BREAKING: Judge Hears Trump Argument To Dismiss Jack Smith

Breaking today on Sekulow is Judge Cannon hears the Trump argument to dismiss special counsel, Jack Smith. We have hearings that begin today as Judge Cannon weighs whether or not the appointment of Jack Smith as special counsel violates the Constitution and the laws of the United States.

But I did want to remind you of this because it's a day to kind of mark on your calendar and it will change each day based on the year. But today is a day I will never forget at the American Center for Law and Justice. Two years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court took an action that I never thought I'd actually see in my lifetime if you would ask me. Ten years ago, five years ago, maybe until President Trump was able to start making Supreme Court appointments. I didn't think I would ever see this day.

I thought we'd be battling for life. But the Supreme Court, two years ago today, overturned Roe vs. Wade and returned the issue of abortion to the states. And we know that lives are being saved. Later on in the broadcast, we'll talk about how lives are being saved, but also the strategy around saving lives and the politics, of course, how it's affecting this general election. With Joe Biden going out hard on life, some Republicans trying to say, hey, should this be the federal issue?

Let's have the states make a debate about this. That rush to get amendments was not so successful, understandably, because I thought for the whole time, if we overturned Roe vs. Wade, we'd need years, years to educate the people in the states who have never really had to vote on it directly themselves. It was always judges and federal laws that were being overturned in courts or upheld in courts like the partial birth abortion ban that went up to the Supreme Court twice.

And on the second time, they said, OK, you can do it this way. So those kind of restrictions that are put in place. Some of the states who went more extreme, some of the states who have gone on either side is again, it's the it's the battle. We wanted to have the battlefield moved to the states and to the people.

But we do know that means more resources, more education and a lot more time. So we will get into that today. We're not forgetting about that at all. I also, though, wanted to remind you that this is a second day of hearings. So I'd love your thoughts on this at 1-800-684-3110, beginning as a judge canon in Florida is weighing whether or not the appointment of Jack Smith is constitutional.

Here's why. Jack Smith was no longer a government employee. He was no longer a U.S. attorney.

That was confirmed by the Senate. These special counsels sometimes are pulled out of the Department of Justice and you can make an argument that that's a delegation by the attorney general to give them more kind of give them more jurisdiction to cover than just their state or in larger states. You have multiple U.S. attorneys for different regions because too big to handle. But he had already retired from that, was actually doing a position at The Hague at the International Criminal Court when he was pulled on to do this investigation of President Trump. So he was no longer confirmed by the U.S. Senate to do a job like this. And the question is, under our Constitution and the laws of the United States, can the attorney general do this? Now, I will tell you, this was raised by Hunter Biden's defense team when he had a special counsel, as he does, coming after him. And the court dismissed it very quickly. It's never had even what it got Friday and today, Logan, which is an actual hearing by the judge. She said it was very interesting.

She learned a lot. And today we're going to hear from both the defense team for former President Trump and the government. On Friday it was arguments by kind of specialists and law professors. Absolutely. And if you have a question or comment about that, give us a call.

1-800-684-3110. We're also talking about Life Week with C.C. Hiles. He's going to be joining us in a couple of segments to talk about our current situation in our fight for life, as well as later on, Jeff Balaban from our ACLJ Israel office will be joining us, ACLJ Jerusalem. We are right now promoting right now Life Week, as we said. This is the anniversary, the overturning of Roe versus Wade. And right now, any gift over $60, I got it right here. You get this great, you can show it on the screen, this great Victory for Life 2022 because obviously that's when it happened.

Lapel pin, it's available right now for any gift over $60. Make sure you use that link, ACLJ.org slash Life Week. Make sure we get it to you faster. So use that ACLJ.org slash Life Week.

Scan that code. We really appreciate it as we head to the end of the month of June, celebrate our victory for life. All right, welcome back to Sekulow. So Judge Cannon, as we're on the air now, is hearing the second day of this hearing that's in federal court. So we're not getting audio from this.

So just reporting from this. And the second day of hearing, she's really hearing from the defense team, from President Trump and the government. So Jack Smith's team on, again, these competing arguments about whether or not this appointment of Jack Smith as a special counsel is constitutional.

Now, you could take this 50 different directions. But I think for her, what she's focusing it on is that Jack Smith as special counsel, when he was appointed as of today, is not a confirmed government official, officer of the United States. He was formerly, you know, a U.S. attorney. He was in those positions that had confirmations. He was, I think, the head of the criminal division, things like that.

But he left that to go do some private work. He also did some kind of like semi-government work where he was doing work at the ICC on, I think it was Kosovo and things like that. But, you know, we don't even give jurisdiction to the ICC, the United States. So that was definitely outside of his roles at the Department of Justice. So the question is, can an official like this, can an attorney general just pick a lawyer and say, now you have universal jurisdiction basically, the entire country, to bring any criminal charge you want against this individual.

