Share This Episode
Jay Sekulow LIVE! Jay Sekulow Logo

Does the Senate Have Authority to Try Second Impeachment?

Jay Sekulow LIVE! / Jay Sekulow
The Truth Network Radio
January 14, 2021 12:00 pm

Does the Senate Have Authority to Try Second Impeachment?

Jay Sekulow LIVE! / Jay Sekulow

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 242 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


January 14, 2021 12:00 pm

Does the Senate Have Authority to Try Second Impeachment?

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

Circular radio the house and peaches present for the second time this time around is the student even have authority to try to talk about all of it today on secular radio live from Washington DC Jay Sekulow line phone lines are open for your questions right now. 1-800-684-3110 one 800-6841 10, your host, secular so as you saw yesterday Pres. Trump reached again by the House of Representatives.

It was the impeachment of the problem in US history because you had only two hours of debate they stuck to those two hours of debate. They had no hearings before the date the it was just one article of impeachment and as we predicted, they would your earlier reports were that there could be up to 2025 Republicans joining this impeachment effort ended up being only 10 and really the only name there was was a Liz Cheney because she is the third ranking Republican leadership, at least for the time being. We'll see if she retains that role because of some of the backlash against her trying to lead a charge that obviously did not garner a a lot of significant support in fact I only recognized one other name of those members of Congress that was at Carson.

Fred opted from Michigan who is never been a fan of Pres. Trump so not surprising there. The others were just kind of names that dismember random members of Congress, not leadership, not a people you hear from a lot and so that is a kind of a signal then of what's what's to happen in the Senate. If there is, and that's what we talked about today. If there even is a Senate trial because Mitch McConnell clearly stated and are all Rita given the rules procedures considered precedents to govern Presidential impeachment. There simply no chance that a fair or serious trial could conclude before Pres. Biden's warning next week.

The student is held three Presidential impeachment trial is a blessed 83 days 37 days and 21 days respectively.

Even if the city process were to begin this week and move promptlyfinal verdict would be reached until after present Trump had left office that is key. That is key because there is a lot of discussion amongst editors we been checking in with these offices and they just aren't sure whether or not will the city could even have the strata. Chuck Schumer says they're going to, so you might have to challenge it in court. The President and it will be a former President that time would bring it a legal challenge in court potentially and then you talk about whether or not you know hundred days from now. The Senate still has the kind of instinct to want to do this trial and put everything else on hold, especially if the parliamentarian comes back then says no you can't split your time which is good to do impeachment trial. That's what you really do traditionally wants me, impeachment is is hammered and once the gavel and then that's it that's all the Congress, the Senate can deal with during that time. But here's what's also interesting. Mike Ludi is a former judge on the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit when we just read the first paragraph what he wrote said it appears that even if the House of Representatives and peaches present from this week, the Senate trial and that impeachment will not begin until after Trump is left office in President-elect Biden has become present on January 20, the Senate trial would be unconstitutional.

Thus, if the Senate trial is unconstitutional. Whatever happens, and that's in the trial would be academic would be an academic point because it would have no legal significance. So the constitutionality by the white Tom Cotner said that it was a grandma said that Ben sets I believe is raise that issue.

Last week that he did say just not even sure if they they have the jurisdiction yeah if if you're allowed to do that. The first thing in court that you have to have under any really quickly on this jurisdiction, and in the Senate. The first thing they have to have his jurisdiction. Yeah the first the first thing that the court looks at is whether it has jurisdiction to entertain a motion or trial or whatever the proceeding is the other thing you got have the defendant and then will have a defendant.

If you have an incumbent Pres. and that's another way of looking at it to yes it is a private citizen being impeached. I don't know that that's I don't read the Constitution. That way, says officers assist the Presidents as the vice presidency, former and and by the way it is. This its own rules as Mitch McConnell pointed out that have cause it to take that amount of time the Constitution and said had to their own rules do, so they don't have the time to do it now and when is it present elect Biden is sorted. So again I think there's lots talk about here is a call 100 684312 challenges facing Americans are substantial time and or value freedom sword constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades now ACLJ is on the front lines protecting your freedoms defending your rights and courts in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do more work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you.

Not well this is the perfect time to stand with us. ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ only one.

