Major Corruption Lawsuit: ACLJ Representing Charlie Kirk and Turning Point USA

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, Jordan Sekulow. Hey, welcome to Sekulow. Folks, you know, at the ACLJ, one thing that we do for this broadcast, through the Sekulow broadcast, obviously we have great guests on. A lot of times members of Congress with this legislation that we support that we're working on at the ACLJ and our government affairs team in Washington, D.C. is helping and assisting in writing that legislation. We do it at the state level as well.

We've done it at the local level. And there's a lot of that going on right now, especially in the issues involving life. So we'll bring guests on. But we also have built an expert team of Sekulow analysts that are exclusive to our broadcast, that write exclusive content at ACLJ.org, that appear regularly on the broadcast so that you're getting to know them as not just a commentator or a guest of the show, but as a member of our team. So these are folks that we're talking to before they're on air, after they're on air. They are assisting the ACLJ a lot of times on issues.

Some that we talk about in the air, some that we might not talk about in the air. They've been great assistants to have people like Mike Pompeo and Rick Rinnell assist when we file a FOIA, because they've been on the other side of the government and can say, especially when you're dealing with national security issues, these are the words to use, don't use this, get more specific here. I mean, that can be a great asset for the actual work of the ACLJ. But part of our work is this broadcast and bringing you the best analysis we can and the best information we can from not just, again, people who might be on as guests, but actual team members.

So you know that they're with us and they're working alongside our staff and our team at the ACLJ. A few of those that have just come on these last year and a half has been former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. This is someone who directed the CIA, was a CIA director, was a Secretary of State, our nation's top diplomat, served as a member of Congress, a West Point grad, so has been in all these different levels of government, has sat across the table and been in meetings with every major world leader, whether it's Putin, Xi, or Kim Jong-un.

I mean, literally, they have sat in those rooms with the toughest and with allies as well. And when we see these issues pop up, whether it's been the war in Ukraine, whether it has been the situation with China and Taiwan and Iran, their nuclear program, when issues arise about Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, who better to go to than the people who were negotiating the deals just a few years ago? Just a few years ago, they were in charge.

And of course, they're able to also explain to you how quickly good things that they were able to do have been unraveled by the current administration. So these are two former cabinet members that we brought on the ACLJ team and they've joined our broadcast team as well. So they were on President Trump's cabinet. So you know about Mike Pompeo, former Secretary of State, former CIA director, also Rick Grenell.

Rick has extensive experience. Before he was a member of the cabinet and acting director of national intelligence, he oversaw, just to underscore that, sometimes we don't toot their own horns enough, he oversaw every single intelligence department of the United States of America. Before that, he was the ambassador to the largest economy in Europe, Germany, which plays a very important role when we are talking about Russia because of the economic connections there and of course the economic strength of a country like Germany. So before he was acting director of national intelligence, he was the ambassador to Germany. Before that, he's been a top level campaign advisor. So his political experience, like mine, has been the top levels of Presidential campaigns, both on the communications level. So I think when he's talking, he's also kind of teaching us how we can better communicate our conservative message, but also how we can fight for our conservative views and our values and issues that we care about.

He's great at doing that, Rick Grenell. He spent a decade almost at the UN working with the US ambassador to the United Nations there, dealing with all communications on behalf of the United States. That was during a time of war. And most recently, we brought out Tulsi Gabbard to the team.

She currently is a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve. She's a former Presidential candidate from the Democrat Party. So we're bringing you insight from all these different angles so that after you're done listening to our show, you know that you've not just gotten the news. You've gotten the best possible analysis of the news that day and of stories you might not hear anywhere else. It's a reason why to support the work of the ACLJ is to bring these experts on. They also have exclusive content on our website.

You can find it at ACLJ.org. We'll be right back on secular. Welcome back to secular. We told you we have a big new case to announce, and we are honored to be representing Turning Point USA and Charlie Kirk, an organization that has done incredible work with young people, high school students, college students, university students all across the country. Teaching them about liberty and freedom and the ability to speak up and how to speak up and stand up. But we also know these groups, like so many others, individuals and organizations, have been attacked by social media companies. Deplatformed, de-throttled.

There's so many different. Shadow banning. We've heard all these terms. And it all goes back really to when we thought it was, remember it was Russia doing this, and then the administration at the time, the Obama administration, and then the deep state under the Trump administration said, well, even if we can't prove it's the Russians, you know what, we'll just start blaming it on the American people.

We don't want these American ideas out there. And so we started to see organizations with very big online platforms not being able to reach the people that follow them. We are, again, joined right now by Charlie Kirk and we are representing, the ACLJ is representing Turning Point USA and Charlie in this legal battle.

Charlie, let me first ask you this. When did you first notice that all of your social media accounts, that you weren't getting the same reach that you used to? So it really started to be significant right during the Presidential election.

