Today on Sekulow, the FBI confirms the existence of the Biden bribery document, so will Congress get to see it?
We're also going to be joined by Senator Marsha Blackburn. 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. In the next segment of the broadcast, Senator Marsha Blackburn is going to be joining us. We're going to hit the debt ceiling head on. She's also got a new probe into the current VA chief. Dennis McDonough, who was the chief of staff under President Obama, got briefed on the FBI's Trump-Russia probe back in the summer of 2016.
He's kind of gone. People haven't really asked him questions like, what all happened after you were all briefed? President Obama, you, and the top Obama team.
Did you guys do anything at the White House? We're going to talk to Senator Blackburn about that, so two hot-button issues. Of course, as the debt ceiling bill heads to the U.S. Senate, it's important too to hear from her on what she expects and what she's looking for. Now that the Senate begins debate on that, they've got about five days before default hits. And that's, of course, what people are usually concerned about, especially with the markets, is that if we do default on the full faith and credit of the United States, you can have your credit rating moved down.
You can also have a lot of stock market issues. So far, the stock markets have been very positive because the House was able to pass this out in a big win for Kevin McCarthy, actually. Whether you liked it or not, it was certainly a big win for Kevin McCarthy to push that out of the House of Representatives and send it to the U.S. Senate. We also now know that today, and we're going to get into this throughout the broadcast a couple of times, and take your calls on it, 1-800-684-3110. The FBI Director Christopher Wray has confirmed the existence of the FD 1023 form. That's the confidential informant form the FBI uses that then Vice President Biden engaged in a criminal bribery scheme with a foreign national. He had never before actually admitted that that document actually existed. But he is still unwilling to give that document over to the House Oversight Committee. What he's now done is offered the chairman of that committee, Chairman Comer, an opportunity to review it in a skiff, so in a secure room, and there are redactions that have been made. So right now, the committee is saying that does not justify what our subpoena requested, and they are still potentially moving forward, it looks like, withholding Christopher Wray in contempt as those negotiations with the FBI continue. You think about it this way, Logan, at first they wouldn't even announce that the document existed. No one is alleging, by the way, that we know if the document is true or not. Really what Comer wants to know is if you got something like this, did you investigate it and find out if it was or wasn't true?
That's all. So at first they wouldn't even admit it existed. Then by saying we're going to hold you in contempt, ah, it does exist, and you can come see it now. First they said, no way we're ever going to show this to you. You'll never have access to this.
Then they say, you can come see it, but you have to see it in a secured room, a skiff. So the Congress has now got his back on the wall. I would imagine by the end of this Comer gets what he wants, it seems like. Seems like Christopher Wray does not want to be held in contempt, and I think that's because, remember he was appointed by President Trump? I'm not sure he's got like so many huge fans in the Biden administration. They might like to be able to put their own guy in charge of the FBI. Yeah, I think you're right.
I think there's not a lot of fans. I think you've kind of seen all the conservatives come out and say, yeah, we'll probably replace them, and I think you have a lot of Democrats probably thinking very similarly. It also ends up being this way. These are kind of, end up being thankless jobs, because I feel like always the American people and people within the government start souring within a few years. I think with the FBI directors, because they stay around 10 years, it's a little too long, especially with how politicized they are now. If they were just doing their job, you really barely even knew their name.
I think it'd be better. They kind of pop up when there's something major crime, you know? They announce that there's been a major criminal investigation done, and a major arrest made of like a cartel, or bad actors, or terrorists, and then they kind of go away and do their job.
But instead now, they become very much part of our political process, elevates them to almost a political actor, which they shouldn't be, and again, that's when they start weighing on people, both the right and the left. We come back. Senator Marsha Blackburn, share the broadcast with your friends and family. You don't want to miss it. We're going to hit right away with the debt ceiling and what's going to happen in the U.S. Senate. Be right back. Hi, welcome back to Secular.
We are joined by U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, a great friend of ours at the American Center for Law and Justice. Senator Blackburn, a lot to talk about, and of course, right on top of people's mind, because they're seeing it in the news continually. They're always trying to figure out how it impacts them, how it impacts the country, and of course, their economic standing at home and personally is the debt ceiling issue, which has moved now out of the House, and so it moves to the U.S. Senate, where you are a senator. Tell people your thoughts on where you stand with the current legislation that has been passed by the House and now that the Senate begins your own debate.
Yes, and we are getting ready to go to the floor in about 15 minutes. We'll find out more about a timeline. And Jordan, I think that first of all, we have to realize that nobody wants the federal government to default.
We have to say that is not an option. And second, Speaker McCarthy deserves a tremendous amount of credit for crafting a bill that got through the House back in April. I think it is shameful that the President did not even respond to him for 97 days and then came to the table. Now, the bill that went through the House last night, from what we know when we're waiting to see that final text, I do have concerns with this. First of all, to open in the debt limit amount and say, we're not putting a cap on the amount, we're going to cap it by a date.
