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

TRUMP UPDATE: Chaos Erupts in Jack Smith Trial Courtroom

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
The Truth Network Radio
May 23, 2024 1:12 pm

TRUMP UPDATE: Chaos Erupts in Jack Smith Trial Courtroom

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 1064 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

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

May 23, 2024 1:12 pm

President Donald Trump's classified documents case set off fireworks as lawyers on both sides started yelling at each other in the Florida courtroom. Also, Judge Aileen Canon is worried that Special Prosecutor Jack Smith's case might be too complicated for jurors. The Sekulow team discusses Trump's classified documents trial, a new ACLJ religious liberty case, the latest news on President Joe Biden – and much more. Former Representative Tulsi Gabbard also joins.

Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

This is Logan Sekulow.

Chaos erupts in the Jack Smith trial. Keeping you informed and engaged. Now, more than ever, this is Sekulow. We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments.

Recall 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Logan Sekulow. Look, sometimes it's hard to keep things straight.

Will Haynes, our executive producer. I was texting this morning because I was at a school function for my kids. And I said, let me know what we're thinking about, what we're leading with. I got an article from CNN, of all places, that it said was going to be an eight minute read. And I was driving and I was like, I've got to get Siri to read me this article. And it started with that chaos had erupted in a Trump case.

Which case is this? This is back to my log of documents. So again, I know a lot of you think the Jack Smith case, again about the Mar-a-Lago documents, was permanently on hold. And yes, that is happening. But I think, Will, before we get to what became a epic screaming match, so much so that it seems like we're getting nowhere in this case.

Why is this still even happening? That's right. So if you remember, we told you that the trial date was indefinitely on hold in this case. Meaning that the judge had removed her order for a May 20th start date and did not reschedule it, meaning that there's no time in the future that this is scheduled to start. And she then said it was because of a myriad of pretrial issues that they had to work through.

Well, that's what they're starting to do. This is the first time that they've been back in her courtroom. They still have these pretrial, even though she's like, this can't happen, the pretrial situations. There are motions that are filed by both sides. There are things they have to work out before they can even get to a place where this can go to trial. And so this was the first of many of these hearings that will be taking place at least through the end of July. And that won't even exhaust all of the pretrial issues they have to get to before this could effectively be taken to trial. So they're still arguing over a lot of things, over sealed documents. You saw earlier in the week that there were some previously sealed documents that the judge unsealed, one of which was a search warrant from the FBI that authorized the use of deadly force. So there are a lot of things that are coming out of this.

But one of the major things as they were going through these myriad of pretrial motions that they were arguing over, that the judge questioned whether or not a jury will be able to understand the charges that are here. Yeah, I want you to hear this. That's what Will said. We'll get into this more even in the next segment. I want to hear from you too.

1-800-684-3110. But yes, this is from that article again from CNN and it says, Canon seems skeptical of these arguments while also expressing concern about a jury's ability to understand the legal nuances of the case at a future trial. Again, a trial that right now is theoretical, if you will.

Right. The quote was, real people have to decide these issues. So again, really pushing forward to the fact that at some point, somewhat the judge is saying, beyond my pay grade, if you will, real people have got to decide what's happening here and I don't even know if they can fully understand it. And when we say it got heated, from all the reports I've seen, it was a screaming match inside this courtroom. That's right. And some of these issues have to do with a motion that was brought forward by the defendant, Nada, which was an assistant to President Trump at Mar-a-Lago that has also been charged in this.

And if you'll remember, his attorney is the one who alleged that the prosecutors were trying to pressure Nada into cooperating by offering a favorable opinion when it comes to a judgeship for that attorney. And that was brought up. And this, by the way, for timeline wise, that was only back in the end of 2022.

That's right. So we're not talking about something that was four years ago. We have to start looking at context and timeline because where we are now, it feels like the Trump Mar-a-Lago raid was like a decade ago. But really, we're only talking about a couple of years ago, they said the heated proceedings Wednesday.

This is crazy. They were yelling, this didn't happen. The story of what's happening at this meeting is a fantasy. This is all going on inside a courtroom, and of course, it's over. President Trump are somehow connected to President Trump. I want to hear from you. What are your thoughts on this?

Does this just need to be thrown out? It feels like that's where we're at. It even feels like that's where the judge is at. And of course, they're going to slander and say the judge is a Trump appointed judge. But just as all Presidents do, there are every President. Go look around the country. You're going to find some President appointed judge. It's how it works.

But of course, that's how the media is going to spin this. And also, some fun last names here. Now a fun one to hear Siri try to say. Right.

This is what it is. All right, give me a call. 1-800-684-3110. Welcome back to Sekulow.

I do want to take your calls at 1-800-684-3110. When you hear that these cases are devolving into legitimately the judge, Eileen Cannon, having to yell things like, you're going to need to calm down, quoting Taylor Swift. I feel like that's what's happening here. She didn't quote Taylor Swift. I added that part to it. She didn't say, to quote Taylor Swift, you're going to need to calm down, but was yelling that at these lawyers as they started to go back and forth about the story that was presented of whether a judgeship was being essentially bribed and dangled for this to happen.

