Share This Episode
Sekulow Radio Show Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow Logo

Trump Indicted in Georgia: What Happens Next?

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
The Truth Network Radio
August 15, 2023 1:15 pm

Trump Indicted in Georgia: What Happens Next?

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 1022 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

August 15, 2023 1:15 pm

President Trump and 18 others have been indicted in the state of Georgia under the state's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations – or RICO – statute related to the 2020 election. This 100-page indictment is the fourth indictment levied against President Trump, the latest effort to derail the leading Republican candidate in the days leading up to the 2024 presidential election. The Sekulow team covers this breaking news as well as an ACLJ victory for religious liberty in a senior living center. Also, ACLJ Senior Advisor for National Security and Foreign Policy Ric Grenell joins the broadcast to give his perspective on the latest Trump indictment.


Today on Sekulow, Trump indicted in Georgia. What happens next? 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. Alright, the fourth Trump indictment came down and it's a doozy. Again, Donald Trump alone faces 13 charges in this indictment from Georgia versus Donald John Trump. Those 13 charges together could combine into 71 years in prison. That would get him up to all of these charges he was found guilty of. I think somewhere close to 800 years in prison if you add up the four different cases to federal, to state that he is facing right now. There are 41 different charges mentioned in this indictment spread across 19 different defendants.

President Trump himself is indicted with 13 different charges, Dad. Yes, and let me say this also because this is, I think, points to reality. If you looked at the totality of this complaint, this criminal case that's been brought, here's what it does. It criminalizes the practice of law. If you're an election lawyer, you're going to be very hesitant to file an election law challenge if this is the future trend in jurisdictions around the country, that you turn a legitimate election challenge, even if those theories are novel or new, which lawyers do every day.

Into, this is what's important here, into this kind of morass of turning everything into a state RICO, Racketeering Influencing Corrupt Organizations case. So it chills the ability of the lawyers to defend their clients. Every election, and Jordan, you know this, every election has a national election, I'm talking about here, has election challenges. That's part of it. There's teams.

That's all they do. And lots of local elections do too. I mean, even at the most local level because those races can be very tight. I mean, you see state rep races, city council races, those can be within 10, 12, or just 100 votes that could sway the race. So there are always, every major campaign sets up, usually has someone in their office and their only job at the Presidential campaign. But their only legal job, they're an attorney, is to coordinate volunteer attorneys all across the country in every major voting location. So that on election day and leading up to election day, there is already a team of attorneys who have gone through training and are ready to go and file. If they need to file, for instance, the time.

You see that all the time. I mean, I think we saw it in the last election multiple times through places like in Arizona where the voting machines weren't working for a couple of hours, so you've got to go file in court to keep those voting machines open for an additional two hours. That is technically an election challenge. And so going to court on election day is not bizarre. Going to court after election day is not bizarre. I mean, Bush versus Gore was not decided in November. No, I was involved in the Bush versus Gore challenges both in Florida and at the US Supreme Court. And frequently, I took a case for President Trump to the Supreme Court out of Pennsylvania right after the election, like November 4th.

November 5th, we were in federal court and it ended up in the Supreme Court in the United States. We won. They had to segregate those late ballots. They ended up not being outcome determinative because there was enough votes purportedly for Biden to carry the day.

But we won. We got to stay and all the justices agreed with us that you can't amend the laws of the state on voting issues by court fiat. It has to be legislative. Now, having said that, the chilling effect of this, and it's for real, folks, is what it does to the lawyers representing people. So in Washington, you had this great challenge, I think, on the January 6th one on free speech, but they also indicted as unindicted co-conspirators, and they didn't indict them as unindicted co-conspirators, lawyers that were defending those that were engaged in free speech. Next segment of the broadcast, I'm going to talk about that at length.

When you start doing that, what happens in a society when you punish the lawyers? So we have a win, I also want to report, and that is a senior living center that we talked about that case last week stopped the Bible study. It had been going on for a year.

They stopped it in June. I am happy to report we now have a victory. That Bible study actually took place again this morning, and that's because of your support of the ACLJ. We've been fighting these cases for decades. We've been winning these cases for decades. We can't stop these calculated attacks, though, without your help, and that's where you come in. A reminder, too, that those companies and organizations still try to shut those Bible studies down with inappropriate interpretations of the law.

It's why the ACLJ exists in the first place, to fight for your rights. Be a part of our Life and Liberty Challenge today. We'll be right back.

Welcome back to Sekulow. We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. Of course, the biggest news of the day, and this is the fourth, and we don't know if it's final indictment, but it is the fourth indictment of President Trump, this time with 17 additional co-defendants. And again, actually 18 additional co-defendants. 41 different charges. Now, he doesn't face all of those 41.

He faces 13, but you go through the list of names that you will know and names that you will not know through this list of individuals. Let me go through this, because let me tell you what I'm concerned about here, folks, and I want to put this into perspective for you. This goes to the heart of our Life and Liberty drive when you're talking about defending liberty, okay? It could be religious liberties we talked about in that win in the case that we had with the Bible study for the Senior Center.