That is a tremendous concern for me and here is why. If you look at what happened with our nation's debt, if you went back to George Washington and followed all the way to George W. Bush, you would have $10.6 trillion in debt. George W. Bush hands the key to the Oval Office to Barack Obama and during the Obama-Biden eight years, you had that debt doubled.
And we have seen this same repeated thing with the Biden administration. They have added about $5 trillion worth of debt in two years. I don't want to open in that. I do not like this underfunding the military. I do not like the fact that there's nothing that deals with the border.
There is nothing that will keep the 87,000 IRS agents from being hired. Those are all concerns that I have. Plus, you've got the issue on the across-the-board cuts and as you know, I'm a proponent of cutting across the board, getting everybody to have skin in the game and when we did the Budget Control Act in 2011, we used my 2% across-the-board legislation in that document. Well, this one has the 1% cut. But if you don't put the enforcement mechanism in there with it and if you allow a bureaucrat, the OMB director, to waive that 1% cut, then you have not accomplished anything. It's not going to give you the outcome that you want. Senator Blackburn, I think it's a spot, because I always like to be very realistic with our audience.
We always try to not oversell them, overpromise, and also just kind of give them the direct facts like you've been walking through. I think at the end of the day, we know as conservatives dealing with a Democrat President and a Senate that you're working with inside that's controlled by Democrats, but within a Republican House, that we can get some things that we want. We're probably not going to get everything we want, but ultimately it's kind of how far we go and how much we can get and also prevent the default, which would not be good for any American.
I think it's even more dangerous than before us, Senator Blackburn, because we've seen how the interest rates are rising and it would give them an excuse to even raise them more, which would really impact working families even more so sometimes than these defaults do, because it would have such an immediate impact on them at home. So I think there's even a more conservative, like, if we could get a deal we're comfortable enough with and say, you know what, we get this deal done, we don't default, we've got what we can, and let's come back and fight it out another day when we're in a better situation too. Yes, and you know, this, the team, McCarthy's team, felt as if they got what they could, and they know, and I think it was helpful to people to hear some of the House leadership last night say, this is just a very teeny tiny first step. They know that they're going to have to come through with finishing all 12 appropriations bills, and in those appropriations bills, which are the spending bills, they're going to have to make additional cuts and recisions and put in place other restrictions.
They know that. So we're going to have to cheer them on and help them get to that point where there are more recisions, and you'll see conservatives in the Senate trying to help them meet those objectives. You know, I wanted to move on to another issue. You have opened up a brand new probe, it's just reported by New York Post, I think it's the first time you're talking about it today, on the air, into the current, it's the VA Secretary, Dennis McDonough, who was, people might remember, the Chief of Staff to President Obama in 2016, in the summer of 2016, before that election, we know that there was a briefing by the FBI and top Obama officials in the Situation Room at the White House. On the probe, on the Trump-Russia collusion probe, and basically accusing, I guess, to those officials, saying that they believe that President Trump and his campaign was colluding with Russia in the election, and you now want to bring forward Secretary McDonough and say, you know, he's kind of not gotten as much attention, maybe we need to hear from him about what went on in that meeting and what came after. Did they just listen or did they actually do something? Well, and he was coming before us for a VA meeting.
And we were, and that was just as we were getting this Durham report. And it was interesting that the FBI placed him in that meeting. So, as I did my questions of him, for the VA hearing, I wrapped it up by saying, you know, it is terribly disappointing to read that you were in a meeting, that you were a part of crafting this Russia collusion. And he said he did not recall being in the meeting. I found that to be unbelievable. You know, the whistleblowers, the FBI have placed him in that meeting. I wanted to know, what did you do?
What was your participation? Did you agree with weaponizing the government? And we have to realize that Hillary Clinton's Russia collusion was a segment of her imagination. This was Hillary making up a story of what she thought would be a great way to go get Donald Trump because she didn't like him.
And she wanted to be the first female President of the United States and how dare he get in her way. So, they make this story up. Her campaign hires somebody to carry this out, to find a way to make this happen. They hire other people.
That's how you get fusion GPS. So, if you've got this being cooked up in the Situation Room at the White House, and the person involved in that is now the VA Secretary, and you've got all these issues at the VA, don't you want to hear straight from that person? Don't you want to know what their involvement is? Don't you want to know if they're dealing as they should be dealing with our veterans? Right now, we've got a backlog of over 250 cases for veterans' health care and benefits.
I think this is something we need answers from. We want to know that people that are serving the veterans in this country have the best interest of the veteran at heart. That that is first and foremost, that they are not politicizing this agency, that they are not picking winners and losers, that they are not going to or do not have a history of weaponizing an agency of the federal government against individuals. People are tired of two tiers of service and two tiers of justice coming from the US federal government.
