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

CONFIRMED: FBI Going After Trump Supporters

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
The Truth Network Radio
June 12, 2024 1:14 pm

CONFIRMED: FBI Going After Trump Supporters

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 1081 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

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

June 12, 2024 1:14 pm

The Deep State FBI has been exposed again. Memos surfaced showing that FBI Director Christopher Wray's agency interrogated witnesses to see if a government employee had voted for President Trump, declined the COVID-19 vaccination, and supported the Second Amendment. After conducting the inquiry, the FBI revoked the employee's security clearance. The Sekulow team discusses the Department of Justice's unconstitutional targeting of conservatives, the ACLJ's fight to protect FBI whistleblowers, a recent Washington Post op-ed by Attorney General Merrick Garland, the 2024 presidential election between President Biden and President Trump – and much more.

Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
The Charlie Kirk Show
Charlie Kirk

It's been confirmed, the FBI going after Trump supporters. 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. That's right, Logan Sekulow. I'm back.

Will Haynes is in the studio as well. You know, I've been monitoring all your comments. I was trying to watch the show here and there while I was out on vacation. You know, I didn't see a lot of Where's Logan comments. You know, everyone else leaves. A lot of Where's everyone else when I'm hosting, but not a lot of Where's Logan comments.

You know what, I'm deeply offended and horribly upset with it, but it's okay, I'll forgive you. I'm back. We do have some really interesting news, and we're going to have some great guests on later today. We'll have Tristan Levitt, who's going to be joining us from Empower Oversight, as well as Christy Campagnone, one of our attorneys here, who's going to go over the lawsuit that was happening about the pornographic speech that was being made public, or that was being made by a student, and forced to be made by a student. We have an update live on the ground in Las Vegas as that case goes through today. Give me a call also. 1-800-684-3110 if you want to be on the air.

1-800-684-3110. Will, this is pretty interesting. This comes out of sort of an update on the whistleblower situation, where we've seen the abuse of whistleblowers, and we'll get into it a lot more with Tristan coming up, being treated unfairly and a lot of times based on their political beliefs, or even just their political thoughts.

That's right. So this is another case where Empower Oversight is representing a new whistleblower. You'll remember we announced last week a victory for our client that we represented with Empower Oversight, Marcus Allen, who had had his security clearance suspended. He was suspended without pay.

It went on for 27 months, and we finally resolved that. He got his security clearance back. But in a similar type tale, we see here that the FBI had an agent who honorably served for 12 years, received cash awards from the FBI and positive performance evaluations. And then in March of 2022, the FBI Executive Assistant Director Jennifer Lee Moore suspended our client's security clearance. And as they looked into this, they also found that there were memos and interview forms that were asked of colleagues of this individual that asked things like, did the agent vocalize support for President Trump? Did they vocalize objection to the COVID-19 vaccine?

Now, mind you, this is March of 2022. This is after the vaccine had been out for over a year and a half. This wasn't as if initially this was something that they were concerned about. This is even after the Supreme Court struck down a vaccine mandate. So the fact that they are keying in on views that are deemed controversial, like the supporting of a President or thoughts about a very hot-button issue, they go after something that is completely irrelevant to that, and that is his security clearance. Now, the FBI is not supposed to use security clearance as a punishment or a tool that they can guide people's behavior with, and that's what it appears more and more is happening out of this FBI. And we're going to hear more about this with Tristan Levitt from Empower Oversight in the next segment.

Yeah, we're going to do that with Tristan coming up. Hey, I wanted to tell you really quick, though, we are fighting against this. We are fighting against the Biden FBI, the DOJ, the extreme attacks that they are doing to conservatives. We're seeing it over and over again, and I want your support right now. This is an important time. We're about midway through almost, midway through this month of June.

Can you believe that? We're already there. We need you to help us. So right now, as we go to federal court to help defeat the FBI deep state, take action with us. Sign the petition right now. Go to slash sign, and if you can, help make this fight possible. Donate today. If you're able to become an ACLJ champion, that's great, too, but I encourage you right now to just support the work of the ACLJ. Just give one time donation would be amazing right now as we continue on this continual fight against Christians being labeled or conservatives being labeled as essentially domestic terrorists or threatening. Be a part of it right now. Also, give us a call. I'd love to hear your thoughts when you hear situations like this occur. I know you're going to learn a lot more in the next segment, so I know you may want to wait. Then give me a call. I'd love to get you in line. 1-800-684-3110. 1-800-684-3110. Coming right back in just a minute with Tristan Levitt, President of Empower Oversight. Be right back. Welcome back to Secular.

Still waiting for Tristan to connect, but we are going to be taking your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110. Again, this is from Just the News. They put in a shocking litmus test. FBI security inquiry tried to unmask employee support for President Trump. Again, going through to decide whether you get security clearance based upon your support or non-support of a political candidate. If this was Joe Biden, I'd feel the exact same way. If this was more liberal causes, you'd feel the same way. This should not be how we are judging people based on their political preferences, whether they're going to get security clearance when they're working for the FBI. Hopefully, we are above that and beyond that. Also, we know you do not lose these kind of things just purely based on your free speech because you work for the FBI.

