Today on Sekulow, we have breaking news as reports say the US and Iran have reached a deal. It's up to the President. to approve it. 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. Welcome to Sekulow Will Haynes here today, and we've got a pack show for you today. But we are talking about this report that comes out of Axios.
They got the scoop on this, that the US and Iranian negotiators have reached an agreement. That's right, they've reached an agreement, and now it is up to President Trump to give the final approval on this agreement. What it would look like is a 60-day memorandum of understanding that extends a ceasefire and sets the framework for negotiations to go forward. on Iran's nuclear program.
So, this agreement, while it would not be a final deal, a final agreement, would be that very critical first step. To getting to a final deal and to ending the conflict there in Iran, opening the Strait of Hormuz and all of the things that go with that. But most importantly, it gives that initial step of what a negotiation around Iran's nuclear program and ambitions would look like. We want to hear from you today. What do you think?
Do you think they will get to a final deal? Do you think they will get even to this memorandum of understanding? That critical first step to be able to continue negotiations. Call me 1-800-684-3110 as we break all of this down, including the new skirmishes that started overnight where Iran was sending one-way drones. Across out of their territory in the direction of United States assets, a ballistic missile towards a U.S.
base in Kuwait. They were all intercepted and taken out before they reached their intended targets.
However, That is not very much in the spirit of a ceasefire.
Now, is it, Iran? Give me a call, 1-800-684-3110. Do you think they can get to a deal? Do you think they can even get to a memorandum of understanding? An extended ceasefire, an extended period of calm, so to speak.
To be able to negotiate on the things that really matter to the President, to the United States. And to the American people, I want to know what you have to think about that. We also have. One of our great attorneys here, Nathan Molker, who will be joining me a little bit later to talk about a critical court filing the ACLJ just submitted. And what it means as a federal judge, surprise, surprise, tried to strip the President.
of his authority. When it comes to Sanctions. I want to hear what you think about that after that segment as well.
So stick around. It's a very important topic as we here at the ACLJ continue to defend the Constitution. and the rule of law in America. But this is fascinating that this memorandum of understanding. Would, according to the reports.
be a sixty day memorandum. It extends the ceasefire and launches negotiations on Iran's nuclear program, moving the timeline of the ceasefire further down the road as the negotiations continue. It would be a very much a first step, but it also. Would be kind of that good faith situation where they're saying, look, we are. Uh we understand this is the framework that we're going to be talking about.
It gets you over that first hurdle of can we even deal with these certain issues and gets you to what you need to be talking about. It's as one U.S. official told Axios, this is an agreement to get everyone to the table. We will work out the details in the negotiations. We have some sound from the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, we will be playing as well.
But this is in line with what he had been saying all week. Uh when you get Past that first hurdle when you say, hey, here are the things we agree will be in our deal.
Now we have to negotiate the language. We have to negotiate how it looks on paper, how we enforce this, what those mechanisms are. I see once again a lot of people saying, I don't trust Iran to make a deal. But do you trust the President and his administration to make one for you. The American people.
Give me a call, 1-800-684-3110. We will be right back with more on Sekulow after this quick break. Welcome back to Sekulow. Will Haynes here. Go ahead and give me a call.
Do you think the U.S. can make a deal with the Iranians? I know we don't trust the IRGC. We don't trust the Iranian leadership there. But do you trust the President and his team?
That they are going into this knowing you can't trust the Iranians, that they are going into this clear-headed and knowing that whatever deal they would make. would have to have the right mechanisms to enforce it. Do you trust the President and his negotiating team and his cabinet? To make a deal like that with the Iranians, give me a call, 1-800-684-3110. I am seeing comments come in on YouTube.
One says, I don't want a deal with them at all. I want freedom for the Iranians who don't want an Islamic regime. They want the Shah for the most part. I don't know all of his views, but probably preferable. We have another comment that says the IRGC is not a rationally thinking group.
So, when you start to look at what we're dealing with here, what does this mean? What would a memorandum of understanding even mean? Which is what is being reported is on the table at this point. I think we should go ahead and play. This is from CNN, everyone's favorite here.
