HAPPENING NOW: Impeachment Trial Begins

This impeachment trial present Donald Trump's this time present on trial today on security line from Washington DC Jay Sekulow you think is I think it might be done in a week bill. It's really not all DOS senators will be listening to the arguments on both sides up to the house.

Impeachment managers and lawyers on how long they proceed West witnesses will evaluate time. Phone lines are open for your questions right now: 1-800-684-3110. I think today is a very important threshold question of whether the Senate has the constitutional authority to proceed with this trial against a former President.

I don't think they do. And now, your host Jordan secular. This is the day the impeachment trial begins, yet again, this time of former President Donald Trump today is very interesting ethical be actually one of the most interesting days for the next likely 67 days and that's because there's a short time only four hours to two hours each side to debate whether or not this is constitutional at all.

Now you know our position on that we released yesterday was you watching the memos available online ACLJ.org we got this to every Senate office as well. Why this is unconstitutional. The ACLJ position is that under the Constitution when it says you shall have the power to remove and the disqualification clause right there if there if there can be no removal.

There can be no impeachment that they don't have jurisdiction. So 45 sinners. Remember, agreed to that position and what that meant is that you know where you're getting close to two thirds to convict. But here's what happens today were to see both the house managers led by Jamie Raskin Carson for Marilyn and then present Trump's attorneys who are not danger to know from cable news there.it's not as that like last time in the last bits which build up its rich testimony from government officials, former government officials and SC officials always people want to focus there was none of that. This time so you'll see present Trump's attorney, so don't make the constitutional argument, but then I would go right to Washington DC because then I'd like the last piece of trial where there weren't as many test was the big test that we had to wait until almost the end, which was on witnesses before we knew that there were not boats to convict.

But if the try was good to keep going past it was it three weeks.

At that point and ultimately the vote was no witnesses this time around we can vote today on whether or not it's constitutional, which will tell us yet again and will kinda reaffirm if if if again that this is even in play for Democrats. I don't think it is but but whether or not probably also how much wiggle room. There is on the witnesses issue because it will be a vote today on whether or not the Senate should even be having this trial yet rat at the gate.

Jordan, the very most important debate is to be issued on the on the Senate floor and quite frankly, I'll say it before I've stayed all preface it with.

I don't think Democrats will go along with this book return. I think this should be the end of the trial today because a goodly four hours of debate on the constitutional question, the one that we presented a memo to every Senate office on whether or not the Senate has jurisdiction on a former President only four hours of debate on that and then essentially Jordan, they have to move straight to a vote debate is not allowed only what's called deliberations by the Senate which just to cut to the chase will be a little bit of procedural maneuvering and then there will be a vote on that underlying question Jordan for majority of the Senate, says that if they don't have constitutional jurisdiction that would be it.

That would be the end of the trial.

Now, we do anticipate Democrats will probably strike that motion down and it will proceed. But again, yet right out of the gate, Jordan. The most important question of this trial. Does the Senate even have jurisdiction ACL days made its position clear that we believe that is clear to the Constitution. No, it does not really go to any cotton we get back to retake your phone calls. This 164 3110 today at the impeachment trial, which begins right up this broadcast is done. We live off the air at 1 PM Eastern types. Today the focus of the Constitution. I don't imagine it would get to see enough senators to vote it down in the trial today. Three. Get into today.

Also, what happens next. What it puts up the next argument. 16 hours per side. What are you going to be here. What is what is the actual issue of this impeachment post is whether or not it's constitutional to even be doing good ACLJ metal repetition over to her 50,000 want to keep that growing@aclj.org.

The challenges facing Americans are substantial time and or Valley freedom sword constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice ACLJ on the frontlines injecting your freedoms defending your rights in courts in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. Here's the bottom line we could not do our 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 are already a member. Well, this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ only one.

A society can agree that the most vulnerable in voice. 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 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 personally.

Publication includes a look at all major ACLJ were fighting for the rights of pro-life activists ramifications. 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the ministry. What Obama care means many ways your membership is empowering the right question mission life today online/secular take your phone calls 164 3110 today will get the constitutional arguments pretty short. It's four hours total in a vote. So I think by again they they take breaks they start at 1 PM Eastern time units two hours aside but maybe they go to our group. There's a break another two hours than they they would have to have the vote.

So I think by 6 PM-ish.

You probably going to get a vote on whether or not it's constitutional.

