BREAKING: New Filing from Special Counsel Durham

Breaking news today on Sekulow as there's a new court filing from Special Counsel Durham. 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, Jordan Sekulow. Welcome to Sekulow.

Folks, if you're watching on Facebook, you might want to head over to Rumble. Every time we talk about Durham, it seems like it gets flagged even when we are literally reading from a legal court filing by the U.S. Department of Justice because that's who Durham is appointed by, is the Attorney General. He's been allowed to continue under the Biden administration. So when he files its department, United States of America, that's filing. So in this latest filing, I think this is so telling because it all goes back to how this Trump-Russia collusion story began. Again, we're still just getting to the bottom of how it began and the sophistication that went in to trying to fool the FBI or the CIA, except now we know they weren't fooled at all and they still went with the narrative, which raises questions about why did they continue with Crossfire Hurricane when it was clear — this is reading from the Durham filing on Friday night — the government does expect to induce evidence at trial reflecting, one, the fact that the FBI and Agency 2 — Agency 2 is the CIA — concluded that the Russian bank allegations were untrue and unsupported and the primary basis is for these conclusions, including the particular investigative and analytical steps taken by these agencies. Again, I just want to make that clear to people that it was not plausible, it did not withstand technical scrutiny, it contained gaps, conflicted with itself — and this is from the CIA — was user-created. So this wasn't even data that was manipulated or data that was mislabeled to try and send the FBI and the CIA in the wrong direction, but notice now we're hearing from the CIA. That tells you a lot about where Durham is and maybe explains why it's taken so long, because getting information from the CIA is not easy.

I'll ask Rick Grenell about that later in the broadcast when he joins us. But the idea that it was user-created, not machine or tool-generated. I want to get your thoughts on this 1-800-684-3110, because this applies more to SUSPENT. That means that there were people literally making this data up. It was user-created for all you Facebook, again, monitors out there, people trying to flag everything. When it says user-created, that means somebody made up this data. They didn't take data that existed and mislabel it. They didn't go, this data didn't exist. It was user-created and it wasn't true.

So I just want to go through that one more time for everybody. This is filed in Durham and I want to get your calls on it. 1-800-684-3110, because here's the question I bet you also want to know. Who instructed this data team to create and make this data up out of thin air?

1-800-684-3110, if you want to talk to us there. Who do you think? I have my own thoughts. I think it would probably more than SUSPENT, there had to be some other people within that Clinton world or within that Fusion GPS world or within that Christopher Steele world that said, you know what, let's just make this data up. They're paying us. We got to give them something. I mean, is that where it went or is it worse than that?

Give us a call at 1-800-684-3110. But I mean, just understand the government expects to show evidence at trial reflecting that the FBI and CIA concluded that the Russian bank won allegations about the Trump organization and campaign were untrue and unsupported and the primary basis for these conclusions, including the particular investigative and analytical steps taken by these agencies. For example, why the FBI didn't reach an ultimate conclusion on the data or whether it might've been whole or in part genuine.

CIA concluded that it could not withstand technical scrutiny, contained gaps, conflicted with itself and was user created and not machine tool generated yet still crossfire hurricane gets open. Then we get a Mueller. Then we get impeachment. Then we get, you know, this nasty, all of this happening around an election or take your thoughts at 1-800-684-3110. We have to ensure this never happens again because it clouded our entire electoral process in the United States.

1-800-684-3110 to join us on the broadcast. We'll be right back. We're also going to get into some oil and gas issues. The Biden administration, all what they released on Easter week and they didn't want you to see at the American center for law and justice. We're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad, whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith. I'm covering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress, the ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support for that.

We are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ matching challenge for every dollar you donate. It will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes 100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do simply would not occur without your generous support. Take part in our matching challenge today. You can make a difference in the work we do protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected.

Is there any hope for that culture to survive? And that's exactly what you were saying. When you stand with the American center for law and justice to defend the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn. It's called mission life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life.

Request your free copy of mission life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. All right, welcome back to SECO. We're about to jump into your phone calls, but I do want to make sure that if you're just joining us, you understand the significance of this Durham filing. And also it shows that it's going bigger than just Sussman, the Clinton campaign attorney saying, you know, to the FBI that he wasn't there on behalf of a client. This is going much deeper because the government, this is an evidentiary motion that was filed Friday. The government is saying, this is what we're going to show.

So don't exclude this evidence. We need this evidence to show exactly how far the defendant, in this case Sussman, but also it's building a bigger narrative that should likely include more people than Sussman. It's also now broadened out past the FBI to what we know as the CIA being involved. So here's what the government expects to be able to show at the Sussman trial next month.