So you can go to Florida for a case, you can go to New York for a case, you go to D.C. for a case, you go to California for a case. I will tell you, lawyers, both left and right, defense attorneys, have been fighting this issue for years. Most recently, just so you think this isn't some right wing, how they try to paint Judge Cannon as outside the mainstream, then ask Hunter Biden's lawyers. I bet they wish they had Judge Cannon out in some of their cases, like California, where they raised this specifically in the tax case where they said this special counsel has no jurisdiction, they are not appointed constitutionally.

Now, Logan, to be fair and to be honest, this is as far as this has ever gotten. We've never even gotten hearings on this. So the fact that there were hearings Friday and that there are hearings today to even have the judge consider saying that she believes that the appointment of Jack Smith is unconstitutional, that is the furthest we've ever gotten in this argument.

Now, some of that is because we used to have independent counsels, that office got closed, that was what Ken Starr was, and because we kind of are in this new era where we keep appointing special counsel after special counsel after special counsel in the Trump years. And so, again, we've raised it before, courts have not really had an interest in it, but Logan, she decides, ultimately, that this appointment is unconstitutional. I mean, not only is this case way behind because of the classified documents, so we knew this wasn't going to be done before the election. This then puts into question, of course, the case out of D.C. Because, again, if the appointment is unconstitutional, you can't move forward with that case, so you'd have to take it to the appeals court. I have no idea what the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals would do, and ultimately, I mean, my lord, I know that the Supreme Court does not want to keep hearing these cases, but this is right up their alley. I mean, I don't know how they would say no unless the Eleventh Circuit was just so clear, and the fact is, there haven't been other circuits that have taken that position.

At the end of the Friday's hearing, Judge Cannon said, this has been very illuminating and helpful. Now, that statement, Logan, when you hear from both sides- You don't want to lean into what it could mean, but you do kind of feel like it's telling. Well, especially because she's taken so much heat, and I just want to remind you that Hunter Biden's attorneys, who are some of the best defense attorneys in the country, raise this very issue every time he's been brought up on charges by a special counsel. It's something defense attorneys, when dealing with special counsels, have been fighting for years. The debate's obviously this Thursday.

The question is, does this get too heady to be brought up, these kind of things? Because I feel like the American people, obviously our listeners, our viewers on YouTube and Rumble, they're very well-stewed. Whenever we talk about Jack Smith, whenever we talk about any cases like this, we get a lot of viewers.

A lot of people are very interested in it, but it is a bit broad, or not broad, it's a bit specific, a bit heady for the general public who's going to be watching. Yeah, I mean, I wonder if it could be a response by Donald Trump. Like, if, for instance, Biden was to attack him on going after the special counsel, I think Donald Trump, and I hope his team knows that if they're listening right now, that they could quickly turn around and say, well, why did your son file that, that this appointment was unconstitutional? He kind of just... Joe Biden's going to have opening statements, I think is what they said, right? Trump closes?

No opening statements, but I think he has the advantage, whatever it would be. He had to pick what side he was going to be on, I think he gets the first question. So you also know that that was a coin flip that happened over the, I think, Friday.

So now you know there's that, but they also said, because of that, sort of like football, Donald Trump now I think gets the last word. This is Thursday, this is CNN. CNN, Dana Bash and Jake Tapper. 9 o'clock, Houston.

I would assume somewhere in that prime time. Yeah. Everyone's doing pre and post coverage.

I think it's on CNN and I think it's simulcast on a few networks, on NewsNation, maybe some of the others. So it should be interesting. They're picking it up.

It's kind of like they used to be able to do. I think so. So it'll be a... We'll have time on Friday to break all that down for you. And on Thursday, kind of guess about what you think each side is going to kind of focus on when they go back to, you know.

I want to take a phone call. We're in the middle of Life Week right now. This has been something, the very beginning of Life Week. And again, Life Week, we're celebrating the overturning of Roe vs. Wade two years ago today. And Jerry from Rhode Island has an interesting call because it kind of does tie into the Supreme Court and what's happening right now even. Because it was that moment where the Supreme Court started to become a bit more politicized. You start seeing those protests happening out in front of people's houses, sort of death threats to our justices. Jerry, Rhode Island, go ahead.

Hello, team. It's been two years ago we talked about this and the Dobbs decision and it got leaked. And the Supreme Court is supposedly doing their own investigation.

Any status on that? That investigation is over and I think that was inconclusive. And I feel like the Supreme Court, to again on an issue that was controversial because of the leak, had decided it's time to move on.

Again, because the temperature got so high. Now what it did to leak, honestly, because I think for those of us on the pro-life side, we wanted to believe it was 100% true. But literally we've been fighting this battle since before we were born and you weren't going to believe it was true until you got the actual opinion from the US Supreme Court. It was done for the left.

And why do I say that? Because they were ready to go on the ground. It's like they already knew they had lost. And you can kind of tell the oral argument did not go well for them. So they went right into the states where they've got a lot more, they've got a billion dollars to spend, that's just plain parenthood, to make sure they would start their education campaign against any pro-life measures before any pro-life measures even made it to people's ballots. So what has worked in the states is legislative actions. You know, gone through the state house, state senate to a pro-life governor. What has not worked, even in deeply red states, is when the voters vote on amendments and that is because they will plan parenthood, change the topic, they put a nurse on a commercial and they say, you know, people are going to be dying at the hospital. Or I had IVF and they're going to say I'm a murderer if I don't keep all of the embryos alive. All those kind of things that weren't true.