I think your we should be looking at is about 45 sinners, maybe one or two switches after they've actually been presented with more than just the idea of talking points, but things like our memo your 45 pages all right what you're about to do is unconstitutional and and he heard the actual oral arguments from the house managers. The Democrats supposition that you can impeach anybody forever or or the presence of attorneys working to set you cannot do this and if you actually look back in history which I'd I think what has been ignored in a go to Andy on this and then what I do want to switch to what will be the is and is 16 hours aside, still much shorter than what we had was with 24 hours aside, took more than three days on each because of the timing and get the Chief Justice schedule as he was actually there. That impeachment is a real impeachment trial with ridiculous absurd but but real because the present was in office is your go to see you go to see Eddie and you will hear even that the couple of times in history when former officials brought forward with impeachment. There never been a present, but ultimately they were always acquitted and one was so far back in history is not really good history of whether not the reason why they were acquitted was harsh part of that was because they don't think that Dick didn't think that jurisdiction, that was a guy at a Tennessee but he got the wood back to us.

He got elected state level never showed up to the trial in this again. The bullet same argument you have no jurisdiction over me. Ultimate is acquitted. Second time around. This happens the 1800s more legislative history. What we learned is that the Senate said no, there were enough senators that yes he got to the trial phase, but when it what else we came to a vote. They said they actually agree that there were high crimes and misdemeanors. There were crimes you could bid impeach if you work in office, but because that person was no longer in office. It was a legal issue whether not there were laws violated, not a Senate political issue trial to be dealing with it. So the history is on the site out the side that were advocating that this is unconstitutional. That's absolutely correct Jordan history is on the side of this is an unconstitutional proceeding. If you look at the constitutional convention, and what the framers of the Constitution came up with. They were aware of the British system and the system in England at the time provided for what we call late impeachment. There was a governor general of India where Warren Hastings, who resigned his position rather than face impeachment.

But the British said, you can still be impeached after you left office the American founding fathers of the Constitution were fully aware of the Hastings situation and they opted against that because the Constitution of the United States does not permit late impeachment is silent on the issue have a intended to permit late impeachment they would've said you can be impeached for events occurring while you were in office after you left office that is not the case is not the historical case number one, and more importantly, it is not the textual case that you read the Constitution and it's a good idea. Every once in a while to look at the Constitution of the United States which is the instrument that we live and die by the Constitution says the impeachment of the President.

It does not say a President does not say a former President. This impeachment trial that is supposedly taking place in the Senate here. Beginning today is not a valid impeachment trial because the Senate does not have jurisdiction either historically or textually under the Constitution to try Donald Trump. That's the long and the short of it right there so I get this question from YouTube web on YouTube is it you believe the trial could actually be done today with enough sinners switching on the jurisdiction issue, then I don't see six more moving from the vote that they ran polisher comfort his motion there could be some movement to volunteer to votes there, but I will.

I would be surprised that like they should. I would be surprised. It's that you can get enough Democrats to make. That's what it is she need all five Republicans who voted that there was jurisdiction.

Some of them just despise President Trump and title thinker to move on the issue like Mitt Romney and probably been set to early on was indicating that he thought maybe it wasn't. It wasn't constitutional, but again he's very antitrust but I think when made may be movable by argument but not sure. And then you gotta find a Democrat or two that to me seems uphill. Unfortunately, which moves us into the next phase of the trial tomorrow during I think it's unlikely I mean, just given the political nature of Washington DC these days.

I think the sides are pretty well entrenched, but I would say this, I think it's still a very important argument to push because if a senator is not going to carefully review his or her own jurisdiction before proceeding to a matter of this importance. I think his or her voters need to know that look at regardless of where you stand on President Trump or what happened on January 6 or what happened after the election of Jordan, the issue of making sure you as a public officeholder don't exceed the bounds of authority granted to you by the Constitution. That's a fundamental question that, in order to uphold your oath, you have to consider. So I will answer your question honestly that I do not expect another six senators to join the 45, who previously voted that they don't have jurisdiction but Jordan, I think, every argument should be made to them to make that could careful consideration and look I why would say even to Democrats and the other side of the aisle that have very strong differences with President Trump. I think it would prove to be tremendous credit to you if you were to come out and say I strongly disagree. I strongly think the President should have been impeached and convicted before he left office, but I am to honor the bounds of the Constitution and I am going to vote that we do not have jurisdiction during I think in the long run that would play well for them. All of that said, I don't think you'll get another six subjects to move onto the next phase.

The trial that any what's interesting in the next phase. The trial is the Democrat position that the First Amendment doesn't really apply here. That's actually the position of the house managers is that because it's a political trial. The present doesn't just have First Amendment rights so is not it's not governed by freedom of speech I heard Allender certificate made excellent point. We have no religious test in our country. So then could you impeach a a elected President or elected official cabinet member because they were Muslim. Could you and peace and because they were Catholic or Jew and and even though that violate the Constitution because the impeachment trial existed that be the same thing as what they're arguing is that the first minute of supply.

