Caption: White House Issues Criminal Warning to Democrats

On today's show, the White House just issued a criminal warning to Democrats. Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever. This is Sekulow. We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments.

For call one eight hundred six eight four three one one zero. And now, your host Logan Secula. Welcome to Secula once again. We are live and taking your calls at one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. Of course, it is Veterans Day, so.

Of course, our thoughts and prayers are always with military and the military families.

So, of course, we will be talking about that as well. President Trump, right now as we speak, is speaking at Arlington right now, you know, talking about the U.S. servicemen and women and you know their families, and it's a really an amazing time and a celebration of veterans, you know, in. We can't lose, you know, that part of what America is. We got to make sure that we always are, you know, focused on what's important.

And of course, the military and military families are always very close to the top of all of our minds, really all the time. But of course, today on Veterans Day, but of course, that doesn't stop the news from moving. That doesn't stop our work from continuing on. And this is another interesting moment. You may have remembered as the election results were coming in, there was a statement made by ranking member.

But Robert Garcia essentially saying, "Lawyer up!" Right, right. I mean, that was that. It was simple as that. On X, just said, "Lawyer up, Congressman Robert Garcia." I mean, really opposing a threat to conservatives, to Republicans, and now we've actually seen some pushback here as things have started to heat up, and what that could look like, and kind of a stark warning. To Democrats, to don't play your cards like this.

To where it's going to be all or nothing. We are going to work together. We're going to try to. President Trump even said that in a lot of his statements, saying, you know what, now that I don't control, it's time we actually start working together. We're going to negotiate things out.

But that is not what the other side has seemingly decided to go with. And at the same time, now we have a statement coming out from the White House saying, you know what. Be careful what you wish for. Right. This is from the Office of White House Counsel, and it's fascinating letter that was sent to Ranking Member Robert Garcia, who will be the expected chair of the House Oversight Committee.

So he will be the one leading the House Oversight Committee in the new Congress, right in the new year. And what the White House Counsel's office is saying is basically putting them on notice, saying, "I write to remind you of the foundational limits that the Constitution." Imposes on congressional investigations and subpoenas, which you and members of the new Congress have evinced a clear intent to transgress. We'll go into this in the next segment. But we also have all these statements from all these members of Congress that are basically saying things like they're going to hand out subpoenas like candy. There's going to use enough paper to level a forest.

All of these things go to show that their intent isn't. Oversight, their intent is, as some say, to make individuals squirm, or maybe even to convince people to not serve their country. As Alyssa Slotkin said, we're going to get into all that and what this means with the White House Counsel's office basically saying we're not going to be afraid of you, and you better not cross a line here. Yeah, I mean, the letter says threats to executive branch officials designed to deter from the. Public service or processed, designed merely to abuse or instill fear in the recipient may cross the line into blatant criminality.

We'll discuss that and more coming up. What do you think about this? And again, also if you have any thoughts or messages here on Veterans Day, I encourage you to call in today. We'll be talking about that as well. One eight hundred six eight four three one one zero.

But speaking of standing strong, the ACLJ continues on in our fight. It doesn't change depending on who is in charge in terms of what. Washington D.C. That doesn't change the mission here, but it only doesn't change because you continue to support.

So we're we're fighting back. Where that's in court in Washington D.C. or here in the media, and right now during this month during our Stand Strong Challenge, all gifts are doubled.

So again, during the Stand Strong Challenge, every gift when you make a donation, say it's twenty bucks, it becomes worth forty bucks, and so on and so on. Donate today at aclj.org/stand or scan the QR code that you see on the screen right now. That's at aclj.org/stand. When we get back, we're going to continue and start really taking your calls and comments as they come in at one eight hundred six eight four three one one zero one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. It's going to be a packed show.

What I was going to say, be a packed show. But I want you to be a part of it today. Once again, one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. Give us a call during the break here. We'll get some calls coming up shortly.

Welcome back to Secular. We are going to take your calls and comments again, Veterans Day. But it's one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. We kind of want to really dive into this a little bit more. We have a lot of great clips to play.

That really set up what happened and what is leading to this, where you have the Republicans now, you have the White House pushing back, saying you gotta be careful, Democrats, what you wish for when you start sort of throwing out these threats to essentially everyone for causes that really are not legal issues. And if so, then you will be held liable criminally yourself. And we do have some setup for this.

Well, I know you wanted to play. Yeah, I think we should start with this because this was. Before the election, this was Senator Slotkin from Michigan at the University of Chicago Institute of Politics, talking on a panel about what they want to do when they win Congress back. This is bite one, and then I'm going to kind of respond with what is in this letter from the White House Counsel to the Oversight Committee Chair or incoming Oversight Committee Chair. Let's go ahead and roll, Alyssa Slotkin, though.

I am into effectiveness, and if we have the House but not the Senate, you know, I don't have a ton of faith that my Republican colleagues are going to have any more strength.

