NEWSOM Sells Out California Ahead of Presidential Run

On today's show, California Governor Gavin Newsom sells out his own state ahead of a probable Presidential run. 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 to Sekulow. I am in the studio. This is Logan Sekulow with Will Haynes. Mike Pompeo is joining us a little bit later.

Jeff Balabon, ACLJ Jerusalem is going to be joining us later.

So you're not going to want to miss that. It's going to be a jam-packed show. Of course, we will cover a little bit of that meeting with Zelensky and sort of the rest of the power team, if you will. All of the world leaders of Europe seem to all Join up at the White House. It was a pretty remarkable image, actually, to see them all together in the newly golden, gilded Oval Office.

And it was. Pretty wild.

Now, was there a lot that came out of it? Not that we necessarily know yet.

Now, it doesn't mean there won't be. It doesn't mean that there wasn't. It just means a lot of the details haven't come out, other than they all said: look, there may be some trilateral negotiations. There may be a deal in place. We all want there to be a deal.

We want the war to end. Zelensky, for the first time, seemed kind of excited. Uh that the war May be coming to an end.

Now, this also happens at the same time, and you may have seen the headline, as the big debate over redistricting has taken quite another turn. You saw Texas having their issues saying, Hey, the state gets to control where our redistricts are. Our districts are, we get to redistrict ourselves. And now, California Governor Gavin Newsome says, Hey, us too. We're going to play that game.

We're going to have some fun here. The difference is, Will, that is not what the California law states. That's right. In Texas, the legislature sets the districts, a congressional district map, and people may like that or not like that, but that's the current law in Texas. That's the same way in a lot of states.

California actually has an independent bipartisan, allegedly, bipartisan commission that draws their congressional district maps. That's something that the state voted on in 2010 and put into law.

So this isn't a new thing. It's been 15 years that they've done it this way.

Now, Gavin Newsom, as retaliation to Texas, is trying to force this unprecedented move, which needs to be approved. The language needs to be approved by the state legislature on Friday.

So they can have a special election this November. Mm-hmm. To change their law temporarily, just a one-off, to be able to redraw the maps outside of the bipartisan Independent Commission and be able to. For only purely political purposes, redraw their maps to give them extra congressional seats to have this political fight with Texas.

So we'll get into more of the details, but it's pretty shocking he's going after this, and this is the way he wants to do this at this point in time. I just think he wants to get pressed. He's another guy who's just attention-hungry, especially when he is eyeing a Presidential run. We know this. It's very clear.

It's very obvious. It's been obvious for years. This is a guy who has eyes set beyond the governor of California, and his eyes are set at the presidency. He doesn't care if it breaks any laws or if it changes anything or that he can go in and do it. It's about getting attention, getting press, getting news.

And look, I got to give it to him. We're giving it to him right now.

So maybe that's good, maybe that's bad, but you also don't want to get blindsided if you're one of our California supporters who don't know this is happening and then all of a sudden what you voted into law just 15 years ago gets upended because you have a governor who has decided to take matters into his own hands because of his own endeavors, his own plans to seek the White House in just a few years.

So let's not forget that we have a large listener base. People kind of write off California. They're right off some of these big states, New York, where the populace is huge. But truth be told, those are some of our biggest states of supporters, the ACLJ. Why?

Because you see firsthand what it's like to live in some of these states. Also, there's a lot of conservative pockets when you have a giant state. But that can be easily changed if this de-redistricting happens. Look, like Will said, you may not like the idea of redistricting. You may go, I don't like what the Republicans do, and I don't like what the Democrats do.

It seems like they both play politics with it. Of course, they do. No politician is above the politics. It's part of the game. Don't like it, but it's just the truth.

We've had to deal with that for the last decade. Phone lines are open for you. I'd love to hear from you, especially if you're in California. 1-800-684-3110. But it's okay if you're not.

1-800-684-3110. The ACLJ has been winning. In defending freedom for 35 years, we want the opportunity. to continue that journey with you.

So, right now, if you can, your donations are doubled through the end of the month. We're already almost to the 20th of the month. We're on the 19th of the month. We are wrapping this thing up. We are wrapping up our 35 years of victory.

Challenge right now. I want your donation doubled. All you gotta do is go get $5 becomes 10, 10 becomes 20.

Some amazing champion unlocks their pledge. We'll be right back. Welcome back to Sekulow. Phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110, and I want to hear from you.

So, again, 1-800-684-3110. Of course, we are not only discussing the redistricting plans. By the GOP and by now Gavin Newsom. And Gavin Newsom wants to take the law in his own hands and have the entire state potentially redistrict once. Just for a quick fix, Will, just to battle Texas is sort of like his beef he had with Ron DeSantis, meaningless at the end of the day, but brought him a lot of attention.

Well, and what's different here is that they're criticizing Texas for following the way their law is set up, that their state legislature decides how the congressional maps are drawn. And as a news item as well, the Texas House last night actually was able to get to a quorum because dozens of those Democrats that fled the state came back to Austin.

So it looks like they will be moving forward with their plan. But what Gavin Newsom is doing here isn't doing what Texas is doing. They're not using their normal process to try and change their congressional maps. He's trying to go outside of what their state law has on the books that the people of his state voted for. And according to a recent poll from Politico, 64% of the state wants the power to remain in the hands.