That's great. But this is also to the heart of liberty. I mean, directly to the heart of liberty. If you start indicting the lawyers that are defending the clients because they're engaged in free speech activities, and then you go after the lawyers too, that's a really dangerous move. So, you know, in addition to President Trump, they go after Rudy Giuliani, who was my colleague in the Mueller probe. Now, Rudy Giuliani's crime may include RICO and solicitation of the violation of an oath of public officials and false statements and writings. The false statements and writings are legal positions that they were advocating at public hearings on behalf of their client. And that is now the basis of a RICO charge.

And they're doing that to the former mayor of New York City, former U.S. attorney, former third-ranking official in the Department of Justice. Okay? So, and then I can give you the list of lawyers. There's a lawyer on here. You're not going to, people aren't going to know him. I know him. He's a really good lawyer.

Bob Chealy, excellent lawyer in Atlanta. Same thing. They have criminalized the practice of law. Their crime was they went to hearings and said, we believe there was election fraud.

Here's what the remedies are. Here's how this should be done. And this is how you win these cases when they're brought against you. You're going to have to have mass defense. I mean, there needs to be a mass defense. I mean, I know some people are setting up legal defense funds.

They're going to need to do that because this is going to be massive in scope. Of all of the, I'd say of all the cases when you look at them, New York was kind of a wash. People kind of shrugged their shoulders at that one. Because that one's probably getting dismissed out. And then you look at the one in D.C. is really a speech case.

And so that one is pretty easy to understand. Is it free speech, First Amendment, protected speech, or not? And then you go to the classified documents. Classified case is a document fight. That's a document fight. That takes a long time because of the Classified Documents Act. I mean, getting that to the jury takes forever. And it's, right, bureaucracy. Is it the National Archives?

Who was the wrong? This one. Very different.

This one is the multi-year, multi-client, multi-count. This is the biggest one. Yes, by far. Because it's the most complicated. And most complicated.

Most complicated will take the longest. A President cannot pardon himself from a state cause of action. So you've got that ramification. And they have, this is litigation and criminalization by tweet. Do you understand that? In these allegations, Act 22 of what is supposed to be the RICO Act here is on or about the third day of December, Donald John Trump caused to be tweeted from his Twitter account, at Real Donald Trump, quote, Georgia hearings now on OANN.

Amazing. And then it says this was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy. It's really commenting on something that was on television. I'm not going to say it.

I was about to say something I'm not going to say. Lawyers in America should be up in arms. But they won't be. Conservative attorneys might, but you know what?

And even them I'm not so sure because nobody wants to get near this stuff. But here's the real problem here. I mean, first of all, some really good lawyers have been brought into this, which is not right. But as lawyers that represented a President, this President for four years, I could tell you as a lawyer, I read this thing twice last night, once this morning. I am incensed by the allegation of 41 counts, most of which are lawyers doing their job. You realize most of the defendants here are lawyers.

Yeah, it's going through. I want everybody to hear that. They've gone after the lawyers saying that the lawyers were involved in a racketeering influence corrupt organization scheme on the election. And they were advocating legal positions. By the way, and Ken Cheeseburrough, whose name's been now coming popular, he was a protege at Harvard Law, by the way, of who?

Lawrence Tribe. John Eastman, people said, oh, who is he? A law clerk for Clarence Thomas and the dean of the Chapman School of Law. Bob Chealy, one of the leading, if not the leading defense law plaintiffs lawyers, one of the leading plaintiffs lawyers in the state of Georgia. The chairman of the Georgia Republican Party. So when is everybody going to wake up and say, report for duty here?

You can't just talk about this. You've got to take action on this stuff. I mean, multiple pages of this will say an attorney who does this, an attorney who does this, another person's attorney working with the Trump team, a former Trump team. A Georgia attorney is how they recognize Chealy. Not even working for Trump, they don't even say, just a Georgia attorney.

But that's how they describe it. I mean, the idea here is this. In our system of justice, you've got to have attorneys to protect your rights. We're in a life and liberty drive right now. Part of that drive is that we're there to fight beside you so that if you feel that your rights have been violated, whether it's the life or liberty, that you've got attorneys to fight for you.

What this Georgia DA is trying to do in Fulton County is scare attorneys from taking cases. And that is not America. That is Russia. And that's not maybe even Russia today. That's communist Russia. That's like Stalinism. That's like you can't even be associated with the accused because being associated with the accused means you are also a criminal.

I want to open up our phone lines totally on this because I want to ask a question to our audience, okay? We're trying to figure out what to do here because this is a massive case. I mean, there's 19 defendants. There's 30 unindicted co-conspirators. There's a lot of allegations you wouldn't have anything to do with it. It was like voting machine stuff. Okay, forget that. But on the lawyers that were involved in advocating their client's position, how do you feel as an American knowing those people are being charged with crimes that could put them into jail for 5 or 10 years? I'm going to open up the phone lines on this at 1-800-684-3110.

