SHOCKING: Hunter Biden Protected By Dad’s Dept. of Justice

Today on Sekulow, a shocking revelation.

Hunter Biden is being protected by his dad's Department of Justice, and we can prove it. 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. So last month we have emails from David Weiss, who is now the special counsel, who was the U.S. attorney investigating Hunter Biden, to the Department of Justice trading emails with DOJ's Legislative Affairs and Legal Counsel's Office about how to respond to questions posed by House Republicans about the Hunter Biden investigation. So he sought the advice of the DOJ, not his team, but the DOJ, how do you want us to respond to these political questions we may be receiving from House Republicans? Congressman Jim Jordan is going to be joining us live on the broadcast today to talk about this. But, Dad, that alone shows you why in these bizarre special counsel setups, where they are really not truly independent of the Department of Justice, in fact, Merrick Garland is still David Weiss's boss, and Merrick Garland's boss is Joe Biden, that it gets into this, I'd say, gray area at best, and it looks horrible on paper.

Well, I mean, the special counsel, as you said, is not an independent counsel, so that's number one on this list. Number two, as this email shows, let's put it up on the screen if we can. The email, we're going to put it, there it is.

I mean, it says it. Hi, Shannon. This is from Shannon Hansen, U.S. AD, United States Attorney in Delaware, to David Weiss, who's the now special counsel. He was not at the time that this email was drafted.

And it says, we received a letter attached addressed to several Department officials, including U.S. Attorney Weiss. Well, Office of Legislative Affairs will take the lead on drafting responses for the Department. If, when I see a draft, I will share it to you. Notice the if, when, if I see a draft.

If you have any questions, please let me know. So you had this coordination of efforts going on here, and then it was reported over the weekend that a staff from Jack Smith's office, that's a separate, that's the D.C. special counsel dealing with the January 6th matter, had lawyers going over to the White House counsel's office to discuss issues with them. And the unusual nature of that was that normally that would have gone through the deputy attorney general.

It's called the DAG. You wouldn't have direct communication. I mean, can you imagine if Trump's office did that, they'd have a fit. And, but that's what was going on there. And you had the unique situation in these particular cases where they're going after a former President who is the leading Republican candidate for President. Then you have on top of all of this now trial dates that are set on a calendar that's going to have the President, former President of the United States in trial basically from March 4th forward. Yeah, I mean, we look at this right now. I did an interview on Newsmax this morning just to walk people through because this is a very aggressive setup and it's so politically charged. It's so obvious. You don't have to even read between the lines.

You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist. A D.C. judge sets the first trial date the day before Super Tuesday for someone who is the leading candidate of the major political party in the United States. And then that doesn't stop it there in March. You move on a little bit later in March. That's when they'd like to bring the case beginning again in D.C., New York. So you've got May. You've got all this activity in March.

You've got all, and then you're still waiting. The only case that really is going to be a little bit longer is the classified documents case. And that's just because of the evidence load there. And you look again. So you look at Georgia.

You look at D.C. You look at the case again out of New York. I mean, March could be an extremely busy month. They all want, in fact… Well, talking about a busy month, let me tell you, we're in a busy three days here because we're in the last three days of our life and liberty drive. It's been a great success so far, but we are still short of our goals and we are in the last three days.

This is when it really makes a difference. We need your support. Without your donation, we do not get to fight these cases. By the way, we filed 16 lawsuits against the Biden administration, including our FOIA lawsuit on Hunter Biden. We're defending FBI whistleblowers being crushed, their words, by the Biden administration. We can't do it without you.

Your chance to have your gift doubled ends at midnight this Thursday. To defend life and liberty, go to ACLJ.org. That's ACLJ.org. And participate today. It's critical.

Welcome back to Second. Just to kind of put this into perspective for you, this is how the D.A. 's wanted to set this up. And it's coming to light now. And this is even from the New York Times. So a federal judge yesterday, Judge Chudkin out of D.C., set a trial date on March 4th. That's the day before Super Tuesday in the prosecution of former President Trump. The decision by Judge Chudkin already is kind of getting in the way potentially of another D.A., because though it hadn't been approved yet by a judge, that is when Georgia's District Attorney Fannie Willis also had March 4th. So it's like they circled the day before Super Tuesday and said, let's start the trials then. So that, again, in Georgia, that hasn't gotten the okay yet. But then you go just a bit further into March, March 25th. So you go from definitely D.C. and then potentially back to the New York District Attorney. They want to start that case over the financial crimes.

That's Alvin Bragg. They want to do that March 25th. Why do I bring up March so importantly? Because the classified one, that one is going to take much longer because there's a classified documents act.

You have to go through every piece of evidence. It's going to be a long time before that has any trial date. So push that one to the side. They all want to bring their cases in March, Dan.

And the one reason, there's only one reason to do that. March is the most important time politically in the primary season for each major party. It is when usually the next candidate is chosen or at least the field is whittled down to two candidates.

