On today's show, we uncover a shocking poll that showed Democrats support a military coup. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Logan Sekulow.
Welcome to Secular, another packed show. Will Haynes joining me in studio. Christy Campagnone, ACLJ attorney, going to be joining us in the third segment. And of course, we're going to hear from you later on and Rick Grinnell.
So you know what? Jam-packed. If you do want to be on the air, it's a good time to call in right now at 1-800-684-3110. This poll came out. Look, it's from a Democrat polling facility, whatever you want to call it, organization.
So of course, it is one poll, so you got to take it for what it is. But the results of this poll are shocking. And of course, they asked some very strange questions, questions that maybe should have been inappropriate to even be asking the American people. But a lot of them seem to point to the fact that, yes, they would love President Trump to be removed from office sometime between now and the end of his term early. And how really at any means necessary, if you look at this polling.
And that ranges from 23% saying certain things all the way up to 75% of people polling saying that they would be fine if essentially the military got involved and said, no more of this. That's right.
So when you look at this, this is a poll that was commissioned by Liberal Currents, which is a liberal magazine, online magazine. But they commissioned it through the Center for Strategic Politics, which is a polling firm. and one of the questions and there's a lot to dig into here this is basically them asking the base what they think about many things whether 2028 leader etc but here is one of the main things here it's about President trump leaving office and in the poll there was a range of things whether it be very supportive all the way down to uh very negative feelings and it was about whether there's various ways that if you woke up tomorrow morning and saw the following news headlines how would you feel that to clarify that was the polling question the question was if you woke up tomorrow morning and saw the following news headlines how would you feel so i just want to clarify that that's what they were asking people and we can go through it because all of them are pretty um are pretty disturbing well right here so we talk about if you uh the main one that we were talking about to safeguard the constitution a group of u.s military leaders have removed President donald trump from power and assumed control of the united states so if they woke up tomorrow these democrat voters that were pulled and they saw that headline that there was a military coup there is no longer an elected government it is a revolution democratic uh military coup as you see in third world countries 59 percent total between very positive and somewhat positive so 59 percent had a positive feeling about that potential headline and 43 percent of that was very positive you go down there's the 25th amendment question 84 percent have a positive feeling about that whether he's impeached and convicted 86 percent have a positive feeling about that if the President died in his sleep overnight 56 of these voters in this poll said they would feel positive about that headline and then finally the only one that didn't have a majority of the individuals feeling positive was if donald trump were assassinated while speaking at a rally if they woke up to that headline 31 almost a third of democrat voters in this poll would feel positive about that and neutral was another 25 so just uh didn't really have a feeling one way or the other look okay you have to take this for what it is but remember that this does reflect a certain group of voters that would feel fine like you said with a military revolution happening in the streets would feel fine. And I'm fine positively if this was to all happen. We're going to break it all down and more coming up at 1-800-684-3110.
What do you think about this? What are they thinking? Of course, even the fact that they were willing to answer these questions to a poll. I mean, I would just be hanging up very quickly if this became the questions being asked. Again, phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110.
Again, 1-800-684-3110. Support the work of the ACLJ. You're going to find out why specifically coming up even in just a couple segments. We'll be joined by one of our attorneys, Christy Campagnone, in just a moment. Again, you can do that at ACLJ.org.
A lot going on, everybody. We are balancing a lot of topics right now. Look, also right now happening, President Trump just spoke at the U.N. General Assembly. that's all happening yesterday he was meeting with Mayor McDowell we saw that very seemed like a very positive meeting with the mayor I think President Trump it's always interesting when you see him meet with people like that because you think it's going to be this antagonistic thing and they always especially with New Yorkers he always seems to find some common ground and it becomes almost overly cordial and overly friendly to the point where I think a lot of people get thrown off that's right and once again even him praising Gracie Manchin and the condition it was in it's looking beautiful inside it is those moments where it's like yeah politicians are sometimes people uh sometimes not always not always well and then you start to read this and this is what the problem is this this poll that was commissioned by liberal currents by the center for strategic politics um we talked about that shocking number that there was 59 percent total would feel okay with a military coup they would have a either very positive or somewhat positive feeling about waking up to a headline that military had taken over the country let's say even the majority or just any way that you'd say the President has been removed from office whether that is by natural causes whether that is all the way from i mean there's assassination attempts on here where you had a still a pretty strong uh argument to be said 25 said they'd feel neither positive nor negative and 23 said they would feel positive so you have half would either feel positive or nothing and then you have it all the way up to again what if there's a military coup what if uh he was impeached and removed from office of course you're going to have some people that one's not as shocking the impeachment one because like okay you've got the whole process Yes, you've tried him, and this is what happens.