So that's what I'm saying. I want to look at these signature cases and not just focus on the President, but on the people who enabled him. I want young people coming out of school to say, "Should I go work for the Trump administration? Like that sounds fun. I might get an opportunity." I want them to be like, "Lord, that might be buying myself." A ton of problems that I don't want, and so let me avoid participating in that.

I want that deterrence message sent.

So the senator there is saying what her intent is, and that is a deterrence message, not just from individuals. She says she wants to have a couple of key signature cases. That's not just the President, but people who enabled him, and then she says she wants to deter people from working. Give Their their their work in their career over as service to the American people. That's what one of her goals is, and when you also start to see the the lawyer up tweet from Ranking Member Garcia in the while the election results are coming in, then you see this letter from White House Counsel, and there's a couple key portions here I want to for everyone to understand because this is going to be the fight that is coming ahead.

This. This is from the White House Counsel William Sharf, and he says. The Supreme Court has held that investigations conducted solely for the personal aggrandizement of the investigators or to punish those investigated are indefensible. That's Watkins v. United States.

Congressional investigations must further a legitimate legislative task. Congress cannot employ them to exercise powers of criminal prosecution assigned to the executive and the judiciary. That comes from Trump v. Mazars. You may have heard that often.

Because of the involvement of Chief Counsel of the ACLU, Jay Sekulow, in many of those cases back in 2020, then it goes on to say that failure to identify a legitimate legislative purpose in to do so in this context represents a clear abuse of power and an affront to our constitutional system of government and the rule of law. As you mentioned earlier, Logan, it talks about using the legislative process to intimidate and interfere. With the lawful functioning of government, that's what Senator Slotkin was referencing. But here's where it gets really kind of drawing the line in the sand from the White House Counsel's office. Yeah, and I think people need to say real quick before you said this is a letter or a statement.

Where was this? This was presented out to the public.

Well, no, this was sent directly. We are just now getting this, Congressman Garcia. It was sent to Congressman Garcia, saying, "Hey, you better watch out about what." Could be the plans, these grand plans of the Democrats, as they say they're going to hand out subpoenas like candy. They want people to be squirming when they're on the stand. Those all are signaling they just want to punish people for being conservatives or working for President Trump.

But here's the key, because this is where it goes beyond words and where it goes back to the executive power of the administration. Compulsory process is a power Congress has for oversight functions, and only for oversight functions. Abusive threats and public statements about the indiscriminate issuance of subpoenas, along with the threats directed at prospective targets within the administration, make it abundantly clear that any forthcoming investigative process will be deployed to harass and aggrandize rather than advance any legitimate legislative end. Beyond being inconsistent. Would the clear, well-recognized constitutional limits on your investigative functions, threats to executive branch officials designed to deter them from public service—that goes back to what Senator Slotkin was saying—or process designed merely to abuse or instill fear in the recipient may cross the line into blatant.

Criminality.

So the actual Justice Department and White House Counsel, the actual executive function of criminal investigation, not oversight, is what could be at stake here. And then you have to hear from AOC. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, because here's how they're even framing their oversight work. This was just yesterday, so we're not talking about a flashback bite here.

Something that you know we could take out of context. We're talking about directly related to this. She said this bite eight. There are so many criminals in this administration. It's hard to figure out who should be, you know, the order of operations.

There are going to be many, many, many investigations. I imagine many subpoenas, and we have to follow wherever the evidence takes us. They are not. The law enforcement arm of the government—that is the Department of Justice, that is the Federal Bureau of Investigation—who investigates the crimes, and then the DOJ that prosecutes the crimes. All of these statements, and we have plenty.

We'll get into more, but even lawyer up from Garcia and Slotkin saying signature cases in these next two years. Those cases are. Are they going to go to to the Attorney General Blanche and say, "Here's a criminal referral." Go after the administration when they've been so blatantly political about these prosecutions. Here's where they're going to get themselves in trouble, Logan. They're going to start making their own base think.

Wait, where's the accountability? You promised prosecutions.

Well, look, and I think we can look into that too. Even had Pete Hegseth's process of being impeached already thrown out. We're going to talk about that coming up. Essentially, that is was dead in the water. You know, immediately where they thought they may actually have some leverage, but no, that is not.

The case we'll get into that coming up, and if you see this, though, of course that was Thomas Massey, a quote-unquote Republican, doing it. We all know how he has been siding the last little bit of time here. And again, there'll be some disappointment there, I'm sure, from a lot of Democrats. Can you continue to do that? But this letter, this statement, too, Robert Garcia, essentially is a, you know what?

Two can play at this game. If you're going to start threatening us, don't expect us to play nice. And we can hear that we can push back on this. There was even more.

Well, I think with CNN with Stephen Lynch. Yeah, this is once again the they feel so empowered at this point. But this is Congressman Stephen Lynch from Massachusetts on with Cape. Baldwin on CNN, and this is in response to that letter, bite fourteen. If what I'm reading, if this is a, if this letter, if this new, if this position from the White House is now meaning that the administration may go after you, you all Democrats who are conducting investigations in the new Congress, what do you do about that?

