Democrat Pat Leahy to Preside Over Senate Impeachment Trial

Secular radio get this Democrat sooner, Patrick Leahy is going to be the presiding officer of the Senate impeachment trial even constitutional discussed today secular you live from Washington DC.

Phone lines are open for your questions right now called one 806 843-110-1800 68412, and now your post secular right if you hear that news. It was wrapped real near yesterday, the Chief Justice Roberts is a statement, but he made it clear to the U.S. Senate is not going to preside over the impeachment epithet." Of a private citizen so in his mind. I think he's given the clear idea out there is put out that it it's not impeachment of the present. So if it's not impeachment the President what happens of the Constitution. Well, if this was a another current officer in the United States. So a cabinet member, a federal court judge then the Chief Justice never presides. It's the it's usually it is the proper President pro tem of the Senate and that would be the longest-serving member of the party in charge that is Patrick Lahey and that is who now is going to be run. He's got me running as a presiding officer. The second impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump and this brings to light whether or not this is even an impeachment trial or if it's a trial by the student, a US citizen whose private and in his private life, which they don't have jurisdiction of, and they don't have much record they have larvae articles back and forth. Having that I think to be Putting a partisan in charge of this just shows this is not that the impeachment of a present that the founders were intending. They never they made it clear that if it could be present to be a summerlike a lifetime appointed sheet the highest ranking judge in our federal judiciary, the Chief Justice of the United States on any mostly procedural role for the most part, but still he is the one making sure things are staying on course staying cordial in the sense of law, and that everyone is performing the functions they are supposed to perform ablated all of the rules is close to the point that this really is an impeachment trial mean that calling an impeachment trial, but by nature.

The impeachment of the President says this. The President retail related Constitution article 1, section 3, the Senate shall have the sole power trial impeachment when sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the United States astride the Chief Justice shall preside and note person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two thirds of members present when the President of the United States astride the Chief Justice shall preside. What this is and then a trial of the present, the President, this is a trial of a former President and the Chief Justice is not presiding and now it's being presided by Patrick Lahey the President pro tem of the Senate, meaning what is this exactly is politics and I idled it was elevated to the standard of impeachment but immediate obviously that's what it's it's going to be called in them in the media and I guess that's what it is and I'm say. I guess because I'm not sure how the President pro tem of the political party can be the presiding officer and then barring the President from life and purchase money in politics.

I don't think I'll get a conviction. Here, but it's interesting to me. This dynamic nothing and they confirmed that when yesterday last night. Yesterday day, and it's and honestly I mean, it's a pretty direct acknowledgment that is not an impeachment present. Otherwise, the Chief Justice would be there.

J the concern I'm hearing from senators on the Republican side and this is in a state the obvious, but Patrick Lahey's communitarians not just in a preside J he's gonna preside and of course as a senator, he can evoke in you do both well. He's planning to artichoke Roberts could not, of course, right in the Pierrot, the it's outrageous folks outrageous that the put the country through this outrageous.

They want to try a private citizen. It's outrageous that it's going to be Patrick Lahey in that chair and I think we need to make our voices loud and clear about that. People are looking for a way to do that is to provide that for you. The ACLJ a potentially through survey be a petitioner guy, great people been asking for that Satan.

This is wrong and I like to hear from a half-million people that we can notify United States Senate that this is unconstitutional. In our view, and that the American people post rewrite back challenges facing Americans for substantial time in our Valley freedom sword constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades now ACLJ on the front lines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in courts in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do more work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member.

Thank you. Not well this is the perfect time to stand with us.

ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing work, member today ACLJ only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice. Is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn, called mission will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the Obama care means to the many ways your membership is empowering the right question free copy of mission in life today online ACLJ/is your private citizen and now you're going to be called up by the United States it to be impeached regarding left office and when you read the impeachment power. It says that impeachment power extends to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office Odyssey can't run again for another office basically say or it doesn't say cases you gotta have removal. And then if removal and then the punishment but their vote. Let's say they were about to vote to impeach.

They got to 67 votes, which I don't think they will. But let's say they do not remove so how can they then go to another. These words are very important law phallus. What he says and it's a combo.

It means the first thing has to happen and then the second thing can follow you nice others don't. Removal and I this makes American court should they said they January 6 made America look bad on the world state.

I think for temporarily there was nothing like what we see in other countries was be honest military coups constantly and things like that. It was put down very quickly the nuts. They did that but but what this could do is make us look like we run kangaroo courts and that is something we've never had an issue with the United States.