That's right. They're not supposed to be using security clearance as a punishment or if that is something that they can try to guide or use as a carrot and a stick to get someone to do what the FBI wants to do. And then, as we've seen time and time again, when they believe that this process has been used improperly and then they maybe go through appropriate whistleblower channels, you see retaliation by the agency. And even here, this individual was unable to make money. They were put on indefinite suspendents. We don't know if this is a man or woman. None of the details have been revealed because this is someone who is protected as a whistleblower.

That's correct. And so, as we'll hear from Tristan here just momentarily, we're going to get a lot more of the details and we'll go from there. All right. Hey, there are phone calls coming in. Give us a call. I'd love to hear from you. 1-800-684-3110, 1-800-684-3110. Let me know when you've heard from Tristan so we can make sure to connect.

I'd love to hear from you. I see some of you guys in the comments already throwing in the clowns. I guess you haven't forgotten too soon from this. We have Tristan now. Tristan Levitt, again, who is the President of Empower Oversight.

Tristan, we've worked with you. The ACLJ has worked with you over the years, but we also just recently secured a big victory for whistleblower Marcus Allen. We have a new client that we've been talking about that is pretty shocking. I want you to go break it down for us. Give us a little bit of the details of this new client and what does it reveal about the FBI's, really, abuse of the security clearance process.

Absolutely. In the course of the last year, the public's heard a lot about FBI whistleblowers and even some before that. Chairman Jim Jordan, before he was chairman, had been writing the FBI about the fact that whistleblowers are coming to his office. A year ago, I testified before the House Weaponization Subcommittee alongside Marcus Allen, Garrett O'Boyle, Steve Friend.

Since that time, we have been representing several folks. The most recent letter to the Inspector General is about someone who's not been public. He is someone who, unlike all those other FBI employees who had no actual connection to January 6th, he is somebody that went down to the Capitol to hear President Trump speak on January 6th. When President Trump said to go to the Capitol, he went down to the Capitol building. He stayed outside. He didn't engage in any violence. He didn't go inside.

He didn't break any laws. About a year later, I should add, he self-reported at that time that he had been there, but again, indicated he had not done anything wrong and it wasn't an issue with his supervisors or security officer. A year later, he came under suspicion within the security division of the FBI. There was a referral to them, and so they started an investigation of whether he had broken any laws. In the course of that, what we've now become aware of is that after spending his security clearance, they interviewed a number of his colleagues. These were compelled interviews. These were interviews that his co-workers had to answer. They were told that if they didn't answer truthfully and completely, their own security clearances could be subject to suspension or revocation. And they also asked about the context of their interactions with this individual who has, again, chosen to remain anonymous to this point.

They asked if they'd ever socialized with him, even outside of work. So with that background, these people being forced to rat out whatever the security division wants to ask about their co-workers, they didn't ask them specific things about January 6th. They asked them, have you ever heard him vocalize support for President Trump?

Have you ever heard him vocalize objection to the COVID-19 vaccine? These were completely inappropriate questions for the FBI to be asking about any of its employees, but much less the security division, which is what we've discussed on this show before, has the power of someone's employment. If they revoke your clearance, if they suspend your clearance, you are in an unpaid limbo that can extend for months and months and months. So we recently sent this information to Inspector General Horowitz and fully expect that they will be opening an inquiry into how widespread these kinds of questions, which violate First Amendment protections, extended. Tristan, the FBI isn't supposed to use an employee security clearance as punishment or even as a carrot to try to get behavior out of them, but what does it tell you about the nature of the questions they were asking during a security clearance review about what's going on at the FBI? It's pretty clear and has been for some time that the FBI went overboard internally in terms of trying to silence dissent about how people viewed January 6th or the FBI's response to January 6th more specifically. And so that was the issue with Marcus Allen, of course, in our case that we shared together where he just said, it looks like there are some questions about this that are legitimate.

That led to his clearance being suspended. What we've been hearing and we expect there will be other whistleblowers on this in the future is that the security division, once anyone came within the funnel of suspicion, that's when they just went completely overboard and asking about all kinds of conservative views and then use that as a reason for drumming them out of the agency. And so it really does look like there was a purge of a number of conservative employees just based on some of these things that were not appropriate for the security division to be looking at. So this is really a problem for the entire security division. And of course, it raises questions about how high up within the FBI they knew about this activity. The weaponization committee has interviewed Jennifer Lee Moore, who was an assistant director, executive assistant director over the security clearance division, another H.R.

And of course, she was very close with FBI leadership. So what I think we're going to see is a big focus on did the FBI leadership know that this kind of witch hunting was going on? And if so, that's that's extremely problematic. If it was if it were just a hand, one lower level person just asked us, that would still not be appropriate, but it would might be limited to one case. We are hearing that this is happening in lots and lots of cases, and we have already been able to see, you know, Steve Friend in his case, he's confirmed that others of his colleagues were asked questions like this.