A society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless as is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold edition like it will show you how you are personally support publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pieces were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the Obama care means to the pro-life in many ways your membership in the ACLJ is empowering the right to question your free copy of mission in life today online ACLJ/secular radio and let you set the stage for you. So yesterday the President it is historic in the sense that he is the first President to be impeached by the house twice. Remember the first was acquitted and I would say that right now if I was betting you'd be acquitted. The second time as well. If a trial ever comes to comes to fruition and that's because there is a serious now constitutional debate. Losers may be crisis you might want call it over whether or not the Senate, and I'll just repeat what Sen. Talcott wrote in his statement he just put up-to-date. The houses pass an article peach meeting is the President, but the Senate and I keep saying this under its rules and precedents cannot start and conclude a fair trial before the President leaves office next week. Under these circumstances, the Senate lacks constitutional authority to conduct impeachment proceedings against a former President.

The founders designed impeachment process as a way to remove officeholders in public office, not an inquest gets private citizens. The Constitution presupposes office from which impeached officeholder can be removed right present Trump can't be removed.

Once this trial begins, he's already done with his term of office. And that's how impeachment begins that secondary punishment they keep focusing it on the you can also then take a vote to ban them from ever seeking federal office again is a secondary that's not the primary you have a judgment that's after you bid impeached and convicted.

But before you get to impeachment and conviction. You have to have the ability to have them tried and the Constitution to me seems very straightforward on this and I may III like what God Tom concept but I also like again what God should be judge looting said and that is in Burnaby hold fidelity to the Constitution here, the idea of impeachment storms.

That is the removal of office of someone that is offended Constitution under oath of office, high crime or misdemeanor. But before you can do that.

You actually have to be able to remove them from office. Here, the President present Trump reported to the present United States will be out of office by the time this starts because if this is not the case that you could just impeach any President in anytime later on in life. Why could they go back and say I want to impeach you note George Bush or I want to re-impeach Bill Clinton. But what would be the harried gotchas that are director, policy, what would be the what would be the guard rail on that.

Under this theory, there would be no constitutional guard rail and this whole exercise is driven by deeply embedded animus and to some extent it is design to harm not necessarily Pres. Tromp, but Tromp supporters and so one of the things I think the Democrats fear is a resurrected crop not necessarily running for office again what being a major influence on US politics going forward.

And so that is one of the reasons why there adamantly pressing forward with this particular impeachment and that is why many Democrats seek a trial and that's why Mitch McConnell or Chuck Schumer was trying to get an agreement for them to come back in session right now to avoid what what I think Chuck Schumer knows is a significant constitutional hurdle they have to get over yes and in an even Mitch McConnell said to that that even if we did that, it still would have time we were talking less than a week your folks that I could do it a full impeachment trial based off the presses. They said that's it mandated by the Constitution. That's by Senate precedents and it hits as Senate rules that they just don't have the time to do it and it's again that's not the Pres.'s fault.

That's Congress decided to move forward with this form of of punishment to the present at the house level, knowing good and well that there was no precedent to try a former President that the Senate would lose jurisdiction to Congress within lose jurisdiction and and then I think you know it brace that question of of of again the impeachment by the house means nothing unless you are convicted by the Senate. You know it and you saw yesterday that I think they actually have taken the impeachment down to like. It's like almost like a century or less. How fast that moved was so absurd it's oh so partisan again with only 10 Republicans joining and if they were upward. They were up to like 20-ish but they came out there and they started doing the whole. Let's blame all Republicans and everybody I said it I heard others. A repeat is later the day the roof they heard me say first that I isolate right on his radio rock is a sick that impeachment yesterday was impeachment of everybody who voted for Pres. Tromp and that's why think you'll got to 10 Republicans on there is because it was like impeachment of of the Republican party or those who voted for present Trump by the way, Adler's semiformal 75 million people was a very small number who were at the capital you not, most people are just normal folks who voted for present truck because they like the policies he was at a place like the the people he put in place foreign policy, domestic policy and how he was handling the economy and fairs the country they were not protesters. They don't show up at rallies a little short, but even his rallies and they don't then shop at the US Capitol to invade it yet. It was felt like we were all being impeached right leg you ever associated with present Trump that I think drove Republicans away made this more partisan again and makes it less likely that there will even if they had a trial which I think is a huge question.

I don't think they should. I don't think they have the ability to do it.

I think it's unconstitutional. I think they lose jurisdiction. The moment present.

Trump leaves office, and Joe Biden is sworn in and that's it.

