Attorney General’s UNBELIEVABLE Defense

Today on Sekulow, the U.S. Attorney General's Unbelievable Defense. 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. Hey, welcome to Sekulow. We are taking your calls 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. And we've got two interesting testimonies before Congress that occurred, both Attorney General Garland and Christopher Wray, who then went before and did an interview with Bret Baier. I want to start with Attorney General Garland and his questioning with Josh Hawley about the, again, the tactics around the protesters specifically.

Take a listen to this by 30. Why did you send 20 to 30 SWAT-style agents and a SWAT-style team to this guy's house when everybody else had declined to prosecute and he'd offered to turn himself in? Determinations of how to make arrests under arrest warrants are made based by the tactical operators in the district. But you surely looked into it by this point, right? You know the answer, surely. They, all I know is what the FBI has said, which is that they made decisions on the ground as to what was safest and easiest. Safest and easiest.

First of all, safest is always the standard in any kind of case, right? And by the way, it's not safe to show, go up with God's cross. Surely, that's what I was going to say, having 25 agents with AK-15s or AK-47s, whatever they might be, surrounding, including kids, home on a guy that's never had an arrest warrant, has never been prosecuted, and his lawyer volunteered to surrender him is outrageous. And what the scary part of Merrick Garland's whole communication right there was, well, all I know is.

Remember that one, all I know is. Nothing is the rest of the sentence. I'm also so a little personal about like these people showing up at your door like that unannounced. It was about like 2 a.m. last night, I heard like the little ding, my ring didn't go off. And Amazon delivers in the middle of the night.

Yeah, which is not great. So I think that's likely it, but it was kind of like this random car and it kept staying in our lot. It was a delivery ultimately. But you sit there, I sat there, waited, and the guy saw me sit and finally drove off, realizing I was a little bit nervous, like why is he still probably waiting for his next delivery. That, again, is way less than guns drawn at that time of night. You know, it's still dark outside and they swarm your house because what do you do? Your first instinct is I need to protect my family. Right. So interesting that delivery guy yelled out really loud, this is 2 a.m., I just delivered a box, like don't do anything to me. But, and I looked down, it was a small Amazon box.

I know everybody's dealing with that. It is not the best way and safest way to go after somebody who wasn't prosecuted at all for such a, and the offense that they tried to prove. By the way, remember, let's remind everyone, they failed their prosecution. Oh yeah, he was acquitted.

DOJ failed. He was acquitted. He was acquitted because, again, his son was cursed at, similar to how we've seen these students that we represent, cursed at and treated unbelievably poorly. And he kind of got into like a shoving match between two adult men. That's not something, that's not a federal crime.

He was acquitted and found not guilty. Protecting his son. And they went to his home when they arrested him and treated him like he was a terrorist. Like a cartel leader.

Yes, or a drug cartel leader. But it shows you the outrage in this, folks. And by the way, that's why our Office of Government Oversight, our Office of Government Affairs are on top of what the FBI is doing. We've got those FOIA cases involving the FBI. We're in a matching challenge, folks, at ACLJ.org. I'm going to encourage you to go to ACLJ.org and support our work. Let me tell you what a matching challenge means. It means any amount you donate to us, we're going to get a matching gift for. So if you donate $30, we get another $30, so it's $60.

If you donate $10, we get another $10, it's $20. So these are the most important months for us at the ACLJ. Let me encourage you to go to ACLJ.org, that's ACLJ.org, in order to support the work of the American Center for Law and Justice. And as I said, we're in a matching challenge campaign. If you're new to the broadcast, maybe you're watching on New to Rumble and watching us there or on YouTube or Facebook, wherever it might be, or our radio stations, support our work.

That's how we keep those broadcasts on the air, too. ACLJ.org, that's ACLJ.org. More coming up, our Senior Counsel for Global Affairs, Mike Pompeo, coming up with us next. Again, support the work at ACLJ.org.

Welcome back to Secula. We are joined by our Senior Counsel for Global Affairs, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, talking about these hearings that took place yesterday with Attorney General Garland. We also had Christopher Wray sit down with an interview with Brett Baer and talk about some of these decisions by the FBI, the politicization and weaponization of these two departments at the highest levels. And I'll play the sound and then we'll go right to Secretary Pompeo, but this is Senator Mike Lee questioning Merrick Garland about all of the protest and vandalizing that went on at pro-life pregnancy centers. And ultimately they gave up, they put up a $25,000 reward. Like, they couldn't find these people on their own.

Take a listen to the question and the response. In 2022 and for the first couple of months of 2023, DOJ has announced charges against 34 individuals for blocking access to or vandalizing abortion clinics. And there have been over 81 reported attacks on pregnancy centers, 130 attacks on Catholic churches since the leak of the Dobbs decision, and only two individuals have been charged. So how do you explain this disparity by reference to anything other than politicization of what's happening there? The FACE Act applies equally to efforts to damage blockade clinics, whether they are a pregnancy resource center or whether they are an abortion center. It applies equally in both cases and we apply the law equally. I will say you are quite right, there are many more prosecutions with respect to the blocking of the abortion centers, but that is generally because those actions are taken with photography at the time, during the daylight, and seeing the person who did it is quite easy.