Not that he just, by the way, not only that he told the FBI he was there on his own just as a good citizen and not because he worked for the Clinton campaign, that was what he was charged with, but it's going to go further. The government wants to first show the fact that the FBI and CIA concluded that the Russian bank one allegations were untrue and unsupported. And two, the primary basis for these conclusions, including the particular investigative and analytical steps taken by these agencies. And this is the difference between the FBI and the CIA and he even writes it here. For example, while the FBI did not reach an ultimate conclusion regarding the data's accuracy, so maybe that's how we got Crossfire Hurricane still. Maybe the CIA wasn't communicating correctly with the FBI or whether it might've been in whole or in part genuine, spoofed, altered, or fabricated, the CIA concluded in early 2017 that the Russian bank one data and Russian phone provider one data was, and I want to understand this in 2017, remember Sussman goes once a month before the election, then he goes back in February.

So they figured out already in early 2017, this stuff that he's providing us is junk. So agency two concluded in early 2017 that the Russian bank one data and Russian phone provider one data was not quote technically possible, did not quote withstand technical scrutiny, quote contained gaps, quote conflicted with itself and quote was user created and not machine or tool generated. It was made up. The data was totally made up. And this is what clouded the entire four years of President Trump's administration was made up data. So when he says terms like witch hunt and we felt like the system was against him and you felt like the Kobe's of the world were bad actors. I mean, look at, look at the actual evidence. The system was against him because they didn't say when they figured all this out.

Okay, enough. We're going to make it clear to the people. There's no Russia, this and that no need a special counsel CA has already figured it out. No, no, they still got FIS awards on American citizens still continued with cross fire hurricane.

They went from crossfire razor to crossfire hurricane. Then we got an impeachment over a phone call. I mean, this is folks again, it's just the most telling info we've gotten so far because the government, our top intelligence agency had said, this is bogus is made up. It doesn't make sense.

It doesn't add up. It's user created. It's not even something generated by a computer program.

It is user created. I want to go to the phone calls 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. Let's go to Jerry first in Rhode Island online one. Hey Jerry.

Hello team. I think I got my answer just from you. What you just said is that 2017 they know this was bogus before Clapper made all these media releases. If I'm understanding you right.

Yes. I mean, so it goes on. The diagram goes on because, but yeah, early 2017, we don't have a specific date there. We have early 2017. That's right after President Trump takes the oath.

We know Sussman goes back in February, still trying to take down President Trump. So it's all around that time period where Comey ends up getting fired, special counsel getting appointed. I mean, it's all around then, but the document goes on. This is a court filing I am reading from.

This is not my opinion. This is the opinion of the United States of America and it's court filing separate and apart from whether the data was actually unreliable or provided a motive for the defendant that Sussman to lie about why he was at the FBI. Evidence concerning the steps that the FBI and CIA took to investigate these matters is critical to establishing materiality because it will enable the jury to evaluate those steps, which in turn will inform their conclusion about whether the defendant's alleged false statement was material and could tend to influence or impair government functions. So he's trying to mislead the CIA and the FBI about a, at first when he goes, a Presidential candidate.

Then when the second time he goes, the actual President of the United States. So it's not just about him lying about who he was there for, but it's that the lie was material. By trying to cover up that this was a Clinton campaign, just bad opposition research. And that's why he was trying to pass it along.

He was impairing the functions of the FBI, the CIA and the office of the President of the United States. If you want to call us and talk to him about this on the air, 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. We're going to get back to it to a second half hour of the broadcast because Rick Cornell is going to be joining us.

So get some questions to him about this. We're going to get into some oil and gas issues the next segment of the broadcast. If you want to talk about it, either call right now or you call later in the broadcast. 1-800-684-3110. Mary Ellen called in from Illinois online too. Hey Mary Ellen. Hey Jordan, how are you doing?

I'm good, thanks for calling. Yes, you talked about the user created items. If I go out on the street and interview somebody and I post it, I've created, I'm the user, I created it, correct? So in this scenario, if you were to have manipulated the data, so this is different because this is not like you're just filing a report. What they're saying here is that if like if you falsify the report, so you appeared to go out and like take a report but you didn't actually use what you found, you just made up a bunch of information that fit your narrative and you just made it up.

So you created it you created it on your own. You created something that wasn't true because here what they were presenting was this highly technical DNS data that the Trump organization and campaign had this server set up with a Russian bank and a Russian telecom company to communicate secretly with the Kremlin. Pretty huge allegation that the CIA figured out was not plausible technically, didn't withstand technical scrutiny, contained gaps, conflicted was itself, and was user created and not machine or tool generated. So manipulated data. This again, the FBI, they didn't go that far but they did say that again, and I think it's clear that you want to know this, is that they didn't reach an ultimate conclusion on whether it's all genuine or part genuine spoofed, altered, fabricated that the CIA did. So is it the FBI politically who just turned a blind eye here? That I think we're going to find out more through additional court filings. Again, to take your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. But what I think is very important here and why it's worth spending the time on the broadcast right now is that this is going a lot deeper than he came to the FBI and lied because he didn't tell them he was actually passing along this information because he worked and was paid for by the Clinton campaign. So it's going deeper because you're starting to find out there's other bad actors here. It wasn't Sussman himself sitting there going, I'm going to create this highly technical data on my own. And there are some people who have gotten immunity who were like the data creators. Not like the top people, but like the people who were told by a boss's boss to create this data on the Trump campaign. So I think that person has gotten immunity, which means they're talking to Durham's investigative team and explaining to Durham's investigative team.