Jordan that's a good observation in Prof. Dershowitz really fill that out very carefully look you have in this country something called the First Amendment to the Constitution which is the freedom to express himself and the freedom of speech. Okay, the President's lawyers have articulated that very carefully if we are going to apply some of the Constitution, but not all, of the Constitution and we have violated all of the Constitution. The Constitution is a document that has integrity that it's got to be taken in its entirety. If you've got the right to free speech.

If you have the right to make statements if you've got the right to express your beliefs then you should also have the right to be tried by the Senate that has jurisdiction to try you and not by kangaroo court. That is just been put together for political reasons. Look, the reality here Jordan is that the Democrats hate President, they despised him they want to tarnish and they want to taint him they cannot stand the fact that he is now out of office and untainted by what is happening in their estimation. At any rate. And they're going to continue to pursue this. But they failed to recognize that even a former President, even a President who is incumbent in office as President, Trump was when he made his speech has the right under the First Amendment to talk and the consequences of that are very far-reaching. I'm very disappointed in the Senate if it goes on and has this trial, especially in view of the fact that the Chief Justice has sent a very strong signal to be a part of this don't come to me this is not a valid trial of a President of the United States that I'm going to preside over so you go ahead and pick someone else, but it's knocking to be me. This is again secretly, as if she question coming in online for Phil from California fill welcome to secular you're on the air.

Well, thank you.

My question is regarding the Chait presiding patient say they must be invited with the option to or refuse or does it say he must. He shall be challenged with the word salads must interpret in a loss. I will review the constitutional provision when the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.

That's it does give him any space to make the decision shall preside and that's why when we did the first impeachment trial date. They had a figure out John Robert schedule is a Chief Justice because the court was in session and accommodate that's a way to start later. Some days, and in the end, and because he had he had no choice but to be there under the Constitution, a former President, John Robert said no I'm not sitting there.

Hearing this, this, I don't need to be there is not impeaching the President of the United States impeaching the former President. I think that says a lot.

Right off the bat. But again, they have no option if it's a figure for Joe Biden John Roberts have to be there but it's it's not it's the last visit we had whose that living as a private citizen in Florida were at 264,000 people signed a petition ACLJ.org, which is share this broadcast with your friends and family know where else you get this kind of insight into unfortunately the second impeachment only when 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 and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold mission will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activists ramifications of weighing 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the worship ministry and what Obama care means to the pro-life discover the many ways your membership is empowering the right to life question free copy mission in life today online/challenges facing Americans for substantial time and organelles freedom sword constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades. ACLJ on the front lines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress to get in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success.

Here's the bottom line we could not do our 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 thoughts well this is the perfect time to stand with us. ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ every day, but I'm starting about every morning doing either a Newsmax or what American news on David Brody shall be a child had his radio broadcast there today and television broadcast is all these things can change, because it's all about what's happening during live trial when you're on the floor with his brakes and it is boating. I think you noticed about it now, after this broadcast. I would be on at Sorrento 2 o'clock Eastern time on Newsmax again breaking down and I think it's important to get sweet folks love the constitutional issue. I think that is the core issue to this because a 45 or so senators greeted what they think should even be there and what they're going to hear next which is a much more extended debate at 16 hours per side per side on why the President was impeached in the first place by the house so a lot of the folks on do have the jurisdiction but why is the President being impeached 16 hours per side to eight hours a day they limited to, basically two days each to start playing this out. You're looking at. They both take both all the time today so today and so it starts today that will this debate. Of course, will easily come to an end with a vote on Tuesday and you're looking at Saturday. Now that's good to be a data going to move forward on. Then the question answer session, which only four hours and the op try to remember how long our question answer way, but I know was long and four hours. I failure was it was maybe 12, maybe 8 AM 12 something to took an entire day they went in the evening. I recollect that Jordan. It seemed like it was going on for days and weeks because the Chief Justice kept getting questions from senators and then he would ask it, and then each member of the President's defense team would have the right to get up and respond to those but it seems like it went on forever. This is severely abbreviated end of this project is so you four hours to answer questions and in writing and then I guess it'll be Patrick Leahy reading them there usually addressed to one side are sometimes addressed to both sides.