Okay. Mr. Secretary, you ran the CIA. This is the Attorney General of the United States saying basically we can't find the people that are violating and blowing up abortion crisis pregnancy centers around the country because it happens at night as if there's no cameras or surveillance material. I mean, this was a pathetic performance.

All he kept saying was, Mr. Secretary, all I know is, which I've concluded all he knows is, is not much. Yeah, I saw a good deal of that testimony yesterday. It was really weak and doesn't begin to account for the discrepancy in how they're doing this enforcement. This is almost certainly the data support that these are political decisions being made by senior leaders on how to prosecute, who to prosecute.

It is not the absence of camera. It's not the time of day that these things are taking place. This is a decision being built and filtered through the bureaucracy in the Department of Justice and perhaps at the FBI as well about which cases are more important to them. And, you know, this is these are these are these are not pro-life people.

These are folks who have supported the abortion movement for awfully long time in their political lives and the rest of lives. And this is now emanating in our most sacred space, this important space where we're supposed to do equal justice under the law. I thought his his performance yesterday both reflected the politicization of the attorney general's office and was not representative of the best things that America knows need to happen. It's indecent, what he said yesterday. You know, Secretary Pompeo, when you when you hear this kind of just, you know, we can't do it, it's late at night. The other response was, well, you know, I don't really have anything to do with those FBI agents that showed up at that pro-life activist door. And I think that was the safest practice, you know, FBI with 20 guns drawn. It seems like whoever is the next President has got a mess to clean up at the DOJ and FBI.

How serious is that mess? And, you know, I think people want to see it cleaned up. They want an effective FBI and an effective DOJ to be doing the right thing. But they know it's not doing that right now. And we know how hard the bureaucracy fights back against anyone who tries to make changes.

Jordan, it'll be a death struggle because this is at this is at the core of their capacity to wield power in ways that reflect their point of view, their political preferences. The next President's got to get after this in a serious way, not just with the most senior leadership, but rooting this out, root and branch throughout the bureaucracy inside both the FBI and the Department of Justice. But we know, Jordan, there's good FBI agents out there working the streets doing good work. We know there's folks at DOJ that are just trying to prosecute even handedly. But the folks making the decisions and to say, gosh, I didn't know or I couldn't know.

You're the you're the attorney general, the United States of America. That is an inadequate response to a question from a serious center who was simply trying to get the facts and to have people treated equally under the law. Yeah, especially coming in a case where when they went to trial and brought in their lead DOJ lawyer on free access to clinics entrances, so handles all the abortion prosecutions.

The jury found the gentleman that was charged not guilty after he had twenty seven FBI agents surrounding his house the year and a half of 18 months before. It's it's absurd, quite frankly. And I appreciate your your view on this. Let me ask you this.

Chris Ray has been in the news a lot. He made a statement yesterday in his interview with Brett Baer that it's the FBI's position that the origin of covid likely came from the lab in Wuhan. We've seen that also now from the Department of Energy and some other agencies as well. The White House, on the other hand, is still resisting. And I understand it could be up for obviously it's a it's a big issue and it's got geopolitical ramifications.

That's what I want to focus on. What is the geopolitical play on this? Because the White House, obviously it's clear they do not want to tag this as a leak out of a lab. Yeah, the facts are clear since March of 2020, three years ago now when I said that this almost certainly came from a lab.

Now everyone can see it. Every intelligence agency is going to make the same conclusion that that is the near certain probability. The reason they're walking away from that is because once you say that this came from the Chinese lab, you know that Xi Jinping would have known about this. We know that then the cover up was connected to that. And that requires holding the Chinese Communist Party accountable, actually imposing real costs on them for the millions of lives lost, the billions of dollars in wealth that was destroyed. So it's a political statement for National Security Advisor Sullivan to say, hey, there's no consensus on this is a statement that is trying to kick this can down the road, probably trying to figure out how to get through the next two years without having to deal with this very serious matter that we now know to be near certain. Xi Jinping knew that there was a lab leak.

He covered it up and sent this virus around the world. We all know the results of that. So what does accountability look like? We hear that often with even like the war in Ukraine.

If China used arms Russia with any weapons that can be used for deadly force, they're already sending over some non-deadly tactical items. But if they do that, there will be consequences. In the case of the COVID situation, what would consequences look like? Well, goodness, there's multiple things, Jordan.

It's the right question. First, there's certainly government action that can be taken. Don't forget this lab, this Wuhan Institute of Virology is still open, still doing science and research. I pray no longer American money in there doing it, but getting that thing shut down as a governmental task. Second, there should be financial consequences for the decision makers and for the Chinese Communist Party. I know you folks at the ACLJ, you guys have done great work on cases just like this before.

