BREAKING: MASSIVE Election Case at Supreme Court

Breaking news today on Sekulow as a massive election case is at the U.S. Supreme Court. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow.

We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Hey, welcome to Sekulow.

This is Jordan Sekulow. We are taking your phone calls. 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. We are at the U.S. Supreme Court. Last night at 4 p.m. Eastern Time, there was a deadline for the reply briefs from our opponents, the Nevada Democrat Party. Interesting enough, the party that tells you it's all about choice and decisions and liberty and freedom. We told you they've redefined all of those terms because the Green Party gets access to the ballot. But the Secretary of State, who is a Democrat, by the way, also filed a reply trying to keep the Green Party off the ballot in Nevada. Isn't it interesting that what they're actually doing in court is trying to make sure that there are less options for voters in Nevada to actually vote for? And that is where their briefs are focused in on. By the way, they waited the Nevada Democrat Party until the final day, the latest day possible, to file this challenge.

Now they can do that under strategy, but think about it. This is supposed to be the party of liberty, freedom, and choice. So they wait until the final day to file this challenge. And then the Nevada Green Party, of course, we filed suit and we brought it to the U.S. Supreme Court and we asked the U.S. Supreme Court to look at it. Their argument then in their reply, though, is that now they don't have enough time, they wouldn't have enough time to print the ballots even if the court thought what they did was wrong. And that's kind of the classic thing here, Logan, is even if what the court did here is wrong, even if what we did is wrong, it's too late. We can't hit reprint on the machines. Everyone knows, I hope the Supreme Court justices realize, too, that we live in a society where you can get things overseas in a day. It's not too late until the day has actually come, literally. Yeah, to actually just print new ballots.

Especially if you made an error as the state. Right, and I think that it's just so clear what's going on, that's maybe the biggest concern that everyone should have who should be watching this. Because you may go, why do we care? Why are we involved in the Green Party?

Because it's just clear what kind of interference is trying to happen. What's the latest poll? We've got a will to pull it up. What's the latest poll in Nevada when you look at Harris versus Trump? Yeah, because you may be thinking, OK, well, the Green Party's what? Got a poll of one percent, you know, a couple percent? One to three percent, usually, the states they're in. What's the latest poll? So the RealClearPolitics average has Harris up.2. The latest polls, though, one she is up four and Trump is up three in the other.

OK, so all these margin errors and the Green Party gets somewhere between one and three percent, different game. You know, and we know who that would probably whose votes those are likely coming from. So, I mean, it's the Nevada Democrat Party. They're telling you. You don't have to be some political expert to figure that out. But the fact that they, as Democrats, try to act like they are this we're friendly to all, except all, they're not the big tent party anymore.

They are the you're either with us or we try to take you and destroy you. They did it to RFK. They've done it now to the Green Party, which, you know, is a party that has had a long history of getting on the ballot. Everyone knows the Green Party. It's not like this is a brand new thing. It's been around forever as sort of that known third party, if you will. It's not unheard of. It's like that and the libertarians, like we know them.

They've been around forever at this point. Yeah, I just I think that we are again, there's going to be more action. So the U.S. Supreme Court will just, you know, how this works. Just again, if you're just joining us at 1-800-684-3110, this is with Justice Kagan. She is the circuit justice for this case.

My dad's going to join us in the next segment to kind of walk it through now that all the filing should be in by today. And she will then make decisions on her own. She could more likely is referred to the entire Supreme Court. They can take action here without oral argument or additional briefing. They could request additional briefing on a specific question and they could rule for us. They could rule for against us without oral argument. They could do oral argument.

They'd have to come back early. So I don't think this is as complicated of a case where you've got to do that. But we are going to take your calls at 1-800-684-3110. And Logan, too, for new champions out there, this is something for the last couple of days. When you become a new ACLJ champion right now at ACLJ.org slash champions, your first donation is matched. That's pretty awesome.

If you become a brand new champion, your first donation, a champion is someone who gives a recurring basis, a recurring donor. So do it right now at ACLJ.org and scan the QR code. We'll be right back.

All right, welcome back to SECU. We are taking your calls. 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. Dad, our chief counsel of the ACLJ, I wanted to bring you in because I know it's a busy time for our legal team.

The texts keep coming in and out. There's almost, I think, finished with the initial rounds of our filings here on the case out of Nevada. But I did want to go to you, Dad, just to kind of explain to people how you think this plays out. Because I think it's something probably by the end of the week we're going to probably have a decision on. Yeah, I mean, we may have a decision technically, I think, from this afternoon forward.

Any time now you can have it. Look, I just reviewed a brief that we're filing in response to the filings we now receive from Nevada and from the Nevada Democrat Party. And they are really arguing on a procedural basis. And they touch on the substance, but not a lot.

Because they're very weak on the substance. They're trying to hook it procedurally by basically asserting that it's not a relief that can be requested. And I think we've done a very effective job of rebutting that. Look, what the Nevada Secretary of State did was unconscionable. They said, use this form. The Green Party used the form. And then they said, we're not going to accept it because that form is not the right form.