This is bite three, where it talks about how this could play out. Axios got the scoop on this this morning. Other outlets are starting to report it as well. But let's go ahead and play bite four from Barack Ravid on CNN about what is potentially coming our way. US and Iranian negotiators have reached a deal.
on a memorandum of understanding that will extend the ceasefire by sixty days and launch negotiations, direct negotiations, on Iran's nuclear program. This I hear from two U. S. officials and another regional diplomat involved in the mediation efforts. The U.S.
officials told me that President Trump still hasn't si gave the final sign-off on this deal. The US officials told me Trump has relayed to the mediators, and through the mediators to the Iranians, that he wants, quote, a few days to think about it. But US officials are optimistic That this deal is likely to go through unless some surprising thing. happens over the next 24 to 48 hours. And remember where we were over the weekend, over a holiday weekend, where many of the cabinet officials, as well as the vice President, they were told, cancel your plans.
come back to Washington. We also saw that there was supposed to be that cabinet meeting at Camp David, but then they moved it to the White House. The President, according to all reports and he himself, was ready to renew strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Over the weekend, over the holiday. What happened?
They push those back because, as he said, they are making good progress. He's a negotiator.
So when we hear. That the deal is before the President. He has not given the final sign off. He wants to think it over. I think that he is giving it serious thought, but also we wouldn't be at this place if he didn't have trust that what his negotiators were at least getting the United States towards was something that he was already leaning towards accepting.
Now, Once you get something that both sides have agreed upon and he has to sign off on it, we will see if all of the language is acceptable to the President on his terms. But When we're looking at all this, we also. Look at what the Secretary of State Marco Rubio said just yesterday during that cabinet meeting. Which, once again, the fact that these cabinet meetings are now. Live and they have cameras in there is such a contrast.
And even one of our producers Will pointed this out yesterday: of back in 2016, and you get the leaks out of the cabinet meetings: like, oh, this cabinet member was saying this and was going against the President, pushing back.
Now it's out there for everyone to see. There's no opportunity to leak what's in the cabinet meetings because they are live streamed. But let's go ahead and play bite nine from Secretary Rubio about these negotiations yesterday before this news that a deal could be imminent and that a memorandum of understanding could be signed soon within the coming days if the President signs off on it. This is bite nine. There's an agreement to be made.
We want that to be made. I think there's been some progress and some interest. And we'll see over the next few hours and days whether progress could be made. I just want to remind everybody, Mr. President, you know this well.
You have other options available to you if that doesn't work. But the bottom line is that we prefer the negotiated diplomatic route and we're going to give it every chance to succeed. I know you're giving it every chance to succeed, Mr. President. But here's the bottom line.
Because I keep getting asked, what is this all about? It's very simple. Iran and these people in charge of Iran can never have a nuclear weapon. And they will never have a nuclear weapon. And they most certainly will not have one as long as you're President of the United States.
Once again, that being the reiterating at the end of that bite what the goal of this incursion, this skirmish, this war, whatever you want to call it, this operation against Iran for the administration and for the President. What was that goal? What would success look like? Iran not having a nuclear weapon. And Secretary Rubio reiterated that at the end of that bite that we just played, as well as saying, and they will not have that as long as you are President.
Obviously, in the United States, Presidents come and go, and parties change who has the administration.
So they can't Say that a future President would go ahead and just rip up this deal, much like. President Trump did with the terrible IRGC. But what their goal is to make this so lock and secure and solid. That no matter what a future President does, if they want to change terms with Iran. That it protects the United States going forward from having a nuclear weapon.
That was the stated goal. That is what their goal remains through all of this.
So I go back to even the comments that. That we saw on our channel, and that we sympathize with. The Free Iran the people of Iran taking back their country and their great history. That isn't the goal and wasn't the goal of Operation Epic Fury. The stated goal was to make sure they never have a nuclear weapon, which also gives the people of Iran more power.
If the weakened regime, one, you've seen layers and layers of their own leadership be wiped out. You then have new leadership that sees how quickly they can be taken out. as well as the regional strength of the threat of a nuclear Iran goes away. A lot of their internal power diminishes also. We're seeing reports that Iran is taking steps to turn the internet back on to their people.