I hope everyone listening understands that. I'm sure you all are thinking about a strategy to go hold accountable financially those who imposed real financial costs on America. This wasn't some far off problem for us. We all lived it. We all experienced that people lost jobs. Families were hurt. And there are remedies for that in the U.S. court systems and frankly, in international systems as well. And then finally, I think it tells us a lot about what we've already known about international organizations. The World Health Organization failed and it's a single mission. Xi Jinping was able to manipulate the United Nations in a way.

And we should make sure that the Chinese Communist Party pays in those places as well by kicking them out of those institutions that cause so much death and destruction about an intentional decision from Xi Jinping. You're speaking today at CPAC. What are you going to tell the conservatives in attendance?

What's going to be the theme? Remember, America's counting on conservatives to take this nation forward. The core idea is that we have known, Jay, that you've worked on, the ACLJ has worked on for decades. These are the right principles to build America back to the right place, whether it's the Wuhan virus, whether it's an attorney general that is prosecuting ways that are deeply unfair. The way you get this back is by hard-nosed conservatism that understands American greatness, never apologizes, and always works to put the American people in the front of everything they do, whether it's abroad or here at home. Very good.

Mike Pompeo, of course, Senior Counsel for Global Affairs for the ACLJ, former Secretary of State, Director of the CIA. Mike, thanks as always. I want to reiterate what Secretary Pompeo just said, and that is your support of the ACLJ and all these issues that we just discussed in this segment are really critical. This is how we engage on these issues, and that's where your support comes in. I encourage you to go to ACLJ.org and stand with us in our matching challenge campaign. Jordan's going to lay out how that works for you, but it's really important that we hear from you.

So it's simple. What we do is we have a group of donors that are loyal to the ACLJ that come together and say, we will match the donations that come through in the month of March to ACLJ. So if you make a $50 donation right now at ACLJ.org, that group of donors will match that donation.

So you have to take the initial action for them to, of course, for the match to occur. So it takes those of you who are listening right now to make that donation. And by the way, don't get scared away by amounts. It could be a $5 donation. And when that's matched, it's matched by another $5 donation. So it's like $10. If you were able to donate $15, that's matched by another $15 donation.

So it brings in $30 to the ACLJ. Without your initial action and your donation, we don't get that matching promise. That only occurs through you taking action and donating, which you do online at ACLJ.org. Right on the home page, you'll see matching challenge. Can't miss it. Takes a couple of minutes to donate at ACLJ.org.

Be a part of that match. Welcome back to Cinco. We are taking your calls to 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. Attorney General Garland was pushed by Senator Cruz about the violence at pro-life pregnancy centers. Why aren't there people devoted to figuring out who firebombs these crisis pregnancy centers and threatens these crisis pregnancy centers? They do it under the banner of Jane's Revenge. How unified is that group? Why has the FBI not got a task force on it?

By 27, take a listen. Why do you send two dozen agents in body armor to arrest a sidewalk counselor who happens to be pro-life, but you don't devote resources to prosecute people who are violently firebombing crisis pregnancy centers? It is a priority of the department to prosecute and investigate and find the people who are doing those firebombings. They are doing it at night and in secret, and we have found one group which we did prosecute.

You found one. How many have there been? How many attacks have there been? A lot, and if you have any information specifically as to who those people are, we would be glad to have that. This is pathetic. This is the Attorney General of the United States in charge of the FBI who is saying, hey, they do these at night.

What do you want us to do here? This is the guy that says all I know is they're doing it at night, so it's hard to do it. The others do it during the day. And what are they doing during the day? They're handing a piece of literature to a woman seeking access to an abortion clinic.

What are they doing at night? Blowing the buildings up that house pro-life crisis pregnancy centers. He then asked Ted Cruz for information to those people. Just that nastiness again, this idea. Right there when he did that, you realize the Department of Justice could care less about those pro-life pregnancy centers. In fact, they would like them destroyed. In fact, the guy they arrested with 27 FBI agents was acquitted by a jury because they couldn't prosecute him.

Now, Andy Econimo, Senior Counsel for the ACLJ, was head of the Criminal Division for the U.S. Attorney's Office for Atlanta. The idea that the excuses that we can't get to these people is because it happens at night, we know the surveillance in cities is unbelievable. I mean, it's laughable except it's serious. Well, that is ludicrous.

And it is. You want a laugh in his face, but it is very serious to say that the FBI cannot prosecute the crimes because the attacks on pro-life centers typically take place at night. What a ridiculous statement to make. I can't prosecute the crime because it occurred in the nighttime.

What does that have to do? Most of these carjackings, most of these burglaries are nighttime crimes. Murders, nighttime crimes. Does that mean that we do not have the capability in the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation to prosecute anybody after 7 p.m. at night because we can't tell who they are? This is silly. And it's absurd for the Attorney General of the United States to make a remark like that. And as Jordan pointed out, and I want to say this, him asking Senator Cruz, if you've got any information about where they are and what they are and what they're doing, you tell me that's not a United States Senator's responsibility.