Even though it was the form you told us to use. So, I mean, I think we've got a very strong case on the merit. But look, Supreme Court review on these things are always, you know, odds are against it.

But I'm pretty optimistic here that we at least got a shot. We certainly got the court's attention. Yeah, I mean, we got the court's attention. We knew that when they ordered the replies last week.

And, of course, there was a holiday some places, some federal holidays on Monday. So, their replies came in. I was interested in their replies, which is they try to rely, their argument, their main argument to the Supreme Court is, you don't have the power to do this.

Like, the court loves to hear that. And we don't have time to print ballots. Now, this is 2024. If you have to print new ballots for an entire state, and a lot of these are actually just the early ballots that go out, you can do it in a day. You can ship it overseas in a day.

Right. There is no, the time constraint is a time constraint of Nevada's own making. The truth of the matter is there's some days here. I mean, this has to move quickly, no doubt. I mean, we're, what are we, 49 days away from the election. So, this has got to move quickly.

But quickly here should mean that there should be a resolution by the end of the week. And this argument that we don't, that there's not enough time is just not right. I mean, I also just remind people the Nevada Democrat Party, Dad, it's something they, I mean, they could do it. It was not, you know, illegal for them to do it. But they waited to file on the final day they could attack and file against the Green Party to try and make it more difficult if they were successful for the state to print the ballots.

There is no, in my mind, there is no question about that. And if you look at how they procedurally handle it, you'd have to come to the same conclusion. But nevertheless, I think we presented a very coherent argument, and we're worried about election integrity. Knocking parties off when they've been basically hoodwinked by the Secretary of State will be a horrible precedent to allow to sit.

Yeah, absolutely. And I think that people need to understand why we're getting involved in this. Because you hear words like, you know, Green Party and all of this, and you know where we stand, and we want to know why we are getting involved.

I've seen that even in some of the commentary, if they maybe aren't watching this show. They go, that's strange that the seculars are getting involved in this. So can we give a bigger idea, I understand it's election integrity, but why that should be important to our listeners? Logan, that's a great question. And here's the truth. I mean, we've represented, in the religious liberty front, I've represented, as you all both know, the Hare Krishnas before. Why? Not because I support the theology of the Krishnas. Because their right to propagate their beliefs, their evangelism, if they're denied their right, well then our clients are denied their right. And the same thing goes here.

Jordan said this very well the other day. If this is allowed to happen to the Green Party, you don't think they're going to do this to other parties, including conservatives? You know they will.

So that's why you've got to kind of nip these things off as soon as they start happening. Yeah, especially in a time period where it's possible you could see the makings of a potential third party that conservatives could be interesting. A viable one. I mean, you kind of see the makings of the RFKs, the Tulsi Gabbards of the world.

You could imagine in a scenario in our lifetime, but not if the major two parties are able to keep those parties from even being on the ballot. Even when they've spent the resources, even when they've gone to the Secretary of State and said, hey, we want to double check, make sure the form we're about to use is the correct form. The Secretary of State, and that would have been the right form, Dad.

They had the right form. The Secretary of State's team said no. And then now the Secretary of State's team, instead of taking responsibility for that, wants to say, well, it's their fault for using the wrong form. It's their fault for relying on the Secretary of State's information. Yeah, they're saying the Secretary of State made a, quote, inadvertent mistake and you can't hold them responsible for it. But you can penalize the client who now can have their party registered for voters to cast a ballot for.

So that tells you how unjust that is. It also tells you where the Democrats are in this. So I hope that explains why we're doing this. Yeah, but also it makes sense because, like you said, could they do it to other parties?

Well, they already know that they tried to do this to President Trump. We had to get involved in that. The original.

The original one. So this isn't some sort of shocking thing that this would happen. We've saw it with RFK multiple times, but then we had to get involved for President Trump. That's exactly right. And it was the same kind of thing. It was one of these, everybody said on that one, remember, oh, there's no way that could happen.

And it did. So I think, look, I think we're doing the right thing institutionally. I sent a letter to a lot of our board, a text to our board members explaining why we're doing it. And the reason we're doing it is if you let it sit, it's going to impact, it could impact the entire election, especially in the closed states. And if this was, if this kind of standard was okay, if it was okay to give a candidate or party the wrong form, and then let their opposition party file a lawsuit against them on the final day you can to say they used the wrong form, and by the way, now they don't have time to correct it.

And you, the state, are the reason why they used the wrong form. I mean, that gives bad actors in the secretaries of state's office a actual framework to deny ballot access. Oh, it's an incentive to deny ballot access.

Are you kidding? I mean, that's the reality of what it is. It's an incentive to deny ballot access. But that's why we're fighting and that's why people supporting the work of the ACLJ is making the use different on so many issues. Yeah, and that's again why I believe too, you know, people are supporting the work. They see, again, the work we're doing on the 14th Amendment, the work we're doing in this case, and we're asking people right now, you know, if you become an ACLJ champion right now at ACLJ.org slash champions, your actual first donation that you make and your recurring donations, your first one is going to be doubled, kind of like a matching challenge, but your first donation will be doubled.