That's sort of the system we've built here in the United States of America. And if you are a Democrat voter, yeah, you're going to feel more likely.
Now, good luck with President Vance. I'm sure you're going to love that. I mean, that's always to me what I look at and go, man, I think if you've got President Trump on one hand, you have a guy who will at least go meet with the mayor of New York City. I don't know what President Vance looks like.
Now, what I think we also need to take from this is not just the shocking top line that we led with that this is that's one specific angle of a very lengthy poll that was commissioned it was really to get a pulse on the base of the party so these were democrat voters that were polled and when you start to dig through it when we talk about the where the base is at it seems that the base of the party is more aligned with the dsa candidate agenda than with the historic mainstream democrat party and a lot of these things are antithetical to our constitutional framework namely a military coup i mean this was the party that was has talked endlessly about insurrections and yet the base wants to say but we would wake up and feel very good about the military taking over the united states of america i think some of these though we got to look to like the 2028 one i think is pretty fascinating as well even just like the baseline who you would think is the front runner for the 2028 Presidential primary kamala harris leads right now with 25 as their first choice support 33 have her as either first or second choice and 70 of democrats view her favorably so again you're talking about a number that maybe we're not talking enough about kamala harris right heading into the next election because that is a shocking number for me for someone that won so clearly lost or lost so clearly to President Trump and also did not seem to have a dinner in terms of getting that that buzz building. But the numbers here really show that and they didn't really show any other candidate that has enough support to really take that on. And you had Gavin Newsom last week saying, well, she runs, I'm not going to run. Right. Maybe he's seen these numbers and maybe those numbers don't lie.
Well, and Gavin Newsom is the one in the poll that's behind her with the first choice is almost half. It's 10 points behind her for first choice at 15%.
So Kamala Harris, based off this polling, once again, this is a single poll. Very early. But it is of the base. That is what they targeted with this. I like this one because it's just saying Democrats.
Right. It's not being skewed by potentially even just being like affiliated or likely. These are Democrat voters. But so you take that, you take Kamala Harris. I think this should be a wake-up call for someone like Kamala Harris.
100%. As well as any other person in leadership in the Democrat Party.
So any person in leadership that believes in the constitutional framework of the United States, because what else did they find? The majority support ending the filibuster. 69% support the next Democrat President of expanding the Supreme Court. they support nationalization and public ownership of artificial intelligence the electric grid the pharmaceutical and health care industries they believe it 34 net approval of senate abolition uh they have all of these things uh the prosecution of people in the trump administration including Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. It goes on and on and it reads like something that you'd read on Blue Sky or some social media outlet that is an echo chamber.
But in reality, this seems to be where the base is at. And I think it's going to take strong leaders to course correct in that party to say, no, this is not what America is about. The fact that you have so many in that party that sit there and and are fine with voicing to a poll that the various litany of different ways they would be fine waking up and feel good about the sitting President of the united states no longer being in office because of an alive an abnormal event or alive as you mentioned shows how far we've gone from a civil society and that needs to fix on both sides of the yeah and i think we got to break down some of these other ones because there's so many in here because they went through, look, comprehensively, I don't know how many people were polled. Maybe we can find that out. But they went through a good number of the top issues, including AI ownership.
They went into court packing with the Supreme Court of the United States, the filibuster, all those kind of things. And guess what? The polls really do showcase exactly what you would think they would, which is a lot of in favor of. When you had something like the filibuster, you had a mass majority of Democrat voters support the ending of the filibuster. You had 69% support the next Democrat President expanding the Supreme Court.
So court packing. This has been a big topic of conversation that we've had here because it has only really been threatened by one side of this. I feel like it has been threatening the idea of adding more justices to the United States Supreme Court in a way that was intentionally unfair. In a way that you're saying, look, the idea of the Supreme Court is lifetime appointments. you actually can have some sort of randomization of who's in charge versus what laws are getting passed.
Yes, President Trump got to pick an inordinate amount of Supreme Court justices. That is true. That doesn't usually happen. Usually a President, even with two terms, maybe gets two maybe three in their lifetime And sometimes those are phasing out rather quickly Now look a lot of these justices are on the older side you will see a large group of their i guess not that many of them two or three of them probably go in the next five to ten years right well i mean there was a lot of chatter that even some may be leaving it this term this term yeah five years is probably five years you should have two or three that could turn over next President likely could have uh quite a few picks right through in court but they're saying if it's a democrat let's go in there and let's get another handful let's let's or let's let's move it to 24 john i don't know let's move it to whatever you can do uh to make it happen so that's one of them uh and there's a lot more senate abolition came in that became a little less popular i mean still plus 34 net approval that's net approval that means over the median it wasn't 50 50 it's 34 more want to abolish it than not abolish it. When you talk about methodology here, it's a sample size of 683 with a 3.75% margin of error, meaning it could be plus or minus that percentage.