Obviously, this is about, for those who are just joining us know a lot of you are just joining us, probably need to reset. This is related to the Mar-a-Lago documents case, which you may think, hey, Logan, last time you said this was permanently on hold. It is still on hold because of all of these pretrial issues, as Will was saying earlier, but they still have to work their way through those pretrial issues. Right. But this judge is thinking, we may not get there.

That's right. And so yesterday was the first since her postponement of the trial indefinitely of these hearings they'll be holding on pretrial issues. Now, they know that these will at least go through late July, but even that won't resolve all of the pretrial issues if they go perfectly until to get to a trial. CNN, I read their report, their theory or what they want to float out there is that because this is a Trump appointed judge, they're playing the long game here to try to get him to be elected and then for the case to be dismissed.

Because President Trump can pretty much get himself out of it at that point. But that's not really what's happening here. Right. What's happening here is there are so many issues, there's so much corruption, there's issues with how the documents were obtained, the photos that were taken, the plans that were made, the deadly force, all of these issues that keep coming up in these pretrial situations makes the case just fraught with error.

That's right. And every time something new is discovered, whether it be the filing that was just a couple of weeks ago that said, yeah, we had originally told the court that the documents were preserved exactly as we found them. That wasn't accurate. Actually, some of it got mixed up, so we mishandled these documents. We were accusing the President of mishandling. Those issues keep coming up because the Jack Smith team isn't necessarily doing a great job at running this prosecution. And so yesterday, some of these issues that were coming forward was that the defendant, now that he was wanting to have his charges dismissed based on the grounds that he was being selectively prosecuted because he didn't cooperate with the government early on.

And that's actually where his attorney, Woodward, brought up the fact that the prosecutor had dangled a judgeship before him. Now the prosecutor pushed back, yelled, screamed, slammed his fist on the table in the courtroom saying, this is a fantasy. Fantasy, garbage argument is what he said also. This is a garbage argument.

Mr. Woodward's story of what happened at that meeting is a fantasy. They said, as banging on his hand on the lectern in front of him, it did not happen. Again, a bunch of, you know, he said, she said at that point, and the judge is saying, yeah, we're going to probably take this to the people to decide.

Right. So that one, she did not rule on the bench on whether or not to throw his charges out. That doesn't mean that she couldn't. She didn't rule anything on it at that point that she will, she'll rule later at whether or not to grant his dismissal of the charges. But also it did start to get back and forth with the prosecutor and the defense attorney of saying, well, you didn't record the meeting we had.

And then the defense counsel saying, I'll go under oath on the stand to testify to it. So it's getting heated. It's chaotic. And that's not even the end all be all of the issues that they had yesterday.

Because this, like you said, this could take not only this one, but this will take at least through the mid to late summer. That's right. And then there was another issue and this is where the judge was concerned about the jury's ability to understand it.

Yeah. And this is where some of the charges that were filed, and these were all the defendants brought this claim and asking for the charges to be thrown out where some of the charges read exactly the same or were worded almost precisely the same. So it got confusing whether or not it was the same charge or if it were different counts of the charge. And the prosecution's explanation was, don't worry, we'll explain it all to the jury when it gets to them. And the judge was then saying, now she didn't say, I'm going to throw the case out on this grounds, but she said, still have to make a ruling, but did say she was concerned about the jury's ability to understand the legal nuances in the case at a future trial. And the quote from CNN says, real people have to decide these issues. I also think that was a little bit of shade towards the prosecutor and the defense for saying, you're not acting like real people right now.

No one goes into court. Yes. Courts get very heated. Look, maybe this is what we need. Maybe that's what we need in America. Maybe we need to go a bit back to the olden days. We need to go back to the parliamentary hearings of the United Kingdom where you just scream and yell, chaos breaks out, people clap, people boo, people cheer. You know, there was a while there where that kind of went away in America. I'm not so sure we don't need a little bit of it, like a little, like, it's kind of like what goes on currently in the Capitol, like I don't care for a lot of it, but a little bit of it, you are speaking for, you are representing someone in this situation or you are representing your people.

And if sometimes you got to kick it up a notch, okay. But in this instance, the judge is even saying real people have to decide these, not you screaming, you know, this is a fantasy. It does feel very television and it's sad. It's not on TV though, right?

We don't get to watch this. The best we're going to get is 24 hour news, live tweeting it, as you said, live posting it on the side of your screen in red. They all went with red.

They did. I don't know why they all, even the colors of the channels that aren't red, like you say Fox, the main color is probably not red, it's probably blue, but they went red on them. I wonder if it's an easier contrast to read. Because I'm sure there's a reason there's a, there's a ratings and advertising driven, you know, nature to all of it, which, you know, is it brings up a whole nother conversation too.

I was thinking about that this morning, just driving in. It's the, the fairness of news media is obviously, because I was listening to this seven page article from CNN that came out this morning and you do think about how, as soon as, look, it's just part of the nature of the business. So this is a, this is a world filled with consumerism and it's a commercial business and that's fine. But as soon as the news media and advertising became hand in hand, the idea of completely objective news dissolved and, and, or you could even say advertising or even federal funding. So you could say, you know, what they give to NPR because, because all of a sudden, even if it's, even if the advertiser is not dictating, what's on the show, they certainly can dictate in some ways what's not on the show and they can be a decision maker on how things are perceived because they can withhold their funding, which is the only way these networks make money.