We have a well respected whether you like it or not judicial federal judiciary with lifetime appointments who are held to a high standard about are very independent from the other branches and Chief Justice Roberts. He read the Constitution and he said that the current President that's been four weeks presiding over this because this is not the impeachment trial of the present. So what is this is a trial it's a political exactly how to get his own impeachment. Well, if it or not, removing so he's already removed because of the election, so to speak, so he's in the presence not an office, so when you look at the Constitution itself last I need and you and George Wright got a look at the and it's judgment, judgment and got impeachment sorry happen judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office about a trust profit under the United States and is very clear you have the impeachment and that's what made the fact that John I thing I would argue if I was arguing the case I get up and say will look is not in the chair John Roberts to me that is a telltale sign that this is an impeachment probably the reason for all the President the presiding officer is supposed be the Chief Justice so this is an impeachment trial of a former President except there's nothing in the Constitution it says you do. Impeachment draws a former President know is not. He's a former President. He is not an officer of the United Nations, not a cabinet member is not a federal judge. There is no provision constitutionally to impeach a former President and you're right it's two separate votes if they vote to to convict. They have to have a separate vote to to make sure they can't run for office again what I think is so sad about this.

I grew up like you to a political junkie, all in my life. Where are the honored political norms in America. Where is the reputation of the Senate is the world's largest, most honored deliberative body. It's like they don't care about how this looks to the nation and how it looks to the world and whether or not constitutional, is in question. But whether or not it is constitutional still doesn't detract from the fact that this isn't it. This whole exercise is illegitimate in legitimacy is undermined. I have the secular constitutional that is yet if the Supreme Court is a sometimes not the Senate, where they kind of take the Constitution have extended out.

They read into it and say, well this this Brett this is a broad provision of this provision could cover this, so it's extraconstitutional it's it's taking so that doesn't the Constitution does its best. Specifically, bar but also doesn't specifically endorse or layout and that if, by the way, that's one reading my reading is that if you can't be removed is ready God you can't be barred from disk arriving from office again so you can be impeached. That doesn't mean you are not subject to legal you know this doesn't that's nothing apart. That is, I cannot subject to the laws United States as a former President if you did nothing wrong you to be subject to actual real court party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and in punishment.

But what's interesting with I warned about this yet, the cheapening of impeachment in the very first year ago probably year ago, maybe a year ago today for a year ago this week is why settle for the state Senate in our presentation. So far, you've now heard from legal scholars from a variety of schools of thought from a variety of political backgrounds, but they do have a common theme with a dire warning danger, danger, danger to lower the bar of impeachment based on these articles of impeachment would impact the functioning of our constitutional Republic and the framework of that Constitution for generations and Bill Bill's comment about that from Wyoming online to retake your phone calls 164 3110 Woody think about a partisan Democrat Sen. overseeing the trial of Pres. Trump during the calling Peachtree Moretti's a political trial is as a said that's a bill welcome there. Secular radio you're on the air like slippery slope page up and they can also impeach Obama they can go clear back to Washington and impeach him for creating a war against the United Kingdom for separating from a country club nowadays. If they do impeach Pres. trip Wednesday effective date. Does that mean is back in January 2017, which means everything the President trumpeted know if I can go no go backwards, if you think about this when you are convicted right undo anything to before.

That's why none of this makes any sense whatsoever. He said John Cornyn addresses yes John Cornyn said with a sound if the Democrats really tweeted out if the Democrats go this route then then we have you've they've open the door for them when they were this Republicans take back the Senate which could happen anytime minutes is 50-50 Senate think they will look back at present Obama because there were some serious things that may not of been crimes in the court of law or work were prosecuted, but that they can certainly impeach over Benghazi, the lies, the administration fast and furious IRS targeting the listen thing he said were opening that door that he's he's levelheaded got heated one open the door will relive the past in America were forward-looking country, you know that's how we can estimate that we get we used to be.

This is this is opening the door and if they do this to present Trump. I say we do at present Obama and Hillary Clinton is Hillary Clinton was a cabinet official so we can feature to, and in those trials. It will be Republicans running Jamie resting said that about what how he views impeachment. Take a listen.

