KLZ 560 AM DENVER'S CONSERVATIVE HOME STATION
Menu
In today’s episode, we navigate the complex legal waters surrounding Letitia James’ latest lawsuit against the Trump administration. With a focus on the potential cuts to federal programs, we discuss how such legal maneuvers play into broader political strategies and what they mean for various stakeholders. Our discussion includes a critical examination of the legal processes at play and the challenges faced by state attorneys general as they attempt to preemptively block budget cuts. Expert guests join us to offer their perspectives on both the strategic game plan behind these lawsuits and their real-world implications on social programs and
SPEAKER 08 :
On today’s show, Letitia James threatens new lawsuit against the Trump administration.
SPEAKER 10 :
Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Seculo. We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110.
SPEAKER 08 :
And now your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome to Sekulow. Phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110. Will, it’s Monday. Somehow we’re back. We’ve done it. We’ve returned. Another Monday. We haven’t been thrown off yet. But here we are as things are getting cut nationwide. We do have an update from one of your favorites. And that, of course, is Letitia James. As she has decided, I don’t know, maybe it’s time for a new podcast. against the Trump administration. And this one is almost theoretical.
SPEAKER 11 :
That’s right. And we’re going to get into the details of what she’s even saying in the next segment with Professor Hutchison. But if you’ll remember, just a few weeks ago, there was that criminal referral to the Department of Justice over potential mortgage fraud and other crimes that were allegedly committed by Letitia James. And you’d think maybe is the time to be quiet. You know, I’ve got my own legal issues. No, she’s doubling down or tripling down with announcing this new lawsuit. Yeah. where she is teaming up with other attorneys general nationwide, and they are going to go after some of this funding that is being reportedly under consideration of cuts under the budget proposals and things of that nature.
SPEAKER 08 :
She picked some things in this that I think that some people will go, okay, if they are cutting some of these programs, maybe she picked some that are a little bit more, bipartisan if you will sure they’re not like just you know Planned Parenthood she’s talking about Meals on Wheels and a few of these that most people go yeah that’s probably good that we’re funding those things it’s probably not a bad thing helping people helping the homeless help people that need food but again none of these have happened yet and it’s just to get your name in the lights and it’s just to again if you’re trending you might as well continue that story so if you’re trending a few weeks ago even the bad how can you flip it and that’s the way to do it
SPEAKER 11 :
That’s right. And what she is saying is that this lawsuit will be trying to block anticipated cuts. These aren’t things that have been cut yet. As far as the Head Start program was one of the ones that was mentioned, that’s a preschool program, federally funded, and it is currently still in the House budget. There have been some officials that have maybe said restructure it or change the funding nature of that. But that doesn’t mean that it has happened yet. And typically, in a normal American legal system world, you’ve got to wait for there to be the damage, not just the anticipation of this happening, but the actual damage before you start suing to stop something.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, well, let’s hear from her. So you let her give her her spiel, if you will. Give her her time. Here you go. Here is Letitia James. This is just the day before yesterday.
SPEAKER 01 :
The White House is threatening our way of life. They want to cut Meals on Wheels. They want to cut funds to firefighters. Why? Because they want to cut funds for housing. And the list goes on and on and on. All of these funds and more, we’ve got to stand up. And that’s why Democratic attorneys general will be joining me in filing this lawsuit.
SPEAKER 08 :
Look, this is a moment where you have Letitia James and other attorneys general filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration, and it is for possible cuts. And look, again, like I said, there are some of these cuts that we all agree on. There are some we’re not going to agree on. When you go through the list of what she’s talking about, I don’t know the background of a lot of these organizations. I don’t really know. know if they’re all on the up and up and what they’re doing or if they deserve the funding that they’re getting but it does on paper sound like things that most people would like head start meals on wheels the world trade center health care program for 9 11 first responders these don’t feel like programs that on paper name wise are the ones you want to see cut but they are specific specified for a reason and that’s to get this kind of attention what do you think 1-800-684-3110 it is a little harder when president trump said hey we got to reopen alcatraz But then on the other hand, to say, let’s cut meals on wheels, how do you conflate those two? 1-800-684-3110. It’s going to be a packed show today, by the way. We have CeCe Heil joining us. We’ve got Harry Hutchinson joining us. We’ve got Rick Grinnell joining us. It is going to be packed. We’re going to get to your comments as well, the most important voice in the room, at 1-800-684-3110. And we have three trials happening this month. We’re going to tell you how you can support the work of the ACLJ and keep us in the fight. And join us in that fight. We’ll be right back. Welcome back to Secular. Like I said, phone lines are open for you. I know a lot of you watch on YouTube and you’ve had this same glitch that’s been going on for the last couple of weeks and we are working to figure out what is happening. So if you’re watching us on YouTube right now, I encourage you hit that thumbs up. Because that helps us get back in the feeds of the people that we lost. It’s unfortunate when that happens, but occasionally it does. So if you could, hit that thumbs up and that subscribe button if you haven’t already. Just tell YouTube you’re watching and you’re engaged. Because this is how hundreds of thousands of you watch each and every day. Nearly 480,000 of you have subscribed to our YouTube channel. We couldn’t thank you enough for that. Letitia James back in the news. We’re going to give a bit of a reset of what was going on as she plans with a bunch of other attorney generals to sue the Trump administration this time over healthcare funding cuts that are currently not cut. We’re talking about cuts that are allegedly going to happen. Now they could happen. These are ones that have been discussed. But this is another way for them to get back in the news and get the attention on them to try to rally people together. Because, look, midterms are coming up faster than you can imagine. They’re going to want to have something to run on. They’re going to want to have something for the Trump administration to take some heat on. Harry Hutchin joined us in studio. But, Will, you give a little reset and then kick it over to Harry.