Now there are independent news sources. There's people like us who, by the way, are not supported traditionally by advertisers. There's been advertisers here and there, but for the most part, 99% of guys, more than that 99.9% of what we do here at the ACLJ and on this broadcast is by you, powered by you. And what we've always told you at the ACLJ, what I've always told you is I will not tell you what you want to hear. I will tell you the truth because I know when you make a donation to the ACLJ, when you support our work, if we're going to report back to you just the facts, obviously there are times, you know, coming up in the next segment, we're going to talk about ACLJ case. That is what the funding is going to to me. That's going to help people with their legal bills so they don't have to pay for any legal bills. We take care of all of that. So if you become an ACLJ client at slash help, if you need legal help, that's at no cost.

It's going to be people like you who support the organization and who financially back it and give monthly. And I appreciate that tremendously, but it also stops us from being filtered by anyone. The only thing we are being filtered by maybe is because we are still on terrestrial radio and because of who we are, you know, the certain words we're not using.

That's about it. No one's telling us what topic. We didn't get a call from corporate this morning saying, here's what the headline is. And when you read this sort of eight page, good for CNN, they gave a very broken down version of it. And of course they have to end it with some form of, you know, hinting at a conspiracy, hinting at this is only happening to delay a case to the point because this judge feels like she has to do this because Trump appointed her. Again, it goes back to the start of this conversation, which is all judges are appointed by somebody.

So then you can say the same for pretty much any case in any way. If it's a case that involves a Republican or a Democrat, that because X person, you know, whether it's Barack Obama or Jimmy Carter for that matter, you know, put them in place. Appointed judges.

Yeah. Appointed judges. Their job is not to be just controlled by whatever President or future President or past President, not to say they don't have their own political beliefs or feelings. And by the way, they should be able to do that. I believe freedom of speech for justices, judges, and all of that does not end because they are taking these roles, but I want to hear from you.

Give me a call at 1-800-684-3110. When you hear these cases are devolving this way, does it give you more hope because you see that the absurdity of some of these cases are starting to wiggle their way into the American zeitgeist where even CNN is going, this is chaos. Okay. The judge is saying it can't happen. We think it can't happen. Do you feel that way? Or does it just make you feel like we're getting closer and closer to a catastrophic meltdown here in this country?

Give me a call at 1-800-684-3110. Coming up in the next segment, we got Cece Heil and then Tulsi Gabbard's going to be joining us later on with some pretty interesting updates. We got an update for her also, a little celebratory moment because we were talking about the New York Times, New York Times list for her book, which again, we have nothing to do with. We're just happy to be fans of and supporters of. We've got some interesting updates for that, so we'll let you know coming up.

Right now though, you've seen it. You've seen the government targeting us because of your political views, because your rivals are targeting your faith and religious freedom, but here at the ACLJ, we are going to stand up and we're going to fight the tyrannies and we're winning. Whether it's individuals, kids in public schools who are banned from bringing their Bibles and praying or residents of a senior center, you're going to hear about another one coming up that's happening in the LA area. Really interesting stuff, but because of the support of members of the ACLJ and ACLJ champions, we get to do this work for you.

Go to We'll be right back. Welcome back to Sekulow. Hey, if you're just joining us right now, we are going to go back to that main topic that you heard about in the next segment. So about the Jack Smith case, everything, the chaos that broke out in the courtroom, and we're going to take calls on that as well at 1-800-684-3110, but that doesn't stop the amazing work that's happening by the ACLJ.

I know Cece's joining us at studio. She's been taking calls all day on ACLJ matters. It has been chaotic as it sometimes is, but that's okay. That's why we're here.

That is why the ACLJ is here. But if you are joining us right now about that topic, because I see thousands of you are, I'm going to ask you to do one thing. If you're brand new, which we typically find out, especially on YouTube, about 50% of the people that click to watch live have never seen this before. So I encourage you right now to hit that subscribe button. We do this broadcast each and every weekday.

We're here Monday through Friday, live, noon to one Eastern. But we also post clips, new videos, all that, all day long, all the time, shorts. Get involved in the work we're doing here. You can do that. The simple, if you're brand new, I'm not asking you to support the work and ask you to give us any money. I'm just gonna ask you to hit that subscribe button and while you're at it, hit the like and comment. Also, you need to hear about what the ACLJ does because beyond this broadcast, which we're obviously covering the news this morning of what's happening, we are involved in legal matters at absolutely no cost to our clients and a lot of these clients would not be able to afford the work that we're doing, but because of generous supporters, we're able to do that.

So CC, give us an update. This is actually coming out of Southern California. That's right. Again, I think a little bit of information I'm happy to share, Southern California, one of the strongest areas for our listenership, for our viewership, for our supporters, ACLJ champions, a lot of them come out of Southern California because I think they feel maybe the pressure that we don't feel in Nashville.