So we it seems like this might just be the tip of the iceberg. I see a lot of comments coming in. People want to know what's the action? What's taking place? So right now, you've sent a letter to the DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

I want you to go on a little bit what you're going to lay out for him, but what not only what did you lay out, but what do you hope actually comes from this? I think that's what a lot of people's concerns are when they hear about this, when they know that you have found this information or worked with these whistleblowers. But now they go, but now what? Because they see the corruption happening. They see the rooting out of conservatives in these organizations and in these departments. So I guess what do you hope comes from this letter?

Two things. First off, I expect there will be, like I said, a widespread investigation by the inspector general. They have access to all of this. Security clearance process is not one that typically gets a lot of oversight.

In some ways, it's subjective. Right. And it's really left up to individual agencies, even though they are supposed to use broad guidelines that are put out in executive order and administered by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. But so for the IG to do this deep dive here, I think will be critical. I think Congress needs to hold the IG's feet to the fire to make sure that they do this thoroughly and completely. Congress needs to additionally do its own oversight. That's the big picture of the investigating.

From there, I think it really depends on what they find. Again, if this was a widespread problem, then there are definitely staffing changes and other things. People need to be held accountable for this kind of inappropriate behavior. It may be that there are structural problems with their security clearance process, which we've already highlighted just in a whistleblower context. But this extends even beyond the whistleblower context. Even if someone wasn't a whistleblower, it's not appropriate to ask questions like this in a security clearance context. So I think there are a lot of reforms that need to happen. There will be staffing changes that need to happen and potentially legal changes as well.

I've, of course, advocated legislative changes to try and strengthen FBI whistleblower protections. We've talked about how the Supreme Court case in Navy versus Eagan really impedes any outside review of security clearance cases. Otherwise, it would be the Merit Systems Protection Board that I sat on as a member until about a year and some change ago that would be an outside look at these. So someone could say, this is unfair how I was treated in this security clearance case. So those are all things that can happen along the way if it becomes clear that some of the individual FBI employees who lost their clearances had this really taint the process. We're going to fight for them to try and get those clearances back. And of course, we have joined ACLJ. We've worked with Garrett O'Boyle for quite some time, but we are now representing him as we prepare to file a retaliation complaint with the inspector general. We want to see justice for some of these specific individuals who we can see had the process used against them. And Tristan, we only have about a minute left here, but you mentioned the IG letter and hoping that an investigation comes out of that. But as you see things where there's potential First Amendment claims or things of that nature that could also be looked at here, do you anticipate any legal action will be needed to take on behalf of the client as well?

It's hard to say. For now, the quickest route to move forward is working with the inspector general. And that was very effective for us with Marcus Allen. And so that is the step that we're going to focus on beyond that.

All options are open, but we'll see what makes the most sense to help our client. All right. Thank you so much for joining us again.

That was Tristan. He always comes on and has great insight. He is from Empower Oversight. Take a look at them.

Hey, I want to encourage you right now to give us call 1-800-684-3110. Also, you hear this fight continue. You've heard from Tristan.

You hear about the like Marcus Allen, those that we have had great success. We can't do that without your support. So I encourage you right now.

We're halfway through the month of June. We're down a little bit, to be honest, in terms of our fundraising goals. So right now, I'm going to encourage you to go make a one time donation if you could.

Obviously, if you could become an ACLJ champion, that's fantastic. If you want to just go on and just sign the petition, you could do that as well. But I'm going to ask you directly if you could go make a donation right now. Help us through this month of June. We'll be right back with your calls and more coming up. Welcome back to Secula.

We are going to be taking your calls 1-800-684-3110, 1-800-684-3110. Once here, I have this article pulled up from Merrick Garland. This is his Washington Post op-ed that said, this was the top line subject, the headline. Unfounded attacks on the Justice Department must end. And Will's got some pieces to read. Again, this is coming from Merrick Garland himself deciding, I'm going to take out an article.

I'm going to go put in an op-ed because, man, people are just being too mean to me. Well, and also, think about this in the context of what we just heard, that within the FBI, under the purview of the Attorney General, you have them asking individuals, have you heard if your colleague has voiced support for President Trump? So what we've got here is he says that these are the way that these attacks come in the form of. And some of these are, they come in the form of dangerous falsehoods about the FBI's law enforcement operations that increase the risks faced by our agents. They come in the form of efforts to bully and intimidate our career public servants by repeatedly and publicly singling them out. They come in the form of false claims the department is politicizing its work to somehow influence the outcome of an election. Such claims are often made by those who themselves are attempting to politicize the department's work and to influence the outcome of an election.

We will not be intimidated by these attacks, but it is absurd and dangerous that public servants, many of whom risk their lives every day, are being threatened or simply doing their job and adhering to the principles that have long guided the Department of Justice's work. Yes, and of course, one was they come in the form of conspiracy theories crafted and spread for the purpose of undermining public trust in the judicial process itself. So again, calling a lot of people conspiracy theories, but are these conspiracy theories? Well, are they conspiracy theories? We have a list of just the active things we're involved in right now, whether they're cases or actions that we are doing right now with the Department of Justice that shows I don't think these are just some right wing conspiracy theories.

