Speaker 1: Let not your heart be troubled. You are listening to
Speaker 1: the Sean Hannity Radio show podcast Okay, Winner is on
Speaker 1: the way. And if you listen to this show, you
Speaker 1: know there's only one product that I absolutely rely on
Speaker 1: when I get a sore throat or a scratchy throat,
Speaker 1: and that's the delicious Pine Brothers Softish Throat Drops. Now
Speaker 1: it's the only throat trop that has ranked number one
Speaker 1: and throat coating action number one. And I mean you
Speaker 1: can literally feel it that coating of your throat with
Speaker 1: their gumm acacia, their plant glycerin, and of course they're
Speaker 1: delicious natural flavors. Now, they're amazing. My favorite is wild
Speaker 1: cherry and licorice. I also love the honey and liquorice. Now,
Speaker 1: I've heard a lot of people onto Pine Brothers. You
Speaker 1: want to know the first three things that come out
Speaker 1: of their mouth. One, they're delicious, I can feel them
Speaker 1: coat in my throat and wow, they're soft, almost like
Speaker 1: a gummy bear. Yeah, I know they're soft. That's why
Speaker 1: they're called Pine Brothers Softish throat Drops. Now, work with me, people,
Speaker 1: So this season, look, you're gonna have some throat issues
Speaker 1: and do what I do to soothe my golden throat,
Speaker 1: I use Pine Brothers throat drops. You will love this product.
Speaker 1: It's worth every penny. You can find Pine Brothers at
Speaker 1: CBS Select, Walmart, Target Shop right why because they are
Speaker 1: the best. Everybody. Welcome to Shawn Hannity Shows. Jay Sekulo
Speaker 1: sitting in for my good friend Sean Hannity. But we've
Speaker 1: got to start this broadcast on a bit of a
Speaker 1: sad note. We've got a great program for you lined
Speaker 1: up today. We're gonna talk about a lot of issues,
Speaker 1: but we cannot ignore the fact that a good friend,
Speaker 1: a great friend of Shawn is a good friend of
Speaker 1: ours UH at the American Center for Law and Justice,
Speaker 1: where I serve as Chief Council, passed away today, and
Speaker 1: that is Alan Combs, age sixty six. Um. We've already
Speaker 1: shared earlier on on some of our broadcasts the our
Speaker 1: thoughts and prayers for Jocelyn Crowley, the entire family. Alan
Speaker 1: has been partners with Seawan for a very long time.
Speaker 1: They go back a long way and they were very close.
Speaker 1: Shawan is out today, but he's agreed to call us
Speaker 1: to talk about this, and I think we we have
Speaker 1: to start the program Sean with acknowledging the fact that
Speaker 1: we've lost a great one. Jay, by the way, thanks
Speaker 1: thanks for doing the show. And you're a good friend.
Speaker 1: You know, it's amazing and I'm all these years we
Speaker 1: did this show together, do you know every single conservative
Speaker 1: friend of mine? You included Laura Ingram, included, Bill Cunningham included.
Speaker 1: I mean, I can't tell you the number of my
Speaker 1: friends on my but that agree with me politically. That
Speaker 1: just knew. The guy that I knew together, that I
Speaker 1: worked with together an amazing human being. And you know
Speaker 1: when we started this show, j when Fox News went
Speaker 1: on the air in October, nobody, I mean nobody thought
Speaker 1: we had a shot. Neither one of us had a
Speaker 1: lot of TV experience, and and every single day, you know,
Speaker 1: we were working on really just trying to hold our
Speaker 1: own and survived in those early years. And and the
Speaker 1: amazing thing was that even though we had political disagreements,
Speaker 1: he got along with all of my friends. And you know,
Speaker 1: he used to always say to me, you know, you're
Speaker 1: friends always treat me better than my friends treat you.
Speaker 1: And maybe it was a tribute to him over me,
Speaker 1: but um, he was an amazing, amazing guy. He had
Speaker 1: a wit, a sense of humor, quickness, and more importantly,
Speaker 1: I mean he was he was somebody that loved free speech.
Speaker 1: I'll tell you that we had him when we approached
Speaker 1: to had him come down and join us at Regent
Speaker 1: University for a symposium where he was one of the guests,
Speaker 1: and he was just phenomenal. I mean, this was a
Speaker 1: guy that loved free speech and did not mind, as
Speaker 1: you said, Shawn, speaking to an audience that didn't agree
Speaker 1: with him, and they walked away maybe not agreeing, certainly
Speaker 1: not agree in most cases, but they loved the guy.
Speaker 1: And that was that was the magic of Alan. And
Speaker 1: he also because he had the stand up comedy background.
Speaker 1: I can't tell you how many times I've often said
Speaker 1: that it's the most difficult people to debate, our comedians
Speaker 1: because they can switch on in time. You can think
Speaker 1: you've got him pinned up against the ball and you
Speaker 1: made all your great political points and then all of
Speaker 1: a sudden, you know, he takes all of it right
Speaker 1: of your balloon. And and Alan would do that. Um,
Speaker 1: I want to say that you know, when we started
Speaker 1: Jay in, we never thought we were going to make
Speaker 1: it very long, and so we really collaborated and really
Speaker 1: worked hard behind the scenes together to make the show
Speaker 1: a success. And I know people may remember the fact
Speaker 1: that politically we disagreed, but the one thing that we
Speaker 1: always agreed on was that we wanted this show to work,
Speaker 1: and it really did. It became a huge hit and
Speaker 1: were but we were both so very proud of that,
Speaker 1: and it was it was us working together as friends
Speaker 1: behind the scenes every day and trying to make this
Speaker 1: thing work. The one thing that really stands out about album,
Speaker 1: You just know, how can just the political atmosphere is
Speaker 1: in the country right now, and he, you know what
Speaker 1: the mikes would he believed everything he said he when
Speaker 1: when he wrote in his books, and it proved me crazy,
Speaker 1: absolutely insane, but he believed it. And we we argue
Speaker 1: when we'd argue, and we'd argue, and then after the
Speaker 1: show we were discussing how we can do a better
Speaker 1: show the next day and we were discussing, I'll tell
Speaker 1: you one of the things, you know, I without the
Speaker 1: everything that I've known for a while when when he
Speaker 1: first was his illness and he had a big fight
Speaker 1: out of him, and we actually were more very hopeful
Speaker 1: that things would turn around for him he said to me,
Speaker 1: was he goes, you know, this is easy for me.
Speaker 1: I'm just worried about my wife. I don't want her
Speaker 1: to worry. I don't want her to be upset. And
Speaker 1: that that kind of captures the Alan that I knew.
Speaker 1: He always thinking about somebody else. He was the most
Speaker 1: generous human being, the nicest guy to ever work with.
Speaker 1: If you got to work with somebody that you don't
Speaker 1: agree with politically, he was the guy. And I was
Speaker 1: very honored all these years to work with him. I
Speaker 1: know people thought because people typically we never got along,
Speaker 1: and I was never true and and uh, I just
Speaker 1: have such a deep respect for him. It's a really
Speaker 1: tough day. I got like a hole in my heart. Um,
Speaker 1: I thought to Monica Crowley's sister in law, and and
Speaker 1: she's heartbroken. His poor wife has devastated. They're both wonderful people.
Speaker 1: They did so much for him, and he did so
Speaker 1: much for them. And I'm very very impressed with every
Speaker 1: It really was a tribute to Alan to hear from
Speaker 1: every single major conservative that ever went on our show
Speaker 1: today how much they liked him, and how much even
Speaker 1: though they disagreed. What a good guy, what a great person.
Speaker 1: What a fun person to be around. And so it's
Speaker 1: a it's a it's a tough day. It's um. You know,
Speaker 1: I deal with everything. The one thing I've always had
Speaker 1: the most difficulty dealing with his death. And uh, and
Speaker 1: you know, I was hoping this day would never was
Speaker 1: hoping for a miracle. And I can tell you this.
Speaker 1: He went out fighting. He went out with great courage,
Speaker 1: and even in his toughest latest moments in life, he
Speaker 1: was thinking about everybody else. And that's the guy that
Speaker 1: he was. Well, as you said, Sean, he's a he's
Speaker 1: a great one. I spent a lot of time with
Speaker 1: him on your program in the in the in the
Speaker 1: for so many years. But also, as I said, we've
Speaker 1: had him in a number of events where he spoken
Speaker 1: in debates and programs and even at the dinner table
Speaker 1: with students. Usually I would have students from Regent University
Speaker 1: around him. And he was so engaging, so warm. People
Speaker 1: loved him and he will we will not forget, and
Speaker 1: we will pray for and continue to pray for his family.
Speaker 1: And he had a weak sense of humor, wicked. He
Speaker 1: was just sense of timing, and he had a way
Speaker 1: of the slating you know, tense moments with that sense
Speaker 1: of humor, and and that made him you know, we
Speaker 1: used to always say it bounds the lovable liberal, and
Speaker 1: he loved being all that because he felt we should
Speaker 1: be compassionate. He lived out that life in his personal life.
Speaker 1: And so I have great admiration for him. I have
Speaker 1: a whole in my heart today. My my prayers are
Speaker 1: so with his his wife and Rick Proudley. Um. You know,
Speaker 1: they've devastated, They've lost you know, a husband, uh, a
Speaker 1: brother in law, and you know, we lost their friend.
Speaker 1: And I was very proud, very honored, and I feel
Speaker 1: very blessed to have had the opportunity to work with
Speaker 1: him because it was a collaboration and and we he
Speaker 1: more success than we have a dreamed of. When we
Speaker 1: beat Larry King and we became number one in that
Speaker 1: time slot, that was yeah, yeah, well and then we
Speaker 1: sustained it and he uh and and when even when
Speaker 1: he moved on and by the way, he even when
Speaker 1: he got the scent humor comes out, well that Obama's
Speaker 1: you know with that. That's what he said to me,
Speaker 1: and hie, that's for sure. Gave me the communist He
Speaker 1: gave me the copy of the Communist manifesto. That's so Alan.
Speaker 1: You know, well, he was a true believer. I mean,
Speaker 1: he believed what he said. He wasn't pretending that was
Speaker 1: that was who he was. I think that was one
Speaker 1: of the real reasons for the success of the show.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think my audience knows you know me
Speaker 1: for a long time. You you believe everything you say.
Speaker 1: I believe everything I say. And he believed everything he said.
Speaker 1: But he had an ability to turn it off, an
Speaker 1: ability too. He had the human side of him. He
Speaker 1: wasn't like these crazy, you know, people in the streets
Speaker 1: and marching and trying to silence conservatives. The one thing
Speaker 1: you mentioned, freedom of speech. The one thing we always
Speaker 1: always always agreed on was free speech issues. He because
Speaker 1: we both knew he made our living with freedom of speech.
Speaker 1: It didn't matter if it was politically incorrect, over was controversial,
Speaker 1: it was over the top. He he was the staunchest defender.
Speaker 1: And he didn't like I can tell you this. He
Speaker 1: didn't like when conservatives were shut down on college campuses.
Speaker 1: He didn't like that his side was doing that. He
Speaker 1: felt it was a kind of you know, liberal fascism,
Speaker 1: and he felt like hear these people out, you know,
Speaker 1: let's have the debate. Let's make it free, open, fair debate,
Speaker 1: and and a dialogue discussion and exchange of ideas and
Speaker 1: principles and and and I admire him for that too.
Speaker 1: He you know, Jay, he died too young. I mean,
Speaker 1: such a young man. He had so much life in him.
Speaker 1: And uh, that's that's the hard part. You know, if
Speaker 1: somebody get it, you understand they had a whole life.
Speaker 1: And he was so full of life. The one other
Speaker 1: thing I want to add, you know, he he loved
Speaker 1: a microphone, and and for his radio audience, and I
Speaker 1: know we share some audience. He loved every single solitary
Speaker 1: moment he spent on the air. It was his passion,
Speaker 1: it was his vocation, it was his hobby, it was
Speaker 1: his life. Even when he was really sick and I
Speaker 1: would see him, Um he still was. He was he
Speaker 1: was pushing through and doing his radio show and I'm like,
Speaker 1: what are you doing here? I used to you know,
Speaker 1: I'd argue with him about that. And so you need
Speaker 1: to be resting, you need to be taking care of yourself.
Speaker 1: And he couldn't pull himself away from the microphone because
Speaker 1: he loved it, and he loved his audience, and he
Speaker 1: loved what he was doing, and he loved life. So I, um,
Speaker 1: you know, just because we have disagreements, sometimes you can
Speaker 1: really see the good in a person. And he represented
Speaker 1: everything that I would want, you know, that's going to
Speaker 1: live true to their their ideology and their principles. This
Speaker 1: to me, you know, he he embodied that. And Uh,
Speaker 1: we lost a dear friend today, Jackson. We sure did
Speaker 1: an uh a liberal in the classic sense. And the
Speaker 1: party that is now operating and the liberals that are
Speaker 1: now operating did not have the convictions of Alan Colmes
Speaker 1: on free speech, that's for sure, and free discourse. As
Speaker 1: you said, he was a protector rub but he wanted
Speaker 1: to hear both sides. He'd argue, he'd argue intensely, but
Speaker 1: he would listen also, And that was He'll be missed.
Speaker 1: And again, thoughts and prayers for his family and Sean,
Speaker 1: thanks for taking time out today. He's for giving me
Speaker 1: the time and our thoughts and prayers really especially for
Speaker 1: his wife, Jocelyn and and Monica and the rest of
Speaker 1: his family. And uh, they're having a tough day. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Our thoughts and prayers will continue for them. All right, thanks, Shawan,
Speaker 1: appreciate it very much. All Right, we've got a lot
Speaker 1: more ahead. Let me tell you what we're gonna get into.
Speaker 1: And again, I'm Jason Kilo, Chief council of the American
Speaker 1: Center for Law in Justice. You can find out more
Speaker 1: about what I do at a c LJ dot org.