We know that it is a controlled internet as it is, but that the people of Iran since the end of February, since the operation began, have not had that outside contact with the outside world. They have not been able to, except for those few that were able to smuggle in or get a Starlink. They were not able to see what the world was saying about this operation, only what state media was saying. And we even saw early days the propaganda from their state media saying the Ayatollah was not harmed in the airstrikes, but we know he was killed as one of the first targets of Operation Epic Fury.
So, what will happen internally when the people of Iran start to understand what's going on, what the situation is, how little their regime was able to stand up to the United States and Israel during this operation? When they see things like the way Iran attacked the UAE, Kuwait. Bahrain Cutter. Other regional Gulf member states that uh that you wouldn't have expected before this. When the people start to see that, oh, you're you're attacking our neighbors.
For no reason. You have made. What was a relative secure region, a little bit less secure? government. Will they then decide now is the time with this weakened regime to overthrow the government.
That's an unknown. But that's not what this stated goal is, and that's not what the details of this memorandum of understanding are. Does the time period also weaken the regime more? That as they are negotiating. Focused on that, do people within their own country rise up?
I'd love to see it. But I don't think that, that is what the goals are here. I want to hear from you. Do you think that this administration can get to a good deal for the American people? Simple question.
Can President Trump And Marco Rubio, And Pete Hagseth. and all of the cabinet members of that make up this administration, can they get to a good deal? Can the negotiators deliver for the President on something that is good not just for the administration, but for the American people? I want to hear from you. Call me at 1-800-684-3110.
In the next segment, ACLJ attorney Nathan Molker will be joining me. We're going to be talking about a federal judge, surprise, surprise, trying to strip the President. of a very important power. And the way that it was done will surprise you. Stick around because we filed a critical brief in this, we are fighting back.
As the appeal process through this goes forward. But once again, I want to hear from you 1-800-684-3110 on this Iran topic. We've got a lot more to get to ahead, a lot more sound to play from the administration. But once again, support the work of the ACLJ. Go to aclj.org today and support.
Our work, it's critical, and you're about to hear something next. Welcome back to Sekulow. Will Haynes here, and I'm joined in this segment by Nathan Mulker, one of our great attorneys in our DC office, to talk about this really critical issue. This is a fascinating one because it's not one you're going to hear on even the conservative news channels because it isn't one that you would hear normally a lot about prosecutors at the ICC. It's just not the headlines that people are going for at CNN, at Fox, at MS Now.
But that's why you watch Sekulow. That's why you pay attention to the work of the ACLJ, because this is a very critical issue. For protecting the constitutional order of our separation of powers. When you look at what the President did here. Within his authority, and what a federal judge.
Tried to take away from the President. Nathan, could you give us a little bit of a background of what this case is even about? And there's a blog everyone can go read after the show that has a lot more information. It's written by Nathan. It says, federal judge tried to strip the President's power to defend Israel.
ACLJ is fighting back. But give us a little bit of background on this case and how we got to where we are today. Thank you.
So this case is really important because as you say, this gets to the fundamentals of executive power. President Trump issued a number of sanctions designed to recognize the fact that the ICC is going after an ally of the United States, going after Israel for illegitimate reasons. And so the President issued sanctions pursuant to his responsibility over foreign affairs. And so he issued those sanctions, and of course, as always happens, people brought lawsuits. This particular lawsuit.
Was actually brought by the family members of Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur.
So they brought this lawsuit and they claim, as her family members, that they're no worried about whether they can give her gifts for Christmas or whether they can live with her as a family because of these sanctions. Which, sympathetic or not, what this federal judge then did is the real problem. Because rather than saying, you know what? You're right to be worried, let's make sure that you as a family are protected. He invalidated the sanctions across the board.
So he completely struck down all sanctions against the UN Special Rapporteur just because of a single alleged harm to a family member. And so that kind of judicial overreach is a pattern we're seeing over and over again right now. ICC. This is something that if you watch the Sekulow broadcast, if you follow the ACLJ, you're more familiar with probably than the average American. The United States is not a party to the International Criminal Court.
