In a speech this morning, President Trump makes a prediction he'll be impeached again if the GOP loses the midterms. 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. We are monitoring a few different breaking news stories, as we always do. But phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110. President Trump, speaking for what felt like hours this morning, but kind of had one big revelation after kind of talking about his normal, you know, kind of bloviating a little, talking like President Trump does, his successes, you know, all of the normal kind of greatest hits, if you will.
He kind of let this one slide. And it was kind of interesting. It's about the midterm elections, which are obviously. Very soon now. We're talking about 11 months away from this happening and what the consequences could be.
We also know. Tim Walls is about to speak once again. Answering questions.
So, again, if you thought he was going away from two days ago, sorry, that doesn't look like from yesterday.
Sorry, that doesn't look like that's going to happen.
So, we'll cover that as well. And we'll have a packed show later on talking about some of the work of the ACLJ as well. But, phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-30110. But we wanted to kick off hearing from President Trump. This is just moments ago talking about the midterms.
You got to win the midterms. Because if we don't win the midterms. It's just going to be. I mean they'll find a reason to impeach me. Uh I'll get him pitched.
We don't impeach them. You know why? Because they're meaner than we are. We should have impeached Joe Biden for 100 different things.
So, not only, of course, saying you should have impeached Joe Biden, is actually saying on there, they will impeach me, impeach me again. And look, Will, that's something you've been talking about for a while, saying it seems to be what the playbook is, that they have been building the case, if you will, not even that they necessarily need it, a case for impeachment. That's right. One, you know that they have lowered the bar for impeachment so drastically because of President Trump's first term. They impeached him once over what he called a perfect phone call.
We know that story all too well. He was acquitted by the Senate, had a great legal team defending him in that first impeachment. As you may know, Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ, was there in the Senate well, defending the President of the United States in an impeachment trial. Then they tried a second impeachment after he was out of office. To try and retroactively impeach him.
That one failed as well and didn't even have the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presiding over it because it wasn't the impeachment of a President. Very confusing, but. They've been building towards this, and we know that if they get the majority in the House back, that they will try it again, whether it be over National Guard deployments, whether it be over originally strikes on boats in the Caribbean, now over maybe an illegal incursion to arrest the President of Venezuela, as we saw just over the weekend. They are building towards it. It's just which one of their narratives, their threads will they choose to stick it out with?
They are going to do that if they have the majority in the House of Representatives. They get it done. I mean, I think that's how he's impeached. Yeah, I mean, that's going to happen. He's done enough that would be the gray area for them.
to make their case. And again, why not put America through that again? We saw how well it worked the last time. Phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-30-110. He also inferred with Venezuela that it looks like the transition period of time, they're looking at about an 18-19 month.
Uh, uh, looks like we would be in control while the government's transitioning. That's right. Really, what he was saying was 18 months, really, to get the country set up and on his feet to move forward. A lot of questions there. We'll talk about that later on in the broadcast.
But we will also focus on what was the point of this speech this morning, where was he, and where does this even matter in kind of this point in time predicting his impeachment? Yeah, all I know is I turned on the radio on the way into work today, and he was talking. I don't, I mean, did he just end? Yeah, just ended.
So, I mean, we're talking about hours long, kind of a throwback President Trump speech, which could go on for days. Phone lines are open at 1-800-684-3110. We are in the month of January.
So, with that, it's just a big thanks right now. Thank you so much for all your support. We really appreciate it. Here at the ACLJ, you can find all that incredible free content at aclj.org. Of course, support the work if you feel so inclined.
ACLJ.org, we'll be right back. Welcome back to Sekulow. Phone lines, as I said, are open at 1-800-684-3110. I'd love to hear from you. President Trump infers, not only in Fur, he says, hey.
We got to win in the midterms. Republicans have to win, or I'm getting impeached again. What do you think about that? Do you think that's true? Do you see that happening?
Does it end result this time in a result of him being removed from office? We can go through what that would look like and what that would actually have to happen to make that happen. But phone lines, like I said, are open for you. And I want to hear your thoughts on that at 1-800-684-3110. Actually, think because a lot of people are just joining us right now.
We should play back. This is President Trump speaking just moments ago. You know, he's been making a speech. Will you set us up? Why was he making this speech?
Because again, it was a multi-hour campaign, if you will. That's right. So, this is at the Republican conference retreat, the GOP retreat. They were meeting at the Trump Kennedy Center today, where they kind of lay out their agenda for the coming year. These retreats happen early in the year, always, where they break off from the normal duties of Congress.
And they're like, okay, what are the agenda items we want? To get done if you're in the minority, sometimes it's what agenda items do we want to block. Uh, but what the Republicans are doing here, they're meeting with the President, and then there will be kind of breakout sessions among committees and leadership to try and, yeah, it's your favorite kind of thing. I love a good breakout, you love a breakout session, you love a conference, love it, especially with talkers, just a bunch of talkers. One of those places they put you in a sitting next to someone you don't know, yeah.