SPEAKER 11 :
That’s right. So this is comes from a speech on Saturday where the attorney general of New York was saying that she is going to be joined by other states attorneys general to sue specifically Department of Health and Human Services to block the cutting of certain funds for certain programs. Now, a lot of this is theoretical at this point. They’re talking about things like the Head Start program, funding that could go to Meals on Wheels. She says it directly, Meals on Wheels, but a lot of times these are through assistance programs and things of that nature. So not even a direct funding to that. But the biggest problem here. Professor Hutchison, is that all of these seem to be theoretical cuts that she’s targeting at this point. This isn’t something that the Head Start program’s budget hasn’t been slashed. As a matter of fact, currently it is still in the reconciliation bill that they’re putting together. So it’s not even like she could point to the fact that it’s already been stripped from this reconciliation bill. Now, there have been talks of reallocating, reshifting the way that a lot of these programs are run because many of these programs haven’t been run efficiently. But regardless, as Logan pointed out, these seem on paper, at least without any sort of deep research into it, does seem to be programs that could be bipartisan in the way that they are presented, that she is stopping the government from cutting funding to. However, there’s a big caveat here. This lawsuit is trying to stop preemptively the cutting of funds before it’s even been put into a bill. It’s even been done through executive order. This is a pure preemptive lawsuit that the attorney general is trying to with other states attorneys general to do here. And that’s not normally how the legal process works in the United States. Your analysis is spot on.
SPEAKER 09 :
And I think it’s clear beyond question that Attorney General Letitia James, as is her pattern and practice, is attempting to create litigation de novo. That is out of nothing, out of thin air. And there is a legal doctrine called ripeness that prevents the litigation that she is talking about. Now, having said that, it’s important to keep in mind that there are district court judges, federal district court judges, that are probably willing to overlook a legal doctrine such as the doctrine of ripeness. Now, what is ripeness? Basically, it says you cannot bring a lawsuit until the facts are quote-unquote ripe, meaning that there is an actual case or controversy for the court to decide. And so if Health and Human Services is proposing a cut, that does not give rise to litigation, except in the imagination of Attorney General Letitia James and her compatriots.
SPEAKER 08 :
Now, if the cuts do go through and it is something that they do present, what is the legal recourse there? Then there is a pathway for them to do this, not when it’s preemptive, but when there’s actually a plan going ahead. Let’s say that these, because look, these are not, So with all of the Trump cuts that have happened, it’s not like this is shocking that there’s a few organizations there that would be listed in this. So what is even their recourse? I’m just curious for, I guess, the right way to do it if these cuts were to go in place.
SPEAKER 09 :
Number one, if the cuts occur basically because there is a bill that passes Congress signed by the president, then those cuts are indeed constitutional unless there’s some constitutional principle that has been invalidated by the law. which is very unlikely because the Constitution gives spending power to Congress. And so if Congress passes a law signed by the President of the United States, in general, it’s going to be enforceable unless you can find some form of discrimination or some other basis for invalidating.
SPEAKER 08 :
They’re making the decision on where things go. No one is guaranteed this money.
SPEAKER 09 :
Precisely. And the president and Congress were elected to do what? To enact policy. And it’s not up to state attorneys generals to define what is possible with respect to spending by the Health and Human Services Department.
SPEAKER 08 :
I did want to say real quick, it is hard to say attorneys general. But I do want to make sure everyone knows that’s what you’re supposed to say. Yeah, it messes with your head. I’m just letting you know this, audience, because it sounds like we have a flub every few minutes right now. Right. That’s what they say. Attorneys General.
