Today on Seculo, Jim Jordan's committee launches an investigation into Biden. Keeping you informed and engaged. Now more than ever, this is Seculo. We want to hear from you.
Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Jordan Seculo. Welcome to Seculo folks. So every time we've come back to you each day last week, once this story broke about the classified documents, it's been a drip, drip, drip. In the White House, they committed the ultimate sin in one of these processes, which is to say, it's over. We've got all the documents found. They're over to the special counsel.
We'll cooperate. Nothing to see here. And then you wake up on Saturday morning and you get another news alert and you kind of have to parse through it and go, okay, is this the news alert I already read last night or is this a new news alert?
And it was. They found while they were getting the getting what they thought were the final classified documents from his home in Delaware, they found what, six more pages of classified documents. This in the library at his home. I think also to point out something we've been talking about this morning with our team over the weekend was this is where Joe Biden resided basically for two years straight because he campaigned from his home in Delaware. Remember because of COVID, their decision was he will stay in that basement. He'll do his interviews there.
He'll do his events there. So he was not the only person there to put all those shots together, to put all those images. Basically that was his campaign headquarters. So it might not have been a hundred people, but there were significant amount of in and out. We have also know that, and again, this would have been maybe during when he was vice President, but not in that gap period, but there's no visitor log. So there's no knowledge of how many times anybody was in and out of there. If he hosted four dignitaries ever at his home and of course, Hunter and people like that. I mean, this was during COVID.
So this was his primary residence. How they didn't, he didn't know the documents were there. It's a little hard to believe that especially then when they found more, but you did say something that, you know, we have some experience in this and the lawyers are making a big mistake.
They're, you know, they're making these statements. We've got everything. Then the next day we don't have everything. Then the next day they find more documents and, you know, we didn't get one this morning, but we did get one Saturday.
And here's the problem with all this. Obviously there were documents there that weren't supposed to be there. They've got a special counsel. They've got a special counsel on the former President of the United States.
And now they've got a special counsel on the President of the United States. Both of these individuals are going to be running for President again in 2024. That campaigning starts when Jordan, about now it's going to start March, April. Listen, he was going to announce next month, which is a couple of weeks away. Do you think he'll announce with this pending?
No. I mean, I think if it depends on how long this is pending, if, if he, if it wraps up in a month, I think you'd wait. I mean, why would you want to announce in the middle of this when you've got a scandal that involves particularly him, this doesn't impact the vice President. She has nothing to do with this.
She was not, this is documents from the Obama years. So it really impacts the staff that's been with him the longest, which is the current secretary of state, his chief of staff, his white house council and former white house council. Then you've got all these new people. I mean, you know, Jake Sullivan definitely implicates him.
Maybe these guys who moved over, but the new people who were maybe just, you know, I like Korean John Pierre as, as bad as she's done throughout this process. This is what you got to rethink all of that. Like, do you need to bring in a different spokesperson? I know they tried to use, maybe they could use Kirby potentially, I guess, because this is national security, but then it makes it also elevated. But these are usually talks about war, not.
Yeah. But we've got documents that are related to Ukraine documents that are related to the United Kingdom documents that are related to Iran. So this is serious information. And then we, then they stopped saying what these other documents were involving, which, which lends, leads me to believe that there's something else going on there that they don't want it out. And the lawyers are saying, well, we're trying to balance transparency with a, now an ongoing special counsel. And as we said on last week's broadcast folks, when a special counsel is implemented, that means there's concern of criminal liability. They don't do special counsels for civil cases. And the lawyer that was looking at this, the US attorney in Illinois said to the, to the attorney general, you have to put, in his view, you need to put a special counsel in place. Take your phone calls on this 1-800-684-3110 the ACLJ is taking action. We'll talk to you about what we are doing to get more information for you and to the Congress, to the media, to the public.
1-800-684-3110 on this Martin Luther King day, when we recognize his legacy in our country. We'll be right back. One thing I love about, you'll start seeing more and more this week is people like Adam Schiff who are on TV now, they've been totally taken out of the intelligence world. So, but they of course are going to obsess over them being the experts in this. I guess I would ask him, hey, let's start an impeachment today. You guys love that.
Let's do it. But what he's now critical is of the House investigating it, which is of course what he was doing the entire time, of course. He didn't let special counsel just do the investigation.
Now they're saying it's leaking out information during the special counsel. I'm talking about Mueller. I mean, he was talking about the most interfering House member was probably Adam Schiff and his staff, including the fact that when they couldn't get Russia and they already saw that ship sailing, they came up with Ukraine.
And then obstruction in between. And then it was the Ukraine that was the basis for the impeachment. I mean, something that probably should have been investigated, which was Hunter Biden's role. I mean, now we all know this has all led to a full-scale war. So was President Trump wrong at all in asking them to say, what were the Bidens up to?