And I think during this process, and by the way, thrilled to be working together, guys. We're going to get all the facts right through discovery and all this, because based on the documents that I've made public through Twitter files and through other FOIA requests, we know that the federal government was actively involved in suppressing Twitter accounts such as ours and many others. And there'll be more and more facts that come out and it's illegal what the government did. But I started to see it in the Presidential election where all of a sudden, you know, we were averaging 120 to 140,000 retweets a day, which is a fair amount. According to Axios, we had the third or fourth largest Twitter account during the Presidential cycle. And, you know, right in the middle of the 2020 election, all of a sudden we started to see that kind of taper off.

And then it really hit post January 6th, which makes sense because, you know, after January 6th, all of a sudden this language started to get introduced. And obviously a new regime took the Oval Office where they considered my views and the views of half the country and more than half the country, in my opinion, to be that of domestic violent extremism. And if you look at the DHS documents that have been made public and you look at the Twitter files, I was put on a do not amplify list on Twitter.

That's a fact. And so what, you know, I want to know, and we're going to find out through this complaint in this process is, you know, decisively, in my personal opinion, is the federal government labeled my account and Turning Point USA and many others for censorship. And the federal government is not allowed to shut up the citizen. The federal government is not allowed to say that, you know, your First Amendment liberties and freedoms are quietly, you know, basically being shadow banned. And that's essentially what's happening here.

And so and who knows how many other people. But really, Elon Musk is helping make this argument possible. I'm looking forward to working with you guys on this because with the Twitter files, we learned that there was government private collusion to restrain my Twitter account that could have reached millions more people and maybe even further influence the election for Donald Trump. You know, it's interesting because the way this has worked is the Department of Homeland Security sent up these grants and went to the University of Dayton and other entities and some of these private organizations and then worked in cooperation with the Department of Homeland Security. As if the Department of Homeland Security was trying to like cast the blame for any censorship onto these groups, which is not going to work.

And we're going to have a very we have a very aggressive lawsuit plan for this. But when you look at the list of organizations that were targeted in addition to Turning Point USA, CB Christian Broadcasting Network, the Heritage Foundation, Fox News. But and then you go up the list, you get into neo-Nazi groups. So, you know, Charlie, the thing that's happened here is the government, it appears and I'm convinced through discovery and I've been litigating I've been litigating these kind of cases for 40 years. We're going to find that the government put their hand on the scale and they put the hand on the scale to tip it so that groups like yours and others would not have the voice that you already had earned in the marketplace of ideas. That's what's so important to emphasize here. You had that voice in the marketplace of ideas already, and then they were squelching it once you were trying to get your message out.

That's right. And it's illegal for the government to do that. The government is not allowed to pick and choose which voices they want to be able to be heard more than others. No, that's actually called viewpoint discrimination, which in three cases I argued to the Supreme Court and one unanimously, all three of them. So and then the most liberal justice, the most conservative, the most egregious form of discrimination on speech is when you shut down one viewpoint on an otherwise covered topic.

But go ahead. But that's you're exactly right. And even further is they did it in a clandestine way where you didn't really know it. And they called you conspiracy theorist if you said it. And we don't know how involved the FBI was.

We know the DHS vector. But the FBI was having standing meetings with Yol Roth at the Twitter office and they were discussing potential censorship activities. I lost access to my Twitter account because I tweeted about the Hunter Biden laptop for a whole week during the Presidential election because they said it was Russian disinformation. And you have to wonder, I mean, how many other voices were suppressed and how many? Yeah. And so I think this is the complaint here.

You guys do such a great job. It's going to be really focused and precise. And I think this really needs to be a hallmark case where we put the government and shine a light on how they have been actively involved in viewpoint discrimination. But my fear, guys, and this is why I think that this lawsuit is so timely and important, what's to prevent them from doing it during the 2024 election? Nothing right now, except that's why we got to follow this lawsuit because they're going to be on notice and that's what put them.

Go ahead, Jordan. Yeah, I remember when they got rid of Nina Jankowicz, they didn't really get rid of the disinformation board. They renamed it. They just called it something different. And now they don't want to put the focus on it anymore.

They're not going to put the spotlight on it. They tried that. That failed.

So they tried to move along. Nothing to see here. But Charlie, I think you hit on a really important point, which was, you know, there's people like you, you can take a stand. You've got a voice. There's groups like us. We've got our voice. We can take a stand. But how many more people who just gave up trying to utilize these platforms that could have reached their friends, their family, their network that they could influence, especially when you talk about politics and people voting. And they've just said, you know what, I don't even want to use these systems anymore because obviously somehow they're working against me. Or I don't want to get in legal trouble because of what I tweet or because of my viewpoint or because of the political candidate I support.