That's 800-684-3110. There's a reason I'm asking you this. We just came out of a – I'm incensed by this. This to me is disgusting that this DA – do we have that bite of mine? I want to – folks, this is what I predicted at the Supreme Court in the United States on behalf of President Trump 3 years ago and it's coming true now.

Take a listen. The Second Circuit is wrong. It should be reversed. If not reversed, the decision weaponizes 2,300 local DAs. An overwhelming number of them are elected to office and are thereby accountable to their local constituencies.

The decision would allow any DA to harass, distract and interfere with the sitting President, subjects the President to local prejudice that can influence prosecutorial decisions and to state grand juries who can then be utilized to issue compulsory criminal process in the form of subpoenas targeting the President. This is not mere speculation. It is precisely what has taken place in this case. That's in New York.

This is in Georgia. And it's the same thing. It's not just the President. It's the President and his lawyers. And it's exactly what I said from this very studio, because we had to do the argument remote, to the Supreme Court of the United States.

And I was exactly correct. You've weaponized these DAs to then turn around and shut up the lawyers. Stop the lawyers from speaking. Let's the lawyers stop. If we can shut down the lawyers, you know, we think about Bush versus Gore. My gosh, there was 20 cases in litigation that went to the Supreme Court of the United States to be determined. Would Bush and Gore be held liable for, you know, criminal RICO when they were trying to get the count stopped? They were trying to get the count stopped.

Remember, that was part of the process because they didn't think this count was going through in a legal manner. I'm just telling you, folks, that if we talk about, we're in the middle of a life and liberty drive, which we should probably do for the rest of the year on this. If we don't stand up for these lawyers, there is no way the country survives this when you have the lawyers.

I'm not even talking about the President. When the lawyers are put in the crosshairs for defending their client, which we take an oath to do. An oath to defend the Constitution of the United States, so help me God. And they're saying, you do that, you now are a racketeer influence and corrupt organization criminal. By the way, they all lose their bar license, too, on top of this. It seems much easier right now in the United States of America to represent a murderer or rapist than it does a politician from the right, a conservative politician in many jurisdictions across the country. In those cases, they would say, oh, you know, represent the terrorists, that's a duty of the equal justice of the law. Represent Donald Trump, you're also a criminal.

But take that theory further. If they get away with doing this this time, again, people won't be able to find attorneys, people that will not be able to defend themselves in court. We're having trouble finding lawyers to defend the lawyers right now. You know what will ultimately happen is they shut you up.

They get you afraid to even engage these battles. Jordan, we're in the middle of our, midway through our life and liberty challenge. We talked about life yesterday, we're talking about liberty today. Let me tell you the heart of liberty.

It's having a constitutional republic that can function. And I'm not just saying this because I am a lawyer, but the idea that you can shut the lawyers up by throwing indictments at them for engaging in defense of their client. I'm not talking about contempt of court. Trial lawyers, we've all been threatened with that before. I'm talking about losing your personal liberty.

These lawyers are losing their personal liberty for representing a client who happened to be the President of the United States. You want to help us help them? Go to right now, join our Life and Liberty Drive and this is the liberty portion of that drive.

Your gifts will be doubled. Go to, do it today. We encourage you to be engaged in this incredibly important issue. Life and Liberty Drive. Welcome back.

We're going to take your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110. I mean this one, obviously next to I'd say the documents case, which is complicated because it involved classified documents and who can declassify it, how long it will take to get through all those different documents to a jury, to the defense team because of the classified documents act. The case out of New York, people kind of pooh-poohed immediately, even the left, so that was kind of weak. The one out of DC, it's a First Amendment case, straight up. Does the President have the First Amendment right to speak out this way or is that not protected First Amendment speech? And usually it's on the side of the First Amendment wins most of the time in those cases. But in this case out of Georgia, where you've got 41 different charges, 19 different defendants, that includes President Trump.

He's got 13 charges against him that would include about 71 years in prison just in this case, so he's up to close to 800 years in prison with all these cases combined. And people have a lot of questions about this because they've seen politicians for decades, if not throughout our entire history, question the outcome of elections. And Jeff in North Carolina has a good point there. Hey, Jeff, welcome to Sekulow. You're on the air. Hi, Jeff. Hey, thanks for taking my call.

So I actually had two quick questions. First is, given this indictment and the allegations in it, is there any chance that Stacey Abrams gets charged for essentially doing the exact same thing? Zero.

And I'll tell you why it's zero. Because of what I said. Local DAs have been weaponized. And they've been weaponized on political grounds. And in Fulton, DeKalb, Cobb County, Gwinnett, the major counties around the major cities, Bibb County in Macon, Georgia, the counties around Columbus and South Georgia where there's different U.S. District Court judges.

No way. Those are controlled by the left and they're not going to do it. It's a two-tiered system of justice. But it's a weaponization of an attack on lawyers. And I'm trying to figure out exactly what we should do here because I've got lawyers that I've known for decades that are involved in this thing, Jordan.

It's very personal to me. And Logan pointed this out. Fortunately for us, when we represented Trump during heated things, we were able to avoid all of this as lawyers. We were able to avoid all this. But the landscape has changed a lot in four years. It was changing at that time.