What are they up to now? Because look at how bad that region is. And they played a role in it, a role big enough to where we know that some of the documents he took were on Ukraine, that he didn't want people to see likely. And this family was wrapped up in Ukraine. It's an almost unexplainable amount. When you look at all the other countries in the world, it's like we all know the Saudis, they spent a lot on former government, even the Chinese.
That's one thing. But to be that involved in a specific Eastern European country like that, which is ripe with corruption, and to be on a board when you don't speak the language, you have no history in natural gas and all the corruption that surrounds that world. Again, you have to ask yourself, even the Democrats are having a tough time defending this. Yeah, but they're trying to say now these investigations are not appropriate. And by the way, the Mueller probe was going on while Adam Schiff was going after everybody that he could possibly think of.
So this idea that they bifurcated this and it wasn't the way they did it is nonsense. Now, of course, they're going to go after Jim Jordan, but the Judiciary Committee has said, Andy, that they are launching an investigation. Now it's important to point out this is different than what the special counsels are doing. Yes, this is a congressional investigation. This is an investigation that's given to the Judiciary Committee under its oversight responsibilities of the Department of Justice and of other governmental agencies that apply to other committees. And Jim Jordan, as chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has rightly said, I want to investigate the handling of these documents from a congressional point of view in terms of legislation that might be enacted later to prevent this from recurring, if that's at all possible. So Jim Jordan is totally within his right in instituting an investigation. And the special counsel is a separate animal altogether. That's a creature of the Justice Department.
He's got subpoena authority, so does Congress have subpoena authority, but Mr. Herr has his authority and his mandate from Merrick Garland, the Attorney General, and Jim Jordan has his mandate and authority from the people of the United States. So, I mean, the point is that this investigations, these investigations are going forward. Now, the question is going to be, I mean, I'm looking at every single network, you know, news networks, the big three, Fox, CNN, and MSNBC. And the fact is they're all covering it. I mean, right now, as we're on air, CNN's got ex-deputy AG, legal questions, did Biden know about the classified documents? They were in his home, in his home office for two years, well, for six years, excuse me. And ask yourself, how did he not know? No, I mean, and his team, especially when this became something you were going to comment on with Donald Trump and including the raid.
So that alone, let's say you had a gap period and you just kind of forgot about it over four or five years, okay? Now you are okay raids of your predecessor, okay, into his home, like the Mar-a-Lago raid and the special counsel. You would think way before you would have okayed that, hey, let's check our files. Because what we've learned also from the National Archives, how slow they are, and he was not the President. So he was not the first person they were going to probably priority wise for documents.
He would have been the second, if that. So there's likely, we were talking about this in our meeting, they're dealing still with Obama documents and probably Bush documents. And not to say that they're all rise to the level of needing a special counsel, but does any of this rise to the level of a special counsel?
They weaponize this game. I think this is when you say let's weaponize documents and start raiding former President's homes, not like a random bureaucrat who stole a classified document to sell to China. We're talking about documents that are locked away. When you weaponize that and you say that you need a criminal investigation from him and his whole colleagues and everyone around this former President, now you have said you must follow, which is what Mary Carla had to do then on Thursday, and do the same thing to Biden. Now the difference is if you're Joe Biden, you don't have to fear the bureaucracy as much.
You don't. No, but we talk about the weaponization of the FBI, the Department of Justice. Let's explain to Andy what that means.
Yeah, what does it mean? Well, it's taking an organization that is a bureaucracy that should not be political. The FBI, any agency of the federal government, the Commerce Department, Health and Human Services, any of these, the Treasury, whatever it is, these should be administrative agencies of the government there to do neutral tasks to perform their functions, then they should not be used for political purposes. When we say weaponization, what we're saying is giving them authority to engage in political attacks and political hunts of people who are the enemies of the person who's sitting in the White House, and you weaponize them by doing things like a massive search warrant on the House of the former President of the United States, but nothing with respect to President Biden's house. How do you know, how can you say today that there are no further documents in President Biden's house or in the curtilage around the house?
I don't know that. An FBI agent hasn't gone through there with a search warrant to make a search. We're relying on them voluntarily producing these documents. That's what I mean by weaponization, using a government agency as a political firebrand, a tool, a weapon.
Very, very dangerous in a constitutional republic, and that's supposed to happen, actually. No. Let's go to the phones. Jerry in Rhode Island online. One, if you want to talk to us folks, have questions about this, the ramifications, the investigation. 1-800-684-3110.