Oh, I love it so much, moderator, put a Lego in front of you and go, that's going to mean something later. Yeah, oh, just wait, just wait. These Legos are great, clown nose.
So, anyhow, you get through this, but the President was there to kind of, as the leader of the party, kind of lay out the agenda, so to speak. But it was kind of a pep talk. To the members of Congress, like, look at all we've done and bashing the left. But he did get to this really key point. And I think.
Maybe for him. the most important point of the midterms. is that if the House falls to the Democrats as far as a majority in this November election, there will be, I would wager, almost no legislation moving forward for two years. And then you are going to see attempt after attempt at the Democrats, whether it be through oversight hearings, whether it be through calling people before Congress, or whether it be impeachment, which I've predicted a long time, and a lot of others have as well. That is their main agenda item for this election cycle.
I'm going to dig that audit. You put a. Yeah, I mean, you can do that now. I'm sure you can. But that he will do that.
The left will do that early in. They will try to get an impeachment for it. I mean, there's already articles of impeachment written, I'm sure, for every single offense that they can come up with, but they will get that done early. They will try to get it before the Senate soon. If they were to take the Senate, then I think it would be, you know, obviously the Senate would set the rules there.
It would move forward a lot more easily for them. You still have to get to 60 votes. To have someone removed from office.
So it's not as if there would be an overwhelming victory in the Senate that could even get to a 60-vote majority for the left. It would be waste of taxpayer dollars, waste of time, trying to tarnish the legacy, etc. Yeah, just put everyone through another torturous experience. No thanks. I would much prefer that not to happen.
And look, he is right. That if the Democrats and the Republicans played by the same rules, there were plenty of things that could have happened during the Biden presidency. In fact, it was floated out there many times, and often it was shut down. Because Republicans don't seem to play that game. The lowering the bar of, you can say whatever you want about the people in the House and the Senate, the Republicans and the Democrats, some of the ones that have been there forever, some of the ones that are new.
They do play by a bit of different set of cards. And maybe that's why you've seen some frustration out of some of the younger ones that come through because the older ones, specifically the older Republicans, kind of are maintaining. The decorum, if you will, that has been at least in their lifetime. That's right. And whether or not that will hold going.
I don't think so. Because here's the thing: impeachment was always the ultimate political threat. Obviously, Bill Clinton was impeached, but before that, it was Andrew Johnson. That was impeached.
So it was a very long list of Presidents that were not impeached. But then you had the Nixon era where impeachment was looming and he resigned. But then when old Tim Waltz, you had, yeah, what did you have? You had impeachment of Bill Clinton. Also, not a crook.
You got some zingers today. But then what happens? That becomes the ultimate threat. Bill Clinton was impeached, not removed from office. But then, how many times did the left start to chant for George W.
Bush, impeach him, impeach him? Then Obama impeach him, impeach him. But what did Congress never actually do? They never got to that. They never got the job done.
With Trump, they broke through that invisible barrier, that red line in the sand, twice. Once wasn't he not even in office anymore. He wasn't even in office anymore. They decided just for old time's sake, let's go for an encore.
Now, today, they are doing something to try and set it up as well. They are having a kind of a mock hearing about January 6th. As well as kind of a memorial, as that is their kind of agenda day. They are bringing that back up. It is the anniversary of January 6th today.
So that is where their focus is. At the same time, the President is saying they're going to try to re-impeach me. He doesn't have to be some sort of crystal ball reader. to know that this is coming. This is the apparent playbook now.
And it is going to be interesting to see if there is any sort of course correction in the Democrat Party if they do this and it fails once again. Do they finally get over this obsession with waging this political tool, this political show trial? For any reason under the sun when it's just policy differences. I think as long as you have a President Trump or someone in that ilk, someone who feels like President Trump, maybe someone who is who's willing to break some political norms. No, I think this will be the standard.
I think this is the standard going forward. And by the way, like you said, I wouldn't be surprised to see if the Republicans switch it up and start doing the same thing. I don't approve of it, I don't like it. But I wouldn't be shocked. As some of these younger ones become A more seasoned become the senior leadership.
that this starts happening more and more. I don't like it. I would love to see us return to something a little bit more civil in that, but. I just, it doesn't feel like it's on the horizon. I mean, look, if they were successful, if some bizarre reason, they were successful in removing him from office, do you think they really want a President J.D.
Vance? And the answer to that is: no, they do not want a President, J.D. Vance.
So that's how you know that this is still a bit of a show. Because they're ne look before, you would have had a President Mike Pence.
Okay, regardless, at least it would have been a calmer situation. You may not have approved of him, but it would have been a calmer situation. A President JD Vance, Way different. Way different. You know, you're talking about someone who is not afraid to speak his mind or say things that are controversial or do things that are controversial or even say things that I would say go against even the traditional conservative platform.
You would have a very, very different time.