So when you look at something where they're saying 59%, it actually could only be 56% that support the military coup. When they do methodologies like this, they look for Democratic voters, the Center for Strategic Politics, that's their business, is polling.
So they run panels, they find panels, they find different demographics that fit that they think make up the framework of the party at large. Is it perfect? No. Is it one poll? Yes, only one poll.
But it is concerning. Even the percentages of people willing to go on the record on some of these things in a poll is shocking. And I think, once again, we look at everything that we talk about on this broadcast and you talk about the candidates that are winning in very radical places. like New York that have a history of going far left. If you don't have a check on that within your own house, within your own party, Democrats, then the entirety of the system starts to break down and you stop seeing people as human across the aisle.
And I say that for the right as well. We see the rise of antisemitism in conservatism, the dehumanization of certain people groups that is happening in the conservative you know internet world and that can't stand this isn't policy debates over uh tax rates or or safety net programs these are literal debates that that dehumanize people and is so antithetical to what the foundation of this country looked like there's got to be some people looking at this and saying this is a wake-up call i need to speak to the voters in my party and say, we can't live like this. Listen, we're pivoting here in the next segment. I want you to call in about this, though. What do you think?
We got phone lines open. Six lines open right now. None of y'all are calling.
So guess what? Call in. Be kind to the phone screener. Fine, make it on the air. We do only have a few segments for phone calls today because we're going to be joined by, in the next segment, ACLJ attorney Christy Campagnone, followed by, later on, Rick Grinnell.
So give us a call right now at 1-800-684-3110. I'm going to give you a lot of reasons to support the work of the ACLJ with your financial donations coming up in the next segment because we're busier than ever. Today is no exception. You're going to hear about that when we get back all the work the ACLJ is doing. And, of course, you can become an ACLJ champion, someone that gives every month, occurring basis.
Do it right now. When we get back, we'll give you even more reason to do so. Stay tuned. Welcome back to Secular. We are going to pivot a little bit, but we will be taking calls on that poll.
1-800-684-3110. What do you think? But now we are joined by ACLJ senior attorney, Chrissy Campagnone from Washington, D.C. Always interesting to hear about updates going on with the ACLJ and the individual cases that we are working on all the time. You may remember this back from April of 2025.
Again, these things take time. This is someone who is out there with a small sign, small yard signs reading, love your pre-born neighbor as yourself, and we will adopt your baby in front of abortion clinics and places like this. Of course, you see them all the time, but was within minutes, was told essentially you're violating some sort of code. The ACLJ gets involved. And now a year later, we're still fighting for this.
Christy, I'll let you kind of take it from here to give people not only the history of this, but where we are right now. I know you wanted to hop on today to discuss this. Yeah.
So today we're in the Seventh Circuit and we were arguing in front of a panel of three judges. This is a case that goes back to last year at Hammond v. Carbondale, Illinois. And just like you were saying, he was simply trying to stake in small signs into the ground outside of the abortion clinic, which is his First Amendment right. And yet he was told he had to remove the signs that he could only carry them.
Turns out, as we continue to file a lawsuit and push for his rights with the city, they're holding down true that they can't place signs in the ground, even though we have case law that says otherwise. The First Amendment is the most important protected amendment for individuals when they are trying to speak. And a city can't just disregard that because of aesthetics or this desire to not have signs. There are reasonable limits to that. And I think that is what the core of our cases is, well, you have an ordinance that isn't clear about what you can and can't do.
Therefore, our client has no way to know whether he is doing the right thing or if he's violating the ordinance. And furthermore, if your entire argument is that no signs can ever be staked in public ground, well, that's unconstitutional. And so we brought both a vagueness claim saying, well, your ordinance doesn't make any sense as written. There are all sorts of exceptions in here. And when they all interplay, there's no way for our client to know what he can and can't do.
But more importantly, you also cannot prohibit him from speaking at all in totality. And so we brought that in a preliminary injunction at the lower court. She did not grant that.
So we appealed it to the Seventh Circuit. And that's where we were today fighting and arguing for our client in front of a three-panel judge. And as many of us in the office were listening to Nathan as he was delivering that oral argument before the three-panel judge today on this preliminary injunction issue. And that's what I want to also ask about because this isn't even the full case yet. This is the appeal very early still.