He's not law enforcement. How pathetic is this? This is the FBI that's supposed to be catching the terrorists. They don't care. No, they don't care. They don't care.

They would like the pro-life centers shut down, so if that means they get firebombed. So be it. So be it. Right. I mean, I'm not going to say they want people to get hurt. I think that's going too far.

But if it's happening at night and no one's getting hurt and it's just shutting down the pro-life procedures, well, those are centers of mis and disinformation. So don't they deserve it? And by the way, I guess they'll only find them if Ted Cruz can do the – I mean, think about the resources they have. They're asking a senator for help. That's like when they put up that $25,000 reward.

That's wonderful. What a joke. That was – we're not going to even try. Let's play Josh Hawley, press the attorney general as well. Let's take a listen. You are the attorney general.

Give me your answer. Do you think that it was objectively reasonable and they followed your guidelines in sending 20 to 30 armed agents to terrorize these people? Yes or no? The facts I have, which are those presented by the FBI, are not consistent with your description. So you think it was reasonable? I'm saying the facts are not as you describe. What, that the children weren't there? That there wasn't – that there weren't long guns there?

That there weren't agents? What wasn't – what do you dispute? What's the factual premise you dispute?

Be specific. The FBI said they don't agree with your description of – Be specific. They don't agree with what?

Of how many agents, of the agents who were there and of what their roles were. They don't agree. Do you know the jury in this case acquitted Mr. Houck, so I'm sure you're aware. Do you know how long it took him? I am aware and we respect the decision of the jury. Do you know how long it took him?

I don't know. One hour. I mean, first of all, Josh Hawley from legal school is right there, but second of all, a guy is acquitted after a federal grand jury, after he gets indicted by a federal grand jury. The case is tried by their lead free access to clinic actresses act lawyer that handles abortion clinics, and he's acquitted, Andy, in one hour. I mean that means the jury goes back, basically they do their – They have to pick their foreperson.

That took about 35 minutes. Yeah, and then they said guilty or not guilty? Not guilty. Thank you, Bob.

We're done. Exactly. And the attorney general's answer to this is not the way – they never will give you a factual predicate for any of this. By the way, his lawyer offered to surrender him when the indictment came down. You know, one of the big mistakes that people make in the FBI nowadays is when you offer to surrender your client, no, they want to make a big show. They want to go there with the manacles and the handcuffs and the leg irons, and they want to put these people who are pro-life in shackles and drag them to the courthouse down the middle of Peachtree Street in Atlanta, for example.

Bring them into the courthouse when they are the absolute most docile people in the world who do not engage in any violent activity so that they can make a showing to the woke left that we're going to really prosecute these people. And we're going to show you the power of the FBI and the Department of Justice. You know, I've defended these free access to clinic entrances at cases.

I have challenged them in court. We have fought aggressively on federal laws that try to limit free speech and protests outside of abortion clinics. We're handling one right now at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. So at the ACLJ, we are front and center on all of this on the life issue. And I want to encourage you to take time today to stand with us right now at ACLJ.org. And the reason I'm saying that is we are in a match.

March is a big matching challenge month for us. And your support at ACLJ.org makes a huge difference. So let me encourage you to go to ACLJ.org, support our work, which not only keeps us broadcast on the air. If you're listening to us right now, that's how you're watching us, keeps the broadcast on the air, but also keeps us in court to fight for life, gets us in front of legislative bodies, as well as you're going to see in the next segment of the broadcast. Your support on all of these issues makes a huge difference. And we're in this matching challenge campaign.

And that means this. If you donate to the ACLJ, we have a donor that's going to match that gift. So if you donate $50, we're getting another $50.

Effectively, the ACLJ gets $100. So it's really imperative that we hear from you on this. It's critical, it's important, and we want to encourage you to support our work.

And it goes, folks, right to the heart of these constitutional liberties. You just heard from Mike Pompeo, senior counsel with the ACLJ. I mean, to bring in the caliber of talent, of lawyers that we have at the ACLJ and policy experts, government affairs professionals, takes the support of all of you together.

And so many of you listen to us or watch us every day on this broadcast. We've been doing this for 25 years. Your support keeps all of this going forward, and we encourage you to do that at ACLJ.org.

That's right. So the matching challenge for the month of March, it's very simple. If you donate $25, we have a group of donors that are going to match every donation that comes through the month of March. So if you donate $25 right now today at ACLJ.org, that triggers a matching $25 donation.

So what does that mean? Effectively, because of your $25 donation, the ACLJ receives a total of $50. So again, we are a nonprofit tax-exempt organization, so we get that entire $50 to utilize for our work.

Again, the numbers go up and down, so if you can't give as much as you usually give, it's still a very important time to give because it adds up. The $10 donations that, again, become $20. The $25s that become $50.

