. Yeah, get rid of it. Get rid of the Supreme court.

So yeah, what they'll try, who knows. I wonder if, you know, we haven't even gotten into Fulton County yet. You want to touch on Fulton County Andy? Yeah, I touch on Fulton County every day of my life. I want to do a segment on Fulton County, but we'll touch on it here. Okay.

So as the world turns, or as Fulton County turns, we have another filing last week. Again, more evidence. I will see what the judge is going to do, but let's update everybody on what's happened on that disaster. Okay. What we have found out, and no, it is a disaster and it is a fiasco and it's an embarrassment. It works better than disaster in DeKalb. Yes.

That's true. Both adjoining counties and both of which I have lived in all my life, basically. But what is happening in Fulton County is first of all, an embarrassment to prosecutors of whom I was one for many years of my life and an embarrassment to the state of Georgia and to the criminal justice system. You have a prosecutor who has undertaken a political prosecution of the former President and other people in connection with the election that he lost to Joe Biden.

Okay. And what Fannie Willis, the DA has done is taken this, made it a political prosecution. But instead of being as pure as Caesar's wife, which a prosecutor has to be, and that I mean is above reproach, she has sewn herself to be corrupt, inept, and tainted by perjury and lies. So what's his newest allegation? The newest allegation is that one of the witnesses who testified about not knowing when the relationship between her and her boyfriend, who's the prosecutor that she paid $700,000 to, said that it started later. Now we have evidence that it started when she was running for DA in 2019. So she and Nathan Wade have been boyfriend and girlfriend and had a romantic relationship long before she hired him. And they're going after the former President of the United States and 19 other people, including very well-known and very well-respected lawyers in Fulton County, in Atlanta.

I mean, Bob Cialier, some really good lawyers. It's been an outrage what's happened. All right, folks, we're taking a break. We got more coming up. Rick Grenell's going to be joining us.

We're going to talk about the kind of what you look for in the eight months ahead here. I think we got to be clear there. Your support of the ACLJ, though, is absolutely critical. And we are in our life and liberty drive right now.

So we're in week two. And our legal work, as you know, it doesn't end. I mean, it continues. Even when you have a win at the 9-0 at the Supreme Court, as I always say, we always tell our team, next case. And the next case on the Supreme Court front is the immunity issue.

And that one, that brief's due in about 10 days. So that case is going to be filed. We'll file a brief on that.

And then also, coming up, big case against the UN relief agency. All that to say, support the work of the ACLJ. Any amount you donate will be doubled in our life and liberty drive at ACLJ.org. And I encourage you to do that today at ACLJ.org. Now, if you can donate each and every month, and almost 20,000 of you are now, we started at 15,000 back in October.

We're close to 20,000. You become an ACLJ champion, a champion for life, liberty, and freedom. That means you're donating every month. And then when we have these matches, your gift is automatically matched.

So your gift will automatically be doubled. So I encourage you to go to ACLJ.org. That's ACLJ.org to support the work of the ACLJ and our life and liberty drive. Coming up after the break, we're going to be joined by Rick Grinnell. So you want to stay tuned again.

ACLJ.org. Back with more in a moment. Hey, welcome back to the broadcast, everyone. We're discussing what I call, and I've said this for, I probably have said this for three or four election cycles, but I do believe this, that between Super Tuesday being over and then the election, I call it the most eight most dangerous months politically in our calendar. And it only is during a year in which there's a general election because havoc happens. You got the fiasco in Fulton County. You got the January 6th trial now going onto the immunity issue. You got all of this stuff happening.

And then you got the international issues that we just were talking about. Rick Grinnell, of course, with us. And Rick, I have said, I'm not going to claim this the first time I've said it because I've said it before, that this is, I always view that Super Tuesday, once it's done to the election, you know who the nominees are going to be now? It's going to be President Trump and President Biden. I can't imagine anything that derails that at this point.