That's right. So we have one, this is the top line on our list of FOIA actions against UOJ and FBI. This is to the FBI because there was the report that they worked with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network within the Department of Treasury, that's called FinCEN, that they were targeting Bible purchases. They were getting from banks a list of people who had purchased Bibles, gone to sporting goods stores, maybe purchased some merchandise that had in the business code MAGA. They were going and deep dive. They were looking at your bank records if you just existed and bought a Bible.

Yeah, exactly. Just bought a Bible. If you went to a retailer and decided on your items list you're going to pick up a Bible, which I'm feeling a lot of us have been, maybe we're all guilty of. Hopefully you are. Hopefully you're guilty of buying a Bible in your lifetime.

I think I probably bought just purely for my kids or probably five or six this year. So I'm probably on some major list. This guy's a Bible extremist. You have a lot of Bibles. He's bought dozens of Bibles in his life. And if you bought the Trump Bible, double list. Oh, yeah. Because it's both MAGA and Bible, same transaction.

Yeah, and Lee Greenwood. That's just too many things. Too many things. Here's another one. But quit complaining about their conspiracy. Quit making us look bad, DOJ.

That's what they keep saying. They go, come on guys, this is dangerous. You're treating us like we're going after people for their politics or their religion. Maybe they're a traditional Catholic and all of a sudden they're now a radical traditional Catholic.

That goes to the next one that we are currently fighting in court to get the document productions on. This is the FBI targeting of, quote, radical traditionalist Christians. This is where they had actual people placed within Catholic churches to spy. And we found out, they said, no, no, no, that was just Richmond, Virginia.

Don't worry. Then we found out it was all over the country. Did the FBI just have to learn Latin? Did they have to go to the Latin mass?

No, just fake it. I think they have a script. Do they? Like a translation? I don't know if they did or not.

I've never been to a Latin mass. I don't know. Well, and if it's not enough that they're sending spies into your churches, what about them creating a threat tag against parents, labeling them as potential domestic terrorists? That when we're on administrative appeal with the FBI and we're still fighting, the next time they have to reply is, and they give themselves great long dates. They don't have until December 22nd to reply to that one because that's in the administrative process, not in a lawsuit yet.

So they're slow rolling this till after the election. One of our comments to just put, they bought six Bibles this year. Okay, you're in trouble. You've got to go to slash L because you're going to be on a list here because, man, that is too many Bibles. Is that Old and New Testament? That's 12.

I mean, really, if we're talking about it. Twelve Bibles? I mean, the Holy Bible, one book. One book. You know what I'm saying? I feel like they could extrapolate that.

If they wanted to. Maybe it's individual books in the Bible, like, oh, man. Sixty-six times six. Sixty-six times so many. There's too many. Well, that's not bad.

I don't like that number well. Different list. Different list. I've got a problem with that list. All right, so then we've got this.

A lot of Cassius King comments coming in here. Look, a lot of these stores, though, they don't even know if they accept cash anymore. They don't.

Most of them say Apple Pay or Chip. That's it. This one, we've got a new production was just completed. We were asking about the FBI's role in squelching the Hunter Biden laptop story. That's obviously in the news a lot lately because of the conviction we just saw yesterday. We're still fighting the FBI to get documents on this. Our next joint status report is July 29th. That's where we'll go before a judge and say, hey, are they complying or not?

So we've got that. We have the 702 abuse that's within the FISA court system spying on Americans. We're getting erratic production out of this. They're supposed to be having a timeline, giving us things because we went to federal court. The judge lays out an agreed upon timeline. We get erratic production is what our attorneys have told me. And our next joint status review is on August 1st of this year. But quit being so mean to the Department of Justice. Look, we only got a couple of others as well. You get the gist, though. They're doing bad things.

And yet it's Merrick Garland that's upset that you're making these baseless attacks. These feelings are hurt. Hey, give us a call.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on that. 1-800-684-3110. As we head into the second half hour, we're going to take more calls. We're also going to hear from ACLJ attorneys that are currently in Nevada. When they said, where's our attorneys calling in from? They're going to be calling in live from Las Vegas. I was like, how come I didn't get to sit on that trip?

Of all the trips, come on, man. They're in Las Vegas fighting against that Nevada public school. You may have heard about this. We've been talking about it, I think, for over a year now.

But it's finally coming to its day about the student that was forced to read the speech that was just completely inappropriate and vulgar. We're going to discuss the updates of that with Christy Caponione, one of our attorneys, coming up here in the second half hour. But I do want to encourage you right now, because some of you lose this if you're listening on the radio. You should be watching us. We do full television-style production.

Find us online. Find us on YouTube, on Rumball and But if you do lose this or you just have to be done here, I want to encourage you right now, make a donation to the ACLJ. You've heard what we're doing, whether that's fighting against the deep state, fighting for these whistleblowers, and, of course, standing up for people of faith around the country. Because that is the most important thing the ACLJ does, stand up for people and their beliefs. So whether you think you've been targeted because maybe you bought a Bible this year, the Department of Justice is coming after you.