Now I feel you. This has taken very long. I think where we've figured out now why it's taken so long is a lot of this is being relied upon, not the FBI.

We know that these were not great actors. Okay, I mean the FBI was a mess. We got a secret plan.

We'll do something if Trump gets elected. They already had Crossfire Razor. Even after this, I guess either the CIA didn't inform the FBI or the FBI didn't care that this was bad information. It's like, it's not technically plausible. And you put that in tandem with user generated. This is not just a report.

This is somebody intentionally creating data to mislead two government agencies. And that is the bigger story about this filing is that it shows that by Sussman going in and lying about the fact that he wasn't there on behalf of a client, it impaired and influenced in a way that was wrong, the workings of the CIA, the workings of the FBI, two very important branches of our federal government, our entire justice system. And of course the cloud that hung over the Trump presidency that the mainstream media never stopped pounding. We were there fighting from the beginning folks. You were there fighting from the beginning. We're starting to learn a lot more.

I think that's good news. And we're not going to stop reporting on it until we get all of the truth on this broadcast and on our website at ACLJ.org. And let me encourage you, we're in a matching challenge month right now. We are behind and I know it's a tough time economically for some folks. So I only want you to donate if you're financially able to. If you're financially able to, this is a great time to donate because you can double the impact. We've got a matching challenge, donate online, ACLJ.org.

We'll be right back on Sekulow. It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life. Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad, whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith. I'm covering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress. The ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support.

For that, we are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes 100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do simply would not occur without your generous support. Take part in our matching challenge today. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family.

Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. Not technically possible, does not withstand technical scrutiny, contains gaps, conflicts with itself, was user created and not machine tool generated. Listen, I think that the slowdown we're seeing, why the Durham investigation, the wheels of justice are turning so slowly, is that he's having to rely a lot on CIA data, which it's not easy to get CIA information. That's not the same as getting information from the FBI. And what we're seeing from the FBI is it's like they didn't care. They were in on this and they just wanted to go after President Trump and anyone associated with President Trump. But I wanted to thank our Director of Government Affairs in Washington, D.C. because, stay on this a bit, because the idea that a rival Presidential campaign would have the nerve to walk into the FBI General Counsel's office, lie about why they're there, and then present them with data that the CIA was quickly able to figure out was totally inaccurate, couldn't even exist.

It was technically, even if you wanted this to be true, it's technically implausible, it doesn't work, and it was user-created. I mean, the Clinton campaign, to walk in there that way, they must have known the FBI would react the way it did, which was ignore all these warnings and continue on. Now, Jordan, I'd say a couple of things about this. First of all, you're right, it is staggering that a political campaign would have the audacity to do that. You're right, they must have had some comfort that they would be somewhat well-received, or at least not provided the scrutiny that you would expect out of the FBI and the CIA.

But, Jordan, I would flip the word on its head a little bit. I think the part that's really staggering is that something that was not technically plausible and that they could identify as having been user-created, I think you said the right word in an earlier segment, which is made up. This is created.

Someone created this. It wasn't evidence that that would be taken seriously by the highest levels of our law enforcement. And we've seen a lot of issues along this chain of investigation, Jordan, but this might be right up there. You have to have confidence in the Federal Bureau of Investigation and in the Central Intelligence Agency. Jordan, when this is the outcome, how can you have confidence when something that is called technically implausible is treated seriously?

I think, as we said, I want to repeat it over and over. When they start using these terms in court, user-created, it means made up. Like Dan said, like we've said, it means they just made it up out of thin air. They based some numbers. They made it look very technical. And then they said, look, here's the data.

And you know what, though? They gave the data over to the FBI and I guess got to the CIA because of an allegation that the President of the United States was a Russian agent would make its way to the CIA. The CIA was immediately able to say, no, you guys made this up. But the CIA has a very interesting role.