Of that independent majority. But what he's doing now is he's taking what is supposed to be independent bipartisan in his state for 15 years that his state voted on and taking it and making it purely political. We know that around 40% of Californians vote Republican.

So when you look at that, but you realize how few representatives are from that state, he's taking an already politicized map and trying to make it more political by redrawing the lines to combat Texas. And what has to happen here. Is they have to approve legislative language by Friday, so they have to get it voted out so that they can then start notifying and plan for this special election by November 4th. Is his plan? They already have some municipal elections there, but in order for that to happen, it has to be redrawn by the end of the year because candidates for the midterm cycle start declaring candidacy and all those things early next year.

So, really, they're on a time crunch. This is kind of a dice roll. If he loses this ability and then the people of the state don't vote for this redistricting, there's some egg on his face, sort of of, look, I took on Trump and the Republicans. But it just reeks of political gamesmanship when he is saying we are trying to protect democracy against someone who is elected to the presidency and to members of Congress and members of a state legislature by saying we're going to change our law real fast. and try to do something that 64% of the state Probably doesn't want only to play games with our House of Representatives in the United States.

It's disgusting, and they're about to spend about $250 million of Californian taxpayer money in order to get this special election done.

Meanwhile, the state is a $55 billion deficit last year. Does anyone actually want to see this done? That's what I want to hear. I want to hear from people in California. Let's go to Scott, who's calling in Nevada, not too far away from California, who's got a question.

Listening on the radio. Scott, go ahead. Hi, gentlemen. How are you today? I was just wondering what the options are for the Republican Party in California.

file suit against this and drag it out as far as possible to prevent it. From happening in a timely fashion or to prevent it completely. I mean, well, it's going to go up to a special election. That's the plan is for it to go.

So, I mean, you'd hope that you don't have as many brainwashed people as you do in California who are just going to go along with what Gavin Newsom had to say. That being said, the derangement that is happening against President Trump and anything that's Republican or anything that's conservative right now would not shock me if they decide to give him this ultimate power.

Well, and when you look at also the makeup of their state legislature, where this has to go to first, and they can't preemptively sue. There has to be some sort of damage before they can get the lawsuit out. But you look at the makeup of their structure of the houses. You have the state assembly, which is like their state house, is 80 Democrats to 19 Republicans in one vacant. And then their state Senate is 30 Democrats to 10 Republicans.

So very lopsided within the House and Senate in the state that they're going to be able to pass this on Friday if they want. And They can get the language buttoned up and in the right way that they want to present to voters in what they're calling Proposition 50, which will be voted on. But I honestly, I'm not sure. And there's definitely not a preemptive lawsuit they could file to try to block it. But with them passing it and sending it to a ballot measure, there may be difficulty even suing to block it before it goes on the ballot.

I think the main thing is we got to bring attention. We got to bring attention for California friends who may not know that this is how their law is set up, that he is circumventing their own law that was voted in just 15 years ago. Yes, that means it's been a little while, but not that long in terms of electoral cycles. Where they say, no, we want to actually have an independent bipartisan council creating these districts. We don't want it to be politicized.

It could be one of the first things California has done that I agree with. You don't want those politicized counties and the politicized districts because it becomes, I mean, look at some of those ones in Illinois where you see them go up like a river through the middle of the state just to pick up seats, to pick up seats, to pick up seats. It has nothing to do with actually supporting an area or representing an area. It's not how it works.

Now, I also wanted to say we are going to be talking about what happened with the meeting yesterday. President Trump met with Zelensky, of course, a couple of days post meeting with Putin, and he had all the world leaders, all the European world leaders were there to also meet with Zelensky to talk about what the future looks like for the war in Ukraine, is Russia and Ukraine. You can look at amazing photos. I mean, they don't even look real. The fact that you're able to get all these people in the same room together.

And in the Oval Office. In the Oval Office, whether it's Stammer, whether that is Macron, all of these top-tier. European leaders, and of course, Zelensky himself. I want to take a phone call about this because actually I want to know his point of view because I think things have changed rapidly in the last few weeks and a few months. Mike, go ahead in California.

How are you doing? Thanks for taking me on.

Well, you know, the interesting thing. is that The interesting thing is that Um They're not paying attention to the fact that Amnesty was already removed. Not even over yet.

Okay? And these people actually make better Americans than most Americans. Mike, I thought you're calling in. Mike, Mike. Stop for a second.

Mike. I thought you were calling in to talk about Ukraine. Was that not right? He's going to kill everybody.

Okay, just drop him. All right, Mike. Unfortunately, I actually think you had an interesting comment. Right. And it wasn't even a pro comment.

It was a d it was one that I wanted to take discuss. Because I think Mike's original comment before he started to go into amnesty, which again, it was a whole other debate, a whole other discussion. And one, by the way, you probably would be surprised more on my points of view than you wouldn't. You decided to decide that my views had to be whatever the prevailing, I guess you'd say, conservative views are. But sorry about that, Mike.

Mike actually was saying he was disappointed as someone who's a supporter of Ukraine. He said he voted for President Trump. Obviously, hell, that was a lie. But saying that he didn't feel like he was selling out the Ukrainian people. I think that there were times you probably could have gleaned that.