That's 1-800-684-3110. Hey, Jerry. Hey, I asked this question in light of one of Jay's questions last week. Does the DNC have their own independent power on whose campaign they're going to fund in light of this recent stock issue, even if the sitting President and the presumptive nominee, can the DNC decide how much money to put into a campaign? Well, right now, when you're the President, you run that political party, and those are your allies. Now, can the committee men and women—I know more about the Republican rules than the Democrat rules, and they are different. They have all those super delegates. It changed some of that to make it a little bit more fair, but they have the super delegates, all of that. But could the committee men and women come together and say, this is not a good idea, and pressure him not to run?
Sure. When you run for President, though, the DNC technically—well, it depends on if you have opposition or not. If you are the sitting President and you don't have opposition, they still rely more on the campaign money. It's not as much—DNC is kind of doing general political work. So, again, could this be a move to remove?
I absolutely think so. I think that his own party members could have seized on this moment to say, you know what? He got back on this little bit of a bump, so he was going to announce to run again, which means none of us can, the Newsom's of the world.
You really can't. It's not going to probably go anywhere. And so he was turning things around, and then they seize on this, and they try to turn him and say, well, if we're saying it about Donald Trump, can't go back to the White House. We have to say the same thing about Joe Biden.
It hasn't gotten there yet, but it could. There's a political element to this, there's no question. Let me also say, Andy, we have filed a Freedom of Information Act request, interestingly, against the National Archives, because we want—they were right on top of the Donald Trump documents, and they wanted him back and all this, and there was this whole dispute, which has ended up now with litigation and a special counsel. We've asked them, what were you doing here?
Yeah, that's right. You were all over the President Trump and saying you want the documents, and you were in negotiations, apparently, with President Trump's team with respect to the documents. And these documents now—what about you, National Archives? What is your role with respect to the receipt of these documents and the keeping of these documents and the disclosure of these, if you did, in fact, disclose them?
And how did you handle them? We're on that. We sent a FOIA request, and I think we did it on an expedited basis, Jay.
So we want something to come back very quickly. We don't know what the archives would do. I know if it was to justice, they would say pending investigation, that would be closed.
No more on that. But archives doesn't have that privilege. Well, you know, there's also the comparison, too, about where these are being found. Mar-a-Lago is a residence, but also a club with staff security cameras. There was locks. We know there were locks. And then they actually went down. They said, okay, let's just relock it.
Let's put this special lock on the door. They didn't immediately start a criminal case over this. And then somebody at the Department of Justice got to Merrick Garland. There was a pressure on him the whole time to go after Trump.
Yes. So they decided this is what will launch the special counsel over pieces of paper. And now it looks like Donald Trump, though he had more documents, he had just left office as President, not vice President, and had them in a more secure location. Remember the picture we saw for the FBI?
They created that picture. The documents weren't found on the floor in his office. No. So he's now come out, I think rightfully so, and said, if you want to just compare apples to apples here, mine is secure, yours is at this random house. He's right.
And that's part of the issue here. Where there's not staff and security 24 seconds. Secret service at the former Presidents. All right. We're going to take your calls when we come back.
We've got an update on some other issues. 800-684-3110. 1-800-684-3110.
All right. Welcome back to Secchia. We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110.
Of course, acknowledging Martin Luther King Day and his legacy to our country and events going on around the country and a lot of last week as well. We know kids are out of school and some offices are closed. But if you've got calls for us, we're here. 1-800-684-3110.
That's 1-800-684-3110. We do want to update you on some ACLJ news, some life news as well. This is the March for Life Week in Washington, DC. We'll be up there. We're doing an event in our office for folks who are participating in that on Friday.
And I'll be up there in Washington with a number of our team. So we're excited about that opportunity. It's kind of a new movement and new fight and new battles, both at the state court level, legislative level. We're kind of outside the federal world now and we're back into state legislatures and constitutional amendments and state courts. We knew some of the blue states would be tough and some of the red states have proven to be tougher, which because for so many decades, these attorneys who become judges or Supreme Court or even in their state Supreme Courts, right or left, have just had this pounded into them that this is in the Constitution and that the Supreme Court got this wrong.
And so because they're not bound by federal, you have this whole new state issue, which is, hey, we don't care if it's in the federal Constitution, but do we have this right in our Constitution? So it's a whole new world, it is a battle for life. And I think it's a great opportunity for the next generation then to say, okay, we fought this out the federal, we got this out of Washington DC to some extent, but a 50 state strategy when you're up against an industry, right now we're being outspent, outfunded and outworked. And we knew that would happen as part of the getting to the next phase, but we rapidly have to get our act together.
Yeah. And I think this is, you know, it comes down to right now, and this is the first national right to life, March for Life actually, it's all the groups, since the decision overturning Roe. So it's very interesting because the state reaction right now, Cece, has not been great. I mean, the state, a lot of these rush to, and I call them rush tos because I immediately had to get out these constitutional amendments or these statements, these resolutions they wanted the states to pass, and then you had the state Supreme Courts. It's been a rough road.