One thing that I want to point out Chris is that impeachment is not nearly so much about the past as it is about the future right behind you that they don't want him is accounting 23 right that's that's what they think will okay I like to bar present Obama from the just just to sully his name from ever being able to hold federal office and hold them accountable for those things and and Hillary Clinton certainly and the list could go on. Maybe a bit later the Joe Biden baby Kemal Harris next. That's the problem with this impeachment is to become more and it's not even ended like an indictment or anything like that. It is just cheap and support it with something rarely use before Donald Trump had to write to actual people think Nixon was impeached.

He never got impeached by the house he was. I resigned. They did move forward so I impeachment of of even lower level officials.

I think it's in the 20s. I waited 30 I was a little I was, in essence, what's the kind of the calculation moon on the hill right now on this. A lot of the talk centered around what you're discussing right now the acknowledgment that impeachment is about the future.

Will that must be about politics because there are no more official actions that Pres. Trump will take his is already out of office. You mention a lot of officials that this reach back could could reach to add Jay.

I think on the floor of the Senate, maybe as soon as today. By the way, when Sen. Paul goes down to raise a point of order about the constitutionality of this you know the official that's going to be mentioned is good to be Chuck Schumer. There gonna say look, when Republicans get back the Senate one day. Is it appropriate for us to censure or impeach or even expel Sen. Schumer over his remarks on the on the floor of the Supreme Court. So if this is about looking forward, I expect Republicans on the floor of the Senate to say in a future Republican Senate. Is this really the standard Democrats want to be held by that that debate can happen on the floor. J interesting Wall Street Journal editorial board said the trial which will start in earnest on February 9 will end in the Senate with acquittal if it does Mr. Trump claim vindication is not matter how many times Nancy's speaker Nancy Pelosi claims that he's been impeach forever. Mr. Trump played as one more show of elite contempt for the deplorable or his voters.

He could emerge politically strengthened. That's the calculus I do not understand for the life of me this entire process do not understand what the calculable of any so folks were to continue taking phone calls or answer questions whether watching on Facebook, YouTube, or your listing on radio, take your calls at 164 3110. Your comments it as well share this with your friends and family who want to bring you this analysis will be done this before the real impeachment is a fake phone. It should be happening.

I think more and more senators start to see the light on that because because there certain look at the constitutionally like everyone at St. doesn't fit. This is it right. This is not a country where we don't want to open this door. The light present or not, will come back to only one.

A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive.

And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the Obama care means to as many ways your membership is empowering the right to life mission life today online/challenges facing Americans is a time when our freedoms are constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress. In the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do more work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms that remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member.

Thank you, are not well this is the perfect time to stand with us. ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing work, member today ACLJ wondering because it just was in the news it happened when I was actually on Sean Hayes radio show yesterday so after show that Lahey confirmed and there was no written statement. Nothing you call about this episode before you head of that Rick in Montana on my five hey Rick, welcome the secular radio protected by call and/or with Robert not even able to oversee this proceeding, white caretaker, why didn't he affirm that it was because the Supreme Court of the United States when it comes to matters of impeachment use the Constitution as it's written and it says in matters of impeachment is the United States House and Senate that are the jurisdictional basis for this. That is, the Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments and the Supreme Court will not get involved and it's just the way it is. So they're not can issue rulings, inaccurate issue judgments. Any motions to dismiss. That will be made will be made to the Senate proceeding.

But what you said something during the break, that's important. People understand the way they're doing this with lowering the bar than changing the rules is to come back around them as insurers were sent here yeah karma is a horrible thing is remember whenever the Democrats control the Senate and they lowered the standard for approving new federal judges used to be. Had to have 60 bucks to move forward with those they lowered it to a simple majority, thinking they would always have control of the Senate. They lost control and Republicans can bags you know that wasn't a bad idea.

Were also going to do it for the next Supreme Court justice. This is a sword that cuts both ways, and it seems like that lesson that the sword actually cuts both ways and that karma is very problematic is lost on the Democrats you know my question in all of this unite as an American is where is the honor and our political bodies. This is not honorable. Where's the justice this is not justice. This is political gamesmanship and revenge and is a shameful time for the nice Center for for the majority party there.

You know, it's also interesting joiners can be the political fallout of this and I think from comes out stronger reruns.

I got it going or not he still is the strongest was in the Republican Party in this leak gets acquitted. It stronger not you note this in the witch trials letters in a jury trial or impeachment trial. You never know how Senate no one should say enough.