And there were some missteps by some states. Oh, and people can fall, I feel like they fall into traps all the time. I feel like that's happening in churches, I feel like it's happening in the IVF, they're falling into the far left's traps that then make this a much harder argument to win.

Yeah, I mean, I'd love to take people's thoughts on this. Do you think because it's moved to the states, I think we need a massive amount of resources to do education campaigns. There are groups that are set up to do that. Of course, we are at the ACLJ as well. We don't just do the legal work.

We've got ACLJ action that can partner with those groups to make sure. My idea has been put the brakes on where you can and really prepare before you've got to go to the voters. Now, if you could do things legislatively, those voters are actually going to support it. Those pro-life voters, especially here in the red state. But if you give them a vote and you know the other side is going to outspend you 10 or 20 to 1 with misleading ads. Logan, you're going to have people who consider themselves very pro-life and they'll be in a church, regular church attendees, very pro-life people who consider themselves a pro-life activist. And they will come in and then say, but I saw this ad, I think this goes too far.

And they end up voting on the side of Planned Parenthood without knowing it. Yeah. We need to be able to educate as well. Not only are we fighting in the battles in the courthouse, we're also fighting in the media and getting in front of people's faces.

That's why it's so important for you to be on here on YouTube, on rumble, on Facebook or listening on radio or Sirius XM. It's so important to make sure that you are following what we're doing here, but also that is why we need your support. And right now we are, like I said, kicking off life week, which again, we are celebrating. That's what we're doing. We are celebrating it. But because we're celebrating, we also know that the battle has not stopped. In fact, it has gotten heavier and heavier in state by state.

We have to have people more expensive. Washington, it was very stuck in the federal courts. Now it's state to state. There's 50 states in the country.

So you've got 50 battles. So right now, all you have to do is please go make a donation to the ACLJ and all donations during life week, over $60, will receive our ACLJ commemorative lapel pin celebrating the overturning of Roe. Jordan's wearing it right now. I have one right here in my hand. It is a great little piece. Obviously, it is just a gift to you for making that donation. It's not a purchase. This is just a, we want to give you something back for the fact that you have been so supportive of our pro-life work over the years. So I encourage you right now, we do have a limited supply. So get it while you can. I'll say that, you know, obviously we'll fulfill absolutely as many as possible. We do have plenty of them right now, though.

We have a limited supply. Go to ACLJ.org slash life week and make that donation. And let me know in the chat, if you're watching that you've done that. We appreciate it.

That donation has to be $60 or over. And again, I'm wearing it as blue with the gold. And I think it's a great reminder, you know, it says 2022 when the Supreme Court returned with the Supreme Court. It's a great prayer reminder as well that these battles, while the big battle at the US Supreme Court was won, that the battle continues in the states. So it's a great reminder to have with you, whether you wear a lapel pin regularly or not, to remind you to pray for all of those of us who are fighting for life in the states across the country. So make that $60 donation at ACLJ.org today. We'll be right back. Alright, welcome back to Secular. We are going to take your phone calls on this.

If you've got questions about it, 1-800-684-3110 and how it would affect President Trump, especially as we're getting closer and closer to election day. We have the debate this week. Obviously, we're going to do a lot of pre-debate analysis on Thursday, a lot of post-debate analysis on Friday. But this will be, yes, they're always fun.

And, you know, again, earlier on, I didn't think we'd even have this opportunity. And I think this debate will probably determine whether or not the second debate happens because of how, you know, there's no crowd, no audience. They can cut your mics. There's a lot of rules.

Yeah, a lot of the mic cutting, which, again, I think for both of them, if they do it equally, is fine. If the questions are all about January 6th again, though, we know where this is going. This is just, you know, the liberal media. I mean, I expect a big chunk of them to be.

I think maybe one or two. But, I mean, so far, these cases, there's bigger issues in the country, the economy, the wars going on in the world. The fact that an Israeli leader last week said the U.S. isn't providing us the weapons we need, and he's coming to give a joint session speech later in July. I mean, and, of course, elections in France that may replace, at the legislative level, a pretty moderate government with a more very right-leaning government that would be more in line with where we were as, maybe where we are as a Republican Party. Though they certainly like to cast them as even further right than that. When you actually talk to those folks, and we do because we have our office at the European Center for Law and Justice in Strasbourg, and when you actually meet with them, you realize, you know, they're still looking a lot toward, to us. They get name-called as fascists there because that's kind of what every right thing means, but they really do look to us on issues like speech and life and the economy and, again, getting out of the welfare state and getting back into, again, the ideas of putting France first is not an anti-American statement. They always say, if all these countries put themselves first, guess what? The world benefits because that means they've all got strong militaries.