The $50s that become $100. Donate today. Be part of our matching challenge at ACLJ.org. Keeping you informed and engaged. Now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. All right, welcome back to Sekulow.

We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110. If you're watching the broadcast, if you're watching on Rumble or Facebook or YouTube, share it with your friends and family. We've seen tremendous growth in our Rumble audience in the last couple of weeks, and that's awesome because we're able to connect to you not just by audio but by video as well. You're able to see us and interact with you live through the chat there, through your calls that come into the broadcast, and your questions as well. Yeah, I want to get back into the situation with Chris, Ray, Andy, and that is you've got the FBI director basically saying in the situation with China that the COVID was likely from a lab.

This is the FBI, which is the world's most prestigious investigative agency in the country. That's what they say. Yeah, but for him to say that, they would have to have evidence to back that up. I would think so. I would think that he would.

That's a big statement. I think he would have evidence to make it up. I know Chris, Ray, and I've dealt with him, and if he made a statement that it was a lab-generated, lab-propagated virus, then you would think that the FBI would have some basis in fact for making that remark.

I agree with you. Brett Baer interviewed our friend from Fox News yesterday. This is about the virus issue.

Take a listen to this. There's this Department of Energy study that says it's likely to have come from a lab leak, although the confidence is low. It cites the FBI. What is the determination by the FBI?

So, as you note, Brett, the FBI has for quite some time now assessed that the origins of the pandemic are most likely a potential lab incident in Wuhan. There was also questions that came, and we talked about this earlier, and that was on this issue with these pro-lifers that were arrested. A pro-life guy was arrested for violating the Free Access to Clinic Entrances Act, which is a felony. He was indicted.

They surrounded his house with weapons pulled. It went to trial, a federal trial. The jury went out for 60 minutes and found him not guilty. The FBI, though, when they did this arrest, acted like this guy was a terrorist. He had no prior criminal record, and his lawyer was willing to surrender him. Take a listen with Brett Baer pressed him on it.

So, let's talk about by the book. Mark Houck, Pennsylvania pro-life activist, arrested at his home in front of his family for an alleged violation of the Freedom of Access of Clinics Act, alleged incident which he was protesting in front of an abortion clinic. He was recently acquitted of all charges at trial. The show of force for that arrest, that decision to use that force, was that by the book?

Those decisions are made, as they should be, by the commanders on the ground in the field office who have the expertise about when to conduct operations safely and securely for the safety of everybody involved. And to my knowledge, those processes were all followed in this case. Andy, there's no way that could have been followed in this case. Well, you know what?

The lawyer was willing to surrender him. The guy had no previous criminal correct arrest record. That's total nonsense. It is. And if that's the case, then those commanders who were there should be fired.

Right. The guy was tried by a federal jury in a federal court and was acquitted, acquitted in one hour. They took 20 houses, 20 agents, more than 20 agents surrounding his house. And this is where we got, to me it's unbelievable that this happened, Jordan, quite frankly. I think, again, that there's no outrage even at the top to say, this is wrong, this should never have happened. This is escalating a situation. Any time you bring out guns, and you know what, I don't like saying this about the FBI, but you know what I think they want in these situations? An incident to occur. They can then blame the pro-life activist.

So he sees all these people with guns, he's defending his family, some violence occurs, and then it's the pro-life activist attacking the FBI. We just got a $250 gift to the ACLJ on our matching challenge campaign for one of our viewers on Facebook. I know you're doing that at Rumble as well. We encourage you to do that right now. We're in a matching challenge campaign for the month of March. ACLJ.org for that. That's ACLJ.org. Your support means a lot, makes a big difference on how we move forward. And we encourage you to do that at ACLJ.org.

And any amount you donate, we get a matching gift for. We've got more on the Chris Ray defense, more on Merrick Garland. What a horrible situation for the United States to be in at the Department of Justice.

Back with more in a moment. Welcome back to Secular. We are taking your calls to 1-800-684-3110 as well as your comments online. We did say on Facebook someone made a $250 donation on our matching challenge. That means effectively right now the ACLJ received $500 because of that $250 donation.

We really appreciate that. So again it just shows how that can add up very quickly through whether you can make a donation of that size, whether you make a $50 donation or a $20 donation. It all adds up again at ACLJ.org. You'll see that matching challenge right on the homepage.

Alright, I want to play, this is another question with Chris Ray from our friend Brett Baer. Take a listen to this one. Historically FBI protocols that a defendant has, if he has no criminal history, is not believed to be violent or pose a threat to public safety that he or she is permitted to self-surrender rather than subject dynamic execution of an arrest warrant.

Here's what I'm talking about is the dual system. There's that for a pro-life activist but not that for a Black Lives Matter protester who maybe torches a federal building over the summer. So that disparity, that dichotomy is what sticks in people's mind. I understand that people have their opinions. All I can tell you is that we have one standard, one standard, which is irrespective ideology of politics in this country, it doesn't matter what you're upset about or who you're upset with, you don't get to express that upset with violence.