So go to ACLJ.org slash champions. And, Dan, I mean, we have a big team on this. It moved very quickly, of course, last week, and then it moved even more quickly the last 24 hours. Yeah, and it's going to move quickly now.

I mean, look, it's in the court's hands and any additional orders are going to come, I think, very, very quickly. All right, Dan, we appreciate you joining us. And, folks, we take your calls on this too.

If you've got any more questions about why, I think you've now, we have explained it and made it as clear as possible, 1-800-684-3110. And then, you know, add to the third, there's no question why we're in Nevada. I was at Monday night, I was in Washington, D.C., and one of the Senate candidates running, the Republican running, was at a dinner, and it's a three-point race.

Yeah, I mean, it's very close. It's a three-point race, and most of these polls are showing two and three. Now, again, and that is why you're getting so much, the Nevada, remember. Because why would they, you think about why would they care. In some states, they wouldn't. I guarantee you, in deeply blue states and deeply red states, the Democrat Party isn't trying to sue to keep the Green Party off. It's just specifically because it's a swing state.

Swing states. It's a swing state, they found a way to do it. Which is, oh, they didn't use the right form, even though, and I think what they got caught was, that may have worked if it was their fault for not using the right form. But, then when they sued, they found out, uh-oh, they used the wrong form because the Democrat Secretary of State gave them the wrong form. It actually said the form that they had, which was the correct form, was the wrong form. So, I mean, there's a lot of issues here that they actually caused by filing this lawsuit.

Yeah, but we got a good comment that came out of Rumbleside. I'm glad the ACLJ and the second, those are tackling this case, because they would also do this to the Libertarian Party if they could, or any of the other parties. Absolutely, and again, you have to look at that, and RFK is fighting those battles there. He's got the resources. We also look at resources, too. And ACLJ, and our co-counsel of this, knows we have the resources to take this all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and fight the battle. And they have the resources, too, though. On the other side, yeah, has brought in two of the biggest law firms in the United States. So do not think, when you were talking about the Secretary of State of Nevada and the Nevada Democrat Party and some local general counsel, they do have those. But they brought in the two biggest law firms in the United States to write their reply to the Supreme Court.

Yeah, so spending a lot of money and taking it very seriously. Very seriously, because this is about, those 3% or less could determine who is in the White House come January. Alright, the closer we get to this election, you know that you're going to see more and more of this kind of behavior, and we have to be there.

Whether that is for the Green Party, or just to really protect your rights to be able to vote for who you feel is the best candidate. We obviously are continuing our support. Our friend Tulsi Gabbard, our colleague, after she was put on the Quiet Skies terror watch list. And hey, we're also representing, once again, Operation Rescue, after a U.S. Army training instructed soldiers to view pro-life organization as terrorist.

You remember that story? We're getting involved in that as well. If you've ever considered becoming an ACLJ Champion, now is your time to do it.

We can defeat the attempts to shred the Constitution and the targeting of Christians, conservatives, and those who just want to have basic, standard freedoms. When you become a new ACLJ Champion, brand new feature, a recurring monthly donor, your first gift will be doubled. Go to ACLJ.org, scan the QR code. Be right back.

Alright, welcome back to Secular. We are taking your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. And we do want to go right to the phones as long as we have some calls coming in. Yeah, let's go to Randi who's calling in Pennsylvania on Line 3. Randi, you're on the air. And also, if you want to give us a call, 1-800-684-3110.

We got a couple lines open. Randi, go ahead. Okay, yesterday I was watching the news. There's a lady named Paula Collins. She's running for Senator, I think, in New York. And she said on TV that anybody, MAGA people, who post anything on social media about Donald Trump was like robbed of the election, I'm paraphrasing here, you know, posting false information, needed to be put in re-education camps. Yeah, we actually have the sound from Ms. Collins, the candidate in the House. She's running against Elise Stefanik, our good friend there.

So let's play it. Did she actually send a radio broadcast or did she know she was a Zoom call to supporters? A Zoom call to supporters. So she thought maybe she was in a more private setting.

You never are if you're speaking to anyone on any device that can be recorded, which is basically everywhere now. But let's take a listen. Even if we were to have a resounding blue wave come through, as many of us would like, putting it all back together again after we've gone through this MAGA nightmare. And re-educating, basically, which that sounds like a rather, a re-education camp. I don't think we really want to call it that. I'm sure we can find another way to phrase it.

Yeah, so we want to call it something differently than the communist Chinese would or the North Korea's Logan. But we need to put everybody inside. This is really going to help lower the rhetoric. So what Randi Hurd is right, I just want to make sure people understand, she heard everything correctly.