Come at me, bro. You know, I just think we are so well situated to do our jobs. What they're saying is, don't do your jobs, don't do oversight, don't check on the administration of of the government. Obviously, we we pass laws, and and the President habitually violates those laws.

So we believe we have the the right, and we have been empowered to express. In the Constitution, to make sure that the President obeys the law, this is pretty basic. Pretty basic, there, well. I don't think he understands fully what oversight means. Typically, it's legislative oversight to see if they need to pass a new law.

I do love that accent. It's like we are listening to Ted the Bear, like as a senator, come at me, bro. Come at me, bro. I mean, I do love it. I mean, they come across so out of touch and nerdy when they try to be cool.

That's the best, isn't it? Come at me, bro. No, I'm not dealing with. Massachusetts, will you're going to end up bloody on the street? I'm going to be careful.

That I don't think he can find his way down to Tennessee. You know what I'm saying? There's a good buffer. And look, there's also now a response to the response to the response. This is happening.

This comes again from Robert Garcia. He said, "It appears Donald Trump has something to hide." Let's be clear: Congress authority comes from Article One of the Constitution, not from the permission of the White House. Congress has wide latitude to conduct investigations and oversight. And authority inherent to the power in the power. Legislate well, and so once again, he's saying he has something to hide.

This is going to go on and on. This is going to be a push back and forth. I do think, do I think that they are going to criminally charge any of the members of Congress for abuse of power for these hearings? No, they may try, but I do like that they're putting them on notice because the entirety of, and we have more statements. We'll play them in the next segment as well because I know a lot of you tuned in for this.

But all of this is. Happening at the same time today is Veterans Day. President Trump has been speaking for at least the last 20 minutes or so live right now at Arlington National Cemetery. Of course, speaking to all the different families, all of the military that is there right now. This is a day we should be spending time thinking about that.

But instead, we're thinking about essentially the the push and pull of the government deciding to let's let's cause a little havoc. Let's unravel each other just for the heck of it. Because again, like you said.

Well, this is the political win they want, but it may not be the political win they end up getting.

Well, and once again, if they continue down this path of trying to make people think that they are the Justice Department, that they themselves are going to prosecute members of the administration, especially during this two-year time period, then they are fooling and lying to their constituents that just put them in power, and it's not going to turn out well. Phone lines open for you: one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. I issue a challenge. At me, bro. Give me a call.

One eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. I want to hear your voice today on the air. We'll be right back. Welcome back to Sekulow. Phone lines are open for you at one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten.

A lot of you are just joining it now, so we need to probably restate this. We see a lot of people commenting saying, "What's happening here? What is this?" That's right. When you read the headline, the White House issues a criminal warning to Democrats. Actually, response to the kind of Yeah, flagrant messages that have been posted online or been said in the press, essentially saying we're subpoenaing everyone.

We're coming after you, regardless. Really, if you had anything to do with any of this, don't worry. The next two years are not going to be fun for you. And the White House responded, essentially saying, "You be careful." Be careful what you wish for. What you could be threatening, which is essentially bullying people to not want to do this or do their jobs properly, could be criminal as well.

And then, of course, there was a response. Then to that response, saying, "Well, then it looks like President Trump's got something to hide." And we went back and forth and back and forth. And that's sadly going to be a little bit of how at least the initial months of this new government is going to be, because again, they're trying to score some points.

Now, what's going to happen? When they cannot succeed with these points, what happens when you try to impeach a Pete Hegseth, and that gets shut down within 24 hours? What happens when you make these kind of big proclamations and then you can't proceed with any of them? We'll see how the American people respond. How will the voters who voted for something new and look, they won, they won, they wanted something new.

But that doesn't mean this process is going to be anything easy. And you now have at least a very active Trump administration responding after President Trump's original statements, just essentially saying, "Yeah, we're going to work together. We're going to. I'm good at working across the aisle." Of course, you know people will say that's ridiculous. President Trump's never been able to do that, but we all know, actually, especially in the first term, that that was not the case.

Well, and once again, here's what's wild about all this: you have the Oversight Committee promising criminal prosecutions, effectively, which. They don't have the ability to do. You also have, like you mentioned, President Trump saying maybe I could work with them on immigration if they didn't think, hey, I just we just have to you know push back on everything this administration does. Maybe they could get something done. Maybe this could be their window.

But instead, here's what they're going after. This is the memorandum to the leader sent to the incoming, which they expect to be Speaker of the House Hakeem Jeffries. They say to leader Jeffries, "This is from the Cost of Living Healthcare Working Group." So once again, they said they ran on on on cost of living and etc. This is what they sent to him about what their first hundred days' priority should be. The first one is to repeal Trump and Republicans' health care cuts.