You could have said, if you're a supporter of Ukraine, you could have seen President Trump specifically that last meeting with Zelensky, where everything broke loose in the middle of it with J.D. Vance and it became almost a meme. That one, you could at least say, okay, I don't necessarily disagree with you, theoretical, Mike, with that, because I think that that is an issue we had to address.

Now, I think since meeting with. Putin and before that, talking with Putin and seeing the lies that were coming out of Russia, saying that, you know, President Trump made the remark that, oh, I'd have a great call with him, and then I'd turn on the TV and my wife would go, Oh, they bombed a nursing home. And look, that kind of happened in the last 24 hours as well.

Well, and I think to your point, I take a little bit of a different angle on it. I think the narrative that we've been fed is that President Trump is selling out Ukraine. He said from the campaign he wants to end the war. And what you see is: one, Zelensky in that first meeting, I think there's a good argument that he was coming in from a position of power that he had under the Biden administration and thought he can go in and just say, you have to give me more things. President Trump wants the war to end, not to protract it out as long as possible by continuing just to send just enough munitions for them to have a stalemate effectively.

And what we've seen now is actual novel moves by this President. President, by meeting with Putin, by demanding things of Putin, by warning, we're going to start tariffing your trading partners if you don't stop this and come to the table. I don't think that's selling out Ukraine at all. I think those are just taking a different tactic than the failed foreign policy of the Biden and Obama years, which led to these wars in the first place. We won't sit down and talk with anybody.

In the next segment, we're going to be joined by Mike Pompeo. I know some of you love hearing from Mike Pompeo, some of you disagree with him, but you know what? There's a few things you can't take away from him. One, he was a former Secretary of State. He was really involved at high-level in a lot of different issues, but he also has been someone who's been on the ground in Ukraine.

He's been someone who sat across from Vladimir Putin. This is not someone to take lightly. This is someone who's been in the room.

So you should listen up. Whether you agree or disagree with certain things that he has to say, I think he's an invaluable resource here. Because who else can bring this kind of expertise? Who else can we have on this broadcast who could bring on a level of a background? Like Secretary Pompeo.

Later on, we'll be joined by Jeff Balabon, also with an update on what's going on in Israel. Seems like it's old news right now. It feels like the Israel-Gaza war is kind of on the back burner right now, but we know it's still happening. We know there's still issues going on. We know it is right now, just in one of those seasons where it's not as popular.

It's not as popular to talk about it right now because we gotta talk about other things. We got to make sure we don't forget what's going on over there. Phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110. 1-800-684-3110. We'll be back in a minute because we are still celebrating our 35 years.

Of Victory Drive, and I want you to be a part of it right now. We are working so So diligently, non-stop, and we've been winning for 35 years. We're going to keep it going, keep it going. ACLJ.org. Welcome, Mike to Sekulow.

We are going to take your calls at 1-800-684-3110. We are now joined by Senior Counsel for Global Affairs, of course, Secretary Mike Pompeo. Thank you so much for joining us today. There's obviously been a lot of news. And before this segment, I was kind of prepping people for you to come on because there's very few people who have been on the ground, who can have this conversation, who have experienced what it's like to be with Vladimir Putin, to be with Zelensky, to be in Ukraine.

And I tend to, you know, I always look at people who actually have been there, you know, boots on the ground, if you will, who have experienced it. I always feel that way with Israel. When people comment on Israel and they've never been there, they've never seen it. They don't understand what it's like to cross that border and to feel the difference, to feel the shift in terms of the way you're treated and the way people are treated and the way the hostility is. But you've been there.

You've experienced it. As we know, President Trump met with Putin on Friday and then very quickly met with Zelensky just yesterday with that whole group. The trilateral meeting between the three of them. Do you think that could actually get done? Do you think this could happen?

Because we are actually now seeing progress, maybe some smiles on the face of all three of these trilateral parties. First of all, I love your camo. It's fantastic. Thank you. Yeah.

Yeah, look, there's enormous progress I think has been made. Look, I also caution folks, this is difficult. Vladimir Putin has shown literally no evidence that he's prepared to compromise on anything that is material. The things that we need, that the United States needs him to compromise on. To date, he's not shown any willingness, no movement.

The fact that he's having conversations, that he's meeting with President Trump, he would have never met with President Biden, for goodness sake. The fact that it looks like he's prepared to contemplate meeting with Zelensky, probably going to happen. Those are good signs. They're signs that there is enough pressure on Putin now that he actually has to take seriously the risk that Donald Trump will make his life and the life of the Russian people incredibly difficult. And it's that very pressure that may well convince Putin that the cost of continuing this conflict exceeds the benefit.

And in the end, we all know that's what will drive the outcome. Deterrence is predicated on a decision maker like Putin deciding it's not worth the candle. President Trump is slowly convincing him that it's not worth it.