But assuming that's the case, I always say, watch out for the havoc. We saw the reaction to the Supreme Court decision. The left went crazy against their own judges that they confirmed, including Justice Jackson, who is the most recent appointment to the Supreme Court, because he had dared to say that Colorado didn't have the authority. But when you look at all of these things, we know about the weaponization of the FBI. We had one of our colleagues on last week talking because we're doing those whistleblower cases.

But you've been inside a government, you were the director of national intelligence, you basted in Germany, worked at the UN. How do you view this time period we're in right now, Rick? Well, what's crazy to me is just what we see from the left in terms of crushing dissent. There's literally a hesitation to have any type of debate. And when I was growing up, it was all about debate. You'd sit and listen, and you'd listen to the other side. And then there would be some sort of a coming together to say, well, we agree to disagree.

That is gone now. You see that the left is attacking anyone who doesn't give the narrative that they want. The left is really, I think, breaking apart with common sense people attacking the far left.

And I say this a lot, Jay, but I think one of the reasons why we're in this problem is that the media just don't play an unbiased role. They're not the referee. And when they are the referee and they call out some of the crazy left situations, then we see the left kind of pull back and not do some of the crazy things that they continue to do. But we just saw Jamie Raskin, for instance, join with some really far left congressmen to say, well, we're still going to try to kick Donald Trump off the ballot through Congress. And they just have not learned their lesson.

It's really crazy how radical they've been. You know, Harry, one of the things when you were teaching law school, and you still teach and so do I, we used to say the way you combat speech you disagree with is more speech. The free marketplace of ideas, you're going to hear things in America you disagree with. That's the price of living in a free constitutional republic. You're going to hear things, see things you disagree with, but that's the price of living in a free country. I think what Rick just said, Harry, is exactly right.

That is now verboten on the left. I think that's true. But I would also go on to suggest that with respect to Mr. Raskin, he has long believed that the ends justify the means. And so anything that advances a political agenda, he is willing to use whether it means barreling over constitutional principles. I've had a brief conversation as a law professor with Mr. Raskin, and he proved himself to be an utterly despicable person, in my opinion, 10-15 years ago when I was teaching law in the Washington D.C. area.

He has become even more politicized as a congressman. And so he looks to individuals like Keith Overman, nation justice correspondent Eli Miskin, both of those individuals have suggested, for instance, that the Supreme Court is corrupt, it's illegitimate, it must be dissolved. Eli Mistel has suggested that the Supreme Court must be stopped. We must basically limit its power, its budget, etc. So essentially, we shut down every institution in the United States that maintains and defends democracy in order to achieve what?

Our political objective. So Rick, what's fascinating about what you said and what Harry said and this whole idea of we've eliminated discourse, the conservatives are the ones who are saying let's have discourse. It's the left that's saying shut the discourse down. Yeah, look, to say it very clearly is that it's the right that wants diversity and tolerance, and it's the left that doesn't want diversity, they want everybody to have the same voice. What I don't understand, though, Jay, is just the loss of common sense here. How does the left actually convince themselves that they're saving democracy by kicking off the political opponent?

I really don't understand how they don't see that what they are doing is actually attacking democracy and taking the power of the regime that's in control and just crushing their political opponents, much like Venezuela and Pakistan and some of these countries that we have traditionally called out for their tactics. It's interesting because there are some Republicans that have taken the same position, Andy, we talked about that, including a well-known former judge, Judge Ludick, who's still saying he was right when nine justices said he was wrong. Well, of course, he had an axe to grind and he's a resentful person, but he was absolutely wrong. And if being a judge, a former judge, he should realize that the highest court in the land has unanimously stated what the law is. And the law is what the Constitution says the law is, that the states cannot choose to make their own qualifications for the office of President of the United States. That is a congressional function. It is not a state function, just like in the Dobbs case. It is not a federal function.

It is a state function. It is reserved to the states. So it's those kinds of things that the left cannot tolerate if you violate their party line and their belief in the way it should go, you're dead meat. That's it. We were teaching a group of law students a couple of weeks back, and this idea of divergent views is what you're supposed to encourage. That appears no longer to be the case.

