BREAKING: Trump Target of Special Counsel Letter. 3rd Arrest Imminent

Breaking news today on Sekulow as Trump is the target of another special council letter, a third arrest could be imminent. 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. Here we go again, this is not a replay folks, this is breaking news. Again, President Trump has received a target letter from Special Counsel Jack Smith and this is a new grand jury target letter coming from Washington, D.C. where a grand jury has been investigating his role with January 6th. Now it's not just with the insurrection, the riots that occurred on January 6th, but also the election, what they call election denial or what they call the big lie. What we would call political speech or speech, the idea that, again, you can put out speech and believe that the election was stolen. That President Trump, whether that's, again, you agree with that or not, it's not illegal to hold that view. But again, there's some speculation then what exactly is Jack Smith going to be indicting about? Is it the electors, the alternative slate of electors? I mean, there's a whole host of issues, but what we now know is that President Trump received on Sunday evening another target letter from the Special Counsel Jack Smith with four days to appear before the grand jury.

We're going to break this down for you when we come back from the first break. But I want to let you know, this is new, this would be a third likely arrest and indictment of President Trump. Which, again, you know that even when it's imminent, it has to be organized because he's the former President of the United States, so it doesn't happen very randomly.

This would be out of Washington, D.C. This would be a separate case he would have to defend himself in. So he's got New York, he's been indicted in the state there. He's been indicted federally in Florida. Now he likely will be indicted federally in Washington, D.C. And people are expecting him to be indicted back in state court in Georgia. So he could be arrested and arraigned four times before we even get to the primary votes. And yet so far, every time this has happened, his political fortunes have gone up. People have said enough is enough.

Stop. What is going on here? This is political targeting at its worst. We're going to get into all of it today on the broadcast and take in your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110.

I mean, the two big questions are this. So far, when this has happened to President Trump, his poll numbers have gone up. And more Republicans, even who in the past have said maybe I'm willing to look for someone else for the future, have said, you know what? This guy has gone through it for us. We should stand with him since he is going through this for us. He doesn't have to be running for President. He didn't have to ever run for President. He was a billionaire, successful, didn't have to get involved in politics, didn't have to go try to drain the swamp for America, didn't have to do all of this.

But he did. And look at the consequences he's paying for it. And so people even rethink, even people who weren't necessarily on the Trump train for round two have gotten back on the train because they realized, you know what? He's willing to fight for us.

He's willing to go through it for all of us. So I want to take your calls on this at 1-800-684-3110. But, Logan, I think what's huge here is that this would be the third time in just the past few months that the former President was arrested and arraigned. Yeah, we're going to hear from a lot of people today. We're going to discuss this with Tulsi Gabbard.

We're talking later on with Rick Grenell, obviously with Andy Akonimo as well, remote. And we are going to be breaking this all down. But it does, like you said, feel a little bit like Groundhog Day that we're just over and over hearing the same story. But again, of course, it's breaking news, so we have to cover it because people are going to be tuning in to see what is this?

What is new in this? The details we're still getting. But we know that the letter was delivered and that is not good.

So we're going to break it down. What President Trump has said in his statement is that when you get these letters, likely it means your arrest and arraignment is fairly imminent. And it's likely. So we're going to talk to Andy Akonimo about that, former federal prosecutor, part of the ACLJ team, to kind of walk us through what to expect next in this round of the federal investigation into President Trump. This is still special counsel Jack Smith. I want to make that clear to all of you. And remember, we've been on that Trump team before. You know, you're attorneys of the team, so we know what we're talking about here. We want to hear from you.

1-800-684-3110. Share this broadcast with your friends and family. This is breaking news with up-to-date analysis. As Logan said, we've got Andy Akonimo. We've got Tulsi Gabbard. We've got Rick Grenell. All today on the broadcast to weigh in on this. We will be right back on Sekulow. All right, welcome back to Sekulow. We are taking your calls to 1-800-684-3110.

I want to go right to Andy Akonimo. Andy, in President Trump's comments, he's now let us know. He received this letter Sunday evening that he was a target. He has four days to appear before the grand jury. Very unlikely that he would do that.

He hasn't done that in the past, and most people would not. And if you don't appear before the grand jury, that means the grand jury is wrapping up and that an indictment could be imminent. So we could see – I know it has to – with President Trump, because he's a former President, things have to be arranged, and so it's not necessarily as quick always as it is with a regular defendant or target in the process. But this looks like, again, another moment where we could be very close to seeing a third arrest and arraignment of Donald Trump.

That's true, Jordan. What is happening here is that Jack Smith, the prosecutor handling the grand jury now in the District of Columbia, not the one in the Southern District of Florida, has issued a letter to President Trump saying you're a target. Now, that means you're not simply a witness anymore. You're not simply someone that we're interested in hearing that – whether you have information with respect to what we're looking at. But we have actually targeted you and made you the center, the focus, the epicenter, the whatever it is, the main point of our investigation.