Sometimes multiple senators sign on to the question all bring that will bring the stuff in the turn onto Mars broadcast I can show you the actual cards that they they write their questions on, but it universe done a very formal way, but there's been out not as much discussion, what, what is this actual impeachment about what the point where that when the house actually impeach over so they are saying specifically that the President failed to preserve and protect and defend the Constitution violated his oath that he engaged high crimes and misdemeanors of this. The key by inciting violence against the government of the United States. So, incitement to violence up. It would be a inhibits it somewhere in between sedition which is kind of the words and actions that incite the insurrection and that's what they're saying he did by saying go to the capital.

Yet, a fight, but we use these terms of all politicians at that happy to have you here.

Politicians would fight you if you want to meet at every habits that we use the ACLJ in writing as well.

It doesn't mean throw punches and everybody pretty much understands that occasionally there's a nut who shows up at a softball game like like It at that. Republicans practice for their further gait and takes the language and interprets it in a way that the speaker had no intention of. And that's exactly I think what's happening here just because its present trump on a bigger scale of it. We saw this horrendous event happened of bad actors try to take advantage of a situation, but again words are words and we have we really protect a wide range of political speech and for goodness sakes, if if you pent up start picking and choosing like this. I think that every one of those senators should be thrown out of the Senate because of language they use in their muttering protectant. You we should protect that unpopular speech as well during any luck. All violence should be condemned.

We roundly condemned what happened on January 6, as well as previous acts of violence against both sides of the Jordan.

Look, if you look around the world. It's the places that don't allow dissenting speech that don't allow aggressive debate.

Those are the places Jordan where people don't have freedom we should actually celebrate the idea.

Not that people get nasty, but that they have the freedom to strongly disagree with either leadership or the opposition party that that plays out in elections across across the country also plays on the floor. The United States house the United States Senate and Jordan look, I mean, I'm all for calls for unity and for being partners with your neighbor once you disagree with ones you don't Jordan that does not mean acquiescence if that happens, it means the best ideas don't rise.

We have to stand in defense of and ability to disagree an inability to dissent is that kind of disagreement that our foundation was built on, and if working to do away with that door and just look around the world of Oregon and up. It's not can it be a place anyone wants to be diming this age 67, Facebook, or hooded, that my own take on this, then you might have a more diplomatic approach you and Andy might what would it take for Sen. Joe mansion to side with the GOP on this I would say a backbone which he severely has lacked his entire congressional career. He talks like he's got one but he doesn't vote like he does than what you think and mean what you think is he talks like it when he does it were so used to that with Joe mansion and him voting lockstep with Democrats. I don't think he's going to Jordan all answer the question two ways. One, the diplomatic way, if you decide with Republicans, he probably need to read this document, Constitution of the United States are, namely, article 1, section 3, clause 6 but to Jordan, the harsh reality of it. It would probably take West Virginia voters rising up and demanding that he do it in him realizing his seat and happy. Honestly, that's the truth.

Take right there.

That is what they think the President over what they have a bite West Virginia voters rising up and just decided to try as I means of it was a public official. He needs to be in think is that Joe mansion needs a backbone. What he needs some part of the body and may not be a backbone, but it may be close to an Joe manager doesn't have that is been talking a big talk for a long time in a red state but he's going to follow the party line.

This time, just like he has every single time I don't have any faith in him at all you he's easy for State Sen. Ted.

He's not for trees in a public up so this is we laugh because it's it's a crying honestly for your country. This is so horrendous we've all been through it and and I've been there for the days on and it's not again accepted to to laugh about, but it is it is you is like that laugh or cry situation have like a funeral where you got to at some point you there's there's levity because it is absurd. This is not this is not some major commission that we are due and we went through Muller went through Ukraine with a 35-year-old President and organa pizza present for five phone call that 35+ people are listening to some private call the got leaked out and then without impeaching them over using the same words like like Sandra said, which is a voters would have to be engaged and have it uprise after rise up you have to do something and they have to reach out and you have to show up and peacefully protest is now means incitement to you know insurrection.

It is again. I think, to me it's that it's that it gets to the heart of this and why I think the partisan politics. So many people I just you know you're sick and tired of it.

How I get to cope with relief how I get to running our country have. I get to figuring out you know we got election two years for midterm elections and that that it's like we are still litigating Donald Trump express United States would come back and take more your phone calls, 1-800-684-3110 work, we will answer your questions and I think there's gonna be a lot of questions to really get into that second part of this debate and try to argue with the First Amendment free speech I throw that out is his impeachment trial were not bound by the Constitution. So in the future a little like that Jewish President so I will impeach the is not bound by the no religious test is think about this is why it's absurd.

Even if you believe it's a gray area in the Constitution is absurd to go this way and not the other in Satan's Constitution be right back@aclj.org.