So I don't believe that they think they can get this done, but they know that it is painful. Right. And it is a painful experience to go through, whether you are the person being impeached, the family of the person being impeached, the administration, the amount of time and effort you have to put in to this kind of thing. It's not some silly fun throw it together, put it together. It is really straining.
So like Will said, it would theoretically in many ways end any movement of President Trump's agenda through At least the House that said it. Yeah. I mean, that would be the very first and obvious thing is that even if they weren't moving forward with impeachment, I don't think that there is any desire for any sort of working together. Uh i in history, the the bipartisan uh thing started to come about during after midterm elections when it's like, okay, we lost having a majority, now we're gonna have to figure out how to work together. The world now is a place where, okay, we took back the majority of the House from the party of the President.
Now we can just stonewall for two years. That is the world we live in now. The cost to the taxpayer, whether it be through show trials, impeachments over policy, or whether it just be shutting down effectively a moratorium on government for two years. That seems to be what our country is turned into when it comes to our Congress. And I think that's what we're going to see.
I think it is. Always hard for the party that's the incumbent party to hold a midterm. We'll see. But even today, there were news unexpectedly. A congressman 65 years old out of California, Republican congressman, passed away suddenly.
So that just sets back even further the Republicans' base that they have to work with as far as their majority It gets a lot tougher going forward. All right, we'll be back. We'll be taking your phone calls at 1-800-68-430-110. Stay on hold if you're on hold. Cece Hiles gonna be joining us, senior attorney here at the ACLJ, to give you a bit of an update on some of our really important cases, some big wins, and some.
Wins that unfortunately aren't over yet and will be moving forward. Ones that you are going to be shocked, can't believe that's not over yet. But here we are, and that's why supporting the work of the ACLJ is always important. And look, we had a very, very big December, and I really appreciate that. That's why we're just thanking you.
Just go to aclj.org, spend time on it, look at all the great content, join the email list, sign a petition, get involved. There's a lot of different ways you could do it beyond even donating. You could donate, great, but that's not what I'm asking you to do right now. I'm just asking you to go, spend time on the site, look at all the great content, share it with your friends. We'll be right back with more.
Hey, some of our phone lines just opened up that got cleared. 1-800-684-3110. We'll be right back. Welcome back to Secula. We are joined now by CeCe Heil, Senior Counsel here at the ACLJ.
We do have some phone lines open at 1-800-684-30110, and I'm going to want to get to your calls in the next half hour.
So make sure you get on hold. We'll do our best to get to you. This is an update on a case. You may remember, this is a teacher who said, Hey, I want to pray. Maybe I want to get involved.
See you at the poll. I've been doing this for years. And the school district said, No, you cannot do that. You cannot pray within public. And we went.
We got a win. But of course, It doesn't end here. You'd think this would be an easy spot to go. You know what? If you're the school that really hates prayer so much, you can take the L and understand the court ruled against you.
We won here at the ACLJ.
So, congratulations to everyone who fought for that and everyone who was on the team and all of you who supported the work. That's great. But you'd hope that would be the end. But no, they decided let's maybe waste some more resources. Let's push forward because we really, really don't want prayer in this school.
We really, really don't want our teachers to be praying in public.
So let's back it up a little bit, Cece. Give us a bit of a history of this case, and then, of course. Where it happens to end up now. Right. Well, what's another shocking thing, and this is we talk about this all the time at the ACLJ and on this radio show: that it's in Katy, Texas.
So, once again, we're not talking about New York, we're not talking about California, we're not talking about places where we think, okay, well, we've got some, you know, really liberal principals and school administrators that maybe don't understand the Constitution and they're going after it.
So, in Katy, Texas, we have a teacher that has taught for 26 years at this junior high school. She's participated at CU at the Poll. For all of those years with no problems. But this past year in 2025, she gets a notice from the principal that she cannot pray, that teachers, not just her, but teachers cannot pray with or in the presence. Of students.
So, this is a blanket. She wanted to do a Bible study with teachers before they started school, so before hours on her own time. They cannot do that. If by chance any student could ever see them, they cannot pray. And what's amazing about this is if people recall, and I think our listeners will, the Coach Kennedy case where he wanted to pray on the football field.
And the Supreme Court ruled on that and said, absolutely, he has that right. In fact, Gorsuch wrote that schools cannot force employees to shed their religious identity at work. And yet, that's what this principal is doing.
So, like you said, we did have a win. He filed them, the school filed a motion to dismiss, and the district court denied that. Saying absolutely not, this case goes forward. And he is appealed from that. And so now we are in the Fifth Circuit Appellate Court, and we have oral argument on Friday.
To go further with this case and defend this teacher's right to have her religious faith and practice her religious faith as a teacher. And what's kind of crazy about this is a lot of times these are the type of cases because it's such established law. And even when you have a Supreme Court precedent that weighs in here as recent as the Kennedy case, that this is a demand letter. This is a classic demand letter case.
Sometimes we're like, oh man, wish we could have sued the school to, you know, get out there and fight for it. But no, you send a letter and they say, you're right. We looked at it. How dare the principal, whatever, slap on the wrist. Move along and here it is in writing so your teacher's not going to get in trouble.