You're the one we're looking to indict. And if you want to appear before the grand jury and be heard, which of course would be foolish for the President to do, no one would appear before the grand jury if they're a target and take Fifth Amendment, which the Justice Department cannot force you to do. That's something that is improper to make someone take his constitutional right over and over and over again just so that you can beat up on him in the grand jury.

But that's exactly where we are. And yes, it would follow the normal procedure. A bill of indictment would be returned in open court. The United States magistrate would unseal it. The President would have to appear with the security, the Secret Service guards around him, as he usually does. He'd enter a plea of not guilty to what could be a fruit basket turnover of charges of all kinds, respectively, of the election.

And then we'd be back again on another track of trial along with the one in New York and the one in the Southern District of Florida involving Mar-a-Lago. Now, this one is interesting, Andy, because unlike Mar-a-Lago where you could point to, okay, what they thought was the problem was the documents. So if you agree or disagree with that, and we've walked through that and given our opinion, you had these documents that were, does he have the power to declassify them?

Should he have had them? Were they cooperating the right way? It was kind of easy for people to understand what they were at least alleging, even if you thought it was bogus. Here, I mean, right now we don't have the actual indictment yet, but what we know that's been looked at is things around January 6th, not necessarily what occurred at the Capitol, but potentially, maybe also just some of what President Trump was saying. They're even saying they're looking at some of the fundraising he was doing, opposing some of the election results. So there's already talk that a lot of this is going to become a constitutional issue between how much of this was protected political speech by President Trump and how much of it is actually something you could charge criminally.

Well, that's exactly right. You know, you're coming on a very thin line here between protected First Amendment speech, the right to express yourself, the right to disagree with the election if you don't think that it came out right or that it was taken improperly by states where the votes were not properly counted or not accounted for. What's wrong with that? That's political speech that's permitted in the United States, as opposed to going over that thin line, seeking an insurrection, take the Capitol, go to the barricades like the 14th of July 1789 in France, oh, barricade, let's go and kill the king and the queen. That's the kind of speech that is not permitted. But President Trump also has protected speech here, and that speech has to be protected for not only him, but for every one of us who seek to disagree with the system that came out and the election that came out.

If you don't feel it's right, you can say that. So I don't know exactly where Jack Smith is going with this, but he's treading on very, very treacherous waters, very difficult waters when you're involving free speech and the First Amendment, Jordan. Yeah, GW Law Professor Jonathan Turley, similar remarks. This is the initial reaction from people, which is, you can tell why Democrats were angry at President Trump. They didn't like what he was doing around January 6th, but was any of it criminal? And are we focusing on the electors here? That's something that Georgia was specifically looking at, but that's a state issue. So what's going on here at the Federal?

So take a listen to Turley. The concern here is that the special counsel could be proceeding on a case that might be constitutionally challenged. If the case is built around Trump's speech on the ellipsis on January 6th, I don't believe that it could withstand judicial review. The question is, does Smith have something else, something that's a direct link to a conspiracy or effort to cause violence? We haven't seen that. I mean, the January 6th committee in Congress came up with nothing as a direct nexus to that type of evidence.

Yes, I mean, Andy, that would be the other part. So we're looking at, you know, is it the speech about just questioning the election? Well, that's not illegal. There's no way you could prosecute that. But is there some connection that President Trump was part of the planning of the violence at the Capitol, which, for the most part, looked like it was actually spontaneous and a crowd that got out of control and not something that was actually coordinated? Well, you ought to think if it was a coordinated effort and President Trump was behind it and it was a plan and designed to force an insurrection upon the Capitol, we should have heard that by now. I mean, it's been a long time and we should have heard that evidence. So if Smith has got that, what's he been keeping it for?

Is it a secret? No, it's something that should have been put out in the public and that we should know about it. So I think he's treading perilously close to free speech under the First Amendment, the right to express your views, the right to say, I believe that this election was fair and right.

I don't believe that the Vice President of the United States did the right thing. What's wrong with that kind of speech? We all say that. I may not feel that way.

I may feel that way. But that's what the Constitution and this republic is about. But whether he's got some kind of grand scheme or design behind this and that it was a plot masterminded by Donald Trump to take over the United States imperiously is something that is a far cry from a First Amendment right to open your mouth and express your opinion. And so far, like Charlie said, we've had all those congressional hearings, we've had all those investigations, and none of them came up with anything like that.

There's been no tie at all that President Trump was involved with the planning of what happened at the Capitol that day, or even it was planned and all, and whether it was actually just a spontaneous out-of-control crowd that just, again, sometimes we see happen. So again, we're going to take your calls to this 1-800-684-3110. Logan, let's go to the phones. Yeah, let's go to Mike in Nevada on Line 1.