Read our memo sign the petition. Thinking about 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, 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 now secular déjà vu and I would've been using this chair. It it's the second impeachment trial, a new set of lawyers and that's good for present Trump by the way art private practice separately ACLJ were still in present Trump's legal team, you'll see that when I'm on different news shows though say that as well and so I handling a lot of issues for for a present Trump and unfortunately because he is still under what I call all fair. Using the courts and legal system to try and attack him even though he is a former President so go after him on issues at front, some that are front and center like the impeachment others that that might not get as much attention, but are just as serious and that and so again were at impeachment again. But you're here for the people that were actually there are no my data be joining us back on the air tomorrow on the radio broadcast will be able to we can walk through what was in it it it will be strenuous when it gets to the second phase, I want to take this call that people ought I would answer this question. His other people have this this question as well from Nick and I will online to hey Nick, welcome to secular you're on the air. My call at what even though the general movement board anyway so they if they if the vote was 51 is if it was 51 votes to say that it was unconstitutional. That would be yet they would not move forward. But the issue isn't and fan just to be clear by none of us could expect that this could be 51 votes or so would take all the Republicans and a Democrat and that did not happen the first time around on the issue of do they even have jurisdiction, that doesn't mean that those five Republicans believe that what the President is an impeachable offense.

It was whether not they even have jurisdiction fan but I don't expect the trial to be over today. I think it should be expected. I think you have to prepare for this at least going for a full week yet that's right. Jordan essentially and functionally. This is gonna be a motion to dismiss based on the jurisdiction question. Now there is to be an opportunity later in the trial for additional motions to be filed, so you might find additional similar votes later on but but functionally it's gonna be a motion to dismiss based on the constitutional arguments that we presented to the Senate just a couple of days ago. Anything got 51 votes of the rest of the trial would not happen. The article would be dismissed in the court of impeachment would adjourn you. I think what what is could be interesting, and the second part of this is going to be that issue of these companies are some unsettled issues for its it's can Kemal Harris break a tie that might not come about, there may not be a tie-breaking vote, but eyewitnesses which I think is again for our impeachment. I think for this impeachment is the big tell about for whose if the presence could be acquitted or not, but for how long the country can be dragged through this, there's a timeline where this could be over by early next week, but if witnesses are are are allowed and that's it, that there will be the house would have to be the house managers be the ones requesting it in the Senate would go back and kind of discuss it right then amended the rules they would discuss they would have liked time to discuss amongst themselves and then they would hold you that that's right, Jordan, and this is where the Senate has some wiggle room on this and if you read through the resolution on questions like this, as well as questions about timing and the only start time it's noted in the resolution is a noon start time for Wednesday at least leading up to that.

After that it's it's subsequent until until Sunday so on. All of those questions, you're in the Senate has wide latitude under the Constitution and a lot of them are unsettled they would be able to discuss it and then ultimately in order to be dispositive, it have to get 51 votes right to get another four hours of eight and then they get it they they would debate and the due date and then when you call each witness gets voted on after the deposition summary this again. I just quickly Andy, this is how you take it impeachment product be done in a week because it was done in a day. Impeachment in the house and a two hour debate, but it could be dragged on into weeks and even into a month plus you start taking depositions than voting on whether or not each witness is going to testify is how it works.

That's exactly right. Jordan could go on forever. If you depose the witnessing of the witness testifies that his objections to the testimony on different grounds.

Admissibility hearsay and so forth, back and who breaks the tires that lay who breaks the tires and Kemal arrows who comes in the breaks. The time it's a very complicated procedure folks would get back to Gloria phone calls and secular 2064 3110 challenges facing Americans or substantial time in our Valley freedom sort constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice ACLJ on the front lines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress to get in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do our 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 Knott's well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ 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 created a free and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold edition like it 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 abortion industry and what Obama care means to the many ways your membership is empowering the right question free copy of mission in life today online ACLJ/7.

Joe Biden was asked specifically about prison being asked to testify, I would play that for every biased document.

This will reduce mass because Mr. unifier, you fix the presidency should show up and testify agrees with the house managers that you know he should just be there and testify that was ever done that know it would be absurd for him to do that. I don't think the present.

Be scared to do that. I just think it's it's it's it's again is a former President like the other officials who they've tried to impeach the past. The didn't show up either. They would even take service of process and they they would back to the states of insurgent violence could even find them and they would back and became elected officials is different time.