And we'll talk about it with Rick Rinnell's second half hour of the broadcast with how they share information and who they share information with. But how frustrating it was for the President of the United States, I could say it was, because I know, that you knew that this was false and user-created. And yet it's now 2022 and we're finally getting that in a actual court filing. And I mean, Dan, people have wondered all along why the FBI and the FISA wars continued that effort. And I think it speaks to it right here because it says in the document that the FBI and agency too, so CIA, and we don't know how the difference, they did conclude that they were untrue and unsupported, but then they get very different on why. And we don't know exactly from this filing when the FBI accepted that as untrue. It might've been under Mueller when they finally just closed and didn't have any information on that aspect. Yeah. I mean, to me, it comes back to this, Jordan, we give these agencies awesome powers.

I mean, awesome powers. We let them spy on Americans to some extent. Now they have to meet a threshold of evidence, which they clearly did not meet in this instance. But Jordan, so I come back to what's the recourse now. I know people want folks to be held accountable.

I do too. That should certainly happen, but I'm most interested in making sure that it never happens again. And so when I evaluate sort of the options that we have in front of us, Jordan, really the only two that I come back to is either stripping some of these agencies of these authorities and sort of rewriting them all together, right? These are the thresholds and the evidentiary thresholds that you have to meet if you're going to have these powers or just totally reform them. I mean, I know you've proposed a couple of times along the way, Jordan, that some of these agencies might need to be even renamed, not just a renaming, a restructuring and a rebuilding from the bottom up. But look, I think it's got to go beyond. Yes, it does have to start with personal responsibility, but I think it's got to go beyond that. Jordan, if we're going to give these agencies that type of awesome power, we've got to make sure that they're not abused in this way.

You know, Thade, I want to talk to this because this affects everybody that's listening to the broadcast right now. We've been on the oil and gas issue and American energy independence since this inflation began. And really during the conflict when we started floating ideas out from the Biden administration about getting oil and gas from such bad actors as the Islamic Republic of Iran and Venezuela. But then the Biden administration, again, this is all happening on a weekend where they know you're very busy with Easter.

I hope you all had a wonderful Easter, but the people may not notice. So it sounds nice at first. Oh, the Interior Department has opened up 145,000 acres of public land in nine states for new public land permits and leases on oil and gas. Now, Thade, what they didn't get to in here is that that's a pretty small amount of the land available. But also the Biden administration probably doing this for their Green New Deal Democrats. They raised the price tag of this for the oil and gas companies up so high that you have to wonder if they are even going to, and I don't think they will even take this offer seriously. Well, first of all, Jordan, you're correct to point out that that's why this was released on Friday before Easter holiday.

Whenever they don't want someone to look at it, that's when you would release something. And by the way, I actually think that one of the reasons is they didn't want some of their Green New Deal Democrats to understand that they were even exploring this. But you're right, Jordan, this is a perfect example of how sometimes Washington, D.C. acknowledges that they've got a problem and the solution is very clear. This is part of the solution, Jordan, opening federal lands that are appropriate to exploration for domestic sources that we can expand supply and reduce costs for the American people. That would be the right thing. But Jordan, this is so half baked that I don't even think it's a partial answer.

Let me just give you three reasons why. The first one is the one you just mentioned. It only opens up 144,000 acres. Jordan, that's about 20 percent of the federal land that was already being evaluated for exploration. So there's plenty of more capacity there. The second one is the cost issue.

They're going to raise by 50 percent from 12 and a half percent to 18 and three quarters percent the royalty that is charged on these oil and gas companies to explore. So, Jordan, you're right, that company is going to have to take a new look at the economics and see if it's even if they could even break even to to take advantage of these offerings. And the final point I would make, Jordan, this industry, as much as any other, this is not a light switch, not a light switch that you can turn on and off. And I don't there's not a pun intended there.

There has to be enough lead time for permitting, authorizing, extracting, refining, transporting and then ultimately using. If you don't have that comprehensive plan and enough roadmap to get there, Jordan, there's no way you can utilize it. So, look, it's the idea of trying to throw out the correct idea, but it being so half baked and not thoroughly thought out. Jordan, I don't think this is a piece of the puzzle.

I really don't. Maybe they want to take nearly a fifth of the revenues from the oil companies. That's up from 12 percent. So from 12 to almost 20 percent. And and by the way, no increase on that in over 100 years in the United States.

So they've had something to base on. They know that they're going to have to give over significant amount of revenues over to over 10 percent in royalties to the federal government. But now it's getting close to 20 percent and it's on a limited amount of land. And you're going to trust the administration said we're never going to we're going to stop drilling on federal land.

Maybe Biden will actually keep this promise because they made it so bad for the oil and gas industry that he could like put the offer out so that the Dems can come out and say, oh, it's the oil companies that won't do it. But in fact, they like they said, can you even break even when you get a royalties increase like this second half hour count up a secular support our work at aclj.org. Donate today if you can.

At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's Matching Challenge for every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes 100. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at aclj.org. Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Welcome to the second half hour of the broadcast. I can't wait to get Rick Renell's insight on this. He's going to be joining us in the next segment of the broadcast. You don't want to miss that because remember, his final position with the Trump administration and the cabinet was the acting director of national intelligence, which oversees all of the U.S. intel agencies. And here is the government's filing.