The Senate doesn't have jurisdiction anymore and there they're looking for ways around this, including Joe Biden try to say, well, let me split time have today will impeach heaven impeachment trial half the day at some point we will we will do regular business of the Senate by confirming his nominees, and legislation. Well, that there's a precedent for that. So the parliamentarian didn't come back quickly with an answer. I wish they would've quickly because I said no but but maybe this is because they are putting together well reasoned response hopefully to why you cannot do that and under the current precedent set and say rules. I want to play Prof. Jonathan Turley was asked on Fox news this morning about this whole issue in the member Andy and Harry come about some of the questions we will take a listen with Jonathan Turley set a lot of questions about whether or not chief justice John Roberts would preside over a figure who has left office in answer to that. I do not we are well into the land of the unknown mean it is going to get even more bizarre. Once the present leaves office, you will be trying to remove a President who's already left it's it's like grounding a plane that landed yet. So here's here's the thing. I mean, their argument would be what you grounding a plane that landed Richard now permanently grounded and I guess that's with the argument on the other side is that I think with Jonathan Turley set his right and would like ludicrous things right. What Tom cotton said is right and that is how do you do this constitutionally, and I don't think you can know you don't look at the idea of impeachment. It says shall not extend further than to removal from office. That's what the Constitution says if you look at the Constitution as I like to do occasionally and read the text as it was a good idea to do if you don't have a President who is an incumbent officeholder and you did receive articles of impeachment.

You can't try an empty chair. You cannot do that if the remedy that you are seeking in a trial's removal from office, then the incumbent has been removed and is no longer an incumbent he's out of office we trying to do at that point as a bill of attainder is to make him anathema because of the fact that he was impeach you can't do that.

And impeachment is an indictment that's all it is it to charge. In order to talk to try on the charge got have a defendant, you have to have jurisdiction if the remedy is to remove him from office.

Guess what he's gone. Who you try and what you trying to achieve. It's unconstitutional.

In my opinion. I think Andy is precisely correct. In addition to which, of course, the remedy that the Democrats seek in this particular case, that is, to prevent President prompt from ever seeking office again is inconsistent with the language of the Constitution, which provides for what removal from office. If he has already left.

Then you cannot punish the President.

That's number one. But number two you have to deal with a huge threshold issue, which is can you actually bring a trial in the first instance, and that would be a question in the first instance for Justice Roberts. Does he indeed have a trial to preside over and secondarily it even assuming the Senate overrules justice Roberts. I think the defendant in this particular case, Pres. Tromp would still have a plausible argument for the entire Supreme Court and I think it could end up at midnight they think that I think a motion to dismiss a skewed logic with the chamber. They rule in one way or another.

And then it was 5051. I think they would get out enough is very hard itself. I don't know if any.

And it's again that this is what lies the Senate over the house put the Senate in the situation that again will drag the country through another debate that will not be settled by January 20 when Joe Biden takes the oath of office that will be could be late into the by the ministrations of first-term payment leg of the first hundred days were still time a Donald Trump and whether not they can impeach him and then to bring him back to the forefront which I think they don't have the constitutional authority to do if they try will just make down Trump that much more influential in American politics figure because we come back, secular radio only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is certainly returned. Is there any hope for that culture to survive.

And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life. We've created a free and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold edition life will show you how you are personally pro-life battle and publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist the ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in emotion and what Obama care means to the pro-life discover the many ways your membership abuse eulogy is empowering the right question. A free copy of mission in life today online ACLJ/challenges facing Americans are substantial time and are now free to soar. Constitutional rights are under attack is more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades. ACLJ on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights and courts in Congress. In the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do our work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms event remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you, are not well this is the perfect time to stand with us.

ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ secular radio. So again you Kathy on Facebook in the Senate passed relief bills for the people over there to complete the trial. Before handling other business.

I think the question is this. It depends on when the house delivers the articles some of talked about saying maybe will dissuade 100 days, so they could do it you're saying Kathy and a contrite Pres. Tromp hundred days so the get the nominees for the cabinet confirmed it yell Joe Biden off to us start so is gotta start with that working on legislation and I getting his people in place and maybe passed relief bills like you talked about for the covert relief bills and larger packages for that. The problem is if that if the house waits 100 days, so over three months.

3 1/2 months from the time impeach to deliver the President's been out of office then about 120 days that point. Where is their jurisdiction to try. I think it disappears the dissolves the further you get away from the present leaving office is even that much more difficult because where's the urgency where there were impeachment is supposed to have urgency around its mostly we've got to get rid of this person they have committed high crimes and misdemeanors.