I was there with technology, but you know I think I would read a part of our memo because I think that we were very fair in our memo about how this is again it's not like this is settled by the Supreme Court about about the former officials, but we were honest in our memo to say this could at worst. The Senate lacks such a power by the date of the clear constitutional text and its proceedings. As such, are ultra-virus and they did at best and everything outside of this, there their power.

The best the case in hand fall squarely in the gray area of whether a former President counts as quote be present for purposes of impeachment trial in the Senate proceeding against him as such is grounded on a dubious constitutional foundation lacks precedent imprudence. It's a bad decision. So even if you are one of those senators today who thinks you have the power to do it because of a constitutional gray area we we still argue in our memo, you should not do it because you're opening up a Pandora's box you're opening up a door that doesn't need to be opened. We move forward as a country we elect leaders or reelect leaders. If we decide to do that we don't we don't move backwards. If impeachment is for an immediate you know, kind of, you need to remove this person even though they were duly elected by the people. It's extreme very extreme so the founding fathers put a bar it's never been met for any present as partisan as our country's God is happened many times throughout history.

No President has been removed from office by impeachment. Some of resign because the threat was Nixon, but no one has actually been found guilty by the U.S. Senate of the present that's happened to judges happen to lower ranking officials, but when it comes the present it's it's again they take it that much more seriously. Twice Chief Justice, but has to be there. What is the President doesn't have to be.

There was not so who is this it's being tried that. That's my question to ask that to Harry Wes at eight Andy as well.

It also start with with Harry story. Step two, the Chief Justice is there and that beats the President is not on trial, who is actually on trial was the citrine under their petro power be that that that the house bidders honestly get around that. I think you're asking a very brilliant question and I think at the end of the day.

The trial proceeds and is unconstitutional and be the trial becomes nothing more than a referendum on rhetoric and the scope of the First Amendment. A second the history of the text and the rule of law are all on President prompts saw.

Third, the Democrats hate crop but they are propelled by something greater than from hatred. They hate trump voters more and in answering your question Jordan. It's important to note that a recent Time magazine article shows that the elites in our country of the people that are associated with some of the major media companies, major unions, they have all gotten together in order to ensure that trump voters are defeated. So at the end of the day. This impeachment if it goes forward, puts trump voters on trial and on YouTube to impeach Carter, John Horton said impeach Obama fast and furious Benghazi targeting by the IRS of conservative organizations we go through five extra list. As you know, so if you don't go so far back as Jimmy Carter just go to a couple back to the can impeach Bush over what weapons of mass destruction said this to me again. It's if the ideas who is on trial here it's really like what Harry said, it's, it's the it's the movement behind that that person that's on trial because not the person right more you can do anything to the person you can you can hurt the movement, and I agree with everything Harry said, yeah, it begs the question why are the Democrats doing this and I think here's the answer. They want to divide the GOP and make political gains and in 2022. If these GOP senators about to convict the President are going to face the wrath of the people who voted for Donald Trump if they voted to acquit the President and the Dems will accuse them of being supportive. All that happened on January 6 and so the note. It is a special political stunt that really doesn't take the welfare of the nation are the unity of America, a new chapter in American American life into into counted all the only witnesses. For example, that they have called is Donald Trump which is proof that it's a political stunt in, and the American people and their welfare. Be damned him that the Arrhenius the GOP the Republicans in the Senate would like to move own. They would like to debate some of the policies of Joe Biden.

They would like to look at some of his cabinet nominees. They can't move own because the Democrats will not let them move on their process with Donald Trump there obsessed with using this for political gain.

This is not about justice.

This is not about doing what is right is not about holding Donald Trump accountable. It's politically motivated, completely anyway.

Think about Joe Biden said this opportunity unity unity all that Chris Wallace have no love for it all at Fox News. It is the greatest return to me is like really at unit we was not me was is fine impeachment bizarre because a covert and an even just take you away from trying to be nonpartisan.

Looking at it, which is impossible for anybody in America because we are what we are partisan by nature and by the fact of how involved people are in the political process in this election cycle, but but you knew his calls for is always unity talk was bogus. Even then because of the actions he was Artie planning to take and then he gets that you gets asked about impeachment. I got nothing to do with it.

I think they need to do it and he said for unity purposes. We need to drag the country through the mud for unity and blame half the country for for 200 bad people did for unity, but Joe Biden said this, only your thoughts any right 44.

This is just just yesterday about the President showing up and testify meet this to get that's not leadership.

He has not yet leadership could have been Andy knock this off Nancy Pelosi knock this off Chuck Schumer. Let's get to my business is present. I don't want Donald Trump in the distraction for for a week or two weeks or month in the focus but get the media they love Donald Trump a lot more than Joe Biden because he gets better ratings so they won't be talk about Joe Biden much the next week and 1/2.