I admit lawyers I'm sure didn't notice that are doing this, you should assume nothing is a foregone conclusionand you get witnesses we had that with with John Bolton remember and whether you have witnesses or not the boulders and the whole slew of witnesses a notice on the proceeding. Instead of taking a weekend of taking three weeks for us this when this thing can be done in three days to get me through maybe a month. I think you said that during the impeachment trial if they were going to do that with Bolton. There were people that were house managers are becoming to him on this. I said that I had thickly added for family finance and that you know that this would be yesterday, this is so are we. And then you got a's another two weeks. The probably will usually locate depositions. It changes everything. It's not just the senators writing the questions anymore to the lawyers. Now they are actually deposing witnesses and exactly hearing depositions very different price examination. Slowly but is there any sense that where mansion and cinema are on this. Then I saw that they lended their credence to not having to change the filibuster rule yeah they sided with Lena McConnell and that both made public statements that they did not favor of eliminating the legislative filibuster that can lead to an organizing resolution between leaders humor and leader McConnell a McConnell saw an interesting break with party there a Kiersten cinema has not said anything specifically with a whole lot of substance impeachment but Joe mansion has Joe mentions that he doesn't like the idea of prioritizing impeachment. He thinks that we should be proceeding with the with the needs of the American people. Now he has not said how he would vote I think he again might much like you said about the other senators � I don't think you should assume where his vote would lie other proceeding in this fashion is not his first priority, which is why when Sen. Paul goes to the floor and offers this point of order or when a motion to dismiss is offered by Sen. McConnell or Sen. Paul at the outset of the trial.

I don't think his vote is actually a certainty. So II think it's a fair question to ask you the very interesting so were taken from house 164 3110. I want to continue take these calls so people know that the truth about these procedures and and how things will play out Lorrie on line 4 from Florida one who shall lawyer on their whole question we go.

That the credit line we all think is going to and that part about him not being able to run will be involved in government that then also happen or if these acquitted. He's done is done.

Acquitted didn't really cannot move on said second vote. So you have to convict to get to the second vote is that the concert is clear removal from office, and disqualification got to have the removal from office that I think the part there is it even if he was convicted the can of the removal from office, so can even get that second vote. That's when he brings up a whole host of more issues and I don't know that the courts would ever get involved.

They seem like they won't, but you see where this raises issues, whether or not you think this present he was still in office should be impeached because of this he's not. So what are you doing there. It really opens up the witnesses for three weeks and then but yet you're right, I just answer the question he is if he's acquitted, he's acquitted that music can't sag on your acquitted from impeachment which we cannot remove you but we are in a bar you from office. They can do that then I can get away with doing that. That is our goal is to convict and bar him from seeking future office just because there that concerned about him being involved in any official role as a candidate and had tried to target with that whether or not he decides to run again were not in in a couple years, which is when you start a Presidential campaign again so that that just answer that question. You have to get a conviction to get to that vote was go to Scott Scott in South Carolina on line 6 a Scott McCall, an opinion the reason I believe I'm hearing a lot. The Democrats are emboldened to do all these great enough that they're doing all of your analysis is spot on and it could come back to bite them, like you said, but the reality of it is the Republicans historically always take the high road and an athlete should we know have integrity, so were not going to play these crazy ridiculous names and their counting on that and that's why they continue to do some counting wrong now because member Mitch McConnell's the world to be there forever.

If you think John Cornyn very is it kind of a line him or something like that but some, like John Cornyn very levelheaded Sen. who to conduct himself.

The way Scott you're describing saying he would do it. I think you're opening up a new a new window of political action and I I didn't advocate since this election that not to play dirty. But to do everything legal with elections and if things soon seemed unseemly to the country club class of Republicans in the past. We don't want to winnow the harvest votes when it's legal in some states harvest value to it. I would only go there that that that the nursing homes old age. Others are, but if it's legal though states go into it.

Go to the Hispanic community reach out and intent and educate them about the vote, encourage about who they should look for if they're asking you if it's legal in that state. It's legal. That jurisdiction, that's what Stacy Abrams did in Georgia. Successful everything you can do up to the line that steadily unseemly or wrong, but you do it to get out at country club mindset of similar public, which by the way is the part of the party that is lost a lot of power within its diminishing part of the second half hour coming up a lot to discuss ACLJ's been on the frontlines protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side.

If you're already a member.