That's such a good point. This will be harder to prove in court, I think. But there's a mass demoralization component to this, which I think you're getting at, which is people that say, why even speak if my stuff is going to be shadow banned, right? And we were called we were called conspiracy theorists for even introducing the idea of a shadow ban. The great work by James O'Keefe proved with undercover videos that Twitter was indeed shadow banning. But now to kind of complete the circle, was it the federal government that was pressuring the companies to shadow ban in the first place? And that's like, whoa, now you're at a whole nother level that these companies were not acting independently. And it sort of makes sense because there was this mysterious change of behavior by a lot of these tech CEOs that used to present themselves as like free speech absolutists. You know, if you read the early writings and musings of Dorsey and Zuckerberg, they were always, you know, they were liberal, but they were like, you know, we're going to die the First Amendment. Classic liberalism, right? Exactly. Were they being pressured by the Leviathan with other regulatory action or just pure outright law enforcement?

I mean, here's what you got, Charlotte. We know this from we know this from other litigation we've had against the Biden administration recently. We know that James Baker, who was the general counsel of the FBI when the whole crossfire hurricane started against President Trump. So we know that James Baker ended up becoming the general counsel of Twitter. So when you ask the question of, you know, how much were these tech companies involved and it was Elon Musk who fired James Baker because Baker was putting the kibosh on the Twitter files being released. And Elon said, who is this? Who is this James Baker?

And they said, oh, he's the former general counsel of the FBI. So not only did they have their finger on the scale, they were specifically targeting voices they disagreed with. And I'm not defending any tech company here either, by the way, but they were put in a really tough situation by the government. Let's not kid ourselves there.

Go ahead, Jordan. Because they've got immunity. Right. And that Section 230 immunity they are so afraid of. But we've had Mark Zuckerberg went on the record and told Joe Rogan. The FBI came into him and said, you better shut down any of the laptop stories. And like you said, Charlie, once you put anything up about the laptop, it didn't matter if you were Charlie Kirk with millions of followers or the New York Post with hundreds of years of reporting the news, your account was shut down and you were shut out.

Yeah. And now we have, thanks to FOIA requests, which I know will be a major part of this, the DHS was doing block grants to continue the censorship regime, right? And as you guys know, through discovery and asking for documents and stuff, I think we're going to get a really interesting picture of the modern censorship Leviathan, right? How deep is this?

How widespread? It seems as if they want to use the full force of the government to try, not to try to win the debate, but to make that there's no debate at all. And thankfully, we still have that, you know, handy dandy United States Constitution that you guys at ACLJ have done a phenomenal job of actually defending for years that a fair judge looking at this, you know, with all the information put together. Boy, federal government is not allowed to shut up its citizens. We have explicit protections for that.

Don't have to read beyond the First Amendment to get there. Well, Charlie, it's an honor for us to represent you and TPUSA. We're going to get to the bottom of this.

It's going to be aggressive litigation, but it's very, very important litigation. There's going to be more ahead. We appreciate it, Charlie. Thanks for being with us. Thanks so much, guys. God bless.

Thank you. Now, we have assembled a stellar team. We've increased our staffing over the last several weeks, last several months, actually. So we've got the team assembled, and this is where you come in. They need our help, and we need your help, and that's how we get together on this. Your support to the ACLJ is critical. Join us today to support this work so we can defend groups like Charlie Kirk and TPUSA and so many others around the country. That's ACLJ.org. Welcome back to Sec Heal. We're taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. We're now joined by Congressman Jim Jordan, as well, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee. And, Congressman Jordan, I want to go right to you because you are demanding an unredacted information on Hunter Biden's special counsel appointment.

There are so many bizarre moves now from David Weiss and his team. It seems like, Congressman Jordan, this is the time for Congress to get some real answers on what is going on here. Yeah, why do we need a special counsel when the investigation was already completed? And by definition, the investigation was completed because they'd entered a plea agreement. They went to the judge.

Now, thank goodness the court and the judge said this plea agreement is bogus. But why do you need a special counsel now, after four years, when you already had a plea deal in front of the court? The time for a special counsel, frankly, was probably January 20th, 2021, at about 1202, when Joe Biden takes the oath of office and the Justice Department says, oh, we've been investigating his son.

His father is now President of the United States. Maybe that's a situation that would warrant a special counsel. They should have named it then, not now, when we're figuring out just how bad this investigation has been run, thanks to those two brave whistleblowers who came forward a few months ago. You know, Jim, this is Jay, and we're representing some of those whistleblowers.

And they've used the phrase crushed by the FBI because they're put in this unbelievable situation where their, you know, security clearances are basically suspended and they can't take, they're not getting paid and they can't take outside work. You look at this and you say to yourself, you know, between what's happening there and what you're dealing with, with this so-called special counsel, and you know my view on special counsel, I don't like them. I don't like the whole process. It always ends up messy.