Therefore, they don't have jurisdiction over the United States. That doesn't mean that they haven't tried. They have tried throughout their history to go after U.S.
soldiers. Because Uh what they see as war crimes, what they view in their, you know, uh uh their omniscience at the International Criminal Court, uh they can pick and choose what me what a war crime means. Uh they we know are going after Israel, trying to arrest Bibi Netanyahu. Who is also not a party to the ICC? They are trying to exert this global power, this global law enforcement authority, over countries that have not even signed on to the Rome Statute, that have not been a party to their court.
So Of course, the President, you would think, if they are trying to exert authority where they do not have it, has those powers to issue sanctions. That's broad foreign policy powers of the United States and the Treasury, which is under the executive branch. And you have this judge that takes a case, which just, once again, Nathan, you said the absurdity of like a family member saying, we're afraid we can't give mom a Christmas present. Because of sanctions.
Well, one, The The law does not Take into account feelings. The law takes into account facts and the way this plays out. But, Nathan, this judge did this. What is the ACLJ doing now? Yeah, so this case has been moving very, very quickly, as it should, because this concerns matters of national security.
So the judge issued his order just a couple of weeks ago on the 13th. Last week, the Trump administration appealed to the DC Court of Appeals. And what they did is they asked the DC, excuse me, the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. What they did is, and they asked that court, please stay this order. Let us put these sanctions back in place, because this is a matter of national security.
So what the ACLJ did is, over the long weekend, we prepared our brief. that we filed this past Tuesday supporting that motion for a stay. What we're urging the court to do is, no, the President, not a federal judge, is the one who should be deciding international sanctions. It's not up to a judge in DC to decide what international sanctions should look like when these kinds of problems happen for our national security. It's a matter for the President, not a single unelected judge.
Eve the point if you take this example to the extreme. I feel like most people would say sanctions against Vladimir Putin are appropriate at this point. or sanctions on Russian oligarchs. If all of a sudden a family member were to file in U.S. court.
Saying you can't do this because we're afraid we may get caught up in it because. Yeah, I mean, yeah, dad's Vladimir Putin, but I want to give him a Christmas present. Like, just the absurdity of the argument. And then the federal judge saying, you know what? You're right.
And who knows who else could get caught up in this? We're just going to get rid of the entire sanctions scheme. The entire thing. That is what we're talking about here. It's up to the discretion of the executive branch, the sanctioning of individuals and the treasury and the President ultimately.
The President is the executive branch under the Constitution. And so, Nathan, that's exactly what we look at here. If you were to take the hypothetical that they made real here. and apply it to any other person on the sanctions list. You start to quickly see how absurd, on the face of it, this ruling is.
Exactly right. And I think, too, I think it's important for everyone to emphasize. As important as the ICC is, I know not all of us are necessarily dealing with the ICC on a daily basis, but what we are seeing every single day are these attempts. To put obstacles in the way of letting Congress and the President do their jobs, right? People trying to run to the courts as an end run around the systems that are supposed to be in place.
Right, and so I think that's what this case is very fundamentally about. Should a judge be the one deciding policy for the entire country, or should the people we've elected? And so that's really what our brief is getting at at a really fundamental level is no, it's not a judge who should be deciding what country should be sanctioned. Congress has set up a system and under that system it's the President who has the authority to make the sanctions. And that's the thing we're urging the Court of Appeals.
And of course, if necessary, this could even go to the Supreme Court. And we're urging those appellate courts to hold this district judge accountable. Nathan, thank you so much for that update. We'll have you back on as this proceeds through the court system. Folks, once again, this is one of the reasons why you watch this broadcast.
I know it. Because you hear things like this. That that isn't making headlines in the mainstream media. It may not have the most clickable headline when it's put on a YouTube video or a Rumble video or a segment on Fox News. but it is critically important work.
Sometimes the most important work doesn't make a great headline. It doesn't seem urgent. Or breaking as news needs to be to get attention in the day of algorithms. But that's why you watch this broadcast because we are going to tell you about this work, this critical work. And that is why you support the ACLJ.
It's issues like this. that many people may ignore. But they are fundamental to protecting our Constitution and rule of law. Support the ACLJ at aclj.org today. Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever.
This is Sekulow. Welcome to Sekulow second half hour of the broadcast, and I want you to give me a call. We've been talking about all of these issues. We've been talking about the skirmishes that happened overnight with one-way attack drones coming from Iran, as well as a ballistic missile fired towards Kuwait. And then the U.S.
responding to those, as well as this news, that a. deal, a memorandum of understanding could be imminent as it appears both sides have agreed to the language in it.