Well, and yesterday, when you saw all those European leaders in the room, in the Oval Office, which was a remarkable sight, and obviously President Zelensky there as well, you heard a tone shift, even when they went to reporters, that even though it's a very serious matter, you heard both the European leader. And the President of Ukraine seemed to have a more sunny disposition almost in the way that they were talking to reporters and excited about this meeting, which is not something you've heard at all, I think, since the beginning of this war. What was your take on kind of the way it even rolled out in Washington yesterday? I think they all had walked into President Trump's second administration thinking he was going to hand Ukraine to Vladimir Putin. I think these European leaders.

Had sort of bought the Russian hoax story somehow that he was weak on Russia. And so, what I think you saw there was a recognition of the fact that that's not President Trump. President Trump indeed puts America first, always. Every one of those leaders in that room puts their own country first. But what they saw was President Trump understands that it is in America's best interest to ensure that Vladimir Putin is not successful of rolling up Europe.

And I think they belatedly, grudgingly, some of them probably regretfully can now see that President Trump is tougher than they are in many respects on Russia. And I think that brought them confidence that now there is a pathway to bringing the killing to an end, to bringing peace to the region, and to setting up a security architecture that will actually work to protect Europe. And they've also now all gotten, what's the right term? I want to be careful. They've all gotten religion on the fact that they've all got to spend enough of their own resources to defend themselves as well.

And so I think you saw that coming. Together and gelling in a way yesterday that is really important, and I'm sure to send a message to Putin as well. Trevor Burrus, Jr.: Well, as well as there were the talks about some sort of security agreement or security guarantee for the Ukrainians that wouldn't include NATO membership, but something similar to like an Article 5 protection. A lot of talk about that. Obviously, there's no details on what that would be.

That isn't something that's signed, and we all know. But what could that look like, as well as the President saying no U.S. boots on the ground in Ukraine, but still some protections for them going forward as a way to try and bring this to a closure? With your expertise, what could you imagine something like that could look like? Yes, so this looks like a European coalition of the willing with American support.

So it'd be European national militaries on the ground, on the line of contact, wherever they ultimately draw the lines. There'll be soldiers, there'll be defensive bulwarks, there'll be monitoring systems put in place to defend that boundary to make sure that something like this never happens again. They won't be Americans, they won't be U.S. citizens, blue passport holders, they'll be European fighters, warriors. But you will get American support.

And what does that look like? That looks like all kinds of weaponry that they would purchase from us. It looks like intelligence sharing so that the tools that we have that are uniquely American capabilities we have can be shared with them to help. But no risk to American citizens and our uniformed military personnel on the ground there. That's what I think it ultimately looks like.

That is a good outcome for everyone and one that I think benefits the United States greatly as well if we can achieve it.

Well, and I think also when you've heard many of the detractors of support for Ukraine, many on the right that tried to push that, you know, this is Europe's problem. This isn't the United States' problem. Shouldn't something like this be alleviating their concerns? This is what they've asked for, saying, Europe, they're in your backyard, you can handle this, but the U.S. needs to support our allies and be a backstop to some degree.

I feel like, once again, President Trump is able to thread the needle of the possible. when there's so many detractors even within the MAGA movement per se. Very true. Think about what, just think about a parallel conflict, right, in the Middle East. Without putting an American soldier on the ground, we deter the Iranian regime for quite some time and set the nuclear program back a long ways.

The same model he's used here. He told the Europeans, get your act together, put your young men and women on the line, put your money, your taxpayer money on the line, and then the United States understands we're going to be a good partner and friend, and we'll provide the things that are uniquely our capabilities. I think that's the model that will follow from this. And it's fundamentally consistent with what we did in the President's first term. We deterred Vladimir Putin for four years.

I'm convinced President Trump can get that very deterrence model back. And this will benefit all of us greatly too as the Chinese continue to think about their next play. They'll see President Trump is serious about this. Secretary Pompeo, thank you so much for joining us. Thank you so much for joining us.

Also, we're celebrating right now the ACLJ's 35th anniversary, our 35 years of victory. I just want to say thank you for being a part of. Of that team because it has been a wonderful part. Uh, just to have someone with such an incredible voice who's been there, uh, it's been amazing. I want you to right now support the work of the ACLJ as we head into the second half hour of the broadcast.

And if some of you have to disconnect here, uh, know that if you are listening on the radio, you may not get us for that full hour. You can find us always for that full hour at aclj.org on YouTube, on Rumble, on Facebook. We are broadcasting there live every day from 12 to 1 p.m. Eastern time. And of course, you can pick us up on all your favorite podcast players or archived on all of those, YouTube or however it is, because there's so many of you that join us now each and every day digitally.

And I want to say thank you to you guys as well. But I also know you may not understand the way its structure works here at the organization at the ACLJ. There's this show, and of course, this show, without your support, doesn't happen. Then there's all of our legal work. We're gonna head over to ACLJ Jerusalem in just a minute.

That doesn't happen without you. We're not funded by major sponsors, we're not funded by major donors. We are funded by individual people who give small to medium-level donations every month. or once a year. Or maybe you do it just during these drives where it's doubled.

Or maybe you've never done it at all. I encourage you to do it today and be part of the team here. Every gift is going to be matched double dollar for dollar through the end of the month.

So, right now, if you've ever thought about doing it, do it right now at aclj.org. We'll be right back in less than a minute. Mm. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever. This is Sekulow.