So tell us about what happened. Yeah. So in California, and it's Southern California, it's city of Manhattan beach. The parks facility there has a policy that allows people to rent, the public to rent their facilities, such as the community center rooms, picnic shelters, parks, athletic fields, and in their policy, they specifically have a clause that says facilities will not be used for religious worship or other religious purposes. So we have a client in Manhattan beach that reached out to them and said, well, we want to reserve one of your community center rooms for a religious purpose. And they of course were shot down because of this policy that they have in the ACLJ. As you have mentioned multiple times, you know, all these people have to do is reach out to us at slash help simple form. It's very easy.

Absolutely. And they get in, put in touch with an attorney. So we got a contact from this client and we went into action immediately and sent out a demand letter to this, the Manhattan beach park, letting them know that this is against the constitution, that the first amendment protects the rights. You can't exclude speech based on its content. So you can't exclude speech just because it's religious. And this is an issue that at the ACLJ we've won on for decades. It's also an issue that if you ever go to a church that meets in a school, it's settled law, but sometimes you got to remind people, but that's what the ACLJ fought for. That if you open up your facility for people to rent, you can't discriminate based off of their viewpoint. This is a classic viewpoint discrimination case. That's if you hear that term, this is what it means.

It means that you're letting people use your facilities or rent your facilities or even just gather. But if they have a certain viewpoint on something such as their faith or their religion, you are discriminated against and are not allowed to use it. And so that's the kind of the argument, something that we've won in court and at the Supreme court for decades. That's the arguments we take.

It's not just a, Hey, this isn't right. It's we cite the case law and everything that we've worked on for decades to present to them why they can't do it. So we start with a demand letter.

That's right. And what's the process from there? And when we give the demand letter, we give them a statement of law. We tell them what the background is, you know, who we're representing, what the statement of law is, and then we literally give them a deadline. And in this case, we have given them until Tuesday, May 29th to respond to us. And that response needs to be that they've changed their policy, that they won't discriminate against our client anymore and that they will allow him to rent this facility. And so if they don't do it, cause we await that he's at the 29th, that's just a few days away. That's right. What happens then come I guess midnight, the 30th, we are set to file a case against them in court and we will, and we will take this to court and we will fight and we will show that this is like you have said, established law.

You cannot have viewpoint discrimination if you allow facilities to be rented for the common purpose, but exclude only religious use. That is illegal. But we have to still, even though we could say it's settled law, it is what it is. When it goes beyond a demand letter, because you're honestly, you are dealing with Southern California, all bets are off. And I think that's always important to know too. We have to have the best of the best.

You have to have the best attorneys on this. And that's where ACLJ supporters, ACLJ champions come in, people that support the organization either by a single one-time donation or get the recurring program, which we call ACLJ champions. Those are people that are champions of life, champions of liberty, champions of freedom around the world.

But even in your own backyard, again, this is in Manhattan beach in California around where our buddy Rick Cornell lives. This is what's happening in our own country. And if people don't stand up against it, we'll never get involved.

We have to hear from you. You obviously are out there searching for, you know, we're talking to people, but a lot of them come in from people who just go to our website, go to slash help. They fill out a very simple form and that form immediately goes to a ACLJ attorney and it's determined if it is part of what we say, if it's in scope of what we do here, obviously we're not doing family law, all those kinds of things.

But if it's within scope, religious freedom, practicing your faith, and so on and so on, go read the list. List of things saying on that website, even if you can even go there, even if you don't need help right now, but you need, you want to be familiar with the organization because we're ready for you because of ACLJ supporters. We are ready for you at no additional cost.

And I think that's very important. We are, you know, the law firm does not charge you. If you call this number, you're not getting hit with some fees to get connected with a lawyer.

None of that happens. We are just there for you. We also be taking your calls here in the next segment.

I want to hear from you, Will, because I know a lot of people are joining us right now because of the Jack Smith situation, because of the chaos breaking out. So you see, in cases like when you've been in the courtroom, is this common that you get into these kinds of screaming matches? Is it fun?

No, it's not fun. And I'm going to get my mom's quote completely wrong, but she's like, you know, when you don't have the facts, you pound on the desk. If you don't have the law, you know, you scream. And if you don't have the facts and law, you scream and pound on the desk. And so I think maybe we're seeing a little bit of that in action of you just get frustrated and you know, it's just emotions rise. I have seen screaming in the courtroom. Everyone's got a temper. Give me a call.

1-800-684-3110. We want to know about your thoughts on this. How do you feel about this case even having any sort of movement or the Trump situation in general? And then later on in the broadcast, just in one segment from now, we're going to be joined by Tulsi Gabbard. She will, there's a pretty interesting story that happened and it relates to our border.

That's right. So the Marine base at Quantico, Virginia, it's where Marine training facility is, was attempted a breach of that base. And it turned out to be two Jordanian men who had maybe entered the country illegally from the Southern border. We're going to talk about that coming up with Tulsi Gabbard in just another segment. So the next segment, we're going to take some of your calls. There's a lot of you are calling in about the Jack Smith situation. We're going to reset that if you're just joining us, you want to know those facts, we're going to do that in just about a minute. It's a one minute break that we do right here in that one minute break, I'm going to ask you to go support the work of the ACLJ, become an ACLJ member or an ACLJ champion, single time donation, monthly donation, whatever you can do right now, scan the QR code on screen.