Speaker 1: I'm not normally hosting Shawan Hannity's radio broadcast. Normally I
Speaker 1: am spending my time at the Supreme Court or other
Speaker 1: courts around the country. But then I've been a frequent
Speaker 1: guest on this broadcast, so it is great to be
Speaker 1: with you. I want to get into when we come
Speaker 1: back from the break. The potential Democratic head, the d
Speaker 1: n C Chair for the Democrats, a former fair con member,
Speaker 1: could be the literal chair of the Democratic National Committee,
Speaker 1: Keith Ellison. We'll give you a little expose in a
Speaker 1: little background on him when we come back from this break,
Speaker 1: because folks, you're gonna wanna, you're gonna want to know
Speaker 1: a lot about this. And again, if you want to
Speaker 1: talk to us, it's one Sean. That's one eight hundred
Speaker 1: one seven three two six. We'll be back with more,
Speaker 1: including your comments in a moment in the I r
Speaker 1: S scandal and the n s A Atrocities Convention. You
Speaker 1: need a watchdog on Washington with insiders sources. You need
Speaker 1: Hannity every day. All right, I have insomnia, but I've
Speaker 1: never slept better. And what's changed just a pillow. It's
Speaker 1: had such a positive impact on my life. And of
Speaker 1: course I'm talking about my pillow. I fall asleep faster,
Speaker 1: I stay asleep longer. And now you can to just
Speaker 1: go to my pillow dot com or call eight hundred
Speaker 1: zero nine zero, use the promo code Hannity, and Mike Lindell,
Speaker 1: the inventor of My Pillow, has the special four pack.
Speaker 1: Now you get off to my Pillow premiums and to
Speaker 1: go anywhere pillows. My pillows made here in the USA
Speaker 1: has a sixty day unconditional money back guarantee and a
Speaker 1: tenure warranty. Go to my pillow dot com right now
Speaker 1: or call eight zero nine zero promo code Hannity to
Speaker 1: get Mike Lindell's special four pack offer. You get to
Speaker 1: my Pillow Premium pillows and to go anywhere pillows forty
Speaker 1: percent off. And that means once those pillows arrive, you
Speaker 1: start getting the kind of peace full and RESTful and
Speaker 1: comfortable and deep, pealing and recuperative sleep that you've been
Speaker 1: craving and you certainly deserve. My pillow dot com promo
Speaker 1: code Hannity. You will love this pillow. Welcome back to
Speaker 1: the Sean Hannity Program Everywhere. This is j Sekulo. I
Speaker 1: am a guest hosting today for Sean, Chief Council of
Speaker 1: the American Center for Law in Justice. Been on this
Speaker 1: program a lot as a guest. Glad to be co
Speaker 1: guest hosting today for Shawn. We'll be taking some of
Speaker 1: your calls at one Shawn. That's one nine, one seven,
Speaker 1: three to six. You can find out more about what
Speaker 1: I do at a c l J dot org. So
Speaker 1: we've got a Democratic congressman calling for the impeachment and
Speaker 1: impeachment investigations to begin on President Trump. Well, that's not
Speaker 1: shocking the Democratic member of Congress would already start thirty
Speaker 1: two days into administration calling for the impeachment of the president.
Speaker 1: There's one issue here though, This particular congressman, Minnesota Representative
Speaker 1: Keith Ellison, is running to be the chairman of the
Speaker 1: d n C, the Democratic National Committee. They are going
Speaker 1: to be voting in Atlanta this weekend and right now,
Speaker 1: according to a lot of sources, he is the leading
Speaker 1: candidate to be the d n C chair. Keith Ellison
Speaker 1: is a congressman. He is an anti semit He was
Speaker 1: a devotee of Louis Farrakhan. He's also called for the
Speaker 1: impeachment of the president. Take a listen to this. This
Speaker 1: is Keith Ellison talking about impeachment. I think that he
Speaker 1: h Donald Trump has already done a number of things
Speaker 1: which legitimately raised the question of impeachment. Thirty two days
Speaker 1: into the administration, and it already raises levels of impeachments.
Speaker 1: By the way, under the Constitution, to impeach someone high
Speaker 1: crimes and misdemeanors, that's basically how it works. They don't
Speaker 1: like his policies, you don't get to call for impeachment.
Speaker 1: That's number one. Number two he's got. Look, Keith Ellison
Speaker 1: has a long history and a long history of anti Semitism.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna start with, though, the fact that his initial
Speaker 1: conversion to Lam it's a free country and believe in
Speaker 1: whatever religion you want, was under Louis Farrakhan. That's the
Speaker 1: one of the leaders, the leader of the Nation of Islam.
Speaker 1: Here's some sound from a conference the Nation of Islam
Speaker 1: with Keith Ellison giving the famous Muslim chance a bala Wakbar. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: there you go. That's that's Keith Allison. Ala Akbar could
Speaker 1: be the chairman of the d n C. He also,
Speaker 1: and I'm gonna play this a little bit later, he
Speaker 1: also has made direct statements about choose. In fact, one
Speaker 1: of the things he said, and I'll talk about this
Speaker 1: more with our next guest is gonna be Jorgan Seki,
Speaker 1: who's our executive director at the a C l J
Speaker 1: and has studied Keith Ellison for a long time. This
Speaker 1: is a guy that says, why should foreign policy be
Speaker 1: dick tatd by a country of seven million people and
Speaker 1: their d as bora that of course is Israel. That's
Speaker 1: who he's talking about there. So he's making no bones
Speaker 1: about it. He's not hiding it. This is an anti Semite.
Speaker 1: He's anti Israel. He's anti Semitic. Which is the irony
Speaker 1: of this is you've got an anti Semite that may
Speaker 1: now end up being the head of the d n C.
Speaker 1: When yesterday the Vice President the United States, what was
Speaker 1: he doing cleaning up graves that were desecrated Jewish graves
Speaker 1: that were desecrated by anti Semites. Interesting time we live
Speaker 1: in all right, We're gonna be back with more, including
Speaker 1: your comments. George seku will be joining us next back
Speaker 1: with more a minute stay in Dutch with a Hannity
Speaker 1: faithful joined the message board at Hannity dot com. Everybody,
Speaker 1: Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Program. This is j Sekulo.
Speaker 1: I am guest hosting today for Sean, Chief Council of
Speaker 1: the American Center for Law and Justice. Always love being
Speaker 1: a guest on Shawn's program, and it's great to be
Speaker 1: able to host while he's out today. If you want
Speaker 1: to get more information about what I do, go to
Speaker 1: a c l J dot org. That's the American Center
Speaker 1: for Law Injustice where I've served as Chief Council. We've
Speaker 1: got a great program lined up where you We've already
Speaker 1: had a good discussion again, our condolences to Alan Come's family,
Speaker 1: the passing of Alan uh much too young and a
Speaker 1: great defender of free speech and a great friend of
Speaker 1: Shawn's and ours. I might say, let me say this,
Speaker 1: we are concerned that you've got a Democratic National Committee
Speaker 1: chairman possible looks like the leading contender right now, Minnesota
Speaker 1: Congressman Keith Ellison. He is anti Semitic, and that's being kind,
Speaker 1: that's an understatement. Uh. This is someone that has had
Speaker 1: a relationship with Louis Farakhan. He's someone that has even
Speaker 1: deeper is than that within the Islamic world and against
Speaker 1: free country. Believe whatever religion you want, you could serve
Speaker 1: in office. We don't have a religious test in our constitution.
Speaker 1: But you need to know where people stand. Right now
Speaker 1: in the studio with me is Jordan's seculer. He's the
Speaker 1: executive director of the American Center for Law Injustice. But
Speaker 1: also someone that has as a lawyer, has studied Keith Ellison,
Speaker 1: and there's some interesting things, you know, And this is
Speaker 1: someone that's gonna be, could be, and as the leading
Speaker 1: candidate right now, could be decided this weekend to be
Speaker 1: the leader of the Democratic National Committee. This is a
Speaker 1: big position with a lot of influence. But Jordan, let's
Speaker 1: talk about who is Keith Ellison. Keith Ellison is one
Speaker 1: of the top two contenders to be d n C chairs.
Speaker 1: So it's either him or Tom Perez, who was a
Speaker 1: former Labor secretary under President Obaba. We will know this
Speaker 1: weekend four hundred and forty seven Democrat National Committee members
Speaker 1: will select their new chairman. So either way he will
Speaker 1: finish probably one or two. He's going to be someone
Speaker 1: with a lot of influence in the Democratic Party over
Speaker 1: the next few years. So he entered Congress in two
Speaker 1: thousand seven. He was elected to OH six. His controversy
Speaker 1: started back when he was in law school as a
Speaker 1: defender of the Nation of Islam and Louis Farrakon. Actually
Speaker 1: worked to organize events for Louis Farrakon. He converted, he
Speaker 1: was a convert to Islam. It was a nominal Catholic
Speaker 1: before that. Uh, no problem there. He has the right
Speaker 1: to convert to whatever religion he chooses or not. But
Speaker 1: but then the issues start right when he's in law school.
Speaker 1: He doesn't distance himself from far Akon. In fact, he
Speaker 1: was a known anti Semite who spoke publicly about in
Speaker 1: a very derogatory way against the Jewish community. And Ellison's writings,
Speaker 1: Keith Ellison's writing the leading candidate to be the chair
Speaker 1: of the Democrat National Committee that had had Democrat in
Speaker 1: his writings on Farrakon. That started while he was in
Speaker 1: law school. He was defending Farrakon as not being racist,
Speaker 1: as not being anti Semitic, while he was spewing some
Speaker 1: of the worst rhetoric of the time. And that was
Speaker 1: back again a couple of decades ago. He did not
Speaker 1: distance himself from the Nation of Islam until he and
Speaker 1: for the States Congress now and the and the controversy
Speaker 1: doesn't stop when he runs for Congress, because what happens
Speaker 1: when he runs for Congresses he ends up getting investigated.
Speaker 1: Why does he get investigated. He gets investigated because he
Speaker 1: started engaging in activities with Saudi Arabia and others that
Speaker 1: raise serious concern That's right. So he makes a two
Speaker 1: thousand and eight trip. This is just after a year
Speaker 1: after being in office, so he hasn't been up for
Speaker 1: re election again yet at this point. He makes a
Speaker 1: two thousand and eight trip to Saudi Arabia, which is
Speaker 1: paid for and organized by the Muslim American Society. Now
Speaker 1: you can see photos of his trip and of the
Speaker 1: individuals are about to tell you that he met with
Speaker 1: because the Muslim American Society's chapter in Minnesota posted the photos.
Speaker 1: So none of this is Here's say, this is congressional investigation.
Speaker 1: So First, he meets with Chik Abdullah bin bay I.
Speaker 1: Important because in two thousand four, that chik from Saudi
Speaker 1: Arabia issued a fatua calling for jihad and the killing
Speaker 1: of US troops in Iraq. So he is sitting down
Speaker 1: a memory the United States Congress with that Chi as
Speaker 1: a member of you at the U S country, and
Speaker 1: the Sheik is calling for the destruction of American troops
Speaker 1: and American civilians killing American troops in Iraq. But that's
Speaker 1: not all. He also met with Dr Ahmed Mohammed Ali.
Speaker 1: Now this guy very interesting, president of the Islamic Development Bank.
Speaker 1: This bank established in two thousand the Al Kuds into
Speaker 1: Fata Fund and the Aloxa Fund. What does it do
Speaker 1: provide money to Palestinian terrorists families who are killed, including
Speaker 1: suicide bombers by Israeli's after they carry out their ROAs.
Speaker 1: So everybody needs to understand what happens here. The individuals
Speaker 1: that engage in terrorism, especially coming out of the Palestinian areas,
Speaker 1: or Palestinian terrorists, are actually paid money by various probe
Speaker 1: Palestinian leading organizations, including these banks in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.
Speaker 1: You've got a member of the United States Congress who
Speaker 1: may well end up becoming the chair of the Democratic
Speaker 1: National Committee. I mean this is Keith Allison is right
Speaker 1: now in the lead. If the boat was today, probably
Speaker 1: would win. It may take a ballot or two, but
Speaker 1: he would probably win it. He has the support from
Speaker 1: what I understand, President Obama. And this although the President
Speaker 1: tries to stay neutral, but this is clearly an outgrowth
Speaker 1: of President Obama where he'd like to be and as
Speaker 1: a member of the United States Congress, and that's what
Speaker 1: the audience needs. As a member of the United States Congress,
Speaker 1: he sits down with bankers who are funding and giving
Speaker 1: rewards to terrorists, to suicide bombers, and specifically the president
Speaker 1: of the bank, not just bankers, but the president of
Speaker 1: the Islamic Development Bank. You know that fund when it
Speaker 1: was started in two thousand, which was during the first
Speaker 1: into Fata, the first uprising by Palestinians against Israeli's acts
Speaker 1: of terror. The funds started. This just tells you about
Speaker 1: the money being tossed around in that Islamic part of
Speaker 1: the world, in this terror world. Started with two hundred
Speaker 1: million dollars to give out to families of the United
Speaker 1: that's how they recruit these people were in bad economic
Speaker 1: situations to send their kids off to be suicide bombers.
Speaker 1: So you've got a member of the United States Congress
Speaker 1: sitting down with a bank that funds suicide bombers while
Speaker 1: he's a member of the United States Congress. At the
Speaker 1: very same time time, you've got statements that he made
Speaker 1: that are not only in flammatory and by the way,
Speaker 1: they're not just you know, Ferricon and that ILK are
Speaker 1: not just anti Semitic, they're anti American, they're anti are values.
Speaker 1: But listen to this sound. This is again about nine eleven,
Speaker 1: and the speaker here is the potential chair of the DNC,
Speaker 1: all this discrimination against religious minorities. Uh. And but for
Speaker 1: nine eleven, I mean, you had it, but you didn't
Speaker 1: average to the degree that the ey Now nine eleven
Speaker 1: is this is this junger not event in American history,
Speaker 1: and it allows I mean, it's almost like, you know,
Speaker 1: the Red stock fire kind of reminds me of that.