We must get rid of this person. Now there Artie gone and you you not even going to try them until it's 100+ days after the soap but this is the prophecy I think they're risking is the American people\saying you to do this instead of the people's business unit tried ex-President private now.

As of now private citizen of the United States instead of doing the work of the people asking her Joe Biden that's got her Democrats more than it is the minority Republicans in the House and Senate.

You have to have in the wall. Subject matter jurisdiction to put have a case preside now Lindsay Graham lays out a real issue about due process also limit played this in the multi in the due process and the subject matter jurisdiction of Lindsey Graham Gladden impeachment can 24 hours while witness without a lawyer without without a real trial of without a real hearing now holistic problem alike were going to impeach Donald Trump after he's out of office. If we go along with it. As Republicans we will destroy the Republican Party. If we do it as a Senate I think over time will destroy the presidency listen looks and programs that destroy the presidency because of you could do this, the threat of this over any administration that at any time during their life may mimic new opossums and they can impeach a President after he's deceased mean because there's no jurisdiction because the as you said Andy impeaching the President is to remove the do it to remove him from office and from Prof. Hutchison acid said that very well just now impeach Clinton again, but let's impeach Jimmy Carter that's a good idea, let's go back and impeach Jimmy Carter for high crimes and misdemeanors and things that he did. Having been out of office now for 46 years. That's a ridiculous thing look the minute Joe Biden puts his hand down and says so help me God. The jurisdiction over Donald Trump in the Senate is over with that said, he is no longer the President you can't remove them from office.

Your jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the person is gone.

You don't have a defendant says about personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction are lacking and the harm it could do to the Senate as well.

I think that's where it all comes and it. The thing you know from a policy standpoint just ends up your direct deposit sets up a dangerous precedent, absolutely. And I think it also suggests that the House and Senate. Instead of doing the people's business might re-focus their attention on rewriting history. So for instance the house and the Senate.

They could go out and impeach LBJ or Richard Nixon. They passed away, but we want to clean up the historical record and then we would have a conviction are potentially at conviction. But then there's a problem.

Where is the defendant and can he or she raise a defense from the grave, but I think at the end of the day. The Democrats really don't care about these long term issues.

These long-term policy questions.

They are so struck with what might still be called the prompt derangement syndrome that they want to extract vengeance and I think vengeance typically backfires on the individual who attempts to go down that road.

And lastly, let me point out.

I think this would actually help resurrect the political career of Pres. Tromp because he would look more and more like a murder. And if you look at his history in business. He has made several comebacks over time, and I think in the long run this might indeed backfire in the Democrats and help President tried to attend the thing carries right or that I think that this is wrought with peril. There trying to make some point, I think it's going to hurt Biden I think is can hurt the presidency. I think the present will be acquitted think there's no jurisdiction to begin with and this is another one of these you know the man's leaving office.

What's the point yeah and I think it is at a point is to bar him from life, but you weren't successful. When you try to do that which was a year ago when there was a real impeachment trial. This is like the IMF was gone. I don't get it now and I would go to Shirley's caution hold on Shirley in Michigan on line 3 a surely welcome to Jay Sekulow life.

"Gail conservative like me appointed President temp policies that mean we wish he had more of the filter. When you speak that we supported this policy, like a slap in the face for House Republicans including Fred Upton from Michigan to vote for impeachment. They now with being primary.

Why would they do that. I think that this was the group who thinks they want to take that that like Liz Cheney who stood with the present. The first impeachment and thought that was absolutely wrong and yet was okay with this rush impeachment they think politically for the Republican Party. It's better to distance from present. From that we only get 10 1010 House Republicans out of you know what 100, something it had to do it you not distancing that set the Republic apart is sick so I do think I think Liz Cheney's probably put her leadership role in India in question is certainly there could be challenges to that that will be up to the Republican caucus and of its people like Kevin McCarthy and others about whether or not they're comfortable with with her.

I didn't whip the boat so they didn't say we need to vote this way so not sure that they'll be able to easily remove her from that position because that wasn't like they didn't say they succumb to vote your conscience on this because it was the quick quick move and I think that's because it was looking more like 20-ish and then quickly if you heard those speeches and you saw who they appointed Jamie Raskin for for goodness sakes, voted against the certification of the 2016 election of Donald Trump's vote. He's calling that insurrection now and and and and hauling on Ted Cruz and Jo Josh Holly to be a no-fly list and resign. But he did the same thing in 2016. So he's leaving it and then you got Eric swallow well with the spy he's idea and it had little who's one of their most his nastiest attack dog was a they missed their home and so then Republicans look and say, okay, wait, this is just to attack Republicans into damage. Republicans and conservatives. It's bigger than Tromp. It's about taking down the Republican Party.