This is on Friday. So again, I know a lot of you have not seen more than maybe a snippet of this if you watch Fox News. I know you're not seeing it in a lot of other places. That's true, maybe on Newsmax and on some conservative talk radio.

But I think you'll start seeing it a lot more today. And that's why when you go through this document, I just like to highlight to everybody, this is not Republicans versus Michael Sussman. This is not House Republicans, Senate Republicans, or some outside groups on ACLJ.

It's the United States of America versus Michael Sussman. This is an evidentiary filing in the case. And what was clear, what is so important about this evidentiary filing is it goes further than just saying Sussman lied because he didn't want them to know he was there on behalf of the Clinton campaign because he wanted to take these allegations seriously.

It goes deeper than that. We're starting to learn about how many people must have been involved to put together this sophisticated presentation, which it took the CIA, not the FBI, but the CIA, the time to analyze and realize very quickly. Early 2017, which means we could have avoided Mueller. We could have avoided this whole Russia hoax and moved on as a country, focused on the issues.

I think President Trump did a great job at doing that. But I will tell you, I mean, just having this hang over you constantly, it's more than a distraction. It's something you have to deal with. We had to sit down with the President and his attorneys and go through all this information from Mueller to that impeachment.

I mean, the list goes on and on. But here's the key from the filing. So you have Sussman trying to preemptively bar this evidence. So Hillary Clinton's attorney doesn't want this in. Here's what the government says they expect to induce.

I'm reading directly from the filings to the Facebook censors. The government does expect to induce evidence at trial, reflecting one, the fact that the FBI and CIA concluded that the Russian bank won allegations were untrue and unsupported. So we know that both those agencies knew it was untrue and unsupported.

Here's where it gets different. Part two, the primary basis for these conclusions, including the particular investigative and analytical steps taken by these agencies. For example, while the FBI did not reach an ultimate conclusion regarding the data's accuracy or whether it might have been in whole or in part genuine spoofed, think about the words you spoofed, altered or just fabricated, made up out of thin air. The CIA concluded in early 2017 that the Russian bank won data and Russian phone provider won data was not, quote, technically plausible. This came from the CIA did not quote withstand technical scrutiny, quote, contained gaps, quote, conflicted with itself and quote was user created and not machine or tool generated.

So you see the problem. The FBI ultimately got to the right conclusion, but not before launching these investigations and then having Kobe go out there and testify that, you know, he's doing this leaking information to get a special counsel. He's leaking his notes to get a special counsel, an investigation that concluded nothing.

That concluded nothing. And yet still to this day, we have Democrats on Capitol Hill trying to claim there were some Russian links to the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, even though the CIA said it was, quote, user created. They go so far as to say spoofed, altered or fabricated. We'll take your phone calls on it at one eight hundred sixty four thirty one to help you share this with your friends and family.

This goes a lot deeper than a lawyer for a campaign misleading the DOJ and FBI about why is there means how material because he sent the FBI, the CIA on this chase using government assets. That's a major deal by providing false information, information that's made up. Think about that. We're at the forefront of this issue. We're not we're not afraid of the sensors on social media. We're going to keep coming to you when there's new information on it. We're talking to Rick Renell.

He oversaw all the intelligence agencies. I know he can't probably share everything, but I would love his reaction to the fact that they figured out that it was completely user generated. One eight hundred sixty four thirty one to talk to us on air. And if you can, if you're in a position to financially support the ACLJ, it's a great time to do so at ACLJ.org. We have a matching challenges this month. Donate today at ACLJ. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad, whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith. I'm covering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress. The ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support.

For that, we are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's Matching Challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A ten dollar gift becomes twenty dollars.

A fifty dollar gift becomes one hundred. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do simply would not occur without your generous support.

Take part in our Matching Challenge today. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade forty years later, the play on parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life.

Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. Welcome back to Secula. Rick Rinnell is joining us now. I'm so glad it's perfect timing in the broadcast to get Rick with us. He is our senior advisor for national security and foreign policy. And I remind you, final position within the Trump administration was the acting director of national intelligence overseeing all of the U.S. intelligence agencies. And Rick, I know there's, you have to be careful on these subjects, but we see this new court filing Friday, and I always like to remind people this is not by Republicans, it's by the United States of America because they've allowed Durham to continue his investigation. And he's relying more on this. It's an evidentiary filing, but on CIA analysis, that all of the idea that the Trump campaign had this server connected to a Russian bank and a Russian phone company, the CIA concluded was not technically plausible, and he's quoting them, did not withstand technical scrutiny, contained gaps, conflicted with itself.