Absolutely. Senator Blackburn, we appreciate all of your work. Go get them when it comes to this debt ceiling issue and the negotiations there. I know you're going to be fighting hard for all of us, not just in Tennessee, but the entire country, and also on this VA issue, because you're so right. How we treat our veterans, I think, reflects on our entire country.
I think it's kind of a way you can almost judge a country is how you treat those who volunteer to serve and to risk their life to protect our freedoms. As always, we appreciate you, Senator Blackburn, for joining us and spending time talking through these very important issues. I'm glad we have her in the US Senate. We are going to continue to take your calls at 1-800-684-3110. You can weigh in on the debt ceiling issue. You can weigh in on, again, some of these issues involving the FBI finally admitting that 1023 form does exist. You can see it, but you can see it in our skiff. Your committee staff can't get it, but don't hold us in contempt. Maybe he is going to be held in contempt when we talk about the FBI director. We'll get more into that when we come back as well.
Share it with your friends and family. We'll be right back on Secular. Alright, welcome back to Secular. So, as we reported, so if you're just joining us, it was great to hear from Senator Blackburn. I think it's a great day because she's literally, since it's going to begin debate today, shedding 15 minutes, I guess about right now, on the debt ceiling. And then they've got to get to, I think as she pointed out, so you kind of get this all straightforward in your head, the 12 different spending bills they've got to go through after this. And that, you know, we have to be realistic. There's obviously things she does not love that's passed out of the House, and she's got some real questions about, and I kind of think it's how far can we go, how much can we get as conservatives, understanding that we don't control the Senate, that we don't control the White House, and that default right now, while sometimes you could say, eh, we can default and kind of fight through that and go push them harder for a couple weeks. When people are really hurting economically, and the interest rates keep rising, let me tell you something, that gives the Fed an opportunity to go and say, you know what, instead of raising by a quarter point, we might need to raise it by a full point.
So, I mean, the economic consequences, negative consequences, have a working families. So the Democrats, while Republicans have Democrats in a quarter because they control the House, and the votes are very slim in the Senate, let's be honest, they've got Republicans up against the biggest quarter. They only have so much room to negotiate. So I think it's all about kind of take what you can and realize you can always come back to fight this another day on a lot of these issues. They always say like, oh, this is for 10 years, this is for this many years, but the truth is Congress keeps changing and overturning. So you can always push back.
So push as hard as you can, I think, is where we want to see that. Then on the issue that's not going away is still on the Trump-Russia issue. I mean, we're still learning about new officials who are, I mean, now we've got the White House chief of staff placed in a situation room months before the election being briefed about this, and no one thought, man, this sounds ridiculous. This is either so, if this is true, this is one of the worst things we've ever heard in the country in our history, that the Russians have infiltrated the leading Presidential candidate's campaign.
But if it's not true, it's the worst thing you could possibly say about a fellow American regardless of how you feel about their politics. We know it was all bogus, and you have to feel like most of them sat there going, this sounds like a book. This doesn't sound like reality. It doesn't even sound like, it just sounds like something a rival campaign would love to make up and have the federal government give this kind of feeling like, oh, oh yeah, it's real because we're investigating it.
They never did anything with it, but since we're investigating it, it must kind of give it like this feeling that it actually exists. So, what we do know that exists, though, is the 1023 form from the confidential informant that said that Joe Biden as vice President took $5 million as a bribe, I mean, that's what the whistleblower has testified to, $5 million as a bribe to enact certain policies. He took that bribe from a foreign national. Initially, when the House Oversight Committee went to Christopher Wray and was asking about this 1023 form that a whistleblower came to the Congress and said exists, he never even would acknowledge it exists. He never said they even had this form.
He just said, you don't get it. Well, now he's acknowledged because they said, well, okay, if you're not going to comply with our subpoena for the document, we're going to hold you in contempt of Congress. If you're held in contempt of Congress, you can actually be prosecuted. That's a crime that can be prosecuted by the Department of Justice. Would this DOJ do it? I don't think so with Merrick Garland. I don't think he's going to be prosecuting Christopher Wray for not letting them have a lot of documents about Joe Biden.
At the same time, he did make this accommodation attempt, which is, okay, I'm not going to give you and your staff the document to review, but you can come over to the FBI in one of our secret rooms and you can review it here, but it's also going to be heavily redacted. These members of Congress have total oversight over the federal government. It's kind of like a slap in the face. You can come see it, but not all of it because you're just a member of Congress. That does always seem to be the case. You're elected. Yeah, exactly. You're just someone who a President just appointed, made it through the process, but that is a ridiculous thing. That is where the branches of government, some of the oversight, it's very odd of what you can and what you can't get, what they can see and what they can't see, but then on the other hand, you have people who can see all these classified materials, can do all of these things, but they're not the elected officials. It's sort of a reformation that needs to happen.