And now, your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome back to Sekulow, second half hour of the broadcast. Right now, we're talking about a few different major topics. We're also going to be heading over to ACLJ Jerusalem. Jeff Balabon's going to be joining us in the next segment.

But of course, the lead topic today we've been talking about is that Gavin Newsom has decided: hey, slow down, Texas. You may have the right to redistrict, but I don't care that I don't have the right. I don't have the law. I'm gonna do it myself. I'm gonna do it by holding a special election.

Because I want to be able to redistrict too. Two can play at the political game. Like, I don't really love this when it comes to playing politics in general. I think both sides are guilty. Of playing politics with your vote, with playing politics with your district, when a lot of times it doesn't even represent an area that makes any sense because they know they can get their way politically.

As you said, Will, 40% of the state of California votes for Republicans. And look how few seat holders they have. Same can be said for probably on the converse on different states. That's right. And when you look at this, also the cynicism that the Democrats have poured into our political system, which was already pretty rough as it was, but that, hey, what they're doing is trying to take our democracy, take away people's representation.

So what are we going to do? We're going to do it, but do it worse. I mean, just the reality of that is so shocking that Gavin Newsom is willing to rush forward a constitutional amendment or a ballot proposition, Proposition 50, which he's saying represents all 50 states because this is a national issue. It's just shocking that they're willing to. To go that far over something.

And they're even calling it the Election Rigging Response Act, is the legislative package they're putting forward, wanting to say that it's President Trump that is and the Democrat or the Republicans in Texas that are rigging elections.

So, what are we going to do? We're going to force something through real quick so we can redraw our maps and make them even more unfair than they already are. And we're going to put that forward as if this is democracy. They're taking the bait in some way of showing it. But this also goes back to Logan.

I mean, there was this New York Times article, the opinion piece that came out Just a few days ago. And it shows what really the left is at the heart of, because the mouthpiece for the left, the New York Times, decided to put up this long interview and article accompanying opinion piece that says: abolish the Senate in the Electoral College, pack the court. Why the left can't win without a new constitution. It shows they're saying that President Trump is putting us into a constitutional crisis. No, everything they're doing is trying to get rid of that very constitution they're saying he's putting in crisis.

They don't believe in it. We used to have a system where the two parties at least had different opinions on what the Constitution said, but still believed in it being our foundational document. The Democrat Party in the left is so far removed from that now, they don't even believe in our foundational document and want to get rid of it. And I think the New York Times being willing to put this out there and saying, oh, we're going to listen to all voices. No, they don't.

They amplify the voices they want to be heard. And this is a scary amplification. They also know it's going to get clicks. They know people like you are going to read it and go, oh, what are they doing? Oh, the leftist.

And you click on it and you get angry.

So remember, they're all doing it for the clicks. That's the only way they make money is advertising revenue. And they barely make money to begin with with that.

So what are you going to do? Say, abolish the Constitution. Get rid of the Electoral College. That's not that controversial. People talk about that every election season.

So get rid of the Electoral College. We got to get rid of the Constitution. We got to, what else was in there? And abolish the Senate. Oh, the Senate.

Senate's got to go away. As if the Senate isn't razor-thin conservative. Yeah. I mean, that's what we're talking about.

Well, the problem is, is that it's too close. And because of the filibuster rule, you have to get two-thirds majority. It's much easier for them to redraw their districts and get a lot more Democrats in the House of Representatives and then have essentially mob rule in the country. I hope you've liked this hot map talk we've had. This hour.

Geography hour. Yeah. Brought to you by Will and Logan. Yeah. You into maps?

I like them. In the next segment, we're going to be joint speaking of maps. We're talking about Israel and Gaza, which, of course, is always talking about maps because they're always trying to figure out whose path is right and whose map is right. If you're a Barack Obama, maybe you're referring to the 60s. If you're a President Trump, you're looking forward to a 2025 version, 2026 version, which maybe has all of Israel.

We're going to talk about that and really what's going on. He's been updating, getting an update from our friend Jeff Balabon, who runs ACLJ Jerusalem. It's been a little bit since we've heard from him. As I said, it gets a little quiet on this side. When it gets quiet, you know there's actually a lot going on.

So we're going to talk about that coming up with him. Then take your calls when we get back at the very end of the show: 1-800-684-3110. Welcome back to Sekulow. We will take your calls in the next segment at 1-800-684-3110.

So, Bill and Doug, stay on hold. If you're also on hold, we'll get to you.

Some are being screened right now. We got three lines open, though, so we'll try to get as many of those in the next segment. But I wanted to head over to Jeff Balabon, head of ACLJ Jerusalem. Jeff, we're going to talk about some of the updates that you've been doing, some of the meetings you've been having, because it feels like it kind of goes the Israel-Gaza conflict, it kind of goes in and out of style, I feel like, with the news cycle. And right now is one of those times where it's quiet.

Now, I don't know if it's quiet because it is actually quiet or it's quiet because they see the ratings are stronger talking about Zelensky or Ukraine or talking about whatever else could be going on in this country in the world. But right now, when we don't get actually information on the regular, I want to make sure we are checking in with you to see how things are actually going for our team at ACLJ Jerusalem, but also in this war right now. Sure.