This is, as people know, if you watch this broadcast, if you follow the ACLJ, the court systems take time. And we are just appealing that preliminary injunction portion. We are asking the Seventh Circuit to reverse the lower court and allow our clients free speech to continue while the rest of this case plays out. Am I getting that right, Christy? Exactly.
So there is enough evidence here for the judge to be able to look at the case and say, you are violating our client's rights, and we're going to go ahead and put an injunction to stop you from violating his rights any further as the case at the district court continues on.
Now, that first district court judge didn't agree with us, and so that's why we're able to appeal it to the Seventh Circuit.
So today there was a lot of discussion about what is this ordinance? What is it saying? And could a reasonable person actually read the ordinance and even understand what their rights are or if they're going to violate it? And so, again, we held and we are arguing before that panel of judges that this is unconstitutional as it's being applied, but also the ordinance on its face is unconstitutional because he doesn't understand what it's even saying. Yeah, Christy, I also want you to explain to our audience, because when you see, well, the judge didn't side with us, essentially a loss, what does that look like then?
Because for a lot of other clients and not in the ACLJ world, if you were paying a private attorney or something like that, you go, okay, well, we lost here. Are we really going to push it to the next level? Is there even a next level to push? You have to have those discussions of finances and all that. Thankfully, due to our ACLJ supporters, that's not a question that comes up.
But for you guys, what you get to do is decide what the next step is. And we see what your next step is. But again, I want to put that on a little bit of our listeners to go, okay, when they support the work of the ACLJ, understand that there are so many paths, even when there may be a roadblock, there's a path to keep going. Absolutely. And that's what's neat about our job is we get to keep fighting for you because there isn't a limit.
There isn't a financial burden on us to be able to take this into the upper courts to appeal them. And we often appeal cases all the way for the Supreme Court. And that's where we really are strong and we win even at the Supreme Court.
So you have several opportunities for your case to be heard. Losing at the district court really doesn't mean much. And in fact, we kind of like to be able to get into the appellate court because that's really where we do shine in our oral argument before a panel of judges. And so when you are donating to us and helping us to do that, what you're doing is giving all of our clients an opportunity to have their case heard, even if there's one person that maybe doesn't agree with them or isn't wanting to protect their rights, we have this opportunity to bring it before more people to say, help, we need you to look at this set of facts and protect our client. And there are several opportunities to do that because of what you guys are able to give to us at the ACLJ.
And also many times, once it gets out of the district court, that also the precedent and the protections start to reach a broader group in the court affirming the constitutional rights of a broader group of people when it's not just the one specific district, but as it climbs up the ladder. But also, I want to ask you because one, we heard Nathan, he delivered that oral argument today and did a fantastic job. We thank him for his hard work on all that. And I also want to know what are kind of the next steps that we could be looking at here at the ACLJ as we see this case play out?
So on one hand, they might side with us, which is wonderful, which means we go back down to the district court with an injunction at play, which means our client can continue to go out sharing his message with people going into these abortion clinics who are scared and lost. He can reach out to them and will be protected from the police interfering with him posting his signs. On the other hand, if they reject it, then we still can be at that district court level if we choose to be where we actually bring the merits argument. We will start into discovery. We will start taking more testimony and really trying to dig into what the intent was behind the ordinance that's being applied here.
But we also have the opportunity possibly to appeal it to the Supreme Court. And so we will take whatever decision comes from the Seventh Circuit and we'll analyze it and kind of go from there on what's best for our client.
Well, thank you, CC. I'm sorry, it's not CC. Thank you, Christy, for joining us. Christy Kamanyani.
So technically, CC. It's a CC. There you go. I'm just so used to it.
So thank you so much for joining us, Christy. I really appreciate you coming on and updating us. See, I was right. Updating us and our team here at the ACLJ and all the supporters out there. We've only got about a minute until we go to break.
I know some of you don't get us for the full hour. If you don't, join us on ACLJ.org. You can find it also on YouTube, Rumble, Facebook. We broadcast live there and of course archived however you get your podcasts. It's available.
When you hear the work of the ACLJ, what our team is doing here, you hear it from whether it is appearing at the UN, whether that is our ECLJ, whether ACLJ Jerusalem or you hear about someone who's just trying to put a sign saying, I'll adopt your baby in front of an abortion clinic. None of it's lost on any of us that you can have an individual person that needs representation to go potentially all the way to the Supreme Court. Or you could have a leader of a country who needs our support. All of it is because you help out. All of it is because you donate.
All of it is because you sign petitions. Go to the website, read, share, all of those things. whether it's something that's free, like sharing and liking and doing all that, or whether you decide, I'm going to put up a monthly donation and become an ACLJ champion. All of it matters. We are going to shift a little bit back in the next segment, talk a little bit more of that polling.