Absolutely. It's no longer the case. You talked about discourse and how we, the conservatives, are the ones that want discourse and the left is not. Well, they want discourse as long as it's only what they agree with, which is not discourse at all. You can only speak their message. You can only believe their message. And if a law doesn't agree with it, then it's not law.

And if a person doesn't agree with it, they cancel you. And we see that even with their own justices, they have gone after all three liberal justices because they think they didn't get it right. You know, it's an amazing thing. We've got a whole half hour of the broadcast coming up, so we're going to get into some of this. I want to get into some of what the FBI is doing too.

You talk about targeting conservatives. And we're getting this for our Freedom of Information Act and plus our work with the whistleblowers. It's ongoing. Hey folks, your support of the ACLJ, though, is really critical right now. We're in our life in Liberty Drive. You've seen the cases. We just had the win at the Supreme Court. We're back up on another one right now. We've got a case that we're going to be bringing against the United Nations Relief Agency, who's funding Hamas, basically, at least through their C3.

So we got all of this going on. Your support of the ACLJ is absolutely critical. I want to encourage you to go to ACLJ.org.

Any amount you donate will be doubled. You go to ACLJ.org Life and Liberty. And if you can make it a monthly gift, you become an ACLJ champion. It means become a champion for life, for liberty, and for freedom. And that's what we're talking about here. That's the issues we're dealing with is the fight for freedom, the fight for life, and the fight for a constitutional republic. We're going to be joined again by Rick in the next half hour, as well as our panel here in studio. Support the work of the ACLJ. Go to ACLJ.org. And again, your donations will be doubled through our Life and Liberty drive.

Back with more in a moment. You got the fiasco in Fulton County. You had the attempt at a scheme to remove a Presidential candidate from a ballot by a state.

Then it became 14 states. We fortunately won that at the Supreme Court of the United States, nine to zero. You've got the FBI investigating Catholics because they're concerned, they're subversive. And I want to go right to Rick Grinnell on that one, because Rick, you were the director of national intelligence, a member of the cabinet for the former President. This idea that the FBI would be targeting Catholics because they're conservatives and they wanted to increase their activity. If they didn't get caught, they were increasing their activity in these eight months. This is when they said, this is the time leading up to the general election. That's in their documents.

The Richmond office assessed that there's an increase over the next 12 to 24 months in the run-up to the next general election. This is their documents we got. So they were already doing this targeting thing. Now, I think we stopped them because we brought it to light. But how dangerous of a threat is that to our Republic?

Well, first of all, let's thank ACLJ's entire team for being at the forefront on this. But let's be clear about one thing too, is that the FBI agents that were investigating parents, religious parents, didn't do this on their own. They were instructed to do it. And what's so infuriating now is that we have the Democrats and the media saying that Republicans are manipulating elections. Republicans are the ones who are attacking democracy and politicizing intelligence.

But we know the opposite is true. Every time they accuse us, it's because they're trying to cover up for what they're doing. They had a strategy that was to help the woke mob and to beat back parents who wanted to tell schools that they had a voice, that wanted to tell teachers that they can't just overrule parents.

And they don't like that because they don't want anyone to get in the way of their woke ideology. Thank God that we bought them. But this is just the tip of the iceberg, Jay. There are plenty of more strategies that the FBI is going to do, and we've got to stop them and clean house.

I'm going to talk in the next segment about a case we have in Nevada that was outrageous, talking about parents' rights. But Andy, you worked with the FBI for a long time. I did.

As a US attorney. I did. And I had a lot of respect for the FBI and for the line agents. I still have respect. It's the internal supervisory agents and the politicization of the FBI. And I'm very disgusted at Chris Ray, who's from Atlanta, who should have known better, who's allowed the FBI to become a political arm of the Democratic Biden administration, instead of stepping in and saying, we're not a political entity. You talk about fidelity, bravery, and integrity as what you stand for, and yet you have no integrity. You're dogging Catholic churches to see if they do something that's improper in their theology.