Thank you. If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us, ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ live from Washington DC Jay Sekulow and Mexico radio Benelux.Millis recent states are so we now know she we have no idea how it was communicated. The Chief Justice's office is not doing some putting out some statement about why you don't think it needs to be the Constitution tells us why he's not presiding is not a President that's been tried as a former President and a private citizen to me. I think it's far exceed going saying this is probably not right guys but you know you said it, that's have his thing you Senate go down the path you want wrong or right, but I'm not to be involved in this. I'm not can sit up there and give you the sit the symbol. This is an actual real impeachment trial of the present, because it's not a big knock on trial rest by the laws it's a political trial of the former President they wanted. They wanted Robert separates the formality of the solemnity to it makes it real so they in a real way. This was a blow for them a clear low hundred percent. I mean look this day, the language of the Constitution is not clear in the Chief Justice spoke very loudly by not saying anything the Constitution says the Chief Justice shall preside if it's an impeachment of the President. So by not presiding. It is not an impeachment of the President and the other thing J for cyclothymic is that that's a very important point that you made and I we made it a couple done. If John Roberts was sitting it's arguably at that point in impeachment proceedings. He is not seating.

It certainly not an impeachment of the President, so it's a political trial to try to remove the President from running for office and go and finish. Well, not just on that point. I think what you can hear for day from leaders humor and the others while the Chief Justice didn't say anything so we don't know how he feels. Note the Chief Justice did say something he didn't say it in a statement. He didn't say it verbally, but he took an oath to follow the Constitution and the Constitution mandates that he be there if it's an impeachment trial of the central of the present. So by not going J he spoke volumes say my comment on Sen. Paulsboro for later, but there's an important point on this to make there as well. It is interesting. Barbara face for shirts it should. We see groups like the ACLU representing present trunk due to loss of due process. You would think that they might be interested in doing what we're doing right now addressing the average citizen to evaluate whether we are drafting right now. A document that will make available to our members and to people to watch than listen.

This broadcast which went with the legal position is just x-ray Constitution position not getting into the factual merits of the case which is getting into the legal issues of the constitutionally of trying a former President.

I don't know if the ACLU is going to say anything nice, take it they will not bite what the American Center for Law and Justice is going to do is will let it be known probably to the entire United States Senate. I probably am sure will do the entire nice is that where legal position is what is the legal position of a group that a principles have tried an impeachment case is number one.

Many of us in two of us to the three sitting on this radio studio TV studios that I have tried to impeachment case. A real impeachment case that's number one number two Oregon put our position forward as to why we think the position of trying former President is unconstitutional and I think number three were looking right now is will be great if we can get enough for 500,000 names that which may be impossible by February 8. When this starts, that would send something a people say that we think this is impeachment and from all 50 states from every jurisdiction get it to the sender's broken egg fan I know it's hard to deliver.

Now, but I think that would make a statement to people you know we've adjusted the times we would get it delivered. You do it electronically and break it down by state and make sure where there voter standing. J would be very significant in states where there actually is a divide on IT. I just miss and be significant in a state where there's a divide on on how people feel about Pres. Trump.

But JJ, I think there would actually be quite a bit of a unanimity on the constitutionality of this and I think it to hear from voters that they don't think the trial should proceed. Think would make a big difference. Great calls coming in her intake for those we come back the break. If you want to talk to us in their 1-800-684-3110 Suzanne on YouTube. She wrote Chief Justice Roberts, not presiding over the trial is antiques, volumes does Elizabeth Warren thought he was going to be a little divorce last week.

That's his constitutional deep duty. You can imagine my springboard Joseph will not do his duty is not impeachment from that his duty is month right hearing arguments about a private.

This is a barely big blow to them. Let me tell you things been fully flushed out by the media yet, but that it will be it will be challenges facing Americans for substantial time in our Valley freedom sword constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice on the frontlines projecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success.

But here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you.

Well, this is the perfect time to stand with us. ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing, member today ACLJ only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable in voice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the Obama care means to as many ways your membership is empowering the right question of mission life today online/this is July 8, 2004 old school � the nastiest immigrant the headline Sen. Patrick Leahy, Republican nightmare spec 2004, the other Vermont sitters no day at the beach is Patrick Lahey Lahey landed a big job this when he became chairman of the district committee's job is always wanted in Republican nightmare had begun by consensus. A consensus of Hill Republicans Pat lady is the meanest, most partisan, most ruthless Democrat in the Senate as Republican about Lahey will shutter the save though he could be nice and he smiles. He does do that on the surface underneath the he's a left-wing brute. He's nasty and mean that things went on and on and this was during the Bush years of trying to get nominees through and he was nasty and he would do with a smile also takes pictures he does.