Well, let's remind everybody, it's day 683. Uh and You know, you see me and you see others wearing this yellow ribbon that uh That's the hostage-riven, and there's still 50 hostages, 20 of whom are living. And there's news today of a potential deal being struck. But honestly, it's a deal that's been reported by Israel's enemies, and Israel's being pressured into it.

So things are happening constantly, and there's never a moment that people here are not living with an awareness. It's a very small country. It's a very united country that there are hostages, some of whom living in horrendous conditions, truly horrendous conditions.

So yeah, there's an ongoing sense of that. There's an ongoing war. We don't hear about it necessarily all the time in the news, but there are people fighting on the fronts all the time. And here in Jerusalem, even the capital, in the last week, we had, if I'm recalling correctly, it's not even that newsworthy anymore, two alarms of incoming missiles or rockets that we had to go run to shelters for.

So it is an ongoing war, not just at the front, but throughout Jerusalem. And Jeff, we see this now, this new push that places like the New York Times are putting out there, that there is allegedly a new plan for a ceasefire that Hamas is putting out there and signing on to. We know how these have gone in the past when they have put out a plan. They normally have a poison pill in them, something that is unworkable for Israeli security. We have not seen a response from the Prime Minister yet, but I want to get your take on that because this is just coming out overnight that there is purportedly a new plan for a ceasefire in Gaza.

So, the New York Times reports of the plan, skimpier on details than some of the Israeli reports. The Israeli reports are that the offer is that Hamas will release 10 live hostages, or Gaza has released 10 live hostages, in exchange for a 60-day ceasefire and the release by Israel of 150 convicted terrorists serving lifetime sentences.

Now, just reminding everybody that it was convicted terrorists who were released, like Yehansin-Sinwar, that actually planned and executed October 7th. And so this is something which Israel gives into because of global pressure and because of its desperate internal desire to see these hostages come back alive. But the Hamas is saying nothing, they're proudly stating nothing saying here relating to giving up Hamas weapons.

Meanwhile, Israel's position has been release all the hostages. Disarm Hamas, demilitarize the Gaza Strip, and that if there's any governance taking over Gaza, it has to be non-terrorists, meaning not the Palestinian Authority, which is terrorists, and not Hamas, which is terrorists.

So there's a big gap between them. Nonetheless, what this does seem like is a big push after this last round of terrible press, honestly, open lies about Israel trying to starve people or cause genocide. Israel does the opposite to again try to put pressure really here internally on the politics. And basically, this seems to be trying to put pressure on Netanyahu himself, collapse his government. That's what it looks like, to me at least, what this so-called new deal looks to be.

It's stuff that's already been rejected. Israel is under pressure to look at it again. Yeah, it's a PR move that maybe Israel has to look at, unfortunately. But look, I mean, I think that window, like you said, where all of a sudden there was this new moment just a few weeks ago where it was back in the press, and you're right, that the narrative was starvation and all these things that were happening. It gave also the opportunity for the media and for.

Media personalities and for musicians and all those, even those that supported Israel before, to be able to cave. Without really much attention to finally, well, I supported Israel at the beginning, but clearly now, I mean, you saw with you two, they each put individually put out a statement. And again, I loved what they said originally. They were very much on the right side, I would say, of history. But now they are essentially caving to which you're probably right, which is probably to what the press is pushing them to do.

And unfortunately, that is happening again and again and again when you're given these moments of, like you said, lies that end up turning into the mainstream media's facts. Look, the problem is exactly that. People get worn down, and unfortunately, I think people have a hard time believing just how mendacious, just how false. And evil, much of the global media is. They simply lie about this.

I mean, there are some wonderful people sending out the right messages. I think here at ACLJ, one of the most important things we do is not only that we're here and know what's going on firsthand, but that we bring it to Americans who do care and they need to know what's actually happening. But there's been, you know, it's six, day 683 since October 7th. It's 683 days, honestly, of relentless lies about the state of Israel and what's happening there. And it's wearing on people, but it's afraid.

People are afraid to look at the media. The alternative is, oh my God, I can't trust the news at all. Unfortunately, that's the truth. Yeah, and it's exhausting. I mean, you're not wrong.

It is exhausting. They have worn us down. They've worn a lot of people down. They have worn the American people down to really have to not only shape their point of view, but even to just sort of pretend it's not happening at some point, just to ignore it. And what I'm hopeful is that we're able to, you know, everyone wants the war to end and for it to wrap up.

It's just the way the method is of where you get there at this point. Has it gone too far to be one of these ceasefire, shake hands at the end of it kind of meetings? I think probably. But where does that leave us? We'll have to see.

Will, but that is the reason why we are there. It's the reason we keep these things in the front of people's minds because it's easy. Look, I don't, the smallest case is look at what happened with President Trump meeting with Vladimir Putin. The narrative coming out of there was he didn't get a ceasefire. He didn't get it done like he said he was going to.

Now, if you had watched any of the interviews leading up to it for President Trump, since they decided, he said, I'm not planning on getting a ceasefire out of this. I'm planning this to get to stage two and then hopefully get to meeting three, which actually puts the two of them in the room together. That was always the plan. That. That plan looks like it may come to fruition.

However, they decided that we're going to spin this and we're just going to make it look like it's a giant disaster and put egg on the face of the American people for no reason other than press.