Speaker 1: Does anybody know what I'm talking about? Benefit Well, I mean,
Speaker 1: you know you you and I both know bos. But
Speaker 1: but the thing is is that you know, after the
Speaker 1: right stock was burned, they blamed the Communists for it
Speaker 1: and then put um the leader of that country, in
Speaker 1: a position where he could basically have authority to do
Speaker 1: whatever he wanted. So this is a guy that may
Speaker 1: be chairing that's one of the largest parties in the
Speaker 1: United States. Now, you know, Republicans conservatives will say, well,
Speaker 1: you know that's where they want to go. Let him
Speaker 1: go there. This is not good for the country though
Speaker 1: that you've got a major political party in the United
Speaker 1: States that thinks that this may be a good way
Speaker 1: to lead the country down the road. You heard the
Speaker 1: comments in there by the way, who do you blame?
Speaker 1: And the audience member said the Jews and who benefited? Yeah?
Speaker 1: Does he distance himself from it, No, he's never really
Speaker 1: distanced himself from this because this is his worldview. This
Speaker 1: is really how he thinks. This is the way in
Speaker 1: which he engages. So Jordan, you look at this guy
Speaker 1: and you see the nature of what he's saying, and
Speaker 1: yet he is the leading candidate to chair a major
Speaker 1: political party in the United States, one of the two largest,
Speaker 1: the Democrats are the Republicans. He's the Democrat. He's a
Speaker 1: nine eleven truther, He's anti israel I mean he's still
Speaker 1: part of this area. Bush is responsible for nine eleven
Speaker 1: and this was just a reason why, I mean comparing
Speaker 1: it to Hitler and the Reichstag. But he was congressily
Speaker 1: investigated because, of course, as typical with Islamist he didn't
Speaker 1: disclose the trips cost to Congress, which these congressmen have
Speaker 1: to do now, and ended up he was forced to
Speaker 1: disclose that he received this trip cost over thirteen thousand
Speaker 1: dollars that came from the Muslim Brotherhood founded and they'd
Speaker 1: make no calms about this. And we in the United
Speaker 1: States still list the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization,
Speaker 1: certainly the the aspect of the Muslim Brotherhood that's involved
Speaker 1: in Hamas, which is their military wing. That's right. And
Speaker 1: so the Muslim American Society, which is founded by the
Speaker 1: Muslim Brotherhood, they paid for his trip. He gets congressionally investigated.
Speaker 1: They post photos of it. It's why we know all
Speaker 1: of this about Keith Ellison. We're not having to figure
Speaker 1: this out. He's telling us, he's showing us in photos.
Speaker 1: He's meeting with the terrorists. He's meeting with the terrorists
Speaker 1: religious leaders in Saudi Arabia. He is then spewing the
Speaker 1: rhetoric of of Islamic kind of leftist Islamic rhetoric. What's
Speaker 1: unfortunate He's got the endorsement of Senator Schumer, who was
Speaker 1: the Senate Minority leader, the top Democrat in the United
Speaker 1: States Senate, who is Jewish and a very strong supporter
Speaker 1: of Israel. Actual Lee is supporting Keith Ellison for d
Speaker 1: NC chair. I mean, it's one thing to have, you know,
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders support for him, but another that Chuck Schumer
Speaker 1: is still to this day, even with calling for this
Speaker 1: impeachment thirty days into Trump's presidency, that the Chuck Schumer
Speaker 1: who should be shamed into backing off this endorsement. Yeah,
Speaker 1: he really should be, but he's not. And let me
Speaker 1: tell you the words. I like presenting evidence when I'm
Speaker 1: in court. That's what I do. I present evidence. I'm
Speaker 1: laying out some evidence for you. Let me lay on
Speaker 1: another piece of evidence here. This is a flashback to
Speaker 1: a speech of Congressman Ellison. Now this is again, let
Speaker 1: me kind of set this up for you. He is
Speaker 1: blaming a group of people on foreign policy issues and
Speaker 1: that we're taking basically the wrong side. But listen to
Speaker 1: what he says, and I'm gonna break it down for you.
Speaker 1: Here's what he said. The United States for policy in
Speaker 1: the Middle East is governed by what is good or
Speaker 1: bad through a cuntry of seven million people region all
Speaker 1: turns are seven million. Does that make sense? Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: actually it is logic, and it does make sense. It's
Speaker 1: logic because the country he doesn't name, but that he's
Speaker 1: talking about is Israel, a country of seven million people
Speaker 1: surrounded by the entire Muslim world of three million people.
Speaker 1: And he doesn't like the fact that the United States
Speaker 1: foreign policy is in sync with the state of Israel, because,
Speaker 1: let's face it's the only democracy in them at least.
Speaker 1: I mean we, by the way, we don't have other
Speaker 1: allies in the region. We do the United States, so
Speaker 1: does Israel, Egypt. I could George Jordan's there are a
Speaker 1: number of the Arabs of the Gulf States that have
Speaker 1: very close relationships with the United States and with Israel.
Speaker 1: But the point is here, this individual, Keith Ellison, to
Speaker 1: be possible, looks like the leading candidate to be the
Speaker 1: chair of the d n C, has these views. This
Speaker 1: is the way he thinks, this is the way his
Speaker 1: mind works, and this is gonna be the person leading
Speaker 1: a party. And that's what you gotta be thinking about here,
Speaker 1: one of the two major political parties in America. And
Speaker 1: though if you're a Republican or a conservative out there
Speaker 1: and you think that's great, because I don't think the
Speaker 1: Democrats are gonna do very well with him as their leader.
Speaker 1: Remember when you have a Republican president, the RNC chair
Speaker 1: is not quite as f in the forefront on the news,
Speaker 1: not as much in the media, because the president is
Speaker 1: really the head of the party. President Trump is right now,
Speaker 1: but there's an RNC chairs actually don't get as much attention.
Speaker 1: When Keith Ellison now is going to be the could
Speaker 1: be the leader of the Democrat Party, that means nationally,
Speaker 1: so anytime issues come up, he would be their spokesperson
Speaker 1: for all Democrats. I think if you're a Democrat out there,
Speaker 1: this is very concerning. Only four hundred and seventy four
Speaker 1: basically they're super delegates get to vote four forty seven
Speaker 1: this weekend. But he again, I think win or lose,
Speaker 1: he's coming in first or second place. He's going to
Speaker 1: have This is the trend of Democrats right now. And
Speaker 1: now we've always warned about the this move between Islamist
Speaker 1: and leftist. It makes no sense because Islamists are so
Speaker 1: against LGBT rights. They don't let women drive cars. I mean,
Speaker 1: they are anti Semitic, they are, and it says they're
Speaker 1: they're racist, sexist, homophobic. Everything the leftist doesn't like. They
Speaker 1: don't they don't like free speech. They don't even like
Speaker 1: democracy or elected not even a word in their language. Now.
Speaker 1: They believe democracy is evil. And yet we've seen this
Speaker 1: alliance between Islamist and the left, and I think Keith
Speaker 1: Ellison is the merger of that as one of their
Speaker 1: representatives on Capitol Hill. Yeah. I think what you've got
Speaker 1: to realize here, folks, is that this is a serious
Speaker 1: situation for the United States. And we may say, yeah, politically,
Speaker 1: but let them do this. But the fact that you
Speaker 1: know a large part of the country is going in
Speaker 1: this direction should send shock waves to the American people.
Speaker 1: That's why defending free speech is so important, because these
Speaker 1: are groups that want to shut down speech. They don't
Speaker 1: want you talking about this. They want they don't want
Speaker 1: the truth of a Keith Ellison coming on. That's why
Speaker 1: I'm so glad that Shawn's on the air every day
Speaker 1: talking about this because this is the reality of what
Speaker 1: we live in our country right now. Is it very divided, Yes,
Speaker 1: but there used to be a unifying force, and that
Speaker 1: unifying force was free speech. That seems to be what's
Speaker 1: in jeopardy the most. And all of this. I've spent
Speaker 1: thirty years in the Supreme Court of the United States
Speaker 1: arguing free speech cases. I will tell you that we
Speaker 1: are in a season of life for our country. We're
Speaker 1: free speech is in peril. And you look at a
Speaker 1: situation like this, we end up with someone like Keith
Speaker 1: Ellison and you say to yourself, this is not the
Speaker 1: way the country is supposed to be. All right, Thank
Speaker 1: you Jordan very much for that. We've got a lot
Speaker 1: more ahead. I'm gonna talk about the shadow government when
Speaker 1: we come back from a break here. What do you
Speaker 1: mean by the shadow government? You know, when they're talking
Speaker 1: about intelligence leaks, we're talking about information getting out. We're
Speaker 1: talking about internal bureaucrats entrenched. You know what we're talking about.
Speaker 1: We're talking about a shadow government. We're gonna get in
Speaker 1: depth on that coming up, and that includes, by the way,
Speaker 1: inside our intelligence agencies, which makes it even worse. All Right,
Speaker 1: We're gonna take more of your calls or more of
Speaker 1: your comments when we come back as well. One Shawn.
Speaker 1: That's one, seven, three to six. Jay Sekulo sitting in
Speaker 1: for Shawn Hannity, back back with more in just a
Speaker 1: moment and a se of government lies. He's the beacon
Speaker 1: of truth. This is the Sean Hannity Show. Everybody, Welcome
Speaker 1: back to the Shawan Hannity Program. Is Jay Sekulo. I
Speaker 1: am sitting in today for Shawn. I'm Chief council of
Speaker 1: the American Center for Law Injustice. That's a law firm
Speaker 1: that engages in cases all over the country, do a
Speaker 1: lot of work at the Supreme Court of the United States.
Speaker 1: I also host a radio broadcast at twelve o'clock noon
Speaker 1: Eastern Time, Jason Seculo Show. But I am thrilled to
Speaker 1: be sitting in for Sean. Coming up, I'm gonna talk
Speaker 1: with Professor Harry Hutchinson. Professor Hutchinson's the director of policy
Speaker 1: at the American Center for Law and Justice. Also a
Speaker 1: law professor, was with George Mason University. Now with Regent.
Speaker 1: But let me just tell you something. We're gonna talk
Speaker 1: about the shadow government. It's getting a lot of news. Now.
Speaker 1: We we talked about this last week when I was
Speaker 1: on with Sean, and that is when you look at
Speaker 1: these leaks that are coming out, and you look at
Speaker 1: the difficulties the administration in the sense of kind of
Speaker 1: silencing these leaks. Whatever you thought about whether Mike Flynn,
Speaker 1: General Flynn should have been the the NSA director or not,
Speaker 1: the fact of the matter is this, there were leaks
Speaker 1: by the intelligence agencies. We're not supposed to do that
Speaker 1: in the United States of America. We're gonna talk about
Speaker 1: this shadow government. Hey, if you're enjoying the music, by
Speaker 1: the way, that's the J Secular band. I gotta give
Speaker 1: a plank to a little plug to the bandmates there.
Speaker 1: We have a Facebook page, J Seculovan. I've got a
Speaker 1: Facebook page as well, Jay Sekulo. When we come back,
Speaker 1: I'll be joined by Professor Hutchinson. We're gonna talk about
Speaker 1: what is serious, the shadow government, the bureaucrats in wrenched
Speaker 1: inside even the current agencies. We'll talk about that when
Speaker 1: we come back from the break, and we'll take more
Speaker 1: of your calls as well. We'll be back in a moment. Hey,
Speaker 1: welcome back everybody to the Shawan handy program. This is
Speaker 1: Jay Sekulo. I am guest hosting for Seawan. We're taking
Speaker 1: calls at one eight nine for one Shawn. That's one
Speaker 1: one seven, three to six time. The Chief council for
Speaker 1: the American Center for Law Injustice. That's a law firm.
Speaker 1: I do a lot of work at the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: in Nined States, literally getting all over the country. Host
Speaker 1: of program also at noon Eastern Time called The j
Speaker 1: Secular Show. And I will tell you that I want
Speaker 1: to start this off by acknowledging something very important and
Speaker 1: very important to Shawn, very important to to our team
Speaker 1: as well, and that is the passing of Fox News
Speaker 1: Channels Alan Combs. We had Shaun on earlier and um
Speaker 1: Alan Colmes was a friend of mine, a very close
Speaker 1: friend and partner with Sean Hannity for many many years.
Speaker 1: Of course, when it started, Hannity and Colmins first launched
Speaker 1: on the Fox News Channel. I've been on that program
Speaker 1: many times and had the privilege of getting to know
Speaker 1: Allen and a couple of different venues, including speaking at
Speaker 1: an event that I sponsored and hosted at Regent University
Speaker 1: School of Law. And he was not only gracious, but
Speaker 1: he was some of that understood free speech and the
Speaker 1: importance of civil discorse. I do want to take a call.
Speaker 1: We're gonna take more calls as well at one Shawn.
Speaker 1: That's one, one seven, three, two six against Jay Sacho
Speaker 1: sitting in for Shawn today. Let me go to Randy
Speaker 1: from Colorado Springs, Colorado, who wants to talk a little
Speaker 1: bit about Alan. Then I'm gonna be joined by Professor
Speaker 1: Harry Hutchinson in just a moment. Randy, go ahead, Jay, Hi,
Speaker 1: and nice sir, you too. Um. I've been a talk
Speaker 1: radio junkie for probably thirty years, and the first time
Speaker 1: I heard uh Alan's voice, I was traveling in Portland
Speaker 1: and I thought, jeez, you know, I don't really agree
Speaker 1: with what the guy has to say, but I sure
Speaker 1: like the way he said it. Yeah. Well, this was
Speaker 1: a guy who love free speech and a guy that
Speaker 1: was true to his convictions. He was liberal in the
Speaker 1: classic sense of the word. And while we disagreed on
Speaker 1: a lot of issues, and I know Sean did as well,
Speaker 1: they were very close friends. I was a good friend
Speaker 1: of Alan's and let me tell you, our thoughts and
Speaker 1: prayer really go out to Jocelyn, his wife Monica Crowley,
Speaker 1: his sister in law, in the entire family at this
Speaker 1: untimely passing of a good friend and a great broadcaster.
Speaker 1: And I've never called talk radio before, but we appreciate it.
Speaker 1: And I said, we lost a great one with Alan Combs.
Speaker 1: All Right, folks, there is something that we have been
Speaker 1: concerned with in my work in the legal arena, and
Speaker 1: that is this issue of what we're calling the shadow government.
Speaker 1: You look at the situation with my Flynn and the
Speaker 1: leak of intelligence gathering. I look at head lines today.
Speaker 1: We started talking about this on John's program last week.