It is that critical of a time. And they are trying to get, by scheduling these trials, and I have no doubt this is their intent, they are trying to get Donald Trump off the campaign trail, forcing him to sit in courtrooms. So we're taking your calls on all of this.

How do you react to this whole thing? That's New York Times. I know. Well, because it's true. I mean, they're not reporting something that's false there. They got it.

We're taking your calls at 800-684-3110, 1-800-684-3110. Get your reaction to this. Because what has happened here, if you look at the way that these trials are coming together, and I think this is the thing you have to focus on here, it is March-centric. That's what all the DAs are asking for, March-centric. The judge wants that also.

That effectively, as you said, takes the leading Republican candidate out of the election process. Because remember, it's not just showing up to trial. You have to be prepared for trial. Now, I wouldn't put Donald Trump on the stand.

That would not be the way I'd try the case. But these lawyers are in a very, I mean, I know these lawyers, and they're very good lawyers. John Laro is an excellent lawyer. John Sauer, these are good lawyers.

Of course, Steve Sadow in Atlanta, great lawyer. And these are all great lawyers, but they've got a very difficult challenge coming on. And it's so obviously political that you could see through it.

Even some of the left-wing media was saying that. So, I mean, people see what's going on here. We're taking your calls at 800-684-3110.

Let's go ahead and take one. Yeah, we're talking about witch hunts. This is the ultimate of witch hunts, a coordinated effort by judges both in the federal and state system to bring a former President and leading nominee into court the most important month of the primary season. Let me say something else on this, and then we will get to our phone calls.

Also understand this. If they go to trial in March, let's say the trial takes six weeks, so you're in May, sentencing will be May. I mean, if there's a guilty verdict, which in D.C. is likely because it's a D.C. jury, you're going to have a sentencing of the leading Republican candidate in May or June. I mean, how that plays politically, I'm not sure. Does it galvanize the base, or do you know?

There's no historic precedent for this. You know, so far the indictments have galvanized the base. With a guilty verdict and a President potentially being behind bars or under house arrest or something like that, would that galvanize the base still? That is a question that remains to be seen. Well, they could also take him – you realize they could take him off the battlefield, so to speak, because they could say we're going to – you know, pending sentencing or reporting, let's say they don't do jail, they do house arrest, you can't leave. So if you don't think this is political – You have to run your campaign like Joe Biden did the first time. Yeah, and probably could still win, but I mean, it's very, very difficult situation. Let's go right to the phones.

Even when you take out the legal issues, just the timing alone here is so important. I know. Becky in Tennessee on Line 1. Hey, Becky. Hey, how are you? We're good.

You're on the air. My question is after taking paralegal classes for some time back, I learned the responsibilities of the courts and I just wonder why the U.S. Supreme Court does not have a letter sent out to all the judges and all the attorneys regarding their conduct responsibilities to all of this. No, that's a good question, and here's the reason why. The Supreme Court can only act upon specific grants of jurisdiction. That's what the Constitution says. And also what the statutes, the Judiciary Act says. So the Supreme Court cannot sui sponte, in other words, on its own motion, Becky, say, hey, judges, you can't put all these cases together. Now, lawyers could make motions that could go from the district court or the state court to the court of appeals in the state or the court of appeals in the federal system and then ultimately to the Supreme Court and weigh in on it. But I got to tell you something, not likely to move a trial date. I mean, it's not unconstitutional. I would argue it is unconstitutional because you're denied effective assistance of counsel if you're putting this kind of pressure on the lawyers to get this case ready. The government had two years to put it together. You have six months.

I mean, that's absurd. So those motions could be made, but the Supreme Court can only act when asked to act, and that's where the lawyers have to get in there. And at the ACLJ, as these constitutional issues mature, and if they're constitutional issues that are maturing, we're going to get engaged in that because this is very significant for – listen, we're in a life and liberty drive, but the heart of liberty is living in a free constitutional republic. If we don't have that, there's going to be nothing left.

There's going to be nothing to fight for because you have no basis and place to fight. So as we've said, we're in the last three days of our life and liberty drive. I want to encourage you to do something, folks. We've had a great success so far, and thank you for those that have supported, but we're still short of our goal.

We had to make up – the beginning of the year was a little bit slower for us, so we're making up some lost track time here. Without your donations, we cannot fight for the issues that matter most to you. And let me explain what that means. We have 16 federal lawsuits, 16 federal lawsuits currently against the Biden administration. Right now, against the Biden administration, 16 federal lawsuits. I'm holding in my hands one of them, which deals with the whole Hunter Biden mess and the U.S. attorney.

That's one of 16, okay? We are defending the FBI whistleblowers who said they're being crushed by their own agency. That's going on right now as well. But we can't do this without you. And when you say go to the Supreme Court, you just don't go to the Supreme Court. There has to be cases that get you to the Supreme Court.

Your chance to have your gift doubled is over within three days, so this is critical for us, folks, in our life and liberty drive. We want to defend life. We want to defend our constitutional republic. Go to ACLJ.org and make that donation today. It is that important as we list 16 lawsuits.