Or, like this case coming up, this parent who said, my child should not be forced by a teacher to read just horribly vulgar material. If you want to see those fights continue, we can't do it without you, because we don't charge anyone. No clients get charged a dollar. But we need your support. Go to Make that donation today. Know that we appreciate it so much, because it goes to keeping not only the show going, keeping the incredible legal resources available to you.

All you have to do, make that donation, because when you need the help, you're going to want us to be there as well. If you do need legal help right now, and it's within our scope of what we do here, go to slash help. Fill out a very simple form, and you get contacted immediately by one of our ACLJ attorneys that are currently ready to help you get at no cost. Support the work coming up. Second half hour. Give us a call. 1-800-684-3110. We'll be right back.

Welcome back to Sekulow. We are going to be taking your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110. Let's go ahead and let's kick this off, actually, with one of those calls. Let's go to Don, who's calling in California on Line 4. Don, you're on the air. Oh, great to be on with you guys.

God bless you for all you do. You know, I'm so concerned about these attacks on Justice Alito and Justice Thomas. I mean, Mr. Obama attacked Alito, I remember, back at the State of the Union address, remember? And they've been going after Thomas forever. But it's like our side.

We're like asleep at the switch, you know. Nobody's looking at the records of the liberal justices and anything that might be in their record. Or any of the other justices. Why are they just targeting the most conservative?

And I think let's just lay it out on the table. Because I'm sure there's stuff on all these other people's records that you could point at. Of course, Don, because you're an American citizen. You don't lose your freedom of speech because you're a Supreme Court justice. Now, obviously, what they're trying to do is push Justice Alito to have to recuse himself from certain cases coming up. Whether those are Trump-related, whether they're January 6th-related.

Or try to show, even if it's not, trying to show some sort of air that something is wrong. That there is impropriety happening right now. I think it's ridiculous, these attacks on Justice Alito.

The fact that you have somebody who is getting secretly recorded. And that secret recording says that, yes, he agrees that we should be a more godly nation. And that, of course, is the most egregious New York Times headline sin that could be happening. God bless Justice Alito. I'm just happy that there's somebody there who represents a lot of the values that we hold here. And values that we hold at the ACLJ. And a lot of Americans hold, by the way.

Over half the country. It really bums me out to watch, though, you're right, these attacks. You know why we wouldn't do that?

Because you guys go after me and go, well, we should go harder on them. No, because you don't want your Supreme Court justices to feel like they lose their freedom of speech. There was a time, not too long ago, where you could also have two Supreme Court justices that vehemently disagreed with each other. But also respected each other. And that the country also respected. If you had a Ginsburg, you could have a Scalia. And you could have those two operate in a successful way on the Supreme Court of the United States.

And be good friends. Because that's the way America used to be. Somehow, in the last four years, in the last eight years, all of that has become upended. And now it's all politics.

And one of the things, Don, you are right. The Republicans don't do a very good job during the campaigns talking about the Supreme Court. Democrats do a better job at it.

They do. Because, obviously, they're going to have a bigger fish to fry, if you will, this time, because you had the overturning of Roe. So now the Supreme Court becomes a bit more sensitive to the Democrats. But typically, it's not something that, for some reason, all of the political advisors in my whole lifetime, they don't run on the Supreme Court. And they don't run on their successes, especially when it comes to the Middle East.

And what we always see when there is a Democrat in office, you always see chaos in the Middle East. And you always see a Supreme Court trying to be packed or overrun or some sort of disaster happening there with little to no pushback. Well, and to Don's point, why I don't want to see people going after the justices on the left is because I don't think it brings about stability and something good for the country. What you're seeing with Justice Alito are ridiculous attacks, especially this latest one where someone secretly recorded him and got him to say, yes, I agree with you about, do you think that we should have a more godly country? It's like, of course, if you're a person of faith, you want to see more morality within your country. But for the left, that is, as you said, the unforgivable sin. That's maga extremism to say that you want a more godly country.

That's what they're saying, which is insane. It's so disturbing that this is the country we live in right now. And I mean that with all my heart, that we can't even say, can't have a Supreme Court justice. By the way, almost all of them have been professing some sort of religious belief to say, I believe there should be what we should be, have a more godly country.

And also, by the way, I don't believe a Supreme Court justice just because your Supreme Court justice means your wife or your spouse, your husband also loses their freedom of speech. I don't believe in that. I don't think that's how this should work here in our nation. Give me a call. 1-800-684-3110.

If you feel the same way or maybe you don't, you want to debate it out, let's chat it out. 1-800-684-3110. Coming up, ACLJ attorneys live from Las Vegas next time. Welcome back to Sekulow. I hope you guys are having a good day. Give us a call.

1-800-684-3110. I always want to focus a good portion of our show on the work the ACLJ attorneys are doing. Right now, Christy Campagnani is joining us live from Las Vegas. Again, a trip I said, I wish I got invited to that one.

Live from Las Vegas. Really, a big update going on. I would love for you to kind of give us a breakdown for those that maybe haven't been watching this show. Maybe they're new. We know a lot of thousands of you have just joined our YouTube channel.