Right. And this is, we want to put you in a mandatory re-education camp and rewire your brain. This is like when people joke about how one day they will say, if you support MAGA, you know, you're somehow, they will say that's child abuse. And this is someone running for Congress. It's like you'll be criminal or somebody, you won't be, you're not a responsible human to raise children. Parent, yeah. This is, I mean, the truth of this is though, this is someone running for Congress. This is not some random person on the internet. This is someone who seriously- Won a nomination.

Won a hard nomination. It's insane. I mean, when you hear that, it's really pretty disturbing. Pretty disturbing.

Yeah. Just, I mean, I think again, it is extremely- But it's rhetoric that would only happen also on really one side, I feel like. You would not hear that the other way. You would not hear the conservative candidate saying, we need to take all of those who, we need to take all of the woke leftists and put them in re-education camps.

I don't think that people would say that. I would hope not because that's simply not how we do things in America. It's really an unfortunate time when you hear that kind of rhetoric come out. Yeah, but the rhetoric continues.

We have the soundbite from Karine Jean-Pierre. I mean, this is again, this Peter Doocy asking her because she keeps using that language about Donald Trump that they've said, this is obviously encouraging people when you use this kind of language. And these shooters are using it when they write on their social media the same words. It's been only two days since somebody allegedly tried to kill Donald Trump again. And you're here at the podium in the White House briefing room calling him a threat. How many more assassination attempts on Donald Trump until the President and the vice President and you pick a different word to describe Trump other than threat? Peter, if anything from this administration, I actually completely disagree with the premise of your question, the question that you're asking.

It is also incredibly dangerous in the way that you're asking it because American people are watching. So she's scared. She's scared about what she should be saying. Yeah, because now all of a sudden it's like putting it back onto them and saying, you know, that's an issue saying you're asking this, you're kind of blaming me for this. Her party and her candidate and their White House and her own microphone, that word is coming out.

She had just said threat. This is why they don't like Donald Trump's rhetoric, but he's the one getting shot at over the words that they use as he's a threat to democracy, he's a threat to the Constitution. And they've been pounding that along so hard that MAGA, you know, needs to go to reeducation camps. Who do you think it's like, well, and you know what they'll say every time? They're going to say as a crazy kid, this is a crazy person down in Florida. Who do you recruit to do crazy things like try to kill a President?

Crazy people, right? It's not the most sane people that even bad actors would recruit. Who do you think terrorists recruit to become suicide bombers? They recruit people who are vulnerable.

They recruit people whose families are in bad situations or individuals who have found themselves in very bad situations. And that's in, again, we're talking about Islamic terror. They still use the same strategy, vulnerable people. That's why you say, well, why isn't everybody in ISIS becoming a suicide attacker if they believe this is the greatest thing? That's because they use the vulnerable. They use those who feel like they've done something wrong and need to atone for it to carry out these horrific acts. Same thing goes when you're talking about these shooters. And yet we go by after two, three days and acts like, oh, these are just one-offs.

How many one-offs do we have to have? There's another clip I think we need to play from Wolf Blitzer on CNN just, was it a day or two ago? Yesterday.

So yesterday this happened. This is with Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, again, to show you that the rhetoric is not changing. And in fact, it may be getting worse. And at the same time, Trump is blaming the latest assassination attempt against him on Democratic rhetoric that he says is a threat to democracy in our country.

How do you respond to him on that? Well, I think that he has been the most inflammatory person, and in fact, Democratic rhetoric has not escalated in any way in recent months, hasn't escalated in any way. He has always been a threat to democracy.

We've always said that. I mean, back to the same verbiage of threat to democracy, of course, yeah, maybe it hasn't gotten worse. Someone doesn't hear something once and then go act. This is slow-rolling people who really get, like you said, who are not well. And how do you take people from saying, I hate this person, to saying, I'm going to kill this person, and I don't care if I get killed or have to spend the rest of my life in jail. You know, I know this is almost like a suicide mission. Yeah, becoming a martyr for their own heads. Right, a martyr for this cause, because he wanted to film the whole thing, you know. And whether it's the kid in Pennsylvania and whether it's the guy, the older guy in Florida, they are following what they think are directions that they're hearing.

They think they're hearing directions. I'm not saying political rhetoric, by the way, cannot be tough. No, I mean, Donald Trump is always going to be tough. And he's got some of the toughest political rhetoric, but when you demonize your opponent as an enemy of the state, as like a kind of a disease or something that is, again, foreign almost. Like, they don't want to ever talk about the fact that we've got the Chinese influence in our country, or they love talking about foreign actors, like the foreign actors calling in all the threats, but then they kind of ignore that issue in Springfield, Ohio.

Now that that's not crazy MAGA people, but probably China and Russia and other countries. Yeah, we'll definitely break that down coming up a little later. You know, all of that has come up.

You know what I'm saying, though? It's like, they only acknowledge it, now they're hiding behind podiums, but I think this is what they've decided. They're not going to change. They've doubled down on it. Yeah, they've got 40-something days.

