Breaking: DC Gov Calls to Remove Washington Monument and Other Landmarks

Breaking news, the DC Commission looking at landmarks and statutes, ready for this, recommends the removal of the Washington Monument. Live from Washington DC, Jay Sekulow live. Phone lines are open for your questions right now. Call 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. And now, Chief Counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, Jay Sekulow. Hi everybody, welcome to the broadcast. We've got a lot to cover today, but I've got to start with a, first of all, we had a big win in a case involving the President and the tax returns, I'll talk to that a little bit later in the broadcast. But the DC Commission, there's been a special commission was assembled to review, it was called the DC FACES Working Group Recommendations, and this was to review the statues and memorials that exist in Washington DC.

Logan, tell everybody a little bit of what was going on here first. When you see the list folks, it's shocking. Yeah, you see this list, again, this is coming from DC FACES, which is an organization that the mayor and some of the other people involved in the government DC have put together, so the parks and everything. And they've put out a whole list, a whole document of statues, memorials, schools that they believe should be either replaced, removed, or explained.

Essentially put a reason why this should exist and to put it into a contextualized, essentially put it into context. And the list is pretty debatable, I'd say the least. There are a few on there that I think we go through and you'll go, okay, yeah, I think that that's okay to be changed.

I think in 2020 we can look at that and go, there was some definitely some evil involved. But you look at the main list and you're talking about the Washington monument, the George Washington statue that's along the George Washington monument, Christopher Columbus, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, the Jefferson Memorial. And again, the options that are on the table right now are remove and replace and essentially contextualize these monuments. And what's interesting is the President actually has been saying this for years and people laughed at it, that eventually they were going to not just come for, look, I think there's been a lot of debate on the Confederate monuments and those types of things. I think those at least is a discussion that can be had. How are you going to move the Washington monument?

I feel like just the physics of that is going to be very difficult and look, not to say that there isn't some conversation that should again, have you had about some of these people? But you're talking about George Washington, you're talking about Thomas Jefferson, you're talking about the founding fathers of the country. Yeah.

So look, nobody is perfect. We know that. And here you have a situation where they are talking about, and this is what's so clear here. It says the federal government will remove, relocate, they're asking for this to be done or contextualize the following assets.

They don't say which should be removed and which should be relocated or which should be contextualized. But the idea is that, you know, and the President did say they're going to be, I remember when he said it, they're going to be attacking the Jefferson monument, the Jefferson memorial. Well, they are, they're going to attack the Washington monument. Well, they are. Now here's the problem. This is a cancellation culture.

No, our history is not perfect, but you know, it is our history and history matters. We're going to be joined after the break by Dr. Andy Econimo, Dr. Andrew Econimo, our senior lawyer is also a PhD in history. We're going to be joined by Harry Hutchinson, our senior policy director. I want to quickly go to Fan Bennett and get a reaction. Well, Jay, it's a city I love, a country I love, the idea that the contributions of George Washington to this city and this country are now somehow worthy of shame. It's just beyond me, Jay.

And I'll just quickly say this though. She's got a jurisdiction issue because some of these city buildings, city schools, yeah, they can unilaterally rename them, but these federal monuments, Jay, she has no jurisdiction to rename those. Those go through the federal government and just for the record, the interior secretary says, not on my watch, never going to happen. Well, if you just even look at it, dad, from a sense of let's just, let's just take the historical side about from a tourism point of view. Well, that you would think, honestly, this does damage to tourism now is what you're saying.

Everyone's going there now. Everyone's afraid to go. No, not right now with current situations, but just the idea that, oh, if you take a photo with the Washington monument, you're now a racist. You're now would be considered some form of racist or, or insensitive situation. That's also the concern too. Cause it's not just that it's putting the seed in there that plants the idea that these things that bring in so much tourism money are now deemed inauthentic. All right, we'll take your calls on all this 800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. The challenges facing Americans are substantial at a time when our values, our freedoms, our constitutional rights are under attack. It's more important than ever to stand with the American center for law and justice. For decades now, the ACLJ has been 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 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.

If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life changing work. Become a member today, ACLJ.org.

Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected, is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you were saying when you stand with the American center for law and justice to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called mission life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, Dan parenthood's role in the abortion industry and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life.

Request your free copy of mission life today, online at ACLJ.org slash gift. We're going to talk a little bit later in the broadcast about a victory for on the President's tax return issue. That's been so prevalent in litigation as I would know firsthand because I've been litigating it, but this new recommendation that came forward from the mayor's office, they put together a commission to review statues, uh, statutes that were statues. You know, I'm so stuck on my whole life has been a statues or statue schools. I'm trying to find the list of schools that they're talking about changing the name of a lot of shears and Memorial. Yeah, but that's not, I mean, that's just the tip of the iceberg.

It's Christopher Columbus. Okay. This is not like someone sent out a willy nilly list here. This is a full on, you know, presentation of DC faces.