If you're watching and you can become an ACLJ champion again, that creates a great baseline to continue this broadcast, the incredible media work we do here as well as the legal work. Phone lines are jammed right now. We'll be right back to you coming up. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome back to Sekulow, Will Haynes executive producer joining me in studio Tulsi Gabbard coming up in the next segment. Will, I think we need to reset because so many thousands of you are joining us right now. Clearly we struck a nerve. If you want to know what happened inside these courtrooms, well, if you're brand new, I'm going to ask you to subscribe if you're watching on YouTube or rumble, do that right now as Will restates the chaos that broke out in the courtroom, including yelling, you are living a fantasy, you know, that sort of stuff is happening right now.

Will, go ahead. That's right. So judge Eileen Cannon held hearings yesterday. This is on the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case that was brought by special counsel Jack Smith.

So she had indefinitely postponed the trial date to begin the trial of the former President. However, they're having to go through a litany of pretrial motions. And some of these motions were brought up yesterday. Two of them were to dismiss the case outright based off of prosecutorial misconduct in some cases, such as maybe potentially offering the defense counsel of one of the defendants a judgeship dangling that before him and that broke chaos out into the courtroom as the prosecutors and the defense were both displeased with each other shouting back and forth pounding the tables and also some issues that were brought up. The judge said, I'm not even certain the jury can understand the legal nuances that you're trying to put forward here prosecution. So as a matter of the status of where this stands, the case is, we'll be going through all these pretrial motions, but the trial date is indefinitely postponed. And if it continues to go like this, I'm not sure that many of these issues will ever get resolved, which really draws a big question mark.

If this case will ever make it to trial. Yep. Let's go ahead and take a couple of phone calls. Marty's calling from Tennessee online.

One who's watching on YouTube. Great. Welcome. You're on the air. Yeah. I'm a subscriber on YouTube.

Appreciate all you do. My question is, uh, when cases like this, uh, happened with the high offices in the land and what prompted my curiosity is when it says it's too complicated for jurors, um, are we looking at a case that involves constitutional law rather than civil law or any other kind of normal federal law that it should go to a court that's designed for this, that doesn't involve normal jurors? Well, Marty, the law still has to be followed in the process of how this works is that the prosecutors brought charges, uh, and it has to start at the lowest court in the system. It's still a federal court. It's still in the federal court system.

It's a district court. And once that trial is over, if it ever gets to trial, then the former President, if he was convicted, would have a chance to appeal that to a higher court. Now, I wouldn't be in favor of short circuiting the system just because of, uh, the stakes of the matter, but that's why they have these pretrial conferences and hearings are to try to boil it down to what actually is being charged. Did the prosecution make it way too complicated? Can they resolve some of these issues before it even gets to a jury? And that's what you're seeing play out. It's a part of the process and it will continue to go through.

And despite what some on the left may think, I do think that Judge Cannon is very competent and is taking this very seriously. Hey, I'm going to ask you also, thank you, Marty, for calling in, uh, and James, we'll get to you in a little bit. We're going to get you in the next, next time we go to Tulsi Gabbard, but if you could stay on hold, I'll get you in the final segment. We'll take as many calls as we can in that segment.

I do want to encourage you also tomorrow, we had a lot of fun last week, last Friday. We took a lot of your questions. We did a whole Q and a show.

I don't have to be a whole Q and a show. We are going to do at least a segment of questions that come in from rumble and YouTube and on Facebook. So right now I'm going to ask you while we're in this break, if you have a question or comment, you want answered on the air tomorrow, because I know some people can't call, maybe you're listening at work, you know, maybe you're, you're quietly get your AirPods in. No one knows that you're, you're really listening to us, but maybe you could type in a quick question, put it first word, put Friday and big bold letters, just Friday, all caps.

So then our social media team can easily sort through it, go through, pick out some great questions or comments. We had some great ones last week and I look forward to taking some more. So in the next segment, I'm going to ask you to do that during this break. And while Tulsi's on, if you've got a question or comment, just put those in Friday.

And I'll answer a lot of those tomorrow. Will and I will, it'll be a great show. Again, it's not going to be the full show like we did the other day, but we'll at least do segments for it. Give us a call though right now, if you want to be on the air and get in line, because we're going to take calls coming up very shortly, 1-800-684-3110 welcome back to set killer. We are going to be taking your calls at 1-800-684-3110. We are now joined by, and I'm excited to say this, New York Times bestseller Tulsi Gabbard. We were talking last time whether it was going to happen.

Not only did it happen, it happened in a huge way, multiple weeks running now. So I got to start with congratulations. I got, you got the book right there. I got the book right here.

Again, go take a look, go get it for love of country. It's out now, but again, congratulations. You made the list defying what we thought may happen. Just congratulations. Thank you.

Thank you, Logan. And thanks to all of you and your team for talking about the book, promoting the book, urging people to buy it and to share it with friends and family. I honestly was quite shocked when it showed up on the list. Not because we weren't getting the kind of support and people weren't buying the book.