Yeah, it has. And I think the March for Life, you know, the whole purpose of that is to really promote a culture of life and really changing hearts and minds of the American people. And so even though the battle is not a federal law battle anymore, as we've had Dobbs overturning Roe v. Wade, the battle still remains for the American people. And, you know, for a day where killing a baby is just unthinkable.
I mean, that nobody would think that that was something that was all right. And I think that's why this march goes forward. And that's why the March for Life is still very important and relevant is because there's still a battle for the hearts and minds of the American people to stand up and promote a culture of life.
Yeah. I mean, now we, and we've got, we see the legislative, just the, how different it is in Washington. For instance, there was a recent vote because we don't have a federal protection for children who survive abortions. What happens then? So what is the burden on the doctor?
What should they have to, what's the care that they need to offer? So they botched abortion. Two hundred and ten Democrats voted against any protection for those children. Those are children at that point.
They're not, no one is arguing about that. You can't use fetus anymore. That is a child. That means the abortion was botched. They were birthed maybe with injuries and life-threatening.
What kind of care has to be taken? And we heard, heard this said, was this from Jerry Nadler? I want to hear the same because this is how they tried to spin. So we had one Democrat, it was Quilar who's on the border of Texas. He voted with Republicans. One didn't vote.
So that's how you got to 210. So only one Democrat voted. That's how far the party's gone. I mean, there's just no space for pro-lifers in the Democrat party. Quilar, I don't even know how he stays in with how strong he is on the border, but take this out. This is how they try to confuse people about why we voted against protecting children.
Take a listen to Jerry Nadler. The problem with this bill is not that it makes anything that it is not that it provides any new protection for infants. The problem with this bill is that it endangers some infants by stating that that infant must immediately be brought to the hospital where depending on the circumstances, that may be the right thing to do for the health and survival of that infant, or it may not. That is the problem with this bill. It directs and mandates a certain medical care, which may not be appropriate, which may be endanger the life of an infant in certain circumstances. What is he talking about? He's lying because the legislation is very clear and it says this, the degree of care required immediate admission to a hospital. So he read that and tried to turn that into his statement. Any health care practitioner present at the time the child is born alive shall exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life.
Not immediately, not do that and then just go to a hospital. So the first step is what? Stabilization. He took the title of that, ran with it, obviously didn't read the text, well doesn't care about the text, that of course you do what's best for the child and exercise, this part b is you exercise that skill of care and then ultimately make sure that that child born alive is transported and admitted to a hospital. But the first step is stabilization.
Let's at the at the at the plate. So you do what's best for the child. That gives a lot of these abortion assistance. This is their nightmare. That happens.
And yes, but let's okay, go ahead. That's the problem. Yeah, I think the issue is everybody's trying to say that this does not happen, but it does happen. There are babies that are born alive after a botched abortion and what happens to them, the abortionists leave them on a table to die, throw them in a bucket to die. These are babies that are born alive and so this law is needed to say when a baby is born alive from a botched abortion, the doctor has to take care to save that baby's life, which you would think would be a no-brainer that everybody would say who in the world would vote against that. Of course, if a baby is born alive, you would want a medical doctor to preserve that child's life, but you have 210 Democrats that say, no, we don't want that to happen. We want that baby to be left on the table. We want that baby to be thrown in a bucket to just be allowed to die. And that is disgusting really.
It really, it really is horrific. And the Jerry Nadler knows that that's not what it says, or maybe his staff didn't tell him, but it's obvious what, what the law is. It's still abortion distortion. When it comes to any legislation, even something like the born alive protection, they, they have, they twist it into this is anything that might be considered pro-life or is not protecting the abortionist first.
So that's what Cece was talking about. They, they see it as protect, the abortionist must be protected first. The act of abortion must be protected first.
And then you could go to the, this, this life. But he called an infant. That's the crazy part about this vote is you, you call it an infant.
And yet you, you say that, oh, by doing this, you're going to put the infinite more danger. They've survived abortion at this point. And all it says is to that abortion is you can't kill them.
Yeah. And the abortion distortion is alive and present because you hear from Pelosi's tweet, she talks about, oh, the house Republicans choose to push their extreme anti-choice agenda. Schumer says the MAGA Republican controlled house is putting on display their extreme views on women's health. Kamala Harris says house Republicans pass an extreme bill today.
And then we heard, you know, what Nadler said directly. They try to switch it and do the abortion distortion and make this about women's health. When we're talking about a baby that has completely been born alive. So this has nothing to do with the mother's reproductive health anymore or her choice anymore. This isn't a baby that has been born alive and their life deserves to be protected. And the medical doctor should have taken an oath to protect and preserve life.