That's why said it was impeachment of everybody was Republican. It wasn't just impeachment of Pres. Tromp got a question on YouTube and answer quickly says with the present before Wales lowers one of them since it's the office of the presence of the answer is no. Once he's out of office.

He does not have a White House counsel yet something that also brings the question of course white happy dude impeachment when the present doesn't have a White House. Think about these things. We back significant for decades ACLJ has been on the frontlines protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member thinking. If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us, ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ live from Washington DC Jay Sekulow line and now Jordan secular just to reiterate saying is that this is this impeach was impeachment of all Republicans and, thus, even though there were 10 Republicans and supported with initially it was looking like 2025 I think are your sure to see the U.S. Senate dwindling support for this demo so it does not look like they have votes to two actually convict if they ever even could have the trial, which is what we can talk about as well because in this close.

My point listen to Congresswoman Maxine Waters.

Obviously, their messaging was exactly what we said let's make this about impeaching Republicans across the country, not just elected officials.

You you the voter you who may have voted for present Trump or Josh Holly or Ted Cruz or or Republicans in your state. I'd listen to this by 33 they Republican Party is now the truck party and I want you to know that this is a trap power grab that will not stop and will not stop when attacking the capital and I state legislatures. This President intends to exercise power long after he is out of office the first of that statement is fundamentally incorrect.

When you do not have the powers the presidency she me that he has influence in the media. Anybody can do that before President can do that. What powers is she talking about that to me. What's interesting is that is so many people try to say quickly the theater the, the, the elites in Washington DC as the end of Donald Trump lesson what Democrats think right that somewhat long elected pup politically very partisan Democrats. They they are scared that he comes right back in 2024 as 75 million already on his side, and maybe more if Joe Biden doesn't do a good job and so they want to bar him from running from office in even giving him that chance would buy the way to do that they would have to get a Senate conviction which means it have to get 17 Republicans on board and then they'd have to vote on that.

That's a separate vote. Now that's there's an argument over whether that vote just requires a simple majority. We'll get to that vote without a conviction, a conviction which looks very difficult to get yet again. It's almost like whether or not you have to question this data me this is a theory I've had would you even send lawyers if you present Trump I don't know. I don't think I will and I will be not show up and I don't think I'd acknowledge unless you just want to get on record the motion to dismiss, but I I think it saves almost that kind of thing every he's out of office so we is no obligation to show up so you convict them in absentia well you have to get the 67 when you got members of the Senate, saying we don't have jurisdiction, and if that grows, I think you have to seriously look at whether you proceed with the defense any time and you can walk away and say you have no jurisdiction over me.

I'm not going up here. I'm not going to defend something that is that I don't have to defend this. This happens in the world court situations in these international tribunals were countries. Harry don't show up. I said no yeah and I think then the other issue of course is whether or not if they attach this punishment, which is to bar President from from ever seeking office whether or not that can withstand constitutional scrutiny as well.

Certainly they have the right to remove the President if he were in opposition says that they can they can remove them and it does say they can vote to bar him for life at 25 minutes, says that but the question is whether if they didn't jurisdiction the first right right place. Yeah. So they can't that you have to get conviction first yes summertime activities. The 14th amendment to you, but there's no enforcement mechanism of the 14 that was written precisely for a specific time. It actually is the opposite it has the role of how you can let people back in it says by two thirds vote you get this removed from yourself from the Confederates could actually though it could have that removed they could serve again in federal office by two thirds vote in the House and Senate. That's the only voting mechanism there so I see again all they're looking to do is ban Pres. Tromp for potentially seeking office again because of that scared about him running again at 2024 we think about that after company operates. If you read say this is done.

He's over. He's is you know he's finished :-) that's a whole show of Republicans still got overwhelming support from the public party voters and and that's after all of this try to attempt to trash.

My question is this. You even show up just say you know what executive oyez of this self money begin to show up and you don't have the authority to be there and you connect with the challenges facing Americans or substantial time in our Valley freedom sword constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades now ACLJ on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress to get in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you. If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us.

ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice.

Is there any hope for that culture to survive.