Well over 400,000 now. So people may not be familiar with this case, but we've been involved in this one for a while. It involves really a parent who was dealing with the fact that her child, a student at the school, was being forced to read something that was so incredibly vulgar and inappropriate that she thought legal action should take place. We got involved with the ACLJ.

Why don't you take it from there? Yeah, so we are representing our client who just has turned 18, but at the time this instance happened, she was only 15 in a theater class here in Las Vegas, and the theater teacher had everybody write monologues and then put them all out on the floor and told the other classmates to go and pick up the other individual's monologues, and they only get to switch out once. So our client picked up her first one. She didn't like it because it was coming from a boy's point of view or something, and so she put it back, and then there was only one left on the floor, and she picked that up, and it was this obscene monologue that went into sexual content and innuendos and used curse words. And she didn't feel comfortable, but the teacher had already told everyone, hey, you can't switch more than once, and it was the last monologue on the ground, so there was nothing to switch to. So she went ahead and actually performed it on a day when the rest of the class wasn't performing, and it turns out a few months later, her mom found the monologue in her school folder and asked the school, what in the world, how are you having my child read this? And they responded with, sorry, this is the art school.

This is what we do. This is part of the core curriculum, and they completely ignored everything that the mom was concerned about. So she then took it to the school board meeting where they turned off her mic while she was reading the monologue to the school board to show them how obscene the monologue was, and they told her, you can't use this kind of language in the board meeting. When you see that clip, and I'm sure a lot of people did just to see it during the break, when you see the clip and they go, oh, ma'am, we won't use that kind of language here, and then she does respond very strongly with, well, if you thought it made you uncomfortable, how do you think it would have made my child? And then the ACLJ had to get involved.

Absolutely. So we've been in here for a while. We've survived the motion to dismiss with several of our claims, so that means we now got into discovery. So we're here in Las Vegas doing depositions. We're defending our client this morning from the defense counsel, but then we've also had key personnel from the school district that we're deposing and several students. So we're starting to formulate our trial strategy through their answers, and I think you could say that there's actually a pattern emerging from these depositions that this wasn't just an isolated event.

The curriculum has included other inappropriate content for high school classes. Christy, that's the question I have for you is, as you look at this for our audience, you say you're in the discovery phase, you're taking depositions. What does that mean in layman's terms for those that are watching about what the ACLJ are actually doing in Las Vegas this week?

Absolutely. So both our attorneys and the defense attorneys are in a room interviewing the potential witnesses for trial. So it's like a discovery to figure out what will happen during the trial.

What will these individuals say? And it is on the record. So they have a duty to tell the truth, and then we will be able to have a transcript so that if we go into trial and they say something different, we can say, well, hold on, you said this during the deposition.

Now you are lying. And so it is a tool that we use to better defend, and it's also to actually be on the offensive, and it's also a tool to defend when something comes up that is wrong or inaccurate, and it helps us to formulate our whole strategy going into a trial. We have that clip. I want to go back. I just want to make sure people got to see it. We actually have the clip of the parent at the hearing talking about this, and I want to make sure that those who are just listening get to hear it, those who are watching get to see this again.

This is sort of the origin story. And then the ACLJ gets involved. And again, without your support of the ACLJ, without you coming in, making that donation, again, encouraging you right now, halfway through the month of June, we're a little bit down. We can really use your support. Go to When you hear this, know that the ACLJ is there for parents like this who aren't going to probably want to go seek out legal help and get charged for it, enormous legal fees. That's not what we do here. With the individual support from all of you, whether you're an ACLJ champion, that's someone who gives on a monthly recurring basis, or you decide just to give a one-time donation, that alone is what keeps this free for people like this parent.

Take a look. This will be horrifying for me to read to you, but that will give you perspective on how she must have felt when her teacher required her to memorize this and to act it out in front of her entire class. I don't love you. It's not you.

It's just I don't like your dick or any dick in that case. I cheated, Joe. I'm sorry.

Thank you so much for your comment. Forgive me. We're not using profanity. Simply, this is a public meeting. I asked for decorum. If you don't want me to read it to you, what was that like for my 15-year-old daughter to have to memorize pornographic material? It was almost as if we couldn't have written it better.

It doesn't feel real when you watch it. You hear the person say, I'm sorry, we don't use profanity here, and you realize this is what's going on in your public school system. This is what's happening to students around the country. The ACLJ gets involved. You're doing these depositions now, Christy. What comes next for those people who want to keep focusing and following this case? When does trial happen?

If that does happen, what does this look like timeline-wise, and what's next for you and your team? We still have another round called summary judgment motions. What that means is we take all of the evidence that we've compiled through this discovery, and then we go to briefing. The defense counsel will argue, look, we've gone through all of the evidence, and there's nothing here.

These claims are baseless, and the court should dismiss this case, where we'll come and argue, look at all of the evidence proving that there was no pedagogical interest in this monologue, that she was forced to speak against her First Amendment rights, and that there's enough compelling witnesses that will take the stand that we are definitely going to win in trial. And then it goes through. It could take several months. I've seen one take up to nine months where the court sits on it to make that decision.