And when that baby is born, there should be actions taken to protect it. And we are representing pregnancy resource centers, literally from coast to coast, all over the United States. The ACLJ is standing for life. And that's why we'd encourage you to stand with us at ACLJ.org. Support the ongoing work of the American Center for Law and Justice and our work around the globe. And of course, here in the United States, you do that by going to ACLJ.org. That's ACLJ.org. To have your voice heard and to stand up for those that can't speak for themselves. And we're doing that.
And we've been doing that for four decades. ACLJ.org. Back with another half hour coming up. 431 Center, talk to us. Keep you informed and engaged. Now more than ever, this is Seculo. And now your host, Jordan Seculo. Welcome back to Seculo. We are taking your phone calls 1-800-684-3112.
That's 1-800-683-1110. I do want to point out too our FOIA. So we are directly involved in this, the document dispute that now has a special counsel and a house investigation, rightfully so.
Even though you've got people like Adam Schiff saying how dare they get involved in the process. I mean, this is a guy who was like obstructing, constantly leaking. His staff was like the biggest problem during the entire investigation. Then ultimately launched an impeachment that had nothing to do with their initial concern about Russia. It was about Ukraine and a phone call about now what we know is pretty legitimate things.
Hunter Biden's involvement with Zelensky, who was a new President at the time, who came in, who, remember, replaced this poor Sheko, who Biden did not have a good relationship with. And now, you know, we see these names again because we've got a massive war in Europe that's ongoing. We're about to.
It hasn't even started. Our Patriot missiles, they're just being trained on. So all of those things, when you come together and realize President Trump was asking about it, totally legitimate, they impeached him over that.
I think, again, I saw like Ted Cruz's tweet, where's the raid? I'd say, where's the impeachment? I mean, I think that there's a case you can make that Republicans should go there because of the way they cheapened impeachment and the hell you could put them through by impeaching them. You can literally make their lives impossible. You can make it much harder for them to legislate, much harder for them to do their jobs, put them through, you know, remember how Kobe said, I'll just send the FBI to them and see what you can get. I mean, at this point, why not?
Well, it's interesting because you made the point, I think you made the point, which is true. They have cheapened the bar of impeachment so significantly, especially then round two of it, right? The second impeachment after that, that they cheapened it so much that it now is just, it's of course, it was always a political process, but it's like, yeah, just appoint them special counsels. I mean, you realize there's three special counsels right now, Durham, Her and Smith. Who get their own multimillion dollar budgets. Oh, 30, 40, 50 million dollars. We haven't heard yet if these special counsels are bringing outside. We don't know how they're building it up.
Mueller mostly brought in people from outside the government who used to be in the government, but were more like high profile, former congressional staffers or US attorneys and things like that. We're not hearing as much about that at this level, which makes me think it's just perfunctory to some extent. Could be, but the media and Logan just walked in, the media doesn't seem to be giving up on this though. I mean, even the CNNs and the MSNBCs. Well, I think it's one story they can actually talk about right now too.
It's a pretty slow time when it comes to news. They're able to actually have something that's kind of juicy for both sides. Conservatives are mad about it. Liberals are freaking out about it because it kind of obviously hurts all of what they've been saying for the last year. So I think it's a fun story in some ways because likely these documents, much like the Trump documents are going to lead to what? Probably the actual physical documents.
Who knows? But it's not like, again, I think a lot of people don't care necessarily about the documents. They care about exposing the hypocrisy on all sides of politics. You see how this is playing out. You've got this new special counsel, her, that's now the one that's on the Biden matter.
How would you like to be in their situation? Think about this for a moment. They can't coordinate with each other. They're not supposed to do that, but they're investigating the same set of facts. And the left is trying to say, well, it's not as many documents. And of course then we say, well, wait a minute. The other guy was the President. He had the right to declassify documents. It was more recent. And it was the dispute. Under security lock and key.
Yes. We do where all the work. This guy had him in his garage next to his Corvette. Multiple states. And his office with no security apparently. And who was in that house? No, when they talk about the garage, it was not like it's some special kind of safe. Like people have in their garages.
No, it was like in boxes. And then in the office, just in the office. And then another office. So with Trump, it was all centered around Mar-a-Lago where it was behind lock and key. And he was just out of office and there's going to be the back and forth. And that's what National Archives thought they were engaged in. And somewhere somebody stepped on each other's toes.
Yes. And then it spiraled out of control. It ends up being an enforcement of the search warrant. So it seemed like the Trump team didn't handle it perfectly? Yes, they did. And obviously, you're seeing that with the Biden team. Listen, the Trump team ended up getting themselves a search warrant.
The Biden team ends up making all the lawyers witnesses. Yeah. Okay.
So they both have handled it completely wrong in my view. We'll take your calls 800-684-3110. Back with more in a moment. Rick Grenell is going to be joining us as well. The implications of national security.