On Nevada, Mike, you're on the air. Yeah, my question is, so with all this chasing down these empty rabbit holes, because they keep coming up empty, at what point does this not become harassment of the President? Because it's obvious that's what they're doing. They've got all this stuff that they've done wrong, and they seem to just get away with everything. But Trump does things that they say is wrong, which he doesn't do anything wrong, and they keep bringing these fake charges against him. It's like, can't he sue them for harassment?

It just seems ridiculous to me. Andy, at this point, listen, it does feel like harassment. He calls it a witch hunt very directly. He's been calling it that ever since he fired Jim Comey. I mean, it's basically since that moment in history, President Trump has been facing the, I guess, full wrath of the federal government, even when he was in charge of the federal government, whether it was special counsels and now this additional special counsel, Jack Smith, whether it's DAs or state AGs. I mean, they've all been trying to go after him. But what we are looking at here, which I think would be, it's unprecedented.

This would be the third, and potentially we're looking at four, indictments and arraignments of a former President who is the leading candidate in the Republican Party to be the nominee. I think we – hold on, we got Andy coming on? Andy, hold on one second. Guys, Andy, you there? Yes, I'm here.

All right, sorry, we had a connection issue. Go ahead. This is obviously the politicization of the Justice Department, writ large, Logan and Jordan. This is the politicization of the process.

To answer the caller's question directly, you can't sue for harassment. This is something that you deal with in the ballot, Bob. And this is – listen, we've got new – there's new sound. I think we can pull it from Kevin McCarthy is coming down. He's come out with a very aggressive statement. There's now discussion about potentially putting impeachment documents together against Merrick Garland, that this has gone out of control and that they're shifting their focus from even Mayorkas on the border to Merrick Garland.

And this is coming from people like Kevin McCarthy. This is not coming from the right of the right of the party. Yeah, it's not just out of the Trump statement, which we have to read some of at some point here. We only got a minute, but he talks about Merrick Garland specifically.

So we can go through that. We only got a minute before – What does he say about Merrick Garland? He says, Joe Biden's Attorney General, Merrick Garland, who I turned down for the United States Supreme Court in retrospect, his corrupted unethical actions, a very wise decision. So, you know, not parsing his words there for Merrick Garland or anyone.

You can find that statement, by the way, on Truth Social. We can go over it. Coming up in the next segment, we have Tulsi Gabbard.

Later on in the show, Rick Grenell. And we'll keep rolling, talking about this topic. We've got some other ones to get to as well.

But we know this is on the top of everyone's mind right now. And we'll continue to take your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110 to be part of the broadcast today. Support the work of the ACLJ. Remember, we're at our matching challenge month of July, where you can double the impact of your donation. So if you donate online at ACLJ.org, that's ACLJ.org, you can, again, you're doubling the impact of that donation.

So a $25 donation triggers an additional $25 donation from our group of donors ready to match it. We hope you take part in it today. We'll be right back on Sekulow.

Welcome back to Sekulow. There's a lot of breaking news, obviously, this morning. And again, I just want to remind people, this is not a repeat of a show.

This is brand new. Yet another indictment likely of President Trump, a third indictment, this coming again from Special Counsel Jack Smith. This is now, you saw the one out of the state indictment, DA indictment at New York and Manhattan. Then you had the federal indictment in the Southern District of Florida that was led by Jack Smith. This would be Washington, D.C. President Trump's got the target letter and the request, if you'd like to appear before the grand jury in the next four days, likely when you don't. At some point after that, an indictment gets issued.

And then you have to go through an arraignment and arrest process. Yet again, Tulsi Gabbard is joining us. Tulsi, a senior advisor to us on the political and foreign affairs as well.

Tulsi, I want to go right to this. Again, I think the reaction from most people right now is, again, they think that this is just political targeting, over-the-top political targeting. And this time, when it's related to January 6th, where we've had all these investigations, and we know that we had this violence that was wrong that occurred, but it doesn't look like Donald Trump was directing any of it. So is this just about political speech and the idea that he questioned election? Are we going to actually criminalize that kind of speech in America? Jordan, you said it.