That's just in the Biden administration and many, many others. All right, we're taking calls. We said we would explain all this.

There is a lot to explain. Jim Jordan coming up on the next segment of the broadcast. Looking forward to talking to him. Let's grab another phone call.

Yeah, Brian at Missouri Online 4. Hey, Brian. Morning.

Morning. Hey, I'd like to comment on them trying to take Donald Trump off of the campaign trail. Do they not realize that 70 million people voted for him?

75 million, actually, I think the number was at the end or close to it. I think they don't care, Brian. I think that they view him as an existential threat politically and to the swamp and to the deep state. So what do you do with an existential threat?

You try to eliminate it. Here, what they're doing is they've turned the legal system into lawfare and that's what they're engaged in. So this is lawfare and we're seeing it played out in person.

Yeah. I mean, I think, you know, Wall Street Journal talks about it. They have the headline up today about the March date and the Super Tuesday date.

I mean, everybody sees through. Listen, these district court judges, they're smart. They're very politically involved. Even though they're supposed to keep politics out of it, Dad, they follow politics closely. They're appointed politically.

And especially one's based out of Washington, D.C. So to put the date at March 4th is a figure in the eye to Donald Trump. It's a statement move. I mean, wouldn't you say that? I mean, you don't just randomly choose the day before Super Tuesday to start a trial that we didn't keep the leading candidate in your courtroom and with an inability to fully campaign.

It just reeks of not even a two tiered system of justice, but a system of justice that has turned on anyone who happens to be conservative. Yeah. But what they've also done is by cramming these cases all in in March, I mean, they have effectively taken it.

Let's assume that Donald Trump's- Even before they won in March. Yeah. But here's the thing. It effectively takes him off the field because- He's important both of the primaries.

And then pass that. Yeah. So let's say he's the nominee even with all this. Yeah, survives this. Okay. But what if he has a jail sentence in Washington that maybe he could, you know, pending appeal, they could not enforce it.

That is home confinement or jail, who knows what it would be in D.C. What this judge would do. So do I think we're in an existential crisis right now? Yeah. We're in an existential crisis right now in our political system. And that is where you come in, in our life and liberty drive, folks, because we're defending the heart of liberty when we entertain these cases. And as I said, 16 lawsuits against the Biden administration, including the case with Hunter Biden right now.

We're defending those whistleblowers who are telling them the truth. We need your support. We can't do without you. Jordan's gonna let you know how you could respond to our life and liberty drive right now. Yeah, exactly.

You go to aclj.org. We want you to be part of our life and liberty drive. A few days left here.

Your gift will be doubled. So it's still important time to donate. You have heard us feature these very important cases.

We've got more even coming up later this week on life and liberty. Support us. Donate aclj.org today.

All right. Welcome back to second. We're taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110. We're now joined by Congressman Jim Jordan as well, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee and Congressman Jordan, I want to go right to you because you are demanding an unredacted information on Hunter Biden's special counsel appointment. There's so many bizarre moves now from David Weiss and his team. It seems like Congressman Jordan, this is the time for Congress to get some real answers on what is going on here. Why do we need a special counsel when the investigation was already completed? By definition, the investigation was completed because they'd entered a plea agreement. They went to the judge. Now, thank goodness the court and the judge said this plea agreement's bogus, but why do you need a special counsel now after four years when you'd already had a plea deal in front of the court that makes no the time for a special counsel, frankly, was probably January 20th, 2021 at about 1202 when Joe Biden takes the oath of office and the Justice Department says, oh, we've been investigating his son.

His father is now President of the United States. Maybe that's a situation that would warrant a special counsel. They should have named it then. Not now, when we're figuring out just how bad this investigation has been run, thanks to those two brave whistleblowers who came forward a few months ago. You know, Jim, this is Jay, and we're representing some of those whistleblowers and they've used the phrase crushed by the FBI because they're put in this unbelievable situation where their security clearances are basically suspended and they can't take, they're not getting paid and they can't take outside work. You look at this and you say to yourself, you know, between what's happening there and what you're dealing with, with this so-called special counsel, and you know my view on special counsel, I don't like them. I don't like the whole process. It always ends up messy.

This is going to be no exception as you're learning as you know firsthand from your experience. But if you look at that, then I combine it with the judges that are all throwing the trials on Donald Trump in March, you know, the day before Super Tuesday. The country's looking like a laughing stock here. Yeah, and then they do it because they can't. I mean, that's the arrogance and the power that they use for their political purposes is, as you say, just completely, completely frightening. Yeah, I'm frustrated by it all, and we've said this for a long time. You guys said it for a long time, that there's a double standard.

There's not equal application of the law. And the country sees that, and that's not supposed to be the way it works in America, the greatest nation ever, but it's exactly what's happening. We shouldn't be surprised, though, that they're retaliating against FBI agents, they are retaliating against these IRS agents who came forward, because the Justice Department, a DOJ, and an FBI who will spy on a Presidential campaign, who will say parents are terrorists who show up at school board meetings, who will say that pro-life Catholics are extremists, who will do the things that we shouldn't be surprised that they didn't, that they retaliate against the very people who come forward and tell us about those issues and those things that were going on in the Justice Department.