And then the kicker was user created, not machine or tool generated. And they concluded this in early 2017. I guess the question is, Rick, I know the intelligence agencies have, there are ways they could communicate in ways they can't, but the FBI, it looks like, didn't care that this was already determined to be totally false by 2017 and made up.

They continued with crossfire hurricane. They continued with a special counsel. They continued with the Russia narrative. So one of the things that I tried to point out as acting DNI consistently was that the dissenting voices on the Russian collusion hoax were silenced or classified away.

It's one of the reasons why I went through and tried to declassify all of the testimony. It's why we tried to unredact the redacted sections of reports that showed that there were dissenting voices. And the key to this, Jordan, is this, the dissenting voices were always there from the very beginning. They were classified away. They were silenced. They were bullied. And so when you look at now all of this mounting evidence that Durham has to say, wow, we're finding that early on there were dissenting voices saying, this is a phony file and a phony process. All of those people who were silenced away were also told by their superiors that we're going to continue doing this despite knowing that there are dissenting voices. And so what does that mean? It means that the CIA, FBI leadership knew and allowed this to happen.

Yeah. I mean, to me, that is so frustrating as someone who represented the President because whether you like it or not, I mean, he worked through it, but it certainly took his time. I mean, it took some of his time because you had Mueller and you have to do certain things with that.

You have to talk to your lawyers. I would always give the President this credit. He would try to always do it as late as possible in the day so that he was doing the people's business as much as possible.

And so we'd be working late at night with him on these issues, but it was additional items he had to deal with every single day. So when he called it a witch hunt, when he called it a hoax, and now we see it, yeah. I mean, how many times have we seen, you know, Rick, over and over that the Steele dossier, we've known that was completely fabricated. Now we know that they went so far as to fabricate like DNS tech data and the CIA knew it and the FBI either just ignored the CIA or, you know, some people have called in with questions. I know there's issues with the CIA sharing information with the FBI. I mean, is that possibly an excuse for the FBI here? No, no. Let me be very clear that people knew that there were dissenting voices. And so the good news, I'm kind of a guy that likes to talk about the glass being half full. The good news is that the US intelligence officers who are career people poked holes in this in the beginning and knew it was a sham.

Okay. That's the good news. The bad news is that their bosses silenced them away, continued on with the investigation. And these individuals were bullied enough to where they weren't courageous enough to stand up and go public.

Now that's the bad news. And what we have to do is we have to be able to fix the system. I've said multiple times, I won't be happy unless Durham prosecutes senior DOJ, CIA and FBI officials. They knew from the beginning, they saw the dissenting voices. They allowed all of this information to bubble up and even go to the FISA court. They continued the phony hoax, even though people below them knew that it was wrong and they knew it was wrong. It could have been done from the very beginning of the Trump presidency. It would have been a blip.

It would have been oppo research that was bad. February, you know, early February, 2017, you figure all that out. President's inaugurated, he's in office and you move on. But instead it was the number one narrative on the President throughout his entire administration. Rick, talking politics a bit too, I wanted to get to a couple other things with you while we got you on the air today. First is a tweet you sent out on Iran. Our viewers here obviously at ACLJ supports, they care deeply about this issue of a nuclear Iran. And you said that, you know, anything with Iran is going to have to basically be an executive order because there's no treaty here unless there was some treaty adopted. It looks unlikely that this Congress would be able to do that. Explain your tweet though to folks out there, because you also said this is the problem with the European reliance on the administration right now. Look, when you look at the Iran deal or the Paris climate accord, all of these issues, I said this as US ambassador in Germany consistently. I told the Germans and the German people, you must insist that any administration, the Biden administration, the Trump administration, the Obama administration, you have to insist that these things become a treaty. We have a process in the United States that in order to make something permanent outside of just one administration, it needs to be a treaty, therefore it needs to go to the Senate for Senate approval. Now you've got to give it to Barack Obama for having political calculus that was good and real because he never sent the original Iran deal to the Senate because he knew it would fail if it went to the Senate. So therefore it's an executive order.

It's something that lives just during the Obama administration or the Biden administration. So we should be telling the Iranians, the Europeans, look, this is a deal that you cut with just Biden and it's over when Biden is gone. The next administration doesn't have to honor it if it's not a treaty sent to the Senate, voted on by the Senate. The Biden team will not send this to the Senate because they also don't have the votes. Yeah, and again, it's trying to get in for three years.

It certainly seems muddled because the Russian involvement in this process, but it's one you got to keep your eye on because if you don't, you wake up one day and Jake Sullivan will be announcing that we're back into the two pages of bullet points that no one signed on, actually signed. And finally, Rick, we are in this, I think, important time of speaking to a Republicans women's group tomorrow night and a time when people, depending on where you live, there's primaries going on, though they're either happening very soon or at least by the end of the summer. And one of the keys is we see these big articles like even the New York Times by Democrat strategists, a Biden bloodbath, question mark. And I'm always careful this many months out to say, oh, it's just a done deal. But I do think if there's good candidates in the Republican party that are making the case to their constituents, whether it's at the congressional district level or the statewide level in the Senate, that there are going to be tremendous gains, but we still have to get the good candidates selected to make sure that's the case.