Now it would be up to President Trump to sign off on that to move forward. But I want to hear from you, one eight hundred six eight four three one one zero. Do you believe President Trump could get a deal done? Do you think the mediators that he has there negotiating with the Iranians? Could get a deal.
That is.
Okay with the United States, okay with the President, but good for the United States. I want to go ahead and take some phone calls. Hopefully, it will prompt you to call in. Flying solo here today, folks.
So give me a call, 1-800-684-3110. But let's go to Dakota, calling from Oregon online three. Dakota, you're on Sekulow. Uh Yeah, regarding Iran. We can't trust them.
We need to snap them ears back to the Stone Age. And do it toot sweet. Enough molasses already, as it were. I hear you. I understand.
And I think that is the way many people are looking at this, right? Many people think: hey, we've been down this road before. If the Obama deal was a bad deal, does that mean all deals with Iran are a bad deal? You've seen the left already start to try and pick up that mantle. There were early reports that any deal with Iran would have nothing to do with the nuclear program.
And immediately the media loved it. They jumped on that and they said, ha. Look We went to war for nothing. He's getting a worse deal than the JCPOA, which they are inferring wasn't great. Right?
Like the inference that they put out was saying, look, He's getting a worse deal than JCPOA and he had to go to war to do it. One, the JCPOA would be over by now.
So something would have to be happening, anyways. There was a 10-year sunset clause in that.
So, regardless, there would have to be some sort of negotiations to keep Iran in place. at this point in time. But the media, they're playing tricks with you. They're trying to spin it. They're trying to say: look, this is going to be worse than even what Obama did.
That they're admitting, they're saying the quiet part out loud that the Obama deal was bad. It was pointless, it was rubbish. It opened up flows of cash to the Iranian mullahs to be able to do things like October 7th, to perpetrate terror around the world, to try and assassinate President Trump. All of these things were happening because they were flush with cash again. It wasn't going to their people.
Their economy was in shambles. It was going only to push terror around the world because they are, and I'll say it again: a theocratic, apocalyptic, genocidal death cult. That is what their theology is.
Now, does that mean? that you can deal with. You can make a deal. with an apocalyptic Theocratic genocidal death cult. That's the question I have for you.
Do you think you can? Call me 1-800-684-3110. I happen to think there is a path towards that. Because not every deal is a JCPOA where you get a bunch of cash. No restrictions on your ballistic missile program.
Light inspections using the IAEA. To go in and give you a month's notice and say, I want to come inspect the centrifuges that you tell us about. No, it'd have to be real. Real inspections. Real limits on what they can do.
Real. Uh Stoppage of their ballistic missile program. Those things would have to be real, it'd have to have teeth. You didn't see President Obama or even the Biden administration. Try and enforce things.
They took the victory lap. They said, look, we dealt with Iran. Are things different in these negotiations? We'll see. Give me a call, 1-800-684-3110.
And once again, if you enjoy this broadcast, if you enjoy hearing things like what Nathan joined me on, that you're not going to hear anywhere else, support the work of the ACLJ today. Welcome back to Sekulow, and the phone lines have lit up. Thank you everyone for calling in. I'm gonna start taking calls now.
so that I can free up more phone lines for you to call in. Because I want to hear from you. I want to hear what your thoughts are on this. And I'll give you a little bit of my opinion here before I get to yours, so that even if you want to respond to that. I'm open to it.
Uh I think I think that we should not prejudge what could come out of this because we don't know all the details. And if we are trusting in the administration and the President and what their philosophy towards Iran is and what their stated goals towards Iran are, And we do trust that Marco Rubio and President Trump and Pete Hegseth and those that are doing the negotiations are going to come to an agreement if they get to that level. that they know what they're talking about. If we have that trust in the administration. Then we should see what the deal is before we prejudge it.
That's where I land. I also think. If it does turn out that Does nothing at all, doesn't even get to a negotiation on the nuclear issue. If this memorandum of understanding looks more like a final deal and less like a starting point, Then I think we should call it out and we should say, yeah, that's not what we thought it was going to be. But I think we should see what it is before we prejudge that.