You said it. You had to remind your viewers and your listeners that this is not a rerun of a previous conversation. Actually, one that I think you and I had last time I sat there in your studio when another, I think it was the first, indictment was announced coming from the DA in New York. You know, the Democrat elite are so hell-bent on doing all they can to destroy Donald Trump, they are willing to destroy our democracy in the process, and that is exactly what's happening here. When people say that this is an unprecedented action, yes, it is, and it's unprecedented in the sense that one after the other, they are throwing these nails in the coffin of our democracy, lobbing these charges, throwing everything but the kitchen sink at the former President of the United States, as you said, who is the major opponent, political opponent, running against the sitting President of the United States in this active and upcoming campaign and election. It's something that we read about not only in history books, but we see happening by tyrants or dictators in other countries, but this is happening right here in the United States of America. You know, we hear from the Democrat elite and their friends in the propaganda media over and over and over, no one is above the law, but it's such BS because when you look at some of the things that they're alleging Donald Trump has done, some of the things they're charging him with, and you can find examples amongst their cabal of warmongers, so-called woke warmongers in the permanent Washington establishment who have done the very same things they're charging President Trump with felonies for, and yet these people have gone completely, no accountability, no prosecution, no charges, in fact. These are people who continue to be lifted up and celebrated amongst the Democrat elite in permanent Washington. So, you know, the fact that President Trump's polling numbers continue to increase one after the other after these indictments are thrown at him to me tells me that the American people are seeing through the Democrat elite's nonsense and actually are very clear-eyed about what they are doing here in politicizing the national security state and law enforcement at the federal and the state level against the guy that they are most scared of and most threatened by who threatens their power.

That's exactly what's happening here again. Yeah, I mean, Chuck Schumer made the statement, I don't know if we have it right now, but he made that statement, you know what, if you take on the intelligence community, they've got an unlimited arsenal to come after you, and he made that statement. When President Trump removed, Jim Comey took on the FBI and said there's some bad actors here. We've seen how even whistleblowers inside the FBI, how they've been treated, they've been, you know, their whole careers have been destroyed, even though they've had whistleblower protections by Congress and that's not supposed to happen. We've talked about this two-tiered system of justice in America, which is unfortunate that we're even having to talk about and discuss as something that is real, Tulsi, but this today, this one specifically is raising a lot of eyebrows because it's likely that most of whatever this charge ends up being is going to be related to speech. It's not going to be related to some conspiracy because no one found anything like that, there's been lots of investigations there, but this is going to be like we don't like this kind of political speech, so we are going to criminalize it in the United States of America and if this can be done to someone as high profile as a former President, it can be done to any of us.

That's exactly right and then that's what we're seeing play out here. So the tactics that they are using against the former President of the United States, Donald Trump, right now are tactics that they can and are using against Americans, people who are saying things that they don't like, people who dare to challenge their authority and these tactics are reminiscent of Stalin's former chief of secret police when he said show me the man and I'll show you the crime. So they are trying every single thing that they can possibly find to charge President Trump with because in their minds, he's guilty.

He's guilty no matter what. They don't care about the rule of law. They don't care about a fair and equal justice system. They don't care about upholding and protecting our democracy so that people can actually have faith and trust in these institutions that are supposed to be serving the interests of the American people.

All they care about is their power and they're willing to destroy anything and everything that they feel they must to accomplish that objective of holding on to and gaining more power and that means not only the destruction of Donald Trump, this is about something much bigger than one person. This is about our country. It's about our democracy and we've got an election just over one year away that will be very, very critical given all of the things that we are seeing.

Can we play that bite from Chuck Schumer? I just want to remind people this is what he said and it wasn't him threatening what Congress could do. It was what the Intelligence Committee will do to you as an elected President if you question them and if you take them on. Take a listen. You take on the intelligence community.

They have six ways from Sunday of getting back at you. So even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he's being really dumb to do this. And listen, in some ways, Tulsi, we are seeing this happen in real time. I mean, it's coming out of the FBI. It's coming from the intel community.

That's where these investigations all started, whether it was Crossfire Razor, Crossfire Hurricane. But the fact that this is a statement that it wasn't like he did. Chuck Schumer didn't say if it was legitimate that you took on the intelligence community. He was like saying you can't ever take on the intelligence community.

They'll just take you out. Almost as though they are some autonomous entity within our government that can do what they want without accountability. The problem is that so far what we've seen, and in both the national security state and law enforcement who are being directed by the Democrat elite and their cabal in permanent Washington, is they're getting away with it.

There hasn't been any accountability. There hasn't been anyone so far yet able to bring them in and rein them in on the basis of our Constitution and our democracy. And so they continue to be more and more emboldened seeing, hey, we've gotten away with this much so far.

We might as well keep pushing the envelope. Our framers, the founders of this country, empowered we the people to be able to lift our voices and our votes to hold these powerful entities accountable. And so we as voters have to be very clear-eyed about what is happening and making sure that we are exercising our fundamental freedoms and rights enshrined in the Constitution and making sure that we bring about serious, serious change in this election across our government, clean out these corrupt entities. The FBI, for example, we are seeing how corrupt it is to its core either completely clean it out or get rid of it and start a whole new law enforcement organization that will allow us to start from a clean slate for it to fulfill its service to the American people. Yeah, I mean, that's what we have to do. And Tulsi, we appreciate you being part of our team. This election is going to be how we combat this.

It's not going to be in the courts. It's going to be the election. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Hey, welcome back to Sekulow. Folks, second half hour coming up. We were just joined by Tulsi Gabbard.