SPEAKER 11 :
It is Attorneys General. Yeah. Who made that decision? Mr. Webster? Old English. Yeah, Mr. Webster. I like that. That’s a good call there. But Professor Hutchison, the other angle to this is when the state’s attorneys general bring lawsuits of this kind, what we’ve seen in this environment is we’ve seen going to a district judge, who then sometimes puts out something called a nationwide injunction. And that’s the very thing that the ACLJ is fighting at the Supreme Court right now with our representation of the state of West Virginia. So that is something that we are very involved in. But as that is heard and looked at by the Supreme Court, There is that feeling that you could see a district court judge issue a nationwide injunction on a novel situation like this, blocking any cuts from the Department of Health and Human Services while their lawsuit plays out, which there’s no harm yet. So I don’t know how the lawsuit could play out in that situation, but it almost feels like they know that this is the time to try a move like this.
SPEAKER 09 :
I think you’re correct, and I think that’s a brilliant question. So it’s important for listeners to note that two-thirds of the nationwide injunctions issued in the history of the United States apparently have been issued against the Trump administration. So the ACLJ’s work in going after these nationwide injunctions is very, very important. According to a Harvard Law Review study, which was published last year, at least more than half of the injunctions issued between 2018 and 2023 were issued against the Trump administration. That doesn’t include all of the injunctions, nationwide injunctions, that have been issued this year. So one of the reasons why Attorney General Letitia James is attempting to go after the Trump administration is the judges have incentivized action which is contrary to both the Constitution and to prevailing law.
SPEAKER 08 :
If you have a question or comment related to this topic, we will be taking them towards the end of the show. You can get in line right now. There’s four lines open, 1-800-684-3110. A lot of you are watching right now. And when we get back, not only will we continue this discussion, but CeCe Heil is going to be joining us. We’re going to talk about the ACLJ having three trials set for this month on vital cases. And ones that you’ve been following, ones that we’ve all been involved in for many years now. So we’re going to break all of those down today. When we get back, as the ACLJ, we’ll continue to fight also for Christians around the globe. It is a tough time for a lot of our friends outside of America. Sure, there is persecution happening. I say lowercase p, persecution happening in America. But there is some really bad uppercase P persecution happening that I don’t like to get into the details on on the show, but you know about it. And the ACLJ is getting involved in many different ways. We’re going to talk about that with CC as well and how people can respond and interact with these kind of heartbreaking topics that are happening, as well as… some of these trials that are really to protect the life of the unborn and protect those, honestly, to protect free speech as well, that you’re able to share your point of view and your opinion on controversial topics, on topics that sometimes are uncomfortable to speak about. Be a part of that conversation and support the work of the ACLJ. We’re fighting in court, but we need you to take action. We also need you to pray for us. I encourage you to do that. You can get the ACLJ prayer guide for free on our website. Of course, you can sign in petitions at ACLJ.org slash sign, and you can make a financial donation if you can. But again, there’s a lot of different ways you can interact with us. A lot of you right now are on YouTube or on Rumble. If you’re brand new to us, by the way, and you’ve never seen us before, or you haven’t hit that subscribe button, That’s a great free way to get this kind of message into more people’s hands, more people’s eyes. So right now, I encourage you to do that. Let’s cross that 480,000 mark on YouTube. It would mean a lot to us as we zero in on 500,000 on just YouTube alone. It’s really amazing. We’ll be right back. Welcome back to Sekulow. CeCe Hiles joining us in studio today because we have the month of May is going to be packed for the ACLJ legal team. I know it’s packed for a lot of you, maybe a lot of your parents. You got to run around to school a lot in the month of May, field days, all of those things happening. We’ll take that and add on three trials that the ACLJ is going to be in in just this month and all in support of the unborn or your right to speak out on controversial topics, including for the rights of the unborn and potential for mothers who are looking for other options than abortion. Of course, we’ve been doing this in Massachusetts now for the better part of this year. And we are getting involved in a lot of different instances. We’re going to go through all three of these. I think it’s important for all of you who are listening and watching right now. We’ll obviously still talk about the breaking news. We’ll talk about Letitia James a little later. We’re going to have on Rick Grinnell. We’ll go back to news and politics and all that. But the ACLJ team, hard at action right now in the month of May.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, so this week we have our hearing on the motion to dismiss in the Massachusetts case. And just to remind our listeners, or if this is the first time you’re listening, Massachusetts has launched a campaign, basically a smear campaign against… pregnancy resource centers and they’re basically the government of Massachusetts and so they’re basically punishing and silencing a viewpoint that they don’t prefer that they don’t like and so we are representing and going after those laws we’ve actually launched a media campaign also to counteract that campaign. But this week on May 8th, we have the hearing on the motion to dismiss because the other side has filed a motion to dismiss, dismiss this case. And we will be arguing that case that the case go on and that we get to discovery um in massachusetts so prayers are needed for that for sure uh our attorney olivia summers will be arguing that motion to dismiss case and that’s on may 8th and then we have an actual trial that is going on this week as well for another pro-life protester in ohio that we are defending And that is a case where he was cited and arrested under a noise violation. And that’s a case where basically they just did selective prosecution. They didn’t go after other people for noise violations. And that one is actually a full blown trial that we will be having this week. So again, your prayers are coveted for that trial as well. And then lastly, we are filing a preliminary injunction in our illinois pro-life protester case and this is the case that was very interesting because literally we were on the air when we got a call from someone saying we are potentially being arrested right now and our attorneys were able to go into action at that very moment actually get on the phone with the arresting officers explained that they could not arrest our clients there we were able to stop that but we’re trying to address now the actual ordinance and what’s the problem of this and so we have filed with the city they have not responded so we’ve actually filed again in federal court a preliminary injunction so we have the three very important pro-life cases this is not the entirety of all of our pro-life cases but these are the three that are happening this week right now