What's so remarkable is that they wanted to litigate it. They won't take the L, as Logan said. And they're like, no, we're gonna double down. We're gonna appeal that up. We're gonna keep going.
So it also is foretelling that they're gonna try to appeal at every level of this. They are really adamant about this. And imagine that for the teacher. Been working there 26 years, having to fight this. With just a run-of-the-mill offer, just trying to say.
Hey, I'm going to hire an attorney. I'm going to go forward. The legal bills alone would be almost bankrupting because it's not just the normal course of action. It's this school saying we're going to appeal every stage of this. We are getting involved early.
Motion to dismiss denied. Fine, we're taking that up to the Fifth Circuit. You can only imagine that they're going to try to draw this out as long as possible. Many of these kids will have graduated from high school and moved on, that could have been the people that could have seen her praying by the time that this plays out, unless we put an end to it early. Yeah, absolutely.
And it is ridiculous. You're exactly right. That's why the ACLJ exists because these teachers, and when you have a situation like this, there is no way you can go to federal district court and then federal appellate court and possibly the United States Supreme Court and be able to pay the legal fees. And so that's why our supporters are so critical in our efforts. And we are so thankful for everyone.
Supporter. And I'll tell you, it is ridiculous because in the district court ruling, the judge said that the Kennedy case was on point. And what that means legally is this Kennedy case is literally specifically speaking to this case. And a lot of times you don't have on-point cases that you're arguing. But for a district court judge to say the Kennedy case is on point, and absolutely I'm not going to dismiss this case that it is going forward because I believe that the First Amendment rights of these teachers, this teacher has been violated, that is very telling.
And then for the principal to appeal that, you're exactly right. That's very telling. He's going to fight it all the way and it's ridiculous. And we will be in court on Friday. Nathan, one of our great attorneys, will be arguing the oral argument on Friday and hopefully will be very successful.
We have a good panel of judges. I think it's a Trump, Bush, and Reagan appointee.
So when we say. That it moves forward on Friday and Friday is the trial. What is the timeline then after that? And how far, when you say, well, go all the way, how far could this in theory go? Because you'd think, I mean, it's just, it feels like very much a one-off for a lot of people listening, going, okay, this is one teacher in one school district, but the ramifications can be huge if it keeps going.
Right. So, again, it is. If we win, we not only win for this teacher, we win for all the teachers in this district. And we also establish what Kennedy, the Kennedy case, has established is that teachers can practice their faith at school. And we make that very clear.
So it is, it will be a big win if the appellate court says, no, we're not going to overrule the denial of the motion to dismiss. Then it goes back to that district court and we see what happens there. And we might go to the appellate court again and it might go to the Supreme Court. Yeah, I mean, it could go as far as you can imagine.
Well, and think about this, because this is the principal tried to get in and appeal the motion to dismiss, just wanting it to be thrown out and enforce their rule. Of against prayer, that, okay, if he loses at that, then could ask for an on-bunk, meaning the entire Fifth Circuit gets involved. Loses there, tries to take it to the Supreme Court. Then, all of that, that's before ever getting to the merits of the case. And then it could start all over.
Once again, sometimes these cases in a place like Katy, Texas, you don't think, oh, because it normally should be a demand letter. Type of resolution to this. You don't think how big it actually could end up being. And that's why you have to take even the ones that seem small, that seem easy. Because you have to be prepared to fight each one of them as far as it will go, even if in your head this should just be resolved by a letter.
Yeah, and remember, this is coming up this Friday. You know, we're talking about, we're only what, 10 days after Christmas. This team has been working hard at this, knowing this was all coming and building. Again, the ACLJ team doesn't rest, doesn't stop. Credible group of attorneys, credible media team that are always ready to serve and to be there.
And again, of course, they're doing it at no cost to the client because of people like you that support the work. We only have a second half hour coming up. You may not get it on your local radio station if you're listening on terrestrial radio. You can find us broadcasting, though, each and every day online. That's at aclj.org, YouTube, Rumble.
We are available wherever you get your podcast as well. You can find it later on, archived, of course, on all those podcast platforms and on aclj.org and the ACLJ app. We get back. We're going to continue our discussion. If you have a question or comment related to what was going on either in Venezuela.
What was happening, of course, with President Trump saying they're going to impeach me again in the midterms. Or maybe we could even talk about some of the other topics. Of course, we're waiting on more from Governor Tim Walls. He's going to be speaking any minute here. Who knows what he's going to say?
What kind of revelations are going to come out next? We'll find out. The second half hour of Sekulow coming up in just a minute. Um Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever. This is Sekulow.
And now, your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome back to Sekulow. Phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-30-110. We were talking about a few different topics. The top story was, of course, President Trump saying we got to win in the midterms, or I'm going to get impeached again.
I want to quickly jump to this call. About that. Let's go to Brent, who's calling in Virginia Online 1. Brit. Go ahead.
