SHOCKING: Early Results Have Democrats Terrified

On today's show, early results are in from the LA Mayoral race as the counting continues. 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 Seculum. Welcome to Seculum. We shouldn't be surprised here. It's June 3rd, 2026, that you know, in the year of 2026 with elections that they can't just seem to count the ballots.

Well, we can't get that. Jordan's here, too. Look. There are some early results. We're going to cover them.

And look, they're probably some of the early results you saw about. I don't know, 8 o'clock Pacific time last night. I feel like the first tranche came in. 50% of the votes came in, and then. We got a standstill here.

But in that standstill, you have Karen Bass leading the way, but not too far behind. But what, about 20,000 votes?

So, what we're looking at, yeah, is 21,000 vote difference between Karen Bass and Spencer Pratt. And then Spencer Pratt has about 41,000 more than Nithya Rahman, who is the councilwoman that was also running as a Democrat to unseat Karen Bass.

So here's what's crazy, though. L A County They have counted, or not even counting, the city for the election, Los Angeles. They have only counted 496,608 votes. which is only about 63% of what they think they have to count. When you look back at previous elections, including 2024, When you get to that 95% threshold, that's when a lot of places, especially if it's a close race, they're comfortable making a call of who's projected to win.

Obviously, it takes some time to certify the elections. It took ten days. In 2024. For Los Angeles to get to 95% of the results reported. That is also the same amount of time it took the entire state.

To get to 95% of the ballots counted 10 days after an election.

So When we're at this level, they've already said that Karen Bass, it would be. Statistically improbable for her to lose. A 60,000 vote lead against the third place runner to end up in third place.

So she has already been said, you are going to the runoff. But it's still up in the air between Spencer Pratt and Nithya Rahman, even though he has a comfortable lead against him. I feel like when you look at this lead, and we can break it down like, I don't want to be someone because you never know what can happen, but you would have to have almost everyone. Voting One way. And you assume that Karen Bass is going to have a significant amount of mainland votes as well.

Well, and that's what you look at. You look at that they can even receive ballots after the election that are postmarked on election day that can still be counted in Los Angeles. What you're saying is, yes, there was obviously a lot of excitement, a lot of people that wanted to go vote for Spencer Pratt. He had this kind of insurgent-style political campaign. Will he still get mail-in votes?

Yes, he will. But it would almost have to be, we're looking at can the third place person make up a 40,000 vote deficit over the, let's see, 37% left to be counted. It could happen, but you're going to assume that they're also splitting votes between Karen Bass. She'll still probably get a lot more votes. He still will receive votes, but statistically, too close to call between Spencer Pratt and Nithya Rahman for that second place.

I think there's a very high likelihood that you will see it be between Karen Bass and Spencer Pratt. And he thinks so. He said, well, obviously God wanted five more months of me exposing all the failures of our mayor.

So it's going to be a fun ride. You know, it's always fun to see what goes on in these elections. And this is very different this time. Jordan, as California, historically, this has not been something that has been in the... I mean, the key in all these races is can you get a Republican head-to-head?

with the Democrats so that you don't end up with two choices between just different Democrats. We don't yet know, but it's good that Steve Hilton is leading in the gubernatorial. Yeah, we'll get into that. That's about 56% into, so that you can't say that that's done yet, but it'd be great to have a Republican option in each of these races. And it's looking like that's at least a potential after the overnights.

And that's a better spot to be in than waking up and seeing that the Democrats just ran the table in California. It shows you there are a lot of voters who are concerned about the direction of the state. We will break all of that down to both those races and more. Rick Rennell is going to be joining us, but you can be a part of the show too. 1-800-684-3110.

Have your voice on the air today. 1-800-684-3110. Be right back. In the clip we just played, they did say: if you're a Republican, you should be smiling at these results. And we're going to be joined by Rick Rinnell, who's been really heavily working on California.

I think that they may not be quite there just yet, but these results are at least showing there is some change of tide there in California.

Now, I have to say, California's had Republican governors. We know historically, Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger. You know, these are people who were running as Republicans that have won in the gubernator race. Always gives there's a little bit more of a chance, I feel like, than just Los Angeles. Yeah, that's that's right.

I mean, when you look at the numbers so far with Karen Bass, with all of the negatives on her, she is the only one right now that they're looking at saying she's made it in based off the statistics that she's performing in. And as you said, Yetup, all those other people that voted dim, well, they're not all going to necessarily go and vote for Karen Bass because they voted against her, they voted against her.

So it would, if, if, Pratt is able to get through and it's not two dims. Um His job will be Going to those voters who didn't vote for him, but also didn't vote for Karen Bass. And you can look at it and say, okay, you know, you don't want her again. Here's what I can offer, and here's what my goals are. It's not to fundamentally transform the moral makeup of this city, of this county.