But in the meantime, while the court is making the decision on the summary judgment, we will start continuing to prepare for trial. So the trial more than likely will be sometime in 2025. And remember, the student was 15 years old when this started, when this incident took place. She's 18 years old now, just turned 18, and the ACLJ is fighting potentially into 2025 and hopefully to win a victory for this student and for her family. But imagine the legal bill if you are trying to fight a case out from a 15-year-old now 18 into another year if it weren't for the work of the ACLJ and our hardworking attorneys like Kristi and her team that are out in Las Vegas because we do this at no cost to the family because of the members of the ACLJ. Obviously the impact is well beyond this family.

We've got two minutes here, Kristi. Well beyond the family because some people may go, well, she's 18 now. What does it matter?

This is an adult. The impact of these lawsuits, these cases really reach everyone. Absolutely.

I mean, this will protect the future generations coming into this school and other schools within this whole, within this circuit even, depending on how this goes in court. So I know that our client has really suffered for several years, and she's just wanting justice at this point, and her mom is going to continue to fight to the end for that. All right. Thank you so much. That, again, is Kristi Cappagnani, one of our incredible ACLJ attorneys, who, again, because of you, because of your support, were able to afford, send them to Las Vegas, send them to be able to do this for weeks on end, years on end, to make sure your voice, your point of view is heard around the world. Thank you, Kristi, for joining us. Hey, in the next segment, I do want to encourage you all to give us a call.

We're going to be taking your calls and your comments, but really, I like hearing your voice. Give me a call. We have three lines open right now. 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. I want to see those lines line up right now. And, hey, we're heading into this last segment of the broadcast. Obviously, I always like to hear from you. You've heard now what the ACLJ is doing, whether for the individual student and mom who just didn't want our kid to have to be forced to read something that they found incredibly offensive.

Most people would find it incredibly offensive for a child to have to read. We're able to do this for years. Or you've heard about the whistleblowers and what we're doing to protect you in a fight up against the deep state and the Department of Justice.

So, again, the individual level and then all the way up to Capitol Hill. We can't do that without your support. I'm asking you right now to make that donation. Again, if you can become an ACLJ champion, that goes a huge way. That goes a really long way. We are doing incredible because 21,000 plus of you that are ACLJ champions.

But if you can make a one-time donation right now, help us right this June. Get this back on track. We appreciate it. Go to right now.

Phone lines are open at 1-800-684-3110. And, hey, I've been back today and I've been following us on vacation last week. I've been following what's been going on. It is a crazy time in the world right now. And it's only going to get crazier as we know we are just months away from a general election.

We are just weeks away now from the first debate if that is to happen. Pretty crazy. Give us a call. I want to hear from you. Do you think that's going to happen?

What do you think this year is going to hold? 1-800-684-3110. And, hey, just for the fun of it, you know what, I've seen the clowns going in the comments.

We're headed into the last segment. Do one for me. Let's send in the clowns, alright?

If you know what that means, you know what it means. Give me a call. 1-800-684-3110. Send in those clowns. Welcome back to Secula. We are going to take your comments right now and some calls. And thanks for all the clowns.

I appreciate that. If you've got more clowns, feel free to keep going. Let's go to the calls. Let's go into order. Will's got some answers for some of these questions. Let's go to Nancy, who's calling in North Carolina.

ACLJ champion and watch it on YouTube. Two things I just want to say thank you for. So, Nancy, you're on the air. Yes, I have two questions for you or two thoughts.

I was an investigator as my career. And one of them is, is Mr. Her a psychiatrist or someone who can actually make a statement that Biden is incapacitated?

And the second one, mindfully, that is. And the second one is, if they end up doing the debate, Trump and Biden, I think they need to check Biden and make sure he doesn't have an earwig. I know that sounds funny, but it would be something I would think of. It's happened before in the past. Look, a lot of these situations there are when you're doing TV, a lot of people have earpieces or headphones. We used to hear this broadcast. It's not uncommon.

And look, there's a way for us to talk to the studio without you hearing us. That's just part of the nature of broadcasting. So you have to be careful on what you're dealing with in those situations. But to go back to the Her report, that's something that you look at people a little bit of understanding.

Maybe they don't even know what that is. So Robert Her was a special counsel that was looking into Biden's mishandling of classified documents. And in the classified documents report that he put out, he said he wouldn't take it to trial because Mr. Biden would present himself to a jury as a well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory.

And then there's lots of instances showcasing that he has a poor memory. To Nancy's question specifically, he's a former U.S. attorney, currently special counsel. I guess actually the office has probably closed down at this point since he has completed his job. But Robert Her is not a psychiatrist or psychologist. He is an attorney, U.S. attorney, served in government, private practice, and as a special counsel. So nothing in his report would deem him incapacitated or unable to perform duties. What he was doing was telling why to the attorney general that he wouldn't be bringing a case. Now, there also would be the issue of bringing a case against a former sitting President or a currently sitting President, which is against DOJ policy. So he wouldn't have brought the case currently anyways, but he added this flavor to his report that a lot of people latched on to. And obviously the Biden administration was very upset with that he decided to add this color to this report of other reasons why he wouldn't bring a case against Joe Biden. And one of those being the memory issues that he saw throughout the entire process of of building this report for the attorney general and that and finally, that he wouldn't present it to a jury because a jury would see him as a well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory.