Don't you Yeah, um, you know, with uh me and millions of uh Americans uh I I think we're all getting frustrated and kind of upset that nobody's being held accountable and You know, Bondi's been in office uh a year now. And there's nobody that's been held accountable. And I think that's where Possibly Trump's gonna lose. The midterms.
Well, Brent Brent, when you say no one's been held accountable, I assume you mean uh people, members of the deep state, things of that nature, people that have been going after the President in previous years. Yeah, like the J six uh thing. It's it's just like if unt until you somebody's held accountable, like in the House or the Senate, Like, what's this deal? I don't know if it's true or not, but what about this deal about how Team Jeffery is trying to contact Murdo, letting them know that there's gonna. Trump's coming after him or going to arrest him.
I'm not sure about that one. Yeah, you can do some diving on it. Right. Maduro. Maduro is Venezuela.
Haven't seen that one. But I think to your point, Brent, yes. I think you're kind of frustrated. A lot of people are. There's frustration.
And a lot of times the frustration, when it may be on someone like Pam Bondi, who's a part of the executive branch, Department of Justice head as the Attorney General, in the midterms, that frustration is transferred then to members of that same party. That have nothing to do with that because, at the end of the day, those are co-equal branches of government, Congress, and that. But that is where you tend to see the reprimand is in the midterms. And it almost always happens. Yeah, exactly.
And whether it be this or this or this. And so the individuals in a midterm. have to then fight for their job.
Sometimes not even on their own record, but they have to figure out what the pulse of their own community is and constituency and run in that way when we're talking about national issues, Brent. And so that, I mean, that is why traditionally, The frustration of the things that a party wanted. Don't see fruition. In quick enough time, and then the opposite side is much more motivated than those people that feel disenchanted by what didn't happen. That's how it plays out almost every time.
And Brent, that is typically and probably why the Republicans will no longer retain control of the House. Yeah, and I think that one of the concerns with having just essentially a one-term presidency, if you will, knowing that President Trump only has this term to maybe get his agenda through. Uh Is a bit frustrating because you know that a lot of this stuff takes a lot of time. You probably do have a full year to have to get everything set up and people hired. It took a long time.
Remember, Pam Boni has not been in that job for a year. There were other people in that slot, or at least beforehand. It was not all handled really quickly, really fast. We know there's been some chaos. We know that Albon Gino left.
We know all of these things have happened. Not to say that you shouldn't be frustrated. I understand it, but a lot of this takes time. And the problem is the clock is a lot shorter this time.
Well, and I want to say this to Brent and to everybody else listening. And the reason that Democrats like to go for impeachment is because it's easier and it's political. It's faster and political. They can get that big tag of impeached, even if it doesn't really mean anything in the long run. Going through the traditional way, law and order, going through the justice system, a lot harder and a lot longer.
You even see some of the complications with James Comey because of statute of limitations. These are real issues when you do things the right way and by the book. And unfortunately, that's why that is why, also, Democrats, why do you think they're playing the American people with the Epstein stuff? That Trump's not trying to shield things, not holding anyone accountable, because they know it's working on midterm voters.
So don't be played, be smart. All right, with that, we will be taking your calls coming up. We got a few lines open: 1-800-684-31-10. I see a lot of good comments coming in. Switch on over, give us a call.
I want to hear from you at 1-800-684-0110. We'll be right back. Welcome back to Sekulow. We're going to take some more calls today. 1-800-684-3110.
Should like a lot of the calls that are coming in right now, but there's still three lines open. We're going to keep discussing this. One of the things President Trump also said was about Venezuela, and of course, talking about the maybe somewhat controversial play where we captured their leader. You know, I think that it's going to be overall a good thing, but of course, then it was the who's going to run it. He said, hey, we're going to run it.
Now, what does that look like?
Well, according to President Trump, it looks like about 18 months or so of just getting Venezuela on its feet before deciding how things are going to be moving forward. What do you think about that? I'd love to hear from you at 1-800-684-3110. That's right. Let's go ahead and get to a phone call.
Fine. Let's go.
Okay. Jeff. North Carolina, he's calling in. Jeff, go ahead. Hey, I'll just call in.
I wanted to disagree with the last caller about the length of time that Pan Bondi's had. Yeah. One year. Uh it it's not a lot of time in Washington DC. It doesn't move that fast.
I think that's why it's so important that we get out and vote And the midterms to get the extra four years that's needed. Look, Jeff, I uh go ahead. Go ahead. Yeah. Yeah, I think for a lot of people, maybe they're new.
I mean, I mean, we were talking about this during the break. I don't think that last call was ill-meaning or had any sort of ill intent. But maybe they are just not as informed as how Washington works. And look, I'm not saying it's a good thing that it works this slow. I hate sometimes how slow all of this does.
We talk about ACLJ cases that last years and years and years before a decision is made. Look, Maduro doesn't go back into court until mid-March.
Well, he waved his right to the left. He waved it. Yeah, he did waive his right. I'm not even saying. But the fact that that's the standard.