It's really just to get to basics of security, police, get people back in their homes. Kind of like the basics of what you do as mayor. Right. Not flying around the world meeting with other, you know, in other countries. That's acting like you're a world when you've got crises going on at home.

Well, and to that point as well, the councilwoman, Rahman, had had a lot of comparisons almost to Mandami. That she had a personality that was kind of charismatic young. She also, policy-wise, was much more in line with someone like Mondami.

So if you think about that, it's not like if Mondami had lost the primary to Mayor Adams before he was out of the race, it's not like all those people that were really excited about him would all of a sudden be like, well, we got to hold our nose and go vote for Mayor Adams.

So that is kind of what you're looking at. Even though I think that Karen Bass is much more liberal, much more progressive than Eric Adams was. That is kind of the dynamic that you're seeing play out in Los Angeles.

So it's not all of a sudden that you're like, okay, well, yes, you know, Pratt may have done well, but then there's going to be another 110,000 people that are going to go vote for Karen Bass. It'll be a blowout. It still may be, but you can't necessarily count on all those people even caring to show up. But it's whether the Democrat established majority, that's something that's going to happen here. They're going to flood.

The money into this ad campaign against Spencer Pratt.

So you're going to have, you're going to have a. The wildest amount of, I feel, negative ads running towards him to get all of those people who were voting against Karen Bass to now try to get them on board. Yes, I would imagine if he is in, it could become the most expensive mayor's race in our history. Yeah. If Republican and independent donors, we're talking about the big groups too, the 527s, start dumping the tens of millions.

They usually don't in mayoral races, but because we're talking about Los Angeles here and kind of the whole idea that if you can win in LA, You should be able to win anywhere when those who've been elected to do their job take the DNR out of their name. Aren't getting the basics done, like roads, like having enough water ready if there's a fire to put out that fire. Again, and if you find out that that's happening in a place where you oversee, you know, whatever international trip you're on, you need to get back as quickly as possible and not joke about, well, I'm not there right now, especially when you knew it was a high potential to happen. And then, second, I think, clear, as you pointed out, the Spencer Pratts of the world are the Republicans that have been able to win in California. Ronald Reagan, movie star, Arnold Schwarzenegger, movie star.

So, and again, who we agree with on the social issues may be very different than what most Republicans are. A Republican in that sense. I mean, it's a tendency, right? Isn't tended to be the mayor is not a partisan position. The race is not even listing partisan.

Yeah, because it's just people run. Karen Bass obviously was a member of Congress as a Democrat, but that's also part of the confusion, maybe for some people, maybe not for most people. But when you go into the ballot box, or if you're getting a ballot, it isn't listing Republicans and Democrats for party preference. Right. And so I think, again, It's one to look for.

First, of course, does he, as the votes come in, does he maintain the second place? And then, two, if he does, do Republican and Independent donors, both at the grassroots level, So that means from even outside of LA, outside of Los Angeles, do they then? Decide, you know what? We're going to treat this like a Senate race because this would send a signal. Does it really?

Even if the House is tougher for us this cycle, this would send a huge signal about the power of the Republican vote in places that look like they've been completely lost. And maybe that's actually where we need to go and look to run more Republicans in places that have been so mismanaged by the left.

Well, and I think what we also see is you see the governor's race there where we have Hilton, who has actually taken the lead, has the most votes. He has 1.3 million, almost 1.4 million votes with 58% of the votes in. Javier Becerra, who was the former Attorney General of California, was also the Secretary of Health and Human Services under Biden, was chosen for that role because of how progressively pro-choice he is in all the processes and all the things that he put in place in California under his attorney generalship as he has. Help pave the way for the governor there to make more liberal laws as far as it comes to being pro-choice, but also going after like pro-life pregnancy resource centers, things like that. And then you have Tom Steyer, who's the billionaire, but not like a Michael Bloomberg billionaire running for office.

He's the type of billionaire that decides: I have so much money, I can be as liberal as I want. And it doesn't matter. And so he it takes the Extreme far left on every single position. He has just under a million votes. And then there is a second Republican with half a million.

So. You look at this, they haven't called any of it yet. Steve Hilton is the leader, Jordan, with 27.8%. It looks very much like it could be Steve Hilton versus Becerra. It would be pretty big for someone like Tom Steyer to overcome a 300,000 vote deficit if the way that things progress, even with right-end, I'm sorry, the mail-in voting.

But they haven't called any of those as moving forward yet. But it does look like it's going to be Steve Hilton versus Becerra. I can imagine there's 400,000 plus because Steve Hilton's going to get more in too with the 56% that's reporting.

So how does Tom Steyer?

So it looks like, again, we're not there yet, but it's close that we're going to have a Republican choice. This jungle primary system is actually backfiring on Dems in California as we speak because it's not just finishing up with, well, we're such Democrat areas that we know that they're going to vote in. At least the two Democrats are always going to be the choice. It looks like that may not be the case when you're talking about the LA mayor as well as the governor. And again, then it goes to does the Republican Party, the apparatuses, the outside groups, do they go in and spend the big dollars to try and make a stunning victories?