It will be all about Donald Trump NEC by Joe Biden eat eat, you would love that Donald Trump back in the spotlight again. That is, is he easily asking for. Yeah, that's true.

This is a great unifier, the great hypocrite spoke during the campaign about how important it is to bring the nation together to unify that he was going to bring everyone together is 47 years in Washington and all his experience in unifying and reaching across the aisle and the first thing he does when he has the opportunity to unify when he has the opportunity to tell Hubert and Pelosi and don't tell me that he doesn't because he does not get off. He takes the opportunity of saying well. This must happen. I heard him say that this must happen.

Why must it happen. There's no reason why it must happen.

There is every reason why it should not happen. Not that it must happen, and then he says they've asked the senators asked him to come and testify that rather the house managers and invited them to come and testify.

Well, he went to law school.

Biden apparently died some years ago which law school because he owes a stable, different schools in these days is been he's been to many different universities that have record of his attendance.

Yeah, I think, is that he went to Syracuse law school then they think in criminal law there. Didn't I think of if you're in charge of the high crime and misdemeanor. You have the absolute right to remain silent and you cannot be called to testify that me know that. But instead of doing that he prefers to make this call to unity, which is a fraudulent and fake call by a person who really doesn't appreciate the constitutional implications of what he saying fan.

I think this was waiting California line 3 anyway look securely on the air and Michael Jordan. My question is why are the Republicans going along with his family impeachment trial again the votes to stop it so that soaks the first time around the city.

There could be a motion to dismiss their work devotes even that it was a slim Republican majority.

Their work devotes there to dismiss it right off the bat. You can always do that within this time around. Republicans are in our it's a 50-50 split and you got Republicans are just don't like present from like the Mitt Romney's of the world. The votes are just not there so is not the majority Republicans 93% of them are on board. It's the rest is that smile anyway in the yeah there's been a suggestion. There is senators to just boycott the proceedings but you go back.

Article 1, section 3, clause 6, it says that conviction will come down could to concurrence of two thirds of the members get this going.

Present if the Republicans were to boycott the level for conviction, conviction would actually drop and that's when you could see a connection.

They can't boycott the proceedings. They have to show up and have to vote Constitution that I will continue take your calls one more segment coming up within the trial begins literally as we go off the air. 1-800-684-3110 call us only when 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 Gold edition like it will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry and what Obama care means to the pro-life in many ways your membership in the ACLJ is empowering the right to question your free copy of mission in life today online ACLJ/challenges facing Americans for substantial time and or value freedom sort constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice ACLJ on the front lines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress to get in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do our 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, member today ACLJ thank you for your phone calls 164, 31 to sort were about like nine minutes away from the starting.

Unfortunately for the country today can you get a very legal argument which appears in constitutional law to the subissue four hours but it's getting very legal it suck to be the most that that the stuff about the violence that occurred in the language from Chuck Schumer and Maxine Waters and Sweetser Nancy Pelosi about you that the election being hijacked which sheet she tweeted out about the last election and and you know what is said she was inciting anything and no one's ever brought Bernie Sanders to be thrown out the Senate because that shooter at the Congressional Republican practiced thought he was doing something for Bernie Sanders and blaming Republicans for policy reasons wasn't just a crazy person but was a crazy person doing it for political purposes and know whatever blade Bernie Sanders.

In effect, I feel bad for when that happens to political leaders and and someone does something in their name. Did you know they didn't intend.

That's not happening till tomorrow you're going to have to sit through straight eight hours to days. 16 total of the Democrats first and then you get the presence life. Second two more days of that surrogate towards the week it you will get a key vote today that Kevo to watch for is due the 45 Republicans remain to say we don't have jurisdiction here because that tells you there's not even close to enough. Number two, to acquit, so the rest of this is basically it's just a political show trial which is disgusting. The United States of America and additional trials in dictatorships. They do show trials in countries you don't want to live it it said were doing this our country because it's the countries that you are were usually condemning on the world stage to do this kind of show trials that are so outside the bounds of even their legal systems. That's one of these today. Alyssa disintegrated because it is talking about what this does to the presidency of the United States, which I think is Artie been cheapened a lot by Muller the first junkie impeachment over phone call. They could give you rest should simply switch to Ukraine which is not ally Russia and it was you, now is, is it too close to Ukraine and by the way we fetter the hunter by the house of Israel about Hunter Biden, and there is a criminal investigation is been ongoing since Donald Trump was present. But I guess you left yet. It would say anything there to clear that up soup by the racks you are investigating him for serious crimes, add to, and then another Muller impeachment and impeachment.