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, and as you said, CeCe, there are three big items this week. Plus, as far as that trial situation, we have two other trials this month. So the ACLJ team is very busy. And you may also think, okay, we’ve got these individual trials and individual things. How does that really affect me? I almost look at the ACLJ legal team sometimes as almost like firefighters, is that these little fires are popping up that affect an individual or an organization in individual areas. But when you see how broad this is, and that it can happen in states that are left-leaning or more conservative, where they are trying to use the force of government and law enforcement to silence Christian speech, pro-life speech, and in many cases, trying to criminalize that speech. And you also look at what is happening in Massachusetts, where they are trying to run this campaign saying that pro-life pregnancy resource centers are fraudsters, they are giving out misinformation, etc. They’re trying to shut that down any way they can. So why is it important that we get involved in these campaigns? broad issues with individuals or with organizations or filing a lawsuit in Massachusetts. Because if we don’t rush to the scene of the fire, that fire will spread and it will get out of control. And it’ll affect every single person watching this broadcast. If you’re a person of faith, if you’re a pro-life, if you’re conservative, if we don’t fight these, then your speech is next and it will be your city. No matter what state you think you live in that may be so conservative, there are people that will try to use law enforcement and government to take away your First Amendment right of freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, to practice your faith. That’s what happens if we don’t rush to the scene.
SPEAKER 02 :
that’s right and not only do we stop it from spreading and massachusetts is the perfect example of that because if this were allowed to stand in massachusetts you better know that planned parenthood and the pro-abortion industry and machine is going to be trying it in other places and probably already are but if we can stop it here we stop it from spreading and when we win these cases We’re not just winning them for our clients. We’re winning them for everyone who wants to then go and protest in front of an abortion clinic, who wants to have a Bible study in their school, who wants to have a church on the beach. We’re not just winning those rights for our clients and defending those rights for our clients and liberties for our clients. We’re defending that for all American citizens.
SPEAKER 08 :
And again, we’re responding in many different ways, whether it’s in the court or in the media. I saw a few comments came in and one just came in saying they were in Boston. They saw our ad campaign running. They saw the choice begins here ad campaign. And again, that’s not an ad campaign to fundraise for the ACLJ. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. We’re spending a lot of money to get these ads out there. And all the ads are promoting people to go to pro-life pregnancy resource centers. That’s all it is in a creative and a humble and a sweet way. You know, again, great visuals and imagery. This is not done as some sort of negative campaign. It’s a very positive, very hope-filled campaign. We’re seeing great results.
SPEAKER 11 :
And you know what’s ironic to me is as they go after these pro-life pregnancy resource centers in Massachusetts, this is an article from the New York Times just a few weeks back. Botched care and tired staff, colon, Planned Parenthood in crisis. Is the state of Massachusetts going to run a campaign saying Planned Parenthood could be dangerous? They may not give you the health care that you’re looking for. Never. They’re running a campaign to try and get more business to Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics.
SPEAKER 08 :
And before we were there, it was working. And they were getting results by running this smear campaign where people were avoiding those pro-life pregnancy centers. Of course, they called them anti-abortion centers. We’re able to go in because of members of the ACLJ, because of champions, people that give on a monthly basis. We’re able to go in and kind of hit it in two different ways. And that’s the best way, which is obviously you take it to the court. We have incredible attorneys like CeCe over here. But also, we have an incredible media team and media staff because of your support. And we’re able to run things like a counter campaign, take out billboard space, digital space, advertise. And of course, not advertising the ACLJ. Obviously, it’s paid for by the ACLJ. but it’s just to advertise these pro-life pregnancy resource centers in the area that are under attack and don’t have the funds themselves. Cause a lot of them are volunteer run. They don’t have a way to combat the state, but thankfully people like you support our work and we’re able to do that. we just got out of our life and liberty drive you can obviously still support the work but i encourage you right now just pray for us sign our petitions do whatever you can even the free ways to support the aclj a lot of great ways you can do it at aclj.org slash sign and again pray for us as we head to these three vital pro-life trials that’s just again a tip of the iceberg of really what’s going on we have a second half hour coming up on the show but So make sure you stay tuned for that. If you lose us, find us on ACLJ.org or broadcasting on YouTube, Rumble, or later on on the ACLJ app, or right now on the ACLJ app, later on on the podcast feed. And hey, CeCe, someone said a happy CeCe de Mayo. So there you go. All right, we’ll be right back with more on Sekulow.