This is going to be no exception as you're learning, as you know firsthand from your experience. But if you look at that, then I combine it with the judges that are all throwing the trials on Donald Trump in March, you know, the day before Super Tuesday, where the country is looking like a laughing stock here. Yeah. And then they do it because they can't. I mean, that's the arrogance and the power that they use for their political purposes is, as you say, just completely, completely frightening. Yeah, I'm frustrated by it all. And we've said this for a long time. You guys said it for a long time that there is there's a double standard. There's there's not equal application of the law and the country sees that.

And that's not supposed to be the way it works in America, the greatest nation ever. But it's exactly what's happening. We shouldn't be surprised, though, that they're retaliating against FBI agents. They are retaliating against these IRS agents who came forward because the Justice Department, a DOJ and an FBI, who will spy on a Presidential campaign, who will say parents are terrorists who show up at school board meetings, who will say that pro-life Catholics are extremists, who will do the things that we shouldn't be surprised that they didn't, that they retaliate against the very people who come forward and tell us about those issues and those things that were going on the Justice Department.

That's how bad it's gotten. And it's why it's so important that we win the White House in the next election. And I'm hoping that individual is going to be President Trump. So and they're hoping it's not. Let me tell you, I mean, as you know, I've represented this guy for a long time now and they are hoping it's not. And they're hoping it's not by doing everything they can between these special counsels and the hearing dates. But I want to talk about what you're doing, because a lot of the American people are really counting on you, Congressman Jordan, and your committees to get to the bottom of this. And how confident are you that we're going to get some real answers here?

I think we will. We've already got some changes made. I mean, the fact that the IRS announced four weeks ago that they will no longer send agents unannounced to Americans' homes, that's because we caught them doing that. When Matt Taibbi was testifying in front of our committee and the Democrats are asking to divulge their sources, he's given them a lecture on the First Amendment. While all that's going on, the IRS was knocking on his door for goodness sake. So because we brought that to light, I think that's three now. Danny Warfahl, the commissioner, says, oh, no, no, it's because we're concerned about the safety of our agents.

Baloney, you did it because it caught you doing things arrogantly, aggressively against the American people. So we got to I'm confident we're going to get to the bottom of this. I'm also I also feel like the speaker has been clear about this. I do think it's likely we move to an impeachment inquiry. The facts keep building up here on the on this Biden business operation, the ties to Burisma, what we learned, the Devin Archer deposition. I do think that that's looking more and more likely. And the speaker said, if that's where our oversight takes us, we will we will go there.

I do think that we have Merrick Garland coming in on September 20th. We're going to we're going to get to the bottom of some of this stuff dealing with David Weiss. The Justice Department said David Weiss, they've committed to us that he will be in front of the Judiciary Committee late September, early October. We'll see if they honor that commitment now that they named him special counsel. But we're going to keep working to get to get the facts. And your colleagues over in the Senate, Senator Grassley, Senator Lankford, have also sent a letter to Christopher Wray saying, you know, basically, you know, you made all these statements, many of which were incorrect. You need to come back and correct the record.

So that's good news. Go ahead. How did it feel, Congressman Jordan, to see that David Weiss, while he was U.S. attorney, now special counsel, his team felt like they couldn't directly respond to you, that he had to get preclearance. If you had questions that Congress had questions for him and his team, that they had to go to the Department of Justice and get the answers from them, that they did not feel like they had the authority to answer your questions directly, even though they were appointed to these unique positions.

Yeah. And even though Merrick Garland, the attorney general, said they did have the full authority. No, it was everything was strange about this. I wrote them on February 23rd asking why there wasn't a special counsel in this situation.

Again, not saying that there had to be, but just if ever there was a situation that warranted one, this seems like it would be one. And they didn't respond. No letter. Now, they always you know how this works, guys, whenever the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee writes the attorney general, the United States, you always get a response back.

May not be what you like. May take them a while, but you get a response. No response. I wrote him again. They didn't respond again, but they had David Weiss respond. So that is all strange. And the things the changing story from David White, June 17th, he said he had the complete authority to determine when, where and whether to bring charge.

And then on June 30th, he wrote me again and says, well, I stand by what I wrote, but I want to expand. I can only bring charges in my district. Well, which one is it?

You can only bring charges in your district or you can bring them anywhere. They've been all over the map. And now, of course, that same guy's been named the special counsel, which makes no sense to anyone. It really doesn't. Congressman Jordan, we appreciate everything you're doing. We appreciate working with you and your team and keep up the great work for the American people. Same. You do the same. Thanks. Very good. Folks, I want to say this.

Jim Jordan, they've got change and we work very closely. It's important for him to point that out, too. Yeah, they have gotten change and we have gotten results. It's like when we went after the IRS, you get results. And when we get information in these four years, we're able to get it to Congress.

So this is all interrelated. Here's what I want to tell you. We've got three days left in our life and Liberty Drive. And it's been a great success, but your support is needed now more than ever.