They all have strong economies, so we're not having to be the only country paying our 2% into NATO, which we pay a lot more of that. So, again, 1-800-684-3110 to talk to us. It will be interesting because Judge Cannon is going to decide today whether Jack Smith, his appointment is unconstitutional. When she makes that decision, which we don't have an exact timeline yet, but I would imagine she's not going to take too long on that, it will get appealed. I can't imagine the 11th Circuit not taking it. Now, if the 11th Circuit takes it and says, no, this is fine, which is what every other court has done, it's never gotten that far because every other district judge has just dismissed the argument, whether you're a Republican or a Democrat. But now, if it does, and we don't know that she will, but if it does, likely this will go to the 11th Circuit. That 11th Circuit decision, which could end up even being where they've got to go en banc and bring in the entire 11th Circuit.

So you're talking some major time here, where Jack Smith is in limbo, by the way. Whatever decision they make, unless they say no, that it's fine to have Jack Smith, I think it definitely goes to the Supreme Court. So we're watching that one very carefully, because of course that could affect half of the cases against President Trump that Jack Smith is trying to bring. Yeah, I wanted to bring up, obviously it is Life Week, we've been discussing that, but I wanted to kick it off, I don't know if you've heard this, President Biden released a video this morning, obviously we are, if you will, celebrating the overturning of Roe vs. Wade. Of course he is using it as a campaign moment to say, two years ago today, the worst tragedy happened, of course is what the Biden Administration is essentially saying, the campaign.

Let's take a listen, this is their Biden, this is essentially their Dobbs anniversary video. Never before has the court granted and then taken away a widely recognized constitutional right. Decades of progress shattered just because the last guy got four years in the White House. Republicans, Roe is just the beginning, we're going to try to ban the right to choose nationwide, we're coming for IVF and birth control next, repregus extremism, send me back to the White House and I'll fight like c**t, restore Roe vs. Wade, and protect American freedom. All right, there you heard it right there folks, what are the ads that they know are effective Logan, they know it's not about 8th month abortions, you know, it's IVF and birth control, birth control which was again a very empowering moment for women when that became legal and it also reversed a lot of laws about husbands having to sign off on whether or not you can go to the doctor or not, things like that. I want to go to CC House, we're going to keep you on for the next segment too, but that's what they're talking, there's a very direct pitch to women and men that don't get, they're trying to say don't get distracted about the late term abortions or the baby in the womb, even though we know that's what the fight's really about.

You talked about whether or not you and your wife or partner are having trouble but you want to try to have the children and you want to use IVF and they're going to criminalize you, you could be put in jail if you're a doctor who specializes in that or an individual who goes through with the IVF procedure or you could somehow be imprisoned if you're a doctor that prescribes birth control or if you take birth control, both of which are not on the table. Right. No one is discussing doing that.

Absolutely. It's more of what we call the abortion distortion. It is them spinning and changing the narrative to make it something that's palatable. And so instead of talking about saving a baby's life or just the fact that the Dobbs decision rightly found that there is no constitutional right to abortion, they start talking just like you said about IVF and contraceptives and it's the same thing we saw in some of these local state fights where states had this issue on the ballot where they talk about miscarriages, that oh my gosh, miscarriages.

So it's all smoke and mirrors, it's all spin, it's abortion distortion. Let's go to the phones. 1-800-684-3110. Alright, let's go to Richard in Connecticut online. 4, Richard, you're on the air. Hi, thank you for taking my call, first time caller.

Thanks. And I really believe the Republicans or Americans in general, we need to do a better job of educating through communication. What I've seen is that truth and life cannot stand against the sunlight of truth. And what left of them, they have so captured the narrative by making it seem like we are against women rights, and they do that to undermine the integrity of human life. How is it that we are talking about human life?

When did you, if it's a murder to commit, if it's a crime to kill somebody. We understand, I think we understand all of that. I think what you have to do now is realize we won this at the federal level for now. We want to keep it out of Washington, D.C. We want to have these battles state to state. But to have those battles is not throwing up a ballot initiative that we as ACLJ attorneys understand and can read through and say, yeah this is perfect, it doesn't do anything about IVF, it's nothing about birth control. That doesn't matter if you're up against 10 million dollars more in ads by Planned Parenthood who wants to protect their business here so they can continue to do abortions, even if it's medicated abortions.

That they're going to do everything they can in those ads to mislead people. They're targeting pro-life voters actually in red states to make sure they've got a big buffer to win when it's a vote to the people. I'm not against people voting on this, but I think we're two or three years away before they should.

I think we need to run two or three years of going into states educating people, I mean in-person kind of education with ads, having meetings so that they know the truth and understand the lies they're going to see. Right, Richard was right, truth will trump this and that's what we need to make sure and that's what the ACLJ does is tell the truth. Alright folks, today again marks the second anniversary of the overturning of Roe vs Wade through the Dobbs case. Every donation $60 or more at ACLJ.org. As long as we've got them, you'll get this special commemorative pin that I'm wearing on my lapel right now.

It is a great reminder that we won this at the federal level at the Supreme Court and that we've got to keep fighting and praying to win it in the states. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Alright, welcome back to Sekulow.