Part two their walking into the Senate. Now the house managers going into the Senate as we speak, but I would take what you… At a gram by 13 when you combine a staff impeachment within impeachment of a President who is out of office is going to destroy the presidency itself.

I know you hate Trop, but please pull back before we set in motion the destruction of the presidency by never ending impeachment's based on lack of the product due process and clinical retro Bauman is the motive show eight again, what is it me was it me for Joe Biden. Was it before it might be nothing for Joe but he cannot inspire you write so he kinda could go way that whatever was to teach it, but Obama was very divisive people very divisive present truck divisive George W. Bush very divisive mean it's like you to set the bar differently for each timing and that it certainly if if if Kemal Harris residue vessel running is happy to see these possibly pretty divisive people. She was right, the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate to come up with reasons to impeach them because out and we don't that were not bound by the Constitution. We have the power by the Constitution were not bound by the freedom of speech not bound by no religious test. Use the absurd.

The absurdity this gets to Frank and Fort online to a Frank I like my brother-in-law is presiding as President pro tem of the Senate will give me any signs of showing favor to sort out managers yes absolutely.

He will do whatever they want and less enough Democrats and others don't want to do what they want, so he's getting along with whatever the Democrats want bases on site at night and I think it'll be the first for the sinners. That's his body. So if the sinners you want something a rule on something that's reason to go to first and second yes he's gonna be biased.

That's why this isn't the Chief Justice is it there it's not, so it's not as serious of impeachment because it's not a real impeachment of the present it's fake and Patrick Leahy sitting there makes it that much more fake and absurd and in an unfortunate event for our country. He cry about laugh about, but you do have take seriously to appoint because you got enough of these just angry politicians who would love to just impeach certain people, so it helps their own political careers because the politicians we Artie think about maybe I would run for President Donald Trump was run for President. This could hurt my fundraising efforts that hurt me. He's got your 40+ percent of the support already Republican Party keeps that the next four years I've no chance how many are thinking basically Ronnie Theissen to be present to get presence of Canadian. They have grant delusions of grandeur. Even the US sinners is only hundred. They've Artie made it pretty far in politics but not Florida for any of them.

Everyone wants to be present. Some are better and I think Heidi that some are better at strategically placed and others are good servants of the people but but to be honest with you I become eyes, politicians, and that's why you gotta really press something and and on the issue like constitutionality and holding those 45 feet to the fire one more time today will every single one of them. I want to be President, but they still have a duty to their voters to uphold the Constitution. We have to continue to remind them of that in Jordan, I might add one thing to your list there any way while this impeachment trial is going on but they're knocking to be considering is the covert relief package on that is on the back burner till the end of this trial and by the way, both the House and the Senate passed a resolution saying that they are to move that with only Democrat vote using the budget reconciliation process to look just as a voter Jordan.

You gotta look into this a political fishbowl that were in right now and realize what's happening those priorities need the pandemic relief efforts are being set on the back burner for what for political considerations of 2022 and 2024. I don't think there's another justification for it. I really don't because you're not can get the 67 votes now mean the again just that I want to go around the table as this is a beginning now under sinners or stars at you see how he estimates a three minutes until this was the start, then I think the price start about on time two hours aside so that they just be you and flashpoint review just what you think we get the boat around 6 PM Eastern time. Some around there take breaks for light and bright break for dinner today. Yeah on on the on the constitutionality yet think dinner our thinking. Scott's a good guess right and he what you think anybody's fist persuaded at this point. On the other side to say you know what now that I've heard this not have had time to think about it.

Maybe this is a bad idea or the theater's remains as partisan as it has been for the most part, with the five angry Republicans who don't like the President's keep saying that way to younger not to get one Democratic vote to say that there is no jurisdiction in the five angry Republicans are going to stay five angry and wrong. I legally by opening this door even if it's ultimately acquittal they've open the door, absolutely. But the Democrats have never been serious about the rule of law. The text of the Constitution or due process unless it favors them politically or in terms of political theater and in the country less. We can all talk about awake and laughing and cracking. It's mostly cry moment it is a cry moment for sure. You know, and for the Democrats to taxi, the sale, enough is enough would require some honor and integrity that their political motivations are overpowering. They simply will not do it.

It's all politics all the time.

That's our nation is now operating in a it's not a good way to operate this time for that groups like us to exist for that but that this insert is a person who is on trial. The question that I can fail if it just is not there.

The present is all of present from decades. ACLJ is been 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 us, ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