Speaker 1: I look at headlines. Obama's shadow government is organizing to
Speaker 1: undermine Trump. Now, the Democrats call Obama's shadow government a problem,
Speaker 1: and that's because we're normally presidents go away quietly do
Speaker 1: their presidential libraries. President Obama took his Obama for America
Speaker 1: organization converted it to Organization for Action. That's what he's
Speaker 1: doing now. And that o f A is basically got
Speaker 1: entrenched bureaucrats, and that we now find out that a
Speaker 1: law firm has been basically established by former d o
Speaker 1: J and White House counsels of President Obama challenge everything
Speaker 1: that Donald Trump does I wrote a book called Undemocratic
Speaker 1: where I talked about unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats taking our liberties
Speaker 1: one agency at the time. And this is an entrenched
Speaker 1: part of the problem. And this is what even a
Speaker 1: president as strong as Donald Trump is confronting the entrenched
Speaker 1: bureaucracy and what we call this chef bato government. Joining
Speaker 1: me right now is our director of policy at the
Speaker 1: American Center for Law in Justice and professor of Law,
Speaker 1: Professor Harry Hutchinson. Harry, thanks for being with us. Let's
Speaker 1: define for our audience here when we talk about shadow
Speaker 1: of government, when we're talking about undermining, we see leaks
Speaker 1: coming out of intelligence andc. By the way, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: be joined a little bit later with someone working for
Speaker 1: the CIA and is concerned about this very issue of
Speaker 1: leaks and intentional sabotage against the president. We'll talk about
Speaker 1: that coming up, but let's define terms first. We're talking
Speaker 1: about a shadow government. What are we talking about in
Speaker 1: the perfect term. That's a very good question, Jay, and
Speaker 1: thanks for the opportunity. Uh. We should note that a
Speaker 1: shadow government represents and ever expanding, ever ramifying network of
Speaker 1: individuals who wish to will power secretly. In many instances,
Speaker 1: they appear to be invisible. Um. The term shadow government,
Speaker 1: the term shadow government um arose initially because of a
Speaker 1: parliamentary system of government in England. In England, they created
Speaker 1: what is called a shadow cabinet, so you'd have a
Speaker 1: foreign Minister, and then you'd have a shadow foreign Minister,
Speaker 1: and you'd have a Chancel of the Exchequer, which it
Speaker 1: would be like our Secretary of the Treasury, and they
Speaker 1: would operate independently. But here, Harry, these are individuals that
Speaker 1: were in lockstep with the Obama administration for eight years
Speaker 1: inside these bureaucracies, deep career employees, many of them, and
Speaker 1: they are the ones that are now causing this internal problem,
Speaker 1: this internal shadow government. Absolutely, they are also leaking information, uh,
Speaker 1: with the connivance of willing members of the press at CNN,
Speaker 1: at NBC and at other networks who are spreading either
Speaker 1: misinformation or classified information which violates US law. Yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: I don't want to talk about the law here for
Speaker 1: a moment, folks, because we got lost in the whole
Speaker 1: general Flint situation was that there was a violation of
Speaker 1: federal law when that intelligence information was leak Now, think
Speaker 1: about this, Why in the world would an intelligence agency
Speaker 1: leak information, Well, they're trying to harm the person that
Speaker 1: is taking a position contrary to them. Who is that
Speaker 1: In this particular case, they don't like the policies of
Speaker 1: President Trump. Now take it a step further. The National
Speaker 1: Security Agency, the n s A had in place since
Speaker 1: Ronald Reagan. When sig intel signature intel, that is, like
Speaker 1: the phone taps, wire taps, that information would come in
Speaker 1: the raw intelligence would go to the n s A.
Speaker 1: They would decide where it would go. With seventeen days
Speaker 1: left in President Obama's administration, seventeen days left, he changes
Speaker 1: the rules signed off by James Clapper and then Lauretta Lynch,
Speaker 1: the Attorney General, on January three, seventeen days left to go,
Speaker 1: and decides that now sixteen agencies can get this raw data.
Speaker 1: So now go find the leak. And we ask yourself
Speaker 1: this question, why in the world did they wait? Why
Speaker 1: in the world did they wait until there was seventeen
Speaker 1: days left in their administration? If this was so important
Speaker 1: to share this intelligence information with these other agencies, giving
Speaker 1: more individuals access to it, but for eight years during
Speaker 1: their administration, they didn't want to do that. But they
Speaker 1: did that with an incoming president. You know what that
Speaker 1: is sabotage, That is a soft coup attempt, that is
Speaker 1: a shadow government being empowered. Absolutely, and so essentially the
Speaker 1: Obama administration did not want to live under these new rules.
Speaker 1: On the other hand, they wanted to expand the network
Speaker 1: of people who would receive classified information pursuant to their
Speaker 1: own request, and then they could use that information to
Speaker 1: subvert the Trump administration and to some extent, protect the
Speaker 1: Obama legacy. So I want to talk about the Obama
Speaker 1: legacy as you hear quickly, Harry, and that is this. Normally,
Speaker 1: presidents go away, they do their library, they do humanitarian efforts,
Speaker 1: whatever it might be. Here you've got a president that's
Speaker 1: sending out tweets, former president sending out tweets encouraging protests
Speaker 1: in the streets, and a lot of these protests, by
Speaker 1: the way, you're seeing at the Republican town halls, these
Speaker 1: are put up. These are these are paid protesters or
Speaker 1: or activists that these aren't people that are voting for
Speaker 1: these members of the United States Senate or have ever
Speaker 1: voted for the members of the United States Senate. This
Speaker 1: is the put up Okay, it's a free country. Say
Speaker 1: whatever you want to say. But when you look at
Speaker 1: the situation as it exists with this legacy attempt to
Speaker 1: protect this president, former president President Obama, former President Obama
Speaker 1: is not going away quietly, absolutely so. Number One, he
Speaker 1: decided to set up residents in Washington, d c. Second,
Speaker 1: he set up a new foundation which he claims will
Speaker 1: be a startup citizen foundation. Third, he initiated a partnership
Speaker 1: with Eric Holder, and this partnership is designed to create
Speaker 1: another political action committee. So when you have the new
Speaker 1: executive order that's rolled out next week on immigration, Eric
Speaker 1: Holder and that's the former Attorney general, the United States
Speaker 1: is gonna be filing lawsuits or assisting in the filing
Speaker 1: of lawsuits with this whole cabal of groups. Listen, it's
Speaker 1: a free country. File lawsuits, but you need to understand,
Speaker 1: everybody needs to understand exactly what's going on here. These
Speaker 1: are bureaucrats that I would say it this way. You
Speaker 1: gotta resist, you gotta reform, and you've gotta revolutionize. And
Speaker 1: the revolutionary aspect of this is you've got to change
Speaker 1: these agencies. Because right now, firing these bureaucrats is almost
Speaker 1: it's like they get life tenure, Harry. Notwithstanding the difficulty,
Speaker 1: I believe the Trump administration needs to launch an affirmative effort,
Speaker 1: a root and branch effort, to remove many of these
Speaker 1: Obama loyalists, particularly from mid level positions in the bureaucracy.
Speaker 1: And if he doesn't move quickly on this, this will
Speaker 1: impair or impede his agenda going forward. You know, I
Speaker 1: litigated that I R. S case and that targeting that
Speaker 1: went on in conservative organizations, and you know, everybody was
Speaker 1: looking at lowest learner and she was certainly guilty of
Speaker 1: her involvement, but it went much higher and much deeper,
Speaker 1: and we found that out on the litigation where we
Speaker 1: ultimately won. But you need to understand that this is
Speaker 1: an entrenched bureaucratic machine. When we come back in a
Speaker 1: little bit, I'm gonna be joined a little bit later
Speaker 1: in the program with a former CIA operative who's gonna
Speaker 1: tell you a Democrat, by the way, who's gonna tell
Speaker 1: you how concerned he is about what is taking place
Speaker 1: right now in these intelligence agencies, how difficult this is.
Speaker 1: And coming up after this break, I'm gonna be joined
Speaker 1: by Colonel west Smith, he handled classified information. We're gonna
Speaker 1: talk about that as well. This is Jay Sekula. I'm
Speaker 1: sitting in for my friend Shawn Hannity. I'm gonna take
Speaker 1: some more calls when we come back as well, and again,
Speaker 1: and our thoughts and prayers of condolences to the family
Speaker 1: of our friend Alan comes and again if you want
Speaker 1: to talk to us. One eight one Shawn. That's one
Speaker 1: seven three two Sick is Jay Sekulo. I'll be back
Speaker 1: with more in a moment. Never mean Scott problems. He's
Speaker 1: got solutions. America listens to the Sean Hannity Show. Everybody,
Speaker 1: Welcome back to John Hannay. You showed this a J
Speaker 1: Secular sitting in for Sean. I'm Chief council of the
Speaker 1: American Center for on Jesse. If you like that music,
Speaker 1: that is the J Secular band. Most people do not
Speaker 1: know that. Addition to being a Supreme Court lawyer, I'm
Speaker 1: a drummer and occasional guitarist. There you have it, h
Speaker 1: Enough of the selfish plugs here, all right, here's what
Speaker 1: we're gonna do. I want to talk about We've been
Speaker 1: talking about the shadow government with Harry Hutchinson. I want
Speaker 1: to talk about we've got an executive order that's probably
Speaker 1: coming out Monday or Tuesday on the asylum immigration issue.
Speaker 1: We've been working on it. We believe the Ninth Circuit
Speaker 1: was wrong. But I'm gonna tell you something. We are
Speaker 1: joined right now in the studio by our senior military analysts,
Speaker 1: Colonel West Smith. Colonel Smith, by the way, was the
Speaker 1: presiding officer when the remains of Ambassador Stevens will return
Speaker 1: to the United States. The famous picture of Colonel Smith
Speaker 1: between the President, President Obama the Secretary of State as
Speaker 1: he offered a prayer for Ambassador Stevens. So this is
Speaker 1: someone that knows government knows material. But I want to
Speaker 1: you know, West, is one thing that you know, we
Speaker 1: talked about this Ninth Circuit case in the District Court judge,
Speaker 1: and I've argued in the Ninth Circuit. It's you know,
Speaker 1: it is a court that if you win there, you're
Speaker 1: gonna lose at the Supreme Court of the United States.
Speaker 1: Let me just put it generally that way. I may
Speaker 1: I think, I but one case that on the Ninth
Speaker 1: Circuit that I want at the Ninth Circuit and actually
Speaker 1: want at the Supreme Court United States. One, uh, that rare,
Speaker 1: But you talk about classified information, but you talk about
Speaker 1: information not getting out. There have been and this judge
Speaker 1: in this case involving the initial immigration order, by the way,
Speaker 1: Washington State, they're all gonna file a lawsuit again even
Speaker 1: though the president's order, I believe is gonna be airtight,
Speaker 1: and believe the Ninth Circuit was wrong this last time,
Speaker 1: but this is gonna be airtight. But you talk about
Speaker 1: what's happened in the United States with prosecutions of iss
Speaker 1: from these countries of concern, which, by the way, this
Speaker 1: judge said there were no incidents. The judge was absolutely wrong,
Speaker 1: Yes he was. Whenever he asked Michelle Bennett was one
Speaker 1: of the lawyers from the Department of Justice, how many
Speaker 1: citizens of these seven Muslim majority countries have been arrested
Speaker 1: on domestic terrorism charges since nine eleven, she said she
Speaker 1: didn't know, and his response was, well, I do know,
Speaker 1: and I can tell you it was zero. He said
Speaker 1: it was zero because he read it in the like
Speaker 1: the New York Times are never Washington Post. Yeah, that
Speaker 1: was his evidence. Go ahead, But in fact, seventy two
Speaker 1: people from those seven countries, according to the AP and
Speaker 1: other other sources, have been arrested since nine eleven own
Speaker 1: terrorism charges seventy two of them. So you know, I
Speaker 1: deal with courts, I deal with evidence. The government did
Speaker 1: not do a great job on that hearing. Let's be honest.
Speaker 1: I've been critical of the performance of the Department of Justice.
Speaker 1: That was before our friend Jeff Sessions became the Attorney
Speaker 1: General in the United States. A different world now, and
Speaker 1: I believe as this case goes, as the order comes out,
Speaker 1: and the case goes forward, we're gonna see a very
Speaker 1: different response here from the Justice Department. I have no
Speaker 1: doubt about this, and this we will win this and
Speaker 1: may take it going all the way to Screme Court
Speaker 1: to win, because I still think that the Ninth Circuit
Speaker 1: could easily get it wrong, because they generally get, like
Speaker 1: I said, everything wrong. But West, you were a colonel
Speaker 1: in the Army, and you served in the Middle East,
Speaker 1: and you've served and you've handled classified information. These leaks
Speaker 1: that are going out right now that which I'm concerned.
Speaker 1: The President is supposed to get a report from the
Speaker 1: General's about their plan to eliminate isis the president. President
Speaker 1: Trump said he's gonna do it. I believe he's going
Speaker 1: to But they're gonna be those inside the Department of Defense,
Speaker 1: the State Department that are gonna be opposing this, this
Speaker 1: classified information mishandling that's going on. If you were to
Speaker 1: do with and when you're on active duty as a
Speaker 1: colonel in the United States Army, what would have happened
Speaker 1: to you? I would go to prison. Absolutely, I handled
Speaker 1: classified information and we were read the Riot Act about
Speaker 1: the proper way to handle it. And it is illegal,
Speaker 1: and those kinds of leagues are are against federal law.
Speaker 1: And in all seriousness, people in the military that have
Speaker 1: done there, they go to prison. So when you're looking
Speaker 1: the presidents can get this report about how to deal
Speaker 1: with ISIS, how to deal with this Islamic threat that
Speaker 1: we're dealing with in a group called ISIS, They're gonna
Speaker 1: be people inside the agencies that are entrenched that are
Speaker 1: not gonna win. Like the way the fact that the
Speaker 1: President calls it radical Islamic terrorism, you have to be concerned.
Speaker 1: I am as an American and as a lawyer, I'm concerned,
Speaker 1: and you, as a former military officer, have to be
Speaker 1: concerned that there will be those inside these agencies trying
Speaker 1: to undermine exactly what the president is trying to do.