That's how bad it's gotten, and it's why it's so important that we win the White House in the next election, and I'm hoping that individual is going to be President Trump. So, and they're hoping it's not. Let me tell you, I mean, as you know, I've represented this guy for a long time now, and they are hoping it's not, and they're hoping it's not by doing everything they can between these special counsels and the hearing dates. But I want to talk about what you're doing, because a lot of the American people are really counting on you, Congressman Jordan, and your committees to get to the bottom of this. And how confident are you that we're going to get some real answers here?

Oh, I think we will. We've already got some changes made. I mean, the fact that the IRS announced four weeks ago that they will no longer send agents unannounced to Americans' homes, that's because we caught them doing that. When Matt Taibbi was testifying in front of our committee and the Democrats are asking to divulge their sources, he's giving them an election on the First Amendment. After all that's going on, the IRS was knocking on his door, for goodness sakes. So because we brought that to light, I think that's through now.

Danny Warfahl, the commissioner, says, oh, no, no, it's because we're concerned about the safety of our agents. Baloney, you did it because we caught you doing things arrogantly, aggressively against the American people. So we got to, I'm confident we're going to get to the bottom of this. I also feel like, and the speaker has been clear about this, I do think it's likely we move to an impeachment inquiry.

The facts keep building up here on this Biden business operation, the ties to Burisma, what we learned in the Devin Archer deposition. I do think that's looking more and more likely, and the speaker said if that's where our oversight takes us, we will go there. I do think that we have Merrick Garland coming in on September 20th. We're going to get to the bottom of some of this stuff dealing with David Weiss. The Justice Department said David Weiss, they've committed to us that he will be in front of the Judiciary Committee late September, early October. We'll see if they honor that commitment now that they named him special counsel, but we're going to keep working to get the facts. And your colleagues over in the Senate, Senator Grassley, Senator Lankford have also sent a letter to Christopher Wray saying, you know, basically, you know, you made all these statements, many of which were incorrect. You need to come back and correct the record.

So that's good news. Go ahead, Jordan. I mean, how did it feel, Congressman Jordan, to see that David Weiss, while he was US Attorney now Special Counsel, his team felt like they couldn't directly respond to you, that he had to get pre-clearance. If you had questions, that Congress had questions for him and his team, that they had to go to the Department of Justice and get the answers from them, that they did not feel like they had the authority to answer your questions directly, even though they were appointed to these unique positions.

Yeah. And even though Merrick Garland, the Attorney General, said they did have the full authority. Now, everything was strange about this. I wrote them on, excuse me, February 23rd asking why there wasn't a Special Counsel in this situation.

Again, not saying that there had to be, but just if ever there was a situation that warranted one, this seems like it would be one. And they didn't respond. No letter.

Now, you know how this works, guys. Whenever the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee writes the Attorney General of the United States, you always get a response back. May not be what you like, may take them a while, but you get a response. No response.

I wrote them again. They didn't respond again, but they had David Weiss respond. So that is all strange and the changing story from David Weiss, June 7th, he said he had the complete authority to determine when, where, and whether to bring charge.

And then on June 30th, he wrote me again and says, well, I stand by what I wrote, but I want to expand. I can only bring charges in my district. Well, which one is it?

You can only bring charges in your district or you can bring them anywhere. They've been all over the map. And now, of course, that same guy has been named the Special Counsel, which makes no sense to anyone. It really doesn't. Congressman Jordan, we appreciate everything you're doing. We appreciate working with you and your team and keep up the great work for the American people. The same. You do the same. Thanks. Very good. Folks, I want to say this. Jim, Jordan, and they've got change and we work very closely. It's important for him to point that out, too.

Yeah. They have gotten change and we have gotten results. It's like when we went after the IRS, you get results. And when we get information on these foyers, we're able to get it to Congress.

So this is all interrelated. Here's what I want to tell you, that we've got three days left in our life and liberty drive. And it's been a great success, but your support is needed now more than ever.

We're short of our goals, trying to make up some lost time in the first half of the year. Without your donations, we can't fight for all these people. And we can't fight for the issues that matter the most for you. That's how we deploy lawyers out to do this and keep this broadcast on the air. We filed 16 lawsuits against the Biden administration currently in court.

We're defending these whistleblowers that Congressman Jordan was talking about. But as I said last week, they need us and we need you. And together we can get this done and we can save our constitutional republic. Your chance to have your gift doubled ends in just three days.

Thursday, it's over. So I want to encourage you to defend life and liberty. Go to ACLJ.org and sign on to our life and liberty drive and make that donation. Somebody yesterday donated $5,000. That's effectively to us $10,000. You donate $50.

It's another $50 for us. You know how it works. But we've got 16 lawsuits against the Biden administration, folks. We're representing these whistleblowers. My colleagues are on the phone with the whistleblowers and their lawyer and other lawyers this afternoon.