You know this is interesting. Of course he didn't answer Brett Baer's question number one. And then he says there's one standard. But there's not. Because the protocol is if you don't have a criminal history, if there's not that kind of situation, and the person is willing to surrender, you let them surrender. And then he pointed out the fact that pro-life activists were taken in handcuffs with guns pointed at the family. Black Lives Matter activists who torch federal buildings were not treated the same way. And his answer is I understand people have their opinions.

Andy, this has nothing to do with opinions. It has everything to do with equal protection under the law and due process. Listen, Chris is being disingenuous, makes that statement about we have one standard.

You don't have one standard, Chris Ray, and you know you don't have one standard. You know that you take violent action with respect to people at pro-life clinics who are protesting, who are trying to defend life. You know that if it's Black Lives Matter or if it's the woke left, you take it easy and you back off. I know that's the case and you know that's the case. Why don't you say that and admit it for heaven's sake? You know, can we play that when Merrick Garland was asked a question about the jury and he says, oh, I respect the jury?

Because this is the ridiculous nature of it. This guy's charged with a pre-access to clinic entrance act violation. That means he's indicted by a federal grand jury. He's arrested at his home with guns by FBI agents. He goes to a federal trial in front of a federal court judge where he puts on a defense. And the jury goes back for one hour. And you know what that jury says? Not guilty. Not guilty. Listen to this. You are the attorney general.

Give me your answer. Do you think that it was objectively reasonable and they followed your guidelines in sending 20 to 30 armed agents to terrorize these people? Yes or no? The facts I have, which are those presented by the FBI, are not consistent with your description. So you think it was reasonable? I'm saying the facts are not as you describe.

What? That the children weren't there? That there weren't long guns there?

That there weren't agents? What do you dispute? What's the factual premise you dispute? Be specific. FBI said they don't agree with your description. Be specific. They don't agree with what?

Of how many agents, of the agents who were there, and of what their roles were. They don't agree. Do you know the jury in this case acquitted Mr. Houck? I'm sure you're aware. Do you know how long it took him?

I am aware and we respect the decision of the jury. Do you know how long it took him? I don't know.

One hour. You know what, here's the thing that's the most trouble. You said they don't agree with, the FBI doesn't agree with the assessment. Well I don't agree with the FBI arresting this guy, charging with the crime, indicting him, the Department of Justice, trying him, and then he gets acquitted. And what's his recourse then?

After they've terrorized his entire family. And Merrick Gartland's answer is, the FBI doesn't agree with your conclusion. Does the FBI agree with my conclusion that they made up the Russian probe? Do they agree with that? Do they agree with that Strachan page where we're trying to take down a sitting President of the United States? Do they agree with that? I don't know.

You want to go through the list? Do the FBI agree when they put in a FISA warrant that they changed what the actual email said that was the predicate of the FISA warrant and lied to a federal court judge? And that lawyer's discipline, by the way, is he suspended for six months.

Six months. And that was an FBI lawyer. So yeah, we have the right, Andy, to be really suspect right now. Well we should be outraged and not just suspect, Jay. I think I'm outraged by the way.

Yeah, the sound of your voice would indicate outrage to me. Senator Hawley asked the question of the Attorney General of the United States, do you know how long it took the jury to acquit Houck? You would think he would know.

And he said, I don't know. We respect the decision of the jury. But he didn't even know how long it took to acquit him. And the senator had to say, it took an hour. Don't you think? I think he... I think taxpayer dollars are being used to fund all this.

You realize that. The trial, the arrest, the FBI agents... The FBI agents using all these DOJ attorneys and then again, like Josh Hawley said, at the end of the day it took them an hour to acquit.

And as Andy said, most of that time was probably spent just determining the kind of the logistics of the jury. But we can't catch those ones bombing the clinics because you know what, folks? They do that at night. And when you do stuff at night, the FBI can't figure out who did it because... That's pretty scary since most crime is done at night. Really.

Most crimes are at night. So is that really... America... This is pathetic. Pathetic. But he is pathetic.

Yes. And he's been... That's why he didn't deserve his file in the Supreme Court. And they gave him this in return and it's just...

Almost... It's not as bad as a lifetime appointment, but you wonder why we have crime running rampant through all the country. It's because they're focused on the pro-life activists, not the actual criminals. Because if that's...

The FBI is afraid of that pro-life activists where they need 30 FBI, then how many FBI have to show up to arrest one cartel member? Well, this is the problem. Yeah, but you don't even...

But they're too scared to do that because those guys fire back. Yeah. So this is the situation.

You've got... This is a government out of control. Now here's what we do at the ACLJ though. We don't just say, oh, this is terrible.

Oh, this is bad. We file maybe a Freedom of Information request and find out what the heck was the charging decision here. How did this all happen?