We are taking your calls to 1-800-684-3110 on two issues. One, the fact that for the first time ever, a federal court is hearing the argument about whether or not a special counsel who's appointed by the Attorney General who has not been confirmed by the U.S. Senate. So this is someone who is no longer an active government official that went through the confirmation process to be a U.S. Attorney or Deputy Attorney General or the head of a division with the Department of Justice. Even if they were previously, but they've lost that title now, they would have to go back through the process if you were going to nominate them to be a U.S. Attorney somewhere.

So why are we able to just say, well, right now, we'd like this person to be a special counsel. They have this universal jurisdiction over the entire country in Jack Smith's case. So in the past, courts have shut this down. Right-leaning judges, left-leaning judges. It's arguments that have been brought up by both Hunter Biden's legal team and the Trump legal team.

And when Hunter Biden's legal team brought it up in California, it did not go anywhere. The Trump team has been able to get a hearing, and there's a second hearing today that they're participating in. Then Judge Kanda will ultimately make a decision about this. That will not be the final say. If she says that the special counsel was or is unconstitutional and not provided by in the statutes. If that happens, the Eleventh Circuit will almost certainly take the case. It could end there if they dismiss and overturn Judge Kanda's decision. If they would along with it, I think the case ultimately has to go to the U.S. Supreme Court because we've seen the appointment of so many of these special counsels, and they're going to have to make that decision. So we're going to keep our eyes on that very carefully because, again, it'll affect Donald Trump the most in the short term, but in the long term, it affects so many battles. This is kind of how they weaponized the justice and legal system was by getting these special counsels to be able to build out their own hit teams from private practice to go after them. That's what Mueller did. When we were representing President Trump, he went to private practice, former district attorneys, former U.S. attorneys, to build these teams that the government would not be able to usually hire.

They'd say, oh, I'll come and do it for a year, and they'd pay him a lot more, and they'd have all these resources. So we're going to watch that very carefully. It's very important. It's a huge constitutional issue. But I want to go to CeCe Howe because, CeCe, on Life Week, and we're just getting started today, but on the second anniversary of the overturning of Roemer v. Wade, I wanted to remind people about all the work we're working on.

Not that we've done in our history. That would take a long time, maybe multiple shows or weeks of shows, but what we're doing right now when it comes to protecting life. Yeah, so a lot of people thought the Dobbs decision would actually end the debate over life, but as we knew that it was just starting, that the fight and the battle was just starting. So right now we have five cases that are actively in court, and that's anywhere from protecting sidewalk counselors for having the right to actually give good advice and sound advice and options for women who are entering abortion clinics, all the way to defunding Planned Parenthood, who we know is still the biggest abortion provider and still gets money from the federal government for providing abortions.

So we literally have five cases, and that's not, those are active cases, that's not all the work we're doing. We still work with crisis pregnancy centers, supporting them, protecting their rights, because again, states are coming after them, and we always have to be there to support. Because as Richard was saying, truth kind of uncovers the situation, and crisis pregnancy centers are on the front line.

When people actually can have an ultrasound and see their baby, they make the choice more often than not to keep their baby. So truth is the way that we're going to win this battle, and the ACLJ has been at the forefront of it for decades, and will continue to be so. Yes, and I mean, I want to just double down on that to say, a lot of this work is going and testifying to a committee in the state level about why the pro-life pregnancy centers deserve the constitutional protections.

So like Cece said, we get in on the life battle usually a long time before we have to get in on the legal battle. And we work with organizations regularly, daily, both in Washington D.C., so for the national organizations, but also those pregnancy centers that you might see in your communities that are really on the front lines on the fight for life. So we want you to make that donation today to get this pin as long as we've got them at ACLJ.org. A $60 donation or more and you will get this life pin that I'm wearing today.

That's at ACLJ.org. Make that $60 donation for life. We'll be right back. Welcome back to Secular. We're going to head to Israel soon with our director there of ACLJ Jerusalem. And again, we'll get some updates on what is happening in Israel, of course, and what the Biden administration is up to as well. But before we do that, you might have been hearing this talk about this is life week at the ACLJ. And I want to give Logan a moment to explain that and explain what we're asking you to do.

That's right. It is life week again. We are celebrating the second anniversary of the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, obviously the Dobbs decision. And with that, we have started to really focus and show you what we're doing right now because that battle, though it was a big victory, was not the end of the story. We're continuing to fight these battles in each and every state in smaller locations and districts. We are fighting continually to support life.

So we're going to hear about it all week. We want to do something special for you all who have supported the ACLJ's life work and will continue to put towards our specifically towards the fact that we have these ongoing cases. We have launched ACLJ life week with any donation over $60. You will get this victory for life anniversary pin. It's a lapel pin. It's gold.

It's beautiful. ACLJ has the Supreme Court and the ACLJ logo and a great blue color, like a navy blue color. ACLJ.org slash life week. Make your donation.

Any donation over $60. It will come to you in the mail. You'll get it. So make sure you do that right now. Scan the QR code if you're watching online and let me know that you're supporting ACLJ during this special week here at the end of June.