In both the mayor's race and the governor's race. Also, a big shout out to Good, very close with us. He was a former U.S. Attorney, just recently former U.S. Attorney in Montana, Kurt Allmay.

He, again, to replace Steve Daines in the U.S. Senate, won his Republican primary by 76% as the votes are coming in right now.

So it'll be close to 80%. And excited then about, again, general election. Montana, you have to take seriously. They do elect Democrats occasionally, but we'll certainly want to get behind him. I know he's going to be on the broadcast soon.

Very good. One other thing, and I think, sorry, we can go to we should talk about because once again, we're looking at California a lot. We're looking at some of these places that had positive results for more conservative candidates. You're also seeing things like in New Jersey. Where there was a Democrat who won the primary there to run for Congress.

who has ties to Al Qaeda. Oh, yeah. And this is what is so shocking: is that this individual, Adam Hamawe, was an Egyptian-born former combat surgeon. Who volunteered and interned with a nonprofit that was linked to al-Qaeda in Bosnia, as well as he was called as a defense witness. for the trial of the blind sheikh.

He has now become a nominee for the Democrat Party. Back up in who that is. Blind Shake. Big time terrorists. Not that I was al-Qaeda that we have prosecuted in the United States and really dominated kind of even the New York political scene, like the trials around the blind shake for so long.

Yes, I mean, this is, again, it's pretty shocking. Like you said, that these kind of individuals are getting through the process, and it just shows you kind of where the left is right now. New Jersey's so weird. I feel like it should not be these kind of candidates out of New Jersey. Not spend any time in New Jersey.

They just not feel. It doesn't sound very Bruce Springsteen, the boss, having the blind shot. I don't know about that. That's the worst example you could have. There's definitely a lot of kind of like labor union-type Democrats winning.

But not again, not guys who were tied to terror attacks that impacted a lot of people in New Jersey. Yeah, absolutely. We're going to take some more phone calls as Will decides that Bruce Springsteen is who we should be. I was trying to get people fired up. I would have said, you know, he doesn't like us playing this music.

No, I don't think so. I would have said Bam Bam Bigelow or someone like that, you know, the king of Aspury Park. Phone lines are open for you. 1-800-684-3110. I don't know if Bam Bam Bigelow's political affiliation.

Rest in peace. I feel like he was probably pretty. See the head tattoo. 1-800-684-3110. 1-800-684-3110 to have your voice heard on the air today.

Also, support the work of the ACLJ. We got a petition up right now. I think you could be a part of it. Go to ACLJ.org slash sign. I'd like you to do that.

We have petitions, new petitions that go up all the time. Great way to get involved. Great way to start your journey here at the ACLJ or to continue on. Again, give us a call. We'll be right back with more on Sekulow.

Back to Sekulow. I want you to call in, be a part of the show today. 1-800-684-3110. We got a couple calls we're screening right now, but there's a few lines open. Give me a call right now.

Let's also know we have a lot of California listeners. Did you vote yesterday? Did you vote by mail? Did you vote in person? And if you did vote in person, what did the scenes at the polls look like?

Give us kind of a report on the ground there from California. California.

Some people don't like doing this, but if you're willing to, we'd love to know who did you vote for and why. A favorite song about California. Just who did you vote for and why? Yeah. Give us a call.

1-800-684-310. 3110. With that, though, there is an update on some of the work of the ACLJ.

So I want to make sure, for those of you who maybe are over California, don't want to hear about it all the time. There is some big updates in our current fight. against CNN. At the Supreme Court of the United States. You know, you've heard about this if you've been a longtime listener.

This has been a case we've been working on for many, many months and has been moved around a few times. And now we are finally starting to maybe settle in at the United States Supreme Court of getting more information. That's right. And Jordan, obviously, this is a case we've talked about for quite a while now, since really the end of last year, where we filed our cert petition at the Supreme Court. This is related to a defamation case where CNN ran.

with a a narrative. And not just once, but then repeated this narrative and it was a lie against Alan Dershowitz, who had given testimony in the well of the Senate during the first impeachment of Donald Trump. And they took what he said, clipped it out of context, and created something they called the Dershowitz Doctrine, and then ran with this lie, basically saying he said the opposite of what he actually said. In lower courts. All came together and denied his defamation claim.

Because of New York Times v. Sullivan, there was even one judge that wrote. But for New York Times v. Sullivan, clearly there was defamation here. Clearly, Alan Dershowitz was defamed by CNN.

But because of New York Times v. Sullivan, we can't do anything about it. And that's a Supreme Court precedent that gives this higher standard of defamation if it's against a public figure. It was in a different way. That gets very complicated in the age of media and when you have social media, here's where that gets very complicated: you have maybe an Instagram account or a TikTok account that's not private.