We do have a few lines still open. Two lines are open. 1-800-684-3110. Call in now because Rick Grinnell is going to be joining us in the following segment.
So he's going to take up that part, and then we're going to take as many calls as we can by the last segment. If you're on hold right now, stay on hold. I will get to you. Just give us a little bit of time. And again, phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110 Go to ACLJ.org today If we do lose you here support now if you can Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever this is Sekulow And now your host, Logan Sekulow.
Welcome back to Sekulow. Second half hour coming up. Phone lines are almost completely jammed. We got one line open at 1-800-684-3110. We just heard from Christy Campagnani here at the ACLJ giving you an ACLJ update, but what we are focused on today is this wild poll.
Of course, this is at the time when the President of the United States was speaking to the head of China, Benjamin Netanyahu. All of these people are coming in town. It's the U.N. General Assembly. He's meeting with Mayor Mondami in New York City.
A very pleasant, seemed very nice meeting, you know. Again, if you took all of the mayor of New York's, like, I don't know, all of his policies and positions, and you just saw him in these bits, you'd really like him. He's a very compelling guy. He's a very great speaker.
so you have these moments with him where you're like oh he seems like it's like obama where you're like he's a he's very good at the pr side of this and then he swerves you and hits you with everything he believes and you go ah dang it i can't get behind it but that being said these polls just came out this poll's from a democrat leading poll i mean it's from what's it called the liberal uh so the liberal currents is who commissioned the poll they are it's a yeah it's a digital magazine and they said hey we're gonna pull uh current democrats on where they are who they're gonna to vote for in 2028? What are they looking for? But then one of the things was, if you woke up in the morning, and this was the headline, how would you feel? Good, bad, in between? Mass majorities came out with good things about President Trump that they would feel good about, I don't know, the President being impeached and convicted.
Now, I understand from Democrat voters, that makes sense. That's not a shock. That was not a shocker. I feel like, honestly, if you polled Republicans and said the same thing about Joe Biden, you're probably going to end up with a similar number. And then you have, though, using the 25th Amendment, okay, 70% say.
And then you have the President dies in his sleep i mean this again i'm not saying this this is what it says on here it's 45 said they would feel positive very positive about it another 10 said somewhat positive 28 said neither way i just kind of would just take the news in and then sort of the big ones 43 said very positive and you can lead that to well over 50 just positive or neutral said to safeguard the constitution a group of u.s military leaders have removed President Trump from power and assume control of the United States. That's the shocking part, too. Assumed control. You're talking about a French Revolution happening that you would be totally fine with. Again, could you think of President Trump in that way?
I also can't get over in this poll specifically that question. 13% of people said, you know what? I would have no feelings if I woke up and read there was a military. I understand how wild politics have gotten that, yes, that it is insane that 59% of the country, or not of the country, these Democrat voters said they would feel great about a military coup. You like that?
The fact that there is anyone that said, you know, I have no feeling one way or the other about a military coup. You're like, is Dancing with the Stars still on tonight? Right. If it is, all good. Team Taylor all the way.
My goodness. All right. Phone lines are open for you. We want to hear from you 1-800-684-3110. When we get back, we are going to hear from Rick Grinnell.
Maybe we can take a quick call. We've got a minute and 42 seconds. Let's go to Kedrick, who's calling from Maryland on Line 1, watching it on the Salem News Channel. Go ahead. Yes, how are you doing today?
Good. I'm perplexed about this poll. I think we all are, buddy. Because the reason being is, I think mostly it's the Democratic Party that do not promote the great things that President Trump is doing. And that's what makes me so mad.
I'm in Maryland, and everybody hates President Trump. And I'm like, listen, what happened to the big, beautiful bill? Everyone, I own a tax and financial firm. Everybody's tax return was at least $1,500 to $3,000 more, especially law enforcement, firefighters. I mean, the overtime alone that the big, beautiful bill provided for so many people and no tax on tips, then all of the Social Security, no tax on Social Security.
Social Security doesn't even matter. And it was so many great things that President Trump has done for the people. And it's like the Democrat, the Republican Party really don't explain it. Yeah, Kendrick, I think there's two reasons for that. One, I think you're right.
Sometimes we fail in positive PR. 100% agree with you. And I've seen we, everyone.
Sometimes we do in ACLJ. Positive PR is tough. And the other thing is we all live in echo chambers.
So you're never going to hear the positives if you're living on one side of the aisle completely. We'll be right back with Rick Grinnell. Welcome back to Sekulow. Rick Rennell's joining us right now. And look, there's a lot going on in the political world.