And remember, those were actually COVID enhancements to things that were not supposed to be permanent. And then they flipped it on him and said, "Look, he's cutting health care." But then the second thing is reestablish a federal right to abortion. Abortion care—that's their hundred-hour priority. The first hundred hours of being the hundred twentieth Congress, they want to go back to COVID-era Medicare and Medicaid and ACA premium credits, and then they want to re-establish a federal right to abortion care. Tell me how that actually is going to affect the cost of living for Americans that they said they ran on.

No, it's just going back to their agenda. It goes back to pushing back on this lawless Supreme Court that overturned Roe v.ersus Wade, and then you're going to have that being their legislative agenda, just abortion again, and then you're going to have the oversight committee saying we're going to prosecute this administration, and Senator Slotkin saying we're going to have signature case. Says where, where are you going to have this? They're just lying to their constituents that just put them there. That's the problem.

I think that most people on the right and the left get very infuriated by their who they elect. Is that they're still so tone deaf? Is it no? Maybe Americans. If you said you ran on cost of living and affordability, which is what they said they ran on.

Maybe they want you to try and do something with that. Yeah, try something different. I did want to pose a question to you if you're listening right now, because we'll have a second half hour of the show, by the way, after this segment.

Some of you don't get on your local radio stations, but if you're watching online, just stick around here. We're here. Or go to aclj. dot org. You can find us on YouTube and Rumble.

We're broadcasting live there as always, the full hour of the show. But I want to pose a question to you as well. We saw yesterday Jim Jordan be selected now to represent the House minority. What do you think of? About that, as Jim Jordan, as essentially the future leader of the Republican Party within the House.

This, of course, comes at a time where you have the current speaker of the house deciding he no longer would like. He didn't even run. Decided he was done.

So again, Mike Johnson is has decided he's done.

Now I think Mike's been great. I think he's been a good friend of ours, good friend of this show. I'll be sad to see him go. But what do you feel about Jim Jordan now taking the spot?

Well, and I also think to that point that shows real leadership on Mike Johnson's part because he became speaker. Of the House, it was not. He wasn't even the the headlining name, but became the Speaker of the House at a time where there was a lot of of tumult in the Republican Party. But has done an effective job of corralling the caucus when he had a very small majority, a very very razor thin margin, to be able to move forward the agenda of the President, the executive branch, as well as the congressional agenda. But then you have this as well, where he now sees.

Time of you know what we lost the house. It is time for me to pass leadership. He's not doing the traditional cling to power for a leader within the House of Representatives. Phone lines are open for you. I love your thoughts about that.

One eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. That's one eight hundred six eight four three one one zero. Again, should we also set up the Pete Hegseth situation? Because Pete Hegseth, of course, they filed articles of impeachment. They did not go very far.

Aaron Burnett discussed this on. CNN with Representative Benny Thompson. That's right.

So, what we saw was that it failed the that vote, the motion to table passed.

So, the none of the Republicans that Thomas Massie thought would defect and and move forward this impeachment, none of that worked out for him. And, but don't worry, the Democrats have a plan by twelve. Do you feel your own party cost you the chance to move forward with Hegseth's impeachment, given that that impeachment was led by a Republican?

Well, I think it's a problem. Obviously, it came up. If we'd had our members there, the outcome could have very well been different. But there'll be other opportunities. I think the record is clear in terms of the Department of Defense and the mismanagement, and the fact that we're at a war that Congress had nothing to do with approving.

So clearly, there are some things that we will address in the near future.

So once again, he's trying to to say, "Don't worry, we'll have another shot at it when we have all of our new members of Congress in place." So they're not even giving up on that. Please don't. Connect us to Thomas Massey. We'd appreciate. We wanted it to fail.

We didn't want him to be leading this. And look, he's only got a few months left. Impeachment takes some time. Phone lines are open for you at one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. As we go to break, some of you I know will inevitably have to check out here at the half hour mark.

I do want to encourage you. If you've ever thought about supporting the work of the ACLJ, now is the time to do it. It's aclj dot org slash stand or scan the QR code you see on the screen right now. Look, this show exists and our legal work exists. Without ever sending you a bill.

If you're one of our lawyers, if you want to listen, watch this show, you want to share the clips with your friends, you want to read all the great content we put on the website, none of it's at a paywall, and that is only because, of course, we have to financially support our team. They got families to feed. We go to aclj.org. You make a donation today, and all donations right now, because we have a great group of core donors, are ready to match it.

So we only can offer that for a few months a year. This is one of those months. And the last two months of the year are always the biggest months for us in terms of setting the budget.

So we've got to set up what next year is going to look like. Where do you want us to see us go in 2027? We need your support today.

So I encourage you go to aclj.org during our Stand Strong Challenge, where every gift, tax-deductible gift, will be doubled. Dollar for dollar, I need you to do it today at aclj dot org. And if you can become an ACLJ champion, someone that gives on a monthly basis, just opt into that. We'll be back second half hour coming up. Less than a minute break.

Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever. This is Sekulow. And now your host, Logan Sekulow. All right, second half hour of Sekulow kicks off right now. Will Haynes in studio.

Is Rick Cornell joining us in the next segment? In the next segment, yes, we'll have Rick joining us. With John, so means we want to take calls from you coming up towards the end of the show.

So one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. But let's kick it off with a phone call. It's been a little bit here. Let's go to D in California. D, go ahead.

Yes. I am just wanting to say that I think President Trump and the Republicans are being the bigger person because in the first in his first term he could have gone after Hillary and these others, but they didn't. And so because he knew the country needed to unite and not this division.

Now we're seeing this division with the Democrats coming up all over again and. Hopefully, people will see that. Yeah, I mean, we can remember D back in the early days of the Trump campaign, 2016. There was obviously a lot of those "lock her up" chants and those kind of things. And then quickly after the President won, said, "You know what?

We did that essentially by showing it at the polls." And then he said, "At that point, let's move on." Now we've seen some of that pushback, and we've seen people had issues with that, said this was just playing politics. But this is what happens when the gloves start to come off on both sides here, right? And I know that a lot of the criticism of the administration from the left has been, oh, he's targeting people like James Comey. Oh, he's targeting people like Adam Schiff. He's he's targeting these individuals like Letitia James.

And what you start to see is that. They they say that that's such a great constitutional crisis.

Now they're saying we're going to prosecute people, even though we aren't the Justice Department.

So it's both sides playing politics with this narrative here. I do think what James Comey did to America, to our Constitution, was egregious and criminal, and should have been prosecuted a long time ago. We'll see if there is the amount of convictability in the court system for what he's done, but. Those were things where he was weaponizing intelligence, going after constitutional offices, and it was egregious and and messing with our elections. And yet, once again, he didn't go after James Comey, other than firing him in the first term, as D is talking about.

Now, has he gone after people more? Has the Justice Department gone after people in this term? Yes, much more than definitely than in the first term. But at the same time, I think the American people are probably getting tired of it from both sides because now you have the Democrats try to throw him in jail before he ran and won. Then.

Won election and now he goes after James Comey and whether it's legitimate or not, people are just seeing this as political. And what do we have now? Instead of the Democrats deciding, let's move on from this, they're they're fooling their base by saying we're going to hold these people accountable because they're criminals. That makes you think they're going to put them in jail. They have no authority to do that.

They can't do that. They're not the Justice Department. You take the good, you take the bad, and that's just the facts. It's just you take the both, and then you have right. The facts, life.

Phone lines are open for you at one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. We'll be back in just a minute with Rick Grinnell. We did open up two phone lines, so one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. I also want to get your thoughts. Like I said, Jim Jordan now takes over as now maybe House Minority Leader, but we'll be leading the Republicans.

How do you feel about that? He's been a central voice for the GOP for quite a while now. And to see him now taking those reins, did he win pretty handily? It's a secret ballot. Oh, we don't know.

Yeah, you know what? You learn something new. The facts of life. One eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. I do want to hear from you today.

Give me a call. We get back. We're going to talk to Rick Cornell, not only about that, but of course, this situation as Washington D.C. bubbles up continually, and we got some work here at the ACLJ to go over as well.

So stay tuned for that. Again, I'm going to tell you about it. I'm going to keep talking about it. Our stand strong challenge, where every gift is doubled throughout this month. And look, it has been a rough economic year for a lot of people, and I understand that.

And I am not taking I am not taking that lightly. Does it affect our budgets? Of course, it affects everyone's budgets.

So, I encourage you, if you can. And you have the means. This is a great time to do it. If you do not have the means to support financially, don't let that be a deterrent. Look at the incredible content we're providing; it's absolutely free without a paywall.

Send that to your friends. You are on YouTube. Hit that subscribe button. It does mean a lot to us as well. Those are great free ways you can get involved.

When I look at the numbers right now, I know about half of you watching on YouTube alone are not subscribed.

So if you thought, man, there's no way I can't financially support right now, I can't give $10. I understand that. If you can, great, but if you can't, I understand. Hit that subscribe button. That does a lot for us as well.

We'll be right back. Welcome back to Sekulow. A couple lines open for you, just one line open right now, but they'll open up one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. Because after we hear from Rick, I always want to hear from you. One eight hundred six eight four thirty one tens.

Go ahead and get in line. We move our attention now, obviously, to the election, the election results, and some of the strategies that came from the Democrats to have this really historic victory that they had. Where do we turn to for this advice? We look to Van Jones at CNN, who made a pretty interesting proclamation.

Well, that's right.

So this is yesterday on CNN. We'll play it for people because this is what Van Jones said was really the reason they were able to unify a message and get people out to vote. This is Bite Thirteen.

Now it can be told. How did we win the narrative on affordability? With just these nice little Democrats out there running for office and going to no, the Republicans never figured out what we were doing. There's something called the American Accountability Network. Tens of thousands of online humans, not bots, coordinated to make the affordability message a winning message online.