And so therefore, no, there's no medical diagnosis or anything that would come out of this, but it does speak to the rationale behind the special counsel saying, I can't bring a case here. Let's go ahead and continue on with these calls. Let's go to Charlene who is calling from Washington online too. Thanks for holding Charlene. You've been a hold for a long time. You're an ACLJ champion. I know that I appreciate that. Charlene, go ahead.

Thanks for taking my call. We've been listening routinely to Mark Levin and he waxed last week on all the reasons why President Trump's lawyers could appeal to the Supreme Court without having to mess with the appellate. And if that's the case, why doesn't somebody try it? I mean, so what their angle is on that, Charlene, and we spoke with Jordan about it last week, actually, is that they're trying to say under the precedent that was set in Bush v. Gore that they could because of the implications on the certifying of the election, because at that point, that case that people had already voted. There were deadlines that constitutionally you have to meet that it needed to be taken by the Supreme Court without going through all the other lower court processes because of the essence and the time that was needed to get a resolution to meet constitutional mandates as far as the dates.

It's a little different. There are some legal analysts and scholars that think that because this is just during the campaign that that wouldn't necessarily still play out. He's still trying to use that rationale that it affects the election. But other than that, as well, because it isn't apples to apples, because the timeline is a little different, there's also what you've seen the Supreme Court do with Jack Smith when Jack Smith tried to subvert the natural process on the immunity issue. He took it immediately to the Supreme Court for very similar reasons and said, we need to get clarity on this now. And the Supreme Court rejected that and said, no, go through the normal process, go through the appeals court, get it up here. And then they did.

They had to go back down. And then finally, the Supreme Court did take it after it went through the appeals process. So because I don't think we have that running up on the constitutional timeline issue, it seems like the Supreme Court, especially this court, the Roberts court, would be wary to take that challenge without it exhausting the typical appeals first because it's also not dealing with vote certification. It isn't really an apples to apples comparison. So I hope that helps. I don't discredit that Mark Levin has thought it through and that he is an attorney and I'm not.

But there are definitely differences of opinion when it comes to how that would play out. Yep. All right. What Will said is right.

Sure. I like that. I looked into it.

And Jordan also gave a very good explanation as well. I miss the show. See, that's probably you miss a show left in the dark. It's got to make sure you subscribe, hit that notification bell. So every day, even if you're on an airplane, which I was, I couldn't see the show because you know what they say they have Wi-Fi in the air. A lot of times that Wi-Fi, it's never on the plane you're on. It's not the streaming. It's like somehow I could text you. Yeah, but I can't see anything.

I don't understand how it works. Joni's calling from New Hampshire. Probably the last call of the day. Listen on Sirius XM. Joni, welcome back. You're on the air.

Thank you so much. I love being a champion and I love reporting for duty. First of all, we did miss you and we knew you were on vacation because you had done so much work for so long without any support. So we're cheering for you and we'll welcome back. Yay.

And my question is, it wasn't without any support, family support, but Will's amazing as well. Well, thank you, Joni. I do appreciate you calling in. I appreciate those people who have said hello and welcome back.

Yeah, I was just on vacation with my family, took a week off, but I'm back. I will be doing this show for this week coming up. It's going to be really great. We're going to have packed shows with just incredible guests, but Joni, thank you. Obviously, thank you to all the ACLJ champions.

Most of the calls today, people ACLJ champions. What that means, some of them decided not only are going to give a one-time donation, they decided they were going to give on a monthly recurring basis. We couldn't keep this organization going without people like Joni who call in, who comment, who get engaged, who subscribe on our YouTube channels, who listen on different platforms, who really are a part of our family here. We couldn't do it without you. So right now I would encourage you to get engaged. However it is, if you don't have the money right now, I understand it's tight time. Look, I was just on vacation in Florida.

I could see the economic impact that's happening around the country. It's tough time. So if you can't give, I totally understand. But what I encourage you to do, then do stuff that's free. Subscribe to our channel, hit that notification bell, tell your friends about this show, tell your friends about the ACLJ. Do all of those things that you can do that cost absolutely nothing, but mean so much to the organization. And obviously if you can, you've heard us going around the country today, whether that's in Las Vegas fighting for the individual parent student, whether you heard what we're doing with the Biden Deep State right now, and what's happening with the whistleblowers being targeted just purely for their political beliefs, we can't do any of that work without you. So I encourage you right now, as we go off the air in 15 seconds, go to I want to see that number spike in donations over the next minute. You can be a part of it right now. We'll talk to you tomorrow.
Whisper: medium.en / 2024-06-12 14:09:50 / 2024-06-12 14:31:35 / 22

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