We obviously have the UN General Assembly happening right now. President Trump is going to be meeting with top level officials, whether that is Xi Jinping, whether that is Benjamin Netanyahu, whether it was the mayor of New York City. We saw a lot of that happening just over the last few hours. We all saw President Trump speaking today, but also there's been more movements in that historic and somewhat controversial early on talks about Greenland and Denmark and how that was all going to play out. But as expected, it played out probably according to plan, but well.
Rick, I think we got to see one of the greatest moments in television today as the President of the United States spoke at the UN General Assembly and talked about the ongoing conflict of Iran. And you saw the cameras pan to the representatives from Iran sitting there, very stone-faced as they watched the President speak. But I mean, what other time do you get to see a juxtaposition of words and diplomats then at the UN General Assembly?
Well, you know, I spent eight years of my life there. It's a fascinating place. 191 countries come together. They're all there. They're all, you know, intermingling.
And these are countries that don't get along a lot of the time.
Some of them are banned from going throughout the United States, that they have to only be within like a mile radius or a three mile radius or a 10 mile radius. We've got different rules for different countries. It used to be Venezuela was not allowed to go outside of their, you know, building to the UN and now they're free. Iran is under big restrictions. There's always visa issues, but it's right here in our backyard, right the world literally comes together in new york during this time once a year for a full week and inside that room inside the un general assembly room it's so fascinating because each country gets six people to sit three in the front and three behind your placard and you get to select who sits there a lot of countries do uh people who are taking notes because they write cables after the speeches.
And of course, the room is packed for the United States, whether or not our President is speaking or not. But when it's Donald Trump, the room is an overflow. People want to go and see it. And I love how the cameras of the UN always do the flashing. If the President is talking about Israel, it goes to the Israeli delegation.
If the President is talking about Gaza. They're looking for the Palestinian authority group that's off to the side. And what we saw is when the President was talking about Cuba, the Cuban delegation got up and left. And that drama always plays out.
Now, look, we do that same thing. A lot of times we will send lower level people. When I was at the UN, we would literally figure out who would be there to send a lower level message rather than a top diplomat. We didn't want to have our ambassador level people sitting in those chairs. But this is how the world works.
I think it's a good idea to have the UN, but it does become the lowest common denominator of what 191 countries believe.
So it's a little bit of mush.
Well, this is an interesting UN General Assembly for me, Because normally there's almost one big agenda item that we're watching when it comes to what the U.S. foreign policy, what our big ticket item is. It's going to be either displayed throughout this or that the State Department's been working really hard on showcasing. This is a really interesting one because you think about you mentioned Venezuela. I mean, that happened back in January.
So this is the first General Assembly since there has been a leadership change and a temperature change between the United States and Venezuela. I don't give that enough attention, I feel like, at all. We talk about Iran and the conflict that started back in February, the end of February, that has been ongoing. You talk about the fact that there is also a state visit from Xi Jinping that is kind of surrounding all of this. obviously the ongoing always conversation of Israel and having Bibi Netanyahu here but then you also have this this Denmark agreement that Greenland Denmark and the United States signed yeah that has been an ongoing uh you know negotiation but it's all coming to a head this week this may be one of the most active you in general assemblies that I've ever seen you're exactly right and President Trump knows that he was very proud of the fact that unlike like any other Presidents before him, he engages on these issues.
He's not afraid to say this is a problem and I want to try to fix the problem. I mean, look, Washington, D.C. is used to people who just kick the can down the road. They're used to people who do not come up with a solution. They would rather manage the problem and figure out how to get more votes our power money out of the problem and and what donald trump is somebody who comes in and he just touches the third rail of politics all of the time and he he knows how to say this is a problem let's let's go for it let's try to fix it we've never had a President so willing to fix problems and i think you're exactly right on the world stage we're seeing all of these regional issues kind of pop up and the President trying to play whack-a-mole and solve as many of them as he can.
I think maybe you can address this probably better than anyone and Will brought it up as well which is in general when you have these UN General Assemblies when you have these meetings how much of it typically is just sort of show politics where it's you know sort of state of the union style come out there make your statements move on go home and it is like you said made for television or made for the people in the room. And a lot, a lot gets done compared to what we're seeing even just this week, where clearly there's a lot getting done. But in general, someone who's been there and operated in this, is this a show or is this where work is actually happening? It's both. It's both.
And at the UN General Assembly in that big room, which if you've ever been in the room, it actually looks, I'm old enough to know what super friends are. And I know Of course, of course. Wonder Twins. And that room is modeled, or I should say that the Super Friends is modeled after that room because you walk in and it is the Hall of Super Friends. It's exactly the same feeling.