You know, it's the New York Times, the New York Times bestseller list ultimately is, in their own words, an editorial decision. And so I was quite heartened and surprised to see that my book was in the top five of the New York Times bestseller lists and going, I think, on the third week now. So there is some hope, folks.

There is some hope. My wife and I were hanging out a couple nights ago, I guess a couple weeks ago now when it happened. And I was like, oh, I need to go check the list updated. I was like, she made it. And then like everyone was very excited.

Her house was like a celebration because you're all right. You never know what's going to happen with something like this that can be a bit, you know, arbitrary. It can be a bit less decided on sales.

Thankfully with Amazon and some of these, we could kind of track somewhat where book sales were. We knew you should have qualified for it. So if it wasn't, it would have been a big deal if you had not made it. But we're very excited that you had. But we're going to move on now.

We'll go check out the book you need to. This obviously shifts a little more serious. There's a lot going on obviously in this country right now and we're learning more. Will brought this up to me today and we'll learn more about a Jordanian national, a group of Jordanian nationals who tried to ram a gate at Quantico in Virginia.

Let me make a long story short. Two weeks ago, we learned they were stopped by security, but they came in illegally. Where we find out these Jordanian nationals across the border in San Diego, they're now in ice custody. But I want to know your initial thoughts on this. When you hear that the border obviously has become a top topic for a lot of us. In the compassion part of it, we obviously all play into.

We all go, okay, of course, people are looking for a better life. And then we fight back, go, yeah, but that's not really all that's happening here. And then there's these definitive proof moments where that is not what's happening here. So I want to get your thoughts. Yeah. You know, I've spent a few days down at that border in Jordan, not in Jordan, in San Diego and saw in multiple places along the border wall where people are crossing, are into our country illegally.

And I think that's what a lot of people don't realize is how well oiled of a machine this is. Throughout the course of the few days that I was there, you know, there are almost designated places. No, there's not a sign. But people who come across the border from all over the world, they know exactly where to go to get picked up by border patrol. I thought, oh, well, maybe they're going to try to evade border patrol and try to get away and not be caught. So these are people who are searching for those spots, many of them already know exactly where to go.

There are some nonprofits who set up tents that provide food and water for people because they know exactly where to go. They want our border patrol agents to come and pick them up because that means they will get processed and they'll walk out of that with a piece of paper and a plane ticket to anywhere in the country that they want to go and a court date that who knows, it may be in two years or it may be in 10 years, but really no way to keep track of these individuals and where they're going, no way to know who they are, what their intentions are in our country or really what their background is. And so, you know, you heard Senator Lindsey Graham ask a bunch of questions. I'm sure we know that that border patrol does run the names that people are giving them to see if there's a name that pops up on the terror watch list. I think there's been close to 200 names that have pinged on that terror watch list. But I got to tell you, I walked along the border in several parts of San Diego and I couldn't hardly take two steps without seeing a half burned passport or a torn up ID card or destroyed government identification papers from people from almost every region in the world.

So why is that? Why are people coming across our border illegally and then trying to destroy documentation that prove government issued documentation that proves their identity? What happens then when they get picked up and they go in through that processing? They say, oh, well, you know, the cartels took my ID card, but this is who I am. Just trust me.

This is the reason. So how do you vet someone like that? How do you run a background check? How do you cross check their name with an international terror watch list?

You can't. We have no idea who is in our country. I spoke to a lot of these illegal immigrants when I was down there. Many of them were very calm. They were well-dressed.

They knew exactly where they were going. I didn't see a single person crying, starving, begging for help. I'm sure that those people are out there. But the vast majority and I saw hundreds and hundreds of people over the couple of days that I was there and I talked to them, I said, you know, where are you from? How did you get here? They were very open and willing to talk. They weren't trying to hide anything. Most of them saying they flew in through Tijuana or Mexicali. They knew exactly where to go to cross into the border.

They knew where to go once they came onto U.S. soil. And they said, you know, I'm going to go see my family in Boston. One guy came from Colombia.

That was a family from Brazil. Another guy from Colombia said, oh, you know, I'm going to go to Utah. I said, well, what's in Utah? He said, oh, there's a woman there. And I asked him, is this the first time you've come into our country? He said, no, not at all. I've been here many times before. And you contrast that President Biden's open border policies that are posing a direct threat to our own domestic security, our national security, and the fact that people, thousands of people are crossing our border every single day in different parts of the border illegally.

And then compare that with a good friend of mine who's not alone in this experience, by the way, but he's served as a special forces soldier for over 31 years. He's about to retire. His wife's sister is a resident of Italy. She's married.

She's got children in school. They have jobs, business, everything. They applied for a tourist visa to come to the United States to attend my friend's retirement ceremony from the military.

And they have been denied. They can't even get a two week tourist visa to come and celebrate the service of one of our American service members and heroes. And yet these people are brazenly walking across our border, walking away with papers that give them some kind of legal documentation and doing who knows what in our country. The problem with this open border security is is serious on so many levels. And frankly, it just shows that that the Biden-Harris administration not only doesn't care about securing the border, they don't care about our national security.