I mean, the Catholic church, a 2000-year-old institution, one of the foundations of the Christian East and West, is now we're going to look at it and make sure that they're not too conservative. Or what about school board meetings? I represented a school board in the southern part of Atlanta. And as Ambassador Grinnell said, we're going to tell parents that you don't have a voice in what your students and your children are learning. And if you do say something, you're a domestic terrorist because you stand up for what is right. What has become of the FBI? What has become of our government if it's going to be politicized this way?

Shame on them all. I'll tell you what, coming in the next segment, I'm going to talk about this case we've got in Nevada. We have had a big win, but that means the case is really just starting. But your support of the ACLJ right now is critical. We have people like Rick Grinnell and this team that's with us right here in the studio right now, and the folks behind the screen. We get you this broadcast five days a week, live, on every social media app, on TV, radio. Your support is critical. We're in our life and liberty drive. Go to ACLJ.org. And what happens is your donations are going to be doubled, which means we've got someone that's going to match that gift. Go to ACLJ.org.

You can use the QR code that's right on the screen right now. And if you can make it a monthly gift, you become an ACLJ champion. Let me tell you about the champions. We started our campaign to increase our champions in October. We had 15,000. We are just shy of 20,000 basically four months later, which is about on par where we wanted to be. See if we could add somewhere between 500 and 1,000 a month, and it's happening. And you make a big difference in our ability to fight back on these issues.

Go to ACLJ.org. Have your gift doubled. Hey, welcome back to the broadcast, everyone. Rick was mentioning earlier, and I want to go back to you on this, Rick, parents being kind of locked out of the school board. Let me give you a horror story. And I wish I could say this was a law school exam and not a real case, but it's a real case. So we've got a 14-year-old, 15-year-old student in a drama class. She's in a school that is one of these magnet schools that if you've got gifts and talents in these areas, they kind of accentuate that and they teach them.

That's great. She gets into the program. They have to do a monologue, which is not uncommon. I did that in my drama class and speech class in law school, in undergraduate school.

So they do that in the high school. You randomly draw a monologue, okay? Now, teachers approved this monologue. The monologue was so vile, the language... First of all, I said the language here would be fine by the FCC, okay?

This is coming out of a 14, 15-year-old. The mother... Do we have this? Rick, I want you to see it. I want our audience to see this. The mother goes to a school board meeting and starts reading the monologue her student was required to read in class and watch what happens here.

This will be horrifying for me to read to you, but that will give you perspective on how she must've felt when her teacher required her to memorize this and to act it out in front of her entire class. I don't love you. It's not you.

It's just, I don't like your dick or any dick in that case. I cheated, Joe. I'm sorry. Excuse me. I don't... Thank you so much for your...

Thank you for your comment. Forgive me. We're not using profanity. Simply, this is a public meeting. I asked for decorum. If you don't want me to read it to you, what was that like for my 15-year-old daughter to have to memorize pornographic material?

Okay, Rick, I wish I could tell you that wasn't real and it is. Now, so real that we went to federal court and sued on behalf of the mother and the student. And the student's case is going forward now.

We beat back a motion to dismiss, which was a big win. There was also, and I don't want to get into the details on this part, there was the teacher did things the teacher should not have done as far as physically touching the student after this happened, which was also inappropriate. And that is part of the lawsuit. And then of course there was the First Amendment claim. An Obama appointee judge said there was no pedological concern that would have justified that action in that classroom.

And yet when the mother went to the school board meeting, they shut her down because it was, quote, had profanity in it. I mean, what's so outrageous, I'm sitting here thinking, how many more times is this happening across our country? I mean, we have been teaching our kids to hate America and all this woke BS.

We've got to get much more aggressive. Part of the problem, Jay, is ourselves. We have allowed this to happen in our communities. And people need to realize they have a voice, they better get involved, and they better participate with organizations that are on the front line like ACLJ. This is so outrageous to me that we're teaching 15-year-olds and 14-year-olds to do this and to memorize pornographic information and act it out in front of their peers. Who is this teacher and why do they still have a job?