We had Andy Akonmou on. Rick Rinnell is going to be joining us with reaction to this latest news. It was President Trump who has let the country know.

He received on Sunday evening, he got back from that Turning Point USA event. And on Sunday evening, he got from Special Counsel Jack Smith that letter that you are a target of our investigation, the January 6th investigation in Washington, D.C. Is any of this shocking? I would say most of it was expected.

It's kind of the timing of it that is always a little bit surprising. And with this one, it's a bit of a head scratcher on what are they going to try to charge him with this time. Listen, we know that we also expect in addition, this is not going to be it likely. We expect another indictment out of Georgia. So we're going to go through this a third time. But it looks like, Logan, we're going to go through this a fourth time so one out of Manhattan, one out of Southern District of Florida, one out of Washington, D.C.

So two federal, one Manhattan, and then Fulton County, Georgia. Yeah, that's what he says in the statement, which by the way, President Trump made a statement on truth, so you can go read. It's pretty, you know, it's pretty aggressive. Not a brief statement. Not a brief statement, but he does mention that. He goes, on top of all that, they've now effectively indicted me three times with a probable forthcoming from Atlanta where the DOJ are in strict and possibly illegal coordination with the district attorney.

And it goes on and on. And you should go take a look at the statement if you'd like to. It's not like a quick little tweet or quick little truth social post. It is a, you know, paragraphs upon paragraphs, clearly not thrilled, what's going on.

No, I mean, think about this. He's running for President of the United States. He gets a letter on Sunday evening saying you got four days to show up to a grand jury in Washington, D.C., which by the way, you don't do. But everyone knows, and now he knows it very well because he's been through this now, this is the third time he's gone through it, that when you get that letter and then you don't go, likely the grand jury, that's it, they're at the end. And then, like we always say, you can indict a ham sandwich. They'll then issue the indictment. And then we're going to go through the process again, Logan, where it's going to be cameras. You're going to see Trump Force One flying into Washington. He's going to have his security detail. They're going to follow up to the D.C. federal courthouse.

He's going to go in. We're not going to see anything at all because there's no cameras in federal courts. But you get all-day coverage. All-day coverage. Wall to wall.

Wall to wall. And actually, from now until it happens, he's probably the biggest news story in the world right now. Yeah, it's a quiet time, really, in the news. And then tonight he's an exclusive special on Hannity.

With Fox just relaunching their primetime lineup. Is that live? That's a live special?

I think it's town hall. He can address everything that happened today, too, potentially. So that's an interesting timing as well. So now you have a primetime special tonight at 9 p.m. Eastern. Our friend Sean Hannity's broadcast, President Trump Town Hall, which went from me being like, I'll catch some highlights, to now going, I should probably tune in live. Yeah, I mean, listen. This is, again, so far, I think we have to look at Logan, too. We could talk about it, too, in the next segment of the broadcast.

We'll take people's calls on 1-800-684-3110. The left knows at this point that every time this happens, they're elevating Donald Trump. You'd think. So is this what they want to do? Do they think just that one of these will finally take- Do they think that elevating Donald Trump is good because they think he's the best person to run against still? It feels that way. I mean, it feels that they just think that keeping him, maybe if he's only in the news for what they perceive as negatives, then maybe that's the way to try. But again, as Tulsi said, as we've all said, that doesn't seem to be dissuading anyone.

No. That's what's coming up. So I don't know what the point is. Every time they do this, new people say, this is gross. You think they'd almost want to- What they tried to do for DeSantis was make DeSantis the big enemy, so then it would devalue Trump.

But it's just certainly not what's happening right now. We are going to take your calls coming up in the next couple of segments. Rick Grenell's joining us. He joins us next during the final segment. So we'll be taking- Okay, next segment, we'll be taking your calls. So give us a call. 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. Good time to call in. Probably last chance to get your voice heard on the air today. And if you're on hold, stay on hold.

We'll get to you. And I will say this too. There are a few people that could weather this. Donald Trump is unique in the sense that he can even weather this and actually utilize it to his advantage. There's not many people who could. But I think that the left is seeing that, so they're throwing- Like you said, it's the kitchen sink.

Everything possible. Let's see if anything sticks and we can somehow get this guy in jail. That's their goal here, right? I don't think he'll ever be behind bars. But that's what they're hoping to do. They brought enough charges for him to be in jail, if they won, for the rest of his life.

Lifetime in prison. We'll be right back on Secular. Welcome back to Secular. We are going to take your phone calls.

1-800-684-3110. It appears that- And listen, when we say imminent, we have to make sure we're defining this right. Because if you're a former President of the United States, this is all pre-planned out with Secret Service. But President Trump, let it be known, he got the target letter Sunday evening, and that will likely lead to a third indictment. This will be the second federal indictment by Jack Smith, the special counsel.

This is relating to January 6th. Now I want to remind you, do you remember the painful January 6th committee, Logan, with Liz Cheney and Adam Kissinger and Schiff and all of them? And we were going to have all this evidence, and it was so horrible. And all they had was Donald Trump giving a speech that they didn't like.

Yeah, that we all saw. And supposedly that speech was a conspiracy to storm the Capitol. But they had no evidence that there was anything behind the scenes. They had no documents that Donald Trump was planning anything, that he tried to actually do this, that it was not just a spontaneous crowd that acted out of control because it was too big and hectic and wild.

No one is saying that it was good what happened, but also that you can't blame one person for it because of a speech they did, and people took that and took bad actions. This is what it looks like this would be related to, which then gets us to do the whole constitutional issue, which also the classified documents does, which is who has the power to declassify at the end of the day. The President has this unique ability. It's like when Joe Biden went on TV and said we don't have enough weapons. Let's say that was classified.

It doesn't matter. He could say it right on TV if he wants. He could read the nuclear codes out as President of the United States. You could go on TV and read out the nuclear codes because you are the President. You're the President.

The classification is made for you. So that would raise his constitutional issues. The one in New York, we still don't even know what he's really charging. Remember the falsification of business records is supposedly tied to an election crime. We still haven't gotten what the election crime is here. So that one is goofy.

This one looks like it's directly tied to speech. It's one thing to demonize the opponent's political speech, but to criminalize your opponent's political speech, that is third world country. That's third world country.

That's not America. Yeah, but now we want to hear from you because we've got a lot of people who have called in. Let's go. First, let's go to Kathy who's calling in Kentucky on Line 5. Kathy, you're on the air.

Thank you for taking my call. I would just like to ask if there is something the legislature can do. I feel like we're losing our representative republic because the opposition is keeping their opposition going to court. That's a limit of resources for everybody, and I'm sure it's depleting Trump's fortunes as well. And I really think that every time they break the law, they take someone to court, and that takes time. So they really are trying to wear everybody down who wants Trump. But I do believe that we're all hoping the legislature can do something.

Do you see that in the future? I think what you can do is your lawyers, and we saw this in Florida already with that special counsel there. That was just last week when they filed a motion to hold over the trial to start after the political process.

So they didn't define a date, but it was at least after the primary and potentially after the general election so that it would not interfere with the political process, so it would be a trial that's interfering with our election. So you could do that through your attorneys and the legal process. Now, the judge would have to agree. So you might have a judge in Florida that does agree, but a judge in Washington, D.C. that doesn't. So you could have one judge say, yes, we will wait. Another judge could say, no, we're not going to wait. But you certainly can file that motion, and your attorneys then can argue, Logan, hey, we'll do all the pretrial stuff. The attorneys can do all of that, but we're not going to trial on this until after this election is over. This is an election for President of the United States of America that you'd be interfering with. So we're not going to allow that to happen. We're going to move this to whenever it's over for him. If he gets the primary win, then through the general, if you become the President, we'll figure out what happens then. If you lose, then have the trial. Yeah, I think that's right. I think to avoid maybe the chaos that they're saying that this is what led to, you're going to have to do that.

That is the smart way to do it for the safety, honestly, of a lot of people, because people will see it as election interference, and it will get nasty very quickly. Let's go continue on with calls. Let's go to Teleste, who's calling in South Carolina on Line 4. Thanks for listening. You're on the air. Hi.

Thank you for taking my call. I do agree with everything that Tulsi Gabbard said. There was one thing, though, that I would like to add to that. I have always noticed how the Democrats try to demonize whatever Republican is in office since Ronald Reagan. However, with Trump, it is at a totally different level that I have never witnessed before.

It's like the whole ball has joined hands against him in a way that is unprecedented. They have broken norms over and over and over to get him, which concerns me in this. If we fail to get President Trump elected, they're going to see this as working, and they're going to do this to every Republican in the future, and we will never have power again.

Listen, I think we are to something new, Logan. This is not normal in our political process. We have seen time and time again the intelligence community get a little bit out of control in America and try to flex their muscles, and then usually we're able to rein it back in. It's unprecedented territory to see a President get indicted over and over again, impeached twice, impeached after they were done. He was impeached out of office.

We have seen insane action. Yeah, the timeline gets very blurry in January of 2020. It's very hard to be like, wait, that was before, but then later on this happened again, like you said, after he was already out of office. It gets kind of messy in your head because of how much chaos has surrounded that moment and how it seems to have continued to follow.

It seems to have every few months, every few weeks, peaked back up. Tulsi said when she was here in our studio, that was the first time, and that wasn't all that long ago. It was a few months ago, and of course now it's rolled out many a times. We literally walked into this room to do our first podcast with Tulsi, and it was Alvin Bragg had brought, literally they had just announced that they were going to be bringing the indictment in New York. And then since then we've had another federal indictment, looks like we're going to have a third, and then a fourth out of Georgia. All right, let's go ahead and take, let's go to Patrick who's calling in Georgia online too, speaking of Georgia. Hey, Patrick.

Hey, thanks for taking my call. If President Trump was already impeached for actions while he was President, how can the DOJ charge him for crimes that supposedly happened during his presidency? Well, like a double jeopardy thing. I think listen, I think impeachment first, I think the second impeachment was without basis. There was nothing they could do. He was no longer in office. The Chief Justice of the United States did not show up. He did not preside over it.

It was a political show. So I don't think that would necessarily preclude, impeachment is how to deal with wrongdoing of an elected President. So our founding fathers did give us a safeguard. They did say, even if you elected someone, but they got out of hand or they started violating the law, we are going to make sure there's a process to remove them even before the election so that we can keep, that the republic is more important than the people and the politicians. So we have those safeguards. That's different than the federal court system.

So it's not like a double jeopardy situation. I do think they've investigated January 6th for Lord knows now three years and found no direct ties to Donald Trump and any illegal activity, except for the fact they just don't like how he talks. A lot of this goes to the fact that they don't like how Donald Trump speaks to people.

Yeah. I think a lot of people want to speak out. Let's go quickly to Sue on line one, cause she has a comment that I think a lot of people are feeling. Sue, you're on the air. Is it possible for the American people interested parties to file a class action lawsuit against the DOJ, the Democrats to stop this nonsense?

Unfortunately, no. I think people are just fed up. I understand everyone. Listen, this is how we win. You listen to what Tulsi said.

I have a feeling Rick will probably say the same thing. You know how we fight back on this. We have to win the election overwhelmingly. We have to turn out and vote. We have to show up. We have to get people out early. We have to get people with absentee ballots.

You don't demonize. You don't tell people, oh, the election's rigged. We can't win because guess what?

This will keep happening and you will never have power again. We have to win at the election. We have to win at the ballot box. We can then clean up Washington, D.C. We can rewrite the path of our country. We can put our country on the right path. But we can't do it in four years. You can't do it with a divided Congress. You've got to give someone like President Trump a Republican House and a Republican Senate. And then you can start getting rid of all the other Jim Comys in Washington, D.C. But it's really tough to do that when you didn't even have full support necessarily of Republicans. And when you didn't, certainly you were being impeached for removing people that you had a constitutional right as President to remove for whatever reason you want. You didn't even have to give a reason. You could just fire them.

I don't like them. Fired. But you got impeached over it. We will win this only if we win at the ballot box. That means you can't be telling people your vote won't count. Don't do early voting.

Don't do ballot harvesting. If you keep saying that, guess what we keep doing? We will keep losing. We will just keep losing. That's what they hope at the end of the day you're going to do is sit at home and say, it's rigged, we can't win.

President Trump wouldn't be running again if he thought he couldn't win. Remember that. But you've got to vote. We'll be right back on Secular. Welcome back to Secular.

We are taking calls here at 1-800-684-3110. Rick Grenell is joining us again on this show. If you're just joining us throughout the broadcast today, I just want to make it clear. This is not a repeat episode. This is not Groundhog Day.

It might feel that way. But what we now have is likely a third indictment coming down for President Trump. He got the target letter. He let everyone know this morning on Sunday evening. The target letter, which this went out of DC, it's special counsel Jack Smith. This would be related to January 6th. We don't have more specifics than that right now. You can only speculate, well, is it about electors? Is it about the actual speech on January 6th?

What about the fact that we already had this entire investigation by Congress that found no ties to President Trump and any illegal activity. It's just they don't like the way he talks. Rick Grenell is joining us now.

Rick, I want to go to you first on this because I'm seeing it all over our chats. And we've got a lot of people watching right now on our social media outlets and all over the web. What people are still kind of nervous about this election cycle is not that President Trump won't likely get the Republican nomination even after all this. But they are still concerned. I think we have to be very clear with them that they've got to get out and make sure they vote. They're still concerned that their vote's not going to count. There's a lot of people saying, you know, I don't even know if I want to show up. It feels like the whole system is still just so rigged against us.

And I want to remind them, President Trump wouldn't be running again if he thought he couldn't win. First of all, I hear that complaint all of the time, and I got to say it's extremely valid. People are pissed off. I'm pissed off. It seems like the Democrats are constantly trying to just push us into, you know, mail in ballots and recklessness and not have a check and a balance on the signature verifications.

All of that is true. But I have to push back and say, what's the alternative? We're not giving up. We're Americans. We're conservatives.

We're going to fight. And so we've got to do a couple of things. One, not only just fight and talk about it, but we've got to make some changes. And I think there have been changes from a variety of groups, not just the RNC, where I think a lot of people were a little bit concerned about the management of their fight at the RNC.