Yeah, for sure. And, you know, when you look at the Trump endorsed candidates or what we call America first candidates, they are people who really believe that Washington is broken and they want to have the outside mentality go. And there's a lot of these individuals who are new types of Republicans.

They're not the typical Republican first and second generation. Americans are incredibly proud to be Republican, to be against the woke culture, because, you know, Jordan, as you know, they left fascism. They know that America is great.

And I think that's the key for Dr. Oz in Pennsylvania. Here's a first generation American who loves this country, who became, you know, wildly successful because of this country. And he's entering politics because he's watching this slip away. And he and Donald Trump see the world very clearly and very, very much alike when it comes to saying we can't let America slip away.

We have to fight for America first. And this great idea of capitalism, the rule of law, all of the issues that make everybody else safe around the world. And, you know, see, I recognize you can criticize every endorsement because you got to pick somebody at some point. What I think is cool with President Trump is that his endorsements show the idea of growing the party, that they're not all exactly the same, like, cut out person.

It's not the same. The women who are being endorsed are not all the same. The men are not all the same. They come from different backgrounds. He's also very open to people who are totally outside of politics, getting in, who might not have these perfect records because they're not lifelong politicians.

They don't really have records. It's more about get them in the process. We need some people who aren't just owned by the system. And that you can do that and that he's not afraid of doing that as well. And I would say that the theme that all of them have, the thing in common, is that they look at America and they say, this is the greatest country in the history of the world. We may not be perfect, but we're the best. Don't tear it down. Don't teach our kids to hate America.

Let's fight back against the woke cancel culture and let's defend America. All right. As always, Rick, your information is great. I mean, to have you on a day where we've got all this intel coming out from CIA and the FBI and this court filing appreciate, as always, Rick is our senior advisor for foreign policy and national security. He's on our team because of your support for the ACLJ. We have two former Trump cabinet members on the ACLJ team because of your financial support. And I know everybody can't do it right now and I totally understand it.

You can do other things. You can sign petitions, share the broadcast, get people so they learn about the ACLJ. But if you're financially able to right now, this is a great time to donate to the ACLJ because you double the impact of your donation.

We have a matching challenge the entire month. Donate online at ACLJ.org. That's ACLJ.org.

Be right back. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn. It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life. Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad, whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith. I'm covering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress. The ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support.

For that, we are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes 100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do simply would not occur without your generous support. Take part in our matching challenge today. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family.

Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. All right, welcome back to Secula. We're going to take your phone calls, 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. I didn't want to mention something to you that Rick was talking about, politics and primaries. Listen, sometimes there's two good candidates or more running. You got to make a decision of who you think is best and then you still should come together at the end if your candidate gets it or not. But you know, if there's two or three good candidates and it's just not your candidate that won the primary, you got to unite. Democrats are very good at that. Republicans not as good. This is an election cycle. To get the gains that we're talking about our potential for Republicans in the House and the Senate, state level, you better unite after the primaries. You can have a really tough primary.

Back who you want to back but still be willing to suck it up if you need to and enjoy the bigger team for what is the greater good for our country when we talk about these issues. Let me go to Barbara's call, Virginia online 1. Hey Barbara, welcome to Secula. You're on the air. How are you?

Good. Listen, I was, well I'm still concerned but I'm glad that Durham is there and doing what he can do to find out what's happening. My concern or one of the questions that I had, I thought after 9-11 that we had the Patriot Act and that it was trying to get us to focus with both the FBI and our intelligence agencies, et cetera, et cetera.

And I'm concerned now to hear this use of creative stuff that's going on and wondering, well what happened? Where are the folks making the connections they should be making? And if this happened at the time, why wasn't this kind of information conveyed between both agencies and then to make a decision what we're going to do or not do?

Yeah, I think Barbara, we got a lot of that from Rick when he explained, I know we're talking about a lot with Rick Renovo, he explained there are a couple of things. He thinks that there are people at the top that need to be seriously investigated by Durham, that they should be going down with this Durham investigation with indictments because they got the analysis. So it's like the good people that work hard at the FBI and CIA and that's most of the people that work there, they got the analysis and yet then it got classified out. So when they were sharing the information, one side would not share it with the other side or even if they did it wasn't available and so that position was basically hidden and they were allowed to move forward, the FBI, with this narrative.