We're short of our goals, trying to make up some lost time in the first half of the year. Without your donations, we can't fight for all these people. And we can't fight for the issues that matter the most for you. That's how we deploy lawyers out to do this and keep this broadcast on the air. We filed 16 lawsuits against the Biden administration, currently in court.

We're defending these whistleblowers that Congressman Jordan was talking about. But, as I said last week, they need us and we need you. And together, we can get this done and we can save our constitutional republic. Your chance to have your gift doubled ends in just three days.

Thursday, it's over. So I want to encourage you to defend life and liberty. Go to ACLJ.org and sign on to our Life and Liberty Drive and make that donation. Somebody yesterday donated $5,000. That's effectively, to us, $10,000. You donate $50, it's another $50 for us.

You know how it works. But we've got 16 lawsuits against the Biden administration, folks. We're representing these whistleblowers. My colleagues are on the phone with the whistleblowers and other lawyers this afternoon. We're fighting for freedom.

Back with another half hour. ACLJ.org to participate. Keeping you informed and engaged. Now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Welcome back to Sekulow.

We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110. This headline, The Wall Street Journal, it's in their opinion page by their editorial board. It's Trump's Super Tuesday trial date.

I just want to read the first paragraph to you because I think it really highlights what we've been talking about today in a succinct way. When Donald Trump won the Republican Presidential nomination in 2016, he spent Super Tuesday barnstorming Columbus, Ohio, and Louisville, Kentucky, holding his signature rallies. Next year, Mr. Trump might be stuck in a defendant's chair at the federal courthouse in Washington, D.C., and how the public will respond is anybody's guess, Dad. But they've made a political decision here, throwing these chips on the table, to say, all right, indicting him hasn't worked. That's only made him more popular. So maybe if we could get him in the defendant's chair and off the campaign trail, we could end him politically. What do you think about that? You know, I think if people really see through what they are doing here, it could benefit Donald Trump. The problem is the mainstream middle-of-the-road voters that you do have to convince, not in the Republican primary, but in the general election to win, who might say, you know what, this person's got way too much going on to run for President of the United States.

How can they possibly be focused? Now, I will tell you again, I think that alone, to me, I wish, I keep kind of brainstorming through my mind, how you could challenge that based off this being like a political act by a judge, because it's like, I wish you could FOIA their letters back and forth about what date you want to choose. Let's choose the day before. By the way, she acknowledged that she's talking to the judges in New York. Oh, yeah. Judge Jenkins. So let's go ahead and take a phone call at 1-800-684-3110. Henry's been holding for a while. Let's take his call.

Henry, go ahead. You're on the air. On the air? Yeah.

Yeah. All I wanted to do was make a comment about the fact that, you know, Trump's already a proven deal. If they tie him up in court, that'll be the final nail in the coffin of the Democrats and anybody else. He's not in on the field. He is the field.

There's nobody else that's even going to come close. And his base, which is in the tens of millions, we're not going to be buffaloed or lied to. Even Democrats are coming alive and realizing… I think you're 100% correct, Henry, as it relates to the primary, okay? I do.

Yeah. My concern is, let's face it, in a general election, neither Republican nor Democrat is going to be a runaway. It's going to come down to five or six states, and you're going to have to get some people that are on the fence. And does this distraction hurt them? I think it's so political that people will see through it. And it is outrageous. I agree. I think it's outrageous.

I think it's unconstitutional. Now, how those motions are going to be made is what we're all trying to scratch our head right now for figuring out. But this is a very troubling development.

There is no doubt about that. And politically, you said we're in unknown territory, Jordan, you think? I really do believe we are in an area where you can't predict, because I can predict the indictments helping him. I can't predict what it's going to be like if he can't be on the campaign trail. And if people will rally behind him in that effort, maybe he will in the Republican primary. But how much damage it does to the general election remains to be seen. We are going to have to really convince people about what we've been talking about here, that this is a political persecution prosecution. Where it looks like they are literally looking at the calendar and saying, what date would be the worst for Donald Trump politically? Let's schedule all the court dates then. Because he's got to prep before the trial.

So if it starts March 3rd or 4th, he's prepping for a month, which is the entire three months of the campaign. We're a completely independent organization. I want that to be very clear. We see a lot of world right now where you notice that maybe those who are running the show aren't in your best interest. And maybe there's a great pocket of people putting on a show. Well, the person who owns that show doesn't always agree.

Here's the deal. The ACLJ is completely independent. We are fully backed and fully supported by people like you. So all you have to do is go to ACLJ.org, make a donation. Not only does it keep this broadcast on the air, but it also funds all of the legal work that we do. Whether it's for you or whether it is to take on our government when absolutely necessary.

And it is absolutely necessary. We'll be taking your calls coming up also. 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. In our next segment, we'll be joined by Tulsi Gabbard. You're going to make sure you stay tuned for that. We'll be back in just a minute.