Speaker 1: Here right right, And it is really alarming because it
Speaker 1: becomes a real threat to national security when these kinds
Speaker 1: of things are compromised, and it undermines, undermines what we're
Speaker 1: doing is for is keeping the nation secure. So that
Speaker 1: was my last question, because we're going to a break.
Speaker 1: The nation's security is at stake here, both with the
Speaker 1: executive order and with the president's plan on when he
Speaker 1: gets it from the General's on isis our nation's securities
Speaker 1: that stay? Absolutely, that's the bottom line. It was famously
Speaker 1: said at the Supreme Court of the United States that
Speaker 1: the Constitution, folks, is not a suicide pack. We need
Speaker 1: to operate under that understanding. I'm Jay Seculo sitting in
Speaker 1: for Sean Hannity. We're gonna be taking some calls. We've
Speaker 1: got Doug Shown coming up, also, a former CIA operative
Speaker 1: that is as concerned as we are about what is
Speaker 1: developing right now. And this is folks. Look, these leaks
Speaker 1: are undercutting our constitutional republic. And all I'm doing today
Speaker 1: is laying out this evidence for you so you understand
Speaker 1: exactly what we're facing as a country. That's one one, Sean.
Speaker 1: I'm Jay Sekulo back with more in just a moment
Speaker 1: now three breaking news straight from the source. This is
Speaker 1: the Sean Hannity Show. Everybody, Welcome back to The Shawan
Speaker 1: Hannity Show. It's Jay Sekulo guest hosting for Seawan. We'll
Speaker 1: pay calls at one one Shawn. That's one nine, one seven,
Speaker 1: three to six. You can follow Seawan on Twitter at
Speaker 1: Sean Hannity. You can follow me on Twitter at j Seculo,
Speaker 1: and you could like the band page if you like
Speaker 1: the music you're hearing to some of these breaks. It's
Speaker 1: Jay Secular Band. We have a Facebook page and we
Speaker 1: sometimes broadcast live on Facebook our concerns and jam sessions,
Speaker 1: so we encourage you to do that and follow the
Speaker 1: A c l J as well. I've got a page
Speaker 1: Jay Sekulo at Facebook, and so does the American Center
Speaker 1: for Law and Justice. And Jordan who was on earlier,
Speaker 1: also has a page. Well, we've talked about this shadow government,
Speaker 1: we've talked about concerns about leak I. I read a
Speaker 1: fascinating piece up at Fox News yesterday, and this is
Speaker 1: by Brian Dean Wright, former CIA operative officer, member of
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party, says I'm a Democrat, an x C
Speaker 1: I A but the spies plotting against Trump are out
Speaker 1: of control. He says. Over the past few months, America
Speaker 1: has lurched from partisan warfare to the cliffs of what
Speaker 1: this is. What Brian says is an existential crisis. Joining
Speaker 1: us on the Sean Hannity program is Brian Dean, right,
Speaker 1: author of this article. Brian, thanks for being with us,
Speaker 1: the absolute pleasure to be here. Let me ask you
Speaker 1: about this, former CIA operations officer. You're a registered Democrat.
Speaker 1: I'm concerned about these leaks. I don't like leaks, period,
Speaker 1: no matter which party. Don't like the way the Justice
Speaker 1: Department handled the whole situation, UH during the election with
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton for against her, for whatever, back and forth.
Speaker 1: I don't like leaks that are going on against I
Speaker 1: don't like the leaks that were going on with Mike Flynn.
Speaker 1: And I was a gunment lware in the beginning of
Speaker 1: my career a long time ago. You're a former CIA operative.
Speaker 1: Tell us what you're concerned about here. What is it
Speaker 1: that you're seeing and hearing that has you so concerned. Well,
Speaker 1: two things. First, the vast majority of America spies are
Speaker 1: incredible people doing amazing things. But there's also an equal
Speaker 1: amount of fear that I have or concerned that is
Speaker 1: bordering on this existential crisis. There are clearly folks within
Speaker 1: the national security apparatus, whether it be the CIA or FBI,
Speaker 1: et cetera, who are leaking information. We saw this fall
Speaker 1: with the dossier, and then we've seen it once again
Speaker 1: in terms of the leaks in the last six weeks
Speaker 1: to the New York Times and CNN, Washington Post, and
Speaker 1: then there have been reports of the intelligence community withholding
Speaker 1: information from the president. Now the president, whoever it may be,
Speaker 1: cannot defend this nation if they don't have all the
Speaker 1: information that one needs. That's the first big piece. The
Speaker 1: second is what happens when we start making our military
Speaker 1: or our intelligence services partisan or political right because today,
Speaker 1: you know, maybe liberal spies might think, hey, great, we
Speaker 1: can we can bash this Trump and get them out
Speaker 1: in Well, what happens if let's say Warren or Sanders
Speaker 1: should win for the Democrats. That becomes a problem if
Speaker 1: the conservative spies want to start creating problems for the liberals.
Speaker 1: So of course there's let me ask this, Brian, there's
Speaker 1: a constitutional loath that you took in the c I.
Speaker 1: It was the same oath that I took as a
Speaker 1: lawyer for the Treasury Department, and I'm going to faithfully
Speaker 1: execute the laws of the United States, defend the Constitution
Speaker 1: of the United States. When I was sworn into Supreme Court,
Speaker 1: it was the same thing. And I make I take
Speaker 1: this oath of office. You took the oath of office.
Speaker 1: Your fellow agents took this oath of office. But they're
Speaker 1: basically what I'm hearing from you is that there are people.
Speaker 1: Now we're not talking about all the people when I've
Speaker 1: been talking about a majority of the people, but there
Speaker 1: are some intrenched within these agencies, including our spy intelligence Agency.
Speaker 1: These are agencies and in conduct counterintelligence, UH, deal with
Speaker 1: terrorism that disagree with the policy and operated. You said,
Speaker 1: I know what's best for foreign policy and national security.
Speaker 1: I'm going to act on that. As if they had
Speaker 1: the right to do that. That's just the concern, Right.
Speaker 1: So you've got a group of people with tremendous power,
Speaker 1: and trust me, I had it, and it is uh.
Speaker 1: It is an amazing power to have. It can also
Speaker 1: be wickedly seductive. Right. So they've got this tremendous power,
Speaker 1: and if they start engaging in this partisan warfare, they
Speaker 1: forget their oath not only to the agency that you mentioned,
Speaker 1: the Department of Treasury, et cetera, as a civil servant,
Speaker 1: but to your constitution and ultimately your commander in chief. Uh.
Speaker 1: And that is the piece that starts to get extraordinarily
Speaker 1: dangerous for the republic. And that's a huge concern that
Speaker 1: I have, regardless of the fact that I'm a Democrat.
Speaker 1: I mean, before being a Democrat, I'm an American, and
Speaker 1: I think that that's the most important thing that most
Speaker 1: fives understand. But clearly there's a group that aren't. And
Speaker 1: in fact, one journalist recently quoted a member of the
Speaker 1: intelligence community is saying, the d i C. Or the
Speaker 1: intelligence community is going full stop on this guy, and
Speaker 1: we are going to make sure that he dies in jail.
Speaker 1: That is horrified. All right. So you've got a policy
Speaker 1: president United States that's putting forward policies that he thinks
Speaker 1: are best for the country in consultation with his cabinet.
Speaker 1: That's how it works in a constitutional republic. So that's
Speaker 1: that's usually a given. What is not a given is
Speaker 1: that you've got and I know there has been This
Speaker 1: is not the first time in our history where we've
Speaker 1: had leaks, but what I hear from you and in
Speaker 1: reading your really well done article. And by the way,
Speaker 1: this is up at Fox news dot com and I
Speaker 1: encourage people to get it. It's by our guest, Brian
Speaker 1: Dean Wright, former c I A operations officer and as
Speaker 1: he said, proudly a registered Democrat. And this is not
Speaker 1: a Republican Democrat issue. This is goes to the heart
Speaker 1: of our constitutional republic. So if there's disagreement, Brian, in
Speaker 1: an agency on an intelligence matter or the way something
Speaker 1: should be approached, there's normal conversation. I would expect that
Speaker 1: people talk about their differences. It's that's very different from
Speaker 1: then acting on So what is it typically without disclosing
Speaker 1: information that would be confidential. When you were engaged in
Speaker 1: your activities with the CIA, you had discussions, because I've
Speaker 1: represented agency officials before, you had discussions where people might
Speaker 1: have disagreed on an approach. What was that supposed to
Speaker 1: look like when you disagreed it was a real conversation. Well,
Speaker 1: I'll tell you from what I understand what has already happened.
Speaker 1: And this is not open source, but I'll give you
Speaker 1: sense with this pieces of Russia and and ties to
Speaker 1: some of the cadre that surrounds President Trump. Right, so
Speaker 1: the investigation, uh that there is one. Right now, the
Speaker 1: Department of Justice and its Counter Espionage Division are working
Speaker 1: with the n s A and the CIA to make
Speaker 1: sure that there are no defarious connections as have been alleged.
Speaker 1: That's where this should happen, right within the system that
Speaker 1: is classified in nature, and use all various kinds of
Speaker 1: tools to make sure that that isn't in fact happening.
Speaker 1: That is this connection between President Trump and some of
Speaker 1: these advisors and the Russian government. All of we should
Speaker 1: stand up and say, listen, that is a good thing.
Speaker 1: Let's make sure that there's nothing to this. And if
Speaker 1: there is nothing, then this investigation dies. It does not
Speaker 1: be prosecuted, should not be prosecuted in the open press.
Speaker 1: That is not good for the country because clearly it's
Speaker 1: being done for partisan reasons. So I have absolutely no objection.
Speaker 1: I don't think any reasonable person would have an objection
Speaker 1: to making sure there's no funny business going on between
Speaker 1: the current president and the Russian government. But for Pete's sake,
Speaker 1: it cannot, it must not be prosecuted in a way
Speaker 1: that it currently is in the open press. You wrote
Speaker 1: in your peace, and I want to quote this exactly.
Speaker 1: You said, for reasons of misguided righteousness or partisan hatred
Speaker 1: talking about these that are leaking and causing these issues.
Speaker 1: They've taken in upon themselves to be judge, jury an executioner.
Speaker 1: They have prosecuted their case in the court of public
Speaker 1: opinion with like minded media outlets. And you point out CNN,
Speaker 1: the New York Times, the Washington Post. But we're talking
Speaker 1: about our nation. Spies are intelligence gathering capability here. So
Speaker 1: what you're writing about, Brian, is a very serious statement.
Speaker 1: And when you first heard of the leagues and first
Speaker 1: saw the league, what was your initial reaction to this? Well,
Speaker 1: when the dos he uh was the league? Uh? In
Speaker 1: the fall? I gotta tell you, my jaw hit the
Speaker 1: ground because here's the thing. You do not brief unvetted rumors. Right,
Speaker 1: There's something called Presidential Daily Brief or the PDB, and
Speaker 1: when that goes to the president obviously usually every day,
Speaker 1: there are a variety of different pieces of information that
Speaker 1: about what's happening in the world. Well, they included this
Speaker 1: this doss he which was completely apparently unvetted, right, and
Speaker 1: just rumored that doesn't happen. I can't emphasize how bizarre,
Speaker 1: uh that is to be done. And in fact President
Speaker 1: Biden at the time, the Vice President Biden rather said
Speaker 1: well this is strange. Why the heck are you guys
Speaker 1: including this. He's on the record of saying that, right,
Speaker 1: And then of course the c I. A. Brennan at
Speaker 1: the time was director, said well, hey, it's it's it's
Speaker 1: not our information. We we just included it just in case,
Speaker 1: you know that the next president want to be should
Speaker 1: be aware that this was out there. That's garbage, that
Speaker 1: doesn't happen. So clearly they did this for a political purpose,
Speaker 1: knowing that it would be leaked and thus smears President Trump. Again,
Speaker 1: I did not vote for Mr Trump the president. It
Speaker 1: was not my choice, but I understand that he is
Speaker 1: my president, and he's the country's president for at least
Speaker 1: the next four years. And this kind of stuff that
Speaker 1: happens in terms of politization, it's so incredibly dangerous. I've
Speaker 1: always taken the position at look, I mean, elections, common
Speaker 1: election goes, but the Constitution and the republic that is
Speaker 1: represented by that Constitution in the United States of America,
Speaker 1: we've endured really difficult times in our history. But when
Speaker 1: you've got this kind of partisan bickering or even worse
Speaker 1: here leaks and attempts to sabotage the elections over there's
Speaker 1: been an election. I mean, that's what happens now, you
Speaker 1: wrote again, I I like pointing people to evidence into
Speaker 1: hard facts. You wrote. If you're not convinced about this difficulty,
Speaker 1: imagine that consequences of letting spies decide not just Trump's
Speaker 1: fate but other political winners and losers. To imagine how
Speaker 1: they might treat our candidates next talking about Democratic candidates.
Speaker 1: So I look at the situation with Mike Flynn, putting
Speaker 1: aside the fact, which is hard to put aside, that
Speaker 1: he made a misstatement to the Vice president of the
Speaker 1: United States, so that was you get terminated for that,
Speaker 1: but the fact that that information was leaked, there was
Speaker 1: lack of minimization, which isn't within the own law on
Speaker 1: how you deal with that, The fact that information is
Speaker 1: leaked and letting spies decide the fate of these I
Speaker 1: feel like that with Mike Flynn, they figured they got one.
Speaker 1: Now those that are opposed to what Donald Trump, what
Speaker 1: the president wants to do, are looking for the next target.
Speaker 1: Am I overstanding that? I think that's fair, and I
Speaker 1: think that that you were getting to that conclusion because
Speaker 1: you're looking at the evidence and it's a pretty reasonable
Speaker 1: one to say, well who's next, right, And that's the
Speaker 1: ultimate fear that I have is once this can gets
Speaker 1: opened about, you know, partisanship within our intelligent agencies, it's
Speaker 1: incredibly difficult to shut it because when the culture starts
Speaker 1: to do embrace, even to a small degree, it's it's
Speaker 1: people get away with it. Then what's to prevent the
Speaker 1: next generation of spies to try the same thing? You know?