The standard is we're going to hold this guy in jail for three months while we figure it out. I don't know if that's the best, but you know what? That's the system we're working with here. I don't see any changes to that. But I will agree with you, Jeff, that we actually think quite a bit has gotten done under Pamboni.
Right. And I think, I mean, one, the Maduro was captured. That's a part of the Department of Justice action because he was indicted actually by the first Trump administration. They'd had a superseding indictment that updated it. But I mean, all this to say, and to your point, Jeff.
The fact the way that Washington works slowly, especially with legislation, is actually by design. The the founders didn't want things to be knee-jerk. They didn't want it to be This happened, then this happened, this and this happened. They wanted stability to be created through compromise and through building towards something as opposed to just fighting your enemy nonstop and then swinging back and forth on the pendulum.
So, that was the design of the founders and part of the genius of it. We are just in a period of time where it is so partisan and so devoid of being able to find common ground, it seems, on things that could make the country better because the ideologies that the base principles are so far apart. That, yeah, we are in a point where it seems like nothing can get done and it's completely broken. But also, to that point, about cases take a long time. You know what was fascinating to me reading some of the reporting out of that courtroom with Maduro yesterday?
Is Hearing that when he got in there, he immediately started just like ranting. feeling that that was almost his only chance to mount a defense. He's the dictator of a country and is in a courtroom for the first time in America. And he thinks basically, this is my one shot. And so the judge had to remind him, you don't even have to speak.
and gave him a, through a translator, a version of the Miranda rights. And he said, did you know you have these rights? And he said, no idea. Had no concept of the constitutional protections that the United States gives.
So, once again, like while all this crazy and you think things don't work fast enough, it's like there is a reason why our system is there to protect the innocent. Even though Maduro may not be innocent, may not be a good guy, he didn't even realize he could have an attorney. Yeah, or be attorney. They said he was shocked he was going to have counsel. or that he wasn't forced to talk.
That's a testament to how great of a thing this country has built. When a third world dictator gets here and has like no clue about constitutional protection, he could become our best friend very soon because he's like, you don't immediately straight to jail? Like all the jokes that come out of that, but it's real. Yeah, absolutely. I want to take one more call, at least for this segment.
We're going to continue to take a lot of calls.
So stay on hold. I didn't mean that one more call. I just meant one more call for this segment. Let's go to Florence, who's calling in New York. Hear your thoughts, Florence.
Go ahead. Oh, hi. Thanks for taking my call. I got a lot going on in my brain right now listening to everything that is said. I'm going to disagree with the first call of that call about us not being able to take back the house.
I believe the Republican Party is going to take back the House. I think we have a short tension span on remembering, actually forgetting where we just came out of under four years under Biden, the worst economy, the worst border. And people have to remember with Pam Bondi, she's bringing her cases basically to the courts. But again, people seem to forget that these are Biden-appointed, Obama-appointed judges, and they are not going to start on the air of anything that is right, anything that is good, anything that is moral. They're not going to stand on that.
And one other thing I want to say. Is that you look at President Donald Trump and what he just did with Maduro, standing up to him when every Democrat, probably back in 2020, wanted Maduro a $25 million bounty on his head? Donald Trump, President, President Donald Trump, give him the dignity. It's President Donald Trump. He is tearing down and ending communism for these people in Venezuela, in every communist country.
And when you look at New York City and Schumer and Sanders and AOC, they are now embracing what Donald Trump, President Donald Trump, is now ending over in Venezuela for these people to finally be liberated and know what it is to live free under a regime where New York City has just embraced communism, collectivism, and socialism, and it's not going to work. Florence, I think you like rugged individualism, if I were to guess. Favorite caller is Florence from New York. Florence, you are welcome to call back anytime because we can just let you go and you can monologue for us because it's fantastic. And honestly, you know what?
What I like is you call in, you're from New York. We have a couple calls from New York. New York is one of our biggest spots of our listenership and our viewership is coming from New York because people like you are there and you are representing your people very strongly. I think we always tend to forget, as you even said, short attention spans, we also compartmentalize real quick. Look how many people did not vote for Mondami.
Look how many people are in New York that do vote conservative. Look how many people, honestly, in states like we're in, in Tennessee, vote for the Democrat. You know, we live in areas that are still pretty split up, but Florence is a great representative. I want to point out one thing that Florence said, and this is not really parsed out well as something that this administration is doing. But she brought up What about when the Biden administration actually raised the bounty on Maduro from $15 million to $25 million?
So. That for information leading to the capture of Maduro, we were offering $25 million under Biden. Trump raised it to $50. And, you know, with millennial math, they said he just saved $50 million because we didn't have to pay that out. But the fact that.
The previous administration had that bounty either It didn't mean anything. They weren't serious about it. Or now the left is just lying because they were incapable of actually coming up with a plan to getting it. And now they're like, oh, we actually didn't mean that.