SPEAKER 10 :
Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever. This is Sekulow.
SPEAKER 08 :
And now your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome back to Sekulow. We’re going to get back to the main topic of the day. And of course, we’re talking about Letitia James, Attorney General, going after the Trump administration, getting a bunch of other liberal attorney generals together to protest, to sue, saying you can’t take away funding. for things that have not been cut even yet and of course again these are kind of bipartisan kind of programs you’re talking about meals on wheels you’re talking about the world trade center health care program for 9-11 responders you’re talking about the head start program these i think you have a lot of people going okay of all the cuts maybe this isn’t where we need to be cutting however this is a political move this is a media move you can see it you can see it in her quotes you can see in her statements i actually want to take a call right off the bat let’s go to justin who’s calling uh Watch it on YouTube. And if you want to give us a call too, 1-800-684-3110. Justin, go ahead.
SPEAKER 04 :
Hey, thanks for taking my call. Yeah, I support President Trump, but I think these programs maybe need to be refined with a sharpening stone rather than be throwing the trash. I mean, my question is this. Are cutting some of these bipartisan programs really even going to make a dent in the federal budget? I mean, I personally think it’s unnecessary, and I think the fallout alone isn’t worth the potential minimal cost savings.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, Justin, I think the PR part of this is one of my concerns as well, which is does this all play into it? But we’re talking about a lot of money here.
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, I think there’s many ways to look at this, Justin. One, the top line is that the federal deficit is unsustainable. And the United States, unable to prosper and continue, has got to get a control on the spending addiction that Congress has and the federal government has. But as you even point out that, you know, there are some that like, really, is that even going to make a difference? Is that going to change it? One, The problem here, too, is that what Letitia James is saying they’re going to try to stop them from cutting is preemptive in that we don’t even know if that is the way that it’s going to roll out, if it is a cut to these programs or if it’s even restructuring of these programs. We’ve seen how inefficient the government is. what the the left wants is no changes to the federal government and the way it spends its money and administers this money if if the program changes or is administered in a different way they’re going to try to block that as well even if it provides better services to those people that it is trying to help that’s why when they keep saying they’re going after social security because they’re making cuts to the way social security is run not the benefits being paid out because they are making it more efficient and a better value for the taxpayer that’s not a cut to social security benefits but the pr from the left is that they’re coming after uh grandparents who are on a fixed income And that’s not the reality. And so I do see and empathize with your position that like, OK, it could be getting out of hand because they’re able to win meals on wheels.
SPEAKER 08 :
People will think that.
SPEAKER 11 :
But once again, that’s not even what we won. We don’t even know what’s going on. There are the. The when you read into it, it seems that an administrator that was in charge of a department that oversaw some of the grants given to Meals on Wheels had been placed on leave. That doesn’t mean that they have fired or completely done away with that program. So once again, we have to see one what they allege in the lawsuit because it hasn’t come out yet. And two, we have to then get our heads around the fact that some of these things aren’t reality of what they’re saying.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yep. Phone lines are open for you too at 1-800-684-3110. If you’re about to hold, stay on hold. Robert, Tony, Lynette, we’ll make sure to get to all of you coming up in the segment after this one. The next segment, we’re going to have Rick Grinnell joining us. We’re going to talk about this, but we’re also going to talk about some of the new political items that are happening right now. Of course, Rick always has a great point of view and a great perspective. We’re honored to have him as part of One of the ACLJ team and part of the broadcast team here each and every week. We can’t do that, obviously, without your support to have great people like him, former directors of national intelligence. I mean, it’s pretty wild to have him on our show still every week. And, of course, special envoy for President Trump. And remember our team from even last year. A lot of them are in the cabinet now. You’ve seen a lot of them on your TV screen. It really is because of people like you who support the work of the ACLJ. And, hey, who would you like to see join? our broadcast team you know some of them like uh tulsi gabbard sadly good for her and good for us too she is now the director of national intelligence that means she can’t be on the show you know a couple times a week so who would you like to see put in the comments we’d like to hear from you phone lines are open for you as well at 1-800-684-3110 we’ll be right back with more and rick grinnell coming up Welcome back to Secula. We are going to take your phone calls here in just a little bit. And we’re going to start this off. Do we got Rick? Is Rick joining us? We got him connected. Okay, cool. Rick Grinnell’s joining us. Before that, though, I want you to hear, Will, maybe you could set this up as well, from one of our favorites, from AOC. And she had a town hall this weekend. They set that up for us.
SPEAKER 11 :
That’s right. So she was speaking at this town hall and decided to name check Tom Homan, the border czar who’s been going around the country doing a fantastic job. And as you see the reports of the encounters at the border, it’s unbelievable how quickly. They were able to get that situation under control. But earlier on, he had he had kind of put her on warning like, hey, if you are helping people evade the law and evade justice, then, you know, I’m putting you on notice. And this is what she had to say just this weekend directly at Tom Holman. Let’s play by five.
SPEAKER 07 :
And when we first did one of these seminars, Tom Homan, then acting director of ICE, said that he was going to threaten to refer me to the DOJ because I’m using my free speech rights in order to advise people of their constitutionally guaranteed protection, and he may want to do it again today. And to that I say, come for me.
SPEAKER 11 :
Rick, with this sitting member of Congress basically saying, come for me, do I look like I care? When we’ve seen that there have been judges that have been arrested for helping illegal aliens evade justice and the federal government, what do you make of this threat from her?
SPEAKER 13 :
Look, let’s be very clear about something. It is illegal to come into the country You have to have permission. We’re the only country in the world that literally has politicians celebrating the fact that people are going around the rules. And so I think the reality is, is that we have a responsibility to out all of these politicians who are supporting illegal immigrants and screaming about a due process that really doesn’t exist if you are coming into the country and then breaking the law by committing crimes, not showing up for court, all of these things. We are the most generous nation when it comes to immigration. We give roughly a million people a year U.S. citizenship, but they’re our rule. And so we are not going to allow these radical left-wing politicians To blur the lines as to what they’re doing. They are accomplices in people who are breaking federal immigration law. You don’t get to pick and choose which laws to go into. If you do, we’re going to have chaos in our society where everyone gets to pick and choose which laws they follow. We’re not doing that. So what I would say. The solution is, is out every one of these radical politicians Who are screaming about allowing illegal immigrants to stay in our country because it’s a very unpopular position. They are going to get wiped out in the next election. Again, no one in America who has common sense, hard work ethics wants to have people breaking the law and staying here. Of course we want due process, but you have a due process when you’re at the border. And you tell us, you fill out an application and you tell us why it’s so important for you to jump to the front of the line for asylum because of your situation. An economic situation. I can’t find a job. I’m not making money. That is not a criteria to jump the line and to get asylum. It’s safety issues. And we have a very good process that looks at all of this. But you have to follow the rules. If you don’t follow the rules, then you you should get kicked out. And we need to out all of these radical politicians who are telling us that we should allow these criminals inside our country.
SPEAKER 08 :
Rick, and I think people hear that. Look, it tugs on the heartstrings of Americans. Americans are compassionate people. They, you know, want to see. I think they’ve been pushing for our comprehensive immigration reform for many, many years because they don’t want to see it just become mass chaos. They don’t want to see this happens. Why the border? We supported closing the borders in some ways, getting them more secure. because we do appreciate uh immigration in this country but when you’re just using it as a pawn or a tool and i think we could see that in the last election i think a lot of people could see that that it was a lot of talk but it wasn’t the reality it was a lot of democrats trying to pull at your heartstrings but when it came down to actually protecting american citizens and even uh honestly protecting those coming over illegally they didn’t really care about the topic they didn’t really care about the humanity
SPEAKER 13 :
Look, let’s be honest about one thing. The left keeps saying that they want comprehensive immigration reform. Why would we work really hard to come up with a new law when they literally have created cities and states to ignore the laws? They have a terrible track record of pretending like the rules, actually, the laws actually are something that they’re going to follow. They’ve already told us they’re not going to follow laws that they don’t agree with. This is anarchy. And we need to be very clear and call them out. They think that this is a popular position. It’s not. Let’s go toe to toe all the way into the next election. We need to be very clear that we are generous. There’s a process. But if you break the law, if you jump to the front of the line without permission, you are going to be dealt with harshly and you’re going to be sent back home. This is just enforcing the rule of law.
SPEAKER 11 :
Rick, I wanted to change topics here for just a moment. President Trump put up on Truth Social this morning that he had a very productive telephone conversation with the president of Turkey, President Erdogan, concerning many subjects, including the war with Russia and Ukraine. all things Syria, Gaza, and more. But what caught my eye as well is that he talked about the relationship with President Erdogan during the first administration and that we worked together closely on numerous things, including the fact that he helped return Pastor Andrew Brunson, who was imprisoned, back to the United States. If you’re new to the ACLJ broadcast, Andrew Brunson was the client of the ACLJ, Christian pastor held in prison in Turkey, And both president Trump and ambassador to Germany, Rick Grinnell at the time were instrumental in getting pastor Brunson back to the United States. So our client that president Trump demanded Erdogan release and Rick Grinnell was there to meet him on the tarmac and present him with an American flag. So just context for that, if you’re seeing that on truth today, but, He also said that I look forward to working with President Erdogan on getting the ridiculous but deadly war between Russia and Ukraine ended now. How instrumental or pivotal could Turkey be in ending some of these conflicts?
SPEAKER 13 :
Well, I think they’re crucial. Remember, Turkey is a member of NATO, the NATO ally of ours. They’ve been a member of NATO since 1952. And we’ve had a series of different types of relationships with Turkey. I believe that we need to keep the Turks very close, that we need to coordinate more. We need to have a better policy. We we clearly have some rough policy issues with them right now. We need to pressure the Turks to have a better relationship with Israel. We need the Turks to play a constructive role within NATO. And I do think that they have been helpful. Certainly, Erdogan is the Putin whisperer. He can help us when it comes to Russia. And I think a powerful force of Trump and Erdogan together could really solve a lot of our problems in the Middle East and make a lot more progress globally. on the ukraine issue and so i’m i’m a fan of trying to keep the turks our nato ally close and that requires working on the relationship so that it doesn’t go sour and that they understand where we’re going i’ll finish with this tom barrack who is a close friend of president trump And a good friend of mine is going to be the next U S ambassador to Turkey. He’s just waiting for the Senate on approval. He’s been through the committee process. It looks like the Senate likes him and will support him. And as soon as Tom Barrick can get to Turkey, I think he will help in this relationship because. He and President Trump are close, and he understands the importance of having a good NATO ally like Turkey in the fold of what the United States is trying to do.
SPEAKER 08 :
Thank you, Rick, for joining us. As always, we always appreciate it. And now it’s time in the next segment to hear from you. We got a few lines open for you right now. If you’re on hold, Lynette and Robert stay on hold. We lost a few calls, so we got a few open lines. Perfect time to call in at 1-800-684-3110. Why don’t you go ahead and do that again? 1-800. Look, it’s on the screen right there if you’re watching. 1-800-684-3110. 1-0. Call us right now. Kind of last chance to get on the air today. We can talk about any of the topics of the day. Letitia James, talk about our Supreme Court, our big trials coming up this month. All of our pro-life work, free speech work, whatever you got, we’ll do our best to cover it right now. Again, give us a call, 1-800-684-3110. Of course, as we prepare for these trials, I want you to get involved. You can sign a petition right now at aclj.org slash sign, or just go to the website, click around, see all of the cool, great content that we provide at absolutely no cost. No extra cost, nothing behind a paywall. Tried to send an article to a friend this week, and they said, I can’t read it. Not on aclj.org. We’ll be right back. All right, it’s time. It’s time to hear from you. That’s right, secular listeners. The most important voice in the room. Some of you have been on hold for close to a half hour, and I appreciate that. But of course, if you’re an ACLJ champion, you get bumped to the front. And that, of course, the champion is someone who gives on a monthly recurring basis. And again, that’s not like a hard set rule. That’s just because I decided it. So when you tell our phone screeners, make sure to always tell them if you’re an ACLJ champion.
SPEAKER 11 :
I love that you say it’s not a hard set rule, but you decided it, but you are the one that is making that decision.
SPEAKER 08 :
It’s not like on the website. I mean, like it doesn’t say like here are the perks and one of them is bump to the front of the line. Got it. I just have mandated that. It’s executive order, really. There you go. This wasn’t through committee or legislation. Who is it that presents executive orders? When he sits there and signs them, we go, what’s this for? And then he says it. So you could do that for me. You could be like, this is for the champions. And then you’ll get a photo, like a snap, smile. I’ll hand you the pin. There you go. I’ll hand the pin to Lynette, who’s calling in New York on line five. She’s an ACLJ champion, which I appreciate. You’re on the air.
SPEAKER 06 :
Thank you so much. And God bless all of you. And as you mentioned correctly, also, I am born and raised in New York. And horrified at what Leticia James, who’s supposed to be the, the lead, um, um, person actually supporting and enforcing the laws. And instead she’s encouraging lawlessness because, uh, just, just, um, loud mouthing about what, uh, an organization or a group are going to do. And without even we don’t even know yet exactly what is going to be cut and why.
SPEAKER 11 :
Lynette, I agree with you. It seems like New Yorkers should not be pleased with this. Obviously, there is a constituency in New York that probably love this, that really want to see Letitia James just go after President Trump, as she said when she was running for attorney general she was going to do. And then she did. She brought the lawfare. Now she’s doing it again, even though she has her own legal issues. Not every New Yorker is like you, Lynette, that is well-informed, understands what’s going on here, that this is lawfare, this is trying to distract and play games. But, you know, there’s another thing that’s also being reported, that she’s now hunting for insider trading crimes within Trump’s inner circle. with relation to the tariffs like she has no actual uh allegation no whistleblower she’s just starting to go around and see if anybody she’s like i assume if they work for president trump they must be corrupt so let’s just do some deep dives and there’s even people saying this is from business insider that ex-prosecutors call this inquiry unprecedented So once again, she is just engaged in a witch hunt against President Trump. And that is why she was elected. That was what she ran on. And she’s going to continue doing it no matter what her legal issues that pop up. She’s not going to focus on actually helping the people of New York. She’s not going to go after the crime in the state like she needs to be doing to clean up areas of New York. Instead, she’s going to continue her focus on the leftist agenda that she feels like she has a mandate to do. And that’s to go after conservatives anywhere she can. And Lynette, I’d be frustrated if I were a New Yorker as well, that that’s what my taxpayer dollars are going to. Because, you know, state taxes in New York, not cheap, not cheap. I’ve heard that.
SPEAKER 08 :
Let’s continue on. Let’s take some more phone calls. This is probably the last chance, by the way, if you want to call in. We’ve got five minutes left in the show. We’ve got two calls lined up. Probably take one more. So if you want to be that last call of the day, maybe you’ll make it through. 1-800-684-3110. Let’s go to Robert in Maryland on line four. Robert, welcome back.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, thank you. My question is, when the media talks about President Trump cutting federal employees jobs, I wonder, do they ever bring up the fact that the jobs that he is cutting, the people are receiving buyouts and also many of them are being put on administrative leave? The other question I have is the media also talking about the fact that many of the the federal spending and the money that’s being done by some of the government agencies that have been, uh, Doge it’s talked about cutting money are actually not in line with the original mission of those agencies. Look at the USA ID, for example, they’ve been shelling out millions of dollars on an annual basis, uh, to fund terrorist groups, uh, to sell condoms to different countries, to, to fund DEI programs and have absolutely nothing to do with, uh, disaster relief, uh, as if they were originally founded for that express purpose.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, Robert, I think a lot of people feel that way. They see the corruption in the spending and they want to take care of it. Now, I think you have to walk a fine line, and this is where the Trump administration’s got to be careful. I think you’re right. Most people are not protesting the idea of government spending being reduced and being cleaned up. I think almost you could probably say that is the most bipartisan thing ever. The problem is when it starts to affect the sort of liberal propaganda machines, when it starts to affect organizations. Now, again, it doesn’t necessarily mean that all the people feel that way. It’s just the people with the voice. And a lot of times those are lobbyists. A lot of times those are big groups, not necessarily always the people.
SPEAKER 11 :
See, I have to disagree with you here a little bit. You said, you know, cutting spending or is the most bipartisan thing. What I’ve seen from the Democrat Party is that if you cut one dollar. That means you are ending a life somewhere. That is how far they’ve taken this line of anything is that any cut is threatening someone’s life. That literally every single dollar in our budget, which is running at almost $2 trillion deficit. So we’re spending $2 trillion more than the government takes in in revenue. is essential to saving lives in this country and that there’s no waste. Yeah, but that is the people who are giving the talking points to the people. And I don’t feel like anyone that I’ve seen that is supporting of the party today is fine, has openly said, honestly said, yeah, we got to get spending in check. we really got to and in the fact that the congress is so addicted to spending and many republicans are guilty of this as well this is a bipartisan issue is how much congress will spend is that there can be no cuts that without them doing a lawsuit that every once you start spending the money it is illegal to stop spending money and you got to get away from that mindset all right let’s try to get a couple calls in ron in new york you’re on the air ron
SPEAKER 05 :
Tony, how you doing? Yeah, I’m calling about this Letitia James thing. As a New Yorker, I just feel it’s totally shameful that my tax dollars are going to fund an attorney general who’s up on charges for fraud. And quite frankly, it looks like an open and shut case. And for her now to bring in a lawsuit against Donald Trump,
SPEAKER 08 :
It gets her back in the news. I’m only cutting you off because we’ve got a minute and a half left. It gets her back in the news and maybe a positive spin for her people. So they get excited about that. Maybe they’ll move on from the press circus surrounding the last few weeks with her, including, like you said, that fraud scandal, which I’m sure is more covered in the state of New York than it is here. Let’s very quickly, I don’t know if we’re able to take all this call, but Alan, you’ve been on hold. Go ahead or watch on Salem News Channel. And that’s why I still put you up. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 12 :
Yeah, thank you. The question I had was, Alejandro Mayorkas was the individual in the Biden administration that made my blood boil every time I heard him before Congress just lie and lie and lie. Is there anything in the law or Trump’s administration that Can it hold him legally, judicially responsible for… Is he one of the pardoned ones?
SPEAKER 08 :
I’m not sure.
SPEAKER 11 :
I don’t know if he got a pardon, but I think one thing that held him accountable, he’s no longer in government anymore. And you know what? We also saw how quickly the border could get under control under a new administration. But a lot of the things, Alan, I think that happened under the previous administration were a national tragedy.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, and then there was a referendum in that big vote. All right, 20 seconds left. I’m going to encourage you to go to ACLJ.org, sign the petition. Great way to do it, absolutely free. Helps support the work of the ACLJ that way. If you’re new on YouTube right now or you never have, hit that subscribe button. And if you’re on Rumble, you can follow us there too. All right, that’s going to do it for today’s show. We’ll be back tomorrow on Sekulow.