And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice defend the right to life, we've created a free and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission life will show you how you are personally support, and publication includes a look at all major ACLJ cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the motion and what Obama care means to the prone life in many ways your membership abuse you is empowering the right to life question free copy of mission life today online ACLJ/164 3110 is that a lot of these calls during the Obama years and even after as Obama left office sure now. People start to think exactly what joints they can for main online what he joined welcome to Jay Sekulow life, and to equate impact equating legal jurisdiction over that that would stop us from going back to taking Alana to this procedure or even have any claim to the side of the plate connect spying on trumpet that presents the residence. Impeachments are banal differently than other officers.

You can impeach other officers there handled differently, but certainly I think Pres. Obama, you bring up the good point because we laughed about that the release of the this is not how you hold them accountable. I don't think you can impeach them after they left office was what he at the very left office and he again, though this would open the door that strip of strip involves benefits of of Secret Service protection of his stipend of his multimillion dollar travel budget.

He receives rest of his life yearly strip them of all that, of all the big ex-President for the next Republican majority do that then listens on our way yet. Under this theory absolutely. For that reason again is not a good idea to suspend the service. He served the country you don't like his policies. He served two terms.

He's out it's done.

It's been is why we going backwards. This is the same thing and this is where the lack of jurisdiction at the level of the Senate, I think, is it's a really fundamental issue here. Gabby Sam is a good question on line 5 from Pennsylvania hey Sam, welcome to Jay Sekulow life like all the time. I question how long an interim time limit or when the house after the article of impeachment of the Senate that they receive it is our time limit as to when they would actually able to try it and if Tromp became President in 2024. With that article of impeachment shall be valid that Congress with expired senescent. I think the argument would be no they don't have an obligation what time they have to get there there but once it is received.

The trial starts the next day at 1 o'clock. Usually it's time based off I think the kids like it when we did the appeaser a calendar based on ideas how their holidays and then so they got through the holidays and the then they brought over about a month later the house to the citizens lives of mine were six yeses a month. I think around their yeah and and but but again this is different because the President is going to be a logon whether not they delivered them today.

Then I would describe it in his first day they could be start.

The trial is the time that Joe Biden would be taking the oath of office present, begun, and that which to begin the trial certificate finish the trial in the one hour yeah I meet so this is why it's absurd and I think we can now is eight this is a people sit back and think this is not what we do and why are we creating this division in our country at a time when we all said what happened to the capital was horrendous.

The President said that as well. He is now also called on future action since it said do not do not he's made it very could as clear as possible. Do not take any kind of violent actions by the state or in whether you not here to Washington DC quickly.

Some of that from the President, he issue this video yesterday from the White House from Oval Office by fellow Americans.

I want to speak to you tonight about the troubling events of the past week. As I have said the incursion of the US capital struck at the very heart of our Republic. It angered and appalled. Millions of Americans across the political spectrum.

I want to be very clear.

I unequivocally condemned the violence that we saw last week, violence and vandalism have absolutely no place in our country, and no place in our movement. So yeah, I'm the President very strong getting ahead of of what is excuses grief guidance that an obscene, it's the US capital that is getting most of their divisiveness. This week yeah and Natalie and state legislatures state capitals as well. Let me say this also been sass came a very strong when this first happened, saying he was ready to like impeach yeah he's issued a statement now which I find very interesting. Let's let's play it and then we are right, in the breaking of the house. If they come together and have a process. I will definitely consider whatever articles they might move if they come together and have a process for the truth of the matter is they did not have a process was no process, no trial, no hearing, no not yet. The committee had a bunch is first on the Judiciary Committee. No witnesses were called for against the articles of impeachment.

It was like an indictment with no grand jury met the granary did not meet. We simply had an indictment. We didn't hear any evidence we have no probable cause when I'm in, I'm just analogizing it took him in the trial because that's what people understand. You look if you are going to try somebody for a crime you got to have a process. The process that we have is grand jury's grand jury's meet grand jury hear evidence it can be hearsay can be whatever they return an indictment.

What happened in the house get a bunch of speeches and then you Vote in the President was indicted, i.e. impeached.

That's not process yet, so how does that process like a process point desire.

Well, I think it undermines the houses impeachment effort. So essentially what we've had is a slap process without the introduction of a shred of evidence other than press reports and certainly I think anyone that's familiar with the court process with the criminal process at least once to talk to firsthand observers who can point to specific claims made and come up with a timeline instead what we've had.