So here's the problem. Previously, those bounties were they just meaningless? Did it literally mean nothing? Like, we don't actually want him. But we have a bounty out there to posture, to make a statement.
The President in this administration is making America's word mean something again. And if they're saying there's a bounty on this person for the capture, we're going to capture them. Yeah. And that's what they did.
So maybe don't start putting bounties on people's head like it's the Wild West if you're not going to follow through. You know, it didn't happen. It wasn't real because your dog didn't go out there and get Moduro. I mean, it's a great bounty. 25.
That's a lot. That's 50. Yeah. Right. And uh why is Doug not involved in the administration?
I don't know. Do they need a cheaper bounty hunter? Yes. I think the answer to that is a lot of money.
Well, you know what? If he gets the job done. He's a big bad dog. Phone lines are open for you, 1-800-684-3110. I mean, honestly, I'm serious.
Can you think about all the characters you've seen in the Oval Office? I don't know if I've seen Dog the Bounty Hunter in the Oval Office. Probably too lucrative. To be outside the government, yeah. He's like, you know what?
It's just, I like to keep things separate here. Yeah, uh, let's go. We've only got a minute here. We'll take a call as we get back from break. I do want you to spend a little time.
Go to aclj.org. Look what we're doing there. We got a lot of great work going on. Of course, we do this show each and every day. If you're brand new to the broadcast, if you've been watching on YouTube or you just saw our faces, you've never seen us before, hit that subscribe button or you haven't done it before.
Over 551,000 on YouTube alone, hundreds of thousands other places, and collectively, millions of people watch our broadcast each and every day. We know that that's uh It's incredible. And it's not lost on us. How many people support the work of the ACLJ? Support this broadcast.
It means a lot. We get back. I want to hear from you. We just cleared through some open lines.
So we have four lines open right now: 1-800-684-31-10. Bobby and Ruth stay on hold, and we'll get to some more calls as well.
So, if you want to be on the air, this is a great time to do it. Again, that's at 1-800-600-100. 684-54. 3-1. One Zero.
Maybe you agree or disagree with some of the callers. Maybe you got some other thoughts. Maybe we'll talk about Venezuela. Maybe we'll talk about impeachment. Whatever you want to do, we'll do our best to get to you today.
Again, that is 1-800-684-3110. We'll be right back on Sekulow. Welcome back to Sekulow. We do have one line still open at 1-800-68-430-110. You get a couple ACLJ champions on hold, too.
And if you're an ACLJ champion, you get bumped to the front of the line, which, again, just a little perk we offer here. And a champion, by the way, is someone that gives like a membership, like a monthly recurring basis where they just automatically set to have a donation made each and every month to the organization. Helps us have a great baseline to know where we're headed. And there's about 20,000 of you that do that, which is awesome.
So many more of you give individually, and that's great too. Of course, there's no difference there. But those who give the champion level, and again, that could be $5. That could be $5,000 a month. It could be whatever you want.
We don't change what a champion means. We're just happy if you say, hey, I'm committed to giving. We really appreciate that. We have two champions. One's about to hold longer, so I'm going to put that one person up first.
That's Ruth in Texas. Ruth, you're on the air. Thank you. Two points. One is the Supreme Court is not Donald Trump's boss, and there's a limit to what they can even do to him.
He's supposed to do his job, and they're not supposed to criticize everything he does. The second point is the woman that is having to go to court about being able to pray at school, that has been established. That is done. Just have the judges throw it out of court or throw the judges out of court if they can't throw things like that out of court. Ruth, you would think so.
So many of these things have been, we call them the ACLJ classics, ones that we have had really set rulings on for 30 plus years that the ACLJ got involved.
So these are free speech cases early on.
However, Those can be challenged. Things can be overturned. Just because it's set law doesn't mean there can't be 30 years later another attempt to change that. Look, in the positive ways, we saw that with the overturning of Roe. Stuff like that that you don't think could happen does happen.
So, even though there are established laws, there are things that feel like when you've heard this, Ruth, and when you hear about these cases, specifically ones like this, this teacher who wants to pray at her school or wants to go to see you at the poll or have a Bible study in off hours. You go, you guys have been talking about this stuff for 35 years. Why doesn't the court just throw it out?
Well, that can happen. We can get to that point. It doesn't mean it always does.
Well, and many times there are different options that you can take. And, like we said, why? Most of the time, it's just a letter because they're like, oh, It is settled law. We don't want to have to spend money on our defense because they're going to sue us. But then there's other avenues.
There's motion for summary judgment when you ask the judge to just look. I this is the law. This fits within the law. Just throw it out.
Now, remember, these the principal here at the school. tried to have our lawsuit thrown out. And filed a motion to dismiss saying, basically, this is a frivolous lawsuit. This doesn't apply. We want it dismissed.
The judge at the district court level. Denied that, said no, this actually fits specifically within Kennedy. And what we were going forward with was to get to the trial stage, really file a motion for summary judgment to get to that point. But They short-circuited that by appealing. The motion to dismiss.