There's no reason to adjust now. We're going to take some more calls coming up. We have a second half hour of the broadcast. If you don't get it on your local station, find us broadcasting live each and every day from noon to one Eastern time. And again, throughout the day, replay it on our podcast.

You can find that at ACLJ.org, on YouTube, Rumble, X, wherever, Facebook, wherever you get your podcasts, wherever you get your broadcasts, you can find us there. Make sure to join us and subscribe. Again, second half hour coming up.

Make sure you're a part of that conversation. We take just a one-minute break here, a very short break, and we'll be right back. Again, support the work of the ACLJ.

If you become an ACLJ champion today, your first gift is doubled at ACLJ.org. 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. 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. Do have a new update for you. I hope it's ready for the screen. So we have filed, you may have heard my dad mention it when he was on earlier in the broadcast, our reply brief to the response from the Nevada Democrat Party and the Nevada Secretary of State in the case involving them trying to kick the Green Party off. This reply, it's been delivered to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Look, do we have it on the screen? Maybe explain what that means, because we're replying to a reply to a reply. So we file a brief at the U.S. Supreme Court, and that's because this case had been adjudicated all the way through Nevada to the U.S. Supreme Court of Nevada. Okay, so we filed an initial brief. Then Justice Kagan, who is the circuit justice. So the justices, there's the 13 circuits of the United States.

The justices divide those up. Because she's the circuit justice, you take that and you send your requested, or you file your brief with her. It's almost like a cert petition slash, you're asking them to take some kind of action. So it actually says in there, this is both a cert petition and also a request to vacate her, which is basically to take action without no oral argument. She then asked for a briefing from the Nevada Secretary of State and the Nevada Democrat Party. And that briefing had to be in by Tuesday at 4 p.m., and it was delivered by Tuesday at 4 p.m. The Supreme Court rules are kind of silent on if you're the party who goes from the state Supreme Court, like we are, to the U.S. Supreme Court, do you get an automatic reply?

It's kind of silent. So what you hear is, if you want to reply, you better do it quickly. So what do we do? Well, these came in at around 4 p.m. Eastern time. Yesterday, our reply is already in from the ACLJ representing our client. There it is on the screen. It's been filed with, I mean, you're fresh, you're seeing it as I'm seeing it right now.

It's on this show. But that is our team. And so, again, that was put together by our team, basically working all through the night last night because you were just starting to reply to something that you received late afternoon.

So what does that team look like? You're talking about a big group of people working on these things. You have to have a— Well, at least, I mean, probably eight attorneys total, four of which are putting it together the entire time, and I'd say an additional four who are reviewing it constantly so that when the final edits go through, you can hit the button and deliver it. So, yeah, you've got upwards of eight, probably even more close to 10, eyes on it. Yes, I want people just to understand, as they give to the ACLJ, as they become ACLJ champions, that is people who are locked in. That's not including all the ancillary people that are involved in it.

Of course, all the people in our production team, they have to put on this show each and every day. It's a massive effort to get all of this going and to continue on the work of the U.S. Supreme Court. The tables you've got to include, the appendices that you have to include. All of that, we have teams working on that while they're simultaneously editing other edits that have come through. And so, again, it shows you what we're capable of doing at the American Center for Law and Justice because of the resources you make available to us. And, by the way, that's not the only work we're doing at the ACLJ. It's not like the ACLJ somehow shuts down. It's actually, again, it's a team. That team is on it, and everything else moves forward.

Yeah, there's other teams working on other cases all the time. And, look, if you want to support the work, this is a great time to do it. When we get back, we're going to have Rick Grinnell joining us, but I want to encourage you right now to, number one, give us a call if you want to be on the air. We've got a few lines open right now.

This is a great time. 1-800-684-3110. But I do want to encourage you, if you've ever considered becoming an ACLJ champion, over 21,000 of you have. An ACLJ champion is someone that gives on a monthly recurring basis at any level.

I think minimum maybe $5 because of processing fees. So anything over that, you become an ACLJ champion. You can obviously cancel any time at that recurring donation, but it is tax deductible. And, most importantly, really brand new, a brand new feature we have right now is your first gift will be doubled if you become a champion today.

You can scan the QR code. You can go to ACLJ.org right now. If you give $50, say, I'm going to pledge to give $50 a month, that becomes $100 for your first time.

Now, obviously, you're not being charged that. That is someone on the other side, another ACLJ supporter, ready to unlock an additional donation to match your first donation. So do that right now. I encourage you.

Go to ACLJ.org. Again, Rick Grinnell is going to be joining us in the next segment, and phone lines are open for you. 1-800-684-3110. We'll be right back. All right. Welcome back to Secula. Rick Grinnell is joining us.

Rick, I want to go right into it. I don't even want to call it an interview. President Trump participated. It was kind of bizarre, to say the least. But Harris, I'm sure she'll try to claim it's some kind of interview setting because she received questions from moderators.

And, I mean, for us, I don't think it went well. She also just had some really bizarre answers to the questions she received. One was directly about the Secret Service protection of President Trump. Let's play this for everybody because I want to make sure Rick hears it, too.