But again, ACLJ.org. We appreciate you. Go take a look over there. We'll be right back. Welcome back to Cenk. We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. Our senior analyst Tulsi Gabbard joining us now to discuss some issues too. We'll take calls on politics as well throughout the show.

We've got a lot more coming up today on the broadcast. But Tulsi, news out of Ukraine because we now have that former prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, who was fired famously by Joe Biden. He said, listen, you don't either fire him today or the billion dollars, you're not going to get a billion dollars, sounded like a quid pro quo. And he was ultimately fired. And there was this whole story that, oh, his firing had nothing to do with Burisma. In fact, the problem was he wasn't going after the corruption in Burisma. Now he's done interviews where he directly says, Tulsi, he was fired because of his investigation into Burisma and what the Bidens were doing in Ukraine. Jordan, you know, it would be easy for some people and I think some Democrats are using the line Democrats in Washington.

Well, this is a matter of like he said, he said it's one word against the other. And of course, they're going to go with the word of the Biden family. But what's becoming very real is there are multiple pieces of evidence and documents that Congress was asking for for months, if not longer, that actually point to a very specific timeline that proves what that prosecutor is saying to be true. He was actively investigating Burisma. You had Devin Archer working for Burisma going and trying to get the Biden administration to act and shut this guy down.

And what happened? It's not a coincidence. It cannot be a coincidence that President Biden went to Ukraine to fire this prosecutor who was going after the business that Hunter Biden was working for. This is such a clear point, Jordan, to the great threat, the imminent threat that we face in this country, which is political powers.

The Democrat elite are using and abusing their power by turning the Department of Justice against their political opponents, very specifically President Donald Trump, to try to make it so voters don't even have the option to to choose him and to protect their own, to protect Hunter Biden, to protect President Biden and their family. And and frankly, protect voters from seeing how corrupt they actually are. This is what is the most dangerous thing, because they're turning the United States of America into a banana republic through their actions.

You know, Tulsi, I said something very similar just a few minutes ago. If you look at the situation right now, you've got the Ukraine situation and what was going on there and the money going into Hunter Biden and all that. OK, I mean, it reeks of corruption, no question. And I did the impeachment that was involving Ukraine. And I mean, everybody knows Ukraine has got corruption issues.

This is not new. But if you were looking at the United States right now from another country and saying, OK, you got a former President of the United States who is the leading candidate right now for the Republican Party for President for 2024. And he has four federal, four criminal cases against him. And all four of them want to have the trial in March, the day before Super Tuesday.

You ran for President, so you know how significant that date is. You think to yourself, geez, that's going to look pretty political. But the Justice Department, like you said, the judges are going along with this like this is OK. And the problem is it's not OK. Fixing it is very difficult. But this is looking horrible for us on the global stage right now, in my view.

What do you think? Jay, I couldn't agree more when I saw the news come out, I think it was yesterday that March 4th was the day that they chose. It is so transparent, regardless of political affiliation or political agreements or disagreements. Anyone who's looking at what's happening with clear eyes and an open mind can recognize how how overtly they are trying to keep President Trump off of the campaign trail to keep him away from being able to make his case to voters in this country of why they should elect him as President and commander in chief. Once again, they're afraid that he actually could win, which is why they are they are committing this such egregious abuse of power that cuts so much deeper than just going after President Trump.

Because what they're really doing is setting this precedent that puts the United States of America not on a high platform of of trying to be an example of democracy to the world, but of reducing our great country to none other than a banana republic and an abuse of power that we see happening in other countries around the world. Can I ask you this because you've had this experience, you ran for President, you were very successful within in the Democratic Party, you were the you clearly were the one rising and then they, you know, they kind of put their sights on you. But explain to people what it's like, say, five weeks before Super Tuesday, because, you know, you don't just walk into federal, I'll say from my end, you don't just walk into federal court when you're the defendant and start prepping about it the day before. So what do you do and say a month out of Super Tuesday? Well, Jay, you look at when the first first voting will take place in Iowa, it will likely be in early to mid January, so the elections will already be starting. When you look at, yes, you don't just show up in court one day without any preparation, but you look at from when voting begins with the caucuses in Iowa in January. And that span between those first votes being cast and Super Tuesday on March 5th is critical. It's what sets the front runners apart from those who say, hey, maybe this is not this is not working out for me. So to be able to tie President Trump up in multiple court cases, multiple legal battles during that critical period in time is their intent is to be able to cripple him and tie him up, tie his resources up and choosing that that timeline can be the difference between someone succeeding or failing. I hope voters are seeing through this and seeing the truth about what they're doing. You know, I don't remember sleeping much during that period of time.

I know I was on the move constantly, as one should be. But, you know, it's not only putting him at a disadvantage. I think it's terrible for the country.