Who was getting these emails from these people? Who was making the decisions on the FBI field office makes these determinations in accordance with protocol? What does that protocol actually say in your Department of Justice FBI manual, which is supposed to be the way this is done? Oh, this one blames it on the field agent. This one blames it on the manual. We give equal justice.

We treat everybody the same. We just can't find the people that blow up the Abortion Pro-Life Center. Sorry about that. Can't find them. They're not out here.

Can't find them, but everybody else we can. This shows you the absurd nature of this, but this is where the ACLJ comes in. When we go to court, whether it's on a Freedom of Information Act request or whether it is in federal court defending life, you're getting us there. And that's one of the things I want to talk about because in talking about getting us there, we had one of our lawyers yesterday in Maryland defending life on a Maryland legislation that is so broad. It's another one of these perinatal situations, which is abortion up to the time of delivery.

Take a listen and take a look if you're watching our social media. If Maryland wants to add this extreme bill to its constitution, I urge you not to do it under the guise that this goes back to Roe or that Dobbs made this necessary. This has nothing to do with Roe. This is so far beyond Roe. I heard at the committee last week before the House testimony that this would actually allow late term abortion up to birth of a healthy baby. And they weren't open to an amendment. It's not tied to viability at all. This is not going back to Roe, and we respectfully request that you report this bill unfavorably.

Thank you. Jordan, talk about when we do those hearings, what we're trying to do as the predicate to court action. Yes, and it's also to make sure that the legislators there are exposed, those who are on the payroll of Planned Parenthood through their campaign donations and doing Planned Parenthood's bidding, that what they are selling to the people is not, in fact, what they are voting on in the legislature. They are not just trying to codify Roe. They are going way past Roe and allowing, as Ben said, abortion up till birth. And that there's no viability standard.

That was Roe. There's no viability standard at abortion at nine months. The child's viable.

The child's viable at eight. And we know through technology it can be viable much earlier than that through other procedures. But this is the abortion distortion on display. We make sure that it's noted that they know exactly what they're voting for as infanticide, nothing more, nothing less. And that, again, makes, we did defeat this the last time through. It's a little tougher this time in Maryland because you've got a Democrat governor.

We had a moderate Republican governor who was not pro-life but was against late-term abortion, so it didn't move that time. So now they're trying once again. And, again, we don't give up in these kind of states like Maryland. People would honestly, I think, kind of say, well, I can't believe you're even fighting it out in Maryland.

I just want to remind you, we beat them the first time out, so you've got to go back. I mean, last week we had this situation where they wouldn't let Ben testify. And it was some procedural change they had made post-COVID, even though we had testified a number of times. And about half the times we've been invited to testify, we've been shut down there. But did we show up every time?

Yes. Every single time. Now, folks, stay tuned. If you're watching our social media apps, share it with your friends. Because I've got, we've got one more on the FBI and the Department of Justice we want to go through because it's outrageous. What the Richmond office did, and we're in court on that one.

We'll tell you about that when we come back for a break. Support our work. Keep this broadcast on the air, ACLJ.org.

Support the work, what we're doing with our matching challenge campaign at ACLJ.org. We also have Congresswoman Claudia Tittie joining us as well from New York's 24th congressional district about the border surge, not at the southern border, but where she represents the northern border, Canadian border with the United States. You don't want to miss it. Be right back. All right, welcome back to Sekulow. We're joined now by a great friend of the broadcast, good friend of the American Center for Law and Justice as well, Congresswoman Claudia Tittie, who represents New York's 24th congressional district. And that's key to the first part of our discussion with Congresswoman Tittie because, Congresswoman, we have heard about a surge of illegal immigration at the northern border.

I just want to make sure it's clear for everybody. And you, along with your colleagues, because you represent Americans who live on and near that border, you've launched a northern border security caucus. It's almost shocking to me that this is necessary, but tell people about what's going on.

Well, thank you for having me on and thank you for highlighting this. And while everybody's focused on the southern border, you can go back to my interviews even years ago where I say, don't forget, there's a northern border and we have issues on this border. And what's happened is the overstressed situation on our border agents in the southern border, because of the failure of the Biden administration and Secretary Mayorkas to enforce the law, to do the common sense things that we did under the Trump administration, continues to cause this cartel control of the border, whether it's trafficking drugs, human trafficking, the disasters we're seeing throughout our country. And we've diverted so many of our northern border agents who control a huge swath of land across all the way across, including a big part of New York, have been diverted to the southern border to try to help deal with the mass immigration there. We now see in the northern border of New York, and I'm just referring to the Swanton sector, is actually over 800 percent increased since Biden took office. So this is a major problem up in the New York region, and we don't have the border agents to handle it. We also have a state reservation, a Native American reservation on that border with Canada that sort of crosses the border, and that's controlled by our New York governor mostly.

There's some arrangements that have been in place, but for decades it's been a problem. So people in New York see this porous border upstate. We've heard from our sheriffs around the northern New York region and down into my district that they have seized all kinds of cars with fentanyl that have come from the northern border. These people are able to get to New York City and other areas where they meet up with their cartel friends and distribute this dangerous fentanyl and other illicit drugs all around our country, the human traffic. We've heard about gun running.