And then where she takes it, which is, again, it's ignoring the actual question, even from a friendly questioner. Do you have full confidence in the Secret Service to protect all of you? I do. Do you feel safe, you and your family?

I do. But, I mean, you can go back to Ohio. Not everybody has Secret Service. And there are far too many people in our country right now who are not feeling safe.

I mean, I look at Project 2025 and I look at, you know, like, the don't say gay laws coming out of Florida. Members of the LGBTQ community don't feel safe right now. Immigrants, or people with an immigrant background don't feel safe right now. Women don't feel safe right now. And so, yes, I feel safe.

I have Secret Service protection. But that doesn't change my perspective on the importance of fighting for the safety of everybody in our country. So, Rick, on the one side, we now know that those bomb threats that came into Ohio from the Ohio governor, they've done the work there, they took it seriously, were all by foreign actors.

And so they all came out by foreign actors. They weren't Americans making those threats. That's point one. Point two is, it's almost like she went through it in so many different groups of people that no one in our country is safe except for her. And she has Secret Service.

But if you're Donald Trump and you have Secret Service, you may not actually be safe because you're still getting shot at. Wait, first of all, the headline is, she's in charge. She just listed a whole group of Americans that don't feel safe. Well, she's in charge.

What does that say? You know, we keep talking about turning the page. Let's turn the page. Well, we have to turn the page on the fact that people don't feel safe right now under this administration.

This is the first point. The second point is she throws around Project 25 and these don't say gay laws like the Russian dossier. This is a scandal that the Democrats are pushing, just like the Russian dossier, which turned out to be totally Hillary Clinton, trumped up fake charges against Donald Trump. This whole Project 2025 is is another Russian dossier. It's phony and they keep pushing it and they keep getting fact checked. But it's like they don't care that they're just pushing phony Russian disinformation again.

And this time it's in the form of Project 2025. So whatever, whatever keywords they can throw out there, it does appear, though, Rick, like the rhetoric, it's not going to stop. I mean, they keep getting asked, Karine Jean-Pierre gets asked about why are you using words like threat?

And then she said, I can't believe, you know, Peter Ducey, you even asked me that question because you're putting us all in danger. But yet it is this is not like Donald Trump doesn't use tough rhetoric. But the rhetoric that they have decided to use to describe Donald Trump specifically is now rhetoric that we're seeing play out in dangerous events. I mean, that's just reality. People aren't making up. They're seeing it with their own eyes. It doesn't matter what news channel you're watching.

They may try to play it down like they did with the second event, but eventually the truth starts coming out on all these networks. Look, I was the U.S. ambassador to Germany. One basic thing I learned is there is nothing, nothing that compares to the Holocaust. Shame on the left for trying to pretend like there is something similar. When they talk about Nazi language, Nazis or the Holocaust to compare to their political enemies, it's shameful.

The Nazis killed six and a half million Jews. This is not even comparable. They need to stop using this language to go after their political opponents. That's all they're trying to do is score political points. I mean, this is another time in this forum, Rick, where again, it's like Harris, maybe this is how it felt as the vice President to Joe Biden.

Like he weren't even working or you weren't even, he had nothing, you weren't even doing anything because he couldn't really like keep it together, know what he was even going on. But listen to the second bite from that conference. Is the price of groceries still too high? Yes. Do we have more work to do?

Yes. And I will tell you, I do believe that I offer a new generation of leadership for our country that is about, in particular, turning the page on an era that sadly has shown us attempts by some to incite fear, to create division in our country. Again, it's an era that she's been in office as a senator and vice President of the United States, Rick. Look, I think she's going after Joe Biden there. We already know that she called Joe Biden a racist during the primary. And I think that this is her chance to distance herself from Joe Biden. So she's talking about turning the page, a new generation, really a swipe at how old Joe Biden is.

And she's talking about the fact that we don't feel safe in this current environment and she wants to do something different. This is her trying to distance herself from Joe Biden. She can't distance herself from Joe Biden. She was handed the entire nomination because Joe Biden says, give it to Kamala.

There wasn't even a democratic process. So she is going to have to try to distance herself from Joe. But I don't think it's working.

No, I don't either. I mean, I think, Rick, what do you think the response needs to be from the American people that don't, you know, they don't have the opportunities to get to go on TV necessarily. But when they're talking to their friends and family about this kind of rhetoric, and it does feel like, you know, if you use a few support certain candidates, you're putting yourself potentially like in danger of violence right now. I hate that for the country. Well, look, it's the fear on the left that they're trying to pretend that somehow all of these problems now are someone else's fault. It's their fault. They've been in office for three and a half years.

So I think the first point that people have to make is Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have been in office for three and a half years. Why don't we have a closed border? Why don't we have a lower grocery prices, lower gas prices? And why do we have two wars?

They need to answer those questions. Then I think the second point is just compared to Donald Trump's administration, we didn't have an open border. We didn't have these higher prices. People could afford groceries and gas.