Welcome back to Secchia. We are finally starting to see Democrats, one, they're almost all acknowledging the special counsel was appropriate to a point. I think they felt like they have to, but Rick Grenell is joining us. The second part, Rick, they're finally starting to acknowledge when it comes to national security. They won't say it definitely impacted our national security, but because of the amount of time these documents were in these unsecured locations, they are finally admitting, Rick, that it may. Even Adam Schiff had to say this may have impacted our national security because of what we know about some of these documents. Rick, taking away the legal issue and going to the national security issue of it, the fact that this stuff was just floating around and it's the highest level, you've talked a lot about over-classification, but there are some things that are supposed to be classified.
Yeah. Look, there's no question. My concern is that Joe Biden was vice President at the time where these documents were taken and he had no authority to declassify these documents. And so the reality is that it's clear that they weren't declassified.
He didn't ask to have these documents declassified. He didn't go to President Obama, who was the person who would have been able to declassify this information. And it's concerning. I will also say that we've watched how the media and the political types in Washington at first tried to really downplay this by saying, oh, there's just a few.
CNN was literally running a headline that said under 10. And so there was a collective idea of downplaying all of this. And that, to me, is a troublesome part of this. Six years of these documents floating around in an unsecured place, and they were clearly not declassified.
Yeah. We have a FOIA that went out there. And really the purpose of this FOIA, again, they're not going to get the classified documents.
The purpose of the FOIA is to go to the National Archives and say, what were you doing? Did you say this was, did you ever come to an agreement that you were done asking for documents? And how did these not... Six years. How did these not make your list? What was the problem here?
What was the, what was the problem here? Where were the communications to Biden to say, we need these documents? And why did you stop asking for them?
Or did you not know about them and not have them? Because they're supposed to have this kind of in a spreadsheet, if you will. Exactly.
I'm putting it on the screen right now. This is what we sent to the National Archives on January 12th. And it's a demand for documents as to what was going on here. We're not going to get the documents that are classified, obviously.
We're not asking for that. But it'll be very interesting to see how they respond. But Rick, we've also got congressional investigations going on. I want to play a question from Jonathan Karl ABC this week to Adam Schiff.
Take a listen. Should the White House cooperate with the House Oversight Committee on this? Well, those requests are completely hypocritical when you consider what he said about the Mar-a-Lago situation. I think Congress sought to handle both situations the same way. And that is, we have to get a briefing from the intelligence community about any potential risks to national security of where those documents were and what they contained. But Congress shouldn't try to interfere with the investigations.
I think sadly, that's what Mr. Comer's object is. This is coming, Rick, from the guy that interfered with every investigation to serve his own purpose, Adam Schiff. Look, I was Director of National Intelligence when Adam Schiff was leaking against Donald Trump constantly as the chief intelligence house member.
It was really scary to watch his team work. I had people who worked for me in the intelligence community who came to me to say that they will no longer brief Adam Schiff on intelligence matters because they were afraid that he would leak against them and ruin their career. I had multiple people come and say, take me off being on the rotation of trying to give Adam Schiff or his team any type of intelligence briefing. This was the reality. The intelligence community was beginning to notice that their words were being completely manipulated by Adam Schiff.
Yeah. I think, Rick, what obviously the American people are trying to figure out is the serious level because the Democrats made such a big deal. There was a raid at Mar-a-Lago. They've made a huge deal about appointing the special counsel and this criminal investigation. Last week, just on Thursday, a special counsel gets appointed by Merrick Garland. We went through the statute.
We've talked about maybe the abuse of this, but you can't treat one differently than the other. When you get stuck in this situation, I feel like that's what the Democrats have done. They've weaponized documents. By weaponizing the documents and treating Donald Trump this way, they finally got stuck where they could no longer treat Donald Trump differently. They had to appoint a special counsel.
We went through the statute, Rick. You don't appoint a special counsel just to issue reports. It's kind of become that, but it's really the first part of the special counsel statute is a criminal investigation that you believe the Department of Justice cannot do on its own internally. That should be the number one point is Joe Biden is under criminal investigation right now.
Rick, here's what I was going to follow up with this. We've talked about this weaponization of the agencies. You're the director of national intelligence, but it seems like to me that the FBI has been totally weaponized here and the Department of Justice.
Well, I want to point out one thing to the listeners and that's the ACLJ documents request because it gets to the heart of what you're saying, Jay. It gets to the heart of why was there not a raid on Joe Biden? And what our document request is doing is going to the National Archives and saying, when did you end your search? Did you end a search?
Did you have any type of a process? Because if they ended the search and we now know that they missed all these documents, then after finding one document, they should have immediately raided the rest of Joe Biden's homes because they were told that the process ended and they had proof that it clearly wasn't the end. Well, here's what makes no sense if you're the, you know, if you're the FBI. You've got documents found at the Biden pen center in, this is after six years, by the way. So they've been out there for six years. They're founded the pen center. You ask yourself, why did they find them all of a sudden?