It used to be illegal cigarettes until the Democrats made them legal and really hurt our other cigarette manufacturers against them. So this has just been an area that has plagued New York and is even worse now because we don't have border agents who can focus their time on this really important issue. You know, the border issues are significant around the country, and you're right, the northern border has not gotten the attention. We've talked about it here, we've talked about it with you before. It's not gotten the attention that it needs. I want to turn, though, attention for a moment, if I can, Congresswoman, and that is you are very concerned, you led a group of members of Congress, very concerned about what's going on with the Iranian majils, the parliament there, who have signed in late last year an open statement calling for the Islamic Republic of Iran's government and judiciary to, quote, show no mercy towards protesters and compared them to ISIS terrorists. Yeah, this is something that's devastating. It's bipartisan, can you believe it?

I teamed up. Marco Rubio and, of all people, Katie Porter, Senator Cardin, and numerous others, we teamed up, I led the letter with Marco Rubio and called for our Director of National Intelligence to look into this. How many of these members of the Iranian parliament, who, by the way, showed no mercy to peaceful protesters all across Iran, getting executed, tortured, imprisoned for peaceful protests, were standing up to a brutal regime that is tyrannical, and yet their family members, the parliamentary family members, are able to come to the United States, they're able to get jobs, earn American dollars, go to school, learn at American universities, and buy land in America, and there's nothing being done by the Biden administration. The speckless administration continues to ignore this unique opportunity, this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, where we have a regime that is weakened, where if we could exhibit strength and keep on the pressure campaign that was put in place by President Trump, enforced by Secretary Pompeo, with what we were doing with Iran, maximum pressure, taking out Soleimani, taking out al-Baghdadi, putting pressure on the Iranian regime's military police, and holding them accountable, but the Biden administration remains neutral, trying to get into this week, you know, and re-engage in this week nuclear program, and it's just disastrous, but we have these people pleading for help. This is not 2011, when people are seeking reforms. These people are seeking democracy, they're seeking peace, they're seeking freedom, and they're seeking a chance to turn this regime by the people against the regime that's been in place since 1979, when the Shah was overturned.

You know, Congressman, I want to go back to this, too. It's nice to hear that there's some bipartisan work on Iran, because the human rights abuses are so egregious, their military actions, the attempt to get nuclear weapons, the rhetoric that they use against the United States and our ally Israel, calling for the destruction of our country, of the state of Israel as well, and that it shouldn't be a partisan issue to oppose this Iranian regime. And it seems like while there may be some of that pushback that goes on from the executive branch, that Congress and the legislative branch is waking up to the fact that, hey, we need to unite around this issue.

Oh, absolutely. And it's amazing that the Biden administration remains very quiet on this whole issue. It's like, oh, great, there's Iranian protesters.

That's nice. You know, much the way the Obama administration looked at it, and I don't know, Joe's memory is not that great, and I wonder if he thinks this is just a replay of 2011. I think a lot of Iranian experts and people will tell you that watch the Middle East. This is a unique opportunity.

This is different. These are people seeking a new government on their own through protests, dangerously putting themselves in harm's way, where they're on an execution list. I mean, this regime is executing people.

This government is supporting the ultimate, as you said, the ultimate penalty of killing and executing human beings who are simply asking for freedom, for a chance to have a voice in their government. And where's Joe Biden? Joe Biden is busy wandering around, you know, not really dealing with this issue.

Who knows what he is? Criticizing poor women who have lost their children to fentanyl overdoses and mocking them and laughing at them. I mean, this is really incredible that we're seeing this.

And the other interesting thing is look at the bipartisan support, because guess what? The Iranians around the world, the diaspora who have gone other places, have done exceedingly well, because this is a country that is known for its historic achievements and contributions to humankind for centuries. The Persian culture, a very educated part of the world that has been ravaged and destroyed by this regime, by this, you know, religious tyranny that we have there. And they're causing disruption and violence in the Middle East, the biggest sponsor of terrorism, you know, the biggest problem that Israel faces, our partner in the Middle East.

Imagine a free and democratic Iran could change actually the world, because peace in the Middle East would really change the balance of power. You're right. Congressman, we appreciate you being on. Thank you so much for all you're doing for your constituents, but also for all of us around the country. We appreciate it so much. Folks, again, your support for the ACLJ makes such a significant difference, and we're in a matching challenge campaign. It means this. Any amount you donate, we get a matching gift for.

It's that straightforward. If you donate $250 today via Facebook, great. That's matched. That means we got $500. Many of you have done it by also on Rumble and our other social media apps and also by radio. ACLJ.org for that.

ACLJ.org for the matching challenge campaign. We've got a lot more to talk about on tomorrow's broadcast. We couldn't get to a lot of it today because there's so much going on. We'll talk to you then.