Thirty-two point five million people hit on Instagram every day. 88.8 88.8 million hit on Twitter X every single day. And 185 million Facebook hits every single day, and they never figured out. The Republicans could not understand. It wasn't bots; it was actual human beings.

The most effective online organizing campaign called the American Accountability Network flew under the radar screen. Never been told. And they were talking.

So right there, Rick, he is he saying that they did this.

Now I'd be curious to see if these these non-bot farms were in like Russia, Ukraine. Or, but maybe we don't even need to investigate that. But regardless, he's making a claim that they had organic reach with with ten thousand real people that were pushing this affordability narrative, coordination, and they coordinated and they worked. And there we go. There's the story of the midterms.

What are your thoughts on this?

Well, first of all, let's be very clear that that they didn't push an affordability narrative. They pushed the word affordability. There was no substance. There was no policy. They had no ideas.

Look, this is really easy to do, and it's not like the Republicans didn't know that they were doing this. They were pushing the word affordability because they were in the opposition. When you're in the opposition, you don't have to come up with ideas. The electorate just gets outraged, and people are outraged about affordable products. And therefore, when someone says affordability, affordability, you're like, yes, I'm hurting, and so it's just the out.

Rage machine that is vapid and devoid of any ideas, getting people charged up. Do I think that they reached millions of people with messengers that said the word affordability? Yes, but there's not a single idea in there, and so this is the difficulty. When you're in the majority, you have to come up with ideas, and I think that one of the things that Republicans. Didn't do enough of was reminding people what it was like under Joe Biden.

We we took the closing of the border and changing of of energy supply, where we really started you know drilling again and producing our own domestic energy. We took those issues of the border and immigration and energy. And we we failed to talk about them. We failed to show that we dramatically changed the way that Joe Biden and the Democrats were governing. And what we have to do is go back and run more as the opposition, even when you're in the majority.

By saying, "Look, these are the people who want to be in the majority. This is what they did, and this is what we're trying to do to fix it." It's difficult. No one is saying it's easy, but they just had a. Of messengers with no message.

Well, and I feel like this is the political trap that's easy for the campaign cycle and then the governing cycle, which you see on both sides. This is not a new concept where a party runs on something and then it's like the the dog chasing the car. What are you going to do when you catch it? And this is what we see. We see what we've been talking about the previously in the show.

The fact the White House Counsel's office is pushing back, saying. Hey, if you're going through with all these investigations, you better make sure it's actually for legislative oversight purposes. But you you have this thing they push the word affordability, like you said. I went to the American Accountability Network's website, and they say the problem is right wing misinformation and disinformation has permeated across social media platforms and heavily influenced public opinion and key demographics. As a result, the Democratic base has been demobilized, and our opposition has been galvanized.

So the big question here, though, is if they just pushed a word, are they just admitting, like, yeah, we need to be better at misinformation and disinformation too? Because that's all. It sounds like they did. They didn't actually push solutions or problems to combat what they see as right-wing misinformation. Those buzzwords.

They just decided to push a word to win, and then if none of these campaigns or none of these politicians had anything to follow up, as it seems like the only thing they could follow up with is lawyer up. Then then it's going to be an election trap for them as well. Look, I'm old enough to remember that we go through these cycles all of the time, and it's really easy to be in the opposition because all you do is sit on the sidelines and critique. Democrats are really good at being in the opposition because they've got a whole bunch of friendly media. It's more difficult to be in the majority and to hold the majority because you've got to be substantive.

You've got to supply policy issues that help change and make life better. You've got to fix. The problems, and you've got to communicate that, and you're you're constantly working against people who are just negative and screaming that everything is wrong. And so, what what we have to do now is play their game. We're now in the opposition, and we just have to say, you know, there's no substance.

You didn't fix these problems. It's getting worse, and really point that out. But we also have to get ready for when we do come back. You know, I heard from a lot of people. My brother is one of the smartest people alive because he's a truck driver, and all he does is listen to everybody all day long.

And what he told me yesterday is how infuriated he is. Hearing Republicans talk about when they're in the minority, all the things that we're going to do when we get back in the majority, and he's sitting there thinking, "Why didn't you do that before?" And I think he's exactly right. Yeah, when you had full control, I think a lot of people have that frustration. We see it in the chat, we see it in the comments all the time, and and just like this, of course, I got plenty of those messages the night of the election. Of course, the I guess what people try to do to soften the blow, they'll always text me.

They're like, "Well, you got easy shows to make for the." Next couple years, and while I understand that people think that way, the work of the ACLJ is a little bit bigger than just what we do here on the show. I know Rick's one of the reasons you're involved as well, is because the work has to continue on. We have to learn how to work with people and actually get things done. Or this organization doesn't exist, or a lot of people don't exist. It's very easy.

I'll be honest, they're not wrong. In the sense, it's a much easier show. The Obama years were easier. The Biden years were easier to do a broadcast. Because the frustrations were daily.