And you put lots of info up, and maybe you use it for sales. Maybe you use it to promote some companies. You might use it as a second business, you know, something like that. If you do that, then Why would you not be considered someone who is a public person under the current law and interpretation of the law of New York Times versus Sullivan, and thus an average person who just has a public social media account that could be fairly active? I wouldn't say all the public ones would go that way, but if you had like a thousand plus followers, I think you could certainly make the case that this is someone who is going out to the public.

They're not stopping anyone from looking at their account.

So then do you then have to, if someone says something horribly nasty about you and defames you? And you've met that bar, do you then have to meet the bar that it, the malice bar as well? And again, that's why I don't think those who wrote this law ever intended it to apply to public citizens. It applied to public elected officials and those who work for those officials. Very different time.

And once again, that bar here, even they also had the ability to go back and check their work, and other people could see it. They came up with a term for it. When they came up with the Derschwitz Doctrine, they doubled down on it. They didn't say. Did he just say that?

Or did we get that wrong? I mean, let's get the full clip so we can actually make sure what we're doing is right. They didn't do that till like weeks later. Right. And only because he was like demanding it.

And so when no one was paying attention anymore, they kind of went on there and said, well, you could have also interpreted this way. They still would not say. That they cut it to make it look bad. And you even had that judge dissenting, not dissenting, saying in the opinion that it was defamation. It's just whether or not he's a public official that is the bar here.

And here's where we are. Last night, now move on. What's going on?

So remember, we filed this CERT petition back in December of 2025.

So we're now in 2011. We filed the petition. They decided that is insane. It's June. But they decided, they decided in January, CNN waived their right to respond.

It was distributed for conference in February of this year. And then the Supreme Court justices said, you know what? We actually want to hear what CNN's response is. That kicked the can down the road to March. They filed their response, then they asked for an extension of their response.

They finally filed that in April. And then we filed our reply brief here in May. It was distributed for Congress for Congress for Conference a second time, May 5th. They then rescheduled another conference May 26th. Then it was distributed for conference again on June 1st.

They distributed it for the conference on June 4th. This is now the fourth scheduled conference. The difference is the first one they said we actually want to hear from CEO. When I was moving the admissions before the justices, that was about 10 days ago now, not last Friday, but the Friday before Memorial Day. And again, the court was in session that day.

It was on the calendar for them after we were done doing the, moved three of our ACLJ attorneys into the Supreme Court bar that they would then be leaving that because they didn't have cases that day or oral arguments. to to consider our case. It was on the document then. Since then it's already gotten moved yet again. Two times.

And now it is scheduled for tomorrow. That's right. And what they do in conference is that they're going to be a lot of people to pray, too. It's important to pray to just kind of get in the minds. It takes four usually to take four justices to take a case, want to take a case.

And that's what I was going to say: that what they're actually doing in conference is voting. And that's it's called the rule of four. You have to have five to win a case, but to have the Supreme Court accept it and hear it, it has to have four justices say, at least minimum of four, say, this is something we feel like the court should hear.

So that is what we're looking for. And we could know Monday. And once again, they do the orders list every Monday following the week before conference. We could know Monday something. We could see it be redistributed for conference.

There's some options there, but we are praying at this point that tomorrow when the justices are in conference and they hear about this again. That they are moved to take this case. What I would say is that, look, we know that there are justices on the U.S. Supreme Court that have written about this before and said that New York Times versus Sullivan has gone too far, but they have to look at this strategically, right? I mean, you cannot get around New York Times versus Sullivan in this case.

So it's going to be a major precedent that is being looked at again by the Supreme Court if they say yes. To the oral arguments and say yes to the briefing on this, and we've accepted this.

So, you have, if you are one of the justices who believes New York Times versus Sullivan has just not been interpreted correctly since the rise of a different kind of media age, you want to make sure you're not going to just bring this case up and end up doubling down on this policy. Because, again, if you think this is not the best vehicle, so they've got to look and say, it's not even just the county, the four, it's that out of those five, are any of them kind of giving the signal that they could be persuaded here to make a change and overturn a precedent.

So, then what happens in a scenario that if it is turned down, if they decide not to go forward, where does the law end up? It's just over? The state of where the law has been interpreted remains. What's interesting is that usually in one that's been kicked down this many times, that's a good sign for cases at the Supreme Court. It usually, again, after three, there's either one of two things.

Usually, it's going to get granted, or someone is. Writing a dissent from it not being granted. They are upset that the court did not decide to take the case. It won't hear the case. All right, we'll find out more potentially next week on that, but we're not going anywhere.

We still got a second and half hour left on the broadcast, and I want you to be a part of it. If you don't get us on your local station or you just want a different kind of experience, find the full video experience where you can talk and chat at aclj.org, at YouTube, on Rumble, Facebook, however you get your podcast. We are there always. Whether that is noon to 1 p.m. Eastern Time, where we are live Monday through Friday, or if you want to catch us on archive later on immediately following the show, that is again however you get your pods or available on our YouTube channel, Rumble.