And I've been seeing a lot of prejudging. Of what a deal is without knowing what the deal is. And that's kind of where I sit on it.
Now, There are people that disagree with me. It may be you. Give me a call, 1-800-684-3110. But I am cautiously optimistic with when you hear the words of Secretary of State Rubio, when you hear the President saying, They will never have a nuclear weapon. and yet they are continuing down the path of diplomacy, That they they know more than me at this point.
They have the entire intelligence apparatus. that is, advising them on this? They have Uh the power of the US government. The military? They have all of the factors and all of the data points that I do not.
Therefore, I will give that benefit of the doubt. In a perfect world, do I want a complete regime change and a free Iranian people and not a genocidal? theocratic apocalyptic death cult running a country. Shooting missiles at the neighbors, funding terror groups throughout the world. We saw last week That someone was arrested.
That was an Iranian agent. Targeting the President's daughter for assassination? Ivanka Trump? That is what the Iranian regime is, even to this day.
So That's where I sit on it. I want to know what the deal is before I prejudge it. But let's go to some phone calls and hear what you have to think. Ray, you're calling from Pennsylvania on line two? Ray, welcome to Sekulow.
You're on the air. Thank you very much. I just have to say this is going to be 60 days, more wasted time. There's no way that we can trust the Iranians no matter from here until they're just holding out, hoping for the elections to come along and the Democrats win. And the next thing that's going to happen is they're never going to stop attacking Israel.
They'll always want to bring Israel down. No matter what.
So this is just 60 days wasted time. Wait and see what happens. And the American people are the only ones paying for this. Ray, I hear where you're coming from, and I think that you have the same sentiment as a lot of people. I've heard that often, too, that the Iranians are trying to run out the clock.
We know that's what they do, they always try to run out the clock. Do one, the sixty days of a memorandum of understanding is what is being reported.
So that is what we are taking at face value. Whether or not there's any teeth to that, there's any clawback if anything is violated within that. I don't know. Once again, we haven't seen it. Do is there in your mind?
Is there any world where The President and this team. could and and they don't trust the Iranians either. They're not going in very Pollyanna ish, thinking they're honest brokers here on the Iranian side. Do you think that there is a world where this administration could come up conceivably With a deal with a regime that's on their back foot that have had 13,000. Targets destroyed by the United States over the course of Operation.
Epic Fury. A Navy decimated. Really, all they are is a nuisance more at this point when they do try to do an attack. Is there a world where We could come up with a deal with our administration that they would have to agree to With proper oversight, proper sanctions, proper investigations and inspections. Is there any world in your mind that we could get to that with this administration?
Not at all. There you go. And that's what I want to hear. I want to hear from individuals. What do you think?
Where is this going? Because it also does play into the midterms, as Ray even pointed out, is that the. Not only does the Iranians want to get to a point where the administration, their negotiating partner, if you want to call it that, is weakened, which would be closer and closer to the midterms, but The Democrats want that as well. They are probably very much for a sixty day memorandum of understanding. Not publicly, they'll never say that, but it gets them closer to their goal.
What is their goal? Getting in office and trying to impeach the President. Once again, that isn't good for the American people either. But Ray, thank you for calling. Thank you for your honesty on that.
And I'm going to keep going. I want to take Marion online three from Texas. Marion, ACLJ champion, longtime listener to the broadcast as well. You're on the air. Yeah.
Yeah, uh first of all, I'm taking a different view than the majority of the people. I think we should quit worrying about what the deal is and stuff like that. We know from past history that Trump knows how to make deals. And everybody's worrying about how long it's taking, that the gas prices are going up and stuff like that. I think that the longer it takes for them to make an agreement or whatever, I think it's going to be better for America because it's going to give Trump more time to see possibly he could even weed out, find out who the leaders are that are part of the regime and replace them with leaders that are going to do something that's good for the Persian people.
I don't care how long it takes. And everybody keeps complaining about gas prices. They didn't complain of the length of time that it took Obama to do something. And then the Afghanistan war and Obama, what he did at Benghazi and all these other things. And Trump's got a record of success.