I said this before. The fundamental thing about liberty is we live in a constitutional republic, so we have more liberty than any place, any other government in the world. But we got to fight for it. You fight for it in the military. You fight for it in Congress. You're fighting for it now in the in the court of public opinion.

But we got to fight for it. And the reality is when you see a situation developing like it is now with the former President and what the pile on that's happening here and the going after the lawyers, which I find personally repulsive, the moment I cannot defend my client zealously and to say, boy, if I bring that legal theory up, am I going to be subject to RICO? Is a sad day for the United States of America. And we're putting liberty at stake at a huge level when we do this, Tulsi. And that is exactly what's at stake here. So I just urge, you know, your viewers, your listeners, but really the broader electorate in the United States to recognize what this moment means and that we cannot afford we the American people cannot afford to sit back and allow these corrupt people to be successful in what they're doing and their abuse of our Constitution and their abuse of this democratic process that our founders put in place for us. We have to lift our voices and make sure that we exercise our right to vote to ensure they are no longer in a position where they can abuse that power and undermine our democracy. That is what is at stake in this election.

It is much bigger than any individual. The future of our democracy and the future of this country is what's on the line. You know, I told our members we have filed 16 lawsuits against the Biden administration, including FOIA lawsuits on the Hunter Biden situation.

We're in federal court on those right now, Tulsi. We are defending those FBI. We're representing those FBI whistleblowers who have been basically shut down security clearance suspended, can't get another job because they don't security clearance, and you're not allowed to take outside employment when you're still employed by the agency. They're employed by the FBI.

They're just not getting paid. They're crushing these people. And I keep telling our donors that people like you as part of our team at the ACLJ has made us a lot stronger, but we can't do it without our support of our members. And as Tulsi just laid it out eloquently, we are fighting for our country. So go to ACLJ.org.

I mean, we really could see this is a risky moment in our history right now, in my view. Yeah, Jay, you know, I will second that and encourage all of your listeners and viewers to support the great work that the ACLJ is doing. You know, your organization and the time, the decades that you have dedicated, you and your team, to fighting for liberty and fighting for freedom is rare in this day and age where people are divided into different camps.

And there are very few voices who are objectively committed to upholding the Constitution and liberty for every single American, no matter politics or race or religion or anything else. I have been a longtime supporter of yours and the ACLJ, the great and important work that you're doing, and it's essential that we all stand up and continue to support it because you are literally in the trenches and on the front lines fighting this battle for our future, for our country. Tulsi, we appreciate you being part of our team. I've known you and your family for, my goodness, I think since you were about 16 years old. So we go back a long time and I represented your dad. So I mean, I appreciate everything you're doing and appreciate you being part of the team here at the ACLJ. It's amazing how things work out in time.

That's when, you know, God's in control of the universe because nobody else could play in this. We appreciate it. Thanks for the insight. So I encourage you, make sure your friends know, your family knows, and you know, remind yourself that if you feel like you're in one of these situations, the best thing you can do for your country is to speak up because it takes people speaking up. You protect so many other people's rights when you do that. Contact us.

It doesn't cost you a thing. We're asking you to do so at ACLJ.org slash help. We'll be right back on Secular.

Welcome back to Secular. We're taking your calls and Rick Renaud is joining us now too, the senior advisor for foreign policy and national security. And I want to go back to Deborah in New York. I'd like Rick to be able to weigh in this too.

And it's good. So Deborah, just kind of reset your question for the audience and for Rick as well. I live in upstate New York and we are having buses come from the border and they're being released into the community. We don't know if they are asylum seekers, illegal immigrants or migrants. It seems like the definition is changing and it's a shell game.

And if we question who they are, we are called racists. I'm in healthcare. I'll take care of anybody, but we need to know is even the healthcare, who are we treating and who are the people? What part of New York are you from? Western New York, New York Falls, Buffalo. Oh, sure.

Buffalo. Okay, great. So Rick, thanks for joining us. You're the former director of national intelligence and you know, this issue of the portions of the border, we had the report earlier about ISIS affiliated individuals coming through the border. But to her point, to Deborah's point, she's in the healthcare profession. She wants to help people. She's not given care, but they can't even discuss the status of these people without being labeled. Yeah, it's really outrageous. Now look, this all started when blue states decided to coin this phrase sanctuary cities and sanctuary states.

And it all sounds like a nice marketing and certainly everybody wants to be generous in their humanitarian giving and helping people. But the reality is, is that a sanctuary state is a state that ignores federal law. We have laws. If you don't like the law, you should lobby against the law, but to have places where you get to ignore federal immigration and State Department rules and you're protected. Now over years, this has built up and now we're seeing the hypocrisy of states like New York, which have touted the fact that they're a sanctuary state for immigrants, but now that they're getting too many immigrants, illegal immigrants, they're getting very nervous. We have to do a better job of distinguishing between immigrants and illegal immigrants. And right now, Kathy Hochul is not doing that. She's allowing this radical idea that you get to break laws and go anywhere you want in America.