Easy way to do it is just go to aclj.org, experience all we have to offer there. Sign the petitions if you want. Become a champion. We'll be right back in less than a minute. Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever.

This is Sekulow. And now, your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome back to Sekulow. We are covering the election results out of California as well as some of the work of the ACLJ and a lot more over the next half hour. Rick Rinnell is going to be joining us, so we'll definitely get into that in that segment.

For those who are just joining us, I know a lot of you want to know what happened in California. Maybe it's not your top-line story today in your local market.

Well, where's where we're at? They have counted half the votes or so, a little bit more, because California seems to be following the trend of the rest of the country, not being able to get us full election results quickly. It could be days and days now until you have all of the mail-in ballots voted. But where it stands right now is. Karen Bass is in.

And then a too close-to-call race between Spencer Pratt and Ramin.

Now, it does look like if everything plays out, Spencer Pratt does have a significant lead.

So, again, all of the top pundits are not saying that they are calling this yet for Spencer Pratt, but. There is a wide enough margin to where you can at least start to infer that, likely, there's a very good chance you will see this become a two-person race in LA with Spencer Pratt versus Karen Bass. Sure to be a very entertaining few months to say the least.

So, at a minimum, we're going to get some good ads, we're going to get some good promo moments coming from their campaigns, and of course, a lot of money is going to be flooded in to Los Angeles to try to swing this election one way or the other. There's also the governor's race in California. Will, why don't you give us an update on that? That's right. So, we have the governor's race as well, where Steve Hilton, the former Fox News contributor and then host, now gubernatorial candidate, is at 1.3 million votes for him.

That's about almost 28% of the vote going to Steve Hilton. Javier Becerra has 25.4% of the vote, and Tom Steyer at 19.6%. Those are really the top three that are in the running right now. Neither Hilton. Hilton nor Becera have been said already, like Karen Bass, who is getting to move on officially to November.

None of the races have been called there. They are only at 58%, so less than even the reported totals of the mayoral race in Los Angeles. What we're looking at here is it is a good sign for those that want a Steve Hilton on the ballot in November. The fact that he does have that first place lead in the vote tally right now. There's still, like I said, we're talking about a significant amount, 42% of votes still to be counted.

He even have to lose, though. Almost 400,000 votes of a lead to fall in third place for Tom Steyer to end up in that second place. It seems unlikely, it seems improbable, but Remember, a lot of these votes are coming in. They couldn't just be postmarked yesterday. And received, they didn't get to 95% of the vote tallied in 2024 elections.

For 10 days. After the election in 2024.

So we'll see. 24 hours. Exactly. As you said, dated postmarked ballots, mail-in ballots are good. And those wouldn't even necessarily be there by today, not even through the mail system.

But I think it's clear is that this could have backfired on Democrat, this idea, and it's happened before, where when you have this jungle primary set up, where what you're hoping is that you're basically only going to have two Democrats as the choice from the biggest positions in the state. And even at the municipal level, when you're talking about LA and Los Angeles, the city and all the other unincorporated cities in LA County, like where Spencer Pratt, and you've heard about Pacific Palisades and the burned down houses, the roads that have not been repaired, all of that, that people are living out of hotels still. This idea, again, that the backfiring could have happened if you end up with a Republican choice. For California voters, which just gives them somebody else to actually look at voting, not when you're just choosing between who's the more liberal or moderate of two Democrats. All right.

Hey, we get back. Rick Rinnell's will be joining us. If anyone knows about California elections, California politics, it's Rick.

So you're not going to want to miss that. And then we're going to take calls and comments at the end of the show.

So be a part of it. Get in line right now. We'll start taking calls in the next 10 minutes.

So 1-800-684-31-10. Again, we're covering that. And of course, the work of the ACLJ continues. And if you like this show, if you like the legal work that we do, and you want to be a part of that family, I encourage you to become an ACLJ champion. That's someone that gives on a monthly basis, recurring donations.

You can cancel anytime. It's a great way. You set the level of how big you'd like to be of a champion. All champions are champions. That's ataclj.org.

We'll be right back. Welcome back to Secula. Look, we are covering what happened in California and what is still happening in California as the election results are still ongoing. Rick Rinnell's joining us. Rick, I want to get your just feedback from last night and where we stand right now.

Thoughts?

Well, I think we've got mixed results here. Certainly, when you look at how many people voted in Los Angeles, I can't help but think We have such a very small number of people determining the government of Los Angeles. And this has got to change. We've got to get much louder and much more poignant about registering people to vote and getting people to the polls. You look at what's happening, it's like 150,000 votes.

is determining seats and determining who gets to become mayor and This is just for a city as large as Los Angeles, it's just unacceptable. We really have got to get greater participation. By my calculation, The eligible voters in Los Angeles we had about fifteen percent of them show up to the polls. And that's unacceptable for the direction that California is going, the direction that Los Angeles is experiencing with homelessness, And the high taxes and water not in the fire hydrants when there's a blazing fire in front of you. All of the just basic problems can be solved with common sense leadership.