Even during those impeachment hearings, I would say the nastiness between Adam Schiff. There was not the collegiality that there would usually be in a courtroom of law of respect at least for those who might have a different view but still have respect. The respect was already gone and out the door. But now, like you said, they've taken the lack of respect.

I can deal with that. But now they've taken the lack of respect to mean you're a criminal if you don't agree with our position. You're a criminal if you advocate a position that ultimately a court says is wrong. I thought it was always okay to come up with novel legal arguments.

Take them to court and see if you win. They've been shortened by Supreme Court law clerks. These are smart people. Harvard. Law professors. Deans of law schools.

They may not have been right, but the day that a lawyer cannot represent their clients zealously, which is what our ethics require us, is a sad day for America. I'm watching on our social media feeds and I'm reading the comments. And by the way, if you're watching on Rumble, Facebook, or YouTube, you need to subscribe. So hit that subscribe and you need to share the feed with your friends. And you know how to do that on the various platforms. You're on Twitter as well.

Now X. It's very important to do that because we've got a lot of people listening because I'm seeing all these calls coming in from radio as well. We're taking your calls on this. We're obviously very concerned.

I am trying to figure out how to channel the energy of what we need to do here. Somebody needs to set up a real defense fund for these lawyers. I mean, there's going to be defense funds for people that have been. Somebody needs a legal defense fund like the old NAACP legal defense fund.

That's almost what you need in a situation like this. Because it's so outrageous what they're doing to the lawyers. Just outrageous what they're doing to the lawyers.

A lot of law firms don't want to touch these. Listen, we're going to have to find the right way. Listen, I'll make this very personal. Jordan and I represented the former President for four years. The environment was pretty hostile, okay? But we did our cases and we didn't get brought up in any investigations. We pushed back very hard against the special counsel. We had words with them. We had arguments. We were on the floor of the United States Senate for three weeks.

It was, as Jordan said, it was not collegial. It was very intense advocacy. The landscape has changed drastically in the four-year period. Not even three-and-a-half-year period that this has taken place.

Drastically. The practice of law now is dangerous if you're representing a movement. And I've represented movements my whole life where we've had the government on the other side. But I've never seen, and I've almost, I've been threatened with contempt. I've had a judge say, tell your client to bring their toothbrushes because they're going to jail.

And I'd handle that with Judge Ward in Kansas City. But let me tell you what I've never seen before. Exactly what I said to the Supreme Court in the United States, the criminalization of the legal process. I've never seen anything like that. And I'm seeing it right now. And it's scary.

And it's dangerous for the country. And as we're in a liberty drive, I cannot think of anything more at the heart of liberty than this. All right, let's take another call. Yeah, Bill in Wyoming on Line 2. Hey, Bill.

Welcome to Secular. You're on the air. Yeah, thanks for letting me talk. I'm going to have to change my question here. I just got out of the hospital and I got my finances together, so I'm sending some money for those FBI agents. But the thing of it is, I agree with what you're saying concerning what happened with Al Gore.

I mean, he could have been brought upon charges for interference. I'm thinking, let's go into the future. What if the GOP gets elected? Could they go against the Democratic Party? I mean, what is this?

Is this insanity? Lack of intelligence? Or hello, Banana Republic? I mean, that's my question. You know, you're borderlining Banana Republic when one of the major parties is doing this. I don't want to be the party or the movement that says we're going to treat our adversaries as criminals because they have different political views than us. If that becomes the norm in America, it's not the America that I even grew up in. I mean, not the time I get grandparents in America. It's not the America I grew up in for the majority of my life. That's a different country. So this is the moment that we have to choose to prevent from becoming that America.

An America where sharing a viewpoint that is different from another can be a criminal act. I mean, you know, these calls. John Kerry and John Edwards, who got beat easily in that election in 2004, did not immediately concede that night. I think it was A.C. Abrams still hasn't conceded to Kemp in the 2016. 24 hours later, they were looking at legal options. Bush versus Gore did not tear up the country.

It was a kind of wild couple of months. But was there any moment there as an attorney that you had to say, because I was representing Al Gore, I was representing George Bush, that I was going to go to jail myself? There was no talk about anybody going to jail. No. Those weren't criminal cases. No.

We have an interesting comment on YouTube. It says, in your opinion, can or will the Supreme Court step in sui sponte? Sui sponte means on their own motion.

Probably not. Which means that you're going to have to get a group of really smart lawyers to brain trust this for everybody to bring those series of cases that ultimately do go to the Supreme Court. But you got to go through the Supreme Court of Georgia first. And by the way, the Supreme Court of Georgia is a conservative court.

So you've got a better chance. But I'm just trying to figure out, you know, we're on radio and I feel like I'm talking out loud on how to engage this for these lawyers that have been put in a horrible situation here. We are in the middle of our life in Liberty Drive. And I'm telling you, folks, if there was ever a drive for liberty and the survival of the constitutional republic, this indictment says the reason why we have to fight back. And that's where you come in. We need you to go to right now or respond to our email.