Absolutely. I think that here it's like, well, you're not supposed to be able to see this because this is an ongoing investigation. Well, first of all, this is Congress. They have total oversight role and every time they go to court, they usually just expand their ability to get more information from the executive branch. So it's not really a good idea for the executive branch.
You can fight back. There's certain things certainly that if they're ongoing, but remember they wouldn't even admit that this was true and no one knows if the actual information on the report is true. No one is alleging it's true. All the whistleblower said is we got a document that said this and all Congress really wants to know is what did it say? Let us give a read because we'll also, if we read it, it sounds ridiculous. You know, maybe it wasn't worth a major investigation. Maybe it was kind of bogus sounding and it would admit that it would make sense that you guys didn't go further on it. Or, wow, I can't believe I read this and you didn't even check a couple of these allegations out?
Maybe made a couple phone calls? Because I think what Congress is upset about here, Logan, is first it took them this long to even get to admit that they had the form. I think really all they wanted to know was, was there an investigation done on these allegations?
If not, why? And so they said, okay, if you're not going to tell us that, let us look at it then because at least that will give us a clue into was it wild and salacious sounding that sounded like it couldn't be realistic? Okay. If not, but what do you, there's some reason they were protecting this, but slowly and surely as you, if you keep pushing, it's like our FOIA work, you keep pushing them and pushing them. Now you can see the document.
Maybe in a couple of days they'll have the document. Let's go ahead and go to the phones. If you want to call in 1-800-684-3110, we've got a call coming from Thomas in Texas who has a concern that a lot of people have. Thomas, you're on the air. Hey, uh, good afternoon guys. Appreciate you of my call. Actually, I'm calling from cash, Texas, which is appropriate right now.
Um, I don't understand why you, with all due respect to your center you had on there, you're just a bunch of knuckleheads. Tell me when in history anyone has ever been able to borrow themselves out of debt. This eventually it's going to have a come up and, and, uh, it's all going to crash. I would prefer it happen now during my generation rather than passing this down to my grandchildren. You know, I can suffer through it. I can survive.
I'm over 60 years old. I could live in despair for 20 years. Okay, but what you're saying, America should ever be at that point. We should be able to negotiate ourselves out of that. That's where I would disagree with you, Thomas.
I don't know. I first, I think we'd all agree on where the debt is. It's absurd. And Senator Blackburn said that as well. She went through, I think an excellent example of from the time of George Washington to George W. Bush. It was at 10.6 billion and then it's now now in the 30 trillions.
So, I mean, this has all happened very recently, 15 years. And I think that you say, Oh, I'd like to do this so that my grandkids don't have to live through it. I think we've got to learn this as a country because unfortunately the younger generations, Logan, think that you can just spend without consequence, that we can have this. This is funny money. We can have, we just send people money. It feels that way though. I'd say they make it feel that way. None of these numbers really are real and nothing is backed by anything.
So what does it matter? We've had calls in and goes, why don't we just print more money? Well, that because that devalues your courage. No, no, I understand that. I'm saying that that's how almost how you perceive money. I get what Thomas is saying.
I would take this burden on so that my kids don't have the burden. I mean, I think it's a patriotic position to have. I think it's more patriotic to say, let's not weaken our country to the point where the whole world seizes on us. Because if we crash the way you're talking, Thomas, guess who is going to be in charge of the world? A country that just manipulates currency. They don't care about this stuff.
China. They just manipulate. They're not going to take a fall like that. So we're not taking a fall like that. We're not going to let our country take that fall. We're going to keep fighting for good and for right. We'll be right back on Secular.
Keeping you informed and engaged. Now, more than ever, this is Secular. And now your host, Jordan Secular.
Welcome back to Secular. We are taking your calls to 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. Do we have the sound from Chairman Comer?
I just wanted to play that for folks. It's just very important to understand as we kind of reset that this whole idea that there was a confidential informant that came forward to the FBI. They have a 1023 form that alleged that Joe Biden as Vice President took $5 million, that's what the whistleblower said to Congress, from a foreign national to enact specific U.S. policies, which would be a serious allegation and crime. And now I guess currently it would be like an impeachable offense because he's President of the United States.
But certainly it would be important also for the American people to know and if there were others involved who might not have the same protections as the President of the United States. So, when they initially came forward with this information from the whistleblower and they went to the FBI, Christopher Wray wouldn't even acknowledge that the form existed and said, Congress certainly can't have it. Well, then they said, well, we're going to subpoena you. And then they failed to meet the subpoena yesterday. Then they said, we're going to hold you in contempt. And then suddenly we found out the document exists and we're not going to give it to you yet, but you can come see it.