It is an important time for us to always remember the big victories and the future battles, the continual battles that the ACLJ has. We are going to go right to the phones. 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. Let's go to Bob first in Michigan on Line 1. He's calling about this appointment of Jack Smith, which has been a long time now, but because we've got this case that's actually gotten further than ever before. We'll take your words away from you. Bob, welcome to Secular.

You're on the air. Thank you. That is correct. I have a concern that when Merrick Garland was testifying before Congress, does it seem to others as it seems to me that he was duplicating his authority as Attorney General of the United States by washing his hands entirely of the appointment of Jack Smith. To do whatever Jack Smith pleases with no supervision, no qualifications, no constitutional authority left untouched to do anything. Yeah, I mean, I think this is the whole issue with the special counsel, because though they will pitch it to you like that, they aren't. They report to the Attorney General of the United States. And so the idea that you could try to wash your hands of it, but ultimately the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General of the United States and even the President can dismiss them at any time. They are not truly independent.

You cannot wash the hands of their work. And the question before the court is, can you appoint people who have not been confirmed to serve in these roles? Again, to give us a call, talk to us on the air, 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. We're going to be joined in just a minute from Jeff Balaban from our ACLJ Israel, ACLJ Jerusalem, which is important to all of us think you should have. And Jordan, maybe you need to tell people as they support the work of the ACLJ why it's important not to. We have the European Center for Law and Justice. We have different ACLJs all over the world. But specifically, this one was ACLJ Jerusalem.

I think that I'll go right to an issue. Because of having this office in Jerusalem, we're ahead of the issues. We don't have to wait until the issue gets to the US media translated. We have people there who are speaking Hebrew, who are working with the elected officials, working with the organizations in Israel, working with the key people.

It's a smaller country, so it's not as hard to do that, especially when you make the commitment like we have to be there for decades. And I want to go to Jeff Balaban on this, who directs our ACLJ Jerusalem, and he's in Jerusalem now. And Jeff, you brought attention to us on an issue again that is great to have on this show, which is this questionnaire going out to those seeking immigration status into the US about their potential service in the IDF.

Tell people about this. Yeah, so reports have come out now, and apparently they've been confirmed, but obviously we at ACLJ are digging deeply to find out the actual facts that under the Biden administration now, the Israelis who are coming to the States are undergoing interrogation, as though there might be potential war criminals. Now, let's be clear about this, and we've covered this on the show often, as you know, Jordan and Logan, we've covered this, that Israel has waged this war in a way that has literally fewer casualties, noncombatant casualties to combatant casualties than any war in recorded history, even in the worst circumstances where the enemy is actually using them as human shields. And yet, based on nothing whatsoever, they are trying to treat Israelis as though they are war criminals or potential war criminals.

It's outrageous. You know, and this is the thing, I mean, to think about the fact is that this is an ally of the United States. While we are supplying them weapons, and hopefully we continue to supply those munitions that are so important that Prime Minister Netanyahu felt like he had to go address the American people on, because when he does a video in English, that is for us.

So that's not for the domestic audience, it's for us. But this is, like he said, it's a number one ally. A lot of the questions are asking, Jeff, we've provided a lot of those munitions and explosive devices from the United States so that they could be on the front lines of terror, hoping to keep that terror away from the United States.

That's right. And so, Jordan, you know, we're digging in now, the ACLJ team in Washington is digging in now to find out what's really going on here because we're able to go behind the scenes with FOIA and, you know, and Freedom of Information Act requests and trying to dig in because we still have an outstanding Freedom of Information Act request that they're now overdue on this about some of the advisors there, one particular advisor who seems to come from a pro-terror background, and yet is advising them on exactly on Homeland Security issues, on these issues. And so we have to know, the American public deserves to know who's making these policies, what's the basis on which these policies are making, and the other level on which this operates. And again, where ACLJ has been at the forefront is fighting domestic anti-Semitism in America, where these kinds of libelous accusations with really zero credibility and no basis charging the Israelis potentially with war crimes, etc, etc. You know, those things are playing out in incitement to actual violence against American Jews. We just saw this horrific images coming out of Los Angeles, where I'll call them terrorists.

They called themselves protesters, but they went to an Orthodox Jewish neighborhood, went to the synagogues, and they started beating people up. And all of this is incitement and incitement. So on so many different levels, this is all tying together, and we're trying to confront it on all those levels. Yeah, and I mean, again, if our own government is doing this, you know, most Israeli citizens have served in the military, especially both male and female. And if not the military, in some government role, connected to military service, even if it's, you know, the ambulatory care, and again, being armed, having to make tough decisions.

These are, you know, this is an urban warfare oftentimes. So it's not, it's again, we would be upset, I think, if countries were asking our citizens about their US military service. Especially if it was an allied country, Jeff, which under the Biden administration, I honestly wonder, is it truly an allied country for now?

I think it is long term, and I think we will get back to that point again, because we're going to work and really, you know, educate people about why we need to get back to that point again. But it feels more and more every day like Israel is being treated like a pariah, even by the Biden administration, or that they want to have it both ways. We'll bring in Netanyahu to speak, and Schumer will sign off on that, at the same time calling for him to step down.