We're fighting for freedom. Back with another half hour, ACLJ.org to participate. Keeping you informed and engaged. Now more than ever, this is Sekulow and now your host Jordan Sekulow. All right. Welcome back to Sekulow.

We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110. This headline, the Wall Street Journal, it's their opinion page by their editorial board. It's Trump's Super Tuesday trial date.

I just want to read the first paragraph to you because I think it really highlights what we've been talking about today in a succinct way. When Donald Trump won the Republican Presidential nomination in 2016, he spent Super Tuesday barnstorming Columbus, Ohio and Louisville, Kentucky holding his signature rallies. Next year, Mr. Trump might be stuck in a defendant's chair at the federal courthouse in Washington, D. And how the public will respond is anybody's guess, dad. I mean, but they've made a political decision here throwing these chips on the table to say, all right, indicting him hasn't worked.

That's only made it more popular. So maybe if we could get him in the defendant's chair and off the campaign trail, we could end him politically. What do you think about that? You know, I think if people really see through what they are doing here, it could benefit Donald Trump. The problem is the mainstream middle of the road voters that you do have to convince, not in the Republican primary, but in the general election to win, who might say, you know what? This person's got way too much going on to run for President of the United States.

How can they possibly be focused? Now I will tell you again, I think that alone to me, I wish I keep kind of brainstorming through my mind how you could challenge that based off this being like a political act by a judge, because it's like, I wish you could FOIA their letters back and forth about what date you want to choose. Let's choose the day before. By the way, she acknowledged that she's talking to the judges in New York. Oh yeah. Judge Jenkins. So let's go ahead and take a phone call at 1-800-684-3110. Henry's been holding for a while. Let's take his call. Henry, go ahead. You're on the air. I'm here? Yeah.

Yeah. All I wanted to do was make a comment about the fact that, you know, Trump's already a proven deal. If they tie him up in court, that'll be the final nail in the coffin of the Democrats and anybody else. He's not in on the field.

He is the field. There's nobody else that's even going to come close and his base, which is in the tens of millions, we're not going to be buffaloed or lied to. Even Democrats are coming alive and realizing. I think you're a hundred percent correct, Henry, as it relates to the primary. Okay. I do.

Yeah. My concern is, let's face it, in a general election, neither Republican nor Democrat is going to be a runaway. It's going to come down to five or six states and you're going to have to get some people that are on the fence. And does this distraction hurt them? I think it's so political that people will see through it and it is outrageous. I agree. I think it's outrageous.

I think it's unconstitutional. Now how those motions are going to be made is what we're all trying to scratch our head right now for figuring out. But this is a very troubling development.

There is no doubt about that. And politically you said we're in unknown territory, Jordan, you think? I really do believe we are in an area where we just, you can't predict because I can predict the indictments helping him. I can't predict what it's going to be like if he can't be on the campaign trail. If people will rally behind him in that effort, maybe he will in the Republican primary.

But how much damage it does to the general election remains to be seen. We are going to have to really convince people about what we've been talking about here, that this is a political persecution prosecution, where it looks like they are literally looking at the calendar and saying, what date would be the worst for Donald Trump politically? Let's do, let's schedule all the court dates then.

I mean, you had Fannie. She's got to prep before the trial. So if it starts March 3rd or 4th, he's prepping for a month.

Which is the entire three months of the main months of the campaign. So this is totally political. And it wasn't just her idea, Fannie had the idea and the DA in New York wanted to finish out the month of March, which is usually when you wrap up the nomination. And then the federal judge in DC says, I'm going to pick the same time. So you know what's going on here, folks? We're in a life and liberty drive. You want to defend liberty?

This may be the moment to defend it because it's under attack like never before. So I want to encourage you, thousands of watching on our social media platforms and millions listening on radio right now, I need you to go to ACLJ.org and participate in our life and liberty drive. As I said, 16 cases against the Biden administration. We also have to gear up for constitutional challenges coming out of all these cases involving the former President because we have got to file amicus briefs on the constitutional issues. Our briefs, as Jordan said to me this morning, our briefs are read. Our briefs are cited by judges, including Supreme Court justices. So we need your support to help us stay in this fight.

ACLJ.org, that's ACLJ.org for the life and liberty drive. Do it today. We'll be back with more in a moment. Welcome back to Second, we are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110, that's 1-800-684-3110. Our senior analyst, Tulsi Gabbard, joining us now to discuss some issues too. We'll take calls on politics as well throughout the show.

We've got a lot more coming up today on the broadcast. Tulsi, news out of Ukraine because we now have that former prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, who was fired, you know, famously by Joe Biden, who said, listen, you don't either fire him today or the billion dollars, you're not going to get a billion dollars, sounded like a quid pro quo and he was ultimately fired. And there was this whole story that, oh, his firing had nothing to do with Burisma. In fact, the problem was he wasn't going after the corruption in Burisma. Now he's done interviews where he directly says, Tulsi, he was fired because of his investigation into Burisma and what the Bidens were doing in Ukraine.