They don't care about the rule of law on so many levels, and this is just another example of that. Thank you, Tulsi. We need to clip that, by the way, so you can just take her entire answer and send this to your friends because people like me, look, there is that moment of compassion where you look at some of those imagery and sort of the narrative that is presented. You go, yeah, what are we doing here?

How do we handle this? But then your firsthand knowledge, you get to see what actually was going on. Those are the stories that are happening. Like you said, it wasn't crazy. It wasn't intense.

It wasn't screaming, crying. These are people who want to go visit family and they're doing it this way. And then, of course, you have, well, the counter stories, which is now going after members of our military.

That's right. And we are concerned about the safety of our service members abroad. But now we're having to be concerned about Jordanian nationals that can come across in San Diego and make the trek all the way from San Diego to Virginia and ram a box truck into the gate at Quantico. We know that we're concerned about the safety of our service members abroad.

But now that comes home. How far is the administration willing to let this continue? Well, and this is the thing, Will, as you talk about the safety of our service members abroad, as we approach Memorial Day here on Monday, let's talk about the sacrifices that our servicemen and women have made in multiple wars and conflicts just in my generation alone to secure our country, to prevent those Islamist terrorists from coming into our country and launching yet another horrific attack here on our own soil. And you look at those sacrifices in my brothers and sisters lives, their limbs, injuries, visible and invisible injuries over the last two decades. And yet we know that there are members of Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations who are illegally entering our country. We know there are sleeper cells right here at home. What a horrific slap in the face to our men and women in uniform and the Gold Star families that they left behind who never had a chance to say their final goodbye or to kiss or hug their loved one one final time before they got that knock on the door saying that they had been killed or died in service to our country. This is such a serious issue that shows how offensive the Biden-Harris administration is through their actions and their policy and their lack of care for all that we cherish and all that we hold dear.

Thank you so much for joining us again this week. Of course, The Love of Country, Leave the Democratic Party Behind is available right now wherever you get books. I'm excited about this. Again, New York Times bestseller.

Tell us the average new book. Take a look. Thank you as always for joining us. We'll be back with your phone calls 1-800-684-3110 I want to hear from you if you're watching on social media, you're watching on Facebook, watch on YouTube, whatever it is, you can still pick up the phone. Give me a call. We've got two lines open right now 1-800-684-3110 that's 1-800-684-3110 and like I said earlier, put your comments in for tomorrow as well. Put your questions into the chat.

Put big bold letters. Put Friday. We'll take some of those tomorrow on the broadcast.

Then Friday in the comments and then ask your question. We're back with your call. It's the most important voice in the room. We'll be right back.

Welcome back to Sekulow. Like I said, the most important voice in the room, always yours. You've heard from senior attorneys like Cece Ohio.

You've heard from Tulsi Gabbard. You've heard from us, of course, but now we turn to you. Let's go ahead and start off the top. James is calling from Arkansas, watching on YouTube, been on hold for about a half an hour. I appreciate it, James.

You're on the air. Yeah, man. First, can I say that I'm a little beat off with all these illegals are letting in and they're not helping homeless veterans. Yeah, James, I understand. I think there's a lot of feelings like that, that when you see how much the money is being spent on these situations at the border and how much we are not spending on, like you said, like all the veterans.

I remember when there was that time where they were telling current active duty servicemen to get food stamps. And I was going, you know, there is a time where the dignity of people needs to outweigh even our politics, the dignity of the best of America, which are those that fight for our freedom, defend our freedom and should be taken care of. So, James, we agree. I know that wasn't your question, though. Go ahead to your question.

No. Well, that was the most important part anyway. All right. That's fine with me, James.

That's what you got. That's good with me. I appreciate you calling.

And I couldn't agree more. Let's go ahead and continue on. We got a couple of lines now open 1-800-684-3110. That's at 1-800-684-3110. Let's go to William who's calling in the state of Texas, watching on YouTube as well. William, thank you for watching on YouTube. Welcome. You're welcome. Yeah, I have a legal question to ask you.

If Trump wins the New York case, can the judge do a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and then reverse that and find him guilty? Here's what I'm going to tell you. Well, we're going to find out the information for you. As you may know, Will and I are not the attorneys here on this broadcast. But here's what we're going to tell you, William. Tomorrow, we're going to have these attorneys on the broadcast, and then my brother will be joining us back next week. We're going to have a lot of those legal minds there. I don't want to give you legal opinions, and I cannot give you without a certainty.

And I want to tell people who are calling in general, but Will's got something. So a judgment notwithstanding the verdict would be basically the judge going around the jury. And in this case, no, the judge cannot do that. So just direct answer, an attorney got me the answer very quickly, so I want to pay for that.

We've got a great team here. But I will say that in this case, no, the judge would not be able to do that. So if he were to prevail, in this case in New York, that would be the final word for that. Yep. So that answered your question. But also, due to some of those legal questions, if you do have them, we obviously have attorneys like CeCe Heil on the broadcast most days.

