BREAKING: Kash Patel Opens ‘Conspiracy’ Probe

We got breaking news, Kesh Patel opens brand new conspiracy probe. Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever. This is Sekulow. We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110.

And now, your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome, it's Monday. It's time for Sekulow. I'm Logan Sekulow. Will Haynes is joining me in studio.

Cecily Howell is going to be on later. Mike Pompeo is going to be on later. We got a packed show. And of course, we want to hear from you. That's at 1-800-684-3110.

Give a minute for all the peoples, all the people to start working their way. Onto our live feed here again. If you don't watch us live, we do this each and every day, Monday through Friday, from 12 p.m. to 1 p.m. Eastern Time.

Work your way back from there. We do have some breaking news, and again, this is Monday. We are live. I want to make sure you know this. Even during the summertime, we're coming at you live.

Phone lines are open, as I said, at 1-800-684-30110. But we'll. People may have seen the headline if they're watching on YouTube, watching on Rumble, Breaking Cash Patel opens conspiracy probe, brand new conspiracy probe. Let's break down what that is because obviously it's been a maybe contentious time for Cash and for Bongino and for Pam Bondi, a lot of people that are in the news, a lot of our friends here. But in this moment, you just had President Trump say he's very unhappy with Vladimir Putin.

There's a lot going on, but this is one that kind of is slipping by. As this new probe has been opened, really to search for what feels like a pretty broad. Conspiracy. That's right. This comes from John Solomon at Just the News.

John Solomon has been on this broadcast many times. Great reporting out of John Solomon. And this headline is: FBI opens grand conspiracy probe on weaponization, opening door to special prosecutor.

So, one, I know people are probably like, oh, not another special prosecutor. But what is interesting about this is we talked last week about John Brennan and James Comey, that there have been criminal referrals handed over to the FBI from the CIA on Brennan, and that the FBI themselves were looking at Comey. And one of the big cautions were that many of the things that we would think would be looked at. would be outside the statute of limitations when they committed an alleged crime. If it were all the way back in 2015, 2016.

What it looks like the FBI, at least based on this reporting, is looking into is that it wasn't isolated incidents.

So, you know, false document filings that happened on X Day, but that their behavior was a part of a broad conspiracy by former and current deep state actors, if you want to say, or former government employees or officials. That We're conspiring against one political party and trying to benefit another political party in our elections.

Now, a lot of you are probably saying, okay, yeah, we've seen it. We know that that happened. What makes this different is that if it can tie together under a conspiracy banner. Things that happened back in 2016 that shows this ongoing effort. Then you look at the former Intel leader's letter that John Brennan spearheaded saying that the Hunter Biden laptop was a Russian disinformation, misinformation.

And then even things that happened in the 2024 election. If they can tie this together, that this was an ongoing conspiracy, it would open up the door for them to use those things as evidence against this conspiracy before a grand jury, which would allow them to potentially move forward with prosecution. But it's also a search for the theoretical smoking gun here. If there is that information. It's Accessible to the American people, something they can actually put out.

That will be the question. That will be whether we actually get to that point. If you get to the point where you actually can say, here's exactly what happened, here's what we're doing, at least that's more information to the American people. I think why people seem a little disenfranchised with this kind of news is because it does feel like, like you said, another special counsel, another person to be thrown in here, another report, another dossier. But if they think they have the evidence to showcase to us, fantastic.

Phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110. Maybe you're Have some ideas of who should be that special counsel. Saw a lot of people floating around some ideas over the weekend. There was someone that wasn't at the turning points conference that a lot of people pointed to.

Someone that had to jet out kind of quick. Phone lines are open for you, 1-800-684-848. 3110. We are celebrating 35 years here at the ACLJ during our 35 years of justice drive. We'll talk about that a little bit more with some news in the Planned Parenthood case coming up very shortly.

Welcome back to Sekulow. Phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110 as we are celebrating the ACLJ's 35 years of justice, 35 years of justice drive right now. It's a fundraising drive. Mm. Every donation that's made, there's another ACLJ supporter, ACLJ champion, ready to unlock.

Their donation. There's a lot of you who just joined us during the break. We're able to watch that. It's really one of the best parts of being on a platform like YouTube or Rumble is being able to live watch when people come and go.

So we know, you know, if we're talking to the same group of people, new people, we can tell there's been a big bump just in the last minute as people have been joining us during the break.

So I wanna make sure we do a little bit of a restating of what's going on because you may see that breaking news item and say, hey, what is it that Cash Patel and the FBI are doing?

So they're opening a new conspiracy probe. Will, this is sort of a catch-all, if you will, going back for the last decade. and covering some of the big issues we've all been talking about to see if there really was this It's a master conspiracy that was going on. That's right. So, what this would be looking into, and once again, this hasn't gone before a grand jury, according to reporting yet.

So, they are looking into this case.

Now, this came from just the news, who are friends, John Solomon. We've had him on this show so many times. And look, there's a lot of questionable news sources out there. John and that team usually does a very good job.

So, we are always, you know, we can't say with 100% certainty, it's not our reporting, but we are pretty confident when they put out a piece like this that they have done their due diligence. As well as whenever John Solomon puts out a piece, it is so thorough. That you're like, okay, go ahead and read it like three times. Right, exactly. You sit there and you're like, okay, the New York Times doesn't even write pieces this long and thorough anymore because, well, for obvious reasons.

But what we're seeing here is that under Cash Patel, the director of the FBI, the FBI has opened a grand conspiracy investigation into years of alleged political weaponization against Republicans by the DOJ, FBI, and intelligence agencies. This goes back even to the way that the Hillary Clinton email scandal was treated through things like the Hunter Biden laptop, Russia Gate, the special counsels being appointed. It's going to be a catch-all investigation looking into whether there was this conspiracy within people in the Intel community and Justice Department to try and tip the scales in elections towards Democrats over Republicans and President Trump. There are some other things out of this reporting that they're saying need to be declassified. To get to the bottom of this, that could actually help boost the case before a grand jury.

Two of those things are a classified annex to the Inspector General's report on the Clinton email investigation. That's where we got a public report, but there's this classified annex that Senator Grassley has been trying to get for years, which typically senators like Senator Grassley. Are able to get those things, still hasn't been able to get it and get it into the public. But then also, you have the Clinton intelligence plan that special counsel John Durham on the Russiagate investigation brought up that. Has also still never been declassified.

And there are things within that that many people think, if once it's in the open and could be used for a grand jury, could really boost the case that this is a broad conspiracy. This wasn't one action by James Comey or John Brennan way back in 2016. It was an ongoing effort, utilizing their intelligence sources and backgrounds to go after one party over the other and try to fix the election for Democrats in the United States, not once in 2016, but again in 2020 and even in 2024. That was a very just the news answer.

Well, you know, I thought it was sense. I thought it was appropriate. It was. This is your shout out to John Solomon. Yeah, I like him.

Let's go take a phone call. And phone lines are open for you also at 1-800-684-3110. Let's go to Julie in Oregon who's got a question or a comment. Go ahead. Hi guys.

I have a couple of comments. Wow, 35 years. Congratulations, you guys. Thank you.

So blessed to have you. I really appreciate that. Thank you, Julie. It's been most of our lifetime, which has been life's work.

So we appreciate it. Secondly, what's With regard to overall conspiracy, I think, oh my gosh, it's about time. Um I'm certainly hoping that all of this stuff will be Um link together. Many of us feel that it has been and that it's about time that it finally gets put out there and I'm going to be very happy about that. Yeah, I mean, Julie, I think there is that thought.

Will, we talked about it, but just whether they can actually get it to the point where you, Julie, and our listeners and supporters will feel confident in whatever the final report is. Are they actually able to find those, as I said, proverbial smoking guns that tie all of this kind of together and really can. Expose what we all believe is probably happening and what happened over the last decade, but. You know, uh i it's sad to say this. I could see in the comments There's not a lot of uh There's not a lot of good morale happening right now for this department, and they need a good win here.

This could take time. If you were to look at things that President Trump was elected on, this would be one of them. Obviously, the Epstein release was a big one of them. They can't afford, I feel like, as the Department of Justice and the FBI, what they ran on was to restore faith in the institution. And a lot of people within the more base, the more MAGA crowd have kind of become disillusioned with the jobs of some of these kind of superstar heroes that they were seen as put in these positions because of the Epstein stuff last week.

This can't fail on this. That's what I'm saying. And the caution also is that. Building this grand conspiracy, whether that be some sort of seditious conspiracy charge or a RICO charge, the U.S. government, as of late, has a pretty poor track record when going after RICO charges and prosecuting RICO cases.

If they don't have this buttoned up in a way that you can secure a conviction, because you know what people don't see as accountability anymore, because it's not an indictment. Indicting someone is meaningless at this point. If the deep state continues to win by getting off on charges, by being able to get something lesser than full accountability, the base will lose that last little bit of faith in the institution that may be there and the hope that it can be rebuilt.

So while this report is encouraging to us because we've lived these scandals and Russia gate issues and things for 10 years now. Yeah, but it doesn't mean anything until it does. Exactly. They can talk about an investigation all they want, but unless they are able to fulfill that promise, but once again, it has to be there. Don't want to talk about it.

The law has to, they have to have these clear violations of law. We don't just want people locked up for no reason. But we see the reason. We know it's there. If they can prove it in court and can get it done, though, I think that will go a long way to restore the trust in the institutions as well in these people that President Trump put there to lead it.

Yeah. And the reason. It's you. All right. We're going to take some phone calls coming up.

We'll see if we can get these. Cleared. Can we make sure? We see if we get them up there, make sure I want to continue this conversation because in the next segment, Cece Howell from the ACLJ is going to be joining us. We're going to talk about a big update as a court has moved forward, and we'll discuss that in our Planned Parenthood case.

It's an exciting time here at the ACLJ. Again, it's Monday. It's 35 years of Justice Drive. We're halfway through the month. You got to be a part of it.

Let's go to Vince, who's calling in Florida on line one. You're on the air. Good morning. How you guys doing today? Doing well.

We're good. Good. I have a question about The fifty one intelligence officers that signed off on the FISA warrants for the Russian collusion. which we come to find out. was a big hoax.

Is anything going to happen to them?

So, Vince, I think there is a little bit of conflation in two stories. One, the 51 intelligence officers, that number specifically relates to the letter, the open letter that was sent about the Hunter Biden disinformation laptop story. But yes, there were intelligence officers and individuals that pushed and put forward the FISA warrants. A judge would have signed off on that, and a judge did. One of the biggest miscarriage of justice in this entire story, which once again shows that they're favorable treatment to deep state actors, was that one of the individuals that was signing affidavits and things of that.

For these FISA warrants to try and get the FISA warrant, was a CIA analyst. That that modified documents.

So effectively lying before the court took off portions of the evidence they were putting forward that would have made a judge say, no, you cannot get this, and made it seem worse by selectively editing this to ensure they would get a FISA warrant against Carter Page. That was a criminal act. And he got a slap on the wrist. When someone used a a a secret court where you are not allowed to defend yourself. And someone entrusted with upholding the Constitution.

Lied on a FISA warrant and able to get that warrant to surveil an American citizen, do espionage on an American citizen, all for the point of making sure Donald Trump isn't elected. That is election interference. That is an attempted coup trying to overthrow the norms of our elections and governments. And that person got a slap on the wrist instead of going to prison as he probably should have.

So that is the issue there. At that point, nothing will happen to him, but this broader conspiracy. could go after those that were around him. Those that were his leaders, in order to finally see justice served in this American tragedy that we've been living for almost 10 years now. Hey, phone lines are still open for you.

We're going to get to Lynette coming up next.

Next segment, Cece Hiles, go to aclj.org right now to support the work. We'll be right back. We've got a lot of you watching right now. A lot of people are just joining us. We're able to see that live because of our YouTube and Rumble feeds when people are watching live when numbers spike.

So I know a lot of you are curious about what this Cash Patel conspiracy probe is coming out of the FBI. We're going to continue that conversation here in just a minute.

So stay tuned. But we did want to pivot just a little bit because we are in our ACLJ 35 years of Justice Drive, and that is an important time. It's also my brother's birthday. Jordan's birthday.

So, you know what? If you want to give, you can give on behalf of my brother today for his birthday. Not quite sure how old he is. I think we've all lost count a little bit, but you can celebrate his birthday by making a donation to the ACLJ, and it will be matched by one of our great ACLJ supporters and ACLJ champions. Will said it's also Bastille Day, right?

And clearly, according to the comments, it's also people are very stunned that I have a haircut. Yeah. Which I get a haircut every few months. Every month, maybe. You had to have very long, you know, flowing lungs.

It grows very aggressively. It does have good genes. It does. I mean, I'm not mad about it, but people are asking for my barber. I mean, look, something's got to keep private in your life.

Yeah. You don't want to share the barber, then how are you ever going to get an appointment? I mean, it's hard for me to get an appointment out. I know. You work me in.

All right. Thanks, Sean. All right. We got a lot of comments coming in, a lot of questions, but let's talk a little bit about the work of the ACLJ because you may have heard last week we talked about that Planned Parenthood case where they were like, hey, you can't defund us with the Big Beautiful Bill. We're going to take this to court and take it to court.

And guess what? The ACLJ gets to join up in this battle as well. Cece, I'll let you take it from here a bit on where we are right now and what just happened. Yeah, and it shouldn't be shocking that they took it up in court in Massachusetts because we've been saying all along, let's watch Massachusetts. It is a pro-Planned Parenthood, pro-abortion state.

And that's where a lot of the fights are going to be. And that's where one of our fights is right now with the campaign that the state of Massachusetts is doing against. Pro-life pregnancy centers. And so now we have Massachusetts as the venue once again where Planned Parenthood chose to come after the Big Beautiful Bill and the fact that it defunds money, cash, going into Planned Parenthood's pockets. And so the judge there, which was an Obama appointee judge, and it's the same, of course, it's the same court that we're in in our case in Massachusetts.

It's a different judge. But we were able to file in this an amicus brief in this case, and the judge granted a temporary restraining order, which means that Planned Parenthood can continue getting its funding, that the Big Beautiful bill can't do what it's supposed to do right now.

So she granted that temporary restraining order. Immediately, then the government came back and said, wait, you didn't follow all the rules when you granted this TRO. Surprise, surprise, right? A judge giving a different set of rules for Planned Parenthood than anyone else, but yeah, continue. Right, abortion.

distortion again add its edits Finest. And so she doesn't follow all the rules.

So the government complains. And so, what does she do? She goes, Okay, I'm going to withdraw it, but then I'm going to reissue it, trying to comply with all the things you said were missing in my first order.

So that's what she did. She's reissued, she withdrew it, and then she reissued this temporary restraining order.

Now, on July 18th, there is a hearing on a preliminary injunction, which, of course, is the actual. Case that's going to decide whether this case can go forward or not. And the temporary restraining order is something that just temporarily enjoins it.

So we will on the 18th have a hearing, and we will be watching that of this month.

Next week, that's right. Four days, yeah. And we will be watching that. And the TRO expires on the 21st.

So the judge has to give her opinion by the 21st. And we will be watching, I'm sure, if she doesn't rule correctly, the government will appeal and the ACLJ will be there. This is a question for you, and this is just me asking a question of a regular person. A lot of times these situations seem like they take years and forever, and it goes on and on and on. What makes this different to where things are getting done in days and weeks instead of years?

Right. Because people have been hearing, I mean, look, what we just had with this probe. It's like you're talking about going back a decade. Right. Most people who file a lawsuit, you know, you're in for a three or four year journey.

Not that this won't get there, but the fact that it's this quickly moving, is it just because it's the President and it's the big beautiful bill? Or what is it that gets us there so quick? It's because they're doing a temporary restraining order.

So that's something that's an ex parte order that does move it very quickly. And so, yes, this will still be probably years in the making, but these are things that can happen right up at the beginning of any kind of lawsuit. You can ask for a temporary restraining order, which can be put into place without any hearing. That's what it is. It's an injunctive relief ex parte, which means outside of a court hearing.

And then the preliminary injunction. Comes next, and that's what will happen on July 18th. And then we'll see if it's enjoined or not. And then the case goes forward, like you're saying, it will be. A lengthy case.

Right. And that's this Friday, July 18th. That's why it's so important for people to support the work of the ACLJ on an ongoing basis because you never know when these type of issues are going to just pop up and we have to be able to jump into action. We never thought Massachusetts was necessarily going to be the battleground state. I think we've probably done more in Massachusetts in the last year than we've maybe done in our entire career because it seems like, like you said, they've zeroed in on that being the place they can go to.

And now, what we've heard, though, is from the people of Massachusetts. The people from Massachusetts say this does not represent even who we are. Even us, more liberal Democrat union members, all of the things, liberal Catholics, they're saying, hey, This is going way too far. We're still a pro-life community here, and we're happy to kind of rally around the people of Massachusetts as well. Not just who's controlling the government, not just the judges there.

Now, we've had some success with the judges there, so I'm not laying any bad words towards them. But this has become clearly a friendly state to not only just have. open abortions, however you want, whatever, you know, no restrictions. But to Go after people who are pro-life.

Well, and Cece, to that point, and why it's always an uphill battle, is this case, once again, Logan asked why it was so quick that we're getting to this point. Remember, the Supreme Court tried to put a limit on nationwide injunctions. Planned Parenthood got a little clever with their filing and filed in Massachusetts, but on behalf of their entire organization.

So, effectively, getting a nationwide TRO, which they are hoping turns into a nationwide injunction that affects the entire organization of Planned Parenthood, giving that instead of just the Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts filing in their individual capacity. They're on there as well, so they had that backup plan just in case. But they went to a judge thinking it would be a friendly court to get what would be, in effect, a nationwide injunction, while the language of the TRO and injunction wouldn't have to say applies to everyone, they can say applies to the plaintiff. But we're also seeing that this judge is doing a little bit of shell games with when the administration pushed back, said, Okay, fine, you just told me what I need to fix. I'll dissolve it like you asked.

Here's a new one with all these things fixed. And one of those things was they didn't require Planned Parenthood to put up a bond. The judge then said, Okay, now they have to put up a bond, $100. The court filing for the ACLJ to submit our brief. Was more than that bond Planned Parenthood had to put up.

So we know that there is some bias there. Absolutely. Clear bias towards the abortion, you know, people in Planned Parenthood always. And it's abortion distortion. And we see it over and over again and now in the state of Massachusetts.

And so the ACLJ is watching it, and we will be ready. That's right. We're at it once again. Look, we only have one minute left here in this segment. We are going to continue on talking about the FBI probe.

We're also going to have Mike Pompeo joining us a little bit later. We're talking a little bit about the war in Russia and Ukraine. As you may have seen, there's been some updates for that. President Trump getting a little more aggressive towards Vladimir Putin. What's that look like?

And we're going to hear from Pompeo about that as well as taking your calls and comments at 1-800-684-3110. As we head into this break, again, my brother's birthday. Help celebrate with him. It's a great time to give to the ACLJ. These months are matched, which is awesome, but it's also we are celebrating not just 35 years.

of past. But what the next generation is going to look like moving forward. We have some big, big plans. We really could use your help.

So I encourage you, go to aclj.org. Let me know in the chat if you've given during this 35 years. of uh justice drive You have no idea how important it is to me and how amazing it is to see all of you. We'll be right back. 30 more minutes.

We also have just a one-minute break. Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever. This is Sekulow. And now, your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome to Sekulow, second half hour coming up, and we got Mike Pompeo joining us in the next segment.

We're also going to take your calls and comments. Heard about this FBI probe and well, I think we need to give a little restate for people who just joined us.

Some people just check us out on the back half.

Some networks carry the back half of the show. Later on in the day. Right. So maybe you're just now hearing this and you haven't heard the first 30 minutes of our broadcast. If so, welcome.

Like maybe you're in the Los Angeles area, you're listening on the radio. In LA, we air the first half hour, because I was just there a few weeks ago. The first half hour airs in the morning. For morning drive, the second half hour they air.

So when you can drive home with us, you can go with us. Where the bookends of the house. Yeah, coming and going. All right. So.

Let's break down what's happening here. We put quote-unquote conspiracy probe that's coming out of Cash Patel and the FBI. That's right. So, just the news with John Solomon is reporting that the FBI has opened this quote grand conspiracy probe on the weaponization of the Department of Justice, the intelligence agencies, as well as others against a specific political party and candidate, trying to influence U.S. elections in favor of that.

There are other things that we haven't even discussed that there could be a part of this, such as the fact that the FBI had reports and credible evidence that China actually had an influence campaign with mail-in ballots in 2020. FBI had evidence of this, and then they, what did they do? They did not investigate and actually told field offices allegedly to destroy the evidence that they had about this scheme.

So there seems to be this long line and years-long conspiracy, is what the FBI is looking into, starting with the way the email scandal with Hillary Clinton was handled. The way the Russia Gate scandal Unfolded and was weaponized against the then sitting President of the United States. The way that this 2020 revelation, where China was trying to influence the election with fake votes, was never investigated. What impact that may have had, whether it went forward, that that was just not even looked into, as well as things like the special counsels, the ways that they tried to influence the 2024 election.

So, there is almost a decade-long conspiracy that they are looking into: whether or not members of the government and former members of the government conspired against someone to influence elections through fake intel, through biased intel, things of that nature.

So, we don't know what stage they're at. This hasn't gone before a grand jury yet, which is when indictments would come forward. But we do know that there were rumblings even last week. Because we know that John Brennan and James Comey are under investigation as well. Is this a part of this?

Is this a way also that they could get outside the statute of limitations for things that happened in 2015 and 2016 and still charge these individuals with crimes related to that with a broader conspiracy or RICO type charge? All right, hopefully, then you got like a good overview of what we're talking about here. I do want to take some calls quickly before we go to break because Lynette's been on hold for a while. She's ACLJ champion. Champions get up front.

Lynette, you're on the air. Thank you for taking my call, and happy birthday, and God bless you. And I am I'm wondering, I'm so excited. I consider that this conspiracy probe is an answer to my prayers. I still have a 2016, 2020, and 2024.

It's supposed to be bumper sticker, but I keep it on my refrigerator. because I keep it in prayer. My question is, is there a way that we can, in addition to praying, can we treat this as similar to a crime stopper's in situation where people are asked to contact Cash and his team. Uh if they have some Like a tip. Yeah, I think, look, I think you can always show your support.

There's a lot of ways you can do that. We'll get involved in that in the next segment. I'll give you a little bit of update. In terms of actual tips and things, if you're internally, there are ways I'm sure that they can do that. Yeah, the FBI has an installment.

It has an electronic tip line. You can go to tips.fbi.gov if that's what you're interested in, Lynette. Obviously, that's not an ACLJ webpage or anything. That's just the way they have open tip lines. Yeah, I think you'd probably be surprised how much goes through there, Lynette.

So sure, yeah, get involved however you can. Phone lines are open again at 1-800-684-3110. We appreciate you being an ACLJ champion. We'd love you to become an ACLJ champion. That's someone that gives on a monthly recurring basis.

And right now, your first donation will be doubled during our 35 years of Justice Drive. Give right now, Mike Pompeo, coming right up. Welcome back to Sekulow. Mike Pompeo is joining us right now. Secretary Pompeo, it seems like there has been some movement, some tides that's been changing from the Trump administration.

Look, someone who I know you've spent time in Ukraine, you've seen what it's like on the ground. Of course, heading into this past election, there have been definitely a lot of dissent, a lot of people who are concerned about where America should be aligned in terms of Russia and Ukraine. You've been pretty focused on where it is. And it seems like President Trump is kind of coming around to your point of view as well, which is after dealing with Vladimir Putin and what it actually looks like once again, including those comments where he said, hey, I thought he was kind of a stand-up guy and means what he said. I mean, that's a paraphrase.

And then he's bombing people at night.

So clearly not. And he's announced some big plans, including major tariffs and also getting much more involved in the military efforts in Ukraine.

So I wanted to get your point of view as someone who's been kind of. Preaching this for the last few years to maybe finally see the conservative world start leaning towards your point of view.

Well, it's great to be with you. Look, I saw the President's statements today. I think he gave. gave Vladimir Putin every opportunity to bring peace. And Vladimir Putin rejected that.

It's classic President Trump, right? We all want peace. We hate wars. We don't want people being killed. And President Trump gave Vladimir Putin a chance to avoid that.

And now he has said, look, we got to do everything we can to make sure that the Ukrainian people can defend themselves from this onslaught. He said, you know, Putin would say to one thing and then bomb at night. That's not something you trifle with with President Trump. I think the Iranian leadership can see that.

So I think this is actually very consistent with putting America first. America has a deep interest in seeing. Vladimir Putin not succeed at stealing European land through aggression, through war, through conflict, through the war crimes he's committed, and both the tariffs that he's proposed, what that's fifty days, basically Labor Day of this year, if Putin doesn't cease doing what he's doing, and then His commitment to saying, sure, we will be happy to sell more Patriot missiles to NATO and they can distribute them in Ukraine fits perfectly with the President's campaign promises and fits really well with America's interests as well. Why do you think the tide had turned a little bit? Why do you think not now?

Now I think you're going to see people getting on board with President Trump's plan. But it did feel like, and maybe it's just the length of this conflict, that the American people, and specifically, I guess you'd say, in that sort of MAGA crowd, and some of the influencers, some of the podcasters. They seemed to, you don't want to say flip-flop, they seemed to certainly move either away from supporting Ukraine, and then some even felt like they were. more supporting what's going on in Russia. Do you feel like that that's just You know, clickbait essentially that they were doing that.

And when you actually get into it, like President Trump has, you see what's really going on.

So, I think some of it's each. I think some of them didn't know, and it was clickbait. They were going to do whatever got them attention. I think for some of them, they. They wanted me there because they were good people and they wanted to believe that Vladimir Putin II isn't as evil as he is.

We've seen this with previous Presidents, right? who he just fools them. And I saw him up close. This guy's just pure evil. And they wanted to hope for a better.

I think the reality has become clear. I think some of them didn't trust President Biden. Sign me up for that, by the way. I thought President Biden failed to deter Vladimir Putin and brought this war on by some of the things he did and said, the fall in Afghanistan, his statement about a minor incursion might be okay. And so they didn't want to get behind what they saw as President Biden's policies.

And then they didn't remember the central premise, which is that there is evil walking the earth. It is manifested in folks like Vladimir Putin. And without America standing astride to deter him from going after American interests, the world becomes a chaotic, dangerous place for Americans. And so I think unfortunately Putin will see what President Trump did today and probably not take it seriously enough. I suspect we will have to actually deliver on some of the commitments President Trump.

Trump made today, but I'm hopeful after those commitments have been delivered on that Vladimir Putin will see not that America is good or he's changed his ways, but he will just see that the cost for him is too high. Take it more seriously. He'll take a different path. Trevor Burrus, Jr.: One thing that I think is interesting is that after years now of seeing the way that President Trump does business with foreign leaders, is that it's not what more isolationists want. It's not what more interventionalists want.

It's his own style. I think we can say that that is now, has been on display for a long enough time that it shouldn't catch people off guard. The fact that, you know, we're, what, six months into his presidency. He started with what he always tries to start with: talks. And then he goes for things that people would have never necessarily thought would be different carrots or different sticks that we see today.

He is announcing that. President Vladimir Putin has 50 days to get to a deal, or he'll place 100% tariffs on Russia and trading partners. This is one thing that I don't think that many, and now I don't know directly how much trade we do with Russia, but even discussing that of what is with the trading partners, that can make it very interesting. But this is more of a novel concept, I think, using something to try to bring someone to the table that we maybe hadn't thought of. And basically, is he about to get some people that wanted us to go full on into the Russia-Ukraine conflict, maybe become a fan of tariffs?

I'm just kind of interested in what your take is on using novel things to try and get people to the table.

Okay. Yeah, look, I think you're right. He has a very unique way of delivering on his foreign policy. I certainly observed that when I was the Secretary of State, we were unconventional in so many things that we did, whether it was what we did in the Middle East with Abraham Accords or moving the embassy, recognizing the Golan Heights or how we deterred Vladimir Putin during the first term, right? When you drill, baby, drill and energy prices go lower, a huge burden on the Russian economy and constraining and deterring for Vladimir Putin.

So I do think, I think you're right, he is unconventional in that sense. You know, the sanctions, the tariffs he's imposed, we put a bunch of sanctions on Russia during the first term. A tariff and a sanction, when used in this way, are very similar economic tools. It's not sending the 82nd Airborne. We're not sending a Marine Division.

We are using the best of American power to defend American interests wherever he may find them. And if there's one thing you can say for sure about President Trump, in his first four years and now in his next first six months of this term, he is going to always do the right thing by the American people in securing our interests around the world to make sure that we have a robust, capable economy and we're safe and more prosperous and peaceful here at home. Absolutely. Secretary Papayo, you've been in those rooms also. Like you said, you've dealt with people like Vladimir Putin.

And again, I think there's always a misunderstanding when someone says, hey, there's evil, but it doesn't mean these people aren't smart. A lot of times that they are able to accomplish their goals because they can be both evil and brilliant at the same time. And I think you have a situation where we kind of conflate the two in America. You start saying, you know, it even happens on the right and the left. It's like you start calling people names, dummies, you know, whatever it may be.

And you go, no, no, no. If you got to this position and you're able to do what you're able to do, even if it's evil, and by the way, I think it is. That doesn't mean that they're not playing 4D chess, if you will, that they're not many steps ahead of you.

So you have to be careful with that. And there's a big obstacle clearly with Russia to wanting to have any kind of peace deal with Ukraine. And some of that is their own pride as well, because it felt like this should have been something that was over so many years ago in terms of Ukraine just rolling over and dealing with this situation because Russia had. Created this uh vibrato. To be this.

I mean, I've spent time there many years ago. You've spent time there. This is not a small country. This is not something to not take seriously, especially when they have some of these tendencies. Absolutely.

Look, you got to make really good points. I remember when I said about two and a half years ago that Vladimir Putin was a smart, savvy guy, and I was savage for being a Russian asset. We should not underestimate him. He's a nuclear-capable nation. There's real risk associated with this.

He is not dumb. He is cunning and savvy. He made a mistake in invading Ukraine. His military didn't deliver. But he is regrouped and will always continue to try to deliver for the things that he cares about.

And so it requires a counterparty like President Trump to deter him from that idea that he can actually achieve territorial gains through aggression. But that requires hard power, soft power, and real leadership. President Trump has demonstrated he's prepared to do that. Secretary Pompeo, thank you so much for joining us. And always, of course, we are celebrating this ACLJ 35 years of justice drive.

We couldn't have incredible voices like Mike Pompeo on this show without you because. Those uh you know no one has that kind of analysis. It really is. A wonderful thing to be able to hear from these people. And you may not agree with them.

You may not agree with Secretary Pompeo. You may not agree with some of our other team members that we've had on here and commentators we've had on here over the years. Of course, we're talking about Eric Grinnell. We're talking about Tulsi Gabbard, people that are so directly involved and have very different points of view. But it doesn't matter.

You're hearing from people who have been in the trenches, have been there. That doesn't happen on any other broadcast to this level, where you could have 10 minutes right there to break down what's going on in Russia with someone who's been staring across the table from the guy. who actually has seen it, who has actually been there. And we always think that's important. And look, we're always looking for new people to join as well.

If you have a suggestion, throw it in the chat right now. Who would you like to see as a new commentator here? On Sekulow. You can reach out. Preferably not someone who's currently in the administration.

That becomes a little harder. I don't think they would leave their position within the government to come be on the broadcast, but you know, stranger things have happened. You know, put in a comment and let me know who you'd like to see. You never know who we could add to our roster because I always want to make sure you're informed. Phone lines are open for you, and we don't have any calls right now.

I'm just going to be honest. We have. Thousands and thousands. Probably our biggest show in a couple weeks of people watching right now. But no one's called in.

Phone lines are open 1-800-684-3110. I want to hear from you. Maybe who your suggestion is. What do you think about Russia-Ukraine? Maybe this FBI probe, whatever it is, or any thoughts that you have that are in the ACLJ world, I'd love to hear from you right now.

Give us a call, even if it's just to say hi and thanks. We'll be right back. Uh Welcome back to Sekulow. We are screening some calls right now, but there's still three lines open. Let's try to get these up fast: 1-800-684-3110 because I want to hear from you.

A lot of comments are coming in who you'd like to see join our team, be part of the ACLJ and part of the Sekulow commentary group. We got some good suggestions here.

Some of our friends, like Ben Ferguson, those guys, obviously, a lot of them have been on the show many, many times. We appreciate that. There's some interesting names that have popped up as well.

Someone said Dean Kane, Superman.

Well, you know, that's a name I'm looking through here. Mel Gibson. You know, I don't know if I can I if Mel Gibson and I didn't sell Washington. I mean, there's some big, there's some big gets here. I think this some of these would be difficult.

Uh some people say, hey, if Dan Bongino was to leave, Come join us here. Right. I don't know. I think you'd go right back to his show, which was doing very well. Pretty well.

Yeah. But, you know, there's a lot of good ones coming in.

So I'll keep watching it. I'll see what you guys are suggesting. I'm taking it for real.

Someone just said, is this pre-recorded? No, it's not. You can tell by the haircut. Because I just answered your question on air. This is not pre-recorded.

Some people are asking about this specific case still because they're just joining us live.

So, Will, I'm not going to ask you for the four-minute version. Give me the 20-second version. Give me the 30-second version. And then they can go back themselves up. All right, I'm going to time it.

I'm going to go for it. I've got to stopwatch here.

Okay, you ready? I'm ready. All right. So it appears the FBI is investigating the actions of former intelligence leaders, Department of Justice leaders, and others within the government for a broad grand conspiracy dating back to 2015, even through the most recent election, where they were using their influence and intelligence to try and tip an election away from one candidate to another, therefore interfering with U.S. elections.

That's what they're investigating. Hasn't gone to a grand jury yet. How long have I gone? That was 31 seconds. I know I was watching a time.

That was pretty oh, you that's that's called cheating, Will. No, it's called using the tool set you have, Logan. All right. Why'd you have me time it? All right, let's take some phone calls.

Uh, let's go to Robert in Florida with an interesting suggestion. Robert, go ahead. Steven Segal. All right. You think Steven Seagal should be sending him a Steven Seagal?

Is that because we need a pro-Russia voice? You know, under siege? Right. Did you do Under Siege? Is that Steven Seagal?

Yeah. It is, yeah. Just making sure. You know your films. I know Steven Seagull.

I don't know Steven Seagal. Yeah, that's a bold claim. I know. He lives in Moscow, right? He is now a Russian resident.

And, you know, he can't. He has his own version of martial arts that's so deadly he cannot practise it anywhere. Because he will kill you. I love that. I love that.

Yeah. That's incredible. Thanks for watching. I'm not making fun of Stephen Seagal, by the way. I know that he lives in Russia and I don't really care for all of that whole part of it.

But, you know, he made some good films. I was more of a Van Dam man, though. Jean-Claude? I hope so. Right.

I don't know if there's another Rob Van Dam? You like Rob Van Dam? I'm hoping you were that as well. I'm a fan of all the Van Dams. Let's go to Bobby, who's calling in New York.

Bobby, you're on the air. Hi from Niagara Falls on the American side. There you go. My question is, whatever happened with the Dan Bongino Pam Bondi thing? He was going to leave unless she was fired.

What's the latest there? And my suggestion for you guys to bring on the show, he might be too controversial, is Mark Levin. I don't think too controversial, but he's got a good gig as well. Doing pretty well. I don't know if he needs to be on the show, but you know what?

What do they call him? The great one? They do. Yeah, the greatest. You know, Sean's a good friend of ours as well.

In terms of the Bongino Bonnie thing, although it was rumored, no one has made a statement. There has been reports as well as we know that Dan Bongino, at least according to the reports, kind of left the office for a few days, maybe thinking things over. One, politics in D.C. loves a scandal and they love conflict. And so that's obviously going to make a big story.

Now, What they're trying to, in some circles, make it seem like is that Dan knew that they had this information and Pam Bondi was blocking it. From my external analysis, I think it's more about the complete mess up of the way that the PR around the Epstein things were happening. In reality, they should have never done the binders thing. They should have never said it's on, Pam Bonnie should have never said it's on my desk. And now people will say that we're trying to cover for the administration and whatever.

But at the end of the day, also, if you. Let's go to the basis of the theories around Jeffrey Epstein. Mm-hmm. Let's say that he did have the FBI did have all this evidence, and they just weren't prosecuting him, they weren't releasing it. Yeah.

President Trump wins in November. And the entire team that he's putting in place that he's announced are saying they're going to release all this information. If we believe that there's bad actors at the FBI and deep state actors, do we think that would still exist? They're just going to leave it there? For them to then release?

No. Of course not.

So They may not have the evidence at the FBI. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It doesn't mean it isn't something that the American people should know about. But I think that the pylon is overblown because really it was a big PR mess up. And in reality, we know he was a bad guy.

We know that a lot of the stuff that he was in prison for was because of his own personal actions, not just the blackmail schemes or things of that nature. We also know that he got favorable treatment of the government with non-prosecution agreements, a nice house arrest kind of situation several decades ago. How did we get here, Will?

Well, because he asked about that's what the Dan Bongino and Pam Saudi. We need four minutes of what people are focused on: is that there was this blow-up. President Trump put out and said, Look, my team is solid. We're going to move forward. And also, those things that people wanted may not have existed in the thing, in the way they thought they did when this team got there in the first place.

All right. Let's go to Fred. Line six. Line six. You're on the air listening on the radio.

We only got about a minute, Fred. Go ahead. 30 years, so I kind of know the Russian mentality. Uh I am an American. We have a little bit of an unintended consequence of.

not allowing Ukraine to attack into Russia. That unintended consequence is that Putin is emboldened to continue this war Thank you. Yeah, I think you're saying trying to get him to the negotiating table needs to be a little bit stronger of an action coming from Ukraine. Fred, thanks for calling. I appreciate your comment.

Let's try to get at least to one more. We'll try. I don't think we can get to two. Let's go to Anthony first in Oregon. Anthony, go ahead.

Sean, stay on hold. We'll see. I just wanted to say that I'm an American who just happens to be black. I support Trump 110%. While I would want the Epstein evidence to come to light, it's not something that I'm torn up over.

And make no mistake about this, the real MAGA base They're not turning on Trump over this. They're not turning on Trump over this. Yeah, Anthony, I do think it's a lot of social media. You know, it's just kind of blah. People say that.

I agree with you. Let's go quickly to Sean. Sean's calling online too. Sean, just get to your question real quick, and we'll do our best.

Okay, thanks, guys.

Okay, so Pam Boggy in the past screwed up this whole thing with Epstein when she was working at the AGA, I think it was in Florida.

So every people involved with that got off with a slap on the wrist, even though they knew that they were guilty.

Now the same exact person is in a higher position and once again, she's I don't want to use the word sabotage. Sean, I am only cutting you off because we're running out of time, and I believe you are calling us from the inside of a water slide. But other than that, you're asking, do we think she's done a good job so far? I do. I think Pam Bonnie is a really smart person.

We've worked with her before many years. Of course, there's always going to be issues. You're never going to 100% agree. And that was one of those blunders. We've talked about that.

We're saying it was on my desk and what that meant and how that all worked and how that all came out. You know what? That's going to happen to politics. Not defending, but saying I do think she's a smart person is great for this job. This is just one of those.

You know, kind of uninforced errors that happen in politics. Hey, 15 seconds left, and that's 15 seconds for you to join us here at the ACLJ during our 35 years of justice drive. Do it right now. Scan the QR code, go to aclj.org if you can. a part of it.

We'll be back tomorrow with another show.