Is it because of the unions and tenure? Well, then that's a problem. Yeah, well, the reality is this was a very traumatic event for this family, as you can imagine. But the fact is, and we're in federal court on it, we're going to beat them.

We're going to get justice here. But the fact that this even happened is outrageous. Yeah, and it's extremely outrageous when you see the mother trying to bring this to the attention of the school board, the horror that happened to her daughter. And yet she gets shut down at the school board saying, oh, you can't say that here because it's pornographic.

You can't use that profanity. Yet her 15-year-old daughter was required, required to memorize it and to recite it. And that is where it gets to be ridiculous. Obviously, that child should not have been able to or be required to say that. And that teacher should have pulled that monologue in the first place. The thing I go back to is how did that monologue get in the school curriculum in the first place, Rick? A teacher who read it thought, well, this is something that students should learn because it's going to push them in a certain direction. And that is exactly what they said.

Yep. That is the whole problem because teachers shouldn't be pushing kids in certain directions. They don't have this moral authority to somehow expand the horizons of these kids. This is the job of the parents.

And teachers who are this aggressive, who have a strategy, an activist strategy should actually lose their job. They got to go back and teach the basics. Kids are failing. Kids are failing. They're not able to compete in today's economy in terms of just computer skills. Yet we're teaching them to memorize pornographic speeches because the teacher likes it.

This is really a depraved activity. I mean, it's so interesting to me that the Obama judge, Harry, President Obama's nominee, who is judging the case, recognize the lack of legitimate pedagogical concern here. There was no child benefit, educational benefit in that approach. So essentially in Nevada, the school was weaponizing itself and its classroom against both parents and school children. And this is part, I think, of the left's deep state agenda to disassociate parents from their children and to see parents, if you will, as an impediment to the child's education. So the school sets itself up in local parentis, basically as a superior to the parents. And I think this is an agenda, a deep state agenda that the ACLJ is fighting strongly against. But the key to the fight here is you got to go, Andy, to federal court and you got to beat back the school boards and the school board lawyers and all the insurance companies that are part of it.

Yes. And that's exactly what we did. And that's exactly what we persist in doing, Jay, because we are going to stand up for the family, for traditional values.

And as we say in Greek, sindiritiki, conservative and not ashamed about being conservative, sindiritiki, traditionalist, and not being ashamed to be traditionalist in the tradition of the Greco-Roman Judeo-Christian tradition that we inherit and not to be ashamed of it. But you know, the fascinating aspect, Rick, and I want to go back to you with this. We're now in the heat of the, I feel like the general election's already started. It really has for all practical purposes. And when you look at the kind of the lay of the land right now, and it is a tale of two cities, it's the worldviews are so different. There's no commonality anymore. There's no middle ground to meet on, unfortunately. And the left is trying to silence anybody that even, even their own people when they speak out, if they agree with us. Look, that's one of the things that I think conservatives have to start pushing back on is just the idea that we have dissenting views, that we have a conversation where two people have different opinions, and one is not right, and one is not wrong.

It's a different of opinion. And we can't cancel each other for it. We can't have this system where we say, you're providing misinformation, and so there's a moral obligation to crush you and to silence you. And that's what's happening right now. The media have taken the side of Democrats, that people who have a differing opinion, somehow pushing misinformation, dangerous information, and they must be stopped and crushed.

That is a problem. That is the problem on the left and a problem with the media. We have to get back to being able to have differing opinions, agree to disagree, and to fight it out in elections.

When you have two different visions, whatever a politician or school board member or whatever it is, whoever wins, elections have consequences. Absolutely. All right, Rick, we appreciate it.

Thanks for being with us and thanks for being part of the team. Folks, you're seeing the scope and nature of the work of the American Center for Law and Justice. You know we're in our life and liberty drive right now. And we talked about the Supreme Court win. We got another one we're dealing with on the immunity issue for Presidents, and that affects every President. It's a very dangerous President, what the D.C.