That's number one. So was there communication with the National Archives? Hey, we're missing documents.
I don't know. We're going to find out. Number two, then they find them in the garage next to the Corvette. And then you say to yourself, if the FBI, oh, there's documents floating around here. Then on Saturday they announced, oh, guess what? We found five more or six more documents in an office in his home. So then you say to yourself, okay, there's been three times here where the documents just mysteriously are now being disclosed.
Why haven't you done a search warrant? That's what the question really is for the American people here, Jordan. Yeah. I want to go to the phones, Clay in North Carolina on line one. If you want to talk to us in here folks, 1-800-684-3110 is the number.
That's 1-800-684-3110. Hey Clay. Hey brothers. I just want to say Merry Christmas and hope and pray y'all are having a blessed new year. Thank you for taking my call. And I just want to say thanks for the whole situation and everything.
But I just, how can anybody be satisfied with what's going on and what's happening, you know, especially this document stuff and also the other thing about abortion. I mean, this is, you know, this is not our right without our hearts. I've been supporting y'all ever since I found Truth Radio and I'm thankful to the Lord for what y'all do. God bless your heart for what you are doing. And I'm wholeheartedly supportive and I'm thankful for y'all doing this. Clay, let me tell you something. You mentioned the life issue here and this is a, look, this is a new challenge. It's a different challenge with the constitutional amendment, constitutional right to abortion not recognized, but we're fighting that out in the States.
We've got our teams deployed. On this issue with the documents, Rick, last question here, following up with what Clay said is, it is frustrating for the American people to hear this and then you, and most people are thinking not a whole lot's going to happen here and they're not going to indict a sitting President. They can't.
So there is this, you know, kind of fait accompli feeling out there. You know, what Clay is touching on is the frustration that everyone outside of Washington DC has, which is just a practical look at the situation and say, no one in their right mind can see that the FBI or the intelligence community or the National Archives are playing fair. They're just not playing fair.
We all know it. And while they scramble to pretend like the situations are different, they are absolutely different in one aspect. Joe Biden was the vice President without declassification authority. Donald Trump was the President with declassification authority.
That is a fundamental difference. And that, for me, makes the FBI's lack of going on offense, lack of concern of finding the rest of these documents, proof that we are in a situation where DOJ and FBI have weaponized their power against their political enemies. Rick, as always, we appreciate your insight into this as former acting director of national intelligence, now our senior advisor for foreign policy and national security. And we'll continue to go to Rick on this because I think again, this is trip, trip, trip. Oh yeah. And the President says he'll, God willing, he'll be able to, you know, discuss this with the American people soon. I suspect not. Yeah. I mean, I feel like they, they, they never just stuck to the one state, which is, we can't say anything. Yeah.
It's going to be very interesting. And then also they didn't release what these other documents topics were. The first group they did. And how did they think they weren't going to, how did he not know they were in his house?
But let's assume he did. I mean, that's just dangerous. Why, why, okay. The raid on Trump.
No, this could destroy your entire career. Garland knew that. Yes.
Yes. We know that this goes back to October, November. What you never want to do with these situations too, is forget that we've got other real issues, including on the border. We talked about life. We know we've talked about, we've mentioned throughout the show, you know, of course, Ukraine and Russia, we haven't had the Patriot missile system delivered yet that they're being trained in America right now, which that can't make the Russians very happy. That right now we've got Ukrainian military somewhere in the U S learning how to use the Patriot. So when that, when that day comes, that's a whole nother like world changing event when that system is delivered and they start shooting out Russian aircraft from the sky using us made weapons, but also these there's world events that are happening like the mayor of New York now in El Paso, Texas. Yeah. On a real tour.
Yes. About what's going on. So mayor Adams of New York has had a tough time. He was kind of a tough on crime, came from the police, but has had a lot of pushback from the bureaucracy in New York and just an overwhelming, even before this issue with the migrants, it was already dealing with just a surge of violent crime.
The COVID epidemic hit New York, the hardest, and it has not yet fully recovered. And now they're dealing with about 400 migrants today, which in a city like New York, if everything was operating at full speed, which is maybe, maybe that could work. But what you have to remember is these aren't 400 immigrants who have a job and a family to live with. These are 400 people a day showing up who have nothing illegal entrance. And then there's bad apples within them. So you've got families you got to take care of. They don't necessarily speak any English whatsoever.
So you can't just easily get them a job placement or school. So if it's, if it can, that's why I mean, if it could burn the city of New York at this level, imagine what, why all these other border cities are saying, like what you're doing to us. Take a listen to Mayor Adams in El Paso, which again, I think it's very interesting that these Democrats are doing this on their own.