I think that was it. And he said, unfortunately, even those good agents who did the right work and figured out what Durham is quoting that this was completely user-generated, they used the word fabricated, that means made up out of thin air is what that means, is that they weren't willing to take the second step was to actually put their job on the line to help the country because it drugged the country into just a nasty, nasty debate about the President of the United States, a Russian agent. We had time and time again information come out to make it clear that these claims were totally bogus, but it's now all coming together about how sophisticated the campaign to take down President Trump was. Highly sophisticated with the CIA's involved and as Rick said they're starting to classify certain information so that you can't put the puzzle pieces together.

I'm imagining that's what has slowed down the Durham investigation so much. Now on another security front, I want to get to today because this is again things they love to bury in the Easter holiday news cycle. Thanh, our Director of Government Affairs is back and Thanh, when we look now at some reports coming out about immigration in 2021, we find out about the number of terrorists, people who are on the terror watch list that were apprehended on our southern border. It's going to be pretty alarming to our listeners, Jordan. The Customs and Border Patrol have announced that during the year of 2021, 23 people coming across the southern border whose names were, get this Jordan, their names were on the terror watch list were detained by CBP.

That's just in the year 2021 alone. Now that's probably going to shock a lot of people, Jordan, but it doesn't shock us and it doesn't shock us because we've been engaging this for some time now. Our listeners might remember a while back the Department of Homeland Security actually announced that they had detained two terrorists who were trying to cross the southern border. They put up a press release about having detained them and then, Jordan, they randomly took that press release down. Now we didn't know why they took it down. We didn't know if it was because they were going to release those terrorists.

We didn't know if because maybe there were a lot more that were coming across. Now we know today that that was probably one of the reasons they disappeared that press release but, Jordan, that's why we engaged our Freedom of Information Act to ask a number of questions in this space. We want to know how many terrorists came across the border during the said period. We want to know if they've told the public about all of them that they detained. We also want to know why they stopped programs like Operation Talon that were meant to remove people who were illegally present in the country that had committed sexual predator crimes.

Jordan, that program was suspended under the Biden administration. We want to know all of that information and today, Jordan, is one great piece of evidence why we've engaged that because we now know, according to this report, that at least 23 people on that terror watch list were detained at our southern border last year alone. And look, I think it's fair to ask how many more? How many more were not reported or how many got away? Because the only reason we know about this, Jordan, is because another FOIA report that was filed by Fox News. So, look, there's just a lot of information here and clearly that porous southern border is in need of a physical barrier, Jordan. Yeah, I mean, when you look at the fact that they won't tell you this information so that you can make smart decisions about what we should be doing at the border, whether it's finishing the wall, what policies we should be in place, what should come after Title 42 than, is that they try to hide this away from the American people.

They make, they drag their feet. Fox News had to file a FOIA. We file FOIAs. I don't know in that FOIA if Fox had to go to court to get the information.

So, if it took the entire year. But the fact is, 23 known terrorists got through our southern border that they know about. The question is, who else? Who else wasn't apprehended?

Because we know the border is so porous that if 23 were, I mean, you would imagine there's another 23 plus or even many more than that who walked right through. No question. It's the tip of the iceberg, Jordan. It always is. You learn about the ones that they get caught on.

There's a number of others below. And, you know, Jordan, I think it's pretty clear why they do this, why they aren't forthcoming with information, why they always have to be caught. It's because it's because when the American people of all political stripes actually look at an issue like this, Jordan, they largely agree. I mean, they say, should the border be, have enough operational control, whatever that means, where there's places where there's a physical barrier needed, a wall needed, where there's more CBP agents needed, whatever it may be, the American people of pretty much all political persuasions want to make sure that terrorists aren't entering the country. Now, look, there, certainly there are some radicals who don't agree with that statement. Certainly, there's plenty of people in Washington, DC that don't believe that, but the average American citizen who's going to go into a polling booth and be confronted with the issue of, do I want terrorists, people who we know are terrorists, they're actually on our watch list. Do I want them to be able to enter our country? Jordan, overwhelmingly that voter is going to say, no, what is clear is that the policies under this administration are not effectively keeping those people out.

The reason they won't tell us voluntarily about this information is because Jordan, even their very own voters, they would turn them against them on this issue. Yeah. I mean, folks, to just finish up today, there was a lot of information today. We always want you to be able to come from each segment. You can be able to take some new facts of new information that you may not have known yet, or that you may not have heard explained to this level.

So you can share that with your friends and family. And, but is this the former border patrol chief, Rodney Scott, repeatedly sounded the alarm over the number of terrorist screening database individuals coming across the border, telling fellow agents, this was last year in 2021, that it was quote, this is the amount of terrorists being apprehended at a level we have never seen before. This whole show today revolved around our national security, whether it's our energy independence, the Russia hoax, our Southern border. Support our work, ACLJ.org.

We'll talk to you tomorrow. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20. A $50 gift becomes 100. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org.