We do not have an email going out on the situation here. This is because we've got these religious liberty wins we wanted to bring to you and what we're doing there and a major case that we've just filed at the District Court on prayer. So that's all going on right now. But it all ties into life and liberty. And this is liberty.

When you lose the lawyer's ability to defend you, we've lost our liberty. Go to right now and stand with us and participate in the Life and Liberty Drive. Download the prayer guide. We encourage you to do that. But also, keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Hey, welcome back to Sekulow.

We are taking your calls to 1-800-684-3110 just to remind people because we do have people who are just joining. The fourth indictment of President Trump, this is out of Georgia and Fulton County. You've got here 41 different charges, 19 different defendants. That includes President Trump who himself has 13 charges against him.

That would be a total of 71 years in prison if found guilty on all of them. If you add up all these four cases, two by special counsel, one out of the DA in New York, one out of the DA in Fulton County, you're looking at nearly 800 years in prison combined total. But here is a unique case because of the amount, I think I counted seven or eight of the defendants in this case, as co-defendants with President Trump, are attorneys who are charged with being the same acts for representing their clients in public hearings, in legal filings, in court documents. And I've never again thought we lived in a country where an attorney would go to jail because they didn't win a case or their position wasn't accepted by a court. Look what they've charged Rudy Giuliani with. If you go through each of the charges, it includes phone calls with legislators, phone calls with President and other lawyers, meetings and hearings. And for that, Rudolph Giuliani, America's mayor, is facing a multi-count indictment. I worked with Rudy Giuliani. He's one of the smartest lawyers I've ever worked with. And whatever you're thinking about what you saw at the end there, you know what?

You don't judge somebody from one incident. You know what I do think about? Weaponize. That's exactly what I said would happen. You've weaponized these DAs.

There used to be guardrails in place. I mean we get a lot of you are asking on YouTube and Rumble, can't the Supreme Court just step in? No. You can't. They don't.

You have to do this through the process. I talked to any economist in England this morning, texting with Jane Raskin, one of the President's other lawyers, when we were all representing him, saying, what do you do here? First of all, these are your friends. I don't like leaving people on the battlefield. This is ridiculous. It's so ridiculous.

It's actually, Jordan, it's more than ridiculous. It's repulsive. It's repulsive because what they've done, they figured it out, the left, go after the lawyers. If you can go after the lawyers, you end the fight. Because there's no one there to stand up in the breach.

We're supposed to be the bulletproof vest of our clients. You can't do that when they're threatening you and putting you in jail. And that's what they're doing. They are bringing charges against people like Rudy Giuliani and Bob Shealy. They didn't like Cindy Powell, who won General Flynn's case, by the way. So they go after her.

And a whole host of lawyers you never heard of. And it's just, it's unbelievably dangerous. We've got a lot more to talk about this. I want you to do this, folks. I want you, I don't know exactly what we're going to do here because I don't.

I'm texting my colleagues. We're all trying to figure out what to do. But I want you to support the work of the ACLJ and whether it is the fact that we get that Bible study restarted, which is really important for those senior citizens in a Bible study, or defending prayer in the city of Ocala that was subject to a crime spree. And that now is back at the district court. And we already got a good order first out of, at least a couple of justices out of the Supreme Court. We don't do that without you. And that includes fighting for liberty, which includes all of those cases, and then standing up for our constitutional republic. But this is where you come in. We're in the fight for the soul of this country.

And we need your help. Go to Jordan's going to let you know how to do it. Our Life and Liberty Drive. You just go to You'll see the Life and Liberty Drive logo right there.

And once you take part, your gift is still doubled. So it's an important time to donate to the ACLJ as liberty is under attack like never before. And I always think it's important to balance that Bible study win that we're able to get in just a few weeks for those senior citizens. That's standing up for liberty. Making sure the attorneys don't become the criminals because they represent clients that a DA doesn't like, or happens to have a different political view then. That's part of liberty as well. We need you to donate today.

Step up because again, we're able to take on more, add to our team because of additional resources we have available to us at the ACLJ. So donate today at Be part of the Life and Liberty Drive.

Welcome back to Secular. There's a lot to break down in this. There's a lot to talk about. Keep getting calls from different media outlets because everybody's looking at it from different points.

And I'm getting calls from lawyers all over the state of Georgia. No one's really seen anything like this before. First of all, RICO used in a political manner. RICO used in a manner of people's views that they shared on Twitter. Saying a tweet about a hearing on OAA, One America News Network, it's great that they're having a hearing on that, is somehow part of a RICO, a conspiracy. Literally, that's in the count. But the left thinks this is a wonderful day for America.

And that's when I scratch my head and say, they don't realize what they're doing to the United States of America. Rick is joining us. I want to play though. Do we have it yet, Will?

We have it. Rick, I stood in this studio during COVID and argued a case before the Supreme Court of the United States on behalf of President Trump. And I said something in the beginning of that argument. They give you two minutes to say something uninterrupted. So this is not two minutes, it's about 40 seconds. But I want to play this for everybody because it's exactly what I said was going to happen. And I think this is the first time we're actually going to show the video in this courtroom that we built in our studio to give me the sense I was in the Supreme Court.