So I think that's being fixed. But the outside groups are really going after this. You have Charlie Kirk and Turning Point talking about ballot harvesting, where it's legal. I know of many people who are doing a initiative to increase conservatives participation, let them know that they have to participate, which means registering them to vote in all of the swing states. But we absolutely need the army doing two things. We need conservatives to volunteer locally to watch the polls. And we've had in the past, Jordan, a difficult time when we would call for poll watchers.

People didn't always want to show up. But now I think we need the mama bears there with their phones watching and making sure that everything is OK so that we need the poll watchers army. We need people to vote early, not wait for Election Day. When we saw in Arizona, they have paper problems, printer problems, because I think that the Democrats are always going to try to create problems on Election Day because they heard our call to vote on Election Day. We've got to constantly be changing our strategy. But participation is key.

Lastly, I'll say this. There are a whole bunch of legal organizations on the conservative side challenging this vote by mail. It will not be the same as it was when there were emergency measures in place during covid. We have to combat that because sending a mail in ballot to someone who doesn't know it's coming is completely reckless. We're for mail in ballots. If you request them, if you don't request them, then it shouldn't be mailed to you via the U.S. post office because someone is going to have a problem. I'll finish with this. The U.S. post office just two weeks ago warned us not to send physical checks or cash in the mail because it isn't safe.

To which I would reply, if the U.S. Postal Service is telling us it's not safe to send checks and mails, checks and money, cash through the mail, then it's certainly not safe to send your ballot. This is the thing.

It's frustrating. I think I had three live ballots last election from different addresses that came to different addresses and people forwarded me. They would come and say it had your name and they'd figure out.

I kept them with me and I would show them on the broadcast. Here's three different live ballots for the Presidential election. Three different states. It was two states and just D.C.

But you point out something I think was important for people to hear. The words that we kind of use as dirty words like ballot harvesting. I remember we had to call an ACLJ team with a U.S. Senator's office. I'm not going to name that Senator, but they're working on a plan too with the RNC to say, you know what, if it's legal in that state, we need to do it. So we don't need to be afraid of taking advantage of what is legal to win an election in a state. We shouldn't be afraid of utilizing the tools. If a state is trying, you know, if in the past they did that because, oh, Democrats like utilize those tools, well, it's legal for us to do it too.

Let's stop being afraid of it. We need to actually embrace it and do everything we can that's legal to win the election. Look, we vote by states in the United States. So if you're listening to this broadcast, you have to know what the rules and laws are in your state. Don't worry about other states. Worry about your state.

Figure out if you live in Arizona, if you live in California, if you live in Georgia, what are the rules? Are you allowed to ballot harvest? Are you allowed to go pick up all of the ballots for the people from your church? Get involved.

Don't wait for someone else to do something. Organize at your church to pick up every single ballot and turn it in if it's legal. Find out what you can do in terms of ballot harvesting and go at it. Do it in your own community.

You need to be unleashed. We don't need to have a union or some other group doing this for us. We can do it. So if you're hearing my voice, find out what is legal and maybe what we could even do. Jordan, can we put on our website links to every state and the election laws so that people could go to ACLJ, click on their state? It's just something I'm thinking out loud here. Maybe it's not legal for us, but it's something that we should think about doing, providing information to people so that they can quickly find out the real story.

We could do it. In fact, a lot of the research we did for that senator's office, we could utilize and flip it back around because that's what we were doing is going back and looking at, okay, what was done under COVID that was actually changed under law? What was just done kind of like outside of law, like emergency statuses, things like that, Logan, where it wasn't really something that you can effectively, what could you challenge? Did they actually change? Some states did change the law. Like Rick said, it's not going to be the same as it was.

But yeah, I mean, I think we could definitely do things like that. So people understand. And I think where Rick said support to figure out your state, your jurisdiction, know what you can do and take full advantage of that.

Final questions, Rick, we have 30 seconds left here. People, I think they wonder, you know, I already saw the broadcast. I think President Trump is a unique person who could weather this and still run a full campaign for President. Most people couldn't. So I don't think people need to worry about that aspect. Correct. I don't think so either. But, you know, one thing that I will say that is different between conservatives and liberals, you look at the small dollars, like a dollar, ten dollars, twenty five dollars given to Joe Biden.

It was pretty enormous. Republicans, when they hear someone needs money, I think or needs help, I should say, I think they tend to pray. I think they send good thoughts.

They go on social media and they create a storm and talk about it. But we have been notoriously bad at sending ten dollars. I think that we need to start flooding with small dollars.

The candidates that you like, the candidates that you support, I support Donald Trump. But I think it's really important to start sending the small dollars. That all adds up. It's really important. It's what the ACLJ is. That's what I mean. We are based off the small dollar donation in the grassroots donations of people out there. Rick, we appreciate all of your insight. Folks, you can support the work of the ACLJ with those small donations and double them up with our matching challenge at ACLJ.org.