Uh, we'll, I'm going to try to find the list of, uh, the schools, but they're in there somewhere. How about, uh, uh, is Washington DC? Yeah.

Washington, I guess it just called the district of Columbia. And then Andy, I noticed, first of all, give me, give me your general reaction to this horror. Yeah. What you can just make sure it's something you could say on the radio.

Yes, go ahead. It's the worst that I can come up with that I can say on the radio. And that is horror because I am a practicing historian as well as a practicing lawyer. And I see what we're trying to do is to rewrite the past and to take out of context the American dream and the American inheritance. I mean, for all you say about Thomas Jefferson, he's the author of the declaration of independence, the pro President of the United States, secretary of state, uh, George Washington. Yes.

He, uh, had, uh, ideas that are not consistent with what we do in the 21st century, but he was the founder of the country, uh, in the sense that he led the army of the revolution against the British. And what are we going to do as a Jordan, as Logan said, just the physics, are we going to blow up the monument? Are we going to blow up the, uh, the, the, the needle? I mean, what kind of outrageous ideas are we coming up with and what is contextualized means that to me is a leftist word for destroy and to denigrate something into and to minimize it. This is something that I can't, it's so difficult for me to express into words. Look, the present is a text. The past is its interpretation. In order to understand where we are, we have to look at where we have been, not destroy what we had.

Let me, let me ask this. Um, I will put this in context, uh, contextualize. I can contextualize this, but let me put this in context. So they want these buildings, monuments, schools, renamed all of this.

And then we just played a clip in our break for those that watch us on our social media platforms that had a lot of these monuments in it. Yeah. Including the building of the Supreme court in the United States, which by the way, did incorrectly decide Plessy versus Ferguson, decided Dred Scott. These are all cases on race.

The three-fifths blacks were three-fifths plus Plessy versus Ferguson, separate but equal. Okay. Karamatsu, the internment of Japanese Americans, horrible decisions. You want, how do we contextualize the building of the Supreme that's where decisions are made and in our Republic wrongs get righted. You correct them.

Right. And this is interesting because actually in the list, it gives you sort of the qualifications of what they decided, who should have their name replaced. And some of them, like I said, we can go through all of them, Christopher Columbus, Benjamin Franklin. There's some you wouldn't know on this list that maybe if you did look at their history, you're like, you know, maybe, you know, top Klansman, we shouldn't be naming a school after, you know, I get that I'm in support of that.

But in general, some of these names that we're very familiar with, there's a reason what is really interesting is of sort of the five imperatives. One of them is the violation of the district's human rights laws, their current laws. So the current DC human rights laws, if they said did research and evidence find the namesake committed a violation of the DC human rights act in whole or part, including discrimination against protected traits, such as age, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and natural origin. We're talking about people from the 1700s. Yeah.

So you're taking the DC human rights code, which I think we could look this up. I believe it was like 19, some of it was in like the late 1970s, maybe. We can find it.

I say that. I still remember. So yeah, the first one was 1977. So we're only going to go back.

Under 50 years. So 1777 to 1776. Right. Or, I mean, this is, it's not just revisionist history. It's, it's really absurd. And they're going to apply retroactively the DC human rights statute to our founders. I mean, that's what it says pretty clear as day. No monuments to any men because only men could vote. Yeah.

No monuments. I mean, really, honestly, everyone is flawed, but to view people through a lens of today is nearly impossible for someone who was by the way, famous 15 years ago, much less someone famous 200 years ago. They also are talking about renaming and they said, this is using the existing process to rename the following public schools. Obviously you have some of those names that we've brought up before. You have names like Alexander Graham Bell.

You have names like Thomas Jefferson, Francis Scott Key. What did Alexander Graham Bell do? I'd have to look it up. I don't know what, what, what agreements he did.

I mean, it could be terrible. I don't know. I don't know a lot about him. He did come up with a telephone. I know that part. Yeah. That's a good part.

That's something you should celebrate for sure. We're still using those today. I hear there's also, you know, John Tyler, a lot of Presidents, a lot of Presidents on this list, Zachary Taylor. Yeah.

So, yeah, so this is not just applying though. The monuments are the easiest for you to look at and go, well, that makes that's, that seems, that's the absurdity of it because they're talking about again removing, replacing architecturalizing what buildings that are, let's just put our gigantic, gigantic. I want to get, if our, I don't know if it's possible, Will, could our team as we're producing it right now, get me so we could show it on our TV audience, the Washington monument, the Jefferson Memorial, different shots of the Supreme Court, Congress, the Washington's, all the main ones listed are the Benjamin Franklin one.

Let's get, get as many of those as we can. And when you get them, I want to be able to put them up, but then give it, if you walk out of our office, you would start removing things block by block. I mean, literally outside our door, I guess, I guess outside our door for the United States Capitol too. Yeah, I guess it would open, it would open up some new city parks, Jay.

I mean, because there would be nothing but trees left in the, in the blocks surrounding it. Look, I would say a couple of things and Logan touched on this, but these monuments are why people come to the city in the first place to learn. Second, many of these monuments don't even belong to the city.

This report that we're talking about specifically acknowledges that they belong to the federal government. And Jay, the other thing, and you want to talk about retroactive application of DC law, I sure hope this week or next week, I don't violate some DC law that they're going to pass in the 22nd century or the 23rd century long after I'm gone, because that'd be pretty hard, Jay, to abide by laws that aren't written as I'm living today, but that's what we're looking at here. You know, Andy, the retroactive application of laws is usually deemed unconstitutional.

It is ex post facto laws. In other words, making it a crime today that something was not a crime yesterday or telling me without giving me notice, if you walk up those steps, when you get to the one that I'm thinking of, that's criminal. And when you step on it, you've committed a crime, but you do not criminalize activity that was not criminal when it was committed. And none of these things were criminal when they were committed. They may have been antisocial. They may have been immoral.

Slavery was a horrible thing. We Greeks were living under the Turkish boot for 400 years. Does that mean that we have to destroy every mosque in Greece because the Turks were there? No, it doesn't mean that. Does it also mean that the Turks should destroy every church in Turkey and make it into a mosque?

Certainly not. We have to be realists in our history. We have to appreciate and understand the reality of what history means. History is the story of the human past. With all its dirt, it's good, it's bad, it's evil, it's right, it's wrong.

That's what it is. You don't ignore it. You don't destroy it. You live with it and you understand it. And most important, you learn from it. That's what Condoleezza Rice said, that having the monuments up is a lesson in history.

I'm watching right now in our studio. They didn't say take down the Lincoln Memorial. No, that's not on there. I mean, understandably. There's certain ones that obviously some of the more modern ones also. They don't like, but clearly Jefferson and Washington are in the event, frankly. Those are the top two. Jefferson and Washington and Christopher Columbus are the three top notch people that they are going after really nationwide. And you're talking about, again, not only the founders of our country, but you know, somewhat war heroes in their time. And it's very strange. I want people that are on Facebook and Periscope and whatever other social media devices that you can share, share this because we're going to start showing these monuments a little bit.

And fan, we only got a minute and a half here before the break. But, you know, obviously this year was an exception because of COVID. I mean, tourism was, you know, any tourism up there or virtually none right now? It's down quite a bit, Jay. I mean, there are still some people coming and they come to see these monuments, but it's down this year.

But typically, I mean, Logan's exactly right. These are the things that draw people to the city. And just one point, Jay, as we go to a break here, there are honest conversations that can be had here, much like the protest. But here's what I see in both the protests that have gone violent and this conversation about removing these monuments. We've gone way past that. We've gone to anarchy and what has it cost us, Jay? It's cost us those honest conversations. The honest conversations Logan's talking about, those aren't happening because we're talking about removing the Washington monument. It's pretty unbelievable. Yeah, I think these are honestly kind of, I don't want to say missing the point, but really missing the point of what those discussions can be.

And I think you're absolutely right then. Hey, give us a call right now. 1-800-684-3110.

I am sure the thousands of you watching online, the millions of you listening on the radio, all have a point of view on this and would like to share some of those on the air. Give us a call. 1-800-684-3110. That is 1-800-684-3110. And always check out the work of the ACLJ at ACLJ.org.

Be right back. Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected 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 to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, play on parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life.

Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. The challenges facing Americans are substantial. At a time when our values, our freedoms, our constitutional rights are under attack, it's more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the frontlines 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 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. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life changing work. Become a member today, ACLJ.org.

Welcome back to GCLI, this is Logan Sekulow. We're talking obviously about the DC faces. The government of the District of Columbia has put out the mayor, and it essentially says it's time to either remove, replace, or contextualize the biggest tourist attractions in Washington DC, the Washington Monument, the Jefferson Memorial, among many others that are on this list, some rightfully, but most of them are just like you said, removing history. And look, that's something here at the ACLJ we're working on. You may have heard about the school choice initiative. We've been doing that for the last few months. There's a new thing coming next week. Stay tuned. Next week, if you have kids or you have grandkids, or you just honestly feel like these points of American history are important to teach and to preserve, you're going to want to tune in next week to see what we have. It is a different angle at the way you teach and you learn and it's for kids. Adults will probably enjoy it as well.

So applicable with all this going on. And it's going to be ready, I believe on Tuesday or Wednesday to launch. I wish I had it today for you, but I will say... What's going to be ready to launch Tuesday? There'll be a promo and we're going to be doing a fundraiser on it. So we're going to hopefully support the work of the ACLJ, but through it support the work of what we're building for the next future leaders of this country. So I think it's really important and we've been developing it for the last number of months and it's ready to roll out right after Labor Day. So it's something that has just happened to line up right around the same time as this broke, because this is one of the top issues that's going on in society right now. And I think it's important for the ACLJ to always be on top of that and to always be finding unique ways to help your kids, your grandkids, and you when times like these happen. All right. I want to talk about this in this context also, and that is... Let me go first to Andy.

Andy, I'm looking at... There's a couple of things that we would all agree could be changed. I don't want to monument to a Ku Klux Klan leader or a founder of the Ku Klux Klan. I accept the need for a memorial or a monument though for people like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, the very founders of the country that we live in. They were not perfect men. They were not without flaw.

No one is. They were a product of their times. They're not a product of the 1977...

This is interesting. They're not products of the 1977 DC Human Rights Act, however, applying in 1776 or 1789. Look, you look at people in the context of the generation of the century and of the time in which they lived, and you judge them by those standards, not by the standards of today or by the standards of tomorrow. We judge them by what they were and what they did at the time.

The contributions that Jefferson and Washington made were tremendous contributions to the founding of the country. We built memorials to them, Greek revival architecture. Should we take that down because Greeks in ancient times had slaves? That means we should destroy every building in Washington DC that is built in the Greek revival type of architecture. That's how ridiculous it gets.

And let me say something else that a lot of people don't know. At the end of the Civil War, the Marine Band stood outside the White House and President Lincoln said, I want you to play a song. And they said, what do you want us to play Mr. President? And he leaned out the window and said, Dixie, should we now condemn President Abraham Lincoln, one of the greatest Presidents the United States has ever had, because he slipped up once and made a statement that could be construed in the year 2020 as being racist? Or was he trying to reach out to the conquered and to be reconstructed? There's a whole history about why he did that.

And Harry Hutchison, our director of policies, joining us. But there's a whole history of why Lincoln said play that. It was this reconciliation mode and to bring the southern states back into the country. You could criticize it and you could come 100 reasons why that wasn't a good idea.

But in Lincoln's view, there was a reason to do it. Putting that aside, Harry, this is a cancellation culture. When we say that, what are we talking about? Well, essentially, Jay, we're talking about individuals who oppose reconciliation, who oppose actually American history. In essence, the move by the D.C. Committee to recommend changes to the Washington Monument, the Jefferson Memorial, and other historical assets is simply the first step in a long desired process in abolishing history as part of the Democratic Party's relentless support of perfectionism, including the retroactive prosecution of the past and past historical figures based on the current D.C. human rights statute. This is a massively ridiculous campaign that does nothing for the people of Washington, D.C., except make politicians feel better about themselves. And so next, the D.C. Committee will likely decide that the English language itself and math are systematically racist. This is ridiculous.

Let me let me ask you this. So if you've got a controversial, you know, there's a controversial history with all of our founders because they were proud of their times. How would you handle it, Harry? Well, you could develop a balanced approach. You could have a bipartisan commission. You could have individuals who are actually interested in preserving and actually interested in contextualizing history. We are not a perfect people. This is not a perfect country.

But what we really have at hand here with this D.C. Committee is the relentless pursuit of perfectionism. And the Democrats conveniently forget their own racist past. So are the members of the D.C. Committee prepared to support the defunding, for instance, of the Democratic Party itself?

No. Are they willing to support criminal justice reforms like the Justice Act proposed by Tim Scott? Are they willing to support school choice, which would disproportionately improve the lives of African-Americans and Hispanic Americans? On many of these issues, the Democratic Party, the D.C. Committee is found wanting.

So in my judgment, this is not a serious attempt to rebalance the history of the United States. All right. So we're going to have Harry stay for another segment in the back half hour. I want to get into a little bit in the back half hour about what took place yesterday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. We'll talk more about this.

Logan, but do let everybody know what's coming next week. I mean, with our special project. We have a brand new project from the ACLJ that we're going to need your support. We're definitely going to need resources to start putting out content specifically aimed at your children and your grandchildren. We'll have more to talk about. It really fits in with this. It really does. It's really about preserving American history, preserving faith and the instruction of it in a really unique, fun way.

It's not necessarily what you think of. This is not going to be some real heady, deep type content. This is content your kids need to learn, content that maybe you could find handy as well. We're going to help preserve the American history. We're going to do it through some of the work here at the ACLJ. We're going to need your help. And there's going to be a very, very cool way for you to do it and see what we've going on. We have a great promo completed, near completed, and I can't wait to showcase it next week.

I've seen it in the rough. It was pretty fun. We're still tweaking it. Make sure it's perfect for all of you. We're great for kids and grandkids. Let me just tell you that. I'm very excited about it. It's going to be a lot of fun and also be very serious business as we say in the video. We're going to have some real deal. Everybody will learn from the content. I think so too.

It's not unlike stuff you grew up with but done in a very modern way for kids of 2020. All right, we'll take calls when we come back from the break. Your reaction to all of this. We'll talk about the President's tax return case and support the work of the ACLJ at ACLJ.org. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines, protecting your freedoms, defending your rights in courts, 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, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life changing work. Become a member today. ACLJ.org.

And now, Chief Counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, Jay Sekulow. So the questions being asked on Facebook are interesting. Aren't these federal monuments? What gives the mayor the right to go after them? Are they going to ask for Monticello and Mount Vernon be torn down also? What's next?

Renaming Washington, D.C. is exactly what Logan said. That's the comments coming in on Facebook. And there's a reason why those comments are coming in. Don't give them ideas. Tell people why it's coming in. Don't give them ideas. Don't give them any ideas, by the way.

They might actually do that. So the reason this is happening, we've been addressing it for the last half hour, is the organization DC FACES, which is part of the government of the District of Columbia, has put out a list and which requirements to rename, replace, or not even rename, replace, remove, or contextualize things like the Washington Monument, the Jefferson Memorial, amongst many others on this list of Christopher Columbus, sort of the people that are now the biggest target when some of these people are people who helped found this country. And not only that is they're putting them under the rule of law of 2020 and saying if essentially if these people ever violated human rights laws of today 200 years ago, they should have their names removed. They should no longer be celebrated. And sort of your defense of that is there would be no one to be, there's be nothing to be celebrated without some of those people.

Without George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, good luck America. Fam, will you explain to people what it would be like in Washington, D.C. with these guns? I mean, you live there. I mean, I've lived there too, obviously, on and off and half the year usually.

I mean, I'm just trying to even visualize this. Well, it'd be darn near empty, Jay, and there would also be no real celebration of our past because so much of the city is laid out in a way where you actually do literally walk through the history and the formation of our country. Jay, I was glad to see the Facebook commenter ask about how this would actually happen, because the only thing that the D.C. mayor can do is use her position on the National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission to recommend the removal of at least the federal monuments. Jay, that would go two places.

First of all, it would go to the National Park Service overseen by the Secretary of Interior. We've already said that he has said this is not going to happen on his watch. But here's the other interesting thing, Jay. But it's going to be a big question in the Presidential debates, I guarantee it.

One hundred percent. But the reason I mentioned that is because I wanted to layer on top of it the congressional level. The hearings would take place in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

Jay, that is chaired by Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and the ranking member, Jay, it's Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Do you think this is going to have resonance with Joe Manchin of West Virginia? If it does, I'll be very surprised. Yeah, but I mean, the fact of the matter is, Harry, this will be it's going to be a question in the debates. You know it. Absolutely. And one of the things that I would anticipate is that Joe Biden would have difficulty coming up with a constructive, if not articulate answer, because Joe Biden is being pulled in two distinct directions.

And based on the recent past, more likely than not, he will have to side with the left wingers in his party or he will lose their support. Yeah, by the way, it's just been it just broke that the first debate of the President will be for the Presidential debate, which will be on in Cleveland on September 29th. It will be moderated by Chris Wallace. And I think the second one is Kirsten Walker from NBC.

Both of these folks I know. On September 29th. So that's just a few weeks away. You realize that the election is less than two months away.

Yeah, just right around a little more. It would be today. Maybe exactly today. Two months today. Two months today. Right, Will?

Am I right? Sounds right. November 3rd. Yeah, yeah. 60 days.

Yeah, just eight weeks. Let's get through it. Come on. Yeah, we will. I'm ready. I'm ready for- We'll get through it. We'll get through it. Are we interested to see the debates? Yeah, I'm glad they're having them. Yeah. Nancy Pelosi said no debates.

Not because of COVID. She said no debates because she didn't think- But you're covering, you got a special thing on your Logan secular reprogramming. You're talking about Nancy Pelosi, I understand. Oh, are we talking about? I'm sure we will. Yeah.

I mean, obviously she was in there getting illegal haircuts. All right, we're taking a break. We come back. We're going to take your phone calls.

1-800-684-3110. Andy Cahn was still with us then, of course, and Professor Ari Hutchinson and you. Yeah, and me. And you can find, like you said, the Logan Secular Reprogram, my radio show where we talk about the influence of the liberal elitist on the Logan Secular Reprogram. With a little more of an edge, shall we say.

You can find that on YouTube, youtube.com slash logansecular reprogram, and all over the internet. We're there. And thank you to our donors who made August just a tremendous month for us. The challenges facing Americans are substantial at a time when our values, our freedoms, our constitutional rights are under attack. It's more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice. For decades now, the ACLJ has been 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 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.

If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life changing work. Become a member today, ACLJ.org.

Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected 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, to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, play on parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life.

Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. Hey, welcome everybody. So let me change gears for a moment here. So our Facebook audience just saw kind of a history of the Vance, Trump versus Vance cases. We had three Supreme Court cases we argued right here in this studio, actually, in May, right over there, right where I'm pointing. And in two of them, the congressional subpoenas, we had a complete victory. On the third one, we did not get the absolute immunity we sought and we did not get the heightened scrutiny we asked for. We did get the court unanimously agreed that the President's entitled to special deference, that he's entitled to raise these constitutional challenges and that it was remanded back to the federal courts for that.

We did that. We filed a suit in the federal court challenging the DA's subpoena, the same subpoena that's been issued now for over a year as unconstitutionally overbroad, that it was a fishing expedition, that it was not valid. The district court issued a 103-page opinion against us and said we had no case, but it took them 103 pages to explain it. We filed an application for a stay with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit pending the disposition of the appeal. In other words, don't let them enforce the subpoena while we appeal this case. And the concern, of course, was they were going to do that. We were prepared to go to the Supreme Court.

Well, that is not what happened. We do not have to go to the Supreme Court. And I want you to listen to this question by Judge Walker to my counsel on the other side, Kerry Dunn.

He was asked this. By the way, we got the stay. Let me clarify. We need to bury the lead here.

Okay. We got the stay. It stays in place with the disposition of the Second Circuit. Briefing will take place in September. Argument at the end of the month.

Probably get an opinion, depending on if there's dissents, mid-October. I think we've got a good chance of prevailing, and you'll see why in a moment. And then it goes en banc, which is the entire, possibly the entire Second Circuit would hear it. I think they would.

I think we have a really good chance there. May never make it way back up to the Supreme Court. But take a listen to this from the argument yesterday. What I can understand, however, is why, is how this reaches all 11 of the subpoenaed entities, whether or not they are even in this country. And that, it seems to me, is a broadening of even what the Congress had in mind. And that's what I just have trouble understanding. It has the feeling of overbreadth, but there's no way to measure it.

That's the problem that I have. Well, Your Honor, with respect, this is the breadth of the subpoena here in a financial investigation by our office is actually not unusual at all. And again, if the public record reflects that each of the categories we're talking about has been publicly alleged to be a transaction that involves potential criminal wrongdoing by the organization at issue. But what's so key here is the DA would not give us a stay of the enforcement of this, Andy, during the appellate process, as if the President wasn't entitled to deference and full appellate review.

Yes, but of course the DC, the Second Circuit thought otherwise. And Judge Walker in a very prescient comment said, what about overbreadth? How broad can a subpoena from a grand jury be before it is so broad that it brings into its purview so many things that would make it burdensome upon the respondent to answer and that would get into areas that you don't have to get into and you have no right to get into. And I think that that is what ultimately is going to be the death knell of the subpoena, Jay, is that it is so overbroad and encompasses so much material worldwide that the Trump organization and that the President and his individual capacity were involved in that the Second Circuit is going to say, you narrow this down before we enforce it. And by the way, the overbreadth, the arguments on the merits were not even up in this. I mean, it wasn't even to be addressed, but this came up also again, Judge Walker was only a three judge panel. Asked my colleague, Will Consavoy, a very important question.

Also, take a listen to this number five. It seems to me that what happened was that the Supreme Court, despite its ruling that the subpoena could pass muster on the questions of immunity and a special need, nevertheless said that when it goes back, there's various standards that may come into play. And that is the heightened respect that's due the President and also the necessarily meticulous review in the case of a President. And what the question I have is, wouldn't a court of appeals have to kind of give definition to those those concepts on appeal? Thank you, Your Honor.

I think the answer is eventually yes, but I don't think so right now. And I think that's a function of the way the district attorney decided to handle the case on remand. So the important part here is I think it is when Judge Walker makes the statement that the Supreme Court said that there is a heightened respect due the President and a necessarily meticulous review in the case of a President.

And when the court of appeals have to give definition of those concepts on appeal, and I want to be clear, I mean, you know, there's not been a marriage decision here, but the New York DA entity was denying us that right because they said you could keep your appeal going, but produce the documents and give them to the grand jury. And the toothpaste at that point is out of the tube. But even if you try to put it back in, you're not going to ever get all of it back in.

And it's pretty messy. No, the district attorney was not really following the spirit. Indeed, the letter of the law of the Supreme Court of the United States interpreted it by not giving due deference to the President in this.

They won everything. They're going to demand everything. They did not look at it in an overbroad capacity, which is what it really is. And they were called on that by this panel, especially Judge Walker on the Second Circuit, who said, why you haven't given deference to the President. You've just mimicked the subpoena and you're back again to the overbroad standard that you established before you didn't do what the Supreme Court told you to do at all. And you're going to get this subpoena stayed, the reinforcement of it and the response to it stayed until the Second Circuit. And I do think it will go in bank. That is to say, the entire Second Circuit is going to hear this.

And I think that ultimately, in my view, the President will prevail. Jay, I'm absolutely convinced of it. Logan. All right, let's go to the phones. This is obviously about the situation going on in Washington, D.C.

Recast it for everybody. Yeah. If you didn't know, there was a document circulated today, the District Columbia Facilities and Commemorative Expressions Department from the mayor. And it specifically goes in to the replacing, removing or architecturalizing some of the top Washington, D.C. monuments, parks, school names. And look, some of these, as we've said, are controversial and maybe should be adjusted.

But you're talking about names like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, you know, the classic founding fathers, the ones everyone knows about. And also, they happen to be the biggest tourist attractions in Washington, D.C. And so if you have a question or comment on that, give us a call or the other 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. Let's go to the phones. Let's go to Julie. She's calling in Iowa, great state of Iowa on line two.

You're on the air. Hey, Julie. Hi.

Hi, gentlemen. My question is, why is the cancel culture criminalizing men from the past who were not criminals of their time but are letting actual criminals of our time do whatever they want? That's a great... That really is actually, Julie, a great question. It's the hypocrisy of all of this, Julie. And look, I have... We talk about this a lot on the RE program because that's where my frustration comes in. I'm all for people having the right to say whatever they want to say. I'm pretty much an anti-censorship advocate. But when it comes to these kinds of situations, you're right.

You can't even look the person in the eye. You can't even talk to them because the hypocrisy is so evil and astounding that it's disturbing to your core. We're gonna talk about this on the RE program. A video game website, GameSpot, big news site owned by CBS, had an ad yesterday for the National Guard. They bought an ad, it ran, and they tweeted it out, joined... Check for more information. They had a gamer who's also a... National Guard.

A National Guard. And then they said, if you'd like more information about... It's like a recruiting ad.

They got slammed, had to delete the tweets because they're saying... People are going out and saying, how dare they? This is the most disgusting thing you've ever seen. They're promoting the United States military and they're also promoting it to children who play video games. Also, at the same time, the Biden-Harris campaign announces that they've now put campaign ads... You can actually place a little pretend Biden-Harris sign in Animal Crossing, which is really aimed at kids. I mean, there are a lot of adults that play it.

I know maybe too many adults that play it. But it's one of those things you look at and go... And that's praised. The hypocrisy of it is astounding. The fact that a video game news website owned by a major corporation may take money to advertise a wing of the United States military, and that's somehow egregious and offensive because it advertises the military as good guys to kids. I'm so over all of this. It is hypocrisy at its core. When we come back from the break, I want to ask Harry again to lay out a definition of what this cancel culture is.

But then, we only got a minute here. How significant is this cancel culture impacting Congress? It's very significant and I appreciate Julie's call. I appreciate Logan's comments because, Jay, this is a city I love. But I'll tell you right now, I cannot take my family right now to participate in outdoor dining on the streets because mobs are randomly harassing here. So look, respectfully to Mayor Bowser, who I've worked with in the past, let's address that.

Let's address that rather than moving the Washington Monument because it's a very real issue and it's affecting your city. I just have to say, because you brought this up and we just had a lot of video game discussion, the mayor's name is Mayor Bowser, which if you are a Mario fan, I mean, unbelievable coincidence. Unbelievable. You couldn't write that monologue.

I didn't set him up for that. Mayor Bowser, I can't. All right, give us a call. 1-800-6-8-431-10. Get your voice heard on the air. Final segment, J-Sec Your Life coming up and then I got to do another hour. So 1-800-6-8-4-31-10.

We'll be right back. Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected 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 to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life.

Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. The challenges facing Americans are substantial at a time when our values, our freedoms, our constitutional rights are under attack. It's more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice. For decades now, the ACLJ has been 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 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. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life changing work. Become a member today.

ACLJ.org. Hey, welcome back to the broadcast. Everyone taking your call.

Last segment, 1-800-684-3110. We'll also get some Facebook comments. And I want to go to Harry and Andy first here. Harry, define what are we seeing? This is the cancellation culture being implemented, but let's define it again for everybody so everybody understands what we're talking about. Well, Jay, increasingly the United States is defined by what divides us. And so we have now succumbed to what might be called identity culture or identity politics. And so that is essentially tearing the nation apart. And much of this, the impetus for this is grounded in the notion of grievance and victimhood.

And I think it represents at bottom, the miseducation of the American people, particularly young people at elite educational institutions who have advanced evidence of their hatred for the United States itself. And so if you look at the New York Times with their 1619 project, they essentially claim that the United States was grounded in slavery. Well, they're absolutely wrong because the Jamestown settlement occurred 12 years before 1619. And so the United States was not founded, for instance, on slavery. But nonetheless, many of these advocates from the Black Lives Matter movement, from Antifa, from left wing members of the Democratic Party, they believe that the United States founding was wrong and essentially it must be turned down or removed in addition to which, of course, they have now turned their attention from monuments to math to English itself. All of those things have to go because they represent suppression, subjugation, and victimhood. And Andy, as a historian, you said this earlier, I think it bears repeating, we don't have a perfect history. These are not perfect men and women.

None of us are. And the idea that there was errors, mistakes made, policies that we find now abhorrent, violating our conscience, but this was 200 years ago. And what the New York, DC did was say, we're going to apply the DC human rights statute from 1977 back to the founding of our country.

Well, you don't do that. You don't rewrite history. History is the story of the change through time. That's what history is.

And the history of human reality, the history of the intervention of God in human life, the great event of the incarnation of Christ, all these things are events that occurred. You cannot deny them. What you do from them is you learn from the errors of the past and you try to repeat it. He who does not know history is doomed to repeat it again. You don't condemn. You don't knock down monuments. You understand that they were put up at a time and a place and for a specific reason. And you learn and you look at these as a learning experience and you don't victimize everybody.

You cannot, we're all victims. If you look at it that way, the country is a victim founded country and we are hypocrites if we keep saying over and over that we've got to change what America is. America is for all its faults still the beacon for what is free and just and right in the world. And these statues and these men and these monuments with all their faults and all their foibles and all the things that they did wrong nonetheless did right and good and just things and that is what we should concentrate on and not the bad traits. Darrell Bock Will on Facebook said, it seems like people are confusing the point of the monuments.

Not all of them are to celebrate every action of every person associated. Andy's right. We will remove any semblance of history and the ability to have meaningful conversations. Then Kristin on Facebook – Pete Yeah, Kristin. This is an interesting comment. I think this is one that maybe we could help settle people down but I don't know if you can. She said, is this at a point where legal action can be initiated or is this such a ridiculous request that it probably won't even get to that point?

Well, I'll tell you this first, Kristin. If you're watching on Facebook, some time went into this. This was not like – Pete Loads holding up the report. Pete Yeah.

You're talking about pages and pages and beautifully graphic design report. Pete Serious. Pete This didn't, this didn't just come out of thin air. They didn't just write an email that said, hey, we should replace the Washington monument. You know, this is a legitimate thought out thing from Mayor Bowser and it would say, it's a ridiculous point of view but is it at the point where real action should be taken?

Pete So this is, yeah, this is, and then I can address this. These are federal monuments. Number one, the state, the District of Columbia cannot remove federal monuments. So, in fact, it would take acts of Congress to remove these. But I'm gonna tell you, and we'll save the debate, it's gonna come up in the debates and they will be pressed to take a stand on these issues but let's talk about it from a legal standpoint and congressionally, it would take congressional action to remove this in the District of Columbia because DC's Congress is the, basically the legislature for the DC.

Pete Exactly correct. There are gonna be tiers to this, Jay, and the mayor has said that she is gonna be guided by this commission. She set it up and said she is going to advance the recommendations based on this. You know, the things that are within her control, the renaming of schools and parties. Pete She can move them to, when she says, hold on, when she says, I'm gonna move these recommendations, where is she moving them to? She can't take action herself.

Pete Yeah, well, it depends which ones. The ones that are for city schools and city parks, she and the council can work together on those but you're 100% correct on the federal monuments and that's really what is the most upsetting to me because if she wants to advance those recommendations, Jay, she has to use her seat on the National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission to recommend that action. But who would be responsible for implementing that? It'd be the federal government under the National Park Service headed by the Secretary of Interior, who has said he's not gonna do it. She could try to get the Congress to pass a statute, Jay, and she would have to go through the Senate Natural Resources Committee, which is chaired by Lisa Murkowski and try to get Jay, you had the confusion before between statute and statute, they could pass a statute to remove the monuments or the statues. Jay, I don't think that's gonna happen. I don't think she would even get bipartisan support for that.

But I would tell you this, this recommendation might seem unbelievable, but Jay, it has to be believable. It's here and it has the mayor's support. Pete Logan's right. It's a thick document. It will be a debate question. That means it could become, you know, it could take years. It could take 10 years. It could take 20 years. Maybe get a Republican Democratic House, a Democratic Senate, a Democratic President could take 10 minutes.

Right. It's certainly at least setting, like I said, it maybe even it's planting the seed that you may not want to take a selfie with the Washington Monument. But tell everybody what's coming so that we are offering hope on a historic basis.

Yes, from American history point of view in world history and faith, but specifically American history. And it comes to, we saw this in Chicago with certain political leaders going out and saying that, you know, we should abolish history classes for the time being until we can rewrite those history classes. We're going to take action on this. We have a really great new project that I'm excited about. We have an incredible creative team who we've put together. Really people who've worked with every major brand in the world of children's entertainment. We're creating educational entertainment content, specifically aimed at elementary aged around there, even, but I think as it can go, it can apply to everyone because it's stuff we all need to know.

You know, you remember Schoolhouse Rock or anything like that. There's something coming next week. Can't say just yet what there's a big project from the ACLJ that's going to need your help and support, but it's great. And I'll be on the air. One of us will be, and you'll see me talking about it here very, very soon. I'm really excited about it.

Specifically because of issues like this that will arise where your children may not be raised or your grandchildren to know who George Washington was. I mean, you know, it's hard to think about, but it's true. I'm going to say this. I'm really excited about this project that Logan and the team are doing because at the ACLJ, whether it's in court, whether it's media advocacy, whether it's providing content, that's what we do. Support the work of the ACLJ at ACLJ.org.

Have a good day. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines, protecting your freedoms, defending your rights in courts, 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. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work. Become a member today. ACLJ.org.