Circuit put in place. And the idea that immunity expired the day you leave office and you could be sued for, you could be criminally prosecuted for official acts as President. I mean, maybe in Venezuela, which it shouldn't even be there, but not in the United States.

Then you look, and then take it right down. So you go from the Supreme Court of the United States to the local school board. And here's the truth. The American Center for Law and Justice is front and center. And then travel overseas, CC's heading over to Geneva this next week on issues involving people that we have incarcerated because of their faith, fights that are taking, wars that are taking place in the Middle East, where the laws of war of course aren't followed, and Israel's being basically just beaten back in the international tribunals. And when that happens, you gotta be there, folks.

I mean, part of what you gotta do is be there. And I call it the ministry of presence, and that's what we're doing. We've got our life and liberty drive going on right now. Your support of the ACLJ this month means your donation will be doubled.

You go to ACLJ.org slash life and liberty. There's a QR code also on the screen. You can go right there and it'll link you right over to the website. So we encourage you to do that. If you can donate monthly, you become an ACLJ champion, which means automatically when your gifts are made, they'll be doubled during times like this. So we really encourage that. Like I said, we're just shy of 20,000 and on our way to getting there. And hopefully, by the end of this month, we'll be at 20,000 ACLJ champions.

So we encourage you to do that at ACLJ.org slash life and liberty. Back with the last segment coming up. Hey, welcome back. You know, we touched just barely on what's going on internationally, but I want to go over to C.C. Heil, senior counselor for the ACLJ, who is on her way to Geneva and the UN. So I want to kind of give us a sense of what's going on, what are we going to be talking about, what are we going to be doing, what are the cases we're involved in? Yeah, so the Human Rights Council meets three times a year in Geneva.

And so this will be their 55th session. And we will be over there. We have a team that'll be going over there and we will be making oral interventions on behalf of really persecuted Christians worldwide. Describe for everybody what an oral intervention is at the UN, because people have seen them sometimes but may not know.

Sure. So the Human Rights Council actually has an event where all the member states are present, representatives of all the member states are present there. The President oversees the meeting and NGOs have an opportunity to actually present an oral statement regarding the human rights records of certain countries, depending on what the conversation is at that time.

They have general topics and then, you know, we actually have to file to make an oral intervention and we do that and we do that again, mostly on behalf of persecuted Christians in certain countries. But we also do them on behalf of Israel, because as we know, at the United Nations, Israel is the most condemned member state out of the 193 member states before the United Nations. And we are consistently a voice that supports them and their right to self-defense.

You know, Andy, you came back recently and Jordan's there right now in our office in Strasburg. They did a magnificent job dealing with the hostage situation at the European at the European Union, the European Parliament. But that work is another very important aspect of what we do. We have a center in Strasbourg, France, the European Center for Law and Justice, which handles our European affairs throughout Europe. And we are very active in promoting pro-life anti-abortion things, human trafficking sometimes, and especially persecuted Christians. That is the thing that we're really very sensitive about and to making sure that Christians who are in Europe and throughout the Middle East are not being persecuted.

They are marginalized groups, and they are being hurt and harmed. And we are speaking up for them before the European Parliament, before the European Court of Human Rights, and before the European community as a whole. And this is something that we engage in actively. We have a director there. We have a staff of lawyers and researchers who work on these matters. And it's very important to us to keep our European presence, as you say, the ministry of presence.

It's very important to be there. One reason CC is going to Geneva is not only to make the oral intervention, but to be there to show that the European Center for Law and Justice and its American counterpart, the American Center for Law and Justice, are active present beings in the international scene. Harry, you've been involved in international teaching. We've had programs at Oxford University. You've done programs for law schools in Europe. The global reach of the ACLJ is something that we don't spend a lot of time talking about, but it's a very important part of what we do.