We have these he's just Vermont had where other Vermont gets interesting since one with his mittens and the one who will probably have his camera up there and take a picture is the whole whole thing going on think pictures may take the picture started last a piece of trying to get the Deus position, but he will.

This time, and to me, though I just want to remind you he is older now, so sometimes he seems more like a grandpa's figure or even old and that like a great grandpa, but the natural view back in 2004. This is the guy that can preside over called him quote the nastiest Democrat the nastiest and when I look at it. I would say that the number two on there was probably Biden to me because what he did to Clarence Thomas there very similar.

They played a grandpa game, but they will rip you apart. They at a talk unity. They rip you apart. Take a listen to Sen. Rand Paul in the rear back your phone calls really bizarre notion that they think that the American public can accept. This is legitimate when the guy in charge of its gonna be a partisan Democrat who already know different patient once I think that sums the whole thing up. The Chief Justice is not sitting it's not impeachment from it's that simple. There's no constitutional provision for impeaching a private citizen. Donald Trump is a private citizen know you got it real court for that would violate a law you bring charges die USA CRS criminal state prosecutor brings a civil case to bring civil charges as a private citizen) is no procedure for removing private citizens that already not serving. No, I mean, and they all went back to the Belknap Cape, the Secretary of War, but of the 22 senators.

The 23 senators that voted against it also should be convicted if you was guilty 23 of them said he's guilty, but we can't take actually no jurisdiction right is not in office and he was acquitted, acquitted Mary Ellen's call Illinois online to Havertown. Hello everyone and everything. I don't mean you Washington and in the media. I never hear anything talking about the doctrine of immunity for an elected official and the D38 at the how political speech is protected speech is protected. It's no different than any other free space political speech, religious speech will protect one of the arguments that will be made by I would think by the lawyer doing the actual this political file that's about to happen only on impeachment trial. I'm sure is going to be that the present statements were protected speech under the First Amendment and did not reach the standard of non-loss of protection based on the case. In 1969 called Brandenburg versus Ohio so that will be the free speech argument with regard to immunity. They're not immune sums will impeachment then so it's a meal while you're in office and then impeached, then actions can be taken. I'm watching Susan Rice the domestic policy advisor giving a White House press briefing underway and thinking myself a she's not a domestic policy advisor. She's a if anything, a foreign policy advisor that why did she take this job to run the White House run. Joe Biden is the proper divide at this point he's he's not talking give speeches he does his press conference. He sounds fine, but none of that happens. None of it. None of it becomes actions instead were talking about equity net equity is not equality.

June equity means by the way, to discredit just a side note here equity means everybody gets the same thing. Equality means everybody starts off at the same place we should always fight towards equality. This will export school choice.

You have the same opportunity to make the best for yourself and for your family equity equity is more like socialism.

That's everybody being on the same page. This is how America works is in our country was founded and has not worked anywhere this very utopian view. You can ever reach that we were in a country still fighting to get to equality. I would argue so equity is a list of bypass that and will just make everybody the same point regardless of how hard you worked or didn't or how much schooling he went to or didn't or luck that's involved.

Also in business and and so equity sounds like equality is not. There are some cases where there should be equity limited, but not this national view of so this is Susan Rice putting another kind of statement and putting her out this early this divisive figure again with Benghazi, and all that just shows you who's running the show at the White House just wanted is your sense of of Van in watching this bondable Jordan said as to how things are to move forward legislation.

For instance, on the on the issue of the covert relief what what happened there. Yet a covert relief J.

Looks like there to be used at the very infamous procedure known as budget reconciliation are planning on starting that this week and having it teed up a sword ready to get through the process to without getting all the weeds. Data gonna pass the budget and they would probably move to the impeachment trial and then probably wouldn't return to trying to implement that covert legislation through reconciliation until after the trial was over. I J just one note on that.

We won't know hundred percent until that week of February 8 because even though there's disagreement on the framework in place they still have to pass that resolution that says how long each senator has the answer, ask questions and and all of that week. We think we know how it's going to go both like every week in Washington DC bring surprises so there's just no certainty on it yet. It was granting the coffeehouse go right back to the folds go to John in California online for John, welcome to Jay Sekulow life like all my question is if don't help us put through this and will impeachment and they vote to disqualify her from taking public office. Could he didn't run for President in 2024. Anyway, since it's unconstitutional, I think there's a question there, though it commitment.