Speaker 1: So that's the concern, is we end up like a
Speaker 1: Pakistan or in Egypt that we're you know, the intelligence
Speaker 1: agencies really control those nations even though there is a
Speaker 1: quasi democratic process in each of those countries. That's the fear. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And of course not you know, Egypt, Pakistan and not.
Speaker 1: Constitutional republics were more than as you said, we're more
Speaker 1: than a democracy here. We're a constitutional republic. We have rules,
Speaker 1: we have laws, we have a constitution that impacts how
Speaker 1: the branches of government operate. So bottom line here and
Speaker 1: this is you know, you you served our country honorably
Speaker 1: in the c I A. How serious of a threat
Speaker 1: is this for our national security and for our republic.
Speaker 1: I think we should all be watching this very closely.
Speaker 1: I don't think that it is at any breaking point,
Speaker 1: but boil boy, the fever is increasing and we have
Speaker 1: to be watching these kinds of stories are coming out,
Speaker 1: you know, referencing these intelligence officials, and if it continues
Speaker 1: to happen, we have all got to be deeply concerned
Speaker 1: because I think President Trump will understandably react very angrily
Speaker 1: to the intelligence community, and he will start, one could say,
Speaker 1: understandably shutting different entities down, different operators, and that's not
Speaker 1: in the best interest of the country. Do you think
Speaker 1: there do you sense there is tension? I mean there's
Speaker 1: in the media is talking about this tension between the
Speaker 1: intelligence community and the president. When you've got information being leaked,
Speaker 1: i'd have some tension to what's your sense of the
Speaker 1: of the relationship, what you're hearing from your former colleagues,
Speaker 1: what's your sense there At the end of the day,
Speaker 1: all the uh that that are my friends salute the man.
Speaker 1: They understand that he's their commander in chief. I think
Speaker 1: that there has been some pretty profound frustrations, if I
Speaker 1: can just be real honest around the the rejection that
Speaker 1: President Trump or Kennedy Trump had that the Russians were
Speaker 1: monkeying around in our election. Listen, I don't believe that
Speaker 1: they ultimately convinced Americans to vote for Trump or against Clinton.
Speaker 1: I think that American people made their choice. But what
Speaker 1: people in the intelligence community were very frustrated with it is, listen,
Speaker 1: we we did our job as for president. We we
Speaker 1: gave you very good information and the excellent assessment with
Speaker 1: multiple sources of information that the Russians were doing this business,
Speaker 1: and you just rejected. That was the first frustration I
Speaker 1: think a lot of us had, both former and from
Speaker 1: what I understand the current the second pieces. You know,
Speaker 1: on the first full day, he did try to go
Speaker 1: to the agency. In fact, he did go and in
Speaker 1: front of the wall of fallen comrades and and said, hey, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, I want to address you all, you know,
Speaker 1: managmen and man woman. And he turned into a bit
Speaker 1: of a candidate at that point. He talked about how
Speaker 1: smart he was and where she disliked the media. It
Speaker 1: just was the wrong place at the wrong time to
Speaker 1: have that kind of conversation, and but of course, as
Speaker 1: you as you said, though, Bran, none of that justifies
Speaker 1: if there's tension, None of it justifies this leak's all right.
Speaker 1: Brian Wright has a great piece up at Fox News
Speaker 1: is an op ed. It's called I'm a Democrat and
Speaker 1: next CIA. But the spies planning against Trump are out
Speaker 1: of control. Brian, I really appreciate you coming on the
Speaker 1: Sean Hannity prog am and appreciate your insight on this.
Speaker 1: This is a big topic and I'm with you. We
Speaker 1: gotta keep our eye on this. I am very concerned
Speaker 1: about where this could go, and I'm very concerned about
Speaker 1: the next aspect of this. So we are keeping our
Speaker 1: eye on this. We're gonna be back with a lot
Speaker 1: more conversation. We'll taking some calls. We've joined by my
Speaker 1: friend Doug shown talk about some of the politics of
Speaker 1: all of this. Believe it or not, folks, even in
Speaker 1: the intelligence agencies, it's politics, you know. At the end
Speaker 1: of the day, that's what we're dealing with. We're gonna
Speaker 1: talk to Doug Sean. I want to talk to him
Speaker 1: about Keith Ellison. I trust Doug. I like Doug. I
Speaker 1: don't always agree see what he has to say, so
Speaker 1: we'll take more of your calls at one Sean. That's
Speaker 1: one eight, nine, four, one seven, three to six. I'm
Speaker 1: Jay Sekulo, sending in for Sean Hannity. Be back with
Speaker 1: you in a moment. The biggest stories of the day,
Speaker 1: solutions to help move America forwards. This is a Sean Show.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Program. Everybody. This is
Speaker 1: Jay Sekulo. I'm guest hosting for Sean. We're taking your
Speaker 1: calls at one Sean. That's one to six. Coming up,
Speaker 1: our friend Doug Show, and I want to ask him
Speaker 1: about the Democratic National Committee chairman race, where Keith Ellison,
Speaker 1: congressman that has said provocative things to say the least
Speaker 1: I call him an anti Semite. He is the leading
Speaker 1: candidate right now. We'll get Dougs perspective on all of this.
Speaker 1: We've had a fascinating conversation about what we're calling the
Speaker 1: shadow government, and that is this whole issue involving the
Speaker 1: in French bureaucrats. They're unelected, they're unaccountable, but they're running
Speaker 1: these agencies. How do you root them out? We talked
Speaker 1: about that. You gotta take action. I think this president
Speaker 1: is gonna do it all right. We're gonna come back
Speaker 1: from the break again, J Seculo. You can follow me
Speaker 1: at j Sekulo. Also get information at a c l
Speaker 1: J dot org. And we've got a radio broadcast at noon.
Speaker 1: Be back with more in just a moment. Hey, welcome
Speaker 1: back to the Sean Hannity Show. Everybody. This is J Secular,
Speaker 1: guest hosting for Sean. We're taking your calls at one
Speaker 1: hundred nine f one Seawan. That's one one seven three
Speaker 1: two six. I am the chief counsel of the American
Speaker 1: Center for Law in Justice. It's spent a lot of
Speaker 1: my time dealing with cases at the Supreme Court in
Speaker 1: the United States and litigating in front of the Supreme Court.
Speaker 1: I thought about this the other day. For three decades,
Speaker 1: thirty years and UM actually had a case in front
Speaker 1: of Judge Gorsch, who I am very hopeful will soon
Speaker 1: be Justice Gorsage of the United States Supreme Court. We
Speaker 1: had a case involving a ten Commandments display out of Utah.
Speaker 1: That case ended up, but what's called an on bank proceeding,
Speaker 1: that is the entire ten Circuit heard it. He Although
Speaker 1: we lost in the District Court. One in the District
Speaker 1: Court lost in the Court of Appeals, we won unanimously
Speaker 1: at the Supreme Court nine to zero in our favorite
Speaker 1: Judge Gorset's joined an opinion by Judge McConnell which really
Speaker 1: served as the basis of our religious liberty claim and
Speaker 1: our free speech claim. And I was very pleased with that,
Speaker 1: and I'm looking forward to Judge Gorsets becoming Justice Gorgious.
Speaker 1: I was hearing set for March twenty, so this pretty
Speaker 1: much the Supreme Court term this time is probably going
Speaker 1: to be gone, but we will have him for the
Speaker 1: next term. We'll be back to a full complement of
Speaker 1: nine justices. I've had the experience, by the way of
Speaker 1: having eight justice members eight justices at the Supreme Court,
Speaker 1: and I've had to reargue with cases before. It's not
Speaker 1: fun for the lawyer. I'll tell you that that someone
Speaker 1: that does it. I also host a radio broadcast at
Speaker 1: new on noon Eastern Time called the J Secular Show,
Speaker 1: and you can follow me at J Secular on Twitter
Speaker 1: and follow the A c l J at a c
Speaker 1: l J dot org. I'm gonna go ahead and take
Speaker 1: some calls. Let's go ahead and get Paula up from Hamilton, Ohio. Paula,
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Seawan Hanny Show. Hey, how are you great? Um?
Speaker 1: I have been watching you and listening to you for years,
Speaker 1: and I'm feeling older by the moment when you said that,
Speaker 1: But go ahead. I appreciate that, really respect you. I've
Speaker 1: watched you for years and I've prayed that you would
Speaker 1: be able to give wise counsel to President Trump. And Um,
Speaker 1: but my question was about Hillary and Obama and Loretta
Speaker 1: Lynch and I was just wondering, why hasn't any of
Speaker 1: them than brought to justice yet? Well, here's what you happen. Yeah,
Speaker 1: So here's what you've got, um, And this is a look,
Speaker 1: this is a decision that that when President Trump became president,
Speaker 1: he had to make. Was he going to allow the
Speaker 1: Justice Department to reopen the investigation of Hillary Clinton. The
Speaker 1: President wanted to move forward, he wanted to look forward,
Speaker 1: So going looking back and drag the country into something
Speaker 1: that sometimes it's just not that necessary. So with President Obama, look,
Speaker 1: I mean I didn't like the policies, I didn't like
Speaker 1: the I R. S targeting, and there was a whole
Speaker 1: host of issues I didn't like the way we handle
Speaker 1: the war on terrorism. But that's the past now and
Speaker 1: I think what we've got to do is look forward.
Speaker 1: And what we've been talking about on the on the
Speaker 1: program today, and it's something I'm very concerned about, is
Speaker 1: this undercurrent inside these agencies. Doesn't mean, by the way,
Speaker 1: that that that everybody has to agree on every policy,
Speaker 1: on every issue, but this idea that you've got leaks
Speaker 1: going on right now by the intelligence agencies themselves should
Speaker 1: be sending chills up Republicans and Democrats. We should all
Speaker 1: be concerned about that because it's it's not simply a problem.
Speaker 1: It goes beyond a problem. This goes to the heart
Speaker 1: of our constitutional republic. And it's one thing to challenge
Speaker 1: the president's policies, and you know, you know, we challenge
Speaker 1: a lot of those policies in court. I was involved
Speaker 1: in a lot of the litigation on that on those
Speaker 1: issues during the Obama administration. But at the end of
Speaker 1: the day, now you got to look forward. You've got
Speaker 1: to close these leaks down. I think you have to
Speaker 1: have wide discussion in any of these situations, but you
Speaker 1: have to go forward. And I think the President made
Speaker 1: the decision. We're gonna move forward. We're not going to
Speaker 1: concentrate on the press. Look, President Obama is not going away.
Speaker 1: I think that is very very clear. He's going nowhere.
Speaker 1: He set up his Organizing for Action, which was the
Speaker 1: previous Obama for America group. He's already tweeting about various
Speaker 1: protests going on right now and encouraging a lot of that.
Speaker 1: He's a citizen, it's a former president. Is the right
Speaker 1: to do it. But I think we have to be
Speaker 1: aware of what is going on internally, and that's where
Speaker 1: this real fight comes in. I appreciate your call, Paula.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna go. Let's take Mike's call out a Los Angeles, California.
Speaker 1: Hi'm Mike, Hey j how are you, brother? Good? Good? Good?
Speaker 1: Go ahead, please listen. Um, this has just been bothered
Speaker 1: me ever since it occurred. Why didn't President Trump just
Speaker 1: tell the Ninth Circuit to stick it? You know, I'm
Speaker 1: the president, You're only the Ninth Circuit. You can yeah,
Speaker 1: because we're a country of laws, and even presidents will
Speaker 1: respect the law. And I think, look, the President made
Speaker 1: very clear he disagree with the Ninth Circuit opinion. He's
Speaker 1: gonna be reissuing an order. I think it's gonna moot
Speaker 1: that entire case out. But we're a country of laws
Speaker 1: are coequal branches of government. That's what we're talking about.
Speaker 1: So a president shouldn't ignore the courts. I mean, I
Speaker 1: think that's a mistake. I mean, you gotta fight when
Speaker 1: you get listened. I don't like losing and I like
Speaker 1: getting you know. I famously in the Supreme Court case
Speaker 1: I had, we had lost it in lower court, came
Speaker 1: up to the Supreme Court in the United States. Then
Speaker 1: Chief Justice William Rehnquist said to me, goes, Mr Saeculo,
Speaker 1: exactly what would you like us to do here? And
Speaker 1: I said, somewhere in the opinion, I'd like it to
Speaker 1: say reversed, because that means we would have won. So
Speaker 1: the President respected the court, disagreed with it, but moved
Speaker 1: on by issuing. I believe the new order that will
Speaker 1: come out Monday. Hey, good news. Doug shown is joining us.
Speaker 1: He is. I've been on this program both on radio
Speaker 1: and TV with Doug for many years, of course a
Speaker 1: regular with Sean Doug. I want to get your impression
Speaker 1: and your sense, and you're well connected Polster political analysts
Speaker 1: for Fox. I appreciate you coming on this whole situation
Speaker 1: with Keith Ellison and he you know, a lot of
Speaker 1: people think he was gonna be the chair of the
Speaker 1: d n C. This is a guy and I'm just
Speaker 1: laying out the evidence and we could. I'll play it
Speaker 1: for everybody and if we need to. He has made
Speaker 1: some very anti Semitic statements. He has he has a
Speaker 1: former relationship with Louis Farrakhan. He was investigated by the
Speaker 1: Congress for a meeting with the Saudis, uh and and
Speaker 1: groups that were sponsoring terrorists. You're a democratic polster, You're
Speaker 1: a polster. What do you think? Tell me what is
Speaker 1: happening here with your party? Well? I don't know, Jay,
Speaker 1: I I can't answer the question because this is a horrant.
Speaker 1: This is somebody who has never renounced his support of
Speaker 1: our coon announced Farcon. He has made comments that I
Speaker 1: consider hostile to Jews, if not anti semitic, and he
Speaker 1: you know, I will not be the same type of
Speaker 1: democrat I am now and have been for forty years.