Essentially, this is my view, is an incoherent series of speeches by Democrats basically attacking all Republicans from here to eternity and so I think that if I bent Sen. sass is going to adhere to his past statement, then I think he would have to reject the quote" process of the house unless I forget that we have one of the house managers replay the x-rays on played again, who is comparing as Eric swallow is under his own investigation because the Chinese spy's relationship with the police interns with after the fundraising for and he's on the Intel committee know he's a house manager sees him to make the argument to the Senate that that's someone who really, by the way can convince Republicans a hyper- partisan, a Democrat like him and Ted lit just go after Republicans for being Republican. Think about Tromp.

They just think Republicans are just the worst. Listen to who we compared present from two hey this is comparing the words of a individual who would incite and radicalize somebody as Osama bin Laden did what present frontage. You don't actually have to commit the violence or self.

If you call others to violence that itself is a crime.

Osama bin Laden funded the attacks planned the attacks that he is a central role as a leader, mastermind of Al Qaeda yet but later admitted he was not just a guy talking who the inspired some guys to form another group called Al Qaeda yet said that that the comparison alone is ridiculous and absurd but you see is to divisiveness is to divide neighbor against neighbor, instead of a time when you know you hope you could at least say hey we had an election.

Some people didn't like the way it turned out, some of us don't like the way they were held taking advantage of covert to do these mail ballots okay whatever, but is to be a peaceful transition of power and will have another election in four years were present in another election for the in for the house in two years. Everybody's upper election the house and lot of sinners up there to limber up and into yours as well.

So the balance of power. There is up and we can still be nice with our neighbors and we don't have to be. But again, they're not allowing us to get there is a country there keeping us in our partisan kind of come community if you will. And like if you're not in that partisan community because the anger that they're espousing then brings more anger from us to an enemy because have you not respond that you have to respond to that. So I get to me this is the further we get into it the further we get away from the six and we get into this impeachment.

I think what you see and what comes to light. Is it another ridiculous mood by Democrats to continue to divide our country.

Are you a trump suit.

Are you are you Republican, and thus you are bad or are you and it should be canceled or are you with us and that is the lines they are drawing that is not lines that help unify America.

It will, it will actually seek divide presidency. If this is how begins the I was about to ask Andy that question.

I think you know when trial strategy requires thinking a couple steps ahead. I don't think they did that no they didn't.

It was a knee-jerk reaction look.

We want to kill trump you want to kill the Republican party. We want to kill conservatives want to kill babies want to do all kinds of things. Let's do what we have to do and let's do it quickly.

Let's do it radically without any witnesses and without any process that kill yourself.

Vengeance does not belong should not be exercised in that fashion in the political processes of the United States. I'm sorry if you got questions or comments on this without oversight become an up 100-684-3110 at 2000 684-3110.

Take your questions or comments about this because is not clear-cut is the opposite of clear-cut and to I think is dangerous for countries I've said from the beginning regardless of what side of the alley were on a country divided for continued amount of time, wrong only one.

A society can agree the most vulnerable invoice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission life will show you how you are personally support the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ plainly Jesus were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist the ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in your motion and what Obama care means to discover the many ways your membership in the ACLJ is empowering the right to life question free copy of mission life today online ACLJ/challenges facing Americans are substantial time and are now free to insert constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades now ACLJ on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights" in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. Here's the bottom line we could not do more work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times.

The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member.

Thank you. Not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ God where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ during the break, rethinking health services that were at this point the minute. What would you think that me.

Obviously, the events of the day were horrific but if you care about the First Amendment. This is this is really dangerous up because you remember Chuck Schumer on the we don't have it yet on the steps the spring on Friday. Here you will see that they can't read okay night we get that video by an audio rather objects. Schumer and at the steps of the I think at the Supreme Court has held in chastising the justices and threatening them threatening to force it to count on by name and so I will put I the all you have to do if you're defeating the Prez is lit literally go through all those Democrats like Maxine Waters I Schumer made that are inciting that you could be put off that are way more inciting than let's march to the capital have a protest with by the way, happens in Washington DC every single day and that and so here you listen to this you think this is it inciting. I want to tell you is I want to tell you all you really play that game. I want everybody to share this with your friends right now, open the broadcast will broadcast more with this we forgot how bad that was. Now that was in front of a crowd in front of the Supreme Court of the states where Gore's account number where they were hearing cases play. I want to tell you is I want to tell you know you really will pay the price. You will not know what hit you. If you go for the throat if you go through break that down Nick tomorrow word for word.