Absolutely. And so we should never forget our presence in Jerusalem in addition to Strasbourg. And Strasbourg is a very helpful location, for instance, in dealing with Southeast Asia, with Pakistan, where many Christians suffer from persecution. And so the ACLJ has been upfront and basically doing really important work on behalf of Christians worldwide. And this work will continue.

It needs to continue. If you look at the number of Christians who've been murdered over the last several years, the numbers have gone up from Nigeria to Southeast Asia and elsewhere. In addition, Christians face active threats in Europe.

And so it's very important to think about what the ECLJ is doing in Europe, particularly in the pro-life arena. And so listeners need to be made aware of that and to support our efforts in that arena. We also, as Harry mentioned, we have an office in Jerusalem. You've seen Jeff Balaban from our office in Jerusalem many times on this broadcast. We also see him have an office in Pakistan.

We do. And that office is extremely important because, as Harry said, the Christian minority there in Pakistan is very much targeted. And without our assistance, so many of the poor Christians, they're targeted, they're thrown in jail on false blasphemy charges. You have children, Christian children that are targeted and never have justice, never receive justice. So we actually have law office there in Pakistan, and we have been very successful. We have seen that when we show up, again, ministry of presence, when we actually have attorneys that show up and push for justice in these cases, we have been very successful in getting our clients, again, that have had false blasphemy charges released and then getting justice for clients that had no hope of getting justice. You don't like having to brag about this. I don't mean bragging in that way, but our success record of getting hostages that are religiously being persecuted and held by regimes that are hostile, whether it's India, whether it's Iran, whether it's Turkey, the list goes on and on and on. China, others, we have an unbelievable success record. And I give God the credit for that and also the capabilities that he's given our staff to stand with these cases that sometimes take literally CC years to resolve.

Yeah, they absolutely do. The hostage cases, you're in it for the long haul, sometimes almost seven years. But that's another place at the UN that we can do at least some work.

The UN has a working group on arbitrary detention, and we have gotten really great opinions from that working group, which actually helps put pressure on the countries that they have detained someone wrongfully. And that does help us when we are advocating, again, for justice and to get hostages released. But it is a long-term commitment. Andy, we've been doing the ECLJ for over 25 years.

Yes, it started in 1997, yes. And it's been continuously operative in Strasbourg, France, and it's a beautiful offices on KCOC, which I'm pleased to be a member of the board of the European Center for Law and Justice and to be part of that organization. And we do a lot of work, as I said, on behalf of persecuted Christians throughout Europe and about the pro-life and around the globe as well, Jay.

Yeah, and the work there is extensive. And listen, our team did a magnificent job. Both our D.C. team, when the hostage families came to the United States, did an amazing job with the families and members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats. And I will say our European team also did a great job.

Same thing, fantastic job. We've got a great team. That team is in place because of your support for the work of the American Center for Law and Justice. In other words, without you, none of this happens, whether it's Mike Pompeo, Rick Grinnell, Tulsi Gabbard, the team you have right here, the people you don't see behind the screen right now that are making sure this broadcast is on the air, our social media teams, our lawyers, our public policy people. None of it happens without your support.

So I want to encourage you to go to ACLJ.org. Right now, we're in our life and liberty drive. This is the second week. I want to encourage you to donate. Your donation will be doubled, which means you donate $20.

We're getting another 20 from someone else, $40. It's an amazing opportunity for us. We do it, and it really impacts our ability to do these cases and have this team around the globe. We're expanding.

We're going to get more into that in the days ahead. We're continuing to our outreach. We've got a major case we're filing against the United Nations Relief Agency in federal court, folks.

This is going to be a big case. So go to ACLJ.org or our life, slash life and liberty. And again, any amount you donate, we'll get a matching gift for. Also, if you can donate monthly, you become an ACLJ champion. What that means is you're donating every month. And then when these drives happen, they're automatic. So you become a champion of life, a champion of liberty, a champion of freedom. If you could afford to give a monthly gift to the ACLJ at ACLJ.org, forward slash champions.