Take a listen to this. The Second Circuit is wrong and should be reversed. If not reversed, the decision weaponizes 2,300 local DAs. An overwhelming number of them are elected to office and are thereby accountable to their local constituencies. The decision would allow any DA to harass, distract, and interfere with the sitting President. It subjects the President to local prejudice that can influence prosecutorial decisions and to state grand juries who can then be utilized to issue compulsory criminal process in the form of subpoenas targeting the President. This is not mere speculation. It is precisely what has taken place in this case and with this subpoena we challenge. 2,300, Rick, weaponized local DAs.

One of them happens to be in Fulton County, Georgia. I said that almost three years ago and I mean I'm not a prophet but boy was I right. And now what they've done, in addition to going after President Trump so they can knock him out politically, they're going after the lawyers whose job it is is to defend people. And I think this is one of the greatest attacks on liberty we have seen in our lifetime. Look, Jay, what ended up happening a couple of years ago is that you saw very clearly that this was a bad precedent and that if it went forward, it would allow local DAs who are hungry for political life. They're hungry for media attention. They're wanting bigger jobs.

They're wanting statewide jobs. But what you did is you warned everyone that if this went forward, we would have local DAs wreaking havoc on the justice system. And what we saw yesterday is a local DA completely wreaking havoc on the justice system. It was embarrassing to watch her lay out RICO charges. She didn't know what she was talking about.

She was reaching. There was clearly a political bet to this. We saw the charges go up online before the grand jury even voted.

This is a system that is making a mockery of the United States' justice system and we've got to put an end to it. You know, and then the Fulton County office said, clerks said, oh, that was not, somebody must have put that by false. And then when you saw the document that actually came out, no, it was exactly correct. And then Reuters got the indictment first and Reuters was the one who published that. So it was obviously Fannie Willis's office was probably talking to the, I mean, I don't know this to Reuters, but here's what I'm concerned about. When I said you're weaponizing these district attorneys, but going after the, it's one thing to go after the President, bad enough. You go after the lawyers representing these people. And these are some of the most well-respected lawyers, Rick, in Georgia, in Atlanta.

I'm like in stunned. They have charged Robert Chealy, Bob Chealy, one of the best trial lawyers in the state with multiple count indictments on felonies. Bob Chealy, multiple count indictments on felonies.

He's not a household name. He's not a name you know, that we know they charge Rudy. For showing up at legislative hearings and say, hey, this is what you should be doing, this is what we think the law is, that has now been, and that's what I cannot stand about this, is you criminalize the defense of the lawyers. And I, of course I'm biased, but the truth is we're supposed to be the guardians of liberty. We're the bulletproof vest between our client and the state.

And you can't be the bulletproof vest if they threaten you or not just threaten you, indict you and throw you in jail. And I thought it was acrimonious three and a half years ago, four years ago, five years ago when I was doing this for the former President. But now this is, we're in a brave new world, Rick, a brave new, a dangerous brave new world. To me, it looks like the death of common sense.

Most people are watching this and saying, what happened? But I hope that we have a legal system. We have lawyers across this country who will stand up and say that this is wrong.

This is beyond weaponization. And they are going to have to do something. I'm here in Arizona, Jay, and I have to tell you, there's a state rep who sent an email around to a couple of people last night. And he said, I was trying to stay on the sidelines in this race, but as a lawyer, I'm watching the weaponization of the justice system against one political party. And I cannot sit by and allow this to happen. I am now standing firm with Donald Trump.

Now, that is a state weapon in Arizona. I think that's happening over and over. People who have common sense are looking at the situation and saying, wow, is this scary? Are we literally teetering on a system that is like kangaroo courts? Rick, worse than a kangaroo court. Because unfortunately, these courts and these judges can put people in jail for a really long time.

I was about to say, kangaroo courts get overthrown all the time. We don't want to become that country. But Rick, I can't think of a time that is more serious for people to take a stand and to speak out. Because I think we have one of two options.

We're either going to do that and we're going to right this wrong and right this ship, if you will, or we're going to sit on the sidelines and this is going to be the norm. And this will be our last opportunity really to speak out. Because in the future, we will know and our kids will also learn that if you speak up against the system, the system will crush you. Even if you represent people who are speaking up against the system, you might not even agree with them, but you represent their freedom to do that, the system will crush you. And we are now living in a totally different country than our founders. But this might be that moment that if we allow it to move forward, and if you're a young person right now looking at this, you say, I don't want to ever be involved in this process.

Yeah, you know, I'm encouraged. I want to encourage our listeners because every single time that I talk to someone who is a first or second generation American, I'm really encouraged about what's going to happen to our country. And I have hope because these individuals who left fascism and came to America are watching what's happening. And they're like the canaries in the coal mine, they're screaming, they're saying, I left this system of fascism, where the media and the ruling party completely go after the opposition and crush the opposition.