Again, my brother will be back in just a few days. So a lot of those voices, you're going to hear from all the time. So always ask those questions, and we'll answer as many as we can. Let's keep it going. Hey, now we've opened up like four lines, by the way.

So I'm going to say this is probably the last chance to call in, because we only have about five minutes left on the broadcast, but you can do that right now at 1-800-684-3110. And I also want to encourage you to do a couple things before we take these last calls. I'm going to encourage you to support the work of the ACLJ by going to

Take a look at the... Anyway, I don't just mean support the work financially. I do think you should, but we provide an incredible amount of resources, content. You heard about the situation in California earlier in the broadcast. We can do that because of your support, but all the content, everything is available for absolutely no cost.

Go to, and if you need help, slash help, legal help. We are there for you. And then also tomorrow we're going to be taking a lot of questions or comments. So start off your comment right now with the word Friday, and we're going to have our social media team right now go through and hand select some of the questions we are going to take on the air.

And if they're legal questions, I will make sure we have someone, an attorney here sitting to answer those questions or to have those answers ready for you. So do that right now, Friday. Let's continue on with the calls. Let's go to John who's calling in Illinois, watching on YouTube also. We've got YouTube day. John, you're on the air.

Hi, thanks for taking my call. I know this is another legal question, but on the Mar-a-Lago case, doesn't the misplacement of the place cards and mishandling Jack Smith has done with these documents give the whole defense the right to deniability of what classified documents they want to say were in these boxes? I think that the judge has said this, is fraught with so many issues right now. Whether it is the fact that there was now pretty much definitive, we know a lot of those photos that we saw were not what was presented. We know that the documents were not handled correctly.

So John, you're right. There are so many legal issues that are coming upon this and these pretrial things that are erupting into chaos are just more of a result of that. What John's asking about is specifically, you'll remember the pictures even that were released of the documents that were staged across the floor at Mar-a-Lago and there were the placeholders that said classified documents. We found out through filings that those were actually brought by the FBI for the staged photo. They weren't actually, those placeholders, those red color slips that said classified documents and things, those weren't actually in the boxes.

They used that as a symbol for what was there that they removed. So John's asking about that, coupled with the fact that the evidence was admitted to being out of sorts, out of order within the discovery boxes and the evidentiary boxes that the special counsel admitted that before the court, does that give some sort of defense for the President? What it seems, as Logan pointed out, is that those are issues that they're going to have to address. There will be filings.

There are all these pretrial motions and that is the exact reason why the case has been placed on indefinite hold as far as a start date with the trial. So all of that will continue to play out. There will be more hearings and more hearings. They said that they're at least scheduled to go through the end of July, but they don't even believe all of those issues will be resolved by then. So it's going to be very interesting to watch what comes out of these hearings as we move along because there's more coming.

Yep, absolutely. Hey, I want to thank all of you who called in today, all the people who joined us, whether that was obviously Will here, myself, I think myself, C.C. Heil, senior attorney, we had Tulsi Gabbard, we're going to have another packed show again tomorrow, but we are going to hear more from you. So I'm going to ask you, I'm looking at the comments, a lot are coming in, ask some good questions. We're going to give you some great answers. Put Friday at the beginning of the comments and again, for those watching on radio, you can do this later on. You could go on our Facebook feed or go on our YouTube channel. If you're watching this later, go find the most recent broadcast, put the comments in. On X, you could tweet out to ACLJ or to me or to whoever your question, then we're going to get to as many of those on the air as we can tomorrow. But of course, as I like to end the show, one, thank you for your support.

Thank you for your prayers. I always appreciate it, but we have seen now the government, we've talked about it all day, the government targeting basically a lot of us because of their political leanings. Political rivals are being targeted, whether that's us or whether that is a former President of the United States. We've also heard about your faith, religious freedom under attack in places like Southern California and we can get involved and we're going to get involved. The ACLJ is taking action. So whether you're a kid in a public school who's banned from carrying the Bible or you are a President of the United States who is being persecuted, we are there for you because of the support of the members of the ACLJ. When I say members, these are people who say, yes, we want to fight against the attacks of faith. We want to fight against the attacks that are coming upon people who have conservative views, Christian views. Really, that's what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about a lot of you evangelical Christians.

I know evangelical Christians or Christian Zionists and all these have become dirty words, but they aren't to us and they aren't around here. Become a member of the ACLJ today with a one-time donation or become an ACLJ champion. And as someone that supports the work of the ACLJ on a monthly basis. So when you need us, we're there for you. And if you do need us right now, if you heard maybe about that case in California or the situation in California, if you heard about any of these situations, you think that's me. That happened to me. That happened to my workplace. That happened.

And maybe I work for the government. This is what happened. Go to slash help. I encourage you to do that right now. Fill out that form and be assigned to an attorney. Again, it's at zero cost to you ever.

Our clients do not get charged. I want to make sure that's always clear and always known. If your rights are being infringed upon, we're here to help. We'll be back tomorrow again, getting those comments and questions, put the big word Friday before your comment. We're going to take a lot of those tomorrow on Secula. We'll see you there.
Whisper: medium.en / 2024-05-23 14:17:37 / 2024-05-23 14:40:26 / 23

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