Take a listen. He offered us the opportunity to come look at it in a private chip, but he was going to redact it. My experience with getting documents from the FBI when they're redacted, it's all black lines.
They don't show anything. But I'm going to say on this show what we told Director Wray, what Senator Grassley told Director Wray. He and I have already seen the 1023 form.
We knew what was in the 1023 form. Until we told Director Wray that, he never even admitted that the form existed. So, I mean, this is, I think the important part, Logan. Congress doing its oversight job, which is what they oversight committee is. They push it, but they don't accept the first response, which is that doesn't exist. They say, we got a whistleblower came to us.
I don't think they're just making this up. Oh, well, they found one. Oh, we got it.
The exact form. You can come, but we're going to redact it. And he's right. If you, because in our FOIA work, even when the FBI finally complies the first time they comply, it's literally blacked out. It's not even blacked out lines. It's like, man, this is just block it down.
It's like a, it's like a bad for the earth. You're going to have to, you need that Shaquille O'Neal like a printer refill refill because or else you're going to be going down to the, there's not even anywhere to buy ink anymore. Hopefully Amazon can get you into in time, but literally that's how blacked out it is absurdly. And he knows that's what he's going to get. He's going to show up in there. If he agrees to that as that's it. And then he's, he's not going to go back and be able to go, wait, what's this line was.
It'll mean nothing. But I think he's chipping away. And that's the important part is what you do with like our foil work at the ACLJ. You chip away, you keep pushing for it. You don't take their first answer. You don't take their second answer. Then you take them to court. Then they got to start complying. And even that answer you don't take.
Then you fight over their answers. And I mean, it's unfortunate, Logan, that Congress has to do this much work as the oversight committee. Because Lord knows if this was a document about Donald Trump, Christopher Wray would have handed it over that committee in 18 seconds.
Oh yeah. Somehow it would have been leaked. Everyone would have seen it. It would have been part of the regular news broadcast on MSNBC. There'd be some military Vintman out there giving his own transcript version of it that might not be accurate. Adam Schiff would be there.
Schiff would be in the skin. I think people need to understand what this means too, because maybe they don't understand the whole system. It's legitimately what, a room they can go on? Is it like, in my mind, there's like a light shining on this, there's like a dark room and there's just like a light that comes out of a box onto this one document and they can peer in.
Like the Lord of the Rings is how it feels to me. I feel like it's a lot more drop ceiling and not so fun. In fact, it's actually much more generic in the United States. You can designate certain rooms as these secure rooms. You can actually see online, you can buy one. A sensitive, carpetalized information facility. And it's like a conference room with all these protections about electronics coming in. You can also build them into, you could go into an office, the government, and not even know the room you're in could also be used as that. And many offices are. I think when Secretary Pompeo was on, his house was considered a skin. So they had secured his entire home when he was CIA Director and Secretary of State.
So it's a broader term. I think what you're thinking though is right. If you went to the FBI, you're going into a room with no windows, a little light, and a little table. You're like in the Lost Ark or something.
You're reading a bunch of redacted pieces of paper. Alright, we'll be right back. Alright, welcome back to Secchios.
We take your calls to 1-800-684-31. Tim, remember earlier in the week we were talking about a graduation speaker at the City University of New York School of Law. The City University of New York has a number of undergraduate institutions as well all over the city. There's been a lot of issues there with anti-Semitism. You saw that on display at the law school, which that was just one part of the horrendous statements being made by the student who was chosen by her peers. So didn't necessarily earn it by academics and then you know what, so what, we can't really do anything about it. They earned it because they got the grades. Now they were chosen by their peers and while they were criticizing even the school as not being liberal enough, criticizing law itself as a creation of white supremacy. We now see a new report. I'm going to bring Jeff Balaban into this discussion who oversees our office in Jerusalem but also works in a lot of our work combating anti-Semitism even right here at home in the United States, especially at the college campuses.
This is a little disturbing. So the City University of New York Law School, which is not the one that necessarily you've heard of off the top of your tongue, it sends more law school graduates into government and public interest jobs. 61% of its graduates last year went into the government and public interest jobs within 10 months of graduation, which is about as close as you can get a job. You've got to pass the bar, then you go get a job. That is more than any law school by double.