I see it happening in the Balkans pretty regularly. And people who come to this country who leave fascism are warning Americans. And so the people who have been here, Americans that are fourth, fifth, sixth generation, they need to take this warning from the first and second generation Americans, wise up, take a stand and do not let this happen to our country.

I think Washington, D.C. and everyone involved in Washington, D.C. is totally corrupt. I've got to tell you this, Rick, where I'm really concerned. And I know I'm coming to this with my own bias as a defense lawyer. I've been defending people for 40 years. That's what we're supposed to be. And what I've always trained is I'm the bulletproof vest. I'm the one that stands between the system and my client. And if the system is allowed to take my bulletproof vest off and stick it in a closet being a jail, well, then who's defending the people?

And then what kind of republic do we have? So all these people on CNN last night cheering this indictment, these lawyers should be ashamed of themselves. I mean, it's horrifying. This isn't lawyers that help rob a bank. This wasn't a lawyer who was involved in a murder. This was a lawyer defending an election law lawsuit. And for that, they're facing 20 years in prison. Sorry, go ahead. And by the way, the hypocrisy is very real, because when you look at the video of Democrat after Democrat challenging the elections of 2001, 2005, 2016, they did the same thing. And yet now it's weaponized against them.

I want to say this, too. I think that it's a very valid point to show that Donald Trump was pushing back using his free speech moments to push back on what he saw as a stolen election. But when it came time to leave, when all options were done, he didn't try to stay in office. He left.

He left. We're running out of time. They're conveniently forgetting that part. But you know what?

Here's what I want to say, Rick. President Trump has got resources to hire lawyers. He's got lawyers. Here's the problem. These lawyers are not Donald Trump.

I mean, they're very successful lawyers, but you're talking about millions of dollars in legal fees. And this is the real problem with all this. And folks, that's why we've got to figure out how we're going to stand with these people and defend freedom, defend liberty and do it today. Yeah, because these are the people that stand up for you if you've got an issue. And now they're under attack. And these are the ones that were brave enough to do it at that time, but it was, again, it was already politically wrong to do so.

I didn't think it was going to be criminally wrong. Be part of our life and liberty. Drive today. Donate at All right, we're going to go right to the phone calls, 1-800-684-3110. Jerry in Rhode Island on Line 3. Hey, Jerry. Hey, Jerry.

Hey, team. When I first called in, I was thinking all of this is so frivolous that a judiciary with a backbone who used to be lawyers and knows advocacy would dismiss this scrap or would it go over to case the first impression because of the social media aspect? Well, the social media aspect is a big part of it because it's never been done before, but they actually use the social media as counts inside the acts that constitute racketeering influence and corrupt organization challenges.

They consider that part of the enterprise, Jerry. We have to have some non-brittle judges, I guess. Well, we're going to have to have some lawyers with a backbone to go in there and say, knock this nonsense off. But I mean, really well-prepared lawyers because this is going to be a dogfight like you've never seen before.

Yeah, I think that's what people realize. They want to try all at the same time. Yeah, 19 defendants at the same time plus a bunch of unindicted co-conspirators. She wants a show. She wants to be President.

Fannie Willis wants to be the next governor of Georgia because Stacey Abrams is done, probably, and then run for President. That's what this is. And she wants to put them all in a box.

Knock out your adversary and then knock out the lawyers defending them. I feel like the way that they would do this is they'd all be in a box like a criminal gang. I think that's right.

I mean, that's how she wants them sitting in court, right? Yeah. All together like that. Dangerous, dangerous, dangerous. You just see that.

What imagery do we see like that still? Russia. Yeah, Korea.

Where they put you in a box. Right. Take another call.

Yeah, back to the phones. Oh, we go. Mary Ellen. Illinois has been holding on. Hey, Mary Ellen. Oh, thank you.

And just know we have your back in prayer, but two points I want to make quickly. An alarm rose up in me when I saw they took the attorney-client privilege to Pierce with John Chapman. And the second one when I heard Alan Dershowitz talk about the 65 Project. Yeah. Well, the 65 Project is a group that's going after the lawyers. They started that. Alan's right. And you talk about Dr. John Eastman's attorney.

When you start piercing attorney-client privilege, you're in a danger zone. And we're way past that now. That looks like ancient history, unfortunately. But that's why we're fighting back. And like I said, we're going to figure out exactly which way this goes. Let's go. Let's take another call, Jordan.

Yep. Randy in Ohio on Line 5. Hey, Randy.

Hey, Randy. Hey, thanks for taking my call. I have two questions.

First and foremost, if they're charging him with the RICO Act, does that mean they're going to be able to put all of his funds on hold and then he won't even be able to campaign? When you say he, you're referring to Trump? Yes. Okay. Let me tell you something, though, Randy.

I just said this to Rick. Donald Trump's going to be able to defend himself. He's a billionaire.

Okay. So they're not going to be able to tie up his assets. But these lawyers, some of them are very successful.

Others are just regular lawyers making regular income. They don't have those resources. So this is what they're trying to do is bankrupt the people and make them plead guilty. That's what they're going to try to do. And we need Superman to fly in here and figure out how to defend these people.