Maybe what he could do his alarm for the balance.

I mean, there's a place maybe, but I think they would be a bargain if I think here's what I would do if he is convicted with something will happen and it is then I might take it to the court represents a liberty interest in my liberties now been impacted and now it maybe maybe I can get them adjudicating whether you can impeach a former President or not there is that you know but that would not be an easy case. I do think you run the risk of not being put on the ballot in every state. California is insane that which not coming anyways but other states could say no. I mean, yeah, you just don't know how because what you'd have to be really that you could run into the same thing where he goes to the Senate for the certification and you really have objects right right side and I probably don't want to go down this path elsewise path is not easily acquitted in the present should be acquitted. I believe he will be acquitted, but you never know what will happen.

These are trial and you don't know because of what Georgia said it is confidently what you got going confidently and you know we felt very good about the trial but we did a year ago that went for three weeks. We knew there were points along the way we have these and moments where things could change you had that with the boat book coming out the day before we were to start our case it they were leaking it out that day and he knows we are today before the trolley is not actually and then there was this call for witnesses.

It was a very close vote.

Maybe we won by what two votes. Yes, we lost one Republican.

I think yeah so I believe these can be close and again you go back to the unifying theme Wes. New ministers have for a moment. This is an unifying anybody no not at all the binders and endorsed that he did last night so I read that statement yet.

I would read the statement from Job ID for the chat will succeed in but it's not unifying was not unifying and I think the result of this is the President trunk will be acquitted and possibly this will cause his political revival. It doesn't matter how many times nasty politically as the Wall Street Journal says says he's impeach forever because the Pelosi number acquitted forever. Yeah, because of Pelosi and Schumer.

This could be his political resurrection and also because of Joe Biden who failed to model leadership by telling the leaders of his party to call the whole thing off is very divisive to the message Joe Biden told CNN last night.

The hallways of the other was for anything to see in any said directly about the impeachment trial.

I think it has to happen and he acknowledged the effect he could have his legislative agenda and cabinet nominees, but said there would be a quote worse effect if it didn't happen, told CNN he believe the outcome would be different if Trump had six months left. His term said he doesn't think will be 70 Republican senators who vote to convict.

The Senate has changed since I was there, he said," but hasn't changed that much, so he doesn't think that there this will be successful. Impeachment but that it has to happen that that the correct response fee. If you have no shot, you will unite the country want you to find and wide for the present. Do you want to put the former President on TV for vindication, potentially as your predicting which provide this over and over and over and over and over again in this lead up to February 9 ended throughout. 334 weeks.

Donald Trump will be the biggest news that Joe Biden is a signal of what the Biden Principe like much like his campaign he will not be the forefront of only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable.

Is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when used with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life. We created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn gold light will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications 40 years later: what Obama care means to many ways, your membership is empowering the right question for mission life today online/challenges facing Americans is no freedom or constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice on the front lines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress. In the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms than remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you. Well, this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ God where you can learn more about her life changing work, member today ACL 164, 31 to order now so go first to April in Virginia online. Three.

April welcome to secular radio earlier about our people, I would violate action by people 73,500,000 74 million.

I don't think you can follow class-action. I think it would be up to the party convicted, which be the President was our client to see if there's any post judicial remedy, but your sentiment is interesting because course of this wasn't happening for years. What is running in or not.

But the political party, the political apparatus is pretty good but a lot of people to the Republican Party that just were not there before so I think it would be na�ve to think that he's not Wes. The dominant force in a mass at the fantail that he absolutely is and a lot of people who were not engaged in politics much at all. Who felt left out by the political establishment Donald Trump brought the question. I guess that was in it and I don't think anybody would deny I think the Democrats would agree that you can say is not the dominant player on the Republican side. The question is do those people that came and rescued us to join the people I can muster within the people that came in today come in because of Donald Trump and then when Donald Trump if he is not the nominee in 2024. It's just like a mezzo which I met. I don't know. I think in many, I think in many cases they did and in a bare minimum JII know that they want the right to decide whether or not he is their choice in the future and that's kind of the point you can decide for a candidate or otherwise. It's really not up to the United States Senate to strip you of that right.

We talk about this a lot J what's the political calculation here and you said that you think Democrats have miscalculated so do I but bike. I think they see Republicans divided they want to keep them divided.