And we can't just have fifteen percent of the people living in Los Angeles determining the future of this great city.

So I think we've got mixed results there. When it comes to statewide, You know, I look at the statewide results, and I have to say, we really have a shot here for Attorney General. Um We have a great nominee on the Republican side And Michael Gates. And he is really Focused on the issues. He's not a partisan person.

He's really a common sense leader, and I think he's got the best shot. statewide. And so we'll have to really get behind him. Steve Hilton, I think, had a really good night.

So did Gloria Romero, the lieutenant governor candidate. Let's see what they can do. I mean, the Democrats nominating Javier Becerra is just such a joke. Unfortunately, California is such a Democrat state. That he's going to have the inside lane.

But I think we finish by saying, Tom Sire, once again, At the worst nights, he literally spent $250 million. And came in third, so he is over his political career. which we thought was over when he ran for President, is now truly over running for Governor of California. Rick, one of the things I want to go back to is where you're talking about that the amount of people that voted in Los Angeles. And I think while one, you say it's mixed results, I think there's also a positive silver lining to see about that for a tactic of someone like a Spencer Pratt that could be that insurgent candidate, that one that comes that no one expected to be doing what he is doing currently.

But as you even said, the fact that reported votes right now are still under half a million votes. in Los Angeles, one of the biggest cities in the country. Right now, clearly, they're still more outstanding, but we're talking about under half a million votes. That is what you see in mid-sized cities that get that for mayoral races. And the fact that That you're saying it is that low percentage.

Does that almost to some degree give some hope as well that if the campaign can organize, can structure it in a way to get people that clearly just aren't voting to actually care about someone for a change instead of the machine that has run the politics there for so long? Does that mean that there is an opening here to potentially see some sort of upset in November? Yes, there is an opening. I think we always have challenges for get out the boat no matter where we are. But in California in particular, this is a state and I would say Los Angeles is even more so a city that prides itself are not being that political.

They don't like politics. They're too busy. The weather is perfect. We're outside. We're enjoying life.

We're experiencing what California has to offer. And I think a lot of Californians are really proud of the fact that they don't get involved in partisan politics.

However, we're at a point where we've got to shake them, and we're going to have to raise the money and get a get out the vote campaign because Spencer can win. People are not happy with Karen, but the very few organizations, union types of organizations that are on the ground, that do what they do best, they came out and they did their part for Karen. We don't have that system in Los Angeles for a common sense politician, a new politician, or Republican. And so we're going to have to create that and really begin to bring out the vote because this is doable. Spencer can win in November.

There's no question about that. And Rick, I feel like one of the major talking points that we have brought up today, which is if the election results steady, so if it's Spencer versus Karen Bass, I can't imagine the kind of money that is going to be coming in, especially from the left, to put in, hopefully from the right as well, but from the left to say, okay, we've got to do whatever we can to stop this candidate. Yeah, for sure. They have already started sounding the alarm. I think Mythia and Karen do not get along, but there's going to be a lot of pressure on Mythia just to get behind Karen.

and then support her and try to unite the Democrats. But I have to tell you, that this is such a small turnout. That we must be able to spend and get the people involved who are just usually not involved. How do you do that, Rick? When the sense of, I can't imagine a mayoral race getting more public attention nationwide.

You know, nationwide attention comes in on this race to the point where everyone is talking about it, and you still only have such a small percentage of the locals engaging. What do we do from there?

Well, look, I again, I think I go back to the fact that part of this is just unique to California and that we pride ourselves on not being part of it. Look, I I'm a Trump Supporter all through and through Trump appointments, multiple Trump appointments. I'm known as a Trump person, but I have really lefty friends. Who are proud of the fact that I work in Washington, that I've had big jobs. They don't see a disconnect like we do on the East Coast, where you want to cancel someone, or you hate your neighbor, or there's violence that arises because you have political disagreements.

I don't get that in Los Angeles. Never. I get people who disagree with me. But they don't go to the next step to think they got to cancel me or, God forbid, do violence against me just because they disagree with me. That is a problem, though, because when there is a brand new person like Spencer Pratt on the scene, we've got to be able to mobilize and get people more engaged by turning in their vote.

I've got friends who don't even know where to go vote, and they're not even sure if they're registered, and they're kind of proud of it. And so that's the apathy that we have to really push back against. All right, Rick.

Well, I think this is going to be an interesting thing to see, whether the results stay steady. And the fact that we are still at a point where, not just California, this is a problem we've seen now, it feels like nationwide, where counting does not seem to be our friend. I mean, we know we've been focusing on California with Rick, but Rick, did you see a candidate in New Jersey who is linked to al-Qaeda and was a defense witness for the blind shake? is now a nominee for Congress for the Democrats. I mean, I thought that that even the mayor of New York was an out there candidate, but it seems like they just can't help themselves when they're nominating candidates these days.