It is it is harder when you are now leading everything, but that doesn't really change the work that we do, Rick, and it certainly doesn't change the work you do, whether that's locally in California or the work you do around the world.

Well, look. The substance part is really hard. The the outrage and the lip service is easy, and I and certainly there'll be a whole bunch of programs that just do the outrage machine. But the one of the reasons why I joined ACLJ and and really am committed to ACLJ is simply because we do the substantive work. We've got lawyers.

We've got international offices. We're actually doing the work that that highlights the problem that tries to stop. The problem, and that takes action. Very few organizations do that, and ACLJ does. All right, Rick.

Thank you so much for joining us again today. We always love hearing your thoughts. When we get back, though, I got a full bank of calls. Look, I think a lot of you are excited to talk, even about Jim Jordan. We're going to talk about that coming up, and we got a lot of calls.

So, so right now, if you called, it's probably going to be a busy signal. If you want to hear a busy signal like it's the '90s again, call. You can hear a busy signal at one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. But we are going to continue to take your calls and comments throughout the next segment of the show. And well, we still got a lot to cover because that we've been able to go over this.

I know a lot of you are joining us right now, and you are wanting kind of a recap. Maybe we should just in the next minute here.

Well, recap what that White House criminal warning was because I see the numbers rising, and I know that always happens. Like when are they going to talk about it? It's like well, we did it for forty-five minutes, but let's give you a minute recap. That's right.

So we know that the incoming chair of the House Oversight Committee, Robert Garcia, on election night put up a post on X that said lawyer. And then we've heard the litany of threats from Democrats saying that they're going to go after members of the administration. And the White House Counsel's office sent this letter to that incoming rank, the ranking member, and said, beyond being inconsistent with the clear, well-recognized constitutional limitations on your investigative functions, threats to executive branch officials designed to deter them from public service or process designed mere. Really, to abuse or instill fear in the recipient may cross the line into blatant criminality, and that's what we're looking at right now. As these threats from members of Congress and members of Congress elect keep flooding in, their lawfare is going to be on full display.

But we also at the ACLJ know how to fight back against lawfare. That phone lines are jammed, but if you want the way to support right now, this is a great time to do it. All donations are doubled today. We're continuing our efforts. Go part of the Stand Strong Challenge today.

Be a part of it. ACLJ. dot org. That's ACLJ. dot org.

All donations are doubled. Again, if you see the QR code on your screen, if you're watching us, which you always should be watching us, scan it right now and be a part of it today. All your donations are doubled, tax deductible. Do it right now. We're back with your calls and comments coming right out.

All right, last segment of the day. We have a full bank of calls. A lot of you've been holding for a very long time. We'll get to some of those coming up here again as we go through them. We may have some time for more, but go to aclj.org right now.

Yep, someone hung up. I got nervous. Give me a call. One eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten. Let's kick it off with longtime caller Bobby in New York.

Bobby, go ahead. Hi, what I'd like to hi guys, what I'd like to see happen, and I don't think it will, is that some normal Democrat or Democrats will step up during these hearings and shame the rest of the Democrats and say, "What are we doing? That we're not getting anywhere with this? Let's go back to being reasonable because." Remember when one of the guys on the Supreme Court was was trying to be confirmed, and somebody—I guess maybe it was a Republican—that that shamed the the Congress or whoever, and and brought everything to a halt. Was it Gorsuch?

Do you remember? Do you know what I'm talking about? It happened many times over the last handful. You had people like Senator Graham who were always very, very you know, push forward, even to the point where Republicans got mad because they would say. You know what?

Are you qualified? Whether I disagree or agree with you, the President has the right to pick who he wants as Supreme Court justice. We're here to judge whether they have the, like I said, the background, the history. They have the qualifications to be a Supreme Court justice, not whether we agree or disagree with them on the legal matters. But that is a world that feels like it was far gone, Bobby.

And look, I think when you said normal Democrats step up, don't expect that over the next two years. I think was as you have the final years of the Trump administration. That is not going to slow down. The road to 2028 began, you know, two weeks ago. It began two years ago for a lot of people, but it began two weeks ago publicly.

And now we see a big process moving forward, as we have already started to see who is going to run, potentially run, and all that. And you can't have what you're going to have. You said normal Democrats that are willing to work across the aisle, because that does not help their political future. Sadly, right now.

Well, you remember the old Blue Dog Democrat coalition kind of narrative, which were the moderate Democrats and ones that would work across the aisle. And the House of Representatives—it's ten people. That's it. They have a majority now of well over two hundred and fifty, so it's going to be hard for them to actually to do what Bobby would like. Actually, make deals.

And let's not forget, though, if you are one of those like hardliners who just on the other side, even let's let's take it back to the MAGA movement. Think about all of those people, those new fresh faces that came in, and how many have not made it. How many have left the party? How many have left supporting President Trump or have left. Who have moved with the political winds have tried to.