There are talking out of two sides of their mouths, and you know, there's a lot of speculation. We don't have to make it ourselves, it's out there in the political press, that they want to keep the donors happy, but they also want to keep the sort of rampaging street mobs happy, and both things used to be important to them. But more and more, their behavior is belying what you're saying, Jordan, which is, obviously, America should remain Israel's ally, and by the way, America, this administration is teaching every ally we have not to trust America, at least under their administration. And we have to repair that. It's desperately needed to repair that for our own sake as well, because you know what, America relies very heavily on Israel's intel and military affairs in the Middle East to try and provide some kind of stability there.

And right now, we're on demonic stability. You see, U.S. assets are being attacked precisely by the same Iranian proxy terrorists that attacked Israel. So this is really, we cannot afford to alienate Israel in the way that the Biden administration has been doing. Jeff, I think this, again, that's just a reminder, folks, right there about the FOIA work we're going to do, because this is an issue that we learned about because of our office in Israel, so it's the importance of you supporting the ACLJ to make sure we have that office there. We have Jeff there, we have specialists there, the teams we work with, so we can be ahead of issues before a reporter picks up on it, and we can be ahead of the government, so we can get a FOIA out before they even know, uh-oh, this has become an issue that we need to start covering up, and to really nail them down on, did you really put this out on these immigration documents?

You were asking people what kind of ammunitions they used when they served in the Israeli Defense Forces, which is an allied military of the United States, our number one ally in the Middle East, if not in the world, certainly the world in the fight against terror. Jeff, we appreciate you joining us live from Jerusalem and for directing that office there. Two quick things, if you want to call in, this is the perfect time to call. We've heard some experts, now we want to hear from the experts who listen and watch this broadcast, so give us a call right now. We've got three lines open, 1-800-684-3110, your voice just as important here in the room. If you want to talk about Israel, if you want to talk about the Jack Smith case, if you want to talk about Life Week, whatever it is, give us a call, 1-800-684-3110. You're going to hear it a lot this week. It is Life Week. Any donation made to the ACLJ on ACLJ.org slash Life Week, over $60 will receive our commemorative victory for life lapel pin celebrating the overturning of Roe versus Wade and also pushing forward to the future of the life debate.

We'll be right back with your calls. All right, welcome back to Secular. So we've got actually some breaking information out of the court hearing today in front of Judge Candid in Florida on whether Jack Smith's appointment as special counsel is constitutional or even under statute because he was not confirmed before to be a special counsel. And currently, but until he had this position, was not even working for the U.S. government, though he has in the past. So she said this so far in the hearing and this is a report from Julie Kelly from Real Clear Investigations, who's in the courtroom. The most revealing part of the hearing today relates to the funding for Smith's office. You know, that's your taxpayer funding to the office. The special counsel has not released a financial report since September of 2023. Well, if you were any other kind of, you know, law firm or organization and you had issued a financial support, that's so government, right? It's like because they don't care, right? You'll see in this description that money is so fungible, they just do not care. So since September 2023, that violates the six month reporting requirement because that's like their FOIA, you know, and they violate that all the time with us. And ultimately, we have to take them to court and that's what they want to do.

So there's no, there's no trouble for them to violate their own timelines except for they get pushed, you know, eventually. But then a candidate asked James Pierce, who is representing DOJ this morning, about the status of the report. He said the report was completed in March of 2024, but it is undergoing some sort of review process. So again, it was completed not on time, but you can't see it, Judge, because it's being reviewed in the bureaucracy.

I think this is where you got to go, though. She drilled down on what she described as, which is even different than the U.S. Attorney, the permanent and indefinite appropriation for Smith's office, that the funding is, quote, limitless. Just like I was talking about with Mueller, how they put together these legal attack dog dream teams because they can go to these New York firms who maybe a former prosecutor has made his way up to a managing partner at a defense firm in New York and say, hey, will you come and do this for six months? This is a prominent role.

Oh, and I can pay you enough. You can't do that if you're the U.S. government. They have, like, payrolls and, you know, all those different statuses you make, GS roles. But with a special counsel, they get these budgets. So what did the government say back when they said the funding is limitless? Well, the DOJ said that they have two examples in the law that permits sort of public funding, but when the judge then said these are really vague examples and I don't think they survive a court challenge, interesting, the DOJ attorney quickly responded that the DOJ could always find, quote, an alternative funding source and emphatically stated that the DOJ, quote, will fund the prosecution. The judge did not like that, expressing further concern how easy it is for which the Department of Justice can just find more money whenever it wants to prosecute Americans. So this does not seem like a great start for the DOJ in their defense of the special counsel, and it's a different look at it. It's not just about whether or not they're constitutionally allowed, but also the funding source, why they get to just keep the money going and how easy it was for that DOJ attorney to say, Logan, well, if you think it's not right for us to get the money this way, we'll get it from somewhere else.

This is not costing billions. I have a question for you, because this is an important topic, obviously, that people are interested in. We have thousands of people who are watching.