I think it's double the next law school down. When we talk about government, what do we mean? Of course the Department of Justice and places like that, but also IRS and DAs. Let me bring Jeff Balaban in because, Jeff, if we are sending these radicalized kids who have gone through this law school and cheer on that kind of speech that we heard, anti-American, anti-Semitic, I mean there's so many things there that were problematic, and that these are the people we are putting inside our government, and there's no question why we have institutions that should not be political at all overrun with hardcore anti-American ideologies. It's an excellent point, Jordan. I have not seen people put these two pieces of news together. CUNY Law School, which as you say, puts more people into government and what they call public interest, so all these groups that claim to be human rights organizations or ESG organizations or DEI organizations, they are training them in the most virulent anti-Semitism and, by the way, or not so by the way, anti-Americanism. And we saw it happen here. CUNY Law School, by the way, the same institution, is currently under investigation for violating New York's anti-discriminatory boycott law because they recently passed a resolution supporting BDS, which as of course we know is discriminatory boycotts against Jews. Yeah, and they were actually, Jeff, in that situation because that came up in her speech and we actually said, you know, she's starting to talk about things in her speech that could get them in trouble legally, which is that it's one thing, again, I guess like if a student body passes, but it's another thing that the actual school enacts a real divestment policy, that that does violate, it violates the laws of the state of New York, correct? Right, in fact, this is something which we've been talking about looking into via our abilities at ACLJ because here's what seems to have happened because we don't know for sure. First of all, there's a question, was this commencement speech reviewed?
There's some argument whether it was reviewed by faculty, often, or maybe almost always, commencement speeches are. Then it was posted online and quickly taken down. The only reason it was put back up online, we think, is because our client, our client in our case against CUNY, generally speaking, for its Title VI violations of anti-Semitism in terms of what's going on against Jews across the campuses there, so our client, Professor Lacks, he launched an investigation.
He lost a FOIL inquiry and suddenly the video went back on. So yeah, it's possible, Jordan, there may actually be evidence here that CUNY Law School is violating New York laws against discriminating against Jews. There's no reason why, I mean, Jeff, there's so many different government agencies that would have oversight here. We started with the governor, of course, the mayor, you've got city councils who could say, you know, what is going on in this university? How it's treating its professors, how other students with maybe opposing ideas, maybe if you're a Jewish student or if you were a student, I guess, who was maybe ROTC or served the military and you hear these kind of language coming after you or had family that were in the police and the way they're condemning police. I mean, again, students have speech rights, they can say things we don't all like, that's fine, that's part of the experience, but the college itself can't actually engage in discrimination and that's what I think is important for people to understand here. We're not just airing these to show you crazy, you know, law school graduate kids making crazy political statements that hopefully in a decade they move on from and join the real world. Unfortunately, they are joining the real world believing this and the reason why is because they're going to schools that appear to be actually enacting this crazy ideology, that they actually are discriminating, they actually are implementing the ideology. So it's not just allowing the students to have free speech, but it's in fact their free speech gives us an insight into what's going on at the schools, which is illegal conduct.
Right. Professor Lacks, this CUNY professor who, again, we're working with, he made a comment which I loved, which he says, you know, students have a right to be idiots. He said, I was an idiot when I was a student. It's not about what this student says. It's scary. Honestly, it's frightening to see the support that she had for these horrifying statements weren't just against Jews, but were against America as well. That's frightening itself, but that doesn't threaten our existence. What threatens us as a culture, what threatens Jews, what threatens America is that you have law schools who then take these people and train them and put them out to become decision makers, policymakers, lawyers, judges, put them into groups that are affecting policy and society, which is why we have to do our work here at ACLJ, which is the nexus of law and policy and media and culture, because that's exactly where they are.
And you see it. This is an unbelievable, this is a terrifying example. Yeah, because, Jeff, there was a great movement and we've seen it across the country to enact those BDS laws at states and municipalities adopted them. So local jurisdictions all the way up to the states have adopted these policies. And I think we're now living in a time where it's okay, we got them on the books. Now we've got to make sure these states are actually going to enforce them. And that might be easy in a red state, but you get into a blue state and it's kind of like that these officials, whether or not they really agree with this craziness or not, it's like, well, but that constituency, I need the hard left to vote for me. So maybe I'll just ignore actually investigating whether this is a violation of laws that we passed.
Right. We actually worked on New York's anti-BDS law, Jordan. I mean, I was working on it here and what happened was it was a split government. We had Cuomo was the governor, but we had a Republican controlled Senate and that passed the anti-BDS law, the anti-discrimination law. And then the Senate, I'm sorry, the assembly, which was Democrat controlled, did not. Governor Cuomo stepped in and he put it through by executive order. So you're right.
The divide between the right and the left. Listen, there are a number of Democrats, I have to say this, who did come out to condemn this particular speech, but there are the exceptions. Governor Hochul has been silent about it. The rule has been, the Republicans have been correct on this with some exceptions.
Democrats have been wrong with some exceptions. So in New York, that's how it played out, but it is the law. You are not allowed to discriminate against Jews for being Jewish or because you don't like Israel. And again, you personally can do that, but you can't use government funds, et cetera.