Jordan, you know, it would be easy for some people, and I think some Democrats are using the line, Democrats in Washington, well, this is a matter of like he said, he said, it's one word against the other. And of course, they're going to go with the word of the Biden family. But what's what's becoming very real is there are multiple pieces of evidence and documents that Congress was asking for for months, if not longer, that actually point to a very specific timeline that proves what that prosecutor is saying to be true. He was actively investigating Burisma. You had Devin Archer working for Burisma, going and trying to get the Biden administration to act and shut this guy down.

And what happened? It's not a coincidence. It cannot be a coincidence that President Biden went to Ukraine to fire this prosecutor who was going after the business that Hunter Biden was working for. This is such a clear point, Jordan, to the great threat, the imminent threat that we face in this country, which is political powers.

The Democrat elite are using and abusing their power by turning the Department of Justice against their political opponents, very specifically President Donald Trump, to try to make it so voters don't even have the option to to choose him and to protect their own, to protect Hunter Biden, to protect President Biden and their family and and, frankly, protect voters from seeing how corrupt they actually are. This is what is the most dangerous thing, because they're turning the United States of America into a banana republic through their actions. You know, Tulsi, I said something very similar just a few minutes ago. If you look at the situation right now, you've got the Ukraine situation and what was going on there and and the money going into Hunter Biden and all that.

OK. I mean, it reeks of corruption, no question. And I did the impeachment that was involving Ukraine. And I mean, everybody knows Ukraine has got corruption issues.

This is not new. But if you were looking at the United States right now from another country and saying, OK, you got a former President in the United States who is the leading candidate right now for the Republican Party for President for 2024, and he has four federal, four criminal cases against him. And all four of them want to have the trial in March, the day before Super Tuesday.

You ran for President, so you know how significant that date is. You think to yourself, geez, that's going to look pretty political. But the Justice Department, like you said, the judges are going along with this like this is OK. And the problem is it's not OK. Fixing it is very difficult. But this is looking horrible for us on the global stage right now, in my view.

What do you think? Yeah, Jay, I couldn't agree more when I saw the news come out, I think it was yesterday that March 4th was the day that they chose. It is so transparent, regardless of political affiliation or political agreements or disagreements. Anyone who's looking at what's happening with clear eyes and an open mind can recognize how overtly they are trying to keep President Trump off of the campaign trail, to keep him away from being able to make his case to voters in this country of why they should elect him as President and commander in chief once again.

They're afraid that he actually could win, which is why they're they're committing this such egregious abuse of power that cuts so much deeper than just going after President Trump, because what they're really doing is setting this precedent that puts the United States of America not on a high platform of of trying to be an example of democracy to the world, but of reducing our great country to none other than a banana republic and an abuse of power that we see happening in other countries around the world. Can I ask you this? Because you've had this experience. You ran for President. You were very successful within in the Democratic Party.

You clearly were the one rising and then they, you know, they kind of put their sights on you. But explain to people what it's like, say, five weeks before Super Tuesday, because, you know, you don't just walk into federal, I'll say from my end, you don't just walk into federal court when you're the defendant and start prepping about it the day before. So what do you do in, say, a month out of Super Tuesday? Well, Jay, you look at when the first first voting will take place in Iowa.

It will likely be in early to mid-January. So the elections will already be starting. When you look at, yes, you don't just show up in court one day without any preparation, but you look at from when voting begins with the caucuses in Iowa in January. And that span between those first votes being cast and Super Tuesday on March 5th is critical. It's what sets the front runners apart from those who say, hey, maybe this is not this is not working out for me. So to be able to tie President Trump up in multiple court cases, multiple legal battles during that critical period in time is is their intent is to be able to cripple him and tie him up, tie his resources up. And choosing that that timeline can be the difference between someone succeeding or failing. I hope voters are seeing through this and seeing the truth about what they're doing. You know, I don't remember sleeping much during that period of time. I know I was on the move constantly, as one should be.

But you know, it's not only putting him at a disadvantage. I think it's terrible for the country. I said this before. We you know, we're in the middle of our life in Liberty Drive, actually at the end of its last three days here. And I said, you know, the fundamental thing about liberty is we live in a constitutional republic. We live in more liberty than any place, any other government in the world. But we got to fight for it. You fight for it in the military. You fight for it in Congress. When you were in Congress, you're fighting for it now in the in the court of public opinion.

But we got to fight for it. And the reality is when you see a situation developing like it is now with the former President and what is the pile on that's happening here and the going after the lawyers, which I find personally repulsive, the moment I cannot defend my client zealously and to say, boy, if I bring that legal theory up, am I going to be subject to RICO? Is a sad day for the United States of America. And we're putting liberty at stake at a huge level when we do this, Tulsi. And that is exactly what's at stake here. So I just urge, you know, your viewers, your listeners, but really the broader electorate in the United States to recognize what this moment means and that we cannot afford. We, the American people cannot afford to sit back and allow these corrupt people to be successful in what they're doing and their abuse of our Constitution and their abuse of this democratic process that our founders put in place for us. We have to lift our voices and make sure that we exercise our right to vote to ensure they are no longer in a position where they can abuse that power and undermine our democracy. That is what is at stake in this election.