And we certainly didn't have two horrific wars, one in Europe and one in the Middle East. Because always we appreciate you joining us on the broadcast and your insight on all of this. Because, again, I think, you know, as again, there's room for tough political rhetoric in our country. There always is room for that, folks. But there's certain times when you see the actions that we've seen.

When you see two assassination attempts, it's almost like the school shootings issue. You keep seeing these things happen over and over. People get not used to it, but you get calloused to it. Numb to it.

You get numb to it. You sort of just say, okay, well, yeah, this is what happens in America. How serious that is. Yeah, exactly.

And I think that when we got to the second one, and of course the success of the fact that the shooter did not get off a round, that really, I think, brought a different perspective than the first one, which was obviously inches away. But there are a lot of questions that are coming in about that. I want to go ahead and take Tim, who's been a hold for a long time.

Tim, you're on the air in Indiana. Go ahead with your question. I just have a quick question.

It's something that I don't know, and I'm hoping you can educate us. What would happen in an election environment like we are right now if the candidate does get assassinated, or let's say they die before the actual election day? Okay, so before election day, you've got the case. So you're saying like these candidates now, they've got the nomination from their party, but they don't make it to election day. Each party has got rules, so it's not automatically J.D. Vance, necessarily, under party rules. Now, again, you can change those party rules every time the party comes together, which is every two years. The Republican Party works it, but they do most of their platform work every four. So the members of the Republican Party, like the committee men and women, likely would have a – there is a policy in place about who to choose that would be the Presidential candidate at that time. So it's not automatically necessarily who has the VP nomination, same for the Democrat Party as well.

It can be, but – Right, it could be, but it's not necessarily the parties get to decide how that is fixed, and that's ultimately the name that appears on the ballot. So thank you for calling in. I would encourage you all to give us a call. We love taking all of your calls in the last segment. We do have a few lines open right now as we just took some calls. So 1-800-684-3110 if you're watching on Rumble.

If you're watching on YouTube, you can obviously comment, but we'd love to hear your voice. So give us a call again at 1-800-684-3110. Once again, I'm going to ask you today to become an ACLJ champion.

That is someone who gives on a monthly recurring basis because your first gift will be doubled. I'll be matched by another incredible ACLJ supporter. You heard our response that we're putting in right now?

The Supreme Court of the United States. You've seen our defense of our colleague Tulsi Gabbard. We now are representing Operation Rescue again after a U.S. Army training ceremony instructed soldiers to view pro-life organizations as terrorist organizations.

We can defeat these attempts to undermine our Constitution. You can be a part of it right now. Be a champion of life, liberty, and freedom. Become an ACLJ champion. And look, if you can't become a monthly recurring donor, make an individual one-time donation. That's obviously incredible. That's what the majority of people do.

But if you can't become a champion, your first gift will be doubled. We'll be taking your calls coming up in the next segment. All right, welcome back to Cinco. We are taking your calls to 1-800-684-3110. In this segment, we try to get to as many calls as possible. Let's do it, Logan. Yeah, first we're going to go to Annabelle in California who is an ACLJ champion.

One of the perks being an ACLJ champion is you get moved up to the front of the line if you call in. So, Annabelle, you haven't been holding for very long compared to some of these others, but you are on the air. Well, what I want to say, and I'll be quick to let others speak. I have this little, I don't know what you'd call it, what's guiding me right now in this country.

And of course, you do fabulous work all around the world. What's guiding me, three elements. One, prayer.

That always comes first in my life. Two, vote. Get out and vote. When I say vote early, it kind of hamstrings them a little bit. Number three, and I consider each part essential.

That's the point I want to make very quickly. Support the ACLJ. You know, I put it all under an umbrella. I know this sounds weird, but they like to play fast and loose in the courtroom, play fast and loose with the Constitution. Fine. I call it, in my mind, a class action suit against tyranny. And I consider supporting the ACLJ, voting for my candidate choice, and praying.

All essential elements. All under. So I ask everybody my words. I know you don't have to go with it. Support the, join the class action suit against tyranny here and around the world. Save our country. Support the ACLJ.

I'm begging you. I would not, when I hear Jay Sekulow's voice, it actually gives me chills. I get scared because I wouldn't want to be on the opposing table. This guy has been there, done that, and everything.

No one is better to help all of those elements come together. And that's all I want to say, and God bless you. Thank you, Annabelle, for your call. We always appreciate it. Annabelle calls in, and I think she makes our ads for us, so we appreciate it.

I don't even have to do a pitch. So, Annabelle, we really, obviously, always appreciate it. She's an ACLJ champion, and thank you so much. All right, we'll continue on and take some more phone calls. Let's go to Wendy, who is calling in Florida on Line 1, listening on Sirius XM.

That's cool. Wendy, you're on the air. Hey. So, of course, I have to follow a caller like Annabelle, and you know what? Because of her, I'm going to start being an ACLJ champion. Here we go. Donate monthly. Thank you.