Speaker 1: If Keith Allison becomes the d n C chairman, I
Speaker 1: can say that with certainly, what do you think is
Speaker 1: gonna happen there? Doug, I mean, do you. I mean
Speaker 1: a lot of people think if it goes more than
Speaker 1: two rounds in the vote in Atlanta, that maybe not him,
Speaker 1: but if it's in the one or first or second,
Speaker 1: it probably goes to him. What do you think? What
Speaker 1: are you here? I think he's the front runner going
Speaker 1: into the multi candidate process. Um, you know. I think
Speaker 1: it'll be close between me and Paris on the first ballot.
Speaker 1: I don't know what will happen thereafter. But all I
Speaker 1: can say if if he's the front runner, having the
Speaker 1: support of our senior Senator Schumer here in New York,
Speaker 1: it's it's it's calamitous, horrible. How explained to me, Doug?
Speaker 1: How do the party? How did the DNC? Because I've
Speaker 1: said this is what I said. Republican or Democrat, independent, libertary,
Speaker 1: and whatever your political position is. We have two major
Speaker 1: parties in the United States, Republicans and Democrats. The idea
Speaker 1: that one of the major parties in the United States
Speaker 1: would be not only aligning themselves with but supporting and
Speaker 1: nominating and putting in as the chair of the d
Speaker 1: n C Keith Ellison, that has me concerned as an
Speaker 1: American and where that party is going and what it
Speaker 1: means for our country. How did you get here? I
Speaker 1: don't know. I mean the left has taken over the party.
Speaker 1: Israel has been delegitimized to a very large event, and
Speaker 1: as part and parcel of that, somebody who has views
Speaker 1: that I think are outside the mainstream, certainly on Israel,
Speaker 1: the Middle East, and Louis Farton uh is um emerging
Speaker 1: as a front runner, if not the front runner. And Jay,
Speaker 1: I'll tell you this. I spoke to some non Jews
Speaker 1: today and they couldn't bleekly when they didn't believe me
Speaker 1: when I explained who Allison was and who far Account was.
Speaker 1: You know, this is in large measure of faded from
Speaker 1: our consciousness. But those of us who are culturally, politically
Speaker 1: and socially aware Jews and Democrats, you know this is
Speaker 1: almost a revival of the Holocaust. Let's be clear. Well,
Speaker 1: I mean the things that the things that he said,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna play. I want to play some of the
Speaker 1: sound here. You know, I'll get to the impeachment one
Speaker 1: in a moment, but I want to play. I mean,
Speaker 1: you've got this is Look, it's a free country. You
Speaker 1: can believe in any religion, you want, and we have
Speaker 1: no oath of office. You can. But there's a difference
Speaker 1: between believing in a religion and preaching hate, and ellis
Speaker 1: exactly have preached hate consistently with never never an apology.
Speaker 1: Here's what I don't understand. And I've got a lot
Speaker 1: of family members that are Democrats, uh, coming from Jewish households.
Speaker 1: It's part of the politics. My family wasn't, but a
Speaker 1: lot work all right, So let me play this sound
Speaker 1: bite because I think this is the most anti Semitic
Speaker 1: of all of them. And this is the bite where
Speaker 1: basically what Ellison lays out is this issue of seven
Speaker 1: million people controlling the foreign policy. And basically he doesn't
Speaker 1: say Israel, but this is the reference. Obviously, let's go
Speaker 1: ahead and play that one. The United States for policy
Speaker 1: in the Middle East is governed by what is good
Speaker 1: or bad through a country of seven million people, a
Speaker 1: region of three million. All terms are a cuntry of
Speaker 1: seven million. Does that make sense? What does make sense? Actually,
Speaker 1: because Israel's are allied. But you know, Doug, he's talking
Speaker 1: about million people now. And by the way, not all
Speaker 1: of them, not all of them are not allies. Are
Speaker 1: Egypt Jordan. We've got allies in the region, the United States,
Speaker 1: but in the Gulf States. But you know in that
Speaker 1: region is also Iran and Syria. So how in the
Speaker 1: world is and and what does this mean for the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party if it goes in this direction, Doug? What
Speaker 1: what do you think the future holds? It means that
Speaker 1: we are throwing in with the worst sort of anti Semites.
Speaker 1: And I call it racism because you just can't ascribe
Speaker 1: political views and social views to people based on their
Speaker 1: religion and creed. It is. It is horrific. And look, Jake,
Speaker 1: you and I have differed on politics, sometimes VEHEMENTI but
Speaker 1: that to me is the American way. This is rank, gross,
Speaker 1: offensive anti semitism that cannot be countenanced, whatever your views are.
Speaker 1: If I was a leftist Democrat, which I'm not, I
Speaker 1: would still find this abhorrant. So the question, of course,
Speaker 1: it begs the question, Doug. And that is right now
Speaker 1: he's the leading contender so inside that party, and I mean,
Speaker 1: I don't know if this is the Bernie Sanders wing
Speaker 1: or it is. Okay, so is the influence of that
Speaker 1: part of the Democratic Party. That's significant right now that
Speaker 1: I mean, he's leading yes, it is, and it means
Speaker 1: that are only uh stable, consistent democratic ally in the
Speaker 1: Middle East, Israel is at risk. Let's be clear. I
Speaker 1: know there's this, you know, Doug, there's something area and
Speaker 1: we both agree on this. And I've done a lot
Speaker 1: of work for for the State of Israel. I've I've
Speaker 1: done a lot of legal work at the International Criminal
Speaker 1: Court in the Hague defending Israel's positions on a variety
Speaker 1: of things. And we've talked about this before. There's this
Speaker 1: whole movement to de legitimize you said, a de legitimize
Speaker 1: Israel is called BDS, boycott, divest sanction. To me, this
Speaker 1: feeds into the worst of that by by encouraging this
Speaker 1: kind of anti Semitic, anti Israel, anti Jewish fervor inside
Speaker 1: the party. That's absolutely right, and that's what so scares me,
Speaker 1: because this hasn't gotten the attention it deserves. Only courageous
Speaker 1: people like yourself and Sean have brought it out. But
Speaker 1: this has calamitous, calamitous potential impact on the State of
Speaker 1: Israel and indeed on our relations, as you suggest rightly
Speaker 1: with other states radical states in the Middle East. At
Speaker 1: the end of the day, if Keith Ellison is the
Speaker 1: chair of the d n C. What do you think
Speaker 1: the reaction within the party will be. I think, sadly,
Speaker 1: in the most cases, it will be a big yawn.
Speaker 1: The sent minority leader is his most prominent supporter, who
Speaker 1: is a you know, a to who has been a
Speaker 1: strong supporter of Israel, opposed the the Aran nuclear deal.
Speaker 1: I don't know how he can back Ellison. I couldn't
Speaker 1: back him ever, just that, but I think it's gonna
Speaker 1: be bad for Israel. J And we got to keep
Speaker 1: speaking out. We appreciate it, Doug. Thanks for coming on.
Speaker 1: I appreciate you and saying this. Look, there's areas, like
Speaker 1: he said, we're Doug said, we agree, we disagree. This
Speaker 1: is when we agree on this would be disastrous for
Speaker 1: the country. That's what I'm saying about Keith Ellison as
Speaker 1: the d n C disasters for our country, disastrous for
Speaker 1: the state of Israel. And I think that we as
Speaker 1: Americans have to understand that. All Right, Jay Secular in
Speaker 1: for Sean Hannity. I'll be back with your phone calls
Speaker 1: in just a moment. Breaking every single day. This is
Speaker 1: the Sean Hannity Show, and welcome back to the Sean
Speaker 1: Hannity Show. It's Jay Sekulo Shan. That's seven, three to six.
Speaker 1: Let me tell you what we're looking at Monday. I'm
Speaker 1: already looking to Monday. New executive order is probably going
Speaker 1: to be released from the President on Monday. That executive
Speaker 1: order is going to deal with the issue of asylum
Speaker 1: immigration from seven countries of concern. Now they may expand
Speaker 1: that out somewhat. The seven countries of concern were the
Speaker 1: countries that the Obama administration labeled as the most dangerous,
Speaker 1: the place we could not verify who was coming in
Speaker 1: and coming out of the United States. Now, we went
Speaker 1: to work when the first case came out, when the
Speaker 1: President unrolled it back in January, and then the Ninth
Speaker 1: Circuit came out with their decision. We looked at that
Speaker 1: Ninth Circuit decision, which, by the way, fundamentally was incorrect
Speaker 1: as a matter of law. In our view, the Ninth
Speaker 1: Circuit is generally incorrect as a matter of almost reversed
Speaker 1: circuit in the country, always in the top one or two.
Speaker 1: But I looked at the holes, if you will, that
Speaker 1: were in the order, and those holes, I believe what
Speaker 1: you're gonna see on Monday or Tuesday are going to
Speaker 1: be filled. The president has the authority to determine who
Speaker 1: comes into the United States and who does not. There
Speaker 1: is not a constitutional right to migration into the United States.
Speaker 1: There's not a constitution. And I'm I'm the grandson of
Speaker 1: a Russian immigrant, so I believe in legal immigration, and
Speaker 1: I think we need immigration reform, comprehensive immigration reform. But
Speaker 1: I gotta tell you, we need to know who's coming
Speaker 1: in and what they're up to. So I believe what
Speaker 1: you're gonna see in the new order that the President
Speaker 1: is gonna put forward is gonna be a clarification of
Speaker 1: exactly that the seven countries of origin will be named.
Speaker 1: That will we do process for those that are Green cardholders,
Speaker 1: those with visas. That doesn't mean, by the way, that
Speaker 1: when you come into the United States, even if you
Speaker 1: have a valid visa, that you can't be questions. For instance,
Speaker 1: if you were in Czechnia. The Sarnet brothers were here
Speaker 1: legally they went to Czechenia, our immigration officials could have
Speaker 1: questioned them significantly about what they were doing in Czechenia
Speaker 1: even though they had a visa. So part of that
Speaker 1: is just the law as it is, so I expect
Speaker 1: that order to come out on Monday. So that'll be, uh,
Speaker 1: I think a pretty big day for the President again
Speaker 1: as he rolls out this new uh immigration order. When
Speaker 1: we come back, I'm gonna take more of your calls.
Speaker 1: This is J Sekulo, Chief Council of the American Center
Speaker 1: for Law in Justice, for Sean Hannity today. One eight
Speaker 1: one sewn. That's one eight hundred nine four one seven,
Speaker 1: three to six. We'll be back with more in just
Speaker 1: a minute. Yea, yeah, yeah, Hey, welcome back to the
Speaker 1: broadcast with Sean Hanny's program. I appreciate Linda having playing
Speaker 1: that song for my bandmates. That's J Secular Band, a
Speaker 1: great tune. We have a Facebook page, by the way,
Speaker 1: J Secular Band on Facebook. That's simple. All right, we're
Speaker 1: gonna take your calls. One's seven, three to six. Let's
Speaker 1: go ahead and start with Dan and Buffalo. Go ahead, Dan,
Speaker 1: you're on, Yes, Hi, Hey, thanks for having me on.
Speaker 1: You're doing a great job. Thanks me and joining the
Speaker 1: show today. UM my pleasure, wasn't it here in Wyoming? Uh.
Speaker 1: You probably know that Wyoming is um the largest energy
Speaker 1: producing state in the right country. And we've lost thousands
Speaker 1: of jobs in the last two years under the last
Speaker 1: administration and the e p A. And my question is,
Speaker 1: and I'll just listen to your answer off the line, Um,
Speaker 1: what do you know about Prutt and who has been
Speaker 1: appointed by by President Trump? Yeah, and I know that
Speaker 1: he was an attorney general I believe for Oklahoma and
Speaker 1: he's fighting against the e PA for years. But I'm
Speaker 1: wondering if you have any insight into me. Yeah. I
Speaker 1: actually we've worked with Scott Pruett in a variety of
Speaker 1: capacities as the as the attorney general to state, and
Speaker 1: I think the President made a great select the e
Speaker 1: p A regulatory process. And you could be in favor
Speaker 1: of environmental protection, I get it, but some of these
Speaker 1: rules and regulations are so non number one outdated. Some
Speaker 1: of these don't even make sense with the technology we
Speaker 1: have now. But also what you saw in Wyoming and
Speaker 1: what you've seen and elsewhere in the country is it
Speaker 1: is stopped our ability for energy independence. And I think
Speaker 1: eliminating these unness I love what the President is doing
Speaker 1: about For every new regulation, two have got to go
Speaker 1: and a great way to start that is right there
Speaker 1: in the Environmental Protection Agency. I think that's where a
Speaker 1: great place to start. So I think Scott Pruitt was
Speaker 1: a great choice. Will do a great job. Randy from Cincinnati, Ohio. Hi, Randy, Jay,
Speaker 1: how are you doing good? Sir? Hey, I have a
Speaker 1: question about the executive order you were just talking about
Speaker 1: Monday Monday. Um, you know, and I know that a
Speaker 1: liberal group like the a c l U was going
Speaker 1: to job shop this and challenge the coutionality of it. Um,
Speaker 1: my question is why can't an organization or group like
Speaker 1: yours the minute he signs that, you guys challenged the
Speaker 1: constitutionality of that law in front of a judge that
Speaker 1: would be more favorable uh, getting it in the circuit. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Let me tell you how it works, though, and I
Speaker 1: appreciate that. I appreciate the call. So here's how it works.
Speaker 1: It's called forum shopping. By the way, it's not illegal.
Speaker 1: You can go to a forum that is hospitable to
Speaker 1: your viewpoint. And that's precisely what why Washington State and
Speaker 1: Minnesota joined them in this. That's why they went to
Speaker 1: the Ninth Circuit because it is the most liberal court
Speaker 1: in the United States. The Ninth Circuit not only ignored
Speaker 1: the law live in a twop that gives the president
Speaker 1: the authority and make these determinations on on asylum and
Speaker 1: immigration and coming into the United States. They didn't just
Speaker 1: ignore it, they didn't even cite it as if it
Speaker 1: doesn't exist. But the way you have to beat them,
Speaker 1: and this is what we did. While it was this
Speaker 1: first round, the initial executive order, we filed what's called
Speaker 1: a friend of the court brief. So the American Center
Speaker 1: for Law in Justice, our organization a c l J
Speaker 1: dot org, we filed a brief on behalf of millions
Speaker 1: of our members, putting out the legal position that established
Speaker 1: the president's authority. So how you engage the litigation when
Speaker 1: you're not a party is through these called amikas cure
Speaker 1: a friend of the court briefs. That's what we did
Speaker 1: so the administration can't file what's called a put up lawsuit.