So the principal is still gaming the system to some degree by taking it to the appeals court. Yeah, thanks, Ruth, for calling. Hopefully, that gives you a bit more information. We don't necessarily disagree, and thanks for the support. Let's go to Muriel, who's calling in Maryland.
Muriel in Maryland, who's an ACLJ champion. That was fun. I know. I like the way you said that. Very sing-song-y.
Go ahead, Mariel. Hi. Hi, how are you? Thank you for taking my call. I just want to say that, you know, I get so frustrated because the Democrats, we know they have no rules, no principles.
They just do whatever, you know. And the Republicans, I am a Republican, and they just don't seem to fight hard enough. I mean, you know, I know times have changed and they want to do things according to the Constitution. But sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. Like the Democrats, they're always hollering about affordability, and they're the ones that cause the problem, but yet they want to bring it on, blame it on Trump.
And it's like the Republicans, they don't stand up and refute that enough. I totally get it. I don't mean to cut you off. We're running a little low on time, but I. I think that that is a big discussion point we all have to have.
As conservatives, as Christians, as anything that involves politics, is where it gets a little bit more, you know, rough, if you will. Where do you start responding like the way they did? I think that it's a slippery slope. I think we have to be careful, but I understand. Look, some of it's also a social media.
How do you get involved in social media? Look at the success of Mom Dami. Look how good he did at rallying a base of people that's not watching traditional news. You have to kind of play by somewhat whatever the modern playbook is. or else you get left in the dust some ways.
Now, I would hope that doesn't have to mean you have to be name-calling. I hope that doesn't mean you have to be insulting, that you have to really go lower and lower and lower, because I don't like that. I don't like that when President Trump does it either. I think it's not necessarily beneath the office. I just don't really like it as a human being.
I think that some of that gets too far. But I understand your concern that we don't necessarily respond in the same ways.
Some of that is the tradition, some of that is trying to be better. But There are times when things get kind of in the dirt, and you feel like maybe the Republicans decide to not get themselves dirty as well. And here's where we end up. Thank you for calling so much. Willie, got something real quick?
Yeah, real quick. I mean, that's why it's so hard what we do here at the ACLJ. There's that old saying, it's attributed to many people, but something to the effect of: you know, a lie gets halfway around the world before the truth gets its shoes on. That just means the work of telling the truth. Is so much more difficult and the burden because it's much easier for the damage of a lie to get out there.
But standing for the truth and fighting for the truth, it's difficult. We have to do it every day, and it takes real work. That's why I wear crux. Easy to put them on. Quick.
I think they're lies. I think that's the point of that story. Let's go to Bobby in New York. Bobby, you're on the air. Hi, guys.
I think that Florence from New York City is so cool. She should run for office. But what I want to say is I wish the Democrats would go back to the days of Tip O'Neill and JFK. I mean, the way that I think it all started with Judge Robert Bork, I think that's when it started turning for the worst. And I'd like to see them, because Bork was such a good man, I'd like to see them go back to the way they were.
Thanks very much. Yeah, Bobby, I think there are a lot of thoughts. I think you have a lot of classic Democrats who now vote more conservative. They may not vote Republican all the time, but of course we saw a big changeover. We saw a more embracing of the unions under President Trump.
We saw more embracing of a lot of the traditional And I say traditional Democrats, we're talking about now 30-plus years ago, 40 years, 50 years ago, Democrats who would have voted, like you said, more of the Kennedy era, now voting more Republican. I think some of that is. Is really you could celebrate and say, okay, where did that come from? A lot of it came from what ended up being the MAGA movement.
Well, and to Bobby's point as well, though, who was the father of the going after Bork and kind of changing that tone in politics. Joe Biden. Yep, working.
So he ushered it in and led it all the way to the end. Yep, exactly. Swedish chef, Bill, in New York. Line three, last call of the day. Hey, ignorance is it's not bliss, it's dangerous.
My grandmother taught us that for forty five years, a teacher. In the New York system of schools, which is a disgrace for an education system. I went to school with the governor, and the governor, like Mandami and like the Democrats, they are geniuses when it comes to base, you know, rallying their base, getting the information out, using the misinformation, I should say, the ignorance, because a lot of people over many, many years, that's what they've used. The thing I don't get here is that I love Israel, I love the Jewish people, I'm a Christian, I believe in everything that the Bible stands for, the Old, the New Testament, everything. And I don't, I couldn't understand it when I was in Florida at businesses that the Jewish population down there, which had to be misled, ignorant, it's not a bad word.
Voted. Voted for a while. Look, Bill, I'm only cutting you off because we only have 20 seconds. Look, that is a whole nother discussion of why the Jewish vote has often gone Democrat. It is of history and tradition.
We are hoping to open some more eyes on that as well. But look, look what happened in New York with Madame. I mean, I think that that's not uncommon. It is a big, big discussion point in the Jewish community. With that, it's going to wrap up the show for today.
I'd love to address that more later. With that, thank you so much. Go to aclj.org for more information.