Government contract need to do that. There's a question whether CUNY is violating it, and this seems to be a red flag that we definitely need to pursue to see what's actually going on at CUNY law. I think the one positive out of this speech, well, there might be two. One is the American people can see how radical it is at these schools, not just the undergrads, judges, schools, but professional schools, people that are going to practice law. And again, at a school that's putting in, most of their students are going into government positions. So you think, why as a conservative do I, is the government always seems so hostile to me?
Government employees seem so hostile to me. Well, there's an example of it right there. But second, and maybe the kind of silver lining in this, is that she was starting to say that the school had done things that violate the laws of the state of New York. And so it gives us a reason to push into that and maybe potentially hold, which we're already engaged in other battles with the City University of New York, hold them accountable when it comes to the BDS issue as well. Because she was bragging about how they had adopted that and implemented it at the school.
It'd be one thing if, again, they want to adopt it in words, but if they're actually implementing the policy, they're violating the laws of the state of New York. And something can be done about that to stop it. Jeff, as always, we appreciate your insight.
Thank you for your work you do for us in Israel as well. Folks, when we come back, we'll take more of your calls to 1-800-684-3110. I think it was good to go back to that speech and say, what did we learn? Okay, take it in.
Sometimes it's very helpful. I mean, they tried to delete it. They deleted it off YouTube.
They at least took it down. They knew that there was a problem. And then of course the protest movement began on the campus again and they bowed down to the... As you do.
Which almost makes you think because she might have implicated them in problems with the law. Hopefully so. Let's get involved and see what happens. Hey, I do want to say if you're just joining us now, because I know a lot of people just did over on Rumble, we're going to reset a little bit. You'll hear about what that first segment was. Obviously, our title is the FBI confirms the existence of a Biden bribery document.
Yeah, I know a lot of you are clicking over to see that and you just heard a completely different segment. When we get back in just about a minute, we're going to go over that again. And we'll also be taking your phone calls. We'd love to hear from you. What are your thoughts on this situation coming out of the Biden bribery scheme that seems to be all in more closer and closer to being confirmed?
Confirmed. Give us a call. 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. Kind of last call for calls. So if you want to be on, this is the time to call.
1-800-684-3110. We'll be right back. All right, welcome back to Sekio. So a big development that happened, again, to kind of reset it for you.
We've got a lot of new people, of course, joining the broadcast, specifically on some of those who watch the broadcast on Rumble and other places like that. Remember, there was a whistleblower came forward to Congress, both to the House Oversight Committee and Chairman Comer, who oversees that, the congressman from Kentucky, and also to Chuck Grassley, the senator from Iowa, and their teams. And they said, listen, I've got this information. There's an FBI 1023 form that alleged that Vice President Biden at that time took a $5 million bribe, so it's a pretty big allegation, from a foreign national to enact specific policies of the United States and to push for certain policies of the United States. Clear violations of many laws brings up lots of issues. And the question was, did it ever get investigated? Not was it all true or not, you don't know that yet, but did you even look into it?
And if so, did you close it out and why? If not, why? And by the way, we'd like to see the document. And until yesterday, the FBI didn't even confirm the document existed. Christopher Wray wouldn't confirm it existed.
Then he was told he was going to be held in contempt if he didn't give it over to Congress because they issued a subpoena. And suddenly they said, it does exist and you can come see it in a skiff, which we talked about what that was, but it's going to be redacted. Which means, from the FBI, a bunch of lines that are blacked out so you can't even literally put a sentence together. I mean, seriously, that's how... And I think a lot of people think that the redactions are how it gets released publicly. I don't know if they understand that that's also still how they're seeing it.
That's not really how I kind of pictured it. In my head, I pictured, yeah, what we get is this redacted thing, but the member of Congress walks into a secured facility, they're seeing it. But that's clearly not the case. That is what they are supposed to be doing. But see, they have to get in the same battle that we do on FOIA, they have to do as members of Congress, which is really not a good process because Congress decides to fund these agencies. They exist because Congress provides them money, our taxpayer resources. So when Congress says, we need something from you, they're supposed to comply, at least do their best to comply. And if they have a reason why they can't, like if there's an ongoing investigation, there's certain things they could do and say, especially behind the scenes, but obviously that wasn't done here.
And they start looking ridiculous when they say, okay, it actually does exist and you can come, but you've got to come see it our way. And I want to play this from Chuck Grassley, who's talking to Bill Hibber about it, also very important because I think that there's a little bit more here. I think some of these members of Congress may have already seen it.
Take a listen. What I understand, he says you're okay to come to the Bureau and look at it. Is that the case and is that good enough for you?
Well, it's not good enough for me. We asked for the document a month ago. It's been subpoenaed. He ought to respond to a subpoena. We're doing the constitutional job of oversight. I have read that document. If he would read it and it's an unclassified document, he admits it exists and we aren't interested in whether or not the accusations against Vice President Biden are accurate or not. We're responsible for making sure the FBI does its job.
And here's why it's important. Remember yesterday we talked about how Katherine Harris at CBS, was this on our podcast? Did we even get to this on the show?
I don't know if we got to this on the show, maybe on the podcast. That whistleblowers came from the FBI, said that the FBI put derogatory evidence related to Hunter Biden. That they wrongly labeled that evidence as disinformation. This was evidence that could be and some that had already been verified. So some of the evidence was verified as true and was still labeled as disinformation. Some of the evidence was not yet verified, but could have been verified. So literally they took information they knew was true, labeled as disinformation, and then placed it in a highly restricted system that prevented other FBI investigators from reviewing it in the course of their investigation of Hunter Biden. So they took truth, bad facts about Hunter Biden, mislabeled it, and put it in a spot that the FBI, until these whistleblowers came out and said, you know, they did this.
So the investigators wouldn't even have a chance to review it. I mean, that's pretty bad. I think we did talk a little bit about it. And also I want to put all the context, you know, for sure. It's being of all this, you know, we need to promote, you know, later on this afternoon, Jordan and I have another podcast, secular brothers podcast. We got a special guest coming on.
This is going to be very interesting. And I encourage all of you to listen and to watch. You can watch it on rumble. You can also watch it on YouTube. Just search secular brothers, Logan secular.
You'll find it right there. And we'll be actually joined by Jack Carr, who you may know from the terminal list. He's got a brand new book out and we're just kind of break down the debt and it is a really fast. It'll be really fascinating interview and conversation. And you're gonna want to tune in.
That's going to be going up today around 4 p.m. Eastern time. We dropped the podcast. That's where you'll be able to find it there. Again, it's on all your favorite podcast players. It's on visually. Yeah.
Yeah. He's on video watch too. He done Skype on rumble and on YouTube.
And you can find that by just going to secular brothers.com secular brothers.com. We'll have the link to wherever you usually get your podcast. We're there, but this can be really interesting one because it does tie into a lot of the topics that are being brought up. It's not just about his book or about the show. He actually is a really great interview because he was a Navy SEAL for 20 years. He served in Iraq and Afghanistan at the highest levels.
He was a sniper as a SEAL commander. So he's got a lot of insight there, even in the withdrawal of Afghanistan. And some of this information that hasn't played out, like how we were told in the withdrawal in Afghanistan that we were going to have like a month before the Taliban could actually take over Kabul. And they took it over in like, what is it, 12 hours?
24 hours? Yeah, it was nothing. And the same thing happened with Russia on the flip end. We were told that if Russia did invade, Ukraine would fall in a day. And that, of course, now we're in a war of attrition.
Year and a half later, a year and a couple months. And he said this too, this could anger you when you're in the armed forces because it's not your role. Your role is to carry out orders.
And of course, that's what he did honorably for his entire career. But when you leave it, you say, you know, like, is it bad intel or are they just telling us bad information that they know is not true? It's like, it's one or the other. Either we have an intelligence failure in our country or we're not being told, or we're just misleading our entire country when it, when it suits the government's bigger interest, even if it makes them look foolish for a period of time.
And even if it ends up in the loss of US lives, which he was, what he was upset about again is that, you know, the botched withdrawn Afghanistan. Yeah. We talk a lot about that. It's a really interesting in depth. It's not like five minutes.
We spend a good, almost half hour talking about all of this and we break down some other topics as well, but it's always fascinating to really get a different point of view. The content is still made in Hollywood. Yeah.
That's also a big thing. A guy who's coming out there and creating stuff that is not, it's not for reviewers, it's for the audience and still getting made by some big studios. An Amazon show on Amazon. Yeah. What is funny is like, he's obviously the terminal list is on Amazon starting Chris Pratt, but he also talks about how we need to support local independent bookstores. He's not someone who's just shilling for Amazon. So that was pretty fun also to kind of see that guy's getting paid from Amazon is also saying, but no, go pick up my book at a local, a local bookstore. Yeah. And it's very cool. So check that out. Jack Carlby, join us on the secular brothers podcast.
And those go up at, it goes up at 4 PM Eastern time, whether it, wherever you listen or watch a podcast. So if you're a place like rumble, come watch us. And Jack car joins us.
It's a, it's a visual interview as well. So he joins us to that way and check it out. As long as we encourage you, all these issues we're talking about, we're working on at the ACLJ, but we brought in Jeff Balibahn to tie that into our work. The speaker at that university, we're not just talking about how bad the speech was. It actually involves our work in the ACLJ. We have active cases right now against the city university of New York. This may lead to more to support the work of the ACLJ at ACLJ.org. Donate today. And again, this broadcast with Marsha Blackbird, remember you can always share it with your friends and family after we finish up. So they get a chance to hear and learn about all the information you got to hear today on secular.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-06-01 15:26:11 / 2023-06-01 15:47:38 / 21