It is much bigger than any individual. The future of our democracy and the future of this country is what's on the line. You know, I told our members we have filed 16 lawsuits against the Biden administration, including FOIA lawsuits on the Hunter Biden situation.

We're in federal court on those right now, Tulsi. We are defending those FBI, we're representing those FBI whistleblowers who have been basically shut down. Security clearance suspended, can't get another job because they don't security clearance.

And you're not allowed to take outside employment when you're still employed by the agency. They're employed by the FBI. They're just not getting paid. They're crushing these people. And I keep telling our donors that people like you as part of our team at the ACLJ has made us a lot stronger, but we can't do it without our support of our members. And folks, we have got three days left on this and as Tulsi just laid it out eloquently, we are fighting for our country. So go to ACLJ.org and participate in this drive for life and liberty because you're talking about the core of liberty here, Tulsi, is at stake.

I mean, we really could see, this is a risky moment in our history right now, in my view. Yeah, Jay, you know, I will second that and encourage all of your listeners and viewers to support the great work that the ACLJ is doing. You know, your organization and the time, the decades that you have dedicated, you and your team, to fighting for liberty and fighting for freedom is rare in this day and age where people are divided into different camps.

And there are very few voices who are objectively committed to upholding the constitution and liberty for every single American, no matter politics or race or religion or anything else. I have been a long time supporter of yours and the ACLJ, the great and important work that you're doing, and it's essential that we all stand up and continue to support it because you are literally in the trenches and on the front lines fighting this battle for our future, for our country. Tulsi, we appreciate you being part of our team. I've known you and your family for, my goodness, I think since you were about 16 years old. So we go back a long time and I represented your dad. So I mean, I appreciate everything you're doing and appreciate you being part of the team here at the ACLJ. It's amazing how things work out in time.

That's when, you know, God's in control of the universe because nobody else could play in this. We appreciate it. Thanks for the insight. Folks, participate, as Tulsi just said, in our Life and Liberty Drive. We've got three days left.

And that three days, by the way, okay, is 72 hours, a little bit less. Go to ACLJ.org right now, ACLJ.org, and stand with us in this Life and Liberty Drive as we defend liberty at probably one of our most dangerous tipping points. Now, we've got a lot of phone calls coming in, so it's ACLJ.org for that. We got a lot of calls at 800-684-3110. We're going to get to them in this next segment of the broadcast, 1-800-684-3110. We'll be back with more in a moment. Welcome back to Second. We're going to take your calls, 1-800-684-3110.

We had people holding for a while. Sorry about that, but we had a lot to cover today. Yeah. So I'm going to go in order. First, starting with Jim in Oregon, on line four. Hey, Jim.

Hi. My question is in regards to the Hunter Biden case in Delaware, since David Weiss is a government employee and not qualified to be a special prosecutor, could the judge in the case simply disqualify him, say, you're no more above the law than I am? You're off the case?

Probably not. I mean, a motion technically, I guess, could be made, but the problem is, who's going to make that motion? Hunter Biden's going to make the motion to get David Weiss off. I mean, maybe he could do that. But you're not prohibited, the fact that you're an employee, you're not prohibited from being a special counsel, although the regulation would seem to indicate that.

For instance, John Durham was the US attorney for Connecticut and he was appointed as special counsel. So, but that would be a motion that had to be made there. Yeah. So, okay. We'll just keep going through the calls. 1-800-684-3110. Next up is Wayland in Colorado on line three. Hey, Wayland. Hey, guys.

Thanks. My question is, do attorneys who may take their bar exam, is there a code of ethics training? And if so, wouldn't it be a violation of the code of ethics to impede the proper process of constitutional due process for these indictments? Well, here's the thing, lawyers have a canon of ethics, it's called the Canons of Professional Responsibility. There's actually a bar exam test on those canons of professional responsibility. So a violation of your professional responsibility can result as high as anything from a reprimand to disbarment.

Let me tell you where I get very concerned though. I think lawyers need to be free to make aggressive arguments, very aggressive arguments. And the moment that you start saying that the lawyers can't make the aggressive arguments, lawyers are no longer functioning as what they are, lawyers. I mean, famously, John Adams represented four British soldiers charged during the Boston Tea Party. By the way, they were acquitted and these were British soldiers, okay? So I think it's very dangerous when the lawyers' professional responsibilities put at risk simply because they're coming up with a novel argument.

I'll never forget this. I was in law school and this was a long time ago, 1977, took a criminal procedure course from a famous criminal defense lawyer. I wrote the exam out and then afterwards, everybody went to the local pub and we talked about the exam and I was the only one that answered the question that way and I was nervous until I got the paper back, the exam back and it takes a month to grade it. And I got the highest grade in the class and the highest grade that Mercer gives to any student which was a 99 because at Mercer, nobody gets 100 because no lawyer is perfect.