And it's not easy. And that includes, by the way, what they've done to Rudy Giuliani. And people say, well, you know, he had some crazy theories. You know, lawyers come up with theories. That's what we do. We answer hypotheticals that are insane half the time when you were writing your exam.

For this very purpose. And like Jordan, you said, 250 years, half of these questions haven't been answered by the Supreme Court yet. No, there's always going to be new questions because there's new ways of speech. The new way of speech is social media outlets. These social media outlets aren't actually a public forum. They're private forums.

And yet they're private forums where you're saying, oh, it's great. I'm watching a hearing on a television channel. That's part of a RICO case now. That's part of an organized crime activity. Sending out a tweet.

Sending out a tweet that you're watching a hearing. They're literally putting that as an account. But going after the people who are willing to defend you or going after those who have a different theory of the law when there are questions about that law. Remember, they had to go back and they have reworded the Electoral Count Act since this election. Because though it was accepted that the vice President's role was ceremonial, it wasn't actually clear. It wasn't actually written down that it was.

100%. I said publicly and I still believe that he did not have the discretion to reject ballots, but I'm not the Supreme Court. I said I think what the Constitution had in mind was his was going to be more of a ministerial function.

But he had in mind. Ultimately Congress had the Governor to say it. But there were really smart lawyers saying that they're under the Electoral Count Act and then they wanted to clarify the Electoral Count Act. Why did they want to clarify it, by the way?

Maybe because it wasn't clear. Right. So anyways, take another call.

Yep. Back to the phones we go. Joe in New York online.

Well, I just got a good point. Hey, Joe. Hey. God bless what you guys are doing. Thanks. You know, I appreciate your standing up for the Constitution and everything you're doing. Thank you. Big, small, medium, large, whatever.

Thank you. Well, my question is when President Trump said that he wanted to drain the swamp, did he realize it was an ocean? No. And what do you – No. Loaded with barracudas and man-eating sharks. No, I think that's – I think you're exactly right.

And any President going into it going forward needs to understand that. This is not a pond. It's not even a swamp. It's an ocean that's operating with a tsunami. That's what it is.

And that's how outrageous and dangerous it is. Let's get another call. Yep. Let's go to Joanne in Ohio online too. Hey, Joanne. Hi, guys.

Thanks for everything. Sure. I just have a comment and a quick question.

And part of it you've already answered since I've been on hold. But Rudy Giuliani, the man has probably prosecuted more RICO cases in this country successfully than anyone. Yeah. And they're charging him with RICO? Yes.

I don't get that. And my question is, what is this trial going to look like with all these defendants? A circus.

All their representation. It's going to be a circus. It is going to be a circus. You're right about it. By the way, Rudy Giuliani talking about busting organized crime with RICO, there's a guy that did it.

I mean, this is the guy that did it. What's this trial going to look like? Exactly what the DA wants it to look like. A showcase for her and an unbelievably difficult management situation for the lawyers. Oh, yeah.

So somebody's got to get in there for Rudy and Bob Chealy and all these others and come up with a defense and boldly go in there. You know, what was that? It was a Star Wars. You boldly go where no man – no, that was Star Trek. Boldly go where no man has gone before.

And that is the truth. This is – you are in uncharted territory, folks, here. We're just trying to figure out what to do. I've been reading this thing for a day now or an evening. It came out almost midnight. Yeah, it was very late.

So I read it till about 2 in the morning, then read it again this morning. We just got to fight. I mean, the answer is you got to fight. Yeah, and this is a fight worth having because I really do believe that when you – when we get to – I don't want my kids to grow up in a country where they have to feel like they can't share their political views.

There's only one accepted political view. And if you have a different opinion but it's not the opinion that the local DA has, that that opinion might be criminal to have the opinion. I thought we lived in a country where we were pretty clear on what was criminal and what was, again, just speech we didn't like or activity we might not agree with, but it certainly did rise to the level of crime. I thought we kind of accepted that as Americans. And occasionally we might have to take a case or two to figure that out, to figure kind of where we are because things change and the country changes and demographics change. But then as a whole we can figure out what's just something I don't like but I accept as part of being an American with liberty, and what's something that is actually criminal that society needs to prevent.

And when I read through this indictment, I don't see activities that rise to the level of criminal activity that we need to remove from our society. And I think that's right. I think that's 100% correct. But we've got to fight here, folks, in a challenge that I've never seen. So we're in the middle of a… In a locality where the jury is going to be… A disaster.

Yeah. But we're in the middle of a life and liberty drive. So we've had to learn this month that we've got to defend life and liberty and we've got to defend multiple things at multiple times, maybe with multiple people. Your support for the ACLJ is critical now more than ever. We need you to stand with us.

We don't get to do this without you. If you want to help all these people, we're helping these whistleblowers, these cases, go to Donate to the ACLJ. Your gift will be doubled. But this is our life and liberty drive month and we need you to stand with us. Again, And download that prayer guide as well.

15,000 of you have. We'll talk to you tomorrow.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-08-15 15:29:41 / 2023-08-15 15:51:04 / 21

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime