Logan Sekulow explores the political undercurrents both domestically and internationally. The episode sheds light on the allegations of a billion-dollar campaign aimed at influencing regime change in Israel, funded by American taxpayers. The team discusses the implications of these revelations, highlighting the intricate balance of justice, governance, and international relations that challenges democratic systems.
SPEAKER 12 :
we’ve got breaking news complete chaos erupts amid rogue judge’s order 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 11 :
And now your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome to Sekulow. Phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110. You may have heard it in my voice, but once again… Those judges are at it again. I feel like we are the Scooby-Doo gang and they are the monster or the person hiding behind the monster mask. Right, not an actual monster.
SPEAKER 03 :
We know that’s a costume, Logan.
SPEAKER 11 :
It’s 25 minutes of us trying to figure out and then having the same show once again, which is, oh, it was a rogue judge the whole time. And I would have gotten away with it. Yeah, it always feels like the same deal. This is the Scooby-Doo effect, as we call it here. And they call that in Washington, D.C. That’s something we need to coin. The Scooby-Doo effect. Yeah, like SDE. What is that Scooby-Doo effect?
SPEAKER 01 :
Oh, everybody knows that.
SPEAKER 11 :
Everyone knows that. It’s the new FOIA, really. 1-800-684-3110. Have your voice heard on the air today. And Will, let’s break this down because this has to do with the case involving the defunding of Planned Parenthood. As you know, they said, yes, you can defund Planned Parenthood. And they said, well, let’s hold off and see. Now it is even more of a mess as it sounds like 25% of Planned Parenthood
SPEAKER 03 :
can still be funded cannot be funded cannot be fun can be funded it is convoluted you’re right the first time here’s what it’s like the way they play the money game when it comes to life right so the the judge remember gave a two-week temporary restraining order blocking the implementing of the big beautiful big beautiful bill portion today that defunded planned parenthood They had a hearing on Friday, which was three days early because Planned Parenthood tried to get it moved back. But the government said, no, we can do it early. So the judge took that up. They had their hearing early on Friday. And yesterday was the judge’s own deadline for ruling on a preliminary injunction.
SPEAKER 11 :
We talked about that. That being the deadline, that this is going to happen very fast. And look, CeCe Howell is going to be joining us, one of our senior attorneys here, to really break this down from a legal perspective in the next segment. But I wanted you to have an understanding. This is what we’re talking about, what we had talked about last week, saying there was a specific deadline put in place by this judge.
SPEAKER 03 :
That’s right. So the temporary restraining order would only last until midnight last night on the 21st of July. And then either the law would go into effect or she would have to rule on a preliminary injunction. Now, when our team came in this morning and I was trying to explain what the judge did, I led with this. And so I want to say it to everyone. This is going to hurt your brain, the logic and the hoops that the judge jumped through to try and… come up with some sort of protection for Planned Parenthood. And at the end, she granted a preliminary injunction for about 25% of Planned Parenthood affiliates. She did not rule on a preliminary injunction for the remainder of them. She said, I’ll take it under advisement. Even though she had given herself a deadline, she didn’t say, I don’t grant a preliminary injunction in them, or I do. She just said, I’ll take it under advisement, which essentially kicks the can down the road, but it allows for the defunding.
SPEAKER 11 :
of that 75% for now. Yeah, and let’s, so you understand, the reason it’s the 75% is she’s saying roughly 25% of Planned Parenthood facilities do not provide abortions. Of course, we know a lot of state laws have changed. We know that a lot of state laws now no longer allow abortions. So, of course, what she’s saying is you can’t justify defunding those places that don’t support abortion. Not support abortion is the wrong word. If you’re Planned Parenthood, you support abortion. But if you don’t provide abortion, Because Planned Parenthood is broken up into individual states, individual regions and districts. It’s not just all one corporation. Now, there is the big corporation, and that is what’s been defunded. 75% of it. Look, this fight is going to continue on. We’re going to have to get some specificity on. They go, well, we got to get ourselves together here. Right, yeah. You know what you can get yourself together? You can support the work of the ACLJ. It’s nine days left. Number nine. Nine days. Nine days. left in our 35 years of justice drive. All donations are doubled today. We’re going to break it down a little bit more with CeCe Heil. She’s a legal expert. She’s going to be able to tell you exactly what this all means, what it looks like moving forward. And if she can’t, well, I’m just going to tell you that she can. 1-800-684-3110 if you want to be heard on the air today. Again, phone lines are open. I’d love to hear from you. When you hear rogue judges once again, how does it make you feel? How does it feel? We’ll be right back. Welcome back to Sekulow Senior Council. CeCe Heil is joining us in studio to break this down. I think we got to restate it a little bit because a lot of you are just joining us. And it is, as Will said, it’s a bit of a head scratcher. As another judge, the same judge said, hey, I’m going to give myself my own deadline. And the deadline passed and they said, okay. 25% of Planned Parenthood can remain funded. 75% can remain defunded temporarily for now, but I can look at it later on. I mean, am I missing anything here? I mean, that’s pretty close. That’s almost like I put it into AI and said, make this easy to understand.
SPEAKER 03 :
I think you could have also broken AI with this case because CeCe, the judge went to great lengths to find a way to, to keep some money flowing to Planned Parenthood. And it goes into… I mean, when you read the factual statement basis of her order, it just goes into how wonderful and how necessary life-saving Planned Parenthood is and that by… picking and choosing, the government is putting millions of people’s lives at risk. That’s always the favorite angle of everyone is that if you cut money somewhere by default, someone’s life is at risk. That’s kind of the status quo for government funding at this point. But what this judge did was effectively grant the injunction. So allowing this subset of Planned Parenthood affiliates the ability to continue to receive government money while the vast majority at least for now because of her deadline the tro the temporary restraining order expired they won’t be receiving medicaid reimbursement or federal dollars uh break down what the judge did here and and really kind of why it was so unusual for us to see this yeah
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, and just like you said, as I was reading the opinion, it’s about, I think, 30 pages long as I was reading the opinion. It definitely reads like an advertisement for Planned Parenthood. So, you know, exactly as you read this, where this judge’s alliance and allegiance lies. Definitely. However, she gets very creative because, you know, in our amicus brief that we filed in this case, we absolutely argue the fact that, you know, the the. There’s no constitutional right for subsidies, that Congress has the power of the purse, all of those arguments, which are the constitutional arguments that, yes, the federal government, when they’re giving money, they can have strings to that. So she goes out and says, Okay, I’m going to go and go to the Freedom of Association. That’s where I’m going to go because some of these Planned Parenthoods, and just to kind of put it into numbers, there’s 47 members that the Planned Parenthood Federation has. So there’s 47 members.
SPEAKER 11 :
The members are essentially districts or states.
SPEAKER 02 :
Usually a state.
SPEAKER 11 :
A state of Massachusetts or of Utah. We have of Tennessee and northern Mississippi. Yeah, they have them broken down. Right. So they’re organizations probably so they can say, okay, this one needs more funding, less funding.
SPEAKER 02 :
That’s right.
SPEAKER 11 :
When they’re big corporate.
SPEAKER 02 :
So the 47 members, there’s about 600 clinics that these 47 members operate. And actually two of the members joined in this lawsuit. So the Planned Parenthood Massachusetts and Planned Parenthood Utah were also members that joined individually. Right. But she reaches to those members that actually didn’t join individually, but she reaches to the other members and she basically says, look, if you’re just associated, let’s say you don’t comply with you provide abortions and you get less than $800,000 worth of Medicaid reimbursements. your only kind of harm or crime is that you’re associated. But because of that association, the way that the law is written, it lumps in affiliates. She’s saying, well, that then violates your freedom of association for those 10 clinics out of the 47, the 10 members, not clinics, members, the 10 members that don’t fall under that law. $800,000 and providing abortion limit. And so I think you’ve already addressed this. I mean, overall, it is probably about 75% of the Planned Parenthoods that are not getting their funding. So that is a very, very good thing. But it’s an interesting opinion that she’s carving out. The door stays a little open. Yes, abortion exception and the fact that she’s taking it under advisement. So what that means to when an appeal can happen.
SPEAKER 03 :
That’s right. One, it also seems like she set up a scenario where you could have both the defendants, which would be the government, and the plaintiffs, which would be Planned Parenthood, both appealing her preliminary injunction ruling at some point because the government’s saying, you gave them too much. The Planned Parenthood’s saying, you’re not giving us enough. She may be trying to have threaded the needle for optics to some degree. But here’s the other angle of it that has me scratching my head is that we got the case of Trump v. Casa where that was about the preliminary injunctions at the Supreme Court, these nationwide universal injunctions. And the Supreme Court basically said that you can issue an injunction, which is what we’re dealing with here in this case, in a case before your court to people that are before your court in the proper jurisdiction. And what we’re starting to see out of this is where she wanted to say Planned Parenthood isn’t that closely interrelated when it comes to the funding issue. So for government purposes, you have to look at them as just a bunch of different organizations that hang out. But when it comes to the injunction purposes, they are so intertwined that I can give injunctive relief to these 10 members, only one of which was before the court. That would have been Utah. Massachusetts Planned Parenthood, who was in her state, did not get injunctive relief. Right. but others that weren’t a party of it. So is it like she’s trying to have it both ways, that Planned Parenthood isn’t that closely related when it comes to funding, but when it comes to the purpose of this, I can give… close to extra special injunction relief to parties that aren’t even a part of this lawsuit in practicality.
SPEAKER 02 :
I think we’re seeing, again, abortion distortion, like you’re saying. They’re very tightly knit for one reason that supports her pro-abortion stance, and they’re not so tightly knit for another reason that doesn’t support her pro-abortion stance. We see that. And I think what you said about… You know, these injunctions and what the Supreme Court has said now judges are trying to get very creative of how they don’t run afoul of that, how they’re, you know, can possibly say I’m not giving a nationwide injunction, although she is giving an injunction again, like to individual parties that were not. Before her court. They were not parties to this case, but she’s lumping them in because they are an affiliate or a member of Planned Parenthood Federation.
SPEAKER 03 :
And on top of that, it seems that she found that pathway and with the briefing, obviously, that Planned Parenthood Federation for America put forward of this First Amendment violation, the freedom of association. As a matter of fact, she even goes into detail and says that, you know, by defunding these individual communities, clinics it could harm Planned Parenthood Federation for America because that could discourage membership in their organization from states that don’t allow abortion and therefore it impairs their ability to engage in advocacy so now we’re tying federal dollars to advocacy organizations which just seems like a bizarre situation in and of itself but on top of that Planned Parenthood Federation for America is doesn’t receive medicaid reimbursement it doesn’t have uh clinics it is the umbrella organization so if we’re starting to separate it out their only harm is that people may not want to pay them dues because they may lose federal subsidies right absolutely she has crafted and created this freedom of association harm and that’s what she’s relying on for the whole entire opinion
SPEAKER 11 :
I want to take this phone call. We’ve got a call specifically for CeCe Jerry in Rhode Island. While you’re here, CeCe, I want to make sure you have time to take this call. Let’s go ahead, Jerry.
SPEAKER 10 :
CeCe, my question is, I’ve heard your analysis on a lot of cases. Do you see the detached neutrality in this writing of this judge? And if not, is there oversight for those kind of judges?
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, okay, Jerry, if you listened to me earlier, which you were, you know, the first thing when I read this opinion, it sounds like an ad for Planned Parenthood. So there’s no guessing where this judge’s allegiance in the alliance lies. She’s not neutral. And yes, you know, I mean, if judges… are elected then you can get rid of them through that election process if they’re appointed then you need to make sure that you’re again voting for the people that are appointing judges it’s kind of that kind of situation of that’s the oversight uh definitely not neutral you can read the opinion she’s very much pro-planned panhood what’s the next step here okay because our team is obviously involved in massachusetts we’re involved so much in the life campaigns right now we got about a minute but what are we going to do here Real quickly, we will watch this. If an appeal is filed, if the government files an appeal, we’ll file an appeal supporting. And if the Planned Parenthood files an appeal, we can file a brief against.
SPEAKER 03 :
We may have two more briefs coming up just at this appeal stage of the injunction because now she set it up where we’ll probably see one from the government and from Planned Parenthood. We will want to weigh in on behalf of the ACLJ members in both of those. Both of them.
SPEAKER 11 :
That’s right. And you can be one of those ACLJ members, ACLJ champions and someone that gives on a monthly basis. Right now, during the last few days of our 35 years of Justice Drive, your donations are doubled. That means there’s another member who has pledged to match any donation that comes through. It’s a whole big group of members. So you give $10, it becomes $20. If you give $100, it becomes $200. Understand how helpful that is. So do it today. We only are able to offer those kind of things during very specific months because, again, you have a very specific amount of people who are ready to unlock during a certain amount of time. So I encourage you to do it. If you’ve ever thought about supporting this broadcast and our legal work, they both go hand in hand. They both can’t exist without you. So go to ACLJ.org slash 35 or scan that QR code on your screen. Give me a call if you want to be on the air. We’ll be right back. We’re going to update you also on what we were talking about yesterday with Tulsi Gabbard. You’re releasing hundreds of documents that really, I mean, according to her and her words, not mine. Look, I know she’s taking a lot of heat for it. As expected, the moderate and liberal press have both said, you know, this is ridiculous. We can’t believe it. There’s no merit here. But again, her words, not mine, says some treasonous activity that came down during the Obama administration to try to thwart the election of President Trump. So that’s her statement. That’s paraphrased, but a lot of those words were in there. Treasonous conspiracy was also in there. Treasonous conspiracy. We’re using some pretty big words here. Words that, by the way, are hefty and mean a lot. So like I’ve said, though, Tulsi is one of our good friends. She’s been on this show for years until she became, like the week before she became the director of national intelligence, was on this show many times a week. And someone who I really respect. And I think is a great person. But these are some hefty, hefty words. You start throwing out, was it treasonous conspiracy? Right. I mean, that’s not nothing here. Okay, now she refers it to the Department of Justice, right? And the Department of Justice says, we’ll take it under consideration for criminal intent. Now, President Trump did respond as well. And I want you to hear specifically from President Trump, again, in his words, not mine, about these documents.
SPEAKER 01 :
But you know what? If you look at those papers, they have a stone cold, and it was President Obama. It wasn’t lots of people all over the place. It was them, too. But the leader of the gang was President Obama, Barack Hussein Obama. Have you heard of him? And except for the fact that he gets shielded by the press for his entire life, that’s the one they… Look, he’s guilty. It’s not a question. You know, I like to say, let’s give it time. It’s there. He’s guilty. This was treason. This was every word you can think of. They tried to steal the election. They tried to obfuscate the election. They did things that nobody’s ever even imagined, even in other countries. You’ve seen some pretty rough countries. This man has seen some pretty rough countries, but you’ve never seen anything like it.
SPEAKER 11 :
I mean, that’s, again, a pretty big statement to make. He said, you know, all the words. Essentially, he is guilty. I mean, those are the words. Look, he’s guilty. It’s not a question. You know I like to say it. Let’s give it time. It’s there. He’s guilty. This was treason. Those, again, very strong words from the President of the United States. I do think he got to tread lightly here, but it is what it is, especially when we’re dealing with this. Not that I don’t necessarily, I haven’t looked at all the documents, I haven’t gone through everything, but what I’ve seen so far, there’s some rough stuff there, but there’s also presidential immunity, which we know happened. He did say this was every word you can think of, and knowing President Trump, There’s a lot of words. There’s certain words. A lot of them we can’t say on the air.
SPEAKER 03 :
Obfuscate is one of them. Obfuscate was one. He did say that one.
SPEAKER 11 :
I feel like that’s the one. He’s like, have you heard this word?
SPEAKER 03 :
Learn this word. It’s a good word. Obfuscate. I can’t say it. So here’s the other angle to this as well as Senator Chuck Grassley from Iowa, who has been for a long time trying to get the public release of the classified annex to the Inspector General Horowitz report on Hillary Clinton, her email scandal. The inspector general looked at the way the FBI handled it, came to conclusions that James Comey did not handle it appropriately. But there was this classified annex that really gave the detail of how he came to those conclusions. And what is interesting about this is now, finally, this is public. There is redactions of sources and methods as is usual when you’re dealing with work product from the FBI. But Chuck Grassley was able to put this out in public. And here’s what he had to say about this, because remember, This entire treasonous conspiracy we’re talking about, one of the big angles of it is Russiagate, the way that they weaponize and manufactured intelligence, as Tulsi Gabbard told us earlier this week, to try and hamstring and do this years-long coup, as she called it, against President Trump so that he could not fulfill his mandate from the American people. But a lot of this started with the white glove treatment that James Comey gave Hillary Clinton when investigating alleged crimes when it came to… White glove treatment. I like that. You know, it was like she had special treatment. I know what it is. I know what it is. I’m saying I liked it.
SPEAKER 11 :
I like that you’re saying that, Leo, when you book a nice hotel.
SPEAKER 03 :
Right. White glove treatment. So what they’re concerned is that this started even before in the way they handled this server issue. Remember, the federal government was completely fine under the Biden administration going after and indicting President Trump, former President Trump, for having classified materials at Mar-a-Lago. which he had the power to declassify, but the Secretary of State that was mishandling classified information was told by James Comey, you’re good to go, shouldn’t have done it, whatever, nothing to see here. But here’s what Chuck Grassley had to say after revealing this information. It was a complete cover-up. completely ignoring their responsibilities, another way of saving the politicization and weaponization of the FBI and the Department of Justice, turning a blind eye to key evidence while investigating Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information on this private email server. These findings prove that the Clinton investigation wasn’t thorough and complete. In fact, you could say they didn’t even start to look at it. That’s what’s in this classified annex. They had thumb drives. They had emails. They had all this stuff that they didn’t even investigate. They had it, didn’t look at it. So therefore, we’re showing another angle of the weaponization and politicization by by James Comey that started even before they decided to conjure up this Russia hoax that they perpetrated on the American people after President Trump won because they thought they had it in the bag for Hillary Clinton by just ignoring her crimes.
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah I think that’s true. Phone lines are open for you 1-800-684-3110. I also wanted to say Tulsi Gabbard again has been in the news this morning also because they have released now Hundreds of thousands of documents, 230,000 documents on the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. And again, his family said, please respect them, have empathy for them right now as you go through it. I haven’t had time because this broke really this morning to go through any of it. But you know what? This is another one of those promises that was kept. They said they were going to have all the information happen with JFK. It’s not always what you’re looking for. It’s not always the here’s who did it or whatever it is. But I can see some of the information that comes in from this MLK assassination document dump that is fairly fascinating. And I’m sure it’s going to be worth a read for a lot of you. Again, a lot of us were not born in that era when that happened. Our parents were. But here in Tennessee, you know, one of the places you go see is where that moment happened. Lorraine Motel. Yeah, at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee. And I took my son there just less than a year ago to see that spot, which you learn about in history class. So I think having more transparency on all of these things is going to be helpful and helpful for the country to heal as well. I want to know about what you think. And look, I know I see a lot of people watching. I know these are a heady topics and we do these heady topics. We don’t get a lot of callers. We get a lot of viewers. There’s no, a lot of you are just listening and you’re wanting to hear, or you’re wanting to watch and really take in what we’re doing here. But phone lines are open for you. And I’d love to hopefully answer some of those questions at 1-800-684-3110. That’s 1-800-684-3110. If you’re in the chat right now on YouTube, by the way, I don’t like to call out people. I’m not gonna call anyone by name. Uh, You can take your racism somewhere else. This is not what we’re talking about here. If we bring up MLK assassination or President Obama and you immediately jump to some racial slurs, you are not welcome on this channel. So goodbye. And I’ll make sure our moderators see that as well. Phone lines, though, are open for you. at 1-800-684-3110 as we hand as we head into the second half hour of this broadcast i want you to join us not only supporting us during the aclj a drive that’s happening right now celebrating 35 years of justice i also want you to join us for the next half hour scan that qr code if you can make a donation it’s doubled and some of you don’t have the access to the second half hour through your local radio stations that’s fine we are live right now That’s 12 to 1 p.m. Eastern time each and every day on ACLJ.org, on YouTube, on Rumble, and of course, later on Archive. Most of you watch this not live, but if you are live right now, we appreciate it. We’ll be right back.
SPEAKER 12 :
Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever. This is Sekulow. And now your host, Logan Sekulow.
SPEAKER 11 :
Welcome to Sekulow. Phone lines are open. About three lines are open right now. 1-800-684-3110. 1-800-684-3110. If you see me do this, it’s like when they’re training the velociraptors. Right.
SPEAKER 03 :
I didn’t see that one.
SPEAKER 11 :
Hold. You didn’t see that one. The Jurassic World.
SPEAKER 03 :
I didn’t see that one. That’s Chris Pratt. I’m just the original two. The goat. Yeah, but I like the original too. Jurassic Park. The Lost World. The Lost World.
SPEAKER 11 :
Which is what we call America right now. All right. Phone lines are open for you. That was a good joke. Lost World. 1-800-684-3110. You know any good quotes from The Lost World? No. No? I don’t remember radio. Anybody in there?
SPEAKER 03 :
We’re going to need a bigger boat, right? That’s from The Lost World. That’s not even in Jaws. I know. I was trying to get on your bad side today because you’re already telling me to hold. Hold? That’s Braveheart. Right. That’s different. I don’t know where we’re at right now. I do. We’re in the studio. We’re talking about- No, I know where I am physically. We’re talking about what happened in Massachusetts because this is- This is a hard pivot.
SPEAKER 11 :
All right. We’re talking now about the very easy topic that you want to talk about, Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood, of course, there was, in the big beautiful bill, there was the fact that Planned Parenthood got defunded. Now a judge, as you’d expect, another rogue judge comes out and says, you can’t do that right now. Let’s put a temporary restraining order on you. They say, okay, we’re going to make a decision in the next couple weeks. Here’s our deadline. They make that decision. That decision is 75% of Planned Parenthood gets defunded. For now, 25%, the ones that don’t provide abortions, because again, Planned Parenthood is set up into different member states, you know, states and chapters and areas. So the ones that don’t provide abortion, they can still receive funding. Those that do provide abortion, they can’t for now, but maybe we’ll take it in advisement. Of course, the ACLJ is on top of it when we have to be, because these kind of things get very nuanced. uh very headache driven as will said uh but there’s a lot of people out there who are concerned about this we’re also talking about that tranche of documents that came out from tulsi gabbard uh in director of national intelligence both the mlk documents that just dropped this morning that i’ll be honest we’ve not had a chance to review yet but i i very much am appreciated that they said they were going to do it and once again they did it uh that is something that people have been asking for for a very long time uh and then of course the documents that came out and the look president trump again now using the word what was the specific phrase president trump says president obama treason look he’s guilty it’s not a question you know i i like to say give it time but he’s guilty this was treason this was every word you can think of so again they’re not really you know they’re not really uh placing their bets in a place where they’re not they’re not making sure that you they politic around this right they are using guilty of treason and that comes with a litany of responses that have to come out when you start making these kind of claims of course they made these claims about president trump for you
SPEAKER 03 :
Right, and they took him to court and they tried to have him put in jail and they tried to come up with every single thing they could to stop him. And I don’t know, man.
SPEAKER 11 :
I don’t want to live through this again. I mean, this is where I get people.
SPEAKER 03 :
I agree, except I don’t want to live through it again. And also, I don’t know, based off of the immunity ruling, I think it’d be hard for you to argue to a court that President Obama calling a meeting, when you take it to the base level of what an official act is,
SPEAKER 11 :
even if the outcome that he doesn’t have immunity for that i think also but these other individuals i mean we lived through it logan it was horrific what they did to our country but you know what happened then president trump won in a landslide because everyone saw it and said that’s not what we do here in america my concern would be now you’re just uh playing revenge and the same thing will happen once again now i’ve said this before We live in a pendulum. In our lifetime, we have seen Republicans and Democrats back and forth and back and forth. It’s never. People like change. People like new. New is always better. Well, phone lines are open. 1-800-684-3110. I want to hear from you. There’s a lot of calls coming in. We got Jeff Balaban joining us the next time. Is that right? He’s with ACLJ Jerusalem. There’s some updates there, not specifically even on Israel, but of course, once again, that taxpayer funding was going to fund not just Israel, but specifically almost regime change in Israel. It’s pretty interesting. We’re going to break that all down with Jeff Balaban coming up. And remember, when you support the work of the ACLJ, you also support the ECLJ, the European Center for Law and Justice, ACLJ Jerusalem, and our international affiliates. We’ll be right back. Welcome back to Secular. Phone lines are lighting up right now. We only got one open, but you can give us a call still. We’d love to get you in the next half hour or the next segment. We’re going to be taking a lot of your calls and comments to wrap up the show. We’re going to be joined now by Jeff Balaban, head of ACLJ Jerusalem. This is pretty interesting. And the ACLJ was very involved. This is something you need to really look at the way your government runs. And that is through an investigation. The ACLJ, again, kind of led the charge in. I’ll let Will go through some of the details here. We’re able to uncover a lot of information that showed that not just that the Biden administration and the Obama administration was not necessarily the biggest friend of Israel. And again, remember, this is not during this current wartime. This is during relative peace. This is for the Biden administration. This is coming out of the Abraham Accords. I’d say probably one of the most peaceful times in the Middle East we’ve ever experienced. And they were actively working with up to the tune of a million dollars in taxpayer dollars. No, you left out a very key letter there. Billion dollars. You said million. I said billion. Okay, maybe our phone scratched. I thought when you said million, I actually thought- Not that much. Yeah, I mean, you can barely buy a house in Nashville for that. But a billion dollars that was going specifically to fund organizations who goal in Israel. Israel is very diverse politically. I think that there is sort of this overarching. It’d be like if you thought everyone in America was a Trump supporter. It’s not how it is. Israel is very diverse in that sense in terms of conservatives and liberals. They were going to fund those specifically anti-Netanyahu organizations, organizations that were essentially going to try to either stop or have a regime change at the time, depending on when it was, wherever he landed. But people who are specifically against what would be considered the more conservative movement of Israel that is what they were using your tax money to do not support Israel like a lot of people claim but to actually be involved in in the politics so deeply.
SPEAKER 03 :
Well Logan I think this ties directly to what we were talking about with how the Obama administration weaponized intelligence manufactured intelligence to try and affect regime here in America with the first Trump administration. This is something, Jeff, we uncovered during the Obama years that the U.S. through the State Department was funding Mahmoud Abbas’s son for the express purpose of trying to defeat Bibi Netanyahu. Now, tell us about how this started, because this is a report coming out of the Judiciary Committee and Jim Jordan showing that close to a billion dollars was from the State Department, from USAID, and from the Department of Defense was going to these groups in Israel that were trying to basically bring about regime change and get rid of Bibi Netanyahu in Israel during the last four years.
SPEAKER 05 :
Right. There were rumors floating around for a long time, based also on what had been happening during the Obama years, of money coming from Democrat groups and potentially even from the administration when the Democrats were in the White House, trying to undermine the elected government of Israel. Now, let’s be clear. It’s not the same system in Israel. In Israel, it’s a parliamentary system where you have direct party elections. You elect a slate of people. Those slates of various parties form coalitions. Right now, the governing coalition is headed by the party with the most mandates, which is Likud, which is Netanyahu’s party. And so it’s the most important and biggest block in the coalition. But these coalitions are extremely narrow. So a party with even three or four votes mandates can collapse the entire government at any time. It’s not like you wait four years for an election. So an entire coalition could collapse. And so it looked to us like they kept on finding issues to try and rile up the public to create that kind of hostility to topple the government. right before the war started, and one of the reasons the war started, according to Hamas, was they saw the Israeli populace was fractured and angry and fighting in the streets, not violently, but there’s a lot of hostility over the issue of judicial reform. And it turns out, we looked into this, uh, The Israeli government keeps records, obviously in Hebrew, of foreign money coming in, and we started taking a look at it, and it looked suspicious to us that some of the money looked like it was being laundered through non-profits that were coming directly from the United States of America, from American tax dollars, from the Biden administration, going to groups which were then being funneled through to support these street protests being mobilized against Netanyahu. It’s, by the way, a playbook that we see in America, which is why we need to look for it here. We brought this a couple of years ago already to Jim Jordan, who is the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, to his office and a couple of offices on Capitol Hill. And they started looking into it. And last week they published a report and they put out information, as you say, tracking about a billion dollars or so of money going from the United States government directly to organizations trying to rile up street support to essentially topple the Israeli government.
SPEAKER 03 :
Jeff, and when you put this into context, when you think about the 2024 election, in the 20-month campaign cycle, the Federal Election Commission put out presidential candidates raised about $1.6 billion and spent over $1.3 billion. Now, that’s just the campaigns themselves, not including super PACs and things of that nature. But that’s talking about the candidates in the United States for president. Now take almost that much, about 66% of that amount was then being funneled by our government into a country the size of New Jersey to try and influence their elections. It can’t be understated how effective our government could have been by influencing an election with a billion dollars.
SPEAKER 05 :
Number one, number two, think about it. This is the same party that was riling America up over foreign interference in our elections, in America elections, at the same time as, according to this report, they’re funneling an enormous amount of American tax dollars to try to destroy Israel’s governing coalition. Israel’s democracy. And so this is, I think, a bombshell. This is a scandal, a terrible scandal. And we’re glad that the Judiciary Committee really dug into this, followed up, and is now making this public and looking for answers from the public.
SPEAKER 03 :
And Jeff, I think one, it goes to show that the complete disregard that both the Obama administration and the Biden administration actually have for elections when it doesn’t help out their one party. But also when you think about this, I think we finally have found something that can bring us together with the BDSU movement because, you know, they want to boycott, divest and sanction Israel. I think we can defund this money. to stop influencing israel elections they should be happy with us defunding this kind of money going to israel right i mean you’d think that that would be something they’d be okay with of course not they want this they just want you ben and jerry’s exactly
SPEAKER 05 :
It is no question that it’s the same mentality, the same – that is trying to really change, really destroy the American concept of governance. It’s really trying to do the same thing in Israel. Coming out of America, it is extraordinary the amount of money being spent on this tiny country. And it’s also truly – terrible to see the amount of hostility they were able to generate in the streets here and the amount of turning brother against brother and how, again, those who committed the terrible atrocities on October 7th said they knew the time was right because they saw that Israel itself was becoming frayed at the seams and there was internal anger over this judicial reform issue. Well, it turns out, yeah, America was funding that out.
SPEAKER 11 :
It was funny. And Jeff, I think that is something. We’ve only got a couple of minutes here. I think that is something that doesn’t get talked about at all in America. It’s Israel. If you’re on the left, Israel, bad. You know, the Palestinian people or you would say Hamas. Good. But they don’t even understand. And maybe it should be another one of those, you know. proof that Israel is one of the free areas of the Middle East is that it is that fractured. The fact that you can have people who believe whatever they want to believe politically and can take to the streets and can be against a political regime, even Jewish people, even Israeli people, who have a problem with the Netanyahu administration. That exists, and it exists in a way that is not unlike America, where you’re able to actually talk about this, where you know if this was in, I don’t know, any of the surrounding countries, it could never happen. But here they paint Israel as just this sort of right-wing extremist.
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, you know, Israel’s not behaving the way the left wants it to behave. The left wants Israel to essentially commit suicide and abandon its protection of itself. And Israel is somehow stubbornly refusing to just commit national suicide. And so they’re trying from the outside to rev up the process. But yes, it is extraordinary. Israel continues to be amazingly resilient. And there were moments, beautiful moments, even during those fights, even during the anger in the streets of protesters going up one escalator and down another escalator on the train, meeting each other on both sides, carrying banners opposite sides, reaching out and hugging each other or shaking hands to show they’re still brothers. And so there was some element to that. But yes, it caused tremendous strife. in Israel. I believe they’re still funding certain protests right now over other issues in Israel, these groups. And it’s very, very important that the American government is looking into it, that the Congress is looking into it. And I am very happy that we were able to bring it to their attention.
SPEAKER 11 :
Absolutely. That’s why we have an ACLJ Jerusalem, even our ACLJTC office can work in tandem to make sure this kind of thing happens. Jeff, thank you so much for joining us. We head into this last segment of the day I want to hear from you we got two lines open at 1-800-684-3110 it can be on any of the topics we talked about today or if you have a question or comment that is at least within scope you can call in I know a lot of you are watching right now thousands of you that watch live and of course the hundreds of thousands of you plus that watch later on or listen later on if you are brand new and you’re watching right now however you’re watching because I know about half the people that watch the show each and every day have never seen my face before never seen Will’s pretty face before I’m going to ask you to hit that subscribe button That’s a great free way to help support the work of the ACLJ and help get this information into more hands. That being said, we always want to remain that this show and all of our work is without a paywall and it’s always free for you to share. We can’t do that without you. So that’s why we have this right now. ACLJ matching 35 years of justice drive. Be a part of it today. Take your calls and comments coming right up. Welcome back to Seculo. We’re about to take your calls and comments right now. So give us a call. Two lines open. 1-800-684-3110. We saw a lot of people because I said our pretty faces, our beautiful faces, Will. And we just nicknamed you. You’re Big Beautiful Will. That’s right.
SPEAKER 03 :
Big Beautiful Bill. That’d be my father. Yeah. That’s my father’s name. It’s not my name. Don’t call me that. Yeah.
SPEAKER 11 :
I’m Big Beautiful Will. Would you buy Big Beautiful Will merchandise? Let me know. I can throw together some shirts. Okay. Yeah.
SPEAKER 03 :
Is it going to be as great as the Rapture Prepper? I don’t know.
SPEAKER 11 :
I got an email from those people who printed those.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah.
SPEAKER 11 :
You had more orders than any first day. It dropped off pretty significantly after that first day. But that first day, we sold a lot. I got a tote bag, by the way, if anyone’s looking for one. Yeah, I think you were half the orders, though, because you bought one of everything. I wanted the whole set. Right. And now I look at it and go, well, it’s a beautiful design. All right. It’s really good. Yeah, big, beautiful design. Let’s go and take a phone call. Let’s go to John in Illinois, who’s calling on line one. John, go ahead.
SPEAKER 09 :
Hey, you guys, I’m really getting tired of the revenge thing. These guys did something wrong. Let’s go after them. Not because of revenge, because they did something wrong. I think the country’s ready for this.
SPEAKER 11 :
John, I appreciate your call. I want to reiterate what I was saying. What I was saying is because of the immunity case. that it’s going to become a little bit harder to actually make this happen and of course do you want this then to happen to your president uh moving forward because this is going to continue on in a vicious cycle unfortunately it’s where we are i understand you want justice everyone wants justice uh and i don’t believe it’s specifically out for revenge but you got to make sure you play these cards right and john i appreciate your calling i think you were on a motorcycle in illinois which is pretty cool you know that’s you know they won’t get a lot of callers on it could be batman batman called into the show yeah you know like last thing in illinois chicago that’s the you know dark knight series yeah exactly the nolan verse yeah my gotham city is new york yeah my gotham city’s gotham city oh okay fair i’m bigger fan of bloodhaven let’s go ahead and continue on let’s go to candy who’s calling uh from georgia on youtube candy you’re on the air
SPEAKER 06 :
Okay, I like motorcycles too. Anyway, I have a question. Can the rogue judges actually stop what was passed by Congress since defunding Planned Parenthood? The abortion is a legislative law.
SPEAKER 11 :
Candy, what a question to ask. Because what we’ve learned is, I don’t know, everything seems to be written with these ridiculous loopholes. Right. where it doesn’t matter the intent of the Supreme Court, doesn’t matter the intent of the President of the United States, these judges, they Jurassic Park it, Will. They find a way.
SPEAKER 03 :
That’s right. And Candy, what is going on here is that that’s why they’re using the First Amendment claim, violating the freedom of association for the Planned Parenthood affiliates, because Congress can’t pass a law that violates the Constitution. So they had to go to something like the First Amendment and try to create this right to funding claim by default through the first amendment association when it does seem ridiculous right but they that’s how you can overturn laws that are passed because you can pass a law in congress and get signed by the president but if it violates the constitution it can’t stay on the books and that’s where you get challenges in court so um you Yeah, it seems bizarre. Congress has the power of the purse. They decide to not fund someone. That isn’t some constitutional right to continue funds flowing to an individual organization. But we’re in a bizarre place. They found a weird loophole. About 25%, 20 to 25% can continue to get it, at least under this preliminary injunction. But we’ll see where it goes. But we know at the ACLJ, we will be filing more briefs very quickly because we’re not going to stop on this.
SPEAKER 11 :
All right, thanks for calling, Candy. Let’s move on to Debra, who is watching on the Salem News Channel. Debra, you’re on the air. Hi. Hello. hello go ahead we are here okay i’m just wondering when these people are going to start being publicly prosecuted for what they’ve done to our country yeah it’s a process deborah let’s just go through it because right now so uh dni gabbert releases these documents then those documents go to the department of justice with a recommendation recommendation for some sort of
SPEAKER 03 :
uh criminal prosecution so yes there was a criminal referral from the agency the director of national intelligence’s office the odni to the doj they now have the evidence that was turned over and referral of a crime then it has to go through the normal process they have to do an investigation look at the evidence decide if they want to take individuals before a grand jury Then the grand jury has to return the indictment, a true bill, that these people are indicted. And then you move forward with the prosecution, with the case.
SPEAKER 11 :
So the answer is, Deborah, you’d be lucky to get it through in this Trump administration.
SPEAKER 03 :
You can indict quickly if they have the evidence. But I mean, a trial could last a very long time.
SPEAKER 11 :
Could last years. And of course, it’s the American way. You got to stretch things out. You got to stretch things out.
SPEAKER 03 :
You have the right to a speedy trial unless you’re the deep state, then never happens.
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, and then they can somehow say 25% gets defunded or gets funded. 75%, we’ll see. Maybe I’ll think about it. Maybe I’ll spend some time. Let me mull it over a little bit. Get that, Will? Mm-hmm. Let’s go to Susan who’s calling in Maryland. on Line 5. You’re on the air watching on YouTube, which means so many thousands of you join us. 508,000 508,000 subscribers on YouTube. But understand, that’s only about half the people that watch the show. Millions watch the show each and every week just through YouTube alone. It’s really remarkable. We are living in a different world. You know, there’s been that whole debate over Stephen Colbert and the cancellation and what happened, what didn’t happen. What didn’t also happen is the fact that millions of you watch us. More people watch us then watch a lot of these shows on YouTube. It’s a changing world. Embrace it or die. Let’s go to Susan. Marilyn, you’re on the air.
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, support ACLJ. If Trump could prove treason, would a president accused of treason be treated differently as a vacating president or
SPEAKER 11 :
Yes. Susan, we at least know how President Trump was treated, but very different if he was still the sitting president.
SPEAKER 03 :
Right, and because the actions that they’re saying are treasonous or treasonous conspiracy happened during his time as president, that is very similar, at least if you want to look at an analogy or a parallel. The government went after President Trump for things they alleged he did while in office. And what did the Supreme Court come back with is that There is broad immunity for presidents, things that could be considered official acts by the president while they are in office. That’s why making phone calls that the Democrats like to harp on to state officials. Because that’s what it was, and that is a normal thing that a president would do. Call state officials, look into the integrity of the election. Normal thing. That is considered an official act. That is why the same thing that I think they would have a hard time bringing charges against President Obama are because… He was calling a meeting of principals. That is something that presidents do. Now, the people underlying that took orders and went and did things may be a lot easier to go after. But I think in this, the naming of President Obama gets the headlines. I personally, my analysis is just my two cents. It is very hard for them to go after President Obama for this because he was the president. While he was president, he did this. And I think they would argue these were official acts.
SPEAKER 11 :
All right. Hey, that’s going to do it for today’s show. We appreciate everyone joining us. Will gave some great analysis. Big, beautiful Will. You did a great job.
SPEAKER 03 :
I’m going to wear that shirt tomorrow. Tomorrow?
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, I’m going to go spray paint. Okay. I know a guy. 1-800, not 1-800, what am I saying? Go to ACLJ.org. Let’s throw the QR code up on the screen. I want you right now, donations are doubled during this 35 years of Justice Drive. There’s only a few days left during this drive. Final nine days to have your gifts doubled. Again, at ACLJ.org slash 35. In the month of August. Because everyone sadly goes back to school. I hate talking about it. I hate thinking about it. We’re going to do something a little different to keep celebrating the ACLJ 35, as we will for the next year, because it’s such an important moment. And we know, for you, you’ve been with us for a long time, or whether you’re brand new, you want to help us out, this is the only way to do it. Help us stay free. ACLJ.org.