Yeah, we should make him the poster boy along with Graham Plattner. And now we also have Scott Wiener, who is going to be in Congress representing Nancy Pelosi's seat from San Francisco. This guy is. Ba dar. Very far left.

problematic beliefs that mainstream America are going to just hate. Nancy Pelosi endorsed his opponent, and he still won.

So he's coming to Congress. The Democrats got a lot of problems with their people we should make them all famous. Not unlike California, we were talking about this. New Jersey is another one that I just don't quite understand as someone who's spent time there, visited there, as family spent a lot of time in New Jersey. It doesn't feel like a state that should be putting forward these kind of candidates.

Sure, they're going to be Democrats. Yeah, but maybe they'd be more like a Pennsylvania Democrat, a Fennerman kind of guy or something like that. But instead, you're still getting these radicals, I guess, out of the tri-state area, if you will. Yeah, it's really crazy. It's sad.

The Democrats have a real problem with the radicals. But in Los Angeles, here we're going to have a Pratt summer.

So we should have ACLJ come out and do a whole week in California. Hey, you'll be a part of the Pratt summer. We'll fight you on that one. Yeah, find us. We'll be there.

We'll be there. Happy to take some time. Rick, I appreciate you joining us today. And thanks for giving us an inside look of what's going on. When we get back, though, I want to hear from you.

We got a few lines open for you: 1-800-684-3110. 1-800-684-3110. And also. While you're doing that, while you're calling in, or maybe you've been wanna call in, and I understand some people don't wanna talk on the air. But what you can do is you can support the work that we're doing here.

I want you to go to aclj.org right now, become a ACLJ champion, someone that gives on a monthly basis. That could be as little as $5 a month. That's pretty much covering processing fees. You know, $5 a month. $10 a month, whatever it could be.

It's a donation each and every month, a tax-deductible donation that goes out automatically. You, of course, can cancel at any time, but it's a great way for us to create really the ground level for the ACLJ.

So we know What? Potentially could be coming in each and every month from a big group of people who want to support the work ongoing. We'll be right back with more on Secula.

Now it's time we hear from you. This is the last chance you have actually to call in for today. Give me a call right now and you can still maybe make it on the air. 1-800-68-431-1010. A lot of talk about California.

A couple different things in California. Let's start with Doug in Alabama, though. He's going to hold for quite a while. Watch it on YouTube. Doug, welcome.

Well, thank you for taking my call. Yes, this is Doug from Alabama right now. I was from Homul, California five years ago. I got out of that state. I was trained as twenty twelve Lecture in a technery project, did two elections, found voter fraud, reported it, nothing happened, trained by the San Diego Register of Voters, eight elections, found three cases of voter fraud, reported it all the way up to Michael View.

He was the director at that time. Nothing happened. I have a pretty good guess how some of the Democrats can like cheat, how they can steal these elections. And it starts with the street index. The police and inspectors have to update the police index on who votes.

They checking them off. And they also have the mail. Vo uh ballot roster in the provisional ballot ballot uh roster. They can get all those rosters in and they can see who did or didn't vote and they can start printing off ballots of people who didn't vote. It just feels like in the digital age that so much of this could be taken care of very easily.

The reason it's not is because. He found those three.

Someone else would find three more. They don't want to know. Yeah. I mean, thank you for being a poll watcher, by the way. If they're continuing to win elections, they don't want to look at voter fraud.

They don't want to change upgrades to technology. Whereas Republicans have seen these weird numbers come through and say, Could they really win by that much, even if they won? Should they have won by a number that could only really be possible if people that were dead are voting?

So, shouldn't we look into that? But see, the party that won. Then has the power because you lost, obviously, if you have that position. And they're saying, no, no, we don't want to look into that.

So it doesn't get looked into unless. Uh, it starts happening to both parties, and unfortunately, it seems to happen much more to Republicans than it does to Democrats. You don't hear a lot about oh, Republicans winning. There's the only way they got those numbers is because dead people are voting. I've never heard that uttered from a Democrat operative in my life, and that's because it doesn't happen.

Well, and here's the other part of that ticket as well: is then we looked at how many people actually voted in LA so far, and we were talking about that with Rick. And when you have less than half a million people with a city that size with 63% of the vote in, it should be at least double that, right? I mean, if not triple, to have it what would be normal election. This is the mayor race when there is a gubernatorial race. Like, it's not as if there's not other things on the ballot that same day that you, as a Californian, care about.

There's been significant drama around Karen Bass and the current mayor because of her response to the fires. In parts of LA County that she does oversee directly, like Pacific Palisades. She was the mayor for Pacific Palisades. It's unincorporated, and they didn't have enough water and they didn't have enough tools to put out the fires before they destroyed most of those homes. Right.