And that's the showroom. That's where people come up and they make their big speeches and it's all for show. But what you don't see is in every single hotel in New York City, delegations are holding bilateral discussions. A ton of people are there to make economic deals. Private equity firms are doing dinners.
They're meeting all the heads of state. And the energy ministers all show up, the ministers of foreign affairs, infrastructure ministers. And so you really do have a lot of work on the sidelines that gets done Yeah okay I mean that good to know Obviously there are a lot of people involved in all of this that happening Well when it comes to actually the work So sometimes you may just see a leader up there But remember, there are an entourage for each one of these countries. And there's one of these members of the UN going, okay, we have to get stuff done. Like you said, it's one of the few times a year that they are all together.
And certainly, it's the time of the year where they are in New York City. And while the UN may live on its own in a bubble, they're experiencing what's happening in America, I guess, for better or worse right now.
Well, and I want to wrap up with this because I think it hasn't gotten enough play yet. I think going on, this will be a huge achievement of this administration. And this is that agreement that was just signed by the President with Denmark and Greenland that give the United States much more. And you see B-roll, if you're watching online, of the President signing that agreement. with the representatives of those other nations but in reality if you're say someone on the left that is really frustrated with the aggression of Russia and Ukraine this should be something that you should put your politics aside and be like you know what this is a great thing that has been done and it's it's not the oh we bought Greenland it's not the bluster that you know obviously was a negotiation tactic and works uh when you get to this point but this is a thing that will really keep a check on the Russian and Chinese aggression as the frontier of the Arctic is at play.
And now the United States just made the world that much safer against that aggression by this deal.
Well, listen, you nor our listeners are going to be surprised by this point. But, you know, I was watching CNN and MSNOW this morning to see what they were going to say about the Greenland deal because they spent a huge amount of time talking about how Donald Trump was ruining our relations and the negotiation style. They hated, they hated, they critiqued it, they were screaming about it. But they should be noticing that that style that they always complain about Donald Trump is actually a winning style. And you see there, there is now an agreement on Greenland making sure that the russians do not take the the spoils of the nature the minerals and and all of the uh the the the real uh products that are within greenland's authority that are needed for phones and for intelligence and ai and we now have an agreement with western countries to be able to make sure that we control that area that is a huge win for the united states but you will not see that talked about on CNN or MSNOW.
They would rather critique the style, but that style is a winning style. Thank you to President Trump. Absolutely. It's not something that's going to be rolled back next time there's a Democrat President. Right.
I think that the next President, if it is a Democrat, is going to be very thankful that that type of agreement is in place and that they don't have to figure out how to negotiate that. Always got to keep that in mind. Thanks, Rick, for joining us. Look, a few lines are open still. 1-800-684-3110.
If you want to call in about that topic, you can. We got more coming up. Last segment of the day where I like to hear from you. You've heard from ACLJ attorneys. You've heard from Will.
You've heard from me. You've heard from Rick Grinnell. Experts.
Now I want to hear from the most important voice, yours. Give me a call. 1-800-684-3110. Welcome back to Secular. Phone lines are still open if you want to call in last segment of the day 1-800-684-3110 give me a call 1-800-684-3110 many of you have been a hold for close to half an hour and i appreciate it let's just take them in the order as they came in let's go to norma first is calling from ohio online too norma go ahead hi hello guys hello guys um you you have your segue into your poll where you showed um the bucket list of what a future administration wanted to do this and that with the courts and the filibuster and everything.
Well, my question is about what legislation is presently being worked on to secure that no future administration can open those borders wide open again and let the surplus people of the world in here. It's tough, Norma, because a lot of times this is all being run by whoever you're putting in charge of something like a direct, you know, Homeland Security or something like this, or the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, all these situations, the DNI controlled by, you know, obviously the President of the United States puts those people in power and those people go and do as said. We know it gets lighter and the restrictions get looser when you do have a Democrat in office. And mainly it actually happened when you had a Biden administration in office. Let's not forget that Obama and many of the other Democrat Presidents, Clinton, Obama, they actually pushed for a secure border.
They were actually pushing for it.
Now, do they get a lot of it done? No, because the tide started to turn, especially for Obama, towards the end there. But remember, a lot of those original complaints, the kids in cages and all that, came from an Obama era. And then you had the Biden era, which is sort of when what you would say that AOC called woke 1.0, whatever it is, that's when sort of all of that was at a pinnacle. Right.