They are not relying on the federal government and the Biden team to, to brief them on it. Take a listen. No city deserves this. El Paso does not deserve this. Chicago, Washington, Houston, Los Angeles, New York, no city deserves what is happening.
This is a beautiful city. And what has happened over the last few months undermined this city. And we don't deserve this. Migrants don't deserve this.
And the people who live in the cities don't deserve this. We expect more from our national leaders to address this issue in a real way. And we need a real leadership moment from FEMA. This is a national crisis. So the mayor of New York City is in El Paso, Texas, and Harry, he correctly notes that this is a national crisis that takes a national response. And so far it's pretty much nothing from the national government.
I think that's correct. I think the Biden administration's approach to the border is crickets. We will do nothing.
We will talk about doing something. We will hope that the border crisis ends. We will tell the American people that the border is closed and we will tell the migrants not to come. Meanwhile, thousands upon thousands of individuals are crossing the border illegally each and every day. And the Biden administration's response is to continue a failed policy. And so now you have a bipartisan movement by the mayor of New York City, the governor of Colorado. They are all reacting to what is going on because our border is open and each and every city, each and every state in the United States is now a border area.
December, 250,000, the final number is going to be 250,000 encounters, a quarter of a million. Now, Andy, Mayor Adams said, and this is interesting, the people that live in the cities don't deserve it. The services of the city can't handle it. That includes law enforcement and district attorneys.
Well, that's the main thing that obviously being a prosecutor, having been all my life a prosecutor, that sort of impresses me more than anything. How in the world can you handle law enforcement on a situation where you've got 400 in the city of New York, 400 migrants per day coming into the city of New York? You know that there's criminals among them.
It's inevitable. There's going to be disorder. There's going to be criminal acts that are committed. You've already got a city of multiple millions of people with a prosecutorial staff in the New York DA's office that's not even able to handle that. Now you're superimposing upon that 400 migrants a day, law enforcement, police officers, fire departments, prosecutors just can't handle the surge. You know, and politically, I think also, Jordan, this has become a liability for cities around the country.
They're the politicians, Republican and Democrat issues quickly evaporating because again, I think it's a big deal that he went there because Joe Biden was not able to go and put this to like rest for Democrats. He's not helping these cities. These cities are having to do this on their own and I think you do have to break it down to where we're talking about 2,000 people-ish a week into New York with nothing who are coming and saying we need everything.
So they're trying to take care of these folks. They've already got a crime surge. They have an issue with getting the city back to operating post-COVID and that wasn't done yet and then on top they did not have this dumped on top. You have a crisis on top of crisis and when you have that in management you've got to start peeling off the crisis this area and that seems to be the problem is this, as you said, every city, we've been saying this, is a border city now.
Absolutely. Every town. And then it converges with the Democratic agenda which is no bail policies with respect to criminals and so there's a crime surge in New York City and the immigrant crisis exacerbates this issue. Keep in mind that New York City since 2022 has taken in 40,000 migrants, opened 74 emergency shelters for humanitarian centers.
They expect that the migrant surge will cost at least 2 billion dollars I believe on an annual basis. And guess what Washington DC is doing with the borders are Kamala Harris. She is talking about the United States being in the western hemisphere. She really recognizes finally that we're in the western hemisphere. That Mexico is in the western hemisphere. But why won't she act?
Why won't she engage in affirmative action which stems the flow of migrants? If the DA's can't prosecute and the police can't arrest and then bail is not going to be set, what happens? Chaos. Chaos. You have chaos. You have lawlessness. You have a situation in which there is complete confusion.
You have disorder. You have riots in the streets. You have people who are paying taxes who are sick and tired of supporting illegals who come into their cities and into their municipalities. You have a fragmentation of society. You have a breakdown of society. You have an end to the country.
And I'm not being overdramatic about it. The cities are the core little blood cells that make up the country. Towns and cities throughout the United States. When you impact them as adversely as you have impacted New York for example or the other cities that Mayor Adams mentioned.
Washington, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, Portland, Seattle and so forth. You impact them. You destroy them. You destroy the fabric of the country.
These are the blood vessels and you're just clogging them up. All right folks, as always, we want you to stay updated at ACLJ.org. A new Secular Brothers podcast today this afternoon.
So check that out as well. A lot of more insight into that. We'll get to more. Two, how should the Republicans respond? Should we launch impeachment? Should those committees begin? And this kind of tit-for-tat that we see in Washington DC. And we encourage your support to work with ACLJ at ACLJ.org. You said on the 12th we already had a way out on this matter. ACLJ.org. We will talk to you tomorrow on Secular.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-01-16 15:36:55 / 2023-01-16 15:57:36 / 21