That doesn't always mean good things when you don't have people who are willing to work with other people.

So, hopefully, we will see that proceed. But, Bobby, I won't hold my breath. I want to continue on. We got some, yeah. Let's go to Lisa on line five calling in right now.

I think this is a good time, also, to to bring this back up. Lisa, you are on Sekulow. Hi, thanks, guys. I just want to say also thank you for your work here in Nebraska with the firefighter and the homeschool. Oh, absolutely, guy.

Because I am a homeschool mom, so I'm going to give you a little bit of homeschool mom challenge. All right. You said earlier in the show that we should be talking about veterans today, and you are exactly right. I know the show today is. Is set, and you have your your script or whatever for today.

But I'm going to challenge you for next year. There are so many veterans out there with beautiful stories, heroes that have done amazing things. And so maybe next year for the show, you could just talk about veterans, Lisa. I would love that. I would love for that to be the show.

I'd love for our audience to say they support that idea. Of course, we have been talking about it. We've been putting out content about Veterans Day every year.

Sometimes you're right. This year's a little different. Of course, we are having breaking news happening. What feels like each and every day, heading outside of an election. I don't want us to forget about that, though.

And like I said, President Trump spoke for a good portion of this morning on it. We almost decided to go to it live, but we. Presented with a different show, but Lisa, I I appreciate the challenge. By the way, also appreciate you as a homeschool mom, as you know we're a homeschool family as well with my kids.

So I understand that that is easier said than done sometimes.

Well, and I think to Lisa's point as well, remember that Veterans Day is distinct from Memorial Day for a reason. Yeah.

So thank a veteran, thank people that are in your family or your friends. Yeah.

Say honor them today and thank them for everything that they have sacrificed for. This country because it it is wow there is a solemnity to it because of the sacrifice many have given but there is a reason why it's distinct also from Memorial Day is so that you can thank them for their service today so go ahead and do that as well that's right thank you so much for calling hey we just lost one of our calls was on hold for a long time if you want to call back in I think we may have had some lines drop one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten yeah it seems like we're having maybe an issue there you try to give us a call we'll do our best to. Get you back up. Let's go though to Charles, who is calling in Oklahoma online. Charles, go ahead.

Yeah, I I have a idea of what how you could phrase what the case for Donald Trump. You know, it'd be the illegitimate use of the court as. To do what could be called slander or something that that the use of the court as a weapon against anyone friendly. Charles, I think exactly what we call it also is lawfare. It is using the law for for warfare, effectively against their political enemies.

And they tied that in in this letter exactly. But now also remember, they won't be necessarily using the courts. They're going to be using the halls of Congress to do this persecution. But we also are fighting. In the courts, because they also try to do this to people that would represent conservatives or members of the administration.

That's why we are right now that we're waiting on a response from the state of California, and we will then have another reply at the Supreme Court because they tried to disbar Professor John Eastman for his representation of the President.

So they're trying to make sure that even when we do go after you, you're not going to have an attorney that is willing. To put their career or their bar license on the line to actually represent you, so we have to stand firm there as well, and we're doing that right now. And that's where you can also support our work at aclj.org. That's right.

Let's continue on. Let's try to get a couple more calls in before we wrap up for the day. It's going to Steve in New York, line two, Steve. Yes, sir.

So obviously, the threat of prosecution on both sides are not something that could happen before twenty twenty nine. But we need to keep an eye on what the Democrats are going to be doing in the meantime, in terms of a lot of voters voted for higher fuel prices, thinking they were voting for lower fuel prices.

So. We have to report carefully on: Are the Democrats raising taxes in the states they control? Are they keeping out of state oil out of their state? Is Texas going to be, or not? Reducing their reducing their oil production, and then report what the Democrats are doing because I know a lot of people that have graduate degrees, advanced graduate degrees, and stellar academic and professional credentials, but they don't want to know anything that's not directly related to doing their work.

So we have to try to open their eyes by just reporting honestly. In the next two years, on what the Democrats will actually. I'll cut you off for time here, Steve, because we only got a minute left in the show. I agree with you. There's gonna be a lot of political theater over the next couple years.

When our previous caller said, "Hey, I hope there's some common sense Democrats to come out," say, "I don't expect much over the next couple years," because we are still in that political cycle. There will be a new President of the United States coming up in two years, whether what party it may be, will. Yet to be seen, but you bet—you know—the gloves will come off fully. You'll hear over the next two years, and we will be there to tell you the truth, whether you like it or not.

Sometimes I say that, and I mean it. You know, the ACLJ work continues on because it doesn't matter who's in the political office; our work continues.

So I encourage you to support it. Theaclj.org will. Do our best to work on you know either side of the aisle to make sure that your religious freedoms are represented all over the world, not just even in America. And I ask you to pray for us and support the work if you can financially. That's at aclj dot org.

We will talk to you tomorrow. We'll be back live on Sekulow.