And once again, Norma, many of the things that put in place some of these wishlist items, as you called it, are the Constitution. Abolishing the Senate, it would really take completely dismantling the constitutional republic that we have and starting over. It would be a revolution, not necessarily a violent revolution per se but it would take a revolution of sorts to cause something like that to happen where you you scrap the entire system and start over now when you start to see marxist ideology creep in to the mainstream yeah that's marxism is a revolutionary ideology that is what they do that's what they take and export around the world with the Marxist ideology.
So the root of all of this is the creep of the Marxist ideology that is becoming mainstream. And people may not even realize how mainstream it has become. But then you start to read this poll and you realize these individuals aren't sitting around thinking, I'm a communist, I'm a socialist, I'm a Marxist-Leninist. No, but they are hearing this. or will when i run a attack ad on will that's fair you will at some point it's coming but when you start to look at all of these things and you realize oh this is where the ideological creep has is risen within the party and you can go back to things that we've talked about on this broadcast for years whether it be the the confucius institute that has so much embedded himself in american academia uh across the country or the the stations that housed chinese spies across the country.
This entire movement to upset the constitutional framework of the United States has been a long play from our ideological enemies. And now it's starting to rise within the other dominant party in American politics. I want to swerve. We got Jamie calling in in Mississippi watching on Rumble, kind of a different topic in general here, but let's take Jamie, go ahead. Hello.
Thank you very much. Great interview with Mr. Grinnell, by the way. Thank you. I have just two quick points.
One, I wholly support the President banning CNN and all these clowns. Those are not press. Those are propagandists. And that's to be kind. I don't want to cuss on the radio.
Thank you. I appreciate it. And then the other thing is President Trump very quickly can solve this issue with our gasoline issues. We don't have an output problem. We have a problem refining.
We don't have enough refineries. If he goes into California, which they closed down about seven or eight refineries, if he goes in there, declares a national emergency and just takes them over, there's nothing to build. The refineries are there. All they have to do is get them up and running and start refining. And all of a sudden we drop our gas prices will drop to a reasonable amount.
Jamie, it's a novel approach. I mean, obviously we know FDR and Eisenhower and other Presidents in the past have used war powers in nationalizing industry. Historically, that may have been a solution in the time. I don't think that that is the angle I would want our President to go nationalizing industry and starting to take that over. One, it would be met immediately with lawsuits and we know the climate that we see.
But two, I think you are seeing that some of the spike in the prices isn't necessarily due to a supply issue, per se. The supply concerns are easing, but it is more that uncertainty that if the supply will be drastically caused again.
Now, that's not necessarily good in the short term, but I don't know that you fix the short term problem, which is a problem for every single person of high gas prices. by creating maybe a problem down the road of a nationalized industry all right last call of the day let's go to steve in texas going back to the polls steve go ahead hey shalom elohim adonai thank you so much for taking my call i want to tie today's call to yesterday's call i think that there is a systemic issue between the results of the poll and everything that we spoke about yesterday sure all of the all of the dissension the deception uh even the obviously the rhetoric those are massive tools put out by the enemy to drive us completely apart wake up america pray hard against this look steve i don't i don't disagree with you you know the idea of packing the court let's say that's probably the one that's the least like violent on here in some ways that's a pretty radical idea that is not an idea that 15 20 years ago even 10 years ago pre-Trump was something that was really I mean it was floated in in very marginal ways it was not floated as a mainstream idea right these are all now being floated as mainstream ideas revolution let's call you know taken to all of those these topics these were not mainstream democrat ideas I wouldn't even seen these were liberal ideas these were not conservative ideas these were fringe ideas and now it's that way and Steve I don't I don't discount what you're saying I actually agree with it, that it's the rise of social media. It is the mainstream media doing what they're doing. Yes, does it tie back into who should be allowed or not allowed to cover? Yeah, I think we can have that discussion.
But in general, I think you're right in terms of we've dehumanized all of this. We've taken away the idea of sitting across from each other and having discussion points. We have just become so siloed, whether that is what we get in our algorithm or what we've decided, which is good and bad. There's never a gray area in terms of politics at this point right now, and nothing can get done if that's the truth, unless you start saying, what if we finally overthrow the government? Maybe that's what we need to do.
Well, and to your point as well, Logan, that rhetoric is not only a problem on the left. No. It's on the right too. The dehumanizing, demon rats. I mean, it may seem comical and whimsical and funny online, but it all is working towards dehumanizing other human beings created in the image of god that believe differently than you and what's gonna that gonna do continue to push people apart i wish you had said that earlier in the show so you would get a lot more hate like i did yesterday no i save it very specific just the last 10 seconds support the work of the aclj aclj.org we'll talk to you tomorrow on secular