And I just wanted to let you know that I love listening to your show. I'm wondering if you heard this, that Kamala Harris wants to change the name of USA to BRA, which stands for Banana Republic of America. So, feel free to plagiarize that, because it so fits. She's like fingernails on a chalkboard to listen to, just cringes. Yeah, it's all cringy. Yeah, I mean, there are these phones. We played those interview bites.

I think those were, or you called an interview, the panel that was happening. When you have every three weeks an assassination attempt on a former President, though, you are getting into banana republic territory for real. Of course, yeah, it feels that way. If you look in other countries, in developing world countries, or failed states as well, so states that might have been one time very successful, but have crumbled, this is what happens. Political violence becomes extremely normal. And I think we live with a little bit of blinders on, because in the majority of our lifetime, there have been assassination attempts, but not regularly. If you actually think about when they have happened, but if they did happen, they've been very early, like the Ronald Reagan ones, very early in our lives. So, we haven't really experienced that, like our parents' generation did with Kennedy, and previous administrations did with plenty of others throughout history.

So, it's not that uncommon. No, it's not that uncommon in the developed, but the earliest assassination, we were a developing country. And then we saw, I think we saw JFK posed a new threat to the elite in America, because of the fact that a Catholic, an Irish Catholic, could become President of the United States, literally. And then we saw the first Islamic terror through RFK, and RFK Jr.'s father, that attack.

So, usually it is kind of like you can track kind of historic moments happening around the world to those. But when you've got a former President facing this, this is when you actually get into, I think, the worst territory. He's a current candidate, but former President. These are not individuals going after the current President of the United States for something they've done. All those were current Presidents.

When you can be on the top of the list as a former candidate, you are living in a place where the rhetoric has gotten out of control. All right, we're going to continue on and take some more calls. Let's go to Pat, who's calling in Maryland on Line 5. Pat, you're on the air.

Hey, guys. Thank you so much for all you do. God bless you.

Thank you. My question is, what can we do to get a Republican governor or a highly ranked state Republican to do the same thing as governors Abbott and Youngkin did in Texas and Virginia and get these illegals off the registration voter rolls? Yeah, I think that, listen, you got to go state by state. But I mean, the issue is you've got to have, one, Republican leaders in your state, and half the states don't have that. So they're not going to necessarily do that.

I mean, they are not going to do that. They're not going to purge voter rolls unless there's law that requires them to do so. So maybe you could get it through if you've got a state legislature that's Republican, even if the governor's not.

So what do you have to do? Well, in these jury elections coming up, there's going to be plenty of gubernatorial races, too. You've got to elect people who are going to do that.

Now, each state is going to have different rules on who is actually able to kick that off. But what you do is you get a law passed saying, we do this every so many years. Our state is going to go through the voter rolls every year about people who've moved, people who should not be on. It's not just illegal immigrants who somehow got put on the ballot, maybe because they were allowed to get IDs at one time or driver's licenses at those states. And it's people who've also passed away, people who have moved. We saw under the COVID voting how bad the voting rolls were because I got three live ballots. And that's over 10 years of places I live. Yeah, from different states.

So I have been cleared in places that were a decade old. Yeah. I think we all learned a lot during that. Let's go to last call of the day. Let's go to Bonnie. She's calling it North Carolina. You're on the air.

Hi, everyone. I just wanted to call because I feel like Trump needs to target specific areas and age groups that he's not pulling highest in, like for instance, tip the gen Z gen X, let them know I stand for you use a tagline to pull those young people in your face with trying to start your career. Can I afford rent?

I'm a young couple trying to get married in the cross of that and rent and car payments and student loans. I stand for you to senior citizens. Now with social security, I'm not going to be taxing your social security.

I stand for you. He needs to bring it to a personal of how he's standing for that age group, that person. I think there's a lot that can be said to those different generations.

You said, whether it's the senior community, whether it's the brand new voters, those that are 18 to 22, maybe never voted, haven't voted yet. It is harder to activate those bases. So you see a little less time spent talking to them and maybe you're correct.

Maybe there's a way to do that. Well, I encourage you, Bonnie, I appreciate you for calling in and giving your feedback on that. That's going to do it for today's show. I do encourage you also to become an ACLJ champion. This is a really critical time for us. You heard all of our legal fights that are going on right now.

All of our media fights as well. You can be a part of it. Join us right now. Become an ACLJ champion and when you do become a new ACLJ champion, your first gift will be doubled. That's something we just were able to start offering this week.

So that's brand new. So if you ever thought about becoming a champion, like one of our callers did, this is a great time to do it because your gift is effectively doubled. So do it right now.

Go to ACLJ.org. Click champions, become a champion. Click that recurring button. It's real easy. You can cancel anytime.

It's tax deductible. Be a part of a bigger movement. Be a champion of life, liberty, and freedom and have your gift doubled today at ACLJ.org. We'll talk to you tomorrow. Thanks for listening.