Look what he did in Venezuela. Look at what he did. And now he's going to help Cuba out too. I'm telling you, the guy is. Brilliant.
We need to just sit back, let everything play out, and let Trump decide when and when is the best time for him to back out. And I guarantee you, he's going to make a good deal. Everybody thinks it's going to hurt him in the election period. I disagree with that. I think when the time comes and then the gas prices start shooting down, a lot of the things that they're pointing at Trump about are going to just dissipate, and Trump's going to be a hero again.
That's my comment. Marion, thanks for your call as well. And that's what I want to get on this because it is an issue where there are not just. Two sides and two opinions on this. There's a lot of different angles, and there's a lot of things to think about.
And so I'm giving you a platform on this today to hear what your thoughts are. Marion, I tend to agree more with that. One, I don't think. I think the President While he is concerned about the midterms, Has already seen that the legislative agenda is very narrow, even with Republican majorities.
So I don't think that he's as concerned about the House flipping to the Democrats as those that are in Congress are.
Now, There are reasons to be concerned about that if you want a more conservative agenda. But. It's not as if, even with the majority in the House being Republicans, that it was just like, ah, I can get my agenda through. And then it's going to go to the Senate where there's a Republican majority, and I'm going to get my agenda through. It's been herding cats for the President, for the administration.
And there is, in some ways, you know, not a bad thing that the separation of power still exists.
So people can't say he's a king. He hasn't been able to get everything he wants done. Even through the proper channels.
So a king. would have probably figured that out. But Back to Marion's point. People elected President Trump because he was a deal maker. And then if you don't trust him to make a deal.
then you didn't trust him to be your President as a deal maker. I think there's a lot to unpack here, and we're gonna keep doing it. Join me in the next segment by calling in 1-800-684-3110. Are you more on Marion's? Mindset?
Where he's the deal maker. I think it's going to happen. I think it's going to be good. I don't think the midterms are as big of a deal when it comes to this as people are trying to say it is. Or are you more like Ray that says you can't ever get a deal with the Iranian regime?
Or do you have your own thought? I'd like to hear it. 1-800-684-3110. And as I mentioned earlier, we talked about. that brief that we filed this week in federal appeals court.
trying to protect the constitutional order. We can't do that without you, aclj.org, to support us today. Welcome back to Sekulow, final segment of the broadcast today on this beautiful Thursday in late May. And I'm going to be taking your phone calls, but I want to play this again for folks. This is Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, yesterday at the cabinet meeting.
Talking about what an agreement would look like. And I want to play this to kind of, once again, inform our conversation as we go forward, bite nine. There's an agreement to be made. We want that to be made. I think there's been some progress and some interest.
And we'll see over the next few hours and days whether progress could be made. I just want to remind everybody, Mr. President, you know this well. You have other options available to you if that doesn't work. But the bottom line is that we prefer the negotiated diplomatic route and we're going to give it every chance to succeed.
I know you're giving it every chance to succeed, Mr. President. But here's the bottom line. Because I keep getting asked, what is this all about? It's very simple.
Iran and these people in charge of Iran can never have a nuclear weapon. And they will never have a nuclear weapon and they most certainly will not have one as long as you're President of the United States. And once again, Here's where I am. I am optimistically skeptical. I think that's the best way to describe how I feel.
I'm optimistic because I hear the Secretary of State there, I hear the President saying Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. I also know that they took the actions of Operation Epic Fury. and Operation Midnight Hammer last year. I feel like those were positive things. They've gotten us to this point.
Now, I'm skeptical because it's the Iranians.
So I'm optimistic because of who is in charge, who the leaders are in this country. I'm skeptical because it's the Iranians. Let's go to John calling from Missouri online five. John, you're on Sekulow. Hello, thank you for taking my call.
Absolutely. Go ahead. Yeah, I agree with actually Marion, Ray, and you. You know, I mean, you all have valid points. Uh the problem we're dealing with a regime that's have two generations of hating us, you know, right forty-seven years and uh you know i there's a this negotiation process, I'm not so sure how good it's working because you don't know who's calling the shots from their side.
Exactly. I think there needs to be a more openness about it and bring other countries in and make your testimony in front of everybody and what you're going to do. They obviously don't want to give us completely what we Demand, you know.