If you don't have border laws, if you don't have enforced laws, you don't have a country. You know, we know too, she works in the healthcare industry and how these hospitals have been overrun. Again, it's not that they want to deny anyone care. It's that it gets to a point where there's no more care to offer.

There's no more space. Because the staffs are taxed to the maximum and they don't even know who they're helping or what they're helping for. And it's affecting hospitals from across the country.

I know that because we have family in the healthcare industry. It's very, very serious. Rick, I want to talk about the two-tier system of justice too. Celeste is calling on line two. Celeste, go ahead. You're on the air with Jay Sekulow, Jordan Sekulow, and Rick Grinnell.

Thank you for taking my call. I got two questions. One is what can we average people that live here in America, what can we do? And a hypothetical one, what would be done if our country was taken over for real?

If someone had just taken over the President's office and we didn't know it, what would we do? Do we just sit and watch? No, you don't sit because you live in a constitutional republic, so you don't sit and you don't sit.

And by the way, if you think that's happening, you don't sit either. I mean, that's not the way it works. We have elections. They're supposed to be fair. And that's how we turn government over in the United States peacefully. But you're asking the first part of your question, which is I think the one that is on the minds of a lot of people right now, Rick, and this is the two-tiered system of justice.

Go ahead, Jordan. Do you want to say something? Yeah, because I think, you know, we're learning about this new story of the York Post. So there was a FOIA made on behalf of an organization, and they've uncovered 5,400 emails from Vice President Biden where he uses fake names, and that's where he was providing information to Hunter. So those emails were the ones being used to forward information to Hunter while he was doing these business deals while Joe Biden was Vice President. I mean, people kind of—they scratch their heads because it's like, okay, how do you—there's all these special counsels out there.

They're all saying they got nothing to charge. Then all of a sudden, there's whistleblowers come out, and they change titles, and now we find out, Rick, secret email accounts. It's not so much that they had secret email accounts.

What were they using the accounts for to provide info to their son to do business deals while you're Vice President? Look, I think Celeste is really articulating this frustration that so many of us outside of Washington, D.C. have, which is we've woken up to the fact that the pot on the stove is completely boiling over, and this has been a very slow burn. We have watched, and many of us, I would say, even ignored the heat that's been coming from the stove to the pot. Our country has been on this simmer, and it's now boiling over. And many people are just waking up to say, wait a minute, what happened?

Why do we have a two-tier justice system? Why do we have a media that's totally in the tank for the ruling regime? Why do we have an attack on dissenting voices and a cancel culture and wokeism? What's happening? And I want to answer Celeste's question of what can we do, because there's a lot that we can do. One, I think, Jay, we should talk about our prayer initiative and strategy, because I think that is incredibly important. I think it's important to raise your voice, sign petitions, do everything you can to share on social media. You're doing a good job by listening to this broadcast and getting some ammunition, but now you've got to use it to fire back.

You also have to support organizations financially and with prayer to make sure that the organizations that you're supporting and that you're trying to help are actually doing the work to challenge government and to challenge the system. And I can just attest to me personally that ACLJ is one of those organizations that absolutely is playing this law fair game that the left is playing, and we're playing it just as strong. Yeah, you know, you're talking about this law fair, and that's what it is.

And I look at the cases. We just said we've got two cases, one now at the Supreme Court of the United States, second brief on that case being filed Friday. Sixteen lawsuits against the Biden administration. Folks, as Rick just said, Rick's part of our team here, former director of national intelligence, former ambassador to Germany. We've got also Mike Pompeo, former secretary of state, former director of the CIA, Tulsi Gabbard, Democratic Congresswoman. You're saying Democratic Congresswoman? Yeah, with great insights, especially on military engagement.

And she has challenged her own party, and we give voices to that. All of this happens because of your support of the American Center for Law and Justice, ACLJ.org. And if you're watching, and many of you are right now, on our social media apps, make sure you're subscribing and make sure you're sharing this with your friends. It's very, very important. I believe we're also now on Twitter, broadcasting on Twitter, so we encourage you to do that.

Jordan? I think when he's talking, he's also kind of teaching us how we can better communicate our conservative message, but also how we can fight for our conservative views and our values and issues that we care about. He's great at doing that, Rick, right now. He spent a decade almost at the U.N. working with the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations there, dealing with all communications on behalf of the United States. That was during a time of war. And most recently, we brought on Tulsi Gabbard to the team. She currently is a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve.

She's a former Presidential candidate from the Democrat Party. So we're bringing you insight from all these different angles so that after you're done listening to our show, you know that you've not just gotten the news. You've gotten the best possible analysis of the news that day and of stories you might not hear anywhere else. It's a reason why to support the work of the ACLJ is to bring these experts on. They also have exclusive content on our website. You can find it at ACLJ.org.