Speaker 1: By the way, there were times when the Obama administration
Speaker 1: would do that. They would encourage groups to go file
Speaker 1: lawsuits to establish their right to do something, even though
Speaker 1: they were in cahoots with each other. It was a
Speaker 1: fake plane of fake defendant. I wrote about it in
Speaker 1: a book called Undemocratic. This was a very typical practice
Speaker 1: of the Obama administration. But the way it's supposed to
Speaker 1: work in our republic is you get a lawsuit, you
Speaker 1: respond to it. Now, I think there will be an
Speaker 1: executive order Monday or Tuesday. I think it will be
Speaker 1: challenged immediately. I have no idea what the Ninth Circuit
Speaker 1: will do. I believe this is gonna be air tight,
Speaker 1: and the Ninth Circuit still, I will not be shocked
Speaker 1: if they rule against the President. Having said that, that
Speaker 1: goes to the Supreme Court of the United States. The
Speaker 1: way we've recommended w do process rights with it very
Speaker 1: clear on who's covered and who's not covered. I don't
Speaker 1: believe this religion argument, that this is a Muslim ban,
Speaker 1: it's going to carry that. I've argued a lot of
Speaker 1: pubishment clause cases. That's where the religion clauses come out
Speaker 1: of the Constitution. I've argued a lot of establishment clause
Speaker 1: cases at the Supreme Court. I would be happy to
Speaker 1: take that one. There is no way that they're gonna
Speaker 1: be able to say seven countries that happened to have
Speaker 1: a majority Muslim populations and that establishes a religion in
Speaker 1: the United States or shows harm to a religion when
Speaker 1: eighty five of the Islamic world is not covered by this.
Speaker 1: So I think it's gonna be a bogus argument. But
Speaker 1: we're gonna find out soon enough. John Michigan, go hey, John, Um,
Speaker 1: I just said an idea about term limits. You want
Speaker 1: to get your opinion on it all right now? You know,
Speaker 1: just a simple majority gets you in, right, right? Um?
Speaker 1: What if we limited to two terms like that and
Speaker 1: then on the third term they had to win by
Speaker 1: like five percent? You know what? That would take a
Speaker 1: constitutional amendment? I mean, John, that would take you gotta
Speaker 1: have a constitutional amendment to put that in place. And
Speaker 1: I mean, look, I think there's a lot of valid reasons.
Speaker 1: I'm the lawyers to I argue both sides of issues
Speaker 1: all the time. I think there's a lot of valid
Speaker 1: reason and for having term limits. And that is the
Speaker 1: idea with our founders was not that you'd have this extended,
Speaker 1: always serving United States Congress. In fact, it was really
Speaker 1: deemed at our founding to be quite a burden. You
Speaker 1: gotta remember, look at the founding of our country and
Speaker 1: then the first Congress is set, or for that matter,
Speaker 1: when the first Supreme Court set, you had no transportation capabilities.
Speaker 1: You don't even have trains at that point. Nothing. People
Speaker 1: were going on horseback or in carriage. So they would
Speaker 1: go to Washington, d C. Which was like the swamp
Speaker 1: of Washington, d C. It was uncomfortable, and there was
Speaker 1: this sense that you did this out of a sense
Speaker 1: of calling and duty, but you didn't want to do
Speaker 1: this for the rest of your life. Many of them
Speaker 1: wanted to get back to their careers, get back to
Speaker 1: their families. That you didn't hop on an airplane and
Speaker 1: get back to you know, Alabama or to Texas in
Speaker 1: two and a half hours from Washington. I mean these
Speaker 1: were day long's, week long drives on you know, on horseback.
Speaker 1: So the idea was never to have this you know,
Speaker 1: continual legislative body that would be the same people all
Speaker 1: the time. But again Founders would have to you have
Speaker 1: to do an there's an amendment process in the Constitution.
Speaker 1: It would take a constitutional amendment to do that. Adam
Speaker 1: is calling from Michigan. Go ahead at him. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: was calling because I'm really sick of the hypocrisy. During
Speaker 1: the election, everybody, all they wanted to talk about was
Speaker 1: that the leaks came from Russia and nobody wanted to
Speaker 1: talk about what was in the WEEKI leaks revelations and
Speaker 1: not with the administration. All they want to talk about
Speaker 1: what was leaked and where it came from. My question
Speaker 1: for you is, as the people, what can we do
Speaker 1: to ensure that what happened during the election doesn't happen again?
Speaker 1: And how can we hold those people accountable for what
Speaker 1: they did? Well, I mean the difference with wiki leaks,
Speaker 1: and you gotta put wiki leaks and the Hillary Clinton
Speaker 1: email scandal on one side. That is people internally leaking
Speaker 1: information or access to computers through servers that were not
Speaker 1: secured enabled these nefarious groups and they're out there and
Speaker 1: there's lots of them. That's why you have software protections
Speaker 1: and all this, and that's why what Hillary Clinton did
Speaker 1: was so dangerous by going to a server that was
Speaker 1: not protected, not controlled by our government. That's different, and
Speaker 1: it's bad. By the way. I don't I don't like
Speaker 1: those either. I think that what these individuals did is
Speaker 1: treason us if they came from inside the United States.
Speaker 1: But what you've got going on right now with leaks
Speaker 1: is internal leaks. In other words, Adam, these are leaks
Speaker 1: that are happening by people that are working in the
Speaker 1: United States government right now, in the intelligence community, and
Speaker 1: that has to have I don't care if your Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, independent,
Speaker 1: or you never voted. That in our constitutional republic is very,
Speaker 1: very dangerous and it sets our horrendous precedent. It puts
Speaker 1: our people at risk, It puts our country at risk,
Speaker 1: and puts our constitutional republic at risk. Look are we
Speaker 1: there now? Are we on the cliff of danger? I
Speaker 1: don't think we're on the cliff of danger. We live
Speaker 1: in the greatest country in the world, period. But you
Speaker 1: can't allow this stuff to go on checked, which means
Speaker 1: when you find out through the Department of Justice, with
Speaker 1: a real investigation, who did this, you hold them accountable.
Speaker 1: These are felonies ten years for each act. You put
Speaker 1: a couple of these bureaucrats in jail for doing this,
Speaker 1: for violating the law. Give them, do process, have a trial,
Speaker 1: they're found guilty, they serve time. Guess what doesn't happen
Speaker 1: so frequently it's very easy to be this, you know,
Speaker 1: undercover information going out when you're not held accountable. And
Speaker 1: we can't have that anymore. I mean, we saw that
Speaker 1: with the I R. S case. We won that, by
Speaker 1: the way, in the Court of Appeals. But look, the
Speaker 1: fact is the lowest learns of the world they got
Speaker 1: away with it. And that's just you know, it's unfortunate,
Speaker 1: but that's fact. So you gotta deal with the system
Speaker 1: you got. You do the best you can with what
Speaker 1: you got, and that's exactly what we're gonna do. Let
Speaker 1: me go to Lvy in Jackson, New Jersey. L we
Speaker 1: go ahead. Yes, today, I'm really on the same subject
Speaker 1: with Lewis Rhino and Obama and Hillary. They have to
Speaker 1: be held accountable. That's the biggest mistake we made because
Speaker 1: if the situation after us, well, I'm not I don't.
Speaker 1: I don't disagree with you on that, but let me
Speaker 1: tell you they were held accountable. Hillary Clinton is not
Speaker 1: the President of United States Donald Trump is. I mean
Speaker 1: they lost an election. Now, if there were violations of
Speaker 1: the law, I mean that whole scenario with the FBI
Speaker 1: engaging on engaging, we found no violation. Now we've got
Speaker 1: to reopen it. There's new evidence. Then we closed it again.
Speaker 1: The FBI should not have done that. I thought that
Speaker 1: what James Comey did was inexcusable. That was not professional.
Speaker 1: It wasn't right. I think he should have resigned. Frankly,
Speaker 1: but the FBI director does not just serve at the
Speaker 1: pleasure of the president. It's a tenure appointment. It overlaps
Speaker 1: administrations and that's not on purpose. It makes sense. But
Speaker 1: the holding them accountable was you all at the ballot box.
Speaker 1: That's how you hold people accountable. Republican, Democrat, independent, that's,
Speaker 1: at the end of the day, how you're holding people
Speaker 1: really responsible. Tony from Orlando, Florida, go ahead, Tony clear
Speaker 1: in that segment about you know the shadow government, mention
Speaker 1: any coup and everything. Isn't that illegal? And what could
Speaker 1: be done about it? Well, it is illegal to engage
Speaker 1: in a shadow government. When you're leaking information. You can
Speaker 1: we we talked about this. You could with Professor Hutchinson.
Speaker 1: You could hold your beliefs. That's one very different than
Speaker 1: acting on them in this way. So, yeah, leaking information
Speaker 1: is called a crime. We don't just call it a
Speaker 1: leak in the United States. It's a crime, and you
Speaker 1: shouldn't be able to do it and you should be
Speaker 1: held accountable. I believe that the FBI under Jeff Sessions
Speaker 1: leadership will get to the bottom. That's by the way.
Speaker 1: It won't be overnight. It's gonna take some time. But
Speaker 1: I am very encouraging to say that this is something
Speaker 1: we moved. All right. Uh Jerry from Texas, welcome to Sean. Hey,
Speaker 1: you said that we should let Hillary Clinton go in
Speaker 1: the past. But I got two points. Okay. First of all,
Speaker 1: it's not fair to the marine and spending a year
Speaker 1: in jail for taking six pictures on the submarine. I
Speaker 1: know that suck it based upon the logic that it's
Speaker 1: in the past and we should forget about it, and
Speaker 1: that means we should never open a cold case. Well, look,
Speaker 1: I'm not that's not what I said. What I said
Speaker 1: was the President made a determination because it's the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice that would have to bring any action against
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton. Remember an Obama didn't give her a pardon.
Speaker 1: There's no pardon there, so it would be the president
Speaker 1: making the determination whether he would proceed with prosecution. He
Speaker 1: decided not to do that, and he decided not to
Speaker 1: do that because he wants to look forward. There's enough
Speaker 1: on the plate for the country. It is not fair
Speaker 1: to those marines, it's not fair to other people that
Speaker 1: have had horrible real sentences for doing violations and this look,
Speaker 1: you you disclose classes. We talked about that with Colonel Smith.
Speaker 1: You you disclose classified information. Guess what you're held accountable.
Speaker 1: She wasn't in the criminal sense, she was in the
Speaker 1: political sense. I don't know if that's a sense. I
Speaker 1: don't know if that's solace for anybody. But that's the
Speaker 1: way the laws and the president and the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice would have to initiate this. And I just don't
Speaker 1: think they're gonna do it. I think there, as I said,
Speaker 1: I think they're looking forward. Steve Utah, you're on the
Speaker 1: air on the Sean Hannity Show. Go ahead, Jay, you
Speaker 1: have done stuff. I want to be like you when
Speaker 1: I grow up. Well, then you'll be an old guy,
Speaker 1: because I'm I'm turned sixty. I'm almost sixty one. Actually
Speaker 1: I should say that very clearly. But then you can
Speaker 1: to have grandchildren. It's a great thing, and I've got
Speaker 1: four of them. Hey, So so here's the deal. First
Speaker 1: of all, I'm one of the newly underemployee who did
Speaker 1: not get to keep his doctor or planned as counted
Speaker 1: as a success by the Obamatiah uh let's see. Secondly,
Speaker 1: Maxine Waters on the scumback Thine. Yeah, um, she's got
Speaker 1: street cred on that. She may be believable because back
Speaker 1: and then, I think it was two thousand and twelve,
Speaker 1: there's a New York poster, New York Times article on
Speaker 1: this at that time, a few years before that. Let
Speaker 1: me tell you what that that is. This this political
Speaker 1: grandstanding and calling names. Let me tell you who does
Speaker 1: not help anybody in the body politic. I don't believe
Speaker 1: that helps anybody. I think that we've got to be
Speaker 1: clear that kind of language, that kind of discussed. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's a free country. Maxine Waters can say whatever she wants,
Speaker 1: but that's just not the way it's supposed to be
Speaker 1: in the United States of America. I'm Jay Seculo. I
Speaker 1: am been sitting in for Sean Hannity. What a pleasure
Speaker 1: it has been to do this. We've got more ahead,
Speaker 1: but I want to tell you something. This has been
Speaker 1: an honor for me to sit in for my friend
Speaker 1: Shawn Hannay after minutes. Respect for Shawn and the entire
Speaker 1: team that produces great radio broadcast every day. So it's
Speaker 1: been a pleasure for me to sit. Now I've got
Speaker 1: more to talk about when we come back from the
Speaker 1: break again one Sean. I'm Jay Sekulo a c l
Speaker 1: J dot org or at Jay Sekulo and again you
Speaker 1: could follow us on Twitter or Facebook. We'll be back
Speaker 1: with more, including some more closing comments in just a
Speaker 1: few minutes. Yes, you shoul where I'm Sean's got more
Speaker 1: behind the scenes in for ration, more contacts than anybody
Speaker 1: what more friends behind the church. Sean Hannty is on
Speaker 1: Everybody's Jay secularent for Sean Hanny. Let me thank Sean
Speaker 1: for this opportunity to come to you today on the broadcast.
Speaker 1: I have been a fan and have been pleased to
Speaker 1: be a guest so many times on this broadcast. I
Speaker 1: want to thank Sean, Thank Linda, I think Linda for
Speaker 1: playing some of that Jay Secular Band music. You can
Speaker 1: follow that by the way in Facebook. Ja Secular Band
Speaker 1: follow me at Facebook as well and at Jay Sekulo
Speaker 1: on Twitter. And again, our thoughts and prayers for the
Speaker 1: Alan Comb's family and the loss of him. I lost
Speaker 1: to our country of an advocate for free speech. Like
Speaker 1: I said, didn't always a grist agree politically, but he
Speaker 1: was a great guy and we sorely missed Thanks for
Speaker 1: having me, Thanks for listening to Sean Hanny program, Come
Speaker 1: Back