So right. Yeah. And John, and I think that that's that is uh a very valid point as well, is that this is a negotiation.
So at some point, the Iranians agreeing to something diplomatically is meaning they at least see something beneficial for themselves in it.
Now, maybe that beneficial for themselves is survival, because I think we should also remind people. This is the fifth string at best. that is negotiating and that is the leadership there. Their leaders were wiped out. Their longest Ayatollah.
was wiped out. On day one of Operation Epic Fury. 13,000 targets were struck. by the United States. I don't believe that includes the Israeli strikes as well.
This was a massive operation.
So, I think a lot of times we're also thinking about this as if it is pre-war Iran and pre-war United States talking. It's not. The context has changed drastically for those in leadership in Iran. Once again, it doesn't mean that we can get there diplomatically. But It also shows you how.
One, how I want to say nice, we have it in the United States, that we have, and I say that a little tongue-in-cheek. That The opposing party In our Government. in the Congress Can say things like Senator Murphy said when he was like, awesome, when he fell for Iranian propaganda. that ships had gotten through the uh American naval blockade. And he's like, I was being sarcastic because of how ridiculous this is.
And then you see the media scrutinizing every single level and making it all about our elections and making it all about the fact that they think that the President's going to fail on this. When President Obama was conducting airstrikes against ISIS. You didn't see the level of scrutiny from the media against the sitting President of the United States. And there was plenty. I think that was the right call, by the way.
Him conducting airstrikes using drone warfare against ISIS. You know what President Obama also made the call on? Killing an American citizen. In Yemen. With an airstrike that was accused of nothing.
And the media didn't go after him saying he's a war criminal. As soon as the Republicans are in office, they're going to impeach him because he killed an American citizen extrajudicially. That happened. You can look it up. It wasn't headlines everywhere.
That You may have problems with. I have big problems with that. But You didn't see the reaction the way that even the slightest things happened with President Trump. That's the difference in the world we're living in. It isn't.
Equal playing field in the media. And it's not equal playing field coming from the left. Let's go to Kathy calling online four. Kathy, you're on Sekulow. Yeah, yeah.
Thank you.
I really see where the President. Holds. Has the ability to negotiate. I pray for him. I pray for all those who are working over there.
This situation with Iran, they feel it's a religious war, I have no doubt. And the bad thing, they're willing to die for what they think Their goals should be. I don't trust them, but I do trust the President with his experience and his background. I do trust him, as I believe Marion was talking about, and you've shared too, that we need to have them have the time. To negotiate.
And Kathy, I think that point as well. These are the third, fourth, fifth string leaders in Iran. What does our intelligence agency have on these guys? What do they know about their background? What do they know about their fanaticism?
Are they fanatics or are they a part of the IRGC business machine? It makes a lot of money. That is the economy of Iran. being inside that machine.
So, are they even fanatics at all? Are they a part of a system? Because that is how the system operates that wouldn't mind if it was a little bit more free. I don't know that. I don't know that that's the case.
But I do know that our intelligence agency probably has a lot more idea of who we are negotiating than I do as a commentator on it.
So that is once again why I am. cautiously, optimistically skeptical. Let's go to Martha. Final call of the day, calling from Idaho, ACLJ champion. Welcome to Sekulow.
Oh, hey, Will. Thanks for taking my call. Absolutely. I just wanted to say that. I You know, I trust President Trump.
He's a brilliant man, as Marion said. He didn't build a multi-billion dollar empire by being duped.
So I think he's got open eyes, clear eyes. And he may just be giving the Iranians enough rope to hang themselves. But I think also as Christians, we need to be praying that the Lord would direct his thoughts and his decisions.
So that you can make the right decision, that's our job. Martha, thank you. And I think that's a great way to end the broadcast today. At the end of the day, I want less war in the world. I want less terrorism.
I want less nuclear weapons. From Rogue States.
So I pray that a deal Is a good deal and can keep more people, not just here in the United States, but around the world, safe. And I pray that our leadership is strong and clear-eyed in that. And I think everyone should be. Those on the left not rooting for the President to fail, and those on the right that are worn out by this. And I get it.
but should also be praying for this. to end peacefully. We'll talk to you tomorrow. Yeah.