And we've heard that over and over again.

Well, did you have some of the thoughts? I was just even getting back to that low number, Doug, where it's like, you don't even have to get to the how did that many people vote, dead people on the roster, because it's so low that it's just, you know, I mean, it shows how they've demoralized a voting base as well of just accepting whatever is going to happen is going to happen. And that's where I personally, as someone who would like to see change, would like to see an LA that is thriving, not what it is. I think it's a stain on the American society when you have our major cities that people want to go visit are in such a disaster zone that I think that should motivate people. But I also think that shows a window is there.

if that few people are voting. There is a window for someone different to win. And to look at it as a long-term strategy. If in in a in a city race like LA. You can start getting a Republican as one of the two choices through the jungle primary.

Count that as a win this year. If that happens, count it as a win if California voters even have a Republican to choose from in the gubernatorial primary. And then say, okay, how do we then go to those people who voted for someone else or didn't vote and say, we could have a shocking election win here? We've done it before, not 100 years ago, not 70 years ago, but Arnold Schwarzenegger.

So it's not like that long of history to say, you know what? If we show up because we're angry about how things are being run, we can actually win and make a difference in the state or city they call home. But you can't take away the little victories either. If Steve Hilton makes it in and Spencer Press makes it in, that is its own small victory to look for in future elections as well. Yeah, it just shows the tide could be turning.

Let's go ahead and take another call. It's about California, but a different little update. Bobby's calling in New York. Go ahead. Hi, guys.

Before I ask my question, I tried to become a new champion earlier, a few days ago. Do I come up that way yet or not? It was a small donation. Let our phone screeners know when that happens, and then they double-check, and then you're good to go.

So, you've got to tell the screener that you're a champion. Of course, that's it.

So, yeah, I need to tell people that. When you become a champion, I always give a little perk that you get bumped to the front of the line. But with that, Bobby, you just tell us, they do a little quick back-end check, make sure you're being honest, and they go for it. And, Bobby, we trust that. The chatting call doesn't cross-reference with your phone number.

Yeah, exactly. They're doing the manual labor here, though. Bobby, go ahead though, with your comment.

Okay, before I ask my question, one of the things I want to say about you two is the thing I like most about both of you is your warmth. You're very, very warm people, and I really get a lot out of the show because of that warmth that you guys have.

Now, the question that I have is: what happened with that church out in California with all that money that was supposed to be paid out that California wanted? Yes, this is where Calvary Chapel was facing. Facing those exorbitant fines, over $1.2 million over COVID restrictions. We took it to the Supreme Court, filed a CERT petition. And Jordan, I think this is what's interesting about the ACLJ work because.

Hundreds and hundreds of petitions get filed at the Supreme Court. But the vast majority, you file a cert petition, there is a reply brief, it gets distributed for conference. And what happens? The following Monday, you get the orders list and it says cert denied. Right.

That's 99%. Not when it's the ACLJ, because one, we take cases that we know we have a real chance of getting before that. Even if it's a slim chance because of the Supreme Court, we know there's a real chance. There's a real issue for us to win here on. This is one of those, again.

And what happened? Not what the vast majority of cases happened. It was distributed for conference on April 24th, for the April 24th conference. Normally, if it were just a case that would get that, you'd get a denial of cert on Monday. We have nothing.

Which, once again, if you're a court whisperer or someone that kind of understands, like there's a lot of different things the court could be doing, but they haven't just denied it. It's been sitting, last docket entry was distributed for the conference of April 24th, 2026. What I think they're looking for in cases like this, and there were a lot of cases that arose out of the COVID restrictions that became federal court cases. And one thing they're looking at is: are there other cases? pending that we've accepted that are so similar this should be almost like added to it?

Is this a separate kind of case we need to be looking at? Or in this case, do we have even potentially the votes to really make a difference here when it comes to setting this policy for future kind of pandemic situations? We hope we don't see that again, but if we do, so that there's clear precedent for houses of worship and their operational ability when it comes to, hey, if you're going to open the bars and casino, can you really still keep the church closed? And just a reminder, as I was talking about the CNN case, Keeps getting redistributed for conference. And so something's happening there.

Yes. We don't know what. Same thing with both the cases we have at the Supreme Court. That is not the normal thing. One, for an organization like ours to have two at the same time, but both of them.

Have something happening. We don't know what yet, but we need your prayers and we need your support right now. That's right. I would encourage you to do that. You can do that, obviously.

Say your prayers, support the work of the ACLJ by just. Yep, again, pray for our team here, our media team, our legal team. Hard at work all the time. And if you feel so moved, of course, you can get engaged in many different ways and you can donate. That's ataclj.org.

Do it today if you can. Or honestly, just go there, sign the petition, get involved in all the different ways. Read all the incredible, free content. All that content is there for you for free because people like you also support. Talk to you tomorrow.