If you're watching on YouTube or on rumble, hit that like button. We appreciate it. And of course, as always, you know, send us your comments.

We appreciate those as well. But what does this kind of case mean, knowing that's going to take some time to a general election? Is this one of those ones where if Trump wins, it won't matter, if Biden wins, or is this one that can prolong and keep going? I think, again, all of these cases would be, if there's no conclusion, are put on hold if Donald Trump wins. If he wins. I think if Joe Biden wins, the cases might continue, and they'll have to make a decision about whether it's worthwhile anymore, because I don't think President Trump's going to be running again. So they have to look. Where are we in the cases?

How far did we get? And the state actors will have to look, too, because is he going to be the boogeyman for Letitia James or Alvin Bragg that he was? I don't think he will be. Speculating here that Donald Trump lost, which right now, I mean, it's a 50-50 game. We got a debate this week.

A lot of things. We don't even know who the VP is. It's going to be a few percentage points, though. He did say he has picked a VP, and they will be at the debate, so, you know. But a lot of people are going to be. But a lot of people will be at the debate. That'll be a front row. But there's no audience. There's no audience, but you're allowed to have, I'm sure you're allowed to have, your campaign teams are there with you. Come on, someone send us an invite. Whether or not they're in the back.

We'll drive down to Atlanta. I don't know if they're seated at all. Yeah, I'm not sure. A lot of times, being on those campaigns, you're in a- You're watching on a monitor in the back.

You're watching on a monitor in a room separate from the other campaign's room. Let's go ahead and take a couple phone calls before we wrap up. Let's go to Wesley about the debate. Wesley's calling from Indiana, watching on YouTube, which we appreciate.

Thank you, Wesley. You're on the air. Will the moderator's mics be shut off when Trump's turn to speak? I predict it will be like a Nazi show trial when Trump tries to speak.

Someone will start screaming over him. Well, look, I think they're going to- they have these rules when the mic's cut off. We will see how much they abide by them. I think they have time to respond, and if you go over the time, your mic gets cut.

You could probably ask for additional time, because if it was you responding to an attack that was more- that would take more time to respond to. But we'll see if they- the big thing I think you're talking about, Wesley, before we have to get into comparisons of Nazi trials, is whether or not moderators are going to be able to keep control. So far, what we've seen with Donald Trump and Joe Biden in the past, and with Donald Trump more recently than that CNN town hall he did, was the moderators aren't able to keep it under control. Yeah, it was always chaos.

Now hopefully this time- And if it comes to chaos, then the American people go, okay, I didn't learn anything. Yeah, that's why I think you have one of those situations where I think the first half hour is going to be really important to make sure people actually stay through it. I mean, you know, these are two salty guys. Exactly. I mean, it can be interesting.

Look, and you have- You never know. I mean, Joe Biden hasn't done anything like this since he debated Donald Trump. We haven't had, what, an hour and a half of Joe Biden have to stand there by himself responding to attacks? Did they decide if they have to stand? Do they have to stand?

Did he win that? They've seen it. They've seen it. So the Trump campaign lost that one, because that was one thing they were pushing for. So they're going to be seating round table, I guess.

Are they sitting there with nothing in front of them? That's awkward. All right. Let's go to Andrew, who's calling in North Carolina online, too. The whole thing just sounds made for, unfortunately, what I will say is made for Joe Biden. Yeah.

Go ahead, Andrew. The Supreme Court did not make abortion illegal. The Supreme Court said it is not a federal issue. Therefore, it defaults back to a state level decision.

Exactly. Which is what we talked about why this is a 50 state battle now. So we've worked so hard to get this out of the federal courts where it was just stuck. Or federal legislation. You'd have to fight through the Supreme Court. Is this okay under Roe? Is this okay under Planned Parenthood versus Casey?

Now you say, no. We're going to take this to people directly. Well, you knew that a lot of those cases, especially from other organizations, I'll be honest, that were taking cases. Well, with Roe on the books, you're going to lose.

Because a lot of times it was restrictions and there's a federal right. Now, the times have changed. We have to continue that fight even more so. And with today being that anniversary, that two-year anniversary of Roe being overturned, sure, we celebrate the victory of that. We also just celebrate a victory for life in general and continue the fight for life that is going to not only continue to ramp up, but there are going to be major consequences come November of what this looks like. So you want to make sure the ACLJ team is there. And of course, any donation over $60 right now on our link, ACLJ.org slash life week, you will get a victory for life 2022.

That's obviously when it happened. Supreme Court pin lapel pin beautifully done. It's just a gift to you for making that donation again for any donation over $60. We appreciate that ACLJ.org slash life week.

Again, do that right now. We're going to encourage you all week. But again, supply is unlimited, so we'll only be promoting it for as long as we have it. Yeah, and I think it's a great reminder, too, if you're thinking, well, I don't wear a lot of suits. I think it's a great reminder to pray for the battle for life, to pray for the ACLJ, so to have it at your home. To remind you of the victory, but also of the fight ahead. So go to ACLJ.org, make that $60 donation today, and get your life pin. We'll be right back tomorrow on secular.