I got a 99 and you know what he wrote over my exam question? Novel argument. Novel argument.

And for that, I got an A plus. You know what these lawyers get for a novel argument? Indicted for RICO. Things have changed a lot in 43 years.

Yeah. This entire system of legal system, this idea of bar complaints and putting forward bar complaints for people because they represent clients you don't like. I mean, it's like you could do that to every lawyer because... They tried that with us, remember? I mean, it was Ted Lieu filed lawsuits against me, not lawsuits, a bar complaint against me in Georgia and in Washington, DC.

I didn't even have to respond to them. I mean, that's how ridiculous they were. But that's changed a lot also in three years now. And it makes big firms wary of taking on either new attorneys who may be associated with that or clients who are associated with the political process. Let's be honest. We looked at a case the other day that was an election law case out of Arizona about filing an amicus brief. And we had second thoughts.

We have to because of the world we live in, which is absurd. Let's go ahead and take Susan's call from Marilyn Online 2. Hi, Susan. She's watching on YouTube.

Hey, Susan. Oh, yeah. Thank you so much for the answer. My question is, I was looking at the Bush-Gore recount lawsuit and and of course, Bush did not go after Gore's attorneys because he was unhappy with the fact that they did a recount. So I think that that and then now this this election day, I mean, it seems like there's precedence for election interference that you know, that there are other elections that they've had problems with.

They didn't go after attorneys. Right. I mean, I mean, this looks like I agree. Let me tell you, this looks like election interference. Three things look like election interference. Number one, going after the lawyers. Number two, going after multiple indictments against a candidate that's a leading Republican candidate for President. Number three, then sending his trials all before Super Tuesday or the day Super Tuesday starts. And as Tulsi Gabbard just said, the weeks leading up to Super Tuesday, you don't sleep much when you're the candidate.

So I think, yes, all of this looks like election interference because that's what it is. And that's why we're fighting for this constitutional republic so aggressively. And that's why we've got 16 lawsuits against the Biden administration right now. But we've got three days left in this matching program in our drive here, our life and liberty drive. And this is a focus on liberty.

So go to ACLJ.org and participate in that. Let's take another phone call. Yep. Carol in Texas on Line 1. Carol, thanks for holding on.

You're on the air. Carol, you there? Yep.

Carol, it looks like Carol dropped. That's okay. I want to say something. Yep. I want to talk to all of our listeners and everybody that's watching on any of our social media feeds, any of our radio stations around the country, when people listen to this broadcast around the world.

I need to talk to you for a minute here. This is really serious. I've been on, you know, up late at night as Jordan knows, working on various constitutional approaches to this thing.

It's very, very serious. The moment you start arresting lawyers for advocating their client, this isn't where they're stealing money. This is where they're advocating legal positions that the elite don't like.

But that's what lawyers do. My friend Sean Hannity on his broadcast yesterday ran a clip of all the objections in 2016 on the floor of the House and Senate to Donald Trump's President. They called him an illegitimate President. They said, we don't recognize these 10 voters, electors from Florida. And now in this short period of time, we've now criminalized an entire political discourse and we've criminalized it.

And I've got six grandkids and a lot of you that are listening to this broadcast have kids or grandkids. This is not the country you want to leave to them. Now we can fix this. You heard Jim Jordan, we're getting results. We have people like Tulsi Gabbard as part of our team. Rick Grenell, former director of national intelligence.

Mike Pompeo, former secretary of state and former director of the CIA on our ACLJ team. We have the leading experts in the world as part of our team here. We bring you a one hour broadcast five days a week with the best ofs on Saturday to thousands of radio stations, multiple media platforms, social media platforms, including now Twitter. And all of this happens because of you.

And let me tell you, without you, it does not happen. So we are in the critical three days here and we had a good response yesterday. I need to keep this momentum really building. So I want to ask you that are watching us and maybe been watching and listening to us for a long time. So you're listening on radio, Sirius XM radio station, ACLJ.org or any of our social media apps.

You've been listening, watching this broadcast. This is the time to support the work of the ACLJ. This is that moment, and I think we're at the most critical moment in our history to defend our constitutional republic. So I want to encourage you to go to ACLJ.org today, right now, and join our life in Liberty Drive and support the work of the ACLJ. Sixteen lawsuits against the Biden administration, defending whistleblowers. My colleague, Jane Raskin, who's now special counsel of the ACLJ and a couple of our other lawyers are on calls with them and laying out legal strategies. Within the hour of when we're off the air, okay? I'm about to get on another call on another big matter, on misinformation and disinformation.

If you want to stand with us, this is the moment to know I'm asking everybody that's listening and watching. If it's $5 or $5,000, whatever it is, go to ACLJ.org, that's ACLJ.org and participate in our life in Liberty Drive. Your gifts will be doubled. That's ACLJ.org, the life in Liberty Drive. Your gifts will be doubled or respond to that email that's out today at ACLJ.org as well.