Well, and Jeff, another question I want to ask you about is things that don't get brought up enough by our media, unless, especially when it pertains to the region, unless they can go after Israel. But something that Israel has been concerned about, we here at the ACLJ have been concerned about. We have our office in Washington working on this, and this is the plight of minority communities in Syria. And we know that Israel took action to try and protect many of those minority communities, whether it be Christian or Druze. They used airstrikes to try and push back against the groups.

But there are concerning reports now, something we've been afraid was the truth, but we're waiting and we're working with partners in Congress as well as at the UN about if the Syrian government is actually sanctioning this. And there are reports that actually the Syrian government as well as mosques. within Syria are calling for jihad against these minority communities. And I wanted you to speak to that because it's something that Israel deeply cares about, protecting minority populations in the region, as well as we here at the ACLJ. Yeah, I mean, one of the most perverse reversals of reality that's been pushed now is that Israel or Israelis are somehow attacking Christians and trying to commit genocide against Christians.

And it's the literal opposite. Israel, more than any nation on the planet, more than the United States of America, has been sending its troops, risking its troops, sending to the front line to save Christians, to save Jews, save others who are trapped in Sunni or Shia majority places that are calling for their destruction, their genocide. Israel has been saving them. Israel has been saving them from. I mean, horrible fates, including being sold as sex slaves, including being murdered, and The exact opposite.

When Israel went in to do this, The world attacked Israel as though Israel is starting another war. It's the exact opposite. Israel's the moral actor. Only afterwards did this come to America's attention. Only after Israel did it.

But again, the damage is done. Everything Israel done, it does. It does honestly to do as well as it can to do what's righteous and just. And the spin against it is just honestly satanic.

Well, and Logan, I want to bring this up before we end this segment, because I've been seeing that in some of the right-wing media sphere, that, oh, Israel actually isn't protecting Christians. They're committing genocide against Christians as well.

Some of the most well-known names in conservative media are doing this lie. But One of the very first film projects that we worked on here at the ACLJ was a movie called Unshaken. What was the ACLJ doing? A lot of people that watch this show now don't know about this. There was a man who had a family, they were a Christian family in Gaza, and he ran the only Christian bookstore in Gaza.

And he was killed and dragged through the streets of Gaza by Hamas and the Islamists there. brutally murdered, and then they try to take his wife and kids and give them to the Imam. In the community there. As a gift. As a gift, after they murdered the family, trying to also, that's a genocidal tactic, because then they are forcibly converted to Islam.

So, their Christianity and their lineage is wiped out. And what did the ACLJ do? We worked with Israel to get that family out of Gaza. And we did that in the middle of a war. And you know where they went?

They went to Judea and Samaria to be with their family. That is not genocide by Israel. Israel worked with the ACLJ and we saw that to fruition. That's right. And Jeff, anybody got something to say?

We only got 10 seconds. Go ahead, though. Let's take it out.

Well, in many ways, Israel is a light into the nations, and unfortunately, the media is just blacking that out. Thank you, Jeff, for joining us. Always support the ACLJ because when you do, you support ACLJ Jerusalem. Your calls and comments are coming up. Other magic secular.

This segment, I like to take as many calls and comments as we can. We got three lines open right now. It's perfect time to call in: 1-800-684-3110. Be last chance to be heard today. 1-800-684-3110.

I saw a comment or two that said I was being rude to that caller that called in earlier. I just wanted to clarify, that caller lied to our phone screener.

So if you call and you lie to our phone screener, And tell them what you're going to talk about. because we have it in front of us. And then you swerve us. And you don't talk at all about that.

Sorry, you deserve to be. thrown off the air. That's just how it is.

So Bill in Wyoming, go ahead.

Well, I was just saying, lying is traditionally held as rude. That's rude.

So when that person lied, I think they were being the rude. They were the first rude. Right. All right. Bill in Wyoming, go ahead.

You're ACLJ champion. I want to encourage everyone to become a champion. That's something that supports on a monthly basis. Helps us with a great baseline. And again, call in right now.

And if you do that, you become a champion, you get pumped to the front of the line.

So, Bill, go ahead. Yeah, thanks. I'm glad for letting you for you let me help you sell Yeah. I need some straightening out of my confusion because it seems like a couple of years ago I'm out. Yeah.

Us putting some boots on the ground for what security training or aid, or did I have an attack of uh audio dyslexia. At that time. If I did, I apologize. Sure.

Well, and that is one of the things that the Biden administration kept trying to push as a narrative that we will not put boots on the ground.

However, U.S. Special Forces were definitely boots on the ground in Ukraine. They try to cover that up as it's training and assisting and things of that nature. But you better believe that they're going in to train these battalions and things into battle. And I don't think that our U.S.

special forces are not going to return fire if they're being fired upon.

So there is a false narrative. And that's not just the Biden administration, by the way. A lot of administrations use no boots on the ground when in reality, special forces are in the ground a lot of places right now, probably fighting wars that we don't even know about. But yes, there were U.S. special forces and probably still are U.S.

special forces on the ground in Ukraine. And in my book, That's boots on the ground, even if it's for a training mission. Thank you, Bill, for calling. Hopefully that clears that up for you. Of course, a lot of it is just semantics.

You got to make sure that you stay paid attention to what's actually happening. Let's go to Doug, who's calling, listening on the radio in Colorado. Doug, you're on the air. But before we get to you, phone lines are open. Last chance to call in.

This is the time to do it. Be kind to our phone screener. 1-800-684-3110. 1-800-684-3110. Doug, you're on the air.

Yeah, guys, redistricting. I'm trying to get a handle on all this. There's a lot there, and it's hard to find anything that's real cogent because it's different from state to state, and the federal government lets. Let the state government do that. When it comes to the the Voting Rights Act of 1965, that's no coincidence that came along with the great so uh you know the so-called great society legislation.

They've been using race for 60 years now to redistrict, and that that was found as unconstitutional in 1993 in Shaw versus Reno.

So, what what I'm getting at is this. What determination do you have to redistrict? Isn't there some sort of uh something that has to happen. With Texas, you see a lot of people moving into Texas.

So, of course, they're moving out of California and other places.

So, you redistrict there, you gain a seat there, you gain a representative.

So, shouldn't that represent be put in where they gain the most population? And in California, where they lost the most population, shouldn't that representative be taken out of that spot? Why is it so difficult?

Well, I mean, Doug, you're making way too much sense for the media to handle.

So, that is the reason that Texas is saying that they need a redistricting now. They have seen a mass influx of people. Typically, they wait until after a census where there is the data is given to them and they can say, okay, here's the reason why we're redistricting now. Our populations have shifted and the allocations. In the current world, the census has got to be largely meaningless.

Just the fact that we are in a digital society. Most likely, they know who's living where and how many people.

Well, and a lot of the concerns of the census in 2020, and when we look at these, are that. On the census questionnaires in the last census, it was: how many people live in this household? And not how many citizens live in this household. And so the allocation of representatives going to states is based off of the population of the state. What one of the big concerns is that the language that said how many people live in this house, not how many citizens live in this house, gave California, and a lot of the states that are blue states that had sanctuary cities, it gave them an inflated population count of which they get federal assistance, they get representation, when in reality, they're getting representation based off of people that are not here legally.

I think there's a very valid argument with that. That's also part of why Texas is like, look, we're redistricting because we've gotten a lot of the citizens from California have moved here in recent years.

Now, California's. Only justification for this that they're saying And they're having to jump through a lot of hoops to get there. Is not because of population. They're just saying, we're doing it because we're mad at Texas for doing it.

So, I mean, you know, the old two wrongs don't make a right. If they truly believe that this is wrong, what Texas is doing, then having to jump through all these very extra special hurdles to get to another wrong should not right that. And I think that that shows how disingenuous they are about the whole thing. In reality, Gavin Newsom sees a way to spend his state's money. $250 million plus of it to do this wild theory to try and take on the Republicans, trying to own Trump.

He's even, if you look at his X account, He's trying to mock Trump doing bold letters, all caps, saying thank you for your attention to this matter, thinking it's making him like a superhero. But in reality, everyone knows the left can't meme, and he's failing at this as well. Yeah, and speaking of that, I see a lot of comments coming in. One of them just keeps asking professional wrestling questions, which I'm so tempted every time to answer. Ben, if you're watching right now, but know that I'm going to keep my pro wrestling talk to a minimum today's show.

You know, I think it's okay. But I think Triple A is doing some good stuff. Jerry in Indiana, line one. Let's go, Jerry. How you doing?

I'm good, Jerry. Go ahead. Yeah, I'm just wondering, can the federal government make it mandatory Uh for photo I D's for voting. I know so Trump's talking about Uh no bail mail-in ballots, which I mean, what do you do about people who literally can't vote? I'm only cutting you off because we're running out of time.

Could they get a Supreme Court case? Could it happen? In theory, I guess you probably could get there, but do you really want it? Remember the consequences that come with Really manipulating the elections in each state and know that each state has their own election laws for a reason. I think there's largely good reasons for that.

Now, that doesn't mean that I agree with the fact that I think not having some sort of photo ID is ridiculous. I think that that's an absurd thing that we have to go through each and every election cycle. And of course, it gets played on both sides where you're racist if you say it, you're racist if you don't say it. And that ends up becoming a battle that's a no-win situation. Yeah, the federal government could theoretically pass a bill that have to get through the House and Senate and signed by the President on that.

There would be legal challenges to it, obviously, because that's what the left does. They challenge everything. But I do agree with Logan to some degree. You do want your states to run the election, not the federal government, because when it's the next party, they're going to play some dirty tricks. You got to think about that.

You always got to think about what's around the corner. They have Presidential immunity. And now look what happens to previous Presidents like Biden and Obama, and remember what that could mean for the future. Not to say it's not the right ruling. You gotta always keep in your right mind to understand.

Four years is a very short period of time. Eight years is not a very long period of time. With that being said. That's gonna do it for today's show. And I want you to support the ACLJ today if you can.

Your donations will be doubled. They're matched by another ACLJ champion or supporter ready to go. You've heard from ACLJ Jerusalem, you've heard from so many incredible voices today. None of it happens without you. None of it.

So give today at aclj.org. We'll talk to you tomorrow.