But I'll tell you, you push too far that actually has a unifying effect and quite frankly I think that's what the next two or three weeks will show it to glycerin Paul by 31 Democrats are about to do something no self-respecting senator has ever stooped to Democrats are insisting the election is actually not over, and so they insist on regurgitating the bitterness of the election.

This acrimony they are about to unleash has never before been tried. Why because call Morehead's have typically prevailed in our history and allowed public opinion to cast blame where blame is deserved. Preshow statements is made plain and it looks like another calls go to one thing that Rick in Florida online. Six. A request to secular radio.

Good afternoon. Thank you for taking my call. I know that we have three branches of government for the purposes of checks and balances who provide the check and balance on the Congress house in the Senate if their actions are unconstitutional relating to impeachment.

You do we do in America before the final say that we get to vote. The men and vote them out every every two years for the house numbers every six of the sinners and so it's up to you to remember what's with some of the sinners are doing and how they vote and how they proceeded what they say it's us that we are the ultimate that they are there, they are ultimately accountable to the American voter and Senators again.

They date the set up our system of government.

So when the house is always accountable. Basically every two years so everything here getting ready to hold them accountable and then the Senate every six, but we live in a very hyper- partisan country right now.

So while I say we hold them accountable that the the likely voters in midterm elections are usually more partisan voters and and I because there are very few independents that Ron even of their people registered independently, nor were they going to vote so you don't see as much accountability on on these mostly held.

This is one of those issues where though like rows over Dick Morris a site on Newsmax where you can't you could see accountability is down the road. All you this is all on camera. Now it's all being recorded. Your statements are being made like the statement from Rand Paul take a listen by 29 hyper- partisan Democrats are about to drag our great country down into the gutter of rancor and vitriol all the likes of which has never been seen in our nations history. Instead of doing the nation's work with their new majorities in the house. The Senate and the executive branch. Democrats are wasting the nation's time on a partisan vendetta against a man no longer in office so they you play that seditious for that is the signature of late he produces a rerunning again.

The older guys.

But when you Vermont Senate seats. I don't know.

Probably not, but certainly could in in those battleground states like Arizona, you know, Markel is very quiet, hilly, he'll be up again to interiors. He's been very quiet and I would imagine vote to impeach, but play that was kind of sound bites your mind Arizona voters what this senator did it suddenly that could be a seat. It's very contested in two years saving those in Georgia is Warnock is back up again in Georgia still right on the line to get a good candidate in your mind. People what they did to the country, not just Donald Trump would like grandpa talk to the country itself back to the funds we go Joe in New Mexico on my one Joe Logan Sekulow radio could take my call. I was wondering the policeman and of course that we deal a lot in the intent of is there any chance they would day impeachment failed miserably. Like if I will try to get pregnant Trump criminally charge what the Atty. Gen. for the District of Columbia said they've opened up an investigation on this and I believe the US attorney's office has also open investigation on this and I think the President's defense to that would be of First Amendment free speech, but could they surely could likely, I'm not so sure. I think his speech was protected so I don't see how they would give it again, incitement charge, but just meeting the could that could they scenario sure they could very type very very damaging to the country that happens was going back that unity thing or absolutely damaging you can indict anyone and convicting them is another matter. But that whole process would be very very harmful to country, signified a call the day Patrice and in count California line for Patrice� Wall Street Journal editorial board wrote Democrats and the press they're addicted to Donald J. Trump so America gets to do this all over again. He Patrice will show how horrible I wanted to get off. The Democrats are trying to hide my I don't think Linehan out in public thinking equivalent of hiding in the light. He didn't see any disrespect conference yesterday was fine but he didn't take this question during the press conference. Another video we just have CNN's report that I think what he said is true. I fed so you get what he said but that's very different see him say I support this impeachment. I think it has to happen. In reading and so I agree with you to sit. I think that's why you have Susan Rice right now as we speak to you I doing the White House press briefing today.

It's sending a signal of who is in charge and who's running the show at the White House. These are senior Obama officials are running roughshod over Joe Biden and his team. In fact, his Kemal Harris is like a bigger, broader team in some places even Joe Biden is put together yet because people see the future. Even the Democrat actors and I think the watch and see that we will again break it to cover this report elsewhere and give you an action item away to speak out on this unconstitutional, dangerous and destructive action. This is set political trial of a private citizen.

Chief Justice will show up is not impeachment but ACLJ.org support the work of the American surfline justice AC LJ.org AC LJ.org will talk tomorrow AC LJ on the frontline protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena.

The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member thinking. If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life-changing work, member today AC LJ