Now is anybody talking about removing Chuck Schumer from officer will be shod no one as a prison term's remarks have you seen them ever played until they never point don't you know why because no excitement in the summers is to be honest I mean you could disagree with the speech at this is amazing was that it that it was the wrong time Babylon cellulitis addition.

I mean, I wish we could just compare the two pick their best. Their best argument is the President said you had a fight only about the yard that a fight yet fight for real. But then he said all is a disallowance of this guidance a peacefully that I know will know what it was playing at. I want to tell you is I want to tell you know you really will thus buy was arguing the case.

The first thing I would do would be to start the argument by playing Chuck Schumer and he could play 100 more.

Yes, but does that's recent and a direct threat, you will not know what hit you a world when he's doing in front of a crowd that's in okay there you have another salver that crowd didn't react. That's not how you jut it free speech issue.

There is very different, but the point is an end that you look at the time I do, but actually was happening. The capital they are doing the capital) that this thing looks like it was really awful and well-planned. I'm not equating violence. Violence having that's a mistake.

But be careful on the First Amendment be very very careful on what you're asking for here and Mary care fence right now minion of the First Amendment does provide for the freedom of speech and you know either there or there are limits and we no one inside the riot.

We don't want to do things that we shouldn't do, but I think that this should Chuck Schumer's remarks were absolutely outrageous as I will our producer said these are lifetime appointed judges. What else could he have meant, but a threat against them went. You will never know what hit you. You will and pay the price. When someone tells me you will pay the price that's been identified as yeah know that sounds occasional is your life.

Yeah, that's the price was and what else is running so I look at the video that Thomas we have that for Facebook page email disliking their hate speech, which is probably protected under the Constitution amended political speech.

They think they can spew it and then everybody's got ignored because the Democrats know advise not.

I didn't take us long to figure it out, pull that and say okay that's that's that's a little bit close your present truck was saying stuff like that. That speech, I mean that be a lot different but in 30 seconds. Chuck Schumer did with their choosing presence off of doing in a long speech he did in 30 seconds and I never forget that because I think it was one of those inappropriate remarks by US Sen., especially a leader of the U.S. Senate ever in a lesson, at least in modern history. We have remarks that will Chief Justice come out after that is and then the remote yes yes yes, let's get that to promote will get into that are, let's go ahead and take the lexical. Yeah, let's go to Marsha and Mississippi aligned to a Martian. Hoping something fighting know what happened) topic the whole thing with preplanned is going out is coming out that it's preplanned. It hurts their case that he incited something that was preplanned by obviously people that had rags, this man is in grammatical groups so you know that I could listen. It's not a hard case to defend in a proceeding. I'm just not even sure the proceedings I'm I'm sure I don't believe it's constitutional by the proceedings start admitting that that is the big question everyday in North Dakota life or hairnet may call or article that will be a correct, why aren't they being held accountable and they leave it that would hold them accountable. So I mean again they can hold they hold themselves accountable by Congress and the voters mean soap is under that under their roles as a removal process for members of Congress and censures and things like that so they have their process. Obviously, I know this can happen. Chuck Schumer's speech but if you can try to do that you have present a mean again.

I think it just is why speech should never be the reason why anybody's impeached yet words cannot be the way why anybody's impeached, the Supreme Court is set such a high bar for what speech you can punish such a high bar and ends and I think that's because were country values the freedom of speech more than we do. Being offended or hearing things without exactly.

I think what we need for tomorrow's broadcast is when you Chuck Schumer's full speech in the will break it down a maven that shut may been. That's all it was was was a rally.

Let's find that out and then looking to play the audio. Some of the audio from the President speech where in fact he said I know that everyone here will soon be marching over the capital building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard you people really think that the President was saying going there and do what they did. They want to hear. They want to see that that's why they don't play on TV. No one will play with the President said in speech on TV you never hit see Siemens on planet MSNBC's are playing the speech he says peacefully peacefully marching much of that that's what they do washing every day, the Democrats doing Republicans doing interest groups doing pro-life groups toward pro-abortion groups do it at you the peacefully protest that he was calling anyone to break the law to break into a building to to cause any kind of violence.

He said the abscesses were peaceful peaceful. Make your voice heard becomes receipt of this protest. Make your voice or this is this is this to get the absurdity I think we can push this even further, and more of you will understand how absurd it is when you listen to Chuck Schumer. They will pull some others as well were because I know this views at this exciting language is always check out ACLJ.org touching on secular radio for decades now ACLJ is been on the frontlines protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member thanking God's well this is the perfect time to stand with us, ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ


Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime